Nashville patriot. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1858-1860, 1858-02-02
An Excellent sketch of the Fire Eat
ing TriumVirate.

An Excellent Sketch OF the FIRE Emu
ing Triumvfrate.
We find the following sketch of Messrs.
DAVIS. HUNTER and TooMBs, in the Washing
ton correspondence of the st. Louis Dtzno-
Graf.
Yesterday, Jan. 49, when Hale was speak
inc the right side of the chamber was empty,
(as it generally is during the delivery OF an
anti-slavery speech,) with the exception OF
group of three, who sat near the center OF the
vacant space. This remarkable group, which
wore the air if not the ensigns OF power, au-
thority and public care, was composed OF Sen
ators Davis, Hunter and TOombs. They
were engaged in an earnest colloquy, which,
however, was foreign TO the argument Hale
was celebrating, for though the connection OF
their words was broken before it reached the
gallery, their voices were distinctly audible,
and gave signs of their abstraction. They
were thinking aloud. If they had met to-
gether under the supervision OF some artist,
gifted with the faculty Of illustrating history
and character by attitude and expression,
who designed to paint them in fresco on the
walls of the new Senate chamber, the cOmbl-
nation could not have been more appropriate
" arranged, than chance arranged 1t on TINS
occasion TOombs sits among the opposition
on the left. Hunter and Davis on the right.
and the fact that the two first came to Davis
seat, the one gravitating to 1t from remote,
the other from near point. may be held to
indicate which of the three is the preponderat-
Ing body in The system--.f preponderance there
be and whose figure should occupy the fore
ground of the picture, if any precedence is to
be accorded Davis sat erect and composed /;
Hunter listening, rested his head on his hand;
and Toomhs inclining forward was speaking
vehemently. Their respective attitudes were
no bad Illustration of their individuality.
Davis impressed the spectator, who observed
the easy but authoritative bearing with which
he put aside or assented to ToOmbs's sugges-
tons, with the notion of some slight super
iority, some hardly acknowledged leadership;
and Hunters attentiveness and impassability
were characteristic of his nature, for his pro-
fundity OF intellect was the guise OF stolidlty,
and his continuous industry, that of Inertia 4;
while Toombss quick utterance and restless
head, bespoke his nervous temperament and
activity of mind. But though each is differ
ent from either of the others, the three have
several attributes in common. They are
equally eminent as statesmen and debaterS;
they are devoted to the same cause; they are
equals in rank and rivals in ambition; and
they are about the same age, and none OF
them, let young America take notice, wears
either beard or mOustache. | come again to
the traits which distinguished them from each
other. In face and form, Davis represents
the Norman type with singular fidelity, if my
conception of that type be correct. He Is
tall and sinewy. with fair hair, gray eyes
which are clear rather than bright, high fore
head, straight nose, thin, compressed lips and
pointed chin. His checks are hollow, and the
vicinity of his mouth is deeply fUrrOwed with
interesting lines. Leanness of face, length
and shapeness of feature, and length Of lint
and intensity of expression, rendered acute
by angular facial outline, are the general cha
racteristics of Lis appearance.
! should imagine the blood of POcahOntas
enriched the veins of Hunter, for his complex
ion. though faded Is tinted with the warm
cOloring OF the native race lie is of middle
size, solidly built, and black haired. His
features are neither prominent nor expressive
though his nose is siightly-vcry sughtly-
aquiline. His physique would attract 10 in,
spcction in public from either sex, and lis
quietness of demeanOr on the floor Of the Sc
nate would not designate to the stranger the
leading senator Of Virginia, and the triarcl
of the slavery party in Congress. The per
vading expression of his cOuntenance is that
of exhaustion. TepOse, Incidence, indifference
But his ordinary apathy and immObllity give
the measure OF his force on extraordinary Oc-
casiOns. 1t requires strong impulse tC
move him, but when the motive power is AIDE
quate, his momentum Is great.
expression Of cOuntenauce. His black hair is
slightly grisled, his black eyes are bright, and
his rich olive complexion is subdued by
thought. He has lire, energy, viyacity, and
fluent animal spirits. Though not possessed
of a regular feature, he is almost handsome;
or, as the ladies would say, fascinating. He
is equal to himself on all occasions, and seems
to be familiar with the merits of every ques-
ton that comes before the Senate. He has
force of character. force Of fancy, and the
knowledge reaped from severe and protracted
study.
Oh the three, he is the most formidable an,
ta@onist III debate. not from superior powers
Of argument, but from his emphatic dogInatisn
and assertion of his own personality. His or
atory is discUrsive, embracing argument, dee
lamatiOn and denunciatiOn, and his clear loud
accents, range the vocal gamut There i
nothing conventional or artistic in his style
which is vigorous, natural and occasionally
rude. He is strong man, expressing him
self strongly aud earnestly.
Davis voice is what the opera people call q
baritone. 1t serves well the purpose of pub
lie speaking, for though mOHOtonous il is pleas
ing to the ear, and Hills large circle with il;
sOnOrous cadeuccs. If Toombs is discursiye
Davis is didactic. He states principles anC
rules rather than facts and arguments. ii,
gives the ultimate inference but suppresse,
the mental process by which he discovered it
When he rises to any question, you may tax,
il for granted that he IL master of the subject
The faculty Of generalization would seem t(
be the dominant one of his mind. He some
times affects the pathetic, but with doubtful
success, and shuns the realm of the ima%ina
ton. Even in his speeches you cannot fail I,
recognize the evidence of great admiuistIu
tive capacity. He is equally well QUALIFIED
for shining in council and in controversy
Hunters oratory is learned, logical, aud cX
haustive of the subject Reasoning is hi
forte. His style is eminently practical anC
elective. Though neither brilliant nor strik
ing in parts, his spec ches are more telling ant
conclusive, on the whole, than those of th,
others; he accumulates facts and arguments
which in the mass are irreiragible. He speak,
but seldom, but lubors Hdclaugaby in III,
committees He has the rare merit of prefer
ring what is useful to what is merely popular
III the filling of his senatorial Office. Or thj
three, | think lac is the least liable To error
of judgment. ToOmbs i very much Of
gladiator; Davis is ready enough to break
lance; but Hunter, with the greatest iirmncss
seems to possess but little combatvene-s. /
afiirmatycncss. or the assertion Of PERSONAL
~, Is the most destructive mark of Toomb'
oratory, generalization that of Dayis'S, anal
ysis and combination may be said to bc the pc
cular distinction of Hunters.
Royal Wedding.
1t is eighteen years since the heart of Johr