The moral arguments and political actions of those opposed to the spread of slavery can be seen in the Missouri Compromise and the Compromise of 1850. The South wanted to expand slavery into the new territories, while the North didn't favor the expansion of slavery. The political actions of the Missouri Compromise showed that the North had less of a moral issue with slavery. Most Northerners were against slavery because it took jobs away from the white people and it gave the South more representation. Henry Clay proposed a compromise which satisfied both the north and south.The Missouri Compromise admitted Missouri as a slave state and Maine as a free state. All future slavery was prohibited in the reminder of the Louisiana Purchase north of the 36 30 line. Both the North and South gained something. The South won a new slave state and the North won the admission that congress could forbid slavery in the remaining territories. The restriction of slavery was not offensive to the slaveowners because the northern land did not seem suited to slave labor. Southern congressmen still voted against the compromise. The Compromise of 1850 showed a moral issue the north rather than just a political issue. The Compromise dealt with the issue of whether the remainder of the Mexican Cession area was to be free or slave. Henry Clay created a compromise that admitted California as a free state, while New Mexico and Utah selected their stand through popular sovereignty.