This text is part of:
[314]
or its candidates in favor of slavery or the Compromise; and the thought of the New York statesman was, that, in the event of a secession of Southern Whigs, their places would be more than supplied by recruits from the antislavery voters of the free States.
If his plan had succeeded, a considerable part, probably the greater part, of the Free Soilers would, while maintaining as well as they could their ‘third party’ organization, have given their votes for Scott, who, by reason of his supposed sympathy with Northern opinions and his confidential relations with Seward, was thought to be less likely than his Democratic rival to promote further schemes for extending and strengthening slavery.
Nowhere at this time was the perplexity among the Free Soilers greater than in Massachusetts, where there were cross purposes growing out of their co-operation with the Democrats for the two previous years, and the prospect of carrying some of the Congressional districts by another year of such co-operation.
Adams looked favorably on Scott's candidacy, and all the more because of its probable effect in breaking up the coalition, which he had always disapproved.
Midway between the Democratic and Whig conventions he wrote to Sumner, June 11: ‘My opinion is that we can make no effective stand on an independent candidate.
If Governor Seward can succeed in preventing any resolution at the convention, my inclination is to declare in Scott's favor individually, but not collectively as Free Soilers.’
With him agreed S. C. Phillips and many others of the party.
At a conference of the Free Soil leaders at the Adams House in Boston, June 5, there was developed such a want of common purpose that the party seemed near its end.
In the midst of this perplexity, Sumner, while conferring with Chase and Seward, and keeping up a correspondence with Free Soilers at home, adhered steadily to his independent position, and counselled Wilson and other political friends to keep themselves entirely uncommitted until the field was made clear by the action of the two conventions.1 He was specially anxious to
1 An account of a conference at Dr. Bailey's office in Washington, D. C., before the election of 1852, is given in the ‘Reminiscences of the Rev. George Allen,’ pp. 99, 100, purporting to have been obtained by Mr. Allen from Mr. Giddings on the latter's visit to Worcester, Mass., at some time later than 1852. Conferences were probably held at Dr. Bailey's house; but Mr. Allen's report of what Sumner and others said is not authentic. Chase's inclinings were not, as stated by Mr. Allen, to General Scott, but rather to a Democratic candidate of Free Soil sympathies.
Cambridge, MA. Press of John Wilson and Son. 1877.
Tufts University provided support for entering this text.
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.
An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.