To appreciate his peculiar character as a civilian it is important to know his triumphs as a soldier, for the one is the natural complement of the other.
Charles Sumner
The Public Record
Charles Sumner was an American lawyer and statesman who represented Massachusetts in the United States Senate from 1851 until his death in 1874. Before and during the American Civil War, he was a leading American advocate for the abolition of slavery, and after the war he was a key figure in the Reconstruction era, during which he and other Radical Republicans successfully fought to end slavery and ensure basic rights for Black Americans. He continued advocating for racial equality until his death, lobbying in his final days for a civil rights bill that served as a model for the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Historians credit Sumner with coining the phrase "equality before the law," which he first used as part of an early attempt to integrate Boston's public school system.
gutenberg.org
As if to exclude all question, he is classed by the Constitution among “civil officers.” Therefore as civilian is he to be seen.
Therefore personal government in all its forms, and especially when it seeks to sway the action of any other branch or overturn its constitutional negative, is hostile to the first principles of republican institutions, and an…
A government of laws and not of men is the object of republican government; nay, more, it is the distinctive essence without which it becomes a tyranny.
It is the One-Man Power elevated above all else, and is therefore in direct conflict with republican government, whose consummate form is tripartite, being executive, legislative, and judicial,--each independent and coëqual.
King George the Third of England, so peculiar for narrowness and obstinacy, had retainers in Parliament who went under the name of “The King’s Friends.” Nothing can be allowed here to justify the inquiry, “Have we a King George among…
It is easy to see that Cæsarism even in Europe is at a discount, that “personal government” has been beaten on that ancient field, and that “Cæsar with a Senate at his heels” is not the fit model for our Republic.
Not only are Constitution and Law disregarded, but the Presidential office itself is treated as little more than a plaything and a perquisite,--when not the former, then the latter.
As the elect of the people he owes not only the example of willing obedience, but also of fidelity and industry in the discharge of his exalted office, with an absolute abnegation of all self-seeking.
As President he is foremost servant of the Law, bound to obey its slightest mandate.
A President must turn into a King before it can be said of him that he can do no wrong.
No honor for victory in war can justify disobedience to the Constitution and to Law; nor can it afford the least apology for any personal immunity, privilege, or license in the Presidential office.
Let the party split,” says the President, “I will not renounce my chance of a second term.” The extent of this personal pressure and the subordination of the party to the will of an individual compel us to consider his pretensions.
Believe me, Sir, I should gladly leave this matter to the judgment already recorded, if it were not put in issue again by the extraordinary efforts, radiating on every line of office, to press its author for a second term as President; and…
Too plainly it was becoming the instrument of one man and his personal will,--no matter how much he set at defiance the Constitution and International Law, or how much he insulted the colored people.
Evidently the party was in process of change from that generous association dedicated to Human Rights and to the guardianship of the African race.
It is not difficult to indicate when this disastrous change, exalting the will of one man above all else, became not merely manifest, but painfully conspicuous.
Once country was the object, and not a man; once principle was inscribed on the victorious banners, and not a name only.
For such a party there was no death, but higher life and nobler aims; and this was the party to which I gave my vows.
Such, on the eve of the Presidential election, was my description of the Republican Party and my aspiration for its future.
I stood by its cradle; let me not follow its hearse.
Therefore do I ask, with no common feeling, that the peril which menaces it may pass away.
Not without regret can I see it suffer; not without a pang can I see it changed from its original character, for such a change is death.
In the consciousness of right I was willing to be alone.
In this cause I never asked who were my associates or how many they would number.
Politicians like Charles Sumner
