[
288]
not satisfactory to
Mrs. E. C. Stanton and
Miss Susan B. Anthony, who took occasion in letters to him to express their discontent with his apologetic manner in presenting their petition.
At the next session he voted and spoke, on the ground of untimeliness, against woman suffrage in the District of Columbia, remarking that suffrage for that sex was ‘one of the great questions of the future,’ which would ‘be easily settled whenever the women in any considerable proportion insist that it shall be settled.’
1
He wrote to
William Claflin, May 4:—
If Massachusetts speaks, it must be for those principles which are essential to the peace and stability of the republic.2 . . . It is said the President will veto the Colorado bill.
What madness to pass such a bill, and brave such a veto, where Congress is in the wrong!
Fessenden, Grimes, and myself, to say nothing of others, will sustain the veto when it comes.
Thus the politicians who engineered Colorado will fail in their purposes, while they injure their influence inconceivably in sustaining the just course with regard to the rebel States.
How can they insist upon impartial suffrage in any rebel State when they refused to require it in a State over which at the moment they had jurisdiction?
To
Mr. Bright, May 21:—
I was very glad to hear from you, and to find you so cheerful.
Of course, I note day by day all that you say and do. I see how you are the selected mark; that will not hurt.
I speak from a little experience of my own. I am sure that there can be no tranquillity or security here until complete justice is rendered to the negro.
Perhaps your question is not so urgent, yet I confess I can see nothing but “agitate and convert” until the franchise is extended.
It seems to me that you consent to accept a very small installment.
Our deadlock continues, with no chance of relief.
The people sustain Congress, which stands firm.
But there is no hint that the President will give way; he is indocile, obstinate, perverse, impenetrable, and hates the education and civilization of New England.
Seward encourages him; McCulloch is bitterly with him; Dennison sometimes with him, and sometimes against him; Welles is with him; Stanton, Harlan, and Speed are against his policy,—so that his Cabinet is nearly equally divided.
When I speak of the opinions of these men I speak according to my personal knowledge, from conversation with each of them.
I do not think that they are always frank with the President.
Seward is rash and visionary, with a most wonderful want of common-sense.
For instance, only a week ago he told me that he had drawn a message for the President, asking for proceedings against Ecuador, because this puny republic had failed to pay the first instalment on an award of our claims, and that he has had a
