one.

in the Courier, October 1, on which occasion it was said, — —“We believe the speech of Mr. Webster will be approved by all who are not absolutely pledged to go with a certain party, right or wrong. We shall be disappointed if it do not produce a prodigious effect throughout the country. We said, a few days ago, that he never stood higher in popular estimation than at that time. His position is now a still more elevated The confidence in his patriotism is confirmed, and the country will be grateful for his firmness in remaining at the post where she needed his services, though assailed by vituperation and hypocrisy, in all the forms which the ingenuity of office-seeking avarice could invent. . . . . It was confidently asserted, for several days previous, that Mr. Webster would take this occasion to cut loose from Mr. Tyler's administration; and some went so far as to say that he had already resigned, and would avail himself of the occasion to announce a fact which then existed. The authors of these declarations and predictions must have been a little disappointed. Those who, from a sense of honor peculiar to themselves, have kindly informed him that he cannot remain in the cabinet without disgracing himself, must be especially gratified with the manner in which he accepts their advice and admonition. But, whatever may be said or thought of the speech in some other respects, no one can deny that it is frank, bold, manly, and entirely free from all that looks like affectation. It was evidently an unstudied, extemporaneous effort. There was no attempt to stifle opinion or to conceal feeling, no attempt to palter with the audience in a double

sense, by the use of words of uncertain meaning. There was no sly insinuation, no dark innuendo, but a straight-forward, independent exposition of truth, a copious outpouring of reproof, animadversion, admonition, and entreaty."

It may be mentioned, as a curious fact, that while the most intelligent merchants, manufacturers and mechanics, those who daily frequented the resorts of men of business, were uniform and decided in expressions of approbation of the sentiments delivered by Mr. Webster in this speech, the whig papers in Massachusetts, with hardly an exception, were as uniform in condemning the whole performance, and many of them continued to fulminate denunciations of his willingness to remain in the cabinet, after the resignation of his colleagues, in September, 1841. Notwithstanding all these manifestations of censure, chagrin and mortification, he continued in the office till some time in May, 1843.

The National Convention of Whigs, which assembled in 1844 to nominate a candidate for the Presidency, proposed Mr. Clay for that office, as the most "available candidate." Thus Mr. Webster was sacrificed on the altar of availability. With true magnanimity he took the field, and used his whole power in promoting the election of Mr. Clay. But Mr. Clay was defeated, and Mr. Polk was chosen to the office of chief magistrate of the Union. The noble stand taken by Mr. Webster, - submitting without complaint to the voice of the convention, and, forgetting his own claims, enforcing with all the strength of his almost omnipotent eloquence the claim of a rival, seemed

to render him more popular; and the general voice of the people, especially the people in the nonslaveholding states, was equivalent to a pledge that he should, certainly, be the choice of the Whigs, when the period for another presidential election should occur. In the mean time, several circumstances tended to strengthen his popularity. He opposed the annexation of Texas, deprecated the consequences which he foresaw would flow from it, and took no part in the measures that produced the Mexican war. The war, however, became popular, the brilliancy of military exploits dazzled the eyes of a large portion of the people, and, to complete the climax of folly, the name of General Taylor, the hero of the war, was brought forward, first in the camp, and soon afterwards at convivial festivals in the southern and western states, as the man, and the only man, who could be "available" in the next political campaign. The nomination was viewed, at first, rather as a matter of sport than of serious consideration, but as the time for a new election drew near, it assumed a more imposing aspect. It received no support in the Courier, and but little in any influential journal in New England. The name of General Scott was sometimes coupled with the office of President; and Judge M'Lean was proposed in the papers of the Liberty and Anti-Slavery parties. Still the strong current of public sentiment ran in favor of Mr. Webster. The Courier never faltered in its fidelity to him; and though a correspondent might occasionally be permitted to discuss, in its columns, the claims and qualifications of some other candidate, such an indulgence was invariably accompanied by an

editorial protest against its argument. From many columns which I wrote upon this subject, in 1847 and 1848, the few extracts which follow are selected, as embodying the sentiments I honestly entertained, and which I have seen no reason to renounce. The first of these extracts was the cause of some severe strictures from a democratic paper; but I do not recollect that any whig journal took any exceptions to its tone or language. It certainly does contain some hard words; but I always thought that frankness in the expression of one's honestly-entertained belief, demanded that things should be called by their proper names. If, however, the preservation of it in this volume be thought a folly, or a crime, so let it be. I am not kneeling at the confessional, nor praying for absolution. I submit to all the punishment which the sin deserves:

HERO WORSHIP.

"The progress of hero worship is truly alarming. The war in which we are engaged has already diffused a military taste among the people, which tends to nothing but a corruption of morals, and the utter extinction of every truly patriotic sentiment; for the spirit that exults in the success of an aggressive war has no affinity with the spirit of patriotism. The latter seeks to make men happy by teaching them habits of industry, the arts of peace, and the refinements of literature, philosophy, and morals; the former brutalizes a nation, and bids defiance to the unarmed philosopher and politician, who bring into the field truth without a spear, and argument unbacked by artillery.'

"All wars beget Heroes, as naturally (and almost as suddenly) as lightning produces thunder, and the more skill and science in the work of butchery, the greater the hero, and the sooner he arrives at the zenith of glory. Thus, General Zachary Taylor, who, twelve months ago, was not half as celebrated as • General Tom Thumb,' has become the idol of a host of worshipers, whose name is Legion. The public mind is essentially (we hope not thoroughly) debauched with the doctrines of hero worship. The press lends its aid in the dissemination of these pernicious doctrines, and the establishment of a system of the most abominable despotism that can be inflicted on a nation. Some of the most influential journals have the name of this Hero in double pica capitals at the head of their editorial columns, as a candidate for the Presidency; as if success in murdering men, women, and children by hundreds and thousands, were all that is desired to give him a claim to the suffrages of a people who boast of their magnanimity and love of justice. Editors, whose moral sensibilities are in convulsions if they see an advertisement showing where wine is for sale, snatch up with eagerness every paragraph that glorifies the conduct or character of this military chieftain, and present it as a luscious morsel to their readers. Political principles and opinions, in regard to subjects hitherto thought to be of the utmost importance to the prosperity of the country, are no longer thought of, and Whigs and Democrats seem to have buried all their ancient animosities, and to vie with each other in a new contest, to decide whether the Hero is actually a Whig or a Democrat. One