Sumner and Brooks --Louisville, Kentucky, Journal [American](24 May 1856)
We think that the
violent assault made by Mr. Brooks, member of
the House of Representatives from South Carolina,
upon Senator Sumner is much to be regretted.
It does not appear from the telegraphic
account of it to have been at all chivalrous,
and we fear that it will do injury at the North
by still further inflaming the already inflamed
public sentiment in that section. Indeed it will
inevitably produce that effect to a very extraordinary
extent. Mr. Sumner, for his incendiary
harangues, may really deserve a greater punishment
than he has received or is likely to receive
in this world, but we think that the House of
Representatives, for the sake of its own dignity and
the honor and harmony of the Republic, should
expel Mr. Brooks for using a bludgeon upon a
Senator for words spoken in debate. If such
is to be the character of the collisions in the
Halls of Congress, the people of the North and
the people of the South will soon learn to
conform their actions to the condition of things.
They will send to the Senate and House of
Representatives men capable of breaking skulls and
noses rather than men of intellectual distinction.
We presume that Massachusetts might
find many a bully within her borders who could
make as short work with Mr. Brooks as he
made with Mr. Sumner -- and that too
without taking him at a similar disadvantage.
From the fact that Mr. Brooks felled
Sumner while the latter was in an armchair,
and that Sumner called out for help as
long as he could articulate, we rather think
that both of them, the fire-eater and the
abolitionist, are deficient in the right sort of spirit.
It seems that Brooks attacked Sumner
because the latter had in debate abused South
Carolina and Mr. Brooks's rather aged relative,
Senator Butler. The idea of using a bludgeon
upon a Senator for making a speech against a
State is monstrous. A score of South Carolina
members of Congress within the last few years
have used their whole power of abuse and
vituperation against Massachusetts, and as many
Massachusetts members have exercised themselves
upon South Carolina. A pitched battle
has long been raging between the champions of
those two States, and generally the harshest and
most offensive language has come from the South
Carolinians, who don't like to be outdone in
anything. What Sumner may have said about
Senator Butler we know not, but we think that
the old Senator, who is quite as fiery-hearted
as he is white-headed, would scorn the thought
of letting any younger man take a quarrel with
an abolitionist off his hands. We happened to
be in the Senate Chamber near the close of the
last session of Congress during one of the night
discussions of all manner of slavery questions.
Judge Butler, who is really of gentleman of many
fine and generous personal qualities, had become
exceedingly elated from frequent visits
to the Senatorial Restaurant. Sumner was
making a severe speech that evidently had
reference to the forcible expulsion of Mr. Hoar, a
venerable citizen of Massachusetts, from the
limits of South Carolina, but he did not
mention South Carolina's name. Mr. Butler
interrupted him by asking in a fierce tone, "does he
mean South Carolina?" Sumner proceeded
without noticing the interruption. "I demand,"
exclaimed Butler, starting again to his feet,
"whether he means South Carolina; for if he
does, let him say so, and I will give him something
to make him remember me and South Carolina
as long as he lives." Sumner still proceeded
quite imperturbably, bestowing no attention
upon his excited opponent just in front of him.
"Does he mean South Carolina?" ejaculated
Butler for the third time. "Yes, I do mean
South Carolina," thundered Sumner with more
spirit than we had thought an abolitionist could
possess. He finished his speech without any
further interruption, and Butler rose to reply,
but the fine old South Carolina gentleman was
too far gone to be half equal to the tremendous
occasion.
We repeat the expression of the hope, that,
however obnoxious Sumner may justly be to the
patriotic portion of the people of the United
States, the House of Representatives will
promptly expel Brooks if the account of his
assault upon the Massachusetts Senator shall
prove correct. Indeed the House of Representatives,
it seems to me, would be guilty of the
grossest and most shameful dereliction of duty
to the Senate if it were to refuse to punish one
of its own members for knocking down a
Senator upon the floor of the Senate for words said
in Senatorial debate.
Since the preceding was set in type, we learn by
later dispatches, that Mr. Sumner did not call
for help, being knocked senseless by the first
blow. So much the better for Mr. Sumner.
[<<Previous Editorial][Next Editorial>>]
|
