"Perish with him the folly But whatever diversities in judgment, or errors of estimate there may have been, Mr. Phillips did not err when, standing by the open grave of John Brown, he said that his words were stronger than his arms, and that, while the echoes of his rifles had died away among the hills of Virginia, his words were guarded by a million hearts. When, a few months later, the uprising nation sent forth its loyal sons to battle, his brave, humane, and generous utterances were kept in fresh remembrance. The "John Browh Song," extemporized in Boston harbor, and sung by the "Massachusetts Twelfth," marching up State Street, down Broadway, and in its encampment in Pleasant Valley on the banks of the Potomac, struck responsive chords that vibrated through the land. Regiment after regiment, army after army, caught up the air, and in the camp, on the march, and on the battle-field, brave men associated the body "mouldering in the ground" and the soul still "marching on" of the heroic old man with the sacred idea for which he died and for which they were fighting. CHAPTER XLVI. HUNTING FOR TREASON. Mason's resolution. -Trumbull's amendment. Debate thereon. - Trumbull, Mason, Hale, Hunter, Davis, Wilson, and Clark. — Charges against the Republican party by Mason and Iverson. Colloquy between Wilson and Iverson. Strong speech of Mr. Wade. Report, in part, of committee. - Hyatt at the bar of the Senate. — Imprisonment. — Release. - Case of Sanborn. — His memorial. - Final report. - Douglas's resolution. His attack on the Republican party. - Fessenden's reply. — Damaging admissions. — Hunter's oration. - Failure of Douglas's resolution. THREE days after the execution of John Brown the XXXVIth Congress assembled. A resolution was immediately offered by Mr. Mason for the appointment of a committee of investigation concerning the affair at Harper's Ferry. Upon taking up the resolution Mr. Trumbull offered an amendment instructing the same committee to inquire into "the facts attending the invasion, seizure, and robbery, in December, 1855, of the arsenal of the United States at Liberty, Missouri, by a mob of armed men." Mr. Mason expressed the conviction that the only purpose of the amendment was to embarrass his resolution. Mr. Hale replied in his best vein. Though his words bore the semblance of raillery and wit, they were trenchant and severely truthful. Alluding to the charges which had been made and reiterated against Republicans, he said he had no confession to make, no words to unsay. He favored the inquiry, and expressed the wish that it might be most thorough and searching. Mr. Hunter expressed surprise that any one should be disposed to embarrass the resolution by an amendment "not germane," or by partisan appeals. Jefferson Davis expressed the opinion that there was no necessary resemblance between the scenes enacted at Harper's Ferry and those in Missouri. Mr. Wilson avowed his purpose to vote for both the resolu tion and the amendment, and for the resolution with or without the amendment. He spoke of John Brown's acts, words, and bearing as having excited the deepest sympathy, and as having extorted the admiration of many, though they regretted the course he had pursued at Harper's Ferry. "Men believed," he said, "that he was sincere, that he had violated the laws, but that he had followed out his deepest and sincerest convictions, and was willing to take the consequences of his acts." Mr. Clark said that there was "an eminent fitness and appropriateness in sending these two resolutions, which are kindred though different, to the same committee." He thought that such a reference would "quiet much of the ill-feeling and jealousy which had grown up here." Mr. Mason, with an evident purpose to fasten responsibility on the Republican party, said: "The vagabond Brown, a ruffian, a thief, and a robber, nothing more, had no resources of his own, but he brought resources there for the purposes of this insurrection, proportioned to it, and costing a large sum of money. We want to know where this money was supplied. We want to know the incentives that led him to that expedition. We want to get at the thousand rills which go to make up public sentiment, and which resulted in adequate treasure to send a ruffian with an armed band on such an errand." With still greater violence of language, Mr. Iverson made the same imputation, declaring that the whole design was "political." "It cannot be disguised," he said, "that the Northern heart sympathizes with Brown and his fate, because he died in the cause of what they call liberty. . . . . The truth is that it is the intention of the Republican party to break down the institution of slavery by fair means or foul means, and if they cannot accomplish it in one way, they intend to accomplish it in another. If they cannot ac complish it by appealing to the slaveholders themselves, they mean to accomplish it by appealing to the slaves." Referring to these assaults on the Republicans, and to the intense excitement then pervading the country because of the attack of John Brown and his few followers at Harper's Ferry, and also to the systematic and long-continued assaults on Northern men at the South, Mr. Wilson called attention to the outrage, just then perpetrated on Mr. Fisk of Massachusetts, who was doing business in Savannah, and who had been tarred and feathered for the alleged offences "that he generally expressed abolition sentiments, and that on last Sabbath evening he read to negroes in his store." To this statement Mr. Iverson replied: "For such conduct as that, teaching abolition sentiments among slaves, he deserved, not only to be tarred and feathered, but deserved the fate which John Brown had." In allusion to the expulsion of Professor Hedrick from a North Carolina college, mentioned by Mr. Wilson, for expressing sentiments favorable to the election of Fremont, Mr. Brown of Mississippi frankly said: "I have not hesitation in saying that I would not tolerate any man who would go to my State and avow his preference for the election of Mr. Seward upon the programme laid down in his Rochester speech." And the twofold fact is to be noted that the Slave Power not only demanded this complete suppression of all freedom of speech and action, but that it was thus bold and outspoken in its insolent demand. Disowning all sympathy with the attack on Harper's Ferry, Mr. Wade expressed profound admiration for the man who planned it, and the most unmitigated disgust for those who had so much sympathy for Virginia, one of the oldest and largest States, because she had been assaulted by such an insignificant force, but who had shown none for Kansas four years before, with "its few and feeble colonies scattered in the wilderness," outraged by border-ruffians, backed by the countenance and aid of "a powerful party," in full possession of the government. "You may treat old John Brown," he said, "as a common malefactor, but he will not go down to posterity in that light at all." On Mr. Trumbull's amendment the vote stood twenty-two yeas and thirty-two nays. Mason's resolution was unanimously adopted, the committee was ordered, and Mason, Davis, Collamer, Fitch, and Doolittle were appointed. On the 15th of February Mr. Mason asked leave to report, in part. He stated that the committee had summoned three witnesses, Frank B. Sanborn, James Redpath, and John Brown, Jr., and that they had failed to appear. He accordingly asked that they should be compelled to attend, and the authority was granted. A few days afterward he reported similar facts concerning Thaddeus Hyatt, asked authority to compel his attendance, and it was granted. The debate on this proposition was quite spirited, many making the point that the Senate had no authority thus to interfere with the personal rights of the citizens of States. The results of the attempts to coerce the attendance of these witnesses, which had been unsuccessful except in the case of Hyatt, were succinctly stated in the final report of the committee, made on the 15th of June. From this report it appeared that Hyatt only was arrested; that John Brown, Jr., at first evaded the process of the Senate, and afterward, with a number of other persons, armed himself to prevent his arrest. Sanborn was arrested in the night, and ironed, but he was released from custody by the judges of the supreme court of Massachusetts on habeas corpus. Redpath, by leaving his State, or otherwise concealing himself, successfully evaded the process of the Senate. Of Hyatt the committee said "that on his appearance before the Senate, still refusing obedience to the summons of the committee, he was, by order of the Senate, committed to the jail of the District of Columbia." On Mr. Hyatt's presenting himself at the bar of the Senate he put in, for answer to its summons, a long and elaborate paper, which occupied the clerk nearly three hours in the reading, and which embodied a labored argument of Samuel E. Sewall and John A. Andrew, afterward governor of Massachusetts, giving reasons why he should not be compelled to appear and testify in the case at issue. It occasioned an earnest debate, but the result was his imprisonment. He remained in the jail from the 12th of March till the 13th of June. The statement in the report of the committee that Mr. Sanborn was released from custody on habeas corpus Mr. Mason denied, declaring that he had been “rescued by a mob." The facts were that the officials found themselves |