THREE GREAT STATESMEN
JOHN C. CALHOUN
The territory which we obtained from Mexico added much to the vastness of
our country. But it led to a bitter dispute between the North and the
South over slavery. For the North said: "All this territory shall be
free." The South said: "It must all be open to slavery."
[Illustration: John C. Calhoun.]
The trouble over slavery was no new thing. It had begun to be really
serious and dangerous many years before the Mexican War. To understand
why, a year or two after the close of this war, there should be such deep
and violent feeling over the question of making the territory free or
opening it to slavery, we must go back to some earlier events in the
history of the Union.
In doing so, we shall find it simpler to follow the careers of three great
statesmen, John C. Calhoun, Henry Clay, and Daniel Webster, who took each
a prominent part in the events.
John C. Calhoun, born in South Carolina in 1782, was the youngest but one
of a family of five children. His father died when he was only thirteen,
and until he was eighteen he remained on the farm, living a quiet, simple
out-of-door life, ploughing, hunting, riding, and fishing.
Then his brother, who had observed John's quickness of mind, persuaded him
to get an education. After studying two years and a quarter in an academy,
he entered the junior class at Yale College. Graduating in 1804, he at
once took a course in the law school at Litchfield, Connecticut, and then
returned home to complete his studies for the bar.
[Illustration: Calhoun's Office and Library.]
Calhoun's conduct in school was above reproach, and as a man he was always
steady and serious-minded. During the early years of his public life he
won much praise for his close attention to work, his stately speeches, and
his courteous manners. His slender and erect form, his dignified bearing,
and his piercing dark eyes made him an impressive figure; while, as a
speaker, his powerful voice and winning manner were sure to command
attention.
In 1808 he entered the South Carolina Legislature. This was the beginning
of his long public career of more than forty years. During this time he
served his country as a representative in Congress, Secretary of War,
Vice-President of the United States, Secretary of State, and United States
senator.
In all these many years he was a prominent leader, especially in those
events which concerned the slave-holding Southern planter. This we shall
see later, after we have made the acquaintance of the second of the
powerful trio of great statesmen, Henry Clay.
HENRY CLAY
Henry Clay was born near Richmond, Virginia, in 1777, in a low, level
region called "the Slashes." He was one of seven children. His father was
a Baptist clergyman, of fine voice and pleasing manner of speaking. He
died when little Henry was four years old, leaving but a small sum for his
family to live upon.
Henry went, like the other boys of "the Slashes," to a tiny log school
without windows or floor. The schoolmaster, who knew very little himself,
taught the boys to read, write, and cipher. But that was all.
Outside of school hours Henry shared in the farm work. He helped with the
ploughing and often rode the family pony to the mill, using a rope for a
bridle and a bag of corn, wheat, meal, or flour for a saddle. For this
reason he has been called "the Mill Boy of the Slashes."
[Illustration: Henry Clay.]
When fourteen years old he was given a place as clerk in a Richmond drug
store. But he was not to stay there long, for about this time his mother
married again, and his stepfather became interested in him. Realizing that
Henry was a boy of unusual ability, he secured for him a place as copying
clerk in the office of the Court of Chancery at Richmond.
[Illustration: The Birthplace of Henry Clay, near Richmond.]
Henry was fifteen years old, tall, thin, and homely, when he entered this
office. The other clerks were inclined to jeer at his awkwardness and his
plain, home-made, ill-fitting clothes. But Henry's sharp retorts quickly
silenced them, and they soon grew to respect and like him. He was an
earnest student. He stayed indoors and read in the evenings, while the
other young fellows were idling about the town. He was eager to do
something in the world. His opportunity soon came in the ordinary course
of his daily work. His fine handwriting attracted the notice of the
chancellor, a very able lawyer. This man was wise and kindly and had a
deep influence on his young friend.
[Illustration: The Schoolhouse in "the Slashes."]
Clay joined the Richmond Debating Society and soon became the star
speaker. He improved his speaking by studying daily some passage in a book
of history or science, and then going out into a quiet place and
declaiming what he had learned.
The chancellor knew about this, and it pleased him. He advised Henry Clay
to study law, and within a year after his studies began, when he was only
twenty-one years old, he was admitted to the bar.
To begin his law practice, he went to Lexington, Kentucky, which was then
a small place of not more than fifty houses; but Clay very soon built up a
good practice. Although he had arrived with scarcely a penny, within a
year and a half he had been so successful that he was able to marry the
daughter of a leading family. He soon owned a beautiful estate near
Lexington, which he called "Ashland," and with it several slaves.
He became a great favorite among the people of the State, largely because
he was absolutely truthful and honest in all his dealings. He was also
talented, good-natured, and friendly to all. It is said that no man has
ever had such power to influence a Kentucky jury as Clay.
Twice he was sent to the United States Senate to fill seats left vacant by
resignation, and here his power as a speaker was so marked that when it
was known that he would address the Senate the galleries were always full.
Such was the beginning of his life as a statesman. It lasted some forty
years, and during this long period he was a prominent leader in the great
events having to do with the country's future.
He filled various national offices. He was Speaker of the House of
Representatives for many years, was four years Secretary of State, and
during much more than half of the time between 1831 and 1852 he was in the
United States Senate. Three times he was a candidate for President, but
each time he failed of election.
He would not swerve by a hair's breadth from what he considered his duty,
even for party ends. "I would rather be right than be President," he said,
and men knew that he was sincere.
Living in a Southern State, he would naturally have the interests of the
South at heart. But he did not always take her part. While Calhoun was apt
to see but one side of a question, Clay was inclined to see something of
both sides and to present his views in such a way as to bring about a
settlement. Therefore he was called "the Great Peacemaker."
His most important work as a peacemaker had to do with the Missouri
Compromise (1820), the compromise tariff (1833), and the Compromise of
1850--all of which we look into a little farther on, after we come to know
something about the last and perhaps the greatest of our three statesmen,
Daniel Webster. For all three were interested in the same great movement.
DANIEL WEBSTER
Daniel Webster was born among the hills of New Hampshire, in 1782, the son
of a poor farmer, and the ninth of ten children. As he was a frail child,
not able to work much on the farm, his parents permitted him to spend much
of his time fishing, hunting, and roaming at will over the hills. Thus he
came into close touch with nature and absorbed a kind of knowledge which
was very useful to him in later years.
He was always learning things, sometimes in most unusual ways, as is shown
by an incident which took place when he was only eight years old. Having
seen in a store near his home a small cotton handkerchief with the
Constitution of the United States printed upon it, he gathered up his
small earnings to the amount of twenty-five cents and eagerly secured the
treasure. From this unusual copy he learned the Constitution, word for
word, so that he could repeat it from beginning to end.
[Illustration: Daniel Webster.]
Of course, this was a most remarkable thing for an eight-year-old boy to
do, but the boy was himself remarkable. He spent much of his time poring
over books. They were few in number but of good quality, and he read them
over and over again until they became a part of himself. It gave him keen
pleasure to memorize fine poems and also noble selections from the Bible,
for he learned easily and remembered well what he learned. In this way he
stored his mind with the highest kind of truth.
When he was fourteen his father sent him to Phillips Exeter Academy. The
boys he met there were mostly from homes of wealth and culture. Some of
them were rude and laughed at Daniel's plain dress and country manners. Of
course, the poor boy, whose health was not robust and who was by nature
shy and independent, found such treatment hard to bear. But he studied
well and soon commanded respect because of his good work.
After leaving this school he studied for six months under a private tutor,
and at the age of fifteen he was prepared to enter Dartmouth College.
Although he proved himself to be a youth of unusual mental power, he did
not take high rank in scholarship. But he continued to read widely and
thoughtfully and stored up much valuable knowledge, which later he used
with clearness and force in conversation and debate.
After being graduated from college Daniel taught for a year and earned
money enough to help pay his brother's college expenses. The following
year he studied law and in due time was admitted to the bar. As a lawyer
he was very successful, his income sometimes amounting to twenty thousand
dollars in a single year. In those days that was a very large sum.
But he could not manage his money affairs well and, no matter how large
his income, he was always in debt. This unfortunate state of affairs was
owing to a reckless extravagance, which he displayed in many ways.
Indeed, Webster was a man of such large ideas that of necessity he did all
things on a large scale. It was vastness that appealed to him. And this
ruling force in his nature explains his eagerness to keep the Union whole
and supreme over the States. This we shall soon clearly see.
SLAVERY AND THE TARIFF
Having taken this glimpse of our three heroes, let us see how the great
events of their time were largely moulded by their influence. All of these
events, as we are soon to learn, had a direct bearing on slavery, and that
was the great question of the day.
Up to the Revolution there was slavery in all the thirteen colonies. Some
of them wished to get rid of it; but England, the mother country, would
not allow them to do so, because she profited by the trade in slaves.
After the Revolution, however, when the States were free to do as they
pleased about slavery, some put an end to it on their own soil, and in
time Pennsylvania and the States to the north and east of it became free
States.
Many people then believed that slavery would by degrees die out of the
land, and perhaps this would have happened if the growing of cotton had
not been made profitable by Eli Whitney's invention of the cotton-gin.
After that invention came into use, instead of slavery's dying out, it
took a much stronger hold upon the planters of the South than it had ever
done before.
This fact became very evident when Missouri applied for admission into the
Union. The South, of course, wished it to come into the Union as a slave
State; the North, fearing the extension of slavery into the Louisiana
Purchase, was equally set upon its coming in as a free State.
The struggle over the question was a long and bitter one, but finally both
the North and the South agreed to give up a part of what they wanted; that
is, they agreed upon a compromise. It was this: Missouri was to enter the
Union as a slave State, but slavery was not to be allowed in any part of
the Louisiana Purchase which lay north or west of Missouri. This was
called the Missouri Compromise (1820).
It was brought about largely through the eloquence and power of Henry
Clay, and because of his part in it he was called "the Great Peacemaker."
But Calhoun was one of the men who did not think the Missouri Compromise
was a good thing for the country. He therefore strongly opposed it.
The next clash between the free States and the slave States was caused by
the question of the tariff, or tax upon goods brought from foreign
countries. Not long after the Missouri Compromise was agreed upon,
Northern manufacturers were urging Congress to pass a high-tariff law.
They said that, inasmuch as factory labor in England was so much cheaper
than in this country, goods made in England could be sold for less money
here than our own factory-made goods, unless a law was passed requiring a
tax, or duty, to be paid upon the goods brought over. Such a tax was
called a protective tariff.
Calhoun, who voiced the feeling of the Southern planters, said: "This high
tariff is unfair, for, while it protects the Northern man, it makes us of
the South poorer, because we have to pay so high for the things we do not
make."
You understand, there were no factories in the South, for the people were
mostly planters. With the cheap slave labor, a Southern man could make
more money by raising rice, cotton, sugar, or tobacco than he could by
manufacturing. Also, it was thought that the soil and climate of the South
made that section better fitted for agriculture than for anything else.
"So the South should be allowed," said Calhoun, "to buy the manufactured
goods--such as cheap clothing for her slaves, and household tools and
farming implements--where she can buy them at the lowest prices."
[Illustration: The Home of Daniel Webster, Marshfield, Mass.]
But in spite of this bitter opposition in the South, Congress passed the
high-tariff law in 1828, and another in 1832.
The people of South Carolina were indignant. So, under the guidance of
Calhoun, some of the leading men there met in convention and declared: "We
here and now nullify the tariff laws." By these words they meant that the
laws should not be carried out in South Carolina. Then they added: "If the
United States Government tries to enforce these laws on our soil, South
Carolina will go out of the Union and form a separate nation."
Andrew Jackson was at that time President of the United States. Although
he himself did not favor a high tariff, he was firm in his purpose that
whatever law Congress might pass should be enforced in every State in the
Union. When the news came to him of what South Carolina had done, he was
quietly smoking his corn-cob pipe. In a flash of anger he declared: "The
Union! It must and shall be preserved! Send for General Scott!" General
Scott was commander of the United States army, and "Old Hickory," as
President Jackson was proudly called by many of his admirers, was ready to
use the army and the navy, if necessary, to force any State to obey the
law.
In this bitter controversy Daniel Webster, then senator from
Massachusetts, had taken a bold stand for the Union. He said: "Congress
passed the tariff law for the whole country. If the Supreme Court decides
that Congress has the power, according to the Constitution, to pass such a
law, that settles the matter. South Carolina and every other State must
submit to this and every other law which Congress sees fit to make."
This shows clearly that Daniel Webster's belief was that the Union stood
first and the State second. His deep love for the Union breathes all
through his masterly speeches, the most famous of which is his "Reply to
Hayne." Hayne, a senator from South Carolina, was on the side of the South
and set forth its views in a public debate. He had declared that the State
was first and the Union second, and so powerful seemed his arguments that
many doubted whether even Daniel Webster could answer them.
But he did answer them. In a remarkable speech of four hours he held his
listeners spellbound, while he argued, with wonderful eloquence and power,
that the Union was supreme over the States.
Again the great peacemaker, Henry Clay, brought forward a plan of settling
the trouble between the two sections. By this compromise the duties were
to be gradually lowered. This plan was adopted by Congress (1833), and
again there was peace for a time.
THE COMPROMISE OF 1850
The next dangerous outbreak between the North and the South came at the
end of the Mexican War. Then arose the burning question: "Shall the
territory we have acquired from Mexico be free or open to slavery?" Of
course, the North wanted it to be free; the South wanted it to be open to
slavery.
Henry Clay tried again, as he had tried twice before--in 1820 and in
1833--to pour oil upon the troubled waters. Although he was now an old man
of seventy-two and in poor health, he spoke seventy times in his powerful,
persuasive way, to bring about the Compromise of 1850, which he hoped
would establish harmony between the North and the South and save the
Union.
On one occasion when he was to speak he had to enter the Capitol leaning
upon the arm of a friend, because he was too weak to climb the steps
alone. After entering the Senate Chamber that day, the great speech he
made was so long that his friends, fearing fatal results, urged him to
stop. But he refused. Later he said that he did not dare to stop for fear
he should never be able to begin again.
[Illustration: Henry Clay Addressing the United States Senate in 1850.]
Calhoun was no less ready to do all he could. Early in March, 1850, the
white-haired man, now in his sixty-eighth year and, like Clay, struggling
with illness, went to the Senate Chamber, swathed in flannels, to make his
last appeal in behalf of the slaveholders. The powerful speech he made,
which was intended as a warning to the North, expressed the deep and
sincere conviction of the aged statesman that the break-up of the Union
was at hand. He made a strong plea that the agitation against slavery
should stop, and that the South, which, he said, was the weaker section,
should be treated fairly by her stronger antagonist, the North.
Having made this last supreme effort in defense of the section which he
loved as he loved his own life, the pro-slavery veteran, supported by two
of his friends, passed out of the Senate Chamber.
But in spite of Calhoun's opposition, the Compromise of 1850 passed. "Let
California come in as a free State," it said. This pleased the North. "Let
the people in all the rest of the territory which we got from Mexico
decide for themselves whether they shall have slavery or freedom." This
pleased the South. It also adopted the Fugitive Slave Law, which said:
"When slaves run away from the South into the Northern States, they shall
be returned to their masters; and when Northern people are called upon to
help to capture them, they shall do so."
A month after his speech on this compromise Calhoun died. The last twenty
years of his life had been largely devoted to trying to secure what he
regarded as the rights of the slaveholders and of the whole South. He was
honest in his views. He was also sincere in his convictions that the South
was not receiving fair treatment from the North.
Henry Clay also died in 1852. Some of the qualities that gave him his rare
power over men were his magical voice, which was so deep and melodious
that many people of his time said it was the finest musical instrument
they had ever heard; his cheerful nature, which made him keenly enjoy life
and delight to see others enjoy it; and above all else his never-swerving
sincerity and honesty, which commanded the respect and confidence of all
who knew him. Men believed that Henry Clay was a true man. His popularity
grew in strength as he grew in years. His many followers proudly called
him "Gallant Harry of the West."
Webster's power as an orator was still more remarkable. His voice was
wonderful, his style was forceful, and his language was simple and direct.
But after all, it was his striking personal appearance which made the
deepest impression upon the men and women who heard him speak. It is told
that one day when he was walking through a street of Liverpool, a navvy
said of him: "That must be a king!" On another occasion Sydney Smith
exclaimed: "Good heavens, he is a small cathedral by himself!" He was
nearly six feet tall. He had a massive head, a broad, deep brow, and
great, coal-black eyes, which once seen could never be forgotten.
He, too, was faithful in his devotion to his country. To the day of his
death he showed his deep affection for the flag, the emblem of that Union
which had inspired his noblest efforts. During the last two weeks of his
life he was troubled much with sleeplessness. While through his open
window he gazed at the starlit sky, his eyes would sometimes fall upon a
small boat belonging to him, which floated near the shore not far away. By
his direction a ship lantern had been so placed that its light would fall
upon the stars and stripes flying there. At six in the evening the flag
was raised and was kept flying until six in the morning up to the day of
Webster's death.
He died in September, 1852, only a few weeks after his great compeer,
Henry Clay. His was a master spirit, and the sorrow of his passing was
well expressed by the stranger who said, when he looked at the face of the
dead: "Daniel Webster, the world without you will be lonesome."
SOME THINGS TO THINK ABOUT
1. What can you tell about the early life of John C. Calhoun? Of Henry
Clay? Of Daniel Webster?
2. Why was Clay called "the Great Peacemaker"?
3. Why were the people of South Carolina opposed to the high tariff laws
of 1828 and 1832?
4. What was Webster's idea of the Union, and in what way did it differ
from Hayne's?
5. What was the Missouri Compromise? What was the Compromise of 1850?
6. What do you admire about each of the three great statesmen?
7. Are you making frequent use of your maps?