The Collected Works of Theodore Parker/Volume 04/Discourse 11
XI.
PSALM XII. 8.
"The wicked walk on every side, when the vilest men are exalted."
On the last Sunday of May, 1854, which was also the beginning of Anniversary Week, I stood here to preach a Sermon of War. In 1846, at the beginning of the Mexican trouble, I spoke of that national wickedness, and again, at the end of the strife, warned the country of that evil deed, begun without the People's consent. When the next great quarrel broke out, in 1854, and Russia, Turkey, England, and France, were engaged in a war which threatened to set all Europe in a flame, I prepared an elaborate sermon on the causes and most obvious consequences of that great feud, an account of the forces then in the field or on the flood, and tried to picture forth the awful spectacle of Christian Europe in the hour of war. I spent many days in collecting the facts and studying their significance. But, while I was computing the cost and the consequence of foreign wickedness, a crime even more atrocious was getting committed under our own eyes, in the streets of Boston; and, when I came to preach on the Russian attack against the independence of a sister state, I found the sermon wholly out of time: for the Boston Judge of Probate had assaulted a brother man, innocent of all offence, poor, unprotected, and apparently friendless. The guardian of orphans—a man not marked by birth for such a deed, but spurred thereto by cruel goads—had kidnapped an American in our streets, clapped him into an unlawful gaol, watched him with ruffians, the offscouring of the town, and guarded him with foreign soldiers, hired to rend and kill whomsoever our masters set them on. Without hearing the evidence, this swift judge had already decided to destroy his victim, and told the counsel. Put no "obstacles in the way of his going back, as he probably will." The whole Commonwealth was in confusion. Boston was in a state of siege. A hundred and eighty foreign soldiers filled up the Court House. There had been an extemporaneous meeting at Faneuil Hall, an attempt to rescue the kidnapper's victim, an attack on the Court House, then unlawfully made a barracoon for our Southern masters to keep their slaves in. One of the volunteers in man-stealing had been slain, and ten or twelve citizens were in gaol on charge of murder. So, when I stood here, and looked into the eyes of the great crowd which filled up these aisles, I saw it was no time to treat of the Russian war against liberty; and my discourse of that wickedness turned into a "Lesson for the Hay," touching the new Crime against Humanity. Since then, no occasion has offered for treating of that dreadful conflict of the European nations.
Now, when the Russian war is all over, the treaty of peace definitely settled, I thought it would be worth while to examine that matter: for the cloud of battle has lifted up, and we can look back, and learn the causes of the conflict; look round, and see the dead bodies, the remnants of cities burned, of navies sunk; can look forward, and calculate what loss or gain thence accrues to mankind; and so get possibly a little guidance, and a great deal of warning, for our own conduct. So, to-day, I had intended to preach a calm and philosophical Sermon of the Late War in Europe; examining at length its Cause, Process, and Results, for the present and the future, and its Relation to the Progress and Welfare of Mankind. I meant to look at that transaction in the light of modern philosophy, and of that religion which is alike human and Christian. But now, as before, a new Crime against Humanity has been committed. I must therefore lay by my speculations on that distant evil, and speak of what touches the sin at our own doors. So, this morning, I shall ask your attention to A New Lesson for the Day, in which I shall say a little about the Russian war and European affairs,—yet enough to give a tone of warning, and so likewise of guidance,—and shall have much to offer touching affairs in our country; a little of the Russian war, much of the American. This discourse may be profitable; it is not pleasant to speak or hear.
When an important event occurs, I have felt it my duty, as a minister and public speaker, to look for its Causes,—which often lie far behind us, wholly out of sight,—and also for its Consequences, that are equally hidden in the distance before us. Accordingly, to some, who only look round them in haste, not far back or forth, what I say often seems improper and out of season. Thus, in 1846, when I treated of the Mexican war, many critics said, You must wait till we have done fighting, before you preach against its wrong! And when I reviewed the Life and Conduct of Mr. Webster,—the greatest understanding New England has borne in her bosom for a whole generation,—they said again, De mortuis nil nisi bonum,—You had better put off your criticism for fifty years! But at that time both you and I will not be here to make or profit by it. Some men will also doubtless condemn what I offer now. Wait a little, before you judge. A few years, perhaps a few days, will justify the saddest things I have to say. I wish to mount a great Lesson on this fleet occasion.
The events of the last week at Washington have caused a great heat in this community, not excessive at all; it is too little, rather than too much. They have not heated me in the smallest; my pulse has not beat quicker than before; and, though a tear may sometimes spring to my eye, my judgment is as calm and cool as before: for this assault on Mr. Sumner is no new thing. I have often talked such matters over with him, and said, I know you are prepared to meet the reasoning of the South when it is tendered in words; but her chief argument is bludgeons and bullets; are you ready for that? And our Senator was as cool about it as I am: he also had looked the matter in the face. It excites no surprise in him, none in me. When the iron is hot, it is just as well that the blacksmith should be cool. First look at the Russian matter, then at the American.
Look at the Amount of Evil in that Russian war.
It did not last two years; yet see what vast sums of money it has cost! Here are the figures: they are partly conjectural, but wholly moderate; they are the estimates of some of the great European journals. France and England have paid four hundred and eighty millions of dollars, Turkey a hundred and forty millions, Austria a hundred millions, Russia three hundred millions. Here, then, ten hundred and twenty millions of dollars have been eaten up in a war not twenty-four months long. Now, that sum of money is more than seven times as great as the entire property, real and personal, of "the great State of South Carolina." That is the direct cost to the governments of the Five Nations: it does not include the damage done to their forts and ships (and, in a single night, Russia destroyed a larger navy of her own vessels than the United States owns,—burnt and sunk it in the harbour of Sebastopol); it does not embrace the diminution of military and naval supplies, or the pensions hereafter to be paid; it makes no account of the injury to individuals whose property has been consumed, or the great cost to the other powers of Europe. When all the bills are in, as they will be a hundred and fifty years hence, then I think it will appear that that two years' fight cost Europe two thousand millions of dollars. That is the amount of the personal and real estate of Massachusetts and Pennsylvania.
Here are the figures representing the deaths of soldiers. England has lost fifty thousand soldiers, France a hundred and seventy thousand, Turkey eighty thousand, and Russia four hundred thousand; making seven hundred thousand men, who have perished in the prime of life. This does not include those who will yet die of their wounds, nor such as perish by the worst of deaths, — the slow heart-break of orphans and widows, or those who meant to be wives, but are widows, though never married. Put it all together, and the two years' war has cost at least a million of lives. Such a spendthrift is war, both of money and men. Now look at the Causes of this amount of evil, which are quite various. Some of them lie on the top.
First, there is the despotism of the Russian governors, who rule their subjects with an iron rod. There is no freedom of industry in Russia, none of religion; and freedom of speech is also cut off. They attack and despoil other nations more civilized than themselves. The Russian Government has long been the great filibuster of Christendom. Turkey was feeble, Russia strong; each was despotic; and the big despot would eat up the little. Russia was Christian,—theologically Christian, not morally,—Turkey was Mahometan; and the Christian wished to tread the Mahometan under foot. The Emperor said, "Turkey is a sick man; let us kill him, that the inheritance may be ours." This was the first obvious cause, the despotism of Russia, the initiating cause.
But other rulers had a kindred spirit. The other great powers of Europe are Prussia, Austria, France, and England. Prussia and Austria are despotic governments. A small class of oligarchs domineer over the people. They are closely joined to Russia by nature and aim; by alliances, matrimonial or diplomatic. The governments of Russia, Austria, and Prussia, are a national brotherhood of thieves. In the eighteenth century, they plundered Poland; in the nineteenth, other nations; and their own subjects continually. This judgment seems rather harsh. I do not speak of the People, only of the oligarchy which rules the hundred and twenty millions who make up these three nations.
France has established a military despotism, with the picture of "universal suffrage" painted on the cannon. The farce of a Republic is every year enacted by soldiers and government officers,—administration officials. She also longs for conquest,—witness Algiers and Rome,—and in idle vanities consumes the people's wealth,—spends eighty thousand dollars to christen a little baby, an imperial doll.
Alone of all these great powers, England respects the rights of the people, and has institutions progressively democratic. She purposely advances towards freedom. But she, too, shares the instinct to conquer, and, after Russia, is the most invasive power in Europe. Witness her conquests all round the world. She owns a sixth part of the earth's surface,—controls a fifth part of the population. Besides that, this noble Anglo-Saxon nation is ruled by an hereditary aristocracy of kings, nobles, and priests, who, though the best perhaps in Europe, yet tread the people down, though far less than anywhere else in Europe. Certainly, for the last three hundred years, England has been the great bulwark of human freedom ; and, just now, she is the only European nation that allows liberty of speech on matters of religion, politics, science, everything. In Europe, freedom can only be defended in the English tongue.
Now, in common with Austria, Russia, and France," the English Government had longed for the spoils of Turkey,—also counting the Sultan a sick man, and wanting his inheritance. But these great powers could not agree as to the share that each should take; otherwise the Sultan had died twenty years ago.
All Europe is ruled by an affiliated oligarchy of kings, nobles, and priests, who have unity of idea and aim, to develop the power of the strong and to keep the people down, and unity of action in all great matters. But in England there is such a mass of thoughtful men, men of property too, such a stern love of individual liberty, that the foot of despotism is never secure, nor its print is ever very deep, on that firm Saxon soil. Just now the Anglo-Saxon nation in Europe presents a very grand spectacle. She opens her arms to the exile from every land: despots find a home there, with none to molest nor make them afraid; and patriots are welcome to the generous bosom of England, which bore our fathers. Though she once, and wickedly, fought against us, she respects and loves her sons, perhaps not the least noble portion of herself.
The spirit of despotism in the other governments of Europe, kindred to the invasive despotism of Russia, was the next cause of that war,—the cause co-operative.
The reputation of France and England for ancient mutual hate, led the Russian Emperor to believe they would not oppose his rapacity. Neither was strong enough alone; and they could not join. So he reached out his hand to snatch the glittering prize. Of course, he began the robbery with a pious pretence: he did not wish for Turkish soil, only "to protect the Christians," to "have access to the holy places where our blessed Lord was born and slain, and buried too;" so that all Christian people might fulfil the prophecy, and "go up to the mountain of the Lord." The Latin proverb says well, "All evil begins in the name of the Lord." This was no exception.
This brief quarrel, which costs mankind two thousand million dollars and ten hundred thousand lives, was a War of Politicians, not at all of the People. It began only with despots: there was no ill-blood between the nations. Had Nicholas asked the Russians, "Will you go and plunder Turkey in the name of Jesus of Nazareth?" the People would have said, "Not so; but we will stay at home." The war came from no sudden heat. Nicholas had foreseen it, planned it, and in secret made ready at Sebastopol the vast array of means for this wicked enterprise; had laid his gunpowder plot long years before; and, at the right time, this imperial Guy Faux fired the train which was to blow up an ancient empire, and open his way to the conquest of the Western World, No more liberty, if that scheme succeed! Yet the statesmen of France, Austria, Prussia, England, were privy to the intentions of this re-actionary, who sought to put back the march of human-kind: they were accessory to the purpose, though they knew not the hidden means. The war was the result of causes long in action, which produced this waste of life and its material—the "proximate formation" of men—as certainly as grass-seed comes up grass. Here are the practical maxims of all despotism: No Higher Law of God above the selfish force of the strong; no natural rights of the weak; all belongs to the violence of power!
In open daylight, two things went before this European waste of life: (1.) The corruptions of the Ruling class: one of the most learned men in Christendom declares, that, since the downfall of the Roman State in the fourth and fifth centuries, Europe's controlling men have never been so corrupt, so mean and selfish, as are now the kings, nobles, and priesthood. (2.) The servility of the class next below the high aristocracy, who tolerate and encourage the inflicted wrong, hoping themselves to share the profit that it brings. Still more, all this wickedness is the work of very few men. If a hundred politicians in Europe had said, "There shall be no war," there would have been no war; nay, if ten men in Europe had distinctly said, "There shall be no war against Turkey, "there would have been none; if two men in the cabinets of each of the five great powers had said so, all this immense outlay would have been spared.
Such are the Causes. On so narrow a hinge turns the dreadful gate of war!
Look now at the Results. Some are good. The intervention of France and England has shown that national hatred can be overcome; that difference of religion does not separate the Turk from Christian sympathy. The bloody valour of France and England has checked the Westward and Southward progress of Russian despotism for the next fifty years; and that fillibustering nation is weakened in her purse, her army, and her navy, and restrained from immediate encroachment on other European States. She will now turn her immense power to develop the material resources of her own territory. And let me say, that the Russian People have grand and magnificent qualities; and whoso stands here three hundred years hence will tell a history of them which few sanguine scholars would dare prophesy at this day. The Russian Government is another matter ; of that I do not wish to say anything. That is the first good that has been done; it was done wholly by France and England. You do not forget the "perfidious " conduct of Austria.
Then, the war has led Russia to open her ports, and establish free trade with all the world; and that will not only increase the material riches of Russia, but it will be in some measure a guaranty against future wars between her and other nations. For those fortresses which at this day most effectually keep war from a nation are not built of stone and earth: they are the warehouses in the great commercial streets, bales of goods, boxes of sugar, money on deposit in the great cities of the world. Free trade will help that.
Again, Turkey is delivered from her worst foe; and a secret treaty between Austria, England, and France, guarantees the independence of that State. It seems the Allies stole a march on the Russian, and negotiated this treaty in the dark.
Besides, Turkey agrees to respect the Christians who have delivered her from the enemy. She has agreed to set a lesson of toleration; and it is a little striking to see, that, just at the time when Turkey offered freedom of religion to the Christians and all others, California was doubting whether she should allow the Chinese to set up a temple to Buddha, which even Americans think should not be suffered. But I thank God that every form of Religion, old as the Buddhistic or new as the Mormon, can find a place in our land. I would not ask the Chinese to let our missionaries into their country, and refuse the Chinese missionary a corresponding privilege. Just now, Christianity is more free in Turkey than in Russia, Austria, or the Home of the Reformation itself. Another Arius or Athanasius might teach at Constantinople; while neither would be allowed in a pulpit at Vienna, Moscow, or Wittenberg.
Moreover, the treaty makes a desirable change in the law of nations. Privateering is abolished; a neutral flag protects enemy's goods, while the hostile flag does not imperil neutral goods; there can be no paper blockades. This is a great step in civilization.
But all those things might have been done without drawing a sword or shedding a drop of blood. Had the controlling class been humane men; nay, had the ten I speak of insisted on these few things,—the whole would have been done, and not a bullet shot. But the People must have leaders ; and the hereditary rulers in Europe seem hardly wiser than the elected in America. A born deceiver is no better than a deceiver chosen and sworn in; and, if the wicked lead the ignorant, the latter are sure to fall into the ditch. The crimes of statesmen are written in the People's blood.
Some of the effects are only evil. There is a great debt entailed on the nations, to be paid by millions not yet born. The yoke of bondage is more firmly fixed than before, for the standing armies are increased all over Europe: and they are the tools of tyrants.
France and England have become stronger by their union. To balance that increase of power, the Austrian Emperor has made a Concordat with the Pope ; and those two are likewise at one. In all the Austrian territory, the Romish Priest controls the public worship, the public education, the printing and selling and reading of books. Thus a long step is taken backwards towards the dark ages. Besides, there has been a considerable demoralization of the people in the greater part of Europe, caused by those deeds of violence, the spectacle and report of such national murder, which it will take years to overcome.
All the good, it seems to me, might have been effected with no war; all the evil saved, had only the leading statesmen of Europe had noble hearts, as well as able heads and high political rank. That vast sum of misery is to be set down to the account of a small number of men. Nicholas of Russia seems most of all to blame; next, mankind must charge this waste of property and life on the corruption and selfishness of the ruling class in Europe, and the servility of those next below them in social rank and public power. Remember all this when you come to think of America; and this old Hebrew oracle not less: "Righteousness exalteth a nation; but sin is the ruin of any people." The sin of the ruler is the destruction of the people.
So much for Europe. Now a word of our own country.
America is now in a state of incipient civil war: houses are burned, others are plundered ; blood is shed. A few months ago, two worthy men from Kansas, Judge Conway and Gen. Pomeroy, were worshipping here with us. They were often at my house. They have violated no constitutional law, no legal statute. But the newspapers report that both are in gaol: if they are at large, it is through their skill in escaping from lawless foes. Governor Robinson, who was also here but a few weeks ago, is now in gaol, on the charge of Treason. The Border Ruffians will hang him, if they dare. His crime is obedience to the law of his land, and hatred to Slavery. Mr. Tappan, a young man known to many of you, a member of this congregation, went to Kansas with the first company of emigrants: a worthy man, but guilty of respect for the self-evident truths of the Declaration of Independence. If he is not in gaol, his freedom is due to his own adroitness, not the justice of the "Authorities." The usurping Government strikes at those men because they love justice. Lawrence has been sacked; property destroyed, one states to the amount of a hundred and thirty thousand dollars; and I know not how many men have been murdered. I shall not speak of the violence to women. These are acts for which the General Government is responsible, committed by its creatures, who have been set upon the honest inhabitants of Kansas.
We also have a Despotic Power in the United States. There is a Russia in America, a privileged class of three hundred and fifty thousand slaveholders, who own three million five hundred thousand slaves, and control four million poor whites in the South. This despotism is more barbarous than Russia; more insolent, more unscrupulous, more invasive. It has long controlled all the great offices in America. The President is only its tool. It directs the national policy, foreign and domestic; sympathizes with every foreign tyrant; and, at home, wages war on all the best institutions of the country. Impudent and consolidated, it governs the American Church and State. It says to the Tract Society, "Not a word against Slavery;" and the Tract Society bends its knees,—so limber to men, so stiff against God,—and answers, "Not a word against Slavery: we will take a South-side view of all popular wickedness. It is true, the North pays us the money; and so it is proper that the South should tell how it must be spent. Not a word against Slavery." It comes up to the Bible Society, and thunders forth, "Don't give the New Testament to the slaves!" And the Bible Society says, "Not a New Testament. Slavery is Christian. If Jesus of Nazareth were on earth, he would open a commissioner's office in Boston, and kidnap men. Judas is the beloved disciple. We never will disturb Slavery." It tells the Northern courts, legislatures, governors, "Steal men for us; kidnap your own fellow-citizens of New England, and deliver them up to be our bondsmen for ever, and then yourselves pay the costs!" And the Northern courts, legislatures, governors, citizen-soldiers, are ready: they volunteer to steal men, and then pay the price, not only of blood, but of money, and that "with alacrity."
In Kansas, on a large scale, this Russia in America, this Privileged Class of despots in a democracy, wages war against freedom. It burns houses, destroys printing-presses, shoots men. There it was Missouri Ruffians, some of them members of Congress, an Ex-Senator or so, United-States soldiers, Southern immigrants, whom it furnishes with weapons, adorns with a legal collar, and then sets upon the people. Just now, the House of Representatives asks what force the Government has in Kansas, and what instructions have been given. The answer is, There is only a Lieutenant-Colonel's command there,—half a Regiment; the officer is ordered not to enforce the laws of the territorial legislature. This does not tell the whole story. The United- States Marshal does the bidding of the unlawful legislature which the Missourians elected: he calls out his posse comitatus, and the United-States Government furnishes them with weapons and authority. They are the provisional army in this civil war which the Government wages against the people. Look at this fact : slaveholders have hired immigrants to go from Alabama and South Carolina to Kansas, and fight the battle of Slavery. When Col. Beaufort's party, three or four hundred strong, arrived at Lawrence, they were too poor to pay for their first breakfast. What shall be done with them? They are draughted into the posse of the sheriff; and in the service of the Government, they burn the property and shoot the sons of New England: I need not dwell on these things. Every mail brings tidings of fresh wickedness committed in that ill-fated territory.
At Washington, on a small scale, this despotic power wages war against freedom. There it uses an arm of a different form,—the arm of an Honourable Ruffian, a member of Congress, a (Southern) "gentleman," a "man of property and standing," born of one of the "first families of South Carolina," a nephew (by marriage) of Senator Butler. He skulks about the purlieus of the Capitol, and twice seeks to waylay his victim, honourable, and suspecting no dishonour. But, failing of that meanness, the assassin, a bludgeon in his hand, pistols in his pocket, attended by his five friends, armed also with daggers and pistols. watches in the Senate Chamber till his enemy is alone, then steals up behind him as he sits writing, when his arms are pinioned in his heavy chair and his other limbs are under the desk, and on his naked head strikes him with a club loaded with lead, until he falls, stunned and bleeding, to the floor, and then continues his coward blows. South Carolina is very chivalrous! If an Irishman in Cove Place should strike another Irishman after he was down, it would be thought a very heinous offence amongst Irishmen. If Patrick had Michael down, and then beat him, (pardon me, forty thousand Irishmen in Boston, that I suppose it possible!) it would be thought a great outrage. Cove Place would hoot him forth with a shout of contemptuous rage. But when a son of South Carolina beats a defenceless man over the head, after he has stunned him and brought him to the ground, it is very chivalrous ! South Carolina applauds it, and gets up a testimonial to do it honour. All the South will commend the mode as well as the matter of the deed.
This American oligarchy means to destroy all our democratic institutions. Russian despotism is not more hostile to liberty in Europe than the Slave Power to freedom here. But the slaveholders are not alone. American and Russian despotism have the same allies,—the corruption of many controlling men, such as direct the politics of the North, and to a great extent also its large commerce. Since the settlement of the country, the great mass of Northern men have never been so well educated and so moral. But the controlling class of men, who manage the high commerce and fill the political offices, have never been so corrupt, so unpatriotic, so mean and selfish. Will you say I am mistaken? Then the error is of long standing; a judgment formed after careful study of the past, and a wide knowledge of the present. Look at Massachusetts, the State officials, the United States officials, the United States Court in New England: can the past furnish a parallel since Andros was Commissioner, and Papal James II. was King? The Hutchinsons and the Olivers of revolutionary times would blush to be named with men whose brow no wickedness can shame. It would be cruel to Benedict Arnold to compare him with certain other sons of New England now in high official place. Be not surprised at this attack on Mr. Sumner. It is no strange thing. It is the result of a long series of acts, each the child of its predecessor, and father of what followed, not exceptional, but instantial, in our history. Look with a little patience after the Cause of those outrages at Kansas and at Washington. You will not agree with me to-day; I cannot convince four thousand men, and carry them quite so far, all at once. Think of my words when you go home.
Look first at the obvious cause of the blows dealt that fair senatorial head by the Hon. Mr. Brooks, of South Carolina. It is the ferocious Disposition of the Slaveholder. I know the cruelty of that despotism only too well, and am not thought very sparing of my words. You know what I utter; God, what I withhold. Much, both of fact and feeling, I have always kept in reserve, and still keep it. What I give is quite as much as any audience can carry or will take.
This ferocious despotism has determined on two things:
First, Slavery shall spread all over the land, into the Territories, into the (so-called) free States.
Second, Freedom of speech against it shall not be allowed anywhere in the Territories, in the free States, or in the Capitol, any more than in South Carolina.
Proof of each is only too plentiful and plain. As a sign of the times, look at a single straw in the stream of slavery: it is a poison-weed in a muddy, fetid stream, but it shows which way its pestilential waters run. A few days since, a man, holding an important office under the United States Government in Boston, told one of my friends, "It won't be three years before a man will be punished for talking Nigger (speaking against slavery) in Boston, as surely as he now is in Charleston, S.C." This "unterrified democrat" has now gone to the Cincinnati Convention, whereof he is a worthy member, to organize means to attain that end. I shall not tell you his name,—that is hateful enough already; but turn your wrath against the ferocious despotism which uses him to bark and bite.
That is the obvious cause, the cause initiative, of which I have much more to tell, only not now.
Look next at the Secondary Causes, not quite so plain, but as fertile in results.
The North allows the South to steal black men, and men not much darker than you and I, if born of swarthy mothers; it allows the South to sell them at will, brand them as cattle, mutilate them as oxen, beat them, not seldom to death, burn them alive with green fagots, for the sport of a mob of "very respectable gentlemen," a "minister of the Gospel" looking on and justifying the deed as "Christian." The North allows all this: it is only "an incident of Slavery," the shadow of the substance. New England allows it. Boston has no considerable horror at any of these things,—I mean a part of Boston. Up to this time Boston has defended slavery with her "educated intellect," and by means of many of her "citizens of eminent gravity." Hitherto the controlling men of Boston have been the defenders of slavery; this day they are not its foes.
Now, if the South may thus ruin one black man, so it may all white men whom it can master. Colour is an accident to man as to these roses; it determines neither genus nor species; it is of the dress, not the person. There is only one genus of man, one species,—the human genus, human species. The right to enslave one innocent man is the right to enslave all innocent men. One- seventh part of the Federal House is painted black, the rest white: do you believe you can set the black part on fire, and not burn down the white, not scorch it, not crack the boards, nor smoke the paint? You may say, "Thus far, but no farther:" will the fire heed you? I rather think not: I believe the experience of mankind tells another story. If you sustain the claim of South Carolina to beat black men at Charleston, you need not be surprised if she is logical enough to beat a white man at Washington, soon as she dares. And her daring will be just in proportion to your forbearance. It is a very courageous State, its chivalry bravely attacking defenceless persons.
A portion of the North—of New England, Massachusetts, Boston, those portions deemed best educated, and, in general, most "orthodox" and "Christian" in the church, most respectable in society—have all along made mouths at everybody who complained that slavery was wicked, was cruel, even that it was unprofitable. We were told, "It is none of your business; you have nothing to do with slavery: let it alone. Besides," they said, "it is not cruel nor un-profitable. It is true, we should not like it for ourselves; but it is good enough for black men: it is a very Christian thing." You do not forget, surely, that there is a doctor of South-side Divinity in the city of Boston, a most thoroughly "respectable man." He has not lost a hair of "respectability" from his clerical head by perverting the Bible to the defence of slavery. When the United States Court opens its session, it asks him to come and pray for a blessing on the Court of Kidnappers in the city of Boston. It is very proper. And he represents the opinion of a large class of men, who are bottomed on money, who have a good intellectual education, and very high social standing.
When South Carolina shut up coloured sailors of Massachusetts in her gaols at Charleston, and made the merchants of Boston pay the bill, the State sent one of her eminent men to remonstrate, and take legal measures to secure the constitutional rights of her citizens. But Mr. Hoar was ignominiously driven out of the State; and it was only the handsome presence of his daughter that saved him from a fate far worse than what befell Mr. Sumner. Massachusetts bore it all. Boston capitalists were angry if a man complained above his breath at this indignity; but, when they came to be tired of paying the bills, they got up a petition to Congress, very numerously signed, asking Congress to abolish that nuisance, and secure the constitutional rights of Massachusetts men. The petition was put into the hands of the senator from Boston; but he "lost it:" he "put it into his hat, and, some way or other, it fell out." But the sagacious merchants had kept a duplicate, and the senator had an attested copy sent him. He lost that too. He never dared to offer the petition of Boston merchants against an outrage which had no colour of constitutional plea to stand under. Freedom of speech was struck dumb on the floor of the Senate more than ten years ago. Even the almighty dollar could not find a tongue. But, when Rufus Choate returned to Boston, his "respectability" was not harmed in the least: he was still the "Hon. Mr. Choate." Suppose it had been a petition to increase the duty on cottons and woollens fifty per cent, and he had "lost that out of his hat?" Why, when he returned to Boston—I will not say he would have lost his head from his shoulders, but it would have been worth very little upon them. Long ago, the South said the North should not discuss the morality of slavery; that was their business. Well, the controlling men of Boston obeyed. They said, "No: the North shall not discuss the subject of slavery." The lips of yonder college were sewed up with Slavery's iron thread: I hope they will open now. Slavery put its thumbs into the ears, and its fingers over the eyes, of Boston respectability; and it sewed up the mouth of Commerce, Fashion, Politics,—I was going to say Religion; but it did not: it sewed up the mouth only of the churches.
It is not twenty-five years since the Governor of Virginia asked Mayor Otis, of Boston, to put a stop to the efforts of the Abolitionists; and, after three days' search, the police of Boston found the "Liberator," who was making all this mischief. His office was in a garret; and his "only visible auxiliary," quoth Mr. Otis, " was a negro boy." Mr. Otis wanted to ferret out antislavery, and put the heel of the Hartford Convention upon it.
It is not twenty-one years since a Governor of Massachusetts, in his annual message, recommended the Legislature to inquire if some law should not be made to suppress the freedom of speech. It is not yet quite twenty-one years since there was a meeting in Faneuil Hall to denounce the discussion of this very matter. Here is what a distinguished man said ; he was not a young man then: "I would beseech them" [the Abolitionists] " to discard their dangerous abstractions," [the abstractions that "all men are endowed with certain unalienable rights, among which is the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness,"] "which they adopt as universal rules of conduct,… which darken the understanding, and mislead the judgment." He would advise them to consider "the precepts and example of their Divine Master. He found slavery, Roman slavery, an institution of the country in which he lived. Did he denounce it? Did he attempt its immediate abolition ? Did he do any thing, or say any thing, which could, in its remotest tendency, encourage resistance and violence ? No: his precept was. Servants (slaves), obey your masters! It was because he would not interfere with the administration of the laws of the land." If the "Divine Master" was Jesus of Nazareth, then no such word is given to us in this Bible. It was only the gospel according to Peleg Sprague. Boston honoured it. The hall rang with applause when he invented a Bible to suppress discussion. Since that time he has had his reward: he is a judge of the Court of the United States.
It is not twenty-one years since a mob of well-dressed "gentlemen of property and standing," in this very city, broke up a prayer-meeting of women, where a Quaker lady presided, because they came together to discuss slavery. It is not quite twenty-one years since the great advocate of freedom for all men was forced to take shelter in the stone gaol of Boston, to secure him from the fury of a mob,—the only place in Boston where he could be secure from the hands of the property, the education, the fashion, the respectability, of this town. It is not twenty-one years since, at night, a gallows was erected before his house, with an appropriate motto on it, meaning, "If you don't hold your peace, we will take your life!" You know what insults, private as well as public, were heaped upon Dr. Channing, as soon as he spoke in behalf of freedom. He lost his influence; he hurt his reputation. If a minister said a word in behalf of the slave, that minister was an object of scorn in his own parish, and in the whole town also. No man took an interest in promoting the cause of humanity but he lost all his "respectability." Personal qualities stood him in no stead ; birth from a distinguished line was of no consequence; even money did not save him. "Decency" dropped him out of its ranks. Freedom of speech was assaulted with violence in Boston long before the experiment was tried on the senatorial head of Mr. Sumner. Mr. Brooks, in Washington, only does in 1856, what Mr. Sprague, in Boston, encouraged twenty years before,—puts down discussion.
When the Slave Power wanted Texas annexed, to spread bondage over two hundred and thirty-seven thousand square miles of land, the controlling men of Boston were anxious for that measure. Even the indignant voice of Mr. Webster could not make a public opinion against that extension of wickedness. "However bounded" was the cry!
When the Mexican War broke out, by the act of the slave despotism, how feebly did Boston oppose the crime! Nay, its representative voted for the war and the falsehood which laid the blame on the feebler nation. How few ministers dared speak against the evil deed! The Peace Society turned its secretary out of office because he spoke against that war. It struck its own flag as soon as Slavery gave command.
Alas! how sad a gift is memory! You cannot forget the year 1850, the Fugitive Slave Bill, the discussions on it at Boston and at Washington. It is dreadful to bring up the terrible speech in the Senate House on the 7th of March, when that mighty power of eloquence shook the land, so loud did it cry for the extension and perpetuation of slavery!
You remember the nine hundred and eighty-seven men of Boston, who thanked the recreant son of New England for his treason to humanity, told him he had pointed out "the path of duty, convinced the understanding, and touched the conscience, of a nation;" nay, expressed their "entire concurrence in the sentiments of that speech," and gave him " their heartfelt thanks for the inestimable aid it afforded to the preservation of the Union." You cannot forget the speech from the steps of the Revere House on the 29th of April,—the declaration from those senatorial lips that " discussion" on the subject of slavery, in Congress and out of it, must " in some way be suppressed." You remember that Massachusetts was to " conquer her prejudices" in favour of justice and the law of God, to "do a disagreeable duty," and kidnap her own citizens. How many controlling men of Boston said "Ay," we will conquer those " prejudices," do that "disagreeable duty!" Political and commercial journals, ministers in their pulpits,—they went for the Fugitive Slave Bill! I wish I could forget it all. May God forgive them for the atheism they preached, and the dreadful woe springing up in our future path from the seed they cast abroad! But there were honourable exceptions, commercial and ecclesiastical,—a few!
Mr. Eliot voted for the bill (I had hoped better things from a man with so much good in him, which no wickedness, past or future, shall blot from my book); and, when he returned, the prominent citizens of Boston called upon him, and one by one, in public places, they grasped his hand, and said, " We thank you for all this; it was just what we wanted you to do; you have represented the feeling, not of all Boston, but of the property, the talent, the piety, of Boston."
When the first kidnappers came here, you will easily call to mind the indignation of the controlling men, because William and Ellen Craft could not be taken and made slaves. You will not forget the Union meeting in Faneuil Hall, the resolutions, the speeches of Mr. Hallett and Mr. Curtis. From the senator who had lost the petition out of his hat came the triple admonition, "REMEMBER, REMEMBER, REMEMBER." Let us keep it in recollection.
When the country towns, like Lynn and Worcester, said, "We will not kidnap men," what did the great political and commercial journals say?" We will cut off their trade; we will starve them out. If they do not mean to sustain that law, Boston will not deal with them : it won't sell West-India goods and calicoes to Lynn and Worcester." You know what the most distinguished men of Boston said of the Free Sellers about that time. So me men of high social standing, large talent, great character, inherent nobleness of spirit, said, "We will have nothing to do with slave-hunting. That bill is a bill of abominations: we tread it under our feet." One of the most conspicuous men of Boston called these men "a nest of vipers,"—said they "broke their teeth gnawing a file:" how many echoed the word all around the town! Charles Sumner belonged to this "nest of vipers" in 1851.
When Shadrach was rescued, you know how the newspapers mourned over it, and the ministers of Boston made public lamentation.
When the Mayor of Boston was kidnapping Thomas Sims, to gratify the desire of a certain family of Boston, Marshal Tukey drilled the police in Court Square, teaching them "military duty." A man laughed at the evolutions of the "awkward squad," and, for that offence, was imprisoned in the lockup. A woman was threatened with the same punishment, for the same offence ; but the Quakeress laughed it down. "Fifteen hundred gentlemen of property and standing" volunteered their armed help to deliver the poor boy into the bondage which now wears his wretched life away. What respectable and affluent joy lit up both the parlours and the churches of commerce and politics when Boston bore the first-fruits of the Fugitive Slave Bill ! How blessed was the brig "Acorn," which cradled Thomas Sims in its shell!
Men of shortest memory can reach back to Anniversary Week, 1854, and recollect Anthony Burns, a Baptist minister, "ordained" a slave by Commissioner Loring,—fore-ordained, as the sentence was given without waiting for the "trial." I hope you remember the kidnapper's counsel on that occasion. I know you will recall the soldiers in Court Square, who loaded their muskets with powder and ball. I think you have not forgotten the cannon, filled with canister-shot at that time, in Court Square. I am sure some of you remember the charge of the United States Judge on the 7th of June, 1854 ; the indictment, in October, 1854, against Wendell Phillips. He had made a fatal mistake; he did not know that freedom of speech was "to be crushed out" of Massachusetts. So, in the Cradle of Liberty, he had spoken such words as he always speaks, straight out from the heart of Humanity, and with a tongue of such persuasion as never before his time has rung through New England; and, depend upon it, when that ceases to be mortal, God will not create such eloquent lips again in any haste. He had spoken, at Faneuil Hall, against kidnapping. Messrs. Hallett and Curtis had him indicted for a misdemeanor; and he was held to bail in fifteen hundred dollars. The punishment was to be a fine of three hundred dollars, and imprisonment in gaol for twelve months. That was the state of things at that time. Look at Boston now. The Judge of Probate, who sent Anthony Burns into bondage, is still the guardian of orphans. He holds the same office he held before, though a law of Massachusetts has been made expressly forbidding it. That law of Massachusetts is trodden under foot; the Governor treads it under his feet; the Judge of Probate, the House of Representatives, the Senate, the press of Boston, tread it under their feet. The City Authorities of Boston must have some one to deliver an oration on the birthday of American independence. Do they invite Mr. Sumner? Not at all. Mr. Phillips? They would sink the State rather than have him No: it must be one of the kidnapper's counsel in 1854. A very proper man to preach a sermon to the people on the Fourth of July, with the Declaration of Independence for a text! He can go back two years, and find an illustration of it. The argument lie used in the kidnapper's court, in May, 1854, would be very convenient for him to introduce on the Fourth of July, 1856. The Declaration of Independence must be read. I suppose that will be done by George Ticknor Curtis, Benjamin Franklin Hallett, or some other of that excellent fraternity of kidnappers who are appointed to rule over us.
The Legislature of last winter (1855) was the greenest Legislature we ever had: it had less legislative experience than any other. It was the poorest in point of property: none ever represented so small a ratio of the wealth of Massachusetts. It was the most uneducated : none ever had so little of the superior education which falls to the lot of lawyers, doctors, and ministers. But no Legislature, since I have known lawmakers, ever showed so much honesty, humanity, and justice. It cleared the Massachusetts statute-book of obnoxious laws, and passed an excellent law, making kidnapping impossible on the soil of Massachusetts. That was a Legislature which contained the better portion of what is called the "American party." The present Legislature contains a large portion of that other part of the American party, which is more properly called Know Nothing, which required no inauguration for membership; and you know what this Legislature proposes to do. It would repeal the Personal Liberty Law. Nothing but the assault on freedom in Washington will save it. It is laid over until next Tuesday, when it receives its final judgment. What that judgment shall be, I will not now say.
Now, put all these six or seven things together, and see what they amount to. The slaveholders understand this perfectly well. They know, that, when they strike at the head of Charles Sumner in the Senate of the United States, they attack a man whom the respectability of Boston called one of a "brood of vipers," whom it seeks to put down.
Put all these things together, and you see the Secondary Cause of this wickedness,—the cause co-operative. Corrupt men at the North, in New England, in Boston, have betrayed the People. They struck at freedom before South Carolina dared lift an arm. The slaveholders know these things,—that, as often as they have demanded wickedness, Boston has answered the demand: they piece out their small bit of lion's skin with the pelt of many a Northern fox. They are in earnest for slavery: they think New England is not in earnest for freedom. Do you blame them for their inference? A few years ago, Mr. Sumner spoke in Boston, on "the True Grandeur of Nations," a lofty word before the City Fathers, on the Fourth of July, 1845. An Argument against War, a Plea for Peace. As two of our most distinguished citizens came from listening, one said to the other, "Well, if that young man is going to talk in that way, he cannot expect Boston to hold him up." Since then, that young man has spoken even nobler words. Boston has not held him up; nay, the controlling part of it has sought to strike him down,—counted him one of "a nest of vipers,"—done nothing to support, all to overthrow him. Why? Because he was the continual defender of the unalienable rights of man. Slaveholders are not fools: they know all this. The South never struck a Northern advocate of a tariff, or a defender of the Union. She knew the North would "hold up" the champions of the Union and the tariff. It attacks only the Soldiers of Freedom, knowing that the controlling power of the North also hates them. I know men in Boston to-day, who would long since have struck Mr. Sumner, had they only dared,—nor him alone.
Last week, there were two remarkable spectacles in the United States. One at the State House, in Boston: it was the Legislature, stimulated by the enemies of freedom, proceeding to repeal the Personal Liberty Law, and seeking to restore kidnapping to Massachusetts. I need not tell here who it was—a very few men—that plotted the wickedness, nor how much they expected to gain by it. On the same day, not far from the same hour, in the Nation House at Washington, there was another spectacle. A Representative of slavery, with a bludgeon, knocks our Senator to the ground,—strikes him twenty or thirty blows after he is down. They are two scenes in the same tragedy. Both blows were dealt by the same arm,—the Slave Power; both aimed at the same mark,—the Head of Freedom; each came from the same motive, which I need not name. My friends, I am not sorry to see you thus excited. I am too old to look on such scenes with astonishment. I entertain no sudden heat. Pardon me that I am cool today.
To me, Massachusetts is the twelve hundred thousand persons in it; or, more emphatically, it is the thoughtful, it is the moral, it is the religious, people of Massachusetts. To me, Boston is the one hundred and sixty thousand men within her limits; or, more properly speaking, it is the moral and religious part of them. I am proud of Massachusetts: it is the grandest State in the world, I think. I am proud also of Boston. I respect and venerate her manifold excellence. I know her past history, and look for a future far more glorious than the deeds of Pilgrmi or Patriot Fathers have rendered days gone by. For this reason, I tell Boston her faults; whereof the noble city is not conscious, else had she never done those deeds of shame. I do not hesitate to expose this wickedness to you, who easily understand it all; and even to men not familiar with such thoughts, whose disapproval was most grateful unto me,—such men could not believe that our Boston was an accomplice with Carolina in this foul work. I say I am proud of Boston,—not of those controlling men, who darkly misrule its politics, whose Machiavelian craft is like the Venetian poisons of old time, which destroyed sight, hearing, feeling, every noblest sense, and only left the vegetative life: I am ashamed of them. I do not hate them; I shall never belittle their excellence; I do not scorn them. I may be allowed to have pity for them,—not the pity of contempt, but the pity of charity and love. I am not proud of them; but of the sober, moral part of Boston, I am proud,—thereof is New England proud. It is the grandest city in this world; it is the humanest city, the most thoughtful city, on this continent; it is the furthest advanced in its humanity.
But the Boston which the South knows, listens to, and respects, is a very different city. It is a Boston that consists of some twenty or thirty persons, perhaps a hundred, "men of property and standing;" and some two or three thousand flunkies,—I do not know exactly how numerous they are. That is the Boston which the South knows. Now, that Boston, which the South knows, hates freedom, hates democracy, hates religion. In 1835, it put down a woman's prayer-meeting. In 1844, it annexed Texas. In 1846, it liked the Mexican War. In 1850, it indorsed the Fugitive Slave Bill. In 1851, it sent back Thomas Sims to bondage. In 1854, it "restored" Anthony Burns. In 1856, it pays the kidnapper's counsel to discourse to the people on the Fourth of July. The South understands that that Boston hates Mr. Sumner,—hates him because he loves liberty; hates Mr. Wilson and Mr. Banks; and hates the memory of Washington, and, whenever it mentions him, it disembowels him of his noblest humanity before it dares to praise. Last night, at Faneuil Hall, there was much official talk about freedom of speech. Some of it was honest; but how much of it was only "sound and fury, signifying nothing?" Study the history of the speakers,—it is not a long task,—and then judge.
The ghastly evils which Southern despotism has brought on us in ten years' time are to be charged to a few persons. I could mention ten men in Boston who might have saved us all this woe. In 1844, if they had said, No such annexation of Texas,—her hand red with Mexican blood, her breath foul with Slavery,—the Slave Power would have yielded before us. In 1850, had they said. There shall be no Fugitive Slave Act, Mr. Mason's Bill had slept the sleep of death. Even after Mr. Webster had spoken against the best instincts of his nature, which I still love to think was generous, they might have forbid the evil which came. Had they said the word, no kidnappers had profaned the grave of Hancock and Adams. In April, 1851, if they had said, Mr. Sims is not to be a slave henceforth, the family of man-stealers would suddenly have "caved in." In the winter of 1854, when Mr. Douglas wished to spread Slavery into Nebraska, had these men heartily said. It shall not be, it would not be. In the May of that year, if they had declared. We have had enough of man-stealing for Boston; nay, if only four of them had entered the Court House, and spoken to Mr. Burns, given him the public sign of their sympathy,—depend upon it, we should not have been a second time tormented with that hideous sin. Commissioner Loring was not born for a kidnapper: that once kindly and now suffering heart took such wickedness by collateral infection, not hereditary taint. But those ten men wanted this iniquity brought about, wanted slave-ridden Texas in '44, wanted the Fugitive Slave Bill in '50, kidnapping in '51, and again in '54. They protested against the "abrogation of the Missouri Compromise," but in such language that the South knew it meant, "Do as you like; we will not prevent you." So it has been continually, "On the side of the Oppressor there was Power."
Where are such men now? Eecall the platform of last night. Where were the citizens of most "eminent gravity," where the great fortunes, the great offices, the judges of the courts, the great "reputations?" Not one of them was there. Of the Boston which the South cares for, I saw not a man. Why not? You shall answer that question.
In Boston, there are three men of senatorial dignity: they have been in the Senate of the United States, and have all left it. They are men of large talent, good education, high social standing. They are all public orators, and seek occasions on which to address the people; and, to one of them, speech is as the breath of his nostrils. Last night, there was a meeting to express the indignation of Boston at the outrage on Mr. Sumner. These three men were asked to go and speak : not one of them was there. Twice the Committee waited on Mr. Winthrop and Mr. Everett, and twice solicited the ex-senators to come and speak; and twice was the labour thrown away. Did Mr. Everett, once a minister of this cit}^, remember that he refused to present in the Senate the petition of three thousand New-England ministers against the enslavement of Kansas? Did he recollect, that, a whole generation since, he volunteered to shoulder his musket, and march from Bunker Hill to Virginia to put down any attempt of the slaves to regain their natural and unalienable Right to Liberty? At a generous word, Massachusetts, who never forgets, would have rejoiced anew in the bounteous talents, in the splendid scholarship, of the man,—would have recalled every public service he has done, and dropped a tear on his failures and evil deeds. But it was not in him. Mr. Winthrop inherits a name dear to all New England,—connected with her earliest history, stitched into the cradle-clothes of American liberty. Could not he add a personal leaf to the ancestral bough,—a merit to an accident? Or did he, who called Mr. Sumner one of a "nest of vipers," think Mr. Brooks was that prophetic "seed of the woman," who was to "bruise the serpent's head?" Let us honour every public service of such men with generous gratitude, but not forget how they fail us in an hour of need,—never, till they repent: then let the dead bury their dead, and let us manfully forgive.
There is great talk about the freedom of speech: how much of it is sincere? Last night, at the indignation meeting,—which had a low platform,—there were two speakers, who, as a hearer said, "had got the hang of the school-house," and knew what to say; but, with these exceptions, the speaking was rather dull, and did not meet the feelings of the people. Towards the end, the audience, seeing the well-known face of that man whose eloquence never fails him, because it is eloquence that comes out of so brave a heart, called for him: "Phillips! Phillips! Phillips! PHILLIPS!" What said the platform? "Phillips shan't be heard;" and they dismissed the meeting,—a meeting called to vindicate freedom of speech in Massachusetts; and the one speaker of Massachusetts—who would have gathered that audience, as I hold up in my hand these sweet Lilies of the Valley, and have raised them towards heaven, and then brought them down for common duty—must not speak, though the audience calls for him! The South understands us perfectly well.
Blame me as much as you please for what I say: ten years hence you will say that I am right. But, ere I go further on, let me do an act of gratitude and justice. In all those dark days behind us, there have been found faithful men, who risked their political prospects, the desires of honourable ambition, their social standing, nay, the esteem of their nearest relatives, and were faithful to Truth and Justice. What treatment have they met with in the Parlour, in the Forum, in the Market, in the Church ? One day, their history must be writ; and some names now hated will appear like those which were the watch-words of the Revolution, and are now the heavenly sounds that cheer the young patriot in this night of storms. In such men, no city is so rich as this. Daughter of Nobleness, she is its Mother too. I hope to live long enough to do public honour to their high worth.
Be not surprised at the attack on our Senator. Violence at Washington is no new thing. You have not forgot the threat to assassinate John Quincy Adams. I knew men in Boston who said they wished it might be executed. But, not to go back so far, see what has happened this present year. Mr. William Smith, formerly Governor of Virginia (Extra Billy), knocked down an editor in the House of Representatives. Mr. Eusk, of Arkansas, with equal cowardliness, attacked another editor in the street,—Mr. Greeley. Some Boston newspapers justified the outrage: a man who ventures to say a word against a distinguished slaveholder must expect to be knocked down. Alabamian Mr. Herbert shoots a waiter; the House takes the matter into consideration, and will not expel him : the Democratic party vote against it; not a Southern Democrat, and but one Northern Democrat, I think, saying otherwise. The Know-nothing part of the American party go in the same direction : all the South justify the deed. It is a country in which there is only one class of men, and freedom of religion is secure! But it is of no consequence if an Irish Catholic, who is a waiter, is shot down by an Alabamian!
Charles Sumner is the next victim. One thing I must tell you, which you do not understand. There was a plot laid among these "chivalrous gentlemen" to do the deed. When the Senate adjourned, several distinguished Southern Senators staid: it was noticed by some persons, and one said, "I wonder what is in the wind now." Mr. Wilson has not the reputation of a non-resistant; he is a mechanic, and a soldier,—a general. He carried his pistols to Washington, and caused it to be distinctly understood that he had not the common New-England prejudice against shooting a scoundrel. He has not been insulted, and he will not be. That day he had some business with Mr. Sumner. He came and spoke a word to him as he sat and wrote at his desk. Those ruffians, Mr. Brooks and Mr. Keitt, had come into the Senate ; they did not advance, but sat down and waited until Mr. Wilson had withdrawn. The only ally of Mr. Sumner was then gone; not a friend stood near him. Then the Southern "chivalry" gathered around, and Mr. Brooks came and assaulted him.
Now, do you know the seed whence came the bludgeon which struck that handsome and noble head? It was the "Acorn," in whose shell Boston carried back Thomas Sims in 1851; and on the 19th of April, on the seventy-sixth anniversary of the battle of Lexington, she took him out of that shell and put him in a gaol at Savannah, where he was scourged till a doctor said, "You will kill him if you strike him again!" and the master said, "Let him die!" That was the Acorn whence grew the bludgeon which struck Charles Sumner.
Here is a letter from him, written but a day before beginning his speech: "Alas! alas!" he says, "the tyranny over us is complete! Will the people submit? When you read this, I shall be saying in the Senate, they will not. I shall pronounce the most thorough Philippic [against Slavery] ever uttered in a legislative body." He kept his word; it was the most thorough Philippic against Slavery ever uttered in an American Parliament. Nay, Wilberforce and Brougham, and their famous peers, never surpassed it in the British House. The talent, the learning, the eloquence of Mr. Sumner never went further. The composure, the respectful dignity, of this man, who is a gentleman amongst gentlemen, was never more decorous and manly than at that time. He gave an argument: the South has answered it with a bludgeon cut from a tree whose seed was sown in Boston,—Mr. Pearson's Acorn. Two years before this assault. Judge Loring was kidnapping Mr. Burns. That very day, the Know-nothing Legislature, stimulated thereto by men well known, was attempting to re-establish kidnapping in Boston, by destroying the Personal Liberty Law. It was not my Boston that wanted such wickedness; it was the slave-hunter's Boston that wanted it,—a few men, idiotic in conscience, heart, and soul.
I keep the coat of Thomas Sims; it is rent to tatters. I wish I had also the bloody garment of Charles Sumner, that I might show it to you; and I would ask Boston, "Knowest thou whether this be thy son's coat or no?" And Boston would answer, "It is my son^s coat: an evil beast hath devoured him." And I would say, "The evil beast is of your own training."
When Mr. Phillips was indicted for freedom of speech, the bail was fixed at fifteen hundred dollars. Mr. Brooks is arrested for beating a man to an extent which may cause his death : the bail was fixed at five hundred dollars. The crime is only one-third so great. In 1851, when a Pennsylvania Quaker, a miller with a felt hat, rides to his neighbour's house on his sorrel horse, and the coloured people, resisting a kidnapper, cheer him, he is indicted for high treason against the United States, and spends months in gaol; but Mr. Brooks goes at large. Passmore Williamson was charged with contempt,—not for the United States, not for its laws, but only for Judge Kane; and he spends months in gaol; and Mr. Representative Brooks goes at large all this time.
Now, I am not surprised at this. They who sow the wind must expect to see the whirlwind come up in time. It is very pretty work sowing the wind broadcast; light and clean to the hand, very respectable: but when you come to eat the harvest of whirlwinds, when the bread of storms is broke on your table, then you remember that "righteousness exalteth a nation, and sin is the ruin of any people." When the vilest of men are exalted, you must expect the wicked will "walk on every side." Remember the Cause of this wickedness in Washington, Kansas, all over the land, — the ferocious disposition of the slaveholders, their fixed determination to spread bondage over the whole country, to " crush out " all freedom of speech. Remember the allies of that ferocity,—corrupt men in the midst of us who have promoted this wickedness, who still encourage it. Remember the general servility of the Northern people, who tread down the black man that the white might gain money from the oppressor.
Do not think this is the act of a single person. Mr. Brooks is a representative man, more decorous and well- mannered than most men of his section or his State. He was but the agent of the Slave Power: all the South will justify his deed. Already South Carolina sends him a "testimonial" of its gratitude,—a pitcher and a cane. Of course there are honourable men in the South, who abhor this cowardly violence; but they will not dare to speak aloud.
Do not think the blow was struck at Mr. Sumner alone. It was at you and me and all of us,—a blow at freedom of speech. Violence must begin somewhere, and he happened to be there. Now threats are uttered against all others who oppose the enslavement of the people: your masters say that Seward, Wilson, Wade, and Hale shall next take their turn.
It is encouraging to see the effect of this outrage on the people at the North. Nothing has so stirred men before. Each new stroke of the slave-driver's whip startles some one. Whenever Slavery is driven through our Northern cities, it breaks up the pavement a little; the stones are never replaced: by and by, the street will be impassable for that tumbril. The Fugitive Slave Bill opened some Northern eyes; others were unstopped by its enforcement here. Some recovered their conscience when the Nebraska iniquity was first proposed ; the blows in the Senate House waken yet more ; the fall of the buildings at Lawrence startle other men from deadly sleep. "Let bygones be bygones:" if a man comes into the field at the eleventh hour, to honest work, let not those who have borne the burthen and heat of the day grudge him his place and his penny. If a man stand with his back leaning against the public whipping-post in Charleston, S.C, but looks northward, and loves freedom, and will do anything for it, let us give him our thanks and our help.
The crime which the slaveholders have now committed against our senator is very small compared to the sin of Boston against two of its inhabitants. Which is worse, for Mr. Brooks at Washington to beat an unarmed senator with a heavy bludgeon, taking him unawares, or for Commissioner Curtis and Commissioner Loring to steal Mr. Sims and Mr. Burns? What are a few blows, to slavery for life? what the Southern "testimonial," compared to the "fifteen hundred gentlemen "who voluntered for the first kidnapping, and the citizen soldiers who so eagerly took part in the last one? Will Massachusetts ask the House of Representatives to expel the assassin ? Who is Judge of Probate in Suffolk County? Two years ago, with the sword of Boston, the slaveholders cut and wounded peaceful citizens of our own town, and in vain do they besiege the courts of our own State for redress! Mr. Brooks obeys the law of honour among ruffians, Messrs. Curtis and Loring the Fugitive Slave Bill : which is the better of the two,—the law of bullies, or of kidnappers? If Mayor Smith had a right to tread down the laws of Massachusetts, and smite and stab men with the sword, that he might steal a negro, why may not Mr. Brooks beat a senator who speaks against the great crime of the nation?
I rejoice in the indignation which this outrage has caused. Boston is stirred as never before. Does she know that Mr. Sumner was wounded for her transgression, and bruised for her iniquity? Let us lay these things sorrowfully to heart. The past cannot be recalled ; but we may do better in the future,—remove the causes of this evil; may root slavery out of the land, "peaceably if we can, forcibly if we must."
In the country, I expect great good from this wickedness. New-England farmers cover the corn they plant with a prayer for God's blessing: this year they will stamp it also with a curse on Slavery. The matter will be talked over by the shoemakers, and in every carpenter's and trader's shop. The blacksmith, holding the horse's hoof between his legs, will pause over the inserted nail, and his brow grow darker while the human fire burns within. Meetings will be held in fifty towns of Massachusetts, nowhere with a platform so tame as that last night.
There is a war before us worse than Russian. It has already begun : when shall it end? "Not till Slavery has put freedom down," say your masters at the South. "Not till Freedom has driven slavery from the continent," let us say and determine. I have four things to propose: First, Ask Mr. Sumner to come to Boston on the 4th of July, and, in this place, give us an oration worthy of the day, worthy of Boston, and worthy of himself. If he is too sick, ask Wendell Phillips; and, depend upon it, he will be well. Second, Make Mr. Sumner senator next time, and let those men who talk about a "nest of vipers" understand that Massachusetts knows who has got poison on his tongue. Third, Make a man President who is not a knave, not a dunce. Fourth, Reverence the higher law of God in politics and in everything else; be not afraid of men; do not be afraid of God, but afraid to violate any law which he has writ on your soul; and then his blessing will be upon you, and his peace will be with us for ever and ever.