At the Edge of the Precipice Summary Robert Vincent Remini is the author of ‘At the Edge of the Precipice' which is a book that gives a thrilling account of a vital moment in the history of United States of America. It is narrated from the viewpoint of one of America's most substantial historical iconic charisma. It depicts a colossal practice of politics that only a competent statesman such as Henry Clay could broker. Even though the Compromise would collapse a decade later, plummeting the country into civil war, Clay's triumph in 1850 eventually salvaged the Union by offering the North an additional decade to mechanize and prepare. Moreover, the author assesses the aspects resulting from the ultimate break-up of the union that exhibited why the compromise was challenging and substantial. Consequently, he provides an in-depth look at the legislative procedure and the play of numerous political interests in implementing the Compromise. Clay's strengths and contributions to the Compromise are stressed as well his shortcomings. “At the Edge of the Precipice” covers issues of slavery, secession, civil war, compromise and bipartisan which offers a timely recap of the significance of bipartisanship in a pugnacious era. The theme of slavery is the first one discussed in “At the Edge of the Precipice”. The United States experienced an intense national crisis in 1850 with a …show more content…
crisis that threatened to break up the country into two. The problem of slavery in the new territories of California and New Mexico. Majority of the northerners were convinced prohibiting the practice of slavery was the solution for attempted secession. Though, the southern states viewed that the federal government did not possess any right to deduce to decide on the practice of slavery. The then President Zachary Taylor had no precise strategy to counter the issue. He tried to be neutral though this proved to be a wrong solution to the cooling the tension between the southern and northern states. On the contrary, the division between the North and South continued to be wider. Majority of the southerners conversed that the southerners should declare its independence from the remainder of the nation. Surprisingly, Senator Henry Clay of Kentucky presented his opinion of slavery in the union. Even though a slave merchant himself, Clay conflicted the expansion of slavery on belief. He said, "I consider slavery as a curse—a curse to the master, a wrong, a grievous wrong to the slave" (Remini 145). He argued bondage as both legal and significant to the economy of the southerners, painting supporters of prompt freedom as "sentimentalists". Compromise is the second theme that is addressed in Remini’s ‘At the Edge of the Precipice.' In instances of problems, the call for compromise has presented a certain type of genius. The fidgety antebellum masses have referred Clay as ‘the great composer.' For instance, Clay brainstormed the Missouri Compromise that addressed about South Carolina from annulation and blocked Andrew Jackson from using power against the state. Clay agitates "That principle holds as true now as it did 160 years ago—something we'd do well to remember during the current rancorous debate over health care" (Remini 34). The Missouri Compromise negotiated the welfare as one of the most beleaguered populations even further by enabling a new slave state into the union. The Senator's initiatives to craft a bill that enabled South Carolina to salvage itself from a hot discussion over a state's right to annul a federal law dodged an armed confrontation, though flopped to resolve the financial problems of southern farmers. His exemplary diplomacy foreseen Jackson's application of force, though was debatably less than a band-assist on a gaping and rotten wound and a short-term stay against a president's recurrent recourse to ferocity. Every of these famous compromise measures centered on an acute evaluation of the greater good: salvaging the union rather than a pure abolitionist strategy: conserving the supremacy of federal law over decentralization of power that would have cemented a disjointed vocation to political anarchy. Additionally, Clay saw numerous issues that divided the union and that a thriving compromise package would require to associate with apparent disparate issues. Therefore, Clay brainstormed a sequence of proposals entailing: the inclusion of California to the country, the organization of the region of New Mexico, the borders of Texas, bondage business in Columbia state and a federal presumption of the debts of the former Republic of Texas. Furthermore, the suggested compromises offered something to every party and Clay presented them using violence and articulateness. After numerous debates comprising missteps along the journey, Clay's proposals became the foundation of the Compromise of 1850. Civil War is introduced as the third issue that Remini strives to present to the reader. Professors of Law advice that each move should be tactical in mediating an agreement, and Remini narrates the options Clay made to convince his proposal to the audiences. "All legislation, all government, all society, is formed upon the principle of mutual concession, politeness, comity, courtesy,"( Remini 91) which shows that Clay declared as he deviously persuaded his fellow honorable to accept on the situations of addition of California and New Mexico as states, ban on slavery business in the District of Columbia and other disturbing problems. Nonetheless, the twisted procedure deals brokered and eventual resolution became the material of high drama in Remini's crafting of Clay's efforts. The victory of Clay's campaign, each approved at the period, stopped the civil war in 1850. The role of national leadership in conserving the union in 1850, especially that of the Great Triumvirate and contends that their worries for the union and their skillful leadership over the forces of disunion. An addition of new territory provoked Northern politicians to demand their new states remain free; in return, Southerners bluntly threatened to exclude themselves from the Union. Here, only Clay could brainstorm the best solution for this issue. The fourth issue addressed in the book is the Threats of Secession. Remini applies the sectional predicament accelerated by the acquisition of territory from the Mexican War as a briefing to assess the craft and procedure of political compromise. His vigorous account of the Compromise of 1850 dexterously and briefly examines the leadership role of Henry Clay in directing the country via the swirling and deadly political waters of the period and in avoiding the dissolution of the political bickering, partisan interests, individual frailties, and sectional distinctions that ultimately concluded in the sequence of the Compromise, ironically with Stephen Douglas at the pinnacle. Clay had left the capital after the setback of his "omnibus" bill that had categorized the numerous components of the Compromise into a solitary legislative proposal, a tactical error that Douglas had grasp from the initial and later corrected via the sequence of its elements via isolated bills. Clay's most noteworthy occasion of the authoritative phase came in 1850 concerning California. In his epic speech, Clay encouraged a sophisticated system of a room that would remove concerns from every phase. He deduced with a fanatical appeal for the nation. "I am directly opposed to any purpose of secession, or separation," (Remini 64). On the other hand, he begged the Northerners and Southerners to break at the edge of the slope, earlier the terrifying and cataclysmic jump is grasped into the huge abyss underneath. Bipartisanship reveals the fifth theme that the author tries to shade to the reader.
Clay addresses "that great principle of compromise and concession which lies at the bottom of our institutions" (Remini 184). The contemporary preoccupation for "bipartisanship" as principled ends in themselves recreates what may be alluded as the Clay Fallacy, which is the affinity for the system over the material, the assumption that there dependably should be a suitable answer to be determined between the two stages. Infrequently the best answer lies in a single stage. In some cases, it is wherever
completely. Issues of slavery, secession, civil war, compromise and bipartisan are the main issues addressed by the author in ‘At the Edge of the Precipice'. Remini’s ‘At the Edge of the Precipice' proves to be a thrilling account of a crucial instance in the history of United States of America. It is recited from the standpoint of one of America's most important ancient iconic charisma. In fact, it portrays a colossal practice of politics that only a capable statesman such as Henry Clay could have brokered. Attempted secession, civil war, bipartisanship, compromise and slavery highlight the five themes addressed in this book.
Slavery’s Constitution by David Waldstreicher can be identified as a very important piece of political analytical literature as it was the first book to recognize slavery 's place at the heart of the U.S. Constitution. Waldstreicher successfully highlights a number of silences which most of the general public are unaware of, for example, the lack of the word “slavery” in the Constitution of the United States of America. Also, the overwhelming presence and lack of explicit mention of the debate of slavery during the construction of the document.
Analysis of The Shattering of The Union by Eric H. Walther In Eric H. Walther’s, “The Shattering of The Union”, the question of the Kansas Nebraska Act came along during 1854. The Kansas-Nebraska Act infuriated many in the North who considered the Missouri Compromise to be a long-standing binding agreement. In the pro-slavery South it was strongly supported. On March 4, 1854, the Senate approved The Kansas-Nebraska Act with only two southerners and four northerners voting against it. On May 22, the House of Representatives approved it and by May 30, 1854, The Kansas-Nebraska Act was passed by the U.S. Congress.
Both sides desired a republican form of government. Each wanted a political system that would “protect the equality and liberty of the individuals from aristocratic privilege and…tyrannical power.” (404) However, the north and south differed greatly in “their perceptions of what most threatened its survival.” (404) The secession by the south was an attempt to reestablish republicanism, as they no longer found a voice in the national stage. Prior to the 1850s, this conflict had been channeled through the national political system. The collapse of the two-party system gave way to “political reorganization and realignment,” wrote Holt. The voters of the Democrats shifted their influence toward state and local elections, where they felt their concerns would be addressed. This was not exclusively an economically determined factor. It displayed the exercise of agency by individual states. Holt pointed out, “[T]he emergence of a new two-party framework in the South varied from state to state according to the conditions in them.” (406) The “Deep South” was repulsed by the “old political process,” most Southerners trusted their state to be the safeguards of republicanism. (404) They saw the presidential election of Abraham Lincoln, a member of the “the anti-Southern Republican party,” as something the old system could not
By 1824 however, the strong nationalistic unity had collapsed, ushering John Quincy Adams, who would prove to be a very divisive president. One must also look at the duality of the issue of the Missouri compromise. One hand, as shown in Document F, the very idea of drawing a line across the country is wholly separatist. The tensions and divisions created with the Missouri compromise would grow, and lead to the establishment of two very different societies in the North and South. On the other hand, the line illustrated the willingness of the politicians to work together to improve the nation.
Throughout the course of American political history rarely has there ever been a rivalry as fierce and contested as that of the one between Tennessee’s Andrew Jackson, and Kentucky’s Henry Clay. During their extensive political careers the two constantly seemed to cross paths differing in terms philosophically and ideologically. Simply put, these two men profoundly shaped the American Antebellum period, specifically involving the 1820’s to the 1840’s. Their notions of what was best for the country became the basis for their respective parties and consequently their differences in methodology facilitated countless battles in the American political atmosphere. The most significant issues that centered on these types of political skirmishes involved
“I would rather be right than be President,” stated Senator Henry Clay concerning the issue of finding a resolution for the countries burning issue during the mid 1800s. Even though Clay lost the presidential election of 1849 to Zachary Taylor, he was determined to find a solution to America’s prevailing debate of whether or not to extend slavery into their new territories. The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo had officially ended the war with Mexico and political warfare in the Unite States was a rising issue. Part of the treaty forced the Mexicans to give up tracts of their land including Texas, California, and all the land between. This left the Americans in a predicament of whether or not to admit California to the Union as a free state, therefore making the ratio of free to slave states imbalanced. Ever since the Missouri Compromise of 1820, the balance between slave states and free states had been maintained, but California began to petition Congress to enter the Union as a free state. Since Texas was a slave state, they claimed land north of the 36°30' demarcation line for slavery set by the 1820 Missouri Compromise. However, the Texas Annexation resolution required that if any new states were formed out of Texas land; the land north of the Missouri Compromise line would become free states. As Clay worked for months to develop a compromise to solve the nation’s issue, he received help from Stephen Douglas, a young Democrat from Illinois. On January 29, 1850, after several other people suggested ideas that failed, the two men presented a series of bills that were ushered through Congress. California’s wish was granted and they were entered as a free state, officially disrupting the equilibrium in the states. The second bill...
South Carolina was one of the only states in which the black slaves and abolitionists outnumbered their oppressors. Denmark Vesey’s slave revolt consisted of over nine-thousand armed slaves, free blacks, and abolitionists, that would have absolutely devastated society in South Carolina for slave owners, and could have quite possibly been a major step towards the abolishment of slavery in the United states. Robertson succeeded in describing the harsh conditions of slaves in pre-civil war Charleston, South Carolina. This book also helped me to understand the distinctions between the different groups. These groups including the black slaves, free blacks, extreme abolitionists, and the pro-slavery communities.
Henry Clay, one of America’s greatest legislators and orators, lived from 1777 to 1852. In his lifespan, Henry was a very successful attorney, a well respected farmer, a horse race enthusiast, and a “Great Compromiser”. The name “Great Compromiser” comes from the fact that Clay was very good at negotiation. With this skill at hand, Henry was able to avoid the Civil War until it could not be adverted.
Between 1800 and 1860 slavery in the American South had become a ‘peculiar institution’ during these times. Although it may have seemed that the worst was over when it came to slavery, it had just begun. The time gap within 1800 and 1860 had slavery at an all time high from what it looks like. As soon as the cotton production had become a long staple trade source it gave more reason for slavery to exist. Varieties of slavery were instituted as well, especially once international slave trading was banned in America after 1808, they had to think of a way to keep it going – which they did. Nonetheless, slavery in the American South had never declined; it may have just come to a halt for a long while, but during this time between 1800 and 1860, it shows it could have been at an all time high.
The controversies surrounding slavery have been established in many societies worldwide for centuries. In past generations, although slavery did exists and was tolerated, it was certainly very questionable,” ethically“. Today, the morality of such an act would not only be unimaginable, but would also be morally wrong. As things change over the course of history we seek to not only explain why things happen, but as well to understand why they do. For this reason, we will look further into how slavery has evolved throughout History in American society, as well as the impacts that it has had.
The turmoil between the North and South about slavery brought many issues to light. People from their respective regions would argue whether it was a moral institution and that no matter what, a decision on the topic had to be made that would bring the country to an agreement once and for all. This paper discusses the irrepressible conflict William H. Seward mentions, several politician’s different views on why they could or could not co-exist, and also discusses the possible war as a result.
In The article “Slavery, the Constitutional, and the Origins of the Civil War”, Paul Finkelman discusses some of the events that he believes lead the United States to have a Civil War. He discusses how both the North and the South territories of the Untied States did not see eye to eye when it came to ab...
The presidential elections of 1860 was one of the nation’s most memorable one. The north and the south sections of country had a completely different vision of how they envision their home land. What made this worst was that their view was completely opposite of each other. The north, mostly republican supporters, want America to be free; free of slaves and free from bondages. While on the other hand, the south supporters, mostly democratic states, wanted slavery in the country, because this is what they earned their daily living and profit from.
After winning the Mexican-American War in 1848, the United States gained the western territories, which included modern-day California, Nevada, Utah, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, as well as parts of Wyoming, Colorado, Kansas, and Oklahoma. However, controversial topics, that helped cause the Civil War, arouse with the addition of these new territories. Primarily, the people of the United States wanted to know whether the new territories would be admitted as free states or slave states. In order to avoid fighting between the slave states of the South and the free states of the North, Henry Clay (Whig) and Stephen Douglas (Democrat) drafted the Compromise of 1850. Although the compromise was created to stop conflict ...
Roark, J.L., Johnson, M.P., Cohen, P.C., Stage, S., Lawson, A., Hartmann, S.M. (2009). The american promise: A history of the united states (4th ed.), The New West and Free North 1840-1860, The slave south, 1820-1860, The house divided 1846-1861 (Vol. 1, pp. 279-354).