Washington City, Dec. 20, 1850.
My Dear Sir, I
recd. your letter last night and thank you for it. I had written you the day
before and have little to add.
Those in Ohio, who think that the Radical Democracy are
going to acquiesce in the nomination of a partizan of the leading measures of
this administration as a Democratic Candidate for the Presidency deceive
themselves; and those who think that any democratic candidate can be elected
without the aid of the Radical Democracy deceive themselves still more
egregiously. There may be a democratic National Convention, but its action will
hardly be as binding as that of 1848. The Slaveholders and their allies declare
openly that they will support nobody who is tainted with Freesoilism, in other
words, nobody who does not agree to except slavery from the application of his
principles: with what force can they complain of us, if we refuse to support
anybody who does? Complain or not they will find enough, who are inflexible, to
defeat their cherished scheme of reaching the patronage of the National
Government through the prostitution of the Democratic organization to the
purposes of the slaveholders. I venture the prediction that Benton will support
none of the Compromise Tribe. He don't worship the "political
trinity" of Foote — Clay — Cass — Webster.
I see the Chillicothe Advertiser, The Cin. Enquirer, the Mt.
Vernon Banner, and the Trumbull Democrat are joining in denunciation of the
election of Morse, and of all cooperation with Free Democrats by the Old
Liners. I am sorry that the defeat of Myers has prepared some to sympathize
with this spirit, who would otherwise have been differently affected. But after
all, I trust, the influence of this denunciation will not be great. The Old
Line democrats of Ohio, separating themselves from the Free Democrats, cannot
hope for power, except by submitting to Whig terms and Whig alliances. The
demoralization of the party would be sure to result. I cannot believe that any
considerable number will consent to it.
I hope the Free Democrats in the Legislature will stand
firm. I regret exceedingly Mr. Randall's course: but it is too late to amend
the past. Mr. Giddings sees it as I do, and regrets it as I do. But at all
events stand firm, not for mere freesoilism but for free democracy, for
the whole glorious family of free principles, in land, currency, trade &
men.
As to Senator if the free democrats think of going out of
their own rank for the Cong term why not vote for Spalding, Myers, Carter, or
Stanton, — some man of known and proved sympathy with us? Mere pledges,
without antecedent works, are of little worth. How can democrats either object
to such a man as Brinkerhoff or Fitch, always democrats. Though they voted for
the Buffalo nominee last election, did they not vote for the elder and better
democrat?
But the Old Line democrats must meet the Free democrats on
terms of equality. Our democracy is as good as theirs — we think it better. Our
devotion to democratic principles is as ardent as their and as constant. We
think it more ardent and more constant. They must recognize us as democrats,
differing from them in only one respect, that we will not cooperate with
slaveholders, who make antislavery a disqualification for their suffrages, in
party organization. In voting for a true free democrat for Senator, they
sacrifice nothing of principle or interest. I trust there will be no yielding
to the clamor of the Hunker Presses, and that the Free Democrats will not relax
their standard in consequence of it. Rather than aid in placing in the Senate,
a man who will sell out to the slaveholders, let the election go over, or let
the Hunkers of both sides combine, and take the consequences. Better elect in
cooperation with the Whigs — though hardly any circumstances would, under the
present aspects of National politics, reconcile me to this — if a good and
reliable freesoiler can be secured, though of whig affinities, than take the
responsibility of voting for a man who may deceive you.
I have read Wood's message. It is not very definite, and his
doctrines on the subject of the Fugitive Slave law are unworthy of him; but on
the whole it is antislavery enough to give no satisfaction whatever to the
Hunkers here. Write often.
_______________
* Lent by Mr. Homer E. Stewart, Warren, Ohio.
SOURCE: Diary and correspondence of Salmon P. Chase, Annual
Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1902, Vol.
2, p. 225-7
No comments:
Post a Comment