New Hampshire Statesman And Concord Register

" When Daniel Webster was upon a farm, doing the sort of work that John Randolph's negroes are now about."

Such is the language which the Boston Statesman, the organ of the Opposition in Massachusetts, holds in regard to Daniel Webster, a distinguished and eminent son of a New-Hampshire farmer. And what is the amount of it? what is the meaning of it ? Why, it is to reproach him that he has been employed in the occupation of husbandry ; that his hands have been polluted by holding a plough, a hoe, or a spade; that instead of being born to a princely fortune, so that he might lord it, with an absolute and uncontrollable tyranny over hundreds of slaves, he has been obliged, by the labor of his own hands and the sweat of his brow, to gain himself an honorable subsistence in early life. It is virtually saying, that to be born on a farm is enough at once to exclude him from competition with the sons of the rich planters of the South. Oh no ! say then gentlemen it will not do, he has been employed in the same occupation with these men's negroes, and it would be a monstrous absurdity now to admit him to an equality with their masters. He has not gained for himself the reputation of a " man of honor" at the expense of the blood of his fellow citizens. The crime of adultery does not emblazon his escutcheon. He has been a mere tiller of the soil, and it will be contrary to all rules of " good society" to admit him into the company of gentlemen. He is not fit for a station in the government, for the probability is he never horse-whipped a slave in the whole course of his life; nay, so far is that from being the case, he has been employed "in doing the sort of work that John Randolph's negroes are now about."

Such, freemen of New-England, is the language of the hirelings of the Combination to us, even in our land. Sixty years since, when we were the colonies of the mother country, the King of Great Britain, on his throne, dared not have used such language to our fathers. And do we brook all this and more, and yet claim to be the descendants of the fathers of the revolution ? Surely we cannot. There is a mistake somewhere. We are not the countrymen of Warren and Stark, of Hancock and Adams. We are the " base coin nailed to the counter,"and there to be kept. We are these gentlemen's "white slaves of the North," and we dare not breathe a lisp against our oppressors, lest the lash of the task-master teach us our duty. What share have we in the government? What do our masters expect of us? Why if ever their black slaves should revolt. they may march over some of their " white slaves of the North" to quell the rebellion. But to think of a New-England farmer, who has been employed in the same work with John Randolph's negroes, to think of him as having any thing to do with the government, is too absurd; how would be look, with his sun-burnt face, and his hands polluted by " doing the same sort of work with John Randolph's negroes," by the side of these fair faced gentlemen, with " diamond rings and lily hands." Monstrous! Let this be distinctly avowed; let it be widely circulated, that no tiller of the soil is eligible to any office, and in November let the " white slaves of New-Hampshire" respond to it. This is the edict. Your masters have willed it.

A YANKEE.