answersLogoWhite

0


Best Answer

Dred Scott v. Sanford

User Avatar

Wiki User

10y ago
This answer is:
User Avatar

Add your answer:

Earn +20 pts
Q: Which of these determined the status of slave territories in the 1850's?
Write your answer...
Submit
Still have questions?
magnify glass
imp
Related questions

What determined the status of slavery in territories in the 1850s?

Under the 1850 Compromise, New Mexico and Utah were allowed in as slave-states, in exchange for California as free soil. After that, Kansas and Nebraska were to be admitted on a local vote on slavery ('Popular Sovereignty'). This resulted in bloodshed that foreshadowed the Civil War.


What determined the status of slaves in rome?

The status of Roman slaves was determined by the slave's education and abilities and also by the status of his master. Education and abilities speak for themselves, but if a master was a person of high status, such as a senator, consul or wealthy merchant, the slave gained status accordingly.


What determined the slave status of a newborn in colonial times?

A baby born to a slave was automatically a slave. They were often sold away from mom as young as 3-4 years old.


What issue did Stephen A Douglas believe had a constitutional basis for its resolution?

Slave ownership in territories could be decided by popular sovereignty


What development during the 1850s caused northerners to fear that slavery would spread throughout the western territories?

The decision of the Supreme Court in the Dred Scott case that the Constitution protected a man's property, including slave property.


Missouri compermise of 1820?

There were two Missouri compromises. The one in 1820 determined the slave/free status of new states within the territory acquired from France in the Louisiana Purchase. The second one, the Compromise of 1850 did the same thing for the territories acquired from Mexico after the Mexican war.


What was Dred Scott argument to the supreme court?

Dred Scott argued that his time living in free territories should have made him a free man, as these territories prohibited slavery. He claimed that this should have nullified his status as a slave under the Missouri Compromise.


Was Crispus Attucks a runaway slave?

yes, he escaped in the 1850s 20 years before he died


In the 1850s which slave's case for freedom was argued before the U.S. Supreme Court?

Dred Scott


Why were there different classes of slaves?

The Romans did not actually have classes of slaves. A slave was a slave; slavery was a class. However a slave, depending upon his/her education and skills had status. For example a secretary had more status than a litter bearer and a city slave had more status than a rural worker in some cases. Any responsible position held by a slave raised his/her status. The Romans did have names for the jobs that a slave performed, such as "cantrix" for a singer, "agaso" for a groom, but these were job descriptions rather than classes.The Romans did not actually have classes of slaves. A slave was a slave; slavery was a class. However a slave, depending upon his/her education and skills had status. For example a secretary had more status than a litter bearer and a city slave had more status than a rural worker in some cases. Any responsible position held by a slave raised his/her status. The Romans did have names for the jobs that a slave performed, such as "cantrix" for a singer, "agaso" for a groom, but these were job descriptions rather than classes.The Romans did not actually have classes of slaves. A slave was a slave; slavery was a class. However a slave, depending upon his/her education and skills had status. For example a secretary had more status than a litter bearer and a city slave had more status than a rural worker in some cases. Any responsible position held by a slave raised his/her status. The Romans did have names for the jobs that a slave performed, such as "cantrix" for a singer, "agaso" for a groom, but these were job descriptions rather than classes.The Romans did not actually have classes of slaves. A slave was a slave; slavery was a class. However a slave, depending upon his/her education and skills had status. For example a secretary had more status than a litter bearer and a city slave had more status than a rural worker in some cases. Any responsible position held by a slave raised his/her status. The Romans did have names for the jobs that a slave performed, such as "cantrix" for a singer, "agaso" for a groom, but these were job descriptions rather than classes.The Romans did not actually have classes of slaves. A slave was a slave; slavery was a class. However a slave, depending upon his/her education and skills had status. For example a secretary had more status than a litter bearer and a city slave had more status than a rural worker in some cases. Any responsible position held by a slave raised his/her status. The Romans did have names for the jobs that a slave performed, such as "cantrix" for a singer, "agaso" for a groom, but these were job descriptions rather than classes.The Romans did not actually have classes of slaves. A slave was a slave; slavery was a class. However a slave, depending upon his/her education and skills had status. For example a secretary had more status than a litter bearer and a city slave had more status than a rural worker in some cases. Any responsible position held by a slave raised his/her status. The Romans did have names for the jobs that a slave performed, such as "cantrix" for a singer, "agaso" for a groom, but these were job descriptions rather than classes.The Romans did not actually have classes of slaves. A slave was a slave; slavery was a class. However a slave, depending upon his/her education and skills had status. For example a secretary had more status than a litter bearer and a city slave had more status than a rural worker in some cases. Any responsible position held by a slave raised his/her status. The Romans did have names for the jobs that a slave performed, such as "cantrix" for a singer, "agaso" for a groom, but these were job descriptions rather than classes.The Romans did not actually have classes of slaves. A slave was a slave; slavery was a class. However a slave, depending upon his/her education and skills had status. For example a secretary had more status than a litter bearer and a city slave had more status than a rural worker in some cases. Any responsible position held by a slave raised his/her status. The Romans did have names for the jobs that a slave performed, such as "cantrix" for a singer, "agaso" for a groom, but these were job descriptions rather than classes.The Romans did not actually have classes of slaves. A slave was a slave; slavery was a class. However a slave, depending upon his/her education and skills had status. For example a secretary had more status than a litter bearer and a city slave had more status than a rural worker in some cases. Any responsible position held by a slave raised his/her status. The Romans did have names for the jobs that a slave performed, such as "cantrix" for a singer, "agaso" for a groom, but these were job descriptions rather than classes.


What was the status of the black slave family?

The status of the black slave family was not good. These individuals and their family were not treated as equals to the white families that surrounded them.


What was the compromise resolved the issue that involved slavery?

The Compromise of 1850 was a series of laws passed by the U.S. Congress to address the issue of slavery in newly acquired territories from the Mexican-American War. The compromise included California being admitted as a free state, the Fugitive Slave Act to return escaped slaves to their owners, and popular sovereignty to determine slave or free status in other territories.