Thomas Corwin to John J. Crittenden, Undated

WASHINGTON.

DEAR CRITTENDEN,—If Messrs. Crittenden and Burnley, or either of them, want exercise, let them visit the sick. Here I am ensconced, like a Hebrew of old, on my back, about to dine, but, unlike the Hebrew, with no stomach for dinner. Oh, these cursed influenzas, they fatten on Washington patronage alone! Hot water runs out of one eye like sap from a sugar-tree, or like lava from Vesuvius. The mucous membrane of my nose, "os frontis" and "os occipitis," is, of course, in a melting mood. Did you ever look into the technology of anatomy? If not, this Latin will be above “your huckleberry." Is there no news—no lies brought forth to-day? Has the Father of Lies been celebrating the 8th of January, and allowed his children a holiday? Is Kossuth a candidate for the Presidency? Oh, you should have seen Sam Houston last night, with a red handkerchief hanging down two feet from the rear pocket of his coat! He looked like the devil with a yard of brimstone on fire in his rear. All the candidates were there, and acted as if they thought themselves second fiddlers to the great leader of the orchestra in that humbug theatre.

Civilized men are all asses. Your gentleman of God's making, nowadays, is only to be found in savage life. God help us! Good-night,

THOMAS CORWIN.

Hon. J. J. CRITTENDEN.

SOURCE: Ann Mary Butler Crittenden Coleman, Editor, The Life of John J. Crittenden: With Selections from His Correspondence and Speeches, Vol. 2, p. 38

Alexander H. Stephens to John J. Crittenden, February 17, 1852

WASHINGTON, D. C., Feb. 17, 1852.

MY DEAR SIR,—It is the wish of the committee that the birthnight celebration come off at Willard's Hotel on Saturday night, and that you should respond to a sentiment in allusion to the President and heads of the administration. I intended to call and give you notice of the position assigned you in the order of the day, but have been too much occupied. You must hold yourself in readiness for the call made upon you.

The dinner is an anti-Kossuth affair, or at least it is intended as a demonstration in favor of the neutral policy of Washington. It is our intention to have the proceedings of the evening, with all the speeches, etc., printed in neat pamphlet form for circulation. Hour of meeting, seven o'clock.

Yours most respectfully,

ALEXANDER H. STEPHENS.

SOURCE: Ann Mary Butler Crittenden Coleman, Editor, The Life of John J. Crittenden: With Selections from His Correspondence and Speeches, Vol. 2, p. 27

Daniel Webster to Richard M. Blatchford, March 9, 1851

Washington, March 9, 1851.

MY DEAR SIR,—I thank you for your brother's letter, which I should like to keep in the Department. I thank you also for your short note received to-day. I keep it for the warmth and strength of its expression.

I have a reply from Vienna, very amiable. To-morrow or next day will be published a despatch to Mr. Marsh respecting Kossuth.

Yours,

D. WEBSTER.

To Richard Milford Blatchford, towards whom my feelings, founded in regard, have grown into affection.

DAN'L WEBSTER.

SOURCE: Fletcher Webster, Editor, The Private Correspondence of Daniel Webster, Vol. 2, p. 421

Samuel Gridley Howe to Senator Charles Sumner, January 7, 1853

BOSTON, Jan. 7th, 1853.

DEAREST SUMNER: — I was very sorry indeed to criticize your speech, but I could not do otherwise in loyalty to our friendship. I have felt much grieved about it, the more so that it seemed to me Liberty had received a blow from her staunch friend; all unawares — but still a heavy blow.

— Look at it! will not the declaration that no pressure whatever shall force this country from her neutrality greatly encourage the despots to go on in their devilish career? Could we not at least have held our peace, and not assured them that we should never interfere, though they cut the throat of every liberal in Europe?

Then again, about poor Kossuth. I did feel sad indeed to have you speak (in your note) of his arrogance. My dear Sumner, is he not doing exactly what you felt called upon to do in your first peace oration, propound doctrines true in the abstract, good in principle, and surely realizable by and by, though so unpopular as to be deemed absurd by many? What Kossuth claims in the name of human brotherhood cannot, I concede, be now granted; we cannot plunge the country into war for any cause as yet set forth; but as surely as God lives and keeps up the progressive movement of humanity, so surely will the time come when nation shall say to nation, “Strike not, abuse not our brother nation! or we will help him strike you and defend himself.”

Do not take any fixed ground upon this subject; I mean an unprogressive position, and say what we will and what we will not do; wait and do what the crisis may require. We want peace; peace, and a century of it if possible, but we must have progress; we must remove the impediment in the way to it, and if despots oppose us we must remove them, peaceably if we can, forcibly if we must. . . .

SOURCE: Laura E. Richards, Editor, Letters and Journals of Samuel Gridley Howe, Volume 2, p. 386

Samuel Gridley Howe to Senator Charles Sumner, May 30, 1852

Boston, May 30th, 1852.

Dear Sumner: — I have been remiss of late about writing to you, but have been hardly in a state to do more than make the movements which the treadmill of necessity enforces.

I note what you say about Felton, and your wish that I should not, in defending you, lose his friendship. I did indeed delay to the last moment answering his letter; not through fear of losing his friendship, but from a reluctance to undertake a disagreeable and vain task. On Thursday evening I wrote to him my reply; the ground I took was, that it would be utterly useless to try the case between you in the court of the reason; it must be removed to that of the affections. I then put it to him to say whether, if he should receive news of your death, he would not then begin to think that he should have made more allowance for your peculiarities of manner; and even if what he charged were true, whether he should not rather have kept in mind the many noble and endearing traits of character, and the devotion to principle which he admitted you to possess. I gave him credit for honesty of purpose, but told him that in my humble opinion his public course, or acts, had been hostile to the sacred cause of humanity. I wrote a long letter of which the above is the substance. The next evening he appeared at our children's fete, and said to me briefly but feelingly, “It is all right! all right!” and that was all.

We had a party got up on my plan. We had about fifty children, who came early in the afternoon and frolicked to their hearts' content. Afterward came their parents to tea, and on the whole we had about eighty persons, whose pleasure and enjoyment it was pleasant to behold. We had swinging and dancing, and running and tumbling; we had also music, and a theatrical representation for the big folks. Altogether it was a good affair, a religious affair. I say religious, for there is nothing which so calls forth my love and gratitude to God, as the sight of the happiness for which He has given the capacity and furnished the means; and this happiness is nowhere more striking than in the frolics of the young. It is true that the sight of any true happiness should call forth the same feeling; and if we only cultivated it, we should have a religion that all could enjoy, instead of one that is sad and repellent to all but a few minds of peculiar stamp.

My vacation is over, and my hopes of seeing you in Washington are over for the time. I was glad, as were all your friends here, to hear of your so courteously throwing down the gauntlet, and announcing by a sort of herald that you would soon appear in the arena. It is well-timed; for it gives you the advantage of satisfying the anti-slavery people, and does not give to Webster and others the advantage they might derive from your speaking before the nominations. What I said about a person to furnish information from Washington I supposed you would understand. It was for Kossuth, who wished especially not to have anyone recommended by Senator Cass, but one who would not be likely to be in the interests of either party. He has agents and informants in all the courts of Europe; he needs one in Washington; he is willing to pay a correspondent. It is not a spy, in the obnoxious sense of the word, but a man who, acting in the interests of humanity, will furnish information honourably obtained, to be honourably used. Do you know any such?

s. G. H.

SOURCE: Laura E. Richards, Editor, Letters and Journals of Samuel Gridley Howe, Volume 2, p. 376-8

Samuel Gridley Howe to Senator Charles Sumner, May 19, 1852

Boston, May 19, 1852.

Dearest Sumner: — I wrote you a very hasty note from my office to-day.

Kossuth left us yesterday. At his request I accompanied him to Worcester, and Julia went also, to talk to Madame Kossuth. I know not why, but K—— has given me more of his confidence than any other person here. To the Committee that was formed at his request, he said he should like to have one person appointed to whom he could reveal in confidence so much of his plans and prospects as would show there was reason for hope and for immediate action; and he so plainly indicated me that they insisted upon my being their agent of conversation with him. I have had several interviews with him; he has been here twice, and was to have privately spent the two last days here, but the pressure of business prevented. I am quite overwhelmed by the degree of confidence he has placed in me, and feel keenly the mortification of being unable to do more than guard what he confides to me, and work in a public way for his cause.

Surely he is an inspired man! and he is as gifted in moral qualities as in intellectual powers. I can well understand the enthusiasm that would lead his followers fearlessly to the death at his command. He is the only man to whom my intellect bows quite down. He has done a great work here. The amount of material aid is about $16,000, but that which may be forthcoming in case of need is incalculable. Say what Hunkerdom may, he really made a deep impression on our people, and though there was not much noisy applause, there was deep enthusiasm among our best people. As for the soi disant aristocracy of Boston, though it is of little consequence what they do or say, the truth is that while pretending to ignore him, they felt, and others do too, that he ignored them. They would have opened their salons to him — but they knew he would not enter them. Winthrop is the only man among them who openly upheld him. The Pulskys were everywhere — the Governor [Kossuth] went nowhere! Upon the people of the Commonwealth he left the impression — the conviction — of his being an honest, earnest, eloquent and highly gifted man.

Julia was much with the ladies. I saw them not much. Madame Kossuth, as you know, is an invalid, and nervous; she is not a gifted woman. She brought with her to America some money, and has received some from home since; this she carried about with her, being anxious to invest it, but not daring to trust any one with it; meantime the good Governor kept borrowing from her for Hungary, so she mustered courage and almost with tears put a bag of five hundred eagles ($5,000) in my hands, the day before yesterday, and told me to invest it for her. To-day I got fifty shares of Worcester Railroad for her. She saw and liked good Mrs. Hillard much, but upon Hillard's being proposed to receive the money, she declined, and told Julia she could not trust a Hunker!

We have formed a Committee for Hungarian affairs; S. C. Phillips, Banks, Carter, Wilson, Kellogg, Alley, etc., and shall see what we can do.

I was at Ellen Dwight's¹ wedding this forenoon, a very brilliant party, as the world goes. The bride was really most beautiful, with all that wild fire of her eyes subdued into an earnest seriousness. Twisleton looked anxious and not well. He is nineteen years her senior. I have not seen Felton, nor noticed his letter; it is very long, and has an array of complaints (if I may so call them) against you. I put off the answer as an undesirable thing. I must be true to you and to the right, and by so doing I shall give him offence, mortal I fear; yet I hope not, for with all his faults he is a man to be esteemed.

Julia dined with the Agassiz the other day, and said Felton was even more jovial than in the olden time. Mann is here, not looking well.

Ever faithfully yours,

S. G. Howe.

_______________

¹ She married Edward Twisleton of London, younger brother of Lord Say-and-Sele.

SOURCE: Laura E. Richards, Editor, Letters and Journals of Samuel Gridley Howe, Volume 2, p. 374-6

Samuel Gridley Howe to Senator Charles Sumner, May 11, 1852

Boston, May 11, 1852.

My Dear Sumner: — I have been somewhat taken up with Kossuth's matters, though I work indirectly and not publicly. The other day he sent a message that he would come out to see me at nine o'clock in the evening. I was unfortunately engaged to a formal dinner party at T. B. Curtis's and could only promise to be at home as near nine as possible; when I got home he had just driven from the door, having stayed a quarter of an hour or so. I followed him to his quarters, and he took me into his chamber, and for two hours discoursed to me as only he can: filling me with increased admiration and love. He extended to me a degree of confidence about his plans which quite amazed me; and humiliated me too, for I felt I could do nothing to make me worthy of it.

Julia has seen much of them en famille, and bears glowing testimony to his gentleness and tenderness in the domestic relations.

As I said to you once before I think, I was glad of an opportunity of making Hillard ashamed (or deserving to be so) of having so easily entertained the belief of Kossuth's want of kindness to his wife.

By the by, H—— wrote some articles in the Courier which you may have seen. The other evening he walked into town from my house with Pulsky and others; and Pulsky, knowing H—— had written the articles, took occasion to riddle and utterly cut them to pieces, as he well could. H—— was silent and opened not his mouth.

Kossuth is really making a very strong impression here, that is in the neighbourhood. Hunkerdom is silent — dumb — angry. I was (mirabile dictul) at Ticknor's the other evening, and was surprised to find how subduedly and quietly they took allusions to the subject. They are wise, and, since fas est ab hoste doceri, I hope to imitate the wise caution when I feel excited and angry.

I had a long talk there with Mrs. Agassiz, and it was mostly about you. I thought it best (or rather I did not think much at all) to try to put her right as to your break with Felton, and to show her that she was blaming you without cause. I told her my mind fully, and spoke of F—— kindly but rather sternly, giving him credit for intentions, but not for actions. The next day, (or yesterday) Monday, came a long letter from F—— in which he paraded in formidable array his charges against you. I shall not trouble you with them now; but perhaps you may be interested in one paragraph, in which he says, as he supposes on good authority, that Fillmore, in answer to a query about how you could seek his hospitalities after denouncing him so bitterly, said, “Mr. S—— seems to like me pretty well; at any rate, by coming to my house he shows he did not believe what he said.” I give you this valeat quantum, — but in confidence. I shall perhaps answer F——’s letter, but more probably see him.

Faithfully yours,

S. G. Howe.

SOURCE: Laura E. Richards, Editor, Letters and Journals of Samuel Gridley Howe, Volume 2, p. 372-4

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

Samuel Gridley Howe to Congressman Horace Mann, April 9, 1852

Boston, April 9th, 1852.

My Dear Mann: — I am indeed grateful for the kind expressions contained in your note of the 7th. (How it got here on the 9th I cannot conceive.)

You have one virtue in an eminent degree, that of magnifying and multiplying through the eyes of affection the virtues and the capacities of your friends. If I could only get you into Rhadamanthus’ seat when I go below, I should have a less warm berth assigned to me.

But your words stir me up to merit a tithe of the praise you give me.

I should be with you now but for the illness of my Flossy. She has ever been in the most robust and uproarious health, and her present illness, though other people tell me it is nothing, seems to me alarming. I employ a homœopathist, just to keep away all doctors and drugs, and to prevent the women nursing her and coddling her. Fresh air and cold water, inside and outside the belly — these are all my medicines. As soon as she is better, or so that I shall not worry and be pained by the thought that the poor thing is asking for Papa, I shall start.

I must however be here when Kossuth comes. If you see him in Washington tell him to be sure to enter the State from the West, and to gather strength and popularity and heat, so as to melt something of the iceberg he will find here.

I have no news for you, for I see nobody. At the State House they have their sop and I am quiet. We shall have to be quiet until the devil stalks abroad again and behaves so intolerably that we can get up a public battue and hunt him down again.

Ever yours,

S. G. H.

SOURCE: Laura E. Richards, Editor, Letters and Journals of Samuel Gridley Howe, Volume 2, p. 369-70

Samuel Gridley Howe to Senator Charles Sumner, April 8, 1852

Boston, April 8th, 1852.

Dearest Sumner: — I am very grateful for your frequent though brief notes. I know how much your present position increases the value of those grains of the hour-glass which even in days of leisure you were wont to count as grains of gold.

I should now be on my way to join you, but for the illness of my Flossy. It is nothing serious, I trust, but I could have no comfort away from her. The health of my children is seldom interrupted; they are vigorous, beautiful, bright and happy; but all this makes me less (instead of better) able to bear an interruption.

I have a vacation at the Blind [Institution] and though the Idiots call for some of my time and thought, I shall leave them as soon as my child's health is restored.

I note what you say about your course respecting the compromise, etc. It is perfectly manifest that if you did not feel called upon by a high sense of duty to speak, your silence respecting slavery, and your action upon other matters, are fortunate and felicitous, for you will speak with all the more power and effect when the proper time comes.

As for the Hunkers, they would have made a much worse outcry against you for having spoken, had your speech been that of an angel, than for your having been silent. I say to all here (what is needless however), that your friends may count upon your tact as to “time when,” as you can count upon your friends (?). . . .

We have nothing of interest here.

Kossuth is coming and this will stir up a little excitement.

I have written to offer my whole house and servants to him for as long as he will stay and even if it be two months.

Let us not criticize such a man too closely, dear Sumner. His mission is a high and noble one, and if he asks much, asking boldly, even pretentiously, let us pardon and admire. If God would but vouchsafe to the earth a hundred Kossuths, would it not go forward with a rush?

Ever thine,

S. G. Howe.

SOURCE: Laura E. Richards, Editor, Letters and Journals of Samuel Gridley Howe, Volume 2, p. 368-9

Samuel Gridley Howe to Senator Charles Sumner, March 15, 1852

Boston, Thursday, March 15, 1852.

Dearest Sumner: — I write you from my house, to which I have been confined by a more than commonly severe attack of neuralgia. I have been indisposed four days, or else I should have studied the land question in order to be able to give a reason for the faith that is in me. I have a sort of instinct that you are in the right, but that you do not go far enough. This whole matter of ownership of God's earth, whether by individuals or by nations, has got to be ripped up and readjusted upon principles and considerations different from those ever yet entertained by any except those who are pooh-poohed down as visionaries.

I do not think the press can make much impression by their outcry against you; besides, that will cease now that Daniel, in order to make a little capital, has followed in your wake. However, I shall be out to-morrow, and will see what I can do.

Some of your friends, and good judicious ones, have been alarmed by the onslaught made upon you for your silence about slavery;¹ and all Hunkerdom shouted “a hit! a capital hit!” when Judge Warren quoted something of yours about the effect of Washington atmosphere upon our Northern representatives &c. Some friends say that you cannot altogether get over an impression (if such should get abroad) that you had wavered, even by your being ever so firm afterwards. I do not share their alarm — not as yet. I do not much regard any temporary and passing policy got up by the daily press; by and by it will not be asked how long was Sumner silent — at what precise moment did he speak — but it will be asked did he speak out and speak bravely? I do think it important, and more than a matter of taste, that your speech should be well-timed, and seem to be called for. There are great and vital questions yet to come up about the Territories, and about California. However, I know nothing about the how, the why, the when — but this I know, you are true and brave—the Bayard of politicians, sans peur et sans reproche.

You will, I doubt not, give due weight to those considerations which your friends urge as calling for a speedy manifestation of your principles.

Vaughan is here, upon Kossuth business principally, but this is entre nous.

I have seen much of him; he is a very intelligent man and I think an honest one as politicians go.

I saw Longfellow at his beautiful home a few days ago.

I saw Palfrey too — growing rapidly into an old man; thin, wan and sad. He is a noble and beautiful spirit.

At the State House our friends are fighting for freedom in every way that seems to them likely to redound to their own credit and continue them in power.

They talk, you know, of violating the common law of custom, and running Rantoul into the Senate — but they will hardly venture, because they do not feel strong enough, and a defeat would be very bad. I am sorry they ever put out any feelers about it.

Your description of your genial days makes me sigh; to-day we have a cold easterly storm and the ground is covered with snow and sleet.

I had fully determined to leave on the first of April when my vacation at the Blind begins; but I have to look out for the Idiots.

Seguin² has been here two months, and proves to be a man of great vigour of intellect, and full of resources; he has done wonders — but we can hardly keep him; he is full of self-esteem and exigeant to the uttermost; one of his conditions is that the Trustees shall not be allowed to hold any meetings without his being present. Another that neither the matron nor any teachers shall hold any communication with the parents of the pupils, &c., &c. Besides, he is choleric, not benevolent, and not very high in his motives.

C'est la gloire — la gloire.

But I must close. Ever thine,

s. G. H.

_______________

¹ See post, p. 382.

² Dr. Edward Seguin, author of “De l'Idiotie,” etc., came in 1852 to “take charge of the school for Idiots long enough to organize the classes, and introduce his method of training.” This gentleman . . . was at the head of the first public institution (for the teaching of idiots,) organized in France.

SOURCE: Laura E. Richards, Editor, Letters and Journals of Samuel Gridley Howe, Volume 2, p. 365-8

Samuel Gridley Howe to Senator Charles Sumner, Thursday, February 12, 1852

Boston, Thursday, Feb. 12th, 1852.

My Dear Sumner: — I have yours of the 7th, and thank you for it.

Don't think too much of my dissent from your Kossuth speech. I have with heart and hand, with conscience and reason, with warmth and affection approved and sustained every political step you ever took save two — the Coalition, and the declaration to European despots that, throttle liberty as they might and when they might, we would never interfere.

On these alone have I differed from you, but give to you the same credit for honesty and earnestness and sincere conviction of right that I claim for myself.

Bygones are not yet bygones, and the sad state of things this day here confirms me in my views of the Coalition; but for your election we should have lost everything.

You are true and earnest and persevering; you are the noble and worthy head of our party and are doing something to save its honour; but the rest of the leaders, where are they? — in office, and trying to keep possession as an end, not a means.

But enough of this! let the infinitesimal of my dissent from you disappear in the wholeness of my approval, admiration and regard.

I am in some perplexity and dismay; a check for $500 has been forged in my name and paid! my suspicion falls upon one for whom I grieve; — and, if true, will carry desolation to a widowed hearth — I am much more anxious to be found wrong than right.

Your note came too late to prevent your election as Trustee — if you are very desirous of being left off you can be — but perhaps you had better remain until I learn what I hope may be [the state of things] at the end of this year. How we change! — once I could not understand your indifference to life — now you can not understand mine.

Faithfully yours,

S. G. Howe.

SOURCE: Laura E. Richards, Editor, Letters and Journals of Samuel Gridley Howe, Volume 2, p. 363-4

Samuel Gridley Howe to Senator Charles Sumner, December 28, 1851

South Boston, Dec. 28, 1851.

My dear Sumner: — I received to-day the revised copy of your speech, and thank you for it. It is a beautiful and characteristic speech; and had you stopped where you say, “and here I might stop,” it would have had my heartiest approval. What follows does not please me; nay! it pains and grieves me. Perhaps I cannot give you any good reason for my dissent, because I am not your equal in logical power; I yield habitually to your reasoning; but where my moral instincts lead me to differ with you, you cannot shake me. They have rarely led me so to do, but in this case they rise up, and will be laid by no magic of logic; and they tell me you are wrong. I can understand that Mann and Giddings and Allen,¹ all my superiors, vastly so, in knowledge and power, should approve your sentiment, for they are lawyers, statesmen if you will, and bow themselves with what seems to me a superstitious reverence before the "Law of Nations," as expounded by Grotius, Puffendorf and others.

Do you not yourself, dear Sumner, have too much reverence of this kind? Does it not amount to blind veneration?

You talk about “that Supreme Law, the world's collected will, which overarches the Grand Commonwealth of Christian Nations!”

The world's collected will! in God's name what do you mean? The world is the people of the world; and this “Supreme Law” was not enacted by the people, nor for the people, but by the selfish few who have governed and oppressed the peoples — enacted or rather acted in the interests and for the preservation of the rulers, and not in the interests of the people.

“The Grand Commonwealth of Christian States” — where — when was there ever such a thing or anything approaching it?

It is a mockery to call the Governments of Europe Christian. They hate; they do ever to others as they would not be done to; they try to overreach and undermine and injure and destroy each other. A precious set of piratical combinations against the true interests of the people and the real progress of humanity to be dignified with the name of a “Commonwealth of Christian States!”

This is mere rhetoric, my dear Sumner, and poor rhetoric, for everything is poor that is not true.

You say “what that code forbids you, forbear to do!” and I am sorry you said it, for you may have to unsay it if you continue to be among the powers that embody the sentiment of our people in the stirring times that are coming. Many and many of the laws of your venerated code of national law will be rent asunder and trampled upon in that resurrection day of the people's rights when the principles of international communication shall be settled not with a view to the interest of the governors but the governed.

The law of nations! Why, what is a nation? Is it an entity, a principle, an enduring thing? No! but a temporary arrangement, a convenient classification for those whose motto is divide et impera: a classification which your law of nations would fain keep up, but which is fast disappearing as the sentiment [of] human brotherhood is passing from the abstract into the concrete.

The only fault I have found with Kossuth (and I find the same with you), is the assumption of the innate reality, the great importance, the enduring nature of these national distinctions and divisions. A people united under one government, living within certain geographical boundaries, may do whatever they choose, may enslave, oppress and outrage in every possible way those of a certain sect or colour living within their borders; and those nations over the border, though they may hear the groans of the victims, have no right to interfere. This is not human brotherhood: we were men before we were citizens,² and though we are to look first to the interests of our immediate neighbours and countrymen, we are not [to] overlook the claims of our brethren over the border. I know what you will say — you will use all moral means, but you will never use force — you will have no wars. Against this, again, all the instincts of my nature revolt. God gives us power, force, and the instinct to use it, and though it is better never to use it in war, yet it may be the only means in our power to save the perishing. I tell you, Sumner, as I have often told you before, these instincts of ours, this combativeness and this destructiveness, though destined to die out by and by, when the moral sentiment becomes supreme, have yet their work to do in the suppression of wrong and the establishment of right. Suppose your neighbour is beating his wife and his children, and you hear their cries, and you cannot stop him by any moral means, will you not knock him down and tie him? If you would not, then ought God to wither the arm and shrivel the knuckles that will not use the strength He lent them.

And do you not hear the cries of people over the border, and say, “Oh! I must not interfere, you are not of my people, you are only men and women, not my fellow citizens; the ‘law which overarches the Grand Commonwealth of Christian States’ forbids me to employ the force which God has given me in your behalf, and what that forbids, I cannot do.”

You say that “against every purpose” you will uphold the peaceful neutrality of your country. Now, my dear Sumner, this seems to me a wrong doctrine and a selfish doctrine. Our country is growing with a giant growth; in a few years its strength may become so great, it may so command the commercial and monetary interest of the globe that no nation would dare to risk its enmity; I say this may possibly be: and yet you would so tie up our hands that we could not interfere even if another partition of Poland, or another Massacre of Parga³ or a St. Bartholomew's Eve, were to be enacted. It would be none of our business according to your doctrine, though another Herod slew all the infants over the border, or the rivers on the other side of the mountains were red with the blood of Huguenots, or another Poland shrieked as her last Kosciusko fell.

It is true you say “you would swell with indignation at the steps of tyranny;” but, Lord bless you, if you should swell until you burst, you would not do half so much good as by a kick and a lick at the tyrant.

Sumner, I know that abstractly and logically your peace principles seem sound, and I doubt not they will finally prevail; but there is a time for all things; and so long as avowed tyrants go about tying up people and flogging them, it is the business of somebody who has the power, to knock the tyrant down and let the people up.

Nobody who knows your generous sympathetic nature will ever suspect you of selfishness or of irony, but a stranger might almost suspect you of both, as you apostrophize Kossuth, and tell him “to be content with outgushing sympathy,” while you deny him any material aid; “to trust in God,” while you refuse him, and tell every other nation to refuse him, the aid of means, by which alone God ever does anything.

I have thus loosely and rapidly put down some passing thoughts for your consideration.

But the principal one is this; and this, dear Sumner, has disturbed me more than all: it seems to me that all this latter part of your speech is de trop; is uncalled for; is suggested by a desire to set forth and reiterate your peace principles, in forgetfulness of the harm it may do to the downcast, the struggling, the almost desperate patriots of Europe. Why tell the Despots that under no circumstances will we ever resort to the kind of interference which alone they fear, or care much for? What care they for our “outgushing sympathy” or our “God speed” to patriots, or our swelling bosoms — so that we will only keep quiet, and hold our hands off while they bind their victims securely — and put off, for years incalculable, the emancipation of their people?

If you will be as harmless as a dove, at least be as cunning as a serpent, and do not tell the Despot that you will show nothing but a white feather.

Kossuth has partly exposed the miserable charlatanerie of secrecy in diplomatic intercourse; I wish he had gone further and said that an honest, brave and intelligent people ought absolutely to forbid any secret negotiations, and insist upon every despatch being public. I hope you will move in this matter. I never read of a member of your Senate or of the House asking the President to communicate some information provided in his opinion the public interests do not forbid it, without a feeling that we are grossly humbugged (pardon the word).

How can truth ever do any harm but by being concealed — rotting in the dark? But methinks before throwing aside entirely the old maxims of diplomacy and statesmanship (forsooth !) I would at least use that part which allowed me to conceal from the despots of Europe the (to them comforting and encouraging) fact that never under any circumstances would we be driven by any atrocities of theirs to interfere in behalf of those our unfortunate brethren whom they hold in their grasp, and may legally hold by the “Great Law which overarches the Grand Commonwealth of Christian Nations.” Fas est ab hoste doceri; and if I am to be bound by the Devil's code, let me learn all I can of his mode of working, and counteract him where I may.

I have wanted to sit down and write something about this matter for publication — but alas! I find fast creeping over me a disinclination for any work of the kind — and my deep interest in everything that touches you or your fame, has, I fear, led me to feel more about this matter than my devotedness to the right and good.

At any rate I have done one duty of friendship and told you frankly how much in my opinion the latter part of your speech falls short of the high standard you usually maintain. This is the speech of Lawyer Sumner, Senator Sumner — not of generous, chivalrous, high-souled Charles Sumner, who went with me into the Broad Street riot,³ and who, if need had been, would have defended the women and children in the houses, by pitching their ruffianly assailants downstairs. Enough; I will not begin upon another sheet. Good night, God bless you.

Ever thine,

S. G. h.

_______________

¹ Charles Allen, then a Congressman.

² “Before man made us citizens, great Nature made us men.” — Lowell.

³ By Ali Pasha.

⁴ See ante, page 97.

SOURCE: Laura E. Richards, Editor, Letters and Journals of Samuel Gridley Howe, Volume 2, p. 355-60

Samuel Gridley Howe to Senator Charles Sumner, December 26, 1851

Boston, Dec. 26, 1851.

Dear Sumner: — . . . I told you I should give you my views touching that part of your beautiful speech from which I dissent entirely.

You are quite right in saying Kossuth is demanding more than is reasonable, if by reasonable you mean practical and feasible. If however you plant yourself upon the ground of human brotherhood, and demand of your brother man, or brother nation, all that the sacred tie of brotherhood warrants, and suppose others will do their duty — then you have a right to demand nearly, if not all, that he does.

I am not at all moved by what you (and still more others) say about a war costing us five hundred millions — of course we must first settle if it be right, and then meet the cost as we best may.

Depend upon it, Sumner, God has not yet finished his work with his instrument of combativeness and destructiveness; and though wars are as bad as you have ever depicted them; though the ordeal, the fight, is absurd and all that, still, — still, — when the lower propensities are so active in the race they must occasionally be knocked down with clubbed muskets.

It is not at all probable, still it is possible that, taking advantage of reaction, and of Louis Napoleon's treason,¹ and of the intense desire of the bourgeois class all over Europe for peaceful pursuit of business, let who may govern, and despairing of anything better, the Russians and the Prussians and the Austrians may combine to establish despotism and avert all progress in western Europe; and it is possible that England may be forced to engage single-handed with them: if so shall we be neutral? Shall we merely send a “God speed!” — and not back it up by hearty blows at the enemies of the race?

I say no! a thousand times no! and be it five hundred or five thousand millions that it will cost, let us go into the fight.

Kossuth is doing a great and glorious work; and though like all enthusiasts he overdoes his task, — and attempts more than it is possible to perform — still he will do much for us. God keep him and give him a chance to work for five years more, when he will have a chance to try a struggle with Russia.

What does George² write you? I take it Louis Nap. will have it all his own way for some time to come; not long as Nature views things, but long for us impatient mortals.

Ever thine,

s. G. H.

_______________

¹ The Coup d’Etat.

² George Sumner.

SOURCE: Laura E. Richards, Editor, Letters and Journals of Samuel Gridley Howe, Volume 2, p. 353-5

Samuel Gridley Howe to Charles Sumner, December 12, 1851

Boston, Dec. 12, 1851.

My Dear Sumner: — But for an aching head and a sad heart (my spirits always sink to zero when my body is out of working gear), I should write you fully about your speech, which everybody likes and praises, everybody but I! I think you made a mistake, and went too far — and I'll tell you why I think so, when I have any nervous energy to stimulate the brain.

I am glad to hear its praises however, though not so much from Hunkers as others.

Would I could have heard you! And had I known you were to speak I should have done so at any cost. I had determined upon one thing as what I would not swerve from — hearing your maiden speech. But on the 8th you did not know you were to speak.

I fear we shall not succeed in the attempt to get up a Kossuth demonstration here. I have tried in many quarters in vain. I had faint hopes of Hillard, though others said he was earnest in favour of K——. I found him in a poor mood, evidently ill and irritated. He swore by all his Gods, and with an earnestness amounting almost to fierceness, that he would never again as long as he lived take any part in anything of the kind; he denounced politics and political movements, and vowed never to go one inch out of his way for any public matter whatever.

The prospect is that we shall not have a meeting.

I saw Miss Catherine Sedgwick last evening: she felt most warmly about K—— and was indignant at the coldness here. She said she had been here two weeks and seen many people, but I was the first one who had expressed any feeling in favour of K—— being received with honour.

If our party leaders write to you they will tell you there is trouble ahead. I hope to Heaven they have not in any way pledged the party to the Democrats; we have been their bottle holders long enough. Oh! that we had nominated Mann for Governor! It may be Palfrey will go in.

We must fight the Democrats before long. They have not — the masses have not — intelligence enough to overcome their prejudices about colour. The Whigs have more — and when their tyrant oppressor — the Lord and master of their bodies and souls — Black Dan¹ — is dead politically or corporeally — if it happens soon — they will be better allies than the Dems.

But I cannot write more.

Ever thine,

S. G. Howe.

_______________

¹ Daniel Webster.

SOURCE: Laura E. Richards, Editor, Letters and Journals of Samuel Gridley Howe, Volume 2, p. 352-3

Samuel Gridley Howe to Charles Sumner, December 5, 1851

Boston, Dec. 5, 1851.

Dearest Sumner: — I had a hasty note from you just as I was closing my last. In neither of your notes do you mention having received one from me in answer to your touching words from N. York. I hope that mine¹ was not lost; not that it would be of consequence to any one, but what was consecrated to your eye of friendship I would not have looked upon irreverently by another.

I miss you, more even than I supposed I should: it makes me sad and almost sick at heart to think that you are where I cannot reach you, be my need of sympathy ever so great. But I have my usual poor resource to drive away thought — regret — sorrow — by work.

I have the whole Idiot School on my shoulders, and enough to do beside that.

We had the pleasure of your sister's company on Wednesday, and as usual found her full of earnest life and joyousness. Julia is fond of her, and knows she can give me no greater pleasure than by kindness to your sister.

We went to hear Felton again last evening. His lecture was better than the first, and better delivered. On the whole it was successful. I was pained, however, to find he indulged in flings at good and high things; for instance, speaking of the agglutinated languages, he made some quaint remarks in ridicule, and then said eagerly, “but don't suppose I have any reference to a late electoral law of this State.”

I saw Longfellow to-day, and as usual saw much that is lovely in him.

His Golden Legend I have read, and shall read again; it is very beautiful.

We had a pretty good meeting here (my office) yesterday about Kossuth's reception: we shall move publicly early next week. Do let me hear from you, if but a line.

Ever thine,

S. G. Howe.

_______________

¹ This note is missing.

SOURCE: Laura E. Richards, Editor, Letters and Journals of Samuel Gridley Howe, Volume 2, p. 347-8