in its local circulation.

What course, then, was the adminis tration now to adopt? Why, sir, it is plain that it had but one alternative. It must either return to the former practice of the government, take the currency into its own hands, and maintain it, as well as provide for the safe keeping of the public money by some institution of its own; or else, adopting some new mode of merely keeping the public money, it must abandon all further care over currency and exchange. One of these courses became inevitable. The administration had no other choice. The state banks could be no longer tried, with the opinion which the administration now entertained of them; and how else could anything be done to maintain the currency? In no way, but by the establishment of a national institution.

"There was no escape from this dilemma. One course was, to go back to that which the party had so much condemned; the other, to give up the whole duty, and leave the currency to its fate. Between these two, the administration found itself absolutely obliged to decide; and it has decided, and decided boldly. It has decided to surrender the duty, and abandon the constitution. That decision is before us, in the message, and in the measures now under consideration. The choice has been made; and that choice, in my opinion, raises a question of the utmost importance to the people of this country, both for the present and all future time. That question is, Whether congress has, or ought to have, any duty to perform, in relation to the currency of the country, beyond the mere regulation of the gold and silver."

This speech of Mr. Webster was not only very able; but it produced a profound impression on the senate, and on the country. He maintained, in opposition to the message of the president, that it was incumbent on congress, besides keeping and disbursing the public money, to provide for a sound and safe currency for the people; and such was the weight of his

THE DOMESTIC SLAVE-TRADE.

315

several arguments and illustrations, in support of his proposi tion, that the recommendation of the president failed to become a law. The first step, therefore, of the new administration was a failure.

One of the first topics that engaged the attention of Mr. Webster, at the regular session of congress of 1837-8, was that of slavery in the District of Columbia. On the 27th of December, 1837, a number of resolutions were read to the senate by Mr. Calhoun on this subject, the fifth of which was expressed in the following language: Resolved, That the intermeddling of any state, or states, or their citizens, to abolish slavery in this district, or any of the territories, on the ground, or under the pretext, that it is immoral or sinful, or the passage of any act or measure of congress with that view, would be a direct and dangerous attack on the institutions of all the slaveholding states." The resolutions had been quite generally discussed, when, on the 10th of January, 1838, Mr. Clay offered a substitute for Mr. Calhoun's fifth resolution, which was couched in the following terms: "Resolved, That the interference, by the citizens of any of the states, with the view to the abolition of slavery in this district, is endangering the rights and security of the people of this district; and that any act or measure of congress, designed to abolish slavery in this district, would be a violation of the faith implied in the cessions by the states of Virginia and Maryland, a just cause of alarm to the people of the slaveholding states, and have a direct and inevitable tendency to disturb and endanger the Union." Mr. Clay supported his substitute by a speech, which was followed by a brief one from Mr. Webster. He had be

fore, on the 16th of March, 1836, on presenting several petitions praying for the abolition of the domestic slave-trade within the district, expressed his views in relation to the power of congress over slavery in the District of Columbia in a very plain and emphatic manner: "I have often," he then said,

"expressed the opinion, that over slavery, as it exists in the states, this government has no control whatever. It is entirely and exclusively a state concern. And while it is clear that congress has no direct power over the subject, it is our duty to take care that the authority of this government is not brought to bear upon it by any indirect interference whatever. It must be left to the states, to the course of things, and to those causes over which this government has no control. All this, in my opinion, is in the clear line of our duty. On the other hand, believing that congress has constitutional power over slavery, and the trade in slaves, within the district, I think petitions on those subjects, respectfully presented, ought to be respectfully received, and respectfully considered."

These had always been Mr. Webster's opinions on the subject. They had been the opinions of the country and of the government. So early as 1809, on the 9th of January, the house of representatives had resolved, "that the committee on the District of Columbia be instructed to take into consideration the laws within the district in respect to slavery; that they inquire into the slave-trade as it exists in, and is carried on through, the district; and that they report to the house such amendments to the existing laws as shall seem to them to be just." The same body, at the same time, resolved, "that the committee be further instructed to inquire into the expediency of providing by law for the gradual abolition of slavery within the district, in such manner that the interest of no individual shall be injured thereby." In the month of March, 1816, the subject had been again introduced by Mr. Randolph, of Virginia, when, at his motion, it was resolved, "that a committee be appointed to inquire into the existence of an inhuman and illegal traffic in slaves carried on in and through the District of Columbia, and to report whether any, and what, measures are necessary for putting a stop to the same."

The steps thus early taken, which had so clearly recognized

SLAVERY IN THE DISTRICT.

317

the power of congress over slvavery in the district, were well known to Mr. Webster; and on these, as well as on the grants of cession by which the territory was given to the United States, he based an argument in favor of the constitutional power of congress over this subject, and which has never been and never can be answered. In return for his efforts in the cause of freedom, he was taunted by Mr. King, of Alabama, with having made himself the head of the abolition party; but this did not daunt Mr. Webster, or turn him from his integrity, or his purpose. He went directly forward, defended the rights of the petitioners, maintained the exclusive power of congress to legislate on all subjects touching the District of Columbia, slavery as well as others, and spurned the sneers of southern senators; and he thus continued to maintain his ground, till the subject was again brought forward by Mr. Calhoun, and modified by Mr. Clay, at the time now under consideration. His opinion, as held at this time, is best conveyed in his own language. "I cannot concur," he says, speaking of Mr. Clay's substitute, "in this resolution. I do not know any matter of fact, or any ground of argument, on which this affirmation of plighted faith can be sustained. I see nothing by which congress has tied up its hands, either directly or indirectly, so as to put its clear constitutional power beyond the exercise of its own discretion. I have carefully examined the acts of cession by the states, the act of congress, the proceedings and history of the times, and I find nothing to lead me to doubt that it was the intention of all parties to leave this, like other subjects belonging to legislation for the ceded territory, entirely to the discretion and wisdom of congress." He goes on to establish this opinion by a most conclusive argument, and then brings the opposite view into disfavor by successfully applying to it the reductio ad absurdum: "If the assertion contained in this resolution be true," he says, "a very strange result, as it seems to me, must follow. The resolution affirms that the faith of congress is

pledged, indefinitely. It makes no limitation of time or cir cumstance. If this be so, then it is an obligation that binds us forever, as much as if it were one of the prohibitions of the constitution itself. And at all times hereafter, even if, in the course of their history, availing themselves of events, or changing their views of policy, the states themselves should make provision for the emancipation of their slaves, the existing state of things could not be changed, nevertheless, in this district. It does really seem to me, that, if this resolution, in its terms, be true, though slavery in every other part of the world be abolished, yet in the metropolis of this great republic it is established in perpetuity. This appears to me to be the result of the doctrine of plighted faith, as stated in the resolution.”

Mr. Buchanan replied to Mr. Webster; and Mr. Webster rejoined, maintaining with still greater force of expression his original position; but it was not till he rose to reply to Mr. Clay, who, after Mr. Buchanan, had commented with some severity upon Mr. Webster, that the great orator gave completeness to his argument. Thus called out, there that argument now stands, the ablest ever delivered on the subject; and every man, who has since seen fit to misunderstand Mr. Webster, on the subject of slavery, is bound to read it, and ponder it well, before he allows himself to ascribe to Mr. Webster his position in relation to this question.

It would be impossible to follow out in detail all that Mr. Webster said and did, during the remainder of Mr. Van Bu ren's administration, on this and other important subjects. He was still chiefly engaged, as were the senate and the country, on topics connected with the currency. The administration of Mr. Van Buren, indeed, may be regarded in history as an unsuccessful attempt to relieve itself, and the country, of the financial evils brought upon it by the preceding administration; and in every effort made to better the condition of the national finances, Mr. Webster took, on behalf of the opposition, the