[323]
whatever name of party, sect, or society he may assume, does good.
I welcome him as a brother.
To
William Jay, January 31:—
I have hoped to see in the treaty on the fisheries now negotiating with England a clause providing arbitration instead of war. Mr. Everett is willing; so is the British minister;1 but it is feared that the necessary instructions cannot be obtained in season from England.
But there is another treaty of less importance, constituting a commission on certain outstanding claims, to which it may be attached, if it should be thought advisable.
Mr. Everett doubts if the latter treaty is of sufficient importance to bear so important a provision.
My reply has been, “The provision at all costs and anywhere.”
If once established, it will become a precedent of incalculable value, and will mark a new era in the law of nations.
I think Mr. Everett would be glad to illustrate his brief term of service by such an act. My special object now is to invite you to prepare such a clause as you think best for adoption.
Perhaps it would be well to present it in several different forms.
Mr. Everett expressed a desire to have the advantage of your counsels.
To
Theodore Parker, March 28:—
I mourn the feud between brothers in antislavery.2 If Phillips, whom I love as an early comrade and faithful man, or Pillsbury,3 rail at me for my small work in antislavery, I will not reply.
To me the cause is so dear that I am unwilling to set myself against any of its champions.
I would not add to their burdens by any word of mine.
In proportion as the position of our pioneer friends seems more untenable and less practical, they cling to it with absolute desperation.
If the skill and eloquence of Phillips as evinced in his late speech4 had been directed, not against allies but against slavery and its enormities, against its influence on our government, against Hunkers, he would have struck a good blow like yourself on that occasion.
When the term of
Mr. Davis,
Sumner's colleague, was about to expire, there was a general disposition to leave him in retirement.
His party was again in power, and Whig opinion turned to three leaders among whom the selection of his successor should be named,—Winthrop,
George Ashmun, and
Edward Everett (then
Secretary of State).
Winthrop, now less active as a Whig leader than before, withdrew his name.
Ashmun had the support of the western part of the
State; but his vote in the caucus fell considerably below that of
Everett, who was nominated and elected early in the session of 1853.
To
