Slavery -- United States; United States -- Politics and government -- 1861-1865; United States -- Race relations
Toombs is now about to leave the lower for the upper house. He has grown
in all directions in the qualifications and powers marking the good
representative. There is no other man in the house, from either section,
whose ability is superior or whose promise greater. Three days before his
career in the United States senate begins, he made the following appeal,
protesting against hasty and reckless expenditure, which seems to me a
model of matter and extemporaneous expression:
"In this bill the fortification bill is introduced; and provision made
for private wagon ways for Oregon and California. There is in it an
appropriation of $100,000 to pay somebody for the discovery of ether.
You have a provision for a Pacific railroad; and you have job upon job
to plunder the government in the military bill;--and the
representatives of the people are called upon to vote on all these
grave questions under five minutes' speeches. You do gross injustice
to yourselves; you betray great interests of the people when you act
upon such important measures in this manner. Let the house reject the
amendments; let the senate devote its time to maturing bills, and send
them to us to be acted upon deliberately; and then whichever way
congress determines for itself, it will have a right so to do. But to
act upon them in this way, is not only to abdicate our powers, but to
abdicate our duties. Put your hands upon these amendments and strike
them out." March 1, 1853.
Manifestly all that he had learned of the pending bill was from having
heard it read. The instant apprehension and accurate statement, and the
exhaustion of the subject in far shorter time than his small
allowance--these recall what I often heard Stephens say, "No one else has
ever made such perfect and telling impromptus as Toombs."
His famous Hamilcar outburst did not consume all of his five minutes.
Toombs was United States senator from March 4, 1853, until the spring of
1861. His peculiarities must be suggested. Although he was perhaps the
ablest lawyer in the senate, loved the profession with all the ardor of
first love, and had great cases with large fees offered him every day, he
resolutely subordinated law practice to his congressional duties. He did
much practice, but it was all in the vacations of congress. He did not
seek office. There is not to be found, so far as I know, a trace of any
aspiration of his during his congressional career for other than the place
of senator. If on a special committee, he worked energetically; but he
avoided the standing committees. He says:
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account