The Worcester spy. [volume] (Worcester, Mass.) 1898-1904, 1901-10-21
COMMUNICATIONS
To the Editor of The Spy:

To the Editor of The Spy:
I desire to reply to one statement in
the communication from F. B. SanbornI
published in today's Spy. His recol-
lection is evidently at fault in aScrlolngI
to the late Hon. Eli Thayer a PROPOSE
ton to send or employ men to aSsaS-
snate the leaders of the Missouri bor-
der ruffians. in November, 1856, and pro-
badly confuses him with some other
person. The record of the whole course
of Mr.. Thayer's connection with the
Kansas emigrant movement, which hel
originated and directed to successful
outcome, shows that he was utterly OPP
posed to anything like unlawful or vio-
lent action, and that he had great diff
ficulty in contending with the DISPOSE
ton to resort to such action on the part
of those who entered late into the
work He vigorously resisted all eff
forts to subvert order and government
whenever he had knowledge of them,
and the distinctive feature of his Plan
of Freedom" in it's operation against
the slave power, was that it proceeded
by methods IN strict accordance with
the constitution and the laws of the
country. 1t is not reasonable to main
tain that at the same time Mr.. Thay-
er was conveying in a letter to H. w.
Beecher and others his sharp condem-
nation of a scheme into which they had
been drawn to arm company or
hired men to go to Kansas and at
tack the border ruffians, he was openly
advocating assassination and anarchy
in a meeting. There is abundant evil
dence in Mr.. Thayer's papers and in
the papers of the New England Emil
grant Aid Company which shows ms
sentiments on this point. But while he
ii TfK11
he did believe in self defense, which
was lawful and justifable morally, and
he did not hesitate to furnish the Kan
sas free State Settlers with Sharpsl
rifles and other arms to repel attack
Furthermore Mr.. Thayer did not be-
lieve in November, 1856, that the free
state cause in. Kansas was in danger
from the recent election Of James
Buchanan Long before that time he
was fully assured in his own mind that,
the crisis in the Territory had passed,
and this is proved by his public ut
terances in September and October
1885, after he had really retired from
the work with the sure conviction that
the overwhelming majority of anti
slavery men in Kansas could never be-
overcome by the meagre resources and
feeble efforts of the South. Early I'M
November, 1856, he was elected a mem
Der of Congress from the Worcester
district and to the convention thatI
nominated him on the 9th of October,
he said that it made no difference
whether Fremont, Buchanan or the
devil was elected observation-disclosures
was free anyhow, and he continually
reiterated this during the remarkable
six days canvass that followed, to dis
pei the prevalent delusion that if Buch-I
anan should be elected everything
would be lost.
1t is natural that Mr. Sanborn should
consider Mr.. Thayer 'ill-judging,
since that latter never agreed with
him in his estimate of the Kansas work
or of John Brown and certain other
characters who have been exalted by
him. But violent Mr. Thayer never
was in the sense conveyed by Mr. San
born. No man was more self-poised
and calm under stress. That he was
forcible, direct positive, and sometimes
severe in speech and criticism of
wrong-doing does not imply, as Mr..
Sanborn and some others seem to
think that he was passionate. They
simply fail to understand him.
In the great contest with the slave
power in 1S5456 Mr.. Thayer well knew
that it was a condition with which he
was dealing, and not individuals. He
was too sensible to suppose that the
killing of Stringfellow, Atchison or any
other border ruffian could right the
wrong in Kansas. If the opponents of
imperialism or expansion had been as
wise they would have seen the folly
of personal criticism of Mr.. Mckinley.
and there would be little or no neces-
sity now, in the shadow of the recent
calamity of his lamented death, for
apology and explanation.
FRANKLIN P. RICE
Meredith, N. H, Oct. II, 1901