Posted on 06/06/2020 6:10:59 AM PDT by Homer_J_Simpson
Kansas is certainly entitled to universal sympathy. She is the child of misfortune, and it is sometimes hard to say whether she suffers most at the hands of her friends or her foes. She has been struggling for a recognized existence now for four or five years. Her people have at last conquered a peace. They have defeated the worst designs of her enemies, -- have succeeded in throwing off the heavy yoke which the slave-holding interest, aided by the Federal Government, struggled long and laboriously to fasten upon them, and have applied, with a Constitution of their own making, for admission to the Federal Union. The House of Representatives, with commendable alacrity, has granted the application; and the appeal now, -- at the very heel of the session, -- awaits the action of the Senate. Every consideration of expediency, as well as of justice, favors the admission. The Democratic majority has much to lose, and nothing of substantial value to gain, by refusing it, -- and it was becoming a matter of some curiosity to know in what direction they could find motives for rejecting so just an application.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
First session: November 21, 2015. Last date to add: Sometime in the future.
Reading: Self-assigned. Recommendations made and welcomed.
Posting history, in reverse order
To add this class to or drop it from your schedule notify Admissions and Records (Attn: Homer_J_Simpson) by reply or freepmail.
Representative Anson Burlingame publicly humiliated Brooks by goading him into challenging Burlingame to a duel, only to set conditions designed to intimidate Brooks into backing down. (As the challenged party, Burlingame, who was a crack shot, had the choice of weapons and dueling ground. He selected rifles on the Canada side of Niagara Falls, where U.S. anti-dueling laws would not apply. Brooks withdrew his challenge, claiming that he did not want to expose himself to the risk of violence by traveling through Northern states to get to Niagara Falls.)[33]
Then, to top it off, Preston Brooks died a horrible death.
Preston Brooks died unexpectedly from a violent bout of croup on January 27, 1857 at age 37, a few weeks before the March 4 start of the new congressional term.[35] He was buried in Edgefield, South Carolina.[36] The official telegram announcing his death stated "He died a horrid death, and suffered intensely. He endeavored to tear his own throat open to get breath."[37] Despite terrible weather, thousands went to the Capitol to attend memorial services.[38] After his body was transported back to Edgefield, another large crowd took part in funeral ceremonies before he was buried.[39]
Loud mouth Massachusetts Puritan trouble maker needed his gob smacked hard enough to shut up his nasty bitch mouth.
Don't want to get your @$$ deservedly beat down? Don't talk sh*t about other people.
Sh*t talking gets @$$ beatings.
I understand, but he was sneaked up on in a surprise attack. Then, Preston Brooks slunk away like a little sissy when Anson Burlingame baited him into a duel. Burlingame was a crack shot, and Brooks couldn't sneak up behind him the way he did Sumner.
Friends of Charles Sumner tried to stop him. They exclaimed out loud that he was going to get himself killed. It wasn't just all slaveowners in general, it was specifically directed at the uncle or cousin or something, (I forget) of Butler.
It was very vulgar and nasty for that era, and it was indeed fighting words, but the man it was directed at was old and feeble and could do nothing about it.
I understand, but he was sneaked up on in a surprise attack.
My recollection is that Sumner was working at his desk, and Butler approached and told him he was going to beat him. It was a surprise attack insofar as Sumner didn't know it was coming until Butler announced it. Butler had a friend stand guard to make sure no one intervened.
Then, Preston Brooks slunk away like a little sissy when Anson Burlingame baited him into a duel. Burlingame was a crack shot, and Brooks couldn't sneak up behind him the way he did Sumner.
A man would have to be a fool to duel with someone who will easily kill him. Alexander Hamilton comes to mind. Butler didn't kill Sumner, but he did mess him up very badly, such that he never recovered from it.
Passion is fine, but making it personal was deadly in that era. Puritan Massachusetts always did have trouble controlling their passion.
So did the Scot-Irish South. Dueling was a pastime in the Old South. The most notorious was Alexander Keith McClung, a notorious duellist.
Brooks died eight months later from a sudden attack of "croup", aged 37.
Sumner tried to return to the Senate in 1857, but could not endure, so toured Europe until 1859, then returned feeling better.
No wonder DiogenesLamp hates Sumner!
But these were generally individual affairs. Massachusetts Puritans couldn't help but stir up trouble with entire populations of their neighbors. They are busybodies that cannot refrain from poking their noses into people's affairs outside of Massachusetts.
I think Brooks went too far with the beating, but I do think Sumner asked for it. Even his own friends tried to stop him, but he just kept letting his mouth write checks his @$$ couldn't cover.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.