Part 5 (2/2)
which emanated froest terms the principles of ”nullification” These hout the country, but they were rather lost sight of in the intense excitement of the presidential election The accession of Jackson then caht with it the sweeping rely denounced At the sa the President's power of renable position of steady resistance to the evils of patronage, which could be cured only by the operation of an enlightened public sentiitation about other ht of the conflict for which they were preparing, and that they were on the alert to bring nullification to the front in aand pronounced fashi+on than had yet been atterand assault was finally reat nullifier, who then occupied the chair of the Vice-President, and came in an unexpected way In December, 1829, Mr Foote of Connecticut introduced a har the sales and surveys of the Western lands In the long-drawn debate which ensued, General Hayne of South Carolina, on January 19, 1830, land States He accused therowth of the West in the interests of the protective policy, and tried to show the sympathy which should exist between the West and South, and lead theainst the tariff Mr Webster felt that this attack could not be left unanswered, and the next day he replied to it
This first speech on Foote's resolution has been so obscured by the greatness of the second that it is seldom referred to and but little read
Yet it is one of the est pieces of destructive criticish its purpose was sie of hostility to the West on the part of New England The accusation was in fact absurd, and but few years had elapsed since Mr Webster and New England had been assailed by Mr McDuffie for desiring to build up the West at the expense of the South by the policy of internal iroundlessness of this new attack, but Mr Webster did it with consuu it under foot Mr Webster only alluded incidentally to the tariff agitation in South Carolina, but the crushi+ng nature of the reply infla day, insisted on Mr
Webster's presence, and spoke for the second tiland, upon Mr Webster personally, and upon the character and patriotism of Massachusetts He then iving free expression of the views and principles entertained by his master and leader, who presided over the discussion The debate had now drifted far froinal resolution, but its real object had been reached at last The war upon the tariff had been begun, and the standard of nullification and of resistance to the Union and to the laws of Congress had been planted boldly in the Senate of the United States The debate was adjourned and Mr Hayne did not conclude till January 25 The next day Mr Webster replied in the second speech on Foote's resolution, which is popularly known as the ”Reply to Hayne”
This great speech hest point attained by Mr Webster as a public man He never surpassed it, he never equalled it afterwards It was his zenith intellectually, politically, and as an orator His farew and extended in the years which followed, he won ample distinction in other fields, he made many other splendid speeches, but he never went beyond the reply which he made to the Senator from South Carolina on January 26, 1830
The doctrine of nullification, which was theThe as borrowed from the Kentucky resolutions of 1799, and the principle was contained in the inia resolutions and of the Hartford Convention in 1814 The South Carolinian reproduction in 1830 was fuller and more elaborate than its predecessors and supported by ed Mr Webster's arguht of revolution He accepted the proposition that no one was bound to obey an unconstitutional law; but the essential question as to say whether a laas unconstitutional or not Each State has that authority, was the reply of the nullifiers, and if the decision is against the validity of the law it cannot be executed within the liorous sarcasm hich Mr Webster depicted practical nullification, and showed that it was nothing more or less than revolution when actually carried out, was really the conclusive answer to the nullifying doctrine But Mr
Calhoun and his school eagerly denied that nullification rested on the right to revolt against oppression They argued that it was a constitutional right; that they could live within the Constitution and beyond it,--inside the house and outside it at one and the sa a coovernment was the creation of the States; yet, in the saovernment was a party to the contract froet rid of the difficulty of proving that, while the single dissenting State could decide against the validity of a law, the twenty or ht to deliver an opposite judg as the opinion of the enious or very profound in the argument by which Mr Webster demonstrated the absurdity of the doctrine which attempted to e, when it could be in practice nothing else than revolution But the nificent and final As he himself said, in this very speech of Saument, his inference demonstration”
The weak places in his armor were historical in their nature It was probably necessary, at all events Mr Webster felt it to be so, to argue that the Constitution at the outset was not a compact between the States, but a national instruinia and Kentucky in 1799 and of New England in 1814, from that of South Carolina in 1830 The forhtly, the latter he discussed ably, eloquently, ingeniously, and at length Unfortunately the facts were against him in both instances When the Constitution was adopted by the votes of States at Philadelphia, and accepted by the votes of States in popular conventions, it is safe to say that there was not a ton and Hae Mason on the other, who regarded the new syste but an experiment entered upon by the States and froht peaceably to withdraw, a right which was very likely to be exercised When the Virginia and Kentucky resolutions appeared they were not opposed on constitutional grounds, but on those of expediency and of hostility to the revolution which they were considered to embody Hamilton, and no one knew the Constitution better than he, treated theovernerms of a conspiracy to destroy the Union As Dr Von Holst tersely and accurately states it, ”there was no tile the healthy huical deductions” That was the work reserved for John C Calhoun
What is true of 1799 is true of the New England leaders at Washi+ngton when they discussed the feasibility of secession in 1804; of the declaration in favor of secession ress a few years later; of the resistance of New England during the war of 1812, and of the right of ”interposition” set forth by the Hartford Convention In all these instances no one troubled himself about the constitutional aspect; it was a question of expediency, of ht was simply stated, and the uniform ansas, such a step means the overthrow of the present systean her resistance to the tariff in 1830, tiovernment established by the Constitution It was now ato threaten the existence of the Federal governreat fabric which had been gradually built up overnment look very terrible; it made peaceable secession a mockery, and a withdrawal from the Union equivalent to civil war The boldest hesitated to espouse any principle which was avowedly revolutionary, and on both sides men wished to have a constitutional defence for every doctrine which they pro which led Mr Calhoun to elaborate and perfect with all the ingenuity of his acute and logical uments in favor of nullification as a constitutional principle At the same time the theory of nullification, however much elaborated, had not altered in its essence from the bald and brief statee had come on the other side of the question, in the popular idea of the Constitution It was no longer regarded as an experiht to withdraw, but as the charter of a national government ”It is a critical moment,” said Mr Bell of New Ha of January 26, ”and it is tih time that the people of this country should knohat this Constitution _is_” ”Then,”
answered Mr Webster, ”by the blessing of heaven they shall learn, this day, before the sun goes dohat I understand it to be” With these words on his lips he entered the senate chamber, and when he replied to Hayne he stated what the Union and the government had come to be at that moment He defined the character of the Union as it existed in 1830, and that definition so rand eloquence, went home to the hearts of the people, and put into noble words the sentinificance of the reply to Hayne It ht of the Constitution in 1789 The governenerated into a confederation little stronger than its predecessor But the Constitution did its work better, and converted a confederacy into a nation Mr Webster set forth the national conception of the Union He expressed what , and the principles which heuntil, thirty years afterwards, they had a force sufficient to sustain the North and enable her to triule which resulted in the preservation of national life When Mr Webster showed that practical nullification was revolution, he had answered completely the South Carolinian doctrine, for revolution is not susceptible of constitutional argument But in the state of public opinion at that time it was necessary to discuss nullification on constitutional grounds also, and Mr Webster did this as eloquently and ably as the nature of the case admitted Whatever the historical defects of his position, he put weapons into the hands of every friend of the Union, and gave reasons and argu and ti of Mr
Webster's speech in our history and its significance to us are, that it set forth with every attribute of eloquence the nature of the Union as it had developed under the Constitution He took the vague popular conception and gave it life and form and character He said, as he alone could say, the people of the United States are a nation, they are the masters of an empire, their union is indivisible, and the words which then rang out in the senate cha years of political conflict and of civil war, until at last they are part of the political creed of every one of his fellow-countrymen
The reply to Hayne cannot, however, be dismissed with a consideration of its historical and political nificance
It has a personal and literary importance of hardly less moment There comes an occasion, a period perhaps, in the life of every hest point, when he does his best, or even, under a sudden inspiration and excite better than his best, and to which he can never again attain At the moment it is often impossible to detect this point, but when the man and his career have passed into history, and we can survey it all spread out before us like a map, the pinnacle of success can easily be discovered The reply to Hayne was the zenith of Mr Webster's life, and it is the place of all others where it is fit to pause and study him as a parliamentary orator and as a , however, to analyze what he said, let us strive to recall for aof the er and excited crowd
Every seat on the floor and in the galleries was occupied, and all the available standing-room was filled The protracted debate, conducted with so much ability on both sides, had excited the attention of the whole country, and had given time for the arrival of hundreds of interested spectators froland
The fierce attacks of the Southern leaders had angered and alaring to have these assaults met and repelled, and yet they could not believe that this apparently desperate feat could be successfully accoland could be known in Washi+ngton, in those days, by their indignant but dejected looks and downcast eyes They gathered in the senate cha with anticipation, and with hope and fear struggling for the led those ere there fro 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 ether, Mr Webster rose He had sat i days, while the storument and invective had beaten about his head At last his ti hirandeur and his majestic calm thrilled all who looked upon him With perfect quietness, unaffected apparently by the at 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 hilance 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 whereare I ask for the reading of the resolution before the Senate”
This opening sentence was a piece of consue, the low voice, the calm manner, relieved the strained excite the speaker if it had been maintained Every one was now at his ease; and when theof the resolution ceased Mr Webster was master of the situation, and had his listeners in complete control With breathless attention they followed hi , the burning appeals to love of State and country, flowed on unbroken As his feelings warlow on his swarthy cheek; his strong right arm seemed to sweep away resistlessly the whole phalanx of his opponents, and the deep and an-tones as they filled the chamber with their music As the last words died away into silence, those who had listened looked wonderingly at each other, dirand speeches which are land-marks in the history of eloquence; and the land 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
As every one knows, this speech contains ainst nullification, which has just been discussed, and exhibits all its author's intellectual gifts in the highest perfection Mr Hayne had touched on every conceivable subject of political i slavery, which, however covered up, was really at the bottom of every Southern movement, and was certain sooner or later to come to the surface
All these various topics Mr Webster took up, one after another, displaying a rasp and ease of treatment He dealt with thehout there are bursts of eloquence skilfully ument, so that the listeners were never wearied by a strained and continuous rhetorical display; and yet, while the attention was closely held by the even flow of lucid reasoning, the emotions and passions were froly excited In es of direct retort Mr Webster used an irony which he employed always in a perfectly characteristic way
He had a strong natural sense of humor, but he never ainst his opponent He was not a witty ranified sarcasm, which at times, and in this instance particularly, he used freely ands attacks, and yet brings home a keen sense of the absurdity of the opponent's position The weapon resembled more the sword of Richard than the scimetar of Saladin, but it was none the less a keen and trenchant blade There is probably no better instance of Mr Webster's power of sarcase in which he replied to Hayne's taunt about the ”murdered coalition,” which was said to have existed between Adae about Massachusetts, perhaps in its way as good an exaher and ht is simple and even obvious, and the expression unadorned, and yet what he said had that subtle quality which stirred and still stirs the heart of every man born on the soil of the old Puritan Commonwealth
The speech as a whole has all the qualities which reat orator, and the sah his other speeches An analysis of the reply to Hayne, therefore, gives us all the conditions necessary to for a correct idea of Mr Webster's eloquence, of its characteristics and its value The Attic school of oratory subordinated forht to avoid the misuse of ornament, and triumphed over the ave the palone still farther in the same direction, until its predo sustained appeals to the understanding
Logical vigilance and long chains of reasoning, avoided by the ancients, are the essentials of our modern oratory Many able men have achieved success under these conditions as forcible and convincing speakers But the grand eloquence of , of iument This combination is rare, and whenever we find a reater or less degree, he is one of the great masters of eloquence as we understand it The names of those who in debate or to a jury have been in every-day practice strong and effective speakers, and also have thrilled and shaken largeChathaniaud, Patrick Henry and Daniel Webster
Mr Webster was of course essentially modern in his oratory He relied chiefly on the sustained appeal to the understanding, and he was a conspicuous example of the prophetic character which Christianity, and Protestantisiven to modern eloquence At the same time Mr Webster was in some respects more classical, and resembled more closely the models of antiquity, than any of those who have been h class He ont to pour forth the copious streae in the varied appeals to feeling, ham sets down as characteristic of ancient oratory It has been said that while Demosthenes was a sculptor, Burke was a painter Mr Webster was distinctly more of the fore or a description, and in this he followed the Greek rather than the Englishman
Dr Francis Lieber wrote: ”To test Webster's oratory, which has ever been very attractive to me, I read a portion of my favorite speeches of Demosthenes, and then read, always aloud, parts of Webster; then returned to the Athenian; and Webster stood the test” Apart froreat compli as showing the similarity between Mr Webster and the Greek orator Not only does the test indicate the merit of Mr Webster's speeches, but it also proves that he rese than the inevitable difference born of race and time Yet there is no indication that Webster ever made a study of the ancient models or tried to form himself upon them
The cause of the classic self-restraint in Webster was partly due to the artistic sense which made him so devoted to simplicity of diction, and partly to the cast of his ination, but not in the least the iination of the poet, which
”Bodies forth the fors unknown”