Part 18

December 2, 1872, Mr. Sumner asked, and by unanimous consent obtained, leave to bring in the following bill, which was read twice and ordered to be printed:--

A Bill to regulate the Army-Register and the Regimental Colors of the United States.

Whereas the national unity and good-will among fellow-citizens can be assured only through oblivion of past differences, and it is contrary to the usage of civilized nations to perpetuate the memory of civil war: Therefore,

_Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled_, That the names of battles with fellow-citizens shall not be continued in the Army-Register, or placed on the regimental colors of the United States.

TRIBUTE TO HORACE GREELEY.

REMARKS INTENDED TO BE MADE IN THE SENATE, IN SECONDING A MOTION FOR ADJOURNMENT ON THE OCCASION OF MR. GREELEY’S FUNERAL, DECEMBER 3, 1872.

The death of Mr. Greeley at the close of the canvass in which nearly three millions of his fellow-citizens had given him their suffrages for the Presidency, seemed, in the view of leading Senators on both sides, to require from their body a respectful recognition of the day appointed for his funeral; and it was accordingly arranged that a motion for adjournment on this occasion should be offered by Mr. Fenton, of New York, and seconded by Mr. Sumner, with appropriate remarks by each. But a dominant party-spirit, by recourse to parliamentary tactics, prevented its introduction, and the day passed without notice. The remarks designed by Mr. Sumner were as follows:--

MR. PRESIDENT,--I have been requested to second this motion. One word, if you please. A funeral will take place to-morrow, on which the eyes of the nation will rest, while innumerable hearts throb with grief, and the people everywhere learn the instability of life and the commandment of charity. It is proper, therefore, for the representatives of the nation to suspend labor, that they too may be penetrated by the lesson of the day. More for them than the illustrious dead is this needed. He is gone beyond any earthly call; we remain. Duties are always for the living; and now, standing at the open grave of HORACE GREELEY, we are admonished to forget the strifes of party, and to remember only truth, country, and mankind, to which his honest life was devoted. In other days the horse and armor of the departed chieftain have been buried in the grave where he reposed. So, too, may we bury the animosities, if not the badges, of the past. Then, indeed, will there be victory for the dead which all will share.

RELIEF OF BOSTON.

REMARKS IN THE SENATE, DECEMBER 12, 1872.

The subject under consideration was a bill from the House providing for a drawback of the duties on all materials imported into Boston for the rebuilding of that portion of the city laid waste by the recent conflagration,--with amendments, including one excepting lumber, proposed by the Committee on Finance, to whom the bill had been referred.

Mr. Sumner said:--

MR. PRESIDENT,--Hoping that the Senate will not be less generous than the House of Representatives, I trust that we shall take the bill as it comes from the House, voting down the amendments reported by our Committee.

I hear it said by the Senator from Michigan [Mr. FERRY] that the bill will be a bad precedent; and the same argument is repeated, with variety of illustration, by my excellent friend the Senator from Vermont [Mr. MORRILL]. Sir, is it not too late to correct the precedent? You already have the case of Portland and the case of Chicago; I am sorry that you must now add the case of Boston. Call it a bad precedent. It can only be applicable in a parallel case, and I do not believe such cases can occur often. The fire-fiend latterly has been very busy in our land; but he cannot always be so; at least I have a well-founded trust that by proper precaution, if not also by better fortune, we shall escape from his visitations. I put aside, therefore, the argument that this is a bad precedent. It can be called into activity only in a similar case; and when a similar case occurs, I am ready for its application. Let any other metropolis sit like Boston in ashes, and I hope there will be no hesitation in extending to it a friendly hand.

It is not fair to call up the smaller losses that may occur in smaller places, for the simple reason that such losses are not within the reach of Congress by any ordinary exercise of its powers. It is only where the loss is great, as in the familiar cases before us, that there is opportunity for Congress. An ancient poet says: “Nor should the Divinity intervene, unless the occasion be worthy.”[226] I would say, Nor should Congress interfere, unless the case be such as to justify the exercise of extraordinary powers. Obviously such an occasion does not occur except where the scale of loss is great.

Then, again, the Senator from Michigan reminded us of the exception of lumber in the bill for the relief of Chicago; but he vindicated that exception by facts which do not occur in the present case. He said, as we all know, that Michigan was also a sufferer at that calamitous moment; and he did not think it right, therefore, that the peculiar interests of his State should be called to contribute even to the great losses of Chicago. I do not say that the Senator was not entirely right in that position. Certainly the case as presented by him is entirely reasonable. Had I had the honor to represent Michigan at the time, I know not that I should have acted otherwise than he did. But I call attention to the point, as presented by him, that no such case exists now. Michigan is not a sufferer; Maine is not a sufferer; nor is any part of our country which contributes timber to our business a sufferer. Therefore is there no reason for introducing this exception. The reason failing, the exception should fail also. I hope, therefore, that the Senate will keep the bill in that respect precisely as it came from the House.

Then my friend from Vermont suggests that this bill is practically an invitation to the people of Boston to go to Europe and elsewhere in order to find workmen. He seemed frightened at the possibility. I think my friend sees too often the question of protection to American industry, and makes himself too unhappy on this account. I hope that this bill will be considered without any question of protection. Let the people of Boston go where they can buy cheapest in order to meet their great calamity; and if it be to their neighbor British provinces, I hope my friend from Vermont will not interfere to prevent it.

THE LATE HON. GARRETT DAVIS, SENATOR OF KENTUCKY.

REMARKS IN THE SENATE ON HIS DEATH, DECEMBER 18, 1872.

MR. PRESIDENT,--I was a member of the Senate, when, in 1861, our departed Senator entered it; and I was to the end the daily witness of his laborious service. Standing now at his funeral, it is easy to forget the differences between us and remember those things in which he was an example to all.

Death has its companionship. In its recent autumn harvest were Garrett Davis, William H. Seward, and Horace Greeley. Seward was the precise contemporary of Davis, each beginning life with the century and dying within a few days of each other. Always alike in constancy of labor, they were for the larger part of this period associated in political sentiment as active members of the old Whig party. But the terrible question of Slavery rose to divide them. How completely they were on opposite sides I need not say. Horace Greeley was ten years the junior, but he was the colleague and peer of Garrett Davis in devotion to Henry Clay. In the whole country, among all whose enthusiastic support he aroused, there was no one who upheld the Kentucky statesman with more chivalrous devotion than these two. Here they were alike, and in the record of life this signal fidelity cannot be forgotten. It was to the honor of Henry Clay that he inspired this sentiment in such men, and it was to their honor that they maintained it so truly. Kindred to truth is fidelity.

At his death, Garrett Davis was our Congressional senior, having entered the other House as early as 1839, after previous service of six years in the Legislature of Kentucky. For eight years he sat as Representative, and then, after an interval of thirteen years, he was for nearly twelve years Senator. During this long period he was conspicuous before the country, dwelling constantly in the public eye. How well he stood the gaze, whether of friend or foe, belongs to his good name.

All who knew him in the Senate will bear witness to his wonderful industry, his perfect probity, and the personal purity of his life. No differences of opinion can obscure the fame of these qualities, or keep them from being a delight to his friends and an example to his country. Nor can any of us forget how, amid peculiar trials, he was courageous in devotion to the National Union. No pressure, no appeal, no temptation, could sway him in this patriotic allegiance. That fidelity which belonged to his nature shone here as elsewhere. He was no holiday Senator, cultivating pleasure rather than duty, and he was above all suspicion in personal conduct. Calumny could not reach him. Nothing is so fierce and unreasoning as the enmities engendered by political antagonists; but even these never questioned that he was at all times incorruptible and pure. Let this be spoken in his honor; let it be written on his monument. Nor can the State that gave him to the national service and trusted him so long fail to remember with pride that he was always an honest man.

With this completeness of integrity there was a certain wild independence and intensity of nature which made him unaccommodating and irrepressible. Faithful, constant, devoted, indefatigable, implacable, he knew not how to capitulate. Dr. Johnson, who liked “a good hater,”[227] would have welcomed him into this questionable fellowship. Here I cannot doubt. Better far the opposite character, and even the errors that may come from it. Kindred to hate is prejudice, which was too often active in him, seeming at times, especially where we differed from him, to take the place of reason. On nothing was this so marked as Slavery. Here his convictions were undisguised; nor did they yield to argument or the logic of events. How much of valuable time, learned research, and intellectual effort he bestowed in support of this dying cause, the chronicles of the Senate attest. How often have we listened with pain to this advocacy, regretting deeply that the gifts he possessed, and especially his sterling character, were enlisted where our sympathies could not go! And yet I cannot doubt that others would testify, as I now do, that never on these occasions, when the soul was tried in its depths, did any fail to recognize the simplicity and integrity of his nature. Had he been less honest, I should have felt his speeches less. Happily, that great controversy is ended; nor do I say anything but the strict truth, when I add that now we bury him who spoke last for Slavery.

Time is teacher and reconciler; nor is it easy for any candid nature to preserve a constant austerity of judgment toward persons. As evening approaches, the meridian heats lose their intensity. While abiding firmly in the truth as we saw it, there may be charity and consideration for those who did not see it as we saw it. A French statesman, yet living, whose name is indissolubly connected with the highest literature, as well as with some of the most important events of his age, teaches how with the passage of life the judgment is softened toward others. “The more,” says M. Guizot, “I have penetrated into an understanding and experience of things, of men, and of myself, the more I have perceived at the same time my general convictions strengthen and my personal impressions become calm and mild. Equity, I will not say toleration for the faith of others, in religion or politics, has come to take place and grow by the side of tranquillity in my own faith. It is youth, with its natural ignorance and passionate prejudices, which renders us exclusive and biting in our judgments of others. In proportion as I quit myself, and as time sweeps me far from our combats, I enter without difficulty into a serene and pleasant appreciation of ideas and sentiments which do not belong to me.” Even if not adopting these words completely, all will confess their beauty.

Here let me be frank. Nothing could make any speech for Slavery tolerable to me; but when I think how much opinions are determined by the influences about us, so that a change of birth and education might have made the Abolitionist a partisan of Slavery and the partisan of Slavery an Abolitionist, I feel, that, while always unrelenting toward the wrong, we cannot be insensible to individual merits. In this spirit I offer a sincere tribute to a departed Senator, who, amid the perturbations of the times, trod his way with independent step, and won even from opponents the palm of character.

EQUALITY IN CIVIL RIGHTS.

LETTER TO THE COMMITTEE OF ARRANGEMENTS FOR THE CELEBRATION OF THE ANNIVERSARY OF EMANCIPATION IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, APRIL 16, 1873.

The long procession stopped before Mr. Sumner’s house, where one of the bands played “Auld Lang Syne.” Arriving in front of the City Hall of Washington, they were addressed by R. T. Greene, Esq., and also by Hon. Frederick Douglass. Letters were read from President Grant, Senators Anthony, Pratt, and Sumner, Hon.’s Horace Maynard, B. F. Butler, A. G. Riddle, S. J. Bowen, N. G. Ordway, and A. M. Clapp. Mr. Sumner’s letter was as follows:--

WASHINGTON, April 16, 1873.

DEAR SIR,--I regret that it is not in my power to be with you according to the invitation with which you have honored me. This is a day whose associations are as precious to me as to you.

Emancipation in the national capital was the experiment which prepared the way for Emancipation everywhere throughout the country. It was the beginning of the great end.

Here, as in other things, you are an example to our colored fellow-citizens in the States. Your success here will vindicate the capacity of colored people for citizenship, and your whole race will be benefited thereby.

Let me speak frankly. Much has been done, but more remains to be done. The great work is not yet accomplished. Until your equality in civil rights is assured, the pillar of your citizenship is like the column in honor of Washington,--unfinished and imperfect. There is constant talk of finishing that column at great cost of money, but the first thing to be done is to finish the pillar of your citizenship. Here I shall gladly work; but I trust that you will all work likewise, nor be content with anything less than the whole.

Accept my thanks and best wishes, and believe me, dear Sir,

Faithfully yours,

CHARLES SUMNER.

TO THE CHAIRMAN.

EQUAL RIGHTS OF COLORED FELLOW-CITIZENS IN NORMAL SCHOOLS.

LETTER READ AT A PUBLIC MEETING IN WASHINGTON, JUNE 22, 1873.

A proposition in the Legislature of the District of Columbia, opening the Normal School without distinction of color, failed through the vote of a colored member, which was the occasion of the following letter, written in reply to an inquiry. The letter was read by the chairman of a public meeting of colored citizens on the evening of June 30, 1873, who said he had conferred with distinguished gentlemen, legal and otherwise, regarding the right of the District Legislature to pass such a bill, and all had stated that their power was unquestionable. He had addressed a letter to the Hon. Charles Sumner upon that question, and had received the following reply:--

WASHINGTON, June 22, 1873.

DEAR SIR,--In reply to your inquiry, I have no hesitation in saying that in my judgment the right of the District Legislature to provide a normal school where there shall be no distinction of color is beyond doubt. To call it in question is simply ridiculous.

Having the right, the duty of the Legislature is clear as sunshine. It must open the school to all, without distinction of color. Should any persons be shut out from this right on the wretched apology of color, I trust they will make their indignation felt by the guilty authors of the outrage.

I write plainly, because the time has come for those who love justice to speak out. Too long have colored fellow-citizens been deprived of their rights; they must insist upon them.

Faithfully yours,

CHARLES SUMNER.

THE PRESIDENT OF HAYTI AND MR. SUMNER.

LETTER IN REPLY TO ONE FROM THE FORMER, JULY 4, 1873.

The following is a translation of the Haytian President’s letter:--

REPUBLIC OF HAYTI, PORT-AU-PRINCE, September 24, 1872.

Sixty-Ninth Year of Independence.

HONORABLE SENATOR,--I eagerly seize the good opportunity offered me by the departure of our Minister, Citizen S. Preston, to pray you to receive the testimony of my high consideration, which does not cease to grow, by reason of the eminent services which you render daily to the noble cause of an oppressed people.

I should consider myself as failing in one of my most imperious duties, if I did not express to you the sentiments of gratitude which your name awakens in the breast of every one belonging to the African race.

In assuming the defence of the rights of this people, guided by the most generous sentiments of your rich nature, by a sincere love of justice, you have acquired an immortal title to the gratitude of all the descendants of the African race.

Please to receive this feeble expression of my high esteem for the noble character of an illustrious citizen, and believe in the depth of sentiment with which I declare myself, Honorable Senator,

Your devoted friend,

NISAGE SAGET.

MR. SUMNER’S REPLY.

WASHINGTON, July 4, 1873.

MR. PRESIDENT,--I cannot, at this late day, acknowledge the letter with which you have honored me, without explaining the reason of my delay.

Owing to absence in Europe, where I had gone for my health, I did not receive your valuable communication until some time in the winter, when it was put into my hands by your excellent Minister. Continuing feeble in health, I reluctantly postponed this acknowledgment. I now take advantage of convalescence to do, thus tardily, what my feelings prompted at an earlier day.

Please, Sir, accept my thanks for your generous appreciation of what I have done, and your kindness in letting me know it under your own hand. But I beg you to understand that I do not deserve the praise with which you honor me. In advocating the cause of an oppressed people I have only acted according to my conscience. I could not have done otherwise; and now my only regret is that I have done so little. I wish I had done more.

In the history of mankind the crime against the African race will stand forth in terrible eminence,--always observed, and never forgotten. Just in proportion as civilization prevails will this enormous wrong be apparent in its true character; and men will read with astonishment how human beings, guilty only of being black, were sold into slavery, and then (such was the continuing injustice towards this unhappy people) how, when slavery ceased, they were still treated with indignity by persons whose lordly pretensions were founded on the skin only. As these things are seen in increasing light, they will be condemned in no uncertain words; nor will the denial of equal rights, on account of color, escape the judgment awarded to slavery itself. Human conduct on this question is a measure of character. Where the African race is enslaved or degraded, where it is exposed to any indignity or shut out from that equality which is a primal right to humanity, there civilization is still feeble.

To the certain triumph of civilization I look with constant hope. It is sure to come; and one sign of its arrival will be that prevailing sentiment which recognizes the perpetual obligations of equal justice to all, and the duty to repair past wrongs by compensations in the future.

In the great debt of the whites to the blacks there is a bank from which, for generations to come, the latter can draw.

Accept, Mr. President, the expression of my ardent hope for the peace, prosperity, and happiness of the Republic of Hayti, and allow me to subscribe myself with true regard,

Your faithful friend,

CHARLES SUMNER.

TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE REPUBLIC OF HAYTI.

INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION.

LETTER TO HENRY RICHARD, M. P., ON THE VOTE IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS AGREEING TO HIS MOTION FOR AN ADDRESS TO THE QUEEN, PRAYING COMMUNICATION WITH FOREIGN POWERS WITH A VIEW TO A GENERAL AND PERMANENT SYSTEM OF INTERNATIONAL ARBITRATION, JULY 10, 1873.

UNITED STATES SENATE CHAMBER, WASHINGTON, July 10, 1873.

MY DEAR SIR,--Few events have given me more pleasure than the vote on your motion. I thank you for making the motion; and I thank you also for not yielding to Mr. Gladstone’s request to withdraw it. You were in the very position of Buxton on his motion against Slavery. He, too, insisted upon a division; and that vote led to Emancipation. May you have equal success!

I anticipate much from this vote. It will draw attention on the Continent, which the facts and figures of your speech will confirm.

I find in your speech grand compensation for the long postponement to which you have been constrained. It marks an epoch in a great cause. I know you will not rest. But this speech alone, with the signal result, will make your Parliamentary life historic. Surely Mr. Gladstone acted under some imagined exigency of politics. He cannot, in his soul, differ from you. Honoring him much, I regret that he has allowed himself to appear on the wrong side. What fame so great as his, if he would devote the just influence of his lofty position to securing for nations the inappreciable benefits of a tribunal for the settlement of their differences!

How absurd to call your motion Utopian, if by this word is meant that it is not practical. There is no question so supremely practical; for it concerns not merely one nation, but every nation; and even its discussion promises to diminish the terrible chances of war. Its triumph would be the greatest reform of history. And I doubt not that this day is near.

Accept my thanks and congratulations, and believe me, my dear Sir,

Sincerely yours,

CHARLES SUMNER.

HENRY RICHARD, ESQ., M.P., LONDON.

A COMMON-SCHOOL SYSTEM IRRESPECTIVE OF COLOR.

LETTER TO THE COLORED CITIZENS OF WASHINGTON, JULY 29, 1873.

WASHINGTON, July 29, 1873.

GENTLEMEN,--I am honored by your communication of July 26th, in which, after congratulating me upon returning health, and expressing your sincere hopes that I may resume my labors in the Senate, there to take up again the cause of Equal Rights, you mention that the colored citizens of Washington are now engaged in agitating what you properly call “a common-school system for all children.”

I desire to thank you for the good-will to myself which your communication exhibits, and for your hopes that I may again in the Senate take up the cause of Equal Rights. Health itself is valuable only as it enables us to perform the duties of life, and I know no present duty more commanding than that to which you refer.