But private griefs, nor any considerations of a private character ever controlled his regard for the public interest; the one has been with him at all times postponed to the other. In the present case, he held the cause of the administration, the cause of the constitution, and of the country-if the former went down on this issue, the constitution and the country would go down with it. He forgot, therefore, the contumelious treatment he had received, forgot the injuries done and intended him, and rallied his whole strength in support of the persons to whom, for the time, the interests of his country were intrusted.

CHAPTER X.

MR. WILKINS of Pennsylvania, who introduced the bill, commenced the debate upon it. He opened the case for the government. His introductory remarks were well conceived and expressed, moderate in tone, and pertinent. He was not allowed to proceed, however, without interruption. Messrs. Calhoun and Miller of South Carolina, and Poindexter of Mississippi, broke in upon him with interrogatories, explanations, and denials, continually, during the first day of his speech. The second day he got along with less difficulty, though not uninterruptedly; Mr. Calhoun watching every word that fell from him, and gainsaying many. "The moment," said Mr. Wilkins, "we fail to counteract the nullification proceedings of South Carolina, the Union is dissolved; for, in this government of laws, union is obedience, and obedience is union. The moment South Carolina

Mr. Calhoun, interposing" Who relies upon force in this controversy? I have insisted upon it, that South Carolina relied altogether on civil process, and that, if the general government resorts to force, then only will South Carolina rely

upon force. If force be introduced by either party, upon that party will fall the responsibility."

Mr. Wilkins-" The general government will not appeal, in the first instance, to force. It will appeal to the patriotism of South Carolina-to that magnanimity of which she boasts so much"

Mr. Calhoun, with some asperity-"I am sorry that South Carolina cannot appeal to the sense of justice of the general government"—and hereupon, two or three Senators called him to order. So far from being considered laudable, it was holden censurable then for any Senator to speak in objurgatory terms of the general government. To have spoken of the advantages of separation or secession, would have provoked for the offender, the indignation or contemptuous pity of the House, in which such sentiments were proposed. Twenty years before this, in 1811, when a distinguished member from Massachusetts, in a debate on the bill for the admission of Louisiana, in the House of Representatives, used these expressions"If this bill passes, the Union is virtually dissolved; and it will be the right of all, and the indispensable duty of some of the States, to prepare definitely for a separation-amicably, if they can, forcibly, if they must," the Speaker, Joseph B. Varnum, of Massachusetts, formerly a soldier of the Revolution, decided that it was not in order to use words in debate which threatened the stability of the Union. But parliamentary manners have changed since, and members of Congress now threaten disunion, not only without attracting cen

sure, but even attention. The idea no less than the word seems to have become endurable.

Mr. Wilkins continued and concluded his speech the second day, when Mr. Bibb of Kentucky, took the floor. His appearance gave a character to his words. He retained somewhat of the old school in his manner and dress. His words, too, were selected and enunciated with great particularity. But though formal, his manner was not cold; nor was his language, though precise, without force. "I have witnessed," he said, in his exordium-" the ragings of the natural elements, when the blackening clouds gathered. I have seen the forked flashes blaze upon the mountain, and yet the rock that decked the mountain's brow, and defied the storm, remained unscathed by the lightnings of heaven. I have heard the clamoring of the winds, and seen the proud forest bend before the majesty of nature. In the fury of the storm, I have seen the fond mother press her infant to her bosom, and sigh, with fearful apprehension that her husband might be exposed, houseless, 'to bide the peltings of the pitiless storm.' But, in the darkest gloom of elemental strife, there was a consolation; for there was an assurance that the storm would cease; that the sun would again shed his gladdening rays, on herb, tree, fruit, and flower, displaying the charms of nature in renovated health and refreshened verdure. But when, in the storm now gathering in the political horizon, I shall hear the blast of a trumpet, the neighing of the steeds, the noisy drum, the resoundings of the heavy-toned, fiery-mouthed cannon; when I

shall see the glittering of small arms; when I shall read the proclamation preparatory to mortal strife between State and State, and know that the strife is in fact begun 'in all the pride, and pomp, and circumstance of war,' I shall then despair. There will be no assurance that the Constitution will erect its proud crest above the struggling hosts, and come out unscathed from the contest. I have no assurance that the Union will survive the carnage and embittered feelings engendered in the impious war of child against parent, brother against brother." This, after all, seems a kind of speech that occupies the debateable ground between eloquence and bathos; a decided lurch either way would conclude its destiny. A man without ability could not use such language; a man of great abilities would not.

The whole of his first day, Mr. Bibb used for an historical introduction to his speech. He gave, in great detail, the proceedings of States antecedent to the adoption of the Constitution. The second day he devoted to a consideration of the powers of the general government under the Constitution; and, before the close of the senatorial day, he exhausted, if not the subject, his audience and himself.

He gave way about two o'clock in the afternoon to Mr. Poindexter, who moved an adjournment; but the Senate refused to adjourn. Wherefore Mr. Buckner of Missouri, moved to postpone the further consideration of the bill, and to make it the special order for the next day.

Mr. Webster rose to a point of order. The gentleman from