Bear witness that I have never been over-confident of sudden success. I am not now; but I am none the less sure of the great result. This struggle can have but one end. You must observe how we have constantly gained. The lines of the enemy have been drawn in, and their strong places have been taken; and this will continue to the end. . . . The capture of Atlanta is surely a great point in the war. I have had great confidence in Sherman; he is a consummate soldier, and I think military critics must confess that his campaign shows no ordinary ability. I agree with you in turning away from this bloodshed,4 which I deplore always; but I have seen no alternative for us since the attack on Fort Sumter. Since then the national government has been acting in self-defence against belligerent slavery. General Grant is confident that he shall take Richmond, and he is no boaster. He gives great praise to Sherman, saying he is the best soldier on this continent, and ought to be in his place . . . The hesitation in the support of Mr. Lincoln disappears at the promulgation of the Chicago treason. There was a meeting in New York of persons from different parts of the country to bring about a new convention to nominate a Union candidate. The “Tribune,” “Evening post,” “Independent,” and Cincinnati Gazette were all represented in it; but as soon as they read the platform, they ranged in support of Mr. Lincoln. I declined to take any part in the meeting, for I could not but see that nothing could be done except with Mr. Lincoln's good-will. If he had patriotically withdrawn, and given his support to any nominee of a new convention, whoever he might be,—any one of a hundred names,—I was very sure the nominee would be elected. You understand that there is a strong feeling among those who have seen
[199]
for a few days at Newport.1 He attended the Saturday Club dinners, at one of which as a guest was Chase, just resigned from the Cabinet, and on his way to the White Mountains.2 He dined with J. B. Smith when the latter entertained Auguste Laugel; he dined often at Mr. Hooper's, took tea at Mrs. J. E. Lodge's, and passed an evening at James T. Fields's. He began sittings with Milmore for his bust, which was finished late in the next year.
In the autumn, as before, his visits to Longfellow at Cambridge were frequent.3
Sumner wrote to Mr. Cobden, September 18:—
1 At a dinner at William Beach Lawrence's he met Lord Airlie, who recorded in his diary Sumner's remarks on the speeches of English statesmen, our Civil War, and other topics,—extracts from which, without Lord Airlie's authority, appeared in the ‘Scotsman,’ Jan. 7, 1865. Both Sumner and Lord Airlie were annoyed by the publication. Lord Airlie and his brother-in-law, E. Lyulph Stanley, who visited this country the same season, brought letters to Sumner from the Duchess of Argyll.
2 William Curtis Noyes was another guest.
3 Robert Ferguson, an Englishman, in his book, ‘America during and after the War’ (p. 32), quoted in Longfellow's ‘Life’ (vol. II. pp. 414, 415), wrote his recollections of Craigie House: ‘Sumner, with the poet's little daughter nestling in his lap,—for he is a man to whom all children come,—calmly discussing some question of European literature, seeming to feel deeply the defection of certain of the old antislavery leaders of England from the Northern cause in the great crisis of the struggle.’
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.