Calhoun, Seward, and Webster Your

¶ … Calhoun, Seward, and Webster your purchase.In his "Higher Law" speech, William Seward reveals his opinions toward slavery pointing out that he believed it to be morally wrong. He encouraged his readers to think outside the box, so to speak when considering the aspect of slavery and freedom. He could not deny that slavery was legal in regard to the Constitution but what he so desperately wanted others to realize is that the Constitution did not protect the act of slavery. This might have seemed like a flimsy argument, but Seward recognized the difference and articulated it in this speech. He realized that the two could not rationally exist and still uphold one of the most precious rights Americans possess and that is the right to pursue happiness. Seward wrote, "There is another aspect of the principle of compromise which deserves consideration. It assumes that slavery, if not the only institution in a slave state, is at least a ruling institution, and that this characteristic is recognized by the Constitution" (Seward 21). Here we see that Seward is not attempting to change the Constitution. He then writes, "But slavery is only one of many institutions there. Freedom is equally an institution there. Slavery is only a temporary, accidental, partial, and incongruous one. Freedom on the contrary, is a perpetual, organic, universal one, in harmony with the Constitution of the United States" (Seward 21). The fact that Seward suggests that slavery is accidental demonstrates how he is willing to look at things from a different perspective. He was appealing to a higher law than the Constitution when he spoke out about slavery because he saw the contradiction within these two terms.

In his response to The Clay Compromise Measures, John Calhoun speaks out against Clay's notion. In his speech, he emphasized northern aggression and attempted to persuade his audience against any kind of compromise. He was under the impression that, at the time, there were two separate nations within the country and the differences between them must be settled in the name of peace. He thought that secession would solve all problems. He wrote, "It is only through a long process, and successively, that the cords can be snapped until the whole fabric falls asunder. Already the agitation of the slavery question has snapped some of the most important, and has greatly weakened all the others" (Calhoun). Here Calhoun is recognizing the problem and the possible scenario if the problem is not resolved. He also writes, "There is, again, only one way by which this can be effected, and that is by removing the causes by which this belief has been produced. Do this, and discontent will cease, harmony and kind feelings between the sections be restored, and every apprehension of danger to the Union removed" (Calhoun). Here he is presenting the problem and then he presents a solution when he writes that the North can "do justice by conceding to the South an equal right in the acquired territory, and to do her duty by causing the stipulations relative to fugitive slaves to be faithfully fulfilled" (Calhoun). Calhoun believed that the two opposing sides could retain their beliefs if the North would simply let the South live and operate the way they wanted to, as this was clearly not a violation of the Constitution.