government were less oppressive, we should still strive against this usurpation. The South is acting on a principle she has always held sacred - resistance to unauthorized taxation. These, Sir, are the principles which induced the immortal Hampden to resist the payment of a tax of twenty shillings. Would twenty shillings have ruined his fortune? No! but the payment of half twenty shillings, on the principle on which it was demanded, would have made him a slave. Sir, if in acting on these high motives if animated by that ardent love of liberty which has always been the most prominent trait in the Southern character we should be hurried beyond the bounds of a cold and calculating prudence, who is there, with one noble and generous sentiment in his bosom, that would not be disposed, in the language of Burke, to exclaim, "You must pardon something to the spirit of liberty!" THROUGH pinching family economy DANIEL WEBSTER graduated at Dartmouth (1801), and in 1805, at the age of twenty-three, began legal practice in Boscawen and Portsmouth in New Hampshire, his native State. In 1813 he became Congressman from that State, and thereafter spent his active life chiefly in Washington, although often called away for important legal arguments, or addresses on great occasions, — laying the corner-stone of Bunker Hill Monument (1825) and its dedication (1843), commemorating the deaths of JEFFERSON and ADAMS (1836), etc. He removed his residence to Boston in 1816, and from 1823 represented Massachusetts in the House of Representatives till 1827, and in the Senate till 1841, and 1845 to 1850. WEBSTER was a wonderful lawyer, with vast legal knowledge and colossal oratorical power, which also made him a leader in Congress, especially as to construction of the Constitution, the relations of which to the people and the States had been his profound study. WEBSTER'S dominance in oratory arose from his majestic personality, his mastery of every subject discussed, his lucid method of statement, his fund of historical and literary illustration, and his power of raising his theme to the regions of emotion and by his grand voice and presence transporting his hearers thither also. This appeared signally in his reply to Senator HAYNE'S second speech on the FOOTE resolution concerning sales of public lands. HAYNE spoke; WEBSTER replied; HAYNE rejoined (see pp. 141-156), covering many matters, but especially "The South and the Union." Then (January 26, 1830) WEBSTER made that fundamental speech on which thereafter stood the defenders of Constitution and Union. Portions referring to the South, State sovereignty, and the Constitution are herewith given. WEBSTER was twice Secretary of State, achieving notable service. He was twice Whig Presidential candidate - never reaching his highest ambition. Yet the presidency would have added nothing to the fame of this great lawyer, councilor, legislator, philosopher, statesman, and orator. THE STATES AND THE CONSTITU TION 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. [The secretary read the resolution relating to the sales. of public lands.] We have thus heard, Sir, what the resolution is, which is actually before us for consideration; and it will readily occur to every one that it is almost the only subject about which something has not been said in the speech, running through two days, by which the Senate has been now entertained by the gentleman from South Carolina. Every topic in the wide range of our public affairs, whether past or present everything, general or local, whether belonging to national politics, or party politics, seems to have attracted more or less of the honorable member's attention, save only the resolution before the Senate. He has spoken of everything but the public lands. They have escaped his notice. To that subject, in all his excursions, he has not paid even the cold respect of a passing glance. I spoke, Sir, of the ordinance of 1787, which prohibited slavery in all future times northwest of the Ohio, as a measure of great wisdom and foresight; and one which had been attended with highly beneficial and permanent consequences. I supposed that on this point no two gentlemen in the Senate could entertain different opinions. But the simple exprestion of this sentiment has led the gentleman not only into a labored defense of slavery, in the abstract, and on principle, but, also, into a warm accusation against me, as having attacked the system of domestic slavery now existing in the Southern States. For all this there was not the slightest foundation in anything said or intimated by me. I did not utter a single word which any ingenuity could torture into an attack on the slavery of the South. I said only that it was highly wise and useful in legislating for the northwestern country, while it was yet a wilderness, to prohibit the introduction of slaves; and added, that I presumed, in the neighboring State of Kentucky, there was no reflecting and intelligent gentleman, who would doubt, that if the same pro |