Ohio History Journal

BEVERLY WILSON PALMER

 

Towards a National Antislavery

Party: The Giddings-Sumner Alliance

 

Shortly after meeting Joshua Reed Giddings in 1846, Charles Sumner,

in a 30 December 1846 article in the Boston Courier, praised the Ohio

Congressman for his opposition to the Mexican War. Emphasizing

Giddings's roots in New England, Sumner wrote: "New England may

be happy that her voice was heard at so early a stage of this important

discussion, and in a manner calculated to influence it so materially."

Already a widely recognized antislavery leader, Giddings had repre-

sented Ohio in the House of Representatives since 1839. In 1842 he had

been drummed out of that body for trying to force the House to go on

record opposing federal support of slavery; he was immediately

reelected by constituents in the Sixteenth District of northern Ohio and

returned to serve until 1859. In 1846, Sumner, on the other hand, was

just embarking on a political career. The young Boston lawyer's 1845

antiwar oration had attracted national attention, while locally his

prison and school reform efforts exasperated the establishment Whigs.

From their first meeting, Giddings and Sumner formed an alliance.

They shared not only their dedication to antislavery politics but also

strong optimism and moral fervor. Sumner, a political intriguer, was

still a political outsider. But Giddings was pleased to find such a

fervent, articulate Massachusetts ally. Early on he must have recog-

nized Sumner's magnetism and verve. In a letter to Sumner of

25 December 1846, Giddings wrote that despite his confidence in his

convictions, he lacked "the qualities of mind necessary to influence

those who are timid and wavering."1 Sumner of course rejoiced in the

opportunity to influence a well-established radical.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Beverly Wilson Palmer is the editor of the Charles Sumner Correspondence and

teaches at Pomona College, Claremont, California.

 

1. Letter to Sumner, 25 December 1846, Reel 5/Frame 391, The Papers of Charles

Sumner, ed., Beverly Wilson Palmer (Cambridge, 1988). Hereafter all references to this

edition will be abbreviated, e.g., 5/391, PCS.

• 1
 

52                                             OHIO HISTORY

 

As Eric Foner has argued in Politics and Ideology in the Age of the

Civil War, the 1845 issue of Texas annexation put slavery in the

forefront of American politics. This issue galvanized Sumner into

strong opposition, and by January 1847, Sumner had already moved

beyond simply opposing the extension of slavery; in his letter of

21 January to Giddings, Sumner proposed its abolition, albeit cautious-

ly ("any where within our Constitutional action").

Working together, from different political bases, Sumner and

Giddings opposed the Mexican War on several grounds, but mainly

because it would bring more potential slave territory into the United

States. They agreed on the need to ally with antislavery Democrats and

to secure the support of nationally respected leaders from either party,

men like Thomas Corwin, Martin Van Buren, and John McLean. Any

leader, however, must adhere to the Giddings-Sumner standard: sup-

port of the Wilmot Proviso, the proposal forbidding slavery in the

territories. The two men likewise debated how much compromise was

necessary, how much was palatable.

As Sumner and Giddings increased their protests against what they

termed "the Slave-Power," they discussed how best to form a new,

national antislavery party. That party must stop the South from

encroaching on both the federal government and the newly acquired

territory. The Free Soil Party seemed the means to ensure that goal.

Sumner wrote excitedly on 3 September 1848, "We are a new party-

entirely." Despite the Free Soil Party's poor showing in the 1848

elections, neither despaired. With men like Preston King, Salmon P.

Chase, and Benjamin Wade elected to Congress, Sumner and Giddings

saw a viable national antislavery party slowly but inexorably emerge.

In late 1851, when Sumner went to Washington to take his Senate

seat, the two had, obviously, no need to correspond. Gradually,

Sumner became the leading Congressional antislavery spokesman,

especially after his explosive "Crime Against Kansas" speech and the

Brooks assault in May 1856. Giddings, for health reasons, was not

renominated in 1858. Lincoln appointed him consul general in Montreal

in 1861, and he died there in 1864.

Shortly after the Civil War began, Sumner wrote Giddings, "I hope

that you are enjoying your new position; but I can not reconcile myself

to your not being at Washington." Giddings replied that he too missed

Washington but rejoiced that slavery at last seemed doomed: "The first

gun fired at Fort Sumter rang out the death knell of slavery."2

 

 

2. Sumner to Giddings, 28 April 1861, 74/677; Giddings to Sumner, 30 April 1861,

22/429, PCS.

• 2
 

The Giddings-Sumner Alliance                                             53

 

These fifteen letters from Sumner to Giddings, beginning shortly

after the two first met in Springfield, Massachusetts, and ending with

Sumner's election to the U.S. Senate, show how Giddings and Sumner

shed their Whig affiliations and how they helped the antislavery protest

grow from a regional to a national movement.³

 

 

 

Boston Dec. 21st '46

My dear Sir,      I feel happy in your approbation of any thing which I

have been able to do, & thank you much for the kindness of yr letter to

me.4

Let me thank you still more for yr free voice on the floor of

Congress. Yr speech has been received, as reported in the Intelli-

gencer.⁵ It will, probably, appear in the Whig tomorrow.

The speeches which have been made seem to fall below the

occasion. They are superficial, & do not really grasp the question. Mr

Winthrop's seemed a party speech, in which he avoided the discussion

of all ultimate principles. I should add, that I have not yet read Mr

Hudson's.⁶

 

 

 

3. Standard reference works, such as the Dictionary of American Biography, are not

cited for information that is readily accessible; neither is notation made for names and

events which cannot be identified. The transcriptions are faithful to the original

manuscript letters, including mistakes and idiosyncracies in spelling or punctuation.

Angle brackets represent the editor's insertions. All letters, one at the California

Historical Society Library, San Francisco, and fourteen at the Ohio Historical Society

Library, Columbus, are reproduced with the permission of those societies.

4. Giddings thanked Sumner for sending his Phi Beta Kappa address of 27 August

1846, "The Scholar, The Jurist, The Artist, The Philanthropist." Washington,

13 December 1846, 5/387, PCS.

5. In his speech of 15 December 1846 printed in the Congressional Globe, 29th Cong.,

2nd Sess., Appendix, 47-52, Giddings declared "the civilized world will hold advocates

of that measure <the Mexican War> responsible for all the crimes, the misery and

suffering, which have resulted from it." Since the Mexican War was "a wicked and

unjust war, it follows, that the longer it is carried on the greater will be the wickedness

and the injustice of those who continue it." Sumner's Boston Courier article of

30 December 1846 warmly praised Giddings's speech.

6. Robert C. Winthrop, Whig Congressman from Massachusetts, 1840-52, 1842-50,

protested the U.S. occupation of the conquered territory in Mexico with the intention of

annexing it, and expressed his fear that Polk in his annual message "had taken care to

suppress that which the people had a right to know." Speech of 9 December 1846, Globe,

29th Cong., 2nd Sess., 17-18. Charles Hudson, a Whig Congressman from Massachusetts,

1841-49, declared on 16 December 1846 that the various alleged charges that Mexico had

instigated the war were all spurious: "there was no just cause of war in this case."

Ibid., 49.

• 3
 

54                                             OHIO HISTORY

 

I am curious to know, whether we may expect any sympathy from

Mr Clayton.⁷ You led me to think that he might be found with us.

As we parted at Springfield, you pressed upon my attention the

important question, whether the relation of Slavery was not dissolved,

when the Slave escaped upon the Ocean. I had often thought of this

question before, & have considered it somewhat since. Certainly, the

Ocean ought to be free in every sense-mare liberum ("a sea open to

all").

There is one difficulty to which I venture to call yr attention. The

laws that sanction slavery are local & municipal in their character. It is

clear that, by the common law, & the law of nations, the status of

slavery is divested, when the slave passes under a municipal jurisdic-

tion, which does not sanction slavery, as if he reached England or

France. But is the status of slavery divested on the Ocean? The slave

has fled from the local laws, which sanction his slavery; but has he

reached the influence of other institutions, which will discharge him?

The writers on the Conflict of Laws, treating of the Capacity of

Persons (a fruitful theme) assert that it attends them on the sea. Though

Slavery should derive no sanction from the Constitution of the

U. States, he I fear, that, in accordance with the principles of public

law, governing the capacity of persons, it is so deeply impressed on the

person, that it can be dissolved only by the strong action of a municipal

jurisdiction, within which the slave may be brought. The slave be-

comes free, not merely by escaping from his own laws, but by virtue of

other laws, which shall actively pronounce him free, as if he comes

under another jurisdiction, as by getting on board a ship of war of a

foreign state, or touching the soil of a foreign state.

It seems to me clear that the Slave cannot be held on the Ocean, by

virtue of the Constitution of the U. States. That ground is dismissed at

once. But I do fear, that looking at his condition, in the light of

jurisprudence, the subtle thread of the municipal law, by which he

was held in slavery, would continue to bind him, until it was cut or

snapped asunder, by the operation of some other municipal law.

I have ventured to throw out these suggestions with diffidence,

submitting them to yr better judgment.

We all watch yr course with interest & gratitude. Believe me, my

dear sir,

Faithfully Yours,  Charles Sumner

P.S. I think Presdt. Adams⁸ is gaining strength as fast as could be

 

7. Giddings replied that John Middleton Clayton, a Whig Senator from Delaware,

1845-49, was "not the man for the times." Washington, 25 December 1846, 5/391, PCS.

8. Giddings's ally in Congress, John Quincy Adams.

• 4
 

The Giddings-Sumner Alliance                              55

expected. He sits up now, & walks across his chamber. I conversed with him two evenings ago as much as two hours. ALS    OHi    (67/599, PCS)   Boston-Jan. 21st '47 My dear Sir,      I agree with you entirely in yr views of the proper course towards the Democrats. You will see something on this matter in an article which I wrote in the Whig of last Tuesday, entitled "The Boston Atlas & Southern Influence."9 It is evidently the present design of the ultra Whigs to discredit the Democratic movement & to denouce its authors as "turncoats." But it seems to me that they have come nearer to our position, than our associates the Whigs. They have     9. In his letter of 18 January 1847, Giddings proposed "taking ground a little more liberal toward the northern democrats than heretofore . . . extending to them the hand of fellowship in consequence of their late position" (i.e., a split from the southern Democrats). Washington, 5/410, PCS. Sumner's article in the Whig of 19 January 1847 protested the "slaveholding influences which predominate in the Atlas." He rejoiced that Democrats like Preston King and Hannibal Hamlin ("turncoats") supported the Wilmot Proviso. Wrote Sumner, "Welcome to such turncoats! ... ties of mere party" were "no more than threads of gossamer, compared with the adamantine claims of duty by which we are bound to our high endeavor."

• 5
 

56                                                      OHIO HISTORY

 

proclaimed Slavery to be wrong, & have pledged themselves with force

against its extension. It is difficult to see how they can longer sustain

themselves merely on that ground. Their premise sustains a broader

conclusion, that is, the duty of no longer allowing the continuance of

the evil any where within our constitutional action. They must become

Abolitionists. It seems to me that our great object should be to

encourage union among all who are against Slavery. The disputes

between Anti-Slavery men are unseemly.

I hope that our friends will stand firm with regard to the candidates

for Presdt & Vice-Presdt. It seems to me that we must not have a

National Convention. We cannot expect a Convention to adopt candi-

dates who are true on our questions. We must not consent to any who

are not true. I have supposed that it would probably end in a

multiplicity of candidates as in 1825, & in our defeat. The term after

next our chance will be pretty sure. But we must stand firm now.

I do not know Mr Marsh the correspondent of the Tribune. I am told

that he does not incline to our views. But why did Greeley take him?

I am glad the Tribune has spoken at Last.10

Mr Cushing's Resolve11 will be rejected by a large vote. The

discussion has turned much upon the question of the character of the

troops-whether militia or army.

I am glad you are to speak again. Whatever may have been the

opinions as to justice of the war of 1812 with England, it is very clear,

from the character of that Power, that when it was once commenced,

it was to us a war of self-defence.¹² I send you a copy of C. F. Adams's

speech on that point. It is on the hand-bill, which you have already

had. 13

Yours faithfully,    Charles Sumner

ALS    OHi (67/629, PCS)

 

 

 

 

10. Probably Charles M. March. Donald Ritchie, Press Gallery, unpublished manu-

script, 1988. Horace Greeley, editor of the New York Tribune, devoted several columns

on the front page of the 20 January 1847 issue to antislavery messages, including a poem,

"Epistle," by John Quincy Adams.

11. On 14 January, a majority of a Massachusetts House Committee chaired by Caleb

Cushing, then a Massachusetts state representative, voted $20,000 to support a regiment

from Massachusetts in the Mexican War. But the Resolve was defeated on 28 January by

the full House. Claude M. Fuess, Caleb Cushing (New York, 1923), II, 36-38.

12. In his letter to Sumner, Giddings had said that in a forthcoming speech he would

"try to draw the distinction between the war of 1812 and the present, between offence

and defence, and to answer Mr. Winthrop's views in regard to the precedent set us by

British statesmen." 18 January 1847, 3/410, PCS.

13. No speech by Charles Francis Adams has been located, but his editorial, "The

War," appeared in the 15 January 1847 Whig.

• 6
 

The Giddings-Sumner Alliance                                        57

 

Boston May 24th '47

My dear Sir,     On my return from New York, where I had been for

a few days, I found yr favor, dated April 12th, postmarked May 13th.

A letter from me, written at about the last date, will have answered

somewhat yr inquiries.14

Taylor has disturbed all parties, & at the present moment seems to

be the most popular person in the U.S. I think Massachusetts stands as

firm against him as any state, or part of the country. Her resolutions

have made her position strong.¹⁵ But the current in his favor is strong

even here. I have had no intimate conservation with any of the leading

Cotton Whigs with regard to him; but I presume from what I observe

& hear that they would be willing, if not glad to support him. Union

under him puts the slavery question in abeyance, which they desire

above all things. I heard of John Davis talking in his favor, & saying

that Mass. would support him. It would certainly be difficult to oppose

him, as he would draw a large part of the Locoes.¹⁶ Still I should not

despair. It is said now, that [Daniel] Webster will run as Vice-Presdt.

on the ticket with Taylor. If he should, it would embarrass us here,

unless we confined our opposition to Taylor.

In New York I was much struck by the war-spirit; all, locoes &

Whigs, seemed penetrated by it. In a long conversation with Greeley,

he avowed warm opposition to Taylor, but thought it better to allow the

feeling in his favor to subside with time, & to be neutralized by the

rising claims of Scott. He prefers Corwin; but said that he should

support McLean with a hearty goodwill if nominated by the conven-

tion.17-He perceived feelers for Winthrop as speaker. The latter is

now in Europe.

I conversed with several of the other side, all of whom assured me

that they should stand firm on the Wilmot Proviso; & give "our

Southern friends" as John VanBuren called them, a lesson.¹⁸ The latter

 

 

 

14. In his letter from his home in Jefferson, Ohio, Giddings had asked about the stand

of the Cotton Whigs and Winthrop on the presidential candidacy of the Mexican War

hero, Zachary Taylor, and worried about the New York Tribune's hesitancy toward

slavery. 5/497, PCS.

15. A resolution opposing annexation of Mexican territory and condemning slavery

was signed by George N. Briggs, governor of Massachusetts, 1844-51, on 26 April 1847.

Acts and Resolves of the General Court of Massachusetts in the Year 1846, 1847, 1848,

541-42.

16. John Davis, Whig Senator from Massachusetts, 1835-41, 1845-53. The term

locofoco, originally applied only to Antimonopoly Democrats, had now become a Whig

reference to all Democrats.

17. Winfield Scott, major general in Mexican War; Thomas Corwin, Whig Senator

from Ohio, 1845-50; John McLean, U.S. Supreme Court Justice, 1829-61.

18. Proposed on 8 August 1846 by David Wilmot, Democratic Congressman from

• 7
 

58                                                       OHIO HISTORY

 

told me, however, that if he were obliged to vote tomorrow, he should

vote for Taylor!-He thinks politics in inglorious confusion, & looks to

some changes in the course of the year. Sedgwick, Field, & Bryant,19

all talked warmly against the extension of slavery.

Our true course, it seems to me, is loyalty & perseverance. Our

principles are correct. They will not allow us to support Taylor. We

must watch our opportunity for bearing our testimony.

Yours very faithfully,     Charles Sumner

ALS    OHi    (67/678, PCS)

 

Boston Nov. 1st 47

My dear Sir,       Yr favor marked confidential was duly received.

Since then I have received a letter from Mr Corwin, in which he shews

some anxiety on account of the reports of the Carthage speech.²⁰ I

regret that speech very much. The passage with Mr Chase was

unfortunate. It has undoubedtly disaffected the Abolitionists, who

already inclined to Mr Corwin. His shrinking from the Wilmot Proviso,

as a dangerous question was another mistake. That question, when

rightly understood, is a source of safety. It is the beginning of the rally

against the Slave-Power which will save the Union. I wish Mr Corwin

could see this as we do. I had begun to feel a personal attachment for

him, & shall be unhappy if we cannot act under him.²¹

The courage which he shewed against the war ought to inspire him to

active demonstrations against slavery.

Meanwhile the Democrats in N.Y. are in motion. I have assurances,

on which I rely, that they are in earnest. Preston King says he does not

care whether the Presidential candidate is a Whig or a Democrat, but

he must be a Wilmot Proviso-man.²² I may say confidentially that a

 

 

Pennsylvania, 1845-51, the proviso called for the prohibition of slavery in any territories

acquired as a result of the Mexican War; John Van Buren was a lawyer and son of U.S.

President Martin Van Buren.

19. Theodore Sedgwick, New York attorney; David Dudley Field, New York lawyer

and reformer; William Cullen Bryant, poet, editor, New York Evening Post.

20. In his letter to Sumner, Corwin wrote that if the Whigs "go into convention, we

must abide the result," and any Whigs unwilling to do so should not attend the

convention. He saw a split of the Whigs as a "fearful alternative." Corwin stated his first

priority was opposition to further territorial conquest, rather than support of the Wilmot

Proviso. Corwin had disagreed with the Ohio Democrat and antislavery activist, Salmon

P. Chase over Chase's support of Henry Clay in 1844. 25 October 1847, 5/641, PCS.

National Era, 30 September 1847.

21. Regarding Corwin, Giddings wrote from Jefferson on 8 November 1847 that the

Ohio Senator would get antislavery support only if he stuck by "our doctrines." He

thought Corwin currently, but only temporarily, influenced by "timid newspapers."

5/656, PCS.

22. At their Syracuse convention in September 1847, the Democrats had split into

• 8
 

The Giddings-Sumner Alliance                                  59

 

letter has been received here from Albany, inquiring if J. Q. Adams will

join with Martin Van Buren & others in a call for an Anti-Slavery

Convention to nominate a Northern candidate. Mr Adams was asked

yesterday, if he would do it. He expressed great pleasure in the plan;

but pleaded that he was so old & infirm, that he could not do what

might be justly expected of him if he were to sign such a call. He was

not urged.

It seems to me that the continuance of the war will prevent such a

call immediately; but when that ceases, nothing can prevent the

coalition of the two Anti-Slavery sections. Let us try to prepare the

way.

I regret J.P. Hale's acceptance of the Liberty Nomination.²³ 1 urged

him in vain to a contrary course.

Yr anticipations with regard to Palfrey will be fulfilled.²⁴ He is true

as steel. As a new member, of marked opinion, he will be exposed to

trials. I know he may count upon yr friendship & sympathy.

I see that the Whigs will continue to vote supplies.²⁵ Before going

into caucus on the speakership should you not understand their

proposed course?

Faithfully Yrs,   Charles Sumner

ALS   OHi (68/052, PCS)

 

Boston Dec. 1st '47

My dear Sir,    I find that the person who wrote to ascertain whether

Mr Adams would unite with the Van Burens & others in the call of an

Anti-Slavery Convention, was not authorized to speak for the latter.

He saw Mr M. Van Buren, who said that he was in favor of the Wilmot

Proviso, but that he must keep himself aloof from the agitation of that

question. Old fox!

You will be able to communicate directly with the Northern Demo-

crats at Washington. I trust you will do what you can for union, sooner

or later, with them. At all events, extricate us if possible from our

present uncomfortable position of political association with those who

really hate us more [than] they have Locofocoes. Let the lines be

 

 

Hunkers (those against opposing slavery in the territories) and Barnburners (those

supporting the Wilmot Proviso). Preston King, a Barnburner, was a Democratic and Free

Soil Congressman from New York, 1843-47, 1849-53.

23. John Parker Hale, Democratic Congressman, 1843-45, and Free Soil and Inde-

pendent Senator, 1847-53, from New Hampshire, had been nominated for President at

the Liberty Party's convention in November 1847.

24. John Gorham Palfrey had narrowly won a seat in the U.S. House of Represen-

tatives as a Conscience Whig.

25. For continuance of the Mexican War.

• 9
 

60                                                         OHIO HISTORY

 

drawn.-The sooner the better.-I hope this way be in the organiza-

tion of the House.²⁶

Palfrey has left to-day for Washington. He has been seriously ill; but

is happily restored, so as to be able to commence his journey. He is

firm as adamant. I hope that he may have some early opportunity

to shew his character. He is not, however, without sensitiveness,

& I know he will appreciate any sympathy of friendship which you

& yr friends may shew him.

You & Palfrey are our only sure hope & anchor at Washington. I

know both of you will stand firm.

We shall be glad to know, if any light is struck out with regard to the

organization of the House.²⁷

Yrs faithfully,     Charles Sumner

ALS    OHi    (68/065, PCS)

 

Boston March 4th '48

My dear Sir,      I have yours of March 1 st.^{28 I} have not supposed you

inattentive to the subject to which you refer, nor have I wished to make

any suggestions to you.

The death of Mr Adams²⁹ seems to throw a pall over our anxieties

& struggles. Would that it could cause harmony! But the great cause of

difference still remains. Winthrop's system of action is entirely differ-

ent from ours.

 

 

 

26. Giddings had written Sumner 8 November 1847 that all antislavery Congressmen

should take the Wilmot Proviso as their platform and repeal any Congressional law which

supported slavery; Congress should "leave [slavery] to the states in which it is situated."

Giddings wrote that if a "War Whig" were elected Speaker of the House, he would have

locofoco votes; he thought that the Whig Party would be "remodelled" at the beginning

of the next Congress. 5/656, PCS.

27. Giddings replied from Washington 4 December 1847 that he had refused to attend

the Whig caucus because he did not want to be obliged to support the likely Whig

nominee for Speaker, Winthrop. After the caucus, Giddings finished his letter and

informed Sumner of Winthrop's nomination and of his "indecision" as to his course of

action. 5/688, PCS. Winthrop was elected Speaker on the third ballot, 6 December 1847,

but both Giddings and Palfrey refused to vote for him.

28. The "Conscience Whigs" of Massachusetts had been engaged in a widely

publicized dispute with conservative Whigs over Winthrop's support of the Mexican

War. At issue was whether, as the Conscience Whigs asserted, Winthrop had attended

a Whig caucus in May 1846 and insisted that all Whigs support the Mexican War.

Giddings had stated that Winthrop was present, but Winthrop's supporters denied this

allegation. Giddings's letter expressed hope that Winthrop might retract his denial of

Giddings's claim. If not, Giddings would send his "proofs" to the Boston Daily Atlas.

6/050, PCS.

29. John Quincy Adams had collapsed in the House on 21 February and died

23 February 1848.

• 10
 

The Giddings-Sumner Alliance                                          61

 

Then this special issue, affecting you personally, & myself also, can

not be left untried. He (Winthrop) has traversed what you have said. Of

course his [traverse?] must be withdrawn, or yr proofs must proceed.

I cannot forget that this whole matter has been made the grounds of

personal charges against me of a most offensive character, in print & in

private.³⁰ In all this unhappy controversy there has been on Winthrop's

side a peculiar personal feeling-amounting almost to malevolence-;

on his side has been the personality while his friends have charged it

upon us.

I long to read yr speech, & yr new cathechism to Taylorites.31

Mr J.Q. Adams's successor³² will stand by yr side & Palfrey's in

Congress. No other man can come-so those familiar with the District

say.

Faithfully Yrs,     Charles Sumner.

ALS CSfHS (68/190, PCS)

 

Boston April 21st '48

My dear Sir,      It seems to me advisable that you should join in

interrogating (Henry) Clay, or at any rate, that you should promote the

plan. An answer in our favor would help that public sentiment which

we chiefly seek to forward. It would help us in another contingency.

Suppose he shall be nominated by the Convention?³³ It will be difficult

for us, who have always supported him, to organize a revolt against

him. We may be content to remain inactive. Anticipating such a

contingency I shall be happy to see him take such a position as will

indispose us to any formal opposition, in the event of his nomination.

A distinct declaration from him in favor of the Wilmot Proviso-not

a jesuitical juggling Janus-faced expression-would have great influ-

ence in fortifying our cause. It would help shut the gates of the North

 

 

30. The Atlas protested what it called the "malignant attacks" of the Courier writer,

i.e., Sumner, who "vamps up charges against Mr. Winthrop, and expends his leisure

moments in spitting out his venom at him" (27 January 1848).

31. In his 28 February 1848 speech, "Deficiency of Appropriations," Giddings stated

that the new issues of upholding and extending slavery might lead to a realignment of

political parties. For example, Whigs voting for further appropriations for the Mexican

War or for slave trade in the District of Columbia did not differ from conservative

Democrats. Giddings described Taylor as "one whose hands are dripping with human

gore" and stated that Taylor's supporters had no real idea how their candidate stood on

such issues as the tariff, free trade, internal improvements, and the extension of slavery.

He declared that Whigs "shall not again be Tylerized." Globe, 30th Cong., 1st Sess.,

Appendix, 380-83.

32. At this time the Massachusetts Whigs had not yet chosen the successor. On

15 March 1848, the Whig caucus nominated Horace Mann. Jonathan Messerli, Horace

Mann (New York, 1971), 453-54.

33. The Whig convention was scheduled for 7-9 June 1848 in Philadelphia.

• 11
 

62                                                     OHIO HISTORY

 

upon Taylor. This would be its direct influence. Indirectly, it might

help Clay's personal views. But I am willing to forget this indirect

influence in the direct good. I am also desirous or at least willing to give

Clay every opportunity of putting himself in a position, which will take

from us the necessity of organizing an opposition, in the event of his

nomination. Of course, if Taylor is nominated, it will be our duty to

revolt.

Efforts are now making here to have Webster nominated by our

Legislative caucus.³⁴ I have been asked to favor it. I replied, that I did

not regard him as the representative of our sentiments-that I did not

see how we could join in presenting him as a candidate-that if he were

nominated by the Convention, it would be difficult, if not impossible,

for us to oppose him. I think he will be nominated by the caucus. His

friends say that, united New England can carry him through the

Convention, & that if he is nominated, he can be elected. They are very

sanguine. It is their purpose to have something done at once in

Connecticut & Vermont.

I am filled with shame at the transactions in Washington.³⁵ I honor

you much for yr constant efforts in behalf of the oppressed. I trust that

no day will pass without some motion, that shall bring this hypocritical

sin before the country. In Europe they mob for Freedom, in Washington

for slavery. But all these occurrences prepare the way for the final

success, which I know we shall yet achieve.

Webster has recently said that the Wilmot Proviso is the great

question for the next campaign. He says he will not formally oppose

any nominee of the Convention; but if Taylor should have the

nomination, he "will not ask his fellow-countrymen to vote for him."

In short he will not sustain Taylor.

Ever Yrs,     Charles Sumner

P.O. Should not C. J. Ingersoll's motion³⁶ about duties on French

goods prevail? It seems to me it should.

ALS    OHi (68/232, PCS)

 

 

34. Judge Ebenezer Rockwood Hoar and Charles Train were organizing a movement

to nominate Webster with an address "setting forth the Wilmot Proviso as the platform,"

Sumner wrote Palfrey 23 April 1848. If Webster were nominated, Sumner had told Hoar

that "our present policy would be silence." 68/243, PCS.

35. On 17 April Daniel Drayton and William Sayres had sailed from Washington with

78 slaves, bound for freedom. The ship was captured by the U.S. Navy, the slaves

sold, and Drayton and Sayres jailed without being specifically charged of any crime. On

18 April Giddings asked for a Congressional investigation and received several threat-

ening notes. At the same time, proslavery mobs in Washington had clamored for the

lynching of Drayton and Sayres. James B. Steward, Joshua Reed Giddings and the

Tactics of Radical Politics (Cleveland, 1970), 152-53; Globe, 30th Cong., 1st Sess., 641.

36. On 17 April 1848 Ingersoll had proposed a 50 percent decrease in the duties on

• 12
 

The Giddings-Sumner Alliance                                          63

 

Boston May 6th '48

My dear Sir,      I think the effect of the debate in the Senate & the

House has been admirable. I hear it often spoke of. I long to read yr

closing speech.³⁷ Such another debate would deepen the impression.

And the subject must be pushed, until the House entertains it, like any

other subject,-as the Mexican War, or the annexation of Texas.

I am not prepared to say, how I should have answered the question

put to you,-whether you thought Capt. Sayres wrong?³⁸ In the first

place, I am not entirely satisfied of the constitutionality & legality of

Slavery in the District; & in the second place, assuming its legality, I

am not prepared to say that I can condemn those, who, in obedience to

the great law of Humanity, have striven to extricate their fellow-men

from unjust laws. I have always said, when speaking of such cases,

that, as at present advised, I would not myself be a party to any efforts

to remove a slave from the custody of his master; but that I could not

condemn those who engaged in them-nay more, that it was difficult

for me not to regard them with honor. Who can doubt that the day will

yet come when Torrey³⁹ & Capt. Sayres will be regarded as martyrs of

Liberty?

It seems to me that Hale should bring forward some agressive

measure on Slavery-I would suggest a Bill for the Abolition of the

Slave-trade in the District. In support of this let him set forth all the

enormities of the system, as we have them in Jay⁴⁰ & other writers.

What he says or reads in the Senate is reported at length, & thus

circulates over the whole land.

 

 

 

 

imported French goods in order to assist French industry "at this crisis in French

Government," i.e., the revolt against Louis Philippe. Ibid., 638.

37. Congress debated from 20 April to 25 April 1848 on matters relating to the

Drayton and Sayres arrest. In the Senate on 20 April John P. Hale introduced a bill

providing for restoration of property damage from "riotous assemblage." The House

debated Palfrey's motion that a committee be appointed to investigate the need for

legislation protecting Congressmen and other citizens from mob violence. Ibid., 649-56,

657-64, 665-72. In his speech 25 April 1848, "Privileges of Members of Congress,"

Giddings declared that he did not advocate interference with slavery in present

slaveholding states, but that slavery in the District of Columbia was a violation of the

Constitution. Giddings said that slave dealers from nearby cities had led the mobs in

Washington, prodded by House members. Giddings concluded that the slavery issue

must and would be discussed in Congress. Ibid., Appendix, 518-23.

38. When asked on 20 April by William T. Haskell of Tennessee whether Drayton and

Sayres had broken the law in stealing slaves, Giddings replied that they had committed

a "legal crime" but not a moral crime. Ibid., 654-55.

39. Charles T. Torrey, a clergyman and abolitionist, had been jailed for helping an

escaped slave and died in a Maryland prison in 1846.

40. William Jay was a New York judge and an antislavery writer.

• 13
 

64                                                    OHIO HISTORY

 

I fear (Winfield) Scott. I believe you have confidence in his Anti-

Slavery. If you have, I am content; but I cannot disguise an [inimicable?]

repugnance to support for high office the man who bombarded Vera

Cruz, & otherwise acted as the instrument of this atrocious war.

Webster's friends are sanguine. They quote Thurlow Weed41 as saying

that he is the most "available" Whig at the present moment. I passed

a half-hour with him this morning; talking all the while of European

politics-not a word of American. I did not think it best to introduce

the latter.

I have written to Mann, urging him to make a demonstration against

Slavery very soon. Dr (Samuel Gridley) Howe will call on you in

Washington. He is very intimate with Mann. I feel that every new voice

against Slavery on the floor of the House helps mightily to create a

Public Opinion. I trust that you will be able to enlist others yet; but

Mann must speak soon.

Ever faithfully yours,   Charles Sumner

ALS    OHi (68/266, PCS)

 

Boston June 23d '48

My dear Sir,     I have just received yours of June 21st.⁴²

Your name has been advertised among those who are to speak at

Worcester. There is an intense desire to see & welcome you in

Massachusetts.

Let me exhort you, my dear sir, to renounce all those compunctions,

to which you refer; & to speak to us from your heart. Give us yr views

on Slavery, & the duty of the North. Say what you would say in Ohio.

Our Convention will be of farmers, & men from the people-compar-

atively few politicians.

If you should not come, we should be disappointed, & I fear that our

Convention would lose much of the force which we desire to give to it.

I have written also to Mr Roote. We count also on his presence.⁴³

Mr Philliips is preparing an Address & resolutions to put forth from

the Convention.⁴⁴

 

 

41. Weed was an Albany journalist and Whig politician.

42. Giddings wrote that he did not see how his presence at the anti-Taylor convention

at Worcester on 28 June 1848 would help the cause, but he would come if he were not

asked to speak. 6/201, PCS.

43. Joseph M. Root was a Whig Congressman from Ohio, 1845-51. Sumner also

hoped to get Horace Greeley and Thomas Corwin to attend, but evidently did not.

Sumner to Giddings, 17 June 1848, 68/301, PCS.

44. At the Free Soil Convention, 28 June 1848, Stephen C. Phillips, chair of the

committee on an address and resolutions, offered a resolution thanking delegates Charles

Allen, Free Soil Congressman from Massachusetts, 1848-53, and Henry Wilson for their

• 14
 

The Giddings-Sumner Alliance                                        65

 

I have just met Abbott Lawrence.⁴⁵ I said to him-"I am glad you

were not nominated for the Vice-Presidency"--"That is a doubtful

compliment" said a bystander.-"I would not have Mr L's name" said

I, "discredited by association with General Taylor." He then said

-"Do you know where you are going-You will have to support

Martin Van Buren"-"I am ready" was my reply.

So I am. If the Utica Convention nominates him,⁴⁶ will he not be our

man? He has suffered in the cause of Anti-Texas.

Yours most truly,     Charles Sumner

ALS OHi (68/316, PCS)

 

Boston Sept 3d '48

My dear Sir,      I was gratified by yr favor of Aug. 24th, &      the

encouragement it afforded.⁴⁷ I received it a short time before one of our

meetings, & could not forbear reading some passages from it, which I

see the papers have misrepresented. I expressly said that you forbore

to express any definite opinion with regard to the vote of Ohio.

Our ratification meetings have been large & enthusiastic beyond

expectation.⁴⁸ Our meeting at Faneuil Hall was prodigious in numbers

& in determination. I have never seen so powerful a demonstration in

Boston. That at Salem surpassed any political meeting ever held in that

place. And so throughout the State Free Soil meetings & speakers

seem to excite overwhelming favor.

Many of our friends are sanguine that we shall carry Massachusetts.

This is my own belief. The people every where are with us.

Mr Webster's speech at Marshfield, so far as I can judge from what

I hear, will not damage our movement. He was described by those who

heard him, as talking like a man angry with every body.⁴⁹

 

 

stand against the Taylor nomination at the Whig convention (the two delegates had left

the convention in protest). Phillips's address set forth goals for an organized political

party to protest slavery. Henry Wilson, Rise and Fall of the Slave Power (Boston, 1874),

II, 146.

45. Abbott Lawrence, cotton manufacturer and Whig Congressman from Massachu-

setts, 1835-37, 1839-40.

46. The Utica convention, meeting 22 June, nominated Van Buren for President and

the nomination was ratified by the national Free Soil Party on 9 August 1848.

47. Giddings wrote from Jefferson, Ohio, that attendance at Free Soil meetings was

three times that at Whig rallies. He expected the candidates Van Buren and Charles

Francis Adams to carry the county and district, but was doubtful about the entire state.

24 August 1848, 6/304, PCS.

48. Both Free Soil ratification meetings on 22 August 1848 at Faneuil Hall and

30 August at Salem were described as crowded. The Daily Evening Transcript of 23

August 1848 called the Faneuil Hall audience "enthusiastic and intelligent." The Boston

Daily Atlas, 31 August 1848, said that most attended the Salem meeting out of curiosity.

49. In his "Speech at Marshfield," 1 September 1848, Webster declared that,

• 15
 

66                                                 OHIO HISTORY

 

Still I cannot disguise that Mr Van Buren's past course puts a load

upon the cause, which I regret that it is obliged to hear. Here in

Massachusetts that is felt more than, perhaps, any where else. With

McLean we should have swept the state easily. I cannot express to you

how easily. Is it too late for him to write a letter approving what was

done at Buffalo? Think of this.

Our State Convention takes place Sept. 6th & 7th. John Van Buren

is to be here. We anticipate a great gathering.

(George N.) Briggs & Reed⁵⁰ both sustain Taylor. We shall be

obliged to oppose them, & shall have candidates of our own every

where. We are a new party-entirely.

Yrs faithfully,  Charles Sumner

ALS   OHI (68/411, PCS)

 

Boston Nov. 10th '48

My dear Sir,    You already know the result of our election on the

Presidential question. Our Governor & members of Congress will be

chosen on Monday Nov. 13th.

I think Massachusetts has been the chief battle-ground of our cause.

The enemy have fought with great desperation, supported by greater

resources of talent & money, perhaps, than in any other state-in

proportion to the size of Massachusetts. The money said to have been

subscribed by the Zacharites here in Boston is enormous.

Our friends feel happy thus far in our success. If we have not reached

the anticipations of the more sanguine, we have disappointed all the

calculations of our enemies. We have polled nearly 40,000 votes,

& taken our place, before the Cass party, as the second party. First we

are in principles; I trust we shall soon shew ourselves first in numbers.

The opposition to us has assumed a virulence, which, to me a

stranger to the strifes of politics, seems most unprecedented. Perhaps,

I have had the largest share of it, directed against me.

I have spoken almost every night for the last two months-in

N. Hampshire, Maine, & from one end of Massachusets to the other-

in all the large towns-from Nantucket to Berkshire. This has been a

new experience to me-one that I never expected, in my wildest

visions, to have.

 

 

although the Taylor nomination displeased Massachusetts Whigs, the nomination had

been fairly conducted and represented the choice of Whigs in many non-slaveholding

states. Webster listed a number of proslavery actions taken by Van Buren, and reiterated

his original intention not to oppose Taylor if he became the Whig nominee. James W.

McIntyre, ed., Writings and Speeches (New York, 1903), IV, 123-44.

50. The Whig John Reed was lieutenant governor of Massachusetts, 1845-51.

• 16
 

The Giddings-Sumner Alliance                                            67

 

You will see that I consented most reluctantly to stand for Congress.⁵¹

Of course, we can make no effectual head against the over-powering

Taylorism & Hunkerdom of Boston. I am put up, merely to be put

down. But we shall strengthen you in Congress by at least one good

man-Judge (Charles) Allen. His election is certain-if not on the first,

at least on the second, trial. Palfrey, I think, will be chosen on the 2nd

trial.⁵² Hudson is doomed to an ignominious defeat. But it is said that

he is to retire to one of the fat offices at Lowell. It is by these places,

that our manufacturing power, wields an enormous influence. Its

patronage is greater, I believe, in Massachusetts, even than that of the

General Govt.

Taylor is probably elected.⁵³ It is better for our movement that this

should be so. The Northern Democrats must join us, & together we will

organize a grand Northern opposition. Our course is clear. I trust that

our friends in Ohio will stand firm.

It seems to be that an Address should be put forth from some Central

Committee (but none such exists) rallying our friends to keep together,

& marking our future course. Think of this.⁵⁴

We have as yet no certain returns from Ohio. Like Olympus, yr state

is enveloped in clouds.⁵⁵

Ever Yrs,      Charles Sumner

P.S. I am disgusted & indignant at Truman Smith's beastly attack upon

you.⁵⁶

I forgot to say how glad we all are that you are again in the House. You

will have much to do this winter.57

ALS    OHi    (68/441, PCS)

 

 

 

51. Sumner was nominated by the Free Soil caucus of District One in Massachusetts

for the Congressional seat held by Winthrop.

52. After a series of ballots in which he always failed to get the necessary majority,

Palfrey was defeated.

53. The 1848 Presidential election gave Taylor 163 electoral votes, Cass 127, and Van

Buren none. Van Buren ran second to Taylor in Massachusetts, New York, and

Vermont, and was instrumental in giving New York to Taylor. Frederick J. Blue, The

Free Soilers (Urbana, 1973), 141-46.

54. Giddings wrote from Jefferson, Ohio, that although the Free Soilers would

organize when Congressional delegates reached Washington, he thought it "a little too

assuming" to publish an address. 17 November 1848, 6/382, PCS.

55. Cass won Ohio, with 47 percent of the vote; Taylor gained 42 percent, and Van

Buren, 11 percent. Van Buren carried Giddings's home county, Ashtabula, with 55

percent of the vote while Giddings was reelected as a Free Soiler. Blue, The Free Soilers,

147-48.

56. Giddings responded that he would answer the attack of Smith, Whig Congressman

from Connecticut, 1845-49, and Senator, 1849-54, not so much for his own reputation,

but to "promulgate free-soil truth."

57. In his 17 November letter, Giddings wrote Sumner that he was not discouraged;

• 17
 

68                                                     OHIO HISTORY

 

Boston Oct. 19th '49

My dear Sir,      Since I last heard from    you many things have

occurred to distract our friends. The New York Union had a very bad

look. But some of our friends have made it worse than it is. The Boston

Republican has been very unfortunate in its course. Wilson has set at

naught the counsels of our best friends. Adams, Allen, Palfrey, Phillips

all condemn him. I have most earnestly protested. His course has

embarrassed us very much.⁵⁸

I have been in New York, & seen many of the Barnburners. I am

satisfied of their sincerity, & earnestness. They hope to make the

united Dem. party of New York an Anti-Slavery party. It remains to be

seen, whether they can succeed. Meanwhile we should adopt with

regard to them the rule of non-intervention. At all events, do not

embarass them.

The recent union in New York, & the way in which the Republican

has treated it have embarrassed our position in Massachusetts very

much. The day after our Worcester convention we stood firm

& confident; never more so. At this moment, there is a little uncer-

tainty as to several matters connected with our organization(.) I think

it very probable, that there will be a union with the Democrats, in most

if not all the counties on the senatorial ticket; but this has not yet taken

place. If it should take place, the Democrats will probably withdraw

their opposition to Palfrey.

I anticipate a very bitter contest here for the last week or two

preceding our elections the 12th Nov.

Horace Mann has shewn signs of choosing Whiggery rather than our

party. Inter nos, I have written most earnestly, telling him to beware of

timidity, & putting it to his conscience to meditate well before he leaves

us. He lacks courage.

I was glad to see so much of Chase as I did here a month ago. He is

a very able senator. I trust the friends of Freedom in Ohio will forget

old feuds, & old party names.⁵⁹ Let us all stick together.

Ever Yours,     Charles Sumner

ALS    OHi (69/034, PCS)

 

 

"over the whole field, I think we may say "thank God and take Courage." Giddings

thought the Democrat Party would soon "disband" in the North and join with the Free

Soilers.

58. According to Frederick J. Blue, many of the elitist Conscience Whigs such as

Adams and Palfrey resented Wilson's democratizing political schemes and opposed his

plan for joining with antislavery Democrats. The Free Soilers, 211-12. The Republican,

edited by Wilson, ran an editorial, for example, on 6 October 1849, stating that "the

people are sick of this annual cry-this wail of Corporations and Capitalists." The

Republican warned against a tariff favoring wealth or special interests.

59. Sumner refers, no doubt, to the Giddings-Chase contest for the U.S. Senate

• 18
 

The Giddings-Sumner Alliance                                         69

Boston Nov. 3d '49

My dear Sir,      Mann writes me as follows: "I have never to any

mortal given the slightest indication whom I should vote for for

speakership-never; I have long ago made up my mind, on what

principles, I shall vote, when the facts are more fully before me, but the

person for whom I shall vote is another thing."

I have seen him since he wrote this, & I read to him what you wrote

about his vote.⁶⁰ He says further, that he will oppose any state

constitution, which has not a prohibition of Slavery. I represented to

him that an effort would be made to admit California with a constitution

silent on slavery. He said most solemnly that he would oppose all such

efforts.

Our State election is at hand. There are unions in many of the

counties on Senatorial tickets between Free Soilers & the Old Democ-

racy. It is very probable, that these may succeed, & that our combi-

nation may control the Senate, perhaps the whole State Govt.⁶¹ But all

is uncertain.

Ever Yrs,      Charles Sumner

ALS    OHi    (69/042, PCS)

 

Boston Feb. 19th. '50

My dear Sir,     Here is our circular calling our Convention. We count

upon Roote. He must come. You must, if need be, molliter manus

imponere ("lay your hands on him gently"), & compel him to the

North. It is important to know, so that his coming may be announced.

We wish to know whether to propose at our convention a National

Convention in June. In this we must be governed very much by the

advice of our friends in Congress.

Of course, it must not be called, unless the occasion shall promise to

be of such interest as to secure a powerful convention.

 

 

 

earlier in the year in which Chase was elected to the U.S. Senate as a Free Soiler by the

Ohio legislature. On 29 October 1848, Giddings replied from Jefferson, "Chase is an able

man, and will prove an able Senator. He lacks a knowledge of popular feeling and of

popular sentiment and is not qualified to lead a party. His policy last winter came near

to ruining us in this state . . . But that is now passed." 6/721, PCS.

60. Giddings wrote Sumner on 29 October 1849 regarding Mann: "Mr Mann has

always appeared unwilling to enter into the free soil movement. I think he has not

confidence in our success." Still, Giddings continued, he would be surprised if Mann

would "vote for the re-election of a man [Winthrop] who has thus [exited?] himself to

save the slave trade from abuse." 6/721, PCS.

61. The Free Soil gubernatorial slate, Stephen C. Phillips for governor and John Mills

of Springfield, a former Democrat, for lieutenant governor, came in third in the fall

election. Blue, The Free Soilers, 211.

• 19
 

70                                                        OHIO HISTORY

 

If called, where shall it be? We have thought of Washington. Think

of this. A descent of several thousand Free-Soilers upon the District

would have a good influence. It would be a movement of our lines to

attack nearer to the enemy. Our own friends would be stimulated by

the idea of proclaiming liberty to the captive at the very seat of Govt.

I hear of Winthrop's dodge during Roote's speech, & mirror magis

("wonder of wonders"), his appeal to Roote to notice his absence from

the House during the allusion to him.⁶² I hope Roote will put in a note

or in brackets, at that part of the speech where W. left his seat [here Mr

Winthrop left his seat] & then afterwards, add at the part alluding to

him, that Mr W. requests it to be known that he was out of his seat at

this time, or something like this.

Ever Yrs,      Charles Sumner

ALS OHi (69/091, PCS)

 

Boston April 3d '51

My dear Sir,      I am obliged by your good tidings with regard to the

position of Mr Wade.⁶³ I trust that he may be true to the inspirations of

his early life. You know better than I the pressure he will be obliged to

withstand at Washington. He has a noble place. May God give him the

heart to fill it, as becomes a man from the Western Reserve of Ohio.

I have implicit confidence that we shall yet rally the Free States

against the Fugitive Slave Bill. Each day discloses its atrocities.⁶⁴ The

persecutions here in Boston will keep them before our public; & our

convention next week will deepen the impression.

The result of the Senatorial question here is still uncertain. It is

now postponed for three weeks. I am told that a more thorough

 

 

 

62. On 15 February 1850, after Root spoke supporting his bill prohibiting slavery in

the California and New Mexico territories, the House voted to table it. In his speech

Root declared, "It is bad enough for gentlemen representing constituencies in favor of

the proviso to vote against it, but it is worse ... for such to refuse to vote on the

question. Better, sir, vote wrong than dodge." Globe, 31st Cong., 1st Sess., 276;

Appendix, 108. The Boston Atlas on 16 February 1850 defended Winthrop's courage in

"withholding" his vote on Root's bill against Free Soilers' criticism of Winthrop for

walking out of the House as the vote was being called.

63. In his letter of 17 March 1851, Giddings announced that Benjamin Wade, Whig

and later Republican Senator from Ohio, 1851-69, had been elected Senator by a Free

Soil-Whig coalition. Giddings wrote he "had no distrust of his present feelings" (Wade

was strongly opposed to the Fugitive Slave Law), but he did question Wade's

"determination of purpose," 7/608, PCS.

64. Part of the Compromise of 1850, this law (which Sumner refused to categorize as

such) had recently created much disturbance in Boston when U.S. authorities arrested

the fugitive slave Frederick Jenkins, also known as Shadrack. He escaped with the help

of some antislavery activists.

• 20
 

The Giddings-Sumner Alliance                                      71

 

& systematic effort will be made next time by our friends than ever

before. There was a defection yesterday of one vote, caused, it is said,

by the influence of Marcus Morton.⁶⁵

I have told our friends to abandon me at any time "without notice or

apology." But, I believe, that the conviction is pretty general that I am

the only person who can be elected. If the bolters should be satisfied of

this, it remains to be seen whether they would take the responsibility of

throwing the election over to the next year, with the prospect of giving

the post to the Whigs for six years.

I believe no person in New England has ever run such a gauntlet as

has been my fate. It is odd that this should have befallen one, who had

in every way striven not to be a candidate. I am told that, notwith-

standing the political ardours which have been aroused, there has been

little or no personal asperity. This is not true, however, of the Webster

Whigs. They are very bitter. But I have not read the newspapers,

teeming with this discussion.

I am always glad to hear from you; & hope soon to know yr further

impressions.⁶⁶

Ever sincerely Yours,     Charles Sumner

ALS    OHi (69/550, PCS)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

65. The Massachusetts state legislature had been in a deadlock since January over the

U.S. Senate seat. Sumner had received the most votes but not the necessary majority.

Finally, on 24 April 1851, he was elected on the 26th ballot. Morton was a former

Democratic governor of Massachusetts.

66. Congratulating Sumner on his election, Giddings wrote on 28 April 1851 from

Jefferson that he could recall "no event which has given greater joy to our population

generally," and he rejoiced at the "triumph of the friends of freedom." 7/697, PCS.

• 21