“How shall these ideas be saved? How shall the war waged by Abraham
Lincoln be brought to an end, _so as to assure peace, tranquillity,
and reconciliation_?”[212]
In the speech at Worcester, before the Republican State Convention,
September 14, 1865, I insisted upon guaranties for the national
freedman and the national creditor; and until these were accomplished,
proposed to exclude the Rebel from political power:--
“I ask not his punishment. I would not be harsh. There is nothing
humane that I would reject. Nothing in hate. Nothing in vengeance.
Nothing in passion. I am for gentleness. I am for a velvet glove;
but for a while I wish the hand of iron. I confess that I have
little sympathy with those hypocrites of magnanimity whose appeal
for the Rebel master is only a barbarous indifference towards
the slave; _and yet they cannot more than I desire the day of
Reconciliation_.”[213]
Thus constantly did this idea return.
And yet again, in a letter to the “Evening Post” of New York, dated
September 28, 1865, after insisting upon “supplementary safeguards” for
the protection of the freedman, I used these words:--
“Without this additional provision, I see small prospect of
_that peace and reconciliation which are the objects so near our
hearts_.”[214]
Again it appeared in a telegraphic dispatch to President Johnson, dated
November 12, 1865, and afterwards published. Asking the President to
suspend his “policy towards the Rebel States,” I said:--
“I should not present this prayer, if I were not painfully
convinced that thus far it has failed to obtain any _reasonable
guaranties for that security in the future which is essential to
peace and reconciliation_.… The Declaration of Independence asserts
the equality of all men, and that rightful government can be
founded only on the consent of the governed. I see small chance of
peace, unless these great principles are practically established.
Without this, the house will continue divided against itself.”[215]
Here Reconciliation is associated with Reconstruction on the basis of
the Equality of All Men.
Shortly afterwards, in the “Atlantic Monthly” for December, 1865, p.
758, I pleaded again:--
“The lesson of Clemency is of perpetual obligation.… Harshness
is bad. Cruelty is detestable. Even Justice may relent at the
prompting of Mercy. Fail not, then, to cultivate the grace of
Clemency.…
“There must be no vengeance upon enemies; but there must be no
sacrifice of friends. And here is the distinction never to be
forgotten: _Nothing for vengeance; everything for justice_. Follow
this rule, and the Republic will be safe and glorious.”[216]
Then again in the Senate speech, February 5 and 6, 1866, while dwelling
at length upon Equal Suffrage without distinction of color, I thus
spoke for the Southern people:--
“The people there are my fellow-citizens, and gladly would I
hail them, if they would permit, as no longer _a section_, no
longer _the South_, but an integral part of the Republic, under a
Constitution which, knowing no North and no South, cannot tolerate
_sectional_ pretension. Gladly, in all sincerity, do I offer
my best effort for their welfare. But I see clearly that there
is nothing in the compass of mortal power so important to them
in every respect, morally, politically, and economically--that
there is nothing with such certain promise to them of beneficent
result--that there is nothing so sure to make their land smile
with industry and fertility,--as the decree of Equal Rights I now
invoke.… This is our retaliation. This is our only revenge.”[217]
In an address at the Music Hall, in Boston, October 2, 1866, entitled
“The One-Man Power _vs._ Congress,” I declared that the Reconstruction
I sought was one where “the Rebel region, no longer harassed by
controversy and degraded by injustice, _will enjoy the richest fruits
of security and reconciliation_,”--and then added, “_To labor for this
cause may well tempt the young and rejoice the old_.”[218]