“Mr. Sumner’s speech attracted a large audience to the Senate
galleries, which continued well filled during the four hours
of his scourging review of Slavery in all its relations,
political, social, moral, and economical. There appeared to be
a studied effort at indifference on the Democratic side; for
only a dozen Senators were in their seats during the first hour
or two. Afterward they gradually appeared, and leading Southern
members from the House contributed to the general interest by
their presence and attention.
“As a whole, this speech was regarded as being more offensive
by the South than the one which created such a sensation
before, and there is reason to believe, that, but for
prudential considerations, it might have been attended with
similar results. It was found quite difficult to restrain some
decided exhibition of resentment in certain quarters. The
only expression of indignation which found vent was in Mr.
Chesnut’s brief and angry reply, from which the general temper
of the South may be inferred, as he is regarded among the most
discreet and considerate in his tone and bearing.”
The correspondent of the _Chicago Press and Tribune_, under date of
June 5, wrote:--
“The speech of Charles Sumner yesterday was probably the most
masterly and exhaustive argument against human bondage that has
ever been made in this or any other country, since man first
commenced to oppress his fellow-man. He took the floor at ten
minutes past twelve, and spoke until a little after four. The
tone of the speech was not vindictive, and yet there was a
terrible severity running through it that literally awed the
Southern side. There will, of course, be various opinions as to
the _policy_ of this awful arraignment of the Slave Power, yet
there can be but one opinion as to its extraordinary logical
completeness, and, however it may affect public opinion to-day,
it is an effort that will live in history long after the
ephemeral contest of this age shall have passed away. Indeed,
while listening to it, I could not but feel--and the same
feeling was, I know, experienced by others--that the eloquent
and brave orator was speaking rather to future generations, and
to the impartial audience of the whole civilized world, than
to the men of to-day, with a view of effecting any result upon
elements with which he was immediately surrounded.”
The correspondent of the _New York Evening Post_ wrote, under date of
June 5:--
“Mr. Sumner’s speech was a tremendous attack upon Slavery,
and was utterly devoid of personalities. He attacked _the
institution_, and not individuals, but his language was very
severe. There was no let-up in the severity from beginning
to end. Facts were quoted, and _they_ were allowed to bear
against States as well as individuals; but Mr. Sumner made no
comment upon that class of facts. While he was exhibiting the
barbarous character of Slave-Masters, there was a good deal of
restlessness on the slaveholding side of the Senate Hall, as if
it required great self-control to keep silence.”
The correspondent of the _Boston Traveller_ wrote at length on the
delivery, and the impression produced. Here is an extract:--
“So far as personal violence was to be apprehended, we think he
was as unconcerned as a man could be. Anxiety on that account
might have been felt by his friends, but not by him. He seemed
to be all forgetful of himself, and to have his mind dwelling
on the cause to which he was devoted, the race for which he was
to plead, and on the responsibility under which he stood to his
country and to generations to come.…
“There was something sublime in the ardor and boldness and
majesty with which he spoke. At times we could not but forget
the speech, and think only of the speaker,--the honorable
emulation of his youth, the illustrious services of his
manhood, the purity of his aims, the sufferings he had endured,
and the merciful Providence which had preserved him. Nothing
could surpass the effect of the concluding paragraphs, in which
he predicted a Republican triumph in November next.
“The four hours during which we listened to him can never pass
from our memory. It would be superfluous here even to enumerate
the points of the speech, or to suggest its most powerful
passages, for it will be universally read. An arraignment
of Slavery so exhaustive has never before been made in our
history, and it will supersede the necessity of another.
Hereafter, when one desires to prove Slavery irrational and
unconstitutional, he will go to that speech as to an arsenal.
During a part of its delivery, the Southern Senators, as Toombs
and Wigfall, were very uneasy, walking about the Senate, and
conversing aloud. Keitt and other members of the House from
South Carolina were also in the Senate Chamber, and were rather
unquiet. Near Mr. Sumner, throughout his speech, sat his
colleague, Mr. Wilson, Mr. Burlingame, and Owen Lovejoy; and
had any Southern member attempted a repetition of the Brooks
assault, he would have found in either of them a foeman worthy
of his steel.
“The Republican Senators gave excellent attention to the
speech. Some of them, who are understood to hold very moderate
and conservative opinions, expressed a strong admiration of the
speech. One of them called it ‘a mighty effort’; another said
it was ‘the greatest speech of the age’; another said ‘it was
an unanswerable refutation of the doctrines which Senators from
Slave States had repeatedly advanced and debated in favor of
the justice and policy of Slavery, and It was a good work.’ …
“Mr. Sumner was called upon last evening by some of the leading
citizens of Kansas, some of whom are to hold official positions
upon its admission, who thanked him for his speech, and assured
him that their cause would rather be advanced than injured by
it. Their course puts to shame the timidity of some persons
who were opposed to its delivery, fearing lest it would defeat
the admission of Kansas,--just as if the Proslavery Democracy,
in their treatment of that question, are to be governed by any
consideration except their own party interests and the demands
of Slavery. It is time that the Republican party pursued its
own course, without asking the counsel or permission of its
adversaries.”
An occasional correspondent of the _Chatauque Democrat_, New York, gave
a familiar sketch of the scene.
“Mr. Breckinridge remained all the time, and sat with an open
book in his hands, pretending to read; but his eyes wandered
from the page, and, with a frown upon his brow, he finally
gazed at the speaker till he closed. Jeff Davis pretended to
be reading the _Globe_, but it was plain to be seen by the
heading of the paper that it was upside down. Wigfall seemed
in torment. He listened respectfully awhile, and then glided
silently around from one Senator to another, and conferred in
whispers. He seemed to be hatching mischief; but the grave
shake of the head of the older Senators doubtless kept this
uneasy, restless desperado quiet. Hunter sat like a rock,
immovable, and listened respectfully to the whole. Not a muscle
moved upon his placid face to denote what was going on in his
mind. Toombs heard the most of it quietly, and with as much
of a don’t-care look as his evil passions would permit. Near
the close, ‘Sheep’s-Gray’ Mason came in and took his seat, and
commenced writing a letter. He evidently intended to show the
galleries that Sumner was too small for him to notice. But he
soon found a seat in a distant part of the Hall, and an easy
position, where he sat gloomily scowling upon the orator till
he sat down. When the speech was about half through, Keitt,
the accomplice of Brooks in his attempted assassination of
Mr. Sumner, came in and took a seat near Senator Hammond.
For a while he sat gazing about the galleries, evidently to
notice the dramatic effect of his presence upon the audience
there. But few seemed to notice him. By degrees he began to
pay attention to the speech.… Curry, of Alabama, and Lamar, of
Mississippi, members of the other House, though Southerners
of the straitest sect, could not conceal their delight at the
oratory and classic and scholarly feast before them. They
are scholars and orators themselves, and could appreciate
an intellectual treat, though the sentiments were ever so
obnoxious.
“On the Republican side breathless attention prevailed. Those
who immediately surrounded the Senator were Mr. Wilson, Senator
Bingham, John Hickman, Preston King, and Solomon Foot. Mr.
Seward sat in his usual seat, and scarcely moved during the
delivery of the great speech.”
As the speech was read, the conflict of opinion began to show itself.
Democrats were all against it; Republicans were divided.