CHAPTER IV.

A fashionable young American at Gadsby’s Hotel.—A Washington Party.—Description of the Parlour and the Refectory.—Apple Toddy.—Introduction to the Lady of the House and to a Fashionable Belle.—The young Lady’s Literary Taste.—Mr.Wise.—Grand Distinction between American and English Conservatism.—American Literati.—A regular American Tory—his Rise and Progress.—Mr.Rives.—Mr.Preston.—Mr.Webster.—Pendant to the Old Bailey Speech quoted by Miss Martineau.—Calhoun’s Remarks on the Money-mania of his Countrymen.—Webster’s Answer and pathetic Conclusion—his giving into Poetry and sinking the Bathos.—John Quincy Adams.—Mr.Forsyth.—Anecdote of an American Anchorite.—A Mazurka danced by four Fashionable Indies, a Polish Count, and three Members of theCorps Diplomatique.

“The greatest problem of the human race, to the solution of which men are forced by the peculiarity of their nature, is the establishment of a society for the maintenance of their rights.”—Kant’s Idea of a Universal History in a Cosmopolitical Sense.

On my return to the hotel I found the people at tea, which was served with beefsteaks, chops, ham, &c. and answered the purpose of a regular meal. It being too early for me to join them,I quietly sneaked off to my room, or rather to the third part of a room, which was granted me by the kindness of the innkeeper; the other two-thirds, with the corresponding beds, &c. being occupied by a lieutenant in the navy, and a young man of fashion just returned from Europe, who, in proof of his foreign civilization, was constantly singing French songs without reference to melody or metre. One of these, which he usually sang in the morning, when owing to our late rising we got a cold breakfast, I yet remember had this singularrefrain:—

“Je suis content, je suis heureux;Tout homme doit l’être dans ces lieux.”

Being afraid lest the songster should enter the room, and dispute with me the use of the only looking-glass, I dressed as quickly as I could; and then went down to the reading-room, to drag out the time from six till eight with the newspapers. The appointed hour finally arrived, and with it the carriage I had previously engaged; and in less than three-quarters of an hour,—the house of Mrs. *** being situated on the confines of the ideal town,—my “negro driver” halted before a small building with a wooden staircase in front, which looked as though it might be blown off by the first gale, or washedaway by the rain, considering that it was exposed to the unmitigated fury of both, and evidently placed there for no other purpose but to save room for the kitchen. The house, which was so uncommonly snug as to have but three windows in front, was brilliantly illumined by the aid of a single chandelier; and the door left open, in order that the invited guests might see their way up stairs into the parlour.

Arrived at the place, my coachman sprung off the box, opened the door of the carriage, and assisted me in alighting amidst a group of dark faces that were only rendered visible by the reflection from the whites of their eyes. I passed the review of the servants without loss of time, and scrambled up the wooden staircase in order to force my entrance into the parlour. This, however, was in vain; the gentlemen, who, much against their own inclination, were placed with their faces in the room and the more vulgar part of their composition outside, being unable to move forward, in order to admit the ingress of a new-comer, without interfering with the dancers. I tried to lookintothe room, in order to have at least a peep at the ladies; but, measuring but five feet ten, and the two gentlemen who guarded the entrance being probably Kentuckians, I couldnot manage to look over their shoulders. I endeavoured to have a glance between their bodies, or between their shoulders and arms. Vain attempt! they were too compact to suffer a beam of light to go through them.

In despair I went up another pair of stairs, which led into a sort of refectory, to which the entrance, though difficult, was not impossible. The room was furnished in a befitting style of simplicity. There was no display of overgrown wealth; a few painted chairs and tables, a small ebony-framed looking-glass, and a few settees,—the bed having been previously ejected in order to make room for the company,—constituting the sum total of theameublement. On a small side-table, neatly covered with a white table-cloth, were placed several large plates of sandwiches, bread and ham; and in the middle of the room stood a large basin, which at first I took for a Roman bathing-tub, placed there for the accommodation of such guests as came from a distance, but, on drawing near, discovered to be full of that exquisite beverage called “apple toddy,” which differs very little fromMr.Price’s gin punch at the Garrick, so much approved of byMr.Theodore Hook. Indeed, I rather think the advantage, if any, on the side of the toddy, theapples imparting to the gin a much more simple and delicate flavour than the Maraschino; and the thing would be better still if iced soda-water were added to the compound.

The gentlemen formed a very interesting group round this tub; and, perceiving a stranger step amongst them, immediately made room; while one of them, probably the presidentpro tem, seized a huge ladle, and immersing it first into the liquid, and holding it up again in triumph as high as he could, filled a more than double-sized glass to the very brim without spilling one drop of the liquid. This feat, which convinced me at once of his being anhabitué, was scarcely accomplished, before, in the most graceful manner possible, he offered me the glass with the amicable greeting of—

“Every stranger is welcome in Washington!”

I of course pledged him in due politeness, and in less than five minutes felt perfectly acquainted with the whole company. I then made a second attempt at forcing an entrance into the ball-room, which, the Kentuckians being gone, and their places filled by two spindle-shanked heroes of New York, succeeded beyond my most sanguine expectations; admitting me not onlyinto the room, but into the presence of the lady of the house. Having been invited only through the kind intercession of a friend, without knowing mine hostess, and the custom of announcing by servants being not yet introduced into the United States, a gentleman who acted as usher immediately offered me his arm, and led me into the presence of an elderly lady, dressed rather in the English matron style thanà la française, and whose countenance betokened a life passed in domestic peace and comfort.

The gentleman introduced me asMonsieurDE***, much against my own inclination, and I could clearly perceive the consequence that little worddegave me; not so much with the lady of the house, as with a number of fashionable misses, strangers in the metropolis, “who had just come out that season.” I do not know whethervanityhad something to do with it, but I thought I heard one of them ask whether I was a bachelor; which question being answered in the affirmative, I am quite sure I heard another one say, “Hem! I dare say he is as poor as that Polish Count ***, who flirted with every young lady, and, when it came to the scratch, had hardly money enough to pay the parson.”

This common-sense remark of an American belle, which proved in a most satisfactory manner her preferring the useful to the agreeable, did not much affect me; neither did I ascribe it to the want of liberality towards strangers, having seennative Americansvictimized in the same manner. I therefore pretended not to have heard the remark, and asked the gentleman who acted as master of the ceremonies to have the kindness to introduce me to the lady who, I thought, had inquired whether I was married.

I found her well-educated,spirituelle,—full of imagination. I even think she gave me to understand that she once wrote poetry—as an exercise at the boarding-school, and that she always had a secret attachment to men of letters. Among the various English writers, she was most in love with Scott, who completely transported her to the times of chivalry and knight-errantry; while her own countryman Cooper was to her “an object of perfect horror,” though she had no particular objection to his last works, “which contain a great deal of information about the state of society in Europe.” She “longedto see Europe; and was very much indebted to mamma for bringing her to Washington, where she could already have a foretaste of it.” On hearing this, her mother,who stood near her, said that she was a child, and that I must not listen to her. Being really not disposed for a flirtation, and seeing the same senator with whom I had taken a walk in the afternoon enter the room, I was glad to find an opportunity of leaving my sentimental fair one to the care of her tender parent, who had instilled into her such delicate tastes.

When the senator saw that I was disengaging myself, he came up to me without ceremony, shook me by the hand, and asked me how I liked the party. I related to him my adventure in the upper room, which made him smile. “You may depend upon it,” said he, “that if ever you meet with any of those gentlemen in the neighbourhood of his estate, you will not be able to get off with less than a month’s stay at his house,—such would be his hospitality, and the pleasure of meeting you again. I must now lead you round a little, in order to show you some of our most remarkable characters.

“That man there, with white hair and dark keen eyes, who so violently gesticulates, isMr.Wise, a member from Virginia. He is a paragon of American speakers,—always up, always ready, always determined to speak, on every occasion, the modicum of two or three hours, were it but toshow his friends and constituents that he is ‘up and doing.’ He is a member of the Whig opposition; fighting against the government as against a hydra with many heads, all whichhehas to sever from the trunk. His contempt for the present administration knows neither bounds nor reason; and he is opposed to every one of its measures, to every member or senator that ever seconded or defended one of these, and to every man that ever voted for any such member or senator. He goes, in fact, ‘the whole hog t’other way,’ and, as such, is the very type of an American Whig. He carries his opposition almost to madness, though amongst his numerous speeches there are a good many clever ones.”

“I could never tell the object of your Whig party,” said I; “pray, whatareits peculiar principles?”

“Our appellation ofWhigsorConservatives, andTories,Democrats, orDestructives,” replied he, “must really puzzle the English. I would ask, what haveourConservatives to preserve? What our Destructives to destroy? Our Conservatives possess no exclusive rights, no privileges beyond those enjoyed by the people at large; their names are not associated with the history of the country; their ancestors, if they were known,had nothing to do with establishing the government,—for themaniafor aristocracy is least to be found among those families whose forefathers distinguished themselves in the revolutionary war; they hold no property which the first commercial crisis may not destroy; and hold, in fact, the veryreverseposition of the Conservatives in England. They do not endeavour topreservewhat theypossess, but strive toacquire more; they are not associated with thepast, but entertain bright hopes of thefuture; they do not stand on the broad basis of the history of their own country, but seek for precedent in Europe. This, sir, is the character ofourConservatives, Whigs, or Aristocrats, who bear no more resemblance to the English Tories, than a poor man, who tries to become rich by shaving his neighbour, does to a millionnaire who defends his own property.

“You must not be misled by the idle declamations of those who incessantly talk of the levelling system, and its consequences on the people of this country. The levelling system commenced at the very settlement of the country, and was most active during the revolution. It was then that the Conservatives, with some show of logic, might have declaimed against the levelling principle; not now. There are some who will gravely tellyou that the most eminent American statesmen, during the revolution and immediately after, were Conservatives, or moderate Tories; but what does this prove, if it be true? Simply, that a great number of those whom an overruling Providence used as instruments in bestowing liberty and happiness on our people, did not understand what they were doing: which, after all, does not make so very much against them; there being at all times, and in all countries, but few politicians capable of foreseeing the ultimate result of an innovation. And what, I would ask, have nine-tenths of these Tories to lose by this levelling system, that makes them so tenacious of their doctrines? Where is the elevation from which they are afraid to descend? What noble principles which they cherish, will thereby be trodden in the dust? What protection which they give to arts and sciences, will thereby suffer? Echo must answer, ‘What?’—Daniel Webster, the gentleman there with the hawk-eyes, told us that the war between the democrats and the aristocracy is a war of the poor against the rich; and I am inclined to think he is half right,—as far, namely, as concerns his own party. But if wealth form the only distinction, the only claim to supremacy in our country, the sooner we get rid of its influence the better.It is the most degrading of all, and must be equally spurned by the labourer and the man of genius.”

“But a great number of your literary men belong likewise to the opposition.”

“Pray, don’t talk to me of our literary men! We have as yet, for the most part, but literary imitators, who follow the beaten track of the English or French; and the organization of our society is admirably calculated to retain them in this state of imbecility. It is the want of nationality, the absence of generous and expanded feelings, which are crushed by the vulgar inordinate desire after money, and the little love which our upper classes in general bear to the institutions of our country, which are the cause of our poets singing the praise of the lark and the nightingale, with whose melodious strains they are only acquainted through the medium of some English annual. What is there in our country to inspire poetic sentiments, if it be not the love of liberty and of nature, the great sources of all poetry?

“We are told that our political principles are bad, because they do not meet with the approbation of some two or three score of vain scribblers calling themselvesliterati, but being in factpettifogging lawyers, that have not wit enough to make a living by their profession. Now, in order to prove such an assertion to be correct, it would first be necessary to show that these representatives of the wisdom, intelligence, and patriotism of the country are capable of forming a correct judgment of the position and wants of our people; and, secondly, that they are capable of forming anindependentjudgment. When ourliteratishall be known otherwise than by writing for the newspapers, or occasionally for an album, I shall believe the first; when I shall see a paper without advertisements, I shall trust in the second.

“We talk of an independent press, and our editors are more easily bought and sold than any writer in France! They are, indeed, not bought by so much money down, simply because there is none to give it them; but by contributions of twenty-five dollars a-piece forannual advertisements, paid at the end of the year,—if the subscriber does not fail in the mean time. Ourliteratiwant to make a living with their pen, and are in this respect just like other tradespeople.

“There,” said he, pointing to a young man dressed in the latest London fashion, “is a gentleman,the son of a respectable merchant in New York, who may serve as an illustration of whatwemean by a Tory. He is just turned twenty-one, and has already been in France, England, and Italy. His father is rich; that is, he associates with fashionable people, keeps a carriage, and will, if he do not meet with great reverses, leave to his six children from fifteen to twenty thousand dollars a head. This modicum the young man will have to improve, or he will die a beggar; so that, if he does not marry a rich woman, he will be unavoidably condemned to personal labour and exertion. Yet this young man isan aristocrat! His father, knowing his inability to provide for him in such a manner as to render him independent, thought fit to give him apracticalrather than a literary education. The young man accordinglylearnedreading, writing, and spelling; writes a tolerably fair hand, and has studied mathematics—as far as the rule of three! When he had acquired so much of a practical education, he was sent to Europe toperfecthimself.

“He first went to England, where he saw all the great actors and actresses, went upSt.Paul’s to take a view of the city of London, made theround of the principal gambling-houses and other public establishments worth the attention of a traveller, dined with every gentleman to whom he brought a letter of introduction, and then wrote home, that, being perfectly acquainted with English society, he was now desirous of seeing France. His father accordingly sent the money, and the young man set out in a stage-coach from London to Dover. From Dover to Boulogne he went in a steamer; and at Boulogne he took themalle-postefor Paris, making observations all the way on the manners of the French people.

“Arrived in Paris, his first care was to secure comfortable lodgings; then he delivered his letter of introduction, which was a letter of credit on Messrs. *** and Co.; then dined with his banker; after which he dined again at arestaurant’s, and then set out to prepare for his daily avocation, which consisted in strolling from his lodgings in the Rue Rivoli, through the RueSt.Honoré, to the Palais Royal; from the Palais Royal, through the Rue Vivienne, to the Place de la Bourse; thence through the Passage du Panorama to the Boulevards; and over the Boulevards, through the Rue de la Paix and the Place Vendôme, into the garden of the Tuileries,which, together with the principal theatres and other places of amusement, contained his circle of acquaintance in the French metropolis.

“Society in France being a little easier of access than in England, he obtained, by dint of perseverance,—one of our cardinal virtues,—access to one or two respectable families, and left his card with our minister in order to be presented at court. Whether he was actually admitted into ‘the presence of royalty,’ after which his heart panted ever since he was a boy, I know not; but I rather think hewas, since, immediately on his return, he cut most of his old friends and acquaintances, and was, in fact, quite another man.

“The time of his embarkation at Havre being fixed upon, he employed the remaining six or seven weeks to see Italy; not forgetting to buy in Milan someblack lacefor his sister, in Genoa somevelvetfor his mother, and in Rome one or two pieces ofmosaïque, in order to show his taste in the fine arts. The reason he did not purchase ahatat Leghorn was, that he did not know how to dispose of it in his portmanteau. I forgot to say, that, during all the time the young gentleman was in Europe ‘improving himself,’ he wrote home ‘the most touching letters,’ which wereshown to all the acquaintance of the family; and, it being thought a pity that such talents should remain hidden under a bushel, and not enlighten other Americans that did not enjoy the same advantages, some of them actually appeared in the papers, superscribed ‘Correspondence of an American Gentleman now travelling in Europe.’ What was particularly remarkable in his correspondence was the great number of Gallicisms; showing his acquaintance with a foreign idiom, which he had already mastered to such a degree as to forget his own language. At last he came back from his tour, and has ever since been a lion in our fashionable society. Such, sir, is the usual type of our aristocrats, who are constantly railing against the levelling system, which would confound them with the industrious mechanic, the honest farmer, and the enterprising and thriving backwoodsman. But we have already lost too much time with apuppy; I must now show you some of ourmen.

“That gentleman there, whose animated conversation has brought together a circle of hearers, isMr.Rives, senator from Virginia. He is one of the best specimens of our Southern gentlemen, uniting great vigour of mind, and the eye of a statesman, with those agreeable and affable mannerswhich throw off restraint without diminishing respect; a gift which nature seldom bestows on those born under more Northern latitudes. He will be a prominent candidate for the Vice-presidency, and a great support to the democratic party.Mr.Rives is an agreeable speaker, clear and precise in his arguments, and an enemy to the rhetorical or flowery style. He has no notion of sinking the bathos, or of shaking the Senate with the thunder of his voice.

“Next to him stands a gentleman with a red wig and a laughing countenance; his eyes sparkle, though he has not yet had any champaign, and the spirits confined within his brain seem to celebrate one continual Lord Mayor’s day. This isMr.Preston, senator from South Carolina. What a pity it is he is on the side of the opposition! He is full of fun; mixes up repartee, sarcasm, irony, andpersiflagein one continual strain of humorous eloquence; and is, in fact, the prince of wags in Congress. His manners, of course, are those of a gentleman,—which indeed he cannot help, being a South-Carolinian; and his wit, though it sometimes touches to the quick, is accompanied by so much good-nature that it is impossible to be angry with him. These qualities, of course, do not make him aleader, butrather the cavalry of the opposition; and his spirited attacks sometimes make greater havoc than the artillery of Clay or Webster.

“Mr.Webster you know already. He sits at yon table, playing at whist. This is trifling away his time, for he is the last man to spend his hours in innocent amusements.Mr.Webster is, according tomyopinion, a gentleman without imagination or extensive reading; but of immense natural talents, and severe application to his profession. He is considered one of the best, and there are those who consider himthebest, constitutional lawyer; and, certes, his judgment, discrimination, and logic are not surpassed by any member or senator in Congress. Yet, with all these qualities, he is better calculated for a debater than for a leader; his mind being more of that analytic order which succeeds in dissecting and destroying, than of that synthetic character which combines simple elements to an harmonious whole. The latter requires a creative genius, and a certain intuitive knowledge of things; whereas the process of dissection presupposes but a careful examination of facts, and the application of sound logic.

“To understand whereMr.Webster’s talents lie, it is only necessary to study his parliamentarytactics, and to read his speeches. He never rises from his seat, except to repel an attack, or to take advantage of an overture given by one of his enemies. When an important question—of which he is hardly ever the originator—is proposed, his practice is to wait until every one has given his opinion; he then compares them, dissects them, analyses them, and (wonderful!) pronounces upon them like a judge after hearing the argument of each counsel. Every flaw in the reasoning, in the expression,—every logical imperfection is sure to be detected; and his speech, which in truth is a critical abstract of all the speeches delivered in Congress, passes then, with his friends at least, for anoriginalproduction. But I would ask, what particular measure has he originated that produced either good or evil to the country? The tariff?—That wasMr.Calhoun’s measure. Internal improvements, or a bank.?—That honour (!) belongs to Henry Clay. When, at the session of Congress in 1832-3, the country was threatened with civil war, was ithethat averted the calamity by the proposition of a measure calculated to satisfy all parties?—No; this honour belongs again to Henry Clay. What, then, I ask, has he done that is so wonderful?—He is a great constitutional lawyer! That may be; but hehas not yet delivered his ideas in a scientific form, and the commentaries ofMr.Justice Story will perhaps outlive the fame of Daniel Webster.

DANIEL WEBSTER.

“Mr.Webster’s great tact in repelling an enemy consists in personal satire and irony. Thus he succeeded againstMr.Haines, and against a number of minor opponents, who all went to swell his renown. His speeches are clear and argumentative; but, while they occupy your understanding, they leave you cold and cheerless. He cannot excite your imagination; he cannot touch your feelings; and he does not stimulate your enthusiasm. Neither is he capable of supplying this deficiency by his personality; for, though respected and admired throughout the country, he is not beloved,—no, not even by his own partisans.Mr.Webster knows the laws of his country; but he is less acquainted with the men that are to be governed by them, and possesses none of those conciliating and engaging qualities which insure personal popularity. This accounts for his position in Congress, where, notwithstanding the powerful aid he lends to the opposition, he stands alone—the terrible senator from Massachusetts.

“Neither isMr.Webster as a speaker entirely without faults. He sometimes tries to sink thebathos by being flowery and rhetorical; and he seems to labour under the singular impression that a public speaker must commence and leave off with a flourish, and on this account violates his imagination with the composition of regular beginnings and ends, which are but too frequently wholly irrelevant to the text of his discourses. He had, in this respect, better follow the example of certain landscape painters, who, being perfectly equal to theinanimate, leave thefiguresto be done by somebody else.”

N.B.—It is now three years since I noted down the conversation of the democratic senator. I have since heard so much of Daniel Webster,—European writers, and especially Miss Martineau,[26]having actually made his apotheosis,—that, as apendantto the Old Bailey speech recorded in herlast work on America, I cannot refrain here from laying before the British reader some elegant extracts from one of his speeches (called theGreatSpeech), in reply to the remarks of John C. Calhoun, delivered in the Senate on the 12th of March 1838. This speech, one of the most elaborate of which he was ever delivered, fills, in the “New York American,” seventeen and a quarter columns, and was intended to demolish his antagonist. It is on that account full of personal attacks, occasionally interspersed with a modest praise of himself.

Mr.Calhoun had been defending an independent Treasury, such as exists, and has always existed, in every country, whether the Government was monarchical or republican; whileMr.Webster, the advocate of a union between the Government and the Bank, tried to ridicule theidea; endeavouring to show that his adversary had beenpreviouslywrong on a question relating to thetariff.Mr.Calhoun, in his opening remarks, pointed to the evils of the irresponsible American banking system; to its “self-sustaining principle, which poised and impelled the system, self-balanced in the midst of the heavens like some celestial body, with scarcely a perceptible deviation from its path from the concussion it had received;” and at last took the following philosophic ground:—

“But its most fatal effects (the effects of the American banking system) originate in its bearing on the moral and intellectual developement of the community. The great principles of demand and supply govern the moral and intellectual world no less than the business and commercial. If a community be so organised as to cause a demand for high mental attainments, they are sure to be developed. If its honours and rewards are allotted to pursuits that require their developement by creating a demand for intelligence, knowledge, wisdom, justice, firmness, courage, patriotism, and the like, they are sure to be produced. But if allotted to pursuits that require inferior qualities, the higher are sure to decay and perish. I object to the bankingsystem, because it allots the honours and rewards of the community in a very undue proportion to a pursuit the least of all others favourable to the developement of the higher mental qualities, intellectual or moral,—to the decay of the learned professions, and the more noble pursuits of science, literature, philosophy, and statesmanship, and the great and more useful pursuits of business and industry. With the vast increase of its profits and influence it is gradually concentrating in itself most of the prizes of life,—wealth, honour, and influence,—to the great disparagement and degradation of all the liberal, useful, and generous pursuits of society. The rising generation cannot but feel its deadening influence. The youth who crowd our colleges, and behold the road to honour and distinction terminating in a banking-house, will feel the spirit of emulation decay within them, and will no longer be pressed forward by generous ardour to mount up the rugged steep of science as the road to honour and distinction, when, perhaps, the highest point they could attain in what was once the most honourable and influential of learned professions would be the place of attorney to a bank.”

The force and truth of these remarks are amply illustrated by the actual composition ofAmerican society, and would be equally felt in England, if, with a system of banking similar to that now in use in the United States, the people were at any time to bedeprived(I use that word on purpose) of the influence of the nobility and clergy. It is the absence of high dignitaries, and of men placed by their birth and education above the level of ordinary men, which renders the presence of a moneyed aristocracy in the United States truly odious and degrading; and forces every man of sound sense, who is capable of understanding the true position of the country by comparing it to that of others, naturally over to the democratic party. In proportion as science and literature will be cultivated in America, democracy will become more and more powerful; for it is only vulgar and inferior minds Whiggism can purchase with money.

To the short and pithy speech ofMr.Calhoun, then,Mr.Webster made, as I said before, a seventeen and a quarter column answer. This I surely have no intention of inflicting upon the innocent reader;[27]but, in order to verify the criticism of the democratic senator, I shall quote a few of those passages in whichMr.Webstergives into the poetical,—that is, those passages in which his imagination seems to be sufficiently excited toquotepoetry, exhibiting his taste in the selection,—and the grandfinale, which will demonstrate his art of sinking the bathos.

At the head of the ninth column, after expatiating at some lengthon the inconvenienceof counting money, which would ensue in case of a Treasury, he says,

“But this is not all: once a quarter the naval officer is to count the collector’s money, and the register in the land-office is to count the receiver’s money. And, moreover, sir! every now and then the secretary of the Treasury is to authorize unexpected and impromptu countings in his discretion, and just to satisfy his own mind. What a money-counting, tinkling, jingling, generation we shall be! All the money-changers in Solomon’s temple will be as nothing to us. Our soundwill go forth into all lands.Weshall be like the king in the ditty of the nursery,

‘There sat the king a-counting of his money.’”

What mighty reasons these for not having a Treasury! And what glorious quotation of poetry! What a beautiful association of ideas! To think of the nursery ditty in the Senate ofthe United States! How wellMr.Webster remembers the days of his innocence! and what a talent he must have had, even as a boy, for finance, to remember just the verse which relates to the “kinga-counting of his money!”

The next quotation of poetry occurs on the fourteenth column, whereMr.Webster speaks of the issue of Treasury notes, which, as the orator assures us, might be given out by the Government so as toflood the country.[28]

“And now I pray you to consider,Mr.President,” saysMr.Webster, “what an admirable contrivance this would be to secure that economy in the expenses of Government which the gentleman has so much at heart. Relaxed from all necessity of taxation, and from the consequent responsibility to the people,—(this is a wilful misrepresentation of the fact,)—not called upon to regard at all the amount of annual income,—having an authority to cause Treasury notes to be issued, whenever it pleases,

‘In multitudes, like which thepopulousNorthPourednever from herfrozenloins to passRhine or the Danau,’—

what admirable restraint would be on Government!” &c.

Now mark how well those three lines of blank verse are brought in! What a beautiful simile, to compare the issue of Treasury notes to thepopulousNorthpouringfrom herfrozenloins hordes of barbarians to cross the Rhine or theDanau! How applicable! Just the thing for America! What a terrible sensation those children of the North would make among the Yankees, just as they are crossing the Rhine or the Danube!

But the conclusion ofMr.Webster’s speech is a perfectchef d’œuvre. He there apostrophises Calhoun in the following manner:—

“Let him go! I remain! I remain where I ever have been, and ever mean to be. Here, standing on the platform of the General Constitution,—a platform broad enough and firm enough to uphold every interest of thewholecountry,—I shall still be found!”

The words, “Let him go! I remain!” produce a sort of dramatic effect; and are, I believe, a happy imitation of those ancient soliloquieswhich commence thus: “He is gone, and I am alone.” And then how natural that the platform of the General Constitution, which is broad enough “to upholdeveryinterest of thewholecountry,” should also supporthim! Nothing could be moreà propos.

“Intrusted,” continuesMr.Webster, “with some part in the administration of that constitution, I intend to act in its spirit, and in the spirit of those who framed it. Yes, sir; I would act as if our fathers who formed it for us, and who bequeathed it to us, were looking on us,—as if I would see their venerable forms bending down to behold us from the abodes above! I would act too, sir, as if that long line of posterity were also viewing us, whose eye is hereafter to scrutinise our conduct.”

What a thorough view and review that is! and what can be more pathetic than to see the fathers of the constitution firstlookingupon them, and then bending down their venerable forms tobeholdthem!

Mr.Webster continues the same beautiful figure still farther.

“Standing thus as in the full gaze of ourancestorsand ourposterity, having received this inheritance from the former to be transmitted tothe latter, and feeling that, if I am born for any good in my day and generation, it is for the good of the whole country, (what a modest way this of recommending himself to the Presidency!) no local policy or local feelings, no temporary impulse shall induce me to yield myfoothold(!) on the constitution and the Union. I move off under no banner not known to the whole American people, and to their constitution and laws. No, sir; these walls, these columns,

——‘flyFrom their firm base as soon as I.’”

This is the third and last quotation of poetry, and a direct challenge of the nullifier,defeated by General Jackson. The selection is beautiful!Mr.Webster’s bravery needs no comment!

Then comes the reallast endof the speech,—a perfectbijouof rhetorical amplification.

“I came into public life, sir,in the serviceof the United States.” (Mr.Webster probably means toservethe United States.) “On that broadaltarmy earliest and all my public vows have been made. I propose to serve no othermaster. So far as depends on any agency of mine, they shall continue United States, united in interest and affection, united in every thing in regard towhich the constitution has decreed their union; united in war, for the common defence, the commonrenown, and the common glory; andunited,compacted,knit firmly togetherin peace, for the common prosperity and happiness of ourselves and our children.”

Who does not here remember the wholesome piece of advice Napoleon gave to his brother Lucien when the latter had sent him a proclamation intended for the public? “I have read the proclamation,” observed Napoleon; “it is good for nothing. There are too many words and too few ideas in it. You struggle after pathos. This is not the way to speak to the people. They possess more tact and judgment than you are aware of. Yourprosewill do more harm than good.”

I am not disposed to undervalueMr.Webster’s talent as a judge and critic,—except as regards poetry and the arts. The bench is the proper place for him; but as a statesman, or party leader, he can only succeed by the blunders of his antagonists.

The next gentleman to whom my democratic friend directed my attention was a short stout figure, with a bald head, and a cold, displeasing,repulsive countenance, which, notwithstanding, beamed with an almost supernatural intelligence. “This isMr.John Quincy Adams,” observed my friend, “formerly President of the United States, and now a member of Congress. Next to General Jackson, he is perhaps the most remarkable man in the country, though he is his perfect antipode. If anything shows the superiority of character over abstract knowledge, it is the triumph of the honest, straightforward soldier over this hair-splitter. Were there yet twenty Jacksons in the country, they would yet twenty times succeed against such a man. This is a law of nature.

“Mr.Adams, if you consider his acquirements, is probably the best informed man in America, though his knowledge is somewhat rhapsodical, like his character. He has the most astonishing memory, and possesses great conversational powers. Yet, with all these eminent qualities, he has not one true friend! With almost universal talent, and, I might add, universal application, he possesses no genius, no great personality, like Jackson, born to wield the destinies of a country. He is full of information, understands most perfectly the routine of business, reads everything, examines everything, and remembers everything; and yet, when he comes to act, is sure of committing someblunder which will expose him and his friends. He is, in fact, a living illustration of Voltaire’s motto:

‘Nous tromper dans nos entreprises,C’est à quoi nous sommes sujets;Le matin je fais des projets,Et le long du jour des sottises.’

The reason is, he knows Europe better than he does America;—he is a stranger in his own country. He fights his battles on paper; calculating the number of men, their position, and the kind of arms, but making no allowance for their moral character. Many of his plans are well conceived, but all are badly executed; and he has the weakness of most bad generals, to account for his lost battles by the faults of his inferior officers.

“Thegaucherieswhich distinguish his political life also mark his private intercourse; he talks better than any man in the United States, and yet is sure to be embarrassed when addressed, unless previously prepared for it. This want of social talent I have frequently noticed among the most eminent men of New England, and it accounts for their little popularity.Mr.Adams belongs, of course, to the opposition; but, like the independent Yankee militia-man, fights his battles ‘onhis own book.’[29]He will not suffer any one near him, and attacks indiscriminately friend or foe that opposes his progress. Of late, few of his own party have dared to come within his reach; for, though his political principles are somewhatrococo, his wit and sarcasm are as unimpaired as ever, and his capacity to scratch those who tread upon his toe as good as in the best days of his manhood.

Mr.Adams’s peculiar manners have, with the exception of too much panegyric, been well described in an article entitled “Glances at Congress,” inserted in the first number of the United States’ Magazine and Democratic Review, published at Washington. “Our attention,” says the reporter who furnished the article, “is now attracted to a ray of light that glitters on the apex of a bald and noble head, ‘located’ on the left of the House, in the neighbourhood of the Speaker’s chair. It proceeds from that wonderful man, who in his person combines the agitator, philosopher, poet, statesman, critic, and orator,—John Quincy Adams. Who that has seen him sitting beneath the cupola of the hall, with therays of light gathering and glancing about his singularly polished head, but has likened him to one of the luminaries of the age, shining and glittering in the political firmament of the Union. There he sits hour after hour, day after day, with untiring patience; never absent from his seat, never voting for an adjournment, vigilant as the most jealous member of the House; his ear always on the alert, himself always prepared to go at once into the profoundest question of state, to the minutest point of order. What must be his thoughts as he ponders on the past, in which he has played a part so conspicuous! We look at him, and mark his cold and tearful eye, his stern and abstracted gaze, and conjure up phantoms of other scenes. We see him amid his festive and splendid halls ten years back, standing stiff and awkward, and shaking a tall, military-looking man by the hand, in whose honour the gala was given, to commemorate the most splendid of America’s victories. We see him again, years afterwards, the bitter foe of that same military chieftain, and the competitor with him for the highest gift of a free people. We look upon a more than king (!?), who has filled every department of honour in his native land, still at his post; he who was the President of millions, nowthe representative of forty odd thousand, quarrelling about trifles or advocating high principles. To-day growling and sneering at the House, with an abolition petition in his trembling hand; and anon lording it over the passions, and lashing the members into the wildest state of enthusiasm by his indignant and emphatic eloquence. Alone, unspoken to, unconsulted, never consulting with others, he sits apart, wrapped in his reveries; and, with his finger resting on his nose, he permits his mind to move like a gigantic pendulum, stirring up the hours of the past and disturbing those of the hidden future. Or probably he is writing,—his almost perpetual employment;—but what?—who can guess?—perhaps some poetry in a young girl’s album! He looks enfeebled, but yet he is never tired; worn out, but ever ready for combat; melancholy, but let a witty thing fall from any member, and that old man’s face is wreathed in smiles. He appears passive, but woe to the unfortunate member that hazards an arrow at him; the eagle is not swifter in his flight thanMr.Adams; with his agitated finger quivering in sarcastic gesticulation, he seizes upon his foe; and, amid the amusement of the House, rarely fails to take a signal vengeance.

“His mode of speaking is peculiar. He risesabruptly, his face reddens, and, in a moment throwing himself into the attitude of a veteran gladiator, he prepares for the attack. Then he becomes full of gesticulation, his body sways to and fro, self-command seems lost; his head is bent forward in his earnestness till it sometimes nearly touches the desk; his voice frequently breaks, but he pursues his object throughout its bearings. Nothing daunts him; the House may ring with the cries of ‘Order, order!’—unmoved, contemptuous, he stands amid the tempest, and, like an oak that knows his gnarled and knotted strength, stretches his arms forth, and defies the blast.”

Leaning against the wall, his hands folded on his back, a contemplative spectator of the busy scene before him, stood a gentleman with venerable white hair, and a pale placid countenance, which at once bespoke reserve and affability, firmness of purpose and urbanity, in an extraordinary degree. This, as my friend acquainted me, wasMr.Forsyth, formerly senator from Georgia, but now Secretary of State. He was one of the most strenuous defenders of General Jackson’s policy at a time when the latter had a large majority against him in the Senate, and was shortly aftercalled into the cabinet. There he distinguished himself by his tact, moderation, and sound statesmanlike policy. The part he took in the recent difficulties with France is known, though it is believed he principally acted under General Jackson’s direction.

Mr.Forsyth is one of those few members of the cabinet who have escaped the ferocious attacks of the opposition. Though a strong partisan of democracy, neither his private nor his public life furnished a text for the abuses of party. Some ignorant and uncultivated persons haveaccused(!) him of too great a devotion to the ladies; but this reproach, so far from injuring him in the estimation of sensible persons, only goes to elevate his character as a man.

It is high time for the Americans to leave off the barbarous and ridiculous notion that a man, in order to be a statesman, a lawyer, an orator, or a man of business, must necessarily be a bore in society. I was once present when an American, who was in the habit of delivering gratuitous lectures on morality, was asked by a Frenchman what sort of impression the sight of a beautiful and lovely woman made upon him? “Precisely the same as that of a finehorse,” replied he, by way of showing the utter subjection in which hekept his passions.—“Dieu merci!” cried the Frenchman; “I vill not invite you to see my darters.” Nothing, certainly, marks the irredeemable vulgarity of a person more strongly than his indifference to beauty and accomplishment.

“There are yet three gentlemen,” continued my friend, “whom I would gladly show you, as amongst those who have the greatest influence on the destinies of our country; but unfortunately they are not here, and, with the exception ofMr.Van Buren, who is one of them, are seldom seen at parties. To-morrow, however, after our call on General Jackson, I shall introduce you to them personally. At present you must excuse me; I have to see some of my colleagues in order to prepare them for a question which I know will to-morrow come up in the Senate. The opposition want to steal a march upon us; but I am determined they shall find us prepared.”

Shortly after the senator disappeared, and with him a number of his colleagues. Scarcely one member remained after twelve, though the dance continued till half-past two. On this occasion I saw the firstmazurkadanced in the United States; four fashionable ladies consenting to be partners to three Russian gentlemen and a Polish count, who was something of a lion in Washington.The three Russians were none other than the amiable and witty Baron K—r, the Russian minister; the clever and kind-heartedMr.K—r, the secretary of legation; andMr.G—, theattaché. The partners could not have been better selected: and, though I could observe not a few sneers in the countenances of the elderly portion of the fair, the younger was evidently delighted; and, as I understood afterwards, practised the steps and the “turn-abouts” more than a week, to the exclusion of everything else. I remained until two; at which time I took another glass of apple-toddy, which enabled me to return home without stopping on the way at the “Epicure House.”

Back to Index Next