In the following winter Mr. Webster continued his policy of opposition to all acquisitions of territory.  Although the cloud of domestic sorrow was already upon him, he spoke against the legislative powers involved in the “Ten Regiment” Bill, and on the 23d of March, after the ratification of the treaty of peace, which carried with it large cessions of territory, he delivered a long and elaborate speech on the “Objects of the Mexican War.”  The weight of his speech was directed against the acquisition of territory, on account of its effect on the Constitution, and the increased inequality of representation which it involved.  He referred to the plan of cutting up Texas so as to obtain ten senators, as “borough mongering” on a grand scale, a course which he proposed to resist to the last; and he concluded by denouncing the whole project as one calculated to turn the Constitution into a curse rather than a blessing.  “I resist it to-day and always,” he said.  “Whoever falters or whoever flies, I continue the contest.”

In June General Taylor was nominated, and soon after Mr. Webster left Washington, although Congress was still in session.  He returned in August, in time to take part in the settlement of the Oregon question.  The South, with customary shrewdness, was endeavoring to use the territorial organization of Oregon as a lever to help them in their struggle to gain control of the new conquests.  A bill came up from the House with no provision in regard to slavery, and Mr. Douglas carried an amendment to it, declaring the Missouri Compromise to be in full force in Oregon.  The House disagreed, and, on the question of receding, Mr. Webster took occasion to speak on the subject of slavery in the territories.  He was disgusted with the nomination of Taylor and with the cowardly silence of the Whigs on the question of the extension of slavery.  In this frame of mind he made one of the strongest and best speeches he ever delivered on this topic.  He denied that slavery was an “institution;” he denied that the local right to hold slaves implied the right of the owner to carry them with him and keep them in slavery on free soil; he stated in the strongest possible manner the right of Congress to control slavery or to prohibit it in the territories; and he concluded with a sweeping declaration of his opposition to any extension of slavery or any increase of slave representation.  The Oregon bill finally passed under the pressure of the “Free-Soil” nominations, with a clause inserted in the House, embodying substantially the principles of the Wilmot Proviso.

When Congress adjourned, Mr. Webster returned to Marshfield, where he made the speech on the nomination of General Taylor.  It was a crisis in his life.  At that moment he could have parted with the Whigs and put himself at the head of the constitutional anti-slavery party.  The Free-Soilers had taken the very ground against the extension of slavery which he had so long occupied.  He could have gone consistently, he