shrink from such a contest as this. I applaud their sentiments: they are such as religion and humanity dictate, and such as none but cannibals would wish to eradicate from the human heart." Whereupon the editor asks, Will not the federal soldiers call the man who made the speech "a coldblooded wretch, whose heart is callous to every patriotic feeling?" and then, "We do not wonder at Mr. Webster's reluctance again to appear at the city of Washington" (he was attending cases at court): "even his native brass must be abashed at his own conduct, at his own speeches."† Flattery "has spoiled him; for application might have made him something a dozen years hence. It has given him. confidence, a face of brass, which and his native volubility are mistaken for 'pre-eminent talent.' Of all men in the State, he is the fittest to be the tool of the enemy.". He was one of the men that bring the "nation to the verge of ruin;" a "Thompsonian intriguer;" a "Macfarland admirer." "The self-importance and gross egotism he displays are disgusting." "You would suppose him a great merchant, living in a maritime city, and not a man reared in the woods of Salisbury, or educated in the wilds of Hanover." $ Before he was elected to Congress, Mr. Hill accused him of "deliberate falsehood," of "telling bold untruths to justify the enormities of the enemy." The cry was raised, "The Union is in danger." Mr. Webster was to bring about “a dissolution of the Union."¶ "The few conspirators in Boston, who aim at the division of the Union, and the English Government, who support them in their rebellion, appear to play into each other's hands with remarkable adroitness." The Patriot speaks of "the mad measures of the Boston junto; the hateful, hypocritical scheme of its canting, disaf * "New Hampshire Patriot," Aug. 27, 1814. † Id., Oct. 4, 1814. | Id., Oct. 29, 1812. Id., Aug. 2, 1814. § Id., Aug. 9, 1814. ¶ Id., Oct. 13, 1812. fected chief, and the audacious tone of its public prints. The language of Washington was quoted against political foes; his Farewell Address reprinted. Mr. Webster was charged with "setting the North against the South." The Essex junto was accused of "a plot to destroy the Union," in order "to be under the glorious shelter of British protection." The Federalists were a "British faction;" the country members of the Massachusetts Legislature were "wooden members; " distinguished characters were "exciting hostility against the Union;" one of these "ought to be tied to the tail of a Congreve rocket, and offered up a burnt sacrifice." It was "moral treason " not to rejoice at the victories of the nation- it was not then "levying war." The Legislature of New Jersey called the acts of the Massachusetts Legislature "the ravings of an infuriated faction," and Gov. Strong a "Maniac Governor." The "Boston Patriot" called Mr. Webster "the poor fallen Webster," who " curses heartily his setters on: ""the poor creature is confoundedly mortified." Mr. Clay, in Congress, could speak of "the howlings of the whole British pack, let loose from the Essex junto:" the Federalists were attempting "to familiarize the public mind with the horrid scheme of disunion."§ And Isaac Hill charges the Federalists with continually "threatening a separation of the States; striving to stir up the passions of the North against the South, — in clear defiance of the dying injunctions of Washington." || I mention these things that all may understand the temper of those times. In 1814, Mr. Webster sought for the office of Attorney General of New Hampshire, but, failing thereof, was reelected to the House of Representatives. In the fourteenth * March 30, 1813, quoted from the "Baltimore Patriot." July 21, 1813. § Speech in House of Representatives, Jan. 8, 1813. "New Hampshire Patriot" for June 7, 1814. Congress, two important measures came up amongst others, the Bank and the Tariff. Mr. Calhoun and Mr. Clay favored the establishment of a national bank, with a capital of $35,000,000. Mr. Webster opposed it by votes and speech, reaffirming the sound doctrines of his former speech the founders of the Constitution were "hard-money men;" government must not receive the paper of banks which do not pay specie; but "the taxes must be paid in the legal money of the country."* Such was the doctrine of the leading Federalists of the time, and the practice of New England. He introduced a resolution, that all revenues of the United States should be paid in the legal currency of the nation. It met scarce any opposition, and was passed the same day. I think this was the greatest service he ever performed in relation to our national currency or national finance. He was himself proud of it in his later years.† The protective tariff was supported by Messrs. Calhoun, Clay, and Lowndes. Mr. Webster opposed it; for the capitalists of the North, then deeply engaged in commerce, looked on it as hostile to their shipping, and talked of the "dangers of manufactories." Was it for this reason that the South, always jealous of the Northern thrifty toil, proposed it? So it was alleged. Mr. Webster declared that Congress has no constitutional right to levy duties for protection; only for revenue. Revenue is the constitutional substance; protection, only the accidental shadow. § In 1816, Mr. Webster removed to Boston. while he was a private came before the nation, In 1819, citizen, a most important question Shall slavery be extended into the Missouri Territory? Here, too, Mr. Webster was on the * Speech in House of Representatives, Feb. 28, 1816 (in "National Intelligencer for March 2, 1816). See also Works, vol. iii. p. 35, et seq. It passed April 26, 1816. Yeas, 79; nays, 35. But see Mr. Calhoun's defence of his course, Life and Speeches, p. 329. § Speech in House of Representatives. side of freedom. He was one of a committee appointed by a meeting of the citizens of Boston to call a general meeting of the citizens to oppose the extension of slavery. The United States Marshal was chairman of the meeting. Mr. Webster was one of the committee to report resolutions at a subsequent meeting. Said the preamble: "The extirpation of slavery has never ceased to be a measure deeply concerning the honor and safety of the United States." "In whatever tends to diminish the evil of slavery, or to check its growth, all parts of the confederacy are alike interested." "If slavery is established in Missouri, then it will be burthened with all the mischiefs which are too well known to be the sure results of slavery; an evil, which has long been deplored, would be incalculably augmented; the whole confederacy would be weakened, and our free institutions disgraced, by the voluntary extension of a practice repugnant to all the principles of a free government, the continuance of which in any part of our country necessity alone has justified.' It was Resolved, that Congress "possesses the constitutional power, upon the admission of any new State created beyond the limits of the original territory of the United States, to make the prohibition of the further extension of slavery or involuntary servitude in such new State, a condition of its admission." "It is just and expedient that this power should be exercised by Congress, upon the admission of all new States created beyond the limits of the original territory of the United States." In a speech, Mr. Webster "showed incontrovertibly that Congress had this power; that they were called upon by all the principles of sound policy, humanity, and morality, to enact it, and, by prohibiting slavery in the new State of Missouri, oppose a barrier to the further progress of slavery, which else and this was the last time the opportunity would happen to fix its limits would roll on desolating the vast expanse of continent to the Pacific Ocean.”* Mr. Webster was appointed chairman of a committee to prepare a memorial to Congress on this matter.† Said he: * Account of a Meeting at the State House in Boston, Dec. 3, 1819, to consider the Extension of Slavery by the United States (in "Boston Daily Advertiser" for Dec. 4, 1819). "A Memorial to the Congress of the United States, on the Subject of Restraining the Increase of Slavery in the New States to be admitted into the Union," &c. &c. Boston, 1819. pp. 22. "We have a strong feeling of the injustice of any toleration of slavery." But, "to permit it in a new country, what is it but to encourage that rapacity, and fraud, and violence, against which we have so long pointed the denunciations of our penal code? What is it but to tarnish the proud fame of our country? What is it but to throw suspicion on its good faith, and to render questionable all its professions of regard for the rights of humanity and the liberties of mankind?"—p. 21. At that time, such was the general opinion of the Northern men.* Said a writer in the leading journal of Boston: "Other calamities are trifles compared to this (slavery). War has alleviations; if it does much evil, it does some good at least, it has an end. But negro-slavery is misery without mixture; it is Pandora's box, but no Hope at the bottom; it is evil, and only evil, and that continually." † A meeting of the most respectable citizens of Worcester resolved against "any further extension of slavery," as "rendering our boasted Land of Liberty pre-eminent only as a mart for Human Flesh." "Sad prospects," said the "Boston Daily Advertiser," "indeed for emancipators and colonizers, that, faster than the wit or the means of men can devise a method even for keeping stationary the frightful propagation of slavery, other men, members of the same community, sometimes colleagues of the same deliberative assembly, will be compassing, with all their force, the widest possible extension of slavery." + The South uttered its threat of "dissolving the Union," if slavery were not extended west of the Mississippi. "The Charge of Judge Story Article on the Missouri * See a valuable series of papers in the "Boston Daily Advertiser," No. I. to VI., on this subject, from Nov. 20 to Dec. 28, 1819. to the Grand Juries, &c.; ibid. Dec. 7 and 8, 1819. Compromise, in "North American Review," Jan. 1820. Mr. King's speech in Senate of United States, in "Columbian Centinel" for Jan. 19 and 22, 1820. See also the comments of the "Daily Advertiser" on the treachery of Mr. Mason, the Boston representative, March 28 and 29, 1820. † "L. M." in "Columbian Centinel" for Dec. 8, 1819. + "Boston Daily Advertiser" for Nov. 20, 1819. |