In 1850, Massachusetts Senator Daniel Webster came forward to give a speech in support of Kentucky Senator Henry Clay’s, “Compromise of 1850”. Webster is in no way fond of the idea of splitting the states based on “slave free and slave holder”. He is eager to present his determination to hold America as one, connected country. He uses repetition, asyndeton, and tone alongside word choices to stabilize his argument to the reader of his stance on a separated America. To introduce, Webster makes it clear that he is here to speak out for the sake of his country, he states that he wishes “to speak today, not as a Massachusetts man, nor as a Northern man, but as an American, and a member of the Senate of the United States.“ (Webster) He is here to …show more content…
Peaceable secession!” (Webster) He underlines this peaceable secession to prove to his audience that there is a peaceful solution to resurrect this conflict brought upon America and its citizens. Webster also utilizes asyndeton to enhance his frustration with the wishes of the Americans to split up their country. He rapidly spits out, “The concurrent agreement of all the members of this great republic to separate! Why, what would be the result? Where is the line drawn? What States are to secede? What is it like to remain American? What am I to be? An American no longer in the U.S.? Am I to become a sectional man, a local man, a separatist, with no country in common with the gentlemen who sit around me here. “ He looks down upon the area of interest to separate the nation that was once deemed to be the nation of freedom. Webster is infuriated asking to know what would be left of being called an American if America was to be split up. Besides America’s profound name being the United States, what would be United in that circumstance? Webster also personifies the eagle that was once there to abide the representation of America, stating “Where is the eagle still