In approaching the Compromise of 1850, the modern historian is likely to find himself on ground previously and even repeatedly traversed. The last appearance of Clay, Calhoun, and Webster in the Senate spotlight, the shadow of the second Fugitive Slave Law, the growing prominence of William H. Seward and Salmon P. Chase -these and similar landmarks make the usual roads to the Compromise familiar terrain.' Yet one wonders whether the old historical highways can lead to a successful reappraisal of an oft-accepted story, which the eloquent triumvirate of America's silver age has all but monopolized. A number of facts project reasonable doubt. Despite the repeated emphasis which writers have placed on Daniel Webster's Seventh of March Speech, only one northern Whig senator, James Cooper of Pennsylvania, supported Webster as long as President Zachary Taylor lived. Owing to Henry Clay's prominence in the debates, readers are disposed to assume that Whigs provided most of the votes for Clay's Omnibus Bill. Actually, it was a Whig, James A. Pearce of Maryland, who spiked Clay's efforts on July 31, 1850; nearly all the Whigs then deserted Clay,' and the bulk of the backing given first to Clay and later to Stephen A. Douglas stemmed from Democratic ranks. It is known, of course, that John C. Calhoun died when the Great Debate was barely under way. But the role of another southern senator, Henry S. Foote of Mississippi, from the mild winter days of early 1850 through the steamy Washington summer, has been obscured perhaps by Calhoun's reputation and death. 1 This article received the Mississippi Valley Historical Association's Pelzer Award for 1954.