New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1878-01-29
CHARLES SUMNER.
HIS MEMOIRS UNDER REVIEW ABROAD

HIS MEMOIRS UNDER REVIEW ABROAD
sR PiERcE's WORK NOTICED BY THE Epishohoi'
AND WESTMINSTER REVIEWS MR.. SUMMED"
COURSE REGARDING THE ALABAMA CLAIMS MIS-
uxpppsrOoD BY THE FoRaiER-A FAIRER BUT
SOMEWHAT INACCURATE ESTIMATE OF MIX SUM
NFR MADE IN THE WESTMINSTER REVIEW
rrpon THE REGULAR CORRESPONDENT OF THE rRIBUSEl
LONDON. jan l7.-Both the Westminster ana re-
;nbob for the current quarter have notices of ME-
I, Perce's Memoir and Letters of Charles Sumner"
Roth are interesting because they contain more or
leas couplete estimates Of Mr.. Sumner from an
English point of view. To Mr.. Sumner himself, IL
was always a matter of some concern what Engish-
men Thought of him. American rs he was 10 the
backbone he never concealed has strong liking lo'
England or his strong desire to be liked py r-hg-
land He valued what is best here precisely DIS
Engishmen of some breadth of culture Value "n''
is best in America. or in any other foreign county
The number of patriots who suppose that al oo"
ceiyable excellcnces may be found wlthln the iin-
its of their own land cannot after ailbe very Ese
can remember, indeed, hearing now ana tneh so'ne
petulant criticism of Mr.. Sumner as TOO Epghsh'
And there is story of Mr.. Seward which the re-
viewer of the Edinburgh tells not for the first time.
. to this effect
"Mr. Seward. who was afterwards Secretary OF
State. paid a visit to London: he was, of course
well received and dinner was given nm ;-Iur-
self nothing would be easier than to present man
of his distinction to Lord Palmerston. Lord LansI
dOwne, and other leading men OF the tiime a,u
members of the Government. 10 TINS 0Her All.
Seward replied: no sir. don't wish To make ther
acquaintance. There MIR. Sumner, VINO came
to England and saw good deal OF your arls'oci'Hy.
believe they very evil 10 MN; oiu IN ",i
country II did him a great deal OF harm 20 MT.
Seward was resolved to steer clear of that rock.
That NAV all be true, but strikes me as far less
creditable to Mr.. Seward than To Mr.. sumner MI
Seward ought to have been strong enough 10
despsc all clamor of the kind he seems to nave
dreaded | don't know that Mr. Sumner desplsed
H. he was only too sensitive the opinion of Others
at all times: but he braved it. He would gladly
have escaped abuse but he would not escape it at the
price of doing thing he thought wrong, or omit
ting to do thing he thought right. lie
was incapable of q baseness of any SORT
He never won his way into English society
by any kind of mean solicitation or by any kind OF
concession The unpopuarity which he had to en-
dure afterward in England on account of his Ala
bama speech was q real grief to him. He could not
understand il. have heard him say over and over
again that he thought that speech friendly to Eng
land and not unfrendly. He was astonished at the.
outbreak of anmOsity which it provoked here: But
he bore il with his wOnted evenness of temper. lie
was made to at the time OF his lasf VISIT 10 Eng
land how much Englishmen resented ms planness
of speech Some old friends Abandoned MN
many acquaintance held aloof: the world in winch
he had formerly been welcomed SO eagerly, ShOWed
itself neglectful and cold. He felt IL acuely. 10
one or two of his own countTylnen he may nave
spoken of it, but am confident that no Engllshnan
ever heard syllable of surprise pass MS ilps lie
would no more complain of II than he could nave
complained at home-if he really had cause of com
paint-because of the foolish talk about ms Anglo
mania. He would, nevertheless, have been justly
indignant, if he could have toreseen that the Gay
would come when an Engshlnap could write and
The Edinburgh Rerietc could publish what follows:
ct fa iDqu a friendly
ridicule TO which he keeniy sensitive) on the
score of his aristOcTatical English acquaintance and
when he entered public life and became a senator,
and the chairman of the Committee on Foreign Re-
lations the lmputatiOn of being oyer-frendly to
English interests one which told against hlm.
The consequence that he driren into the opposite
erfreme and no american could So ill Afford or, indeed
trds so little disposed to make even reasonable con-
SESSIONS If concessions had been required) TO the
country"
Iii unnecessary to answer that. 1t is enough to
say that the man who writes it is utterly ignorant
of Mr. Summers real character. He is not less ignO
rant of the best known facts in the history Of the
anti-slavery movement. He accounts for Summers
not Joining the antsiavery party in early life by
SAYING that "he seems TO hare thought that Garrison
and his friends carrying their agitation be-
yond the point which the laws Of the Union tolerant
of slavery in the Southern States, could sanction"
Considering that Garrison and his friends began their
work by pronouncng the Constitution covenant
with death and an agreement with hell, 1t does
Just possible that Mr.. Sumner may have thought
this view one which the claws of the Union" did
not sanction. 1t would be worth while for the next
English writer an anti-slayerv leader, whether
early late, to understand that the abolitonists
deliberately placed themselves outside OF the
Union because there was no spot INSIDE
aMtatiOn. The Westmiaster writer comes nearer
eqnally urgent for abolition, refused to be party
to breaking up the Union. He was not at that
Iitionist" No, not at that time, nor ever; nor were
the AbOitionists party" in the proper sense
81 fe TOra w dney eSeaed the people in
to an adherence Of slavery, because il was sin,
and to whom it is due that the war for the Union
became, in the end also, war against slavery.
It is not to be inferred however from the strange
ignorance shown by The Ediabmqh reviewer on one
or two points. that his estimate of Sumner is wrong
or unfrendly q whole. He says, finely. that
Summers generous ardor for freedom and the equal
rights of every of man broke forth like fire."
He recogniz es in him Of the ablest Of the ber-
ators of the slaves. and the first victim of
the struggle. What he says of Preston Brooks's
:" base blow" is well said The reviewer had met
Sumner in Europe during the severe treatment
quired for his wound; had been impressed as he well
might be- by the ndOmitable courage with which
he bore his fortunes; and he considers that it
after his triumph over almost fatal shock that the
aspirations of his earlier lite expanded into real
magnanimity and greatness
The article in The Westmnster is more elaborate
than that of The Ediab~gh and in a higher tone
by no peans always accurate, but pervaded with
conception of public life and duties which every
body but politicians and office-seckcrs-ffa dstinc-
ton between them can be established--wll
readily assent. 1t sets out with the state
ment that the possession of office is neither
o proof nor condition of the greatness or
the usefulness of public man. Golden was
never in Office; the Earl Of Liverpool was fifteen
years Prime Minister; yet who can doubt which Of