Probably the most eloquent exhibition of oratory, based on logic and true statesmanship, ever exhibited in the Senate of the United States was the contest between Mr. Webster, of Massachusetts, and Mr. Hayne, the silver-tongued orator of South Carolina; the debate transpiring in 1830. The subject of discussion before the senate by these two intellectual gladiators grew out of a resolution brought forward by Senator Foot, of Connecticut, just at the close of the previous year with a view of some arrangement concerning the sales of the public lands. But this immediate question was soon lost sight of in the discussion of a great vital principle of constitutional law, namely: The relative powers of the States and the national government.
Upon this Mr. Benton and Mr. Hayne addressed the Senate, condemning the policy of the Eastern States as illiberal toward the West. Mr. Webster replied in vindication of New England, and of the policy of the Government. It was then that Mr. Hayne made his attack--sudden, unexpected, and certainly unexampled--upon Mr. Webster personally, upon Massachusetts and other Northern States politically, and upon the constitution itself. In respect to the latter, Mr. Hayne taking the position that it is constitutional to interrupt the administration of the Constitution itself, in the hands of those who are chosen and sworn to administer it; by the direct interference in form of law, of the States, in virtue of their sovereign capacity.
All of these points were handled by Mr. Hayne with that rhetorical brilliancy, and the power which characterized him as the oratorical champion of the South on the floor of the Senate, and it is not saying too much that the speech produced a profound impression. Mr. Hayne's great effort appeared to be the result of premeditation, concert, and arrangement.
He selected his own time, and that, too, peculiarly inconvenient to Mr. Webster, for at that moment the Supreme Court was proceeding in the hearing of a case of great importance in which he was a leading counsel. For this reason he requested, through a friend, the postponement of the debate. Mr. Hayne objected, however, and the request was refused. The time, the matter, and the manner, indicated that the attack was made with the design to crush so formidable a political opponent as Mr. Webster had become. To this end, personal history, the annals of New England, and the federal party were ransacked for materials.