Showing posts with label Free States. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Free States. Show all posts

Monday, July 23, 2018

George L. Stearns to Mary Hall Stearns, May 17, 1860

[May 17, 1860.]

I have to-day two letters from you and one from Frank — your letter, May 9 and Frank's May 12, and have telegraphed that I am here and will leave for Philadelphia to-night.

I found on arrival at Lawrence some earnest men, who are desirous to use active measures if they could have the means. Among them a Mr. Stewart, who tells me he formerly lived with Mr. Henry A. Page. S. has several colored people on his farm, one a good-looking young girl who, when her master tried to take improper liberties with her, knocked him down and ran off.

He, with others I saw, assured me that it was the wish of the majority of the people of Kansas to make it a “free state” for blacks as well as whites, and they would do so if the means could be procured to effect an organization.

If I had returned home my work would only have been half developed, and of course half done. I now feel confident that we can make the whole of Kansas a place of rest for the “panting fugitive,” and that done, Missouri, Arkansas, and the Indian Territory can be cleared of slaves.

Montgomery is a splendid man. I will tell you lots of stories about him when I get home.

SOURCE: Preston Stearns, The Life and Public Services of George Luther Stearns, p. 225-6

Wednesday, July 11, 2018

Amos A. Lawrence to Charles L. Robinson, August 10, 1855

Boston, August 10, 1855.

My Dear Sir, — From Mr. Abbott who has just arrived here from your neighborhood, I infer that the spirit of the settlers has been raised so high that they are ready to repudiate the present legislature altogether, and to resist its requirements. In this, you will have the good-will and assistance of the citizens of the free States at least.

But many are willing to go farther, and to resist the United States government, if it should interfere. For this I can see no apology; nor can there ever be good cause for resisting an administration chosen by ourselves. However wrong in our opinion, there never can be good reason for resisting our own government, unless it attempts to destroy the power of the people through the elections, that is, to take away the power of creating a new administration every four years. But I do not believe the present administration will attempt to impose the Missouri code upon the citizens of Kansas.

There is another reason of a more prudential kind, viz.: that whoever does this is sure of defeat. We are a law-abiding people, and we will sustain our own government “right or wrong.” Any movement aimed at the government destroys at once the moral force of the party or organization which favors it. Already the present administration is rendered powerless by the House of Representatives, and soon will come the time to vote for a new one. The people will never resist or attempt to destroy it in any other way.

Yours very truly,
A. A. L.

SOURCE: William Lawrence, Life of Amos A. Lawrence: With Extracts from His Diary and Correspondence, p. 99-101

Thursday, May 31, 2018

Amos A. Lawrence to Franklin Pierce, July 15, 1855

Boston, July 15, 1855.

My Dear Sir, — It is evident that there is a body of men in Missouri who are determined to drive our people from Kansas, if they dare to do so; and for the reason that the settlers from the “free States” are opposed to the introduction of slave trade there. Up to this time the government has kept so far aloof as to force the settlers to the conclusion that if they would be safe, they must defend themselves; and therefore many persons here who refused at first (myself included) have rendered them assistance, by furnishing them the means of defense.

Yours with regard,
A. A. L.

SOURCE: William Lawrence, Life of Amos A. Lawrence: With Extracts from His Diary and Correspondence, p. 95

Wednesday, May 23, 2018

Amos A. Lawrence to David R. Atchison, March 31, 1855

(cottage Farm Near) Boston, March 31, 1855.

My Dear Sir, — I take the liberty to address you upon a subject in which I have a common interest with yourself, viz.: the settlement of Kansas. Since the repeal of the “Missouri Compromise” by the last Congress, this Territory has attracted the attention of distant not less than of the neighboring States; for it is evident that there must be decided the question whether there shall be slave or free labor over a vast region of the United States now unsettled. You and your friends would make slave States, and we wish to prevent your doing so. The stake is a large one, and the ground chosen. Let the fight be a fair one. It is to secure this that I address you. Your influence is requisite to restrain your people from doing great injustice to actual settlers, and provoking them to retaliatory measures, the consequences of which would be most deplorable. I beg you, my dear sir, to use your efforts to avert so great an evil.

Let the contest be waged honorably, for unless it be so, no settlement of the question can ever be final. It is already reported here that large bodies of Missourians will cross over merely to vote, and that they may gain this election as they did the last. But how delusive to suppose that settlers who have come from one to two thousand miles with their families will acquiesce in any election gained by such means, or that any future election can be satisfactory which is not conducted according to law. The advantage of proximity is yours; your people can afford to be not only just, but generous, in this matter. The repeal of the law which secured this Territory against the introduction of slavery is considered by most men in the “free States” to be a breach of the national faith; and it is not unreasonable for those who have gone there to find a home to expect a compliance with the laws as they are. Those from New England have gone in good faith and at their own expense. They are chiefly farmers; but among them are good representatives from all professions. Some have considerable property, but all have rights and principles which they value more than money, and, I may say, more than life itself. Neither is there any truth in the assertion that they are abolitionists. No person of that stripe is known to have gone from here; nor is it known here that any such have gone from other States. But oppression may make them abolitionists of the most dangerous kind.

There has been much said in regard to an extensive organization here, which is wholly untrue. I assure you, sir, that what has been undertaken here will be carried on fairly and equitably. The management is in the hands of men of prudence, of wealth and determination; they are not politicians, nor are they aspirants for office: they are determined, if it be possible, to see that justice is done to those who have ventured their all in that Territory. May I not hope, sir, that you will second this effort to see that the contest shall be carried on fairly? If fairly beaten you may be sure that our people will acquiesce, however reluctant; but they never will yield to injustice.

Respectfully yours,
A. A. L.

SOURCE: William Lawrence, Life of Amos A. Lawrence: With Extracts from His Diary and Correspondence, p. 89-92

Wednesday, May 16, 2018

Governor Salmon P. Chase to Senator Charles Sumner, December 13, 1856

State Of Ohio, Executive Department,                       
Columbus, Dec 13, 1856.

Dear Sumner, I long to hear of you at the Capitol, but I long infinitely more to hear of your perfect restoration. At the present moment you are not greatly needed at Washington. Nothing can be done now but to announce principles, & make test questions. A year hence it will be important to have our strongest men in the field. Mr. Buchanan's Administration will then be fairly under way. For that time you should be prepared, &, if need be, reserved. I write this because I see it stated that you propose going to Washington about the first of January. Let me beg you to risk nothing; but to lay aside every care except that of your own restoration. You will of course be reelected. Why not let the present session go, & take a trip somewhere out of sight and as far as possible out of recollection, of disturbing & exciting causes. If your friends think it well, you might resign that your place this session be filled by somebody else. Then be whole for the next session.

My intelligence from Kansas is encouraging. The reasons for believing it will be a free state preponderate more & more. I expect next week the return of a gentleman whom I sent to the territory to ascertain the precise condition & to bear to Gov Geary a letter in behalf of the prisoners, & to them some little relief. I hope the best. But for our cause — we must make a deeper issue; believe that right is expedient; be consistent & trust the people. Then I believe will come the day when the Republic, restored to its original policy, will renew her strength & move forward in the fulfilment of her sublime mission, with the applause of all the patriotic & all the good. Talia sӕcla, cunite.

Affectionately yours,
[SALMON P. CHASE.]

SOURCE: Diary and correspondence of Salmon P. ChaseAnnual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1902, Vol. 2, p. 274-5

Sunday, April 1, 2018

Wood Hinton To Howell Cobb, Jan. 7,1845

Georgia, Jackson County, [Jan. 7,1845.]

Sir: I have one request to make of you that is this there are some negroes property to be Transported into some free State in the United State thare are maney opinions about it some say that it cannot be dun on a count that thare is no state that will receive them this question you can decide. I dont want you to make this a publick question in the House but to talk with the Members of Illinois or Indiana as they are the two nearest free States to me I am told that their States will not receive Negroes from a slave holding state and that they have past a law to that effect and a penalty if any is carried there this point you can decide . . . That question is one of importance to me and this business if actd on will stop the mouths of many I sincerely request of you for me  Will confer special favour.

SOURCE: Ulrich Bonnell Phillips, Editor, The Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1911, Volume 2: The Correspondence of Robert Toombs, Alexander H. Stephens, and Howell Cobb, p. 60

Tuesday, March 20, 2018

Diary of Gideon Welles: Thursday, December 31, 1863

The year closes more satisfactorily than it commenced. The wretched faction in the Free States which makes country secondary to party had then an apparent ascendency. They were dissatisfied with the way in which the War was conducted, — with what they called the imbecility of the Administration, — and, uniting with another faction which is opposed to the War, they swept the States. The country understands them better than it did. The War has been waged with success, although there have been in some instances errors and misfortunes. But the heart of the nation is sounder and its hopes brighter. The national faith was always strong, and grows firmer. The Rebels show discontent, distrust, and feebleness. They evidently begin to despair, and the loud declarations that they do not and will not yield confirm it.

The President has well maintained his position, and under trying circumstances acquitted himself in a manner that will be better appreciated in the future than now. It is not strange that he is sometimes deceived and fails to discriminate rightly between true and false friends, and has, though rarely, been the victim of the prejudices and duplicity of others.

The Cabinet, if a little discordant in some of its elements, has been united as regards him. Chase has doubtless some aspirations for the place of Chief Executive, which are conflicting. Seward has, I think, surrendered any expectation for the present, and shows wisdom in giving the President a fair support. Blair and Bates are earnest friends of the President, and so, I think, is Usher. Stanton is insincere, but will, I have no doubt, act with Seward under present circumstances.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 1: 1861 – March 30, 1864, p. 499-500

Monday, January 22, 2018

Senator Salmon P. Chase to Edward S. Hamlin, July 19, 1852

Washington City, July 19, 1852.

My Dear Sir, I say as usual, “ditto to Mr. Burke.” The ideas of your letter are my own. I fear more danger — much more to the cause of Freedom from Pierce's election than from Scott's. Still, if the least dependence can be placed on the professions of the Freesoil Democrats who are supporting him, even he will not be able to do much mischief should the vote for the Pittsburgh nominees prove large & their support warm. Clay writes me the cause moves steadily on in Kentucky: and I think it probable that all the boarder slave states will be represented at Pittsburg, as well as all the Free States. This will make a great impression, & if the vote shall correspond, and the Freesoil Democrats shall prove true, not much need be apprehended even from Pierce.

The present duty seems to be that of putting the Pittsburg Convention on the right ground and under the right name — then getting the right candidates and then giving the largest possible vote. My judgment is that it should assume the name of the Independent Democracy — adopt the Buffalo Platform — modified by the introduction of judicious Land Reform & European Freedom Resolutions — and nominate Hale for President & Spaulding or some other good western democrat for Vice & make the best fight possible. Much has been said to me about receiving the nomination, but my judgment is against it. Hale & Sumner urge me & our friends in the House I think agree with them — that as a Democrat I would carry the largest votes — but I think Hale is good enough Democrat — far better certainly than Cass or Buchanan or Pierce or King; and I wish to be out of the scrape for many reasons.

I hear from Cleveland that there is a good deal of feeling there against me, & I should not be surprised if there were some in Cincinnati.

You will see my letter to Butler before long. The Herald Correspondent here applied to me to allow its appearance first in that paper, which I consented to thinking it would be read by more of the class I wish to reach, than in any other paper at first. I hope you will approve of it.

I wish very much that you wd. buy the Nonpariel & put Miller there, or get somebody else to do so. I will cheerfully contribute $500.

P. S. I want to ask you two or three questions in confidence, and to beg of you perfectly frank answers.

Do you think I ought to be reelected? Do you think there is any probability of my reelection; and, in this connection, what so far as you know are the sentiments of the Democrats towards me? What do you think my course ought to be in relation to state politics?

SOURCE: Diary and correspondence of Salmon P. ChaseAnnual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1902, Vol. 2, p. 243-4

Thursday, September 14, 2017

Senator Charles Sumner to Governor John A. Andrew, January 26, 1861

Washington, January 26, 1861.

My Dear Andrew, — Yesterday I was with the Attorney-General,1 an able, experienced, Northern Democratic lawyer, with the instincts of our profession on the relation of cause and effect. He drew me into his room, but there were clerks there; opening the door into another room, there were clerks there, too; and then traversing five different rooms, he found them all occupied by clerks; when, opening the door into the entry, he told me he was “surrounded by Secessionists,” who would report in an hour to the newspapers any interview between us, — that he must see me at some other time and place, — that everything was bad as could be, — that Virginia would certainly secede,—that the conspiracy there was the most wide-spread and perfect, — that all efforts to arrest it by offers of compromise, or by the circulation of Clemens's speech, were no more than that (snapping his fingers), — that Kentucky would surely follow, and Maryland, too. “Stop, Mr. Attorney,” said I, “not so fast. I agree with you to this point, — Maryland would go, except for the complication of the National Capital, which the North will hold, and also the road to it.”

Of course you will keep Massachusetts out of all these schemes. If you notice the proposition for a commission, say that it is summoned to make conditions which contemplate nothing less than surrender of cherished principles, so that she can have nothing to do with it.

My opinion has been fixed for a long time. All the Slave States will go, except Delaware, and perhaps Maryland and Missouri, — to remain with us Free States.

The mistake of many persons comes from this, — they do not see that we are in the midst of a revolution, where reason is dethroned, and passion rules instead. If this were a mere party contest, then the circulation of speeches and a few resolutions might do good. But what are such things in a revolution? As well attempt to hold a man-of-war in a tempest by a little anchor borrowed from Jamaica Pond; and this is what I told the Boston Committee with regard to their petition .

I have but one prayer: Stand firm, keep every safeguard of Human Rights on our statute-book, and save Massachusetts glorious and true.

Ever yours,
Charles Sumner.
_______________

1 Hon. Edwin M. Stanton.

SOURCE: Charles Sumner; His Complete Works, Volume 7, p. 191-3

Thursday, August 24, 2017

Diary of Gideon Welles: Tuesday, September 15, 1863

The President read the paper which he had drawn up. Mr. Chase proposed as a preferable course that the President should, pursuant to the act of the 3rd of March last, suspend by proclamation the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus on military questions. This proposition, after discussion, met with favor from all, and the Council adjourned to 1 P.M. for Mr. Seward to prepare a proclamation. On meeting at one o'clock, the draft which Mr. Seward had prepared was criticized and after some modifications was ordered to be recopied and carried into effect. All came into the arrangement cordially after Stanton read the reports of sundry provost marshals and others detailing the schemes practiced for defeating the draft.

The question is raised whether the executive can suspend the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus without Congressional action. If the executive can suspend in the cases specified, which is generally admitted, the policy of falling back on the act of the 3d of March last is more than questionable, for if Congress has, as claimed, the exclusive right, can it delegate away that right? If the right is in the Executive, it is not wise nor proper to place the proclamation on the delegated grant in the law of last March which is made the basis of the proclamation. I think I am not mistaken in my impression that Mr. Chase is one of those who has claimed that the President had the constitutional right to suspend the privilege of this writ, yet he was to-day sensitive beyond all others in regard to it and proposed relying on the act of Congress instead of the constitutional Executive prerogative. He feared if the President acted on Executive authority a civil war in the Free States would be inevitable; fears popular tumult, would not offend Congress, etc. I have none of his apprehensions, and if it is the duty of the President, would not permit legislative aggression, but maintain the prerogative of the Executive.

Commander Shufeldt, an officer of ability, gives me trouble by a restless but natural desire for change and more active employment. Wishes an independent command, is dissatisfied to be in the South Atlantic Squadron. Inadmissible. It is only recently he has been reinstated in the service, on my special recommendation and by my efforts, against the remonstrance of many officers and their friends in and out of Congress. Now to give him choice of position over others who never left the service would be unjust. I cannot do it. Duty on his present station is arduous, irksome, exhausting; some one must perform it were he to leave.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 1: 1861 – March 30, 1864, p. 433-4

Thursday, August 10, 2017

Senator bentonSalmon P. Chase to Edward S. Hamlin, December 17, 1849

Washington, Decr. 17, 1849.

My Dear Hamlin, I have just comedown from the Capitol. In the Senate we had a brief Executive Session — nothing done. Today we were to have elected Committees but the Old Line Caucus had not arranged matters to suit them, & the elections were put off till tomorrow. You know that in the Senate the Majority party selects in Caucus the majorities of such committees as they think fit so to organize & minorities on the others, & the minority party in caucus selects the balance. The committees thus selected have been hitherto adopted by common consent. What will be done tomorrow I cannot say. There was trouble yesterday between the friends of Benton & Calhoun in Caucus. I have not been invited to the Democratic Caucus. I do not think I should attend, as matters now stand, if I was: but it is not impossible that both Hale and I shall go in before the session closes. To a democratic Senator who spoke to me on the subject I answered that I thought that having been elected exclusively by Democratic & free democratic votes I ought to be invited; but whether I wd. attend or not I was not prepared to say. There was a discussion or conversation about inviting me; but of what character I dont know.

In the House they have been balloting, or rather voting for Speaker. Since the menaces of the Southern men the other day and their insolent proscription of every man, as unfit to receive their votes, except slavery extensionists the northern democrats have got their backs up and so many of them now refuse to vote for any extensionist that it seems impossible to elect any man whom the slaveholding democrats' will support, except by a coalition between these last, aided by the doughfaced democrats & the slaveholding Whigs. Rumors of such a coalition have been rife for a day or two; but the candidate of the extensionists, Lynn Boyd, has not yet received votes enough to enable those Southern Whigs who are willing to go for him, to effect his election. I am glad to be able to say that the Ohio delegation is firm on the side of the Free States, with two exceptions Miller & Hoagland. Until today I hoped that Col. Hoagland would abide with the body of the Ohio democrats; but he gave way today & voted for Boyd. This is the more to be regretted as Boyd was, as I hear, one of the foremost in clapping & applauding Toombs's insolent disunion speech the other day; and after he had closed his harrangue went to him & clapped him on the back in the most fraternizing manner.

Who, then, can be speaker? you will ask. To which I can only reply, I really cannot say. At present it seems as if the contest must be determined final by the Extensionists against the Anti Extensionists without reference to old party lines. An attempt was made today at a bargain between the Hunker Whigs & Hunker Democrats. A Kentucky member offered a resolution that Withrop should be Speaker; Forney, Clerk; & somebody, I can not say who, Sargeant at arms. The democrats voted almost unanimously to lay this resolution on the table — the Whigs, in great numbers, voted against this disposition of it. This looks well for those Hunkers who affect such a holy horror of bargains.

With these facts before you, you can form, better than I can, an idea of the probable shape of things in the future. To me it seems as if the process of reorganization was going on pretty rapidly in the northern democracy. I am much mistaken, if any candidate who will not take the ground assumed in my letter to Breslin, can obtain the support of the Democracy of the North or of the Country.

We are all looking with much interest to Ohio. Mr. Carter has received several letters urging him to be a candidate for Governor: but he will not consent except as a matter of necessity. He is a true man here, and so, above most, is Amos E. Wood. Judge Myers would be a very acceptable candidate to the Free Democracy:—  so, also, I should think would be Dimmock. My own regard for Dimmock is very strong. Judge Wood would encounter, I learn, some opposition from the friends of Tod, and his decisions in some slavery cases would be brought up against him especially with Beaver for an opponent. Still, in many respects, he wd. be a very strong man. After all it is chiefly important that the resolutions of the Convention should be of the right stamp & that the candidate should place himself unreservedly upon them.

As to the Free Democratic State Convention, — I think it desirable on many accounts that one should be held; and that it be known soon that one is to be held. I do not think it expedient to call it expressly to nominate, but rather to consider the expediency of nomination & promote, generally the cause of Free Democracy.

I have written to Pugh urging the adoption by the House, if the Senate is not organized, of resolutions sustaining their members in Congress. I think much good would be done by resolutions to this effect.

Resolved, That the determination evinced by many slave state members of Congress, claiming to be Whigs & Democrats, to support for the office of Speaker no known & decided opponent of Slavery Extension, and indeed no man who will not, in the exercise of his official powers, constitute the Committees of the House of Representatives so as to promote actively or by inaction the extension of slavery, is an affront & indignity to the whole people of the Free States, nearly unanimous in opposition to such extension.

Resolved, That we cordially approve of the conduct of those representatives from Ohio who have, since the manifestation of this determination on the part of members for the Slave States, steadily refused to vote for any Slavery Extensionists; and pledge to them, on behalf of the State of Ohio, an earnest support & adequate maintenance.

I give these resolutions merely as specimens. They are not so strong as I would introduce. Perhaps, indeed, it will be thought best to introduce a resolution appropriating a specific sum to be applied to the support of the members here in case the continued failure to organize the House shall leave them without other resources.

The bare introduction of such resolutions into our Legislature would have the happiest effect. Can't you help this thing forward? I dont want these sample resolutions used in any way except as mere specimens & suggestions.

So far as developments have yet been made the Administration has no settled policy. In the present state of the country I confess I do not much fear Cuban annexation.

Write me often.
[SALMON P. CHASE.]

SOURCE: Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1902, Vol. 2, p. 189-92

Friday, August 4, 2017

Salmon P. Chase to Charles Sumner, September 15, 1849

New Haven, Sep. 15, 1849.

My Dear Sumner: I wish I could have an opportunity to commune with you, and hear of all your doings at your Convention, and what was the spirit that animated the Free Democracy there assembled. I find no man so congenial to me as yourself; though I do not pretend to be up to your theories in all respects. I fear that this world is not to be redeemed from its ten thousand self inflicted curses so easily as we flatter ourselves at the outset of any reform enterprise, and, especially, before brought much in contact with the machinery behind the scenes, by which the movements in view are regulated.

Still shall we do nothing because we can not do best, or by directest means? I think otherwise. Let us do what our hands find to do, and by such means as we can, ever caring that they be honest so that our consciences reproach us not.

I want to see your Address. I am sure it must be worthy of you; though you labored under so many disadvantages in the composition of it. I could hardly pardon myself if I could imagine that your kind compliance with my wishes has abated anything of its force or persuasiveness.

For this is a time when we need our strongest utterances and most animating exhortations. It is the day of reaction the world over, I fear. And we must take onto ourselves the whole armor of Freedom if we would withstand the assaults of the adversary.

I am in doubt about the course of our friends in New York. On the one hand, the fact that John Van Buren, who has so fully and thoroughly committed himself with us, not only last fall but this Summer at Cleveland, advised the union inspires me with hope that he and his friends mean to bring the Democracy of New York unreservedly upon our platform, and have assured ground for believing that they can do it; on the other hand, I know so well how difficult a task it is that they have undertaken, and how easily, if adhesion to the antislavery articles of our platform be not made a test, men can creep into office and into Congress who will betray the people of the Free States as they have been betrayed over and over again, that I feel very, very uneasy about the issue. I know no better way now however than to put the best face possible on the matter, fight the battle through with the Whigs this fall, and prepare the old Liberty men and the Antislavery Whigs, and the Antislavery Democrats who constitute the life and soul of the Free Democracy, to rally anew on the Buffalo Platform, and break up the union, if the union shall be found to necessitate an abandonment or essential sacrifice of our Antislavery Positions.

Next winter will determine much. We shall know each other and how we stand and where we stand. For one I'll not budge an inch from my old positions. Nothing less than the Divorce of the General Government from slavery will satisfy me. I originated this expression in 1841 in the first Liberty Address published in Ohio, or west of the Mountains; and I mean to be faithful to its entire import. I have full confidence that at least two men in the House will stand firmly on the same ground.

But we are not to have Palfrey. At least so would it seem from the results of the last trial. Has he reconsidered his determination not to stand again? He ought not to think a moment of declining. If he adheres to that resolution, however, it does seem to me that nothing can be done half so well as to have you just move into the district, and take the nomination in his place. Every man who votes for him would vote for you, and none of that spirit of persistence in wrongdoing which is so active against him could be brought to operate against you. I do hope, if Palfrey absolutely declines, that this will be thought of him.

Please write me at Philadelphia, care of C. D. Cleveland, 3 Clinton St. and send me a weekly Republican containing the report of your Convention and anything else you may think of interest to me. I expect to be in Philadelphia, Wednesday morning, and to remain there two or three days.

Ever faithfully your friend,
[SALMON P. CHASE.]

SOURCE: Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1902, Vol. 2, p. 183-5

Wednesday, August 2, 2017

Salmon P. Chase to Benjamin F. Butler,* July 26, 1849

Cincinnati, July 26, 1849.

My Dear Sir — The Free democracy of Ohio naturally regard with a good deal of solicitude the movement now made in New York with a view to Union between the Free democracy and supporters of General Cass: and as one of their number I have thought it best to state frankly to you the light in which the matter appears to me, and to ask in return an equally frank expression of your own thoughts upon it. Union between the different sections of the Democratic party is undoubtedly much to be desired: but it must be a union upon principle. The Buffalo Convention promulgated a Platform of Democratic Doctrines & Measures which those who composed that body pledged themselves in the most solemn manner to maintain and defend, until victory should crown the efforts of the free Democracy. That platform we adopted, as the National Platform of Freedom in opposition to the sectional Platform of Slavery. I have never met a Democrat of the Free States who did not admit that every resolution adopted by the Convention embodied sound democratic opinion. The resolution least likely to meet such general approval was that in relation to the Tariff and this resolution, as you are well aware, was the least palatable to me. Still it is unquestionable that this resolution expresses quite as distinctly the doctrine of a Tariff for Revenue, in contradistinction from a tariff for Protection, as the resolutions generally adopted on that subject in Democratic Conventions. The Buffalo Platform then is the Democratic Platform on which we are pledged to stand, at least until in National Convention the Free Democracy shall see fit to modify it, in harmony with the progress of Opinion. I see that the Pennsylvanian suggests as the basis of Union in New York general forgiveness on the part of the Cass Democrats to the Barnburners for the crime of supporting Martin Van Buren, and, in consideration thereof, the abandonment on the part of the Barnburners of the Buffalo Platform. I have no fear that any terms so degrading will be acceeded to by the generous spirits with whom you & I fought last year the most important political battle which this country has ever witnessed. But I have feared that a desire for union and the hope of a speedy triumph over their ancient antagonists the Whigs might lead them to take somewhat lower grounds on the subject of slavery than was taken at Buffalo. I should regard this as a deplorable mistake, to say no worse. I do not think that the Democracy could be reunited by such a step. You would leave out of the party formed by such a compromise, the entire body of the old liberty men and nearly all the Progressive Whigs who united with us last fall mainly on the Anti Slavery grounds: but those principles and views on political questions generally are so little whiggish, in the conservative sense of that term, that we may fairly assert them to be as Democratic in the main as our own. Besides this loss of numerical force, there would be the loss, still more to be deprecated, of moral power. The surrender or modification of Anti Slavery principle for the sake of Hunker affiliation and support would provoke and justify the contemptuous sarcasm of the entire Whig press, giving it a vantage of attack, which it would be prompt to avail itself of: Under these circumstances where would the Democracy be in future struggles, in nearly every one of the Free States? Borne down, I think, by a tide of opinion setting against it as untrue to its own principles & retrograded from its own position, much better it seems to me, will it be for the Free Democracy to maintain its own organization firmly and resolutely, and trust for growth for individual accessions and the junctions of small bodies in counties and towns, than to form any union upon the ground of compromised principle. There is no occasion for haste. The campaign of 1852 will not be opened for more than a year. The Free Democracy is daily gaining strength. The people approve our views and measures. The Old hunkers cannot go into the Battle of '52, without uniting with us on our own platform, except to meet inevitable and disastrous defeat. Not many of them have any such love for the maxims of Hunkerism as will make them covet political martyrdom. They must therefore advance to our platform however reluctantly or gradually. Better wait for them where we are than in our haste to rush to their embraces, leave our principles behind us.

I was much pleased by the remarks of John Van Buren at Cleveland.1 He took the true ground “No more Slave States: No Slave Territory No encouragement But rather discouragement of Slavery by the General Government, and no support of any candidate for the Presidency who is not with us upon the platform” of course I don't give his language, but his views only. The last is the test clause. There are enough who will shout forth the three first propositions: but shrink from their practical application by the fourth, and agreement in the application must necessarily be the only secure basis of Union: for no other union will stand the trial of a nomination for the Presidency if that nomination would fall on a candidate of proslavery or doubtful principles. I hope that John Van Buren's sentiments truly reflect the opinions of the Free Democracy of New York. If they do whatever may become of the proposed union between the Free Democrats and hunkers in your state, the union of the Free Democracy of the union — far more important to the country and the cause of human freedom & Progress in general — is safe and its ultimate triumph as certain as the truth of its glorious principles. I enclose to you a communication to the Toledo Republican written, I suppose, by Mr. Hamlin the President of our Board of Public Works, which will still further shew you the views which prevail among us — I shall be glad to hear from you as soon as your leisure will permit and meanwhile remain
_______________

* From letter-book 6, pp. 113 and 194-195. Benjamin Franklin Butler, 1795-1858; Attorney General of the United States 1833-1838; Acting Secretary of War October, 1836-March, 1837. Mr. Butler had presented Van Buren's name at the Buffalo convention in 1848.

1 Probably at the Northwest Ordinance Convention, July 12. Cf. T. C.Smith Liberty and Free Soil Parties, 177.

SOURCE: Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1902, Vol. 2, p. 180-2

Thursday, July 27, 2017

Ralph Waldo Emerson’s Speech on Affairs in Kansas, at the Kansas Relief Meeting in Cambridge Massachusetts, Wednesday Evening, September 10, 1856

I regret, with all this company, the absence of Mr. Whitman of Kansas, whose narrative was to constitute the interest of this meeting. Mr. Whitman is not here; but knowing, as we all do, why he is not, what duties kept him at home, he is more than present. His vacant chair speaks for him. For quite other reasons, I had been wiser to have stayed at home, unskilled as I am to address a political meeting, but it is impossible for the most recluse to extricate himself from the questions of the times.

There is this peculiarity about the case of Kansas, that all the right is on one side. We hear the screams of hunted wives and children answered by the howl of the butchers. The testimony of the telegraphs from St. Louis and the border confirm the worst details. The printed letters of the border ruffians avow the facts. When pressed to look at the cause of the mischief in the Kansas laws, the President falters and declines the discussion; but his supporters in the Senate, Mr. Cass, Mr. Geyer, Mr. Hunter, speak out, and declare the intolerable atrocity of the code. It is a maxim that all party spirit produces the incapacity to receive natural impressions from facts; and our recent political history has abundantly borne out the maxim. But these details that have come from Kansas are so horrible, that the hostile press have but one word in reply, namely, that it is all exaggeration, It is an Abolition lie. Do the Committee of Investigation say that the outrages have been overstated? Does their dismal catalogue of private tragedies show it? Do the private letters? Is it an exaggeration, that Mr. Hopps of Somerville, Mr. Hoyt of Deerfield, Mr. Jennison of Groton, Mr. Phillips of Berkshire, have been murdered? That Mr. Robinson of Fitchburg has been imprisoned? Rev. Mr. Nute of Springfield seized, and up to this time we have no tidings of his fate?

In these calamities under which they suffer, and the worse which threaten them, the people of Kansas ask for bread, clothes, arms and men, to save them alive, and enable them to stand against these enemies of the human race. They have a right to be helped, for they have helped themselves.

This aid must be sent, and this is not to be doled out as an ordinary charity; but bestowed up to the magnitude of the want, and, as has been elsewhere said, “on the scale of a national action.” I think we are to give largely, lavishly, to these men. And we must prepare to do it. We must learn to do with less, live in a smaller tenement, sell our apple-trees, our acres, our pleasant houses. I know people who are making haste to reduce their expenses and pay their debts, not with a view to new accumulations, but in preparation to save and earn for the benefit of the Kansas emigrants.

We must have aid from individuals, — we must also have aid from the State. I know that the last Legislature refused that aid. I know that lawyers hesitate on technical grounds, and wonder what method of relief the Legislature will apply. But I submit that, in a case like this, where citizens of Massachusetts, legal voters here, have emigrated to national territory under the sanction of every law, and are then set on by highwaymen, driven from their new homes, pillaged, and numbers of them killed and scalped, and the whole world knows that this is no accidental brawl, but a systematic war to the knife, and in defiance of all laws and liberties, I submit that the Governor and Legislature should neither slumber nor sleep till they have found out how to send effectual aid and comfort to these poor farmers, or else should resign their seats to those who can. But first let them hang the halls of the State House with black crape, and order funeral service to be said there for the citizens whom they were unable to defend.

We stick at the technical difficulties. I think there never was a people so choked and stultified by forms. We adore the forms of law, instead of making them vehicles of wisdom and justice. I like the primary assembly. I own I have little esteem for governments. I esteem them only good in the moment when they are established. I set the private man first. He only who is able to stand alone is qualified to be a citizen. Next to the private man, I value the primary assembly, met to watch the government and to correct it. That is the theory of the American State, that it exists to execute the will of the citizens, is always responsible to them, and is always to be changed when it does not. First, the private citizen, then the primary assembly, and the government last.

In this country for the last few years the government has been the chief obstruction to the common weal. Who doubts that Kansas would have been very well settled, if the United States had let it alone? The government armed and led the ruffians against the poor farmers. I do not know any story so gloomy as the politics of this country for the last twenty years, centralizing ever more manifestly round one spring, and that a vast crime, and ever more plainly, until it is notorious that all promotion, power and policy are dictated from one source, — illustrating the fatal effects of a false position to demoralize legislation and put the best people always at a disadvantage; — one crime always present, always to be varnished over, to find fine names for; and we free-statesmen, as accomplices to the guilt, ever in the power of the grand offender.

Language has lost its meaning in the universal cant. Representative Government is really misrepresentative; Union is a conspiracy against the Northern States which the Northern States are to have the privilege of paying for; the adding of Cuba and Central America to the slave marts is enlarging the area of Freedom. Manifest Destiny, Democracy, Freedom, fine names for an ugly thing. They call it otto of rose and lavender, — I call it bilge water. They call it Chivalry and Freedom; I call it the stealing all the earnings of a poor man and the earnings of his little girl and boy, and the earnings of all that shall come from him, his children's children forever.

But this is Union, and this is Democracy; and our poor people, led by the nose by these fine words, dance and sing, ring bells and fire cannon, with every new link of the chain which is forged for their limbs by the plotters in the Capitol.

What are the results of law and union? There is no Union. Can any citizen of Massachusetts travel in honor through Kentucky and Alabama and speak his mind? Or can any citizen of the Southern country who happens to think kidnapping a bad thing, say so? Let Mr. Underwood of Virginia answer. Is it to be supposed that there are no men in Carolina who dissent from the popular sentiment now reigning there? It must happen, in the variety of human opinions, that there are dissenters. They are silent as the grave. Are there no women in that country, — women, who always carry the conscience of a people? Yet we have not heard one discordant whisper.

In the free States, we give a snivelling support to slavery. The judges give cowardly interpretations to the law, in direct opposition to the known foundation of all law, that every immoral statute is void. And here of Kansas, the President says: “Let the complainants go to the courts;” though he knows that when the poor plundered farmer comes to the court, he finds the ringleader who has robbed him, dismounting from his own horse, and unbuckling his knife to sit as his judge.

The President told the Kansas Committee that the whole difficulty grew from “the factions spirit of the Kansas people, respecting institutions which they need not have concerned themselves about.” A very remarkable speech from a Democratic President to his fellow citizens, that they are not to concern themselves with institutions which they alone are to create and determine. The President is a lawyer, and should know the statutes of the land. But I borrow the language of an eminent man, used long since, with far less occasion: “If that be law, let the ploughshare be run under the foundations of the Capitol;” — and if that be Government, extirpation is the only cure.

I am glad to see that the terror at disunion and anarchy is disappearing. Massachusetts, in its heroic day, had no government — was an anarchy. Every man stood on his own feet, was his own governor; and there was no breach of peace from Cape Cod to Mount Hoosac. California, a few years ago, by the testimony of all people at that time in the country, had the best government that ever existed. Pans of gold lay drying outside of every man’s tent, in perfect security. The land was measured into little strips of a few feet wide, all side by side. A bit of ground that your hand could cover was worth one or two hundred dollars, on the edge of your strip; and there was no dispute. Every man throughout the country was armed with knife and revolver, and it was known that instant justice would be administered to each offence, and perfect peace reigned. For the Saxon man, when he is well awake, is not a pirate but a citizen, all made of hooks and eyes, and links himself naturally to his brothers, as bees hook themselves to one another and to their queen in a loyal swarm.

But the hour is coming when the strongest will not be strong enough. A harder task will the new revolution of the nineteenth century be, than was the revolution of the eighteenth century. I think the American Revolution bought its glory cheap. If the problem was new, it was simple. If there were few people, they were united, and the enemy 3,000 miles off. But now, vast property, gigantic interests, family connections, webs of party, cover the land with a network that immensely multiplies the dangers of war.

Fellow Citizens, in these times full of the fate of the Republic, I think the towns should hold town meetings, and resolve themselves into Committees of Safety, go into permanent sessions, adjourning from week to week, from month to month. I wish we could send the Sergeant-at-arms to stop every American who is about to leave the country. Send home every one who is abroad, lest they should find no country to return to. Come home and stay at home, while there is a country to save. When it is lost it will be time enough then for any who are luckless enough to remain alive to gather up their clothes and depart to some land where freedom exists.

SOURCE: The Works of Ralph Waldo Emerson, Volume 11: Miscellanies, p. 241-7; Franklin B. Sanborn, The Life and Letters of John Brown, p. 500

Monday, May 1, 2017

Diary of Gideon Welles: Saturday, June 6, 1863

Am unhappy over our affairs. The Army of the Potomac is doing but little; I do not learn that much is expected or intended. The failure at Chancellorsville has never been satisfactorily explained. Perhaps it cannot be. Some of the officers say if there had been no whiskey in the army after crossing the Rappahannock we should have had complete success. But the President and Halleck are silent on this subject.

How far Halleck is sustaining Grant at Vicksburg I do not learn. He seems heavy and uncertain in regard to matters there. A further failure at V. will find no justification. To-day he talks of withdrawing a portion of the small force at Port Royal. I am not, however, as anxious as some for an immediate demonstration on Charleston. There are, I think, strong reasons for deferring action for a time, unless the army is confident of success by approaches on Morris Island. Halleck is confident the place can be so taken. But while he expresses this belief, he is not earnest in carrying it into effect. He has suddenly broken out with zeal for Vicksburg, and is ready to withdraw most of the small force at Port Royal and send it to the Mississippi. Before they could reach Grant, the fate of Vicksburg will be decided. If such a movement is necessary now, it was weeks ago, while we were in consultation for army work in South Carolina and Georgia.

Halleck inspires no zeal in the army or among our soldiers. Stanton is actually hated by many officers, and is more intimate with certain extreme partisans in Congress — the Committee on the Conduct of War and others — than with the Executive Administration and military men. The Irish element is dissatisfied with the service, and there is an unconquerable prejudice on the part of many whites against black soldiers. But all our increased military strength now comes from the negroes. Partyism is stronger with many in the Free States than patriotism. Every coward and niggardly miser opposes the War. The former from fear, lest he should be drafted; the latter to avoid taxes.

The examination at the Naval School has closed, and the practice ship, the Macedonian, sails to-day. The report of the board is highly commendatory of the school. I have, amidst multiplied duties, tried to make the school useful, and have met with opposition and obstruction when I should have had support.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 1: 1861 – March 30, 1864, p. 323-5

Thursday, February 16, 2017

Diary of John Beauchamp Jones: February 15, 1863

Already, as if quite certain that the great Northwest would speedily withdraw from the Eastern United States, our people are discussing the eventualities of such a momentous occurrence. The most vehement opposition to the admission of any of the non-slaveholding States, whose people have invaded our country and shed the blood of our people, into this Confederacy, is quite manifest in this city. But Virginia, “the Old Mother,” would, I think, after due hesitation, take back her erring children, Ohio, Illinois, Indiana, and perhaps one or two more, if they earnestly desired to return to her parental protection.

Some of the Cotton States might revolt at such a project, and even the cabinet might oppose the scheme of adding several powerful free States to the Confederacy; but it would not all suffice to prevent it, if they desire to join us. It is true, the constitution would have to be modified, for it is not to be supposed that slaves would be held in any of the States referred to; but then slavery would be recognized by its proper term, and ample guarantees would be agreed upon by the great free States which abandon the United States on the issue of emancipation.

Ohio, Indiana, and Illinois, added to the thirteen Confederate States, would speedily constitute us a people of sufficient military power to defy the menaces of the arms of the greatest powers of the earth; and the commercial and agricultural prosperity of the country would amaze the world.

I am of the opinion that Virginia, Maryland, Delaware, Kentucky, North Carolina, Tennessee, Arkansas, and Missouri would form a league of union with Ohio, Illinois, and Indiana, even if the rest of the Southern States were to reject the alliance. But who can foresee the future through the smoke of war, and amid the clash of bayonets? Nevertheless, division and subdivision would relieve all of the burden of debt, for they would repudiate the greater part, if not the whole, of the indebtedness of both the present governments, which has been incurred in ravaging the country and cutting each other's throats. The cry will be: “We will not pay the price of blood — for the slaughter of our brothers!”

SOURCE: John Beauchamp Jones, A Rebel War Clerk's Diary at the Confederate States Capital, Volume 1, p. 259-60

Thursday, December 1, 2016

Diary of Gideon Welles: Monday, December 29, 1862

We had yesterday a telegram that the British pirate craft Alabama captured the Ariel, one of the Aspinwall steamers, on her passage from New York to Aspinwall, off the coast of Cuba. Abuse of the Navy Department will follow. It will give the mercenaries who are prostituted correspondents, and who have not been permitted to plunder the Government by fraudulent contracts, an opportunity to wreak vengeance for their disappointments.

I am exceedingly glad it was an outward and not a homeward bound vessel. It is annoying when we want all our force on blockade duty to be compelled to detach so many of our best craft on the fruitless errand of searching the wide ocean for this wolf from Liverpool. We shall, however, have a day of reckoning with Great Britain for these wrongs, and I sometimes think I care not how soon nor in what manner that reckoning comes.

A committee has been appointed by the Legislature of Connecticut, of eight persons, to visit Washington and urge the selection of New London for a navy yard. Twelve hundred dollars are appropriated to defray their expenses. There has been no examination by the Legislature of the question, or investigation of the comparative merits of this and other places, or whether an additional yard is needed, or what the real interest of the country requires; but there is, with excusable local pride, a speculating job by a few individuals and a general idea that a government establishment for the expenditure of money will benefit the locality, which controls the movement. As I am a citizen of Connecticut, there is a hope that I may be persuaded by personal considerations to debase myself,—forget my duty and make this selection for that locality regardless of the wants or true interests of the country. I have proposed to transfer the limited and circumscribed yard at Philadelphia to League Island, where there is an abundance of room, fresh water, and other extraordinary advantages. We do not want more yards, certainly not east of the Hudson. We do need a government establishment of a different character from any we now have, for the construction, repair, and preservation of iron vessels. League Island on the Delaware combines all these required advantages, is far in the interior, remote from assault in war, and is in the vicinity of iron and coal, is away from the sea, etc., etc. New London has none of these advantages, but is located in my native State. My friends and my father's friends are there, and I am urged to forget my country and favor that place. A navy yard is for no one State, but this the Legislature and its committee and thousands of their constituents do not take into consideration; but I must.

The six members of the Cabinet (Smith absent) to-day handed in their respective opinions on the question of dividing the old Commonwealth of Virginia and carving out and admitting a new State. As Stanton and myself returned from the Cabinet-meeting to the Departments, he expressed surprise that I should oppose division, for he thought it politic and wise to plant a Free State south of the Ohio. I thought our duties were constitutional, not experimental, that we should observe and preserve the landmarks, and that mere expediency should not override constitutional obligations. This action was not predicated on the consent of the people of Virginia, legitimately expressed; was arbitrary and without proper authority; was such a departure from, and an undermining of, our system that I could not approve it and feared it was the beginning of the end. As regarded a Free State south of the Ohio, I told him the probabilities were that pretty much all of them would be free by Tuesday when the Proclamation emancipating slaves would be published. The Rebels had appealed to arms in vindication of slavery, were using slaves to carry on the War, and they must be content with the results of that issue; the arbitrament of arms to which they had appealed would be against them. This measure, I thought, we were justified in adopting on the issue presented and as a military necessity, but the breaking up of a State by the General Government without the prescribed forms, innate rights, and the consent of the people fairly and honestly expressed, was arbitrary and wrong. Stanton attempted no defense.

At the meeting to-day, the President read the draft of his Emancipation Proclamation, invited criticism, and finally directed that copies should be furnished to each. It is a good and well-prepared paper, but I suggested that a part of the sentence marked in pencil be omitted.1 Chase advised that fractional parts of States ought not to be exempted. In this I think he is right, and so stated. Practically there would be difficulty in freeing parts of States, and not freeing others, — a clashing between central and local authorities.

There is discontent in the public mind. The management of our public affairs is not satisfactory. Our army operations have been a succession of disappointments. General Halleck has accomplished nothing, and has not the public confidence. General McClellan has intelligence but not decision; operated understandingly but was never prepared. With General Halleck there seems neither military capacity nor decision. I have not heard nor seen a clear and satisfactory proposition or movement on his part yet.

Information reaches us that General Butler has been superseded at New Orleans by General Banks.

The wisdom of this change I question, and so told the President, who called on me one day last week and discussed matters generally. I have not a very exalted opinion of the military qualities of either. Butler has shown ability as a police magistrate both at Baltimore and New Orleans, and in each, but particularly at the latter place, has had a peculiar community to govern. The Navy captured the place and turned it over to his keeping. The President agreed with me that Butler had shown skill in discharging his civil duties, and said he had in view for Butler the command of the valley movement in the Mississippi. Likely he has this in view, but whether Halleck will acquiesce is more questionable. I have reason to believe that Seward has effected this change, and that he has been prompted by the foreigners to do it. Outside the State and War Departments, I apprehend no one was consulted. I certainly was not, and therefore could not apprize any of our naval officers, who are cooperating with the army and by courtesy and right should have been informed. Banks has some ready qualities for civil administration and, if not employed in the field or active military operations, will be likely to acquit himself respectably as a provisional or military governor. He has not the energy, power, ability of Butler, nor, though of loose and fluctuating principles, will he be so reckless and unscrupulous. The officer in command in that quarter must necessarily hold a taut rein.
_______________

1 Just what this suggestion referred to does not appear.

SOURCE: Gideon Welles, Diary of Gideon Welles, Secretary of the Navy Under Lincoln and Johnson, Vol. 1: 1861 – March 30, 1864, p. 207-10

Sunday, November 13, 2016

Salmon P. Chase to Charles Sumner, June 20, 1848

Columbus, June 20, 1848.

My Dear Sir: I thank you for the few words of cheer you sent me on the 12th. I rejoice greatly that Massachusetts is moving. But you will need firmness and courage Taylorism is furious, and would crush all dissent if it had the power.  ———1 few Independent Whigs met together to express their dissent from the nominations were fairly yelled out of their room of meeting. At Cincinnati drunken Taylorites from Kentucky tried their best to break up our meeting, and failed only because the mass was so large that they could not move it. Taylorism is conscious of treason to the Free States, and those who have bowed the knee are enraged at the prospect of losing their reward. But I verily believe that the tocsin which is now gathering the Freemen of the North to the battle of Liberty, rings also the knell of Slavery.

Our Convention has just commenced its session. A large delegation from almost every Congressional District is in attendance. Great enthusiasm and fixedness of purpose are manifested. The delegates from the Reserve say that if a suitable free State candidate is named, the Reserve will give him 13,000 majority over Cass or Taylor and will try hard to roll it up to twenty thousand.

I have no knowledge of Judge M'Lean's position. I hardly think he will feel at liberty to accept an Independent Nomination, having suffered his name to go before the Whig Convention. But he may. He is now at Detroit, but will return to Cincinnati soon.

I suppose the New York Democracy will nominate candidates of their own; but possibly they may yield to the representations which have been made to them and invite a General Conference or Convention.

As things stand I think our Convention will nominate an electoral ticket, and invite a National Convention to assemble at Buffalo, say on the 1st of August. By that time we shall know who are for us and who are against us, and be prepared for advised (?) nominations. For myself I am well content with Hale and content also to take any fit man who will represent our views and concentrate a larger suffrage, if any care for Freedom, Free Territories, and Free Labor.

Corwin, as I feared he would, has bent the knee and received the yoke and goes for Taylor.

Yours faithfully,
[SALMON P. CHASE.]

I will advise by letter to Boston tomorrow of the further action of our Convention. I hope Massachusetts will be well represented at Buffalo.
_______________

1Torn in MS.

SOURCE: Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1902, Vol. 2, p. 137-8

Sunday, September 4, 2016

Salmon P. Chase to Preston King,* Ogdensburgh, New York, July 15, 1847

July 15, [1847.]

I have no reason to suppose that you know anything more of me than what my argt. for Vanzandt last winter made you acquainted with, & perhaps I am unwise in writing you this letter. Still as I think it may be the means of some good to our country & the character I have heard of you induces me to believe that you will treat my communication as made in strict confidence I will proceed with what I have to say, only observ'g that I shall be glad to hear from you in reply & that you may depend on my making no other use of yr. letter than that wh. you expressly authorize.

You are not ignorant that many of the Anti slavery men who have heretofore acted with the Lib. Party are prepared to support Mr. Wright of yr. State for the Presy. upon Wilmot Pro. grd., understand by that term not merely the exclusion of Slavy, from future territorial acquisition, but also a return to the line of policy marked out for the Nat1. Govt, by the Ordc. of ’87, by putting the example & influence of the Govt, on the side of Liby. instead of the side of Slavy. I am persuaded that very many Whigs of the west shall have these sentiments & that shd. the Whig Party commit itself to the support of any Slaveholder — even of Gen. Taylor, Mr. Wright may be elected to the Presy. by the votes of the Free States alone.

If there is any proby. that Mr. W––– may be the candidate of the Wilmot Prov. Democy. for the Presy. it is now very important to ascertain his views. The Lib. Party will hold its nominating Convention in October, and if no candidate of the other parties can be relied on for a firm though temperate & strictly constitutional opposition to Slavy., they will doubtless nominate their own candidates & adhere to them with unanimity: whereas shd. Mr. Wright be likely to be a candidate upon the grounds I have indicated, a vast number of them wd. feel it to be their duty to give him their cordial support.

For myself I sympathize strongly with the Dem. Party in almost everything except its submission to slaveholding leadership & dictation. I cannot abide the crack of the whip, but if the Demo. Party takes independent ground, & follows boldly the lead of its own principles, then I am willing to give to its nominations my humble support.

I was shewn yesterday a letter written by a gentleman, represented to be an active politician of your State &claiming to be possessed of the views of “the Great Man of New York,” meaning Mr. Wright. This writer informs his correspondent Mr. Taylor, the Editor of the Signal, that Mr. W. is prepared to render important aid to the election of Gen. T. & suggests the connection of Mr. W's name as can. for the V. Py. with that of the Gen. as can. for the Py. I can hardly imagine that there is any ground for this representation. If Mr. W. be willing to accept such aposition, he is not, of course, the man to be the leader of the Democracy of the Country in the impending struggle with the Slavehg. Arisy. & its supporters North & South. Surely such a leadership is a far more honorable position than a nomination for the V. Presidency upon any ticket whatever. I have misconceived the character of Mr. Wright if he does not so regard it. And it does seem to me that if the N. Democy. will but maintain the ground, which you & others marked out first last winter, its success will not be less signal than its position will be glorious.

As to Gen. T. I have reason to know him to be as honest as he is brave; but he is certainly not a democrat in our understanding of the word or in any proper understanding of it: and it seems to me that it wd. be nothing short of suicidal vanity, to indulge the expectation that a man in his circumstances & with his connexions can ever be relied on as a friend of the Wilmot Proviso or any measure at all antislavery in its character. I shall feel much obliged by the favor of an early reply & remain
_______________

* From letter-book 6, pp. 96-97. Preston King, 1806-1865, Member of Congress, 1843-1847,1849-1853. At this time a leader of the “Barnburner” wing of the New York Democrats. He became a Republican in 1854, and was United States Senator 1857-1863.

SOURCE: Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1902, Vol. 2, p. 120-2

Monday, August 15, 2016

Amos A. Lawrence to David R. Atchison, March 31, 1855

(Cottage Farm Near) Boston, March 31, 1855.

My Dear Sir, — I take the liberty to address you upon a subject in which I have a common interest with yourself, viz.: the settlement of Kansas. Since the repeal of the “Missouri Compromise” by the last Congress, this Territory has attracted the attention of distant not less than of the neighboring States; for it is evident that there must be decided the question whether there shall be slave or free labor over a vast region of the United States now unsettled. You and your friends would make slave States, and we wish to prevent your doing so. The stake is a large one, and the ground chosen. Let the fight be a fair one. | It is to secure this that I address you. Your influence is requisite to restrain your people from doing great injustice to actual settlers, and provoking them to retaliatory measures, the consequences of which would be most deplorable. I beg you, my dear sir, to use your efforts to avert so great an evil.

Let the contest be waged honorably, for unless it be so, no settlement of the question can ever be final. It is already reported here that large bodies of Missourians will cross over merely to vote, and that they may gain this election as they did the last. But how delusive to suppose that settlers who have come from one to two thousand miles with their families will acquiesce in any election gained by such means, or that any future election can be satisfactory which is not conducted according to law. The advantage of proximity is yours; your people can afford to be not only just, but generous, in this matter. The repeal of the law which secured this Territory against the introduction of slavery is considered by most men in the “free States” to be a breach of the national faith; and it is not unreasonable for those who have gone there to find a home to expect a compliance with the laws as they are. Those from New England have gone in good faith and at their own expense. They are chiefly farmers; but among them are good representatives from all professions. Some have considerable property, but all have rights and principles which they value more than money, and, I may say, more than life itself. Neither is there any truth in the assertion that they are abolitionists. No person of that stripe is known to have gone from here; nor is it known here that any such have gone from other States. But oppression may make them abolitionists of the most dangerous kind.

There has been much said in regard to an extensive organization here, which is wholly untrue. I assure you, sir, that what has been undertaken here will be carried on fairly and equitably. The management is in the hands of men of prudence, of wealth and determination; they are not politicians, nor are they aspirants for office: they are determined, if it be possible, to see that justice is done to those who have ventured their all in that Territory. May I not hope, sir, that you will second this effort to see that the contest shall be carried on fairly? If fairly beaten you may be sure that our people will acquiesce, however reluctant; but they never will yield to injustice.

Respectfully yours,
A. A. L.

SOURCE: William Lawrence, Life of Amos A. Lawrence: With Extracts from His Diary and Correspondence, p. 89-92