Which of the following arguments could best be used to support the statement, "the compromise of 1850 increased sectional divides"? the compromise of 1850 increased sectional divides because texas was admitted to the union as a slave state. the compromise of 1850 increased sectional divides because washington d. c. could not participate in the slave trade. the compromise of 1850 increased sectional divides because it did not decisively address the issue of slavery. the compromise of 1850 increased sectional divides because it did not extend the missouri compromise into new territories.

The Compromise of 1850 was yet another attempt by the US federal government to decrease tensions between the North and South. In this compromise, California is added as a free state, New Mexico and Utah get to vote on whether or not they have slavery (also known as popular sovereignty), the slave trade will be banned in Washington DC, and a a new fugitive slave law is implemented. Based on these conditions, you can rule out the first statement.

Since the question asks specifically about sectionalism, you must consider the option that talks about the US in its entirety rather than a specific place, hence why you can rule out the second statement. Based on the conditions of this compromise, you can see that it does not directly deal with the issue of slavery for the entire US. This is why the third statement is correct.

Do you have more info about it ? i doubt this is the answer because i don't have all the information but if trouble was brewing in a clinic maybe it was an argument as to which clinic was better or smth of that nature