[190]
time-Hillard, Felton, Liebe, and even Longfellow — were either opposed to introducing the slavery question into politics or practically indifferent to it.
On the other hand, Sumner never could agree with Garrison's position on this question.
He held the Constitution in too great respect to admit that it was an agreement with death and a government with the devil.
He believed that the founders of the Constitution were opposed to slavery, and that the expression, “persons held to labor,” was good evidence of this.
One of his finest orations in the Senate was intended to prove this point.
Furthermore he perceived the futility of Garrison's idea-and this was afterwards disproved by the war — that if it were not for the National Government the slaves would rise in rebellion and so obtain their freedom.
He always asserted that slavery would be abolished under the Constitution or not at all. Like Abraham Lincoln he waited for his time to come.
Charles Sumner was the reply that Massachusetts made to the Fugitive Slave Law, and a telling reply it was. Unlike his legal contemporaries he recognized the law as a revolutionary act which, unless it was successfully opposed, would strike a death-blow at American freedom.
He saw that it could only be met by counter-revolution, and he prepared his mind
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.