MR. WEBSTER AS A MEMBER OF CONGRESS.
Before I proceed to speak of Mr. Webster’s Congressional career, I
will make room for a professional anecdote, which carries with it an
excellent lesson for my young readers.
I find it in Harvey’s “Reminiscences,” already alluded to.
“In the first years of his professional life a blacksmith called on him
for advice respecting the title to a small estate bequeathed to him
by his father. The terms of the will were peculiar, and the kind of
estate transmitted was doubtful. An attempt had been made to annull the
will. Mr. Webster examined the case, but was unable to give a definite
opinion upon the matter for want of authorities. He looked through the
law libraries of Mr. Mason and other legal gentlemen for authorities,
but in vain. He ascertained what works he needed for consultation, and
ordered them from Boston at an expense of fifty dollars. He spent the
leisure hours of some weeks in going through them. He successfully
argued the case when it came on for trial, and it was decided in his
favor.
“The blacksmith was in ecstasies, for his little all had been at stake.
He called for his attorney’s bill. Mr. Webster, knowing his poverty,
charged him only fifteen dollars, intending to suffer the loss of
money paid out, and to lose the time expended in securing a verdict.
Years passed away, and the case was forgotten, but not the treasured
knowledge by which it was won. On one of his journeys to Washington Mr.
Webster spent a few days in New York City. While he was there Aaron
Burr waited on him for advice in a very important case pending in the
State court. He told him the facts on which it was founded. Mr. Webster
saw in a moment that it was an exact counterpart to the blacksmith’s
will case. On being asked if he could state the law applicable to it he
at once replied that he could.
“He proceeded to quote decisions bearing upon the case, going back to
the time of Charles II. As he went on with his array of principles
and authorities, all cited with the precision and order of a table of
contents, Mr. Burr arose in astonishment and asked with some warmth,
“‘Mr. Webster, have you been consulted before in this case?’
“‘Most certainly not,’ he replied. ‘I never heard of your case till
this evening.’
“‘Very well,’ said Mr. Burr; ‘proceed.’
“Mr. Webster concluded the rehearsal of his authorities, and received
from Mr. Burr the warmest praise of his profound knowledge of the law,
and a fee large enough to remunerate him for all the time and trouble
spent on the blacksmith’s case.”
I have recorded this anecdote, partly to show the tenacity of Mr.
Webster’s memory, which, after a lapse of years, enabled him so exactly
to repeat the authorities he had relied upon in an old case; partly,
also, to show how thoroughly he was wont to prepare himself, even in
cases where he could expect but a small fee. In this case, not only
did he subsequently turn his knowledge to profitable account, but he
lost nothing by the kindness of heart which prompted him to place his
best powers at the service of an humble client. My young readers will
find that knowledge never comes amiss, but, in the course of a long and
sometimes of a short life, we are generally able to employ it for our
advantage.
I come back to Daniel Webster’s entrance upon Congressional duties.
He had reached the age of thirty-one, while Henry Clay, who occupied
the Speaker’s chair, was five years older. Mr. Clay came forward much
earlier in public life than his great rival. Though but thirty-six, he
had twice been a member of the United States Senate, being in each case
elected to serve the balance of an unexpired term. He had been a member
of the Legislature of Kentucky, and Speaker of that body, and now he
was serving, not for the first time, as Speaker of the U. S. House of
Representatives. John C. Calhoun was the leading member of the House,
and he as well as Mr. Clay favored the policy of the administration,
both being supporters of the war. Other distinguished members there
were, among them John McLean, of Ohio; Charles J. Ingersoll, of
Pennsylvania; William Gaston, of North Carolina, and Felix Grundy, of
Tennessee.
Though Mr. Webster was a new member he was placed upon the Committee on
Foreign Relations, at that time of course the most important position
which could have been assigned him. This may be inferred from the
names of his fellow members. He found himself associated with Calhoun,
Grundy, Jackson, Fish and Ingersoll. He was, as I have stated, not in
favor of the war, but since it had been inaugurated he took the ground
that it should be vigorously prosecuted. He did not long remain silent,
but took his stand both in the committee and in the House as one who
thought the war inexpedient.
It does not fall within the scope of this volume to detail the steps
which the young member took in order to impress his views upon his
fellow members; but, as a specimen of his oratory at that time, and
because it will explain them sufficiently, I quote from a speech made
by him in the regular session during the year 1814:
“The humble aid which it would be in my power to render to measures
of Government shall be given cheerfully, if Government will pursue
measures which I can conscientiously support. Badly as I think of the
original grounds of the war, as well as of the manner in which it
has hitherto been conducted, if even now, failing in an honest and
sincere attempt to procure just and honorable peace, it will return
to measures of defence and protection such as reason and common sense
and the public opinion all call for, my vote shall not be withholden
from the means. Give up your futile object of invasion. Extinguish the
fires that blaze on your inland frontier. Establish perfect safety and
defense there by adequate force. Let every man that sleeps on your soil
sleep in security. Stop the blood that flows from the veins of unarmed
yeomanry and women and children. Give to the living time to bury and
lament their dead in the quietness of private sorrow.
“Having performed this work of beneficence and mercy on your inland
border, turn and look with the eye of justice and compassion on your
vast population along the coast. Unclinch the iron grasp of your
Embargo. Take measures for that end before another sun sets upon you.
With all the war of the enemy on your commerce, if you would cease
to war on it yourselves you would still have some commerce. Apply
that revenue to the augmentation of your navy. That navy will in turn
protect your commerce. Let it no longer be said that not one ship of
force, built by your hands, yet floats upon the ocean.
“Turn the current of your efforts into the channel which national
sentiment has already worn broad and deep to receive it. A naval
force, competent to defend your coast against considerable armaments,
to convoy your trade, and perhaps raise the blockade of your rivers,
is not a chimera. It may be realized. If, then, the war must be
continued, go to the ocean. If you are seriously contending for
maritime rights, go to the theater where alone those rights can be
defended. Thither every indication of your fortune points you. There
the united wishes and exertions of the nation will go with you. Even
our party divisions, acrimonious as they are, cease at the water’s
edge. They are lost in attachment to national character on the element
where that character is made respectable. In protecting naval interests
by naval means, you will arm yourselves with the whole power of
national sentiment, and may command the whole abundance of the national
resources. In time you may enable yourselves to redress injuries in the
place where they may be offered, and, if need be, to accompany your own
flag throughout the world with the protection of your own cannon.”
My young reader, without knowing much about the matter at issue, will
nevertheless be struck with the statesmanlike character of these
utterances. It is not often that a new member of Congress is able to
discuss public matters with such fullness of knowledge, and in a tone
of such dignity and elevation of sentiment. His fellow legislators were
not long in learning that the new member from New Hampshire was no raw
novice, but a publicist of remarkable ability, knowledge, and a trained
orator. In a discussion which sprang up between Mr. Webster and Mr.
Calhoun, the conceded leader of the House, the honors were at least
divided, if Mr. Webster did not win the larger portion.
While the young man was thus coming into national prominence his
residence in Washington helped him in a professional way. He began to
practice in the Supreme Court of the United States, being employed in
several prize cases. Judge Marshall was at that time chief justice, and
of him the young lawyer formed an exalted opinion. “I have never seen a
man,” he writes, “of whose intellect I had a higher opinion.”
On the 18th of April, 1814, the session of Congress terminated, and
Mr. Webster undertook the long and toilsome journey from Washington
to his New Hampshire home. It was not the same home which he left
when he was called a year earlier to attend the special session. His
house and library were destroyed by fire, and though the loss was
but six thousand dollars, it was a severe set-back to a lawyer whose
professional income had never exceeded two thousand dollars. He bore
the loss, however, with equanimity, since it involved only a loss of
money. His talent and education remained, and these were to earn him
hundreds of thousands of dollars in the years to come.