Part 9

“Your speech on the Mason and Slidell matter has won, most justly, golden opinions from all sorts of people. The affair has been put to rest, but simply on legal grounds.… The Trent will tell more terribly upon England than the ghost of Cæsar upon Brutus at Philippi.”

Hon. George T. Bigelow, Chief Justice of Massachusetts, wrote from Boston:--

“I have read your speech on the Trent affair with very great pleasure. It is an admirable exposition of the doctrine which England has so long held on the subject of neutral rights; and while it demonstrates that the act of Captain Wilkes might have been justified on English practice and precedents, it places in the most clear light that it was inconsistent with the position which our Government has always occupied on the subject of search and seizure. The tone of the speech is so quiet and dignified, that it will have the effect, I think, of a severe rebuke on the hasty and unjustifiable conduct of the English Cabinet in demanding a reparation and a surrender of the captives with warlike menaces and preparations.

“The prevailing sentiment here, especially among those who have not heretofore been inclined to speak your praise, is one of commendation of your speech. I am rejoiced that you have been able, while vindicating the course of the Administration in making the surrender of Mason and Slidell, to add so much to your reputation as a statesman.”

Hon. Theophilus Parsons, the eminent law-writer and law-professor, wrote from Cambridge:--

“I have read and studied your speech, and am really unwilling to repeat to you what I have said in commendation of it to others.

“This question may be considered after the fashion of a lawyer, or a politician, or a statesman.

“You have viewed it as a statesman, and, in my understanding of the word, that includes the other two, and elevates them both.

“The affair has given rise to no paper so entirely satisfactory to me, nor to one calculated, in my judgment, to be so truly and permanently useful.”

Hon. Emory Washburn, Professor at the Law School, and former Governor of Massachusetts, wrote:--

“I cannot forbear expressing my satisfaction in reading your speech in the Senate on the Trent affair. It seems to me to place the matter on the true ground; and if the English Government do not find, when they come to look coolly at the matter, that in taking Mason and Slidell they have caught two Tartars, I shall be greatly mistaken. I think, moreover, you have spoken the sober, sound thought of the country; and while they are indignant at the inconsistent annoyance of the ministry and the press of England, they feel that the course taken is not only the wise and expedient one, but, on the whole, the most consistent.”

Hon. John H. Clifford, former Attorney-General of Massachusetts, and Governor, wrote from Boston:--

“I have read with unqualified approval and satisfaction your admirable exposition of the interesting questions of public law in your recent speech, growing out of the arrest and rendition of the ‘two old men’ taken from the Trent. I trust its treatment of the doctrine of Maritime Rights will command on the other side of the water the respect to which it is so justly entitled, and of which its reception by the best minds at home gives a hopeful assurance.”

Hon. John C. Gray, a venerable and accomplished citizen, wrote from Boston:--

“I return you my acknowledgments for your speech on the Mason and Slidell affair. The more I have examined the law,--and I regret that I did not do it earlier,--the more I am satisfied that our civilians here were mistaken in their first impressions.”

Hon. George S. Hale, lawyer, wrote from Boston:--

“Permit me to congratulate you on your late speech in the Senate. I am not unfamiliar with your speeches, and feel great pleasure in saying that none has ever, in my opinion, so strengthened your position as a statesman; none has been more happy, more effective, or more generally satisfactory to your constituents.

“Without calling up any of those questions upon which many of them have differed from you, you have done much to contribute to public peace, and aided well, under peculiarly difficult circumstances, in placing the country in an honorable position before the world.”

Hon. Charles P. Huntington, late Judge of the Superior Court for Suffolk County, wrote:--

“I have read your speech on the Trent affair with more satisfaction than anything that has yet been uttered on the subject, and as placing the merits of the question on the most satisfactory and statesmanlike ground.”

Rev. Theodore D. Woolsey, the excellent President of Yale College, and author of a work on International Law, wrote from New Haven:--

“Having just read with great pleasure your speech on the Trent case, as given in the _Tribune_ of yesterday, I feel moved to express to you my satisfaction that you have given the affair such a shape, and have tacitly exposed some of Mr. Seward’s errors.”

Hon. John Jay, afterwards Minister at Vienna, wrote from New York:--

“Accept my congratulations on your very able speech on the Trent matter. It will rather surprise your friends in England.”

Hon. John M. Read, a Judge of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, wrote from Philadelphia:--

“I was very much gratified in reading your very able, temperate, and forcible speech on the Trent affair.”

Then, in a second letter, the same judicial authority wrote:--

“It is the very best discussion of the whole subject that I have seen.”

Hon. Francis Brockholst Cutting, former Representative in Congress from New York, and a leader of the bar, wrote from New York:--

“Your speech on Maritime Rights has given me very great satisfaction. It was worthy of your reputation, and equal to the occasion. The argument was particularly gratifying to me, because, from the outset, I had looked at the case from the American point of view, and had expressed myself accordingly.”

Hon. R. J. Meigs, of Tennessee, for a long time eminent at the bar and in juridical study, wrote from New York:--

“One word more. I thank you for your speech upon the Trent affair. It vindicates the honor of our baited and abused country. It will be a well-remembered document in the diplomacy of the world, settling as it does forever the immunity of neutrals from the insulting pretension of the right to seize persons on their ships merely upon the ground that they owe allegiance to the belligerent. It effectually extracts that poisonous fang from the jaws of Leviathan.”

Hon. David Roberts, lawyer, and author of a “Treatise on Admiralty and Prize,” wrote from Salem:--

“I deem it your best effort, settling, what to me was from the first _the_ embarrassing element in the Wilkes question, _a true American_ definition of ‘despatches.’

“I therefore thank you for the speech sincerely; and though differing _toto cœlo_ from you politically in other respects, I shall not withhold my commendation from your present effort, deeming it, as I do, the paramount duty of all to inculcate the lesson of loyalty everywhere, until this Government is vindicated, and the existing Rebellion suppressed.”

Hon. George Wheatland, lawyer, wrote from Salem:--

“Allow me, for the first time of ever addressing you, to thank you for your masterly statement of the Trent matter, which I have just risen from reading in the _Boston Journal_.

“You have put the matter in its true light.…

“Your speech will shed light, and, in fact, illuminate the whole subject, and should be read by every one. By taking Mason & Co. we were acting on the English law; by giving them up, we act under our own view of what the law should be, and have brought England over to adopting our view.”

Hon. Asahel Huntington, the veteran lawyer, wrote from Salem:--

“I am always greatly obliged by your speeches, which you have had the kindness to send me from time to time. They are all gems of the first water, but the ‘Trent’ is the greatest gem of all,--so calm, so full, so exhaustive, so statesmanlike, so Websterian in its statements, structure, and heavy logic, that, on first reading it, before receiving the pamphlet, I had it in my heart to write you at once and express my high admiration of that great passage in your public life. It was a great opportunity, and was met in the true spirit of a controversy between nations on questions of International Law. It was potential for good at home and abroad, and is worthy itself to be trusted as an authority from its own intrinsic weight.”

Hon. George Morey, lawyer, and for a long time a political leader in Massachusetts, wrote from Boston:--

“I congratulate you on your having delivered an excellent speech touching our foreign relations, and particularly the case of the Trent.

“Your speech comes exceedingly apropos, following in the track of Mr. Seward’s despatch. As that despatch will be looked upon in England with some suspicion, as proceeding from an artful and wily statesman, and there may be a disposition to regard it as a cunning _dodge_, &c., it is very fortunate that your speech will follow in the wake of Mr. Seward’s letter. A very great number of distinguished men in England, statesmen, diplomatists, &c., will say, Mr. Sumner is honest, he speaks his real sentiments. Besides, it will be said that Mr. Sumner is a most decided Antislavery man, and he is heartily engaged in putting down this great Rebellion, not because he desires to fight for _empire_, as Earl Russell stated in a speech some time since our Government were, but because he is anxious to extinguish Slavery, and because he knows that Slavery is the origin of this war. I am satisfied your speech will have an excellent effect in England, and also in France, and all over the Continent. You have done a capital thing towards conciliating the favor and good-will of our State Street gentlemen. Mr. Cartwright, President of the Manufacturers’ Insurance Office, where I am a director, says you have done excellent service to the country and the good cause. He has a pretty large amount of war risks. Your short speech in answer to Mr. Hale was commended very highly everywhere.”

Hon. Theophilus P. Chandler, lawyer, wrote from Boston:--

“Your Trent speech is by far the best thing I have read on the subject. You look _down_ upon the matter, while others look _at_ it.… The tables are completely turned upon England. If there is any shame in her, she will show it now.”

Hon. E. F. Stone, lawyer, wrote from Newburyport:--

“As one of your constituents, I write to thank you for your speech on the surrender of Mason and Slidell. I have read and re-read it with great satisfaction. It is just the thing to create a correct public opinion upon the subject in the country.”

Hon. Alfred B. Ely, lawyer, and officer in the War of the Rebellion, wrote from Boston:--

“I have just read your speech on the Trent affair with great pleasure. I deem it entirely unanswerable, and that it ought to conclude the whole subject. I desire, therefore, to congratulate you upon it.”

William I. Bowditch, conveyancer and Abolitionist, wrote from Boston:--

“I read your speech on the Mason and Slidell matter yesterday. It certainly is very admirable and conclusive. Still, I think it doubtful whether England will consider that she has really abandoned any of her previous pretensions by demanding and accepting the men.”

Hon. Edward L. Pierce, lawyer, writer, and speaker, correct in opinion, and able, wrote from Boston:--

“I read your speech. It is grand,--dealing just right with the British, and putting us on the highest grounds. It will help the country.”

Rev. Baron Stow, the Baptist clergyman, wrote from Boston:--

“My opinion of its merits may be of small importance to you, but I cannot forbear to assure you that it has the approbation and admiration of one of your constituents. I cannot be supposed to be much versed in International Law, but I understand your argument, and am sure that every one who reads must understand. I see not how you could have made it more clear or cogent. You condense the history of a vexed question into a crystalline lens, and every eye must see your point. I greatly mistake, if your views do not produce conviction both at home and abroad. You have performed a service to the true and the right which will surely be appreciated and acknowledged.”

Rev. Caleb Stetson, the Liberal preacher, wrote from Lexington, Massachusetts:--

“I must for a moment break in upon your vast public labors to thank you for your admirable speech on the affair of those two wretches, Mason and Slidell. You have said the best things that could be said, in the best manner. I greatly rejoice that the traitor villains are given up, for we cannot afford a war with England when we have this diabolical Rebellion. I am glad of your forbearance towards her, but I fear this generation will not forgive.”

Rev. William H. Furness, the eloquent and Radical preacher, wrote from Philadelphia:--

“Lend me your own gift, that I may tell you in fitting words how admirable your speech is. It is cheering to see how it has convinced people that all is right in regard to the Mason and Slidell affair. With all its shortcomings and shilly-shallying, what a glorious nation this North is!”

James Russell Lowell, eminent in our literature, wrote from Cambridge:--

“Let one of your constituents thank you for your speech on Maritime Rights. Excellent, as far as my judgment goes, in matter and manner.”

Charles E. Norton, the accomplished author, and for a time editor of the _North American Review_, wrote from Cambridge:--

“I read your speech last night with such great satisfaction, that I desire to express my thanks to you for it. The argument could not be more forcibly presented, or in a manner better fitted to enlighten and confirm the sense of national dignity here, and to give the right direction to public opinion abroad. You have done a work of the highest value.”

Orestes A. Brownson, the able writer and reviewer, wrote from Elizabeth, New Jersey:--

“I have been absent from home, and have read only the one on the Trent affair, which I think does you equal credit as a lawyer and a statesman. The view you take is the one which I myself took, when I first heard of the capture of Mason and Slidell, but I knew not that it could be backed by so many and such high authorities as you have cited.”

Hon. Amasa Walker, Professor of Political Economy, and afterwards Representative in Congress, wrote from North Brookfield, Massachusetts:--

“I am much obliged for your speech on Maritime Rights. It is your grandest effort. A noble theme, and treated in an able and most statesmanlike manner. You have never made a speech that did your country more good or yourself more credit. I am particularly glad that it draws forth encomiums from presses in this State that have been very hostile to you. They seem compelled to admit their admiration of the speech, and that it is a great historical document.”

Parke Godwin, the able writer, wrote from the office of the _New York Evening Post_:--

“Let me add my congratulations to the thousands you must have already received for the noble speech in defence of our time-honored championship of the seas. It is thorough, searching, manly, and unanswerable.”

Charles L. Brace, the enlightened Reformer and author, wrote from New York:--

“Will you allow me, as one of your great ‘Constituency,’ to express my admiration of your speech on the Trent affair, as reported by telegraph to-day? Its enlightened views, broad treatment, sound policy, and thorough historical soundness make it, to my mind, the first of your many public efforts in oratory.”

Professor Henry W. Torrey, of Harvard University, wrote:--

“I hope that you will allow an old Whig, who has often differed from you in political opinion, though never seduced into supporting Mr. Buchanan or Mr. Bell, to congratulate you on the position you have taken and so ably maintained on Neutral Rights. From the first moment I trembled for the consequences of the seizure of the insurgents. Captain Wilkes’s act appeared to be a portentous blunder, matched only by the truculent indorsements that followed it. It consoles me, however, that this deed has become the occasion for teaching our people their own antecedents, and proving to the world their ability to mortify their pride in the presence of higher claims.… You have nobly substituted the _argumentum ab humanitate_ for the _argumentum ad hominem_, which you so justly condemn.”

Rev. Convers Francis, the learned Professor, wrote from Cambridge:--

“Most heartily do I thank you for your _great_ speech on Maritime Rights, which adds another to your many claims on the nation’s gratitude. It is a thorough, exhaustive, and most able piece of argument,--by far the most so which that question called forth,--and extorts praise even from enemies.”

John Penington, the bookseller, wrote from Philadelphia:--

“I have delayed reading the ‘Maritime Rights’ speech till I could enjoy it in the pamphlet form, corrected. It is an admirable compend, a perfect _multum in parvo_. It is a verification of the adage, that ‘Doctors don’t like to take their own physic,’--our friend Bull being no exception to the rule. I feel much obliged to you for the treat you have afforded me.”

Alfred Pell, an intelligent Free-Trader, intimate with England, and manager of an important insurance office, wrote from New York:--

“I have a long letter from [Admiral] Dupont. He wrote when his last advices from the North were of the 22d December, so that he could not have known what action the Government had determined upon; yet he says, ‘Few persons in the fleet approved of the action of Commodore Wilkes, and some of the most intelligent condemned it _in toto_, yet all allowed that it showed high moral courage on the part of Wilkes.’ … You show we do not stoop to conquer, and I am sure that our friends on the other side will feel like the lady’s maid spoken of by Swift, who said ‘that nothing annoyed her so much as being caught in a lie.’”

John E. Lodge, merchant and personal friend, wrote from Boston:--

“Your speech is more complete even than Mr. Seward’s note; it is considered here as your very happiest and ablest effort. The English will open their eyes at some parts of it.”

Willard P. Phillips, merchant, wrote from Salem:--

“The truth is, that at last you have satisfied even the commercial community, and they acknowledge that you have more than ‘one idea.’ They express surprise to find that you have attended to anything but Slavery, which they supposed had occupied all your thoughts and all your time. I am sure that your speech has made many who have heretofore opposed you feel much more kindly towards you; and I congratulate you, both upon this change of feeling towards you, and also upon the delivery of your speech, which, so able and clear, has satisfied even the doubtful ones that the surrender of the ‘two old men’ was right.”

Stephen Higginson, merchant, wrote from Boston:--

“I have read to-day with infinite satisfaction your speech of the 9th on the Trent affair, and you must allow me to tell you how much I admire it. Crammed with unimpeachable authorities, the argument terse, vigorous, and eloquent, this speech sheds a flood of _American_ light upon the subject, which has been wanting to all other essays upon it which have come under my notice.”

George Livermore, merchant and student, wrote from Boston:--

“I read your speech on the Trent affair with unqualified admiration, as it was printed in the _Journal_, and I hope a large edition will be published in pamphlet form for preservation. I had supposed Mr. Seward had exhausted all that could be said on ‘our side,’ but you have given new interest by your wonderful illustrations. The whole tone of the speech is admirable.”

Waldo Higginson, an educated man of business, wrote from Boston:--

“Having just completed reading your great speech on the Trent Question, I am impelled to write you, to do my humble part towards thanking you for such a triumphant effort. I think it is exhaustive, abstinent of all not strictly germane to the weighty matter in hand, puts the country in a far more dignified position than it was left by Mr. Seward’s late letter to Lord Lyons, eminently courteous towards _present_ England, and determines as far as possible that country’s position.”

Carlos Pierce, merchant, afterwards agriculturist, wrote enthusiastically from Boston:--

“I am especially grateful for a copy of your most remarkable and wonderful speech, delivered in the Senate January 9, on Maritime Rights. It came at an opportune moment, when the whole populace were terribly excited, ready to plan any kind of an expedition to sink the vessel that should be sent to convey the Rebels from Fort Warren. It is hardly possible for you to conceive of the change it wrought in public sentiment in twenty-four hours. It was as oil poured upon the troubled waters to their wounded pride. But it equally astonished and delighted your best friends and worst enemies, and won for you a host of new admirers. It was the most masterly and powerfully convincing argument I have ever read of yours on any subject. The people, the press, the nation, the world, will ever delight to honor the man that displayed the genius equal to such a rare opportunity, and was ready to strike so powerful a blow against a terrible wrong long endured, and in favor of our nation’s honor, humanity, and civilization.”