To
me his oratory was a perfect surprise and curiosity. He not only
spoke with very unusual deliberation, but with pauses having no
relation whatever to the sense. His sentences were broken into
the oddest fragments, and the hearer was perplexed in the endeavor
to gather his meaning. In declaring, for example, that he "would
put in no Wilmot proviso for the purpose of a taunt," etc., he made
a long pause at "Wilmot," perhaps half a minute, and finally, having
apparently recovered his breath, added the word "proviso"; and
then, after another considerable pause, went on with his sentence.
His speaking seemed painfully laborious. Great drops of perspiration
stood upon his forehead and face, notwithstanding the slowness of
his utterance, suggesting, as a possible explanation, a very recent
and heavy dinner, or a greatly troubled conscience over his final
act of apostasy from his early New England faith. The latter was
probably the truth, since he is known to have long and seriously
pondered the question of his ultimate decision; and with his
naturally great and noble traits of character he could not have
announced it without manifest tokens of uneasiness. I was greatly
interested in the brief dialogue between him and Mr. Calhoun, which
followed this speech. Reference was made to their famous passage-
at-arms twenty years before; and Mr. Calhoun, while taking exception
to some of Mr. Webster's positions, congratulated him on his strong
deliverance in the interest of slavery. The great Carolinian was
then wrestling with the disease which soon afterward terminated
his life, and was thin, pale, and feeble of step; but his singularly
intellectual face, and the peculiar light which flashed from his
eye while speaking, made him the most strikingly picturesque figure
in the Senate. No man can compute the evils wrought by his political
theories; but in private life he was thoroughly upright and pure,
and no suspicion of political jobbery was ever whispered in connection
with his name. In his social relations he was most genial and
kindly, while he always welcomed the society of young men who sought
the aid of his friendly counsel. Politically, he has been singularly
misunderstood. He was not, as has been so generally thought, a
disunionist. He was the champion of State Sovereignty, but he
believed that this was the sure basis and bond of Union. He thought
the right of State nullification, if recognized, would hold the