The Clements Library website includes events, exhibits, subject guides, newsletter issues, library staff, and more.

Home » Public Programs » Online Exhibits » N. S. Townshend and Salmon P. Chase » Salmon P. Chase Letter to N. S. Townshend, January 23, 1849

Salmon P. Chase Letter to N. S. Townshend, January 23, 1849

Salmon P. Chase Letter to Norton Strange Townshend, January 23, 1849. Norton Strange Townshend Family Papers, Box 1, Folder 7.

Cincinnati, Jany 23, 1849

My dear friend,

It is past twelve oclock and I, with all other decent mortals ought to be in bed and asleep; but, knowing that I shall be so much interrupted after daylight that I shall not be able to get a letter written in time for the mail, I have determined to give an hour that belongs to sleep to you.

I sent you a brief note by yesterday’s mail, with a member of the National Era, containing a certain letter from Columbus, which I thought you might like to see. Please show it to Riddle and then hand the paper to our friend Moore.

I referred, also in my note, to your letter to the True Democrat, which I had just glanced over in the Plaindealer. (By the way you ought to hire Gay to abstain from [puffing?] you) Since then I have read it, thoroughly, in the T.D. I like it very much. It is very spirited and pointed, and tells the story in such a way that it cannot fail to be understood & felt. Perhaps one or two expressions might have been advantageously avoided; such as “unmitigated Whigs”-“cunning scheme” & “Free Soil Whigs rendering aid & comfort to the Taylor Whigs”. I incline myself always to moderation in language–as you will see from the letter in the Era. Very possibly I err on that side; but I always feel solicitude that the enemies of our cause and personal unfriends may be compelled to attack acts rather than phrases. But, though I could wish that you employed a phraseology less calculated to provoke the personal resentment towards yourself of the parties implicated, I am right glad that the letter was written. It must do

a deal of good by setting matters in the right point of view before the people of the Northern part of the State. It will bring out the true sentiments of the Free Democracy and we shall know how large a portion that our party shall take Whig ground and manifest its spirit of indiscriminate conservatism. I do not myself believe that the number is large. I am sure that very few indeed of the old Liberty Guard have any such desire, and none of the recruits who have joined our ranks during the late campaign for the old Democracy. I am pretty confident too that the number of those who, having come to us from among the Whigs, cherish such views is much smaller than some believe. It is quite true that some voted for Van Buren because they are not satisfied with Mr. Taylor’s Whigism; not from any desire to curb or hush the Slave Power. They, of course, cannot be expected to remain in a Party like ours, or to sympathize at all with its Democratic tendencies. But the Whigs, who joined the Free Soil movement from love of its principles, as most did, must necessarily, under the influence of the great doctrine of Equal Rights, recognized as the basis of Antislavery action, become less and less attached to the measures of conservatives, and more and more ready to carry their fundamental principle into practical application to all questions of public policy. I think, therefore, that our friends who have expected sympathy and support, in their endeavor, to which only the objects, which, as Free Soil men, they have in view, by cooperation with the Taylor men will be disappointed. I feel very confident that you & Moore and those who may take similar ground will be triumphantly sustained by the People. You will find the very language of the Lorain resolution which you quote, in one of the resolutions of the New Liberty Convention of June.

I understand that Moore has written a letter to the Painesville Telegraph of the same tenor with yours to the True Democrat. I wish you would ask him to send it to me when he receives it. I had a letter from Dr. Bailey yesterday, in which he quotes Mr. Giddings as saying that if the Freesoilers cannot unite on him, he wishes my election to the Senate. I quoted Dr. Bailey’s language in a letter to Hamlin which he may have shown to you. I had been for some time thinking of uniting w[ith] Giddings, stating frankly my real position and views. This letter of Dr. Bailey’s incited this inclination afresh, and I accordingly wrote him a very plain letter, giving him my real views on the subject of the Senatorial Election. I gave him full credit for all that his most partial friends claim–admitted that if we are both out of Congress he ought to be preferred over me but stated that I could not help believing, since he was already in Congress and looking to other aspects of the case that my election this winter would be a greater gain to the Freesoil cause than even his own. I don’t know but it was unwise to write such a letter, and should like to have your opinion of the propriety of the step. I act’d in obedience to an impulse springing from a desire that he should not misconceive me as some of his friends have done. I had a copy of the letter made therefore I will send it to Hamlin that you may see it.

I wish I could judge with more accuracy than I feel myself able to do, as to the prospects of the Senatorial Election. Were I to permit myself to be influenced by the ? here and wishes too of the Freesoilers in [mass?]; of a great majority of the Democrats, & not a few even of the Whigs, I should be pretty sanguine. But I have schooled myself to slender expectations, that I may not be overwhelmed by the ? and run of events. I wish you could tell me candidly what you think of the whole matter.

I suppose you will soon have before you this question of the Hamilton County seats. I have been surprised to find, how little expectation of decision favorable

23rd A.M. ½ past 9

to the claims of Messr. Spencer & Runyon exists here. I have talked with a number of Whigs & fully half of them incline to regard the Clauses dividing Hamilton County as unwarranted by the Constitution, while the other half are, by no means, [illegible word] as to their Constitutionality. The Whigs feel that public sentiment on the subject of the Apportionment law is decidedly against them, and particularly, as to that part of it which divides their county. They would acquiesce, therefore, very willingly in the repeal of the law. They would be glad to get the fruits of its passage by the admission of Spencer & Runyan this winter, but that [is much?] a good deal like the Southern policy and its fruits, putting forth enormous pretensions and getting–and showing their moderation by taking–a great deal more than they have any right to. I think the people generally will not be dissatisfied whether the law be repealed first, and the election then sent back into the Courts, or, (in case the law shall not be repealed in time in the Senate), Pugh and Peirce [sic] be admitted directly as constitutionally and, therefore, legally elected. As to the printing, I hope, if it is not given to the Standard, that any resolution directing a central with Phillips or ?, will be put distinctly on the ground, that advances having been made there, it is expedient that the state should take the work which they have been already paid for doing, though that payment has been made in derogation of the right of each General Assembly & each House to select its own [printer?]. This much at least the House if it means to assert its rights in the premises at all, over to itself.

Truly your friend,

Salmon P. Chase