Carl Schurz

LIBERTY AND EQUAL RIGHTS

’

’

’

’

’

Carl Schurz (l829-1906), who had participated as a young man in the unsuccessful German revolution of 1848, came to the United States in l852, a refugee. He became active in American politics, affiliated with the new Republican party and its antislavery positions, and had a long career as a newspaper editor and public figure. (He was ambassador to Spain, a general in the union army, senator, and Secretary of the Interior.) In 1859, during a Massachusetts senatorial campaign, he made the speech which follows. Two issues, one national and one local, were prominent in this particular election―the national debate over slavery and a local proposal to delay giving the vote to newly naturalized citizens. Schurz forcibly spoke for certain views---hat slavery's evil effects were not limited to the slave alone, but to the master and to the rest of the nation as well; that when governments seek to suppress freedom in one restricted area they must inevitably broaden their control into a wider system of oppression; and that political rights cannot be the reserve of a particular group or class.

’

A few days ago I stood on the cupola of your Statehouse and overlooked for the first time this venerable city [Boston] and the country surrounding it. Then the streets and hills and waters around me began to teem with the life of historical recollections, recollections dear to all mankind, and a feeling of pride arose in my heart, and I said to myself, I, too, am an American citizen. There was Bunker Hill; there Charlestown, Lexington, and Dorchester Heights not far off; there the harbor into which the British tea was sunk; there the place where the old liberty tree stood, there John Hancock's house, there Benjamin Franklin's birthplace... .And here, with all these glorious memories crowding upon my heed, I will offer mine....

’

        .. .the first time that I heard of America.. .my childish imagination took possession of a land covered partly with majestic trees, partly with flowery prairies, immeasurable to the eye, and intersected with large rivers and broad lakes--a land where everybody could do what he thought best, and where nobody need he poor because everybody was free.

’

And later, when I was old enough to read, and descriptions of this country and books on American history fell into my hands, the offspring of my imagination acquired the colors of reality and I began to exercise my brain with the thought of what man might be and become when left perfectly free to himself. And still later, when ripening into manhood, I looked up from my school books into the stir and bustle of the world, and the trumpet tones of struggling humanity struck my ear and thrilled my heart, and I saw my nation shake her chains in order to burst them, and I heard a gigantic, universal shout for liberty rising up to the skies; and, at last, after having struggled manfully and drenched the earth of fatherland with the blood of thousands of noble beings, I saw that nation crushed down again, not only by overwhelming armies but by the deadweight of customs and institutions and notions and prejudices which past centuries had heaped upon them, and which a moment of enthusiasm, however sublime, could not destroy; then l consoled an almost despondent heart with the idea of a youthful people and of original institutions clearing the way for an untrammeled development of the ideal nature of man. Then I turned my eyes instinctively across the Atlantic Ocean; and America and Americanism, as I fancied them, appeared to me as the last depositories of the hopes of all true friends of humanity.

’

.. .Was it but a wild delusion when we thought that man has the faculty to be free and to govern himself? Have we been fighting, were we ready to die for a mere phantom, for a mere product of a morbid imagination? This question downtrodden humanity cries out into the world, and from this country it expects an answer.

’

As its advocate I speak to you. I will speak of Americanism as the great representative of the reformatory age, as the great champion of the dignity of human nature, as the great repository of the last hopes of suffering mankind. I will speak of the ideal mission of this country and of this people....

’

Sir, I wish the words of the Declaration of Independence, "that all men are created free and equal, and are endowed with certain inalienable rights," were inscribed upon every gatepost within the limits of this republic. From this principle the revolutionary fathers derived their claim to independence; upon this they founded the institutions of this country; and the whole structure was to be the living incarnation of this idea. This principle contains the program of our political existence. It is the most progressive and at the same time the most conservative one; the most progressive, for it takes even the lowliest members of the human family out of their degradation and inspires them with the elevating consciousness of equal human dignity, the most conservative, for it makes a common cause of individual rights... .And when the rights of one cannot be infringed without finding a ready defense in all others who defend their own rights in defending his, then and only then are the rights of all safe against the usurpations of governmental authority.

’

Shall I point out to you the consequences of a deviation from this principle? Look at the slave states. There is a class of men who are deprived of their natural rights. But this is not the only deplorable feature of that peculiar organization of society. Equally deplorable is it that there is another class of men who keep the former in subjection. That there are slaves is bad, but almost worse is it that there are masters. Are not the masters freemen? No, sir! Where is their liberty of the press? Where is their liberty of speech? Where is the man among them who dares to advocate openly principles not in strict accordance with the ruling system? They speak of a republican form of government, they speak of democracy; but the despotic spirit of slavery and mastership combined pervades their whole political life like a liquid poison. They do not dare to be free lest the spirit of liberty become contagious. The system of slavery has enslaved them all, master as well as slave. What is the cause of all this? It is that you cannot deny one class of society the full measure of their natural rights without imposing restraints upon your own liberty. If you want to be free, there is but one way--it is to guarantee an equally full measure of liberty to all your neighbors. There is no other....

’

It is an old dodge of the advocates of despotism throughout the world that the people who are not experienced in self-government are not fit for the exercise of self-government and must first be educated under the rule of a superior authority. But at the same time the advocates of despotism will never offer them an opportunity to acquire experience in self-government lest they suddenly become fit for its independent exercise. To this treacherous sophistry the fathers of this republic opposed the noble doctrine that liberty is the best school for liberty, and that self-government cannot be learned but by practising it. This, sir, is a truly American idea; this is true Americanism; and to this I pay the tribute of my devotion....

’

As to religious fanaticism, it will prosper under oppression; it will feed on persecution; it will grow strong by proscription, but it is powerless against genuine democracy. It may indulge in short-lived freaks of passion or in wily intrigues, but it will die of itself, for its lungs are not adapted to breathe the atmosphere of liberty. It is like the shark of the sea f drag him into the air and the monster will perhaps struggle fearfully and frighten timid people with the powerful blows of his tail and the terrible array of his teeth; but leave him quietly to die and he will die. But engage with him in a hand--to-hand struggle even then, and the last of his convulsions may fatally punish your rash attempt. Against fanaticism, genuine democracy wields an irresistible weapon--it is toleration. Toleration will not strike down the fanatic but it will quietly and gently disarm him. But fight fanaticism with fanaticism and you will restore it to its own congenial element....

’

I have already called your attention to the despotic tendency of the slaveholding system. I need not enlarge upon it; I need not describe how the existence of slavery in the South affected and demoralized even the political life of the free states; how they attempted to press us, you and me, into the posse of the slave catcher by that abominable act which, worse than the Alien and Sedition Laws, still disgraces our statute book; how the ruling party, which has devoted itself to the service of that despotic interest, shrinks from no violation of good faith, from no adulteration of the constitutional compact, from no encroachment upon natural right, from no treacherous abandonment of fundamental principles. And I do not hesitate to prophesy that, if the theories engendered by the institution of slavery be suffered to outgrow the equalizing tendency of true democracy, the American Republic will, at no distant day, crumble down under the burden of the laws and measures which the ruling interest will demand for its protection, and its name will be added to the sad catalogue of the broken hopes of humanity.

’

But the mischief does not come from that side alone; it is in things of small beginnings, but fearful in their growth. One of these is the propensity of men to lose sight of fundamental principles when passing abuses are to be corrected.

’

Is it not wonderful how nations who have won their liberty by the severest struggles become so easily impatient of the small inconveniences and passing difficulties which are almost inseparably connected with the practical working of general self-government? How they so easily forget that rights may be abused and yet remain inalienable rights? Europe has witnessed many an attempt for the establishment of democratic institutions; some of them were at first successful and the people were free, but the abuses and inconveniences connected with liberty became at once apparent. Then the ruling classes of society, in order to get rid of the abuses, restricted liberty; they did, indeed, get rid of the abuses but they got rid of liberty at the same time. You heard liberal governments there speak of protecting and regulating the liberty of the press, and in order to prevent that liberty from being abused they adopted measures, apparently harmless at first, which ultimately resulted in an absolute censorship. Would it be much better if we, recognizing the right of man to the exercise of self-government, should, in order to protect the purity of the ballot box, restrict the right of suffrage?....

’

Another danger for the safety of our institutions, and perhaps the most formidable one, arises from the general propensity of political parties and public men to act on a policy 9f mere expediency and to sacrifice principle to local and temporary success. And here, sir, let me address a solemn appeal to the consciences of those with whom I am proud to struggle side by side against human thralldom.

’

You hate kingcraft, and you would sacrifice your fortunes and your lives in order to prevent its establishment on the soil of this republic. But let me tell you that the rule of political parties which sacrifice principle to expediency is no less dangerous, no less disastrous, no less aggressive, of no less despotic a nature than the rule of monarchs. Do not indulge in the delusion that in order to make a government fair and liberal the only thing necessary is to make it elective. When a political party in power, however liberal their principles may be, have once adopted the policy of knocking down their opponents instead of voting them down, there is an end of justice and equal rights....

’

Remember the shout of indignation that went all over the Northern states when we heard that the border ruffians of Kansas had crowded the free--state men away from the polls and had not allowed them to vote. That indignation was just, not only because the men thus terrorized were free--state men and friends of liberty but because they were deprived of their right of suffrage and because the government of that territory was placed on the basis of force instead of equal rights. Sir, if ever the party of liberty should use their local predominance for the purpose of disarming their opponents instead of convincing them, they will but follow the example set by the ruffians of Kansas, although legislative enactments may be a genteeler weapon than the revolver and Bowie knife. They may perhaps achieve some petty local success, they may gain some small, temporary advantage, but they will help to introduce a system of action into our politics which will gradually undermine the very foundations upon which our republican edifice rests.

’

Of all the dangers and difficulties that beset us, there is none more horrible than the hideous monster whose name is "Proscription for opinion's sake." I am an antislavery man, and I have a right to my opinion in South Carolina just as well as in Massachusetts. My neighbor is a pro--slavery man; I may be sorry for it, but I solemnly acknowledge his right to his opinion in Massachusetts as well as in South Carolina. You tell me that for my opinion they would mob me in South Carolina? Sir, there is the difference between South Carolina and Massachusetts. There is the difference between an antislavery man, who is a freeman, and a slaveholder, who is himself a slave.

’

Our present issues will pass away. The slavery question will be settled, liberty will be triumphant, and other matters of difference will divide the political parties of this country. What if we, in our struggle against slavery, had removed the solid basis of equal rights on which such new matters of difference may be peaceably settled?...

’

Force instead of right, privilege instead of equality, expediency instead of principle being once the leading motives of your policy, you will have no power to stem the current. There will be new abuses to be corrected, new inconveniences to be remedied, new supposed dangers to be obviated, new equally exacting ends to be subserved; and your encroachments upon the natural rights of your opponents now will be used as welcome precedents for the mutual oppression of parties then. Having once knowingly disregarded the doctrine of equal rights, the ruling parties will soon accustom themselves to consult only their interests where fundamental principles are at stake. Those who lead us into this channel will be like the sorcerer who knew the art of making a giant snake. And when he had made it, he forgot the charmword that would destroy it again. And the giant snake threw its horrid coils around him, and the unfortunate man was choked by the monster of his own creation....

’

Under this [American] banner all the languages of civilized mankind are spoken, every creed is protected, every right is sacred. There stands every element of Western society, with enthusiasm for a great cause, with confidence in each other, with honor to themselves. This is the banner floating over the glorious valley which stretches from the western slope of the Alleghenies to the Rocky Mountains....The inscription on that banner is not "Opposition to the Democratic Party for the sake of placing a new set of men into office"; for this battle cry of speculators our hearts have no response. Nor is it "restriction of slavery and restriction of the right of suffrage," for this―believe my words, I entreat you--this would be the signal of deserved, inevitable, and disgraceful defeat. But the inscription is "Liberty and equal rights, common to all as the air of heaven―liberty and equal rights, one and inseparable !"

’

With this banner we stand before the world. In this sign―in this sign alone, and no other―there is victory. And thus, sir, we mean to realize the great cosmopolitan idea upon which the existence of the American nation rests. Thus we mean to fulfill the great mission of true Americanism, thus we mean to answer the anxious question of downtrodden humanity. "Has man the faculty to be free and to govern himself?" The answer is a triumphant "Aye," thundering into the ears of the despots of the Old World that "a man is a man for all that", proclaiming to the oppressed that they are held in subjection on false pretenses; cheering the hearts of the despondent friends of man with consolation and renewed confidence.

’

This is true Americanism, clasping mankind to its great heart. Under its banner we march; let the world follow.