USA > Massachusetts > Commonwealth history of Massachusetts, colony, province and state, volume 4 > Part 12
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43 | Part 44 | Part 45 | Part 46 | Part 47 | Part 48 | Part 49 | Part 50 | Part 51 | Part 52 | Part 53 | Part 54 | Part 55
In the midst of a life devoted so largely to legislative duties, Webster could not labor unremittingly at his profession. In the intervals between Congressional sessions, he could always be sure of important clients and large fees. At the Supreme Court session for January, 1830,-the month in which he delivered his Reply to Hayne,-he argued thirteen cases in-
114
DANIEL WEBSTER, STATESMAN
volving a variety of principles. As to his prestige there can be no doubt. William H. Seward asserted that "fifty thou- sand lawyers in the United States conceded him an unap- proachable supremacy at the bar." He is probably more quoted, even today, than any other American lawyer.
WEBSTER'S GREAT ORATIONS (1820-1826)
The Dartmouth College Case gave Webster a national reputation as a constitutional lawyer. The "Plymouth Ora- tion," December 22, 1820, at the celebration of the two hun- dredth anniversary of the landing of the Pilgrims, established his fame as a public speaker. The slender youth had de- veloped into an imposing man, with a large and noble head, an enormous chest, "Jove's own brow," and a voice of great compass and carrying power. His mere presence aroused awe among those who listened to him. His style, which had formerly been sometimes bombastic and florid, was now a pleasing combination of simplicity and grandeur. He was praised as a man
"Whose words, in simplest homespun clad, The Saxon strength of Caedmon's had, With power reserved at need to reach The Roman forum's loftiest speech."
He did not always escape being platitudinous-what orator does? But Webster, with his sonorous tones, could make even a platitude sound like a declaration from an oracle. The "Plymouth Oration" was conceived on a giant scale, and he ranged without difficulty over "vast spaces of time and thought." George Ticknor described Webster as being "con- scious of his own powers," and it is probable that he never, in all his career, reached a more exalted height.
The address delivered on June 17, 1825, at Bunker Hill, on the fiftieth anniversary of the battle, has made a more lasting impression, possibly because its balanced sentences have been memorized by so many generations of American school boys. It was spoken in the open air, and it was esti- mated at the time that at least fifty thousand people heard him distinctly. Curtis was struck by the quality of his voice,
115
REPUTATION IN ORATORY
which, though high-pitched, was never shrill, and had unusual richness of tone. Some of the paragraphs, especially the sections addressed to the veterans of the battle and to Lafay- ette, were composed by Webster as he waded down Mashpee Brook casting for trout; and with all of it he had taken the utmost pains, correcting and revising. In unity, logical con- tinuity, and poetic imagery it is an improvement on the Plymouth Oration.
Somewhat more than a year later, August 2, 1826, he de- livered in Faneuil Hall his eulogy on Adams and Jefferson, containing the masterly imaginary speech of John Adams so often declaimed by embryonic orators in our schools. These three addresses, considered in conjunction with some of his later speeches, won him the foremost position among Ameri- can orators, and his preëminence has never since been seriously questioned.
WEBSTER'S REPUTATION IN ORATORY
Webster, as an orator, created the taste which he gratified. He was a student of elocutionary technique. To a natural earnestness and depth of feeling, he joined a knowledge of all those devices by which the hearts of men may be stirred and their souls be lifted up. He knew when to pause, when to repeat, and when to slacken his pace, and he did not allow his audience to become weary or bored. Emerson said of him in 1834 that
"When he launched the genuine word, It shook or captivated all who heard."
It may well be questioned whether people today would listen patiently to an address two hours in length. For Webster, everybody sat spellbound. In his old age, we are told, he was sometimes ponderous on ordinary occasions. Even then, if something happened to rouse him, he would glow with the former fire. Edward Everett was probably more studied; Rufus Choate was more brilliantly imaginative; Wendell Phillips, at his best, may have been more emotional. Yet if the effect produced is a fair test of oratory, no one in the United States has ever surpassed Daniel Webster.
116
DANIEL WEBSTER, STATESMAN
RETURN TO CONGRESS (1823-1825)
It was inevitable that Webster, so intimately acquainted with political matters and so widely known among influential people, should be drawn into public life in Massachusetts. In 1820 he was chosen as a member of the State Constitutional Convention, where he was welcomed as a leader of conserva- tive sentiment. He favored the removal of a religious test for officeholders, and gained his point; he argued successfully for the retention of the clause apportioning the members of the State Senate on the basis of the taxable property in the dis- tricts ; and he spoke valiantly in support of certain measures intended to protect the independence of the judiciary. Im- pressed by Webster's active part in the debates, Judge Story wrote of him, "He was known before as a lawyer; but now he has secured the title of an eminent and enlightened statesman."
In 1822, with some honest reluctance, Webster was elected to Congress from the Suffolk District, in Boston. It was a period of uncertainty in government affairs, when Massa- chusetts was involved in what Webster called "this miserable, dirty squabble of local politics," and it is difficult to say just what party he represented; on the floor of the House he avoided partisan quarrels, showing an interest only in business which concerned the nation at large.
His first long speech was made on January 19, 1824, in behalf of the Greeks, who were then struggling to free them- selves from Turkish domination. For this appeal Webster had made careful preparation, and when a collection of his works was later published, he wrote to the editor, "There is nothing in the book which I think so well of as parts of this speech." One of his chief motives was to present a conception of the American Union as a strong nation, unafraid to exert its rightful influence on public opinion throughout the world. That he failed to get tangible results was due to the timidity of his colleagues, who would not let his resolutions come to a vote.
As a legislator, Webster was most industrious. He finished the winter of 1824-25 "as thin as shad," with much of his energy depleted. Henry Clay, as Speaker, appointed Webster chairman of the Judiciary Committee, in which capacity he
117
SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS
promoted some important measures, including the "Crimes Act," in which the whole body of Federal criminal law was for the first time codified and digested. He introduced a farsighted bill for the improvement of the Federal judiciary, only to have it blocked by the votes of Western Senators.
SENATOR FROM MASSACHUSETTS (1827-1829)
Webster earnestly desired to succeed Rufus King in 1826 as minister to Great Britain; but President Adams was not disposed to further his ambition. After some consultation with his friends, Webster allowed himself to be elected in June, 1827, Senator from Massachusetts. In December, leaving his wife ill in New York, he took his place in that historic body where he was to win his most enduring triumphs. From that moment he was always "Senator" Webster to Massachusetts people; and the office was his at any time for the asking. Indeed he became almost a Massachusetts institu- tion, like Faneuil Hall or Plymouth Rock.
Webster had hardly qualified for his seat before he was recalled to New York, where his wife died, January 21, 1828. She was buried in Boston, beneath St. Paul's Church, beside her two children, Grace and Charles. Three others- Fletcher, Julia, and Edward-survived her; and Webster, entrusting them to the care of friends and relatives, returned to the capital, a sad and lonely man.
In April he was awakened from his melancholy lethargy by the debate over the Tariff of 1828,-sometimes called the "Tariff of Abominations,"-which was strenuously opposed by the South, especially South Carolina. As the acrimonious discussion drew to a close, Webster, while acknowledging that the bill did not meet with his unqualified approval, an- nounced himself as prepared to vote for it. Massachusetts, he declared, had not originally favored protection ; indeed she had opposed the "American System" in 1824; but in view of the increased prosperity brought to New England by its adop- tion, he was now obliged to admit its benefits to his own section.
Much has been made of Webster's rather sudden change of heart on this question. Essentially he considered the tariff to
118
DANIEL WEBSTER, STATESMAN
be a problem not of morals but of expediency. So long as he could see that a protective policy was injurious to New Eng- land shipping and importing, he opposed it; but when com- merce declined and manufacturing increased, Webster adapted himself to altered conditions. In theory, he had no great enthusiasm for the "American System" ; but he was convinced that, everything considered, it had restored prosperity to New England. The opinions of his constituents differed with regard to his vote; but he was greeted on his return, June 5, 1828, with a public welcome in Faneuil Hall, the first of several such occasions.
THE TARIFF AND NULLIFICATION (1830)
The dispute over the tariff undeniably gave Webster his opportunity to stand before the country as the "Defender of the Constitution." South Carolina, in an irritable mood, denounced the "Tariff of Abominations" and, through the "Exposition of 1828" (written by Calhoun), justified nullifi- cation as a remedy for her grievances. The matter was not brought before Congress until January 18, 1830, when, in the midst of a prolonged debate on the public lands, Senator Benton, of Missouri, delivered an able speech criticising the attitude of the East towards the West and South. He was followed on the next day by Senator Robert Y. Hayne, of South Carolina, who spoke for Calhoun, who, as Vice-Presi- dent, was the presiding officer of the Senate. It was then that Webster, who had heard Hayne but not Benton, came forward as the representative of New England.
Webster's "First Reply," delivered January 20, was occupied chiefly with the refutation of the charge that the East had been hostile to the interests of the other parts of the country. Hayne, without any delay, insisted on answering Webster and attacked him in no gentle language, pointing out his apparent inconsistency on the question of tariff. Then, to Webster's delight, Hayne developed at length the theory of nullification held by Calhoun and himself. January 26, Webster rose to speak, with the galleries and the Senate Chamber packed with people. Hayne's speech was forcible, and there were those who felt that Webster had met his match.
Courtesy of Massachusetts Historical Society
From the original by Healy
WEBSTER'S REPLY TO HAYNE
119
REPLY TO HAYNE
When the Massachusetts orator had finished, after four hours of splendid eloquence, the audience was left gasping, and victory was undoubtedly with the North. According to Lodge, this speech marked "the highest point attained by Mr. Webster as a public man." Blaine declared it to be "like an amendment to the Constitution," and McCall said that "it compacted the states into a nation." Certainly its effect upon the nation was and has been more far-reaching than that of any other similar utterance in our history.
REPLY TO HAYNE (1830)
The "Reply to Hayne" was a statement in popular language of doctrines which Webster had already expressed in more technical terms before the Supreme Court. The so-called "compact theory" of the Union held by Calhoun and Hayne was not at all new. Although not explicitly avowed by the signers of the Constitution, it was undoubtedly in the minds of many of them, and it was approved both by the promul- gators of the Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions in 1799, and by some of the delegates to the Hartford Convention of 1814. Secession from the Union was openly discussed by New Eng- land during the ten years preceding the War of 1812; and Webster himself, in the Rockingham Memorial, had hinted at its feasibility. From several points of view Hayne was supported by history.
As the government slowly grew in strength and as the momentous decisions of Chief Justice Marshall built up a new conception of the nation, the dangers involved in nullification became more evident. It was Webster's function, in such controversies as the Dartmouth College Case, to expound his view of the supremacy of the Federal Government over an individual State. Now he appeared at precisely the right psychological moment as the champion of an indivisible Union. When he announced "that the Constitution of the United States is not a league, confederacy, or compact be- tween the people of the several States in their sovereign capacities, but a government proper, founded on the adoption of the people and creating direct relations between itself and individuals," he may not have been historically incontro-
120
DANIEL WEBSTER, STATESMAN
vertible, but he was speaking a statesmanlike doctrine, which the average patriotic citizen could comprehend.
If we had only this speech on which to base a judgment, Webster would still be America's greatest orator. He em- ployed every conceivable device-sarcasm, logic, pathos, humor, and invective. The sentences were usually short and crisp, but the style was so varied that it did not become mo- notonous. The imagery was beautifully suited to the subject matter. The magnificent concluding paragraph has been ex- ceeded in popularity only by Lincoln's Gettysburg Address. And back of the speech itself was the magnetic personality of Webster.
CALHOUN AND NULLIFICATION (1832)
The two answers to Hayne must be considered in connection with the battle with Calhoun in 1833. South Carolina, un- dismayed, passed in November, 1832, the Nullification Ordi- nance virtually nullifying the revenue laws of the United States, only to learn that President Jackson would urge Congress to adopt a measure authorizing the Executive to enforce the laws by means, if necessary, of the Army and Navy. This "Force Bill," as it was called, was supported by Webster, who on February 15, 1833, replied to Calhoun in a long and carefully constructed speech, which he called "The Constitution not a Compact between the States." It was an able and convincing exercise in sheer logic, less spirited, per- haps, than the Reply to Hayne, but supplementing admirably his previous utterances. As he concluded, after evening had fallen and the lamps had been lighted, the galleries rose and cheered. Jackson wrote to Poinsett that Webster had handled Calhoun "like a child."
Webster vainly opposed Clay's bill for the reduction of the tariff by gradual stages; and, when the Tariff of 1832 was passed, Calhoun had reason to feel that, from the practical point of view, he had achieved his object. In his attempt to compel the Federal Government to relieve his State from what he considered to be unfair taxation, he was in a degree successful. Incidentally, he had drawn from Daniel Webster a statement of the conception of the Union which was later
121
DESIRE FOR THE PRESIDENCY
to win the Civil War and defeat all that Calhoun held most dear.
WEBSTER AND THE PRESIDENCY (1832-1841)
Except for his temporary alliance with Jackson against Cal- houn on the nullification issue, Webster was by nature an anti-Jackson man. In spite of overtures occasionally made to him by the administration, he fought the President on the United States Bank, attacked his financial policy, and voted for the Senate resolutions censuring the Executive. When the Whig Party was formed, it was inevitable that Clay and Webster should be its conspicuous leaders, and Webster was a hopeful candidate for the presidency in 1836. He was duly nominated by the legislature of Massachusetts, but he de- clined to yield to the demands of the anti-Masons, thus losing strong support in Pennsylvania. When General Harrison was made the Whig candidate, Webster withdrew his name; but Massachusetts insisted on casting her fourteen electoral votes for her favorite son. It was a futile gesture, for the Whigs were beaten from the very opening of the campaign.
Webster's personal popularity was never more apparent than in 1837, when he announced his intention of resigning from the Senate. He needed money badly, for his expenses were heavy, and while he had been battling with Jacksonism his professional income had dwindled. He may also have had an eye on the Whig nomination in 1840. Whatever his motives, his friends rose and protested. The Massachusetts General Court appointed a committee to dissuade him, and he finally agreed to remain in the Senate. His New York ad- mirers gave him a dinner at Niblo's Garden, where, in March, 1837, he discussed the Constitution and the Union, drawing up a scathing indictment of the Democratic party. When he made a western tour in the spring of 1839, he was greeted everywhere as if he were the hero, not merely of Massachu- setts, but of the nation at large. In the summer of 1839 he took his only trip across the Atlantic, being received cordially by such personages as Sir Robert Peel, Wordsworth, Dickens, Macaulay, and Carlyle. His daughter, Julia, was married in September, in London, to Samuel A. Appleton; and Webster
122
DANIEL WEBSTER, STATESMAN
landed on December 29 in New York, to learn of the nomi- nation of General Harrison by the Whigs.
It seemed to be Webster's unfortunate destiny to get the cheers and applause while others gained the ballots. In spite of the loyal endorsement of Massachusetts, Clay had not been enthusiastic for Webster, and the party leaders wanted Harri- son. Without a trace of disgruntlement, Webster threw him- self heartily into the "hard-cider campaign," making notable speeches at Saratoga, Bunker Hill, New York, and Richmond, and Harrison was elected. Clay having declined the Depart- ment of State position, Webster accepted that. All looked auspicious for the hungry Whigs. And then the weary old general, beset by place-seekers, died, and the White House was occupied by John Tyler, of Virginia.
SECRETARY OF STATE (1841-1843)
The events which followed proved Webster's independence of spirit. In the quarrel which quickly developed between the autocratic Henry Clay and the no less stubborn half-Demo- cratic Tyler, Webster avoided attachment to either side. After Tyler's veto of the "Fiscal Corporation"-an act for which he has often been unjustly condemned-four Whig members of the Cabinet withdrew; Webster, however, stayed in the State Department, offering as a reason the fact that he was occupied with delicate negotiations which he could not abandon without precipitating a crisis. Denounced by the Whig press, he consulted the Massachusetts delegation in Con- gress, who agreed-to quote John Quincy Adams-"that Mr. Webster would not be justified in resigning at this time." With these friends to back him up, he placed his duty to his country above his obligations to party and to Henry Clay.
Webster soon revealed himself as a diplomat of the first class; indeed Rhodes, who was not inclined to exaggeration, said he was our greatest Secretary of State. He inherited from his predecessors an accumulation of complicated ques- tions which in the aggregate seriously threatened the peaceful relations between the United States and Great Britain. In 1840, Alexander McLeod, a Canadian who had openly boasted of the murder of Durfree at the time of the burning of the
123
CHINESE TROUBLE
Caroline in 1837, was arrested and thrown into prison in New York State; the British authorities protested on the ground that McLeod was obeying military orders. The northern boundary of Maine was still unsettled, and there was a dispute over England's right to search vessels engaged in the African slave trade. The two Anglo-Saxon nations were perhaps not far from war, and ardent jingoes on both sides of the Atlantic did their best to provoke a clash of arms.
Webster, for his part, was resolved that peace should be preserved. With careful eyes he watched the trial of McLeod at Utica, and was pleased when the latter, having established an alibi, was freed. He took advantage of the fall of the Melbourne Cabinet to reopen negotiations. Finally, in 1842, Lord Ashburton, one of the most urbane and liberal-minded of Englishmen, was accredited to Washington and empowered to discuss all controversial matters between the two peoples. The ensuing negotiations were prolonged, but marked by the most amicable feeling on the part of the two diplomats. Re- gardless of his annoying hay fever, Webster worked late into the spring, in the heat of the capital, and was able to complete a treaty which, although not altogether satisfactory to Ameri- can Anglophobes, was probably the best obtainable under the circumstances. During the course of the negotiations Web- ster wrote to Lord Ashburton a letter concerning the impress- ment of American seamen, stating emphatically that "the practice of impressing seamen from American vessels cannot hereafter be allowed to take place." Never, since that com- munication, has England attempted to impress sailors from our ships. Although the Ashburton Treaty was attacked severely both in the Senate and in Parliament, good sense eventually prevailed, and it was ratified August 9, 1842.
CHINESE TREATY (1843)
This negotiation completed, Webster turned his attention to China and succeeded in inducing Congress to pass a bill authorizing a special mission to that empire. Presumably Webster hoped to persuade his friend, Edward Everett, then minister to England, to accept the Chinese mission, thus open- ing up a way through which Webster could escape gracefully
124
DANIEL WEBSTER, STATESMAN
from the Department of State by going to the Court of St. James. Everett was not disposed to let himself be thus sum- marily; exiled to a remote part of the world, and respectfully declined the appointment. In the end, Caleb Cushing was named as Commissioner to China and negotiated the important Treaty of Wang-Hiya in 1843. Meanwhile Webster tried in vain to get Congress to approve "a special extraordinary mission" to England, to which he might be appointed ; but this plan also was blocked in committee.
RECONCILIATION WITH THE WHIGS (1843-1845)
For many months partisan Whigs had been demanding Webster's resignation. A Massachusetts Whig convention, in September, 1842, daringly attempted to read him out of the party, but his supporters held a public reception for him a few weeks later in Faneuil Hall, at which he appeared, tanned by the Marshfield breezes and garbed in the famous blue dress coat with brass buttons. Without any apology for his con- duct, he said, "I am, gentlemen, a little hard to coax; but, as to being driven, that is out of the question." When he added, "I give no pledges, I ask no intimations one way or the other," the cheering of three thousand men showed that Boston would not abandon the worship of her idol. Some of his critics have maintained that he was arrogant, but it is fairer to say that he was proudly conscious of his power. He continued in the Department of State until May, 1843. His full program was carried through, and he resigned. For the first time in fifteen years he was without a public office.
It was impossible for Daniel Webster to be nothing more than a private citizen. He returned to his law practice, visited "The Elms," and cheerfully cultivated his farm at Marshfield; but he prepared and delivered a Websterian ad- dress on the completion of the Bunker Hill Monument, June 17, 1843. He spoke at Andover in November, where he was formally reinstated in the Whig Party and tried to bring harmony to its ranks. He was urged to let himself be brought forward as a presidential candidate, and he was offered again his seat in the Senate, Choate having announced his readiness to resign. In the campaign of 1844 he supported Clay through
125
WEBSTER AND SLAVERY
a series of forceful addresses; but the latter Western states- man, by his vacillation on the question of Texas, lost to Polk, who knew and declared precisely where he stood. After Polk was elected, Webster could no longer withstand the importuni- ties of his friends, who made him Choate's successor in the Senate. There he took his place once more in March, 1845.
WEBSTER AND SLAVERY (1830-1848)
It was inevitable that Webster, always in the public eye, should be brought face to face with the problem of negro servitude, which during his last years threatened at critical moments to split the nation asunder. Like most intelligent Northerners, he instinctively disapproved of slavery, and he denounced the African slave trade in a frequently quoted passage in the "Plymouth Oration" of 1820. In the "Reply to Hayne," a decade later, he specifically declared slavery to be "one of the greatest evils, both moral and political," but joined with it the observation that slavery in the South "has always been regarded as a matter of domestic policy left with the States themselves, and with which the Federal Govern- ment has nothing to do." In his "Niblo's Garden Speech" of 1837 he described slavery as "a great moral, social, and political evil," adding that he should do nothing "to favor or encourage its further extension"; but he also continued : "Slavery as it exists in the States is beyond the reach of Congress. It is a concern of the States themselves." In October, 1840, in Richmond, he repeated, "There is no power, direct or indirect, in Congress or the General Government to interfere in the slightest degree with the institutions of the South." Thus over a period of many years he made a series of statements, perfectly consistent, and representing the typical conservative Northern point of view. He deplored the existence of slavery; but he had no intention of wrecking the Union in order to eradicate it from American soil; and he did not foresee the disruptive force of an institution opposed to the great American principles of equality before the law and personal freedom.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.