ENPages
page_0001
FREDERICK DOUGLASS TO CHARLES SUMNER
Rochester[, N.Y.] 6 July 1870.
HON: CHAS SUMNER.
MY DEAR SIR.
I have been deeply interested and instructed by your truly able speech on the Franking question.1On 10 June 1870, Charles Sumner delivered a speech in Congress on the franking privilege. This privilege, which allowed members of Congress to send and receive mail with their signature free of postage, had been debated over the years. While some believed congressmen abused this power, others viewed the franking privilege as a way to connect directly with constituents. Sumner argued that this system brought the government and people “nearer together” by circulating knowledge through franked speeches and documents. During this lengthy speech, Sumner not only defended the franking privilege but also gave a historical review of the postal systems of the United States and Great Britain. Walter Gaston Shotwell, Life of Charles Sumner (New York, 1910), 631–33; David B. Frost, Classified: A History of Secrecy in the United States Government (Jefferson, N.C., 2017), 101; Congressional Globe, 41st Cong., 2d sess., 4291–98. You have opened the eyes of the nation to the highly beneficent character of the whole mail service of the country. I rejoice also to see you in the right place upon the Chinese question.2Following the Civil War, there was great fear about the rising number of Chinese immigrants coming to the United States, especially in western states such as California, where Democrats attempted to sway voters by arguing that the Republican principle of “equality for all races” would lead to foreign born control of the government, and so pushed to keep strongly restrictive naturalization laws. As the chair for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Charles Sumner played a key role in the formation of the Burlingame-Seward Treaty of 1868, which, among other things, established some basic principles that aimed to ease immigration restrictions. In a speech entitled “Naturalization Laws: No Discrimination on Account of Color,” given over the course of 2 and 4 July, Sumner argued for the removal of the word “white” from current naturalization laws, as he had done in previous years. He argued that if any immigrant were coming to America with the intention of becoming a citizen and taking a vow of loyalty, regardless of color, that vow should be trusted to uphold “our institutions.” Sumner continued, “I simply ask you to stand by the Declaration of your fathers . . . Worse than any heathen or pagan abroad are those in our midst who are false to our institutions.” Douglass thought much the same way, as is seen in his discussion of Chinese immigration in his “Our Composite Nationality” speech. Douglass Papers, ser. 1, 4: 250–52; New Orleans Republican, 30 August 1868; Charles Sumner, The Works of Charles Sumner, 15 vols. (Boston, 1880), 13:483, 485; Foner, Reconstruction, 313–14; “The Burlingame-Seward Treaty, 1868,” history.state.gov. As usual, you are in the race. The country is in the rear, and you will have
page_0002
to bide your time. A bitter contest, I fear, is before us—but when pride, prejudice—and narrow views of political economy are on one side—and humanity—civilization and sound Statesmanship are on the other—there is no reason to doubt as to which will finally prevail. In this discussion you have the advantage which comes of fixed principles. While others are entangled in the meshes of temporary expediency—and hesitate—you can go forward untousled. I send you this line simply to remind you that now as in time past I follow your every important step with <the> eager earnest eye—of a friend. a grateful friend—
I have not been able to see with you the Cuban question3In October 1868, a group of Cuban planters initiated a revolution for independence from Spain. In the United States, debates emerged over the role the country should play in the conflict. Some believed the United States should recognize the rebels as belligerents, while others deemed the conflict a civil war and called for neutrality. While Sumner and Douglass sympathized with the Cuban rebels, they differed about what action to take. Sumner, along with Grant’s secretary of state, Hamilton Fish, pushed the president to issue a proclamation of neutrality, not only to protect American commerce but also to avoid a war with Spain. Douglass advocated a more aggressive approach. For example, he called for money to be raised to publish the Constitution of the Republic of Cuba, which would proclaim the abolition of slavery, and supported the calling of a national colored convention to aid the rebel cause. Ultimately, the United States declared its neutrality, and after a ten-year struggle, Spain thwarted the rebellion. Douglass Papers, ser. 1, 4: 204n; Quarles, Frederick Douglass, 284–85; Herbert Donald, Charles Sumner and the Rights of Man (New York, 1970), 395, 416–19; Kenneth E. Hendrickson, The Spanish-American War (Westport, Conn., 2003), 5; Merline Pitre, “Frederick Douglass and American Diplomacy in the Caribbean,” Journal of Black Studies, 13: 458 (June 1983).—yet I trust your understanding of its relations and bearings rather than my own.
I have to thank you for several important documents of late—and among them, I was especially pleased to find a copy of the eulogies pronounced upon the late Senator Fessenden.4Samuel Fessenden (1784–1869), lawyer and abolitionist, was born in Fryeburg, Maine. He graduated from Dartmouth College in 1806, gained admission to the Maine bar in 1809, and married Deborah Chandler in 1813. He served in the Massachusetts state senate in 1818–19. Along with his son and later U.S. senator William Pitt Fessenden, he moved to Portland, Maine, in 1822. Fessenden served with the Massachusetts militia for fourteen years and rose to the rank of major general. He represented Portland in the state legislature from 1825 to 1826, following the separation of Maine from Massachusetts, and practiced law in Maine for forty years. An active philanthropist, Fessenden became involved with the American Anti-Slavery Society and was the Liberty party’s candidate for governor and congress in 1847. Douglass saw Fessenden speak at least once in Portland, and Fessenden was nearly always present for Douglass’s orations there. Douglass was also welcomed into Fessenden’s home not long after his escape from bondage. Douglass to Francis Fessenden, 10 October 1881, Fessenden Family Mss., MeB; ACAB, 2: 443. I see not how you could have spoken more tenderly of him. Your tribute to his memory, is a tribute to your own magnanimity. To his friends it must have <been> touching and grateful indeed—for they know how easily a man of different mould— might have remained silent—or spoken in other tones of the grandly gifted but often ill tempered senator.
Dont acknowledge this note. I value your time
Truly yours Always
FREDK DOUG LASS
ALS: Charles Sumner Correspondence, MH-H. Another text in General Correspondence File, reel 2, frames 561–63L, FD Papers, DLC.
