What is the significance of the Compromise of 1850?

The potent nature of the slavery question gnawed at the
America political consciousness in 1850.  When Jefferson described the issue of slavery
as similar to holding “a wolf by the ear, and we can neither hold him, nor safely let
him go,” one recognizes that the Compromise of 1850 was an akin to holding on to a
wolf.  It was only a matter of time before the wolf was going to be free with
destruction to follow. 

A series of legislation designed to
effectively address the issue of slavery through policy, the Compromise of 1850 hoped to
deliver consensus to an issue where agreement was slowly becoming impossible to
achieve.  "The Great Compromiser" Henry Clay drafted the compromise which called for the
state of California to be admitted as a free state.  It also divided territory into the
states of Utah and New Mexico, which were to decide their state of slavery by popular
sovereignty, meaning the settlers in those states were going to vote on the issue.  Land
between Texas and New Mexico would be divided and reallocated to satisfy claims on it
that Texas was making, while the slave trade was to be abolished in the nation's
capital.  Finally, the fugitive slave law was strengthened, making it easier for
slaveowners to recapture slaves who had
escaped. 

Essentially, the Compromise was designed with
something for each side of the slavery issue.  It ended up creating more frustration and
anger.  Proponents of slavery began to consider secession, while abolitionists could not
embrace the strengthening of the fugitive slave law, which essentially made slavery
exist everywhere.  Clay initially left his negotiations in disgust, a feeling that would
resonate around the nation regarding slavery with a striking unanimity.  The Compromise
of 1850 demonstrated in stark detail that negotiation and policy debate can go very far
in alienating many, the exact opposite of what it is intended to
do.