1. On your whiteboard, can you write cow in 13 letters?
See o double you

2. By the end of today’s lesson, everybody will be able to…
DESCRIBE the people involved with the 1850 Compromise
ANALYSE the different view points on the 1850 Compromise
ASSESS the value of primary sources to historians studying the 1850 Compromise

4. 1850 Compromise Henry Clay Daniel Webster John Calhoun Jefferson Davis
William Seward
Stephen Douglas
Zachary Taylor
Millard Fillmore
1850 Compromise
Party and State (N/S)
Their situation at the time of the compromise (career)
View on the Compromise
Specific actions/speeches
Key quotes
Wider political career

5. Compromise of 1850

7. Did your person represent a Northern state?
Southern

8. Did your person belong to the Democrat party?
Whig

9. Did your person work in the Senate at the time of the 1850 Compromise?
Senator
House of Representatives
President

10. Was your person in favor of the Compromise?
FOR
AGAINST

11. BONUS ROUND
Tell me one fact about your person’s wider political career
What was your person’s specific involvement with the 1850 Compromise?

12. Senators

13. Henry Clay Whig from Kentucky
United States Senator for Kentucky. End of his career. Last major involvement in national affairs. Dies 2 years after the compromise.
In favour of the Compromise
Clay introduced an omnibus bill (8 resolutions to the senate), first 6 grouped together as concessions.
I believe it is the dove of peace, which, taking its aerial flight from the dome of the Capitol, carries the glad tidings of assured peace and restored harmony to all the remotest extremities of this distracted land. I believe that it will be attended with all these beneficent effects.
‘Great Compromiser’ – 1820 Missouri Compromise and creator of the third tariff in the Nullification Crisis 1933

14. John Calhoun Democrat from South Carolina
Senator for South Carolina > dies in the same year as the Compromise
Against the Compromise
Speech to Congress, but James Mason of Virginia made it. Calhoun was too weak to speak for himself, and so was sat wrapped in flannels.
“The great and primary cause of danger is that the equilibrium between the two sections has been destroyed”
Defender of states rights (specifically Southern values from perceived Northern threats). Leading politician in the Nullification Crisis. Had raised the issue of secession on several occasions through out his career. Served as Secretary of State and Vice President.

15. Daniel Webster Whig from Massachusetts
Senator for Massachusetts > Rejected Vice-Presidency > Secretary of State > his name had been mentioned in connection with possible Presidential candidacy (1852 election)
In favour of the Compromise
Seventh of March Speech (3.5 hours, little preparation – on drugs). Followed final speech of John Calhoun.
Mr. President: I wish to speak to-day, not as a Massachusetts man, nor as a Northern man, but as an American and a member of the Senate of the United States.
Federal action to stimulate the economy. Denounced nullification when South Carolina adopted it. Long an opponent of slavery extension, he spoke against annexing Texas and against going to war with Mexico.

16. William Seward Whig from New York
Senator for New York (beginning of career- had been involved in local political before as Governor of New York). He was an Abolitionist.
Against the Compromise
Higher Law speech made on the Senate floor. Condemned by Clay, Taylor and Southerners.
Slavery was an immoral practice and argued that there existed “a higher law than the Constitution.”
Goes on to be Secretary of State during the American Civil War

17. Jefferson Davis Democrat from Mississippi
Senator for Mississippi > early on in his career, has been in the HoR (rising star – Southern Nationalism)
Against the Compromise, particularly California as a free state
The Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government (after the Civil War)
“I somewhat impatiently declared my unwillingness to transfer to future generations a problem which they would be relatively less able to meet than we were”
Leaves Senate and becomes Governor of Mississippi. Staunch states’ rights Democrat and champion of the unrestricted expansion of slavery into the territories Will go on to be President of the Confederacy (southern states that secede from the Union), and will lead to the Confederacy in the Civil War. The Confederacy will ultimately lose…

18. House of Representatives

19. Stephen Douglas Democrat from Illinois
Had been in the House of Representatives and involved with state politics (Secretary of State of Illinois)
In favour of the Compromise (one of the strongest advocates)
Took over control of the Compromise bill, he split it down into single bills.
He becomes one of the Democrats national leaders, fails to win Presidential nominations (pierce). Stays in the Senate – causes political upheaval with the Kansas-Nebraska Act.

20. Presidents

21. Zachary Taylor Whig from New York
President (died mid-way through Compromise – July 1850)
Against the Compromise
As Congress negotiated and secession talks grew, Taylor threatened to send troops into New Mexico to protect its border from Texas, with himself leading the army.
anyone "taken in rebellion against the Union, he would hang ... with less reluctance than he had hanged deserters and spies in Mexico."
N/A – dead.

22. Millard Fillmore Whig from New York
Vice Presidents > President (after death of Taylor)
In favour of the Compromise
When he takes over as Presidents, he dismissed the cabinet and changed the administration's policy. The new president exerted pressure to gain the passage of the Compromise, which was enacted by September.
He sought election to a full term in 1852, but was passed over by the Whigs in favour of Winfield Scott.

23. Source Questions

24. NEVER USE THE WORD BIASED
Assessment
The question will ask you how useful a primary source is to historians who are studying X.
To do this, you need to look at:
Provenance
Tone/Emphasis
Argument/content in the source
How to set out each paragraph
Point about provenance/tone/content
Own knowledge
Explain whether this makes the source useful to a historian
NEVER USE THE WORD BIASED

25. PROVENANCE TONE/EMPHASIS CONTENT & ARGUMENT
POINT
EVIDENCE
EXPLAIN
What to pick out of the source for the paragraph
Own knowledge you have on the points you have picked out
Does what you’ve mentioned make the source valuable?
PROVENANCE
Nature/type
Author
Audience
Date/context
Who is the author
Who is the audience
The date/context
Is the author significant/have insight to the topic
Is the audience large or significant
Does the source give you insight you will not get elsewhere?
TONE/EMPHASIS
Language
Emotion
Why is the author using this language/emotion?
What reaction does the author want?
Does the tone convey emotion or strength of response to a reaction or event?
CONTENT & ARGUMENT
Views/opinions
Details
Does the content/argument give you insight to the debates and issues at the time?
Does the content/argument show you how a person or group perceived the world
VIEW POINT ARE VALUABLE

26. Adapted from the Seventh of March Speech to the US Senate (1850) by Daniel Webster, a leading Northern Senator. He gave this speech to the US Senate in favour of the Compromise.
Mr. President: I wish to speak to-day, not as a Massachusetts man, nor as a Northern man, but as an American and a member of the Senate of the United States. It is fortunate that there is a Senate of the United States; a body not yet moved from its respectability, not lost to a just sense of its own dignity and its own high responsibilities and a body to which the country looks, with confidence, for wise, moderate, patriotic and healing counsels. It is not to be denied that we live in the midst of strong agitations and are surrounded by very considerable dangers to our institutions and government. The imprisoned winds are let loose. The East, the North and the stormy South combine to throw the whole ocean into commotion, to toss its billows to the skies and disclose its profoundest depths. I do not affect to regard myself, as holding, or as fit to hold, the helm in this combat with the political elements.
One together – then give half the class one source and other half of the class another source.

27. Provenance
This speech by Daniel Webster is considered a key step in the move towards the Compromise of It followed the final speech in the Senate of John C. Calhoun. Webster, an important Northern Senator, was speaking in favour of the Compromise.
Webster’s willingness to compromise may have been connected to his ambitions of high office in the future; his name had been mentioned in connection with possible Presidential candidacy. He would require support from the North and South to gain the Presidency.
Webster made the speech with little or no preparation and was at this time largely sustained by drugs. This is the most famous and most important of Webster’s speeches but is not considered one of his best generally due to his state of health at the time.

28. Tone and Emphasis
Webster aims to persuade Senators to vote for compromise and the American people to support it. This was a key stage of the debate and Webster is looking to counter Calhoun’s speech against the compromise.
Webster uses emotive imagery to emphasise the danger that America was in if compromise was not reached. He likens America to a ship in a storm. This fits with picture of potential danger America was in that Douglas and others were focusing on to persuade people of the need to compromise.
The tone presents him as a patriot and humble servant of the nation. This may be seen as false humility from a man hoping to become the Whig Presidential Candidate.

29. Content and argument
The speech stresses the need for the nation and in particular the Senate to pull together and the need to heal the wounds of division. In particular it is aiming to counter Sectionalism, which had been stoked by Southern calls for secession. There was growing fear that failure of the Compromise would lead to Secession and in these circumstance it was essential that Clay and Douglas found conciliatory voices from amongst Northern Senators.
He warns of the potential threat to the very foundations and key institutions of America. This argument would appeal to Senators given the uncertainty of what would happen if there was a failure to reach compromise and Senators feared the collapse of the existing system.
He states that he is willing to play his part but does not see himself as taking the lead in the move to compromise. This role was being fulfilled by Clay and Douglas, they did however, need the support of the likes of Webster who could help shift the position of some of the wavering senators towards compromise.

30. Adapted from The Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government Volume One (of Two), by Jefferson Davis, 1881
While the compromise measures of 1850 were pending and the excitement concerning them was at its highest, I one day overtook Mr. Clay, of Kentucky, and Mr. Berrien, of Georgia, in the Capitol grounds. They were in earnest conversation. It was the 7th of March, the day on which Mr. Webster had delivered his great speech. Mr. Clay, addressing me in the friendly manner which he had always employed since I was a schoolboy, asked me what I thought of the speech. I liked it better than he did. He then suggested that I should “join the compromise men,” saying that it was a measure which he thought would probably give peace to the country for thirty years. Then, turning to Mr. Berrien, he said, “You and I will be under ground before that time, but our young friend here may face trouble in the future.” I somewhat impatiently declared my unwillingness to transfer to future generations a problem which they would be relatively less able to meet than we were

31. Provenance
The source is written by Jefferson Davis who was a rising star in Southern Nationalism at the time and who went on to be President of the Confederacy. He was widely believed to be the man who would take on Calhoun’s mantle as the leader of the Southern section in Washington.
The source is written after the Civil War and is written with hindsight by a man wanting to present his own version of the events, to defend the actions of himself and the South.

32. Tone and Emphasis
The tone shows that there was ‘excitement’ in March 1850 surrounding compromise but he did not share it. Many in the South felt that there was not enough in the Compromise for the South and it didn’t address the fundamental lack of balance between North and South.
There is emphasis on the friendly relations between Davis and Clay, but also Davis’ growing frustration with the elder statesmen’s desire to put off a final settlement of the issues. He clearly sees as this being the time for the issues to have been fully dealt with.

33. Content and argument
Davis states that Clay (the key man behind the Compromise) was less pleased with Webster’s speech than Davis was himself (as a strong supporter of slavery and the South).
Davis states that he was asked to join the pro-compromise camp but declined.
Davis argues that even Clay acknowledged that compromise would be temporary at that the Union faced potential conflict in the future.
Davis is demonstrating that he never supported compromise and knew it would not succeed.

34. Adapted from The New York Herald, September 8, 1850
Adapted from The New York Herald, September 8, The New York Herald was a Northern, popular and controversial newspaper.
Within the short space of two days, the House of Representatives has passed four of the most important measures connected with the slavery agitation, which grew out of the acquisition of new territory through the Mexican War. Leaving only the Fugitive Slave Bill and the bill for the abolition of slave traffic in the District of Columbia to be disposed of, the former having been passed by the Senate and the latter being now under consideration in that body. The whole of this disagreeable subject will, therefore, be shortly wound up and a check put to the ultras and fanatics of different sections of the Union, who have exerted themselves to keep alive the slavery agitation and maintain an estrangement of feeling between the Northern and the Southern States. The subject, therefore, which has caused so much uneasiness to the friends of the Union everywhere, as well as to the admirers of our political institutions at home and abroad, is set at rest in a manner satisfactory to all.

35. Provenance
The extract is taken from the New York Herald, which was a popular Northern newspaper and also a controversial one, in particular in its support for slavery.
The paper was known for its sensationalist stories more than considered political comment.
The New York Herald later became a target for Northern anger due to its stance on slavery. It cannot therefore be seen as fully representative of Northern opinion.

36. Tone and Emphasis
The source is celebratory in its tone, fitting for those who supported compromise but many believed the issues had not been resolved.
The emphasis is that compromise is good news and that sectional division highly damaging. This was certainly a view held by many but in the North there was much anger especially over the Fugitive Slave Law.
Those in favour of compromise are portrayed as ‘friends of the Union’ and those who opposed it as ‘fanatics and ultras’. This language is clearly aimed to persuade those who didn’t support the compromise.

37. Content and argument
The extract argues that the steps towards compromise were excellent news and the issue of slavery in the territories ‘is set at rest in a manner satisfactory to all’. Students may comment on how valid this is based on there being notable opposition to the Compromise.
The sectional divisions are blamed on ‘the ultras and fanatics of different sections of the Union’. These are clearly subjective terms being used to emphasis the case for compromise.
The extract points to the land acquired in the Mexican War as being a key aspect leading to Sectional tension, this was clearly the case in the debate on the extension of slavery.