He had decided to study law, but declared that he preferred being a common planter to a half-educated lawyer. He soon entered Yale College, where he graduated with distinction. President Dwight is said to have remarked 'That young man has ability enough to be President of the United States and will become one yet.' Before returning home he spent eighteen months in the law-school at Litchfield, Connecticut. He also cultivated extempore speaking, and finally returned South to finish his studies.
Being admitted to the bar he began practice; in 1808 was elected to the Legislature, and in 1811 to Congress. The war party had gained complete control of the House, and a speaker was chosen by the Democratic party.
Calhoun was placed on the Committee of Foreign Relations, and he framed the report that the time had come to choose between tame submission and bold resistance. Calhoun was chosen chairman of this committee, and was a staunch supporter of the administration throughout. The increasing financial distress led to the National Bank debates, in which he was a leading figure. The necessity of this institution being admitted, to Calhoun was intrusted entire management of the bill, and to him is due the passage of the charter of the bank.
He was a most efficient agent of internal improvements, carrying a bill through the House by a vote of 86 to 84, authorizing a million and a half to be paid by the United States bank and the income on seven millions more to be devoted to internal improvements. This bill passed the Senate twenty to fifteen, but was vetoed by the president, denying the authority of congress to appropriate money for any such purpose. He next became Secretary of War, under Monroe. He found the war department in a demoralized condition--bills to the amount of $50,000 outstanding.
These Calhoun promptly settled and secured the passage of a bill reorganizing the staff of the army. President Monroe bringing before the cabinet the question of whether he should sign the Missouri Compromise, Calhoun gave it as his opinion that it was constitutional, supporting the view that it was the duty of the president to sign the bill.
He was very seriously thought of as Monroe's successor, the great State of Pennsylvania supporting him at first, but General Jackson's great military fame won for him the nomination, and Calhoun was almost unanimously selected for vice-president.
The tariff question was an all-absorbing issue, and on this question the Democrats divided--the northern wing being for protection, under the lead of Martin Van Buren; while the South was unanimous for free trade, led by Calhoun. A rupture between the president and Mr. Calhoun now arose; this and other causes led to Mr. Calhoun's distrust of the president, and the belief that he could not be depended upon to settle the tariff question; therefore he brought out his nullification doctrine.
This doctrine was founded on the Virginia and Kentucky resolutions of 1798-9 which declared the constitution to be a compact, each State forming an integral part. It also declared that the government created by the compact was not made the final judge, each party having a right to ratify or annul that judgment as an individual State, that is, such laws as were deemed unconstitutional. This doctrine he prepared, and the paper was presented to the legislature where it became known as the South Carolina Exposition. The next we see of it is in the Senate of the United States, where the doctrine is brought forward by Mr. Hayne, which led to his world-famed debate with Mr. Webster.
Then followed the passage of the tariff bill and the nullification act, whereby South Carolina signified her determination to resist the laws; and the final compromise measure of Henry Clay which happily settled the difficulty at this time. Calhoun was now a senator and soon formed one of the powerful trio in opposition to president Jackson. He characterized Jackson's distribution of the surplus left by the United States bank as an attempt to seize onto the power of Congress and unite, in his own hands, the sword and purse.
He declared that he had placed himself with the minority to serve his gallant State, nor would he turn on his heel if thereby he could be placed at the head of the government. He thought that corruption had taken such a hold of it that any man who attempted reform would not be sustained. The American Anti-slavery Society having sent tracts denunciatory to slavery throughout the South, and as it was believed that such measures had a tendency to incite the slaves to insurrection, Calhoun brought in a bill subjecting to severe punishment any postmaster who should knowingly receive any such matter for distribution in any State which should pass a law prohibiting the circulation of such. The bill failed on a final vote, twenty-five to nineteen.
He maintained that Congress had no jurisdiction over the subject of slavery; that it was a recognized institution; that the inequality of the negro was manifest; that in slavery they held their true position and to change their condition was to place them wholly dependent upon the State for support. Calhoun, believed that the relations between the races was right, morally and politically, and demanded that the institution of slavery be protected.
The bill recommended by Jackson, to restrict the sale of public lands to actual settlers and that in limited quantities, drew from him a most fiery speech. He claimed that the measure was really in the interest of speculators who had loaded themselves with land, and whose interest now was to restrict the sale and thus enhance the price of their ill-gotten domain. He also claimed that people high in office had speculated largely, even some in near relation to the president.
This brought from Jackson a letter that he should either retract his words or bring the matter before Congress as an act of impeachment. The sole power of impeachment lies within the House of Representatives, and, while the senate had previously passed an act denouncing Jackson's methods, yet the House of Representatives was overwhelmingly in his favor, and he must have known that no impeachment could pass this body.
Jackson realized that such charges needed his attention. Calhoun read his letter before the senate pronouncing it a cowardly attempt to intimidate, and repeated his charges; stating that not only persons high in authority were implied in the charge, but the president's nephew, calling his name, was a large speculator.
During the administration of Van Buren came the great financial crash of our history; the aggregate of the failures in New York and New Orleans alone amounting to $150,000,00. All this trouble had been foretold by Calhoun.
Mr. Van Buren's plan of an independent treasury, which created a place for all the surplus to accumulate, met with Calhoun's approval, and he accordingly separated from Webster and Clay to act in support of what was right, notwithstanding his personal feelings toward Van Buren. This illustrates the principle of Mr. Calhoun. Notwithstanding his known idea of right and wrong, this aroused the indignation of his late allies, who could ill spare his vote and powerful influence. The fact that this measure, which he had determined to support, is still in existence, proves conclusively the wisdom of Calhoun as against both Webster and Clay.
Yet, in reply to Calhoun's speech on the Independent Treasury bill, Clay used the strongest language, charging him with desertion, and making his whole life the subject of one of those powerful invectives so characteristic with him. Calhoun answered; Clay replied on the spot, and Calhoun answered back.
This was a wonderful example of the different styles of oratory of which each was master; Clay, of declamation, invective, wit, humor and bitter sarcasm; Calhoun of clear statement and close reasoning. This contest, aside from its oratorical power, deserves a place in history. In answer to Clay's attack on his life he replied: "I rest my public character upon it, and desire it to be read by all who will do me justice."
As a debater, where close reasoning was essential, he was an acknowledged leader. The tariff laws of Jackson's time which brought this nullification doctrine prominently before the country were acknowledged to be drawn in favor of the North, as against the South.
The least that can be said is that he was honest; and that he was able to defend his doctrine no one disputes. Happily manufacturing interests are now investing in the South, and the tariff question will right itself.
Mr. Calhoun was brilliant and his great aim in life was the defense of slavery. He regarded that institution as essential to the very existence of the Southern States; therefore thought that the abolition of slavery would tend to the overthrow of the South. He declared that the Constitution should be revised.
Although never publicly proclaiming such a method, yet it seemed that his idea was to elect two Presidents, one from the slave and one from the free States, and that no bill of Congress could be ratified without their approval. But if Mr. Calhoun was honest in this, as he no doubt was, yet his measure would tend to take the power from the many and place it within the few, which is contrary to democratic ideas of good government.
It was on March 13th, 1850, that he fell exhausted at the close of his speech in answer to General Cass, and died soon after. Mr. Webster's funeral oration delivered in the Senate upon the announcement of his death is a most eloquent yet unexaggerated account of the virtues of John C. Calhoun.
"Calhoun was a part of his own intellectual character, which grew out of the qualities of his mind. It was plain, strong, wise, condensed, concise, still always severe. Rejecting ornament, not often seeking illustration; his power consisted in the plainness of his propositions, the clearness of his logic, and the earnestness and energy of his manner. No man was more respectful to others; no man carried himself with greater decorum; no man with superior dignity. I have not, in public or private life, known a man more assiduous in the discharge of his duties. Out of the Chambers of Congress he was either devoting himself to the acquisition of knowledge pertaining to the immediate subject of the duty before him, or else he was indulging in those social interviews in which he so much delighted.
"There was a charm in his conversation not often found. He had the basis, the indispensible basis of all high character; unspotted integrity and honor unimpeached. If he had aspirations they were high, honorable and noble; nothing low or meanly come near his head or heart.
He arose early and was a successful planter; so much so that to have been an overseer at 'Fort Hill' was a high recommendation. He dealt almost exclusively in solid reasoning when speaking, which was so plain that illustration was rarely needed. Certain it is that he was a great and good man."
ROBERT Y. HAYNE.
The renowned debate on the doctrine of nullification in which he was one of the principals,--if it were the only act of his life, must make the name of Robert Y. Hayne forever illustrious. He was born in 1791, and admitted to the bar before he was twenty-one, having been educated in Charleston, South Carolina, his native State.
He volunteered early in the war of 1812 and rapidly rose to the position of Major-General, being considered one of the best disciplinarians in the South. As his old friend, Mr. Ehres, had been chosen to a seat in Congress, he succeeded to his large practice, and before he was twenty-two he had the most lucrative practice of any lawyer in his State.
He was elected to the South Carolina legislature as a member of the assembly of 1814, and as speaker of that body four years after taking his seat and soon was chosen Attorney General of the State. In every position young Haynes was placed he not only acquitted himself with credit but won for himself great esteem, and as soon as he was old enough to be elligible for United States Senator he was sent by his State to defend their interests at the national capitol.
Here he became a most aggressive opponent, culminating in "The battle of the giants," the great debate on the interpretation of the constitution.
Mr. Hayne's speech on this occasion was heralded far and near, and it was classed by his supporters with the mightiest efforts of Burke or Pitt. Mr. Webster's reply has been generally acknowledged the superior effort of the two; but certain it is that whatever may have been the tendency of the views espoused by him, Robert Y. Hayne was an honest and sincere defender of the doctrine of the State Rights, and was held in high esteem by his political opponents.
The obnoxious tariff laws passing, General Hayne was elected Governor of his State; the people feeling that they could place the helm of their ship in no safer hands during the trying ordeal they felt they were to pass through. In replying to President Jackson's celebrated proclamation Hayne issued a counter-manifesto full of defiance. Happily the compromise of Mr. Clay postponed for thirty years the threatened civil war.
The evening of the close of that great debate at a presidential levee, Mr. Webster challenged Mr. Hayne to drink a glass of wine with him, saying, "General Hayne, I drink to your health, and hope that you may live a thousand years." Hayne's disposition is shown by his reply: "I shall not live a hundred if you make another such a speech." If he felt there was merit in an individual he was quickest to admit it even when it might be to his own detriment, and when it is remembered that he was one of the first to compliment Webster on his great parliamentary success, his noble qualities are shown in their true colors.
After serving in the gubernatorial chair with great distinction he retired to become Mayor of Charleston. He now turned his attention especially to internal improvements, and soon became president of the Charleston, Louisville & Cincinnati Railway. This office he held at his death, which occurred in his fiftieth year, September 24th, 1841. There are many things in the character of General Hayne worthy of study.
DANIEL WEBSTER.
On January 8th, 1782, was born at Franklin, New Hampshire, a son to a comparatively poor farmer. No royal blood flowed through the veins of this child whereby to bring him honor, yet one day he was to rise to the foremost rank among the rulers of his country. At that early period the town of Salisbury, now Franklin, was the extreme northern settlement in New Hampshire, and the schools were of necessity in a primitive state.
Daniel Webster labored on his father's farm during the summer, and a few months of each winter attended the district school some two miles from his home. Considering the cold, and the heavy snows which are characteristic of his native State, one can scarcely realize the amount of energy he must have utilized to enable him to enter Exeter Academy at the early age of fourteen, and one year later, Dartmouth College. He is represented as promising nothing of his future greatness at this time, but it is stated that he pursued every study with EXTRAORDINARY TENACITY.
He read widely, especially in history and general English literature, and thereby laid a good foundation for the splendid education which his personal energy at last brought him. As a matter of course, such a line of action must bring out what qualities might be in any man. The college societies soon sought him as a member.
While at Exeter he could hardly muster courage to speak before his class, but before he had finished his college course he had delivered addresses before the societies, which found their way into print. His diligence soon placed him at the head of his class, a position he maintained until the close of his college studies, graduating in 1801 with high honors.
Choosing law as his profession, he entered the law office of a friend and neighbor, Thomas Thompson, who afterwards became a congressman and eventually a senator. Mr. Webster remained here for some time when he left the office to become a teacher in Maine at a salary of $350 per year, which he enlarged somewhat by copying deeds. He afterwards returned to the office of Mr. Thompson where he remained until 1804, when he went to Boston and entered the office of Christopher Gove, who also distinguished himself afterwards as governor of Massachusetts.
He had previously helped his brother Ezekiel to prepare for college, and Daniel now in turn was helped to continue his law studies as Ezekiel was teaching. His opportunity to enter the office of Mr. Gove proved most fortunate, as he was thus enabled to study men, books and daily hear intelligent discussions on the topics of national interest.
In 1805 he was admitted to the bar, and established himself at Boscawen.
He had been offered the clerkship of the Hillsboro County Court at a salary of $1,500 a year, which was then a large income, and he was urged to accept it by his father and other friends, but was dissuaded from so doing by Mr. Gove, who foresaw great honor in store for him at the bar.
He practiced at Boscawen one year, when he was admitted to practice in the Superior Court of New Hampshire, and he established himself at Portsmouth, at that time the capital of the State. Here he rose to distinction among the most eminent counsellors. During his nine years residence in Portsmouth he gave his especial attention to constitutional law, becoming one of the soundest practitioners in the State.
He had inherited from his father the principles of the Federalist party, and, therefore, advocated them in speeches on public occasions, but did not for some years enter into politics. Mr. Webster came forward in a time when party spirit ran high, and the declaration of war in 1812, long deprecated by his party, created a demand for the best talent the country afforded. Mr. Webster now held a commanding reputation, and in 1812 he was sent to Congress. This was a most favorable time for Webster to enter Congress, as measures of the greatest importance were now to be discussed.
Henry Clay was speaker of the house, and placed this new member on a most important committee. June 10, 1813, he delivered his maiden speech on the repeal of the Berlin and Milan decrees. These decrees were a scheme of Napoleon's, avowedly directed against the commercial interests of Great Britain.
They closed all ports of France, and her allied countries against all vessels coming from England or any English colony. All commerce and correspondence was prohibited. All English merchandise was seized, and English subjects found in any country governed by France were held prisoners of war.
Great Britain retaliated by prohibiting neutral vessels from entering the ports of France under pain of confiscation; and a later order placed France and her allies, together with all countries with whom England was at war, under the same restriction.