A very interesting way to approach
the problem of the Compromise of 1850
is to read the interpretations of some
of the leading writers in the American
historiographical tradition. It is interest-
ing to compare the analyses of the crisis
and the assessments of the roles of poli-
tical leaders in such older works as:
Hermann Von Holst, The Constitutional
and Political History of the United
States, III, IV ( Chicago, 1881); James Schouler
, History of the United States
of America, Vol. V ( New York, 1891);
James Ford Rhodes, History of the
United States From the Compromise of
1850, I ( New York, 1892); John B. MacMaster
, History of the People of the
United States, VIII; Edward Channing,
A History of the United States, VI ( New
York, 1925). This investigation of the
great works of historical synthesis in
American historiography should include
a distinguished representative of our own
generation, Allan Nevins, whose Ordeal
of the Union, 2 vols. ( New York, 1947),
uses much modern scholarship for this
period of our history.

Other recent studies of the political
history of the 1840's and 1850's contain-
ing much useful material for an under-
standing of the events preceding and
succeeding the Compromise of 1850 are:
Fredrick Jackson Turner, The United
States, 1830-1850 ( New York, 1935),
especially the later chapters; Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr.
, The Age of Jackson
( Boston, 1945), the last four chapters;
Avery Craven, The Coming of the Civil
War ( New York, 1942); and for good
background material on social and cul-
tural forces, Arthur Cole, The Irrepres-
sible Conflict 1860-1865 ( New York,
1936). See also a much neglected work
by Milo M. Quaife, The Doctrine of
Non-Intervention with Slavery in the
Territories ( Chicago, 1910).

For studies of party organization and
internal party politics consult such works
as: Roy F. Nichols, The Democratic Ma-
chine, 1850-54 ( New York, 1923);
George R. Poage, Henry Clay and
the Whig Party (Chapel Hill, 1936);
Arthur C. Cole, The Whig Party in the
South ( Washington, 1913); Glyndon Van Deusen
, Thurlow Weed, Wizard of the
Lobby ( Boston, 1947); F. H. Hodder,
"Authorship of the Compromise of 1850,"
Mississippi Valley Historical Review,
XXII ( March, 1936), 525-36. A very
good article on Senatorial politics which
also contains some provocative ideas on
the historiography of the Compromise is
Holman Hamilton "Democratic Senate
Leadership and the Compromise of
1850," Mississippi Valley Historical Re-
view, XLI ( December, 1954), 403-418.

There is much good writing about the
South during this period. Particularly
valuable for understanding the mind of
the South are W. J. Cash, The Mind of
the South ( New York, 1941) and Jesse T. Carpenter
, The South as a Conscious
Minority, 1789-1861 ( New York, 1930).
Special studies of southern behavior at
the time of the compromise are numer-
ous: Chauncey S. Boucher, "The Seces-
sion and Cooperation Movements in
South Carolina, 1848 to 1852," Washing-
ton University Studies, V, No. 2 ( April,
1918), 65-138; Cleo Hearon, Mississippi
and the Compromise of 1850 ( Oxford,
Miss., 1913); Richard H. Shryock,

-97-