Search
The Rare & Early Newspapers Hobby
Receive the Newsletter
Buy Historic Newspapers
“The Compromise of 1850” – Daniel Webster’s costly plea for unity…
May 19, 2025 by GuyHeilenman · Leave a Comment
Whereas it is hard for those of us living today to imagine any “compromise” regarding slavery as a good thing (i.e., if it was wrong – and it was, how could anything less than abolishment be acceptable?), but the passionate antislavery politicians who lived through this era had to navigate the treacherous path between what they knew to right and the likely fracturing of what had increasingly become a fragile union. If they pushed too hard too fast, such a splintering would most assuredly result in an all-out Civil War with countless deaths, and if lost, the Southern institution of slavery would continue unabated by abolitionist sentiment. Even if it is agreed that an attempt at arriving at a compromise is in order, as with any deep-rooted, entrenched disagreement, any move to the middle requires someone to risk taking the first step.
It is with the above in mind history declares Daniel Webster’s “Seventh of March Speech” as being pivotal in bringing both sides to a compromise. Although it cost this anti-slavery Senator from Massachusetts his reputation and career, all are agreed his multi-hour oration was instrumental in holding succession/war at bey for over 10 years (although it may have ultimately deepened the divide). We are thankful to have found a lengthy report in a New York Tribune (March 8, 1850) which included excerpts, paraphrases, and commentary on the speech.
The following is the result of our research regarding its significance (Wiki, ChatGBT, Grok, etc.):
Summary of Daniel Webster’s “Seventh of March” Speech and Its Impact
Daniel Webster’s “Seventh of March” speech, delivered in 1850, was a heartfelt appeal for national unity and compromise amid escalating tensions over slavery that threatened to tear the United States apart. Webster declared, “I speak today for the preservation of the Union. ‘Hear me for my cause,’” emphasizing his alarm at the prospect of secession and civil war. He urged both the North and South to make concessions to safeguard the Union, a stance that significantly influenced the passage of the Compromise of 1850. However, this plea for moderation sparked widespread controversy and exacted a heavy toll on Webster’s career and reputation.
Key Points of the Speech
- Call for Unity: Webster positioned himself as an American, not merely a representative of Massachusetts or the North, advocating for the Constitution and the Union against the specter of disunion.
- Support for Compromise: He endorsed measures like the Fugitive Slave Law, hoping to bridge the divide between Northern and Southern interests and avert conflict.
Impact on Public Opinion
- In the North:
- Abolitionist Backlash: Northern abolitionists and anti-slavery Whigs felt betrayed by Webster’s support for the Fugitive Slave Law, which mandated their participation in returning escaped enslaved people—a stark departure from his earlier anti-slavery rhetoric.
- Regional Fallout: In Massachusetts, his home state, Webster’s reputation plummeted as he was branded a traitor to the anti-slavery cause, eroding his political base.
- In the South:
- Cautious Approval: Southern leaders appreciated Webster’s defense of the Fugitive Slave Law, seeing it as a gesture of respect for their rights under the Constitution.
- Lingering Distrust: Despite this, many Southerners remained wary of Webster due to his prior anti-slavery positions, viewing the Compromise of 1850 as a stopgap rather than a solution.
- Nationally:
- Passage of the Compromise: The speech rallied moderates across regions, providing Northern politicians with the justification to back the Compromise of 1850 without seeming disloyal to the Union.
- Deepened Divide: While it delayed immediate conflict, the speech underscored the irreconcilable differences over slavery, setting the stage for future strife.
Cost to Webster’s Career and Reputation
The “Seventh of March” speech marked a turning point that ultimately derailed Webster’s political career and tarnished his legacy:
- Northern Alienation: His endorsement of the Fugitive Slave Law alienated his Northern supporters, particularly in Massachusetts, where he lost the goodwill of abolitionists and anti-slavery advocates. This backlash effectively dashed his presidential ambitions.
- Incomplete Southern Acceptance: Although the South valued his compromise efforts, his earlier anti-slavery stance prevented him from fully gaining their trust, leaving him without a solid regional alliance.
- Political Isolation: Webster’s attempt to occupy a middle ground failed to heal the nation’s fractures. The Compromise of 1850, while a temporary success, only postponed the inevitable Civil War, and his role in it left him isolated as sectional tensions intensified.
Conclusion
Daniel Webster’s “Seventh of March” speech was a critical moment in American history, encapsulating both a desperate bid to preserve the Union and the profound challenges of compromise in a divided nation. While it facilitated the Compromise of 1850, it came at a steep personal cost, shattering Webster’s reputation in the North, limiting his influence in the South, and ending his political aspirations. The speech remains a poignant symbol of the era’s turmoil—a warning of division and a missed chance to confront slavery head-on.
They Put It In Print – but should they have? Lewis & Clark edition…
May 5, 2025 by GuyHeilenman · Leave a Comment
Over the years we have amassed a series of posts under the heading, “They Put It In Print”. However, we recently came across a letter William Clark (of Lewis & Clark fame) wrote to his brother while on his famous expedition, which made us wonder if it was intended to end up printed in a handful of newspapers for others to read. While the line between private and public affairs is often blurred for those in the public eye, in this case a citizenry who was anxiously awaiting any news from the frontier probably never gave this tension a thought. Regardless of whether lines were crossed, over 200 years later we still benefit from the details provided regarding this historic trek through the wilderness.
The entire letter, warts and all, is shown below as printed in the Boston Gazette dated November 13, 1806. We hope you enjoy. We also have a note following the letter.
Whereas educators are welcome to use the photos above as a teaching resource for no cost (or credit given to us), in addition to the actual collectible issue which may still be available, we also have high-resolution digital photos of the above available through our Etsy Store: “THEY PUT IT IN PRINT – Historical news from the day it was first reported.”
Announcing: Catalog #354 for May, 2025 – Rare & Early Newspapers…
May 2, 2025 by GuyHeilenman · Leave a Comment
|
The May catalog (#354) is now available. Shown below are links to various segments of the catalog, our currently discounted
|
[The links above will redirect to the latest catalog in approx. 30 days
upon which time it will update to the most recent catalog.]
Hidden Gems – What’s that above the story by Charles Dickens?
April 11, 2025 by GuyHeilenman · Leave a Comment
One of the pleasures of the hobby of collecting Rare & Early Newspapers is the “hidden gems” we find almost daily. Today I was photographing a story written by Charles Dickens within the Concord Daily Monitor (NH) dated December 21, 1865, and low and behold directly above the heading for the story was a poem titled, “Snow Flakes”, by Henry Wadsworth Longfellow. Having contemporary selections from both literary giants within a few inches of each other was certainly something I did not expect. Yet, the discovery at this point was only partly realized. Thanks to the internet I took a few minutes to see what I could unearth about this particular poem, and with little effort I discovered it was a “Poem of the Week” selection in 2023 for The Guardian. Revealing my deficient 6th sense for poetry (or perhaps betraying my hidden affection for snow), at first blush I was a bit surprised that after so many years it had garnered such recognition – that is, until I learned Longfellow had written it in response to his grief over the death of his beloved wife. I love this collectible!
Snapshot 1768 – Ben Franklin’s thoughts on the poor…
April 7, 2025 by GuyHeilenman · Leave a Comment
I am currently reading “Benjamin Franklin: An American Life” (by Walter Isaacson), and often struggle to put it down. One of the many new things I’ve learned about Franklin: he was always a “work in progress”. Many of his views on significant topics of the day changed over his lifetime – often as a result of his ongoing quest for new information. He was certainly the poster-child for a “life-long learner”.
Two among these adjustments were his thoughts regarding the capabilities of blacks (specifically slaves), and his royalist (devotion to England) inclinations – both which morphed into positions more in line with current thought. However, one stance which stood the test of time and adjusted only microscopically (if at all) was his strong posture towards personal industry – regardless of one’s societal rank. If you were poor, you should work to the best of your abilities in all you do. If you were wealthy, your industry should overflow into looking for ways to contribute to the betterment of society – which included caring for those who were less fortunate. While he was always compassionate toward those at the bottom of the economic ladder, he was also a firm believer in the mantra: “If you don’t work, you don’t eat.” He was convinced that handouts to those who were not industrious would only inspire others to join the ranks of the lazy. As harsh as this sounds, his attitude towards those who personally consumed the bulk of their own abundance was no less gracious.
While he spoke on this topic quite often, he put his thoughts to paper through a letter printed in The Gentleman’s Magazine for April, 1768: “Hardheartedness to the Poor Considered”. As was often the case, he signed it using one of his many pseudonyms (Medius). The entire letter is shown below. Whether you agree with his stance or not, one can not argue that he was being vague.
\
Contribution from N.G. – Anson Burlingame’s historic 1856 speech…
April 4, 2025 by GuyHeilenman · Leave a Comment
Many are familiar with the anti-slavery speech of Senator Charles Sumner which was greeted with his near-death caning (repeated blows from a walking stick) by Senator Preston Brooks was pro-slavery. However, I was not aware of Congressman Anson Burlingame’s fiery defense of Sumner’s position which is credited for being instrumental in galvanizing the pro-abolition resolve of Northern citizens. It is interesting to note how often good grows from the pain and suffering of adversity, suffering, and ill-intent. What Brooks intended to silence abolitionist views spawned quite the opposite.
I am indebted to one of our collecting friends, N.G., who brought this historic speech to our attention. The full text was printed in several newspapers of the day, including the New York Daily Tribune dated June 25, 1856. Whereas a snippet is shown below, the text of his entire speech is available online.
Background (source – GROK):
The Burlingame Speech of 1856, formally titled “Defense of Massachusetts,” was delivered by Anson Burlingame, a U.S. Representative from Massachusetts, on June 21, 1856, in the House of Representatives. Its significance lies in its bold confrontation of the escalating tensions between the North and South over slavery, its defense of Northern principles, and its role in galvanizing anti-slavery sentiment during a pivotal moment in American history.
The speech was a direct response to the brutal caning of Senator Charles Sumner by Representative Preston Brooks on May 22, 1856, an event that shocked the nation and intensified sectional conflict. Sumner, a Massachusetts senator, had delivered an anti-slavery speech titled “The Crime Against Kansas,” which provoked Brooks, a pro-slavery Southerner from South Carolina, to attack him with a cane on the Senate floor. Burlingame’s address condemned Brooks’ actions as an assault not only on Sumner but on free speech, Massachusetts, and the broader cause of liberty. He described the attack vividly, stating that Brooks “stole into the Senate, that place which had hitherto been held sacred against violence, and smote [Sumner] as Cain smote his brother,” framing it as a moral outrage that transcended personal violence.
The significance of the speech is multifaceted. First, it marked a turning point in Northern resolve. Burlingame’s fiery rhetoric and unapologetic stance signaled that Northern leaders would no longer tolerate Southern aggression passively. He defended Massachusetts’ anti-slavery efforts, including its personal liberty laws that resisted the Fugitive Slave Act, and praised its role in opposing the spread of slavery into Kansas. This defiance challenged the South’s expectation of Northern compliance and asserted a willingness to fight for democratic principles.
Second, the speech had immediate political repercussions. Burlingame’s scathing denunciation of Brooks as a coward provoked a challenge to a duel, which Burlingame accepted. His choice of rifles and a location on the Canadian side of Niagara Falls—knowing Brooks would hesitate to travel through hostile Northern territory—forced Brooks to back down, enhancing Burlingame’s reputation as a fearless anti-slavery advocate. This episode amplified the speech’s impact, turning Burlingame into a Northern hero and further polarizing the nation.
Finally, the speech contributed to the growing momentum of the Republican Party and the abolitionist movement. Delivered at a time when the nation was fracturing over slavery, it rallied Northerners to the cause of freedom and democracy, reinforcing the idea that the conflict was not just about policy but about fundamental values. Historians note that it resonated widely, with one observer calling it “the most celebrated speech” of Burlingame’s career, reflecting its emotional and political resonance.
In summary, the Burlingame Speech of 1856 was significant for its bold stand against Southern violence, its defense of Northern ideals, and its role in mobilizing anti-slavery sentiment, making it a key moment in the lead-up to the Civil War.
This Month in History – April…
April 1, 2025 by GuyHeilenman · Leave a Comment
What a month! As we consider the month of April one would be hard-pressed to find another which is pregnant with as many recognizable historic events. While any attempt to come up with the most noteworthy would certainly be anemic, most efforts to create a shortlist would likely include: Lincoln’s assassination, the attack on Fort Sumter, the end of the Civil War, the 1906 San Francisco earthquake, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.’s assassination, the Pony Express’ maiden trek, the U.S. Mint, Microsoft, and Apple are born, Jesse James is killed, the Titanic sinks, Paul Revere (and his compatriots) make their famous ride, the Revolutionary War begins (i.e., “The shot heard ’round the world” is fired”), a mutiny occurred on the HMS Bounty, Benjamin Franklin dies, and more. The following link will take you to our available newspapers from the month of April:
NEWSPAPERS PUBLISHED IN APRIL
*Although we do not have a contemporary newspaper report to offer (since what we call “newspapers” were yet to exist), far be it from me to not mention the most impactful April event of all time: the crucifixion of Jesus Christ.
Announcing: Catalog #353 for April, 2025 – Rare & Early Newspapers…
March 28, 2025 by GuyHeilenman · Leave a Comment
|
|
[The links above will redirect to the latest catalog in approx. 30 days
upon which time it will update to the most recent catalog.]
Collecting Newspapers – The Basics (Part II) – What to Expect…
March 24, 2025 by GuyHeilenman · Leave a Comment
The 2nd installment of “Collecting Newspapers – The Basics” continues with a focus on the answers to handful of common questions: “Why does my newspaper look like it came from a bound volume, and what are the small holes along the spine?”, “Considering their age, what their condition?”, “Why is my issue so small?”, “How many pages do they have?, “Will it be brittle?” “What is ‘foxing’?”, “What does ‘chipping’ mean?, “Why is the old newspaper I just received so white – is it a reprint?”, and similar. Whereas many of these questions are answered in detail through dedicate posts, a quick primer is provided the page shown below which comes from the brochure we send out to new collectors.
Additional information about the hobby can be found through this Blog and on the Rare Newspapers’ website.
Artificial Intelligence, Alexander Hamilton, and The Funding Act of 1790…
March 13, 2025 by GuyHeilenman · Leave a Comment
“A jack of all trades, a master of none” is often how I feel in my role as the overseer of life at Timothy Hughes Rare & Early Newspapers. Since collectible reporting covers nearly every topic under the sun (politics, religion, flight, exploration, literature, social issues, war, and more), it is impossible to know everything about everything. Even the areas which are personal favorites are more than enough to drive my quest to be a life-long learner. One such topic involves the early years of American and the “Founding” of The United States. Still, my nearly 7 decades of knowledge-absorption still leaves me wanting. A case in point was recently brought to the surface by a set of 4 issues covering The Funding Act of 1790. I knew the father of the Act was largely Alexander Hamilton and that it was an essential step in the early formation of the U.S., but beyond these basic elements, I admittedly knew little. Since our desire when describing collectible items is to be as accurate as possible, whenever I/we would be presented with a knowledge gap “back in the day”, our bookshelves full of resource material was essential – but cumbersome. Then the internet came alive and our ability to gather information was drastically reduced – especially once we gathered a repertoire of reliable sources. BUT NOW…
The question of the day: “How reliable/accurate is AI?” Only time will tell, but I thought it might be fun to seek a little input as it relates to the topic at hand. I did a basic (“think”) search on Grok (Elon Musk’s AI) for: “Why was the 1790 Funding Act so significant?” The response was:
The 1790 Funding Act was a landmark piece of legislation in United States history, playing a pivotal role in shaping the young nation’s financial and political landscape. Proposed by Alexander Hamilton, the first Treasury Secretary, the act addressed the massive debt accumulated during the Revolutionary War by consolidating state debts under federal control and funding them at full value. Its significance can be understood through several key aspects:
(by John Trumbull)
### 1. **Debt Consolidation and Federal Authority**
The act allowed the federal government to assume the debts of individual states, centralizing financial responsibility. This move stabilized the economy by creating a unified approach to debt management. While controversial—some states that had already paid off their debts opposed subsidizing others—it strengthened the federal government’s authority over the states, marking a shift toward a more centralized system.
### 2. **Establishment of National Credit**
By issuing bonds to pay off old debts and funding them through tariffs and excise taxes, the Funding Act established the United States as a credible borrower. This was critical for gaining the trust of international creditors and investors, laying the foundation for future economic growth. It demonstrated that the U.S. could honor its financial obligations, a vital step for a fledgling nation.
### 3. **Foundation for a National Economy**
The act was a cornerstone of Hamilton’s broader financial vision, which included creating a national bank to manage government finances and issue currency. By addressing the debt crisis and introducing federal taxation, it set the stage for a stable, centralized financial system. This stability was essential for the nation’s economic development and influenced future fiscal policies.
### 4. **Political Impact**
The Funding Act deepened the divide between Federalists, who favored a strong central government, and Democratic-Republicans, who worried about federal overreach. This ideological conflict shaped early American politics and highlighted the act’s role in defining the balance of power between federal and state governments.
In summary, the 1790 Funding Act was significant because it marked the federal government’s first major step into financial governance, resolving the post-war debt crisis while establishing the U.S. as a financially credible nation. It solidified federal authority, built a foundation for economic stability, and influenced the political and economic trajectory of the United States for decades to come.
How did Grok do? Did it miss anything of critical significance?
If so, perhaps you would like to review Grok’s “DeepSearch“.
I’ll admit, AI makes me more than a little nervous; however, if properly constrained… Ok, I’d still be more than a little nervous.
Thoughts?
