Compare and Contrast Essay - Daniel Webster & John Calhoun

Daniel Webster & John Calhoun

The Compromise of 1850 brought changes into the Union, some good and some bad depending on what beliefs someone might have. The Compromise mainly took care of California admitted as a free state, the territories of New Mexico and Utah had no federal prohibition of slavery, boundaries between Texas and New Mexico adjusted, Texas awarded 10 million dollars to compensate for land given to New Mexico, slave trading was prohibited in the District of Columbia but not slavery itself, and fugitive slave law was vigorously enforced. All of these changes came after the speeches from three gentlemen who all served as Legislators.

William Seward born in Florida, New York and a leader of the Whig party was the last to give his speech on March 11, 1850. Seward later became a republican in 1855 after the Whig party was no longer. Daniel Webster, who read his speech to the senate on March 7, 1850, was a senator from Massachusetts and was also part of the Whig party and very influential. Seward and Webster may have been both part of the Whig party but they had different opinions about the Compromise of 1850. John Calhoun was the first to give his speech to the Senate on March 4, 1850. Calhoun was the senator of South Carolina and a member of the Republican Party. Seward, Webster, and Calhoun may have had some similarities in their lives, but their opinions, and what they thought was right, were totally different.

The three gentlemen speeches had different positions on slavery. Calhoun was pro-slavery and said, "The agitation of the slavery question is one of many causes that jeopardize the unity of the nation." Seward, who was opposed to slavery, warned people that if slavery was not abolished there will be a civil war in America. Maybe the people should have listened to Seward and the Civil War, in which over 600,000 lives were lost, would have never happened. Webster, on the other hand, was a man who played it safe he compromised to both pros and cons of slavery.

The entrance of California and New Mexico was another issue that Calhoun and Seward did not agree upon. Calhoun was opposed to the admittance of California and New Mexico into the Union for the fact that the equilibrium would be unbalanced. Although Seward came with a good point and said that there was no equilibrium among the nations in the first place. If California entered the union as a free state the South would be outnumbered even more so than the present time. This would lead to the North being even more powerful with senate leaders. Seward was, of course, for the entrance of California and New Mexico.

The Annexation of Texas on the other hand had different views from Webster and Calhoun. Calhoun was for the Annexation of Texas and Webster was against. Webster didn't have strong views in most of his speech, although he felt that the Annexation of Texas was