Compromise of 1850

“It is a work of mutual concession—an agreement in which there are reciprocal stipulations—a work in which, for the sake of peace and concord, one party abates his extreme demands in consideration of an abatement of extreme demands by the other party: it is a measure of mutual concession—a measure of mutual sacrifice.”

After opening his speech with three rather short sentences, Clay allows the fourth to expand, relying on repetition to ensure clarity of his definition. The term “mutual” occurs three times, with the phrase “mutual concession” repeated twice. In addition, the term “abate” occurs twice, as does “demands.” The phrase “one party” is also echoed by the phrase “other party.” Another effect of the repetition is thus to embody in the language itself the nature of what a compromise is: an exchange in which something is given by both sides.

“But when he comes to reflect that, from the nature of the government and its operations, and from those with whom he is dealing, it is necessary upon his part, in order to secure what he wants, to grant something to the other side, he should be reconciled to the concession which he has made in consequence of the concession which he is to receive, if there is no great principle involved, such as a violation of the Constitution of the United States.”

Clay outlines here the realization that he imagines that his fellow lawmakers should have already had, namely that compromise is necessary in order to govern. His first six phrases and clauses, set off by commas, are short; the seventh is longer and includes repetition of the word “concession.” The effect is that Clay again uses the cadence of his sentences to communicate the nature of compromise. The choppier features of the sentence build tension and suspense, while the longer clause (“he should be reconciled to the concession which he has made in consequence of the concession which he is to receive”) returns the