it lies uncut in the third volume of its author’s speeches, its unturned leaves sticking together, yet we can say of it, that the whole course of American history had been different if its counsels had been followed.  The essence of the speech is contained in two of its phrases:  “Freedom of trade, the general principle; restriction, the exception.”  Free trade, the object to be aimed at; protection, a temporary expedient.  Free trade, the interest of all nations; protection, the occasional necessity of one.  Free trade, the final and universal good; protection, the sometimes necessary evil.  Free trade, as soon as possible and as complete as possible; protection, as little as possible and as short as possible.  The speech was delivered in reply to Mr. Clay; and, viewed merely as a reply, it is difficult to conceive of one more triumphant.  Mr. Webster was particularly happy in turning Mr. Clay’s historical illustrations against him, especially those drawn from the history of the English silk manufacture, and the Spanish system of restriction and prohibition.  Admitting fully that manufactures the most unsuited to the climate, soil, and genius of a country could be created by protection, he showed that such manufactures were not, upon the whole, and in the long run, a benefit to a country; and adduced, for an illustration, the very instance cited by Mr. Clay,—­the silk manufacture of England,—­which kept fifty thousand persons in misery, and necessitated the continuance of a kind of legislation which the intelligence of Great Britain had outgrown.  Is not the following brief passage an almost exhaustive statement of the true American policy?

“I know it would be very easy to promote manufactures, at least for a time, but probably for a short time only, if we might act in disregard of other interests.  We could cause a sudden transfer of capital and a violent change in the pursuits of men.  We could exceedingly benefit some classes by these means.  But what then becomes of the interests of others?  The power of collecting revenue by duties on imports, and the habit of the government of collecting almost its whole revenue, in that mode, will enable us, without exceeding the bounds of moderation, to give great advantages to those classes of manufactures which we may think most useful to promote at home.”

One of his happy retorts upon Mr. Clay was the following:—­

“I will be so presumptuous as to take up a challenge which Mr. Speaker has thrown down.  He has asked us, in a tone of interrogatory indicative of the feeling of anticipated triumph, to mention any country in which manufactures have flourished without the aid of prohibitory laws....  Sir, I am ready to answer this inquiry.

“There is a country, not undistinguished among the nations, in which the progress of manufactures has been more rapid than in any other, and yet unaided by prohibitions or unnatural restrictions.