In 1808, Mr. Peyton removed to the town to enter the arena against these great men, and in a very brief period, indeed, he gained, in the opinion of the court and the lawyers and of the people, the first place at the bar. Such was his vigor, originality and learning, that Col. Preston, one of his biographers, says that "he met in contest the strongest men in each department of the law and he made himself a champion in all." Daniel Sheffey said "he possessed gigantic power without effort, was leader in his circuit and at the head of the profession."
From 1808 to 1846, when struck down by apoplexy, he bent the whole energies of his mind and body to the profession—the only interruption in this long period of practice being a brief episode of military service, from 1812 to 1815, as Chief of Staff to Gen. Porterfield in the war against England, and one of five years in the Senate of Virginia from 1839 to 1845, when he resigned during his second term from ill health. He did not desire, still less seek, a seat in the Senate, but yielded to the importunities of his Rockbridge and Augusta friends, the leading men of Rockbridge particularly importuning him to accept the position, in order to promote, among other things, the fortunes of the Virginia Military Institute; a school they esteemed of great importance to the county and the cause of State education, and to which it was well known Mr. Peyton was most friendly, for he was everywhere known and recognized as the friend and promoter of learning and the liberal arts. And his deep interest in the cause of education was evinced by his acceptance of the position of trustee of Washington College in 1832, which he held till he resigned in 1846, having during this long period at great inconvenience to himself, attended the meetings of the Board, of which he was an active and useful member. He also acted for many years before and after 1832 as President of the Board of Trustees of the Staunton Academy; was one of the founders of the Virginia Female Institute at Staunton, and a member of the Board of Trustees; was one of the most earnest advocates of the scheme for establishing the Virginia Military Institute and suggested the union of the Institute and Washington College under one management, believing that the United University ought to be and would become one of the greatest seats of learning in the country. He also accepted, in 1840, the position of visitor to the U. S. Military Academy at West Point, and wrote the able, interesting and instructive report of the Board for that year. This was said at the time to be the ablest report ever written on the condition, the mode of instruction, the changes and improvements which should be introduced in the course of study and discipline and the future usefulness of West Point.
Education he considered the philosophy of the human mind, enriching it with all that is useful or ornamental in knowledge, teaching us how to avert evil and produce good. It was not so valuable for the learning acquired, for to be well informed, was not, in his opinion, to be well educated; as for the moral character it formed, for the habit of thought engendered, for the preparation it was for the practical duties of life—in a word, he regarded education or intellectual progress as the sure forerunner of moral improvement.
It may not be out of place to mention here that his interest in, and sympathy for the unfortunate and afflicted was manifested in various ways, but especially by his services as a member of the Court of Directors of the Western Lunatic Asylum at Staunton for over twenty years, during ten of which he was President of the board.
Mr. Peyton's political life can be briefly summarized. He voted for the election of James Madison and zealously supported his administration. He also voted for James Monroe, and opposed the election of John Quincy Adams, voting for Gen. Jackson. He voted for Jackson twice, reluctantly when a candidate for a re-election, because of his refusal to sign the bill to recharter the United States Bank, but under a belief that Jackson's course was more due to the feelings created by the particular time when congress passed the bill, it being just previous to his second election, than to any settled hostility on his part to a United States Bank, and he subsequently abandoned that party, and ever afterwards adhered to the Whig party.
Mr. Peyton thus gives his reasons for abandoning the democratic party—he said: "shortly after his (Jackson's) re-election, he commenced a train of measures, to which I was utterly opposed, measures of a novel and alarming character, which in their origin and their subsequent developments, brought distress and embarrassment upon the banks, upon the country at large, and especially upon all our commercial interests. I allude to his wild, violent and undigested schemes of finance, commencing with his pet bank system and ending with his order in council, the specie circular. This warfare upon the bank of the United States, the currency and the commerce of the nation, reduced us in 1837 to the degradation of witnessing a general suppression of specie payments by the banks. These acts, connected with the corrupting system of party discipline, introduced by that administration, with the view of compelling private judgment to succumb to the behest of the party, completely separated me from the administration of Andrew Jackson." (See his letter of date May 1st, 1839, and addressed to the people of Augusta and Rockbridge counties.)
In the Senate, he opposed the annexation of Texas, a revenue tariff, and a war with England on the question of the Oregon boundary line, saying in regard to Oregon, "while our title to the whole of that vast region extending westward from the Rocky Mountains to the Pacific Ocean, and the 42nd degree of north latitude to 54° 40′ was certainly as good as that of any other nation, and probably better, we had ourselves, on repeated occasions virtually admitted that it was not so complete and unqualified as to preclude all other claims to any portion of it; and therefore a war for Oregon, unless an attempt was made to wrest it forcibly from our possessions would be not only a blunder but a crime."
The annexation of Texas he opposed on many grounds. He declared first that America was already too vast to be national, and too rich to be democratic, and any extension of her borders would increase the evils. Secondly, he objected to a clause in the constitution of Texas which refused to the legislature power to pass laws for the emancipation of slaves. Thirdly, he was opposed to the United States Government assuming the debt of Texas and he thought annexation might lead to useless wars about boundary, etc.
On the question of the tariff, he held that direct protection was a legitimate object of legislation and he opposed any tariff which gave merely incidental protection. He derived his doctrine on the question both from the necessity and justice of the case, and the explicit avowal of those who framed the constitution and of those who sat in the first Congress under it, that it was designed and desired to lay duties for the encouragement and protection of domestic manufactures and he would allow no arguments of expediency to induce him to abandon his ground and to fall in with the friends of a revenue tariff giving incidental protection. This phraseology he denounced as a device of demagogues who were willing to conceal or abandon their principles in order to secure success. He also supported the "Monroe Doctrine," opposed nullification and secession, and favored a United States bank and popular education by means of State aid. He also spoke on behalf of a generous system of internal improvement and against the great liberty of divorce. In a word, he gave a general support to the principles of the old Whig party and occupied a position of commanding influence. His speeches in the Senate, like those at the bar, were distinguished for their clear, nervous brevity. And the great men of the day, B. W. Leigh, John J. Allen, R. E. Scott, William C. Rives, Vincent Witcher, Wm. Daniel, R. C. Conrad, and others, declared were equal to anything ever heard in a deliberative assembly. He was consulted and deferred to for the wisdom, sagacity and moderation of his counsels and was usually styled the "Nestor of the Senate." His influence was paramount and always exerted for the public good, and the prosperity of Virginia, for half a century; indeed, up to the civil war, was to no inconsiderable degree, due to the wise advice of this patriotic and public spirited man.
Some years before he entered the Senate, he had grown stout, weighing 220 pounds, his fine silk-like hair was snowy white, his face florid, his eyes bright, piercing and thoughtful, and in silence his calm and serene countenance gave him a majestic and graceful appearance. Alexander McD. Cowan, writing of him in the Vindicator newspaper of Staunton, February 18th, 1887, says; "Mr. Peyton was a remarkably handsome man, being of a fine figure and size, and with a face whose every feature was well-nigh faultless in shape and expression. Indeed, the word superb which used to be applied to the late Gen. Hancock's commanding appearance, might with equal appropriateness have been applied to John Howe Peyton." Gen. William Preston, of Kentucky, told the writer he was, when he first met him in 1835-6 at the White Sulphur Springs, the "finest specimen of the Virginia gentleman of the old school, in his scrupulous, old fashioned courtesy, and open handed liberality, in his dress and appearance, he had ever seen—was not only an honor to the State but to human nature." His health was good up to the age of 66 years, his step firm, his figure erect; in fact, he was as straight as a dart, and there was something in his look which seemed to arise from an innate disposition of the mind or the workings of a great soul.