Part 2
From 1808 to 1846, when struck down by apoplexy, he bent the whole energies of his mind and body to the profession--the only interruption in this long period of practice being a brief episode of military service, from 1812 to 1815, as Chief of Staff to Gen. Porterfield in the war against England, and one of five years in the Senate of Virginia from 1839 to 1845, when he resigned during his second term from ill health. He did not desire, still less seek, a seat in the Senate, but yielded to the importunities of his Rockbridge and Augusta friends, the leading men of Rockbridge particularly importuning him to accept the position, in order to promote, among other things, the fortunes of the Virginia Military Institute; a school they esteemed of great importance to the county and the cause of State education, and to which it was well known Mr. Peyton was most friendly, for he was everywhere known and recognized as the friend and promoter of learning and the liberal arts. And his deep interest in the cause of education was evinced by his acceptance of the position of trustee of Washington College in 1832, which he held till he resigned in 1846, having during this long period at great inconvenience to himself, attended the meetings of the Board, of which he was an active and useful member. He also acted for many years before and after 1832 as President of the Board of Trustees of the Staunton Academy; was one of the founders of the Virginia Female Institute at Staunton, and a member of the Board of Trustees; was one of the most earnest advocates of the scheme for establishing the Virginia Military Institute and suggested the union of the Institute and Washington College under one management, believing that the United University ought to be and would become one of the greatest seats of learning in the country. He also accepted, in 1840, the position of visitor to the U. S. Military Academy at West Point, and wrote the able, interesting and instructive report of the Board for that year. This was said at the time to be the ablest report ever written on the condition, the mode of instruction, the changes and improvements which should be introduced in the course of study and discipline and the future usefulness of West Point.
Education he considered the philosophy of the human mind, enriching it with all that is useful or ornamental in knowledge, teaching us how to avert evil and produce good. It was not so valuable for the learning acquired, for to be well informed, was not, in his opinion, to be well educated; as for the moral character it formed, for the habit of thought engendered, for the preparation it was for the practical duties of life--in a word, he regarded education or intellectual progress as the sure forerunner of moral improvement.
It may not be out of place to mention here that his interest in, and sympathy for the unfortunate and afflicted was manifested in various ways, but especially by his services as a member of the Court of Directors of the Western Lunatic Asylum at Staunton for over twenty years, during ten of which he was President of the board.
Mr. Peyton's political life can be briefly summarized. He voted for the election of James Madison and zealously supported his administration. He also voted for James Monroe, and opposed the election of John Quincy Adams, voting for Gen. Jackson. He voted for Jackson twice, reluctantly when a candidate for a re-election, because of his refusal to sign the bill to recharter the United States Bank, but under a belief that Jackson's course was more due to the feelings created by the particular time when congress passed the bill, it being just previous to his second election, than to any settled hostility on his part to a United States Bank, and he subsequently abandoned that party, and ever afterwards adhered to the Whig party.
Mr. Peyton thus gives his reasons for abandoning the democratic party--he said: "shortly after his (Jackson's) re-election, he commenced a train of measures, to which I was utterly opposed, measures of a novel and alarming character, which in their origin and their subsequent developments, brought distress and embarrassment upon the banks, upon the country at large, and especially upon all our commercial interests. I allude to his wild, violent and undigested schemes of finance, commencing with his pet bank system and ending with his order in council, the specie circular. This warfare upon the bank of the United States, the currency and the commerce of the nation, reduced us in 1837 to the degradation of witnessing a general suppression of specie payments by the banks. These acts, connected with the corrupting system of party discipline, introduced by that administration, with the view of compelling private judgment to succumb to the behest of the party, completely separated me from the administration of Andrew Jackson." (See his letter of date May 1st, 1839, and addressed to the people of Augusta and Rockbridge counties.)
In the Senate, he opposed the annexation of Texas, a revenue tariff, and a war with England on the question of the Oregon boundary line, saying in regard to Oregon, "while our title to the whole of that vast region extending westward from the Rocky Mountains to the Pacific Ocean, and the 42nd degree of north latitude to 54° 40' was certainly as good as that of any other nation, and probably better, we had ourselves, on repeated occasions virtually admitted that it was not so complete and unqualified as to preclude all other claims to any portion of it; and therefore a war for Oregon, unless an attempt was made to wrest it forcibly from our possessions would be not only a blunder but a crime."
The annexation of Texas he opposed on many grounds. He declared first that America was already too vast to be national, and too rich to be democratic, and any extension of her borders would increase the evils. Secondly, he objected to a clause in the constitution of Texas which refused to the legislature power to pass laws for the emancipation of slaves. Thirdly, he was opposed to the United States Government assuming the debt of Texas and he thought annexation might lead to useless wars about boundary, etc.
On the question of the tariff, he held that direct protection was a legitimate object of legislation and he opposed any tariff which gave merely incidental protection. He derived his doctrine on the question both from the necessity and justice of the case, and the explicit avowal of those who framed the constitution and of those who sat in the first Congress under it, that it was designed and desired to lay duties for the encouragement and protection of domestic manufactures and he would allow no arguments of expediency to induce him to abandon his ground and to fall in with the friends of a revenue tariff giving incidental protection. This phraseology he denounced as a device of demagogues who were willing to conceal or abandon their principles in order to secure success. He also supported the "Monroe Doctrine," opposed nullification and secession, and favored a United States bank and popular education by means of State aid. He also spoke on behalf of a generous system of internal improvement and against the great liberty of divorce. In a word, he gave a general support to the principles of the old Whig party and occupied a position of commanding influence. His speeches in the Senate, like those at the bar, were distinguished for their clear, nervous brevity. And the great men of the day, B. W. Leigh, John J. Allen, R. E. Scott, William C. Rives, Vincent Witcher, Wm. Daniel, R. C. Conrad, and others, declared were equal to anything ever heard in a deliberative assembly. He was consulted and deferred to for the wisdom, sagacity and moderation of his counsels and was usually styled the "Nestor of the Senate." His influence was paramount and always exerted for the public good, and the prosperity of Virginia, for half a century; indeed, up to the civil war, was to no inconsiderable degree, due to the wise advice of this patriotic and public spirited man.
Some years before he entered the Senate, he had grown stout, weighing 220 pounds, his fine silk-like hair was snowy white, his face florid, his eyes bright, piercing and thoughtful, and in silence his calm and serene countenance gave him a majestic and graceful appearance. Alexander McD. Cowan, writing of him in the Vindicator newspaper of Staunton, February 18th, 1887, says; "Mr. Peyton was a remarkably handsome man, being of a fine figure and size, and with a face whose every feature was well-nigh faultless in shape and expression. Indeed, the word superb which used to be applied to the late Gen. Hancock's commanding appearance, might with equal appropriateness have been applied to John Howe Peyton." Gen. William Preston, of Kentucky, told the writer he was, when he first met him in 1835-6 at the White Sulphur Springs, the "finest specimen of the Virginia gentleman of the old school, in his scrupulous, old fashioned courtesy, and open handed liberality, in his dress and appearance, he had ever seen--was not only an honor to the State but to human nature." His health was good up to the age of 66 years, his step firm, his figure erect; in fact, he was as straight as a dart, and there was something in his look which seemed to arise from an innate disposition of the mind or the workings of a great soul.
He kept up a large establishment at his elegant home of Montgomery Hall, having over fifty servants about his premises, entertained a great deal of company in a delightful manner, gave sumptuous dinners and a great many of them, and of other entertainments--in fact, he kept open house, and while he set no bounds to his generous hospitality, there was no ostentation or vain display, though his house and furniture were thoroughly well appointed. His guests were among the most distinguished for talents and acquirements, for rank and station in the State and country. It was said, therefore, that at Montgomery Hall you were sure to enjoy the "feast of reason and the flow of soul." While he entertained so well, he was himself abstemious in his habits and denied himself animal food one day in every week.
He was wise and prudent in forming his intimacies and friendships, but when once a man's friend, unless for some good cause, he was ever constant and unchangeable, and there was no length to which he would not go to serve a friend. On one occasion, when in the Senate, he sacrificed the office of Governor of Virginia, to which he was about to be elected, to serve a friend and to secure the election of his friend, as he did, to the position of Judge. At another time, for he was a friend who "abided in the day of trouble" he offered a friend in distress from pecuniary losses, the occupation, use and proceeds of one of his estates in Alleghany county, of nearly 5000 acres of land and a large number of servants. In this munificent spirit of liberality and generosity, he sought to provide for this unfortunate friend and his dependant family. So constituted was he, that it was often said that if a man's friend, he was the friend of his family, indeed of everybody connected with him--in a word he took the whole tribe to his heart. As a master, he was kind, humane, just and ever mindful of the wants of his servants, provided every family with a good house and garden, extended to them the privilege of raising poultry, pigs, etc., and of enjoying the fruits of such care and industry as they chose to bestow on them, during time allowed for this purpose. And he was so loved and respected by his servants that they considered it a favor, not a task, to do his bidding. But when there was occasion for it, he could be severe, and required a strict account from all.
Every community has its leading spirit, who, to a certain extent, impresses his character upon it and brings it up, in a measure, to what that choice spirit is, and that is precisely what Mr. Peyton did. He was identified with every interest of the people, with their trade and commerce, with the material development of the State, and its moral, educational and religious prosperity. He was honest and upright in the highest degree, and never violated a trust, but was ever faithful to every obligation. His heart was full of that charity which "vaunteth not itself and is not puffed up." The poor, the afflicted, the distressed, whether "in mind, body or estate," were recipients of his kind deeds, and the widow and orphan knew him in their extremity. Principle dictated all his acts and he never departed a hair's breadth from the line of duty.
He was warm hearted, genial, and kindly, was fond of intellectual society, in which he was sure to shine, was given to hospitality and entertained more company probably than any gentleman of his day in Virginia; in fact, lived with open house.
Among other accomplishments, it should be remembered that he was a refined and robust writer, and had his professional and business engagements permitted, he would doubtless have been a famous author. Now and again he indulged, in an hour of leisure, in preparing an article for the British Reviews. They showed eminent literary talents. Those productions were, for the most part, destroyed in the library of his son, Col. J. Lewis Peyton, which was stored for safe keeping during the Civil War, on his Jackson River estate in Alleghany county, where they were burnt by Federal troops. His essays were generally on subjects of utility to the State and country, but some times his disquisitions were on moral and metaphysical science, and were remarkable for their clearness and force--no man, indeed, could have presented his views in a more perspicuous, more forcible or convincing manner. Judge McCue says, "his conception of a great subject and mode of expression were as clear, distinct and demonstrative as were those of Edmund Burke."
In a brief sketch only his salient points can be touched upon. Enough has been said, however, to present a fair idea of the superior mental and moral endowments of this extraordinary man. For his wonderful life-long labors he did not receive, though having a most extensive and fairly lucrative practice--probably the largest of any lawyer in Virginia--a tithe of the annual income of a modern millionaire, but he accomplished great and noble ends, and no language can describe the inward satisfaction, the mental pleasure he must have enjoyed. He rejoiced in what riches cannot purchase, the love, admiration and respect of every one, from the humblest mountaineer to the highest official in the land.
His name has not perished and will not, but will grow greener with years and blossom through the coming ages. This little tribute, it is hoped, will extend and confirm the reputation of a man worthy of universal admiration. May it, however, do more. The fame of the truly great can only be of use when stimulating by example. Let every reader of these pages consider what he can contribute towards the same great cause of social melioration, what sacrifices he will make to reclaim the vicious, instruct the ignorant, cheer the disconsolate, what selfishness and bigotries he will relinquish; what benevolence, justice, charity he will exercise, and what, in a word, he will do to imitate the example of heroic worth given us by this truly wise and good man.
He was struck down by apoplexy in 1845, recovered sufficiently to walk about his house, but was disabled in 1846, by a second attack accompanied by paralysis. His mind, however, continued clear and vigorous, though his voice was indistinct. This was illustrated by his ability displayed on his sick bed, in a conversation with the late Col. John B. Baldwin, in which he gave him the points and elucidated the intricacies of an important and difficult law case, then in progress and cited the authorities. Throughout his illness, he endured his sufferings with patience and meekness, and died at Montgomery Hall, April 3d, 1847, leaving the reputation of having been a perfect gentleman, the soul of honor, and the pink of chivalry.
MR. PEYTON'S REPORT IN 1810.
VIRGINIA LEGISLATURE.
EXTRACT FROM THE MESSAGE OF GOV. TYLER OF VIRGINIA.
DECEMBER 4TH, 1809.
A proposition from the State of Pennsylvania is herewith submitted, with Gov. Snyder's letter endorsing the same, in which is suggested the propriety of amending the constitution of the United States so as to prevent collisions between the government of the Union and the State government.
HOUSE OF DELEGATES.
Friday, Dec., 15th, 1809.
On motion ordered that so much of the Governor's communication as relates to the communication of the Governor of Pennsylvania, on the subject of an amendment proposed by the legislature of the State to the constitution of the United States he referred to Messrs. Peyton, Otey, Cabell, Walker, Madison, Holt, Newton, Parker, Stevenson, Randolph, Cocke, Wayatt and Ritchie.
Thursday, Jan., 11th, 1810.
Mr. Peyton from the committee to whom was referred that part of the Governor's communications which relates to the amendment proposed by the State of Pennsylvania, to the constitution of the United States, made the following
REPORT.
The committee to whom was referred the communication of the Governor of Pennsylvania, covering certain resolutions of the legislature of that State proposing an amendment of the Constitution of the United States by the appointment of an impartial tribunal to decide disputes between the State and Federal judiciary, have had the same, under their consideration, and are of opinion that a tribunal is already provided by the Constitution of the United States to wit; the supreme court, more eminently qualified from their habits and duties, from the mode of their selection, and from the tenure of their offices, to decide the disputes aforesaid in an enlightened and impartial manner than any other tribunal which could be selected.
The members of the supreme court, are selected from those in the United States, who are most celebrated for virtue and legal learning, not at the will of a single individual, but by the concurrent wishes of the President and Senate of the United States; they will therefore have no local prejudices or partialities. The duties they have to perform, lead them necessarily to the most enlarged and accurate acquaintance with the jurisdiction of the Federal and State courts together, and with the admirable symmetry of our Government. The tenure of their offices enables them to pronounce the sound and correct opinions they may have formed without fear, favour, or partiality.
The amendment of the Constitution proposed by Pennsylvania seems to be founded upon the idea that the Federal judiciary will, from a lust of power, enlarge their jurisdiction, to the total annihilation of the jurisdiction of the State courts; that they will exercise their will instead of the law and the Constitution.
This argument, if it proves anything, would operate more strongly against the tribunal proposed to be created, which promises so little, than against the State courts, which, for the reason given, have every thing connected with their appointment calculated to insure confidence. What security have we, were the proposed amendments adopted, that this tribunal would not substitute their will and their pleasure in place of the law? The Judiciary are the weakest of the three departments of government, and least dangerous to the political rights of the Constitution; they hold neither the purse, nor the sword; and even to enforce their own judgments and decisions, must ultimately depend upon the executive arm. Should the Federal judiciary, however unmindful of their weakness, unmindful of the duty which they owe to themselves, and their country, become corrupt and transcend the limits of their jurisdiction, would the proposed amendment oppose even a probable barrier to such an improbable state of things?
The creation of a tribunal, such as is proposed by Pennsylvania, so far as we are able to form an idea of it, from the description given in the resolutions of the Legislature of the State, would, in the opinion of your Committee, tend rather to invite them to prevent collisions between the Federal and State courts. It might also become in process of time, a serious and dangerous embarrassment to the operations of the general government.
Resolved, therefore: That the Legislature of this State do disapprove of the amendment to the Constitution of the United States proposed by the Legislature of Pennsylvania.
Resolved also: That his Excellency the Governor be, and he is hereby requested to transmit forthwith a copy of the foregoing preamble and resolutions to each of the Senators and representatives of this State in Congress, and to the executives of the several states in the union, with a request that the same be laid before the Legislature thereof.
The said Resolutions being read a second time, were, on motion ordered to be referred to a committee of the whole House on the state of the Commonwealth.
Tuesday, Jan. 23rd, 1810.
The House according to the orders of the day, resolved itself into a Committee of the whole house on the state of the Commonwealth, and after some time spent therein, Mr. Speaker resumed the chair, and Mr. Stannard of Spottsylvania, reported that the Committee had, according to order, had under consideration the preamble and resolution of the select committee, to whom was referred that part of the Governor's communication which relates to the amendment proposed to the constitution of the United States by the Legislature of Pennsylvania, had gone through with the same, and directed him to report them to the House without amendment, which he handed in to the clerk's table.
And the question being put, on agreeing to the said preamble and resolutions, they were agreed to by the House unanimously.
Ordered that the clerk carry the said preamble and resolutions to the Senate, and desire their concurrence.
IN SENATE.
Wednesday, January 24th, 1810.
The preamble and resolutions on the amendment to the constitution of the United States, proposed by the Legislature of Pennsylvania by the appointment of an impartial tribunal to decide disputes between the State and Federal judiciary, being also delivered in, and twice read, on motion was ordered to be committed to Messieurs Nelson, Currie, Campbell, Upshur and Wolfe.
Friday, January 26th, 1810.
Mr. Nelson reported from the committee on the preamble and resolutions on the amendment, proposed by the legislature of Pennsylvania, etc., that the committee had, according to order, taken the said preamble and resolutions under their consideration, and directed him to report them without any amendment.
* * * * *
"This important state paper," says Judge McCue, "can be seen in the works of Daniel Webster, vol. III, pp. 352-54, and so able were these views and resolutions, considered at the time, as to attract the attention of the leading Statesmen of the country, and they guided the other States in the adoption of similar resolutions, thus overthrowing the effort of Pennsylvania to establish a separate and distinct judicial department as arbiter between the Federal and State Governments."
In the great debate in the United States Senate between Daniel Webster and Gen. Hayne, of South Carolina, Mr. Webster quoted Mr. Peyton's preamble and resolutions, as so conclusive of the questions involved, as to admit of no further discussion. In a subsequent pages of Judge McCue's sketch, an interesting conversation between Mr. Webster and Daniel Sheffey is reported.
DISEASE LEADS TO HIS CHANGE OF HOME.