and exceptions, recognizing it as most important that the lofty ideal of the oration should be kept in view.
wrote, Aug. 17:—
I have just got your oration, and read it immediately, of course,—glad all along that the thing had been done, and with an undertone of rejoicing that you had done it. As I closed the last page I could not help thinking how far ahead you had strode of the C. S. of '32 and '33, and wondering, at the same time, whether I had been all that time playing with pebbles.
I hope not. 'Tis a good thing, nobly done, and will make your name dear to many whom you will never hear of. Probably you know this already, as its high position will have attracted to you many a kindly eye which never greeted you before.
I went with you in almost every thing,—here and there margining a “de hoc quaere,” which, should we ever be thrown together on a desolate island or in a postchaise, I might get time to talk to you about.
Richard H. Dana, Jr.
, who was some years younger than Sumner
, wrote, Aug. 22:—
I have allowed some time to elapse since you did me the kindness to send me your oration, because I did not want my note to fall upon your table, one among the hundreds every day which you have had, congratulatory, expostulatory, condemnatory, and laudatory.
I have not only read it with great interest, but taken a great deal of pleasure in watching its effect as shown by the Cerberus of the press.
It is a fair subject for congratulation whenever a man is made, or makes himself, to feel that he is exerting influence upon his fellow-men for that he thinks to be good.
How it breaks up ennui, and gives spirit and purpose to life!
Surely you have accumulated the horrors of war in a way that no one can escape being affected by them. . . . . It is not for me to speak of the ability of your performance.
You will hear of that from better judges.
But I may say that I was struck with the manifest earnestness, sincerity, and humaneness of feeling.
Nor can I help alluding to the picturesque effect produced.
After expressing the wish to have ‘the whole subject of force under Christianity taken up together,’ and suggesting that ‘war is an act of the State
, punishing strangers for a violation of a generally recognized law of nations, just as it punishes its own citizens for violating its own municipal law,’ Mr. Dana
added: ‘I am truly glad that you have given yourself to such a subject, and with such success.
Let me join my congratulations to the host of those you are receiving.’
Rev. Howard Malcom
of Georgetown College, Ky., wrote, Aug. 30:—
I cannot restrain myself from offering you my humble but most hearty thanks for your late Fourth of July oration.
Familiar as I am with the subject,