Part 23

“Mr. Sumner’s resolutions, which have so triumphantly passed the National Legislature, and which receive at the same time the cordial approval of the President and the Cabinet, will deepen and justify the feeling in our favor. They define our position with a distinctness that has not always been attained in our official acts. They describe boldly and vividly the nature of the Rebellion which has destroyed our peace, tracing it wholly to the ambition and selfishness of the Slaveholders, and warning foreign nations of the awful crime they commit in lending their aid to such an infamous assault upon all the principles of orderly government, all the rights of humanity, and all the best interests of Christian civilization. Every reflective mind in Europe will know, after reading them, that whatever encourages the Rebellion will encourage the most odious tyranny that human cupidity ever devised.”

The speech on Foreign Relations, at New York, September 10, 1863,[151] was a vindication of these resolutions.

INEXPEDIENCY OF LETTERS OF MARQUE.

LETTER TO A CITIZEN OF NEW YORK, MARCH 17, 1863.

The following letter, which appeared in the papers at the time, was written in the hope of preventing any action under the law of Congress authorizing letters of marque.

WASHINGTON, March 17, 1863.

MY DEAR SIR,--In the freedom of that conversation which I had with you as we drove to the Capitol recently, allow me for a moment to speak again on the question which interested us then.…

I confess that I am anxious that the issuing of letters of marque should be avoided, not merely because it will give us a bad name without commensurate good, nor because it will be a departure from the early and often declared policy of our Government, which has not hesitated, by the pen of Benjamin Franklin and John Quincy Adams, to denounce privateering as an “enormity,” but because it does not meet, in a practical way, the precise necessity of this time. People who advocate it are obviously misled by the experience of another generation, when we were at war with a nation whose commerce was a temptation and a reward to private enterprise. The case is so different now that the old agency is entirely inapplicable.

The privateer cruises for booty, which is in lieu of rations and pay to officers and men, and of hire and compensation to owners. But if the booty does not exist, or if it is in such inconsiderable quantity as to afford small chance of valuable prize, evidently you must find some other system of compensation; as this cannot be, you must abandon the idea of private enterprise stimulated and sustained by booty. An agency must be found applicable to the present case, precisely as in machinery a force is found best calculated to do the required work.

Now our present business is to help the Government capture the Alabama and her piratical comrades, and also to catch blockade-runners. But a letter of marque is not proper for this purpose, nor will the chance of booty be the best way to stimulate and sustain the cruiser, while, on the other hand, it is obvious that such a ship, invested with the belligerent right of search, in the quest of booty, will be tempted to exercise it on neutral commerce, and thus become the occasion of contention and strife with foreign powers.

Privateers have never been remarkable for the caution or reserve with which they employ belligerent rights. I would not exaggerate the troubles that might ensue; but when I think of these sea-rovers, with license to overhaul neutral ships and to inflict upon them visitation and search, I feel how much evil may ensue compared with the good. You would not threaten a whole street in order to catch a few robbers who had sought shelter in some of its recesses, nor would you burn down your house, according to the amusing story of Charles Lamb, in order to roast a pig.

It seems to be only according to common prudence, that private enterprise, if enlisted now, should be regulated by the object in view. To this end, it is not necessary that it should assume a form calculated to awaken solicitude. The way is simple. If citizens are willing to unite in efforts of the Government, let them place their ships at its disposal, to be commissioned as national ships, and let the Government, on its part, offer bounty and prize money, in addition to pay and rations, for the capture of the Alabama and her piratical comrades. The motive power will thus be adapted to the object, while our country will be saved from all chance of additional complication, and also from the stigma of reviving a policy which civilization condemns.

The argument of economy is sometimes pressed. But it is poor economy to employ an agency which in its very nature is inapplicable. Besides, I doubt if any success reasonably expected from such ships, called by the French _corsaires_, will be a compensation for the bad name they will give us, and the bad passions they will engender.

I hope I do not take too great a liberty in sending you this sequel to our conversation. At all events, you will be pleased to accept my best wishes, and believe me, my dear Sir, with much regard,

Very faithfully yours,

CHARLES SUMNER.

JOHN AUSTIN STEVENS, Jr., Esq., &c., &c., &c.

UNITY FOR THE SAKE OF FREEDOM, AND FREEDOM FOR THE SAKE OF UNITY.

LETTER TO A PUBLIC MEETING AT CLEVELAND, OHIO, MAY 18, 1863.

WASHINGTON, May 18, 1863.

GENTLEMEN,--It will not be in my power to take part in the generous meeting to assemble at Cleveland, but I pray you to accept my thanks for the cordial invitation with which you have honored me.

If it were my privilege to speak on that occasion, I should urge upon my fellow-citizens everywhere the duty of _Unity for the sake of Freedom_, and also of _Freedom for the sake of Unity_. The two cannot be separated. They are mutually dependent. Let this people continue united, and Freedom must surely prevail. Let Freedom prevail, and this people cannot cease to be united.

With such a cause, there is but one side and one duty. Whoever is for the Unity of the Republic must be for Freedom, and whoever is for Freedom must be for the Unity of the Republic. It is vain to think that one can be advanced without the other. Whoever is against one is against the other, and whoever is lukewarm for one is lukewarm for the other. We must be fervid and strong for both.

This is not the time for doubt or hesitation. We must act at once and constantly, so that the Republic may be saved, while Slavery is scourged from this temple consecrated to Freedom. And this will be done.

Believe me, Gentlemen,

Very faithfully yours,

CHARLES SUMNER.

PACIFIC RAILROAD.

LETTER TO MESSRS. SAMUEL HALLETT & CO., MAY 23, 1863.

Messrs. Hallett & Co. were associated with General Fremont in urging the Pacific Railroad. This letter was extensively circulated.

WASHINGTON, May 23, 1863.

GENTLEMEN,--I have always voted for the Pacific Railroad, and now that it is authorized by Congress I follow it with hope and confidence. It is a great work, but science has already shown it to be practicable.

Let the road be built, and its influence will be incalculable. People will wonder that the world lived so long without it.

Conjoining the two oceans, it will be an agency of matchless power, not only commercial, but political. It will be a new girder to the Union, a new help to business, and a new charm to life. Perhaps the imagination is most impressed by the thought of travel and merchandise winding their way from Atlantic to Pacific in one unbroken line; but I incline to believe that the commercial advantages will be more apparent in the opportunities the railroad will create and quicken everywhere on the way. New homes and new towns will spring up, making new demand for labor and supplies. Civilization will be projected into the forest and over the plain, while the desert is made to yield its increase. There is no productiveness to compare with that from the upturned sod which receives the iron rail. In its crop are school-houses and churches, cities and states.

In this vast undertaking coöperation of all kinds is needed, and it will be rewarded too. Capitalists, bankers, merchants, engineers, mechanics, miners, laborers, all must enlist. Perhaps there will be a place also for _the freedmen of this war_, although it seems to me that their services can be more effectively bestowed at home, as laborers and soldiers. But I see not why emigrants should not be invited from Europe to take part in this honorable service, and share the prosperity it will surely organize. Let them quit poverty, dependence, and wretchedness in their own country, for good wages here, with independence, and a piece of ground which each man can call his own.

Emigration will hasten the work; but, with or without emigration, it must proceed. Everywhere, from sunrise to sunset, the Rail and Wheel, which an eminent English engineer has pronounced “man and wife,” will yet be welcomed, sure to become the parents of a mighty progeny.

I have the honor to be, Gentlemen,

Your faithful servant,

CHARLES SUMNER.

MESSRS. SAMUEL HALLETT & CO.

UNION OF THE MISSISSIPPI AND THE LAKES BY CANAL.

LETTER TO A CONVENTION AT CHICAGO, MAY 27, 1863.

The Convention was held June 2d.

WASHINGTON, May 27, 1863.

GENTLEMEN,--I resign most reluctantly the opportunity with which I am favored by your invitation, and shall try to content myself with reading the report of your powerful and well-organized meeting at Chicago, without taking part in it.

The proposition to unite the greatest navigable river of the world with the greatest inland sea is characteristic of the West. Each is worthy of the other. The idea of joining these together strikes the imagination as original. But the highest beauty is in utility, which will not be wanting here. With this union, the Gulf of Mexico will be joined to the Gulf of St. Lawrence, and the whole continent, from Northern cold to Southern heat, traversed by one generous flood, bearing upon its bosom untold commerce.

It is for the West to consider well the conditions of this enterprise, and the advantages it will secure. Let its practicability be demonstrated, and the country will command it to be done, as it has already commanded the opening of the Mississippi. Triumphant over the wickedness of an accursed Rebellion, we shall achieve another triumph, to take its place among the victories of Peace.

To this magnificent work Science will contribute her myriad resources. But there is something needed even to quicken and inspire science: it is the unconquerable will, which does not yield to difficulties, but presses forward to overcome them. No word is used with more levity than the word “impossible.” A scientific professor, in a public address, declared the navigation of the Atlantic by steam “impossible.” Within a few weeks it was done. The British Prime-Minister declared the construction of a canal between the Mediterranean and the Red Sea “impossible.” The Pacha of Egypt, with French engineers, is now doing it. Mirabeau was right, when he protested against the use of this word as simple stupidity. But I doubt if the word will be found in any Western dictionary.

Believe me, Gentlemen, with much respect,

Very faithfully yours,

CHARLES SUMNER.

To Hon. JAMES ROBB, I. N. ARNOLD, and others of the Committee.

THE ISSUES OF THE WAR.

DEDICATION OF A NEW EDITION OF THE SPEECH ON THE BARBARISM OF SLAVERY,[152] JULY 4, 1863.

TO THE YOUNG MEN OF THE UNITED STATES I DEDICATE THIS NEW EDITION OF A SPEECH ON THE BARBARISM OF SLAVERY, IN TOKEN OF HEARTFELT GRATITUDE TO THEM FOR BRAVE AND PATRIOTIC SERVICE RENDERED IN THE PRESENT WAR FOR CIVILIZATION.

It is now more than three years since I deemed it my duty, in the Senate, to expose the Barbarism of Slavery. This phrase, though common now, was new then. The speech was a reply, strict and logical, to assumptions of Senators, asserting the “divine origin” of Slavery, its “ennobling” character, and that it was the “black marble keystone” of our national arch. Listening to these assumptions, which were of daily recurrence, I felt that they ought to be answered; and considering their effrontery, it seemed to me that they should be answered frankly and openly, by exhibiting Slavery _as it really is_, without reserve,--careful that I should “nothing extenuate, nor set down aught in malice.” This I did.

In that debate was joined the issue still pending in the Trial by Battle. The inordinate assumptions for Slavery naturally ripened in Rebellion and War. If Slavery were in reality all that was claimed by its representatives, they must have failed in duty, if they did not vindicate and advance it. Not easily could they see a thing so “divine” and so “ennobling,” constituting the “black marble keystone” of our national arch, discredited by popular vote, even if not yet consigned to sacrifice.

The election of Mr. Lincoln was a judgment against Slavery, and its representatives were aroused.

Meanwhile, for more than a generation, an assumption of Constitutional Law, hardly less baleful, had become rooted side by side with Slavery, so that the two shot up in rank luxuriance together. It was assumed, that, under the Constitution, a State was privileged at any time, in the exercise of its own discretion, to withdraw from the Union. This absurdity found little favor at first, even among the representatives of Slavery. To say that two and two make five could not be more irrational. But custom and constant repetition gradually produced an impression, until, at last, all the maddest for Slavery were the maddest also for this disorganizing ally.

It was then, conjoined with this constitutional assumption, that the assumption for Slavery grew into noxious vigor, so that, at last, when Mr. Lincoln was elected, it broke forth in flagrant war; but the war was declared in the name of State Rights.

Therefore there are two _apparent_ rudiments to this war. One is Slavery, and the other is State Rights. But the latter is only a cover for the former. If Slavery were out of the way, there would be no trouble from State Rights.

The war, then, is for Slavery, and nothing else. It is an insane attempt by arms to vindicate the lordship asserted in debate. With madcap audacity it seeks to install this Barbarism as the truest Civilization. Slavery is announced as the “corner-stone” of the new edifice. This is enough.

The question is presented between Barbarism and Civilization,--not merely between two different forms of Civilization, but between Barbarism on the one side and Civilization on the other side.

Such is the issue, simply stated. On the one side are women and children at the auction-block, families rudely separated, human flesh lacerated and seamed by the bloody scourge, labor extorted without wages; and all this frightful, many-sided wrong is the declared foundation of a mock Commonwealth. On the other side is the Union of our fathers, with the image of Liberty on its coin and the sentiment of Liberty in its Constitution, now arrayed under a patriotic Government, which insists that no such mock Commonwealth, having such declared foundation, shall be permitted on the national territory, purchased with money and blood, to impair the unity of our jurisdiction, and to insult the moral sense of mankind.

Therefore the battle waged by the Union is for Civilization itself, and it must have aid and God-speed from all not openly for Barbarism. Every one must give his best efforts, and especially the young men to whom I now appeal.

CHARLES SUMNER.

WASHINGTON, 4th July, 1863.

LET COLORED MEN ENLIST.

LETTER TO A CONVENTION AT POUGHKEEPSIE, NEW YORK, JULY 13, 1863.

BOSTON, July 13, 1863.

DEAR SIR,--It will not be in my power to take part in the proposed meeting at Poughkeepsie. But I am glad it has been called, and I trust it will be successful.

To me it has been clear from the beginning that the colored men would be needed in this war. I never for a moment doubted that they would render good service. And thus far the evidence in their favor is triumphant. Nobody now questions their bravery or capacity for discipline. All that can be said against them is that they are not “white.”

But they have a special interest in the suppression of the Rebellion. The enemies of the Union are the enemies of their race. Therefore, in defending the Union, they defend themselves even more than other citizens; and in saving the Union, they save themselves.

I doubt if in times past our country could have justly expected from colored men any patriotic service. Such service is the return for protection. But now that protection has begun, the service should begin also. Nor should relative rights and duties be weighed with nicety. It is enough that our country, aroused at last to a sense of justice, seeks to enroll colored men among its defenders.

If my counsels could reach such persons, I would say, Enlist at once. Now is the day, and now the fortunate hour. Help to overcome your cruel enemies battling against your country, and in this way you will surely overcome those other enemies, hardly less cruel, here at home, who still seek to degrade you. This is not the time to hesitate or to higgle. Do your duty to our common country, and you will set an example of generous self-sacrifice which must conquer prejudice and open all hearts.

Accept my thanks for the invitation with which you have honored me, and believe me, dear Sir,

Very faithfully yours,

CHARLES SUMNER.

EDWARD GILBERT, Esq.

FOOTNOTES

[1] See, _ante_, Vol. VI. p. 379.

[2] May 6, 1862, pp. 1957, 1958.

[3] Congressional Globe, 37th Cong. 2d Sess., May 20, 1862, p. 2223.

[4] _Post_, p. 128.

[5] Statutes at Large, Vol. XII. p. 591.

[6] 12 Juin, 1862.

[7] The Crime against Kansas, May 19 and 20, 1856: _ante_, Vol. IV. p. 125.

[8] Sonnet XVI. 9-11: To the Lord General Cromwell.

[9] Rose _v._ Himely, 4 Cranch, S. C. R., pp. 272, 273.

[10] Ibid., pp. 288, 289.

[11] Cheriot _v._ Foussat, 3 Binney, R., pp. 252, 253.

[12] Upton, The Law of Nations affecting Commerce during War, pp. 211, 212.

[13] Law Reporter, Vol. XXIV. p. 345, April, 1862.

[14] Lib. I. cap. 3, § 1.

[15] Oratio de Chersoneso, p. 97: Grotius, De Jure Belli ac Pacis, Prolegom. § 25.

[16] Story, Commentaries on the Constitution, Vol. II. § 1344.

[17] Commentaries, Vol. IV. p. 381.

[18] Introduction to the Literature of Europe, 3d edit., (London, 1847,) Vol. II. p. 568, note.

[19] 12 Wheaton, R., 14, 15.

[20] Bynkershoek, Questiones Juris Publici, Lib. I. cap. 7.

[21] Mr. Jefferson to Mr. Hammond, May 29, 1792: American State Papers, Foreign Relations, Vol. I. p. 201.

[22] Speech on International Maritime Law, March 17, 1862: Hansard’s Parliamentary Debates, 3d Ser., Vol. CLXV. col. 1608.

[23] Manning, Commentaries on the Law of Nations, p. 127.

[24] Vattel, Book III. ch. 5, sec. 76.

[25] 8 Cranch, S. C. R., 110.

[26] Wheaton, Elements of International Law, Part IV. ch. 1, § 11.

[27] Law of Nations, p. 136.

[28] Halleck, International Law, p. 460.

[29] “Washington, dans la guerre de l’Amérique, inventa l’expression et la chose.”--KLÜBER, _Droit des Gens Moderne de l’Europe_, (Paris, 1831,) Tom. II. p. 33, sec. 251, note.

[30] Page 410.

[31] Q. Curtius, Lib. VII. cap. 8.

[32] Law of Nations, Book III. Ch. 13, § 203.

[33] 8 Cranch, S. C. R., 110.

[34] Le Caux _v._ Eden, Douglas, R., 594; Faith et al. _v._ Pearson, Holt, N. P. Cases, 113.

[35] Elphinstone _v._ Bedreechund, 1 Knapp, Privy Council R., 337.

[36] Elphinstone _v._ Bedreechund, 1 Knapp, Privy Council R., 360, 361.

[37] Merlin, Répertoire de Jurisprudence, art. CONFISCATION, § I.

[38] History of the Reformation (Oxford, 1829), Vol. I. p. 538.

[39] Alison, History of Europe, (5th edit.,) Vol. IV. pp. 708, 709, note.

[40] Ibid., p. 705, note.

[41] Alison, History of Europe, Vol. IV. p. 706, note.

[42] Austin’s Life of Elbridge Gerry, Vol. I. p. 207.

[43] American State Papers, Foreign Relations, Vol. I. pp. 198, 199.

[44] Letter to United States Commissioners: American State Papers, Foreign Relations, Vol. I. p. 219.

[45] American State Papers, Foreign Relations, Vol. I. p. 219.

[46] Extract from Mr. Adams’s Journal respecting Peace, November 29, 1782: Ibid., p. 220.

[47] American State Papers, Foreign Relations, Vol. I. p. 221.

[48] Definitive Treaty of Peace, Art. V.: United States Statutes at Large, Vol. VIII. p. 82.

[49] American State Papers, Foreign Relations, Vol. I. p. 201.

[50] Ibid., p. 205.

[51] Ware _v._ Hylton et al., 3 Dallas, R., 222.

[52] Ibid., p. 282.

[53] Ibid., p. 227.

[54] Ibid., p. 264.

[55] Ware _v._ Hylton et al., 3 Dallas, R., 210.

[56] How completely this early prophecy has been fulfilled appears in our history.

[57] Law of Nations, Book III. ch. 9.

[58] Count Portalis, at the installation of the Council of Prizes in 1800: Cussy, Phases et Causes Célèbres du Droit Maritime des Nations, Tom. I. pp. 179, 206, 264. Montesquieu had previously enunciated the same principle, with a limitation: L’Esprit des Lois, Liv. I. ch. 3.

[59] “Impius et crudelis judicandus est, qui libertati non favet.”--FORTESCUE, _De Laudibus Legum Angliæ_, Cap. XLII.

[60] Executive Documents, 37th Cong. 2d Sess., Senate, No. 67.

[61] This prophecy, like so many others with regard to Slavery, has failed, as appears from a Comparative Statement of the Cotton Crops of the United States for the three years last preceding the War (which years had the largest crops ever produced), and for the three years last past, prepared by Mr. B. F. Nourse, of Boston, December, 1871.

+-------------------------+-----------------------+--------------+ | | CROP PRODUCED. | Aggregate | | YEAR, OR COTTON SEASON. +---------+-------------+Value at Ports| | | Bales. |Pounds Gross.| in Gold. | +-------------------------+---------+-------------+--------------+ |1858-59 |4,019,000|1,876,800,000| $164,225,000 | |1859-60 |4,861,000|2,343,000,000| 207,190,000 | |1860-61 |3,849,000|1,886,240,000| 170,000,000 | | | | +--------------+ | Gold value, three years | | | $541,415,000 | | | | +==============+ |1868-69 |2,367,000|1,103,957,000| $201,835,000 | |1869-70 |3,123,000|1,441,057,000| 242,195,000 | |1870-71 |4,352,000|2,021,651,000| 236,770,000 | | | | +--------------+ | Gold value, three years | | | $680,800,000 | +-------------------------+---------+-------------+--------------+

[62] Debates in the Federal Convention, August 22, 1787: Madison Papers, Vol. III. p. 1396.

[63] Debates, August 25: Ibid., pp. 1429, 1430.

[64] Congressional Globe, 37th Cong. 2d Sess., p. 2403.

[65] Congressional Globe, 37th Cong. 2d Sess., p. 2402.

[66] Congressional Globe, 37th Cong. 2d Sess., p. 2403.

[67] Congressional Globe, 37th Cong. 2d Sess., p. 2404.

[68] Notes on Virginia, Query XVIII.: Writings, Vol. VIII. p. 403.

[69] Debates in the Federal Convention, August 22, 1787: Madison Papers, Vol. III. p. 1391.