Daily union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1865-1866, 1866-06-23
FORCE vs.. IDEAS

FORCE W.. IDEAS
The New York World in an article anal
wing the character, mental qualities, and
political career of the late LEWIS CAS-, in
dulges in a general disquisition upon several
Of the most distinguished public men con-
temporary with that distinguished states
man. The position assigned Gen. Cas- is,
in the main, the true one, and viii be so &C
cepted; but we think the criticism of the
World though it gives due credit and is writ
ten in the spirit Of fairness, does injustice
when it Institutes comparisons of any public
men of their day, with the matches and
preeminent trio, WEBSTER, CALHOUN and
CLAY. This is the custom Of all who set
out to delineate the characters of American
statesmen of the second era of the Republic.
| The great triumvirate is first, and the state
ment of this fact tends unduly to dwarf the
dimensions of all others. The truth is,
there were great men before them, and great
men on the stage with them, some Of whom
survived them and even yet live, though
very few are now active or participating in
public affairs. Gen. CAss was one of these,
and there were several others, some of them
perhaps his superiors.
The article in question in speaking of
WEBSTER, CALHOUN and CLAY, says that
Each of this distinguished trio impress
oil hiUalalg daaraiv his orra. and &c
measure their influence by the permanence
of its results, WEBSTER overtopped them
all. The vigorous acuteness of CALHOUN
impressed on the Southern mind theory of
the Constitution which united the South, al
most as one man, in the late terrible struggle
for Southern independence. 1t was the
massive elequence Of WEBSTER that over
bore the subtle logic of CALHOUN, and
erected a barrier against any considerable
spread of the secession doctrine in the
Northern States. The intellectual part of
the late struggle was fought in the preceding
generation, between those powerful cham
piOns, each fixing the belief of his own section
so unalterably that only conflict of arms
could decide which theory of the Constitu-
ton should prevail. 1t was impossible not
to do homage to the intellectual power
which produces such mighty results; and
we suppose that the final prevalence of Mr.
WEBsTER's doctrine must stamp him az the
greater statesman"
Without assuming to champion either of
the theories of the Constitution so ably up
held by these two statesmen, we must object
TO the conclusion here stated. Mr.. WEE
sTER's doctrine prevailed in a trial of physi-
cal force only. The doctrine of Mr.. CAL
HoUN fairly stated, and wholly disconnected
from everything extraneous and merely
emotional has never been passed on by the
American judgment, and perhaps never will
be dispassionately. 1t may be said that Mr..
WEBSTER was the greater in the fact that he,
as results have shown, was the better able to
discover in his countrymcn trait that
would tolerate no theory whose application
would prevent unity as people, and that in
the enunciation of his views he struck the
numerically popular chord. But even
admitting this, it would seem that the palm
Of true superiority is due to CALHOUN.
1t is conceded by this critic that the
intellectual power Of CALHOUN was able
to inflse his whole section with one
idea-the Independent sovereignty of the
States in their relation to the General Gov
eminent, while Mr.. WEBsTER's strength
was consumed in preventing its spread and
adoption by the North, and that even in
this, he succeeded only in preventing any
considerable spread" Of the doctrine Of his
great adversary The one addressed the in
telleCt and so controlled it that it command
ed entirely almost one section, and con-
strained the belief in its truth of portion
Of the other. The other appealed with
magnificent power and eloquence to the in
tcllect and emotion, and was only able to
gain his cause in the appeal to arms, and
the feeling which such contest aroused.
The intellectual digaddation of these great
men on this great theme is unsurpassed in
history, and an impartial judgment may |
well stand in pause to which of the two vic |
tory should be accorded; but the fact that |
Mr.. CALHOUN's theory went DOWN. contest |
Of physicol force, and the nation sees cause
to accept the result, does not prove that his
was the greater statesman, or that
his views Of the nature of the government
were moro philosophical and statesmanlike
The World concludes the article to which
we have ventured to take this exception, in
the following paragraph:
One by one, the links are breaking which
this political generation with the
last When Mr.. BUCHANAN and JOHN
BELL have followed General CAss, there
will be left among us no considerable repre-
sentative Of the American Senate as it ex-
sted, in its high and palmy days at the
dawn of the anti-slavery era in our poll
lies