“It is said in certain quarters that it would have been more
politic to have left the speech unspoken. It is even urged by a
leading journal that the admission of Kansas is endangered by
it. The fact is, that the journal knows--none know better--that
the Kansas Bill stands just as good a chance at the hands of
Southern Senators to-day as if Charles Sumner had bent low
and with bated breath begged the admission of that Territory
as a favor, instead of demanding it as a right.… The speech
is demanded by the progress of the assumptions of Slavery.
It boldly sets itself up as divine in origin, Christian in
practice, the best form of civilized society, and challenges
our scrutiny and approbation. This, taken in connection with
its extraordinary interpretation of the Constitution as a
charter of Slavery, and not of Freedom, as we have all along
supposed it to be, forces the discussion upon us. Let us thank
Heaven that we have men bold enough to take up the gauntlet.
Charles Sumner deserves well of the country and well of the
age, for his calm and masterly exposition of the true character
of that system we are urged to accept and extend, as divine in
appointment, and adapted to the wants of our time.”
The _New Yorker Abendzeitung_, a German paper at New York, published an
elaborate leader, translated by the _Evening Post_, of which this is an
extract:--
“The oration made by Mr. Sumner is not a mere speech in the
common meaning of the term, but rather a thoroughly digested
treatise, carefully prepared, on the basis of a great number
of facts and quotations. It unites the most thorough-going
philosophical research, regardless of the conflict of its
results with the nearest practical aims, to that variegated
poetical coloring, which, appealing to the power of
imagination, is an indispensable element of an efficient
speech. Even to the best speeches of Senator Seward Sumner’s
speech stands in proportion as an oil painting of richest
coloring and most dramatic grouping of figures to a mere black
crayon etching. If Mr. Sumner’s speech had been uttered before
the meeting of the Chicago Convention, he would undoubtedly
have occupied a prominent rank among the candidates of the
radical portion of the Republican party.”