He held, of course, to his opinion that, under the revenue power, protection could be incidental only, because from that doctrine there was no escape.

But he dropped the condemnation expressed in 1814 and the doubts uttered in 1820 as to the theory that it was within the direct power of Congress to enact a protective tariff, and assumed that they had this right as one of the general powers in the Constitution, or that at all events they had exercised it, and that therefore the question was henceforward to be considered as _res adjudicata_.

The speech of 1828 marks the separation of Mr.Webster from the opinions of the old school of New England Federalism.
Thereafter he stood forth as the champion of the tariff and of the "American system" of Henry Clay.

Regarding protection in its true light, as a mere question of expediency, he followed the interests of New England and of the great industrial communities of the North.

That he shifted his ground at the proper moment, bad as the "bill of abominations" was, and that, as a Northern statesman, he was perfectly justified in doing so, cannot be fairly questioned or criticised.