Brooks walked calmly out of the chamber
A bit of Senate history, from the Senate Historical Office, which I didn’t know there was such a thing.
On May 22, 1856, the “world’s greatest deliberative body” became a combat zone. In one of the most dramatic and deeply ominous moments in the Senate’s entire history, a member of the House of Representatives entered the Senate Chamber and savagely beat a senator into unconsciousness.
The inspiration for this clash came three days earlier when Senator Charles Sumner, a Massachusetts antislavery Republican, addressed the Senate on the explosive issue of whether Kansas should be admitted to the Union as a slave state or a free state. In his “Crime Against Kansas” speech, Sumner identified two Democratic senators as the principal culprits in this crime—Stephen Douglas of Illinois and Andrew Butler of South Carolina. He characterized Douglas to his face as a “noise-some, squat, and nameless animal . . . not a proper model for an American senator.” Andrew Butler, who was not present, received more elaborate treatment. Mocking the South Carolina senator’s stance as a man of chivalry, the Massachusetts senator charged him with taking “a mistress . . . who, though ugly to others, is always lovely to him; though polluted in the sight of the world, is chaste in his sight—I mean,” added Sumner, “the harlot, Slavery.”
Representative Preston Brooks was Butler’s South Carolina kinsman. If he had believed Sumner to be a gentleman, he might have challenged him to a duel. Instead, he chose a light cane of the type used to discipline unruly dogs. Shortly after the Senate had adjourned for the day, Brooks entered the old chamber, where he found Sumner busily attaching his postal frank to copies of his “Crime Against Kansas” speech.
Moving quickly, Brooks slammed his metal-topped cane onto the unsuspecting Sumner’s head. As Brooks struck again and again, Sumner rose and lurched blindly about the chamber, futilely attempting to protect himself. After a very long minute, it ended.
Bleeding profusely, Sumner was carried away. Brooks walked calmly out of the chamber without being detained by the stunned onlookers.
It took Sumner years to recover, and he was never the same again.
Liberals and certain believers have been known to die for their opinions and beliefs. Authoritarians to kill for them.
Moral: if you fight for a belief, best have a means or two of self-defence.
That article seems to me to have an excessively neutral tone. The part about the attack uses verbiage normally employed when describing something heroic (“moving quickly”, “struck again and again”) while the reaction of the victim is described in terms with negative connotations (“futilely attempt to protect himself”). It almost reads as an edit of a piece that was originally pro-south.
Sumner later challenged another person who insulted him to a duel…then backed out when he found out that person knew how to shoot.
What other person? I can’t find it.
Agreed about the neutral tone. Sean Wilentz is much less so in The Rise of American Democracy.
According to Wikipedia Sumner was first hit before he could get to his feet and after that was trapped under his desk which was bolted to the floor. And afterwards, Brooks’ Southern friends praised the courage of their man for taking a cheap shot and then continuing to beat his enemy while he was down. The same way MAGA bullies behave. Whining when they’re called out or suffer consequences for their actions, while otherwise strutting about like world conquerers.
Yep. Also Brooks took a couple of fellow
RepublicanDemocratic* Reps with him to prevent any other Senators from defending Sumner.*Apologies. My brain took an unauthorized detour into January 2021 for a second.
Sorry, I switched names. I meant to say Brooks, the bully, later challenged someone to a duel and then backed out:
(Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preston_Brooks)
This is in the olden days of yore when the Republicans were anti-slavery and the Democrats were the pro-slavers, so Brooks and his two buddies were all Democrats and Sumner was a Republican.
Yeah, and the Democratic Party had a stronghold on southern politics until after the Civil Rights Act. I remember when I was young, Oklahoma pretty much never voted Republican; all those old time Democrats who hadn’t figured out yet that the party was falling out of favor.
Then, of course, the Republicans decided they wanted all those southerners in the GOP, so more voters, so win more elections. The pro-business Republicans have pandered to the religious right and the white supremacists ever since.
Agh my bad! I know that of course, but dumb-brain tripped me up.