The court-room, the school-house, the horse-car, and the ballot-box are all open, never to be closed.
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.
Most sincerely do I congratulate you on these signal triumphs, so little to be expected when I first became acquainted with you.
This will be only by the enactment of a Civil Rights Bill which shall relieve the citizen, whoever he may be, from any exclusion or discrimination on account of his color.
Only then will be established that Equality before the Law to which now, for the first time in our history, all political parties are distinctly pledged.
There must be a constant, watchful, public opinion behind, to see that these are enforced in letter and spirit.
Here there must be no failure in awakening and invigorating this public opinion.
You can do much,--I would almost say you can do everything.
How constantly have I urged, in public speech and in all my intercourse with you, that our colored fellow-citizens must insist upon their rights always, by petition, by speech, and by vote!
Above all, never vote for any man who is not true to you.
The great soul of the world is just,” and the sober second thought of the people of Massachusetts will, I doubt not, sustain you in the position you have taken in favor of Reform and Reconciliation, and therefore of the election of Greeley…
But nothing can I say which is not prompted by a sincere desire to serve my country, and especially to promote that era of good-will, when the assent of all shall be assured to the equal rights of all.
By the operation of our electoral system, and the superadded dictation of National Conventions, the choice is practically limited to President Grant and Horace Greeley; so that no preference for another can be made effective.
Preferring Horace Greeley, I have no hesitation in assigning the reasons which lead me to this conclusion.
Long ago I declared, that, while recognizing party as an essential agency and convenience, I could not allow it to constrain my conscience against what seemed the requirements of public good.
But it is easy to see that a vote for such a candidate on such a reason was “to do evil that good might come,” which is forbidden in politics as in morals.
But it is not easy for me to be neutral,--certainly where wrong-doing is in question; nor is it my habit to shrink from responsibility.
For years I have sought to establish in the National Government the great principles of the Declaration of Independence, avowing always that when this was done nobody should surpass me in generosity towards former Rebels.
Not only by the logic of my life, but by constant speeches, was I bound to welcome those who placed themselves on this glorious platform.
In voting for Horace Greeley you will not sustain nepotism, you will not sustain gift-taking and repayment by official favor, and you will not lend your sanction to the San Domingo machination, with its unconstitutional usurpations, its…
Nepotism is already condemned by history, and most justly; for it is obviously a form of self-seeking, hostile to purity of government, and strangely out of place in a Republic.
Nothing for self, but all for country and mankind, should be the rule of our President.
If the promptings of his inner nature fail, then must he feel the irresistible obligation of his position.
As he does, so will others do; and therefore must his example be such as to elevate the public service.
Nothing in Washington’s career has shone with more constant light than his refusal to confer office on his relations.
Like nepotism, the taking of gifts by a public servant is condemned by history.





