Part 1

Statesman Edition Vol. XII

Charles Sumner

HIS COMPLETE WORKS

With Introduction BY HON. GEORGE FRISBIE HOAR

BOSTON LEE AND SHEPARD MCM

COPYRIGHT, 1874, BY CHARLES SUMNER.

COPYRIGHT, 1900, BY LEE AND SHEPARD.

Statesman Edition. LIMITED TO ONE THOUSAND COPIES. OF WHICH THIS IS No. 259

Norwood Press: NORWOOD, MASS., U.S.A.

CONTENTS OF VOLUME XII.

PAGE

CONGRATULATIONS ON THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION. Speech at a Public Meeting at Faneuil Hall, Boston, November 8, 1864 1

JUBILEE OF LIBERTY. Letter to the Young Men’s Republican Union of New York, November 10, 1864 5

MR. ASHLEY AND RECONSTRUCTION. Letter to a Public Banquet in Honor of Hon. James M. Ashley, at Toledo, Ohio, November 18, 1864 7

CASE OF THE FLORIDA: ILLUSTRATED BY PRECEDENTS OF BRITISH SEIZURES IN NEUTRAL WATERS. Articles in the Boston Daily Advertiser, November 29, 1864, and January 17, 1865 9

RELATIONS WITH GREAT BRITAIN: THE ST. ALBANS RAID. Speech in the Senate, on a Bill for Fortifications and Batteries on the Lakes, December 19, 1864 42

TERMINATION OF THE CANADIAN RECIPROCITY TREATY. Speeches in the Senate, on the Joint Resolution giving Notice for the Termination of the Canadian Reciprocity Treaty, December 21, 1864, January 11 and 12, 1865 46

THE EMANCIPATION PROCLAMATION AND EQUAL RIGHTS. Letter to a Public Meeting in Philadelphia, December 26, 1864 60

FREEDOM OF WIVES AND CHILDREN OF COLORED SOLDIERS. Speech in the Senate, on a Joint Resolution for this Purpose, January 5, 1865 61

MASSACRE OF THE CHEYENNE INDIANS. Remarks in the Senate, on a Joint Resolution relating thereto, January 13, 1865 66

THE LATE HON. EDWARD EVERETT. Telegraphic Despatch to Joint Committee of the Legislature of Massachusetts, January 16, 1865 68

TERMINATION OF TREATIES BY NOTICE. Remarks in the Senate, on a Joint Resolution to terminate the Treaty of 1817 regulating the Naval Force on the Lakes, January 18, 1865 69

RETALIATION, AND TREATMENT OF PRISONERS OF WAR. Speeches in the Senate, on a Joint Resolution advising Retaliation, January 24 and 29, 1865 74

ADMISSION OF A COLORED LAWYER TO THE BAR OF THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES. Motion in the Supreme Court, February 1, 1865 97

PARTICIPATION OF REBEL STATES NOT NECESSARY IN RATIFICATION OF CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENTS. Declaratory Resolutions in the Senate, February 4, 1865 101

APPORTIONMENT OF REPRESENTATIVES ACCORDING TO VOTERS. Proposed Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, February 6, 1865 104

RAILROAD USURPATION IN NEW JERSEY. Speech in the Senate, on a Bill to regulate Commerce among the Several States, February 14, 1865 105

REPRESENTATION OF VIRGINIA IN THE SENATE. Remarks in the Senate, on the Credentials of Hon. Joseph Segar, of Virginia, February 17, 1865 134

REPUDIATION OF THE REBEL DEBT. Concurrent Resolution in the Senate, February 17, 1865 137

NO BUST FOR AUTHOR OF DRED SCOTT DECISION. Speech in the Senate, on a Bill providing for a Bust of the Late Chief Justice Taney, February 23, 1865 138

NO RECONSTRUCTION WITHOUT THE VOTES OF THE BLACKS. Remarks in the Senate, on the Resolution recognizing the New State Government of Louisiana, February 24, 25, and 27, 1865 179

GUARANTY OF REPUBLICAN GOVERNMENTS IN THE REBEL STATES. Resolutions in the Senate, February 25, 1865 197

NO PICTURE AT THE CAPITOL OF VICTORY OVER FELLOW-CITIZENS. Remarks in the Senate, on Joint Resolution authorizing a Contract with William H. Powell, February 27, 1865 201

FREE SCHOOLS AND FREE BOOKS. Remarks in the Senate, on an Amendment to the Internal Revenue Act, making Books free, February 27, 1865 204

THREE CONDITIONS PRECEDENT TO THE RECEPTION OF SENATORS FROM A REBEL STATE. Resolution in the Senate, March 8, 1865 208

UNJUST ARREST AND PROSECUTION OF TWO BOSTON MERCHANTS. Protest and Opinion on the Case of the Messrs. Smith Brothers, March 17, 1865 209

RESPECT FOR THE MEMORY OF ABRAHAM LINCOLN. Resolution adopted at a Meeting of Senators and Representatives, April 17, 1865 229

RIGHT AND DUTY OF COLORED FELLOW-CITIZENS IN THE ORGANIZATION OF GOVERNMENT. Letter to Colored Citizens of North Carolina, May 13, 1865 231

HOPE AND ENCOURAGEMENT FOR COLORED FELLOW-CITIZENS. Letter to the Editor of “The Leader,” in Charleston, S. C., May, 1865 234

PROMISES OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE, AND ABRAHAM LINCOLN. Eulogy on Abraham Lincoln, before the Municipal Authorities of the City of Boston, June 1, 1865 235

IDEAS OF THE DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE. Letter to the Mayor of Boston, on the Celebration of National Independence, July 4, 1865 297

CONSENT OF THE GOVERNED NECESSARY IN THE NEW GOVERNMENTS: ADVICE TO COLORED CITIZENS. Letter to a Committee of Colored Citizens at Savannah, July 8, 1865 298

JUSTICE TO THE COLORED RACE. Letter to a Trustee for Colored Schools in the District of Columbia, August 16, 1865 300

THE LATE GEORGE LIVERMORE, ESQ. Article in the Boston Daily Advertiser, September 2, 1865 301

THE NATIONAL SECURITY AND THE NATIONAL FAITH: GUARANTIES FOR THE NATIONAL FREEDMAN AND THE NATIONAL CREDITOR. Speech at the Republican State Convention, in Worcester, Massachusetts, September 14, 1865. With Appendix 305

QUORUM OF STATES NECESSARY IN ADOPTION OF A CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT. Letter to the New York Evening Post, September 28, 1865 357

SELF-SACRIFICE FOR THE COLORED RACE. EQUESTRIAN STATUE OF COLONEL SHAW, FIRST COMMANDER OF MASSACHUSETTS COLORED TROOPS. Article in the Boston Daily Advertiser, October 2, 1865 361

THE LATE RICHARD COBDEN. Letter to Mrs. Cobden, covering Resolutions of the Republican State Convention of Massachusetts, October 5, 1865 366

EQUAL RIGHTS _vs._ THE PRESIDENTIAL POLICY IN RECONSTRUCTION. Letter to the New York Independent, October 29, 1865 368

CLEMENCY AND COMMON SENSE. A CURIOSITY OF LITERATURE WITH A MORAL. Article in the Atlantic Monthly, December, 1865 371

CONGRATULATIONS ON THE PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION.

SPEECH AT A PUBLIC MEETING AT FANEUIL HALL, BOSTON, NOVEMBER 8, 1864.

At an impromptu meeting for congratulation, on the evening of the Presidential election, as the votes were announced, there were speeches by Mr. Hooper, Mr. Sumner, Dr. Loring, Mr. Rice, and Mr. Everett. Mr. Sumner spoke as follows.

FELLOW-CITIZENS,--The trumpet of victory is now sounding through the land, “Glory, Hallelujah!” [_Loud cheers._] It is the silver trumpet of an archangel, echoing in valleys, traversing mountains, and filling the whole country with immortal melodies, destined to awaken other echoes in the most distant places [_cheers_], as it proclaims “Liberty throughout all the land, unto all the inhabitants thereof.” [_Great applause._]

Such is the victory we celebrate, marking an epoch in our history and in the history of the world. But beyond immediate victory are two things not usually occurring together,--a funeral and a birth. [_Great laughter and applause._] The funeral we celebrate is of the Democratic party, which we bury to-night with all the dishonors that belong to it. Loathsome with corruption while still above ground, let it be hurried out of sight, where it will no longer be a nuisance. [_Tremendous cheering._]

The Democratic party had ceased to be patriotic. It was in sympathy with the Rebellion, so much so as to be its _Northern wing_. Such a party could not exist in a country that had determined to exist. It was an outrage and a shame, and hereafter it can never be mentioned except with judgment. [_Cries of “That’s so!” and cheers._]

The extent of its degradation is seen in the frauds it has perpetrated to influence this election. Nothing so mean as these. Fraud is always odious; but it becomes more so in proportion to the occasion on which it is employed. It is odious in small things,--doubly odious in greater things. To cheat one man is crime; to cheat a whole class of men is greater far. But if these men be citizen soldiers fighting for their country, and it is proposed to cheat them of their votes by barefaced fraud, I know no language to depict the despicable and most intolerable enormity of the offence. And yet this is the fraud attempted,--happily the last and dying fraud of the Democratic party. [_Applause._] Do you inquire the origin of this fraud, and its vicious energy? I answer, It is Slavery. Men who make up their minds to sustain Slavery stick at nothing. If willing to forge chains, they will not hesitate to forge votes. If ready to enslave their fellow-men, they will not hesitate to cheat soldiers. Therefore all these recent frauds are derived naturally out of that baseness and insensibility to right bred of Slavery. [_Applause._] But these frauds testify against the Democratic party, that undertook to perpetrate them.

There was an English monarch, whose head, as it dropped from the block, was held up to the people, while a voice cried, “This is the head of a traitor!” Thus do I hold up the head of the Democratic party, and say, “This is the head of a traitor!” Let it be buried out of sight, and let the people dance at its funeral. [_Tremendous applause._]

I have said that we celebrate a birth, as well as a funeral. The birth is the new life of our country, born to-day into assured freedom, with all its attendant glory. The voice of the people at the ballot-box has echoed back that great letter of the President, “To whom it may concern” [_laughter and loud cheers_], declaring the integrity of the Union and the abandonment of Slavery the two essential conditions of peace. [_Loud applause._] Let the glad tidings go forth, “to whom it may concern,”--to all the people of the United States, at length now made wholly free,--to foreign countries,--to the whole family of man,--to posterity,--to the martyred band who have fallen in battle for their country,--to the angels above,--ay, and to the devils below,--that this Republic shall live, for Slavery is dead. This is the great joy we now announce to the world. [_Here there was a perfect torrent of approving cheers._]

From this time forward, the Rebellion is subdued. Patriot Unionists in the Rebel States, take courage! Freedmen, slaves no longer, be of good cheer! The hour of deliverance has arrived. [_Renewed cheering._]

JUBILEE OF LIBERTY.

LETTER TO THE YOUNG MEN’S REPUBLICAN UNION OF NEW YORK, NOVEMBER 10, 1864.

A public meeting, called a Jubilee, was held at the Cooper Institute, New York, to celebrate the recent victory at the polls. Among the letters read was the following.

BOSTON, November 10, 1864.

DEAR SIR,--It will not be in my power to meet with the Union citizens of New York at the “Jubilee” of Friday evening, according to the invitation with which you honor me. But my joy will mingle with theirs.

The occasion you celebrate is worthy of jubilee, which in the Hebrew language is simply “the blast of a trumpet,” and now, in all languages, signifies “rejoicing.”

The occasion is kindred to that famous jubilee in sacred history, when the mandate went forth, “_Proclaim Liberty throughout all the land_, unto all the inhabitants thereof: it shall be a jubilee unto you; and ye shall return every man unto his possession, and ye shall return every man unto his family.” And now this same mandate has gone forth, assuring the return of patriot Unionists to their possessions, and the return of patriot soldiers to their families, and crowning all with Universal Emancipation, sign and seal of union and peace. Such is the mandate of the American people in the reëlection of Abraham Lincoln. I pray that it may all be executed promptly and triumphantly.

Thank God, the pettifoggers of compromise are answered by the people, who demand peace on the everlasting foundations of Union and Liberty. The political barbers, who undertake to prescribe, when they can only shave, are warned that their quackery is at an end.

Accept my thanks and best wishes, and believe me, dear Sir, very faithfully yours,

CHARLES SUMNER.

FRANK W. BALLARD, Esq., _Corresponding Secretary of the Young Men’s Republican Union_.

MR. ASHLEY AND RECONSTRUCTION.

LETTER TO A PUBLIC BANQUET IN HONOR OF HON. JAMES M. ASHLEY, AT TOLEDO, OHIO, NOVEMBER 18, 1864.

BOSTON, November 18, 1864.

DEAR SIR,--It will not be in my power to unite in the banquet to your most faithful Representative.

I know Mr. Ashley well, and honor him much. He has been firm when others have hesitated, and from an early day saw the secret of this war, and, I may add, the secret of victory also. In all questions of statesmanship, which will soon supersede military questions, he has already given assurance of practical wisdom. His various indefatigable labors and his elaborate speech on “Reconstruction” show that he sees well what is to be done in order to place peace and liberty under impregnable safeguards.

For myself, I have no hesitation in saying, that, next to the Rebellion itself, I most deprecate a premature State Government in a Rebel State. Such a Government will be a source of sorrow and weakness incalculable. But I am sure that your Representative will fail in no effort to prevent such a calamity.

There is also the Amendment of the Constitution prohibiting Slavery throughout the United States. Nobody has done more for it, practically, than Mr. Ashley.

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

Faithfully yours,

CHARLES SUMNER.

TO THE COMMITTEE.

CASE OF THE FLORIDA: ILLUSTRATED BY PRECEDENTS OF BRITISH SEIZURES IN NEUTRAL WATERS.

ARTICLES IN THE BOSTON DAILY ADVERTISER, NOVEMBER 29, 1864, AND JANUARY 17, 1865.

The case of the Florida attracted attention at the time, and aroused the British press. Especially to meet the criticism of the latter the first of the following articles was written. Though published in a newspaper anonymously, its authorship was recognized and acknowledged, and it was reprinted in a pamphlet by the Young Men’s Republican Union of New York.

The Florida was a Rebel war-steamer, built in England, which had done damage to our commerce. After capturing and burning the bark Mondamon off Pernambuco, it arrived at Bahia Bay, October 5, 1864, where the United States steamer Wachusett, with Captain Napoleon Collins as commander, was then lying. The Florida at first anchored in the offing, but, at the invitation of the Brazilian admiral, came inside in the midst of the Brazilian fleet, and close under the guns of the principal fort. At about three o’clock on the morning of October 7th, the Wachusett slipped her cables, and, with full head of steam, bore down upon the Rebel war-vessel, one half of whose officers and crew, including Captain Morris, were on shore, and the remainder, having just returned, were in no condition to repel an assault. The officer of the deck, supposing the collision which he saw imminent merely accidental, cried out, “You will run into us, if you don’t look out.” The design of Captain Collins was to strike the Florida amidships, crush in her side, and send her at once to the bottom; but this was not accomplished; the Wachusett struck only the stern, carrying away the mizzen-mast and main-yard, so that the Rebel vessel was not seriously injured, but the broken spars fell across the awning over the hatchway, and thus prevented her crew from getting on deck. In the confusion that ensued several pistol-shots were fired from both vessels, at random and without effect. Two of the Wachusett’s guns were discharged,--by accident, according to one report, or, as another had it, by order of a lieutenant. The shots did not strike the Florida. Captain Collins cried out immediately, “Surrender, or I will blow you out of the water!” The lieutenant in charge of the Florida replied, “Under the circumstances I surrender.” In an instant the vessel was boarded by men from the Wachusett, who made her fast by a hawser to their own vessel, which at once turned her course seaward, moving at the top of her speed and towing the Florida in her wake.

The Wachusett was challenged from the Brazilian fleet, but there was no reply. The Florida, when commanded to stop, answered that she was towed by the vessel in front. Shortly afterward the heavy guns of the fort opened fire. Three shots passed harmlessly above the pennant of the Wachusett, striking the water beyond. Two vessels of the Brazilian fleet gave chase, but soon abandoned it, and the Florida was brought to Hampton Roads, where it was anchored.

Meanwhile the case passed into diplomacy. Mr. Seward addressed a note, under date of November 11th, to Mr. Webb, the minister of the United States at Rio Janeiro, directing him to say that the Government of the United States was not indisposed to examine the subject upon its merits carefully, and to consider whatever questions might arise out of it in a becoming and friendly spirit, if that spirit was adopted by his Imperial Majesty’s Government. The Brazilian representative at Washington, in a note dated December 12th, expressed the belief that the Government of the United States would give the explanations and reparation which, in conformity with international laws, are due to a power that maintains friendly and pacific relations with it. Mr. Seward, in his reply, dated December 26th, disallowed the assumption that the Rebels were “a lawful naval belligerent,” and asserted, that, being still “destitute of naval forces, ports, and courts,” the ascription of that character to them by Brazil “is an act of intervention in derogation of the Law of Nations, and unfriendly and wrongful, as it is manifestly injurious, to the United States.” He also disallowed the assumption that the Florida belonged to the Rebels, and maintained, “on the contrary, that that vessel, like the Alabama, was a pirate, belonging to no nation or lawful belligerent.” He added, that it did not belong to captains of ships-of-war of the United States, acting without authority, to assert the rights and redress the wrongs of the country. The captured crew, being unlawfully brought into the national custody, could not be lawfully subjected here to the punishment they deserved, and were therefore set at liberty. Then follows this statement with regard to the vessel: “The Florida was brought into American waters, and was anchored under naval surveillance and protection at Hampton Roads. While awaiting the representation of the Brazilian Government, on the 28th of November, she sunk, owing to a leak which could not be seasonably stopped. The leak was at first represented to have been caused, or at least increased, by a collision with a war transport.” After stating that there were courts of inquiry on the subject, he concluded: “In the mean time it is assumed that the loss of the Florida was a consequence of some unforeseen accident, which cast no responsibility upon the United States.”[1] Nothing further occurred in this case.

* * * * *

The _Advertiser_, in a leader on this article, after alluding to the author as “a gentleman whose position and pursuits have led him to give great attention to questions of International Law,” says:--

“We ask attention to his view of the precedents, therefore, and to the connection which he establishes between them and the present case, as being both interesting and instructive, and as deserving no small weight in settling our views upon this important subject. He makes it clear, that, whatever Brazil may feel herself called upon to say in the matter, it does not lie in the mouth of England, either by her press or her ministry, to intermeddle by lecturing the United States.… The most embarrassing feature in the Florida case, however, has been removed within a few hours by the fortuitous collision of an army transport with this steamer, in the crowded roadstead at Fortress Monroe.”

Admiral Porter’s despatch reports this incident.

“FORTRESS MONROE, November 28, 1864.

“HON. GIDEON WELLES, _Secretary of the Navy_:--

“I have just received a telegram from the commander of the prize steamer Florida, informing me that she had sunk in nine fathoms of water. She had been run into by an army steamer, and badly damaged. I have not heard the particulars. I will inform the Department, when I receive the written report.

“DAVID D. PORTER, _Rear-Admiral_.”

If we may judge from recent English newspapers, there is to be another cry against us, on account of the Florida, not unlike that on account of the Trent. One paper says the seizure was “most flagrantly lawless”; another, that “the precedent will establish a claim to the right to pursue and destroy every such vessel, whatever may be the port in which she may seek shelter or supplies”; another, that “the outrage cannot be permitted to pass unnoticed by other powers”; and still another, that “events such as these will speedily force European nations to interfere in the American difficulty for their own security.” Such are specimens of British criticism, before the facts in the case have been ascertained in any authentic form, and before our Government has had opportunity to declare itself on the subject.

The same swiftness occurred in the matter of the Trent. The parallel will be complete, if Earl Russell sends us a letter of complaint.