The Compromises Of Daniel Webster And The Compromise Of 1850

1037 Words 5 Pages
Daniel Webster Defining his standing for his intent for the future of the Union with “Liberty and Union, now and forever, one and inseparable!”, Daniel Webster spoke for what would become the Compromise of 1850 (Kennedy 59). A legislature that would preserve the peace between the northern free states and the southern slave states, Webster risked his reputation, political career and his followers support for preservation of the Union. He believed that the Union was more important than himself, and as such spoke for a controversial proposal that it needed. Leading up to 1850, a fragile balance was kept between the number of free states and the number of slave states in the Senate. As an example, one compromise’s provisions kept that balance by adding Maine as a free state and Missouri as a slave state - thus named the Missouri Compromise. However, more and more conflicts arose that rocked the “peace” such as the questions of the slave trade in the District of Columbia, the enforcement of the Fugitive Slave Act, the future of New Mexico, which Henry Clay proposed a solution for: The Compromise of 1850. His compromise included five major parts: California would be admitted into the Union as a free state; New Mexico and Utah would be made into territories that had no laws prohibiting or allowing slavery, and …show more content…
Despite conflicting beliefs, Webster argued for a compromise that would later end his political career and his reputation that he believed was essential to the Union. And although there are differing opinions, the Compromise of 1850 helped the Union by delaying the Civil War by ten years as well as allowing for the inevitable war’s focus to be refined. True to his words, “I should indeed like to please you; but I prefer to save you, whatever be your attitude toward me”, Webster placed the welfare of the Union over him and especially the

Related Documents