Week 9 · Chapter

Chapter 9 — Jeffersonian & Jacksonian America

U.S. History to 1877 Free sample edition

The module's primary reading · ~60–70 minutes · Objectives 1 and 6 · Read it first this week, before the lecture and the slide deck.

In plain language

This week covers the three decades after Thomas Jefferson took office in 1801. The country doubled in size with the Louisiana Purchase (land bought from France in 1803), fought Britain in the War of 1812, and built canals, steamboat lines, and factories that tied farms to distant markets. Voting widened under Jacksonian democracy (the opening of the vote to most white men around Andrew Jackson's rise), but only for white men. The same government forced the Cherokee Nation and other Native nations from their homelands in the Southeast, a policy called removal (forcing a people off its land to a place the government chose). You will read three dated documents from these years and ask, each time, who speaks in the document and who does not.

Why you already care about this

Picture a farm family in the hill country of the early 1800s, sitting at a table after supper. A cousin has written from the West. The land there is cheap, the rivers carry crops to market, and the government keeps promising more land. The family could sell the farm, load a wagon, and go.

You may know a version of that choice: a family that moved for work, or a friend who left home for a cheaper city. The questions underneath are the ones this week asks. Who owned the land the family wanted? Who decided it was for sale? And who paid the price of the move, besides the family itself?

In 1803 the United States bought Louisiana from France. In 1830 Congress passed the Indian Removal Act, and Andrew Jackson defended it to Congress. By 1832 Jackson was facing down South Carolina over a tariff. You will read the treaty, the message, and the proclamation at the center of that story, one short pinned passage at a time.

By the end of this chapter you will be able to:

explain the Louisiana Purchase and Jefferson's doubt about the Constitution;
explain the causes and the peace of the War of 1812, and compare two accounts of that peace;
explain the market revolution and its tie to cotton grown by enslaved people;
tell the Missouri Compromise line from popular sovereignty;
explain why Jacksonian democracy did not widen the vote for everyone;
source and close-read Jackson's removal message as evidence of his argument;
describe the Cherokee Nation's resistance and the forced removals;
explain the nullification crisis and Jackson's proclamation;
order the week's four years and sort a claim that shows from one that goes beyond.

Hook to keep: a growing country is also a country taking something from someone.

Carry this sentence with you: a President's word is evidence of his argument, not proof of his claim.

Where we are

Already covered: Week 1 built the four moves of sourcing, contextualization, close reading, and corroboration. Weeks 2 and 3 traced the colonies, Native nations' land, and how colonial law built hereditary racial slavery. Weeks 4 and 5 followed the break with Britain. Week 6 read the Constitution (1787), and Week 7 followed the first parties to Jefferson's First Inaugural Address (1801). Week 8 reviewed it all and read the 1790 census.
This week: the Louisiana Purchase, the War of 1812, the market and transportation revolutions, the Missouri Compromise, Jacksonian democracy, Indian removal and the Trail of Tears, and the nullification crisis.
How they connect: Week 7 ended with a peaceful change of parties in 1801. This week shows what the new majority did with power, and who paid for the country's growth.
Where we're going next: Week 10 turns to the reform movements of the same decades, and later weeks follow expansion to the Pacific.

Week 7 gave you two readings of the Constitution. Strict construction allows only the powers the text names; loose construction allows implied powers. Hold that pair, because Jefferson himself had to choose between them in 1803. Week 2 gave you the word dispossession, and Week 7 showed it in the Treaty of Greenville. This week dispossession happens on a far larger scale. This is a heavy week, in pages and in subject, and the course is built to be supportive of it. Take one section at a time.

1. Read the Louisiana Purchase: a treaty of cession

Imagine buying a house from a seller who bought it last year, while other people are still living in it. The deed changes hands in an office far away. Nobody asks the people inside. Keep those people in mind as you read this section.

In 1803 the United States bought Louisiana from France. The Louisiana Purchase is that purchase of the territory west of the Mississippi River. The National Archives gives the land as 828,000 square miles and the price as $15 million. The document that made it is a treaty of cession: a treaty in which one nation hands land to another.

The sale came out of events in the Caribbean. The Office of the Historian, the State Department's history office, ties it to Napoleon's failed war against the revolution of enslaved people in the French colony of Saint-Domingue. When that war collapsed, Napoleon gave up his plans for Louisiana and offered all of it.

Worked example — the four moves on the Louisiana Purchase Treaty. You take the moves in order.

Sourcing: the United States and the French Republic made it; it is a treaty of cession, signed in 1803; the National Archives keeps the transcript. Its closing line dates it twice, once in the French Republic's own calendar and once as 30 April 1803. It also says the text was first agreed in French, so the English you read sits beside a French original.
Contextualization: France had taken Louisiana back from Spain, and Napoleon's war in Saint-Domingue had failed.
Close reading: the pinned fragment says France "doth hereby cede to the United States in the name of the French Republic for ever and in full Sovereignty the said territory". The words "for ever" and "full Sovereignty" claim total control.
Close reading, continued: name what it leaves out. The land was home to many Native nations. The treaty mentions Native nations only as parties to Spain's old treaties, which the United States promised to honor.
Corroboration: the National Archives notes that Jefferson doubted the Constitution let the government acquire territory, and he set the doubt aside. That is a strict constructionist bending his own rule.

The reading in one plain sentence: the treaty shows that France handed Louisiana to the United States in 1803; it is evidence of what two governments agreed, not of what the Native nations living there agreed.

Misconception check. Students often think the Louisiana Purchase bought empty land. That is tempting, because maps of the purchase show one big shape with no people in it. But the land was the home of many Native nations, and the treaty sold claims to it without them. The cure is close reading: ask who lived on the land and whether the document names them.

Honesty note: the figures 828,000 square miles and $15 million are the National Archives' figures, written as the issuing body gives them. The course keys the year 1803, not the price.

2. Weigh the War of 1812: causes and a contested peace

Picture a small trading firm whose ships keep getting stopped at sea by a bigger rival. Sailors are pulled off the decks. Cargoes are held up. After years of protests, the firm's owners decide that talking has failed.

That was how many Americans saw Britain by 1812. The War of 1812 was the war the United States declared on Britain that year. The Office of the Historian names two causes at sea. The first was impressment: the British navy's practice of seizing sailors, American sailors among them, and forcing them to serve. The second was British limits on neutral trade. It adds two causes on land, western expansion and relations with Native nations.

Worked example — two accounts of one peace. You corroborate two sources on the treaty that ended the war.

The facts both share: Madison asked Congress for war in 1812, British forces burned the White House, and the Treaty of Ghent, signed in 1814, ended the war and restored the old boundaries.
Source A, the Office of the Historian, says the treaty made peace with Indian nations on the frontier.
Source B, a chief of the Whitecap Dakota First Nation speaking for the Canadian War Museum, says the First Nations allied with Britain were left out of the peace talks and felt abandoned.
Compare: the two do not contradict each other on the treaty's text. They differ on what the peace meant to Native nations, and Source B speaks from inside one of those nations.

In words: corroboration does not always settle a fact. Sometimes it shows you two vantage points on one event, and you report both.

Misconception check. Students often think the War of 1812 was only about ships and sailors. That is tempting, because impressment is the famous cause. But the Office of the Historian adds western expansion and relations with Native nations, and Native nations fought on both sides. The cure is to list every cause your sources give before you pick one.

3. Follow the market revolution: canals, mills, and cotton

Think about a canal town in western New York in the late 1820s. A merchant stands on the dock deciding what to ship east: wheat, flour, or potash. A month ago a barrel took weeks to reach the coast by wagon. Now a canal boat carries it in days, for far less.

That merchant is living through the market revolution: the change, from about 1815 to 1850, by which canals, steamboats, early railroads, and factories tied farms and towns into national markets. The building of those canals, steamboat lines, and railroads is the transportation revolution, and it drove the market revolution. Goods moved faster and cheaper, so more people made goods to sell and bought what they once made at home.

The Erie Canal, opened in 1825, is the famous case. It ran across New York State and linked the Great Lakes to the Hudson River and the port of New York City.

Worked example — following a bale of cotton. You trace one chain of the new market.

In a Massachusetts mill town, water power runs the spinning and weaving machines, and young women from farm families tend them for long hours.
The mills spin cotton. That cotton was grown in the South.
The cotton was grown by enslaved people. The market revolution deepened the South's dependence on enslaved labor, because the new mills wanted more cotton every year.

In words: the market revolution tied the free-labor mills of the North to the slave-labor cotton fields of the South. A new market is not a neutral thing; you ask who did the work at each link.

Misconception check. Students often think the market revolution belonged only to the North, because the canals and mills were there. That is tempting. But the mills ran on cotton that enslaved people grew. The cure is to follow the goods back to where they were made.

Pause and choose one. (a) Write two sentences on how a canal could change the life of a farm family a hundred miles from the coast. (b) Write two sentences on what a mill's cloth leaves out about the people who grew its cotton.

4. Keep two rules apart: the Missouri Compromise line

Imagine a club whose bylaws say a new member may join only if another joins at the same time, so the two sides of a long quarrel stay even. One day a member applies, and the club has to find a partner to admit. Then it writes a second rule for everyone who applies later.

That is the shape of the Missouri Compromise (1820). You read it from the course's territories set. It admitted Missouri as a slave state and Maine as a free state, and it barred slavery north of 36 degrees 30 minutes in the rest of the Louisiana Purchase. The National Archives says Congress paired the two states to keep the balance between slave and free states.

The Missouri Compromise line is that line of latitude, drawn by Congress. North of it, in the rest of the Louisiana Purchase, slavery was barred.

Worked example — reading the measure. You read the territories set's row, part by part.

Missouri: admitted as a slave state.
Maine: admitted as a free state.
The rest of the Louisiana Purchase: slavery barred north of 36 degrees 30 minutes.
Who decided? Congress drew the line on a map, in 1820.

In words: the Missouri Compromise was Congress deciding where slavery could spread, by drawing a line.

Misconception check. Students often think the Missouri Compromise line and popular sovereignty were the same rule. That is tempting, because both dealt with slavery in the territories. But the Missouri Compromise line was a line Congress drew. Popular sovereignty, which a later week takes up, left the question to the settlers' votes instead. The cure is to ask one question of any measure: who decides, Congress or the settlers?

5. Test a word: Jacksonian democracy and who could vote

Picture a county seat on election day in the 1830s. Men crowd the courthouse steps, a band plays, and a candidate's friends hand out handbills. Voting is loud and public. Now look at who is in the crowd, and who is missing.

Jacksonian democracy names the widening of the vote to most white men in the 1820s and 1830s and the rise of mass party politics around Andrew Jackson. Parties now ran campaigns aimed at very large numbers of ordinary white voters.

Worked example — who gained and who lost. You sort the groups at that county seat.

Most white men: gained the vote.
Free Black men: lost voting rights in several states in the same years.
Women: could not vote at all.
Native nations of the Southeast: were being driven from their homelands.
A document check: the Missouri act's own text, in the National Archives transcript, had already limited the voters for Missouri's convention to free white men. That is a paraphrase, not a quotation.

In words: the vote widened for white men while the rights of others narrowed. One word, democracy, covers both movements, so you check whom it included.

Misconception check. Students often think Jacksonian democracy widened the vote for everyone. That is tempting, because the word democracy sounds universal. But it widened the vote for white men while free Black men lost ground, women stayed shut out, and Native nations were removed. The cure is to name the group every time you say the vote widened.

6. Read Jackson's removal message: a President's argument

Think about a company's annual report to its shareholders. It describes the year's biggest decision in the best possible light. It speaks for the company, to people the company wants to persuade. You would never read it as the employees' view of that decision.

In 1830 Congress passed, and Jackson signed, the Indian Removal Act: the law that authorized the President to negotiate treaties for the removal of Native nations living east of the Mississippi River to land in the west. Months later Jackson reported on it to Congress. That report is an annual message: the President's yearly report to Congress. It is the week's Primary Source Workshop document.

Worked example — the four moves on Jackson's message. You take the moves in order.

Sourcing: President Andrew Jackson is the author; it is an annual message to Congress, dated 1830; the National Archives keeps it. He wrote it to persuade Congress and the public.
Contextualization: the Removal Act had passed that year; Georgia and other states were pressing to take Native land.
Close reading: the pinned fragment reads "the benevolent policy of the Government, steadily pursued for nearly thirty years, in relation to the removal of the Indians beyond the white settlements is approaching to a happy consummation". The word benevolent means kind. Jackson calls removal kind and nearly complete.
Close reading, continued: name who speaks and who does not. The President speaks to Congress. No Native nation speaks anywhere in the message. The message also uses the language of its time about Native peoples; the course quotes it only to read the document and never adopts that language.
Corroboration: set it beside what the Cherokee Nation itself did, in the next section.

The reading in one plain sentence: Jackson's message shows how the President justified removal to Congress; it is evidence of his argument, not of the Cherokee Nation's view.

Misconception check. Students often think a President's word that removal was benevolent is evidence that it was. That is tempting, because the source is official and confident. But the message shows what Jackson claimed, not what removal did to the people removed. The cure is the plain sentence: say what the source shows, then say what it does not.

Pause and choose one. (a) Write two sentences on why an official report is strong evidence of a government's aims and weak evidence of the people it affected. (b) Write two sentences on what a reader of 1830 would have missed by reading only this message.

7. Name the removals plainly: the Cherokee Nation and the Trail of Tears

This section describes forced removal and the deaths of thousands of people. Read it at your own pace.

The Cherokee Nation is a Native nation whose homelands lay in present-day Georgia, Tennessee, Alabama, and North Carolina. Before removal it had a written constitution and published its own newspaper, the Cherokee Phoenix, printed in Cherokee and English. When Georgia moved to take Cherokee land, the Cherokee Nation took Georgia to the Supreme Court and won. Removal went ahead anyway.

Worked example — the steps of the Cherokee removal. You follow the record the National Park Service gives, in order.

1835: a small group of Cherokee people who held no elected office signed the Treaty of New Echota, a removal treaty giving up the homeland in the East. Most of the Cherokee Nation protested it.
1836: the Senate ratified the treaty anyway.
1838: soldiers and state militias forced more than 16,000 Cherokee people from their homes into camps.
1838 and 1839: the forced march west to Indian Territory, in present-day Oklahoma. This is the Trail of Tears.

Thousands of Cherokee people died on the Trail of Tears and in the camps, the journey falling hardest on children and elders. The National Archives and the National Park Service give different estimates of how many. Historians revise these figures, so this course says it in words and asks you to memorize no death figure.

The Cherokee Nation was not alone. The Muscogee (Creek), Choctaw, Chickasaw, and Seminole nations were also forced west to Indian Territory. These nations remain nations today. The Cherokee Nation's capital is Tahlequah, Oklahoma. The Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians, descended from people who escaped the roundup, governs from Cherokee, North Carolina.

Now corroborate the message from section 6. Jackson called removal benevolent. The Cherokee Nation's own record shows a people who governed themselves, went to court, and protested a treaty they never approved.

Misconception check. Students often think Native nations belong only to the past, because history books stop telling their story after removal. That is tempting. But the Cherokee, Muscogee (Creek), Choctaw, Chickasaw, and Seminole nations govern themselves today. The cure is the present tense: these nations are nations now.

Caveat: contextualization explains why removal happened; it never excuses it.

8. Defend the Union: the nullification crisis

Imagine a town that decides a state sales tax does not apply inside its limits. The town council votes the tax void and tells shopkeepers not to collect it. Every other town is watching to see what the governor does next.

That is the shape of the nullification crisis. Nullification is the claim that a state may declare a federal law void and refuse to enforce it inside its borders. A tariff is a tax on goods brought into a country from abroad. In 1832 a South Carolina convention declared the federal tariff acts of 1828 and 1832 null and void inside the state.

Jackson answered with a presidential proclamation: a formal public announcement issued by a President. The Avalon Project keeps the text.

Worked example — the four moves on the proclamation. You take the moves in order.

Sourcing: President Jackson issued it in 1832; it is a presidential proclamation. Avalon's note says Secretary of State Edward Livingston wrote it, so you source it as Jackson's proclamation in Livingston's words.
Contextualization: the South Carolina convention had declared two federal tariffs void inside the state.
Close reading: the proclamation calls a state's claimed power to annul a federal law "incompatible with the existence of the Union".
Corroboration: set it beside the removal message. The same President defended federal law against one state, while the law he had signed drove Native nations from their homelands.

The reading in one plain sentence: the proclamation shows that Jackson denied a state's power to annul a federal law; it is evidence of his position, not of how every South Carolinian saw the tariff.

Misconception check. Students often think the proclamation's words are Jackson's own pen, because his name is at the bottom. That is tempting. But Avalon's note credits Edward Livingston as the writer. The cure is sourcing: ask who wrote a document as well as who signed it, as you did with Washington's Farewell Address.

9. Order the week's years and sort two claims

Picture four folders on a shelf, each with a year on its spine. Before you open them, you put them in order. Then the week's story has a shape you can follow.

Worked example — ordering the week's years. Put four years from the course chronology in order and measure the gaps.

Order, earliest to latest: 1803 (the Louisiana Purchase Treaty), 1820 (the Missouri Compromise), 1830 (the Indian Removal Act and Jackson's removal message), and 1832 (the Proclamation on Nullification).
Gaps: 1820 − 1803 = 17 years; 1830 − 1820 = 10 years; 1832 − 1830 = 2 years.
Span: 1832 − 1803 = 29 years.
Check: the three gaps add back to the span, 17 + 10 + 2 = 29 years.
From Week 7: Jefferson's First Inaugural Address (1801) to the Louisiana Purchase Treaty (1803) is 1803 − 1801 = 2 years.

Worked example — fragments to documents. You match each pinned fragment to its document.

"doth hereby cede to the United States in the name of the French Republic for ever and in full Sovereignty the said territory" comes from D20, the Louisiana Purchase Treaty, 1803.
"the benevolent policy of the Government, steadily pursued for nearly thirty years, in relation to the removal of the Indians beyond the white settlements is approaching to a happy consummation" comes from D21, Jackson's message, 1830.
"incompatible with the existence of the Union" comes from D22, Jackson's proclamation, 1832.
Count: one fragment from each document, 1 + 1 + 1 = 3 fragments.

Worked example — sorting two claims. The course's evidence-claims set is illustrative; it pairs a claim that shows with one that goes beyond.

Item 5: Jackson's message calls removal a benevolent policy. That shows what the source says.
Item 6: removal was benevolent because the President said so. That goes beyond the source.
Count: one of each, 1 + 1 = 2 items keyed.

In words: in 29 years the country bought Louisiana, drew a line for slavery, removed Native nations, and faced down a state. A source shows what its author claimed; it does not prove the claim.

Misconception check. Students often think a claim about a document is proved because the document exists. That is tempting, because the message is real. But item 6 turns Jackson's word into a fact about removal. The cure is to ask whether the claim describes the source or the world.

Key terms

Louisiana Purchase — the United States' purchase from France, by a treaty of 1803, of the territory of Louisiana west of the Mississippi River. (first used: 1. Read the Louisiana Purchase: a treaty of cession)
Treaty of cession — a treaty in which one nation hands land to another. (first used: 1. Read the Louisiana Purchase: a treaty of cession)
War of 1812 — the war the United States declared on Britain in 1812 over impressment and trade, with western expansion and Native nations also at stake. (first used: 2. Weigh the War of 1812: causes and a contested peace)
Impressment — the British navy's practice of seizing sailors, American sailors among them, and forcing them to serve. (first used: 2. Weigh the War of 1812: causes and a contested peace)
Treaty of Ghent — the treaty signed in 1814 that ended the War of 1812 and restored the old boundaries. (first used: 2. Weigh the War of 1812: causes and a contested peace)
Market revolution — the change, from about 1815 to 1850, by which canals, steamboats, early railroads, and factories tied farms and towns into national markets. (first used: 3. Follow the market revolution: canals, mills, and cotton)
Transportation revolution — the building of canals, steamboat lines, and early railroads that made moving people and goods faster and cheaper. (first used: 3. Follow the market revolution: canals, mills, and cotton)
Erie Canal — the canal across New York State, opened in 1825, that linked the Great Lakes to the Hudson River and New York City. (first used: 3. Follow the market revolution: canals, mills, and cotton)
Missouri Compromise — the measure of 1820 that admitted Missouri as a slave state and Maine as a free state and barred slavery north of 36 degrees 30 minutes in the rest of the Louisiana Purchase. (first used: 4. Keep two rules apart: the Missouri Compromise line)
Missouri Compromise line — the line of latitude at 36 degrees 30 minutes, drawn by Congress, north of which slavery was barred in the rest of the Louisiana Purchase. (first used: 4. Keep two rules apart: the Missouri Compromise line)
Jacksonian democracy — the widening of the vote to most white men in the 1820s and 1830s and the rise of mass party politics around Andrew Jackson. (first used: 5. Test a word: Jacksonian democracy and who could vote)
Indian Removal Act — the law of 1830 that authorized the President to negotiate treaties for the removal of Native nations east of the Mississippi River to land in the west. (first used: 6. Read Jackson's removal message: a President's argument)
Annual message — the President's yearly report to Congress. (first used: 6. Read Jackson's removal message: a President's argument)
Cherokee Nation — a Native nation of the Southeast that resisted removal in the courts, was forced west on the Trail of Tears, and governs itself today from Tahlequah, Oklahoma. (first used: 7. Name the removals plainly: the Cherokee Nation and the Trail of Tears)
Cherokee Phoenix — the Cherokee Nation's own newspaper, printed in Cherokee and English before removal. (first used: 7. Name the removals plainly: the Cherokee Nation and the Trail of Tears)
Treaty of New Echota — the removal treaty of 1835 signed by a small group of Cherokee people who held no elected office. (first used: 7. Name the removals plainly: the Cherokee Nation and the Trail of Tears)
Removal treaty — a treaty in which a Native nation gave up its homeland in the East for land in Indian Territory. (first used: 7. Name the removals plainly: the Cherokee Nation and the Trail of Tears)
Indian Territory — the land west of the Mississippi River, in present-day Oklahoma, to which the United States forced the Native nations of the Southeast. (first used: 7. Name the removals plainly: the Cherokee Nation and the Trail of Tears)
Trail of Tears — the forced removal of the Cherokee Nation to Indian Territory in 1838 and 1839, during which thousands of Cherokee people died. (first used: 7. Name the removals plainly: the Cherokee Nation and the Trail of Tears)
Nullification crisis — the conflict that began in 1832 between South Carolina, which declared the federal tariffs void, and President Jackson. (first used: 8. Defend the Union: the nullification crisis)
Nullification — the claim that a state may declare a federal law void and refuse to enforce it inside its borders. (first used: 8. Defend the Union: the nullification crisis)
Tariff — a tax on goods brought into a country from abroad. (first used: 8. Defend the Union: the nullification crisis)
Presidential proclamation — a formal public announcement issued by a President. (first used: 8. Defend the Union: the nullification crisis)

Summary

The Louisiana Purchase Treaty (1803) ceded Louisiana to the United States without the Native nations living there.
Jefferson doubted the Constitution allowed the purchase and set the doubt aside.
The War of 1812 ended with the Treaty of Ghent; First Nations allied with Britain were left out of the talks.
The market revolution tied northern mills to cotton grown by enslaved people.
The Missouri Compromise line (1820) was drawn by Congress; it is not popular sovereignty.
Jacksonian democracy widened the vote for white men, not for everyone.
Jackson's message (1830) is evidence of his argument, not of the Cherokee Nation's view.
The Cherokee, Muscogee (Creek), Choctaw, Chickasaw, and Seminole nations were forced west, and they remain nations today.
Jackson's proclamation (1832) called nullification incompatible with the Union.

Check your understanding

Work these before looking at the answers — they are ungraded, and the answers (with reasoning) are at the bottom of the page.

An illustrative river town opens a ferry in 1841, a bridge in 1858, and a rail depot in 1866. How many years passed from the ferry to the bridge, and from the bridge to the depot?
An illustrative county rule says only property owners may vote. A new rule drops the property test for men of one group and adds a ban for men of another. Did the vote widen for everyone? Explain in two sentences.
A classmate writes that a governor's speech proves his road plan helped every town. Rewrite the claim so it says only what the speech shows.
An illustrative state legislature votes to let each new county decide by ballot whether to allow a new kind of mill. Is that a line drawn by the legislature or a choice left to the settlers' votes? Explain.

Answers (worked reasoning — read after attempting)

Ferry to bridge: 1858 − 1841 = 17 years. Bridge to depot: 1866 − 1858 = 8 years. Name which two dates you measure between, as you did with the purchase and the compromise.
No. The vote widened for one group while another lost it, which is the pattern of Jacksonian democracy for white men and free Black men; you name each group rather than say the vote widened.
Write it as: the governor's speech says his road plan helped every town. That describes the source; whether the plan helped every town needs other evidence, as with item 6 of the evidence-claims set.
It is a choice left to the voters of each county, the shape of popular sovereignty rather than a line the legislature drew. The Missouri Compromise line, by contrast, was drawn by Congress.

Next up in this module: the Readings & Resources page, the lecture tutorial, the practice set, and the quiz. Next week the reform movements take up a new method, reading a dictated narrative.

Built with The Course Maker · samples.thecoursemaker.com