AMERICAN CRISIS BIOGRAPHIES 
 
 Edited by 
 
 Ellis Paxson Oberholtzer, Ph. D. 
 
Gbe Hmertcan Crisis ffiiOQtapbiee 
 
 Edited by Ellis Paxson Oberholtzer, Ph.D. With the 
 counsel and advice of Professor John B. McMaster, of 
 the University of Pennsylvania. 
 
 Each iamo, cloth, with frontispiece portrait. Price 
 $1.25 net; by mail,' $1.37. 
 
 These biographies constitute a complete and comprehensive 
 history of the great American sectional struggle in the form of readable 
 and authoritative biography. The editor has enlisted the co-operation 
 of many competent writers, as will be noted from the list given below. 
 An interesting feature of the undertaking is that the series is to be im- 
 partial, Southern writers having been assigned to Southern subjects and 
 Northern writers to Northern suojects, but all will belong to the younger 
 generation of writers, thus assuring freedom from any suspicion of war- 
 time prejuaice. The Civil War will not be treated as a rebellion, but as 
 the great event in the history of our nation, which, after forty years, it 
 is now clearly recognized to have been. 
 
 Now ready : 
 Abraham Lincoln. By Ellis Paxson Oberholtzer. 
 Thomas H. Benton. By Joseph M. Rogers. 
 David G. Farragut. By John R. Spears. 
 William T. Sherman. By Edward Robins. 
 Frederick Douglass. By Booker T. Washington. 
 Judah P. Benjamin. By Pierce Butler. 
 Robert E. Lee. By Philip Alexander Bruce. 
 Jefferson Davis. By Prof. W. E. Dodd. 
 Alexander H. Stephens. By Louis Pendleton. 
 John C. Calhoun. By Gaillard Hunt. 
 " Stonewall" Jackson. By Henry Alexander White. 
 John Brown. By W. E. Burghardt Dubois. 
 Charles Sumner. By Prof. George H. Haynes. 
 Henry Clay. By Thomas H. Clay. 
 William H. Seward. By Edward Everett Hale, Jr. 
 Stephen A. Douglas. By Prof. Henry Parker Willis. 
 William Lloyd Garrison. By Lindsay Swift. 
 Raphael Semmes. By Colyer Meriwether. 
 Daniel Webster. By Prof. Frederic A. Ogg. 
 
 In preparation : 
 Ulysses S. Grant. By Prof. Franklin S. Edmonds. 
 
&^&-^u*€uz^,- 
 
AMERICAN CRISIS BIOGRAPHIES 
 
 Daniel Webster 
 
 by 
 
 / 
 FREDERIC AUSTIN OGG, Ph.D. 
 
 Associate Professor of History in Simmons College, Boston, 
 and author of "Social Progress in Contemporary Europe," 
 "The Governments of Europe," etc. 
 
 PHILADELPHIA 
 
 GEORGE W. JACOBS & COMPANY 
 
 PUBLISHERS 
 
E 
 
 Copyright, 191 4, by 
 George W. Jacobs & Company 
 Published March, igi4 
 
 APR -I 1914 
 
 All rights reserved 
 Printed in U. S. A. 
 
 CI.A371287 V " 
 
PREFACE 
 
 Although in truth one of the most human of men, 
 Daniel Webster is, and must remain, for students 
 of American history primarily the orator, jurist, and 
 statesman ; and while in this brief biography an at- 
 tempt has been made to convey some impression of 
 the personal characteristics of the man, and especially 
 of the conditions surrounding his earlier life, space has 
 been devoted principally to the multifold public ac- 
 tivities by which his ultimate distinction was attained. 
 The subject is old, and yet ever fresh. The shelves 
 of our libraries groan under the masses of books re- 
 lating to it. Yet neglected or largely unused materials 
 are still being brought to light ; and so intricately do 
 the life and work of the man enter into the very 
 texture of the nation's history that they are very 
 nearly as incapable of full and final interpretation as is 
 that history itself. 
 
 In the preparation of the present sketch liberal use 
 has been made of the earlier biographies, especially of 
 the two excellent ones by Curtis and Lodge, of the 
 standard histories, and of monographs. The very 
 abundant source materials, however, — chiefly the writ- 
 ings of Webster and of his contemporaries, — have been 
 the principal reliance. Since the publication, in 1! 102, 
 of Professor Van Tyne's " Letters of Daniel Webster," 
 and, in 1903, of the eighteen-volume "National Edi- 
 tion" of Webster's "Writings and Speeches," these 
 sources have been almost entirely available in print 
 In the bibliography which is appended there is an enn- 
 
6 PREFACE 
 
 meration of the most useful materials of various kiuds. 
 In the foot- notes the title " Works of Webster » is em- 
 ployed to denote the six-volume edition published 
 originally in 1851, that of " Writings and Speeches » 
 to denote the more recent and complete edition. The 
 smaller set is likely to be found in many places where 
 the larger one is not available, and for this reason it 
 has been deemed desirable to give references to both. 
 
 To Professor Van Tyne, who, according to original 
 plans, was to have written this volume, I am indebted 
 for a number of helpful suggestions and for the use 
 of transcripts and other materials gathered by him 
 during the preparation of his admirable collection of 
 the " Letters." My thanks should be expressed, also, 
 for courtesies received from the authorities of the 
 Library of Congress, the New Hampshire Historical 
 Society, the Massachusetts Historical Society, and the 
 Boston Athenaeum. 
 
 Frederic Austin Ogg. 
 
 Cambridge, Mass., 
 January 10, 1914. 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 Chronology 9 
 
 I. Parentage and Youth . . .15 
 
 II. Preparation for the Law ... 35 
 
 III. The Young Practitioner ... 60 
 
 IV. In Congress From New Hampshire 82 
 V. Law and Oratory in Massachusetts 110 
 
 VI. In Congress Again, 1823-1827 . . 135 
 
 VII. In the Senate : The Tariff . . 163 
 
 VIII. In the Senate : The Hayne Debate 187 
 
 IX. The Contest with Jackson : Nul- 
 lification . . . 225 
 
 X. Public Finance and Whig Politics 256 
 
 XI. Secretary of State : The Treaty of 
 
 Washington 286 
 
 XI r. Texas, Oregon, and the Election of 
 
 1844 317 
 
 XIII. The Mexican War and the Compro- 
 
 mlse of 1850 343 
 
 XIV. Secretary of State Under Fillmore 376 
 XV. The Election of 1852 : Last Phases . 396 
 
 Bibliography 421 
 
 Index 426 
 
CHRONOLOGY 
 
 1782— January 18, born in the township of Salisbury, in the county 
 of Hillsborough, New Hampshire, the second son of Ebenezer 
 Webster and his second wife, Abigail Eastman. 
 
 1796 — May, beoomes a student at Phillips Exeter Academy. 
 
 1797 — February, begins preparation for college under the tutelage of 
 Dr. Samuel Wood of Bosoawen. August, becomes a mem- 
 ber of the freshman class at Dartmouth College. 
 
 1800 — July 4, delivers public oration by invitation of the towns- 
 people of Hanover, N. H. 
 
 1801 — August, is graduated from Dartmouth College. Begins the 
 study of law in the office of Thomas W. Thompson, in 
 Salisbury. 
 
 1802 — January, assumes the preceptorship of Fryeburg (Me.) 
 Academy. September, returns to the study of law in the 
 office of Mr. Thompson. 
 
 1804 — July, goes to Boston and obtains a clerkship iu the office of 
 Christopher Gore. 
 
 1805 — January, refuses the clerkship of the court of common pleas 
 of the county of Hillsborough, N. H. March, is admitted 
 to the bar in Boston. Begins practice of law in Boscawen. 
 
 1807 — May, is admitted as a counsellor of the Superior Court of New 
 Hampshire. September, removes to Portsmouth. N. H. 
 
 1808 — June 24, marries Miss Grace Fletcher, of Hopkinton, N. H. 
 Publishes anonymously " Considerations on the Embargo 
 Laws. ' ' 
 
 1809— Delivers Phi Beta Kappa oration at Dartmouth College. 
 
 1809-1612 — Absorbed by growing professional activities ; rises to a 
 position of eminence at the New Hampshire bar. 
 
 1812 — August, writes the "Rockingham Memorial." November, 
 elected from the Portsmouth district to a seat iu the Thir- 
 teenth Congress. 
 
1 CHBONOLOG Y 
 
 1-1 — Juu" 10 introduces resolutions relative to the Berlin and 
 Milan decrees. December 22, fire destroys Portsmouth 
 home. 
 
 1813-1814— Aotive in criticism of the conduct of the war by the 
 
 Madison Administration. 
 1815— January 2, speaks on the bill to establish a second Bank of 
 
 the United States. 
 
 161G— Opposes a protective tariff bill. Challenged to a duel by 
 John Randolph. August, removes from Portsmouth to 
 Boston. 
 
 1 g 1 7 —September, participates in argument of the Dartmouth 
 College Case before the Supreme Court of New Hampshire. 
 
 1818— March 10, makes notable argument in behalf of Dartmouth 
 College before the United States Supreme Court. 
 
 1820-1821— November to January, serves as a member of the con- 
 vention to draft a revision of the constitution of Massachu- 
 setts. 
 
 182U— December 22, delivers an oration at Plymouth commemora- 
 tive of the coming of the Pilgrims. 
 
 1822 — November, elected to Congress from the Suffolk district. 
 
 1824 — January 19, speaks on the Greek Revolution. April 1-2, 
 speaks in opposition to a protective tariff. December, 
 visits Jefferson and Madison in Virginia. 
 
 1825— March, procures passage of the Crimes Act. June 17, de- 
 livers first Bunker Hill oration. June-July, excursion to 
 Niagara Falls. 
 
 1826 — January 4, speaks in behalf of a reform of the federal judi- 
 ciary. August 2, delivers eulogy on Adams and Jefferson. 
 
 1827— June, elected to the United States Senate. 
 
 1828— January 21, Mrs. Webster dies. May 9, speaks in support 
 of the " tariff of abominations." June 5, is given a public 
 dinner in Faneuil Hall. December, brings suit against 
 Theodore Lyman for libel. 
 
 1829— April Id, Ezekiel Webster dies. December, marries Miss 
 Caroline LeRoy, of New York City. 
 
 1830— January 20-27, engages in debate with Senator Hayne on 
 the nature of the Union. August-September, participates 
 in the Knapp trials. ' * l 
 
 1831— Maroh 10, is tendered a public dinner at the City Hotel, 
 rsew York. \\ idely considered as a possible candidate for 
 tne presidency, Begins the acquisition of land at Marshfield. 
 
CHRONOLOGY 11 
 
 1832 — April.5, submits a report on the apportionment of representa- 
 tives. May 25, speaks on the bill to renew the oharter of the 
 United States Bank. July 11, speaks on the President's 
 veto of the Bank Bill. October 12, speaks at the National 
 Republican convention at Worcester. 
 
 1833 — February 16, delivers the speech "The Constitution not a 
 Compact between Sovereign States," in reply to Calhoun. 
 Opposes the Compromise Tariff. May- June, makes a visit 
 to the Middle West. 
 
 1834 — January-June, makes numerous speeches in the Senate on 
 the President's course regarding the removal of the deposits 
 and on the subject of a national bank. May 7, speaks on 
 the President's protest against the Senate's resolutions of 
 censure. 
 
 1835 — January 12, speaks on the claims arising from French 
 spoliations prior to 1800. January, is nominated for the 
 presidency by the Whig majority of the Massachusetts 
 legislature. February 16, speaks on the appointing and 
 removing powers of the President. October 12, is presented 
 with a vase by the citizens of Boston. 
 
 1836 — January 14, explains the grounds of opposition to the Forti- 
 fications Bill of 1835. Receives the electoral vote of Massa- 
 chusetts for the presidency. December 21, speaks on the 
 Specie Circular. 
 
 1837 — January 16, protests against the Expunging Resolution. 
 Proposes to retire from the Senate, but is persuaded not to 
 do so. March 15, delivers an important speech in Niblo's 
 Garden, New York. June-July, makes an extended visits 
 to the Middle West. September 28, speaks on the regula- 
 tion of the currency. 
 
 1838 — January 31 and March 12, speaks on the President's in- 
 dependent treasury proposals. 
 
 1839 — May 18, sails for a brief visit to Great Britain. July 18, 
 addresses the Royal Agricultural Society at Oxford. De- 
 cember 29, arrives in New York. 
 
 1840 — Supports Harrison and Tyler for the presidency and vice- 
 presidency. December 1, receives from General Harrison an 
 offer of the State or the Treasury portfolio. December 
 11, accepts the secretaryship of state. 
 
 1841 — February 22, resigns seat in the Senate, being succeeded by 
 Rnfus Choate. May-September, watches apprehensively the 
 conlliot of President Tyler and the Whigs in Congress. 
 September, refuses to resign from the cabinet with his 
 colleagues. September-October, assists in the settlement of 
 the MoLeod Case. 
 
12 CHRONOLOGY 
 
 1842— June, opens negotiations with Lord Ashburton relative to 
 the northeastern boundary and other matters in dispute with 
 Great Britain. August 9, signs the treaty of Washington. 
 September 30, speaks in Faneuil Hall in defense of his refusal 
 to retire from the cabinet. 
 
 1843 — May 8, resigns the secretaryship of state and retires to 
 Marshrield. June 17, delivers the second Bunker Hill 
 oration. November 9, addresses the convention of Massachu- 
 setts Whigs at Andover. 
 
 1844— Participates actively in the campaign for the eleotion of 
 Clay. 
 
 1~ 1")- December 22, speaks in protest against the annexation of 
 Texas. 
 
 18 Hi— February 26, opposes the resolution to give immediate notice 
 to Great Britain concerning Oregon. April 6-7. speaks in 
 defense of the treaty of Washington. Accepts an annuity 
 from Massachusetts friends. July 25-27, speaks on the 
 Walker tariff. 
 
 1847— March 1, speaks on the Three Million Bill. April-May, 
 makes a journey through the South. 
 
 1848— January 25, a son, Major Edward Webster, dies in Mexico. 
 March 17, speaks on the Ten Regiment Bill. March 23, 
 speaks on the Objects of the Mexican War. April 28, a 
 daughter, Mrs. Julia Webster Appleton, dies. June 9, 
 General Taylor is nominated for the presidency by the 
 Whigs. October 1 and 24, speaks at Marshfield and in 
 Faneuil Hall advising, with reluctance, that the Whigs 
 -upport Taylor. 
 
 1849— February 22, introduces a bill proposing to postpone the 
 ne of slavery in the newly acquired territories. 
 
 1 *■".»>— January 25, Clay introduces his Compromise Measures. 
 March 7, delivers notable speech in behalf of the Com- 
 promise. July 9, Fillmore succeeds to the presidency. 
 July 23, enters upon second period of service in the State 
 Department. December 22, speaks at the Pilgrim Festival 
 at New \ork. 
 
 1851 -May accompanies the President on a trip through central 
 «erc ^ ork. July 4, delivers an oration at the laying of the 
 
 £ansmi T ? aD 2^ iti0n t0 the Ca P itol « December 21, 
 tran^ t s to Baron Hulsemann a letter proclaiming the power 
 aud independence of the United States. Adjusts difficulties 
 SiZ v "" y Ua0k ° n the S P aDish consulate in New 
 
 or Z ^JKlS T' 18 - Urg - d by *** Massachusetts Whigs 
 to. me presidential nomination. 
 
CHRONOLOGY 13 
 
 1852 — January 7, speaks at a banquet tendered to Louis Kossuth. 
 February 24, addresses the New York Historical Society! 
 June 16, Whig nominating convention assembles in Balti- 
 more. Nomination of General Scott and disappointment of 
 Webster. July 9, is tendered a reception by the people of 
 Boston. July 26, is welcomed by the citizens of Marshlield. 
 July 20, offers to resign the secretaryship of state. September 
 8, leaves Washington for the last time. September 20, 
 makes last visit to Boston. October 24, dies at Marshfield! 
 
DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 CHAPTER I 
 
 PARENTAGE AND YOUTH 
 
 In the history of New England, hardly less than in 
 that of the Ohio and Mississippi valleys, the termina- 
 tion of French dominion in America in 1763 was an 
 epoch-marking event. In the one region as in the 
 other the tension which through a century had been 
 growing ever more threatening between the westward 
 pressure of the seaboard, English-speaking population, 
 and the stubbornly resisting powers of French and In- 
 dian allies was brought definitely to an end, and vast 
 stretches of virgin territory, hitherto largely inacces- 
 sible, were thrown open for uncontested and profitable 
 exploitation. At the beginning, in 1754, of the last 
 and greatest phase of the Anglo-French combat in 
 America an aggregate area not much in excess of a 
 third of the 66,424 square miles now comprised in the 
 six states of New England was occupied, in even the 
 smallest measure, by English colonists, and every- 
 where the frontier line still hovered very near the At- 
 lantic. The regions still awaiting population included 
 virtually the whole of Vermont ; all of New Hamp- 
 shire save a strip along the coast, the Merriinac valley 
 northward to New Hampton, and a bit of the Con- 
 necticut valley in the southwest; all of Maine except 
 an irregular coastal strip from the Piscataqua to 
 
10 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 Penobscot Bay ; and broad areas in western and north- 
 ern Massachusetts. 1 The aggregate population of the 
 New England colonies was approximately 400,000. 
 
 At the close of the war there came an outburst of 
 expansive enterprise in consequence of which there 
 was wrought a remarkable sectional transformation. 
 Although within the settled portions of every one of 
 the colonies, with the possible exception of Rhode 
 Island, there was still an abundance of vacant and till- 
 able land, men of rugged fibre and restless spirit, ac- 
 customed to pioneer conditions and impatient with 
 the restraints of a rapidly conventionalizing society, 
 cut loose by the hundreds from their uncongenial or 
 unpromising surroundings and went off with their 
 families and possessions into the mountains and valleys 
 of the interior in quest of land, livelihood, and larger 
 opportunity. The passing and repassing of colonial 
 troops through the disputed northern territory during 
 the course of the war had served to familiarize many 
 people with the resources of the back country, and the 
 upshot was that, long in advance of the formal signa- 
 ture of peace, the royal governors of New York and 
 New Hampshire were driving a lucrative business in 
 the grauting of land tracts to thrifty speculators and 
 settlers. In the single year, 1761, not fewer than sixty 
 townships were granted on the western side of the Con- 
 necticut and eighteen on the eastern. The grantees 
 began forthwith the quest of purchasers and tenants 
 and thereby stimulated substantially an influx which 
 was already setting in from the adjacent province of 
 Massachusetts, and from remoter Connecticut and 
 Rhode Island. All fear of French attack and, for the 
 moment, of Indian outbreak, was removed. The task 
 ' Matthews, " The Expansion of New England," chap. 4. 
 
PARENTAGE AND YOUTH 17 
 
 as it presented itself to the prospective settler was one 
 simply of occupying cheap lands and wresting from a 
 niggardly soil the means of a plain but comfortable 
 existence — a task from which the average New Eng- 
 lander of the eighteenth century was in no wise dis- 
 posed to shrink. Only with the northward and west- 
 ward rush of settlers after 1760, so the historian of New 
 Hampshire tells us, began the prosperity of the later 
 Granite State ; ' and one would hardly go far wrong in 
 making the same affirmation concerning New Eng- 
 land as a whole. 
 
 In 1749 a band of pioneer farmers of Kingston, in 
 southeastern New Hampshire, had obtained from Gov- 
 ernor Benning Wentworth the grant of a township 
 near the centre of the province, so located that it in- 
 cluded the spot where the Merrimac River is formed 
 by the confluence of the Pemigewasset and the Win- 
 nipiseogee, some eighteen miles north of the present 
 town of Concord. The leader of the group was a cer- 
 tain Colonel Ebenezer Stevens, in whose honor the 
 first settlement established, Stevenstown (incorporated 
 under the name of Salisbury in 1767), was named ; 
 and among the settlers who after a few years were at- 
 tracted thither was a stalwart frontiersman who, it ap- 
 pears, when a child had been bound to Stevens as an 
 apprentice, Captain Ebenezer Webster. Ebenezer 
 Webster was a typical eighteenth -century New Eng- 
 land soldier-farmer. Bom in Kingston in 1730, al- 
 ready by 1763 he had crowded into his twenty-four 
 years more adventure than is allotted the ordinary man 
 of three score and ten. His father was a farmer and 
 freeholder of the same name, and his remoter ancestry 
 can still be traced back, in the town records of Hamp- 
 1 Belkuap, " History of New Hampshire," Vol. 11, p. 312. 
 
18 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 tun, Kingston (now East Kingston), and Salisbury, to 
 a Thomas Webster, who settled at Hampton, on the 
 New Hampshire coast, only sixteen years after the 
 coming of the Mayflower. The family, although resi- 
 dent in England some generations before emigration, 
 was apparently of Lowland Scotch origin. 
 
 The boyhood of Ebenezer Webster fell in an exciting 
 period— the years when all New England was aroused 
 by King George's War, and, in particular, by the ex- 
 ploit of Pepperell and his men at Louisburg. There 
 was little time, and less opportunity, for the acquire- 
 ment of an education. The boy, as a pupil, never saw 
 the inside of a schoolroom. He none the less picked 
 ap a good deal of knowledge of a homely and practical 
 sort, and even became in a limited degree a reader and 
 student of books. Some of the earliest records of the 
 town of Salisbury are in his handwriting. After the 
 age of twelve or fifteen he lived for several years in 
 the family of Colonel Stevens, until, apparently in 
 1 760, at the age of twenty-one, he enlisted in one of 
 the famous companies of "rangers" commanded by 
 Robert Rogers, which accompanied Sir Jeffrey Am- 
 herst on his invasion of Canada. Upon the conclusion 
 of the war the young man, now a captain, returned 
 to Kingston, where he married, in 1761, Mehitable 
 Smith. Some months later, accompanied by his wife, 
 and by several fellow-townsmen— most of them, like 
 himself, but lately thrown out of military employment 
 
 he traversed the almost unbroken way to his patron's 
 wilderness settlement, Stevenstown. The new town- 
 ship, as originally laid out, comprised a tract four 
 miles in width along the west bank of the Merrimac, 
 and extended to the southwest a distance of some nine 
 miles, almost to the summit of Kearsarge Mountain. 
 
PARENTAGE AND YOUTH 10 
 
 To Webster fell the northernmost portion of it, — so 
 that after he had erected his log cabin on a hill three 
 miles west of the Merrimac and lighted his fire, " his 
 smoke ascended nearer to the North Star than that of 
 any other of his Majesty's New England subjects. " ' His 
 nearest civilized neighbor on the north was at Montreal. 
 
 Life in most parts of rural New England in the eight- 
 eenth century was hard and prosaic. Nowhere, per- 
 haps, was it more so than among the hills of central 
 New Hamx)shire. The soil was shallow and unproduc- 
 tive. Roads and bridges scarcely existed. The winters 
 were long and forbidding. Of newspapers, books, 
 schools, and other agencies of entertainment and in- 
 formation, there were few or none. There was not even 
 entire security, for although the French no longer 
 threatened from Montreal or Quebec, in the woods 
 lurked savages ready to steal and destroy, if not actu- 
 ally to burn and kill. As late as 1775 a frontiersman's 
 wife was slain by marauding redskins within three 
 miles of the Webster homestead. Unceasing toil, 
 recurring hardship, and not infrequent danger — con- 
 ditions which only men and women of the toughest fibre 
 could hope to meet and overcome — were the certain 
 lot of every commonwealth-builder of northern and 
 western New England a hundred and fifty years ago. 
 
 " My first clear and distinct recollection of my 
 father's appearance," wrote Daniel Webster in 1829, 
 " was when he was at the age of fifty. I think it was 
 rather striking ; he was tall, six feet, or six feet within 
 half an inch, erect, with a broad and full chest, hair 
 still of an unchanged black, features rather large and 
 prominent. He had a decisive air and bearing, partly 
 
 1 " Autobiography of Daniel Webster." Webster, " Private 
 Correspondence," Vol. I, p. 5. 
 
20 DANIEL WEBSTEK 
 
 the effect, I suppose, of early soldiership. . . . 
 The last time I ever saw General Stark, he paid me 
 the compliment of saying that my complexion was like 
 that of my father, and that his was of that cast, so con- 
 venient for a soldier, that burnt gunpowder did not 
 change it." 1 Writing in 1846, Webster said of his 
 father : "He had in him what I collect to have been 
 the character of some of the old Puritans. He was 
 deeply religious, but not sour. On the contrary, good- 
 humored, facetious, showing even in his age, with a 
 contagious laugh, teeth all as white as alabaster, gentle, 
 soft, playful, and yet having a heart in him that he 
 seemed to have borrowed from a lion. He could 
 frown ; a frown it was ; but cheerfulness, good- 
 humor, and smiles composed his most usual as- 
 pect." 2 As a man of sound common sense, of correct 
 judgment, and of resolute character, a patriotic, devout, 
 high-minded citizen, the elder Webster early achieved 
 a solid reputation throughout the section of the country 
 in which he lived. In 1768 he was chosen by his 
 neighbors moderator of the Salisbury town-meeting, an 
 office to which he was thereafter elected forty-three 
 times, serving for the last time in 1803. In March, 
 1774, after ten years of backwoods existence, Mrs. 
 Webster died. Of the five children she had borne, 
 i wo — a son and a daughter — had died young, while 
 three — a daughter, Susannah, and two sons, David and 
 Joseph— survived. Within the year (in August) the 
 father married again, the second wife being Abigail 
 Eastman, a woman, according to all accounts, of more 
 than ordinary force of will and loftiness of soul. 
 
 i ti 
 
 Autobiography of Daniel Webster." Webster, "Private 
 Correspondence," Vol. I, pp. 4-6. 
 
 Webster to Blatohford, May 3, 1846. Ibid., Vol. II, p. 229. 
 
PARENTAGE AND YOUTH 21 
 
 Early in 1775 the storm of war broke upon the 
 colonies. Among the first patriots to respond to the 
 call to arms which followed Concord and Lexington was 
 Captain Ebenezer Webster. The town of Salisbury had 
 so grown that it was now able to muster a company of 
 two hundred men, and throughout the larger portion of 
 the war this company, raised by the efforts of Webster 
 from among his neighbors and kindred, inarched and 
 bivouacked and fought under his command. At the 
 operations about Boston in 1775-1776, at White Plains 
 in 1776, with General Stark at Bennington in 1777, and 
 at West Point on the occasion of the discovery of 
 Arnold's treason in 1780 — not to mention a fruitless 
 expedition to aid in the relief of Ticonderoga in 1777 — 
 Captain Webster rendered services of an intrepid and 
 highly honorable character. The proudest moment of 
 his career came when, on the night following the ex- 
 posure of Arnold's treachery, he was selected to stand 
 guard in front of General Washington's headquarters, 
 and when, if tradition is to be accredited, the general 
 declared to him, "Captain Webster, I believe lean 
 trust you." In the New Hampshire militia he rose, by 
 1785, to the rank of colonel. 
 
 Interspersed with military services were not only 
 hurried intervals of farming but labors of a civic 
 nature. By his neighbors Webster was sent as a dele- 
 gate to the convention which framed the first New 
 Hampshire constitution. More than once he sat as a 
 member of committees having charge of the regulation 
 of prices, the prevention of forestalling, and the raising 
 of the town's quota of troops. Three times, in all, he 
 was chosen first selectman, and three times town clerk. 
 And with the establishment of a state government the 
 range of his political activities was broadened. During 
 
DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 ■di\d after the war he served lour terms in the lower 
 house of the state legislature and four in the upper one. 
 In 1788 he was a member of the Exeter convention 
 called to consider the ratification of the proposed 
 Constitution of the United States, and in the adjourned 
 session of that convention, at Concord, in the following 
 June, he is reputed to have given material assistance 
 in carrying the day for the new frame of government. 
 In 1789 he served as a presidential elector, and from 
 1791 until his death, in April, 1806, he was continued 
 by the suffrage of his neighbors in the office of judge 
 of the court of common pleas for the county of Hills- 
 borough. 
 
 Meanwhile certain changes had come about in the 
 economy of the Webster household. With the growth 
 of the family a larger and better dwelling became a 
 necessity, aud shortly before the close of the war a 
 " frame ' ' house was built, not far from the old structure 
 of logs. The new building was a typical New England 
 farmhouse of the old days — " one story high, clap- 
 boarded, with the chimney in the centre, the door in 
 the middle of the south side, four rooms on the ground 
 floor, and a lean-to in the rear for a kitchen. " ! The 
 evidence is not entirely conclusive, but it would appear 
 that, of the five children borne by Captain Webster's 
 second wife, two first saw the light in the old log house, 
 two others in the frame dwelling, and the fifth in a 
 house three miles to the eastward to which the family 
 
 1 McMaeter, " Daniel Webster, " p. 6. The house, still standing, 
 is located four miles from the centre of the town of Franklin on the 
 Salisbury road. In recent years it has been leased to various per- 
 rons by a building and loan association by which it is owned. In 
 1912 an organization was formed, under the presidency of Ex- 
 Hfnator William E. Chandler, for the purchase and preservation 
 of thr homestead. 
 
PARENTAGE AND YOUTH 23 
 
 removed in 17S3. Of the five, three were daughters — 
 Mehitable, Abigail, and Sarah. Of the two sous, 
 Ezekiel was born in the log house, April 11, 1780 ; 
 Daniel, in the frame structure, January 18, 1782. 
 
 The piece of ground to which Captain Webster 
 removed during the year following Daniel's birth was 
 known in later days as " Elms Farm." It was situated 
 in a valley two and a half miles to the south of the 
 head of the Merrimac. At the time when the Websters 
 made it their homestead, it was included within the 
 township of Salisbury, although subsequently it fell 
 within that part of the parent township which, in 1828, 
 was set off under the name of Franklin. From a sheep- 
 pasture, which commanded the most extensive out- 
 look from the farm, Ascutney Mountain, to the north- 
 west, in Vermont, was plainly visible, as, to the north- 
 east, was the snow-capped summit of Mount Washing- 
 ton. Altogether, with hills and valleys and distant 
 mountain stretches, the physical environment amidst 
 which it was the fortune of the boy Daniel to grow up 
 contained much that was impressive, even awe-inspir- 
 ing. That his earliest recollection, recorded in his 
 autobiography, should have been one of those spectac- 
 ular visitations of Nature — a devastating flood — to 
 which the New England hills are liable, is hardly sur- 
 prising. The spell cast over him by rugged, relentless 
 Nature as he studied her and woudered at her subtle 
 power, never left him, and perhaps it is not too much to 
 fancy that to its influence he owed something of thai 
 rueeedness and force which were to make of him a 
 
 »&&■ 
 
 veritable giant among men. 
 
 Ezekiel Webster was the common sort of New Eng- 
 land boy, sturdy, self-reliant, ready at the age of ten 
 or twelve to bear a hand in the rough task of maintain- 
 
u 
 
 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 i og the family group. But the youuger Daniel seemed 
 disl inctly less fortuuate and less promising. Delicate, 
 even sickly, in his infancy, as a boy he was altogether 
 incapable of manual labor. He accordingly was al- 
 lowed, aud encouraged, to spend his time in the fields 
 and woods at play. Racing over the meadows, steal- 
 Lug among the trees to watch the habits of animals and 
 birds, fishing, and occasionally riding horseback up 
 and down the corn rows which his father was ploughing, 
 he gradually accumulated a larger vitality than fond 
 parents had dared hope for him, and at the same time 
 he filled his mind with a lore not then, or at auy time, 
 satisfactorily to be had from books. As an almost in- 
 separable companion, the boy had, through many years, 
 a curious old character by the name of Robert Wise— 
 an unlettered adventurer who had fought in several 
 European wars, had served with the New Hampshire 
 levies in the Revolution, and had at last settled for the 
 remainder of his days in a little cottage located on a 
 corner of Elms Farm. Between the two a bargain was 
 quickly struck whereby the old soldier was to instruct 
 the boy in angling and other outdoor^sports, as well as 
 to entertain him from an apparently inexhaustible 
 fund of experiences and anecdotes, in return for which 
 young Daniel was to read to his companion, " still a 
 true Briton," such accounts of British affairs and deeds 
 of valor as could be wrung from the meagre newspapers 
 of the day. u Alas, poor Robert," runs a passage in 
 the autobiography of later years, "I have never so 
 attained the narrative art as to hold the attention of 
 others as thou, with thy Yorkshire tongue, hast held 
 
 mine'" ' 
 
 But all was not mere play and entertainment. There 
 1 Webster, "Private Correspondence, " Vol. I, p. 16. 
 
PAKENTAGE AND YOUTH 25 
 
 was the problem of an education. In his autobiography 
 Webster tells us that he was unable to remember when 
 or by whom he was taught to read, and that he never 
 could recollect a time when he was not able to read the 
 Bible. His supposition was that he was taught by his 
 mother or his elder sisters, and the instruction must 
 have begun at the tender age of three or four. Of op- 
 portunity for further education there was none save 
 such as was afforded by the extremely inadequate town 
 schools of the vicinity. Ambitious, even as a child, to 
 extend his range of information, and given every en- 
 couragement by the members of his family, the boy 
 attended these schools as regularly as health and 
 weather permitted. That district of the town of Salis- 
 bury in which the Webster family lived contained, 
 indeed, three log schoolhouses. The itinerant masters, 
 however, who elsewhere came from time to time into 
 such communities and dispensed learning in its simpler 
 forms seldom penetrated so far as the Webster com- 
 munity, so that the keepiug of schools fell almost ex- 
 clusively to various small farmers or storekeepers who 
 sought thereby to eke out their precarious livelihood. 
 One may well believe that such teachers, to employ 
 Webster's own phrase, were " sufficiently indifferent." 
 In these schools, he says, " nothing was taught but 
 reading and writing ; and, as to these, the first I gener- 
 ally could perforin better than the teacher, and the last 
 a good master could hardly instruct me in ; writing was 
 so laborious, irksome, and repulsive an occupation to 
 me always. My masters used to tell me that they 
 feared, after all, my fingers were 1 destined for the 
 plough-tail.'" The first of these masters, Thomas 
 Chase, is said to have been able to read and write with 
 1 Webster, " Private Correspondence," Vol. I, p. 7. 
 
26 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 fair facility, but to have floundered hopelessly with his 
 .spilling. Another, James Tappan, who occasionally 
 " boarded " with the Websters, was more proficient. 
 
 For most children attendance at school was restricted 
 to the eight or ten weeks of the year during which in- 
 struction was being offered in the immediate neighbor- 
 hood. While still but six or eight years of age, how- 
 ever, Daniel persisted in walking, even in the depth 
 of winter, to and from a school two and a half or three 
 miles distant. And when no opportunity was to be 
 had within even this distance, the boy's indulgent 
 father sometimes made arrangements for him to board 
 for a few weeks with a family living in the vicinity of 
 a school that was more remote. ' l A good deal of this, ' ' 
 the autobiography records, " was an extra care, more 
 than had been bestowed on my elder brothers, and 
 originating in a conviction of the slenderness and 
 frailty of my constitution, which was thought not 
 likely ever to allow me to pursue robust occupation.' 7 1 
 
 The sacrifice was well repaid. The boy was not a 
 prodigy, but he learned rapidly and remembered 
 unfailingly all that he had been taught. When, upon 
 one occasion, a master, as a special inducement to 
 industry, made an offer of a jack-knife to the pupil 
 who at a specified time should be able to recite the 
 largest number of verses of Scripture, Daniel easily 
 carried off the prize, and without being allowed, so 
 we arc assured, to reel off the full quota of passages 
 which he had tucked away in his mind for the occasion. 
 < tatside of school he read as widely as the restricted op- 
 portunities of the frontier permitted. His father and 
 "•fain other men of standing in the community estab- 
 lished a small circulating library, and from this Daniel 
 1 Webster, "Private Correspondence," Vol. I, p. 7. 
 
PARENTAGE AND YOUTH 27 
 
 obtained a variety of books, most of tliein of fair quality 
 and readableness. Among them was Addison's "Spec- 
 tator," which, by reason of the boy's decided taste for 
 poetry, was a godsend, although he tells us that it per- 
 plexed him not a little that the essayist should have 
 taken so great pains to demonstrate the beauty of Chevy 
 Chase, a thing which was so perfectly self-evident. At 
 the age of ten or twelve he could repeat from memory 
 the greater portion of the psalms and hymns of Dr. 
 Watts, and not seldom in his later life did he draw upon 
 them for apt quotation. " I remember," he records in 
 the autobiography, " that my father brought home from 
 some of the lower towns Pope's ' Essay on Man,' pub- 
 lished in a sort of pamphlet. I took it, and very soon 
 could repeat it, from the begiuniug to end. We had 
 so few books that to read them once or twice was noth- 
 ing. We thought they were all to be got by heart." l 
 Even the arrival of the yearly almanac was an event, 
 and upon one occasion it came near being attended with 
 disastrous consequences. Rising by candle-light at two 
 o'clock one morning to ascertain a word in the third 
 line of the quatrain set down at the top of the page 
 devoted to April, young Daniel accidentally set the 
 house on lire, and it was only by his father's presence 
 of mind that the property, and perhaps the family, 
 was saved. The boy's chagrin was not lessened by the 
 discovery that in the dispute in which he and Ezekiel 
 had been engaged relative to the April quatrain he had 
 been in the wrong. 
 
 When Daniel was not more than eight years of age 
 there fell into his hands a copy of the recently adopted 
 Constitution of the United States. From his father, 
 whoso hard-headed reasoning in the Concord conven- 
 
 1 Webster, " Private ('onespomlenor," Vol. I, p. 8. 
 
28 DANIEL WEBSTEK 
 
 tiOD of two years before had helped turn the tide in 
 favor of a ratification of the instrument, the boy must 
 have picked up a good deal of information concerning 
 the pressing political problems of the time. He had 
 never seen the text of the new frame of government, 
 however, until one day, in a little store kept by William 
 Iloyt, he bought for a few cents a small cotton pocket- 
 handkerchief, on the two sides of which was printed the 
 (institution, embellished with crude cuts of flags and 
 other emblems. It was a gaudy affair, proudly exhib- 
 ited by the owner, but roundly complained of by the 
 good housewife on the ground that it " wouldn't wash.' ' 
 The printed matter was painstakingly spelled out and 
 studied, and from it the boy learned, as was laughingly 
 remarked in later years, " that there was a constitution, 
 — or that there were thirteen states." Eelating the 
 ineideut, in 1850, Webster testified that this was his 
 earliest acquaintance with the Constitution, adding 
 naively that he had "known more or less of it ever 
 since." ! 
 
 Until his fourteenth year the life of the boy flowed 
 in its accustomed channels. "A great deal of the 
 time," he records, "I was sick, and when well was ex- 
 ceedingly Blender, and apparently of feeble system. I 
 read what I could get to read, went to school when I 
 
 'ii Id ; and when not at school was a farmer's youngest 
 boy, not good for much, for want of health and strength, 
 but was expected to do something." 2 There appeared 
 no hope of an education beyond such as might be af- 
 forded by the agencies that have been described. In 
 1791, however, there had come an improvement in the 
 affairs of the elder Webster which eventually opened 
 
 ! v , !' S ! ,r - '; ; p ; iv ;' r te Correspondence," Vol. II, p. 398. 
 Webster, Rid., Vol. I, p. 9. 
 
PARENTAGE AND YOUTH 29 
 
 the way to a wider opportunity for the sou. Possessed 
 in ever increasing measure of the confidence and favor 
 of his neighbors, Ebenezer Webster was elevated in 
 1791 to a " side," I. c, an associate, justiceship in the 
 court of common pleas for the county in which he 
 resided. There was attached to the office a salary of 
 three or four hundred dollars a year. This acquisition 
 made a world of difference in the economy of the 
 Webster household, and gradually there took shape in 
 the Judge's mind a plan for the further education of 
 his youngest son. All of the sons save Daniel and 
 Ezekiel were long since settled in life. As between the 
 two who remained, Daniel seemed perhaps the more 
 promising ; at any rate, his obvious lack of adaptation 
 to the life of the farmer pointed him out as the natural 
 recipient of a paternal encouragement which could not 
 be stretched to cover both. 
 
 In July, 1795, the father gave to Daniel his first 
 intimation of the special opportunities that were to 
 be offered him. The circumstances attending the 
 incident left an impression which never faded from 
 Webster's memory. It was a hot July day and the 
 boy was in the field with his father, giving such assist- 
 ance as he could in the haying. " About the middle 
 of the forenoon," he records, "the Honorable Abiel 
 Foster, M. C, who lived in Canterbury, six miles off, 
 (tailed at the house, and came into the field to see my 
 father. He was a worthy man, col lege- learned, and 
 had been a minister, but was not a person of any con- 
 siderable natural power. My father was his friend and 
 supporter. He talked awhile in the field, and went on 
 his way. When he was gone, my father called me to 
 him, and we sat down beneath the elm, on a haycock. 
 He said, 'My son, thai is a worthy man; he is a 
 
30 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 member of CoDgress ; he goes to Philadelphia and gets 
 six dollars a day, while I toil here. It is because he 
 had an education, which I never had. If I had had 
 his early education, I should have been in Philadelphia 
 in his place. I came near it as it was. But I missed 
 it, and now I must work here.' ' My dear father,' said 
 I, ' you shall uot work. Brother and I will work for 
 you, and will wear our hands out, and you shall rest.' 
 And I remember to have cried, and I cry now at the 
 recollection. ' My child,' said he, ' it is of no impor- 
 tance to me. I now live but for my children. I could 
 not give your elder brothers the advantages of knowl- 
 edge, but I can do something for you. Exert your- 
 self, improve your opportunities, learn, learn, and, 
 when I am gone, you will not need to go through the 
 hardships which I have undergone, and which have 
 made me an old man before my time." l 
 
 The precise purport of this admonition did not ap- 
 pear until some months later. In 1781— the year before 
 I tonieFs birth— there had been established at Exeter an 
 institution of learning modeled on the higher-grade 
 English schools of the time, aud known, from the name 
 of its benefactor, the Honorable John Phillips, as the 
 Phillips Exeter Academy. In the spring of 1796 the 
 elder Webster disclosed to his son his purpose to place 
 him in this far-famed school, and, May 26th, the two 
 made the trip together on horseback to Exeter, where 
 the necessary arrangements were concluded with the 
 principal of the school, Dr. Benjamin Abbott. Daniel 
 was at the time but fourteen years of age. Never 
 before, except for a few days at a time, had he been 
 away from home, and in his new surroundings he was 
 
 :;°V^^:K 9 1846 - Webster, "Pfivate Cor- 
 
PARENTAGE AND YOUTH 31 
 
 at first somewhat overpowered. His home-made 
 clothes and his rustic manners subjected him to a 
 certain amount of ridicule on the part of his more 
 fashionable associates, and there were recurring attac3<s 
 of homesickness. Application to his studies, however, 
 and the commendation of his teachers enabled him in 
 time to overcome these difficulties. During the session 
 from May to October he mastered the rudiments of 
 English grammar and made substantial progress in 
 writing and arithmetic ; and after a brief autumn vaca- 
 tion, spent at home, he entered upon the study of more 
 advanced subjects. In Latin grammar he fell under 
 the tutelage of Joseph Stevens Buckniinster, an older 
 student of the academy who in 1796 was giving in- 
 struction during the illness of Dr. Abbott. Other 
 teachers of this period whom Webster in subsequent 
 days recalled with gratitude were a Mr. Thacher and 
 a Mr. Emery, both of whom turned eventually to law 
 and attained some eminence in the profession. 
 
 In one respect only was the boy's career at Exeter 
 unsatisfactory to himself and to his masters : he never 
 was able to summon up the requisite presence of mind 
 to deliver a declamation, as every boy was expected to 
 do, in the hearing of his fellow-pupils. " The kind 
 and excellent Buckminster sought, especially," he tells 
 us, " to persuade me to perform the exercise of declama- 
 tion like other boys, but I could not do it. Many a 
 piece did I commit to memory, and recite and rehearse 
 in my own room, over and over again, yet, when the 
 day came, when the school collected to hear declama- 
 tions, when my name was called, and I saw all eyes 
 turned to my seat, I could not raise myself from it. 
 Sometimes the instructors frowned, sometimes they 
 smiled. Mr. Buckminster always pressed and en- 
 
32 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 treated, most winniugly, that I would venture, but I 
 could never command sufficient resolution. When the 
 occasion was over, I went home and wept bitter tears 
 of mortification.'' 1 From the timid Exeter school- 
 boy to the confident and peerless orator of the Plym- 
 outh and Bunker Hill commemorations, or of the 
 Seventh of March, was a transition of tremendous 
 magnitude. Although Webster himself nowhere gives 
 us any light upon the point, it is reasonable to suppose, 
 as does his principal biographer, that the deficiency of 
 the schoolboy arose from conditions of mental sensitive- 
 ness and physical frailty which in time completely dis- 
 appeared. 2 At any rate, under more favorable circum- 
 stances, at college and in his profession, the difficulty 
 seems never to have recurred. 
 
 After nine months at the academy there came another 
 change. In February, 1797, it was arranged that Daniel 
 should be placed under the tutelage of the Reverend 
 Samuel Wood, a minister of the adjoining town of 
 iJoscawen, but six miles distant from the Webster 
 homestead. It was now the purpose of Judge Webster 
 to send the boy to college, and Dr. W T ood. strongly 
 impressed by the lad's ability, had volunteered to fit 
 him for admission, making a charge therefor, cover- 
 ing lodging, board, and instruction, of one dollar a 
 week. On the road to Boscawen the father disclosed 
 to the boy his ultimate intention. " The very idea," 
 m rote Webster long after, " thrilled my whole frame. 
 He said he then lived but for his children, and if I 
 would do all I could for myself he would do what he 
 could for me. I remember that I was quite overcome 
 and my head grew dizzy. The thing appeared to me 
 
 | Webster, " Private Correspondence," Vol. I, pp. 9-10 
 Cuius, " Life of Daniel Webster," Vol. I, p. 21. 
 
PARENTAGE AND YOUTH 38 
 
 so high, and the expense and sacrifice it was to cost 
 my father so great, I could only press his hands and 
 shed tears. Excellent, excellent parent ! I cannot 
 think of him, even now, without turning child again." ! 
 
 With Dr. Wood the boy continued his studies dur- 
 ing a period of approximately six months. He read 
 Virgil and Cicero, conceiving, as he tells us, " a pleas- 
 ure in the study of them, especially the latter, which 
 rendered application no longer a task. ' ' When haying 
 lime came round he was called home for a time by his 
 father, but his indifferent application to the prosaic 
 tasks of the farm only confirmed the conviction that 
 he must be prepared for some occupation that would 
 not involve manual labor. He was therefore returned 
 without delay to the tutelage of Dr. Wood, and to the 
 end that he might obtain the necessary preparation in 
 the Greek grammar for an early entrance to college, a 
 Dartmouth senior by the name of Palmer was called in 
 to give him special instruction in that branch. Dr. 
 Wood was not an exceptional scholar or teacher, but 
 during a pastorate covering upward of fifty years he 
 taught in his own house, sornetime*s without hope of 
 pecuniary reward, no fewer than one hundred aud fifty 
 boys, most of whom went to college, and several of 
 whom, like Webster, attained rare distinction in sub- 
 sequent professional life. It was service of this nature, 
 hardly less than the more immediate ministrations of 
 religion, that gave the New England minister of a hun- 
 dred years ago his remarkable hold upon the life and 
 thought of his times. 
 
 In midsummer of 1797 Dr. Wood announced to his 
 youthful pupil that he might consider himself prepared 
 for college. His attainments as yet, of course, were 
 1 Webster, " Private Correspondence, " Vol. I, p. 10. 
 
34 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 meagre enough. The Latin grammar he knew fairly 
 well. The first six books of the ^neid and Cicero's 
 four orations against Catiline he had read. Of the 
 Greek grammar he had an elementary knowledge, 
 and he* had read, although with indifferent pro- 
 iicieucy, the four gospels in the original tongue. Of 
 mathematics he knew nothing, except the elementary 
 arithmetic studied in the town schools and at Exeter. 
 Of geography and history he had no systematic 
 knowledge, although his reading had given him an 
 acquaintance with some phases of these subjects. 
 In the domain of English literature, while he had 
 never received formal instruction, he had read with 
 sufficient range and discernment to be at least better 
 eq nipped than was the average college student of 
 the day. For Greek and mathematics he had small 
 taste ; but for the Latin classics, English literature, 
 history, and politics he exhibited a decided liking. 
 As to his preparation for college, the boy seems him- 
 self to have cherished some misgivings. His patron's 
 efforts, however, accomplished their purpose, and in 
 August, 1797, at the age of fifteen, Daniel found him- 
 self a member of the freshman class at Dartmouth. 
 Doubtless it was, as he himself long afterward described 
 it, a "mere breakiug-in" ; but it opened anew and 
 wonderful field of opportunity. 
 
CHAPTER II 
 
 PREPARATION FOR THE LAW 
 
 When Webster became a student at Dartmouth the 
 institution was— as it still was twenty-one years later 
 when he summoned all his powers to its defense before 
 the highest tribunal of the land— a little college. Its 
 origin is to be traced to a plan of the missionary, 
 John Sergeant, for the establishment of an Indian school 
 at Stockbridge, Massachusetts. By reason of the pre- 
 mature death of Sergeant the project upon which he 
 was bent was delayed, but it was taken up by Dr. 
 Eleazer Wheelock, of Lebanon, Connecticut, and 
 broadened to comprehend the founding of an institution 
 of higher learning for both Indians and whites. 
 Funds were collected in England and America and a 
 site, offered by Governor Thomas Wentworth and other 
 citizens of New Hampshire, was accepted, consisting 
 of the township of Hanover, on the eastern bank of 
 the Connecticut. In 1770 the college, bearing the name 
 of an English patron, the Earl of Dartmouth, and 
 endowed with upward of fifty thousand acres of land 
 in New Hampshire and Vermont, opened its doors, 
 under the management of President Wheelock and a 
 self-perpetuating board of twelve trustees. A class of 
 four was graduated in 1771. 
 
 By 1797 there were upward of two hundred students 
 in the college, and the number of graduates from year 
 to year was surpassed nt only one other institution in 
 the country. The quality of instruction was excellent, 
 
36 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 although the range was of necessity restricted. As a 
 freshman young Webster merely went on with the 
 reading of the ^Eneid and of the Greek New Testa- 
 ment. In the sophomore year there was more of the 
 same sort of tiling, with excursions into arithmetic and 
 algebra. Of new subjects to be studied there were 
 practically none. And, recalling the dislike which 
 Webster cherished for mathematics, and his compara- 
 tive indifference to Greek, it is easy enough to under- 
 stand the conclusion at which apparently he in time 
 arrived, namely, that the academic routine with which 
 most of his companions were content was ill-considered 
 and insufficient. That during his earlier years at the 
 college he ever got so far as definitely to formulate this 
 revolutionary doctrine does not appear. What he did 
 was simply to attend with fair diligence to the tasks 
 which his instructors imposed, employing the remain- 
 der of his time in more congenial pursuits, especially 
 in extending his knowledge of English literature, phi- 
 losophy, and modern history. There was still the pas- 
 sion for poetry, and not merely for the reading and 
 memorizing of it, but for writing it, Some of the 
 effusions of this period, for which the author in later 
 years expressed a profound contempt, survive, among 
 them verses addressed to George Herbert, an intimate 
 < allege friend, when Webster was on the point of re- 
 turning to Salisbury for the winter vacation of 1798- 
 1 799. ■ They exhibit sophomoric flamboyancy, and yet 
 arc by no means lacking in delicacy of sentiment and 
 felicity of expression. The consequence of the youth's 
 somewhat independent apportionment of his time was 
 that, while he was recognized as a student who could 
 be depended upon absolutely to come up to the mark 
 'Webster, " Private Correspondence, " Vol. I, pp. 71-72. 
 
PREPARATION FOR THE LAW 37 
 
 with his required exercises, he did not attain great dis- 
 tinction in his academic subjects. At the sophomore 
 " exhibition " in 1799 neither of the two principal 
 appointments conferred by the faculty fell to him. 
 Measured solely by those standards according to which 
 academic honors were then, and have often been since, 
 bestowed, Daniel's college career was, indeed, con- 
 siderably less brilliant than was that, subsequently, of 
 his brother Ezekiel. 
 
 The credit, however, for Ezekiel' s attainments rests 
 in no small degree with the younger, and on the whole 
 the more capable, brother. When Ebenezer Webster, 
 in the teeth of financial embarrassment and approach- 
 ing old age, formulated his plan for the education of 
 Daniel it was his purpose that Ezekiel, vastly superior 
 in physical strength and accounted of no special prom- 
 ise intellectually, should remain on the farm, gradually 
 to take over the heavier labor that was to be per- 
 formed and, eventually, the care of the surviving mem- 
 bers of the household. In this disposition of his future 
 Ezekiel uncomplainingly acquiesced. To the sensitive 
 mind of Daniel, however, the arrangement brought 
 sore misgiving. Never were brothers more sympa- 
 thetic and more inseparable than Daniel and Ezekiel ; 
 and that, by reason of his precarious health and greater 
 boyishness, he had been shielded and humored in 
 countless ways by his large-hearted brother, Daniel 
 was much too honorable to fail to recognize. The re- 
 lations sustained between the two are well illustrated 
 by a little anecdote which, whether or not based upon 
 actual fact, was long current in New England. Tbe 
 two boys, as the story runs, were once provided with 
 a little pocket money and permitted to attend a count r\ 
 fair. When they returned in the evening Daniel was 
 
38 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 enthusiastic, Ezekiel rather non-coinniittal. "What 
 did you do with your money?" Daniel was asked. 
 "Spent it," was the exultant answer. "And, Ezekiel, 
 what did you do with yours? " The reply came with 
 an air of resignation : " Lent it to Daniel." 
 
 When, in May, 1799, the young sophomore returned 
 to the old homestead for the spring vacation, he found 
 Ezekiel visibly depressed by his apparently unpromis- 
 ing lot. He had been thinking, so he confided to 
 Daniel, of seeking his fortune in some new portion of 
 the country, and had been deterred only by the reali- 
 zation that his father was coming to be more than ever 
 in need of his help and that within perhaps a few years 
 he would be the sole dependence of his mother and his 
 two unmarried sisters. In a conference which lasted 
 throughout an entire night the two boys, the elder as 
 yet only nineteen years of age, canvassed a problem 
 which for older heads would have been sufficiently 
 knotty. In the end it was decided that the idea of 
 seeking a fortune in distant parts should be abandoned, 
 but that, instead, Daniel should take up at once with 
 his father the question of arranging, even at this late 
 day, for Ezekiel's education, including eventually a 
 course at Dartmouth. Both recognized that such a 
 project would come as a shock to the other members 
 of the family, particularly as the father was growing 
 old, his health was not good, and his circumstances 
 were far from easy. None the less, on the morrow 
 1 taniel broached the plan and supported it with argu- 
 ments which enabled him to carry the day. He prom- 
 1 to "keep school" himself, if need should arise, 
 and thus to take more than the allotted four years to 
 complete bis own course at Hanover, if only Ezekiel 
 might be given an opportunity such as that which he 
 
PREPARATION FOR THE LAW 39 
 
 was himself enjoying. The father "said at once," 
 Webster records, "he lived but for his children ; that 
 he had but little, and on that little he put no value, 
 except so far as it might be useful to them. That to 
 carry us both through college would take all he was 
 worth ; that, for himself, he was willing to run the 
 risk ; but that this was a serious matter to our mother 
 and two unmarried sisters ; that we must settle the 
 matter with them, and, if their consent was obtained, 
 he would trust to Providence, and get along as well as 
 he could." ' 
 
 In a family council which Webster feelingly de- 
 scribed in his old age the mother affirmed her willing- 
 ness even that the farm, already under mortgage for 
 Daniel's education, should be sold, if need be, to meet 
 the expenses of the two boys. To such lengths it 
 proved, fortunately, not necessary to go, but through 
 many years thereafter the shadow of debt hung heavy 
 over the family. For Ezekiel the road to be traversed 
 was long and hard. At the relatively advanced age of 
 nineteen, and after having given several years exclu- 
 sively to the labor of the farm, he had to begin with 
 those elementary studies which the younger brother 
 had long since left behind. By dint of resolute ap- 
 plication, however, he overcame the disadvantage. 
 Two terms at a little academy recently established at 
 Salisbury were followed by nine months of instruction 
 under the directiou of Dr. Wood at Boscawcn, and in 
 March, 1801 — six months before Daniel's graduation — 
 he entered Dartmouth, so well prepared, and with such 
 habits of industry, that within a year he had taken 
 rank as one of the most proficient students of the 
 college. He was graduated in 1804, after having 
 1 Webster, "Private Correspondence," Vol. I, p. 12. 
 
40 DANIEL WEBSTEB 
 
 been in residence at Hanover little more than three 
 
 ^turning to coUege in the antnmn of 1799 for his 
 junior year, Daniel found himself obliged to eke out 
 by his own efforts the diminishing funds with which 
 i t was now possible for his father to supply him. By 
 superintending the publication of a little weekly news- 
 paper, the Dartmouth Gazette, and making selections 
 for it from books and current periodicals, he was able 
 to pay his board and at the same time to indulge his 
 taste for literature and public affairs. " I suppose I 
 sometimes wrote," he says, " a foolish paragraph my- 
 self." ' The winter vacation of 1800 found him teach- 
 ing a small school at Salisbury, the proceeds of which 
 went to the support of Ezekiel during his months of 
 tutelage at Dr. Wood's. 
 
 The last two years of Webster's stay at Dartmouth 
 were distinctly a period of growth in mental power 
 and of broadening grasp upon those things that make 
 for success in professional life. With scrupulous 
 fidelity, although in sometimes a rather perfunctory 
 mariner, the subjects which fell to juniors and seniors 
 under the rigid curriculum of the day were accorded 
 their quota of time and labor. But beyond these the 
 rapidly maturing student pushed his interests and in- 
 quiries in multifold directions. History, especially, 
 he read with voracious zeal, and, as appears from a few 
 'hie Letters which have survived from these years, the 
 politics of the day, both foreign and domestic, received 
 his continued attention. At home the times were full 
 of interest. In the election of 1800 federalism, under 
 whose segis Webster had been reared, went down to 
 defeat, and in 1801 there was being established that 
 
 1 Webster, " Private Correspondence," Vol. I, p. 11. 
 
PREPARATION FOR THE LAW 41 
 
 Jeffersoiiian regime which some of the young student's 
 friends and companions regarded as a curious experi- 
 ment, others as a curse that had fallen upon the land 
 by reason of the iniquities of the people, but few if any 
 as a natural or desirable refreshing of the body politic. 
 Abroad, affairs were still more stirring. " Who would 
 have thought six months ago," wrote Webster, Feb- 
 ruary 5, 1800, to a former Exeter comrade, James H. 
 Bingham, " that Bonaparte, who was then represented 
 as lying with his slaughtered army on the plains of 
 Egypt, to taint the air and gorge the monsters of the 
 Nile, would at this time have returned to France, have 
 destroyed the Directory and Legislative Councils, have 
 established a triumvirate, and have placed himself at 
 its head — which is saying, have virtually made himself 
 sovereign of France ! Who could have predicted that 
 the Duke of York, who so late was marching victori- 
 ously through Holland, should ere this time have 
 entered into a convention, by which he was to give up 
 all his booty and prisoners and evacuate the country ? 
 Or, who ever supposed that Paul, emperor of Russia, 
 who so lately was raising one hundred and eighty 
 thousand men to reinforce his armies, should now order 
 Suwarrow, with his veteran Cossacks, to quit the field 
 and return home ? The occurrences hitherto would 
 have warranted the most extravagant expectations ; 
 but these events must have been, I think, unprepared 
 for. What unknown cause has wrought these changes ? 
 I cannot determine. lam weary of conjecture." ! 
 
 The letter just quoted is of further interest by rea- 
 son of the comments contained in it upon the perils by 
 which the writer believed his own country to be beset. 
 
 •Webster to Bingham. February S, 1800. Webiter, " Private 
 Correspondence, " Vol. I, p. 78. 
 
42 DANIEL WEBSTEE 
 
 " When baffled in attempting to scan the horizon of 
 European politics, could I turn my eyes home and be 
 presented with such a prospect as was afforded five 
 3 ears ago, I should lift my heart to heaven in a trans- 
 port of devotion, and exclaim, 'Let France or Eng- 
 land be arbiter of Europe, but be mine the privileges 
 of an American citizen.' But, Hervey, our prospect 
 darkens ; clouds hang around us. Not that I fear the 
 menaces of France ; not that I should fear all the pow- 
 ers of Europe leagued together for our destruction. 
 No, Bingham, intestine feuds alone I fear. The 
 French faction, though quelled, is not eradicated ; the 
 southern states in commotion ; a Democrat the head 
 of the Executive in Virginia ; a whole county in 
 arms against the government of McKean, in Pennsyl- 
 vania; Washington, the great political cement dead, 
 and Adams almost worn down with years, and the 
 weight of cares. These considerations, operating on 
 a mind naturally timorous, excite unpleasant emo- 
 tions. In my melancholy moments, I presage the most 
 dire calamities. I already see, in my imagination, the 
 time when the bauner of civil war shall be unfurled ; 
 when Discord's hydra form shall set up her hideous 
 yell, and from her hundred mouths shall howl destruc- 
 tion through our empire ; and when American blood 
 shall be made to flow in rivers, by American swords ! 
 But propitious heaven prevent such dreadful calam- 
 ities! . . . Heaven grant that the bonds of our 
 federal union may be strengthened ; that Gallic emis- 
 saries and Gallic principles may be spurned from our 
 land : that traitors may be abashed, and that the stars 
 and stripes of United Columbia mav wave trium- 
 phant." ' 
 
 Webster to James H. Bingham, February 5, 1800. Loc. cit. 
 
PREPARATION FOR THE LAW 43 
 
 In these sentences there is, of course, much sheer 
 bombast and a good deal of partisan prejudice. But 
 it should be borne in mind that they were penned by 
 a college junior who had arrived at the stage of de- 
 velopment where one is likely to be too proud of one's 
 rhetoric to be able to keep it wholly within bounds. 
 Between the effectiveness of the passages that have 
 been quoted aud that of the peroration of the second 
 Reply to Hay ne there is no apparent possibility of 
 comparison. Yet the superiority of the later effort 
 arises not so much from the sentiments contained in it 
 as from the simple and restrained language in which 
 they are expressed. The statesman of 1830 cherished 
 an attachment for the Union hardly more fervid than 
 that which stirred the heart of the schoolboy of 1800. 
 
 It was during his junior year at Dartmouth that 
 Webster first acquired proficiency in public speaking. 
 A society, ll The United Fraternity," of which he be- 
 came a member afforded abundant ox>portunity for 
 practice, and gradually the shyness which had ren- 
 dered his days at Exeter a torment completely disap- 
 peared. By the beginning of the senior year no one 
 in the college was regarded as his equal in debate or 
 set oration. It was now that his enormous reading and 
 his prodigious memory began to tell to his advantage. 
 At a moment's notice he was able to call up from the 
 depths of his mental storehouse a wealth of fact and 
 allusion, with which nothing short of his long-con- 
 tinued, painstaking reading could have equipped him. 
 His own testimony on the poiut is interesting. "So 
 much as I read, I made my own. When a half-hour, 
 or an hour at most, had elapsed, I closed my book, 
 and thought over what I had read. If there was any- 
 thing peculiarly interesting or striking in the passage, 
 
44 DANIEL WEBSTEE 
 
 I endeavored to recall it and lay it up in my memory, 
 and commonly could effect my object. Then if, in 
 debate or conversation afterward, any subject came up 
 on which I had read something, I could talk very 
 easily so far as I had read, and there I was very care- 
 
 ful to stop." 1 
 
 Three only of the orations which Webster delivered 
 during his days at college have been preserved. That 
 the young man had achieved fame locally as a public 
 speaker is sufficiently demonstrated by the fact that 
 he was invited by the townspeople of Hanover to make 
 the principal address at the Fourth of July celebration 
 in 1800. The character of this effort was in part 
 predetermined, of course, by the nature of the occasion. 
 In the speech the eighteen-year-old orator rehearsed 
 the more exhilarating aspects of the Revolution, paid 
 lofty tribute to Washington and other Revolutionary 
 Leaders, and praised the new order which had been 
 ushered in under the Constitution. The tone was pro- 
 nouncedly Federalist, but few if any of the auditors 
 were likely to take offense thereat. The style, while 
 Bimple and more direct than had been usual in eight- 
 eenth century oratory, was still florid, and at times 
 labored. The thought was, in large part, solid. The 
 bin den of the argument — the necessity of the Union, 
 the menace of civil discord, the efficacy of the Consti- 
 tution as the bulwark of the nation—was precisely that 
 which it was to be the lot of Webster to bear before 
 his conntrymen in countless oratorical appeals through 
 upward of two succeeding generations. 2 Of the other 
 two college orations which have survived, one is a dis- 
 
 1 McGaw to Sanborn, November 16, 1852. Webster, " Private 
 Correspondence," Vol. I, p. 51. 
 
 1 Writings and Speeches," Vol. XV, pp. 475-484. 
 
PREPAEATION FOR THE LAW 15 
 
 course on "Opinion," delivered before the United 
 Fraternity ; l the other, a eulogy on a classmate, 
 Ephraiin Simonds, who died in June of his senior 
 year. Both show some improvement upon the Han- 
 over speech, the eulogy, in particular, being, as Mr. 
 Curtis describes it, "natural, unaffected, full of feel- 
 ing, and of a strong religious faith. " 2 
 
 In 1801 Webster was graduated with his class. Al- 
 though admittedly the best speaker and the student 
 of widest information in the college, he had no part in 
 the commencement exercises. This, as he tells us, was 
 "owing to some difficulties — futc non meminisse juval." 
 The circumstance reflected at the time no discredit 
 upon the young graduate, nor indeed upon any one 
 concerned. It arose from the fact that Webster's rank 
 in his academic subjects was surpassed by that of a 
 few of his classmates and that a misunderstanding be- 
 tween the faculty and the graduating class with regard 
 to commencement parts left Webster quite without an 
 appointment. There is no evidence that he ever cher- 
 ished a grudge by reason of the affair. 
 
 Of his attainments upon leaving college Webster 
 spoke several times during his subsequent life, always 
 with modesty, if not disparagement. In 1S02, to one 
 who was complimenting him upon his scholarship in 
 college he protested : " The opinion of my scholarship 
 was a mistaken one. It was overestimated. . . . 
 Many other students read more than I did and knew 
 more than I did." In 1825 he said to Mr. Ticknor : 
 "My Greek and mathematics were not great while I 
 was in college, but I was better read in history and 
 
 1 " Writing and Speeches," Vol. XV, pp. 494-504. 
 * Cm-tin, "Webster," Vol. I, p. 40. For the speeoh we 
 "Writings aDd Speeches," Vol. XV, pp. 487-493. 
 
46 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 English generally than any of my class, and I was good 
 in composition. My Latin was pretty strong too." 
 And in 1851, in a letter to a classmate, Dr. Merrill, 
 he said: "I believe I was less industrious; at any 
 rate, I indulged more in general reading, and my at- 
 tainments, if I made any, were not such as told for 
 much in the recitation -room. After leaving college, 
 1 • caught up,' as the boys say, pretty well in Latin ; 
 but in college, and afterward, I left Greek to Loveland, 
 and mathematics to Shattuck. Would that I had pur- 
 sued Greek till I could read and understand Demos- 
 thenes in his own language ! " l A taste of elementary 
 Greek, a slight acquaintance with the higher forms of 
 mathematics, a reasonably thorough familiarity with 
 Latin grammar and literature, a broad and discerning 
 knowledge of history, politics, and English literature 
 — such, in brief, was the academic equipment which 
 the aspiring graduate of nineteen was able to bring to 
 the task of making his way in the world. Other qual- 
 ifications, however, he possessed in liberal degree. He 
 could write smooth and forceful, even if as yet occa- 
 sionally extravagant, English. In facility in public 
 debate, and in oratorical abilities generally, he had 
 achieved the highest distinction possible within the 
 sphere to which he had thus far been confined. His 
 capacity for work was prodigious, his memory extra- 
 ordinary. Further than that, his character and de- 
 portment were such as to win the readiest confidence. 
 Be was refined in his tastes, unimpeachable in morals, 
 genial in manner, optimistic in temperament, and pas- 
 sionately patriotic. No one knew him but to admire 
 him, and when he went forth from the little New 
 
 *Webeter to Merrill, January 10, 1861. Webster, « Private 
 Correspondence," Vol. TT. p. 412. 
 
PEEP Ali ATI OxN FOR THE LAW 17 
 
 Hampshire college many of those who had observed 
 his genius and measured his character were ready to 
 predict for him the loftiest distinctions of life. 
 
 After commencement Webster returned to his father's 
 house in Salisbury. Not until now, it would appear, 
 was the choice of a profession definitely made. Even 
 at his graduation, the young man himself seems to 
 have beeu totally undecided as to the direction in 
 which he should turn. The father suggested, and 
 mildly urged, the study of law ; and, without enthu- 
 siasm — even with ill-concealed indifference — the son 
 accepted the suggestion. In August, 1801, he entered 
 the office of his father's old friend and neighbor, 
 Thomas W. Thompson, an able practitioner and in 
 later times a member of both the House of Represent- 
 atives and the Senate of the United States. " 1 have 
 precipitated myself into an office, " wrote Webster to 
 his friend Bingham a few months after graduation, 
 " with how much prudence I do not now allow myself 
 to reflect. I am not like you, harassed with dreams, 
 nor troubled with any waverings of inclination ; but 
 am rather sunken in indifference and apathy. I have 
 read some since commencement, learned a little, for- 
 gotten a good deal, and should be glad to forget much 
 more." l In a later portion of the same letter he con- 
 fesses that he expects " to meet many disappointments 
 in the prosecution of the law," states that he has 
 "calculated too largely on the profession," and 
 solemnly records that he has lately "engaged a new 
 auxiliary" to support him under mortification, 
 namely, tobacco. To a Mr. Coffin he writes, a few 
 days later : " Considering how long I must read law, 
 
 1 Webster to Bingham. September 22, 1801. Webster, " Private 
 Correspondence, " Vol. I, p. 92. 
 
48 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 prospects are not very flattering, but perhaps I may 
 find room hereafter in some wilderness, where the 
 violet has not resigned her tenement, to make writs 
 without disturbance of rivals, if there should be no- 
 body to purchase. . . . Our class are much in- 
 clined to the law, but I believe we have all mistaken 
 our talents. We have those that might be good di- 
 vines, and perhaps eminent physicians. But, in hon- 
 esty, it is not my opinion that any individual has 
 brilliancy, and at the same time penetration and judg- 
 ment enough, for a great law character." 1 
 
 Mr. Thompson was a graduate of Harvard and had 
 served for three years as a tutor at that institution. 
 He possessed a library which, as country lawyer's 
 libraries went in the early nineteenth century, was 
 well filled and well selected. It was Webster's lament 
 that as a student of law he was obliged to pore over 
 Vattel, Montesquieu, and Blackstoue when he should 
 greatly have preferred Homer, Shakaspeare, and Mil- 
 ton. And although he made substantial progress with 
 his legal subjects, especially the law of nations (of 
 which one day he was to become an eminent ex- 
 pounder), he found time to devour the "Iliad," in 
 Pope's translation, a large part of the poetry of 
 Towper, "Paradise Lost," several of Shakespeare's 
 plays, and the histories of Hume and Robertson. 
 When there were no writs to be copied and reading 
 grew wearisome, the woods and streams tempted him 
 forth with dog and gun and fishing-rod. 
 
 The intention had been that Webster should con- 
 tinue with Mr. Thompson throughout the winter of 
 1801-1802. By mid-winter, however, the state of the 
 
 Webster to Coffin, October 3, 1801. Webster, '« Private Corre- 
 spond pnoe," Vol. I, pp. 94-95. 
 
PREPARATION FOR THE LAW 49 
 
 family finances became such that there was nothing for 
 the young man to do but to suspend his studies and 
 earn some money, for both his own support and the 
 maintenance of Ezekiel at Dartmouth. At this junc- 
 ture there came, opportunely enough, an offer of the 
 preceptorship of a little academy at Fryeburg, Maine. 
 Fryeburg, at the head of the Saco River and near the 
 New Hampshire line, was a comparatively new settle- 
 ment, but it was growing rapidly, and even if Webster 
 had been in a position to select the scene of his labors 
 he should probably have adjudged the town by no 
 raeaus an unattractive place. As it was, he grasped 
 the opportunity without delay, and the middle of Janu- 
 ary found him once more in the schoolmaster's chair, 
 on a contract for six months 5 service at a salary of one 
 hundred and seventy-five dollars. To the end that he 
 might save his entire earnings he forthwith entered 
 into a self-sacrificing arrangement with the register of 
 deeds for the county of Oxford, Mr. James Osgood, 
 with whose family he lived and boarded. " The fee," 
 he tells us, " for recording at full length a common 
 deed, in a large fair hand, and with the care requisite 
 to avoid errors, was two shillings and threepence. 
 Mr. Osgood proposed to me that T should do this 
 writing, and that of the two shillings and threepence 
 for each deed I should have one shilling and sixpence. 
 I greedily seized upon so tempting an offer, and set to 
 work. On a long winter's evening I could copy two 
 deeds, and that was half a dollar. Four evenings in a 
 week earned two dollars ; and two dollars a week paid 
 my board. This appeared to me to be a very thriving 
 condition. . . . But the ache is not yet out of my 
 fingers, for nothing has ever been so laborious to me as 
 writing, when under the necessity of writing a good 
 
50 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 hand." ' To a young man who loved reading, social 
 converse, and recreation as did Webster, all this meant 
 dradgery of the dreariest sort. A further passage in 
 the autobiography lays bare the motive : " In May of 
 this year (1802), having a week's vacation, I took my 
 quarter's salary, mounted a horse, went straight over 
 all the hills to Hanover, and had the pleasure of put- 
 ting these, the first earnings of my life, into my 
 brother's hands for his college expenses. Having en- 
 joyed this sincere and high pleasure, I hied me back 
 again to my school and my copying of deeds." 2 
 
 Continued outlays in Ezekiel's behalf left Daniel in 
 a chronic state of dire poverty. " You will naturally 
 inquire," he writes to Mr. Fuller toward the end of 
 his stay at Fryeburg, " how I prosper in the article of 
 cash ; finely ! finely ! I came here in January with a 
 horse and watch, etc., and a few ' rascally counters ' 
 in my pocket. Was soon obliged to sell my horse and 
 live on the proceeds. Still straitened for cash, I sold 
 my watch, and made a shift to get home, where my 
 friends supplied me with another horse and another 
 watch. My horse is sold again, and my watch goes I 
 expect this week ; thus you see how I lay up cash." s 
 Ezekiel's needs were no greater than Daniel's had 
 been, but through reiterated supplications they were 
 made to appear insatiable. "Now, Zeke, you will 
 not read half a sentence," so runs a note written from 
 Salisbury, November 4, 1802, "no, not one syllable, 
 before you have thoroughly searched this sheet for 
 scrip ; but, my word for it, you will find no scrip here ! 
 
 'Autobiography. Webster, "Private Correspondence," Vol. 
 i, p. is. 
 
 1 Ibid., p. 14. 
 
 5 Webster to Fuller, August 29, 1802. Ibid., Vol. I, p. 122. 
 
PREPAKAT10N FOE THE LAW 51 
 
 We held a sanhedrim this morning on the snbject of 
 cash, could not hit upon any way to get you any ; just 
 before we went away to hang ourselves through dis- 
 appointment, it came into our heads that next week 
 might do. ... I have now by me two cents in 
 lawful federal currency ; next week I will send them, 
 if they be all ; they will buy a pipe ; with a pipe you 
 can smoke ; smoking inspires wisdom ; wisdom is 
 allied to fortitude ; from fortitude it is but one step to 
 stoicism ; and stoicism never pants for this world's 
 goods ; so perhaps my two cents, by this process, may 
 put you quite at ease about cash." 1 " Money, Daniel, 
 money," was the appeal that came from Hanover four 
 days later. "As I was walking down to the office 
 after a letter, I happened to find one cent, which is the 
 only money I have had since the second day after I 
 came on. It is a fact, Dan, that I was called on since 
 for a dollar where I owed it, and borrowed it, and 
 have borrowed it four times since to pay those I 
 borrowed of." ' l 
 
 After some weeks a new and perplexing problem 
 was presented. As a schoolmaster Webster was 
 eminently successful. His pupils were devoted to him, 
 and the townspeople of Fryeburg besought him to re- 
 main in their midst. He was offered a salary of five 
 or six hundred dollars if he would consent to retain 
 the preceptorship, and as an additional perquisite the 
 clerkship of the court of common pleas for tlie county 
 of Oxford was placed at his disposal. Could he expect 
 to attain even this measure of success as a lawyer? At 
 times he doubted it. "What shall T do?" he writes 
 
 1 Daniel to Ezekiel Webster, November 1, 1802. Webster, 
 "Private Correspondence," Vol. I, pp. 122-123. 
 •Ezekiel to Daniel Webster, November G, 1602. Ibid., p. 124. 
 

 52 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 to Bingham shortly after the trip to Hanover. " Shall 
 I hay, 'Yes, gentlemen/ and sit down here to spend 
 my days in a kind of comfortable privacy, or shall I 
 relinquish these prospects, and enter into a profession, 
 where my feelings will be constantly harrowed by 
 objects either of dishonesty or misfortune 5 where my 
 living must be squeezed from penury (for rich folks 
 seldom go to law), and my moral principle continually 
 be at hazard? I agree with you that the law is well 
 calculated to draw forth the powers of the mind, but 
 what are its effects on the heart? Are they equally 
 propitious ? Does it inspire benevolence, and awake 
 tenderness ; or does it, by a frequent repetition of 
 wretched objects, blunt sensibility, and stifle the still 
 small voice of mercy?" 1 After enumerating the 
 inducements that still drew him toward the law — his 
 father's wishes, his friends' advice, and Mr. Thomp- 
 son's offer of tuition gratis and eventually of his 
 clientage — he concludes : " On the whole, I shall make 
 one more trial in the ensuing autumn. Tf I prosecute 
 the profession, I pray God to fortify me against its 
 temptations. To the winds I dismiss those light hopes 
 of eminence which ambition inspired, and vanity 
 fostered. To be l honest, to be capable, to be faithful ' 
 to my client and my conscience, I earnestly hope will 
 be my first endeavor." 2 
 
 In September, 1802, after nine months of service at 
 Fryeburg, Webster was back in Mr. Thompson's 
 office at Salisbury, where he remained until the earlv 
 spring of 1804. Even during the busy weeks at Frye- 
 bnrg he had contrived to continue to some extent both 
 
 'Webster to Bingham, May 18, 1802. Webster, " Private Cor- 
 '■■-pondeiice." Vol. I, pp. 110-111. 
 1 /foW., p. in. 
 
PKEPABATIQN FOB THE LAW 58 
 
 his legal and his general reading. He was much too 
 poor to purchase Blackstone, but he borrowed a set of 
 the Commentaries and waded through two or three of 
 the portly volumes. From a circulating library he 
 obtained Adams's " Defense of the American Constitu- 
 tions/' Goldsmith's "History of England," Mosheim's 
 "Ecclesiastical History," "The Spectator," "The 
 Tatler," Pope's poetical works, and various other 
 books, all of which were perused with unflagging inter- 
 est. Here, also, there had fallen into his hands Fisher 
 Ames's memorable speech on the Jay Treaty, which he 
 not only read but memorized. During the year and a 
 half spent at Salisbury after the sojourn at Fryeburg 
 his reading was confined more continuously to the law. 
 Hume, however, he reread, and as much time as could 
 be spared was devoted to the Latin classics— Cicero, 
 Horace, Caesar, Sallust, and Juvenal. Long extracts 
 from Cicero were committed to memory, and some of 
 the odes of Horace were converted into English rhymes. 
 "If one can keep up an acquaintance with general 
 literature in the meantime, the law may help to 
 invigorate and unfold the powers of the mind." Such 
 was the highest praise which, as late as 1803, he could 
 find it within him to bestow upon his adopted pro- 
 fession. 
 
 That the lofty ideals which weighed so heavily with 
 Webster during these maturing years should have 
 created within him a desire to attain, not necessarily a 
 higher rank, but a higher efficiency, in his profession 
 than had been commonly aimed at by men in his cir- 
 cumstances, was inevitable. In his letters he begins 
 to speak of a "rational and necessary ambition," and 
 to exhibit ill-concealed impatience with the straight- 
 ened conditions amidst which his lot had thus far been 
 
54 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 cast. An idea that came to him again and again was 
 that of going to Boston for the completion of his legal 
 studies. "I believe," he writes in 1803, " that some 
 acquaintance in the capital of New England would be 
 very useful to us who expect to plant ourselves down 
 as country lawyers. But I cannot control my fortune ; 
 I must follow wherever circumstances lead. My going 
 to Boston is therefore much more a matter of hope 
 than of probability ; unless something like a miracle 
 puts the means in my hands, I shall not budge from 
 here very soon. " l 
 
 For the realization of this dream the way was 
 opened much more speedily than the ambitions stu- 
 dent had dared hope. In the early weeks of 1804 Daniel 
 and Ezekiel came to a realization that one or the other 
 would be obliged to turn at once to something that 
 would yield a little revenue ; " for," so the autobiog- 
 raphy informs us, "we were getting to be heinously 
 unprovided." In February Daniel made his way to 
 Boston in quest of employment for himself or his 
 brother. Very opportunely he found that a college 
 friend, Dr. Cyrus Perkins, was on the point of giving 
 up a small private school in Short (afterward Kings- 
 ton) Street, and the upshot was that arrangements 
 were made for Ezekiel to assume the mastership. By 
 continuing his studies out of residence, the older 
 brother was able to be graduated, in the same year, 
 with his class. And so well did he prosper in his new 
 position that, dissuading Daniel from yielding to a 
 transitory impulse to seek his fortunes in New York, 
 he was permitted to repay bygone sacrifices by bring 
 mg the young law student to Boston and maintaining 
 
 'Webster to Bingham, October 6, 1803. Webster "Private 
 Correspondence," Vol. I, p. 14,1. ' rnvate 
 
PREPARATION FOR THE LAW 55 
 
 hiin until his professional preparation bad been com- 
 pleted. 
 
 Arrived in Boston, in July, 1804, Daniel's first 
 problem was to seek out an office wherein to obtain a 
 clerkship and, with it, an opportunity to continue his 
 studies. Having acquaintance with no member of the 
 legal profession in the city, and totally unprovided 
 with letters of introduction, he found the task far from 
 easy. After a few unsuccessful attempts, he secured, 
 through a young man scarcely better known than him- 
 self, an interview with Christopher Gore, a Federalist 
 of eminence who, after upward of eight years spent in 
 Great Britain as one of the commissioners under the 
 Jay Treaty to settle claims for damages by British 
 cruisers, had just returned home and had opened a law 
 office in Scollay's building, but had as yet taken no 
 clerk. In his autobiography Webster relates with 
 zest the incidents of this interview — his own embar- 
 rassment in the presence of so courtly a gentleman, 
 Mr. Gore's reassuring manner, and the engagement 
 that, after fifteen minutes' conversation, was entered 
 into between them. "My young friend," said Mr. 
 Gore, as the awkward youth rose to go, " you look as 
 though you might be trusted. You say you came to 
 study, and not to waste time. I will take you at your 
 word. You may as well hang up your hat at once ; g< i 
 into the other room ; take your book and sit down to 
 reading it, and write at your convenience to New 
 Hampshire for your letters." ! That a lawyer of Mr. 
 Gore's experience and reputation should receive in his 
 office as a clerk a raw youth whom he had never seen, 
 and who came without any sort of commendation ex- 
 
 1 Autobiography. Webster, " Private Correspondence," Vol. I, 
 p. 19. 
 
66 DANIEL WEBSTEK 
 
 cept that of his face and manner, is substantial evi- 
 dence of the exceptional marks of trustworthiness, if 
 not of promise, which the young man bore. 
 
 For Webster the affiliation with Mr. Gore was a 
 stroke of great good fortune. During the months from 
 July, 1804, to the succeeding March, he enjoyed the 
 widest opportunity, as he tells us, to study " men and 
 books and things." Books on the common and mu- 
 nicipal law he read, besides Yattel for the third time, 
 Ward's " Law of Nations," Lord Bacon's "Elements," 
 Pnffendorfs "Latin History of England,'' Gifford's 
 "Juvenal," Boswell's " Tour to the Hebrides, " Moore's 
 "Travels," and numerous other miscellaneous works. 
 The field in which he labored most was that of the com- 
 mon law, especially the portions of it relating to special 
 pleading. " Whatever was in Viner, Bacon, and other 
 books then usually studied on that part of the science, 
 I paid my respects to. Among other things, I went 
 through Saunders's Reports, the old folio edition, and 
 abstracted and put into English, out of Latin and Nor- 
 man French, the pleadings in all his reports. It was 
 an edifying work." 1 Invaluable, too, was the oppor- 
 tunity which was now obtained for the first time of 
 attending the sittings of the higher courts, especially 
 the United States Circuit Court and the Supreme Court 
 of Massachusetts. A fragmentary journal entitled 
 "Some Characters at the Boston Bar, 1804," contain- 
 ing characterizations of Chief Justice Theophilus Par- 
 ens, Samuel Dexter, Harrison Gray Otis, James Sulli- 
 
 :ni, and other legal lights of the time, affords inter- 
 ag evidence of the faithfulness with which this op- 
 portunity was improved. In August, 1804, it became 
 
 ^Autobiography. Webster, "Private Correspondence," Vol. I, 
 
PEEPAKATION FOR THE LAW 57 
 
 necessary for Ezekiel to journey to Hanover to be 
 present at the graduation of his class. Assuming 
 charge, for a brief interval, of the Short Street school, 
 Daniel formed the acquaintance, among its pupils, of 
 Edward Everett, destined to be thereafter through half 
 a century friend and companion, and in time fellow- 
 publicist. 
 
 In January, 1805, there arose a circumstance which 
 called out another of the great decisions which had so 
 much to do with the determining of Webster's career. 
 The clerk of the court of common pleas of the county of 
 Hillsborough (the court of which Ebenezer Webster 
 was a judge) resigned, and Daniel was named as his 
 successor. The office carried an income of fifteen hun- 
 dred dollars, and the appointment seemed to mean 
 that at last the fortunes of the Webster family were 
 secure. The father long since had set his heart upon 
 obtaining it for his son, and when at length it was in 
 hand he lost no time in sending word that the prize 
 was won. It fell to Mr. Gore, in the interest of the 
 larger future, to prick the bubble of present good for- 
 tune. The arguments with which he tactfully dis- 
 suaded the young man from accepting the post — thai 
 the tenure would be precarious, that even if permanent 
 it would never mean more than a mere clerkship, and 
 that its acceptance would cut off the chances of a pro- 
 fessional career now about beginning — constituted in- 
 deed, as Webster testifies, " a shower bath of ice 
 water." But they were convincing, and iu the end 
 they prevailed. The most unpleasant part of the af- 
 fair was the breaking of the decision to the aged and 
 fast declining parent who, after a life crowded full of 
 sacrifice for his children, bad caughl ;it last a gleam of 
 hope for a competency for those who were dear to liirn. 
 
58 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 The thing was done, although Webster took care to 
 travel all the way to Salisbury to the cud that he 
 might bear the news in the most tactful and reassuring 
 manner possible. "I should be very sorry," he de- 
 clared, half in bravado, to the assembled family, "if I 
 could not do better at present than to be clerk, for fif- 
 teen hundred dollars a year, not to speak of future 
 prospects. I mean to use my tongue in the courts, not 
 my pen ; to be an actor, not a register of other men's 
 actions. I hope yet, sir, to astonish your Honor, in 
 your own court, by my professional attainments ! " 
 The immediate effect of so startling an announcement 
 was painful. "For a moment," relates Webster, "I 
 thought he [the father] was angry. He rocked his 
 chair slightly ; a flash went over an eye, softened by 
 age, but still as black as jet ; but it was gone, and I 
 thought I saw that parental partiality was, after all, a 
 little gratified at this apparent devotion to an honor- 
 able profession, and this seeming confidence of success 
 in it. He looked at me for as much as a minute, and 
 then said very slowly, ' Well, my son, your mother has 
 always said you would come to something or nothing, 
 she was not sure which ; and I think you are now about 
 settling that doubt for her.' This he said, and never a 
 word spoke more to me on the subject." ' 
 
 In the mind of the son, however, if not in that of the 
 father, there must have lingered some misgiving. But 
 a few weeks remained before he was to be admitted to 
 the bar, and of what he was then to do he had no 
 notion, other than is indicated in a letter of March 
 10th to Mr. Fuller : " In two weeks I again put myself 
 in motion, and like Koah's dove, shall flutter, with 
 
 'Autobiography. Webster, "Private Correspondence," Vol. I, 
 
 p. '~ ... 
 
PEEPAEATION FOE THE LAW 59 
 
 faint and wearied wing, over the deluge of this world, 
 seeking for rest. In some country town in New 
 Hampshire I shall probably put off my character of a 
 rover, and fix my feet for a season. Having been for 
 the winter a wandering comet, in the spring I become 
 a falling star, and shall drop from the firmament of 
 Boston gayety and pleasure to the level of a rustic vil- 
 lage, of silence and of obscurity." l In March, 1805, 
 on the motion of his patron, Mr. Gore, young Webster 
 was admitted to practice in the court of common pleas 
 in Boston. 
 
 1 Webster to Fuller, Maroh 10, 1805. Webster, "Private Corre- 
 spondence," Vol. I, p. 200. 
 
CHAPTEE III 
 
 THE YOUNG PRACTITIONER 
 
 The choice of a field within which to enter upon the 
 practice of his profession gave Webster no small con- 
 c. rn. He would gladly have remained in Boston ; but 
 that city seemed already to be supplied with legal 
 talent in superabundance. New York City was con- 
 sidered ; but, on the ground principally of the expen- 
 se veness of living there, and of possible uncongeniality 
 of climate, Ezekiel advised against a removal thither, 
 and the idea was given up. The elimination of these 
 larger cities meant, in effect, the fixing upon a loca- 
 tion in some town or rural region, presumably in New 
 Hampshire. A twelvemonth prior to his admission 
 to the bar Webster wrote to his schoolboy companion, 
 Bingham, that he especially desired to settle in a place 
 " where the practice of the bar is fair and honorable, n 
 that he had understood that the bar of Cheshire County 
 was superior in this respect to that of any other county 
 in the state, and that he would probably seek a loca- 
 tion within that county. In this decision he professed 
 to be influenced in a measure by his preference for the 
 
 ople of the Connecticut Valley. 1 
 
 Judge Webster wisely refrained from attempting to 
 influence his son's decision. " As to the place of your 
 settlement," he wrote in December, 1804, "you must 
 determine for yourself." The ground upon which a 
 
 1 Webster to Bingham, April 3, 1804. Webster, " Private Cor- 
 respondence," Vol. I, p. 162. 
 
THE YOUNG PKACTITIONEK 61 
 
 decision was finally reached, however, was that of 
 filial obligation. Immediately upon his admission to 
 the bar. in April, 1805, Daniel went to Amherst, New 
 Hampshire, where his father was in attendance npon a 
 session of court. By his earlier legal mentor, Thomp- 
 son, and by others whose counsel he valued, he had 
 been advised to settle in Portsmouth, which, being a 
 seaport and the largest town in the state, gave promise 
 of a fairly substantial practice ; and in his autobiography 
 he tells us that at the time when he left Boston he ex- 
 pected to make Portsmouth his home. Judge Webster, 
 however, had been for years in precarious health, and 
 he was at this time so manifestly in decline that Daniel 
 could not bring himself to remove to even a distant 
 part of the same state. Resolving not to leave the im- 
 mediate neighborhood of Salisbury during the re- 
 mainder of his father's lifetime, he " took a room," as 
 he tells us, " in the little adjoining village of Boscawen, 
 and there commenced the practice of the law." x The 
 station of the county lawyer in New England a hun- 
 dred years ago was not without its attractiveness. It 
 was respectable. It carried with it, indeed, a certain 
 social distinction, at least locally, and it opened the 
 door not infrequently to political preferment. If it 
 was rarely lucrative, it at least afforded the means of 
 comfortable existence. Most men who attained it 
 were content with it, and most, whether by reason of 
 limitation of talent, restriction of opportunity, or 
 simple inertia, were never heard of beyond the confines 
 of their neighborhood or state. Save for a certain 
 r'-stiveness of spirit and a wholesome self-confidence, it 
 might well have been so with Daniel Webster. As it 
 
 1 Autobiography. Webster. ' Private Correspondence. '' Vol I. 
 p. 23. 
 
62 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 was, the young lawyer seems never to have resigned 
 himself to aii indefinite prolonging of his humdram 
 existence at Boscawen. The considerations involving 
 his sojourn there were of the most honorable sort ; but 
 soon as they had ceased to be operative he lost no 
 time in seeking a sphere which he felt to be more com- 
 mensurate with his aspirations and abilities. 
 
 "The two years and a half which I spent in Bos- 
 cawen," he tells us, "were devoted to business and 
 study. I had enough of the first to live on, and to 
 afford opportunity for practice and discipline. I read 
 Law and history ; not without some mixture of other 
 things. These were the days of the Boston Anthology, 
 and I had the honor of being a contributor to thatpub- 
 1 i cation. There are sundry reviews, written by me, not 
 worth looking up or remembering. " 1 By unflagging 
 diligence a practice was built up which could be de- 
 pended upon to yield some six or seven hundred dol- 
 lars a year— enough to provide the necessities of life 
 and leave something over for the purchase of books. 
 Even such a competence was to Webster a source of 
 genuine gratification. "If I am not earning my 
 bread and cheese in exactly nine days after my admis- 
 3ion to the bar," he had written to Bingham, "I shall 
 certainly be a bankrupt," His practice extended over 
 the three counties of Grafton, Rockingham, and Hills- 
 borough. Although his life, as he described it, was 
 ■>ne of "writs and summonses," there were frequent 
 intervals of leisure, and these were employed prin- 
 cipally in the study of the law and of kindred subjects. 
 Cut off from access to libraries, he purchased books in 
 
 We^ ^/^ S eb8 p r ' UPriv ^ e C ^spondeuoe of Daniel 
 reoi u « u vm! J« «■ wS'J 23 * F ? n ~ ^"bntions to the Anthology are 
 ' in ^ ntl »gs aud Speeches, » Vol. XV, pp. 548-663. 
 
THE YOUNG PKACT1TIONER 63 
 
 such quantities as the condition of his purse would 
 permit. When upon one occasion a sum of eighty -five 
 dollars which had been despatched to a Boston book- 
 seller in payment for a consignment of volumes was 
 stolen from the bearer, the effect was that of a genuine 
 calamity ; although the book -seller filled the order on 
 credit and would not so much as accept the security 
 which Ezekiel, in Daniel's behalf, procured. For 
 many months thereafter the loss of Daniel's eighty-live 
 dollars was a subject of frequent allusion, sometimes 
 seriously, but often jestingly, in the letters of the 
 Webster family. To Bingham Webster laments in 
 this period his inability, by lack of time, to continue 
 certain of his college studies and diversions, especially 
 the practice of the art of versification. One ray of 
 hope presents itself to him, however, namely that 
 writs may some day be found reducible to poetical 
 form, thus : 
 
 All good sheriffs in the land 
 
 We command 
 That forthwith you arrest John Dyer 
 
 Esquire 
 If in your precinct you can find him 
 
 And bind him, etc., etc., etc. 
 
 A saving sense of humor softened the asperities of 
 other dreary stretches in Webster's career long after 
 the life at Boscawen was but a memory. 
 
 Surrounded by conditions which afforded constant 
 temptation to indulgence in petty chicanery, Webster 
 preserved scrupulously throughout these years his per- 
 sonal dignity and his lofty ideal of his profession. 
 "Study," he writes to Bingham, " is truly the grand 
 requisite for a lawyer. Men may be born poets, and 
 
(i4 DANIEL WEBSTEK 
 
 Leap from their cradles painters; nature may have 
 made them musicians, and called on them only to exer- 
 cise, and not to acquire, ability. But law is artificial. 
 It is a Ii uman science to be learnt, not inspired. . . . 
 The evil is that an accursed love for money violates 
 .\ erything. We cannot study, because we must petti- 
 fog. We learn the low recourses of attorney ism, when 
 e should learu the conceptions, the reasonings, and 
 the opinions of Cicero and Murray. The love of fame 
 is extinguished ; every ardent wish for knowledge re- 
 pressed ; conscience put in jeopardy, and the best 
 feelings of the heart indurated, by the mean, money- 
 catching, abominable practices, which cover with dis- 
 grace a part of the modern practitioners of law. 
 . . . Our profession is good if practiced in the 
 spirit of it ; it is damnable fraud and iniquity, when 
 its true spirit is supplied by a spirit of mischief -mak- 
 ing and money-catching. ,M By men generally with 
 whom Webster in this period of his career was brought 
 in contact it was agreed that there was in him the 
 promise of au exponent of the law of a type essentially 
 different from that which has in all times been more 
 familiar than it ought to be in the profession. 
 
 1 1 was the fortune of Judge Webster to be permitted 
 to hear his son's first argument in court, but only the 
 fii sf. Daring the winter of 1805-1806 health failed 
 completely and in April, 1806. the pioneer, soldier, 
 lawmaker, and jurist passed away, at the age of sixty- 
 seven. He was, iu words applied to him by his dis- 
 tinguished son four decades later, " every thing that a 
 man could be to whom learning never had disclosed 
 her ample page' —one who faltered at nothing when 
 
 1 Webster to Bingham, January 19, 1806. Webster, " Private 
 ti-l"Miilence," Vol. I, p. 222. 
 
THE YOUNG PRACTITIONER 65 
 
 the interests involved were those of his family, his 
 community, or his country. 
 
 In May, 1807, Webster was admitted as an attorney 
 and counselor of the Superior Court of New Hamp- 
 shire, and in September of the same year he relin- 
 quished his office and his business in Boseawen to his 
 brother Ezekiel and, in conformity with his earlier 
 purpose, removed to Portsmouth. Ezekiel had but 
 been admitted to the bar. Family interests at Salis- 
 bury— the care of the mother and sisters and the man- 
 agement of the property— made it imperative that one 
 of the brothers remain in that neighborhood, and 
 Daniel, "not being very willing to take charge of the 
 farm," decided to endorse over to Ezekiel both farm 
 and office, on condition that the two be assumed to- 
 gether. The field of Legal opportunity at Boseawen 
 was severely restricted. For Ezekiel it might suffice, 
 at least until he should be upon his feet ; for Daniel it 
 was already outgrown. Besides, it afforded no "pleas- 
 ure of a social sort," of which the younger brother was 
 ever fond. But it is not to be overlooked that Daniel 
 now assumed his father's debts and that he long con- 
 tinned to contribute to the support of his mother and 
 
 sisters. 
 
 The removal to Portsmouth constitutes a division 
 point in Webster's career. By it he definitely cut 
 loose from the petty routine of an obscure country 
 lawyer and set his foot on the upward path of profes- 
 sional attainment. Nino years, in all, wore spenl in 
 practice and study within this Larger field. For a 
 time the outlook was not roseate. In the town the 
 newcomer found seven or eight other men who filled 
 writs and performed varied legal services, so that the 
 share which fell to him was for n time meagre. 
 
o6 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 "Money," he writes to Ezekiel, March 3, 1808, "I 
 hive none. I shall certainly be hanged before three 
 weeks, if I cannot get some. What can be done f » 
 V week later he writes that he has " already got to 
 the second item of his will." The days brightened, 
 however, and within a year or two he was earning an 
 ample competence. From debt he never wholly es- 
 caped. Indebtedness, on the part of himself, his 
 family, and many of his associates, was a perennial 
 condition, and it was his misfortune to allow the easy 
 assumption to settle upon him that it was a normal, 
 and in no wise a dishonorable, condition. His in- 
 tegrity was unimpeachable, but he neither now nor 
 later felt, as his father and his brother Ezekiel felt, 
 that indebtedness involved a certain sort of social, and 
 even moral, stigma. 
 
 At the time of his settlement in Portsmouth Webster 
 was twenty -five years of age. He was in appearance 
 -inking and in manner attractive. People generally 
 concurred in the judgment of the Eeverend Buck- 
 minster's daughter that the young lawyer was "are- 
 markable person" and that he "had a most marked 
 character for good or for evil." Dr. Buckminster was 
 the father of the Exeter usher already mentioned and 
 minister of the principal Congregational church in 
 Portsmouth. He took a lively interest in the young 
 man and, perceiving the apparent frailty of his consti- 
 tution, urged upon him the exercise afforded by a half- 
 hour's wood-sawing each morning before breakfast. 
 indeed, indisposed to counsel what he would not hiui- 
 
 ■lf practice, the reverend gentleman very frequently 
 pulled one end of a " cross-cut " saw while Webster 
 palled the other. "We young people," wrote Miss 
 Buckminster later, " were always delighted when this 
 
THE YOUNG PRACTITIONER 67 
 
 strong medicine was taken before breakfast, for, how- 
 ever disagreeable in itself, Mr. Webster appeared at 
 our breakfast afterward with his genial humor unim- 
 paired." * 
 
 Nine months after the settlement in Portsmouth 
 Webster slipped away for a visit, it was supposed, 
 among his relatives and earlier friends, but, in point of 
 fact, to be married. Until within a few months of the 
 date of the wedding no intimation of such a purpose 
 had been forthcoming. " I am making," he writes to 
 Merrill, in May, 1804, " no progress toward matri- 
 mony. In point of time I am twenty- three years 
 nearer to it than when I was born ; but, in point of 
 probability, I cannot say that I am any." At some 
 time in 1807, however, he made the acquaintance of 
 Miss Grace Fletcher, daughter of the Rev. Elijah 
 Fletcher, of Hopkiuton. One story is that he saw the 
 young lady for the first time at church in Salisbury 
 during the course of a visit which she was paying to 
 her elder sister, the wife of Israel W. Kelly, of Salis- 
 bury, then sheriff of Merrimac County and subsequently 
 United States marshal for the district of New Hamp- 
 shire. At any rate, an engagement ensued, and before 
 the end of the year Webster was confiding to Fuller 
 that he had "been a young dog long enough," and 
 that he now thought of joining himself, "as soon as 
 convenient, to that happy and honorable society of 
 which you arc one, — the society of married men/ 
 The wedding took place at Salisbury, June 24, 1808. 
 Immediately after it Webster returned with his bride 
 to Portsmouth. 
 
 At the time of her marriage Mrs. Webster was 
 
 1 Curtis " Webster,'' Vol. T, p. 82. 
 
 2 Van Tyne, " Letters of Daniel Webster," p. 26. 
 
68 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 twenty-seven years of age, one year older than her 
 husband. All testimony concurs that she was a woman 
 of refinement and of forceful character. Her education 
 fitted her to appreciate, and even to share in, the 
 labors and the successes of her husband, and during 
 the twenty years of her subsequent life she was com- 
 monly regarded by all who knew her as a model wife 
 and mother. Her dignity, her composure, and her 
 ability to meet every kind of situation commanded 
 wi de-spread admiration. In 1810 there was born a 
 daughter, to whom was given the name of the mother. 
 Such glimpses as may be had into the Webster house- 
 hold during the years at Portsmouth are pleasing in 
 the extreme. In a collection of reminiscences employed 
 by Mr. Curtis in his biography of Webster Mr. Ticknor 
 writes as follows : " Between 1S09 and 1814 I was fre- 
 quently in Portsmouth. ... I always saw Mr. 
 Webster on these occasions, dining with him at his 
 own house and elsewhere, and meeting him often in the 
 evening. Sometimes I saw him at his office. He 
 seemed busy, but was always ready for cheerful con- 
 versation ; and loved to tell humorous stories of his 
 college life. His office was a common, ordinary look- 
 ing room, with less furniture and more books than 
 common. . . . When I first saw him there he 
 lived in a small, modest, wooden house, which was 
 binned in the great fire in 1813. His parlor was a 
 bright and cheerful room. I remember how proud 
 and fond lie seemed of little Grace, his first child, as 
 she sat by the fire with her book ; a child of uncom- 
 mon intelligence, with a brilliant red and white com- 
 l> and deep-set eyes, and hair as black as her 
 
 father' He seemed very happy. He had grown a 
 little stouter than he was when I first saw him, and had 
 
THE YOUNG PRACTITIONER 69 
 
 a more commanding air ; but he was always animated, 
 and sometimes full of fan. After the fire he had a 
 somewhat better house ; that, I think, was behind Dr. 
 Buckminster's church. Mrs. Webster was pleasing 
 and animated, and her manner to the friends of her 
 husband, and to us young men, was very kind and 
 cordial." l 
 
 Professionally, at least, the nine years spent at 
 Portsmouth comprised the formative period of Web- 
 ster's life. It was during these years that the crude 
 law student was converted into the skilled and polished 
 practitioner. In his professional friendships and as- 
 sociations he was from the outset fortunate. The 
 ablest lawyers of New Hampshire — Jeremiah Smith, 
 George Sullivan, William Plumer, Jeremiah Mason — 
 and legal leaders of adjacent states, including Dexter 
 and Parsons of Massachusetts, practiced regularly at 
 Portsmouth, and with all of these Webster was brought 
 into intimate relation, both professionally and socially. 
 The environment was precisely of the sort that the 
 young man needed. His efforts to hold his own with 
 his older associates kept him continuously upon his 
 mettle. He was impelled to study assiduously and to 
 amend relentlessly every error into which he fell. In 
 the earlier contests in which he was engaged he was 
 not infrequently worsted. Plumer defeated him in the 
 first case in which the two were opposed. Mason <li<l 
 the same thing. It was instantly perceived, however, 
 that in young Webster the ablest lawyer of them all 
 had an opponent worthy of his steel. By Leaving off 
 the florid style of speaking to which he had been prone 
 and by cultivating in its stead the simple, direct oratory 
 which appealed to a jury, he multiplied his effective 
 
 1 Cnrtfe, 'Webster." Vol. I. p. 85. 
 
70 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 ness as an advocate and ere long was winning more 
 than his share of cases. Under the spur of combat with 
 more experienced men he was pushed all of the time to 
 the limit of his ingenuity and ability. Nothing con- 
 tributes more directly to the ripening of lawyerly 
 
 talent. 
 
 Of all his professional mentors and associates, by his 
 own testimony Jeremiah Mason was most helpful and 
 most influential. Mr. Mason, to-day but little known, 
 was in his time a commanding figure. When Webster 
 settled in Portsmouth, Mason was the recognized 
 leader of the New Hampshire bar and one of the prin- 
 cipal lawyers of New England. A man of massive 
 physique, of heavy countenance, and of apparently 
 lethargic disposition, he was none the less wonderfully 
 alert, industrious, and forceful. His knowledge of 
 books was not remarkable, but his acquaintance with 
 the great body of the common law was in his day un- 
 surpassed. Of rhetoric he knew little, and of the fine 
 points of studied oratory, less. He scorned, indeed, 
 all arts of speech save that of simple and clear argu- 
 mentation. By sheer ability to couch his arguments 
 in language comprehensible by the most ordinary jury 
 he won many a case. In all that pertained to court- 
 room methods Webster took him as a model. "He 
 had a habit," Webster one time recalled, "of stand- 
 ing quite near to the jury, so near that he might have 
 laid his finger ou the foreman's nose ; and then he 
 talked to them in a plain conversational way, in short 
 sentences, and using no word that was not level to the 
 comprehension of the least educated man on the panel. 
 This led me to examine my own style, and I set about 
 reforming it altogether.'' 
 Throughout his later life Webster not infrequently 
 
THE YOUNG PRACTITIONER 71 
 
 testified to his admiration for Mason and to the debt 
 which he owed hiin. In the Autobiography, written 
 eighteen years before Mason's death in 1848, appears 
 the following tribute : " For the nine years I lived in 
 Portsmouth Mr. Mason and myself, in the counties 
 where we both practiced, were on opposite sides, 
 pretty much as a matter of course. He has been of 
 infinite advantage to me, not only by his unvarying 
 friendship, but by the many good lessons he has 
 taught and the example he set me in the beginning of 
 my career. If there be in the country a stronger in- 
 tellect, if there be a mind of more native resources, if 
 there be a vision that sees quicker or sees deeper into 
 whatever is intricate or whatsoever is profound, I 
 must confess I have not known it. I have not written 
 this paragraph without considering what it implies. I 
 look to that individual who, if it belong to anybody, 
 is entitled to be an exception. But I deliberately let 
 the judgment stand. That that individual has much 
 more habit of regular composition, that he has been 
 disciplined and exercised in a vastly superior school, 
 that he possesses even a faculty of illustration more 
 various and more easy, I think may be admitted. 
 That the original reach of his mind is greater, that its 
 grasp is stronger, that its logic is closer, I do not al- 
 low." J The person whom Webster had in mind in 
 drawing this comparison was none other than Chid' 
 Justice John Marshall. 
 
 The years of residence at Portsmouth were marked, 
 further, by Webster's entry, in a modest way, into 
 
 1 Webster, " Private Correspondence," Vol. T, p. 24. During 
 the years 1813-1817 Mason occupied a seat in the United States 
 Senate. In 18:i2 he removed to Boston, where, after six years of 
 practice, he lived in retirement nntil his death in 1848, 
 
72 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 politics. It was the opinion of William Plumer, after 
 hearing some of Webster's earlier arguments in court, 
 that the young man was indeed rather better fitted for 
 politics than for the law ; and there was some ground 
 for the judgment. Kemarkable as were Webster's 
 subsequent triumphs within the domain of the law, 
 they were clearly surpassed by his achievements as 
 statesman and publicist. In the first half of the nine- 
 teenth century a young lawyer was even more likely to 
 be drawn into political life than is his counterpart to- 
 day. Opportunity within the purely legal field was 
 more restricted, pecuniary rewards were very much 
 smaller, and the allurements of public office were cor- 
 respondingly more impelling. Webster's entrance 
 upon a career of political activity was gradual but 
 inevitable. From an early day he had cherished a 
 distinct taste for politics and for things political, and 
 his large participation in political affairs in after times 
 is to be attributed not only to the logic of circumstances 
 but to the following out of a predominating personal 
 inclination. 
 
 In politics Webster was a Federalist. At the outset, 
 at least, he could hardly have been anything other 
 than a Federalist and at the same time have been his 
 father's son. For Ebenezer Webster was a Federalist 
 of the deepest dye. It is related of him that, being 
 once taken ill in a Democratic community, he begged 
 to be removed to his home, declaring that he had been 
 born a Federalist, that he had lived a Federalist, and 
 that he would not "die in a Democratic town." 
 
 ekiel Webster, likewise, was a Federalist of the 
 
 k-rihbed variety. He refused persistently to mod- 
 in the least the political principles under which he 
 
 i'l been brought up, even though by yielding but a 
 
THE YOUNG PRACTITIONER 73 
 
 little he might easily have attained the honor of a seat 
 ill Congress. In his earlier years Daniel, likewise, 
 could see nothing of good in a Democrat. The polit- 
 ical overturn of 1800 by which Jefferson was brought to 
 the presidency was for the Webster family gall and 
 wormwood, and the capture of New Hampshire by the 
 Democrats in 1804 was little short of a public calamity. 
 In reply to a pessimistic letter from Daniel announc- 
 ing to Ezekiel, then at Boston, the last-mentioned 
 event, Ezekiel writes : " In my opinion there is not a 
 nook or corner in the United States that will not be 
 revolutionized. The contagion of democracy will per- 
 vade every place and corrupt every generous and 
 manly sentiment." ' 
 
 Never did Daniel question the essential soundness of 
 the principles of Federalism. But he early threw off, 
 if indeed he ever cherished, that intensely partisan 
 spirit which was so eminently characteristic of his 
 lather and of his brother. Political parties seemed to 
 him inevitable, but undesirable. Power of intellect 
 and breadth of sympathy enabled him to view public 
 questions with a larger judiciousness than was for most 
 men possible, and from an early stage of his career he 
 schooled himself to practice moderation in speech and 
 in action in all things, political as well as otherwise. 
 Prior to 1812 his own political activities were limited. 
 Early in 1804, during a visit to Salisbury, he was pre- 
 vailed upon to write an anonymous pamphlet advocat- 
 ing the election of John Oilman, the Federalist candi- 
 date and long a friend of the Webster family, to the 
 governorship of New Hampshire. Of this brochure — 
 u An Appeal to Old Whigs" -he wrote to Bingham a 
 year later that he had " had the pleasure of seeing il 
 
 •Webster, " Private Correspondence," Vol. I, p. 17."). 
 
1 1 DANIEL WEBSTElt 
 
 kicked about under many tables." He thought but 
 little of it and requested that the secret of its author- 
 ship be preserved. 1 Three Fourth of July orations de- 
 livered between 1801 and 1809 were of literary rather 
 than political interest, 2 "My time," he records in the 
 A ntobiography, "was always exclusively given to my 
 profession till 1812, when the war commenced. I had 
 occasionally taken part in political questions, always 
 felt an interest in elections, and contributed my part, 
 I believe, to the political ephemera of the day. In- 
 deed, I always felt an interest in political concerns. 
 My lucubrations for the press go back, I believe, to 
 my sixteenth year. They are, or ought to be, all for- 
 gotten, at least, most of them ; and all of this early 
 period." 3 
 
 In the intervals of professional labor Webster, none 
 the less, read widely upon the political developments 
 of both America and Europe. His interest in public 
 questions knew no bounds, geographical or otherwise. 
 Many things he found to disapprove. Iudeed the pre- 
 vailing tone of his political observations during this 
 period is pessimistic. To Merrill he writes, a few 
 months before the removal to Portsmouth : "It is in- 
 deed alarming that private character weighs nothing 
 in the scale of public office. ... Indeed I fear 
 thai our country is growing corrupt at a rate which 
 distances the speed of every other. I do not say that 
 the degree of positive corruption is so great, but the 
 course toward total depravity is swift." There is 1am- 
 
 ' The pamphlet is reproduced in " Writings and Speeches ' Vol. 
 XV, pp. 522-531. 
 
 'In 1 B02 al In eburg ; in 1805, at Salisbury ; in 1806, at Con- 
 cord. See '• Y\ ntings and Speeches," Vol. XV, pp. 505-521, 537- 
 
 •Ml. * ' 
 
 •Webster, "Private Correspondence," Vol. I, p. 25. 
 
THE YOUNG PRACTITiONEB 75 
 
 entation also by reason of the evils that have befallen 
 Europe in consequence of the Napoleonic domination. 
 "The times," it is declared, " are such that I am sur- 
 prised at nothing. If, before I rise from my table, I 
 should learn that Napoleon is in London, it would not 
 astonish me. I am persuaded that a great revolution 
 is taking place, not only in Europe, but through the 
 world. Society is deeply shaken everywhere. The 
 minds of men are flying from all steadfast principles, 
 like an arrow from the bow. Principles are called 
 prejudices, and duty, scrupulosity. Where all of this 
 will end, you and I cannot tell." 1 
 
 Webster's earlier years at Portsmouth fell, indeed, 
 within a period of wide-spread public unrest. More 
 and more the United States was being made to suffer 
 by reason of the abnormal situation in Europe created 
 by the titanic conflict of England and France. The 
 Napoleonic decrees and the British orders in council 
 of 1806 and 1807 unquestionably involved less injury 
 to American commerce than has sometimes been rep- 
 resented, but the injury was certainly considerable, 
 and the course which the United States might best 
 pursue to obviate it came to be easily the predominat- 
 ing public issue of the day. In New England, and es- 
 pecially among the New England Federalists, it was 
 urged that the ultimate responsibility for the disturb- 
 ance of the international equilibrium was to be laid at 
 the door of Napoleon, and that, however reprehensible 
 the course which Great Britain was pursuing in mari- 
 time affairs, France was the nation primarily to be 
 held to account. The shipping interests, solidly Fed- 
 eral ist in political affiliation, demanded insistently the 
 
 1 Webster to Merrill, March 8, 1807. Webster, "Private Oor 
 respondenoe," Vol. I, p. 225, 
 
76 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 preservation of peace, the adjustment of our commer- 
 cial difficulties by diplomacy, aud the avoiding of any 
 course of action that would bear the slightest appear- 
 ance of an alliance with Napoleon. Federalism, how- 
 ever, had lost its grip upon the nation, and the Federal- 
 ists were uuable to prevent the gradual drift of the coun- 
 try into war with Great Britain. Prior to the actual 
 outbreak of hostilities Webster was too much preoccu- 
 pied with his legal practice to do more than follow with 
 interest, aud occasionally to comment pointedly upon, 
 the giowiug problem of our foreign policy. In 1808 
 he indulged his political inclination to the extent of 
 publishing anonymously a small pamphlet entitled 
 •• ( lonsiderations on the Embargo Laws," the principal 
 thesis of which was the unconstitutionality of an ein- 
 bargo measure not expressly limited in duration. 1 In 
 his clear-cut differentiation of a limited from an un- 
 limited embargo he here gave evidence of that ability 
 which he displayed so remarkably in later years to 
 seize upon a vital aspect of a subject and to portray it 
 so vividly that even the most unlearned and the most 
 indifferent might comprehend it. Portsmouth was a 
 mast towu, in which commercial interests prep on der- 
 ated, and it may be supposed that the attitude of 
 Webster toward the restrictionist measures of the 
 Jefferson aud Madison administrations was determined 
 in some degree not merely by his Federalist proclivi- 
 t ies but by the feelings and interests of his neighbors. 
 
 Prom L809 to 1812 Webster's time was absorbed al- 
 most wholly by his professional engagements. He 
 followed the Superior Court through most of the coun- 
 ties of the state, and appeared before it as counsel in 
 \ <i y oearly every case of first-rate importance. Ac- 
 1 "Writings and Speeches," Vol. XV, pp. 564-574. 
 
THE YOUNG PRACTITIONER 77 
 
 cording' to his own account, his income in these times 
 rarely, if ever, reached two thousand dollars a year. 
 But he was fast acquiring a legal reputation which was 
 much out of the ordinary, and the way was opening 
 more rapidly than he dreamed for the broadening of 
 his field of activity. In the summer of 1809 he paid a 
 visit to Dartmouth College, in the course of which he 
 delivered before the Phi Beta Kappa Society an 
 oration on the subject " The State of our Literature. ■ ' 
 If the oration was not a remarkable one, it should be 
 remembered that it was prepared at odd moments dur- 
 ing the tedious trip to Hanover. It was, however, far 
 from a perfunctory piece of work, and we have the as- 
 surance of Mr. Ticknor, who as a youth of eighteen 
 was privileged to hear it, that it was very much ad- 
 mired and praised ; although he adds that it seemed 
 to him at the time " that the excitement he created 
 and the homage he received were due rather to their 
 [the hearers 1 ] affection for the man, and their admira- 
 tion of him, than to the merit of that particular per- 
 formance." l 
 
 On Juue 18, 1812, by act of Congress war was de- 
 clared with Great Britain. July 4th — barely more than 
 two weeks later — Webster delivered a speech which, 
 marking as it did in a very real sense his entrance of 
 the political arena, was easily the most important of 
 his career to this point. The address was delivered, 
 by invitation, before the Washington Benevolent So- 
 ciety of Portsmouth. It comprised a masterful argu- 
 ment against the necessity and the wisdom of the 
 lately adopted policy of war. Demonstrating that 
 maritime defense, the protection of trade, and the pro- 
 
 1 Curtis, <l Webster," Vol. I, p. 96. For the oration see " Writ- 
 ings and Speeches," Vol. XV, pp. 575-^82. 
 
78 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 \riding of a Dational revenue were fundamental ob- 
 jects of the Union, and directing attention to the de- 
 partures which the Democrats had made from the 
 sound Washingtonian policies in these matters, the 
 orator went on to insist that if there must be a war, 
 the depleted navy should be at once reconstituted, the 
 omch-talked-of project of invading Canada should be 
 abandoned, and every measure should be adopted to 
 bring the conflict to an early and an honorable close. 
 In his criticism of the men who, while ready to force a 
 war, had neglected to prepare the country for such a 
 i oatingency, he but voiced the opinion of the Feder- 
 alists universally. At one point, however, he took 
 occasion to affirm in no uncertain tone a principle 
 upon which Federalists were far from agreed, namely, 
 the unalterable obligation of all citizens to obey im- 
 plicitly the laws of the land, however objectionable 
 they might be. So unpopular among New England 
 Federalists was " Mr. Madison's war " that, as is well 
 enough known, many persons were ready not simply 
 to withhold from it every vestige of support, but even 
 to go as far in positive opposition to it as was possible 
 without incurring the risk of an indictment for trea- 
 son. Within the circle of Webster's friends and asso- 
 ciates there were scores of men whose attitude was, and 
 continued to be, one of unrelieved bitterness. 
 
 By Webster himself, however, the absolute enforce- 
 ment of the Constitution and of the laws had ever been 
 regarded as a basic necessity and unreserved obedience 
 iln ret o on the part of the citizen an unquestionable 
 obligation. "With respect to the war in which we 
 are now involved," he solemnly affirmed, "the course 
 which our principles require us to pursue cannot be 
 doubtful. It is now the law of the land, and as such 
 
THE YOUNG PRACTITIONER 70 
 
 we are bound to regard it. Resistance and insurrection 
 form no part of our creed. The disciples of Washington 
 are neither tyrants in power nor rebels out. If we are 
 taxed to carry on this war, we shall disregard certain 
 distinguished examples, and shall pay. If our personal 
 services are required, we shall yield them to the pre- 
 cise extent of our constitutional liability. At the 
 same time, the world may be assured that we know 
 our rights, and shall exercise them. AW- shall express 
 our opinions on this, as on every measure of govern- 
 ment — I trust, without passion ; I am certain, without 
 fear. . . . Ry the exercise of our constitutional 
 light of suffrage, by the peaceable remedy of election, 
 we shall seek to restore wisdom to our councils and 
 peace to our country." At a time when older and 
 more experienced men were playing fast aud loose 
 with the obligations of law-abiding citizenship, such 
 doctrine from the lips of a Fourth of July orator but 
 thirty years of age was hardly less remarkable than 
 wholesome. It would have been well if many a New 
 Englander in succeeding years had pondered more 
 seriously the principle here so forcefully enunciated. 1 
 
 To men of moderate temper Webster's oration 
 appealed with power. The document was promptly 
 printed and two editions were exhausted. In the 
 following August its author was appointed a delegate 
 from Portsmouth to attend a convention of the people 
 of the county of Rockingham, held in part to prepare 
 a formal expression of the public disapproval of the 
 war; and the Rockingham convention proved an im- 
 portant episode in his career. A paper drawn up by 
 liim the so-called "Rockingham Memorial "--was 
 
 l The speecli is (Minted in "Writings and Speeches," Vol. XV, 
 pp. 583-598. 
 
80 DANIEL WEBSTEE 
 
 signed by a committee representing more than fifteen 
 hundred delegates and transmitted to President Mad- 
 ison as the approved expression of the sense of the 
 convention. The tone of the memorial was dignified, 
 courteous, and moderate; but the protest against the 
 war was firm, the disapproval of cooperation with 
 France was uncompromising, and the demand for imme- 
 diate naval preparations was insistent. Continued 
 fidelity to the Union was specifically avowed, although 
 there was mention of a possible dissolution of the 
 Union, which, should it ever occur, might be expected 
 to take place " on some occasion when one portion of 
 the country undertakes to control, to regulate, and to 
 sacrifice the interest of another." There is every 
 reason to suppose that this allusion to the subject of 
 secession sprang from the influence of the committee, 
 whose sentiments Webster, as chairman and spokes- 
 man, was obliged to incorporate in the memorial. In 
 the Autobiography, written in 1832, occurs this inter - 
 esting comment : " August. 1812, 1 wrote the Bocking- 
 ham Memorial. It was an anti-war paper, of some note 
 in its time. I confess I am pleased to find, on looking 
 at it now, for I do not think I have read it in all the 
 twenty years that have rolled by since I wrote it, 
 among all its faults, whether of principle or in execu- 
 tion, that it is of a tone and strain less vulgar than 
 such things are prone to be." ' 
 
 The Rockingham convention was of further impor- 
 tant- in the career of Webster in that, in recognition 
 of his services during the session, as well as of his well- 
 tested ability and integrity in general, the delegates 
 
 'Webster, "Private Correspondence," Vol. I. p. 25. The 
 Mridt is printed in "Writings and Speeches," Vol. XV, pp. 
 
THE YOUNG PRACTITIONER 81 
 
 conferred upon him the honor of a nomination to a seat 
 in the Thirteenth Congress. At the election in the 
 following November his party was victorious in the 
 district, and May 2±, 1813, at the convening of the new 
 Congress in special session, he took his place on the 
 ftoor of the lower house at Washington. He was at 
 the time but thirty-one years of age. 
 
CHAPTEE IV 
 
 IN CONGKESS FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE 
 
 In compliance with an arrangement agreed upon by 
 its expiring predecessor, the Thirteenth Congress was 
 convened in special session May 24, 1813. The Senate 
 was still strongly Democratic, and in the new House 
 of Kepresentatives the dominating element was the 
 remarkable group of younger Democratic statesmen — 
 the "war-hawks" of John Eandolph's famous char- 
 acterization — whose voices and votes had been chiefly 
 instrumental in bringing on the contest with Great 
 Britain and in determining the method of its conduct 
 to the present point. Henry Clay was a member and 
 was promptly reelected Speaker. 1 John C. Calhoun 
 was the Administration's ablest spokesman. John 
 McLean of Ohio, Charles J. Ingersoll of Pennsylvania, 
 Felix Grundy of Tennessee, William Gaston of North 
 Carolina, and John Forsyth and George M. Troup of 
 Georgia, were able debaters and vigilant parliamenta- 
 rians. To Webster fell at the outset a post which 
 afforded him, as a new member, an unusual oppor- 
 tunity to make his voice heard in the proceedings of 
 the House. He was appointed, May 26th, to the Com- 
 mit h-e on Foreign Eelations, of which Calhoun was 
 chairman. Xo committee was at the time more im- 
 portant, and no appointment could have been to the 
 3 onng New Hampshire member more gratifying. 
 
 1 Ha\ ing been appointed n member of the commission to negotiate 
 v'^^w.th Great Britain, Clay resigned the speakership, January 
 
IN COXGKESS FKOM NEW UAMPSHIKE 85 
 
 The fundamental task of the Thirteenth Congress 
 was to make provision for the successful prosecution 
 of the war. All things considered, the task was one of 
 disheartening proportions. The war hitherto had 
 been, by common admission, a failure, whose depress 
 iug effect was relieved only by certain brilliaut 
 achievements upon the high seas. The armies were 
 small and undisciplined ; the commanders were, in 
 large part, inexperienced and of doubtful ability ; 
 equipment was meagre and antiquated ; funds were 
 low. Large portions of the people, especially in New 
 England, continued to be entirely out of sympathy 
 with the contest, and in some quarters where the war 
 had at first been popular it no longer commanded 
 enthusiasm, or even willing support. The Madison 
 Administration, backed by a diminished majority in 
 Congress, found itself more than ever compelled to 
 contend not alone with the forces of the enemy but 
 with wide-spread indifference and subtle opposition at 
 home. 
 
 To Washington Webster came in 1813 a thorough- 
 going New England Federalist, recognizing rather 
 more clearly than many New England Federalists 
 were prone to do the fundamental obligations of loyal 
 citizenship, but admitting no obligation to follow un- 
 protestingly the lead of an administration whose course 
 he believed to be unwarranted and indefensible. His 
 spirit was very much less vindictive than was that of 
 the Federalists of his section generally. He scrupu- 
 lously avoided personalities, and through all of tin- 
 heated controversies that filled the later months of the 
 war period he contrived to remain on very agreeable 
 terms socially with all of his opponents, including 
 President Madison. But it was by reason of his per- 
 
8 4 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 soual dignity and fairness, not by mincing of words or 
 wavering upon principle, that this was made possible. 
 " Wholly inexperienced in public affairs," he wrote to 
 Timothy Pickering shortly after his election, "my first 
 object is to comprehend the objects, understand the 
 maxims, and imbibe the spirit of the first administra- 
 tion ; persuaded, as I am, that the principles which 
 prevailed in the cabinet and councils of that period 
 form the only anchorage in which our political prosper - 
 iiy and safety can find any hold in this dangerous and 
 stormy time. " 1 
 
 Webster's active legislative career was inaugurated, 
 June 10, 1813, by the introduction of a series of five 
 resolutions calling upon the President to supply in- 
 formation concerning the time and manner in which 
 the repeal of the Berlin and Milan decrees had been 
 communicated to the authorities of the United States." 
 Subsequent to the declaration of war, June 18, 1812, 
 there was made public a decree of the French Govern- 
 ment, under date of April 28, 1811, which purported 
 to repeal the measures mentioned. It was further 
 stated by the French foreign secretary that a copy of 
 this decree had been forwarded without delay to the 
 French minister at Washington. Had the President 
 and his advisers taken it upon themselves to withhold 
 this decree until there should have been a declaration 
 of war, in the fear that, if the decree should be made 
 public, the British Government might be constrained 
 to rescind its orders in council, and so to leave the 
 United States with no ground upon which to declare a 
 war ? Or had the Administration simply been duped 
 by the French authorities? In either case the situa- 
 
 1 Van Tvne, "Letters of Daniel Webster," pp. 29-30. 
 1 Writings and Speeches, 1 ' Vol. XIV, pp. 3-7. 
 
EST CONGRESS FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE 85 
 
 tion hardly redounded to the credit of Mr. Madison 
 and the war party. Webster was not slow to detect 
 the weakness of the Administration's position, and in 
 his resolutions of June 10th he sought deliberately to 
 turn the search-light upon a situation whose laying 
 bare could hardly fail to prove embarrassing to those 
 who had been responsible for the war. The speech in 
 which the resolutions were explained and defended, 
 however, was characteristically temperate ; and, in 
 truth, throughout the acrimonious debate which 
 ensued Webster spoke bul twice, and each time but 
 briefly. Calhoun, leading in the defense of the Ad- 
 ministration, was at first inclined to suppress the pro- 
 posed inquiry. He found, however, that the House 
 was in no mood to countenance such a course, and, fol- 
 lowing a debate which lasted intermittently through a 
 week, all of the resolutions were adopted by over- 
 whelming majorities. Sentiment in their favor grew 
 so rapidly that Webster found it superfluous to deliver 
 a closing speech in their defense, although he had 
 given some time to the preparation of such a dis- 
 course. Webster and John Rhea, of Tennessee, were 
 named as a committee to present the resolutions to the 
 President. 1 
 
 When the two men appeared at the White House in 
 fulfilment of their commission they found Mr. .Madi- 
 son suffering from a fever and were able to obtain from 
 him only a promise that in due time the resolutions 
 would "be attended to." On July 12th a formal state- 
 ment was issued in the name of the President by Mr. 
 Monroe, Secretary of State, in which ii was affirmed 
 
 1 Text of the resolutions in " Annals of Congress," 13th Con- , 
 l^tsess., Vol. 1, pp. 150-151, For the debate, Bee iWtf., pp. 170-311, 
 
8G DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 that the Government had remained in ignorance of the 
 repealing decree of April 28, 1811, until July 13, 1812, 
 upward of a month after the declaration of war. The 
 explanation was accompanied by an elaborate defense 
 of the Administration's course throughout the conflict. 
 Monroe's reply was referred forthwith to the Committee 
 on Foreign Relations and five thousand copies were 
 ordered to be printed. On behalf of the committee 
 Calhoun brought in a report sustaining the Administra- 
 tion in general and recommending the adoption of a 
 resolution specifically approving the conduct of the 
 Executive in relation to the various subjects embraced 
 in Webster's resolutions. Persistent effort, however, 
 to procure the approval of this report failed, and, 
 August 2d, Congress adjourned until the regular 
 meeting date in December. In the meantime, foresee- 
 ing that there would be no early action upon the sub- 
 ject, Webster had returned to Portsmouth. 
 
 On the whole, the youthful statesman's first taste of 
 public life had been far from disagreeable. He had 
 formed the acquaintance of men of note from all sec- 
 tions of the country. Without thrusting himself for- 
 ward unduly, he had been instrumental in forcing from 
 the Madison Administration the most elaborate defense 
 of its conduct that it had as yet felt called upon to 
 render. By the few brief speeches that he had made 
 lie had added to the reputation he had brought with 
 him to Washington for both breadth of information and 
 skill in debate. By his fellow-partisans he was looked 
 upon as a worthy champion; by his opponents, as a 
 hard-hitting but fair-spirited foeman. Life in Wash- 
 ington, particularly during the summer months, he re- 
 garded as largely devoid of attractiveness, and, but for 
 the consciousness that his position obligated him to re- 
 
IN CONGRESS FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE 87 
 
 main well through the session, he should have been 
 glad to return to his family and his professional inter- 
 ests sooner than he did. " I have been to the levee or 
 drawing-room," he writes to Bingham, "but onee. 
 It is a mere matter of form. You make your bow to 
 Mrs. Madison, and to Mr. M. if he eomes in your 
 way, but he being there merely as a guest, is not offi- 
 cially entitled to your conge. Monsieur Serurier, 
 Madame Bonaparte, the Russian minister, heads of de- 
 partments, and tails of departments, members of Con- 
 gress, etc., etc., here and there, interspersed with mili- 
 tary and naval hat and coat, make up the group. 
 You stay from five minutes to an hour, as you p lease ; 
 eat and drink what you can catch, without danger of 
 surfeit, and if you can luckily find your hat and stick, 
 then take French leave j and that's going to the 
 1 levee. ' ' ' l 
 
 The return to Washington for the regular session of 
 1813-1814 was delayed until three weeks after the sit- 
 tings had begun. Almost immediately upon the ar- 
 rival letters were received giving information of a dis- 
 astrous fire, December 22d, whereby a considerable 
 portion of the town of Portsmouth had been swept 
 away. Webster's own residence, recently purchased 
 for the sum of six thousand dollars, had been desl roved, 
 together with his library and practically the whole of 
 his personal property. He carried no insurance, and 
 the loss was absolute. His first thought was to return 
 at once to New Hampshire j bul in communications 
 from his wife, and from various friends, he was ad- 
 vised that this would be unnecessary. Mrs. Webster 
 and the two children, Grace and Daniel Fletcher (the 
 
 L Webeter bo Bingham, June 4, 1813. Webster, "PrivateCor- 
 
 responrionce, " Vol. I, p. 2:u 
 
88 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 son had been born during the previous summer), were 
 provided with shelter for the winter in the home of 
 Mr. Mason. Assured, therefore, that all would be well 
 with them, and induced by the critical character of 
 the times, Webster deeided to remain uninterruptedly 
 at Washington. 
 
 One of his lirst acts during the new session was to 
 call up for consideration the Administration's recent 
 defense of the war. " If," said he, " its advocates can 
 show satisfactorily that this war was undertaken on 
 grounds plainly and manifestly just ; if they can show 
 that it was necessary and unavoidable; that it is 
 strictly an American war ; that it rests solely on Ainer- 
 ican grounds ; and that it grew out of a policy just and 
 impartial as it related to the belligerents of Europe, — 
 if they ever make all this manifest, the war will change 
 its character. It will then grow as energetic as it now 
 is feeble. It will then become the cause of the people, 
 and cot the cause of a party. The people would then 
 maintain their own cause, with vigor and effect." ' 
 Following a short debate, January 3, 1814, the message 
 transmitting Monroe's reply was referred to a commit- 
 tee of the whole and a date was fixed for its consid- 
 eration. The discussion, however, never took place. 
 Though leading to no positive action, the resolutions 
 of inquiry were adjudged by all parties to have been 
 by no means barren of effect. They had put the Ad- 
 ministration more than ever upon the defensive, and 
 had compelled a wholesome inquiry into the entire 
 status and prospect of the war. They had won for 
 their author a commanding place among the opposi- 
 tion members on the floor of the House. And they 
 
 »8peech of January 3. 1-11. 'Annals of Congress." 13th 
 Cong.. 1st seas., Vol. I, p. 826. 
 
IN CONGRESS FEOM NEW HAMPSHIRE 80 
 
 constituted the point of departure for many a sub- 
 sequent attack and argument. 
 
 During the early weeks of 1814 Webster participated 
 iu debate with some frequency. On January 10th he 
 spoke at length against a resolution introduced by 
 Eobert Wright, of Maryland, proposing to extend to 
 citizens generally the rules of war relating to spies. 
 The object of the measure was to bring to an end the 
 giving of aid to the enemy by American citizens, which 
 was known to be not uncommon, especially on the 
 northern frontier. In a speech of which we have only 
 an epitome Webster avowed that if illegal intercourse 
 with the enemy existed he would "go as far as any 
 one in applying constitutional remedies to that evil." 
 The offenses, however, which the measure in hand was 
 designed to reach were, he pointed out, already covered 
 by the laws on the subject of treason, and adequate 
 penalties for the commission of them /were already 
 prescribed. Mr. Wright's measure was tantamount to 
 a proposal to transfer the trial of such offenses from 
 the ordinary courts of law to tribunals of a military 
 character. " Sir," declared Webster, " the proposition 
 strikes me as monstrous. I cannot consent to entertain 
 the consideration of it even for a moment. It goes to 
 destroy the plainest Constitutional provisions. . . 
 If the proposition should pass into a law, it takes away 
 the Constitutional definition of the offense of treason : ii 
 takes away the prescribed mode of proof ; it takes away 
 the trial by jury ; it takes away the civil tribunal, and 
 establishes the military. On a resolution of this sort, 
 I cannot believe the House will consent to deliberate." 
 
 Despite the efforts of Webster and others, the reso- 
 
 1 " Annals of Contrrc^. '' 13tli Cnnjz., 1st seas., Vol. I, p. 885 ; 
 "Writings and Speech.-," Vol. XIV, pp, 11-13. 
 
<jO DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 lutiou was referred, by a majority of eleven votes, to a 
 committee of the whole j but it was never reported 
 ui)on ij or subsequently discussed. Of the fundamental 
 soundness of Webster's position there can be no ques- 
 tion. That the relations maintained between the 
 British and certain of the American opponents of the 
 war were exasperating in the extreme from the point 
 of view of the Administration, can readily enough be 
 understood. On the American side, those relations 
 were not infrequently clearly treasonable. But the 
 wholesale extension of martial law, upon this account, 
 to all cases involving questions of the kind would have 
 meant, as Webster demonstrated, not merely to make 
 provision for what was already sufficiently provided 
 for, but flagrantly to subvert the fundamental rights 
 of citizenship as guaranteed in the Constitution. 
 
 On the day (January 10th) upon which Webster de- 
 livered his speech in opposition to the Wright resolu- 
 tion George M. Troup, of Georgia, reported to the 
 House from the Committee on Military Affairs a bill 
 making provision for the filling of the ranks of the 
 regular army, encouraging enlistments through the 
 payment of liberal bounties, and authorizing there- 
 enlistment for longer periods of men whose terms of 
 service were about to expire. The measure was re- 
 ferred to the committee of the whole, and three days 
 later it was called up for consideration. Debate, which 
 turned at first upon various details of the bill, broad- 
 ened inevitably into a discussion of the fundamental 
 aspects of the war itself— its causes, its methods, its 
 prospects, and particularly the policies pursued by the 
 government in its administration. On January 14th 
 I Daniel Sheffey, of Virginia, offered an amendment to 
 the engrossed bill to the effect that the troops which 
 
IN CONGRESS FROM NEW BAMPSHIRE 91 
 
 should be enlisted under the terms of the prospective 
 
 act should be kk limited, as to service, to the defense of 
 the territory and frontiers of the United States." The 
 purpose of the amendment was to compel an abandon- 
 ment of the projected invasion of Canada and to re- 
 strict the war on land to operations of defense. The 
 earlier attempts to invade Canada had failed miserably, 
 and on the part of many people there was small desire 
 to witness their renewal. By the decisive vote of 103 
 to 54, however, the Sheffey amendment was rejected. 
 
 At this point, Webster, who thus far had partici- 
 pated in the debate but incidentally, rose to deliver a 
 speech which easily surpassed all of his earlier efforts 
 and touched, indeed, the high-water mark of his ora- 
 tory during his first period of congressional service. 
 Writing to Ezekiel two weeks later, and enclosing for 
 distribution in Salisbury some copies of the speech, 
 Webster strongly maintained that the effort was not 
 what it ought to have been. " I had not time," he in- 
 sists. "I had no intention of speaking till nine o'clock 
 in the morning, and delivered the thing about two. I 
 could make it better, but I dare say you think it would 
 be easier to make a new one than to mend it. It was 
 well enough received at the time, and our side of the 
 house said they would have it in this form." ' The 
 subject was one of which Webster was full, and, al- 
 though there was opportunity for but slight prepara- 
 tion of the details of the discourse, the speaker's inter- 
 est in, and knowledge of, all of the questions pertain- 
 ing to the war, combined with his highly developed 
 oratorical ability, fitted him above :ill men to discuss 
 instantly any phase of the subject wilh force and effect 
 
 1 Daniel to Ezekiel Webster, January 30, 1814. WVlnWr, 
 " Private Correspondence," Vol. I, j». 239. 
 
92 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 The florid style which had marred earlier speeches had 
 now virtually disappeared and in its stead was sim- 
 plicity, directness, deliberation. The speech was pro- 
 fessedly partisan, and in it there was little that was 
 aew. But it gathered up the arguments of the oppo- 
 sition, arrayed them in masterful fashion, and drove 
 them home with a cogency which commanded the ad- 
 miration of the least sympathetic hearers. 
 
 Beginning with an avowal of readiness to support 
 any measure that could be shown to be necessary for 
 the defense of the country, Webster attacked sharply 
 the Administration's conduct of the war and its laws 
 restrictive of commerce, and urged that henceforth the 
 war should be made one of defense solely, that the 
 navy should be developed, and that the proposed meas- 
 ure for the enlistment of troops, presumably for the 
 conquest of Canada, should be defeated. The war it- 
 self, it was contended, was a mistake. Those who were 
 responsible for it had never been able to justify it. It 
 had been rashly undertaken and feebly prosecuted. 
 The opposition to it was, and had been from the out- 
 set, honest, firm, and well considered. The right of 
 those in opposition to speak, write, and vote as their 
 consciences dictated was inviolate. The war, being 
 supported by but a party, could prove only wasteful 
 and inconclusive. "Badly as I think of the original 
 grounds of the war, as well as of the manner in which 
 it has been hitherto conducted, if even now, failing in 
 an honest and sincere attempt to procure just and hon- 
 orable peace, it [the Government] will return to meas- 
 ures of defense and protection, such as reason and com- 
 mon sense and the public opinion all call for, my vote 
 shall not be withholden from the means. Give up 
 your futile projects of invasion. Extinguish the fires 
 
IN CONGKESS FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE 93 
 
 that blaze on your inland frontiers. Establish perfect 
 safety and defense there by adequate force. Let 
 every man that sleeps on your soil sleep in security. 
 Stop the blood that flows from the veins of unarmed 
 yeomanry and women and children. Give to the liv- 
 ing time to bury and lament their dead, in the quiet- 
 ness of private sorrow. Having performed this work 
 of beneficence and mercy on your inland border, turn 
 and look with the eye of justice and compassion on 
 your vast population along the coast. 1 nclench the 
 iron grasp of your embargo. Take measures for that 
 end before another sun sets upon you. With all the 
 war of the enemy on your commerce, if you would 
 cease to war on it yourselves, you would still have 
 some commerce. That commerce would give you some 
 revenue. Apply that revenue to the augmentation of 
 your navy. That navy, in turn, will protect your 
 commerce. Let it no longer be said that not one ship 
 of force, built by your hands since the war, yet floats 
 upon the ocean. ... If, then, the war must be 
 continued, go to the ocean. If you are seriously con- 
 tending for mar-it ime rights, go to the theatre where 
 alone those rights can be defended. Thither every in- 
 dication of our fortune points you. There the united 
 wishes ami exertions of the nation will go with you. 
 Even our party divisions, acrimonious as they are, 
 cease ;it the. water's edge. They are lost in attachment 
 to national character on the clement where thai char- 
 acter is made respectable. In protecting naval inter 
 ests by naval means, you will arm yourselves with tin 
 whole power Of national sentiment, and may command 
 the whole abundance of the national resources." ' 
 
 1 " Annals of Congress," 13th Oong., 1st Vol. I. pp. m:>0-951; 
 
 11 Writing and Speeches," Vol. XIV, pp. 3^-34. 
 
94 DANIEL WEBSTEE 
 
 Pressure from the opposition, combined with the 
 drift of circumstances, compelled the Administration 
 and its supporters, within a brief period, to adopt the 
 course thus so vigorously marked out. The embargo 
 of December 17, 1813, against which Webster inveighed 
 proved not only ineffective but unsupportable. By its 
 terms all foreign commerce was inhibited, and likewise 
 (he coasting trade, even trade by water between ports 
 of the same state. Certain influential Eepublicans, as 
 Lowndes and Cheves, had regarded the measure from 
 the outset as impossible to enforce, if not otherwise ob- 
 jectionable. Within a month it was found necessary to 
 niter the law for the relief of the population of the 
 island of Nantucket, and ou the 4th of April Calhoun 
 was obliged to report from the Committee on Foreign 
 Relations a bill providing for its complete and imme- 
 diate repeal. The task of piloting the bill through the 
 House, which fell to Calhoun, was not an enviable 
 oue, for although there could be little doubt as to the 
 measure's passage, a plausible defense of so sharp a re- 
 versal of policy on the part of the war party called for 
 the exercise of unusual ingenuity. The policy of re- 
 striction was admitted frankly to have been a failure, 
 but the reasons for the failure were declared to lie, not 
 in the inherent inefhcacy of restriction as a principle, 
 but rather in the change of situation which had taken 
 place in Europe. It was confessed that when war was 
 once begun the restrictionist policy should have been 
 discontinued. The plight of the advocates of restric- 
 tion was, at best, however, embarrassing, and the op- 
 ponents of the system were not unnaturally exultant. 
 
 Following Calhoun's labored, though artful, ex- 
 planations, Webster spoke at some length in commen- 
 dation of the proposed repeal, but deprecating the 
 
IX CONGRESS FKU31 NEW HAMPSHIRE 95 
 
 opinion advanced by Calhoun to the effect that the 
 rescinding of the restrictive system should not be al- 
 lowed to affect the increased tariff rates established by 
 the act of 1812. Speaking now, as indeed through 
 many years to come, for the commercial and ship- 
 building interests of Xew England, Webster was quick 
 to raise his voice against anything whatsoever thai 
 savored of an artificial restraint upon trade. In the 
 present speech, throughout which ran a vein of digui- 
 tied but pointed sarcasm, the speaker confessed to a 
 special delight at being present to participate in " the 
 funeral ceremonies " of the restrictive system. " The 
 embargo act, the non-importation act, and all the 
 crowd of additions and supplements, together with all 
 their garniture of messages, reports, and resolutions, 
 are tumbling undistinguished into one common grave. 
 But yesterday this policy had a thousand friends aud 
 supporters ; to-day it is fallen and prostrate, and ' few 
 so poor as to do it reverence. '" l Especially forceful 
 was the ridicule which was heaped upon the shifting 
 and uncertain policies, both commercial and military, 
 which had characterized the Administration's conduct 
 of the war. " It would seem, however,'' he concluded, 
 " that there is a class of politicians to whose taste all 
 change is suited, to whom whatever is unnatural seems 
 wise, and all that is violent appears great." Uut ;ii 
 no point, upon this occasion or upon any other, did 
 Webster permit himself to descend to the level of mere 
 invective. His power lay not alone in his oratory, 
 but in his fair-mindedness, his moderation, and his 
 rigorous abstention from personalities. Before the 
 Thirteenth Congress had passed into history it was 
 
 1 •' Annals of Con^i eas," 1 : it 1 1 Con-., Istsess., Vol. II, p L973 ; 
 " Writing and Speeches," Vol. XIV, p. 42. 
 
96 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 generally conceded that the House contained no orator 
 who was his equal aud no parliamentarian who, iu 
 agility and fairness, was his superior. Calhoun— 
 young, aggressive, patriotic— was perhaps the most 
 active member of the body. But his speeches, com- 
 pared with those of Webster, were formal, dry, and 
 spiritless. The bill providing for the repeal of the 
 Embargo became law April 14th, and with its enact- 
 ment all direct restraints upon foreign trade disap- 
 peared, save, of course, in goods which could be 
 styled enemy's property. 
 
 Throughout the few remaining days of the session 
 Webster found occasion or incentive to speak upon no 
 topic of first-rate importance. By the repeal of the 
 restrictions upon trade he appears to have felt that the 
 most urgent public need of the hour had been met. 
 On April 18th came the adjournment, and he returned 
 forthwith to his home. The four-month sojourn at the 
 capital had been crowded with activity, and it had set 
 the young New Hampshire member forward very ap- 
 preciably in both his public and his professional 
 career. In addition to the discharge of his duties in 
 the House he had opened during the winter a practice 
 in the federal Supreme Court which was destined to be 
 renewed at frequent intervals throughout the next 
 thirty-five years, and in the course of which he was 
 eventually to arrive at the zenith of his profession. 
 His earlier cases pertained principally to captures and 
 prizes. 
 
 By reason of the urgent necessity of further prepara- 
 tions for the prosecution of the war Congress was sum- 
 moned by the President to meet in special session 
 September 19, 1814. Negotiations between the British 
 and American commissioners at Ghent had indeed 
 
IX CONGRESS FEOM NEW HAMPSHIRE 97 
 
 been opened, but the outlook for peace was far from 
 reassuring. During the previous August there had 
 occurred the sack of Washington, together with the 
 burning of the capital and of the President's mansion, 
 niid with the collapse of the Napoleonic power in 
 Europe it seemed not improbable that the contest in 
 A merica had entered upon a new and more serious 
 stage. In his message of September :20th President 
 Madison called for an increase of the regular army, a 
 reclassification of the militia for purposes of active 
 service, and the voting of supplies adequate to meet 
 the enlarged needs of the country. The session, which 
 terminated only with the expiration of the Thirteenth 
 Congress, March 4, 1815, Mas taken up almost ex- 
 clusively with the consideratiou of measures pertain- 
 ing to the procuring of men or of money, or of both, 
 for the war. 
 
 Webster's attitude throughout was that of an in- 
 dependent Federalist. On most subjects he was in 
 substantial accord with the majority of his party. He 
 at no time, however, acknowledged obligation to sup- 
 port party measures of which he did not approve. 
 And in one important matter he broke absolutely with 
 the more radical members of his party in his own 
 section of the Union. With the Hartford Convention 
 of I he winter of 1814-1815 he had nothing to do ; and 
 he was totally out of sympathy with both its purposes 
 and its methods, in the autumn of 1814 the Federalist 
 majority in the legislature of Massachusetts procured 
 the appointment of twelve delegates— including such 
 men of influence avs George Cabot, Harrison Gray Otis, 
 and Nathan Dane— who were instructed to meet with 
 similarly appointed delegates from other >o'\v England 
 States for the purpose of taking under consideration 
 
98 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 the grievances of New England arising from the war 
 and recommending measures of redress. Twenty-three 
 official delegates from Massachusetts, Connecticut, and 
 Rhode Island, together with four unofficial representa- 
 tives of New Hampshire and Vermont, met at Hart- 
 ford, December 15, 1814, and during the ensuing 
 month worked out a report in which appeared some of 
 the principles, and even some of the phraseology, of 
 the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions of 1797-179S, 
 closing with a series of resolutions and proposed con- 
 stitutional amendments which embodied a most vigor- 
 ous assault upon the Administration, even if they did 
 not, as many men believed, amount to deliberate sedi- 
 tion. Memorials requesting the call of such a conven- 
 tion were transmitted from various towns of Massa- 
 chusetts early in 1814, but it was not until after Web- 
 ster had returned to Washington for the special session 
 that the movement assumed serious proportions. To 
 the governor of New Hampshire he wrote advising 
 earnestly against the appointment of delegates, and al- 
 though two of the western counties of the state took it 
 upon themselves to send representatives, the state as 
 such had no part in the Hartford enterprise. Web- 
 ster's deep-seated attachment to the Union led him to 
 deprecate any project which involved so much as the 
 calling in question of the nation's permanence. His 
 familiarity with the situation at Washington, further- 
 more, encouraged him to expect an early turn in af- 
 fairs by which the policies and measures to which the 
 New England opposition was most forcibly objecting 
 would be brought to an end. 
 
 The principal measures of the new session with which 
 Webster had something to do were those relating to 
 the laying of war taxes and the establishment of a na- 
 
IN CONGRESS FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE 99 
 
 tional bank. October 10, 1814 — five days before Web- 
 ster appeared in his seat — there was reported from the 
 Wayff*»and Means Committee of the House a series of 
 resolutions declaring the expediency of continuing the 
 direct tax of 1813 and of increasing it by fifty per 
 cent., and likewise the desirability of increasing va- 
 rious existing indirect taxes and of laying a number of 
 new ones. There ensued a spirited debate, involving 
 discussion not merely of the wisdom of the specific 
 modifications which had been recommended but also 
 the conduct of the war and the prospects of an honorable 
 peace. On October 24th, there being under immediate 
 consideration the question of increasing the direct tax 
 from fifty to one hundred percent., Webster explained 
 at some length his reasons for voting against the meas- 
 ure. The purport of the speech was that, in view of 
 the certainty of the bill's adoption, he did not feel him- 
 self "under the necessity, either of obstructing the 
 passage of the taxes through the House, or of taking 
 upon himself any portion of the responsibility of lay- 
 ing them." " It is not put to us who opposed the war 
 in its origin, and have steadily reprobated the manner 
 in which it has been prosecuted, to say now whether a 
 burdensome system of taxes shall be imposed upon the 
 people to replenish the exhausted Treasury. That is 
 for those to determine who have made the taxes neees 
 sary. Our voles are not asked for now. any more than 
 upon the declaration of hostilities." 1 If. he continued, 
 it could be shown that the Administration's honest ef- 
 forts for peace had been frustrated, that it would ap 
 ply henceforth its means to "the firsl great object of 
 all governments, the protection of the people," that, 
 
 1 "Annals of Congress," I3feh Cong., 3d sees., Vol. Ill, p 459; 
 '• Writings and Speeches," Vol. XIV. p. 4'.'. 
 
100 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 indeed, it would consent to carry on the war in a man- 
 ner "agreeable to the common sense of the commu- 
 nity," he would be willing to vote all supplies for 
 which the occasion might call. In the absence of 
 these assurances, he could not bring himself to seem to 
 lend his approval, as he should do were he to concur 
 in the proposed increase of revenues. In assuming 
 this position he acted, as he seldom did, with the Fed- 
 eralists of the extremer type. The majority of his fel- 
 low-partisans voted for the taxes, which were carried. 
 During the winter Webster contributed to the defeat 
 of a draft project designed by the Administration to 
 fill the depleted regiments of the army. His speech 
 of December 9th upon this subject, first published only 
 recently, 1 was regarded at the time as an exceedingly 
 able defense of the constitutional rights of the citizen, 
 and as late as 1831 Webster himself referred with some 
 pride to the part which he had "in overthrowing Mr. 
 Monroe's conscription in 1814." In his own later 
 judgment, however, his most honorable and effective 
 service as a congressman from New Hampshire was 
 rendered in connection with the establishment of the 
 second national bank and the regeneration of the 
 nation's disordered currency system. " My efforts in 
 regard to the banks at different times suggested," he 
 wrote in 1832, "and in regard to the currency of the 
 country, I think were of some small degree of utility to 
 the public. Other subjects were temporary, and what- 
 ever was done or said about them has passed away, and 
 lost interest." 2 By reason largely of Federalist op- 
 
 'In Van Tyne. "Letters of Daniel Webster," pp. 56-68: 
 Writings and Speeches," Vol. XIV, pp. 55-69. 
 Autobiography. Webster, '■ Private Correspondence," Vol. I, 
 
IN CONGRESS FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE 101 
 
 position to the renewal of its charter, the first national 
 bank, established in 1791, had passed out of existence 
 in 1811. During the war period there was a veritable 
 craze for the establishment of state banks and the issu- 
 ing of paper money, so that within the brief space of 
 i wo years (1811-181:3) the number of local banks in the 
 country rose from eighty-eight to two hundred and 
 eight Some of these institutions were securely 
 founded, but many were not. Sooner or later the 
 majority of them were obliged to suspend specie pay- 
 ment, with the consequeuce that all forms of bank 
 paper entered upon a sharp and ruinous depreciation. 
 When the banks of Boston were still paying specie en 
 demand, the notes of the New York banks were ten 
 per cent, below specie value, those of Philadelphia 
 banks fifteen, those of Baltimore twenty, those of 
 Washington twenty-five. Everywhere the currency 
 was deranged ; in the West and South its state can be 
 described as nothing short of chaotic. Even the gov- 
 ernment was obliged to accept its revenues iu the form 
 of depreciated and widely fluctuating paper. No 
 national need was more obvious or imperative than 
 some device, whether or not a national bank, which 
 should exercise a steadying influence upon the cur- 
 rency, such as at one time had been exercised by 
 Hamilton's bank. 
 
 The consequence of this situation was the inaugura- 
 tion of a movement for the establishment of a second 
 bank. As early as April 2, L81 1, it had been proposed 
 in the House that a committee should be appointed to 
 
 inquire into the expediency of establishing a bank, but 
 it was not until Alexander J. Dallas, of Pennsylvania, 
 became President Madison's Secretary <>( the Treasury 
 (October, L814) that the project took definite form. 
 
102 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 Within a fortnight of his appointment to the treasury 
 portfolio Dallas addressed to the Ways and Means 
 Committee a letter recommending a national bank with 
 a capital of fifty million dollars. On October 2S, 
 1814, by a vote of ninety-three to fifty-four, the House 
 resolved ' i that it is expedient to establish a national 
 bank with branches in the several states/ 1 and in- 
 structed a committee to bring in a bill for such an in- 
 stitution. The resulting measure, introduced Novem- 
 ber 7th, failed in the House, but a new bill, originated 
 in the Senate, was eventually passed by both houses. 
 This bill provided for a bank with a capital of thirty 
 million dollars, of which amount the United States 
 might subscribe one-sixth. By reason, however, of the 
 restrictions imposed upon the loans which the bank 
 might make the government, as well as from other con- 
 siderations, President Madison, with the approval of 
 Dallas, vetoed the measure, January 30, 1815. 1 Within 
 a week peace was proclaimed, and the question of the 
 bank went over to the next Congress. 
 
 In the House debates upon the bank question Web- 
 ster had an active and an influential part. To him no 
 subject seemed of more fundamental importance. In- 
 volved in it was not merely the successful prosecution 
 of the war, but the prosperity of industry and business 
 and the credit of the nation. To the end that there 
 might be a general toning-up of the currency system 
 Webster advocated warmly the establishment of a 
 bank, provided only that the bank established be one 
 of the right description. There were those in Con- 
 gress who opposed the establishment of any bank. 
 There were those who advocated a bank which should 
 
 J liiHmn^on, "Messages and Papers of the Presidents," Vol. 
 
IN CONGRESS FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE 103 
 
 not be obliged to restrict itself to the redemption of its 
 notes in specie. And there were those who desired a 
 bank which should be compelled always to pay its 
 notes, upon demand, in specie, and which should be 
 entirely free to determine its own policy in respect to 
 the making of loans to the government. To the third 
 of these groups Webster belonged. " Throughout all 
 the debates on the bank question," he records, " 1 kept 
 steadily in view the object of restoring the currency as 
 a matter of the very first importance, without which it 
 would be impossible to establish any efficient system of 
 revenue and finance. The very first step toward such 
 a system is to provide a safe medium of payment. I 
 opposed, therefore, to the full extent of my power, 
 every project for a bank so constituted that it might 
 issue irredeemable paper, and thus drown and over- 
 whelm us still more completely in the miseries and 
 calamities of paper money. I would agree to nothing 
 but a specie-paying bank." 1 
 
 Both the House and Senate bills, as originally drawn, 
 provided for a paper- money bank, and it was against 
 this feature of the two measures that Webster directed 
 most forcefully his opposition. The speech of Jan- 
 uary 2, 1815, on the recommitment of the Senate bill 
 was one of the most notable of his earlier efforts.' 
 With clearness, force, and eloquence he laid bare the 
 evils of a paper-money regime and expounded those 
 fundamental principles of public iiuance which air 
 acknowledged to-day t<» lie at the very root of all 
 Sound banking. It was largely through bis influence 
 
 1 Memorandum of 1831, cited in Curtis, " Webster," Vol. I, p. 
 140. 
 
 1 " Annals of Congress," 13th Cong., 3d Bess., pp. 1014-1023; 
 11 Writings and Speeches," Vol. V, pp. 36-47, 
 
104 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 that there were incorporated in the measure amend- 
 ments taking from the government the power to force 
 loans from the bank and to permit the institution to 
 suspend the payment of specie, and not until these 
 amendments had been secured was Webster willing to 
 give the project his vote. " We had a hard time," he 
 writes to Ezekiel, "to prevent its [the bill's] passing 
 in its worst shape " ; and again : " A hundred of the 
 narrowest chances alone saved us from a complete 
 paper-money system, in such a form as was calculated 
 and intended to transfer the odium of depreciation 
 from the government to the bank." Madison's veto 
 of the measure was interpreted by Webster as indica- 
 tive that the proposed bank was too sound to suit the 
 Administration. "The President has negatived the 
 bank bill," he writes to Ezekiel. "So all our labor 
 is lost. . . . What is to be done next nobody can 
 tell." The veto precipitated a renewal of the contro- 
 versy, but the announcement of peace intervened, and 
 on the 4th of March, 1815, the Thirteenth Congress ex- 
 pi red. 
 
 In November, 1814, Webster was chosen to a second 
 term as representative from the Portsmouth district. 
 As late as 1831, he still regarded the Fourteenth Con- 
 gress as the most talented he had known, and it is 
 therefore the more worthy of being observed that by 
 common consent Webster was recognized at the time 
 as the Federalist leader of the House, even as Calhoun 
 was yet admitted to be the Administration's principal 
 spokesman and parliamentarian. Most of the abler 
 members of the Thirteenth Congress reappeared in the 
 Fourteenth, and some men of marked ability took 
 their seats for the first time. Clay, returned from 
 Europe, was again in the Speaker's chair. William 
 
IN CONGRESS FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE 106 
 
 Pinkuey, of Maryland, indisputable leader of the 
 American bar, was present until, in April, 1816, he 
 departed for Russia. The men of largest influence in 
 the House were Webster, Clay, Calhoun, John Ran- 
 dolph, Pinkuey, and Lowndes. 
 
 By the illness of his daughter Grace, Webster was 
 prevented from taking his seat until February 7, 1816. 
 During the session, which had begun on the 5th of the 
 previous December, the two subjects which engrossed 
 most attention were the bank and the tariff. When 
 Webster arrived in Washington he found already 
 under consideration a bank bill, introduced January 
 8th by Calhoun, chairman of the committee on the 
 national currency, and following with some closeness a 
 plan recently submitted by the Secretary of the Treas- 
 ury. The project as it stood embraced several features 
 essentially identical with those to which Webster had 
 taken exception in connection with the bills of 1814- 
 1815. Plunging unreservedly into the fight, the Fed- 
 eralist leader, with the assistance of other members of 
 like mind, secured once more a reduction in volume of 
 the proposed capital, a restriction of the power of the 
 
 vernment to exact loans, and — most important of all 
 — an absolute prohibition of the suspension of specie 
 payments. " I was at special pains," he records. 
 " to convince Congress and the country that a paper 
 bank would be ruinous ; a bunk with an inordinate 
 amount of capital, such as fifty millions, dangerous : 
 and that all hope of restoring the currency of the coun- 
 try, even by means of the best -conducted bank, futile, 
 until the government itself should execute existing 
 laws, and require payment of debts and taxes in legal 
 coin, or in the paper of specie-paying banks. ,J Dur- 
 ing the course of the delaj which had taken place 
 
106 DANIEL WEBSTEK 
 
 Webster's interest in the bank had, in truth, somewhat 
 waned, and his argument now was rather that the 
 United States already had a currency (gold and silver) 
 as good as any in the world, and that if the govern- 
 ment would but refuse to receive the issues of non- 
 specie-paying banks such institutions would forthwith 
 be driven out of existence and the currency, undis- 
 turbed by depreciated paper issues, would right itself 
 automatically. In the end he cast his vote against the 
 bank bill, being led to do so more particularly by his 
 opposition to the government's participation in the 
 direction of the proposed institution. Under the lead- 
 ership of Calhoun and Clay, however, the friends of 
 the measure were able to muster eighty votes in a total 
 of one hundred and forty-nine in the House. The bill 
 was concurred in by the Senate and, approved by the 
 President, April 10, 1816, it became law. 
 
 During its earlier years the new bank was badly 
 managed, its stock became a medium for violent spec- 
 ulation, and several of the difficulties which had been 
 predicted were fully realized. Eventually, however, 
 the institution got upon its feet, and during its later 
 career Webster came to be one of its warmest defenders. 
 Perhaps the most significant aspect of the bank con- 
 troversy, taken as a whole, was a fundamental agree- 
 ment of Webster, Clay, Calhoun, and a large portion 
 of their respective followings, regarding not only the 
 necessity of a stable currency and the utility of a na- 
 tional bank to that end, but the indubitable constitu- 
 tionality of the establishment of such an institution. 
 Under the spell of the nationalizing spirit of the war 
 period South Carolina and Kentucky were ready to 
 join hands with New England in the undertaking of 
 this, and many another, public project which twenty 
 
IN CONGRESS FROM NEW HAMPSHIRE 107 
 
 years earlier, and twenty years later, would have been 
 pronounced simply inadmissible. To the restoration 
 of financial stability Webster made further notable 
 contribution in 1816 through his procuring of the pas- 
 sage of resolutions, approved by the President April 
 30th, in accordance with which the government re- 
 quired all obligations due it to be met in coin, in 
 Treasury notes, in notes of the Bank of the United 
 Siatcs, or iu notes of other specie-paying banks. 1 The 
 victory was the more noteworthy by reason of the fact 
 that Calhoun had but just failed to carry through the 
 House a similar measure. 
 
 On March 12, 1816, there was introduced in the 
 House a general tariff bill, embodying substantially 
 the suggestions offered by Secretary Dallas in his 
 notable report of February 12th preceding. The bill 
 was neither a party nor a sectional measure. It was 
 the first tariff bill in our history in which the protec- 
 tion of American industry was a preponderating con- 
 sideration ; but to most people the defense of the 
 newly risen manufactures of the war period seemed so 
 obviously the part of wisdom that upon the principles 
 of the bill there was but small difference of opinion. 
 l r pon the details of the measure, especially the rates of 
 duty to be imposed and the period of their application, 
 there was naturally some variation of view. As re- 
 ported by the Ways and Means Committee, the bill 
 proposed to lay a duty of twenty-five per cent, ad 
 val,orem on all imports of cotton and woolen manu- 
 factures. On motion of Clay, the rate on cottons was 
 increased to thirty per cent. Webster opposed the 
 measure as a whole and the cottons schedule in partic- 
 
 l See the speech of April 20, 181G. " Writings and Speeches," 
 Vol. V, pp. 48-59. 
 
10S DANIEL WEBSTEB 
 
 ular. It was manifest that under its operation the 
 importation of East Indian cotton fabrics would be ter- 
 minated completely. The India trade, however, was a 
 valuable asset of New England, and, although the cot- 
 ton and woolen manufactures which were to be accorded 
 protection flourished principally in New England, 
 '.Vebster represented as yet a commercial, ship-building 
 constituency and in its interest he felt obliged to vote 
 against the bill. It was his judgment, moreover, that 
 t lie rates stipulated in the measure were too high to be 
 permanent, and that a further evil that might be ex- 
 pected from the proposed system would be its insta- 
 bility. Eecoguizing that he was powerless to prevent 
 the passage of a protective measure of some kind, he 
 proposed that the duties on cottons be fixed at thirty 
 per cent, ad valorem for two years only, from June 30, 
 1816, at tweuty-five per cent, for the next two years, 
 and at twenty per cent, indefinitely thereafter. By a 
 large majority this proposition was concurred in, al- 
 t hough before the final passage of the bill it was modi- 
 fied to stipulate a twenty -five per cent, duty for three 
 years from the ensuing June 30th and a duty of twenty 
 per cent, thereafter. 
 
 During the remainder of the session Webster partic- 
 ipated in the shaping of a number of measures, but 
 none of first-rate importance. An incident of some 
 momentary interest was John Randolph's challenge to 
 a duel, arising from a fancied insult during the course 
 of a House debate. The challenge was declined with 
 dignity and ere long the two men were again upon the 
 best of terms. In the proceedings of the second session 
 of this congress Webster's part was still less prominent. 
 Early in the session there occurred the death of his 
 daughter Grace, and after the return to Washington 
 
IN CONGRESS FEOM NEW HAMPSHIRE 109 
 
 his practice in the Supreme Court absorbed the larger 
 portion of his time and thought. February 8, 1817, he 
 voted for Calhoun's bill setting aside as a permanent 
 fund for internal improvements the bonus of one and a 
 half million dollars, together with the dividends, to be 
 derived from the United States Bank. Upon both the 
 constitutionality and the expediency of the measure 
 Webster was in complete accord with his South 
 Carolinian colleague, although the bill was opposed by 
 no fewer than twenty-three of the Federalist members 
 from New England, and by nine of the ten New Eng- 
 land senators. Madison's veto of March 3d did not 
 shake his judgment. He voted to sustain the bill as 
 against the veto. But the measure failed for want of a 
 constitutional majority. 
 
 March 3, 1817, the Fourteenth Congress expired, and 
 with it ended for a period of five years Webster's 
 services in public office. 
 
CHAPTER V 
 
 LAW AND ORATORY IN MASSACHUSETTS 
 
 DuKi>iG the coarse of his second congressional term 
 Webster arrived at a decision to remove from his 
 native state in quest of a broader field of professional 
 opportunity. To Ezekiel he announced his purpose as 
 early as March, 1816. Although but thirty-four years 
 of age, he stood already at the head of the New Hamp- 
 shire bar, and within the circumscribed sphere of his 
 earlier triumphs there were no more worlds to conquer. 
 His income of barely two thousand dollars a year was 
 increasingly inadequate, and the loss of almost the 
 whole of his property in the Portsmouth fire of Decem- 
 ber 22, 1813, rendered it the more necessary that some 
 measure be taken to advance his personal fortune. 
 After all, however, the principal propelling force was 
 a sober consciousness of powers yet unused and a laud- 
 able ambition to press forward to the topmost heights 
 of the legal profession. Various possible locations 
 were considered, principally New York, Albany, and 
 Boston. At one time New York was all but selected. 
 'Our New England prosperity and importance," 
 wrote Webster pessimistically to Ezekiel, "are pass- 
 ing away. This is fact. The events of the times, the 
 policy of Euglaud, the consequences of our war, and 
 the Ghent Treaty, have bereft us of our commerce, the 
 great source of our wealth. Tf any great scenes are to 
 be acted in this country within the next twenty years 
 New York is the place in which those scenes are to be 
 
LAW AS D OBATORY IK MASSACHUSETTS 111 
 
 viewed/' ' The ultimate decision, none the less, was 
 iu favor of Boston. In the New England metropolis 
 Webster had already a somewhat extended acquaint- 
 ance, and the opportunity for professional promotion 
 there awaiting men of high ability was almost, if not 
 quite, as attractive as that in New York. In August, 
 1816, the removal was made and the family was settled 
 in a comfortable but unpretentious house in Mt. Vernon 
 Street, at the summit of Beacon Hill, a stone's throw to 
 the northwest from the State House. 
 
 So far as appears from his writings, Webster had at 
 this time no thought of returning to public life. His 
 years in Congress had been full of interest and profit ; 
 but he was still primarily a lawyer, and even during 
 his period of service in the House he had divided his 
 time habitually between his legislative duties and his 
 employments of a professional nature. When remov- 
 ing to Boston, he expected to devote himself uninter- 
 ruptedly to the practice of the law, in both the courts 
 of Massachusetts and the federal tribunals ; and so he 
 was enabled to do during somewhat more than halt' a 
 decade. Success in the new field was instant and flat- 
 tering. If, as tradition tells, there were legal lights in 
 Boston who at first were disposed to regard the c< vil- 
 lage n lawyer from New Hampshire with some conde- 
 scension, the time soon came when the greatest of them 
 were obliged to receive him as an equal. There had 
 not yet come into his countenance that striking, even 
 awe-inspiring, appearance of solemn majesty which in 
 later years transfixed men who gazed upon him. But 
 even now his presence was such that, by all accounts. 
 when he so much as entered a room every eye was 
 
 1 Daniel to Ezekiel Webster, March '.20, 161G. Webster, "Pri- 
 vate Correspondence," Vol. I, p. 25G. 
 
112 DANIEL WEBSTEB 
 
 riveted upon him aud voices were hushed. His friends 
 and associates in the new home soon comprised not 
 simply the leaders of his own profession but men of the 
 highest standing in all callings. Business crowded 
 in upon him, and within a year his income had been 
 increased to upward of twenty thousand dollars. 
 
 Side-lights afforded by the testimony of various 
 persons who in this period had the privilege of know- 
 ing the Websters somewhat intimately reveal a picture 
 of spleudid domestic felicity and professional prosperity 
 —an epitome of substantial but unostentatious New 
 England town life at its best. In no period of his 
 career, probably, was Webster a busier man. He rose 
 early and as a rule disposed of a goodly amount of 
 work before other people had set about the duties of 
 the day. In the midst of the preparation of argu- 
 ments and the multiplied exactions of a lawyer's life 
 he kept up his study of the more difficult phases of the 
 law and gave no inconsiderable amount of time to the 
 reading of books, documents, and periodicals relating 
 to the politics of Europe, especially of Great Britain. 
 The day was ' crowded with toil ; the evening, as a 
 rule, was devoted to rest, recreation, and the amenities 
 of family life. " After dinner," writes an intimate 
 acquaintance of the family, " Mr. Webster would 
 throw himself upon the sofa, and then was seen the 
 truly electrical attraction of his character. Every 
 person in the room was drawn immediately into his 
 sphere. The children squeezing themselves into all 
 possible places and postures upon the sofa, in order to 
 be close to him ; Mrs. Webster sitting by his side, and 
 the friend in the house or social visitor, only too happy 
 to join in the circle. All this was not from invitation 
 to the children ; he did nothing to amuse them ; he 
 
LAW AND ORATORY IE MASSACHUSETTS 113 
 
 told them no stories. It was the irresistible attraction 
 of his character, the charm of his illumined counte- 
 nance, from which beamed indulgence and kindness to 
 every one of his family." ' 
 
 Within a twelvemonth after the settlement at Boston 
 Webster was drawn into the most notable piece of liti- 
 gation with which he had as yet had connection. In 
 the ripening of his own legal talent, in the develop- 
 ment of the facilities of higher education, and in the 
 shaping of the constitutional law of the United States, 
 the Dartmouth College case was alike of prime im- 
 portance. The history of the " college causes » which 
 centred about the case of Dartmouth College vs. Wood- 
 ward is too extended to be related in detail here. The 
 controversy sprang originally from an attempt on the 
 part of an element in the board of trustees of the col- 
 lege to drive John Wheelock from the presidency, or, 
 in any event, to curb the influence of the " Wheelock 
 dynasty " in the affairs of the college. By the terms 
 of its charter, conferred by the crown in 1769, the col- 
 lege was created a perpetual corporation, Dr. Eleazer 
 Wheelock was appointed president, with power to des- 
 ignate his successor, subject to the approval of the 
 trustees, and the trustees were authorized to make 
 laws and ordinances for the government of the college, 
 with power to till vacancies in their own bod\ . Ill 
 1779 John Wheelock, under provision of the will of 
 liis father, succeeded to the presidency. As earl\ 
 179;{ there developed a certain amount of friction be- 
 tween the president and some of the trusters, and in 
 1809 the enemies of Wheelock secured a majority of 
 the board, enabling them to lie the hands of the pres- 
 ident and to exclude from the government of the col- 
 
 1 Quoted in Curtis, " Wet) Vol. I, p. 161. 
 
1U DANIEL WEBSTEK 
 
 lege men known to be friends of the Wheelock regime. 
 For a time the conflict was kept under cover, but in 
 1815 the Wheelock forces published a brochure in 
 which their grievances were thoroughly aired, and in- 
 stantly there ensued a campaign of pamphleteering and 
 recrimination which attracted much attention. Whee- 
 lock, contemplating legal proceedings, secured from 
 Webster a promise of professional assistance ; and 
 when, at his own request, a committee of the legisla- 
 ture was appointed to investigate the charges brought 
 by him against the trustees, he requested Webster to 
 appear in his behalf before the committee. On the 
 pretext of absorption in business, Webster neglected to 
 appear, whereat some of the partisans of Wheelock 
 took serious, and perhaps in a measure justifiable, of- 
 fense. The truth is that Webster entertained doubts 
 as to the strength of the president's case and preferred 
 for the present to keep clear of it. Eventually he 
 abandoned Wheelock altogether. 
 
 In 1815 the trustees summarily dismissed Wheelock 
 from the presidency and appointed in his stead the 
 Reverend Francis Brown. The "college question" 
 became forthwith the principal interest of the state. 
 The trustees were Federalist in politics and Congrega- 
 tional in religion, with the consequence that all 
 Democrats, all members of sects other than Congrega- 
 tional (Wheelock himself was a Presbyterian), and all 
 independent spirits generally were easily induced to 
 join in a crusade to break the grasp which Federalist 
 Congregationalism had hitherto maintained upon the 
 affairs of the college. At the spring elections of 1816, 
 with the college question as a preponderating issue, the 
 Democrats swept the state, electing both a Democratic 
 legislature and William Plumer, a former Federalist 
 
LAW AND ORATORY IN MASSACHUSETTS 115 
 
 but now the Democratic candidate, as governor. 
 Wheelock and his adherents went over bodily to the 
 triumphant party. The victory was followed up, on 
 June 27, 1816, by the enactment of a measure sub- 
 mitted by Plumer changing the corporate name of the 
 institution from " The Trustees of Dartmouth College " 
 to "The Trustees of Dartmouth University," increas- 
 ing the number of the trustees, vesting the appoint- 
 ment of some of them in the governor and council, 
 and in other ways altering fundamentally the nature of 
 the original corporation, to the end that the college 
 might be converted into a liberal institution after the 
 model of Jefferson's University of Virginia. The old 
 board refused absolutely to yield to the new one. 
 Judge William H. Woodward, its secretary, was ex- 
 pelled from his office by reason of his having accepted a 
 similar position with the new board, and suit was 
 brought against him in the Supreme Court of the state 
 to recover possession of the college seal and other ef- 
 fects of the corporation. 
 
 In the first argument of the case, in May, 1817, the 
 college, i. e., the old board, was represented by Jere- 
 miah Mason and Judge Jeremiah Smith, two of the 
 ablest lawyers of the day, while the interests of Wood- 
 ward and the recently created board were entrusted to 
 Ichabod Bartlett and the attorney -general of the stmt, 
 George Sullivan, who likewise were hard fighters and 
 ingenious advocates. The case was postponed to the 
 September session, at Exeter, and at the second argu- 
 ing — affirmed by one writer to have been the sharpest 
 intellectual contest which ever took place in a New 
 Hampshire court '—it fell to Webster to coBperate 
 with Mason and Smith in the defense of the college. 
 1 McCall, " Daniel Webster," p. 23. 
 
116 DANIEL WEBSTE& 
 
 V two-hour speech (unreported), closing for the plain- 
 tiff, exhibited many of the qualities which reappeared 
 in yet more striking fashion in the effort of the next 
 year before the Supreme Court at Washington. The 
 judgment of the court, however, sustained the consti- 
 tutionality and validity of the act of 1816 without 
 reserve, and was therefore adverse to the claims of the 
 college upon every point. The charter was declared 
 to have created a public corporation, established for 
 the purpose of promoting public education ; hence, not 
 being a contract with individuals, it must be regarded 
 as at the entire disposition ultimately, in the public 
 interest, of the legislature of the state. 
 
 It having been determined to continue the light, the 
 case was carried, on a writ of error, to the Supreme 
 Court of the United States. The claim upon which the 
 appeal was based was that the statute of June, 1816, 
 had so altered the character of the college corporation 
 as to have comprised an impairment of the obligation 
 of a contract, involving the exercise of a power which 
 the Federal Constitution plainly withholds from the 
 legislatures of the states. In the consideration of the 
 case in the New Hampshire court this point had re- 
 ceived little emphasis. It had been mentioned, but the 
 arguments of Mason, Smith, and Webster had run 
 along other lines, to the effect, chiefly, that in the act 
 of 1816 the legislature of the state had transcended not 
 merely the normal scope of legislative power but also 
 the positive limitations imposed upon such power by 
 the constitution of the state. So keenly did Webster 
 regret the necessity of resting the college's case upon 
 the purely constitutional issue in relation to the im- 
 pairment of contracts that he instigated the devising of 
 cognate cases covering other aspects of the situation, in 
 
LAW A^s'D ORATORY IN MASSACHUSETTS 117 
 
 the hope that these cases, after having been pushed 
 through the courts of the state, should be carried to 
 the supreme federal tribunal, so that they iu time 
 might be made the means of a victory for the college 
 over its adversaries. It was destined to come about 
 that before any of these cognate causes could be made 
 to yield results the immediate case had been argued 
 and decided, and the college had won the most signal 
 of victories upon the fundamental issue of the impair- 
 ment of contracts. Despised as was this issue by all of 
 the college's attorneys, Webster included, it was 
 squarely upon it, and upon nothing else, that John 
 Marshall and his colleagues in 1819 based their famous 
 decision ; and the principal importance of that decision 
 arose from the solemn proclamation which it accord- 
 ingly contained both of the inviolability of the provi- 
 sions of the constitution and the transcendant power of 
 the federal government. " If," as has been suggested, 
 " the whole cause had been subject to review, it might 
 well have been decided upon one of the other grounds, 
 and thus it would not have become one of the great 
 landmarks of constitutional history." ' 
 
 When it became known that neither Mason nor 
 Smith was able, or willing, to assume the conduct of 
 the college's case before the Supreme Court, the task, 
 by the common consent of those interested, was en- 
 trusted to Webster. As late as September 4, 1S17, he 
 writes to Mason, however, that he "has not thought 
 of the subject, nor made the least preparation," and 
 that he is " willing to be considered as belonging to 
 the cause and to talk about it, and consult about it, 
 but should do no good by undertaking an argument" 
 November 27th he writes that he has "engaged to 
 1 MoCall, "Daniel Webster," p. 25. 
 
118 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 keep hold " of the case in the event that he should go 
 to Washington during the winter, and that if the man- 
 agement of the case should fall to him he should ex- 
 pect to make liberal use of the briefs prepared by 
 Mason and Smith upon the subject. December 8th he 
 writes to Smith : " If I argue this cause at Washing- 
 ton, every one knows I can only be the reciter of the 
 argument made by you at Exeter. You are, therefore, 
 principally interested, as to the matter of reputation, 
 in the figure I make at Washington. Xothing will be 
 expected of me but decent delivery of your matter.' 7 J 
 During the winter months preparation for the han- 
 dling of the case was pushed, when other and exacting 
 duties permitted. Liberal use was made of the briefs, 
 and of the occasional advice, of Mason and Smith, and 
 in the substance of the argument which was put in shape 
 there was, as Webster was the first to affirm, little or 
 nothing that was original. Here, as upon many another 
 occasion, the skill of the man displayed itself peculiarly 
 in the selection and adaptation of contributions made 
 by other minds. His own personal contribution was 
 to be oratorical, rather than strictly legal. 
 
 A s associate counsel Webster selected a close per- 
 sonal friend, Joseph Hopkinson, an old-school lawyer 
 of Philadelphia whose practice in the federal courts 
 was extended. The case for the state fell into hands 
 lather less capable than those of Bartlett and Sullivan. 
 The attorneys whom Webster and Hopkinson were 
 called upon to meet were John Holmes, of Maine, and 
 the Attorney-General of the United States, William 
 Wirt. Holmes was an influential Democratic poli- 
 tician, but an indifferent lawyer. Wirt was a man of 
 
 1 Webster to Smith, December 8, 1817. Webster, " Private Cor- 
 respondence," Vol. I, p. 268. 
 
LAW AXD OEATORY IN MASSACHUSETTS J L9 
 
 distinction and of unquestioned ability ; but at the 
 present juncture he was so preoccupied with other 
 business that he quite neglected to prepare for tin- 
 Dartmouth case, and when he appeared in it he made 
 a rather pitiable showing. If, however, his opponents 
 were not formidable, the task which Webster had as- 
 sumed was, none the less, by no means an easy one. 
 He must bring the Supreme Court to a decision advei 
 to that just rendered by the highest tribunal of New 
 Hampshire— a judgment which he had himself been 
 obliged to admit was "able, plausible, and ingenious." 
 He must accomplish this, furthermore, by the employ- 
 ment of a course of reasoning (respecting the impair- 
 ment of contracts) in which he had not hitherto placed 
 great faith ; and it was the judgment of many disin- 
 terested members of the bar that he had insufficient 
 ground upon which to build a successful plea. 
 
 The argument of the case, opened March 10, 1818, 
 occupied upward of three days. By reason of the 
 fact that the Capitol had not yet been rebuilt, the sil 
 tings of the Court were held in a small and ill -adapted 
 apartment Audiences were therefore meagre, al- 
 though upon this occasion they were select, beingcom- 
 posed principally of men of the legal profession who 
 had been attracted, in some instances from considerable 
 distances, by the fame of the case and of the advocates. 
 The case was opened by Webster. According to Dr. 
 Chauncey A. Goodrich, a Vale professor, who was 
 present upon the occasion, Webster entered upon his 
 argument in a tone of easy and dignified conversation. 
 "His matter was so completely at his command that 
 he scarcely looked at his brief, bul went on for more 
 than four hours with a statement so luminous, and a 
 chain of reasoning so easy to be understood, and yet 
 
120 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 approaching so nearly to absolute demonstration, that 
 he seemed to carry with him every man of his audience 
 without the slightest effort or uneasiness on either side. 
 It was hardly eloquence in the strict sense of the term ; 
 it was pure reason. Now and then, for a sentence or 
 two, his eye flashed and his voice swelled into a 
 bolder note, as he uttered some emphatic thought ; but 
 lie instantly fell back into the tone of earnest conver- 
 sation which ran throughout the great body of the 
 speech." ' 
 
 Complete mastery of the law and facts, remarkable 
 simplicity and cogency in the elaboration of his argu- 
 ment, profound and even passionate devotion to his 
 client— these were Webster's principal assets in the 
 prosecution of his cause. Nowhere has his speech been 
 preserved in full. An abridged revision of it was in- 
 corporated in the Supreme Court reports, and this is 
 the document which has found a place in the published 
 editions of Webster's writings. But, as Webster him- 
 self one time observed, in the printed document 
 "something was left out," that "something" com- 
 prising, indeed, a wealth of oratorical outburst and of 
 passionate appeal which the reporter adjudged to have 
 no place in the dry and sober synopsis of constitutional 
 argument contained within the formal record. The 
 essential points in the argument, buttressed by varied 
 allusion to precedent, and by close and convincing 
 reasoning, may be summarized thus : (1) the charter 
 of 1769 created a private, and not a public, corpora- 
 tion, to administer a charity, in the administration of 
 which the twelve trustees had a property, recognized 
 by law ; (2) the grant of such a charter constitutes a 
 contract between the grantor and successors, on the one 
 1 Quoted in Curtis, " Webster," Vol. I, p. 169. 
 
LAW AND OEATOKY IN MASSACHUSETTS 121 
 
 hand, and the grantee and successors, on the other ; 
 and (3) the legislation of 1816, by which was taken 
 from the trustees the right to exercise the powers of 
 visitation and government, and by which this right 
 was conferred upon another body of men, comprised 
 an impairment of contract, within the meaning of the 
 Constitution of the United States, and was therefore 
 null and void. The judgment of the state court of New 
 Hampshire, it should be observed, had been rendered 
 on the ground that the college was a public corporation, 
 and that in respect to corporations of a public charac- 
 ter there is no contract or agreement which the state 
 may not regulate. 
 
 For his arguments of a purely legal nature upon 
 these matters Webster relied almost wholly upon the 
 briefe and the opinions of Mason and Smith. Even 
 here, however, he was far more than " a mere reciter," 
 for he welded together the material supplied by his 
 elders, supplemented it from the resources of his own 
 learning, and poured forth the whole in a flood of 
 surpassing eloquence which invested the subject with 
 interest and meaning undreamed of by those whose 
 knowledge of the case was more academic. Nor did 
 the speaker content himself with precedents and Logic. 
 He did not scruple to appeal with all the power that 
 was in him to the emotions, and even to the political 
 susceptibilities, of his hearers, and especially of the 
 members of the Court. Of the seven justices, two- 
 Marshall and Washington — Webster was confident 
 he could carry with him ; two others — Todd and 
 Duvall — he could hardly expect to move; the remain- 
 ing three — Slory, Livingston, and .J<>hn-<ui were not 
 at the outset favorably inclined, but might lie won 
 over. One stroke Webster conceived to ho of the 
 
122 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 greatest strategic importance, namely, to arouse the 
 political feelings of the Chief Justice and to enlist 
 his sympathy for the college as a surviving but 
 sorely beset bulwark of Federalism. To this end 
 a considerable portion of the speech was deliberately 
 devoted ; and with such consummate art was the 
 appeal made that it is commonly believed that, 
 had it been necessary, Marshall would probably have 
 brought about a decision in the college's favor by 
 the sheer force of his dominating influence within the 
 Court. 1 
 
 The peroration of the Dartmouth College speech and 
 the scene attending it, as described by eye-witnesses, 
 have hardly been paralleled in the history of modern 
 oratory. The formal argument ended, Webster paused 
 some seconds while every eye was riveted upon him 
 and the silence became almost oppressive. " This, 
 sir," he concluded, " is my case. It is the case not 
 merely of that humble institution, it is the case of 
 every college in our land. It is the case of every 
 eleemosynary institution throughout our country — of 
 all those great charities founded by the piety of our 
 ancestors, to alleviate human misery and scatter bless- 
 ings along the pathway of life. . . . Sir, you may 
 destroy this little institution ; it is weak ; it is in your 
 hands ! I know it is one of the lesser lights in the 
 literary horizon of our country. You may put it out. 
 But, if you do so, you must carry through your work ! 
 Vou must extinguish, one after another, all those 
 greater lights of science which, for more than a cen- 
 t my, have thrown their radiance over our land ! It is, 
 sir, as I have said, a small college. And yet there are 
 those who love it " 
 
 1 Lodge, " Webster," p. 89. 
 
LAW AND ORATOKY IN MASSACHUSETTS 123 
 
 At this point, as the- episode is described by Dr. 
 Goodrich, the emotion which the speaker had so far 
 succeeded in holding in restraint broke forth. His 
 lips quivered, his cheeks trembled, his voice choked, 
 and his eyes filled with tears. In words of exquisite 
 tenderness he continued, in broken voice, to express his 
 personal anxiety for the college. " The whole,' ' says 
 Dr. Goodrich, " seemed to be mingled throughout with 
 the recollections of father, mother, brother, and all the 
 privations and trials through which he had made his 
 way in life. Every one saw that it was wholly un- 
 premeditated, a pressure on his heart, which sought 
 relief in words and tears. The court-room during 
 these two or three minutes presented an extraordinary 
 spectacle. Chief Justice Marshall, with his tall and 
 gaunt figure beut over, as if to catch the slightest 
 whisper, the deep furrows of his cheek expanded with 
 emotion, and his eyes suffused with tears ; Mr. Justice 
 Washington at his side, with his small and emaciated 
 frame and countenance more like marble than I ever 
 saw on any other human being — leaning forward with 
 an eager, troubled look ; and the remainder of the 
 court, at the two extremities, pressing, as it were, 
 toward a single point, while the audience below were 
 wrapping themselves round in closer folds beneath the 
 bench, to catch each look and every movement of the 
 speaker's face." Recovering his composure and fix- 
 ing his eye upon the Chief Justice, Webster drew 
 himself up to his full height and in the tone of majesty 
 with which he sometimes thrilled an audience declared : 
 " Sir, I know not how others may feel, but, for myself, 
 when I see my Alma Mater surrounded, like Ctesar in 
 th»' senate-house, by those who are reiterating stab after 
 stab, I would not, for this right hand, have her turn to 
 
124 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 me, and say, Et tu quoque mi fill ! And thou too, my 
 
 son ! " l 
 
 During the ensuing days the case was argued further 
 by the opposing counsel, Holmes and Wirt, and by 
 Webster's associate, Hopkinson. The substance of the 
 opposition's contention was (1) that the charter was 
 not a contract ; (2) that all corporations were ter- 
 minated by the Revolution ; (3) that the charter, if a 
 contract, had not been impaired ; and (4) that, both 
 parties belonging to the same state, the Supreme Court 
 lacked jurisdiction. Holmes's speech Webster pro- 
 nounced ' ' three hours of the merest stuff that was ever 
 uttered in a county court." Of Wirt's effort he had a 
 higher opinion, although he was unable to see that the 
 Attorney -General brought forward an iota of either 
 new matter or new reasoning. " I believe," wrote Web- 
 ster to Mason on the day after the closing of the hear- 
 ing, "I may say that nearly or quite all the bar are 
 with us. How the court will be I have no means of 
 knowing. " 2 A day later he wrote to Smith : "I think 
 we shall finally succeed." 
 
 On the morning of March 13th the Chief Justice an- 
 nounced that the Court had conferred, that there were 
 differing opinions, that some of the justices had not 
 formed opinions, and that, accordingly, a decision 
 would not be immediately forthcoming. The following 
 day the Court adjourned. During the several months 
 which intervened before the opening of a new term 
 I here was carried on by the counsel and friends of the 
 college an adroit campaign for the conversion of those 
 
 1 Quoted in Curtis. " Webster," Vol. I, pp. 169-171. The 
 Bpeeoh is printed in " Works of Webster," Vol. V, pp 462-501, 
 and " Writings and Speeches," Vol. X, pp. 194-233. 
 
 ' Webster to Mason, March 13, 1818. Webster, " Private Cor- 
 
 :>ondence," Vol. I, p. 276. 
 
LAW AND ORATORY lis MASSACHUSETTS 125 
 
 members of the Court — Livingston, Johnson, and 
 Story — who were believed to be wavering in their 
 opinion. The state, at the same time, prepared for a 
 renewal of the contest and engaged as counsel William 
 Pinkney, acknowledged leader of the American bur. 
 When the Court convened, however, the Chief Justice 
 brushed aside all preparations for a rehearing of the 
 case and announced forthwith that a decision had beeu 
 arrived at. The judgment which Marshall then made 
 public, February, 1819, takes rank among the most 
 far-reaching and influential in American history. The 
 college charter, it was held, was a contract ; the acts 
 of the New Hampshire legislature constituted an im- 
 pairment of it, in the meaning of the Constitution of 
 the United States ; these acts were, accordingly, void. 
 The arguments of Webster were sustained at every 
 point. The Chief Justice and four associates supported 
 the opinion ; one justice, Todd, was absent ; only one, 
 Duvall, dissented. Even Story, who had accepted 
 membership on the opposition board of trustees, 
 acquiesced in the majority opinion. At a single point 
 only had the Supreme Court passed hitherto upon the 
 meaning and scope of the constitutional provision 
 relating to contracts. It had been ruled that a grant 
 of land made by a state constituted a contract whose 
 obligation it was beyond the competence of the state to 
 impair. By the Dartmouth College decision, however, 
 there was brought within the scope of the constitutional 
 guarantee, by implication, every charter and similar 
 instrument conferred within a stair. The independ- 
 ence of the states in the administration of all contrac 
 tual affairs was sharply curtailed, the pervading power 
 of the federal government under the Constitution v. 
 correspondingly exalted, and ;i fundamental principle 
 
126 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 of law was laid down which, although again and again 
 assailed since Marshall's day, has never been over- 
 thrown. 1 
 
 It is the opinion of most persons conversant with 
 the career of Webster that he seldom equalled, and 
 never surpassed, the brilliance of his pleading in this 
 memorable case. The great jurist, Chancellor Kent, 
 confessed to have been changed completely in his views 
 of the merits of the case by a mere reading of the con- 
 densed report of Webster's speech. The case was not 
 the first which Webster had argued before the Supreme 
 Court, but through it he attained at a stroke a place 
 among the three or four most eminent practitioners at 
 the bar of that tribunal, and in general it may be said 
 that after 1819 his position as an advocate was 
 hardly second to that of Pinkney, Wirt, or any of his 
 older contemporaries. Of his own generation there 
 was no one whose legal ability and fame could be 
 regarded as in any sense the equal of his. Clay was a 
 consummate parliamentarian, but only an ordinary 
 lawyer. Calhoun knew a great deal of law, but never 
 practiced. 
 
 In the midst of a lucrative professional activity 
 Webster was called upon not long thereafter to render a 
 service of distinguished character to his adopted state. 
 The separation of Maine from Massachusetts in 1820, 
 together with certain other exigencies of the time, 
 st imulated a movement for the revision of the constitu 
 tion of the commonwealth, and a convention was 
 elected to undertake the task. The assemblage met at 
 Boston in November, 1820, and continued its delibera- 
 
 1 In consequence of the decision Dr. Brown and the " old " board 
 of trustees took possession of the insignia and property of the 
 college. TV heelock himself had died in 1817 
 
LAW AND OKATOKY EN MASSACHUSETTS 127 
 
 tious until the following January. It was composed 
 of some five hundred members and included practically 
 all of the ablest men of the commonwealth — members 
 of Congress, state officials, the federal judges, leaders 
 at the bar and in business, and representatives of every 
 important class, profession, and interest. John Adams, 
 then in his eighty-fifth year, and one of the few surviv- 
 ing framers of the constitution of 1780, was honored by 
 election to the presidency of the convention, although 
 by reason of infirmity he declined to serve and the 
 duties of the chair fell to Chief Justice Parker. Among 
 the delegates representing Boston was Webster. 
 
 In most respects the constitution of 1780 had proved 
 a very satisfactory instrument, and there was little or 
 no demand in 1820 that it be set aside entirely. As to 
 the extent and nature of the changes that should be 
 introduced in it, however, there was much difference 
 of opinion. The period was one in which political 
 parties as such cau scarcely be said to have existed. 
 There was, none the less, a pretty sharply drawn issue 
 between the radical and the conservative wings of the 
 convention, which but reflected far-reaching divisions 
 of sentiment among the inhabitants of the state. 
 Since 1780 there had been a remarkable growth of 
 democratic opinion, and the force of this opinion in 
 18_!') was directed toward the elimination of numerous 
 eighteenth-century principles and governmental forma 
 iron) the constitutional system. In opposition to the 
 radical revisionists stood a substantial body of conserv- 
 atives, ready to acquiesce in certain modifications, 
 but disposed to resist all changes not regarded as ab- 
 solutely necessary. Webster was identified, In the 
 main, with the conservative group, and throughout 
 the proceedings of the convention no member, with the 
 
1 28 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 possible exception of Joseph Story, exercised a more 
 potent influence in behalf of the sane and judicious 
 adjustment of the problems in hand. He delivered a 
 number of formal speeches and participated freely in 
 impromptu discussion. He served as chairman of two 
 important committees. And when, upon several occa- 
 sions, he was called by Chief Justice Parker to occupy 
 l lie chair, he presided with a dignity and ability so 
 noteworthy that men were moved to comment upon his 
 peculiar qualification for the speakership of the na- 
 tional House— a post of responsibility which, however, 
 he was destined never to occupy. 
 
 The questions to whose settlement Webster con- 
 tributed most during the deliberations of the conven- 
 tion pertained to three subjects : the character of the 
 oath of office, the basis of representation in the senate, 
 and the independence of the judiciary. The constitu- 
 t ion of 1780 prescribed as a feature of the oath of office 
 a declaration of belief in the Christian religion. In a 
 speech of remarkable cogency l Webster demonstrated 
 that while the existing requirement did not operate, as 
 in certain quarters it had been alleged to do, to de- 
 prive some men of the right to public office — because 
 no man has such a right — it was not in harmony with 
 the fundamental principle of liberty of conscience, and 
 was. moreover, in practice, unnecessary. A people so 
 predominantly Christian as were the inhabitants of 
 Massachusetts would be very unlikely to elect to pub- 
 lic office a disbeliever. If they should do so, it must 
 be because they were not disposed to insist upon an 
 avowal of belief in Christianity as a necessary qualifi- 
 cation. In any ease, the test imposed by the present 
 constitution was non-essential, and, being so, undesir- 
 1 "Writings and Speeches," Vol. V, pp. 3-7. 
 
LAW AND OKATOKY IN MASSACHUSETTS 129 
 
 able. Under the influence principally of this logic the 
 convention was brought to a decision to elimiuate from 
 the oath all reference to religious opinion ; and from 
 that day no religious qualification has been required 
 of office-holders within the state. 
 
 A second question to which Webster addressed him 
 self with uotable force and effectiveness was that of the 
 basis of representation in the senate. Here his part 
 was to avert, rather than to encourage, change. Under 
 the constitution of 1780 members of the upper house 
 were chosen by the voters in districts in proportion to 
 taxable property. Members of the lower house were 
 apportioned according to population. By 1820 the 
 growth of democratic ideas, especially in the rural por- 
 tions of the state, had been such that a very consider- 
 able elemeut of the people had come to look upon the 
 composition of the senate as archaic, aristocratic, and 
 indefensible. It was urgently demanded that the con- 
 stitution be so amended as to provide for an appor- 
 tionment of both senators and representatives accord- 
 ing to population. It fell to Webster to develop in a 
 carefully prepared speech ' the theory of bicameral 
 legislative bodies and to demonstrate the advantages 
 that may be expected to arise from a constitution of 
 the two houses upon bases that are not identical, to the 
 end that the one chamber may not become a mere 
 replica of the other, and that each may constitute a 
 proper check upon the other. While it was beyond 
 serious question that one house should be apportioned 
 wholly to population, into the apportionment of the 
 other, it was urged, property— not in the sense of mere 
 personal interests, but in the sense of the great per- 
 manent interest whose protection is one of the func- 
 > " Writings Rod Speeches," Vol. V pp. 8-25. 
 
1,30 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 tions of society— should always enter. The view was 
 not a popular one, but by sheer force of persuasion 
 Webster carried his point, and the existing provision 
 of the constitution was left untouched. Every student 
 of political science to-day recognizes in Webster's ex- 
 position of the theory of legislative bodies numerous 
 arguments that are unanswerable. It was only in 
 later years, after the spell of Webster's influence had 
 been somewhat relaxed, that the composition of the 
 Massachusetts senate was modified in accordance with 
 the popular demand. 
 
 A third subject upon which Webster expended no 
 small amount of effort in the convention was the inde- 
 pendence of the judiciary. After the analogy of Eng- 
 lish practice, the constitution of 1780, while stipulat- 
 ing a judicial tenure of good behavior, provided that 
 a judge might be removed by the governor on an ad- 
 dress from the legislature. A simple majority of the 
 legislature was competent to issue the address ; no 
 reasons need be assigned ; and the official in question 
 was guaranteed no opportunity for defense. Many 
 men, including Webster, felt that under these ar- 
 rangements judges were too much subject to the whim 
 of the legislative chambers. It was therefore proposed 
 that the constitution be so amended as to require that 
 an address of removal be passed by a two-thirds vote 
 of each house, that reasons should be assigned, and 
 that an accused official should be given an opportunity 
 to bring in a defense. A masterful speech of Webster i 
 failed to carry conviction and the proposed amendment 
 Mas lost. On Webster's motion, however, it was stip- 
 ulated in the revised constitution that no address for the 
 removal of a judicial officer should be passed in either 
 1 Writings and Speeches," Vol. V, pp. 26-32. 
 
LAW AND ORATORY IN MASSACHUSETTS 131 
 
 branch of the legislature until the reasons therefor 
 should have been entered upon the records and the ac- 
 cused should have been admitted to a hearing in his 
 own behalf in each house. 
 
 All in all, the part taken by Webster in the conven- 
 tion was one of peculiar distinction. " Our friend 
 Webster," wrote Judge Story to Mr. Mason, "has 
 gaiued a noble reputation. He was before known as a 
 lawyer ; but he has now secured the title of an emi- 
 nent and enlightened statesman. It was a glorious 
 held for him, and he has had an ample harvest. The 
 whole force of his great mind was brought out, and in 
 several speeches he commanded universal admiration. 
 He always led the van, and was most skilful and in- 
 stantaneous in attack and retreat. . . . On the 
 whole, I never was more proud of any display than his 
 in my life, and I am much deceived if the well-earned 
 popularity, so justly and so boldly acquired by him 
 on this occasion, does not carry him, if he lives, to the 
 presidency." ] 
 
 While the deliberations of the convention were in 
 progress, there came on the two hundredth anniversary 
 of the landing of the Pilgrims at Plymouth. Early in 
 the year citizens of Plymouth, together with descendants 
 of the Pilgrims elsewhere, organized the " Pilgrim So- 
 ciety,"' whose purpose was "to commemorate the land- 
 ing, and to honor the memory, of the intrepid men who 
 first set foot on Plymouth Rock." It was determined 
 to celebrate the two hundredth anniversary with un 
 usual elaborateness, and Webster was chosen to deliver 
 the oration. The invitation carried with it a magnifi- 
 cent opportunity. The occasion, the subject, the hear 
 
 'story to Mason, January 21, 1821. vv. Story, " Lift- and Let 
 tersof Joseph Story," Vol. I, pp. 396 396. 
 
132 DANIEL WEBSTEB 
 
 ing— all were such as to inspire to the loftiest endeavor. 
 And when, on the 22d of December, the orator rose 
 before an audience that filled and overflowed the old 
 First Church, he was in every sense prepared for an 
 effort worthy of the day. Already the fame of his 
 eloquence at the bar, on the floor of Congress, and in 
 the constitutional convention then in session had 
 covered the land. Whether he should be able to seize 
 upon a striking historical event, interpret it in the 
 light of the development of a growing nation, and at- 
 tain the summit of polished speech in an address in- 
 tended neither to convince a judge nor to mold the 
 course of a deliberative assembly, remained to be de- 
 termined. Within the domain of purely ' ' occasional ' ' 
 oratory his efforts hitherto had been confined almost 
 entirely to Fourth of July speeches, a Phi Beta Kappa 
 oration at Dartmouth in 1809 upon a purely literary 
 theme, and an address in 1812 before the Washington 
 Benevolent Society of Portsmouth upon a theme purely 
 political. But people who knew the man and were 
 familiar with the depths of his feeling did not hesitate 
 to expect of him upon this occasion the greatest things. 
 The test was met with a splendid achievement. By 
 some it has even been maintained that Webster himself 
 never subsequently rose in sheer eloquence above the 
 height attained in the Plymouth oration. In this 
 judgment it is hardly possible to concur, for in the 
 present effort there lingered a quality of grandioseness 
 which is happily lacking in the Bunker Hill speech of 
 1825, the eulogy on Adams and Jefferson in 1826, and 
 other orations of subsequent years. Yet in loftiness of 
 conception and eloquence of diction the Plymouth ad- 
 dress was unquestionably superior to anything of the 
 kind which had been heard in America within a gen- 
 
LAW AND ORATORY IN MASSACHUSETTS 133 
 
 eration. Its stirring portrayal of the hardships of the 
 Pilgrims both before and after migration, its masterful 
 characterization of those institutions which lay at the 
 basis of New England society in colonial times, its 
 tribute to the fundamental principles of republicanism 
 upon which the nation of later days was built, its com- 
 pelling survey of the whole stretch of American civi- 
 lization and achievement, were destined to classical 
 celebrity. Especially notable was the peroration, dur- 
 ing the course of whose delivery the speaker stood with 
 arms outstretched as if to welcome the oncoming gen- 
 erations of men to whom it was addressed. u Ad- 
 vance, then, ye future generations ! We would hail 
 you, as you rise in your long succession to till the 
 places which we now fill, and to taste the blessings of 
 existence where we are passing, and soon shall have 
 passed, our own human duration. We bid you wel- 
 come to this pleasant land of the fathers. We bid you 
 welcome to the healthful skies and the verdant fields of 
 New England. We greet your accession to the great 
 inheritance which we have enjoyed. We welcome you 
 to the blessings of good government and religious 
 liberty. We welcome you to the treasures of science 
 and the delights of learning. We welcome you to the 
 transcendent sweets of domestic life, to the happiness 
 of kindred, and parents, and children. We welcome 
 you to the immeasurable blessings of rational existence, 
 the immortal hope of Christianity, and the lighl of 
 everlasting truth.* ' ' 
 
 "I was never so excited by public speaking before 
 in my life," afterward wrote George Tick nor. •• Three 
 or four times 1 thought my temples would burst with 
 
 '"Works of Webster," Vol. I, pp. 49-60; "Writings ami 
 Speeches," Vol. I, pp. 22r>-22<;. 
 
i:U DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 the gush of blood. When I came out I was almost 
 afraid to come near to him. It seemed to me as if he 
 was like the mount that might not be touched and that 
 burned with fire. I was beside myself, and am so 
 still." 1 And Ticknor, while an admirer and, upon 
 the present occasion, a traveling- companion, was by 
 nature cool and critical. The effect of the discourse 
 was to place Webster at once in advance of all con- 
 temporary orators, at least in the judgment of most 
 American critics. " Mr. Burke," wrote John Adams, 
 " is no longer entitled to the praise — the most consum- 
 mate orator of modern times." Within a year the 
 oration was put in print — rather more, indeed, than 
 was actually spoken during the upward of two hours 
 occupied by the delivery — and circulated broadcast 
 over the country. The reception with which it met 
 was rivaled only by that accorded the " Sketch Book " 
 and other works of Washington Irving then appearing. 
 
 1 Quoted in Lodge, " Webster," p. 118. 
 
CHAPTER VI 
 
 IN CONGRESS AGAIN, 1823-1827 
 
 In the autumn of 1822 a number of the prominent 
 men of Boston persuaded Webster to accept a nomina- 
 tion as representative of the Suffolk district in Con- 
 gress. The nomination was tendered formally, and 
 unanimously, by a body of delegates representing the 
 various wards comprised within the urban district. 
 When the proposition was broached Webster was in- 
 clined to demur, and there is reason for the belief that 
 when eventually he yielded to public demand he did so 
 in contravention of his actual desires. Acceptance 
 meant the abandoning, in at least some measure, of his 
 lucrative and absorbing legal practice ; and, since he 
 had assumed the indebtedness of his father to prevent 
 the paternal estate from being declared insolvent, his 
 financial position was not yet such that he could con- 
 template with equanimity the impairment of his yearly 
 income. And, even if it be assumed that Webster 
 had in mind a return to public life, it may be inferred 
 that, having already spent four years in the lower 
 house at Washington, he would now have preferred 
 some other and more exalted station. But the people 
 of Boston would not have it otherwise than that he 
 should represent them in the Eighteenth Congress, and, 
 indeed, in the two succeeding congresses, to which they 
 reelected him almost unanimously. 1 "Mr. Webster," 
 
 1 He was returned to his seat at the election of 1824 by a vote of 
 4,990 in a total poll of 5,000. 
 
136 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 declared a member of the committee appointed to wait 
 011 him in 1822, " I come to ask you to throw down 
 your law books and enter the service of the public 5 for 
 to the public you belong. I know what sacrifices we 
 demand of you, but we must rely on your patriotism. 
 We cannot take a refusal.' * l Against the force of 
 such an appeal Webster found it impossible to hold out. 
 He accepted, and in the following November he was 
 elected by an overwhelming majority. 
 
 The six years of congressional service thus inaugu- 
 rated comprised a distinctly active and useful period 
 in Webster's public career. During the interim since 
 his retirement in 1817 he had made great strides in 
 both reputation and ability. By reason of the Dart- 
 mouth College case, the Plymouth oration, the succes- 
 sion of masterlv efforts in the constitutional conven- 
 tion of 1820, and scores of notable victories at the bar, 
 both state and federal, his position had come to be that 
 of the most widely-known and most commanding New 
 Englander, with the possible exception of John Quincy 
 Adams. Since the death of Pinkney, in 1822, he had 
 become unquestionably the foremost of advocates at 
 the American bar. The Eighteenth Congress, in 
 which he took his seat in December, 1823, was much 
 the superior of its predecessor in ability and influence. 
 Clay was again a member of the House of Representa- 
 tives, and with him appeared Forsyth, Crowninshield, 
 Randolph, Edward Livingston, McLane, Tod, Taylor, 
 Barbour, and Sam Houston. Webster reentered the 
 Mouse with outlook broadened, spirit chastened, and 
 patriotism undiminished, and it was to be expected that 
 he should be accounted from the first one of the half- 
 dozen ablest members of the body. With peculiar fit- 
 1 Curtis, "Webster," Vol. I, p. 198. 
 
IN CONGKESS AGAIN, 1823-1827 137 
 
 ness Clay, once more elected Speaker, appointed him 
 to the important post of chairman of the Committee 
 on the Judiciary. 
 
 Politically, the situation in Congress, and through- 
 out the country, in 1823 was very different from that 
 which obtained in 1817. During the six years of 
 Webster 7 s absence from Washington there had occurred 
 an almost complete dissolution of political parties. 
 There were still Federalists who called themselves by 
 the time-honored party name and who, in respect to 
 their principles, were as irreconcilable as a decade 
 earlier. But they were not numerous or influential, 
 and in the forthcoming campaign for the presidency 
 they gave promise of cutting little or no figure. The 
 great mass of people in all sections of the country had 
 been absorbed by the broadly nationalized Republican 
 party, which, indeed, by reason of the very complete- 
 ness of its triumph, had largely ceased to maintain the 
 essential qualities of a party. According to the 
 school-books of later days the era was one of " good 
 feeling." In point of fact, there are not more than 
 two or three epochs in our national history in which 
 political feeling was more intense, bitter, and personal. 
 What was nominally the great party of Jefferson and 
 Madison and Monroe was in truth little more than a 
 congeries of jealous and struggling groups, each led by, 
 or rallying around, some one of the half-dozen active 
 presidential aspirants of the day — Clay, Calhoun, 
 Crawford, Jackson, Clinton, John Quincy Adams. 
 
 In the midst of a situation so confused the political 
 inclinations of Webster were for a time uncertain and 
 anomalous. Throughout his public career he had been 
 accustomed to stand as a matter of course with the 
 Federalists, although, as has appeared, he was not 
 
138 DANIEL WEBSTEK 
 
 averse to a break with the majority of his party when 
 occasion seemed to him to demand an independent 
 course of action ; and he had never been identified with 
 the reactionary and irreconcilable Kew England element 
 which bad been wont to delight in factious opposition 
 for its own sake. During the earlier months of the new 
 Congress every political leader and group angled with 
 more or less skill for the support of the Federalist 
 members, with the consequence that a minority ele- 
 ment which had no program or prospects of its own 
 was exalted occasionally to a position of influence al- 
 together disproportionate to its numerical strength. 
 Webster, still inclined to the opinion that political 
 parties are essentially an evil, was not displeased with 
 the uutrammeled position in which he found himself. 
 He set out to be essentially a free lance, and through- 
 out his three terms he held aloof persistently from a 
 number of political groups, any one of which would 
 gladly have welcomed his accession to its ranks. 
 Eventually, with the re-formation, in the late twenties, 
 of definite party lines, Webster became again perforce 
 a party man. But he never gloried in the affairs of 
 party as such, and it may be doubted whether in his 
 own judgment the greater brilliance of later stages of 
 his career ever quite compensated for the loss of indi- 
 vidual independence involved in party allegiance. 
 
 The period covered by the Eighteenth Congress was 
 one of exceptional importance, not alone in respect to 
 the unfolding of the domestic political situation, but 
 by reason of a state of affairs abroad which stimulated 
 widespread interest and at times occasioned serious 
 apprehension. The questions at home which elicited 
 most attention were those relating to the tariff and in- 
 ternal improvements, and the most striking event was 
 
IN CONGKESS AGAIN, 1823-1827 139 
 
 the election of John Quincy Adams to the presidency 
 
 by the House of representatives. The principal for- 
 eign questions were those arising from the revolt of 
 the Spanish American colonies and the threatened ac- 
 tivities of the Holy Alliance. 
 
 The first issue to which Webster addressed himself 
 in a deliberate manner after the opening of the ses- 
 sion of 1823-1824 was one which arose from con- 
 temporary developments in the remoter portions of 
 Europe, notably the struggle of the Greeks for inde- 
 pendence from Turkey. As has already appeared, 
 Webster from boyhood cherished a living interest in 
 European politics, and his correspondence, even as a 
 college student, abounds in allusions to men and affairs 
 on the other side of the Atlantic. He had watched 
 with solicitude the rise and predominance of Napoleon ; 
 he had followed with satisfaction the collapse of the 
 Corsican's dominion ; he had viewed with apprehen- 
 sion the reaction which followed the Congress of 
 Vienna, and particularly the designs of the Holy 
 Alliance upon liberalism, both in Europe and beyond. 
 At the present moment he was moved to enthusiasm by 
 the magnificent contest for independence which the 
 successors of the ancient Hellenes were waging against 
 the semi-barbaric and cruel power of Turkey. This 
 contest had begun in 1821. In 1822 a national as- 
 sembly had proclaimed the independence of Greece 
 and made provision for the organization of an autono- 
 mous government. No nation had as yet recognized 
 the independence of the country, but in the opinion 
 of Webster the time had arrived, by the end of 1823, 
 when the United States ought to Bel the timid and reac- 
 tionary powers of Europe an example by doing SO. 
 December 8th, but a few days alter the opening of the 
 
140 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 sessiou, he introduced in the House a resolution to the 
 effect that provision ought to be made by law for de- 
 fraying the expenses incident to the appointment of an 
 agent or commissioner to Greece, whenever the Presi- 
 dent should deem it expedient to make such an ap- 
 pointment. The resolution was not introduced until 
 its author had conferred privately with a number of 
 men, all of whom gave the project their approval. 
 From various quarters, however, it encountered sub- 
 stantial opposition. Many members professed to be- 
 lieve its adoption would precipitate war, and many 
 others feared that by the powers of Europe the action 
 which was proposed would be interpreted as a piece of 
 sheer meddling in a situation that was of no immediate 
 concern to the United States. The Administration, al- 
 ready committed to the maintenance of a firm attitude 
 apropos the threatened interference of the Allies in 
 Latin America, hesitated to give the resolution its sup- 
 port, although in his famous message of December 2d, 
 President Monroe had gone so far as to express the 
 opiniou that there was reason to hope for the eventual 
 triumph of the Greek cause. " The pinch is," wrote 
 Webster to Everett, " that in the message the Presi- 
 dent has taken, as is supposed, pretty high ground as 
 to this continent, and is afraid of the appearance of 
 interfering in the concerns of the other continent 
 also." To the author of the resolution himself this 
 consideration appealed with little force. " I think," 
 he maintained, "we have as much community with 
 the Greeks as with the inhabitants of the Andes and 
 the dwellers on the borders of the Vermilion sea." l 
 On January 19, 1824, the resolution came up for 
 
 1 Webster to Everett, December 6, 1823, Webster, "Private 
 Correspondence," Vol. I, p, 332. 
 
IX CONGRESS AGAIN, 1823-1827 141 
 
 consideration in committee of the whole, and in 
 advocacy of it Webster delivered a very notable 
 speech. Exjiecting a dazzling display of oratory upon 
 a theme which so readily lent itself to passionate ap- 
 peal, listeners crowded the galleries. Webster's pur- 
 pose, however, reached far beyond the delivery of a 
 merely brilliant oration, and in truth the speech was 
 so sober and restrained that some of the hearers were 
 doubtless a bit disappointed. "My intention," the 
 speaker had written to Everett, " is to justify the res- 
 olution against two classes of objections, those that 
 suppose it not to go far enough, and those that sup- 
 pose it to go too far. Then, to give some little history 
 of the Greek revolution, express a pretty strong con- 
 viction of its ultimate success, aud persuade the 
 House, if I can, to take the merit of being the first 
 government, among all the civilized nations, who 
 have publicly rejoiced in the emancipation of Greece. ' ' " 
 Brushing aside all considerations of sentiment arising 
 from the classical associations of the Greek peninsula, 
 Webster devoted himself to (1) an exposition of the 
 reactionary principles of the European powers, as 
 developed in successive congresses from that of Paris 
 in 1814 to that of Laibach in 1821 ; (2) an argument to 
 the effect that, while the United States might do! 
 properly interfere in European affairs, she was none the 
 less obligated by the broader interest of humanity to 
 throw her iulluence squarely against the designs of the 
 Allies; (3) a review of the progress of the revolution 
 in Greece, with an optimistic forecast of its outcome ; 
 and (4) an appeal that Congress, by passing the pro- 
 posed resolution, should at least go so far as to provide 
 
 1 Webster to Everett, December 21, 1*2:?. Webster, "Private 
 
 Correspondence, " Vol. I, j». 336. 
 
142 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 the President with the means of recognizing the new 
 Greek nation whenever he should deem it the part of 
 discretion to do so. "They [the Greeks] look to us," 
 he declared in closing, " as the great Republic of the 
 earth— and they ask us by our common faith, whether 
 we can forget that they are struggling, as we once 
 struggled, for what we now so happily enjoy? I can- 
 not say, sir, that they will succeed : that rests with 
 heaven. But for myself, sir, if I should to-morrow 
 hear that they have failed — that their last plialanx had 
 sunk beneath the Turkish scimitar, that the flames of 
 their last city had sunk in its ashes, and that naught 
 remained but the wide melancholy waste where Greece 
 once was, I should still reflect, with the most heartfelt 
 satisfaction, that I have asked you, in the name of 
 seven millions of freemen, that you would give them at 
 least the cheering of one friendly voice. ' ' ! 
 
 During the lively discussion that ensued Webster's 
 resolution was warmly defended by Clay, who brought 
 forward another of similar purport with reference to 
 the intervention of European powers in the affairs of 
 Latin America. Poinsett, of South Carolina, offered 
 an amendment to the effect that no appropriation for a 
 Grecian mission should be voted, but that Congress 
 should promulgate a formal declaration of American 
 sympathy with the Greeks and of good wishes for their 
 cause. John Randolph emptied upon the original 
 project, and upon its author, all the vials of his wrath. 
 It became apparent that the resolution could not pass, 
 even in the form of the Poinsett amendment ; where- 
 upon Webster reluctantly abandoned the effort, and no 
 
 1 Annals of Congress," 18th Cong., 1st sesa., Vol. I, p. 1099. For 
 the speech see "Works of Webster," Vol. Ill, pp. 60-93, and 
 Writings and Speeches," Vol. V, pp. 60-93. 
 
IN CONGRESS AGAIN, 1823-1827 143 
 
 vote was taken. Three more years elapsed before the 
 powers of Europe took it uijon themselves, first to offer 
 mediation in Greece, and subsequently to intervene ; 
 and the final independence of the Greek nation was not 
 established until 1832. By his resolution and speech 
 Webster did not affect in any overt manner the official 
 attitude of the United States respecting the situation. 
 He had, however, achieved his deeper purpose of ex- 
 posing the reactionary principles which at that time 
 dominated the policies of the European powers and of 
 setting the United States still more firmly in opposition 
 to them. Between the Greek resolution and the Mon- 
 roe Doctrine there was a closer relation than is apt 
 nowadays to be perceived. Alluding half-humorously, 
 as late as 1831, to a recently published collection of his 
 orations, Webster said of the Greek speech that he was 
 "more fond of this child than of any of the family." 
 Certainly it attracted wider attention than any other. 
 " Mr. Webster's speech," reported a friend of Henry 
 A. S. Dearborn in London, "has been received with 
 general approbation and applause. It has been trans 
 lated into Greek and printed in London, in order to be 
 distributed all over Greece. I am happy that the 
 Demosthenes of America lias taken the lead in encour- 
 aging and animating the countrymen of his great pro- 
 totype." ' The speech was, in fact, translated into 
 most of the European languages and was circulated 
 not only in Europe but throughout Latin America. 
 In sheer oratorical quality it was inferior to some of 
 its predecessors, but its subject, combined with its 
 authorship, gave it a world wide interest. 
 
 As lias been stated, Webster occupied in the Bight- 
 
 1 Dearborn to Webster, May 1, 1834. Van T^ne, " Letters of 
 
 Daniel Webster," p. 104. 
 
144 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 eenth Congress the position of chairman of the Com- 
 mittee on the Judiciary. In this capacity it fell to him 
 to handle a considerable number of questions relating 
 to the extension and the reorganization of the federal 
 judicial system. The time was ripe for an increase of 
 the number of justices attached to the Supreme Court, 
 or, in lieu of that, the creation of new tribunals whereby 
 the Supreme Court might be relieved of a portion of 
 the work which devolved upon it, and Webster would 
 have been happy to devote himself without delay to 
 the preparation and promotion of legislative measures 
 directed toward these ends. The obstacles to be over- 
 tome were, however, enormous. In Virginia, in Ken- 
 tucky, and other quarters, there was insistent demand 
 that the expanding functions of the Supreme Court in 
 relation to the passing upon the constitutionality of 
 law should be put under restraint, and Webster found 
 that he could hardly hope to do more for a time than 
 to defend the judicial power as it was against the proj- 
 ects that were continually being brought forward for 
 its impairment. To Justice Story he writes, January 
 4, 1824: "I am in great trouble and perplexity on 
 this subject of the courts ; and often wish I was almost 
 anywhere rather than where I am. There are difficul- 
 ties inherent in the subject ; there are others, more 
 formidable, arising from the state of men's opinions." ' 
 The most immediate reform which it was desired to 
 bring about was the increase of the membership of the 
 Supreme Court from seven to nine, 2 to the end, chiefly, 
 
 1 Webster to Story, January 4, 1824. Webster, " Private Corre- 
 spondence," Vol. I. p. 338. 
 
 'The number of justices of the Supreme Court, fixed at six by 
 
 the act of September, 1789, was reduced to five bv the act of Febru- 
 
 1801, restored to six by the act of March 8, 1802, and increased 
 
 bo seven by an act of 1807 under whose terms a new circuit in the 
 
 West was created. 
 
IN CONGRESS AGAIN, 1823-1827 145 
 
 that it might not become necessary for the justices to 
 
 abandon altogether the practice of holding court, in 
 cooperation with the district judges, on circuit. With 
 such an increase Webster believed that the country 
 could "get along probably lor twenty yens, or for- 
 ever." Early in the Nineteenth Gongn durii 
 whose term he was continued at the head of the Judi- 
 ciary Committee, he framed, with the assistance of 
 members of the committee, a judiciary bill and labored 
 with incessant zeal to procure its enactment into law. 
 The bill provided that the membership of the Supreme 
 Court should be increased from seven to ten, that six 
 should constitute a quorum, and that the states should 
 be divided into ten circuits, with a circuit court in 
 each, in which one of the Supreme Court justices 
 should at least occasionally sit. The bill was intro- 
 duced in the House December 22, 1825. On the 4th 
 of January, 1826, its adoption was advocated by its 
 author in a speech in which there was reviewed in a 
 masterful manner the growth of the American judi- 
 ciary and the situation within the domain of federal 
 justice which called for the changes which were pro- 
 posed. 1 Within three weeks the bill was passed by 
 the House, but in the Senate it had no able champion, 
 with the result that it came back to the Hons^ encum- 
 bered with so many amendments as to be scarcely 
 recognizable. Upon the amendments the two houses 
 failed to agree, and the outcome was that the measu 
 was lost. If the West, in whose interest largely the 
 bill had been framed, had rallied to its support if 
 might easily have been carried. Webster's interest m 
 the reform continued unabated, and his corresponderi 
 
 l " Works of Webster," Vol. Ill, pp. 150-177; "Writings and 
 Speeohea," Vol. V, pp. 150-177. 
 
146 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 with Judge Story in succeeding years contained fre- 
 quent references to the subject. It was not, however, 
 until 1837 that the enlargement of the Court, to nine 
 members, with a corresponding increase of the federal 
 circuits, took place. It is of interest to observe that 
 Webster in 1825 believed that in the future the growth 
 of judicial business would be met by " a gradual and 
 progressive improvement in the district courts, and 
 that so far as the business becomes incapable of being 
 performed by the supreme judges on the circuit, the 
 duties of the circuit court will be devolved on the dis- 
 trict judge." Intermediate circuit judges, such as 
 had been provided for by the act of 1801 (repealed 
 in 1802) were not likely, in his opinion, ever to be 
 required. 
 
 During the closing session of the Eighteenth Con- 
 gress Webster introduced and procured the enactment 
 of one very important measure relating to the judici- 
 ary, namely, the Crimes Act of March 3, 1825. The 
 First Congress under the Constitution had enacted, 
 under date of April 30, 1790, a carefully drawn crim- 
 inal code ; but this body of law was never complete, 
 and by 1825 its gaps and deficiencies were glaring and 
 serious. With the assistance of Justice Story Webster 
 laboriously compiled a criminal code, supplementing 
 and amplifying the code of 1790, and for this he con- 
 trived, with a good deal of patience and adroitness, to 
 procure the approval of Congress. In its final form 
 the new code, published in twenty-six sections, made 
 provision for every kind of case that had arisen during 
 the past thirty-five years, involving the jurisprudence 
 of the United States as distinguished from that of the 
 several shoes. And the opinion is avowed by Mr. 
 Lodge that the Crimes Act is perhaps the best monu- 
 
IN COKGRESS AGAIN, 1823-1827 147 
 
 nient that remains of "Webster's purely legislative and 
 constructive ability. 1 
 
 Another subject to "which some attention was giv< d 
 at this time is that of internal improvements. In the 
 spring of 1817 Webster had voted for Calhoun's 
 "Bonus Bill," and in his conviction of both the con- 
 stitutionality and the expediency of a liberal policy of 
 road and canal building at the national cost he was not 
 shaken by President Madison's veto of that measure. 
 During the session of 1821-1825 there was introduced 
 in the House a measure providing for the extension of 
 the Cumberland Eoad from Wheeling to Zanesville. 
 The bill was opposed with vigor by McDuffie, of South 
 Carolina, and by others, on the ground that it was 
 partial and sectional. In a speech of much force 
 Webster combatted the notion that in the determining 
 of internal improvement policy Congress was obligated 
 to attempt to balance the conflicting interests of the 
 various sections. If the power existed at all — and 
 Webster never doubted that it did — it ought to be 
 exercised for the good of the nation as a whole and 
 without regard to sectional concerns. That road or 
 canal should be constructed first which was most 
 needed, in whatsoever portion of the country it might 
 happen to be located. In thus advocating a policy by 
 which the settlement of the West might be expected 
 to be promoted Webster broke absolutely with New 
 England tradition and planted himself squarely upon 
 the bed-rock of nationalism. Emigration from a more 
 densely populated to a less densely populated region 
 he regarded as not only inevitable but altogether 
 desirable. If. he declared, any of his own constituents 
 care to settle " on the Kansas or the Arkansas, or the 
 
 1 Lodge, " Webster," p. 13a 
 
148 DANIEL WEBSTEK 
 
 Lord kiiows where, within our territory/' he should 
 cherish not the slightest objection. Let them go and 
 be happier if they could. By a legitimate expansion 
 of population the wealth and prosperity of the country 
 would be increased far more than by any policy whose 
 object should be to confine population to the Eastern 
 states. The lofty and liberal tone of this argument 
 contributed distinctly to the enactment of the present 
 bill, and in consequence Webster attained a degree of 
 favor throughout the West which hitherto he had not 
 enjoyed. "Permit me to say," wrote an Ohio con- 
 gressman in 1825, " that with our people no man in 
 this nation stands on more elevated ground." 1 
 
 The years of Webster's second period of service in 
 Congress comprised throughout the country an epoch 
 of intense political rivalry and excitement. At the 
 outset Webster himself exhibited indifference toward 
 the purely political questions of the day, and at no 
 time did he suffer politics to encroach upon the legis- 
 lative and professional labors in which he was prima- 
 rily interested. In the unfolding of his public career 
 the period is, none the less, highly important, because 
 here it was that, almost against his own will, he was 
 drawn into the gigantic political game that was play- 
 ing, and here it was that he was induced by the sheer 
 drift of circumstances to assume a position of leader- 
 ship in the new anti-Jackson, National Eepublican, 
 later Whig, party with whose fortunes his subsequent 
 career was destined largely to be bound up. As early 
 as December, 1823, when he first assumed his seat, the 
 question as to who should succeed Monroe in the 
 presidency fifteen months hence was claiming the at 
 
 'Joseph Vance to Webster. March 29, 1825. Quoted in Curtis, 
 •'Webster," Vol. I, p. 241. 
 
IN CONGRESS AGAIN, 1823-1827 149 
 
 tention of many of his colleagues to the exclusion of 
 very nearly everything else. There were numerous 
 candidates, principally Adams, Clay, Jackson, Cal- 
 houn, and Crawford, and intrigues among their respect- 
 ive groups of supporters were at their height. So 
 evenly matched were the candidates that many men 
 already believed, as did Webster himself, that the 
 election would inevitably be thrown into the House of 
 Representatives. As to a preference among the men 
 in the held, Webster was for a time undecided. 
 Jackson, the champion of militarism and the favorite 
 of the unthinking masses, he could not abide. Craw- 
 ford, the representative of radical Republicanism, 
 stood at the pole totally opposite to a Federalist, even 
 though of the moderate school. With Clay Webster 
 had often stood on common ground. .More than once 
 the Kentuckian had manifested unreservedly his respect 
 for Webster's station and ability, and the two were 
 most of the time on very friendly terms. Toward Clay, 
 however, in the present situation Webster felt no incli- 
 nation, perchance, as Mr. Lodge suggests, by reason of 
 a certain instinctive feeling of rivalry between them. 
 
 The natural candidate to have received Webster's 
 support, and the one who, through process of elimina- 
 tion, finally did receive it, was Adams. Between 
 Webster and Adams there was no small community of 
 taste and of ideas. Circumstances eventually com 
 polled the one to become the parliamentary champion 
 of tlie administrative policies of the other. As yet, 
 however, there existed between fche two men but a 
 limited acquaintance; and even after acquaintance 
 had ripened, there always lingered in fche heart of each 
 a certain distrust of the other. By reason of lus sup- 
 port of the Jefferson administration in its commercial 
 
150 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 policies in 1807-1808 and his essentially independent 
 attitude upon public questions thereafter, Adams had 
 long been out of favor with the leaders of his former 
 party. By many New England Federalists of the 
 stricter school he had been, and by not a few he still 
 was, regarded, indeed, as nothing short of an arch- 
 traitor. "I ne^er did like John Q. Adams," writes 
 Kzekiel Webster to his brother in 1822. " He must 
 have a very objectionable rival whose election I should 
 not prefer. ... I should really prefer Calhoun, 
 Lowndes, Crawford, Clinton, and fifty others that I 
 could mention." ! Such, so far as personal inclination 
 went, was the position of New England Federalists 
 very generally. At the same time, by the definite turn 
 of New England to Republicanism the political position 
 of Adams in his own section had been vastly improved. 
 From the Federalists he had little to expect, but New 
 England was no longer Federalist, and by 1823 he 
 found himself in a position to be supported by not only 
 the lifelong Republicans but also the large mass of 
 Republicans of Federalist antecedents. He was not 
 personally popular, but as the election of 1824 drew 
 on, being the only New England (and only important 
 northern) candidate, he was assured of a very general 
 support in Massachusetts and adjacent states. "I 
 think," wrote Ezekiel Webster, with an air of resigna- 
 tion, in the letter above quoted, " it would be difficult 
 for any candidate to divide the vote in New England 
 with him. Although he may not be very popular, yet 
 it seems to be in some degree a matter of necessity to 
 support him, if any man is to be taken from the land 
 of the Pilgrims." 
 The candidate toward whom Daniel Webster was 
 * Van Tyne, " Letters of Daniel Webster," p. 89. 
 
IN CONGKESS AGAIN, 1823-1827 151 
 
 inclined, so long as there appeared any chance of his 
 success, was Calhoun. April 3, 1823, a letter from 
 Ezekiel, in reply to specinc inquiry upon the point, 
 conveyed the opinion that of all the persons who had 
 been named for the presidency, the people of New 
 Hampshire would prefer Adams 5 but that, if he we] 
 removed from the held, Calhoun would undoubtedly 
 be their choice. In this order of preference Ezekiel 
 declared that he himself now, somewhat reluctantly, 
 concurred. 1 As the winter of 1823-1824 progressed it 
 became increasingly clear, however, that the contest 
 in the end would lie between Adams and Jackson. 
 Convinced that the election of Calhoun was unattain- 
 able, Webster began advising the political leaders of 
 New England to support the South Carolinian lor the 
 vice- presidency, and Calhoun's election to the inferior 
 office in 1824 must be attributed in no small measure 
 to influence from this source. To his brother he 
 wrote, March 14, 1824, " 1 hope all New England will 
 support Mr. Calhoun for the vice-presidency. If so, 
 he will probably be chosen, and that will be a great 
 thing. He is a true man, and uill do good to the 
 country in that situation." '-' 
 
 Between Adams and Jackson there seemed to Web 
 ster no possible choice except Adams, although Gen 
 eral Jackson's manners, he was obliged to confess, were 
 more presidential than those of any of the candidates. 
 " He is grave,'' he writes, " mild and reserved. My 
 wife is for him decidedly." ■ Crawford's chances he 
 
 1 Ezekiel to Daniel Webster, April 3, 1823. Webster, " Private 
 Correspondence," Vol. I. p. 323. 
 
 Daniel to Ezekiel Webster, March 14, 1824. Hid, Vol. I. 
 p. 347. 
 
 ;t Daniel to Ezekiel Webster, February 22, 1824. 1ML, Vol, I, 
 p. 346. 
 
152 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 rightly believed to have been injured by his accept- 
 ance of a nomination at the hand of a congressional 
 caucus. Against the caucus as an institution, involving, 
 as it did, the assumption by a clique of congressmen 
 of the right to dictate the presidential nominee of a 
 party or political group, there was arising a public 
 protest so vigorous that never again, as it proved, 
 would a presidential aspirant consent to enter upon a 
 race handicapped by a caucus nomination. What 
 Webster himself thought of the caucus as a political 
 device appears very clearly in his correspondence in 
 1823. On November 30th he wrote to Mason : "It ap- 
 pears to me to be our true policy to oppose all cau- 
 cuses ; so far our course seems to me to be clear. Be- 
 yond that I do not think we are bound to proceed at 
 present. To defeat caucus nominations, or prevent 
 them, and to give the election, wherever it can be 
 done, to the people, are the best means of restoring the 
 body politic to its natural and wholesome state." ' 
 And to his brother Ezekiel he addressed, December 
 4th, an admonition, apropos the forthcoming New 
 Hampshire state elections, to the following effect : 
 " One thing I hold to be material— get on without a 
 caucus. It will only require a little more pains. It 
 is time to put an end to caucuses. They make great 
 men little, and little meu great. The true source of 
 power is the people." 2 
 
 The electoral vote of 1824 was distributed as follows : 
 Jackson, ninety-nine ; Adams, eighty-four ; Crawford, 
 forty-one; Clay, thirty-seven. Final choice among 
 the first three candidates devolved upon the House of 
 Representatives. In view of the fact that Webster had 
 
 1 Van Tyne "Letters of Daniel Webster," p. 93 
 Webster, "Private Correspondence," Vol. I, p. 331. 
 
EN CONGRESS AGAIN, 1823-1827 163 
 
 already arrived at the opinion that the interest of the 
 country demanded the election of Adams, and in view 
 of the further fact that the electoral votes of New Eng- 
 land were cast solidly for the Massachusetts candidate, 
 it followed as a matter of course that Webster's sup 
 port iu the House should be accorded to Adams. In 
 the interim preceding the House election, however, 
 various contingencies that, might conceivably arise 
 were carefully canvassed. Under date of January 18, 
 1825, a series of questions was addressed to Ezekiel de- 
 signed to elicit information which might prove helpful. 
 " If on the first or any subsequent ballot Mr. Adams 
 falls behind Mr. Crawford, and remains so a day or 
 two, shall we hold out to the end of the chapter, or 
 shall we vote for one of the highest? If for one of the 
 highest— say Jackson and Crawford— for which? Is 
 it advisable, under any circumstances, to hold out aud 
 leave the chair to Mr. Calhoun 1 Would or would not 
 New England prefer a man of the power of Calhoun, 
 to a choice of Geueral Jackson f" 1 From Ezekiel, and 
 from other sources, came the opinion that New Eng- 
 land would expect her representatives to hold out for 
 Adams as long as there should be any chance of his 
 election. 
 
 The House election was set for February 9th. Six 
 days in advauceof that date Henry R. Warfield, a rep- 
 resentative of Maryland, feeling that his vote might 
 determine the vote of his state, and thereby nut in- 
 conceivably the result of the election, addressed to 
 Webster, in a note which has beeD preserved, an in- 
 quiry as to the policy iu relation to partisan Interests 
 which the New England candidate, if elected, might be 
 expected to put into execution. Warfield was identi- 
 1 Van Tyne, " Letter* of Daniel Webster," i>. 111. 
 
154 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 fied with the Maryland group of Federalists, and there 
 was among this element grave apprehension lest 
 Adams should "administer the government on party 
 considerations," so that the old landmarks of party 
 distinction should be revived and all persons who had 
 hitherto been denominated "Federals" should be 
 denied a share in public office. For his own part, 
 Warfield declared he "should trust that Mr. Adams's 
 administration would be conducted on liberal and in- 
 dependent grounds ; and that, regardless of names, he 
 would not deny to talent, integrity, and competency a 
 due participation." The subject was one of no small 
 degree of interest to Webster himself. Had he be- 
 lieved that Adams as president would resort to a 
 proscription of men of Federalist antecedents he could 
 not at any point have allowed himself to be known as 
 an Adams man. "For myself," he wrote in reply, 
 February 5th, " I am satisfied, and shall give him 
 [Adams] my vote, cheerfully and steadily. And I am 
 ready to say that I should not do so if I did not believe 
 that he would administer the government on liberal 
 principles, not excluding Federalists, as such, from his 
 regard and confidence. ... I wish to see nothing 
 like a portioning, parceling out, or distributing offices 
 of trust among men called by different denominations. 
 Such a proceeding would be to acknowledge and to 
 regard the existence of distinctions ; whereas my wish 
 is that distinctions should be disregarded. " * Before 
 transmitting to Warfield his letter containing these 
 sentiments Webster sought an interview with Adams, 
 laid the letter before him, and secured from him a 
 statement to the effect that with all that was said 
 
 ' Webster to Warfield, February 5, 1825. Webster. " Private 
 Correspondence," Vol. I, p. 378. 
 
IN COXGEESS AGAIN, 1823-1827 155 
 
 therein he was in complete agreement. It was nuclei 
 stood between the two that (assuming Adams's elec- 
 tion), while a cabinet position might not be bestowed 
 upon a Federalist, some important appointment should 
 be made expressly to manifest the Administration's 
 disposition to disregard party distinctions. 
 
 February 9th, as had been generally expected, Adams 
 was elected to the presidency by the House on the fir: si 
 ballot. With the result Webster was in no wise dis- 
 pleased. "If there is any faith in man," he writes 
 to Ezekiel a week later, " we shall have a liberal ad- 
 ministration. I think it not unlikely that if the mat- 
 ter were pressed, there might be a Federalist in the 
 cabinet, but our friends are not at all satisfied that such 
 a measure would be discreet at this moment. No doubt 
 the true course at present is to maintain the adminis- 
 tration, and give it a fair chance. We may be de- 
 ceived, but if we are, it will be a gross deception." ■ 
 Fully appreciative of Webster's ability and prestige, 
 Mr. Adams as president could not have been otherwise 
 than desirous of his support. In his protestations of 
 non-partisanship Adams was absolutely sincere, and 
 throughout the entire administration his adherence to 
 the lofty principles with which he entered office was - i 
 rigid as to give offense to very many of the persona 
 who had been responsible for his election. From the 
 outset he took care to cultivate the acquaintance of 
 Webster, and between the two men there arose some 
 thing very like cordiality. During the bitter and pro 
 longed contests Which ensued between the President 
 
 and the majority of Congress it devolved upon Webster 
 hi serve almost continuously on the floor of the lower 
 
 1 Daniel to Ezekiel Webster, February 1G, 1825. Webster, 
 
 Private Correspondence," Vol. I, p. 381. 
 
156 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 chamber as the Administration's spokesman and 
 champion. In this capacity was delivered an impor- 
 tant speech of April 14, 1826, explaining the nature of 
 the forthcoming Panama Congress, interpreting the 
 recently promulgated declarations of President Monroe, 
 and defending the right of the President to appoint 
 and to instruct commissioners to represent the United 
 Slates at the proposed Congress. 1 And in a similar 
 capacity, early in the next year, was delivered a stir- 
 ring defense of the President in the attitude which he 
 iiad assumed in relation to the pending issues between 
 Georgia and the Creek Indians. 2 
 
 All of the while, however, there lingered in the 
 background a certain distrust, cherished by both men, 
 but perhaps the more consciously by Webster. At the 
 beginning of the administration Webster appears 
 clearly to have had in mind a possible appointment as 
 minister to Great Britain. If we are to accept Adams's 
 impression, recorded in the " Memoirs," he was indeed 
 " panting " for the honor. As time passed all hope of 
 this, or any other, appointment faded. In the interest 
 of congressional harmony Adams intervened to dis- 
 suade Webster, furthermore, from becoming a candidate 
 for the speakership of the House— a post for which, in 
 truth, he cared but little. By these and other indica- 
 tions the Massachusetts member was brought to the 
 opinion that his services were inadequately appreciated. 
 The sacrifices of time and effort which he had made 
 were heavy, and there was a limit beyond which he 
 was not disposed to go. That limit was pretty well 
 reached by the beginning of the second half of the ad- 
 
 q ' ", W °y. k * °, f Webster," Vol. Ill, pp. 178-217 ; " Writings and 
 Speeches." ^ ol. V, pp. 178-217. 
 
 Writings aud Speeches," Vol. XIV, pp. 107-118. 
 
LN CONGKESS AGAIN, 1823-1827 157 
 
 ministration, and it was not made more remote by the 
 circumstance that when, early in 1827, it was proposed 
 at Boston to elevate Webster to the Senate Adams ex- 
 pressed a decided preference that the choice should fall 
 upon Governor Lincoln. This attitude was assumed, 
 not in disparagement of Webster, it is true, but rather 
 on the ground that he was more needed in the House 
 than in the Senate ; yet the episode added to the cool 
 uess between the two men which was already becoming 
 very perceptible. 
 
 But for his hostility toward Jackson, it is probable 
 that the attitude of Webster during the campaign of 
 1828 would have been one of thoroughgoing indiffer- 
 ence. In a very real sense that campaign began with 
 the inauguration of Adams as president in 1825. It 
 reached its culminating stages of intensity in 1827 and 
 1828. The choice of the country lay clearly between 
 Adams and Jackson, with the consequence that the 
 political alignment of the period became one of Adam s 
 men vs. Jackson men. The personal element was still 
 preponderant, but there was a growing demarcation 
 of principles, and in truth the period was one in which 
 political parties, for some time virtually non-existent, 
 were destined to spring up again, with sharply defined 
 programs and thoroughgoing organization. The Jack- 
 son men were becoming the democrats of later days: 
 the Adams men, the National Republicans and Whigs, 
 Webster was perforce 4 drawn into the National Repub- 
 lican party, and by the logic of events he, with Clay, 
 was brought step by step to a position of leadership 
 within it. As yet, however, in 1S27 and 1828, part} 
 lines were not very clearly drawn and the coolness of 
 Webster toward Adams disinclined him to an active 
 participation in the contest for the Latter's reelection. 
 
158 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 Jackson he disliked as heartily as ever, aud it was 
 only this consideration that influenced him to speak 
 aud write for Adams. Uulike Clay, he did not believe 
 that Adams could be reelected, and in this judgment 
 he proved correct. From a " cold sense of duty," as 
 Ezekiel subsequently declared, " and not from any 
 liking of the mau," New England chose a full quota of 
 Adams electors. None the less, when it became known 
 that Jackson was the victor the Websters accepted the 
 result with equanimity. 
 
 Throughout the years covered by his second period 
 of service in the House Webster was most of the time 
 pressed hard with professional duties. His practice 
 in the Supreme Court was very large. During a single 
 session, in the winter of 1826-1827, he argued fifteen 
 regularly reported cases, in addition to arguments 
 made on motions ; and he not infrequently appeared 
 before inferior tribunals throughout the eastern states. 
 During several years, furthermore, he served as lead- 
 ing counsel for the prosecution of claims under the 
 Florida treaty of 1819 for indemnification on account 
 of spoliations committed by Spanish cruisers upon 
 American commerce in 1788-1789. The commissioners 
 appointed to adjudicate these claims held numerous 
 sessions at Washington between 1S21 and 1826. The 
 subject was one of unusual difficulty and in the prose- 
 cution of the many claims which were committed to 
 his care Webster was obliged to undertake extended 
 research and to expend an amount of labor often quite 
 disproportioned to the seriousness of the question in- 
 volved. His fees for this work alone, however, asrffre- 
 gated seventy thousand dollars. 
 
 The period was further marked by a number of 
 splendid exhibitions of " occasional " oratory, of 
 
IN CONGRESS AGAIN, 1823-1827 159 
 
 which two — the Bunker Hill address of June 17, 1825, 
 and the eulogy on Adams and Jefferson of August 2, 
 1826 — stand out with special prominence. There had 
 beeu for some years in Boston a Bunker Hill Monu- 
 ment Association, whose object was to bring about the 
 erection of a shaft commemorative of the battle of June 
 17, 1775, and, in general, to keep alive a public sense 
 of gratitude toward the patriots and leaders of the 
 Revolution. As the fiftieth anniversary of the battle 
 drew near it was planned to celebrate the day in a pe- 
 culiarly worthy manner by laying the corner-stone of 
 the proposed monument. Webster, who at the time 
 was president of the Association, was chosen unani- 
 mously by his fellow- trustees to deliver the principal 
 address. The interest of the occasion was increased 
 by the presence of General Lafayette. The day was 
 one of the most memorable in the history of Boston. 
 The weather was perfect and the outpouring of people 
 tremendous. A procession from the State House to 
 the Hill ; an oration such as only a Webster could de- 
 liver ; an outdoor dinner on the neighboring hill, with 
 toasts by Webster, Lafayette, and others ; and in the 
 evening a grand reception at the Webster house in 
 Summer Street — such were the proceedings of a day 
 long remembered by those who had part in them. It 
 was always the opinion of Webster that the oration at 
 Plymouth surpassed that delivered at Bunker Hill. 
 In the breadth of its sweep, and in the quality of 
 majesty, it undeniably did so. In sheer eloquence, 
 however, it may be doubted whether anything that 
 Webster ever uttered surpassed his address upon the 
 later occasion to the survivors of the battle, his apos- 
 trophe to General Warren, and his encomium of La- 
 fayette. Like many of Webster's greatest speeches, 
 
1G0 DANIEL WEBSTER . 
 
 the Bunker Hill discourse was thought out in all of 
 its larger aspects far from books and manuscripts— 
 in this instance during the course of a day's fishing in 
 the Marshpee River. Its details, however, were the 
 ground of much solicitude, and even after its delivery 
 the author consumed no small amount of time in the 
 revision of his manuscript preparatory to printing.' 
 The address, placed at the disposal of the Monument 
 Association, was given a wide circulation, being trans- 
 lated, indeed, almost immediately into French and 
 other languages, "to the very great profit/ 7 so Lafay- 
 ette wrote, " of European readers." 
 
 On July 4, 1826, there occurred within the space of 
 a few hours the death of John Adams at Quincy and 
 of Thomas Jefferson at Monticello. Throughout the 
 country there were held commemorative meetings, and 
 in Boston the municipal authorities requested Webster 
 to pronounce, in Faneuil Hall, a public discourse upon 
 the careers aud services of the two men. In the pres- 
 ence of the dignitaries of state and city, and of a con- 
 course of citizens who struggled, in large part vainly, 
 to gain admission to the hall, the eulogy was delivered, 
 August 2d. "Mr. Webster spoke," records an auditor 
 (Mr. Ticknor), "in an orator's gown and wore small- 
 clothes. He was in the perfection of his manly beauty 
 and strength ; his form filled out to its finest propor- 
 tions, and his bearing, as he stood before the vast 
 multitude, that of absolute dignity and power. His 
 manuscript lay on a small table near him, but I think 
 he did not once refer to it. His manner of speaking 
 was deliberate and commanding. When he came to 
 the passage on eloquence, and to the words, 'It is 
 
 1 For the speech see "Works of Webster," Vol. I, pp. 79-108 ; 
 "Writings and Speeches/' Vol. I, pp. 233-254. 
 
IN COKGKJ&SS AGAIN, 1823-1827 161 
 
 action, noble, sublime, godlike action,' he stamped his 
 foot repeatedly on the stage, his form seemed to dilate, 
 and he stood, as that whole audience saw and felt, the 
 personification of what he so perfectly described. I 
 never heard him when his manner was so grand and 
 appropriate." x When the oration was concluded the 
 pent-up feeling of the audience burst forth in three 
 mighty cheers, inappropriate enough to the occasion, 
 yet by no means without excuse. The portion of the 
 address which attracted most attention subsequent ly 
 was that in which there was put in the mouth of John 
 Adams a supposititious speech in behalf of American 
 independence and in that of an unnamed opponent a 
 similar argument in opposition to so boldly-conceived 
 a policy. With such consummate skill and realism 
 was the thing done that even as late as 1851 men were 
 still inquiring whether the utterances ascribed to the 
 orators of 1776 might not be real, despite long-con- 
 tinued effort of Webster and his friends to make clear 
 i Ue actual character of the speeches in question. "I 
 will tell you," confessed Webster to President Fillmore 
 npon one occasion near the end of his life, " what is 
 not generally known. I wrote that speech [the one 
 ascribed to Adams] one morning before breakfast, in 
 my library, and when it was finished my paper was 
 wet with my tears." " Your attempt," wrote Richard 
 Rush, "to pass the doors of that most august sanctu- 
 ary, the Congress of '76, and become a listener and 
 reporter of its immortal debates, was extremely bold, 
 extremely hazardous. Nothing but success could have 
 justified it; and you have succeeded." 1 
 'Quoted in Curtis. "Webster," Vol, I, p. 275. 
 
 • Rush to Webster, August 30, 1826. Ibid., Vol. I. p. 280. Foi 
 
 the texl of the speech Bee -'Work- of Webster," Vol I. pp. 109- 
 
 160 j "Writing ami Speeches," Vol. I, pp. 389-334. 
 
162 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 Life in these years was too much crowded with work 
 to permit of much diversion Iu December, 1824, 
 however, Webster was one of a small party that paid 
 a visit to Jefferson and Madison at their Virginia 
 homes. At Monticello the travelers were detained up- 
 ward of a week by bad weather, so that opportunity 
 for conversation with " the sage" was extended ; and 
 subsequently Webster took occasion to commit to 
 writing a memorandum of this conversation which is 
 of no inconsiderable interest. 1 Webster and Madison 
 were, of course, old acquaintances, and it is interesting 
 to observe that after his return to Washington Webster 
 confided to Mr. Ticknor that Madison's conversation 
 upon the occasion of the recent visit had confirmed 
 him in an opinion he had for some time entertained, 
 "that Mr. Madison was the wisest of our Presidents, 
 except Washington. " In June and July, 1825, Webster 
 was a member of a party that journeyed by stage- 
 coach and Erie Canal passenger-boat by way of Albany 
 to Niagara Falls. Besides Webster himself, the party 
 consisted of Mrs. Webster, Judge and Mrs. Story, and 
 Miss Buckminster (afterward Mrs. Lee). At Albany 
 Webster and Story met Lafayette at a public dinner. 
 Numerous letters written from Niagara Falls abound in 
 splendid accounts of the scenery of the region, evincing 
 not merely the descriptive art that one might expect 
 in so consummate a master of English but also a fresh 
 and boundless love of Nature and an appreciation of 
 her humblest as well as of her grandest works. 
 
 1 Printed iu Webster, "Private Correspondence," Vol. I, pp. 
 364-373. 
 
CHAPTEE VII 
 
 IN THE SENATE: THE TARIFF 
 
 In the year 1827 it devolved upon the legislature of 
 Massachusetts to elect a successor to Elijah H. Mills in 
 the United States Senate. By reason of his precarious 
 health, grave doubt arose as to whether Mr. Mills 
 could be, or should be, induced to accept a second 
 term. Months in advance of the election members of 
 the legislature began to canvass the field in search 
 of another candidate, and early in the course of this 
 search the name of Webster was very naturally sug- 
 gested. To a member who had addressed him upon 
 the subject Webster, under date of January 10, 1827, 
 advocated very strongly the immediate reelection of 
 Mills, or, in lieu of that, a postponement of the choice 
 until the ensuing Juue, in the hope that the senator's 
 health would at that time more clearly warrant his 
 reelection. "For mercy's sake," he urged, "do not 
 weaken our power in the Senate ! When all the Phi- 
 listines are against us, do let us have all the strength 
 we can have. If Mr. Mills lives, he is second to no 
 man in the Senate among our friends. Why, then, 
 should he be now superseded? ... 1 can only 
 Say that if you are governed by a disposition to sustain 
 Mr. Adams, and help on the public business, yon will, 
 in all events, elect a man of the very best talents which 
 are at your disposal. I pray yon let no local, nor 
 temporary, nor any small consideration induce yon to 
 refrain from electing the fittest man that can be found, 
 
164 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 and that can possibly be prevailed on to take the 
 place. The present moment, be assured, is a crisis in 
 the affairs of Massachusetts and all the North." l 
 
 During its winter session the legislature arrived at 
 no conclusion in the matter of the senatorship. The 
 Senate went so far as to make choice of Levi Lincoln, 
 then governor of the commonwealth ; but Mr. Lincoln, 
 in a communication addressed to the Speaker of the 
 House of Representatives, declined to permit his name 
 to be used further, and there the matter rested. During 
 the months which intervened prior to the reassembling 
 of the legislature in June, Webster was urged by mem- 
 bers and by friends at Washington to allow himself to 
 be considered a candidate ; and, over the protest of 
 many persons of influence, who, in some instances for 
 partisan and in others for broadly patriotic reasons, 
 believed that he was of larger service in the lower 
 house than he could well be in the upper one, he was 
 brought gradually to a decision to accept the senator- 
 ship if it should be urged upon him. In May he wrote 
 to Lincoln urging that he consent to be chosen to 
 Mr. Mills's seat. " There are," he declared, "many 
 strong personal reasons, and, as friends think (and as 
 I think, too), some public reasons, why I should de- 
 cline the offer of a seat in the Senate, if it should be 
 made to me. " J The consideration of a public character 
 to which allusion was made was that, in the critical 
 situation of the time, the Administration ought to be 
 strengthened in both houses, and that this end might 
 be best attained by the accession of a senator of the 
 
 ' Webster to Joseph E. Sprague, January 10, 1827. Webster, 
 Private Correspondence," Vol. I, p. 414. 
 
 'Webster to Levi Lincoln, May 22, 1827. Quoted in Curtis, 
 "Webster," Vol. I, p. 293. 
 
IN THE SKNATE : THE TARIFF 1G5 
 
 calibre of Governor Lincoln, rather than by the mere 
 translation of Webster himself from the one house 
 to the other. Governor Lincoln, however, remained 
 steadfast in his refusal and insisted that for the public 
 good Webster should consent to his own promotion. 
 The upshot was that when the legislature reassembled, 
 in June, the House, by a vote of 202 out of 328, and 
 the Senate, by a vote of 26 out of 39, conferred 
 upon Webster the senatorship for the term beginning 
 March 4th previous. We have it on the authority of 
 Clay that, much as Adams valued Webster's influence 
 in the House, the President's wish had come to be 
 that, in the event of Governor Lincoln's final refusal, 
 the choice should fall upon Webster. Administration 
 members of the lower branch, however, lamented 
 keenly the loss of leadership arising from the transfer. 
 The election to the Senate in 1827 has been correctly 
 appraised by Mr. Curtis as a turning-point in Web- 
 ster's life. For, while there is no reason to suppose 
 that his service in the House of Representatives might 
 not have been prolonged and increasingly honorable, 
 d none the less is true that, "whatever may have 
 hitherto been his inclination or his power to withdraw 
 from ail public station, his eutrance into the Senate 
 must be considered as having fixed for the remainder 
 of his days, and fortunately or unfortunately for his 
 personal happiness and welfare, his position as a 
 statesman who belonged to the country, and for whom, 
 henceforth, private life was to be a matter of intervals 
 and episodes." l In the oft-expressed reluctance of 
 Webster to surrender himself to the exigencies of a 
 public career it is not difficult to detect a note of sin- 
 cerity. The demands of public service interfered con- 
 'Curtis, »« Webster," Vol. I, i>. 290. 
 
166 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 stantly with the practice of a chosen profession. They 
 not merely precluded that si ngieness of devotion which 
 would have brought well-nigh unrivaled preeminence ; 
 they involved steady sacrifice of pecuniary advance- 
 ment. Despite his unusual mouey-making talent, 
 Webster died a poor man, and not alone because he 
 habitually lacked thrift when financial affairs were 
 involved, but largely by reason of his long-continued 
 absorption in public service. The demauds of a pub- 
 lic career, too, not infrequently ran counter to the 
 domestic tastes and interests which were at all times 
 in Webster highly developed. Despite all of these 
 considerations, however, it cannot be maintained that 
 Webster was in his public life unhappy. Impelled by 
 that same fraukly owned ambition which had consti- 
 tuted the maiuspriug of his life from early boyhood, he 
 inwardly exulted in every broadeniDg of his field of 
 opportunity. He loved power, eminence, and adula- 
 tion, and his desire for public station grew as the 
 years passed by, until in the end, as will appear, 
 nothing short of the presidency itself could be made 
 to satisfy him. 
 
 In the midst of wide-spread felicitation upon his 
 election to the Seuate, Webster was plunged into the 
 depths of domestic distress. During the summer of 
 1827, Mrs. Webster, who for some time had been 
 afflicted with a tumor, declined perceptibly in health ; 
 and although a few weeks spent at Sandwich seemed 
 to give her fresh vigor, when, in December, in company 
 with her husband, she set out from Boston for Wash- 
 ington her state was such as to occasion grave concern. 
 
 te journey to New York proved taxing, and two 
 physicians of that city, on being called into consulta- 
 tion, could offer no ground for expectation of an ulti- 
 
IN THE SENATE : THE TARIFF 167 
 
 mate recovery. "I hope/' wrote the grief- stricken 
 husband to his brother-in-law, Mr. Paige, "I may be 
 able to meet the greatest of all earthly afflictions with 
 firmness, but I need not say that I am at present quite 
 overcome." l Two weeks of treatment yielded no very 
 encouraging result, although the patient's coudition 
 seemed to grow no worse. Sick at heart, and himself 
 all but disabled by an attack of rheumatism, Webster 
 pressed on to Washington, in the hope that Mrs. 
 Webster might subsequently be able to follow in the 
 company of Judge and Mrs. Story- The hope was 
 vain, and on the 4th of January, Webster returned 
 to New York. A succession of letters written during 
 the ensuing two weeks to relatives and close friends 
 record with pathetic incisiveness the alternations of 
 hope and despair, the effort to temper the painful facts 
 of the situation and the struggle to accept them with 
 resignation, which filled the life of the anxious husband 
 during these days. January 21st the end came. 
 When the funeral party returned to Boston, Webster 
 and his children stayed, both before and after the 
 burial, at the home of a close friend, Mr. George 
 Blake, in Summer Street. Mrs. Webster's remains 
 were placed with those of her children, Grace and 
 Charles, in a tomb beneath St. Paul's Church. At the 
 hour of the funeral, says Mr. Ticknor in his " Reminis- 
 cences," Webster "took Julia and Daniel in either 
 hand and walked close to the hearse through the streets 
 to the church in whose crypt the interment took place. 
 It was a touching and solemn sight. He was excess- 
 ively pale." The day was wet and an attempt was 
 made to persuade the husband to ride in one of the 
 
 1 Webster to Paige, December .">, 1827. Webster, " Private Corre- 
 spondence," Vol. I, p. 424, 
 
168 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 carriages. " No," was his reply, " my children and I 
 must follow their mother to the grave on foot." 
 Among the numerous friends of the family in and 
 around Boston homes were found for the three children, 
 Julia, Daniel Fletcher, and Edward; 1 and, having 
 closed his house, Webster was able within three weeks 
 to return to Washington to resume his duties in the 
 Senate. The remainder of the winter brought little of 
 interest. Even when conditions were in every re- 
 spect favorable it was not infrequently with difficulty 
 that Webster overcame a certain innate disposition to 
 lethargy, and it is not remarkable that under the im- 
 pact of the blow that had befallen him he continued 
 for some time as one whose every impetus had dis- 
 appeared. "I feel," he writes, "a vacuum, an in- 
 difference, a want of motive, which I cannot well 
 describe. I hope my children, and the society of my 
 best friends, may rouse me ; but I can never see such 
 days as I have seen." 2 
 
 The comparative inactivity of Webster during his 
 earlier months in the Senate is to be accounted for not 
 solely upon the ground of personal bereavement. Pro- 
 fessional duties, postponed in some instances by reason 
 of Mrs. Webster's illness and death, absorbed a con- 
 siderable amount of time. As a newcomer, further- 
 more, in the upper chamber he was disposed to pro- 
 ceed cautiously, although, it is true, he was moved to 
 speak at some length upon a pending question as early 
 as the second day after assuming his seat. Finally, 
 there was the conviction that the elements of opposi- 
 tion were too formidable to be overcome by any 
 
 1 A son, Charles, bora in 1822, died December 18, 1824. 
 s Webster to Mrs. E. B. Lee, May 18, 1828. Webster, "Private 
 Correspondence," Vol. I, p. 458. 
 
IN THE SENATE : THE TARIFF 169 
 
 amount of parliamentary activity. By the close of 
 1827 the anti-administration forces, i. c, the large and 
 varied elements inclined to the support of Jackson, 
 were in effectual control in both branches of Congres 
 and between the President and the opposition majority 
 there was incessant conflict and at times prolonged 
 deadlock . ' ' According to present appearances, ' > Web- 
 ster writes, December 17, 1827, " there will be little 
 for me to do. Our adversaries undoubtedly have a 
 majority, and I think the true course is to let them 
 exercise it as seems to them good. Why should we be 
 responsible for what we cannot control ? " l 
 
 Upon an occasional legislative issue, none the less, 
 Webster was roused to the point of participation in 
 debate, notably upon a bill for the relief of surviving 
 officers of the Revolution, which, largely through his 
 effort, was enacted into law. 2 But the one subject 
 upon which he was stirred to his best effort at this 
 time was the tariff. It was in the course of the debate 
 upon the tariff act of 1828 that he abandoned his earlier 
 attitude of opposition to protectionism and for the first 
 time gave his support unreservedly to a measure 
 founded upon that principle. In the history of the 
 tariff, no less than in the shaping of Webster's public 
 career, the event was one of unusual importance : so 
 that it becomes necessary at this point, first, to review 
 the earlier course of Webster in relation to tariff legis- 
 lation and, secondly, to examine in some detail the 
 circumstances of the vdtte-face of 1828. 
 
 It is hardly too much to say that Alexander Hamil- 
 
 1 Webster to Mills, 1 teoemberl9, 1827. Webster, 4l Private Corre- 
 spondenec," Vol. I, p. 428. 
 
 'See speech of April 25, 1828. "Writings and Speeches," Vol. 
 
 V, pp. 218-227. 
 
170 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 ton was the founder of Federalism ; and one of the 
 arguments upon which Hamilton, in his remarkable 
 Report on Manufactures, submitted to Congress Janu- 
 ary 5, 1791, laid greatest stress was that for the due 
 development of the industries of a new country such as 
 the United States the imposition of protective tariff 
 rates is a practical necessity. In New England, how- 
 ever, which early became the principal stronghold of 
 Federalism, the protective idea was from the outset 
 unpopular. It was not that a tariff for protection 
 was considered unconstitutional. The liberal views 
 entertained by all Federalists respecting the powers of 
 the general government left small room for a denial of 
 the power to impose protective duties. The objection 
 with which Hamilton's proposed policy was met arose 
 rather from a doubt as to the expediency of protection 
 upon general principles and, more particularly, from 
 the free-trade proclivities of a predominantly commer- 
 cial people, running sharply counter as they did to a 
 policy whose adoption would have for its avowed ob- 
 ject the liberating of the nation from a dependence 
 upon the importation of foreign goods. Prior to the 
 War of 1812 the question of protection entered but 
 slightly, if at all, into the deliberations of Congress. 
 There are students of the subject who maintain that 
 into the earliest of all of our tariff acts under the Con- 
 stitution, that of 1789, the element of protection was 
 deliberately injected. The view probably arises, how- 
 ever, from a disposition on the part of protectionists 
 of a later day to read back into this original act an 
 element which they are at least pleased to believe was 
 in it. Certainly, as a general proposition, it can be 
 maintained that of all the varied features of the 
 Hamilton scheme of public finance the one alone which 
 
IN THE SENATE : THE TARIFF 171 
 
 was deliberately rejected was that pertaining to the 
 imposition of a protective tariff. Until the War of 
 1812 the tariff continued a means simply of raising- 
 revenue ; and when, upon the outbreak of the war, 
 Congress voted to double all existing duty rates, the 
 sole consideration was still the procuring of funds. It 
 was only at the close of the war, when by the reopen- 
 ing of commercial relations with Great Britain the 
 newly risen manufacturing industries of the United 
 States seemed on the point of untimely extinction, 
 that there arose that wide-spread and persistent demand 
 for the adoption of a policy of protection which cul- 
 minated in the important legislation of 1816. 
 
 As has been pointed out, Webster's earlier views 
 respecting the tariff were in all respects those of com- 
 mercial New England. In 1814, in rejoinder to an 
 argument by Calhoun in favor of the continuance of 
 the existing double duties as a protective measure, 
 Webster, then but lately become a member of the 
 House, was impelled to express himself with force upon 
 what he and his constituents regarded as the artificial 
 stimulation of manufactures. "In respect to manu- 
 factures," he said, " it is necessary to speak with some 
 precision. I am not, generally speaking, their 
 enemy; T am their friend; but I am not for rearing 
 them or any other interest in hot-beds. I would no1 
 legislate precipitately, even in favor of them ; above 
 all, I would not profess intentions in relation to them 
 which I did not purpose to execute. I feel no desire 
 to push capital into extensive manufactures faster than 
 the general progress of our wealth and population 
 propels it. I am not in haste to see Sheffields and 
 Birmingham* in America. Until the population of 
 the country shall be greater in proportion to its extent, 
 
172 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 such establishments would be impracticable if at- 
 tempted, aud if practicable they would be unwise." 
 At considerable length he went on to argue two funda- 
 mental propositions— first, that agriculture, possessed 
 of numerous advantages over manufacturing, should 
 remain forever in America the normal occupation for 
 the great mass of citizens, and, second, that the govern- 
 ment ought not to seek to control or to alter the 
 natural industrial proclivities of the people. " It is," 
 he declared, ' ' the true policy of government to suffer 
 the different pursuits of society to take their own 
 course, and not to give excessive bounties or encour- 
 agements to one over another. This, also, is the true 
 spirit of the Constitution. It has not, in my opinion, 
 conferred on the government the power of changing 
 the occupations of the people of different states and 
 sections, and of forcing them into other employments. " 
 The attitude maintained by Webster at this point was, 
 it is clear, not one of hostility to the development of 
 manufactures under the gradual operation of enduring 
 economic causes. It was, rather, as it has been char- 
 acterized, an attitude of laissez faire, arising from the 
 fundamental consideration that while it is the duty of 
 the government to protect all legitimate occupations, 
 it is neither constitutional nor expedient for it to ex- 
 tend its beneficence to one occupation more than to an- 
 other. 
 
 At the time of the enactment of the tariff law of 
 1816 Webster contented himself with a series of attacks 
 upon individual items and was successful in procuring 
 some reductions of the original schedules. He voted 
 against the measure, although he was compelled to 
 recognize that in doing so he was opposing the wish 
 of a very large majority of the people of the country. 
 
IN THE SENATE : THE TARIFF 173 
 
 From 1817 to 1823 he was out of Congress, and during 
 that period there arose but one occasion upon which 
 opportunity was afforded for a notable pronouncement 
 upon the tariff question. That came in 1820. Under 
 the stimulus of the act of 1816 cotton, woolen, and 
 other kinds of manufactures exhibited a remarkable 
 growth ; although there was complaint almost from the 
 beginning that the rates which finally had been deter- 
 mined upon were inadequate. In 1818 it was voted 
 by Congress not to allow to go into operation the 
 reduction which the act of 1816 had set for 1819, and 
 a period of business depression in 1818-1819 gave 
 occasion for an insistent demand from manufacturing 
 interests for a new tariff schedule, with increased rates. 
 In the spring of 1820 Henry Baldwin, representing 
 the district in which Pittsburgh was located, brought 
 forward in the House a bill of a more thoroughgoing 
 protectionist character than any which as yet had been 
 seriously advocated. Under its terms ad valorem duties 
 were increased by proportions varying from twenty- 
 tive to sixty-six per cent. Employing principally his 
 favorite argument in behalf of the extension of home 
 markets for raw materials and foodstuffs, Clay de- 
 fended this measure in one of the most remarkable of 
 his numerous tariff speeches. In the House the bill 
 was passed by a vote of ninety-one to seventy -eight. 
 
 The vote of New England was almost exactly evenly 
 divided— eighteen in favor and seventeen opposed. 
 The representatives of Rhode Island voted solidly tor 
 Hie bill. With a single exception, those of Connec- 
 ticut did the same. Rhode island and Connecticut 
 
 were fast becoming manufacturing states, and accord- 
 ingly they were inclining ever more strongly to the 
 
 protectionist point of view. Of the members from 
 
174 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 Massachusetts proper only three voted against the bill, 
 and they represented the commercial districts about 
 Boston and Salem. That portion of Massachusetts 
 subsequently set off as the state of Maine registered 
 four votes in opposition. New Hampshire and Ver- 
 mont, save for a single vote from the latter state, were 
 solidly opposed. The significant thing regarding the 
 New England vote was the extent to which the recently 
 developed interest in manufactures was beginning to 
 tell in tariff legislation. For the first time the section 
 declared as a whole, even though by the narrowest 
 possible majority, for protection. By a single vote, on 
 a motion to postpone, the Baldwin Bill was lost in the 
 Senate. The friends of the measure at once, however, 
 set about preparation to reopen the issue at the next 
 session, and the country understood that the question 
 was but deferred. 
 
 During the summer of 1820 public meetings were 
 held in various places, some to promote and some to 
 organize opposition to the proposed legislation. At a 
 gathering of the second type held in Faneuil Hall in 
 Boston on October 2d, Webster was invited to be pres- 
 ent and to speak. The meeting was called by men 
 whose interests lay in agriculture and commerce, and 
 the resolutions adopted at the close of the proceedings 
 comprised a forceful declaration of free-trade doctrine. 
 In an able speech in support of these resolutions Web- 
 ster took occasion to present at length his views 
 respecting the unconstitutionality of such a protective 
 measure as that which had recently passed the House. 
 As a rule the advocates of protectionism had main- 
 tained hitherto that the power to lay a protective 
 tariff was incidental to the power to lay and collect 
 taxes, duties, imposts, and excises. In his Faneuil 
 
IN THE SENATE: THE TARIFF 175 
 
 Hall speech Webster argued that if protection is an 
 incident to revenue, the incident cannot fairly be 
 carried beyond the principal, and that duties laid 
 solely or primarily for the purpose of affording pro- 
 tection to domestic manufactures fall outside the scope 
 of the power under which it was claimed they might 
 be imposed. In some quarters there was an attempl 
 to defend the constitutionality of protection upon gen- 
 eral grounds, or upou specific grounds independent ol* 
 the taxing power. It was the contention of Clay, for 
 example, that the power to lay a protective tariff is to 
 be derived from the power which is given Congress 
 to regulate foreign commerce. Against all such argu- 
 ments, however, Webster entered protest. There was, 
 he maintained, no " substantial and direct" power in 
 virtue of which a protective tariff could be laid. "It 
 would hardly be contended,'' he declared, "that Con- 
 gress possessed that sort of general power by which it 
 might declare that particular occupations should be 
 pursued in society and that others should not. If such 
 power belonged to any government in this country, it 
 certainly did not belong to the general government. 1 ' ' 
 As to the inexpediency of protection Webster's opiu- 
 ions had undergone no change. Manufactures he be- 
 lieved to be in themselves only moderately desirable. 
 For Clay's idea that American manufactures ought to 
 be developed in the interest of national independence 
 he had nothing but ridicule. The effects of the rapid 
 growth of manufactures, it seemed to him, were likely 
 to be but the unwholesome concentration of capital. 
 the making of the rich richer and the poor poorer, 
 and the increase of social injustice and misery. Even 
 
 if such a development were desirable, and if there 
 
 1 "Writings ami Speeches," Vol. XIII, pp. 5-22. 
 
176 DANIEL WEBSTEB 
 
 existed an indubitable power in the hands of the 
 federal government to promote it by a policy of protec- 
 tion, a measure such as that for which manufacturing- 
 interests were clamoring would be unjust. Its adop- 
 tion would be unfair to the numerous manufacturers 
 who were not extended its supposed advantages, and 
 in its operation it would constitute an agency of gross 
 and indefensible favoritism. Its effect would be to 
 increase both the cost of living and the burden of tax- 
 ation. a In troth,' 7 it was contended, "every man in 
 the community not immediately benefited by the new 
 duties would suffer a double loss. In the first place, 
 by shutting out the foreign commodity, the price of 
 the domestic manufacture would be raised. The con- 
 sumer, therefore, must pay more for it, and insomuch 
 as the government will have lost the duty on the im- 
 ported article, a tax equal to that duty must be paid 
 to the government." For cogency of argument upon 
 low tariff lines the Faneuil Hall speech has rarely been 
 surpassed. 
 
 During the years covered by the second Monroe ad- 
 ministration there continued strong demand for ad- 
 vanced tariff legislation, and the demand was accen- 
 tuated from time to time by a recurrence of depression 
 in various fields of business. Throughout the period 
 Clay and his school kept up the contention that only 
 by the creation of an enormous home market for raw 
 materials — iron, hemp, wool, and other articles — and 
 for foodstuffs could a substantial basis for national 
 prosperity be laid, and that the development of such a 
 domestic market involved of necessity the deliberate 
 stimulation of manufactures through the means of high 
 I >rotecti ve d uties. Adequate protection against foreign 
 i ■■ >mpetition, it was urged, was the sole method by 
 
IN THE SENATE : THE TAEIFF 1 7 7 
 
 which European nations had been able to maintain 
 themselves, and it was only the part of prudence for the 
 United States to conform to the universal experience 
 of modern states. Although during the years 1820- 
 1823 Monroe's messages advocated repeatedly a moder- 
 ate increase of prevailing duties and several attempts 
 were made to rouse Congress to the point of action, it 
 was not until the beginning of the session of 1823-18'J I 
 — the session in which Webster reappeared as a mem- 
 ber of the House — that the protectionist forces, under 
 the aggressive leadership of Clay, commanded a ma- 
 jority adequate for action. Early in the session there 
 was introduced a bill providing for an increase of the 
 duties on cottons, woolens, iron, and hemp, and con- 
 templating a general overhauling of the existing tariff 
 laws, with a view to sweeping extensions of the pro- 
 tective system. In committee of the whole the meas- 
 ure was debated from time to time at great length and 
 by the ablest members of the House. The principal 
 champion of the bill was Clay, who in successive 
 speeches elaborated with rare eloquence the funda- 
 mental aspects of his well-known "American system.'' 
 A masterful appeal by Clay, delivered March 30 and 
 31, 1824, was followed, April 1st and 2d, by the lengthiest 
 and ablest speech which Webster had yet delivers 1 
 upon this subject. 1 
 
 After alluding to the pending bill as a "collection 
 of different enactments, some of which meet my appro- 
 bat ion and some of which do not," the Massachusetts 
 member discussed with some fulness the state of dis 
 
 'If. has well been said Mint "these two speeches together axe as 
 
 interesting an economic stndv ns can lie found in our parliamentary 
 history." Sohnrz, "Henry Clay," Vol I, p. 21ft. For Webster's 
 wpeech see 'Works of Webster," Vol. Ill, pp. 1)1-149; •' Writings 
 and Speeches," Vol. V, pp. 94-149. 
 
178 DANIEL WEBSTEE 
 
 tress which Clay had represented as prevailing through- 
 out the couutry. From the accuracy of Clay's picture 
 he dissented strongly, maintaining that, despite oc- 
 casional depression, "a country enjoying a profound 
 peace, perfect civil liberty, with the reward of labor 
 sure, and its wages higher than anywhere else, cannot 
 be represented as in gloom, melancholy, and distress, 
 but by the effort of extraordinary powers of tragedy." 1 
 The true causes of such business un settlement as ad- 
 mittedly existed in some sections Webster bade his 
 hearers seek in a loose and ill -ordered system of cur- 
 rency and public finance. The issue of irredeemable 
 paper money he regarded as the "niost prominent and 
 deplorable cause of whatever pressure still exists in 
 this country." To the adoption of a more rigidly pro- 
 tectionist policy such as Clay had advocated he inter- 
 posed a number of objections, each of which was sus- 
 tained by a wealth of argument. In the first place, 
 Clay's denomination of his scheme as an American sys- 
 tem was ridiculed, on the ground that, historically, 
 that was precisely what it was not. If names were to 
 mean anything, he said, a policy which even its advo- 
 cates admitted was new to America ought hardly to be 
 called American ; nor ought that policy which America 
 had hitherto maintained, and which foreign nations 
 had never pursued, to be spoken of as foreign. In the 
 second place, it was unfair to impose upon a branch of 
 industry, i. e., commerce, which had contributed so 
 largely to the prosperity of the country the handicap 
 which must inevitably arise from protectionist policy 
 —the more so when it was considered how depressed 
 already were navigation and foreign trade in conse- 
 
 1 >( 
 
 Works of Webster," Vol. Ill, p. 97 ; "Writings and 
 Speeches," Vol. V, p. 97. 
 
IN THE SENATE : THE TARIFF 179 
 
 quence of the new conditions which had arisen since 
 the restoration of peace in Europe. Thirdly, it was 
 contended that the state of manufactures was not at all 
 such as to demand the amount of governmental support 
 which it was proposed to accord. The cotton, woolen, 
 and iron industries had passed beyond their infancy, 
 and whatever claim to special favor they once had pos- 
 sessed must be adj udged to have disappeared. Filially, 
 it was argued that the pending bill was a hodge-podge 
 of proposals, some less objectionable than others, but, 
 taken together, far from calculated to accomplish even 
 the purposes avowed by its friends. 
 
 "Gentlemen tell us," declared Webster, "that they 
 are in favor of domestic industry ; so am I. They 
 would give it protection ; so would I. But then all 
 domestic industry is not confined to manufactures. 
 The employments of agriculture, commerce, and navi- 
 gation are all branches of the same domestic industry ; 
 they all furnish employment for American capital and 
 American labor. And when the question is whether 
 new duties shall be laid for the purpose of giving fur- 
 ther encouragement to particular manufactures, every 
 reasonable man must ask himself, both whether the pro- 
 posed new encouragement be necessary, and whether it 
 can be given without injustice to other branches of indus- 
 try." In two or three passages of the speech, in par- 
 ticular, Webster stated incisively both his own view 
 aud that of the interests which he as yet represented. 
 " With me it is a fundamental axiom, it is interwoven 
 with all my opinions, that the great interests of the 
 country are united and inseparable ; that agriculture, 
 commerce, and manufactures will prosper together or 
 languish together; and that all legislation is danger- 
 ous which proposes to benefit one of these without 
 
180 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 looking to the consequences which may fall on the 
 others. . . . Protection, when carried to the 
 point which is now recommended, that is, to entire 
 prohibition, seems to me destructive of all commercial 
 intercourse between nations. We are urged to adopt 
 the system on general principles. ... I do not 
 admit the general principle ; on the contrary, I think 
 freedom of trade the general principle, and restriction 
 the exception. " l In rejoinder to the appeals of Clay 
 and other speakers to the policies and experience of 
 England, Webster contended that as the true nature of 
 international trade should come to be better understood 
 the entire system of monopolies and restraints which 
 had grown up in England and other European coun 
 tries would grow in disfavor, and that, indeed, there 
 were already abundant and increasing signs of revolt 
 against it. With current economic and political 
 opinion in Great Britain Webster displayed here, as 
 upon numerous other occasions, a degree of familiarity 
 which was remarkable. 
 
 After a debate of nearly ten weeks the bill passed 
 the House of Representatives, April 16th, by the 
 narrow margin of 107 to 102 votes. Webster and 
 twenty-two of his New England colleagues voted 
 against the measure. Fifteen New England members 
 — but one of them from Massachusetts— voted for it. 
 In the Senate the various items of the bill were dis- 
 cussed at length, and in the end some amendments 
 were introduced by which certain of Webster's objec- 
 tions to details were removed. The final vote was 
 favorable, although only by a balance of 25 to 22, and 
 eventually the measure became law. 
 
 1 " Works of Daniel Webster," Vol. Ill, p. 96 ; " Writings and 
 Speeches," Vol. V, p. 96. 
 
IN THE SENATE : THE TAKIFF 181 
 
 The act of 1824 was a compromise evolved from a 
 melange of conflicting and insistent sectional demands. 
 At the time of its adoption it pleased nobody in all of 
 its specifications, and in practice it failed completely to 
 meet with the approval of many important interests. 
 Chief among the malcontents were the woolen manu- 
 facturers, whose numbers and interests in the New 
 England states were rapidly increased during the 
 years immediately following 1824. They were espe- 
 cially aggrieved because the advantage of an increased 
 duty on woolen cloth had been offset by a doubling 
 of the rate on raw wool in the interest of the wool- 
 growers of rural New England 'and the Middle West. 
 Early in 1827 a bill was introduced in the House by 
 Eollin C. Mallary, of Vermont, substituting specific 
 for ad valorem duties and applying to woolens the 
 minimum principle already applied to cottons by the 
 act of 1816. The measure passed the House, February 
 10th, but in the Senate, by the casting-vote of Vice- 
 President Calhoun, it was laid on the table. During 
 the summer of 1827 the question was agitated through- 
 out the country, and at the first session of the Twenti- 
 eth Congress, beginning in December of that year, i 
 House Committee on Manufactures brought in a bill 
 extending protection to wool, hemp, flax, iron, and 
 other raw materials, even where the producers had not 
 asked for it, and fixing a schedule of minimums for 
 woolens so devised that the woolen goods chit-fly manu- 
 factured in New England should be left without benefit. 
 The bill was drawn by a committee in which Southern 
 men preponderated, and we are given to understand 
 by Calhoun that it was framed on the lines which have 
 been indicated to the end that Now England should be 
 forced to join with the South in the defeat of the meas 
 
182 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 ure. It was part of the scheme that the opprobrium 
 of the defeat should be made to fall upon the Adams 
 administration, arid so to contribute to the defeat of 
 the President for reelection later in the year. The bill 
 referred to manufactures of no sort or kind, scornfully, 
 and not altogether inaptly, declared John Randolph, 
 "but the manufacture of a president of the United 
 States I " To the great chagrin of the Southern lead- 
 ers, however, a sufficient number of New England ers 
 gave their support to the bill to pass it, in the House 
 by a vote of 105 to 94, and in the Senate by one of 26 
 to 21. And Webster was one of the number. 
 
 By writers upon this period of American history the 
 course pursued by Webster in relation to the tariff of 
 1828 has been interpreted in various ways. Some 
 have viewed it as equivalent to a sheer surrender of 
 principle. Certainly, it is true, that since his entrance 
 of public life Webster had never before failed, not 
 only to vote against protectionist measures, but to put 
 forth his utmost endeavor to circumvent their adop- 
 tion. Certainly also he was far from willing to approve 
 all features of the act of 1828. That the measure con- 
 stituted truly enough a "tariff of abominations" he 
 would have been among the first to admit. None the 
 less, he gave the bill both his voice and his vote, and 
 for the fundamental reason that he now believed that 
 the country had adopted protection as a permanent 
 policy, and that in this matter its purpose was for the 
 time unshakable ; in which case it seemed to him alto- 
 gether desirable that the policy should be followed up 
 in a logical and systematic manner. In a speech of 
 May 9th he explained to the Senate why, despite the 
 many glaring faults of the bill, he proposed to give it 
 his support. His first care was to disabuse the minds 
 
IN THE SENATE: THE TARIFF 183 
 
 of some of his hearers of the idea that the present 
 measure and the protectionist policy which underlay 
 it were to be attributed to the preferences of New Eng- 
 land as a section. " New England, sir," he declared, 
 "has not been a leader in this policy. On the con- 
 trary, she held back herself, and tried to hold others 
 back from it, from the adoption of the Constitution to 
 1824. Up to 1824 she was accused of sinister and 
 selfish designs, because she discountenanced the prog- 
 ress of this policy. . . . Now the imputation is 
 precisely of an opposite character. The present meas- 
 ure is pronounced to be exclusively for the benefit of 
 New England ; to be brought forward by her agency, 
 and designed to gratify the cupidity of the proprietors 
 of her wealthy establishments. Both charges, sir, are 
 equally without the slightest foundation. 7 ' 
 
 Then follows a crisp exposition of the earlier New 
 England attitude, which, as has appeared, had been 
 precisely the attitude of "Webster himself. "The 
 opinion of New England up to 1824 was founded in 
 the conviction that, on the whole, it was wisest and 
 best, both for herself and others, that manufactures 
 should make haste slowly. She felt a reluctance to 
 trust great interests on the foundation of government 
 patronage; for who could tell how long such patron- 
 age would last, or with what steadiness, skill, or per- 
 severance it would continue to be granted .' . . . 
 At the same time, it is true that, from the very first 
 commencement of the government, those who have 
 administered its concerns have held a tone of encour- 
 agement and invitation toward those who should 
 embark in manufactures. . . . When, at the com- 
 mencement of the late war, duties were doubled, we 
 were told that we should find a mitigation of the 
 
134 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 weight of taxation in the new aid and succor which 
 would be thus afforded to our own manufacturing 
 labor. Like arguments were urged, and prevailed, 
 but not by the aid of New England votes, when the 
 tariff was afterward arranged, at the close of the war 
 in 1816. Finally, after a whole winter's deliberation, 
 the act of 1824 received the sanction of both houses 
 of Congress, and settled the policy of the country. 
 What, then, was New England to do ? She was fitted 
 for manufacturing operations, by the amount and 
 character of her population, by her capital, by the 
 vigor and energy of her free labor, by the skill, 
 economy, enterprise, and perseverance of her people. 
 I repeat, What was she under these circumstances to 
 do? A great and prosperous rival in her near neigh- 
 borhood, threatening to draw from her a part, perhaps 
 a great part, of her foreign commerce ; was she to use, 
 or to neglect, those other means of seeking her own 
 prosperity which belonged to her character and her 
 condition? Was she to hold out forever against the 
 course of the government, and see herself losing on one 
 side, and yet make no effort to sustain herself on the 
 other? No, sir. Nothing was left to New England, 
 after the act of 1824, but to conform herself to the will 
 of others. Nothing was left to her, but to consider 
 that the government had fixed and determined its 
 own policy ; and that policy was protection." ! 
 
 The ground, therefore, upon which Webster sought 
 to justify his course in voting for the bill was that of 
 the sheer logic of circumstances — of circumstances 
 which he, and the section of the country which he 
 
 1 " Annals of Congress," 20th Cong., 1st seas., p. 751 ; " Works of 
 Darnel Webster," Vol. Ill, pp. 229-230 ; "Writings and Speeches," 
 Vol. V, pp. 228-230. * V 
 
Ui THE SENATE : THE TARIFF 185 
 
 represented, had been powerless to control. There is 
 uo evidence that he now or at any later time aban- 
 doned his belief in free-trade as an abstract principle. 
 A tariff, none the less, he conceived to be no matter of 
 morals, but rather a simple concern of business and 
 of expediency, and in changing rather abruptly his 
 public attitude upon the subject in 1828 he seemed 
 neither to himself nor to most other men of fair temper 
 to be invitiug just opprobrium. Upon the constitu- 
 tional aspects of protectionism he was silent in 1828 
 and, in so far as possible, throughout his prolonged 
 career as an advocate of high tariffs thereafter. There 
 can be no question that upon this point he was obliged 
 to modify, or to ignore, the views which he so posi- 
 tively avowed in 1816 and still maintained in 1820. 
 It is not clear that he ever fully accepted Clay's doc- 
 trine that the power to lay protective duties is to be 
 derived from the clause of the Constitution authorizing 
 Congress to regulate foreign commerce. But he seems 
 at least to have arrived at the conclusion that, the 
 power having been exercised repeatedly at various 
 stages of the country's history, and being bound up 
 with the inevitable order of things, the question was 
 to be consigned to the category of res adjudicate. 1 
 For his colleague, Mr. Silsbee, and the represent;! 
 tive of the Boston district, Mr. Gorham, both of whom 
 voted against the measure, he had no word of re- 
 proach. To him it had seemed the part of wisdom 
 to "take the evil " of the bill for the sake of obtaining 
 the good ; to them the evil had appeared too com- 
 pletely to outweigh the good to render such a course 
 desirable. "In the place 1 occupied,*' he subsequently 
 explained to the people of his state, "I was one of the 
 
 •Lodtfe, "Webster," p. 170. 
 
186 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 representatives of the whole Common wealth. I was 
 not at liberty to look exclusively at the interests of 
 the district in which I live, and which I have here- 
 tofore had the high honor of representing. I was to 
 extend my view from Barnstable to Berkshire ; to com- 
 prehend in it a proper regard for all interests, and a 
 proper respect for all opinions. Looking to the aggre- 
 gate of all the interests of the Commonwealth, and 
 regarding the general current of opinion, so far as that 
 was properly to be respected, I saw, at least I thought 
 I saw, my duty to lie in the path which I pursued. 
 The measure is adopted. Its consequences, for good or 
 evil, must be left to the results of experience. In the 
 meantime I refer the propriety of the vote which I 
 gave, with entire submission, and with the utmost 
 cheerfulness also, to the judgment of the good people 
 of the Commonwealth." * 
 
 1 "Works of Webster," Vol. I, p. 166. This passage occurs iu 
 the Faneuil Hall speech of June 5, 1828, to be mentioned presently. 
 See p. 187. 
 
CHAPTEE VIII 
 
 IN THE SENATE : THE HAYNE DEBATE 
 
 Upon his return to Boston at the close of the session 
 of 1827-1828 Webster was accorded the honor, June 
 5th, of a public dinner in Faneuil Hall. Despite the 
 fact that his vote upon the recent tariff act was disap- 
 proved by many of his fellow-citizeus, it was recog- 
 nized by every one that his career during his first year 
 in the Senate had been marked by the continued dis- 
 play of ability, independence, and integrity. To the 
 flattering toast "Our distinguished guest, — worthy the 
 noblest homage which freemen can give or a freeman 
 receive, the homage of their hearts," he responded in 
 an extended speech, in the course of which, after ex- 
 pressing deep appreciation of the compliment tendered 
 him, he explained (as has been mentioned) the consid- 
 erations by which he had been influenced to vote for 
 t lie late tariff measure, touched upon his course in ref- 
 erence to a variety of other legislative proceedings, de- 
 livered a forceful argument in behalf of a liberal policy 
 respecting internal improvements, and concluded with 
 an eloquent defense of New England against charges of 
 disloyalty which were all the while bein.i; circulated by 
 the Jackson forces in an effort to cast opprobrium upon 
 the candidacy of John Quincy Adams. 
 
 One passage in the discourse deserves quotation, !><•- 
 cause in it Webster stated succinctly to his friends the 
 principle which underlay his attitude toward every sort 
 
188 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 of public issue. Apropos internal improvements he 
 declared: "It is my opinion, Mr. President, that the 
 present government of the United States cannot be 
 maintained but by administering it on principles as 
 wide and broad as the country over which it extends. 
 I mean, of course, no extension of the powers which it 
 confers ; but I speak of the spirit with which those 
 powers should be exercised. If there be any doubts 
 whether so many republics, covering so vast a territory, 
 can be long held together under this Constitution, there 
 is no doubt in my judgment of the impossibility of so 
 holding them together by any narrow, local, or selfish 
 system of legislation. To render the Constitution per- 
 petual (which God grant it may bej, it is necessary 
 that its benefits should be practically felt by all parts 
 of the country, and all interests in the country. The 
 East and the West, the North and the South, must all 
 see their own welfare protected and advanced by it. 
 While the eastern frontier is defended by fortifications, 
 its harbors improved, and commerce protected by a 
 naval force, it is right and just that the region beyond 
 the Alleghanies should receive fair consideration and 
 equal attention, in any object of public improvement, 
 interesting to itself, and within the proper power of 
 the government. These, sir, are the general views by 
 which I have been governed on questions of this kind." ' 
 To the people of his section, who were prone to regard 
 the building of trans- Alleghany roads and canals at 
 the national expense as a matter of, at the least, no 
 practical concern to themselves, Webster appealed to 
 assume in this matter, as indeed in all others, a point 
 of view more broadly nationalistic. The appeal was 
 
 'Works of Webster," Vol. I, p. 170; "Writings and 
 Speeches, '' Vol. II, p. 20. 
 
IN THE SENATE : THE H AYNE DEBATE 189 
 
 rational and wholesome. It was the direct outcome of 
 a decade and a half of broadening i n flue nee exerted 
 upon Webster himself by the circumstances and associa- 
 tions of his service in Congress and at the bar of the 
 federal courts. In a letter of June 13th, Clay took oc- 
 casion to extol in the strougest terms the entire speech, 
 and especially the sentiments "truly national and pa- 
 triotic," which were contained in it in reference to 
 "the great interest of internal improvements." 
 "Good/' he declared, "will come of your work." 
 
 It was with much satisfaction that, upon his return 
 to Boston, Webster gathered again his children under 
 his own roof, even though for a period of but a few 
 months. Now and again he was seized with fits of de- 
 pression from which only the presence and needs of 
 those who were dear to him availed to arouse him. In 
 the midst of somewhat exacting professional engage- 
 ments he was deluged with invitations to public meet- 
 ings and requests for public addresses from all parts of 
 the nation, especially from Massachusetts and New 
 Hampshire. Only a few of these could be accepted. 
 On the 12th of November, at the opening of a course 
 of lectures to be given throughout the winter by profes- 
 sional and business men of note before the Boston Me- 
 chanics' Institute, he delivered a discourse upon the 
 relations of science and the practical arts, in which, 
 while speaking of course as a layman, he gave evidence 
 of no mean acquaintance with the progress of science 
 and invention throughout the centuries. 1 In the sum- 
 month he presided at a meeting held by a group of 
 Boston gentlemen, at which there was brought into ex- 
 istence an organization under t lie nana* of the Boston 
 
 '"Works of Webster," Vol. I. pp. 175 190; M Writings and 
 Speeches, " Vol. II, pp. 27-40. 
 
190 DANIEL WEBSTEE 
 
 Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge. Of 
 this society he, in the following year, became president. 
 As has been pointed out, with the campaign of 1828 
 Webster had not much to do. He maintained through- 
 out its course the attitude of a supporter of the candi- 
 dacy of Adams, but he did not believe, as did Clay, 
 that Adams would win ; and on both public and per- 
 sonal grounds he was too much out of sympathy with 
 Adams to be able to exhibit zeal in the President's be- 
 half. Of Jackson he knew little, and the little that he 
 knew was unfavorable. The aspect of the campaign 
 which interested him most was the reappearance of po- 
 litical parties, a development by which, however, he 
 was in no small degree distressed. It was only by the 
 logic of circumstances that he was gradually forced to 
 identify himself with the National Eepublican organi- 
 zation, and eventually to assume a certain status of 
 leadership within it. A Jacksouiau he could not be, 
 and in those days one could not well be other than a 
 Jacksonian or an anti- Jacksonian — which is to say, a 
 Democrat or a National Republican. To Webster at 
 this time it seemed that the weakest portion of the Con- 
 stitution was that which related to the executive and 
 that a quadrennial scramble for the presidential office, 
 such as the country had witnessed in 1824, and such as 
 that through which it was at present passing, might 
 easily prove subversive of the government itself. 
 " The love of office," he declared in the Faneuil Hall 
 speech, " will ere long triumph over the love of coun- 
 try, and party and faction usurp the place of wisdom 
 and patriotism. If the contest for the executive power 
 is thus to be renewed every four years ; if it is to be 
 conducted as the present has been conducted ; and if 
 every election is to be immediately followed, as the last 
 
IN THE SENATE : THE HAYNE DEBATE 191 
 
 was followed, by a prompt union of all whose friends 
 are not chosen against him who is, there is, in my 
 judgment, danger, much danger, that this great experi- 
 ment of confederated government may fail, and that 
 even those of us who are not among the youngest may 
 behold its catastrophe." ! 
 
 An illustration of the partisan bitterness of the time 
 is afforded by a little-known episode in which Webster 
 himself, near the close of the campaign, was involved. 
 A number of New England Federalists who had never 
 forgiven Adams for his friendliness toward the em- 
 bargo measures of 1807-1809 were supporting Jackson 
 and were maintaining in Boston a semi-weekly paper, 
 the Jackson Republican.* On October 29, 1828, there 
 appeared in this paper an article purporting to repro- 
 duce a charge made by Adams to Jefferson in 1807- 
 1808, and reiterated as late as 1828, to the effect that 
 during the second Jefferson administration Harrison 
 Gray Otis, Samuel Dexter, and other New England 
 Federalists were engaged in a plot to dissolve the 
 Union and to reannex New England to the dependen- 
 cies of Great Britain. In the list of conspirators was 
 included the name of Webster, and the writer of the 
 article demanded to know, among other things, why 
 '•for three years he [Adams] has held to his bosom, as 
 a political counselor, Daniel Webster, a man whom 
 he called, in his midnight denunciation, a traitor in 
 L808." Responsibility for the accusation was laid at 
 the door principally of Theodore Lyman, Jr.. one of 
 the proprietors of the Republican, and a gentleman 
 
 1 " Works of Webster," Vol. I, p. 172. 
 
 • Alter the election of Jaokaon tin- Dame was changed to the 
 ning Bulletin and United 8tate* Republican, In 1830 the paper 
 was transferred to the New England Palladium, which during the 
 same year was merged with the Columbian Centinel, 
 
192 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 of ability and high social standing. Webster felt the 
 charge keenly and, after ascertaining definitely that 
 Lyman was the author of the article in question, he 
 was impelled to do what no amount of provocation 
 ever again drove him to do, namely, to bring suit in 
 vindication of his name and honor. On indictment 
 for criminal libel Lyman was brought to trial in the 
 Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, in December, 
 1828. 
 
 By reason of the eminence of the parties directly or 
 indirectly involved in it, the case commanded wide- 
 spread interest. The burden of the contention of 
 Webster and his counsel, the Solicitor-General Daniel 
 Davis, was that, whereas Adams's actual charge was 
 only that in 1808 leading Federalists (not named) of 
 Massachusetts had been guilty of treasonable designs, 
 Lyman had referred to Webster specifically as a per- 
 son to whom the libel applied, which was tantamount 
 to a libel of Webster by Lyman himself. Lyman's 
 defense was (1) that the article was not libelous, be- 
 cause, while Adams had not named individuals, he 
 had charged all the leading Federalists with treason- 
 able purposes, and while he spoke especially of the 
 Federalists of Massachusetts, he really referred to all 
 t lie leading Federalists of New England, of whom 
 Webster was one, and (2) that the article — written 
 hastily and in admitted disregard of the fact that in 
 1808 Webster was not resident in Massachusetts — was 
 directed, not against Webster, but against Adams, so 
 that if Webster had been charged with implication in 
 a treasonable plot it was by inadvertence. In view of 
 the fact that Webster in 1807-1808 was but an obscure 
 New Hampshire lawyer, who had never as yet sus- 
 tained any sort of relations with the men who were 
 
IN THE SENATE : THE HAYNE DEBATE 19;; 
 
 nanied as his fellow-conspirators, the charge was so 
 easily refuted as to be absurd ; and the defense of 
 Lyman was shallow and halting. At the same time 
 it is to be observed that there was offered to Lyman 
 no opportunity to retract, or to explain, outside of 
 court. The indictment was based upon the law of 
 scandahim mag malum, or slander of great men, not un- 
 known to English usage but never adopted into tin* 
 common law of the United States. And, furthermore, 
 a criminal suit was brought rather than a civil action 
 for damages, rendering it possible, as the law then 
 was, for Webster, but not for Lyman, to testify. In 
 other words, the conditions of the trial were shaped 
 deliberately to place the defendant at an unusual dis- 
 advantage ; and it is impossible to escape the convic- 
 tion that the bitterness felt by the plaintiff and his 
 political friends toward the "renegade " Lyman played 
 some part in the whole proceeding. 
 
 The jury in the end found itself unable to agree 
 upon the facts involved. Ten members favored con- 
 viction, but two dissented. The case was continued 
 until the March term, 1829, and thence until the 
 November term following. But when the November 
 term arrived the Solicitor-General, with Webster's 
 consent, entered a nolle prosequi, and the case was 
 dropped. Lyman clearly considered the action more 
 political than personal. Previously he and Webster 
 had been on intimate terms socially, and within a year 
 or two they were so again. Tin; reconciliation was 
 promoted by the fact that, in December, L829, Web 
 ster married as his second wife a former schoolmate 
 of Mrs. Lyman. In L831 Lyman was elected mayor of 
 
 Boston as the "Jackson candidate. " The episode, 
 
 furthermore, does not appear to have affected the 
 
194 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 relations existing between Webster and President 
 Adams. March 29, 1829, after Adams had retired 
 from office, he recorded in his diary that Webster 
 had called to take his leave and that the senator 
 had declared that he entertained " no feeling of 
 dissatisfaction." 
 
 When Webster returned to Washington at the open- 
 ing of the session of 1828-1829 he found official circles 
 at the capital absorbed principally in speculation con- 
 cerning the prospective policies and measures of Jack- 
 son. From Clay came the counsel that, pending the 
 establishment of the new administration, the National 
 Republican policy should be to avoid alike professions 
 of support and declarations of hostility ; and with the 
 course thus marked out Webster was in entire sym- 
 pathy. In a memorandum of February, 1829, com- 
 municated probably to Ezekiel, the situation at the 
 capital is characterized in scattered jottings as follows : 
 " General Jackson will be here about 15th February. 
 Nobody knows what he will do when he does come. 
 Many letters are sent to him ; he answers none of them. 
 His friends here pretend to be very knowing ; but, be 
 assured, not one of them has any confidential communi- 
 cation from him. Great efforts are making to put him 
 up to a general sweep, as to all offices ; springing from 
 great doubts whether he is disposed to go it. Nobody 
 is authorized to say whether he intends to retire, after 
 one term of service. Who will form his cabinet is as 
 well known at Boston as at Washington. . . . My 
 opinion is, that when he comes he will bring a breeze 
 with him. Which way it will blow I cannot tell. 
 . . . My fear is stronger than my hope." 1 There 
 is added this exhortation relative to Clay : " Keep New 
 'Van Tyne, " Letters of Daniel Webster," pp.142-143. 
 
IN THE SENATE : THE HAYNE DEBATE 195 
 
 England firm and steady, and she can make him Presi- 
 dent if she chooses." On February 9th Jackson ar- 
 rived in Washington. Ten days later Webster wrote 
 to his sister-in-law that "the city is full of speculation 
 and speculators ; a great multitude, too many to be fed 
 without a miracle, are already in the city, hungry for 
 office. 1 ' March 4th he writes : "To-day we have had 
 the inauguration. A monstrous crowd of people is in 
 the city. I never saw anything like it before. Per- 
 sons have come five hundred miles to see General Jack- 
 son, and they really seem to think that the country is 
 rescued from some dreadful danger. The inaugura- 
 tion speech you will see. I cannot make much of it, 
 except that it is anti-tariff, at least in some degree. 
 What it says about reform in office may be either a 
 prelude to a general change in office, or a mere sop to 
 soothe the hunger, without satisfying it, of the thou- 
 sand expectants for office who throng the city, and 
 clamor all over the country. I expect some changes, 
 but not a great many at present." ! 
 
 The Senate was convened in special session March 
 •4th. This circumstance, together with a number of 
 professional engagements, detained Webster in Wash- 
 ington upward of six weeks, and during the period he 
 chafed like a boy in school. "My health is good," he 
 writes to his sister-iu-law, "but I find, to confess the 
 truth, that I am growing indolent. I would be glad 
 to have more decisive volitions. I do nothing in Con- 
 gress or the court but what is clearly necessary ; and 
 in such cases, even, my efforts 'come haltingly off.' 
 In short, I believe the truth is, thai I am growing old, 
 and age, you know, or rather you have heard, requires 
 
 1 Webster to Mrs. K/ekie! Webster, March t. 1H2!». Webster, 
 "Private Correspondence," Vol. I. p. 173. 
 
196 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 repose." ' To Ezekiel lie writes a fortnight later in a 
 strain to suggest that he was seriously considering a 
 retirement from public life. Over his own protest 
 Ezekiel, some weeks previously, had been nominated to 
 Congress, and although Daniel was extremely desirous 
 of his brother's election, neither he nor Ezekiel was at 
 all confident. "If no change takes place," he writes, 
 "in my own condition, of which I have not the slight- 
 est expectation, and if you are not elected, I shall not 
 return [to Washington]. This, inter nos, but my mind 
 is settled. Under present circumstances, public and 
 domestic, it is disagreeable being here, and to me there 
 is no novelty to make compensation. It will be better 
 for me and my children that I should be with them. 
 If I do not come in a public, I shall not in a profes- 
 sional, character. I can leave the court now as well as 
 ever, and can earn my bread as well at home as here. 
 Your company and that of your wife would make a 
 great difference. " 2 In this same letter, written imme- 
 diately prior to the election, Webster declared that of 
 Ezekiel's being returned he had not "much expecta- 
 tion" ; and the ensuing results proved his apprehen- 
 sions to have been well founded. 
 
 During the second week of April Webster arrived at 
 his home in Boston, only immediately to be over- 
 whelmed by the news of his brother's sudden and 
 wholly unexpected death. The decease, which took 
 place in the court-house at Concord, is thus described 
 by a son-in-law. " Mr. Webster was speaking, stand- 
 ing erect, on a plain floor, the house full, and the court 
 
 1 Webster to Mrs. Ezekiel Webster, March 2, 1829. Webster, 
 • Private Correspondence,'' Vol. I, p. 472. 
 1 Daniel to Ezekiel Webster, March 15, 1829. Ibid.. Vol. I, 
 p. 474. 
 
IN THE SENATE : THE HAYNE DEBATE 197 
 
 and jurors and auditors intently listening to his words, 
 with all their eyes fastened upon him. Speaking with 
 full force, and perfect utterance, he arrived at the end 
 of one branch of his argument. He closed that branch, 
 uttered the last sentence, and the last word of that sen- 
 tence, with perfect tone and emphasis, and then, in an 
 instant, erect, and with arms depending by his side, he 
 fell backward, without bending a joint, and, so far as 
 appeared, was dead before his head reached the floor. " ' 
 Mrs. Webster and the elder of the two daughters were 
 in Boston at the time, and it was there, at three o'clock 
 on the morning of the 11th, that information of the 
 death, which had occurred at four o'clock the previous 
 afternoon, reached them. The wife and daughter, to- 
 gether with the brother and his two sons, arrived at 
 Boscawen at nine o'clock the same evening, and the 
 funeral was held on the following day. The grief of 
 the surviving brother was extreme. "He [Ezekiel] 
 has been my reliance through life, and I have derived 
 much of its happiness from his fraternal affection. 1 ' 
 The tribute was simple, but heartfelt. In response to 
 a note of condolence from Jeremiah Mason he writes : 
 "You do not and cannot overrate the strength of tin- 
 shock which my brother's death has caused me. I 
 have felt but one such in life ; and this follows that bo 
 soon that it requires more fortitude than [possess to 
 bear it wit h firmness, such perhaps as I ought. . . . 
 With a multitude of acquaintance, 1 have few friends; 
 my nearest intimacies are broken and a sad void is 
 made in the objects of affection." ■ Rarely are brothers 
 
 1 Edwin I). Sanborn, quoted in Curtis, "Webster," Vol. I. 
 p. 341. 
 
 •Webster t.» Mason. April li). I^j Webster, u Private Corre- 
 spondence, Vol. 1. p. 477. 
 
IDS DANIEL WEBSTEli 
 
 bound by a tie of such virility as that which underlay 
 the relations of the two Websters. Established in the 
 days of poverty-stricken boyhood, and strengthened 
 through the arduous period of youth and early man- 
 hood, it had continued to the present the most tangible 
 controlling force in the careers of the two men. In in- 
 tellect, in oratorical power, and in breadth of informa- 
 tion Daniel was much the superior ; in integrity and 
 loftiness of spirit he was his brother's equal, but no 
 more; in industry, thrift, and patience he was in- 
 disputably the inferior. At every stage of his public 
 career he had been accustomed to take Ezekiel into 
 council, and not infrequently to defer to his judgment. 
 The loss which he now suffered was beyond repair. 
 
 It fell to Webster during the ensuing summer to 
 give much of his time to the adjustment of his brother's 
 family and business affairs. Ezekiel, at his death, 
 was forty-nine years of age. By dint of persistent 
 effort he had acquired a competency for those depend- 
 ent upon him, although not such but that careful 
 management was required to preserve and make the 
 most of it. By arrangement with the guardian of his 
 brother's children, the farm at Franklin, containing 
 the graves of his parents and of his brothers and 
 sisters, passed now into Daniel's possession, and to it 
 he thereafter made repeated reverential pilgrimages. 
 In the course of time he regained some measure of 
 good spirits, and the idea of abandoning public life 
 was given up. During the autumn of 1829 he had 
 occasion to spend some weeks in New York in the 
 pursuit of professional duties, and while there he 
 became engaged to marry Miss Caroline Le Boy, sec- 
 ond daughter of Jacob Le Eoy, a wealthy merchant 
 and a member of one of New York's most honored 
 
IN THE SENATE : THE HAYNE DEBATE 199 
 
 families. The wedding took plaee iu Deeember, and 
 before the beginning of the new year Webster was 
 again in a home circle of his own in Washington. 
 The elder son, Daniel Fletcher, was now a freshman 
 in Harvard College, and the younger, Edward, was in 
 a preparatory school. The daughter, Julia, whose 
 health was not good, was taken to Washington. 
 
 Meanwhile the affairs of the country were approach- 
 ing a crisis, and in order to make clear the significance 
 of the part which Webster was destined shortly to 
 play in the drift of these affairs some attention must 
 be given to the character of the situation which, by 
 the close of the first year of Jackson's presidency, had 
 developed. To the student of the third and fourth 
 decades of our national history two great facts are 
 patent. One of them is that at the close of the War of 
 1812, the United States possessed a larger measure 
 of solidarity and its people a closer community of in- 
 terest than at any time since the adoption of the Con- 
 stitution. The other is that the period 1815-18.30, and 
 especially the second half of it, is notable above all 
 other things for the rapid growth of sectionalism 
 which took place within it. In 181.") the nation was 
 Hushed with the enthusiasm of victory. Its enemies 
 abroad had been driven to cover, the malcontents at 
 home discredited and silenced. Into the pursuits of 
 peace it threw itself with anreserved energy. In fine 
 disregard of carping critics, and with the assent of 
 well-nigh all elements of the people, it laid tariffs to 
 protect its newly risen manufactures, it appropriated 
 national moneys for the improvement of means of 
 trade and travel, it established a bank for the regula- 
 tion of currency and the facilitation of public finance, 
 it acquired territory tor the adjustment of border 
 
200 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 difficulties and the extension of the country to its 
 natural frontiers. By 1830, none the less, this same 
 nationalized republic had come to be, in no small 
 degree, a mere aggregate of sections or regions, each 
 with its own iuterests, its own conditions, its own 
 demands, its own prospects. New England was a pre- 
 dominantly commercial, changing now into a predomi- 
 nantly manufacturing, section. Pennsylvania was a 
 manufacturing section, but of an entirely different 
 sort. The West, to the north of the Ohio River, was 
 an agricultural section, producing principally food- 
 stuffs and seeking ever a wider market for them. 
 Virginia and adjacent portions of the older South com- 
 prised an agricultural section in decline, with soil 
 outworn, and inclining more and more toward slave- 
 breeding as a source of wealth. The further South 
 — both the seaboard and the newer regions westward 
 to the Texan frontier — was the great cotton-growing, 
 slaveholding section, peculiar unto itself, profoundly 
 conscious of its peculiarity, and, like every other one 
 of the sections that have been enumerated, jealous of 
 its interests and vigilant to defend them. 
 
 To attempt an explanation of the causes contributing 
 to this remarkable transformation — the fundamental 
 fact, in some regards, of the history of the " middle 
 period ' ' —would lead too far afield. These causes were, 
 in part, political. The acerbities arising from the 
 presidential campaigns of 1824 and 1828, for example, 
 when, in default of clear-cut party lines, candidates 
 represented in some measure rival sections of the 
 country, undoubtedly had their decentralizing effect. 
 Much more largely, however, these causes were eco- 
 nomic and social. They sprang, in larger part, from 
 diversity of occupation, of industrial condition, and of 
 
IN THE SENATE : THE HAYNE DEBATE 201 
 
 local interest. It would be possible to illustrate the 
 rise and progress of sectionalism with perfect clearness 
 by reference to the history of internal improvements, of 
 Ihe national bank, or of any one of many other public 
 issues of the period. Most striking, however, is the 
 evidence afforded by the history of the tariff — a topic 
 upon which there has been occasion to touch at a 
 number of earlier points in this volume. The tariff 
 of 1816 was enacted in response to a wide-spread and 
 insistent demand that the infant industries which had 
 sprung up during the war should be safeguarded 
 against the ruin which impended at the hand of for- 
 eign, mainly British, competition. In no quarter was 
 the measure seriously or formidably opposed. By its 
 operation the entire country was expected to be bene- 
 fited. Not many years, or even mouths, of experience, 
 however, were required to inaugurate a gradual but 
 thoroughgoing disruption of this unanimity of tariff 
 sentiment. The woolen manufacturers of Khode Island 
 aud Connecticut speedily developed a point of view 
 with which the wool-growers of Pennsylvania and 
 Ohio could hardly be expected to sympathize ; the 
 Portsmouth ship-builder wanted free hemp, while the 
 Kentucky hemp producer clamored for a share in 
 the benefits supposed to accrue from a protective duty 
 upon his commodity; the iron manufacturer of Pitts- 
 burgh had his individual interests : and so ad infinitum. 
 Under the operation of these conditions tin' framing 
 of tariff bills became inevitably the occasion of log- 
 rolling, of intrigue, and of the display of the most 
 discordant sectional demands. It was so in 1820, in 
 1824, in 1827, and in 1828. Bach section as a matter 
 of course played for the maximum of advantage and 
 the minimum of concession. 
 
202 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 One of the clearest effects of the prolonged con- 
 troversy which arose upon the subject of the tariff was 
 the setting of a great section, the South, in an attitude 
 of unalterable opposition to protective duties of what- 
 soever nature or purport. In 1816 the South did not 
 apprehend that she might not expect to have some 
 direct share in the forthcoming expansion of manufac- 
 turing industry. It was not even clear that, should 
 manufactures fail to be developed, the increased de- 
 mand for raw materials in the North would not com- 
 pensate her for any increase that might appear in the 
 cost of the manufactured commodities which she 
 needed. All illusions upon these points, however, 
 were in time dispelled. Slave labor, it was discovered, 
 could not at all be adapted to the purposes of manufac- 
 ture. The foreign market for raw cotton, it was found, 
 was even more valuable than the home market and the 
 freer the conditions of trade the more inviting the for- 
 eign market was certain to be. Tariffs, it was realized, 
 not only operated to close markets ; they increased the 
 cost of clothing, machinery, and other manufactured 
 goods which the planters had to buy. That the South 
 not only did not profit by the protective system, but 
 actually suffered by reason of it, came therefore to be 
 the settled conviction of most — eventually of virtually 
 all— Southern men. Lowndes broke with protectionism 
 in 1820, Calhoun not definitely before 1826 or 1827 ; 
 but by 1828 Southern leaders were almost unanimously 
 in opposition. 
 
 The enactment of the tariff of 1828— a measure 
 framed by Southern men, as has appeared, expressly 
 to be defeated— caused in the cotton-growing states 
 chagrin and exasperation. That such a measure could 
 be passed seemed clearly to sustain the thesis laid down 
 
IN THE SENATE : THE HAYNE DEBATE 203 
 
 by Webster that, for better or for worse, protectionism 
 had become the settled policy of the country. Id the 
 manufacturing states the protective idea was rampant. 
 Scarcely less so was it in the great wool, hemp, iron, 
 and food producing regions of the West and Southwest 
 The day seemed to have arrived when, in defense of 
 her peculiar interests, the South must do more than 
 speak and vote through her representatives in Cougre 
 Protest hitherto had been by no means lacking. In 
 1824 the senate of South Carolina declared protective 
 tariffs unconstitutional. A year later the lower house 
 adopted a resolution affirming the inalienable right of 
 remonstrance against federal encroachments and de- 
 claring the laying of duties to protect domestic manu- 
 factures to be " an unconstitutional exercise of power. 1 ' 
 In March, 1826, the legislature of Virginia, reaffirming 
 the principles of the resolutions of 1798, pronounced a 
 protective tariff unconstitutional and "highly oppress- 
 ive and partial in its operation." In December, 1827, 
 the legislature of Georgia adopted a report declaring 
 that "an increase of tariff duties will and ought to be 
 resisted by all legal and constitutional means." Other 
 similar expressions antedating the act of 1828 might be 
 cited. 
 
 The effect of the Tariff of Abominations was to call 
 out expressions still less conciliatory in tone. The 
 most noteworthy was that embodied in a set of eight 
 resolutions adopted by the legislature of South Caro- 
 lina, December 10, 1828, and accompanied by an elab- 
 orate report, drafted originally by Calhoun, known as 
 the South Carolina Exposition, [n this composite 
 document were contained the essentials of the constitu- 
 tional argument which underlay the nullification move 
 ment of 1832: that, namely, the federal government 
 
204 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 exists by virtue of a compact among the states ; that 
 the powers which may legitimately be exercised by the 
 federal government do not transcend those which are 
 expressly delegated in the Constitution ; that each 
 state, as a party to the compact, has an independent 
 right, which it enjoys equally with all the other states, 
 to judge for itself the constitutionality of any measure 
 undertaken by the " joint agent" of the states; and 
 that any state, believing a measure of the federal gov- 
 ernment to have been undertaken in contravention of 
 the Constitution, possesses the right to interpose its 
 authority in its own defense, i. e., to declare the given 
 measure, within the limits of the state, null and void. 
 In the substance of this argument there was, even in 
 1828, nothing that was new. The fundamental as- 
 sumptions upon which it was based were as old as the 
 Constitution itself, and in the Kentucky and Virginia 
 Resolutions of 1797-1798 every essential of the Calhoun 
 doctrine of 1828 may easily be recognized, even to the 
 employment, in the second set of Kentucky resolutions, 
 in 1799, of the word "nullification." Calhoun him- 
 self, in the treatises that flowed from his pen in 1831, 
 surpassed by a wide margin the present effort in elab- 
 orateness of historical appeal and in subtlety of logic. 
 The importance, none the less, of the South Carolina 
 manifesto of 1828 was very great. The document was 
 promulgated at a time when the public mind, deeply 
 agitated, was prepared to be profoundly impressed. 
 The Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions had, in their 
 day, fallen flat. Despite the efforts of their sponsors, 
 they made but a limited appeal and elicited but feeble 
 response. The South Carolina pronouncement of 1828 
 met with a very much more cordial reception. Three 
 other Southern states, through their legislatures, ex- 
 
 
IN THE SENATE : THE HA YNE DEBATE 205 
 
 pressed formal concurrence in part or all of the senti- 
 ments contained, and in numerous other quarters there 
 were sympathy and openly avowed support. 
 
 One circumstance chietly, perhaps it alone, served 
 to avert an immediate attempt to reduce the theories 
 of the Exposition to praetice. That was the impend- 
 ing change of administrations, involving as it did at 
 least the possibility of a reversal of tariff policy, by 
 which the way should be opened for an easy and nat- 
 ural escape from the impasse into which the South be- 
 lieved itself to have been driven. In respect to the 
 tariff Jackson, prior to his election, had said little, and 
 the little which he had said was to no practical effect. 
 He was supposed to be mildly favorable to protection, 
 but in what measure he was so aud what effect his at- 
 titude would have upon the existing situation, were 
 mysteries no man could fathom. From the point of 
 view of the South there was at least some ground for 
 hope, and the disposition which almost universally 
 prevailed was to give the new executive a chance and 
 await developments. From the inaugural it was im- 
 possible to glean any distinct foresh ado wings of policy, 
 and the issue rested until the convening of the Twenty- 
 first Congress, December 7, 1820. In his firsl annual 
 message Jackson spoke at some length of the tariff, but 
 beyond a few specific recommendations respecting 
 schedules he said little that was of definite import. 
 One thing, however, was manifest: he did not an- 
 nounce, nor even counsel, the adoption of a policy 
 of systematic tariff reduction. On the contrary, his 
 assumption that there would long continue to accrue 
 from the tariff a surplus of revenue seemed clearly to 
 indicate his purpose not at any subsequent time to ad- 
 vocate the renunciation of protectionism. He even 
 
206 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 suggested an amendment to the Constitution, if it 
 should be deemed necessary, to authorize the distribu- 
 tion among the states of the recurring surpluses. The 
 South was disappointed grievously; and, although 
 there was required the sting of yet another protection- 
 ist tariff law before nullification should be undertaken, 
 it is not too much to say that with the sending in of 
 the first Jackson message to Congress the fateful issue 
 was definitely reopened. 
 
 It was at this critical juncture that there took place 
 on the floor of the Senate one of the most memorable 
 of debates, participated in by two of the most skilled 
 debaters, and upon the most fundamental of subjects 
 known to American history. December 29, 1829, 
 Samuel A. Foote, senator from Connecticut, introduced 
 in the Senate a resolution whereby the Committee on 
 Public Lands was instructed to inquire into the expe- 
 diency of limiting for a period the sales of public lands 
 to such lands as had theretofore been placed upon the 
 market and were subject to entry at the minimum 
 price of $1.25 per acre. In itself, the resolution was 
 harmless enough. It had been pointed out by the 
 commissioner of the land office that the supply of land 
 upon the market far exceeded the demand and that 
 sales were proceeding in a sluggish and haphazard 
 manner, and Senator Foote proposed simply that the 
 placing of new lands upon the market should be dis- 
 i iontinued pending an investigation of the conditions 
 attending current sales. No sooner did the resolution 
 make its appearance, however, than it was challenged 
 by the representatives of the Middle West, and it was 
 only over vigorous protest that its consideration was 
 
 ■t for the eleventh day of January, 1830. The debate 
 upon it was begun, in point of fact, on the thirteenth. 
 
EN THE SENATE : THE HAYNE DEBATE 207 
 
 On the eighteenth Senator Benton, of Missouri, deliv- 
 ered a lengthy speech in which it was maintained that 
 the West had been called upon much too frequently 
 to sacrifice its interests at the behest of the East, that 
 the prosperity of the West depended absolutely upon 
 the rapid and unobstructed settlement of the country, 
 and that the present measure, by imposing restrictions 
 upon the sale of public lands, was calculated to retard 
 the progress of the section of the nation which the 
 speaker represented. A number of members partici- 
 pated in the general discussion that followed, among 
 them Holmes, of Maine, who spoke in defense of the 
 resolution. The last speaker of the day was Kobert Y. 
 Hayne, of South Carolina. 
 
 Hayne belonged to the younger group of members of 
 the upper house. He was representative of all that was 
 proudest and best in the South Carolina of his time — a 
 man of education and dignity, an able lawyer, a fluent 
 orator, a persuasive debater, and an adroit parliamen- 
 tarian. Since his election to the popular brauch of the 
 legislature of his state in 1814 he had risen rapidly in 
 the public eye. In 1822 he was chosen to the United 
 States Senate, and in 1823 he took his seat in that 
 body. At Washington he won almost instant distinc- 
 tion by a powerful speech in opposition to the tariff 
 of 1824, and in the years that ensued lie came to be 
 known and feared as the ablest and boldest spokesman 
 of the South in the upper house. As early as 1826, 
 during the course of the debates on the Panama mis 
 sion, he sounded the threat thai secession would be the 
 remedy to which resort would be had in the event that 
 
 the security of the slaveholding interests should con- 
 tinue to be menaced, hi 1828 lie was reelected to the 
 Senate by unanimous vote of the South Carolina legis 
 
208 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 lature, and during the troubled period which followed 
 the enactment of the tariff of that year he assumed 
 within his state a position of more open, if not more 
 effective, leadership than even that occupied by Cal- 
 houn. As yet, in 1830, it should be observed, Calhoun 
 was silenced in a measure by his tenure of the vice- 
 presidential office. 
 
 In his speech of January 19th Hayne vigorously 
 attacked the Foote resolution. He contended, in the 
 first place, that its adoption would impose a restriction 
 upon the natural development of the West and that it 
 indubitably was, as Benton and other Western senators 
 had contended, an expression of Eastern jealousy of, 
 and unfriendliness toward, the West. He made much 
 of the argument that there existed a natural sympathy 
 between the West and the South, and called upon the 
 West to recognize in the South, rather than in the 
 East, its logical ally. The proposed measure, he 
 urged, was but one manifestation of the deep-seated 
 disposition on the part of the East, and particularly 
 New England, to check westward migration, to build 
 up manufactures, and to perpetuate indefinitely the 
 protective system. Finally, there was deprecation of 
 all " unnecessary extension of the powers or the in- 
 fluence of the Legislature or Executive of the Union 
 over the States, or the people of the States." 
 
 At the moment when Hayne began speaking Web- 
 ster, quite by chance it appears, came into the Senate 
 chamber from the Supreme Court. Completely en- 
 grossed by pending business in the Court, he had 
 given thus far little or no attention to a debate whose 
 principal feature appeared to be the readiness of the 
 speakers to wauder from the point at issue. On the 
 next day, the 20th, argument was to begin in an im- 
 
IN THE SENATE : THE HAYNE DEBATE 209 
 
 portaut cause in which Webster was employed, that of 
 Carver's Lessees vs. John Jacob Astor, arising oat 
 of a coutrovers3 r between the fur magnate and the 
 state of New York. Seemingly it was only by the 
 hearing of Hayne's discourse that the Massachusetts 
 senator, moved by resentment of the reproaches cast 
 upon his section and alarmed by the frankness of 
 the South Carolinian's particularistic appeals, was 
 prompted to enter the lists. This does not mean that 
 Webster was not willing enough to take advantage of 
 any opportunity that might arise to defend with all 
 the eloquence of which he was master both his section 
 and the Union. It does not mean, even, that he was 
 not, at this stage of his career, half-con sciously seeking 
 precisely the sort of opportunity that now presented 
 itself. It only means that there is no reason to believe 
 that Webster had expected the Foote resolution to be 
 productive of such an opportunity, or that he had ex- 
 pected to participate in the discussion which grew out 
 of that proposal. That the contest with Hayne was 
 entered upon without premeditation is the direct testi- 
 mony of Webster himself. Speaking in New York, in 
 March, 1831, upon the occasion of a public dinner in 
 his honor, he declared : "Seeing the true grounds of 
 the Constitution thus attacked, I raised my voice in 
 its favor, I must confess, with no preparation or pre- 
 vious intention. I can hardly say that I embarked in 
 the contest from a sense of duty. It was an instanta- 
 neous impulse of inclination, not acting against duty, i 
 trust, but hardly waiting for its suggestions. I felt it 
 to be a contest Cor the integrity of the Constitution, 
 and I was ready to enter into it, not thinking, or 
 caring, personally, how I might come out." ' 
 1 " Works of Webster," Vol. I, p. 211. 
 
210 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 At the conclusion of Hayne's speech, on the 19th, 
 "Webster rose to undertake a reply, but a motion to 
 adjourn cut off debate and the intended reply was made 
 upon the following day. The speech of January 20th, 
 characterized properly by Mr. Lodge as " one of the 
 most effective retorts, one of the strongest pieces of 
 destructive criticism, ever uttered in the Senate," ! 
 comprised in its essentials a vindication of the policy 
 of the government toward the newer states of the West 
 and, more notably, a defense of New England as a sec- 
 tion against the charges of selfishness, jealousy, and 
 disloyalty which had been brought against her. Not 
 only was it denied that the East had at any time shown 
 an illiberal policy toward the West ; it was demon- 
 strated by a brilliant review of public measures, begin- 
 ning with the Northwest Ordinance, that again and 
 again legislation admittedly favorable to the West had 
 been carried only with the aid of New England votes. 
 The tendency of such utterances as those voiced by 
 Hayne " to bring the Union into discussion, as a mere 
 question of present and temporary expediency " was 
 especially lamented. 2 
 
 On the following day a member from Maryland, in 
 recognition of Webster's engagement in the Supreme 
 Court, moved a postponement of the continuation of 
 the discussion. But Hayne demanded the privilege of 
 ;ui immediate reply, and Webster was obliged to mod- 
 ify his plans in order to remain in the Senate chamber. 
 The speech begun by Hayne on the 21st and completed 
 four days Inter covered a wide range of subjects. Dis- 
 claiming antipathy toward the people of New England, 
 
 1 Lodge, "Webster," p. 173. 
 
 2 "Works of Webster, 1 ' Vol. Ill, pp. 248-269; " Writings and 
 Speeches," Vol. V, pp. 248-269. 
 
IN THE SENATE : THE HAYNE DEBATE 211 
 
 the speaker none the less reiterated his charges of Fed- 
 eralist disloyalty and accused Webster himself of im- 
 plication in political "bargain and corruption.' 1 lie 
 lamented the tendency of the times toward a policy of 
 "consolidation," aud he pointed to the tariff of 1828 
 as an unmistakable manifestation of that policy. And, 
 citing freely the Kentucky and Virginia Resolutions 
 and the South Carolina Exposition, he developed with 
 some minuteness and ingenuity the fundamental predi- 
 cations, doctrines, and conclusions of state rights and 
 nullification. Throughout the speech Webster took 
 notes, and at its close he rose to reply. An adjourn- 
 ment was moved aud carried ; but under the rules of 
 the Seuate the Massachusetts member was entitled to 
 the floor at the opening of the next day's sitting. 
 
 Already the brilliance of the debate had attracted 
 wide attention. The hotels of the city were filled with 
 people who had come from a distance to follow the 
 course of the discussion, and when, on the morning of 
 the 26th, the doors of the Senate chamber were thrown 
 open, every available inch of space in the galleries and 
 on the floor was soon filled with interested, and even 
 excited, spectators. So great was the pressure that all 
 rules respecting the attendance of the public were 
 waived. Ladies were admitted to the seals of the 
 members, and the throng overflowed through the lob 
 bies and down the long stairways, quite beyond hear- 
 ing distance. In the House of Representatives the 
 Speaker remained at his post, but the attendance was 
 so scant that no business could be transacted. " 1 
 never spoke," declared Webster subsequently, "in the 
 presence of an audience bo eager and so sympathetic 
 
 " i 
 
 ■Webster to Dutton, March 8, L830. Webster, "Private Coi 
 respondeiioe," Vol. I. p. 494. For a graphic description of tbe 
 
212 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 No possible incentive to powerful exertion, indeed, 
 was lacking. The theme of discussion had come to be 
 nothing less than the nature and permanence of the 
 Union. The forces in opposition, represented not 
 alone by the dashing senator from South Carolina, but 
 by the still better known South Carolinian to whom it 
 fell to occupy the chair while the debate proceeded, 
 were adroit and commanding. The hearing repre- 
 sented the finest culture and ability of the country. 
 In the heart of Webster, now in his physical and intel- 
 lectual prime, these circumstances inspired only con- 
 fidence, resoluteness, and fervor. Already recognized 
 as the foremost statesman of New England, the ablest 
 American constitutional lawyer, and the greatest of 
 American orators, he rose with all his superb dignity 
 and capacity to meet an occasion which meant not only 
 the crowning or the collapse of his own reputation but 
 the vindication or the discrediting of the conception of 
 national unity and vigor for which he stood. Again 
 he spoke with such immediate preparation only as the 
 labors of a single night made possible. His written 
 materials were confined to five letter-paper pages of 
 notes. In point of fact, however, the entire previous 
 career of the man had constituted preparation for pre- 
 cisely such a supreme effort. The origins of the fed- 
 eral union, the theories and applications of the Consti- 
 tution, the history and character of the doctrine of nul- 
 lification — these were matters with which years of 
 study, observation, professional activity, and ac- 
 quaintance with great men had made him absolutely 
 
 scene and of Webster's manner npon the occasion see March, 
 " Reminiscences of Congress," pp. 132-148, reproduced in part in 
 Everett's " Memoir, " in "Works of Daniel Webster," Vol. I, pp. 
 92-97. ' ' ™ 
 
IN THE SENATE : THE HAYNE DEBATE 213 
 
 familiar ; and while there devolved upon him in the 
 few hours preceding his speech of the 26th the marshal- 
 ing of his materials and the blocking out of the pro- 
 portions and sequences of his arguments, he was 
 equipped in both mental power and range of knowledge 
 to accomplish the task with a readiness and a thor- 
 oughness of which no other living American would 
 have been capable. 
 
 The " Second Keply to Hayne," as the speech of the 
 26th and 27th is commonly known, opened with an ex- 
 ordium calculated to alleviate the tenseness of the mo- 
 ment and to supply the forthcoming argument with a 
 direct and appealing introduction. "Mr. President," 
 began the speaker, "when the mariner has been tossed 
 for many days in thick weather, and on an unknown 
 sea, he naturally avails himself of the first pause in the 
 storm, the earliest glance of the sun, to take his lati- 
 tude, and ascertain how far the elements have driven 
 him from his true course. Let us imitate this prudence, 
 and. before we float farther on the waves of this de- 
 bate, refer to the point from which we departed, that 
 we may at least be able to conjecture where we now 
 are." ' The attention of the Senate was then directed 
 in a simple manner to the fact that the proposal nomi- 
 nally under consideration, i.e., the Foote Resolution, 
 had been quite lost to view, and in tin- earlier portion 
 of the speech an effort was made bo bring back i he dis- 
 cussion to its point of departure. The text of t he en- 
 tire speech, as reported by Joseph Gales, senior editor 
 of tiie Xafio/Ktl Intelligencer, fills seventy-three pages 
 of print, and of this amount no fewer than forty-eight 
 
 pages are taken up with :i defense of New England, 
 
 •"Works of Webster," Vol. Ill, p. 270; '• Writings and 
 Speeches," Vol. VI, p. 3. 
 
214 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 and especially Massachusetts, against the charges of 
 sectionalism and disloyalty reiterated in the second 
 speech of Hayne. Once more, and at greater length, 
 was reviewed, with a wealth of illustration and his- 
 torical allusion, New England's share in the settlement 
 and development of the West, in the promotion of a 
 liberal public land policy, in the making of provision 
 for internal improvements, and in the enactment of 
 tariff legislation ; and it was denied with fresh vigor 
 that New England as a section had ever countenanced 
 disunion— even that the Hartford Convention had nur- 
 tured the treasonable sentiment which Hayne ascribed 
 to it. Few of Webster's utterances are more familiar 
 than the sentences with which this portion of the 
 speech was brought to a close. "Mr. President," he 
 declared, " I shall enter on no encomium of Massachu- 
 setts ; she needs none. There she is. Behold her, 
 and judge for yourselves. There is her history ; the 
 world knows it by heart. The past, at least, is secure. 
 There is Boston, and Concord, and Lexington, and 
 Bunker Hill ; and there they will remain forever. 
 The bones of her sons, falling in the great struggle for 
 Independence, now lie mingled with the soil of every 
 state from New England to Georgia ; and there they 
 will lie forever. And, sir, where American Liberty 
 raised its first voice, and where its youth was nurtured 
 and sustained, there it still lives, in the strength of its 
 manhood and full of its original spirit. If discord and 
 disunion shall wound it, if party strife and blind am- 
 bition shall hawk at and tear it, if folly and madness, 
 if uneasiness under salutary and necessary restraint, 
 shall succeed in separating it from the Union, by which 
 alone its existence is made sure, it will stand, in the 
 end, by the side of that cradle in which its infancy was 
 
 
IN THE SENATE : THE HAYNE DEBATE 215 
 
 rocked ; it will stretch forth its arm with whatever of 
 vigor it may still retain over the friends who gather 
 round it j and it will fall at last, if fall it must, amidst 
 the proudest monuments of its own glory, and on the 
 very spot of its origin." l 
 
 The portion of the Second Reply, however, which 
 entitles the speech to be considered the most remark- 
 able in the history of American forensics is that which 
 was devoted to refutation of the doctrine of nullifica- 
 tion and appeal for the solidarity and indestructibility 
 of the Union. "There remains yet to be performed, 
 Mr. President," declared the speaker, "by far the 
 most grave and important duty, which I feel to be 
 devolved upon me by this occasion. It is to state, and 
 to defend, what I conceive to be the true principles 
 of the Constitution under which we are here assembled. " 
 The wish was avowed that the task might have fallen 
 "into abler and better hands'' ; but the occasion had 
 been "encountered, not sought," and Webster was the 
 last among men to shrink from the responsibilities 
 which it imposed. The position assumed by Hayne 
 had been that it was the right of the legislature of a 
 state to intervene whenever in its judgment the federal 
 government should transcend its constitutional limits, 
 and to thwart the execution of any and all measures 
 of that government adjudged by it to be unconstitu- 
 tional. The validity of this proposition Webster un 
 reservedly denied. That there exists, in the United 
 States as in all nations, an ultimate right of revolution, 
 and that the people, here :is elsewhere, had a right 
 to resist the execution of unconstitutional laws, he 
 declared to be altogether beyond question. But that 
 
 1 "Works of Webster," Vol. III. p. 317; "Writings and 
 Speeches," Vol. VI, p. 50, 
 
216 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 between implicit and universal obedience to law, on 
 the one hand, and revolution, involving the overthrow 
 of the existing order and the establishment of a new 
 one, on the other hand, there could be any admissible 
 middle course, was pronounced an egregious and alarm- 
 ing fallacy. It being agreed that the people ought 
 not to be expected to be obedient to unconstitutional 
 laws, the vital question, it was pointed out, was as to 
 whose prerogative it was to decide the constitution- 
 ality or unconstitutionality of measures which should 
 be brought in question. The contention of Hayne 
 and of his school was that this power was lodged, not 
 in the general government or in any branch thereof, 
 but in the legislatures of the several sovereign states. 
 Webster's contention was that it was lodged in a 
 branch of the federal government, namely in the judi- 
 ciary ; that this branch of the government was created 
 in part to discharge this very function ; that a federal 
 law whose unconstitutionality was doubted could be 
 put to a test in the courts at any time ; that a measure 
 so tested, and adjudged constitutional, must be obeyed 
 implicitly so long as it should remain upon the statute 
 books ; and that the i>roper recourse of its opponents 
 was not " nullification ' but rather the inducing of the 
 immediate repeal of the measure, or the accomplish- 
 ment of the same end more slowly by returning to 
 Congress a sufficient number of members of like mind 
 with themselves, or even by bringing about an amend- 
 ment of the Constitution. 
 
 The issue hinged squarely, of course, upon the char- 
 acter of the union established under the Constitution, 
 and inevitably Webster was led to declare himself at 
 length upon this subject. The national government 
 was asserted unequivocally to be the creature, not of 
 
IN THE SENATE : THE HAYNE DEBATE 217 
 
 the states, but of the people, who alone can "control 
 it, restrain it, modify, or reform it" Against Hayne's 
 objection that "the people of the United States" 
 meant only the people of the several states, it was 
 maintained that it was by all the people of the United 
 States, in a collective capacity, that the Constitution 
 was ordained and established. "It is, sir, the people - 
 Constitution, the people's government, made for the 
 people, made by the people, and answerable to the 
 people. The people of the United States have de- 
 clared that this Constitution shall be the supreme 
 law. We must either admit the proposition, or dis- 
 pute their authority. The states are, unquestionably, 
 sovereign, so far as their sovereignty is not affected by 
 this supreme law. But the state legislatures, as polit- 
 ical bodies, however sovereign, are yet not sovereign 
 over the people. So far as the people have given 
 power to the general government, so far the grant is 
 unquestionably good, and the government holds of the 
 people, and not of the state governments. We are all 
 agents of the same supreme power, the people." ' 
 From all this it followed that when the sovereign 
 people should become dissatisfied with the distribution 
 of powers which had been effected they could alter 
 it, through the process of constitutional amendment 
 "But until they shall alter it, ,? it was urged, kk it must 
 stand as their will, and is equally binding on the 
 general government and on the states." 
 
 Webster's arguments were drawn, however, not 
 only from constitutional theory but also from con- 
 siderations of political practicability. Using for pur- 
 pose of illustration the tariff law of 1828, he exposed 
 
 |ll \v<,iks of Webster," Vol. in, p. 321; "Writings and 
 Speeches," Vol. VI, p. 54. 
 
218 DANIEL WEBSTEK 
 
 with startling clearness the practical difficulties to 
 which the nullificationist doctrine, if put into opera- 
 tion, would lead. "The tariff [so Hayne had de- 
 clared] is a usurpation ; it is a dangerous usurpation ; 
 it is a palpable usurpation ; it is a deliberate usurpa- 
 tion. It is such a usurpation, therefore, as calls upon 
 the states to exercise their right of interference. . . . 
 Let us suppose the state of South Carolina to express 
 this same opinion, by the voice of her legislature. 
 That would be very imposing ; but what then ? Is the 
 voice of one state conclusive ? It so happens that, at 
 the very moment when the state of South Carolina 
 resolves that the tariff laws are unconstitutional, 
 Pennsylvania and Kentucky resolve exactly the 
 reverse. They hold those laws to be both highly 
 proper and strictly constitutional. And now, sir, how 
 does the honorable member propose to deal with this 
 case? How does he relieve us from this difficulty, 
 upon any principle of his? His construction gets us 
 into it ; how does he propose to get us out ? In Caro- 
 lina, the tariff is a palpable, deliberate usurpation ; 
 Carolina, therefore, may nullify it, and refuse to pay 
 the duties. In Pennsylvania, it is both clearly con- 
 stitutional and highly expedient ; and there the duties 
 are to be paid. And yet we live under a government 
 of uniform laws, and under a Constitution, too, which 
 contains an express provision, as it happens, that all 
 duties shall be equal iu all the states. Does not this 
 approach absurdity ? If there be no power to settle 
 such questions, independent of either of the states, is 
 not the whole Union a rope of sand f Are we not 
 thrown back, again, precisely upon the old Confedera- 
 tion ? It is too plain to be argued. Four-and-twenty 
 interpreters of constitutional law, each with a power to 
 
IN THE SENATE : THE HAYNE DEBATE 219 
 
 decide for itself, and none with authority to bind any- 
 body else, and this constitutional law the only bond of 
 their union ! " ' 
 
 Far from having left to the states the determination 
 of the constitutional questions which should inevitably 
 arise, the people, Webster maintained, had created th< i 
 Constitution with the express purpose of establishing a 
 government that should not be obliged to act through 
 state agency or to depend on state opinion and state 
 discretion. " Sir, the people have wisely provided in 
 the Constitution itself, a proper and suitable mode and 
 tribunal for settling questions of constitutional law. 
 There are in the Constitution grants of powers to Con- 
 gress, and restrictions on these powers. There arc, 
 also, prohibitions on the states. Some authority must, 
 therefore, necessarily exist, having the ulti mate juris- 
 diction to fix and ascertain the interpretation of these 
 grants, restrictions, and prohibitions. The Constitu- 
 tion has itself pointed out, ordained, and established 
 that authority. How has it accomplished this great 
 and essential end? By declaring, sir, that 'the Con- 
 stitution, and the laws of the United States made in 
 pursuance thereof, shall be the supreme law of the 
 land, anything in the constitution or laws of any state 
 to the contrary notwithstanding.' This, sir, was the 
 first great step. By this the supremacy of the Const] 
 tution and laws of the United States is declared. The 
 people so will it. No state law is to be void which 
 comes in conflict with the Constitution, or any law of 
 the United States passed in pursuance of it. But who 
 shall decide this question of interference 1 To whom 
 lies the last appeal I This, sir, the Constitution it 
 
 1 " Works of Daniel Webster," Vol. l. pp. 323 324 ; " Writings 
 itud Speeches," Vol. VI, pp. oG-31 . 
 
220 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 decides also, by declaring, 'that the judicial power 
 shall extend to all cases arising under the Constitution 
 and laws of the United States.' These two provisions 
 cover the whole ground. They are, in truth, the key- 
 stone of the arch ! With these it is a government ; 
 without them it is a confederation.' ' 
 
 In a peroration of unsurpassed eloquence Webster 
 advanced to the objective point of the entire effort, 
 namely, a plea for the maintenance inviolate, and for 
 ail time, of the Union. " Mr. President," he said, " I 
 have thus stated the reasons of my dissent to the doc- 
 trines which have been advanced and maintained. I 
 am conscious of having detained you and the Senate 
 much too long. I was drawn into the debate with no 
 previous deliberation, such as is suited to the discus- 
 sion of so grave and important a subject. But it is a 
 subject of which my heart is full, and I have not been 
 willing to suppress the utterance of its spontaneous 
 sentiments. I cannot, even now, persuade myself to 
 relinquish it, without expressing once more my deep 
 conviction that, since it respects nothing less than the 
 Union of the States, it is of most vital and essential 
 importance to the public happiness. I profess, sir, in 
 my career hitherto, to have kept steadily in view the 
 prosperity and honor of the whole country, and the 
 preservation of our Federal Union. It is to that Union 
 we owe our safety at home, and our consideration and 
 dignity abroad. It is to that Union that we are 
 chiefly indebted for whatever makes us most proud 
 of our country. That Union we reached only by the 
 discipline of our virtues in the severe school of adver- 
 sity. It had its origin in the necessities of disordered 
 finance, prostrate commerce, and ruined credit. 
 Under its benign influences, these great interests im- 
 
IN THE SENATE : THE HAYNE DEBATE 221 
 
 mediately awoke, as from the dead, and sprang forth 
 with newness of life. Every year of its duration has 
 teemed with fresh proofs of its utility and its bless- 
 ings ; and although our territory has stretched out 
 wider and wider, and our population spread farther 
 and farther, they have not outrun its protection or its 
 benefits. It has been to us all a copious fountain of 
 national, social, and personal happiness. 
 
 " I have not allowed myself, sir, to look beyond the 
 Union, to see what might lie hidden in the dark recess 
 behind. I have not coolly weighed the chances of pre- 
 serving liberty when the bonds that unite us together 
 shall be broken asunder. I have not accustomed my- 
 self to hang over the precipice of disunion, to see 
 whether, with my short sight, I can fathom the depth 
 of the abyss below ; nor could I regard him as a safe 
 counselor in the affairs of this government, whose 
 thoughts should be mainly bent on considering, nol 
 how the Union may be best preserved, but how toler- 
 able might be the condition of the people when it 
 should be broken up and destroyed. While the Union 
 lasts, we have high, exciting, gratifying prospects 
 spread out before us, for us and our children. Beyond 
 that I seek not to penetrate the veil. God granl that 
 in my day, at least, that curtain may not rise ! God 
 grant that on my vision never may be opened what 
 lies behind ! When my eyes shall be turned to be 
 hold for the last time the sun in heaven, may I nol see 
 him shining on the broken and dishonored fragments 
 of a once glorious Union ; on states dissevered, dis- 
 cordant, belligerent; on a land rent with civil fends, 
 or drenched, it may be, in fraternal blood ! Let their 
 
 last feeble and lingering glance rather behold the gor 
 geous ensign of the republic, now known and honored 
 
222 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 throughout the earth, still full high advanced, its arms 
 ami trophies streaming iu their original lustre, not a 
 stripe erased or polluted, nor a siugle star obscured, 
 bearing for its motto no such miserable interrogatory 
 as ' What is all this worth? ' nor those other words of 
 delusion and folly, ' Liberty first and Union after- 
 ward ' ; but everywhere, spread all over in characters 
 of living light, blazing on all its ample folds, as they 
 float over the sea and over the land, and in every 
 wind under the whole heavens, that other sentiment, 
 dear to every true American heart — 'Liberty and 
 Union, now and forever, one and inseparable ! ' " x 
 
 Webster's speech occupied some three hours on the 
 26th and was concluded, in the space of approxi- 
 mately an hour, upon the following day. To it Hayne 
 made reply immediately and at some leugth, maintain- 
 ing still that each state is "an independent sover- 
 eignty,' 1 that the union is built upon a compact, and 
 that every party to the compact is a rightful judge of 
 violations of the fundamental agreement by which all 
 are bound together. The argument was closer and 
 more forcible than that made from this point of view 
 during the earlier portion of the debate, but in a brief 
 series of concluding remarks Webster effectually de- 
 molished most of the assumptions upon which it was 
 based. 2 The discussion of Foote's resolution was con- 
 tinued intermittently through upward of four months. 
 More than half of the members of the Senate partici- 
 pated in it ; but long before May 21st, when, in accord- 
 ance with a motion of Webster, the proposal was laid 
 upon the table, the country had ceased to have an in- 
 
 1 "Works of Daniel Webster," Vol. Ill, pp. 341-342 ; "Writings 
 and Speeches, " Vol. VI, pp. 74-75. 
 
 2 .1 
 
 Writings and Speeches," Vol. VI, pp. 76-80. 
 
IN THE SENATE : THE HAYNE DEBATE L>2i 
 
 terest in it. Save for the debate to which the consid- 
 eration of it led, the resolution would hardly be men- 
 tioned in books to-day. 
 
 That debate, however, was easily the ablest and the 
 most momentous since the adoption of the Constitution. 
 It served to set before the country with exactni 
 hitherto uuattained the position occupied by the two 
 great schools of political thought which were battling 
 for the popular support. The contest, of course, was 
 not at all decisive. Large numbers of men whose 
 views had been hazy were led unquestionably to the 
 adoption of the strictly nationalist interpretation of 
 the Constitution for which Webster argued ; but, sim- 
 ilarly, other men of ill-defined opinions were won over 
 by the arguments of Hayne. And probably very few 
 people whose ideas upon the subject discussed were al- 
 ready clear were affected, other than by being con- 
 firmed in their opinions. But the effect was at least 
 to clarify the political thinking of the people of all 
 sections of the country. At some points Webster was 
 undeniably upon the surer ground, at other points 
 Hayne. The facts of history were in no small degree 
 favorable to Hayne's contention, and although Web- 
 ster felt obliged to recur to argument from the intent 
 of the framers of the Constitution and the ideas gener- 
 ally prevailing in 1787-1789, he was in these matters 
 least convincing. Upon conditions and questions of 
 an economic nature, notably the operation of the tariff, 
 he likewise was at a disadvantage, and he strove in so 
 far as possible to keep clear of this ground. The 
 South had a real economic grievance, and Webster wa> 
 well enough aware that it could not be argued out of 
 existence. 
 
 On the other hand, in his contentions based upon 
 
224 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 the impracticability of nullification as a working prin- 
 ciple of government he had a tremendous advantage 
 and one which he did not fail to use to the utmost. 
 The most unanswerable portion of his argument was 
 that wherein he demonstrated that nullification, in 
 practice, could of necessity mean nothing but chaos. 
 Finally, it is to be observed that the logic of the larger 
 phases of the situation lay with the New Englander. 
 If the Union for which he made his plea was not 
 the Union which the fathers intended to establish, 
 or that which actually existed in the days of Wash- 
 ington and John Adams, it was at any rate the 
 Union in which, by the close of the fourth decade un- 
 der the Constitution, the majority of the people of the 
 United States had come to believe. It was the Union 
 of Henry Clay, of Andrew Jackson, of Abraham 
 Lincoln. And the largest significance of Webster's 
 arguments in 1830 arises from the definiteness and 
 force with which he invested popular convictions 
 which as yet were vague and ill -expressed — convic- 
 tions which " went on broadening and deepening until, 
 thirty years afterward, they had a force sufficient to 
 sustain the North and enable her to triumph in the 
 terrible struggle which resulted in the preservation of 
 national life." 1 In the judgment of an able student of 
 the subject, it was the Second Eeply, more than any 
 other single event from the adoption of the Constitu- 
 tion to the Civil War, which " compacted the states 
 into a nation." 2 
 
 1 Lodge, " Webster," p. 179. *McCall, " Webster," p. 63. 
 
CHAPTER IX 
 
 THE CONTEST WITH JACKSON : NULLIFICATION 
 
 The "Great Debate" commanded the attention of 
 the country as had few events since 1789. The more 
 important portions of the various speeches, especial ly 
 Webster's Second Reply, were reproduced in the 
 newspapers, and large numbers of copies were cir- 
 culated in various pamphlet editions. Few people who 
 were able or disposed in any measure to follow public 
 affairs failed to read more or less of what had been said, 
 and the more inspiring passages began to be declaimed, 
 as they are to this day, by schoolboys in thousands of 
 communities. In the political literature of the coun- 
 try the Second Reply took its place at once very near 
 the top. Webster was the recipient of scores of letters 
 of congratulation, some from intimate friends, some 
 from less-known admirers, some from total strangers, 
 some even from political opponents. u The glorious 
 effect of your patriotic, able, and eloquent defense of 
 New England," wrote H. A. Dearborn, "and the 
 triumphant support you have given to the funda- 
 mental principles of the Constitution are not confined 
 to the capital of the Union. Th<" aroma comes to 
 gladden our hearts, like the spicy gales of Arabia to 
 the distant mariner. Never have I heard such 
 universal and ardent expressions of joy and approba- 
 tion." 1 " If anything," wrote Governor Lincoln of 
 Massachusetts, "can rouse the people of the United 
 
 1 n. A. Dearborn to Webster, February 5, 1830. Van Tyne, 
 14 Letter* of Daniel Webster/ 1 p. 147. 
 
226 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 States to a sense of their danger, and a timely protec- 
 tion of themselves and their free institutions, it must 
 be the appeals to their intelligence and virtue which 
 have been addressed to them from the Senate- 
 chamber." 1 "I return my thanks," wrote Madison, 
 " for the copy of your late very powerful speech in the 
 Senate of the United States. It crushes ' nullification,' 
 and must hasten an abandonment of secession." 2 " I 
 congratulate you," wrote Clay, " on the very great ad- 
 dition which you have made during the present session 
 to your previous high reputation. Your speeches, and 
 particularly that in reply to Mr. Hayne, are the theme 
 of praise from every tongue ; and I have shared in the 
 delight which all have felt. I trust that they will do 
 much good." 3 Certain men, notably Clay and Jack- 
 sou, might continue to enjoy a measure of popularity 
 with the masses which Webster could never attain ; but 
 after 1830 no public personage in the country com- 
 manded quite such a measure of admiration for his 
 patriotic fervor and his statesmanlike abilities. 
 
 The sittings of Congress during the spring of 1830 
 Webster found, as in truth they were, largely lacking in 
 interest. There was discussion of the tariff, of Indian 
 affairs, and of the bank, but no important legislation. 
 The one somewhat startling development was Jackson's 
 veto, May 27th, of a bill authorizing a subscription of 
 stock by the United States in the Maysville, Washing- 
 ton, Paris, and Lexington Turnpike Road Company. 
 The veto, which evinced unmistakably the President's 
 
 'Lincoln to Webster, March 17, 1830. Cnrtis, "Webster," 
 Vol. I, p. 371. 
 
 8 Madison to Webster, March 15, 1830. Webster, " Private Cor- 
 respondence," Vol. I, p. 496. 
 
 3 Clay to Webster, April 29, 1830. Curtis, " Webster," Vol. I, 
 p. 374. 
 
THE CONTEST WITH JACKSON 227 
 
 opposition to national outlays upon internal improve- 
 ments, furnished occasion for an acrimonious debate in 
 the House ; but in the Senate it was received with 
 equanimity. " I never felt more completely weary of 
 a session/' Webster confided to a friend ; 4k if it do not 
 terminate soon, I shall run away and leave it. 1 ' ' From 
 various quarters of the country the thanks and con- 
 gratulations of old and new admirers continued to pour 
 in. At Boston a public dinner was proposed, al- 
 though on the ground that numerous Massachusetts 
 representatives in Congress had rendered service so 
 eonspicuous that to celebrate the home-coming of one 
 of the number would be invidious, the honor was de- 
 clined. 2 An enterprising publisher brought out a 
 volume of the senator's speeches — a book upon which 
 Webster passed the comment that it was " well enough 
 except the awful face, which seems to be placed in the 
 front of the volume, like a scarecrow in a corn-field, to 
 frighten off all intruders." 3 From a substantial 
 citizen of Boston came a service of plate as a testimony 
 of " gratitude for your services to the country, in your 
 late efforts in the Senate, especially for your vindica- 
 tion of the character of Massachusetts and of New Eng- 
 land." 4 It was also at this time that, at the sugges- 
 tion of friends, Webster began the composition of an 
 autobiography. The task, however, was soon discon- 
 tinued, and the resulting sketch, meagre at best. 
 stopped short with the happenings of L816. As the 
 
 'Webster to Dutton, May !), L830. Webster, "Private ('<>' 
 
 respomlence," Vol. I, p. 502. 
 
 2 Webster to William Sullivan, Mav ->••>, is:«). Ibid., Vol. I. pp, 
 o()2-oo:;. 
 
 ■Webster to C. B. Haddock, February 6, L831. Ibid., Vol. 1. 
 p. 508. 
 
 4 Amos Lawrenoe to Webster. October 2'A, 1830. Ibid., Vol. 1. 
 p. 507. 
 
228 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 pages were written they were placed in the possession 
 of George Ticknor, by whom they were preserved. 
 
 During the late summer and autumn of 1830 Web- 
 ster participated in a notable prosecution arising from 
 the murder, in the preceding April, of Joseph White, 
 an aged and wealthy resident of Salem, Massachusetts. 
 He was engaged to assist the Attorney-General and the 
 Solicitor-General, and largely through the legal 
 acumen which he displayed two persons of the name 
 of Knapp were convicted and sent to the gallows. By 
 the attorneys for the defense it was charged that Web- 
 ster, in violation of statute, was receiving compensa- 
 tion from a private source ; but the court did not sus- 
 tain the objection. The Knapp trials demonstrated, 
 among other things, that Webster's skill as an orator 
 before legislative bodies had not been developed at the 
 expense of his power to argue after the fashion de- 
 manded by courts of law. 1 
 
 Scarcely was Jackson well established in the presi- 
 dential office before the political leaders began to plan 
 toward the election of 1832. The contest of 1828 had 
 hinged primarily upon the personal issue of the vindi- 
 cation of the people's choice in 1824, and throughout 
 the era of Jacksonian politics the element of personal 
 leadership and personal loyalty never ceased to be of 
 prime importance. During the years of Jackson's 
 presidency, however, the crystallization of political 
 parties which had set in after the election of 1824 
 proceeded with rapidity, and from the political devel- 
 opments of this period sprang the two great parties- 
 Democrat and Whig— which throughout the remain- 
 
 1 Webster's argument in the Knapp ease is printed in "Works 
 of Webster," Vol. VI, pp. 41-105, and " Writings and Speeches," 
 Vol. XI, pp. 41-105. 
 
 
THE CONTEST WITH JACKSON 229 
 
 ing two decades covered by Webster's lifetime divided 
 between them the support of the mass of the nation. 
 The composition of the Democratic party was deter- 
 mined upon lines that were simple and obvious. The 
 Democrats originally were merely the adherents of 
 Jackson. Their basal principles were the rule of the 
 people and a moderately strict construction of the 
 Constitution. In 1828 the first of these meant specifi- 
 cally the election of Jackson ; the second, the cessation 
 of internal improvements at the national cost and a 
 serious questioning of the validity of protective tariffs 
 and of the maintenance of a national bank. After the 
 accession of the party to power in 1829 both were 
 given broader and varied applications as public devel- 
 opments afforded occasion. 
 
 The elements which stood outside of, and in oppo- 
 sition to, the Democratic party were heterogeneous 
 and loosely organized. The principal tie by which 
 they were held in some sort of affiliation was a com- 
 mon opposition to Jackson and Jacksoniauism, and 
 even after, in 1834, the several anti-administration 
 groups became outwardly amalgamated under the 
 general designation of the Whig party, the interests 
 which they possessed in common consisted always 
 more largely of political autipathies than of construct- 
 ive policies. In 1828, and during the ensuing three 
 or four years, the most important anti-Jackson group 
 was the National Republicans, including, in the main, 
 the " Adams men" of the period 1824-1828. The 
 principles of this group were not very clearly defined, 
 but in general they were based upon a liberal con 
 stmction of the Constitution, and they included the 
 advocacy of internal improvements, of protectionism, 
 and the maintenance of the national bank, and depre- 
 
230 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 cation of the elevation of a military hero to the presi- 
 dency. Chief among the prominent members of the 
 group in popularity and in capacity for leadership was 
 Henry Clay. 
 
 In successive messages to Congress Jackson recom- 
 mended the adoption of a constitutional amendment 
 limiting the eligibility of the president to a single 
 term of four or six years. The suggestion elicited, 
 however, no response, and when the President's 
 friends, principally the members of his " kitchen 
 cabinet," set about the effecting of arrangements for 
 his reelection in 1832 he did not feel called upon to 
 discourage them. During several years Calhoun had 
 been considered, and certainly had considered him 
 self, Jackson's probable successor. In 1824, and again 
 in 1828, when Calhoun was persuaded to content him- 
 self with the vice -presidency it was commonly sup- 
 posed that a single term would suffice for Jackson and 
 that for the South Carolinian the step froni the second 
 position to the first would be easy and certain. The 
 Vice-President at no time, however, enjoyed the un- 
 divided support of his party, and between him and 
 Jackson there arose a breach which of itself was suf- 
 ficient completely to alter the tacitly accepted pro- 
 gramme. During the spring of 1830 Jackson was 
 made aware that when, in 1818, he stood in danger of 
 official censure in consequence of his arbitrary manage- 
 ment of the Florida expedition, it was Calhoun, then 
 secretary of war, not Adams, the secretary of state, 
 who had urged in the cabinet that some penalty be 
 imposed. Calhoun, called suddenly to account, offered 
 a labored explanation, but Jackson refused to accept 
 it, and a bitterness was engendered which time but 
 partially assuaged. As matters stood, without the 
 
THE CONTEST WITH JACKSON 231 
 
 favor of Jackson no Democrat might hope to attain 
 the presidency j and not only did Jackson now acquiesce 
 in the plan of his friends for a second term for himself ; 
 he commenced systematically to groom Martin Van 
 Baren for the succession in 1836. Calhoun's chances, 
 wrecked at least temporarily by the withdrawal of the 
 President's favor, were annihilated for all time two 
 years later in consequence of the collapse of nullifica- 
 tion. It is of interest that as early as February, 1830, 
 Webster expressed himself as " quite sure" that it 
 was the intention of Jackson to be a candidate for a 
 second term. 1 
 
 Among the National Republicans there was an al- 
 most universal disposition to support the candidacy of 
 Clay. From 1829 to 1831 Clay was in private life, but 
 his popularity continued unimpaired, and from one 
 state after another came demand that he be agreed 
 upon as the party's standard-bearer. "As to future 
 operations," wrote Webster from Washington in March, 
 1830, "the general idea here seems to be this: to bring 
 forward no candidate this year, though doubtless the 
 general impressiou is that Mr. Clay stands first and 
 foremost in the ranks of those who would desire a 
 change. I do not think there is the least abatement 
 of the respect and confidence entertained for him." ' 
 From various quarters came the suggestion that Web- 
 ster should himself be a candidate. The proposition 
 was contemplated with interest, and there can be do 
 question that, had circumstances shaped themselves 
 favorably, the Massachusetts senator would have been 
 willing to accept the leadership of his party against 
 
 1 Webster to Jeremiah Mason, February 27, 1830. Webster, 
 "Private Correspondence,' 1 Vol. I, ]». 488. 
 
 - Webster to Pleasants, March (>, 1830. Ibid., Vol. I, p. 492, 
 
232 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 Jackson in 1832. It must be observed, however, that 
 he was ready to admit the superior claims of Clay, and 
 that at no time, so long as the candidacy of the Ken- 
 tuckian seemed to contain the largest promise of party 
 success, did he withhold from Clay his cordial support. 
 The temptation to enter the lists immediately was 
 enhanced by the peculiarly disturbed political situa- 
 tion arising from the Antimasonic movement. Anti- 
 masonry acquired its principal strength in those 
 portions of the country which were the strongholds 
 of National Eepublicanism, i. e., New York, Pennsyl- 
 vania, and southern New England, and by the National 
 Republican leaders the spread of the movement was 
 viewed with unfeigned apprehension. Webster's let- 
 ters during the years 1830 and 1831 abound in allu- 
 sions to the uncertainties injected into the political 
 situation by the new propaganda. It was hoped that 
 the Antimasons might be influenced to combine with 
 the National Eepublicans in the support of Clay. But 
 Clay was a Mason, and the Antimasonic leaders let it 
 be understood that he could never be accorded their 
 support ; that, indeed, on the contrary, they proposed 
 to hold a national convention at Baltimore to frame a 
 platform and to nominate candidates of their own. 
 
 In this juncture many persons bent upon compassing 
 the overthrow of Jackson besought Webster to an- 
 nounce himself a candidate. Webster was not a Mason, 
 and the thought of those who approached him upon the 
 subject was that National Eepublicans and Antimasons 
 might well unite in the support of him as they were 
 certain not to be able to do in the support of Clay. It 
 was represented, as Webster himself believed, that if 
 the Antimasonic movement should make further in- 
 roads upon the National Republican ranks the election 
 
THE CONTEST WITH JACKSON 233 
 
 of Clay would be rendered totally impossible and his 
 candidacy useless. To the appeals which poured in 
 upon him, however, Webster turned a deaf car. Un- 
 recognized that Clay had been, and still was, the leader 
 of the party ; that large numbers of his adherents were 
 so attached to him that they were certain to be offended 
 by the displacement of their favorite by any other can- 
 didate ; and that Clay himself expected the support <>!' 
 his party and confidently believed that he could be 
 elected. Moreover, with the Autimasonic movement 
 Webster had little sympathy. He regarded secret 
 orders as of doubtful utility, but he deprecated the dis- 
 placement of fundamental political issues by issues 
 which were both ephemeral and essentially non-polit 
 Leal. The upshot was that he not only refrained from 
 taking the step which his friends advised but made it 
 clear that, for the time, at least, his support would be 
 thrown to Clay. Firmly lodged in his mind was the 
 purpose one day to be an active candidate ; but every 
 consideration of prudence and of honor dictated post 
 ponement of that day. From Joseph Gales, senior ed- 
 itor of the National Intelligencer, came sentiments which, 
 reechoed iu communications received from other 
 friends, rendered easier the decision. " Of all men 1 
 can say in writing what I would not to your lace) I 
 should prefer you to any other for the presidency. I 
 hope in God the time will come which will give to that 
 station 'oneKoman more.' At present Mr. Claj is so 
 prominently before the public, and SO identified with 
 Western feeling (as you will find him), and, through 
 you and other friends, so acceptable t<> the East, and 
 so qualified by experience, and so allied, and as it 
 were, endeared by late associations, that we must £o 
 for him if we go alone. 1. for one, cannot bear the idea 
 
234 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 of auy other being thought of by those who approve 
 
 his politics. " ! 
 
 The numerous and urgent personal and social invi- 
 tations with which Webster was deluged during the- 
 winter of 18.30-1831 testified both to the breadth of his 
 lame and the respect which his countrymen entertained 
 for him. The most important of the functions which 
 he consented to attend was a public dinner given in his 
 honor March 10, 1831, at the City Hotel in New York. 
 The dinner was intended primarily to afford the citi- 
 zens of the metropolis an opportunity to express their 
 appreciation of the services rendered the country by 
 the Massachusetts senator in the debate with Hayne 
 during the previous year. Chancellor Kent, who pre- 
 sided, voiced the sentiment of the gathering in a tem- 
 perate but eloquent appreciation, and Webster himself 
 spoke an hour and a half upon lines suggested espe- 
 cially by the current issue of nullification in South 
 Carolina. Carefully eschewing party politics and 
 avoiding even the appearance of an attack upon the 
 Administration, he paid eloquent tribute to the framers 
 of the Constitution, portrayed the progress achieved by 
 the various portions of the country under the operation 
 of the instrument, laid emphasis upon the vagaries and 
 the dangers of nullification, and admonished the nation 
 that doctrines subversive of the Union, although in 
 disrepute, were still to be guarded against with cease- 
 less vigilance. In appropriateness to the occasion and 
 loftiness of sentiment the effort has hardly been sur- 
 passed in the history of American after-dinner oratory. 2 
 A visit to the West which had long been in contempla- 
 
 1 Joseph Gales to Webster, March 27, 1831 . Curtis, ' ' Webster, " 
 Vol. I, p. 398. 
 
 'The speech is printed in " Works of Webster," Vol. I, pp. 195- 
 215, and in "Writings and Speeches," Vol. II, pp, 45-65. 
 
THE CONTEST WITH JACKSON 236 
 
 tion was at this time definitely deferred. Invitations 
 from Western men and organizations were flattering, and 
 Webster greatly desired to see the newer portions of 
 the country ; but a Western trip at this juncture was 
 
 decided to be politically inexpedient. It was too likely 
 to be construed unfavorably by the friends of Clay. 
 
 As the year 18:>1 advanced preparations for the cam- 
 paign of 1S32 were pushed with vigor, especially by 
 the Anti-Jacksouiaus. On September 26th there as- 
 sembled at Baltimore a national nominating conven- 
 tion of the Antimasonic party, called under authority 
 of a gathering of Antimasons at Philadelphia a twelve- 
 month previously. Prior to the Baltimore meeting the 
 leaders of the Antimasonic movement avowed an in- 
 tention to place in the field a candidate who should be 
 able to muster the strength of all opponents of the Ad- 
 ministration. There was no such person ; but in any 
 case the performance fell further short of the promise 
 than was necessary. Clay might as well have been 
 named ; for the nominee of the convention was William 
 Wirt, who, like Clay, was a Mason, and who, in his 
 speech of acceptance, felt obliged to confess that he 
 had never seen any harm in the order. But Clay was 
 deliberately passed over, and the chances of a National 
 Republican victory were correspond ingly diminished. 
 Webster was among those who urged most forcefully 
 that the issue of Antimasonry was too petty to be 
 made the foundation of a political party and that the 
 
 National Republicans ought not to go out of their way 
 tor the sake of arriving at harmony with the disaffected 
 
 dements. Yet there is testimony that, following the 
 Antimasonic convention, he was not withoul hope that 
 the nomination of his party might !>»• divci ted to him 
 self. He was convinced that the nomination of Clay 
 
236 DANIEL WEBSTEE 
 
 would mean inevitably the reelection of Jackson, be- 
 cause under no circumstances might the Antimasons 
 be expected to give Clay their support 5 but with him- 
 self, a non-Mason, as a candidate, he believed the chance 
 of party unification and victory would be at least fair. 
 The members of the party, however, regarded Clay as 
 their natural leader, and even Webster's more intimate 
 friends were obliged to persuade him afresh that his 
 hour had not yet come. 
 
 At the convention of the National Eepublicaus, as- 
 sembled at Baltimore December 12, 1831, Clay was 
 nominated unanimously, and with him, for vice-presi- 
 dent, John Sergeant of Pennsylvania. On recom- 
 mendation of this convention a national assemblage of 
 young men met in Washington in May, 1832, and, 
 after accepting the nominations that had been made, 
 drew up and adopted the first party platform ever pro- 
 mulgated by an American national convention. To 
 Judge Spencer, of New York, Webster wrote pessimis- 
 tically as follows, a month prior to Clay's nomination : 
 " I believe Mr. Wirt's nomination has secured Gen- 
 eral Jackson's reelection ! I believe he cannot take a 
 vote from General Jackson, but may take a few from 
 Mr. Clay, that is, the Vermont votes ; but a greater 
 evil resulting from his nomination is that it greatly 
 discouraged those who were desirous of producing a 
 change in the General Administration, and greatly en- 
 couraged the friends of the present president. I hope, 
 indeed, for a different result, but I do not expect it. 
 It is true, the events of the session may produce new 
 aspects of things and I am willing to anticipate the 
 best. " ' In the decision that Clay must be the nominee 
 
 (i 
 
 1 Webster to Ambrose Spencer, November 16, 1831. Van Tyne, 
 Letters of Daniel Webster," p. 168. 
 
THE CONTEST WITH JACKSON 287 
 
 Webster acquiesced, at the last, good-naturedly. 
 Passing through Baltimore ou his way to Washington 
 at the time when the convention was sitting, he watch d 
 the proceedings throughout a day with interest ; and 
 after the body had completed its task and many of the 
 members had repaired to the capital, Webster and a 
 Massachusetts congressman, Nathan Appleton, invited 
 a distinguished company to meet the nominee at 
 dinner. 
 
 The conjecture that by the " events of the session " 
 some new aspects of things might be produced proved 
 well-founded. The session, extending from December, 
 1831, to July, 1832, was, indeed, one of rare impor- 
 tance. Its developments precipitated relentless and 
 deadly war between Andrew Jackson and the anti- 
 administration forces ; and, although they did not 
 i udanger the reelection of the President, they con- 
 tributed enormously to the welding of the discordant 
 elements of the opposition into a substantial organiza- 
 tion—the Whig party of later years — destined one day 
 to bring the Jacksonian democracy to overwhelming 
 defeat. Several important subjects came up for con- 
 sideration, but the history of the session centres largely 
 about the contest upon the proposed rechartering of the 
 United States Bank. 
 
 The second bank of the United States was chartered 
 for a period of twenty years by an act of A pi il LO, 
 1816. In its earlier days the institution wasunsuca SB 
 fill, but under the presidency of Langdon Cheves 
 (1819-1823) it got upon its feet and became a powerful 
 and prosperous financial organization. Theeffbrtsof 
 certain states to tax out of existence the branches 
 which were established within their borders were cir- 
 cumvented, and in the gnat case of MeCulloch PS. 
 
238 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 Maryland the constitutionality of the establishment of 
 both the Bank and its branches was upheld at every 
 point by the highest tribunal of the land. For a 
 variety of reasons, however, the Bank continued to be 
 unpopular, especially in the South and West. At his 
 accession to the presidency Jackson was not clearly on 
 record in respect to the Bank, although there had been 
 some indication that his attitude was not favorable. 
 In the inaugural address the subject was passed with- 
 out mentioD. In the first message to Congress, how- 
 ever, both the constitutionality and the expediency of 
 the Bank were called in question, and in the message 
 of December 7, 1830, there was recommended the estab- 
 lishment of a central fiscal institution of a wholly dif- 
 ferent type. In the message of December 6, 1831, the 
 subject was committed to " the investigation of an en- 
 lightened people and their representatives." Late in 
 1S31 the unfriendly position which the President had 
 assumed brought the authorities of the Bank, princi- 
 pally the president, Nicholas Biddle, to a decision to 
 procure with the least possible delay a charter pro- 
 longing the life of the institution. Application for a 
 new charter was presented to Congress January 9, 
 1832, and March 13th a bill framed in accordance with 
 the application was reported from a select committee 
 in the Senate by Dallas of Pennsylvania. 
 
 The Bank Bill was taken up in the Senate May 22d 
 and was debated in detail until June 11th, when it was 
 passed by a vote of twenty-eight to twenty. In the 
 House of Bepresentatives a bill on the subject, reported 
 February 10th, was displaced by the Senate bill, which 
 was adopted, July 3d, by a vote of 107 to 80. The 
 handling of the measure in the upper chamber was 
 managed principally by Webster. Although not one 
 
THE CONTEST WITH JACKSON 
 
 of those who urged the pressing of the issue at so early 
 a date, Webster believed that, since the future of the 
 Bank had been brought iu question, action ought to be 
 taken which should render the perpetuity of the in- 
 stitution certain. On May 26th lie spoke at 
 length in advocacy of the bill, dwelling rather more 
 upon the aspect of expediency than upou that of con- 
 stitutionality, because the real extent of the constitu- 
 tional objections that would have to be encounter 
 was as yet unknown ; and three days later he oppose d 
 successfully au amendment in accordance with which 
 branches of the Bank, established only with the con- 
 sent of the states in which they were located, should be 
 subject to state taxation in like manner as other banks. 1 
 The substance of Webster's contention was that the 
 Bank, during its sixteen years of existence, had as- 
 sisted in the maintenance of a sound and uniform cur- 
 rency, had facilitated the collection and disbursement 
 of the public revenue, had imparted stability to the 
 rates of foreign exchanges, had promoted the interests 
 of agriculture, commerce, and manufactures — in short, 
 had " sought the accomplishment of the public pur- 
 poses designed by its institution with distinguished 
 ability and distinguished success." 
 
 The message with which the President accompanied 
 his veto of the Bank Bill, July 10th, was a curious 
 compound of fiscal and constitutional absurdities. 
 The veto itself was not unexpected, and there is no 
 reason to doubt that it was approved by a majority of 
 the people. The Jacksonian contention that the Bank 
 wielded a dangerous monopoly and that the ownership 
 of a portion of the Stock of the institution abroad con- 
 
 1 These speeches art- printed in " Worksof Weh i " Vol, i' 1 
 pp. 391-415, and in "Writings and Speeches," Vol. VJ, pp, 124 I 18. 
 
240 DANIEL WEBSTEE 
 
 stituted a national menace struck home among a peo- 
 ple accustomed at the merest mention of a " money 
 power " to scent danger. The most startling aspect of 
 the veto was the argument employed by Jackson to 
 the eftect that, although the constitutionality of the 
 Bank had been affirmed by the Supreme Court, it was 
 none the less within the sphere of competency of the 
 chief executive to regard the creation of the institution 
 as unconstitutional and to refuse to be influenced in 
 his attitude or policy by the opinion of a coordinate 
 branch of the government. "The Congress, the Ex- 
 ecutive, and the Court," it was declared, "must each 
 for itself be guided by its own opinion of the Constitu- 
 tion. Each public officer who takes a public oath to 
 support the Constitution swears that he will support it 
 as he understands it, and not as it is understood by 
 others. It is as much the duty of the House of Repre- 
 sentatives, of the Senate, and of the President, to de- 
 cide upon the constitutionality of auy bill or resolution 
 which may be presented to them for passage or ap- 
 proval as it is of the Supreme Judges when it may be 
 brought before them for judicial decision. The opinion 
 of the judges has no more authority over Congress 
 than the opinion of Congress has over the judges ; and, 
 on that point, the President is independent of both." ' 
 The position which Jackson thus assumed, subver- 
 sive as it was of all rational principles of constitutional 
 law, was essentially untenable, and the mass of his 
 fellow-partisans had the good sense in after years not 
 to endeavor to maintain it. To Webster it fell to ex- 
 pose the fallacies involved in it, and the task was per- 
 formed in a cogent speech delivered in the Senate on 
 
 1 Richardson, " Messages and Papers of the Presidents," Vol. II, 
 p. 582. 
 
THE CONTEST WITH JACKSON 241 
 
 the day following the receipt of the veto message, 
 when a second vote upon the measure was pending. 
 With characteristic moderateness of tone, but with de- 
 termination born of clear thinking and deep convic- 
 tion, he demolished completely the President's remark- 
 able doctrine. He showed that while the Executive is, 
 and must be, privileged to entertain an independent 
 opinion upon the constitutionality of a measure or an 
 institution whose validity has not been passed upon 
 by the courts, and to govern his actions accordingly, 
 in the case of measures or agencies whose constitution- 
 ality has been affirmed by the highest tribunal of the 
 land neither the Executive nor any other department of 
 the government possesses the power to proceed in ac- 
 cordance with a contrary opinion. Otherwise, as was 
 easy enough to demonstrate, a principal function of 
 the Supreme Court would be reduced to a nullity and 
 the one means of constitutional interpretation and ad- 
 justment upon which the stability of the governmental 
 system depends would be swept away. 
 
 "When a law," it was declared, " has been passed 
 by Congress and approved by the President, it is now 
 no longer in the power, either of the same president, 
 or of his successors, to say whether the law is constitu- 
 tional or not. He is not at liberty to disregard it ; he 
 is not at liberty to feel or to affect { constitutional 
 scruples,' and to sit in judgment himself on the valid 
 ily of a statute of the government, and to nullify it, 
 if he so chooses. After a law has passed through all 
 the requisite forms ; after it lias received the requisite 
 legislative sanction and the executive approval, the 
 question of itSCOnstitut tonality then becomes a judicial 
 question, and a judicial question alone. In theeourtS 
 that question may be raised, argued, and adjudged ; it 
 
242 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 can be adjudged nowhere else. ... 'It is to be re- 
 membered, sir, that it is the present law, it is the act of 
 1816, it is the present charter of the bank, which the 
 President pronounces to be unconstitutional. It is no 
 bank to be created, it is no law proposed to he passed, 
 which he denounces ; it is the law now existing, passed 
 by Congress, approved by President Madison, and sanc- 
 tioned by a solemn judgment of the Supreme Court, 
 which he now declares unconstitutional, and which, of 
 course, so far as it may depend on him, cannot be exe- 
 cuted. If these opinions of the President be maintained, 
 there is an end of all law and all judicial authority. 
 Statutes are but recommendations, judgments no more 
 than opinions. Both are equally destitute of binding 
 force. Such a universal power as is now claimed for him, 
 a power of judging over the laws and over the decisions 
 of the judiciary, is nothing else but pure despotism." 
 
 Of the essential soundness of this argument there can 
 be no question, and it may be observed that the fun- 
 damental task of Webster throughout his public career 
 was, more than any other one thing, to enforce upon 
 the American people an adequate appreciation of the 
 proper function of the judiciary in the maintenance of 
 the constitutional system. This had been the essential 
 contribution of the debate with Hayne, and the mes- 
 sage was reiterated with convincing effect in the speech 
 on the Bauk veto. The attempt which was made to 
 carry the Bank Bill over the veto failed, and the Bank 
 prepared to wind up its affairs. But in consequence 
 of the controversy the unification of the coming Whig- 
 parly was promoted and the breach between Jackson 
 and the opposition was further widened. 1 
 
 1 For the speech of .Inly 11th see " Works of Webster," Vol. Ill, 
 pp. 416-447, and •« Writings and Speeches," Vol. VI, pp. 149-180. 
 
THE CONTEST WITH JACKSON 243 
 
 The speech cm the President's veto of the Bank Bill 
 was Webster's most notable effort during the in. 
 
 Other subjects, however, received at this time his clo 
 attention. One was the action of the Senate on the 
 nomination of Van Buren as minister to Great Britain. 
 In April, 1831, Van Buren, now popularly regarded 
 a candidate for the vice-presidency, and, prospectively, 
 for the presidency itself, resigned the secretaryship of 
 state, and shortly thereafter he was appointed mini.-: 
 to the court of St. James. He went abroad and was 
 received by the government to which he was accredited. 
 When, however, his nomination came up for endore 
 ment by the Senate, a large number of members de- 
 murred, and, in the end, confirmation of the appoint- 
 ment was refused, on the ground principally that in 
 1829 Van Buren, in the capacity of secretary of state, 
 had communicated to McLane, then going to London 
 as American minister, instructions which cast reflec 
 tions upon the administration of John Quincy Adams. 
 In the course of a series of remarks made in secret » 
 sion, January 24 and 26, 1832, Webster explained 
 forcefully his reasons for voting to reject the Presi- 
 dent's nomination. 1 The essential reason was that, in 
 his judgment, Van Buren had been sent abroad as 
 "the representative of his party and not as the repre- 
 sentative of his country." The subject was admitted 
 to be a delicate one and in speaking upon it Webster 
 avowed that he had performed the most unpleasant 
 act of his public life— an act, however, which, involv 
 iug a solemn public duty, might DOl be shunned. 
 There can be little o,uostion that Webster was im- 
 pelled by an honest belief that, under the circum- 
 
 1 •' Work- of Webster,' 1 Vol. HI- pp. 366-388; " Writing* ami 
 
 Speeches," Vol. VI, pp. 89-101. 
 
244 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 stances, Van Buren was not a worthy representative 
 of the nation, but it is certain enough that many of 
 those who voted for the recall of the former secretary 
 were actuated by motives which were frankly partisan. 
 The vote was so arranged that there was a tie (twenty- 
 three to twenty-three), to the end that Vice-President 
 Calhoun might have the satisfaction, by employment 
 of the casting vote, of compassing the humiliation of 
 the rival by whom he had been displaced. " It will 
 kill him, sir," declared the South Carolinian to a friend, 
 "kill him dead. He will never kick, sir, never kick." 
 In point of fact, the consequence was far otherwise. No 
 other single circumstance contributed so heavily to es- 
 tablish Van Bnren in the favor of the Jackson party 
 and to smooth for him the road to the presidency. 
 
 The activities of "Webster during the session in- 
 cluded a careful study of the questions involved in the 
 apportionment of representatives in the lower branch 
 of Congress. To effect the reapportionment which was 
 due on the basis of the results of the fifth census, a 
 bill was introduced in the House of Eepresentatives 
 providing that representatives should be allotted to the 
 several states in the ratio of one for every 47,700 in- 
 habitants. As upon earlier occasions of the kind, no 
 provision was made for the representation of fractional 
 remainders, and considerable numbers of people in the 
 aggregate would find themselves, if not strictly unrep- 
 resented, at least devoid of proportionate power in the 
 national legislative body. On March 27, 1832, the 
 House bill was referred in the Senate to a select com- 
 mittee, and on April 5th Webster presented, in the 
 name of this committee, a carefully considered report in 
 which it was urged that the proposed measure should 
 be so amended as to make provision for the representa- 
 
THE CONTEST WITH JACKSON 245 
 
 tiou of major fractions. 1 " Let the rule be," it was 
 advocated, "that the whole number of the proposed 
 House shall be apportioned among the several Btatefl 
 according to their respective numbers, giving to each 
 state that number of members which comes nearesl to 
 her exact mathematical part or proportion." Not- 
 withstanding the cogency of the arguments which were 
 employed in behalf of this procedure, Congress could 
 not be brought upon this occasion, nor Indeed upon 
 that of the next decennial apportionment, to apply the 
 reasonable and obvious remedy. By act of May 23, 
 L850, however, the principles urged by Webster's com- 
 mittee were enacted into law, and they have since been 
 adhered to without variation. 
 
 In May, 1832, a Democratic convention at Baltimore 
 " cordially concurred " in the nomination which Jack- 
 son had already received at the hands of sundry legis- 
 latures and mass-meetings and complied with the well 
 understood wishes of the President by placing Van 
 Bnren in nomination for the vice-presidency. IN t> 
 platform was promulgated. None was needed. The 
 Administration went before the country solely upon its 
 record. The election in November resulted in a 
 decisive Democratic triumph. Jackson received two 
 hundred and nineteen electoral votes, Clay forty-nine, 
 John Floyd eleven, 2 and Wii-t seven. The popnlar 
 v ite for Jackson was 687,502 : that for (May and Wirt 
 combined was but 530,189. The real object o( the 
 Democratic gathering at Baltimore had been to unite 
 the party in the support of Van Bnren for the vi 
 presidency, and an important result of the election W8fi 
 
 1 For the text of fehia report see " Work« ol Webster/' Vol. ill, 
 pp. 3b'9-:ji)0, and " Writings and Speeches," Vol. vi. pp. MXM8& 
 
 ' These votes were cast by fchi ->f South Carolina. 
 
240 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 to place " the Little Magician " defiDitely in line of 
 succession to the higher jdosL 
 
 Meanwhile the crisis which long had been threatened 
 by the tariff controversy had been precipitated. In 
 his annual message of December 6, 1831, Jackson 
 urged a revision of the tariff, and during the session 
 which ensued a number of tariff bills were iutroduced, 
 exhibiting, however, no appreciable consensus of inter- 
 est or of policy. In the end a tariff measure was 
 enacted, that of July 14, 1832 ; bub the lowering of 
 rates for which it made provision did not involve, and 
 was not intended to involve, any essential modification 
 of the protective system. Thereafter the nullification 
 party in South Carolina fast gained the ascendancy. 
 The state's representatives in Congress expressed the 
 solemn conviction that all hope of relief at the hands 
 of Congress had disappeared and recommended that 
 independent action be no longer delayed. Late in 
 October the legislature was assembled, and by heavy 
 majorities it passed a measure providing for a conven- 
 tion, which met at Columbia November 19th. By a 
 vote of 136 to 26 the convention, November 24th, 
 adopted an ordinance declaring the tariff acts of 1828 
 and 1832 "null, void, and no law" ; and three days 
 later the legislature reassembled for the purpose of tak- 
 ing such steps as should be deemed necessary to main- 
 tain the position which had been assumed. The date 
 fixed for the taking effect of the ordinance was Febru- 
 ary 1, 1833. 
 
 In the face of this unprecedented situation the atti- 
 tude of the Administration was unhesitatingly firm. 
 In a message of December 4th the President again rec- 
 ommended the readjustment of the tariff, but six days 
 later there was issued a proclamation to the people of 
 
THE CONTEST WITH JACKSON 147 
 
 South Carolina in which the right of nullification was 
 
 specifically denied and the inhabitants of the disa fleet- 
 state were admonished to retrace the revoluf ionary steps 
 which had been taken. "I consider, 7 ' affirmed the 
 
 President, "the power to annul a law of the Unit* 
 States, assumed by one state, incompatible with the 
 existence of the Union, contradicted expressly by the 
 letter of the Constitution, unauthorized by its spirit, 
 inconsistent with every principle on which it w 
 founded, and destructive of the great object for which 
 it was formed.' 1 x The proclamation of December 10th 
 takes rank as the ablest state paper of the Jackson ian 
 era. With the preparation of it the Secretary of Stat i . 
 Edward Livingston, is known to have had much to do, 
 but the credit for the bold stand taken by the Admin- 
 istration belongs, of course, to Jackson. The constitu- 
 tional law upon which the proclamation was based was 
 identical with that expounded by Webster in thegreal 
 debate of 1830, and it was made as plain as words could 
 make it that the authority of the federal governmenl 
 would be enforced by means which, if need be, *ould 
 not stop short of the use of arms. When the South 
 Carolina legislature replied to the proclamation i: 
 tone that was deemed derogatory, Jackson was m< 
 than ever aroused, and there was no guarantee that 
 repressive measures might not include even capil 
 punishment of the South Carolina lead. And the 
 
 chief of these leaders was Calhoun, once \ ice-preside] 
 
 but after his resignation of that post spokesman of the 
 
 recalcitrant state upon the Horn of the Senate, 
 
 1 Richardson, ll Messages and Papered khe Presidents, " Vol. li, 
 
 p. 643. 
 
 a Hayne was inaumiratod governor of Sontfa C linn I 1 
 13,1832. Two weeks later Calhoun r . -i-ne«l th. usidenoj 
 
 and took Qayne'a Baal in tin- Senate. 
 
248 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 At the dinner given in his honor in New York, in 
 March, 1831, Webster had warned his hearers that, 
 contrary to the assumption of some people, the menace 
 of nullification was not terminated. Throughout en- 
 suing months he watched the situation with growing 
 anxiety. With the tariff proceedings of 1832 he had 
 little to do, but he opposed every proposal which con- 
 templated an abandonment of the protective principle. 
 On October 12, 1832, he delivered at the state conven- 
 tion of the National Eepublicans of Massachusetts, 
 held at Worcester, a lengthy speech reviewing the 
 existing situation and arraigning the Administration 
 for its alleged shortcomings. The burden of the ar- 
 gument was that the principles and measures of the 
 Administration were "dangerous to the Constitution 
 and to the union of states," in respect to removals 
 from office, the use of the veto, hostility to internal 
 improvements, and tolerance of the defiance which in 
 the state of Georgia had been exhibited toward certain 
 decisions of the Supreme Court. It was contended, 
 furthermore, that the President had not shown himself 
 clearly to be ready to lead the country in resistance 
 to nullification and that, in the event of a crisis, the 
 course which the Administration would be most likely 
 to pursue would be objectionable and dangerous. The 
 judgment which Webster visited upon the President in 
 the last-mentioned matter was clearly premature, and 
 within four mouths the senator was destined to find 
 himself in the curious position of one fighting to up- 
 hold the policies of the President against the opposi- 
 tion of not a few of Jackson's accustomed supporters 
 and fellow-partisans. 1 
 
 1 The text of the Worcester speech is in ; ' Works of Webster, ' ' Vol. I, 
 pp. 237-278, and in "Writings and Speeches,'' Vol. II, pp. 87-128. 
 
THE CONTEST WITH JACKSOiN 210 
 
 The nullification episode stirred the feelings of 
 Webster profoundly. During the autumn of 1832 
 Calhoun published a fresh defense of nullification, in 
 the form of a letter to Governor Hamilton— a defense 
 which Webster pronounced " far the ablest and uio-t 
 plausible, and therefore the most dangerous, vindica- 
 tion of that particular form of revolution which has yet 
 appeared.' 1 Webster's first thought was to make a 
 written reply, and, October 29th, he addressed to 
 Chancellor Kent an inquiry as to whether he might be 
 permitted to cast the reply in the form of an answer to 
 a supposititious letter from that eminent jurist. 1 I m- 
 pressed that the crisis was "indeed portentous and 
 frightful," Kent extended the desired permission ; but 
 when it became known that, having resigned the vice- 
 presidency, Calhoun was to reappear in Congress as 
 senator from South Carolina, Webster decided that 
 the subject would better be threshed out in oral debate 
 within the legislative chamber. 
 
 On January 16, 1833, the President transmitted to 
 Congress a message recommending the enactment o\' 8 
 measure to enable him to meet the threatened resi 
 auce to the laws of the Union. The Judiciary Com- 
 mittee of the Senate, to which the message was referred, 
 quickly responded by introducing a bill "further to 
 provide for the collection of duties on imports. 1 
 Upon the " Force Bill/' as its opponents denominated 
 it, the Administration members, however, fell into 
 sharp division. To its adoption most Southerners, al- 
 though adherents of Jackson, were opposed, and the 
 situation became such that aid was sought openly 
 among the more independent of the anti-adminisrra- 
 
 • Webster to Kent, October 29, 1632. Webster, " Prim* I 
 
 rcepondeuce," Vol. I, p. 596. 
 
250 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 tion members, and first of all from Webster. Febru- 
 ary 8th, at the behest of Grundy and other Jacksonian 
 leaders, Webster rose in his place and delivered a 
 clinching argument in behalf of the bill. He showed 
 how completely it was an Administration measure and 
 by the force of his logic placed in a difficult position 
 those of Jackson's supporters who had been ill-dis- 
 posed toward it. He declared that the bill was ' ' in- 
 dispensable ' and contended that no course was open 
 to the President save that which he had taken. The 
 nation, it was affirmed, was demanding steps such as 
 the measure contemplated. 
 
 The rapprochement of Webster and Jackson fright- 
 ened Calhoun, who thereupon besought Clay to bring 
 in a tariff measure calculated to allay the controversy. 
 In the House a bill to reduce and alter duties had been 
 reported from the Ways and Means Committee, De- 
 cember 27th, by Verplanck of ISTew York, and this 
 measure was pending when, February 12th, Clay in- 
 troduced in the Senate a bill designed eventually to 
 reduce the tariff to a revenue basis, although without 
 definitely abrogating the principle of protection. As 
 early as the beginning of the session Clay had in mind 
 the possibility of a compromise, and he now urged 
 with all his eloquence the adoption of a scheme from 
 which, it was believed, the largest practicable measure 
 of satisfaction might be derived by all parties con- 
 cerned. By Webster the proposition was opposed with 
 vigor. February 12th he spoke briefly upon it, and 
 the next day he offered a series of resolutions in which 
 his own position was stated with succinctness. The 
 last of these resolutions was to the effect that "no law 
 ought to be passed on the subject of imposts, contain- 
 ing any stipulation, express or implied, or giving any 
 
THE CONTEST WITH JACKSON 263 
 
 pledge or assurance, direct or indirect, which shall 
 tend to restrain Congress from the full exercise, at all 
 times hereafter, of all its constitutional powers, in 
 giving reasonable protection to American industry, 
 countervailing the policy of foreign nations, and 
 maintaining the substantial independence of the United 
 States." 1 
 
 For the original adoption of the protective principle 
 Webster, as has been explained, was in no wise re- 
 sponsible. He considered, however, that, for better 
 or for worse, that principle had been adopted definitely 
 as early as 1824, that its mainteuauee had become one 
 of the abiding policies of the nation, and that ii* it 
 were to be abandoned the great mass of capital and 
 business which had grown up under the shelter of the 
 protective system would be placed in jeopardy. There 
 was, in his judgment, no present question of the con- 
 stitutionality of protectionism, and he believed that to 
 offer concessions at a time when the laws of the coun- 
 try were being defied would weaken the position which 
 the executive authorities had assumed and would en- 
 courage the prolongation and the repetition of assaults 
 upon the perpetuity of the Union. He regarded it as 
 especially undesirable to tie the hands of future con- 
 gresses in respect to tariff legislation. It was not, 
 therefore, the mere reduction of duties to which ob- 
 jection was raised, but rather the proposition to obli- 
 gate the government for a term of years not to exei 
 cise its proper authority within a given field, and. 
 perhaps above everything else, the threatened enact- 
 ment of a weakening measure in the face of, and 03 
 reason of, impending resistance to th<- exercise of a 
 
 constitutional power. In the crisis the thing for 
 1 Curtis, " Webster," Vol. I, p. U\). 
 
252 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 which Clay stood preeminently was compromise ; that 
 for which Webster stood was authority. 
 
 Discussion of Clay's tariff bill and of the Force Bill 
 proceeded si multaneously . On February 15th and 16th 
 Calhoun delivered a great speech in opposition to the 
 Force Bill and in advocacy of a series of resolutions 
 which he had introduced January 22d affirming the 
 sovereignty of the states and maintaining that, " as in 
 all other cases of compact among sovereign parties, 
 without any common judge, each has an equal right 
 to judge for itself, as well of the infraction as of the 
 mode and measure of redress.'' The ground traversed 
 was familiar, but now that a state was proposing 
 actually to put to the test the doctrines propounded 
 the arguments which were made acquired added 
 seriousness, if not increased impressiveness. As a 
 defense of nullification, it is commonly regarded 
 that this speech surpassed the effort of Senator 
 Hayne in 1830. It, in fact, may be regarded as the 
 classic treatment of the subject, the product of the 
 ripened thought and experience of the most influential, 
 and perhaps the ablest, exponent of the doctrines in- 
 volved. 
 
 The effort of Calhoun prompted Webster to make the 
 lengthy and weighty reply embodied in the speech 
 "The Constitution not a Compact between Sovereign 
 States ' ' of February 16th. Some days subsequently he 
 wrote to a friend : "It does not seem magnanimous to 
 underrate one's adversary, but, truly, between our- 
 selves, I was greatly disappointed in Mr. Calhoun. 
 He has little argument, — at least so it appeared to 
 me." l None the less, Webster deemed the arguments 
 
 1 Webster to Nathan Appleton, February, 1833. Van Tyne, 
 " Letters of Daniel Webster," p. 180. 
 
THE CONTEST WITH JACKSON 263 
 
 of his opponent worthy an answer which fills more 
 than fifty pages of print ; and by men who were 1< 
 established in matters of constitutional faith the magni- 
 tude of the former vice-president r s effort WU8 univer- 
 sally admitted. The speech which Webster deliver* d 
 upon this occasion was less rhetorical and more closely 
 argumentative than the Second Reply to Hayne in 
 1830. The ground traversed in the two discourses was 
 much the same, except that in the present effort more 
 attention was devoted to the historical and theoretical 
 aspects of the subject. It is undoubtedly true, as Mr. 
 Lodge has emphasized, that the argument from history 
 was the least convincing which could have been 
 employed — that in attempting to demonstrate that the 
 constitutional principles of 1833 were those of L789 
 the speaker was forced back upon an interpretation of 
 history which was not in accordance with fact. 1 None 
 the less, the judgment of Mr. Curtis may be accepted, 
 that no speech, perhaps, ever made by Webster was 
 "so close in its reasoning, so compact, and so power 
 ful." * 2 The purport of the argument was (1) that the 
 Constitution is not a compact, (2) that no state DOfi 
 sesses authority to dissolve the relations existing be 
 tween the government of the United States and the 
 people, (3) that the final interpreter of the powers of 
 the government is the Supreme Court, and (4) that "an 
 
 attempt by a slate to abrogate, annul, or nullify any 
 
 act of Congress, or to arrest its operation within her 
 limits, on the ground that, in her opinion, such law is 
 unconstitutional, is a direct usurpation on the just 
 
 powers of the general government, and on the equal 
 
 rights of the states, a plain violation of the Const it n 
 
 1 Lodge, " Webster," pp. 216-217. 
 •Curtis, M Webster," Vol. I, p. 151. 
 
254 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 tion, and a proceeding essentially revolutionary in its 
 character and tendency." 1 
 
 The carrying of the Force Bill by overwhelming 
 majorities in both branches of Congress rendered it 
 manifest that the full power of the government was to 
 be available for the execution of the laws in South 
 Carolina. In the Senate the vote was thirty- two to 
 one, Tyler of Virginia alone voting in the negative, 
 and upward of half of the members, among them Cal- 
 houn, refusing to vote at all. The vote in the House, 
 March 1st, was 149 to 47. Meanwhile, February 19th, 
 Clay's tariff bill was reported from committee in the 
 Senate. Against the enactment of the measure Web- 
 ster spoke vigorously six days later, but the tide was 
 running too strongly in the direction of compromise to 
 be stemmed. In the House the text of Clay's bill was 
 substituted for the Verplanck project and, February 
 L'6th, the measure was adopted by a vote of 119 to 85. 
 March lstit was passed in the Senate, twenty-nine mem- 
 bers voting for it and Webster and fifteen others voting 
 against it. Thus, the Force Bill, intended to empower 
 the President to execute the laws in South Carolina, 
 and the Compromise Tariff Bill, intended to remove 
 the conditions which had led to the attempt to evade 
 these laws, were brought to the President for approval 
 simultaneously ; and assent was at once accorded both 
 measures. 
 
 The enactment of the compromise tariff provided for 
 all parties an easy and honorable way of escape from 
 an extremely difficult situation. March 15th, by an 
 overwhelming vote, the reassembled South Carolina 
 convention rescinded the ordinance of nullification 
 
 i ii 
 
 Works of Webster," Vol. Ill, pp. 448-505; " Writings and 
 Speeches," Vol. VI, pp. 181-238. 
 
THE CONTEST WITH JACKSON 
 
 and the legislative acts which had been passed to give 
 it effect; and although three days later an ordinance 
 was voted " nullifying " the Force Bill, the episode 
 was in reality at an end, with both sides claiming a 
 
 victory. The settlement was not as Webster and many 
 others would have had it, but it was probably the mosl 
 reasonable that could have been reached under the cir- 
 cumstances. That the difficulty, however, was re- 
 moved for all time Webster joined with many in doubt- 
 ing. "I agree with you also entirely in the opinion," 
 he wrote to an anti-nullification South Carolinian, 
 " that the danger is not over. A systematic and bold 
 attack, now just begun, will be carried on, I apprehend, 
 against the just and constitutional powers of the 
 Government, and against whatsoever strengthens the 
 union of the states. For my own part, I look forward 
 to an animated controversy on these points for years to 
 come ; and if we can sustain our side of the controversy, 
 my dear sir, with success, as I hope and believe we 
 may, we shall transmit to posterity an inheritance 
 above all price. " ' 
 
 1 Webster to Perry, April 10, 1833. Curtis, " Webster," Vol. I, 
 p. 458. 
 
CHAPTER X 
 
 PUBLIC FINANCE AND WHIG POLITICS 
 
 In the early summer of 1833 Webster found leisure 
 to pay the Middle West a visit which had been long in 
 contemplation. Traveling from Boston by way of 
 Albany, he tarried in the valley of the Genesee to 
 study the agriculture of that attractive region, visited 
 Buffalo, where he declined the honor of a formal recep- 
 tion, pressed on to Columbus, and at length arrived at 
 Cincinnati, where, at a public dinner, he spoke for an 
 hour in response to the toast " the profound expounder 
 of the Constitution, the eloquent supporter of the 
 Federal Union, and the uniform friend and advocate of 
 the Western country." By reason of the prevalence of 
 the cholera in mauy of the Western cities, and likewise 
 on account of his desire to return to New England be- 
 fore the close of a visit of the President to that section, 1 
 he refused the scores of invitations which poured in 
 upon him from various remoter states and cities, and 
 from Cincinnati turned back eastward. Among the 
 invitations was one from Clay, urging an excursion to 
 Louisville and Lexington, and one from a committee of 
 citizens of Nashville, the home of Jackson. On the 
 return trip he arrived, July 4th, at Pittsburgh, where, 
 four days later, he was tendered an informal and 
 highly enthusiastic outdoor reception and was induced 
 
 1 Jackson left Washington early in June and, after sojourning in 
 Boston and vicinity throughout the month, returned to the capital 
 July 4th, while Webster was yet on the way from the West. 
 
PUBLIC FINANCE AND WHIG POLITICS 267 
 
 to deliver au address of some length. 1 JSo notable were 
 (lie amenities of the trip that the National InteUigena r 
 was moved to declare : " Mr. Webster has wrought lit- 
 tle less than a miracle upon the party feuds and 
 divisions of the Western country ; he has fairly extin- 
 guished the one and obliterated the other.' ' It was 
 hardly to be expected, however, that the felicitations 
 of an hour would exert au effect that would prove en- 
 during, and ere long not only were the k ' feuds and 
 divisions" of the West as rampant as ever they had 
 been, but Webster himself was plunged afresh in the 
 swirl of party controversy. 
 
 A memorandum bearing the laconic title " Objects.'* 
 without date, but drawn up about the time of the 
 Western journey, sets forth in an illuminating fashion 
 Webster's programme of public policy at this stage of 
 his career. It runs, in part: "First, and principal, 
 to maintain the Union of the states, and uphold tin- 
 Constitution, against the attempts of its enemies, 
 whether attacking it directly by nullification, or seek- 
 ing to break it up by secession. Second, to support 
 the Administration, fairly, in all its just and proper 
 measures; and especially to stand by the President in 
 his patriotic constitutional principles. Third, to main 
 tain the cause of American Capital, American In 
 dustry, and more than all American Labor, against 
 foreign and destructive competition, bj a reasonab 
 moderate, but settled and permanent Bystem of protect 
 ive duties. Fourth, to preserve the genera] currency 
 of the country, in a safe state, well guarded against 
 
 those who would speculate On the rise and fall of eir 
 
 culating paper; and to this end to advocate the 
 
 1 '■ Works of Daniel Webster/' Vol. 1, pp. 291-306 ; "Writing! 
 and Speech. s. " Vol. II, pp. 141-166. 
 
258 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 renewal of the Bank of the U. S. as the best means of 
 promoting this end, and as especially useful in this 
 part of the Country, as a check against the combina- 
 tion of other monied influences. Fifth, to resist and 
 oppose the oppression and tyrannical combination of 
 the Eegency. . . . Sixth, I oppose, vigorously and 
 unceasingly, all unlawful combinations, all secret 
 oaths, all associations of men, meeting in darkness, 
 and striving to obtain for themselves, by combination 
 and concert, advantages not enjoyed by other citizens 
 of the Republic." ' 
 
 At the height of the contest over nullification the 
 Administration had been pleased to profit by the sup- 
 port of so powerful an advocate as Webster, and after 
 the crisis had passed the President took pains person- 
 ally to express his appreciation of the service that had 
 been rendered. It is the testimony of Benton that 
 many people at the time imagined that thereafter 
 Webster and Jackson would be found in substantial 
 accord and that a cabinet appointment or an important 
 post abroad would be the senator's reward. If, how- 
 ever, there were those who really contemplated such a 
 possibility, they must have been persons whose ac- 
 quaintance with the two men was far from intimate. 
 For in training, temperament, and ideas there was be- 
 tween the two the most complete incompatibility. 
 They had in common an undying devotion to the 
 Union and a purpose to promote under all circumstances 
 the enforcement of the laws ; but beyond that they 
 could not go far together. " On many points of what 
 was then the proposed future policy of the Govern- 
 ment," asserted Webster himself in 1838, " there was 
 no great difference of opinion ; but there was an irrec- 
 1 Van Tyne, "Letters of Daniel Webster," p. 183. 
 
PUBLIC FINANCE AND WHIG POLITICS 259 
 
 oncilable difference on the great question of the cur 
 rency." ' And it so happened that throughout the 
 Jacksonian period the one subject which was most 
 persistently thrust into the foreground of congressional 
 and public controversy, even beyond nullification it- 
 self, was the currency. 
 
 During the winter of 1832-1833 the hostility of the 
 President toward the Bank assumed a new and start - 
 ling aspect. Not content with the defeat of the me;i- 
 ure to recharter the institution, Jackson now proposed 
 that the funds of the United States deposited with the 
 Bank should be withdrawn forthwith and that all de- 
 posits should be made thereafter in state banks to be 
 selected by the Executive. The Bank of the United 
 States was to be left to eke out such an existence as it 
 might until its charter should expire in 1836. The 
 project was under consideration as early as December, 
 1832, and by the following March Webster was in- 
 formed of it, although he was not at liberty to speak 
 publicly concerning it. At the eud of ftf ay McLane, 
 who was opposed to the removal, was succeeded in the 
 Treasury by William Duane, who was supposed to be 
 favorable, and after his return from the New England 
 tour, in July, the President resolved definitely upon 
 the execution of the plan. It is suggested by Mr. 
 Curtis that had Webster been in Boston apofl the 0< 
 casiou of the President's sojourn then- he might have 
 exerted his influence successfully to avert the .step 
 which was impending. This is, of course, sheer con- 
 jecture. Without question Jackson was laboring un- 
 der the disadvantage of bad advice upon the subject, 
 
 but there is do reason, Other than his friendly dispo>i 
 
 'Memorandum <>f 1838, baaed on conversation! with Edward 
 Livingston in 1833. Cite<l in Curtis, " Webster," Vol I. p, 164. 
 
260 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 lion toward Webster at this time, for supposing that 
 he would have been turned by a political opponent 
 from a course which had long appealed to him as en- 
 tirely logical and necessary. In any event, on Sep- 
 tember 18th he read to the cabinet a paper announcing 
 his final purpose ; two days later the decision was 
 made public ; on September 23d Duane, refusing to 
 lend himself to the scheme, was succeeded at the 
 Treasury by Roger B. Taney ; on September 26th the 
 new secretary signed the order for the removal ; and 
 October 1st deposits began to be made in the first of 
 the state institutions to be selected for the purpose, 
 the Girard Bank of Philadelphia. 
 
 The effect of this sudden shift in the relations of the 
 government with the banking institutions of the coun- 
 try was to precipitate wide-spread panic and commer- 
 cial distress, and when Congress reassembled, in De- 
 cember, 1833, the two houses were deluged with 
 memorials calling for relief. To the course of the Ad- 
 ministration Webster, who at this critical juncture 
 became chairman of the Senate Committee on Finance, 
 was unalterably opposed. The subject of public 
 finance was one in which he had long manifested in- 
 terest in a very special degree. He represented a sec- 
 tion of the country in which business and trade were 
 highly developed and in which the property of the 
 people was wrapped up absolutely with the mainte- 
 nance of a sound and uniform currency. He was not a 
 thoroughgoing ' l hard-money ' ' man. On the contrary, 
 he regarded paper money as a desirable adjunct of 
 every well-ordered currency system. But he would 
 have the circulation of depreciated paper repressed by 
 the refusal of the government to accept as revenue any 
 paper which was not actually and immediately con- 
 
PUBLIC FINANCE AND WHIG POLITICS 26] 
 
 vertible into specie — a policy which, it may be said, 
 had been maintained without deviation through up- 
 ward of two decades. He believed, furthermore, that 
 the continuous existence of a great financial institution 
 of the type of the Bank of the United States was nec- 
 essary to preserve the stability and uniformity of the 
 currency, and he considered the banks of the states to 
 be altogether incapable of performing the service 
 which had been performed by that Bank. He recog- 
 nized in 1833 that as matters stood hardly more was 
 to be hox)ed for than a possible agreement to prolong 
 for a brief period after 1836 the existence of the Bank ; 
 but the existence of the Bank would be of little avail 
 unless the government should continue to transact 
 business through the institution, so that the most im- 
 mediate task was to bring to bear the pressure neces- 
 sary to compel a reversal of the President's policy re- 
 specting the deposits. 
 
 On December 26th Clay introduced in the Senate 
 two memorable resolutions designed to comprise at 
 the same time a censure of the President and an assei 
 tion of the ultimate authority of Congress over the 
 subject under controversy. The first declared that, 
 by dismissing Duane because lie would not order the 
 removal of the deposits, and by appointing Taney be- 
 cause he was willing to perform this act, the President 
 had "assumed upon himself authority and power not 
 conferred by the Constitution and laws, hut inde 
 gation of both." The second affirmed that the reasons 
 assigned by Secretary Taney for the removal were 
 " unsatisfactory and insufficient." Throughout tin- 
 earlier months of 1834 discussion of these resolutions 
 and of kindred proposals occupied the attention of the 
 Senate almost to the exclusion of c\ erj t hing else, I 
 
262 DANIEL WEBSTEE 
 
 tween January 20th, when he presented a memorial 
 adopted by a public meeting in Boston, and the ad- 
 journment of Congress, in June, Webster alone spoke 
 upon the subject no fewer than sixty-four times. On 
 February 5th he submitted for the Committee on 
 Finance an elaborate report on the second of Clay's 
 resolutions, recommending its adoption, 1 and March 
 18th he introduced and defended a bill for the pro- 
 longation of the Bank charter during a period of six 
 years. 2 On March 28th both of Clay's resolutions were 
 adopted, the one by a vote of twenty-six to twenty, the 
 other by a vote of twenty -eight to eighteen. The sub- 
 ject, however, continued uninterruptedly under con- 
 sideration, for although Webster's bill was not carried, 
 on April 17th the President sent to the Senate a mes- 
 sage in which he protested against the censure which 
 had been passed upon him as ' l wholly unauthorized 
 by the Constitution, and contrary to its spirit and to 
 several of its express provisions," and requested that 
 the message and protest be entered at length on the 
 journals of the Senate. This remarkable rejoinder 
 precipitated a notable outburst of debate. Into it 
 Webster was drawn with much reluctance, for he still 
 appreciated too deeply the services of the President in 
 the crisis which had been passed to be able to find the 
 satisfaction which some of his colleagues found in sub- 
 jecting him to attack. He felt very strongly, however, 
 that the balance of power contemplated in the Consti- 
 tution was menaced by the attitude which Jackson 
 had assumed, and on May 7th he was led to deliver a 
 powerful speech in defense of the recently adopted 
 resolutions of censure. 
 
 1 "Writings and Speeches," Vol. VII, pp. 50-81. 
 a Ibid., Vol. VII, pp. 82-102. 
 
PUBLIC FINANCE AND WHIG POLITICS 263 
 
 The propositions which were advanced in the presi- 
 dential protest were, in brief, (1) that the Const it u- 
 tion, by vesting in the President the supreme executive 
 power, including the power of appointment, was in- 
 tended to give him discretionary control over the 
 tenure and conduct of all subordinate executive offi- 
 cials; (2) that notwithstanding the provision of tin- 
 Bank charter to the effect that the public deposits 
 might be discontinued only on order of the Secretary 
 of the Treasury, in which event that officer should Lay 
 before Congress his reasons for the course adopted, the 
 President might interpose his own judgment, instruct the 
 Secretary to remove the deposits, and dismiss him from 
 office if he did not comply ; and (3) that neither branch 
 of Congress can rightfully take up or consider for the 
 purpose of censure, any official act of the President, 
 without some view to legislation or the institution of 
 impeachment proceedings. The principal issue raised 
 by the Protest was, then, " whether the general 
 executive power of the President is of such a character 
 that legislation cannot direct a subordinate officer t*> 
 perform duties which are executive in their nature, 
 without subjecting that officer, in the performance of 
 these duties, to the control of the President." ' In his 
 speech upon this subject Webster surveyed with in- 
 cisiveness the debatable ground which lies between 
 the defined limits of the executive and legislative de- 
 partments ami sought to show that the position which 
 
 Jackson had assumed was untenable. 1 The general 
 power of appointment and removal was, of course, 
 recognized. Bui it was maintained that, even though 
 
 1 Curtis, " Webster," Vol. I, p. 489. 
 
 1 *' Works of Webster." Vol. IV, pp. 103-117 ; 'Writing ind 
 Speeches," Vol. VII, pp. 103-147. 
 
264 DANIEL WEBSTEB 
 
 the President might change the officer, the duties of 
 the office must remain as determined by Congress, and 
 they must be discharged by the successor in accord- 
 ance with the law. It cannot be said that the argu- 
 ment, masterful as it was, was at all points conclusive. 
 The removal of the deposits is commonly adjudged 
 a serious mistake, but the controversy which arose 
 from it, in so far as it was of a purely constitutional 
 character, involved some elements of advantage on 
 both sides. The ultimate right of protest which Jack- 
 son asserted can hardly be questioned ; nor can the 
 President's contention that the grant of the power of 
 impeachment precludes the indulgence of Congress in 
 mere " censure." On the other hand, it is scarcely to 
 be admitted that the President had a right to demand 
 the admission of his protest to a place in the Senate 
 journals. 
 
 Immediately following Webster's speech the Senate 
 adopted, by substantial majorities, a series of resolu- 
 tions declaring that the Protest asserted powers as be- 
 longing to the President which were inconsistent with 
 the authority of Congress and contrary to the Constitu- 
 tion, that the President had "no right to send a protest 
 to the Senate against any of its proceedings," and that 
 the Protest should not be entered upon the journals. 
 The opposition majority was powerless, however, to 
 do more than thus to express its hostility, for in the 
 House of Eepresentatives the Jacksonians commanded 
 a substantial majority, and when the Senate resolu- 
 tions were transmitted to that body they were merely 
 laid upon the table. So far as the immediate circum- 
 stance went, the triumph of the President was com- 
 plete. A clear result of the controversy, however, had 
 been to consolidate more effectively than hitherto the 
 
PUBLIC FINANCE AND WHIG POLITICS 265 
 
 elements from which the Whig part} was being 
 gradually evolved ; and in time the effect of this con- 
 solidation was destined to be felt in the collapse of tin- 
 Jacksonian regime under repeated Whig assaults. 
 
 During the sessions of 1834-1835 and 1835-1836 the 
 attention of Congress was absorbed in no small measure 
 by a threatening situation which had arisen between 
 the United States and France. By a convention con- 
 cluded July 4, 1831, the French Government had 
 obligated itself to pay to the United States the sum of 
 twenty-five million francs in liquidation of claims of 
 American citizens arising from commercial injuries re- 
 ceived during the era of the Napoleonic wars. Pay- 
 ment was to be made in six annual instalments, begin- 
 ning one year from the exchange of ratifications of the 
 treaty (February 2, 1832). The treaty was unpopular 
 in France and when, in February, 1833, the first pay 
 meut fell due, a draft on the Minister of Finance, 
 presented through the Bank of the United States, was 
 refused on the ground that the Chambers had ad 
 journed without making an appropriation to meet it. 
 Two years of inaction and vain parleyings ensued, and 
 in December, 1834, President Jackson, irritated by the 
 delay, laid before Congress a complete history of the 
 negotiations and recommeuded that a measure be 
 passed authorizing reprisals upon French property in 
 the event that no appropriation should be made al 
 the approaching session of the French Chambers. In 
 Paris the President's recommendation was taken asa 
 threat, and in January, 1835, the French minister al 
 Washington was recalled and the American minister 
 to France, tin' ex-secretary of Btate Livingston, v. 
 given his passports. The Chambers were disposed to 
 insist that before payment of the debt should !><• began 
 
266 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 President Jackson should be required to tender an 
 apology for the insult which had been offered. Noth- 
 ing was more certain than that such an apology would 
 not be forthcoming, and war seemed imminent. In 
 the Senate, however, the Committee on Foreign Af- 
 fairs, under the chairmanship of Clay, reported that it 
 would be inexpedient to adopt the President's recom- 
 mendation. "There are," wrote Webster, "three 
 parties in Congress on this question : the Jackson 
 party proper, which, like its chief, feels very warlike ; 
 the Southern anti-Jackson men, who seem to me to be 
 in the other extreme ; . . . and then there is the 
 rest of us, who desire to say and do nothing to en- 
 courage France in her neglect of our rights, and who 
 are not willing, nevertheless, to hazard the peace of 
 the country without absolute necessity." ! It was this 
 third group which, fortunately for all concerned, con- 
 trolled the policy of the houses throughout the crisis. 
 In the annual message of December 7, 1835, the Presi- 
 dent declared that the honor of his country should 
 never be stained by an apology from him "for the 
 statement of truth and the performance of duty," 
 and in a special message, January 15, 1836, he again 
 counseled reprisals and naval preparedness. On Jan- 
 uary 27th, however, Great Britain offered mediation 
 and, the offer being accepted, Jackson was able to in- 
 form Congress, May 10th, that the difficulty had been 
 adjusted and that the four instalments then due had 
 been paid. 
 
 In connection with the French episode Webster de- 
 livered in the Senate two notable speeches. The first 
 was in defense of a bill proposing that the United 
 
 'Webster to William Sullivan, February 23, 1835. Curtis, 
 11 Webster," Vol. I, pp. 515-516. 
 
PUBLIC FINANCE AND WHIG POLITICS 267 
 
 States should assume a deiiuite obligation lor claims 
 arising from French depredations on American com- 
 merce prior to the conclusion of the convention of 
 October 1, 1800. These claims, aggregating live mil- 
 lion dollars, had been excluded from the convent ion 
 named, and throughout a generation the claimants, 
 cut off from recourse against France, had Insisted that 
 the government of the United States should make 
 reparation for their losses. In his speech of January 
 12, 1835, Webster urged that the question was not one 
 of party nor of public policy but one siinpty of justice 
 to private individuals. 1 Over the opposition of Benton, 
 Tyler, Wright, and other influential members, the 
 measure was carried in the Senate, January 28th. In 
 the House, however, it failed to be acted upon, and in 
 point of met the " French spoliation claims'' were 
 never put in the way of actual adjustment until, in 
 18S5, they were submitted formally to the Court of 
 Claims. 
 
 The second of Webster's important speeches oc- 
 casioned by the French entanglement was that of Jan- 
 uary 14, 1836, in explanation of his opposition to the 
 Fortification Bill of the previous year. March 3, 1 835, 
 when the last session of the Twenty-fourth Congress \\ as 
 almost at an end, the House of Representatives adopted 
 and transmitted to the Senate an amendment to the 
 pending Fortification Bill stipulating thai the sum of 
 three million dollars should be appropriated, to be ex- 
 pended by the President for the improvement of the 
 military and naval services, provided such an outlay 
 should be deemed necessary for the defense of the 
 country prior to the next meeting of Congress. In tin- 
 Senate the amendment was opposed with spirit by 
 1 " Writing! and Speeches, Vol. VII, pp. 1.V2-17H. 
 
268 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 Webster, on the double ground that no such appro- 
 priation had been asked for by the Executive and that 
 the objects of the proposed expenditure were left with- 
 out specification. The Senate declined to concur in 
 the proposal. The House, however, refused to abandon 
 it, and although a conference committee, of which 
 Webster was a member, brought in a report favoring 
 specific appropriations aggregating eight hundred 
 thousand dollars, the House failed to act upon the re- 
 port and the entire Fortification Bill was lost. In his 
 message of December, 1836, the President asserted that 
 much injury and inconvenience had been experienced 
 by reason of the failure of the bill and impliedly cen- 
 sured the Senate for the stand which that body had 
 maintained. Webster having been chiefly responsible 
 for the Senate's action, felt it incumbent upon him to 
 make reply, and he did so, January 14, 1836, in a 
 speech in which he defended at all points the course 
 which had been pursued and avowed that if the propo- 
 sition of the House were then before the upper 
 chamber, "and the guns of the enemy were pointed 
 against the walls of the Capitol," he would not agree 
 to it. 1 For the employment of this somewhat start- 
 ling language he was criticized so sharply by fellow- 
 members of the Senate that he was impelled to write 
 out a speech in his own defense. By his more intimate 
 friends, however, he was persuaded that a formal re- 
 ply was neither necessary nor expedient. 
 
 On February 16, 1835, the Senate having under con- 
 sideration a bill intended to reduce the influence 
 wielded by the President through the public patron- 
 age, Webster made a speech in which he discussed 
 
 • "Works of Webster," Vol. IV, pp. 205-229; " Writings and 
 Speeches, "Vol, VII, pp. 205-229. 
 
PUBLIC FINANCE AJND WHIG POLITICS 269 
 
 with fulness the questions involved in the appoint- 
 ment and removal of federal officials and gave expres- 
 sion to some distinctly unusual views to which he 
 clung upon that subject. 1 The extent of the patronage 
 had become such, he asserted, that the mass of private 
 and personal interest by it injected into all public 
 elections and public questions had reached, already, 
 an alarming height. The only remedy, it seemed to 
 him, was to place a restriction upon " the unlimited 
 power to grant office and to take it away ' which the 
 Chief Executive enjoyed ; and the most obvious means 
 of doing this was to bring to bear what Webster al- 
 ways believed to be the true intent of the Constitution, 
 namely, that the power of removal, like the power of 
 appointment, should be exercised, not by the Presi- 
 dent, alone, but by the President and Senate con- 
 jointly. It is well enough known that in 17S9 the 
 question arose as to whether the Senate should be en- 
 titled to cooperate with the President in removals, and 
 that, despite a good deal of difference of opinion, the 
 view finally prevailed that practical convenience re- 
 quired that in the making of removals the Chief Exec 
 utive should be free to act alone. This decision Web- 
 ster believed to have been unwise, if not clearly con- 
 trary to the meaning and intent of the Constitution, 
 and in the speech of 1835 he developed at Length his 
 reasons for so believing. At the same time, he reoo 
 nized that the practice of decades was not Likely to be 
 reversed at a stroke, and he expressed himself as, for 
 the present, content with the pending bill, which re- 
 quired that when a nomination should be made to the 
 Senate to till a vacane\ created by the removal of an 
 
 1 " Workfi of Webster," Vol. IV, pp. 17!' L99 ; " Writing! and 
 Speeches," Vol. VII, pp. 17a-l<m. 
 
270 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 incumbent the nomination of the new official should 
 be accompanied by an explanation of the reasons for 
 the removal of the old one. It is the almost unani- 
 mous judgment of students of our constitutional law 
 that the decision of 1789 was, in point of fact, the 
 only correct one, and that the method of removal 
 which Webster advocated would but tend to diffuse 
 responsibility and hence to aggravate the evils com- 
 plained of. The argument which he made was plausi- 
 ble, but it was essentially speculative in character and 
 was not altogether devoid of the spirit of partisanship. 
 The bill which gave rise to the debate failed to become 
 law. 
 
 Throughout the years 1835-1836 the attention of 
 Congress continued to be occupied from time to time 
 by questions arisiug more or less immediately from 
 the discontinuance of the Bank. On February 18, 
 1835, Senator Benton introduced a resolution to ex- 
 punge from the journals of the Senate the record of 
 the censure of Jackson voted March 28, 1834. By a 
 vote of thirty-nine to seven, however, the proposal was 
 rejected and, upon motion of Webster, the resolution 
 was laid upon the table. A similar proposal, in 1836, 
 met a similar fate, and it was not until January 16, 
 1837, that an expunging resolution was finally carried, 
 by the narrow vote of twenty-four to nineteen. The 
 revision of the records of the chamber which was at 
 last obtained was clearly unconstitutional, but the 
 President was vindicated to his own and his support- 
 ers' satisfaction and " the people" were once more 
 supreme. Against the adoption of the resolution 
 Webster made emphatic protest. " We tell you," he 
 declared, speaking for his colleague and himself, 
 " that you have no right to mar or mutilate the record 
 
PUBLIC FINANCE AND WHIG POLITICS 271 
 
 of our votes given here, and recorded according to the 
 Constitution ; we tell you that we may as well erase the 
 yeas and nays on any other question or resolution, or 
 on all questions or resolutions, as on this ; we bell you 
 that you have just as much right to falsify tin record, 
 by so altering it as to make us appear to have voted 
 on any question as we did not vote, as you have to 
 erase a record, and make that page a blank in which 
 our votes, as they were actually given and recorded, 
 now stand. The one proceeding, as it appeals to as, 
 is as much of a falsification of the record as the 
 
 other." ' 
 
 In February, 1835, Webster took advantage of a de- 
 bate upon a bill regulating the deposits of the public 
 money to propose and carry a provision to the effect 
 that, upon demand, Treasury drafts upon the deposit 
 banks should be paid in gold or silver. In the re- 
 marks which he made upon the subject, February 
 26th, he emphasized the fact that already the disad- 
 vantages of the removal of the deposits were beginning 
 to appear and that the fall effect of the Administra- 
 tion's financial policies would be felt only after the 
 paper of the Bank of the United States should have 
 disappeared from circulation. At the same time, he 
 considered the rechartering of the Bank forthepres 
 ent a dead issue. " I wish to say," he asserted, "thai 
 I consider the question of renewing the Bank charter 
 
 as entirely settled. It cannot be renewed. Pttblic 
 opinion, very unfortunately, as I think, for the coun- 
 try, has decided againsl it ; and while there is a strong 
 and prevailing sentiment in the minds of the com- 
 munity againsl a measure, it is quite useless t.> pro 
 
 i " Works ol Webster, ♦' Vol. iv, pp. 398 «W ; "Writings ud 
 
 Speeches.'" Vol. VIII, pp. 34-36. 
 
272 DANIEL WEBSTEK 
 
 pose it. For myself, I shall take no part in any at- 
 tempt to renew the charter of the Bank. The people 
 have decided against its continuance, and it must ex- 
 pire. Nor shall I, if I remain in public life, join in 
 any attempt, at any time hereafter, to establish a new 
 national bank, till experience of its want shall have 
 satisfied the country of its great utility or indispen- 
 sable necessity. That the time will come when the 
 country will feel the fullest conviction of this neces- 
 sity, I do not doubt ; but that conviction, I think, is 
 likely to be brought about only by experience." l 
 
 Although recognizing the impossibility of an early 
 rechartering of the Bank, Webster was ready to do 
 what could be done to save the country from the worst 
 consequences of the Administration's policy ; and as 
 chairman of the Senate Committee on Finance it fell 
 to him to assume a prominent part in the recurring 
 fiscal discussions. The fundamental difficulties of the 
 situation arose, in his judgment, from the superabun- 
 dance of the public funds and from their insecurity. 
 The overflowing condition of the Treasury 2 was attrib- 
 utable, so he declared in remarks of April 23, 1835, to 
 Jackson's pocket veto (in March, 1833) of Clay's bill 
 for the distribution of the proceeds of the sale of pub- 
 lic lands ; the insecurity of the public money was af- 
 firmed to be a result of the veto of the Bank Bill and 
 the removal of the deposits, whereby was overthrown 
 ' the great and salutary check to the immoderate issue 
 «>f paper money." 3 The distribution project reap- 
 peared in December, 1833, and again in December, 1835. 
 
 1 '• Works of Webster," Vol. IV, pp. 200-201 ; "Writings and 
 Speeches," Vol. YU, pp. 200-201. 
 
 2 In January, 1835, the country found itself entirely without 
 debt. 
 
 ' Writings and Speeches," Vol. VII, pp. 238-246. 
 
PUBLIC FINANCE AND WHKi POLITICS 273 
 
 The proposal upon the later of these occasions was to 
 distribute the proceeds of the land sales lor the years 
 1833-1837. May 4, 1836, a bill of this purport passed 
 I he Senate, but the House laid the measure upon the 
 table; and when, June 23d, a bill upon the subject 
 finally became law the funds to be distributed were 
 made to comprise everything in the Treasury January 
 1, 1837 in excess of five million dollars, from whatso- 
 ever source derived, and the sums distributed were re- 
 garded technically as " loans" rather than as absolute 
 gifts. The bill was Calhoun's, although certain features 
 of it were introduced in an amendment proposed by 
 Webster. 
 
 The policy adopted was that of a single distribution, 
 in four instalments, rather than that of continuous 
 distributions through either a fixed or an unlimited 
 period of time. To a policy of the latter sort Webster 
 was unalterably opposed, unless the funds to be dis- 
 tributed should be exclusively those arising from the 
 sale of public lands. "There would be," he declared 
 in a speech of May 31, 1S36, u insuperable objections. 
 in my opinion, to a settled practice of distributing 
 revenue among the states It would be a strange 
 operation of things, and its effects on mm system <■!' 
 government might well 1>" feared. 1 cannot reconcile 
 myself to the spectacle of the states receiving their 
 revenues, their means even of supporting their own 
 governments, from the Treasury of the United States. 
 
 If, indeed, the laud bill could pass and we could act 
 
 on the policy, which I think the true policy, of re 
 garding the public lands as a fund belonging to the 
 people of all the slates, I should cheerfully concur in 
 
 that policy, and be willing to make an animal distri- 
 bution of the proceeds of the lands, for some years ai 
 
274 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 least. But if we cannot separate the proceeds of the 
 lauds from other revenue, if all must go into the 
 Treasury together, and there remain together, then I 
 have no hesitation in declaring now, that the income 
 from customs mud be reduced. It must be reduced, 
 even at the hazard of injury to some branches of man- 
 ufacturing industry ; because this, in my opinion, 
 would be a less evil than that extraordinary and dan- 
 gerous state of things, in which the United States 
 should be found laying and collecting taxes, for the 
 purpose of distributing them, when collected, among 
 the states of the Union." 1 Herein Webster closely 
 approached the eminently sensible position which 
 Jackson himself had maintained with respect to the 
 entire subject, namely, that the best solution of the 
 problem of the surplus was so to amend the fiscal sys- 
 tem that there should be no surplus. 
 
 Meanwhile there came on the presidential campaign 
 of 1836. On the Democratic side the conditions at- 
 tending this contest were almost as simple as those of 
 four years before. Jackson, out of regard for the 
 third-term tradition, was not a candidate. But the 
 policies of his administration supplied everything that 
 the party needed in the nature of a platform, and so 
 fruitful had been his activity in smoothing the way for 
 the succession of Van Buren that when, in May, 1835, 
 the party convention met at Baltimore the desired 
 nomination was carried by unanimous vote. There 
 was no occasion for surprise when in his letter of ac- 
 ceptance Van Buren avowed his intent " to tread gen- 
 erally in the footsteps of President Jackson. " Among 
 the opposition, on the other hand, the situation was 
 
 lu Works of Webster," Vol. IV, p, 257 : " Writings and 
 Speeches," Vol. VII, p. 257. 
 
PUBLIC FINANCE AND WHIG POLITICS 276 
 
 one of distinct complexity. The most obvious fact was 
 the partially accomplished welding of the anti-admin- 
 istration forces into a party with a new name, i. ^., 
 Whig. The name Whig was first employed in this 
 connection in 183-4, when a New York editor, im- 
 pressed by the resemblance between the English and 
 the American opponents of prerogative, applied it to 
 those persons, chiefly National Republicans, who were 
 crying out against the " executive usurpations" alleged 
 to be practiced by Jackson. The principal element 
 entering into the composition of the Whig party of 
 1S36* was the National Republicans. But more or 
 less closely affiliated were men of other and widely 
 varied antecedents — principally Antimasous, South 
 Carolina "milliners," and Democrats who were un- 
 friendly to Jackson. Among these groups there was 
 little community of interest save such as arose from 
 hostility toward the President and his system, and 
 plans for the forthcoming campaign were developed 
 in a loose and unpromising manner. That Clay, still 
 the recognized leader of the preponderating element of 
 the opposition, should be the Whig candidate against 
 Van Buren seemed the logic of the situation. Y<t 
 Clay had suffered defeat in 1832, and the feeling was 
 wide spread that some other candidate might now be 
 able to make a better showing. Against him, at any 
 rate, there were brought into the held a Dumber of 
 local favorites— Hugh L. White, of Tenn< General 
 William Eenry Harrison, of Ohi<>. John McLean, also 
 of Ohio; and among the number was Webster. 
 
 The movement in behalf of Webster's candidacy 
 
 dates from at Least as early as 1834. It developed Brat 
 in Massachusetts, but spread throughout New En 
 land, and eventually somewhat beyond. In the legis 
 
276 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 lature of Massachusetts the Whigs commanded a sub- 
 stantial majority, and toward the end of 1834 it was 
 proposed from many quarters that, in default of other 
 means of bringing a candidate before the country, this 
 body should tender Webster a formal nomination. 
 During the early months of 1835 Webster was in fre- 
 quent communication with Jeremiah Mason upon the 
 subject. On January 1st he writes : " Whether it is 
 or will be best for Massachusetts to act at all on the 
 .subject of a nomination is a question which I leave 
 entirely to the judgment of others. . . . A nomi- 
 nation by Massachusetts would certainly be one of the 
 highest proofs of regard which any citizen can receive. 
 As such, I should most undoubtedly esteem it. But, 
 in the present condition of things, and with the pros- 
 pects which are before us, a nomination is a question- 
 able thing to one who is more desirous of preserving 
 what little reputation he has than anxious to grasp at 
 further distinction." ' It was added that " if Massa- 
 chusetts is to act at all, the time has come " ; for active 
 movements were on foot in behalf of other candidates. 
 On January 5th there came a letter from Abbott Law- 
 rence communicating the opinion that a nomination 
 was certain to be forthcoming and expressing the hope 
 that Webster would not be influenced by it to resign 
 his seat in the Senate. January 22d Webster wrote to 
 Mason that the nomination of McLean in Ohio " ap- 
 pears to take but little," and added : " The schism in 
 the Jackson party proceeds. It appears to me that 
 nothing is likely to stop its progress. If we Whigs 
 had union and energy, we have now before us a pros- 
 pect noway discouraging." 2 The expected nomina- 
 tion was made near the end of January, and on Feb- 
 1 Curtis, " Webster," Vol. I, p. 503. * Ibid., Vol. I, p. 506. 
 
PUBLIC FINANCE AND WHIG POLITICS 277 
 
 ruary 1st Webster wrote to Mason : k< The nomination 
 appeal's to have been done as well as it could be. 1 
 mean, of course, in the manner of it. No fault is 
 found with it by our friends, SO far as 1 know. Mat- 
 ures are in traiu to produce a correspondent fueling 
 and action in New York, Vermont, and some oth« 
 states." 1 
 
 The purposes of Clay and his friends remained the 
 most elusive factor in the situation. "Mr. Clay, 5 
 continued Webster in the letter just quoted, "does 
 nothing, and will do nothing, at present. He thinks 
 — or perhaps it is his friends who think — that something 
 may yet occur, perhaps a war, which may, in so 
 way, cause a general rally around him. . . . If 
 Massachusetts stands steady, and our friends act with 
 prudence, the union of the whole Whig and Anti- 
 masonic strength is certain. Neither yon nor I have 
 ever believed it would be easy to get Southern votes 
 for any Northern man; and I think the prospect now 
 is that Mr. Van Buren will lose the whole Smith." 
 On February 6th Webster addressed Mason at some 
 length regarding the possibility of his retirement from 
 the Senate. He said that he had looked forward to 
 the events which the approaching election might bring 
 about as likely to provide a suitable occasion for his 
 resignation, although he had reached do decision whi< 
 might not be modified by the advice and wishes 
 friends. " I do not affect," he wrote, " to desire bo re 
 tire from public life, and to resume ni> profession. M> 
 habits, l must confess, and the nature of my pursuits 
 for some years, render it more agreeable to me to attend 
 to political than to professional subjects But [have 
 not lost all relish for the bar, and ran still make some 
 1 Van Tyne, " Letters of Daniel Webster/ 1 u. iy4. 
 
278 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 thing by the practice ; and, by remaining in the 
 Senate, I am making sacrifices which my circumstances 
 do not justify. My residence here at Washington so 
 many months every year greatly increases my expenses, 
 and greatly reduces my income. ... I find it in- 
 convenient to push my practice in the Supreme Court 
 while a member of the Senate ; and am inclined, under 
 any view of the future, to decline engagements here- 
 after in that Court, unless under special circum- 
 stances." l 
 
 Throughout the year 1835 the political outlook con- 
 tinued very uncertain, and multiplied evidences of 
 public appreciation of Webster's statesmanship and 
 services to his country gave promise of a possible 
 agreement upon him as the most effective candidate 
 against Van Buren. In March he declined the honor 
 of a public dinner at Harrisburg. In August he was 
 prevailed upon, during the course of a professional 
 visit to Bangor, to address the citizens of that place. 
 On October 12th he was presented with a magnificent 
 vase by the citizens of Boston, and in the presence of 
 four thousand people assembled in the Odeon he spoke 
 at some length upon the character of the Constitution 
 and the nature of the perils by which that instrument 
 was beset. 2 In November he was invited to a public 
 dinner in Philadelphia, and in December to one in 
 Baltimore ; but both of these invitations were declined. 
 From numerous quarters came flattering assurances of 
 readiness to lend support in a campaign for the pres- 
 idency. The tide turned unfavorably however, when. 
 
 1 Curtis, "Webster," Vol. I, p. 506. 
 
 2 "Works of Webster," Vol. I, pp. 325-336 ; "Writings and 
 Speeches," Vol. II, pp. 175-186. The vase is in the possession of 
 the Boston Public Library. 
 
PUBLIC FINANCE AND WHIG POLITICS 279 
 
 in December, the Whig and Antimasonic conventions 
 of Pennsylvania, assembled at Harrisbnrg, placed in 
 
 nomination General Harrison. The Antimasons es- 
 pecially had felt an inclination to nominate Webster. 
 
 But when they interrogated him upon the policy which, 
 if elected, he would pursue regarding appointments to 
 office they were able to obtain only the privately ex- 
 pressed reply that it did not consist with his sense «>t 
 duty "to hold oat promises, or anything that might 
 be regarded as equivalent to promises, particularly on 
 the eve of a great election, the results of which are to 
 affect the highest interests of the country for years to 
 come." l The stand thus taken was eminently states- 
 manlike, but it did not appeal to the hungry horde, 
 and the nomination went elsewhere. 
 
 In the end the auti- Jackson forces were able to unite 
 upon no one candidate. In truth, their plan of cam- 
 paign became that of division rather than of unity, the 
 hope being that the splitting of the vote of the count! \ 
 among a number of sectional favorites would have the 
 effect of throwing the election into the House of Rep- 
 resentatives, where a turn of fortune might well result 
 in the triumph of some one of Van Bur en' a opponents. 
 The scheme was ingenious, but it fell somewhat short 
 of attaining the desired result, [ts success was condi- 
 tioned upon heavy losses of votes by Van Buren to bis 
 various opponents in their respective section- of the 
 country, and while the losses suffered were considei 
 able, the superior discipline of the Democratic paih 
 served to avert defeat. Van Buren received 762,978 
 popular votes, as against 736,250 received DJ all his 
 opponents. lb' obtained one hundred and Seventy 
 
 1 Webster to W. W. Irwin, November 30, 1^35. Curtis, " Web- 
 ster" Vol. I, p. 511. 
 
280 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 electoral votes aiid his opponents one hundred and 
 twenty-four. Of the one hundred and twenty-four, 
 Harrison received seventy -three, White twenty-six, 
 Webster fourteen, and William P. Mangum of North 
 Carolina eleven. It had been hoped that Webster 
 niiorht receive the votes of at least some of the New 
 Eugland states other than Massachusetts. He, how- 
 ever, failed to do so. Maine, New Hampshire, Ehode 
 Island, and Connecticut were carried by the Demo- 
 crats, while the seven votes of Vermont went to Har- 
 rison. That Webster already . cherished a well-defined 
 ambition to attain the presidency is beyond dispute. 
 But he could never have regarded the situation in 1836 
 as really favorable, and there is no evidence that the 
 result was a source of either surprise or lasting disap- 
 pointment on his part. 
 
 Circumstances so shaped themselves that the subject 
 of dominating interest throughout the years of the ad- 
 ministration of President Van Buren was that of 
 finance. Despite the fact that as late as the beginning 
 of 1837 the business of the country seemed highly pros- 
 perous, before the retirement of Jackson two months 
 later there set in, beginning in the South and spread- 
 ing northward, the most ruinous and far-reaching- 
 crisis the country had ever known. The causes were 
 numerous and complex. Excessive speculation, reck- 
 less banking, inflation of prices, and the failure of cer- 
 tain English firms engaged in the cotton trade were 
 among them. In some degree they are to be traced, 
 too, to the financial expedients of the Jacksonian pe- 
 riod—the withdrawal of the deposits, the termination 
 of the Bank, the distribution of the surplus, and, 
 finally, the promulgation of the Specie Circular. The 
 last-mentioned measure, comprising an executive order 
 
PUBLIC FINANCE AND WHIG POLITICS 281 
 
 under date of July 11, 18.'S6, requiring thai after 
 August 15th only gold and silver should be received 
 at the laud-offices in payment for public lauds, had the 
 effect of augmenting enormously the difficulties of the 
 banks in the West, where specie was scarce, and when 
 Congress assembled for the session of 1837-1838 a res 
 olutiou was introduced undertaking to rescind it. On 
 December 21st Webster spoke at length upon this res 
 olutiou, pronouncing the Circular both illegal and in- 
 jurious and explaining in detail his long-cherished 
 ideas upon the proper relations of the government and 
 tlie currency. 1 The resolution was converted into a bill, 
 which passed both houses, but Jackson withheld from 
 it his assent, and the Circular remained in effect until 
 May 21, 1838, wheu it was rescinded by a joint resolu- 
 tion. When, March 4, 1837, Van Buren assumed 
 office, the country was already in the throes of busi 
 ness depression and financial distress. As a temporary 
 expedient quantities of Treasury notes were issued 
 forthwith, and Congress was summoned t<> meet in 
 special session September 4th. 
 
 Some months prior to the inauguration of Van 
 Buren, Webster renewed his determination to retire 
 from public life, and at the close of January, 1837, his 
 purpose was made known to his friends in Massachn 
 setts, to the end that steps might be taken to ensure 
 the election of his successor while the legislature 
 should yet be in session. N"<>t only in hi- nun state, 
 however, but in "New Fork and elsewhere, the an 
 nouncement called forth strong expressions of regret, 
 and a committee of the Whigs in the Massachusetts 
 legislature made a formal request that the con tern - 
 
 1 " Works of WebBler," Vol. IV, pp. 96fi 291 ; " Writing ftnd 
 Speeches," Vol. VII, pp. .'? 29. 
 
282 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 plated resignation be abandoned, or at the least post- 
 poned. The pressure brought to bear was too power- 
 ful to be resisted, and for the time being the plan was 
 given up, although the need of bestowing undivided 
 attention for a period upon private and professional 
 interests was felt to be imperative. On February 21st, 
 when the resignation was impending, a meeting of 
 Webster's political friends, presided over by Chancellor 
 Keut, was held in New York City and an invitation 
 was extended to a public reception. The invitation 
 was accepted, and on the evening of March 15th the 
 senator was greeted by a large, representative, and 
 highly enthusiastic gathering of people at Niblo's 
 Garden. The reception became the occasion of the 
 most notable speech of a purely political character 
 which Webster ever delivered. To no other effort 
 did he refer in later times with so much frequency or 
 so much pride. In the main, the speech comprised a 
 detailed and analytical review of public questions and 
 measures since the accession of Jackson to the presi- 
 dency. Its tone was moderate but frank. The per- 
 sonal integrity of the late President was freely 
 admitted, and the service which he had rendered 
 the country in the enforcement of the laws was 
 acknowledged with unstinted praise. At the same 
 time, his executive usurpations, it was maintained, 
 had produced a complete and well-nigh irreparable 
 derangement of the currency and of business ; 
 and it was predicted that results would be ex- 
 perienced far worse than those which as yet were 
 apparent. Among the portions of the speech deal- 
 ing with subjects other than finance the most note- 
 worthy was that in which, apropos the question 
 of the annexation of Texas, the speaker gave force- 
 
PUBLIC FINANCE AND WHIG POLITICS 283 
 
 ful expression to his views on slavery and its ex- 
 tension. To this matter we shall have occasion to 
 return subsequently. 1 
 
 Two months after the appearance at Niblo's Garden 
 Webster set out upon his last and most extended visit 
 to the West. At Wheeling, May 17th, he was ten- 
 dered a public dinner, and the news of the suspension 
 of the Eastern banks having just been received, he 
 spoke feelingly of a situation which he had " never 
 expected to see except as the result of war, a pesti- 
 lence, or some other calamity. " 2 At Maysville, Lex- 
 ington, Louisville, and Cincinnati there were great 
 outpourings of people and more speeches. On June 
 9th, St. Louis was reached, and there and in neighbor- 
 ing towns the reception was equally enthusiastic. 
 Madison, Indiana, was visited," and thence the line of 
 travel led to Chicago, where there were cavalcades, 
 festivals, and public addresses. On July 1st Michigan 
 City was reached, and thence a return was made to 
 Massachusetts by way of Detroit, Toledo, Buffalo, and 
 New York. One effect of the journey was to impress 
 upon the people of the West the approachableness and 
 democratic spirit of a man who in many quarters was 
 still supposed to be temperamentally cold and aristo- 
 cratic. In Webster himself the trip deepened the con- 
 viction of the actual and latent resources of the West. 
 Already he had embarked upon a plan to acquire a 
 great Western farm. He had become owner of a tract 
 of land in Sangamon County, Illinois, to which lie 
 
 »See pp. 327-336. " Works of Webster," Vol. I, pp. 343-380 ; 
 " Writings and Speeches," Vol. II, pp. 193-230. 
 
 2 "Works of Webster," Vol. I, p. 384 ; ' 4 Writings and Speeches, " 
 Vol. II, p. 234. 
 
 3 For the speech delivered at Madison see " Writings and 
 Speeches," Vol. II, pp. 257-259. 
 
284 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 gave the name Salisbury, and had placed upon it as 
 aeent a son of the Mr. Thomas from whom he had 
 purchased a portion of his estate at Marshfield. 1 Now 
 he proposed to add to his Illinois holding uutil he 
 should have at least a thousand acres, and he even 
 dreamed of establishing himself upon it at some future 
 time, when he should be in a position to withdraw 
 from public and professional life. 
 
 When, September 4th, Congress assembled in special 
 session President Van Buren brought forward a num- 
 ber of proposals for the relief of the country's disordered 
 finances. One was the postponement of the payment 
 to the states of the fourth instalment of the surplus 
 revenue. Another was the issue of more Treasury 
 notes. The third and most important was the estab- 
 lishment of a system in accordance with which the 
 public revenues, instead of being deposited in banks, 
 of whatsoever description, should be kept in the cus- 
 tody of Treasury officials. As expanded in subsequent 
 discussion, this proposition developed into the well- 
 known Sub-treasury, or Independent Treasury, system. 
 The essentials of it had been suggested by Van Buren 
 as early as 1834. A bill incorporating the plan was 
 introduced in Congress September 14th. Over the op- 
 position of the Whigs, who now revived the project 
 of a national bank, it was passed in the Senate ; but 
 in the House it failed, and although eventually the 
 President was successful in carrying his programme 
 into effect, it was not until July 4th, 1S40, and only 
 after three successive measures upon the subject had 
 been defeated. The debates upon the first two of these 
 bills were enlivened by two lengthy and illuminating 
 speeches by Webster. The first was delivered Sep- 
 
 1 See p. 317. 
 
PUBLIC FINANCE AND WHIG POLITICS 285 
 
 tember 28, 1837 ; the second, January 31, 1838. ' Both 
 included attacks upon the proposed Independent 
 Treasury system, and in both the Whig alternative 
 of a national bank was defended with fulness and 
 force. 
 
 i it 
 
 Writings and Speeches, » Vol. VII, pp. 62-108, 140-161. 
 

 CHAPTER XI 
 
 SECRETARY OF STATE : THE TREATY OF WASHINGTON 
 
 During the spring of 1839 Webster arrived at a 
 decision to spend some months in travel abroad, prin- 
 cipally in England. At one time there appeared 
 much likelihood of his appointment as a special envoy 
 to Great Britain to negotiate a settlement of the long- 
 standing controversy regarding the northeastern boun- 
 dary. The Secretary of State, Forsyth, suggested to 
 the President the making of such an appointment, 
 and in order to commend himself as a person qualified 
 to uudertake the task Webster prepared and submitted 
 an elaborate memorandum upon the proper course to 
 be pursued in adjustment of the matters at issue. 1 
 The President was authorized specifically by Congress 
 to make the proposed appointment. Van Buren, how- 
 ever, preferred to allow the negotiation to be carried 
 on by the resident minister (Stevenson) exclusively, 
 and, although by a curious turn of circumstances the 
 opportunity to undertake the adjustment of the pend- 
 ing difficulties with Great Britain came to Webster as 
 Secretary of State within two years, there was no 
 present demand for his services. 
 
 Even so, he resolved upon a trip as a private citizen, 
 and, accompanied by his wife, his daughter Julia, and 
 a sister-in-law, Mrs. Paige, he embarked at New York, 
 May 18th, and landed at Liverpool a fortnight later. 
 On June 5th the party journeyed by rail, expending 
 
 1 Van Tyne, " Letters of Daniel Webster," pp. 215-218. 
 
TREATY OF WASHINGTON 287 
 
 ten and a half hours on the way, to London, where on 
 the morning following the arrival the streets adjacent 
 to the Brunswick Hotel were thronged with the car- 
 riages of substantial citizens eager for a glimpse of the 
 far-famed orator and statesman. During a two mouthy' 
 stay in the metropolis Webster was showered with 
 hospitalities. He met Wordsworth, Carlyle, Moore, 
 Dickens, Sydney Smith, Hallam, Canning, Labouchere, 
 and scores of other men of eminence. He visited the 
 various higher courts, made the acquaintance of the 
 judges, and was an interested spectator at numerous 
 sittings of the two houses of Parliament. "I do not 
 follow sightseeing," he writes to a friend; "what 
 comes in the way I look at, but have not time to hunt 
 after pictures, etc. Westminster Abbey and the Tower 
 are two of the best things ; they hold such memorials 
 of bygone times." l On July 18th a celebration of the 
 Royal Agricultural Society was attended at Oxford, 
 and upon this one occasion during the trip Webster 
 was induced to make a public address. 2 In August 
 there was an excursion through Scotland, followed by 
 a return to London where, September 24th, the 
 daughter was married to a young Bostonian, Samuel 
 Appleton, who, in accordance with an earlier arrange- 
 ment, had joined the party. Late in November the 
 travelers embarked for the homeward voyage, which, 
 however, proved so protracted that it was not uutil 
 December 29th that a landing was effected at New 
 York. 
 
 The impression which Webster made upon his Eng- 
 lish acquaintances was deep and lasting. " Not many 
 
 1 Webster to Curtis, Jnly 4, 1839. Webster, "Private Cor- 
 respondence," Vol. II, p. 55. 
 
 2 " Writings and Speeches," Vol. II, pp. 285-289. 
 
288 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 days ago," wrote Thomas Carlyle to an American 
 friend, "I saw at breakfast the notablest of all your 
 notabilities, Daniel Webster. He is a magnificent 
 specimen. ... As a logic-fencer, advocate, or 
 parliamentary Hercules, one would incline to back him 
 at first sight against all the extant world. The tanned 
 complexion ; that amorphous crag-like face ; the dull 
 black eyes under the precipice of brows, like dull 
 anthracite furnaces needing only to be blown; the 
 mastiff-mouth, accurately closed ; I have not traced so 
 much of silent Berserkir rage that I remember of in any 
 other man ; a dignified, perfectly -bred man, though not 
 English in breeding ; a man worthy of the best recep- 
 tion among us, and meeting such, I understand." 1 
 "It is but an echo of the common voice here," wrote 
 Hallam to Mrs. Ticknor, " to say that I was extremely 
 struck by his [Webster's] appearance, deportment, 
 and conversation. Mr. Webster approaches as nearly 
 to the beau ideal of a republicau seuator as any man 
 that I have ever seen in the course of my life ; worthy 
 of Rome or Venice, rather than of our noisy and 
 wrangling generation." 2 
 
 It is the testimony of an English acquaintance that 
 during his stay in London Webster talked continually 
 of his intention to quit public life, both professional 
 and political, and to retire to the estate which he had 
 purchased in the West. " He spoke of this as a set- 
 tled resolve. With these words on his lips, he em- 
 barked at Liverpool." 3 However seriously he may 
 have contemplated the step at certain moments, it is 
 doubtful whether there was ever a fixed resolution upon 
 
 1 Cited in Curtis, " Webster," Vol. II, p. 21. 
 
 'Ibid., Vol. II, p. 27. 
 
 3 DenisoD, quoted in Curtis, " Webster, 1 ' Vol. II, p. 27. 
 
TEEATY OF WASHINGTON 289 
 
 it, and in any case the development of the political 
 situation which culminated in the election of General 
 Harrison as president in 1840 absolutely precluded it. 
 Webster was himself not a candidate in 1840. His 
 candidacy was proposed by the Whig members of the 
 Massachusetts legislature ; but, prior to sailing for Eng- 
 land, in May, 1839, he made it known to his friends 
 that he did not care to have his name brought before 
 the forthcoming convention of the party. During the 
 sojourn abroad he heard little and talked less of Ameri- 
 can political affairs. " I express no opinion to any- 
 body," he wrote from Glasgow in August, " about the 
 pending election. I see enough to convince me that 
 our affairs at home are in a very bad and difficult 
 state, and I do not profess to know who was born to 
 set them right." ! 
 
 As the administration of Van Bureu progressed there 
 were multiplied indications that the Whigs would have 
 an excellent chance of success in 1840. To the wide- 
 spread desire for reform and the more or less vague 
 desire for change which almost inevitably accompanies 
 a prolongation of power in the hands of one political 
 party there was added in the present instance a very 
 definite longing for relief from the chaos and depres- 
 sion in which the fiscal measures of the Jacksouian 
 regime had involved the country. Van Buren's states- 
 manship was of no mean order, his integrity was unim- 
 peachable, and his administration of public, including 
 financial, affairs was very nearly as effective as could 
 have been expected under the ci rcumstances. The mass 
 of the people, none the less, were ready for a change. 
 The state elections of 1837 resulted unfavorably for the 
 
 1 Webster to Ketehum, August 29, 1839. Webster, " Private Cor- 
 respondence, " Vol. II, p, 63, 
 
290 DANIEL WEBSTEE 
 
 Democrats, and the congressional elections of 183S and 
 the spring of 1839 very nearly resulted in the extinc- 
 tion of the Administration majority in the lower 
 house. On December 4, 1839, two days after the 
 meeting of the Twenty -sixth Congress, the national 
 convention of the Whig party assembled at Harris- 
 burg. The conditions of the time were such as to 
 place a heavy premium upon " availability/' and the 
 members of the convention were disposed from the out- 
 set to be governed in their choice of a candidate by this 
 consideration. Clay was still the principal leader of 
 the party. But he was a free-mason and an ardent 
 protectionist, and it was felt that his position in these 
 two respects would render his election improbable. A 
 candidate much more nearly of the type called for was 
 at hand a in the person of General Harrison, long and 
 favorably known both as soldier and civilian, and ex- 
 cellently qualified to consolidate the diverse elements 
 upon whose support the Whigs must depend for suc- 
 cess. When the balloting began Clay led, but on the 
 third day of the convention's proceedings the nomina- 
 tion was accorded to Harrison. In the hope of at- 
 tracting in a special degree the support of the South 
 the delegates bestowed the vice-presidential nomina- 
 tion upon John Tyler, of Virginia. Clay accepted the 
 situation with good grace and promised his unreserved 
 support, although he was deeply disappointed and, 
 after the successful conclusion of the campaign, a trifle 
 disaffected. 
 
 The first news received by Webster as his ship came 
 into New York harbor, December 29th, was that of 
 the action of the Harrisburg convention. This action 
 he thoroughly approved, and the contest which ensued 
 enlisted from the beginning his hearty interest. 
 
TBEATY OF WASHINGTON 291 
 
 Amidst the swirl of political combat all thought of 
 immediate retirement from the Senate was abandoned. 
 The campaign, as is familiarly known, was one of the 
 noisiest and most exciting in the country's history. 
 Having been unable to agree upon a platform, the 
 Whigs contented themselves with attacks upon the 
 Democratic candidates and with laudation of Harrison 
 and Tyler. The Democrats made some effort to press 
 the reelection of Van Bur en on the strength of the 
 record of the administration, but in the end they were 
 obliged largely to meet the Whigs with their own 
 methods. To Webster there came calls for speeches 
 from every portion of the country. Whig mass-meet- 
 ings and conventions, especially in the East, were 
 hardly considered successful unless he was present to 
 speak, and the number of " Tippecanoe " clubs and 
 similar organizations in which he was elected to 
 honorary membership was legion. In the history of 
 the nation there had been no such universal popular 
 wish to hear public topics discussed by any single 
 statesman. 1 The places at which Webster delivered 
 political addresses of largest importance during the 
 campaign were Saratoga, Charlestown (Mass.), New 
 York, and Richmond, and upon all occasions the prin- 
 cipal subject discussed was the unfortunate situation 
 of the currency resulting from the fiscal policies of the 
 Jackson and Van Buren administrations. 2 
 
 Of the success of the campaign Webster was most of 
 the time reasonably certain. " We shall choose Gen- 
 eral Harrison," he writes as early as February 16, 
 1840, "if no untoward event occurs between this time 
 
 1 Curtis, " Webster," Vol. II, p. 42. 
 
 2 For these speeches see, " Writings and Speeches," Vol. Ill, pp. 
 1-102. 
 
292 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 and November." ' " General Harrison's nomination 
 runs through the country most astonishingly," he 
 writes, March 29th. "Our friends feel confident of 
 the Centre, the Northwest, and the North and East. 
 Kentucky and Louisiana will doubtless be with us ; 
 very probably Tennessee, and there are even hopes of 
 Virginia. . . . This hopeful state of things gives 
 quite a new aspect to our politics." 2 June 11th, he de- 
 clares that he does "not doubt that General Harrison 
 will be elected by a very large majority " and ex- 
 presses the hope that his native state of New Hamp- 
 shire "will now see the path of patriotism and duty, 
 broad and plain before her, and be ready to follow it. 1 ' 3 
 June 23d he writes to Jaudon : " The prospect is now 
 very strong that General Harrison will be elected. 
 Indeed, we have no doubt of it. We are more de- 
 ceived than ever men were before, if there be uot a 
 state of feeling which will bring him in by a large ma- 
 jority. . . . And now, my dear sir, let me say 
 that if this event shall take place, it will change my 
 condition, though I cannot say exactly how. Indeed, 
 some changes, or a change, will take place, let the 
 election go either way. If Mr. Van Buren should be 
 reelected, I shall go back to the bar, leaving the Senate, 
 and go to work with all my might. If General Har- 
 rison should be chosen, I shall equally leave the 
 Senate, and you can judge as well as I, perhaps, 
 whether I shall thenceforward have anything to do 
 with the government, or not." 4 
 
 1 Webster to Edward Everett, February 16, 1840. Webster, 
 
 Private Correspondence," Vol. II, p. 76, 
 
 8 Webster to Jandon. March 29. 1840. Ibid., Vol. II, p. 79. 
 
 ■ Webster to Coffin, June 11, 1840. Ibid., Vol. II, p. 86. 
 
 4 Webster to Jaudon, June 23, 1840. Ibid., Vol. II, p. 87. 
 
TREATY OF WASHINGTON 293 
 
 At the November elections the confidence of Web* 
 ster, and of the Whig prophets generally, was vindi- 
 cated. In a total of two hundred and ninety-four 
 electoral votes Harrison received two hundred and 
 thirty-four, Van Buren but sixty ; while in the lower 
 house of Congress the Whigs were assured a majority 
 of forty-four, and in the upper house of seven. The 
 overturn which was involved seemed to men of the 
 time a veritable revolution. In point of fact, however, 
 in most of the states carried by Harrison the Whig 
 popular majority was small, aud the total popular ma- 
 jority was but 145,914 in an aggregate vote of 2,404,- 
 118. The victory was substantial, but it was not over- 
 whelming, and only by the preservation of harmony 
 and the pursuance of wise and moderate policies could 
 its results be conserved. On December 1st the Presi- 
 dent-elect wrote from Frankfort, Kentucky, a letter 
 to Webster from which it appears that certain pur- 
 poses relative to the formation of a cabinet, in the 
 event of a Whig triumph, had been conceived early in 
 the campaign. One of these was to offer a portfolio to 
 Clay ; another was to make a similar offer to Webster. 
 It was now made known that the post of secretary of 
 state had been tendered to Clay, but that this and 
 every other position of the sort had been declined. 
 "Since I was first a candidate for the presidency," 
 Harrison went on to say, "I had determined, if suc- 
 cessful, to solicit your able assistance in conducting the 
 administration, and I now ask you to accept the State 
 or Treasury department. I have myself no preference 
 of either for you, but it may perhaps be more difficult 
 to fill the latter than the former if you should decline 
 it. It was the first designed for you in the supposition 
 that you had given more attention to the subject of 
 
294 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 finances than Mr. Clay. " l In the event that he should 
 feel obliged to decline to enter the cabinet Webster was 
 asked to make suggestions regarding other men avail- 
 able for appointment. " Give me your advice freely 
 and fully," wrote Harrison, "upon that and every 
 other subject, whether you occupy a place in the 
 cabinet or not, and it will be at all times thankfully 
 received." 
 
 The possibility of the offer of a cabinet position, in 
 the event of the election of Harrison, had received 
 ample consideration from both Webster and his friends. 
 Interests of a professional and personal nature seemed 
 still to require a retirement from public life, and, as 
 has appeared, such a step was more thau once deter- 
 mined upon. Few men, however, have ever been bet- 
 ter fitted for the public service, and, much as he might 
 try, Webster could never get away from the fact that 
 he enjoyed the activities and opportunities of such 
 service. Loug before the election he was urged by in- 
 fluential men in various parts of the country not to re- 
 fuse a cabinet post if it should be offered him, and 
 when it became known that the President-elect had 
 made the expected offer there was a universal expres- 
 sion of desire that it be accepted. Although, there- 
 fore, he should have preferred an appointment as min- 
 ister to Great Britain, he decided to accept the portfolio 
 of state. "lam willing," he wrote to Harrison, De- 
 cember 11th, "to undertake the duties of the office, 
 prepared to give to their faithful discharge my best 
 ability and all my efforts. You are kind enough to 
 suggest that my acquaintance with the subjects of cur- 
 rency and fiuance might render me useful as head of 
 
 ^Harrison to Webster, December 1,1840. Webster, "Private 
 Correspoudeuce," Vol. II, p. 91. 
 
TBEATY OF WASHINGTON 295 
 
 the Treasury. On that subject my view has been this : 
 I think all important questions of revenue, finance, and 
 currency, properly belonging to the Executive, should 
 be cabinet questions ; that every member of the cab- 
 inet should give them his best consideration, and es- 
 pecially that the results of these deliberations should 
 receive the sanction of the President. This seems 
 necessary to union and efficiency of action. If to these 
 counsels I may be supposed able to contribute anything 
 useful, I shall withhold myself from no degree of labor 
 and no just responsibility. For the daily details of 
 the Treasury, the matters of account, aud the supervi- 
 sion of subordinate officers employed in the collection 
 and disbursement of the public moneys, I do not thiuk 
 myself to be particularly well qualified." l Willing- 
 ness was expressed to accept the Treasury portfolio, 
 however, in the event that special difficulty should be 
 encountered in making provision for it. On December 
 27th Webster was informed by his chief that, so far as 
 could be observed, his call to the State Department had 
 given universal satisfaction. 
 
 The last session of the Twenty-sixth Congress was 
 one of comparative unimportance. At its opening 
 President Yau Buren submitted a message in which 
 the Whig proposal to establish a national bank was 
 subjected to severe criticism and the recently adopted 
 sub-treasury system was accorded the highest praise. 
 In the Senate the portions of the message dealing with 
 these subjects were referred to the Committee on 
 Finance, and on December 16th and 17th, they were 
 made the basis of the last important speech which 
 Webster delivered during the present portion of his 
 
 1 Webster to Harrison, December 11, 1840. Webster, "Private 
 Correspondence," Vol. II, pp. 93-94. 
 
296 DANIEL WEBSTEE 
 
 senatorial career. In it the existing state of the 
 finances of the country was reviewed briefly but point- 
 edly, and it was maintained that during the past four 
 years the public expenditure had exceeded the public 
 income by as much as seven million dollars a year, so 
 that the Van Buren Administration had achieved 
 " the dubious distinction of being the first to begin the 
 accumulating of a national debt in a time of profound 
 peace. ' ' ! 
 
 On February 22d, Webster's letter resigning his 
 seat was read in the Senate. In advance of his resig- 
 nation he communicated to his friends in Massachu- 
 setts his desire that the choice of his successor should 
 proceed without any reference to his own opinions or 
 affiliations, and he especially urged that the coolness 
 long existing between himself and John Quincy Adams 
 should not be allowed to militate against the candi- 
 dacy of the Ex-President. "Mr. Adams's great 
 knowledge and ability," he wrote, "his experience, 
 and especially his thorough acquaintance with the 
 foreign relations of the country, will undoubtedly 
 make him prominent as a candidate ; and I wish it to 
 be understood that his election would be personally 
 altogether agreeable to me." 2 In the end the choice 
 of the legislature fell upon Kufus Choate, and Adams 
 was continued as a member of the House of Eepresent- 
 atives ; but the magnanimity displayed toward a can- 
 didate against whom Webster and his friends had long 
 cherished a grievauce is not unworthy of note. 
 
 With the inauguration of Harrison and Tyler, 
 
 f " Works of Webster," Vol. V, pp. 40-54; ''Writings and 
 Speeches," Vol. IX, pp. 40-54. 
 
 'Webster to Solomon Lincoln, Jan. 15, 1871. Curtis, "Web- 
 ster," Vol. II, p. 57. 
 
TEEATY OF WASHINGTON 297 
 
 March 4, 1841, the Whigs were brought for the first 
 time into control of the national government. The 
 new president had written feelingly of his hope for a 
 "quiet and successful' 7 administration. The condi- 
 tions of the time, however, hardly afforded ground for 
 high expectation in this direction. In the first place, 
 the political overturn which had occurred presaged a 
 stupendous demand for removals and new appoint- 
 ments throughout the government service. In the 
 second place, the Whig successes had been won by 
 narrow margins, and, as has been stated, the majority 
 commanded by the party in Congress, especially in the 
 upper house, was so slender that absolute harmony 
 was essential to the achievement of legislative results 
 and the maintenance of power. But, in the third 
 place, substantial harmony was the last thing to be ex- 
 pected of the heterogeneous elements which had bad a 
 share in the winning of the recent victory. And, 
 finally, the death of the President within a mouth 
 from his inauguration brought to the White House a 
 man whose nomination by the Whigs had been a 
 matter of sheer expediency, who was really not a 
 Whig at all, and who had sufficient independence of 
 spirit to prompt him to a course of action conceived 
 without the slightest regard to party obligation. 
 
 Of the tremeudous conflict which was waged, during 
 the years 1841-1842, between President Tyler and the 
 Whig congressional majority, led by Henry Clay, it is 
 impossible to speak at length in this place. Prior to 
 his death President Harrison had called a special ses- 
 sion of Congress, to convene May 31, 1841, and it was 
 early in the course of this session that the storm broke 
 in all of its fury. On June 7th, Clay introduced in 
 the Senate a series of resolutions, which, setting forth 
 
298 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 as they did the legislative programme of the Whig 
 leaders, may well be regarded as a belated announce- 
 ment of the Whig platform of 1840. l These resolutions 
 called, in brief, for the repeal of the sub- treasury law, 
 the establishment of a national bank, the laying of 
 duties such as would yield revenue adequate for the 
 increased needs of the country, and the distribution 
 anion g the states of the proceeds of the sales of public 
 laud. The Senate passed immediately a measure to 
 meet the first of these demands ; but the issue which 
 was pressed most forcefully — and the one which, by 
 reason of the President's well-known hostility, was 
 certain to prove the most critical — was that of the 
 Bank. 
 
 Removed from Congress, and fully occupied with a 
 group of diplomatic questions of the utmost serious- 
 ness, Webster was in a position to hold aloof, at least 
 publicly, from participation in the domestic conflicts of 
 the hour. His most immediate concern was the carry- 
 ing through of the adjustments which were required 
 to safeguard peace with Great Britain. In the execu- 
 tion of this task he needed the full and free coopera- 
 tion of the President, and he early learned that agree- 
 able relations with his chief would be jeopardized by 
 any attempt to influence the executive attitude upon 
 impending domestic issues. Although, therefore, he 
 felt most keenly the desirability of the incorporation 
 of a bank, the subject was rarely so much as mentioned 
 in the frequent conferences between the two men. It 
 was alluded to repeatedly, however, in correspondence 
 with friends in Massachusetts and elsewhere. "We 
 are in the midst of the session,' 9 wrote Webster to Ed- 
 ward Everett, July 24th, " and I may say in the crisis 
 Harrison, "Westward Extension," p. 58. 
 
TKEATY OP WASHINGTON 299 
 
 of our affairs. If we get along with the bank bill, 
 bankrupt bill, land bill, and revenue bill, all which 
 are on the tapis, we shall stand strong with the public. 
 But some of these measures are of doubtful result. 
 The great difficulty consists v in producing and main- 
 taining harmony of action among the Whigs." 1 
 
 The ensuing month revealed, however, that the 
 principal obstacle to be overcome was not the tendency 
 of the congressional majority to inharmonious action, 
 but rather the inflexible attitude of the President. 
 On July 28th the Senate adopted the bill for the 
 establishment of a bank by a vote of twenty -six to 
 twenty- three, and nine days later the House took similar 
 action by a vote of one hundred and twenty-eight to 
 ninety-seven. " Whether the President will approve it 
 [the Bank Bill]," wrote Webster to Everett July 29th, 
 11 is a question which I hardly dare ask myself. If he 
 should not, I know not what will become of our ad- 
 ministration." 2 On the day on which the bill reached 
 the President, Webster wrote to his wife : " He [the 
 President] keeps his own counsel as to approving or 
 disapproving. Opinions differ very much as to what 
 he will do. A great commotion will doubtless follow, 
 if he should veto the bill. By agreement, I say noth- 
 ing to him on the subject, and have therefore no 
 better means of judging than others. But the inclina- 
 tion of my opinion is that he will sign the bill." 3 
 Action was delayed until August 16th, when the 
 measure was returned with a veto, based upon grounds 
 both of constitutionality and of expediency. Upon 
 the question of passing the bill over the veto the 
 
 1 Webster to Edward Everett, July 24, 1841. Webster, " Pri- 
 vate Correspondence," Vol. II, pp. 105-106. 
 1 Ibid., Vol. II, p. 106. 3 Ibid., Vol. II, p. 108. 
 
300 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 Senate was almost evenly divided, and the measure 
 was lost. A second bill, framed by the Whig leaders 
 partially in consultation with the President, was 
 passed in the House August 23d and in the Senate 
 September 3d ; but, September 9th, it was returned 
 by Tyler without his signature, and all prospect of the 
 enactment of a bank bill during the present adminis- 
 tration definitely disappeared. 
 
 By the sharp setback which their programme had 
 suffered at the hand of one whom they had themselves 
 elevated to power the Whigs were alike chagrined and 
 enraged. The President was accused of insincerity 
 and maliciousness, and a select House committee under 
 the chairmanship of John Quincy Adams brought in a 
 report in which it was maintained that Tyler had com- 
 mitted himself definitely to the second bill in advance 
 of its passage in Congress. The charge was denied 
 unequivocally by the President, and in all probability 
 with essential truthfulness. None the less, all of the 
 members of the cabinet save Webster determined to 
 enter protest by resignation, and all of the resigning 
 members except the Postmaster-General, Granger, 
 published statements in which the veracity of the 
 President was sharply impugned. Writing to a friend 
 in New York, September 10th, Webster informed him 
 of the decision of his colleagues, arrived at on the 
 previous evening in a conference at which he had not 
 himself been present, and of the position which he had 
 assumed in the matter. "I told them," he says, 
 " I thought they had acted rashly, and that I should 
 consider of my own course. I shall not act suddenly ; 
 it will look too much like a combination between a 
 Whig cabinet and a Whig Senate to bother the Presi- 
 dent. It will not be expected from me to countenance 
 
TBEATY OF WASHINGTON 301 
 
 such a proceeding. Then, again, I will not throw the 
 great foreign concerns of the country into disorder or 
 danger by any abrupt party proceeding. How long I 
 may stay, I know not, but I mean to take time to con- 
 sider." 1 On the evening of the day upon which this 
 letter was written the members of the Massachusetts 
 delegation in Congress, gathered by invitation at 
 Webster's house, heard from him his reasons for refus- 
 ing to concur in the action of his colleagues and as- 
 sured him of their belief in the propriety of his course ; 
 and three days later he addressed to the editors of the 
 National Intelligencer a statement in which he de- 
 clared, first, that he " had seen no sufficient reasons for 
 the dissolution of the late cabinet by the voluntary act 
 of its own members," second, that if he had seen such 
 reasons he should not have felt warranted in retiring 
 until the President should have been given ample op- 
 portunity to make provision for the handling of the 
 important questions then pending in the State Depart- 
 ment, and, thirdly, that while he was as firmly con- 
 vinced of the necessity of a national bank as were any 
 of his fellow- partisans, he still had confidence that the 
 President would cooperate with Congress in removing 
 the obstacles to the incorporation of such an institu- 
 tion, and there certainly was no prospect of the at- 
 tainment of the desired end through any other means. 2 
 The position thus assumed was so manifestly sensi- 
 ble and patriotic that it commanded wide-spread ap- 
 proval. Only the Whig leaders were disposed to 
 criticize, and all save the more rabid of them were 
 
 1 Webster to Ketchnm, September 10, 1841. Webster, " Private 
 Correspondence," Vol. II. p. 110. 
 
 •Webster to Messrs. Gales and Seaton, September 13, 1841. 
 Curtis, "Webster,- Vol. II, p. 81. 
 
302 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 soon silenced. The vacancies in the cabinet were 
 filled, and on September loth the special session came 
 to a close. Although a considerable amount of reme- 
 dial legislation had been enacted, the bank project was 
 recognized to be dead, and when the autumn elections 
 came on it was revealed that already there had set in a 
 sharp reaction against the Whig ascendancy. During 
 the regular session of 1840-1841 some of the less im- 
 portant portions of Clay's programme were carried 
 into operation. The tariff was readjusted and an act 
 was passed providing for the distribution of the pro- 
 ceeds of the sales of public lands. But the modifica- 
 tions of the tariff were neither large nor enduring , and 
 the distribution act was rendered inoperative by a 
 provision to the effect that no distribution should be 
 made when tariff rates should be in excess of twenty 
 per cent. On March 31, 1842, Clay resigned his seat 
 in the Senate, the more freely to devote himself to the 
 reorganization of his shattered party. 
 
 That Webster likewise felt keenly the humiliation 
 of his party and the discordant character of the times 
 appears repeatedly in his correspondence. " I wish I 
 could say a cheering word, " he wrote to Everett two 
 months after Clay's retirement, "in relation to the 
 general state of our political affairs. But nothing can 
 be worse. . . . Our system of self-government is 
 now undergoing an experiment which amounts to tor- 
 ture. Party and personal rancor, recklessness, and 
 animosity, seem to be making havoc of all just prin- 
 ciples, all practical expediency, and all really patriotic 
 feeling. I hope for better times, but the present dark- 
 ness is thick and palpable." 1 " Public affairs are 
 
 1 Webster to Everett, May 31, 1842. Webster, " Private Corre- 
 spondence," Vol. I, p. 132. 
 
•>A'"> 
 
 TEEATY OF WASHINGTON 30 
 
 in a dreadful state," declared a communication of 
 August 10th, "and I know not when they will inend. 
 Of one thing I am glad, and that is that I am out of 
 Congress. I liked Congress very much formerly ; very 
 much ; but men and things, habits, tempers, prin- 
 ciples, all have changed." "It is obvious," he wrote 
 to his son Fletcher, October 19th, " that the political 
 X>ower in the country is falling back into the hands of 
 those who were outnumbered by the Whigs in 1810. 
 All this was to have been expected, from the violence 
 and injustice which have characterized the conduct of 
 the Whig leaders. " 1 " The recent elections, ' ' he wrote 
 three weeks later, ' ' show that the Whig party is 
 broken up, and perhaps can never be reunited." 
 
 Despite, however, the chaos which prevailed in do- 
 mestic affairs, the Whig Administration was able to 
 pursue a vigorous and highly successful course in the 
 conduct of foreign relations. The fact that the years 
 of his withdrawal from Congress comprised a period 
 during which membership in that body could not have 
 yielded the best of results, and the further circum- 
 stance that the post of secretary of state fell to him at 
 a juncture when the foreign situation was unusually 
 full of opportunity, contributed enormously, not only 
 to Webster's personal satisfaction during these troubled 
 years, but also to his diversity of achievement and, 
 consequently, to his fame. The period during which 
 he retained the direction of the State Department ex- 
 tended from the inauguration of President Harrison to 
 May 8, 1843, i. e., through approximately the first half 
 of the administration. During these years the activities 
 of the Department were widely varied. The question 
 of the annexation of Texas continued in suspense, but 
 1 Van Tyne, " Letters of Webster," p. 281. 
 
304 DANIEL WEBSTBE 
 
 it fell to Webster to vindicate the course of the United 
 States in recognizing the independence of the Texan 
 republic and to take steps several times looking toward 
 the protection of American lives and property in the 
 southwest. 1 A treaty of some importance, arranging 
 duties upon wines, was concluded with Portugal. A 
 mission to China, organized for the purpose of procur- 
 ing a treaty of commerce such as had been concluded 
 between Great Britain and China, was provided for, 
 and in 1844, under the skilful management of Caleb 
 Cushing, the enterprise was carried to a successful con- 
 clusion. At home, the government's policies respect- 
 ing the questions raised by the Dorr "rebellion" in 
 Rhode Island were shaped and executed by the De- 
 partment. 
 
 The questions of first-rate importance, however, 
 which fell to Webster for adjustment were those arising 
 from a somewhat extended series of controversies with 
 Great Britain, and there is reason to believe that one 
 of the considerations by which he was induced to ac- 
 cept the secretaryship of state was the conviction that 
 he could achieve success in the conduct of our British 
 relations where others had failed. Certainly one of the 
 principal considerations which influenced him to re- 
 main in Tyler's cabinet after the withdrawal of all of 
 his earlier colleagues was his desire to complete the 
 gigantic diplomatic task to which he had set his hand. 
 When he assumed control of the State Department 
 there were pending between the United States and 
 Great Britain three principal issues. The first was 
 that of the boundary between Maine and Vermont, on 
 the one side, and the British provinces of Quebec and 
 
 1 See documents in "Works of Webster," Vol. VI, pp. 422-462, 
 and " Writings and Speeches," Vol. XII, pp. 96-136. 
 
TEEATY OF WASHINGTON 305 
 
 Nova Scotia, on the other. The second was a question 
 arising from the relations between American citizens 
 and the Canadian insurgents at the time of the rebellion 
 of 1837, involving especially the affair of the Caroline 
 and the imprisonment in New York of a British- 
 Canadian subject of the name of McLeod. The third 
 pertained to the status of the international slave-trade, 
 and centered largely about the hotly controverted 
 principle of the right of search. Of the three issues, 
 the first and third were long-standing, but of rapidly 
 increasing seriousness ; the second was more ephemeral 
 and was the first to be brought to the point of settle- 
 ment. 
 
 The McLeod case, which was pressing for attention 
 when Webster entered the cabinet, was an outcome of 
 the Caroline affair of December 29, 1837. The Caroline 
 was a vessel owned by a resident of Buffalo. She plied 
 ordinarily between points on the American side of the 
 Niagara River ; but during the course of the Canadian 
 rebellion of 1837 she was used to transport supplies 
 and reinforcements from the insurgent stronghold, 
 Navy Island, to the Canadian side of the stream. On 
 December 29th a party of Canadian troops crossed to 
 the American shore, cut loose the vessel from her 
 moorings, set her on fire, and allowed her to drift over 
 the Falls. During the melSe a citizen of the United 
 States of the name of Durfree was slain. The British 
 Government avowed full responsibility for the de- 
 struction of the Caroline and protested that the act was 
 one of necessary self-defense. The Van Buren Admin- 
 istration demurred, but was unable to establish aright 
 to reparation. Late in 1840 Alexander McLeod, for- 
 merly a Canadian deputy sheriff, made his appearance 
 in New York and boasted that it was he who had killed 
 
306 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 Durfree j whereupon he was placed under arrest and 
 indicted for murder. On the ground that the prisoner, 
 while participating in the capture of the Caroline, was 
 performing an act of public duty for which he could 
 not be made personally and individually answerable to 
 the laws of any country, the British minister at Wash- 
 ington, Fox, peremptorily demanded McLeod's release. 
 Feeling in Great Britain, already stirred by the open 
 sympathy of large numbers of Americans with the 
 Canadian revolutionists, and by other matters, became 
 intense. The foreign secretary, Palmerston, curtly in- 
 formed the American minister, Stevenson, that Mc- 
 Leod' s execution would be the signal for war ; ! and it 
 is certainly true that at no time since 1815 had war be- 
 tween the United States and Great Britain been so 
 imminent as it was in the spring of 1841. Webster's 
 study of the case inclined him to an acceptance of the 
 British contention, namely, that responsibility for the 
 occurrences in which the prisoner was involved lay 
 with the nation and not with the individual, and, ac- 
 cordingly, that McLeod should be set free. The pecul- 
 iar difficulty of the case arose, however, from the fact 
 that McLeod was in the custody of the authorities of 
 the state of New York, who were bent upon proceeding 
 with the trial which was set for the ensuing May. The 
 most that Webster, acting with the concurrence of the 
 President, could do was to see that McLeod was pro- 
 vided with capable counsel and to have this counsel 
 furnished with evidence on which to sue for a writ of 
 habeas corpus before the Supreme Court of New York. 
 When the writ was unexpectedly denied and the 
 prisoner was remanded for trial the situation looked 
 dark. But the counsel for the defendant, abandoning 
 1 Bulwer, " Palmerston," Vol. Ill, pp. 46, 49. 
 
TEEATY OF WASHINGTON 307 
 
 the line of defense marked out by the State Depart- 
 ment, fell back upon the attempt to prove an alibi, 
 and, curiously enough, the attempt was successful. 
 October 12, 1841, McLeod was acquitted and released. 1 
 This termination of the McLeod case, wrote John 
 Quincy Adams in his Diary, removed all immediate 
 danger of a collision between the two nations, but "left 
 the negotiations with the British authorities upon the 
 Maine boundary, the South Sea [Pacific] boundary, 
 the slave-trade, and the seizure of our shij>s on the 
 coast of Africa thorns to be extracted by purer and 
 more skilful hands than are to be found in the Admin- 
 istration of John Tyler." 2 The author of this caustic 
 remark failed completely to estimate at their true 
 worth the statesmanship of the President, the diplo- 
 matic capacities of the Secretary of State, and the in- 
 tegrity and patriotism of the Administration in gen- 
 eral. At the moment when the words were penned the 
 country was, in point of fact, fast approaching a dip- 
 lomatic adjustment with Great Britain destined to be 
 both honorable and permanent. For such a consum- 
 mation the way was prepared, not alone by the acces- 
 sion of Webster to the portfolio of state, but by a gen- 
 eral overturn in official circles at London. In June, 
 1841, the Whig ministry of Melbourne suffered defeat 
 in the Commons, and at the national elections which 
 ensued the Tories won so clear a victory that in August 
 the making up of a ministry was entrusted to the Tory 
 leader, Kobert Peel. At the Foreign Office the aggres- 
 sive Palmerston was succeeded by the cautious Aber- 
 deen, and the new ministry as a whole was disposed to 
 
 'For the documents in the McLeod case see " Works of Web- 
 ster," Vol. VI, pp. 247-269, and "Writings and Speeohes," Vol. 
 IX, pp. 247-269. 2 Adams, " Memoirs," Vol. XI. p. 27. 
 
308 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 be much more conciliatory than its predecessor. The 
 consequence was the rapid smoothing of the way for 
 the series of negotiations whose outcome was the notable 
 treaty signed by Webster and the British commissioner 
 Ashburton in the summer of 1842. 
 
 In many respects the most serious of the pending 
 issues between the two countries was that of the north- 
 eastern boundary, and in the settlement of this long- 
 standing question Webster felt from the first the deepest 
 possible interest. The question arose from the ambi- 
 guity of the treaty of peace of 1783 regarding the line 
 of demarcation between the United States and the 
 British possessions on the north. As early as 1802 a 
 futile attempt was made by Jefferson to procure a set- 
 tlement, and the treaty of Ghent contained a provision 
 in accordance with which two joint commissions were 
 to be constituted to take under consideration the matters 
 in dispute. One of the resulting commissions per- 
 formed successfully the work allotted to it, but the 
 other, confronted by an essentially impossible task, 
 expended six years of arduous effort and ended by 
 failing completely to reach an agreement. In 1827 the 
 two governments concluded a convention by whose 
 terms the issue was referred to an arbitrator ; but the 
 referee chosen, the king of the Netherlands, recom- 
 mended, in 1831, the adoption of a boundary line which 
 he marked out, rather than either of the lines favored 
 by one of the contestants, and the recommendation was 
 not adopted. Correspondence upon the subject was 
 continued intermittently, and the tone of it grew more 
 rather than less unfriendly. Not until after the estab- 
 lishment of the Whig administration in 1841 did there 
 appear prospect of a satisfactory adjustment. Mean 
 while the situation grew ever more serious, for the 
 
TREATY OF WASHINGTON 309 
 
 border populations of Maine and New Brunswick fell 
 to fighting over the disputed lands. In 1838-1839 
 there was a prolonged series of clashes which acquired 
 the designation of the Aroostook, or " Bestook," War. 
 In March, 1841, Webster entered upon his duties as 
 secretary of state convinced that " of all the topics in 
 discussion," that of the boundary was "infinitely the 
 most difficult," l yet confident that a peaceful adjust- 
 ment was by no means impossible. Two years pre- 
 viously, as has appeared, he had taken the suggestion 
 that he should be despatched on a special mission to 
 London as an occasion to draw up a comprehensive 
 scheme for the handling of the boundary issue, and in 
 1841 he found himself in a position to carry into exe- 
 cution the essentials of this plan. To a proposal that 
 negotiations should be renewed informally the British 
 Government replied favorably, and the appointment, 
 late in the year, of Lord Ashburton as special envoy 
 evidenced in unmistakable manner the honesty of pur- 
 pose of the premier and his colleagues. " The prin- 
 cipal aim and object of that part of my life devoted to 
 public objects," wrote Ashburton to Webster soon 
 after the appointment, " during the thirty -five years 
 that I have had a seat in one or the other House of 
 Parliament, has been to impress on others the neces- 
 sity of, and to promote myself, peace and harmony be- 
 tween our countries." 2 The only fault found with the 
 appointment in England was that the envoy was likely 
 to be too little disposed to insist upon British rights. 
 "The special mission," wrote Webster to Everett, 
 "was a surprise to us; but the country receives it 
 
 1 Webster to John Davis. April 16, 1841. Webster, "Private 
 Correspondence," Vol. II, p. 119. 
 
 5 Van Tyne, " Letters of Daniel Webster," p. 253. 
 
310 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 very well. For my own part, no selection of a min- 
 ister could be more agreeable to me than that of Lord 
 Ashburton, as I entertain toward him sentiments of 
 great kindness and regard. ... It [the mission] 
 gives me promise of work enough, overwhelmed as I 
 already am by affairs growing out of the very unhappy 
 state of things among us, and out of the calls and pro- 
 ceedings of Congress. But my health is good — never 
 better — and if I can so far repress anxiety as to be 
 able to sleep, I hope to get through. ' ' ' 
 
 Lord Ashburton arrived in Washington April 4, 
 1842, and was well received in both official and non- 
 official circles. It was commonly believed that he 
 had come, as Webster expressed it, with "an honest 
 and sincere intent of removing all causes of jealousy, 
 disquietude, or difference between the two countries." 
 The negotiations were opened, at the middle of June, 
 with perfect frankness upon both sides, and were car- 
 ried through with no deviation from the initial spirit 
 of friendliness. The task was complicated enormously 
 by the claims of the states of Maine and Massachusetts, 
 pressed by specially appointed commissioners, and at 
 several stages Webster was inclined to despair of a 
 satisfactory issue. But happily the effort was not 
 abandoned. The negotiations were so entirely in- 
 formal that, coutrary to the custom prevailing in such 
 work, no minutes of the meetings were preserved and 
 no protocols whatsoever were prepared. The Secretary 
 had at all stages the cordial support of the President. 
 " I shall never speak of this negotiation, my dear sir," 
 he declared to Tyler after the conclusion of the work, 
 " which I believe is destined to make some figure in 
 
 1 Webster to Everett. January 29, 1842. Webster, "Private 
 Correspondence," Vol. II, p. 114, 
 
TEEATY OF WASHINGTON 311 
 
 the history of the country, without doing you justice. 
 Your steady support and confidence, your anxious and 
 intelligent attention to what was in progress, and your 
 exceedingly obliging and pleasant intercourse, both 
 with the British minister and the commissioners of 
 the states, have given every possible facility to my 
 agency in this important transaction. " ! 
 
 The treaty as signed August 9th dealt with three 
 important subjects— the extradition of persons accused 
 of crime, the suppression of the international slave 
 trade, and the northeastern and northwestern bound- 
 aries. The provision concerning extradition was the 
 first inserted in any treaty to which the United States 
 was a party since the Jay treaty of 1794 ; and the extra- 
 dition article of that instrument had expired by limi- 
 tation in 1806. The present provision was made both 
 comprehensive and perpetual. On the subject of the 
 slave trade the treaty went only so far as to stipulate 
 that the two powers should maintain in service on the 
 coast of Africa independent squadrons sufficient to en- 
 force their respective laws for the suppression of the 
 slave traffic, and that they should cooperate in "all 
 becoming representations and remonstrances " with 
 all powers within whose dominion the market for 
 slaves was permitted to remain open. The opposition 
 of the United States to the right of visitation or search, 
 regarded by the British authorities as a necessary ad- 
 junct to the campaign against the slave trade, was so 
 pronounced that the subject was regarded as one not 
 open to discussion, and between Webster and Ash- 
 
 1 Webster to Tyler, August 24, 1842. Webster, " Private Cor- 
 respondence," Vol. II, p. 147. For the notes exchanged by 
 Webster and Lord Ash burton see "Works of Webster," Vol. VI, 
 pp. 270-328, and "Writings and Speeches," Vol. XI, pp. 270-328. 
 
312 DANIEL WEBSTEB 
 
 burton it was hardly mentioned. The plan of action 
 for which the treaty provided was in reality the 
 President's, and it was in his name that it was pre- 
 sented by Webster to the British commissioner. The 
 settlement of the northern boundaries was made upon 
 the basis of compromise. The disputed lines from the 
 source of the St Croix to the intersection with the St. 
 Lawrence, and from the passage between Lake Huron 
 and Lake Superior to the northwestern corner of the 
 Lake of the Woods, were agreed upon and described, 
 and a commission was provided for to survey and 
 mark them. The claims of Maine and Massachusetts 
 were satisfied by a payment of one hundred and fifty 
 thousand dollars to each by the United States. There 
 were several minor stipulations regarding the naviga- 
 tion of rivers adjacent to the boundaries and other 
 kindred matters. 
 
 Upon several pending questions of more or less im- 
 portance the treaty did not touch. There was nothing 
 regarding the Oregon territory, trade with the British 
 West Iudies, tariff relations, the violation of territory 
 in the case of the Caroline, or the proper course to be 
 pursued when slaves belonging to American citizens 
 were by any circumstance cast upon British soil. The 
 last-mentioned question had been given fresh interest 
 by the Creole episode of November, 1841. The brig 
 Creole, with a cargo of merchandise and slaves, was 
 on her way from Richmond to New Orleans when the 
 slaves rose, overpowered the ship's master and crew, 
 and put in at the port of Nassau, on the British island 
 of New Providence, in the West Indies. The British 
 authorities at the port, instead of coming to the relief 
 of the crew and setting the vessel again upon her 
 course, permitted the slaves to escape and left the crew 
 
TREATY OF WASHINGTON 313 
 
 entirely without succor. The affair aroused keen re- 
 sentment in the South, and it fell to Webster to seek 
 reparation. At the negotiation of 1842, however, 
 Lord Ashburton professed lack of instructions, and the 
 most that Webster could obtain from him was an un- 
 written agreement that there should be no "officious 
 interference" with American vessels driven by acci- 
 dent or by violence into West Indian ports. Not- 
 withstanding these omissions, the results of the nego- 
 tiation were regarded in the United States as distinctly 
 worthy of commendation, and the treaty, laid before 
 the Senate August 11th, was reported by the Foreign 
 Relations Committee without amendment and was rati- 
 fied by a vote of thirty-nine to nine, a majority con- 
 siderably in excess of that which Webster had ex- 
 pected. On October 13th ratifications were exchanged 
 at London, and on November 10th the treaty was pro- 
 claimed. 
 
 The Webster- Ashburton negotiation comprises one 
 of the most highly creditable chapters in the history of 
 modern diplomacy. Not only was a threatened war 
 averted ; the lofty tone of the negotiation fixed a 
 standard which in subsequent times was by no means 
 without effect in the dealings of the two nations. 
 Each negotiator was firm when the interests committed 
 to him required that he be so, but each was actuated 
 by a profoundly friendly spirit toward the other, and 
 each was ready at all times to make every possible al- 
 lowance for the requirements of the other's position. 
 Thoroughly grounded in the principles of the law of 
 nations, Webster maintained throughout the negotia- 
 tion not one point of law whose validity the jurist of 
 to-day is disposed to call in question. And the fact 
 that the settlements arrived at proved eventually satis- 
 
314 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 factory on both sides of the Atlantic, notwithstanding 
 the recent intensity of feeling on both sides, is testi- 
 mony alike to the skill and the fairness with which 
 the negotiations were carried through. ' 
 
 Throughout the summer of 1842 there continued to 
 be murmuring among the more radical Whigs by 
 reason of Webster's refusal to withdraw from the cab- 
 inet, and the fact that in the negotiations with Ash- 
 burton the Secretary was collaborating in a cordial 
 manner with President Tyler brought down upon his 
 head no small amount of open criticism. Even his 
 closest friends were insistent that he should not con- 
 tinue a member of Tyler's official family after the 
 termination of the British treaty. "Your real 
 friends," wrote Abbott Lawrence, July 30th, when 
 the end of the negotiation was in view, " will unani- 
 mously agree with me that now is the accepted time to 
 quit, with honor, your present responsible but disagree- 
 able position." "Your best friends here," wrote 
 Jeremiah Mason from Boston, August 28th, "think 
 that there is an insuperable difficulty in your continu- 
 ing any longer in President Tyler's cabinet." The 
 demand for his resignation became, indeed, after the 
 signature of the treaty, insistent. The attempt to dic- 
 tate his course of action appealed to Webster, how- 
 ever, most unfavorably. The petty persecution to 
 which he was subjected nettled him, and, wholly 
 apart from personal considerations, it seemed to him 
 absolutely essential that he should remain at his post 
 until the execution of the treaty should be entirely as- 
 
 l In Parliament the treaty, referred to by its opponents as "Ash- 
 burton s Capitulation," was attacked by Palmerston and other 
 members of the Opposition. But the objections to it were neither 
 fundamental nor lasting. 
 
TEEATY OF WASHINGTON 315 
 
 sured. He therefore gave his advisers scant satisfac- 
 tion. "I am a little hard to coax," he declared, 
 " but as to being driven, that is out of the question." 
 His resolution was in no wise shaken by the hardly 
 courteous action of the Massachusetts Whig conven- 
 tion of September 13, 1842, which definitely declared 
 a "full and final" separation between the President 
 and the Whig party. On the contrary, he was in- 
 fluenced by that action to appear in Faneuil Hall, 
 September 30th, and in the presence of a brilliant as- 
 semblage of his fellow-townsmen to lay bare merci- 
 lessly the folly of widening the breach between Con- 
 gress and the President, and incidentally to explain 
 and defend the course which he was himself pursuing. 
 As to his intent for the future he refused absolutely 
 to commit himself. " I give no pledges, I make no 
 intimations one way or the other ; and I will be as free 
 when this day closes to act as duty calls as I was at the 
 dawn of this day." 1 
 
 During more than seven months thereafter he con- 
 tinued at his post, and it was only when, in the spring 
 of 1843, he became convinced that he could be of little 
 further service to the country as a member of the cab- 
 inet that he reached a decision to retire. The period 
 was one of comparative inactivity in both foreign and 
 domestic affairs. To the last the pleasant relations 
 which had subsisted between the Secretary and the 
 President were maintained. In his letter of resigna- 
 tion, May 8th, Webster assured his chief that no one 
 could desire more sincerely or ardently " the prosper- 
 ity, success, and honor" of his administration ; while 
 in his very cordial reply the President expressed the 
 
 141 Works of Webster," Vol. II, p. 124; "Writings and 
 Speeches," Vol. Ill, p. 124. 
 
316 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 conviction that in conducting "the most delicate and 
 important negotiations" Webster had " manifested 
 powers of intellect of the highest order, and, in all 
 things, a true American heart." 
 
 
CHAPTER XII 
 
 TEXAS, OREGON, AND THE ELECTION OF 1844 
 
 Immediately upon his retirement from the cabinet 
 Webster withdrew to his Massachusetts home, now 
 definitely fixed at the country seat of Marshfield, and 
 throughout the ensuing two years he was enabled, de- 
 spite frequent professional engagements, to attend al- 
 most continuously to his growing rural interests and to 
 enjoy in a larger measure than at any time since youth 
 his favored forms of outdoor recreation. Marshfield 
 was situated some thirty miles southeast of Boston, in 
 the vicinity of the head of Duxbury Bay. The place 
 was first visited by Webster in 1824. After he and 
 his family had spent a number of summers there, in 
 1831 he purchased from his landlord, Captain John 
 Thomas, a farm of one hundred and sixty acres, bor- 
 dering immediately upon the sea. To this possession 
 were added other tracts from time to time until there 
 was brought together an estate of eighteen hundred 
 acres. The house upon the original tract was a sub- 
 stantial square- shaped mansion, built about 1765. It 
 proved too small for Webster's use and was added to 
 upon several occasions until it became, as Mr. Curtis 
 describes it, " a house of various architecture, irregular 
 within and without, but spacious and convenient, and 
 both externally and internally impressing the visitor 
 with a sense of its fitness as Mr. Webster's favorite 
 home." l At the time of the owner's retirement from 
 
 1 Curtis, " Webster," Vol. II, p. 217. 
 
318 DANIEL WEBSTEK 
 
 the cabinet a room to be employed as a library was in 
 process of construction. In 1839 the house in Summer 
 Street, Boston, which Webster had erected and long 
 occupied was sold, and thereupon the furniture and 
 other personal property of the family was brought to- 
 gether in the Marshfield mansion. Only a law-office, 
 with a valuable professional library, was retained in 
 the city. 
 
 In both the theoretical and the practical aspects of 
 agriculture Webster maintained at all times a vital in- 
 terest. After the death of his brother Ezekiel, as has 
 appeared, he took over the management of the ances- 
 tral Elms Farm in New Hampshire, so that his atten- 
 tion had thereafter to be divided between the lands at 
 Franklin and those at Marshfield. In both places he 
 had overseers and carefully selected tenants ; but he 
 busied himself none the less with the details of both 
 estates. Throughout the periods of hardest labor at 
 Washington his correspondence abounds in letters to 
 his overseers, notably Mr. Weston at Marshfield, re- 
 specting the care of cattle, the sowing and harvesting 
 of the crops, the repairing of fences and buildings, 
 and the multiplicity of labors involved in the op- 
 eration of a profitable farm. From the supervision 
 of his agricultural enterprises he derived the deepest 
 satisfaction, and it was with unbounded joy that he 
 found himself occasionally so free from public and pro- 
 fessional obligations as to be able to yoke a string of 
 oxen to a plough and break an acre of soil or undertake 
 some other feat of rural hardihood. When in the coun- 
 try he rose regularly at three or four o'clock, enjoyed 
 what he always considered the grandest phenomenon of 
 nature, v. e., the sunrise, made the round of the barns 
 with ears of corn for his favorite cattle, and not infre- 
 
TEXAS, OKEGON, ELECTION OF 1844 319 
 
 quently brought down some woodcocks or wild ducks 
 with his fowliug-piece before the call to breakfast. A 
 well-appointed fishing-boat was always at hand, and 
 with a hard-headed old salt, Seth Peterson, as steers- 
 man, mauy a day was spent in quest of halibut and cod 
 in the cool waters of Massachusetts Bay. " Oh, Marsh - 
 field, the sea, the sea," was a plaint repeatedly raised 
 during wearisome stretches of professional or congres- 
 sional routine. 
 
 The opportunity for retirement which presented, 
 itself in 1843 was especially agreeable to Webster be- 
 cause of the need under which he at the time was 
 laboring to devote attention to his private affairs. The 
 fact has been alluded to that in him the quality of 
 thrift was not predominant and that an unfortunate 
 trait developed during his youth was an easy and 
 habitual indifference to debt. In the practice of his 
 profession he made money readily, and often in consid- 
 erable amounts. But he spent freely, even lavishly, 
 and so large a portion of his maturer years was given 
 over to the service of the public that the income which 
 otherwise he would, have enjoyed from his career at the 
 bar was very materially lessened. In 1836, with the 
 aid of frieuds, he contrived to adjust all of his accounts, 
 so that for once he was entirely free from debt. Con- 
 tinued service in the Senate and the cabinet, however, 
 involved further diminution of income, renewed bor- 
 rowing, and once more, in the course of six or seven 
 years, heavy indebtedness. The social obligations of 
 his position, reenforced by a personal inclination to 
 generous hospitality and good, though not extravagant, 
 living, rendered his salary totally inadequate to meel 
 his expenses. This salary could be supplemented only 
 occasionally and irregularly by lawyer's fees. The 
 
320 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 farms at Franklin and Marshfield were fairly produc- 
 tive, but the owner was unsparing in his outlays upon 
 fine stock, improved methods, better buildings, and 
 more land, so that the income was as a rule less than 
 the outgo. There were also several landed investments 
 in the West, few of which yielded returns. Finally 
 must be mentioned the fact that Webster's personal 
 finances were managed at all times in a haphazard 
 manner. No regular accounts were kept, either by 
 himself or by his agents, and it was never possible to 
 ascertain precisely which enterprises were paying and 
 which were not. In less than a year after his retire- 
 ment from the cabinet, however, he was able to report 
 that he was already in enjoyment of an income of fif- 
 teen thousand dollars from his revived law practice. 
 He was hoping, too, to turn some minor pieces of 
 property to good account, and with respect to his com- 
 plete financial recovery he was altogether sanguine. 
 At the suggestion that he should permit himself to be 
 returned at an early date to the Senate he demurred, 
 on the ground principally that he could not yet afford 
 the pecuniary sacrifice that would be involved. 1 
 
 Life at Marshfield during the summer and autumn 
 of 1843 was interrupted by the preparation of certain 
 public addresses and by occasional trips beyond New 
 England, chiefly professional visits to New York. On 
 July 23, 1842, the last stone was raised to its place on 
 the Bunker Hill Monument, and on June 17, 1843, the 
 sixty-eighth anniversary of the battle and theeighteenth 
 of the laying of the corner-stone, the completion of the 
 giant shaft was publicly celebrated. As was befitting, 
 the services of Webster were again sought, and, not- 
 
 1 Webster to Sears, February 5, 1844. Webster, ''Private Cor- 
 respondence, * " Vol. II, p. 183. 
 
TEXAS, OEEGON, ELECTION OF 1844 321 
 
 withstanding his desire for rest, he consented to deliver 
 the principal oration of the occasion. Elaborate prepara- 
 tions for the day were made, the weather proved ideal, 
 and in numbers and enthusiasm the celebration easily 
 surpassed that of eighteen years before. The present 
 oration was less impassioued than the earlier one, but 
 not less powerful. It was delivered in the shadow of the 
 giant obelisk, looming two hundred ami twenty-one 
 feet in the air, and in the presence of an audience of 
 one hundred thousand people, at least half of whom 
 were within hearing of the speaker's voice. " A 
 duty," affirmed Webster in his simple opening sen- 
 tences, "has been performed. A work of gratitude 
 and patriotism is completed. This structure, having 
 its foundations in soil which drank deep of early Kevo- 
 lutionary blood, has at length reached its destined 
 height, and now lifts its summit to the skies. We 
 have assembled to celebrate the accomplishment of this 
 undertaking, and to indulge afresh in the recollection 
 of the great event which it is designed to commem- 
 orate." When, after saying " It is not from my lips, 
 it could not be from any human lips, that that strain 
 of eloquence is this day to flow most competent to 
 move and excite the vast multitude around me,— the 
 powerful speaker stands motionless before us," he 
 paused and pointed in silent admiration to the great 
 pile of granite, the audience burst into unrestrained ap- 
 plause, and many minutes elapsed before the address 
 could be continued. 
 
 "We have indulged," it was asserted in the mem- 
 orable peroration, "in gratifying recollections of the 
 past, in the prosperity and pleasures of the present, 
 and in high hopes for the future. But let us remem- 
 ber that we have duties and obligations to perform, 
 
322 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 corresponding to the blessings which, we enjoy. Let us 
 remember the trust, the sacred trust, attaching to the 
 rich inheritance which we have received from our 
 fathers. Let us feel our personal responsibility, to the 
 full extent of our power and influence, for the preser- 
 vation of the principles of civil and religious liberty. 
 And let us remember that it is only religion, and 
 morals, and knowledge, that can make men respectable 
 and happy, under any form of government. Let us 
 hold fast the great truth, that communities are re- 
 sponsible, as well as individuals ; that no government 
 is respectable, which is not just ; that without un- 
 spotted purity of public faith, without sacred public 
 principle, fidelity, and honor, no mere forms of gov- 
 ernment, no machinery of laws, can give dignity to 
 political society. In our day and generation let us 
 seek to raise and improve the moral sentiment, so 
 that we may look, not for a degraded, but for an elevated 
 and improved, future. And when both we and our 
 children shall have been consigned to the house ap- 
 pointed for all living, may love of country and pride 
 of country glow with equal fervor among those to 
 whom our names and our blood shall have descended ! 
 And then, wiien honored and decrepit age shall lean 
 against the base of this monument, and troops of in- 
 genuous youth shall be gathered round it, and when 
 the one shall speak to the other of its objects, the 
 purposes of its construction, and the great and glori- 
 ous events with which it is connected, there shall rise 
 from every youthful breast the ejaculation, "Thank 
 God, I— I also— am an American ! " ] 
 
 During the summer of 1843 Webster was urged to 
 
 Ul Works of Webster," Vol. I, pp. 106-107; "Writings and 
 Speeches," Vol. I, pp. 282-283. 
 
TEXAS, OREGON, ELECTION OF 1844 323 
 
 attend a fair to be held at Rochester in September, un- 
 der the auspices of the New York State Agricultural So- 
 ciety. ' l Do not wonder, " he wrote to his sister-in-law, 
 September 18th, " if you hear of me making a sudden 
 expedition to western New York, to be gone four days. 
 There are to be cattle and sheep at Rochester. " An 
 invitation to be present at an entertainment given by 
 the officials of the Agricultural Society on the even- 
 ing of September 20th was accepted, and upon this 
 occasion two speeches were delivered, one upon indus- 
 trial topics in reply to the toast " the Farmer of Marsh- 
 field," the other an impromptu reply to another speak- 
 er's remarks concerning the financial condition of the 
 states. 1 
 
 Meanwhile there was looming above the horizon the 
 presidential election of 1844. Already, in August, 1843, 
 the Liberty party had held a convention at Buffalo 
 and had placed in nomination for the presidency James 
 G. Birney of New York, upon a platform denying the 
 power of Congress "to establish or continue slavery 
 anywhere " and otherwise assailing the asserted 
 privileges of the "peculiar institution." Among the 
 Whigs Clay was still unquestionably leader, and 
 that he should be accorded the honor in 1844 
 which he had been denied in 1840 was from the 
 outset inevitable. His only possible rival was Web- 
 ster. At the last, Webster received little or no consid- 
 eration ; but during the winter of 1843-1844 an ap- 
 preciable amount of effort was exerted in his behalf by 
 his Massachusetts friends. As has been observed, dur- 
 ing the year or more preceding his withdrawal from the 
 cabinet Webster's course had been subjected to very 
 general criticism on the part of the Whigs everywhere, 
 1 "Writings aud Speeches," Vol. XIII, pp. 172-195. 
 
324 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 and notably in his own section of the country. Even 
 after his retirement the question continued to be 
 agitated as to whether, indeed, he could any longer 
 properly be considered a member of the Whig party. 
 The charge held against him was not alone his pro- 
 longed continuance in the Tyler cabinet under the cir- 
 cumstances which have been described, but his re- 
 iterated public affirmation that a Bank of the United 
 States upon the old plan had ceased to be practicable. 
 Upon the constitutionality and desirability of duties 
 affording incidental protection to home manufactures, 
 the necessity of the distribution of the proceeds of the 
 sales of public land, the duty of the general govern- 
 ment to employ its full powers in the regulation of the 
 currency, and a variety of other tenets of Whig polity 
 he remained indubitably orthodox. But to many of 
 his fellow-partisans the admission which had been 
 made concerning the Bank appeared altogether unpar- 
 donable. 
 
 To the friends who were desirous of clearing the 
 way for Webster's candidacy in 1844 it seemed im- 
 perative that something should be done to afford the 
 country at large an assurance that within his own 
 section past differences were forgotten and that he was 
 regarded again as a party member in good standing. 
 To effect this end Webster was persuaded to be pres- 
 ent at, and to address, a convention of the Massa- 
 chusetts Whigs held at Andover November 9, 1843. 
 The speech delivered upon this occasion dealt mainly 
 with the subjects of the currency, the tariff, and the 
 public lands, but it comprised also a remarkably 
 straightforward and convincing confession of personal 
 principle. In the course of it Webster affirmed that 
 he was not a candidate for " any office in the gift of 
 
TEXAS, OKEGON, ELECTION OF 1844 325 
 
 the government or in the gift of the people, "and that 
 his condition as a private citizen would never be 
 changed by any movement or effort made for that 
 purpose by himself or at his suggestion. " In my 
 opinion," he asserted, " nominations for the high 
 offices of the country should come, if they come at all, 
 from the free and spontaneous exercise of that respect 
 and confidence which the people themselves may feel. 
 All solicitations of such nominations, and all canvass- 
 ing for such high trusts, I regard as equally incon- 
 sistent with personal dignity and derogatory to the 
 character of the institutions of the country." 
 
 Impelled by the wide-spread controversy to which 
 his course had given rise, he went on to declare 
 himself as follows: "Asa private man, I hold my 
 opinions on public subjects. They are all such, in 
 their great features and general character, as I have 
 ever held. It is as impossible that I should tread back 
 the path of my political opinions as that I should re- 
 trace, step by step, the progress of my natural life, 
 until I should find myself again a youth. On the 
 leading questions arising under our constitutions and 
 forms of government ; on the importance of maintain- 
 ing the separation of powers, which those constitutions 
 establish ; on the great principles of such a policy as 
 shall promote all interests, maintain general harmony 
 in the country, and perpetuate the blessings of polit- 
 ical and religious liberty — my opinions, the result of 
 no little study, and some experience, have become pari 
 of myself. They are identified with all my habits of 
 thought and reflection, "and though I may change my 
 views of particular measures, or not deem the same 
 measures equally proper at all times, yet T am sine it 
 is quite impossible I should ever take such a view, 
 
326 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 either of the public interest or of my own duty, as 
 should lead to a departure from any cardinal prin- 
 ciples." * 
 
 One subject, namely, the propriety of his course 
 in refusing to retire from the cabinet in 1841, Webster 
 declared he made mention of at this time only because 
 the committee which had invited him to the conven- 
 tion had made specific allusion to it. "I am aware,' * 
 he said, " that there are many persons in the country, 
 having feelings not unfriendly toward me personally, 
 and entertaining all proper respect for my public 
 character, who yet think I ought to have left the 
 cabinet with my colleagues. I do not complain of 
 any fair exercise of opinion in this respect ; and if, by 
 such persons as I have referred to, explanation be de- 
 sired of anything in the past, or anything in my pres- 
 ent opinions, it will be readily and cheerfully given. 
 On the other hand, those who deal only in coarse 
 vituperation, and satisfy their sense of candor and 
 justice simply by the repetition of the charge of der- 
 eliction of duty and infidelity to Whig principles, 
 are not entitled to the respect of an answer from me. 
 . . . Gentlemen, I could not but be sensible that 
 great responsibility attached to the course which I 
 adopted. It was a moment of great excitement. A 
 most unfortunate difference had broken out between 
 the President and the Whig members of Congress. 
 Much exasperation had been produced, and the whole 
 country was in a very inflamed state. No man of 
 sense can suppose, that, without strong motives, I 
 should wish to differ in conduct from those with whom 
 I had long acted ; and as for those persons whose 
 
 J "Works of Webster, » Vol. II, pp. 180-181; " Writings and 
 Speeches," Vol. Ill, pp. 180-181. 
 
TEXAS, OBEGON, ELECTION OF 1844 327 
 
 charity leads them to seek for such motive in the 
 hope of personal advantage, neither their candor nor 
 their sagacity deserves anything but contempt. I 
 admit, gentlemen, that if a very strong desire to be 
 instrumental and useful in accomplishing a settlement 
 of our difficulties with England, which had then risen 
 to an alarming height, and appeared to be approach- 
 ing a crisis — if this be a personal motive, then I con- 
 fess myself to have been influenced by a personal 
 motive. The imputation of any other personal mo- 
 tive, the charge of seeking any selfish advantage, I 
 repel with utter scorn. . . . Gentlemen, I thought 
 I saw an opportunity of doing the State some service, 
 and I ran the risk of the undertaking. I certainly do 
 not regret it, and never shall regret it." x 
 
 In the opinion of Mr. Curtis the real reason why 
 Webster made special effort at this point to set him- 
 self right with the Whigs was one which for the time 
 being he was not free to avow, namely, his desire to 
 be in a position to advise and control his party upon 
 the question of Texas. It may be supposed that con- 
 siderations of political expediency were not wholly 
 without their bearing, but it undoubtedly is true that 
 the seriousness of the Texan issue was very keenly felt. 
 When, in 1836, that issue was thrust into the fore- 
 ground by the success of the Texan revolution Webster 
 predicted that it would introduce into the politics of 
 the country " new causes of embarrassment and new- 
 tendencies to dismemberment" ; 2 and throughout the 
 succeeding years of intermittent diplomacy and varia- 
 
 1 Curtis, " Webster," Vol. II, p. 229 ; " Writings and Speeches, ' ' 
 Vol. Ill, pp. 181-182. 
 
 2 Webster to Everett, May 7, 1836. Webster, " Private Corre- 
 spondence," Vol. II, p. 19. 
 
328 DANIEL WEBSTEK 
 
 tion of policy he found increasing rather than dimin- 
 ishing reason for apprehension. In September, 1836, 
 the people of Texas voted overwhelmingly for annexa- 
 tion to the United States, and the demand for such 
 annexation which arose from numerous and influential 
 elements in the United States, northern as well as 
 southern, was such as to be extremely difficult to re- 
 sist. The most that could be obtained, however, dur- 
 ing the continuance of the Jackson administration was 
 a recognition of the index^endence of the republic, in 
 March, 1837 ; and throughout the four years of Van 
 Buren the programme of the annexationists was blocked 
 absolutely by the opposition of the President. In 1838 
 the Texan offer of annexation was withdrawn, and in 
 1839-1840 treaties of friendship were concluded by the 
 republic with France, Great Britain, and other Euro- 
 pean states. When, in 1841, Webster assumed the 
 state portfolio he recognized that the project of annex- 
 ation was likely to be revived at any time, and in 
 December of the year mentioned he was not surprised 
 to be approached by an envoy of the Texan secretary 
 of state bent upon ascertaining the attitude of the new 
 Administration toward such a project. The envoy, 
 Eeily, was given no encouragement, and early in 1842 
 he asked of his government that he be relieved. The 
 request was granted and another envoy, Van Zandt, 
 was sent to Washington to watch and report upon the 
 fluctuations of annexation sentiment in both official 
 and non-official circles. 
 
 Thus matters stood until after the retirement of 
 Webster from the State Department, in May, 1843. A 
 few weeks subsequent to that event, however, new 
 phases assumed by the Texan situation induced a 
 change from a passive to an active attitude on the part 
 
TEXAS, OKEGON, ELECTION OF 1844 329 
 
 of the Tyler Administration. Through the efforts of 
 British and French agents a truce was brought about 
 between Texas and Mexico ; almost immediately there- 
 after Van Zandt was instructed to inform the govern- 
 ment of the United States that the subject of annexa- 
 tion was no longer open for discussion ; and rumors 
 became widely current to the effect that British influ- 
 ence was being employed to bring about the abolition 
 of slavery within the republic. The new secretary of 
 state, Upshur, became so panic-stricken as to believe 
 that Great Britain was eugaged in a gigantic plot hav- 
 ing as its end nothing less than the abolition of slavery 
 in all parts of America. The danger in Texas was be- 
 lieved to be immediate ; and in order to avert it the 
 President and Secretary Upshur resolved upon an im- 
 mediate negotiation of a treaty providing for the an- 
 nexation of the republic to the United States. The 
 negotiations, opened in October, 1843, proceeded slowly 
 and in secret, and it was not until April 12th that the 
 annexation treaty was signed. In the meantime Up- 
 shur, killed in an accident February 28th, had been 
 succeeded in the State Department by Calhoun. 
 
 During the winter of 1843-1844 Webster spent some 
 weeks in Washington attending to business in the Su- 
 preme Court, and while there he became aware of the 
 Administration's Texan project, despite the effort 
 which was being made to preserve secrecy. Further- 
 more, he obtained his information indirectly from Up- 
 shur himself. Webster and his successor, notwith- 
 standing political differences, were excellent friends. 
 In the course of one of their conversations Upshur 
 confided to Webster that he disagreed with the Presi- 
 dent's policy in such a measure that "he would not 
 continue in office a fortnight if he had not a particular 
 
330 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 object to accomplish. " The nature of the object was 
 not specified, but Webster related subsequently that he 
 "felt Texas go through" him and that within two 
 days he knew all about the Administration's dealings 
 with Van Zandt. Returning to Boston, he called into 
 conference his friend Ticknor and disclosed to him 
 what he had learned. War, he declared, would be the 
 inevitable consequence of an annexation of Texas with- 
 out the consent of Mexico. Upon the evils that would 
 follow an extension of territory to the southward he 
 discoursed eloquently, even passionately, asserting 
 that he had been unable to sleep at night and that he 
 could think of little else by day. The existence of the 
 Union itself, he was certain, would be endangered. 
 In the Intelligencer he had published already two 
 articles in opposition to annexation, and at his sug- 
 gestion a Massachusetts member had introduced in the 
 national House of Representatives a resolution to the 
 effect that no proposition for the annexation of Texas 
 ought to be made or assented to by the United States. 
 Ou April 22, 1844, the Texan treaty was submitted 
 by President Tyler to the Senate with an urgent rec- 
 ommendation that it be ratified. Nine days later the 
 Whig national convention met at Baltimore and nomi- 
 nated Clay unanimously, and without a contest, upon 
 a platform devoted almost entirely to laudation of the 
 candidate and his running-mate, Theodore Freling- 
 huysen. In a letter to friends in New Hampshire, 
 written at the middle of the winter, Webster had ex- 
 pressed the hope that his own name should not be em- 
 ployed for the purpose of preventing harmony among 
 men whose general political principles were in accord, 
 or ' for any cause whatever but a conscientious regard 
 to the good of the country." It was obvious, he ad- 
 
TEXAS, OKEGON, ELECTION OF 1844 331 
 
 mitted, that the tendency of opinion among the Whigs 
 was at the time " generally and strongly set in another 
 direction," i. e. 7 toward Clay, and the general support 
 of this candidate was warmly advocated. " The elec- 
 tion of the next autumn," he wrote, " must involve, in 
 general, the same principles and the same questions 
 that belonged to that of 1840. The cause I conceive to 
 be the true cause of the country, its paramount pros- 
 perity, and all its great interests ; the cause of its 
 peace and honor, the cause of good government, true 
 liberty, and the preservation and integrity of the Con- 
 stitution ; and none should despair of its success." 1 
 The events of the months intervening between the 
 writing of this letter and the assembling of the Balti- 
 more convention fully confirmed the conviction that 
 the desire of the party could be met only by the nomi- 
 nation of Clay. 
 
 The Democratic convention met also at Baltimore, 
 May 27th. In the desire to vindicate the claim of the 
 Democracy to the nation's support in 1840 the im- 
 minence of the Texan question had been somewhat ob- 
 scured and a majority of the delegates came to the 
 convention pledged to support the candidacy of Van 
 Buren. To the rank and file of the party, however, 
 the nomination of an arch-opponent of annexation was 
 objectionable in the extreme, and with the aid of the 
 two-thirds rule Van Buren was defeated and the nomi- 
 nation was bestowed upon the first presidential " dark 
 horse " in the history of the country, James K. Polk. 
 In the platform it was proclaimed that " the re-occupa- 
 tion of Oregon and the re-annexation of Texas are 
 great American measures, which the convention rec- 
 
 1 Webster to John Warren and others, January 3, 1844. Curtis, 
 "Webster," Vol. II, p. 238. 
 
332 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 oniinends to the cordial support of the Democracy of 
 the Union." 
 
 On June 8th a vote upon the ratification of the 
 Texan treaty was taken in the Senate. Of the twenty- 
 nine Whig members, all save one opposed ratification, 
 and by a vote of thirty-five to sixteen the project was lost. 
 The issue was thereupon thrown back upon the country, 
 and in the campaign which already was under way it 
 preponderated as no siugle question theretofore had 
 ever preponderated in a national election. From the 
 outset the Democrats had the advantage of a programme 
 which was unequivocal upon this all-important issue 
 and a candidate heartily in sympathy with this pro- 
 gramme. The Whig platform did not so much as 
 mention Texas, and the pronouncements upon the 
 subject which Clay was driven to make were of such a 
 character that they cost the party heavily in both 
 North and South. No one recognized more clearly 
 than did Webster the essential weakness of the Whig 
 position. No course was open, however, save to 
 support the party and its candidate. Even though 
 Clay's attitude upon the Texan question was involved 
 in certain obscurities, he was unquestionably opposed 
 to annexation under existing conditions ; and upon all 
 other important questions of public policy his position 
 was entirely satisfactory. In the campaign Webster 
 therefore took a part of very considerable activity. 
 Of the numerous speeches which he delivered the most 
 important were those at Albany (August 27th), Phila- 
 delphia (October 1st), and Valley Forge (October 3d). 
 The subject to which he devoted most attention was 
 the tariff, but he did not hesitate to make allusion to 
 the question of Texas and, at Valley Forge especially, 
 to argue against the advisability of annexation. His 
 
TEXAS, OREGON, ELECTION OF 1844 333 
 
 contention was not simply that the extension of slave 
 territory was objectionable, but that the area of the 
 country was already so vast that any annexation was 
 for the present undesirable. 1 
 
 The result of the contest was close. The popular 
 vote of the Whigs fell but 38,000 short of that of the 
 Democrats ; that of the Democrats lacked more than 
 24,000 of equaling that of the Whigs and the Liberty 
 party combined. But of the 275 electoral votes 170 fell 
 to Polk, and with them the victory. Inasmuch as the 
 votes for the Liberty candidate were cast chiefly by 
 men who with but two parties in the field would have 
 supported Clay against Polk, it is perhaps not too much 
 to say that "the Abolitionists defeated Clay." But 
 it does not follow, as some have assumed, that the 
 Whigs could have won with Webster as a candidate. 
 His candidacy upon the only sort of a platform upon 
 which he could have stood, namely, one declaring 
 squarely against the annexation of Texas, would un- 
 questionably have attracted many votes in Northern 
 states which were lost to Clay. On the other hand it 
 might well have involved the loss of certain states, 
 notably Maryland, Delaware, Kentucky, Tennessee, 
 and North Carolina, which were carried by Clay. 
 
 By the outcome of the election the early annexation 
 of Texas was rendered inevitable. In his annual 
 message of December 3d President Tyler maintains I 
 that the question, having been left at the previous 
 session without settlement, had "referred itself" to 
 the people, and that by the election of Polk acontrol- 
 
 1 For these speeches see " Works of Webster, " Vo\ II, pp. 217-293, 
 and "Writings and Speeches," Vol. Ill, pp. 217-293; for other 
 speeches delivered during the campaign, " Writings and Speeches," 
 Vol. XIII, pp. 196-305. 
 
 2 Stanwood, "The Presidency," p. 224. 
 
334 DANIEL WEBSTEB 
 
 ling majority of the people, and a majority of the states, 
 had pronounced in favor of the annexationist pro- 
 gramme ; l and there is no ground upon which the 
 validity of this interpretation can be called seriously 
 in question. To both the President and the Democratic 
 leaders in Congress further delay appeared not only 
 unnecessary but dangerous. The opposition was still 
 strong, and there was no reason to suppose that the 
 two-thirds majority requisite for the ratification of a 
 treaty in the Senate could yet be obtained. The plan 
 of action hit upon by the annexationists, therefore, was 
 one whose execution required the concurrence of but 
 a simple majority in the two houses, i. e., that of 
 enactment by joint resolution. The procedure was un- 
 usual, and by many persons its propriety was called in 
 question. But it was simple and certain. The resolu- 
 tion in accordance with which the President was 
 authorized to offer to Texas the privilege of becoming 
 a state of the Union was carried in both houses in 
 February, 1845. In July the proposition was accepted 
 by a Texan convention, and in October the act of the 
 convention was ratified by the people. 
 
 Meanwhile, during the winter of 1844-1845, Webster 
 had been elected to the Senate to fill the vacancy caused 
 by the retirement of Choate. His term began March 
 4, 1845 ; so that when, at the convening of Congress in 
 the following December, a proposal was forthcoming 
 to complete the Texan transaction by the admission of 
 the former republic to statehood he was in a position 
 to take part officially in the discussions which ensued. 
 He recognized, however, that what had been done 
 could not be undone and that resistance to the pro- 
 
 1 Richardson, " Messages and Papers of the Presidents," Vol. IV, 
 p. 343. ' 
 
TEXAS, OREGON, ELECTION OF 1844 335 
 
 gramme of the Administration was futile. Accordingly, 
 when a resolution for the admission of Texas passed 
 the House and came up for consideration in the Senate 
 he confined his efforts to a very brief speech, December 
 22d, stating his objections to the entire line of policy 
 of which the measure in hand was but the culminating 
 stroke. He declared that he had long been of the 
 opinion that it was " of very dangerous tendency and 
 doubtful consequences ' ' to enlarge the boundaries of 
 the country, and that he had " always wished that this 
 country should exhibit to the nations of the earth the 
 example of a great, rich, and powerful republic, which 
 is not possessed by a spirit of aggrandizement. " He 
 asserted, furthermore, that while he was disposed to 
 uphold in every respect the existing arrangements and 
 compromises of the Constitution, he should never be in 
 favor of the admission to the Union of states possess- 
 ing the peculiar rights in respect to slavery which had 
 been accorded the original members of the Union, and 
 he avowed the opinion that if Texas were to be brought 
 into the Union at all the act ought to have been per- 
 formed through the medium of diplomatic adjustment, 
 sanctioned by treaty. " I agree," he affirmed in clos- 
 ing, u with the unanimous opinion of the legislature 
 of Massachusetts ; I agree with the great mass of her 
 people ; I reaffirm what I have said and written duriug 
 the last eight years, at various times, against this 
 annexation. I here record my own dissent and oppo- 
 sition ; and I here express and place on record also 
 the dissent and protest of the state of Massachusetts." ' 
 The protest was recorded ; but, as waseutirely expected, 
 it was without effect upon the actual drift of events. 
 
 1 "Works of Webster," Vol. V, p. 59; "Writings and 
 Speeches," Vol. IX, p. 59. 
 
336 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 The resolution for admission, passed in both branches 
 of Congress by large majorities, was approved by the 
 President December 29th ; and, February 19, 1846, the 
 state government of Texas was formally installed. 
 
 The expansionist sentiment by which the country was 
 swept during the decade 1840-1850 found an outlet not 
 alone toward the south but also toward the northwest. 
 In the same paragraph in which the " re-annexation " 
 of Texas was demanded the Democratic platform of 
 1844 called insistently for the " re-occupation " of Ore- 
 gon, affirming that the title of the United States to the 
 whole of the Oregon territory was ' ' clear and unques- 
 tionable," and that no portion of the territory " ought 
 to be ceded to England or any other power." And in 
 his inaugural address President Polk reiterated the 
 declarations of his party, asserting that the just claim 
 of the United States extended northward to the par- 
 allel 54° 40' and making it clear that it would be a part 
 of his policy to see that the claim was enforced. 
 Within the broad expanse of the Oregon country 
 there had appeared at one time or another four 
 claimants — Spain, Russia, Great Britain, and the 
 United States. By the Spanish treaty of 1819, fixing 
 the forty-second parallel as the northern boundary of 
 New Mexico, one of the four was eliminated. Another, 
 Russia, yielded her claims in treaties of 1824 and 1825 
 with the United States and Great Britain respectively, 
 accepting 54° 40' as her southern limit. Between the 
 other two claimants an agreement for joint occupation, 
 entered into first in 1818, was continued throughout a 
 period of twenty-eight years, upon the understanding 
 that either party had a right to terminate the agree- 
 ment on twelve months' notice. In 1824, and again 
 in 1826, the United States proposed the settlement of 
 
TEXAS, OREGON, ELECTION OF 1844 337 
 
 the Oregon question by the single extension of the 
 forty-ninth parallel to the Pacific. But Great Britain 
 held out for the Columbia River as a boundary, and no 
 compromise was found possible. During the period 
 of the Van Buren and Tyler administrations both the 
 British and American populations in Oregon under- 
 went a considerable increase, and the question of the 
 eventual sovereignty of the territory became rapidly 
 more pressing. It was the judgment of Webster that 
 the forty-ninth parallel should be made the boundary. 
 When, however, in 1842 he proposed that the subject 
 should be included in the treaty of Washington he 
 found that nothing could be done, because Lord Ash- 
 burton had received no instructions upon it. 
 
 As the issue grew in public interest the extreme 
 position maintained by the British authorities operated 
 to drive more zealous Americans to a corresponding- 
 extreme, and by 1844 the sentiment " 54° 40' or fight " 
 was so popular that the Democrats were able to em- 
 ploy it with the most telling effect in the campaign. 
 Upon the establishment of the Polk Administration 
 the effort to bring about an adjustment by negotia- 
 tion was renewed. July 12, 1845, Secretary Buchanan 
 again offered the line of the forty-ninth parallel. Two 
 weeks later, however, the offer was refused by the 
 British minister, Pakenham, without consultation with 
 his government, and in terms that were rather un- 
 necessarily curt. A month later the proposal was 
 withdrawn, the negotiation was broken off, and the 
 right of the United States to the whole of the territory 
 in question was reasserted. So intense was the feeling 
 upon both sides that the two nations were clearly upon 
 the brink of war. On November 7th Webster deliv- 
 ered a powerful speech to his fellow- townsmen gathered 
 
338 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 iu Faneuil Hall in which he contended for the forty- 
 ninth parallel as the natural boundary and urged that, 
 despite the critical character of the situation, peace 
 could be, and must be, preserved. The speech was 
 translated into most of the languages of Europe and 
 was widely influential in inclining the continental 
 peoples to regard as necessary and just the solution 
 which in it was proposed. 
 
 At the opening of the first session of the Twenty- 
 ninth Congress, December 2, 1845, the President sent 
 in a message reasserting forcefully the claim to the 
 whole of the contested territory, and recommending 
 that provision be made by law for the year's notice to 
 Great Britain which was required to terminate the con- 
 vention of 1827. On December 15th General Cass in- 
 troduced in the Senate resolutions calling for an in- 
 vestigation of the state of the national defenses, assign- 
 ing as a reason for such an investigation the pending 
 dispute with Great Britain relative to Oregon ; and 
 three days later a joint resolution was introduced by 
 Senator Allen of Ohio meeting the President's desire 
 by authorizing him to give notice to Great Britain 
 forthwith. On the ground that they might have a 
 tendency to create unnecessary alarm, Webster spoke 
 against the Cass resolutions ; and in opposition to the 
 Allen resolution, which was before the Senate through 
 several months, although not formally discussed un- 
 til February 10, 1846, he took occasion, February 26th, 
 to speak at some length. Amended to provide that 
 the President should give notice to Great Britain at 
 his discretion, the Allen resolution was adopted by 
 Congress and approved by the President in April, 
 and on May 21st the notice was given. 
 
 In the meantime, however, negotiations had been re- 
 
TEXAS, OKEGON, ELECTION OF 1814 339 
 
 suuied. Pakenhain's summary rejection of the pro- 
 posal of the forty-ninth parallel was disavowed by the 
 British ministry, and although much valuable time was 
 wasted in the effort to induce the United States formally 
 to renew the offer, in the end Great Britain herself trans- 
 mitted to Washington the draft of a treaty in which the 
 parallel named was stipulated as a boundary. Such an 
 overture Webster, through private channels, had urged 
 the British authorities to make, and there is reason for 
 thinking that his suggestions had been very influential. 
 Somewhat taken aback by the unexpected turn of the 
 affair, the President departed from custom and asked of 
 the Senate its opinion of the proposed treaty before giv- 
 ing or withholding his own assent. The advice which 
 he received, namely, to make the most of the oppor- 
 tunity, was followed, and the treaty, forthwith submit- 
 ted formally to the Senate, was ratified by a vote of 
 forty-one to fourteen. The confidence which Webster 
 had entertained from the first that the exercise of 
 patience would make possible a fair and peaceful com- 
 promise was abundantly sustained. 
 
 During the course of the debates upon the Oregon 
 question the treaty of Washington was alluded to sev- 
 eral times in a disparaging manner, and the charge 
 was made that in the negotiation of that instrument 
 Webster had yielded territory which belonged prop- 
 erly to the United States. One member of the House 
 of Eepresentatives, in particular, Charles J. Iugersoll 
 of Pennsylvania, angered by Webster's friendliness 
 toward Great Britain, allowed himself to indulge in a 
 savage attack upon the Ashburton negotiation, upon 
 the treaty terminating it, and upon Webster's per- 
 sonal ability and integrity. And certain of the 
 charges which were made— especially that the counsel 
 
340 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 of McLeod was paid by the United States, that the 
 Attorney-General of the United States was directed to 
 take charge of McLeod' s defense, and that Webster 
 had written to Governor Seward, of New York, that if 
 McLeod were not released the city of New York 
 would be "laid in ashes " — were repeated by Daniel 
 S. Dickinson of New York in the Senate. In the ag- 
 gregate, the charges were equivalent to an accusation 
 of gross malfeasance in office. Exasperated by the 
 conduct of his opponents, Webster introduced a resolu- 
 tion, March 20th, asking that the entire correspondence 
 pertaining to the Ashburton negotiation be laid before 
 Congress. The resolution was adopted, the corre- 
 spondence was brought in, and on April 6th and 7th 
 Webster delivered the very lengthy, carefully pre- 
 pared, and virile speech known commonly as the 
 "Defense of the Treaty of Washington." So intense 
 was the speaker's indiguation that for almost the only 
 time during his eDtire public career he permitted him- 
 self to indulge in personal invective. He refuted 
 completely the charges bearing upon the McLeod af- 
 fair, explained and defended the treaty of 1842, omit- 
 ting to speak of no one of the half-dozen important 
 issues which entered into the negotiation of that 
 agreement, and challenged his hearers and the country 
 at large to show that any essential interest had been 
 neglected or that anything had been done " to tarnish 
 the lustre of the American name and character." ' 
 
 Under the attack which was leveled against him 
 Ingersoll waxed yet more bitter. Determined to fol- 
 low up the contest, he now obtained from subordinates 
 in the State Department certain papers which he pro- 
 
 l " Works of Webster," Vol. V, pp. 78-150; " Writings and 
 Speeches," Vol. IX, pp. 78-150. 
 
TEXAS, OREGON, ELECTION OF 1844 341 
 
 fessed to regard as proofs of Webster's misdemeanors 
 and introduced a resolution calling for an account of 
 all payments from the secret service fund, for all cor- 
 respondence pertaining to the McLeod case, and for a 
 variety of other documentary materials. The resolu- 
 tion was adopted, but the President replied to the call 
 of the House by saying that he did not feel justified 
 in violating a fixed practice by revealing the uses of 
 the secret service fund, and accordingly the object 
 which Ingersoll sought was not attained. In the Sen- 
 ate a resolution of similar purport was defeated al- 
 most unanimously. Ingersoll, however, reiterated his 
 charges and insisted that they were susceptible of 
 proof. Reduced to simplest form, they were (1) that 
 Webster had violated all precedent by taking into his 
 possession the fund for contingent expenses, (2) that 
 he had used a portion of this fund for corrupt parts 
 purposes, and (3) that he had left office indebted to 
 that fund and had not been able to make a settlement 
 until after he had been two years out of the State De- 
 partment. Following prolonged and embittered de- 
 bate the charges were referred for investigation to two 
 select committees. Ex-President Tyler appeared vol- 
 untarily before these committees to testify in Web- 
 ster's behalf, and when, in June, 1846, the reports 
 were brought in they showed that, while Webster dur- 
 ing his tenure of the secretaryship of state had been 
 grossly careless in the handling of his accounts, all 
 vouchers had been made up eventually, and of the im- 
 proper use of funds there was no evidence whatsoever. 
 The reports were laid upon the table and no farther 
 action was taken. 1 As is remarked by one writer, this 
 
 ^or interesting correspondence relating to the Ingersoll charges 
 see Van Tyne, "Letters of Daniel Webster," pp. 309-324. 
 
342 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 rather sorry affair is of interest now " merely as show- 
 ing how deeply rooted was Mr. Webster's habitual 
 carelessness in money matters, even when it was liable 
 to expose him to very grave imputations, and what a 
 very dangerous man he was to arouse and put on the 
 defensive." 1 
 
 By accepting at this time an annuity consisting of 
 the interest on a fund of thirty-seven thousand dollars 
 raised for his use by a number of Massachusetts friends 
 and admirers, Webster laid himself open to a charge 
 of another sort— that, namely, of having become the 
 pensioned agent of New England men of wealth, and 
 especially of the manufacturing interests. There is no 
 evidence that any one of the contributors to the fund 
 expected to derive from the gift any personal benefit ; 
 likewise there is no reason to think that Webster re- 
 garded himself thereafter as any less free than before 
 to speak and to vote independently. And it must be 
 remembered that two generations ago the subsidizing 
 of public men in some such manner was, if not more 
 common, at least more open, than to-day. Granted, 
 however, that the man of ability who cuts himself off 
 by a career of public service from the affluence attain- 
 able by other men is entitled to some sort of compen- 
 sation, it remains a serious question of ethics as to 
 whether he may honorably become the beneficiary of 
 private munificence. To do so, even in Webster's 
 time, meant to incur a certain amount of criticism. 
 To do so to-day would mean irreparable loss of dignity 
 and reputation. 
 
 1 Lodge, " Webster," p. 270. 
 
CHAPTER XIII 
 
 THE MEXICAN WAR AND THE COMPROMISE OF 1850 
 
 During the later summer of 1846 Webster partici- 
 pated with some vigor in the debates which preceded 
 the enactment of fresh legislation upon the two closely 
 related subjects of the tariff and the independent 
 treasury. Following the establishment of the Polk 
 Administration the secretary of the treasury, Robert J. 
 Walker, submitted to Congress, in December, 18-15, a 
 comprehensive report recommending the adoption of a 
 revenue tariff based upon ad valorem rather than spe- 
 cific duties, and on April 14, 1846, an elaborate meas- 
 ure framed in accordance with this recommendation 
 was introduced in the House of Representatives. 
 When the bill came before the Senate Webster spoke 
 upon it at much length, admonishing the Administra- 
 tion and its adherents not to make this "leap in the 
 dark, in the early part of its career, unnecessarily, in 
 the midst of a war, a war of which no one can see the 
 end, and of which no man can now reckon the ex- 
 pense." 1 The bill was passed, and July 30th it was 
 approved by the President. But prior to its enact 
 ment Webster was instrumental in causing to be 
 stricken from it an extraordinary provision whereby 
 in cases of undervaluation with intent to defraud tin- 
 goods so undervalued should be seized and sold, the 
 importer being paid the value of the goods as rated in 
 his invoice, with five per cent, in addition. 
 
 »" Works of Webster," Vol. V, pp. 161-243; "Writinga and 
 Speeches," Vol. IX, pp. 161-243, 
 
344 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 After five years of fiscal chaos succeeding the aboli - 
 tion of the independent treasury system by the Whigs 
 in 1841, a law reestablishing that system, was carried 
 through Congress and, August 6, 1846, approved by 
 the President. This measure also Webster felt bound 
 to oppose, and in remarks which he made upon it a 
 few days prior to the final vote in the Senate he de- 
 fended his opposition upon the ground that the pro- 
 posed change would embarrass seriously the fiscal 
 operations of the government and recommended that 
 further consideration of the subject be postponed to 
 the next Congress. ' The system to which return was 
 now made proved, however, not so disadvantageous as 
 had been predicted ; in fact, uutil the rise of the un- 
 usual circumstances occasioned by the Civil War, it was 
 operated with substantial success. 
 
 Meanwhile the annexatiou of Texas had borne its 
 inevitable fruit and the United States was at war with 
 Mexico. Diplomatic relations between the two coun- 
 tries were severed as early as March, 1845 ; in June of 
 the same year General Taylor was ordered to advance 
 into Texas, and in August he did so ; during the 
 winter of 1845-1846 the unsuccessful mission of John 
 Slidell demonstrated the futility of further attempts at 
 negotiation ; on January 13, 1846, Taylor was in- 
 structed to advance to the Rio Grande ; on April 24th 
 the first skirmish between Taylor's troops and the Mex- 
 icans took place ; and on May 11th President Polk 
 transmitted to Congress the famous message avowing 
 that American blood had been shed on American soil 
 and recommending an immediate declaration of war. 
 The recommendation was carried into effect forthwith 
 
 l "Works of Webster," Vol. V, pp. 244-252; "Writings and 
 Speeches," Vol. IX, pp. 244-252. 
 
THE MEXICAN WAK 345 
 
 by overwhelming majorities in both houses. It hap- 
 pened that at the time when war was declared Webster 
 was not in Washington. He therefore voted neither 
 for nor against the declaration. Had he been in his 
 seat, he would undoubtedly have voted in opposition, 
 as did his Massachusetts colleague, John Davis. 1 He 
 regarded the annexation of Texas by the United States 
 as insufficient cause for war upon the part of Mexico. 
 At the same time, he had predicted that from the an- 
 nexation a war would spring, and it was only the sud- 
 denness of the declaration of May 12th that surprised 
 him. On receipt of the intelligence he hastened to the 
 capital, and two days subsequently he was in his seat. 
 The position which Webster maintained throughout 
 the Mexican contest was that of a candid, although by 
 no means factious or relentless, critic of the policies of 
 the Administration. After the actual outbreak of 
 hostilities, and when it was made apparent that only 
 through the President's policy of "conquering a 
 peace" could normal relations between the two coun 
 tries be restored, he was not disinclined to advocate the 
 prosecution of the contest to a decisive conclusion. 
 The President's course, none the less, in precipitating 
 a situation which rendered war inevitable was criti 
 cized as being an infraction of the power of Congress 
 to declare war, and the method which the Adininistra- 
 tion employed in the raising of troops was more than 
 once subjected to unsparing attack. That method 
 comprised neither the enlistment of volunteers officered 
 by the United States nor the calling into service 
 of the militia of the states, but rather the creation 
 
 » Davis and Thomas Clayton of Delaware were the only senators 
 who voted against the declaration. Three members, including 
 Calhoun, refrained from voting. 
 
346 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 of a nondescript body of troops, consisting of vol- 
 unteers organized into regiments and officered by the 
 states. The efficiency of a force raised after this man- 
 ner was called in serious question, and it was main- 
 tained that the process could not be squared with the 
 grant of military powers conferred in the Consti- 
 tution. 
 
 The aspect of the war which, however, aroused 
 deepest apprehension was that relating to the probable 
 extension of territory on the southwest and the eifects 
 of such extension upon the status of slavery. Through- 
 out the earlier portion of his public career Webster 
 had been known as one of the most outspoken of op- 
 ponents of the " peculiar institution." In 1819, when 
 the Missouri question was pending, he had served as 
 chairman of a committee of a public meeting in Boston 
 by which was adopted a memorial appealing to " the 
 justice and the wisdom of the national councils to pre- 
 vent the further progress of a great and serious evil." 
 In the Plymouth oration of 1820 he had denounced the 
 African slave trade in sentences of fiery eloquence. 
 Iu the debate with Hayne, while avowing that he was, 
 and ever had been, of the opinion that the maintenance, 
 of slavery within the states was a matter of domestic 
 policy with which the federal government had noth- 
 ing to do, he declared unequivocally his belief that do- 
 mestic slavery was " one of the greatest evils, both 
 moral and political." During the controversy, opened 
 on a serious scale in 1836, over the reception of anti- 
 slavery petitions in Congress it fell to him occasionally 
 to present such petitions ; and although, like John 
 Quincy Adams, the vigilant champion of the right of 
 petition in the lower house, he was no abolitionist, he 
 was insistent upon the propriety of such of the peti- 
 
THE MEXICAN WAR 347 
 
 tioDS as related to the District of Columbia and upon 
 the imperative necessity of the safeguarding of the 
 privilege of petition as guaranteed in the Constitution. 
 "More than all," he wrote in 1838, " it is my opinion 
 that the citizens of the United States have an unques- 
 tionable constitutional right to petition Congress for 
 the restraint or abolition of slavery and the slave trade 
 within the said District ; and that ail such petitions 
 being respectfully written, ought to be received, read, 
 referred, and considered in the same manner as peti- 
 tions on other important subjects are received, read, 
 referred, and considered ; and without reproach or re- 
 buke to the authors or signers of such petitions." l 
 
 Against Calhoun's bill of 1837 proposing to author- 
 ize postmasters under certain conditions to confiscate 
 abolitionist literature deposited in the United States 
 mails he spoke and voted, although again from a de- 
 sire to defend a constitutional principle rather than 
 from sympathy with the abolitionists. "My own 
 opinion is," he none the less wrote soon afterward to 
 Benjamin Silliman, "that the anti-slavery feeling is 
 growing stronger and stronger every day ; and while 
 we must be careful to countenance nothing which vio- 
 lates the Constitution or invades the right of others, it 
 is our policy, in my opinion, most clearly not to yield 
 the substantial truth, for the sake of conciliating those 
 whom we never can conciliate, at the expense of the 
 loss of the friendship and support of those great masses 
 of good men who are interested in the anti -slavery 
 cause." 2 
 
 'Webster to Peck, January 11, 1838. Webster, "Private Cor- 
 respondence," Vol. II, p. 32. 
 
 2 Webster to Silliman, January 28, 1838. Van Tyne, '•Letters 
 of Webster," p. 211. 
 
U8 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 As his anxiety for the future of the Union increased 
 Webster fell back definitely upon the position to 
 which he adhered throughout the later portion of his 
 life, that, namely, of recognizing the absolute sover- 
 eignty of the states in the control of their domestic 
 institutions and the claims of the slaveholders to the 
 protection of their interests in all respects required by 
 the letter or spirit of the Constitution, while at the 
 same time opposing with determination the magnify- 
 ing of the slavery problem through the admission of 
 new slave states or the extension of territory in which 
 the holding of slaves should be legal. This position 
 was defined with clearness in that portion of the speech 
 in Niblo's Garden in 1837 which related to Texas. 
 " I frankly avow," he asserted, "my entire unwilling- 
 ness to do anything that shall extend the slavery of 
 the African race on this continent, or add other slave- 
 holding states to the Union. When I say that I re- 
 gard slavery in itself as a great moral, social, and 
 political evil I only use the language which has been 
 adopted by distinguished men, themselves the citizens 
 of slaveholding states. I shall do nothing, therefore, 
 to favor or encourage its further extension. We have 
 slavery already amongst us. The Constitution found 
 it in the Union ; it recognized it, and gave it solemn 
 guaranties. To the full extent of these guaranties we 
 are all bound, in honor, in justice, and by the Con- 
 stitution. . . . Slavery, as it exists in the states, 
 is beyond the reach of Congress. ... I shall con- 
 cur, therefore, iu no act, no measure, no menace, no 
 indication of purpose, which shall interfere or threaten 
 to interfere with the exclusive authority of the several 
 states over the subject of slavery as it exists within 
 their respective limits. ... But when we come 
 
THE MEXICAN WAB 349 
 
 to speak of admitting new states, the subject assumes 
 an entirely different aspect." 1 
 
 The attitude herein defined was one which was 
 shared by an increasing number of Northern people, 
 but it was by no means that of the abolitionists, nor 
 even of men who, while not identified with the aboli- 
 tionist movement, felt more keenly than did Webster 
 concerning the moral, non-juristic aspects of the slavery 
 problem. There can be no blinking the fact that as 
 early as 1838 or 1839 Webster was being charged with 
 indifference upon the slavery issue, and even with de- 
 liberate subservience to the slavery interests. In 
 March, 1838, Adams wrote in his Diary that the Mas- 
 sachusetts delegation was truckling to the South to 
 court favor for Webster and that Webster himself was 
 " tampering with the South on the slavery and the 
 Texas question." In 1839 Joshua E. Giddings de- 
 clared it " impossible for any man who submitted so 
 quietly to the dictation of slavery as Mr. Webster to 
 command that influence which was necessary to con- 
 stitute a successful politician." In the secretary ship 
 of state it devolved upon Webster upon several oc- 
 casions, notably in the Creole case, to defend the 
 interests of slaveholders in such a manner as to excite 
 especially the indignation of men who denied the obli- 
 gation of the national government to protect the alleged 
 rights of slaveholders when such rights were Imperiled 
 upon the high seas or in territory belonging to a 
 European power. The principles of law which were 
 acted upon in the cases referred to were in all essential 
 respects sound, but the effect upon Webster's pop- 
 ularity among the more advanced anti-slavery elements 
 was disastrous. 
 
 1 " Works of Webster," Vol. I, p. 356. 
 
350 DAJS T IEL WEBSTEE 
 
 As has been observed, the aspect of the Mexican 
 war regardiog which Webster felt deepest concern was 
 the prospect of the acquisition of new territory, en- 
 tailing a fresh conflict upon the territorial status of 
 shivery. February 1, 1847, while there was pending 
 in the House of representatives a bill to appropriate 
 three million dollars to defray any extraordinary ex- 
 penses that might be incurred in bringing the war to 
 a close, there was introduced a proviso to the effect 
 that from all territory subsequently acquired by the 
 United States slavery should be forever excluded. 
 During the previous year a two-million bill had been 
 amended to provide that from all territory which 
 might be acquired from Mexico slavery should be 
 excluded ; but the amendment, although voted in the 
 House, had been lost in the Senate. The proviso of 
 1847, like its predecessor, was introduced by David 
 A. Wilinot, of Pennsylvania, but in reality it emanated 
 from an anti-slavery Democratic congressman from 
 Ohio, Jacob Brinkerhoff. Of the utility of such a 
 pledge Webster was doubtful. Better by far, it 
 seemed to him, would be the policy of avoiding the 
 issue altogether by refusing to annex any more terri- 
 tory at all. Accordingly, within a fortnight after the 
 introduction of the second Wilmot proviso he sub- 
 mitted to the Senate two resolutions, one declaring 
 that the war with Mexico ought not to be prosecuted 
 for the acquisition of territory to form new states, the 
 other requiring that the Mexican authorities be in- 
 formed that the United States was not seeking the 
 dismemberment of the Mexican republic and that she 
 was now ready to treat for peace. These resolutions 
 did not come to a vote ; but on March 1st a similar 
 proposal emanating from a Southern Whig, Berrien 
 
THE MEXICAN WAR 351 
 
 of Georgia, was rejected, twenty -nine to twenty-four, 
 by an exact party division. The Democrats, both 
 Northern and {Southern, were bent upon the annexation 
 of Mexican territory, and no argument could turn 
 them from their purpose. Many of the Northern 
 members of the party favored the adoption of the 
 Wilmot proviso ; but, proviso or no proviso, the 
 annexation must take place. By the Southern ele- 
 ment the proviso was, of course, opposed. 
 
 Following the rejection of Berrien's resolution Web- 
 ster addressed the Senate in words of solemn warning, 
 denouncing the equivocal attitude of the Northern 
 Democracy which, while ready to concede that there 
 ought to be no more slave states, was still insistent 
 that the war should terminate in the annexation of 
 vast stretches of Southern territory. A golden oppor- 
 tunity, it was maintained, had been lost, and through 
 the defection of Northern votes. From the opinions 
 expressed in the Niblo Garden discourse of 1837 the 
 speaker declared he had not swerved. From the first 
 he had seen nothing but "evil and danger" to the 
 country from the Texan annexation, and now that, as 
 a result of a war precipitated by that annexation, it 
 was proposed to extend still further the possessions of 
 the nation in the southwest he found his worst fears 
 confirmed. "We want no extension of territory,' he 
 declared, " we want no accession of new states. The 
 country is already large enough. . . . Sir, 1 fear 
 we are not yet arrived at the beginning of the end [of 
 controversy]. I pretend to see but little of the future, 
 aud that little affords no gratification. All I can scan 
 is contention, strife, and agitation. . . . We are 
 suffering to pass the golden opportunity for securing 
 harmony and stability of the Constitution. We appear 
 
352 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 tu me to be rushing upon perils headlong, and with our 
 eyes wide open." * When the W r ilmot proviso was moved 
 in the Senate as an additional section of the Three Million 
 Bill Webster was among those who supported it. It was 
 rejected, however, by a vote of thirty-one to twenty-one. 
 The bill finally became law with no mention of slavery, 
 and the President was left to prosecute the war and to ne- 
 gotiate peace unhampered by any legislative restriction. 
 During the months of April and May, 1847, Web- 
 ster made a long deferred excursion for recreation and 
 observation through the Southern seaboard states. At 
 Richmond, Raleigh, Wilmington, Charleston, Colum- 
 bia, and Savannah he was received with unstinted hos- 
 pitality, and at a number of dinners and public meetings 
 in his honor he was called upon to deliver addresses. ' 
 On account of the excessive heat the plan to visit New 
 Orleans was abandoned, but the trip was sufficiently 
 extensive to afford that first-hand information regard- 
 ing Southern life and institutions in which a majority 
 of Northern members of Congress and other men of in- 
 fluence were largely or altogether deficient. Returning 
 to Marshfield, June 8th, the senator spent the ensuing 
 summer and autumn in the supervision of his agricul- 
 tural interests, with an occasional visit to New York 
 or to some New England town in the pursuit of profes- 
 sional business. The catarrh by which he had long 
 been troubled became at this point unusually distress- 
 ing, and although it yielded in some measure to treat- 
 ment aud to changes of climate, it remained at all times 
 thereafter a source of discomfort and, toward the last, 
 
 1 "Works of Webster," Vol. V, p. 261 : " Writings and Speeches, " 
 Vol. IX, p. 261. 
 
 ■ For these speeches see " Writings and Speeches," Vol. IV, pp. 
 G7-103. ' 
 
THE MEXICAN WAR 351* 
 
 of occasional disability. Returning to Washington for 
 the session of 1847-1848, he found himself so preoccu- 
 pied with cases in the Supreme Court that he was able 
 for a time to take but an incidental part in the pro- 
 ceedings of the Senate. The winter was clouded, too, 
 by the increasing poor health of his daughter Jul hi 
 (Mrs. Appleton ;, and by the receipt, in February, of 
 the wholly unexpected news of the death of his sou. 
 Major Edward Webster, which took place near the ci. \ 
 of Mexico January 25th. The son, who was but twenty- 
 eight years of age, had raised the first company of 
 volunteers accepted and organized by his state for the 
 present war, and had gone to the front upon the com- 
 pletion of his regiment. At Matamoras he had fallen 
 ill and his life had been despaired of j but, recovering, 
 he had continued for some months in active service, 
 until the fatal recurrence of his illness, brought on by 
 exposure and over-exertion. 
 
 Visibly depressed, Webster none the less returned, in 
 March, 1848, to an active participation in the delibera- 
 tions upon the floor of the Senate. On the 17th he 
 spoke in opposition to a bill reported by General Cass 
 from the Committee on Military Affairs to increase the 
 army then engaged in Mexico by raising ten additional 
 regiments of troops, and six days later, when the sub- 
 ject under consideration was a bill from the House <>i" 
 Representatives for raising a loan of sixteen million 
 dollars, he delivered an extended speech in which the 
 causes and objects of the war were subjected to the 
 most searching analysis. 1 Six weeks previously the 
 devious diplomacy of the American commissioner, 
 Xicholas P. Trist, had borne fruit in the conclusion of 
 
 l " Works of Webster," Vol. V, pp. 271-301; "Writings and 
 Speeches," Vol. X, pp. 3-33. 
 
354 DANIEL WEBSTEE 
 
 a treaty of peace at Guadelupe Hidalgo. By the terms 
 of this treaty the Rio Grande River was recognized as 
 the boundary of Texas, and Mexico ceded to the United 
 States the whole of the vast territories of New Mexico 
 and California, in return for a cash payment of fifteen 
 million dollars and the assumption by the United 
 States of the claims of her citizens upon Mexico. On 
 March 10th the treaty was ratified by the Senate by a 
 vote of thirty-eight to fourteen. 
 
 Curiously enough, however, warlike preparations 
 continued to be pushed. The "All-Mexico" forces, 
 represented in the cabinet by Buchanan and Walker, 
 were active ; and until the exchange of ratifications 
 there was some possibility that Mexico might refuse to 
 accede to the amendments which had been introduced 
 in the treaty by the Senate. The Ten Regiments Bill 
 was kept under consideration, and it was understood 
 that the proposed sixteen-million loan was intended to 
 pave the way for the raising of twenty regiments 
 more. In his speech upon the loan bill Webster con- 
 tended that the treaty rendered utterly inapt any 
 legislation looking toward a prolonging of the war 
 and charged that the object of the bill was "patron- 
 age, office, the gratification of friends.'' The war, it 
 was maintained, had been waged from the outset for 
 the object of creating new states in the southwest, and 
 the speaker declared afresh his unalterable opposition 
 to this programme, and, indeed, his readiness to op- 
 pose the annexation of foreign territory in any quarter 
 or under any conceivable circumstance. The issue, 
 it was declared, was simply "peace, with no new 
 states, keeping our own money ourselves, or war till 
 new states shall be acquired, and vast sums paid." ' 
 1 "Works of Webster," Vol. V, p. 283. 
 
THE MEXICAN WAR 355 
 
 Eventually, the exchange of ratifications with the 
 Mexican Government, May 30th, brought definite as- 
 surance of peace, and likewise of the annexation 
 which the Administration and its friends were seek- 
 ing. In the meantime Webster had returned to Bos- 
 ton, where at the close of April he was called upon 
 to follow to the tomb, withiu the space of a single 
 week, the remains of his daughter Julia and those 
 of his son Edward. Of his five children but one, 
 Daniel Fletcher, now survived. 
 
 As the election of 1848 approached it became apparent 
 that the contest would turn almost wholly upon issues 
 created by the war with Mexico. The problems of the 
 Democrats were comparatively simple, for although 
 the unity of the party was impaired by factional strife 
 in New York, the nomination of General Cass for the 
 presidency was virtually assured in advance and the 
 framing of a platform anirming the justice and necessity 
 of the Mexican war, condemning opposition to it, and 
 endorsing the record of the Polk Administration af- 
 forded little or no difficulty. The task of the Whigs 
 was more complicated, and in the end it was performed 
 with indifferent success. Of possible candidates there 
 were several. Clay was still in the field, and although 
 his repeated defeats had led many of his former ad- 
 herents to the conclusion that he could not be elected, 
 he was able to command a large and influential 
 following. General Scott was another possibility, and 
 another was Webster. Still others were Judge McLean 
 and John M. Clayton. Long, however, in advance of 
 the assembling of the Whig convention at Philadelphia. 
 June 7, 1848, it became clear that the candidate most 
 likely to be successful was General Taylor, whose 
 active service during the earlier portion of the war had 
 
356 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 enabled hini to supplant Scott in the admiration of the 
 hero-loving public. The growing popularity of Taylor 
 was viewed by Webster with alarm, not alone because 
 he was himself a receptive candidate, but because he 
 disapproved the selection of military men for public 
 office. But as early as April, 1847, he predicted 
 Taylor's nomination. "The probability now is," he 
 wrote to his son, "that General Taylor will come in 
 President with a general rush. He would, certainly, 
 were the election now to come on. It is in the nature 
 of mankind to carry their favor toward military 
 achievement. No people yet have ever been found to 
 resist that tendency." 1 Gradually during the winter 
 of 1847-1848 the movement for Taylor acquired organi- 
 zation. On the part of the managers it was believed 
 that with Taylor as a candidate the party could sweep 
 the country, and it was assumed that under no other 
 condition could success be hoped for. The fact that 
 Taylor had never been identified with the Whig party 
 — that, indeed, if he had political principles they were 
 entirely unknown — was not permitted to stand in the 
 way. It was a part of the original plan that the ticket 
 should be assured of added strength by associating 
 Webster with Taylor as a candidate for the vice-presi- 
 dency ; but the proposal, involving as it did little less 
 than insult, was spurned by Webster and his friends 
 with ill-disguised contempt. The presidency alone 
 was Webster's ambition, and in any case he could not 
 have assented to the candidacy of Taylor, as accept- 
 ance of the plan would have obliged him to do. 
 
 It was Webster's misfortune, throughout the pre- 
 liminaries of the contest for the nomination, to be the 
 
 'Webster to Fletcher Webster, April 25, 1847. Webster, 
 Private Correspondence," Vol. II, p. 239. 
 
THE MEXICAN WAR 357 
 
 victim of well- meaning but tactless friends. Thus at 
 the end of January, 1848, a group of his supporters in 
 New York, thinking to check the progress of the move- 
 ment for Clay, and without consulting Webster, lent 
 their support to a call for a public meeting in behalf 
 of the nomination of Taylor. To Webster the act 
 appeared a grave tactical error, and to one of the 
 number he wrote reproachfully that as things were 
 going the forthcoming convention would have to choose 
 between but two candidates, Clay and Taylor, and that 
 unless Taylor should make a public avowal of Whig 
 principles Clay would certainly be the nominee. 1 
 During the spring, state conventions and mass meetings, 
 especially in the Southern states, made demand for the 
 nomination of Taylor, and in many quarters enthusiasts 
 threatened to run the General as a candidate, whatever 
 might be the action of the party convention. Besieged 
 with requests, Taylor at length indicated in a letter, 
 which was made public, that if nominated by the 
 Whigs he would not refuse to run, provided he should 
 be forced to make no pledges. In another communica- 
 tion he avowed that he was a Whig, " but not an ultra 
 Whig." 
 
 W r hen the convention assembled General Taylor was 
 nominated on the fourth ballot, and with him was 
 associated as vice-presidential candidate Millard Fill- 
 more of New York. On the first and second ballots 
 Webster received twenty-two votes, on the third seven- 
 teen, and on the fourth fourteen. With the exception 
 of one member who came to the convention as a sup 
 porter of Taylor, the Massachusetts delegation accorded 
 him its steadfast support. The convention appointed 
 
 1 Webster to Blatehford, January 30, 1848. Curtis, " Webshi 
 Vol. II, p. 336. 
 
358 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 no committee on resolutions and adjourned without 
 formulating any statement of principles whatsoever— 
 a course which was regarded by Webster and many 
 of his fellow-partisans with extreme disfavor. The 
 party managers, however, were counting upon a victory 
 to be achieved through the personal popularity of the 
 nominee, and from their point of view the enunciation 
 of principles could but be productive of disagreement 
 and defeat. By the action of the convention Webster 
 was grievously disappointed. His heart was set upon 
 the attainment of the presidency, and neither now nor 
 later was he able to perceive how utterly impossible of 
 realization was his ambition. With the nomination of 
 Taylor it became necessary for him to decide upon the 
 course which he should pursue throughout the cam- 
 paign. As appeared repeatedly in private conversation 
 and correspondence, he was disgusted with the Whig 
 nominee, the Whig management, even the Whig party 
 itself. At the same time, he neither desired nor could 
 afford to cast in his lot with the Free-Soilers, and the 
 Democratic ticket he, of course, could not by any 
 possibility support. " I shall endeavor/' he wrote to 
 his son a week after the adjournment of the convention, 
 "to steer my boat with discretion, but it is evident 
 that I must say something, or else it will be said for 
 me by others. And I can see no way but acquiescence 
 in Taylor's nomination ; not enthusiastic support, nor 
 zealous affection; but acquiescence, or forbearance 
 from opposition." ' " It seems to me I must not," he 
 wrote three days later, "in consistency, abandon the 
 support of Whig principles. My own reputation will 
 not allow of this. I cannot be silent without being 
 
 * Webster to Fletcher Webster, June 16, 1848. Van Tyne. 
 Letters of Daniel Webster," p. 368, 
 
THE MEXICAN WAR 359 
 
 reproached, when such as Cass is pressed upon the 
 country. ... I think the safest way is to over- 
 look the nomination, as not being the main thing, and 
 to continue to maintain the Whig cause. " l To men 
 who urged that he support the movement of the Free- 
 Soilers he turned a deaf ear. " These Northern pro- 
 ceedings," he wrote to his son, "can come to nothing 
 useful. . . . The men are all low in their objects." 
 And to a Massachusetts friend he wrote, following the 
 nomination of Van Buren by the Free-Soil convention 
 at Buffalo : " It is utterly impossible for me to support 
 the Buffalo nomination. I have no confidence in Mr. 
 Van Buren, not the slightest. I would much rather 
 trust General Taylor than Mr. Van Buren, even on 
 this very question of slavery, for I believe that General 
 Taylor is an honest man and I am sure he is not so 
 much committed on the wrong side as I know Mr. Van 
 Buren to have been for fifteen years." 2 
 
 For a time Webster held aloof, but before the close 
 of the campaign he permitted himself to take part, in 
 a guarded manner, in the canvass for Taylor. On 
 September 1st he made a notable address to his 
 neighbors and fellow-townsmen at Marshfield, and 
 October 24th he spoke in Faneuil Hall to a represent- 
 ative gathering of Whigs of Boston and vicinity. In 
 the Marshfield address he declared that Taylor's nomi- 
 nation had been dictated by the " sagacious, wise, far 
 seeing doctrine of availability," and that "the nomina- 
 tion was one not fit to be made." At the same time, 
 he admitted that the nominee was a man of bravery 
 and integrity, whose conduct since his nomination had 
 
 1 Webster to Fletcher Webster, June 19, 1848. Van Tyne, 
 "Letters of Daniel Webster," p. 360. 
 'Webster to Hoar, August 23, 1848. Ibid., p. 372. 
 
360 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 been beyond reproach, and he conceded that, taking 
 the General at his word, he might be considered a 
 Whig. The alternative being Cass, with the certainty 
 of the admission of more slave states, or Taylor, with 
 a possibility of the avoiding of such a calamity, Web- 
 ster declared that he could but vote for the latter, and 
 he advised his friends to do the same. In the Faneuil 
 Hall speech he expressed his confidence not only that 
 General Taylor was a Whig but that, if elected, he 
 would surround himself with a Whig cabinet and 
 1 ' honestly and faithfully adopt and pursue Whig 
 principles and Whig measures. ' ' l 
 
 At the close of a somewhat spiritless campaign it ap- 
 peared that the confidence of General Taylor's sup- 
 porters had not been misplaced. The Whigs were 
 successful, even though by no wide margin. Taylors 
 popular majority over Cass was approximately 140,000, 
 while his electoral majority was but thirty-six, so that 
 had either New York or Pennsylvania thrown its sup- 
 port to the Democratic candidate he would have been 
 elected. Of members of the House of Representatives 
 the Democrats elected 112, the Whigs but 105. A Free- 
 Soil group of thirteen held the balance of power. The 
 outcome of the election, however, meant little. The 
 Whigs were returned to power, but they brought with 
 them into office no sharply defined principles, and 
 only the future could reveal what their policies would 
 be. As one writer has put it, practically the only 
 thing which the election decided was that " a Whig 
 general should be made president because he had done 
 effective work in carrying on a Democratic war." 2 
 
 1 " Works of Webster," Vol. II, p. 475. For the speeches at 
 Marshfield and in Fanenil Hall see " Writings and Speeches," Vol. 
 IV, pp. 123-174. 
 
 2 Garrison, " Westward Extension," p, 284. 
 
THE MEXICAN WAR 361 
 
 The success of the Whigs raised at once the quest ion 
 of Webster's attitude toward, and his relations with, 
 the forthcoming Administration. Notwithstanding his 
 well-known opinion of Taylor's nomination, he had 
 been influential in holding in line the malcontents of 
 the party, and his eminence was such that he seemed 
 clearly to be marked out for a diplomatic, cabinet, or 
 other important appointment. Throughout the winter 
 following the election Taylor remained at his Louisiana 
 home, and, in the lack of definite information regard- 
 ing his plans, the public was obliged to content itself 
 with speculation, In large degree the making up of 
 the cabinet was left to the party leaders who had en- 
 gineered the General's nomination, and Webster, not 
 being among these, was never so much as consulted. 
 He stood ready to tender his advice, but he was not 
 called upon, and he scorned to obtrude. To the sug- 
 gestion which came from many quarters that he should 
 himself become a member of the cabinet he replied 
 that he had no reason either to expect or to desire an 
 appointment of the kind. "lam old, and poor, and 
 proud," he wrote to a New York friend. " All these 
 things beckon me to retirement, to take care of my 
 se lf — and, as I cannot act the first part, to act 
 
 none." * 
 
 Three weeks prior to the inauguration he wrote to the 
 same correspondent that he was certain that it was not 
 the purpose of the President-elect, to offer him a cabi- 
 net post, and that even if such an offer were to be 
 made it could not be accepted. The reasons advanced 
 for unwillingness to assume a portfolio, should it be 
 offered, were several. One was the irksomeness of 
 
 » Webster to Blatcbford, December 5, 1848. Curtta, "Wetoler," 
 Vol. II, p. 351. 
 
362 DANIEL WEBSTEB 
 
 the labors involved. Another was the feeling that 
 there was still grave doubt as to what the real char- 
 acter of the Administration would be. A third was 
 the consideration that, being the senior of the Presi- 
 dent in age, loug experienced in public affairs, and 
 himself an aspirant to the presidency, Webster felt 
 that he could best preserve his own dignity by declin- 
 ing to till a subordinate place in the executive branch 
 of the government. Finally, it was pointed out that 
 the practical difficulty of deciding between his own 
 friends and the friends of Taylor in the making of ap- 
 pointments would be embarrassing in the extreme. 
 "It is clear, therefore," he concluded, " that my true 
 position is a position of respect, friendship, and sup- 
 port of the incoming Administration ; but not a posi- 
 tion in which I should be called upon to take part in 
 the distribution of its offices and patronage." 1 
 
 The attitude of benevolent neutrality thus assumed 
 was maintained consistently throughout the sixteen 
 months of Taylor's tenure of the presidency. On 
 May 18, 1850, Webster was able to write: "I feel 
 neither indifferent nor distant toward our good Presi- 
 dent. He is an honest man, and a good Whig, and I 
 wish well to his administration, for his sake and the 
 country's. But what can I do? He never consults 
 mo, nor asks my advice ; nor does any one of his cabi- 
 net except Mr. Meredith. ... I shall support 
 cordially the President's measures whenever I can ; 
 but I have been in public life some time longer than 
 the President or any of his advisers, and suppose I 
 shall not be much blamed if on great public questions 
 I feel as much confidence in my own judgment as I do 
 
 1 Webster to Blatehford, February 16, 1848. Curtis, " Web- 
 ster," Vol. II, p. 358. 
 
THE MEXICAN WAR 363 
 
 in theirs. Personally I esteem the President and like 
 him very well." l 
 
 In the meantime the interest of the country was fast 
 becoming centred upon the titanic contest which had 
 begun in Congress over the organization of the terri- 
 tories acquired from Mexico. In the Faneuil Hall 
 speech of 1848 Webster had made a supreme effort to 
 thrust aside the issue of slavery and to revive the 
 questions of the tariff and the sub-treasury. Yet no 
 one knew better than he that the slavery question 
 could not be kept in the background ; and when, at 
 the convening of the Thirtieth Congress for its last 
 session in December, 1848, President Polk declared in 
 his message that the acquisition of the Mexican terri- 
 tories had created " a domestic question which seri- 
 ously threatens to disturb the harmony and successful 
 operation of our system," he but admitted what 
 Webster had declared from the outset would be the 
 consequence of the annexations. The course urged 
 upon Congress in the message was the extension of the 
 line of the Missouri Compromise westward to the 
 Pacific. 
 
 During the present session, and throughout the en- 
 suing period of controversy, the problem of the status 
 of slavery in the newly acquired territories was found 
 to be susceptible of five possible solutions. At the 
 one extreme was the contention of Calhoun and other 
 advanced exponents of the slavery interests that in 
 Xew Mexico and California, as in all other territori< 
 acquired by the blood and treasure of the entire 
 country, slavery must be not only permitted but pro 
 tected ; otherwise prospective settlers whose property 
 
 1 Webster to J. P. Hall, May 18, 1850. Van Tyne, " Let* n of 
 Webster," p. 412. 
 
364 DANIEL WEBSTEE 
 
 happened to be in the form of slaves would be dis- 
 criminated against. At the other extreme stood the 
 principle of the Wilmot proviso, namely, that slavery 
 in newly acquired territory should be prohibited irrev- 
 ocably by federal law. Between these two courses of 
 action lay three others of a more moderate character. 
 One was that advocated by President Polk, namely, 
 the simple extension to the Mexican territories of the 
 division line adopted in 1820 in relation to the Louisi- 
 ana Purchase. A second was the policy first warmly 
 advocated by General Cass, and now championed most 
 prominently by Stephen A. Douglas, — that of permit- 
 ting the inhabitants of the territories to decide for 
 themselves whether or not they would have slavery. 
 This policy was, of course, that of popular, or 
 " squatter," sovereignty. A third policy contem- 
 plated the inhibition of the territorial legislatures by 
 Congress from the enactment of any law upon the sub- 
 ject of slavery, leaving the status of the institution to 
 be determined entirely by the territorial courts. At 
 the time of their annexation New Mexico and Cali- 
 fornia were, both legally and actually, free soil ; but 
 the question of the immediate effect of the annexation 
 upon their domestic institutions, no less than that of 
 the proper course to be pursued in the future, was one 
 upon which there was apparently hopeless difference 
 of opinion. An effort in the summer of 1848 to make 
 incidental provision for the organization of the 
 Mexican cession in a measure relating primarily to 
 the Oregon territory failed. Oregon was organized as 
 a free territory, but the question of New Mexico and 
 California was postponed. 
 
 During the session which began December 4, 1848, 
 this question took precedence of all others. In the 
 
THE MEXICAN WAR 365 
 
 Senate Douglas introduced a bill erecting the whole of 
 the territory acquired under the treaty of Guadalupe 
 Hidalgo into a single state ; but the Judiciary Com- 
 mittee, to which the measure was referred, reported 
 adversely and the proposal failed. February 22, 1849, 
 Webster introduced a bill authorizing military govern- 
 ment and the continuance of existing laws in the terri 
 tories and postponing still further a permanent settle- 
 ment. This proposal also failed. Still another measure 
 was introduced undertaking to extend the Constitution 
 to the territories, and also to extend to them certain 
 revenue laws of the United States. The discussion of 
 this proposition was rendered especially notable by a 
 clash which took place between Webster and Calhoun 
 upon the question of whether or not the Constitution 
 extended to the territories ex propria vigore. It was 
 the contention of Calhoun that the Constitution did so 
 extend and of Webster that it did not. The advantage 
 of the argument lay clearly with Webster. The ses- 
 sion closed without the enactment of any measure re- 
 lating to the territories, save one extending to them 
 the federal revenue laws and creating in them a col- 
 lection district. 
 
 At the establishment of the administration of 
 President Taylor, in March, 1849, nothing was clearer 
 to thoughtful men than that the slavery issue was 
 likely at any time to precipitate a national crisis. In 
 the first place, the discovery of gold in the Sacramento 
 Valley in January, 1848, had resulted in a mad rush 
 of fortune-hunters and settlers to California, creating 
 an unexpected need for an immediate and definite 
 organization of that region for purposes of government 
 [p the second place, there had arisen a group of other, 
 and more or less unrelated, slavery questions winch 
 
366 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 were pressing ever more seriously for solution. The 
 most urgent of these arose from the demand of the 
 South for a more effective fugitive slave law, but 
 others of importance related to the abolition of the 
 slave trade in the District of Columbia, the adjust- 
 ment of the disputed boundary between Texas and 
 Xew Mexico, and the assumption by the United States 
 of the public debt of Texas. In September, 1849, the 
 inhabitants of California, taking matters into their 
 own hands, held a convention, adopted a constitution 
 prohibiting slavery, set up a state government, and 
 prepared to apply for admission to the Union. And 
 when, in December, the Thirty-first Congress as- 
 sembled for its first session, senators and representa- 
 tives from California were in Washington ready to 
 take their seats as soon as the necessary formalities 
 should have been complied with. The boundaries of 
 the prospective state were such as to render impracti- 
 cable one of the solutions of the territorial question 
 which has been mentioned, that, namely, of extending 
 to the Pacific the line of the Missouri Compromise ; 
 for this line would cut squarely across the proposed 
 state. 
 
 During the early weeks of the session feeling ran 
 high, both in Congress and throughout the country. 
 A determined contest over the speakership of the 
 House, occupying three weeks, by no means bet- 
 tered the situation ; while state legislatures debated 
 sharply, and threats and prophecies of secession were 
 heard on every hand. The outcome was highly prob- 
 lematical when, January 25, 1850, the aged Clay, 
 adopting once more the favorite role of compromiser, 
 came forward with a memorable series of eight resolu- 
 tions calculated to allay the passions of the hour and 
 
THE MEXICAN WAR 367 
 
 to afford a basis for the speedy, fair, and permanent 
 adjustment of the entire group of slavery questions by 
 which the country was vexed. The more noteworthy 
 of the proposals were (1) that California should be ad- 
 mitted as a free state ; (2) that the remaining territo- 
 ries acquired from Mexico in 1848 should be organized 
 without any mention of slavery ; (3) that the slave 
 trade in the District of Columbia should be abolished ; 
 (4) that a new and more effective fugitive slave law- 
 should be enacted ; and (5) that Texas should yield to 
 New Mexico the territory in dispute, in recognition of 
 which act the United States should assume the debt 
 contracted by Texas prior to her annexation to the 
 United States. It is interesting to observe that four 
 days before submitting publicly this plan of concilia- 
 tion Clay sought and obtained a conference with Web- 
 ster concerning it. Presenting himself at Webster's 
 house on a stormy evening, and with no previous inti- 
 mation of a visit, he poured out to his great compeer 
 his fears for the Union and besought sympathy and 
 assistance. The plan as unfolded appealed to Webster 
 in all of its essentials, and he gave his word that if, 
 upon further consideration, he should continue of the 
 same mind he would devote himself to its adoption in 
 the Senate, regardless of what the consequences might 
 be at the North. 
 
 The pledge was abundantly redeemed. On Feb 
 ruary 5th and 6th Clay delivered a powerful speech in 
 support of his resolutions, declaring thai Congress and 
 the state legislatures were "twenty-odd furnaces in 
 full blast in generating heat and passion and intem- 
 perance, and diffusing them throughout the whole ex- 
 tent of the broad land," and expressing the mos1 urgenl 
 anxiety for the restoration of " concord, harmony, and 
 
368 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 peace. " On March 4th the speech of Calhoun, who 
 was too broken in health to be able to deliver it, was 
 read by Senator Mason of Virginia. In it the Com- 
 promise was declared incapable of saving the Union, 
 and it was asserted unequivocally that the only means 
 whereby that consummation could be attained would 
 be the concession to the South of an equal right in the 
 territories, the complete enforcement of the fugitive 
 slave law, and the absolute cessation of anti- slavery 
 agitation. Three days later Webster, the third mem- 
 ber of the great triumvirate whose twoscore years of 
 service in Congress were now drawing to an end, de- 
 livered the memorable speech known from then until 
 now by the date of its delivery, ' ' the Seventh of March. ' ' 
 Earlier in the session Webster had expressed the 
 conviction that the Union was not in imminent peril. 
 11 There is no serious danger," he wrote as late as Feb- 
 ruary 14th. Subsequently, however, and especially 
 after the reading of the speech of Calhoun, he came to 
 the opinion that the threats of secession which were 
 sounded so loudly were not entirely empty. As early 
 as February 22d he was determined to ' ' make a Union 
 speech and discharge a clear conscience, " and March 
 7th, when the resolutions of Clay were the special 
 order of the day, he seized a favorable opportunity for 
 the purpose. That he was likely to do so was known 
 somewhat in advance, and when, on the day mentioned, 
 the doors of the Senate chamber were opened all avail- 
 able space was quickly occupied by ladies, members of 
 the House, and other spectators who had been fortu- 
 nate enough to gain admission. Despite the fact that 
 nothing except an outline was committed to writing, 
 the speech was diligently prepared, and it is the testi- 
 mony of those who heard it that it was delivered with 
 
THE MEXICAN ^ AR 369 
 
 more than the speaker's usual deliberation and poise. 1 
 It was born of an intense devotion to the Union and a 
 solicitous and discriminating study of the highly dis- 
 cordant aspects of the existing political situation, and 
 through it flashed the same flames of eloquence which 
 illumined the Reply to Hayne. 
 
 The exordium was one of singular dignity and power 
 of appeal. "Mr. President, I wish to speak to-day, 
 not as a Massachusetts man, nor as a Northern man, 
 but as an American, and a member of the Senate of 
 the United States. It is fortunate that there is a Sen- 
 ate of the United States ; a body not yet moved from 
 its propriety, not lost to a just sense of its own dignity 
 and its own high responsibilities, and a body to which 
 the country looks, with confidence, for wise, moderate, 
 patriotic, and healing counsels. It is not to be denied 
 that we live in the midst of strong agitations, and are 
 surrounded by very considerable dangers to our insti- 
 tutions and government. The imprisoned winds are 
 let loose. The East, the North, and the stormy South 
 combine to throw the whole sea into commotion, to 
 toss its billows to the skies, and disclose its pro- 
 foundest depths. I do not affect to regard myself, Mr. 
 President, as holding, or as fit to hold, the helm in 
 this combat with the political elements; but I have a 
 duty to perform, audi mean to perform it with fidelity, 
 not without a sense of existing dangers, but do! without 
 hope. I have a part to act, not for my own Becurity or 
 safety, for I am looking out for no fragment upon which 
 to float away from the wreck, if wreck there must be, 
 but for the good of the whole and the preservation oi all j 
 
 * The outline, which filled twenty-eight eheete of fooW ,fc 
 printed in Van Tyne, " Letters of Weteter" pp. ..9.1-403, and In 
 r ' Writings and Speeches," Vol. X, pp. 281-291. 
 
370 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 and there is that which will keep me to my duty during 
 this struggle, whether the sun and the stars shall ap- 
 pear, or shall not appear for many days. I speak 
 to-day for the preservation of the Union. 'Hear me 
 for my cause. ' I speak to-day, out of a solicitous and 
 anxious heart, for the restoration to the country of that 
 quiet and that harmony which make the blessings of 
 this Union so rich, and so dear to us all. These are 
 the topics that I propose to myself to discuss ; these 
 are the motives, and the sole motives, that influence 
 me in the wish to communicate my opinions to the 
 Senate and the country ; and if I can do anything, 
 however little, for the promotion of these ends, I shall 
 have accomplished all that I expect." l 
 
 Following this announcement of purpose Webster 
 passed to a review of the history of slavery in the 
 United States, pointing out how the hope of the dis- 
 appearance of the institution cherished by men of 
 earlier days, including slaveholders, had been brought 
 to naught by the expansion of cotton culture, and how 
 the South, once more outspoken in condemnation of 
 slavery than was the North, had come gradually to re- 
 gard the institution as natural, necessary, and even 
 justifiable upon religious grounds. Then he sketched 
 the annexation of Texas, the war with Mexico, and the 
 general chain of events by which the nation had been 
 brought to its present perilous situation. The charac- 
 ter of every part of the country, with respect to sla- 
 very, was declared now to be fixed, by law or by Na- 
 ture ; and, avowing that Nature had herself attended 
 to the exclusion of slavery from the territories com- 
 prised in the Mexican cession, he declared that he 
 
 lu Works of Webster," Vol. V, pp. 325-326 ; " Writings and 
 Speeches," Vol. X, pp. 57-58. 
 
THE MEXICAN WAB 371 
 
 would not " take pains to reaffirm an ordinance of Na- 
 ture, nor to reenact the will of God," — that he would 
 " put in no Wilmot proviso, for the purpose of a taunt 
 or a reproach." The "criminations and recrimina- 
 tions" of the slaveholdiug and nou-slaveholding sec- 
 tions of the country were then surveyed at length and 
 set forth in bold relief. The grievance of the South to 
 which most attention was given was that arising from 
 the lax enforcement of the fugitive slave law. In the 
 controversy which had arisen upon this subject the 
 South, it was affirmed, was right, the North was wrong. 
 "No man fulfills his duty in any legislature who sets 
 himself to find excuses, evasions, escapes from this 
 constitutional obligation," it was maintained ; and the 
 activity of some Northern legislatures in flooding Con- 
 gress with memorials on slavery in the District of 
 Columbia and kindred subjects was especially dep- 
 precated. Of abolition societies, also, he spoke very 
 unfavorably. Allowing that thousands of the mem- 
 bers of these organizations were honest and good nun, 
 he none the less maintained that the societies during 
 the last twenty years had " produced nothing good or 
 valuable," and that their effect was but to excite feel 
 ing and create alarm. The violence of the Northern 
 press was likewise reprobated, although it was in- 
 sisted that the Southern press was no less at fault. In 
 the entire catalogue of Southern complaints he pro 
 fessed to see, however, "no solid grievance within the 
 redress of the Government" save "the want of a 
 proper regard to the injunction of the Constitution 
 for the delivery of fugitive slaves." 
 
 Turning to the complaints of the North, he enumer- 
 ated as first and gravest the change that had taken 
 place in Southern sentiment since 1789, involving 
 
372 DANIEL WEBSTEB 
 
 efforts to extend the institution of slavery into new 
 regions, contrary to the understanding which prevailed 
 when the Constitution was adopted ; second, the tone 
 of disparagement in which Southern men were accus- 
 tomed to speak of free labor and of the industrial sys- 
 tem of the North ; and, finally, the laws of certain 
 Southern states in accordance with which colored sea- 
 men employed on Northern vessels were denied freedom 
 when in Southern ports. With respect to the griev- 
 ances of both sides it was declared that in so far as 
 they had their foundation in matters of law they could 
 be, and should be, redressed j but that in so far as they 
 had their foundation in matters of opinion, in sentiment, 
 in mutual crimination and recrimination, all that could 
 be done was to endeavor to " allay the agitation and 
 cultivate a better feeling and more fraternal sentiments 
 between the South and the North." 
 
 Toward the close of the speech there came an out- 
 burst of impassioned eloquence such as Webster him- 
 self had seldom equaled. It was inspired especially 
 by the free and easy references to secession which in 
 these days fell not infrequently from the lips of men of 
 high standing and influence. " Secession ! Peaceable 
 secession ! Sir, your eyes and mine are never destined 
 to see that miracle. The dismemberment of this vast 
 country without convulsion ! The breaking up of the 
 fountains of the great deep without ruffling the sur- 
 face ! Who is so foolish, I beg everybody's pardon, as 
 to expect to see any such thing ? Sir, he who sees 
 these states, now revolving in harmony around a com- 
 mon centre, and expects to see them quit their places 
 and fly off without convulsion, may look the next hour 
 to see the heavenly bodies rush from their spheres, and 
 jostle against each other in the realms of space, with- 
 
THE MEXICAN WAR 373 
 
 out causing the wreck of the universe. There can be 
 no such thing as a peaceable secession. Peaceable 
 secession is an utter impossibility. Is the great Con- 
 stitution under which we live, covering this whole 
 country, is it to be thawed and melted away by seces- 
 sion, as the snows on the mountain melt unobserved, 
 and run off? No, sir ! No, sir ! I will not state what 
 might produce the disruption of the Union ; bat, sir, I 
 see as plainly as I see the sun in heaven what that dis- 
 ruption itself must produce j I see that it must pro- 
 duce war. . . . Peaceable secession ! Peaceable 
 secession ! The concurrent agreement of all the mem- 
 bers of this great republic to separate ! A voluntary 
 separation, with alimony on one side and on the other. 
 Why, what would be the result ? Where is the line to 
 be drawn ? What states are to secede ? What is to 
 remain American? What am I to be? An Ameri- 
 can no longer ? 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, or who 
 fill the other house of Congress ? Heaven forbid ! 
 Where is the flag of the republic to remain ? Where 
 is the eagle still to tower ? or is he to cower, and 
 shrink, and fall to the ground? Why, sir, our anc 
 tors, our fathers and our grandfathers, those of them 
 that are yet living amongst us with prolonged li v« 
 would rebuke and reproach us ; and our children and 
 our grandchildren would cry out shame upon us, if we 
 of this generation should dishonor these ensigns of the 
 power of the government and the harmony of that Un- 
 ion which is every day felt among us with so much JOJ 
 and gratitude. What is to become of the army I 
 What is to become of the navy I What is to become 
 of the public lands? How is each of the thirty Btafc 
 
374 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 to defend itself? I know, although the idea has not 
 been stated distinctly, there is to be, or it is supposed 
 possible that there will be, a Southern Confederacy. 
 I do not mean, when I allude to this statement, that 
 any one seriously contemplates such a state of things. 
 I do not mean to say that it is true, but I have heard it 
 suggested elsewhere, that the idea has been entertained, 
 that, after the dissolution of this Union, a Southern 
 Confederacy might be formed. I am sorry, sir, that it 
 has ever been thought of, talked of, or dreamed of, in 
 the wildest flights of human imagination. But the 
 idea, so far as it exists, must be of a separation, as- 
 signing the slave states to one side and the free states 
 to the other. Sir, I may express myself too strongly, 
 perhaps, but there are impossibilities in the natural as 
 well as in the physical world, and I hold the idea of a 
 separation of these states, those that are free to form 
 one government, and those that are slaveholding to 
 form another, as such an impossibility. We could not 
 separate the states by any such line, if we were to draw 
 it. We could not sit down here to-day and draw a line 
 of separation that would satisfy any five men in the 
 country. There are natural causes that would keep 
 and tie us together, and there are social and domestic 
 relations which we could not break if we would, and 
 which we should not if we could. " ! 
 
 The most notable speeches upon the Compromise by 
 which those of Clay, Calhoun, and Webster were fol- 
 lowed were those of William H. Seward, delivered 
 March 11th, aud Salmon P. Chase, delivered two 
 weeks later. Seward and Chase belonged to the 
 younger generation of statesmen, to the generation 
 
 l "Works of Webster," Vol. V, pp. 361-362: "Writings and 
 Speeches," Vol. X, pp. 93-94. 
 
THE MEXICAN WAR 375 
 
 which was destined to witness the war between the 
 sections and the complete abolition of slavery, and 
 while their attachment to the Union was unimpeachable 
 they felt less than did Webster and Clay the necessity 
 of compromise and of toleration for the Union's sake. 
 Seward pronounced all legislative compromises " rad- 
 ically wrong and essentially vicious," declared tin- 
 fugitive slave law contrary to the law of nature, denied 
 that the Constitution recognized slavery, and affirmed 
 that in any case there was a higher law than the Con- 
 stitution in accordance with which the newly acquired 
 territories should be devoted to freedom. With these 
 doctrines Chase was in substantial agreement. 
 
 On April 18th the compromise resolutions were re- 
 ferred to a committee of thirteen, of which Clay was 
 chairman, and May 8th they were reported in the form 
 of two bills, together with an amendment to the fugi- 
 tive slave bill already pending in the Senate. The 
 drift of circumstances throughout the country was 
 strongly in favor of the Compromise. The holding of 
 a convention at Nashville in which nine of the slave 
 states were represented strikingly emphasized the de- 
 sirability of an early settlement. On July 9th Presi- 
 dent Taylor died, and Fillmore, who succeeded, gave 
 the weight of his influence to the proposed adjustment. 
 Disentangling the numerous propositions one by one, 
 Congress adopted the series with few modifications, 
 and before the close of the year the Compromise had 
 become law. The sentiment that the preservation of 
 the Union should be exalted above the attainment of 
 sectional ends upon controverted questions was still In 
 the ascendant. Whether it would continue so after 
 the passing of such bulwarks of nationalism as Webster 
 and Clay was a serious question. 
 
CHAPTEK XIV 
 
 SECRETARY OF STATE UNDER FILLMORE 
 
 With the exception of the debate with Hayne, no 
 performance of Webster in the course of a public career 
 covering twoscore years aroused greater interest than did 
 the speech of the Seventh of March. None provoked 
 contemporaneously more wide-spread discussion, and 
 none has since been judged more variously by biog- 
 raphers and historians. No sooner was the speech de- 
 livered and the content of it made known to an awaiting 
 public than there arose throughout the North, and most 
 of all in New England, a veritable storm of criticism. 
 In pulpit and in press, by abolitionists and by men 
 who detested the abolitionist creed, Webster was pro- 
 claimed, in language now of sorrow and now of indig- 
 nation, a compromiser, a time-server, and an apostate. 
 At a public meeting held in Faneuil Hall the speech 
 was unsparingly condemned and Theodore Parker de- 
 clared that he knew of no deed in American history 
 done by a son of New England to which he could com- 
 pare that of Webster save the act of Benedict Arnold. 
 " Webster," wrote Horace Mann, "is a fallen star! 
 Lucifer descending from heaven!" In a poem of 
 mournful melody, "Ichabod," Whittier deplored the 
 " fallen" statesman's loss of faith and honor ; while a 
 member of the Massachusetts legislature proclaimed 
 the object of his scorn "a recreant son of Massa- 
 chusetts who misrepresented her in the Senate." By 
 the speech, asserted Giddings, "a blow was struck at 
 
SECKETAKY OF STATE UNDER FILLMORE 377 
 
 freedom and the constitutional rights of the free states 
 which no Southern arm could have given." The 
 Boston Atlas, the New York Tribune and other leading 
 Whig journals were outspoken in disapproval. 
 
 The points of specific attack were several. One was 
 the readiness now displayed, despite a strong disposi- 
 tion in the past to resist any possible extension of 
 slavery, to accept the "law of Nature" in lieu of an 
 act of Congress prohibiting slavery in the Mexican 
 cession. Another was the consideration shown the 
 South in the matter of the execution of the fugitive 
 slave law and the seeming indifference to the senti- 
 ments of Northern people which were outraged by the 
 proposed legislation upon this subject. It was charge ! 
 that, instead of maintaining an independent and digni- 
 fied attitude, as was his custom, Webster had stooped 
 to the level of a mere compromiser, even a truckler to 
 Southern interests, and it was alleged that he was curry- 
 ing favor with the South with the express purpose of 
 promoting his chance of attaining the presidency. 
 The abject surrender of moral principle which * 
 alleged to have been made was declared to be the fr. 
 of inordinate and long unsatisfied ambition. "The 
 only reasonable way in which we can estimate this 
 speech," affirmed Parker, "is as a bid for the pres 
 dency." And the charge was reiterated by Mann, 
 Giddings, and numerous other critics. Even the 
 crowning argument by which Webster had sought t<> 
 promote the enactment of the measures of L850, L 0., 
 the necessity of averting the peril of disunion, was 
 pronounced empty and insincere, it being assumed 
 that no peril of the sort existed. 
 
 There can be no question thai throughout the North 
 Webster's standing was affected adversely by the 
 
378 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 speech, nor that in quarters where abolitionism was 
 dominant all claim to popularity was at this point 
 forfeited. Two facts are, however, to be observed. 
 In the first place, if the speech served to bring down 
 upon its author denunciation, and even disgrace, it 
 also brought him numerous and highly flattering ex- 
 pressions of admiration and confidence. These came 
 not alone from the South but from all portions of the 
 country, and from political friends and foes alike. A 
 formal address was sent to him from Boston, signed by 
 eight hundred substantial citizens, 1 warmly approving 
 the stand which had been takem From Kewbury- 
 port, Medford, the cities and towns of the Kennebec 
 Valley, and from a representative body of friends and 
 former neighbors in ISTew Hampshire, came similar 
 testimonials, enforcing the fact that while condemna- 
 tion was sharpest in the senator's own section of the 
 country it was not even there by any means universal. 
 "I wish I could send you," wrote one of Webster's 
 friends (from Washington) to another, "the tons of 
 Southern and Western papers that are filled with 
 glorifications of the speech— they would do you much 
 good. The letters from clergymen all over the 
 country, and from Democrats in all the states, con- 
 curring iu the strongest approbation of the speech, 
 have filled Mr. Webster's ofi&ce, so that there is no 
 room to sit down."; 1 
 
 A second fact to be observed is that after the lapse 
 of a little time large numbers of persons who for the 
 moment had been alienated assumed again an attitude 
 
 J,H q C l U ( Jl n * Geor f e Ticknor, George T. Curtis, Rnfus Choate, 
 William H. Prescott, and Jarerl Sparks. 
 
 » iS wfnf ww t0 ,, Peter Harve * March 15 ' 185 °- y an Tyne, 
 .Letters of VS ebster," p. 405. 
 
SECBETABY OF STATE UNDER FILLMORE 379 
 
 of sympathy and support. The conviction grew 
 that in an era of controversy such as that in which 
 men were now living the leadership of a statesman 
 of Webster's intellect and integrity was something 
 to be prized, not scorned. The abolitionists were ir- 
 reconcilable, and undoubtedly the majority of anti- 
 slavery people continued to be more or less displeased. 
 But many Whig journals in time became less cen- 
 sorious, and several ended by according unreserved 
 support ; and the change of attitude was reflected 
 widely among their readers. It was, as Mr. Rhodes 
 asserts, Webster, rather than Clay, who raised up for 
 the Compromise a powerful and much-needed support 
 from Northern public sentiment. 1 
 
 The truth is that the course which Webster pursued 
 in 1850, if considerably at variance with his course at 
 earlier times, was dictated very much more largely by 
 honest and patriotic motives than the critics of that 
 day and since have been willing to admit. The point 
 is incontestable that Webster in 1850 still aspired to 
 attain the presidency. Such aspiration he, indeed, 
 had cherished since at least the period of the Hayue 
 debate and the controversy over nullification. It may 
 be granted, too, that in the later portion of his career 
 he was distinctly less outspoken in opposition to slavery 
 than in the days of the Missouri Compromise and the 
 Plymouth oration. At no time had he even approx- 
 imated the position of the abolitionists. None the 
 less, he had once been readier to denounce the slave 
 trade and the several harsher phases of the institution, 
 and in later times he was strongly disposed to confine 
 his anti-slavery activities to the prevention of the 
 acquisition of new slave territory. In 1850 he had 
 1 Rhodes, '"History of the United States,'' Vol. I, p. 157. 
 
380 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 seemed, at least, to many people to yield even upon 
 this fundamental point. But the fact is to be borne in 
 mind that, if he refused to insist upon the positive ex- 
 clusion of slavery from New Mexico, he refused also to 
 accede to the demand of the South that the legality of 
 slavery in the territories be recognized and maintained 
 by Congress ; and it must be admitted that, California 
 having already declared against slavery, the contention 
 that there really never would be a slavery question in 
 the Mexican cession was substantially based. Further- 
 more, the argument employed in behalf of the carrying 
 into effect of the fugitive slave clause of the Constitu- 
 tion was, so far as the legal aspect of it is concerned, 
 quite unimpeachable. Webster's only tactical error 
 at this point lay in his failure to perceive the intensity 
 and the permanence of the Northern feeling upon the 
 subject and in his neglect to use the occasion to make 
 fresh protestation of the essential iniquity of slavery. 
 The making of such protestation, however, would have 
 robbed the speech of its conciliatory tone, thereby 
 defeating its essential purpose. That Webster was an 
 anti-slavery man the country knew. In 1848 he had 
 complained to a friend that there were those who 
 refused to regard him as such unless he repeated the 
 declaration " once a week." In 1850 there were those 
 who would not have believed such an assertion if re- 
 peated daily. But the people in general knew his 
 record and required at this time, as he felt, no fresh 
 assurance. 
 
 Finally, despite the opinion of some historians to the 
 contrary, it may be asserted that the motive which was 
 supremely operative in the Seventh of March speech, 
 as in Webster's public acts and utterances upon many 
 other occasions, was that of the safeguarding of the 
 
SEOEETAEY OF STATE UNDEK F1LLMOKE 3fi 1 
 
 Union. "Sir," he declared in one of his speeches upon 
 the Compromise, " my object is peace. My object is 
 reconciliation. My purpose is not to make up a case for 
 the North, or to make up a case for the South. My ol >j e< i 
 is not to continue useless and irritating controversies. I 
 am against agitators, North and South. I am against 
 local ideas, North and South, and against all narrow 
 and local contests. I am an American, and I know 
 no locality but America; that is my country. My 
 heart, my sentiments, my judgment, demand of me 
 that I shall pursue such a course as shall promote the 
 good, and the harmony, and the union of the whole 
 country. This I shall do, God willing, to the end of 
 the chapter." ! Webster's idea that the Union was in 
 danger was scoffed at by his abolitionist critics. Y< i 
 the student of the period knows that never had the 
 threat of secession been made with such resoluteness 
 as in 1850 and that within slightly more than a decade 
 the durability of the nation was destined to be put 
 to the supreme test. In the situation which existed 
 Webster considered the proposals of Clay to comprise, 
 not necessarily an ideal, but a common-sense, fair, and 
 practicable, settlement — one well calculated to meet 
 the rising demand of a large part of the nation for 
 sectional peace. To what precise extent bhe still linger- 
 ing longing for the presidency imparted color to bhe 
 sentiments which were expressed no one can know. 1 n 
 all probability Webster himself did not know. There 
 can be no question, however, that by sonic writers this 
 factor has been greatly exaggerated. At the most, it 
 was incidental rather than preponderant. If, a- Mr. 
 Ehodes has said, "one believes thai Webster surren- 
 dered principle for the sake of winning the fevor of 
 l Curtis, "Webster " Vol. 11. p. 448. 
 
382 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 the South, it must be ou the ground that this man of 
 large public experience did not understand the senti- 
 ment of the North ; or that, with unexampled fatuity, 
 he hoped his position on the sectional question would 
 gain him the support of the South and yet not lose him 
 that of the free states." l 
 
 On July 9, 1850, while the Compromise measures 
 were pending, President Taylor died and was suc- 
 ceeded by the Vice-President, Mr. Fillmore. While 
 relations between Taylor and Fillmore had been agree- 
 able, it was understood that in temper and policy the 
 two men were essentially unlike, and it was assumed 
 that the personnel of the Administration would un- 
 dergo a certain amount of change. " It is at this mo- 
 ment supposed," wrote Webster two days after Fill- 
 more's accession, "that there will be an entirely new 
 cabinet. Certainly not more than one or two can re- 
 main." 2 On the following day he wrote : " As to the 
 State Department, I have no idea who will have it, al- 
 though, if the power were with me, I think I could 
 find a man [Edward Everett] without going out of 
 Massachusetts, who has talent enough and knowledge 
 enough ; but whether he is at this moment so fresh in 
 the minds of the people that his appointment would 
 strike the public mind favorably, may be a doubt. 
 Nobody can well be Secretary of State who has not 
 fortune, unless he be a bachelor." 3 But the man to 
 whom, at the suggestion of Clay, Fillmore turned was 
 none other than Webster himself. At some time dur- 
 ing the three or four days succeeding July 16th the 
 
 1 Rhodes, " History of the United States," Vol. I, pp. 158-159. 
 Webster to Haven, July 11, 1850. Webster, " Private Corre- 
 spondence," Vol. II, p. 376. 
 
 'Webster to Haven, July 12, 1850. Ibid., Yol. II, p. 376. 
 
SECRETARY OF STATE UNDER FILLMORE 383 
 
 offer of the State portfolio was tendered and, with re- 
 luctance, accepted. "I yielded," wrote the new ap- 
 pointee on July 21st, " to what has been suggested 
 from so many sides, and gave up my own wishes to 
 the wishes and opinions of my friends. I must leave 
 myself in their hands. There is work enough for me, 
 and anxious duties in plenty ; but if I can preserve my 
 health, I will toil through a hot summer here, though 
 I confess it does seem hard that at my age I cannot en- 
 joy the comforts of my own home. I was persuaded 
 to think it was my duty, in the present crisis, to ac- 
 cept a seat in the cabinet, but it made my heart ache 
 to think of it." 1 A final speech in the Senate, de- 
 livered July 17th, comprised a masterful attempt to 
 impress upon Congress and the country the supreme 
 importance of the allaying of sectional strife through 
 the adoption of the Compromise." 
 
 On July 23, 1850, Webster entered upon his second 
 period of service in the State Department ; and the po 
 sition at this point assumed was retained until his 
 death, in October, 1852. There was, however, in 
 these times a dearth of foreign questions of serious im 
 port, and the period is marked by no great diplomatic 
 stroke such as that attained in the Ashburton treaty oi 
 a decade earlier. The highly important treaty of 1 6 
 with Great Britain upon the subject of an interoceanic 
 canal was brought to completion by Secretary Clayton 
 before Webster's accession to office. s.» completer) 
 did domestic issues overshadow foreign ones, and bo 
 prominently was the name of Webster associated with 
 
 i Webster to Harvey, July 21, 1580. Webster, ".Private* 
 respondence." Vol. Il] p. 378. Webstei - rocoessor in fee Benate 
 
 was Robert Rautonl. "Writings and 
 
 '"Works of Webster," Vol. V, pp. 41*2-4.58 , Writings ana 
 
 Speeches," Vol. X, pp. 144-170. 
 
384. DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 these issues, that throughout the period of his secre- 
 taryship it was upon them principally that his time 
 and thought were bestowed. When he left the Senate 
 for the cabinet the Compromise measures were still un- 
 der discussion, and his correspondence during the en- 
 suing weeks dealt almost exclusively with them. On 
 September 10th, when at last all of the measures had 
 become law except the one relating to the slave-trade 
 in the District of Columbia, he unburdened himself to 
 a friend as follows : " You have heard how all things 
 have gone, so far. I confess I feel relieved. Since 
 the 7th of March, there has not been an hour in which 
 I have not felt a ' crushing ' weight of anxiety and re- 
 sponsibility. I have gone to sleep at night, and 
 waked in the morning with the same feeling of eat- 
 ing care. And I have sat down to no breakfast or 
 dinner to which I have brought an unconcerned and 
 easy mind. It is over. My part is acted, and I am 
 satisfied. The rest I leave to stronger bodies and 
 fresher minds." 1 
 
 By some writers it has been assumed that the 
 1 ' crushing weight of anxiety and responsibility ' ' to 
 which Webster here alludes was the product of re- 
 morse. Undoubtedly there was involved in it much of 
 regret. But there is no reason for believing that Web- 
 ster ever regarded his course upon the Compromise as 
 anything other than honorable and patriotic. The 
 Seventh of March speech he considered the most im- 
 portant effort of his life, 2 and, far from feeling regret 
 or chagrin regarding it, he was active throughout his 
 
 1 Webster to Harvey, September 10, 1850. Webster, " Private 
 Correspondence," Vol. II, p. 385. 
 
 -' Webster to Everett, September 27, 1851. Quoted in Curtis, 
 "Webster," Vol. II, p. 529. 
 
SECRETARY OF STATE UNDER FILLMORE 385 
 
 remaiuiDg years in promoting its circulation among 
 the people and in defending the propositions upon 
 which it was based. The " crushing weight " was, in 
 fact, apprehension regarding the state of the Union, 
 and relief was forthcoming only when the measures 
 upon whose enactment the saving of the country was 
 believed to be dependent were at last carried into law. 
 "I think," it was declared feelingly, two days after 
 the adoption of the Compromise was assured, " that the 
 country has had a providential escape from very con- 
 siderable dangers." To Harvey, Webster wrote opti- 
 mistically on October 2d : "My main relief, however, 
 is that Congress got through so well. I can now sleep 
 o ? nights. We have gone through the most important 
 crisis which has occurred since the foundation of the 
 Government ; and whatever party may prevail, here- 
 after, the Union stands firm. Faction, disunion, and 
 the love of mischief are put under, at least for the 
 present, and I hope for a long time." 1 
 
 During the years which elapsed between the adop- 
 tion of the Compromise and the rise of the Nebraska 
 controversy, in 1853, the supreme issue before the 
 country was that of the finality of the settlement which 
 had been effected. Several of the adjustments which 
 had been reached— the admission of California as a 
 free state, the fixing of the Texan boundary, the as 
 sumption of the Texan debt— were beyond question 
 final. Others— as the abolition of the slave-trade in 
 the District of Columbia and the organization of New 
 Mexico and Utah without federal regulation of Blavery 
 —were less clearly so. And one— theenactmenl of the 
 new and curiously devised fugitive slave law— was al 
 
 1 Webster to Harvey, October 2, 1850. Van Tync, "Letters -f 
 Webster," p. 433. 
 
386 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 most from the first, the object of continuous and pow- 
 erful attack, by which its stability was seriously 
 threatened. To minimize the effects of continued agi- 
 tation men of influence in both parties (notably Cass 
 and Douglas among the Democrats and Clay, Webster, 
 Choate, and Fillmore among the Whigs) organized and 
 led a nation-wide counter-movement for the enforce- 
 ment of law and the cessation of intersectional contro- 
 versy. In New York, Boston, and other cities ' ' union ' ' 
 meetings were held, and every effort was made to rally 
 to the cause of peace the business, professional, and 
 other influential elements. In this work Webster was 
 especially active. As early as April 29, 1850, he had 
 declared to a Boston gathering that he would support 
 "no agitations having their foundations in unreal, 
 ghostly abstractions 1 '; 1 and throughout ensuing 
 months he wrote numerous letters and delivered sev- 
 eral public addresses in cities of New England, New 
 York, and Virginia denouncing the renewal of agita- 
 tion by the anti-slavery radicals and urging upon the 
 people a general acquiescence in the results that had 
 been attained. ' ' No man, " he preached, " is at liberty 
 to set up, or affect to set up, his own conscience above the 
 law" ; and it was declared unequivocally that persons 
 who should " continue to talk about Wilmot provisos, 
 and to resist, or seek to repeal, the Fugitive Slave Bill, 
 or use any other means to disturb the quiet of the 
 country, will have no right to consider themselves as 
 Whigs, or as friends of the Administration." The 
 campaign for finality was based upon a misapprehen- 
 sion of the actual situation, and in the end it was a 
 failure ; but its apparent success for a time deluded 
 not only Webster but the majority of moderate people, 
 1 "Writings and Speeches," Vol. XIII, p. 387, 
 
SECRETARY OF STATE UNDER FILLMORE 387 
 
 in both North and South, into thinking that the slavery 
 problem had really reached a solution. 
 
 After the adjournment of Congress, September 30, 
 1850, Webster took advantage of the lack of pressing 
 business in the State Department to spend a Dumber of 
 weeks at Marshfield and Elms Farm in quest of re- 
 lief from his increasingly serious catarrhal trouble. 
 Throughout the ensuing winter he was called upon 
 continually to address public gatherings of widely 
 varied character. On December 22d he attended a 
 Pilgrim Festival in New York, held by former resi- 
 dents of New England, and responded to a toast iuom- 
 of the most impressive brief speeches of his career. ' 
 Nearly all other invitations were declined, but they 
 not uncommonly elicited letters upon public issues 
 which found their way into print and attracted wide- 
 Spread attention. The course which Webster had 
 pursued in the debate on the Compromise continued to 
 be discussed with vigor, and when it appeared that no 
 shred of sympathy with the prevailing antagonism in 
 New England to the enforcement of the fugitive slave 
 law might be expected from him, the condemnation 
 which had been visited upon him by pulpit and aboli- 
 tionist press broke forth afresh. In April, 1 861, when 
 it was proposed to tender him a public reception in 
 Faueuil Hall, the board of aldermen, after arrange 
 ments had been effected informally and Webster had 
 assented to the plan, quite unexpectedly refused the use 
 of the hall for the purpose. In the prevailing stato 
 the public mind the incident aroused tremendous in- 
 terest throughout the country. In Boston there * 
 such indignation that the common council, explaining 
 
 1 "Works of Webster," Vol. II, pp. 517-W8; "Writings and 
 
 Speeches," Vol. IV, pp. 217-226. 
 
388 DANIEL WEBSTEK 
 
 that the use of the hall had been refused to a defender 
 of the Compromise only because it had been refused to 
 Wendell Phillips and other opponents of the measure, 
 signified willingness that the proposed reception be 
 held. 1 Webster, however, declined to appear, declar- 
 ing that he should not enter the ' ' Cradle of American 
 Liberty " until its doors should be thrown open with- 
 out reserve to men of all parties who were " true to the 
 Union as well as to Liberty." 
 
 Throughout the year 1851 the work of the State De- 
 partment continued to be almost exclusively of a routine 
 character. " There never was a time, I think," wrote 
 Webster, "in which our foreign relations were more 
 quiet. There seems no disturbing breath on the sur- 
 face. All the diplomatic gentlemen here are amicably 
 disposed, and our intercourse is quite agreeable." 2 
 There was, however, scant opportunity for the relaxa- 
 tion of which the Secretary stood in need. Even the 
 prosaic tasks of administration could not be delegated 
 wholly to subordinates, and from numerous quarters 
 invitations, some of which could not well be refused, 
 continued to pour in. At the middle of May there was 
 a trip, in the company of President Fillmore and sev- 
 eral members of the cabinet, to western New York for 
 the purpose of participating in the celebration of the 
 opening of the Erie Eailroad, connecting the city of 
 New York with Lake Erie. At Buffalo Webster spoke 
 twice, once upon general lines at a public dinner given 
 in his honor, and again upon the political issues of the 
 day at a great open-air gathering of the people. The 
 
 1 Resolutions of Boston Common Council, April 17, 1851. Van 
 Tyne, <k Letters of Webster," p. 471. 
 
 2 Webster to Blatchford, May 4, 1851 ; Webster, "Private Cor- 
 respondence," Vol. II, p. 441. * 
 
SECEETAEY OF STATE UNDEK FILLMORE 389 
 
 second speech, delivered before an audience vaster than 
 could be reached by the human voice, and amidsl 
 heavy downpour of rain, comprised a remarkably 
 straightforward and convincing defense of the Com- 
 promise and of the principles of the seventh of March. ! 
 On the return journey the President stopped and spoke 
 briefly in numerous towns of central New York, and 
 Webster, who followed some days later, felt obliged tu 
 do the same thing or run the risk, as he said, of being 
 " thought churlish." On May 28th he spoke to a 
 great concourse of people in the square of the state 
 capitol at Albany, again upon the issues involved in 
 the Compromise. 2 Shortly thereafter he sought mo- 
 mentary relaxation in the hills of Virginia ; and at 
 Capon Springs, June 28th, the people from fifty miles 
 around tendered him a public dinner and listened to 
 not only a formal speech but also an impromptu plea 
 for the Union called out by the remarks of another 
 speaker who, while expressing his approval of the 
 principal speech, confessed that he differed from Web- 
 ster upon almost every question of public policy. Ou 
 July 4th the corner-stone of an imposing addition to 
 the Capitol at Washington was laid, and, in accordance 
 with the urgent request of the committee in charge ol 
 the ceremony, and also of the President, Webster de 
 livered the principal address.* Following this came 
 an opportunity to repair to Marshmld, and there and 
 at Elms Farm the next three months were spent. 
 The period was, of course, not entirely devoid 
 
 i" Works of Webster," Vol. II, pp.529-664i » Writing* and 
 
 Speeches," Vol. IV, pp. 231-262. 
 P « JWd. Vol. II, PP. 565-592;/ J^ Vol. I \ '• ~ " **> 
 3 "Writings and Speeches " Vol XIII. pp. 4 ■ 4 n w , 
 
 ♦"Works of Webster," Vol. II, pp. 593-690, Writing mo 
 
 Speeches," Vol. IV, pp. 293-318. 
 
390 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 foreign complications, although none assumed great 
 seriousness. Easily the most notable episode within it 
 was the preparation and transmission of the ' ' Hiilse- 
 mann letter." In April, 1849, the revolution which 
 was sweeping over Austria-Hungary culminated in a 
 declaration of Hungarian independence, and two 
 months later President Taylor commissioned an emis- 
 sary, Dudley A. Mann, to proceed to Hungary to in- 
 vestigate the situation with a view to a recognition of 
 the independence of the country, should conditions be 
 found to warrant such a step. Upon his arrival in 
 Europe the commissioner learned that Hungary had 
 failed to make good her declaration, whereupon, with- 
 out so much as setting foot upon Hungarian soil, he 
 reported that recognition would be without present 
 justification. Unfortunately, the purpose of the mis- 
 sion became known to the Austrian Government, and 
 through the charge d'affaires at Washington, Baron 
 Hiilsemann, protest was lodged with Secretary Clay- 
 ton. Explanations were entered upon, but before the 
 incident was closed there occurred the death of the 
 President and the reorganization of the cabinet, so that 
 the framing of the final reply on the part of the United 
 States devolved upon Webster. 
 
 The reply which was made, under date of December 
 21, 1850, comprised one of the most remarkable docu- 
 ments which has emanated at any time from the State 
 Department. In it Webster defined the past policy of 
 the United States in the matter of recognition, denied 
 that the sending of Mann was an unfriendly act, and 
 asserted the right of the American people to extend 
 their sympathy to oppressed and struggling mankind 
 anywhere and at all times. The tone assumed was One 
 of distinct lordliness. " The power of this republic at 
 
SECEETARY OF STATE UNDER FILLMORE 39i 
 
 the present moment," it was declared, " is spread over 
 a region one of the richest and most fertile on the 
 globe, and of an extent in comparison with which the 
 possessions of the house of Hapsburg are but as a 
 patch on the earth's surface. Its population, already 
 twenty-five millions, will exceed that of the Austrian 
 Empire within the period during which it may be 
 hoped that Mr. Hiilsemann may yet remain in the 
 honorable discharge of his duties to his government. 
 . . . Life, liberty, property, and all personal rights, 
 are amply secured to all citizens and protected l>\ 
 just and stable laws; and credit, public and private, is 
 as well established as in any government of Continental 
 Europe ; and the country, in all its interests and con- 
 cerns, partakes most largely in all the improvements 
 and progress which distinguish the age. Certainly the 
 United States may be pardoned, even by those who 
 profess adherence to the principles of absolute govern 
 ment, if they entertain an ardent affection for those 
 popular forms of political organization which have so 
 rapidly advanced their own prosperity and happiness, 
 and enabled them, in so short a period, to bring their 
 country, and the hemisphere to which it belongs, to 
 the notice and respectful regard, not to Bay the ad- 
 miration, of the civilized world." 1 
 
 To this communication the Austrian char<n\ after 
 receiving instructions, replied that his government 
 remained of the same mind as before, but was not dis- 
 posed to jeopardize the friendship existing between 
 the two countries by prolonging the controversy. 
 Webster reciprocated with an expression of good-will, 
 
 1 " Works of Webster," Vol. VI, p. 496. For the Htt lwn s nn 
 
 correspondence see "Works of Webster," Vol. VI, pp. 48S-506. 
 and "Writings and Speeches,' 7 Vol. XII, pp. 16J-180. 
 
392 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 and tlie incident was closed. That the language em- 
 ployed in the letter quoted savored strongly of spread- 
 eagleism and might hardly have been used with im- 
 punity toward a nation better circumstanced is hardly 
 subject to dispute. The letter was, as one historian 
 fairly characterizes it, il hardly more than a stump 
 speech under diplomatic guise." 1 In a note to his 
 friend Ticknor Webster defended it as follows: "If 
 you say that my Hiilsemann letter is boastful and 
 rough, I shall own the soft impeachment. My excuse 
 is twofold : 1. I thought it well enough to speak out, 
 and tell the people of Europe who and what we are, 
 and awaken them to a just sense of the unparalleled 
 growth of this country. 2. I wished to write a paper 
 which should touch the national pride, and make a 
 man feel sheepish and look silly who should speak of 
 disunion." 2 In short, the letter, while addressed to 
 the representative of Austria, was calculated to make 
 appeal to the peoples of both Europe and America — 
 to inspire in the one a respect for the tremendous 
 progress of the United States and to arouse in the other 
 the spirit of patriotism, pride, and devotion to the Con- 
 stitution under which this progress had been achieved. 
 At a later point in Webster's secretaryship the 
 Hungarian question became again troublesome. Early 
 in 1851 arrangements were procured whereby Louis 
 Kossuth and a number of other Hungarian exiles, held 
 since 1849 as semi-prisoners in Turkey, were to be 
 allowed to be transported to the United States on an 
 American inan-of-war, and in October of the same 
 year the agreement was carried into effect. Upon his 
 
 1 Rhodes, "History of the United States," Vol. I, p. 206. 
 3 Webster to Ticknor, January 16, 1851. Curtis, ''Webster," 
 Vol. II, p. 537. 
 
SECEETAEY OF STATE UNDER FILLMORE 393 
 
 arrival the Hungarian leader was lauded by the Presi- 
 dent in his annual message, presented ceremoniously 
 by Webster at the "White House, received with marks 
 of respect by both branches of Congress, and accorded 
 a continuous ovation wherever he appeared. The 
 effect was to delude him momentarily into thinking 
 that the United States might be induced to furnish 
 diplomatic and financial aid in the establishment of 
 his country's independence. The scrupulous caution 
 of the Secretary of State and other officials, however, 
 together with the awakened sense of the people and 
 the indiscretions of Kossuth himself, made it entirely 
 clear in time that the great agitator and his com- 
 patriots could expect from the United States nothing 
 beyond good-will and hospitality. The attentions 
 which were showered upon Kossuth angered Hiilse- 
 mann, and after a banquet had been tendered the 
 refugee at the capital, January 7, 1852, at which 
 Webster was one of the speakers, formal protest was 
 entered at the State Department. 1 Receiving no atten- 
 tion in this quarter, the charge appealed in person to 
 the President, but only to be told to confine his com- 
 munications to the Department. On April 20, 1852, 
 he informed Webster that his government would not 
 permit him to remain longer u to continue official 
 intercourse with the principal promoters of the much 
 to be lamented Kossuth episode." He did not, how- 
 ever, withdraw at once, and when, in 1853, after 
 Webster's death, there arose the complicated Koszta 
 Case, involving the status of a Hungarian refugee, it 
 was still Hiilsemann who voiced the demands of the 
 Austrian authorities. 
 
 'For Webster's speech upon this occasion see "Writings and 
 Speeches," Vol. XIII, pp. 452-462. 
 
394 DANIEL WEBSTEB 
 
 Aside from certain questions relating to the inter- 
 pretation and execution of the Clayton-Bulwer treaty 
 which began to arise thus early, the only other diplo- 
 matic issue of importance duriug Webster's second 
 secretaryship was that which was created between the 
 U nited States and Spain in consequence of the filibus- 
 tering expeditions of Narcisco Lopez and his followers 
 in Cuba. Lopez was a South American who in 1848 
 had led an unsuccessful revolution in Cuba and who, 
 after being condemned to death, had contrived to 
 escape to the United States. Despite the continued 
 protests of the Spanish minister, Calderon de la Barca, 
 and the efforts of the authorities at Washington, he 
 contrived to fit out in the United States three success- 
 ive filibustering expeditions against the Spanish gov- 
 ernment in Cuba. 1 The last one, undertaken in 
 August, 1851, resulted in his own capture and death 
 and the execution of some fifty of his followers, includ- 
 ing several representatives of well-known Southern 
 families. Throughout the South indignation was in- 
 tense, and at New Orleans, the centre of filibustering 
 activities, a mob attacked the houses and shops of 
 Spaniards, wrecked the Spanish consulate, tore in 
 pieces the Spanish flag, and defaced the portrait of the 
 Spanish Queen. 
 
 On October 14th the Spanish minister, under in- 
 structions, made demand upon the United States for 
 reparation, insisting especially that all property-hold- 
 ers should be indemnified for their losses and that the 
 Spanish flag should be honored in some manner no less 
 conspicuous than that in which it had been insulted. 
 Webster recognized that, in part>t least, the demand 
 was entirely reasonable. He pointed out that such of 
 1 The first did not succeed in reaching the island. 
 
SECRETARY OF STATE UtfDEK FILLMORE 395 
 
 tiie Spaniards who had suffered losses as were not 
 official persons must look to the laws of the United 
 States for protection of their interests, but admitted 
 that such as were Spanish officials, principally the 
 consul, stood upon a different footing and might prop- 
 erly seek redress through the representations of their 
 own goverunieut. There was no precedent upon the 
 subject, but Webster agreed that Congress should be 
 requested to provide for the consul's indemnification 
 in full, and likewise that by means of a ceremony of 
 salutation the honor which was asked for the flag of 
 Spain should be accorded. The adjustment proposed 
 proved acceptable and was carried into effect. So 
 tactfully, indeed, was the situation handled that one 
 hundred and sixty survivors of the Lopez expedition 
 who had been carried to Spain with the prospect of be- 
 ing set to labor in the mines were allowed their liberty, 
 although, being filibusterers, they had no legal claim 
 upon the United States for protection. 1 
 
 1 " Works of Webster," Vol. VI, pp. 507-517, and " WritingB and 
 Speeches," Vol. XII, pp. 181-191. 
 
CHAPTEB XV 
 
 THE ELECTION OF 1852 : LAST PHASES 
 
 With the approach of the year 1852 there was 
 opened a chapter which was destined to be the last, 
 and the most unhappy, of Webster's entire public 
 career, that, namely, comprising the final failure to ob- 
 tain the long-coveted Whig nomination for the presi- 
 dency. The party situation preceding the campaign of 
 1852 was in many respects confused. Nominally, the 
 Whigs were in power ; but the administration of Fill- 
 more, although entirely respectable, was not adapted 
 to command enthusiasm, and in the state and congres- 
 sional elections of 1850 and 1851 much ground was lost, 
 in both North and South, to the Democrats. Apart 
 from slavery, there was an almost utter lack of issues. 
 The tariff, the currency, internal improvements — all 
 were dead or quiescent. And a titanic effort was be- 
 ing made to convince the country that even the slavery 
 question was no more. In the campaign for finality 
 which had been in progress since the adoption of the 
 Compromise the Democrats, at least, had been mark- 
 edly successful. In New York the return of the Barn- 
 burners had restored the discipline of the party ; and 
 the mass of the membership, in North and South 
 alike, was ready to abide by the arrangements that 
 had been effected and to frown down any sort of at- 
 tempt to renew agitation. The Whigs had been less 
 successful. Between the Southern wing of the party, 
 strongly attached to the Compromise, and the Northern 
 wing, large elements of which detested the new fugitive 
 
ELECTION OP 1852 : LAST PHASES 397 
 
 slave law and stood ready to abet its non-enforcement, 
 there yawned a chasm by whose widening the party 
 was destined soon to be rent entirely asnnder. Yet at 
 the opening of 1852 most of the Whig leaders talked of 
 finality with quite as much gusto as did their Demo- 
 cratic rivals, and it was assumed that slavery would 
 play but little part in the ensuing contest. On both 
 sides there was rather more than the customary amount 
 of preliminary discussion and intrigue, centring, how- 
 ever, about candidates, rather than about issues. 
 
 The Democratic convention met at Baltimore, June 
 1st. The unity of the party was completely restored, 
 good feeling prevailed, and no difficulty was encoun- 
 tered in the framing and adoption of a platform declaring 
 for a faithful execution of the Compromise measures 
 (including the fugitive slave law) and announcing the 
 purpose of the party to resist "all attempts at renew- 
 ing, in Congress or out of it, the agitation of the sla- 
 very question, under whatever shape or color the at- 
 tempt may be made." The principal candidates for 
 the nomination were Cass, Buchanan, Marcy, and 
 Douglas. No one of these, however, could obtain the 
 two-thirds majority necessary for a choice, and in the 
 end, on the forty- ninth ballot, a stampede resulted 
 in the naming of a "dark horse," Franklin Pierce, of 
 New Hampshire. 
 
 Two weeks later the Whig convention assembled in 
 the same city — indeed, in the same building. Long- 
 in advance of the meeting three candidates had been 
 brought into the field, and when the convention met it 
 was reasonably certain that to one of the three the 
 nomination would fall. The three were President 
 Fillmore, General Scott, and Webster. The candidacy 
 of Fillmore was entirely natural. His conduct of the 
 
398 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 presidency had been dignified and efficient, his admin- 
 istration was connected in the public mind with the 
 critically important Compromise adjustment ; and, al- 
 though president by chance rather than by the suffrage 
 of the people, the fact that he had a record in office to be 
 approved or disapproved gave him peculiar right to con- 
 sideration. He was in no wise active as a candidate, 
 but he permitted his friends to use his name, and in 
 many portions of the country, notably the South, he 
 acquired a large and determined following. Some of 
 Webster's supporters warmly resented Fillmore's 
 candidacy, but there is no evidence that Webster him- 
 self did so. As a member of the cabinet, he continued 
 on the most agreeable terms with his chief. For the 
 candidacy of General Scott there was little justifica- 
 tion. It was promoted principally by Northern 
 Whigs to whom the Compromise, with which both 
 Fillmore and Webster were identified, was objection- 
 able ; and its further basis was the hope that with a 
 military candidate the triumphs of 1840 and 1848 
 might be duplicated. It might be that, as one of the 
 General's enthusiastic advocates declared, he was 
 "greater than Cortez in his triumphant, glorious, and 
 almost miraculous march from Vera Cruz to the old 
 city of the Aztecs " ; but there was nothing to indicate 
 that he possessed even ordinary qualities of statesman- 
 ship. 
 
 The campaign for the nomination of Webster was 
 begun actively in the autumn of 1851. Now that 
 Clay, by reason of failing health and successive de- 
 feats, was definitely removed from the field, it was 
 considered by the friends of the Massachusetts states- 
 man that the claims of their leader could, and should, 
 no longer be denied. In November, 1851, a gathering 
 
ELECTION OP 1852 : LAST PHASES 399 
 
 of Massachusetts "Whigs promulgated an address to 
 the people, written by Edward Everett, in which, 
 after the qualifications of Webster had been duly 
 extolled, the opinion was expressed that the time 
 had come when the welfare of the country required 
 "that mere party claims should yield to higher 
 considerations," and that in the support of the 
 Massachusetts candidate "good citizens of both par- 
 ties and in both of the great sections of the country 
 might cordially and consistently unite." Similar 
 meetings were held elsewhere, notably one in New 
 York City by which an address of similar purport, 
 written by William M. Evarts, was adopted and put 
 in the course of circulation. A public letter of Clay, 
 urging that the Compromise be regarded as final, was 
 accepted as an expression of good-will toward the 
 Webster candidacy, although nothing was said specif- 
 ically upon that subject. During the winter of 1851- 
 1852 the movement was kept up. Webster himself 
 said and wrote little concerning it, but he followed the 
 efforts of his friends with interest and appreciation. 
 His own public activities at the time, aside from the 
 administration of the State Department, were confined 
 to the making of a number of addresses of a non- 
 political character, chief among them being a discourse 
 on "The Dignity of Historical Compositions," de- 
 livered February 24, 1852, before the New York His- 
 torical Society; 1 a speech before the legislature of 
 Pennsylvania, April 1st ; an address at Annapolis ; and 
 a neighborly talk in Faneuil Hall, May 22d, following 
 partial recovery from a fall from a carriage suffered 
 while driving near Marsh field. 2 
 
 1 "Writings and Speeches," Vol. XIII, pp. 463-497. 
 -Ibid., pp. 510-522. 
 
400 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 In April, 1852, Webster received from a Virginia 
 Whig, G. A. Tavenner, acting in behalf of the South- 
 ern Whigs generally, a solicitous letter of inquiry 
 regarding the purposes of the Northern Whigs in 
 respect to the coming presidential contest and the 
 maintenance of the Compromise of 1850. It was ex- 
 plained that Webster's high reputation and his fidelity 
 to national Whig principles comprised the special 
 reason for addressing such an inquiry to him. The 
 Southern Whigs, it was asserted, had ever exhibited a 
 national spirit during the sectional contests by which 
 the country had been disturbed, and they had assumed, 
 since the adoption of the Compromise, that the ques- 
 tion of slavery would no longer jDrevent concert of 
 action among the members of the party in the various 
 portions of the Union. The disposition in the North, 
 however, to keep up the contest — especially the re- 
 opening of agitation upon the subject of the return of 
 fugitive slaves — had aroused deep apprehension, and 
 had raised again the question as to what the South as 
 a section might expect from the North, and especially 
 from the Northern wing of the great Whig party. 
 "You have the means," it was urged, "of knowing 
 the state of public sentiment at the North. You have 
 been identified with no section, in sectional controver- 
 sies. You occupy a position from which you can 
 speak plainly, and I doubt not your advice will be 
 heeded. We are aware that you will differ from many 
 Southern Whigs on the abstract question of slavery, 
 but we also know that you have always stood forth the 
 bold and fearless defender of the Constitution, and so 
 as that instrument guarantees them to us you have 
 been the advocate of the rights of the South. What 
 then in your opinion has the South a right to expect 
 
ELECTION OF 1852 : LAST PHASES 401 
 
 f roiu the North 1 Upon what platform are the Whigs, 
 North and South, to stand in the coming presidential 
 contest 1 Is the Constitution to be the bond of Union 
 between them? Are the late adjustment measures to 
 be considered a final settlement in principle and sub- 
 stance of all the subjects which they embrace, or is the 
 Whig party henceforth to be a sectional instead of a 
 great national party 1 " l 
 
 The reply addressed by Webster to Tavenner on the 
 following day contains so explicit an affirmation of 
 personal policy and conviction as to be worth quoting 
 in full. It runs : 
 
 "Dear Sir,— I have the honor to acknowledge the 
 receipt of your letter of the 8th inst., and thank you 
 for what you are pleased to say of my fidelity to 
 great national Whig principles. I trust there is not a 
 man in the country who doubts my approbation of 
 those measures, which are usually called ' Compromise 
 Measures,' or my fixed determination to uphold them 
 steadily and firmly. Nothing but a deep sense of duty 
 led me to take the part which I did take in bringing 
 about their adoption by Congress, and that same sense 
 of duty remains with unabated force. I am of opinion 
 that those measures, one and all, were necessary and 
 expedient, and ought to be adhered to, by all friends 
 of the Constitution, and all lovers of their country. 
 That one among them which appears to have given 
 the greatest dissatisfaction, I mean the Fugitive Slave 
 Law, I hold to be a law, entirely constitutional, highly 
 proper, and absolutely essential to the peace of the 
 country. Such a law is demanded by the plain written 
 words of the Constitution ; and how any man can wish 
 
 iTavenuer to Webster, April 8, 1852. Van Tyne, " Letters of 
 Daniel Webster," p. 521. 
 
402 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 to abrogate or destroy it, aiid at the same time say that 
 he is a supporter of the Constitution, and willing to 
 adhere to those provisions in it which are clear and 
 positive injunctions and restraints, passes my power 
 of comprehension. My belief is, that when the pas- 
 sions of men subside, and reason and true patriotism 
 are allowed to have their proper sway, the public 
 mind, North and South, will come to a proper state 
 upon these questions. I do not believe that further 
 agitation can make any considerable progress at the 
 North. The great mass of the people, I am sure, are 
 sound, and have no wish to interfere with such things 
 as are, by the Constitution, placed under the exclusive 
 control of the separate states. I have noticed, indeed, 
 not without regret, certain proceedings to which you 
 have alluded, and in regard to these I have to say that 
 gentlemen may not think it necessary, or proper, that 
 they should be called upon to affirm, by resolution, 
 that which is already the existing law of the land. 
 That any positive movement to repeal or alter, any or 
 all, the Compromise Measures, would meet with any 
 general encouragement, or support, I do not at all be- 
 lieve. But however that may be, my own sentiments 
 remain, and are likely to remain, quite unchanged. I 
 am in favor of upholding the constitution, in the 
 general, and all its particulars. I am in favor of 
 respecting its authority and obeying its injunctions ; 
 and to the end of my life, shall do all in my power 
 to fulfil, honestly and faithfully, all its provisions. I 
 look upon the Compromise Measures as a just, proper, 
 fair, and final adjustment of the questions to which 
 they relate ; and no re-agitation of those questious, no 
 new opening of them, no effort to create dissatisfac- 
 tion with them, will ever receive from me the least 
 
ELECTION OP 1852 : LAST PHASES 403 
 
 countenance or support, concurrence, or approval, at 
 any time, or under any circumstances. " l 
 
 This letter, forthwith given to the press, served to 
 make clear to the entire country the precise position 
 which Webster occupied. There was little or nothing 
 in it that was new ; but it at least demonstrated afresh 
 that Webster stood absolutely immovable for finality. 
 By conservatives its contents were received with favor, 
 but by anti-slavery radicals, with forceful expressions 
 of dissatisfaction. The assurances which it contained, 
 however, did not shake the determination of the South- 
 ern Whigs to give their support first of all to the can- 
 didacy of Fillmore. Many expressed their willingness, 
 in the event of the impossibility of procuring Fillmore's 
 nomination, to turn to Webster, who was much more 
 acceptable than Scott ; but it was apparent before the 
 assembling of the Baltimore convention that only New 
 England, as a section, would vote for Webster on the 
 first ballot.' The hope of the Webster campaigners 
 lay in the prevention of Northern defection to Scott 
 before there should have arisen an opportunity for a 
 Southern turning from Fillmore to Webster. 
 
 The Whig convention, which assembled June 16th, 
 has been characterized rightly as "a theatre of in- 
 trigue." 3 On the opening day the Southern Whigs 
 met and adopted a body of resolutions designed to 
 conciliate all elements, and subsequently these were 
 thrust through the convention without debate as the 
 platform of the party. One of them proclaimed, in 
 effect, the validity of the principle of "state rights," 
 
 1 Webster to G. A. Tavenner, April 9, 1852. Van Tyne, "Let- 
 ters of Daniel Webster," pp. 521-522. 
 
 2 By reason of lingering discontent with the Ashbnrton treaty 
 Maine however, was certain to withhold her support. 
 
 3 Stan wood, "The Presidency," p. 250. 
 
404 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 while another asserted that the Compromise measures 
 of 1850, " the act known as the Fugitive Slave Law 
 included, are received and acquiesced in by the Whig 
 party of the United States as a settlement in principle 
 and substance of the dangerous and exciting questions 
 which they embrace " ; also that the strict enforcement 
 of these measures would be insisted upon, and that all 
 further agitation of "the question thus settled" would 
 be deprecated and resisted. By way of concession to 
 the Northern wing of the party, the term " final " was 
 not employed ; but the finality of the Compromise was 
 in effect declared, none the less. The platform had 
 the approval of Webster's friends and of Webster 
 himself. 
 
 The contest for the nomination of candidates was 
 prolonged and keen. On the first ballot Fillmore re- 
 ceived 133 votes, Scott 131, and Webster 29. Webster 
 had votes from all of the New England states except 
 Maine, although he did not receive the unanimous 
 support of the delegation from his own state. New 
 York gave him two votes, Wisconsin three, and Cali- 
 fornia one. The South gave him none at all. Fill- 
 more received every Southern vote except one ; while 
 Scott was given all of the votes from the North except 
 the twenty-nine that were cast for Webster and sixteen 
 that went to Fillmore. Succeeding ballots showed 
 little change. The highest total attained by Webster 
 was thirty-two. On the fiftieth ballot Southern votes 
 began to be turned from Fillmore to Scott, and on the 
 fifty-third the number of changes was sufficient to ef- 
 fect a nomination. The final result was : Scott, 159 ; 
 Fillmore, 112 ; Webster, 21. 
 
 Inasmuch as under Whig practice a bare majority 
 was required for a nomination, the conservatives who 
 
ELECTION OF 1852 : LAST PHASES 405 
 
 so persistently divided their support between Fillmore 
 and Webster might easily, by combination, have car- 
 ried the day. As Mr. Curtis observes, of the delegates 
 who considered that the policy embodied in the Com- 
 promise Measures ought to be adhered to, and that the 
 candidate of the Whig party ought to be a real rep- 
 resentative of that policy, there were at all times 
 more than enough to have made Mr. Webster the 
 nominee." 1 Similarly, there were enough to have 
 nominated Mr. Fillmore. But no such rapprochement 
 took place, despite the fact that Webster and Fillmore 
 were upon the best of terms personally, that the two 
 men were in Washington during the balloting in the 
 neighboring city, that an intervening Sunday afforded 
 special opportunity for negotiation, and, finally, that a 
 delegate from Buffalo had all the while in his posses- 
 sion a letter written by Fillmore withdrawing from the 
 race, with instructions to present it to the convention 
 at his discretion. Webster's strength with the con- 
 vention was, of course, far greater than his quota of 
 votes would seem to indicate. Yet, to a large degree, 
 his strength was of such a sort that it could not be 
 realized upon, L e., could not be converted into votes. 
 He was the second choice of most of the Fillmore men. 
 But these men were pledged to Fillmore as long as 
 there should appear any chance whatsoever of his 
 nomination, and the fact that Webster could not com- 
 mand the united support of his own section, even of 
 his own state, operated to prevent a turning to him. 
 At one point during the balloting, after the nomina- 
 tion of Fillmore was largely despaired of, the Southern 
 friends of Webster proposed to deliver to the Massa- 
 chusetts candidate one hundred and six Southern votes 
 1 Curtis, " Webster," Vol. II, p. 620. 
 
406 DANIEL WEBSTEE 
 
 provided he could obtain as many as forty votes in the 
 states north of Maryland. These, with the one vote 
 from California which could be counted upon, would 
 insure him the nomination. His Northern supporters 
 worked desperately to meet the condition, but were 
 unable to do so, and when the Southern break came it 
 took the form of a slight, but decisive, defection from 
 Fillmore to Scott. 
 
 Both the action of the convention and the intrigues 
 by which it had been accompanied betrayed the fact 
 that the Whig party, far from possessing the solidarity 
 and strength of conviction which was claimed for it, 
 was in reality in imminent danger of dissolution. In 
 its platform it looked strongly in one direction, in its 
 nomination just as decidedly in another ; and events 
 following the adjournment of the convention tended 
 but to accentuate the weakness of position thus ex- 
 hibited. On July 3d a group of Georgia Whigs, led 
 by Alexander H. Stephens and Eobert Toombs, pub- 
 lished a manifesto announcing their purpose to oppose 
 the election of Scott, on the ground that he was not 
 sufficiently committed to the finality of the Compromise 
 measures. Another group formed an independent 
 Webster ticket, and throughout the South generally it 
 was made plain that the regular nominee of the party 
 would receive scant support. Large numbers of 
 Whigs avowed a purpose to support Pierce, in the 
 promotion of whose election the strength of the Demo- 
 cratic party, in both North and South, was solidly en- 
 listed. On the other hand, the Free Soil element of 
 the party could not acquiesce in either Baltimore plat- 
 form, and at a convention held during the month of 
 August John P. Hale, of New Hampshire, was placed 
 in nomination. In Massachusetts the nomination of 
 
ELECTION OP 1852 : LAST PHASES 407 
 
 Scott was received coldly, and in time an independent 
 Webster electoral ticket was put in the field. This 
 nomination, as that made by the Georgia Whigs, and 
 also one tendered by a Native American convention at 
 Trenton, was received by Webster with no indication 
 of acceptance or refusal. Throughout the country as a 
 whole the campaign, barren of vital issues, was petty 
 and uninteresting. 
 
 To Webster the failure to obtain the nomination at 
 Baltimore brought deep disappointment. Both be- 
 cause of his age and increasing infirmity and because 
 of the precarious condition of his party, failure at this 
 point meant, and was understood to mean, that the 
 long-coveted honor would never be attained. Out- 
 wardly he maintained entire composure, and even an 
 appearance of indifference ; but to his friends he con- 
 fided freely his real feeling of regret. It was not so 
 much the loss of the nomination that distressed him as 
 the fact that, while the Southern delegates had pro- 
 tested that they were ready to give him their support 
 when once the nomination of Fillmore should have be- 
 come impossible, they had failed actually to do so. 
 The reasons which had prevented them from doing so 
 were not of record, and on that account, it seemed to 
 him, a " false chapter in the history of the country' 
 was not unlikely to be written— a chapter in whose 
 pages his hold upon the nation would be taken as in 
 dicated merely by the meagre vote at Baltimore for his 
 nomination. So deeply was the nomination of Scott 
 resented that throughout the course of the campaign 
 Webster could never bring himself to give the Whig 
 candidate an iota of support. Indeed, he freely 
 avowed his belief that the party was approaching dis- 
 solution, and he did not hesitate to advise his friends 
 
408 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 to vote for Pierce, the one candidate who was com- 
 mitted irrevocably to the upholding of the Compromise. 
 He predicted, furthermore, that if, in the event of 
 Pierce's election, the Democratic party should remain 
 faithful to its platform it would long retain the confi- 
 dence of the country and the power of administering 
 the public affairs. 
 
 The outcome of the campaign was the triumph, 
 more overwhelming than any one had dared predict, 
 of the Democrats. General Scott carried but four 
 states — Vermont, Massachusetts, Kentucky, and Ten- 
 nessee — and obtained but forty-two electoral votes; 
 while the two branches of Congress remained solidly 
 Democratic. But when the final show of strength 
 took place the two most eminent founders and leaders 
 of the defeated party were no more. When the con- 
 vention at Baltimore was balloting upon candidates 
 Clay lay dying from consumption in a hotel in 
 Washington, although he lingered until June 29th. 
 The death of Webster occurred at Marshfield on 
 October 24th. 
 
 The physical decline which culminated in Webster's 
 death had set in with some rapidity soon after the 
 assumption for the second time of the portfolio of 
 State. It was attributable in part to the prolonged 
 and severe exertions incident to an active public 
 career, in part to debilitating annual attacks of hay- 
 fever, but, at the last, mainly to an incurable affliction 
 diagnosed as cirrhosis of the liver. When, on the 
 9th of July, he reached Boston on his way to his 
 Marshfield home Webster had been tendered a recep- 
 tion, essentially non-partisan in character, which was 
 declared by witnesses of both events to have been 
 more imposing than that tendered General Lafayette 
 
ELECTION OF 1852 : LAST PHASES 409 
 
 in 1825, and at Marshfield a few days later his coming 
 was honored by a general outpouring of the people 
 from many miles around. Upon both occasions he 
 spoke at length upon lines appropriate to the situa- 
 tion, and these were the last public addresses which 
 he was destined to be able to make. 1 On July 26th he 
 communicated to the President his desire to retire from 
 the cabinet. But Fillmore insisted that he retain his 
 post, returning to Washington only when he should 
 have recovered somewhat in health. Early in August 
 he gained sufficient strength to enable him to make 
 the journey, and he remained at the capital until 
 September 8th. To his reiterated offers to resign the 
 President replied that the office could not at the mo- 
 ment be filled satisfactorily ; and he returned to 
 .Marshfield with the understanding that he should give 
 attention from that place to such public matters as 
 could not be postponed. 
 
 On September 20th he went to Boston for the last 
 time to consult his physician, Dr. Jeffries, and it is 
 recorded that when, in the course of the visit, he con- 
 trived to appear for a few moments at a social gather- 
 ing at the house of a friend, all who saw him were 
 startled by the look of suffering in his face and by his 
 general appearance of feebleness. At Marshfield he 
 continued for a time to entertain visitors, write letters 
 to his friends, and make occasional excursions over his 
 estate; but as the October days went by he grew 
 steadily weaker, until by the middle of the month he 
 was no longer able to leave the house. On the 15th 
 lie revised and corrected an inscription to be placed 
 on his monument, dictated a few days before ; on the 
 18th he undertook the preparation of his will : and on 
 1 " Writings and Speeches," Vol. XIII, pp. 528-542. 
 
410 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 this same day the last letter written by his own hand 
 was addressed to the President. On the 21st he was 
 told that the state elections in Pennsylvania and else- 
 where had resulted in overwhelming victories for the 
 Democrats. "Yes," was his response; "that party 
 will sweep the country ; the Whig candidate will 
 obtain but one or two states ; and it is well ; as a 
 national party the Whigs are ended." When it 
 was mentioned to him that a friend in Boston had 
 expressed the hope that he should remain firm in 
 his opposition to the action of the Baltimore con- 
 vention he requested, half-humorously, that the gentle- 
 man be written to and told to "look over toward 
 Charlestown and see if Bunker Hill monument is still 
 standing ! " On the 22d he gave instructions for the 
 farm work of the day and made provision for the pay- 
 ing of the laborers what was due them. On Saturday, 
 the 23d, his feebleness had so manifestly increased 
 that he began directing, with remarkable fortitude 
 and deliberation, the making of preparations for the 
 end. To his physician he communicated his convic- 
 tion that he should die during the coming night, and 
 the physician could but express his concurrence in the 
 prediction. He affixed his signature to the carefully 
 drawn will, 1 spoke feelingly to his family and servants 
 regarding his wishes for them, made solemn affirmation 
 of his religious convictions, and expressed only the wish 
 that he might be conscious of the act of dying. Some 
 time after midnight he roused from a restless slumber 
 long enough to utter very clearly the words, destined 
 to become memorable, " I still live," and then relapsed 
 into unconsciousness. At twenty -three minutes before 
 
 'The will is printed in "Writings and Speeches," Vol. XIII, 
 pp. 586-591. 
 
ELECTION OF 1852 : LAST PHASES 411 
 
 three o' clock Sunday morning, October 24th, the labored 
 breathing ceased, and the end came. 
 
 For the news of the bereavement the public was not 
 wholly unprepared, yet the intelligence came as a 
 shock, and by it a hush was spread throughout the 
 leugth and breadth of the land. The instant feeling 
 was that a pillar of the state had fallen, and from men 
 of every "class of society, of every political affiliation, 
 and of every sectional attachment, rose tributes of 
 praise for the citizen, the statesman, and the patriot. 
 President Fillmore sent to Marshfield a representative 
 of the State Department to propose and execute ar- 
 rangements for a public funeral. "I wish to be 
 buried," Webster, however, had affirmed in his will, 
 " without the least show or ostentation, but in a 
 manner respectful to my neighbors, whose kindness 
 has contributed so much to the happiness of me and 
 mine" ; and when this request became known, it was 
 agreed that the family did the right thing in declining 
 to permit a public funeral to be held. 
 
 At noon on Friday, October 29th, the people of the 
 community were admitted to the Webster home, and 
 every one who desired to do so was allowed to view 
 the remains of the fallen chieftain, reposing in a coffin 
 placed upon the lawn in front of the mansion-house. 
 It is said that not fewer than ten thousand men and 
 women were present After simple religious services 
 had been held in the house, in the presence of the rela- 
 tives and closer friends, the coffin was raised on the 
 shoulders of six stalwart farmer neighbors who had 
 asked the privilege and carried, followed by the male 
 members of the family, the intimate friends, and the 
 faithful servants, as chief mourners, to the ancient bury- 
 ing-place of Marshfield, where all that was mortal of the 
 
412 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 great niau was committed to earth. "Daniel "Web- 
 ster," a plain -garbed spectator is reported to have 
 exclaimed as he turned from the new-made grave, 
 u the world, without you, will seem lonesome." By 
 hundreds of thousands of people, of every rank and 
 profession, and in every section of the land, the feeling 
 was shared ; and even in European countries it was 
 recognized that there had disappeared a figure which, 
 in a generation notable for its statesmen, orators, and 
 diplomats, was worthy of comparison with the most 
 masterful. 
 
 Daniel Webster was not a paragon of virtues. He 
 had faults, some of which were not only serious but in- 
 excusable. His appetites were not always under con- 
 trol. Although never guilty of peculation, he was 
 habitually careless in money matters, and he was 
 ready to accept the largesses of his friends when it 
 would seem that every consideration of personal dig- 
 nity would have interposed to prevent his doing so. 
 He was inordinately fond of good living and prone to 
 generosity which bordered closely upon prodigality. 
 By his failure to keep under restraint the ambition 
 which burned within him to attain the presidency he 
 permitted his later years to be made feverish and un- 
 happy and his usefulness to his generation to be im- 
 paired. He did not desire the presidency more ardent ly 
 than did Clay. The great Kentuckian had the trying 
 experience of being chosen to bear his party's banner 
 twice when there was but a moderate chance of success, 
 only to be rejected as a candidate in 1840 and in 1848 
 when, as events proved, expectation of victory was 
 well founded. Furthermore, Clay was loved by the 
 mass of the people as Webster never was, and he had 
 more right than had his compeer to expect of them an 
 
ELECTION OF 1852 : LAST PHASES 413 
 
 election to the highest office in the land. Yet of the 
 two men, Clay accepted his ill-fortune much the more 
 patiently. The adulation which was heaped upon 
 Webster by friends and admirers was unquestionably 
 sufficient to turn the head of an ordinary person. But 
 Webster was not an ordinary person, and it must be 
 reckoned against him that in his later years he allowed 
 himself to become at times dictatorial and overbearing 
 and to be guilty of pettishness and ingratitude. His 
 moral vigor, in the trenchant estimate of Mr. Lodge, 
 was not equal to his intellectual force ; and while, as 
 this biographer goes on to point out, it is not often 
 that both moral and intellectual powers of a superla- 
 tive order are combined in a single individual, had they 
 been so combined in Webster the product must have 
 been one of the most extraordinary of characters. 
 
 The physical endowments of the man were much 
 above the average. When in his prime he possessed a 
 robustness of which his childhood gave small promise ; 
 and although his last ten years were shadowed by dis- 
 ease, his bodily vigor was such as to enable him to 
 attain the Scriptural age of threescore and ten. In his 
 social relationships, as in his professional and public 
 life, an asset of very distinct value was the majesty of 
 his personal presence. He was five feet ten inches in 
 height; he had an enormous chest measurement ; his 
 head, which was one of the largest ever borne on 
 human shoulders, was nobly formed ; his brow was 
 high and broad ; his hair was straight and black ; his 
 complexion was swarthy ; and his eyes were large, 
 deep-set, and dark, in moments of earnestness flashing 
 with an intensity that was fairly startling. His 
 visage, although usually kindly, was upon occasion 
 stern, with sometimes a touch of melancholy. In 
 
4U DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 every look and gesture there was the element of com- 
 mand. When he walked down State Street men forgot 
 business in gazing upon him ; when he but entered a 
 room voices were hushed as if the newcomer had been 
 a god. 
 
 Physical impressiveness was matched by excellent 
 qualities of character and by extraordinary powers of 
 intellect. Indeed, it was chiefly these, rather than the 
 stature and Jove-like brow, that lent to the presence of 
 the man its attractive, even awe-inspiring, aspect. 
 Webster was the soul of hospitality, and his various 
 places of residence, whether the humble home in Ports- 
 mouth, the capacious house in Summer Street, or the 
 rambling, but splendid, dwelling at Marshfield, were 
 ever shrines of neighborliness and good fellowship. 
 From childhood he was a voracious reader, and his 
 ability to remember what he read was equaled only by 
 his power of assimilating it. Fluent of speech and 
 widely informed, he was a splendid conversationalist ; 
 yet he commonly preferred to listen rather than to 
 talk. Without being himself a humorist, he had a 
 well-developed sense of humor. His recorded speeches, 
 which are peculiarly stately and serious, furnish vir- 
 tually no evidence of this, but the lack is supplied by 
 his more intimate correspondence and by the testimony 
 of his associates in daily life. He liked a joke, and 
 upon occasion enjoyed sheer boisterousness and fun. 
 He was not inapt at playful allusion, unexpected turns 
 of expression, and mock heroics. But he scorned 
 humor as a mere means of keeping his auditors inter- 
 ested, and he seldom or never indulged in it in his 
 public addresses, or upon any occasion with premedi- 
 tation. 
 
 Webster was an ardent lover of Nature, especially in 
 
ELECTION OF 1852 : LAST PHASES 415 
 
 her larger and grander aspects. A boyhood spent 
 among the New Hampshire hills developed in him a 
 sense of intimacy with trees and streams and wild ani- 
 mals which was never lost. He was fond of hunting 
 and fishing and of every sort of outdoor amusement, 
 and, wearied by the routine of legal practice or of 
 statecraft, he not infrequently turned with boyish de- 
 light to the occupations of the farm. He rejoiced in 
 the sunrise and, when at Marshfield, made it a rule 
 never to miss seeing it. Above all other natural 
 things, he loved the sea. Its vastness and its imper- 
 turbability appealed to his sense of grandeur, and he 
 was not content until he had made for himself a home 
 where he could look out across the Atlantic's broad 
 expanse, ever varying in hue and mood, yet ever the 
 same. Among animals he liked best the massive, 
 slow- moving ox. Shortly before his death, after it 
 had ceased to be possible for him to go out-of-doors, 
 he had his finest oxen driven to the lawn about his 
 house in order that he might have the satisfaction of 
 gazing upon their glossy coats and wondering eyes. It 
 has been said, indeed, that more than his hospitality 
 his herds of fine oxen kept him poor. 1 
 
 Love of country became in Webster a veritable pas 
 sion. His speeches glow with patriotic fervor, and the 
 patriotism which is displayed in them was no mere 
 patriotism of words. When he was first elected to Con 
 gress he had personally, perhaps, more to gain than to 
 lose by entering the public service. He was then but 
 a young, comparatively unknown, and far from aflln 
 ent lawyer. When, however, in 1S22 he was returned 
 to the House of Eepreseutatives from the Boston (lis 
 trict he was fast becoming the most highly reputed and 
 HIcCali, "Daniel Webster," p. 121. 
 
416 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 the most highly paid legal practitioner in America. 
 From that year until his death he was never for more 
 than a few months at a time out of public office. He 
 served nine years, in all, in the House of Eepresenta- 
 tives, nineteen in the Senate, and somewhat more than 
 four as secretary of state. Although, despite the ap- 
 propriation of a large portion of his time and energy 
 to his public duties, he became and long remained the 
 acknowledged leader of the American bar, neither the 
 volume nor the excellence of his legal achievement 
 could be what, under freer conditions, it might have 
 been ; and the pecuniary sacrifice which was involved 
 was very great, the more so by reason of his prodigal- 
 ity in money matters and his taste for somewhat 
 sumptuous living. Patriotism, it should be added, was 
 tempered almost invariably by good sense and by the 
 spirit of fairness. An expansionist by nature, Web- 
 ster could oppose the American demand for the whole 
 of Oregon as unjust, that for the annexation of Texas 
 as likely to lead to war, and that for the conquest of 
 Mexican territory as tending to aggravate the contro- 
 versy of the sections upon the growing question of 
 slavery. If in his famous letter to Hiilsemann he per- 
 mitted himself to indulge in the most brazen spread- 
 eagleism, it was solely, as he was careful to explain to 
 his friends, in the hope that national pride might be 
 stimulated to counteract the sectional animosities of 
 the time. 
 
 It may be doubted whether in sheer power of intel- 
 lect Webster has been matched by any public man in 
 the history of the country. In his own generation he 
 was clearly the superior of Clay and of Calhoun, and, 
 less markedly, of John Quincy Adams and Chief Jus- 
 tice Marshall j and although the native mental ability 
 
ELECTION OF 1852: LAST PHASES 417 
 
 of Lincoln was probably not inferior, opportunities of 
 academic education and of lifelong contact with the 
 sharpest wits of bench, bar, and forum gave Webster 
 a considerable advantage over Lincoln in the attain- 
 ment of purely intellectual strength. It is true that 
 Webster's intellectuality was fitful. He was not at all 
 times " on edge," and some of his legal arguments and 
 congressional speeches were of the most ordinary char- 
 acter. In the make-up of the man there were pro- 
 nounced strains of irresolution and indolence. The 
 fact is one which he was the first to recognize, and in 
 his correspondence he complains again and again of 
 having fallen into a slough of lethargy from which he 
 was unable to extricate himself. His intellectual 
 power is exhibited, not in an ability to work day after 
 day and year after year at high tension, but rather in 
 a capacity for prodigious mental performances under 
 pressure of suddenly risen emergency. The most mas- 
 terful of all of his forensic efforts, notably the Second 
 Reply to Hayne and the speech of the Seventh of 
 March, were preceded by but a few hours of direct 
 preparation. No man not possessed of a mental equip- 
 ment of the first order could have achieved equal 
 results under the circumstances. Retentivenoss of 
 memory, quickness and depth of perception, compre- 
 hensiveness of view, sanity and fairness of judgment, 
 orderliness of thought, and aptness in expression — 
 these are the qualities which combined to produce in 
 Webster a mental forceful n ess well-nigh unsurpassable. 
 The most brilliant and the most lasting of Webster's 
 achievements were accomplished through the medium 
 of eloquence of speech. Regarding the position to be 
 assigned him among American orators there is little or 
 no difference of opinion. He was not always as felici- 
 
418 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 tous iu expression or as splendidly imaginative as was 
 Choate, or as finished in style as was Everett. But no 
 other American has exhibited so perfect a combination 
 of all the varied elements that combine to produce 
 true oratorical power. And among orators of other 
 portions of the English-speaking world none rival him 
 closely save Burke, Fox, and Sheridan. The qualities 
 of his oratory which are most conspicuous are those of 
 intellectuality, stateliness, freedom from invective, and 
 patriotic spirit. In speeches which are so nearly ex- 
 temporaneous as were most of those which he delivered 
 there will be included inevitably a certain amount of 
 that which is trivial and irrelevant. The proportion 
 of this sort of thing in Webster's addresses is, however, 
 small. Men who heard them were impressed with the 
 solidity of their texture, with the range and depth of 
 the information upon which their author drew in their 
 composition. And a study of them nowadays serves 
 but to confirm this impression. Their glitter was that 
 of sharply polished fact, not that of flashy nothingness. 
 
 Webster was not at his best in the give-and-take of 
 every-day debate. He was not notably adept at rapier- 
 like thrusts. He rose to the full measure of his ability 
 only upon some solemn occasion for which he made 
 deliberate preparation, such as the Plymouth com- 
 memoration or the Bunker Hill celebrations ; or 
 when, aroused to the necessity of defending some great 
 principle or measure upon which he felt deeply, he 
 mustered the full quota of his physical and intellectual 
 powers and hurled himself into the combat. His best 
 speeches are, therefore, with few exceptions, his 
 lengthiest. Their superiority arises in part from their 
 very massiveness and conclusiveness. 
 
 By reason of the circumstance that his name is asso- 
 
ELECTION OF 1852 : LAST PHASES 419 
 
 ciated with the initiation of few legislative or other 
 public measures, it sometimes has been assumed that 
 Webster's statesmanship was not of a constructive 
 character. It certainly is true that Webster looms less 
 prominently as an author of bills and of governmental 
 policies than do several of his contemporaries, notably 
 Clay, Calhoun, Jackson, aud even Benton and Van 
 Buren. There are, however, two facts to be observed. 
 In the first place, not only did Webster, during his 
 tenure of the secretaryship of state, display the most 
 splendid qualities of originality and constructiveness ; 
 during his prolonged service in the two branches of 
 Congress he became the author of a large number of 
 bills of importance and participated in the framing of 
 many others. It happened that many of the measures 
 with which he was closely identified dealt with ques- 
 tions, especially judicial and financial, which were 
 overshadowed by other and more largely political 
 issues ; and it happened that many of them failed of 
 adoption. But it should not be overlooked that a 
 large proportion of these measures were, in their es- 
 sentials, adopted after the lapse of time, and that the 
 statesmanship which underlay them received complete 
 vindication. 
 
 In the second place, it is to be observed that the 
 statesmanship of Webster was constructive in the most 
 fundamental of all possible senses, in that it had for its 
 aim nothing less than the moulding of public senti- 
 ment concerning the Constitution to accord with the 
 changing needs of the country. The Constitution was, 
 and is, susceptible of the most varied interpretation 
 and development. Men in Webster's day differed no 
 more widely in their understanding of the instrument 
 than had their fathers. But a concurrence of social 
 
420 DANIEL WEBSTER 
 
 and economic circumstances rendered their differences 
 of view far more dangerous than had been those of 
 earlier times, and it became Webster's task to proclaim 
 to the new generation, in season and out, those funda- 
 mentals of constitutional interpretation by whose ac- 
 ceptance alone the per£>etuity of the nation could be 
 assured. Not all men were convinced, and in the 
 course of time the country was deluged with the blood 
 of a fraternal war. So long, however, as the gener- 
 ation of men to which Webster belonged continued in 
 control of the councils of the nation, the conflagration 
 was averted. To the very end the position maintained 
 by that generation — the generation of Clay, Adams, 
 Jackson, Calhoun, Van Buren, Benton, Fillmore, Cor- 
 win, Berrien, and Mangum — upon the momentous 
 issues of slavery and disunion was of a character es- 
 sentially conservative ; and by no one was the con- 
 servative attitude cultivated more assiduously than by 
 Webster himself. It was only with the rise to domi- 
 nance of the generation of Lincoln, Seward, Chase, 
 Sumner, Wade, Wilson, Toombs, Davis, Yancey, and 
 Stephens that the spirit of radicalism came gradually 
 into the ascendant ; and this was the generation which 
 waged the war. When the contest came, it was the 
 creed of the Union as formulated most lucidly by 
 Webster that supplied the grounds upon which the 
 issue was prosecuted to the bitter end. It is to the 
 essentials of that creed that men of all sections and 
 parties to-day pledge their fidelity, under the aegis of 
 a chastened and hopeful nationality. 
 
BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 In the following list the reader will find mention of the principal 
 materials for the study of the life of Webster in both its private and 
 its public aspects : 
 
 Writings of Webster. The speeches and state papers of Webster have 
 been published, singly and in collections, in numerous editions. 
 The earliest collection of speeches was published at Boston in 
 1830 in a volume entitled " Speeches and Forensic Arguments by 
 Daniel Webster." Of this volume there were several reprints. 
 In 1835 a se cond volume, containing speeches not in the first one, 
 and bearing the same title, was published. In 1843 a third vol- 
 ume was added to the series, containing the more important 
 speeches delivered between 1835 and l8 4 x - ln l8 48 the " Diplo- 
 matic and Official Papers of Daniel Webster " was published, in 
 one volume, by the house of Harper at New York. In 1851 an 
 edition of the " Works of Webster," in six volumes, and edited by 
 Edward Everett, was published at Boston by Little, Brown ami 
 Company. As early as 1857 this collection had reached its tenth 
 edition. It had the benefit of a certain amount of supervision by 
 Webster himself, but it was, of necessity, very incomplete. In 
 1903 a new, full, and substantially definitive edition was published 
 under the title " The Writings and Speeches of Daniel Webster " 
 (Boston, Little, Brown and Company), in eighteen volumes, 
 edited by J. W. Mclntire, and designated as the « National Edi- 
 tion." Included in this edition is a vast quantity of materials 
 gathered from newspapers, pamphlets, public documents, and 
 correspondence preserved in the archives of the New Hampshire 
 Historical Society and in numerous other places. Other collec- 
 tions of prime importance are Fletcher Webster (ed.), " The Pri- 
 vate Correspondence of Daniel Webster," 2 vols. (Boston, 1857), 
 and Claude H. Van Tyne (ed.), " The Letters of Daniel Web- 
 ster" (New York, 1902). With a few minor corrections, the 
 " Private Correspondence " is reprinted as Vols, xvii-xvm of 
 the « Writings and Speeches." The first of the two volumes con- 
 tains the Webster " Autobiography," begun in 1830, but discon- 
 tinued with the events of 1816. Almost all of Webster's more 
 important speeches were printed for contemporary circulation in 
 pamphlet form, and collections of these brochures are preserved 
 in many of the larger libraries of the country. 
 
422 BIBLIOGEAPHY 
 
 Writings of Other Public Men. Paul L. Ford (ed.), " The Writings 
 of Thomas Jefferson," io vols. (New York, 1892- 1899); Gaillard 
 Hunt (ed.), " The Writings of James Madison," 9 vols. (New 
 York, 1900-1910); Stanislaus M. Hamilton (ed.), "The Writ- 
 ings of James Monroe," 7 vols. (New York, 1898-1903); Charles 
 
 F. Adams (ed. ), " Memoirs of John Quincy Adams, comprising 
 portions of his Diary from 1795 to 1848," 12 vols. (Boston, 1874- 
 1877) ; Worthington C. Ford (ed.), " The Writings of John 
 
 Quincy Adams," Vol. I published (New York, 1913 ) ; 
 
 Thomas H. Benton, " Thirty Years' View ; or, a History of the 
 Working of the American Government," 1820-1850, 2 vols. (New 
 York, 1854) ; William Stickney (ed.), Amos Kendall's " Auto- 
 biography " (Boston, 1872) ; Calvin Colton (ed.), " Life, Corre- 
 spondence, and Speeches of Henry Clay," 6 vols. (New York, 
 1857); Richard K. Cralle (ed.), " The Works of John Caldwell 
 Calhoun," 6 vols. (New York, 1853— 1855) ; J. Franklin Jameson 
 (ed.), " Correspondence of John C. Calhoun," in Annual Report 
 of American Historical Association for 1899, Vol. II (Washing- 
 ton, 1900) ; Edward Everett, " Orations and Speeches on Various 
 Occasions," 4 vols. (Boston, 1853-1868); Samuel G. Brown (ed.), 
 "The Works of Rufus Choate," 2 vols. (Boston, 1862); and 
 
 G. E. Baker (ed.), " The Works of William H. Seward," 5 vols. 
 (New York, 1853- 1884). 
 
 Neivspapers. Boston Atlas, Daily Advertiser ; New York Trjbune t 
 Times, Courier and Inquirer, Evening Post, Herald ; Charleston 
 Mercury; Richmond Enquirer; National Intelligencer ; Niles' 
 Weekly Register (later National Register). 
 
 Eulogies. Among the more important of the vast number of printed 
 contemporary sermons and other discourses on the career and char- 
 acter of Webster, the following may be mentioned ; Henry A. 
 Boardman, " A Discourse on the Life and Character of Daniel 
 Webster" (Philadelphia, 1852); Theodore Parker, "A Discourse 
 Occasioned by the Death of Daniel Webster," preached at the 
 Melodeon on Sunday, October 31, 1852 (Boston, 1853); T. T. 
 Davis, " Eulogy delivered in Syracuse, N. Y., November 13, 
 1852" (Syracuse, 1852); R. D. Hitchcock, " A Eulogy on Daniel 
 Webster, delivered before the Students of Bowdoin College, No- 
 vember 12, 1852" (Brunswick, 1852); Timothy Walker, " Ora- 
 tion on the Life and Public Services of Daniel Webster, delivered 
 before the Bar of Cincinnati, November 22, 1852" (Cincinnati, 
 1852) ; W. P. Lunt, " A Discourse delivered in Quincy, Mass., on 
 Thanksgiving Day, November 25, 1852, commemorative of Dan- 
 iel Webster" (Boston, 1852) ; Alphonso Taft, "An Oration on 
 the Life and Public Services of Daniel Webster, delivered De- 
 cember 12, 1852" (Cincinnati, 1852); "Obituary Addresses on 
 the Occasion of the Death of Daniel Webster, delivered in the 
 Senate and House of Representatives, December 14-15, 1852 " 
 (Washington, 1853); E. D. Sanborn, " A Eulogy on Daniel Web- 
 
BIBLIOGEAPHY 423 
 
 ster, delivered before the Students of Phillips Academy, December 
 29, 1852" (Hanover, 1853) ; H. W. Allen, « Eulogy on the Char- 
 acter and Services of the Late Daniel Webster, pronounced at the 
 request of the Select and Common Councils of Philadelphia, Jan- 
 uary 18, 1853" (Philadelphia, 1853); Hiram Ketchum, "A 
 Eulogy on the Late Daniel Webster before the Faculty and Stu- 
 dents of Yale College, January 18, 1853 " (New Haven, 1853) ; 
 and Rufus Choate, " A Discourse before the Faculty, Students, 
 and Alumni of Dartmouth College, July 27, 1853 " (Boston, 
 1853). See Charles H. Hart, " Bibliographia Websteriana. A 
 List of the Publications occasioned by the death of Daniel Web- 
 ster" (Philadelphia, 1853). 
 
 Biographies. The standard biography, written in part from first-hand 
 knowledge, but inclined to be eulogistic, is George Ticknor Cur- 
 tis, "Life of Daniel Webster," 2 vols. (New York, 1870). Mr. 
 Curtis was one of Webster's literary executors. The best brief 
 biography, although open to criticism in some of its judgments, is 
 Henry Cabot Lodge, " Daniel Webster " (Boston, 1883). Other 
 more recent biographies or biographical sketches are : John Bach 
 McMaster, " Daniel Webster " (New York, 1902), in part re- 
 printed from the Century Magazine ; Norman Hapgood, " Dan- 
 iel Webster" (Boston, 1899), in the "Beacon Biographies"; 
 Samuel W. McCall, " Daniel Webster " (Boston, 1902), the Web- 
 ster Centennial Oration delivered at the Dartmouth commemora- 
 tive celebration of September, 190 1 ; and Sidney George Fisher, 
 "The True Daniel Webster" (Philadelphia, 1911). Among 
 older books of a biographical nature may be mentioned Charles 
 W. March, " Reminiscences of Congress " (New York, 1850) ; 
 B. F. Tefft, " Daniel Webster, His Life and Character " (Roches- 
 ter, 1852) ; Joseph Banvard, " The American Statesman ; or, the 
 Life and Character of Daniel Webster " (Boston, 1853); Charles 
 Lanman, " The Private Life of Daniel Webster " (New York, 
 1858) ; and Peter Harvey, " Reminiscences and Anecdotes of 
 Daniel Webster" (Boston, 1877). Finally should be mentioned 
 Edward Everett's " Biographical Memoir of Daniel Webster," 
 printed in the " Works of Webster," Vol. I, pp. 1-160, and in 
 the " Writings and Speeches," Vol. I, pp. 1 — 175. 
 
 General Essays, Speeches, and Sketches. Joel Parker, " Daniel Web- 
 ster as a Jurist" (Cambridge, 1853); Henry Cabot Lodge, 
 " Daniel Webster," in " Studies in History " (Boston, 1884), and 
 " Daniel Webster," in " A Fighting Frigate and Other Essays anil 
 Addresses" (New York, 1902); Everett P. Wheeler, "The Con- 
 stitutional Law of the United States as Moulded by Daniel Web- 
 ster " (New York, 1904), and " Daniel Webster, the Expounder 
 of the Constitution" (New York, 1905); Albert E. Pillsbury, 
 » Daniel Webster the Orator " (Boston, 1903) ; Elizabeth P. 
 Gould, " John Adams and Daniel Webster as Schoolmasters " 
 (Boston, 1903) ; E. P. Whipple, " Great Speeches and Orations 
 
424 BIBLIOGEAPHY 
 
 of Daniel Webster, with an Essay on Webster as a Master of 
 English Style" (Boston, 1879) ; Josiah H. Benton, "A Notable 
 Libel Case ; the Criminal Prosecution of Theodore Lyman, Jr., 
 by Daniel Webster in the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachu- 
 setts," November Term, 1828 (Boston, 1904); Eugene Pivary, 
 "Webster and Kossuth" (Philadelphia, 1909); and William C. 
 Wilkinson, " Daniel Webster, a Vindication ; with other Histor- 
 ical Essays" (New York and London, 191 1). Of addresses upon 
 commemorative occasions, in addition to the eulogies heretofore 
 mentioned, there are many. The more important are : Edward 
 Everett, " An Oration on the Occasion of the Dedication of the 
 Statue of Daniel Webster in Boston, September 17, 1859 " (Bos- 
 ton, 1859) ; " Proceedings at the Inauguration of the Statue of 
 Daniel Webster, erected in Central Park, New York, July 4, 
 1876" (New York, 1876) ; T. H. Cummings (ed.), " The Web- 
 ster Centennial. Proceedings of the Webster Historical Society 
 at Marshfield, Mass., October 12, 1882" (Boston, 1883); and 
 Ernest M. Hopkins (ed.), " The Proceedings of the Webster Cen- 
 tennial. The Commemoration by Dartmouth College of the 
 Services of Daniel Webster to the College and the State " (Han- 
 over, 1902). 
 
 General Histories of the Period and Monographs. James Schouler, 
 " History of the United States," 7 vols. (New York, 1880-19 13) ; 
 John Bach McMaster, " History of the People of the United 
 States," 8 vols. (New York, 1883-1913) ; Albert B. Hart (ed.), 
 " The American Nation " (New York, 1904-1907), Vols. XII- 
 XVIII ; Hermann Von Hoist, " Constitutional and Political His- 
 tory of the United States," 8 vols. (Chicago, 1885-1892); James 
 Ford Rhodes, " History of the United States from the Compro- 
 mise of 1850," 7 vols. (New York, 1893-1906) ; Henry Wilson, 
 " The Rise and Fall of the Slave Power in America," 3 vols. 
 (Boston, 1872-1877); Edward Stanwood, " History of the Presi- 
 dency " (Boston, 1898), and " History of American Tariff Con- 
 troversies," 2 vols. (Boston, 1903) ; Charles McCarthy, " The 
 Antimasonic Party " (American Historical Association Report, 
 1902, Vol. I) ; Jesse S. Reeves, " American Diplomacy under 
 Tyler and Polk" (Baltimore, 1907). 
 
 Biographies of Public Men. Henry Adams, " Life of Albert Gallatin " 
 (Philadelphia, 1879); Sidney H. Gay, " James Madison " (Bos- 
 ton, 1884); Gaillard Hunt, "Life of James Madison" (New 
 York, 1902) ; Henry C. Lodge, " Life and Letters of George 
 Cabot" (Boston, 1878); Daniel C. Gilman, "James Monroe" 
 (Boston, 1883); William G. Sumner, " Andrew Jackson" (rev. 
 ed., Boston, 1899) 5 J orm S. Bassett, " Life of Andrew Jackson," 
 2 vols. (New York, 1911); John T. Morse, "John Quincy 
 Adams" (Boston, 1882); Edward M. Shepard, "Martin Van 
 Buren" (Boston, 1888) ; Lyon G. Tyler, " Letters and Times of 
 the Tylers," 3 vols. (Richmond, 1884- 1896) ; ^* r l Schurz, 
 
BIBLIOGEAPHY 425 
 
 " Henry Clay," 2 vols. (Boston, 1887); Thomas H.Clay, " Henry 
 Clay" (Philadelphia, 1910); Andrew C. McLaughlin, "Lewis 
 Cass " (Boston, 1891) ; Hermann Von Hoist, " John C. Calhoun " 
 (Boston, 1882) ; Gaillard Hunt, "John C. Calhoun" (Philadel- 
 phia, 1908); Theodore Roosevelt, "Thomas H. Benton" (Bos- 
 ton, 1888) ; Joseph M. Rogers, " Thomas H. Benton" (Philadel- 
 phia 1905); Frederic Bancroft, " Life of William H. Seward," 2 
 vols' (New York, 1900); Thornton H. Lothrop, " William PL 
 Seward" (Boston, 1896); Edward E. Hale, " William 11. Sew- 
 ard " (Philadelphia, 1910) ; Albert B. Hart, " Salmon P. Chase 
 (Boston, 1899) ; William W. Story, " Life and Letters of Joseph 
 Story," 2 vols. (Boston, 185 1). 
 
INDEX 
 
 Adams, John, Webster's eulogy 
 on, 160-161. 
 
 Adams, John Quincy, presidential 
 candidate in 1824, 149-152; 
 policy in respect to appoint- 
 ments, 153-155 ; candidate in 
 1828, 157-158; supported by 
 Webster, 190-19 1. 
 
 Andover, Webster speaks at, 
 324-327. 
 
 Antimasonic Party, Webster's at- 
 titude toward, 233-234 ; nomi- 
 nates Wirt for the presidency, 
 
 235- 
 
 Apportionment, Webster's report 
 
 upon, 244-245. 
 Aroostook War, 308-309. 
 Ashburton, Lord, negotiates treaty 
 
 of Washington, 308-314. 
 Austria, protests against the Mann 
 
 mission, 390. 
 
 Baldwin, Henry, introduces 
 tariff bill in 1820, 173. 
 
 Baltimore, Democrats nominate 
 Pierce at, 397 ; Whigs nomi- 
 nate Scott at, 403-404. 
 
 Bank, established in 1816, 100- 
 106 ; Jackson's attitude toward, 
 238 ; veto of bill to re-charter, 
 239-242 ; bills to re-charter 
 vetoed by Tyler, 299-300. 
 
 Benton, Thomas II., speaks on 
 Foote's Resolution, 207. 
 
 Birney, James G., nominated for 
 president in 1S43, 323. 
 
 Bonus Bill, supported by Webster, 
 109. 
 
 Boscawen, Webster begins prac- 
 tice of law at, 61. 
 
 Boston, .Webster studies law in, 
 55—57 ; Webster removes to, 
 III; constitutional convention 
 at, 1 26-131 ; Webster elected 
 to Congress from, 135-136. 
 
 Boston Anthology, Webster's 
 contributions to, 62. 
 
 Brinkerhoff, Jacob, author of the 
 Wilmot provisos, 350. 
 
 Brown, Francis, appointed presi- 
 dent of Dartmouth College, 1 14. 
 
 Buchanan, James, presidential 
 candidate in 1852, 397. 
 
 Buckminster, John S., tutor of 
 Webster at Exeter Academy, 3 1 . 
 
 Buffalo, Webster speaks at, 388- 
 
 389- 
 Bunker Hill, corner-stone of 
 monument laid, 159; Web- 
 ster's oration at completion of 
 monument, 320-322. 
 
 Calhoun, John C, chairman of 
 House Committee on Foreign 
 Relations, 82 ; reports bill for 
 repeal of embargo of 1 813, 94 ; 
 introduces Bank Bill of 18 16, 
 105 ; introduces Bonus Bill, 
 109 ; vice-presidential candi- 
 date in 1824, 15 1 ; fails to at- 
 tain the presidency, 230 ; 
 speaks in opposition to the 
 Force Bill, 252 ; becomes sec- 
 retary of state, 329 ; speech on 
 Compromise of 1850, 368. 
 
 California, question of status of 
 slavery in, 364-365 ; discovery 
 of gold, 365 ; adopts a consti- 
 tution, 366 ; admitted as a free 
 state, 367. 
 
INDEX 
 
 427 
 
 Capon Springs, Webster speaks 
 at, 389. 
 
 Carlyle, Thomas, estimate of 
 Webster, 287-288. 
 
 Caroline, destruction of, 305. 
 
 Cass, Lewis, nominated for presi- 
 dency in 1848, 355 ; defeated, 
 360 ; presidential candidate in 
 1852, 397. 
 
 Caucus, Webster's objection to, 
 
 I 5 2 - 
 
 Chase, Salmon P., speech on 
 
 Compromise of 1850, 374-375- 
 
 Choate, Rufus, succeeds Webster 
 in the Senate, 296. 
 
 Clay, Henry, reelected Speaker, 
 82 ; defends Webster's Greek 
 resolution, 142 ; presidential 
 candidate in 1824, 149-152; 
 views on the tariff, 175— 178 ; 
 presidential candidate in 1832, 
 231-237, 245 ; advocates a 
 compromise tariff measure, 250- 
 254 ; introduces resolution to 
 censure Jackson, 261 ; fails to 
 attain presidential nomination 
 in 1840, 290; refuses to enter 
 Harrison's cabinet, 293 ; in- 
 troduces resolutions in Senate 
 in 1 84 1, 297-298; presidential 
 candidate in 1844, 323, 330; 
 defeated by Polk, 333 ; pro- 
 poses Compromise measures, 
 366-368. 
 
 Constitution, interpreted by Web- 
 ster in debate with Hayne, 
 213-220; and in reply to Cal- 
 houn in 1833, 252-254. 
 
 Crawford, William H., presi- 
 dential candidate in 1824, 151. 
 
 Creole \ case of, 312-313. 
 
 Crimes Act, passed, 146. 
 
 Cuba, filibustering expeditions of 
 
 Lopez, 394-395- 
 Cumberland Road Bill, supported 
 
 by Webster, 147-148. 
 Currency, demoralization during 
 
 war of 181 2, 101 ; Webster's 
 
 views in 1833, 260-261 ; dis- 
 
 orders in Van Buren's admin- 
 istration, 280-281 ; proposals 
 for reform, 284. 
 
 Dallas, Alexander J., recom- 
 mends establishment of a Bank, 
 10 1 ; report on the tariff, 107. 
 
 Dartmouth College, Webster en- 
 ters, 34 ; history, 35 ; Web- 
 ster's experiences at, 36-45 ; 
 Phi Beta Kappa oration at, 77 ; 
 case of, 1 1 3-1 19; case before 
 the Supreme Court, 119- 126; 
 decision of the case, 125-126. 
 
 Democratic Party, origins, 157- 
 158, 229; in election of 1836, 
 275-280; in election of 1840, 
 291-293 ; nominates James K. 
 Polk, 331 ; success in election 
 of 1844, ZZl'y defeat in 1848, 
 355-360; recovers strength in 
 1850-1851,396; nominates 
 Pierce for the presidency, 397 ; 
 triumph of 1852, 408. 
 
 Douglas, Stephen A., advocates 
 " squatter sovereignty," 364 ; 
 presidential candidate in 1852, 
 
 397- 
 
 Election of 1824, 148-155 ; of 
 1828, 157-158; of 1832, 231- 
 237; of 1836, 274-2S0; of 
 1840, 289-293; of 1844, 330- 
 333; of 1848, 355-3 6 °; of 
 1852, 395-408. 
 
 Elms Farm, location, 23. 
 
 Embargo, Webster's attitude 
 toward act of 1807, 75-76 ; act 
 of 1 813 repealed, 94-96. 
 
 Erie Railroad, opened, 38S. 
 
 Expunging Resolution, introduced 
 by Benton, 270 ; opposed by- 
 Webster, 270-271. 
 
 Faneuil Hall, controversy over 
 closing to Webster, 387-388. 
 
 Fillmore, Millard, elected vice- 
 president, 360 ; succeeds to the 
 presidency, 375 ; appoints Web- 
 
428 
 
 INDEX 
 
 ster secretary of state, 382- 
 383 ; candidate for the presi- 
 dential nomination in 1852, 
 397-398, 403-406. 
 
 Fletcher, Grace, married to Web- 
 ster, 67 ; character, 68. 
 
 Foote, Samuel A., introduces 
 resolution regarding public 
 lands, 206. 
 
 Force Bill, recommended by Jack- 
 son, 249 ; enacted, 254. 
 
 Fiance, friction with in Jackson's 
 administration, 265-268. 
 
 Free Soil Party, Webster's lack 
 of sympathy with, 359. 
 
 Fryeburg Academy, Webster 
 teaches in, 49-50. 
 
 Fugitive Slave Law, attacked, 
 385-386. 
 
 Gore, Christopher, Webster 
 studies in office of, 55-57 ; ad- 
 vises Webster not to accept a 
 judicial clerkship, 57. 
 
 Great Britain, visited by Web- 
 ster, 286-288 ; difficulties of 
 United States with, 304-307 ; 
 treaty of Washington concluded 
 with, 309-314; influence in 
 Texas feared, 328-329 ; settle- 
 ment of Oregon controversy 
 with, 337-339. 
 
 Greece, struggle for independ- 
 ence, 139; Webster's speech 
 concerning, 139-143. 
 
 Guadelupe Hidalgo, treaty of, 
 354- 
 
 Hanover, N. H., Webster's 
 Fourth of July oration in 1800, 
 44. 
 
 Harrisburg, Whig convention at, 
 290. 
 
 Harrison, William H., nomi- 
 nated for presidency in 1836, 
 279 ; nominated in 1839, 290 ; 
 elected president, 293 ; offers 
 cabinet posts to Clay and Web- 
 ster, 293-295 ; death, 297. 
 
 Hartford Convention, 97-98. 
 
 Hayne, Robert Y., early political 
 career, 207 ; debate with Web- 
 ster, 208-224. 
 
 Holmes, John, in Dartmouth Col- 
 lege Case, 118, 124. 
 
 Hopkinson, Joseph, in Dartmouth 
 College Case, 118. 
 
 Hungary, Mann's mission to, 390 ; 
 arrival of Louis Kossuth from, 
 
 392. 
 
 Hiilsemann, Baron, presents Aus- 
 trian protest against Mann mis- 
 sion, 390 ; receives reply from 
 Webster, 390-391 ; protests 
 against reception of Kossuth, 
 
 392-393. 
 
 Illinois, Webster acquires land 
 
 in, 283-284. 
 Independent Treasury, estab- 
 lished, 284 ; abolished, 298 ; 
 
 reestablished, 344. 
 Ingersoll, Charles J., attack upon 
 
 Webster, 339-342. 
 Internal Improvements, Webster 
 
 supports the Bonus Bill, 109 ; 
 
 favors Cumberland Road Bill, 
 
 147. 
 
 Jackson, Andrew, presidential 
 candidate in 1824, 149-152 ; 
 candidate in 1828, 157-158 ; 
 opposed by Webster, 190 ; in- 
 augurated president, 194- 1 95 ; 
 first annual message, 205 ; ve- 
 toes Maysville Road Bill, 226 ; 
 favors Van Buren as successor, 
 231 ; vetoes Bank Bill, 239- 
 242; reelected in 1832, 245 ; 
 issues proclamation against 
 South Carolina nullifiers, 246- 
 247 ; recommends enactment 
 of Force Bill, 249 ; determines 
 upon removal of deposits, 259- 
 260 ; protests against censure 
 by Senate, 262 ; assumes firm 
 tone toward France, 265-266 ; 
 issues Specie Circular, 281. 
 
INDEX 
 
 429 
 
 Jefferson, Thomas, Webster's 
 eulogy on, 160-161. 
 
 reply to Webster's resolutions 
 of 1813, 85-86. 
 
 Kingston, birthplace of Ebenezer 
 
 Webster, 17. 
 Koszta Case, 393. 
 
 Liberty Party, convention of 
 
 1843. 3 2 3- 
 Lincoln, Levi, refuses to be 
 
 candidate for the Senate, 164. 
 
 Lopez, Narcisco, filibustering ex- 
 peditions, 394-395- 
 
 Lyman, Theodore, sued by Web- 
 ster for libel, 191-194. 
 
 Madison, James, war policy 
 called in question, 83-85 ; de- 
 mands increase of the army, 
 97 ; vetoes Bank Bill of 1815, 
 102 ; approves Bank Bill of 
 1816, 106; vetoes Bonus Bill, 
 109. 
 
 McLeod, Alexander, case of, 305- 
 
 3°7, 339-34L 
 Mallary, Rollin C, introduces 
 
 tariff bill, 181. 
 Mann, Dudley A., mission to 
 
 Austria- Hungary, 390. 
 Marcy, William L., presidential 
 
 candidate in 1852, 397. 
 Marshall, John, renders decision 
 
 in Dartmouth College Case, 
 
 I2 5- 
 
 Marsh field, acquired and de- 
 veloped by Webster, 3 1 7-3 19. 
 
 Mason, Jeremiah, Webster's 
 earlier acquaintance with, 70- 
 71 ; attorney in Dartmouth 
 College Case, 115. 
 
 Massachusetts, revision of consti- 
 tution in 1820, 1 26-13 1. 
 
 Mexico, war with, 344-346 ; 
 treaty of Guadelupe Hidalgo, 
 
 354- 
 Mills, Elijah H., retirement from 
 
 Senate, 163. 
 Monroe, James, explanation in 
 
 National Republicans, in elec- 
 tion of 1828, 157-158 ; in elec- 
 tion of 1832, 231-237. 
 
 Nature, Webster's love of, 415. 
 
 New England, growth of popula- 
 tion, 15-17 ; life in, 19-20 ; at- 
 titude toward protectionism, 
 170-186. 
 
 New Hampshire, early life in, 
 19-20 ; ratifies the Constitu- 
 tion, 22. 
 
 New Mexico, question of status 
 of slavery in, 364-365, 367. 
 
 New Orleans, Spanish consulate 
 attacked, 394-395. 
 
 Niblo's Garden, Webster's speech 
 at, 282. 
 
 Nullification, in South Carolina, 
 246-255. 
 
 Oratory, Webster's achieve- 
 ments in, 417-418. 
 
 Oregon, various claims to, 336 ; 
 disputed by Great Britain and 
 United States, 337-338. 
 
 Panama Congress, Webster's 
 speech on, 156. 
 
 Phillips Exeter Academy,' at- 
 tended by Webster, 30-32. 
 
 Pierce, Franklin, nominated for 
 president, 397 ; elected, 408. 
 
 Plymouth, bicentennial celebra- 
 tion in 1820, 131-132; Web- 
 ster's oration, 132-134. 
 
 Plumer, William, elected gov- 
 ernor of New Hampshire, 114- 
 
 "5- 
 
 Polk, James K., nominated for 
 
 presidency, 331 ; gives notice 
 to Great Britain concerning 
 Oregon, 338 ; policy during 
 Mexican War, 344-354. 
 Portsmouth, Webster removes to, 
 65 ; fire, 87. 
 
430 
 
 INDEX 
 
 Randolph, John, challenges 
 Webster to a duel, 108. 
 
 Rockingham Memorial, written 
 by Webster, 79-80. 
 
 Salisbury, incorporated, 17 ; 
 Webster teaches school at, 40. 
 
 Scott, Win field, presidential pos- 
 sibility in 1848, 355; candi- 
 date for presidential nomina- 
 tion in 1852, 398; receives 
 nomination, 404 ; defeated by 
 Pierce, 408. 
 
 Sectionalism, growth of, 199- 
 202. 
 
 Seward, William H., speech on 
 Compromise of 1850, 374-375- 
 
 Slavery, Webster's attitude 
 toward, 346-349 ; proposals to 
 exclude from new territory, 
 350 ; questions after Mexican 
 War, 363-366 ; in Compromise 
 of 1850, 366-382. 
 
 Slave Trade, provision of Treaty 
 of Washington concerning, 311. 
 
 Smith, Jeremiah, attorney in 
 Dartmouth College Case, 115. 
 
 South Carolina, " Exposition," 
 203-205 ; nullification in, 246- 
 
 255- 
 Spain, demands reparation for 
 
 New Orleans outrage, 394- 
 
 395- 
 Specie Circular, 280-281. 
 
 Stevens, Ebenezer, obtains grant 
 on the Merrimac, 17. 
 
 Stevenstown, founded, 17 ; Ebe- 
 nezer Webster settles at, 18. 
 
 Supreme Court, Webster begins 
 practice in, 96 ; decision in 
 Dartmouth College Case, 125- 
 126 ; Webster's proposal to in- 
 crease membership, 144. 
 
 Tariff, bill passed in 1816, 107- 
 108 ; Hamilton's proposals 
 concerning, 170; Webster's 
 earlier views on, 17 1 - 17 2 ; the 
 Baldwin bill, 173 ; Webster's 
 
 views in 1820, 174-176; his 
 views in 1824, 177-180 ; the 
 Mallary bill, 181 ; act of 1828, 
 182 ; Southern discontent con- 
 cerning, 202-206 ; Jackson's 
 attitude toward, 205-206 ; nul- 
 lification in South Carolina, 
 246-249 ; Compromise meas- 
 ure of 1833, 250-254 ; report 
 by Robert J. Walker, 343 ; act 
 of 1846, 343. 
 
 Tavenner, G. A., Webster's cor- 
 respondence with, 400-403. 
 
 Taylor, Zachary, in Mexican 
 War, 344 ; becomes a presi- 
 dential candidate, 355-357 ; 
 nominated in 1848, 357 ; 
 elected, 360 ; Webster's atti- 
 tude toward, 361-363 ; death, 
 
 375> 382. 
 Texas, asks for annexation to the 
 United States, 328 ; treaty of 
 annexation, 330-332 ; Webster 
 opposes annexation, 332 ; an- 
 nexed by joint resolution, 334, 
 
 Thompson, Thomas W., Webster 
 studies law with, 47-48. 
 
 Trist, Nicholas P., negotiates 
 treaty of Guadelupe Hidalgo, 
 
 354. 
 
 Troup, George M., reports en- 
 listment bill, 90. 
 
 Tyler, John, nominated for vice- 
 president, 290 ; becomes presi- 
 dent, 297 ; breaks with the 
 Whigs, 298-301 ; submits 
 treaty annexing Texas, 330 ; 
 renews proposal for annex- 
 ation, 334 ; defends Webster, 
 
 34i- 
 
 Upshur, Abel P., advocates an- 
 nexation of Texas, 329. 
 
 Van Buren, Martin, favored 
 by Jackson as successor, 231 ; 
 nomination as minister to Great 
 Britain rejected, 243-244; 
 
INDEX 
 
 431 
 
 elected vice-president, 245 ; 
 nominated for the presidency, 
 274; elected president, 279- 
 280 ; advocates the Independ- 
 ent Treasury, 284; candidate 
 for reelection, 291-293; fails 
 of Democratic nomination in 
 1844, 331 ; nominated by;Free- 
 Soilers in 1848, 359. 
 Verplanck, G. C, reports tariff 
 bill, 250. 
 
 Walker, Robert J., report on 
 
 the tariff, 343. 
 Washington, treaty of, 309-314; 
 
 treaty, defended by Webster, 
 
 34°- 
 Webster, Daniel, birth, 23 ; child- 
 hood, 24 ; early attendance at 
 school, 25-26 ; intellectual apt- 
 ness, 27 ; makes acquaintance 
 of the Constitution, 28 ; at 
 Phillips Exeter Academy, 30- 
 31 ; backwardness in declama- 
 tion, 31-32 ; studies with Dr. 
 Wood, 32-34; enters Dart- 
 mouth, 34; studies and tastes 
 in college, 36; procures col- 
 lege education for brother Eze- 
 kiel, 38-39 ; comments on poli- 
 tics in 1800, 41-43; acquires 
 facility in public speaking, 43- 
 44 ; delivers Fourth of July 
 speech at Hanover, 44 ; gradu- 
 ation, 45 ; adopts profession of 
 law, 47 ; studies with Mr. 
 Thompson, 47-48 ; becomes 
 instructor at Fryeburg Acad- 
 emy, 49-50; resumes law 
 studies, 52-53 ; goes to Boston, 
 55 ; in office of Christopher 
 Gore, 55-57 ; appointed to a 
 judicial clerkship, 57 ; refuses 
 the appointment, 58 ; admitted 
 to the bar, 59; practices at 
 Boseawen, 61-64; contributes 
 to Boston Anthology, 62 ; re- 
 moves to Portsmouth, 65 ; first 
 marriage, 67 ; family life, 68; 
 
 growth in professional experi- 
 ence, 69 ; relations with Jere- 
 miah Mason, 70-7 1 , Federal- 
 ist sympathies, 73-75 ; pam- 
 phlet on Embargo Act,' 76; atti- 
 tude toward the war of 1812, 
 77-79 J author of the Rocking- 
 ham Memorial, 79-80 ; elected 
 to Congress, 81 ; member of 
 Committee on Foreign Rela- 
 tions, 82 ; resolutions on the 
 war of 1812,84-88; property 
 destroyed by fire, 87; speaks 
 on extension of rules of war, 
 89; on an enlistment bill, 91- 
 93 ; and on repeal of embargo 
 of 1813, 94-96; begins prac- 
 tice in Supreme Court, 96 ; at- 
 titude toward Hartford Con- 
 vention, 98; opposes the war 
 taxes, 99-100; and a draft 
 project, 100; participates in 
 debate of the Bank question, 
 102-103 ; opposes tariff of 
 1816, 107-108; challenged to 
 a duel by John Randolph, 108 ; 
 supports Calhoun's Bonus Bill, 
 109 ; retires from Congress, 
 109 ; removes to Boston, 1 1 1 ; 
 becomes involved in Dart- 
 mouth College Case, 11 5-1 16; 
 prepares to argue case before 
 Supreme Court, 117-118; ar- 
 gument of the case, 11 9- 124; 
 victory, 125-126 ; participates 
 in amendment of constitution 
 of Massachusetts, 1 26-131 ; de- 
 livers oration at Plymouth, 131- 
 134; reelected to Congress, 
 135-136; chairman of Judi- 
 ciary Committee, 137 ; speaks 
 in behalf of Greek independ- 
 ence, 139-143; proposes in- 
 crease of membership of Su- 
 preme Court, 144-145; procures 
 passage of Crimes Act, 146; 
 supports Cumberland Road 
 Bill, 147-148; political incli- 
 nations in 1822-1824, 148- 
 
432 
 
 INDEX 
 
 151 ; objections to congres- 
 sional caucus, 152; forecast of 
 Adams's policy, 153-155 ; de- 
 fends Adams's administration, 
 155-156; prosecutes Spanish 
 claims, 158 ; delivers first 
 Bunker Hill oration, 159-160 ; 
 and eulogy on Jefferson and 
 Adams, 160- 161 ; visits Vir- 
 ginia, 162 ; and Niagara Falls, 
 162; elected to the Senate, 
 165 ; death of wife, 166-167 ; 
 early views on the tariff, 17 1— 
 172 ; speech of 1824, 177- 180 ; 
 supports protectionism in 1828, 
 182-186; tendered dinner at 
 Boston, 187-189; supports 
 Adams for reelection, 190- 191 ; 
 sues Theodore Lyman for 
 libel, 191-194; death of 
 brother Ezekiel, 196-198 ; sec- 
 ond marriage, 199 ; first speech 
 on Foote's Resolution, 208- 
 210; the " Second Reply " to 
 Hayne, 211-222; effects of 
 the debate, 223-226 ; speeches 
 published, 227 ; begins auto- 
 biography, 227-228 ; partici- 
 pates in the Knapp trials, 228; 
 attitude toward Antimasonic 
 party, 233 ; tendered a dinner 
 in New York, 234 ; advocates 
 rechartering of the Bank, 238- 
 239 ; discusses the powers of 
 the Executive, 240-242 ; re- 
 ports on reapportionment of 
 representatives, 244-245 ; 
 speaks at Worcester, 248 ; sup- 
 ports Jackson's course against 
 nullification, 250 ; replies to 
 Calhoun, 252-254 ; makes visit 
 to Middle West, 256 ; becomes 
 chairman of Senate Committee 
 on Finance, 260 ; defends 
 Clay's resolution censuring 
 Jackson, 262-264 ; speaks on 
 the French spoliation claims, 
 266-268 ; speaks on the power 
 of removal from office, 26S- 
 
 270 ; opposes Benton's Ex- 
 punging Resolution, 270-271 ; 
 presidential candidate in 1836, 
 275-280 ; proposes to retire 
 from public life, 281 ; speaks 
 at Niblo's Garden, 282 ; again 
 visits the West, 283 ; opposes 
 the Independent Treasury, 
 284 ; visits England, 286-288 ; 
 participates in campaign of 
 1840,291; appointed secretary 
 of state, 295 ; resigns seat in 
 Senate, 296 ; refuses to join 
 colleagues in retiring from cab- 
 inet, 300-301 ; settles the Mc- 
 Leod affair, 306-307 ; nego- 
 tiates treaty of Washington, 
 309-314 ; speaks in defense of 
 his course, 315 ; retires from 
 the cabinet, 315 ; life at Marsh- 
 field, 317-319 ; financial pres- 
 sure, 319-320 ; delivers second 
 Bunker Hill oration, 320-322; 
 visits Rochester, N. Y., 323 ; 
 urged for presidential nomina- 
 tion in 1843-1844, 323-327; 
 detects plan for annexation of 
 Texas, 329-330 ; takes part in 
 campaign of 1844, 33 2 't rc " 
 turns to the Senate, 334 ; op- 
 poses Texan annexation, 335 ; 
 urges 49 as Oregon boundary, 
 338-339 ; attacked by Inger- 
 soll, 339-342 ; accepts an an- 
 nuity, 342 ; opposes conduct of 
 the war with Mexico, 345-346, 
 353-354; opposition to slavery, 
 346-349; visits the South, 352; 
 death of son Edward, 353 ; 
 death of daughter Julia, 355 ; 
 fails to obtain presidential 
 nomination in 1848,355-357; 
 participates reluctantly in cam- 
 paign, 359-360; attitude 
 toward Taylor Administration, 
 361-362; Seventh of March 
 speech, 368-374 ; criticized by 
 anti-slavery leaders, 376-378 ; 
 merits of his course, 378-382 ; 
 
INDEX 
 
 433 
 
 becomes secretary of state in 
 Fillmore's cabinet, 382-383 ; 
 pleased with the adoption of 
 the Compromise measures, 384- 
 385 ; insists upon the finality 
 of the Compromise, 385-387 ; 
 refused the use of Faneuil Hall, 
 387 ; speeches at Buffalo, 388- 
 389; at Albany, 389; and at 
 Capon Springs, 389; delivers 
 address at laying of corner- 
 stone of addition to the Capitol, 
 389 ; letter to Baron Hiilse- 
 mann, 390-393 ; participates in 
 reception of Louis Kossuth, 
 392-393 ; adjusts controversy 
 over attack on Spanish con- 
 sulate at New Orleans, 394- 
 395 ; candidacy for Whig nom- 
 ination in 1852, 398-399; cor- 
 respondence with Tavenner, 
 400-403 ; fails to receive the 
 nomination, 403-406; inde- 
 pendent tickets put in the field, 
 406 ; disappointment, 407- 
 408 ; in physical decline, 408- 
 410; death, 41 1 ; burial, 411- 
 412; weaknesses of the man, 
 412-413; physical aspects, 
 413-414; hospitality and love 
 of humor, 414 ; interest in Na- 
 ture, 415 ; patriotism, 415- 
 416; intellectual power, 416- 
 417 ; oratorical skill, 417-418 ; 
 qualities of statesmanship, 419- 
 420. 
 Webster, Ebenezer, birth, 17 ; 
 early life, 18 ; settles at Stevens- 
 town (Salisbury), 18-19; per- 
 sonal appearance, 19-20 ; sec- 
 ond marriage, 20 ; in the 
 Revolution, 21 ; in civil office, 
 21-22; children, 20, 23; re- 
 moval to Elms Farm, 23 ; 
 elected judge, 29 ; sends Daniel 
 to college, 29-34 ; consents to 
 
 a college education for Ezekiel, 
 38-39; failing health, 61 ; 
 death, 64. 
 
 Webster, Edward, death, 353. 
 
 Webster, Ezekiel, birth, 23 ; pre- 
 pares to enter college, 37-39 ; 
 need of money, 50-5 1 ; finds 
 temporary employment in Bos- 
 ton, 54; takes over Daniel's 
 interests in Boscawen, 65 ; at- 
 titude toward candidacy of 
 Adams, 150-151, 153; nomi- 
 nated to Congress, 196; death, 
 196-198. 
 
 Wentworth, Benning, governor of 
 New Hampshire, 17. 
 
 Wheelock, John, dismissed from 
 presidency of Dartmouth Col- 
 lege, 114- 
 
 Whig Party, origins, 229-230, 
 275 ; in election of 1836, 275- 
 280 ; nominates Harrison and 
 Tyler, 290; in campaign of 
 1840, 290-294; difficulties 
 while in power, 297-301 ; de- 
 clining fortunes, 302-303 ; 
 nominates Clay in 1844, 330 ; 
 opposes annexation of Texas, 
 332; triumph in 1848, 355- 
 360; loses ground in 1850- 
 185 1, 396 ; nominates Scott for 
 the presidency, 403-404; dis- 
 ruption and defeat, 407-408. 
 
 Wilmot, David, introduces anti- 
 slavery provisos, 350. 
 Wirt, William, in Dartmouth 
 College Case, 118-119; Anti- 
 masonic candidate for the 
 presidency, 235-236. 
 Wood, Rev. Samuel, helps pre- 
 pare Webster for college, 33- 
 
 34- 
 
 Woodward, William II., case of 
 
 Dartmouth College against, 
 "5- 
 
314-77-1