Election of General Jackson.--Debate on Foot's Resolution.--Subject
of the Resolution, and Objects of its Mover.--Mr. Hayne's First
Speech.--Mr. Webster's original Participation in the Debate
unpremeditated.--His First Speech.--Reply of Mr. Hayne with
increased Asperity.--Mr. Webster's Great Speech.--Its Threefold
Object.--Description of the Manner of Mr. Webster in the Delivery
of this Speech, from Mr. March's "Reminiscences of
Congress."--Reception of his Speech throughout the Country.--The
Dinner at New York.--Chancellor Kent's Remarks.--Final Disposal
of Foot's Resolution.--Report of Mr. Webster's Speech.--Mr.
Healey's Painting.
In the interval between the two sessions of the Twentieth Congress, the
Presidential election was decided. Mr. Adams and General Jackson were
the opposing candidates; and the latter was chosen by a large popular
majority. This result was brought about by the active cooeperation with
General Jackson's original supporters of the friends of Mr. Calhoun, and
many of the friends of the other candidates of 1824. This cooeperation
implied the combination of the most discordant materials, which did not,
however, prevent its members during the canvass from heaping the
bitterest reproaches upon Mr. Adams's administration for receiving the
support of Mr. Clay. That there was no cordiality among the component
elements of the party by which General Jackson was elevated to the chair
was soon quite apparent.
The first session of the Twenty-first Congress, that of 1829-30, is
rendered memorable in the history of Mr. Webster, as well as in the
parliamentary history of the country, by what has been called the debate
on Foot's resolution, in which Mr. Webster delivered the speech which is
usually regarded as his ablest, and which may probably with truth be
pronounced the most celebrated speech ever delivered in Congress. The
great importance of this effort will no doubt be considered as a
sufficient reason for relating somewhat in detail the circumstances
under which it was made.
The debate arose in the following manner.
On the 29th of December, 1829, Mr. Foot, one of the Senators from
Connecticut, moved the following resolution:--
"_Resolved_, That the Committee on Public Lands be instructed to
inquire and report the quantity of public lands remaining unsold
within each State and Territory, and whether it be expedient to
limit for a certain period the sales of the public lands to such
lands only as have heretofore been offered for sale, and are now
subject to entry at the _minimum_ price. And, also, whether the
office of Surveyor-General, and some of the land offices, may not be
abolished without detriment to the public interest."
There is no reason to believe that, in bringing forward this resolution,
Mr. Foot acted in concert with any other member of the Senate. When it
came up for consideration the next day, the mover stated that he had
been induced to offer the resolution from having at the last session
examined the report of the Commissioner of the Land Office, from which
it appeared that the quantity of land remaining unsold at the _minimum_
price of one dollar and twenty-five cents per acre exceeded seventy-two
millions of acres; while it appeared from the commissioner's report at
this session, that the annual demand was not likely to exceed a million
of acres at present, although of course it might be expected somewhat to
increase with the growth of the population.
This resolution, though one of inquiry only, was resisted. It was
represented by Mr. Benton of Missouri as a resolution to inquire into
the expediency of committing a great injury upon the new States of the
West. Mr. Holmes of Maine supported the resolution, as one of inquiry
into an important subject. Mr. Foot disclaimed every purpose unfriendly
to the West, and at the close of the conversation (in which Mr. Webster
took no part), it was agreed that the consideration of the resolution
should be postponed to the 11th of January, and made the special order
of the day for that day. In this manner, it often happens that a
resolution of inquiry on a business question of no urgent importance,
intended to have no political bearing, and brought forward without
concert with others by an individual, becomes by delay the theme of
impassioned debates for weeks and months, to the serious obstruction of
the real business of Congress. In the present case, it must be admitted
that the loss of the public time thus occasioned was amply made up, by
the importance of the speech which has given celebrity to the debate.
The consideration of Mr. Foot's resolution was not resumed till
Wednesday, the 13th of January, when it was opposed by several Western
gentlemen. It was next taken up on Monday, the 18th, when Mr. Benton of
Missouri spoke at length against it. On Tuesday, the 19th, Mr. Holmes of
Maine replied at no great length to Mr. Benton. Other members took some
part in the debate, and then Mr. Hayne of South Carolina commenced a
speech, which occupied the rest of the day. Mr. Hayne was one of the
younger members of the Senate. He came forward in his native State in
1814, when hardly of age, with great _eclat_, filled in rapid succession
responsible offices, and came to the Senate of the United States in
1823, with a reputation already brilliant, and rapidly increasing. He
was active and diligent in business, fluent, graceful, and persuasive as
a debater; of a sanguine and self-relying temper; shrinking from no
antagonist, and disposed to take the part of a champion.
Mr. Webster, up to this time, had not participated in the debate, which
had in fact been rather a pointless affair, and was dragging its slow
length through the Senate, no one knew exactly to what purpose. It had
as yet assumed no character in which it invited or required his
attention. He was much engaged at the time in the Supreme Court of the
United States. The important case of John Jacob Astor and the State of
New York, in which he was of counsel, was to come on for argument on the
20th of January; and on that day the argument of the case was in fact
commenced.[12] Leaving the court-room when the court adjourned on
Tuesday, the 19th, Mr. Webster came into the Senate in season to hear
the greater part of Mr. Hayne's speech; and it was suggested to him by
several friends, and among others by Mr. Bell of New Hampshire, Mr.
Chambers of Maryland, and his colleague, Mr. Silsbee, that an immediate
answer to Mr. Hayne was due from him. The line of discussion pursued by
the Senator from South Carolina was such as to require, if not to
provoke, an immediate answer from the North. Mr. Webster accordingly
rose when Mr. Hayne took his seat, but gave way to a motion for
adjournment from Mr. Benton. These circumstances will sufficiently show
how entirely without premeditation, and with what preoccupation by other
trains of thought, Mr. Webster was led into this great intellectual
conflict.
He appeared in the Senate the next morning, Wednesday, January 20th,
and Mr. Foot's resolution, being called up, was modified, on the
suggestion of Messrs. Sprague of Maine and Woodbury of New Hampshire, by
adding the following clause:--
"Or whether it be expedient to adopt measures to hasten the sales
and extend more rapidly the surveys of the public lands."
Mr. Webster immediately proceeded with the debate. No elaborate
preparation, of course, could have been made by him, as the speech
of Mr. Hayne, to which his reply was mainly directed, was delivered
the day before. He vindicated the government, under its successive
administrations, from the general charge of having managed the public
lands in a spirit of hostility to the Western States. He particularly
defended New England against the accusation of hostility to the West.
A passage in this part of his speech, contrasting Ohio as she was in
1794 with the Ohio of 1830, will compare advantageously with any thing
in these volumes. In speaking of the settlement of the West, Mr. Webster
introduced with just commendation the honored name of Nathan Dane, as
the author of the Ordinance of 1787, for the organization and
government of the territory northwest of the Ohio. He maintained that
every measure of legislation beneficial to the West had been carried
in Congress by the aid of New England votes, and he closed by an
allusion to his own course as uniformly friendly to that part of the
Union. Mr. Benton followed Mr. Webster, and commenced a speech in
reply.
The next day, Thursday, the 21st, the subject again came up, and it was
now evident that the debate had put on a new character. Its real
interest and importance were felt to be commencing. Mr. Chambers
expressed the hope that the Senate would consent to postpone the further
consideration of the resolution till the next Monday, as Mr. Webster,
who had engaged in the discussion and wished to be present when it
should be resumed, had pressing engagements out of the house, and could
not conveniently give his attendance in the Senate before Monday.[13]
Mr. Hayne said "he saw the gentleman from Massachusetts in his seat, and
presumed he could make an arrangement which would enable him to be
present here, during the discussion to-day. He was unwilling that this
subject should be postponed before he had an opportunity of replying to
some of the observations which had fallen from that gentleman yesterday.
He would not deny that some things had fallen from him which rankled[14]
here (touching his breast), from which he would desire at once to
relieve himself. The gentleman had discharged his fire in the presence
of the Senate. He hoped he would now afford him an opportunity of
returning the shot."
The manner in which this was said was not such as to soften the
harshness of the sentiment. It will be difficult, in reverting to Mr.
Webster's speech, to find either in its substance or spirit any adequate
grounds for the feeling manifested by Mr. Hayne. Nor would it probably
be easy in the history of Congress to find another case in which a
similar act of accommodation in the way of postponing a subject has been
refused, at least on such a ground. Mr. Webster, in reply to Mr. Hayne's
remark, that he wished without delay to return his shot, said, "Let the
discussion proceed; I am ready now to receive the gentleman's fire."
Mr. Benton then addressed the Senate for about an hour, in conclusion of
the speech which he had commenced the day before. At the close of Mr.
Benton's argument, Mr. Bell of New Hampshire moved that the further
consideration of the subject should be postponed till Monday, but the
motion was negatived. Mr. Hayne then took the floor, and spoke for about
an hour in reply to Mr. Webster's remarks of the preceding day. Before
he had concluded his argument, the Senate adjourned till Monday. On that
day, January the 25th, he spoke for two hours and a half, and completed
his speech. Mr. Webster immediately rose to reply, but the day was far
advanced, and he yielded to a motion for adjournment.
The second speech of Mr. Hayne, to which Mr. Webster was now called
upon to reply, was still more strongly characterized than the first
with severity, not to say bitterness, towards the Eastern States. The
tone toward Mr. Webster personally was not courteous. It bordered on
the offensive. It was difficult not to find in both of the speeches of
the Senator from South Carolina the indication of a preconceived
purpose to hold up New England, and Mr. Webster as her most
distinguished representative, to public odium. In his second speech, Mr.
Hayne reaffirmed and urged those constitutional opinions which are
usually known as the doctrines of Nullification; that is to say, the
assumed right of a State, when she deems herself oppressed by an
unconstitutional act of Congress, to declare by State ordinance the
act of Congress null and void, and discharge the citizens of the State
from the duty of obedience.
Such being the character of Mr. Hayne's speech, Mr. Webster had three
objects to accomplish in his answer. The first was to repel the
personalities toward himself, which formed one of the most prominent
features of Mr. Hayne's speech. This object was accomplished by a few
retaliatory strokes, in which the severest sarcasm was so mingled with
unaffected good humor and manly expostulation, as to carry captive the
sympathy of the audience. The vindication of the Eastern States
generally, and of Massachusetts in particular, was the second object,
and was pursued in a still higher strain. When it was finished, no one
probably regretted more keenly than the accomplished antagonist the easy
credence which he had lent to the purveyors of forgotten scandal, some
of whom were present, and felt grateful for their obscurity.
The third and far the more important object with Mr. Webster was the
constitutional argument, in which he asserted the character of our
political system as a government established by the people of the United
States, in contradistinction to a compact between the separate States;
and exposed the fallacy of attempting to turn the natural right of
revolution against the government into a right reserved under the
Constitution to overturn the government itself.
Several chapters of the interesting work of Mr. March, already referred
to,[15] are devoted to the subject of this debate; and we have thought
that we could in no way convey to the reader so just and distinct an
impression of the effect of Mr. Webster's speech at the time of its
delivery, as by borrowing largely from his animated pages.
* * * * *
"It was on Tuesday, January the 26th, 1830,--a day to be hereafter for
ever memorable in Senatorial annals,--that the Senate resumed the
consideration of Foot's resolution. There never was before, in the city,
an occasion of so much excitement. To witness this great intellectual
contest, multitudes of strangers had for two or three days previous been
rushing into the city, and the hotels overflowed. As early as 9 o'clock
of this morning, crowds poured into the Capitol, in hot haste; at 12
o'clock, the hour of meeting, the Senate-chamber--its galleries, floor,
and even lobbies--was filled to its utmost capacity. The very stairways
were dark with men, who clung to one another, like bees in a swarm.
"The House of Representatives was early deserted. An adjournment would
have hardly made it emptier. The Speaker, it is true, retained his
chair, but no business of moment was, or could be, attended to. Members
all rushed in to hear Mr. Webster, and no call of the House or other
parliamentary proceedings could compel them back. The floor of the
Senate was so densely crowded, that persons once in could not get out,
nor change their position; in the rear of the Vice-Presidential
chair, the crowd was particularly intense. Dixon H. Lewis, then a
Representative from Alabama, became wedged in here. From his enormous
size, it was impossible for him to move without displacing a vast
portion of the multitude. Unfortunately, too, for him, he was jammed
in directly behind the chair of the Vice-President, where he could
not see, and hardly hear, the speaker. By slow and laborious effort,
pausing occasionally to breathe, he gained one of the windows, which,
constructed of painted glass, flank the chair of the Vice-President on
either side. Here he paused, unable to make more headway. But
determined to see Mr. Webster as he spoke, with his knife he made a
large hole in one of the panes of the glass; which is still visible as
he made it. Many were so placed as not to be able to see the speaker
at all.
"The courtesy of Senators accorded to the fairer sex room on the
floor--the most gallant of them, their own seats. The gay bonnets and
brilliant dresses threw a varied and picturesque beauty over the scene,
softening and embellishing it.
"Seldom, if ever, has speaker in this or any other country had more
powerful incentives to exertion; a subject, the determination of which
involved the most important interests, and even duration, of the
republic; competitors, unequalled in reputation, ability, or position; a
name to make still more glorious, or lose for ever; and an audience,
comprising not only persons of this country most eminent in intellectual
greatness, but representatives of other nations, where the art of
eloquence had flourished for ages. All the soldier seeks in opportunity
was here.
"Mr. Webster perceived, and felt equal to, the destinies of the moment.
The very greatness of the hazard exhilarated him. His spirits rose with
the occasion. He awaited the time of onset with a stern and impatient
joy. He felt like the war-horse of the Scriptures, who 'paweth in the
valley, and rejoiceth in his strength: who goeth on to meet the armed
men,--who saith among the trumpets, Ha, ha! and who smelleth the battle
afar off, the thunder of the captains and the shouting.'
"A confidence in his own resources, springing from no vain estimate of
his power, but the legitimate offspring of previous severe mental
discipline, sustained and excited him. He had gauged his opponents, his
subject, and _himself_.
"He was, too, at this period, in the very prime of manhood. He had
reached middle age,--an era in the life of man when the faculties,
physical or intellectual, may be supposed to attain their fullest
organization and most perfect development. Whatever there was in him of
intellectual energy and vitality, the occasion, his full life, and high
ambition might well bring forth.
"He never rose on an ordinary occasion to address an ordinary audience
more self-possessed. There was no tremulousness in his voice nor manner;
nothing hurried, nothing simulated. The calmness of superior strength
was visible everywhere; in countenance, voice, and bearing. A
deep-seated conviction of the extraordinary character of the emergency,
and of his ability to control it, seemed to possess him wholly. If an
observer, more than ordinarily keen-sighted, detected at times something
like exultation in his eye, he presumed it sprang from the excitement of
the moment, and the anticipation of victory.
"The anxiety to hear the speech was so intense, irrepressible, and
universal, that no sooner had the Vice-President assumed the chair, than
a motion was made, and unanimously carried, to postpone the ordinary
preliminaries of Senatorial action, and to take up immediately the
consideration of the resolution.
"Mr. Webster rose and addressed the Senate. His exordium is known by
heart everywhere: 'Mr. President, when the mariner has been tossed, for
many days, in thick weather, and on an unknown sea, he naturally avails
himself 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 this 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.'
"There wanted no more to enchain the attention. There was a spontaneous,
though silent, expression of eager approbation, as the orator concluded
these opening remarks. And while the clerk read the resolution, many
attempted the impossibility of getting nearer the speaker. Every head
was inclined closer towards him, every ear turned in the direction of
his voice, and that deep, sudden, mysterious silence followed, which
always attends fulness of emotion. From the sea of upturned faces before
him, the orator beheld his thoughts reflected as from a mirror. The
varying countenance, the suffused eye, the earnest smile, the
ever-attentive look, assured him of his audience's entire sympathy. If
among his hearers there were those who affected at first an indifference
to his glowing thoughts and fervent periods, the difficult mask was soon
laid aside, and profound, undisguised, devoted attention followed. In
the earlier part of his speech, one of his principal opponents seemed
deeply engrossed in the careful perusal of a newspaper he held before
his face; but this, on nearer approach, proved to be _upside down_. In
truth, all, sooner or later, voluntarily, or in spite of themselves,
were wholly carried away by the eloquence of the orator.
* * * * *
"Those who had doubted Mr. Webster's ability to cope with and overcome
his opponents were fully satisfied of their error before he had
proceeded far in his speech. Their fears soon took another direction.
When they heard his sentences of powerful thought, towering in
accumulative grandeur, one above the other, as if the orator strove,
Titan-like, to reach the very heavens themselves, they were giddy with
an apprehension that he would break down in his flight. They dared not
believe that genius, learning, and intellectual endowment however
uncommon, that was simply mortal, could sustain itself long in a career
seemingly so perilous. They feared an Icarian fall.
* * * * *
"What New England heart was there but throbbed with vehement,
tumultuous, irrepressible emotion, as he dwelt upon New England
sufferings, New England struggles, and New England triumphs during the
war of the Revolution? There was scarcely a dry eye in the Senate; all
hearts were overcome; grave judges and men grown old in dignified life
turned aside their heads, to conceal the evidences of their emotion.
"In one corner of the gallery was clustered a group of Massachusetts
men. They had hung from the first moment upon the words of the speaker,
with feelings variously but always warmly excited, deepening in
intensity as he proceeded. At first, while the orator was going through
his exordium, they held their breath and hid their faces, mindful of the
savage attack upon him and New England, and the fearful odds against
him, her champion;--as he went deeper into his speech, they felt easier;
when he turned Hayne's flank on Banquo's ghost, they breathed freer and
deeper. But now, as he alluded to Massachusetts, their feelings were
strained to the highest tension; and when the orator, concluding his
encomium of the land of their birth, turned, intentionally or otherwise,
his burning eye full upon them, _they shed tears like girls_!
"No one who was not present can understand the excitement of the scene.
No one who was, can give an adequate description of it. No word-painting
can convey the deep, intense enthusiasm, the reverential attention, of
that vast assembly, nor limner transfer to canvas their earnest, eager,
awe-struck countenances. Though language were as subtile and flexible as
thought, it still would be impossible to represent the full idea of the
scene. There is something intangible in an emotion, which cannot be
transferred. The nicer shades of feeling elude pursuit. Every
description, therefore, of the occasion, seems to the narrator himself
most tame, spiritless, unjust.
"Much of the instantaneous effect of the speech arose, of course, from
the orator's delivery,--the tones of his voice, his countenance, and
manner. These die mostly with the occasion that calls them forth; the
impression is lost in the attempt at transmission from one mind to
another. They can only be described in general terms. 'Of the
effectiveness of Mr. Webster's manner in many parts,' says Mr. Everett,
'it would be in vain to attempt to give any one not present the faintest
idea. It has been my fortune to hear some of the ablest speeches of the
greatest living orators on both sides of the water, but I must confess I
never heard any thing which so completely realized my conception of what
Demosthenes was when he delivered the Oration for the Crown.'
* * * * *
"The variety of incident during the speech, and the rapid fluctuation of
passions, kept the audience in continual expectation and ceaseless
agitation. There was no chord of the heart the orator did not strike, as
with a master-hand. The speech was a complete drama of comic and
pathetic scenes; one varied excitement; laughter and tears gaining
alternate victory.
"A great portion of the speech is strictly argumentative; an exposition
of constitutional law. But grave as such portion necessarily is,
severely logical, abounding in no fancy or episode, it engrossed
throughout the undivided attention of every intelligent hearer.
Abstractions, under the glowing genius of the orator, acquired a beauty,
a vitality, a power to thrill the blood and enkindle the affections,
awakening into earnest activity many a dormant faculty. His ponderous
syllables had an energy, a vehemence of meaning in them, that
fascinated, while they startled. His thoughts in their statuesque beauty
merely would have gained all critical judgment; but he realized the
antique fable, and warmed the marble into life. There was a sense of
power in his language,--of power withheld and suggestive of still
greater power,--that subdued, as by a spell of mystery, the hearts of
all. For power, whether intellectual or physical, produces in its
earnest development a feeling closely allied to awe. It was never more
felt than on this occasion. It had entire mastery. The sex which is
said to love it best, and abuse it most, seemed as much or more carried
away than the sterner one. Many who had entered the hall with light, gay
thoughts, anticipating at most a pleasurable excitement, soon became
deeply interested in the speaker and his subject; surrendered him their
entire heart; and when the speech was over, and they left the hall, it
was with sadder, perhaps, but surely with far more elevated and
ennobling emotions.
"The exulting rush of feeling with which he went through the peroration
threw a glow over his countenance, like inspiration. Eye, brow, each
feature, every line of the face, seemed touched, as with a celestial
fire.
"The swell and roll of his voice struck upon the ears of the spellbound
audience, in deep and melodious cadence, as waves upon the shore of the
'far-resounding' sea. The Miltonic grandeur of his words was the fit
expression of his thought, and raised his hearers up to his theme.
His voice, exerted to its utmost power, penetrated every recess or
corner of the Senate,--penetrated even the ante-rooms and stairways, as
he pronounced in deepest tones of pathos these words of solemn
significance: '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 and
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 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, nor a single star obscured, bearing for its motto, no such
miserable interrogatory 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 American heart,--LIBERTY AND UNION, NOW AND FOR EVER, ONE
AND INSEPARABLE!'
* * * * *
"The speech was over, but the tones of the orator still lingered upon
the ear, and the audience, unconscious of the close, retained their
positions. The agitated countenance, the heaving breast, the suffused
eye, attested the continued influence of the spell upon them. Hands
that, in the excitement of the moment, had sought each other, still
remained closed in an unconscious grasp. Eye still turned to eye, to
receive and repay mutual sympathy; and everywhere around seemed
forgetfulness of all but the orator's presence and words."--pp.
132-148.
* * * * *
After having spoken about three hours on the 26th of January, Mr.
Webster gave way for an adjournment. He resumed and concluded the speech
on the following day. During most of the time that he was speaking, Mr.
Hayne occupied himself in taking notes, and rose to reply at the
conclusion of Mr. Webster's argument. An adjournment was proposed by one
of Mr. Hayne's friends, but he wisely determined to terminate all that
he intended to say on the subject upon the spot. He accordingly
addressed the Senate for about half an hour upon the constitutional
question which formed the most important portion of Mr. Webster's
speech. These remarks of Mr. Hayne were, in the newspaper report,
expanded into an elaborate argument, which occupies nineteen pages in
the register of Congressional debates. When Mr. Hayne sat down, Mr.
Webster, in turn, rose to make a brief rejoinder. "The gentleman," said
he, "has in vain attempted to reconstruct his shattered argument"; and
this formidable exordium was followed up by a brief restatement of his
own argument, which, for condensation, precision, and force, may be
referred to as a specimen of parliamentary logic never surpassed. The
art of reasoning on moral questions can go no further.
Thus terminated the day's great work. In the evening the Senatorial
champions met at a friend's house, and exchanged those courteous
salutations which mitigate the asperity of political collision, and
prevent the conflicts of party from embittering social life.
The sensation produced by the great debate on those who heard it was but
the earnest of its effect on the country at large. The length of Mr.
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
constitutional 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.
Circumstances 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. Constitutional law ceased to
remain wrapped up in the breasts, 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 constitutional 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 assumed a wider range and wandered farther from
the starting-point. Many speeches were made which, under other
circumstances, 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 nobly delineated the person of the principal individual in the act
of replying to Mr. Hayne, with those of his colleagues in the Senate.
The passages and galleries of the Senate-Chamber are filled with
attentive listeners of both sexes. 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.