and the
national Union. In his last message he defended or excused the
lawless efforts made by residents of Missouri to establish slavery
in Kansas. He made no effort to prevent the invasion of Kansas or
the crimes committed against its citizens. He appointed many
governors for this territory, and in every instance where they
sought to protect the rights of its people, he either removed them
or denied them his support. This was the case with Reeder and
Shannon. Even Governor Geary, whom he praised in his message, and
whom Buchanan had lauded during the canvass, was abandoned by both,
and compelled to resign because he sought to protect all citizens
alike.
President Pierce was properly, according to usage, a candidate for
re-election when the convention met to nominate his successor, but
he was defeated by Buchanan. Mr. Douglas, the chief instrument in
the passage of the Nebraska bill, met a like fate. Buchanan was
saved only by the popular cry of "Buchanan, Breckenridge and Free
Kansas," and the confident belief, founded upon his declaration,
that his election would secure freedom to Kansas.
The political excitement existing during the whole of President
Pierce's term entered into social life in Washington. The President
was not brought into contact with those who differed with him in
opinion. His family afflictions were, no doubt, the partial cause
of this. The sincere friendship that often exists between political
adversaries in public life were not possible during this period.
Social lines were drawn on sectional lines, and in the north party
lines became hostile lines. Such causes, no doubt, led to unjust
criticism of the President, and, in turn, caused him to regard his
political adversaries as enemies to their country and disturbers
of the public peace. I scarcely remember seeing him during this
Congress, and was strongly prejudiced against him. A more careful
study of the motives and conduct of public men during this period
has changed my opinion of many of them, and, especially, of President
Pierce. That he was a genial, social and agreeable companion is
affirmed by all who were familiar with him. That his opinions were
honestly entertained, and firmly supported, is shown by his adherence
to them without change or shadow of turning. In this respect he
compares favorable with many leading men of his party, who stifled
their opinions to meet the currents of the day. He had been a
general of
|