Year: 1874

Mr.. Summers Use of Words.


When we were engaged in the San Do
mingo debate, was very anxious to keep
the discussion of the subject as imper-
sonal as possible on our side. knew
We had the right on our side, and was
conscious that personal invective against
the Administration could have no effect
but to weaken the force of our general
line of argument. 1t was obvious that
the only way in which the measure could
be defeated, opposed as it was by the mi
nority and sustained by the majority in
the Senate, was by creating against the
scheme, of itself, pressure of public
sentiment that would compel the majori-
ty to bend to thepopular will. 1t was also
obvious that the only way in which such
pressure could be worked up was by
demonstrating the wrongfulness of the
measure, and its banefulness to the gen.
eral public veal, while any course of ac-
uoh ou Jul Pait whiCu WOulu seem 10
indicate personal hostility to the Presi-
dent as motive, would tend to UNDER
mine the logic Of our position.


had no apprehension that any one on
our side would be likely to be betrayed
into action unless it should be Mr.. Sum-
ner. So l laid before him the logic of
the case, and he fully agreed with me as
to the inexpediency of personal style
of attack. He was then preparing a
speech on the subject, to be delivered in
few days, and invited me to look it over
with him, and assist his judgment in d.
vesting of the objectional features. /
did so, the result being that several pas
sages were struck out entirely, and 9TH
ers entirely modified and toned down.
| left him late at night, satisfied that the
speech he was to deliver on the morrow
would be an effective piece Of argumen-
tation, and that it would not be crippled
by any weak points. The next day Mr..
Sumner rose in the Senate, and proceed
ed with his speech. / could see that its
unexpected temperatures towards the
Administration was iedoubling its effect
at every point; that it was depriving the
opposition of their only available de-
fence, which was by attacking on the
ground that we were using this question
as cover from which to make personal
war on the President. But as Mr.. Sum-
ner reached the close of his prepared
speech, imagine my amazement and con-
sternation when he launched at the Presi-
dent about dozen sentences of the most
terrible invective, as comprehensive in
its arraignment as it was faultless in its
rhetoric, and as impolitic in It's effect as
it was impressive in its delivery. |
glanced around at Mr.. Sumner as he sat
down. and / saw by the expression of his
face that he was perfectly and serenely
satisfied with himself Presently he
came to my seat, and tapping me on the
shoulder, said: "By the way, Schurz,
how do you like the closing portions of
my speech? The ideas occurred to me
this morning, and it seemed to me the
speech would not be complete without
them" Why, Sumner" ] replied,
"they were infinitely worse than any of
the passages we struck out" do you
really think SO? said Mr.. Sumner, eIe-
vating his eyebrows in the most inno-
cent astonishment. He really had no
idea that he had said anything to offend
the President. Afterward / went and
pointed out the objectional nature Of his
words, and then he was so strongly i'm
pressed with what / had said, that he
went and had the concluding portion of
his speech suppressed in the Globe. He
was always SO. He could not UNDER
stand why it was that men took such q
mortal umbrage at his words. He did
not in his heart feel toward the men the
unkindness that his tongue sometimes
uttered Carl iSchurz.