[324]
with the secretary, against his setting aside legal prohibitions on the plea of convenience or necessity.
The disqualified persons were, however, kept in office, and Fessenden reported a bill for paying them, which passed the Senate, but was lost in the House.
Sumner's opposition to the bill provoked Fessenden to some bitter reflections, of which Gillette, formerly a senator, wrote from Hartford: ‘I have just read with unutterable disgust Mr. Fessenden's gross and wanton outrage upon you. . . . I congratulate you upon the dignity of your noble bearing under so great provocation.’1 Three years later the compensation was voted, notwithstanding Sumner's persevering opposition.2 When the heats of the contest had passed, the senator and the secretary had, in 1872, a cordial meeting in London.3
The cession of Russian America to the United States, a territory of 570,000 square miles, took place at this time,—an acquisition with which the names of Seward and Sumner will always be associated.
Late on Friday evening, March 29, 1867, Sumner received a note from Seward asking for an immediate call at his house on a matter of public business.
He went at once, but too late to meet the secretary, who had left for the state department.
His son the assistant secretary, and M. de Stoeckl the Russian minister, who soon came in, explained the proposed cession which was the occasion of the summons, and indicated the boundary as traced by the Archduke Constantine in a personal interview with that minister who had just arrived from St. Petersburg.
All then went to the department, where the treaty was being copied.4 Sumner listened, but gave no opinion, and the conference ended at midnight. Four hours later, the morning of March 30, the treaty was signed; it was sent to the Senate the same day, and referred at once to the foreign relations committee.
It was the day appointed for the adjournment of Congress, but the Senate convened April 1 for the consideration of executive business.
The question was not without difficulty.
There had been no opinion developed in the country for the acquisition, except to a
1 After this session Sumner had no reason to complain of Fessenden, and they came better to understand each other.
2 July 12, 1870, Congressional Globe, pp. 5497, 5502, 5508.
3 ‘Men and Measures of Half a Century,’ pp. 2:32-234, by Hugh McCulloch. Mr. McCulloch suggests that Sumner had a personal grievance which prompted his opposition, —a suggestion which is without proof, and contrary to the presumptions.
4 Leutze painted the scene when the treaty was explained. A photograph of the picture is given in Seward's ‘Life,’ vol. III. p. 349.
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.