The whole series, as read, was received with intense enthusiasm, especially that against Slavery. A motion was made to amend by striking out that part recommending the reëlection of Mr. Sumner, which was voted down promptly, and the resolution was unanimously adopted.
The action of the Convention presented two distinct issues,—first, the extermination of Slavery, and, secondly, the reëlection of Mr. Sumner. There was at once a counter movement. A call was put forth for what was called a “People’s Convention,” at Faneuil Hall, October 7th, whose main object was to defeat the action of the Republican Convention, and especially the reëlection of Mr. Sumner. It was supposed that in this way all the elements of opposition could be united. This plan received an unexpected check by the Proclamation of Emancipation of September 22d. It could no longer be said that the Republican Party of Massachusetts and Mr. Sumner were not in entire harmony with the President.
Meanwhile Mr. Sumner addressed his fellow-citizens at Faneuil Hall, October 6th, in vindication of the Proclamation. On the succeeding day the “People’s Convention” assembled in the same place and nominated candidates for State offices in opposition to the Republicans. The tone of this Convention appears in a brief extract from the speech of Hon. Josiah G. Abbott, of Boston. After alluding to the various interests of Massachusetts, he said:—
“And I tell you, Gentlemen,—and every heart here responds to it,—every heart out of this hall would respond to it, if the lips would speak the language of the heart,—I tell you, Gentlemen, we want men in the Halls of Congress, in the House of Representatives, and, above and beyond all, in the Senate Chamber, who will attend to those interests, and not be continually, as they have been, Sir, attending to mere wild speculations and sentimental theories. [Applause.] Do not the people cry out, ’For God’s sake, give us somebody who believes there is something to be attended to in the wants of a million and a quarter of white men, women, and children’? [Great applause.]”
The spirit of this Convention was thus described by the Norfolk County Journal:—
“The partisanship of the People’s Convention all centres in opposition to Charles Sumner. It is as pure an instance of personal hate on the part of its leaders as was ever exhibited. This animosity comes solely from the fact that he was the earliest and has been the most persistent advocate of what is now the policy of the nation. They hate Mr. Sumner, not because he is personally unamiable, not because there is a flaw in his moral character or a doubt as to the purity of his intentions, not because he has not represented the opinion of Massachusetts, and faithfully advocated her best interests on every point affecting her material prosperity. They have commenced this personal crusade solely because he has been the most conspicuous and uncompromising foe to the encroachments of Southern Slavery. And now that the President has ranged himself on Mr. Sumner’s side, in opposing him they oppose the Administration.”
On the next day, the Democratic Convention at Worcester adopted the nominations of the “People’s Convention,” so that the elements of opposition seemed to be united. The President of the Convention in his remarks announced the common object.
“Let me, then, appeal to you to come here with one heart and with kindly feelings towards all, entertaining respect for the opinions of all, so that, when this Convention shall have adjourned, a voice will go forth throughout this Commonwealth, that the day of John A. Andrew and Charles Sumner is ended. [Prolonged cheers.]”
Other speeches followed in the same tone, and insisting upon union “to beat Sumner and Andrew.”