In a letter dated February 6, 1850, ailing South Carolina senator John C. Calhoun wrote to his friend Thomas G. Clemson about impending legislation addressing the constitutionality of slavery in the western reaches of the Union. Calhoun’s trepidation concerning the slavery question and is abundantly clear in the letter’s final two lines, in which he states- “Clay has offered what he calls a compromise, but will get little support. I do not see how the question can be settled”. The Henry Clay-authored Compromise of 1850 represented, Calhoun argued, yet another attempt to erode the already diminished political influence exercised by the slaveholding states of the South. Sixteen days after Calhoun’s correspondence with Clemson, on March 4,
…show more content…
In regard to the question of slavery in the western territories, Calhoun attested to the South’s willingness to defer to the constitution for resolution of the issue, stating, “[The slaveholding states] are willing to leave the whole subject where the constitution and the great and fundamental principles of self-government place it.” By yielding to the constitution in his defense of the expansion of slavery, Calhoun sincerely believed he was crusading in defense of the union. In the years immediately preceding the Compromise of 1850, Calhoun scorned compromises as antipathetic to the tenets of the constitution, exclaiming in 1847, “Let us be done with compromises. Let us go back and stand upon the constitution!” In an April 1849 letter addressed to John H. Means, Calhoun again appealed to the constitution as the definitive document for resolving the sectional strife between North and South. Following passage of the Compromise of 1850, Calhoun responded by denouncing the compromise and reaffirming his belief in the constitution, stating, “the South has no compromise to offer but the constitution…” From the late 1840s until his death in 1850, Calhoun repeatedly supported the constitution over compromise in matters of sectional disagreement. His unwavering appeal to the constitution was grounded in the fear that Northern political interests would soon become powerful enough to override the nation’s guiding document, placing the South at the mercy of Northern politicians and
In regard to the question of slavery in the western territories, Calhoun attested to the South’s willingness to defer to the constitution for resolution of the issue, stating, “[The slaveholding states] are willing to leave the whole subject where the constitution and the great and fundamental principles of self-government place it.” By yielding to the constitution in his defense of the expansion of slavery, Calhoun sincerely believed he was crusading in defense of the union. In the years immediately preceding the Compromise of 1850, Calhoun scorned compromises as antipathetic to the tenets of the constitution, exclaiming in 1847, “Let us be done with compromises. Let us go back and stand upon the constitution!” In an April 1849 letter addressed to John H. Means, Calhoun again appealed to the constitution as the definitive document for resolving the sectional strife between North and South. Following passage of the Compromise of 1850, Calhoun responded by denouncing the compromise and reaffirming his belief in the constitution, stating, “the South has no compromise to offer but the constitution…” From the late 1840s until his death in 1850, Calhoun repeatedly supported the constitution over compromise in matters of sectional disagreement. His unwavering appeal to the constitution was grounded in the fear that Northern political interests would soon become powerful enough to override the nation’s guiding document, placing the South at the mercy of Northern politicians and