Mr. Fessenden, in reply to Mr. Willey, emphatically disowned Mr. Sumner.
“Why, Sir, I do not hesitate to say here most distinctly, for myself, that I dissent entirely from the conclusions of the honorable Senator from Massachusetts, as stated in his resolutions. I do not look upon the States of this Union as gone and destroyed.… It is enough to say, in this connection, that upon this particular point the opinions of the honorable Senator from Massachusetts are his own, for which he alone is responsible, and which he is undoubtedly well able to defend.”[146]
On the next day Mr. Sherman followed in the same vein,—vindicating the Republican party, and especially disowning Mr. Sumner, which in the course of his speech he did twice. The first time he said:—
“The Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. Sumner], as he has a perfect right to do, introduced a series of resolutions giving his idea about the effect of the war upon the political status of the States, and at once those resolutions are seized upon as the dogmas of the Republican party, and we are denounced for them, although candid men must know that they are but the emanation of a single individual, who has decided convictions on this subject, and who is far in advance of any political organization in this country.”
Then, at the close of his speech, after saying that “we ought to oppose all useless and unconstitutional measures of legislation,” he proceeded:—
“I, therefore, cannot help but say, that, while I respect the motives of the honorable Senator from Massachusetts, while I give him credit for consistency, ability, and a great deal of culture, and am always glad to hear him speak, yet I must confess, that, when I looked over his resolutions, they struck me with surprise and regret. They would revolutionize this Government. Sir, strike the States out of this system of Government, and your Government is lost and gone. I cannot conceive of the United States governing colonies and provinces containing millions upon millions of people, black and white. I do not think such a thing can exist. I do not believe it is in the power of Secession to bring us to such a state of things. I can draw no distinction between the resolutions of the Senator from Massachusetts and the doctrines that are proclaimed by Jefferson Davis.… The doctrine of the Senator from Massachusetts is substantially an acknowledgment of the right of secession, of the right to secede. He, however, puts the States in the condition of abject Territories, to be governed by Congress. Jefferson Davis puts it in the power of the people of the States to govern the States themselves. As to which is the most dangerous or obnoxious doctrine I leave every man to determine.”[147]
Not long afterwards, Mr. Dixon, of Connecticut, took up the same strain, characterizing the doctrine of the Resolutions as “fatal to our form of government, destructive of our Federal system, and utterly incompatible with a restoration of harmonious relations between the States in which rebellion now prevails and the United States”; and he condensed his judgment by calling the doctrine a “fatal heresy.”[148]
Mr. Cowan, of Pennsylvania, some time later, spoke in harmony with the others.
“Now everybody knows that the honorable Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. Sumner] has a scheme by which he proposes to turn all these States, in case they could be conquered, into Territories, that they shall be governed by the United States as Territories, and then, when their people come to their senses,—this is the language of the advocates of the scheme,—they are to be readmitted into the Union upon terms. Mr. President, I do not know anybody hardly who has not deprecated that as a most mischievous scheme to agitate just at present.”[149]
Still later, Mr. Doolittle, of Wisconsin, in an elaborate speech, discussed Mr. Sumner’s policy in the same spirit, saying that he had provided a way of disunion,—“which for brevity I will call, with no disrespect to my honorable friend from Massachusetts, the Sumner way for States to go out of the Union, namely, by Act of Congress.” And he attributed the same position to his colleague, Mr. Howe.