ALEXANDER CAMPBELL AND WATERGATE
Well,
not exactly Watergate, but this account of one of Alexander
Campbell’s visits to Washington will serve to show that human
depravity has been at work in our nation’s capital for a long
time.
I
have recently noticed several references to the fact that Campbell
had the rare experience of addressing both houses of Congress.
Whether this is part of the nostalgia that is presumably sweeping the
country, caused in part by a longing for an age of moral
consciousness in these days of disillusionment, I know not. But this
incident of speaking to Congress, along with the extravagant
compliment paid Campbell by former president James Madison to the
effect that if he should choose one person to represent the human
race on a distant planet it would be the reformer from Bethany, are
two of the better known incidents in his life.
The
purpose here is to tell the story of that visit before Congress and
to draw some parallels between the situation then and now.
It
was a Sunday morning, June 2, 1850. Uncle Alex had gone east to visit
congregations in Baltimore and Washington. He had long promised the
saints in Baltimore that he would give them a week of “lectures”
(he never called this kind of work preaching) if and
when they built a commodious building. Now that they had a house that
would seat upwards of 800, still a rarity within the Movement, he
went there to fill it to capacity, which he did. He hailed the
building as “an architectural gem,” and was quick to
contrast its simple elegance with the ecclesiastical magnificence of
the eastern religious establishment which prided itself on choirs and
organs. The Movement did not yet have a congregation with an organ,
not quite!
He
summarized his week’s work in Baltimore with at least one
unfamiliar reference: “Some demons were dispossessed, some
Christians were edified, a few penitents were baptized, and all the
Christians present were happy.”
It
was while in Baltimore that “a very pressing invitation”
came for him to address a joint session of Congress. In response to
this he took “the cars” to Washington, accompanied by
about 20 brothers and sisters who came along for the big event. He
arranged for two hours of meditation in a private home before
proceeding to the house chamber. When he arrived he found the chamber
overflowing with representatives and senators with their families,
along with many citizens of the community. There was a hymn and a
prayer, and he was introduced by Rep. Phelps of Missouri.
What
was the moral and political climate in the capital in the summer of
1850? The big issue was annexation of new land, and this was
big because it was tied to the slavery question. Texas had become the
28th state only five years before, but only after bitter quarreling.
Henry Clay had lost the presidency almost certainly because of his
opposition to admitting Texas or any other western territory, for he
was convinced that they would be slave states and would encourage
further importation of slaves. As New Mexico and California became
territories, it was only with Clay’s and other Whigs’
protests, and their efforts to write in anti-slavery clauses failed.
The nation obviously wanted everything between the two great oceans,
and the moral climate was such that the people were willing for their
leaders to do most anything to get it.
Henry
Clay, you will remember, presided over the Campbell-Rice debate in
1843, and in 1847, when Campbell left for Europe, he voluntarily sent
along a letter introducing him to dignitaries. Clay served in both
houses of Congress, was Secretary of State under John Quincy Adams,
and ran for President three times, missing it once by only 39,000
votes. In Washington he was known as “the Great Pacificator”
in that he did things like negotiate a peaceful settlement with South
Carolina in 1832 when that state was on the verge of starting a civil
war, and for authoring the Missouri Compromise in 1820, which allowed
that state to enter the union as a slave state on the grounds that
all other states entering the union above that latitude would be free
forever, a move that eased tensions between North and South. At the
time of Campbell’s visit, Clay was surely sitting there as a
senator, having only two years before been rejected by the Whig party
as the presidential nominee, though he was the obvious party leader.
But Gen. Zachary Taylor was a man of war, having been sent by
President Polk into Texas and Mexico to “persuade” the
Mexicans to sell us all their land between Texas and California, and
it was understood that he was to spill blood, if necessary, to
achieve his purpose.
Since
the Whigs figured that the nation wanted expansion and annexation,
even if that meant both slavery and war, they passed by the most
qualified man and gave the nomination to General Taylor. It was not
the hour for a man of peace like Clay, if it ever is. Taylor had a
“clean” political record, for at the time of his
nomination he had never voted in his life! He was also a southerner
who owned 300 slaves. No one knew his political beliefs, probably
because he had none; but he was a war hero, a dubious war though it
was. Not only was Henry Clay bypassed, but the fortunes of greats
like Daniel Webster fared no better.
Had
Uncle Alex gone before Congress just one year earlier, one Abraham
Lincoln would probably have been in the audience, for he served in
the House from 1847-49. It was he who stood in the chamber aisle and
challenged President Polk, who was asking Congress to declare war on
Mexico. Polk was claiming that American soldiers had been attacked
and so he was asking for blood. Lincoln insisted that the President
name the exact spot on which American blood had been shed. But the
President wanted his war, as did much of the nation, and he got it.
Despite warnings from the leaders of both parties to exercise
restraint and wait at least until the Mexicans committed a definite
act of hostility, he pressed his case, saying that “the cup of
forbearance has been exhausted,” and got the declaration of war
that made Gen. Taylor a hero by the slaughter of Mexicans.
But
James Polk holds claims to fame other than warmongering. A governor
of Tennessee, he was something of a protégée of “Old
Hickory,” and was himself dubbed “Young Hickory.”
Gen. Jackson was now the older statesman of the Democratic party, now
retired to the Hermitage, but still active enough to campaign for the
annexation of Texas on pro-slavery basis. When Jim Polk showed signs
of being able to make it to the White House, Old Hickory insisted
that he should marry Sarah Childress, one of his girl friends, so as
to put an end to his lady-chasing activities. And he chose the right
one for a Machiavellian prince, for she was very pious, not even
allowing intoxicating beverages to be served at White House affairs.
And she was probably as kind as she was exacting with Polk’s
slaves. When one of the President’s own party wanted to write
into any annexation bill a proviso that in the new territory “neither
slavery nor involuntary servitude shall ever exist,” Polk
angrily retorted that such an amendment would be foolish and
mischievous.
Feelings
ran Watergate-deep in those days between the Whigs and Democrats,
quarreling as they were about tariff, annexation, slavery and all the
rest. While Polk was still in the House serving as Speaker, the
bitterness sometimes became so rife that there were outbreaks of vile
cursing. Even the normally peaceful Henry Clay came over from the
Senate one day, and shouted at Speaker Polk from the gallery, crying
out, “Go home, --- ---you! Go home where you belong!”
(expletives deleted). Later back at Ashland in Kentucky when Clay
heard that Polk had received the Democratic nomination he cursed in
utter horror.
But
Polk erred at one point as a Machiavellian statesman. He made a hero
out of Gen. Taylor, who belonged to the opposite party, a hazard that
the Italian philosopher pointed to with due assiduity. Polk knew
better, and he tried to keep the Mexican War big enough to serve his
expansionist intentions but small enough not to produce any
substantial heroes. And so, unwittingly, he created the next
President.
These
events bring us to 1850. General Zachary Taylor was in the White
House at the time of Campbell’s visit, but not for long, for he
died only a few weeks afterwards, which was probably a blessing to
the nation, for he was hardly qualified to preside over a nation that
was coming apart at the seams. Millard Fillmore took office and
almost immediately signed into law bills that Zachary opposed, thus
postponing for a decade one of the bloodiest civil wars in world
history.
Campbell’s
visit in June of 1850 came at midway point of the most intense and
dramatic debate in congressional history, featuring the skill and
oratory of Clay, Calhoun and Webster. Slavery had now overshadowed
all other issues and dissension between North and South had reached
frightening proportions. Texas was now part of the union as a slave
state, and the South and the expansionists wanted all additional
territories to be slave also. Only Oregon had been organized as a
territory without slavery. No decision had been made about the great
expanses of New Mexico, California, and Utah. The North insisted that
all new territories be free; the South contended that slaves were
property with constitutional protection.
The
debate was so bitter and impossible as to defy description. Many
compromises were put forth, such as drawing a line both ways, east
and west, from Missouri to both oceans, declaring all north of the
line free and all south slave. Another was to allow each new
territory to decide for itself. Nothing worked.
It
was the wisdom and oratory of Campbell’s friend, Henry Clay,
assisted by Calhoun and Webster, that saved the nation from collapse,
at least temporarily, by pleading for a compromise plan that was
eventually accepted. These men held the nation spellbound by their
oratory. All three were to die within the next year or so, but it was
those last flickers of the fire that burned so brightly in their
souls that brought hope to a dying nation. Calhoun was too ill to
speak himself, so his words were read, pleading with the North to be
less agitating. It was on March 6 that Daniel Webster gave that
famous speech in which he pled for the preservation of the union. A
dying man, his magnificent voice was now abated, and yet he said with
such splendor, “Peaceable secession is an utter impossibility.”
The
debate was still raging when the President died in July. A peaceful
compromise was finally signed in September. Half way through the
debate, in June, it was this Congress that sent an urgent appeal to
the man of God from Bethany, one known to many of them for his part
in the Virginia Constitutional Convention of 1829, to address both
houses on a Lord’s Day morning.
On
that beautiful Sunday morning, while some cherry blossoms were still
in bloom, Alexander Campbell stood before the nation’s
lawmakers in the most perilous hour in the nation’s history. It
would have made Watergate look like a mock trial at Yale Law School.
But what he said on that occasion might well be seen in the light of
what he would say to our nation today. And you can be assured that
Alexander Campbell, acutely aware of the political situation in his
day, knew exactly what was going on in Washington on June 2, 1850. He
had understood the invitation to be urgent. He hastened to the
capital from Baltimore early enough to go to the home of a brother
Tingle for two hours of prayer, and then to the House chamber. He had
been with his Lord and he was ready.
Reading
almost certainly from his own Living Oracles, he began: “For
God has so loved the world, as to give his only begotten Son, that
whosoever believes on him may not perish, but obtain eternal life.
For God has sent his Son into the world, not to condemn the world,
but that the world may be saved.”
For
90 minutes he spoke on his favorite subject, the Divine Philanthropy,
beginning with creation and outlining what God has done for man all
the way to redemption in Christ. He discounted patriotism and
political friendships as expressions of that benevolence, and called
upon his audience to look to that providence that bestows a divine
legislation. He pled for Christian morality.
He
later described his ‘audience as attentive and absorbed as any
he had recently addressed, and he spoke of the legislators as “some
of the greatest statesmen of the world.”
Leaving
the elegance and grandeur of the House chamber, Alex went across town
to a meeting with a small band of disciples in an upper room, in
company of several congressmen. He was impressed to find there the
wife of the congressman that had introduced him to the lawmakers.
“This excellent lady, unlike some other ladies of illustrious
rank that visit Washington during the winter, is not ashamed to meet
with the little flock in some upper room, and to participate with
them the honors and blessings of the family of our exalted Lord,”
he wrote later in the Millennial Harbinger. And the joy he
found in this little congregation pleased him, for though small and
obscure they were happy to honor the holy ordinances on the Lord’s
day and to edify one another in love.
Now
Uncle Alex stood before this small group of saints and spoke of the
Lord’s day and the Lord’s family, wonderfully enjoying
himself. In a matter of hours he moved from the eloquence of the
halls of Congress to the humble sharing of saints in an upper room
beyond the tracks. As Socrates would put it, in weighing the
alternative of life and death, “and only God knows which is
better.”
That
is part of the story of “Watergate” in Washington in the
middle of the last century. And Alexander Campbell was there in the
midst of profane, adulterous, divisive, wrangling, cursing, inept,
warmongering, deceptive politicians, along with the wisdom and
eloquence of the great men of the day. Same old sins, same old human
nature. There is nothing new under the sun, not even Watergates.
And the church’s message must always be the same, God’s love sitting in judgment over human carnality. God so loved the world that he gave. . . The divine philanthropy! Such is our message to a nation that forgets God. And wherever there is a Watergate there is almost certainly the Body of Christ, however humble and obscure. On that remarkable June day in 1850 Alexander Campbell found both, and he found God in them both. From darkness to light, and all those who want light can and will find their way.—the Editor