Charles Sumner: memoir and eulogies. A sketch of his life by the editor, an original article by Bishop Gilbert Haven, and the eulogies pronounced by eminent men

Contents

CHAP. PAGE

I. Bikth and Education 1

II. European Experience 17

Chapter I

Charles Sumner came of typical Massachusetts stock. His family on both sides was of English origin, but his ancestors left England very soon after the landing of the Pilgrims, and dwelt in the neighborhood of Boston for nearly two centuries before his birth. Roger Sumner, his lineal ancestor in the eighth generation, died and was buried at Bicester in Oxfordshire. William, the only son of Roger, came to America about 1635, and settled in Dorchester, which adjoined Boston on the south. He became at once a landowner and was made a freeman in 1637. He was admitted to the church in 1652 ; was a deputy to the General Court, a selectman, a commissioner to try small causes, and in other ways showed himself an active and public-spirited citizen. He brought three children with him from England, and two more were born afterward. Roger, his second son, was born in England. He married Mary Josselyn, of Lancaster, in Massachusetts, and became an inhabitant of that town in 1660, but when Lancaster was destroyed by the Indians he removed to Milton, where he died. George, the third son of William, was the ancestor of Increase Sumner, a justice of the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, and governor of the Commonwealth. William, the fourth son of Roger, had many children, of whom one, Seth, was married twice. A son of the first marriage was the grandfather of Major-General Edwin V. Sumner, who commanded a corps in the Army of the Potomac under McClellan and Burnside. A son of the second marriage, Job, was the father of Charles Pinckney Sumner, and the grandfather of Charles Sumner.

The Sumners had been for the most part farmers, but Job was resolved to obtain a liberal education, and entered Harvard College in November, 1774, at the age of twenty. The shots fired at Concord and Lexington changed the current of his ambition, and in May, 1775, he joined the American army at Cambridge. He was a lieutenant at Bunker Hill and during the siege of Boston, and his conduct in several actions earned him a commission as captain, given him by vote of Congress in 1779, to date from July 1, 1776. He was commissioned a major in 1783, and was second in command of the force which protected New York during the evacuation by the British in that year. It was from soldiers under his command that Washington received the last salute of the revolutionary army. After the war, on July 7, 1785, the corporatlon of Harvard College gave him the degree of A. M., as a member of his class, by a vote which recited that he had " during the war behaved with reputation as a man and as an officer." In 1785 he was appointed a commissioner to settle the accounts between the Confederation and the State of Georgia, and he resided in Georgia until he died. He is said to have been a candidate for governor, and to have been defeated by only a few votes. He was apparently a man of the world, who lived expensively and entertained freely. He died in New York of a fever, in his thirty-sixth year, and was buried in St. Paul's churchyard on Broadway, where stands his tombstone, erected by the Society of the Cincinnati.

His son, Charles Pinckney Sumner, was born in Milton, and brought up on a farm. He went to Phillips Academy at Andover, and graduated at Harvard College in 1796, where he formed a friendship with Joseph Story which exercised an important influence on his son's career. After graduating he taught school for a while, but in 1799 he entered the office of Josiah Quincy, and in 1801 was admitted as an attorney. He took an active interest in politics as a supporter of Jefferson, and his first political speech, made in 1804, was an argument against disunion. He was clerk of the House of Representatives in 1806-7 and 1810-11. He was married in 1810, and in 1819 he accepted the office of deputy sheriff, having been unsuccessful in practice. From 1825 till just before his death in 1839

4 CHAELES SUMNER

he was the sheriff of Suffolk County, and while his political activity ended when he became sheriff, he was interested in the temperance question and in the anti-Masonic movement, though he had been a Mason. He was an anti-slavery man in feeling, though not prominent in the agitation. He delivered a number of public addresses at various times, but was not conspicuous as an orator. He was high-minded, courageous, scholarly, extremely conscientious and faithful in the discharge of every duty, but formal, reserved, grave, and stern ; somewhat narrow also, and without his father's social charm. He foresaw the inevitable result of the agitation against slavery, and in 1820 said : " Our children's heads will some day be broken on a cannon-ball on this question." It is from him that Charles Sumner may well have derived his unbending conscience and his intense earnestness.

Charles Pinckney Sumner married Kelief Jacob of Hanover in Massachusetts, a descendant from Nicholas Jacob, who came to America in 1633, and after settling in Watertown, removed to Hingham in 1635. Her grandfather was a man of property and one of the Committee of Public Safety at the time of the ^Revolution, but the family were generally farmers of the solid New England type. Her father was evidently in narrow circumstances, and before her marriage she supported herself by her needle. She was a woman of even temper and great good sense, who probably did much to temper her husband's austerity in the family life. She had nine children, and died in 1866 at the age of eighty-one.

Such was the ancestry of Charles Sumner. He and his twin sister Matilda, the first children of their parents, were born on January 6, 1811, at the corner of Revere and Irving streets in Boston. His childhood was in no way remarkable ; he was educated in the schools of Boston, and was an amiable, quiet, refined, and studious boy. Among his schoolmates at the Pubbc Latin School were Robert C. Winthrop, who was older, and Wendell Phillips, who was younger than himself. He won several prizes for translations from Latin, for a Latin poem, and for an English theme ; but while taking respectable rank, he seems to have been more remarkable for knowledge acquired by general reading than for striking ability. Though apparently never ill his health was not robust, and having little inclination for sports he early acquired the tastes and habits of a scholar.

His father at first did not intend to give him a college education, and it is a little curious that Sumner himself, in later years the champion of peace, wished to enter the military academy at West Point. His application for a cadetship failed, and the father's opportune appointment as sheriff, with a larger income, enabled the son to enter Harvard College in September, 1826. Lovers of speculative inquiry may be interested to consider what sort of a soldier was thus lost to the country.

Sumner's college class was not so rich in distinguished men as its brilliant predecessor, the famous class of '29, and he was among the youngest members. He devoted his time to history, literature, and the classics, in which he excelled, but his dislike for mathematics and physics prevented his taking high rank, and abandoning this ambition he gave himself up to the studies that he loved. A classmate tells us that he was "one of the best declaimers in the class," showing " a great degree of earnestness with an entire freedom from any effort to make a dash." " It was the same type of subdued eloquence, inseparable from the man," which he afterward displayed, and already he was self-possessed and easy on the stage. He received minor parts at college exhibitions and Commencement, and he won a second Bowdoin prize by an essay on " The Present Character of the Inhabitants of New England," which, we are told, showed copious reading and immense industry, but lacked condensation and clearness. He was fond of discussion, persistent and possibly somewhat aggressive in argument. Socially he was frank, kindly and genial, but possessed a native dignity which became him well. His life at college was a period of healthy and natural growth before anything had occurred to awaken strong feeling.

The year after Sumner's graduation was spent at home. He took time to decide what his work in life should be, and meanwhile, rising early and working late, he read the classics, poetry, general literature and history, and attacked mathematics with better success than in college. He taught school for a few weeks, wrote an essay on commerce for a prize offered by a Boston society, of which Daniel "Webster was the president, and received the award from his hands. This success gratified his friends and we may suppose gave him a certain reputation. Except that, in natural sympathy with his father, his feelings were enlisted against Freemasonry, he seems to have taken little interest in public questions during this year, which was spent in desultory labor. At this time he saw little of society ; he was pondering carefully the question of his future occupation, and it was after much deliberation and with many misgivings that he decided to study law.

Sumner entered the Harvard Law School in September, 1831, where he was brought under the influence of Judge Story, who had been sitting on the Supreme Bench of the United States for twenty years and was just beginning the series of treatises which gave him his great international reputation. Story's enthusiasm and personal charm made him a stimulating teacher. As an old friend of Sumner's father he took a kindly interest in the son, which ripened into friendship, and Sumner was soon a constant visitor at his house. Simon Greenleaf, who was appointed a professor about six months before Sumner left the school, also became his friend, and the two eminent lawyers inspired him with the strongest devotion to his profession.

Sumner remained in the Law School until the end of December, 1833, applying himself to study with ardor and persistency. For the first time he felt a definite ambition, for the first time his work satisfied and inspired him. He wrote to one of his classmates : " A lawyer must know everything. He must know law, history, philosophy, human nature ; and if he covets the fame of an advocate he must drink of all the springs of literature, giving ease and elegance to the mind and illustration to whatever subjects it touches." His plan of life was : " Six hours, namely, the forenoon, wholly and solely to law ; afternoon to classics ; evening to history, subjects collateral and assistant to law, etc. . . . Recreation must not be found in idleness or loose reading."

Possessed with this theory he read law, classics, history, literature, rising early and working late, until his inflamed eyes and clouded complexion showed the effects of excessive labor. Yet he was never ill and seemed independent of sleep and exercise. He treated his mind as a reservoir and into it steadily pumped learning of every kind, which his strong memory retained. He became librarian of the school, and was given a room in Dane Hall, where he acquired a remarkable familiarity with the books under his charge. He won a Bowdoin prize by an essay on the sub' ject, " Are the most important Changes in Society effected Gradually or by Violent Revolutions ? " He wrote two articles for the " American Monthly

Review," and before lie left the Law School became a contributor to the " American Jurist." His style gained in clearness and conciseness, but his writings were more learned than original. The impression which he made upon his contemporaries at this time was very pleasant. Thus President Quincy's daughter, Mrs. Waterston, speaks of seeing at one of her mother's receptions, "the tall spare form and honest face of Charles Sumner," and adds : " This youth, though not in the least handsome, is so good-hearted, clever, and real, that it is impossible not to like him and believe in him."

Judge Story's son, William "W., who was some eight years younger than Sumner, writes : " He used to come to our house some two or three evenings in the week, and to his long conversations I used to listen night after night with eager pleasure. His simplicity and directness of character, his enthusiasm and craving for information, his lively spirit and genial feeling, immediately made a strong impression on me. My father was very fond of him, and treated him almost as if he were a son ; and we were all delighted to welcome him to our family circle. He was free, natural, and naive in his simplicity, and plied my father with an everflowing stream of questions, and I need not say that the responses were as full and genial as heart and mind could desire. . . . He was at this time totally without vanity, and only desirous to acquire knowledge and information on every subject. . . .

Though he was an interesting talker, he had no lightness of hand. He was kindly of nature, interested in everything, but totally put off his balance by the least persiflage ; and if it was tried on him his expression was one of complete astonishment. He was never ready at a retort . . . and was at this time almost impervious to a joke. He had no humor himself and little sense of it in others, and his jests, when he tried to make one, were rather cumbrous. But in ' plain sailing ' no one could be better or more agreeable."

Another characteristic is described by a friend, who says : " A peculiar lif e-and-death earnestness characterized even then all that Sumner did and said."

His years at the Law School gave him a definite ambition, and for the first time he distinguished himself from his fellows and showed promise of future eminence, while the favorable opinion of Judge Story and Mr. Greenleaf gave him a reputation at the very outset of his career. In those days the community was small, and the world outside was ready to welcome a man who made his mark at Cambridge.

In January, 1834, after leaving the Law School, Stunner entered the office of Benjamin Rand, an eminent lawyer of Boston, where he continued to write for the " Jurist," becoming one of its editors in May. In February he went to Washington for a month, making on his way short visits in Philadelphia and New York. Through the introductions of Judge Story, Sumner enjoyed on this trip rare opportunities to become acquainted with the distinguished men of the day. A letter from Professor Greenleaf introduced him to Chancellor Kent, and it is amusing to find Kent saying that he " thought Jackson would ruin us ; wanted to go to Washington, but if he went should be obliged to see much company, call upon Jackson and dine with him, perhaps, all of which he could not consent to do." This was a time when men took political differences seriously, and did not condone in social intercourse conduct which they condemned in public speech. It is amusing, also, to find Sumner writing: "Kent's conversation is lively and instructive, but grossly ungrammatical."

During this visit he saw much of Judge Story ; was introduced to President Jackson ; met the judges of the Supreme Court at their Sunday dinner, he being the only guest ; secured what he " may almost call a place in the court ; " dined repeatedly with Horace Binney ; made the acquaintance of Henry Wheaton and Francis Lieber, afterward his intimate friend ; and heard many distinguished lawyers address the Supreme Court. The country was convulsed at the time by the removal of the deposits from the Bank of the United States, and the debates in Congress were especially interesting. "Webster gave Sumner a card admitting him to the floor of the Senate, so that he heard the greatest orators of the country, — Webster, Clay, and Calhoun, for once on the same side. It was a memorable visit, and it would seem that in scenes of such excitement, and under the influence of such men, the political instincts of Sumner must have been aroused. Yet he wrote to his father : " Calhoun has given notice to-day that he will speak to-morrow on Mr. Webster's bank bill. I shall probably hear him, and he will be the last man I shall ever hear speak in Washington. I probably shall never come here again. I have little or no desire ever to come again in any capacity. Nothing that I have seen of politics has made me look upon them with any feeling other than loathing. The more I see of them the more I love law, which I feel will give me an honorable livelihood."

To see what manner of man he then was we may borrow the eyes of a young lady who saw him in Philadelphia, a daughter of Mr. Peters, the reporter : —

" He was then a great, tall, lank creature, quite heedless of the form and fashion of his garb ; ' unsophisticated,' everybody said, and oblivious to the propriety of wearing a hat in a city, going about in a rather shabby fur cap ; but the fastidiousness of fashionable ladies was utterly routed by the wonderful charm of his conversation, and he was carried about triumphantly and introduced to all the distinguished people, young and old, who then made Philadelphia society so brilliant. No amount of honeying, however, could then affect him. His simplicity, his perfect naturalness, was what struck every one, combined with his rare culture and his delicious youthful enthusiasm. . . . Every one was sorry when he left town, and from that time his name was really a household word with us. There was a sweetness and tenderness of character about him, and an entire unworldliness, that won all hearts, while his delightful culture completed the charm."

A witness of the opposite sex describes him as "modest and deferential, attracting attention by his remarkable attainments and manly presence."

After his return, Judge Story offered him the position of an instructor in the Law School, but he declined it, and in September, 1834, was admitted to the bar. For a little more than three years he practiced law in Boston, forming a partnership in November, 1834, with George S. Hillard. Professor Greenleaf kept a desk in the rooms, and Judge Story was a frequent caller, with others then prominent in literary or legal life. Sumner was not the man to acquire a large general practice. He lacked the readiness and quick perception essential to success before juries, and he had not yet shown any great power as a speaker. He had a number of suits which he conducted with success, but his arguments were learned essays rather than that forcible presentation of the case which is most effective in getting a judgment. Indeed, his copious learning was rather an incumbrance in active practice, since he was disposed to overestimate the value of what had cost him so much labor, and to rely on quotations rather than on his own ideas, often better suited to the immediate occasion. The defect which Doctor Holmes points out in saying that he had " little imagination, wit, or sense of humor" was a serious handicap, the outward sign of that great disqualification, the inability to put oneself in another's place. He stood ready to undertake any work which came, but could not seek business, and apparently did not attract clients. He did as well, probably, as most young lawyers, but the reputation which he brought from the school and the commendations of his friends led him to expect more, and he was naturally disappointed.

Yet he was always occupied. The literary work for which he was fitted sought him constantly. In January, 1835, he became an instructor in the Law School, during Judge Story's absence, and again in 1836-37. He was substantially in charge of the school at one time, and though he did not fail as a teacher, he was not brilliantly successful. In 1835 Judge Story selected him to report his decisions in the Circuit Court, of which he published three volumes. He assisted Greenleaf in his Maine Digest, and prepared the index for Story's " Equity Jurisprudence." He was an editor of the " Jurist," and a constant contributor to it, but dealt more with the literary aspects of the law than with practical questions. He helped Dunlap in revising for the press his work on " Admiralty Practice," and he prepared the forms which are added to it. He wrote for the " North American Review," and delivered some lectures, but they were essays on legal subjects which gave him no popular reputation.

During these years he did not make any effort to enter general society, but he enlarged his acquaintance with eminent men and made some lifelong friendships. His connection with the "Jurist " brought him into correspondence with leading lawyers all over the country and with foreign writers on jurisprudence. He became intimate with Cornelius C. Felton, afterwards the President of Harvard University, Henry W. Longfellow, and Henry R. Cleveland, a company of scholars who met with Hillard and Sumner almost weekly, calling their society " The Five of Clubs." His circle was not large, but it was of the best, and his associates were mostly older than he.

Devoted to his work, he showed little interest in the questions of the day, while his friends were taking part in politics. He became acquainted with Dr. "William Ellery Channing, and later felt his influence strongly, but as yet his sense of public duty was not awakened. Winthrop and Hillard went to the legislature, and Phillips, his intimate friend, had already won reputation as a speaker, but he was still absorbed in law and literature. Only two references to slavery are found in his published letters. On February 24, 1834, in writing to his parents of his journey from Baltimore to Washington, he says : " For the first time I saw slaves, and my worst preconception of their appearance and ignorance did not fall as low as their actual stupidity. They appear to be nothing more than moving masses of flesh, unendowed with anything of intelligence above the brutes. I have now an idea of the blight upon that part of our country in which they live."

Nearly two years later, on January 9, 1836, he writes to Lieber, then in Columbia, S. C. : " You are in the midst of slavery. . . . What think you of it ? Should it longer exist ? Is not emancipation practicable? We are becoming abolitionists at the North fast ; the riots, the attempts to abridge the freedom of discussion, Governor McDuffie's message, and the conduct of the South generally have caused many to think favorably of immediate emancipation, who never before inclined to it."

Sumner had subscribed to the " Liberator " in 1835, and had read it since, but these letters show only a languid interest in the question. Nor was it sympathy with the sufferings of slaves, but indignation at the attempts to impair the liberties of white men, which roused him, and began to change the kindly scholar into the insistent and uncompromising foe of slavery.

Chapter II

Sumner had long felt an overmastering desire to visit Europe, and in 1837 lie determined to go, although his friends with few exceptions counseled against the journey, as an interruption of his professional career. His own funds were insufficient, but Judge Story and two other friends lent him what he needed, and with excellent letters of introduction he sailed on December 8, 1837. He was well prepared for his new experiences. He had learned to be nice in his dress, and the impression which he made upon strangers may be gathered from the description of him given by one who met him just before he started. " He appeared with a right royal presence, his countenance characterized by a genuine warmth and great readiness; in a word it was that of a highly bred, well-informed gentleman of a somewhat older school than I was in the way of meeting." He was "handsomely dressed, erect, easy, conscious of his strength." The " shabby fur cap " of a few years before had disappeared with all that it implied.

The years which he spent in Europe enlarged his horizon, added to his knowledge, filled his memory with a wealth of associations, and made him a citizen of the world. No other American had been received so cordially or offered such opportunities. In a biography intended to present Sumner as a statesman and to show what influence he exerted upon the government of his country, there is room only for such a sketch of his journey as will indicate what it contributed to the education with which he entered public life. It was now that he established personal relations with leading foreigners, and gained an influence which later was of great value in the conduct of our foreign affairs.

Landing at Havre, he spent five months in France, almost entirely in Paris. He was then in England for ten months, again for four weeks in Paris, and then made a tour through France to Italy, where he remained five months ; thence to Germany, where he saw the principal cities, staying in Vienna, Berlin, and Heidelberg, about a month in each. He saw the Rhine and the Low Countries, and in March, 1840, returned to London for about three weeks, after which he sailed for home. His journey was an unbroken success. His spectacles were rosy, and Europe was full of enchantment for him.

In Paris he called at once on his correspondent Foelix, editor of the " Revue Etrangere," but only to find his own knowledge of French insufficient for conversation. Therefore he took lodgings on the unfashionable side of the Seine, studied with two teachers, and supplemented their instruction by attending lectures at the Sorbonne and the Ecole de Droit, and by visiting the theatres, where he followed the play with book in hand. In less than a month he was able to engage in a conversation on American politics and make himself understood in French. Early in March he took lodgings near the boulevards, and presented his letters of introduction. His life in Paris was no vacation; about the middle of April he wrote to Greenleaf that he had heard " one hundred and fifty or two hundred lectures on all branches of jurisprudence, belles-lettres, and philosophy," that is to say, " two or three lectures of an hour or more each " every morning, delivered by the great scholars and scientific men of France. In the hospitals he saw the best surgeons of the day at work ; at the theatres and the opera he enjoyed Grisi, Lablache, Dejazet, Mars ; he visited the museums, the galleries, and the historic places ; he attended the Chambers of Deputies and Peers, and from a reserved tribune in the former heard a great debate and saw the statesmen of France. He made the acquaintance of leading lawyers and was given especial privileges in the courts. He studied French procedure in operation, talked with the judges, learned to know their system of law, heard arguments by the most eminent advocates, and watched important trials. He went into society and met many eminent persons, — Cousin, Demetz, the Due de Broglie, Michel Chevalier, Madame

Murat, Pardessus, David. He saw and had a long conversation with Sismondi. Nor did he forget to study the people, in the streets and at the fetes. The knowledge which he thus gained of the French language was of great service during the civil war, when, as chairman of the Senate committee on foreign relations, he wished to talk freely with foreign ministers.

When on May 29, 1838, he left Paris for England, he was not twenty-eight and had as yet no reputation. Of his attitude towards English society he wrote to Judge Story : " Since I have been here I have followed a rigid rule with regard to my conduct ; I have not asked an introduction to any person; nor a single ticket, privilege, or anything of the kind from any one ; I have not called upon anybody (with one exception) until I had been first called upon or invited." None the less he was received everywhere and given a rare opportunity to see everything and know everybody, so that a brief statement of his doings in England becomes almost a catalogue of names and places.

His first interest was in his profession, and there was scarcely an eminent lawyer or judge whom he did not meet. He went the circuits, was the guest of the bar, attended their dinners and mingled with barristers on terms of close acquaintance, and sat on the bench. He stayed with Lord Brougham and became familiarly acquainted with him. He was the guest of Denman, Vaughan, Parke, Alderson, Langdale, Coltman, and other judges, and in his letters to Judge Story and Greenleaf he describes every judge and every prominent lawyer. With the attorney-general, Campbell, with Follett, Talfourd, Rolfe, Wilde, Crowder, Sir Frederick Pollock, Dr. Lushington, Charles Austin, Hayward, Adolphus, and many others he established cordial relations, and his ten months in England gave him a more extended acquaintance with English lawyers than he had with those of his own country.