The opening of Clay’s speech relies on reductionism, portraying the many complex objections at hand as singular and simple. Clay begins by identifying a single objection against the measure: “that it is a compromise of principle, or of a principle” (Paragraph 1). Clay’s absolute focus on a single objection, as well as his use of passive voice, suggests that there is only one objection issued by someone perhaps not worth naming or unwilling to be named. Clay gives an extended definition of the term “compromise” next, using repetition within a single long sentence to communicate not only the definition itself but the nature of the concept: compromise is “a measure of mutual concession—a measure of mutual sacrifice” (Paragraph 1). By its nature, compromise entails giving as much as taking. Clay then swiftly identifies what he claims is the only valid concern that could arise regarding compromise, that is, the involvement of some “great principle […] such as a violation of the Constitution of the United States” (Paragraph 1). By specifically demanding one of the senators to “point out from the beginning to the end […] a solitary provision in this bill which is violative of the Constitution of the United States” (Paragraph 1), only to be presumably met by silence, Clay expands on the effect created by the passive voice in his opening sentences.