Free Soilers Autolycus and Honestus talk politics

Hon. Joshua Reed Giddings of Ohio
Library of Congress

This imaginary dialogue between Massachusetts Free Soilers is from the Boston Morning Journal, Monday, October 27, 1851. Volume 19, no 5741; page 1, columns 2-3. Honestus speaks for the high aims, Autolycus for the grimy practice of coalition politics. Charles Sumner is not named directly, but the speakers would have regarded his election to the U. S. Senate as a recent Free Soil "success." Named party leaders include Joshua R. Giddings, Salmon P. Chase, and Horace Mann.

Founded as a Whig newspaper, the Boston Journal was still edited by "Captain Sleeper," the retired seaman and nautical writer John Sherburne Sleeper aka "Hawser Martingale." Sleeper promptly reviewed Moby-Dick in the Boston Journal on November 18, 1851.

A DIALOGUE.

SCENE—State street. Enter HONESTUS and AUTOLYCUS, two Free Soilers, meeting.

Autolycus. Ah, my dear friend Honestus, I am heartily glad to see you. It seems an age since we met, and indulged in a pleasant political chat. Allow me to congratulate you on the success of our party schemes—on the organization of the coalition after some little trouble, and the glorious prospects ahead.

Honestus. (gravely.) What prospects do you allude to? 

Autolycus. Why, of course to the overthrow of the Whig party, and the triumph of the Free Soilers and the Democrats.

Honestus. I much fear that this triumph is not in store for us. If I mistake not, these coalitions—these bargains between two parties of opposite political principles, for the spoils of office—do not suit the genius of Massachusetts folks. Although it has once been successful, it does not follow that the same cunningly devised scheme can be repeated, without meeting the fate which its profligacy deserves.

 Autolycus. Hey day, what have we here? I thought you were a Free Soiler—one of us—and of course an advocate for the coalition and the other measures recommended by the leaders of the party.

Honestus.  You know I always have been—and I now assure you that I am a Free Soiler, in the proper sense of that term. But it does not follow that I can therefore lend my sanction and aid to measures, which, as an honest man, I must condemn. The coalition which is so eagerly embraced, I am sorry to say, by so many advocates of Free Soil—who ask no questions of their Democratic associates, but are ready to swallow, without even a wry face, not only Democratic measures, but the most crooked, indigestible pro-slavery Democrats in the State—is not calculated to maintain the respectability of our party. Indeed, the corruption is too palpable. The veil is so flimsy that any man may see through it, and know that place has more to do with the arrangement than principle. Indeed, many honest Democrats are disgusted with it, and have cut loose from the whole. 

Autolycus. Well, what of it? If you can point out any other way by which we can defeat the Whigs, and get offices for ourselves and friends, I should be glad to know it. 

Honestus. Why should we look for offices—we, who profess to act on the broad and immutable basis of philanthropy—who claim to be stimulated by a deep and inherent love of the whole human race? The approval of our own consciences, is surely reward enough for actions growing out of such pure and hallowed feelings.

Autolycus. Pooh, my friend, you are behind the age. Such notions are antiquated, puritanical and obsolete. Who ever heard of a political party organized for any other object, than to control the government, and get a share—a lion's share—of the lucrative and honorable places? The maxim that "every thing is fair in politics," is sanctioned by custom through many ages, and we ought not to be the first to dispute it. Can you, or any reasonable man, think that our eloquent stump orators, who are now thridding the State and inveighing so vehemently against the Whigs, would indulge in such a terrible expenditure of breath and words, to say nothing of the wear and tear of that conscience, which your prate about so much, were it not with the blessed expectation of securing offices of emolument, provided the Coalition is triumphant and the Democrats stick to the bargain?

Honestus. These principles may suit your notions of propriety but they do not correspond with mine. I embarked on this political crusade, and joined the Free Soil standard, because I saw it raised in behalf of HUMANITY and FREEDOM—little thinking that I should be auxiliary to the contemptible work of glorifying disappointed politicians, and foisting noisy demagogues into office. To be plain, I am dissatisfied with the conduct of the Free Soil leaders, and the undignified and unscrupulous tone of the Free Soil presses in the State. I despise this coalition—this fraternizing with Locofocos, whose principles I always detested, and among whom, it is clear as any proposition in Euclid, that the whole Free Soil party will be merged in less than six months? 

Autolycus. It may be so. Things more unlikely have taken place before now. But surely, my friend, you are an advocate of the great "reforms" which were introduced into the Legislature the last session, and which are to be perfected next year, if we—that is, the coalition—get the upper hand in the Legislature!

Honestus. What is there in the character of these reforms which can induce me, as an honest man looking to the good of his fellow-men, to give them my support? you know as well as myself, that all this agitation about "reform" is a mere clap-trap, to gull the people and make capital. But the signs of the times show that the multitude will no longer submit to be gulled.

 Autolycus. But my dear sir, these are Democratic measures—popular of course, and as such must have the support of our party. They are a part of the bargain!

Honestus.  True, but that does not increase their value in my estimation—nor does it look well to see the Democratic party, our dear brethren if I must call them so, who have always opposed manufacturing corporations in the abstract, as an item in their political creed, bringing forward and passing with our assistance, a law to multiply them by thousands, and another which virtually offers a premium for the multiplication of banks, to which a few years ago, they professed their abhorrence! And as for this lien law, which was thought would be popular, and was enacted for the sole purpose of catching the votes of mechanics, it is found in practice to be detrimental to their interests. In Boston alone, since it has gone into operation, it has kept thousands of dollars out of their pockets, to my certain knowledge. The secret ballot law, for which the coalition have claimed much credit, and which is clogged with an immense quantity of useless and expensive machinery, is another of these boasted reform measures, which the people never asked for, and which is about as useful in Massachusetts where every man can boldly look his employer in the face, and vote as his own sense of duty dictates—as a fifth wheel to a coach. And then there is all this gabble about amending the Constitution, and putting the State to the expense of several hundred thousand dollars, for remedying evils which have not even an imaginary existence.— This is all mere humbug, a most shallow device got up for political effect, and you know it. 

Autolycus. Well, well, my dear sir, we must have some ground to stand upon—some measures to talk about—and these will answer as well as anything else. It will not do to be too nice. Honesty and consistency are good enough things in their way, but will not do for us in the present stage of our political existence; and if we, that is, the leaders of the Free Soil party, stuck as closely to conscience and high moral principle as we profess, what reward could we expect for the great sacrifices we have made? But soaring above these things we go for the "Higher Law." Surely you cannot object to that.

Honestus. The higher law! So you would let the promptings of a fanatical spirit override the Constitution of the country, and convert it virtually into a tabula rasa, on which any man may scribble what he pleases. Those minds which can be influenced by such a consideration must be weak indeed. For my own part whatever laws are enacted by the government of the people, under which I live and enjoy many blessings, I conceive myself bound to obey. Such is the duty I owe to myself, my country and my God! 

 Autolycus. My friend, you must not be too scrupulous. Having abandoned conscience, we must hold on to this "Higher Law." Why, you would knock away at a blow our firmest, and almost our only support. You must not be too severe on our system of policy, which is a little loose and profligate, perhaps; but recollect that a desperate cause requires desperate measures. It is true our original platform has slid from under us, but we have still a great and noble object in view, the destruction of the Whig party in the Commonwealth. 

Honestus. To build up Locofocoism on its ruins!

Autolycus. That of course will be the result. Indeed, some of our most zealous and influential leaders, as Giddings, Chase, and Mann, have already espoused the cause of Democracy, and battle manfully against the Whig principles which they once were so eager to defend. 

Honestus. Such conduct is not entitled to respect, but must be censured by every unprejudiced politician. Certain I am that I shall not emulate their example. To be frank with you, I cannot cherish these feelings of bitter hostility against the Whigs, having been for many years in their ranks, and being fully aware that the proud eminence which Massachusetts now occupies among the States, is mainly owing to the wise measures adopted through a succession of years by Whig administrations. 

Autolycus. I was a Whig once as well as yourself. Who was more zealous in behalf of Whig principles and Whig men, or who warred more fiercely against the Locos? But my merit was not appreciated—which is now no longer the case—and my services were unrewarded; and now no scruples of conscience will prevent my becoming a Democrat, perhaps a National Democrat, provided the Free Soil party becomes defunct. But believe me, we shall fight hard for victory. If there be any virtue in "stump speaking," the victory will be ours!

Honestus. You may rest assured that the people will not be deceived a second time. You will find that these outpourings of "slang-whanging," both on the stump and in the columns of our papers, will be thrown away. The people require something more than bold assertions and bitter invectives. I know there are many men who from pure motives have joined and hitherto acted with the Free Soil party, but who have no sympathies with a Locofoco or an Abolitionist. At any rate I can speak for myself—and nothing would induce me to vote for such men as Ithamar W. Beard, or Samuel E. Sewall.  [Exit Honestus. 

Autolycus, (alone.) On election day we shall find that man among the missing, or enrolled in the Whig ranks. This is the curse of honesty! Well said the poet— 

"Thus conscience does make cowards of us all!"

 But he may not be so very honest notwithstanding. Perhaps he adopts the principle that "rats will desert a sinking ship." And, I must confess, matters and things look squally enough. There is nothing left for me, however, but to stick to the Coalition as long as it will hold together, and if we are defeated, the arms of the Locofocos are open to receive me. They will gladly enfold me in their warm embrace. 

Coincidentally, the Boston Journal characterized Abolitionist Free Soilers as "real sons of Ishmael," shortly after Moby-Dick was first published in America. As reprinted in another Whig newspaper, the weekly National Aegis (Worcester, MA) on November 19, 1851:

THE GROWTH, PROSPECTS AND END OF THE FREE SOIL PARTY. 

This party — if such a faction is entitled to the name — was organized to oppose the election of General Taylor in 1848. That it has had in its ranks a great deal of talent and ability—a great deal of cunning and hypocrisy—the elements of success in a good cause, and the power to sustain a bad one, no one will deny.

It commenced trade — for it has been a trading concern from the beginning — with a capital of about 12,000 Abolitionists — real sons of Ishmael, whose hands had been against every man's for years, and who had been so long in a hopeless minority, and who were so perfectly accustomed to contending against overwhelming odds, that they formed the best nucleus for a new party which could possibly have been found....

National Aegis - November 19, 1851
via Genealogy Bank