Clay, Crittenden, and the Calls for Compromise: Why compromise efforts failed in late 1860.
Abstract
This paper explores why compromise efforts led by John J. Crittenden failed in late 1860 while earlier efforts led by figures like Henry Clay were successful. My current hypothesis is that, by the time the Crittenden Compromise entered the halls of Congress, neither the North nor the South truly desired compromise. With the rise of Republicans in the north replacing the more compromise driven Whigs and Northern Democrats that had previously reined there, in addition to the increasing lack of awareness to the validity of southern secessionist threats by northern republicans. On the southern side was the increasing power of radical elitists in southern politics who greatly mistrusted the more egalitarian north. With both parties clearly no longer desiring true compromise, it is no surprise that Crittenden’s compromise failed. There are mountains of paper devoted to the study of the Civil War, from its origins to biographies of its major characters, to the political ramifications it left on the nation. Nearly every aspect of the Civil War and the immediate years on either side of the conflict have been studied to death. While past scholarship covering compromise efforts is substantial, there is an interesting lack of modern scholarship regarding the last-ditch efforts to prevent the conflict. The significance of this paper being that according to contemporaries Crittenden had all the makings to be Clay’s successor, but his efforts failed miserably and were quickly forgotten in the terror of the war itself. These conclusions contribute to the existing literature. Specifically, much scholarship has studied the compromises before the Civil War, but the Crittenden Compromise has been notably absent from the literature.
Start Time
15-4-2026 2:30 PM
End Time
15-4-2026 3:30 PM
Room Number
303
Presentation Type
Oral Presentation
Presentation Subtype
Grad/Comp Orals
Presentation Category
Arts and Humanities
Student Type
Graduate
Faculty Mentor
Brian Maxson
Clay, Crittenden, and the Calls for Compromise: Why compromise efforts failed in late 1860.
303
This paper explores why compromise efforts led by John J. Crittenden failed in late 1860 while earlier efforts led by figures like Henry Clay were successful. My current hypothesis is that, by the time the Crittenden Compromise entered the halls of Congress, neither the North nor the South truly desired compromise. With the rise of Republicans in the north replacing the more compromise driven Whigs and Northern Democrats that had previously reined there, in addition to the increasing lack of awareness to the validity of southern secessionist threats by northern republicans. On the southern side was the increasing power of radical elitists in southern politics who greatly mistrusted the more egalitarian north. With both parties clearly no longer desiring true compromise, it is no surprise that Crittenden’s compromise failed. There are mountains of paper devoted to the study of the Civil War, from its origins to biographies of its major characters, to the political ramifications it left on the nation. Nearly every aspect of the Civil War and the immediate years on either side of the conflict have been studied to death. While past scholarship covering compromise efforts is substantial, there is an interesting lack of modern scholarship regarding the last-ditch efforts to prevent the conflict. The significance of this paper being that according to contemporaries Crittenden had all the makings to be Clay’s successor, but his efforts failed miserably and were quickly forgotten in the terror of the war itself. These conclusions contribute to the existing literature. Specifically, much scholarship has studied the compromises before the Civil War, but the Crittenden Compromise has been notably absent from the literature.
