Compromise of 1850: Writing Style
Compromise of 1850: Writing Style
Wordy, with Long Sentences
The Compromise of 1850 is basically in mid-19th-century version of legalese, so it's not meant for easy reading. It's meant to get all the laws laid out clearly, without leaving too much room for interpretation. One way of doing that is to squeeze all the possible options into single sentences. Take this whopper of an example (this is all one sentence):
Writs of error, and appeals from the final decisions of said Supreme Court, shall be allowed, and may be taken to the Supreme Court of the United States, in the same manner and under the same regulations as from the Circuit Courts of the United States, where the value of the property or the amount in controversy, to be ascertained by the oath or affirmation of either party, or other competent witness, shall exceed one thousand dollars, except only that, in all cases involving title to slaves, the said writs of error or appeals shall be allowed and decided by the said Supreme Court, without regard to the value of the matter, property, or title in controversy; and except also, that a writ of error or appeal shall also be allowed to the Supreme Court of the United States, from the decisions of the said Supreme Court created by this act or of any judge thereof or of the District Courts created by this act or of any judge thereof, upon any writ of habeas corpus involving the question of personal freedom; and each of the said District Courts shall have and exercise the same jurisdiction in all cases arising under the Constitution and laws of the United States as is vested in the Circuit and District Courts of the United States; and the said Supreme and District Courts of the said Territory, and the respective judges thereof shall and may grant writs of habeas corpus in all cases in which the same are granted by the judges of the United States in the District of Columbia; and the first six days of every term of said courts, or so much thereof as shall be necessary. (Utah.Section 9.9)
You can't say they weren't thorough. Everything's accounted for there, including (probably) the answer to the meaning of life and what we asked for for our birthday last year. Just in case. And all contained in one sentence.
Why do this? Well, given the extreme political tension around this whole business, the last thing you'd want to do is leave anything ambiguous. You can't give either side an opportunity to re-interpret the law—so you account for every variation. As for smooshing them all into one sentence, well that's just efficiency over eloquence.