Probably the most eloquent exhibition of oratory, based on logic and true statesmanship, ever exhibited in the Senate of the United States was the contest between Mr. Webster, of Massachusetts, and Mr. Hayne, the silver-tongued orator of South Carolina; the debate transpiring in 1830. The subject of discussion before the senate by these two intellectual gladiators grew out of a resolution brought forward by Senator Foot, of Connecticut, just at the close of the previous year with a view of some arrangement concerning the sales of the public lands. But this immediate question was soon lost sight of in the discussion of a great vital principle of constitutional law, namely: The relative powers of the States and the national government.
Upon this Mr. Benton and Mr. Hayne addressed the Senate, condemning the policy of the Eastern States as illiberal toward the West. Mr. Webster replied in vindication of New England, and of the policy of the Government. It was then that Mr. Hayne made his attack—sudden, unexpected, and certainly unexampled—upon Mr. Webster personally, upon Massachusetts and other Northern States politically, and upon the constitution itself. In respect to the latter, Mr. Hayne taking the position that it is constitutional to interrupt the administration of the Constitution itself, in the hands of those who are chosen and sworn to administer it; by the direct interference in form of law, of the States, in virtue of their sovereign capacity.
All of these points were handled by Mr. Hayne with that rhetorical brilliancy, and the power which characterized him as the oratorical champion of the South on the floor of the Senate, and it is not saying too much that the speech produced a profound impression. Mr. Hayne's great effort appeared to be the result of premeditation, concert, and arrangement.
He selected his own time, and that, too, peculiarly inconvenient to Mr. Webster, for at that moment the Supreme Court was proceeding in the hearing of a case of great importance in which he was a leading counsel. For this reason he requested, through a friend, the postponement of the debate. Mr. Hayne objected, however, and the request was refused. The time, the matter, and the manner, indicated that the attack was made with the design to crush so formidable a political opponent as Mr. Webster had become. To this end, personal history, the annals of New England, and the federal party were ransacked for materials.
It was attempted with the usual partisan unfairness of political harangues to make him responsible not only for what was his own, but for the conduct and opinions of others. All the errors and delinquencies, real or supposed, of Massachusetts and the Eastern States, and of the Federal party during the war of 1812, and indeed prior and subsequent to that period were accumulated and heaped upon him.
Thus it was that Mr. Hayne heralded his speech with a bold declaration of war, with taunts and threats, vaunting anticipated triumph—saying 'that he would carry the war into Africa until he had obtained indemnity for the past and security for the future.' It was supposed that as a distinguished representative man, Mr. Webster would be driven to defend what was indefensible, to uphold what could not be sustained and, as a Federalist, to oppose the popular resolutions of '98.
The severe nature of Mr. Hayne's charges, the ability with which he brought them to bear upon his opponents, his great reputation as a brilliant and powerful declaimer, filled the minds of his friends with anticipations of complete triumph. For two days Mr. Hayne had control of the floor. The vehemence of his language and the earnestness of his manner, we might properly say the power of his oratory, added force to the excitement of the occasion. So fluent and melodious was his elocution that his cause naturally begat sympathy. No one had time to deliberate on his rapid words or canvass his sweeping and accumulated statements. The dashing nature of the onset, the assurance, almost insolence of his tone; the serious character of the accusations, confounded almost every hearer.
The immediate impression of the speech was most surely disheartening to the cause Mr. Webster upheld. Congratulations from almost every quarter were showered upon Mr. Hayne. Mr. Benton said in full senate that as much as Mr. Hayne had done before to establish his reputation as an orator, a statesman, a patriot and a gallant son of the South; the efforts of that day would eclipse and surpass the whole. Indeed the speech was extolled as the greatest effort of the time or of other times—neither Chatham or Burke nor Fox had surpassed it in their palmiest days.
Mr. Webster's own feelings with reference to the speech were freely expressed to his friend, Mr. Everett, the evening succeeding Mr. Hayne's closing speech. He regarded the speech as an entirely unprovoked attack on the North, and what was of far more importance, as an exposition of politics in which Mr. Webster's opinion went far to change the form of government from that which was established by the constitution into that which existed under the confederation—if the latter could be called a government at all. He stated it to be his intention therefore to put that theory to rest forever, as far as it could be done by an argument in the senate chamber. How grandly he did this is thus vividly portrayed by Mr. March, an eye-witness, and whose account has been adopted by most historians.
It was on Tuesday, January 26th, 1830—a day to be hereafter memorable in senatorial annals—that the senate resumed the consideration of Foot's resolution. There was never before in the city an occasion of so much excitement. To witness this great intellectual contest multitudes of strangers had, for two or more days previous, been rushing into the city, and the hotels overflowed. As early as nine o'clock in the morning crowds poured into the capitol in hot haste; at twelve o'clock, the hour of meeting, the senate chamber, even its galleries, floor, and lobbies was filled to its utmost capacity. The very stairways were dark with men who hung on to one another like bees in a swarm.