Washington sentinel., 1856-06-07

and offensive, that Mr.. Sumner was long
time, and careful in preparing it, to give to it
the EXTREMIST bitterness of personal offence,
that he, in advance, gloated over the irritation
it must inevitably occasion, is beyond contra
diction. For among other evidences, he ad
dressed a letter to that political Gabriel"
the "Rev. Theodore Parker" in which he stated
that he had prepared such a Philippic as had
never been uttered in the Senate. And truly
he was as good as his word And we will add,
such a one as we hope will never again be
uttered in Congress or anywhere else, by any
having pretension to respectability.
Is not the vanity of Mr.. Sumner transparent
in this matter? His blind vanity in seeking the
approval and eommendation of Theodore Par
ker, and similar lunatics, renders him oblivious
of the outrage he is about to perpetrate on the
Senate, on the State which sent him, and on
the country, by exhibiting to the world Sena-
tor, arrogating to himself the supremacy Of
scholarship in that body, as a common libeler
and slanderer. He himself calls it Phlippic
that is, speech against one man, against
Senator Butler as being like Philip, false and
traitorous to the Republic Mr.. Sumner, in his
letter, does not pride himself upon the discus
sion of great constitutional questions, nor any
question affecting the interests of the nation.
or of Massachusetts, nor indeed OF any measure
whatever. 1t was Philippe" and nothing
but "Phlippic." The Kansas question was
| a mere vehicle by which to bring this long and
dearly "Philippic" before the Senate,
and the country. He merely used other mea-
sures as strings to his bow, with which to dis
charge his one hundred and ninety arrows.
The whole speech, by his own avowal, was a
piece of pure malevolent~ vanity, laboriously
concocted, not for the good of the nation, not
to command the respect of good men at home,
but as an offering to Theodore Parker, the
high priest of avowed disunion-the denun-
ciator of the Constitution, the EXETER of civil
and of servile war, to obtain the admiration
of this man and Of his compeers.
Mr.. Sumner would never have addressed such
letter to Webster, Everett .Choate, Appleton,
Eliot, or Winthrop, expecting by such means
to win their high approval and admiration.
He knew his man. The speech was for con-
sumption by Theodore Parker-et id omne
genus.
We ask in all soberness, of Mr.. Lord,
if such a speech, with all these disgusting
concomiants, when actually delivered in the
Senate, with all It's arrows envenomed with the
worst personalities, could fail to excite some
of the irritation which it now appears it was
Mr.. Summers especial purpose to provoke.
| The arrows did wound the selfrespect Of the
parties attacked. There is no other alterna-
tive, because they look forward to the indul-
gence by others in similar outrages, and to
their immunity in so doing
Some at the North propose, that for the
future the question for northern candidate
shall be: Can you fght?-Will you fight?
This, of course, looks to repetition of the
offence, and resistance to the consequent
punishment.
One paper, the Courier and Enquirer, Of
New York, proposes to send Tom Hyer as
| fit delegate. He doubtless would be a fit rep
resentative for the redoubtable editor of that
paper, "Whose slanderous columns have not
left him t,oo good legs to stand upon"
We have his idea how to remedy such oc-
currences as that between Brooks and Sumner.
1t never occurred to his simple mind, that by
sending Websters, Everetts, Choates, Woods,
Fillmores, Havens, and such men, that the
dignity Of Congress would be preserved, the
"freedom of debate" remain unviolated, and
argument and fact assume the place of perso-
nal ISLANDERS and affronts No, the more ap-
propriate character for his representave would
be Tom Hyer, who would first use the Ian
guage of insult of Sumner, and then add
the violence Of personal assault
We submit, however, to the Lords, and other
respectable men of the North, if this transac.
tion should not be stripped of all the false
issues made, and judged upon its naked merits?
This being done, can any do aught but give
unqualified condemnation of Mr.. Sumner.