“Mr. Butler, in his seat, impulsively uttered words which
Senators around advised him were not parliamentary, and he
subsequently, at the instance of Senators, requested that the
words might be withdrawn.”
Hon. Lafayette S. Foster, of Connecticut, followed.
“As I understood the honorable Senator from Georgia to remark
that he approved of striking forcibly down in this Chamber a
member of the Senate, I think it incumbent on me, recently
a member of this body, and not having participated in its
debates, to say a word.”
Mr. Foster then proceeded to vindicate liberty of speech.
* * * * *
Shortly afterwards, in another speech, Senator Butler said of Mr.
Sumner:--
“Though his friends have invested him with the dress of
Achilles and offered him his armor, he has shown that he is
only able to fight with the weapons of Thersites, _and deserved
what that brawler received from the hands of the gallant
Ulysses_.”[146]
The declaration of Mr. Wilson, that the attack upon Mr. Sumner was “a
brutal, murderous, and cowardly assault,” incensed the friends of Mr.
Brooks, and many threats of personal violence were made. General Lane,
of Oregon, afterward Democratic candidate for Vice-President, called
upon Mr. Wilson, and placed a challenge from Mr. Brooks in his hands.
Mr. Wilson promptly placed in General Lane’s hands, contrary to the
urgent advice of Mr. Giddings and other friends, who thought his reply
might bring on a personal conflict, an answer to his hostile note, in
which he said:--
“I characterized, on the floor of the Senate, the assault
upon my colleague as ‘brutal, murderous, and cowardly.’ I
thought so then: I think so now: I have no qualification
whatever to make in regard to those words. I have never
entertained, in the Senate or elsewhere, the idea of personal
responsibility, in the sense of the duellist. I have always
regarded duelling as the lingering relic of a barbarous
civilization, which the law of the country has branded as
crime. While, therefore, I religiously believe in the right of
self-defence in its broadest sense, the law of my country and
the matured convictions of my whole life alike forbid me to
meet you for the purpose indicated in your letter.”
The Hon. James M. Mason, a Senator from Virginia, already odious as
author of the Fugitive Slave Bill, and afterwards so conspicuous in the
Rebellion, thus declared his approbation of the assault:--
“SELMA, FREDERICK COUNTY, VA.,
29th September, 1856.
“GENTLEMEN,--I have had the honor to receive your letter of
the 13th instant, inviting me, on behalf of the constituents
of Colonel Preston S. Brooks, to a dinner to be given to him
by them, on the 3d of October next, in ‘testimony of their
complete indorsement of his Congressional course.’
“It has been my good fortune to have enjoyed the acquaintance
of your able and justly honored Representative, on terms both
of social and political intercourse, from his entrance into
the House of Representatives, and I know of none whose public
career I hold more worthy the full and cordial approbation of
his constituents than his.
“He has shown himself alike able and prompt to sustain the
rights and the interests of his constituents in debate and
by vote, or to vindicate in a different mode, and under
circumstances of painful duty, the honor of his friend. I would
gladly, therefore, unite with you, were it in my power, in the
testimonial proposed by his generous constituents, but regret
that the distance which separates us, and my engagements at
home, must forbid it.
…
“But, in reverse of all this, should a dominant sectional
vote be directed to bring into power those pledged in advance
to break down the barriers interposed by the compact of
federation for the security of one section against the other,
then, in my calmest judgment, but one course remains for the
South,--_immediate, absolute, and eternal separation_.
…
“Again regretting, Gentlemen, that I cannot be with you,
“I am, with great respect,
“J. M. MASON.”
The Hon. Jefferson Davis, Secretary of War, and afterwards President of
the Rebel States, thus declared his approbation:--
“WASHINGTON, Monday, September 22, 1856.
“GENTLEMEN,--I have the honor to acknowledge your polite and
very gratifying invitation to a public dinner, to be given
by the people of the Fourth Congressional District to their
Representative, Hon. P. S. Brooks.
“It would give me much pleasure, on any occasion, to meet you,
fellow-citizens of the Fourth District of South Carolina;
and the gratification would be materially heightened by the
opportunity to witness their approbation of a Representative
_whom I hold in such high regard and esteem_. Circumstances
will not permit me, however, to be with you, as invited, and I
have only to express to you my sympathy with the feeling which
prompts the sons of Carolina to welcome the return of a brother
who has been the subject of vilification, misrepresentation,
and persecution, _because he resented a libellous assault upon
the reputation of their mother_.
“With many thanks to you and those whom you represent for your
kind remembrance of me,
“I am very truly your friend and fellow-citizen,
“JEFFERSON DAVIS.
“ARTHUR SIMPKINS, JAMES GILLAM, and others.”
Here may properly be introduced the language of Mr. Savage, of
Tennessee, in the House of Representatives, in his eulogy of Mr. Brooks.
“To die nobly is life’s chief concern. History records but one
Thermopylæ: there ought to have been another, and that one for
Preston S. Brooks. Brutus stabbed Cæsar in the Capitol, and,
whatever we may now think of the wisdom and justice of the
deed, the world has ever since approved and applauded it. So
shall the scene in the Senate Chamber carry the name of the
deceased to all future generations, long to be remembered after
all here are forgotten, and until these proud walls crumble
into ruins.”[147]