In this state of affairs Mr. Clay, now an old man, and with but a short term of life before him, resolved to try once more to solve the problem and tide over the dangers by a grand compromise.  The main features of his plan were:  the admission of California with her free Constitution; the organization of territorial governments in the Mexican conquests without any reference to slavery; the adjustment of the Texan boundary; a guaranty of the existence of slavery in the District of Columbia until Maryland should consent to its abolition; the prohibition of the slave-trade in the District; provision for the more effectual enforcement of the Fugitive Slave Law, and a declaration that Congress had no power over the slave-trade between the slave-holding States.  As the admission of California was certain, the proposition to bring about the prohibition of the slave-trade in the District was the only concession to the North.  Everything else was in the interest of the South; but then that was always the manner in which compromises with slavery were made.  They could be effected in no other way.

This outline Mr. Clay submitted to Mr. Webster January 21, 1850, and Mr. Webster gave it his full approval, subject, of course, to further and more careful consideration.  February 5 Mr. Clay introduced his plan in the Senate, and supported it in an eloquent speech.  On the 13th the President submitted the Constitution of California, and Mr. Foote moved to refer it, together with all matters relating to slavery, to a select committee.  It now became noised about that Mr. Webster intended to address the Senate on the pending measures, and on the 7th of March he delivered the memorable speech which has always been known by its date.

It may be premised that in a literary and rhetorical point of view the speech of the 7th of March was a fine one.  The greater part of it is taken up with argument and statement, and is very quiet in tone.  But the famous passage beginning “peaceable secession,” which came straight from the heart, and the peroration also, have the glowing eloquence which shone with so much splendor all through the reply to Hayne.  The speech can be readily analyzed.  With extreme calmness of language Mr. Webster discussed the whole history of slavery in ancient and modern times, and under the Constitution of the United States.  His attitude is so judicial and historical, that if it is clear he disapproved of the system, it is not equally evident that he condemned it.  He reviewed the history of the annexation of Texas, defended his own consistency, belittled the Wilmot Proviso, admitted substantially the boundary claims of Texas, and declared that the character of every part of the country, so far as slavery or freedom was concerned, was now settled, either by law or nature, and that he should resist the insertion of the Wilmot Proviso in regard to New Mexico, because it would be merely a wanton taunt and reproach to the South.  He then spoke of the