Senator John C. Calhoun to Thomas G. Clemson, April 11, 1847

Fort Hill 11th April 1847

MY DEAR SIR, . . . The spring has been very backward; but the weather has been warm and dry since the commencement of the month, and vegitation has pushed forward with great rapidity. The woods begin to assume their summer garb, and every thing seems gay and cheerful. This morning is a lovely one, of the most agreeable temperature. The birds are sending up their joyous notes in every direction. We, however, begin to want rain, to bring up our corn and cotton, and give vigour to the growth of small grain.

As to politicks, things as yet, continue much as they have been, when I last wrote you. Ritchie continues his abuse, to which I have no objection. He has been long my secret foe, he is now an open and bitter one. Whatever impression he may make against me for the time, will in a short time react. I do not think, that there is the slightest prospect, that the old Hunkers of which he is the Organ, can ever again be resuscitated. They are incredibly corrupt; — alike destitute of honor or honesty. They know, that I have sustained the democratick party for the last ten years, and that without my support, they would have been prostrated forever by the explosion of 1837. They know, that my support has been of the most disinterested character; and yet they hate me, with a deeper hatred, than what they do, their professed opponents, simply because of my opposition to the spoils principle and the caucus Machinery, the only cohesive power, that holds them together. But their days are numbered, and they see it; and hence the gnashing of the teeth, and bitter curses. I take it with perfect calmness. They shall have more cause for Wailling before I am done. The last session is but the prelude to the next, when the day of reconing will commence.

SOURCE: J. Franklin Jameson, Editor, Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1899, Volume II, Calhoun’s Correspondence: Fourth Annual Report of the Historical Manuscripts Commission, Correspondence of John C. Calhoun, p. 726

Senator John C. Calhoun to Duff Green, April 17, 1847*

Fort Hill 17th April 1847

MY DEAR SIR, The mistake, which I think you and the most of my friends make in reference to myself is, that you do not fully realize how completely I hold my own advancement subordinate to what I deem my duty to the Country. Even in the ardour of youthful aspiration, when the Presidency was an object of desire, I never could bring my mind to yield to a measure, or course of policy, which I thought wrong, to obtain that high office; much less can I now, when it is no longer to me an object of desire. Had I arrived at the Presidency by any other way, than an upright, and fearless discharge of what I conscienciously believed to be my duty, I would have been much more flexible, and under the influence of friends; but as it is, when I do not agree with any one portion, they have been too apt to suppose, that I had been influenced by those, with whom I happen to agree. You make this mistake as to my course in 1840. It may be, that the motives of those on the occassion, to which you refer, was such as you suppose; but, be that as it may, in making up my opinion, I had no consultation with them, nor had their opinion in relation to the subject to which you refer, the least influence with me. I am always happy to hear the opinion of my friends and often avail myself of their suggestions, in modifying my course; but rarely ever in taking it. I have said thus much, because, I think, you not infrequently fall into error, in attributing, what is the result of my deliberate judgement to the influence of others.

I entirely agree with you, that the Presidential election ought to be held in reserve, with the restriction, that no one of the old hunkers or their nominee by the Baltimore convention, shall get our support. I regard that portion of the party, as incurably corrupt. In their folly and profligacy they made the Mexican war, without seeing, that the successful general will ever be sure to turn the party, in this country, out of power, which makes a war. They began to see it, when it was too late, and hence their desire to have a Lieut General and to strike a blow at Genl Taylor during the last session. And hence, also, the sending of Genl Scott, in the hope of exciting their mutual Jealousy and dividing their political friends on the Presidential question. Indeed, the movements, on the part of both parties, have looked to that exclusively. It is to be hoped, that the very few, who look exclusively to the country, by taking an independent stand, and keeping in reserve their influence, may finally throw it, where something may be done to advance the publick good.

I am glad to learn, that you have closed a satisfactory arrangement, about your mountain property, and I hope that your expectation will be realized, but let me repeat my hope, expressed on a former occasion, that you will not engage in publishing a paper, unless you can see your way clearly. Your first duty is to your family.

My Charleston friends appear disposed to make an effort to raise the necessary funds to establish a paper for the support of the South, on a solid basis, provided the other Southern States will cooperate, or at least a part of them. But, I fear, that their attention is so much absorbed in the events of the Mexican war, and that they are so much entangled by their party connections, that nothing will be done.

_______________

* Original lent by Mr. R. P. Maynard.

SOURCE: J. Franklin Jameson, Editor, Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1899, Volume II, Calhoun’s Correspondence: Fourth Annual Report of the Historical Manuscripts Commission, Correspondence of John C. Calhoun, pp. 727-8

 

Senator John C. Calhoun to Thomas G. Clemson, May 6, 1847

Fort Hill 6th May 1847

MY DEAR SIR, I am very happy to hear by yours by the Cambria, that you are all well.

The views you take in reference to Ritchie, and the position in which it has placed me in reference to the hunker portion of the party are perfectly correct. They are incurably corrupt; and I am glad to be seperated from them by their own act. It places me on ground perfectly independent of either party; to act according to the dictates of my own judgement. The days of hunkerism is numbered. Mr Polk is the last of the dynasty. It never can rise again to power. The folly and the vice of the party have destroyed it. He sought by the Mexican war to perpetuate the power of the party, but it will prove the means of his and their overthrow. As things now stand, he will make Taylor his successor by making the war. It has made him the available candidate, and that of itself will be sufficient to rally a majority around him. Indeed, it would seem to be an established principle with us, that the party in power, which makes war, will be sure to be turned out of power by it; — if successful, by the successful General; and if not, by the opposition. When that comes to be understood, as it will be, if Taylor should be elected, we never again shall have a war, when it can be averted. Had the administration had sufficient sagacity to see it, Taylor never would have been ordered to the del Norte, and there would have been no war. As much as I am opposed to military chieftains for presidents, I shall, thus thinking, be content to see him elected against Mr Polk, or any one, who contributed to make the war; and, let me add, against the nominee of a convention, either democrat, or Whig. But I go no farther. I shall stand fast on my own doctrines, and act in conformity to them, in any emergency, including the Presidential. It is the only way, by which I can serve the country and preserve my character. . . .

SOURCE: J. Franklin Jameson, Editor, Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1899, Volume II, Calhoun’s Correspondence: Fourth Annual Report of the Historical Manuscripts Commission, Correspondence of John C. Calhoun, pp. 728-9

Congressman Horace Mann to E. W. Clapp, June 24, 1852

WASHINGTON, June 24, 1852.

MY DEAR SIR, — I left home on Saturday, stopped over Sunday in New York, and came on on Monday. At Philadelphia I heard the news of the nomination; and, when I arrived at Baltimore, the first men I saw were some of our Massachusetts Hunker delegates. Sadder-looking men away from a funeral I never saw. The Fillmore and Webster men composed a majority of the convention, and therefore had every thing their own way in the organization; in the Committee on Credentials, by which they let in all their friends, and shut out all their enemies, without reference to the fairness οr unfairness of their election — just as the Democrats did Rantoul; and also in the Committee on Resolutions.

But, when they came to the nomination, the antislavery and anticompromise portion of the convention prevailed; and, if they did not win a full triumph, their enemies suffered a terrible defeat. They withstood not only the Southern slavery phalanx, but all the influence of the Government, and all the mammon Hunkerism of State Street, Wall Street, and Walnut Street. . . .

H. M.

SOURCE: Mary Tyler Peabody Mann, Life of Horace Mann, p. 370

Congressman Horace Mann, June 24, 1852

WASHINGTON, June 24, 1852.

When the Whig Convention nominated Scott, they killed off those who had been most clamorous for slavery, and therefore did a great work. Though not a triumph of antislavery sentiment, therefore, it was a defeat of Hunkerism at the North, and of slavery domination at the South. It was the first antislavery stand in a National Convention that has ever been successful. So far it is matter for thanksgiving and hallelujah. But it adopted the proslavery platform. This was effected by the union of the slavery men of the South, and the Hunkers or Fillmore and Webster men of the North. These together made a large majority; one hundred and forty-nine being a majority. All these men worked together in the organization for the Committee on Credentials and for the Platform Committee, and were, of course, successful. But, when they came to candidates, they split. Nothing could carry enough of the Webster men over to Fillmore, or enough of the Fillmore men over to Webster, to make a majority. A portion of each knew of the other, what all sensible and unbiassed men knew, — that the nomination of the other would be death to the party; and they would not defeat the party, even for the nomination of a favorite. Thus it was done, and thus it was not done.

There is such an infinite difference between Scott and Pierce, that all true antislavery men must desire the success of the former. About ten or a dozen Whigs from the South, and about the same number of Fillmore men, went over for Scott. This is all that could be meant by the South's supporting Scott or abandoning the compromises. They have got them in form, but not much more. The reason why they say Scott adopts the Southern platform is, that he accepts the nomination of the party that adopts the platform; and, indeed, his telegraphic despatch to the convention was, that he accepted the nomination with the platform. But as many interpretations can be given to the platform as to the Thirty-nine Articles. And, besides, the Whig Platform, though disgraceful to human nature, is not so black by many hues as the Democratic.

I read this morning the greater part of Kossuth's speech at the Tabernacle, New York. Is it not his greatest speech?

We are now taking the question, by yeas and nays, on the passage of a bill to give a certain quantity of the public lands to the old States for educational purposes; and it looks as if it would go through the House. I hope so with all my organ of hope.

SOURCE: Mary Tyler Peabody Mann, Life of Horace Mann, pp. 370-1

Senator John C. Calhoun to Thomas G. Clemson, September 6, 1847

Fort Hill 6th Sept 1847

MY DEAR SIR, I agree with you, that the political condition of all western Europe is very unsettled, and especially France. Nor are we much better off. Our future is very uncertain. The old parties are disorganized. The administration weak; and the termination of the Mexican war, and what will grow out of it, uncertain. We must wait for the developements of the next 12 months to know where we are. In the meantime, Clay and his friends are making a great effort to bring him out again, as a candidate, and will probably succeed. Taylor has lost ground greatly, and will probably be ruled off. He has written too many letters, and some of them very illy advised. Wright has died,¹ — a severe blow to the Hunkers; and Benton is denouncing the administration, whether to break with them, or control them is uncertain; probably the latter. We (the State rights party) are making an effort to establish an independent press at Washington, as the organ of the South. A large amount has already been subscribed, and it is hoped, it will be in operation by the meeting of Congress.

_______________

¹ Silas Wright died August 27, 1847.

SOURCE: J. Franklin Jameson, Editor, Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1899, Volume II, Calhoun’s Correspondence: Fourth Annual Report of the Historical Manuscripts Commission, Correspondence of John C. Calhoun, p. 736-7

Congressman Horace Mann to Dr. Edward Jarvis, April 24, 1852

WASHINGTON, April 24, 1852.

DR. JARVIS.

DEAR SIR,— I have just received your favor of the 19th instant, and the accompanying volumes; for which I am greatly obliged to you. If, as Adam Smith said, a man who makes two blades of grass grow where but one grew before be a "public benefactor," of what honor is he worthy who diffuses ideas regarding health and life among the people? The doctrines of human physiology have come in just in season to save the race from destruction. Had their advent been delayed much longer, it is doubtful whether men would have been able to discover them at all. They might have gone, like our Western Indians, beyond the gravitating point. You have done your part to save them.

Political parties here seem crystallizing about Fillmore and Scott. Our debates lately are mostly on the Presidential question; but I don't think Mr. Webster's name has been mentioned for three weeks in reference to the matter.

What are you doing at home? From what I hear, the coalition is not making headway. If they are not, then I suppose Hunker Whiggery is. When Mr. Webster is dead, will Hunkerism die? I hope so.

You must see Kossuth. He has the best sort of greatness; that is, goodness. . . .

Yours very truly,

HORACE MANN.

SOURCE: Mary Tyler Peabody Mann, Life of Horace Mann, pp. 362-3

Senator Charles Sumner to John Bigelow, June 9, 1852

I longed to see you. When you called I was at Eames's, discoursing on Baltimore and its scenes. This nomination¹ makes me lament anew the fatal '49, when the Barnburners and the Hunkers coalesced. Had they kept apart, we should all have been together,—perhaps in a minority, but powerful from our principles and character. For myself, I am left alone. The political fellowships I had hoped to establish are vanishing. Of course I can have nothing to do with Pierce or his platform,—probably nothing with Scott or his. How I wish we had all stuck together! Should Pierce be elected, with a Democratic Senate and House, we should have the iron rule of the slave-power.

_______________

¹ Of Franklin Pierce, as Democratic candidate for President.

SOURCE: Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and Letters of Charles Sumner, Vol. 3, pp. 280-1

Congressman Horace Mann to Reverend Samuel J. May, January 8, 1852

WASHINGTON, Jan. 3, 1852.

REV. S. J. MAY.

DEAR SIR,—It is now a long time since I have received any copies of your shots at Mr. C. So I suppose the war is ended. I did not see his articles; but, from yours, I should suppose you had much the better of him, both in temper and logic. It is curious that you should propose to engage my professional services for your defence in a case arising out of the Fugitive-slave Law, and that so soon my own writings on the subject should require legal defence. I presume you have seen in the "Commonwealth" that Mr. Commissioner Curtis has commenced an action for libel against Mr. Muzzey, the publisher of my speeches, on account of that Lancaster exhibition of himself. What do you say now to being my counsel? Are you ready to do as you would be done by?

I hope you see full debates of Congress—such as are published in the "Globe"—in relation to the reception of Kossuth. The whole opposition to him comes from the South, and from Northern Hunkers who are devoted to the South. The avowed opposition is based on the question of "intervention;" but the real motive is slavery. While they demand that one fugitive shall be fettered and sent home, they cannot bear to see another fêted and honored. You see the cloven foot; indeed, you can see nothing else. With best regards for your family, I am

Very truly yours, &c.,

HORACE MANN.

SOURCE: Mary Tyler Peabody Mann, Life of Horace Mann, p. 356

Congressman Horace Mann to E. W. Clap, January 5, 1851

WASHINGTON, Jan. 5, 1851.

To E. W. CLAP, Walpole, Mass.

MY DEAR SIR, — . . . After a week of factious opposition, we have at last, this morning, passed a vote, by a large majority, to do the handsome thing to Kossuth. The South and the "Old Hunkers" have been in a tight place." How could they vote to honor one fugitive from slavery, and chain and send back another? If an Austrian "commissioner" should issue his warrant for Kossuth, and he should kill the marshal, would he, like the Christiana rioters, be guilty of treason?

You see my book* has been prosecuted, in the name of the publishers, for libel. If the greater the truth, the greater the libel, the book must plead guilty. Regards to you all.

As ever, very truly yours,

HORACE MANN.

_______________

* "Of Antislavery Documents and Speeches," which is to be republished with some additional matter.

SOURCE: Mary Tyler Peabody Mann, Life of Horace Mann, p. 345

Senator John C. Calhoun to Andrew Pickens Calhoun, April 16, 1848

Washington 16th April 1848

MY DEAR ANDREW, Everything here is in a state of uncertainty, in reference to the Presidential election. The parties are more distracted than ever. Clay's address¹ has done him great injury with his party. It has in particular deeply offended the Southern portion.

In the mean time, the address of the Barnburners, just come out, has weakened and distracted the Democratick party. They take strong ground against us on the Wilmot proviso, and proclaim that they must be received by the Baltimore Convention to the exclusion of the Hunker delegates from the State. That I take it will be impossible, and a permanent split, with the loss of the State will be the result. I trust, out of all this confusion, a sufficient number of both parties will be found to be independent enough to make a rally to save ourselves and our institutions. As bad, as you suppose things to be here, it is not worse than the reality.

We are waiting with impatience for farther information from Europe. I have little hope from France, but a good deal of reliance on Germany. She has the materials for a good Govt, if they should be skillfully used. But we shall soon see.

My love to Margeret and the children.

_______________

¹ Clay's speech at Lexington on the Mexican War, November 13, 1817, is probably referred to.

SOURCE: J. Franklin Jameson, Editor, Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1899, Volume II, Calhoun’s Correspondence: Fourth Annual Report of the Historical Manuscripts Commission, Correspondence of John C. Calhoun, p. 751-2

Senator Charles Sumner to George Sumner, September 30, 1851

The field of our national politics is still shrouded in mist. Nobody can clearly discern the future. On the Whig side, Fillmore seems to me the most probable candidate; and on the Democratic side, Douglas. I have never thought Scott's chances good, while Webster's have always seemed insignificant. His course lately has been that of a madman. He declined to participate in any of the recent celebrations,¹ cherishing still a grudge because he was refused the use of Faneuil Hall. The mayor told me that Webster cut him dead, and also Alderman Rogers, when they met in the apartments of the President. The papers-two Hunkers — have hammered me for calling on the President.² It is shrewdly surmised that their rage came from spite at the peculiarly cordial reception which he gave me. Lord Elgin I liked much; he is a very pleasant and clever man, and everybody gave him the palm among the speakers. I was not present at the dinner, and did not hear him.

There is a lull now with regard to Cuba. The whole movement may have received an extinguisher for the present; but I think we shall hear of it when Congress meets, in a motion to purchase this possession of Spain. This question promises to enter into the next Presidential election. The outrages caused by the Fugitive Slave bill continue to harass the country. There will be no end to them until that bill becomes a dead letter. It is strange that men can be so hardened to violations of justice and humanity, as many are now, under the drill of party. Mr. Webster has done more than all others to break down the North; and yet he once said, in taunt at our tameness, “There is no North!” The mischief from his course is incalculable. His speech at the reception of the President was regarded—and I think justly—by many Englishmen as insulting.

Our State politics promise to be very exciting. There has been a prodigious pressure upon me to take the field; but thus far I have declined. Under present circumstances I do not see my way to speaking. I am unwilling to defend the coalition, as in so doing I shall seem to be defending my own election; and I do not wish to seem to pursue Winthrop. His defeat seems to me inevitable, though in a contest like the present there must be an allowance for accidents and for treachery.

_______________

¹ Railroad Jubilee, Sept. 15, 1851.

² September 17, in Boston, on the occasion of the Railroad Jubilee. Sumner, as already seen, had strongly condemned President Fillmore a year before for approving the Fugitive Slave bill.

SOURCE: Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and Letters of Charles Sumner, Vol. 3, p. 254-5

Senator Charles Sumner to John Bigelow, October 24, 1851

I heard of your illness, while I was in New York, with great regret. Time and distance did not allow me to see you at your suburban retreat, although I wished very much to confer with you, particularly on the subject of your letter. Let me say frankly, however, that I despair of any arrangement by which any candidate can be brought out on the Democratic side so as to receive active support from antislavery men. Nor do I see much greater chance on the Whig side. The tendency of both the old parties at present is to national conventions; and in both of these our cause will perish. The material for a separate organization, by which to sustain our principles, seems to exist nowhere except in Massachusetts. Had the Barnburners kept aloof from the Hunkers in 1849, the Democratic split would have been complete throughout the free States, and it would have affected sympathetically the Whig party. A new order of things would have appeared, and the beginning of the end would have been at hand. But the work in some way is to be done over. There will be no peace until the slave-power is subdued. Its tyranny must be overthrown, and freedom, instead of slavery, must become the animating idea of the national government. But I see little chance of any arrangement or combination by which this truly Democratic idea can be promoted in the next Presidential contest.

The politicians are making all their plans to crush us, and they seem to be succeeding so well that all our best energies and most unflinching devotion to principles can alone save us. For myself I see no appreciable difference between Hunker Democracy and Hunker Whiggery: in both, all other questions are lost in the 'single idea' of opposition to the Free Soil sentiment. Nor can I imagine any political success, any party favor or popular reward, which would tempt me to compromise in any respect the independent position which I now hold.

It is vain to try to get rid of this question of the slave-power except by victory over it; and our best course, it seems to me, is to be always ready for the contest. But I am a practical man, and desire to act in such way as best to promote the ideas which we have at heart. If you can show me the road, I am ready to follow. . . The two years before us will be crucial years, years of the Cross. But I know that better times will soon come. For God's sake, stand firm! I hope John Van Buren will not allow himself to be enmeshed in any of the tempting arrangements for mere political success. He is so completely committed to our cause that he can hope for nothing except by its triumph. I know no one who has spoken a stronger or more timely word for us than he has. I am much attached to him personally. I admire his abilities, and am grateful for what he has done; but I feel that if he would surrender himself more unreservedly to the cause he would be more effective still. Few have such powers.

SOURCE: Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and Letters of Charles Sumner, Vol. 3, p. 255-6

Charles Sumner to John Bigelow, January 11, 1851

Whatever may be the result of our proceedings, I am desirous that you should know my position. I have never directly or indirectly suggested a desire for the place, or even a willingness to take it. I shall not generally be believed if I say I do not desire it. My aims and visions are in other directions, in more quiet fields. To sundry committees of Hunker Democrats, who have approached me to obtain pledges and promises with regard to my future course in the State, or in the Senate if I should go there, I have replied that the office must seek me, and not I the office, and that it must find me an absolutely independent man. The Hunkers, Whigs, and Democrats are sweating blood to-day. You perceive that all the Hunker press, representing Cassism and Websterism, are using every effort to break up our combination.

SOURCES: Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and Letters of Charles Sumner, Vol. 3, p. 239

Charles Sumner to John Bigelow, January 21, 1851

You are right in auguring ill from the Fabian strategy. When the balloting was postponed for three days, I thought our friends had lost the chances. My own opinion now is that they are lost beyond recovery; but others do not share this. The pressure from Washington has been prodigious. Webster and Cass have both done all they could. Of course, Boston Whiggery is aroused against me. There were for several days uneasy stomachs at the chances of my success. It is very evident that a slight word of promise or yielding to the Hunkers would have secured my election, it would now if I would give it; but this is impossible. The charge used with most effect against me is that I am a 'disunionist;' but the authors of this know its falsehood, — it is all a sham to influence votes. My principles are, in the words of Franklin, “to step to the verge of the Constitution to discourage every species of traffic in human flesh.” I am a constitutionalist and a unionist, and have always been.

SOURCES: Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and Letters of Charles Sumner, Vol. 3, p. 239-40

Charles Sumner to John Bigelow, September 2, 1850

You inquire about Eliot.¹ He is an honest and obstinate man, but essentially Hunker in grain. In other days and places he would have been an inquisitor. He dislikes a Democrat, and also a Free Soiler, as the gates of hell; still he is not without individual sympathies for the slave. I doubt if he can be a tool; besides, personally, he has little confidence in Webster. The attack here is just now most bitter upon Horace Mann. The substance of his “Notes” they cannot answer; but they have diverted attention from them by charging him with personalities, and then by criticism of his classical criticism of Webster. Now, in this matter two things are to be said: first, Webster was the first offender in personalities; and, secondly Webster is clearly wrong in the classical matter.

_______________

¹ Samuel A. Eliot, elected to Congress as successor to Winthrop.

SOURCE: Edward L. Pierce, Memoir and Letters of Charles Sumner, Vol. 3, p. 217

Governor John A. Andrew to Senator Charles Sumner, June 4, 1862

What means Stanley¹ in N. C.? Don't they know whom they send? Do they wish to drive our N. E. troops out of the field and disgust mankind? The most “hunker” officers we have ever sent, cry out, in their private correspondence, that the army is so managed in its relations to Southern men that a positive bribe is held out to whites and blacks both to be disloyal. Even guards are furnished for rebels' property not vouchsafed to men of known loyalty. This in McClellan's Department.

My letter to Mr. Stanton was within the truth. Our militia, startled by the most startling summons I issued at midnight, based on the telegram of the Sec. of War, supposing the very capitol in danger, rushed to Boston. But all were unwilling, and but a handful consented, to go for the full Militia period. It was not so a year since. No one was reluctant. No one stipulated for short terms. Twenty regiments eagerly pressed for leave to go for any term however indefinite. Now, a battery Co. whose enlistment began a week yesterday has not 85 men. And they are only enlisting for Six Months. The War looks to be of indefinite length. . . .

Perhaps all men do not reason out a conclusion by careful logic or minute observation, but the instinctive sagacity and practical sense of our people is an element we may always be sure exists. Most public men despise the people, think they are foolish and knowing their own personal limitations, believe the people not to be honest.

But Yankees are pretty knowing; they are by instinct sagacious; they have sense of the hardest sort; and they are by disposition honest and manly.

In the long run he will always dupe himself who doubts the people. An honest and brave man who looks into his own heart will find public opinion just there. He need not look at the clouds nor the church steeples, watching the wind for evidence.²

_______________

¹ Edward Stanly, a conservative, appointed May 19 military governor of North Carolina.

² June 4, 1862.

SOURCE: Henry Greenleaf Pearson, The Life of John A. Andrew: Governor of Massachusetts, 1861-1865, Volume 2, p. 22-3

Samuel Gridley Howe to Senator Charles Sumner, July 1852

Boston, July, 1852.

My Dear Sumner: — I have to thank you for many documents, valuable in themselves, but the more so as signs of your kind remembrance of me. I have not troubled you with letters, for you must be encombri already. Everybody but the most desperate of Hunkers is loud in your praise. You know how I feel; with none of their surprise at your prompt and gallant repulse of a cowardly attack, I have more than their appreciation of your motives for so much moderation.

I will tell you of only two out of a hundred things said — one by a lady — young, handsome, enthusiastic; she disliked you formerly — but the other day said with enthusiasm — “If I should meet him now I should be prompted to throw my arms around his neck and kiss him!” My banker, Blake, a Hunker, said yesterday — “Your friend Mr. Sumner has forced my admiration and earned my gratitude; he has done nobly; tell him so!”

SOURCE: Laura E. Richards, Editor, Letters and Journals of Samuel Gridley Howe, Volume 2, p. 384-5

Samuel Gridley Howe to Senator Charles Sumner, July 2, 1852

Boston, July 2d, 1852.

My Dear Sumner: — There is a scattering of our forces here, or there has been, but I think now we begin to settle down to this conclusion — that we cannot vote for Scott,¹ and that we have only to prevent as many Democrats from voting for Pierce as possible. What do you say? Shall you not write to the Worcester Convention, or a letter to a friend that may be used there? Speaking for myself alone, I must say the course seems clear; to go for the abstract right and disregard the consequences. We must teach all parties that there are some men (and they are becoming more numerous) who will not be bought and sold and handed over by any conventions.

I have always had an instinct in me which I have never been able to body forth clearly — which tells me that all this manoeuvering and political expediency is all wrong, and that each one should go for the right regardless of others. If every man, or every third man, would do so, an unworthy candidate, or an unworthy platform, would never be put up; and is it less one's duty to do so because only every three-thousandth man will follow his example? Why is it deemed necessary to go on with great parties, and to twist principles until they all but break — why but because there are so few men who will be inflexible? Let us make those few more, and all will be right.

Can you not foretell about when you shall speak? If you can, with any degree of certainty, I shall be strongly tempted to go on there to hear. Great things are expected of you.

I was in at Mills's to-day; one or two desperate Hunkers were there: they caught eagerly at my expression of a firm belief in Scott's anti-slavery tendency, and Mills swore he would publish what I said. I believe they still cling to the hope of bringing the old man, their man, [Webster] upon the ring yet. They do not know how, or when, but hope for a contingency.

Do write me; and believe me ever faithfully,

S. G. Howe.

_______________

¹ Winfield Scott.

SOURCE: Laura E. Richards, Editor, Letters and Journals of Samuel Gridley Howe, Volume 2, p. 380-1

Samuel Gridley Howe to Senator Charles Sumner, April 25, 1852

Boston, Tuesday, 25th April, 1852.

My Dear Sumner: — I am only waiting to see Kossuth and to ascertain whether I can do anything for his cause, after which I shall flit for Washington.

There is considerable stir and bustle, and note of preparation in our streets (half-past twelve). He will probably be here in an hour or two. I shall hardly go out, for I have no part to play, and I shrink from the crowd and the noise. My whole heart and soul is with this man and his noble cause. I hail him as prophet of good, as high priest of humanity, and I would cheerfully make any sacrifices in my power to aid him in his holy work; but I cannot push forward in the crowd who will be eager to attract his notice. Wilson dined with me on Sunday to meet George [Sumner] and he told me he should have me down among the invited guests at the banquet — but for that I should only see K—— in private, if I can get an interview. He wrote a very kind answer to my letter inviting him to accept my house.

About George, I hardly know what to say. I think he will be well received except by the ultras of the Hunkers. He dines with Prescott on Thursday. Your sisters will probably have told you who and which have called upon him. He is cautious about committing himself in the Kossuth matter. I do not like caution; it betokens little faith in God's arrangement, by which the truth is sure to prevail sooner by bold and open declaration. I reproach myself bitterly for want of faith and courage in my past. The rocks on which most of my hopes have split, — approbativeness, the care for what this one or the other may think. There is nothing good, nothing enduring, nothing worth living for, nothing worth dying for, but truth.

Ever yours,

S. G. Howe.

SOURCE: Laura E. Richards, Editor, Letters and Journals of Samuel Gridley Howe, Volume 2, p. 370-1