Columbus, Nov. 23,
1860.
My Dear Friend:
I missed no gloves, but presume those left at friend
Sparhawk's were mine. I am gratified that you made them useful to the cause and
to yourself.
We have indeed great reason to rejoice; for the power of the
Slave Interest is certainly broken. What use will be made of the victory, does
not so clearly appear. Some indications lead me to apprehend that the wisest
and best use will not be made. Great efforts will doubtless be put forth to
degrade Republicanism to the Compromise level of 1850.
There are also some serious dangers on the disunion side. I
have always regarded the Slavery question as the crucial test of our
institutions; and it has been my hope and prayer that a peaceful settlement of
this question on the basis, first, of denationalization, and then final
enfranchisement through voluntary State action, would establish beyond all
dispute the superiority of free institutions, and the capacity of a free
Christian people to deal with every evil and peril lying in the path of its
progress.
To this end, all needless irritation should be carefully
avoided, and much forbearance exercised. The citizens of the Free States have
now to suffer injuries, when travelling or temporarily sojourning in Slave
States, which, under ordinary circumstances and upon common principles, would,
as between independent sovereignties, justify extreme measures. If extreme
measures are not resorted to, it is because the people of the Free States love
the Union and prefer to forbear. And this is right.
On the other hand, however, the Slave States have, regarding
matters from their standpoint, some just causes of complaint. The slaveholders
undoubtedly think that they have a right to take their slaves, as property,
into the territories and be protected in holding them by Federal power, and
nearly all jurists and statesmen, North and South, are agreed that the Fugitive
Servant Clause of the Constitution entitles them to have their fugitive slaves
delivered up on claim. The Republicans insist, however, that the first demand
is not well founded in the Constitution, while some propose what they call a
reasonable Fugitive Act in satisfaction of the second, and others, still,
refuse to have anything to do with the returning of fugitives, Constitution or
no Constitution.
Now two facts seem clear to me; first, that the Constitution
was intended to create, and fairly construed, does create an obligation, so far
as human compacts can, to surrender fugitives from service; and secondly, that
in the progress of civilization and Christian humanity it has become impossible
that this obligation shall be fulfilled. With my sentiments and convictions, I
could no more participate in the seizure and surrender to slavery of a human
being, than I could in cannibalism. Still there stands the compact: and there
in the Slave States are fellow citizens, who verily believe otherwise than I
do, and who insist on its fulfilment and complain of bad faith in its
nonfulfilment: and in a matter of compact I am not at liberty to substitute my
convictions for theirs.
What then to do? Just here it seems to me that the principle
of compensation may be admitted. We may say, true there is the compact — true,
we of the Free States cannot execute it — but we will prove to you that we will
act in good faith by redeeming ourselves through compensation from an
obligation which our consciences do not permit us to fulfil. Mr. Rhett of S. C.
once very manfully denounced the Fugitive Act as unconstitutional, but still
insisted on the Constitutional obligation which he summed up in these words
"Surrender or Pay." Now, if we say we cannot surrender, but we will
pay, shall we not command the highest respect for our principles, and do a
great deal towards securing the final peaceful and glorious result which we all
so much desire?
There would be some difficulties of detail, if the principle
were adopted; but none insuperable.
There is still another plan of adjustment which might be
adopted, though I fear that, in the Slave States, and perhaps in the Free
States, it would meet with greater objection. It would consist in amendments of
the Constitution by which the Slave States would give up the Fugitive Slave
Clause altogether, and the Free States would agree to a representation in
Congress of the whole population, abrogating the three fifths rule. One
advantage of this would be that the Constitution would be freed from all
discriminations between persons, and would contain nothing which could, by any
implication, be tortured into a recognition of Slavery. Will you think over
these matters carefully and give me your ideas upon them?
I have written in much haste, but I think you will
understand me. What I have written is too crudely expressed for any but
friendly eyes; and I hope that you will let nobody see this letter, except if
you think fit, our friend Sparhawk and your sister.
Affectionately and
faithfully yours,
S. P. Chase.
John G. Whittibr
_______________
* Of Chase Whittier wrote in 1873 (Prose Works, ii,
278): "The grave has just closed over all that was mortal of Salmon
P. Chase, the kingliest of men, a statesman second to no other in our history,
too great and pure for the Presidency, yet leaving behind him a record which
any incumbent of that station might envy."
The letter is marked “Private and Confidential,” but the
occasion for such ceased long ago. It illustrates the difficult situation that
had to be faced after the election of Lincoln.
SOURCE: John Albree, Editor, Whittier Correspondence from the Oak Knoll Collections, 1830-1892,
p. 134-9
No comments:
Post a Comment