July 31, 1872, Mr. Blaine addressed a letter to Mr. Sumner
through the newspapers, arraigning him as recreant both to party
and principle, in the position taken by him on the Presidential
question in his recent Letter to Colored Citizens. Mr. Sumner
responded as follows:--
WASHINGTON, August 5, 1872.
DEAR SIR,--I have seen the letter addressed to me by you through the
public prints, and I notice especially, that, while animadverting
upon my support of Horace Greeley, you say not one word in
vindication of that compound of pretensions known as Grantism in
contradistinction to Republicanism, which you would install anew in
the Government.
You are greatly concerned about the company I keep. To quiet your
solicitude, I beg leave to say, that, in joining the Republicans
who brought forward an original Abolitionist, I find myself with so
many others devoted to the cause I have always served that I had not
missed you until you hastened to report absence; nor had I taken
account of the “Southern Secessionists,” who, as you aver, are now
coöperating with me in support of this original Abolitionist, except
to rejoice, that, if among former associates some like yourself
hesitate, their places are supplied from an unexpected quarter.
You entirely misunderstand me when you introduce an incident of
the past, and build on it an argument why I should not support
Horace Greeley. What has Preston Brooks to do with the Presidential
election? Never, while a sufferer, did anybody hear me speak of
him in unkindness; and now, after the lapse of more than half a
generation, I will not unite with you in dragging him from the
grave, where he sleeps, to aggravate the passions of a political
conflict, and arrest the longing for concord. And here is the
essential difference between you and me at this juncture. I seize the
opportunity to make the equal rights of all secure through peace and
reconciliation; but this infinite boon you would postpone.
Seven years have passed since the close of our Civil War; but,
unhappily, during all this period a hostile spirit has continued to
exist between the contending sections, while the rights of colored
fellow-citizens have been in perpetual question. Seven years mark a
natural period of human life. Should not the spirit be changed with
the body? Can we not after seven years begin a new life, especially
when those once our foes repeat the saying, “Thy people shall be my
people, and thy God my God”?
I declare my preference for an original Abolitionist as President,
and you seek to create a diversion by crying out that Democrats will
support him. To which I reply, So much the better. Their support is
the assurance that the cause he has so constantly guarded, whether of
Equal Rights or Reconciliation, is accepted by Democrats; and this is
the pledge of a true union beyond anything in our history. It is a
victory of ideas, without which all other victories must fail.
To intensify your allegation, you insist that I am ranged with
Jefferson Davis and Robert Toombs; but, pardon me, nobody knows how
the former will vote, while Robert Toombs is boisterous against
Horace Greeley, and with him are Stephens, Wise, and Mosby. This is
all very poor, and I mention it only to exhibit the character of your
attempt.
In the same spirit you seek to avoid the real issue by holding
up the possibility of what you call a Democratic Administration;
and you have the courage to assert, as within my knowledge, that
by the election of Horace Greeley “Congress is handed over to the
control of the party who have persistently denied the rights of the
black man.” You say that I know this. Mr. Speaker, I know no such
thing, and you should be sufficiently thoughtful not to assert it.
I am entirely satisfied that a canvass like the present, where the
principles declared at Cincinnati are openly accepted on one side
and not contested on the other, must result in a larger number of
Congressional Representatives sincerely devoted to the rights of the
colored citizen than ever before.
The Democrats will be pledged, as never before, to the ruling
principle that All Men are Equal before the Law, and also to the
three Constitutional Amendments, with the clause in each empowering
Congress to enforce the same by appropriate legislation. But besides
Democrats, there will be Liberal Republicans pledged likewise, and
also your peculiar associates, who, I trust, will not betray the
cause. Senators and Representatives calling themselves Republicans
have been latterly in large majority in both Houses; but the final
measure of Civil Rights, to which you refer, though urged by
me almost daily, has failed to become a law, less, I fear, from
Democratic opposition than from Republican lukewarmness and the want
of support in the President.
The great issue which the people are called to decide in November
is on the President, and nobody knows better than yourself that the
House of Representatives, chosen at the same time, will naturally
harmonize with him. So it has been in our history. Now harmony with
Horace Greeley involves what I most desire. With such a President,
Congress will be changed. For the first time since the war the Equal
Rights of All will have a declared representative at the head of the
Government, whose presence there will be of higher significance than
that of any victor in war, being not only a testimony, but a constant
motive-power in this great cause.
Opposition, whether open hostility or more subtle treachery, will
yield to the steady influence of such a representative. Therefore in
looking to the President I look also to Congress, which will take its
character in large measure from him. In choosing Horace Greeley we do
the best we can for the whole Government,--not only in the Executive,
but in the Legislative branch,--while we decline to support nepotism,
repayment of personal gifts by official patronage, seizure of the
war powers, indignity to the Black Republic,--also, the various
incapacity exhibited by the President, and the rings by which he
governs,--none of which can you defend. You know well that the rings
are already condemned by the American people.
For myself, I say plainly and without hesitation, that I prefer
Horace Greeley, with any Congress possible on the Cincinnati
Platform, to President Grant, _with his personal government and
his rings_,--a vote for whom involves the support of this personal
government, _with prolonged power in all the rings_. There must be
another influence and another example. The Administration, in all its
parts, is impressed by the President. Let his soul be enlarged with
the sentiment of justice, quickened by industry, and not only the two
Houses of Congress, but the whole country, will feel the irresistible
authority, overspreading, pervading, permeating everywhere.
Therefore, in proportion as you are earnest for the rights of the
colored citizen, and place them above all partisan triumph, you will
be glad to support the candidate whose heart has always throbbed for
Humanity. The country needs such a motive-power in the White House;
it needs a generous fountain there. In one word, it needs somebody
different from the present incumbent; and nobody knows this better
than Speaker Blaine.
The personal imputation you make upon me I repel with the indignation
of an honest man. I was a faithful supporter of the President until
somewhat tardily awakened by his painful conduct on the island of
San Domingo, involving seizure of the war power in violation of the
Constitution, and indignity to the Black Republic in violation of
International Law; and when I remonstrated against these intolerable
outrages, I was set upon by those acting in his behalf. Such is the
origin of my opposition. I could not have done less without failure
in that duty which is with me the rule of life. Nor can I doubt
that when partisan sentiments are less active you will regret the
wrong you have done me. Meanwhile I appeal confidently to the candid
judgment of those who, amidst all present differences of opinion,
unite in the great objects, far above Party or President, to which my
life is devoted.