Harper's Weekly Editorials on Carl Schurz/Carl Schurz

by Harper's Weekly

CARL SCHURZ.

Our correspondent, Mr. Eugene Lawrence, in some recent severe comments upon Mr. Schurz, gave, as we think, a wholly incorrect impression of a passage in the speech of that gentleman in the Louisiana debate. Mr. Lawrence, referring to the speech, said that Mr. Schurz “begins now to despair of the republic,” and “scarcely hopes to see it survive the Centennial of 1876.” We quote the passage which is supposed to authorize this statement, but which really expresses the highest faith in republican institutions. The italics are ours.

“Above all things, gentlemen, indulge in no delusions as to the consequences of your doings. Be bold enough to look this great question for one moment squarely in the face. If you really think that the peace and order of society in this country can no longer be maintained through the self-government of the people under the Constitution and the impartial enforcement of constitutional laws; if you really think that this old machinery of free government can no longer be trusted with its most important functions, and that such transgressions on the part of those in power as now pass before us are right and necessary for the public welfare — then, gentlemen, admit that this government of the people, for the people and by the people is a miscarriage. Admit that the hundredth anniversary of this Republic must be the confession of its failure, and make up your minds to change the form as well as the nature of our institutions; for to play at republic longer would then be a cruel mockery. But I entreat you, do not delude yourselves and others with the thought that by following the fatal road upon which we now are marching you can still preserve those institutions; for I tell you, and the history of struggling mankind bears me out, where the forms of constitutional government can be violated with impunity, there the spirit of constitutional government will soon be dead. Who does not know that republics will be sometimes the theater of confusion, disturbance and violent transgressions; more frequently, perhaps, than monarchies governed by strong despotic rule? The citizens of a republic have to pay some price for the great boon of their common liberty. But do we not know, also, or have we despaired of it, that in a republic remedies for such evils can be found in entire consonance with the spirit and form of republican institutions and of constitutional government? Let nobody suspect me of favoring or excusing disorder or violent transgressions; nothing could be farther from me. But I have not despaired of the efficiency of our republican institutions. I insist that they do furnish effective remedies for existing evils....

“I repeat, republican institutions and self-government have remedies to right the wrongs occurring, and if left to their legitimate action they will prove far more efficient to that end than the arbitrary measures we are now witnessing....

“I have spoken earnestly, Sir, for my feelings and convictions on this great subject are strong and sincere. I cannot forget that this republic, which it has cost so much strife and so much blood to establish and to preserve, stands in the world to prove to struggling mankind that the self-government of the people under wise laws is able to evolve all necessary remedies for existing evils without violating popular liberty or constitutional rights. I can not forget that if we fail in solving this vital problem, this republic will become not a guiding star of liberty, but only another warning example.”

We certainly can not regard such words and sentiments as these as showing any distrust of the republic, for they are entirely harmonious with much that we have said, and we are not conscious of any decline of faith in America or republican institutions. Of course the opinions of the editor of the Weekly upon public questions and public men are expressed only in the editorial columns.