YALE UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY

AMERICAN CRISIS BIOGRAPHIES
Edited by
Ellis Paxson Oberholtzer, Ph. D.

^be Bmerican Crisis 3B(oarapbies
Edited by Ellis Paxson Oberholtzer, Ph.D. With the
counsel and advice of Professor John B. McMaster, of
the University of Pennsylvania.
Each i2mo, cloth, with frontispiece portrait, Pnce
$1.25 net; by mail, $1.37-
These biographies will constitute a complete and comprehensive
history ofthe great American sectional struggle in the form of readable
aid authoritatfve biography. The editor has enlisted the co-operation
of many competent writers, as will be noted from the list given below.
An interesting feature of the undertaking IS thatthe series is to be im-
partia , Southirn writers having been assigned to Southern subjects and
Northern writers to Northern subjects, but all will belong to the younger
Beneration of writers, thus assuring freedom from any suspicion of war
time prejudice. The Civil War will not be treated as a rebellion, but as
the great event in the history of our nation, which, after forty years, it
is now clearly recognized to have been.
Now ready ;
Abraham Lincoln. By Ellis Paxson Oberholtzer.
Thomas H. Benton. By Joseph M. Rogers. -
David G. Farragut. By John R. Spears.
William T. Sherman. By Edward Robins.
Frederick Douglass. By Booker T. Washington.
Judah P. Benjamin. By Pierce Butler.
Robert E. Lee. By Philip Alexander Bruce.
Jefferson Davis. By Prof. W. E. Dodd.
Alexander H. Stephens. By Louis Pendleton.
John C. Calhoun. By Gaillard Hunt.
" StonewaU" Jackson. By Henry Alexander White.
John Brown. By W. E. Burghardt Dubois.
Charles Sumner. By Prof. George H. Haynes.
In preparation :
Daniel Webster. By Prof. C. H. Van Tyne.
William Lloyd Garrison. By Lindsay Swift.
William H. Seward. By Edward Everett Hale, Jr.
Stephen A. Douglas. By Prof. Henry Parker Willis.
Thaddeus Stevens. By Prof. J. A. Woodburn.
Andrew Johnson. By Prof. Walter L. Fleming.
Henry Clay. By Thomas H. Clay.
Ulysses S. Grant. By Prof. Franklin S. Edmonds.
Edwin M. Stanton. By Edwin S. Corwin.
Jay Cooke. By Ellis Paxson Oberholtzer.

C?X A-Qa, y^L^i^i^s^^sq^

AMERICAN CRISIS BIOGRAPHIES

Charles Sumner

iv

GEORGE H. HAYNES, Ph.D.
Professor of History in tlie Worcester Polytechnic Institute

PHILADELPHIA
GEORGE W. JACOBS & COMPANY
PUBLISHERS

Copyright, 1909, by
George W. Jacobs & Company
Published November, igog

akG8

All rights reserved
Printed iri U. S. A.

PREFACE
Time has dealt very differently with the leading
characters in the great drama of the nineteenth
century. At the end of the war, in the opinion of
the best informed and most judicial historian of the
period, Abraham Lincoln and Charles Sumner were
"the two most influential men in public life." On
the very day of his death, the President intimated
that the thwarting of his reconstruction policy had
been due to Sumner's opposition.
To-day Lincoln's name is a household word ; his
memory is revered hardly less in the South than in
the North ; the new generation understands and ap
preciates him far better than did the men among
whom his work was done. But Sumner's figure has
been crowded into the background. Ask intelligent
men of affairs born since 1860 for an account of
his character and career, and few will recall more
than that he was an anti-slavery orator, whose
assault by Brooks in the Senate chamber greatly in
tensified the bitterness between Korth and South.
What manner of impress Sumner is making upon
yet younger America was tested a few months ago
in the examination of applicants for admission to
a Massachusetts college. N'ot one in ten of those
boys in the commonwealth which Sumner had so
long and so honorably represented, showed any in
telligent knowledge of the man. One replied:
" Charles Sumner was always held in respect even

6 PEEFACE
by the people of the South. Port Sumner, Charles
town, was named in his honor," — an honor which
several of the other papers also accorded him ! Of
six histories of the United States in use in leading
secondary schools, two leave Sumner insensible at
Brooks's feet, two others have not a word to say of
any act of Sumner's after the assault, while the
others go little further than to state the bare and
barren facts that he held tenaciously to a peculiar
theory of reconstruction, that he strove to secure
equal civil rights for the freedmen, and that he
quarreled with Grant.
Some reasons for this lessened interest in Sumner
are not far to seek. Unlike Lincoln, he outlived
his best days. His most characteristic and benefi
cent labors belonged to the epoch closed by the war ;
their fruits were merged in its triumphs. His later
years brought misfortunes in full train : domestic
sorrow, racking illness, the loss of friends and cease
less struggle over the problems of reconstruction,
with some of which he was little fitted to cope. Sum
ner had his foibles and faults ; no attempt has here
been made to gloss them over. He made mistakes,
some of which were fraught with disaster. Never
theless, I believe that he deserves of his country a
more grateful remembrance than has been accorded
him, and that both a true historical perspective and
the inculcation of virile American ideals call upon
the writers and teachers of history to bring Sumner
forward into clearer light.
The task of writing a brief biography of Sumner
is made difficult not by the lack of material, but

PEEFACE 7
rather by its abundance. From the hour of his
election to the Senate, Sumner never doubted that
he was an historic personage. He devoted an enor
mous amount of time to editing his Works: in
these fifteen volumes of his speeches he meant that
we should read his life as he saw it related to the
great events in which he was taking part. Thou
sands of letters written by him are preserved. In
the Sumner Collection in the library of Harvard
University are 40, 000 letters received by him from
men of leading in many lands, as well as news
paper clippings and documents in rich profusion.
Sumner was fortunate in having as his biographer
Mr. Edward L. Pierce, who for thirty years had
been his intimate friend. His Memoir a-nd Letters of
Charles Sumner is a marvel of research hardly equaled
in painstaking conscientiousness and completeness
by any other biography of recent years. Its four
bulky volumes represent nineteen years of almost un
remitting labor, and contain but a quarter part less
reading matter than the Nicolay-Hay biography of
Lincoln. But the very completeness of Mr. Pierce's
work bars its use by any but the specialist. It is
" conceived on a scale which assumes in the reader an
interest in the subj'ect, and an indifference to toil,
commensurate with those of the author. . . .
Life simply does not suffice for literature laid out on
such a Brobdingnagian scale ; all sense of proportion
is absent from it."' Mr. Pierce himself justified
the scope of his work on the ground that a com
plete biography would prove "a thesaurus which
' C. F. Adams, Lee at Appomattox and Other Papera, p. 147.

8 PEEFACE
can be drawn upon by the authors of briefer lives."
Certain it is that more than one biographer of
Sumner has sunk his shafts deep in Pierce's ilfemoir
while paying surprisingly scanty royalties of ac
knowledgment for the ore extracted.
Whatever value may be possessed by any later
life of Sumner must consist far less in its discovery
of new material than in its perspective, its point of
view. Thirty-five years, a full generation, have
passed since Sumner's death. His work has been
put to the test in the searching fires of reconstruc
tion. Day by day our dealings with the peoples of
our new insular possessions are bringing into ques
tion doctrines which Sumner held to be absolute
and impregnable. Experience in South Africa is
proving to-day how rapidly trust may make friends
out of conquered foes. The time may have come
for a new attempt to tell the story of Sumner's life
and to appraise his service.
Unfortunately the second volume of "The Letters
and Journals of Samuel Gridley Howe " and " The
Diary of Gideon Welles" were not available until
most of this book was in type.
Among the many who have helped me from their
personal knowledge of Sumner, I wish to mention
here with special gratitude Dr. Edward Everett
Hale, whom we all mourn. Dr. Samuel A. Green,
President Andrew D. White, and Mr. Arnold B.
Johnson, who during most of Sumner's public life
was his secretary and intimate friend.
G. H. H.

CONTENTS

Cheonology  H
I. Parentage and Youth ... 15
II. Choice of a Pkofession . . 31
III. European Travel .... 45
IV. " No. 4 Court Street " . . 64
V. " The Teue Grandeur op Na
tions"  78
VI. Sumner' s Enlistment in the Anti-
Slavery Eanks .... 91
VII. Massachusetts and the Compro
mise : Sumner's Election to the
Senate  115
VIII. Senate Beginnings: "Feeedom
National, Slavery Sectional " 138
IX. Political Eevolution in Massa
chusetts  159
X. "The Crime Against Kansas,"
and the Brooks Assault . . 188
XI. In Quest of Health . . . 221
XII. " The Barbarism OF Slavery " . 231
XIII. War Problems : The Trent Af
fair  247
XIV. Sumner and Lincoln . . . 276
XV. Johnson and Eeconstruction . 295
XVI. Sumner and Grant : The San
Domingo Issue .... 329
xvii. sumnee and grant : the treaty
OF Washington .... 354

10 CONTENTS
XVni. Sumner's Personality and Char
acteristics  384
XIX. Civil Eights and the Battle-
Flag Eesolution : Closing
Scenes  412
XX. Sumner's Leadership . . . 438
Bibliography .... 452
Index  454

CHRONOLOGY
1811 — Born in Boston, Mass., January 6th.
1826 — Enters Harvard College. Is graduated, 1830. Student
in Harvard Law School, 1831-1833.
1834 — Visits Washington, and is strongly repelled by political
life as a career. Admitted to the bar, and begins prac
tice in Boston. Edits legal journals and reports. Inti
mate with W. E. Channing and Francis Lieber.
1837-1840 — European tour, which immensely broadens Sum
ner's horizon, awakens his appreciation of art, gives him
facile command of French, German and ItaHan, a knowl
edge of the politics and jurisprudence and an intimate
acquaintance with many of the leaders in public life and
in letters in England, France and Germany, — an indis
pensable preparation for his unsuspected career.
1842 — Maintains the " right of inquiry." Cooperates with Dr.
Channing in condemning Webster's treatment of the
Creole case.
1843 — Defends Mackenzie's action in the Somers mutiny. Be
comes instructor in the Law Scbool. Contributes fre
quently to the Law Berporter.
1845 — Cooperates with Horace Mann for the improvement of
the system of public education in Massachusetts. July
4th, delivers the city oration, "The True Grandeur of
Nations, ' ' which straightway gives him more than national
fame as an orator, and as a champion of Freedom aud
of Peace. Phi Beta Kappa Address at Harvard. Gains
prominence as lecturer and reformer. Prison Discipline
debates give valuable training, but arouse enmity.
1847 — Denounces R. C. Winthrop's vote in Congress on the
Mexican War bill. The controversy puts Sumner tor-
ward as the champion of the Conscience Whigs, and an
tagonizes conservatives. Is nominated for Congress, but
withdraws his name.

12 CHEONOLOGY
1848 — Active in the organization of the Free Soil party, in re
volt at the Whig nomination of Taylor.
1851 — Pnt forward by the Free Soilers in coalition with Demo
crats, for the United States Senate. Elected by majority
of oue vote, after a deadlock in the legislature of more
than three months. Takes seat in Senate. In first
speech — a tribute to Kossuth — he opposes any belliger
ent intervention in European affairs.
1852 — ^In first formal Senate speech, arraigns Fugitive Slave
/^^ Law: " Freedom national : Slavery sectional. "
1854 — Opposes repeal of Missouri Compromise. Vindicates pe
tition of New England clergy. Opposition angers South
ern senators. Assails Knownothingism.
1856 — Angered by Sumner's speech, " The Crime Againat Kan
sas," Preston S. Brooks assaults him in the Senate
ohamber. May 22d. After months of invalidism Sumner
is welcomed home, November 3d, as the martyr of free
speech, by the governor of the commonwealth, the mayor
of Boston, and a vast throng of citizens. 1856-1859
spent in disheartening struggle for health. Meantime
Massachusetts reelects him to the Senate.
1859-1860— Return to the Senate. "The Barbarism of Slav
ery." Takes the stump for Lincoln.
1861-1862 — Unyielding in opposition to all schemes of com
promise. Made chairman of Foreign Relations Commit
tee. In October, 1861, the first statesman of prominence
to demand the policy of emancipation. In Trent case,
insists on surrender of Mason and Slidell. Puts forward
his theory of reconstruction by Congress in states which
had "become /eio de se."
1863— Third election to Senate. Puts stop to letters of marque
and reprisal. Blocks resolutions which would have em
broiled United States with France. Important corre
spondence with Bright, Cobden and the Duke of Argyll.
Cooper Institute speech on " Foreign Relations."
1864 — Struggles to secure equal rights, including equal suf
frage, for colored people. Initiates movement for civil
service reform. Champions Lincoln's reelection, after
' ' the Chicago treason. ' ' Secures Chase's appointment as
Chief -Justice.

CHEONOLOGY 13
1865 — Opposes retaliation in war, and imposes restraints in the
interest of civilization. Obstructs Lincoln's plan of re
construction. Accompanies the presidential party to
Richmond. Is at Lincoln's deathbed. Delivers the
eulogy upon Lincoln before Boston city government.
1865-1869 — Struggles over reconstruction. Advocates equal
suffrage, free homesteads and free schools for Negroes.
Death of mother. Marriage. Chief supporter of Alaska
purchase. Establishes new home in Washington.
Heartily supports Johnson's impeachment and con
viction.
1869-1871— Fourth election to the Senate. Opposes Fifteenth
Amendment. Prevents confirmation of Stewart as Sec
retary of the Treasury. Approves Motley's appointment
as Minister to England. In speech against ratification
of Johnson-Clarendon Convention, sets forth "national
claims" against England. Opposes annexation of San
Domingo, and thus antagonizes Grant and Fish. Re
moved from chairmanship of Foreign Relations Commit
tee. Advocates ratification of Treaty of Washington.
Persistent in urging Civil Eights Bill.
1872 — Opposes Grant's renomination, but takes no part in fur
thering the Liberal Eepublican movement. Arraigns
Grant in the Senate. Supports Greeley. Last journey
to Europe. Illness compels absence from Senate.
Presents " Battle-Flag " resolution. Censured by Mas
sachusetts legislature.
1873 — Defeat of movement to rescind censure. Sumner urges
justice to Spain in Virginius case. Makes last appeal for
Civil Eights Bill.
1874 — Massachusetts legislature rescinds censure. In last
speech in Senate, Sumner urges national, instead of in
ternational, commemoration of American independence.
niiiess. Maroh 10th — his last day in Senate — is present
when the rescinding resolution is presented. Dies,
March llth. Buried in Mount Auburn, March 16th.
Commemoration in Congress, April 27tb. Lamar's
tribute.

CHARLES SUMNER

CHAPTEE I
PARENTAGE AND YOUTH
Charles Sumner came but slowly to a knowl
edge of himself. His life was more than half spent
before he recognized his real task. The career
which then suddenly opened before him was a sur
prise even to himself, yet it was no accident. From
the beginning, both heredity and environment,
physical, intellectual and moral, had been develop
ing in him a unique combination of powers of mind
and heart. When the crisis came which called him
to service, it found him fuUy armed for the fight.
William Sumner, the first of Charles Sumner's
American ancestors, was a native of St. Edburg in
the county of Oxford, England. At the age of
thirty he moved with his wife and three sons to the
town of Dorchester in the Massachusetts Bay Col
ony. In this little community, which had been
founded only five or six years, William Sumner
soon came to be a man of influence. He was ad
mitted to the freedom of the colony in 1637 and ac
quired a] grant of land. He was elected to impor
tant offices in town and colony, and for many years

16 CHAELES SUMNEE
acted as a commissioner to "try and issue small
causes." From him in the seventh generation
descended Charles Sumner.
With two exceptions the intervening ancestors
need not here be noted. These Sumners of Dor
chester and Milton were generally farmers, in
moderate circumstances, and with families of
patriarchal numbers. Among all these sturdy
forebears of Charles Sumner there is but one to
whom life offered much of variety or romance.
Charles Sumner's grandfather bore the singularly
inappropriate name of Job. When he was seven
teen years old, his father died, leaving a
widow and twelve children. After working a
year upon a neighbor's farm. Job Sumner de
termined to get a liberal education. The prepara
tion cost him a hard struggle, but he finally secured
admission to the freshman class of Harvard College.
Six months had not passed when the news of Lexing
ton entered this scholarly retreat. Forthwith the
college betook itself to Concord, in order that its
dormitories might be turned into barracks for the
Continental Army. But books had lost their lure
for Job Sumner ; he remained behind, and joined
the army, receiving the rank of ensign. As a re
ward for distinguished service in command of one
of the armed vessels on Lake Champlain, he was
presently made a captain. In 1779 it fell to him
for some time to have charge of the guard over
Major Andr6, who was then under sentence of
death, and for whom he came to have a sincere

PAEENTAGE AND YOUTH 17
regard. In 1783 Major Job Sumner was iu com
mand of the forces which guarded New York dur
ing the evacuation of the British troops, and at the
end of that year it was from Sumner's detachment
that Washington received the last military salute
of the Eevolutionary Army. Though he had never
entered her class-rooms since the outbreak of the
war, in 1785 Harvard College was proud to enroll
him in the class to which he had belonged, and to
confer the degree of Master of Arts upon "Major
Job Sumner, . . . who, during the war, be
haved with reputation as a man and as an officer."
In 1785 he was appointed by Congress "a com
missioner for settling the accounts between the Con
federation and the State of Georgia," a task which
occupied him until the time of his death in 1789,
aged thirty-five. At his funeral in New York the
regard for him as a public servant was shown by
the attendence of the Vice-President, the Secretary
of War, and the senators and representatives in Con
gress from Massachusetts.
Job Sumner was a red-blooded man. He loved
the life of a soldier. He made friends readily,
entertained freely, and was easily imposed upon,
his generosity of mind and of purse leading to his be
ing seriously embarrassed through imprudent loans
to friends. That he touched life at many points is
indicated by the variety of his reading. In those
days of few books, his collection included an eight-
volume edition of Shakespeare, "Don Quixote,"
"Junius," "The Wealth of Nations," "Anecdotes

18 CHAELES SUMNEE
of Dr. Johnson," a "History of England," and
Lord Chesterfield's " Letters to his Son." The last
is significant, for in this brave, adventurous and
capable man nothing is more admirable than the
anxious solicitude and shrewd sense which appear
in the Chesterfieldian letters written to the teachers
to whom he had entrusted his son's education.
From the academy at Andover this son, Oharles
Pinckney Sumner, entered Harvard College and
was duly gra,duated in 1796. A number of efi'u-
sions, for the most part in stiff and stilted verse,
are the principal memorials of his student days.
They deal with lofty themes and show genuine
fineness of feeling. Four lines from "The Com
pass" are significant, for they hold up the very
ideals, peace and freedom and equal rights, to which
his famous son's life was to be devoted :
"More true inspir'd, we antedate the time
When futile war shall cease thro' every clime ;
No sanction'd slavery Afric's sous degrade,
Bnt equal rights shall equal earth pervade.''
Upon leaving college, the young man seemed to
have no decided bent ; he taught school for a few
years, then studied law, and in the year 1799 took
a desk in the office of Josiah Quincy. Shrewd Job
Sumner had urged that at the academy his son
should learn "eloquence and manners, as well
as wisdom and the languages," adding, "I lay
great stress on the first two accomplishments, be
cause I think them very essential, and by far the

PAEENTAGE AND YOUTH 19
most difficult for Charles to attain." Conscien
tious in all things, he did attain eloquence and
manners, but both were heavy and came only with
obvious effort. Like John Quincy Adams and
many other young men, he broke away from the
Federalist party ; his speeches and letters show
that the feeling which chiefly dominated his poli
tics at this period was opposition to the aristo
cratic and sectionalizing tendencies of the Federal
ists, who seeraed to him "disposed to erect New
England into a separate government." In later
life, perhaps because of his official position, he
ceased to take much interest in party politics.
In the spring of 1810 Mr. Sumner was married to
Eelief Jacob, in the modest frame house which he
had hired at the southeast corner of what are now
Eevere and Irving Streets, in Boston. Here all but
the youngest of their nine children were born.
Years later they removed to No. 20 Hancock
Street, which remained the home of the family
until 1867.
Mr. Sumner's legal practice was not successful.
He was deeply learned in the law, but his pains
taking study and note- taking did not fit him for
effective court or office practice. As a result, he
came to be mainly a collector of small bills. By
1819 his children numbered five ; his income was
making no gain, and the problem of educating his
sons and daughters became a pressing one. With
a hope of bettering his finances, he dropped his
practice to become a deputy sheriff, — an office

20 CHAELES SUMNEE
which, however, then yielded less than one thousand
dollars a year. The turn in the tide of his affairs
came in 1825 when Governor Lincoln appointed
him Sheriff of Suffolk County, a position which he
coutinued to hold by appointment of successive gov
ernors until a few days before his death in 1839.
He had nothing of Job Sumner's ease and cordial
friendliness with strangers, and neither courted nor
won popularity ; but men upon the bench bore wit
ness to his fidelity and efficiency, and the governors
kept him in office because of his sterling merit, not
withstanding some popular opposition.
For his services as sheriff, including the custody
ofthe county jail, he received from $2,000 to $3,000
a year, which enabled the family to live far more
liberally and even to make some accumulation. He
took his new duties, like everything else, most
seriously ; he delved into the remote history of
the development of the office both in England and
America, and showed true Sumner tenacity in
maintaining with dignity his own opinion as to the
nature and scope of the sheriff's powers in opposi
tion to the view taken by the Supreme Court.
He renounced his early connection with the
Masons, and took an active part in the anti-Ma
sonic movement. The temperance question aroused
his interest, and he lectured upon it, denouncing the
licensing of liquor-selling as immoral. He was an
early and urgent advocate of public school improve
ment. But the cause which appealed to him most
strongly was the anti-slavery movement. He did

PAEENTAGE AND YOUTH 21
not publicly ally himself with the Abolitionists, but
he was outspoken in his condemnation of slavery,
and unusually far-sighted as to its consequences. A
neighbor recalled his remarking as early as 1820,
" Our children's heads will some day be broken on
a cannon-ball on this question." In private and in
official intercourse he treated negroes with studied
courtesy and kindness. Charles Sumner's extreme
views of human equality came naturally to the son
of a man who condemned social aversion to the
negro and the exclusion of negro children from the
public schools; who said that he should be "en
tirely willing to sit on the bench with a negro judge " ;
and who put himself on record against the law pro
hibiting the intermarriage of blacks and whites.
With Sheriff Sumner religion was less a matter of
creed than of honorable living. In his early years
he attended Trinity (Protestant Episcopal) Church,
but after 1825 the family occupied a pew in King's
Chapel (Unitarian). He had no sympathy with
sectarianism, and condemned in word and practice
the fanatical antagonism of his day against Eoman
Catholics. The dominant note in his character was
an almost morbid conscientiousness. In his home,
not less than in his official duties, he was formal
aud punctilious ; his children's manners and educa
tion received his anxious care. He aroused in them
his own love of history and of varied knowledge.
But, especially in his later years, life took on a
gloomy tone. He gained no new friends and " his
rigid and cheerless nature was not one which makes

22 CHABLES SUMNEE
a happy home." The love which he received from
his children had more of dutifulness than of warmth.
Upon the maternal side, the first of Charles Sum
ner's American ancestors was Nicholas Jacob, of
Hingham, England, who established himself in
Hingham, Massachusetts, in 1633. From him de
scended a liue of thrifty farmers, the fourth of whom
was David Jacob, Sr., a man of broad acres, who
was often called to office, and who served during the
Eevolution on the Committee of Public Safety. His
granddaughter, Eelief Jacob, at the time when
Charles Pinckney Sumner married her, had for
some years been supporting herself as a seamstress,
and from this early experience she brought to her
new home a talent for shrewd household manage
ment, much needed where the income was so small
and the family rapidly growing. Mrs. Sumner was
a most devoted mother. It fell to her lot to care for
three of her daughters through long and fatal ill
nesses ; of her nine children but two, Charles and
his youngest sister, survived her. Yet through her
long and arduous life she kept her poise as a woman
of strength and cheer, the family's unfailing source
of help and encouragement.
Charles Sumner and a twin sister were born Jan
uary 6, 1811, the eldest of Sheriff Sumner's nine
children. The Boston of his boyhood days he re
called in after years as a "neat, trim, well-ordered
place " of about 40,000 inhabitants. It was a pros
perous and conservative community, with Faneuil
HaU still the scene of its town-meeting government.

PAEENTAGE AND YOUTH 23
Its population was homogeneous as compared with
that of to-day, and wide social contrasts were un
known. As a man of education and a holder of re
sponsible office, Charles Pinckney Sumner asso
ciated with cultivated people, but his narrow means
and possibly his politics constituted a barrier to the
family's moving among those of most wealth and in
fluence. The first steps in the boy's education were taken
in a private infant school taught by his mother's
sister in a room of the Sumner house. It was at first
the father's intention to have him taught only in
English branches, that he might the sooner be fitted
to eke out the family's slender income. But when
he found that with chance pennies the boy had
bought from a classmate some elementary Latin
books and had been studying them to good purpose,
he relented, and in August, 1821, Charles was en
tered for a five-year course at the Boston Latin
School. Among his schoolmates here were not a
few with whom he was to be closely associated in
later life : Eobert C. Winthrop, George S. Hillard,
James Freeman Clarke, Samuel F. Smith, and Wen
dell Phillips. They remembered him as an over
grown and a rather awkward boy, — "Gawky"
Sumner, the fellows dubbed him. He was pure of
mind and speech, thoughtful and retiring, fond
of his fellows, and well liked by them. He cared
little for most sports, but was enthusiastic over
swimming. He was always a bookworm, and, al
though his standing in his class was rather low, he

24 CHAELES SUMNEE
frequently surprised the boys with stray bits of in
formation which he had come upon in his browsing.
Perhaps at the instigation of his father, who was an
inveterate filler of note-books, at fourteen years of
age he compiled a summary of English history from
Caesar's invasion to 1801, in nearly ninety manuscript
pages. It is a relief tonote that he was still enough
of a boy to embellish it with the title : "A Chro
nological Compendium of English History, by
Charles Sumner. Copyright secured. Boston,
1825." A year later he was reading Gibbon, and
copying passages which struck his liking. Mean
time, although his scholarship did not show any ex
ceptional promise, he won several prizes for transla
tions and for English composition. As one of the
six boys to receive Franklin medals at the end of his
course, it was his privilege to attend the banquet
that afternoon in Faneuil Hall, at which most of the
dignitaries of the new city were present, and to
listen to an address by President John Quincy
Adams. Three weeks earlier he had crowded his
way into that famous hall to hear a part of Webster's
oration on Adams and Jefferson. The associations
of that historic forum and of those famous statesman -
orators cannot have failed to make a deep impres
sion upon a boy of his latent powers.
As the end of his Latin School course drew near,
his father was much perplexed over the problem of
his further education, particularly as there were now
seven other children whose future must be con
sidered. Accordingly he sent a long letter of iu-

PAEENTAGE AND YOUTH 25
quiry, in the boy's writing, to the head of the
"American Literary, Scientific, and Military Acad
emy" at Middletown, Conn. He referred to his
eight children, "to all of whom I wish to givea
useful but not what is commonly called a learned
education. My means enable me only to think of
usefulness." He added: "But, sir, if I send him
at all, it must be on a footing of those who seek
employment," and he made careful inquiries as to
the nature of the employment there available ; —
whether it would be disagreeable to the boy's feel
ings, or of such a menial nature that it would
"injure him in the estimation of those lads who are
now his associates, among whom he is destined to
earn his living, aud, I hope, sustain a respectable
rank." Three weeks after the sending of this letter,
however, a new face was put upon the situation by the
appointment of Charles Pinckney Sumner to the po
sition of Sheriff of Suffolk County. This opportune
appointment led him to look upon Governor Lincoln
as his "greatest earthly benefactor" for the reason
that without it he would " not probably have sent a
son to college." He now made application to the
Secretary of War for a West Point cadetship for his
son, giving Daniel Webster and Joseph Story as his
own references. In this letter he says of the boy :
"He is exceedingly well acquainted with history
and geography, both ancient and modern. He
knows the scenes of many ofthe distinguished battles
of ancient and modern times, and the characters of
the heroes who figured in them. He has a strong

26 CHAELES SUMNEE
sense of patriotic pride, and a devotion to the wel
fare and glory of his country. He is now at the
Latin School in Boston, and in August next will be
qualified to enter the University at Cambridge.
He prefers the Academy at West Point." Years
later Mr. Sumner again declared that it had been
Charles's wish to enter West Point, " but I perceived
it to be a hopeless undertaking to procure his ad
mission." This youthful aspiration for the life of
the soldier is the more interesting in one who in his
maturer years became a most passionate apostle of
universal peace. With the betterment in the family
finances, Sheriff Sumner seems to have given up his
former belief that for Charles "the life of a scholar
would be too sedentary and inactive." In Septem
ber, 1826, Charles Sumner was enrolled as a freshman
in Harvard College, with which thereafter to the
day of his death he was so intimately associated that
his schoolboy longings for West Point seem almost
incredible. He was now fifteen years of age, one ofthe youngest
in his class. His rapid growth had made him some
what ungainly in bearing ; he was diffident, yet by
no means lacking in dignity. Excellently trained
in the Latin School, he soon distinguished himself
particularly in translations from the classics. In
history, literature and forensics he excelled, showing
great earnestness and self-possession in debate. But
for mathematics and kindred subjects he had not
the slightest aptitude. Tt is recalled that in one
recitation he flunked dismally, saying : "You know

PAEENTAGE AND YOUTH 27
I don't pretend to know anything about mathemat
ics ! " " Sumner ! Mathematics ! mathematics ! ' '
cried the instructor. " Don't you know the differ
ence ? This is not mathematics ! This is physics ! ' '
Disgusted by his failures, he soon began to slight
the irksome subjects, devoting himself with zest to
miscellaneous literature. This prevented his attain
ing high rank — he was barely above the average of
his class — but none of its members was more widely
read, and his phenomenal memory made the harvest
of this reading always available. One somewhat
unfortunate result was that from this time on his
conversation, letters and addresses became over
weighted with quotations, particularly from the
classics. In the junior and senior exhibitions he
had inconspicuous parts ; in the former, a Greek
dialogue, he extolled the profession of the orator ; in
the latter, he gave a somewhat discriminating and
favorable characterization of Napoleon. In his
senior year Sumner won a prize of thirty dollars by
an essay of considerable merit ; its chief defect was
a lack of condensation, for, as one of his classmates
said, Sumner was always "too full of matter."
With this prize money he bought books,— Burton's
"Anatomy of Melancholy," Byron's Poems, "Pil
grim's Progress," Hazlitt's " Select British Poets"
and Harvey's "Shakespeare." '
• These last two were constantly upon his desk in later years.
At his death, the Shakespeare was found open at the page where
he had marked the lines :
" Would I were dead ; if God's good will were so :
For what is in this world, but grief and woe ? "

28 CHAELES SUMNEE
Half the members of Sumner's class were assigned
parts upon the commencement stage. But for his
father's urging, Sumner would have declined to ac
cept his part, a discussion of ' ' The Eeligious Notions
of the North American Indians."
As a college student Sumner was on good terms
with the faculty as well as with fellow students.
On only one subject is there record of any friction.
Sumner was always tenacious of his own opinion,
and then, as in later life, he liked individuality in
his own attire. He affected a "cloak of blue camlet
lined with red," and a buff-colored waistcoat. Now
among the rules of the college as to student's dress
was the requirement that the waistcoat be of " black-
mixed, or black ; or, when of cotton or linen fabric,
of white." Accordingly Sumner was several times
summoned before the "Parietal Board" and once
received formal "admonition for illegal dress."
But he persistently maintained that his waistcoat
was near enough " white " to comply with the rule,
and after repeated efforts to swerve him, the board
finally dropped the matter.
In later years his Harvard friends recalled him as
a fellow "of buoyant spirits and refreshing social
ity, sensitive and considerate, and always ready to
take people at their best." He was an enthusiastic
member of the Hasty Pudding Club, and retained a
friendly interest in it even after he became senator.
During his senior year, he and eight of his intimates
in the class formed a secret society called "The
Nine." Its meetings were held at the rooms of the

PAEENTAGE AND YOUTH 29
members, who in turn presented essays and other
literary exercises for mutual criticism.
At the end of his junior year, with four of his
classmates he set out upon a tramping trip to Lake
Champlain. They left Cambridge in fine fettle one
afternoon in the middle of July. At Amherst they
found the college still in session ; they attended
evening prayers and at five o'clock the next morn
ing the college bell again called them to chapel.
Striking to the north, they visited Bennington, for,
as Sumner phrased it, " We came to visit a spot hal
lowed in American history, — and to tread that field,
sacred to liberty, where the cause of the Colonies
first began to brighten." Upon the ground they
studied the positions of the American and British
forces. The pilgrims then passed on to Whitehall,
Ticonderoga and Saratoga. At West Point Sumner
presented to the superintendent a letter from his
father, introducing this youth who a few years be
fore had preferred the Military Academy to Harvard
College. His point of view had already changed,
for while he was making a pilgrimage of famous
battle-fields, and here marveled at the perfection of
the cadets' drill, he acknowledged that his enthusi
asm was now " for the mild arts of peace."
This episode in Sumner's student days is of no
slight significance as an earnest of his future. He
entered upon the trip with a zest which did not fiag
to the end ; to the various historic scenes he brought
a thorough knowledge of the events with which they
were associated and a kindling imagination that

30 CHAELES SUMNEE
thrilled him with patriotic fervor. One and another
of his companions dropped away ; he alone clung to
the plan as originally made, and by himself ascended
Mt. Defiance and hunted out the scenes of Burgoyne's
retreat and surrender. He was everywhere a keen
observer ; industrial methods and opportunities, par
ticularly the advantages of the great canals, im
pressed him. He was in fine physical |,vigor : the
heat of summer, the chances and changes of farm
house hospitality had no terrors for him. In a
single day he tramped alone thirty-seven miles.
This tour was a prelude and a preparation for those
extended and broadening European travels of a few
years later which were to contribute most essentially,
though unexpectedly, to his equipment for the noble
public service that lay before him.

CHAPTEE n
choice of a profession
At the age of nineteen Charles Sumner was grad
uated from Harvard. He had been a diligent
student and his mind was well stored ; he had a high
sense of duty and an ambition for service, yet he felt
no distinct leading toward any particular profession.
Since "chill penury " did not force him at once to
become a bread-winner, he remained at home aud
devoted himself to study, while he wrestled with the
problem of choosing a vocation. During this year
of self- analysis he took life seriously : he laid out for
himself an exacting schedule of work, and held to it,
rising soon after five and rarely retiring before mid
night. Both society and needed exercise were neg
lected. His home was a discouraging environment
for scholarly work, for he had no other study than
the common sitting-room of the whole family, with
its nine children. Nevertheless, he read diligently i,<
samples of his self -prescribed regimen were Tacitfis,
Juvenal and Persius, Shakespeare, Milton, Hume's
" Essays" ; and in history, Hallam, Eobertson and
Eoscoe. What greatly impressed his classmates
was the grim resolution with which he now set about
conquering his college bMe noire, mathematics, in
the conviction that his mental discipline had suffered
from his neglect of that line of study. Four hours

32 CHAELES SUMNEE
of each forenoon he devoted to this rigorous task.
He found that he "really got geometry with some
pleasure," but confessed that after much "digging
among the roots of algebra, those roots, when found,
are but bitter " ; he stuck to them for four months,
however, until he had retrieved his college delin
quencies. As a part of his self-culture Sumner seized every
opportunity to hear great orators. He went to
Salem to listen to Webster's famous appeal in the
White murder trial, and heard several of the states
man' s most celebrated speeches. The first meeting
of these two, whose careers were to be so closely
linked, was significant. "The Boston Society for
the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge ' ' offered a prize
for the best essay, written by a minor, on commerce.
On the evening appointed for the announcement of
the result, before a great audience, Daniel Webster,
the president of the society, opened the envelope
which had accompanied the successful essay, and
requested the winner, "Charles Sumner," to come
forward. As the slender boy of twenty with intelli
gent face and shock of curling brown hair stepped
upon the platform, America's most distinguished
statesman shook his hand cordially, called him his
"young friend," and added, with other kindly
words, that " the public held a pledge of this young
man." But Sumner found it no easy task to determine
how he should set about redeeming that pledge.
He was bitterly unhappy at home, for he was mor-

CHOICE OF A PEOFESSION 33
bidly sensitive at being still dependent upon his
father. To a classmate he wrote : "I am grateful
for the encouraging word you give me. I am rather
despondent, aud I meet from none of my family those
vivifying expressions which a young man always
heartily accepts. My father says nought by way of
encouragement. He seems determined to let me
shape my own course, so that if I am wise, I shall
be wise for myself ; and if I am foolish, I alone shall
bear it." Chance threw in his way an opportunity
to try his hand at teaching ; he filled a temporary
vacancy in a private school where one of his friends
was employed. Three weeks sufficed to convince
him that he had "a natural aversion to keeping
tehool." "And oh! — quorum magna -pars fui — the
harassing, throat-cutting, mind-dissolving duties :
founding knowledge into heads which have no ap-
'petency for it, and enduring the arguing of urchin
boys, and all those other ills to which schoolmaster
•lesh is heir !"
* For a time he plunged into current politics and
ilbecame quite a propagandist of the anti-Masonic
Movement, "pricked on by the wrongs done his
fether by the Masons " ; but in later years he ac-
ifenowledged that this movement had assumed undue
lilirominence in his inexperienced eyes. Gradually
me "brought his resolution to a focus" : his life-work
tiould be in the law. Yet the decision was made
Diiifithout conviction or enthusiasm. To a friend
#lready engaged in legal studies, he had recently
urritten : " I fear that Blackstone and his train will

34 CHAELES SUMNEE
usurp your mind too much, to the exclusion of all
cultivation of polite letters. ... I look upon
the mere lawyer, a reader of cases and cases alone,
as one of the veriest wretches in the world. Dry
items and facts, argumentative reports, and details
of pleadings must incrust the mind with somewhat
of their own rust.''
But a few weeks wrought a startling transforma
tion. Por a year Sumner had been wrestling with
the problem of his future ; when once the decision
was made that he should study law, hesitation and
morbid introspection were at an end. Where his
studies should be pursued was not a matter of ques
tion. The whole bent of his mind was toward a
systematic study of principles : not the lawyer's
office, but the university was the congenial field for
his labor, and to the Harvard Law School he turned,
drawn both by his love for his alma mater and by
his devotion to Judge Story, his father's warm
friend from the days when they were students
together at college.
Only forty pupils were then in attendance upon
the newly established law school. In so small a
group the men were brought into close associa
tion, and here — to cite a single illustration — began
Sumner's intimacy with Wendell Phillips. But the
chief advantage in the smallness of the numbers lay
in the educational opportunities which it afforded.
Class exercises were not formal lectures, but rather
conferences to which both the teacher and his little
circle of pupils contributed. During these years

CHOICE OF A PEOFESSION 35
there were but two professorships, and these were
held during most of Sumner's course by Joseph
Story and Simon Greenleaf. With both of these
eminent jurists Sumner was soon upon terms of the
closest intimacy, and it would be difficult to over
estimate the influence of these friendships. Judge
Story came to love him as a son, receiving him in
his home as a member of the family. This affection
was fully reciprocated. His teacher's beautiful
character, his immense learning, his eloquence, his
well-earned fame as judge and publicist, all appealed
to the ardent disciple and kindled in him intense
enthusiasm. The ideal, which through anxious
months had been eluding his quest, now stood re
vealed in the Jurist, and Sumner eagerly "followed
after, if that he might apprehend."
Indeed, to his friends it soon became a matter of
anxiety lest he be consumed by his own zeal. At
twenty he was described as a "great, tall, lank
creature, quite heedless of the form and fashion of
his garb." Though now six feet and two inches in
height, he weighed but 120 pounds ; his complexion
was not healthy, his eyes were inflamed by much
study, and he developed a cough which caused
groundless apprehensions, for he was endowed
with a splendid constitution. The passionate fervor
of the devotee he brought to the pursuit of his
"noble profession," sacrificing alike recreation and
social engagements. ' ' I wish no acquaintances,
for they eat up time like locusts." He declared that
the lawyer if he were to be anything but a mere

36 CHAELES SUMNEE
pettifogger, must know law, history, philosophy,
and human nature. This is his schedule of work ;
" Six hours, — namely, the forenoon wholly and solely
to law ; afternoon to classics ; evening to history,
subjects collateral and assistant to law, etc." Two
o'clock was his regular hour for retiring, and he
was often up with the sun. Such unremitting labor
early began to yield fruit. Judge Story said;
"He has a wonderful memory, he keeps all his
knowledge in order and can put his hand on it in a
moment. This is a great gift." Yet some of his
friends questioned whether in keeping his mind
constantly on the stretch in the effort of acquiring
knowledge he were not impairing its power for
higher, creative effort.
He was made librarian, a task which he found
thoroughly congenial. He catalogued the collection,
and no one approached him in knowledge of its
treasures. In later years he was remembered as a
" slender, bright-eyed youth, with what seems to me
an adoring reverence for the hallowed spot, so that his
voice was subdued and his touch rested tenderly on
the dear books." Yet aside from his regular tasks,
Sumner found time to get some valuable experience
in writing. He won another Bowdoin prize by a
rather diffuse and hastily written paper. Soon, how
ever, " his pen grew stiffer " as a result of a series
of articles which he contributed to the American
Jurist. But as yet his writing showed little of the
vigor and vividness which were to be called fortli
by the great issues of later years.

CHOICE OP A PEOFESSION 37
William Wetmore Story, the celebrated sculptor,
who knew and loved Sumner as an elder brother,
has left the best picture of the young law student.
He describes him as an eager and indefatigable
worker, who had not limited his studies to the law,
but had ranged with keen interest over the whole
field of literature. "He was at this time totally
without vanity, and desirous to acquire knowledge
and information on every subject." "Of all the
men I ever knew at his age, he was the least sus
ceptible to the charms of women. He would desert
the most blooming beauty to talk to the plainest of
men. This was a constant source of amusement to
us, and we used to lay wagers with pretty girls that
with all their art they could not keep him at their
side a quarter of an hour," and the girls always lost
their wagers. "He was an interesting talker, but
had no lightness of hand. He was kindly of nature,
interested in everything. He was at this time
almost impervious to a joke. He had no humor
himself, and little sense of it in others, and his jests,
when he tried to make one, were rather cumbrous.
But in 'plain sailing' no one could be better or
more agreeable."
At the conclusion of his courses in the law school,
early in January, 1834, Sumner, as a student, en
tered the office of Benjamin Eand, a lawyer of
eminence, in whose conversation and choice legal
library the young man found his chief stimulus.
He continued making frequent contributions to the
American Jurist.

38 CHAELES SUMNEE
But travel was ever one of the most educative
factors in Sumner's development, and he could not
bring himself to settle down to the drudgery of a
law office before taking a trip to Washington, his
main object being to attend sessions of the Supreme
Court, where his ideal and mentor, Judge Story,
was sitting. To the young man of twenty -three it
was a most memorable experience. Leaving Boston
at half-past three o'clock on a February morning,
1834, by hard labor over the worst of roads, in cold
so intense that but for his sister's "tippet" he de
clared he should have frozen, he reached Hartford
at three o'clock the following morning. Before
noon he was off again, and in nine hours the forty-
mile ride to New Haven was accomplished. His
attending morning prayers at Yale College almost
made him lose the seven o'clock boat for New York.
From here to Philadelphia the trip was by boat ex
cept for the thirty-seven miles from Amboy to
Bordentown, where Sumner experienced his first
railway ride. To his fourteen-year-old sister he
wrote : " There is something partaking of the sub
lime in the sense that you are going at the rate of
fifteen miles an hour, drawn by an invisible agent,
the contrivance of man, who has sought out many
inventions." In New York he received a cordial welcome from
Chancellor Kent, to whom he brought a letter of
introduction from Professor Greenleaf. He told
Sumner that he "wanted to go to Washington, but
if he went should be obliged to see much company,

CHOICE OP A PEOFESSION 39
call upon Jackson, and dine with him perhaps, all
of which he could not consent to do." He believed
that "Jackson would ruin us." (A few weeks
later Sumner was referring to Jackson as "the old
tyrant.") He described Kent's conversation as
' ' lively and instructive, but grossly ungrammatical.
It is a wonder which I cannot solve, that he is so
correct a writer, and so incorrect a converser."
At Philadelphia he formed a friendship, lasting
and helpful, with Eichard Peters, the reporter of
decisions of the Supreme Court. In Washington
Judge Story's influence opened to him the rarest of
opportunities. All but one of the justices of the
Supreme Court were living in the same house and
taking their meals at the same table, and here it
was young Sumner's privilege to be admitted to
their goodly fellowship. Chief-Justice Marshall
seemed to him "a model of simplicity ; naturally
taciturn, yet ready to laugh ; to joke and to be
joked with." Sumner spent a month in Washing
ton. His chief interest was in the Supreme Court,
where one of the most important cases was being
tried, with Francis Scott Key and Daniel Webster
as opponents, both of whom seemed to the youthful
critic scandalously remiss in their preparation.
Webster gave him a card entitling him to admission
to the floor of the Senate, and here he heard each
of the great triumvirate. Clay's eloquence he
thought "splendid and thrilling." " His language,
without being choice, is strong ; but it is his manner
. . . which makes him so powerful." Calhoun

40 CHAELES SUMNEE
" is no orator, very rugged in his language, unstudied
in style, marching directly to the main points of his
subject without stopping for parley or introduc
tion." Sumner found his father's benefactor. Gov
ernor Lincoln, who was just beginning a first term
in Congress, homesick and much discouraged by the
size of the Eepresentatives' Hall, where he could
neither hear nor be heard. Sumner wrote long ac
counts of his experiences both to Professor Green
leaf and to his father, to whom he had to apply
repeatedly for funds to meet his expenses of about
ten dollars a week. These letters were signed:
"Affectionately, your prodigal, Chas."
Despite the wealth of opportunities which Wash
ington offered to an impressionable young man, it
made little appeal to Sumner. His first feeling was
one of disappointment. "Here I am in the great
city, or rather the city of great design, of spacious
and far-reaching streets, without houses to adorn
them or business to keep them lively, with a Capitol
that would look proud amidst European palaces,
and with whole lines of poor, stunted brick houses,
with stores beneath and boarding above. There is
nothing natural in the growth of the city. It only
grows under the. hotbed culture of Congress."
Nor was the political and social atmosphere more
congenial to him : " Notwithstanding the attraction
afforded by the Senate, and the newspaper fame
which I see the politicians there acquire, I feel no
envy therefor, and no disposition to enter the un
weeded garden in which they are laboring, even if

CHOICE OF A PEOFESSION 41
its gates were open to me ; in plain language, I see
no political condition that I should be willing to de
sire, even if I thought it within my reach, — which,
indeed, I do not think of the humblest." On the
eve of leaving Washington, he wrote to his father :
" I shall probably never come here again. I have
little or no desire ever to come again in any capacity.
Nothing that I have seen of politics has made me
look upon them with any feeling other than loath
ing. The more I see of them, the more I love law,
which, I feel, will give me an honorable liveli
hood." Not long after Sumner's return from this orient
ing journey, Judge Story urged him to accept an
instructorship in the Harvard Law School. Both
of his old professors had looked forward to this as
sociation, for success in which Sumner seemed well
fitted both by nature and by training. But he was
now eager to get into the active practice of his pro
fession, and declined the offer. In November, 1834,
he entered into a partnership with George S. Hil
lard, whom he had known years before in the Latin
School. The young lawyers rented rooms on the
second floor at No. 4 Court Street, at the corner of
Washington Street, and in that building Sumner
retained an office as long as he continued to prac
tice law. Among his neighbors here were men of
note : Theophilus Parsons, Eufus Choate, John A.
Andrew and Horace Mann. Professor Greenleaf
made the new office his headquarters in town ;
Judge Story often called upon his old pupils, and

42 CHAELES SUMNEE
soon their rooms came to be a much frequented
rendezvous for men of legal and literary tastes.
Sumner's legal studies had been most painstaking
and he had a large circle of influential friends. In
these early years at the bar he met with moderate
success ; but it was far below what his friends had
expected, and he acknowledged his own disappoint
ment. Some of the reasons were not far to seek.
He had little liking for the business routine of the
lawyer's office. His interest was in legal principles
rather than in practice ; his mind suited better the
vocation of the teacher or judge than ofthe attorney.
In court he was apt to display ponderous learning
rather than dexterous marshaling of testimony. An
other cause which tended to impair his success was
the irregularity of his office hours. For, early in
1835, he had begun to lecture in the law school, in
the absence of Judge Story, and for the next two
years he continued this work, which often kept him
away from his office every other day for months.
This teaching proved far more congenial than that
of his earlier days. His pupils remembered him as
assuming no professional airs, but having a warm
sympathy and fellowship with the boys. " He was
very good-tempered and fond of youngsters,— at all
events as listeners." William Wetmore Story was
his favorite pupil, an intimacy which gave great
satisfaction to Judge Story. He assisted both Story
and Greenleaf in preparing some of their legal texts
for the press. For three years he contributed fre
quently to the American Jurist ; in the spring of 1836

CHOICE OF A PEOFESSION 43
its editors were announced as Hillard, Sumner and
Cushing, the author of works on parliamentary law,
a young man with whom Sumner had hired a lodg- ,
ing-room in the same building with his offlce. This
editorial work was of good quality, but it took much
time and brought little revenue. Sumner's articles
usually dealt with legal writers and books rather
than with the law itself, thus further evidencing a
bent of mind little suited to active legal duties.
Another important task which Sumner undertook
was the revising and completing of Dunlap's "Ad
miralty Practice." His careful study of this sub
ject was of great service in his public life. In later
years Sumner came to think that he had allowed
himself to undertake altogether too much literary
drudgery in these early days of his law practice.
The surprising thing is that while his friends and
associates were winning distinction as public speak
ers, and accepting public office, he showed no liking
or special aptitude for the platform and found no
attraction whatever in politics.
But the thing of most significance at this period
of Sumner's life was not his slow rise in his profes
sion, but his widening friendship among men of
force and distinction. In Washington he had first
made the acquaintance of Francis Lieber, the pub
licist, with whom he was to enjoy many years of
close and helpful intimacy. At this period, also,
he came into friendly intercourse with the Eev. Dr.
William Ellery Channing, by whom his ideals and
view of life were profoundly affected. His editorial

44 CHAELES SUMNEE
work brought him in touch with eminent jurists, at
home and abroad. Most stimulating and helpful of
all, however, was the warm friendship which was
formed among five young men of ages ranging from
twenty-six to thirty, — Cornelius C. Felton, Henry
E. Cleveland, Henry W. Longfellow, George S.
Hillard, and Charles Sumner. They came together
informally several times a month, to talk over com
mon interests and aspirations. Two of the number
had already visited Europe, and the others were
filled with a keen Wanderlust. They were all book-
lovers, and had made considerable advances in var
ious lines of literary effort. Good cheer abounded
at their meetings, and in its warmth they talked
over current books and criticized one another's liter
ary ventures with the utmost frankness and good
will. The gatherings of "The Five of Clubs," as
they called themselves, cohtiuued for a number of
years.

CHAPTEE III
EUROPEAN TRAVEL
For years one of Sumner's keenest desires had
been to know Europe, and in 1837 this desire, un
der the influence of Cleveland and Longfellow, be
came a fixed resolve. The decision to break away
from the law office for an indefinite sojourn abroad
was oue not lightly to be made. The counsels of
prudence and of most of his friends were distinctly
against it. Sumner was now twenty-six years of
age. He had disappointed his friends as well as
himself by his failure to gain an assured start in his
profession, and the plainest dictate of common sense
seemed to be that the building up of his practice
should receive his unremitting attention. Moreover,
he had not been able to save more than a third of
what his contemplated tour would cost, and must
therefore borrow three or four thousand dollars, a
sum likely to mortgage his earnings for several
years. Not only did his friends think his plan un
wise because of its expense and its interruption of
his legal career, but they feared that its effect would
be to dissipate his energies, wean him from his pro
fession, and make him discontented with the plod
ding life that lay before him. Sumner was sensitive
to this disapproval, and was not a little disheartened

46 CHAELES SUMNEE
by President' Quincy' s blunt words, "All that Eu
rope will do for him will be to spoil him, sending
him home with a moustache and a cane."
In the face of these discouragements, it requfred
not a little resolution on Sumner's part to hold to
his purpose. But it was no holiday trip for amuse
ment or recreation that he was planning. "My
journey," he wrote to a friend, "will not be pecul
iarly legal. I shall aim to see society in all its forms
which are accessible to me ; to see men of all char
acters ; to observe institutions and laws ; to go cir
cuits and attend terms and parliaments ; and then
come home and be happy." And so, arranging to
borrow from Judge Story and two other friends the
funds needed, on the 8th of December, 1837, he
embarked for travel and sojourn in Europe which
were to last nearly two and a half years. The voy
age was made in the sailing-ship Albany, for as
yet no steamship crossed the Atlantic in passenger
service.' Humboldt used to say: "You never see in a
country what you do not take with you." Earely
has a young man gone from America to Europe so
tingling with anticipation, so susceptible to all that
is best in the society, art and culture of the Old
'To the account of this journey and to Sumner's letters
from abroad, his friend and the authorized compiler of his
memoirs, E. L. Pierce, gives a sixth of the total space devoted
to his life. This is certainly a disproportionate allotment ; yet
it is true that this European experience constituted a turning-
point in his life. It forraed his mind and his associations, and
proved a most essential part of his preparation for his as yet un
suspected life-work.

EUEOPEAN TEA VEL 47
World. From his first sight of Havre his letters
are full of the zest of novelty. He put in a day of
strenuous sightseeing at Eouen, fascinated by the
quaint architecture and the historical associations
of its cathedral and other buildings, and declared
that he could spend months in that city and still
find interest. Yet iu the uext breath this eager
student of "society in all its forms" says that he
must leave Eouen after a stay of only thirty-six
hours, for "to-morrow night is the last on which
the hells of Paris are to be open, they beiug abol
ished after that time by law ; and I wish, if possi
ble, to see them, besides being in Paris on New
Year's Day." Arrived in Paris on the evening of
Sunday, December 31st, his first object of search
was the most famous of these gaming-houses. He
has left a vivid account of this "last night of Fras
cati, and my first night in Paris," discoursing
gravely on the excitements of gambling, and ac
knowledging that he "felt the temptation, though
he restrained his hand."
He remained in Paris till the end of May, two
months longer than he had intended. At first he
took lodgings in the Latin Quarter and renounced
everything that could interfere with his getting com
mand of French. He employed two teachers, and
went for long walks with his landlady's small boy,
"taking every opportunity to speak the language,
even if it be but a word." He became a subscriber
at Galignani's reading-room, where he read ten
newspapers a day. Such persistent study soon be-

48 CHAELES SUMNEE
gan to yield good returns : within four weeks he
was following lectures at the Sorbonne ; a few weeks
later he began to go into society and within three
months he served as interpreter for an American
before a magistrate.
His days were crowded full. All was fish that
came to his net. At the Sorbonne and the College
de France he passed from room to room, sampling
the lectures and testing his knowledge of French.
His programme of a single morning will illustrate
the variety of his intellectual diet : First, at the
Sorbonne, a lecture on the differential and integral
calculus, — which must have been particularly edi
fying, in view of Sumner's mathematical aptitudes;
next, a lecture on Servitudes in the ]&cole de Droit ;
next, at the Sorbonne, a part of a lecture "on some
French author, — I could not catch the name " ; next,
at the ;^co]e de Droit, a lecture on the Institutes ;
next, a visit to the Mus^e d' Artillerie. At the end
of three months he had heard almost all the lecturers
of eminence. He had also made a thorough study
of the courts and of court procedure. The sessions
of the Chamber of Deputies and of the House of
Peers interested him greatly, and he records impres
sions of Guizot, Thiers, Lamartine, and others,
with whom he became somewhat acquainted. He
formed a high opinion of Louis Philippe, — " a great
sovereign, truly great ; mingling in business as much
as his ministers, and controlling them all. He is
more than his cabinet. Measures emanate from
him. With skill that is wonderful, he has reined

EUEOPEAN TEA VEL 49
in the revolution of July." Ten years later the
King was to reveal himself in another light.
But Sumner's purpose had been not to study
governmental or legal institutions alone ; it was
to see society in all its forms. Hence he visited not
only the ordinary objects of tourists' interest, but
also the observatory, the famous hospitals, where he
attended the clinics of the most eminent surgeons,
and the Hopital SalpMri^re, the great almshouse
where were lodged 5,000 infirm and aged women.
He delighted in the city's architectural beauties,
and was captivated by its street scenes and life. At
midnight of Mardi Gras he went to the masked ball
at the French Opera, and at daybreak drove out to
Courtille, a village beyond the walls, where the merry
making of the common people was still at its height.
In March Sumner changed his lodgings from the
Latin Quarter to the region of the boulevards. As
siduous study had loosed his tongue, and he now
began to go more into society. He presented few
of the many letters friends had plentifully provided
him. The editor, Foelix, showed him much kind
ness, and he had a friendly interview with Sis-
mondi. Into general society he went but little. It
is significant of the extent of French knowledge of
America at that time, that at the table of M. i^rard,
then perhaps the most eminent manufacturer of
musical instruments in the world, Sumner was asked
by his host, with the greatest ingenuousness, "if
one of the noblest and most respectable families in
America were not the descendants of Montezuma."

50 CHAELES SUMNEE
The young student of jurisprudence was not
favorably impressed by the learning of the French
bar : " With them now it is indeed the code and
nothing but the code, . . . and it would seem
superfluous to add that they know nothing of for
eign jurisprudence, nothing of English and Ameri
can in particular."
Amid the art treasures of the Louvre and of Ver
sailles Sumner felt " cabined, cribbed, confined
from my ignorance of the principles of art and of
its history, except in its most prominent traits:
. . . but they touched my mind, untutored as
it is, like a sweet strain of music." His artistic
appreciation was much quickened during these
months. The art of the theatre and of the opera
was highly congenial to him, and he was thrilled
by the genius of Mars and of Eachel. Before he
had been in Paris a fortnight he declared : "My
voyage has already been compensated for — seasick
ness, time, money, and all — many times over. It
was fully paid for at Eouen. All that I have seen
since is clear gain." His stay of five months in
Paris, though nearly twice as long as he had in
tended, left many things undone ; but it had ac
complished its chief object in giving him an excel
lent working knowledge of the French language;
in addition it had opened his eyes to vast ranges
of interest to which he had hitherto been almost
totally blind.
Sailing from Calais ori the last day of May,
Sumner approached London by the gate of the

EUEOPEAN TEA VEL 51
sea; for eighty miles upon the Thames he passed
through a continuous stream of vessels, the pano
rama of historic scenes gradually opening before
his eager eyes. Near Charing Cross he took lodg
ings, which he made his headquarters for the next
ten months.
The story of this sojourn in England is one of the
richest and most varied opportunity. Before he
left America, many of his friends had pressed upon
him letters of introduction. These he used most
sparingly ; he made it a rigid rule never to ask for
an introduction. But he soou found himiself over
whelmed by a mass of invitations. As a foreign
visitor, he was given the entree of four clubs, the
Garrick, Alfred, Travelers', and Athenseum. Here
he met on terms of pleasant familiarity many of the
leading men of the day. Judge Story's commenda
tion ' to John Stuart Wortley and to Mr. Justice
Vaughan, together with Sumner's intelligent en
thusiasm for everything pertaining to jurispru
dence, brought him into close association with Eng
land's most famous leaders of the bench and of the
bar, who showed him unexampled cordiality. He
was called to a seat upon the bench at Westminster
'In bis letter introducing Sumner to some of the leading
jurists of England, Judge Story spoke of him as "a young
lawyer giving promise of the most erainent distinction in his
profession, with truly extraordinary attainments, literary and
judicial, and a gentleman of the highest purity and propriety
of character." Later he was frequently heard to say : "I shall
die content, as far as my professorship is concerned, if Charles
Sumner is to succeed me." — Carl Schurz, Eulog-y of Sumner, p.
187.

52 CHAELES SUMNEE
Hall and at the Old Bailey, where he was waited
upon by the sheriff' aud invited to dine with the
judges and magistrates. His health was proposed
by the Lord Mayor, and his response was very well
received. In the middle of the summer, he left
London, and, on invitation of the judges, attended
the circuits, everywhere meeting with the warmest
welcome. He was repeatedly the guest of honor at
banquets to the bar aud court, and his words of ap
preciation and of recognition of the common heritage
of America and England met with high favor. To
Story, Greenleaf, and especially to Hillard, he sent
long letters filled with keen observations of English
legal institutions and with character sketches of the
jurists whom he met upon this pilgrimage. He was
struck forcibly by the contrast between the scanty
and shallow equipment of members of the French
bar and the broad-mindedness and profundity of his
English acquaintances ; and between the bickerings
and jealousies among French lawyers in their re
lations with one another and the " heartiness and
cordiality which pervade all the English bar. They
are truly a band of brothers, and I have been re
ceived among them as one of them." Upon his re
turn to London from the tour of the great circuits,
one of the chief objects of Sumner's European enter
prise had been accomplished : he had gained a
deeper insight into aud mastery of English legal
practice and circuit life than any other foreigner
who had ever visited England.
But these invaluable opportunities were not the

EUEOPEAN TEA VEL 63
only ones lavished upon Sumner, nor were they the
ones that were to exercise the greatest influence
upou his future. He was present at the coronation
of Queen Victoria ; he heard the young Queen's
speech at the opening of Parliament. By the in
vitation of one of the lords-in-waiting, he passed a
day and a night at Windsor Castle, and leaves some
highly unconventional glimpses of the royal house
hold, — as of Lord Byron, the poet's brother, who,
having been sent to take breakfast with the ladies
of the bedchamber and maids of honor, "came
bouncing down, saying, 'Murray, the gals say
that there is nothing bat stale eggs in the castle.' "
No one was more surprised than Sumner at the
freedom with which he was admitted into all that
was best in English society. A cordial welcome
from the lawyers was to be expected both from his
recommendations and from his own attainments in
jurisprudence. But this was a mere incident of the
warm-heartedness with which he was everywhere
received. A letter of introduction to Earl Fitz
william led to au intimate friendship and many
happy hours at Wentworth House and Milton Park.
In the high-minded Lord Morpeth, later seventh Earl
of Carlisle, he found a congenial spirit, and an inti
macy was quickly established which ended only with
death. The aged Earl of Leicester welcomed him
to the sumptuous hospitalities of Holkham House,
where Sumner admired the splendid paintings of
Titian, Eaphael, Da Vinci and Van Dyck, and for
hours pored with delight over the crabbed pages

54 CHAELES SUMNEE
which bore the mark of the great Coke's pen. Lord
Wharncliffe, Lord Durham, and Lord Holland made
him their guest. Of the many public men whom
Sumner met, none was more kind than Lord
Brougham. Sumner's letters give interesting pic
tures of the life at Brougham Hall and glimpses of
its master, — of his tenderness toward his mother,
his devotion to his invalid daughter, his brilliant
conversation, " his versatility and universal attain
ments. ' ' To Sumner it was a mystery why this man,
at the time almost inaccessible, should have shown
the young American student such marked attention
and frank cordiality ; but to a common friend Lord
Brougham said that he "had never met with any
man of Sumner's age of such extensive legal knowl
edge and natural legal intellect, and predicted that
he would prove an honor to the American bar." It
was said at the time that Sumner "made the ac
quaintance of all the principal Whig families going
north, and of the Tories on his return," and he him
self wrote to Lieber : "I have been received with a
kindness, hospitality and distinction of which I truly
felt my unworthiness. I have visited many — per
haps I may say most — of the distinguished men of
these glorious countries at their seats, aud have seen
English country life, which is the height of refined
luxury, in some of its most splendid phases."
But not less stimulating and congenial to Sumner
was his intercourse with the leaders of English
literature. Emerson's introduction led to a friend
ship with Carlyle. Laudor, entertaining him at

EUEOPEAN TEA VEL 55
breakfast, alternately pleased and startled him by
compliment and criticism upon his English. He
spent an interesting morning with Leigh Hunt, on
an introduction from Carlyle. For two delightful
days he was the guest of Sydney Smith. He took
tea with Wordsworth, and was charmed by the
simplicity, grace and sincerity of his manner and
conversation. Lord Jeffrey of the IJdinburgh Review
he met at his own hearth, and was vastly impressed
by "his talent, fertility of expression and unlimited
knowledge (almost learning). He spoke on every
subject and always better than anybody else."
Sumner dined repeatedly in company with Macau
lay, and was struck by his wide knowledge and
brilliant conversation ; but experience led him to
accept Sydney Smith's verdict that in social inter
course Macaulay was "a tremendous machine for
colloquial oppression," for he poured out the stores
of his prodigious memory "withau instructive but
dinning prodigality," — a social fault which Sumner
himself developed in his later years. He saw much
of Harriet Martineau, whose acquaintance he had
already made in America, and was greatly interested
in Mrs. Shelley. He was welcomed in the homes of
Grote, Hallam and Samuel Eogers, and formed a
lasting friendship with Mr. and Mrs. Basil Montagu.
At a dinner of the British Association for the Pro-
inotion of Science, Sumner was one of the guests,
and made an impromptu speech, full of an Ameri
can's appreciation of the mother country, which was
quite the feature of the occasion. Not the least

56 CHAELES SUMNEE
interesting of the hospitalities showered upon him
was a dinner given by Colburn the publisher, at
which were present Tom Campbell "and some six
or eight of the small fry — the minims of literature,
all guilty of print." In short, wheu Sumner left
England, he could truthfully say to Hillard : "I
now hardly call to mind a person in England that I
cared to see whom I have not met under circum
stances the most agreeable and flattering to myself."
It remains to ask. What opened wide England's
most exclusive doors to this young American scholar ?
English society was at that time suspicious of visitors
from across the ocean. Wordsworth complained
bitterly to Sumner of the officiousness and indecency
of some American pen-drivers who had invaded the
privacy of his home to make a page out of an "in
terview." Sumner was but twenty-seven, though he
was by many supposed to be at least teu years older.
He had no established reputation, had made no re
markable advance in his profession, and had given
not the slightest indication of the career that lay
before him. To be sure, he carried letters of com
mendation from friends, but he presented few of
them, and such letters rarely lead to more than con
ventional courtesies, unless the bearer betters his in
troduction. In England, Scotland and Ireland, Sum
ner's travels were a continuous series of visits, upon
urgent invitations which ' ' grew out of casual meet
ings in society and were extended in a spirit of kind
ness and hospitality which made his heart overflow
as he thought of it." Sumner's social success was

EUEOPEAN TEA VEL 57
due alone to the attractive qualities of his own
personality. He was young and full of generous
enthusiasm. His omnivorous reading iu literature,
history aud jurisprudence made him exceptionally
iutelligent upon topics of interest to leaders of Eng
lish thought, and like Lowell he had a strong feeling
of the essential unity of the English-speaking people
which made him thoroughly at home in England.
Although distinctly lacking in wit and brilliaucy,
his manner and conversation were instinct with
genuineness and appreciation. As one of his friends
said of him, in the Quarterly Review, soon after his
return to America : " Mr. Sumner presents in his
own person a decisive proof that an American
gentleman, without offlcial rank or wide-spread repu
tation, by mere dint of courtesy, candor, an entire
absence of pretension, an appreciating spirit, and a
cultivated mind, may be received on a perfect foot
ing of equality in the best English circles, social,
political and intellectual ; which, be it observed,
are hopelessly inaccessible to the itinerant note-
taker, who never gets beyond the outskirts or the
show-houses." To a young man of Sumner's susceptibilities, these
months of intimate association with many of Eng
land's foremost men could not fail to prove a forma
tive influence of the utmost importance. Their ef
fects were to be observed not only in the broadening
of his own horizon, but iu the added power which
he was to exercise, particularly as head of the Sen
ate Committee on Foreign Eelations during most

58 CHAELES SUMNEE
critical years, both because of his thorough under
standing of European politics, and of his personal
acquaintance with party leaders and moulders of
public opinion.
Indeed, the high favor with which Sumner had
come to be regarded by Englishmen of influence was
to be turned to speedy account. In March, 1838, he
left London for Italy. In Paris, however, he was
prevailed upon by General Lewis Cass, United
States Minister to France, to undertake a patriotic
service, which detained him several weeks. Friendly
relations between the United States and England
were at the time much disturbed by the Northeast
ern Boundary controversy and by the affair of the
Caroline. The boundary dispute had arisen out of
ambiguity of the language used in the Treaty of
1783, and all attempts to secure a settlement had
proved futile. The Americans in Paris considered
it desirable that the American argument be plainly
set forth so that it might be clearly appreciated both
in England and on the Continent, and Sumner
finally yielded to their urging that he attempt this
task. The result was a comprehensive paper, filling
six and a half columns in Galignani's Messenger,
copies of which were sent to members of Parliament
and other men of weight in England. While setting
forth the American argument strongly, the spirit of
the paper was candid and pacific, and it made a
most favorable impression both in England and iu
America. When in Paris at this time, Sumner saw
much of Lord Brougham, who later in the House of

EUEOPEAN TEAVBL 69
Lords spoke in favor of the American view of this
matter. The controversy, it will be remembered,
was finally settled in 1842 by the Treaty of Wash
ington, which established a line of compromise.
As soou as this task was fiuished, Sumner con
tinued his journey to Italy. A month was devoted
to sightseeing by the way, and on the 21st of May,
his "fondest expectations all on tiptoe," fromthe
Alban Hills he caught his first glimpse of the dome
of St. Peter's. Sumner's coming to Eome was the
fulfilment of the dearest vision of his youth. His
mind was richly stored with the treasures of history
and of classic literature, and at sight of the monu
ments of " the greatness that was Eome," he thrilled
as with a pilgrim's devotion. He never ceased to
refer to the months spent here as the happiest in his
life. But in his eagerness to see its sights he did not
allow himself to forget his purpose to know Italy's
life and literature. To this end at first he left his
letters of iutroduction unused and devoted himself
to study with an assiduity which soon yielded large
returns. At the end of the summer he reported :
"The hot months passed quickly in Eome. My
habits were simple. Eose at half- past six o'clock,
threw myself on my sofa, with a little round table
near, well covered with books, read undisturbed till
about ten, when a servant brought on a tray my
breakfast, — two eggs done sur le plat, a roll and a
cup of chocolate ; some of the books were pushed
aside enough to give momentary place to the tray.

60 CHAELES SUMNEE
The breakfast was concluded without quitting the
sofa ; rang the bell, and my table was put to rights,
and my reading went on often till five or six o'clock
in the evening, without my once rising from the
sofa. Was it not Gray's heaven ? " At the end of
four months he wrote : ' ' There is no Italian which
I cannot understand without a dictionary ; there is
hardly a classic in the language of which I have
not read the whole, or considerable portions." All
of Ariosto he despatched on the road to Venice.
But the glamour that hung about his Italian days
was due not alone to classical associations nor to the
charms of Italian literature. He formed there some
of his warmest friendships. In the American con
sul, George W. Greene, he found a true scholar and
a cultured man, with whom he enjoyed many an
hour, most of all a retreat of several days in the
Franciscan monastery of Palazzuola. At Eome
Sumner first met the young American sculptor,
Crawford, iu whom he became deeply interested,
and in whose work he thought he detected marked
genius. Crawford had as yet acquired no reputation
in his own country. Sumner wrote in his behalf to
many friends in Boston, and it was through his in
strumentality that the subscription was made which
led to the purchase of Crawford's "Orpheus" for
the Boston Athenaeum (now placed in the Boston
Art Museum), an encouragement which did much to
assure the young sculptor's future, and which he al
ways held in most grateful remembrance. In Flor
ence, too, Sumner took great delight in discussing

EUEOPEAN TEA VEL 61
sculptural matters with Horatio Greenough, then at
work upou his "Washington," regarding some de
tails of which he consulted Sumner. He also met
Hiram Powers, who then ' ' had not got beyoud bust-
making." These months on the Continent and
especially in Italy did much to quicken Sumner's ar
tistic appreciation, in which he was to find a never-
failing source of pleasure and solace.
In the autumn Sumner spent a month in Vienna.
Here he was cordially received by Metternich, who
professed the greatest regard for America, saying
that it was young and Europe old : "Mais laissons
nous jouir de notre vieillesse." Five weeks in Berlin
were filled with opportunity. By the Crown Prince
and Prince William, later the first German Emperor,
he was well received. He met Humboldt and the
historians, Eanke and Eaumer, and discussed his
favorite theme, the codification of the law, with
Savigny, as he had already done with Brougham
and Sismondi. This topic he took up with renewed
interest with Thibaut, the head of the philosophical
school of jurists, whom he met at Heidelberg,
where he spent five delightful weeks, being espe
cially indebted for courtesies to Professor Mittel-
maier, with whom he had had much correspondence
upon legal matters before leaving America.
But his European days were now drawing to a
close. His friends were afraid that longer sojourn
abroad would retard his progress in his profes
sion, and those who knew him best, like Story and
Hillard, advised him to hasten his return. Indeed,

62 CHAELES SUMNEE
he needed no such admonition. He knew that his
European experieuce had greatly "swelled the
man's amount" ; but, as the months passed, he had
times of serious depression. As he confided to
Longfellow : "T now begin to think of hard work,
of long days filled with uninteresting toil and
humble gains. I sometimes have a moment of mis
giving, when I think of the certainties which I
abandoned and of the uncertainties to which I re
turn." To Greene, his companion of fond Italian
memories, he wrote: "To me is unchanging
drudgery, where there are no flowers to pluck by
the wayside — but the great grind.stone of the law.
There must I work. Sisyphus ' rolled the rock re
luctant up the hill,' and I am going home to do the
same." To his brother George he acknowledged
that he had spent more than five thousand dollars
and could not afford to travel longer, adding : "I
wish you a deeper purse than I have, health to en
joy Europe, and the ability to profit by what yon
see. It is a glorious privilege, that of travel. Let
us make the most of it. Gladden my American ex
ile by flashes from the Old World."
For a young man who could use such words, it
was high time to get back to his native land and
settle down to some serious work. Prom Heidelberg
he went down the Ehine, and crossed to London,
which he had left almost exactly a year before. In
a stay of less than three weeks he could do nothing
more than renew his acquaintance with a few of the
many who had lavished kindnesses upon him. His

EUEOPEAN TEA VEL 63
last dinner was with Hallam, at whose house he met
Milman, Hayward, Francis Horner and others.
Sumner had made a warm place for himself in
many an English home. One of his friends wrote
to him: "You have had better opportunities of
seeing all classes of society and all that is interest
ing among us, than any other of your countrymen."
It was the truth ; and to the end of his life Sumner
retained a deep affection for England. This, how
ever, did not blind him to many of the evils in her
society. Although he had been the recipient of un
precedented courtesies from English people, many
of them members of the nobility, he remained a
true republican, and could truthfully declare : "I
have never sat in the palaces of England without
being pained by the inequality of which the inordi
nate luxury was a token ; " the injustice of the
English system of representation and the burden of
primogeniture he clearly recognized and deplored.
Yet he felt that the two nations were one people in
race and in history, and it was to be one of the
greatest objects of his life to remove all sources of
discord between them, for to him the thought that they
should ever be at war with each other was monstrous.
On the 3d of May, 1840, Sumner landed in New
York, after an absence from America of nearly two
years and a half, — a stalwart man of twenty-nine,
with fresh memories of delightful days of study and
leisurely travel, reluctantly retuming to gather up
the loose threads of a petty law practice, without a
glimmer of what the future had in store for him.

CHAPTEE IV
"no. 4 COURT street"
Upon his return to his native city, Sumner found
everywhere a warm welcome. His social successes
abroad commended him to Boston's most exclusive
society, at the head of which stood a group of
families, closely related by marriage and by busi
ness interests, and quick to resent alien thought or
non-conformity to thefr standards in social and
political action. George Bancroft, who had be
come prominent in the counsels of the Democratic
party, felt the chill following his apostasy from the
Whig faith which held the allegiance of Boston's
first families, and Sumner was in time to feel the
weight of similar social disapproval. But while
he was still a prime favorite in Boston society,
there were other associations which brought him
greater enjoyment. There were chance meetings
with congenial spirits like Hawthorne and Frances
Kemble. He now became a frequent and an admir
ing visitor to the studio of Washington Allston.
Eufus Choate's office was in the same building with
his own, and they found many interests in common.
Among the new friendships that with William H.
Prescott was an unfailing joy. Dr. Channing,
whom Sunmer later described aa "one of the

"NO. 4 COUET STEEET" 65
purest, brightest, greatest minds of this age . . .
my friend, and, I may almost say, idol for nearly
ten years," now honored the young man with his
confidence and relied upon him for collaboration
and criticism as to his later writings.
But most of all, Sumner rejoiced in the fellow
ship of the "Pive of Clubs," who now renewed
their meetings with unbroken ranks. With Hillard
there was the delight of constant intercourse at the
offlce ; of a Saturday, Sumner generally went to
Craigie House to dine and spend the night with
Longfellow, and here they were usually joined by
Felton. He often visited Cleveland at Pine Bank,
and it was here that he met Mrs. Kemble. After
Cleveland's death, his place in the group was taken
by Dr. Samuel G. Howe, the talented superin
tendent of the Perkins Institution for the Blind.
His acquaintance with Sumner dated from the day
when the two met while fighting in support of the
mayor to suppress a nativist riot. They were to
stand shoulder to shoulder in many another hard
fight, and in Dr. Howe and his accomplished wife
Sumner was for years to find two of his dearest
friends. The Sumner who returned from Europe was quite
a different man in externals from the slender
student of three years before. He had gained
greater fulness of face and of figure, and his friends
noted that he had ' ' been very materially improved
under the hands of a London tailor " and looked
quite like an Englishman.

66 CHAELES SUMNEE
While in Eome, Sumner had been saddened by
the news of the death of his father, for whom he
had always had a filial regard, though there was
little congeniality between the two. Sheriff Sumner
led a gloomy. Puritanical life, and within his own
family his was a rigid rule, which could not fail to
antagonize such natures as Charles and his vivacious
brother, George. When Sumner had escaped to
Europe from the potestas of this stei'a pater famiUas,
he still felt for his brothers and sisters and wrote to
his father urging that for the younger children a
milder regime might be adopted. The rigor in the
home was somewhat relaxed the following year, but
Sumner's intervention was resented, and from that
time no letters passed between father and son.
This lack of cordial sympathy with his father was
a grief to him for many years.
For several months after his return, Sumner did
not attempt to resume practice. It was the summer
season, when legal work was not pressing, and he
devoted this period to making visits, renewing ac
quaintances and keeping up his enormous corre
spondence with friends abroad. In September,
however, he began to put in long hours at No. 4
Court Street. But it was hard to get acclimated.
Later he confessed that this year was the least pro
ductive of his life. Practice came but slowly.
There was more or less work to be done. He
shared with Hillard the office business, and Story
and Greenleaf enlisted his services in some cases in
which they were interested. Sumner's most im-

"NO. 4 COUET STEEET" 67
portant case was one in which he succeeded Green
leaf in contesting the validity of the Phillips patent
for friction matches. It had already been in the
courts for five years. Sumner devoted himself to
the matter with great assiduity, but it dragged ou
for three years more. At the final trial it occupied
eleven days before the jury ; in closing Sumner spoke
ten hours, and upon the action of tort secured a
verdict in favor of his client.
He worked with dogged persistency, and in time
might have become a lawyer of some eminence.
Large money returns did not allure him, although,
in view of his scanty income and the debts incurred
for his travel, — debts which it is supposed his
mother finally paid from the estate, — it was a satis
faction when he could report : " Business calls. I
charged one client yesterday, as part of my fee in
a case, six hundred dollars. He had the grace to
say that it was no more than he expected, and not
so much as I deserved." But such fees came sel
dom, and it was not long before Sumner's friends
recognized that there were serious obstacles in the
way of his attaining distinguished success at the
bar. For much of the lawyer's routine work he
seemed to have an insuperable repugnance.' To a
' " He was not formed for a jury lawyer, when the jury was
less than a nation or mankind. . . . Sumner's legal mind,
at this time and throughout his life, was largely moulded,
trained to the contemplation of great principles and to lofty re
search. As one of his admiring comrades, himself a renowned
lawyer, says of him, ' In sporting terms, he had a good eye for
country, but no scent for a trail.'"— G. W. Curtis, Orations,
Vol. Ill, p. 210.

68 CHAELES SUMNEE
friend he once wrote: "I found the bill of costs
without understanding it ; and I sometimes believe
that it is not in my power to understand anything
which concerns such matters." William Wetmore
Story, another young man of high aspirations who
had not yet found himself, was then a law student
at "No. 4," and has left an interesting picture of
life in that office. Of Sumner he writes: "He
would talk to me by the hour of the great jurists,
and their lives, and habits of thought. . . .
Hillard and he and I used to talk infinitely, not
only of law, but of poetry and general literature
and authors, when business would allow, — nay,
sometimes when it would not allow ; but who can
resist temptation with such tastes as we all had?"
It was evident that the fears of his friends and his
own misgivings were being realized : in his "Ameri
can exile," he could find no enthusiasm for his
work. The keen-eyed student at his side noticed
that "after the flush of those exciting days abroad,
his office and daily occupations seemed dull and
gray. . . . America seemed flat to him after
Europe." His letters to friends abroad show where
his heart lay. To Lieber he wrote: "Never at
any time since I have been at the bar have I been
more punctual and faithful. Pocket that, ye croak
ers, who said that Europe would spoil me for office
work ! Still, I will not disguise from you, my dear
Lieber, that I feel, while I am engaged upon these
things, that, though I earn my daily bread, I lay up
none of the bread of life. My mind, soul, heart,

" NO. 4 COUET STEEET " 69
are not improved or invigorated by the practice of
my profession ; by overhauling papers, old letters,
and sifting accounts, in order to see if there be any
thing on which to plant an action. The sigh wiU
come for a canto of Dante, a rhapsody of Homer, a
play of Schiller. But I shall do my devoir."
In virtual acknowledgment of failure in his
practice, Sumner gradually turned more and more
to outside tasks. In the absence of Judge Story,
he lectured as a substitute in the law school in 1842
and again the following year. He renewed his
writing for various legal magazines upon his favorite
topics,— judges, lawyers, and publicists. He was a
careful and keen critic, always eager to commend
what was of merit, but scathing in denuuciation of
bad work, so that he sometimes aroused deep resent
ment. In one instance a writer's article was so cut
up that he came ou from New York to Boston, in
tending to challenge the critic to a duel, but Sum
ner's fortunate absence from the city gave wrath
time to cool. In the autumn following his return
from Europe he had brought out the third volume
of his "Eeports" of Judge Story's Circuit Court
opinions. The task of the court reporter was dis
tinctly congenial to Sumner. Although he re
peatedly declared that he did not know the office
that was worth asking for, or asking any influence
to procure, he acknowledged that, with a single
exception, there was one which he might prefer
to any in the countiy and an appointment to
which would be agreeable to him, if it came un-

70 CHAELES SUMNEE
solicited on his part. This offlce of his preference
was undoubtedly that of Eeporter of the Supreme
Court of the United States, held at the time by his
old friend, Mr. Peters. He would have enjoyed its
drudgery. Moreover, Sumner was in a similar
position to that of his father, when he became
sheriff: with no liking for and no prospect of
marked success iu the work of the practicing
lawyer, he would have welcomed the fixed salary
which attached to this office. But in 1843 when
the vacancy occurred, it was filled during Judge
Story's absence. And so another door was closed.
Early in 1844 Sumuer undertook a heart-breaking
task : for the sum of $2,000 he contracted to anno
tate the "Equity Eeports" of Francis Vesey, Jr.,
in twenty volumes, agreeing to make ready one vol
ume every two weeks. He began this work April
10th ; but it soon became evident that the task was
altogether too heavy for the allotted time, yet the
publishers refused an extension of even a single
month. Sumner bent to the work, making diligent
use of the rich material which had accumulated
since the publication of Vesey, and adding — an un
usual feature, but one peculiarly congenial to his
cast of mind — biographical sketches of the judges
and lawyers mentioned in the text. The edition was
dedicated to Judge Story, and was very favorably
reviewed by law journals ; one declared : "In what
may be called the literature of the law, he [Sumner]
has no rival among us." But "the dreary, never-
lightening task" soon proved too great even for

"NO. 4 COUET STEEET" 71
Sumner's splendid physique. With only four vol
umes completed, he succumbed to a fever, and for
many days his life hung in the balance. Then grad
ually his extraordinary vitality reasserted itself.
During his illness his bedside was sought by many
sympathetic frieuds; the members ofthe "Five of
Clubs," Prescott and Bancroft were among the most
constant. Many a tender message from England
showed how wide-spread was the solicitude for his
recovery. Strength returned but slowly. It was
not till November that he was able to get back to his
offlce. Meantime, the wretched task which had
broken him down had been carried on by others.
Nine volumes still remained for his annotation. At
last, in May, he could report: "The edition (in
twenty volumes) is all printed ; and that millstone
has fallen from my neck."
In the months of his convalescence Sumner had
discovered in himself a new appreciation of beauty
in nature. He spent some weeks in a delightful
round of visits with friends in the Berkshires.
Here he renewed his acquaintance with Mrs. Kem
ble, with whom he enjoyed horseback riding. Ou
his way home, he had the pleasure of meeting in
New York Crawford, whom he had not seen since
he left Eome, and whose career had been in no small
degree assured by Sumner's commendation to his
Boston friends. But he was soon called home by
sad news. His beautiful and best loved sister, Mary,
had been in failing health for several years. Her
death was a great grief to Charles, who had always

72 CHAELES SUMNEE
loved her tenderly ; many references to her in his
letters afford some of the most intimate and beauti
ful glimpses of his character.
Sumner, himself, felt little attachment to life.
Again and again, upon the death of some friend, he
would exclaim: "Why was he selected who was
reluctant to go, and another left who has little pleas
ure in staying ? " When, in the crisis of his illness,
the physician told him that his case was incurable,
and that, if he should live, he would never be able
to do anything, Sumner replied that he did not
shrink from death but that to pass through life doing
nothing, perhaps a "driveler and a show," was
more than he could bear. A few weeks later he
wrote to Howe : ' ' For such a signal recovery another
person would feel unbounded gratitude. I am going
to say what will offend you ; but what I trust God
will pardon. Since my convalescence I have
thought much and often whether I have any just
feeling of gratitude that my disease was arrested.
Let me confess to you that I cannot find it in my
bosom. . . . Why was I spared 1 For me there
is no future of usefulness or happiness."
This period brought to Sumner broadened associa
tions along various lines. In the summer following
his return from Europe, he took his father's place
in the Society of the Cincinnati. In 1844 he was
elected to membership in the American Antiquarian
Society, and iu the same year he became a corre
sponding member of theNew York Historical Society.
Some effective popular expositions of legal princi-

"NO. 4 COUET STEEET" 73
pies, which Sumner had contributed to Boston pa
pers, led the friends of Alexander Slidell Mackenzie
to appeal to the young lawyer to come to the defense
of that commander in the Somers mutiny contro
versy.' To bring public opinion to Mackenzie's
support was the task urged upon Sumner, and in
response to it he contributed to the North American
Review '' a convincing article, in which with great
force he argued that the real question at issue was
neither the actual guilt of the conspirators nor the
actual necessity for their execution, but their ap
parent guilt and the apparent necessity, as carefully
'Upon this United States brig-of-war, September 12, 1842,
there had sailed for the coast of Africa a number of apprentice
boys from the Naval School, and Philip Spencer, son of John
C. Spencer, at the time Secretary of War, held the rank of mid
shipman. He was a breeder of mischief throughout the voyage,
and it was discovered that he was the ringleader in a conspiracy
to seize the ship, murder the officers, and hoist the pirate's flag.
Some of the conspirators were put in confinement ; but this de
veloped so mutinous a spirit among the crew that the com
mander, whose intention had been to bring all the prisoners to
the United States for trial, decided to take the formal advice
ot his officers. This council made a careful investigation, as the
result of which they signed a report in which they — "bearing
in mind our duty to our God, our country and to the service "
— advised that Spencer and two of his confederates be imme
diately hanged at the yard-arm, a sentence which was executed
four days before the brig reached St. Thomas. Spenoer and
one of his confederates had not only made full confession of
guilt, but acknowledged the justice of the penalty. Heated
discussion, however, straightway arose as to the guilt of the
second confederate. Commauder Mackenzie was brought before
a court-martial, whose sesjsions of forty days resulted in his ac
quittal, a verdict which President Tyler confirmed. Neverthe
less, by virtue of his position as Secretary of War, Spencer's
father and his friends were able to arouse very severe censure
of Commander Mackenzie's action.
'Vol. LVII, pp. 195-241.

74 CHAELES SUMNEE
weighed by conscientious men, 'who felt full respon
sibility for the United States vessel and the lives
committed to their charge. This article exercised
wide-spread influence. For this defense Mackenzie
himself felt the deepest gratitude, which he showed
by entertaining Sumner at his home and by a mes
sage of appreciation and good- will in a sealed letter
opened after his death.'
Of the novelties of the day, phrenology for a time
aroused Sumner's interest. With his friend. Dr.
Howe, he performed some experiments which seemed
to him to " show clearly that our brains are mapped
out as the phrenologists have described." He pro
cured a plaster cast, and set himself to studying it
with great earnestness. Several years later he up
braided the editor of the North A-merican Review for
" intolerance of mind in having treated phrenology
flippantly." But this interest soon ceased to have
any hold upon him.
The "temperance" movement, which in these
years exercised a great deal of political influence,
' It is interesting to note that this Commander Alexander
Slidell Mackenzie was an own brother of John Slidell, who was
senator from Louisiana at the time of Sumner's election to the
.Senate. A few weeks later the two were guests at the same
hotel in Saratoga, but on being introduced to Sumner, Slidell's
manner was very reserved ; be declined an invitation from a
coramon friend to meet Samner at dinner, explaining a few
days later that, while grateful for Sumner's " chivalrous and
zealous advocacy " of his brother, his social relations could not
be candid with a man of Sumner's "avowed purpose toexclnde
in his region the class to which he [Slidell] belonged from the
courtesies of social life and the common rites of humanity."
After Sumner entered the Senate, however, the two men for
some time were upon friendly terms.

"NO. 4 COUET STEEET" 75
did not appeal to Sumner. He was temperate in
his owu habits; he justified the moderate use of
wine, and felt no sympathy with any political move
ment having prohibition as its object.
Sumner's brother, Horace, was for a time a mem
ber of the Brook Farm community and his college
friend, Browne, tried hard to interest Sumner iu the
transcendental philosophy there taught and prac
ticed. But Sumner refers in rather contemptuous
tone to his brother's bucolic employments. He be
lieved that humanity's triumphs were to be won uot
in an isolated community, but in the ranks with his
fellows. As a young man Sumner had taken very seriously
his duty as the oldest brother to encourage the
younger members of the family to do thefr best in
their studies. While in Europe he had written
anxious letters to President Quincy and Judge
Story, urging that the standards of scholarship at
Harvard be raised. In these early years of his
practice, accordingly, Horace Mann found in him
an ardent supporter of his propaganda for the pro
motion of popular education. In a highly favor
able review, he commended Mann's report of Euro
pean systems of education. In 1844 he accepted the
Whig nomination for one of the two members ofthe
school committee from his ward. The other Whig
candidate was elected, but Sumner was defeated by
a native American. In the belief that the equip
ment of the normal schools of the state was entirely
inadequate, in 1845 Sumuer acted as chairman of a

76 CHAELES SUMNEE
committee which petitioned the legislature in favor
of the erection of two new buildings. He personally
solicited subscriptions and even incurred far heavier
financial responsibility than he had a right to af
ford, in order to accomplish that end.
In view of the career which was so soon to open be
fore him, it is surprising that up to this point Sumner
apparently felt neither any aptitude nor any liking
for politics. Eeturning to America in 1840, he wrote
a few months later to an English friend : " Our pol
itics are shabby enough. . . . They [the Whigs]
proclaimed Harrison the candidate of the * log-cabin
and hard-cider class.' And this vulgar appeal is
made by the party professing the monopoly of intel
ligence aud education in the country!" To his
brother George he declared: "There are some
(among whom I am willing to be counted) who think
success obtained by such vulgar means of very
doubtful value. But the greater part think nothing
of these things, and are now in full cry, running
down their game." He took no part in the cam
paign, and it is not known for whom he voted. At
the time of the next presidential election, he was re
covering from a serious illness ; and there is no in
dication that he felt any interest in the contest.
The distinctive tenets of the Whig party, its policy
as to the tariff and the national bank, however
strongly they commended it to the commercial aris
tocracy of Boston, could make slight appeal to a
man of Sumner's idealism. But in contrast with
their opponents, the Whigs seemed to him less

"NO. 4 COUET STEEET" 77
under the dominance of the slave power and more
disposed to high-minded and peaceful dealings with
foreign states. Like John Quincy Adams, whom
of all American public men he most admired, Sum
ner still marched with the Whigs, because he
"thought this party represented the moral senti
ments of the country, — that it was the party of Hu
manity."

CHAPTEE V
"the true grandeur op nations"
Among the institutions that had fostered the
civic pride, for which from early days Boston had
been famous, the Fourth of July oration played an
important part. Boston has never lacked self-con
sciousness. In the days just before the outbreak of
the Eevolution, she saw in herself — as England saw
in her — the protagonist of the colonists in their as
sertion of what they deemed their rights as British
subjects, and local pride speedily cast about certain
scenes and actors an aureole, which quite transfig
ured them in memory. Thus, the event of March
5, 1770, characterized by one critical twentieth
century historian as a "serious affray" in which
" the mob was fired upon by the angry and fright
ened soldiers," forthwith found its place in local
annals as the "Boston Massacre." Its victims were
added to the noble army of the martyrs, to be com
memorated to remote generations by the monument
on Boston Common to the almost mythical Crispus
Attucks and his fellows.
On the very first anniversary of this event the
citizens of Boston came together to listen to an ap
propriate oration, and the precedent was observed
in each succeeding year. Soon after the close of the

' ' THE TEUE GEANDEUE OP NATIONS " 79
Eevolutionary War, the citizens of Boston, at a
town-meeting in Faneuil Hall, adopted a resolution
which, after asserting that this celebration had
" been found to be of eminent advantage to the cause
of America in disseminating the principles of virtue
and patriotism among her citizens," declared that
from that time forward "the anniversary of the
4th day of July, A. D. 1776, . . . shall be con
stantly celebrated by the delivery of a public ora
tion ... in which the orator shall consider the
feelings, manners, and principles which led to this
great national event, as well as the important and
happy effects, whether general or domestic, which
already have, and will forever continue, to fiow
from this auspicious epoch." And so for threescore
years and more this patriotic festival had been ob
served, the oration being delivered in Faneuil Hall,
the Old South Church, or in one of the larger as
sembly halls.
The choice of orator usually fell upon some prom
ising young man, and the typical oration, as John
Adams (who had listened with fortitude to many of
them) declared, was characterized by "juvenile in
genuity," and usually set forth in conventional
phrases admiration for Greek and Eoman heroism,
evidencing little critical weighing ofthe events of the
Eevolution, or originality in the discussion of pres
ent-day problems.
In 1845, at whose suggestion it is not known,
Charles Sumner was notified by a committee of the
city government that he had been chosen orator for

80 CHAELES SUMNEE
Independence Day. The invitation came so late as
to allow hardly two months for preparation. His
correspondence shows that he accepted with a hesi
tation not unnatural in one so untrained for such an
effort. He made no demonstration in getting to
work upon it, and his friends, particularly Felton,
repeatedly urged him to devote himself to his writ
ing with diligence, mindful that he was to have a
" numerous and distinguished audience."
Heralded by the boom of guns, the sun rose clear
on the morning of July 4th. The streets, the Com
mon and the Public Garden were soon astir with an
animated throng. There was a procession of 800
school-children in gala attire. The national colors
were everywhere displayed. In the harbor lay the
United States ship-of-war, Ohio, brilliantly be
decked with flags. Soon after ten, under escort of
the Washington Light Guard, the officers of the
city government, led by the mayor and the orator
of the day, marched from the City Hall to Tremont
Temple. Seated upon the platform, Sumner
watched the assembling audience. Behind him
was a choir of young girls from the Boston public
schools, all dressed in white. Below, at his left,
his eye rested on the Washington Light Guard, be
hind their officers, while at his right in the front
seats in full uniform sat the superior officers of the
commonwealth's militia and of the United States
army and navy. It was felt that in previous years
the Federal branches of the service had been some
what slighted at this festival, and so it was in re-

' ' THE TEUE GEANDEUE OF NATIONS ' ' 81
spouse to special invitations that these officers from
the navy-yard, from the forts and from the visiting
Ohio, graced the occasion by their august presence.
Of that brilliant audience of more than 2,000, at
least one in every twenty was in military attire.
The invocation and the reading of the Declaration
of Independence were followed by patriotic songs
by the chofr. Then the mayor introduced Sumner.
It was a scene long to be remembered when this tall
and handsome young man stepped forward for the
first time to face a great popular assembly gathered
to hear him. The "Gawky" Sumner of Latin
School days had developed a splendid presence.
He now stood six feet four inches in height, and
his frame already gave promise of the commanding
figure of his later years. His well-cut face, sur
mounted by masses of dark hair, kindled with
animation as he spoke. Always fond of rather
distinctive dress, he wore to-day a blue dress-coat
with brass buttons, and waistcoat and trousers of
white. His voice was of great power, and he used
it with skill. His gestures were his own, the most
characteristic being the swinging of his hand over
his head. Eeferring to his manuscript only for
statistics, he spoke for more than two hours, yet he
held the close attention of his audience to the end.
With but a brief introduction, in which in words
closely modeled upon Plato he urged that our most
worthy tribute to the Fathers of the Eepublic would
be found in striving to excel them in virtue and to
increase the inheritance which they had bequeathed,

82 CHAELES SUMNEE
Sumner proceeded to announce the theme of his
oration, the inquiry: "What, in our age, are the
true objects of national ambition; what is truly
national glory, national honor ; what is the true
grandeur of nations ? ' ' Tersely illustrating his sub-
ject by contrasts, he made timely reference to the
Texas and Oregon issues, declaring "a war with
Mexico would be mean and cowardly ; with Eng
land it would be at least bold, but parricidal."
And forthwith he laid down his main thesis : "In
our age there can be no peace that is not honorable ;
there can be no war that is not dishonorable." '
The place, the occasion, the audience, all combined
to make the announcement of such a proposition
sensational, but these considerations did not deter
the speaker. With a wealth of illustration from
history and poetry he developed his theme : he ex
posed the true character of war by noting how
military heroes were lauded bythe names of brute
and savage beasts ; he emphasized the futility of war
in that its objects are often unattained, as in the War
of 1812, where the alleged causes were not removed
by the Treaty of Ghent ; he described vividly the
senseless wager of battle, which found its belated sur
vival in war ; and he denounced in scathing terms the
approval which misguided patriotism, and social
esteem and even the church had bestowed upon the
unreasoning appeal to brute force. With tremendous
" In his Works, Sumner softened this by putting it in the
form of a question. "Can there be, in our age, any peace
that is not honorable, any war that is not dishonorable?"
Vol. I, p. 9.

' ' THE TEUE GEANDEUE OP NATIONS ' ' 83
power he emphasized the enormous waste involved
in military preparations and manoeuvres, — expenses,
he insisted, which were worse than wasted, since
often instead of assuring peace, they served only to
incite war, whereas the spirit of comity and con
ciliation ensured just and lasting blessings; he
urged that the United States lead in a movement
toward disarmament, and closed with an eloquent
presentation of the moral vfrtues in which the true
grandeur of nations consists.
Among the passages of most power was an effect
ive comparison of the cost to the community of
Harvard University and of the Ohio, then lying in
Boston harbor, and whose officers were at that mo
ment, as guests of the city, sitting at his feet :
"There now swings idly at her moorings in this
harbor a ship-of- the- line, the OMo . . . $834,845
[has been] the actual cost at this moment of that
single ship, — more than $100,000 beyond all the
available accumulations of the richest and most
ancient seat of learning in the land. Choose ye,
my fellow citizens of a Christian state, between
the two caskets, — that wherein is the loveliness of
knowledge and truth, or that which contains the
carrion death ! "
He drove the lesson home still harder by showing
that the sum annually lavished upon the Ohio was
more than four times the yearly expenditures of
Harvard University.'
' Worlcs, Vol. I, p. 81. Sixty years have not made Sumner's
line of argument obsolete. Naval expenditures for the year
ending the week before Sumner uttered these words were in

84 CHAELES SUMNEE
A passage of genuine pathos set forth the
brutality of war, relieved only by deeds of chivalry,
which it borrowed from peace.
" But war crushes with bloody heel all justice,
all happiness, all that is godlike in man. . . .
True, it cannot be disguised that there are passages
in its dreary annals cheered by deeds of generosity
and sacriflce. But the virtues which shed their
charm over its horrors are all borrowed of
Peace. . . . The flowers of gentleness, of kind
liness, of fidelity, of humanity, which flourish in
unregarded luxuriance in the rich meadows of
Peace, receive unwonted admiration when we dis
cern them in War, — like violets shedding their
perfume on the perilous edge of the precipice, be
yond the smiling borders of civilization. . . .
God be praised that Sidney, on the field of battle,
gave with dying hand the cup of cold water to the
dying soldier ! That single act of self-forgetful
sacrifice has consecrated the fenny field of Zutphen
far, oh ! far beyond its battle ; it has consecrated
thy name, gallant Sidney, beyond any feat of thy
sword, beyond any triumph of thy pen ! But there
are hands outstretched elsewhere than on fields of
blood for so little as a cup of cold water. The
world is full of opportunities for deeds of kindness.
round numbers $6,300,000 ; tor the year 1908 they were
$118,725,000. This morning's paper tells of an araendment
(February 16. 1909) cutting down tbe appropriation for each of
two new battle-ships to $4 500,000, not including armor or
armament. Even in these days of large benefactions, that ex
penditure for each unarmed battle-.ship is excelled by the pro
ductive funds of not more than ten American universities.
Were Sumner speaking to-day, he would further emphasize the
appalling rate at which battle-ships depreciate and become
obsolete.

' ' THE TEUE GEANDEUE OF NATION S " 85
Let me not be told, then, of the virtues of War.
Let not the acts of generosity and sacrifice which
have triumphed on its fields be invoked in its de
fense. In the words of Oriental imagery, the
poisonous tree, though watered by nectar, can pro
duce only the fruit of death ! " '
Truly prophetic were his references to emancipa
tion and to disarmament :
"What glory of battle in England's annals will
not fade by the side of that great act of justice, by
which her legislature, at a cost of one hundred
million dollars, gave freedom to eight hundred thou
sand slaves ! And wheu the day shall come (may
these eyes be gladdened by its beams ! ) that shall
witness an act of greater justice still, — ^the peaceful
emancipation of three millions of our fellow men,
'guilty of a skin not colored as our own,' now held
in gloomy bondage under the Constitution of our
country, — then shall there be a victory, in compari
son with which that of Bunker Hill shall be as a
farthing candle held up to the sun. That victory
shall need no monument of stone. It shall be writ
ten on the grateful hearts of uncounted multitudes,
that shall proclaim it to the latest generation. It
shall be one of the great landmarks of civilization ;
nay, more, it shall be one of the links of the golden
chain by which humanity shall connect itself Avith
the throne OfGod." '^
"Let us now, in this age of civilization, sur
rounded by Christian nations, be willing to follow
the successful example of William Penn, surrounded
by savages. Let us, while we recognize the tran
scendent ordinances of God, the Law of Right and
¦ Works, Vol, I, p. 125, ' Worlcs, Vol. I, p. 127,

86 CHAELES SUMNEE
the Law of Love,— the double suns which illumine
the moral universe, — aspire to the true glory, and
what is higher than glory, the great good of taking
the lead in the disarming of the nations. Letus
abandon the system of preparation for war in time
of peace as irrational, unchristian, vainly prodigal
of expense, and having a direct tendency to excite
the very evil agaiust which it professes to guard." '

Such was the oration which greeted this conserva
tive Boston audience, accustomed on the Fourth of
July to listen to "young meu of promising genius,
whose convictions were conformable to the opinions
of the moment." It is needless to say that the open
ing paragraphs produced a sensation and that what
followed gave rise to intense excitement. It was
evident at the outset that here was no mere elocu
tionist or phrase-maker, but a mau of vigorous
thought, ready and perhaps too eager to assail what
he believed to be error, no matter how high en
throned. His references to the Texas and Oregon
policies of the Polk administration called out open
dissent from his audience. Later the opposition
grew more bitter, for the young orator exclaimed :
"What is the use of the standing army? What
is the use of the navy?" and in sarcastic vein he
referred to the "farcicaP discipline," and to "men
closely dressed in padded and well-buttoned coats of
blue, besmeared with gold, surmounted by a huge
' Works, Vol. I, p. 119.
''In revising the oration for his works, he substituted "pain
ful " for this word ! Works, Vol. I, p. 91.

" THE TEUE GEANDEUE OF NATIONS ' ' 87
mountain cap of bearskin, with a barbarous device
typical of brute force, a tiger, painted on oilskin,
tied with leather to their backs, — Christians recogni
zing the example of beasts as worthy of imitation
by man." To many of the military guests in the
audience it seemed that they had been "officially
assailed by the speaker as well as personally in
sulted." They decided forthwith to leave the
hall in a body, and were only dissuaded by the
adjutant-general of the commonwealth, whom they
urged to lead them, but who insisted that such a
proceeding would seem discourteous, since they
were all guests of the city. As the excited audience
was dispersing, a prominent merchant is said to
have shouted : "Well, if that young man is going
to talk in that way, he cannot expect Boston to hold
him up ! "'
According to long-established custom, after the
oration the members of the city government and the
invited guests repaired to Faneuil Hall, where a
banquet was followed by a long list of toasts. It
was significant of the feeling of that day, that every
' Men of very different views agreed as to the probable effect of
this oration npon Sumner's future. "The crowd dissolved;
the audience surges into the street. One man goes up to Mayor
Elliott [Eliot?] and says: 'Mr. Elliott, what do you think of
the oration ? ' 'The young man has cut his throat, sir ! ' "-—
Wendell Phillips, in an oration on Sumner reported in Bos
ton Daily Advertiser, March 3, 1877. "I suppose he has com
mitted a social felo de se by it. I look upon his fearless book
[this oration] as the tombstone of his consideration in the
minds of nine-tenths of this Infidel Community." — Letter of J.
E. Lowell to H. W. Longfellow, Aug. 13, 1845, Lowell's Letters,
Vol. I, p. 95.

88 CHAELES SUMNEE
one of the many speakers referred to Sumner's
oration with "censure, ridicule, or some kind of
criticism." This dissent ran the whole range from
the conservative and moderate qualification of the
historian Palfrey and of Congressman E. C. Winthrop
to coarse and personal abuse from a lawyer who had
long been connected with the militia, and whose
remarks called forth loud applause from the military
guests. Sumner bore all these criticisms with entire
equanimity, and wheu given an opportunity to
reply, contented himself with a graceful compliment
to the choir of the day.
In the mass of comment upon the oration, aside
from the dissent from its main proposition that there
can be no war which is honorable, there was much
criticism upon two matters of taste and propriety.
To the charge that his theme was out of harmony
with the spirit of the day, it may be replied that he
spoke with the utmost earnestness in behalf of a
cause which he believed should enlist every patriot's
support. Progress is not advanced by the insistence
that every public speaker shall conform to the views
which he believes to be held by the majority of his
audience. Sumner chose neither his theme nor the
manner of its development with the purpose of
antagonizing his hearers. For several years in his
letters and conversation there had frequently re
curred references to the brutality, the futility and
the waste of war, which showed that these were
thoughts over which he had long been brooding.
On the other hand, there was much of validity

" THE TEUE GEANDEUE OF NATIONS ' ' 89
in the criticism that in various parts of his oration
Sumner exhibited little tact or consideration for the
feelings of many of his hearers. To the forceful
presentation of his theme it was by no means neces
sary that he descend to slurring remarks upon the
dress and bearing of military leaders there present
as highly honored guests of the city.'
In the weeks following the delivery of this ora
tion, there poured in upon Sumner hundreds of
letters from all over the country, refiecting widely
divergent opinions. One of the most cordial was
from John A. Andrew, the future war governor of
Massachusetts, who in closing expressed his "grati
tude to Providence, that here, in our city of Boston,
one has at last stepped forward to consecrate to
celestial hopes the day — the great day — ^which
Americans have at best heretofore held sacred only
to memory." Theodore Parker's letter of hearty
approval was the beginning of a friendship and a
hearty cooperation that were to end ouly with death.
In England as well as in America Sumner's oration
attracted wide attention, its references to the pend
ing Oregon question giving it added point. An
' It is interesting to note a criticism which Sumner twenty
years later passed upon Bancroft's eulogy upon Lincoln. "I
felt at the time that there was something wrong in such a
speech when the diplomatic corps were official guests. . . .
The chief error was in addressing such a speech to such guests.
Either they should not have been invited, or the speech should
have been what could be said in their presence without giving
offense." March 15, 1865. But Sumner, himself, upon many a
later occasion showed a strange insensibility to the pain which
hia words must inevitably have caused to hearers of normal
make-up.

90 CHAELES SUMNEE
abridged edition of 7,000 copies was circulated by
the several Peace Societies, and four or five editions
of the entire oration were sold.
To Sumuer hardly less than to his friends that
Fourth of July brought a revelation. It was the
parting of the ways. Only a few months before, the
shadows seemed to be settling thick about him.
He was lonely and ill ; he felt that his life had been
a failure, and wished that Death's summons might
have been for him, instead of for those who found
life a blessing. Now, at last, he caught a glimpse of
a goal. He found that he could sway thousands by
his eloquence, and the discovery quickened all the
moral force within him. Aimlessness and depres
sion were flung aside. He would press toward the
mark.

CHAPTEE VI
SUMNER'S ENLISTMENT IN THE ANTI-SLAVERY
RANKS
From that Fourth of July his Court Street offlce
could never again look the same to him. It had
been the scene of dull routine, of editorial hack
work. Now he had found himself. The deflnite
line that his effort should take was not yet clear,
but his interest in the practice of law and in the
study of jurisprudence fell into the background.
His new aspirations had hardly been kindled
when he met with a great sorrow in the death of
Judge Story, to whom he was bound by the closest
ties of affection and gratitude, which found worthy
expression in his "Tribute of Friendship." The
eminent jurist had repeatedly declared that as far as
his professorship was concerned, he should die con
tent if Charles Sumner were to succeed him. But
when the vacancy occurred, the position was not
offered to Sumner. Nor did he expect it. As he
wrote to his brother : "I am too much of a re
former in law to be trusted in a post of such com
manding influence as this has now become." The
radicalism of his oration had not been agreeable
to the members of the corporation. Sumner seems
to have felt somewhat hurt at the evidence that he
was no longer held in so high regard as formerly at

92 CHAELES SUMNEE
his alma mater ; yet it is doubtful whether he would
have accepted the position, for he felt that in such
a professorship he would no longer be a free man.
In the middle of the nineteenth century, to a
young man of philanthropic impulses and blessed
with the gift of tongues, one door opened wide.
That was the New England Lyceum, then in its
pristine vigor. In a way, it was a precursor of the
university extension of a later generation. In
many New England cities and towns the Lyceum
arranged for a course of ten or a dozen lectures.
The pay was small, rarely exceeding ten or flfteen
dollars, but the opportunity for influence was great
and attractive. The audience was certain to be
made up of the most intelligent people of the com
munity. Divisive subjects, such as slavery, or dis
tinctly political topics, were tabooed, but the lec
turer might incidentally get very definitely before
the people his views even upon such subjects.
The Lyceum afforded a forum for the best thinkers
of the day. It is creditable to the audiences that
among the speakers most in demand were Emerson,
Whipple, Holmes and Beecher. Even Choate and
Webster did not scorn the lecture platform. For
the five years following the delivery ofthe "True
Grandeur of Nations," no lecturer was more wel
come before Lyceums than Charles Sumner, and
here it was, as Whipple said, that he got a hold
upon " earnest, progressive clergymen and warm
hearted, cultivated women, — perhaps the two
strongest forces for the moral awakening of a com-

LN THE ANTI-SLAVEEY EANKS 93
munity, — such as no other American public man
has gained." Here, too, he aroused the enthusi
asm of hundreds of young men who teu years later
were to translate his ideals into practical politics.
Sumner's Lyceum lectures were mostly upon
three topics: "The Employment of Time,"
"White Slavery in the Barbary States," and " The
Law of Human Progress." The second of these
themes was obviously chosen to afford an opportu
nity to set forth by indirection the cruelties of
American slavery. Printed in a small volume with
abundant woodcuts, it had a wide circulation.
A year after Sumner first challenged attention as
an orator, he was invited to deliver the oration be
fore the Phi Beta Kappa Society of Harvard, an
occasion and an audience which have called forth
their best from some of America's most eminent
men. Upon the platform were Edward Everett,
who had just been made president of the university,
and Josiah Quincy, his predecessor in that offlce ;
John Quincy Adams, Eobert C. Winthrop, William
Kent, who had recently been appointed to Story's
professorship ; and the Governor of Virginia.
Dr. Edward Everett Hale tells of the profound im
pression which Sumner made upon young men like
himself. His spendid presence dominated the au
dience. It had been the custom of speakers upon
this solemn occasion to appear in the traditional
black gown of the New England pulpit, but
Sumner, in addressing a company of scholars, chose
to appear before them not in the garb of a scholar

94 CHAELES SUMNEE
of 1631 but of the gentleman of 1846. Accordingly
he stood forth in blue dress-coat with brass buttons,
a buff waistcoat, white trousers aud gaiters. And
his manner was equally unconventional ; some of
his hearers were quite aghast at seeing him in the
fervor of his discourse turn his back upon his
audience for several minutes while he addressed
President Everett. Within a few months, four of
the most eminent sons of Harvard had died. They
had all been personal friends of Sumner, from whom
he had gained much inspiration. It was therefore
a congenial task which he essayed in commemora
ting these men in an oration upon the theme : ' ' The
Scholar (John Pickering) ; the Jurist (Joseph
Story) ; the Artist (Washington Allston) ; and the
Philanthropist (William E. Channing)." Many
of his audience had been prejudiced against him as
a theorist and radical, but he won their cordial sym
pathy and for more than two hours he held their
rapt attention. The impression upon high-minded
young men who heard him was one never to be
effaced. The oration's deepest notes were struck
in the passages which attacked slavery and war.
Sumner later acknowledged that " in the sensitive
condition of public sentiment at that time, such an
effort would have found small indulgence if he had
not placed himself behind four such names. While
commemorating the dead, he was able to uphold
living tmth."
In the chorus of acclaim which greeted this ad
dress, no words were more discerning than those of

IN THE ANTI-SLAVEEY EANKS 95
the venerable John Quincy Adams, who wrote to
Sumner: "Casting my eyes backward no farther
than the 4th of July of last year, when you set all the
vipers of Alecto a-hissing by proclaiming the Chris
tian law of universal peace and love, and then cast
ing them forward perhaps not much farther, but be
yond my own allotted time, I see you have a mission
to perform. I look from Pisgah to the Promised
Land ; you must enter upon it. . . . To the
motto upon my seal (^Alteri sceculo) add Delenda est
servitus." In the next year or two, Sumner spoke with great
acceptance as the commencement orator at Amherst
College and Brown University upon "Fame and
Glory, ' ' and at Union College upon ' ' The Law of Hu
man Progress. " It is to be remembered that in these
years the Mexican War, fought for the extension
of slavery, was the subject most in men's minds, and
Sumner's uncompromising treatment of these timely
topics became a potent force in shaping public sen
timent. It was inevitable that the author of "The
True Grandeur of Nations" should be drafted into
the service of the Peace Movement. In 1849 he de
livered the annual address before the American
Peace Society, discussing " the abolishment of the
institution of war, and of the whole system as an es
tablished arbiter of justice in the Commonwealth of
Nations." Eead at the present day, Sumner's plea
for "a Congress of Nations, with a high court of
judicature, or arbitration established by treaties be
tween nations" seems prophetic of things which

96 CHAELES SUMNEE
were to come half a century later, and of hopes even
yet deferred. This address called out warm com
mendations from men with whom he was later to be
closely associated, — among others, Palfrey and
Seward. Although his activity in the Peace Society
ended in the following year, Sumner's interest in
this movement continued unabated. In the Senate
he was the frequent champion of arbitration ; and
in his wUl he left to Harvard College $1,000 in frust
for an annual prize for the best dissertation by any
student on " Universal Peace, and the methods by
which war may be permanently superseded."
In this period, 1845-47, Sumner was drawn into a
controversy which could hardly have arisen in any
other city in the world. For twenty years there had
been in existence the Boston Prison Discipline So
ciety, with a membership made up of some of Bos
ton's most aristocratic and philanthropic citizens.
The principal question then at issue concerned the
merits of the separate (Pennsylvania) system as
contrasted with the congregate (Auburn) system.
The officers of the Boston society favored the latter,
and at the annual meeting, in the Park Street
Church, in 1845, the perfunctory reading of the sec
retary's report was followed by a motion for its ac
ceptance made by a prominent lawyer, who strongly
condemned the Pennsylvania system. At that in
stant the dull monotony of the meeting came to an
end, for near the front of the auditorium there rose
a tall young man, in close-buttoned blue frock-coat.
Mounting upon the rail of his pew, he passed rapidly

IN THE ANTI-SLAVEEY EANKS 97
from pew to pew until he stood upon the platform,
where with but scant courtesy to the chairman he
plunged into a scathing arraignment of the report,
which he continued to assail for half an hour. Said
an eye-witness : " It was like the descent of some
unknown and unexpected god from Olympus.
There was anger and fear and impatience on the
platform ; but the congregation was with the
speaker. He came like a breeze on a calm, dull
day at sea."
Sumner was urged to make this protest by Dr.
Howe, whose penological studies had led him to be
lieve that the Society was doing gross injustice to
the Pennsylvania system. Sumner's unwelcome in
terruption resulted in the appointment of a committee
of investigation. The next year, and again the year
following, the controversy was renewed. Its subject
is too remote from present interest to make the men
tion of its incidents profitable ; but at the time it
stirred the city profoundly. In 1847 on eight hot
evenings in May and June Tremont Temple was
thronged with eager listeners to these debates, last
ing till almost midnight The chief attraction had
come to be less the penological question at issue than
the dauntless and unwearied champion who had
entered the arena against the management of the So
ciety and its rich and conservative supporters. Al
though time seems to have given judgment against
the Pennsylvania system, all Sumner's moral en
thusiasm was then aroused in what he believed was
a battle for justice. In these debates he gained im-

98 CHAELES SUMNEE
mensely in self-control and in adroitness in dealing
with opponents. One unfortunate result was that
in the heat of his onslaught he little heeded the
weight of his weapons, and, as many a time in later
life, his words left wounds that never ceased to
rankle, although he was quite unconscious of giving
personal offense. Au officer of the Society, who
bore the brunt of the defense, was a man of the
highest connections both by blood and by marriage
iu exclusive Boston society, aud cold glances and
curt greetings soon began to show Sumner how this
"Boston" could resent what it deemed an affront.
Sumuer had reached the parting of the ways. He
had become an orator of high rank, but a career of
any unity or stable effectiveness seemed far off.
Moreover, he had aroused distrust if not aversion by
his growing radicalism in American politics and by
his avowed sympathy with ultra-democratic move
ments abroad, and also by the personalities which
he had directed against some of Boston's most rep
resentative men. What was his future to be?
Should he curb the impulses of the radical aud re
former and conform himself to the standards of the
conservative and cultivated society that had shown
him warm hospitality upon his return from Europe ?
Hillard was making concessions which kept those
doors open with friendly welcome for him ; and
few men have been more susceptible to the charm of
luxurious surroundings and of cultivated society
than was Charles Sumner. Or should he put his
enthusiasm and eloquence without restraint at the

IN THE ANTI SLA VEEY EANKS 99
service of freedom and peace, and become a prophet
of revolt ? The decision was hardly left to Sumner.
The call of the times determined the answer.
In no other state had the project to increase the
power of slavery by the annexation of Texas aroused
more opposition and resentment than in Massachu
setts. The spirit of the Puritans breathed in the
address prepared by Webster, Charles Allen and
S. C. Phillips, for the convention which assembled
in Faneuil Hall, January 29, 1845, to voice the Bay
State's sentiment: — "Massachusetts denounces the
iniquitous project in its inception, and in every
stage of its progress ; in its means and its end, and
in all its purposes and pretenses of its authors."
Yet not a few of the most infiuential Whigs held
aloof from this protest, and when, a few weeks later,
annexation became an accomplished fact, the Whig
leaders as well as conservative business men showed
a disposition to acquiesce and to try to focus atten
tion upon the tariff as the chief issue between parties.
But it was clear that Southern leaders were aim
ing at the admission of Texas, that its influence
might restore the balance in the Senate. Against
this next step, all those Whigs whose opposition to
slavery was a matter of principle joined in vigorous
revolt. American party politics had seemed to
Sumner sordid and repulsive, but now when the
"Conscience Whigs" were brought together by
their horror ofthe Texas "conspiracy," he did not
hesitate as to where he should stand.
From his earliest boyhood Sumner's associations

100 CHAELES SUMNEE
had predisposed him against slavery. His father
was a mau of deep convictions as to the evil of the
institution and outspoken in asserting the equal
rights of men of every race. Sumner's first contact
with slavery was in 1834. He had been brought up
in Boston, had received the best that Harvard Col
lege could give, had fiuished his studies in the law
school with distinguished credit, and was now mak
ing a leisurely trip to Washington. To his father
he wrote : "The whole country [between Baltimore
and Washington] was barren and cheerless. . . .
Por the first time I saw slaves, and my worst pre
conception of their appearance and ignorance did
not fall as low as their actual stupidity. They ap
pear to be nothing more than moving masses of fiesh,
unendowed with anything of intelligence above the
brutes. I have now an idea of the blight upon that
part ofour country in which they live." '
It must be confessed that from this it would seem
that the sight of men and women in bondage aroused
little heat in the blood of this young Boston student.
His aesthetic sensibilities were offended rather than
his human sympathy kindled. The cause of the
slave at first appealed to his head rather than to his
heart. Nevertheless, the Liberator was the first
Pfiper to which he ever subscribed, and as early as
1836 he was raising the question with Lieber, then
residing in South Carolina, whether emancipation
were not practicable, and marveling that Lieber
could endure the bondage of opinion at the South.
' February 24, 1834.

IN THE ANTI-SLAVEEY EANKS 101
While in Europe Sumner discussed the subject with
Sismondi, whom he found " a thorough AboUtion
ist, and astonished that our country will not take a
lesson from the ample page of history and eradicate
slavery." It was a gratification to Sumner's hered
itary sentiment of race-equality to find at the Con
vent of Palazzuola "a native of Abyssinia, mingling
in delightful and affectionate familiarity with the
Franciscan friars, whose visitor and scholar he was."
And among the listeners at lectures in the I^cole de
Droit he was glad to see two or three blacks, or
rather mulattoes, — two-thirds black, perhaps, —
dressed quite a la mode, and having the easy, jaunty
air of young men of fashion, who were well received
by their fellow students. . . . Their color seemed
to be no objection to them. I was glad to see this ;
though with American impressions, it seemed very
strange. It must be, then, that the distinction be
tween free blacks and whites among us is derived
from educatiou, and does not exist in the nature of
things." Sumner showed his own sentiments as to
race equality by canceling — as did Emerson — an en
gagement before a Lyceum which had adopted a
rule for the exclusion of colored persons from their
lectures, — a rule which his protest caused to be re
scinded. Upon his return to America, his first contact with
slavery issues was in the question as to the right of
inquiry to determine the nature of a suspected slaver
on the high seas, and in the Creole case. In both
instances his writings were those of a jurist, but in

102 CHAELES SUMNEE
the Creole controversy his human sympathies are
frankly avowed. He collaborated with Dr. Chan
ning in his stern arraignment of Webster's letter
upon this case. In Sumner's correspondence his
opposition to slavery takes on a note of greater
severity and there appear in germ some of the doc
trines which he was to develop later : — his conten
tion, for example, that slavery was purely a local
institution, drawing its vitality from state laws;
and his insistence that "the great moral blockade,
with which the South was to be surrounded, be
strengthened and more firmly established." He in
dignantly repudiated the notion that because North
ern opponents of slavery were debarred from inter
fering politically with the evil in the states where it
existed, they were called upon to suppress their
sympathy with the slave and their detestation ofthe
system of which he was a victim. Sumner held that
slavery was a national evil, for which to a large ex
tent the nation and all its parts were responsible,
and which to a large extent the nation might re
move. He was greatly aroused by the rendition of
several slaves from Boston. To Longfellow, then in
Europe, he appealed to send home some poems on
slavery, — " some stirring words that shall move the
whole land" ; Whittier, too, he urged to attack the
evil. " The literature ofthe world," he wrote, "is
turning against slavery. We shall soon have it in
a state of moral blockade."
Sumner always insisted that he was "a Unionist
and a Constitutionalist " ; the aggression of the South

IN THE ANTI-SLAVEEY EANKS 103
brought him into the political arena. He denounced
the attempt to annex Texas as "infamous," involv
ing a violation of the Constitution and the laws of
nations, and the principles of good morals and fel
lowship. Not until the question of the admission
of Texas as a slaveholding state arose had Sumner
ever spoken at a political meeting or sought to ex
press in public his opposition to slavery ; he had
had no relish for politics, and he had too much rev
erence for the Constitution to ally himself with Gar-
risonlan Abolitionists. But from the hour when in
FaneuITHall he stoodTTorth to oppose the admission
of the new slave state, he never turned back. His
aim, as he declared to Cobden, alittle later, was " to
see slavery abolished everywhere within the sphere
of the national government, — which is in the District
of Columbia, on the high seas, and in the domestic
slave trade ; and beyond this, to have this govern
ment for freedom, so far as it can exert an influence,
and not for slavery."
To the ' ' Conscience Whigs ' ' of Massachusetts the
admission of Texas only emphasized the need of
more vigorous resistance for the future. At that
time the Boston Whig press was far less sensitive
to the evils of slavery than to suggestions from those
identified with manufacturing interests that no
division must be occasioned in Whig ranks. Find
ing editors unwilling to allow them any wide freedom
of expression. Palfrey, Adams, Sumner, S. C. Phil
lips and Wilson bought a struggling newspaper, and
in the summer of 1846 the Daily Whig was launched

104 CHAELES SUMNEE
with Charles Francis Adams as its editor and Charles
Sumner as a frequent contributor.
The logical sequel of the annexation of Texas was
the war with Mexico. In the two houses of Con
gress, only sixteen men had the honesty and courage
to vote against the war appropriatiou bill, which
supporters of the administration had had the ef
frontery to preface by the declaration, "By the act
of the Eepublic of Mexico a state of war exists
between that government and the United States."
The disgrace of the Whig party was the greater
since it is clear that the war measure would have
been passed without their votes, reluctantly given,
doubtless from the fear that a failure to support the
army at the front would react heavily a gainst them, as
against the Federalists in 1812, and injure their pros
pects in the approaching election. Massachusetts
sentiment was pronounced against the war bill, and
all her Whig members but two voted against it.
Both of these were from the eastern part ofthe state,
and the dominant one was Eobert C. Winthrop.
Winthrop was a man after Boston's own heart.
In a community where pride of birth counted for
much, he was the head of the family most dis
tinguished from the earliest colonial days. He had
ample means, and from his studies he had gone
directly into public life. In his twenties he had
been speaker of the Massachusetts House of Eepre
sentatives, and at thirty he had been sent to Con
gress, where he had served with distinction and to
the entire satisfaction of his aristocratic and con-

IN THE ANTI-SLAVEEY EANKS 105
servative constituency. He was a polished gentle
man and an orator of Mgh rank. In debate he was
said to be the peer of any member of the House.
He offered no explanation of Ms vote in favor of
the war measure, and until midsummer the Whig
press of Boston made hardly any reference to this
break in the Bay State delegation. In July,
however, Adams came out in the Whig with a
severe criticism of Winthrop's vote asa "positive
sanction of the acts of the administration," and
raised the question whether he had not thereby
"set his name in perpetual attestation of a false
hood." Friendly editors hurried to Winthrop's
defense, urging that the situation was a complicated
one, and that, in supporting the measure for the
national defense, his vote did not necessarily imply
approval of its preamble. It was at this stage that
Sumner took a hand in the coutroversy, — not will
ingly, for he had had friendly personal relations
with Winthrop and cordially approved most things
in his public career. But at the urging of Adams
and others he published a letter, signed "Boston,"
in which he denied the right of a representative to
put his name to a legislative lie. In a second letter,
he insisted that the bill, which comprised at once a
virtual declaration of war and a false statement as
to its origin, ought to have been opposed by the
entire delegation ; yet he again took occasion to ex
press his high regard for Winthrop's character and
public service. Sumner then wrote a note to Win
throp, frankly avowing himself the author of these

106 CHAELES SUMNEE
two letters. In his reply Winthrop showed that he
was smarting under what he deemed unjust censure,
but expressed the hope that circumstances might
occur which would enable them to restore their
pleasant relations without loss of self-respect ou
either side. Sumner responded with a personal
letter, which explained how reluctantly he had be
come Winthrop's critic, but insisted that a congress
man's vote was public property, and that it was the
duty of one who felt as he did upon that vote to de
nounce it distinctly, unequivocally, and publicly.
He closed with the words: "I hope, my dear sir,
that we may always meet as friends. It will not be
easy for me to proceed into any other relation."
Nevertheless, only three days later, Sumner pub
lished a third article on " Mr. Winthrop's Vote ou
the War BiU," more rhetorical and denunciatory
than the two earlier ones. He asserted that Win
throp by that vote had "given his sanction to all
the desolation and bloodshed of the war. . . .
Surely this is no common act. It cannot be forgotten
on earth ; it must be remembered in heaven. Blood !
blood ! is on the hands of the representative from
Boston. Not all great Neptune's ocean can wash
them clean ! " ' To Winthrop this letter seemed ' ' full
of insinuations as to his motives and imputations on
'In an open letter to Winthrop, two months later, Sumner
reiterated and heightened these charges: " Through you, they
[the people of Boston] are raade to declare unjust and cowardly
war, with superadded falsehood, in the cause of slavery." Thia
guilt " incarnadines the halls of Congress ; nay, more, through
you it reddens the hands of your constituents in Boston."

IN THE ANTI-SLAVEEY EANKS 107
his integrity," and he declined further social rela
tions with a man who had thus arraigned him,
adding, "My haud is not at the service of any man
who has denounced it with such ferocity, as being
stained with blood."
This incident has been narrated with some fulness
for two reasons. In the first place, it affords an
excellent illustration of certain peculiarities of
Sumner's mind and habit. He rarely spoke ex
temporaneously or wrote hastily. Whatever he
said or published had been carefully elaborated in
the quiet of his study. He was not a rhetorician in
the sense that he sought to make the worse appear
the better reason, but when once he became con
vinced that a man or an act ought to be denounced,
he gave himself up to the task with an abandon like
that of the writer of the imprecatory Psalms. His
sense of proportion gave way under the orator's im
pulse and he would repeat and heighten his charges
with a nagging persistence often more exasperating
than the substance of the arraignment. He also
remained strangely obtuse to the pain which his
words were causing. Looked at from a distance of
threescore years, the historian does not hesitate to
pronounce Winthrop's vote a serious mistake ;
though, in view of all the facts, he cannot doubt
that in the perplexity of the case, the vote was
honestly and conscientiously given. Yet in public
print, Sumner, in a fierce crescendo of denunciation,
could accuse Winthrop of sanctioning "unquestion
ably the most wicked act in our history, " — and at the

108 CHAELES SUMNEE
same time he could expect to continue with him upon
terms of personal friendship.
The other point of most importance in connection
with this controversy is its social and political
effects upon Sumner. His attacks upon Winthrop
created a deep and lasting bitterness toward him
on the part of Winthrop's friends. He was the
idol of Boston's best society. Prom this time,
houses where Sumner had been a frequent and wel
come visitor were closed to him. ' When a guest at a
party given by Mr. Ticknor asked if Mr. Sumner
were to be present, that social autocrat replied :
"He is outside the pale of society." This ostra
cism was imposed upon others who refused to banish
slavery to the background of politics. Even Adams,
despite his family history, was not exempt, while
Palfrey and Dana and many another met with slights
and rebuffs from those who had hitherto seemed
warm friends. This ostracism brought to Sumner
a keener hurt than to other anti-slavery leaders, for
he had no hearth of his own, and the hospitalities
of these beautiful Boston homes had been a solace
and a delight. "It is the opposition to Winthrop
that aroused personal feelings against me," he wrote
to his brother. " It has cost me friendships which
I valued much." But he had no thought of barter
ing his manhood to retain them.
' Sumner once told Phillips : ' ' Never after that act [his espous
ing the anti-slavery cause] did I receive a single invitation ex
cept from Longfellow at Cambridge aud Prescott in Boston."
Of course this ostracism came to an end before his last years,
— Phillips, as reported in Boston Dail-y Advertiser, March 13, 1877.

IN THB ANTI-SLAVEEY EANKS 109
In the fall of 1846 Sumner attended his first
caucus and began to take an active hand in party
politics. In the Whig convention the managers
had planned to have Winthrop make a speech
"giving the key-note " ; but urgent calls arose for
Sumner, aud he took the platform and made an
earnest plea that the party then and there, in
Faneuil Hall, "vow perpetual allegiance to the
right and perpetual hostility to slavery." ' He
pledged his adherence to constitutional methods,
but affirmed that the Constitution might and should
be amended so as to make possible more aggressive
action against slavery. Winthrop's speech em
phasized other issues, particularly the tariff, and
its obvious intent was to arrest any tendency to
ward committing the party to a definite anti-slavery
policy. Then followed the consideration of resolu
tions proposed by the "Commercial Whigs" and
of another series clearly voicing the sentiments of
the "Conscience Whigs." Excitement grew in
tense. It seemed likely that the anti-slavery resolu
tions would be adopted, when, after hurried consulta
tion with other leaders, Lawrence went out and
returned escorting Daniel Webster. The effect was
electric. Delegates parted to right and left, opening
a path, as that majestic presence advanced to the
' " Sumner besought Webster to heed the changing aspects of
the time, and add to his great title. Defender of the Constitution,
the greater name. Defender of Humanity. Alas ! it was de
manding dawn of the sunset ! It was beseeching yesterday to
return to-morrow ! It was imploring Webster to be Charles
Sumner ! "— G. W. Curtis, Orations, Vol. Ill, p. 228.

110 CHAELES SUMNEE
front of the hall. Not a word did he say ; yet
his coming instantly started crystallization among
the turbulent elemeuts. In spite of earnest plead
ing from Charles Allen, the Young Whigs' amend
ment was doomed. No sooner were the slated
resolutions passed than Webster addressed the con
vention, closing with the impressive words : " For
my part, in the dark and troubled night that is
upon us, I see no star above the horizon promising
light to guide us but the intelligent, patriotic, united
Whig party of the United States."
In a review of the proceedings of the convention,
Sumner charged that it had been dominated by
those who regarded the tariff as a higher principle
of union than love of freedom. One editor after an
other declined to print this, either because it would
alienate proprietors and advertisers, or on the
ground that it would widen dissensions within the
party ; but Adams brought it out in the Whig.
Sumner's next activity was in connection with a
Faneuil Hall meeting to voice indignation at the
recent abduction of a fugitive slave, which had
been carried out in contempt of the laws of the
commonwealth. At the solicitation of Sumner and
Howe, John Quincy Adams consented to preside
over the meeting. It was the last time he was to
appear before a public assemblage in Massachusetts.
But neither the presence of the commonwealth's
first citizen nor the addresses of Sumner, Phillips,
Parker and other eloquent speakers could give
respectability to such a gathering in the view of

IN THE ANTI-SLAVEEY EANKS 111
Boston's leading merchants and manufacturers.
They were conspicuous by their absence. The
meeting received scant notice in the newspapers,
and most of them referred to it iu terms of censure.
At the time when the Whig began its outspoken
criticism of Winthrop for his vote upon the Mex
ican War measure, there was no thought of or
ganizing opposition to his returu to Congress ; but
as the election drew near, the anti-slavery leaders
became convinced that it would be wise, since the
issue had been made so sharp, to place another can
didate in the field, not with any expectation of
electing him, but in order to furnish a rallying point
for moral sentiment. Sumner was the logical selec
tion. It was he who had forced the issue to the
front. At the time of the meeting to put a candi
date in nomination, Sumner was in Maine. The
mention of his name was greeted with tremendous
applause, and his service seemed so essential to the
strengthening of the movement that in spite of his
repeated refusal to allow consideration of his name,
he was forthwith nominated. But Sumner felt a re
pugnance not only to office-holding in general, but
to this offlce in particular, lest his criticism of Win
throp's course should be suspected to have sprung
from an ambition to succeed him. Although many
of his friends thought him oversensitive to any
charge of place-seeking, he could not be swerved
from his purpose, and positively declined to stand
for election. Dr. Howe's name was substituted.
In the meeting in his support Sumner made most ef-

112 CHAELES SUMNEE
fective use of an historical parallel : he recalled how
Chatham, Burke and Fox had been unceasing in
their denunciation of what they deemed an unjust
war, and insisted that in America at that moment
the higher patriotism demanded the instant with
drawal of our troops fr'om Mexico. The result of
the campaign was at no time iu doubt. Winthrop
was elected, Howe's supporters haviug made but
small inroads upon the normal Whig vote in sup
port of a regular nominee of such eminence. But
Massachusetts' attitude was, in a way, authorita
tively reversed a few weeks later when the legisla
ture, by a vote of nearly two to one, adopted a
series of resolutions (which Sumner had drafted for a
legislative committee) in connection with a report
upon the Mexican War. These denounced the war
in unmeasured terms, and called for the withdrawal
of American troops from Mexico, a doctrine which
Adams declared Sumner had been the first man in
the United States to proclaim and to argue at
length. In the fall of 1847 Sumner was placed at the head
of the one hundred and more Boston delegates to the
Whig state convention. Here again the contest was
renewed between the two wings of the party, espe
cially over Palfrey's resolution, binding Massachu
setts Whigs to "support no men for the offices of
President and Vice-President of the United States
but such as are known by their acts or declared
opinions to be opposed to the extension of slavery."
Palfrey, Sumner, Adams and Allen spoke earnestly

IN THE ANTI-SLAVEEY EANKS 113
in favor of thus making resistance to slavery the
paramount issue iu the selection of caudidates, a
seutimeut which was greeted by hisses especially
from the ranks of the Boston delegates. Winthrop
led the opposition to the passage of this resolution
and succeeded in defeating it, thus for the secoud
time blocking the purposes of the anti-slavery men
in state convention. In the ensuing session of
Congress Winthrop was a candidate for the speaker
ship, and Southerners were the more attracted to
him from the fact that he had made himself obnox
ious to anti-slavery men in his own state. Before the
balloting began, Palfrey sent to Winthrop certain
inquiries as to the policy which he intended, if
elected, to promote by his committee appointments,
particularly in regard to the continuance of the
Mexican War and other matters relating to slavery.
Winthrop refused to make any advance statement,
and in consequence both Giddings and Palfrey — al
though personally urged by John Quincy Adams to
vote for Winthrop — voted against him, an action
which called down upon them the wrath of the con
servative Whigs. ' Sumner immediately sent Palfrey
a letter of warm commendation and came to his de
fense in two spirited newspaper articles, insisting
that a man who deemed opposition to slavery the
one essential issue and who was an unwavering op-
' It was this vote of Palfrey's that called forth the famous
"Remarks of Increase D. O'Phace, at an extrumpery caucus in
State Street, as reported by Mr. H. Biglow," beginning
" No ? Hez he ? He bain 't, though ? Wut ? Voted agin him?
If the bird of our country could ketch him, she'd skin him ! "

114 CHAELES SUMNEE
ponent of the war, could not with self-respect
support a man who was hesitating iu his attitude
toward slavery and whose vote had given sanction
to the war.

CHAPTEE vn
MASSACHUSETTS AND THE COMPROMISE ; SUMNER' S
ELECTION TO THE SENATE
No sooner was the war with Mexico at an end
thau the question became urgent, what should be
done with the ceded territory, and what would be
the effect of the acquisition of such domain upon
the balance between the free and slave states? So
big with embarrassment and danger had this ques
tion loomed in advauce, that not a few men had
sought to forestall it by securing from Congress be
fore the end of the war a declaration against any
acquisition of territory from Mexico. To this
scheme both Webster aud Wiuthrop gave their
earnest support. To Sumner, ou the other hand,
the project seemed futile, for he believed that the
acquisition of such territory was a thing inevitable.
Moreover, throughout his life, he showed himself a
zealous expansionist whenever he believed annex
ation of the territory in question would make for
both the strength of the nation aud the advantage
of the people to be annexed.'
The year 1848 was a time that tried men's souls.
Perhaps the hardest testing came to the old mem
bers of the Whig party of the type of Webster.
Conscious of the party's weakness with the mass of
' Infra, pp. 318-319 ; 363-364.

116 CHAELES SUMNEE
the people, the Whig leaders again made anxious
search for a vote-getter as their candidate for the
presidency, and finally nominated Taylor, a Louisi
ana slave-owner who had won glory in the victories
of a war instigated and fought to advance the
interests of slavery. Upon the instant, this stulti
fying nomination opened schism in the party :
Charles Allen and Henry Wilson, the most in
fluential members of the Massachusetts delegation
in the national convention at Philadelphia, declared
that they would do all in their power to defeat the
nominee, and withdrew from the convention, Allen
declaring that the Whig party was from that day
dissolved.' Indeed, its dissolution had already been foreseen,
and in Massachusetts there had beeu prepared in
Sumner's office a call for a convention of all citizens
of the commonwealth opposed to the nomination of
Cass and of Taylor.^ This call was headed by
Charles Francis Adams, and Sumner's name stood
second on the list of signers. In response, there
gathered in Worcester, June 28, 1848, a throng of
5,000 earnest opponents of slavery, and beneath the
trees of the Common — for no hall would hold the
crowd — as Sumner himself later asserted, "was the
beginning of the separate Free Soil organization in
'G. F. Hoar, Autobiogrfiphy of Seventy Years, Vol. I, p. 146.
Wilson, Bise a-nd Fall ofthe Slave Po-wer in America, Vol. II, p.
136. ' Folding and directing the call for this convention was the
first political work ever done by George Frisbie Hoar. — Auto
biography, p. 148.

ELECTION TO THE SENATE 117
Massachusetts, which afterward grew into the Ee
publican party." Half a century later Senator
Hoar recalled as the most vivid impression of that
memorable day "the manly form of Charles Sum
ner in the splendor and vigor and magnetic power
of his youthful eloquence." ' Strong anti-slavery
resolutions were adopted, and six delegates were
chosen to attend a convention which was held, six
weeks later, at Buffalo, where Martin Van Buren
was nominated for the presidency. Sumner at
tended this first national convention of the Free
Soilers, but not as a member, since it was thought
good politics to choose the delegates from among
leaders who had been closely identified with exist
ing parties.
' Over words used by Sumner in bis speech at Worcester,
charging that Taylor's nomination had been " brought about
by an unhallowed union, conspiracy rather let it be called,
. . . between the Lords of the lash and the Lords of the
loom," a heated controversy arose between Nathan Appleton
and Sumner. Copies of these interesting letters were presented
in manuscript to the Boston Public Library in 1874. In justi
fying his language, Sumner tells of an interview with Abbott
Lawrence, on the latter's invitation, in which, ten days before
the Philadelphia convention, Lawrence told Sumner that Tay
lor would be nominated and that be had consented to allow his
own name to be used for Vice-President. Sumner most ear
nestly protested, bnt Lawrence said : "What can I do about it?
I am in up to the eyes. ' ' Mr. Appleton insisted that for mouths
before the convention met he had been convinced that Taylor
was the only Whig who could be elected ; that he conld be, and
was worthy to be ; that there was no chance of Webster's being
either nominated or elected. Lawrence's nomination he be
lieved was defeated "by his fellow citizens and neighbors "and
he added : " I consider tbe conduct of Allen and Wilson in that
convention as the raost disgraceful piece of political swindling
which has ever fallen within my ken, a transaction from
which every honorable mind sbould revolt."

118 CHAELES SUMNEE
Into the campaign which ensued Sumner threw
himself with great vigor. He was made chairman
of the committee charged with its management.
There was urgent demand for his services in other
states, but, with the exception of a week of cam
paigning in Maine, he devoted all his energies to
his own state. He spoke in twenty-seven cities and
towns. Everywhere he captivated his audiences,
winning approval of his speeches even from oppo
nents and a hostile press, which called him the
"Demosthenes" of his party. Though he ordi
narily spoke for three hours, he kept his hearers
keyed to a high pitch of enthusiasm. Only at
Cambridge did he encounter disturbance, till it was
silenced by Sumner's retort: "The young man
who hisses will regret it ere his hair turns gray.
He can be no son of New Eugland ; her soil would
spurn him."
What this campaign meant for Sumner's future
was perhaps less clearly understood by him than by
some of his friends. It made him known, through
out the state, no longer merely as a platform orator
upon literary themes, but as an effective political
leader and debater. Longfellow wrote in his diary
on October 22, 1848: "Sumner stands now, as he
himself feels, just at the most critical point of his
life. Shall he plunge inevitably into politics or
not? That is the question ; and it is already an
swered. He inevitably will do so, and after
many defeats will be very distinguished as a
leader. . . . From politics as a career he still

ELECTION TO THE SENATE 119
shrinks back. When he has once burned his ships,
there will be no retreat. He already holds in his
hands the lighted torch."
Sumner received the unanimous nomination of
the Free Soilers for member of Congress from the
Boston district. There was no hope of securing his
election, but the campaign of educatiou was effect
ive, notwithstanding the fact that he polled less
than a third the number of votes that were cast for
Winthrop. But Sumuer shared with other leaders
of the movement the bitter resentment of the
Whigs against the Free Soilers, painful separations
from former friends and violent abuse from the
Boston press. He felt these hurts keenly, but con
soled himself with John Quincy Adams's words to
him, in the last year of his life, ' ' No man is abused,
whose influence is not felt."
As a result of their efforts in the national election
of 1848, the Free Soilers saw little prospect of mak
ing large enough accessions to their ranks to play
an important part as an independent organization.
To many of their leaders, including Sumner, it
seemed wisest to adopt an opportunist policy : to
hold fast to their anti-slavery principles, but to seek
their practical advancement by voting with the
party which would make the most valuable con
cessions. An alliance between Whigs and anti-
slavery men in New Hampshire had already suc
ceeded in electing John P. Hale to the United
States Senate. Forthwith a similar coalition begau
to be mooted in Massachusetts between the Free

120 CHAELES SUMNEE
Soilers and the Democrats. Their combined vote
would exceed that of the conservative Whigs by
nearly 12,000. To this policy of coalition Sumner
felt none of the repugnance which held back
many of his former friends, whose connection with
the Whig party had been more intimate than his.
Party to Sumner, all his life long, was merely a
means to an end. In their state convention iu
1849 the Democrats adopted resolutions opposing
the extension of slavery in the territories. Sumner
therefore favored alliance with them iu the election
of anti-slavery candidates. With little effort they
succeeded in electing thirteen members of the Sen
ate and one hundred and thirty of the House, — a
long step toward the more effective coalition of the
following year.
In the country at large there were beginning to
appear results of the Mexican War vastly different
from those sought by the men who forced it upon
the country. The convention that framed the con
stitution on which was based California's applica
tion for admission to the Union, by unanimous vote
inserted in it a section prohibiting slavery, and the
people of New Mexico forthwith petitioned Con
gress that slavery be prohibited in the law for their
territorial government. The thought of such con
cessions was iutolerable to Southern leaders iu Con
gress, and in 1849 and 1850 they did not hesitate to
threaten secession if Congress should prohibit slavery
in the territories or admit California as a free state.
The issue had become full of menace, when Clay iu-

ELECTION TO THE SENATE 121
troduced his scheme of pacification ; its provisions
were under debate for many months before they
finally secured enactment as separate laws, which
have become known collectively as the Compromise
of 1850. Its fate still hung in the balance, when
Webster came to its support. It is needless here to
review the arguments of that epoch-making speech.
There is no question that it exercised a most potent
influence in securing the adoption of the compromise
measures. But the fact that here needs emphasis is
that Webster's Seventh of March speech produced
a revolution in Massachusetts politics by virtue of
which withiu a few months Webster's place in the
Senate was taken not by his logical successor, Win
throp, but by the radical, Sumner.
Historians may continue to debate whether ambi
tion or enlightened patriotism dictated that speech.
Our present concern is with its effect upon Massa
chusetts. The Webster who had repeatedly op
posed the extension of slavery and who had taken
the lead iu insisting that the Wilmot Proviso must
be applied to the territory ceded by Mexico, now
opposed such restrictions. That Webster should
find himself out of sympathy with some Abolition
ists was not strange ; but in this speech he showed
no discrimination between radicals who denounced
the Constitution as a league with Hell, and men of
an utterly different stamp, who urged that the
national government's acts should extend rather
than curtail the domain of freedom : — all these he
grouped together and heaped upon them coarse

122 CHAELES SUMNEE
abuse and derisive epithets. Most disheartening
of all was the support which he gave to the barbarous
Fugitive Slave Bill. The feeling produced in the
hearts of thousands throughout the commonwealth ¦
found fitting expression iu "Ichabod," which
Whittier declared was written "in one of the
saddest moments of my life," as "the outcome of
the surprise aud grief and forecast of evil con
sequences" caused by the reading of this speech:
"So fallen ! so lost ! the light withdrawn
Which once he wore !
The glory from his gray hairs gone
Forevermore ! ' '
Nevertheless, as the summer months came and
the compromise measures still hung in suspense,
Webster's arguments and influence began to tell
strongly with the timorous and with the traders.
Dana later declared : " The truth is, Daniel Web
ster was strong enough to subjugate for a time the
moral sentiment of New England. ' ' ' Massachusetts
manufacturers and Boston merchants were per
suaded that there was no chance of securing pro
tective modifications of the tariff unless at the price
of concessions to the South. In less than a month
from the time when Webster broke his silence, his
course as to the Compromise was approved in a
public letter, signed by hundreds of Boston's most
representative men, including not a few in Sumner's
'From his diary, June 25, 1854. Adams's Biography of
Dana, Vol. I, p. 286.

ELECTION TO THE SENATE 123
cfrcle of intimates — even Prescott and Felton ; and
the news of the final passage of the Compromise was
hailed by the firing of a hundred guns on Boston
Common. Meantime, in July, Webster had be
come Fillmore's Secretary of State and Wiuthrop
had been appointed to the seat temporarily vacant
in the Senate. To fill the vacancy thus caused in
the House, Sumner was nominated by the Free
Soilers, but was defeated by a vote of five to one,
by S. A. Eliot, whom the Whigs nominated
avowedly because of Ms earnest support of the
Compromise, and whom Webster greeted in a pri
vate letter, upon his arrival in Washington, as
"the personification of Boston, — ever intelligent,
ever patriotic, ever glorious Boston." ' Eliot, who
had voted for the anti-slavery resolutions recently
passed by the Massachusetts legislature, now voted
in favor of the Fugitive Slave Bill. He declined re
election at the end of his brief term, and was suc
ceeded by another of Boston's leading citizens of
similar views.
The enforcement of the new Fugitive Slave Law
soon aroused intense opposition throughout the
North. Nevertheless reclamations were made in
various cities, even of persons who under the older
law had been safe from seizure. The expression of
anti-slavery sentiment in Boston and especially the
holding of a meeting in Faneuil Hall to denounce
the new law seemed to arouse its upholders to a de-
' Eliot was the man whom Sumner had most strongly an
tagonized in the Prison Discipline controversy. Supra, p. 98.

124 CHAELES SUMNEE
termination that in Boston it should be most rigor.
ously enforced. A few fugitives were spirited
away, but this only stirred the national administra
tion to renewed energy. Webster, himself, from his
office of Secretary of State, " took a personal interest
in having the law executed in Boston, and assumed
the direction ofthe prosecutions, although it properly
belonged to the Attorney-General." '
Sumner was one of the defense of Sims, a negro
living in Boston, who was claimed by a Georgia
slaveholder. Sumner laid emphasis upon the un
judicial powers delegated by the new law to a com
missioner — not a judge — in that without trial by
jury he could give a certificate of rendition, although
the negro was not allowed to speak in his own
defense and no adequate means were provided of
testing the truthfulness of the claimant's testimony.
But all efforts in Sims' s behalf proved unavailing.
Boston adherents of compromise presently found
divers means of disciplining those who were not
yielding it a supine compliance. Ostracism such aa
Sumner had earlier experienced was now extended
to others, and the leading Boston papers opened
their columns to communications urging that Sum
ner and Howe, Dana and Parker and others named
be boycotted (in modern phrase) not only in social
but also in business relations, that the cutting off of
their livelihood might reduce them to silence.
Even before the Compromise measures were finally
adopted by Congress, the Free Soilers in the Massa-
'Adams, Biography of Dana, Vol. I, p. 228.

ELECTION TO THB SENATE 125
chusetts legislature had been outspoken in their de
nunciation, and demanded the passage of resolu
tions which should put the state iu opposition
to the attitude that Webster had assumed. In all
this movement the lead was taken by Henry Wilson,
the "Natick Cobbler," who has probably never
been excelled in Massachusetts in his power of
getting close to the great masses of the people and
of understanding their thought and will. To the
Whigs, who defeated these resolutions, he boldly
declared: "I will go out from this hall, and will
unite with any party or body of men to drive you
from power, rebuke Dauiel Webster, and place in
his seat a senator true to the principles and senti
ments ofthe commonwealth." At his call, as chair
man of the.Pree Soil state committee, there assembled
early in September fifty or more of the leading Free
Soilers. He bluntly stated the object of the meeting
to be to " consider the policy of cooperation with
the Democrats at the next election," particularly
with reference to securing the election of a United
States senator. This proposed coalition was earnestly
opposed by the more prominent of the Free Soil
leaders, such as Palfrey, Adams, Dana and Samuel
Hoar. They were Whigs of many years' standing,
and could not overcome a repugnance to alliance
with the Democrats, — a repugnance which Sumuer
did not share. In this matter he proved himself a
better prophet and a shrewder politician than men
more versed in party warfare. In the middle of
October he wrote to Charles Allen: "Nothing is

126 CHAELES SUMNEE
clearer to me than this. Our friends should, if pos
sible, secure the balance of power iu the legislature,
so as to influence the choice of senator. Some are
sanguine that we can elect one of our men. I doubt
this, but by a prudent course aud without any bar
gain, we can obtain control of the [state] Senate.
We can then at least dictate to the Whigs whom
they shall send." ' To Horace Maun, at that time a
candidate for reelection to Congress, he wrote a
fortnight later, urging him to take the field at once.
" In what you say, be careful not to disturb Demo
crats. They are desirous of an excuse for support
ing you." '
Massachusetts Democrats, upon their side, were
favorably disposed to coalition, not only because of
their opposition to the Compromise but because the
existing system of representation in the state did
them great injustice. The constitution required that
the election of state officers should be by a majority
vote ; otherwise, the election was thrown into the
legislature. Moreover, each town elected its repre
sentatives on a general ticket, with the result that to
every legislature Boston sent forty-four Whigs ;
whereas if the city had been districted, the minority
party would have received a very considerable repre
sentation. Further, this solid block of Whigs waa
elected every year from Boston, whereas towns below
a certain population were allowed to send a repre
sentative only a proportional number of years in a
decade. In the year 1850, however, — the year pre-
'Pieroe, Vol. Ill, p. 218. Ubid., p. 219.

ELECTION TO THE SENATE 127
ceding a decennial state valuation, — each town was
allowed to send at least one member ; the result was
that in the large legislature of that year there were
many more Democrats than usual, smarting under
the injustices done their party.
The campaign was sharply contested. The state was
thoroughly covered by the ablest Free Soil speakers,
helped not a little by the eloquence, spirited if
crude, of a number of young men fresh from college,
whose first inspirations in politics may well have
come from Sumner's Lyceum lectures. The excite
ment was made the more tense by the fact that a
fugitive slave case was pending in Boston in the
closing days of the campaign. In most of the
counties and towns the Democrats and Free Soilers
united in support of the same candidates for the
legislature, and their alliance returned Mann to
Congress. In Faneuil Hall, Sumner brought the campaign
to a climax in one of the most effective speeches of
his life.' After brief discussion of the local issues
of the hour, he launched into a scathing denuncia
tion of the new Fugitive Slave Law. He pointed
out its barbarous invasion of human rights, declar
ing that the soul sickened at the contemplation of
this legalized outrage. He challenged the mention
of auy act of shame in the dreary annals of the past
that could "compare in atrocity with this enact
ment of an American Congress." Ofthe President
'"Our Immediate Anti-Slavery Duties," November 6, 1850.
Wwks, Vol. II, pp. 398-424.

128 CHAELES SUMNEE
who signed it, he said : " Other Presidents maj> be
forgotten; but the name signed to the Fugitive
Slave BiU can never be forgotten. There are
depths of infamy as there are heights of fame.
. . . Better for him had he never been born."
Eeferring to the fact that he himself was a commis
sioner of a United States court, " before whom the
panting fugitive may be dragged for the decision of
the question whether he is a freeman or a slave,"
Sumner said, " I cannot forget that I am a ma-n,
although I am a commissioner," — a sentence which
his opponents in Massachusetts at the time and later
in Washington caught up as proving him to be
reckless and inflammatory in word and in deed. He
invoked not violence, but "the contempt, the indig
nation, the abhorrence of the community" as the
weapons which should drive the slave-hunter out of
Massachusetts. To the oft-urged claim that the
Compromise had settled the slavery question, came
his ringing retort, "Nothing, sir, can be settled
which is not right ! "
That speech made Sumner the inevitable choice
for the Senate. Its deliberate intent, as he later de
clared, was to "create a public sentiment which
would render the enforcement of the Fugitive Slave
Law impossible." His audience and the state were
fired by his eloquence and by his courage. The
foes of compromise instantly saw that the placing of
such a force in the Senate would be the greatest gain
they could possibly secure for their cause. In the
election the coalition obtained unhoped for success.

ELECTION TO THE SENATE 129
They blocked the election of a governor, and chose
a majority of ten of the senators and of fifty-four in
the House. Other names were suggested as possi
bilities for the Senate, but as the time for the as
sembling of the legislature approached, Sumner's
name was everywhere conceded to be the one that
would be fixed upon, not only because of his bold
and effective leadership, as in the Faneuil Hall
speech, but also on the ground of political expe
diency, since Sumuer had not antagonized Demo
crats by leadership in the Whig party.
Charles Francis Adams wrote to him from Wash
ington, saying, "The only full consideration that
we can receive [for the coalition] is in securing
your services in the Senate." To this Sumner re
sponded ingenuously, acknowledging that such
au election would be a grateful vindication of
himself against the attacks to which he had been
exposed, and that it would open up an attractive
sphere of usefulness. " But," he added, " notwith
standing these things, I must say that I have not
been able at any time in my inmost heart to bring
myself to desire the post or even to be willing to
take it. My dreams and visions are all in other di
rections. In the course of my life I have had many ;
but none have been in the United States Senate. In
taking that post, I must renounce quiet and repose
forever ; my life henceforward would be in pub
lic affairs. I cannot contemplate this without re
pugnance. It would call upon me to forego those
literary plans and aspirations which I have more

130 CHAELES SUMNEE
at heart than any merely political success." ' No
chiirge is more groundless thau that Charles Sumner
sought this office.
Promptly upon assembling, the two houses of the
legislature organized by the election of Henry Wil
son, President of the Senate, and Nathaniel P.
Bauks, Speaker of the House, positious which, by a
strange coincidence, they were both soou to occupy
in the national legislature. Conference committees
of the Free Soilers and Democrats came together
to determine the programme of elections. The one
thing upon which the Free Soilers insisted was that a
Free Soiler, chosen by them, should be elected to
the United States Senate for the full term ; iu con
sideration of this they were willing to turn over to
the Democrats all the state offices as well as the sen
ator to be chosen for the few weeks of Winthrop's
unexpired term. In their caucus, Jauuary 7th, the
Free Soilers gave a practically unanimous nomina
tion to Charles Sumner ; but when his name was
presented to the Democratic caucus, some members
demurred, preferring a less radical anti-slavery
leader. The matter was referred to the decision of
a two-thirds vote, and Sumner received fifty-eight
votes to twenty-seven for all others, so that his nom
ination was formally approved, with but five Demo
cratic votes against him. George S. Boutwell,
Democrat, was forthwith elected governor, andthe
other state offlces were filled in accordance with the
programme. But presently it transpired that Caleb
' December 15, 1850. Pierce, Vol. Ill, p. 233.

ELECTION TO THE SENATE 131
Cushing, although he had voted in favor of abiding
by the two-thirds' decision, was organizing opposi
tion to Sumner's election among the Democrats and
that some Free Soilers — even Palfrey, in an open
letter to members of the legislature, — were question
ing the desirability of electing a pronounced Free
Soiler to the Senate.
In order to elect a senator, the law then required
the concurrent vote of the two houses. On the day
appointed forthe election in the House, the corridors
and galleries were thronged. Intense excitement
prevailed. The ballot resulted in one hundred and
eighty-six votes for Sumner (one hundred and ten
Free Soil, aud seventy-six Democrat) to one hun
dred and sixty-seven for Winthrop, with twenty-
eight scattering votes. Sumner had failed of an
election by five votes. The outcome provoked
much anxious and angry discussion, the Free Soilers
resenting the Democrats' defection. This proved
the beginning of the longest deadlock that Massa
chusetts has ever knowu. Por three months and
over, the election hung fire, Sumner's vote on dif
ferent ballots in the House falling anywhere from
two to twelve short of the number necessary to elect.
Meantime, early in the session, he had been elected
on the part of the Senate, and a Democrat had been
duly elected by both houses for the vacancy which
Winthrop was filling till his successor should be
chosen. The delay encouraged the opposition, and they
set upon the Free Soilers and upon Sumner in par-

132 CHAELES SUMNEE
ticular with every sort of abuse. The coalition was
assailed in the press as "scandalous," involving a
"base juggle," "self-abasement" and "profligacy" ;
it was even declared an " indictable offense," " crim
inal not only in morals but iu the law of the land."
Every similar alliance which Whigs had made in
earlier contests was banished from memory. By
faint-hearted adherents Sumner was urged to modify
the expressions of his Faneuil Hall speech. This he
promptly refused to do. He was waited upon by
deputations of anxious Democrats, who begged for
some assurance that, if elected, he would not agitate
the slavery question in the Senate. His unvarying
answer was that he had not sought the office, but
that, if it came to him, he should enter upon it ab
solutely untrammeled. To John Bigelow he wrote :
"It is very evident that a slight word of promise or
yielding to the Hunkers would have secured my
election ; but this is impossible. The charge used
with most effect against me is that I am a ' disun-
ionist ' ; but the authors of this know its falsehood,
— it is all a sham to influence votes. My principles
are, in the words of Franklin, ' to step to the verge
of the Constitution to discourage every species of
traffic in human flesh.' I am a constitutionalist and
a unionist, and have always been." '
While refusing to make any concession or pledge,
Sumner again and again told individuals that he
was willing to staud aside for any other candidate
who would be true to freedom and better unite the
'January 21, 1851. Pierce, Vol. Ill, p. 239.

ELECTION TO THE SENATE 133
members of the legislature ; and in a letter to Wil
son, to be communicated to the Free Soil members,
he bade them abandon him whenever they thought
best, without notice or apology. But his adherents
stood firm, believing that Sumner better than any
other leader could serve the cause of freedom in the
Senate. After many earlier discussions, the Free
Soilers in caucus, March 17th, formally deter
mined not to present any other candidate. In
their offlcial organ his Faneuil Hall speech was
reprinted in full, as still acceptable to the men of
the party. Yet the advice of the governor, who al
ready held his offlce as a result of votes given in an
ticipation of Sumner's election, was for the substi
tution of a less radical man.
The long delay in the fulfilling of pledges was
felt by many members of the House to be undermin
ing their hold upou their constituents. Indeed, it
was by pressure from outside that the end of the
conflict was flnally forced. Eesort was had to a
provision of the Massachusetts BiU of Eights, for
years unused, by virtue of which at special town-
meetings, legaUy called for that purpose, the voters
in several towns met and by formal vote "in
structed" thefr representatives to support Sumner.
To such a mandate they yielded prompt obedience.
For three weeks early in April no vote was taken,
for the law did not then, as now, require daily bal
lots. Upon the renewal ofthe voting Sumner lacked
but a single vote. Ostensibly to prevent difficulty
from ballots sticking together, a Boston Whig moved

134 CHAELES SUMNEE
that the ballots be enclosed in uniform envelopes.
It was suspected that the real object ofthe motion
was to enable some Democrat with less observance
to vote against Sumner. If so, the device failed of its
intention, for upon the very next ballot he received
193 votes, the precise number necessary to elect.
At the time the vote was declared, Sumner was
dining at the house of Charles Francis Adams, and
the news was brought to him while at table.
Charles Francis Adams, Jr., then a lad in his teens,
was the first to congratulate him. He recalled in
later years that Sumner received the news "with
perfect placidity" and "with an utter absence of
any apparent elation or excessive interest. . . .
He certainly was far less elated than was my father
or any of my father's children." In a few minutes
Mr. Adams's library was thronged with men who
had come over from the State House to offer their
congratulations. Sumner soon left this scene of ex
citement, and went to Cambridge, where he spent
the next two or three nights at the home of Long
fellow, who also noted his lack of elation: "The
papers are all ringing with ' Sumner,' ' Sumner,' and
the guns are thundering out their triumph ; mean
while the hero of the strife is sitting quietly here,
more saddened than exalted." ' This was no pose.
To his brother George, with whom he corresponded
with the utmost frankness, he wrote :
"Now that the victory is won, my former dislike
and indifference to it [the Senate] have lost none of
' Longfellow's Diary, April 25th.

ELECTION TO THE SENATE 135
their strength. From the bottom of my heart I say
that I do not wish to be senator. The honors of
the post have no attraction for me ; and I feel a pang
at the thought that I now bid farewell to that life
of quiet study, with the employment of my pen,
which I had hoped to pursue. At this moment,
could another person, faithful to our cause, be chosen
in my place, I would resign. I am humbled by the
importance attached to the election. TMoughout
Massachusetts, and even in other states, there have
been bonfires, firings of cannon, ringing of bells,
public meetings, aud all forms of joy, to celebrate
the event. As I read of these, I felt my inability
to meet the expectations aroused. Again, I wish I
was not in the place. I am met constantly by joy
ful faces, but I have no joy ; my heart is heavy.
Never did I need sympathy and friendly succor
more than now, when most of the world regards me
as a most fortunate man, with a prospect of peculiar
brilliancy." '
To many conservative Whigs, followers of Web
ster, Sumner's election was as the gall of bitterness.
By them his views were held to be little less danger
ous than those of anarchists to-day, and his political
associates were thought " plebeian " and "revolu
tionary." " But to Free Soilers tMoughout the state
' April 29, 1851. Pierce, Vol. Ill, p. 247.
' Editorial comment in Boston papers on Sumner's election ran
as follows : " It is the greatest outrage upon the feelings of the
majority of the people of the state, by a corabination between
two minorities, which we have ever known to be perpetrated in
any states of the Union. We regard the event as a most unfor
tunate one for tbe reputation of the state." — Daily Advertiser.
" We need hardly say that the election of Mr. Sumner will be
regretted by all who wish the state of Massachusetts to stand
where she has stood, nobly and firmly fixed in her loyalty to the

136 CHAELES SUMNEE
and nation Simmer's election was a cause of heart
felt rejoicings. Not a few men present when the
decisive vote was announced recalled that as the
happiest moment of their lives. It was accepted
not merely as a victory won, but as an earnest of
greater triumphs to follow. Of the many who had
helped to bring this about, none had been so tireless
or so effective in his activity as Henry Wilson, who
was destined to be Sumner's colleague in the Senate
before the end of his first term. This service Sumuer
clearly and gratefully recognized : "To your ability
energy, determination, and fidelity our cause owes
its present success. For weal or woe, you must take
the responsibility of having placed me in the Senate
of the United States." ' Earnest and cordial letters
came to Sumner from friends both at home and
abroad.'' Theodore Parker's greeting was also a
American Union. ' ' — Courier. ' ' The mountain that has been la
boring for three months has brought forth ; and Charles Sumner,
Esq. , has been elected for six years to succeed Mr. Webster in
the Senate of the United States. This will be a sore disappoint
ment to the Whig party." — Transcript. For further examples
of newspaper comment, see Charles Sumner : Memoir and Eulo
gies, by W. M. Cornell, p. 30. But the Boston Common-wealth
of May 16, 1851, contained a long and very favorable comment.
'April 25, 1851. Pierce, Vol. Ill, p. 249.
''From Salmon P. Chase came a warm letter of congratulation,
beginning, " Laus Deo ! From the bottom of my heart I con
gratulate you — no, not you but all friends ot freedom every
where npon your election to the Senate. Now, I feel as if I had
a brother — colleague — one with whom I shall sympathize and
be able fully to act." He speaks of Hale as " too much an off
hand man himself to be patient of consultation " ; of Seward as
" meaning to maintain his own position as an anti-slavery man
in the Whig party and only in the Whig party" ; and thus of
Wade : " He will generally go with Seward. " " None of these

ELECTION TO THE SENATE 137
prophecy: "You told me once that you were in
morals, not in politics. Now I hope you will show
that you are still in morals, although in politics. I
hope you will be the senator with a conscience."
are to me as you are. I feel that you have larger, broader views,
and that you are wUling to labor more systematically for the ac
complishment of greater purposes. " In this and in later letters
he urges that he and Sumner take lodgings in the same house
at Washington. — Letter of April 28, 1851. Diary and Corre
spondence of S. P. Chase, Report of American Historical As
sociation, 1902, Vol. II, p. 235. Among the papers here re
printed are thirty-six letters from Chase to Sumner, covering
the period from 1847 to 1860. In some of the later ones there
is frank discussion of the programme of the Republican party
and of Chase's possible candidacy for the presidency.
Seward's greeting was hardly less cordial. He wrote : "I
take new courage in the cause of truth and justice when I see
a senator coming from Massachusetts imbued with the uncom
promising devotion to freedom and humanity of John Quincy
Adams."

CHAPTEE VIII
SENATE BEGINNINGS: "FREEDOM NATIONAL,
SLAVERY SECTIONAL"
The approach of the time for the opening of
Congress found Sumner deeply saddened. On the
day of his departure for Washington, he wept like a
child at taking leave of his mother and his dearest
friends, Howe and Longfellow. To Howe he wrote,
a few hours later, "I stand now on the edge of
a great change. ... I cannot see the future ;
but I know that I now move away from those who
have been more than brothers to me. My soul
is wrung, and my eyes are bleared with tears. God
bless you ever and ever, my noble, well-tried and
truly dear friend." Throughout his life Sumner
was a mau of deep sentiment, much given to analyz
ing and appraising his own emotions and to giving
them elaborate expression both in letters and in
conversation. On the first day of the session Sumner's credentials
were presented by General Lewis Cass, at Sumner's
request, as "his oldest personal friend in the body." '
' " It must have been ludicrous to see theold time-server, Cass,
act as the senatorial godfather of the handsome young philan
thropist, Charles Sumner. January and May are more alike."
..." The Whig who, when asked, in 1848, whether he would
choose Cass or Taylor, replied in a public speech, 'If two evils
are presented to me, I will take neither,' was not likely to
show much respect for the card-houses of the politicians."
—Frederic Bancroft, Life of WilHam B. Seward, Vol. I, p. 298.

SENATE BEGINNINGS 139
His own colleague, John Davis, upon whom this
service would naturally have devolved, although in
Washington, was absent from the Senate at this
time, whether from unwillingness to stand sponsor
for Sumner is not known. In later years it was
recalled as a matter of dramatic significance that
Henry Clay, ' ' compromise incarnate " tottered from
the Senate chamber for the last time the very day
that Charles Sumner, "conscience incarnate,"
entered its doors.
The Senate was undergoing a great transformation.
Calhoun had died during the previous session.
Webster had become Secretary of State, and was
never again to be heard in that body. Benton, who
had himself just beeu defeated for reelection because
of his opposition to the Compromise, greeted Sum
ner warmly, but "assured him that he had come to
the Senate too late. All the great issues and all the
great men were gone. There was nothing left but
snarling over slavery, aud no chance whatever for a
career." ' A few months later, Sumner's colleague,
"Honest" John Davis, declared as his final verdict
upon public life: "At Washington slavery rules
everything." By the great majority of senators the
Compromise was accepted as a finality, but there
were a few heralds of a new day : John P. Hale had
beeu sent to the Senate by a combination of New
Hampshire anti-slavery Whigs and Democrats, and
Salmon P. Chase, who became Sumner's closest
political associate, had beeu elected by a coalition
'J. M. Rogers, Life of Benton, p. 279.

140 CHAELES SUMNEE
of Free Soilers and Democrats in Ohio. Aside
from these two, he was to find most sympathy in
Seward and Wade, though neither was as yet con
vinced that the anti-slavery cause was to be best
furthered by cutting loose from the party in which
he had attained leadership.
Sumner selected a seat next to Chase on the
Democratic side, — the seat which had recently been
vacated by Jefferson Davis. Contrary to the pre
dictions of the Boston press, he was cordiaUy re
ceived by his colleagues, not only of the North but
of the South as well. The seats of Butler of South
Carolina and Mason of Virginia were clo.se to Sum
ner's and they were soon on friendly terms. In
Soul6, whom Sumner described as "the most pol
ished gentleman of the Senate," he found a valued
friend. But as a new member, without party back
ing, he was "shelved" in the committee assign
ments, being placed at the foot of two of the least
important, — on roads and canals, and on revolu
tionary claims.
In personnel the Senate was then far from its
highest plane. Most of its members had had but
scanty training for statesmanship, and years spent
in Congress had not broadened them. There was
little of elevation in congressional manners or con
versation. Liquors were always at haud, and their
effects were too frequently apparent in the course
of the debates. Tobacco chewing was prevalent-
It is not strange that Sumner, of Puritan stock,
reared in the best educatiou and culture which Har-

SENATE BEGINNINGS 141
vard and Boston could impart, and broadened by
years of travel and intimate association with the
foremost scholars, judges and statesmen of Europe,
should have confided to Longfellow, in these first
weeks of his life in Washington : " I feel heart-sick
here. The Senate is a lone place, with few who are
capable of yielding any true sympathy to me.
. . . Would that I were with you, and could
share your calm thoughts! As for me, farewell
content ; farewell the tranquil mind ! " He saw
everywhere the trail of the serpent: "In truth,
slavery is the source of all our baseness, from gigan
tic national issues down to the vile manners and
profuse expectorations of this place." ' His depres
sion may well have been due to the crush of unfa
miliar duties, aU of which he took most seriously,
and in part to his lonely life. On coming to Wash
ington, he secured lodgings on the ground floor of a
house on New York Avenue, between Fifteenth and
Sixteenth Streets. Here his breakfast was served ;
for dinner, his only other meal, he frequented a
French restaurant, where two or three other men in
offlcial life became his regular table companions.
This cheerless mode of life found some relief in the
cordiality with which he was received by members
of the diplomatic corps, to whom his facile use of
French, a rare accomplishment among congressmen
of that day, and his familiar knowledge of European
society and politics, especially commended him. At
the British embassy and at the home of the Spanish
' December 28, 1851.

142 CHAELES SUMNEE
miuister he was warmly welcomed. The two seua-
tors from New York were especially cordial to him.
The junior, Hamilton Fish, had taken the oath of
office at the same time with Sumner, and their lives
were destined to influence each other profoundly in
later years. In both Mrs. Fish and Mrs. Seward
Sumner found staunch friends, who watched his
career with eager sympathy and heartened him for
his great task.
Ten days after the opening of the session Sumner
flrst addressed the Senate upon a resolution offered
by Seward, which gave to Louis Kossuth, the Hun
garian patriot, in behalf of the people of the United
States, " a cordial welcome to the capital and to the
country. ' ' Kossuth had come to America in response
to an invitation from Congress, and upon a United
States steam frigate. Sumner spoke but briefly.'
He paid an appreciative tribute to Kossuth's efforts
in behalf of his countrymen, and urged the propriety
of his being formally received by Congress in view
of the invitation which Congress had tendered him.
But he took occasion to emphasize our traditional
policy of non-intervention in the domestic affairs of
other nations, and vigorously opposed any departure
from this policy by steps which might lead to bellig
erent intervention in European affairs. The resolu
tion was passed in the form Sumner advocated, and
Kossuth found in Washington a cordial reception at
the hands of Congress and great sympathy and per
sonal kindness ; but the tide of popular sentiment,
'December 10, 1851. Works, Vol. Ill, pp. 1-10.

SENATE BEGINNINGS 143
which he had counted upou turning to the active
service of the Hungarian revolution, had already
waned, largely owing to this maiden speech of
Sumner's. This speech was declared the most successful
first speech which had been made in the Senate for
a long time, and a Boston Whig editor, who heard
it, said that Sumner had "achieved a triumph."
It was a surprise to his opponents and a reassurance
to his doubtful supporters to flnd Sumner, who had
been heralded as a radical of one idea, prepared to
deal in statesmanlike fashion with a problem of foi-
eign relations, and to stand forth as the most vigor
ous defender of the faith of the Fathers. Singularly,
it was from party and personal friends that the se
vere criticisms came. The Free Soilers, eager to fill
their depleted ranks before the beginning ofthe next
campaign, had hoped that the sentiments aroused in
behalf of the struggling Hungarians would react to
the advantage of the champions of freedom in this
country. Wilsou deplored the conservatism which
would hold Congress back from active and armed
intervention. From Howe, a lifelong revolutionist,
came a reproachful letter deprecating "this speech
of Lawyer Sumner, Senator Sumner, — not of gener
ous, chivalrous, high-souled Charles Sumner."
The next cause to which he turned his attention
was one in which Massachusetts felt little interest.
He advocated a grant of lands to the state of Iowa
to promote the construction of railroads within that
state. Friendly recognition from the West rewarded

144 CHAELES SUMNEE
this evidence of his ability and disposition to handle
the general problems which confront the legislator.
He concerned himself conscientiously with many
such during this first sessiou, advocating, in partic
ular, an increase in the pay of enlisted men in the
navy, cheaper ocean postage, and the revision and
codification of the public statutes.
Not a little of Sumner's time, during Ms first
months in Washington, was devoted to an attempt
to procure the release of Drayton and Sayres, of the
schooner Pearl, who for four years had been in prison
under sentence of fines which they could not pay.
A petition, largely signed by Free Soilers, was for
warded to Sumner for presentation in the Senate.
But in his opinion the chief thing was to secure the
prisoners' release, and, believing that agitation in
the Senate would be likely to defeat that object, in
stead of presenting the petition he appealed directly
to the President for the prisoners' pardon, with such
effective importunity that the order was given for
their release. His success in this matter is the more
surprising in view of the fierce attack made, in his
Faneuil Hall speech, upon Fillmore as the President
who had signed the Fugitive Slave Law.
Sumner had owed his election to the Senate
simply and solely to the belief that he was the most
forceful and fearless champion whom the Free
Soilers could put forward. Moreover, his one
weapon, it had been supposed, was ready and
effective speech. Yet days, weeks, months of this
critical session passed, and no word came from

SENATE BEGINNINGS 145
Sumner's lips on the one absorbing topic of in
terest. Not only did he seem to seek no oppor
tunity to speak upon it, but he was silent when the
opportunity was thrust upon him, as in the petition
for the release of Drayton and Sayres, — seut to the
Senate as a peg on which to hang a speech, —
and as in the angry discussion of Foote' s resolution
declaring the Compromise a final settlement of
questions relating to slavery. The Whig press
teemed with taunts, and this long-continued silence
came to disquiet greatly the members of his own
party. The letter which communicated to him the
fact that the Free Soilers in the Massachusetts legis
lature had practically unanimously placed Sumner
in nomination for the Senate, had ended with the
words : ' ' We have sworn to stand by you ; to sink
or swim with you, at all hazards. If you shall fail
us in any respect, may God forgive you ! we never
shall ! " The memory of Webster's defection was
still so fresh in men's minds, that suspicion found
congenial soil. Sumner's intimates never doubted
his steadfastness of purpose, and were disposed to
rely upon his judgment as to the time when he
should speak. But Garrison repeatedly attacked
Sumner in the Liberator, and popular impatience
among anti-slavery men who did not know him
personally was growing rapidly, so that Wilson,
Sumner's political mentor, felt obliged to wam
him : " You must not let the session close without
speaking. Should you do so, you would be openly
denounced by nine-tenths of our people. They say

146 CHAELES SUMNEE
they are daily tormented about your silence by the
Whigs all over the state, and many of them think
you will not speak at all." '
In these seven mouths of delay, however, Sumner
had not wavered from his fixed purpose. His de
termination to make haste slowly had been deliber
ately taken. Six mouths before he took his seat,
he had written to a frieud : ' ' As a stranger to the
Senate and to all legislative bodies, I regard it to
be my first duty to understand the body in which I
have a seat before rushing into its contests." Early
in the sessiou he had resolved that, unless forced to
do so by the course of the debates, he would not
speak at length upon the slavery question until
about the first of July. Meanwhile he was gather
ing material and deciding upon his lines of attack.
But as the time he had chosen approached, he met
unexpected obstacles. Overwork and the heat told
upon his strength, so that for weeks he was far
from equal to his task. At last, July 27th, he
sought to make an opening for his speech, by pre
senting a resolution, "instructing the Committee on
the Judiciary to report a bill repealing the Fugitive
Slave Act." The next day — stating that his inex
perience aud his ill health had prevented his seek
ing this opportunity earlier — he moved to take up
this resolution. It was the uniform custom of the
Senate to grant such a privilege, yet so eager were
the members of both the great parties to keep aU
discussion of slavery questions in abeyance during
' June 29, 1852.

SENATE BEGINNINGS 147
the impending presidential campaign, that Ms mo
tion was rejected by a vote of three to one. Sum
ner was sorely disappointed, for he had relied with
confidence upou senatorial courtesy to secure him
a hearing. But now the disillusionment was com
plete: "You may speak next term," said Mason
to him. "I must speak this term," was his reply.
"By  , you shan't!" retorted Mason. "I
will, and you can't prevent me ! " was Sumner's re
joinder. But he now saw that he could secure a
hearing only in case he could claim it as a right,
not as a privilege. This first failure called forth
fresh taunts from the Whig press, while the Free
Soilers began to abandon hope that Sumuer would
get the floor before the end of the session, aud
Wilson and Parker wrote most urgent letters, em
phasizing how serious the consequences of such
failure must be, both for him and for the cause they
all had at heart. But Sumner was convinced that
his course was the wise one : had he introduced a
bill, he could have spoken only by unanimous con
sent; he therefore proposed "to throw himself upon
the majority and to compel them to the ignoble
position before the country of suppressing de
bate." '
When these friendly but urgent promptings
reached him, only three weeks of the sessiou yet re
mained. Sumner was on the alert and his plan
well formed. Finally, only five days before the
end of the nine-months session, his opportunity
• Letter to E. L. Pierce, Vol. Ill, p. 292.

148 CHAELES SUMNEE
came. On the 26th of August, Hunter of Virginia,
for the committee having charge of the civil and
diplomatic appropriation bill, "moved an amend
ment for paying the 'extraordinary expenses'
incurred by ministerial officers in executing the
laws." Sumner, by consultation with the auditor,
had definitely iuformed himself in advauce that
among the charges intended to be covered were
some due to the enforcing of the Fugitive Slave Law.
He therefore moved the amendment: "provided,
that no such allowance shall be authorized for any
expenses incurred in executing the Act of Septem
ber 18, 1850, for the surrender of fugitives from
service or labor, which Act is hereby repealed,"
and instantly took the floor to speak to his motion.
He reminded his colleagues that he had sought an
earlier opportunity, which had been denied him,
but that at last he was to be heard, not as a favor,
but as a right.'
From the outset, Sumner made it evident that the
restraints of personal ambition or of party ex
pediency, which had silenced or diverted so many
others, would not constrain him.

"Sir, I have never been a politician. The slave
of principles, I call no pa-rty master. . . . By no
effort, by no desire of my own, I find myself a
.senator of the United States. Never hefore have I
held public office of any kind."
'"Freedom National, Slavery Sectional," Works. Vol III,
pp. 87-197.

SENATE BEGINNINGS 149
Boldly assailing the dictum of finality of the
Compromise measures, which the conventions of
both the great parties had recently affirmed, he
pointed out that the Fathers expressly provided
that the Constitution, the supreme law of the land,
should have its prescribed process of amendment.
"Nothing from man's hand is final. Truth alone
is final." He denounced this doctrine of finality as
not only inconsistent and absurd, but as tyrannical
in its attempted suppression of free speech ; yet, he
declared, it was as impotent as it was tyrannical.
"Convictions of the heart caunot be repressed.
Utterances of conscience must be heard. They
break forth with irrepressible might. As well
attempt to check the tides of ocean, the currents of
the Mississippi, or the rushing waters of Niagara.
The discussion of slavery will proceed, wherever two
or three are gathered together, — by the fireside, on ;
the highway, at the public meeting, in the church, f-
The movement against slavery is from the Everlast
ing Arm. Even now it is gathering its forces, soon
to be confessed everywhere. It may not be felt yet
in the high places of office and power, but all who
can put their ears humbly to the ground, will hear
and comprehend its incessant and advancing tread."
For years the apologists for slavery had been
decrying any attempt to curb its advance as an
aggression on the part of the North. In bold chal
lenge of this assumption, Sumner declared: "Ac
cording to the true spirit of the Constitution and the
sentiments of the Fathers, slavery and not freedom, ¦,
is sectional, while freedom, and not slavery, is na- ^

150 CHAELES SUMNEE
tional." In upholding this thesis, he first contended
that slavery was of such offensive character— "so
eminent, so transcendent, so tyrannical, so unjust"
— that it could find sanction only iu positive law ;
that it found no such positive sanction in the Con
stitutiou, which (in the light of the Convention's
Debates, the Declaration of Independence, and the
Address of the Continental Congress) must be in
terpreted openly, actively and perpetually for
freedom ; that at the time when Washington first
became President, ' ' slavery had no national power,
existed nowhere on the national territory, beneath
the national flag, but was openly condemned by the
nation, church, colleges and literature ofthe time."
In support of these assertions, he brought forward a
great mass of evidence, ^ — none of it more telling than
the words in condemnation of slavery and in favor
of "the sacred cause" of emancipation from the
lips of the three great Virginians, the Father of his
Country, the Author of the Declaration of Inde
pendence, and the Orator of Liberty. He laid
especial emphasis upon the words of the Amend
ment : "'So person shall be deprived of life, l-tbe-rty
or property, -without due process of law," insisting
that the convention's rejection of a restriction of
this guaranty to freemen instead of "persons"
(which he proved was explicit and deliberate)
carried with it "an express guaranty of personal
liberty, and an express prohibition of its invasion
anywhere, at least within the national jurisdiction."
But Sumner reserved most of his strength for an

SENATE BEGINNINGS 151
arraignment of the "Fugitive Slave Bill," — for so
he always meant to term it, never conceding that
it had the force of valid law. Sumner first exposed
the falsity of the assertion that the provision of the
Constitution, which was claimed as its basis, was
one to which any especial importance had been
attached, stUl less that it had been one of the great
compromises on which had hinged the fate of the
Constitution. He showed that it appeared in none
of the seven plans or drafts ; that there was no sug
gestion of such a provision till almost the very end
of the sessions when, with little preliminary con
sideration, a clause for the surrender of "persons
bound to service or labor" was moved, and adopted
without debate or opposition of any kind. He
pointed out that in the debates over the ratification
of the Constitution, this vague provision aroused
little comment, and was variously interpreted, a
Virginian declaring that it contained "no security
of property." The fugitive slave law of 1793 had
attracted Uttle attention ; although it had been
rarely enforced, and sometimes " gloriously refused
compliance" in Northern states, nevertheless the
one attempt (1817-18) to amend it so as to pro
vide more effectively by law for the reclaiming
of slaves, had been dropped, so that the Act of 1793
had stood unchanged till 1850.
Approaching this notorious measure, Sumuer said :
"As I read this statute, I am filled with painful
emotions. The masterly subtlety with which it is
drawn might challenge admiration, if exerted for a

152 CHAELES SUMNEE
benevolent purpose ; but in an age of sensibility
and refinement, a machine of torture, however skil
ful and apt, cannot be regarded without horror.
Sir, in the name of the Constitution, which it vio
lates, of my Country, which it dishonors, of Human
ity, which it degrades, of Christianity, which it
offends, I arraign this enactment, and now hold it
up to the judgment of the Senate and the world.
Again, I shrink from no responsibility. I may
seem to stand alone ; but all the patriots aud
martyrs of history, all the Fathers of the Eepublic,
are with me. Sir, there is no attribute of God
which does not take part against this Act."

Meeting the objection that the fugitive slave law
of 1793 had been sustained by the Supreme Court,
Sumner cited instances where that Court had re
versed its own precedents. While he declared its
decisions entitled to great consideration, he never
theless gave his approval to Jackson's dictum that
"each public officer who takes an oath to support
the Constitution swears that he will support it as he
understands it, and not as it is understood by
others." He maintained that the fugitive slave
clause, as some called it, was merely an article of
compact between the states, aud that since the Con
stitution did not accompany this by any grant
of power (as it did in the clause, similar in form,
relating to the proving of state acts and reeords)
this silence should be interpreted as indicating the
convention's intent that no such power should be
grauted. He therefore denounced the Act not only
as an unwarrantable assumption of power by the

SENATE BEGINNINGS 153
nation, but as an infraction of the rights reserved to
the states.'
He next attacked the law as radically unconstitu
tional because of its denial of trial by jury.
"If the language of the Constitution were open to
doubt, which it is not, still all the presumptions of
law, all the leanings of Freedom, all the suggestions
of justice, plead angel-tongued for this right. No
body doubts that Congress, if it legislates on this
matter, may allow a trial by jury. But if it may, so
overwhelming is the claim of justice, it must."
He pointed out that the Stamp Act had been op
posed by the Fathers for precisely the reasons now
urged against this : that it was a usurpation by
Parliament of powers which did not belong to it,
and an infraction of rights reserved to the Colonies,
and that it was a denial of trial by jury in certain
cases of property.
"Sir, in placing the Stamp Act by the side of the
Slave Act, I do injustice to that emanation of Brit
ish tyranny. Both infringe important rights : one,
of property ; the other, the vital right of all, which
'It has been well noted that Sumner and other Free Soilers,
in their eagerness to find constitutional justification for the
defense of national legislation against slavery, took almost tbe
same ground as did secessionist pro-slavery men in asserting the
compact theory ot the Constitution, and tbe reserved rights of
the states. In comment on Sumner's argument that "the
fugitive servant clause of the Constitution was a clause of com
pact between the states, and conferred no legislative power
upon Congress," Salmon P. Chase said : " I avow my convic
tion, now and here, that logically and historically his argument
is impregnable, entirely impregnable."

154 CHAELES SUMNEE
is to other rights as soul to body — the right of a man
to himself. ... As Freedom is more than prop
erty, as man is above the dollar that he owns, as
heaven, to which we all aspire, is higher than earth,
where every accumulation of wealth must ever re
main, so are the rights assailed by the American
Congress higher than those once assailed by the
British Parliament. And just in this degree must
history condemn the Slave Act more than the Stamp
Act." Sumner next laid stress upon the contention that,
even if the Act were constitutional, it lacked "that
essential support in the Public Conscience of States,
where it is to be enforced, which is the life of all
laws, and without which any law must be a dead
letter." Aud he quoted with great effect a thereto
fore unpublished letter from Washington to the col
lector at Portsmouth, whither one of his slaves had
escaped. Although expressing his own wish and
that of Mrs. Washington that the slave be returned,
he added that he did not mean that " violent meas
ures should be used, as would excite a mob or riot —
which might be the case if she has adherents — or
even uneasy sensations in the minds of well-disposed
citizens. Eather than either of these should happen,
I would forego her services altogether ; and the ex
ample, also, which is of infinite more importance.'"
" But [Sumner pointed out] with every attempt
to administer the Slave Act, it constantly become.s
more revolting, particularly in its influeuce on the
agents it enlists. Pitch cannot be touched without
' Works, Vol. Ill, p. 178.

SENATE BEGINNINGS 155
defilement, and all who lend themselves to this work
seem at once to lose the better part of mau. The
spirit of the law passes into them, as the devils en
tered the swine. . . . Not a case occurs which does
not harrow the souls of good meu, aud bring tears of
sympathy to the eyes, and those nobler tears which
'patriots shed o'er dying laws.'" "Even in the
lands of Slavery, the slave-trader is loathed as an
ignoble character, from whom the countenance is
turned away ; and cau the slave-hunter be more re
garded, while pursuing his prey in a land of free
dom?" The conclusion of his speech was devoted to a
solemn appeal :
"The Slave Act violates the Constitution, and
shocks the Public Conscience. With modesty, and
yet with firmness, let me add, sfr, it offends against
the Divine Law. No such enactment is entitled to
support. The conscience of each person is the final
arbiter. Not rashly would I set myself against any
argument of law. This grave responsibility I would
not lightly assume. But here the path of duty is
clear. By the Supreme Law, which commands me to
do no injustice, bythe comprehensive Christian Law
of Brotherhood, by the Constitution which I have sworn
to support, I AM BOUND TO DISOBEY THIS ACT.
Never in any capacity, can I render voluntary aid in
its execution. Pains and penalties I will endure, but
this great wrong I will not do. . . . Finally,
sir, for the sake of peace and tranquillity, cease to
shock the Public Conscience ; for the sake of the
Constitution, cease to exercise a power nowhere
granted, and which violates inviolable rights ex
pressly secured. . . . Eepeal this enactment. Let
its terrors no longer rage through the land. Mindful
of the lowly whom it pursues, mindful of the good

156 CHAELES SUMNEE
men perplexed by. its requirements, in the name of
charity, in the name of the Constitution, repeal this
enactment, totally aud without delay."
Sumner had been speaking for three and three-
quarter hours. Meantime the galleries had filled.
Webster, himself, was an attentive listener for an
hour or more, this being, it is said, his last visit to
the Senate chamber. Sumner was not interrupted,
but no sooner had he ceased speaking than the abuse
begau. Clemens of Alabama expressed the hope
that none of his friends would make any reply to
the speech, " which the senator from Massachusetts
has seen fit to inflict upon the Senate," adding : "I
shall only say, sir, that the ravings of a maniac may
sometimes be dangerous, but the barking of a puppy
never did any harm." Not till, later in the debate,
he referred to the other senator from Massachusetts
as "one who has the fortune to be a gentleman,
which his colleague has not," was he called to order.
Badger of North Carolina took upon himself the
burden of replying in behalf of the Southern sena
tors. He quoted at length from Sumner's Faneuil
Hall speech, and sought to make Sumner respon
sible for sedition. He did not hesitate to suggest
with a sneer that to Southern senators further asso
ciation with the author of such a speech might not
be agreeable.' Weller of California characterized
' It is creditable to both of these men that in later years they
came to regret profoundly their gross abuse on this occasion.
Badger was quite melted by Sumner's characteristic magna
nimity, the following year, in supporting both by speech and
by vote his nomination for the Supreme Court.

SENATE BEGINNINGS 157
Sumner's speech as inflammatory, and indirectly, at
least, counseling forcible resistance. This Sumner
earnestly denied. Quite a number of senators, in
cluding three from New England, spoke in opposi
tion to Sumner's amendment, while Douglas and
Dodge took a positive stand in defense of the con
stitutionality of the Fugitive Slave Act.
The only men who came to Sumner's support
were his two Free Soil colleagues. Hale declared
that Sumner had that day placed himself side by
side with the first orators of antiquity, and as far
ahead of any living American orator as freedom is
ahead of slavery. Chase affirmed his entire agree
ment with Sumner's interpretations ofthe Constitu
tion, and declared that this speech would ' ' mark a
new era in American history."
Sumner's amendment secured but three votes be
sides his own, — those of Chase, Hale and Wade.
His own colleague was among those who dodged the
vote, as did also Seward, while Fish aud four
New England senators were among the forty-seven
who openly voted against the repeal of the Fugitive
Slave Law. It is interesting that the first note of
congratulation to reach Sumner should have been a
most cordial one from Mrs. Fish, soon followed by
a sympathetic and encouraging letter from Mrs.
Seward. Seward, himself, wrote to Sumner that
his speech was "an admirable, a great, a very
great one."
The meaning and effect of Sumner's speech are
not to be gauged by its failure to convert a'single

158 CHAELES SUMNEE
politician or compromiser to vote for the repeal of
the law. Chase caught its immense significance
when he said that it marked the day when the ad
vocates of the restriction of slavery, "no longer
content to stand on the defensive in the contest with
slavery, boldly attacked the very citadel of its
power in that doctrine of finality, which two of the
political parties of the country, through their
national organizations, are endeavoring to estab
lish as the impregnable defense of its usurpations."
Theodore Parker's hope had beeu realized: here
was "the senator with a conscience," — a man whom
no sneers or threats could silence, who owned no
allegiance to party or to boss, who held office-seek
ing expediency in contempt, and who would speak
what he believed to be the truth not in mincing
phrases but with all his titantic power of denuncia
tion. Well might Horace Mann write home to
Massachusetts: "The 26th of August, 1852, re
deemed the 7th of March, 1850."

CHAPTEE IX
POLITICAL REVOLUTION IN MASSACHUSETTS
For the eighteen months following this speech
of Sumner's, the chief interest passes from Congress
to the struggles connected with the national elec
tion of 1852 and with the seething political elements
in Massachusetts.
In the months preceding the national conventions,
there had been much anxious discussion among
Free Soilers as to the course which they should
pursue. Sumner's counsel had been for absolute
independence, without the least commitment, until
they could act with knowledge. But when both
parties had pledged themselves to acceptance of the
finality of the Compromise, his message to Massa
chusetts friends of Freedom was to uphold her sup
porters, and leave the result to Providence. The
Free Soilers nominated John P. Hale, but through
out the country the campaign lacked spfrit, and in
Massachusetts the Free Soil vote feU off more than
twenty-five per cent. The state election followed
the national almost immediately. Por two years the
Bay State Free Soilers had cooperated with the Dem
ocrats, with tangible results in state and national
elections. But in the midst of a presidential cam
paign, where the platforms and presidential candi
dates were pledged to "finality," it was not likely

160 CHAELES SUMNEE
that local coalition would prove so feasible as in
former years. At the Free Soil convention, hardly a
fortnight after Sumner's epoch-making speech, he
was greeted with great enthusiasm. In his address
he emphasized strongly the frequent necessity of
thfrd parties and the high service which they may
render. The Free Soilers entered upon the campaign with
hopes of securing further gains both at home and
in Congress, but they found the Democrats little
disposed to coalition, and the unpopularity of the
" Maine law" which had been enacted with strong
support from the Free Soilers, now reacted against
them. The outcome was the loss of the legislature
by about ten members, and this involved also the
loss of United States senator and of the state offices
which were to be filled by the legislature. For this
disaster not a little of the blame was with consider
able justice visited upon Sumner, who, after his
speech at the convention, had gone upon visits out
of the state, entirely absenting himself from the
campaign. Sumner had little facility in extem
poraneous speech or in recasting his thought,
which he had once elaborated, and it is believed
that he was reluctant to take the stump, when he
had so recently fully delivered his views. Never
theless, his offlcial position and Ms unrivaled elo
quence would have counted for much ; as he grew
more experienced iu politics, he came to regard
himself as subject to draft, whenever his service
was needed to promote the cause he had at heart.

EEVOLUTION IN MASSACHUSETTS 161
The Whigs, iu whose hands the election had
placed the naming of Sumner's future colleague in
the Senate, promptly chose Edward Everett, a
selection as acceptable to Sumner and the Free
Soilers as that of auy compromise Whig could be.
Although Democrats and Free Soilers failed in
their attempt at cooperation for the election of of
ficers in 1852, they nevertheless carried to success a
cause in which their interests were better united, —
the call for a convention to revise the Constitution
of the commonwealth. Upon this issue they were
opposed by the solid Whig vote, for one ofthe
chief objects for which revision was urged was to
remedy the system of representation which worked
to the unfair advantage of the Whigs.' An ener
getic campaign resulted in the election of a conven
tion made up of delegates of unusual ability. The
Free Soil representation was exceptionally strong :
towns were allowed to elect non-residents, and Henry
Wilson did expert work in suggesting men of force
and prominence for towns where Whigs might pos
sibly be defeated. It was in this way that, without
haviug been consulted and somewhat to his annoy
ance, Sumner found himself the Free Soil candi.
date for Marshfield, pitted against Fletcher Webster,
the son of the great statesman who had died but a
few weeks before. His election by a vote of more
than five to two was intended as an indication that the
Compromise was repudiated iu Webster's own town.
Sumner was chairman of an important committee
' Supra, p. 126.

162 CHAELES SUMNEE
of the convention, but did not take a very active
part in its debates, except upon the fundamental
question of the basis of representation. The coali
tion leaders advocated a compromise measure, which
would make numerical inequality favor small towns,
instead of overweighting the large cities, as th^ old
system had done. Such twistings of institutions to
suit temporary partisan advantage did not appeal to
Sumner, and he made a vigorous argument in favor
of a simple district system, which would ensure
equality of representation to the voters of the com
monwealth. His plan met with little favor, and he
finally supported the one already proposed, since it
was a long step toward fairness in the districting of
cities. Consistent with his recent argument in the
Senate against the finality of any human law, Sum
ner secured the inclusion, among the propositions to
be voted upon by the people, of a provision requir
ing the legislature, upon the request of the towns or
cities containing not less than one-third of the legal
voters of the commonwealth, to submit to popular
vote the question whether a convention should be
called for the purpose of revising the Constitution.
The advocates of the new Constitution entered
upon the fall campaign with high hopes, for they
had had a majority of 10,000 in calling the conven
tion and its work had been of great merit. The
Free Soilers put Wilson in nomination for governor
and began a well-planned and sharply contested cam
paign. Profiting by the criticism of the previous
year, Sumner took upon himself his full share ofthe

EEVOLUTION IN MASSACHUSETTS 163
work. He went to seventeen of the largest cities
and towns of the state, and his arguments were con
sidered the most effective of the whole contest. He
usually spoke for nearly three hours, discussing and
explaining the proposed changes in the Constitution
and especially emphasizing the needed improvement
in the basis of representation. Nor did he hesitate
to inject into this speech his favorite anti-slavery
doctrines. But the new Constitution and the coalition were
foredoomed to failure. Unexpected obstacles and
foes appeared. Not only did the Whigs as a body
oppose the new Constitution but their zeal was
quickened by the unlooked-for support of Adams
and Palfrey who now came out against the work of
the convention. From Washington came what was
known as "Cushing's ukase," — a letter from the
Attorney-General virtually forbidding, under pain
of the administration's disfavor, any cooperation of
Democrats with Free Soilers. Por the first time,
too, the Irish vote was made a prominent factor in a
Massachusetts campaign. The strength of that na
tionality was largely centred in Boston, and hence
was enlisted (under the positive intervention of the
Catholic Church, as Sumner charged) against a meas.
ure which would have cut dowu the relative political
infiuence of that city. The unpopular liquor law
again proved a divisive factor. The result was that
the new Constitution was defeated by nearly 5,000
votes, and the Whigs carried the election of the
legislature, thus ensuring also the defeat of Wilson.

164 CHAELES SUMNEE
For Sumner, himself, the year had not been with
out its gains. In the constitutional convention he
had made the acquaintance of leading men from all
over the state, and they had found him not a mere
anti-slavery fanatic, as he had beeu pictured, but an
affable, well-informed man and a tireless worker.
In the ensuing campaign he had commended himself
to the people in all parts of the state, not more by
his eloquence thau by his sagacious and persuasive
discussion of matters of home politics. Neverthe
less, the outlook was far from bright. Further coali
tion between Democrats and Free Soilers in Massa
chusetts was not to be looked for, after the disastrous
failure of this campaign. The insolence of the
Whigs over their unhoped-for victory knew no
bounds. Though Sumner's term had yet four years
to run, the Whig journals began to call upon him to
resign, declaring that he no longer had any constit
uency back of him. They were merciless in their
taunts. Said one prominent Free Soiler : "Which
ever way we go, we are jeered, hissed, pointed at
and spit upon by Whiggery." Upon Wilson in
particular they poured out their gibes. His career
was apparently at an end, and he was forced to re
sume his unsuccessful attempts at shoe-manufactur
ing, despondent of the future.
Among these exultant Whigs, who would have
listened to a Cassandra prophecy that the national
Whig party was doomed to speedy disruption, that
only a twelvemonth later in Massachusetts the now
triumphant Whig organization would suffer polit-

EEVOLUTION IN MASSACHUSETTS 165
ical annihilation, and that this derided Henry Wil
son would then be sent to the Senate as Sumner's
loyal fellow- worker, and put in line for the Vice-
Presidency of the United States !
Sumner's second session in the Senate (December,
1852, to March, 1853), had been of little interest.
At its beginning, the names of Hale, Chase aud
Sumner were omitted from the committee-list upon
the express ground that they were " outside of any
healthy political organization." As questions re
lating to slavery ^ere held in abeyance in these
closing months of a defeated administration, Sum
ner took no very active part in the routine work of
the Senate, not yet being ready to adopt the repeated
advice which Chase gave him, to ' ' take off his coat
and go into the every-day fight."
At the beginning of the next Congress, — the first
of Pierce's administration, — Chase and Sumner were
the only Free Soilers iu the Senate. The Demo
crats, in arranging the majority representation upon
committees, recognized Chase, but in the Whig
caucus Seward's motion to assign Sumner to certain
committees was blocked by the opposition of his
uew colleague, Everett, who deprecated any action
which would "recognize him as a Whig." The
result was that the Democrats placed Sumner in
vacancies left by the Whigs in the Committees on
Pensions and Enrolled Bills.
There was every prospect that the session would
be marked by little of iuterest. Acquiescence in
the finaUty of the Compromise, pledged by both

166 CHAELES SUMNEE
great parties, was undoubtedly expected and desired
by a large majority of the members of Congress.
Yet hardly were the holidays past when the whole
slavery issue was opened up, never again to be closed
till wreck of parties aud civil war had wrought out
a solution far different from that sought by the
anxious compromisers of 1850. The responsibility
for this step, so big with consequences, rests upon
Stephen A. Douglas, who as chairman of the Com
mittee on Territories, ou January 4, 1854, presented
a report upon the bill for the establishment of the
territory of Nebraska, which included the provision
that the status of slavery in this region, — dedicated
to Freedom in accordance with the Missouri
Compromise, — should be determined by the people
of the territory, its admission to statehood being
pledged "with or without slavery," as they might
decide. The motive for this gratuitous open
ing of the slavery question can hardly be found
elsewhere than in Douglas's desire to commend him
self strongly to the South, in anticipation of the
election of 1856. The hint was eagerly taken up
by the Southern leaders who saw a chance of secur
ing what they had supposed far beyond their grasp.
It is not necessary here to review the various modifi
cations made in this measure by its friends, all
in the direction of a more aggressive attack upon
what for a generation had been regarded as a
solemn compact. Early in February the proposi
tion took the form of a new bill, providing for two
territories, Kansas and Nebraska, and declaring the

EEVOLUTION IN MASSACHUSETTS 167
prohibition of slavery north of 36° 30' (1820) "in
operative and void" because inconsistent with the
provisions of the legislation of 1850.
Sumner had promptly met the first amendment
repudiating that prohibition by a counter amend
ment explicitly precluding any weakening of that
barrier. The true nature and effect of the measure
was not generally understood, and its sponsors were
urging its speedy enactment. Sumner therefore
joined with Chase and with four members of the
5ouse in issuing the ' ' Appeal of the Independent
Democrats iu Congress to the people of the United
States." It stated clearly the inevitable effects of
the proposed Act, "to open aU the unorganized
territory of the Union to the ingress of slavery,"
aud continued: "We arraign this bill as a gross
violation of a sacred pledge 4 as a criminal betrayal
of sacred rights ; as part and parcel of an atrocious
plot to exclude from a vast and unoccupied region
immigrants from the Old World and free laborers
from our own states, aud convert it into a dreary
region of despotism, inhabited by masters and
slaves." It sketched the history of the Missouri
Compromise, and asserted that "not a man in
Congress, or out of Congress, in 1850 pretended that
the compromise measures would repeal the Missouri
prohibition. " It summoned the friends of Freedom
at once to "protest against this enormous crime." '
Chase took the lead in putting forth this appeal,
'See Rhodes, Bistory ofthe United States from the Compromise
of 1850, Vol. I, pp. 441-444.

168 CHAELES SUMNEE
which had immense effect iu arousing the North.
It was Chase, also, who was the foremost champion
of the North iu the fierce debate which followed.
But a heavy part of the work devolved upon the
two senators from Massachusetts. It was a task
which Edward Everett found far from congemal.
He had entered the Senate, a few months before,
full of enthusiasm for the new career, in the expecta
tion that the slavery issue had been permanently re
moved from that forum. He was the intimate
friend and successor of Webster, and the representa
tive of Massachusetts Whig conservatism. He did
not touch this unwelcome topic until he had assured
himself that Massachusetts was thoroughly opposed
to the new measure, and even then he spoke in an
apologetic tone which was sorely disappointing to
many of his constituents. Nevertheless, his words
had much weight as standing for the great body of
Whigs who had voted for the Compromise in 1850,
but who had never considered that it annulled the
prohibition of 1820, and who were uow opposed to
the Kan sas- Nebraska Bill. This speech, represent
ing the attitude of men who had reached the limit
of compromise, influenced many minds which would
have remained closed to the arguments of radical
leaders iu Congress. In a high-minded but an un
aggressive address Seward took his stand with the
opponents of the measure. Later in the month,
Sumner got the floor. To a greater extent than
the other speakers, he dwelt upon the evils of
slavery, so that Douglas sneered at his speech as

EEVOLUTION IN MASSACHUSETTS 169
"a mere essay on slavery" ; but he made clear the
absurdity of the claim that the Compromise of 1850
annulled the prohibition of 1820, and drove home
the charge of bad faith, inasmuch as this prohibi
tion had been the proposal of the South, which was
now striving to repudiate it, whUe refusing to per
form its part of the agreement. Sumner had a
faculty for coining telling phrases. In this speech
his reference to "a Northern man with Southern
principles " was instantly caught up by the crowded
galleries, and flgured prominently in later cam
paigns. In his reply, Douglas showed that he con
sidered himself hit by that phrase. In Massachu
setts and throughout the North the speech met with
great favor, even with conservatives. Prescott
wrote: "I don't see but what all Boston has got
round; in fact, we must call him [Sumner] fhe Massa
chusetts senator." Nevertheless, the Boston press
still continued its boycott of Sumner by excluding
from its pages this speech by which, as even Hil
lard declared, he had "gained credit everywhere
throughout the North."
While the bill was pending in Congress, public
opinion was being gradually aroused in regard to it.
In Massachusetts the Free Soilers took the lead, and
called a state convention, which heard earnest
speeches and passed strong resolutions. The men
tion of Sumner's name was " greeted with deafening
applause." The legislature also voiced the protest
of the state against the proposed bill. So deep was
the feeling throughout the state that at the spring

170 CHAELES SUMNEE
town-meetings in fully half the towns, after debate
upon the question as duly presented by au article in
the warrant, the townsmen by an almost unanimous
vote declared the repeal of the prohibition in the
Missouri Compromise "a perfidious and wicked
act." Unsparing denunciation was hurled at the
Kansas-Nebraska Bill from the pulpit. Even the
"mercantile Whigs" of Boston were at last stirred.
They assembled in Faneuil Hall, under the chair
manship of S. A. Eliot, and Hillard was one of the
speakers. While their words lacked the fervor of
the Abolitionists or Free Soilers, they were out
spoken in the assertion that the Compromise of 1850,
to which they had given their assent, had in no way
annulled the prohibition of 1820. The very holding
of this meeting and its able speeches signified that
even these conservatives had reached the limit of
compromise, and had begun to believe that in 1850
they had been swindled into paying too high a price
for a truce with slavery.
The incident which aroused most attention was
the presentation to Congress of a petition signed by
3,050 New England clergymen, representing all de
nominations, protesting "in the name of God and
in His presence" against the passing of the pro
posed bill "as a great moral wrong, ... a
breach of faith eminently unjust to the moral prin
ciples of the community, ... a measure full
of danger to the Union, and exposing us to the
righteous judgments of the Almighty." This mon
ster petition, 200 feet long, was taken to Washington,

EEVOLUTION IN MASSACHUSETTS 171
and, in order that it might not seem like a partisan
protest, it was Everett who was asked to bring it
before the Senate. The task was obviously an
unwelcome one, but he presented the paper without
delay, calling attention to the nature of the petition
and its significance because of the character of its
signers. Upon his motion, it was then laid upou
the table, without having been read. Presently,
however, Douglas called for a reading of the memo
rial, and at its conclusion he launched into a fierce
attack upon the " political preachers " and the im
propriety of their action, an arraignment in which
Mason and Butler followed his lead. The tone of
Everett's reply was almost abject, implying that he
might uot have presented the petition, had he had
an opportunity to read it, and regretting that
what he had done from a sense of duty should have
caused hard feeling on the part of any of his col
leagues. Although he spoke iu terms of commenda
tion of the petitioners, he gave the impression of
wishing to shift all responsibility for having ob
truded their unwelcome protest upon the Senate.
There followed more coarse abuse from Butler and
Pettit. Sumner longed to repel this attack, but ab
stained from speaking partly out of a feeling of del
icacy toward Everett, and partly at the urging of
General Houston, who insisted upon taking the de-
fen.se upon himself in order that it might not seem
to be identified with Free Soilers.
Two months later the Kansas-Nebraska Bill came
back to the Senate for its concurrence with House

172 CHAELES SUMNEE
amendments. Here its consideration was delayed
one day by an objection interposed by Sumner, who
never hesitated to filibuster in a cause which he
thought righteous. The bill was now opposed by
the same four senators who had at first protested
against it, with one exception : Everett, apparently
out of distaste for prolonged controversy over sla
very, had resigned the office which he had entered
upon with enthusiasm but one year before. In his
absence, Sumner took occasion, at the beginning of
his speech, to present several belated petitions from
New England clergymen, which had been intended
for the earlier memorial. In contrast with Everett's
apologetic presentation, Sumner announced that he
did this service " with pleasure and pride," and he
boldly vindicated the reverend petitioners' language
aud their action, declaring, "There are men in
this Senate justly eminent for eloquence, learn
ing, aud ability ; but there is no man here compe
tent, except in his own conceit, to sit in judgment
on the clergy of New England." In eloquent and
zealous words, he showed how throughout New Eng
land's history, the clergy had been associated not
only with the piety and learning but with the liber
ties of the country.
Perhaps the most impressive part of the speech
was the passage which forecast the effects of this leg
islation : "In passing such a bill as is now threat
ened, you scatter, from this dark midnight hour, no
seeds of harmony and good-will, but broadcast
through the land dragons' teeth, whioh haply may

EEVOLUTION IN MASSACHUSETTS 173
not spring up in direful crops of armed men, yet I
am assured, sir, will fructify in civil strife and
feud." Yet " from the sting of this hour I find as
surance of that triumph by which freedom will be
restored to her immortal birthright in the republic.
. . . Am I not right, then, in calling this bill
the best ou which Congress ever acted ? Sorrow
fully I bend before the wrong you commit,— joyfully
I welcome the promise of the future." '
The very day when the Kansas- Nebraska Bill was
passed in spite of Sumner's protest, was the day
when the attempt was made by a crowd led by
Thomas Wentworth Higginson to free the negro,
Anthony Burns, from the Boston Court-House,
where he was being held for a hearing before a
United States commissioner,-:— an attempt which
failed of its object, but resulted iu the death of one
of the guards from a pistol-shot. The excitement
caused by the affair was prodigious, and some South
ern leaders tried to hold Sumner's words about
"scattering dragons' teeth" responsible for this
mob violence, reckless alike of their context in
Sumner's speech and of the fact that his utterances
were not known in Boston until the day after the
attempted rescue of Burns. The bitterness of feel
ing was seen in angry articles in Washington pro-
slavery papers, which were obviously intended to
incite mob violence against Sumner. His friends
'Mr. Rhodes, Vol. I, p. 490, says : " Judged by the succeed
ing events, the most remarkable expressions came from Sumner,
for he had an insight into the future."

174 CHAELES SUMNEE
warned him that his life was in danger, but in the
midst of threats he was ever a fataUst, and he con
tinued to walk unarmed about the capital.
One of the most striking evidences of the change
which public sentiment was undergoing uuder the
combined infiuence of the Kansas-Nebraska debates
and the Burns case was a petition foi the repeal of
the Fugitive Slave Act, which had been placed in
the Boston Merchants' Exchange and had speedily
been signed by nearly 3,000 men, mostly from the
very class who had been zealous advocates of com
promise. Among the signers was even the ship
captain who on two previous occasious had gained
notoriety by ready assistance in the capture and re
turn of fugitive slaves. The presentation of this
petition in the Senate gave rise to serious debate,
in the course of which a senator from Tennessee de
nounced "such miserable miscreants as Parker,
Phillips, and such kindred spirits," spoke of the
pending petition as "teeming with treason and
reeking with the blood of an innocent victim," and
declared that the South would certainly dissolve
the Union, if the Fugitive Slave Act were repealed.
Sumner repelled this threat of disunion, and boldly
defended Massachusetts against the charge of
treason, instancing her opposition to the Stamp Act
as a precedent for her present resistance in the
cause of human rights.
Up to the time of the Kansas-Nebraska debates
Sumner had had no serious breaks with any of his
colleagues ; their angry and disdainful epithets on

EEVOLUTION IN MASSACHUSETTS 175
the occasion of his first anti-slavery speech he had
passed over in silence. Even as late as January 14,
1853, he had declared: "On the floor of the
Senate I sit between Mr. Butler of South Carolina,
the early suggester of the Fugitive Slave Bill, and
Mr. Mason of Virginia, its final author, with both
of whom I have constant and cordial intercourse."
But a change was now at hand. At the end of
Sumner's speech upon this Boston petition, Butler
poured contempt upou his "vapid rhetoric," aud
then faced him with the question, whether Massa
chusetts would execute the Constitution and send
back fugitive slaves even after a jury trial. Sum
ner replied : " Does the honorable senator ask me
if I would personally join in sending a fellow mau
into bondage ? Is thy servant a dog that he should
do this thing?" Butler, in great excitement,
shouted : " Then you would not obey the Constitu
tion. . . . You stand in my presence as a co
equal senator, and tell me that it is a dog's office to
execute the Constitution of the United States ! ' '
"I recognize no such obligation," said Sumuer,
meaning, as Fessenden declared every one on the
Whig side of the chamber understood, merely that
he " did not consider that the Constitution imposed
any such obligation upon him. ' ' But he was imme
diately set upon by Southern senators who charged
him with repudiating his oath of office and with de
claring Ms intention to disobey the Constitution.
"In a moral point of view," said Pettit of Indiana,
"the senator from Massachusetts could not, in view

176 CHAELES SUMNEE
of his declaration that day, find auy one beneath
himself," and he declared that such utterance justi
fied expulsion. Others expressed the same opinion,
aud there is evidence that within a few days the
Senate was canvassed, but that it was found that
the requisite vote of two-thirds could not be
secured. When the debate was resumed a day or two later,
the abuse of Sumner took an even more frenzied
and vulgar tone. He was denounced as "a mis
creant," "a sneaking, sinuous, snake-like pol
troon," and a flood of less decent epithets was let
loose upon him. At last he was stung to reply.
Although at this stage of his career Sumner was
slow to anger, few men ever succeeded in provok
ing him who did not find cause to regret it. He
proudly refused to bandy epithets or to deign any
reply to the more scurrilous of his assailants. To
Butler's protest against his use of the term " slave-
hunter," he rejoined: "Sir, I choose to call
things by their right names. . . . Aud when a
person degrades himself to the work of chasing a
fellow mau who under the inspiration of freedom
and the guidance of the North Star has sought a
freeman's home, far away from coffle or chain, that
person, whosoever he may be, I call 'slave-
hunter.' " Eeproaches against Massachusetts and
against himself as to constitutional obligations he
resented from the lips of a senator who represented
a state which had expelled from her borders the
venerable Samuel Hoar, which had tampered with

EEVOLUTION IN MASSACHUSETTS 177
the United States mails, which was ' ' seamed all
over with the scars of nullification," aud "threat
ened nullification as often as babies cry. " Butler
had asserted that "the independence of America
was won by the arms aud treasure of slaveholding
communities." Sumner now accepted the chal
lenge, and proved by indisputable evidence how
comparatively insignificant had been the coopera
tion of South Carolina and of her sister slavehold
ing colonies in that movement, and that the excuse
which they themselves had given at the time was
"their weakness aud fears growing out of their
slave population."' Turning to "the veteran
senator from Virginia" (Mason), who, "with an
imperious look, and in the style of Sir Forcible
Feeble, undertakes to call in question my statement
that the Fugitive Slave Act deuies the writ of
habeas corpus," Sumner continued: " Sitting near
him, ... I have come to know something of
his conversation, something of his manners, some
thing of his attainments, something of his abilities,
something of his character, — ay, sir, aud something
of his associations. . . . As senator of Massa
chusetts and as man, I place myself at every point
in unhesitating comparison with that honorable
assailant. And to his peremptory assertion that
the Fugitive Slave Act does not deny the writ of
habeas corpus I oppose my assertion, peremptory as
his own, that it does ; and there I leave the issue."
As to the charge that he had repudiated his oath,
•Pierce, Vol. Ill, p. 384.

178 CHAELES SUMNEE
Sumner declared that he had sworn to support the
Constitution as he understood it, and appealed to
well-known words of Jackson and of Buchanan as
serting this interpretation of the oath of a Federal
official. ' ' Does he [Sumner] recognize the obliga-
tiou to returu a fugitive slave?" asked Toucey of
Connecticut. "To that I answer distinctly, no !"
was Sumner's reply, aud with that the debate
closed. Chase did not overrate the significance of Sum
ner's part in this debate when he said : "You have
struck slavery the strongest blow it ever received ;
you have made it reel to the centre." He had vin
dicated the right of free speech and freedom of
petition in the Senate as John Quincy Adams had
doue in the House : hereafter anti-slavery petitions
were duly presented and referred, instead of being
suppressed. To the aggressive arrogance of the
South he had shown an opposition as unyielding as
adamant. At last there had appeared a champion
for freedom, who knew no fear, whom angry looks
or indecent epithets could not swerve a hair's
breadth from the course he had laid down, and who
was a master of debate, skilled in the use of weapons
whose keenness and temper his angry assailants
could not match. It is no wonder that they sought
the expulsion of so formidable an antagonist, and
that by common consent most of the Southern
senators from this time honored him by avoiding
all personal association with him as beneath the
notice of gentlemen of their school.

EEVOLUTION IN MASSACHUSETTS 179
But from all parts of the North came words of
strongest commendation of Sumner's course in this
debate. His promptness and resourcefulness, his
vindication of Massachusetts against unjust attack,
his dignity and courage, his manly self-respect iu
maintaining his own opinion in the face of Mason's
arrogant dictum, — all these made friends and ad
mirers in quarters where he had been held in slight
regard. Even the time-serving press of Boston had
to yield to the demand for the triumphant senator's
speeches, which hitherto they had excluded or
published only iu garbled form.
The point dealt with least positively in these de
bates was the precise attitude of the North toward
the enforcement of the Fugitive Slave Act. More
than once Sumner himself evaded the question or
declined to define that attitude iu advauce. For
himself, he never would admit that the phrase
"persons held to service" was intended by its
authors to apply to fugitive slaves, aud hence he
denied outright the constitutionality of the Act.
He opposed unsuccessfully a proposal for a pension
for the widow of the victim in the Burns rescue, on
the ground that the service rendered by the victim
was not of the nature for which pensions were
granted and further that the Act under which the
service was rendered was unconstitutional, and its
enforcement repugnant to the moral sense of the
states in which it was attempted. Failing in this
effort, he then sought to introduce a bill for the re
peal of the Act, but this was defeated by a majority

180 CHAELES SUMNEE
of twenty-five. It was significant, however, that
instead of four votes, as two years before, his mo
tion now mustered ten iu its favor, and that Seward,
who before had politicaUy refrained from voting,
now came out in favor of repeal, while Fish, who
had then supported the law, now advanced to the
position of uot voting upon the question.
Never had Sumner commanded so cordial a wel
come and so sympathetic a hearing as wheu, a few
weeks after the close of the session, he appeared be
fore the state convention in Worcester. His speech
kindled the most intense enthusiasm. He sought
to vindicate the necessity of a third party in Mas
sachusetts, and to destroy there the operation of the
Fugitive Slave Act, arguing that citizens were not
constrained to its support. He certainly was tread
ing upon dangerous ground when although admit
ting that judgments were binding upon inferior
tribunals aud upon executive offlcers, he neverthe
less denied to judicial tribunals the power to dictate
to Congress au interpretation of the Constitution or
to bind the individual conscience. But the Fugitive
Slave Law as Quincy declared, had become "an in
supportable burden."
Almost immediately after the passage of the
Kansas- Nebraska Bill, the project was agitated in
Massachusetts of forming a new party under the
name "Eepublican," in which those opposed to the
extension of slavery, whatever their previous party
affiliations, might cooperate for the attainment of
that one object. In the early summer a committee

EEVOLUTION IN MASSACHUSETTS 181
of correspondence, of which Samuel Hoar and Ealph
Waldo Emerson were members, was formed in Con
cord, and called a meeting of representative political
leaders in Boston. Hardly any but Free Soilers
responded to the summons, for the project had been
antagonized by the Whig press, by prominent Whig
leaders, as individuals, and by an address in which
the Whig state committee declined to call a fusion
convention, asserting that their party was still
"the vanguard of the great army of constitutional
liberty." This resistance of the Whigs of influence to the
formation of a new party based on the one vital
issue had a curious result. In New York City
there had recently sprung up a secret order which
represented a recrudescence of nativism. Its au
thoritative name is said to have been " The Supreme
Order of the Star- Spangled Banner." It gradually
obtained a foothold in other states, and aspired to
affect state and national politics. Conditions were
ripe for its growth iu Massachusetts. No other
state with the exception of New York had as yet
been so embarrassed and alarmed by the influx of
needy immigrants, who were contributing far more
than their quota to the asylums, jails and alms
houses, and were causing an upheaval in industrial
relations. The growth of the Eoman Catholic
Church, too, was viewed with unreasoning though
not unnatural alarm. The result was that in the
distracted political situation which the Whigs now
forced upou the people of Massachusetts, when the

182 CHAELES SUMNEE
loyalty of tens of thousands of voters to the parties
of their fathers was relaxed because those parties
refused to face the dominant issue, this secret order
made a strong appeal, particularly to young labor
ing men, throughout the commonwealth ; and, as
it was felt to be gaining strength, not a few office
holders and politicians sought entrance to its lodges.
Adams, Sumner, Palfrey and Andrew, and most of
the other strong Free Soil leaders resisted this temp
tation, but Wilsou became a member of the order,
although he had already accepted the nomination
of the Eepublicans for governor. Never was a
greater surprise in the history of politics than on
the day when the results of the state election were
declared : this secret order, the mushroom growth
of a night, was found to have swept the state, elect
ing all the state officers, the full delegation in Con
gress, and practically the entire membership of both
houses of the state legislature. Wilson's election to
the United States Senate, as the successor of Everett,
was thus clearly presaged, and this was speedily
carried into effect.
The methods and some of the objects of the EJiow-
Nothings were deemed unworthy by most Massa
chusetts meu of light and leading, — by none more
than by Sumner ; but their momentary success had
the good effect of furnishing a new gathering-point
in the chaos of Massachusetts politics. It showed
how anaemic the Whig party had become, and the
result was to give opportunity for the rapid aud
healthy growth of the Eepublican party, enlisting

EEVOLUTION IN MASSACHUSETTS 183
in its ranks not only anti-slavery Whigs and inde
pendent Democrats, but also the speedily disinte
grating troops of Know-Nothings.
The first session of the Thirty-third Congress had
been so given over to the discussion of the Kansas-
Nebraska BUI that in the short session there was a
general disposition to let slavery topics alone. To
ward its end, a wide-ranging debate was precipi
tated by a bill introduced by Toucey of Connecticut,
providing for the transfer to federal courts of all
suits "pending in state courts against federal officers
and other persons for acts doue under any law or
color of any law of the United States." Its obvious
though unacknowledged purpose was to bring before
more friendly courts suits begun in state tribunals
for damages against persons aiding in the execu
tion of the Fugitive Slave Act. Chase forced into
prominence this effect and probable object of the
proposed bill, and the debate theu called up the
leaders on both sides of the slavery issue. Wilson,
newly elected by Know-Nothing votes, on this oc
casion discussed slavery for the first time in the
Senate. Butler agaiu seized the opportunity to nag
Sumner with questions as to his fidelity to his sena
tor's oath, and, not succeeding in provoking a reply,
declared that he would "not take advantage of the
infirmity of a man who did not know half his time
what he was about," — a remark the humor of which
appealed to every one but himself, for, while Sum
ner was proverbially temperate, Butler was often
uuder the influence of liquor, and seemed to be uu-

184 CHAELES SUMNEE
duly exhilarated at that very moment. Sumner did
not get the floor till about midnight ; he then at
tacked the bill as "an effort to bolster up the Fugi
tive Slave Act," — a measure which was "conceived
in defiance of the Constitutiou" and was "a bare
faced subversion of every principle of humanity and
justice." His motion for its repeal now secured
nine votes.
During this session Sumner put himself to uo
little trouble, acting as the representative of John
A. Andrew, to effect the purchase of the famUy of
one of Andrew's colored friends. The children
were nearly white, and their appearance and pic
tures made in the North a great impression of the
enormities of the slave system.
Soon after his return to Boston at the close
of the session, Sumner delivered an address in
Tremont Temple on "The necessity, practicability,
and dignity of the anti-slavery enterprise, with
glances at the special duties of the North." It
was one of the most comprehensive and per
suasive presentations of the anti-slavery cause
of the whole period of the controversy. There
was a great demand for it in other cities. For
the first time, Sumner was called to New York City,
and delivered this address twice there and again
in Brooklyn, being received everywhere with much
enthusiasm. It was during the months of this summer that
Sumner gratified a long-felt wish by making his
first trip to the West, On his journey he bad

EEVOLUTION IN MASSACHUSETTS 185
pleasant visits with Horace Mann, who had become
president of Antioch College, and with Chase, who
was entering upon his campaign for the governor
ship of Ohio. He went to the home and grave of
Henry Clay at Lexington, Ky., and iu this vicinity
observed with keen interest the life of slaves on a
large plantation. He seemed both surprised at find
ing them so well-conditioned and contented, aud
saddened at the thought of their being condemned
to a life of servitude. From St. Louis he traveled
by steamboat to St. Paul.
Upon his returu to Boston in September from this
journey on which he had "traversed eleven free
states and three slave states," he found Massachu
setts politics still in turmoil. The anti-slavery fac
tion of the Know-Nothing party was ready to join
with other anti-slavery men, but the other faction
still persisted in emphasizing nativism as the princi
pal issue. The great influence of the Springfield
Republican and of its eminent editor, Samuel Bowles,
was cast in favor of the Eepublican party, aud,
though heretofore not friendly to Sumner, he now
urged him to take the lead in the campaign as " a
captain whose moral power has not beeu weakened
by participation iu the preliminaries of the cam
paign, who has not suffered himself to be debauched
by the local politics of the last twelve months."
Sumner heeded the call, and spoke to great audi
ences in the principal cities of the state, empha
sizing in particular the necessity, under existing
conditions, of a party based upou the principle of

186 CHAELES SUMNEE
resistance to the extension of slavery. But he also
gave prominence to a criticism of the principles and
methods of the Know-Nothing organization, paying
an eloquent tribute to the services rendered to the
United States by men of foreign birth, of both high
and low walks in life, aud showing how religious pro
scription was out of harmony with the best Ameri
can traditions. "A party which, beginning in
secret, interferes with religious belief, and founds a
discrimination on the accident of birthj is not the
party for us."
Such language was reckless of political expe
diency, for Sumner's term in the Senate was ap
proaching its end, and the Know-Nothing body in
Massachusetts was still a power to be reckoned
with. But in his whole career Sumner never
swerved from what he believed to be the line of
truth and duty to further his own fortune or the
success of a political party. The Know-Nothing
governor was reelected, for the Boston Whigs still
refused to recognize that their party was in its last
throes. The Know-Nothings again secured a major
ity in the legislature, and, doubtless in resentment
at Sumner's unpalatable words iu the campaign, it
was urged that this newly elected body should
take into its own hands the choice of Sumner's
successor, which would naturally devolve upon
the legislators to be chosen a year later. Bnt
such a step would have beeu of doubtful con
stitutionality and flagrantly out of harmony with
precedent and current practice, so that the proj-

EEVOLUTION IN MASSACHUSETTS 187
ect was soou dropped. Who could foresee the
dark event which within that twelvemonth was to
bind the heart of Massachusetts as of oue man to
Cbarles Sumuer !

CHAPTEE X
" THE CRIME AGAINST KANSAS," AND THE BROOKS
ASSAULT
At the opening of the new Congress, nearly one-
fourth of the members were Eepublicans. They
could no longer be shut out of committees on the
ground that they were not members of any healthy
political party, but their assignments were to posi
tions of little responsibility. Greeley wrote in the
Tribune of December 14, 1855: "Mr. Sumner —
whose reputation as a scholar, orator and statesman
is not conflned to this hemisphere — dangles at the
tail of two unimportant committees.' Such is sla
very's confession that she feels the point of Ms
spear." During the flrst two months of the sessiou, the
subject of all-engrossing interest was the contest
over the speakership. Though the maj ority of mem
bers of the House were now opposed to the Kansas-
Nebraska Bill and to the administration which had
fathered it, the various Eepublican and Know-
Nothing elements were so discordant that not until
the 133d ballot was the contest decided by the elec
tion of N. P. Banks, a Massachusetts Eepublican,
whose political career had been aided by his tem
porary alliance with the nativists.
¦ Pensions and Enrolled Bills.

"THE CEIME AGAINST KANSAS" 189
Meantime Kansas had become the scene of a yet
sterner struggle. Missourians had hailed with ac
claim the repeal of the prohibition of 1820 in the
belief that the new territory contiguous to their own
state would as a matter of course be peopled by
slaveholders. But it soon became apparent that
this anticipation was likely to be defeated unless
they put forth strenuous efforts, for bands of earnest
settlers were coming from the Northern states, de
termined to turn the decision of " squatter sover
eignty" in favor of freedom.
The principal leader of the Missourians was Atch
ison, who had recently presided over the United
States Senate ; and the appeal went forth to the
cotton states for recruits to repel the colonists from
the North and keep the territory from their grasp.
But the North was not less alert. Even before the
Kansas- Nebraska Bill had become a law, Eli Thayer
of Worcester was devising plans for assisted emigra
tion, which presently took shape in the ' ' New Eug
land Emigrant Aid Company," incorporated under
the laws of Massachusetts, and enlisting iu its work
some of the ablest and bravest men in New England.
The arrival of its first party of colonists in Kansas
in the early spring of 1855 aroused the Missourians
to fierce resentment. At the time of the March
election, 5,000 of the "border ruffians" swept
across the state line, terrorized the polling officers
into receiving their ballots, and elected a legislature
which would be their fitting representatives.
To the body thus fraudulently chosen, the free-

190 CHAELES SUMNEE
state settlers gave no recognition, but proceeded
to elect a delegate to Congress and delegates to a
constitutional convention, who met at Topeka and
drew up a constitution. This was approved by the
free-state voters, who forthwith elected a legislature
which applied to Congress for admission as a free
state under the Topeka Constitution. In all these
proceedings the pro-slavery settlers and thefr allies
had taken no part. But they eagerly sought occa
sions for quarrel, and in November 1,200 border
ruffians surrounded Lawrence, the principal free-
state town, evidently bent on destroying it. Find
ing the townspeople armed with Sharpe's rifles, the
marauders withdrew, but they had not disbanded
when Congress assembled. The message and the
later proclamation of the President gave full recog
nition to what might fittingly be called the " Mis
souri" legislature, and federal troops were placed at
the service of Governor Shannon.
The Senate was prompt in calling for documents
relating to conditions in Kansas, aud these gave rise
to hot debate.' So violent were the passions aroused
that, with sure prescience, Sumner declared to a
friend: "This session will not pass without the
Senate chamber's becoming the scene of some un
paralleled outrage. ' ' Wilson took the lead, emphasi
zing the part which the Missouri invaders had played
and the favor and cooperation extended to the pro-
slavery faction by the administration. In the
• Said to a brother of Col. T. W. Higginson. Contemporaries,
p. 283.

" THE CEIME AGAINST KANSAS " 191
House, the issue was joined over the recognition of
the delegate. Finally it was voted to send a com
mission of investigation to the territory. After
careful study of the situation, the majority reported
that the territorial legislature was the product of
fraud aud violence, and hence all its acts were void.
In the Senate, the principal debate on Kansas
awaited the report from the Committee ou Territo
ries. It proved to be a divided report, but Douglas,
for the majority, following the lead of the President,
laid the blame of all the disorders upou the aggres
sions of the Emigrant Aid Company. He presented
a bill providing for the early organization of a state
government by a procedure which would distinctly
confirm the legality of the "Missouri " legislature.
Sumner straightway denounced this majority report
for smothering the true issue, and declared that
both the motive and acts of the Emigrant Aid Com
pany were right and lawful. He closed thus : "A
bad cause is naturaUy stated ou untenable ground.
You cannot show the misconduct [of the company].
Any such allegation will fail ; and you now begin
your game with loaded dice." These words greatly
angered Douglas, who upbraided him for "justify
ing treason and rebellion," and threatened him with
the penalties of such heinous conduct. Two days
later he returned to au attack upon Sumuer, giving
vent to offensive epithets and attributing to him
"baseness" aud "base purposes."
This discussion of Kansas affairs was but a pre
liminary skirmish to the real fight which began in

192 CHAELES SUMNEE
the latter part of March, when there came before
the Senate the two reports and also two separate
bills, for Seward had introduced one providing for
the admission of Kansas upon the Topeka Con
stitution. Douglas took the lead with a speech full
of venom and scurrility. All his opponents he
stigmatized as "black Eepublicans" and he de
nounced his own colleague from Illinois as a traitor,
worthy of death. The Emigrant Aid Company
drew from him and his followers the bitterest of
abuse. Northern leaders were referred to in terms
of contempt and social ostracism was urged against
them. Wilson resented these insults and made
some stinging rejoinders. Seward ignored such
vulgar attacks ; although his speech arraigned the
President as mainly responsible for the disorders in
Kansas, it did not grapple with the main issue.
Sumner secured the floor for the 19th of May (1856).
Two days before he was to speak, he wrote to Theo
dore Parker : ' ' Alas ! the tyranny over us is com
plete. Will the people submit ? When you read
this, I shall be saying to the Senate, 'They will
not ! ' Would that I had your strength ! But I
shall pronounce the most thorough philippic ever
uttered in a legislative body."
Meantime, in far-away Kansas veritable civil war
had begun. Eecruits had beeu mustered even from
Alabama and South Carolina. At the call of a
United States marshal, ostensibly to aid in execu
ting process on a free-state man, these, together with
hundreds of Missourians, had gathered, and, at the

" THE CEIME AGAINST KANSAS " 193
moment wheu Sumner began his speech, they had
for several days been marauding iu the vicinity of
Lawrence. Their liues kept drawing closer. On
the morning of the day after Sumner had finished
depicting "the crime against Kansas," this armed
mob was in position upon the bluffs which com
manded the town and before the sun had set, al
though the arrest had been made without resistance,
the ruffians had stormed the place, smashed printing-
presses, fired the hotel of the Emigrant Aid Com
pany, and plundered and burned the townspeople's
homes. When Sumner began his speech, despite the in
tensity of the heat, the Senate galleries and adjoin
ing rooms were thronged. There was a tenseness
of anticipation in the air. It was felt that hitherto
the Northern speakers had shown too much meek
ness. Sumner had been the man most viciously
assailed, and it was known that he would now reply
with utter fearlessness and would speak the naked
truth as he saw it. And his text was at hand,
for every one in Washington believed that blood
would soon be shed in Kansas, and before night it
was known that Lawrence lay at the mercy of the
mob. In opening his speech Sumner presented a glow
ing picture of the beauties of the new aspirant for
statehood. He then declared that "the crime
against Kansas" — the phrase in which he epito
mized his own speech — was aggravated by the
motive, which was " the rape of a vfrgin territory,

194 CHAELES SUMNEE
compelling it to the hateful embrace of slavery,
. . . traceable to a depraved desire for a new
slave state, hideous offspring of such a crime, in
the hope of adding to the power of slavery in the
national government, . . . force being openly
employed in compelling Kansas to this pollution."
He denounced the Kansas- Nebraska Bill as "in
every respect a swindle, . . . the only word
which could adequately express the mingled mean
ness and wickedness of the cheat." He enumerated
the deeds of violence which had been committed in
Kansas ; he laid stress upon the ways in which the
President and his administration had abetted them,
characterizing as an "apology imbecile" Pierce's
disclaimer of power to act, and spoke of the other
excuses for the crime as " the apology tyrannical, the
apology absurd, and the apology infamous." . . .
' ' Tyranny, imbecility, absurdity and infamy all
unite, like the weird sisters, to dance about this
crime." He told of Atchison's having, "like
Cataline, stalked into this chamber, reeking with
conspiracy," where he had found ','a senator
[Butler] who had not hesitated to appear as his
open compurgator." He defended the Emigrant
Aid Company with great vigor, and closed his re
marks of the first day with bold words of praise for
Massachusetts, the leader in the war of the Eevolu
tion, "to which she contributed troops in larger
numbers than any other state, and larger than all
the slave states together," just as in the present
struggle "she contributes . . . more of that

" THE CEIME AGAINST KANSAS " 195
divine spark by which opinions are quickened
into life thau is contributed by any other state,
or by all the slave states together, while her
annual productive industry exceeds in value three
times the whole vaunted cotton crop of the whole
South." In the course of his remarks he turned his atten
tion to the senators " who had raised themselves to
eminence on this fioor in the championship of
human wrongs : I mean the senator from South
Carolina [Butler] and the senator from Illinois
[Douglas], who, though unlike as Don Quixote and
Sancho Panza, yet, like this couple, sally forth to
gether in the same adventure." "The senator
from South Carolina has read many books of
chivalry, and believes himself a chivalrous knight,
with sentiments of honor and courage. Of course
he has chosen a mistress to whom he has made his
vows, and who, though ugly to others, is always
lovely to him ; though polluted in the sight of the
world, is chaste in his sight. I mean the harlot.
Slavery. For her his tongue is always profuse in
words. ... If the slave states cannot en
joy . . . the full power in the national territo
ries to compel fellow men to unpaid toil, to separate
husband and wife, and to sell little children at the
auction block, — then, sir, the chivalric senator will
conduct the state of South Carolina out of the
Union ! Heroic knight ! Exalted senator ! a sec
ond Moses come for a second exodus ! " He then
vindicated the Eepublican party against Butler's

196 CHAELES SUMNEE
charge of sectionalism, declaring: "It is in no
just sense sectional, but, more than any other
party, national ; aud ... it now goes forth to
dislodge from the high places that tyrannical sec
tionalism of which the senator from South Carolina
is one of the maddest zealots."
Of Douglas he said : "As the senator from South
Carolina is the Don Quixote, so the senator from
Illinois is the squire of slavery, its very Sancho
Panza, ready to do its humiliating offlces. This
senator in his labored address, vindicating his
labored report, — piling one mass of elaborate error
upou another mass,— constrained himself, as you
will remember, to unwonted decencies of speech."
Sumner then proceeded to declare that while with
his boastful swagger he might convulse the country
with civil feud, Douglas could not enforce obedience
to the tyrannical usurpation in Kansas.
While Sumner was speaking, the pro-slavery
senators at first feigned indifference, and kept up so
much conversation and laughter among themselves
that they had to be called to order. At the end of
three hours, Sumner stopped ; he concluded his
speech in two hours on the following day. He
strongly urged that Kansas be admitted as a state
upon the Topeka Constitution. He denounced
Butler, a judge and chairman of the Judiciary
Committee of the Senate, for proposing that a war
rant be issued for Sharpe's rifles: — "to compass
the wretched purposes of a wretched cause, he thus
purposes to trample on one of the plainest pro-

"THE CEIME AGAINST KANSAS" 197
visions of constitutional liberty." Later, referring
to Butler's angry outbreaks at the mere suggestion
of the admission of Kansas as a free state, Sumner
said: "With incoherent phrase [he] discharges
the loose expectoration of his speech now upon her
representative, and then upon her people. . . .
There was no possible deviation from truth which
he did not make, with so much passion, I gladly
add, as to save him from the suspicion of inten
tional aberration. . . . He shows an incapacity
for accuracy, whether iu stating the Constitution,
or in stating the law, whether in details of statistics
or diversions of scholarship. He cannot ope his
mouth but out there flies a blunder." Eeferring to
Butler's contempt for Kansas and pride in his own
state, Sumner said: "South Carolina counts by
centuries where Kansas counts by years. But a
beneflcent example may be boru in a day. . . .
Were the whole history of South Carolina blotted
out of existence, from its very beginning to the day
of the last election of the senator to his present
seat on this floor, civilization might lose — I do not
say how little, but surely less than it has already
gained by the example of Kansas in that valiant
struggle against oppression, and in the develop
ment of a new science of emigration. . . .
Throughout this infant territory there is more of
educated talent in proportion to its inhabitants
than iu his vaunted 'state.' Ah, sir, I tell you
that Kansas, welcomed as a free state, ' a ministering
angel shall be ' to the republic, when South Caro-

I
198 CHAELES SUMNEE
liua, in the cloak of darkness which she hugs, ' lies
howling.' "
Of Mason he spoke as one who, " as author of the
Fugitive Slave Bill, had associated himself with a
special act of inhumanity and tyranny. " "He holds
the commission of Virginia, — of that other Virginia
from which Washington and Jefferson avert their
faces, where human beings are bred as cattle for the
shambles, and a dungeon rewards the pious matron
who teaches children to relieve their bondage by
reading the Book of Life. It is proper that such
a senator, representing such a state, should rail
against free Kansas."
Watchful as had been his opponents for any op
portunity against him, not once in the whole course
of his speech was Sumner called to order. His
eloquence aud intense earnestness made a tre
mendous impression, aud he was acclaimed as the
peer of the greatest orators and statesmen of Eng
land and America. But Douglas and Mason
writhed under the excoriation he had administered.
Douglas spoke ofthe "depths of malignity that
issued from every sentence"; he affected to be
shocked by the " lasciviousness and obscenity" of
Sumner's speech, and ridiculed him for "practic
ing his speech every night before the glass with a
negro boy to hold the candle and watch the
gestures," — a charge to which Sumner's scorching
rejoinder promptly gave the lie. But what rankled
most was Sumner's denunciation of the Kansas-
Nebraska Bill as "in every respect a swindle."

" THE CEIME AGAINST KANSAS " 199
"Is it his object," cried Douglas, "to provoke
some of us to kick him as we would a dog in the
street, that he may get sympathy upon his just
chastisement?" — words which took on a dark sig
nificance from the events of the next few hours.
Angry censure came from others as well. Mason
denounced Sumuer as "a cunning artificer or
forger, who knows uo other use of truth thau to
give currency to falsehood," and deplored the
political necessity of tolerating him in the Senate,
whereas elsewhere he would not be recognized " as
possessing manhood in any form"; his very
presence would be "dishonor" and "the touch of
his hand would be a disgrace." To such low per
sonalities Sumner would doubtless have turned a
deaf ear, had he not been convinced that patience
in face of the Southerners' swaggering arrogance
had ceased to be a vfrtue. He fronted Douglas
with scorn ; advancing toward him, and pointing
his finger defiantly at him, he said :
"Let the senator remember hereafter that the
bowie-knife and bludgeon are not proper emblems
of senatorial debate. Let him remember that the
swagger of Bob Acres and the ferocity of the Malay
caunot add to the dignity of this body. . . .
I will not descend to things that dropped so natur
ally from his tongue. I only brand them to his face
as false. I say also to that senator — and I wish him
to bear it in mind — that no person with the upright
form of man can be allowed  " (hesitation).
Douglas: "Say it."

200 CHAELES SUMNEE
Sumuer : " I will say it. No person with the up
right form of man cau be allowed without violation
of all decency, to switch out from his tongue the
perpetual stench of offensive personality. Sir, that
is not a proper weapon of debate, at least on this
floor. The noisome, squat and nameless animal, to
which I refer, is not the proper model for an Amer
ican senator. Will the senator from Illinois take
notice?" Douglas: "I will, and so will not imitate you,
sir." Sumner : " I did not hear the senator."
Douglas: "I said, if that be the case, I would
certainly never imitate you in that capacity, recog
nizing the force of the illustration."
Sumner : " Mr. President, again the senator
switches his tongue, and agaiu he fills the senate
with its offensive odor. I pass from the senator
from Illinois.
"There was still another — the senator from Vir
ginia — who is now also in my eye. That senator
said nothiug of argument, and therefore there is
nothing of that for response. I simply say to him
that hard words are not arguments, frowns are not
reasons, nor do scowls belong to the proper arsenal
of parliamentary debate. The senator has not for
gotten that on a former occasion I did something to
exhibit the plantation manners which he displays." '
' In passing judgment upon tbe mode of speech which Sum
ner allowed himseli in this debate, it must be remembered that
he ,had heretofore submitted to the most galling epithets, and

" THE CEIME AGAINST KANSAS " 201
Among Sumner's friends there was not a little ap
prehension as to the consequences to which such a
speech might lead. Douglas's words had seemed to
hint at personal violence, and after the session
Wilson and one or two others told Sumner that they
were going home with him. Wheu Sumner caught
their meaning, he immediately dismissed their sug
gestion of acting as his body-guard. "None of
that, Wilson," said he. Now, as at other critical
junctures, he showed himself almost fatalistically
insensible to fear, and continued to walk alone about
the streets of the capital.'
that unbridled license had repeatedly been used by Douglas and
his allies in assailing the leaders of the Nortb. That these
masters of senatorial billingsgate bad now met with " majestic,
elegant and crushing " rebuke from Sumner gave profound sat
isfaction and encouragement to anti-slavery men throughout the
country. Said Parker to Sumner, after his speech : "Yon had
all three of them at once on the point of your spear." Sum
ner's own vindication of his severity of speech on such occasions
he stated thus to a friend : " There is a time for everything ;
and when crirae and criminals are thrust before us, they are to
be met by all the energies that God has given us, by argument,
scorn and denunciation. Tbe whole arsenal of God is ours ;
and I will not renounce one of its weapons, — not one. That is
my opinion, formed in experience and tried by tranquil medi
tation." Letters of hearty congratulation and appreciation
came pouring in upon him. The speech was issued in enor
mous editions ; it is estimated that within two months of its de
livery a million copies had been distributed. It was reprinted
in England, and translated into Welsh and German.
' " I don't believe he knew what fear was. Perhaps it detracts
from his credit that he didn't know what fear was. Richard
Dana said once, describing him : ' He is a cat without smellers. '
That is be has none of the delicate tests that, as he passes along,
tell him what he touches. He wanted that timidity which rec
ognizes the opposition to him, and so he passed bravely on."
— Wendell Phillips, oration reported in Boston Daily Advertiser,
March 13, 1877.

202 CHAELES SUMNEE
But meantime a self-constituted champion of the
South was nerving himself to avenge what he deemed
the insults that had been heaped upon her. Preston
S. Brooks had come to Congress in 1853 from an up
state district of South Carolina. In the war with
Mexico he had headed a company of volunteers, but
illness had prevented his seeing active service. In
the House he had been orderly in his conduct, had
once helped stop a personal encounter between mem
bers, and had introduced a resolution against the
bringing of concealed weapons. He was considered
less of a "fire-eater" thau many of his Southern
colleagues, and was on quite friendly terms with
some Northern members. Brooks, who was later
referred to as Butler's "nephew" and "near kins
man," was the son of the senator's cousin. He had
heard a part of Sumner's speech on the first day,.
aud resented what he denounced as insults to his
kinsman and to his state. From his own testimony
it seems probable that his real grievance was Sum
ner's attack upon " the harlot, Slavery," and the
devotion which she received from Southern leaders,
and that others, of more brutal mind than he, urged
him on as the champion of his outraged section,
working upon his relationship to Butler as affording
both the natural reason why he should act and a
possible defense in case of court proceedings.
Brooks complained of Sumner's speech the first day;
the second day, comments of colleagues and iu so
cial circles stung him to more definite thoughts of
vengeance. On the following day, he broached the

"THE CEIME AGAINST KANSAS" 203
matter which was burdening his mind to Edmund
son of Virginia, layiug stress, so the latter said,
upon Sumner's characterization of South Carolina as
"disgracefully impotent during the Eevolution, and
still more so on account of slavery." Brooks urged
his colleague to be preseut as a friend, but Edmund-
son's saying that he had only a " little briar stick "
with him showed that he understood Brooks really
wished him to be prepared for active assistance.
They stalked their prey in the Capitol and through
its grounds, but did not find him. The foUowing
day, Edmundson came upon Brooks lying in wait for
Sumuer at the entrance to the Capitol grounds, with
the intention of attacking him there, or, in case he
drove to the Capitol, of passing up the steps and ac
costing him at the East Front, on his way to the
Senate. Edmundson dissuaded him from this course,
lest the exertion of hurrying up the steps should un
fit him for a contest with Sumner, whom both these
ruffians thought to be Brooks's superior in strength.
Accordingly Brooks went to the Senate chamber,
where his companion joined him. While a eulogy
was being pronounced upon a deceased member.
Brooks stood in the aisle a few feet from Sumner's
chair. Upon the Senate's adjournment, most of the
members left the chamber. Brooks taking a vacated
seat, separated by two from the one where Sumner
was sitting. The presence of a woman in the gal
lery embarrassed Brooks's sense of gallantry. He
asked one of the attendants to get her to leave, and
when this supposedly whimsical request was not

204 CHAELES SUMNEE
complied with, he went out to ask Edmund-
son's advice as to whether it would not be best
to send in his card to Sumner. He was dis
suaded on the ground that Sumner would prob
ably not leave his work but would summon him to
his desk.
Free of interruptions, Sumner had settled to his
writing, drawing his chair up close to the desk over
which he was bent, absorbed in his work. A chiv
alrous knight might never again hope to have his
victim more completely at his mercy, for the desk,
firmly fastened to the floor, pinioned him ; until he
should have time to push back his chair, it would
be impossible for him to rise.
Suddenly Sumner heard his name called. Look
ing up, he saw a tall, dark-faced stranger, who,
without giving his name, said : "I have read your
speech over twice carefully ; it is a libel on South
Carolina and Mr. Butler, who is a relative of mine "
— and down upon the head of the defenseless man
crashed a blow from a heavy gutta-percha cane.
Half-stunned, Sumner struggled to rise ; the blows
still coutinued, but the desk held him, till he
wrenched it from its iron fastenings. As he
staggered toward his assailant. Brooks seized him
by the collar and still rained blows at his head.
The cane broke, but the furious blows did not cease
till Sumner sank bleeding to the floor.
The Senate chamber was almost empty at the
time. So swiftly and without warning had the
assault been made that not till Sumner was falling

"THE CEIME AGAINST KANSAS" 205
did any one reach his side. Surprise and lack of
presence of mind hindered some, but there were
others who deliberately held back. Toombs, stand
ing near by, saw the first blow and watched the
assault with approval. Keitt, Brooks's colleague,
who had beeu awaiting his action, immediately
rushed forward, brandishing a cane and with hand
on pistol, shouting, "Let them alone!" He even
threatened the venerable Senator Crittenden, who
was trying to get between the assailant and his
victim. Slidell and Douglas were in the anteroom,
when the shout was heard that some one was as
saulting Sumner. Slidell, who years before had
assured Sumner of his grateful appreciation of his
"chivalrous and zealous advocacy" in defense of
his brother, now " felt no emotion at hearing the
remark. I remained very quietly in my seat. . . .
I have no association of relations of any kind with
Mr. Sumner. ... I did not think it necessary
to express my sympathy or make any advances to
ward him." Despite his own menacing words,
Douglas denied that he had had the slightest sus
picion that any violence was to be offered Sumner ;
he acknowledged that his first impulse had been
"to help put an end to the affray ; but it occurred
to my mind in an instant that if I came into the
hall my motives would be misconstrued, and I sat
down again."
As friends gathered about the stricken senator, it
was thought that he could not survive. He was
bruised upon the face, arms and shoulders, while

206 CHAELES SUMNEE
blood flowed copiously from two long wounds, deep
and very ragged, on the back of his head, which
cut to the boue and down under the scalp. But for
his heavy mass of hair, instant death would proba
bly have resulted from such blows. Wilson took
the half-conscious man to his lodgings. With un
daunted spirit, he declared that he would renew the
conflict with slavery as soon as he could return to
his post. But the next day, for the first time since
he had entered the Senate, the seat of Charles Sum
ner was vacant.
When the Senate convened, by previous arrange
ment among the Eepublicans, Wilson made a brief
statement of what had occurred. There was a
pause. It had been hoped that some member of
the majority would make a motion for a committee
of investigation, but none of them stirred. As the
presiding offlcer was about to proceed to the regular
business of the day, Seward moved that a com
mittee of inquiry be chosen. No objection was in
terposed, and it was passed without debate, after
being amended, however, so that the committee
should be chosen by the Senate. Had ordinary
precedent been followed, the presiding offlcer would
have named Seward chairman of the committee and
have given fair representation to the minority, but
the Senate proceeded to elect a committee made up
exclusively of Democrats. Five days later this
committee submitted a terse report, which, without
comment upon the nature of the outrage, merely
declared that the assault constituted a breach of the

" THE CEIME AGAINST KANSAS " 207
privileges of the Senate, but that it lay outside the
Senate's jurisdiction aud was punishable ouly by
the House of which Brooks was a member. The
committee's recommendation that their report and
affidavits be transmitted to the House was im
mediately adopted by the Senate.
Meantime, in the House, Clingman of North
Carolina had tried to block a motion of inquiry by
making the point that there was no question of
privilege, as the assault was not committed on a
member of the House. But the Speaker ruled
against him, and the resolution was passed by a
vote of about three to two. The Speaker then ap
pointed a committee consisting of three Northern
Republicans and two Southern Democrats. After
a week spent iu taking testimony and deliberating,
the committee by a vote of three to two declared
Brooks guilty of an assault and of disorderly be
havior and recommended his expulsion aud the
censure of Edmundson and Keitt. The two South
ern members dissented in a "coarse tissue of
sophistry," insisting that the House had no juris
diction, since the assault was not committed on a
member of the House nor while the House was in
session. Though the Senate resolution had been passed
without debate, the subject came before that body
some days later through personal explanations which
several of the members sought to make as to allega
tions contained in the affidavits. Toombs's frank
avowal of his approval of the assault called from

208 CHAELES SUMNEE
Wade the ringing challenge : " If the principle now
announced ['an assassin- like, cowardly attack upon
a mau unarmed '] is to prevail, let us come armed for
the combat ; and although you are four to one, I am
here to meet you. God knows a man can die in no
better cause than in vindicating the rights of de
bate on this floor." Wilson declared: "Mr. Sum
ner was stricken down on this floor by a brutal,
murderous, and cowardly assault  " "You are
a liar!" shouted Butler, starting forward as if to
attack him, but other senators interposed and per
suaded him to withdraw his words.
A fortnight later, however, in the debate on the
Kansas bill, Butler recurred to Sumner's speech,
declaring that, had he been present, he would not
have submitted to such insults. He expressed ap
proval of all of Brooks's conduct; professed to be
lieve that Sumner was little hurt and now was
"shamming" ; referred to Mm as a "criminal
aggressor," a "degenerate son of Massachusetts,"
like Thersites in " deserving what that brawler re
ceived from the hands of the gallant Ulysses " ; and
implied that Sumner would have had far less social
currency, had not he (Butler) at the flrst maintained
intercourse with him. Wilson ridiculed as a " piny-
wood doctrine" this assumption of social superi
ority, and proceeded by authoritative quotations
from Butler's speeches to prove that for a long time
he had been the aggressor, nagging Sumner with
the most insulting epithets aud in most offensive
manner. To this Butler made a rather shamefaced

"THE CEIME AGAINST KANSAS" 209
reply. Seward, who had beeu strangely reluctant
to speak, even now seemed unduly conciliatory iu
compliments to the South ; but he spoke most feel
ingly of Sumner as "a cherished persoual friend
and political associate " and declared with sure
prophecy : " The blows that fell on the head of the
senator from Massachusetts have done more for the
cause of human freedom in Kansas and in the terri
tories of the Uuited States than all the eloquence
. . . which has resounded in these halls from
the days when Eufus King asserted that cause in
this chamber, aud when John Quincy Adams de
fended it iu the other house, until the present
hour." The promise of the first few days that Sumner
would soon be back in his seat was not fulfilled.
Violent pain and fever came on. One of his wounds
had to be opened, and for a few days his con
dition was critical. After he had rallied a little, he
was taken to the country, but the wound still re
fused to heal, and he complained of dull feelings in
his head which made him fear the approach of
paralysis. He was in Washington again for a few
days in July, and many anti-slavery men in
Congress and members of the diplomatic corps
caUed to inquire for him, but no call or word of
sympathy came from adherents of the administra
tion with the exception of Cass. Seven weeks after
the assault he went to Philadelphia, to put himself
in the care of an eminent physician.
In these days of Sumner's prostration, the national

210 CHAELES SUMNEE
conventions were held. In the Eepublican assem
bly not a few votes were cast, especially by New
York delegates, for Sumuer as nominee for the vice-
presidency. It was said that his nomination was
prevented only by the Massachusetts delegation
formally withdrawing his name.
Ou the very day that Sumner left Wash
ington, occuiTed Brooks's trial in the circuit
court of the District of Columbia ou the charge of
assaidt. He made no denial, but declared he
had acted as would a husband avenging his out
raged honor. The court imposed on him no
other penalty than the trifling fiue of three hundred
dollars. Two days later began the debate in the House on
the report of the committee on the assault. Most of
the speakers laid chief stress on the contention that
the House had no jurisdiction. But others did not
hesitate to justify the assault in every respect. No
attention was paid to Butler's grievance. Espe
cially forward in praising Brooks's championship
of the South were Clingman, who maintained "the
liberty of the cudgel," and Savage of Tennessee,
who declared that Brooks, "instead of deserving
punishment, merited the highest commendation,"
and that Sumner " did not get a lick more than he
deserved." Most impressive was the speech of
Giddings, himself a hero of the struggle for free
speech in the House. The vote stood one hun
dred aud twenty-one to ninety-five in favor of
expulsion, thus falling far short of the requisite two-

" THE CEIME AGAINST KANSAS " 211
thirds. After the vote had been declared, Brooks
obtained the floor and made a braggart's speech.
He showed with disgusting clearness the deliber
ation with which the assault was planned, explaining
his choice of a cane rather than a whip, so that he
might get the flrmer grip ; he implied that he was
provided with some deadly weapon for use in case
Sumner had wrenched the cane away from him.
He referred in insulting terms to anti-slavery mem
bers, speaking of Comins, with whom he had previ
ously sought association, as a "poltroon and a puppy,
. . . a cock that crows and won't fight, despised
by the hens aud even by the pullets." By her reso
lutions condemning the attack, he declared that
Massachusetts had " given additional proof that she
neither comprehends the theory of our government
nor is loyal to its authority." To those who had
voted for his expulsion he said that "for all future
time his self-respect required that he should pass them
as strangers." He thereupon announced his resig
nation, and strode from the chamber, to be over
whelmed at its door by the kisses and embraces of
Southern women. The resolution of censure upou
Edmundson was defeated, largely ou the ground
that he was not present at the assault. Keitt was
censured by a vote of one hundred and ninety-six
to ninety-six. He thereupon made a brutal speech,
in which he declared that Brooks "redressed a
wrong to his blood and his state and he did it iu
a fair aud manly way." He, too, resigned. And
within three weeks each of these heroes had been

212 CHAELES SUMNEE
vindicated by reelection to his seat by a practically
unanimous vote.'
Brooks challenged a Massachusetts member to a
duel for denouncing the assault " in the name of
that fair play which bullies and prize-fighters re
spect," but later declined to go to the place in
Canada selected for the combat. Wilson's con
demnation of the affair as ' ' brutal, murderous and
cowardly " called forth a challeuge. Wilson con
temptuously declined to fight a duel with him, but
gave it to be understood that he should be prepared
to defend himself. Brooks continued to breathe
out threatenings, but men who called him coward,
ruffian and bully went unscathed, for Brooks as
sumed the r61e of avenger only when his victim was
unarmed and pinioned.
The extended account which has been given of
this assault would be entirely disproportionate,
were it not for the fact that throughout the slave
states Brooks's act received ardent approval as a
valiant deed for the honor of the South. " Good
in conception, better in execution, and best of all in
consequences," was the comment of the Eichmond
Enquirer, and it called for like treatment iu the case
of other Northerners who should dare "slander the

' In a speech at a banquet given in his honor, Brooks declared
himself, in this deed, "the type and representative of the en
tire South." In au address issued to his constituents, he urged
them to elect hira with unanimity, " if I have represented you
faithfully." And in his entire district only six votes were cast
agaiust bim.

" THE CEIME AGAINST KANSAS " 213
South."' Simms, the most eminent Southern man
of letters, justified the attack, and even approved
it in New York in words which deeply incensed his
hearers. Jefferson Davis wrote to Brooks, com
mending both his act and his character. He was
hailed as the representative of Southern chivalry
and presented a gold-headed cane by the students
of the University of Virginia, the greatest centre of
culture in the South, while a dozen canes and other
evidences of admiration came from various places
in the slave states.
Throughout the North there was absolute una
nimity in condemning the assault. It was every
where recognized as an attack upon constitutional
liberty, evidencing a determinatiou to suppress free
speech, just as at the very same time other ruffians
were suppressing free speech aud a free ballot in
Kansas. The legislatures of Massachusetts, Connec
ticut, Ehode Island and Vermont passed stinging
resolutions, which were presented in Congress. In
many of the great cities of the North public meetings
of protest were attended by thousands and addressed
by such men as Henry Ward Beecher, William
Cullen Byrant, William M. Evarts, Francis Way-
laud, E. Eockwood Hoar, Longfellow and Quincy,
Holmes and Emerson. At the formal recommenda-
'The Charleston Mercury of July 21, 1856, commented on
the assault: "The whole affair has been most oppor
tune. ... He [Brooks] has from the first conducted him
self with good taste, good judgment, and good spirit." Sum
ner " is dead in the esteem of every man uot a poltroon, North
or South."

214 CHAELES SUMNEE
tion of the governor of Massachusetts, a resolution
was introduced in the legislature that the common
wealth defray the expenses of Sumner's illness, and
a popular subscription was started to provide a
testimonial in recognition of his championship of
freedom in the Senate. Later this desire to show
popular approval led to the proposal that Sumner
be nominated for governor, with the expectation
that he would serve only from January till March
and then resign. But Sumner vetoed all three pro
posals, requesting that the contributions be devoted
to the cause of freedom in Kansas. From all sides
came expressions of sympathy and appreciation of
his service. As many as 350 letters of such import
were received within six weeks of the assault. It
has been suggested that these would afford an in
teresting contrast, both as to their spirit and the
character of their writers, if they could be placed
iu comparison with the letters of the same period
received by Brooks, Butler and Douglas. Aca
demic recognition was shown in the bestowal upon
Sumner of the degree of LL. D. by both Amherst
a,nd Yale, but not till three years later by his al-ma
-mater. Tributes of sympathy and affection came
from abroad, where the significance of the Brooks
assault was clearly seen by keen observers. " That
outrage," said Cornewall Lewis, "is no proof of
brutal manners or low morality in America ; it is
the first blow in a civil war." '
In search of health, Sumner went first to the
' Morley, Life of Gladstone, Vol. I, p. 441,

" THE CEIME AGAINST KANSAS " 215
shore and then to the mountains, but the gains
were slow and slight. He was much troubled by
insomnia, by a feeling of weight on the brain, and
by throbbing pains in his head. Friends and
physicians noted with apprehension his pallor, his
tottering steps and his exhaustion even from slight
effort. His letters frequently reveal a dread of
" the possibility of life with shattered nerves and
perhaps with a brain that has lost its powers."
As the time of the national election approached,
Sumner, who was then under treatment in Phila
delphia, determined to return to Boston to vote for
Pr6mont. Forthwith came a committee of citizens,
tendering a banquet. This he declined, but was
prevailed upon to accept a public, reception, which
was carried out iu such manner as to make it a
most impressive tribute of sympathy, appreciation
and admiration. Sumner came first to Longfellow's
homfe. The following day he went to Brookline;
here he was met by distinguished citizens and
escorted to the Boston line, where waited a "caval
cade" of nearly 700 citizens as an escort. He was
presented to the mayor and was most feelingly
greeted by him and by the venerable Josiah Quincy.
He entered the carriage, which was drawn by six
gray horses, and the procession, nearly half a mile
in length, advanced to the front of the State House.
The streets were decorated with banners, festoons
and arches ; flags were flying and bouquets were
thrown into Ms carriage. The streets leading to
the State House were thronged with people. Here

216 CHAELES SUMNEE
the senator was presented to the governor of the
commonwealth, who welcomed the "eloquent
orator, the accomplished scholar, and the acknowl
edged statesman, . . . the earnest friend of suf
fering humanity aud of every good cause, . . .
the successful defender of the honor and integrity
of Massachusetts." Sumner started to reply, but
his strength was already overtaxed, and after a few
words of appreciation, he was forced to abandon
the effort. After nine cheers from the thronging
thousands, Sumner was escorted to his own home,
near at hand, where his mother awaited him. The
street before the house was soon packed, and again
and agaiu mother and son had to appear at the
window. Yet in all the excitement and high-
wrought feeling of that day there was no mention of
the assailant, no hint of vengeance.
In the ensuing election Fremont carried Massa
chusetts by a majority of 50,000; the Eepublican
candidate was reelected to Congress, and the Ee
publicans secured a majority in the state legislature.
At the opening of Congress the Eepublicans carried
themselves with confidence born of the knowledge
that they had elected a majority of the next House.
Sumuer was eager to get back to his post. Sena
torial service, so unattractive to Mm at first, now
kindled his most intense zeal. To Giddings he had
written, shortly before Congress adjourned : "For
three weeks of this session I would have given three
years of any future public life." Undaunted by all
Ms past perils and sufferings, he now wrote to

" THE CEIME AGAINST KANSAS " 217
Whittier : "I long to speak aud liberate my soul.
If I am able to speak as I desire, I thiuk that I
shall be shot. Very well, I am content. The
cause will live." '
Wheu the Massachusetts legislature convened, it
immediately took up the election of senator. In
the House there were three hundred and thirty-
three votes for Sumner to twelve for all others,
while in the Senate every vote was cast for him.
Yet six years before, his election had beeu effected
by a single vote at the end of the longest deadlock
in the history of the commonwealth, and a year later
the journals of the Whig party — now dead — had
called upon him to resign, taunting him with lack
of any popular support. As E. H. Dana, Jr.,
wrote : "No one can now say that you have not a
constituency behind you. Where is there a senator
who holds by such a tenure ? "
But his progress toward recovery was tediously
slow.'^ At the opening of Congress he was quite un-
'December20, 1856.
'While he was convalescing at his home in Boston, James
Freeman Clarke called one day, and found him conversing with
three gentlemen. "He introduced one of thera to rae as Cap
tain John Brown of Ossawatomie. It was the first time I had
ever seen John Brown. They were speaking of this assault by
Preston Brooks, and Mr. Sumner said : ' The coat I had on
at the time is hanging in that closet. Its collar is stiff with
blood. You can see it, if you please. Captain.' John Brown
arose, went to the closet, slowly opened the door, carefully took
down the coat, and looked at it for a few minutes with the
reverence with which a Roman Catholic regards the relics of a
saint. It ma.y be the sight of that garment caused him to feel
a still deeper abhorrence of slavery and to take a stronger
resolution to attack it in its strongholds. So the blood of the

218 CHAELES SUMNEE
able to attend its sessions. Friends begged him to
take no risks, and earnestly dissuaded him from
any thought of resigning, urging that he go to
Europe and seek restoration of his health. He
reached Washington a week before the end of the
session, and ou February 26th he was again in his
seat, vacant since the 22d of May. From Ee
publicans he received a cordial welcome, but Demo
crats gave him no sign of recognition. Sumner
found himself unable to stand the strain of the ses
sions. He had come to Washington to cast his vote
in favor of reducing the tariff rates of 1846 on raw^
materials, especially on wool, a modification then
strongly urged by the manufacturers of New Eng
land. He was summoned when votes were to be
taken, and at two stages his vote was decisive. He
was sworn in for his secoud term March 4, 1857,
and was assigned to the Committee on Territories,
under the chairmanship of Douglas. Wilson nomi
nated him for the Committee on Foreign Eelations,
for which he had preeminent qualifications, but this
nomination was defeated by the action of Seward,
who wanted this position for himself
On the 7th of March, Sumner sailed for France,
honored by a salute of thirty-one guns, fired by the
Young Men's Eepublican Club. It was the seventh
anniversary of Webster's Seventh of March Speech,
martyrs is the seed of the church. " — 3femorial and Biographical
Sketches, p. 102. This incident, though narrated with snoli
particularity, is believed to be apocryphal by Mr. A. B. John
son, who was Sumner's private secretary.

"THE CEIME AGAINST KANSAS" 219
and on that morning was published the Supreme
Court's decision in the Dred Scott case.
Meantime Brooks had resumed his seat with
friumphant air. He took part iu the debates early
in the following session ; but in January he died
very suddenly of an acute inflammation of the throat.
In the House friends spoke in his praise ; but only
Savage ventured to refer to the one deed bj' which
he is now remembered, assigning to Brooks a place
in history by the side of Brutus. At this many of
the Eepublican members withdrew from the hall.
Brooks's remains were accorded a public funeral in
South Carolina with civic and military honors.
Upon his monument iu the village of his birth is
carved the following epitaph, — the closing sentences
of the eulogy pronounced upon him in Congress by
his accomplice, Keitt: "Ever able, manly, just,
and heroic, illustrating true patriotism by devotion
to his country, the whole South unites with his
bereaved family in deploring his untimely end.
' Earth has never pillowed upon her bosom a truer
sou, nor heaven opened wide her gates to receive a
manlier spirit.' "
It is said that in these few months Brooks had
come to have a distaste for honors thrust upon him
as the "representative of bullies," and that he felt
the weight of history's verdict upon his "brutal,
murderous and cowardly act." As Wilson wrote to
Sumner on the day of his death : ' ' His enemies
cannot but feel sympathy for his fate. What a
name to leave behind him!" Butler died a few

220 CHAELES SUMNEE
months later, on almost the first anniversary of the
assault. Keitt met his death fighting for the Con
federacy iu 1864.
It was peculiarly characteristic of Sumner that
he cherished no resentment toward Brooks nor to
ward the people of the South. His only war was
upou slavery. He was not present at Brooks's
trial for assault in the District of Columbia court,
and declared himself indifferent as to its outcome.
Years later, when Brooks's uame was mentioned to
him, he said : " What have I to do with him ? It
was slavery, not he that struck the blow." Two
years before Sumner's death, George William Curtis
called his attention to Brooks's cenotaph in the
Congressional cemetery, where Ms remains had
been temporarily interred. "Poor fellow, poor fel
low," said Sumner, turning away. " How did you
feel about Brooks?" Curtis then asked him.
Sumner replied : " Only as to a brick that should
fall upou my head from a chimney. He was the
unconscious agent of a malign power."

CHAPTEE XI
IN QUEST OF HEALTH
Sumner reached Paris toward the end of March,
having followed the same route over which he had
come, nineteen years before, all aglow with youthful
enthusiasm. He came now heralded by a reputation
for achievement and for devotion to a great cause.
But his first concern was to seek out Crawford, the
sculptor, whom he had befriended so effectively, but
whom he now found in the shadow of death ; they
were never to meet again. Sumner spent a busy
month in Paris, during which he greatly enjoyed so
cial meetings and frank discussions with De Tocque
viUe and Guizot, both of whom shared his views
as to slavery, and with Lamartine and Mignet, get
ting au intimate knowledge of French leaders of
thought and of European politics, soon to be of
great service not only to himself but to his country.
He found much recreation in visiting points of his
toric interest and iu attending the opera and theatre,
being greatly impressed by Eistori's acting.
After a three-weeks' tour of the provinces, he
crossed to London, where hosts of old friends over
whelmed him with kindness. He was the guest of
Brougham and Cobden, and also of Gladstone and
Bright, whom he now came to know for the first
time.

222 CHAELES SUMNEE
Hn route to the Continent, he spent four delight
ful days with De TocqueviUe, at his chateau, three
or four centuries old, on the Island of Jersey. In
Paris he enjoyed meeting his friends, Hamilton Fish
and family, just arrived from New York. The next
month was devoted to a hasty excursion, in the
course of which he visited the points of most ar
chaeological and literary interest in Switzerland,
Northern Italy, Holland aud Belgium. In Septem
ber he returned to London, and presently started
northward upon a tour which took him as a welcome
guest to many a famous castle and country house.
On his return from Scotland, he was for a day the
guest of John Bright, and visited Gladstone. On
the day of his sailing for America (against the ad
vice of physicians and friends who insisted upon "a
longer ' fallow ' for my brain ") he wrote intimately
to Cobden : — "I leave England profoundly impressed
by its civilization, and at the same time painfully
regretting three things, — primogeniture, the flun
key ism of servants, and the tolls, — all three showing
themselves everywhere."
At the pier Sumner was greeted by Wilson, Banks,
and other friends and at his home he found the
street thronged with hundreds who had gathered to
bid him welcome. A few weeks later he was cor
dially greeted by Eepublican colleagues at the open
ing of the Thirty-flfth Congress, but administration
men kept aloof. The Kansas debate was to occupy
much of the time of the session, the question being
over the admission of Kansas upon the Lecompton

IN QUEST OF HEALTH 223
Constitutiou, a pro-slavery project which Douglas
was now prepared to oppose. Sumner had come
home because his conscience would not let him stay
away from the field where such fierce fighting was
to be done. But he soon found that while his months
of travel had brought him interesting diversion,
they had by no means restored him to health. A
few days after the opening of the sessiou he wrote :
" At times I feel almost well, aud then after a little
writing or a little sitting iu the Senate, I feel the
weight spreading over my brain." He was obliged
to give up regular attendance, not being able to
listen even to Douglas' s speech. He passed his time
iu quiet reading, browsing much iu the Smithso
nian Institution. His enforced inaction was a sore
trial to him. To Dr. Howe he wrote : "I would
give one year of life for one week now to expose
this enormous villainy " (the Lecompton Constitu
tion). But since attempts at regular attendance in
the Senate were delaying his recovery, he left Wash
ington in late December, and for five months came
to the Senate ouly when summoned to vote upon
some matter of critical importance, usually in rela
tion to Kansas. Much of this time he spent in Phil
adelphia, and also at his Boston home or with Long
fellow. It was in these months of semi-invalid ism
that he developed a keen interest in old documents
and engravings, devoting to their tireless study
many days which would otherwise have hung heavily
on his hands. But in April there came a warning
that not only was his health far from restored but

224 CHAELES SUMNEE
that he must get away from all cares and responsi
bilities. He suffered a severe prostration, brought
on by no undue exertion ; for weeks he could neither
walk nor rise from his chair without great pain.
His best friends iu the Senate as well as his medical
advisers urged him to go to Europe once more, and
reluctantly he started. May 22d — the second anni
versary of the assault — upon what he planned should
be a leisurely tour of lands which he had not yet
visited. Before sailing he published a letter to the
people of Massachusetts, explaining that he was
leaving the Senate solely for the purpose of fitting
himself for better service, and that he should have
resigned, had he not supposed his illness would have
been more speedily cured. On the day of Ms land
ing at Havre he wrote iu bitterness of spirit : "I
long for work, and especially to make myself felt in
our cause. The ghost of two years already dead
haunts me."
Sumner had hardly reached Paris when he was
recommended to consult Dr. Brown-S6quard, who,
while not in regular medical practice, had be
come quite famous for his bold experimenting on
ai;imals and men, and for his special studies of nerv
ous diseases. Both he and a Boston physician
then in Paris, in whom Sumner had great confi
dence, agreed in the opinion that Sumner's case
required not merely time and relaxation but "active
treatment." Dr. Brown-S^quard's theory was that
the blows upon Sumner's head had produced dis
turbances of the spinal cord in which now lay the

IN QUEST OF HEALTH 225
root of difficulty. The remedy which he advised
was "Fire," — aud Sumner asked that it be applied
immediately. It was usual, during this process, for
the patient to take chloroform, but when Sumner
was told that the remedy might prove somewhat
more effective without the anaesthetic, he refused to
have it. At the time. Dr. Brown-S6quard gave the
following account of the treatment: "I have ap
plied six moxas to Senator Sumner's neck and back,
and he has borne these exceedingly painful ap
plications with the greatest courage and patience.
A moxa is a burning of the skin with inflamed agaric
(amadou), cottonwood, or some other very combusti
ble substance. I have never seen a man bearing with
such fortitude as Mr. Sumner has shown the extremely
violent pain of this kind of burning." The appli
cations lasted from flve to ten minutes. Sumner sat
gripping the top of a chair which he broke as he
writhed in agony. Nor did the torture end with the
burning, for wounds were caused which refused to
heal, aud which deprived him of sleep and made
both driving and walking exceedingly painful.
He wrote to Longfellow: "The torment is great,
. . . and then the succession of blisters, inflam
mations and smarts. I struggle for health, and do
everything simply to that end. The doctor is clear
that without this cruel treatment I should have been
a permanent invalid, always subject to a sudden and
serious relapse. Surely this life is sometimes held
on hard conditions." This mode of treatment then
met with approval from many men of distinction in

226 CHAELES SUMNEE
the medical profession, though now entirely dis
carded. In his later practice, Dr. Brown-S6quard
himself discontinued it, regarding the pain which
he had seen Sumner suffer as too great for the
human system to endure.'
It was while he was under Dr. Brown-S6quard'8
ministrations that Sumner experienced his first at
tack of angina pectoris, the painful disease which
was to cause his death. The attack was very severe,
and the pains recurred with such intensity as to
' ' make the fire seem pleasant. ' ' Por two months he
was hardly able to leave his bed. His sufferings were
intense, but his loneliness was somewhat relieved
by scores of letters and messages of sympathy from
friends in America and England. His greatest com
fort, when he could leave his bed, was in the exami
nation of the rich collections of engravings in the
National Library.
In September Sumner spent several weeks in Aix
en Savoie, trying its celebrated baths, with no
marked results. But at the eud of this treatment,
he was able to travel by slow degrees through Swit
zerland and northern Italy, and to visit Vienna,
Prague aud Berlin, where he met Alexander von
Humboldt. In November he reached Paris. Con
siderable gain was noted from these months of travel,
and it was decided that he should spend the winter
in the south of France, " with poisons for medicine"
and dry cupping along the spine, which Sumner de
scribed as painful, but preferable to fire. Accord-
' Pierce, Vol. Ill, pp. 563-565.

IN QUEST OF HEALTH 227
ingly, late in November, Sumner went to Montpel
lier. Here he "began the day with his torments,
and fed on his poisons." But fortunately other
curative agencies were at hand. The quiet little
city of 50,000 had an excellent gallery aud a vener
able university, and in the collections of paintings,
engravings, manuscripts and rare books there
were abundant interests to stimulate him. Warm
friends, too, he made in the families of a distinguished
naturalist and of a retired EngUsh soldier, one of
Wellington's veterans. Sumner was most cordially
received at the university, where he attended courses
of lectures on historical and literary topics. The
quiet walks, the "perpetual spring," the genial so
ciety and the refuge and solace which he found iu
books brought healing. But he could uot banish
from his mind the doubt whether he ought not to
resign from the Senate. From colleagues and from
Massachusetts advisers he received urgent charges
not to consider such a step. And, as he wrote to
Charles Francis Adams, "I could not abandon a
position dearer to me now than ever, because more
than ever, with returning health, I can hope to serve
our cause ; and because I have at heart to be heard
again from the seat where my assassination was at
tempted." Sumner left Montpellier early iu March, and
traveled with many stops through southern France
and northern Italy. These wanderings he described
with enthusiasm, but added : " Nothing touches me
like Eome." Here he spent several weeks, the

228 CHAELES SUMNEE
guest of the Storys. Though but just recovering
from long Ulness, Ms enthusiasm kept him con
stantly on the move from one object of interest to
another. He found especial delight in the studios
of painters and sculptors, in particular discussing
with Eogers the persons and scenes to be commemo
rated upon the bronze doors for the Capitol at
Washington, which were then being modeled. The
unfinished work in Crawford's studio filled him with
sorrow. Motley and Hawthorne were among the
friends with whom he passed many a delightful
hour. But he was ever beset by the call of duty.
To Story he kept saying : "I must get well ; I vM
get well ! My post is in the Senate, and there I long
to be. . . . It is terrible to be thus stricken
down when there is so much to do."
Sumuer left Italy shortly before the battle of
Magenta. He felt it to be "a great moment in his
tory, — nothing like it since 1815." At Turin he
had an informal interview with the foremost states
man of the age, Cavour. He found him confident
that the Austrians would be driven out of Italy
that summer, and full of hope that Italy would take
the place that belonged to her, and that when free
she might again produce great men. Here, too, he
found all the grandes dames " engaged in making
lint for the hospitals, and most happy that the
crisis, long desired, had at length come." On his
way in an open carriage across the Alps Sumner
seemed to be traveling iu a pageant, for he was
constantly passing through files of French troops,

IN QUEST OF HEALTH 229
entering Italy. He yielded to the current belief
that Napoleon III. would hold himself faithful to
the idea of Italian independence, but his misgivings
because of the "strength of that prodigious tri
angle" and of his distrust of the Emperor proved
well grounded. On his return to Paris Sumner
was encouraged to note how much he had gained in
sfrength since the days when he uuderweut torture
in the same lodgings. He met here Motley and
Theodore Parker, and renewed acquaintance with
French frieuds of former years. He spent a few
weeks in London, but the round of social pleasures
and the interest of parliamentary sessions proved too
severe a tax upon his strength. He was in Paris
again in time to witness the Emperor's triumphal
return from Italy.
Both in Paris and in London he found delight in
indulging in his newly awakened passion for collect
ing. He wrote to Parker : " For several days I
have been torn and devoured by desires that have
grown by what they fed on, — at shops on the quays
aud collections of engravings. I have yielded, till
I stand aghast at my extravagance ! " ' His greatest
'It has been estimated that he devoted about $2,800 upon
this trip to the purchase of books, manuscripta, engravings and
works of art, — no small sum for a man in his position. He
was not a good judge of values, nor had he any liKing or apti
tude for bargaining. The result was that be always paid high
prices and often for articles not of great value. By the terms
of his will his marbles went to his sister ; his bronzes were
divided between Longfellow and Howe ; his paintings and en
gravings went to the Boston Art Museum; and his books,
autographs and old manuscripts to the Library of Harvard
College.

230 CHAELES SUMNEE
pleasure was in his engravings. But a sight which
he declared filled him with even keener delight than
these was that of "some twenty colored boys, — some
mulattoes, and others black as Ham, — seated
among the pupils at the College of Havre. Several
of these, including one of the blackest, were among
those who received prizes."
A few lines from a letter to a friend written on
the day Sumner sailed for America will give an idea
of some of his engagements during his last days in
England: "Seven days in London at the British
Museum ; a day with the poet-laureate, Tennyson, at
the Isle of Wight ; two days with Lord Stanhope at
Chevening Park, where I slept in the room which
was occupied for three years by Lord Chatham ; one
day at Argyll Lodge with the Duke, where I met
Gladstone : . . . one day with Motley, the
historian of the Dutch commonwealth, at Walton
ou Thames."
November 21, 1859, Sumner reached Boston, and
was most warmly greeted not only by personal
friends but in public meetings and by the legisla
ture. During these three years and a half of his
disability, Massachusetts had remained loyal to him.
There was no wish for his resignation, for it was
felt that the state could be better served by no one
else, and that his seat in the Senate chamber, vacant
year after year, was bearing eloquent witness to the
great cause of which Charles Sumuer was one ofthe
first martyrs.

CHAPTEE XII
"the BARBARISM OF SLAVERY"
Sumner found the Senate not a little changed
since the day when he first entered it. Then he
had been one of but three Free Soilers ; now there
were already twenty-four Eepublicans to forty-four
of all other parties, and the admission of Oregon
aud Minnesota had given promise that the control
of the Senate by the South was nearing its end.
Sumner was warmly welcomed by the Eepublican
members, but met with only formal recognition
from men on the other side of the chamber. An
indication of change, however, was his assignment
to the Committee on Foreign Eelations. Here his
only Eepublican colleague was Seward, the others
being Crittenden, Douglas, Polk and Slidell, with
the last three of whom Sumner had no personal in
tercourse. Indeed, he found that in the years of his
absence from Washington, the sectional line had
come to be drawn with much greater severity in
social relations, so that for the most part representa
tives of the two sections met only as their official
duties required.
These years had seen long steps taken toward the
great crisis which in some form was felt to be im
minent : in the Dred Scott case the Supreme Court

232 CHAELES SUMNEE
had set the seal of its approval upon the repeal of
the Missouri Compromise ; free-state men in Kansas
had secured control of the territorial legislature and
had rejected admission to the Union on the Lecomp
ton Constitution ; Douglas had effectively divided
the Democratic party, first by forcing the Kansas-
Nebraska issue, and secondly by consistently op
posing the thrusting of a pro-slavery constitution
upon Kansas, against her will. Douglas was now
fresh from the great debate-campaign in Illinois,
from which he had wrested a reelection to the
Senate, but at the cost of admissions and conces
sions that were to blast his hopes for the presidency.
The Southern leaders, seeing the North outstripping
them, had been planning for the acquisition of Cuba
to restore the balance ; since that project failed,
their old threats of disunion took on new force and
definiteness. Following the advice of physicians and friends,
Sumner declined urgent invitations to address public
gatherings and kept out of the Senate debates. The
one absorbing topic of discussion soon became the
choice of presidential candidates. Congress was
still in session when the Democratic national con
vention met at Charleston ahd ended in disrup
tion over Douglas's candidacy, and when the Ee
publicans in Chicago passed over Seward and Chase
to nominate the less-known Lincoln, with his better
chance of carrying the doubtful states of the West.'
'On the first ballot, one delegate — from Kentucky — voted
for Sumner.

"THE BAEBAEISM OF SLA VEEY" 233
Sumner, as usual, had been slow to commit himself
or to give advice as to the selection of the standard-
bearer, only insisting that no one ought to be chosen
who was not "emphatically, heart and soul, life
and conversation, a representative man, . . .
an old and constant servant of the cause."
While these decisive choices were being made,
Southern leaders in Congress were taking more ad
vanced ground as to slavery than ever before. Not
only did they now assert that the institution was a
positive good, beneficial to the black and ennobling
to the white, but they sought by threat of secession
to exact from Congress the most definite guarantees.
Thus, Jefferson Davis's resolutions, affirming the
sanctity of slave property in the territories, were
passed by a vote of two to one.
It was under these circumstances that Sumner de
termined to attempt in the Senate an attack upon
slavery such as had never been ventured in Congress.
For months he had been marshaling his material
for this speech, to which he had given the title,
"The Barbarism of Slavery." The Mil for the ad
mission of Kansas as a free state was pending. As
this would entitle Kansas to six votes in the coming
election, there was not the slightest possibility that
the Democratic majority would aUow the bill to
pass at this session, but the debate upon it gave op
portunity for a number of senators to express thefr
views. Sumner took the floor ou the morning of
Monday, June 4th. Not yet certain of Ms strength,
he had his speech in type. It was the first time

234 CHAELES SUMNEE
since the assault, more than four years before, that
he had thus formaUy addressed the Senate.
At the outset he disclaimed having auy personal
griefs to utter or personal wrongs to avenge, adding,
"The years which have intervened and the tombs
that have opened since I spoke, have their voices,
too, which I cannot fail to hear." He then declared
his intent to lay bare the true character of slavery
iu its social, moral and economic as well as political
aspects. He proceeded to set forth its barbarism,
in degrading a human beiug into a chattel, in its
pernicious effects upon marriage and the relations
between parent and child, in shutting to the slave
the door of moral and intellectual life, and in its
exploitation of the slave's labor. These, he showed,
were all features essential to slavery, here lacking
many of the alleviations that had gathered about
other forms of servitude. He next presented, with
a convincing particularity of statistical detail, the
practical effects which slavery had had upon the
Southern states in their slow growth in population
iind in wealth, in their dearth of inventions and in
ternal improvements, in their scanty development
in education, etc. A humiliating exhibition was
made of the brutalizing effects upon the masters.
He insisted, as he had repeatedly done before, that
the Constitution afforded no recognition of property
in a human being, and held up to ridicule Douglas's
"popular sovereignty" dogma as a "device of
politicians." The speech lasted four hours and over. There

"THE BAEBAEISM OF SLA VEEY" 235
was no attempt at interruption, but many of the
Southern senators, as if by prearrangement, showed
contemptuous indifference, walking about the cham
ber and engaging in boisterous conversation, appar
ently with a childish intention of annoying the
speaker. At its close, Chestnut of South Carolina
put himself forward as the spokesman of the South
ern members : " After ranging over Europe, crawl
ing through the back-door to whine at the feet of
British aristocracy, craving pity, and reaping a rich
harvest of contempt, the slanderer of states and men
reappears iu the Senate. ... It has beeu left
for this day, for this country, for the Abolitionists
of Massachusetts, to deify the incarnation of malice,
mendacity and cowardice. . . . We are not in
clined again to send forth the recipient of punish
ment howling through the world, yelping fresh cries
of slander and malice." ' Sumner's only rejoinder
was that he should print Chestnut's reply as another
illustration of the barbarism to which he had just
been alluding.
This was the last speech of any moment on slavery
delivered in Congress and, with " The Crime against
Kansas," stands to-day as comprising the most thor
ough setting-forth of the indictment against Ameri
can slavery ever made. Several of Sumner's friends
insisted on escorting him to his lodgings, and for
' He condensed into two minutes, says Von Hoist, "so enor
mous an amount of brutal and venomous vulgarity . . .
that the annals ot Congress, rich as they are in such material,
have nothing to match them." — Co-nstitutional Hiatory of the
United States, Vol. VIII, p. 203.

236 CHAELES SUMNEE
some time thereafter, quite to his annoyance, they
kept guard over his apartment at night.
Among most of Sumner's Eepublican colleagues
aud frieuds there was grave doubt as to the wisdom
and timeliness of this " assault on American slavery
all along the line." It was on the eve of a presi-
deutial election, and many feared that voters who
were not of pronounced anti- slavery principles would
be repelled by having this issue thrust into such of
fensive prominence. But Sumner never could be
brought to govern his actions according to the party
expediency of the moment. To him, the slavery
issue was the all-dominating moral question of the
age, to be incessantly forced upon public attention
until it should be settled aright. And, in fact, it
may be doubted whether now, as on earlier similar
occasions, Sumner did not prove the more far-sighted
politician. His address was printed entire, in
enormous editions in all the leading newspapers,
and pamphlet editions of it were spread broadcast
by the National Eepublican Committee. Hundreds
of private letters as well as general comment in Ee
publican journals approved the steadfast, uncom
promising tone of the speech, and in the campaign
of the next few months it was found that this was
the note which called out the most responsive en
thusiasm. Soon after the end of the session, at the
invitation of the Young Men's Eepublican Union,
Sumuer addressed an audience of three thousand in
the Cooper Institute upon " The Origin, Necessity
and Permanence of the Eepublican Party." It was

"THE BAEBAEISM OF SLA VEEY" 237
a brilliant triumph. The speaker's voice and
strength seemed fully restored and from the begin
ning to the end he held his hearers in complete sway.
At the Eepublican state convention in Worcester,
for the first time iu six years he appeared before his
own constituency, and aroused the delegates by his
denunciation of the Douglas " popular sovereignty
dodge," and by his expressions of cordial confidence
in Lincoln. The night before the election, he pre
sided at a great Eepublican gathering in Faneuil
Hall, and thrilled his hearers by the prediction that
Eepublican victory on the morrow would make
"not only a new President, but a uew govern
ment." Sumner yielded to none of the urgent demands
for his services as a campaign speaker outside of
his own state, trusting to the wide circulation of his
two recent speeches to spread his views. In the
autumn, he prepared, for the Lyceum platform, au
eloquent address on Lafayette. He had recently
visited scenes associated with the French patriot
and was fitted both by information and tempera
ment to give an appreciative tribute to the man.
But, in accordance with his frequent practice, he
made his subject almost secondary to the political
issue of the hour, for the points which he thrust into
greatest prominence were Lafayette's " constant
testimony against American slavery " and his life
long devotion to liberty. This address was delivered
four times in cities of New England, and in New
York and Philadelphia, and many a man to-day re-

238 CHAELES SUMNEE
calls the thrUl with which, as a youth, he listened to
that inspiring oration.
American history has known no more critical
period thau the mouths between the November elec
tion and Lincoln's inauguration. These three
months of an outgoing administration, — always a
season of weakness, especially when a change of
party is impending, — were then filled with the
gravest uncertainties. Many courses seemed pos
sible, yet choices apparently trifling might involve
the fate of the nation.
Southern leaders had been makiug their plans far
ahead, and had determined upon their course in the
not improbable event of Lincoln's election. But
Northeru men were now surprised and aghast to
find that disunion, so long threatened, was rapidly
being carried into effect. Straightway there came
forward in the North men who justifled secession as
a constitutioual right. A feeling of panic at the
thought of the break-up ofthe Union quickly spread,
and every sacrifice seemed necessary in order to
avoid that catastrophe. In Boston, as in other large
cities, this feeling showed itself immediately in au-
tagonism to open discussion of anti-slavery meas
ures. Mobs broke up anti-slavery meetings, and
the Boston Courier said in a leader: "Nor do we
believe that our people will listen hereafter to the
fierce tirades of Phillips and his crew, to the empty
platitudes of Sumner, or the insolent bravado of
Wilson." ' 'December 4, 1860.

"THE BAEBAEISM OF SLA VEEY" 239
Meantime Buchanan was waiting upon events, —
events which Southern members of his cabinet
were shaping to the advantage of the South. In the
midst of all this uncertainty, men of undoubted
patriotism sought anxiously for the course which
would ward off impending civil wax. At the dis
tance of half a century the student of history must
seek to realize how impenetrable then was the future ;
nor must he deny patriotic motives to mauy a prop
osition which, in the clear light of the after-event,
seems doomed from the first to prove futile if not
fatal. Greeley was ready to bid the slave states
"go in peace" ; Phillips vehemently asserted their
right to secede ; General Scott busied himself with
elaborate schemes for the peaceful division of the
United States into four confederacies ; and many
influential men at the North were outspoken in
favor of formal guarantees beiug given of the rights
of slave-owners to take thefr slaves into the terri
tories and hold them.
Congress had hardly met when compromise meas
ures began to be proposed, the most favored scheme
being that of Crittenden, which had as its cardinal
features the prohibition of slavery north of 36° 30',
but its distinct recognition and protection by terri
torial governments south of that line ; the prohibi
tion for all future time of any amendment to the
Constitution giving Congress power to interfere with
slavery in the states ; the disfranchisement of free
negroes in all the states ; and the enforcement of the
law against the African slave-trade. Seward de-

240 CHAELES SUMNEE
clared that two-thirds of the Eepublican senators
were " as reckless in action as the South," aud inti
mated that he felt himself commissioned to be the
reconciler. In January, at the end of an elaborate
speech, he presented his remedies : the organization
of territories and the admission of states without
conditions as to slavery } an irrevocable constitu
tional amendment prohibiting interference by Con
gress with slavery in the states ; and a convention to
revise the Constitution. Even Charles Francis
Adams, hitherto one of the most loyal of the Free
Soil men, now showed hesitancy aud an inclination
to accept Seward's proposals.
In the midst of all this uncertainty and com
promise, no man evidenced a clearer vision of the
future or a more steadfast purpose in the present
than did Sumner. To Howe he wrote on January
17th: "I trust that Massachusetts continues un-
seduced by any proposal of compromise or conces
sion, in whatever form or name. My best energies
have been devoted to keep our men firm, firm,
FIRM." A few days iu advance of its delivery,
Seward read his speech to Sumner, who "pro
tested with his whole soul" against its compromise
proposals. Beset by a member of the House with
the question what "concession" he was ready to
make, Sumner replied: "There is one: I will
consent to be silent yet a little longer." ' From
' Sumner and the other radicals, both in the Senate and in the
House, also sat silent and offered no word of protest to the pas
sage at this session of the bill for the organization of the terri-

"THE BAEBAEISM OF SLA VEEY" 241
time to time, in the course of the debates, he made
his attitude plain, but he held himself back from
speaking his full mind because he felt that he
" could say nothing which would not be perverted
by compromisers as an attempt to widen the
breach." He alone of the Massachusetts delega
tion iu Congress opposed the state's being repre
sented in the peace conference which met at Wash
ington iu February and endorsed compromise
measures similar to those of Crittenden. Sumner
early came to believe that war was inevitable, and
that its issue was to be decided only after a long
and bitter contest. Yet he never doubted that the
Union would triumph, his confidence being based
upon his belief "iu a world governed by moral
law." To Whittier he wrote: "People are
anxious to save our forts, to save the national cap
ital ; but I am more anxious to save our principles,
which leaders now propose to abandon as Mr.
Buchanan proposed to abandon Fort Sumter."
He earnestly besought Massachusetts leaders not to
tories of Colorado, Dakota and Nevada, without any mention
of slavery, "thus giving the South the benefit of the Dred
Scott decision therein." Blaine discusses this "extraordinary
change of position " at some length. " Between the words of
Mr. Seward and Mr. Suraner in the oue crisis and their votes in
the other, there is a discrepancy for which it would bave been
well to leave on record an adequate explanation. The danger to
the Union, in which they found a good reason for receding from
the anti-slavery restriction on the territories, had been cruelly
denied to Mr. Webster as a justifying raotive. They found in
him only a guilty recreancy to sacred principle for the same act
which in themselves was inspired by devotion to the Union. "
—Twenty Years of Congress, Vol. I, pp. 269-272.

242 CHAELES SUMNEE
yield a jot in the way of modifying the personal
liberty laws, and it is thought that it was his in
flueuce by which the legislature was persuaded.
He believed that the very inordinateness of the
Southern demands would make it next to impos
sible to appease them. "If they asked less, we
should be lost."
While for the most part keeping out of the
debate, he did read in the Senate with great effect a
theretofore unpublished letter of Andrew Jackson,
of May, 1833, when the nullification controversy
was fresh in mind, in which this Southern Demo
crat declared that " the tariff was only the pretext,
and disunion the real object," and that " the next
pretext will be the negro aud slavery question." '
Again he spoke to the point, when Massachusetts'
attitude was brought iu question. A "Union"
meeting, held in Boston, had endorsed the Critten
den Compromise, and a committee came to Wash
ington to urge its adoption, as advocated by the
formal vote of the Boston City Council and by a
petition signed by 23,000 Massachusetts citizens.
Everett and Lawrence waited upon Sumuer and
begged him to support it, but found him unyield
ing.' Wheu the petition, wrapped in the Ameri-
' Works, Vol. V, pp. 433-436.
'With them came "a large number of the most conspicuous
citizens of Boston, all of whom had been among his strongest
and most positive political opponents." They expressed at
length their confidence in him as the one man who could do
raost to save the country in its present peril. "We implore
you, Mr. Sumner, as you love your country and your God, to
vote (or the Crittenden Compromise." "Sir," said Charles

"THE BAEBAEISM OF SLAVEEY" 243
can flag, was presented by Crittenden, Sumner
spoke briefly, declaring that the propositions therein
contained went " beyond the Breckinridge platform,
already solemnly condemned by the American
people in the election of Abraham Lincoln," and
asserted that the petitioners could have signed the
measure only in ignorauce of its real character.
This was resented by the Boston City Council,
which declared the statement "undignified, unbe
coming a senator and a citizen of Boston, and un
true"; yet Sumner received many letters, some
even from signers, who acknowledged that his
words were entirely just.'
Of all the Eepublican leaders, Sumner found
himself most in accord with Chase, who started the
watchword, " Inauguration first, adjustment after
ward;" and he also drew encouragement from
Lincoln's declaration that the Eepublican party
should not with his assent become " a mere sucked
egg, all shell and no meat, — the principle all
sucked out." He was often consulted by Stanton
and the other loyal members of the cabinet as to the
preliminaries to the inauguration. In the Senate,
which met immediately after Lincoln's taking the
Sumner rising to his lofty height, and never more Charles Sum
ner than at that moraent, " if what you say is indeed tme, and
if at this moment the North trusts me, as you think, beyond
all others, it is because the North knows that under no circum
stances whatever would I compromise." — G. W. Curtis,
Orations, Vol. Ill, pp. 225-226.
' John M. Forbes declared : ' ' One young rascal complained
loudly that ' he hadn't a chance to sign it only fourteen
times.' "

244 CHAELES SUMNEE
oath of office, the Eepublicans found themselves iu
majority, aud hence iu control of the committees.
Nine years before. Bright of Indiana — soon to be
expelled for treason — had explained the exclusion
of Chase, Hale aud Sumner from the committee list
by saying that they were "outside of any healthy
political organization." It was noted as a matter
of poetic justice that it now fell to this same man to
move the report of the committee list which had
been agreed upon by the two parties. Old time
Free Soilers now came to their own. Sumner was
named chairman of the Committee ou Foreign Eela
tions, aud a member of the Committees on Private
Land Claims and on Patents. His chairmanship
was a position exceedingly congenial to him, and
oue in which his thorough grounding in inter
national law, his unrivaled knowledge of European
politics and acquaintance with European public
men placed him where he could be of incalculable
service to his country. For eight years he was to
work for the most part harmoniously with Seward
as Secretary of State, although from now on they
had little sympathy with each other's views upon
the most important questions of domestic policy.
Years in advauce of the time when reform of the
civil service commanded public attention, Sumner
attempted, as far as his infiuence would permit, to
put its principles iu practice. He urged the reten
tion of faithful and competent officers and the dis
regard of proportional distribution of offices where
it hindered efficiency. So far as the appoint-

"THE BAEBAEISM OF SLAVEEY" 245
ments which fell to Massachusetts were concerned,
Sumner took the list, which had been agreed upon
by the delegation while iu Boston, to the President,
and urged that these appointments, while not ideal,
should be made forthwith, in order that the whole
question might be taken out of discussion when so
much more vital matters needed attention ; and this
was done. Sumner's weakness in his owu selections
for office usually lay in his overweighting literary
ability as a qualification. Personal favoritism could
never justly be urged against his caudidates ; service
in the anti-slavery ranks counted for much with
him. It was this that led to his naming Palfrey for
postmaster of Boston, aud to his earnest but unsuc
cessful efforts to secure the appointment of Howe as
Minister to Greece.
Before Sumuer started for Boston at the end of
the sessiou, Sumter had fallen, and Lincoln had
issued his first call for volunteers. Upon his way
North, Sumner stopped for the night in Baltimore,
but when it became known that he was iu the city,
a riotous mob gathered. The proprietor of the
hotel where he had taken a room, alarmed for his
property if the anti-slavery leader should be dis
covered under his roof, demanded that he leave at
once, but Sumner insisted upon the rights due a
guest, aud was accordingly lodged for the night
in concealment. The next morning, on his way to
Philadelphia, Sumner met a train filled with rollick
ing soldier boys : it was the Sixth Eegiment of
Massachusetts, forty of whose members were that

246 CHAELES SUMNEE
very day to be killed or wouuded in the sfreets of
Baltimore by a secession mob, such as had hunted
him as its first victim ; aud after this, their first day
of battle, these soldier boys were to be quartered
for the night in the Senate chamber at Washington.
In New York Sumner visited the armory where a
battaliou of Massachusetts Eifles were quartered.
His words to them were a clarion call to battle for
"Massachusetts, the Constitution and Freedom."
The time had come when even the author of " The
True Grandeur of Nations," with all his heart and
soul, could bid men Godspeed in such a war !

CHAPTEE XIII
WAR PROBLEMS : THE TRENT AFFAIR
Congress met in special sessiou on the Fourth of
July, 1861. A week before its opening, Sumner
wrote to Lieber that he had proposed to the Presi
dent and his cabinet a programme of legislatiou,
which should include an army bill, a navy bill, a
bill for a loan and war taxes, a bill for treason, and
a bill of embargo and non-intercourse. He added
that he hoped this would be carried out " without a
single speech, or one word of buncombe, so that one
short session may be a mighty act." It is signifl
cant both of the consideration already shown Sumner
and of his growing sense of his owu importance, that
he should have put before the administration such a
comprehensive programme.
In the early months of the war great pains were
taken to disclaim any anti-slavery purpose, and
where officials, civil or military, had taken ac
tion which seemed to commit the administration
to any such policy, it was promptly disavowed.
The preservation of the Union was the oue ground
on which Lincoln wished to base his con
duct of the war. In diplomatic as well as in
domestic correspondence, Seward repeatedly as
serted that the status of slavery would remain un
changed, whatever the outcome of the insurrection.

248 CHAELES SUMNEE
From the outset, Sumner and many of the other
radical anti-slavery leaders believed that this policy
was a most unfortunate mistake. They recognized,
however, that, with a view to keeping iu touch with
the border states and with the great mass of Eepub
licans whose chief interest was uot in the auti-
slavery movement but in the preservation of the
Union, it was best not to force the issue prema
turely.' But the disaster at Bull Eun brought a
great awakening ; George Sumner greeted the news
with jubilation confident that at last the admin
istration and the public would be aroused to the
magnitude of the task before them."
As early as May of that year, Charles Sumuer
had broached the subject of emancipation to the
President, and urged him to be prepared to
strike when the proper moment arrived. He now
besought him to come out openly against slavery.
This the President was not ready to do, though he
carefully weighed Sumner's arguments, particularly
his contention that the disavowal of any humanita
rian motive was making the war seem one merely for
power, aud was greatly weakening the Union cause
in the eyes of European nations, whose sympathy
we should do nothing to estrange.
' It was doubtless this conviction which induced Sumner — and
Thaddeus Stevens and Oweu Lovejoy, iu the House — to abstain
frora voting upon the Crittenden resolution declaring that Ihe
war was not waged " in any spirit of oppression, or for any pur
pose of conquest or subjugation, or the overthrowing or inter
fering with the rights or established institutions of those states,"
— Blaine, Twenty Years of Congrens. Vol. I, p. 341.
' Autobiography of Andrew D. White, Vol. I, p. 88.

WAE PEOBLEMS 249
In October Sumner, upon his own rt'sponsibility,
took a decided step. At the Massachusetts state
Eepublican convention at Worcester, be made a
brief speech in which he insisted that slavery was
the sole cause aud the main strength of the rebel
lion, aud that it should therefore be struck down by
every power at the government's command. Said
he : " It is often said that the war will make au
end of slavery. This is probable, but it is surer
still that the overthrow of slavery will make an end
of the war. ... A simple declaration that all
men withiu the liues of the United States troops are
freemen will be iu strict conformity with the Con
stitutiou and also with precedent. The Constitu
tiou knows no man as slave. . . . There is a
higher agency that may be invoked, which is at the
same time under the Constitution and above the Con
stitution, — I mean martial law, in its plenitude, aud
declared by solemn proclamation." He cited John
Quincy Adams as authority for the power to eman
cipate slaves by martial law. While not assuming
to say that the hour for such action had come, he
did declare that "there are times when not to act
carries with it greater responsibility than to act."
In this speech for the first time an American
statesman openly and boldly advocated the policy of
emancipation. His words made a profound impres
sion, but an attempt to secure an endorsement of the
recommendation in the convention's resolutions
showed that there was much opposition. To veteran
Free Soilers this call for an end of "the policy of

250 CHAELES SUMNEE
forbearance" toward slavery was most welcome.
But to those of more conservative temperament and
traditions, it seemed incendiary. Boston journals,
as usual, were especially denunciatory, referring to
Sumner's "insane counsels" and speaking of him
as a "candidate from an insane asylum." "Pro
claim the policy of emancipation," said one, "and
all hope of reconstruction of the Union will be
crushed out." Eight years later, however, one of
these Boston editors, who had ever been severely
critical of Sumner's politics, wrote : "I am struck
with wonder at the clear comprehension which you
had of the magnitude of the war at the beginning,
aud of the true aud only means by which it could be
conducted to a proper termination. Your speech
reads to-day like a sacred prophecy. Por it you
were assailed ; but it was true, nevertheless, and the
country came at length to your defense by adopting
your statesmanship." '
A few weeks later great enthusiasm was aroused
iu Boston, New York, Philadelphia aud other cities
by au address on "The Eebellion, its Origin and
Mainspring," iu which Sumner elaborated and en
forced the points of his Worcester speech. With
tremendous force he denounced slavery as the sole
cause and support of the war, and insisted that
emancipation was a military necessity. "In no
way can we do so much at so little cost. To the
enemy such a blow will be a terror ; to good men it
' William Schouler, Feb. 18, 1869. Quoted by Pierce, Vol.
IV. p. 46.

WAE PEOBLEMS 251
will be an encouragement ; and to foreign nations
watching this contest it will be au earnest of some
thing beyond a mere carnival of battle."
From this time on, iu season and out of season, in
the Senate, in public addresses, in conference with
the President and with public men, Sumner never
ceased to urge emancipation. In the midst of all
the wavering and uncertainty, his steadfast adher
ence to this policy, at first deemed revolutionary,
but soon recognized as inevitable, was one of the
most potent influences in preparation for that ulti
mate resort.
Iu the summer of 1861 the Northern arms seemed
to make no progress. There was deep depression at
home, while abroad the belief was becoming fixed
that the Union was already dissolved. It was in
these days of gloom that an event took place which
wrought the whole country to the highest pitch of
excitement, and bade fair to involve the gravest
consequences. On the 8th of November, Captain
Wilkes of the United States naval-ship San Jacinto
boarded the British steamer Trent between Havana
and Nassau, two neutral ports, and seized Mason
and Slidell, with two secretaries and despatches.
These men, who had been duly accredited as envoys
of the Confederate States to England and France re
spectively, were brought to the United States and
placed in confinement. This exploit was hailed
with wild enthusiasm throughout the North. The
Secretary of the Navy declared that Captain Wilkes's
act was " marked by inteUigence, ability, decision

252 CHAELES SUMNEE
and firmness, and has the emphatic approval of this
department." It is asserted that at first ' ' no man was more elated
and jubilant over the capture of the emissaries than
Mr. Seward." ' Indeed, of all the members of the
cabiuet, Postmaster-General Blair was the only one
who is known to have taken an opposing view at
the outset." At the opening of Congress, the very
first act of the House of Eepresentatives was by
unanimous resolution, without even reference to a
committee, to commend Captain Wilkes's "brave,
adroit, and patriotic conduct." The press and pub
lic men, with few exceptions, joined in the chorus
of jubilation and praise. Sumner was still in Bos
ton when he heard of the envoys' capture. With
out a moment's hesitation he declared, "We shall
have to give them up." From that opinion he
never wavered, for he knew both the law of nations

' Seward's most recent biographer does not deny that this was
probably the line of the Secretary's first opinion and impulses.
He points out that Seward was most likely to regard political
results as of prime consideration. He at this time believed
England and France to be on the point of intervening, and was
putting forth his best efforts to remove all causes of friction.
The Trent seizure was totally unexpected and counter to the
diplomatic plans of the administration. "His habitual te
nacity of purpose was likely to bold bim to bis policy of
avoiding a war. But there was the popular applause of Wilkes;
aud it always made Seward very unhappy to find that the peo
ple were against him, unless he felt confident of quickly win
ning them back to his side. In such circumstances the shrewd
politician tries to wear a complacent look while he waits until
compelled to decide." — Frederic Bancroft, The Life of WiUiam
B. Seward, Vol. II, pp. 232-233.
' Welles, Lincoln and Seward, pp. 186-187.

WAE PEOBLEMS 253
aud the temper of the British government and pub
lic. From his correspondence he was well aware
that in England public opinion was now very
favorable to the South and that probably a
large majority in the House of Commons would be
" glad to find an excuse for voting for the dismem
berment of the great republic.'" Sumner's belief
that the British governmeut would promptly resent
the seizure was speedily justified : a suitable apology
and the surrender of the four men was immediately
demanded, and the British minister received private
instructions, in case these demands were not com
plied with, to end all diplomatic relations with the
Uuited States and take other measures looking di
rectly toward war. The gravity of the situation was
further indicated by the despatching forthwith of
some 8,000 troops to Canada and by preparations to
strengthen the English fleet in American waters.
Upon reaching Washington, Sumner was relieved
to find that the seizure had been absolutely unauthor
ized aud that the President had grave misgivings as
to the capture, despite the almost unanimous ap
proval of it in Ms cabinet and tMoughout the coun
try." In the Senate Sumner did his best to prevent
' Morley's Life of Cobden, Vol. II, pp. 388-390.
'The President's doubts and misgivings, Welles declares, were
" increased after an interview with Senator .Sumner, with whom
he often — soraetimes to the disgust and annoyance of Mr. Sew
ard — advised on controverted or disputed international ques
tions, and especially when there were differences between him
self and the Secretary of State." — Lincoln and Seward, p. 185.
Pierce asserts: "Such was his confidence in Sumner's judg
ment that he sometimes struck out passages from the Secretary's

254 CHAELES SUMNEE
debate upon the question, which might embarrass
the administration. On Christmas Day Lincolu
called a special meeting of his cabinet, not to ex
change holiday greetings but to consider anxiously
the issue of peace or war. To this grave council
Sumner also was bidden ; he took part in its delib
erations, and read letters relating to the seizure,
which he had just received from America's best
frieuds iu England, Cobden aud Bright.' No doubt
remained that the act of Wilkes mu.st be disavowed.
The very next day Seward informed the British
minister, with suitable expressions of regret, that
the envoys would be given up, and the incident, so
far as it involved any threat of war, was closed.*
But among the people at large the affair left a
feeling of humiliation that the American govern
ment should have disavowed and apologized for a
brave act of undoubtedly patriotic intent, which
had been everywhere hailed with delight. In
avoiding war with England, the administration had
despatches to which the senator objected." Vol. IV, p. 52,
II. 4. Lincoln used often to consult Sumner "as the barometer
of the nation's conscience." — G. S. Merriam, Life and Times of
Samuel Bowles, Vol. I, p. 346.
'Sumner did not doubt that the refusal to give up the envoys
would mean war with England, the disastrous consequences of
which he clearly forecast in his letter to Lieber of December 24th.
Pierce, Vol. VI, p. 58. Of great importance is the painstaking
account of the " Trent affair " in Rhodes, Vol. Ill, pp. 521-543,
with its extensive quotations from letters of Bright and Cobden
aud Sumner, and from leaders in English newspapers.
° How reluctantly even the President accepted the necessity
of releasing the envoys is indicated by quotations from Bates's
diary in Nicolay and Hay, Vol. V, p. 36. See alao Bancroft's
Life of Seward, Vol. II, p. 235-253.

WAE PEOBLEMS 255
chilled loyalty at home.' Two weeks later, accord
ingly, when the correspondence in regard to the
" Trent Affafr" was under discussion in the Senate,
Sumner made a tactful and comprehensive speech.
While tacitly exposing some of Seward's grave
errors in international law, he not only explained
and justified the surrender on the ground that since
the envoys were not in military service, neither
'Mr. Frederic Bancroft frankly acknowledges that at first
Seward did not know that Wilkes's act was contrary to inter
national law. He characterizes his final reply to Earl Russell
¦ as "the most studied and elaborately adroit paper that ever
oame from Seward's pen." Its full text is to be found in Sen.
Ex. Doo. No. 8, 37th Cong., 2d Sess. By vague and disjointed
citations from authorities in international law, by ' ' assuming
an analogy where there was none, and then using his false as
sumption to support his contention," Seward "made it appear
that Mason and Slidell were contraband of war, and that there
fore Wilkes was justified in capturing them " ; but he declared
that " by releasing the Trent instead of bringing her into port
for judical examination and condemnation, Wilkes let slip the
only chance of obtaining a legal justification for the seizure."
He even had the ' ' sheer impudence ' ' — as Bancroft calls it — to
assert that " if the safety of this Union required the detention
of the captured persons, it would be the right and duty of this
government to detain them," — a pretense very consoling to
public sentiment in America, for which it was mainly intended,
but which Earl Russell, in his reply, indicated Great Britain
would under no circumstances have tolerated. Bancroft dis
cusses at length the "remarkable absurdities" involved in
Seward's course, particularly in his subordination of the princi
ples and steady practice of tbe United States, ' ' whioh favored in
creasing the rights of neutrals and restricting belligerent inter
ference," and in his now resting his whole argument on the
fact that the Confederates were belligerents, ' ' after constant
declarations, during eight months, that they were not belliger
ents, but insurgents. ' '
In politician's fashion, he made the release which had been
shown to be inevitable. But the judgment of Hamilton Fish
is not too severe : " We might and should have turned the

256 CHAELES SUMNEE
they nor their papers were contraband of war or
liable to seizure, but he went further and laid much
stress upon the point that the seizure had been in
violation of long-declared American principles,
while in resenting it Great Britain had rejected her
own precedents.' In the words of George William
Curtis : "He had silenced England by her historic
self. He had justified America by her own honor
able precedent." In a letter to Bright, written on
affair vastly to our credit and advantage ; it has been made the
means of our humiliation." Pierce, Vol. IV, p. 54. The situa
tion from the outset had been made more strained by the be
lief prevalent in England that Seward was hostile in his attitude
toward that country, and not to be trusted. Cobden wrote to
Sumner: "I confess I have as little confidence in bim as I
have in Lord Palmerston. Both will consult buncombe for tha
moment without much regard, I fear, for the future." In
citing these words, Mr. Rhodes adds : ' ' We may, I think, ac
cept as faithful this characterization.'' Vol. Ill, p. 533. Years
later, J. M. Forbes wrote to Sumner: "History, I am sure,
will give the verdict that we got through without foreign in
tervention not in consequence of Seward's management but in
spite of it. His foreign policy was as short-sighted, empirical,
and unstatesmanlike as bis sixty-day compromising, wood-
cocking home policy. But for the present ' nil nisi bonum ' must
I suppose be the word about the wt7ey secretary." April 17,
1869. Sumner Correspondence, Harvard Library.
' Blaine dissents strongly from the grounds upon which Seward
placed the surrender of Mason and Slidell, and declares : "The
luminous speech of Mr. Sumner . . . stated the ground
for which the United States had always contended with ad
mirable precision." He shows clearly how flagrant and fre
quent had been England's offenses against the principles for
which she now contended. — Twenty Years of Congreaa, Vol. I,
pp. 585-587.
Although the Foreign Secretary, Earl Russell, made prompt
demand that "the seizure be disavowed, and the prisoners set
free and restored to British protection," there is evidence that
this official despatch did not represent the private opinion of
Lord Palmerston, the Prime Minister. It had been anticipated

WAE PEOBLEMS 257
the very day of the speech, Sumner frankly ac-
knowleged that he had perhaps overemphasized this
point, but added: "My earnest desire was to do
something for peace ; but I was obliged to arouse
the patriotism and self-respect of my own country
men by associating the surrender with American
principles." Sumner's influence had undoubtedly

that an attempt might be made in the British Channel to seize
the envoys, and ou November llth, before it was known in
Eugland that the seizure bad already been made on the other
side of the Atlantic, the Prime Minister and six otber promi
nent officers of the government came together to determine
what the British government could properly do in such an event.
In a letter to J. T. Delane, editor of the London Times, on the
very day of this conference, Lord Palmerston explains the con
clusion to which they came : " Much to my regret, it appeared
that, according to the principles of international law laid down
in our courts by Lord Stowell, and practiced by us, a belliger
ent has a right to stop and search auy neutral not being a ship
of war, and being found on the high seas and being suspected
of carrying enemy's despatches; and that consequently this
American cruiser might, by our own principles of intemational
law, stop the West India packet, search her, and if tbe South
ern men and their despatches and credentials were found ou
hoard, either take them out or seize the packet and carry her
back to New York for trial. Such being the opinion of our
men learned in the law, we have determined to do no more
than to order the Phaeton frigate to drop down to Yarmouth
Roads and watch the proceedings of the American within our
three-mile limit of territorial jurisdiction, and to prevent her
from exercising within that limit thoae righta which we cannot
diapute aa belonging to her beyond that limit. ' '
This is a strikingly frank avowal that the act for which his
ministry was about to demand reparation (probably out of re
gard for popular sentiment in England, which had been en
raged by the seizure) was indisputably justified by English
precept and practice ; and that these British precedents (as soon
proved in the Alabama controversy) were likely to prove much
in need of reversal. This letter is reprinted in full in Outlook
(N. Y.), Jan. 30, 1909, p. 251. .

258 CHAELES SUMNEE
been the most potent both in effecting a peaceful
solution and in reconciling the American people to
the inevitable surrender. His strong and intelligent
handling of this difficult case, iu which impulse aud
ignorance of international law had threatened such
momentous consequences, greatly increased his
prestige, particularly with the conservative classes,
heretofore inclined to distrust Mm. Publicists of
eminence warmly commended his speech. It was
declared " the best thing for Sumner's popularity
and reputation he has doue." The address had had
no more unprejudiced or keenly interested listeners
than the representatives of foreign governments who
thronged the diplomatic gallery in the Senate. Said
one of the most accomplished of those diplomats :
"I have considered Mr. Sumner a doctrinaire;
henceforth I recognize him as a statesman." '
During the summer of 1862 not a week passed that
Sumner did not call once or more upon the Presi
dent to urge him to move directly against slavery ; *
he insisted that the putting forth of an edict of
emancipation on the Fourth of July would make the
day more sacred and historic than ever. Lincoln
replied : "I would do it, if I were not afraid that
half the officers would fling dowu their arms and
three more states would rise." He told Sumner
' G. W. Curtis, Eulogy of Sumner, p. 162.
' " Many a time I saw Sumner restlessly pacing up and down
in his room and exclaiming with uplifted hands : ' I pray that
the President may be right in delaying. But I am afraid, Iam
almost sure, he is not. I tmst his fidelity, but I cannot under
stand him.' "-r-Carl Schurz, Beminiacencea, Vol. II, p. 314.

WAE PEOBLEMS 259
early in the session : "You are only a month or
six weeks ahead of me." Sumner repeatedly de
clared himself so opposed to war that he never
would have favored beginning a conflict for the
abolition of slavery, but from the time when the
South brought it on, his conviction never could be
shaken that the war could not end and ought not to
end without ending slavery also. Lincoln, with his
graver responsibilities, saw more clearly than did
Sumner the necessity of proceeding with caution,
particularly with a view to retaining the loyalty of
the border states. During the sessiou he discussed
with Sumner his favorite scheme for gradual and
voluntary abolition, with compensation from the
national treasury. Sumner frankly avowed his dis
trust of the practicability of the measure, but he did
not antagonize it in the Senate. Meantime the
President was coming to the view which Sumner
had long been urging upon him, and September 22d
— probably as early as it was justified — he issued
the Proclamation of Emancipation, which was to be^
come effective on New Year's Day in the states still
in revolt. No man iu the country had done more
than Sumner to prepare public sentiment to approve
and to support this vitally important act.
Upon two diplomatic negotiations relating to
slavery Sumner exercised great influence. The first
of these was the treaty between the United States
and England, which made effective the suppression
of the slave-trade by the institution of a mutual
right of search and mixed courts. Sumner was

260 CHAELES SUMNEE
present wheu the treaty was signed, and upon Ms
speech, accompanying the report from his com
mittee, the Senate ratified it without dissent. Both
Seward and the British minister were exultant, and
highly appreciative of Sumner' s cooperation. After
much opposition, he was able to effect the passage of
a bill for the accrediting of representatives from the
United States to Hayti and to Liberia ; ' a few years
later he was instrumental in securing similar diplo
matic recognition of the Dominican Eepublic.
In this session Sumner for the first time was able
to see some progress made along lines of legislation
against slavery which he was incessantly urging.
One such law embodied his proposal that the em
ployment of the army in the surrender of fugitive
slaves be prohibited. The session had hardly be
gun, when he attacked the slave code of the District
of Columbia. This, "the first open word against
slavery in the District since the break-out of the re
bellion," was intended to help toward its abolition
in the shadow of the Capitol, and such a result was
accomplished before the end ofthe session by a law
of which Wilson was the especial champion. The
President felt doubtful as to certain provisions of
this bill ; while he was hesitating whether to sign it
' Ten years later his continued services to Hayti were recog
nized by the award of a medal, and an order that his portrait be
placed in its Capitol. In a courteous letter Sumner expressed
his appreciation of this recognition, but declined to accept the
medal, on the ground that it was not perraitted under the Con
stitution. The Haytian authorities accordingly presented it to
the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, and it is now deposited in
the state library.

WAE PEOBLEMS 261
or not, Sumner said to him : " Do you know who
at this moment is the largest slave-AoMer in this
country ? It is Abraham Lincoln ; for he holds all
the 3,000 slaves of the District, which is more thau
any other person iu the country holds." Sumner
seized every opportunity to advocate the repeal of
the Fugitive Slave Law. He both spoke and voted
against the bill by which the state of West Virginia
was established, his opposition being grounded on
the fact that that law provided for gradual instead
of immediate emancipation.'
It was during this session that Sumner began two
contests which were to absorb most of his energies
for the rest of his life. The first of these was his
struggle to secure for all citizens of the United States,
regardless of color, equality of civic rights. His
present project was to make it possible for colored
persons to act as witnesses in Federal courts and as
carriers of the mail. The second subject which he
thus early was one of the first to urge upon the at
tention of Congress, was the problem of reconstruc
tion. On February 11, 1862, he introduced a series
of resolutions in which he declared that the seceded
states " had abdicated all rights under the Constitu
tion," or, as he phrased it a little later, had com
mitted " state suicide." " This celebrated doctrine
'Wade aud other radical anti-slavery men voted against
Sumner on this is.sue. Blaine, Twenty Years of Congress, Vol. I,
p. 461.
' " Call it suicide, if you will, or suspended animation, or
abeyance, — they have practically ceased to exist." Speech in
Senate, May 19, 1862. Works,' Yol. VII, p. 14. McPherson,
Bistory of the Rebellion, pp. 322-323.

262 CHAELES SUMNEE
as to the status of the states in revolt was promptly
disavowed by prominent Eepublican leaders in Con
gress, but it was to play a most important part in
debates and legislation of later years. A few weeks
later he strongly asserted his view that the initia
tion aud control of reconstruction should be by Con
gress and not by the President, and that at the in
stance of the President, the Secretary of War had no
right to appoint military governors for seceded
states. His opposition placed a check upon this
practice, and led to the withdrawal of the offer of
the military governorship of South Carolina to
Sumner's intimate friend and biographer, Edward
L. Pierce.'
Although Sumner was one of the most radical
anti-slavery leaders in Congress, and although he
regarded the rebellion, as he told Gladstone, as
"slavery in arms, revolting, indecent, imperious,"
nevertheless he looked forward to a reunited coun
try, and took more magnanimous ground than any
other mau in Congress in proposals to prevent the
perpetuation of bitternesses arising from the war.
In this session he offered a resolution declaring it
inexpedient that the names of victories won over
fellow-citizens should be placed on the regimental
colors of the United States,* and three years later he
opposed hanging in the Capitol " any picture of a
victory in battle with our own feUow-citizens." In
both of these matters he was opposed by Wilson,
' Pierce, Vol. IV, p. 78, n. 3.
' Works, Vol. VI, p. 499.

WAE PEOBLEMS 263
chairman of the Senate Committee ou Military Af
fairs ; but Sumner's stand, taken in the midst of the
stress of war, accords with the unanimous verdict of
a later generation. In the general work of this his
toric session, Sumuer took au active part, speaking
with discriminating intelligence on a great variety
of subjects, in particular the first of the legal tender
acts and the internal revenue tax bill. As to the
legal tender act, Sumner accepted the judgment of
the Secretary of the Treasury that it was rendered
imperative by the exigency of the hour, but added :
" Eeluctantly, painfully, I consent that the process
should issue, and yet I cannot give such a vote with
out warning the government against the danger of
such an experiment. The medicine of the Constitu
tion must not become its daily bread." '
In the year 1862, for the only time in his career,
Sumner's reelection to the Senate was seriously
threatened. The causes were partly general and
partly personal. The lack of success in prosecuting
the war had reacted against the Eepublican admin
istration, so that a coalition of other party elements
now stood some chance of making head. Many felt
that the war was being made an "abolition war,"
and that Sumner's influence had been one of the
greatest in giving it that direction. His "state
suicide" theory had startled conservatives, and
these added a small but earnest group to the oppo
sition. It was also charged that Sumner was so de
voted to anti-slavery projects that he did not attend
' Works, Vol. VI, pp 319-345.

264 CHAELES SUMNEE
to the interests of the commonwealth and of Ms con
stituents,— a charge which was easily and completely
refuted. But no sooner did this movement to dis
place Sumner become apparent, than his supporters
began to rally. "Jackson, Clay and Webster,"
says Pierce, " drew to themselves hosts of friends
by their persoual and intellectual qualities, but
Sumner stands almost alone as a public mau whose
great support was the moral enthusiasm of the peo
ple." Hundreds of young voters were now coming
to the polls whose flrst civic awakening and inspira
tion could be traced to Sumner's Lyceum lectures;
his speeches in the Senate and on the stump had
been read at the flreside throughout the country ;
while his fearless championship of freedom and the
sufferings he had endured in her service appealed
to the chivalrous loyalty of Massachusetts.
It is singular that iu two instances Sumner's elec
tion was determined by the use of political devices
then highly exceptional, but which half a century
later accord with the spirit of senatorial elections in
the most radical states, in dictating from outside the
choice of senator to be made by the legislature. In
his flrst election this was brought about by town-
meetings giving instructions to individual members
to vote for Sumner. In 1862, his supporters re
solved to anticipate the election by securing his en
dorsement by the convention ofthe Eepublican party,
which was sure to control the legislature. This
making the senatorial election an issue before the
convention was without precedent in New England,

WAE PEOBLEMS 266
though the device had attracted attention as a pre
liminary to the memorable Lincoln-Douglas cam
paign in Illinois ; in recent years it has reduced the
election of senators by the legislatures to a mere
formality in most of the Southern states.
In this convention of 1862 the contest came over
a resolution expressing approval of the work of
both Massachusetts senators, and putting Sumner in
nomination for reelection as "a statesman, a scholar,
a patriot and a man of whom any republic in any age
might be proud. ' ' At every step this resolution was
antagonized, in committee and upon the floor of the
convention, the lead being taken by the United
States District- Attorney, an exceptionally able man
ager of political meetings ; but the attempt to defeat
it failed, and the convention flnally adopted the
whole series of resolutions unanimously. Despite
this authoritative endorsement by the party, it was
thought best that Sumner enter actively into the cam
paign. The preliminary Emancipation Proclama
tion was issued within a fortnight after the holding
of this convention. Scorning prudential consider
ations, which would have kept the slavery issue in
the background, Sumner made this proclamation his
main theme, in speeches delivered before great au
diences in the principal cities of the commonwealth.
Vigorous support was forthcoming from Whittier
and Phillips, while Greeley's leaders in the Tribune
emphasized the vast importance to the whole country
of the senator's reelection. This attempt to banish
Sumner from public life came to nothing : the legis-

266 CHAELES SUMNEE
lature carried out the convention's mandate by giv
ing him a vote of 227 to 47 for all other candidates.
At the reopening of Congress, Sumner took a quite
prominent part in the movement of Eepublican
senators to persuade Lincoln to dismiss from his
cabinet Seward, who, in his diplomatic correspond
ence, had refused to recognize slavery as a cause
of the war or as likely to be affected by its outcome,
and who was thought to have been obstructionist
in his attitude toward emancipation. His culmi
nating offense was a passage in a diplomatic des
patch to Adams, which had recently come to light.
A committee of nine, appointed by the Eepublican
caucus, waited upon the President to urge him to
"reconstruct his cabiuet." To their embarrass
ment, at their second conference, the committee
found that Lincoln had invited the cabinet to
meet with them. After prolonged discussion, when
Lincoln asked, " Do you, gentlemen, still think that
Seward ought to be excused?" despite his many
years of intimacy with the secretary and his family,
Sumner joined with Grimes, Trumbull and Pomeroy
in answering, "Yes" ; three declined to commit
themselves, one opposed the proposal, and one was
absent. The outcome was that Chase, whose dislike
and jealousy of Seward's influence had been ill-con
cealed, now found himself in an exceedingly embar
rassing position, and added his resignation to Sew-
aid's, which was already in the President's hands.
" I can ride on now ; I've got a pumpkin in each
eud of my bag," was Lincoln's comment to a friend.

WAE PEOBLEMS 267
He prevailed upou both secretaries to resume their
positions, but he now held the factions of his cab
inet in control, aud he had accomplished this with
out establishing what might have proved a most
unfortunate precedent, if he had yielded to the pres
sure of the senatorial caucus for the expulsion of
an unpopular secretary. '
In midsummer, 1863, Sumner was rejoiced' that
one policy which he had urged from the beginning
of the war was put into effect in the enlistment of
negro volunteers. On the same day was passed an
act for the conflscation of the real and personal
estate of rebels. Sumner's only iuterest in this was
as a step toward emancipation and the providing
of homes for the colored people."
Throughout the war, Sumner rendered invaluable
service to the Union as chairman of the Senate
Committee on Foreign Eelations. Early in this
sessiou (January, 1863), when a resolution was in
troduced condemning French intervention iu Mexico,
Sumner opposed it vigorously as most ill-timed,
calculated to involve us in war with a power which
' Bancroft, Life of Seward, Vol. II, pp. 364-369 ; Nicolay and
Hay, Abraham Lincoln, Vol. VI, pp. 263-272 ; Welles, Lincolnand
Seward, pp. 81-85; Pierce, Vol. IV, pp. 110-111, especially p.
Ill, n. 3, which suraraarizes Sumner's relations to the several
members of Lincoln's cabinet. In the account of this episode
in his Diary, Gideon Welles wrote : ' ' Grimes, Sumner and
Trnmbull were pointed, emphatic and unequivocal in their op
position to Mr. Seward, whose zeal and sincerity they doubted.
Each was unrelenting and unforgiving." Dec. 20, 1862. At
lantic Monthly, April, 1909, p 474.
'Act of July 17, 1862. Pierce, Vol. IV, pp. 75-77; Blaine,
Vol. I, pp. 373-375.

268 CHAELES SUMNEE
still professed friendship, and sure to give aid and
comfort to the enemy at home, who was clearly
taxing all the nation's powers. The resolution was
then tabled by a decisive vote. But a year later its
mover renewed it in more peremptory form, requir
ing the withdrawal of the French troops within
three months. This was referred to Sumner's com
mittee, and here he succeeded in keeping it buried,
despite repeated efforts by its mover to get it before
the Senate. In the House the corresponding com
mittee was headed by Henry Winter Davis, who
ardently supported a resolution which the Houae
adopted by unanimous vote, denouncing "any
monarchical government erected on the ruins of any
republican government in America, under the au
spices of auy European power." In the Senate this
was referred to Sumner's committee, and there it
was kept in innocuous conflnement. But the pas
sage of this resolution by the House had already
given offense : demands for an explanation were
made both by the French minister at Washington
and by the Minister of Foreign Affairs at Paris. Sew
ard's replies affronted the dignity of the House and
of Davis in particular, who proceeded to introduce
another equally dangerous resolution, which passed
the House by a narrow majority, only to be smoth
ered, like its predecessor, by Sumner's committee.
In February, 1863, a bill for the granting of let
ters of marque aud reprisal was brought forward,
backed by the cordial support of Seward and Chase,
Sumner opposed it vigorously as countenancing a pol

WAE PEOBLEMS 269
icy which civilization had rejected, and likely in its
working to embroil us with foreign powers. The bill
passed both Houses and became a law to the great sat
isfaction of both Seward and Chase. Indeed, "Sew
ard felt this to be something of a triumph over Mr.
Sumuer, who often came in conflict with his views,
aud in allusion to whom, wheu confronted as he
sometimes was by the President with the senator's
opinions, he remarked, ' There were too many Sec
retaries of State in Washington.' " ' Nevertheless,
Sumner's opposition did not end. He appealed to
the President, addressed an open letter to the New
York Board of Trade, and sent leaders to some of
the principal papers. Lincoln suggested that he
address the cabinet, but Sumner deemed it more
becoming that he discuss the matter with them indi
viduaUy. The Secretary of the Navy and several
others adopted Sumner's view ; the President sum
moned him to a conference where they went over
the whole matter of privateering reprisals. It is
Welles's testimony that this interview, together
with a conference between the President aud him
self in regard to the only application which had
been filed under the act, " terminated the priva
teering policy, and closed the subject of letters of
marque and reprisal during the rebellion." '
The hope that foreign nations, particularly France
or England, would intervene, was a constant en
couragement to the Southern leaders, and Sumner,
' Welles, Lincoln and Seward, p. 154.
» Ibid., pp. 145-164.

270 CHAELES SUMNEE
with the purpose of doing "something to lift the
tone of our foreign relations," now determined that
the attitude of the United States toward such inter
vention ought to be made clear. After much diffi
culty he succeeded iu carrying through his com
mittee a series of resolutions which declared foreign
mediation unreasonable aud inadmissible in domestic
controversies ; asserted that any effort by a foreign
government to hinder the suppression of the rebel
lion was an encouragement of it, and if repeated
would be considered an unfriendly act ; attributed
to the hope of foreign intervention the vitaUty of
the rebellion ; and deplored the fact that the leaders
of the revolt had not been given to understand by
foreign powers that a new government, "with
slavery as its acknowledged corner-stone, and with
no other declared object of separate existence, is so
far shocking to the moral sense of mankind that it
must not expect welcome or recognition in the com
monwealth of nations." ' These resolutions, pro
nounced by Lieber "one of the most collected, most
faultless of historical documents," ' were adopted by
large majorities in both Houses, and transmitted to
our ministers abroad for communication to the
governmeuts to which they were accredited.
But Sumner's influeuce in behalf of peace and
friendly feeling with England was exerted not more
in his official capacity as chairman of the Committee
on Foreign Eelations, than iu his private correspond-
' Passed March 3, 1863. Works, Vol. VII, pp. 307-312.
" Pierce, Vol. IV, p. 124.

WAE PEOBLEMS 271
ence with the leaders of English thought. It was a
bitter disappointment to him that mauy of the men
of eminence — scholars, philanthropists aud states
men, whom he had come to love — now sided with the
South or were without faith that the North could
succeed. But in John l^right aud Eichard Cobden
he found stanch support e:^«'of the Union. And they
recognized in Sumuer the fitting avenue of com
munication between the friends of freedom in the
two lands. Early iu the war Cobden had written to
Bright : "I doubt whether another year's blockade
will be borne by the world. What say you ? If
you agree, you should let Sumner know." ' Their
letters to him were full of light upon changing
public sentiment in England and warnings as to acts
which might alienate it ; they ranked with Adams's
despatches as guides iu cabiuet discussions regard
ing our relations with England. In his letters to
these British statesmen and also to the Duchess of
Argyll, whose husband was in the cabinet, Sumner
reported the changing conditions of the struggle and
the progress in anti-slavery sentiment and legisla
tion. Nor did he fail to make clear to his cor
respondents how deeply Americans resented the
British government's laxness in enforcing neutrality.
He declared that our commerce was about "to be
driven from the ocean by ships in which every
plank and rope, and every arm, from the knife to
the cannon and the crew, are British, and nothing
but the pfrate officers rebels " ; he pointed out that
' December 6, 1861. Quoted by Pierce, Vol. IV, p. 51.

272 CHAELES SUMNEE
in allowing such a flagrant breach of neufrality
England was laying down precedents which could
not fail to be most disastrous to her in future years :
" A leading merchant said to me this morning that
he would give $50,000 for a war between England
and Eussia, that he might turn England's doctrines
against England." In his letters as in his speeches,
Sumner took every opportunity to identify the re
bellion with slavery, and "slave-mongers" was the
epithet which with wearisome iteration he applied
to the Southerners. His object was to heap
ignominy upon the cause which underlay the at
tack upon the Union. He especially deplored Earl
Eussell' s "hard, curt, captious, and cynical" des
patches, aud his statement that the Union and its
opponents "were contending, as so many of the
states of the Old World have contended, the one
side for empire and the other for independence."
This thesis Gladstone adopted, declaring so often
and with such apparent satisfaction his belief that
the restoration of the American Union by force was
unattainable that Sumner protested: "Opinions
are allies more potent than subsidies. . . .
Nothing is more clear than that whoever assumes to
play prophet becomes pledged in character and pre
tension to sustain his prophecy." ' The Proclama
tion of Emancipation and the victories at Vicksburg
and Gettysburg produced a noticeable change for
the better in British public opinion toward the
' Address, New York, September 10, 1863. Works, Vol. VII,
pp. 351-352.

WAE PEOBLEMS 273
North, but Gladstone, even in the winter of 1863-4,
declared in a letter to Sumner that from the first ofthe
war his opinion had remained absolutely the same.'
On the evening of September 10, 1863, before an
audience of 3,000 in the Cooper Institute, — from
whose doors as many more had been turned away,
— Sumner delivered an address on "Our Foreign
Eelations." The occasion for this intense interest
was not far to seek. The Florida and the Alabama
were already at large, preying upon our commerce,
and other cruisers and rams were building in British
yards. The French emperor was known to be ur
ging intervention upon an apparently not unwilling
British cabinet. Despite his well-known friendship
for England and the English, Sumner's speech
seemed primarily an indictment of the British
government for such sins of omission and commis
sion as he had been pointing out in his letters to
Bright and Cobden. He laid especial emphasis on
" the impossibility in a civilized age of recognizing
a new power openly proclaiming this barbarism
[slavery] as its corner-stone," and argued at length
against a government's beiug entitled to belligerent
rights on the ocean, when it had no access to prize-
courts, but always burned its captured ships, and
none of whose cruisers ever touched a port of the
pretended government.'
Sumner intended this speech for a far larger
* The frankness of Gladstone's acknowledgment of bis mis
takes of judgment and of speech goes far to disarm criticism.
Morley, Life of Gladstone, Vol. II, p. 82.
« Worka, Vol. VII, pp. 327-392.

274 CHAELES SUMNEE
audience than that which he faced, ' — for the
American public, before whom uo comprehensive
presentation of the subject had been placed, and for
British statesmen, that they might be warned for
the future by seeing how deeply British lack of
sympathy aud remissness in neutrality had offended
Americans most friendly toward England. In
America the address met with wide-spread ap
proval. In England it gave deep distress to some
friends of Sumner and of the cause which he repre
sented, and was criticized as grossly indiscrimina-
tiug and unjust. It is true that the speech did not
take into account the self-sacrificing sympathy of
the great working-classes and of many English
leaders of thought : its censures were directed
against England as represented by the government
which had allowed the Alabama to escape. It was
felt, too, that Sumuer made a serious mistake and
did injustice in bringing his indictment against
' Blaine notes this detachment from his immediate audience
as characteristic of Sumner in many of his speeches. "He pre
sented his arguments with power, but they were laborious
essays. He had no faculty for extempore speech. Like Addi
son, he could draw his draft for a thousand pounds, but might
not have a shilling for change. . . . His written arguments
were the anti-slavery classics of the day, and they were read
more eagerly than speeches which produced greater effect on
the hearer. Colonel Benton said that the eminent William
Pinckney of Maryland was always thinking of the few hundred
who carae to hear him in the Senate chamber, apparently for
getting the raillion who might read him outside. Mr. Sumner
never made that mistake. His arguments went to the million.
They produced a wide-spread and prodigious effect on public
opinion and left an indelible impression on the history of the
country." — Twenty Years of Congress, Vol. I, p. 318.

WAE PEOBLEMS 275
England and France together, since the British
government had not taken the initiative toward in
tervention, but had thus far resisted the pressure
of the French emperor. But the difficulties of the
moment were from England. Again, Sumner was
criticized for insisting that foreign countries must
discriminate against the Confederate states because
their government was based upon slavery. In so
doing, Sumner was following his usual practice of
appealing to a higher law, regardless of whether its
behests had beeu recognized in the currently ac
cepted law of nations.
But the turning-point with the British ministry
had already been reached. Two days before Sum
ner launched these reproaches. Earl Eussell had in
formed the American minister that instructions had
been issued that no more Confederate cruisers or
rams should be allowed to depart from British ports.
Nevertheless, in spite of all the friction it caused,
it cannot be doubted that Sumner's speech served
as a salutary warning that past British remissness
had not gone unnoticed aud that its continuance
would seriously imperil peace between the two
countries. Sumner's own avowal to Lieber was :
"On my conscience, after a constant and minute
correspondence on all topics of my speech, I felt
that the time had come when the case should be
stated to England by a friend who meant peace and
not war. My speech was a warning, with a plead
ing for peace. ' ' But Sumner was not always a good
judge of the conciliatory effect of his own words.

CHAPTEE XIV
SUMNER AND LINCOLN
In the session which opened in December, 1863,
Sumuer aroused some antagonism by forcing
through a Senate rule, requiring that members
take the " fron-clad oath," ' and by his successful
championship of a bill requiring this oath of all
attorneys appearing in Federal courts. The old
charge was renewed, that Sumner himself had had
"treason in his heart and on Ms lips" in taking
the oath, while avowing that he would not assist iu
the rendition of fugitive slaves.
At this session also, on Sumner's motion, there
was constituted a special Committee on Slavery and
Freedmen, aud he was made its chairman. To this
committee was referred his bill for the repeal of all
fugitive slave laws. This measure, which he had
introduced almost as soon as he had entered the
Senate twelve years before, and had repeatedly
urged, still met with strong opposition, but Sumner
now kept forcing this and other matters relating to
freedmen upon the Senate with a persistence which
'This oath, prescribed by Aot of Congress of July 2. 1862, re
quired all persons in the civil and military service of the United
States to affirm past loyalty as well as to pledge future allegiance
to the government. Democratic senators had heretofore de
clined to take this oath, declaring that it did not apply to mem
bers of Congress. Pierce, Vol. IV, p. 175.

SUMNEE AND LINCOLN 277
called from Saulsbuiy of Delaware the impatient
wish that the Senate might have " one day without
the nigger." At last, after a struggle of five
mouths, success crowned his efforts. So far as
practical effect upon the returu of fugitives was
concerned, tMs belated repeal was not of much con
sequence, but Sumner deemed it of immense im
portance abroad ; iu fact, within a few weeks Earl
Eussell had stated in the House of Lords that the
retention of the Fugitive Slave Act repelled sym
pathy for the Union cause.
Other measures connected with slavery which
Sumner was largely instrumental in passing were
the abolition of the coastwise slave-trade ; the es
tablishment — though for but a limited term of oue
year — of a Freedman's Bureau, and a prohibition p
of exclusions from street-railway cars in the Dis
trict of Columbia on account of color ; and — what
he deemed of greatest importance — a law pro
hibiting in all courts of the United States any dis- j.
crimination against negroes as witnesses. It is
characteristic of Sumner's attitude of mind that
three of these measures were forced through only
by his loading them as riders upon appropriation
bills or as amendments of general character upon
acts of special legislation. Of such transcendent
importance did he deem this extension of the rights
of the freedmen that he would hesitate not a mo
ment to make use of any legislative device, how
ever embarrassing it might later prove as a prec
edent,

278 CHAELES SUMNEE
Negro suffrage now came under discussion, and
Sumuer joined earnestly with others in the exclusion
of any suffrage discrimination on account of color in
the act for the government of Montana Territory,
making the issue one of principle rather than of im
mediate practical importance. ' Against the judg
ment of many, including Wilson, he also made vig
orous though unsuccessful efforts to have the suffrage
extended to colored persons in the District of Col
umbia. While ou his way to Washington, Sumner drafted
a form of petition for an amendment to the Con
stitution, declaring that " slavery shall be forever
prohibited within the limits of the United States."
This form of petition, adopted a few days later at
the meeting of the American Anti-slavery Society,
is said to have beeu the first ijublic step toward the
Thirteenth Amendment, which at this session was
approved by the Senate though uot by the House.
Sumner, of course, was one of its most ardent advo
cates. He fought hard, but in vain, to secure a
phrasing of the Amendment which would uot imply
any sanction of slavery even as a punishment for
crime." In the debate over this measure, his expres-
'As a matter of fact, it is declared that there was not at the
time a single negro in Montana. In the words of a witty
Southerner, "Tbe whole controvers.y over the territories related
to an imaginary negro in an impossible place."
'The form whicli he proposed in the Senate, February 8,
1864, was as follows: "Everywhere within the limits of the
United State,s and of each state or territory thereof, all persons
are equal before the law, so that no person can hold another as
a slave.''

SUMNEE AND LINCOLN 279
sion, " Nothing against slavery can be unconstitu
tional," showed the temper in which he always ap
proached legal questions. It was from the stand
point of the idealist rather than of the jurist.
In pushing forward these anti-slavery bills Sum
ner showed a pertinacity which exacted acknowl
edgment of his power, but did not tend to make
him liked by his colleagues. Upon a measure which
many at first distrusted, he would keep forcing them
to put themselves upon record, until at last his im
portunity or their fear of popular sentiment brought
them to yield. To the question whether such nag
ging persistency would prove good policy, Sumner's
reply would have been the words he used at one
stage in these debates : " The main proposition is to
sfrike slavery wherever you can hit it."
Yet he did not neglect topics of a more general
interest. It was at this session that he made a most
exhaustive report upon the " French Spoliation
Claims," which had beeu urged upon Congress for
sixty years, and strongly advocated a bill for their
payment. Pour times, at later sessions, this report
was adopted or reprinted as the authoritative sum
ming up of the case, before Congress at last, in 1885,
authorized the payment of the claims.' Sumner an
ticipated public sentiment by introducing, on April
30, 1864, a bill to provide for a system of competi
tive examinations for minor offices in the civil serv
ice, and for the prohibition of removals except for
¦ Pierce, Vol. IV, pp. 187-188. Actual payments began in
1891.

280 CHAELES SUMNEE
good cause. This was the beginning of the move
ment in Congress for the reform of the civil service.
Sumner had matured the measure without consult
ing other senators ; he was so convinced that it
could not be passed in this crowded session that he
himself moved that it be laid upou the table, and he
was too engrossed with other cares to call it up.
But he had long believed that rotation in office,
while justifiable in political posts, was absurd in the
machinery of administration and was convinced that
the reform which he proposed would have a bene
ficial effect on our national credit and everywhere
else. He was both surprised and gratified at the
favorable comments which his bill called forth from
friends aud from some of the leading papers.
Upon the approach of the presidential campaign
of 1864, Sumner shared the opinion of perhaps the
majority of public men (who in a few months were
to be the President's eulogists) that Lincoln lacked
practical talent for his position of transcendent im
portance, and that in the presidency " there should
be more readiness and also more capacity for govern
ment. ' ' But he took no part in the many confer
ences looking toward the substitution of another
cahdidate, repeatedly affirming that nothing could
be done except with Lincoln's good- will. He put
on record some strange judgments, which he himself
must soon have repudiated. To Cobden on Septem
ber 18, 1864, he wrote : "If he [Lincoln] had pa
triotically withdrawn, and given his support to any
nominee of a new convention, whoever he might be,

SUMNEE AND LINCOLN 281
— any one of a hundred names, — I am very sure the
nominee would be elected. . . . The President
made a great mistake in compelling him [Chase] to
resign. It was very much as when Louis XVI.
threw overboard Necker, — and, by the way, I have
often observed that Mr. Lincoln resembles Louis
XVI. more than any other ruler in history. I once
said to Chase that I should not be astonished if, like
Necker, he was recalled ; to which he replied,
' That might be if Mr. Lincoln were king and not
politician.' " '
But as soon as the Democratic platform was made
public, with its assertion that the war had been
" four years of failure," Sumner declared that " all
opposition to Lincoln disappears at the promulga
tion of the CMcago treason," and in many speeches
he did stalwart service to secure the President's re
election. While the campaign was still in progress,
there came an interesting illustration of Lincoln' s
magnanimity, when Taney's death, for months an-'
ticipated as imminent, made vacant the chief -justice
ship of the Supreme Court. Early in the year Sum
ner had urged Chase's name upon the President as
the best appointment. But meantime Lincoln had
forced Chase to withdraw from the cabinet. Never
theless, both by letter and by personal interview,
Sumner now renewed his advocacy of Chase's ap
pointment, which, after some delay, was made.
Soon after the new Chief Justice had taken his seat,
Sumner found intense satisfaction in moving the
' Pierce, Vol. IV, p. 200.

282 CHAELES SUMNEE
admission of a certain colored lawyer as counselor
before the tribunal where Taney had pronounced
the decision which denied citizenship to men of his
race. This Dred Scott Decision seemed to Sumner
such an atrocity that he joined with other sena
tors in temporarily successful opposition to the
placing of a bust of Taney in the chamber of the Su
preme Court. '
Sumner brought himself into strange company by
his earnest opposition to the resolution reported
from the Committee on Military Affairs for the es
tablishment of retaliation in kind upon Confederate
prisoners of war. He did not deny that retaliation
was a recognized right uuder the laws of war, but
urged that such forms as virtual starvation and dep
rivation of necessary clothing and medicines, from
which Union soldiers were alleged to have suffered
in Southern prisons, could not be applied without
grave deterioration of the national character.
'This bill, reported by Trumbull, called out angry debate
frora quite a number of senators. Sumner declared that " Taney
would be hooted down the pages of history, and that an eman
cipated country would fix upon bis name the stigma it deserved .
He had adrainistered justice wickedly, had degraded the judi
ciary, and had degraded the age." Reverdy Johnson eulogized
Taney, and asserted that " tbe senator from Massachusetts will
be happy if his name shall stand as high upon the historic page
as that of the learned judge who is no more." Nine years later,
when all but Sumner of those who had spoken in these earlier
debates bad ceased to be raembers of the Senate, there was pre
sented a bill for conferring the same tribute of respect upou
Taney and npon Chase, who had just died in the chief-justice
ship ; this was passed without debate and with the unanimous
consent of the Senate. — Blaine, Twenty Years of Congreaa, Vol.
I, pp. 135-137.

SUMNEE AND LINCOLN 283
Working with Democrats who were ordinarily his
bitter opponents, Sumner was able to secure the
Senate's assent to certain amendments requiring
that the retaliation be in conformity with the laws
aud usages of warfare among civilized nations.
The first year of the war was hardly past when
the problem of reconstruction began to engage at
tention. Although the suppression of the iusurrec-
tion had proved a harder task than was anticipated,
it was felt that if civU governments were speedily
established in sta,tes which had come within Union
control, they would serve as gathering-points for
national sentiment, and would make a most favor
able impression upon public opinion abroad as an
evidence that orderly democratic government was
soon to be restored in the states which had been in
revolt. Upon this problem Sumner was one of the first to
put himself upon record,' aud no other public man's
attitude and influence had more to do with de
termining the course which reconstruction flnally
took. Hardly six months had passed since the dis
aster at Bull Eun when Sumner, on February 11,
1862, introduced a series of resolutions, the cardinal
feature of which was his insistence that the de
termination of the procedure by wMch the seceded
states should resume functions of government and
be restored to normal relations with the Union, must
rest with Congress. In his opinion the seceded
states had virtually committed " state suicide," and
^ Supra, pp. 261-262.

284 CHAELES SUMNEE
it was now perfectly competent to Congress to make
all rules and regulations for such territory as for
any other territory or property of the United States.'
In the spring of 1862 military governors were ap
pointed by the President for Louisiana, Arkansas,
Tennessee, and North Carolina. Forthwith in
Louisiana, in accordance with orders issued by this
military governor, two representatives (Hahn and
Flanders) were elected ; and upou their arrival in
Washington the House of Eepresentatives accepted
their credentials aud admitted them as members of
the House, "though not without contention and
misgiving." ' In December, 1863, the President's
message set forth his programme of reconstruction :
State governments were to be established on the
basis of one-tenth or more of the number of votes
cast at the last national election, and voters were
to be required to pledge themselves to allegiance to
the Constitution and laws and the proclamations
relating to slavery. During the next two months,
in accordance with a proclamation of General
Banks, the commander of the department, elections
were held, the voting being confined to " male white
citizens," a constitutiou was adopted and state of
ficers were'chosen. In Arkansas the same procedure
had been followed.'
In Congress these acts of the Executive met with
' Constitution, Art. IV, Sec. Ill, Par. 2.
' Blaine, Twenty Years of Congress, Vol. II, p. 36.
'The character of the correspondence which led to these steps
is indicated by letters between Lincoln and Banks. Nicolay
and Hay, Lincoln, Vol. VIII, pp. 427-430.

SUMNEE AND LINCOLN 285
prompt protest, and the House soon passed a bill
providing a method of reconstruction which differed
from that of the President principally in its insist
ence that a majority, instead of merely one-tenth,
of the white male citizens, of the age of twenty -one
or over, should take the oath to support the Consti
tution of the United States before they could par
ticipate in initiating the state governments, and in
the requirement that the new constitution of each
state prohibit slavery forever. In both branches of
Congress the attempt was made to cut out the re
striction of the suffrage to whites, but it failed, only
five votes being cast in its support in the Senate.
It is said that here for the last time Sumner was
ready to waive his objection to such resfriction of
the suffrage, provided the bill asserting Congress's
power to control reconstruction could be passed,
together with a declaration that the Louisiana pro
cedure was no precedent and that freedom should
be secured. But this bill the President killed by a
pocket veto ; for he was firmly of the opinion that
Congress had no authority to abolish slavery within
the states, and he believed that the dielicate adjust
ments of reconstruction could be better effected by
one man than by from two to three hundred men in
two jealous branches of Congress.'
In June, 1864, the concrete question came before
the Senate ou a resolution to recognize the govern-
' Proclamation of July 8, 1864. The bill is reprinted in full
in Macdonald '3 Select Statutes of United States History, 1861-
1898, pp. 124-128.

286 CHAELES SUMNEE
ment of Arkansas. Sumner spoke briefly but with
great earnestness in oijposition to the measure.
This speech showed the extent to which already
" the two most influential men in public life were at
variance." ' Sumner objected to the irregularity of
the proceedings by which the government had beeu
organized under military orders within a territory
hardly subjugated, but laid most stress upon the
contention that the states which had been in revolt
could be readmitted to statehood only by act of
Congress. A resolution of his own was at this time
pending — adopted in substance two years later —
providing : " That a state pretending to secede from
the Union and battling against the national govern.
ment to maintain this pretense, must be regarded
as a rebel state, subject to military occupation, and
without title to be represented on this floor until it
has been readmitted by a vote of both Houses of
Congress ; and the Senate will decline to entertain
auy application from any such rebel state uutil after
such vote of both Houses of Congress." ' Both reso
lutions were referred to the Committee on the Judi
ciary, of which Trumbull was chairman, and were
reported unfavorably, as were also the credentials
of the persons claiming admission as senators from
Arkansas. ' Rhodes, Vol. V, p. 55.
»May 27th. McPherson, Hiatory of the Mebellion, p. 320.
Works, Vol. VIII, p. 470. See similar resolutions of Febmary
23, 1865 and March 8, 1865. Works, Vol. IX, pp. 311 and
340. In the House, Garfield and Dawes proposed resolutions
of like character, June 13 and 22, 1864.

SUMNEE AND LINCOLN 287
In February, 1865, however, substantially the
same question arose over the resolution reported
from the Committee on the Judiciary, of which
Trumbull was still chairman, recognizing the gov
ernment of Louisiana. Personal conference with
the President had apparently brought about this
change of Trumbull's views. Lincoln was so
strongly committed to his scheme of reconstruction
that the senators were reluctant to speak openly in
opposition. Sumner had again and again urged
him to "have no break with Congress on such
questions." ' As to his own ground he had no
hesitation : from this time forward, leaving for
the most part to others the protest against the
irregularity in the initiation of the government by
military orders and the inadequacy of the voting
population on which such government was based,
Sumner now, alone, began his fight to prevent the
admission of auy state which did not guarantee
freedom and equality at the polls as well as before
the courts to colored people ou precisely the same
terms as to whites. To this struggle for absolute
equality of civil rights the greater part of his
strength for the rest of his life was to be devoted.
To it he brought all the intensity of conviction, all
the determination and fearlessness in debate which
he had formerly devoted to securing the repeal of
the Fugitive Slave Act and the proclaiming of
emancipation. His attitude was affirmed both by
word and deed : "I think it [the measure] dauger-
' Letter to Bright, Jan. 1, 1865. Pierce, Vol. IV, p. 221.

288 CHAELES SUMNEE
ous ; and thinking it dangerous, I am justified in
opposing it, aud justified, too, iu employing all the
instruments that I find in the arsenal of parliamen
tary warfare." ' Eiders, dilatory motions, objec
tions, talking against time, — all of these Sumner
used without hesitation. In these early days of
this ten years' struggle, when senators interrupted
him with cries, "Don't waste time!" "Give
up I" his reply was, "That is not my habit."
"We know that!" came the response, with
laughter. The debate was full of sharp person
alities. Sumner found oue of his principal allies
in a senator from Kentucky, but Wade proved his
most zealous supporter. Sumner now asserted, as
many times later, that the Union needed the baUots
as well as the muskets of colored men."
The resolution had been brought in only about a
week before the end of the session, and the ap
propriation and revenue bills were still to be con
sidered. The result was that by persistent filibus
tering Sumner aud a dozen other senators prevented
a 'vote upon the recognition of Louisiana. For the
absolute equality of the colored race as a condition
of readmission, Sumner had made his fight alone,
and his influence more than that of any other
blocked the recognition of the state, which was the
vital point for recon.struction iu accordance with
the Lincoln plan. Even before the debate in the

580.

' February 25, 1865.
'See Sumner's resolution of Feb. 25, 1865. McPherson, p.

SUMNEE AND LINCOLN 289
Senate began, Lincoln is said to have declared :
"I can do nothing with Mr. Sumuer in these mat
ters. While Mr. Sumner is very cordial with me,
he is making his history iu au issue with me on
this very point." ' In his great disappointment
at the outcome of the contest, Lincoln took no pains
to conceal the fact that he considered Sumner
chiefly responsible for the defeat of his favorite
measure. In cabinet meeting on the very last day
of his life, Lincoln declared : " These humanita
rians break down all state rights and constitutional
xights. Had the Louisianians inserted the negro
in their Constitutiou, and had that instrument been
in all other respects the same, Mr. Sumner would
never have excepted to that Constitution." '
The relations between Lincoln and Sumner dur
ing the last weeks of the President's life afford an
interesting study. Sumner had just blocked a
project on which Lincoln's heart was set. Yet, far
from cherishing resentment, Lincoln showed him
more signs of personal regard than to any other man
in public service. It is hard to see much basis for
congeniality iu two men so utterly unlike. ' ' Sum
ner," Lincoln once said, " is my idea of a bishop."
Certainly the Massachusetts senator had been un
remitting in his efforts to point out to the President
the precise line of his duty. It is far easier to un
derstand how Mrs. Lincoln should have come to
' Nicolay and Hay, Lincoln, Vol. X, p. 85.
^Ibid., pp. 282-285. Welles, The Galaxy, April, 1872,
p. 526.

290 CHAELES SUMNEE
have a great admiration for Sumner. His elo
quence and humanitarian zeal always made a strong
appeal to high-minded women. Though of South
ern origin, the wife of the President had come to
sympathize with a radical anti-slavery policy. In
her zeal and inexperience she even took such sur
prising steps as the sending of notes to Sumner,
repeatedly urging him to oppose the appointment
to the cabinet of a man of whom she did not ap
prove.' Sumner's foreign travel aud acquaintance
impressed Mrs. Lincoln, who was interested in
French, and enjoyed discussing French books with
him. On the eve of the inauguration ball came an
autograph note from the President inviting Sumner
to accompany Mm to that function, and the Presi
dent's carriage called for him. As the party en
tered the ballroom, Sumner escorting Mrs. Lincoln,
there were many who inferred that Lincoln had ac
cepted Sumner's reconstruction policies.
According to his custom, Sumner remained in
Washington for some time after the end of the ses
sion, to finish up business and, also, to bring to
bear what influence he could in favor of his plan of
reconstruction. During these weeks apparently
Lincoln and Sumner were each seeking the other in
the hope of making a convert. On one occasion
Sumner had a midnight conference with the Presi
dent in regard to a case calling for executive
clemency, and came to the President's office early
the next morning by appointment to receive the
'Pierce, Vol. IV, p. 221, n. 2, and pp. 230-231.

SUMNEE AND LINCOLN 291
documents. While Sumner was taking some notes,
the President broke out into praise of " Petroleum
V. Nasby," and declared that he must "initiate"
Sumner, adding: "For the genius to write these
things I would gladly give up my office." There
upon he proceeded for nearly half an hour to regale
the cultured Massachusetts senator with that "pa
triotic literature" until Sumner, "thinking there
must be many at the door, waiting to see the Presi
dent on grave matters, took advantage of a pause,
and, thanking him for the lesson of the morning,
left," passing through the anteroom, which he found
thronged with twenty or thirty persons, including
senators and representatives.'
A few days later the President left Washington
for the headquarters of the Army of Virginia.
Sumner was to have accompanied Mr. and Mrs.
Lincoln to the opera on April 5th, as he had done
on the last occasion wheu the President had at
tended the theatre ; but plans were now changed,
and on that day in a party of eight he accompanied
Mrs. Lincoln to City Point, where they joined the
President. Thence the party went to Eichmond,
where with an escort of cavalry they made visits to
the chief points of interest. Sumuer gratified his
collector's passion by securing for Stanton the gavel
which had been used in the Confederate Congress.
The next day the President and his party went to
' Works, Vol. IX, p. 360. Sumner wrote an account of this
episode as an introduction to a new edition of Nasby's letters, is
sued in 1872.

292 CHAELES SUMNEE
Petersburg, and on the following day visited the
sick aud wounded iu the tent hospitals at City
Point. Here Lincoln shook hands with five thou
sand sick and wounded soldiers, and yet declared to
Sumner that his arm was not tired.' They returned
to Washington on the River Queen, as Sumner wrote
to the Duchess of Argyll, "breakfasting, lunching
and dining in oue small family party." In these
four days of intimate association, Sumner came to
appreciate some points iu Lincoln's character which
he had perhaps little suspected. To the few friends
upon the boat the President quoted Longfellow's
" Eesignation " and on Sunday read from his favorite
play, "Macbeth."'
The party reached Washington on the evening of
the 9th. The next day Sumuer received from the
White House, with a bunch of flowers, a special
message announcing Lee's surrender. On the fol
lowing day came an invitation to him to bring a
friend to the White House to see the illumination in
celebration of the surrender, but for some reason
' Works, Vol. IX, p. 410.
' With the strange premonitory mysticism which Lincoln
often showed, the passage over which he lingered and which he
read a second time to this group of his friends was the words of
Macbeth : " Duncan is in his grave ;
After life's fitful fever he sleeps well ;
Treason has done his worst : nor steel, nor poison,
Malice domestic, foreign levy, nothing.
Can touch him further." —Act III, Sc. II, 11. 23-27.
Worka, Vol. IX, pp. 408, 416. Marquis de Chambran's
"Recollections of Sumner," Scribner's Magazine, January,
1893, pp. 33, 35.

SUMNEE AND LINCOLN 293
tMs was not accepted. In response to calls from
the crowd, the President that evening made his last
public speech. To the surprise of the listeners, he
took this occasion to defend, iu a long, earnest argu
ment, his course in regard to Louisiana. On reading
the address the next day, Sumner confided to Lieber
his forebodings: "The President's speech aud
other things augur confusion and uncertainty iu
the future, with hot coutroversy. Alas! alas!"
Thursday evening Sumner was again invited to the
White House to see the illumination iu company
with General Grant. It is not known whether these
two, who in later years were to be brought into such
bitter opposition, met here for the first time. The
next day, the fatal 14th of April, in cabinet meet
ing Lincolu reasserted his view as to reconstruction,
mentioned Sumner's opposing opinion, and in
timated that it was providential that the end of the
rebelliou came wheu the question of reconstruction
could be considered, as far as the Executive was
concerned, without interference from Congress.'
That evening Lincoln was assassinated. The
news of the crime spread rapidly. It came to Sum
ner as he was talking with friends. He went to the
White House immediately, supposing that the
President had been takeu thither, and thence to the
house-where the stricken man lay. There in the
gray hours of dawn he sat, holding the hand that
had freed the slave, and sobbing like a child. As
Lincoln breathed his last, Ms son stood leaning
' Welles, in The Galaxy, April, 1872, pp. 525-527.

294 CHAELES SUMNEE
upou Sumner's arm. The senator then entered a
carriage with General Halleck, who stopped at the
hotel where Johnson was lodging to inform him
that he must not go out without a guard. From here
they drove to Seward's house, where a single assas
sin had wounded six persons. On reaching his own
lodgings. Summer found that Stanton had already
posted a squad of soldiers there, as Sumner's life,
also, was reported to be in danger.
In the joint gathering of senators aud representa
tives then in Washington, Sumner was made chair
man of the committee which prepared the resolu
tions and made other preparations for the represen
tation of Congress in the funeral ceremonies. On
the 1st of June, the commemoration day appointed by
President Johnson, by invitation ofthe Boston city
government, Sumner pronounced the eulogy upon
Lincolu in Faneuil Hall. He told the story of the
dead statesman's rise to power and bore witness to
his great qualities of mind and heart, criticizing
ouly what had seemed to the speaker a slowness in
taking a stand upon some questions. He especially
emphasized his simplicity and strength of character,
and the qualities of his style, " argumentative,
logical aud spirited with, quaint humor and sinewy
sententiousness. " From Mrs. Lincoln Sumner re
ceived a most appreciative message, and Eobert T.
Lincoln wrote to him that of all the mauy eulogies
that had been delivered, he had seen none which so
well as Sumner's expressed " what all who knew my
father feel, but cannot say."

CHAPTEE XV
JOHNSON AND RECONSTRUCTION
At the beginning of the first war session of Con
gress Sumner had gone out of his way to express
great respect for Andrew Johnson, the loyal senator
from Tennessee, and despite the disgraceful features
which had atteuded Johnson's inauguration as Vice-
President, Sumner's early impressions of him in the
of&ce now thrust upon him were distinctly favorable.
He had occasion to call upon him ou business a few
hours before his taking the oath of office ; and he forth
with begau to exert aU possible pressure to induce
Johnson to endorse his reconstruction policy. A
week from the day of Lincoln's assassination, Chief
Justice Chase and Sumner together called upon the
uew Executive to urge him to favor negro suffrage.
Of this interview Sumner wrote to Lieber : "I was
charmed by his sympathy, which was entirely dif
ferent from his predecessor's. . . . Our late
Piesident accepted the principle, but hesitated in
the application. . . . Our new President ac
cepts the principle and the application. . . .
Both of us left him light-hearted." ' Meantime the
question had risen in a conference between Stanton
and some leading members of the two Houses, at
» May 2, 1865. Pierce, Vol. IV, p. 243.

296 CHAELES SUMNEE
which Sumner had insisted that the negro's right to
vote was "the essence,— the great essential; . . .
unless the black man has the right to vote, his free
dom is mockery." It soon arose also at a cabinet
meeting, where, in the absence of Seward, the mem
bers were evenly divided upon the issue ; the Presi
dent did not commit himself. When Sumner went
to Boston to pronounce the eulogy upou Lincoln, he
felt confident that Johnson's influence would be
thrown iu favor of full suffrage rights for the blacks,
and that none of the seceded states would be precip
itated back into the Union without passing through
a term of probation. But ten days had not passed
before the President issued a proclamation of
amnesty, followed by another, providing for the re
construction of North Carolina and excluding ne
groes from the suffrage in that state.' Forthwith
other proclamations affirmed the steps already taken
by Lincoln as to Louisiana, Arkansas and Tennessee,
and provided for the reconstruction of the rest of
the seceded states.
It is not necessary here to canvass the influences
which led to this "political somersault." Itwas a
bitter disappointment to Sumuer and other radicals.
Thaddeus Stevens had already taken alarm at
Johnsoji's proclamation of May 9th, recognizing the
Pierpont government of Virginia ; he now wrote to
Sumner : "Is there no way to arrest the insane
' This proclamation of May 29tb was issued two days before
Sumner's eulogy on Lincoln, and doubtless this fact accounts
for some of his digressions.

JOHNSON AND EECONSTEUCTION 297
course of the President in reorganization ? " and as
serted that he had sent him two letters, urging him
to ' ' stay Ms hand till Congress meets. ' ' Wade went
to Washington to beg Johnson to convene Congress,
but soon reported to Sumner that he had been un
able to divert the President from the policy on which
he was resolved.'
During the summer months these acts of Johnson
apparently awakened little disapproval, still less
apprehension, among the people of the North.
They seemed a consistent carrying forward of am
nesty and reconstruction, as begun by Lincoln. But
the radical leaders, who had viewed with alarm the
first steps taken by Lincoln, were now aghast at the
pace Johnson was attaining. " If something is not
done, the President will be crowned King before
Congress meets," Wade wrote to Sumner, and later :
"The danger is that so much success will reconcile
the people to almost anything." He could foresee
no other result of the President's course than the
consigning of ' ' the great Union or Eepublican party,
bound hand and foot, to the tender mercies of the
rebels we have so lately conquered in the field and
their Copperhead allies ofthe North." '
Sumner was not so disheartened, though he con
fessed to Bright his disappointment that the radicals
in the cabinet had deserted "the good cause." ' He
'Sumner's Works, Vol. IX, p. 480.
'Letter to Sumner, July 29th. Sumner Corr. MS., Harvard
Library. 'Pierce, Vol. IV, pp. 250, 255.

298 CHAELES SUMNEE
straightway set about organizing public opinion.
Through personal correspondence, letters to the
press, magazine articles and interviews with public
men, he sought to further the measures to which he
was ardently devoted. Seward, Welles and McCul-
loch approved Johnson's policies. In the cabinet
no mau was prepared to force equal suffrage for the
negro as an out-and-out issue with the President ;
and of the senators B. Gratz Brown was the only
one who during the summer declared himself ready
without reserve to follow Sumner's lead upon that
point. Of the members of the House, three (Bout-
well, Julian and Garfield) put themselves on record
before the public as in favor of negro suffrage,
but Dawes, soon to follow Sumner in the Senate, now
defended Johnson's course, vigorously challenging
the constitutionality of any equal-suffrage require
ment which Congress might attempt to force as a
condition of reconstruction. Hardly any other pub
lic man or editor of prominence looked with favor
upon Sumner's programme, even Greeley, who ad
vocated negro suffrage as just and politic, being un
wiUing to affront the President by rigidly insisting
upon it. But clearer than ever stood the fact that,
in the face of every opposition, Sumner was inexor
ably insistent that before a seceded state should be
restored to normal relations in the Union, it must
grant full and equal suffrage rights to the negro.
To Lieber Sumner acknowledged that all his first im
pressions were in favor of the reading and writing
test, but that he had come to regard this as imprac-

JOHNSON AND EECONSTEUCTION 299
ticable, since any such test would have to apply to
whites aud blacks alike, and it would be impossible
to get votes of Congress to disfranchise men who
were already voters, as such a test would inevitably
do. "Besides," he added, " there are very intelli
gent persons, especially among the freedmen, who
cannot read or write. But we need the votes of all,
and caunot afford to wait." '
At the Massachusetts state Eepublican conven
tion, on September 14th, Sumuer took the chair.
He spoke with intense earnestness, urging "the
right of the colored race to equality in suffrage as
in all other things, both for its own protection aud
for the safety of the country, — to be maintained by
Congress as a condition in the restoration of the
rebel states, and irrevocably secured by an amend
ment of the Constitution forbidding any exclusion
on account of race or color," — one of the earliest
suggestions of what was to become the Fifteenth
Amendment. The Massachusetts Eepublicans. en
dorsed Sumner's programme, but this stand was
taken by the party in only three other states
(Vermont, Iowa and Minnesota), although before
Congress assembled there was evidence of growth
of popular sentiment, in its favor. Some of the
constitutions adopted and the laws passed in 1865
in the seceded states under warrant of Johnson's
proclamations, especially Mississippi's refusal to
ratify the Thirteenth Amendment and her harsh
legislation with reference to the freedmen, afforded
'Letter of August 14, 1865. Pierce, Vol. IV, p. 256.

300 CHAELES SUMNEE
ample justification to a man of Sumner's mode of
thought for the conviction that their reconsfruction
was premature aud in the wrong hands ; for while,
before Congress met, four of the states had annulled
the ordinances of secession and ratified the emanci
pating Amendment, they not only confined the
suffrage to white citizens but passed a variety of acts
discriminating against the freedmen with the
tendency and effect of reducing them to virtual
peonage. The President himself was so impressed
by the growing belief that mere emancipation
would leave the freedmen defenseless, that in his
circular to the provisional governors he suggested
that the ballot be given to all freedmen "who can
read the Constitutiou of the United States, and
write their names, and also to those who own real
estate valued at not less than two hundred and fifty
dollars and pay taxes thereon." But that the sug
gestion came from the politician rather than from
the statesman or philanthropist is clear from his
message to the Mississippi governor : "I hope and
trust that your convention will do this, aud as a
consequence the radicals, who are wild upou negro
franchise, will be completely foiled in their attempt
to keep the Southern states from renewing their re
lations to the Union by not accepting their senators
and representatives." '
On the Saturday evening before the session
opened, Sumner had a long interview with John-
' Letter to W. L. Sharkey, Ang. 15, 1866. Blaine, Vol. II,
p. 81.

JOHNSON AND EECONSTEUCTION 301
son, and found him " harsh, petulant and unrea
sonable." ' There was so little basis for common
understanding that Sumner left him convinced
"that the President's whole soul was set as a fiint
against the good cause, and that by the assassination
of Abraham Lincoln the rebellion had vaulted into
the presidential chair." As he later wrote to
Bright, "He is indocile, obstinate, perverse, im
penetrable, and hates the educatiou and civilization
of New England." They parted never again to
meet on friendly terms. Ou the very first day of
the session, as soon as he could get the floor, Sum
uer introduced a series of ten resolutions, covering
the whole fleld of reconstruction. His object was
to forestall the President, whose message had not
yet been presented, and to form public opinion.
The condition which he laid down as of fundamental
importance was the maintenance by Congress of
absolute political and civic equality of all citizens,
white or black. He based this upon the constitu
tional duty to guarantee to every state a republican
form of government. It was no longer possible to
fail to see the vast proportions of the problems in
volved. In the House Steveus was not less alert. Under
his prompting, on the flrst day of the session, the
clerk admitted to the roll of members-elect none of
the men who had been chosen from the states which
had seceded, and refused to listen to their protests
or to entertain motions directing that the names of
' Works, Vol. XI, pp. 24, 25.

302 CHAELES SUMNEE
the two Tennessee members-elect be added. The
work of organization was rushed through, and un
der suspension of the rules Stevens then introduced
a resolution providing for the appointment of a
joint committee of nine from the House and six
from the Senate to investigate the condition of the
states which had been in rebelliou "and to report
whether they or any of them are entitled to be
represented in either House." ' Protest was made
as to the impropriety of acting upou such a motion
without awaiting the President's message, but it
was nevertheless passed by a vote of nearly four to
oue and the committee was constituted with Stevens
as chairman of the House committee and Fessenden
of the Senate committee, and also of the joint com
mittee. Johnson's flrst message was an unexpectedly
statesmanlike paper, now known to have been
written by George Bancroft.' It stated the steps
'The surprising fact that Sumner and Stevens, who at first
had but a small following, were soon dictating the congressional
programme of reconstruction is well discussed by W. A. Dun
ning in Essays on the Civil War and Eeconstruction, and in Re
construction, Political and Economic, p. 52 : "It waa to the
esprit de corps of the legislature, as against the overgrown pre
tensions of the executive, that the most effective appeals were
made by the radical leaders, Stevens and Sumner. 'These men
could not have carried with them a majority of either House —
probably not a majority of the non-Democratic merabers in
either — for a proposition to discard the President's plan; bnt
for a proposition to bold it in abeyance till Congress could
formulate an independent judgraent on the question involved
it was easy to win a decisive majority."
'Paper by W. A. Dunning, Mass. Hist. Soc. Proo., Nov.,
1905.

JOHNSON AND EECONSTEUCTION 303
which the President had taken in his effort "to re
store the rightful energy of the general government
and of the states" and intimated that after the
states lately in revolt had adopted the Thirteenth
Amendment it would "remain for the states whose
powers have been so long in abeyance to resume
their places in the two branches of the national
legislature, and thereby complete the work of
restoration." He dwelt upon the fact that the
Constitution did not assume to prescribe suffrage
conditions within the states, and declared that a
concession of the elective franchise to the freedmen
by the act of the President would be au entirely un
warranted departure from precedent and from the
spirit ofthe Constitution.'
In both bodies the debates soon brought clearly
into view a wide-spread opposition to the President.
On motion of Sumner there were sent to the Senate
the reports of Carl Schurz aud of General Grant ou
conditions in the Southern states. Schiu'z's report
was the result of a three months' inspection, made
under the special commission of Johnson. It de
clared that in general he found in the South "an
entire absence of that national spfrit which forms
the basis of true loyalty and pafriotism," and he
therefore urged that negro suffrage be required as a
condition of reconstruction in those states. Such
statements and recommendations were utterly dis
tasteful to Johnson in his present mood, and accord-
' Deo. 4, 1865. Messages and Papers of the Presidents, Vol. VI,
pp. 353-371.

304 CHAELES SUMNEE
ingly his message of transmittal made only formal
reference to this report, but laid emphasis upon that
of General Grant, who had spent only four or five
days iu the South on au inspection tour, the object
of which was primarily military, aud who reported
that " the mass of thinking men of the South accept
the present situation of affairs in good faith."
Sumuer denounced the message as " like the white
washing message of Franklin Pierce with reference
to the enormities in Kansas"; he characterized
Grant's report as "hasty," while that of Schurz
was "accurate, authentic, and most authoritative."
With abundance of detail from reliable sources, he
then set forth acts and laws of each of the seceded
states which showed, so he asserted, a lack of loyalty
or a determination to discriminate against the freed
men.' He called for information in regard to the
President's appointments in the South, and the
acts of Southern conventions, and later repeatedly
brought to the attention of the Senate appointments
of men whom the oath of loyalty should have de
barred. Both in Congress and among the people there
was great reluctance to come to an open breach with
the President. After four years of strife, business
interests wanted a speedy return to normal condi
tions. The Eepublican party held power by a very
narrow margin, and it was feared that factional dis
cord might put the government into the hands of
' For a more judicious verdict upon the spirit of these laws see
Rhodes, Vol. V, pp. 556-557, and citations in notes.

JOHNSON AND EECONSTEUCTION 305
the Democrats, and endanger hard- won fruits of the
war. But when Johnson on February 19th vetoed
the bill to enlarge the powers of the Freedmen's
Bureau, and denounced Sumner and other Eepub
lican leaders as on a par with Davis, Slidell aud
Toombs — a performance which by practically unani
mous vote the Massachusetts legislature declared to
be " without the shadow of justification or defense "
— patience ceased to be a virtue. His next two
vetoes were promptly overridden by Congress. '
During this session much time was taken up by
debates over the Fourteenth Amendment. The
most disputed feature was the clause relating to
representation. As it came up from the House it
provided that "whenever the elective franchise
shall be denied or abridged in any state on account
of race or color, the persons therein of such race or
color shall be excluded from the basis of representa
tion." It was estimated that if all the colored peo
ple in the Southern states were excluded, it would
reduce their representation from eighty-three to
thirty-five, and many men placed great reliance
upon this as the inducement which would lead the
South to extend the suffrage to negroes. Sumner,
however, denounced it as " another compromise
with human rights" and as a recognition of the
right of states to make suffrage discriminations
" ou account of race and color. " In a speech of four
hours he traversed thoroughly not only the question
' The Civil Rights Bill and the second Freedmen's Bureau
Bill.

306 CHAELES SUMNEE
before the Senate, but the whole ground of his reso
lutions ou reconstruction. ' He argued that for de
termining the status of the Negro, Congress had
full competence derived from the war power, from
the clause of the Thirteenth Amendment authori
zing Congress to enforce emancipation by appropriate
legislation, and from the constitutional duty as well
as power to " guarantee to every state a republican
form of government." Upon this last point he laid
great stress. His earnestness and moral elevation
made a deep impression. His arraignment of the
caste spirit involved in the suffrage restrictions
which the proposed amendment would tolerate put
its advocates ou the defensive. But among men of
legal training and judicial miud he won few con
verts to his dictumj " Whatever is required for the
national defense is constitutional." For the import
of "a republican form of government" he studied
not the opinions of the framers of the Constitution
but his owu inner consciousness and political ideals.
The debate continued with a good deal of bitterness
for five or six weeks, during which a test vote on an
amendment forbidding any discrimination as to race
or color received but ten votes in its favor. By the
leaders of the Committee on Eeconstruction Sumuer
was held in large part responsible for the failure of
the amendment in the Senate. ' Fessenden attacked
'February 5, 1866. Works, Vol. X, pp. 119-237. This
speech fills forty-one columns of the Congressional Globe !
' " When the measure [the proposed Fourteenth Araendraent]
came before the Senate, Mr. Sumner opposed its passage and
alleged that we proposed to barter the right of tbe negroes to

JOHNSON AND EECONSTEUCTION 307
him with bitter personalities, while Stevens found
relief for his resentment in declaring that the
amendment had been "slaughtered by a puerile
and pedantic criticism, by a perversion of philo
logical definition" and by the " united forces of
self-righteous Eepublicans and unrighteous Copper
heads." ' March 12th Sumuer himself presented a
form of constitutional amendment, the representa
tive feature of which closely resembled that which
was soon to be introduced by the Committee on Ee-
consteuction, and which late in the session, with
Sumner's approval, passed the Senate, and also the
vote for diminished representation on the part of the old slave
states in the House and in the electoral college ; while in truth
the loss of representation was iraposed as a penalty upon any
state that should deprive any class of its adult male citizens of
the right to vote. Upon this allegation of Mr. Suraner the
resolution was defeated in the Senate." This brought upon
him severe criticisms. " Theae criticisms affected Mr. Sumner
deeply and he then devoted himself to the preparation of an
amendment whioh he could approve. While he was engaged iu
that work I called upon hira and he read seventeen drafts of a
proposition not one of which was entirely satisfactory to him
self, and not one of which vvould have been accepted by Con
gress or the country. The difficulty was in the situation.
Upon the return of the seceded states, their representation
wonld be increased nearly forty votes in tbe House and in tbe
electoral college, while the voting force would remain in the
white population. The injustice of such a condition was ap
parent, and there were only two pos.'iible remedies. One was
to extend the franchise to the blacks. The country — the loyal
states — were not then ready for the raeasure. The alternative
was to cut off the representation from states that denied the
elective franchise to any class of adult male citizens. Finally
Mr. Sumner was compelled to accept the alternative. Some
change of phraseology was made, and Mr. Sumner gave a re
luctant vote for the resolution." — G. S. Boutwell, Sixty Years
of Public Life, Vol. II, p. 42.
' Congressional Globe, p. 2459.

308 CHAELES SUMNEE
House, aud presently was ratified by the states.
Yet the power to discriminate in the suffrage on
account of race or color, so long and fiercely de
bated and still left possible in the final form of the
Fourteenth Amendment, was soon to be takeu away
by the Fifteenth Amendment. '
At this session Sumner accepted an appointment
to the Committee on the District of Columbia, with
the avowed purpose of so changing its personnel as
to secure a report favorable to equal suffrage within
the District. For this he argued with great ear
nestness as a matter of principle and of precedent,
but it did not become a law at this sessiou.
Sumuer did his utmost to impose the condition of
equal suffrage without race or color discrimination
in the acts for the admission of Colorado aud Ne
braska — both of which measures were vetoed ' — and

' The motives and aims of those who drafted and ratified this
Amendment are presented comprehensively in Tlie Adoption of
the Fourteenth Amendment, by Horace E. Flack. Mr. Rhodes
(Vol. V, pp. 602-610) advances cogent reasons for his belief
that the Southern states ought promptly to have accepted what
now became the congressional plan of reconstruction, — the
Johnson conditions supplemented by the adoption of this
Amendment. They would thus have saved themselves from far
more galling exactions.
'It was by a "pocket veto" that this Nebraska bill was
killed. It was said that there were at the time not more than
fifty negroes in Nebraska, and Wade protested against the ex
clusion of the would-be state because of " a mere technicality."
Sumner rejoined : "In other days we all joined in saying ' No
more slave states ! ' I now insist upon another cry, ' No more
states with tbe v/oid white in their Constitutions!'" Con
gressional Globe, 2d Session, 39th Cong., p. 124. It was after
Sumner's success in this matter that Gerrit Smith wrote to
him : "I thank you and I thank God that neither Nebraska

JOHNSON AND EECONSTEUCTION 309
for the reconstruction of Tennessee, his support
from other senators varying from three to seven.
Yet only two years later he was to be upheld by the
entire Eepublican vote iu his contention as to the
necessity and effect of this condition, and it was
theu to be applied to five of the reconstructed states.
At this time an effort was made by the leaders of
the woman's suffrage movement to secure Sumner's
potent advocacy for their cause, but he declined to
be drawn into that controversy while other and
more important issues were demanding solution.
At this time strong pressure was exerted to secure
the modification of the law as to jurors so as to
make easy the trial aud conviction of Jefferson
Davis. It was Sumner's hope that Davis would not
be brought to trial ; in any event he insisted that
such a case " should be approached carefully, most
discreetly, and with absolute reference to the exist
ing law of the land."
Another subject upon which popular feeling was
much wrought up was retaliation agaiust England
for her breaches of neutrality during the war. The
British government still refused to acknowledge any
wrongs on its part iu connection with the Confeder
ate cruisers, built iu British ports, which had
wrought havoc upon American shipping. Accord
ingly the House Committee on Foreign Affairs in

ner Colorado is yet a state, and I trust that neither will be a
state so long as they continue to insult Heaven and earth with
their iufamous Caste Constitutions." Sumner Corr., Harvard
Library. Dec. 36, 1866.

310 CHAELES SUMNEE
troduced a bill for modifying the neutrality acts so
as to permit American citizens to sell ships to either
belligerent in a war when the United States should
be a neutral, and repealing the prohibition upon
Americans' fitting out expeditions against a coun
try with which the United States was at peace.
This bill passed the House by a unanimous vote.
Probably no man in public life rated as more
grievous the injury which England's negligence had
inflicted upon the United States than did Sumner,
yet he insisted that "our own country should be
kept firm and constant in the attitude of justice."
This House measure reached the Senate Friday
afternoon. It had already been voted that the ses
sion should eud at four o'clock on the following
day. The bill was referred to the Committee on
Foreign Eelations, aud Sumner determined that it
should not be acted upon. The hotheads were bound
to call it up, but Sumuer came to the evening ses
sion armed with a formidable array of books and
announced to those near him that he was " good for
five hours at least." From seven in the evening till
seven in the morning he kept his vigil. Toward
noon of the final day the motion was made to take
up the bill, but Sumner instantly took the floor, an
nouncing that he would speak all the remainder of
the session, if necessary, to bring about its defeat.
The advocates of the measure therefore gave up the
fight. The responsibility was a grave one, but he
was ready thus single-handed to oppose what he
deemed an injustice, even though it were embodied

JOHNSON AND EECONSTEUCTION 311
in a bill which was heartily approved by the peo
ple, which had passed the House by a unanimous
vote, and which was sure to pass the Senate if for a
single moment he should relax his resistance.'
During this session was passed a most useful
measure which Sumner had been the first to pro
pose in his earliest days iu the Senate, fifteen years
before, — a bill for the revision and codification of
the statutes of the United States. His other legis
lative interests were very varied. He found time
to advocate international copyright, the raising of
the rank of our representatives at foreign courts,
the adoption of the metric system, etc. His ex
cessive labors brought serious reminders of the
illness which had followed the Brooks assault,
and he was obliged to submit to medical treatment
and make a frip to the White Mountains for his
health. It was in June of this year that Sumner's mother
died. She had been gradually failing, aud the sum
mons which called him from the Senate to her side
was not unexpected. She had been proud of her
famous son, and he felt a genuine affection for her.
All the members of his family, with the exception
of one married sister, were uow dead. A few
months later Sumner made an ill-advised marriage
which led only to disappointment and divorce.
Bereavement, the break-up of his Boston home and
' A writer in the PallMall Gazette declared : " No otherman
could have arrested by his single voice a measure unanimously
passed by the House." December 26, 1866. Pierce, Vol. IV,
p. 292.

312 CHAELES SUMNEE
the wreck of his owu long-deferred hopes of domestic
joys, all coming upou Sumner in a single year, aged
him greatly. His health was impaired, and the
severe contests of the coming years found him more
stern aud less tolerant of opposition than in the
early part of his career.
The recess did not narrow the breach between the
President and Congress. During the summer John
son had "swung round the circle" on a political
tour, and in his speeches had repeatedly referred to
Cougress in most contemptuous terms as " hanging
upon the verge of the government, as it were ; a
body called, or which assumes to be, the Congress of
the Uuited States, while, in fact, it is a Congress of
ouly a part of the United States. ' ' Shortly after the
completion of this unprecedented tour, Sumner de
livered in Boston an address ou "The One Man
Power vs. Congress." It was a scathing indict
ment of the President, charging him with having
done more mischief, iu the same space of time, than
any other ruler in all history. He frankly at
tributed Johnson's change of attitude toward recon
struction to defects in his character and to the in
fluence of unwise counselors, among whom he did
not hesitate to specify Seward. The fall elections
showed that the country at large was in pronounced
opposition to the President, and on the very first day
of the session a bill was introduced into the Senate
' ' to regulate the tenure of offices. ' ' Tt was under de
bate for several weeks. Sumner urged its extension
to a large number of officers whose appointment hith-

JOHNSON AND EECONSTEUCTION 313
erto had not required conflrmation by the Senate.
The bill was vetoed by Johnson, but on the same
day it was passed over his veto by both houses by
votes of nearly three to one. Its intention was to
strip the President of much of his power. The de
bates upon it aroused intense feeling. Sumner de
nounced Johnson as " utterly unprincipled and
wicked," "the author of incalculable Woe to his
country," " the successor of Jefferson Davis, in the
spirit by which he is governed and iu the mischief
he is inflicting on his country." The possibility of
an impeachment was constantly in mind, and a
Maryland senator declared that such language
from Sumner ought to disqualify him from acting as
a judge in the event of an impeachment trial.'
The equal suffrage issue was now to be fought
through to the end. In the first mouth a bill for
equal suffrage iu the District of Columbia was car
ried, and passed over the President's veto.' Then
the bill for the admission of Nebraska was again

' Dewitt, Impeachment and Trial of Andrew Johnson, pp. 189,
191, 219, 229, 231.
' As early as 1864 Sumner had sought to ensure equal suffrage
in the District of Columbia. McPherson, p. 241. By the law
of 1878 all participation of residents of the District in electing
their local government was brought to an end and the present
system of governraent by an appointed coramission was in
stituted. It is said that this change (which raay well have
been inevitable, in order to secure national control over the seat
of the national government) was hastened by the melancholy
results of the experiment of subraitting the government of the
Distriot to an electorate consisting largely of illiterate negroes.
Corruption was rife and the District was brought to the verge of
bankruptcy.

314 CHAELES SUMNEE
urged, and promptly Sumner's supporter of the
previous sessiou moved an amendment requiring
equal suffrage. Objections were strongly set forth,
— in particular, that such a condition could be im
posed only on states lately in rebelliou, and that this
would require in Nebraska a restriction not found iu
many states already in the Union. Sumner argued
against auy exclusion as "odious and offensive,"
and exerted himself to arouse popular sentiment
outside the Senate which might affect senators'
votes. The measure received a majority of two on
a test vote, and secured a two-thirds vote when
vetoed. The winning of equal suffrage in a state
where reconstruction issues were not involved was a
veritable triumph for Sumner. The tide had
turned : the next day, without debate, a bill was
passed prohibiting in the territories any suffrage
discrimination on account of race or color, and this
became a law without the President's signature.
It ¦will be remembered that Sumner never was
satisfied with the form of the Fourteenth Amend
ment, which impliedly allowed suffrage discrimina
tions on account of race or color under penalty of a
proportionate loss of representation. He was, there
fore, not at all disposed to take the position of most
of his Eepublican colleagues, that if the Johnson
legislatures in the seceded states would ratify this
amendment, the restoration of those states to normal
relations with the Union would be complete. Sum
ner insisted that formal declaration should be made
that this amendment "is in uo respect an offer,

JOHNSON AND EECONSTEUCTION 315
which, if accepted by them, will bind Congress to
receive them back. In one word, it is only an in
stalment, and not a finality." '
The unanimity with which the Southern states re
jected the Fourteenth Amendment, the discrimina
tions which they were enacting against the freedmen
aud the race riots, particularly that of July SOth in
New Orleans, were potent infiuences in bringing
Sumner's colleagues to his way of thinking, and
"thorough" became the reconstruction watchword
of Congress. ' When the Stevens bill, ' for the division
of the seceded states into military districts and their
government by military authority, carae from the
House to the Senate, it gave rise to so much dis
agreement that a caucus of Eepublican members was
called to decide upon the party's stand, and a com-

' Letter to F. W. Bird, Jan. 10, 1867. The Araendraent
was then pending before tbe Massachusetts General Court.
Sumner wrote: "I think it best to adopt the amendment, "
but since it was by some cousidered " as an offer to the rebel
states," he urged that report or resolution should make the
above declaration. Pierce, Vol. IV, p. 311.
' Rhodes, Vol. VI, p. 30.
' This was a substitute for the bill from the joint Committee
on Reconstruction in the last session, which had virtually made
ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment the sole additional
condition precedent to the according of representation to the
Southern states. Stevens had "carried this bill through an
unwilling House. . . . He had obtained his majority by
sarcasm, taunts, dragooning and by cracking the party whip.
There had been no such scene in Congress since Douglas carried
his Kansas-Nebraska bill through the Senate. " Rhodes, Vol.
VI, p. 17. It passed the House February 13th, and on that
same day was given its first reading in the Senate, where a proj
ect of similar character had already been introduced by Senator
Williams.

316 CHAELES SUMNEE
mittee of seven was then appointed to consider the
matter. After a vaiu attempt to persuade the com
mittee to add equal suffrage to the conditions to be
required in their constitutions before the seceded
states should be admitted to representation in Cou
gress, Sumner, although but one other member of
the committee agreed with him, gave notice that he
should appeal to the caucus. This he did, aud the
result was a vote of seventeen to fifteen iu favor of
imposing this condition. The vote was accepted as
binding upon the Eepublicans in the Senate, and
it therefore proved decisive of the whole suffrage
question. This bill, which in effect abolished all
the Johnson governments in the South, was carried
over the President's veto.'
Both at this session and at the one which imme
diately followed it, Sumner strove most earnestly to
impose, as further requisites of reconstruction, the
provisiou of homesteads for the freedmen and of free
schools in which there should be no discrimination
as to race or color. But the majority accepted the
view of Sherman and Frelinghuysen, that the addi
tion of further supplementary conditions would be
discouraging and distracting as well as imposing an
enormous burden upou impoverished states. By a
tie vote on March 16th his effort to add this feature
to the supplementary Eeconstruction Act was de
feated. To the end of his life Sumner felt deep dis-
' March 2d. A detailed account of the various steps leading
to the passage of this bill is given in Blaine, Vol. II, p. 250-262.
Rhodes, Vol. VI, pp. 13-21.

JOHNSON AND EECONSTEUCTION 317
appointment at this failure to secure free schools aud
homesteads, — a disappointment which at the time
was so bitter that, as he confessed to George P.
Hoar, "he left the Senate chamber, and when he,
reached his house, grief found vent in tears." '
When the evil consequences of negro suffrage are
laid to Sumner's charge, it is but fair to recall that
in his plan equal suffrage was to be associated with
homesteads and opportunities for free education.
From time to time in these debates Sumner could
not refrain from reminding his coUeagues that they
had repeatedly changed their views and come to sup
port the policy which they had at first scorned. This
made their yielding by no means more pleasurable,
aud did not increase his colleagues' good- will toward
him. The Democrats, too, taunted the Eepublicans
with their inconsistencies, and Buckalew made oue
of the most accurate characterizations of Sumner
when he called him " the pioneer of agitation in the
Senate," whose measures when made were criticized
by all his colleagues as extreme, inappropriate, and
untimely, "but were supported by them the next
year with a zeal and vehemence even greater than
his. " ' Two such anticipations of his party' s policy
came at this session in Sumner's unsuccessful efforts
to get the word " white" sfricken from the natural
ization laws and to get a bill passed prohibiting ex
clusion from office or from jury service in the Dis
trict of Columbia because of race or color.
' Pierce, Vol. IV, p. 317.
' Congressional Globe, March 16th, p. 170.

318 CHAELES SUMNEE
This special session of Congress, held in order to
keep a tight rein on the President and mainly de
voted to angrily debated measures for the carrying
out of reconstruction, is memorable for one act ofa
totally different character, — the purchase of Alaska.
Seward had carried on the preliminary negotiations
in secret, and when Sumner, iu response to an urgent
summons, came to the secretary's house late on the
evening of March 29th, he was astounded to find
that Eussia' s consent had been obtained, and that
at that moment the treaty was being copied to be
sent to the Senate for ratification. On the following
day it was presented and immediately referred to
the Committee on Foreign Eelations. Sumner had
promised to use his influence to secure favorable
action. Yet he confessed to friends that the Eus-
sian treaty tried him sorely. He had no liking for
territorial acquisitions that did not come with the
free consent of their inhabitants. But the question
was so complicated by politics, by a desire to meet
the wishes of the West and to cooperate with Sew
ard and with the Johnson administration when it
was doing a creditable thing, and by the engage
ments into which Seward had already entered, that
Sumner was unwilling to take the responsibility of
opposing it. ' Moreover, he was already captivated
by the vision of " a republic coextensive with the
continent." In the Senate and in the press there
' Pierce, Vol. IV, p. 325, gives these as the grounds whioh
Sumner at the time told him determined bis support of the
treaty.

JOHNSON AND EECONSTEUCTION 319
was much ridicule of the purchase of a " barren,
and worthless God-forsaken region," which pro
duces "nothing but icebergs aud polar bears."
Punsters called it "Walrussia." The treaty was
in committee a week and then Sumuer reported it
favorably, Fessenden being the only dissenter. In
the executive session, April 9th, Sumner made a
carefully prepared speech of tMee hours iu which
he set forth the political and economic advantages
of the purchase so convincingly that the treaty was
ratified by a vote of thirty-seven to two. The
speech was later amplified, and stands to-day as a
marvelously comprehensive presentation of the
resources of the unknown " Eussian America."'
" Alaska," as its far-stretching peninsula was called,
was by Sumner applied to the whole territory, and
by Seward's decision the name became fixed. In
this speech Sumner did not fail to enter his protest
against the treaty's having been fully negotiated
without any consultation of the Senate, and against
its serving as a precedent for "a system of indis
criminate and costly annexation," — a most timely
protest, for within a few months Seward submitted
a treaty with Denmark for the annexation of St.
Thomas, — a scheme which secured the approval of
not a single member of the Senate Committee on
Foreign Eelations.
The months of the recess Sumner devoted to two
literary tasks. The first, a paper entitled "Pro
phetic Voices Concerning America," was a collection
\Works, Vol. XI, pp. 186-349.

320 CHAELES SUMNEE
of predictions relating to the American continent
and to the United States, principally from foreign
ers, and ranging from those sayings of poets and
philosophers which may have inspired Columbus,
to those of Sumner's own friends, Cobden and de
TocqueviUe. Ou the very day of his death, Sumner
was at work upou the proof-sheets of a revised edi
tion of this monograph which was being brought
out in anticipation of the centennial celebration in
1876. His second task was the pi-eparation of a
lecture wMch he used in the fall of 1867 on a tour
through the West as far as St. Louis and Milwaukee.
His theme was "The Nation," and the lecture served
as a means of impressing upon the public the views
which had underlain his Senate speeches on recon
struction. He traced the development of unification
in history and dwelt upon the steps which had made
for the nationalization of the people of the United
States. Chief stress was laid upon the power and
duty of the central government to guarantee and
maintain absolute equality of political and civil
rights against any state interference. Critics even
among Sumner's friends did not fail to note theone-
sidedness in his thought, which seemed to regard
the state as nothing but an adminisfrative conveni
ence, and took little heed of any dangers from cen
tralization. In the spring of 1868 retaliation, incited by re
sentment against Great Britain, was again under
discussion. The House bill not only vigorously
asserted the right of expatriation, but, under Fenian

JOHNSON AND EECONSTEUCTION 321
influence, it added two extraordinary provisions :
In case of the unwarranted arrest and detention of
an American citizen by a, foreign government, the
President of the United States might suspend com
mercial intercourse with the offending government,
or he might retaliate in kind by ordering the arrest
and detention of any subject or citizen of that gov
ernment found within the United States. This pre
posterous measure passed the House by a vote of
104 to 4, eighty-one not voting. In spite of urgent
pressure iu the Senate to secure prompt and favor
able action, Sumuer held up this measure for two
months, aud when it flnally came from his commit
tee, there had been substituted for the retaliatory
provision a requirement that the President report
to Congress auy case of the arrest or detention of
American citizens abroad, with a view to a prompt
securing of their rights. In the ensuing debate
Sumuer denounced the House retaliatory measure
in detail as "nothing less than monstrous and ut
terly unworthy of a generous republic hoping to give
an example to mankind " ; he called attention to
the prodigious powers which it lavished upon the
President and the outrages upon entirely innocent
strangers which it authorized. The opposition in
the Senate was successful iu defeating the most ob
noxious features of the bill, but Sumner could not
prevent the addition of an amendment giving to the
President the authority to "use such means, not
amounting to acts of war, as he may think necessary
and proper to obtain or effectuate a release" of any

322 CHAELES SUMNEE
American citizen unjustly deprived of his liberty
while abroad.
The session of 1867-8 was largely devoted to
the impeachment proceedings against President
Johnson. Sumner's first impressions favorable to
the President had long since given place to a settled
conviction that he was the chief menace to the
countiy. Impeachment had his hearty approval.
Long before the process was actually initiated, and
consistently throughout the trial, Sumner took the
ground that this was a political rather than a ju
dicial proceeding, alleging as his justification for
tMs view that whereas the Constitution vested judi
cial power in the courts, it gave to the Senate the
power to try impeachments. Hence the fact that
he was a member of the body before which the
President might presently be placed on trial, did
not lead him to place any curb, iu the Senate or out
of it, on his denunciations of Johnson's misdeeds;
and his oath, taken with other senators at the be
ginning of the trial, to "do impartial justice ac
cording to the Constitutiou and the laws," did not
constrain him to attempt a judicial attitude of mind
or to insist upon the safeguards ordinarily thrown
about the accused. Whenever Sumner appears in
these proceedings, it is in the act of urging a ver
dict in the case of a criminal whose guilt has already
beeu proved. Thus, on the eve of the trial, he
challenged the credentials of the man just elected
to the Senate by the Maryland legislature on the
ground that that state did not have a republican

JOHNSON AND EECONSTEUCTION 323
form of government, and moved that his credentials
be referred, the effect of which would have been to
exclude a probably friendly judge during the com
ing trial. But few senators supported this project.
Sumner protested against the right of the Chief-
Justice, under the constitutional rule, to decide or
vote upon auy question, but argued in favor of the
right of Wade, who, as president pro tem. of the
Senate, would succeed to the presidency in the event
of Johnson's removal, to vote on all questions. He
favored hastening the despatch of business by ad
mitting "all evidence on either side not trivial or
obviously irrelevant." '
As the trial was drawing to a close, the bill for
the admission of Arkansas under her reconstructed
government was under discussion. In reporting the
'Among Sumner's correspondents were many who accepted
his view that an impeachment trial was not a judicial proceed
ing but a process of removal. When Johnson appointed Grant
Secretary of War, Sumner sent to Stanton a note containing the
single word "Stick ! " This called forth enthusiastic plaudits.
" I shall always remember the eloquence of the word for the
exigency, 'Stick!' The great War Secret-ary will 'stick.'
Now there is a word for the next exigency. Say to the Senate,
when it comes to the trial, 'Quick!'" (Jas. M. Stone, Feb.
24, 1868.) Edward L. Pierce wrote, March 4, 1868. " Cautions
and conservative men . . . now wish it [the impeaching]
done as the only way to peace. To retain their support, the
prosecution must not be languid aud procrastinating. Its suc
cess depends on its speed." W. S. Robinson, April 13, 1868,
writes: "I think your votes to adrait testimony are right.
They will prevent a clamor, and tbey help destroy the stupid
pretense that the Senate is to be bound by court rules." Many
others write in similar vein, and W. L. Garrison, May 2, 1868,
subscribes his letter : " Anxiously waiting for the ignominious
dismissal of a perfidious and usurping President." Sumner
Corr., Harvard Library.

324 CHAELES SUMNEE
bill in the House at this time, Stevens had plainly
hinted that two more judges might be needed in the
Senate. When the question was raised in the upper
house whether, if these Arkansas applicants were
now admitted to the Senate, they could become
members of the court of impeachment, Sumner's
unhesitating reply was : "Of course they can be."
Senators were allowed to file opinions, and eighteen
of the thirty-five who voted for conviction did so.
Longest and most elaborate of all was that of Sum
ner. He and only one other of the eighteen in their
opinions sustained each and every count in the
articles of impeachment. Stunner declaring that he
would "vote, if he could, 'Guilty on all and infi
nitely more.' " '
It must be confessed that in this opinion, care
fully elaborated and filling more than thirty printed
pages, Sumner is seen at his worst. Lurid and
furious invective largely take the place of argu
ment. " Andrew Johnson is the impersonation of
the tyranmcal slave power. In him it lives again.
He is the lineal descendant of John C. Calhoun and
Jefferson Davis." He is " the attorney of slavery,
— the usurper of legislative power, — the violator of
law, — the patron of rebels, — the helping hand of the
rebellion, — the kicker from office of good citizens, —
the open bunghole of the treasury, — the architect of
the 'Whiskey Eing,'— the stumbling-block to all
' Works, Vol. XII, pp 318-410. Trial of Andrew Johnson.
Published by order of the Senate, Vol. Ill, p. 247. Dewitt,
The Impeachment and Trial of Andrew Johnson, pp. 581-586.
See also Dewitt, pp. 568, 584, 587.

JOHNSON AND EECONSTEUCTION 325
good laws by wanton vetoes and then by criminal
hindrances." ' Sumner's lax interpretation of any
constitutional provision which seemed to stand iu
the way of reaching what he thought to be justice
received repeated illustration: " Show me an act
of evil example or influence committed by a Presi
dent, and I show you an impeachable offense." He
asserted that the court of impeachment was uot
to be confined by " the rigid rules of the common
law," but had " rules of its own, unknown to ordi
nary courts." "The ordinary rule of evidence is
reversed. If on any point you entertain doubts,
the beneflt of those doubts must be given [not to
the accused but] to your country." The President
"must show that his longer continuance in office is
not inconsistent with the public safety." He re
ferred to Johnson's loose speech and intemperate
habits with a deliberate aud brutal frankness such
as he had earlier directed against Butler and Mason.
He declared : ' ' This is a political proceeding,
which the people at this moment are as competent
to decide as this Senate. They are the multitudi
nous jury. ... In nothing can we escape their
judgment, least of all on a question like that now
before us."
The vote upon the impeachment charges lacked
one of the number necessary to convict. Sumner
found solace in declaring: "The President was
saved by the skin of his teeth. He was saved by
one vote. I call it a nominal acquittal. There
' Dewitt, pp. 584-585.

326 CHAELES SUMNEE
is ... a moral judgment agaiust Mm." Yet
it was soon recognized even by Eepublican leaders,
that the attempted impeachment had been unwise
and that the large vote for conviction was to be
attributed to party feeling rather than to the
strength of the case against Johnson. Sumner
often showed rare gifts of foresight, but he never
dreamed that within forty years of his fierce on
slaught upon Johnson there would be general ac
quiescence in the verdict of the judicious historian,
Mr. James Pord Ehodes : "The impeachment
managers did not prove their charges and the
minority of the Senate undoubtedly gave a
righteous judgment. . . . The glory of the
trial was the action of the seven recusant sena
tors." Sumner's intense feeling and extravagant
language must be attributed to his disappointment
at Johnson's general policy as to reconstruction,
and in particular to his shift as to equal suffrage,
which in Sumner's opinion was then the one all-
engrossing need. In this lay Johnson's "bare-faced
treachery " ; it was this which made him the one
" enormous criminal" of his century.
In the closing months of Johnson's administra
tion, financial matters occupied much of the atten
tion of Congress. Under the exigencies of the war,
the public debt had mounted to appalling propor
tions, and various measures intended to ease if not
to evade that burden met with favor both before
the public and in Congress. Some of these, partic
ularly the widely-advocated scheme for redeeming

JOHNSON AND EECONSTEUCTION 327
uational bonds in legal tender notes, seemed to New
England business men to involve serious menace to
the public credit, and it was at their earnest in
sistence that Sumner undertook to deal with the
subject. With little taste for the study of problems
of public finance, Sumner nevertheless showed a
keen insight into the best soui'ces of information,
and sound sense aud growing skiU in handling such
matters, lu the middle of July he made a compre
hensive and temperate speech in the Senate, in
which he emphasized the fundamental importance
of safeguarding against even suspicion the public
credit, and strongly opposed any proposition to re
deem national bonds in anything else than coin.
He advocated the funding of the public debt in
long-term bonds, and the simplification of the in
ternal revenue system, aud urged a prompt returu
to specie payments. This speech was of salutary
influence in the Senate — where even Sherman,
chairman of the Seuate Committee on Finance, had
given a qualified approval to the "Ohio idea" of
redeeming national bonds in greenbacks ' — and be
fore the country, greatly sfrengthening Sumner's
reputation among conservative men of affairs. A
few months later, they were somewhat aghast to
hear Sumuer advocating the resumption of specie
payments at as early a date as July 4, 1869. Hav
ing convinced himself that such a step was right, it
was characteristic of him to underestimate the
reasons which were to delay it for ten years.
' E. P. Oberholtzer, Life of Jay Cooke, Vol. II, p. 39

328 CHAELES SUMNEE
In the closing session of the Fortieth Congress,
1868-9, the Fifteenth Amendment was much uuder
discussion. To the surprise of his colleagues, Sum
ner did not take an ardent interest in this measure.
In the first place, he believed it unnecessary, hold
ing the view — which few shared: — that Congress
already had adequate power to prevent discrimina
tions because of race or color as to the suffrage.
Moreover, he feared that the agitation of the pro
posed amendment, by convincing the states that
they still had the power to make the offensive dis
criminations, would prevent the ratification of the
Amendment and lead to worse discriminations in
the future. He insisted that any further amend
ment ought to be broad enough to comprehend all
civil and political rights, and not merely the ballot.
In his speeches he again set forth his startling
thesis that " anything for human rights is constitu
tional," and inveighed against those who tried to
emphasize the constitutional autonomy of the states
as if they were "states rights" men of secession
days. Yet after the amendment had secured the
approval of Congress, he gave it hearty support.

CHAPTEE XVI
SUMNER AND GRANT : THE SAN DOMINGO ISSUE
Even before the end of the war it became evident
that General Grant would make the strongest
candidate for the presidency in 1868. To be sure,
his political affiliations were somewhat in doubt :
his last vote had been cast for Buchanan, but con
froversy with Johnson, whose principal defenders
were among the Democrats, probably now led
Grant to align himself with the Eepublicans. To a
man of Sumner's character and career, aud of his
repugnance to war, the candidacy of a man of no
proved capacity for the tasks of civil government
and whose sole ground for fame was his dis
tinguished military service, could uot make a
strong appeal. A year before the election was to
take place, the political situation was discussed at
an informal gathering of eight or ten senators,
representatives and army men in Wastington.
Every man present, with the exception of Sumner,
favored Grant's nomination ; but Sumner earnestly
opposed the choice, insisting that far from strength
ening the party, it would be a confession of weak
ness.' Although the Massachusetts senator acqui
esced in the nomination when made and nowhere in
'Cincinnati Commercial, July 19, 1891, gives account of thia
conference of Nov. 6, 1867. Pierce, Vol. IV, p. 358.

330 CHAELEb SUMNEE
public letter or speech opposed it, it is probable
that Grant knew from one of the men present at
that early conference — an intimate friend of the
general, who later did him much harm as an ad
viser and tale-bearer — of Sumner's disbelief in his
qualifications for the presidency, and that this
knowledge affected his attitude toward the senator.
Sumner's nomination to succeed himself was made
by acclamation in the state convention, and in the
legislature a few months later he was reelected for a
fourth term by a vote almost unprecedented for its
unanimity.' Massachusetts took pride iu Sumner
who was uow to be the senior member of the Senate
in length of service. Since the beginning of the war
he had been its most conspicuous leader ; his dis
tinguished service as chairman ofthe Committee on
Foreign Eelations, the conversion of the Senate to
his reconstruction policies, and his skilful handling
of matters of public finance had all combined to
bring him high prestige. In the mind of the pub
lic, he measured up to the standard of the old Sen
ate, ih the days when "there were giants in the
land." His name had been much canvassed in con
nection with other positions. In 1864 Lincoln was
considering a change in the State Department and
led Sumner to believe that he would have beeu
obliged to decide whether he would supersede Sew
ard, had the President lived. Lincoln may well
have thought that this would at once give him an
effective Secretary of State and remove from the
'Senate, 37 to 2 ; Hou.se, 216 to 16.

THE SAN DOMINGO ISSUE 331
Senate the chief obstacle to his reconstruction pol
icy. At the time wheu it seemed likely that con
viction in the impeachment trial would make Wade
President, he talked over possible appointments
confidentially with Sumuer, and it was believed that
he intended him for the head of the Departmeut of
State.' This position as well as that of Mimster to
the Court of St. James was mooted after Grant's
election was assured. But it is doubtful whether
Sumner would have accepted any such change. As
he wrote to Lieber : " The headship of the first com
mittee of the Senate is equal in position to anything
in our government under the President; and it
leaves to the senator great opportunities."
Ou the evening following Grant's inauguration,
Sumner entertained at dinner two frieuds of many
years' standing, Hamilton Fish and John Lothrop
Motley, the historian. In the genial flow of that
evening's conversation, little did Sumner and Fish
suspect that there were soon to arise between them
misunderstandings and controversies which were to
embitter the remaining years of Sumner's life.
Entirely inexperienced in civic affairs, the new

'The assurance that Johnson was about to be removed from
office appears in many of the letters from Sumner's correspond
ents. Edward Atkinson feared that Wade was so unsound on
the currency question that his succession to tbe presidency
would be of doubtful benefit. F. W. Bird and others urge
Sumner, if he is to head Wade's cabinet, to postpone his accept
ance of the po.sition until the final adjournment of the then
Massachusetts legislature, frora whora they feared that the
election of a worthy senator eould not be secured. (Sumner
Corr., Harvard Library.)

332 CHAELES SUMNEE
President made his appointments without consulting
senators or representatives, and in many cases seems
to have been guided solely by his personal acquaint
ance or by the judgment of intimate friends, mostly
connected with the army. Thus, to the position of
Secretary of the Treasury he appointed A. T.
Stewart, the New York millionaire merchant. In
the Senate the point was raised that Stewart was
disquaUfied for this office under the Act ofthe First
Congress which expressly excluded any person " di
rectly or indirectly concerned in carrying on the
business of trade or commerce." An attempt was
made forthwith to repeal this disqualifying clause,
and later, at Grant's formal request, to pass au act
exempting Stewart from the application of this Act.
Both of these projects were blocked by objections
interposed by Sumuer, who insisted that such un
precedented action ought not to be taken hastily or
without profound consideration. When once atten
tion was directed to what was involved, enough
senators were found to agree with Sumner's view to
make prompt confirmation improbable ; Stewart's
name was accordingly withdrawn. Judge E. Eock
wood Hoar was called from the Supreme Court of
Massachusetts to the position of Attorney-General.
The post of Secretary of State was awarded to E. B.
Washburne as a compliment, to be held but for a
week. When the permanent appointment was an
nounced, it came as a surprise both to the public
and to the nominee, himself. The President's choice
for his chief official adviser fell upon HamUton Fish,

THE SAN DOMINGO ISSUE 333
whose guest he had from time to time been in New
York. Fish had high standing in the financial centre
of the country, and Grant may well have felt that a
conservative New York mau would prove a desirable
element in his cabinet as a partial offset to others of a
very different type. Moreover, Pish was not without
experieuce in public life : he had served one term each
as governor of New York, as representative iu Con
gress, and as senator, taking his seat iu 1851 at the
same time with Sumner ; but each of these terms of
service was ended without exceptional distinction.
His record was not of a nature to commend him to
Eepublicans at the polls. During all the Kansas-
Nebraska debates in the Senate, Fish had had not
oue word to say ; on the question ofthe repeal ofthe
Fugitive Slave Law, he once voted to sustain the
law and two years later withheld his vote. He had
been thoroughly out of accord with Seward, par
ticularly upon the latter's policy toward slavery,
and confessed that only after " much embarrassment
in determining the course which duty required"
did he bring himself to vote for the Eepublican
candidates in 1856. His later attitude toward the
party had been unenthusiastic and sharply critical.
In 1863, in urging Sumner to use his influence to se
cure a higher grade of appointments in the diplo
matic service he wrote: " I see country and gov
ernment and nationality fading and passing away
amid the riot of vulgarity, violence and corruption,
and uuder the rule of imbecility and vacillation." '
' Jan. 27, 1863. Pierce, Vol. IV, p. 377.

334 CHAELES SUMNEE
In their old days together iu the Senate, despite
Ms disappointment at Fish's lack of sympathy with
his anti-slavery efforts, Sumuer had early formed
au intimacy with his colleague, aud no guest was
more welcome iu the New York senator's home,
where iu Mrs. Fish Sumner found a high-minded
friend who followed each step of his career iu the
cause of freedom with ardent sympathy and encour
agement. After Fish's retirement from the Senate
Sumner kept up a correspondence with him, and
visited him often in New York City and at his coun
try home. He was admitted into family confidences
such as are open only to the closest intimates, was
pressed with thanks for letters which brought to the
Fishes the hospitalities of Sumner's best friends
abroad, was sought out by them for a call of loving
sympathy when he was undergoing the moxa in
Paris, aud most warmly welcomed upon his return
to America. To Sumner, therefore, the announce
ment of Fish's appointment was most gratifying.
Hardly a week had passed since that dinner at Sum
ner's house, when he received a confidential letter
from Fish, stating that he had reluctantly de
cided to go to Washington "to undertake duties for
which I have little taste and less fitness. . . .
In yielding, I hoped that I could rely upon your
friendship and your experience and ability, for your
support and aid to supply my manifold deficien
cies." In genuinely pathetic vein, the letter dwells
upon his great reluctance to accept the position, and
ends with a request that Sumner come to see him

THE SAN DOMINGO ISSUE 335
before it should be necessary for him to attend a
cabinet meeting.'
In the first months of the new administration
Sumner's relations were cordial both with the Presi
dent and with his Secretary of State. As might be
inferred from Fish's comments on appointments
made during Lincoln's first term, he aud Sumner
were in hearty accord as to the type of men desirable
in the diplomatic service. Fish continued to seek
Sumner's counsel, not only as to appointments but
as to difficult questions which arose within the de
partment ; indeed, this intimacy was noted as quite
beyoud precedent between men occupying their re
spective official positions. Secretary Fish at first
found his new office far from congenial ; he wrote to
Sumuer that he most sincerely wished himself out
of the department. He intended to withdraw before
the meeting of Congress, but in midsummer reluc
tantly determined to fill out one year of service.
By far the heaviest responsibility that devolved
upon the State Department when Fish came to its
head was the adjustment of the differences with
Great Britain ; and his task was greatly complicated
by the mistakes made under the previous adminis
tration. In the summer of 1868, Eeverdy Johnson,
a senator from Maryland, had been appointed Min
ister to Eugland. He was an able lawyer, and,
though lacking in diplomatic experience, was
unanimously confirmed as a more satisfactory selec
tion than auy other likely to be made by President
' March 13, 1869. Pierce, Vol. IV, p. 379.

336 CHAELES SUMNEE
Johnson. But in England he showed little discre
tion. He was enamored of his own speechmaking
and he soon disgusted Americans by the friendliness
of his advances toward those who had aided the
Confederates. It was not Seward's expectation that
he would concern himself with the great subjects of
controversy then pending between the Uuited States
and England ; but, notwithstanding the fact that in
November the administration to which he owed his
appointment had been thoroughly discredited at the
polls, he assumed to negotiate a treaty covering the
grievances of the United States against England.
This Johnson-Clarendon Convention, dated January
14, 1869, was in the hands of the Committee on For
eign Eelations when the new administration came
into power. Under the circumstances, the most
critical appointment to the diplomatic service was
that of Minister to the Court of St. James, and for
this post the selection fell upon John Lothrop Mot
ley. His name had been suggested by Sumner in a
list with several other possible appointees for foreign
posts, and there is no doubt that Sumner's friend
ship for the man and his characteristic overvaluation
of literary distinction enlisted him strongly in Mot
ley's support. But that he was " Sumner's man,"
and appointed principally because of his urgent so
licitation, there is little ground to believe.' Motley
'G. S. Boutwell, in Sixty Years of PubUc Life, Vol. II, p. 214,
asserts that Grant told him: "Such was my impression of
Motley when I saw him that I should have withheld his ap
pointment, if I had not made a promise to Sumner."

THE SAN DOMINGO ISSUE 337
had enjoyed pleasant relations with Fish for many
years ; in the recent campaign he had made a bril
liant speech highly eulogistic of Grant, and in the
month precediug the inauguration he had been
thrown much in Grant's society at Washington.
That Sumner's support was a mere incident in pro
curing an appointment which was natural both be
cause of Motley's friendship with Grant and with
Fish, and because of his international reputation as
the historian of the Dutch Eepublic, is the more
probable from the fact that the appointment of
Dr. Howe as Minister to Greece, which Sumner did
most earnestly urge, was refused.
On the 12th of April Motley's nomination was
confirmed by the Senate, and on the following day
he was commissioned as Minister to England. On
that same day Sumner presented the adverse report
from his committee upon the Johnson-Clarendon
Convention. This agreement had secured the ap
proval of not a single member of the committee,
although Sumner had urged its most careful consid
eration, declaring, as the committee's vote was
about to be taken : " We begin to-day an interna
tional debate, the greatest of our history, and, be
fore it is fiuished, iu all probability the greatest of
all history." Since the beginning of the war Sum
uer had beeu doing his utmost to allay unreasonable
passion against England ; but during these years
his sense of the injury inflicted upon the United
States had not grown less. Probably it would have
been better if Sumner had kept silent. It was

338 CHAELES SUMNEE
knowu that the convention stood not the slightest
chance of being ratified but as Fessenden caustically
remarked : "It was uot possible for Sumner to
omit to avail himself of such an occasion." ' In his
present speech he criticized the pending convention
as utterly inadequate iu that it provided only for the
settlement of individual claims, made no expression
of regret for inj uries of the past, declared no past rule
of international duty and laid down no such I'ule for
the future. He directed the severest condemnation
agaiust England's precipitate concession of ocean
belligerency, the Queen's proclamation having beeu
issued on the very day of the new minister's arrival,
as if to forestall any negotiations he might be au
thorized to make. He therefore grouped our griev
ances under three heads : The first consisted of the
claims of individuals for damages wrought by the
Alabama and other cruisers ; upon these he accepted
Cobden's estimate of $15,000,000. For a second
claim for "damages to commerce driven from the
ocean" he suggested that the compensation should
be $110,000,000. There stiU remained " that other
damage, immense and infinite, caused by the pro
longation of the war, all of which may be called
national iu contradistinction to individual." These
" national claims," which he was here the first offi
cially to advance, and which were to be for years
much iu controversy, he did not venture to estimate ;
but he did declare that the cost of suppressing the
rebellion had been more than $4,000,000,000, and
'J. B. Moore, Intemational Arbitrations, Vol. I, p. 508.

THE SAN DOMINGO ISSUE 339
that through British dereliction, largely in the con
cession of belligerent rights upon the ocean, the war
had been " doubled in duration. . . . England
is justly responsible for the additional expenditure."
This speech of an hour, which probably changed
not a single vote ou the pending treaty, played no
small part iu the later controversy.
What Sumner here sought to accomplish, as Carl
Schurz later declared, was " not to extort from Eng
land a large sum of money, but to put our grievance
in the strongest light ; to convince England of the
great wrong she had indicted upon us and thus pre
pare a composition which, consisting more ^n the
settlement of great principles and rules of inter
national law to govern the future intercourse of
nations thau iu the payment of large damages, would
remove all questions of difference." ' The conven
tion was rejected in the Senate by a vote of fifty-four
to one. Sumner's speech, as the British minister
reported to his government, was "received with
vehement applause by the whole Eepublican press."
It certainly accorded with popular sentiment, which
was still sore at the attitude aud action of the British
government during the war. Sumner had con
sulted with Grant before the speech and received
his thanks and congratulations after it.' He also
' Eulogy on Sumner, Massachusetts Memorial of Charlea Sumner,
p 234. /
' Letter to Longfellow, May 25, 1869. Even so discriminating
a critic as Lowell wrote to Sumner within ten days after the
speech : "I think you have struck exactly the true note — ex
pressing the national feeling with temper and dignity." (April

340 CHAELES SUMNEE
had assurance of Secretary Fish's general accord
ance with the positions which he had there taken.
Though Sumuer considered that his speech was
"pacific" in tone, it had a very different sound to
others. In England it aroused intense bitterness.
Even John Bright, who throughout the war had
been carrying on a most intimate aud sympathetic
correspondence with Sumner for the purpose of
preventing any injury from England to the North
ern cause, now declared that he "supposed the
speech was Sumner's bid for the presidency " and
that he (Sumuer) ' ' was either a fool himself, or else
thought the English public and their public meu
were fools." The question was on every one's lips,
What does he intend shall be the outcome ? Sum
ner called England to an accounting for damages
"immense and infinite," yet urged neither haste
nor force. Charles Francis Adams probably pene
trated the mystery, when he declared that intima
tions had beeu made to him that "the eud of it all
22d. Sumner Corr. MS., Harvard Library. ) But another ten
days had not passed before misgivings arose. To E. L. Godkin
he wrote : "I fear it was not a wise speech. Was he not try
ing rather to chime in with that [national] feeling, than to give
it a juster and manlier direction ? " (May 2d. Letters, Vol.
II, p. 29. See also pp. 26, 41.) But itwas not Sumner's habit
to try to " chime in with " others' feelings or beliefs. If he is to
be blamed, it is for bias and one-sidedness rather thau for lack
of independence or of purpose to lead in the right direction. Of
this speech Rhodes says: "Of all the outrageous claims of
which our diploraatic annals are full, I can call to mind none
more so than this." He emphasizes the fact that the " pacific "
tone of its conclusion by no means accords with the main body
of the speech which was distinctly exasperating. Vol. VI,
p. 339.

THE SAN DOMINGO ISSUE 341
was to be the annexation of Canada by way of full
indemnity." '
In the summer of 1865 Grant had indicated that
he regarded Great Britain's conduct during the war
as a grievous wrong to the United States ; and his
notions of compensation were restrained neither by
Sumner's love for Eugland nor by Sumner's hatred
for war. Only a few months after Lee's surrender,
he told Sumner that he " cared little whether Eng
land paid ' our little bill ' or not ; upou the whole,
he would rather she should not, as that would leave
the precedent of her conduct in full force for us to
follow, and he wished it understood that we should
follow it. He thought we should make more out of
' the precedent ' than out of ' the bill,' and thought
Boston especially would gain." '
But although the President held England to be
grievously iu our debt, and although he was a
zealous expansionist, and believed that Canada
could be secured by a short campaign, if war should
ensue, and that in such a war we should have little
to fear, his interest was now engrossed in quite an
other quarter. Por some time an insurrection had
been in progress in Cuba, and President Grant's
sympathies were warmly enlisted in behalf of the
insurgents. On June 9, 1869, Sumner had a long
conference with the President, who proposed issu-
' Quoted by C. F. Adams in The Treaty of Washington, p. 103.
This is the most comprehensive and painstaking study upon
this subject.
' Letter from Sumner to Bright, Aug. 8, 1865, Pierce, Vol,
IV, p. 255,

342 CHAELES SUMNEE
ing in aid of the Cubans a proclamation " identical
with that issued by Spain with regard to us." '
Later in the day Sumuer called upon Fish, who
had just been conferring with the British minister,
and told Sumuer that he had said to him "that our
claims were too large to be settled pecuniarily, and
sounded him about Canada, to which he replied that
England did not wish to keep Canada, but could not
part with it, without the consent of the [Canadian]
population." '
Grant and Sumner were now at one in thinking
that England had done us grievous wrong, for
which the cession of British America would not be
too great a compensation, aud in being willing that
the matter stand in an unsettled state, awaiting it
might be a time when Canadian sentiment should
approve a separation which the British government
already looked upon with favor. But, on the other
hand, Grant and Sumner were as far apart as the
poles ou this point : Sumner traced the root of
England's wroug to the United States to that " fatal
precedent," the Queen's proclamation conceding
belligerent rights upon the ocean to the Confeder-

' Sumner, in letter to Motley, June 11, 1869. More
over, this purpose he actually carried out, for late in the
summer he drew up and signed such a proclamation, and
sent it to Fish with orders to issue it ; but Fish " put it away in
a safe place," and in the course of a few days events had
crowded in, which led Grant to be exceedingly grateful that
Fish's conservatism had protected his administration from the
mistakes into which his impetuous action was on the point of
plunging it. C. F. Adams, p. 118.
' Suraner, letter to Motley, as above,

THE SAN DOMINGO ISSUE 343
ates, whUe at this very moment the President's heart
was set upon issuing a precisely similar proclama
tion in behalf of the Cubans.
But other complications were afready in sight.
Although balked in his Cuban programme, the
President was not deterred from looking into an
other opportunity for Southern expansion, presented
by the disordered conditions in San Domingo. For
the moment, the adventurer, Baez, was in power in
this pseudo-republic ; but, not having enough force
at his command to subdue the rival with whom for
years he had beeu playing see-saw iu government,
he was doing his best to enlist the active interven
tion of the United States in his behalf. For some
uuknown reason, Grant held fantastically extrava
gant notions as to the resources and strategic im
portance of the island, and the project of a protect
orate if not of annexation early secured his ardent
support. A month after that day of earnest confer
ences over British claims and Cuban belligerency,
the President sent one of his military favorites,
Babcock, upon a man-of-war, with instructions
which upon their face merely authorized him to
make full inquiry into the resources of the island,
the characteristics of the people and their views as
to annexation. Nevertheless, the Secretary of the
Navy ordered the commander of this war vessel to
give Babcock " the moral support of his guns," and
a mouth later a second war vessel was despatched
to be at his service. In September this personal
envoy returned, bearing a "protocol" which he

344 CHAELES SUMNEE
had assumed to negotiate for the annexation of the
republic of San Domingo to the United States upou
payment by the latter of $1,500,000. The most
astounding thing in this unprecedented document
was the pledge that "his Excellency, General
Grant, President of the United States, promises
privately to use all his influence in order that the
idea of annexiug the Dominican republic to the
Uuited States may acquire such a degree of popu
larity among members of Congress as will be neces
sary for its accomplishment." ' A year or more
later. President Grant declared : " General Bab-
cock's conduct throughout merits my entire ap
proval." ' After conferences iu Washington, Bab
cock returned to Dominica, under instructions from
Fish aud with a naval force under orders to " con
form to all his wishes." On the 3d of December he
concluded a treaty for the annexation of San Do
mingo and another for the lease of the Bay of
Samana. Meantime our relations with England had been
getting more complicated. As a result of many
conferences between Fish and Sumner, Motley's in
structions had been framed. The task was made
difficult by the President's wish to concede bellig
erency to the Cuban insurgents, and by the feeling
which had been aroused in Eugland by Sumner's
speech in its arraignment of the British government
while the French emperor escaped his condemna-
' N. Y. Times, June 28, 1870. Pierce, Vol. IV, p. 430,
2 Letter to Senator Nye, June 27, 1870,

THE SAN DOMINGO ISSUE 345
tion. The instructions were therefore so phrased as
to recognize " the right of a power to define its re
lations to the parties in a civil conflict iu another
country," but they refused to admit the' projjriety
of the Queen's proclamation, directing especial
reprobation against it as "the beginning and animus
of that course of conduct which resulted so disas
trously to the United States," and as "foreshadow
ing future events." Furthermore, the instructions
laid stress upou the fact that, while other powers
were contemporaneous with England in similar
concession, "itwas in Eugland only that the con
cession was supplemented by acts causing direct
damage to the United States."' The diplomatic
slate had been wiped clean of all previous writing
by the rejection of the Johnson -Clarendon Conven
tion. In midsummer (July 19th) Sumner wrote to
Gushing: "It seems best that our case, in length
aud breadth, with all details, should be stated to
England without any demand of any kind. Eng
land must kuow our grievances before any demand
can be presented."
Sumner was Fish's guest at his country home in
August aud urged that the statement of our claims
be agaiu brought to the notice of the British gov
ernment. On September 25, 1869, Fish seut to
Motley a despatch, drawn by Caleb Cushing, which
summarized the points of our case in such a way
that British public meu declared it was " Mr.
Sumner's speech over again," and that it "out-
' J. B. Moore, International Arbitrations, Vol. I, p. 513.

346 CHAELES SUMNEE
Sumnered Sumner." The prospects of success of
the Cuban insurgents had dwindled so that their
recognition as belligerents was not now to bethought
of. No longer restrained by that consideration, the
President did not hesitate to insert iu his annual
message passages held in England to be decidedly
menacing. In these he listed the American claims,
not conflning them to injuries to individuals, but
closely following the enumeration of what Sumner
had called "national claims," even including the
increased rates of insurance, the decrease and trans
fer to Great Britain of our commercial marine, and
" the prolongation of the war and the increased cost
(both in treasure aud in lives) of its suppression."
Despite this apparent agreement, some tension
had already arisen between Sumner and the Presi
dent and his Secretary of State. There had been
differences of opinion as to the instructions to be
given to Motley, and Sumner had assumed a
dominating tone which Fish found none the less
galling from the fact that his own deference to Sum
ner upon taking office made it not unnatural. " Is
it the purpose of this administration to sacrifice me,
— me, a senator from Massachusetts?" was Sum
ner's outraged inquiry, aud later, in dissenting from
a plan of the Secretary' s, he declared : "I ought not
in any way to be a party to a statement which
abandons or enfeebles any of the just grounds of my
country as already expounded by Seward, Adams
and myself." Whether he had beeu especially in
sistent in urging Motley's appointment or not, there

THE SAN DOMINGO ISSUE 347
can be no question that iu Sumner's frequent and
very voluminous letters, that minister found exposi
tions of his duty and of American policy quite as
direct and detailed as those received from the Secre
tary of State. Soon after Motley's appointment,
Charles Francis Adams made the shrewd prophecy
that the new miuister would meet with one em
barrassment which he himself had never had to en
counter ; — he^would_have to deal with two masters.
Aud so at London it was presently found that Mot
ley was representing Charles Sumner more distinctly
thau the Grant administration. In his very first
interview with Lord Clarendon, he laid great stress
upon the grievous offense involved in the proclama
tion of belligerency, a point which Pish believed
Sumner's speech had overstrained and the very
point which Grant at just that juncture was partic
ularly anxious to have kept in the background.'
On June 7th, so Sumuer reported to Motley, Grant
declared that he was satisfied Motley was " the best
mau for England." But the President, whose
chronology is not always accurate, later declared
that on receipt of Motley's report of this interview
' How widely and exasperatingly Motley in this interview
departed from the spirit of his instructions and voiced Sumner's
distinctive views is clearly brought out by J. B. Moore.
(Intei-national Arbitrations, Vol. I, pp. 516-518.) Motley later
asserted that he had sincerely endeavored to carry out his in
structions. But the eminent historian surely showed here little
skill as a diplomatist. " Instead of refraining from discussion,
he precipitated it, suggesting ' the contingencies of war and
peace ' and confessing to a ' despondent feeling ' as to the ' pos
sibility of the two nations ever understanding each other.' "

348 CHAELES SUMNEE
— three weeks later than the above expression of ap
proval—he was " very angry," and " went over to
the State Departmeut and told Governor Fish to
dismiss Motley at once." This Fish did not do, but
he presently gave Motley to understand that the
entire discussion of the claims against Great Britain
was transferred to Washington. To Sumner it was
intimated that the reason for this step was that the
Senate was there accessible for advice, and that in
Washington there would be better prospect of
securing a settlement " thau where the late attempt
at a convention resulted so disastrously." A year
later, however. Fish declared that the change was
made because of Motley's disobedience to instruc
tions. It may be doubted whether his offense had
reached that point, but there can be no question
that the Secretary felt himself embarrassed by a
minister who reflected so clearly Sumner's distinct
ive views, and that he determined to take the
negotiation into his own hands and carry it through
according to his own ideas.
President Grant's offhand announcement in
cabinet meeting of Babcock' s negotiation of the
protocol for the annexation of San Domingo had
met with a most embarrassing reception ; and Fish,
ou general principles not favorably disposed to an
nexation toward the south, was in addition so af
fronted by the negotiation of a treaty without tak
ing him, the head of the State Department, into
consultation, that he pressed his resignation upon
Grant, who earnestly besought him to retain his

THE SAN DOMINGO ISSUE 349
portfolio, aud finally secured his support even for the
San Domingo project. Undaunted by these experi
ences, Grant now set out to secure the ratification of
his treaties. He knew that Sumner was in position
to have more influeuce than any other man upou the
result, and with characteristic directness and igno
rance of, or contempt for, formal procedure, he
sought to assure himself of the senator's support.
Early in January, 1870, Sumner was entertaining
two friends oue evening at dinner, when the Presi
dent of the United States called. Eecognizing the
voice at the door, Sumner himself left the dining-
room, and presently returned with Grant, who took
a seat at the table, insisting that the other guests re
main. The conversation which ensued was singu
larly maladroit on both sides. The President
promptly introduced his errand by saying that there
were two treaties relating to San Domingo about
which he had wished to speak with the senator (to
whom he four times referred as "chairman of the
Judiciary Committee"), since they were soon to
come before his committee. Sumner, unwilling to
give his opinion in advance of investigation, sought
to divert the conversation to another topic, and by
ill chance chose this occasion to broach the case of
Governor Ashley, and even to read a long letter
from the man, whom Grant had recently removed
from the governorship of Montana Territory. This
subject was highly distasteful to Grant and in
evident annoyance he started to take his leave.
Sumner followed him to the door, and, the matter

350 CHAELES SUMNEE
of the treaties haviug again been raised by the
President, though without explaining their nature,
Sumuer said : " Mr. President, I am an adminis
tration man, and whatever you do will always flnd
in me the most careful and candid consideration." '
The whole interview embarrassed Sumner, thau
whom no man was ever less ready to commit him
self without full knowledge of what was at issue.
But Grant's make-up was of a different nature. He
had dropped in ou Sumner that evening to secure
his support, aud he left his door in the belief that
this " chairman of the Judiciary Committee " stood
pledged to uphold his chief's policy.
A few days later the two treaties came before the
Committee on Foreign Eelations. Sumner was not
on principle opposed to expansion, though he hoped
for expansion to the north, which would include
people of English stock, rather than in the tropics.
\At first, therefore, his prime concern was as to the
leffect which the annexation of San Domingo would
have upon the other negro republic upon the island,
and also upon the newly emancipated negroes of
this country. But some of the despatches led him
to suspect what a visit to the State Department
speedily confirmed, — that these treaties had been
negotiated with a ruler who maintained himself in
power only by his reliance upon United States ships
' Sumner gave an account of this interview in his speech in
Senate, Dec. 21, 1870, Congressional Globe, p. 253. Worka,
Vol. XIV, pp. 125, 126. Other references. Pierce, Vol. IV,
p. 434, n. 2.

THE SAN DOMINGO ISSUE 351
of war, aud that therefore we were "engaged in
forcing upou a weak people the sacriflce of their
country." From the moment of that discovery,
the whole transaction became utterly repugnant to
Sumner ; but he made the mistake — which he after
ward acknowledged and regretted — of not going
directly to the President aud telling him frankly
that he could not give the treaties his support.
They were before the committee nearly two months.
Grant grew restive at the delay, and presently came
to believe that Sumner was the obstruction in the
way of a prompt aud favorable report. Accustomed
to command, his zeal and determination became the
greater at the unexpected opposition. He seut to
the Senate special messages urging ratification, and
proceeded to exert executive pressure upon individ
ual members of the committee aud other senators
to a degree before entirely unknown. He went re
peatedly to the Capitol and on a single day sum
moned fourteen senators to meet him. Babcock
appeared before the committee to answer inquiries.
On March 15th, the day following one of Grant's
most urgent messages, the committee presented an
adverse report, in which five members concurred ;
only two dissented.
Nine days later the debate on the San Domingo
question was opened by Sumuer. In a four-hour
speech he set forth the committee's grounds for op
posing the ratification of the treaties. Wishing as
far as possible to avoid any clash with the adminis
tration, he laid no emphasis upon the unwarranted

352 CHAELES SUMNEE
use of United States naval power in Dominican
waters (upon which he was not so well informed as
at a later date) and he was careful not to impugn in
the slightest respect the President's motives in ur
ging annexation. The points upon which he did lay
stress were the unsuitableness of the Dominican pop
ulation for easy assimilation ; the bad precedent of
annexation toward the tropics, with the probability
of complications with Hayti ; the cMonic civil war to
which the ' ' republic" was subject ; and the wrong in
volved in "impairing the African's predominance in
the West Indies. ' ' The treaties were before the Sen
ate for three months. Meantime the President again
by special message urged their ratification, and the
Secretary of State came repeatedly to Sumner's
house and besought him to support the treaties be
cause the President, who had led the Eepublican
party to victory, had them so much at heart. In
oue of these interviews he said to Sumner : " Why
not go to London ? I offer you the English mission ;
it is yours." Sumner secretly resented this as an
attempt to silence him, aud replied: "We have a
miuister who cannot be bettered." ' But no un
worthy motive need be attributed to Fish ; the
appointment would have placed his old-time friend
in a congenial position of great honor and influence
and have secured peace to the administration.

'June, 1870, a few weeks before the rejection of the treaty.
Sumner adds to his account : ' ' Thus already did the mission to
London begin to pivot on San Domingo." Works, Vol. XIV,
p. 260.

THE SAN DOMINGO ISSUE 353
There was little popular sentiment in favor of an
nexation, aud Sumner was at uo time doubtful as to
the outcome. Ou the last day of June the vote was ta
ken and resulted in a tie, twenty- eight to twenty-
eight, so that, lacking the requisite two-thirds, the
treaties were rejected. The very day after this vote,
by direction of the President, Motley's resignation
was requested. He refused to give it, and some
months later was summarily removed. There was
little doubt in any quarter that his removal was due
primarily to Grant's resentment at Sumner's oppo
sition to the San Domingo treaties in the Senate.
Unable to hit the offender iu person, he aimed his
blow at the man who he declared "represented Sum
ner more than he did the administration." In cabi
net meeting he asserted that he did not propose to
" allow Sumner to ride over him," and when it was
suggested that he appoint Sumner to the English
mission, he said that he would do it provided Sum
ner would resign from the Senate, but that he would
remove him as soon as his appointment had been
confirmed !

CHAPTEE XVII
SUMNER AND GRANT : THE TREATY OF WASHINGTON
During the recess of Congress, Sumner and Pish
continued in friendly correspondence.' But months
before this, — in fact, within a few weeks of the time
when Motley laid down the law to Lord Clarendon, —
Fish had been discussing our claims against Eng
land with Sir John Eose, "a boru diplomatist,"
who, as a member of the Canadian ministry, had
come to Washington to conduct some other negotia
tions. The British government was at last suft'ering
from conviction of sin, and disposed to show forth
works meet for repentance. This change of heart
had been wrought far less by diplomacy thau by the
logic of European events. In July, 1870, the
Franco -Prussian War broke out, aud no man could
tell how soon England might be involved in the
turmoil. In these anxious days she found herself
fronted by the precedents which she had so recently
established during the war in America. The
thought was intolerable that, if England were drawn
into the war, the ports of a neutral would be open,
'In private correspondence, however, Fish was already
sharply critical. June 23, 1870, he wrote to a friend : "Clay
and Benton each domineered iu their day, but they were men
capable of position; the aspirant to their control, in the present
day, knows nothing but books, and not overmuch of them."
C. F. Adams, The Treaty of Washington, p. 248.

THE TEEATY OF WASHINGTON 355
without possible protest, for the outfitting of ships
of war to prey upon her commerce ou every sea.
Fish and the British government were coming closer
together, and the Secretary of State, who had
hitherto remained reluctantly at his post out of loy
alty to his friend, the President, now came to cher
ish an honorable ambition that he might bring this
long-standing controversy to a successful issue. In
September, 1870, he wrote to a friend : "If England
can be brought to think so [that she was drawn into
errors], it will not be necessary for her to say so, —
at least, not to say it very loudly. It may be said
by a definition of what shall be Maritime Interna
tional Law in the future, aud a few kind words.
She will want in thfe future what we have claimed.
Thus she will be benefited — we satisfied." '
The Secretary repeatedly suggested to the British
minister a comprehensive settlement, a feature of
which should be the cession of Canada, but on the
very day that the allies surrounded Paris came the
reply that although England would gladly be rid of
the Colonies, it was impossible for her to force in
dependence upon them, or even to refer the ques
tion of independence to a popular vote of the people
of the Dominion. But England's predicament did
not pass unnoticed by her Continental neighbors :
the Eussiau minister came to Fish with the sugges
tion that the Franco-Prussian War was affording a
most opportune time for pressing our claims for im
mediate settlement, and Pish diplomatically allowed
'C. P. Adams, The Treaty of Waahington, p. 126.

356 CHAELES SUMNEE
the substance of this interview to become known to
the British minister, who thereupon bluntly asked
him what the United States wanted. Pish had be
come convinced that the unwillingness of the Cana
dians to separate from Eugland stood as an insuper
able barrier to the oft-discussed plan of annexation.
" Like the wise diplomat he was, he then dropped
the unattainable from the discussion and on No
vember 20, 1870, asked merely an expression of re
gret on the part of Great Britain, an acceptable
declaration of principles of international law and
payment of claims." '
Though these terms were much more moderate
thau the vague iutimatious heretofore given, Fish
was resolved upon their prompt acceptance, and it
was at his instigation that in the President's mes
sage there were inserted those vigorous paragraphs
relating to our claims, which set London fuming
over the implied menace. But the British govern
ment, through Sir John Eose, promptly intimated a
disposition to negotiate on the proposed basis, and
early in January this trusted envoy in friendly
converse at Fish's table was discussing preliminaries
which led to the Treaty of Washington.
The President, however, was adhering pertina
ciously to his favorite plan ; and if he gave Fish a
free hand iu dealing with England, it was appar
ently upou tacit pledge of his support in regard to
San Domingo. In this same message, dated De
cember 5, 1870, Grant pictured in most fanciful
'Rhodes, VoL VI, p. 365.

THE TEEATY OF WASHINGTON 357
and glowing colors the advantages of annexing the
island, which, though then having a population of
only about 120,000, he declared "capable of sup
porting 10,000,000 people in luxury." He argued
that its acquisition would open a wide market for
our products, and expressed the conviction that
if the step were not taken, a free port would
speedily be negotiated for by European nations
in the Bay of Samana ; he urged Congress to au
thorize the appointment of a commission to nego
tiate a treaty by which the "great prize" might
be secured. This was recognized to be impos
sible, but a friend of the President did offer a
resolution for the appointment of a commission of
investigation. Then was the time for silence or for the soft an
swer on the part of Sumner. It was morally certain
that Congress would grant nothing more than a
commission of inquiry. But in Sumner's opinion
the authorizing of such a commission would involve
approval of grievous violations of international law
and threat of injury to the race of which he had
constituted himself the champion. Moreover, he
had been singled out for attack because he had done
what he conceived to be his duty : he had been
sfruck at in the person of his friend. Motley, who
had just been summarily removed from the English
mission,' and the plan had already been broached
' Motley had greatly exasperated both Grant and Fish by the
paper, '"The End of the Mission," which he had sent to the
State Department.

358 CHAELES SUMNEE
of reconstituting the Committee ou Foreign Eela
tions so as to secure its favor for the San Domingo
scheme. The antagonism between Grant and Sum
ner had reached the point where neither could be
lieve auy good of the other. Their temperaments
and training were so different that from the be
ginning they had appreciated little of each other's
excellencies.' As Sumner grew older he became
more oracular and intolerant of opposition, and the
extravagant value which he always attached to liter-

' "Sumner demanded, as the prerequisite of agreeable per
sonal intercourse, adulation, expressed or tacit ; Grant had by
1870 become accustomed to receive it, but bad not, nor ever
would have, the power to give it." (W. A. Dunning, Eecon
struction, Political and Economic, p. 165.) Tbe widening breach
between these two most influential raen in public life was
viewed with regret and grave apprehension as to its conse
quences. Gerrit Smith, as the loyal friend of both men, was
induced to come to Washington for the express purpose of try
ing to bring them together. He did his best, but had to ac
knowledge to Andrew D. White, at whose instance he had made
the effort: " It is impossible ; it is a breach which can never
be healed." {Autobiography of Andrew D. White, Vol. I, p.
485.) Grant, the man of action, seems to have distrusted Sum
ner aa a man of words. Once asked if he had heard Sumner
converse, he replied, "No, but I have heard bim lecture." It
is said that upon hearing some one remark, " Mr. Sumner does
not believe in the Bible," Grant commented: "No, I suppose
not; he didn't write it." (G. S. Boutwell, Sixty Years of Pub
lic Life, Vol. II, pp. 215, 251.) Nevertheless, there is evidence
that Grant recognized Sumner's power, and that he trie,d to
keep on friendly terms with him. Years later, in 1878, James
Russell Lowell raet Grant in Spain, and one of the things
which raost impressed hira was this: "He seemed anxious
to explain to me his quarrel with Sumner — or Sumner's
with him. ' Sumner is the only man I was ever anything
but my real self to ; the only man I ever tried to conciliate
by artificial means' — those are his very words." (Lettera, Vol.
II, p. 233.)

THE TEEATY OF WASHINGTON 359
ary and oratorical achievements led him to regard
with something of disdain as well as distrust the
taciturn soldier whom he thought uow sadly out of
place iu the President's chair. Tale-bearers, espe
cially those of Grant's quasi-military household, had
done much to widen the breach between the two.
Sumner was even credulous enough to assert his
belief that his life had been threatened at the White
House, a statement which Morton warned him not
to repeat, unless he wanted to be laughed at. Judge
B. Eockwood Hoar, one of Sumner's closest friends,
tells of visits to the senator, who would accompany
him to the door, and there, as he grew more excited,
would shout out denunciations of the occupant of
the White House, just across Lafayette Square, his
voice rising till he " roared like a bull of Bashan,"
so that " it would at times seem as if all Washing
ton, including Mrs. Grant, must hear aud the police
would have to interfere." And this feeling was
warmly reciprocated. George P. Hoar was walking
along the street iu earnest conversation with the
President upon official business when suddenly
Grant, catching sight of Sumner's windows, broke
out with: "That man who lives up there has
abused me in a way I never suffered from any other
man living ! " and he shook his clenched fist at the
senator's house.
Uuder such circumstances, perhaps it was not in
human nature to pass over the President's proposals
iu silence. Certainly that was not Sumner's course.
When the resolution for the commission of inquiry

360 CHAELES SUMNEE
came before the Seuate, heedless of earnest dissua
sion of friends, he took the floor, and in a scathing
speech — which he later made the more exasperating
by the title, " Naboth's Vineyard," — he denounced
the whole San Domingo scheme.' Its key-note was
sounded in the opening sentence : " The resolution
commits Congress to a dance of blood!" In con
trast with his earlier discussion of the matter, he
now laid chief stress upon the illegal use of the
American navy in upholding Baez, and the mena
cing of Hayti both by our war-ships aud by the tone
of the President's message. He pointed out an
analogy between the President's rumored intention
of interfering with the Committee on Foreign Eela
tions and Buchanan's insistence that Douglas be
removed from the Committee on Territories, in
order that that committee's support might be se
cured for the Lecompton Constitution. His speech,
in which burned again all the flre of youth, ac
complished nothing but increased bitterness. One
of his greatest admirers, George William Curtis,
who believed that Sumner's points were well taken,
nevertheless deplored his having " criticized the
administration as a relentless enemy and not as a
friend" at the very time when itwas "of the ut
most importance to criticize without weakening it."
The resolution, amended to the effect that it "should
not be understood as committing Congress to the
policy of annexing San Domingo," was passed by
very large majorities, and the Senate promptly
' Dec. 21, 1870. Worka, Vol. XIV, pp. 89-131.

THE TEEATY OP WASHINGTON 361
confirmed the appointment of B. P. Wade, S. G.
Howe, and A. D. White.'
The day following his speech, Sumner dined at
the house of Secretary Fish with Senator Morton,
who had been the chief advocate of the annexation
of Sau Domingo, and Sumner's outspoken opposi
tion seemed not to have chilled their friendly rela
tions. Nevertheless, only seven days later (during
which no new occasion of difference had arisen)
Hamilton Fish placed on record in an official docu
ment a most damaging reflection upon the integrity
of the man who for twenty years had been one of
his most intimate friends. On Jauuary 9th, iu re
sponse to a request from the Senate, the President
sent to that body the papers relating to the removal
of Motley. Among them was a letter, dated De
cember 30th, to the secretary of the legation at
Loudon, in which Fish spoke of Grant as one "than
whom no man ... is more sensitive to a be
trayal of confidence, or would look with more scorn
and contempt upou one who uses the words of
friendship to cover a secret and determined policy
of hostility." No one for a moment doubted to
whom reference was made.
It is not to be denied that in recent months Sum
ner had proved hard to get on with, but how Fish
' Agassiz declined a place upon this commission because of
his friendship for Sumner. No such delicacy deterred Dr.
Howe. Dissent over this San Domingo question caused an es
trangement between him and Sumner which was never to be
removed. For tbe report of this commission and the close of
the San Domingo controversy, see infra, p. 373.

362 CHAELES SUMNEE
could have allowed a not unnatural irritation to
betray him into so gross an injustice to a friend of
many years is as incomprehensible as his later decla
ration that he was " not conscious of auy just cause
for the discontinuing of the relations which had
existed between us !" ' At the time, however, he
took a step which showed clearly that he believed
their friendly relations had beeu brought to an end
by his own act. The prompt sequel of the Presi
dent's message, with its "menacing" discussion of
the American grievances against Eugland, was the
reappearance in Washington of Sir Johu Eose, on
January 9th, the very day the Motley papers were
sent to the Senate, and his discussions with Fish
soon reached a point which made it desirable to
consult with the chairman of the Committee on
Foreign Eelations. Instead of coming directly to
see him, as had been his frequent custom, Fish, on
January 12th, asked a member of the committee to
find out for him on what terms he stood with the
senator. Sumner told the intermediary that he
should always be at the service of the Secretary for
consultation on public business, but that he could
not conceal his deep sense of personal wrong re
ceived from him, absolutely without excuse.' So
an official interview took place, on January 15th,
at which Fish showed Sumner Sir John Eose's con
fidential memorandum, prepared after cable com-
' Letter to Boston Transcript, Oct. 31, 1877.
' A few days later, at a dinner where both were guests, Sum
ner ignored Fish's presence.

THE TEEATY OF WASHINGTON 363
munication with the Foreign Office. Sumner de
murred at expressing an opinion as to the auswer
which should be giveu. Fish reminded him that
he had come officially to him as chairman of the
Senate Committee on Foreign Eelations to ask him
his opinion and advice, and that he was entitled to
them, siuce he must give an answer. Sumner said
that the matter required much reflection, but that
he would let him know about it in a day or two.
Accordingly, two days later. Fish received from
Sumner a memorandum, the most significant part
of which was as follows : ' " The greatest trouble,
if not peril, being a constant source of anxiety and
disturbance, is from Fenianism which is excited by
the British flag iu Canada.' Therefore the with
drawal of the British flag cannot be abandoned as a
condition or preliminary of such a settlement as is
now proposed. To make the settlement complete,
the withdrawal should be from this hemisphere, in
cluding provinces and islands." '
It is not easy to understand Sumner's motive in
framing this memorandum. He had long beeu in
' The memorandum is printed in full in J. B. Moore's Inter
national Arbitrations, Vol. I, p. 525.
' Fenianism had not always seemed to Sumner so appalling.
April 3, 1866, he wrote to the Duchess of Argyll : " Fenianism
is to us only a noisy shadow, without reality. I never saw a
Fenian." Pierce, Vol. IV, p. 276.
'This meraorandum has been variously regarded. The au
thor of the monumental " Memoir " of Sumner barely mentions
it, evidently not deeming it significant enough to quote. Ou
the other hand, Mr. C. P. Adaras, in his monograph. The Treaty
of Waahington, pp. 145-152, finds in it the key to much that
followed.

364 CHAELES SUMNEE
favor of the annexation of Canada, yet he had de
clared against accessions which would not come to
the United States with the free assent of their pop
ulation, and he could not have failed to know that
at that time the people of the Dominion were stren
uously opposed to the transfer of sovereignty which
he here proposed as an indispensable " condition or
preliminary" to the settlement of the pending
controversy with England. The judgment of Mr.
C. P. Adams, the most painstaking student of this
chapter of American diplomatic history, is prob
ably the most logical : — that by stipulating a cou-
dition which he knew to be impossible of fulfllment,
Sumner hoped to postpone the settlement until a
time wheu Canadian compliance might be secured
to a transfer to which the British government would
have already gladly assented.
Fish had probably scented opposition in his official
interview with Sumner, for that very day he went
to Morton, the leading champion of the administra
tion's Sau Domingo policy, and asked him whether
he thought a treaty along the lines proposed could
secure ratiflcation iu case of Sumner's hostility, to
which Morton answered, yes. Fish then sought out
other leaders, Eepublican and Democratic, and re
ceived assurances of their support in the contingency
suggested. A week after receiving Sumner's " opin
ion," Pish had a conference with Sir John Eose,
showed him in confldence Sumner's " hemispheric
flag- withdrawal memorandum," as Mr. Adams calls
it, and assured him that the administration would

THE TEEATY OF WASHINGTON 365
use every endeavor " to secure a favorable result,
even if it involved a conflict with the chafrman of
the Committee ou Foreign Eelations inthe Senate." '
From this time events moved fast to a consummation.
By the 1st of February the British minister iuformed
Fish of the readiness of his government to submit the
various matters of difference to a Joint High Com
mission, which should arrange a settlement by treaty.
A week later the nominations of five members for the
United States were sent to the Seuate aud promptly
confirmed ; and ou the 27th of February the Joint
High Commission was organized in Washington.
A heavy blow was now awaiting Sumner. In the
debate which followed his speech on the San
Domingo commission resolution, Conkling had de
clared that the Committee on Foreign Eelations
"ought to be reorganized so that it should no longer
be led by a virulent opponent of the administration, ' '
and in the interval before the beginning of the next
sessiou (March 4th) such a change came to be con
sidered probable. In the Eepublican Senate caucus
a committee, the majority of which was supposed to
be against the removal of Sumuer, was appointed to
bring iu a committee list. Suspicion having been
aroused, Allison and another mau eager for party
harmony, called upon the doubtful member of the
committee aud found him inexorably resolved to
recommend Sumner's removal ; the only ground
which he gave for his stand was that by the nature
of his opposition to the Sau Domingo treaty the
'Moore, International Arbitrations, Vol. I, pp. 528-530.

366 CHAELES SUMNEE
senator had made himself offensive to the President.
The committee, accordingly, named Cameron as
chairman ofthe Committee on Foreign Eelations, and
transferred Sumuer to the Committee on Privileges
and Elections. When the report was presented in
caucus, Sumner spoke of his twelve years of service
upon his committee, and of the important questions
with which it had had to deal, and called associates
living and dead to testify if he had ever failed in
any duty of labor or patriotism. He declined his
new committee assignment and withdrew from the
caucus. Debate followed, but the committee's list
was sustained by a vote of twenty-six to twenty-one.'
In the Seuate the motion for the adoption of this list
gave rise to long and acrimonious debate. Sumner
asked to be excused from the unwelcome duties as
signed him, and his request was granted. Against
their will, the Eepublican majority were forced to
give reasons for the proposed removal. The only
ground alleged on the floor of the Senate was the
fact that Sumner was not on speaking terms with the
President and the Secretary of State, although his
champions boldly asserted that this was but "a
flimsy pretext " and that "the San Domingo scheme
was at the bottom of the whole difficulty." ' Even
the very meu who were urging Sumner's removal
' Blaine, then Speaker of the House, severely condemned this
action. " Never was the power of the caucus more wrongfully
applied." He discusses it in detail : Twenty Yeara of Congreaa,
Vol. II, pp. 503-506.
' When as the ground for the proposed action it was alleged
that Sumner had "refused to hold personal intercourse with the
Secretary of State," Schurz, speaking for Sumner, declared that

THE TEEATY OF WASHINGTON 3G7
paid glowing tributes to his merits aud past services,
and declared thatt "under happier circumstances"
he could flll that chairmanship better than auy other
senator. TrumbuU earnestly opposed the removal,
saying that such a change was extraordinary and that
according to established usages of the body, chairmen
"were uot changed contrary to their expressed
wishes." Though bowing to the will of the maj ority,
Sherman declared : "I regard this change as unjusti
fiable, as impolitic, as unnecessary, and ... no
reason has been given which ought to weigh, in my
j udgment, to induce the change. ' ' But no protest was
of any avail ; the removal was carried, ouly the votes
of nine Democrats beiug recorded against it." Per
haps the least favorable light is thrown ou this transac
tion by the choice of Cameron as Sumner' s successor. '
There- cau be no doubt that Grant's resentment

Sumner had not refused to enter into auy official relations,
either with the President or with the Secretary of State, but
had said that he would "receive Mr. Fish as an old friend, and
would not only be willing but would be glad to transact such
matters and discuss such questions as might come up for con
sideration. ' ' And Sumner added : " In his own house. ' '
Blaine, Vol. II, p. 504. Two other grounds, alleged years later
in the mass of controversy to which this action gave rise, -viz.,
default in reporting treaties referred to his committee, and
failure to " move forward treaties" in the Senate, may be dis
missed as wholly unsustained by the evidence. To a third, at
tention is directed below, p. 368.
' See also John Sherman's Eecollections, Vol. I, pp. 470-473.
' " The real raotive of the reraoval was shown past all ques
tion, when to this place of highest dignity and importance there
was appointed a man whose long public record was a story only
of intrigue and suspected corruption, and whose sole recom
mendation lay in being a servile partisan of the President. ' ' —
G. S. Merriam, Life and Umes of Samuel Bowles, Vol. II, p. 131.

368 CHAELES SUMNEE
found a vindictive satisfaction in this deposition of
Sumuer from the position which was his pride aud
glory. Yet it would be an injustice to Fish not to
consider the strongest argument which has been ad
vanced in justification of the pressure exerted by the
administration to secure Sumner's removal. The
Secretary, as we have stated, had giveu pledge to
the representative of the British government that no
pains would be spared to secure a settlement upon
terms which had in general been accepted as the
basis for agreement, " even if it involved a confiict
with the chairman of the Committee on Foreign
Eelations," and in consequence the Joint High
Commission was already in session. Yet Sumner
had proposed "hemispheric flag- withdrawal " asan
indispensable "preliminary" to any complete set
tlement. It is absurd to take the ground that Sum
ner was here speaking figuratively or expressing
merely an aspiration, with a view to testing public
sentiment. Charles Sumner gave this answer to the
Secretary of State, with whom he was hardly on
speaking terms, and who in official capacity had
asked of him, also in official capacity, his opinion
and advice. Sumner had requested time to deliber
ate, and after two days had sent this answer in writ
ing. It is highly significant, also, that this me
morial was almost iu the precise language which Sum
uer had used eighteen months before in an elaborate
communication to Motley, giving his forecast of the
terms upon which the settlement might take place. '
' Letter of June 15, 1869. Pierce, Vol. IV, p. 410.

THE TEEATY OF WASHINGTON 369
This ominous reply had been communicated to
the British euvoy aud to a number of senators.
They were warranted in believing that Sumuer
meant precisely what he said, aud that in com
mittee and iu the Senate he would prove an uu-
yielding obsfructionist to the settlement which the
administration had pledged itself to promote. It is
a legitimate question whether the Senate precedent
which Trumbull said required that no committee
chairman should be changed contrary to his ex
pressed wish, was not seriously out of accord with
auy tenable theory of party responsibility, and
whether the experience of the past forty years has
not offered repeated instances where the good of the
party and of the country as well would have been
furthered by changes in the chairmanships contrary
to the wishes of the incumbents. Because of the
Senate's share in treaty-making, the accord between
the administration and the chairman of the Com
mittee ou Foreign Eelations becomes a matter of
unique importance. Often it lies in the power of
that one man to make or mar its whole foreign
policy. It was the full consciousness of this fact
which had called from Fish that pathetically deferen
tial letter to Sumner before assuming his post in the
cabinet. Sumner just at this time had been show
ing his unrelenting power of obstruction iu the case
of treaties which the administration had earnestly
sought to secure. Far greater issues were now at
stake. Fish saw within his grasp an honorable set
tlement of the grievances which for mauy years had

370 CHAELES SUMNEE
kept alive rancor and ill-will between the two
branches of the English-speaking race, provided the
result of his uegotiations could be put before the
Seuate in such a way as to command the normal
party support. In the view of oue of the keenest Eng
lish publicists, "Fish was mortally afraid of Sum
ner." ' If Fish believed that Sumner, as chairman
of the Committee on Foreign Eelations, would seri
ously menace or delay the final ratification of the
treaty which now bade fair to become the fulfilment
of hopes long deferred, iu the opinion of the present
writer he was not, ouly justified iu exerting pressure
to procure his removal, but failure to do so would
have shown a lack of good faith as to the pledge he
had given the British government and not less a
lack of appreciation of the responsibility which
rested upon him as the diplomatic representative of
the United States to secure for his country peace
with honor.
Sumner's removal was a step that was deeply to
be deplored. For twelve years he had served his
country well. In distinguished qualifications for the
high station he occupied, he was without a peer
among men in public life — except in the peculiar
conditions which had now arisen. That he was no
longer on speaking terms with the President and
the Secretary of State— a point unduly emphasized
iu the debates, siuce diplomatic reserve while the
Joint High Commission was iu sessiou required
that the weightier reason be kept out of sight — was
' John Morley, Life of Gladstone, Vol. II, p. 402.

THE TEEATY OF WASHINGTON 371
far less to Ms discredit than to that of Grant and of
Fish. So far forth, Sumner merits sympathy in
this misfortune which was to shadow aud embitter
the few remaining years of his life. But by his ut
terly impracticable insistence upon "hemispheric
fiag- withdrawal," byhis long record of pertinacious
obstruction in the Senate, and by his growing in
firmities of temper, in large measure, Sumuer drew
this misfortune upon himself.'
' This removal of Sumner from the chairmanship has occa
sioned a vast deal of coutroversy. The views above expressed
accord in the main with the conclusions of Mr. Charles Francis
Adams, whose Treaty of Waahington is the raost comprehensive
study of the issues involved. E. L. Godkin discussed the
matter in a fair-minded editorial, N. Y. Nation, March 16,
1871. In his Memoir of Suraner, Mr. E. L. Pierce gives
an inordinate amount of space to this affair. He bitterly
arraigns Grant and Fish for their persecution of Sumner,
barely refers to his celebrated "Memorandum,'' and seems
to me altogether to underestimate tbe menace of Sumner's
probable opposition to the pending negotiations. Mr. J. F.
Rhodes attaches nearly as much importance as does Mr.
Adams to Sumner's mistakes in his Johnson-Clarendon speech
and in his "Memoraudura," yet declares that Grant's insistence
on Sumner's deposition " raust go down in history unjustified,"
and attributes it to " pure vindictiveness, " adding, 'If it was
done as a matter of policy or supposed necessity, the policy was
mistaken and the necessity unreal," — a judgment which seeras
to me unwarranted. J. C. B. Davis, in "Mr. Fish and the
Alabama Claims, " presents much special pleading in behalf of
Fish ; some of his points are demolished by Pierce's criticism.
The most successful championship of Sumner's cause has come
from ex-Governor D. H. Chamberlain, whose paper, "Charles
Sumner and the Treaty of Washington, " should be read as a
critique of Mr. Adams's monograph. He insLsts that in his
" Memorandum " Suraner had no reason to suppose he waa tak
ing ground which had been abandoned by Grant and Fish ; that
if this " Memorandum " had been considered of much impor
tance, it would have been brought into the Senate debates; that
At the time of his removal, he had given no sign of an intention

372 CHAELES SUMNEE
During the three months preceding his deposi
tion, documents sent to the Senate upon Sumner's
call had revealed more clearly the methods and
incidents involved in the negotiation of the San
Domingo annexation treaties, and, against the
earnest advice of his frieuds, Sumner resolved to
bring these matters to the attention of the Senate.
With some difficulty he secured the floor for the
24th of March. On the appointed day, long before
the session was to open, thousands strove to secure
entrance to the thronged Senate galleries ; the
House adjourned and its members and representa
tives of the diplomatic corps crowded the aisles of
the Senate chamber, so keen was the interest in the
anticipated onslaught of Sumner upon the adminis
tration from whom, as mauy believed, he had suf
fered grievous injustice. It was the very day upon
which the Sau Domingo commissioners were ex
pected to reach Washington, fresh from their fleld
of investigation ; but Sumner cousidered their re
port a foregone conclusion, and immaterial to the
matters he had on his mind. For three aud a half
to obstruct the progress of negotiations for a treaty which were
then under full headway. He ridicules the idea that Sumner's
influence conld have defeated the treaty, and on various other
points " takes the negative " with great spirit. Sumner's own
account of this unfortunate controversy is to be found in an
elaborate " Statement " as to bis personal relations with the
President and Secretary of State. This was prepared for pres
entation in the Senate in March, 1871, but Sumner decided to
withhold it. Accordingly, though printed and distributed
privately, it was not published till after Sumner's death, wheu
F. W. Bird sent it to the New York Tribune, in which it ap
peared April 6, 187i. — Works, Vol. XIV, pp. 254-276.

THE TEEATY OP WASHINGTON 373
hours he spoke with great solemnity and without
persoual bitterness. He did not concern himself
with the expediency of annexation, but brought de
tailed evidence from offlcial documents to uphold
his assertions that the force of the American navy
had been made to serve as the sole support of Baez
and as a menace to Hayti. His auditors were sur
prised that Sumner did not refer to his removal
from his committee nor make mention of current
charges against the President ou the score of nepo
tism aud gift-taking. In one passage it was thought
that he allowed resentment to induce him to bring
unjust imputations against Grant : — in a compari
son between the President's use of the war vessels
and the Ku Klux outrages, with the implication
that a proper use of energies abused iu the annexa
tion enterprise might have prevented or have put a
speedy stop to Southern outbreaks. This passage
was an ill-considered and unworthy afterthought,
regretted by his friends. Somewhat lame defense of
the President's acts was attempted by a few of his
adherents, but Schurz strongly upheld Sumner's
charges as to the illegal use of naval power.
Ten days later, the President transmitted to Con
gress the report of the commission of inquiry. It
was iu general favorable to annexation, though
without recommendation.' Since it had become
certain that the votes necessary for annexation by
' "Senator Wade was favorable to annexation on account of
his ' manifest destiny ' ideas. Dr. Howe was in favor of it in
view of various philanthropic considerations. Neither of these
views affected my opinion, bnt I was influenced later, some-

374 CHAELES SUMNEE
treaty or by joint resolution could not be secured,
here ended the President's dream of adding to the
United States a new commonwealth in the Indies.
The history of the San Dominican "republic" during
the past forty years has shown little basis for the
vision which captivated Grant's imagination.'
what, by the view taken by Presidert Grant in a conversation
after the matter was virtually settled, to tbe effect that, in case
of anything approaching a racial war between the white people
of the South and the freedmen, Santo Domingo might be useful
as giving the blacks sucb an opportunity for colonization that
they conld make terms with the ruling race, who might be more
favorably inclined to a compromise on seeing that they might
be largely deprived of their best laborers, should tha latter have
an opportunity to emigrate to a semi-tropical country nnder the
American flag." Of the commissioners two favored a report
advocating annexation ; Mr. White, however, prevailed npon
them to accept his view that, as Congress had asked only for
facts, advice from the commission would under the circum
stances be an impertinence. (Autobiography of Andrew D.
White, Vol. I, p. 506.) In a letter to the writer (March II,
1909), Mr. White states his personal attitude on the question of
annexation. "My feeling regarding any annexation was one
of doubt, — of ¦suspended judgment. I was by no means anx'
ious to try the experiment, but felt that if there was all Ameri
can majority in favor of trying it, the Spanish part of Santo
Domingo, under the circumstances, afforded the best oppor
tunity to do so safely, siuce it was very sparsely populated and
all its leaders of opinion favorable to coming under the sway of
the United States. ' '
' Grant never escaped from the glamour of this San Domingo
project. On almost the last page of his Personal Memoirs he
recurs to it, saying that he was chiefly led to urge annexation
with a view to the settlement of the race question in the United
States (ifemoirs. Vol. II, p. 393). Headds: " San Domingo was
freely offered to us not only by the administration but by all the
people, alraost without price. The island is upon our shores, is
very fertile, and is capable of supporting fifteen millions of
people." Dr. Howe's forecast waa even more glowing: "In
no case can the cost to the United States exceed |1, 500,000.
But were it a hundred millions, it would be cheaper than Alaska

THE TEEATY OP WASHINGTON 375
One of the most painful features of Sumner's re
moval from his chairmanship was that it put out of
a position of high influence the one man iu the Sen
ate best fltted by education and culture, by knowl
edge of European and particularly of English poli-

at a hundred cents. [The price paid to Russia for Alaska was
$7,200,000. In tbe year 1907, Alaska's output of gold alone
amounted to $18,489,400 or more than two aud one-half times the
total cost of Alaska.] Cheaper than Alaska? Why, Santo Do
mingo is worth more to us than even Cuba would be. Less
extensive, it is more fertile, more salubrious, richer in agri
cultural and mineral resources, and more felicitous iu geo
graphical position. ' '
The anticipations of neither party to this old controversy
have been fulfilled. No European power, after our "folly in
rejecting so great a prize, " made baste to acquire it, or even to
secure a free port on the Bay of Samana. Its population, then
estimated by the Ecclesiastical Court at 207,000, and by tbe
commission at not more than 150,000, had reached only about
416,000, in 1907. Ifa government continued turbulent, and
bankruptcy and repudiation seeraed about to lead to interven
tion of European powers when, by the convention relating to
Dominican finances, ratified in March, 1907, a citizen of the
United States was made Receiver General of Customs, charged
with the responsibility of apportioning a fixed proportion of
the revenues araong foreign creditors.
Hayti retained tbe unmenaced independence whicll Sumner
was eager to assure her. She has paid the interest on her bonds
and kept out of serious quarrels with foreign powers, but she
has shown little capacity for self-government. If Hayti's ex
hibition of what the negro race can do, when left to work out
its own governmental salvation, is to be accepted as representa
tive, it falls far short of fulfilling Sumner's dream. Hayti has
never known a president who was anything else than a dictator ;
her revolutions are numbered by the dozen. As late as Decera
ber, 1908, one dictator was deposed by another, with a ragged
army at his heels, and rioting and pillage and bloodshed fol
lowed. Yet there is a gleam of hope in the despatch from the
American minister to Hayti: "The revolution vrasoneofthe
most orderly that has occurred in Hayti for many years." —
Outlook, Deo. 12, 1908, p. 804.

376 CHAELES SUMNEE
tics and public men, and by study of international
law to work congenially with the Joint High Com
mission in negotiating a treaty of flrst importance
with Great Britain. Two of the British commis
sioners presented letters of introduction to Sumuer.
Though brought into no official relations, both policy
and congeniality led the commission to make much of
Mm. He was often consulted by its members ; the
British minister dined them with Sumner as the only
other guest ; upou their intimation that such an invi
tation would be acceptable, Sumner entertained the
commissioners and their wives at an elaborate ban
quet ; and the following night the meu returned
to dine with Sumner, their deliberations lasting into
the small hours. Judge Hoar came to him fre
quently for conference, and when the treaty was
finally signed, ou May 8th, brought to Sumner's
house the first available copy, inscribed : " The re
sult of long and earnest labor is presented and dedi
cated with respect and confidence by his frieud,
E. E. Hoar."
Much curiosity and some apprehension were felt
as to the attitude which Sumner would take toward
the treaty, for he declined to commit himself, until
he spoke in the Senate. Though no longer iu his
former position of authority, he could nevertheless
exercise great powers of obstruction and opposition
in that body. It was by uo means certain that he
could not at least force amendments which would
make the treaty unsatisfactory to the British gov
ernment ; aud, if he chose to attempt to arouse

THE TEEATY OP WASHINGTON 377
public sentiment, it was believed th;it he might
work upou Fenianism — to which he had himself
already given great prominence, iu his " Memoran
dum," as a force to be reckoned with — so strongly as
to bring enough outside pressure to bear upon sena-
toi'S to defeat the treaty's ratification. The British
commissioners stayed iu Washington for some time
after the signing of the treaty, frankly avowing to
the home government that they deemed it best to
remain where they could be iu touch with certain
influential leaders of the Senate. They were assidu
ous iu attentions to Sumner, and in acknowledg
ments of his assistance and courtesies. Sir Stafford
Northcote declared: "We have paid him a good
deal of attention since he has been deposed, and I
think he is much pleased at beiug still recognized as
apower."' Sumner confided to Lieber : "Lordde
Grey told me that without my speech [ou the John
son-Clarendon Convention] the treaty could uot have
been made and that he worked by it as by a chart."
To the great relief of the administration, Sumner
not only gave to the treaty his vote, but made the
principal speech in its exposition and support. To
his friends he declared that every point he had
urged against the earlier convention was met by this
treaty.' It did uot make our cause "a mere bundle
'Long, Northcote, Vol. II, p. 23.
'"An examination of its provisions, in relation to the
Alabama question, will show that they substantially meet the
requirements of his [Sumner's] speech on the Johnson -Claren
don Convention." — J. B. Moore, International Arbitrations,
Vol. I, p. 553.

378 CHAELES SUMNEE
of individual claims," but comprehended "all com
plaints aud claims" ; it did uot allow any choice
of arbitrator by lot; it expressed "in a friendly
spfrit the regret felt by Her Majesty's government "
for the escape of the cruisers and the damage they
wrought ; it declared as binding both in the pend
ing case and for the future such "due diligence"
as would require a neutral power to "prevent the
fitting out or assisting of belligerent vessels in its
ports, aud to prevent its ports being made a base of
naval operations by one belligerent against the
other." The determination of the amount of com
pensation was assigned to an arbitration conference
which met at Geneva, where at first the more vigor
ous than ingenuous insistence upou Sumner's favor
ite idea of "national claims" — claims which Fish
declared unfounded, an opinion supported by the
weight of more recent authorities, — came near
wrecking the whole negotiation.' Sumner criti
cized the vagueness of the language in the treaty
which led to this later controversy, and he certainly
would not have given his assent to an abandonment
of the "national claims," had he supposed the
treaty's provisions could be interpreted as sanction
ing such a course. He also suggested, but did not
strongly urge, certain amendments, mainly with the
' "The real fact, however, would seem to be that the indirect
clairas were inserted in the Anu'ricau 'case ' by those who pre
pared it, not because of auy faith in them or hope that they
might possibly be entertained, but in order to get rid of theni,
and as a species of political estoppel." — C. F. Adams, Jr., Life
of Charles Francis Adams, p. 388.

THE TEEATY OF WASHINGTON 379
intent of securing more precise definition of the du
ties of neutrals and an extension of the immunity
of private property at sea. Although he had de
clared the withdrawal of the British flag from the
Western hemisphere to be an indispensable pre
Uminary to a complete settlement, he advanced no
such impracticable suggestion in the Seuate. He
cheerfully accepted the treaty as the best that could
be gained, and declared that as such it would be
"hailed with joy by the thinking men of Great
Britain and of the United States." ^
For the sake of clearness, the narrative of the
diplomatic negotiations of Grant's first term, in
which Sumner was so vitally interested, has been
continued to this point without interruption. But
during these four years Sumner had entered into the
general work of the Senate with great vigor. He
became a careful student of financial problems, and
frequently took part in the debates, especially in
protest against what he considered an attack upon
the national credit ; he continued to urge the speedy
resumption of specie payments and the funding of
' Wise after the fact, it is easy for the historian of to-day, in
view of Sumner's magnanimous acceptance of the commission's
treaty, to declare that his removal from his chairraanship was
neither politic nor necessary. But Fish had to act upon the
light theu at his command. As Mr. Morley says, Sumner was
then believed to be " red-hot against England " : he was display
ing implacable antagonism to the President ; his ' Memorandum "
had laid dowu an impossible "preliminary" ; and in twenty
years no other man in the Senate had shown such pertinacity in
obstruction, even in the face of almost unanimous opposition.
Fish certainly had ample ground for seeing in Sumner a serious
menace to the treaty.

380 CHAELES SUMNEE
the public debt into long-term obligations ; he
favored the simplification of the internal revenue
system and the abolition of the income tax. He
devoted much energy to securing a pension for Mrs.
Lincoln, succeeding only after it had been held over
from one Congress to another, aud finally carrying
it against the unanimously adverse report of the
committee to which it had beeu referred. Postal
reform aroused his iuterest ; he earnestly believed
in making the postal system serve as a great educa
tional force for disseminating knowledge, and di
rected much effort to the attempt to secure lower
rates and simpler classifications.
But the legislation appealing most strongly to
him was that which related to reconstruction. At
the beginning of Grant's administration, three states
still remained outside the pale, and Georgia, after
being admitted to representation, presently pro
ceeded to "purge" her legislature in flagrant viola
tion of the Eeconstruction Acts. Sumner cooper
ated heartily with other Eepublican leaders in 1870
in the Act for reforming the legislature of Georgia,
and in imposing a uniform set of " fundamental con
ditions" upon the admission of Virginia, Missis
sippi, and Texas. In replying to colleagues who
denied the propriety of these prohibitions upon
changes in state constitutions allowing exclusions
from the suffrage, or from school-privileges, or from
office-holding, on account of race, color or previous
condition of servitude, Sumner again exhibited his
characteristic mode of constitutional interpretation.

THE TEEATY OP WASHINGTON 381
He was much giveu to citing the Declaration of In
dependence, if uot as directly conferring powers
upon Congress, at any rate as an authoritative guide
in the interpretation of the Constitutiou. Limita
tions upon the powers of Congress he was wont to
brush contemptuously aside, wheu he thought they
stood in the way of " human rights " of which he
conceived himself the chief defender ; aud men who,
fearing this tendency toward centralization, opposed
placing such powers in the hands of Congress, he
would most unjustly but vehemently denounce as
the lineal descendants of nullifiers aud secessionists.
In 1870, when some changes in the naturalization
laws were uuder discussion, Sumner tried to secure
the passage of an amendment striking out the word
"white," so that there should be no distinctions of
race and color in granting admission to citizenship.
This amendment was defeated largely through the
infiuence of senators from the Pacific coast, who
were opposed to the extension of naturalization to
the Chinese. Sumner had no fear ofthe "Yellow
Peril." In his view, "a returned Chinaman is
worth a dozen missionaries ; but while he is here, —
if he does uot return, — he comes under our influ
ences, he shares the good of our churches, of our
schools, and if you will let him he will grow up in
the glory and the beauty ofour citizenship." The
only change made at this time was an amendment,
at Sumner's instigation, admitting to naturalization
" aliens of African nativity or African descent."
The wreck of Sumner's hopes of domestic hap-

382 CHAELES SUMNEE
piness aud the strain of the prolonged controversy
with the administration told heavily upou him. In
February, 1871, he wrote, "I am w^eary and old,
aud much disheartened by the course of our Presi
dent, who is not the mau we supposed. ' ' Later in
the same mouth, for the first time iu a dozen years,
he suffered from a return of the angina pectoris.
Yet despite illness and depression, he found strength
for some literary efforts and diversions. As a
means of disseminating Ms views on civil rights, iu
1869 he wrote a learned disquisition ou "Caste,"
which he put to rather inappropriate use as a
Lyceum lecture, delivering it in eight states. In
the following year he made a lecture tour from
Massachusetts to Illinois, presenting sometimes his
address on "Lafayette" but more frequently a lec
ture on the Franco-Prussian War, just ended ; in
this he discussed its causes, denounced Louis Napo
leon, and emphasized anew his views on the enormi
ties of war. The preparation of a paper ou "The
Best Portraits in Engraving" gave him au oppor
tunity to follow his favorite penchant and to do some
congenial work upon biographical sketches of emi
nent engravers.
In 1871 it might seem that Sumner had become a
mau without a party. He had opposed certain
favorite measures of the Eepublican administration,
and had been deposed by Eepublican votes from his
commanding position iu the Seuate. It was not
known how he would align himself in the future.
Nevertheless, the Eepublican leaders in Massachu-

THE TEEATY OP WASHINGTON 383
setts found themselves obliged to appeal to him in
the fall of this year as the one mau whose influence
was essential to save the commonwealth from the
menace of General Butler's unprecedented cam
paign for the governorship. Sumner's personal re
lations with Butler had not beeu unpleasant and it
was with reluctance that he consented to do what
was laid upon him as a duty : he joined with Wilson
in a declaration that Butler's nomination would be
"hostile to the best interests of the commonwealth
and of the Eepublican party. " This act was thought
to be the turning-point in the campaign. If it lost
Butler the nomination, it certainly won for Sumner
a bitter and vindictive enemy.

CHAPTEE XVni
SUMNER'S PERSONALITY AND CHARACTERISTICS
For nearly a score of years Charles Sumner was
the most conspicuous figure in the Senate of the
United States. In body as well as in mind he tow
ered among his colleagues. In manhood, Sumner's
height was six feet and four inches, and he had the
frame and strength of a giant. In his youth he
swam across the Niagara Eiver just below the Falls.
His broad forehead was overhung by a great mass
of brown hair. His eyes were of a deep blue, his
nose strong and aquiline, his mouth large. In his
college days his features seemed too heavy for his
slight frame, but in his prime came greater fulness,
which gave him a handsome, manly face and most
commanding presence.
There was always lacking in him a certain supple
ness both of body and of mind. He was a man of
great erudition. Extraordinary as were his intel
lectual powers, they were not of the highest order :
they were acquisitive rather than creative, — a con
trast which he himself seemed to draw in a remark
to his friend, Colonel T. W. Higginson, in relation
to some demand upou him which he thought excess
ive : "These people forget that I am a cistern,
not a fountain, and require time to fill up." ' His
^Contemporaries, p. 283.

SUMNEE' S PEESON ALITY 385
phenomenal memory put the harvest of his years of
study aud experience at his instant command. The
variety and fulness of his information often led the
listener to misjudge him. Mrs. Jefferson Davis has
given an interesting account of the impression Sum
uer made upou those who did uot get below the sur
face in their knowledge of him : ' ' He was a hand
some, unpleasing man, and au athlete whose physique
proclaimed his physical strength. His conversation
was studied but brilliant, his manner deferential
ouly as a matter of policy ; consequently he never
inspired the women to whom he was attentive with
the pleasant consciousness of possessing his regard
or esteem. He was, uutil his fracas with Mr. Brooks,
fond of talking to Southern women, aud prepared
himself with great care for these conversational
pyrotechnics, in which, as well as I remember, there
was much Greek fire and the ' set pieces ' were nu
merous ; he never intruded his peculiar views upon
us in any degree, but read up the Indian mutiny,
lace, Demosthenes, jewels, Seneca's morals, intag
lios, the Platonian theory, aud once gave me quite
an interesting resum^ of the history of dancing." '
In his early thirties Sumner became one of the
most sought- for lecturers upon the Lyceum platform,
theu worthily manned by the leaders of American
thought. Here to his kingly presence was joined
a voice remarkable for its fulness and strength,—
" a splendid organ : the diapason was there in tones
full and rich ; yet the vox humana was lacking."
^Memoirs of Jefferson Davia, Vol. I, pp. 557^58.

386 CHAELES SUMNEE
His enunciation was distinct and his sentences well-
rouuded. He allowed himself none of the collo
quialisms or clipping of words which brought a
greater orator, Wendell Phillips, into more intimate
touch with the average audience.' He was always
"full of matter." His speeches grew to portentous
length, not because he was rambling in thought or
did not know how to come to a close, but because
he was absorbed in his theme and because he delib
erately cultivated a florid, over-elabOrated style.
Thus, he would refer to the Fugitive Slave Act as
"most cruel, unchristian, detestable, devilish,
heaven-defying ; setting at naught the best principles
of the Constitution and the laws of God." Though
his popular lectures ran to two or three hours in
length, he was intolerant of any interruption. If
some unfortunate in a far corner of the audience,
after listening to the speaker for two full hours,
tried to steal from the hall, Sumuer would stop
short in his discourse, glower at the offender's every
step, and even continue to glare for many heavy
seconds at the door through which the wretched man
had made his embarrassed exit.
His earlier platform addresses and speeches were
carefully wrought out aud memorized, and then de
livered without notes and with much attention to
gestures and manner. At times, however, he would
forget himself in his theme and quite shake off the
'Personal recollections ot Mr. E. Harlow Russell. For vig
orous descriptions of Sumner's oratory, see Independent, July 19,
1859, by Theodore Tilton ; and N. Y. Tribune, Nov. 16, 1859,
by Mrs. Julia Ward Howe.

SUMNEE' S PEESONALITY 387
conventions of the orator, as when in his Harvard
Phi Beta Kappa address he stood with his back
turned to the audience, while he was directing au
impassioned appeal to President Quincy. But most
of his speeches smelled of the lamp, and his denun
ciations were made all the more galling by the be
lief that the invective which he was much given to
pouring upon his opponents sprang not from his
tongue in the heat of passion but had been carefully
worked up and committed to memory in the quiet
solitude of his study. His speech for the expulsiou
of Bright was described by one who heard it as "a
lash of scorpions." Few meu in so strenuous pub
lic service have found so much time or inclination
to thumb dictionaries and books of synonyms.
"Prophetic Voices coiicerning America" ov " of
America"? — this was the question upou which,
after much anxious thought, he was consulting with
the Librarian of Congress and writing to Longfellow,
on the very last day of his life. He had a fondness
for preambles, and for formal pronunciamentos of
his views. He often showed a rare skill in the
choice of the telling pMase, and in his "Freedom'
national. Slavery sectional," "The Crime against
Kansas," " The Barbarism of Slavery" he forged
weapons that were splendidly effective. ' ' Naboth's
Vineyard," as the title of his speech ou Grant's Sau
Domingo policy, was perhaps more striking and of
fensive than anything in the arraignment itself
No charge is more unjust than that Sumner ever
spoke as a mere rhetorician, yet it is a valid criti-

388 CHAELES SUMNEE
cism that he was " too often the slave of words when
he thought he was thefr master." ' Thus he was
led into an extravagance of expression at times quite
at variance with a prosaic " unoratorical " view of
the facts. As we have seen, at the beginning of his
career, he could write to Winthrop with earnest
protestations of personal friendship aud regard, and
three days later publish a scathing arraignment of
that congressman's recent vote : " It caunot be for
gotten on earth ; it must be remembered iu heaven.
Blood ! blood ! is on the hands of the representa
tive from Boston. Not all great Neptune's ocean
can wash them clean ! " Yet Sumner was surprised
that Winthrop should see cause for declaring their
personal relations at an end. In his Faneuil Hall
speech he pictures the depths of infamy to which
Fillmore had sunk in signing the Fugitive Slave
Bill: "Better for him had he never been born!
Better for his name, and for the name of his children,
had he never been President!" Yet this did not
prevent his showing decided pleasure, a few months
later, at "the peculiarly cordial reception " which
FiUmore gave him in Washington.' And again, to
ward the close of his life, in his flrst speeches on the
'John Morley thus characterizes him. Life of Gladstone, Vol.
II, p. 398.
' Dr. Howe wrote to Sumner that on good authority it was
reported that Fillmore, "in answer to a query about how you
could seek his hospitalities after denouncing him so bitterly,
said. 'Mr. Sumner seems to like me pretty well ; at any rate, by
coming to my house he shows he did not believe what he
said.' " May 11, 1852, Journala a-nd Lettera of S. G. Howe,
Vol. II, p. 374.

SUMNEE' S PEESONALITY 389
San Domingo treaties, although Sumner protested
that he had spoken only in kindliness, his words
seemed to Grant and to many others, so charged
with imputations against the President as to place
the speaker in the attitude of a bitter assailant of
his motives and character. In these very years
Sumuer was being made the victim of a somewhat
similar failure in discrimination to that which he
was displaying. In 1872 the talented editor of
Ea-rper's Weekly found it necessary to rebuke Thomas
Nast because he carried over into his caricatures of
Sumner the brutal method which he had employed
so effectively ' against Tweed. In like manner,
Sumner's pen and tongue became so accustomed to
denouncing slavery and " slave-mougers " that they
kept the same furious diction when condemning the
more venial faults and failings of Johnson and
Grant. In Sumner's later years this lack of self-
restraint extended from his words to his manner,
and at times friends noted with apprehension his
flushed face, trembling voice, and seeming irrespon
sibility for the almost frenzied words he was uttering.'
Aside from this extravagance, there were other
qualities in Sumner's addresses which provoked
criticism. In his speeches upon the Fugitive Slave
Law there was a frequent elaboration of references to
slavery as the "harlot" or the "harpy," which
gave great offense to Southern hearers. These pas
sages are uot pleasant reading to-day ; but it must
' Comments by Fish and Dana, in The Treaty of Wajihington,
pp. 173-176.

390 CHAELES SUMNEE
be said that, in the face of the haughty arrogance
of the Southern leaders, it was Sumner's deliberate
purpose to exhibit the defllement of contact with
slavery, and his plainness, even grossness, of speech
found justiflcation in its occasion aud effect. Sum
uer never appreciated the force and charm of brev
ity and simplicity ; his speeches in the Senate fre
quently exceeded three hours in length, and their
embellishment with labored alliterations, and with
poetical quotations, especially wheu chosen from
the Greek and Latin, at times did more to amuse
thau to convince Ms hearers. For a writer who
concerned himself so seriously with the form of his
expression, Sumner was strangely lacking in sensi
tiveness to the demands of unity or appropriateness
to the occasion. In mauy cases doubtless he vio
lated these demands deliberately. Delenda est Car
thago was hardly a more inevitable ending of Cato' s
speeches in the Eoman Senate than was a denuncia
tion of slavery of every public utterance of the seua-
tor from Massachusetts. It was with this message
that his Lyceum lectures and even his obituary trib
utes were weighted. But only a faulty artistic
sense could have allowed such lapses as the injec
tion of a long section from a ten-year-old lecture on
"White Slavery in the Barbary States" into a
Senate speech, or the devotion of a fourth of his
Faneuil Hall eulogy of Lincoln to such irrelevant
and controversial topics as au elaborate criticism of
the Queen's proclamation regarding belligerency,
and a detailed argument in favor of negro suffrage.

SUMNEE' S PEESONALITY 391
In his later years, Sumuer came to value most the
printed page as the means of spreading his in
fluence. Whether iu the Senate or upon the plat-
foriu, therefore, he became comparatively indifferent
to his immediate hearers, for his thought was flxed
upon the vast audience whom he could thus reach,
and it was often through pressure from this outside
audience that his colleagues were reluctantly brought
to adopt his policies. It became one of Ms chief
objects of solicitude to bring out a revised edition
of his Works before Ms death. " These speeches,"
he said, "are my life. As a connected series they
will illustrate the progress of the great battle with
slavery, and what I have doue in it." At the task
of their revision and annotation he toiled year after
year. To cite a single typical illustration of the
elaborateness of this work, he devoted forty-eight
pages of flue print to setting forth the comments in
the press and from friends on his speech, " The Bar
barism of Slavery." At the time of his death he
was engaged upon the tenth volume ; two more vol
umes were brought out under Longfellow's supervi
sion, and three others were edited by his literary
executors. It must be confessed that Sumner's rhetoric has
uot stood the test of time. The very pains which
he bestowed iu elaboration served in a measure to
defeat his object. But to acknowledge that Sum
ner's speeches do not hold the place which he hoped
for them in world literature is not to deny that in
their day and generation they were a fremendous

392 CHAELES SUMNEE
power for good. Upon the lecture platform Ms ideal
ism and eloquence captivated aspiring young men,
and proved one of the most effective influences upou
those who came to voting age in the decade before
the Civil War. What gave Sumner's words their
tremendous power was their "fervency of holy en
thusiastic conviction." Profound seriousness per
vaded his speeches, as it did Gladstone's ; each
made upon his hearers the impression "thatthe
matter he was discussing was that upou which the
foundations of heaven and earth rest." ' He came
to the Senate at a time when nearly every Northern
leader with any considerable following was urging
supine acquiescence in compromise. On the day
when his clarion voice rang out in stern arraignment
of the Fugitive Slave Act, meu thanked God that at
last a man was come whose courage matched his
conscience. By that speech Sumner ushered iu a
new day.
For years Sumner was one of the most unpopular
men in the Seuate. This was not due merely to the
fact that the measures which he had most at heart
found little favor with the majority of his col
leagues. Without any experieuce in the making or
administering of laws, Sumner had stepped from
the Lyceum platform into the most powerful of
legislative bodies. He changed his forum, but not
his manner. He had become so accustomed to
swaying vast popular audiences that he expected
his hearers to " accept with meekness the ingrafted
' G. F. Hoar, Autobiography, Vol. II, p. 347.

SUMNEE' S PEESONALITY 393
word" ; but this his colleagues were by uo means
minded to do. One of his private secretaries
clearly marks this trait : — "Mr. Sumner was a man
not ready to yield to his equals. ' Domineering '
is a strong word ; but he felt a superiority which
really existed, and Ms manner asserted it. To his
subordinates no one could be more considerate,
more generous." ' He was the champion of the
freedmen and insisted that they must be accorded
absolute civil equality. Among his owu intimates
he numbered mulatto caterers in Boston and in
Washington, and these as well as many other peo
ple of most humble origin and opportunities were
welcome in his parlor, and at his table, — a wel
come which it is said Mrs. Sumner found it very
hard to extend.
Yet Sumner would march roughshod over the
feelings of others when they seemed to him to show
a "caste" spirit. At times his manner was most
unfortunate' : he would speak with brutal frankness,
far beyond what the occasion warranted, so that
men who admired his character and ability and who
prized his friendship, nevertheless hesitated to urge
his election to certain associations of conservative
and scholarly gentlemen, fearing that he would not
" fit. " Among his own colleagues, Sumner was crit
icized for his aristocratic manners, his airs of su
periority. He was reproved by Fessenden for "lec
turing the Senate." He nagged his associates with
reminders of how they had at first derided and
' F. V. Balch, Pierce, Vol. IV, p. 343.

394 CHAELES SUMNEE
then supported his measures. He laid down Lin
coln's duty in a way a man of less magnanimity
would have resented. Of all his associates of
nearly a quarter of a centurj-^ there were hardly any
but Chase, Schurz and Wilsou, with whom his
personal relations were not at some time severely
strained. In every great measure to which he de
voted himself, he believed he saw clearly some high
moral issue. Says Curtis : "I was one day talking
with him upon some public question, and as our
conversation warmed, I said to him, ' Yes, but you
forget the other side.' He brought his clinched fist
down upon the table till it rang again, and his voice
shook the room as he thundered in reply, ' There is
no other side!'"' Such intolerance of others'
opinions aud motives is hard to live with. Never
theless, there grew up among his colleagues a gen
uine respect aud admiration for his absolute sincer
ity, and in his later years the feeling toward him
became more kindly than at the first).
Sumner used always to assert the precedence of
the Senate even over the Supreme Court and cab
inet, saying, "We make justices and cabinet min
isters." He sought to uphold the best traditions of
the Senate, taking his offlcial duties seriously, even
in such matters as punctuality and regularity of
attendance. " A senator cannot leave his place
more than a soldier," was his reply to a flattering
invitation which would have taken him away from
a session to address a New York assemblage. On
' Orations, Vol. I, p. 256.

SUMNEE' S PEESONALITY 395
the day following the Brooks assault his seat was
vacant for the flrst time ; till the summons to his
mother's death-bed, a dozen years later, he had
never been absent from a Senate session except be
cause of illness. He repeatedly insisted that Cou
gress had uo right to adjourn, however great the
discomfort of life in Washington, until the needed
work of legislation was completed. For himself, he
cleared his desk each day of the mass of detail, and
it was his custom to remain in the capital at the end
of sessions, until everything needing his attention
was disposed of. In committee service it was the
testimony of his colleagues that he was efficient aud
energetic in carrying forward the work, yet consid
erate in his treatment of the minority.
Few men in public life have been so generous in
aUowing the calls and requests of strangers as well
as of constituents to trespass upon their time and
strength. But he would waste not a moment
upon such applicants, when he was deep in the
preparation of a speech or engaged upon some
other task of his office. At such times, " How are
you? Sit down," would be the brusque greeting
from the desk, at which, with hardly a glance, the
writer would continue his work. Often the em
barrassed visitor, flnding that his presence was
forgotten, would rise, saying, "I see you are busy ;
I'll call agaiu," only to receive the reply, "But
I'm always busy ; what is your point ? " and the
caUer who had hoped for an hour's discussion
would go away feeling that flve minutes had been

396 CHAELES SUMNEE
grudgingly given. To reporters and others who
sought information from him, Sumner was frank
aud communicative as far as he thought best. If
the caller persisted in pushing his questions beyond
that point, the answer would be, "I can't speak of
that ; " further importunity would be met by a
stony stare. Like other public men, Sumner was
often approached by persons who sought to take
advantage of their friendship or acquaintance with
him to advance some private interest ; frequently
a corporation, seeking legislative favors, would
persuade men of his acquaintance to call upon him.
Sumuer resented such "relaying," and whenever
he suspected, justly or unjustly, that this was being
attempted, he would become brusque and re
pellent. It sometimes seemed that the higher the
rank or the closer the acquaintance of the caller,
the more unpleasant grew his manner. This ready
suspicion, brusqueness and irritability were doubt
less due in large measure to Sumner's physical disa
bilities, particularly to the pain to which he was
constantly subject in his later years and to his lack
of restful sleep. Indeed, in the last two years of
his life, he hardly ever slept without recourse to
morphia. He was jealous for the good name of the Senate
as to language and manners, and the dread of un
popularity did not deter him from demanding a
like observance of senatorial dignity from others.
After much provocation, he denounced Douglas's
indulgence iu coarse personalities, rebuked the

SUMNEE' S PEESONALITY 397
"plantation manners" of Mason and Butler, pro
tested against Abbott's threat of a duel, and even
moved the expulsion of a Delaware senator who had
repeatedly come to the Senate in a state of intoxica
tion. Such school-mastering of one's associates is
usually pleasurable neither to the critic nor to the
one criticized, yet it was doubtless salutary for the
Senate. No American of Sumner's day had a wider or more
distinguished circle of personal friends. It is true
that between him aud his political associates at some
stage differences almost always arose, and political
differences also caused sad ruptures in his relations
with friends whom he loved like brothers, as in the
case of Hillard, of Howe, of Dana, and of Lieber.
In most of these divisive issues of morals and poli
tics, it would seem as if Sumner werie iu the right,
yet it cannot be doubted that his over-pertinacious
insistence upon his own point of view as the only
one possible for a right-minded man, put a severe
strain upon friendship. Until he entered the Seu
ate, Sumner "s associations were decidedly academic,
and he had been brought into deep and abiding
fellowship with the leaders of American thought
and literature. Fortunate, indeed, was the young
man who could grow up into intimate relations with
Story and Greenleaf, Quincy and Channing. Among
the friends of his prime were Longfellow, Whittier,
Holmes, Emerson, Hawthorne, Lincoln, Bancroft,
Prescott, and a score of those whom America de
lights to honor. It is uo exaggeration to say that

398 CHAELES SUMNEE
no other American of his time had so wide and
emineut au acquaintance abroad, aud this intimacy
with leaders of public opinion in England, Prance
and Germany not ouly broadened his own vision
bdt became a national asset, for during the Civil
War the administratiou was kept in touch with
shiftings of public sentiment in England hardly
more through the channels of the State Department
than through Sumner's correspondence.
In Ms unrelenting warfare against slavery aud
other forms of social injustice Sumner found his
stanchest supporters among the preachers and
members of Christian churches of every denomina
tion, yet he himself paid little heed to formal re
ligious ordinances. At the age of twenty-two, he
replied to a college friend, who had written to him
iu grave anxiety for Ms spiritual welfare, in a letter
of singular candor : ". . . I do not think that
I have a basis for faith to build upon. I am with
out religious feeling. ... I believe, though,
that my love to my neighbor ... is pure and
strong. Certainly I do feel an affection for every
thing that God created ; and this feeling is my re
ligion." And he quoted Coleridge's lines begin
ning, " He prayeth well, who loveth well
Both man and bird and beast,"
as illustrating his feeling.
In his more mature years it was doubtless Chan
ning's influence that was strongest in moiUding his
thought on matters of ethics and religion. It meant

SUMNEE' S PEESONALITY 399
much for Sumuer that for nearly ten years he was
brought close to this great leader of meu on terms
of intimate and almost idolizing friendship. But
in King's Chapel (Unitarian) where for a time he
used to occupy his father's place at the head of the
family pew, and in most other Boston churches
Sumner found that the Christianity that was being
preached concerned itself little with the slave or
with the humanitarian causes to which his life was
devoted. To do a man's part in bringing in the
new day was Sumner's task ; he tortured himself
with no anxieties about saving his own soul. " I
never knew a man," declared one of his private
secretaries, "with a firmer grasp upon the faith
iu the good God. He once said to a friend in my
presence that he would not turn over his hand to
know whether he should consciously live agaiu or
not, so sure was he that all was for the best." ' And
this same high optimism was the source of his faith
in the dark days before and during the war. In a
universe ruled as he believed by moral law, it was
inconceivable* to him that Slavery could triumph iu
the contest with Freedom.
Sumner's friendship was pervaded by a warmth
of sympathy rarely to be found in a man. ' ' Heaven
lend me in perpetuity," wrote Greenleaf, " your
ever-gushing fountain of self-denying kindness to
friends ! " ' He seems never to have been happier
' F. V. Balch, quoted by Pierce, Vol. IV, p. 344.
'In Washington, during the strenuous days of the war, he
gave of his time and strength without stint in aiding those who
were trying to get to some wounded soldier or to recover the

400 CHAELES SUMNEE
than when helping a mau of aspiration and promise
to secure a firmer foothold on the ladder. He would
leave his desk to go out on ' change and raise among
his friends the funds to send an ambitious boy
to college. His ardent and tireless efforts to gain
recognition for Crawford, his eager commendations
of the works of Lieber and Longfellow, of Prescott
and Motley, to European critics are typical of his
abounding helpfulness. It may be that we have
Sumner to thank for The Scarlet Letter. While
George Bancroft was Secretary of the Navy, under
date of January 9, 1846, Sumner sent the following
letter to Mrs. Bancroft :

"You will think that I never appear, except as a
beggar. Very well. I never beg for myself. But I
do beg uow most earnestly for another ; for a friend
of mine aud of your husband's ; for a man of letters,
of gentleness.
"I have heard to-day of the poverty of Haw
thorne. He is very poor indeed. He has already
broken up the humble and inexpensive home which
he had established in Concord, because it was too
expensive. You kuow how simply he lived. He
lived almost ou nothing ; but even that nothing has
gone. Let me say to your husband (for I would
not quote Latin to a lady)
bodies of their dead. Colonel Higginson says of him : "I have
never known in public life so prompt and faithful a correspond
ent, or one so ready to espouse the cause of some individual,
raan or woraan, who needed aid. He had no band of hench
men, no one who had been won to support hira for value re
ceived ; but the blessings of the poor, the friendless, the power
less were his. " — Contemporaries, p. 290.

SUMNEE' S PEESONALITY 401
" ' Nil habuit Codrus. Quis enim negat? Et tamen illud
Perdidit infelix totum nihil. '
"Some of his savings were lent to Mr. Eipley at
Brook Farm ; but he is uot able to repay them, aud
poor Hawthorne (that most gentle true nature) has
not wherewithal to live. I need not speak of his
genius to you. He is au ornament of the country ;
nor is there a person of any party who would not
hear with delight that the author of such Gold-
smithian prose, as he writes, has received honor and
offlce from his country.
"I plead for him earnestly, and count upon your
friendly interference to keep his uame present to the
mind of your husband, so that it may not be pushed
out of sight by the intrusive legion of clamorous
office-seekers or by other public cares.
"Some post-office, some custom-house, something
that will yield daily bread, — anything in the gift of
your husband,— ^or that his potent influeuce might
command — will confer great happiness upou Haw
thorne, aud, I believe, dear Mrs. Bancroft, it will
confer greater happiness on you. . . .
" I wish I could have some assurance from your
husband that Hawthorne should be cared for. . . .
"I wrote your husband lately ou peace; but he
will not heed my words.
" Believe me, dear Mrs. Bancroft,
"Yours sincerely (provided you do not forget
Hawthorne)
" Charles Sumner."

Bancroft replied, under date of January 13, 1846.
. . . "As to Hawthorne, I have been most per
severingly his friend. I am glad you go for the
good rule of dismissing wicked Whigs and putting

402 CHAELES SUMNEE
in Democrats. Set me dowu as without influence,
if so soou as the course of business will properly
permit, you do not flnd Hawthorne an office-holder."
Six weeks later Bancroft wrote to President Polk,
endorsing the appointment of Hawthorne as Sur
veyor at the Salem Custom House.'
Brief mention must be made of Sumner's marriage.
In early life he is said to have met with a crushing
disappointment. In later years his conversation
and letters gave frank expression to his loneliness
aud his envy of the domestic joys of his friends, but
until he had become middle-aged and famous he
seemed to have renounced all thought of such hap
piness for himself. In the weeks following his
mother's death, he confided to a friend that now for
the fir,st time iu his life he might feel at liberty to
marry, adding the somewhat cool-blooded explana
tion that he had never before had the means to sup
port a family. Por several years it had beeu his
habit to dine as often as once a week at the home
of Congressman Hooper, and it was no surprise to
intimate frieuds when Sumner announced his en
gagement to Mr. Hooper's daughter-in-law, a hand
some and ambitious young widow of twenty-eight,
with one daughter eight years of age. He entered
upou his new experience with high hopes aud with
the felicitations of a host of friends, — none more
sympathetic and cordial than an exquisite letter
from George Bancroft.' To Whittier, Sumner
' Howe, Life and Letters of George Bancroft, Vol. I, pp. 264-
267. 2 Pierce, Vol. IV, p. 303.

SUMNEE' S PEESONALITY 403
wrote : " To-day [October 17, 1866] at three o'clock,
I shall be married, and at the age of fifty-five begin
to live." But- his hopes were doomed to speedy
disappointment. October and May did not prove
congenial, aud before the first anniversary of their
marriage, they had separated forever. A few years
later Sumner secured au uncontested divorce.
Throughout this bitter experience he retained the
affectionate regard of his frieuds. Mr. Hooper,
whose sympathies would naturally be with his
daughter-in-law, relying, as he said, "upon Sum
ner's manly strength and magnanimity," tried to
bring about a reconciliation, but his failure to do
so did not cloud his friendship and admiration for
Sumuer, with whom he remained on terms of the
closest intimacy till death.
In the first fourteen years of Sumner's life in
Washington, he occupied modest and inexpensive
lodgings. But in 1867 he bought a house, overlook
ing Lafayette Square, standing upon a part of the
site now occupied by the Arlington Hotel. This
was to be his home for the remaining years of his
life, and into his arrangements and furnishings he
wrought his owu individuality, so that it became
one of the notable houses in Washington. He gave
much thought to the disposal of his treasures, the
fruits of years of foreign travel, grouping them ac
cording to some priuciples of association, which he
delighted to expound to his friends. " So numer
ous were the paintings that not only every inch of
wall space in the halls as well as in the principal

404 CHAELES SUMNEE
rooms was covered, but many pictures hung ou the
doors, stood in the corners, acted as screens for fire
places, or stood on movable easels." For years
Sumner had been au enthusiastic collector of en
gravings, of which he was a better judge than of
paintings. The best of these, to the number of
nearly oue hundred and fifty, framed iu accordance
with his owu notions, hung upou his walls, where
they were later appraised at over $10,000. Though
an omnivorous reader, Sumner always placed large
dependence on public libraries, so that in his own
library most of the books were "tools, rarities or
authors' presentation copies." Among the rarities
were the Bible which solaced Bunyan in Bedford
Gaol, Erasmus's "St. Luke," with original pen-
and-ink designs by Holbein on the margins, Mil
ton's "Pindar," and a host of others, which now,
with Sumner's splendid collection of autographs, fill
several cases in the treasure-room of the Harvard
University Library. Among his autographs, the
one Sumner prized most was iu an album, "kept at
Geneva, 1608-1640, in which Milton had recorded
his name, an extract from Comus, and a line from
Horace." In the later years of his life, he "gath
ered new works about him until every table, chair
and lounge was groaning under their load, and
heaps so encumbered the floor that navigation
among the piles was difficult if not dangerous."
To this scholar's retreat a warm welcome was al
ways extended to congenial friends. Phillips and
Howe, Palfrey and E. L. Pierce, and other New Eng-

SUMNEE' S PEESONALITY 405
landers were his guests when in Washington. Caleb
Cushing was ofteuest at his table. Dickens dined
here with Stanton ; in fact, few foreigners of emi
nence visited Washington without being dined by
Sumner. It may be doubted whether Sumuer ever
knew happier hours than when he gathered a few
choice friends about his own table, or sat discours
ing with them of the teeming reminiscences sug
gested by rare books aud engravings which crowded
them on every haud.
It was a marked characteristic of Sumner that he
" had no humor himself aud little sense of it in
others." One who knew him intimately as a young
man declared that though au interesting talker, "he
had uo lightness of touch, . . . was put off his
feet by the least persiflage ; if it was tried ou him,
his expression was one of complete astonishment."
Holmes said that anything of the nature of a jest
came very hard to Sumner, who would look be
wildered and almost distressed with pleasantry that
set a company laughing. He quoted a common
friend as saying that "if one told Charles Sumuer
that the moon was made of green cheese, he would
controvert the alleged fact in all sincerity, and give
good reasons why it could not be so." Schurz de
clared that Sumuer ' ' almost always failed to see the
point of the quaint anecdotes or illustrations with
which Lincoln was fond of elucidating his argument,
as with a flashlight. Sumner not seldom quoted sueh
Lincolnisms to me, and asked me with au air of
innocent bewilderment, Avhether I could guess wbat

406 CHAELES SUMNEE
the President could possibly have meant." ' It was
this lack of humor which made him always take
himself with such portentous seriousness, and pre
vented his relaxing to meet his fellows on their
common plane. Mrs. Julia Ward Howe once in
vited him to meet Edwin Booth at her house. He
replied, " I do uot know that I wish to meet your
friend. I have outlived my interest iu individuals. ' '
In her diary Mrs. Howe recorded this somewhat
ungracious utterance with the comment : " God
Almighty, by the last accounts, has not got so far
as this ! " ' A nagging colleague once attributed
Sumner's persistent criticism of the administration
to dyspepsia, whereupon Sumner assured the Senate
that he had never suffered from dyspepsia in his
life. When questioned as to the alleged venality of
the Senate, he gave as his ground for believing that
the stories were exaggerated : "I am quite sure that
no one ever approached me with an underhand pro
posal. ' ' The story is told that " one afternoou when
he was leaving Dr. Howe's garden at South Boston,
the doctor's youngest daughter ran out from the
house and called to him : ' ' Good-bye, Mr. Sumner ! ' '
His back was already turned, but he faced about
like au officer on parade, and said with formal
gravity : " Good-evening, child ! " so that the little
girl's sprightly mother could not help laughing at
him. It is a great pity that Sumner did not know
the joys of a home of his own in his early manhood,
' Beminiscences, Vol. II, p. 312,
' Ibid., p. 174.

SUMNEE' S PEESONALITY 407
With the corrective of wife aud child, his outlook
upon life might have become uot ouly humane but
simply and frankly human.
Sumner was not without certain foibles which
grew upon him with age and attracted the more
attention because of his greatness. Thus, he prided
himself upon his artistic sense : he was much given
to quoting poetry, yet with no fine feeling of its val
ues ; he collected paintings aud other works of art,
enjoyed haunting studios, took great delight in
the theatre and opera, wrote not a little iu the way
of art criticism, aud in his later years devoted all
the time and more money than he could spare to the
collecting of old engravings, manuscripts and other
literary curios. Yet in none of these fields of inter
est did he show genuine artistic discrimination. His
most intimate friend among artists, William Wet
more Story, said of him : " The world of art, as art
purely, was to him always a half-opened, if not a
locked world. He longed to enter into it, and feel
as an artist does ; but the keys were never given to
him." His taste in sculpture may be indicated by
his congratulations to Greenough (to whom he once
referred as "I doubt not the most accomplished
artist alive") upou the completion of his "Wash
ington" as "sure to give you fame," though he
warns him that he must not be annoyed by the
"criticisms of people knowing nothing about art." '
'For sixty years this sculptural abortion — "The Father of
his Country," nude to tbe waist, with a blanket over his knees,
seated in an ornate Roman chair, his hand upraised as if sig-

408 CHAELES SUMNEE
Sumner bequeathed his collection of nearly a hun
dred paintings to the Boston Art Museum, author
izing its trustees to sell what they did not care to
keep. More than two-thirds were forthwith sold ;
of the pictures retained, only two are occasionally
shown in the galleries.
A foible which subjected Sumuer to some criticism
and which became more prominent in his later years,
was a craving for approval, seemingly as inconsist
ent with his breadth of mind as with his independ
ence iu action. He showed little of this in his col
lege days, and intimate letters indicate that he re
turned from his tour of Europe singularly unspoiled
by the unprecedented attentions showered upon
him which could hardly fail to turn the head of
so young a man. But the lionizing which awaited
him, and the sudden fame which followed his first
oratorical triumphs heightened his appreciation of
himself and of his powers. Night after night, the
facing of great audiences under the spell of his mag
nificent presence and splendid eloquence almost in
evitably made the speaker more statuesque. It was

naling a passing car — sat facing the Capitol. At last it haa
been suppressed.
Sumner, however, rendered a genuine service to art by
a speech iu tbe Senate showing the absurdity of making a con
tract for a statue of Abraham Lincoln, to be executed by Vinnie
Ream, an aspiring young woman from the West, who had never
attempted anything more ambitious than a portrait bust. He
insisted that national dignity demanded the very best examples
of American sculpture for its capital, and he referred to several
sculptural groups of a much lower grade, — nuisances which
have not yet been abated. Speech in Senate, July 17, 1866.

SUMNEE' S PEESONALITY 409
noted that as he crossed the Public Garden in Bos
ton, he had a habit of pausing to gaze upon the
bronze of Story, aud the irreverent concluded that
he was wondering how he himself would look upou
a pedestal, — as he now stands over against his some
time teacher. He used to ask his friends if they
could see his resemblance to Edmund Burke ; and
three pictures of Burke were to be found in his
study. As he strode the street or mounted the
platform, people thought he was not unpleasantly
conscious of the impression he was making. In the
Senate he knew, as every oue else knew, that for
years he had no peer in learning, in eloquence and,
by a strange combination of causes, in influeuce.
He was at all times a bit forensic ; he never quite
shook off the senator's toga. With his growing
fame and power, in his last years the savor of in
cense became more sweet to his nostrils, aud he un
consciously exacted not ouly agreement but defer
ence from those who would be his friends. The
opening of his morning's mail was quite a function,
at which he was obviously gratified to have his
guests present, as he read selections from the letters
of this aud that distinguished correspondent. In
social gatherings he expected to lead the conversa
tion, to dominate the dinner-table. The caustic
editor of The Nation wrote to a friend of " a dinner
at the 'Eadical Club,' with Sumner opposite me
smiling like a benign god on his disciples and dis
pensing wisdom piecemeal ; " and added other words
which showed Sumner's weaknesses not more clearly

410 CHAELES SUMNEE
than some of the temperamental limitations of his
gifted critic.
But if this love of deference aud approval seem a
surprising weakness iu so great a mau, two things
are to be remembered. To Sumner praise was a
thing which it was ever more blessed to give than
to receive. Whenever a friend achieved some suc
cess or produced a good piece of work, uo one was
more prompt iu generous congratulation and en
couragement ; and he who found such joy iu lavish
ing praise where it was merited, felt chilled if
others withheld approval when he deserved well.
What seemed to some au inordinate love of commen
dation was rather, as Senator Hoar says, a love of
sympathy. Moreover, keenly as he appreciated
praise, he never aped the courtier or shifty politi
cian to cater for it. Grateful, indeed, was the ap
proval of friends and of the public, when it came ;
but his eyes were fixed on the stars, and through
good and evil report he swerved his course neither
to the right hand nor to the left to catch popular
favor. Indeed, Sumner's faults and foibles were
but the defects of his qualities. If he was at times
unpractical, it was through loyalty to a high ideal.
If he was over-persistent in urging his favorite
measures, it was from an excess of zeal for right as
he saw it. If he showed little willingness to yield
even on minor points in order to secure common
action, it was but au evidence of that uncompromi
sing tenacity of purpose so rare among public men
at the time when he entered the Senate.

SUMNEE'S PEESONALITY 411
These characteristics made Sumner hard to get on
with, but they left uo cloud upon his fame. Far
outweighing them were qualities which won respect
and admiration even from bitter opponents. Known
of all men were the stainless purity of his life, his
freedom from any unworthy self-seeking or ambi
tion, his generous sympathy with the oppressed of
every race and laud, his magnanimity, and his
dauntless courage. But to those who came closest
to him as a mau, he revealed qualities which stran
gers would hardly have believed he could possess, — a
character as simple as that of a child, gentleness and
tenderness rarely blended with such rugged strength,
and a sympathy so warm, so deep, as to make his
friendship a treasure and an inspiration.

CHAPTEE XIX
CIVIL RIGHTS AND THE BATTLE-FLAG RESOLU
TION : CLOSING SCENES
To Sumner's way of thinking, the war's results
for the freedmen were but half secured wheu they
were given the ballot. He believed that enlightened
statesmanship and justice required that the negroes
be placed upon precisely the same plane with the
whites. In the next sessiou of Congress, therefore,
Sumner made a most stubborn fight to secure the
passage of his Civil Eights Bill, which included
sweeping prohibitions of discriminations on account
of race or color, in railway cars, theatres, inns,
churches, and cemeteries, and in jury service.
Every device of the expert parliamentarian did
Sumner bring to the support of this measure.' He
sought to attach it as a rider to the Amnesty Bill,
declaring that the act of justice and the act of
generosity should stand together. By the casting
vote of the Vice-President he succeeded, but the
amendment weighted the Amnesty Bill so heavily
that it failed to secure the requisite two-thirds vote.
Months later the bitter contest was renewed, and
carried through substantially the same stages. At
' Dec. 20, 1871. Congressional Eecords, 42d Congress, 2d Ses
sion, p. 244. H. E. Flack, The Adoption of the Fourteenth
Amendment, p. 250.

CLOSING SCENES 413
one juncture Sumner's opponents took au unfair
advantage of him. At 5 : 45 A. m., at the end of an
aU-night session from which illness had compelled
Mm to be absent, his favorite measure was called up
without warning, was stripped of almost all its force
by amendments, and theu passed. Coming to the
Senate a few hours later, Sumner denounced this
underhand proceeding, and reintroduced his own
measure. The outcome of months of most persistent
fighting was defeat : the Amnesty Bill became a
law, but civil rights secured no additioual safeguards
from this Congress.
During this session Sumner was drawn into a con
troversy which aroused not a little bitterness at the
time, but which has uow passed almost entirely out
of mind. The question arose over some suspicious
circumstances uuder which arms had been sold to
France during the Franco -Prussian War. In a
study of the present scope, it is not necessary to go
into the matter in detail. Sumner and Schurz re
ceived information which led them to believe that
sales of arms by the United States to agents of
France had been made and coutinued in violation of
the obligations of neutrality. After years of
strenuous insistence upon these obligations in the
controversy over the Alabama claims, Sumner could
not tolerate the idea that his own country should
show herself lax iu this regard. He therefore
moved the appointment of a committee of investiga
tion. The proposition was sharply antagonized by
champions of the President, and the debate — in

414 CHAELES SUMNEE
which Schurz took the leading part because of Sum
ner's ill-health— led to much angry discussion.
Sumner and Schurz were denounced as ' * emissaries ' '
and " spies " of foreign governments, their treason
able offense consisting iu their raising the question
whether thefr country had beeu doing its full duty
as a neutral. The motion was finally carried..
Sumuer stated that his health would not permit his
serving on such a committee. Its members were
then elected by the Senate, and, in disregard of prec
edent and of fair-dealing, not one of the seven was
chosen from those who had spoken in favor of the
inquiry, although its most strenuous opponents
were giveu places. The voluminous report of this
committee disclosed no ground for blame of the War
Departmeut or of other officers of the government.
Sumner assailed the report as "wanting in ordinary
fairness, unbecoming in tone, unjust to senators who
had deemed it their duty to move the inquiry, and
ridiculous in its attempt to expound international
law. ' ' No fair-minded man could question Sumner' s
conscientiousness in forcing this investigation, but
mauy of his frieuds regretted that he had allowed so
much of his waning strength to be diverted to a con
troversy, almost the ouly result of which was to em
bitter still further his relations with the administra
tion. But the subject most iu men's minds during this
session was the approaching presidential election.
Aside from his antagonism to Grant, Sumner would
have opposed his reelection on general principles :

CLOSING SCENES 415
he renewed at this session a measure which he had
advocated in previous years, — a constitutional
amendment making a President ineligible for a
second term. He qualified this, however, by a
clause which made it inapplicable to the pending
election. A resolution which he introduced later
aimed to secure the election of President by popular
vote. In 1872 there were many who had been leaders in
Eepublican party councils who now believed that
the reelection of Grant would not be for the best in
terests of the party or of the country. His personal
associations, and " aide-de-camp-ish" tendencies
(as Sumuer called them) ; his lack of skUl or tact in
the choice and retention of trustworthy advisers ;
his high-handed pursuit of his own will, as in the
San Domingo scheme ; the abuses that he allowed
to go unchecked — all these created the wide-spread
feeling which gave rise to the Liberal Eepublican
party. This came into existence primarily to pre
vent Grant's reelection ; its leaders included many
men of light and leading, notably Schurz and Trum
bull, and a group ofthe most influential journalists,
among whom were Horace Greeley, Whitelaw Eeid
and Samuel Bowles. A convention was called to
meet in Cincinnati, May 1, 1872, and for weeks iu
advance of that date leaders of the movement be
sought Sumner to ally himself openly with them,
urging the steadying influence which his support
would give to the enterprise.
But Sumner was always reluctant to commit him-

416 CHAELES SUMNEE
self as to the choice of candidates. He seemed to
regard such campaign work as hardly fitting in a
senator, and for the personal side of politics he had
little liking or aptitude. He frankly acknowledged
that in the pending election his two desires were
"(1) the protection of the colored race, and (2) the
defeat of Grant." There were shrewd politicians
who believed that if he would come out with a hearty
endorsement of the movement, his own name would
be the probable choice of the Cincinnati convention.
No other man personified so fully the grounds for op
position to Grant, and there is no question that Sum
ner's heart was set upon reconciliation between the
sections, though his methods did not appeal to men
of the South. His failing health was a serious ob
jection to his candidacy. It is hardly possible that
he could have been elected, for his name would not
have been acceptable to Democrats, North or South.'
Nor would he have made a strong President, partic
ularly at that juncture. Sumner had had singularly
little experience in administrative work, and it is
hard to imagine his exhibiting the tact necessary to
get on well with the heads of departments, or with
'Nevertheless his name did receive serious consideration from
some Democrats. In the Springfield Eepublican of Jnne 18,
1872, appeared a letter, signed " A Jeffersonian Democrat " and
addressed to members of the National Democratic Convention,
to assemble in Baltiraore the following month. Reprinted as a
broadside, this letter is in the Sumner Collection in the Harvard
Library. It is headed: "For President, Charles Sumner of
Massachusetts. Por Vice-President, William S. Groesbeck of
Ohio." It puts Sumner forward as the candidate who would
draw the largest following away from Grant.

CLOSING SCENES 417
Congress. His talent and his task lay in quite other
lines. It is difficult to see what advantage Sumner ex
pected would result from his reserve. Had he come
out into the open, he might have helped steady the
opposition to Grant and force at Cincinnati a nomi
nation that would have giveu promise of success.
Even after the preposterous choice of Greeley had
been made, Sumner still delayed iu declaring his
intentions. He wrote to a friend : ' ' Nor have I
ever given a hint to a human being as to my future
course. ... Of this I shall not speak until I
cau see the whole field, and especially the bearing
on the colored race." He found himself between
two fires, importuned ou the one hand to help lead
the Liberal Eepublicans to victory, and ou the
other, in spite of the grievous wounds he had re
ceived at its hands, not to desert the party with
which from its beginning he had fought so valiantly.
Wilsou, who had earlier tried to heal the breach
between Grant and Sumner, was now eager for the
vice-presidency, and renewed his appeals to Sum
ner's loyalty to party. Sumner kept upon terms of
friendship with Wilsou, but from the press and from
the cartoonist he received much undeserved abuse
for his " sulking in his tent" and deserting his old
party. Yet his mind had long been made up : the session
should not end without his setting forth the reasons
why iu his opinion Grant should uot be reelected.
Uuder cover of speaking to his motion for the indef-

418 CHAELES SUMNEE
inite postponement of the appropriatiou bill, on the
last day of May — four days before the end of the
session — he launched into a fierce philippic against
the President. The Seuate chamber and galleries
soou were thronged. Sumner spoke with intense
feeling. There were vulnerable points enough in
Grant's career as Chief Executive ; ' nevertheless, it
was felt that Sumuer overshot his mark. He ar
raigned Grant as a Borgia, a Farnese, a Barberini,
" a Csesar plotting against the peace and life of the
Eepublic." Such denunciations showed au utter
misconception of Grant's character. Moreover,
Sumner injured the effect of his words by making no
mention of the general's transcendent service to the
nation during the war, — service which in the miuds
of the people far outweighed the venial offenses
which Sumner was here exaggerating. Even among
'Sumner ridiculed Grant's preparation for the presidency.
In bad taste he quoted Stanton, who had recently died, as de
claring : "He [Grant] cannot govern this country." He ar
raigned him for nepotism, citing newspaper assertions as to the
number of his relatives who had becorae holders of office. He
assailed his gift-taking with repayraent with office, and rebuked
him for quarrelsomeness, declaring that he spent his time '"lis
tening to stories from horse-cars, gobbling the gossip of his mil
itary ring, discoursing on imaginary griefs and nursing an unjust
anger." As to his conduct of foreign relations he declared;
" Here the President touches nothing which he does not muddle.
In every direction is muddle, — muddle with Spain, muddle
with Cuba, muddle with the Black Republic, muddle with dis
tant Corea, rauddle with Venezuela, rauddle with Russia, muddle
with England, — on all sides oue diversified muddle." . . .
" I disraiss the apologies with the conclusion that in raatters to
which they invite attention his presidency is an enormous fail
ure."— " Republicanism ««. Grantism," Works, Yo\. XV, pp.
83-171.

CLOSING SCENES 419
Grant's opponents there was a feeling that Sumner's
arraignment had beeu both overwrought aud ill-
timed. In the months before the Cincinnati con
vention it might have uuited the opposition. But
it was now too late, for his reuomination and (it is
not too much to say) his reelection had been assured
from the moment Greeley was accepted as the Lib
eral Eepublicans' candidate. Sumner always held
extravagant notions of the power of Senate speeches
to determine political action; at the end of his
speech he firmly believed that his words had given
the coup de grace to Grant's hopes for a second term,
and was utterly astounded and incredulous when a
friend expressed doubt whether his speech would
now have much effect upon the election.'
Not until the eud of July did Sumner declare for
whom he should vote. Then, in a letter to colored
citizens who sought his advice, he announced his
intention to support Greeley as "unquestionably
the surest trust of the colored people. " In comment
upon this letter in Harper's Weekly, Curtis turned
back upou Sumner the words which Sumuer had
used to him upou his endorsement of Grant : " You
have takeu a tremendous responsibility. God keep
your conscience clear ! " '
'Carl Schurz, in Massachusetts Memorial to Sumner, p. 241.
When Boutwell expressed the belief that Grant would be elected,
Sumner "held up his hands and in a tone of grief said : 'You
and Wilsou are the only ones who tell me he has any chance.' "
— Sixty Yeara in Public Affairs, Vol. II, p. 217.
'Curtis said to him : "The slave of yesterday in Alabama,
in Carolina, in Mississippi, will bis heart leap with joy or droop
dismayed when he knows that Charles Sumner has given his

420 CHAELES SUMNEE
Sumuer wished to take part iu the campaign,—
at least, to preseut his views to Ms constituents from
the platform of FaneuU Hall. But the summer
found him so seriously unstrung by the labors and
trials of the recent mouths in Congress that friend
aud physician united in insisting upon his seeking
relaxation aud restoration abroad. Ou the morning
that he sailed, there was given to the press his mes
sage. It was more temperate thau his recent speech
in its attacks upon the President ; insisted that in
all his labors in relation to reconstruction he had
beeu looking forward to a time of reconciliation ;
and rejoiced at the acceptance by the Democrats of
the South of the Cincinnati platform as the best
pledge that the era of harmony was at hand.
In Liverpool Sumner was met by the unwelcome
announcement that at conventions of the Democrats
aud Liberal Eepublicans, held while he was on the
ocean, he had been nominated by acclamation for
governor of Massachusetts. The object in using his
name was to help out the Greeley campaign, but
great name as a club to smite the party that gave him and his
children their liberty?" The tears started to his eyes, that
good gray head bowed down, but he answered sadly, " I must
do my duty." And he did it. — Orations, Vol. Ill, pp. 246-
247. J. M. Forbes was another friend who besought Sumner
to reverse his decision: " Nobody knows better than you that
when his kindness of heart, his fear of violence, or his prejudices
and hobbies are concerned, Greeley can never be depended on
in a pinch. . . . Now you are the very antipode ot Greeley
in firmness and tenacity of purpose. You may for a while act
as a balance-wheel, but with his Democratic millions at his back
I have not the slightest hope that you can keep him out of the
reactionary vortex (if he should be elected)."— ietters a-nd Becol-
lectiona. Vol. II, p. 182.

CLOSING SCENES 421
Sumner immediately seut an absolute refusal to ac
cept the nomination, and another name was substi
tuted. After a wearying week in London, he went to
Paris, where he spent a mouth, receiving mauy
kind attentions from French and American friends.
He was much disappointed at not finding there
Dr. Brown-S^quard, who had recently gone to
America. He seemed far from well, and greatly
depressed. To a friend he declared : "I kuow the
integrity of my conduct and the motives of my life.
Never were they more clear or absolutely blame
less than now. But never in the worst days of
slavery have I been more vindictively pursued or
more falsely misrepresented." He found stimulus
aud relief from his depression iu indulging his
eager quest for rare books and manuscripts. He
had interesting interviews with Laboulaye, Thiers,
the Due d'Aumale aud with Gambetta, whom he
had much wished to meet. As they parted, Sum
ner said: "I am not French, aud I know your
country too little to be justified in pronouncing
judgment on her political principles ; but you wish
to found a republic without religion. In America
we should consider such an undertaking chimerical
aud doomed to certain defeat."
After a couple of days with Motley at The Hague,
Sumner returned to London, where he spent much
time in the libraries and galleries, and in col
lecting curios. In these weeks in London and Paris
he expended about six thousand dollars for auto-

422 CHAELES SUMNEE
graphs and literary rarities. Unfortunately, he
had gained little skill as a bargainer or as a con
noisseur, so that as a purchaser he was the delight
of the dealers.
The morning before he left London for the last
time, he breakfasted with Dean and Lady Stanley ;
he was next the guest of the Duke of Devonshire at
Chatsworth ; regretfully declining an invitation to
visit the Duke and Duchess of Argyll because of
the length of the journey, he spent his last night in
England with John Bright. The conversation took
a wide range, but Bright noted ' ' a great gentleness
iu all he said, with a sadness and a melancholy
which left upon us the impression that he felt him
self seriously ill, and that his life of work was nearly
ended." Upon landing in New York, he was much
saddened to learn of the illness, soon followed by
the death, of Greeley, broken-hearted by the loss of
his, wife and by his disastrous defeat.
It was a depressing session upon which Sumuer
was now to enter. His health was so poor that he
was obliged to ask relief from committee service.
He went to the Senate daily for about two weeks,
during which he did not neglect to urge his Civil
Eights Bill and a bill to prevent race discrimina
tions in the schools of the District of Columbia.
But from the middle of December to the close of the
session he was compelled to absent himself from his
seat ; in the special session beginning iu March, he
appeared but once, to present the credentials of his
new coUeague from Massachusetts. The call for the

CLOSING SCENES 423
Eepublican caucus at the opening of this session was
addressed only to those who had supported the
Eepublican platform and Grant, and no committee
assignment was made by the caucus to Sumner or to
any other member who had voted for Greeley.
Probably no act of Sumner's political life led to
more unexpected results than did the iutroduction
by him ofa certain bill early in the regular session.'
Its main provisiou rau as follows : "Whereas the
national unity and good- will among fellow- citizens
can be assured only through oblivion of past differ
ences, aud it is contrary to the usage of civilized
nations to perpetuate the memory of civil war ;
therefore, be it resolved, etc., that the names of
battles with fellow-citizens shall not be continued iu
the Army Eegister, or placed ou the regimental
colors of the Uuited States." In previous years
Sumner had introduced measures of similar char
acter which had received the cordial approval of
General Scott and General Anderson ; ' they had
aroused no wide- spread attention, still less opposi
tion. But now, although the war spirit might be
supposed to be allayed, apparently there was a dis
position to exact from Sumner the penalty for his
desertion of the party. In the House, a bill of pre
cisely opposite intent was hastily passed, and op
position was announced iu the Senate ; but both
measures were there laid upon the table because of
Sumner's illness.
' December 2, 1872. Worka, Vol. XV, p. 255.
' Supra, p. 262.

424 CHAELES SUMNEE
It happened that at the time when he introduced
this biU there was being held a special session of the
Massachusetts legislature,— "a dead legislature,
galvanized into life by the governor's proclama
tion " solely to attend to matters connected with the
great fire in Boston. Sumner's bill caught the eye
of an ex-soldier, who brought in a resolution
strongly denouncing it. The end of the session was
close at hand and less than one-fourth of those there
present had been reelected to the uew legislature
which was to meet within three or four weeks.
Members therefore acted under little sense of re
sponsibility, aud in fact with slight observance of
parliamentary formalities. An frregular report
from the committee to which the matter had beeu
referred denounced Sumner's bill as "au insult to
the loyal soldiery of the nation" and as "meeting
the unqualified condemnation of the people of the
commonwealth." The debate upon the report was
crowded into two days, and despite vigorous op
position, led by Colonel Charles E. Codmau, it was
adopted, largely owing to the insistence that it was
demanded by the old soldiers. So hurried had
been the procedure that it took the public by sur
prise. But the press and even the pulpit now came
promptly to Sumner's defense. Whittier took the
lead in a movement to secure the rescinding of the
resolution of censure, and a petition, signed by
more than 5, 000 names, including those most eminent
iu the commonwealth, was promptly presented to
the new legislature and reinforced by an appeal,

CLOSING SCENES 425
signed by distinguished men from all over the
country, including Chief-Justice Chase, William'
CuUen Bryant, and Frederick Douglass. The peti
tioners were more vigorously than tactfully repre
sented before the committee by ex-Governors Claflin
aud Washburn and by the Eev. James Freeman
Clarke. Senators and representatives who had
beeu members of the previous legislature took
offense at criticisms passed upou that body ; there
was also surprising opposition from William Lloyd
Garrison and from Mrs. Julia Ward Howe, who had
been one of the petitioners for rescinding. Much
was made of the alleged " soldier feeling " against
Sumner's bill, and the point was urged that it was
not competent for the present legislature to revoke
a resolution of its predecessor. The result was that,
while the public came to see Sumner's propositiou
iu its true light, the legislature, by large majorities,
refused to annul the censure.
Sumuer grieved over an injustice, which, had he
been iu health, he might have regarded with indif
ference. He longed to defend himself in the Senate,
and would have attempted it at the risk of his life,
had Ms physician uot warned him that the strain
might cause prolonged mental disability, the fate
which he had always most dreaded. Months of en
forced absence from his place in the Senate made
him morbid. To Vice-President Wilson he said :
" If my Works were completed, and my Civil Eights
Bill passed, no visitor could enter that door that
would be more welcome than Death." Yet he was

426 CHAELES SUMNEE
the recipient of many letters of sympathy, and with
the coming of spring he began to show signs of im
provement, so that he could take drives and spend
some time each day at the Congressional Library in
the revision and annotation of his Works. Wilson
aud he were soon to be brought into deeper sympa
thy, for the Vice-President was stricken by paralysis
in May, so that both these friends and comrades of
many years were to know months of disheartening
interruption of their public service and of anxious
effort to force thefr enfeebled powers iu literary
tasks which neither was to bring to completion.
Sumner's friends urged him again to seek health
abroad, but he felt that he could not afford such a
vacation trip, and even made arrangements for a
long lecture tour in the fall, in order to pay off
something of the indebtedness incurred by his previ
ous lavish expenditures iu Europe, aud by his costly
illness. But Wendell Phillips and other friends in
sisted upon his canceling these engagements and
husbanding his strength.
The months before the assembling of Congress
brought him much cheer. He was gratified by au
election to the Massachusetts Historical Society,
from which his anti-slavery views had doubtless
debarred him in his early manhood. He had
happy reunions with Longfellow, Agassiz, Emerson,
Holmes, Judge Hoar, and others at the monthly
dinner of the Saturday Club, and he was cordially
received at many gatherings of business and literary
men. It was a joy in these last years of his life to

CLOSING SCENES 427
reknit his intimacy with Hillard, from whom slavery
dissensions had parted him. HiUard had shown
great tenderness toward him as he sailed for Europe,
the previous year, and now, though stricken with
paralysis, he welcomed Sumner to his home, and for
the last time the two renewed mauy fond memories.'
Shortly before his return to Congress, Sumner did
a public service in connection with the Virginius
case. The seizure of this vessel while flying the
American flag and the execution of a considerable
number of the men who had been aboard her, aroused
intense feeling, aud a great public meeting was pi'O-
jected in New York to voice the popular indignation
against Spain. Sumuer was invited to be oue of the
speakers, but instead of accepting he sent a letter in
which he advised delay and calm investigation of the

'One incident of Sumner's last dinner with Hillard is of in
terest. " The old cook had been a slave in Georgia, and was
greatly excited over the preparations of a dinner for the man
who was to her the deliverer of her race. Mr. Hillard told Mr.
Suraner what a solemn occasion it was to her. Mr. Sumner
said it was the custom in sorae places to send a glass of wine to
the cook when the dinner was unusually good, and begged per
mission to do so, which he did, rendering the old woman almost
beside herself with pride. The servants had told rae of their
earnest desire to see the great man, and I asked Mr. Sumner it
he conld gratify them. He assented, simply and readily. I
shall never forget how he looked as he stood in the doorway of
the dining-room, alraost filling it in height and breadth, while
those two poor, horaely black women, one of them scarred by
injuries received in slavery, reverently kissed his band. It was
a scene full of significance. We looked on with wet eyes ; but
he was rather embarrassed, and glad to escape up-stairs. I also
remeraber that the kitchen department was demoralized for
some days following." Told by an eye-witness. Pierce,
Vol. IV, p. 570.

428 CHAELES SUMNEE
facts, deprecating the war spirit and preparations
which the meeting bade fair to excite. In an inter
view in the Tribune he elaborated these views with
very salutary effect. His efforts called forth most
hearty approval from the judicious, and it was pres
ently shown that the facts of the case afforded not
the slightest warrant for the furore into which hot
heads were striving to plunge the country.
Despite his recent differences with the administra
tiou aud the censure of the Massachusetts legislature,
Sumner found on all sides assurances of popular re
gard ; and he returned to Washington with the con
sciousness that at no period of his public service
had the heart of Massachusetts been more with him.
Nothing was more certain than that the censure
would be speedily removed aud that his reelection
to the Senate in 1875 would be unchallenged.
A cordial greeting awaited Sumner at the open
ing of Cougress, but his assignment to a low place
ou two committees with which he had never been
associated indicated that he was not considered a
Eepublican. Senior senator in length of service, he
seized the first opportunity to introduce a list of eight
measures which he intended to urge. Foremost in
his interests was the Civil Eights Bill introduced
by him in 1870. Never vindictive, the policies he
now advocated were those which he believed would
soonest heal the breach. Even iu the heat of the
Grant campaign his counsel had been : ' ' Nothing in
haste. Nothing in vengeance. Nothiug iu passion.
I am for gentleness. I am for a velvet glove ; but

CLOSING SCENES 429
for a while I wish the hand of iron." In urging his
favorite measure in the Senate, he showed the same
magnanimity. "Sir, my desire, the darling desire,
if I may say so, of my soul, at this moment, is to
close forever this question so that it shall never
again intrude into these chambers— so that hereafter,
in all our legislation, there shall be uo such word as
'black' or ' white,' but that we shall speak only of
citizens and of men." He now desired that the bill
should be acted upon directly by the Seuate. Eefer-
ence to a committee was insisted upon, but the de
bate indicated that sentiment was more friendly
than formerly both to Sumuer and to his favorite
measure. The report was not made until several
weeks later ; with trifiing changes the bill was theu
passed by the Senate by a party vote of twenty -nine
to sixteen. It prohibited discriminations on account
of race or color iu inns, public conveyances, theatres,
schools, cemeteries and juries.'
'The House, however, did not act upon this measure and it
was not till a year later (February, 1875) that a civil rights
bill, originating in the House, and omitting the prohibitions aa
to schools — which Sumner would have considered fundamentall.y
essential — and as to cemeteries, became a law. Eight years
later the Supreme Court annulled this Act on the ground that
the discriminations which it prohibited were not incidents or
elements of slavery, and hence subject to the power of Congress
under the Thirteenth Amendment, and that under the Four
teenth Amendment, while Congress might possibly legislate in
correction of state laws beld to infringe civil rights, it might not
impose these prohibitions directly upon citizens of the individual
states. Sumner's reply would have been his dictum, ' ' Whatever
is for human rights is constitutional." Fortunately time had
already proved that the need for such drastic legislation was not
so great as Sumner had believed.

430 CHAELES SUMNEE
Sumner's devotion to this movement for the pro
tection of civil rights was the explanation of his
supporting both by voice and vote the nomination
of Caleb Cushing for Chief- Justice of the Supreme
Court. Cushing's career and party allegiance had
been marked by great inconsistency. Up to the
actual outbreak of the war he had been a zealous
partisan of the South, his indiscreet utterances and
actions on several occasions having caused much
annoyance to the Federal government. It had been
his opposition more than that of any other one man
which delayed for three months Sumner's first elec
tion to the Senate by the deadlock in the Massachu
setts legislature. Sumuer, as he truly said of him
self, " did not cherish old differences and animosi
ties." Of late years Gushing had come into close
sympathy with the government, and Sumner had
greatly prized his genial and intelligent friendship ;
so, in spite of the man's inconsistent record and the
personal opposition which he had shown Sumner
years before, wheu once the senator became con
vinced that Cushing was now in sympathy with his
own views on the Civil Eights Bill, against the
urging of most of his Massachusetts advisers aud
friends, he warmly supported Cushing's nomination.
The name was withdrawn, however, wheu it became
knowu that even after Lincoln's inauguration, Cush
ing had been in friendly correspondence with Jeffer
son Davis.
In February, 1874, Sumuer was actively engaged
upon the annotation of his Works, devoting especial

CLOSING SCENES 431
attention to his "Prophetic Voices Concerning Amer
ica," which was to be given separate publication as
appropriate to the centenary of American independ
ence. In fact the very last measure which Sumner
debated was the bill providing for the Centennial
Exposition at Philadelphia. He was heartily in
favor of a dignified national commemoration of the
great anniversary, but earnestly opposed what he
characterized as " the monstrosity of a world's fair
linked with the commemoration of the national
natal day."
Early in 1874 the new Massachusetts legislature
by large majorities rescinded and annulled the
resolution of censure passed upon Sumner two years
before for his " battle-fiag " resolution. Whittier
was jubilant, and proud that, like Benton in the
case of the Senate's censure of Jackson, "solitary
and alone I set the ball iu motion." A colored
friend of Sumner's, who had beeu on the committee
which reported the rescinding resolution, was
deputed to take it to Washington.' It was promptly
brought to the attention of the House, but in the
Senate its presentation was delayed because of the
iUness of Sumner's coUeague from Massachusetts.
This act of justice was a great comfort to Sumner.
' In speaking of the sympathy and sensitiveness which under
lay Sumner's stately manner, N. P. Banks said that when these
resolutions were presented to Sumner, " he received tbem with
equanimity ; he spoke a few words of one or two gentlemen
connected with the [Massachusetts! government, whom he
knew, and then, overcome with emotion, wept as a child."
Address betore Mass. Senate, March 13, 1874.

432 CHAELES SUMNEE
He did uot care to address the Senate upon it:
"The dear old commonwealth has spoken for me,
and that is enough." The joy that he had thus
been vindicated came at a time when solace was
sadly needed, for early in March he suffered severe
pains in the heart and could find relief and sleep
only by the use of opiates. Ou the 10th, against his
physician's advice, he went to the Senate, for on that
day Senator Boutwell was to leave his sick-room for
the first time in order to present the rescinding
resolution. There have been few occasions in his
tory on which a statesman has been thus formally
tendered a signal act of reparation, and Sumner's
colleagues were generous in their expressions of
congratulation aud good-will. It was a fitting close
to a career which had often brought him into
courageous conflict with popular sentiment. As
Charles Sumner left the Senate chamber, that March
afternoon, with the words of vindication from " the
dear old commonwealth " still in his ears, frieuds
noted with foreboding how haggard and ill he ap
peared. He was never to enter its doors again.
That evening two old friends sat long with him
at dinner. Hardly had they gone, when Sumner
was prostrated by a severe attack of pain at the
heart. It was soon seen that the final struggle was
at hand. Physicians and friends did everything
to alleviate his sufferings. Schurz and Hoar were
constantly by his side. Two colored meu, friends
of many years, served him now with the devotion of
their race. In his moments of consciousness he

CLOSING SCENES 433
moaned, " My book, my unfinished book ! " Even
more upou his miud in these last hours was the
cause for which he had worked so hard ; again aud
agaiu he said to Judge Hoar: "You must take
care of the Civil Eights Bill, — my bill, the Civil
Eights Bill, — don't let it fail!" Almost his last
message was : ' ' Tell Emerson how much I love aud
revere him." Judge Hoar promised to do so, aud
added : "He said of you once that he never knew
so white a soul." The words of that beautiful
fribute were almost the last which fell upon the ear
of the dying man. The eud came in the middle of
the afternoou, March llth. As he laid down the
hand he had been holding, Judge Hoar broke the
silence: "WeU done, good and faithful servant,
enter thou into the joy of thy Lord ! "
The announcement of Sumner's death came with
a shock of surprise to the country, aud " iu many
quiet homes, in many a cabin of the poor and lowly,
there was inexpressible tenderness and profound
sorrow." ' Both houses of Congress immediately
adjourned. The following day, by their joint action
the nation took the statesman's body into its keep
ing as a frust to be delivered to the commonwealth
which he had so long served and so dearly loved.
On a bleak March morning the funeral procession,
led by a body of negroes headed by Frederick
Douglass, made its way from Sumner's home to the
Capitol. Here the body lay in state in the rotunda,
and was viewed by thousands. The funeral service
'Judge E. K. Hoar, in the House of Representatives,

434 CHAELES SUMNEE
was held in the Senate chamber, iu the presence of
the President aud cabiuet, and a great concourse of
those among whom his life-work had been doue.
From Washington the body was borne with large
escort to his native city, meeting upou its journey
many evidences of the deep grief of the people. A
throng of Sumner's townsmen awaited his last home
coming. In the rotunda of the State House Senator
Anthony, addressing the governor, rendered back to
Massachusetts her illustrious dead. Here all day
Sunday, guarded by colored soldiers, the body lay,
while sorrowing thousands filed past. It was signifi
cant that Hayti, by the hand of her minister, sent
her tribute of affection and gratitude to the man
who had championed her right to national recogni
tion, and who had later defended her menaced in
dependence. The funeral service was held in King's
Chapel, and thence this son of Boston, once so
maligned but now so universally mourned, was
borne over the Harvard bridge which he had so
often trod, past the halls of the college he loved, to
Mt. Auburn, the resting-place of the noble friends
of his youth and manhood. Sumner's was a lonely
life and a lonely death : among all those sorrowing
thousands from the Senate chamber in Washington
to Mt. Auburn there was not one man of his own
kin. But at his open grave stood the stricken Vice-
President, his comrade in a quarter of a century of
struggle, and Longfellow, Holmes, Whittier and Em
erson, whose friendship had been to him both solace
aud inspiration.

CLOSING SCENES 435
In death Sumuer was accorded iu full measure ap
preciation and praise which had beeu grudgingly
giveu him in life. Preachers extolled his career and
service, and the press teemed with kindly tributes.
On the day set apart for his commemoration by
Congress, nothing was more significant thau the
evidence, not iu fulsome and conventional eulogy
but in words of genuine grief, that even long-time
opponents had come to know the real character of
the man. Not only was he recognized as "the
chief inspiring cause aud guiding spirit of the anti-
slavery revolution," but, as Senator Sherman de
clared, uow that strife and personal feeling inevitably
aroused by the heat of recent contests in the Senate
were passing away, ' ' Charles Sumner was by the
judgment of his associates here, by the confidence of
his constituents, by the general voice of the people,
the- foremost man in the civil service of the Uuited
States." The commonwealth of Massachusetts aud
the city of Boston both honored their distinguished
sou, calling to their service the loving eloquence of
George William Curtis and Carl Schurz.
Two years before his death it is probable that no
man, with the possible exception of Thaddeus
Stevens, was so cordially hated throughout the
South as was Charles Sumner. Yet the most sym
pathetically discerning characterization of this
great "pioneer of agitation " came in tender words
full of prophetic import from the lips of a Confed
erate soldier and statesman. Never had Lamar
spoken ' ' with a purpose more single to the interests

436 CHAELES SUMNEE
of our Southern people" thau when from his place
in the House of Eepresentatives he paid a tribute to
Charles Sumner iu words full of hopeful significance
that the antagonisms aroused by slavery, and civil
war, and reconstruction were swiftly passing away.
Said he: "Oharles Sumuer was born with au in
stinctive love of freedom, and was educated from
his earliest infancy to the belief that freedom is the
natural and indefeasible right of every intelligent
being having the outward form of man. . . .
And along with this all-controlling love of freedom,
he possessed a moral sensibility keenly intense and
vivid, a conscientiousness which would never per
mit him to swerve by the breadth of a hair from
what he pictured to himself as the path of duty.
There were combined in him the characteristics
which have in all ages giveu to religion her martyrs,
to patriotism her self-sacrificing heroes. To a man
thoroughly permeated and imbued with such a
creed and animated and constantly actuated by such
a spirit of devotion, to behold a human being or
a race of human beings restrained of their natural
rights to liberty, for no crime by him or them com
mitted, was to feel all the belligerent instincts of
his nature roused to combat. The fact was to him
a wrong which no logic could justify." Yet "in
this fiery zeal aud this earnest warfare against the
wrong, as he viewed it, there entered no enduring
personal animosity toward the meu whose lot it was
to be born to the system which he denounced."
Lamar spoke with deep feeling of the kindness of

CLOSING SCENES 437
sympathy which, in his later years, Sumner had
displayed toward the impoverished and suffering
people of the South, and of the gracious magnanim
ity which had prompted his "battle-flag" resolu
tion, " Charles Sumner in life believed that all
occasion for strife and distrust between the North
and South had passed away, and there no longer re
mained any cause for continued estrangement be
tween these two sections of our common country.
. . . Would that the spirit of the illustrious dead
whom we lament to-day could speak from the grave
to both parties to this deplorable discord iu tones
which should reach each and every heart through
out this broad territory, ' My countrymen, know one
another and you will love one another.' "

CHAPTEE XX
SUMNER'S LEADERSHIP
Judicious historians of the United States in the
second half of the nineteenth century have accorded
to Sumner in the years immediately following the
Civil War a position of power and influence second
only to that of Grant. To the reader born since the
war and unprepared by special study of that period,
this judgment comes as a surprise. Sumner's flgure
looms larger on the historian's page than in the
popular miud, where he has been crowded into the
background by famous generals, or executives, or
legislators whose names are directly associated with
some great constructive act.'
'Not altogether without significance as corroborating this
statement are certain Massachusetts college entrance examina
tion papers which have come under tbe writer's eye within the
past few months. " A brief account of the life and public serv
ices of Charles Sumner ' ' was called for. Very few of the papers
showed any accurate focussing upon the man ; the great majority
indicated little more than that he was an anti-slavery orator, who
waa assaulted in the Senate. Among the answers were the fol
lowing : ' ' Sumner was an Englishman who came to the Colonies
before the Revolution. He helped by giving food and clothing
and would not receive any pay." " Sumner was always held in
respect even by the people of the South. Fort Sumner, Charles
town, was named in his honor. ' ' Another goes more into detail :
" When the Civil War broke out he was in command at Fort
Sumter. He held that fort as long as possible and then sailed
to New York. He continued fighting for tbe North throughout
the war and at its close he hoisted tbe flag which he was forced

SUMNEE'S LEADEESHIP 439
The reasons are not far to seek. Sumner's great
est services, and those he was best fitted to perform,
were rendered before and during the Civil War, and
were in a way merged in its results. There was
significance in his very name : its early English
form was Summouer, — "the title of officers whose
duty it was to summon parties into courts. ' ' ' Sum
ner's place in history is that of the Summouer of
Slavery before the bar of the civilized world. The
"Crime against Kansas" and "The Barbarism of
Slavery " placed him in the front rank of the leaders
of the rapidly approaching revolution. That he
became a dominant factor in the attempted solution
of the critical problems of reconstruction was due to
a complex of causes, among which his arguments
and eloquence were far from beiug the most impor
tant.' Sumner was an idealist. He combiued the uu
to haul down by the Confederates over Fort Sumter." A con
siderable number of other papers associated Sumuer with Fort
Sumter. Of course these papers were not of average intelli
gence. But that so large a proportion of this group of appli
cants for admission to a college in the coramonwealth which
Sumner served so long and with such distinction could show
such abysmal ignorance of the man and of his work at the end
of a single generation from the time of his death, does seem to
confirm the statement that Sumner's fame, as compared with
that of less influential leaders of his time, has suffered some
thing of an eclipse.
' Pierce, Vol. I, p. 1.
' G. S. Boutwell suggests an interesting comparison between
Sumner aud Samuel Adams, each of whom showed more skill
and intelligence in organizing the forces that brought on a rev
olution than in reconstructing the government upon the basis of
the new conditions that bad been created by that revolution.
—Sixty Years in Public Affairs, Vol. II, p. 220.

440 CHAELES SUMNEE
yielding conscience of the Puritan with the burning
zeal of a Hebrew prophet. He showed himself a
prophet many times in his prevision of changes in
popular sentiment quite beyond the sight of the
shrewd politician. Aud he was a prophet, too, like
Amos of old, iu his fearless showing forth of the
evils of his day, and in preaching righteousness and
a judgment to come. Now there are diversities of
gifts. If all men were prophets, where were the
making of laws or the administering of government?
Sumner, like all prophets, was by nature a doctri
naire. Even slavery, the sociologist makes clear,
has not been everywhere and at all times an evil, and
certainly in the United States in the fifties it was
not everywhere so black as Sumner painted it.
Nevertheless, the institution was utterly out of ac
cord with the spirit of the Eepublic and with the
nineteenth century, and had become so fruitful of
moral, economic and political abuses that the time
was more than ripe for its beiug swept away. The
issue had become primarily one of morals, and Sum
ner's mind and heart admirably fitted him for the
task of setting forth the enormity of African slavery
in America and of marshaling the North to resist
its aggressions. Again, in the first years of the
war, no one foresaw more clearly that emancipation
was inevitable, and no other man did so effective
work in preparing the public mind to accept and
support that great act of justice. These were tasks
congenial to an idealist, to a prophet.
But the problems which presented themselves at

SUMNEE'S LEADEESHIP 441
the eud of the war were by no means simple moral
issues, to be settled once and for all for the country
by au idealist's appeal to his enlightened conscience.
The reconstruction of a disordered commonwealth
so that it may best accomplish the work of justice
calls for talents of a different order from those
needed for the destruction of au abuse. Sumuer
had entered political life at the top, undisciplined
by the struggles through which alone most men
reach that eminence. He had had singularly little
experience iu the adaptation of legislatiou to con
structive ends and none at all in the practical work
of carrying laws into effect in government. Yet the
war was hardly a year old when Sumner began to
ponder over the status of the seceded states aud the
problem of their future. Forthwith he propounded
his celebrated theory that these states had commit
ted suicide, and that upou the page wiped clean by
their act of self-effacement Congress might write
whatever it pleased as conditions precedent to the
reincorporation of those communities iu the Union.
Sumuer was not held in high regard by his associates
iu the Senate as au expounder of the Constitution,'

' With keen insight George William Curtis has pointed out
that Sumner's attitude toward the Constitution in the days of
the anti-slavery struggle had met a need of the times : '"He
sometimes adopted propositions ot constitutional or international
law which led straight to bis moral end, but which would hardly
have endured the legal microscope. Yet he maintained them
with sueh fervor of conviction, such an array of precedent, such
amplitude ot illustration, that to the great popular mind, mor
ally exalted like his own, his statements had the majesty and
conclusiveness of demonstrations."

442 CHAELES SUMNEE
and this thesis commanded little attention at the
time when it was first enunciated. Its logical in
consistencies were uot far to seek, while the impolicy
of adopting any such basis for reconstruction should
have been apparent to a man who insisted as Sum
ner did — for Dominicans — that government must
be by consent of the governed. The Supreme Court
later repudiated this state-suicide theory. Why,
then, did Cougress come to accept it as a basis for
action ? Not because it was converted by Sumner's
faulty logic or forceful eloquence, but because it
was confronted by a most tangled political condition.
If Lincolu had lived to deal tactfully with a Con
gress whose confidence he possessed, to guide the
freedmen who idolized him and would have heeded
his counsel, and to conciliate the best public senti
ment among Southerners who were already coming
to rely upon his justice, even then the problems of
reconstruction must still have involved struggle and
coutroversy ; but it is not unreasonable to believe
that their solution would have proved far more
simple and enduring. If the Eepublican conven-
" And this, again, was what tbe time needed. The debate was
essentially, although under the forms of law, revolutionary. It
aimed at the displacement not only of au administration, but of
a theory of the government, and of traditional usage that did
not mean to yield without a struggle. It required, therefore,
not the judicially logical mind, nor the fine touch ot casuistry
that splits, and halts, and defers until the cause is lost, but thV
raind so absolutely alive with the idea and fixed upon the end
that it corapels the means. John Pym was resolved that Straf
ford should be impeached, and he found the law tor it. Charles
Sumner was resolved that slavery should fall, and he found the
Constitution for it."— Eulogy on Sumner, p. 154.

SUMNEE'S LEADEESHIP 443
tion of 1864 had appreciated — what party leaders
have not even yet learned from bitter experieuce —
that not ouly patriotism but shrewd politics as well
demand the selection of a candidate for Vice-Presi
dent who in character and in executive efficiency is
qualified for the presidential chair, Lincoln's la
mented death would not have brought further dis
aster in the succession of a Johnson, with his genius
for provoking dissension. Sumner iu the Senate
was intent upou protecting the colored race in its
newly-gained freedom ; Steveus in the House was
resolved that the threateued defeat of the Eepubli
can party by Southern Democrats lately iu rebellion
should not be accomplished. Aud so these two meu,
antipathetic iu almost everything but their hatred
for slavery and all its works, found in the state-
suicide theory a common basis for action and the
logic of events presently brought Cougress to follow
in the way they were leading.
Negro suffrage was the other feature of recon
struction for which Sumner more than auy other
oue man must bear the praise or blame. Almost
alone in the Seuate, in season and out of season, he
urged that no distinction of race or of color must
be drawn at the polls. And again, at last, the
idealist and the politician found common standing
ground. Sumner, a devotee of the doctrine of civil
equality, insisted that there was need of the negroes'
ballots as of their muskets for the protection of
their newly gained rights. Stevens boasted that the
vote of every enfranchised black could be relied

444 CHAELES SUMNEE
upon to uphold the menaced- rule of the Eepublican
party. Doubtless the belief was widely held that
the maintenance of that party in power, even by
such means, was essential, if the results of the
war were to be assured. Nevertheless, it was
the politician's arguments which brought Con
gress to adopt the policy that was treated with
derision wheu first urged upon the Senate by the
idealist. In the days before Sumner came to consider him
self the Moses of the negro race, he had seen suffrage
problems iu a different light. In 1843 he declared :
"Our institutions, more than those of any other
land, stand on intelligence. I believe iu the capacity
of the people to govern themselves, but only when
disciplined by education and elevated by moral
truth."' A few years later, he raised with his
brother the question : "May not France set the ex
ample of founding her republic on intelligence, by
requiring that every voter shall read and write? " '
No man in Cougress had a higher regard for the
teachings of science than Sumner. Among his dear
est friends was a scientist of the first rank who had
devoted much careful study to race problems, and
whose sage conclusions as to the future of the negro
in America eould not have failed to impress Sum
ner, had he faced the question free from the preju
dices developed by years of coutroversy. As early
'Letter to Charlemagne Tower, Sept. 18. Pierce, Vol. II, p.
272. ^April 4, 1848. Pierce, Vol. Ill, p. 37.

SUMNEE'S LEADEESHIP 445
as 1863, Louis Agassiz had written to Dr. Howe :
"We should beware how we give to the blacks
rights, by virtue of which they muy endanger the
progress of the whites before their temper has been
tested by a prolonged experience. ' ' He emphasized
the characteristics which ancient monuments proved
had been from the dawn of history possessed by the
negro race, and showed that while other races had
founded empires and attained a high degree of civi
lization, ' ' the negro race groped iu barbarism and
never originated a regular organization among them
selves." He therefore coucludes: "I am not pre
pared to state what political privileges they are fit
to enjoy uow ; though I have no hesitation in say
ing that they should be equal to other men before
the law. The right of owning property, of bearing
witness, of entering into contracts, of buying and
selling, of choosing their own domicile, would give
them ample opportunity of showing in a compara
tively short time what political rights might prop
erly and safely be granted to them in successive in
stalments. No man has a right to what he is unfit
to use. Our own best rights have beeu acquired
successively. I caunot, therefore, think it just or
safe to grant at once to the negro all the privileges
which we ourselves have acquired by loug struggles.
History teaches us what terrible reactions have
followed too extensive and too rapid changes.
Let us beware of granting too much to the
negro race in the beginning lest it become neces
sary hereafter to deprive them of some of the priv-

446 CHAELES SUMNEE
ileges which they may use to their own and our det
riment." '
But at the time when the problem of reconstruc
tion had to be faced, Sumner had beeu denouncing
slavery from the platform aud in the Senate for
twenty years. The term " slave-monger " had been
so habitually upon his tongue that it had come in
his thought to cover almost all Southern whites who
had not at peril of their lives opposed secession.
And so all the teacMngs of sociology as to the slow
development of capacity for self-government he be
lieved outweighed by the need of protecting the
freedmen from falling under the rule of "slave-
mongers." As early as 1866 he was insisting that
the freedmen must have the ballot " (1) for his own
protection ; (2) for the protection of the white
Unionist ; and (3) for the peace of the country."
Alas for the schemes of idealist and politician !
Neither Sumner nor Stevens had many months to
live, but the grave had not closed upou either of
them before it became evident that in the ballot was
to be found protection neither for the freedman nor
for the white Unionist, while to the peace of the
country hardly anything could have been more
destructive. The orgy of misrule under ignorant
^Life and Correspondence of Louia Agaasiz, Vol. II, p. 605.
Quoted by Rhodes, Vol. VI, pp. 37-38, who also quotes Col. T.
W. Higginson aa saying that when Agassiz heard from him how
admirably the negro soldiers had behaved both in camp and un
der fire, he said : "Then they mnst vote of course. The man
who risks his life for his country has the right to vote in it.
There is no question about that."

SUMNEE'S LEADEESHIP 447
blacks manipulated by unprincipled whites led the
natural leaders of the South in self-defense to unite
iu a determined effort to put an end to such au in
tolerable state of government.' Unrestricted negro
suffrage, imposed for the purpose of protecting the
Eepublican party at a critical juncture, did more
than anything else to create the "Solid South,"
and to make any normal party development in that
section impossible. Intelligent leaders of the negro
race unhesitatingly declare that the indiscriminate
gift of the ballot to the freedman was not even a
doubtful boon ; they frankly avow that it distracted
him from the normal line of development, and that
his best interests would have been subserved by the
imposition of fair educational or even property
tests, which would have made the franchise the re
ward of striving. But, as Agassiz feared, the
ballot, thus hastily given, was soon practically
taken away by force, intimidation or fraud. In
more recent years constitutional amendments have
' Experience soon proved that Governor Andrew had a tar
clearer insight into the problem ot reconstruction than the men
who determined its solution in Congress. "I ara confident
we cannot reorganize political society with any security :
1. Unless we let in the people to a cooperation and not merely
an arbitrarily selected portion of them. 2. Unless we give
those who are, by their intelligence and character, the natural
leaders of the people, and who surely will lead them by and
by, an opportunity to lead tbem now." Valedictory address
to the Massachusetts legislature, Jan. 4, 1866. Chandler's
Memoir of Andrew, p. 251 et seq. Pearson's Life of Andrew,
Vol. II, p. 276. Rhodes gives unstinted praise to Andrew's
clear thought and magnanimous proposals, and thinks that his
idea might have been realized, had it not been tor the quarrel
between the President and Congress. Vol. V, p. 607.

448 CHAELES SUMNEE
been generally adopted iu the South, which, while
undoubtedly working injustice to many negroes at
the time of their adoption, give promise of more
substantial justice in the future. The tacit acquies
cence ou the part of the country at large iu this an
nulment of "equal suffrage" even by such crude
aud unfair devices as the " grandfather clauses " is
significant of a vast change in public sentiment as to
oue of the cardinal features of the reconstruction
policy which Sumner and Stevens brought Congress
to adopt. At a conference upou education in the
South in 1908, one of the most eminent educators in
the country, himself a native of one of the border
states, could command unhesitating assent in de
claring : " We all realize, whether we live north or
south of Mason and Dixon's line, that the law which
placed the unlimited franchise in the hands of the
negro was one of the greatest political blunders of
our history." '
In dealing with the status of the seceded states
and with the political rights of the negro, Sumner
appears as an unpractical theorist, not free from
prejudice. But his stand in these controversies of
the closing years of his life should not be allowed to
hide the real breadth and magnanimity of the man
aud the greatness of his service. Nor was Sumner
so unpractical — in the narrow sense of the term — as
is often implied. He was diligent iu investigating
important measures which did not fall within the
range of his chief interest, and became a clear-
' Dr. Henry S. Prltchett, at Memphig, May 2, 1908.

SUMNEE'S LEADEESHIP 449
headed and effective debater upon such practical
questions as the tariff, the ciirrency, postal regula
tions, and copyright. He was attentive to the
wants of his constituents aud efficient in his com
mittee work. He would have proved a highly
serviceable senator in ordinary times, though it is
doubtful whether a mau of his type could have beeu
elected to the Seuate or would have accepted an
election to the Senate, except iu such a crisis as that
of 1850. Then the call was for the prophet.
For Sumner's great work was not the framing of
laws ; it was rather the kindling of moral enthusi
asm, the inspiring of courage and hope, the assail
ing of public injustice. Sumuer was emphatically
" a pioneer of agitation." His " True Grandeur of
Nations," which first brought him fame threescore
years ago, is still a grand arsenal of weapons agaiust
war. Even at that early day he showed himself an
earnest and far-sighted leader in the movement for
international arbitration. His was the first clear
programme proposed in Congress for the reform of
the civil service. It was Ms timely and much-
needed protest that checked illegal measures and
ill-advised projects aiming at fropical expansion.
It was his dauntless courage in denouncing com
promise, in demanding the repeal of the Fugitive
Slave Law, and in insisting upon emancipation that
made him the chief initiating force in the struggle
that put an eud to slavery. It was he who urged
the arming of the blacks. It was his courage and
magnanimity that put a check upon barbarous at-

450 CHAELES SUMNEE
tempts at retaliation, whether in the treatment of
Confederate prisoners, in the grant of letters of
marque aud reprisal, or in the seizure of unoffend
ing citizens of foreign countries in return for wrongs
inflicted upon Americans abroad. Finally, through
out the greatest crisis of our national history, it was
the influence of Charles Sumner more than of any
other one mau that kept this country out of war
with England and with France, when war with
either of them would have meant the overthrow of
the Union. If these be not the works of practical
statesmanship, where shall such be found ?
But through all his public life he served not so
much by what he said or did as by what he was.
He could truly say of himself: "The slave of
principles, I call no party master." His power lay
in his insight into moral forces and his ability to
convert to his opinion the great public, by whose
pressure his colleagues were often reluctantly brought
to follow his standard. Por the arts of the ordinary
party manager he had no aptitude and little regard.
Not once but mauy times he boldly forced issues
which filled the party leaders with dismay and
threatened to disrupt the anti-slavery forces.
Nevertheless, as Curtis said, "the rank and file of
the party, to borrow a military phrase, dressed
upou Sumner," and in the later years, when dis
sensions had arisen and he took a course which most
of his former comrades would not approve, " there
were thousands and thousands of men who would be
startled and confused to find themselves marching

SUMNEE'S LEADEESHIP 451
in a political campaign out of step with Charles
Sumner." '
Sumner's service has been well appraised by the
man upon whom rather than upon any other his
mantle fell. George Frisbie Hoar, another great
senator from Massachusetts, said of him :
" Charles Sumuer held a place in the public life
of the country which no other man ever shared
with him. . . . He was an idealist. He sub
jected every measure to the inexorable test of the
moral law. Yet, at the same time, he was a power
ful political leader, aud in a time when the fate of
the Eepublic was decided accomplished vast practi
cal results. Where duty seemed to him to utter its
high commands, he could see uo obstacle in hostile
majorities and no restraint iu the lines of a written
Constitutiou. It is right, therefore constitutional,
was the logical formula with which he dealt with
every question of state. We should be deaf aud
blind to all the lessons of history, if we were to de
clare it to be safe that men trusted with executive or
even legislative power should act on that principle.
Unfortunately, humanity is so constituted that the
benevolent despot is likely to do more mischief
even thau a malevolent despot. His example of
absolute disregard of constitutional restraints will
be followed by men of very different motives. Yet
the influeuce of oue such man pressing and urging
his companions forward in a legislative body like
the Senate of the Uuited States, keeping ever before
the people the highest ideals, inspired by love of
liberty, and ever speaking and working in the fear
of God, is inestimable." '
• Orations, Vol. Ill, pp- 231-232.
' Autobiography of Seventy Years, Vol. I, p. 214.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Bartol, C. a. Senatorial Character : a Sermon in West Church,
Boston, after the Decease of Charles Sumner, 1874.
Bolton, Mrs. S. E. Charles Sumner. (In her " Famous Amer
ican Statesmen.") 1888.
Boston, Mass. City Council Memorial of Sumner, 1874.
Chamberlain, D. H. Charles Sumner and the Treaty of Wash
ington, 1902.
Chambrun, Marquis de. Personal Recollections of Charles
Sumner. Scribner's Magazine, February, 1893, p. 153.
Chaplin, J. and Mrs. J. (Dunbar.) Life of Charles Sumner.
Introduction by W. Claflin, 1874.
Clarke, J. F. Charles Sumner. (In his " Memorial and Bi
ographical Sketches.") 1878.
Curtis, G. W. Charles Sumner : a Eulogy. Orations and Ad
dresses, 1894. Vol. III. Same, in Massachusetts General
Court Memorial.
Davis, J. C. B. Mr. Sumner, the Alabama Claims and their Set
tlement. (Letter to N. Y. .S^ra/a?. ) 1878.
Dawes, Anna L. Charles Sumner. New York, 1892.
Elliott, R. B. Oration delivered April 14, 1874. In Massachu
setts General Court Memorial.
GRiMKfe, A. H. Life of Charles Sumner, the Scholar in Politics,
1892.
Harris, A. B. Charles Sumner's Autographs. N. Y. Evening
Post, July 17, 1875.
 Charles Sumner's Library. N. Y. Evening Post, June 11,
1875-
 The Sumner Missals. N. Y. Evening Post, January 22,
1876.
Higginson, T. W. Contemporaries, 1899.

BIBLIOGEAPHY 453
Hoar, G. F. Sumner. North American Review, 1878. Vol,
CXXVI, p. I.

Sumner. Forum. Vol. XVI, p. 549.

Johnson, A. B. Cosmopolitan Magazine, Vol. Ill, p. 406; Vol.
IV, pp. 40, 142.
 Recollections of Charles Sumner. Scribner's Monthly,
August-October, 1887. Vol. VIII, pp. 475-490 ; Vol. IX,
pp. 101-114; Vol. X, pp. 224-229, 297-304.
Lester, C. E. Life and Public Services of Charles Sumner, 1874.
Magoun, G. F. Charles Sumner. (In his "Atlas Essays.") 1877.
Massachusetts General Court. A Memorial of Charles Sum
ner. (Including Commemorative Observances, June 9,
1874; Poem by J. G. Whittier; Eulogy by G. W. Curtis ;
Eulogy by Carl Schurz, April 29, 1874; Oration by R. B.
Elliott, April 14, 1874; Sermon by H. W. Foote, March 22,
1874.)
Nason, Elias. The Life and Times of Charles Sumner, 1874.
Pierce, Edward L. Memoir and Letters of Charles Sumner.
Four volumes, 1877-1893.
 The Completion of the Sumner Memoir. (In his " En
franchisement and Citizenship.") 1896.
Schurz, Carl. Sumner. Eulogy delivered before the City Gov
ernment of Boston, April 29, 1874. Massachusetts General
Court Memorial.
Stearns, F. P. Cambridge Sketches, 1905.
Storey, Moorfield. Charles Sumner. (American Statesman
Series.) igoo.
Sumner, Charles. Works. Fifteen volumes, 1870-1883.
U. S. Congress. Memorial Addresses on the Life and Character
of Charles Sumner, April 27, 1874.
Whipple, E. P. Recollections of Charles Sumner. (In his
" Recollections of Eminent Men.") 1887.
Wright, J. J. In Memoriam: Charles Sumner. Eulogies deliv
ered by J. J. Wright, R. B. Elliott, and T. H. Jackson,
March 17, 1874, in Columbia, S. C.

INDEX

Abolitionists, Sumner's atti
tude toward, 103.
Adams, Charles Francis, editor
of Daily Whig, 104; opposes
coalition, 116, 1 25 ; on Sum
ner's candidacy for Senate,
129; opposes revised consti
tution, 164; on Know-Noth
ings, 182 ; inclined toward
compromise, 240 ; on Sum
ner's " national claims," 340,
378, n. I.
Adams, Charles Francis, Jr.,
134. 341. m; 363.1- 3; 371.
n. I.
Adams, John Q., commends
Sumner's words on slavery
and war, 95 ; on emancipa
tion, 249; no, 113, 119.
Adams, Samuel, Sumner com
pared with, 439, n. 2.
" Admiralty Practice," Dun
lap's, Sumner edits, 43.
Agassiz, Louis, declines position
on San Domingo Commis
sion, 361, n. I ; opinion as to
negro suffrage, 445.
Alabama and the Alabama
claims, 273, 338.
Alaska, Sumner's part in the
accession of, 31&-319 ; com
pared in value with San Do
mingo, 373, n. I.
Allen, Charles, leader of Young
Whigs, no; at Philadelphia
convention, 116.
Allston, Washington, 64, 94.
American Antiquarian Society,

Sumner elected a member of,
72.
American Jurist, Sumner con
tributor to, 37, 42 ; editor of,
43-
Amnesty Bill, 412, 413.
Andrew, John A., 41, 182, 184 ;
views on negro suffrage and
reconstruction, 447, n. i.
Annexation of territory, Sum
ner's attitude toward, Alaska,
318-319; St. Thomas, 319;
Canada, 363-364. See San
Domingo.
Appleton, Nathan, on nomina
tion of Taylor, 117, n. i.
Arbitration, Sumner's early ad
vocacy of international, 95-
96.
Argyll, Duke and Duchess of,
230, 271, 292.
Arkansas, reconstruction begun
in, 284 ; opposition to recog
nition of, 286.
Art, Sumner's interest in, 50 ;
collections of, 404; appre
ciation of, 407-408.
Atchison, David R., leader of
" border ruffians," 189, 194.
Atkinson, Edward, 331, n. i.
Autographs, Sumner's collec
tion of, 404.

Babcock, O. E., negotiates
" protocol " with San Do
mingo, 343 ; concludes treaty,
344. 348.

INDEX

455

Badger, G. E., abuse of Sum
ner, 156.
Balch, F. v., 393, 399.
Ballot, secret, in Massachusetts
legislature, 133-134.
Baltimore, Sumner hunted by
mob in, 245.
Bancroft, Frederic, Life of
Seward, 138, n. I, passim.
Bancroft, George, 64 ; Sumner
criticizes eulogy of Lincoln,
89, 11. I ; author of Johnson's
first message, 302 ; corre
spondence with Sumner con
cerning Hawthorne's appoint
ment, 400-402.
Banks, N. P., 130 ; elected
speaker, 188; 284, 431, n. i.
Battle-Flag Resolution, 262,
423 ; censure by Massachu
setts legislature, 424 ; effort
to rescind, 424-425 ; re
scinded, 43 1-432 ; Lamar on,
437-
Benton, Thomas H., pessimistic
as to politics in 1850, 139.
Bird, F. W., 331, n. i; 371,
n. I.
Blaine, James G., on Sumner's
removal from chairmanship,
366, n. I.
Blair, Montgomery, on Trent
Affair, 252.
Boston, in Sumner's boyhood,
22 ; press comments on Sum
ner's election, 135, n. 2; 179,
250 ; City Council endorses
Crittenden Compromise, 242-
243-
Boutwell, George S., elected
governor of Massachusetts,
130 ; on negro suffrage, 298 ;
presents rescinding resolu
tion, 432 ; 336, 358, n. I ;
414, n. I ; 439, n. 2.

Bright, Jesse D., on exclusion
of Sumner from committees,
165 ; reports committee list,
244 ; Sumner's speech for
expulsion of, 387.
Bright, John, on Trent Af
fair, 254, 27 1 ; on Sumner's
" national claims," 340 ; 221,
222, 422.
Brook Farm, Sumner's attitude
toward, 75.
Brooks, Preston S., 202 ; as
saults Sumner, 204 ; debate
over, 205-209 ; trial of, 210 ;
resignation, 211; reelection,
212, and n. I ; Southern
sentiment toward, 212 ; North
ern feeling, 213 ; death of,
219 ; Sumner's feeling to
ward, 220.
Brougham, Lord, 54 ; approves
Sumner's attitude on bound
ary controversy, 59 ; 221.
Brown, John, 217, n. 2.
Brown-Sequard, Dr. C. E., on
Sumner's case, 224 ; applies
moxa, 225.
Burns, Anthony, attempted res
cue of, 173-174.
Butler, A. P., 140, 171 ; abuse
of Sumner, 183 ; Sumner
rebukes, 195-197 ; connec
tion with Brooks, and the
assault, 202, 208 ; 219.
Butler, B. F., Sumner opposes
nomination of, 383.

Calhoun, John C, Sumner's
impression of, 40 ; 139.
Cameron, Simon, 366, 367, n. 2.
Canada, proposed annexation
of, 341-342 ; opposed by Ca
nadians, 355 ; Sumner favors
annexation of, 363.

456

INDEX

Capitol, paintings in, 262
sculpture for, 407, n. I.
Carlyle, Thomas, 54.
Cass, Lewis, minister to France,
58 ; presents Sumner in Sen
ate, 138 ; 209.
Cavour, Sumner's meeting, 228.
Centralization, Sunsner indiffer
ent as to, 320.
Chamberlain, D. H., on Sum
ner's removal from chairman
ship, 371, n. I.
Channing, W. E., influence on
Sumner, 43, 399 ; Sumner's
" idol," 65 ; with Sumner
condemns Webster's Creole
letter, 102.
Chase, Salmon P., congratulates
Sumner on election, 135, n.
2 ; on compact theory of gov
ernment, 157 ; issues " Ap
peal of Independent Demo
crats," 167 ; urged by Sum
ner for Chief- Justiceship, 28 1 ;
139, 153, il. l; 158, 165.
177, 183,243, 266, 268; 295.
Chestnut, James, abuse of Sum
ner, 235.
Chinese, Sumner's attitude to
ward, 381.
Cincinnati, Society of, Sumner
member of, 72.
Civil Rights Bill, 412, 422,
428, 429, and n. i ; 433.
Civil Service, Sumner initiates
movement for reform of, 244,
279.
Clarke, J. F., 217, n. 2; 425.
Clay, Henry, Sumner's im
pression of, 39 ; last day of,
in Senate, 139.
Clemens, J., abuse of Sumner,
156.
Clergy, petition of New Eng
land, 170, 172,

Cleveland, H. R., 44, 45.
Clingman, T. L., 207, 210.
Coalition in Massachusetts, sug
gested, 119; urged by Wil
son, 125 ; results in Sumner's
election to Senate, 126-134.
Cobden, Richard, 221 ; on Trent
Affair, 254 ; on blockade,
2715255, n. i; 338.
Codification of law, 61 ; of
United States Public Statutes,
144.3"-
Committee Service, Sumner's,
Roads and Canals, 140 ; ex
cluded from, 165, 188; on
Territories, 218 ; on Foreign
Relations, 244; on Slavery
and Freedmen, 276 ; on Dis
trict of Columbia, 308, 422.
See Foreign Relations.
Compromise of 1850, I2i ;
Sumner attacks finality of,
149, 159.
Confiscation, estates of Confed
erates, 267.
" Congress of the Nations,"
Sumner advocates, 95.
Conkling, Roscoe, 365.
Conscience, public, need of
support of, for laws, 154.
" Conscience Whigs," 99, 109.
Constitution (Massachusetts),
revised, 161 ; defeated, 163.
Constitution (United States),
Sumner's attitude toward,
102, 128, 132; guarantees of
freedom, 150 ; Sumner's in
terpretation of, 152, 178, 328,
381, 441, n. I ; compact
theory of, 153, n. I ; and the
Fugitive Slave Law, 155.
Cooper Institute speech, 236,
273-.
Copyright, Sumner favors inter
national, 311,

INDEX

457

Crawford, Thomas, Sumner's
friendship for, 60, 71, 221,
228.
Creole Case, 10 1- 102.
Crittenden, J. J., tries to shield
Sumner, 205 ; compromise
proposals, 239; 231, 248, n. i.
Cubans, belligerency of, 341-
342.
Curtis, George William, 67, n.
I ; 109, n. I ; 220, 360, 389,
394. 411. n- i; 419. n- 2;
43S. 45°-
Cushing, Caleb, opposes Sum
ner's election, 131 ; his
" ukase," 163 ; favored by
Sumner for Chief-J ustice, 430 ;
345. 405.

Daily Whig, estabUshed, 103.
Dana, R. H., Jr., 124, 125, 217.
Davis, H. W., 268.
Davis, Jefferson, 140 ; on
Brooks assault, 213 ; 233, 309.
Davis, Mrs. Jefferson, impres
sion of Sumner, 385.
Davis, John, on slavery's influ
ence on public life, 139.
Deadlock in Massachusetts
legislature, 131-134.
Dewitt, D. M., " Impeachment
and Trial of Andrew John
son," 324, n. I.
Douglas, Stephen A., upholds
Fugitive Slave Law, 157 ;
presents report on Nebraska,
166, 168, 169, 171 ; abuse of
Sumner, 191 ; Sumner re
bukes, 195 ; colloquy with
Sumner, 199-200; on Brooks
assault, 205 ; 231, 23a, 234.
Douglass, F., 433.
Drayton and Sayres, pardoned
at Sumner's request, 143.

Dred Scott Decision, 219, 231,
282.
Dunning, W. A., 302, ii. I and
2; 358, n. I.
Edmundson, H. A., 203, 204 ;
censure of, recommended,
207 ; censure and resigna
tion, 211 ; reelection, 212.
Education, Sumner cooperates
with Mann for improvement
of public, 75 ; urges free
schools for freedmen, 316—
3>7-
Eliot, S. A., 98 ; succeeds Win
throp in Congress, 123; de
nounces Kansas— Nebraska
Bill, 170.
Emancipation, Sumner urges,
on Lincoln, 248, 258-259;
issue in Massachusetts Re
publican Convention, 249 ;
press comments on proposal,
250.
Emerson, R. W., part in or
ganization of Republican
party in Massachusetts, 181 ;
opinion of Sumner, 433.
Emigrant Aid Co., 189, 191, 192;
defended by Sumner, 194.
England, Sumner's first visit to,
Engravings, Sumner's interest
in, 223, 229, 382, 404.
Equality of race, Charles Pinck
ney Sumner's attitude toward,
18, 21 ; Sumner's, loi, 261,
277, 288, 317, 422.
Europe, Sumner's first trip to,
45-63 ; last visit to, 420-422.
Everett, Edward, election to
Senate, 161 ; opposes com
mittee recognition of Sum
ner, 165; on Kansas-Ne
braska Bill, 167; presents

458

INDEX

petition of New England
clergy, 171; resigns, 172;
urges Sumner to vote for
Crittenden Compromise, 242.
Faneuil Hall, banquet fol
lowing Sumner's oration, 87-
88.
Felton, Charles C, 44, 123.
Fenianism, 320, 363, and n. 2;
377-
Fessenden, W. P., 175 ; chair
man Committee on Recon
struction, 302 ; rebukes Sum
ner, 307 ; opposes Alaska
purchase, 319, 393.
Fifteenth Amendment, 328.
Filibuster, 172, 277, 288.
Fillmore, Millard, condemned
by Sumner, 128, 143, 388,
and n. 2.
Fish, Hamilton, enters Senate
with Sumner, 142 ; votes
against repeal of Fugitive
Slave Law, 157, 180, 222,
331; appointed Secretary of
State, 333-335 ; attitude
changing toward Sumner,
355, n. I ; on terms of agree
ment with England, 355 ; in
sult to Sumner in Motley
papers, 361.
Fish, Mrs. Hamilton, 142 ; ap
proves Sumner's speech, 157.
" Five of Clubs," 44, 65.
Flack, H. E., 308, u. I ; 412,
n. I.
Forbes, J. M., 243, n. i ; 255,
n. I ; opinion of Seward, 419,
n. 2.
Foreign Relations, Committee
on, Seward keeps Sumner
off, 218; Sumner assigned
to, 231 ; chairman of,
244; holds up Retaliation

Bill, 310; reorganization pro
posed, 358, 360 ; Sumner's
removal from chairmanship,
365-371-
Fourteenth Amendment, de
bated in Senate, 306; causes
and motives leading to, 306,
n. 2 ; 308 ; " an instalment,
not a finality," 314; rejected
by Southern states, 314.
Fourth of July Oration, 78-89.
France, sale of arms to, 413-
414.
Freedmen's Bureau, 277.
" Freedom national. Slavery
sectional," 148-156.
Free Soil Party, organized in
Massachusetts, 116-118.
French, Sumner's mastery of,
46-48.
French Spoliation Claims, 279.
Fugitive Slave Law, 123; Sum
ner's denunciation of, 1 28 ;
Sumner moves resolution for
its repeal, 146; addresses
Senate on, 148-156; Boston
petition for repeal, 174;
Sumner on enforcement, 177,
179 ; votes on repeal of, 179,
184 ; repealed, 276-277.

Gambetta, LtoN, 421.
Garfield, J. A., favors negro
suffrage, 298.
Garrison, W. L., censures Sum
ner's delay, 145 ; on John
son's impeachment, 323, n. i ;
opposes rescinding censure of
Sumner, 425.
Georgia, reconstruction in, 380.
Giddings, J. R., 113, 210, 216.
Gladstone, W. E., 221, 222,
230, 272, 273.
Godkin, E. L.j 371, n. i; 410.

INDEX

459

« Grandeur of Nations, The
True," 78-89, 246.
Grant, Ulysses S., report on
Southern states, 303-304 ;
nominated for President, 329-
330; approves Sumner's at
titude on Johnson-Clarendon
Convention, 339 ; on British
breach of neutrality, 341 ;
desire to recognize Cuban in
surgents, 341 ; calls on Sum
ner to urge support of San
Domingo treaties, 349 ; praise
of San Domingo, 356-357 ;
attitude toward Sumner, 358,
n. I ; denounced by Sumner,
373 ; candidate for reelection,
414; "Republicanism vs.
Grantism," 417.
Greeley, Horace, 188, 239,
298 ; leader of Liberal Re
publicans, 415 ; presidential
candidate, 419, n. 2 ; defeat
and death, 422.
Greene, G. W., 60, 62.
Greenleaf, Simon, professor in
law school, 35.
Greenough, H., Sumner's cor
respondence with, 407, and
n. I.
Grey, Lord de, 377.
Grimes, J. W., 266,
Guizot, Henri, 221.
Hale, Edward Everett, rec
ollections of Sumner, 94.
Hale, John P., 1 19, 139, 157, 159.
Harvard College, Sumner stu
dent in, 26-28 ; law school,
34-37 ; cost of, compared
with that of Ohio, 83; Phi
Beta Kappa oration, 93 ;
Sumner's bequest of peace
prize to, 96 ; other bequests
to, 404.

Hawthorne, Nathaniel, 64, 228 ;
Sumner secures office for,
400-401.
Hayti, Sumner secures diplo
matic recognition of, 260 ;
tribute to Sumuer, 434 ; Sum
ner defends independence of,
352.
Higginson, Thos. W., tries to
free Burns, 173; 384, 399,
n. 2.
Hillard, George S., forms law
partnership with Sumner, 41 ;
44. 98, 169. 427-
Hoar, E. Rockwood, 332, 359,
376 ; at Sumner's death-bed,
432-433.
Hoar, George F., 116, 117,
317.359.392,45'-
Hoar, Samuel, 176, 180.
Homesteads for freedmen,
urged by Sumner, 317.
Hooper, Samuel, 402, 403.
Houston, General Samuel, de
fends New England clergy,
171.
Howe, Julia Ward, 406; op
poses rescinding of censure
on Sumner, 425.
Howe, Samuel Gridley, 8, 65 ;
Sumner meets, in nativist
riot, 7 1 ; Sumner's illness,
72 ; interested with Sumner
in phrenology, 74; urges
Sumner into Prison Disci
pline controversy, 97; in,
124, 138 ; criticizes Sumner's
speech on Kossuth, 143 ;
Sumner urges appointment to
foreign courts, 245, 337;
commissioner to San Do
mingo, 361 ; favors annex
ation of San Domingo, 373,
n. I.
Humboldt, Alex, von, 226.

460

INDEX

Impeachment of Johnson,
Sumner's language before,
313 ; trial of, 322-326.
Irish in Massachusetts politics,
163, 181.
Italy, Sumner's first visit to, 59.
Jackson, Andrew, on slavery
and disunion, 242.
Jacob, David, Sr., 22.
Jeffrey, Lord, 55.
Johnson, Andrew, Sumner's
early impressions of, 295 ;
proposed qualified negro suf
frage, 300; first message of,
302 ; vetoes overridden, 305 ;
" swings 'round the circle,"
312; denounced by Sumner,
313 ; impeachment of, 322-
326.
Johnson, Arnold B., 8, 2i7,n. 2.
Johnson, Reverdy, 282, n. I ;
negotiates Johnson-Claren
don Convention, 335-336.
Johnson-Clarendon Convention,
336; debated and rejected,
337-338, 345, 377- .
Joint High Commission, 365,
376. 377-
Jury, trial by, guaranteed by
Constitution, 153.
Kansas, civil war in, 189-190,
192 ; debate over admission
of, 233.
Kansas-Nebraska Bill, de
nounced by Sumner, 168 ; by
Massachusetts town-meetings,
170; a " swindle," 194.
Keitt, L. M., aud the Brooks
assault, 205 ; censure recom
mended and passed, 207, 211 ;
reelected, 212; eulogy of
Brooks, 219 ; death, 220.

Kemble, Mrs. Frances A., 64,
65, 71.
Kent, Chancellor, 38-39.
Know-Nothing movement, 181-
183.
Kossuth, Sumner on welcome
to, 142.
Lafayette, Sumner's oration
on, 237.
Lamar, L. Q. C, eulogy on
Sumner, 436-437.
Land-grants to Iowa, favored
by Sumner, 143.
Lawrence, looting of, 190 ; 192-
193-
Lawyers, Sumner on French,
50 ; on English, 52.
Law School, Harvard, Sumner
student in, 34-37 ; declines
instructorship in, 41 ; lecturer
in, 42, 69 ; Story's wish that
Sumner succeed him, 51,
n. I ; Sumner not in favor
at, 91.
Lecompton Constitution, 223.
Legal tender notes, Sumner on
issue of, 327.
Lewis, Sir George Cornewall,
214.
Liberator, first paper subscribed
for by Sumner, 100, 145.
Liberal Republicans, 415-417,
420.
Lieber, Francis, Sumner's cor
respondence with, 43, 68,
100 ; on Sumner's resolutions
on foreign intervention, 270.
Lincoln, Abraham, nominated,
232 ; Sumner supports, 237 ;
on Republican party, 243 ;
on Trent Affair, 253-254;
on opposition to Seward, 266 ;
renomination not favored by
Sumner, 280-281 ; 289 ; last

INDEX

461

speech, 293 ; death, 294 ;
Sumner's eulogy of, 294, 390.
Lincoln, Mrs. Abraham, 289,
290, 380.
Lincoln, Robert T., 294.
LongfeUow, Henry W., 44, 45,
62, 102, 108, n. I; 118, 134,
138. 391.
Louis Philippe, Sumner's esti
mate of, 48-49.
Louisiana, reconstruction be
gun, 284 ; debate over recog
nition of, 287.
Lowell, James Russell, opinion
of Sumner's oration on war,
87, n. I ; comment of John
son-Clarendon Convention
speech, 339, n. i ; 358, n. i.
Lyceum, in New England, 92 ;
color hne in, 101.

Macaulay, Thomas B., 55.
Mackenzie, A. S., Sumner's de
fense of, 73.
" Maine Law," complicates
Massachusetts politics, 160,
163.
Mann, Horace, 41 ; Sumner's
cooperation with, 75, 126,
158, 185.
Marque and reprisal, letters
of, Sumner's opposition to,
268.
Marshall, Chief- Justice John, as
table companion, 39.
Marshfield, elects Sumner to
constitutional convention,
161.
Mason, J. M., 140; opposes
Sumner's addressing Senate,
'47 ; '75 ; Sumner rebukes,
177, 198, 200 ; seized on
Trent, 251.
Massachusetts Historical So

ciety, Sumner's election lo
426.
Memorandum, Sumner's
"hemispheric flag-with
drawal," 363, 368.
Metric system, favored by Sum
ner, 311.
Metternich, Prince, comments
on America, 61.
Mexican War Bill, 104-107 ;
Sumner denounces, 1 12.
Mexico, French intervention in,
267.
Military governors, appoint
ment of, 284.
Mississippi, refuses to ratify
Amendment XIII, 299.
Montana, question of admission,
278.
Montezuma, as ancestor of
.Americans, 49.
Morley, John, 379, n. i.
Morpeth, Lord, 53.
Morton, O. P., 359, 361, 364.
Motley, John Lothrop, 228,
230, 33 1 ; appointed Minister
to England, 336 ; instruc
tions to, 344-346 ; dis
regard of instructions, 347,
and n. I ; resignation called
for. 353 ; removal of, 357.

" Naboth's Vineyard," 360.
Napoleon III, 229, 382.
"Nasby, Petroleum V.," Sum
ner's initiation by Lincoln,
291.
Nast, Thomas, caricatures of
Sumner, 389.
National claims, put forward
by Sumner, 338; urged by
Grant, 346.
NaturaUzation, changes in, urged
by Sumner, 381.

462

INDEX

Nebraska, report on, 1 66 ; ne
gro suffrage imposed in, 309.
Negro suffrage, 278, 295-296;
Sumner's persistent urging
of, 298; in Fourteenth
Amendment, 306, and n. 2 ;
308; in Colorado and Ne
braska, 308; in District of
Columbia, 313, and n. 2 ; in
territories, 314; made condi
tion of reconstruction, 316;
Sumner's championship of,
443-448.
Negroes, in Europe, 230; en
listment of, in United States
army, 267.
Neutrality, Sumner on British
breach of, 271-274, 309-311,
4'3-
New York Historical Society,
72.
Northcote, Sir Stafford, 377.
Northeastern Boundary, Sum
ner's letter on, 58.
Oath of office, 178; "iron
clad oath," 276.
Ohio, cost of, compared with
that of Harvard College, 83.
Oratory, Sumner's, 385-388.
Ostracism, of Sumner in Boston,
98, 108; of anti-slavery lead
ers, 124; by Southern sena
tors, suggested, 156, 178.
Palfrey, J. G., 87 ; refuses to
vote for Winthrop, 113; 125 ;
opposes Sumner's election,
131 ; opposes revised consti
tution, 164; 182; appointed
postmaster of Boston, 245.
Palmerston, Lord, on Trent Af
fair, 255, n. I.
Paris, Sumner in, 47-50, 58.
Parker, Theodore, 124; greet

ing on Sumner's election,
136; 147. '92. 201, 229, 238.
Party, Sumner's attitude towaird,
148, 186, 236.
Peace Conference, Sumner op
poses Massachusetts being
represented at, 241.
Peace Prize, Sumner's gift to
Harvard College, 96.
Peace Society, Sumner's rela
tion to American, 95.
Petition, freedom of, cham
pioned by Sumner, 178.
Pettit, John, abuse of Sumner,
'7'. '75-
Phi Beta Kappa Oration, 93.
Philadelphia Exposition, Sum
ner on, 431.
Phillips friction match case, 67.
Phillips, Wendell, schoolmate
of Sumner, 34 ; 87, n. I ; as
serts right of secession, 239;
426.
Phrenology, interest in, 74.
Pierce, Edward L., " Memoir
and Letters of Charles Sum
ner." 7; 136. n- '; 147,
n. l; 262, 264, 323, n.
I ; 371. "• '•
Politics, Sumner's disgust with,
as a career, 40-41, 76.
Postal reform, urged by Sumner,
'44. 380.
Prescott, William H., 64, 108,
n. I ; 123, 169.
Prison discipline, controversy
over, 96-98.
Pritchett, Henry S., on negro
suffrage, 448.
Public credit, Sumner in de
fense of, 327, 379.
Railway, first ride upon, 38.
Reconstruction, Sumner's the
ory of, 262, 283, 285, 441-

INDEX

463

442 ; Lincoln's plan of, 284 ;
opposition in Congress, 285 ;
Sumner insists on congres
sional initiative, 286; John
son's first steps in, 297 ;
Sumner demands equal civil
rights, 301 ; Johnson's plan,
303; "Thorough," 315;
negro suffrage as condition
of, 316; Sumner's influence
on, 44J-448.
Religion, Sumner's views on,
398-399 ; in relation to the
state, 421.
Representatives, in Massachu-
•setts legislature, 126 ; in
structed to vote for Sumner,
133; 161-162.
Republican party, Sumner's
part in beginnings of, 1 80,
182.
Retaliation, act, 282-283 ; pro
posed against England, 320 ;
for arrest of American citi
zens, 321.
Rhodes, James Ford, quoted,
340, n. l; 371, n. I; 446,
n. I ; 447, n. i.
Ristori, Madame, 221.
Rome, study in, 59-61 ; love
of, 227.
Rose, Sir John, 354, 356, 362,
364.
Russell, E. Harlow, on Sum
ner's oratory, 385-386.
Russell, Earl, on Trent seizure,
255, 272, 275, 277.

San Domingo, 260; Grant's
steps to further annexation
of, 343 ; question before com
mittee and Senate, 350-352 ;
commission appointed, 360 ;
Sumner's speeches on, 351,

360, 372 ; report of commis
sion, 373.
Saulsbury, Senator, 277.
Savage, Senator, 210, 219.
Schurz, Carl, 51, n. 1 ; 258, n.
2 ; report on Southern states,
303-304; 339. 373.405,413-
4'4. 415, 432; eulogy on
Sumner, 435.
Scott, General Winfield, 239.
Sculpture, Sumner's interest in,
60-61 ; urges a higher stand
ard of, 407, n. I.
Senate, Sumner's first impres
sions of, 40-41 ; reluctance
to enter, 129 ; nomination
and election, 130-135; per
sonnel of, 140-141 ; Sum
ner's later attitude toward,
227 ; reelection opposed, 263 ;
manners in, 396—397.
Seward, William H., 96 ; con
gratulates Sumner on elec
tion, 136, n. 2 ; 140 ; votes
on Fugitive Slave Law, 157,
180 ; opposes Kansas-Ne
braska Bill, 168 ; in Kansas
debate, 192 ; moves commit
tee of inquiry on Brooks as
sault, 205 ; 209 ; keeps Sum
ner off Committee on Foreign
Relations, 218 ; compromise
programme, 239, 244 ; de
clares slavery will remain
unaffected by the war, 247 ;
approves Trent seizure, 252;
on giving up Mason and
Slidell, 254, 255, n. i ; at
tempted exclusion of, from
cabinet, 266 ; favors letters
of marque and reprisal, 268 ;
approves Johnson's recon
struction acts, 298; blamed
for Johnson's deeds, 312 ; ac
quisition of Alaska by, 318.

464

INDEX

Seward, Mrs. William H., 142,
'57-
Sherman, John, 327; on Sum
ner's removal from chairman
ship, 367 ; opinion of Suraner,
435-
Simms, William G., 213.
Sismondi, on American slavery,
IOI.
Slavery, 94 ; Sumner's first
sight of, 100 ; " Slavery sec
tional," 148 ; impressions of,
185; "The Barbarism of,"
233-
Slave-trade, treaty for sup
pression of, 259 ; abolition of
coastwise, 277.
Slidell, John, declines to dine
with Sumner, 74, n. I ; on
Brooks assault, 205; 231;
taken firom Trent, 251.
Smith, Gerrit, 308, n. 2.
Smith, Sydney, Sumner's visit
with, 55.
Souls, Pierre, Sumner on, 140.
South Carolina, part of, in revo
lution, 177 ; compared with
Kansas, 197.
Specie payments, Sumner urges
prompt resumption of, 327,
379-
Speech, freedom of, Sumner
champion of, 178.
St. Thomas, proposed annex
ation of, 319.
Stamp Act, compared with Fu
gitive Slave Law, 153, 174.
Stanton, Edwin M., 243, 294,
295.
Stevens, Thaddeus, 248, n. i ;
opposition to Johnson's plans,
296-297 ; secures appoint
ment of Cdmmittee on Re
construction, 302 ; blames
Sumner, 307 ; institutes

" Thorough " policy, 315, and
n. 3 ; 324. 435- 443. 446.
Story, Joseph, friendship for
the Sumners, 34 ; Sumner
visits in Washington, 39 ; 41,
46; opinion of Sumner, 51,
n. I ; 61, 91, 94.
Story, William Wetmore, char
acterization of Sumner, 37,
68 ; 228 ; on Sumner's appre
ciation of art, 407-408.
Style, Sumner's, in oratory and
writing, 107, 385-386.
Suffrage, educational or prop
erty tests for, 444. See Negro
Suffrage. Woman's, 309.
Sumner, Charles, birth, 22 ; at
Latin school, 23 ; aspirations
for West Point, 25 ; at Har
vard, 26-28; tramping trip
to Saratoga, 29-30; Daniel
Webster awards prize to, 32 ;
experience in teaching, 33 ;
chooses law as profession, 34-
37; appearance and habits,
36-37 ; contributes to Amer
ican Jurist, 37 ; visits Wash
ington, 39-41 ; distaste for
politics and for Senate, 40-
41 ; forms partnership with
Hillard, 41 ; lectures in law
school, editorial work, 42-
43; the "Five of Clubs,"
44 ; European trip, 45-63 ;
return to Boston, 63; new
friends, 65-66; death of
father, 66 ; resumes practice,
66-69 ; edits Vesey's " Re
ports," 70-7 1 ; serious illness
and despondency, 7 1-72 ; de
fends Commander Mackenzie,
in Somers mutiny controversy,
73 ; interest in phrenology,
74; works with Horace
Mann for improvement of

INDEX

465

public education, 75-76; dis
gust with American political
methods, 76 ; delivers ora
tion, " The True Grandeur
of Nations," 80-89 J eulogy
of Judge Story, 91 ; lectures
before Lyceums and colleges,
92-93 ; address before Peace
Society, 95 ; ostracized in
Boston, for part in Prison Dis
cipline controversy, 96-98 ;
allies himself with anti-slav
ery men, 100-102 ; contrib
utor to Daily Whig, 104;
denounces Winthrop's Mex
ican War vote, 105-107 ;
speeeh at state convention,
109 ; denounces abduction of
a fugitive slave, 1 10 ; refuses
to accept nomination for Con
gress, in; calls for with
drawal of troops from Mex
ico, 112; commends Pal
frey's vote, 113; part in
organizing Free Soil party,
116-118; defeated for Con
gress, 119; favors coalition
with Democrats, 120, 125-
1 26 ; defeated for Congress,
1 23 ; defends Sims, a fugitive
slave, 124; denounces Fugi
tive Slave Law, 127 ; nomi
nated for Senate, 130 ; dead
lock ends in his election,
130-134 ; takes oath of office,
138 ; treatment by colleagues,
140; life in Washington, 141 ;
welcome to Kossuth, 142;
secures pardon of Drayton
and Sayres, 143; favors
land-grants to Iowa, 144;
reproached for inaction, 145 ;
attempt to address Senate
thwarted, 146; speech,
" Freedom national, Slavery

sectional," 148-156 ; in Mas
sachusetts Free Soil Conven
tion, l6o; Marshfield elects
to constitutional convention,
161 ; measures he favored,
162; champions the revised
constitution, 163 ; called upon
to resign, 164; omitted from
committee list, 165 ; signs
" Appeal of the Independent
Democrats," 167 ; opposes
Kansas-Nebraska Bill, 167-
173; champions New Eng
land clergy, 172; defends
Massachusetts against charge
of treason, 174; expulsion
mooted, 176 ; asserts right
of free speech, 178; op
poses Toucey 's bill, 184 ; re
jects Know-Nothingism, 186;
buys slaves for John A. An
drew, 184 ; Western tour, 184;
criticizes Douglas's report on
Kansas, 191 ; speech, " The
Crime Against Kansas," 193-
199; colloquy with Douglas,
199-200; assaulted by
Brooks, 204; effects, 209;
name put forward for Vice-
President, 210 ; academic
recognition, 214 ; public re
ception in Boston, 215-216;
reelection, 217; goes to
Europe for health, 221 ; re
sumes seat in Senate , 223 ;
forced to return to Europe,
224 ; treatment by moxa, 225,
227; first attack of angina
pectoris, 226; winter in
Montpellier, 227 ; Italian
travel, 228-230 ; return
home, 230 ; resumes seat in
Senate, assigned to Foreign
Relations Committee, 231 ;
voted for in Chicago conven-

466

INDEX

tion for presidency, 232;
speech, " The Barbarism of
Slavery," 234; Cooper Insti
tute speech, 236; lecture on
" Lafayette," 237 ; opposes
all schemes of compromise,
240 ; believes war inevitable,
241 ; criticized by Boston
City Council, 242; made
chairman, Coramittee on For
eign Relations, 244 ; hunted
by Baltimore mob, 245 ; pro
poses programme for the
administration, 247 ; urges
emancipation on Lincoln,
248, 251, 259; puts the issue
before Massachusetts state
convention, 249; on Trent
seizure, 252, 255-257; sup
ports treaty for suppression
of slave trade, 259 ; secures
diplomatic recognition of
Hayti, San Domingo and Li
beria, 260 ; succeeds in pass
ing anti-slavery laws, 260-
261 ; begins struggle for
equal rights, 261 ; propounds
"state-suicide" theory, 261 ;
opposes initiation of recon
struction by President, 262;
introduces resolution as to
battle-flags and paintings in
Capitol, 262; supports legal
tender acts, 263 ; reelection
threatened, 263 ; endorsed by
Republican convention, 264-
265 ; reelected, 266 ; favors
Seward's elimination from
the cabinet, 266; on Confis
cation Act, 267 ; blocks reso
lution on French intervention
in Mexico, 267-268; stops
privateering policy, 268-269 J
resolutions on foreign inter
vention, 270; Cooper Insti

tute speech, 273-275 ; secures
repeal of Fugitive Slave Law,
276 ; urges equal rights meas-
'ures, 277-278; relation to
Thirteenth Amendment, 278 ;
proposes reform of civil serv
ice, 279-280 ; opposes renom
ination of Lincoln, 280 ;
works for his reelection, 281 ;
secures Chief-Justiceship for
Chase, 281 ; on Taney me
morial, 281 ; secures modifi
cation of Retaliation Act,
283; insists Congress must
initiate reconstruction, 286;
opposes recognition of Louis
iana government, 287-288 ;
defeats Lincoln's plan, 289;
escorts President and Mrs.
Lincoln to inauguration ball,
290; accompanies presiden
tial party to Richmond, 291 ;
foresees break with Lincoln
on reconstruction, 293 ; at
Lincoln's death-bed, 293 ;
eulogy on Lincoln, 294, 390 ;
urges negro suffrage upon
Johnson, 295 ; insists upon it
as preliminary to reconstruc
tion, 299 ; breaks with John
son, 301 ; presents recon
struction programme, 301 ;
denounces Johnson's " white
washing " message and ap
pointments, 304; blocks first
form of Fourteenth Amend
ment, 306-307 ; offers new
draft, 307 ; on committee on
District of Columbia, 308 ;
opposes hasty trial of Jeffer
son Davis, 309 ; blocks re
taliation against England,
309-311; advocates interna
tional copyright and metric
system, 311 ; death of mother.

INDEX

467

311; marriage, 311, 402-
403 ; denounces Johnson,
312; urges extension of Ten
ure of Office Bill, 312; insists
on negro suffrage in Ne
braska, 314; declares ac
ceptance of Fourteenth
Amendment only au instal
ment of reconstruction, 315;
successful appeal to caucus on
negro suffrage, 316; tries to
secure homesteads and schools
for freedmen, 317 ; advocates
Alaska purchase, 318-319;
Western lecture tour, 320 ;
part in Johnson impeachment
trial, 322-326 ; urges prompt
resumption of specie pay
ments, 327 ; attitude toward
Fifteenth Amendment, 328 ;
opposed to Grant's nomina
tion, 329-330; elected for
fourth term, 330 ; blocks ap
pointment of Stewart, 332;
intimacy with Fish, 334; re
lation to Motley's appoint
ment, 336 ; opposes Johnson-
Clarendon Convention, 337-
338; tension over Motley,
347 ; urged by Grant to sup
port San Domingo treaties,
349; opposes annexation of
San Domingo, 350-352 ; of
fered London mission, 352 ;
antagonism toward Grant,
359; speech, "Naboth's
Vineyard," 360 ; insulted by
Fish, 361 ; rupture with Fish,
362-363 ; memorandum on
termsof settlement with Eng
land, 363; removed from
chairmanship of Committee
on Foreign Relations, 365-
371; third speech on San
Domingo, 372-373 ; supports

Treaty of Washington, 377 ;
favors new " fundamental
conditions " of reconstruction,
380 ; urges changes in law of
naturalization, 381 ; illness,
382 ; opposes Butler's candi
dacy for governor, 383 ; per
sonality, 384-411 ; religious
views, 398-399; secures of
fice for Hawthorne, 400-402;
marriage and divorce, 402-
403; home in Washington,
403-405 ; lack of humor, 406-
407 ; appreciation of art, 407-
408; craving for approval,
408-410 ; urged to join Lib
eral Republicans, 415 ; consid
ered as presidential candi
date, 416; speech, "Repub
licanism vs. Grantism," 418 ;
last trip to Europe, 420-422 ;
introduces " Battle- Flag Reso
lution," 423; censured by
Massachusetts legislature,
424; struggle to complete
Works, 425 ; election to Mas
sachusetts Historical Society,
426 ; renewed friendship with
Hillard, 427, and n. I ; urges
Civil Rights Bill, 429 ; favors
Cushing for Chief-Justice,
430; censure rescinded, 431-
432 ; illness and death, 432-
433 ; funeral ceremonies,
433-434; Lamar's eulogy,
436-437 ; Sumner's leader
ship, 438-45 1 ; part in re
construction, 441-448; prac
tical statesmanship, 448-451.
Sumner, Charles Pinckney, 18;
marriage, 19 ; sheriff of Suf
folk County, 20; character
istics, 21 ; anxiety as to son's
education, 25 ; death, 66.
Sumner, George, 66, 134, 248.

468

INDEX

Sumner, Job, 16-18.
Sumner, Relief (Jacob), 22, 311.
Supreme Court, Sumner's ob
servations of, 39; attitude
toward its decisions, 152.
Taney, Chief-Justice, 281,
282.
Tariff, Sumner's votes on, 218.
Taylor, Zachary, nomination of,
116, 117, n. I.
Temperance, Sumner's relation
to the movement, 74, 397.
Tenure of Office Act, 312-313.
Territories, organization of, 240,
n. I.
Texas, opposition to annexation
of, in Massachusetts, 99;
Sumner on, 103.
Thayer, Eli, and Emigrant Aid
Company, 189.
Thirteenth Amendment, Sum
ner drafts form of, 278 ; Mis
sissippi refuses to ratify, 299 ;
powers under, 306.
TocqueviUe, A. de, 221, 222.
Toombs, Robert, attitude to
ward Brooks assault, 205,
207.
Topeka Constitution, 190.
Toucey, Isaac, 178, 183.
Trent Affair, 251.
Trumbull, Lyman, opp
Seward, 266, 282, n. i ; 286,
287. 369. 4 '5-
Vesey's " Reports," Sumner
edits, 70-71.
Victoria, Sumner present at
coronation of, 53.
Virginius case, Sumner on, 427-
428.
Wade, B. F., 140, 157; on
freedom of speech and the

Brooks assault, 208 ; 288, 297,
308. 33'. n- I ; 361 ; favors
annexation of San Domingo,
373. "• '•
War, Sumner's denunciation of,
82-89, 94; changed attitude
toward, 246.
Washington, D. C, Sumner's
first visit to, 39-41.
Washington, George, on capture
of fugitive slave, 154-155.
Washington, Treaty of, 356.
Webster, Daniel, awards prize
to Sumner, 32 ; argues case
before Supreme Court, 39;
on Creole case, 102; urged
by Sumner to champion
freedom, 109, n. r ; Seventh
of March Speech, 121- 122;
123; enforces Fugitive Slave
Law, 124; last visit to Sen
ate, 156.
Welles, Gideon, 8; on Trent
Affair, 251-252; on privateer
ing, 269, 298.
West Point, Sumner's wish to
enter, 25 ; visits, 29.
West Virginia, Sumner opposed
to admission, 261.
Whipple, E. P., 92.
White, Andrew D., 358, n. i ;
commissioner to San Do
mingo, 361 ; on annexation
of San Domingo, 373, n. I.
Whittier, John G., 102, 402;
leads movement to rescind
censure of Sumner, 424, 431.
Wilkes, Captain, 251-252.
Wilson, Henry, 103 ; at Phil
adelphia convention, 116; de
nounces Webster, 125; 130;
credited by Sumner with his
election, 136; 145, 147, 161;
defeated for governor, 163,
164; dallies with Know-

INDEX

469

Nothings, 182 ; elected to
Senate, 182 ; on conditions
in Kansas, 190; 205, 208;
declines duel with Brooks,
212; on Brooks's death,
219 ; 238 ; opposes Sumner's
resolutions; 262 ; candidate
for Vice-President, 417 ; 426,
434.

Winthrop, Robert C, 88, 104 ;
vote on Mexican War Bill
criticized, 104- 107 ; Sum
ner's controversy with, 105-
107 ; Sumner refuses to run
against, for Congress, in;
opposed to Sumner in state
convention, 113; appointed
to Senate, 123 ; 3S8.

YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

3 9002 01416 5840