USA > New Hampshire > History of New Hampshire, Volume III > Part 5
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
Chief Justice Marshall read a decision, to which four other judges assented, that the college charter was a contract within the meaning of the Constitution of the United States, and that the act of the legislature of New Hampshire impaired this con- tract and therefore was unconstitutional and void. "The im- mediate effect of the decision was to leave the college in the hands of the victorious Federalists. In the precedent which it established, however, it had much deeper and more far-reaching results. It brought within the scope of the Constitution of the United States every charter granted by a State, limited the action of the States in a most important attribute of sovereignty, and extended the jurisdiction of the highest federal court more than
2 Cited in The Story of Dartmouth, by Wilder Dwight Quint, pp. 109-112.
-
49
A HISTORY
any other judgment ever rendered by them. From the day when it was announced to the present time, the doctrine of Marshall in the Dartmouth College case has continued to exert an enormous influence, and has been constantly sustained, and attacked in litigation of the greatest importance." This is the opinion of Senator Lodge.
The decision, doubtless, has lent stability to educational and other chartered institutions. It has prevented a wrongful diversion of funds from the purpose for which those funds were given. It has taken schools of learning out of the hands of party politics. The principle, however, that a charter granted to a corporation by one legislature can not be changed or modi- fied by a subsequent body of legislators, its legitimate successor, is disputed by able jurists and seems to be unsound. The trustees of Dartmouth College were ready for almost any modi- fication of their charter, if they could only get rid of President Wheelock. The grasp of the dead hand must often be relaxed or made to open. The past has no right to bind the future with unbreakable fetters. Institutions and corporations that do not well serve the public under changed conditions should be com- pelled by proper legislation to yield to present demands. Legislators should continually ask the question, What is right, just and good now? Nothing in the past should prevent an answer expressed in legislative act.3
3 In this connection it is well to read The Dartmouth College Caurses, by John M. Shirley.
-
Chapter IV DANIEL WEBSTER
Chapter IV DANIEL WEBSTER.
Birthplace-Preparation for College-Life at Dartmouth-Teaching at Frye- burg Academy-Conservatism in Religion-Study of Law-Beginnings at Boscawen-Removal to Portsmouth-Enters Congress-Federalist in Politics-Removal to Boston-Patriotic Orator-Representative from Massachusetts-Sent to the Senate-Reply to Hayne-Peroration of His Great Speech-Secretary of State-The Ashburton Treaty-Senator again-The Seventh of March Speech-The Mighty Fallen ?- Denun- ciations of the Abolitionists-Character as a Statesman-He still Lives.
A HISTORY of New Hampshire without a sketch of the life of Daniel Webster would leave out the part of Hamlet in the play. The State is justly proud of him as an orator and statesman, although some of the utterances of his last years have been severely criticised. It was Job who said, "Great men are not always wise, neither do the aged understand judgment." The wisest of men can not always foresee the future and know in advance the results of their deeds. "The best laid plans of mice and men gang aft awry." Great men are not belittled by an occasional mistake, and wisdom sometimes passes for error.
Daniel Wester was born in Salisbury, New Hampshire, January 18, 1782. His father was Capt. Ebenezer Webster, who settled on the extreme northern frontier in that town, in 1763, when there was nothing but forest, Indians and wild beasts between him and Canada. The little log house he built decayed long ago. The frame house that succeeded it has been "restored" of late and is visited by many. It consists of two rooms on the ground floor and an open attic above, reached by a rough stair-case. One room below was the kitchen, dining- room and living-room; the other was sleeping-room of the par- ents. All the children slept in the attic, on husk-beds spread upon the floor. Such was the custom of the times. Back of the house was a saw-mill, on the brook that furnished water power a part of the year.
Daniel Webster grew to have a magnificent form, but in
53
54
NEW HAMPSHIRE
early life he was considered weak and sickly. Some say he was indolent. At any rate he loved books better than manual labor on the farm. So he was humored and aided by the rest of the family, and throughout life he seemed to feel that it was his rightful privilege to receive assistance from others, especially of a financial character. Yet he was grateful for help and ex- tended it to his brother Ezekiel, when the opportunity came.
His father had served in Rogers' Rangers and throughout the revolutionary war. In later life he was made judge of the local court, with a salary of three or four hundred dollars. This was after he had moved to the present village of Franklin. With the most rigid economy he planned to send two of his sons to Dartmouth College. Daniel, the younger, went first and then helped Ezekiel to pay his expenses. A part of his preparation for college was obtained at Phillips Exeter Academy and the Rev. Dr. Samuel Wood of Boscawen supplied the rest. His instructor seems to have been a whole fitting school in himself, the kind of a teacher who needs no assistance, an in- spirer of youth. Dr. Wood is said to have fitted one hundred young men for college at one dollar per week for board and tuition.
With some knowledge of Latin and Greek Daniel Webster entered Dartmouth college in 1797 and spent four years there, reading the books in the library more than studying his text- books. His memory was so good that he needed but little study to stand among the foremost in scholarly rank. One year he paid his board by editing or superintending a small weekly newspaper. A college course in his time was little better than a course in a well organized High School today. The chief benefit, then and now, was and is the associations with growing minds and the inspirations of capable instructors. Daniel spent his time in college in reading and playing, easily first in his studies, and recognized as a man of unusual abilities. He acquired much knowledge of many things and held the same in memory, somewhat like a cyclopedia, yet he was never a student and scholar, in the severe and strenuous sense of those words. He relied more upon native than acquired abilities. He was broader than he was deep. At Exeter he was so diffident that he could not "declaim" in public; at Dartmouth he commanded attention as a speaker and gave the Fourth of July oration
55
A HISTORY
at Hanover before he finished his college course. He had a natural gift of speech. His tone, look, manner and choice of words made him eloquent. As an orator he was like the poet, born rather than made, although study and practice constantly improved his oratory. Other men have grown to eloquence by diligent effort; he was eloquent from the beginning and as a boy could read so as to charm his hearers. Dignity and strength were in his manner and voice. He wrote some rhymes but was not a poet. He lacked in constructive imagination. His early efforts in public speaking revealed a love for his country and its Constitution and a grasp of fundamental principles of law.
After graduation he studied law a little in his home village, read more of English literature, hunted and fished. Driven by financial necessity he taught school at Fryeburg Academy, in Maine. Here he supported himself by copying deeds and gave all his salary for a term to his brother Ezekiel, to help him through college. Many years after, when Daniel was senator at Washington, he recalled the weariness of copying deeds and declared that his arm still ached at the remembrance of it. His school work at Fryeburg opened and closed each day with extemporaneous prayer. He united with the Congregational church in Salisbury and throughout his life ranked himself as a conservative Christian believer. Indeed he never examined the foundations of his religious faith. He took his theology at second hand, accepted the current beliefs and never troubled himself about theological differences of opinion. The religion of his parents was good enough for him. Other matters were of more importance in his plan of life.
After teaching at Fryeburg he returned to the study of law at Salisbury and a little later, having obtained a situation for his brother in a private school in Boston, he also went there and entered as a student the law office of Christopher Gore, later governor of Massachusetts and United States senator. Here he made the acquaintance of some prominent men. He refused the office of clerk of courts, which his father obtained for him, and where he could have had a salary of fifteen hundred a year, and preferred, by advice of Mr. Gore, to open a law office for himself at Boscawen, not far from his home, having been admitted to the bar, in Boston, in 1805. In two years he made sufficient headway and acquired such experience that he felt
56
NEW HAMPSHIRE
warrranted in removing to Portsmouth and leaving his office and practice at Boscawen to his brother Ezekiel. The latter became a prominent lawyer and an exemplary citizen. He was a man of noble form and heart, highly respected and much beloved, whose tragic and early death blighted the promise of a brilliant career. The earnings of Daniel Webster at Boscawen were five hundred dollars a year and a state-wide reputation. During this time his father died, after having spent his life and all for the welfare of his family and in devotion to the interests of his town, state and nation.
At Portsmouth Mr. Webster came in contact with the giants of the New Hampshire bar, with William Plumer, who defeated him in his first contest, with Jeremiah Mason, who taught him much and with whom he was always in firmest friendship, with Jeremiah Smith, the learned judge, and with George Sullivan, the eloquent pleader. His practice soon grew to be worth two thousand dollars or more annually, a princely sum in those days, but Webster's income never was anywhere sufficient to keep him out of debt. This was one of his weak- nesses, for great men are not always completely square. Web- ster was a Federalist in politics, and this fact for a while kept him out of office. He kept making speeches here and there, which won him reputation as an orator. He spoke and wrote against the war of 1812, and this obtained for him his first election to congress, in 1813. Here he argued for a navy and for only defensive warfare. He argued also for the establish- ment of a national bank. In debate he had to measure forces with such men as Clay, Pinckney, Randolph and Calhoun: His reputation as a political thinker and eloquent speaker steadily increased. He was reelected to the succeeding congress and was challenged to a duel by John Randolph, which he refused to accept, in a dignified manner. The next five years were spent in practice of law at Portsmouth and Boston. To the latter place he removed in 1816.
His first year at Boston brought him an income of twenty thousand dollars. His practice in the supreme court kept him busy, and the remuneration was ample. Here he was called to deliver the famous orations at Plymouth and Bunker Hill, as well as to defend Dartmouth College from the clutches of the New Hampshire legislature. Webster was most at home as an
57
A HISTORY
orator when he was defending the Constitution and the Union of the States. On patriotic occasions he was at his best. Occa- sional addresses, which are most difficult for the majority of public speakers, were choicest opportunities for Webster. His- torical imagination he possessed and could picture with words great events. The grandeur of historic events and deeds flowed through his soul in speech and into the souls of his audience, producing vision and intense emotions. Their aroused feelings rekindled his own. There was thus a circle of thrilling inspira- tion. His great speeches in the Dartmouth Case, at Plymouth and at Bunker Hill, his reply to Hayne in the senate and his seventh of March speech are the mountain peaks of Webster's oratory, but there were other lofty utterances that were suf- ficient to make any man famous as an orator.
Massachusetts returned Daniel Webster to congress in 1823, and for six years more he was an acknowledged leader in the house. One of his great speeches at this time was that expressing sympathy for Greece in her struggle for liberty, a speech that was translated into all the languages of Europe. It laid the foundation for his reputation abroad and brought the United States into notice as one of the world powers to be reckoned with. With the assistance of Judge Story he secured the passage of the "Crimes Act," which codified the whole body of criminal law. He defended the "Monroe Doctrine" and championed the cause of the Creek Indians against the en- croachments of Georgia. At that time he thought it unnecessary to conciliate the South and spoke his mind with boldness in the face of denunciations.
In 1827 Massachusetts gave him a seat in the United States senate, and no man ever reflected more honor upon his State. His work was specially to defend the tariff and the Constitution. The latter he did in his celebrated reply to Hayne, overthrowing the doctrine that a State might nullify the law of the nation. Everybody is familiar with the speech. The occasion has been finely described by Senator Lodge:
On the morning of the memorable day the senate chamber was packed by an eager and excited crowd. Every seat on the floor and in the galleries was occupied, and all the available standing-room was filled. The pro- tracted debate, conducted with so much ability on both sides, had excited the attention of the country, and had given time for the arrival of hundreds of
58
NEW HAMPSHIRE
interested spectators from all parts of the Union, and especially from New England. The fierce attacks of the Southern leaders had angered and alarmed the people of the North. They longed with an intense longing to have these assaults met and repelled, and yet they could not believe that this apparently desperate feat could be successfully accomplished. Men of the North and of New England could be known in Washington, in those days, by their indignant but dejected looks and downcast eyes. They gathered in the senate chamber on the appointed day, quivering with anticipation, and with hope and fear struggling for the mastery in their breasts. With them were mingled those who were there from mere curiosity, and those who had come rejoicing in the confident expectation that the Northern champion would suffer failure and defeat.
In the midst of the hush of expectation, in that dead silence which is so peculiarly oppressive because it is possible only when many human beings are gathered together, Mr. Webster rose. He had sat impassive and immovable during all the preceding days, while the storm of debate and invective had beaten about his head. At last his time had come; and as he rose and stood forth, drawing himself up to his full height, his personal grandeur and his majestic calm thrilled all who looked upon him. With perfect quietness, un- affected apparently by the atmosphere of intense feeling about him, he said, in a low, even tone; "Mr. President: When the mariner has been tossed for many days in thick weather and on an unknown sea, he naturally avails him- self of the first pause in the storm, the earliest glance of the sun, to take his latitude and ascertain how far the elements have driven him from his true course. Let us imitate his prudence; and, before we float farther on the waves of this debate, refer to the point from which we departed, that we may, at least, be able to conjecture where we now are. I ask for the reading of the resolution before the Senate." The opening sentence was a piece of con- summate art. The simple and appropriate image, the low voice, the calm manner, relieved the strained excitement of the audience, which might have ended by disconcerting the speaker, if it had been maintained. Every one was now at his ease; and when the monotonous reading of the resolution ceased, Mr. Webster was master of the situation, and had his listeners in complete control. With breathless attention they followed him as he pro- ceeded. The strong masculine sentences, the sarcasm, the pathos, the reason- ing, the burning appeals to love of State and country, flowed on unbroken. As his feelings warmed the fire came into his eyes; there was a glow on his swathy cheek; his strong right arm seemed to sweep away resistlessly the whole phalanx of his opponents, and the deep and melodious cadences of his voice sounded like harmonious organ-tones as they filled the chamber with their music, As the last words died away in silence, those who had listened looked wonderingly at each other, dimly conscious that they had heard one of the grand speeches which are landmarks in the history of eloquence; and the men of the North and of New England went forth full of the pride of victory, for their champion had triumphed, and no assurance was needed to prove to the world that this time no answer could be made.1
1 Daniel Webster, by Henry Cabot Lodge, pp. 177-179.
59
A HISTORY
Senator Hayne of South Carolina had argued that a State had the right to determine for itself whether a law enacted by the national congress were constitutional or not, and his State was threatening to set aside the tariff law. The theory on which the doctrine of State Rights rested was, that the Amer- ican Union was a confederation, an experiment in government, and that the Constitution was a compact of sovereign states, any one of which might break the compact at will. There are historical arguments in favor of this view, but, whatever may have been the original intentions of the framers of the Constitu- tion,-and there were differences of intention,-the states had grown together into one. Acts of congress had assumed that there was a single nation and that the whole controlled the parts. All rights not reserved to the states in the Constitution were yielded to the nation as a whole. The union could be dissolved only by voluntary consent, or by revolution. All the previous training of Webster fitted him for the mighty occasion. His study of constitutional rights and privileges from boyhood had gathered arguments, illustrations and powerful forms of expression. His memory was stored with thunderbolts that flashed before him, and all he had to do was to reach out and catch them as they went flaming by. His encomium of Massa- chusetts and the peroration of his first reply to Hayne are familiar to almost every school boy. The latter is too good to omit :
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 preserving liberty when the bonds that unite us together shall be broken assunder. I have not accustomed myself 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 counsellor in the affairs of this government whose thoughts should be mainly bent on considering, not how the Union may be best preserved, but how tolerable 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 for our children. Beyond that I seek not to penetrate the veil. God grant 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 behold for the last time the sun in heaven, may I not see him shining on the broken, dishonored fragments of a once glorious Union ; on States dissevered, discordant, belligerent; on a land rent with civil feuds, or drenched, it may be, in fraternal blood. Let their last feeble and
60
NEW HAMPSHIRE
lingering glance rather behold the gorgeous ensign of the republic, now known and honored throughout the earth, still full high advanced, its arms and trophies streaming in their original lustre, not a stripe erased or polluted, not a single star obscured, bearing for its motto, no such miserable interroga- tory as "What is all this worth?" nor those other words of delusion and folly, "Liberty first and Union afterwards"; 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.
It is impossible to trace in a few pages the political career of Daniel Webster, interwoven, as it is, with the legislation, legal decisions, and party struggles of nearly half a century. Twice he was made Secretary of State, and during his term of office the Ashburton Treaty was concluded, which settled the northern boundary of Maine and New Hampshire and in which Maine's loss was New Hampshire's gain. The treaty was a compromise for the sake of peace. Each nation surrendered something, and hence those who claimed all were not satisfied. Mr. Webster's whole policy was one, as he thought, of honor- able compromise to avoid civil and foreign war and to preserve the Union. All other matters were of secondary importance to him. After serving in President Harrison's cabinet from 184I to 1845 he was again elected senator from Massachusetts. The great question before the nation then was the extension of slave territory and the return of fugitive slaves. Mr. Webster, in his heart, was opposed to human slavery and had spoken many winged words against it. He recognized, however, what the abolitionists were determined to overlook, that the slave- holding states had certain constitutional rights, and that moral ideals can not be reached and put into practice immediately. Much as he disliked slavery, he feared and hated civil strife and disunion more. He argued that there must be concessions, that extremists in both North and South must yield something. Compromise only could keep the peace. Hence, in his cele- brated speech of the seventh of March, 1850, he seemed to recede from his former positions in defense of human rights and freedom and to yield too much to the wishes and claims of Southerners. He had said, in 1830, "I regard domestic slavery as one of the greatest evils, both moral and political," and he never changed his mind on that point; but in the seventh of
61
A HISTORY
March speech he did not speak out so boldly. The speech was condemned by abolitionists for what he did not say, and he was interpreted as apologizing for an infamous institution. The thoroughgoing moralist can make no compromise with sin; on the other hand the wise, political statesman must sometimes tolerate evil for a time, till the fitting opportunity and means are at hand to crush it. The extreme abolitionists were not states- men; they were impassioned preachers of the gospel of human freedom. With them slavery must be at once abolished, at whatever cost. We admire their moral enthusiasm ; we question the wisdom of their policy.
Impartial history, if that ever is written, will concede to Daniel Webster higher motives than were assigned to him at that time. Theodore Parker, and the great poets, Lowell, Longfellow and Whittier, expressed the moral sense of New England in their denunciations of Webster's speech. The lines of Whittier have become famous; they are terrible in their scorn :
Revile him not-the Tempter hath A snare for all. And pitying, not scorn and wrath, Befit his fall.
Oh, dumb be passion's stormy rage, When he who might Have lighted up and led his age Falls back in night.
Let not the land once proud of him Insult him now.
Nor brand with deeper shame his dim Dishonored brow.
But let its humbled sons, instead, From sea to lake, A long lament, as for the dead, In sadness make.
Then pay the reverence of old days To his dead fame; Walk backward, with averted gaze, And hide the shame.
Perhaps this poem has done more than anything else to
62
NEW HAMPSHIRE
dim the glory of America's greatest orator. The moral radiance of the reformer has outshone the intellectual splendor of the compromiser. It was said then, that Webster was influenced by his desire to become president of the United States. This office and that of minister to the court of Great Britain were the two positions to which his ambition grew to aspire. All efforts to secure even his nomination for the presidency failed. He was too independent in his utterances to be a popular leader. Like Charles Sumner, he was more of a friend to nations than to individual men. He was never, like Henry Clay, the idol of the people. His seventh of March speech, read by hundreds of thousands, made him the leader of the privileged classes rather than of the toilers. The money of Boston merchants and aristo- crats pensioned him in his last years. One man in New York sent him seven thousand dollars because of that speech that damned his reputation more than all else he ever did. The fame of Webster would have been untarnished, had he died before the fatal seventh of March. The future may concede that he was wise and politic, but not that he was inflexibly righteous. The calumnies invented against his private life and the unsifted gossip about his drunkenness may be passed over as unworthy of consideration. Both have been sufficiently refuted by his biographers.
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.