POLITICAL AND PERSONAL.
MY POLITICAL PRINCIPLES--REASONS FOR MY CHANGE OF PARTIES--KANSAS
AND SECESSION--WIDE-AWAKES--GRAND ILLUMINATION OF LINDENCROFT--JOKE
ON A DEMOCRATIC NEIGHBOR--PEACE MEETINGS--THE STEPNEY
EXCITEMENT--TEARING DOWN A PEACE FLAG--A LOYAL MEETING--RECEPTION
IN BRIDGEPORT--DESTRUCTION OF THE “FARMER” OFFICE--ELIAS HOWE,
JR.--SAINT PETER AND SALTPETRE--DRAFT RIOTS--BURGLARS AT
LINDENCROFT--MY ELECTION TO THE LEGISLATURE--BEGINNING OF MY WAR ON
RAILROAD MONOPOLIES--WIRE-PULLING--THE XIV. AMENDMENT TO THE UNITED
STATES CONSTITUTION--STRIKING THE WORD “WHITE” FROM THE CONNECTICUT
CONSTITUTION--MY SPEECH.
I began my political life as a Democrat, and my newspaper, the _Herald
of Freedom_, was a Jackson-Democratic journal. While always taking an
active interest in political matters, I had no desire for personal
preferment, and, up to a late period, steadily declined to run for
office. Nevertheless, in 1852 or 1853, prominent members of the party
with which I voted, urged the submission of my name to the State
Convention, as a candidate for the office of Governor, and although the
party was then in the ascendancy, and a nomination would have been
equivalent to an election, I peremptorily refused; in spite of this
refusal, which was generally known, several votes were cast for me in
the Convention. The Kansas strifes, in 1854, shook my faith in my party,
though I continued to call myself a Democrat, often declaring that if I
thought there was a drop of blood in me that was not democratic, I would
let it out if I had to cut the jugular vein. When, however, secession
threatened in 1860, I thought it was time for a “new departure,” and I
identified myself with the Republican party.
During the active and exciting political campaign of 1860, which
resulted in Mr. Lincoln’s first election to the presidency, it will be
remembered that “Wide-Awake” associations, with their uniforms, torches
and processions, were organized in nearly every city, town and village
throughout the North. Arriving at Bridgeport from New York at five
o’clock one afternoon, I was informed that the Wide-Awakes were to
parade that evening and intended to march out to Lindencroft. So I
ordered two boxes of sperm candles, and prepared for a general
illumination of every window in the front of my house. Many of my
neighbors, including several Democrats, came to Lindencroft in the
evening to witness the illumination and see the Wide-Awake procession.
My nearest neighbor, Mr. T., was a strong Democrat, and before he came
to my house, he ordered his servants to stay in the basement, and not to
show a light above ground, thus intending to prove his Democratic
convictions and conclusions by the darkness of his “premises”; and so,
while Lindencroft was all ablaze with a flood of light, the next house
was as black as a coal-hole.
My neighbor, Mr. James D. Johnson, was also a Democrat, but I knew he
would not spoil a good joke for the sake of politics, and I asked him to
engage the attention of Mr. and Mrs. T., and to keep their faces turned
towards Bridgeport and the approaching procession, the light of whose
torches could already be seen in the distance, while another Democratic
friend, Mr. George A. Wells, and I, ran over and illuminated Mr T.’s
house. This we did with great success, completing our work five minutes
before the procession arrived. As the Wide-Awakes turned into my grounds
and saw that the house of Mr. T. was brilliantly illuminated, they
concluded that he had become a sudden convert to Republicanism, and gave
three rousing cheers for him. Hearing his name thus cheered and
wondering at the cause, he happened to turn and see that his house was
lighted up from basement to attic, and uttering a single profane
ejaculation, he rushed for home. He was not able, however, to put out
the lights till the Wide-Awakes had gone on their way rejoicing under
the impression that one more Republican had been added to their ranks.
When the rebellion broke out in 1861, I was too old to go to the field,
but I supplied four substitutes, and contributed liberally from my means
for the cause of the Union. After the defeat at Bull Run, July 21, 1861,
“peace meetings” began to be held in different parts of the Northern
States, and especially in Fairfield and Litchfield Counties, in
Connecticut. It was usual in these assemblages to display a white flag,
bearing the word “Peace” above the National flag, and to make and listen
to harangues denunciatory of the war. One of these meetings was
advertised to be held, August 24th, at Stepney, ten miles north of
Bridgeport. On the morning of that day, I met Elias Howe, Jr., who
proposed to me that we should drive up to Stepney, attend the Peace
meeting, and hear for ourselves whether the addresses were disloyal or
not. We agreed to meet at the post-office, at twelve o’clock at noon,
and I went home for my carriage. On the way I met several gentlemen to
whom I communicated my intention, asking them to go also; and as Mr.
Howe invited several of his friends to accompany us, when we met at
noon, at least twenty gentlemen were at the place of rendezvous with
their carriages, ready to start for Stepney. I am quite confident that
not one of us had any other intention in going to this meeting, than to
quietly listen to the harangues, and if they were found to be in
opposition to the government, and calculated to create disturbance or
disaffection in the community, and deter enlistments, it would be best
to represent the matter to the government at Washington, and ask that
measures might be taken to suppress such gatherings.
As we turned into Main Street, we discovered two large omnibuses filled
with soldiers, who were at home on furlough, and who were going to
Stepney. Our lighter carriages outran them, and so arrived at Stepney in
time to see the white peace flag run up over the stars and stripes, when
we quietly stood in the crowd while the meeting was organized. It was a
very large gathering, and some fifty ladies were on the seats in front
of the platform, on which were the officers and speakers of the meeting.
A “preacher,”--Mr. Charles Smith,--was invited to open the proceedings
with prayer, and “The Military and Civil History of Connecticut, during
the War of 1861-65,” by W. A. Croffut and John M. Morris, thus continues
the record of this extraordinary gathering:
“He (Smith) had not, however, progressed far in his supplication, when
he slightly opened his eyes, and beheld, to his horror, the Bridgeport
omnibuses coming over the hill, garnished with Union banners, and vocal
with loyal cheers. This was the signal for a panic; Bull Run, on a small
scale was re-enacted. The devout Smith, and the undelivered orators, it
is alleged, took refuge in a field of corn. The procession drove
straight to the pole unresisted, the hostile crowd parting to let them
pass; and a tall man,--John Platt,--amid some mutterings, climbed the
pole, reached the halliards, and the mongrel banners were on the ground.
Some of the peace-men, rallying, drew weapons on ‘the invaders,’ and a
musket and a revolver were taken from them by soldiers at the very
instant of firing. Another of the defenders fired a revolver, and was
chased into the fields. Still others, waxing belligerent, were disarmed,
and a number of loaded muskets found stored in an adjacent shed were
seized. The stars and stripes were hoisted upon the pole, and wildly
cheered. P. T. Barnum was then taken on the shoulders of the boys in
blue, and put on the platform, where he made a speech full of
patriotism, spiced with the humor of the occasion. Captain James E.
Dunham also said a few words to the point.... ‘The Star Spangled Banner’
was then sung in chorus, and a series of resolutions passed, declaring
that ‘loyal men are the rightful custodians of the peace of
Connecticut.’ Elias Howe, Jr., chairman, made his speech, when the crowd
threatened to shoot the speakers: ‘If they fire a gun, boys, burn the
whole town, and I’ll pay for it!’ After giving the citizens wholesome
advice concerning the substituted flag, and their duty to the
government, the procession returned to Bridgeport, with the white flag
trailing in the mud behind an omnibus.... They were received at
Bridgeport by approving crowds, and were greeted with continuous cheers
as they passed along.”
On our way back to Bridgeport, the soldiers threatened a descent upon
the _Farmer_ office, but I strongly appealed to them to refrain from
such a riotous proceeding, telling them that as law-abiding citizens
they should refrain from acts of violence and especially should make no
appeal to the passions of a mob. So confident was I that the day’s
proceedings had ended with the reception of the soldiers on their return
from Stepney, that in telegraphing a full account of the facts to the
New York papers, I added that there was no danger of an attack upon the
_Farmer_ office, since leading loyal citizens were opposed to such
action as unnecessary and unwise. But the enthusiasm with which the
soldiers had been received, and the excitement of the day, prompted them
to break through their resolutions, and, half an hour after my telegram
had been sent to New York, they rushed into the _Farmer_ office, tumbled
the type into the street, and broke the presses. I did not approve of
this summary suppression of the paper, and offered the proprietors a
handsome subscription to assist in enabling them to renew the
publication of the _Farmer_. One of the editors of this paper went
South, and connected himself with a journal in Augusta, Georgia; the
remaining proprietor shortly afterwards re-issued the _Farmer_, but the
peace meetings which had been advertised for different towns were never
held; the gathering at Stepney was the last of the kind.
Elias Howe, Jr., although he was a man of wealth and well advanced in
years, enlisted as a private in the Seventeenth regiment of Connecticut
volunteers and served in the Army of the Potomac. Once when his
fellow-soldiers, not having been paid off, were in need of money, he
advanced $13,000 due them, and when his regiment was disbanded and
discharged from service, he chartered, at his own expense, a special
train to bring them from New Haven to Bridgeport, where they had a
public reception.
Mr. Howe, like all men of his reputed wealth and liberality, was
constantly besieged by solicitors for all sorts of charities, nor was he
free from such applications when he was serving as a common soldier in
Virginia. On one occasion a worthy priest came to him and asked for a
subscription to a church which was then building. “Who is it,” exclaimed
Howe, “that talks of building churches in this time of war?” The priest
ventured to say that he was trying to build in his parish a church which
was to be known as St. Peter’s.
“St. Peter’s is it?” asked Howe; “well, St. Peter was, in his way, a
fighting man; he drew a sword once and cut off a man’s ear; on the
whole, I think,” he added, as he gave a handsome sum of money to the
priest, “I must do something for St. Peter, though about these days I am
devoting my attention and money mainly to saltpetre.”
After the draft riots in New York and in other cities, in July, 1863,
myself and other members of the “Prudential Committee” which had been
formed in Bridgeport were frequently threatened with personal violence,
and rumors were especially rife that Lindencroft would some night be
mobbed and destroyed. On several occasions, soldiers volunteered as a
guard and came and stayed at my house, sometimes for several nights in
succession, and I was also provided with rockets, so that in case of an
attempted attack I could signal to my friends in the city and especially
to the night watchman at the arsenal, who would see my rockets at
Lindencroft and give the alarm. Happily these signals were never
needed, but the rockets came in play, long afterwards, in another way.
My house was provided with a magnetic burglar-alarm and one night the
faithful bell sounded. I was instantly on my feet and summoning my
servants, one ran and rung the large bell on the lawn which served in
the day time to call my coachman from the stable, another turned on the
gas, while I fired a gun out of the window and I then went to the top of
the house and set off several rockets. The whole region round about was
instantly aroused; dogs barked, neighbors half-dressed, but armed,
flocked over to my grounds, every time a rocket went up, and I was by no
means sparing of my supply; the whole place was as light as day, and in
the general glare and confusion we caught sight of two retreating
burglars, one running one way, the other another way, and both as fast
as their legs could carry them; nor do I believe that the panic-stricken
would-be plunderers stopped running till they reached New York.
It always seemed to me that a man who “takes no interest in politics” is
unfit to live in a land where the government rests in the hands of the
people. Consequently, whether I expressed them or not, I always had
pronounced opinions upon all the leading political questions of the day,
and no frivolous reason ever kept me from the polls. Indeed, on one
occasion, I even hastened my return from Europe, so that I could take
part in a presidential election. I was a party man, but not a partisan,
nor a wire-puller, and I had never sought or desired office, though it
had often been tendered to me. This was notoriously true, among all who
knew me, up to the year 1865, when I accepted
[Illustration: _ALARM AT LINDENCROFT._]
from the Republican party a nomination to the Connecticut legislature
from the town of Fairfield, and I did this because I felt that it would
be an honor to be permitted to vote for the then proposed amendment to
the Constitution of the United States to abolish slavery forever from
the land.
I was elected, and on arriving at Hartford the night before the session
began, I found the wire-pullers at work laying their plans for the
election of a Speaker of the House. Watching the movements closely, I
saw that the railroad interests had combined in support of one of the
candidates, and this naturally excited my suspicion. I never believed in
making State legislation a mere power to support monopolies. I do not
need to declare my full appreciation of the great blessings which
railroad interests and enterprises have brought upon this country and
the world. But the vaster the enterprise and its power for good, the
greater its opportunity for mischief if its power is perverted. The time
was when a whole community was tied to the track of one or two railway
companies, and it was too truthful to be looked upon as satire to call
New Jersey the “State of Camden and Amboy.” A great railroad company,
like fire, is a good servant, but a bad master; and when it is
considered that such a company, with its vast number of men dependent
upon it for their daily bread, can sometimes elect State officers and
legislatures, the danger to our free institutions from such a force may
well be feared.
Thinking of these things, and seeing in the combination of railroad
interests to elect a speaker, no promise of good to the community at
large, I at once consulted with a few friends in the legislature, and we
resolved to defeat the railroad “ring,” if possible, in caucus. I had
not even seen either of the candidates for the speakership, nor had I a
single selfish end in view to gratify by the election of one candidate
or the other; but I felt that if the railroad favorite could be
defeated, the public interest would be subserved. We succeeded; their
candidate was not nominated, and the railroad men were taken by
surprise. They had had their own way in every legislature since the
first railroad was laid down in Connecticut, and to be beaten now fairly
startled them.
Immediately after the caucus, I sought the successful nominee, Hon. E.
K. Foster, of New Haven, and begged him not to appoint as chairman of
the railroad committee the man who had held that office for several
successive years, and who was, in fact, the great railroad factotum in
the State. He complied with my request, and he soon found how important
it was to check the strong and growing monopoly; for, as he said, the
“outside pressure” from personal friends in both political parties, to
secure the appointment of the person to whom I had objected, was
terrible.
Though I had not foreseen nor thought of such a thing until I reached
Hartford, I soon found that a battle with the railroad commissioners
would be necessary, and my course was shaped accordingly. It was soon
discovered that a majority of the railroad commissioners were mere tools
in the hands of the railroad companies, and that one of them was
actually a hired clerk in the office of the New York and New Haven
Railroad Company. It was also shown that the chairman of the railroad
commissioners permitted most of the accidents which occurred on that
road to be taken charge of and reported upon by the paid lobby agent of
that railroad. This was so manifestly destructive to the interests of
all parties who might suffer from accidents on the road, or have any
controversy therefor with the company, that I succeeded in enlisting the
farmers and other true men on the side of right; and we defeated the
chairman of the railroad commissioners, who was a candidate for
re-election, and elected our own candidate in his place. I also carried
through a law that no person who was in the employ of any railroad in
the State should serve as railroad commissioner.
But the great struggle which lasted nearly through the entire session
was upon the subject of railroad passenger commutations. Commodore
Vanderbilt had secured control of the Hudson River and Harlem railroads,
and had increased the price of commuters’ tickets from two hundred to
four hundred per cent. Many men living on the line of these roads at
distances of from ten to fifty miles from New York, had built fine
residences in the country, on the strength of cheap transit to and from
the city, and were compelled to submit to the extortion. Commodore
Vanderbilt was a large shareholder in the New York and New Haven road;
indeed, subsequent elections showed that he had a controlling interest,
and it seemed evident to me that the same practice would be put in
operation on the New Haven Railroad, that commuters were groaning under
on the two other roads. I enlisted as many as I could in an effort to
strangle this outrage before it became too strong to grapple with.
Several lawyers in the Assembly had promised me their aid, but long
before the final struggle came, every lawyer except one in that body was
enlisted in favor of the railroads!
What potent influence had been at work with these legal gentlemen could
only be surmised. Certain it is that all the railroad interests in the
State were combined; and while they had plenty of money with which to
carry out their designs and desires, the chances looked slim in favor of
those members of the legislature who had no pecuniary interest in the
matter, but were struggling simply for justice and the protection of the
people. But “Yankee stick-to-it-iveness” was always a noted feature in
my character. Every inch of the ground was fought over, day after day,
before the legislative railroad committee. Examinations and
cross-examinations of railroad commissioners and lobbyists were kept up.
Scarcely more than one man, Senator Ballard, of Darien, aided me
personally in the investigations which took place. But he was a host in
himself, and we left not a stone unturned; we succeeded by our
persistence, in letting in considerable light upon a dark subject. The
man whom I had prevented from being made chairman, succeeded in becoming
a member of the railroad committee; but, from the mouths of unwilling
witnesses, I exhibited his connection with railroad reports, railroad
laws, and railroad lobbyings, in such a light that he took to his bed
some ten days before the end of the session, and actually remained
there, “sick,” as he said, till the legislature adjourned.
The speaker offered me the chairmanship of any one of several
committees, and I selected that of the Agricultural committee, because
it would occupy but little of my time, and give me the opportunity I so
much desired to devote my attention to the railway combinations. The
Republicans had a majority in both branches of the legislature; the
Democrats, however, were watchful and energetic. The amendment to the
United States Constitution, abolishing slavery, met with but little open
opposition; but the proposed amendment to the State Constitution,
striking out the word “white” from that clause which defined the
qualifications of voters, was violently opposed by the Democratic
members. The report from the minority of the committee to whom the
question was referred, gave certain reasons for offering the
contemplated amendment, and in reply to this, I spoke, May 26, 1865, as
follows:
SPEECH OF P. T. BARNUM,
ON THE CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT.
MR. SPEAKER:--I will not attempt to notice at any length the declamation
of the honorable gentleman from Milford, for certainly I have heard
nothing from his lips approaching to the dignity of argument. I agree
with the gentleman that the right of suffrage is “dearly and sacredly
cherished by the white man”; and it is because this right is so dear and
sacred, that I wish to see it extended to every educated moral man
within our State, without regard to color. He tells us that one race is
a vessel to honor, and another to dishonor; and that he has seen on
ancient Egyptian monuments the negro represented as “a hewer of wood and
a drawer of water.” This is doubtless true, and the gentleman seems
determined always to _keep_ the negro a “vessel of dishonor,” and a
“hewer of wood.” We, on the other hand, propose to give him the
opportunity of expanding his faculties and elevating himself to true
manhood. He says he “hates and abhors and despises demagogism.” I am
rejoiced to hear it, and I trust we shall see tangible evidence of the
truth of what he professes in his abandonment of that slavery to party
which is the mere trick and trap of the demagogue.
When, a few days since, this honorable body voted unanimously for the
Amendment of the United States Constitution abolishing human slavery, I
not only thanked God from my heart of hearts, but I felt like going down
on my knees to the gentlemen of the opposition for the wisdom they had
exhibited in bowing to the logic of events by dropping that dead weight
of slavery which had disrupted the Democratic party, with which I had
been so long connected. And on this occasion I wish again to appeal to
the wisdom and loyalty of my Democratic friends. I say Democratic
“friends,” for I am and ever was a thorough, out and out Democrat. I
supported General Jackson, and voted for every Democratic president
after him, up to and including Pierce; for I really thought Pierce was a
Democrat until he proved the contrary, as I conceived, in the Kansas
question. My democracy goes for the greatest good to the greatest
number, for equal and exact justice to all men, and for a submission to
the will of the majority. If I thought I had one drop of blood in my
veins which was not democratic, in the light of this definition, I would
have it out, no matter at what trouble or sacrifice. It was the
repudiation by the southern democracy of this great democratic doctrine
of majority rule which opened the rebellion.
And now, Mr. Speaker, let me remind our democratic friends that the
present question simply asks that a majority of the legal voters, the
white citizens of this State, may decide whether or not colored men of
good moral character, _who are able to read_ and who possess all the
qualifications of white voters, shall be entitled to the elective
franchise. The opposition may have their own ideas, or may be in doubt
upon this subject; but surely no true democrat will dare to refuse
permission to our fellow-citizens to decide the question.
Negro slavery and its legitimate outgrowths of ignorance, tyranny and
oppression, have caused this gigantic rebellion which has cost our
country thousands of millions of treasure, and hundreds of thousands of
human lives in defending a principle. And where was this poor,
down-trodden colored race in this rebellion? Did they seize the
“opportunity” when their masters were engaged with a powerful foe, to
break out in insurrection, and massacre those tyrants who had so long
held them in the most cruel bondage? No, Mr. Speaker, they did not do
this. My “democratic” friends would have done it. I would have done it.
Irishmen, Chinamen, Portuguese, would have done it; any white man would
have done it; but the poor black man is like a lamb in his nature
compared with the white man. The black man possesses a confiding
disposition, thoroughly tinctured with religious enthusiasm, and not
characterized by a spirit of revenge. No, the only barbarous massacres
we heard of, during the war, were those committed by their white masters
on their poor, defenceless white prisoners, and to the eternal disgrace
of southern white “democratic” rebels, be it said, these instances of
barbarism were numerous all through the war. When this rebellion first
broke out, the northern democracy raised a hue-and-cry against
permitting the negroes to fight; but when such a measure seemed
necessary, in order to put down traitors, these colored men took their
muskets in hand and made their bodies a wall of defence for the loyal
citizens of the north. And now, when our grateful white citizens ask
from this assembly the privilege of deciding by their votes whether
these colored men, who, at least, were partially our saviors in the war,
may or may not, under proper restrictions, become participants in that
great salvation, I am amazed that men calling themselves democrats dare
refuse to grant this democratic measure. We wish to educate ignorant
men, white or black. Ignorance is incompatible with the genius of our
free institutions. In the very nature of things it jeopardizes their
stability, and it is always unsafe to transgress the laws of nature. We
cannot safely shut ourselves up with ignorance and brutality; we must
educate and christianize those who are now by circumstances our social
inferiors.
Years ago, I was afraid of foreign voters. I feared that when Europe
poured her teeming millions of working people upon our shores, our
extended laws of franchise would enable them to swamp our free
institutions, and reduce us to anarchy. But much reflection has
satisfied me that we have only to elevate these millions and their
descendants to the standard of American citizenship, and we shall find
sufficient of the leaven of liberty in our system of government to
absorb all foreign elements and assimilate them to a truly democratic
form of government.
Mr. Speaker: We cannot afford to carry passengers and have them live
under our government with no real vital interest in its perpetuity.
Every man must be a joint owner.
The only safe inhabitants of a free country are educated citizens who
vote. The gentleman from Milford lives near the old Washington
toll-bridge, which spans the Housatonic River, and he doubtless
remembers, as I do, when the Boston and New York stages crossed that
bridge, and the coachman would always denounce the “infernal bridge
monopoly” which compelled him to pay a dollar every time the stage
crossed. The passengers would generally laugh and say: “Let him pay,
it’s nothing to us; we are only passengers.” Some twenty years ago, one
of the gentlemen accustomed to travel in that stage, was crossing the
Atlantic in a steamship. At the hour of midnight, when nearly all were
wrapt in sleep, the fearful cry of “fire” rang through the ship. There
were the poor passengers, threatened by the devouring element, and only
a plank between them and death. Our passenger, not half awake, rubbed
his eyes and probably fancying he was in the old stage-coach, cried out:
“Fire away, I am only a passenger!” Fortunately, it was a false alarm;
but when the gentleman was wide awake, he discovered that there could be
no disinterested passengers on board a burning ship.
Nor in a free government can we afford to employ journeymen; they may be
apprenticed until they learn to read, and study our institutions; and
then let them become joint proprietors and feel a proportionate
responsibility. The two learned and distinguished authors of the
minority report have been studying the science of ethnology and have
treated us with a dissertation on the races. And what have they
attempted to show? Why, that a race which, simply on account of the
color of the skin, has long been buried in slavery at the South, and
even at the North has been tabooed and scarcely permitted to rise above
the dignity of whitewashers and boot-blacks, does not exhibit the same
polish and refinement that the white citizens do who have enjoyed the
advantages of civilization, education, Christian culture and
self-respect which can only be attained by those who share in making the
laws under which they live.
Do our democratic friends assume that the negroes are not human? I have
heard professed democrats claim even that; but do the authors of this
minority report insist that the negro is a beast? Is his body not
tenanted by an immortal spirit? If this is the position of the
gentlemen, then I confess a beast cannot reason, and this minority
committee are right in declaring that “the negro can develop no
inventive faculties or genius for the arts.” For although the elephant
may be taught to plow, or the dog to carry your market-basket by his
teeth, you cannot teach them to shave notes, to speculate in gold, or
even to vote; whereas, the experience of all political parties shows
that men may be taught to vote, even when they do not know what the
ticket means.
But if the colored man is indeed a man, then his manhood with proper
training can be developed. His soul may appear dormant, his brain
inactive, but there is a vitality there; and Nature will assert herself
if you will give her the opportunity.
Suppose an inhabitant of another planet should drop down upon this
portion of our globe at mid-winter. He would find the earth covered with
snow and ice and congealed almost to the consistency of granite. The
trees are leafless, everything is cold and barren; no green thing is to
be seen; the inhabitants are chilled, and stalk about shivering, from
place to place;--he would exclaim, “Surely this is not life; this means
annihilation. No flesh and blood can long endure this; this frozen earth
is bound in the everlasting embraces of adamantine frost, and can never
develop vegetation for the sustenance of any living thing.” He little
dreams of the priceless myriads of germs which bountiful Nature has
safely garnered in the warm bosom of our mother earth; he sees no
evidence of that vitality which the beneficent sun will develop to grace
and beautify the world. But let him remain until March or April, and as
the snow begins to melt away, he discovers the beautiful crocus
struggling through the half-frozen ground; the snow-drops appear in all
their chaste beauty; the buds of the swamp-maple shoot forth; the
beautiful magnolia opens her splendid blossoms; the sassafras adds its
evidence of life; the pearl-white blossoms of the dog-wood light up
every forest;--and while our stranger is rubbing his eyes in
astonishment, the earth is covered with her emerald velvet carpet; rich
foliage and brilliant colored blossoms adorn the trees; fragrant flowers
are enwreathing every wayside; the swift-winged birds float through the
air and send forth joyful notes of gratitude from every tree-top; the
merry lambs skip joyfully around their verdant pasture grounds; and
everywhere is our stranger surrounded with life, beauty, joy and
gladness.
So it is with the poor African. You may take a dozen specimens of both
sexes from the lowest type of man found in Africa; their race has been
buried for ages in ignorance and barbarism, and you can scarcely
perceive that they have any more of manhood or womanhood than so many
orang-outangs or gorillas. You look at their low foreheads, their thick
skulls and lips, their woolly heads, their flat noses, their dull, lazy
eyes, and you may be tempted to adopt the language of this minority
committee, and exclaim: Surely these people have “no inventive
faculties, no genius for the arts, or for any of those occupations
requiring intellect and wisdom.” But bring them out into the light of
civilization; let them and their children come into the genial sunshine
of Christianity; teach them industry, self-reliance, and self-respect;
let them learn what too few white Christians have yet understood, that
cleanliness is akin to godliness, and a part of godliness; and the human
soul will begin to develop itself. Each generation, blessed with
churches and common schools, will gradually exhibit the result of such
culture; the low foreheads will be raised and widened by an active and
expanded brain; the vacant eye of barbarism, ignorance and idleness will
light up with the fire of intelligence, education, ambition, activity
and Christian civilization; and you will find the immortal soul
asserting her dignity, by the development of a man who would startle, by
his intelligence, the honorable gentleman from Wallingford, who has
presumed to compare beings made in God’s image with “oxen and asses.”
That honorable gentleman, if he is rightly reported in the papers (I did
not have the happiness to hear his speech), has mistaken the nature of
the colored man. The honorable gentleman reminds me of the young man who
went abroad, and when he returned, there was nothing in America that
could compare with what he had seen in foreign lands. Niagara Falls was
nowhere; the White Mountains were “knocked higher than a kite” by Mont
Blanc; our rivers were so large that they were vulgar, when contrasted
with the beautiful little streams and rivulets of Europe; our New York
Central Park was eclipsed by the Bois de Bologne and the Champs Elysées
of Paris, or Hyde or Regent Park of London, to say nothing of the great
Phœnix Park at Dublin.
“They have introduced a couple of Venetian gondolas on the large pond in
Central Park,” remarked a friend.
“All very well,” replied the verdant traveller, “but between you and me,
these birds can’t stand our cold climate more than one season.” The
gentleman from Wallingford evidently had as little idea of the true
nature of the African as the young swell had of the pleasure-boats of
Venice.
Mr. Johnson, of Wallingford: The gentleman misapprehends my remarks. The
gentleman from Norwich had urged that the negro should vote because they
have fought in our battles. I replied that oxen and asses can fight, and
therefore should, on the same grounds, be entitled to vote.
Mr. Barnum: I accept the gentleman’s explanation. Doubtless General
Grant will feel himself highly complimented when he learns that it
requires no greater capacity to handle the musket, and meet armed
battalions in the field, than “oxen and asses” possess.
Let the educated free negro feel that he is a man; let him be trained in
New England churches, schools and workshops; let him support himself,
pay his taxes, and cast his vote, like other men, and he will put to
everlasting shame the champions of modern democracy, by the overwhelming
evidence he will give in his own person of the great Scripture truth,
that “God has made of one blood all the nations of men.” A human soul,
“that God has created and Christ died for,” is not to be trifled with.
It may tenant the body of a Chinaman, a Turk, an Arab or a Hottentot--it
is still an immortal spirit; and amid all assumptions of caste, it will
in due time vindicate the great fact that, without regard to color or
condition, all men are equally children of the common Father.
A few years since, an English lord and his family were riding in his
carriage in Liverpool. It was an elegant equipage; the servants were
dressed in rich livery; the horses caparisoned in the most costly style;
and everything betokened that the establishment belonged to a scion of
England’s proudest aristocracy. The carriage stopped in front of a
palatial residence. At this moment a poor beggar woman rushed to the
side of the carriage, and gently seizing the lady by the hand,
exclaimed, “For the love of God give me something to save my poor sick
children from starvation. You are rich; I am your poor sister, for God
is our common Father.”
“Wretch!” exclaimed the proud lady, casting the woman’s hand away;
“Don’t call me sister, I have nothing in common with such low brutes as
you.” And the great lady doubtless thought she was formed of finer clay
than this suffering mendicant; but when a few days afterwards she was
brought to a sick bed by the small-pox, contracted by touching the hand
of that poor wretch, she felt the evidence that they belonged to the
same great family, and were subject to the same pains and diseases.
The State of Connecticut, like New Jersey, is a border State of New
York. New York has a great commercial city, where Aldermen rob by the
tens of thousands, and where principal is studied much more than
principle. I can readily understand how the negro has come to be debased
at the North as well as at the South. The interests of the two sections
in the product of negro labor were nearly identical. The North wanted
Southern cotton and the South was ready in turn to buy from the North
whatever was needed in the way of Northern supplies and manufactures.
This community of commercial interests led to an identity in political
principles especially in matters pertaining to the negro race--the
working race of the South--which produced the cotton and consumed so
much of what Northern merchants and manufacturers sold for plantation
use. The Southern planters were good customers and were worth
conciliating. So when Connecticut proposed in 1818 to continue to admit
colored men to the franchise, the South protested against thus elevating
the negroes, and Connecticut succumbed. No other New England State has
ever so disgraced herself; and now Connecticut democrats are asked to
permit the white citizens of this State to express their opinion in
regard to re-instating the colored man where our Revolutionary sires
placed him under the Constitution. Now, gentlemen, “democrats” as you
call yourselves, you who speak so flippantly of your “loyalty,” your
“love for the Union” and your “love for the people;” you who are
generally talking right and voting wrong, we ask you to come forward and
act “democratically,” by letting your masters, the people, speak.
The word “white” in the Constitution cannot be strictly and literally
construed. The opposition express great love for white blood. Will they
let a mulatto vote half the time, a quadroon three-fourths, and an
octoroon seven-eighths of the time? If not, why not? Will they enslave
seven-eighths of a white man because one-eighth is not Caucasian? Is
this democratic? Shall not the majority seven control the minority one?
Out on such “democracy.”
But a Democratic minority committee (of two) seem to have done something
besides study ethnology. They have also paid great attention to fine
arts, and are particularly anxious that all voters shall have a “genius
for the arts.” I would like to ask them if it has always been political
practice to insist that every voter in the great “unwashed” and
“unterrified” of any party should become a member of the Academy of Arts
before he votes the “regular” ticket? I thought he was received into the
full fellowship of a political party if he could exhibit sufficient
“inventive faculties and genius for the arts,” to enable him to paint a
black eye. Can a man whose “genius for the arts” enables him to strike
from the shoulder scientifically, be admitted to full fellowship in a
political party? Is it evident that the political artist has studied the
old masters, if he exhibits his genius by tapping an opponent’s head
with a shillelagh? The oldest master in this school of art was Cain; and
so canes have been made to play their part in politics, at the polls and
even in the United States Senate Chamber.
“Is genius for the arts and those occupations requiring intellect and
wisdom” sufficiently exemplified in adroitly stuffing ballot boxes,
forging soldiers’ votes, and copying a directory, as has been done, as
the return list of votes? Is the “inventive faculty” of “voting early
and often,” a passport to political brotherhood? Is it satisfactory
evidence of “artistic” genius, to head a mob? and a mob which is led
and guided by political passion, as numerous instances in our history
prove, is the worst of mobs. Is it evidence of “high art” to lynch a man
by hanging him to the nearest tree or lamp post? Is a “whiskey
scrimmage” one of the lost arts restored? We all know how the “artists”
of both political parties are prone to embellish elections and to
enhance the excitements of political campaigns by inciting riots, and
the frequency with which these disgraceful outbreaks have occurred of
late, especially in some of the populous cities, is cause for just
alarm. It is dangerous “art.”
Mr. Speaker: I repeat that I am a friend to the Irishman. I have
travelled through his native country and have seen how he is oppressed.
I have listened to the eloquent and patriotic appeals of Daniel
O’Connell, in Conciliation Hall, in Dublin, and I have gladly
contributed to his fund for ameliorating the condition of his
countrymen. I rejoice to see them rushing to this land of liberty and
independence; and it is because I am their friend that I denounce the
demagogues who attempt to blind and mislead them to vote in the
interests of any party against the interests of humanity, and the
principles of true democracy. My neighbors will testify that at
mid-winter I employ Irishmen by the hundred to do work that is not
absolutely necessary, in order to help them support their families.
After hearing the minority report last week, I began to feel that I
might be disfranchised, for I have no great degree of “genius for the
arts;” I felt, therefore, that I must get “posted” on that subject as
soon as possible. I at once sauntered into the Senate Chamber to look
at the paintings; there I saw portraits of great men, and I saw two
empty frames from which the pictures had been removed. These missing
paintings, I was told, were portraits of two ex-Governors of the State,
whose position on political affairs was obnoxious to the dominant party
in the Legislature; and especially obnoxious were the supposed
sentiments of these governors on the war. Therefore, the Senate voted to
remove the pictures, and thus proved as it would seem, that there is an
intimate connection between politics and art.
I have repeatedly travelled through every State in the South, and I
assert, what every intelligent officer and soldier who has resided there
will corroborate, that the slaves, as a body, are more intelligent than
the poor whites. No man who has not been there can conceive to what a
low depth of ignorance the poor snuff-taking, clay-eating whites of some
portion of the South have descended. I trust the day is not far distant
when the “common school” shall throw its illuminating rays through this
Egyptian pall.
I have known slave mechanics to be sold for $3,000 and even $5,000 each,
and others could not be bought at all; and I have seen intelligent
slaves acting as stewards for their masters, travelling every year to
New Orleans, Nashville, and even to Cincinnati, to dispose of their
master’s crops. The free colored citizens of Opelousas, St.
Martinsville, and all the Attakapas country in Louisiana, are as
respectable and intelligent as an ordinary community of whites. They
speak the French and English languages, educate their children in music,
and “the arts” and they pay their taxes on more than fifteen millions of
dollars.
Gentlemen of the opposition, I beseech you to remember that our state
and our country ask from us something more than party tactics. It is
absolutely necessary that the loyal blacks at the South should vote in
order to save the loyal whites. Let Connecticut, without regard to
party, set them an example that shall influence the action at the South,
and prevent a new form of slavery from arising there, which shall make
all our expenditure of blood and treasure fruitless.
But some persons have this color prejudice simply by the force of
education, and they say, “Well, a nigger is a nigger, and he can’t be
anything else. I hate niggers, anyhow.” Twenty years ago I crossed the
Atlantic, and among our passengers was an Irish judge, who was coming
out to Newfoundland as chief justice. He was an exceedingly intelligent
and polished gentleman, and extremely witty. The passengers from the New
England States and those from the South got into a discussion on the
subject of slavery, which lasted three days. The Southerners were
finally worsted, and when their arguments were exhausted, they fell back
on the old story, by saying: “Oh! curse a nigger, he ain’t half human
anyhow; he had no business to be a nigger, etc.” One of the gentlemen
then turned to the Irish judge, and asked his opinion of the merits of
the controversy. The judge replied:
“Gentlemen, I have listened with much edification to your arguments pro
and con during three days. I was quite inclined to think the
anti-slavery gentlemen had justice and right on their side, but the last
argument from the South has changed my mind. I say a ‘nigger has no
business to be a nigger,’ and we should kick him out of society and
trample him under foot--always provided, gentlemen, you prove he was
born black at his own particular request. If he had no word to say in
the matter of course he is blameless for his color, and is entitled to
the same respect that other men are who properly behave themselves!”
Mr. Speaker: I am no politician, I came to this legislature simply
because I wished to have the honor of voting for the two constitutional
amendments--one for driving slavery entirely out of our country; the
other to allow men of education and good moral character to vote,
regardless of the color of their skins. To give my voice for these two
philanthropic, just, and Christian measures is all the glory I ask
legislativewise. I care nothing whatever for any sect or party under
heaven, as such. I have no axes to grind, no logs to roll, no favors to
ask. All I desire is to do what is right, and prevent what is wrong. I
believe in no “expediency” that is not predicated of justice, for in all
things--politics, as well as everything else--“I know that honesty is
the best policy.” A retributive Providence will unerringly and speedily
search out all wrong doing; hence, right is always the best in the long
run. Certainly, in the light of the great American spirit of liberty and
equal rights which is sweeping over this country, and making the thrones
of tyrants totter in the old world, no party can afford to carry
slavery, either of body or of mind. Knock off your manacles and let the
man go free. Take down the blinds from his intellect, and let in the
light of education and Christian culture. When this is done you have
developed a man. Give him the responsibility of a man and the
self-respect of a man, by granting him the right of suffrage. Let
universal education, and the universal franchise be the motto of free
America, and the toiling millions of Europe, who are watching you with
such intense interest, will hail us as their saviors. Let us loyally
sink “party” on this question, and go for “God and our Country.” Let no
man attach an eternal stigma to his name by shutting his eyes to the
great lesson of the hour, and voting against permitting the people to
express their opinion on this important subject. Let us unanimously
grant this truly democratic boon. Then, when our laws of franchise are
settled on a just basis, let future parties divide where they honestly
differ on State or national questions which do not trench upon the
claims of manhood or American citizenship.