Emerson, Transcendental Prudence, and the Legacy of Senator Charles Sumner Kirt H.Wilson O η January 15,1872, Senator Charles Sumner explained Reconstruction's effect on African Americans and public policy: Ceasing to be a slave the former victim has become not only a man, but a citizen, admitted alike within the pale of humanity and within the pale of citizenship. As a man he is entitled to all the rights of man, and as citizen he becomes a member of our common household with equality as the prevailing law.1 According to Sumner, the nation had undergone a social revolution. Now citizens, African Americans deserved civil rights, and the principle of equality determined public policy. Many did not agree, however. In social practice and ideology, the country continued to view those of color as inferior.2 Congress was divided over the meaning and effect of Reconstruction's constitutional amendments.3 In particular, members of Congress were hesitant to use equality as a standard to guide political judgments.4 In the growing uncertainty of late Reconstruction, Sumner continued the agitation that had marked his tumultuous career. Until his death in 1874, he argued that wise policy was the result of using equality as a criterion for judgment. His sense of prudence, both in theory and in practice, made him one of the most important rhetors of the nineteenth-century. Although he was "one of the most potent and enduring forces in the American government,"5 Sumner has attracted little attention from rhetorical critics.6 The essays that do exist investigate either his aggrandized character or hyper-classic rhetoric, and although they extend our knowledge of his indecorous habits, they do not unpack his significance for the nineteenth-century's political culture. Historians have studied Sumner extensively, but they are somewhat puzzled over his legacy. Kirt H. Wilson is Assistant Professor of Speech Communication at the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis, Minnesota. This essay is derived from a December 1995 dissertation completed at Northwestern University under the direction of Michael Leff. The author wishes to thank Karlyn Kohrs Campbell, Edward Schiappa, the anonymous reviewers, and the editor for their assistance and insight. © Rhetoric & Public Affairs Vol. 2, No. 3,1999, pp. 453-479 ISSN 1094-8392 454 Rhetoric & Public Affairs Although his rhetorical practice was controversial and his arguments unpopular, he enjoyed more than 20 years in the Senate. By 1874 he was the longest serving member ; Harper's called him the "Father of the Senate."7 Ronald Jager labels him an enigma.8 David Donald expresses anxiety over the complexities of Sumner's history. Some even have suggested that his behavior indicates a narcissistic personality disturbance .9 How, then, does one begin to understand this important and controversial figure? What is Sumner's legacy? Rhetorical criticism and the notion of prudence are uniquely positioned to answer these two questions. I posit that Sumner's discourse operates within Ralph Waldo Emerson's theory of prudence. This thesis leads to three additional claims about Sumner's significance. First, his transcendental sensibility challenged the nineteenth century's prudence of accommodation. Second, Sumner's prudence helps to explain the controversy and power that marked his career. Finally, the conflict between his prudence and nineteenth -century norms highlights both the potential and limitations of the Reconstruction era. This essay begins with a discussion of prudence generally and Emersonian prudence in particular. It then provides a historical context by highlighting representative moments in Sumner's political/rhetorical career. Next, it analyzes one of Sumner's most important prudential performances. Finally, it discusses Sumner's legacy given the form and substance of his prudence. Transcendental Prudence Rhetorical scholars have been interested in the relationship between political judgments and rhetoric since the inception of public address studies. Only recently have we begun to perceive judgment itself as a construct of discursive practice. That is, rhetoric does not effect judgment so much as constitute judgment. From this perspective, what is said and how something is said become significant critical concerns , because speech is viewed as "a means of (re)constituting the culture."10 The concept of prudence is important to this project. Building on Eugene Garver and Victoria Kahn, several...