The Works of Daniel Webster Part 6

Webster's speech did not prevent its being copied into the leading newspapers throughout the country. It was the universal theme of conversation. Letters of acknowledgment and congratulation from the most distinguished individuals, from politicians retired from active life, from entire strangers, from persons not sympathizing with all Mr.

Webster's views, from distant parts of the Union, were addressed to him by every mail. Immense editions of the speech in a pamphlet form were called for. A proposal was made to the friends of Mr. Hayne to unite in the publication of a joint edition of the two speeches for general circulation throughout the country, but this offer was declined. Mr.

Webster's friends in Boston published a pamphlet edition of the speeches of Mr. Hayne and Mr. Webster. It is no exaggeration to say, that throughout the country Mr. Webster's speech was regarded, not only as a brilliant and successful personal defence and a triumphant vindication of New England, but as a complete overthrow of the dangerous const.i.tutional heresies which had menaced the stability of the Union.

In this light it was looked upon by a large number of the most distinguished citizens of New York, who took occasion to offer Mr.

Webster the compliment of a public dinner the following winter.

Circ.u.mstances delayed the execution of their purpose till some time had elapsed from the delivery of the speech, but the recollection of it was vivid, and it was referred to by Chancellor Kent, the president of the day, as the service especially demanding the grateful recognition of the country. After alluding to the debate on Foot's resolution and to the character of Mr. Webster's speech, the venerable Chancellor added:--

"The consequences of that discussion have been extremely beneficial.

It turned the attention of the public to the great doctrines of national rights and national union. Const.i.tutional law ceased to remain wrapped up in the b.r.e.a.s.t.s, and taught only by the responses, of the living oracles of the law. Socrates was said to have drawn down philosophy from the skies, and scattered it among the schools.

It may with equal truth be said that const.i.tutional law, by means of those senatorial discussions and the master genius that guided them, was rescued from the archives of our tribunals and the libraries of our lawyers, and placed under the eye and submitted to the judgment of the American people. _Their verdict is with us, and from it there lies no appeal._"[16]

With respect to Mr. Foot's resolution it may be observed, that it continued before the Senate a long time, a standing subject of discussion. One half at least of the members of the Senate took part in the debate, which daily a.s.sumed a wider range and wandered farther from the starting-point. Many speeches were made which, under other circ.u.mstances, would have attracted notice, but the interest of the controversy expired with the great effort of the 26th and 27th of January. At length, on the 21st of May, a motion for indefinite postponement, submitted by Mr. Webster at the close of his first speech, prevailed, and thus the whole discussion ended.

It may be worthy of remark, that Mr. Webster's speech was taken in short-hand by Mr. Gales, the veteran editor of the National Intelligencer, a stenographer of great experience and skill. It was written out in common hand by a member of his family, and sent to Mr.

Webster for correction. It remained in his hands for that purpose a part of one day, and then went to the press.

A young and gifted American artist,[17] whose talents had been largely put in requisition by King Louis Philippe to adorn the walls of Versailles, conceived a few years ago the happy idea of a grand historical picture of this debate. On a canvas of the largest size he has n.o.bly delineated the person of the princ.i.p.al individual in the act of replying to Mr. Hayne, with those of his colleagues in the Senate.

The pa.s.sages and galleries of the Senate-Chamber are filled with attentive listeners of both s.e.xes. Above a hundred accurate studies from life give authenticity to a work in which posterity will find the sensible presentment of this great intellectual effort.

FOOTNOTES

[12] This case is known as that of Carver's Lessees against John Jacob Astor, and is reported in 4 Peters, I.

[13] Mr. Chambers referred to the case in court just mentioned, in which Mr. Webster was engaged, and in which the argument had already begun.

[14] Mr. Hayne subsequently disclaimed having used this word.

[15] Reminiscences of Congress.

[16] Chancellor Kent's remarks are given entire in the introduction to Mr. Webster's Speech at the New York Dinner, Vol. I. p. 194.

[17] Mr. Geo. P. A. Healey.

CHAPTER VII.

General Character of President Jackson's Administrations.--Speedy Discord among the Parties which had united for his Elevation.--Mr.

Webster's Relations to the Administration.--Veto of the Bank.--Rise and Progress of Nullification in South Carolina.--The Force Bill, and the Reliance of General Jackson's Administration on Mr.

Webster's Aid.--His Speech in Defence of the Bill, and in Opposition to Mr. Calhoun's Resolutions.--Mr. Madison's Letter on Secession.--The Removal of the Deposits.--Motives for that Measure.--The Resolution of the Senate disapproving it.--The President's Protest.--Mr. Webster's Speech on the Subject of the Protest.--Opinions of Chancellor Kent and Mr. Tazewell.--The Expunging Resolution.--Mr. Webster's Protest against it.--Mr.

Van Buren's Election.--The Financial Crisis and the Extra Session of Congress.--The Government Plan of Finance supported by Mr.

Calhoun and opposed by Mr. Webster.--Personalities.--Mr. Webster's Visit to Europe and distinguished Reception.--The Presidential Canva.s.s of 1840.--Election of General Harrison.

It would require a volume of ample dimensions to relate the history of Mr. Webster's Senatorial career from this time till the accession of General Harrison to the Presidency, in 1841. In this interval the government was administered for two successive terms by General Jackson, and for a single term by Mr. Van Buren. It was a period filled with incidents of great importance in various departments of the government, often of a startling character at the time, and not less frequently exerting a permanent influence on the condition of the country. It may be stated as the general characteristic of the political tendencies of this period, that there was a decided weakening of respect for const.i.tutional restraint. Vague ideas of executive discretion prevailed on the one hand in the interpretation of the Const.i.tution, and of popular sovereignty on the other, as represented by a President elevated to office by overwhelming majorities of the people. The expulsion of the Indian tribes from the Southern States, in violation of the faith of treaties and in open disregard of the opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States as to their obligation; the claim of a right on the part of a State to nullify an act of the general government; the violation of the charter of the bank, and the Presidential veto of the act of Congress rechartering it; the deposit of the public money in the selected State banks with a view to its safe keeping and for the greater encouragement of trade by the loan of the public funds; the explosion of this system, and the adoption of one directly opposed to it, which rejected wholly the aid of the banks and denied the right of the government to employ the public funds for any but fiscal purposes; the executive menaces of war against France; the unsuccessful attempt of Mr.

Van Buren's administration to carry on the government upon General Jackson's system; the panic of 1837, succeeded by the general uprising of the country and the universal demand for a change of men and measures,--these are the leading incidents in the chronicle of the period in question. Most of the events referred to are discussed in the following volumes. On some of them Mr. Webster put forth all his power.

The questions pertaining to the construction of the Const.i.tution, to the bank, to the veto power, to the currency, to the const.i.tutionality of the tariff, to the right of removal from office, and to the finances, were discussed in almost every conceivable form, and with every variety of argument and ill.u.s.tration.

It has already been observed, that General Jackson was brought into power by a somewhat ill-compacted alliance between his original friends and a portion of the friends of the other candidates of 1824. As far as Mr. Calhoun and his followers were concerned, the cordiality of the union was gone before the inauguration of the new President. There was not only on the list of the cabinet to be appointed no adequate representative of the Vice-President, but his rival candidate for the succession (Mr. Van Buren) was placed at the head of the administration.

There is reason to suppose that General Jackson, who, though his policy tended greatly to impair the strength of the Union, was in feeling a warm Unionist, witnessed with no dissatisfaction the result of the great const.i.tutional debate and its influence upon the country.

But the effect of this debate on the friendly relations of Mr.

Webster with the administration was in some degree neutralized by the incidents of the second session of the Twenty-first Congress. Mr. Van Buren had retreated before the embarra.s.sments of the position in which he found himself in the Department of State, and had accepted the mission to England. The instructions which he had given to Mr.

McLane in 1829, in reference to the adjustment of the question relative to the colonial trade, were deemed highly objectionable by a majority of the Senate, as bringing the relations of our domestic parties to the notice of a foreign government, and founding upon a change of administration an argument for the concession of what was deemed and called "a boon" by the British government. In order to mark the spirit of these instructions with the disapprobation of the Senate, the nomination of Mr. Van Buren as Minister to England was negatived by a majority of that body. While the subject was under discussion, Mr. Clay, Mr. Webster, and Mr. Calhoun took the same view of this delicate question. It will be found treated in the speech of Mr.

Webster of the 24th of January, 1832, with all the gravity, temper, and moderation which its importance demanded.

In the Twenty-second Congress (the second of General Jackson's administration) the bank question became prominent. General Jackson had in his first message called the attention of Congress to the subject of the bank. No doubt of its const.i.tutionality was then intimated by him.

In the course of a year or two an attempt was made, on the part of the executive, to control the appointment of the officers of one of the Eastern branches. This attempt was resisted by the bank, and from that time forward a state of warfare, at first partially disguised, but finally open and flagrant, existed between the government and the directors of the inst.i.tution. In the first session of the Twenty-second Congress (1831-32), a bill was introduced by Mr. Dallas, and pa.s.sed the two houses, to renew the charter of the bank. This measure was supported by Mr. Webster, on the ground of the importance of a national bank to the fiscal operations of the government, and to the currency, exchange, and general business of the country. No specific complaints of mismanagement had then been made, nor were any abuses alleged to exist.

The bank was, almost without exception, popular at that time with the business interests of the country, and particularly at the South and West. Its credit in England was solid; its bills and drafts on London took the place of specie for remittances to India and China. Its convenience and usefulness were recognized in the report of the Secretary of the Treasury (Mr. McLane), at the same time that its const.i.tutionality was questioned and its existence threatened by the President. So completely, however, was the policy of General Jackson's administration the impulse of his own feelings and individual impressions, and so imperfectly had these been disclosed on the present occasion, that the fate of the bill for rechartering the bank was a matter of uncertainty on the part both of adherents and opponents. Many persons on both sides of the two houses were taken by surprise by the veto. When the same question was to be decided by General Washington, he took the opinion in writing of every member of the Cabinet.

But events of a different complexion soon occurred, and gave a new direction to the thoughts of men throughout the country. The opposition of South Carolina to the protective policy had been pushed to a point of excitement at which it was beyond the control of party leaders.

Although, as we have seen, that policy had in 1816 been established by the aid of distinguished statesmen of South Carolina, who saw in the success of American cotton manufactures a new market for the staple of the South, in which it would take the place of the cotton of India, the protective policy at a later period had come to be generally considered unconst.i.tutional at the South. A change of opinion somewhat similar had taken place in New England, which had been originally opposed to this policy, as adverse to the commercial and navigating interests.

Experience gradually showed that such was not the case. The enactment of the law of 1824 was considered as establishing the general principle of protection as the policy of the country. It was known to be the policy of the great central States. The capital of the North was to some extent forced into new channels. Some branches of manufactures flourished, as skill was acquired and improvements in machinery made. The coa.r.s.e cotton fabrics which had enjoyed the protection of the _minimum_ duty prospered, manufacturing villages grew up, the price of the fabric fell, and as compet.i.tion increased the tariff did little more than protect the domestic manufacturer from fraudulent invoices and the fluctuation of foreign markets. Thus all parties were benefited, not excepting the South, which gained a new customer for her staple. These changes in the condition of things led Mr. Webster, as we have remarked in a former chapter, to modify his course on the tariff question.

Unfortunately, no manufactures had been established at the South. The vast quant.i.ties of new and fertile land opened in the west of Georgia, in Alabama, and Mississippi, injured the value of the old and partly exhausted lands of the Atlantic States. Labor was drawn off to found plantations in the new States, and the injurious consequences were ascribed to the tariff. Considerations of a political nature had entirely changed the tolerant feeling which, up to a certain period, had been shown by one cla.s.s of Southern politicians toward the protective policy. With the exception of Louisiana, and one or two votes in Virginia, the whole South was united against the tariff. South Carolina had suffered most by the inability of her worn lands to sustain the compet.i.tion with the lands of the Yazoo and the Red River, and to her the most active opposition, under the lead of Mr. Calhoun, was confined.

The modern doctrine of nullification was broached by her accomplished statesmen, and an unsuccessful attempt made to deduce it from the Virginia resolutions of 1798. Mr. Madison, in a letter addressed to the writer of these pages,[18] in August, 1830, firmly resisted this attempt; and, as a theory, the whole doctrine of nullification was overthrown by Mr. Webster, in his speech of the 26th of January, 1830.

But public sentiment had gone too far in South Carolina to be checked; party leaders were too deeply committed to retreat; and at the close of 1832 the ordinance of nullification was adopted by a State convention.

This decisive act roused the hero of New Orleans from the vigilant repose with which he had watched the coming storm. Confidential orders to hold themselves in readiness for active service were sent in every direction to the officers of the army and the navy. Prudent and resolute men were quietly stationed at the proper posts. Arms and munitions in abundance were held in readiness, and a chain of expresses in advance of the mail was established from the Capitol to Charleston. These preparations made, the Presidential proclamation of the 11th of December, 1832, was issued. It was written by Mr. Edward Livingston, then Secretary of State, from notes furnished by General Jackson himself; but there is not an idea of importance in it which may not be found in Mr. Webster's speech on Foot's resolution.

The proclamation of the President was met by the counter-proclamation of Governor Hayne; and the State of South Carolina proceeded to pa.s.s laws for carrying the ordinance of nullification into effect, and for putting the State into a condition to carry on war with the general government.

In this posture of affairs the President of the United States laid the matter before Congress, in his message of the 16th of January, 1833, and the bill "further to provide for the collection of duties on imports"

was introduced into the Senate, in pursuance of his recommendations. Mr.

Calhoun was at this time a member of that body, having been chosen to succeed Governor Hayne, and having of course resigned the office of Vice-President. Thus called, for the first time, to sustain in person before the Senate and the country the policy of nullification, which had been adopted by South Carolina mainly under his influence, and which was now threatening the Union, it hardly need be said that he exerted all his ability, and put forth all his resources, in defence of the doctrine which had brought his State to the verge of revolution. It is but justice to add, that he met the occasion with equal courage and vigor.

The bill "to make further provision for the collection of the revenue,"

or "Force Bill," as it was called, was reported by Mr. Wilkins from the Committee on the Judiciary on the 21st of January, and on the following day Mr. Calhoun moved a series of resolutions, affirming the right of a State to annul, as far as her citizens are concerned, any act of Congress which she may deem oppressive and unconst.i.tutional. On the 15th and 16th of February, he spoke at length in opposition to the bill, and in development and support of his resolutions. On this occasion the doctrine of nullification was sustained by him with far greater ability than it had been by General Hayne, and in a speech which we believe is regarded as Mr. Calhoun's most powerful effort. In closing his speech, Mr. Calhoun challenged the opponents of his doctrines to disprove them, and warned them, in the concluding sentence, that the principles they might advance would be subjected to the revision of posterity.[19]

Mr. Webster, before Mr. Calhoun had resumed his seat, or he had risen from his own, accepted the challenge, and commenced his reply. He began to speak as he was rising, and continued to address the Senate with great force and effect, for about two hours. The Senate then took a recess, and after it came together Mr. Webster spoke again, from five o'clock till eight in the evening. The speech was more purely a const.i.tutional argument than that of the 26th of January, 1830. It was mainly devoted to an examination of Mr. Calhoun's resolutions; to a review of the adoption and ratification of the Const.i.tution of the United States, by way of elucidating the question whether the system provided by the Const.i.tution is a government of the people or a compact between the States; and to a discussion of the const.i.tutionality of the tariff. It was less various and discursive in its matter than the speech on Foot's resolution, but more condensed and systematic. Inferior, perhaps, in interest for a mixed audience, from the absence of personal allusions, which at all times give the greatest piquancy to debate, a severe judgment might p.r.o.nounce it a finer piece of parliamentary logic.

Nor must it be inferred from this description that it was dest.i.tute of present interest. The Senate-chamber was thronged to its utmost capacity, both before and after the recess, although the streets of Washington, owing to the state of the weather at the time, were nearly impa.s.sable.

The opinion entertained of this speech by the individual who, of all the people of America, was the best qualified to estimate its value, may be seen from the following letter of Mr. Madison, which has never before been published.

"_Montpellier, March 15th, 1833._

"MY DEAR SIR:--I return my thanks 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.' But this dodges the blow, by confounding the claim to secede at will with the right of seceding from intolerable oppression. The former answers itself, being a violation without cause of a faith solemnly pledged. The latter is another name only for revolution, about which there is no theoretic controversy. Its double aspect, nevertheless, with the countenance received from certain quarters, is giving it a popular currency here, which may influence the approaching elections both for Congress and for the State legislature. It has gained some advantage also by mixing itself with the question, whether the Const.i.tution of the United States was formed by the people or by the States, now under a theoretic discussion by animated partisans.

"It is fortunate when disputed theories can be decided by undisputed facts, and here the undisputed fact is, that the Const.i.tution was made by the people, but as embodied into the several States who were parties to it, and therefore made by the States in their highest authoritative capacity. They might, by the same authority and by the same process, have converted the confederacy into a mere league or treaty, or continued it with enlarged or abridged powers; or have embodied the people of their respective States into one people, nation, or sovereignty; or, as they did, by a mixed form, make them one people, nation, or sovereignty for certain purposes, and not so for others.

"The Const.i.tution of the United States, being established by a competent authority, by that of the sovereign people of the several States who were parties to it, it remains only to inquire what the Const.i.tution is; and here it speaks for itself. It organizes a government into the usual legislative, executive, and judiciary departments; invests it with specified powers, leaving others to the parties to the Const.i.tution. It makes the government like other governments to operate directly on the people; places at its command the needful physical means of executing its powers; and finally proclaims its supremacy, and that of the laws made in pursuance of it, over the const.i.tutions and laws of the States, the powers of the government being exercised, as in other elective and responsible governments, under the control of its const.i.tuents, the people and the legislatures of the States, and subject to the revolutionary rights of the people, in extreme cases.

"Such is the Const.i.tution of the United States _de jure_ and _de facto_, and the name, whatever it be, that may be given to it can make it nothing more or less than what it is.

"Pardon this hasty effusion, which, whether precisely according or not with your ideas, presents, I am aware, none that will be new to you.

"With great esteem and cordial salutations,

"JAMES MADISON."