[289] bill drawn, which he hoped I would report, giving to the President the authority to make reprisals. I made a mild protest at the time, shrugged my shoulders, and said, “If we must do this thing, let us take one of our size.” Since then the message has been received, and is now before my committee, where it is safe enough. Meanwhile I have ascertained the sum for which war was to be waged. The award was for $94,799, payable in nine instalments—the first installment, due Feb. 17, 1866, being $10,533, for which we were to launch the bolt! Was there ever an enterprise more ridiculous? Your Don Pacifico case was nothing to it. On protection and free-trade there does not seem to be any general feeling. This question will be settled for some time by the necessities of our position, without much reference to principles. My own people, originally strong protectionists, are silent now. It is Pennsylvania which is clamorous, and the balance of parties in this important State makes the question one of political power. I read the ‘Times’ constantly. The perversions of its correspondent about our affairs are as great now as during the war, only in a different way; nothing he says is true. I never see my own name without saying, “What falsehood!” The correspondent writes like a Presidential hireling. I am pained to see that you are not well; I hope you will tell me that you are better. Curiously, I too have fallen into the doctor's hands. He finds my brain and nervous system overtasked, and suffering from my original injuries as a predisposing cause. I long for rest, and yet every day I grind in my mill.Popular feeling at the time favored a trial of Jefferson Davis for treason, making him an exception among the leaders of the rebellion, whom it was thought best not to bring to trial. A great trial like that of Warren Hastings was in the public mind. The judiciary committee of the Senate, in order to facilitate the proceedings, reported a bill to remove objections to jurors on account of ‘opinions founded upon public rumor, statements in public journals, or common notoriety.’ Sumner, who was opposed altogether to the trial of Davis, questioned such a retroactive provision intended for a case of unprecedented historical importance, which, as he said, ‘should be approached carefully, most discreetly,’ and ‘with absolute reference to the existing law of the land.’1 Davis of Kentucky, rarely in accord with Sumner, made a hearty response to his view.
1 January 22; Works, vol. x. pp. 111, 112. Harlan recalled in the Senate, July 12, 1870 (Congressional Globe, p. 5508), in presence of Sumner, who by his silence assented to the statement, that very soon after the close of the war, when he (Harlan) expressed the opinion that a few of the rebel leaders ought to be hung, Sumner ‘looked grave, as he often does under such circumstances, and said he had come to the conclusion that it would be wrong to inflict capital punishment on any of them. He thought that we ought to be able to close up that fearful contest without the shedding of any more blood.’ W. B. Lawrence wrote, Dec. 2, 1871, that on the day of Jefferson Davis's arrest, Sumner said to him that the war having terminated successfully, he desired two measures—universal suffrage and universal amnesty.
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.