rence should have announced his willingness to indorse the sentiments enunciated in Mr. Webster's speech, and to support the course he had taken. Mr. Earle, a Free Soil member from Worcester, then editor of the "Spy," sustained the amendment, and distinctly presented the issues involved in the contest. The amendment, though supported by others, was rejected by a majority of thirty-five. The resolutions, after being modified by certain amendments of Mr. Boutwell, were adopted by an almost unanimous vote, only six voting in the negative. When they came up in the Senate for consideration, Henry L. Dawes, afterward a prominent member of Congress, offered an amendment in favor of giving fugitive slaves trial by jury. Amasa Walker offered an amendment condemnatory of Mr. Webster's course, and spoke in its defence; though it was vigorously opposed by Mr. Dawes, Mr. Upham, and Mr. Hillard, on the ground that in such a contest it was better to deal with principles than with men. Mr. Wood, a Free Soil member from Plymouth County, said that in that great crisis Massachusetts had been betrayed, and her honor had been tarnished "through the open desertion of one of her Senators and the silent acquiescence of the other." She had faltered, was in a false position, and, if she had never spoken before, she should speak then.

Joseph T. Buckingham, a Free Soil member from Middlesex County, moved to amend the resolutions by incorporating into them words which had been uttered by Mr. Webster, to the effect that the opposition of the people of Massachusetts to the extension of slavery and the increase of slave representation is "general and universal," having "no reference to lines of latitude or points of the compass"; and that they "will oppose all such extension and all such increase in all places, and at all times, under all circumstances, against all inducements, against all supposed limitations of great interests, against all combinations, against all compromises." In support of this amendment, Mr. Buckingham made a carefully prepared speech. He was then an old man, had been long connected with the public press, and for thirty years had been the personal and political friend of Mr. Webster. Holding one of

He

the most vigorous and polished pens of his time, he had, as a journalist, he said, "in days of darkness and depression as well as in those of prosperity and sunshine," recommended Mr. Webster to the people as the greatest man of the age, and the fittest man for the highest office of the nation. claimed him as his Mentor and his guide, and said that the ears of his understanding had drunk in "his words of sympathy for suffering humanity, of his abhorrence of the system of slavery, of his detestation of the ambition that was striving to extend the Slave Power over new Territories and secure the mastery of the free States." After thus referring to the long and pleasant intimacies of the past, he said: "But this happy intercourse in all probability is at an end. To use the cmphatic expression of Horace Mann in reference to one whose friendship was withdrawn from him, 'We are now on opposite sides of the moral universe.' I am content it should be so. I expect no friendly recognition from any man who would justify the entrance of a slave-hunter into New England, or who would seek in the Constitution authority or apology for such diabolical employment." After further debate, in which the amendment was eloquently supported by Mr. Dawes and Mr. Upham, it was sustained by a majority of ten.

The resolutions were then referred to a select committee, of which Mr. Upham was chairman. In their new draft, Mr. Dawes's resolution in favor of a jury trial for slaves was modified, and Mr. Buckingham's amendment was entirely left out. This change was opposed by Dawes, Buckingham, and Walker, but was sustained by a majority of six; and they were then passed, as reported by the committee, with only four dissenting votes. They were concurred in by the House, and received the sanction of the governor.

The action of Mr. Webster was also strongly condemned by a public meeting in Faneuil Hall on the 25th of March, over which Samuel E. Sewall presided. Resolutions were introduced by Theodore Parker, in which the speech of the 7th of March was declared to be "alike unworthy of a wise statesman and a good man." In support of his resolutions Mr. Parker delivered an argument of great thoroughness and force.

Wendell Phillips followed in a critical examination of the salient points of Mr. Webster's speech.

Petitions were presented to the legislature, asking that Mr. Webster be instructed to vote for the Wilmot proviso and against Mr. Mason's Fugitive Slave Bill. The committee to whom they were referred having reported adversely, Mr. Wilson moved to strike out its recommendation, and insert resolutions setting forth that Mr. Webster, having declared in the Senate that the prohibition of slavery in New Mexico would be "useless, senseless, and nugatory," that he would "not vote for it, and that he would support the pending Fugitive Slave Bill with all its provisions to the fullest extent," be requested to vote against the organization of any Territorial governments without an express provision forever excluding slavery, and to use "the first, the last, and every occasion" to defeat the bill for the recapture of fugitive slaves. When they came up for consideration, Mr. Wilson, remarking that they were couched in respectful language, said they simply asked their Senator to vote for the recorded principles of Massachusetts, principles which its legislature had asserted and reasserted with votes approaching unanimity.

Mr. Schouler said he deemed the resolutions wholly unnecessary. The legislature had almost unanimously declared in favor of the principles embodied in them, and their Senators could not fail to understand its views and the wishes of the people. They were further opposed by Charles Theodore Russell of Boston. He was in favor of applying the Wilmot proviso to the Territories, and against Mason's Fugitive Slave Bill; but he deemed it child's play for the legislature to allude in any way to Mr. Webster. Mr. Earle said, if the legislature meant anything by the resolutions it had adopted after full discussion and with such unanimity, it ought to say to Mr. Webster, who had proved false to the oft-repeated sentiments. of Massachusetts, that he should listen to, heed, and obey the voice of the people. The vote was then taken, and the resolutions were rejected by a large majority.

Mr. Wilson then moved a reconsideration of the vote. He declared that he had offered the resolutions in good faith, and

unbiassed, he trusted, by party feelings. Mr. Webster had abandoned the well-known principles of Massachusetts, and her legislature, if sincere, should say to her Senator: "We, the representatives of the people you represent, request you to vote for freedom in the Territories, and against that cruel and infamous measure now pending in the Senate for the recapture of fugitives fleeing from oppression." He warned the majority that, if they defeated those resolutions, if they shrank from the duty then imposed upon them by imperilled liberty, the betrayed people of Massachusetts would hold them to the strictest accountability. "The people of Massachusetts will never sustain the position taken by Mr. Webster, nor will they uphold those who follow his lead or apologize for him." He said that, if the majority of that legislature did not rebuke the efforts making by Mr. Webster to sacrifice the cause of liberty, they would themselves be discarded by an indignant people. "I will," he said, " go out from this hall, and unite with any party or body of men to drive you from power, rcbuke Daniel Webster, and place in his seat a Senator true to the principles and sentiments of the Commonwealth." The vote on reconsideration was then taken, and the motion was rejected by the decisive majority of sixty-two. Thus in that crisis the legislature of Massachusetts shrank from meeting the issue, so defiantly and almost contemptuously presented by their Senator. This failure to instruct, or even to request, Mr. Webster, not only to support the undoubted sentiments of the legislature and of the people, but to adhere to his own pledges, so often and emphatically made, exercised, no doubt, an important influence on the subsequent action of the State. It emboldened the Senator and his supporters in their disrcgard of what was manifestly the popular sentiment, and prepared the way for, and largely aided in procuring, the defeat of the Whig party in the election of that year.

CHAPTER XXII.

COMPROMISE MEASURES OF 1850.

Southern demands on President Taylor. He stands firm. - Mr. Hamlin.— Thurlow Weed. Taylor's letter to Jefferson Davis. - General debate. Speeches of Walker, Seward, Douglas, Badger, Hunter, Hale, Chase, Benton. -The admissions of the latter

Ar that time of timidity, wavering, and weakness in both Houses of Congress, President Taylor stood firm, collected, and resolutely determined to maintain the authority of the government. Aggrieved, on the one hand, at what he regarded the ungenerous conduct of Mr. Clay, Mr. Webster, and other leading Whigs, he was deeply moved, on the other, by demands he deemed to be both unpatriotic and personally offensive. Mr. Hamlin, then a Democratic Senator from Maine, states that, making a business call upon the President, he met Toombs, Stephens, and Clingman just retiring from an interview. On entering the President's room, he found him walking the floor, greatly excited and indignant. He told Mr. Hamlin that the men who had just retired had been making demands concerning the policy of his administration, accompanied with intimations that the South would not submit unless they were acceded to. He accompanied this statement with the declaration that, if there were any such treasonable demonstrations on the part of the Southern leaders and people, he would put it down by the whole power of the government, even if he was obliged to put himself at the head of the army to do it. Thurlow Weed, who called at the executive mansion immediately afterward, found the President still in a state of excitement, and he too received the assurance of his purpose to maintain the Union and the govérnment at all hazards. These statements received significance from a letter written by General Taylor to Jefferson