well as the more prominent principles of the financial system, and defined them clearly to his audience. He introduced amendments restrictive of the powers and privileges of the bank, which he carried through by his earnest argument of their necessity; among others, one which made it compulsory and penal on the bank to pay its deposits in specie, as well as its notes and bills; and another, limiting the right of the institution to sue, in State Courts alone, instead of "all courts whatsoever," as provided for in the original bill.

He disliked, and protested against, the participations of the government in the direction and management of the bank,— contending it would be alike injurious to both parties; and urged, with much vehemence of argument, other fatal objections to the bill.

But it passed the House by a vote of 82 to 61. John Randolph, with other republicans, less distinguished, voting in the negative.

Mr. Calhoun too, was the father of the system of National Improvements. Early in the next session of Congress-in December, 1816-a committee was raised on his motion, of which he was appointed chairman, to consider the propriety of setting apart the bonus, which the Bank of the United States paid for its charter, amounting to one million five hundred thousand dollars, and also the dividends in the stock of the Bank belonging to the United States, as a permanent fund for internal improvements; and, soon after, reported a bill for

carrying out the objects for which the committee had been appointed.

In the Committee of the Whole House on this bill, he made a very able, argumentative speech on the general policy of national improvements, and the power of Congress over the subject.

"Let us make," says he, "permanent roads, not like the Romans, with the view of subjecting and ruling provinces, but for the more honorable purposes of defence, and connecting more closely the interests of various sections of this great country.

"Let us bind the Republic together, with a perfect system of roads and canals. Let us conquer space. It is thus the most distant parts of the Republic will be brought within a few days travel of the centre; it is thus that a citizen of the West will read the news of Boston still moist from the press."

In truth, no one member of this celebrated fourteenth Congress, acquired more national reputation than Mr. Calhoun. His early parliamentary career gave promise of permanent utility to the whole country. The liberality of his views, the earnestness and ability with which they were expressed, and the sympathy and co-operation with which they were met, gave assurance to the country of a prosperous Future.

Men watched his star rising in the clear unclouded sky, and rejoiced, for they thought to see it bring in its train national health, happiness and greatness. A Southerner by birth, he expressed and advocated no local views; but, with a mind as

vast as its interests, embraced in his language and his action, the whole country. His popularity was, as his views, national; in Massachussetts he was no less regarded than in South Carolina; his name was familiarized everywhere.

He soon after became a member of Mr. Munroe's cabinet; and, in that position, lent new force to the policy he had so warmly advocated while in Congress. In fact, by this time, his congressional and ministerial services had determined the minds of many influential politicians in various sections of the country, to bring him out as the most proper candidate for the presidency. In the North, he was especially a favorite. His efficient advocacy of internal improvements, sound currency, and protection of domestic manufactures, had gained him a strong alliance there. Mr. Webster, among others, was not insensible either to his services, or to the popularity they had justly given him; and he advised a young friend of his, then editing a paper in one of the New England States, and who had sought his views in regard to the proper candidate of the North for the presidency in the approaching campaign, (1824,) to support Mr. Calhoun for the position; unfortunately, a short-sighted, narrow, sectional pride of feeling induced New England to give its vote to John Quincy Adams, whose elevation, by a seeming retributive justice, did more to render New England men, measures and views unpopular, than any other political event could possibly have done. New England has never recovered from this untoward event.

At the close of the fourteenth Congress, the three names

most distinguished in it-WEBSTER, CLAY, CALHOUN-OCCUpied, almost exclusively, the minds of all men. There was nothing, seemingly, beyond the scope of their ambition or attainment. They had but to form a triumvirate, and divide the world between them; not in contemporaneous but alternate fruition. Had they done so, the historian of the twentyfour years in which they should have filled the presidential chair would have described an era of national honor, national prosperity, and national greatness, the like of which, in no country, have the records of ancient or modern times afforded. The imagination halts in the vain attempt to reach the comprehension of such an ideal, and turns unsatisfied away.

The devoted friends of these eminent men might be equally unwilling and unable to say, whose hot ambition of the three prevented such a glorious consummation; in after times, however, the impartial historian, reviewing carefully their character and conduct, may discover, and demonstrate to the world, the one most faithless to the present, and all future ages.

After the adjournment of Congress, in August, 1816, Mr. Webster left Portsmouth, New Hampshire, and established his residence in Boston. His professional practice in New Hampshire had ceased to afford him and his family a livelihood, broken in upon, as it was, by his duties at Washington. In Boston, his name as an advocate and orator was, by this time well known; and influential friends there succeeded

in prevailing upon him to select that city for his future

home.

He never has since gone into a New Hampshire court, except on one occasion, when he went down from Boston in September, 1817, in the Dartmouth College case.

The question in this case was-whether certain acts of the New Hampshire Legislature, purporting to enlarge and improve the Corporation of Darmouth College, and amend its charter, were binding upon the Corporation, without their acceptance or assent; and not repugnant to the Constitution of the United States? Mr. Webster argued the case as counsel for the Corporation. The opinion of the Superior Court of the State, before which it was argued, as delivered by Chief Justice Richardson, was in favor of the validity and constitutionality of the acts; and judgment was entered accordingly.

Whereupon a writ of error was sued out by the Corporation of the College to remove the cause to the Supreme Court of the United States. It came on for argument there in March, 1818, and before all the judges. It was argued by Mr. Webster and Mr. Hopkinson for the plaintiffs in error, and by Mr. Holmes and the Attorney-General, for the other side.

The question involved in this case was quite new to our jurisprudence; and when the case had been called up for argument, and Mr. Justice Story had run his eye over it, he said he did not see how anything could be made out of it.

He changed his opinion on the hearing of Mr. Webster's argument, and coincided with his colleagues in declaring the