Assault in the Senate

The actions of Senator Sumner and stick out reall(a)y do me think about how knock-down(a) and hurtful ones words can really be. Sumner should grant made his speech strictly on how he felt about Kansas becoming a free state. Sumner let his personal feelings acquire to involved in what he was move to verbalize. Politics is a hard enough thing to be involved in without purposely trying to make enemies, and that is all he was trying to do. In those days disputes were handled differently indeed they are today, Brooks actions today would leave him with lawsuits, and in more trouble then he would wish to be in. Today his job would overly be lost and would never be able to be regained, no-matter how fluent of a speaker or how big of a war hero he may be. But in the 1800s, especially in the South, that was how arguments were handled. I think Sumner is lucky all he got was a cane to the head, instead of a fume to the chest.

Sumner was ignorant in his choice of words, being a gaffer in the senate he should have known better to labialize a fellow senator, even if it was verbally. I do not condone what Brooks did, but I cannot honestly say if I was in his position, in those measure I wouldnt have done the same. I know if I lived in those times and some verbally slaughtered my home, and my uncle, Sumner wouldnt have ever recovered from his injuries. uniform everything in history there is a good lesson to be learned, words are equally as powerful as actions. If you want to get a full essay, order it on our website: Orderessay

Order your essay at Orderessay and get a 100% original and high-quality custom paper within the required time frame.