Source A

John C. Calhoun’s last speech to the US Senate, 4 March 1850, where he suggests there is the possibility of compromise between North and South.

How can the Union be saved? There can be but one way and that is by a final settlement, on the principle of justice of all the questions at issue between the two sections. The South has asked for justice, simple justice, and less she ought not to take. She has no compromise to offer, but the constitution; and no concession or surrender. But can this be done? The North has only to will it to accomplish it – to do justice to the South by conceding to the South an equal right in the acquired territory and to ease the agitation of the slave question.

US Senate 31st Congress

Source B

A Senator from New York explains his reasons for opposing the Compromise of 1850.

The question is this: shall we permit slavery to be established in the new territories? Our forefathers would not have hesitated. They found slavery existing here, and they left it only because they could not remove it. Our own experience has proved the dangerous influence of slavery. All our fears, present and future, begin and end with slavery. If slavery, limited as it yet is, now threatens to undermine the Constitution, how can we, as prudent statesmen, enlarge its boundaries, and thus increase already impending dangers? I cannot consent to introduce slavery into any part of this continent which is now exempt from so great an evil.

William H. Seward, speech in the Senate, 13 March 1850

Source C

The Resolutions of the Nashville Convention, 10 June 1850. This Convention puts forward the view of radicals from the South.

Resolved: that Congress has no power to exclude from the territory of the USA any property lawfully held in the States.

Resolved: that the slaveholding States cannot and will not submit to an act of Congress that limits the rights of slave masters to remove their slaves from any territory of the USA or to make any law against the holding of slaves.

Mississippi Valley Historical Review, Volume IV

Source D

A leading politician from Georgia praises the Compromise of 1850 but criticises its opponents on both sides of the sectional divide.

The dangers which a few months ago threatened the peace of the country, including the very existence of the Union, have been avoided. The series of measures passed by Congress on the slavery question is a fair and honourable settlement of this alarming question. But unfortunately this settlement is not regarded as final by a large proportion of the people. In the North a clamour has been raised for the repeal of the Fugitive Slave Act by the abolitionists. In the South the spirit of opposition is equally violent and determined. Those in South Carolina who openly support the ending of the Union, and the Southern Rights party of Georgia, consider the settlement violates their rights and honour.

Congressman Howell Cobb, letter to Georgia Unionists, 17 February 1851

Source E

A modern historian analyses the Compromise of 1850.

The Compromise of 1850 resolved all the immediate issues that the late 1840s had thrown up. Stephen Douglas rejoiced its passing saying, ‘each section has maintained its rights and both have met on the common ground of justice and compromise’. However, the Compromise of 1850 may have been effective in preventing violence in 1850 but it could only be a temporary solution. It was a ceasefire rather than a true settlement.

Derrick Murphy, (2002) United States 1776–1992