[180] "He never became unduly excited about slavery. He had no sympathy for the religious or sentimental side of abolitionism, nor was he moved by the words of the philanthropists, preachers, or poets by whom the agitation was set ablaze and persistently fanned. He probably regarded it as an evil of less magnitude than several others that threatened the country."—Morgan Dix, Memoirs of John A. Dix, Vol. 1, p. 338.
[181] F.W. Seward, Life of W.H. Seward, Vol. 2, p. 256. For full speech, see Seward's Works, Vol. 4, p. 225.
[182] Diary of R.H. Dana, C.F. Adams, Life of Dana, Vol. 1, p. 348.
[183] F.W. Seward, Life of W.H. Seward, Vol. 2, p. 258.
[184] Ibid., p. 259.
[185] James F. Rhodes, History of the United States, Vol. 2, p. 69. See also p. 68. "Seward," says the historian, "had the position, the ability and the character necessary for the leadership of a new party. He was the idol of the anti-slavery Whigs.... Perhaps his sympathies were heartily enlisted in the movement for a new party and he was held back by Thurlow Weed. Perhaps he would have felt less trammelled had not his senatorship been at stake in the fall election. The fact is, however, that the Republican movement in the West and New England received no word of encouragement from him. He did not make a speech, even in the State of New York, during the campaign. His care and attention were engrossed in seeing that members of the Legislature were elected who would vote for him for senator." On July 27, 1854, the New York Independent asked: "Shall we have a new party? The leaders for such a party do not appear. Seward adheres to the Whig party." In the New York Tribune of November 9, Greeley asserted that "the man who should have impelled and guided the general uprising of the free States is W.H. Seward."
[186] New York Weekly Tribune, February 2, 1856.
[187] Parke Godwin, Life of Bryant, Vol. 2, p. 88.
[188] New York Independent, March 26, 1856.
[189] New York Independent, February 7, 1856.