“Sir, I might here refer to the assault made by the Senator from South Carolina on the Senator from Iowa [Mr. HARLAN], in which he taunted that Senator with being a clergyman, and modestly told him, in the face of the country, that ‘he understood Latin as well as that Senator understood English.’
[MR. BUTLER. I never taunted any gentleman with being a clergyman; and the Senator from Iowa will not say so. I said that I had respect for his vocation; but when he attempted to correct my speech, I put him right.]
MR. WILSON. “Whether it was a taunt or not, the Senator disclaims its being so, and I accept the disclaimer; but I apprehend it was not intended as a compliment to the Senator from Iowa, or that it was received as such by that Senator, particularly when taken in connection with the other taunting assumption of the Senator from South Carolina, that he ‘understood Latin as well as that Senator understood English.’
“Thus has Mr. Sumner been by the Senator from South Carolina systematically assailed in this body, from the 28th of July, 1852, up to the present time,--a period of nearly four years. He has applied to my colleague every expression calculated to wound the sensibilities of an honorable man, and to draw down upon him sneers, obloquy, and hatred, in and out of the Senate. In my place here, I now pronounce these continued assaults upon my colleague unparalleled in the history of the Senate.
“I come now to speak for one moment of the late speech of my colleague, which is the alleged cause of the recent assault upon him, and which the Senator from South Carolina has condemned so abundantly. That speech--a thorough and fearless exposition of what Mr. Sumner entitled ‘The Crime against Kansas’--from beginning to end is marked by entire plainness. Things are called by their right names. The usurpation in Kansas is exposed, and also the apologies for it, successively. No words were spared which seemed necessary to the exhibition. In arraigning the _Crime_, it was natural to speak of those who sustained it. Accordingly, the Administration is constantly held up to condemnation. Various Senators who have vindicated this Crime are at once answered and condemned. Among these are the Senator from South Carolina, the Senator from Illinois [Mr. DOUGLAS], the Senator from Virginia [Mr. MASON], and the Senator from Missouri [Mr. GEYER]. The Senator from South Carolina now complains of Mr. Sumner’s speech. Surely, it is difficult to see on what ground that Senator can make any such complaint. The speech was, indeed, severe,--severe as truth,--but in all respects parliamentary. It is true that it handles the Senator from South Carolina freely; but that Senator had spoken repeatedly in the course of the Kansas debate, once at length and elaborately, and at other times more briefly, and foisting himself into the speeches of other Senators, and identifying himself completely with the Crime which my colleague felt it his duty to arraign. It was natural, therefore, that his course in the debate, and his position, should be particularly considered. And in this work Mr. Sumner had no reason to hold back, when he thought of the constant and systematic and ruthless attacks which, utterly without cause, he had received from that Senator. The only objection which the Senator from South Carolina can reasonably make to Mr. Sumner is, that he struck a strong blow.