Messrs. Brooks And Sumner — published May 26, 1856

With regard to the assault upon Mr. Sumner, by Col Brooks, a statement was made in the Senate on Friday, by Mr. Wilson, of Massachusetts, which represent that Mr. S. was taken at very great disadvantage by his assailant. The following however, is said to be the authentic account of the affair.

Mr. Brooks waited at the Porter’s Lodge about an hour yesterday, and as long this morning, hoping to meet Mr. Sumner, with a view to attack him. Failing in this, he entered the Senate chamber to-day, just as that body adjourned, and seeing several ladies present, seated himself on the opposite side of Mr. Sumner. Soon all disappeared but one. He then request a friend to get her out, when he immediately approached Mr. Sumner, and said, in a quiet tone of voice:—

Mr. Sumner, I have read your speech with great care, and with as much impartiality as I am capable of and I feel it my duty to say to you that you have published a libel on my State, and uttered a slander upon a relative, who is aged and absent, and I am come to punish you.

At the concluding words Mr. Sumner attempted to spring to his feet, showing fight, but whilst in the act was struck by Col. Brooks a backhanded blow across the head with a gutta percha cane, near an inch thick, but hollow, and he continued striking him right and left until the stick was broken into fragments and, Mr. Sumner was prostrated and bleeding on the floor. No one took hold of Col. Brooks during the time, so quick was the operation; but immediately afterwards Mr. Crittenden caught him around the body and arms, when Col. B. said, “I did not wish to hurt him much, but only to whip him.”

No one knew of the anticipated attack but the Hon. H. A. Edmunson, of Virginia, who happened not to be present when the attack commenced. It was reported on the streets for several days previous that Mr. Sumner would be armed when he delivered his speech, and that if occasion required it he should use his weapons. He was not armed when attacked by Colonel Brooks to-day.

We append a sketch of the proceedings in the House of Representatives, on Friday, touching the affair:

Mr. Campbell, of Ohio, rising to a question of privilege, offered the following:

Whereas on the 23rd of May the Hon. Preston S. Brooks and Hon. Lawrence M. Keitt, members of the House from South Carolina, and other members, either as principals or accessories, perpetrated a violent assault on the person of Hon. Charles Sumner, Senator of the United States from Massachusetts, while remaining in his seat in the Senate Chamber, and while in the performance of the duties appertaining to his official station.  Therefore,

Resolved, That a select committee of five members be appointed by the Speaker to investigate the subject and report on the facts with such resolution in reference thereto as in their judgment may be proper and necessary for the vindication of the character of this House, and that said committee have power to send for persons and papers, and employ a clerk and sit during the session of the House.

A debate ensued upon a point of order.

Mr. Smith of Virginia, suggested to Mr. Campbell the propriety of striking out the preamble. It assumed as fact that which could only be ascertained as such on examination. Mr. Campbell was willing to modify the preamble, which he did to read: “Whereas it is represented, etc.” It was, he said, due to the House and all parties that facts should be presented in some authentic form, and could only be done fully and fairly through the committee.

Mr. Clingman said he was satisfied with the statement in the preamble that it was a gross falsehood, but he did not mean that Mr. Campbell had intentionally made an untrue declaration. The gentleman mistook him.

The Speaker decided the proposition in order. He said, substantially that it was represented or charged that a member of the House had assaulted a Senator while in discharge of his official duties. The Senate could not interfere with a member of the House, but it belonged to the House, if one of its members had violated the privilege of the Senate, to make an investigation, it being the prober tribunal for that purpose. The Senate being a co-ordinate branch of Congress, and covered by some constitutional privilege, it was the duty of The Chair to receive Mr. Campbell’s proposition as a question of privilege.

Mr. Clingman appealed from the decision of the Chair.

Mr. Craige was satisfied Mr. Keitt was not concerned in the matter in any way stated.

Mr. Campbell replied that if it should be passed, certainly no wrong would be done.

Mr. Keitt said he thought the dignity of the House required the investigation. His personal relations with the parties [had] always been those of friendship.

Mr. Paine inquired: is this resolution the result of precedent of action outside this hall or of [causas]?

Mr. Campbell replied that not one word had he heard passed by a member of any party as to such a course. He was influenced alone by the dictates of his own judgment and sense of public duty. As to who perpetrated the outrage; he only knew from what he had heard, although he saw Mr. Sumner lying in the ante-room adjoining the Senate Chamber with gashes on his head to the bone, and blood flowing over him.

Mr. Clingman repeated that he would leave the offender, Mr. Brooks, to answer to the law.

Mr. Letcher said that several years ago Postmaster General Hubbard was attacked by George Briggs, a member of the House, yet neither he [Mr. Letcher] nor Mr. Campbell thought it proper to bring the subject to the attention of the House.

The Speaker made a personal explanation. He had not been a party to any deliberation or consultation on this matter; and had no knowledge of the proposition until it was made from the clerk’s desk.

Mr. Brooks explained. I take the entire responsibility on myself, and state on my honor as a gentleman, no human being besides myself know when or where the transaction was intended to be made.

Mr. McQueen informed Mr. Campbell that a process had been instituted against his colleague, Mr. Brooks, who was amenable to the laws of the country. Mr. Campbell said he had no purpose to put any party in a false position, but he merely wished to ascertain the facts, there being so many rumors prevalent.

Mr. Haven appealed to Mr Campbell to omit the name of Mr. Keitt from the preamble.

Mr. Campbell assented.

Several gentlemen wanted him to strike of the words “other members,” but he refused, saying he had reasons for retaining them.

Mr. Keitt remarked that as his name had been withdrawn, he would say that he did not know the time nor the place where the act would be committed, and when it was committed he was behind the chair of the President of the Senate, with gentlemen from his own State, and he didn’t see the beginning of it. Therefore he had not the slightest preconsert with his colleague.

Under the operation of the previous question, Mr. C.’s proposition was adopted—yeas 93; nays 68.

The Speaker appointed Mr. Campbell, of Ohio, Allison, Cobb, of Georgia, Greenwood and Spinner, the committee. Mr. Allison was excused at his own request.

SOURCE: Richmond Daily Whig, Richmond Virginia, Monday Morning, May 26, 1856, p. 2

Public Meeting In Boston — published May 26, 1856

BOSTON, May 25.—The largest meeting ever held in Faneuil Hall assembled last night, for the purpose of expressing indignation at the assault upon Senator Sumner. Governor Gardner presided, assisted by forty Vice Presidents comprising some of the most distinguished men of all parties in Massachusetts. Gov. Gardner made a speech, in which he characterized the assault as exceeding in grossness and brutality anything written in the pages of history, and called upon Congress to expel the assailant.

The Governor’s sentiments were warmly responded to and there was tremendous cheering throughout.

Resolutions, expressive of the sense of the meeting, were unanimously adopted, after speeches from many gentlemen, representing all political parties. Some of these speeches were unusually warm and defiant, eliciting tumultuous responses.

At Lowell, last evening, an indignation meeting was held, Mayor Huntington presiding.

SOURCE: Richmond Daily Whig, Richmond Virginia, Monday Morning, May 26, 1856, p. 1

Senator Sumner Chastised by Mr. Brooks, of South Carolina — published May 23, 1856

WASHINGTON, May 22.—Immediately after the adjournment of congress to-day, while Mr. Sumner of Mass., was still in the Senate Chamber, he was approached by Hon. Preston S. Brooks, member of Congress from South Carolina, who accused him of libeling his State and slandering his grey-headed relative, Judge Butler, and then immediately struck him with his cane. Sumner fell to the floor, and the blows were repeated until he was deprived of the power of speech. No one interfered until the chastisement was effected. Mr. Sumner was then conveyed to his room. It is not yet ascertained wither his injuries are of a serious character or not.

Mr. Brooks appeared before Justice Hollingshead and was held to bail in the sum of $500 for his appearance to-morrow.

[SECOND DISPATCH.]

WASHINGTON, May 22, P. M.—Some eye witnesses say that Mr. Brooks struck Mr. Sumner as many as fifty times, mainly on his head. Sumner, who was sitting in an arm chair when the assault was made, is suffering much from the effects of the chastisement.

SOURCE: Richmond Daily Whig, Richmond Virginia, Friday Morning, May 23, 1856, p. 3

Governor Salmon P. Chase to Senator Charles Sumner, June 20, 1859

I send some papers by this mail.

Columbus, June 20, 1859.

I mark last Saturday with a white stone, for it brought me, dear Sumner, the most welcome intelligence of your almost assured recovery. God grant that the happy auguries of the present may be fulfilled and that completely. What a terrible experience has been yours! How fiery the ordeal you have been summoned to pass! Let us be thankful that memory cannot renew the suffering, and that the retrospect, while it makes one shudder, also brings a sort of sense of present triumph. How strange it seems that the assassin was so soon & so fearfully summoned to his account; and that he in whose behalf, or rather in whose pretended behalf, the outrage was perpetrated, was compelled so speedily to follow, while God in his wisdom, after allowing you to suffer so fearfully, seems about to restore you to the theatre of your usefulness & fame. Do not think however that I imagine your sense of triumph has in it any touch of exultation over the melancholy fates of your assailant and his uncle. I am sure it has not. I am sure that had it been in your power to reverse the decrees of Heaven's Chancery against them your magnanimity would have prompted the reversal. Your triumph is higher & purer: it is over suffering, over wrong, over misrepresentation— and it is for the cause as well as for yourself.

We have, here in Ohio, engaged in a new battle. Our state election takes place next October, and the tickets of both parties are nominated and the platforms of both have been promulgated. Our Republican Platform takes distinct ground for the repeal of the Fugitive Slave Act & against the extention of the five years term of naturalization. The occasion of the first was supplied by the recent trials at Cleveland — prosecutions against some of our best citizens for the alleged rescue of a Fugitive Slave, and the refusal of our own Supreme Court to set them free on Habeas Corpus, on the ground that the act is unwarranted by the Constitution — the occasion of the second was furnished by the two years amendment in Massachusetts which raised such a clamor among the naturalized citizens, and gave rise to such a torrent of accusations against the Republican Party that our Convention found itself obliged to speak out plainly & decidedly. I am glad of it, though great offence is given for the present to some whom I would gladly conciliate at any expense short of the sacrifice of our principles.

Of course I am not a candidate for reelection as Governor. It is generally supposed that if we carry the State Legislature — a result not quite certain — that I shall be reelected to the Senate; and there is a very general disposition in Ohio and several other States to press my nomination for the Presidency as a Western man & on the whole the most available candidate. Our friend Seward will also be urged strongly from New York, and I presume that my friends, if they find that my nomination cannot be carried, will generally go for him as a second choice. His friends will probably make me, also, their second choice if he cannot be nominated. Of course I cannot claim to be indifferent when a position which will afford so grand an opportunity for renovation of admn [administration?] at home & of policy abroad, is thus brought within the possibility of attainment, but I am certain that I would not imperil the triumph of our cause for the sake of securing the opportunity to myself rather than to another.

I presume you will see our friend Bailey. The prayers of thousands follow him abroad. I earnestly pray that he may find the great blessings of health & strength which he seeks. We are now — he & I — both turned of fifty & no longer young. My general health yet remains apparently unbroken but I feel & observe symptoms which admonish me that my hold on life is not so strong as it was. Kate thinks she must send a few lines.

Good bye—May God bless you.

Affectionately,

[SALMON P. CHASE.]

SOURCE: Diary and correspondence of Salmon P. Chase, Annual Report of the American Historical Association for the Year 1902, Vol. 2, p. 280-1

Julia Ward Howe to her Sisters, Thursday, May 29, 1856

Thursday, 29, 1856

We have been in the most painful state of excitement relative to Kansas matters and dear Charles Sumner, whose condition gives great anxiety.¹ Chev is as you might expect under such circumstances; he has had much to do with meetings here, etc., etc. New England spunk seems to be pretty well up, but what will be done is uncertain as yet. One thing we have got: the Massachusetts Legislature has passed the “personal liberty bill,” which will effectually prevent the rendition of any more fugitive slaves from Massachusetts. Another thing, the Tract Society here (orthodox) has put out old Dr. Adams, who published a book in favor of slavery; a third thing, the Connecticut legislature has withdrawn its invitation to Mr. Everett to deliver his oration before them, in consequence of his having declined to speak at the Sumner meeting in Faneuil Hall. . . .

_______________

¹ In consequence of the assault upon him in the Senate Chamber by Preston Brooks of South Carolina.

SOURCE: Laura E. Richards & Maud Howe Elliott, Julia Ward Howe, 1819-1910, Large-Paper Edition, Volume 1, p. 168

Diary of William Howard Russell: April 5, 1861

Dined with the Southern Commissioners and a small party at Gautier's, a French restaurateur in Pennsylvania Avenue. The gentlemen present were, I need not say, all of one way of thinking; but as these leaves will see the light before the civil war is at an end, it is advisable not to give their names, for it would expose persons resident in Washington, who may not be suspected by the Government, to those marks of attention which they have not yet ceased to pay to their political enemies. Although I confess that in my judgment too much stress has been laid in England on the severity with which the Federal authorities have acted towards their political enemies, who were seeking their destruction, it may be candidly admitted, that they have forfeited all claim to the lofty position they once occupied as a Government existing by moral force, and by the consent of the governed, to which Bastilles and lettrès de cachêt, arbitrary arrests, and doubtful, illegal, if not altogether unconstitutional, suspension of habeas corpus and of trial by jury were unknown.

As Col. Pickett and Mr. Banks are notorious Secessionists, and Mr. Phillips has since gone South, after the arrest of his wife on account of her anti-federal tendencies, it may be permitted-to mention that they were among the guests. I had pleasure in making the acquaintance of Governor Roman. Mr. Crawford, his brother commissioner, is a much younger man, of considerably greater energy and determination, but probably of less judgment. The third commissioner, Mr. Forsyth, is fanatical in his opposition to any suggestions of compromise or reconstruction; but, indeed, upon that point, there is little difference of opinion amongst any of the real adherents of the South. Mr. Lincoln they spoke of with contempt; Mr. Seward they evidently regarded as the ablest and most unscrupulous of their enemies; but the tone in which they alluded to the whole of the Northern people indicated the clear conviction that trade, commerce, the pursuit of gain, manufacture, and the base mechanical arts, had so degraded the whole race, they would never attempt to strike a blow in fair fight for what they prized so highly in theory and in words. Whether it be in consequence of some secret influence which slavery has upon the minds of men, or that the aggression of the North upon their institutions has been of a nature to excite the deepest animosity and most vindictive hate, certain it is there is a degree of something like ferocity in the Southern mind towards New England which exceeds belief. I am persuaded that these feelings of contempt are extended towards England. They believe that we, too, have had the canker of peace upon us. One evidence of this, according to Southern men, is the abolition of duelling. This practice, according to them, is highly wholesome and meritorious; and, indeed, it may be admitted that in the state of society which is reported to exist in the Southern States, it is a useful check on such men as it restrained in our own islands in the last century. In the course of conversation, one gentleman remarked that he considered it disgraceful for any man to take money for the dishonor of his wife or his daughter. “With us,” he said, “there is but one mode of dealing known. The man who dares tamper with the honor of a white woman, knows what he has to expect. We shoot him down like a dog, and no jury in the South will ever find any man guilty of murder for punishing such a scoundrel.” An argument which can scarcely be alluded to was used by them, to show that these offences in Slave States had not the excuse which might be adduced to diminish their gravity when they occurred in States where all the population were white. Indeed, in this, as in some other matters of a similar character, slavery is their summum bonum of morality, physical excellence, and social purity. I was inclined to question the correctness of the standard which they had set up, and to inquire whether the virtue which needed this murderous use of the pistol and the dagger to defend it, was not open to some doubt; but I found there was very little sympathy with my views among the company.

The gentlemen at table asserted that the white men in the Slave States are physically superior to the men of the Free States; and indulged in curious theories in morals and physics to which I was a stranger. Disbelief of anything a Northern man — that is, a Republican — can say, is a fixed principle in their minds. I could not help remarking, when the conversation turned on the duplicity of Mr. Seward, and the wickedness of the Federal Government in refusing to give the assurance Sumter would not be relieved by force of arms, that it must be of very little consequence what promises Mr. Seward made, as, according to them, not the least reliance was to be placed on his word. The notion that the Northern men are cowards is justified by instances in which congressmen have been insulted by Southern men without calling them out, and Mr. Sumner's case was quoted as the type of the affairs of the kind between the two sides. I happened to say that I always understood Mr. Sumner had been attacked suddenly and unexpectedly, and struck down before he could rise from his desk to defend himself; whereupon a warm refutation of that version of the story was given, and I was assured that Mr. Brooks, who was a very slight man, and much inferior in height to Mr. Sumner, struck him a slight blow at first, and only inflicted the heavier strokes when irritated by the Senator's cowardly demeanor In reference to some remark made about the cavaliers and their connection with the South, I reminded the gentleman that, after all, the descendants of the Puritans were not to be despised in battle: and that the best gentry in England were worsted at last by the train-bands of London, and the “rabbledom” of Cromwell's Independents.

Mr., or Colonel, Pickett, is a tall good-looking man, of pleasant manners, and well-educated. But this gentleman was a professed buccaneer, a friend of Walker, the gray-eyed man of destiny — his comrade in his most dangerous razzie. He was a newspaper writer, a soldier, a filibuster; and he now threw himself into the cause of the South with vehemence; it was not difficult to imagine he saw in that cause the realization of the dreams of empire in the south of the Gulf, and of conquest in the islands of the sea, which have such a fascinating influence over the imagination of a large portion of the American people. He referred to Walker's fate with much bitterness, and insinuated he was betrayed by the British officer who ought to have protected him.

The acts of Mr. Floyd and Mr. Howell Cobb, which must be esteemed of doubtful morality, are here justified by the States' Rights doctrine. If the States had a right to go out, hey were quite right in obtaining their quota of the national property which would not have been given to them by the Lincolnites. Therefore, their friends were not to be censured because they had sent arms and money to the South.

Altogether the evening, notwithstanding the occasional warmth of the controversy, was exceedingly instructive; one could understand from the vehemence and force of the speakers the full meaning of the phrase of “firing the Southern heart,” so often quoted as an illustration of the peculiar force of political passion to be brought to bear against the Republicans in the Secession contest. Mr. Forsyth, struck me as being the most astute, and perhaps most capable, of the gentlemen whose mission to Washington seems likely to be so abortive. His name is historical in America — his father filled high office, and his son has also exercised diplomatic function. Despotisms and Republics of the American model approach each other closely. In Turkey the Pasha unemployed sinks into insignificance, and the son of the Pasha deceased is literally nobody. Mr. Forsyth was not selected as Southern Commissioner on account of the political status acquired by his father; but the position gained by his own ability, as editor of “The Mobile Register,” induced the Confederate authorities to select him for the post. It is quite possible to have made a mistake in such matters, but I am almost certain that the colored waiters who attended us at table looked as sour and discontented as could be, and seemed to give their service with a sort of protest. I am told that the tradespeople of Washington are strongly inclined to favor the Southern side.

SOURCE: William Howard Russell, My Diary North and South, p. 63-6

Diary of Margaret Junkin Preston: July 2, 1862

. . . People think that the reason Jackson is so successful is because he prays so much. One of his staff told Mr. P. not long ago, that amid the strife of battle he had sometimes seen him for a moment with uplifted hands in the act of prayer. When Mr. P. was his Adjutant-General, he says Jackson was in the habit of withdrawing frequently during the day, when it was practicable, as Mr. P. believes, for prayer.

SOURCE: Elizabeth Preston Allan, The Life and Letters of Margaret Junkin Preston, p. 145

Diary of Mary Boykin Chesnut: June 29, 1861

Mrs. Preston, Mrs. Wigfall, Mary Hammy and I drove in a fine open carriage to see the Champ de Mars. It was a grand tableau out there. Mr. Davis rode a beautiful gray horse, the Arab Edwin de Leon brought him from Egypt. His worst enemy will allow that he is a consummate rider, graceful and easy in the saddle, and Mr. Chesnut, who has talked horse with his father ever since he was born, owns that Mr. Davis knows more about horses than any man he has met yet. General Lee was there with him; also Joe Davis and Wigfall acting as his aides.

Poor Mr. Lamar has been brought from his camp — paralysis or some sort of shock. Every woman in the house is ready to rush into the Florence Nightingale business. I think I will wait for a wounded man, to make my first effort as Sister of Charity. Mr. Lamar sent for me. As everybody went, Mr. Davis setting the example, so did I. Lamar will not die this time. Will men flatter and make eyes, until their eyes close in death, at the ministering angels? He was the same old Lamar of the drawing-room.

It is pleasant at the President's table. My seat is next to Joe Davis, with Mr. Browne on the other side, and Mr. Mallory opposite. There is great constraint, however. As soon as I came I repeated what the North Carolina man said on the cars, that North Carolina had 20,000 men ready and they were kept back by Mr. Walker, etc. The President caught something of what I was saying, and asked me to repeat it, which I did, although I was scared to death. “Madame, when you see that person tell him his statement is false. We are too anxious here for troops to refuse a man who offers himself, not to speak of 20,000 men.” Silence ensued — of the most profound.

Uncle H. gave me three hundred dollars for his daughter Mary's expenses, making four in all that I have of hers. He would pay me one hundred, which he said he owed my husband for a horse. I thought it an excuse to lend me money. I told him I had enough and to spare for all my needs until my Colonel came home from the wars.

Ben Allston, the Governor's son, is here — came to see me; does not show much of the wit of the Petigrus; pleasant person, however. Mr. Brewster and Wigfall came at the same time. The former, chafing at Wigfall's anomalous position here, gave him fiery advice. Mr. Wigfall was calm and full of common sense. A brave man, and without a thought of any necessity for displaying his temper, he said: “Brewster, at this time, before the country is strong and settled in her new career, it would be disastrous for us, the head men, to engage in a row among ourselves.”

As I was brushing flies away and fanning the prostrate Lamar, I reported Mr. Davis's conversation of the night before. “He is all right,” said Mr. Lamar, “the fight had to come. We are men, not women. The quarrel had lasted long enough. We hate each other so, the fight had to come. Even Homer's heroes, after they had stormed and scolded enough, fought like brave men, long and well. If the athlete, Sumner, had stood on his manhood and training and struck back when Preston Brooks assailed him, Preston Brooks's blow need not have been the opening skirmish of the war. Sumner's country took up the fight because he did not. Sumner chose his own battle-field, and it was the worse for us. What an awful blunder that Preston Brooks business was!” Lamar said Yankees did not fight for the fun of it; they always made it pay or let it alone.

Met Mr. Lyon with news, indeed — a man here in the midst of us, taken with Lincoln's passports, etc., in his pocket — a palpable spy. Mr. Lyon said he would be hanged — in all human probability, that is.

A letter from my husband written at Camp Pickens, and saying: “If you and Mrs. Preston can make up your minds to leave Richmond, and can come up to a nice little country house near Orange Court House, we could come to see you frequently while the army is stationed here. It would be a safe place for the present, near the scene of action, and directly in the line of news from all sides.” So we go to Orange Court House.

Read the story of Soulouque,¹ the Haytian man: he has wonderful interest just now. Slavery has to go, of course, and joy go with it. These Yankees may kill us and lay waste our land for a while, but conquer us — never!

_______________

¹ Faustin Elie Soulouque, a negro slave of Hayti, who, having been freed, took part in the insurrection against the French in 1803, and rose by successive steps until in August, 1849, by the unanimous action of the parliament, he was proclaimed emperor.

SOURCE: Mary Boykin Chesnut, Edited by Isabella D. Martin and Myrta Lockett Avary, A Diary From Dixie, p. 72-4

Geo. Francis Train, Esq., Defendes the “Yankees.”

From the London American, Feb. 20.

On Monday evening last, Mr. Train was again challenged by the secessionists, on the question, “What chance has the South to obtain its Independence?”

Mr. TRAIN – Certainly I comply with your call, but more to state the facts than make a speech.  The secession speaker sneers at the Yankees – ridicules their industry, and ignores their wonderful energy.  It is time, Mr. Chairman, to stop this sneering at the North – this Sam Slicking the word Yankees.  Halliburton an Englishman, wrote for an English audience – in an English colony – and the English mind being open to accept any thing that would satirize Americans, takes Sam Slick for a text book, when we never use the language at all which he ascribes to us.  [oh!]  Americans never use the word Britisher, and you should know that when you sneer at the Yankee, you sneer at your own people.

The pilgrims were Englishmen.  When they landed on the Western shore, the Indians ran down to meet them crying, “Yengeese!  Yengeese!” which is the Indian word for English; and as Englishmen torture language to most uncouth shapes, calling my lord – my lud – Derby – Darby, and persist in calling Cowper – Cooper ! – [Laughter.] – so the Indian word Yengeese in time became Yengees – Yenkee – Yankee.  [Hear, hear.]  Yankee meaning Englishman – so remember in future when you sneer at the word Yankee, you sneer at yourself and your own countrymen.  [Applause.]  The New Englander is proud of the name.  You compliment me sir, by the allusion, for it is the Yankee who has raised the Flag of the Union on every mountain in Christendom and raised its hallowed folds over every billow in all the oceans.  [Cheers.]  The secessionist in the winter carries on his trade on Yankee capital, and in the summer is obliged to go to Yankee watering places for his vacation; spending pennies in his meagre plantation fare where nobody is looking on, but throwing away pounds in Yankee land in the bar-rooms, the gambling-houses and places of evil repute, whenever he can dazzle the unsuspecting with his bank notes. [Loud laughter.]

The game of Bragg is not always a game of cards.  Is there any game about here, asked the Young Englishman with a bag and gun when landing on the banks of the Mississippi?  Yes, plenty, lisped the negro.  What?  Oh, principally Poker!  [Laughter.]  That is not a Yankee game, or Yankee story.  [Laughter.]  The South depends upon the Yankee for food and raiment – for its medicines – its necessities and its luxuries.  The Yankee supplies the secessionist with Bibles, though seldom called for, and printing paper and ice and coffins. – [Laughter.]  The secession mother sends to Yankee land for a Yankee schoolmistress to teach her children.  And the Secession father sends his sons to Yankee West Points, Yankee naval schools, and Yankee colleges.  Many of to-day’s traitors were taught truth, honor, morality and religion at our Yankee Harvard University, only to return and lie and swear and steal and breed treason. [Hear.]  Remember again, sir, when you sneer, that Yankee means Englishman – or may be translated – as the true type of such a Christian gentleman.  [Cheers.]

How can the honorable speaker quote Latin when he knows that none of us understand it.  [Laughter.]  Said the classic Sir James Granham to the honest old sailor, Sir Charles Napier, after a warm argument regarding Cronstadt – “In medio tussissimus ibis.”  Sir Charles, under great excitement, responded, “You are another.”  [Laughter.]  “Another what?”  “Just what you called me.”  [Laughter.]  But even Latin won’t do to make out a case for Secession.  He says, as a rule, the attacked party always deserves the most sympathy – intimating, in the face of what is not true, that the North attacked the South, when we all know that Beauregard fired the first shot at Anderson.  [That’s so.]  On that principle he would have been with the Russians in the Crimean war, against his own countrymen – [Hear and applause] – or, with better analogy, when discovering a scamp maltreating a woman, or committing burglary, he would side with the desperate thief rather than the policeman whose duty it was to arrest him.  [Hear.]

He speaks again of Carolinian chivalry!  I am tired of that now.  Who ever heard of it until Brooks brutally crept behind the back of Senator Sumner with a bludgeon in hand, with the intention of assassinating him in the Senate Chamber, while his confederate Keitt stood by with a loaded revolver to see fair play?  [Shame.]  The chivalry are no longer in Congress, and the world can no longer witness there a repetition of such disgraceful secession blackguardism! – Southern chivalry!  Look at our armies within six miles of the chivalric Charleston!  Thank God, I am a Puritan and no Cavalier – I am a Roundhead and no Pretender – I belong to the Cromwellian army, and pride myself on being a Yankee!  [Cheers.]  The secessionist accuses the North of frauds, and says that from the first to the last President there has been nothing but robbery and corruption.  Now, as I have before proved that the South for seventy years controlled the Government and was the Treasurer of the nation, I am not surprised at his statement.  [Loud cheers.]

The Right Hon. Secessionist who immediately preceded me disputed my statement that the South robbed the North of fifty millions sterling private debts, and fifty millions sterling private property, and said that when the Secessionist Commissioners went to Washington they offered to pay the Administration all debts., &c.  Shades of repudiation, protect me!  They pay!  Why, gentlemen, an anecdote will best show how ridiculous is that statement. – The first Secessionist, you know was Satan! – [Laughter and cheers.]  He seceded from a purer world – and with inimitable cheek he took our Savior upon a high mount, and offered all the kingdoms round about if he would join his secession party, when every state he had was mortgaged, and the poor devil had not a shilling in the world.  [Loud cheers and renewed laughter.]  He should have given Mr. Seward credit for generosity in permitting the scamps to return at all.  [Oh!]  You may comment, but had O’Brien, and Mitchell, and Meagher presented themselves to Lord John Russell at Downing street in 1848, on a similar errand, how quickly they would have been incarcerated in the Tower.  [Yes, and loud applause.]  The gentleman wants a monarchy, during the next few weeks he shall have all the military advantages of such a Government.  [Hear.]

The game is up, and the hunters are starting with the bugle.  Long before Mr. Cowper gets his drive through Hyde Park, or Sir Robert Peel fights The O’Donoghue, our manikin traitors will be no more.  The Secessionist made one statement about Southern courage which I must rectify.  This is the same old brag that one Southerner is equal to three or four Yankees – he said that he himself was good any time for two.  [Hear.]  Now, Mr. Chairman, if I have a weak point that is strong, that is the point – [laughter] – and if you will suspend the rules and send out for a pair of gloves, I will soon prove to you by facts – while he uses words – that there is one Northerner, at least who will make as short work of him physically as he has done intellectually.  [Loud and continued cheers and laughter.]

The challenged party became the challenger, but Mr. Train’s proposition, however, was not accepted; and during the excitement created by the novel offer, the question was adjourned until Wednesday.

– Published in The Burlington Weekly Hawk-Eye, Burlington, Iowa, Saturday, March 22, 1862, p. 1