REMARKS IN THE SENATE ON HIS DEATH, DECEMBER 14, 1869.

MR. PRESIDENT,--A seat in this Chamber is vacant. But this is a very

inadequate expression for the present occasion. Much more than a

seat is vacant. There is a void difficult to measure, as it will be

difficult to fill. Always eminent from the beginning, Mr. Fessenden

during these latter years became so large a part of the Senate that

without him it seems to be a different body. His guiding judgment, his

ready power, his presence so conspicuous in debate, are gone, taking

away from this Chamber that identity which it received so considerably

from him.

Of all the present Senate, one only besides myself witnessed his entry

into this Chamber. I cannot forget it. He came in the midst of that

terrible debate on the Kansas and Nebraska Bill by which the country

was convulsed to its centre, and his arrival had the effect of a

reinforcement on a field of battle. Those who stood for Freedom then

were few in numbers,--not more than fourteen,--while thirty-seven

Senators in solid column voted to break the faith originally plighted

to Freedom, and to overturn a time-honored landmark, opening that vast

Mesopotamian region to the curse of Slavery. Those anxious days are

with difficulty comprehended by a Senate where Freedom rules. One

more in our small number was a sensible addition. We were no longer

fourteen, but fifteen. His reputation at the bar and his fame in the

other House gave assurance which was promptly sustained. He did not

wait, but at once entered into the debate with all those resources

which afterwards became so famous. The scene that ensued exhibited

his readiness and courage. While saying that the people of the North

were fatigued with the threat of Disunion, that they considered it as

“mere noise and nothing else,” he was interrupted by Mr. Butler, of

South Carolina, always ready to speak for Slavery, exclaiming, “If

such sentiments as yours prevail, I want a dissolution right away,”--a

characteristic intrusion doubly out of order,--to which the new-comer

rejoined, “Do not delay it on my account; do not delay it on account

of anybody at the North.” The effect was electric; but this instance

was not alone. Douglas, Cass, and Butler interrupted only to be worsted

by one who had just ridden into the lists. The feelings of the other

side were expressed by the Senator from South Carolina, who, after

one of the flashes of debate which he had provoked, exclaimed: “Very

well, go on; I have no hope for you.” All this will be found in the

“Globe,”[185] precisely as I give it; but the “Globe” could not picture

the exciting scene,--the Senator from Maine erect, firm, immovable as

a jutting promontory against which the waves of Ocean tossed and broke

in dissolving spray. There he stood. Not a Senator, loving Freedom, who

did not feel on that day that a champion had come.

This scene, so brilliant in character, illustrates Mr. Fessenden’s

long career in the Senate. All present were moved, while those at a

distance were less affected. His speech, which was argumentative,

direct, and pungent, exerted more influence on those who heard it than

on those who only read it, vindicating his place as debater rather than

orator. This place he held to the end, without a superior,--without a

peer. Nobody could match him in immediate and incisive reply. His words

were swift, and sharp as a cimeter,--or, borrowing an illustration

from an opposite quarter, he “shot flying” and with unerring aim. But

while this great talent secured for him always the first honors of

debate, it was less important with the country, which, except in rare

instances, is more impressed by ideas and by those forms in which truth

is manifest.

The Senate has changed much from its original character, when, shortly

after the formation of the National Government, a Nova Scotia paper,

in a passage copied by one of our own journals, while declaring that

“the habits of the people here are very favorable to oratory,” could

say, “There is but one assembly in the whole range of the Federal

Union in which eloquence is deemed unnecessary, and, I believe, even

absurd and obtrusive,--to wit, the Senate, or upper house of Congress.

They are merely a deliberative meeting, in which every man delivers

his concise opinion, one leg over the other, as they did in the first

Congress, where an harangue was a great rarity.”[186] Speech was

then for business and immediate effect in the Chamber. Since then

the transformation has proceeded, speech becoming constantly more

important, until now, without neglect of business, the Senate has

become a centre from which to address the country. A seat here is a

lofty pulpit with a mighty sounding-board, and the whole wide-spread

people is the congregation.

As Mr. Fessenden rarely spoke except for business, what he said was

restricted in its influence, but it was most effective in this Chamber.

Here was his empire, and his undisputed throne. Of perfect integrity

and austerest virtue, he was inaccessible to those temptations which

in various forms beset the avenues of public life. Most faithfully and

constantly did he watch the interests intrusted to him. Here he was

a model. Holding the position of Chairman of the Finance Committee,

while it yet had those double duties which are now divided between

two important committees, he became the guardian of the National

Treasury, both in its receipts and its expenditures, so that nothing

was added to it or taken from it without his knowledge; and how truly

he discharged this immense trust all will attest. Nothing could leave

the Treasury without showing a passport. This service was the more

momentous from the magnitude of the transactions involved; for it was

during the whole period of the war, when appropriations responded to

loans and taxes,--all being on a scale beyond precedent in the world’s

history. On these questions, sometimes so sensitive and difficult and

always so grave, his influence was beyond that of any other Senator and

constantly swayed the Senate. All that our best generals were in arms

he was in the financial field.

Absorbed in his great duties, and confined too much by the training of

a profession which too often makes its follower slave where he is not

master, he forgot sometimes that championship which shone so brightly

when he first entered the Senate. Ill-health came with its disturbing

influence, and, without any of the nature of Hamlet, his conduct at

times suggested those words by which Hamlet pictures the short-comings

of life. Too often, in his case, “the native hue of resolution was

sicklied o’er with the pale cast of thought”; and perhaps I might

follow the words of Shakespeare further, and picture “enterprises of

great pith and moment,” which, “with this regard, their currents turned

awry and lost the name of action.”

Men are tempted by the talent which they possess; and he could

not resist the impulse to employ, sometimes out of place, those

extraordinary powers which he commanded so easily. More penetrating

than grasping, he easily pierced the argument of his opponent, and,

once engaged, he yielded to the excitement of the moment and the joy

of conflict. His words warmed, as the Olympic wheel caught fire in the

swiftness of the race. If on these occasions there were sparkles which

fell where they should not have fallen, they cannot be remembered now.

Were he still among us, face to face, it were better to say, in the

words of that earliest recorded reconciliation,--

“Let us no more contend nor blame

Each other, blamed enough elsewhere, but strive

In offices of love how we may lighten

Each other’s burden in our share of woe.”[187]

Error and frailty checker the life of man. If this were not so, earth

would be heaven; for what could add to the happiness of life free

from error and frailty? The Senator we mourn was human; but the error

and frailty which belonged to him often took their color from virtue

itself. On these he needs no silence, even if the grave which is now

closing over him did not refuse its echoes except to what is good.

Charles Sumner: his complete works, volume 17 (of 20) · 第 43 / 69 题