Abstract
Gains from trade may have been operative in allowing peaceful, simultaneous violations of the Missouri Compromise of 1820 and the Northwest Ordinance of 1787 both to occur in the year 1836. In the formative years of the vast continental United States, every other proposed and actual violation of these and similarly weighty territorial agreements (such as changes in the ground rules embodied in popular sovereignty, the Kansas-Nebraska Act, the Dred Scott decision, and the Wilmot Proviso) proved disruptive and even deadly. A unique territorial “logroll” unappreciated by historians and economists may have made this breach of vital territorial agreements starkly different.
Published Version
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
