National Republican. (Washington City (D.C.)) 1872-1888, 1881-02-23
Rev. DR.. Lord on Webster.
To the Editor Of The Republican:

| 10 ne EON0f o. Inc htpuOttCdH:
Rev. DR.. Lord, in his recent lecture on
Daniel Webster, represented that Webster lost his
popularity at the North, and was denounced be-
cause in his speech of March T. 1850, he advocated
faithful compliance with all the constitutional
compromises concerning slavery. In this the
lecturer is clearly in an error AT that day the
policy of observing the compromises of the Con-
stitution was popular at the North. 1t was the
policy of the Wing party, of the Democratic party
and of the Free Soil party. 1t was the avowed
policy of the Republican party, which was after
ward organized, and Lincoln on entering upon the
Presidency, took pains to assure the country that
he intended to carry out that policy. Few, if
any, editorials writings or speeches of that day can
be produced denDuncing Webster for advocating
full recognition of all the constitutional rights of
slavery Webster lost his popularity at the North and
was denounced for abandoning in that speech
policy which he previously vowed in his speech at
Niblo's saloon, early 1887, follows: 81
frankly avoW my entire unWillingneSs to do any
thing that shall extend the slavery of the African
race on this continent or add other holding
States to the Union" He reavowed the same
policy in the Senate August Il, 1875 follows: al
have made up my mind for one that under no
circumstances will consent to the further extern
sion of the of slavery in the United States,
to the further increase of slave representation in
the House of Representatives"
This policy was alsopopular at the North. Nearly
all of the State Democratic conventions of the
North avowed this policy in 1S4s. 1t was at that
date the policy of Northern Wings, and the Repub
lican party was subsequently organized to support
the policy that Webster advocated so many years.
But in 1850 Webster, in thespeech of March Z, when
the Territory of New Mexico was much larger than
it now is. declared il resolution or bill were be-
fore the Senate to provide territorial government
for New Mexico he would not vote to prohibit sla-
very. This declaration was regarded throughout
the North as q virtual abandonment of the policy
he had so long advocated. 1t is true that he gave
as reason for this declaration that the nature of
the country was such that slavery could not exist
in that Territory; but this reason was not regarded
as true in fact, as his real morive for making
the declaration. Webster was then candidate for
the presidential nomination in 1852 1t was known
that he could not be elected without Southern
votes and it then and is still believed he made
that declaration to secure Southern support.
The lecture said that the denunciation of Web
ster was by smaller men, who considered him in
their way. No one could have regarded Webster
as candidate for any Office but that of Senator
from Massachusetts,, Secretary of State, or PreSi-
dent, AS he was then seventy years old, it could
not have been supposed he would long be a can
didate for these positions As one at that date,
and for long after who aspired to those positions
neglected TO ayow their adherence TO the policy of
observing all the constitutional compromises no
such aspirant not even a Free Soil candidate,
would have ventured to denounce Webster for ad-
vocating the same policy in his 9TH of March
speech. No; Webster was denounced because it
was believed, and justly believed, that, contrary
to his former declarations and professions, he was
willing that the area of slavery on this continent
should be extended, and that slave representation
should be increased in the House of Representa-
tiVes X