New national era. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1870-1874, 1872-09-12

the purpose of aiding in securing civil rights for the
eolored citizens Of country. regret thar pre-
vious engagement will detau me at the Executive
Mansion this evening, and that shall not be able to
participate with in in your Efforts 10 lur
assure you however that sympathize most cordially
in any effort to secure for all our people, OF whatever
race nativity color the exercise OF those rights TO
which every citizen should he entitled
lam, very respectfully;
i Does not the heart which finds in that
letter uggle or evasion need ito purge itself
clear of all passions?'
Mr.. Sumner greatly wrongs the President
when he says he never, but as soldier,
did anything against slavery, and never, at
any time, showed any sympathy with the
colored race" Mr.. Sumner is mistaken.
as the people of the country know. Presi-
dent Grants timely message, when Congress
was in discussion, ensured the passage of the
Ku Klux bill, and saved thousands of hum
bic homes from outrage and wrong at the
hands of Mr.. Summers present allies. The
will do more practical good for the colored
race than could ever be done by a wilder
ness o: Horace Greeleys.
Mr.. Sumner also does a great wrong to
you. He does you an infinite injustice when
he says the convention at Philadelphia was
composed of delegates chosen largely un-
der the influence of otfice-holders, who as
sembled to sustain what is known as Grant.
ism." Mr. Sumner had no right to say that
Among the $500 900 Republican voters there
was substantial unanimity. No other caud-
date was named but Mr.. Colfax, who with
drew early in the canvass, and wrote letter
declaring that the public will was unmistak-
ably for Grant.
Mr.. Sumner wrongs US all when he charges
those who differ with him with hatred to the
South. Not an act, not word of hatred has
come from the victOrs in the recent struggle.
All that the vanquished even complain of
has been done with Mr.. Summers full APP
probation. The only expressions of hate
come from those with whom he is now act
ing.
Mr.. Sumner also wrongs the people when
he says ''the speeches praising Grant are by
office holders aud members of rings" You
know better than Mr.. Sumner from whose
hearts come the praises which have followed
the services of Gen. Grant.
He also wrongs the people when he de-
clares that ''if any valued friend separate
from me now, it is because he places man
above principles" The National Republi
can Convention, when all Mr.. Summers in
dictment was before the country, unani
mously renomnated the President. In that
act the Republicans of Massachusetts, took
means to impute to them that they place "a
man above principles" or else to say to
them that he does not value their friendship.
Mr.. Sumner also does infinite injustice to
himself. In a moment of headstrong pas
sion with few prominent Republicans from
other States, every one of whom, so far as
know them, has suffered some personal dis
appointment as to Office or power, he disre-
CARDS the judgment of Massachusetts and the
will of her people. In whose friendship
does he find an equivalent? Not certainly
in Mr.. Fenton's, not certainly in Mr.. Trum.
bulls, of whom he declared within two years
in the Senate" How often have we been
obliged to encounter his influence as we
were seeking to lay the foundations of peace
and reconciliation in this Republic? How
often has he shown his tenderness for the
remains of the rebellion and refused to join
us in trampling it out? He has been the
persisting enemy of the suffrage of the col
ored race" comparing him, in his record,
to a sick man turning himself on an uneasy
bed. Will he find it in Mr.. Schurz, who has
voted steadily against the civil rights bill,
and every attempt to protect the cOlored
man, in the Senate? Will he find it in Mr..
Upton, of whom we may perhaps say, as
We said of Addlngton
"And hut little though he meant
| He meant that little we'll"
| see that Mr.. Davis says that "Achilles
will not sulk in his tent" Alas for our
Achilles he has drawn his sword and aimed
his blow at the leader of his own cause in
the very midst of the battle, though wisdom
herself pluck him by the locks and bid him
forbear.
Mr.. Sumner says the President should
| never be re elected, but the Constitution is
| otherwise. The American people. in fullest
consideration, have adopted different pol.
| icy. Mr.. Sumner argument seems to me
| to be based upon an assumption not credit
able either to the virtue or the intelligence
of the country. His argument is that if the
President desires a re. election he will use
unworthy neans, such as the appointment of
bad men to office, to compass his end. But.
| surely, he does not claim that the road to q
reelection is unworthy conduct. Surely,
the Republic, whose idea is confidence in the
people, assumes that the President, ambi-
tious of re election, will gain his object best
by the highest and purest public service.
What has been our experience? Has a sin
| gle President held the office a second term
whose re election the American people now
regret? Mr.. Sumner theory would deprive
us in times of great peril and distress of the
services of tried men. and compel US to rely
on men new in the Presidential office. 1t
would have deprived us of the second term
| of Washington and of the second tenn of
| Lincoln; of the second term of Lincoln for
whose re. election Mr.. Sumner himself was q
Strenuous advocate.
The one Presidential term theory comes
to this: Mr.. Greeley is opposed to the re.
election of the Pre- sident when he wants the
office himself and Mr.. Sumner would have
the Constitution forbid the re. election of
such President as he does not like.
| Mr.. Summers knowledge is vast, but he
does not know the President.
| Mr.. Sumner says this means reconciliation.
| Does it mean reconciliation? Do the rebels
of the South take Mr.. Greeley and the Gin
cinnati platform because they desire recon
ciliation for because, having exhausted every
| form of resistance, they are satisfied that
they could not get rebel and a Democrat?
Does anybody doubt that if the elections in
New Hampshire, in Oregon, in Connecticut,
had given reasonable promise of a Demo
cratic victory, the Overtures of Mr.. Greeley,
and the alliance of Mr.. Sumner would have
been spulned with contempt? They seek
to substitute Greeley for Grant to. day just
as they would have been glad to substitute
Mcclellan for Grant at the head of our ar
mics during the war. Undoubtedly they
like Greeley's principles better than Grants.
They like the generalship of Bull Run better
than the generalship of Vicksburg. They
like his principle that States have right to
secede. They like his talk about domi-
nant race. They will accept reconciliation
with him just SO far as he will consent to be