initial commit of ebook 31191HEADmain

9 files changed, 7120 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6833f05
--- /dev/null
+++ b/.gitattributes
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+* text=auto
+*.txt text
+*.md text
diff --git a/31191-8.txt b/31191-8.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..9dada13
--- /dev/null
+++ b/31191-8.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,2211 @@
+The Project Gutenberg EBook of A Letter to the Hon. Samuel Eliot,
+Representative in Congress From the City of Boston, In Reply to His Apology For Voting For the Fugitive Slave Bill., by Hancock
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+
+Title: A Letter to the Hon. Samuel Eliot, Representative in Congress From the City of Boston, In Reply to His Apology For Voting For the Fugitive Slave Bill.
+
+Author: Hancock
+
+Release Date: February 5, 2010 [EBook #31191]
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1
+
+*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK LETTER TO HON. SAMUEL ELIOT ***
+
+
+
+
+Produced by Meredith Bach, Odessa Paige Turner and the
+Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net
+(This book was produced from scanned images of public
+domain material from the Google Print project.)
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+  A
+  LETTER
+  TO
+
+THE HON. SAMUEL A. ELIOT,
+
+REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE CITY OF BOSTON,
+
+in reply to his
+
+  APOLOGY FOR VOTING FOR THE FUGITIVE
+  SLAVE BILL.
+
+BY HANCOCK
+
+
+  BOSTON:
+  WM. CROSBY & H. P. NICHOLS,
+  111 WASHINGTON STREET.
+  1851.
+
+
+
+
+CAMBRIDGE:
+
+METCALF AND COMPANY,
+
+PRINTERS TO THE UNIVERSITY.
+
+
+
+
+A LETTER, &c.
+
+
+SIR;--
+
+An English courtier procured a colonial judgeship for a young dependant
+wholly ignorant of law. The new functionary, on parting with his patron,
+received from him the following sage advice,--"Be careful never to
+assign reasons, for whether your judgments be right or wrong, your
+reasons will certainly be bad." You have cause to regret that some
+friend had not been equally provident of your reputation, and intimated
+that it was only expected of you to vote for Mr. Webster's measures, but
+by no means to assist him in vindicating them. You did, indeed, vote
+precisely as those who procured your nomination intended you should;
+yet, on your return home, you found your name had become a byword and a
+reproach in your native State. Another election approached, but you
+declined submitting your recent course to the judgment of the electors,
+and withdrew from the canvass. But although the people were thus
+prevented from voting against you, they persisted in speaking and
+writing against you. Anxious to relieve yourself from the load of
+obloquy by which you were oppressed, in an evil hour you rashly appealed
+to the public through the columns of a newspaper, and gave the "reasons"
+of your vote for the Fugitive Slave Law. You had a high and recent
+example of the kind of logic suited to your case. You might have
+indulged in transcendental nonsense, and talked about the climate,
+soil, and scenery of New England and the wonders of physical geography,
+and, assuming that negroes were created free, you might have contended
+that, in voting for a law to catch and enslave them, you had avoided the
+folly of reënacting the law of God. Reasons of this sort, you and others
+had declared, "had convinced the understanding and touched the
+conscience of the nation." Instead of following an example so
+illustrious and successful, you assign "reasons" so very commonplace,
+that the most ordinary capacity can understand them, and so feeble, that
+the slightest strength can overthrow them.
+
+Your first "reason" is, that the delivery of fugitives is a
+constitutional obligation. By this you mean, that, by virtue of the
+construction of a certain clause in the Constitution by the Supreme
+Court, Congress has the power to pass a law for the recovery of fugitive
+slaves. Well, Sir, does this constitutional obligation authorize
+Congress to pass _any_ law whatsoever on the subject, however atrocious
+and wicked? Had you voted for a law to prevent smuggling, in which you
+had authorized every tide-waiter to shoot any person suspected of having
+contraband goods in his possession, would it have been a good "reason"
+for such an atrocity, that the collection of duties was "a
+constitutional obligation"? You are condemned for voting for an
+arbitrary, detestable, diabolical law,--one that tramples upon the
+rights of conscience, outrages the feelings of humanity, discards the
+rules of evidence, levels all the barriers erected by the common law for
+the protection of personal liberty, and, in defiance of the
+Constitution, and against its express provisions, gives to the courts
+the appointment of legions of slave-catching judges. And your "reason"
+for all this is, that the delivery of fugitives is "a constitutional
+obligation"! The "obligation" is not in issue. Please to understand,
+Sir, that it is not denied. It is for the _manner_ in which you profess
+to have discharged the obligation that you are censured, and be it
+remembered, that not one of the obnoxious provisions of your law is
+required by the Constitution. You go on and attempt to enlighten your
+constituents as to the history of this constitutional obligation. As the
+obligation affords you no apology for the iniquitous features of your
+law, its history is, of course, mere surplusage, and serves no other
+purpose than to divert the attention of your readers from yourself.
+About two thirds of your apology is occupied with an historical
+disquisition, which has as much to do with your vindication as the
+question respecting the existence of a lunar atmosphere. I will not,
+however, withhold from you whatever benefit you may derive from either
+your logic or your history, but will give each a fair and honest
+examination. You inform the public that, at the time the Constitution
+was formed,
+
+     "Slavery had been abolished in some of the States, and still
+     existed in others. Here seemed an insurmountable incompatibility of
+     interests, and nothing perplexed the wise men of that day--and they
+     were _very_ wise men--so much as this topic. At last they agreed
+     that the new Constitution should have nothing to do with it; that
+     the word _slavery_ should not be mentioned in it, and that it
+     should be left to the States themselves to establish, retain, or
+     abolish it, just as much after the adoption of the Constitution as
+     before. But in order to secure the existence of the institution to
+     those States who preferred it, it was agreed that the persons
+     escaping from labor to which they were bound, in one commonwealth,
+     and found in another, should be returned to the State from which
+     they had fled. The provision was necessary for the preservation of
+     this interest _in statu quo_. It did not extend slavery. It kept it
+     where it already was, and where it could not have continued if
+     every slave who escaped North was at once free and irreclaimable.
+     The members of the confederacy from the South saw this distinctly,
+     and _deliberately declared_ that they could not and would not enter
+     a union with States who would tempt away their slaves with the
+     prospect of immediate and permanent freedom.... The Constitution
+     was adopted with this provision, and it could not have been adopted
+     without it."
+
+Thus we learn from you, Sir, that when the Constitution was formed,
+"slavery had been abolished in some of the States." It is a pity you did
+not vouchsafe to tell us which of the States had thus early and
+honorably distinguished themselves. Of the thirteen American States in
+1787, how many, Sir, had _by law_ abolished slavery? NOT ONE. Your "some
+States" consisted of MASSACHUSETTS alone. And how was slavery abolished
+there? Not by any express prohibition in her constitution, nor by any
+act of her legislature. Fortunately, her constitution, like that of most
+other States, contained a general declaration of human rights, somewhat
+similar to the "rhetorical abstraction" in the Declaration of
+Independence. Two or three years before the Federal Convention
+assembled, a young lawyer, perceiving that the declaration in the
+constitution had inadvertently made no exclusion of the rights of men
+with dark complexions, brought an action for a slave against his master
+for work done and performed. An upright and independent court, not
+having the fear of our Southern brethren before their eyes, decided that
+the slave was a MAN, and therefore entitled to the rights which the
+constitution declared belonged to _all_ men, and gave judgment for the
+plaintiff. In this way, Sir, was slavery abolished in Massachusetts, and
+hence the delegates from Massachusetts in the Convention were the only
+ones who represented a _free_ State. And now, Sir, what becomes of your
+"insurmountable incompatibility of interests" arising from the fact that
+"slavery had been abolished in some States and still existed in others,"
+which you tell us so much perplexed the wise men of that day? We shall
+see, Sir, that on questions touching human bondage the Massachusetts
+delegation seem to have been slaveholders in heart, and did not partake
+of the perplexity which troubled the wise men. With the exception of
+that delegation, there were not probably half a dozen members of the
+convention who were not slaveholders.
+
+It would seem from your historical review, that the clause in the
+Constitution respecting fugitive slaves was the grand compromise
+between the North and the South, without which "the Constitution could
+not have been adopted"; and that to this clause we owe our glorious
+slave-catching Union. You fortify this wonderful historical discovery by
+appealing to the "deliberate declarations" of Southern members, that
+they "would not enter a union with States who would tempt away their
+slaves," &c. It is to be regretted that you have not deemed it expedient
+to refer to the records of these declarations, as other students of our
+constitutional history are wholly ignorant of them. Suffer me, Sir, to
+enter into a few historical details, for the purpose of vindicating the
+liberty I take to differ with you as to the accuracy of your statements.
+
+The Convention met in Philadelphia, 25th May, 1787. On the 29th of the
+same month, Mr. Randolph, of Virginia, submitted a plan of government.
+It contained no allusion to fugitive slaves. On the same day, Mr.
+Charles Pinckney, of South Carolina, submitted another plan. This last
+provided for the surrender of fugitive criminals, but was silent about
+fugitive slaves. On the 15th of June, Mr. Patterson, of New Jersey,
+submitted a third plan. This also provided for the surrender of
+fugitives from justice, but not from bondage. On the 18th, Mr. Hamilton
+announced his plan, but the fugitive slave found no place in it. On the
+26th of June, the Convention, having agreed on the general features of
+the proposed Constitution in the form of resolutions, referred them to
+"a committee of detail," for the purpose of reducing them to the form of
+a Constitution. In these resolutions, there was not the most distant
+allusion to fugitive slaves. On the 6th of August, the committee
+reported the draft of a Constitution, and yet, strange as you may deem
+it, the provision without which, you tell us, the Constitution could not
+have been adopted, was not in it, although there was in it a provision
+for the surrender of fugitive criminals. For three months had the
+Convention been in session, and not one syllable had been uttered about
+fugitive slaves. At last, on the 29th of August, as we learn from the
+minutes, "It was moved and seconded to agree to the following
+proposition, to be inserted after the 15th article: 'If any person,
+bound to service or labor in any of the United States, shall escape into
+another State, he or she shall not be discharged from such service or
+labor in consequence of any regulation subsisting in the State to which
+they escape, but shall be delivered up to the person justly claiming
+their service or labor,' _which passed unanimously_." Really, Sir, I
+find in this record but little evidence of the perplexity which
+distressed our wise men, or of the great compromise between the North
+and South, on which you dwell. The 15th article, referred to above, was
+the article providing for the surrender of fugitives from justice, and
+this suggested the idea, that it would be well to provide, also, for the
+surrender of fugitive slaves. In an assembly consisting almost
+exclusively of slaveholders, the idea was exceedingly relished; and
+without a word of opposition, the suggestion was unanimously adopted.
+From Mr. Madison's report we learn that, the day before, Messrs. Butler
+and Pinckney had informally proposed that fugitive slaves and servants
+should be delivered up "like criminals." "Mr. Wilson [of Penn.]. This
+would oblige the Executive of the State to do it at the public expense.
+Mr. Sherman [of Conn.] saw no more propriety in the public seizing and
+surrendering a slave or servant than a horse." (_Madison Papers_, p.
+1447.) The subject was here dropped. The next day the motion was made in
+form, and, as Mr. Madison says, "agreed to, _nem. con._" From the
+phraseology of the motion, and the objections of Messrs. Wilson and
+Sherman, it was perfectly understood that the obligation of delivery was
+imposed on the States, and that no power was intended to be conferred on
+Congress to legislate on the subject. Messrs. Wilson and Sherman's
+objections arose from no moral repugnance to slave-catching, but from
+the inconvenience they apprehended the _State_ authorities would be
+subjected to; and Mr. Wilson perhaps spoke from experience, as his own
+State had at that very time a law for catching and returning fugitive
+slaves from other States. The idea, therefore, that this agreement was a
+_compromise_ between the North and South is wholly imaginary, and you,
+Sir, must have mistaken some recent fulminations from the Southern
+chivalry for the "deliberate declarations" which you suppose were made
+in the Convention. Believe me, Sir, no members of the Convention ever
+declared they would not enter into the Union, unless it was agreed to
+surrender fugitive slaves, for the obvious reason, that the Northern
+slaveholders required no threats from their Southern brethren to consent
+to a compact convenient to both. It is very true, Sir, that there were
+compromises, and that there were "deliberate declarations," but they had
+no reference to the surrender of runaway slaves. I have pointed out your
+historical mistake, not because it has the remotest bearing on your
+justification, but because you seem to think that it has.
+
+The first great compromise was between, not the North and the South, but
+the small and the large States. The one claimed, and the other refused,
+an equality of suffrage in the national legislature. It was at last
+agreed, that the suffrage should be equal in one house, and according to
+population in the other. This was the first compromise. Then came the
+question, What should constitute the representative population? The
+Southern States had more slaves than the Northern, and the former
+insisted that slaves should be included in the representative
+population. This would have given the Southern States an unfair
+preponderance in Congress. Moreover, a portion of the Southern States
+were engaged in the African slave-trade, and, of course, every slave
+landed on their shores would increase their political power in Congress.
+To reconcile the North to slave representation, it was offered that
+_direct taxation_ should be proportioned to representation. But the
+North was reluctant, and, as usual, was bullied into a compromise. Mr.
+Davie, of North Carolina, made a "deliberate declaration":--"He was
+sure that North Carolina would never confederate on any terms that did
+not rate them (the slaves) at least as three fifths. If the Eastern
+States meant, therefore, to exclude them (the slaves) altogether, the
+business was at an end." (_Madison Papers_, p. 1081.) This threat, and
+others like it, settled the matter. The compromise, of three fifths of
+the slaves to be included in the representative population, was accepted
+on the motion of _a New England member_; and the consequence is, that
+the slave States have now twenty-one members in the lower house of
+Congress more than they are entitled to by their free population. This
+was the second compromise. There was still a third, far more wicked and
+detestable, and effected by the "deliberate declarations" of Southern
+members. The "committee of detail" has been already mentioned. It
+consisted of Messrs. Rutledge of South Carolina, Randolph of Virginia,
+Wilson of Pennsylvania, Ellsworth of Connecticut, and Gorham of
+Massachusetts. This committee, it will be recollected, were to reduce to
+the _form_ of a Constitution the resolutions agreed on by the
+Convention. Neither in the resolutions themselves, nor in the
+discussions which preceded their adoption, had any reference been made
+to a guarantee for the continuance of the African slave-trade.
+Nevertheless, this committee, of their own will and pleasure, inserted
+in their draft the following clause:--"No tax or duty shall be laid by
+the legislature on articles exported from any State, _nor on the
+migration or importation of such persons as the several States shall
+think proper to admit, nor shall such migration or importation be
+prohibited_." To understand the cunning wickedness of this clause, it
+must be recollected that Congress was to have power to regulate foreign
+commerce, and commerce between the States; and hence it might, at a
+future time, suppress both the foreign and domestic commerce in human
+flesh, or it might burden this commerce with duties. Hence this artfully
+expressed perpetual restriction on the power of Congress to interfere
+with the traffic in human beings. As this grand scheme was concocted in
+the committee, and not in the Convention, it may be interesting to
+inquire into its paternity.
+
+In the debates which ensued on this clause, Mr. Ellsworth, one of the
+committee who reported it, "was for leaving the clause as it now stands.
+_Let every State import what it pleases._ The morality or wisdom of
+slavery are considerations belonging to the States themselves. _What
+enriches a part enriches the whole_, and the States are the best judges
+of their particular interests. The old Confederation had not _meddled_
+with this point, and he did not see any greater necessity for bringing
+it within the policy of the new one." "As slaves multiply so fast in
+Virginia and Maryland that it is _cheaper_ to raise than to import them,
+whilst in the _sickly_ rice-swamps foreign supplies are _necessary_, if
+we go no farther than is urged [a proposal to permit the trade for a
+limited time], we shall be unjust towards South Carolina and Georgia.
+Let us not intermeddle." (_Madison Papers_, pp. 1389, 1391.) This
+gentleman was one of your "very wise men"; and his mantle has recently
+fallen upon other wise men from the East. Mr. Wilson, another member of
+the committee, objected. "All articles imported," said he, "are to be
+taxed; slaves alone are exempt. This is, in fact, a bounty on that
+article." The clause was referred to another committee, who modified it,
+by limiting the restriction to 1800. It was moved to guarantee the
+slave-trade for twenty years, by postponing the restriction to 1808.
+This motion was _seconded_ by Mr. Gorham, another member of the
+committee. Mr. Randolph, also of the committee, was against the
+slave-trade, and opposed to any restriction on the power of Congress to
+suppress it. Two of the committee, then, we find, were against the
+trade, and three, Messrs. Rutledge, Ellsworth, and Gorham, for
+perpetuating it. And now, Sir, what were the inducements which prevailed
+on the two wise men from the East to yield their consent to a
+proposition so wicked and abominable? We are, of course, not informed
+what passed in the committee, but we can well imagine, from the language
+used by the chairman and others in the Convention. Said Mr. Rutledge,
+"If the Convention thinks North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia
+will ever agree to this plan [the Federal Constitution] unless their
+right to import slaves be untouched, the expectation is VAIN. The people
+of those States will never be such fools as to give up so important an
+interest." In other words, "Gentlemen of the North, no Union without the
+African slave-trade." Said Mr. Charles Pinckney, "South Carolina can
+never receive the plan [of the Constitution] if it prohibits the
+slave-trade. In every proposed extension of the powers of Congress, that
+State has expressly and watchfully excepted that of meddling with the
+importation of negroes." (_Madison Papers_, p. 1389.) Mr. Charles C.
+Pinckney "thought himself bound to declare candidly, that he did not
+think South Carolina would stop her importations of slaves in any short
+time." Thus you see, Sir, that the "deliberate declarations" to which
+you allude were made in reference to the continuance of the African
+slave-trade, and not, as you suppose, to the catching of fugitive
+slaves. Two New England gentlemen of the committee yielded to these
+declarations, and sacrificed conscience and humanity for the sake of the
+Union, and the consideration that what enriched a part enriched the
+whole. Happily, in this case, Southern bluster was met by Southern
+bluster, and it is owing to Virginia, and not to the virtue and
+independence of New England, that the Constitution was rescued from the
+infamy of granting a solemn and perpetual guarantee to an accursed
+commerce.
+
+In Virginia, the slaves, as Mr. Ellsworth remarked, multiplied so fast,
+that it was _cheaper_ to raise than import them. She was then, as now, a
+breeding State for the Southern markets. Hence, her delegates were as
+ready to bluster for protection, as the South Carolina delegates were
+for a free trade in men and women. Of course, the _motives_ assigned
+were patriotic, not selfish. Mr. Randolph "could never agree to the
+clause as it stands. He would sooner RISK THE CONSTITUTION." (_Madison
+Papers_, p. 1396.) Mr. Madison would not consent to the continuance of
+the traffic till 1808. "Twenty years will produce all the mischief that
+can be apprehended from the liberty to import slaves. So long a term
+will be more dishonorable to the American character, than to say nothing
+about it in the Constitution." (_Madison Papers_, p. 1427.) Mr. Mason
+from Virginia denounced the traffic as "infernal." (_Madison Papers_, p.
+1390.) The result of all these threats on each side was, as usual, a
+compromise, by which Congress was prohibited from suppressing the
+foreign and internal commerce in slaves for twenty years, and was left
+at liberty to do as it might see fit, after that period. After twenty
+years the foreign trade was suppressed, and North and South Carolina and
+Georgia remained in the Union! Virginia, as well as the other Slave
+States, is greatly interested in the home slave-trade, and that has
+_not_ been suppressed, although Congress has full power over it.
+
+It does not appear from Mr. Madison's report what reply was made in the
+Convention to the Virginia objections, but in his speech in the
+Convention of his own State, he tells us,--"The gentlemen from South
+Carolina and Georgia argued in this manner: We have now liberty to
+import this species of property, and much of the property now possessed
+had been purchased or otherwise acquired in contemplation of improving
+it by the assistance of imported slaves. What would be the consequence
+of hindering us in this point? The _slaves_ of Virginia would rise in
+value, and we should be obliged to go to your markets." (_Elliott's
+Debates_, III. 454.) Certainly, Sir, these South Carolina and Georgia
+delegates were "very wise men," and their predictions are now history,
+and the planters of Georgia, South Carolina, Mississippi, and Louisiana
+buy slaves of the Virginia breeders. But what shall I say of the wise
+men from the East? This horrible compromise, this guarantee of the
+African slave-trade for twenty years, was carried by the votes of the
+Massachusetts and Connecticut delegates, and would have been defeated,
+had they had the courage and virtue to have voted against it.
+
+I have indulged in this long digression, to show that the clause in the
+Constitution respecting fugitive slaves was not, as you represent it,
+the great compromise of the Constitution, the key-stone of the Union,
+and that our slaveholding fathers were not, as you suppose, greatly
+perplexed, nor their consciences deeply wounded, by the existence of
+slavery in all the States of the confederacy with one exception. Having
+disposed of your history, I return to your logic.
+
+Whether the constitutional injunction to surrender fugitive slaves was a
+compromise or not, is of no practical importance. The clause speaks for
+itself, and prescribes no mode by which the title of the claimant shall
+be ascertained, while it expressly implies that the title shall be
+established before the surrender is made. Hence, the fair presumption
+is, that the title to a MAN shall be proved, with at least as much
+certainty and formality as the title to a horse. Had you, Sir, in your
+law, provided that a Virginian shall not come to Boston, and there seize
+and carry off a husband, wife, or child but by the same process, and on
+as strong evidence, as he may now seize and carry off a horse which you
+claim as your own, instead of finding your name a byword and a reproach,
+you would have been honored and applauded by your fellow-citizens, and
+returned to Congress by a triumphant vote; nor is there a syllable in
+the Constitution which prohibits or discountenances such a mode of
+deciding the title to a human being. It is in vain, then, Sir, that you
+plead your "constitutional obligation" in justification of your most
+detestable law. But, as if one wrong could justify another, you plead in
+your excuse the law of 1793, and you ask in your simplicity of those who
+condemn your law if they do not perceive that they are "denouncing their
+fathers." Well, Sir, were our fathers infallible? Pity it is, Sir, that
+you were not on the floor of Congress when that body declared the
+African slave-trade to be PIRACY. You might then, Sir, have risen in
+your place, and inquired, "Do you not perceive that you are denouncing
+your fathers, who were very wise men, and who guaranteed for twenty
+years the very traffic which you now proclaim to be piracy?" Pity it is,
+Sir, that you did not stand by the side of your patron on Plymouth Rock,
+and whisper in his ear, "Do you not perceive that you are denouncing our
+fathers?" when he declared, "In the sight of our law the African
+slave-trader is a PIRATE and a FELON, and in the sight of Heaven an
+offender beyond the ordinary depth of human guilt." Mr. Webster is
+better versed in constitutional history than you are, and he well knew
+that some of our fathers "deliberately declared they would not enter a
+Union" in which they were to be debarred from pursuing this piratical,
+felonious, guilty traffic. Our fathers were mostly slaveholders, and yet
+you, Sir, unconsciously denounce both their morality and intelligence,
+when you affirm the institution of slavery to be "wrong and unwise." And
+yet all who presume to find fault with your cruel, unjust, wicked law
+are guilty forsooth of denouncing their fathers!
+
+You tell us that the Convention of 1787 "_agreed that the new
+Constitution should have nothing to do with slavery_." I have not been
+so fortunate as to find the record of this agreement, but if such a
+compact was indeed made, then seldom, if ever, has a solemn covenant
+been more grossly and wickedly violated. Is it, Sir, in virtue of this
+agreement, that you voted to fine and imprison every conscientious,
+humane citizen who may refuse, at the command of a minion of a
+commissioner, to join in a slave hunt? Did this agreement confer on the
+holders of slaves an enlarged representation in Congress? Was it in
+pursuance of this agreement that the importation of slaves was
+guaranteed for twenty years? Did this agreement authorize the Federal
+government to enter into negotiations with Great Britain and Mexico for
+a mutual surrender of runaway slaves? Was it in pursuance of this same
+agreement, that our government negotiated with Russia and Spain to
+prevent emancipation in Cuba,--a traitorous conspiracy with despots
+against the rights of man? How, Sir, was this agreement illustrated,
+when Daniel Webster, as Secretary of State under John Tyler of glorious
+memory, made a demand on Great Britain for the surrender of the slaves
+of the Creole, who had gallantly achieved their liberty, and taken
+refuge in the West Indies? How comes it, Sir, that under this agreement
+an act of Congress secures to the Slave States officers in the navy in
+proportion to the number of their slaves? How is it, that under this
+agreement colored men are seized in the District of Columbia, under "the
+exclusive jurisdiction" of the Federal government on the _suspicion_ of
+being slaves, and, when that suspicion is rebutted by the non-appearance
+of any claimant, are sold as slaves for life, to pay their jail-fees?
+Perhaps it would be denouncing our fathers, to say that Messrs. Webster
+and Cass may search the archives of Austria in vain for any act so
+utterly diabolical as this, perpetrated by a government which it was
+agreed "should have nothing to do with slavery." Was it to carry out
+this famous agreement that the Federal government officially declared
+through its Secretary, Mr. Calhoun, that Texas was annexed to preserve
+the institution of slavery from the perils that threatened it?
+
+Once more, Sir. We all know that the slaveholders regard the free blacks
+as dangerous to the subordination of their slaves, and are contemplating
+their forcible removal. Think you, Sir, Mr. Webster was mindful of the
+agreement you have discovered, when, on the 7th of last March, in his
+place in the Senate, he proposed his magnificent scheme of taxing the
+whole nation untold millions to give additional security to property in
+human beings? "If," said the Massachusetts Senator, "any gentleman from
+the _South_ shall propose a scheme of colonization to be carried on by
+_this government_ upon a large scale, for the transportation of free
+colored people to any colony or _any place in the world_, I should be
+quite disposed to incur almost any degree of expense to accomplish the
+object." The magnitude of the scheme, and the cost at which it is to be
+accomplished, are thus hinted:--"There have been received into the
+treasury of the United States EIGHTY MILLIONS of dollars, the proceeds
+of the sales of the public lands ceded by Virginia. If the residue
+should be sold at the same rate, the whole aggregate will exceed TWO
+HUNDRED MILLIONS of dollars. If _Virginia and the South_ see fit to
+adopt any proposition to _relieve_ themselves from the free people of
+color among them, they have my free consent that the _government_ shall
+pay _them_ any sum of money out of the proceeds which may be adequate
+for the purpose." Will you, Sir, please to point out the article of the
+agreement of 1787, which, while it restricts Congress from having any
+thing to do with slavery, sanctions an appropriation not exceeding two
+hundred millions of dollars, for the purpose of strengthening the
+institution of slavery, by _relieving_ the slaveholders from the
+presence of free people of color, and forcibly transporting to any place
+in the world hundreds of thousands of native-born Americans, who have as
+good a constitutional right to the pursuit of life, liberty, and
+happiness on their native soil, as Mr. Webster himself? Mr. Webster, it
+seems, now views the subject of negro colonization in precisely the same
+light that he did thirty years since, although his _intentions_ on this,
+as on various other points, have undergone marvellous changes. We learn
+from a Massachusetts paper (_Congregationalist_, 6 July, 1849), that
+this gentleman was in 1822 appointed by a public meeting to draft a
+constitution for the State Colonization Society. After considerable
+discussion in the committee he rose and said, "I must leave. I
+understand the whole project. It is a scheme of the slaveholders to get
+rid of their free negroes. I will have nothing to do with it."
+
+And how, Sir, as a member of Congress, have _you_ fulfilled this
+agreement to have nothing to do with slavery? Not only have you required
+"good citizens," when commanded, to hunt and catch slaves, but you have
+even fixed a money value on every slave. If a master fails to recover
+his fugitive slave through the agency, "direct or indirect," of any
+citizen, you give him an action for damages. In all other cases of
+trespass, the damages sustained by the plaintiff are assessed by a jury
+according to the evidence. You kindly save the master the trouble of
+proving the value of his lost property, and give him out of the pockets
+of the defendant $1,000, no matter whether the slave was sick or well,
+young or old. If a woman escapes with a child at the breast, the master
+is to have $2,000! Recollect, Sir, this is for _damages_ to the
+slaveholder; the trespasser is to pay to the government, which was to
+have nothing to do with slavery, another thousand dollars, and to be
+incarcerated six months. Either, Sir, you have wholly mistaken the
+nature of the "agreement," or the slaveholders, through the aid of their
+Northern auxiliaries, have, in defiance of the agreement, rendered the
+Federal government a mighty engine in protecting, extending, and
+perpetuating the stupendous iniquity of human bondage.
+
+Your first excuse for voting for the recent slave-catching law, after
+relying on your "constitutional obligation," is, that it is
+"_practically more favorable to the fugitive than the law of 1793_"!!!
+The Southern lawyers, then, who drafted the bill, were a set of
+blunderers, and your constituents are blockheads for blaming you for
+legislating against human rights, when, in fact, you were loosening the
+bonds of the oppressed, and facilitating escape from the prison-house.
+Your assertion may well excite astonishment at the South as well as the
+North, till your _proof_ is known, and then, indeed, astonishment will
+be exchanged for ridicule. You tell us, "the _evidence_ of such an
+assertion may be found in the fact, that by the old law every magistrate
+in Massachusetts, amounting to several hundreds, and so in the other
+States, were authorized and required to cause the arrest of any
+fugitive, examine into his case, and deliver him to the claimant, if he
+was proved to be a slave; while under the new law that power is
+_limited_ to the justices of the United States' courts, and to the
+commissioners appointed by them, not exceeding, perhaps, on an average,
+six or eight persons in each State." So it seems the slave-catchers had
+formerly no difficulty in finding a magistrate among hundreds to aid
+them, but that now, before they hunt a slave, they must hunt and catch a
+United States judge, or a commissioner of six or eight in a whole State.
+Truly a hard case, and yet the slaveholders themselves set the very trap
+in which they have been caught, and thus it is that, through their
+folly, and your generosity in not pointing out to them the blunder they
+were committing, the new law is more favorable to the fugitive than the
+old one. Surely, Sir, it could not have been more perilous to the young
+West Indian judge to meddle with "reasons," than it is for you. Either,
+Sir, you voted for the law without reading it, or you have forgotten its
+provision. Be assured, the Southern lawyers were as well acquainted as
+yourself with the fact, that a few individuals, termed "commissioners,"
+had been appointed by the United States courts to perform certain
+ministerial acts; and that, as these men were now to be promoted to the
+office of slave-catching judges, they would be wholly inadequate in
+number to lend efficient aid to the hunters of men. Hence, they inserted
+in the third section of the bill, the following enactment, which has
+strangely escaped your recollection, viz.:--"And it is further enacted,
+that the Circuit Courts of the United States, and the Superior Courts of
+_each_ organized Territory of the United States, SHALL from time to time
+ENLARGE THE NUMBER OF COMMISSIONERS with a view to afford reasonable
+facilities to reclaim fugitives from labor, and to the prompt discharge
+of the duties imposed by this act." So that, instead of six or eight
+commissioners in a State, we are to have as many hundreds, if needed.
+Nor is this all. By the second section, the power possessed by the
+Circuit Courts to appoint commissioners is for the first time conferred
+on the _Territorial_ courts, so that there shall be no lack of
+slave-catching judges in Oregon, Utah, and New Mexico. Instead of your
+six or eight commissioners in a State, your law contemplates that there
+shall be one or more in _each county_; for the fifth section provides,
+that, "the better to enable the said commissioners to execute their
+duties faithfully and efficiently, ... they are hereby authorized and
+empowered, within their _counties respectively_," to appoint one or more
+persons to execute their warrants. So it seems we are to have an
+unlimited number of judges and executioners. These executioners,
+expressly appointed to catch slaves, and of course among the most
+worthless and degraded of the community, are one and all invested with
+the power of a high sheriff to call out the _posse comitatus_, not
+merely in his own county, but in every hamlet in the State, and require
+"good citizens," under pain of fine and imprisonment, to join him in his
+execrable hunt. Really, Sir, your "evidence" that the new law is more
+favorable to the fugitive than the old one falls short of demonstration.
+
+You thus apologize for not giving the alleged fugitive a trial by jury.
+"There was no more trial by jury provided for under the old law than
+under the new law. The claim of a jury trial is entirely _new_; never
+thought of till modern discussions of the subject begun. For fifty-seven
+years our fathers and we have been living under the laws which provided
+no such thing, and now one which makes no such provision is denounced in
+unmeasured terms as cruel and inhuman. Where have we all been living for
+half a century?" Surely, Sir, it is a most logical reason for not
+changing a wicked law, that it has been in force for fifty-seven years.
+Strange that the legislators of Massachusetts did not perceive the force
+of this reasoning when they abolished the laws for hanging witches and
+whipping Quakers. Permit me, Sir, to ask, Where had _you_ been living
+when _you_ declared it to be the _duty_ of Congress to give the fugitive
+a trial by jury, although for fifty-seven years such a trial had been
+denied him? You probably forgot, Sir, when giving the above "reason,"
+that, not long before you took your seat in Congress, you had, as a
+member of the Massachusetts Legislature, voted for the following
+resolution, viz.:--"We hold it to be the duty of that body [Congress] to
+pass such laws only in regard thereto as will be maintained by the
+public sentiment of the free States, where such laws are to be enforced,
+and which shall especially secure all persons, whose surrender may be
+claimed as having escaped from labor and service in other States, the
+right of having the validity of such claim determined by a jury in the
+State where such claim is made." So it seems that, while in Boston, you
+esteemed it the _especial duty_ of Congress to grant the fugitive a
+trial by jury, but that in the atmosphere of Washington you acquired new
+views of moral philosophy.
+
+Suffer me, Sir, also to inquire, Where had Mr. Webster been "living for
+half a century," when, on the 3d of last June, he introduced into the
+Senate a bill amendatory of the act of 1793, granting the alleged
+fugitive a trial by jury whenever he shall make oath that he is not the
+slave of the claimant?
+
+Another of your "reasons" is, that your law does _not_ suspend the
+_habeas corpus_, and in proof of its innocence in this respect, you
+refer to the opinion of "legal authority of the highest kind," viz. Mr.
+Crittenden, of Kentucky. It is very true that the words _habeas corpus_
+are omitted in your law, as the word _slave_ is in the Constitution, but
+in neither case is the omission of any practical importance. You must be
+aware, Sir, that whenever a person is in the custody of another, if
+sufficient ground be shown to render it probable that the custody is
+illegal, the writ is granted as a matter of right. But why is it
+granted? That the court may at its discretion, according to
+circumstances, remand or discharge the prisoner. Take away from the
+court the discretionary power to discharge, and the writ is rendered an
+idle form. Your law, you say, does not suspend the _habeas corpus_; it
+is guiltless of such an enormity. A man who is carrying off one of our
+citizens in chains, may indeed be served with the writ, and he brings
+his prisoner before the court, and he produces a paper for which he paid
+$10, and reads from your law, that this paper, called a certificate,
+"shall be conclusive," and "shall prevent all molestation of said person
+or persons by any _process_ issued by any court, judge, or magistrate,
+or other person whomsoever." It is because the word _process_, instead
+of _habeas corpus_, is used, that your law does not suspend the writ of
+freedom! In vain may the prisoner plead that he is not the person
+mentioned in the certificate; in vain may he offer to show that the
+certificate is a forgery; in vain may he urge that the man who signed
+the certificate was not a commissioner. The little piece of paper
+costing ten dollars is to save the slave-catcher from "all molestation,"
+not because the writ of _habeas corpus_ is suspended,--O, no! but in
+consequence of the words "any process"!
+
+You refer to two objections, which you say are made to your law, and
+endeavour to refute them; viz. the onerous obligations imposed upon the
+marshal, and the penalties attached to an attempt "to assist in the
+rescue of the slave after he has been proved to be such." You have
+evinced your discretion in confining yourself to only four objections
+made to your law; viz. the denial of a jury trial, the suspension of the
+_habeas corpus_, the duties of the marshal, and the penalties imposed on
+an attempt to rescue the slave _after_ judgment. With what success, and
+with what "reasons," you have combated the first two has already been
+seen. As to the last two, they scarcely merit an answer, and hence you
+have selected them. If the obligations of the marshal are onerous, he
+has voluntarily assumed them by accepting the office. If, in a civilized
+country, a man attempts forcibly to rescue a prisoner in the custody of
+the law, he must expect to be punished. There are many weighty
+objections to your law which you have not thought it expedient to
+notice. Permit me to supply your omission, and to tell you why your law
+is so intensely odious. And here let me again remind you of the true
+issue between you and the people. It is not now the constitutional power
+of Congress under the decision of the Supreme Court to pass a law for
+the recovery of fugitive slaves,--this is conceded. The odium you have
+experienced, and against which you have appealed to the public, is
+caused by your having voted for a law which, in its details, violates
+the Constitution, and outrages justice and humanity. Throughout your
+long and labored apology, you avoid grappling with these charges. You
+vindicate the denial of a jury trial only on the ground that it has been
+denied for fifty-seven years, and on the authority of Mr. Crittenden
+affirm that the _habeas corpus_ is not suspended; but you avoid the
+constitutional and moral objections urged against your law.
+
+By the Constitution, fugitive slaves are to be restored to those, and
+those only, who are legally entitled to their services. The means of
+ascertaining whether a man is a slave, whether he has fled from his
+master, and whether the claimant is legally entitled to him, are not
+defined by the Constitution. It is now intrusted to the discretion of
+Congress to specify these means, but of course that discretion ought to
+be exercised in accordance with the Constitution, with justice, and with
+humanity. The complaint against you is, that you have voted for a law
+which outrages them all, and against this complaint you have failed to
+offer the shadow of a vindication.
+
+A Virginian comes to Boston, and there seizes one of the inhabitants as
+his slave. The man claimed declares the claim to be false and
+fraudulent. Here, then, is an issue both of law and of fact between two
+men equally entitled to the protection of law; for the man claimed is on
+every presumption of law and justice to be regarded as free, till the
+contrary is proved. The issue between these two men is, I have said, one
+of fact and of law. Is the person seized the man he is said to be? This
+is a question of fact. Admitting his identity, is he a slave, and, if
+so, does he belong to the claimant? These are both questions of law,
+resting upon facts to be proved. Those familiar with the reports of
+Southern courts know that the title to slaves is a frequent matter of
+litigation, involving intricate questions respecting the validity of
+wills, the construction of deeds, the partition of estates, and the
+claims of creditors. By carrying a slave into a free State, the owner
+forfeits his title to him while there, and cannot reclaim him; and hence
+the acts of the claimant himself may be involved in the issue. And now,
+Sir, I ask, have you ever known, or can you conceive of, any issue at
+law respecting the title to property so awfully momentous to a defendant
+as the one we are considering? Were your son or daughter the defendant
+in such an issue, would you not rejoice to purchase a favorable judgment
+by the contribution of the last cent of your great wealth? Let us, then,
+proceed to inquire what provision _you_, in the fear of God and the love
+of justice and humanity, have made for the trial of this tremendous
+issue,--an issue on the result of which all the hopes of a fellow-man
+for the life that is, and for that which is to come, are suspended.
+
+In the first place, What is the pecuniary value of the plaintiff's claim
+to _himself_?--for it would be an insult to humanity to estimate in
+dollars and cents the blessings of liberty and of the conjugal and
+parental relations to the unhappy defendant. You have yourself fixed the
+value of the plaintiff's claim at _one thousand dollars_. So far, then,
+the issue is, by your own showing, within the constitutional guarantee
+of trial by jury in all suits at common law where the matter in
+controversy is of the value of _twenty_ dollars. But is the claim made
+by the plaintiff "a suit at common law"? What is a _suit_? The Supreme
+Court thus answers the question:--"We understand it [a suit] to be the
+prosecution or pursuit of some _claim_, demand, or request. In law
+language, it is the prosecution of some demand in a court of justice."
+(6 _Wheaton_, 407.)
+
+It seems, then, that the Virginian, in claiming an inhabitant of Boston
+as his slave, in fact brings _a suit_ against him for services due worth
+one thousand dollars. Now remember, Sir, the fugitive is not to be
+delivered up, as a mass of flesh, or inanimate matter, belonging to the
+claimant, but as a debtor, in the phraseology of your own law, "_owing_
+service or labor." The suit is brought for service or labor _due_, and
+the Constitution provides that the person so owing service or labor
+shall be delivered to him to whom the same is "_due_." And now, is this
+suit for service due "a suit at _common law_"? Again let the Supreme
+Court answer. "The phrase _common law_, found in this clause [the clause
+guaranteeing a jury trial], is used in contradistinction to equity and
+admiralty and maritime jurisdiction. It is well known, that, in civil
+causes in courts of equity and admiralty, juries do not intervene, and
+that courts of equity use the trial by jury only in extraordinary cases,
+to inform the conscience of the court. When, therefore, we find that the
+amendment requires that the right of trial by jury shall be preserved in
+suits at common law, the natural conclusion is, that this distinction
+was present to the minds of the framers of the amendment. By _common
+law_, they meant what the Constitution denominated, in the third
+article, 'law'; not merely suits which the common law recognized among
+its old and settled proceedings, but suits in which legal rights were to
+be ascertained and determined, in contradistinction to those where
+equitable rights alone were recognized, and equitable remedies were
+administered.... In a just sense, the amendment, then, may be construed
+to embrace _all suits_ which are not of equity and admiralty
+jurisdiction, _whatever may be the peculiar form_ which they may assume
+to settle legal rights." (3 _Peters_, 446.)
+
+If there be meaning in words, these authorities settle the case, and
+your law is in palpable violation of the amendment to the Constitution
+securing a trial by jury in suits at common law where the matter in
+controversy exceeds twenty dollars in value. Think not, Sir, that I am
+misrepresenting the Supreme Court. I know well that the _dicta_ I have
+quoted have reference to _white_ men, and that they have been virtually
+set aside in decisions respecting black men. I well know, that, in our
+model republic, law and justice and morality are all cutaneous. But
+admitting that the Supreme Court have stultified themselves, and
+virtually denied, that, where a suit was brought for the services of a
+_black_ man, the Constitution required a jury trial, recollect, Sir,
+that not in one single instance has the court decided that the
+Constitution _prohibited_ such a trial. But if not prohibited, then
+Congress are permitted to accord such a trial, and _both you and Mr.
+Webster have declared that Congress had a right to grant such a trial,
+and ought to grant it_. In voting, therefore, for a law denying such a
+trial, you made a voluntary surrender to the slaveholder of the security
+which such a trial would have afforded to multitudes of your poor,
+ignorant, oppressed fellow-men. For this act of cruelty and injustice,
+committed against your own late conviction of duty, what is your
+justification? Why, that the blacks had been already deprived of the
+right of trial by jury fifty-seven years!
+
+Let us now see what tribunal you have substituted for a jury in the
+trial of one of the most momentous issues that can engage the attention
+of a court of justice. You have provided for the appointment of an
+indefinite number of judges, each of whom is to have exclusive
+jurisdiction of these issues, and from whose judgment there is to be no
+appeal. The Constitution declares, "The judges, both of the Supreme and
+inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behaviour, and
+shall, at stated times, receive for their services a compensation, which
+shall not be diminished during their continuance in office." These
+judges are appointed by the Senate, on the nomination of the President.
+Your herd of judges, called commissioners, are appointed by the courts,
+and hold office during pleasure, and instead of receiving a salary, are
+rewarded by a rule the infamy of which, it is believed, belongs to your
+law exclusively,--a rule which doubles their compensation whenever they
+decide in favor of the rich plaintiff, and _against_ the poor and
+friendless defendant. But perhaps you will deny that these men are
+judges; for, if judges, their appointment is palpably unconstitutional.
+Let us hear the Supreme Court, at a time when it was deemed expedient to
+maintain that the persons who executed the law of 1793 were _judges_.
+"It is plain, that, where a claim is made by the owner out of possession
+for the delivery of a slave, it must be made, if made at all, _against
+some other person_; and inasmuch as the right is a right of property,
+capable of being recognized and asserted by proceedings _before a court
+of justice between parties adverse to each other_, it constitutes, in
+the strictest sense, a _controversy_ between parties, and a case arising
+under the Constitution of the United States, within the express
+delegation of judicial power given by that instrument." (16 _Peters_,
+616.) Hence your commissioners are, in the _strictest sense_, judges,
+exercising "judicial power" delegated by the Constitution.
+
+You pronounce Mr. Crittenden "legal authority of the highest kind." This
+legal authority understands the sixth section of your law as providing
+that each commissioner "shall have judicial power and jurisdiction to
+hear, examine, and decide the case in a summary manner." Now, if a man,
+having judicial power and jurisdiction to decide controversies between
+parties adverse to each other, in controversies arising under the
+Constitution and within the express delegation of judicial power given
+by that instrument, is not a judge, do tell us who is one. Once more,
+Sir, Mr. Crittenden says, "The legal authority of every tribunal of
+exclusive jurisdiction, where no appeal lies, is of necessity
+conclusive upon every tribunal; and therefore the judgment of the
+tribunal created by this act is conclusive upon all other tribunals." So
+your commissioner is not only a judge, but he constitutes a tribunal of
+exclusive jurisdiction, and his judgment is binding even upon the
+Supreme Court of the United States. And yet, Sir, you must deny that
+this omnipotent commissioner is a judge, or you must admit, that, in the
+mode of his appointment, you have flagrantly violated the Constitution
+of your country.
+
+It has been most wickedly asserted by our proslavery presses and our
+proslavery politicians, that the surrender of fugitives from labor and
+fugitives from justice are similar proceedings. The surrender of a
+fugitive slave involves two questions, that of identity and that of
+property; and the law makes the decision of the commissioner on both
+points final and conclusive upon every State and Federal court in the
+land. The surrender of a fugitive criminal involves only the question of
+personal identity. The Governor of the State issues his warrant for the
+apprehension and delivery of a certain person proved to him to be
+charged with felony. If the officer arrests the wrong person, he does it
+at his peril, and a writ of _habeas corpus_ would immediately release
+the person wrongfully arrested. Again, it is most fraudulently
+maintained, that, if the wrong person is by the commissioner adjudged a
+slave, he may sue for his freedom in a Southern court! Should he do so,
+the exhibition of the commissioner's certificate is by law declared to
+be conclusive _upon all tribunals_. But even supposing that a Southern
+court, in defiance of law, should go behind the certificate, how is a
+free colored person from the North, working under the lash on a
+Mississippi plantation, to prove his freedom? How is he to fee a lawyer?
+How is he to get into court? If once there, where are his witnesses?
+They are his friends and acquaintances of his own color residing in the
+North. How are they to be summoned to Mississippi? Should they venture
+to enter the State, they would be imprisoned, and perhaps sold into
+slavery; or even if permitted to enter the court-room, their testimony
+would by law be excluded, against the claims of a white man. How
+despicably profligate, then, is the assumption of the advocates of your
+law, that any injustice committed under it would be repaired by Southern
+courts!
+
+It was not enough, it seems, that the wretched defendant in this
+momentous issue should be subjected to the jurisdiction of a judge
+unknown to the Constitution, holding his office by a prohibited tenure,
+incapable of being impeached, and bribed to decide in favor of the
+plaintiff by the promise of double fees, but the very trial allowed him
+must be a burlesque on all the forms and principles of juridical
+justice. The plaintiff, without notice to the defendant, prepares
+himself for trial, and when his affidavits or witnesses are all ready,
+he seizes the unsuspecting victim in the street, and puts him
+_instanter_ on his defence. Had the wretched man been accused of some
+atrocious crime, he might have demanded bail, and would have been
+permitted to go at large to seek for counsel, to look for witnesses, and
+to prepare for trial at some future day, of which he would have due
+notice. But no such privilege is allowed a man who is accused of _owing
+service_. One of your commissioners has already decided that the law
+does not permit him to bail the prisoner. The slave power rides in
+triumph over all the barriers erected by the wisdom of ages for the
+protection of human rights. The defendant is brought, generally in
+irons, before your commissioner judge, who is required "to hear and
+determine the case of _the claimant_ in a summary manner." The law seems
+not even to imagine the possibility of any defence being made on the
+part of the defendant. It makes no provision for such a defence,--no
+assignment of counsel, no summons for witnesses. We shall see presently,
+that if the plaintiff makes out a _primâ facie_ title, satisfactory to
+the commission, it is all the law requires. Let me now call your
+attention to the practical working of your diabolical law. A man named
+Rose was lately seized at Detroit, and brought before a commissioner as
+a fugitive slave. I copy from the newspaper report. "Mr. Joy (counsel
+for defendant) moved a postponement of the trial to a future day, to
+enable Rose to produce his papers to establish his right to freedom,
+which papers he had _sworn_ were in Cincinnati. The counsel for the
+claimant denied that the commissioner had any authority under the law to
+grant a postponement. The commissioner agreed with the counsel for the
+plaintiff, that _he had no authority to postpone the trial_; and he
+further declared, that, _even were the papers by which Rose was
+manumitted present, he could not under the law receive them in
+evidence_."
+
+Utterly devilish as was this decision, it was sound law. The plaintiff
+had proved his title satisfactorily, and this being done, the
+commissioner was bound by the express words of the law to grant the
+certificate. He had no right to admit rebutting evidence. It was
+sufficient to prove that the prisoner had been the slave of the
+claimant's father, and that the claimant was the heir at law of his
+father. This of itself was satisfactory, and therefore the commissioner
+had no right to admit in evidence the very deed of manumission granted
+by the father to the slave. The framers of the law had been as explicit
+as they dared to be. "Upon satisfactory proof being made by deposition
+or _affidavit_, to be taken and certified, &c., or by other satisfactory
+testimony [of course, in writing, and _ex parte_], and with proof, also
+by affidavit, of the _identity_ of the person," &c., the defendant is to
+be surrendered. Not a hint is given that any testimony may be received
+to rebut the _satisfactory_ proof given by the plaintiff. You have,
+moreover, Sir, provided a species of evidence never before heard of in
+the trial of an issue. By the tenth section, the claimant may go before
+a judge or court in Texas, and there make proof by affidavit that _his_
+slave has escaped. Whereupon, the court or judge is to certify that the
+proof is satisfactory. A record of this satisfactory proof, together
+with a description of the fugitive, is to be made, and a certified
+transcript of this record, "being exhibited to any judge, commissioner,
+or other officer authorized," &c., "_shall_ be held and taken to be full
+and conclusive evidence of the fact of escape, and that the service or
+labor of the person escaping is _due_ to the party in such record
+mentioned." Here all defence is taken from the defendant. Should he
+summon a host of witnesses to prove his freedom, not one could be heard;
+should he offer a bill of sale from the claimant to another, it could
+not be received; should he produce a deed of manumission, acknowledged
+and certified in a Southern court, it would be waste paper. And thus a
+man's freedom is to be sacrificed on an affidavit made a thousand miles
+off. What, Sir, would you think of a law that would authorize the
+seizure and sale of your property to satisfy a debt which any man in
+California might think proper to swear, before a Californian judge, was
+_due_ from you to him?
+
+Such, Sir, is the _trial_ which you, the representative of Boston, a
+descendant of the Pilgrims, and "a gentleman of property and standing,"
+have accorded to the poor and oppressed. Did the Constitution require
+such a prostitution of justice, such an outrage of humanity, at your
+hands? I need not be told that some of your commissioners have not
+construed your law as strictly as did the Detroit functionary. Thanks to
+the force of public opinion, and to the zeal of some benevolent lawyers,
+whose hearts were not padded with cotton, in some instances defendants
+have been permitted to call witnesses in their behalf; and some regard
+has been paid to the ordinary principles of justice. But in all such
+instances, the spirit of the law and the intentions of its framers have
+been frustrated.
+
+And now let us listen to your "reason" for justifying all the atrocities
+and abominations of your law. You gravely tell us, "The entire
+population of the North has acquiesced in the law of 1793, without
+thinking itself exposed to the charge of barbarity, and I have only to
+say, that I do not think the charge any more just now." Certainly, Sir,
+the young colonial judge could not have given a reason less logical or
+satisfactory. You must be an inattentive observer of passing events, if
+you are ignorant that the law of 1793 has again and again been denounced
+as iniquitous, that some of the States have prohibited their officers
+from assisting in its execution, that numberless petitions have been
+presented to Congress for its repeal, and that you yourself, instead of
+acquiescing in it, solemnly declared it to be the duty of Congress so
+far to alter the law, as to grant the alleged fugitive a trial by jury.
+Yet the law of 1793, wicked as it was, was justice and mercy compared
+with yours. The trials under that were almost invariably before judges
+of the State courts, not appointed like your commissioners for the vile
+and only purpose of reducing their fellow-men to bondage. There judges
+were not confined to _ex parte_ evidence, were not compelled to receive
+"as full and conclusive" affidavits made in distant States, and by
+unknown persons. For the most part, they honestly endeavoured, by a
+patient investigation according to the ordinary rules of evidence, and
+by holding the plaintiff to strict legal proof, to supply the want of a
+jury.
+
+David Paul Brown, Esq., of Philadelphia, in a letter of last November,
+affirms that for the last thirty years he has been engaged as counsel in
+almost every important fugitive case brought before the judges and
+courts of Philadelphia, and he tells us, "thanks to those upright and
+impartial and independent judges by whom the rights of the parties were
+finally determined," he knows of no instance in which a colored person
+was, in his opinion, wrongfully surrendered. But he adds, "I have known
+HUNDREDS who have been illegally and unjustly claimed." This experienced
+lawyer, commenting on your law, justly says it allows "_ex parte_
+testimony to be received against the alleged fugitive, which, upon no
+principle known to the common law, could be received upon the claim to
+a horse or a dog." About four weeks after the date of this letter, Mr.
+Brown was called to defend an alleged fugitive "illegally and unjustly
+claimed," not before one of the "upright and impartial and independent"
+Pennsylvania judges, but before one of your ten-dollar slave-catching
+judges. I beg you to mark the result.
+
+On the 21st of December, a colored man was arrested in the street in
+Philadelphia, without warrant, and accused of stealing chickens. He was
+thrust into a carriage, driven to the State-House, carried into an upper
+room, and handcuffed. In this state he was detained till a commissioner
+arrived. The name of this executor of your law is worthy of remembrance.
+EDWARD D. INGRAHAM ought to be as much endeared to slave-catchers, as
+Judge Jeffries was to James the Second.
+
+By some means, the arrest became known, and counsel appeared for the
+prisoner. Your commissioner was informed that the prisoner had only been
+seized an hour and a half before, and had not heard the charge against
+him; that his counsel had had no time to learn the plaintiff's case, nor
+to prepare for the defence; that there were persons residing at a
+distance, some in New Jersey and some in Wilmington, who would be
+important witnesses in his behalf. On these grounds, a motion was made
+for a continuance. And what, Sir, do you suppose was the reply made by
+the slave-catching judge to this motion? "THE HEARING IS TO BE A SUMMARY
+ONE: LET IT PROCEED." No doubt you fully participate in Mr. Webster's
+indignation against Austrian barbarity; but see no barbarity in this
+accursed proceeding against a _colored_ American. The hearing did
+proceed, and James S. Price, on behalf of the plaintiff, swore that the
+prisoner was Emery Rice, the man claimed, but knew nothing further about
+his being a slave, except that he had seen him riding the claimant's
+horse. Had _heard it said_ the prisoner was a slave. This was the amount
+of the testimony on behalf of the claimant. Any honest jury, nay, any
+honest judge, would instantly have decided in favor of the prisoner.
+Not so MR. EDWARD D. INGRAHAM. The counsel for the defendant asked again
+for a postponement, and founded the motion on the _oath_ of the
+defendant, that he could procure six persons, naming them, to testify to
+his freedom. A delay of ONE HOUR was asked for. This was refused, and
+the judge(!) sent for a certificate to sign. During the delay thus
+occasioned, one of the six persons named by the defendant appeared, and
+swore that he had known the prisoner all his life. That he was not Emery
+Rice, but Adam Gibson; that he was a freeman, having been manumitted by
+the will of his late master. Mr. Brown produced a copy of the will of
+the late master, and it so far confirmed the testimony of the witness.
+Another person in the crowd now came forward, and swore that he also
+knew the prisoner, and that he was a free person, and that he was Adam
+Gibson. But all was in vain. The commissioner signed the certificate,
+and, with an obtuseness of intellect which marked him as a fit subject
+for a commission of lunacy, declared, "He had no doubt of the identity
+of the prisoner with the slave Emery Rice, and that _all other
+proceedings must be before the courts of Maryland_, whither he would
+send him."[1] And so the prisoner, without seeing his wife and children,
+whom he had that morning parted from unsuspicious of danger and
+unconscious of crime, was hurried off at the expense of our glorious
+model republic, under an escort of officers, who delivered him, not to
+the courts of Maryland, but to Mr. William S. Knight, the reputed owner.
+But Mr. Knight told the officers, "You have brought me a wrong man; this
+is not Emery Rice; this man is no slave of mine." And so Adam Gibson
+returned to Philadelphia, and is now a living illustration of the
+abominable iniquity of one of the most accursed laws to be found in the
+statute-book of any civilized nation.
+
+[1] See report in the _New York Tribune_, 25th December, 1850.
+
+You do not think your law more barbarous than that of 1793. Let me
+further enlighten you. Judge McLean of the Supreme Court, in his opinion
+delivered last May in the case of _Norris_ v. _Newton et al._,
+remarks,--"In regard to the arrest of fugitives from labor, the law [act
+of 1793] _does not impose any active duties on our citizens generally_";
+and he argues in defence of the law, that "it gives no one a just right
+to complain; he has only to refrain from an express violation of the
+law." In other words, the law only required individuals to be passive
+spectators of a horrible outrage, and did not compel them to be active
+participators in other men's villany. Now, what says your law? Why, that
+every commissioner may appoint as many official slave-catchers as he
+pleases, and that each of these menials may "summon and call to their
+aid the _by-standers_ or _posse comitatus_ of the proper county, when
+necessary to insure a faithful observance of the clause of the
+Constitution referred to in conformity with the provisions of this act,
+AND ALL GOOD CITIZENS ARE HEREBY COMMANDED TO AID AND ASSIST in the
+prompt and efficient execution of this law, whenever their services may
+be required." And what is the fate you have provided for the "good
+citizen," who, believing slavery to be sinful, cannot, in the fear of
+God, "aid and assist" in making a fellow-man a slave? Any person "who
+shall aid, abet, or assist" the fugitive "directly or indirectly"
+(cunning words) to escape from such claimant, as, for instance, refusing
+to join in a slave-hunt when required, shall be fined not exceeding
+$1,000, be imprisoned six months, and pay the claimant $1,000. I hope,
+Sir, you are now able to perceive that your law has a preëminence in
+barbarity over its predecessor. And now, Sir, please to recollect, that
+party discipline, aided by the influence of Messrs. Webster and Clay,
+and the factory and cotton interest of Boston and New York, could not
+procure for this atrocious law the votes of _one half_ the members of
+the House of Representatives. Of two hundred and thirty-two members,
+only one hundred and nine dared to place their names on an enduring and
+shameful record, while many basely deserted their seats, fearing alike
+to vote either for or against it. You, Sir, following Mr. Webster's
+advice, "conquered your prejudices," and in company with _two_ more
+Northern Whigs, one of them a native of Virginia, cast your vote for
+this bill of abominations. But, although you voted for the law, you do
+not wish your constituents to suppose you approved of it. "It will not,
+I trust, be inferred from any thing I have said, that I consider the law
+which has passed unexceptionable. There are amendments which I strongly
+desire to be introduced into it." What are the exceptionable features of
+the law, what are the amendments you desire, you refrain from
+specifying. But you tell us that you would have labored for these
+amendments "had it been possible, but every body knows that it was
+_impracticable_." You allude to the _previous question_, which prevented
+both discussion and amendments. But why, then, did you vote for an
+objectionable bill which could not be amended? Here, again, we have one
+of your unfortunate reasons. "I deem conformity to the design of the
+Constitution more important than the objectionable details of the bill."
+So, by your own confession, had there been no previous question, you
+would have swallowed the bill with all its objectionable details, out of
+reverence for the _design_ of the Constitution, although that design
+neither embraced nor required a single one of those details. Did you,
+Sir, vote _against_ the previous question? On this point you are silent,
+and the minutes afford no information; but _if_ you did, your vote was a
+most remarkable aberration from your proslavery course in Congress.
+_After_ the previous question had been seconded, it was moved to lay the
+bill on the table. Had this motion been carried, you might have
+introduced another bill, omitting the "objectionable details," but you
+voted with the slaveholders. The slaveholders then moved that the bill
+be read a third time. Had this been lost, there would have been a chance
+of correcting the "objectionable details." Again you voted with the
+slaveholders, and a third time, also, on the main question.
+
+I will now, Sir, call your attention to the disastrous influence which
+your law has exerted on the _moral sense_ of the community. Says
+Coleridge, "To dogmatize a crime, that is, to teach it as a doctrine, is
+itself a crime." Of this crime of dogmatizing crime, Mr. Webster, and
+most of our cotton politicians, and, alas! many of our fashionable,
+genteel divines, are guilty; nor are you innocent, Sir, who in your law
+require "GOOD citizens" to aid in hunting and enslaving their
+fellow-men.
+
+In former years, and before Mr. Webster had undergone his metamorphosis,
+he thus, in a speech at New York, expressed himself in regard to the
+antislavery agitation at the North. "It [slavery] has arrested the
+_religious feeling_ of the country; it has taken strong hold of the
+consciences of men. He is a rash man indeed, little conversant with
+human nature, and especially has he a very erroneous estimate of the
+character of the people of this country, who supposes that a feeling of
+this kind is _to be trifled with or despised_." This gentleman has
+become the rash man shadowed forth in his speech, and is trifling with
+and despising the religious feeling of the North. In his street speech
+in Boston, in favor of slave-hunting, he avowed that he was well aware
+that the return of fugitives "is a topic that must excite prejudices,"
+and that the question for Massachusetts to decide was, "whether she will
+conquer her own prejudice." In his letter to the citizens of
+Newburyport, he sneeringly alludes to the "cry that there is a rule for
+the government of public men and private men which is superior to the
+Constitution," and he scornfully intimates that Mr. Horace Mann, who had
+objected to your law as wicked, would do well "to appeal at once, as
+others do, to that high authority which sits enthroned above the
+Constitution and the laws"; and he gives an extract from a nameless
+English correspondent, in which the writer remarks, "Religion is an
+excellent thing except in politics," a maxim exceedingly palatable to
+very many of our politicians. Aware that the impiety of this sentiment
+was not exactly suited to the meridian of Massachusetts, he says his
+friend undoubtedly meant "a fantastical notion of religion." Of course,
+he regards the religious prejudice against hunting and enslaving men as
+springing from a fantastic notion of religion. Yet, with a strange
+fatuity, he confesses that "the teaching of Christ and his Apostles is a
+sure guide to duty in _politics_, as in any other concern of life,"
+utterly oblivious of the fact, that the "higher law," which he
+ridicules, was proclaimed in that very teaching. Christ taught, "Fear
+not them [magistrates] who kill the body, but are not able to kill the
+soul, but rather fear HIM who is able to destroy both soul and body in
+hell." What taught the Apostles? "We must obey God, rather than man."
+Such teaching it was, that gave birth to "the noble army of martyrs,"
+and this very teaching will induce multitudes of Christians at the
+present day to hazard fines and imprisonment rather than obey the wicked
+injunctions of your law. It was this same teaching which, on the
+publication of your law, induced numerous ministers of Jesus Christ, and
+various ecclesiastical assemblies, to denounce it as wicked, and
+obedience to it as rebellion against God. This expression of religious
+sentiment alarmed both our politicians and our merchants. How could the
+one expect Southern votes, or the other Southern trade, if the religious
+people at the North refused to catch slaves? Hence arose a mighty outcry
+against the blending of religion with politics, and most fearful were
+the anathemas against the parsons who desecrated the pulpit by preaching
+politics, that is, preaching that people ought to obey God rather than
+the Fugitive Slave Act. Such men were, in the language of one of the New
+York commercial journals, "clerical preachers of rebellion," and their
+congregations were exhorted to "leave them to naked walls." But the
+leaven was at work, and an antidote was greatly wanted. Supply of course
+follows demand, and forthwith there was a sudden advent of cotton
+clergyman, preaching against rebellion, and cunningly confounding a
+conscientious, passive disobedience with forcible resistance. Their
+sermons, in which virtually
+
+    "The image of God was accounted as base,
+    And the image of Cæsar set up in its place,"
+
+were received with mighty applause by the very men who had been striving
+to save the pulpit from all contaminating contact with politics, and the
+reverend preachers of cotton politics were elevated into patriots, and
+their disquisitions against the "higher law" were scattered on the wings
+of the commercial press broadcast over the land.[2] The theology which
+holds that the allegiance we owe to civil government binds the
+conscience to obedience to its mandates, is the same with which
+Shakspeare's assassin quieted his scruples when acting under the royal
+command,--"If a king bid a man be a villain, he is bound by the
+indenture of his oath to be one."
+
+[2] In one of the most celebrated of these sermons, we find the
+following broad assertion:--"If God _has_ left to men the choice of the
+_kind_ of government they will have, he has _not_ left it to their
+choice whether they will obey human government or not. He has
+_commanded_ that obedience." Our rulers command us, when required by a
+commissioner's agent, to aid in hunting and seizing our innocent
+fellow-men, and delivering them into the hands of their task-masters.
+That the reverend preacher would render a cheerful obedience to such a
+mandate, there is little doubt. We read that the Jewish rulers, "The
+chief priests and Pharisees, had given a _commandment_, that, if any one
+knew where he (Jesus) was, he should show it, that they might take him."
+Strange is it, that of the college of Apostles there was but one "good
+citizen," who rendered obedience to the powers ordained by God; all the
+others suffered death for their wilful, deliberate defiance of the laws
+and the magistrates of the land. As a specimen of the teaching of these
+cotton divines, I quote from this same admired sermon the following
+precious piece of information, viz.:--"Nor is it true that the _fugitive
+slave_ is made an _outlaw_, and on that ground justifiable for bloody
+and murderous resistance of law. He is under _the protection of law_;
+and if any man injures him, or kills him, the law will avenge him, just
+_as soon as it would you or me_." To deny the truth of this solemn
+declaration, made in the house of God, would be, in the reverend
+gentleman's estimation, but a portion of "that perpetual abuse of our
+Southern brethren" of which he complains. He must, however, permit us to
+call his attention to the following advertisements respecting a FUGITIVE
+SLAVE, published in the Wilmington Journal of the 18th of October last,
+in pursuance of a law of the State of North Carolina.
+
+"_State of North Carolina, New Hanover County._--Whereas complaint upon
+oath hath this day been made to us, two of the justice of the peace for
+the State and County aforesaid, by Guilford Horn, of Edgecombe County,
+that a certain male slave belonging to him, named HARRY,--a carpenter by
+trade, about 40 years old, 5 feet 5 inches high, or thereabouts, yellow
+complexion, stout built, with a scar on his left leg (from the cut of an
+axe), has very thick lips, eyes deep sunk in his head, forehead very
+square, tolerably loud voice, has lost one or two of his upper teeth,
+and has a very dark spot on his jaw, supposed to be a mark,--hath
+_absented_ himself from his master's service, and is _supposed_ to be
+lurking about in this County, committing acts of felony or other
+misdeeds: These are, therefore, in the name of the State aforesaid, to
+command said slave forthwith to surrender himself, and return home to
+his master; and we do hereby, by virtue of the act of Assembly in such
+case made and provided, intimate and declare that if the said slave
+Harry doth not surrender himself, and return home immediately after the
+publication of these presents, that any person or persons may KILL and
+DESTROY the said slave by such means as he may think fit, without
+accusation or impeachment of any crime or offence for so doing, and
+without incurring any penalty or forfeiture thereby.
+
+"Given under our hands and seals, this 29th day of June, 1850.
+
+"JAMES T. MILLER, J. P.
+
+"W. C. BENTTENCOURT, J. P.
+
+"ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY-FIVE DOLLARS REWARD will be paid for the
+delivery of said HARRY to me at Tonsott Depot, Edgecombe County, or for
+his confinement in any jail in the State, so that I can get him; or one
+hundred and fifty dollars will be given for his HEAD. He was lately
+heard from in Newbern, where he called himself Henry Barnes (or Burns)
+and will be likely to continue the name or assume that of Coppage or
+Farmer. He has a free mulatto woman for a wife, by the name of Sally
+Bozeman, who has lately removed to Wilmington, and lives in that part of
+the town called Texas, where he will likely be lurking.
+
+"GUILFORD HORN.
+
+"_June 29, 1850._"
+
+It is amusing to observe with what awful reverence our merchants and
+brokers regard the sanctity of human law, when it commands them to catch
+slaves; a reverence not always felt by them for the statute of usury
+when the money market is tight.
+
+A vast deal of nonsense and impiety has been recently thrown upon the
+public in relation to the "higher law," by men who had political and
+pecuniary interests depending on the good-will of the slaveholders. The
+whole subject is perfectly simple and intelligible, and has been
+intentionally misrepresented and mystified.
+
+Human government is indispensable to the happiness and progress of human
+society. Hence God, in his wisdom and benevolence, wills its existence;
+and in this sense, and this alone, the powers that be are ordained by
+him. But civil government cannot exist, if each individual may, at his
+pleasure, forcibly resist its injunctions. Therefore Christians are
+required to _submit_ to the powers that be, whether a Nero or a
+slave-catching Congress. But obedience to the civil ruler often
+necessarily involves rebellion to God. Hence we are warned by Christ and
+his Apostles, and by the example of saints in all ages, in such cases,
+not to obey, but to submit and suffer. We are to hold fast our
+allegiance to Jehovah, but at the same time not take up arms to defend
+ourselves against the penalties imposed by the magistrate for our
+disobedience. Thus the Divine sovereignty and the authority of human
+government are both maintained. Revolution is not the abolition of human
+government, but a change in its form, and its lawfulness depends on
+circumstances. What was the "den" in which John Bunyan had his glorious
+vision of the Pilgrim's Progress? A prison to which he was confined for
+years for refusing obedience to human laws. And what excuse did this
+holy man make for conduct now denounced as wicked and rebellious? "I
+cannot obey, but I can suffer." The Quakers have from the first refused
+to obey the law requiring them to bear arms; yet have they never been
+vilified by our politicians and cotton clergymen, as rebels against the
+powers that be, nor sneered at for their acknowledgment of a "higher"
+than human law. The Lord Jesus Christ, after requiring us to love God
+and our neighbour, added, "There is none other commandment greater than
+these"; no, not even a slave-catching act of Congress, which requires us
+to hunt our neighbour, that he may be reduced to the condition of a
+beast of burden. Rarely has the religious faith of the community
+received so rude a shock as that which has been given it by your
+horrible law, and the principles advanced by its political and clerical
+supporters. Cruelty, oppression, and injustice are elevated into
+virtues, while justice, mercy, and compassion are ridiculed and
+vilified.
+
+But lately, the business of catching slaves was regarded as one of the
+lowest grades of scoundrelism. Now, great pains are taken by our
+gentlemen of property and standing to ennoble it; and men of eminence in
+the legal profession are stooping to take the wages of iniquity, and
+lending themselves to consign to the horrors of American slavery men
+whom they know to be innocent of crime. Nay, we have seen in New York a
+committee of gentlemen actually _raising money by voluntary
+contribution_ to furnish a slave-catcher with professional services
+gratis;--a free gift, not to mitigate human misery, but to aggravate the
+hardships of the poor and friendless a thousandfold. Can men of standing
+in the community thus openly espouse the cause of cruelty and
+oppression, and, from commercial and political views, trample upon every
+principle of Christian benevolence, without corrupting the moral sense
+of the people to the extent of their influence? When gentlemen club
+together to hire a lawyer to assist a slave-catcher, no wonder that the
+commercial press should teem with the vilest abuse of all who feel
+sympathy for the fugitive. One of the most malignant proslavery journals
+in New York is edited by your colleague and fellow-Whig, the Honorable
+Mr. Brooks, and his brother. I copy, Sir, for your consideration, the
+following article from the _New York Evening Express_, published during
+the late trial in that city of Henry Long, an alleged fugitive:--
+
+"Two fugitive cases are now before our courts; one that of the negro
+Henry Long, and the other that of three white Frenchmen, under the
+extradition treaty with France. The negro's case makes a great deal of
+noise, because he is black; the three white Frenchmen are hardly heard
+of. The three white French people pay their own counsel: they may have
+committed a robbery in Paris, or may not; are perhaps innocent, though
+possibly guilty; but here they are on trial, with no chance of a trial
+before a jury! If they are sent back, and are convicted, they go to the
+galleys, and are slaves for life. The negro, Henry Long, lucky fellow
+for being black! lives in clover here, and has one of the best speakers
+in the city, on the best fee, interests all the Abolitionists in all
+quarters, who contribute money freely for his defence, and if he is
+returned, leaves here canonized as a martyr, and goes back to the
+condition he was born in, to fatten on hog and hominy, better fed and
+better clothed than nine tenths of the farm laborers in Great Britain.
+Another consideration strikes us, and that is, the cost of defending
+Long will buy his freedom three times over. The very fee of his counsel
+would purchase his freedom. But to buy him and pay for him, _not steal_
+him, would leave no room for agitation. And where does this money come
+from, that cares for Long and neglects the three Frenchmen? From
+England, in the main, we believe. The Abolitionists here do not
+_contribute it_."
+
+It would be difficult to find in the Satanic press a more clumsy piece
+of malignant falsehood. We have here, from the same pen, and in the same
+article, the assertions, that the Abolitionists, in all quarters, we are
+assured, "contribute money freely for his defence"; and then the money,
+it is believed, comes mainly from England. "The Abolitionists here do
+not contribute it." To contribute money for the legal defence of a
+fugitive is _stealing him_. The cost of defending Long amounted to three
+times the price that would be asked for him. Long, after his return,
+sold in Richmond for $750; of course his defence cost $2,250. To whom,
+and for what, was this money paid? Long could not be bought in New York,
+all advances for the purpose being peremptorily repulsed. His counsel's
+fee was $300, being all contributed in New York, and about $100 of it
+being raised by the free colored people. While $300 were thus raised to
+give Long the chance of a legal defence, gentlemen of the New York Union
+Safety Committee, of which your colleague has the honor of being a
+member, contributed $500 to aid the slave-catcher in reducing to bondage
+a man unaccused of crime!
+
+I am inclined to believe, Sir, that you have little cause to
+congratulate yourself, that, in voting for the Fugitive Slave Law, you
+have advanced the cause of truth, justice, humanity, or religion.
+
+A refusal to _obey_ your wicked law has been artfully represented as a
+determination to _resist_ its execution. Very few of our white
+population have intimated the most distant intention of resorting to
+illegal violence. Very many ecclesiastical bodies have denounced your
+law as so iniquitous, that they could not in conscience obey it; but I
+challenge you to point to a _single instance_ in which such a body has
+recommended forcible resistance. To the vast accumulation of impiety
+uttered in support of your law has been added a fiendish ridicule of the
+benevolent and Christian feeling arrayed against it. It is true, that
+some of our free blacks and fugitives have declared, that they would, at
+the hazard of their lives, defend themselves against the kidnapper.
+Whatever may be thought of the wisdom of such a determination, be
+assured it will tax your logical powers to the utmost to prove that God
+has conferred the right of self-defence exclusively upon white men. The
+slave is a prisoner of war, and instead of being protected by law, he is
+subjected by it to every conceivable outrage. When murdered, his owner
+seeks in the courts _damages_ at the hands of the murderer, as he would
+for the death of his horse. For no possible injury committed on his
+person, either by his owner or others, can he receive compensation,
+although the law may profess to punish cruelty to him as to other
+animals. Now it has never been regarded as immoral, by those who admit
+the right of self-defence, for a prisoner of war to effect his escape by
+slaying his guard. All this, I know, will horrify a certain class of
+our divines and politicians. But let them be patient. I am not laying
+down a doctrine, but stating _facts_, which they may disprove if they
+can. Let them remember, that all the slavery which they delight to find
+in the Bible was the slavery of _white_ men, and that the Roman slaves
+in the time of Christ, whose bondage, we are told, he and his Apostles
+approved, were held by the _right of war_. White Americans have been
+held as slaves by the same holy and Scriptural tenure. Let us, then,
+inquire how the escape and resistance of white slaves have heretofore
+been regarded. In 1535, the _white_ slaves in Tunis alone amounted to
+twenty thousand. Cervantes, who had himself been a slave in Algiers,
+says in his writings, "For liberty we ought to risk life itself; slavery
+being the greatest evil that can fall to the lot of man." Acting upon
+this precept, he himself, while a slave, planned a general insurrection
+of the slaves. Yet Cervantes was recognized as a faithful son of the
+Church, and the license prefixed to his works declares they contain
+nothing contrary to the Christian religion. The Annual Register for 1763
+announces, that, "last month, the Christian slaves at Algiers, to the
+number of four thousand, rose and killed their guards, and massacred all
+who came in their way." The insurrection was suppressed, but no one in
+Europe denounced the insurgents as bloodthirsty wretches, nor regarded
+their effort as an impious and anti-Christian rebellion against the
+powers ordained of God. In the reign of Elizabeth, one John Fox, a slave
+on the Barbary coast, slew his master, and, effecting his escape with a
+number of his fellow-slaves, arrived in England. The queen, instead of
+looking upon him as a murderer, testified her admiration of his exploit
+by allowing him a pension.[3]
+
+[3] For the facts on this subject, see the admirable work by Charles
+Sumner, entitled "White Slavery in the Barbary States."
+
+Washington Madison performed a similar exploit on board an American
+coast slaver, and arrived, with a large number of his fellow-slaves, in
+the British West Indies. Mr. Webster, then Secretary of State,
+officially demanded of the British government the surrender of this
+heroic man as a MURDERER.
+
+In 1793, there were one hundred and fifteen American slaves in Algiers,
+held by as perfect and Scriptural a tenure as any slave is now held in
+any part of our wide republic. Had one of these slaves made his escape
+by killing his Algerine master, would any of our patriotic divines,
+would any gentleman of the "New York Union Committee of Safety," would
+even Mr. Webster himself, have pronounced him a murderer? Had the
+captain of a British ship favored his escape, and given him a passage to
+Boston, would your colleague, the Honorable Mr. Brooks, have accused him
+of slave-stealing? Is it not possible, Sir, that, with very many of our
+casuists and moralists, questions of conscience are decided according to
+the tincture of a skin?
+
+I will now ask your attention to some of the political consequences
+resulting from the late measures in which you rejoice, and for which you
+voted. No sooner had Congress made the required concessions to the slave
+power, than the advocates of those measures claimed the glory of having
+given peace to the country, and perpetuity to the Union. Mr. Webster, as
+one of the chief agents in this blessed consummation, received the
+congratulations of a crowd in Washington. In his reply he
+observed,--"Truly, gentlemen, the last two days have been great days. A
+work has been accomplished which dissipates doubts and alarms, puts an
+end to angry controversies, fortifies the Constitution of the country,
+and strengthens the bond of the Union.
+
+    'Now is the winter of our discontent
+    Made glorious summer;....
+    And all the clouds that lowered upon our house
+    In the deep bosom of the ocean buried.'"
+
+The glorious summer anticipated by the orator proved cold and brief, and
+if the lowering clouds were indeed buried in the ocean, the sea has
+given up its dead. Never before, since the organization of the
+government, has such a tempest of indignation swept over the land. Never
+before, in a single instance, has there been manifested throughout the
+religious portion of the community, of all creeds and names, such a
+settled determination in the fear of God to withhold obedience to a law
+of the land. The sentiments of the great mass of the people of the free
+States, exclusive of the commercial cities, are briefly but emphatically
+embodied in a resolution of the Common Council of Chicago, viz.:--"The
+Fugitive Slave Act recently passed by Congress is revolting to our moral
+sense, and an outrage on our feelings of justice and humanity, because
+it disregards all the securities which the Constitution and laws have
+thrown around personal liberty, and its direct tendency is to alienate
+the people from their love and reverence for the government and
+institutions of our country."
+
+How far the clouds which hovered over our house have been dissipated,
+let the recent rout of Mr. Webster's party in Massachusetts testify. Let
+his own declaration, a month after the _peace_ measures were adopted,
+that the Union was passing through a _fiery trial_, testify.[4] How far
+the work of the two days has fortified the Constitution, let the recent
+law of Vermont, denounced as an utter nullification of the Constitution,
+because it rescues the alleged fugitive from the hands of the
+commissioner, and gives him a jury trial before a State court, testify.
+When rumors were rife that Mr. Webster intended to repudiate his own
+thunder, the Wilmot Proviso, the _New York Herald_, the chief Northern
+organ of the slaveholders, promised that, if the Senator would indeed
+pursue a course so patriotic, a grateful country would, at the next
+election, place him in the Presidential chair. But scarcely had the acts
+advocated by Mr. Webster been consummated, than the _Herald_, with
+sardonic malice, announces,--"The predictions of Mr. Clay, that the
+Compromise Bill would speedily conciliate all parties, and restore the
+era of good feeling, were exactly the reverse of the actual
+consequences. Mr. Webster has been cast overboard in Massachusetts.
+General Cass has been virtually condemned in Michigan. Mr. Dickinson,
+the President, and his cabinet, have been routed in New York. Mr. Phelps
+has been superseded in Vermont. Whilst in Ohio, Illinois, Iowa, and
+Wisconsin, the Free-Soilers have carried off the booty." And he winds up
+with declaring, that the next President "can't be Fillmore nor Webster."
+
+[4] Letter to Union Meeting in New York, 28th Oct., 1850.
+
+If the "peace measures" have strengthened the bond of the Union, what
+mean all the meetings lately held to _save the Union_? Why is the tocsin
+now sounded by the very authors and friends of the measures? How comes
+it that, in Boston itself, the chairman of a Union meeting contradicts
+the exulting and jubilant shout of triumph uttered by the Secretary of
+State, and makes the following doleful announcement:--"The Union, and
+consequently the existence of this nation, is menaced, and unless there
+is a great and general effort in their support, we may soon behold the
+mighty fabric of our government trembling over our heads, and
+threatening by its fall to crush the prosperity which we have so long
+and happily enjoyed." So relaxed has become the bond of our Union, that
+one hundred gentlemen of property and standing in New York have, under
+the style and title of "The New York Union Committee of Safety," assumed
+the onerous task of taking it into their safe-keeping. "Committees of
+safety" are associated with times of peril and anarchy, and are never
+wanted when alarms have ceased, angry discussions ended, the
+Constitution fortified, and the bond of union strengthened.
+
+In this universal panic, in this dread entertained, especially in
+Boston, by Mr. Webster's friends, of soon seeing the mighty fabric of
+our government trembling over their heads, it may, Sir, be consolatory
+to you and others to know how so dire a calamity may be averted. The
+chivalric Senator from Mississippi--the gentleman who threatens to hang
+one Senator if he dare place his foot on the soil of Mississippi, who
+draws a loaded pistol on another, and for a third bears a challenge to
+mortal combat--was lately in the city of New York. The Committee of
+Safety found him out, and lauded him for his fearless discharge of duty,
+and his fervor and devotion to the Union, and welcomed him to the
+commercial emporium in the name of all who appreciate the blessings we
+enjoy, and are willing to transmit them to their children. The worthy
+and conciliatory gentleman very appropriately communicated to the
+committee having the Union in charge the conditions on which alone it
+could be saved, notwithstanding its bond had so recently been
+strengthened. These conditions are, we learn, four in number.
+
+1. "The Fugitive Slave Bill passed by Congress shall remain the law of
+the land, and be faithfully executed."
+
+Both you and Mr. Webster admit that the Constitution permits a jury
+trial to the fugitive. Should Congress, in its wisdom, and in obedience
+to the wishes of the great mass of the Northern population, and in the
+exercise of its constitutional power, elevate property in a human being
+to the same level with that in a horse, and permit a jury to pass upon
+the title to it,--_the Union must be dissolved_.
+
+2. "The Wilmot Proviso, that monstrous thing, shall not be revived." It
+was not courteous, certainly, in Mr. Foote thus to characterize Mr.
+Webster's thunder. The claim to this thunder was made in his speech,
+September, 1847, at the Springfield Convention, which nominated him for
+President; and the Convention, in his presence, thus declared their
+devotion to his missile. "The Whigs of Massachusetts now declare, and
+put this declaration of their purpose _on record_, that Massachusetts
+will never consent that Mexican territories, however acquired, shall
+become a part of the American Union, unless on the _unalterable_
+condition that there shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude,
+otherwise than in punishment for crime." The next year Mr. Webster
+launched his thunder over the Territory of Oregon, and thus in his
+speech (10th August, 1848) vindicated it from the character now given to
+it by Mr. Foote:--
+
+"Gentlemen from the South declare that we invade their rights when we
+deprive them of a participation in the enjoyment of territories acquired
+by the common services and common exertions of all. Is this true? Of
+what do we deprive them? Why, they say that we deprive them of the
+privilege of carrying their slaves as slaves into the new territories.
+Well, Sir, what is the amount of that? They say, that in this way we
+deprive them of going into this acquired territory with their property.
+Their property! What do they mean by this 'property'? We certainly do
+not deprive them of the privilege of going into those newly acquired
+territories with all that, in the general estimate of human society and
+common and universal understanding of mankind, is esteemed property. Not
+at all. The truth is just this. They have in their own States peculiar
+laws which create property in persons.... The real meaning, then, of
+Southern gentlemen, in making this complaint, is, that they cannot go
+into the territories of the United States carrying with them their own
+peculiar law, a law which creates property in persons."
+
+So the Wilmot Proviso was no monstrous thing at all, as applied to
+Oregon. When the question came up of applying this same Proviso to New
+Mexico and California, Mr. Webster discovered in these Territories a
+certain peculiarity of physical geography and Asiatic scenery which he
+had not discovered in Oregon, and which, he found, rendered it a
+physical impossibility for Southern gentlemen to carry there "a law
+which creates property in persons," and he therefore gave them full
+liberty to carry their law into those vast regions, if they could. But
+at the very moment of giving this liberty to Southern gentlemen, he
+courageously warned them that his thunder was good constitutional
+thunder, and would be used whenever necessary. "Wherever there is an
+_inch of land_ to be stayed back from becoming slave territory, I am
+ready to insert the principle of the exclusion of slavery. I am pledged
+to that from 1837,--pledged to it again and again, and I will perform
+those pledges." So, should we get another slice of Mexico, or annex Cuba
+or St. Domingo, Mr. Webster would revive the Wilmot Proviso, and then
+_he_ will be the means, if he succeeds, of dissolving the Union!
+
+3. The next condition announced to the Safety Committee is,--"No attempt
+shall be made in Congress to prohibit slavery in the District of
+Columbia."
+
+Now it is the opinion of Mr. Webster, that Congress has the
+constitutional right, not merely to attempt, but actually to effect, the
+exclusion of slavery in _all_ the Territories of the United States. The
+District of Columbia being placed by the Constitution expressly under
+"the exclusive jurisdiction" of Congress, the _constitutional_ right to
+abolish slavery there has rarely been questioned; but it has been
+contended that good faith to the States which ceded the District forbids
+such an act of constitutional power. Hence, in 1838, a resolution was
+introduced into the Senate declaring that the abolition of slavery in
+the District would be "a violation of good faith," &c. What said Mr.
+Webster? "I do not know any matter of fact, or any ground of argument,
+on which this affirmation of plighted faith can stand. I see nothing in
+the act of cession, and nothing in the Constitution, and nothing in the
+transaction, implying any limitation on the authority of Congress."[5]
+
+[5] On the 10th of January, 1838, Mr. Clay moved in the Senate the
+following resolution, viz.:--"Resolved, that the interference by the
+citizens of any of the States with a view to the abolition of slavery in
+this District, is endangering the rights and security of the people of
+this District; and that any act or measure of Congress designed to
+abolish slavery in this District would be a violation of the faith
+implied in the cession by the States of Virginia and Maryland, a just
+cause of alarm to the people of the slaveholding States, and have a
+direct and inevitable tendency to disturb and endanger the
+Union."--Passed, 38 to 8, Mr. Webster voting in the negative. _Senate
+Journal_, _2 Sess. 25 Cong._, p. 127.
+
+4. The last condition on which the Union can be preserved is,--"No State
+shall be prevented from coming into the Union on the ground of having
+slavery." This is an unkind cut at Mr. Webster, since he has again and
+again pledged himself against the admission of slave States. Even so
+early as 1819, he advocated, in a public meeting at Boston, a resolution
+declaring that Congress "possessed the constitutional power, upon the
+admission of any new State created beyond the limits of the original
+territory of the United States, to make the prohibition of the further
+extension of slavery or involuntary servitude in such new State a
+condition of admission. That, in the opinion of this meeting, it is just
+and expedient that this power should be exercised by Congress upon the
+admission of all new States created beyond the original limits of the
+United States." In his New York speech, in 1837, he averred, "When it is
+proposed to bring new members into the political partnership, the old
+members have a right to say on what terms such new partners are to come
+in, and _what they are to bring along with them_." In his Springfield
+speech, he insisted, "There is no one [he forgot Mr. Foote and his other
+Southern friends] who can complain of the North for resisting the
+increase of _slave representation_, because it gives power to the
+minority in a manner inconsistent with the principles of our
+government." So late as 1848, he proclaimed on the floor of the Senate,
+"I shall oppose all such extension [slave representation] at all times
+and under all circumstances, even against all inducements, against all
+combinations, against all compromises."
+
+The State of Georgia, in her convention of December last, added a
+_fifth_ condition to those stated by Mr. Foote as indispensable to the
+preservation of the Union, viz.:--"No act suppressing the slave-trade
+between the slaveholding States." Unfortunately for Mr. Webster, he is
+here, for the fifth time, virtually held up as a disorganizer, and an
+enemy of the Union; for in his speech in the Senate (6th February, 1837)
+he remarked,--"As to the point, the right of regulating the transfer of
+slaves from one State to another, he did not know that he entertained
+any doubt, because the Constitution gave Congress the right to regulate
+trade and commerce between the States. Trade in what? In whatever was
+the subject of commerce and ownership. If slaves were the subjects of
+ownership, then trade in them between the States was subject to the
+regulation of Congress."
+
+Mr. Webster declared, that the work of the two days in which he rejoiced
+had fortified the Constitution, and strengthened the bond of the Union;
+and yet we are now solemnly warned, by the very men and party with whom
+he is acting, that the bond is to be severed, should Congress pass any
+one of five laws, all and each of which he, the great expounder,
+declares the Constitution authorizes Congress to pass. So it seems the
+great peril to which we are exposed, the course which is to make the
+fabric of our government to tremble over the heads of the people of
+Boston, is, not the violation of the Constitution, nor the breach of its
+compromises, nor the invasion of the rights of the South, but the
+exercise by Congress of powers which Mr. Webster declares to be
+undoubtedly constitutional. The Abolitionists supposed they were
+following a safe guide when they confined themselves, in their petitions
+to Congress for legislative action against slavery, exclusively to such
+measures as they were assured, by the eminent expounder, were strictly
+constitutional. The Abolitionists have sympathized with this gentleman
+in the obloquy he incurred, in common with themselves, for holding
+opinions unpalatable to the slaveholders, and for maintaining the
+constitutional rights of Congress. Because he insisted, in the Senate,
+on the power of Congress over slavery and the slave-trade in the
+District of Columbia, Mr. Rives, of Virginia, was so unkind as to say,
+that the gentleman from Massachusetts, "if it so pleased his fancy,
+might disport himself in tossing squibs and firebrands about this hall;
+but those who are sitting upon a barrel of gunpowder, liable to be blown
+up by his dangerous missiles, could hardly be expected to be quite as
+calm and philosophic." Because he presented antislavery petitions, and
+insisted on the duty of Congress to consider them, Mr. King, of Alabama,
+affirmed that the course which the Senator from Massachusetts had taken
+had "placed him at the head of those men who are inundating Congress
+with their petitions." Strange as it may now seem, Mr. Cuthbert, of
+Georgia, told Mr. Webster to his face in the Senate, "The gentleman had
+uniformly been opposed to all those measures which tended to quiet the
+country and heal those sectional dissensions which distract the
+Union."[6] Surely, when the Abolitionists have so long made Mr. Webster
+their polar star in all constitutional questions, and have incurred with
+him the accusation of tossing squibs and firebrands, and of opposing
+measures which tended to quiet the country and settle sectional
+dissensions, they had a right to expect from his friends a larger share
+of compassion and forbearance than they have experienced.
+
+[6] Speech, June 8, 1836.
+
+It would seem, Sir, that, in the late treaty of peace between the North
+and the South, it has been agreed and understood, that every power
+granted by the Constitution, whereby slavery can be protected, extended,
+and perpetuated, is to be actively enforced; and that every power which
+might be used for curtailing human bondage, however unquestionable may
+be its grant, shall for ever remain dormant, under the penalty of an
+immediate dissolution of the Union. This, Sir, is the treaty which our
+commercial cities are glorifying; this is the treaty which has turned
+our "winter of discontent" into "glorious summer." And think you, Sir,
+that the slaveholders, having eyes, see not, and having understandings,
+perceive not, the haberdashery patriotism which rejoices in such a
+treaty, and denounces as "fanatics," "vipers," and "woolly-headed
+philanthropists," all who do not confess it to be a glorious
+consummation? The Southern papers tell us that our Union meetings are
+got up to "sell a little more tape and flannel"; and they remark, "It is
+very queer that Union meetings are held only in places which trade with
+the South." Out of regard to their Southern brethren, a member of the
+British House of Commons was insulted in Faneuil Hall by a portion of
+the Boston people, and forthwith the _New Orleans Delta_, instead of
+gratefully acknowledging the compliment, remarks, that their "good
+Union-loving friends in Boston are now solacing the South with
+sugar-plums in the shape of resolutions and speeches, and spice in the
+form of a row, got up on the occasion of the first appearance of George
+Thompson, an imported incendiary and hireling agitator. Such
+manifestation possesses an advantage which doubtless constitutes no
+small recommendation with our good brethren of Boston,--it is very
+cheap. The _cottoncratical_ clerks and warehousemen may raise a hubbub
+in Faneuil Hall, but the fanatics can slay them at the _polls_."
+
+It is some consolation to those who are now suffering all the contempt
+and opprobrium which can be thrown both upon their heads and their
+hearts, because they have refused to follow Mr. Webster in the devious
+paths in which it has lately been his pleasure to walk, that they have
+by their constancy and firmness extorted from their Southern antagonists
+a tribute which is not paid to their revilers. Said Mr. Stanley, of
+Virginia, in his speech in the House of Representatives last March,
+speaking of a certain class of Northern politicians,--"I would say, with
+a slight alteration of one of Canning's verses,--
+
+    'Give me the avowed, erect, and manly foe,
+    Open I can meet, perhaps may turn, his blow;
+    But of all the plagues, great Heaven, thy wrath can send,
+    Save, O, save me from a _dough-face friend_!'"
+
+In closing this long letter, permit me to advert to the opinion
+expressed abroad of your Fugitive Law. Mr. Webster thought it convenient
+to quote the sentiment of a nameless correspondent, as to the
+mischievous mixture of religion with politics. Possibly the opinion of
+Dr. Lushington, one of the Lords of the Privy Council, Judge of the
+Vice-Admiralty Court, and the negotiator, on the part of Great Britain,
+of a recent treaty with France, may be entitled to at least equal
+weight. This gentleman, in a private letter to an English friend, and
+not intended for publication, thus speaks of your law:--"No one can feel
+more sincerely than myself, abhorrence of the Fugitive Slave Bill,--a
+measure as cruel and unchristian as ever disgraced any country." An
+Irish liberal, writing from Dublin, says,--"I long looked to your
+country as the ark of the world's liberties. I confess I hope for this
+no longer. The Fugitive Slave Bill is a shocking sample of the depravity
+of public sentiment in the United States. So atrocious a measure could
+not have passed into a law, if the majority of the people had not
+actively assented, or passively consented. Here, by the preponderating
+influence of our aristocracy, a small, but compact body, measures are
+often carried into laws that are very distasteful to multitudes; but
+such a mean, vile law as the Fugitive Slave Bill could not pass in
+England."
+
+The English press, Whig, Tory, and Radical, is indignant at the
+atrocities of your law. The taunt of our slaveholders, that the English
+had better reform abuses at home, is thus met by a radical journal (_The
+People_):--"The Americans laugh at us when we speak of American slavery,
+so long as so many of our fellow-subjects in England and Ireland are
+perishing from starvation through monarchical and aristocratical
+tyranny. We answer, that the Americans _know_ that the men and women who
+lift up their voices against American slavery are the enemies of British
+tyranny and oppression."
+
+Your law, Sir, degrades the national character abroad; its excessive
+servility to Southern dictation excites the contempt of the slaveholders
+for the easy, selfish virtue of their Northern auxiliaries, while its
+outrages upon religion, justice, humanity, and the dearest principles of
+personal freedom, under pretence of preserving the Union, weaken the
+attachment of conscientious men for a confederacy which requires such
+horrible sacrifices for its continuance. All these evils might have been
+easily avoided by a law satisfying every requirement of the
+Constitution, and yet treating the alleged fugitive as a MAN, and
+granting him the same protection as is accorded to an alleged murderer.
+God gave you, Sir, an opportunity for which you ought to have been
+grateful, of illustrating your Puritan descent by standing forth before
+the nation as an advocate of justice and freedom, and of the rights of
+the poor and oppressed. Through a blind devotion to a political leader,
+you rejected the palm which Providence tendered to your acceptance, and
+have indelibly associated your name with cruelty and injustice. Had you
+retired from the notice of the public, as you did from the suffrages of
+the electors, you had acted wisely. In an evil hour for yourself, you
+stood forth as the champion of the Fugitive Slave Law. Its enemies
+rejoice in your rashness, for your feeble apology has rendered its
+deformities more prominent, and, by failing to vindicate, you have
+virtually confessed its abominations. May you live, Sir, to deplore the
+grievous error you have committed, and, by your future efforts in behalf
+of human freedom and happiness, atone for the wound they have received
+at your hands.
+
+HANCOCK.
+
+February, 1851.
+
+
+
+
+
+End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of A Letter to the Hon. Samuel Eliot,
+Representative in Congress From the City of Boston, In Reply to His Apology For Voting For the Fugitive Slave Bill., by Hancock
+
+*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK LETTER TO HON. SAMUEL ELIOT ***
+
+***** This file should be named 31191-8.txt or 31191-8.zip *****
+This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
+        https://www.gutenberg.org/3/1/1/9/31191/
+
+Produced by Meredith Bach, Odessa Paige Turner and the
+Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net
+(This book was produced from scanned images of public
+domain material from the Google Print project.)
+
+
+Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
+will be renamed.
+
+Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
+one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
+(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
+permission and without paying copyright royalties.  Special rules,
+set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
+copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
+protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark.  Project
+Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
+charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission.  If you
+do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
+rules is very easy.  You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
+such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
+research.  They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
+practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks.  Redistribution is
+subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
+redistribution.
+
+
+
+*** START: FULL LICENSE ***
+
+THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
+PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
+
+To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
+distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
+(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
+https://gutenberg.org/license).
+
+
+Section 1.  General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works
+
+1.A.  By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
+and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
+(trademark/copyright) agreement.  If you do not agree to abide by all
+the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
+all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
+If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
+terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
+entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
+
+1.B.  "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark.  It may only be
+used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
+agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.  There are a few
+things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.  See
+paragraph 1.C below.  There are a lot of things you can do with Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
+and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.  See paragraph 1.E below.
+
+1.C.  The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
+or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works.  Nearly all the individual works in the
+collection are in the public domain in the United States.  If an
+individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
+located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
+copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
+works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
+are removed.  Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
+Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
+freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
+this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
+the work.  You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
+keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.
+
+1.D.  The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
+what you can do with this work.  Copyright laws in most countries are in
+a constant state of change.  If you are outside the United States, check
+the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
+before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
+creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
+Gutenberg-tm work.  The Foundation makes no representations concerning
+the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
+States.
+
+1.E.  Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
+
+1.E.1.  The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
+access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
+whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
+phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
+copied or distributed:
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+1.E.2.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
+from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
+posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
+and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
+or charges.  If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
+with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
+work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
+through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
+Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
+1.E.9.
+
+1.E.3.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
+with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
+must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
+terms imposed by the copyright holder.  Additional terms will be linked
+to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
+permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
+
+1.E.4.  Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
+work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
+
+1.E.5.  Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
+electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
+prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
+active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm License.
+
+1.E.6.  You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
+compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
+word processing or hypertext form.  However, if you provide access to or
+distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
+"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
+posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
+you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
+copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
+request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
+form.  Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
+
+1.E.7.  Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
+performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
+unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+1.E.8.  You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
+access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
+that
+
+- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
+     the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
+     you already use to calculate your applicable taxes.  The fee is
+     owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
+     has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
+     Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.  Royalty payments
+     must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
+     prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
+     returns.  Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
+     sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
+     address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
+     the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
+
+- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
+     you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
+     does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+     License.  You must require such a user to return or
+     destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
+     and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
+     Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
+     money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
+     electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
+     of receipt of the work.
+
+- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
+     distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+1.E.9.  If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
+forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
+both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
+Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark.  Contact the
+Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
+
+1.F.
+
+1.F.1.  Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
+effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
+public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
+collection.  Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
+"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
+corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
+property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
+computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
+your equipment.
+
+1.F.2.  LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
+of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
+liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
+fees.  YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
+LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
+PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3.  YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
+TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
+LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
+INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
+DAMAGE.
+
+1.F.3.  LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
+defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
+receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
+written explanation to the person you received the work from.  If you
+received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
+your written explanation.  The person or entity that provided you with
+the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
+refund.  If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
+providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
+receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.  If the second copy
+is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
+opportunities to fix the problem.
+
+1.F.4.  Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
+in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
+WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
+
+1.F.5.  Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
+warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
+If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
+law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
+interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
+the applicable state law.  The invalidity or unenforceability of any
+provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
+
+1.F.6.  INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
+trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
+providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
+with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
+promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
+harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
+that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
+or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
+work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
+Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
+
+
+Section  2.  Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
+electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
+including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.  It exists
+because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
+people in all walks of life.
+
+Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
+assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
+goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
+remain freely available for generations to come.  In 2001, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
+and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
+To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
+and the Foundation web page at https://www.pglaf.org.
+
+
+Section 3.  Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
+Foundation
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
+501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
+state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
+Revenue Service.  The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
+number is 64-6221541.  Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
+https://pglaf.org/fundraising.  Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
+permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
+
+The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
+Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
+throughout numerous locations.  Its business office is located at
+809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
+business@pglaf.org.  Email contact links and up to date contact
+information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
+page at https://pglaf.org
+
+For additional contact information:
+     Dr. Gregory B. Newby
+     Chief Executive and Director
+     gbnewby@pglaf.org
+
+
+Section 4.  Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
+spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
+increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
+freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
+array of equipment including outdated equipment.  Many small donations
+($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
+status with the IRS.
+
+The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
+charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
+States.  Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
+considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
+with these requirements.  We do not solicit donations in locations
+where we have not received written confirmation of compliance.  To
+SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
+particular state visit https://pglaf.org
+
+While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
+have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
+against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
+approach us with offers to donate.
+
+International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
+any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
+outside the United States.  U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
+
+Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
+methods and addresses.  Donations are accepted in a number of other
+ways including including checks, online payments and credit card
+donations.  To donate, please visit: https://pglaf.org/donate
+
+
+Section 5.  General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.
+
+Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
+concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
+with anyone.  For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
+Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
+
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
+editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
+unless a copyright notice is included.  Thus, we do not necessarily
+keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
+
+
+Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
+
+     https://www.gutenberg.org
+
+This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
+including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
+subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
diff --git a/31191-8.zip b/31191-8.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..04bc3d8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/31191-8.zip
diff --git a/31191-h.zip b/31191-h.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..beeef22
--- /dev/null
+++ b/31191-h.zip
diff --git a/31191-h/31191-h.htm b/31191-h/31191-h.htm
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..16f1962
--- /dev/null
+++ b/31191-h/31191-h.htm
@@ -0,0 +1,2682 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
+    "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
+
+<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
+  <head>
+    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=iso-8859-1" />
+    <title>
+      The Project Gutenberg eBook of A Letter to the Hon. Samuel Eliot, by Hancock.
+    </title>
+    <style type="text/css">
+
+
+    p {  margin-top: .75em;
+         text-align: justify;
+	 text-indent: 1.5em;
+         margin-bottom: .75em;
+         }
+    h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6 {
+         text-align: center; /* all headings centered */
+         clear: both;
+         }
+    hr { width: 33%;
+	 margin-top: 2em;
+	 margin-bottom: 2em;
+         margin-left: auto;
+         margin-right: auto;
+         clear: both;
+       }
+
+    table {margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;}
+
+    body{margin-left: 10%;
+         margin-right: 10%;
+        }
+
+    .pagenum  { /* uncomment the next line for invisible page numbers */
+            /*  visibility: hidden;  */
+                position: absolute;
+                left: 92%;
+                color: #808080;
+                font-size: smaller;
+                text-align: right;
+              } /* page numbers */
+
+    .linenum  {position: absolute; top: auto; left: 4%;} /* poetry number */
+    .blockquot{margin-left: 5%; margin-right: 10%;}
+    .sidenote {width: 20%; padding-bottom: .5em; padding-top: .5em;
+               padding-left: .5em; padding-right: .5em; margin-left: 1em;
+               float: right; clear: right; margin-top: 1em;
+               font-size: smaller; color: black; background: #eeeeee; border: dashed 1px;}
+
+    .bb       {border-bottom: solid 2px;}
+    .bl       {border-left: solid 2px;}
+    .bt       {border-top: solid 2px;}
+    .br       {border-right: solid 2px;}
+    .bbox     {border: solid 2px;}
+
+    .center   {text-align: center;}
+    .smcap    {font-variant: small-caps;}
+    .u        {text-decoration: underline;}
+
+    .caption  {font-weight: bold;}
+
+    .figcenter   {margin: auto; text-align: center;}
+
+    .figleft     {float: left; clear: left; margin-left: 0; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-top:
+                 1em; margin-right: 1em; padding: 0; text-align: center;}
+
+    .figright    {float: right; clear: right; margin-left: 1em; margin-bottom: 1em;
+                 margin-top: 1em; margin-right: 0; padding: 0; text-align: center;}
+
+    .footnotes        {border: dashed 1px;}
+    .footnote         {margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%; font-size: 0.9em;}
+    .footnote .label  {position: absolute; right: 84%; text-align: right;}
+    .fnanchor         {font-size: .8em; text-decoration: none;}
+
+    .poem             {margin-left:10%; margin-right:10%; text-align: left;}
+    .poem br          {display: none;}
+    .poem .stanza     {margin: 1em 0em 1em 0em;}
+    .poem span.i0     {display: block; margin-left: 0em; padding-left: 3em; text-indent: -3em;}
+    .poem span.i2     {display: block; margin-left: 2em; padding-left: 3em; text-indent: -3em;}
+    .poem span.i4     {display: block; margin-left: 4em; padding-left: 3em; text-indent: -3em;}
+
+    </style>
+  </head>
+<body>
+
+
+<pre>
+
+The Project Gutenberg EBook of A Letter to the Hon. Samuel Eliot,
+Representative in Congress From the City of Boston, In Reply to His Apology For Voting For the Fugitive Slave Bill., by Hancock
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+
+Title: A Letter to the Hon. Samuel Eliot, Representative in Congress From the City of Boston, In Reply to His Apology For Voting For the Fugitive Slave Bill.
+
+Author: Hancock
+
+Release Date: February 5, 2010 [EBook #31191]
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1
+
+*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK LETTER TO HON. SAMUEL ELIOT ***
+
+
+
+
+Produced by Meredith Bach, Odessa Paige Turner and the
+Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net
+(This book was produced from scanned images of public
+domain material from the Google Print project.)
+
+
+
+
+
+
+</pre>
+
+
+
+
+
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_1" id="Page_1">[Pg 1]</a></span></p>
+
+
+
+
+  <h1>A
+  LETTER
+  TO</h1>
+
+<h1>THE HON. SAMUEL A. ELIOT,</h1>
+
+<p class="center">REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE CITY OF BOSTON,</p>
+
+<p class="center">in reply to his</p>
+
+<p class="center">  APOLOGY FOR VOTING FOR THE FUGITIVE
+  SLAVE BILL.</p>
+
+<h2>BY HANCOCK</h2>
+
+
+<p class="center"><br />  BOSTON:
+  WM. CROSBY &amp; H. P. NICHOLS,
+  <span class="smcap">111 Washington Street</span>.
+  1851.</p>
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_2" id="Page_2">[Pg 2]</a></span></p>
+
+
+
+<p class="center">CAMBRIDGE:</p>
+
+<p class="center">METCALF AND COMPANY,</p>
+
+<p class="center">PRINTERS TO THE UNIVERSITY.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_3" id="Page_3">[Pg 3]</a></span></p>
+
+
+
+<hr style="width: 65%;" />
+<h2><a name="A_LETTER_c" id="A_LETTER_c"></a>A LETTER, &amp;c.</h2>
+
+
+<p><span class="smcap">Sir</span>;&mdash;</p>
+
+<p>An English courtier procured a colonial judgeship for a
+young dependant wholly ignorant of law. The new functionary,
+on parting with his patron, received from him the
+following sage advice,&mdash;"Be careful never to assign reasons,
+for whether your judgments be right or wrong, your
+reasons will certainly be bad." You have cause to regret
+that some friend had not been equally provident of your
+reputation, and intimated that it was only expected of you
+to vote for Mr. Webster's measures, but by no means to assist
+him in vindicating them. You did, indeed, vote precisely
+as those who procured your nomination intended
+you should; yet, on your return home, you found your
+name had become a byword and a reproach in your native
+State. Another election approached, but you declined submitting
+your recent course to the judgment of the electors,
+and withdrew from the canvass. But although the people
+were thus prevented from voting against you, they persisted
+in speaking and writing against you. Anxious to
+relieve yourself from the load of obloquy by which you
+were oppressed, in an evil hour you rashly appealed to the
+public through the columns of a newspaper, and gave the
+"reasons" of your vote for the Fugitive Slave Law. You
+had a high and recent example of the kind of logic suited
+to your case. You might have indulged in transcendental<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_4" id="Page_4">[Pg 4]</a></span>
+nonsense, and talked about the climate, soil, and scenery
+of New England and the wonders of physical geography,
+and, assuming that negroes were created free, you might
+have contended that, in voting for a law to catch and enslave
+them, you had avoided the folly of re&euml;nacting the
+law of God. Reasons of this sort, you and others had declared,
+"had convinced the understanding and touched the
+conscience of the nation." Instead of following an example
+so illustrious and successful, you assign "reasons"
+so very commonplace, that the most ordinary capacity can
+understand them, and so feeble, that the slightest strength
+can overthrow them.</p>
+
+<p>Your first "reason" is, that the delivery of fugitives is
+a constitutional obligation. By this you mean, that, by
+virtue of the construction of a certain clause in the Constitution
+by the Supreme Court, Congress has the power to
+pass a law for the recovery of fugitive slaves. Well, Sir,
+does this constitutional obligation authorize Congress to
+pass <i>any</i> law whatsoever on the subject, however atrocious
+and wicked? Had you voted for a law to prevent smuggling,
+in which you had authorized every tide-waiter to
+shoot any person suspected of having contraband goods
+in his possession, would it have been a good "reason" for
+such an atrocity, that the collection of duties was "a constitutional
+obligation"? You are condemned for voting
+for an arbitrary, detestable, diabolical law,&mdash;one that tramples
+upon the rights of conscience, outrages the feelings
+of humanity, discards the rules of evidence, levels all the
+barriers erected by the common law for the protection of
+personal liberty, and, in defiance of the Constitution, and
+against its express provisions, gives to the courts the appointment
+of legions of slave-catching judges. And your
+"reason" for all this is, that the delivery of fugitives is
+"a constitutional obligation"! The "obligation" is not
+in issue. Please to understand, Sir, that it is not denied.
+It is for the <i>manner</i> in which you profess to have discharged
+the obligation that you are censured, and be it re<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_5" id="Page_5">[Pg 5]</a></span>membered,
+that not one of the obnoxious provisions of your
+law is required by the Constitution. You go on and attempt
+to enlighten your constituents as to the history of this
+constitutional obligation. As the obligation affords you no
+apology for the iniquitous features of your law, its history
+is, of course, mere surplusage, and serves no other purpose
+than to divert the attention of your readers from yourself.
+About two thirds of your apology is occupied with an historical
+disquisition, which has as much to do with your
+vindication as the question respecting the existence of a
+lunar atmosphere. I will not, however, withhold from you
+whatever benefit you may derive from either your logic or
+your history, but will give each a fair and honest examination.
+You inform the public that, at the time the Constitution
+was formed,</p>
+
+<div class="blockquot"><p>"Slavery had been abolished in some of the States, and still
+existed in others. Here seemed an insurmountable incompatibility
+of interests, and nothing perplexed the wise men of that day&mdash;and
+they were <i>very</i> wise men&mdash;so much as this topic. At
+last they agreed that the new Constitution should have nothing to do
+with it; that the word <i>slavery</i> should not be mentioned in it, and
+that it should be left to the States themselves to establish, retain, or
+abolish it, just as much after the adoption of the Constitution as before.
+But in order to secure the existence of the institution to
+those States who preferred it, it was agreed that the persons escaping
+from labor to which they were bound, in one commonwealth,
+and found in another, should be returned to the State from which
+they had fled. The provision was necessary for the preservation
+of this interest <i>in statu quo</i>. It did not extend slavery. It kept it
+where it already was, and where it could not have continued if
+every slave who escaped North was at once free and irreclaimable.
+The members of the confederacy from the South saw this distinctly,
+and <i>deliberately declared</i> that they could not and would not enter
+a union with States who would tempt away their slaves with the
+prospect of immediate and permanent freedom.... The Constitution
+was adopted with this provision, and it could not have been
+adopted without it."</p></div>
+
+<p>Thus we learn from you, Sir, that when the Constitution<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_6" id="Page_6">[Pg 6]</a></span>
+was formed, "slavery had been abolished in some of the
+States." It is a pity you did not vouchsafe to tell us
+which of the States had thus early and honorably distinguished
+themselves. Of the thirteen American States in
+1787, how many, Sir, had <i>by law</i> abolished slavery? <span class="smcap">Not
+one.</span> Your "some States" consisted of <span class="smcap">Massachusetts</span>
+alone. And how was slavery abolished there? Not by
+any express prohibition in her constitution, nor by any act
+of her legislature. Fortunately, her constitution, like that
+of most other States, contained a general declaration of human
+rights, somewhat similar to the "rhetorical abstraction"
+in the Declaration of Independence. Two or three
+years before the Federal Convention assembled, a young
+lawyer, perceiving that the declaration in the constitution
+had inadvertently made no exclusion of the rights of men
+with dark complexions, brought an action for a slave
+against his master for work done and performed. An upright
+and independent court, not having the fear of our
+Southern brethren before their eyes, decided that the slave
+was a <span class="smcap">MAN</span>, and therefore entitled to the rights which the
+constitution declared belonged to <i>all</i> men, and gave judgment
+for the plaintiff. In this way, Sir, was slavery abolished
+in Massachusetts, and hence the delegates from Massachusetts
+in the Convention were the only ones who
+represented a <i>free</i> State. And now, Sir, what becomes of
+your "insurmountable incompatibility of interests" arising
+from the fact that "slavery had been abolished in some
+States and still existed in others," which you tell us so much
+perplexed the wise men of that day? We shall see, Sir,
+that on questions touching human bondage the Massachusetts
+delegation seem to have been slaveholders in heart,
+and did not partake of the perplexity which troubled the
+wise men. With the exception of that delegation, there
+were not probably half a dozen members of the convention
+who were not slaveholders.</p>
+
+<p>It would seem from your historical review, that the
+clause in the Constitution respecting fugitive slaves was<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_7" id="Page_7">[Pg 7]</a></span>
+the grand compromise between the North and the South,
+without which "the Constitution could not have been
+adopted"; and that to this clause we owe our glorious
+slave-catching Union. You fortify this wonderful historical
+discovery by appealing to the "deliberate declarations"
+of Southern members, that they "would not enter a union
+with States who would tempt away their slaves," &amp;c. It
+is to be regretted that you have not deemed it expedient to
+refer to the records of these declarations, as other students
+of our constitutional history are wholly ignorant of them.
+Suffer me, Sir, to enter into a few historical details, for the
+purpose of vindicating the liberty I take to differ with you
+as to the accuracy of your statements.</p>
+
+<p>The Convention met in Philadelphia, 25th May, 1787.
+On the 29th of the same month, Mr. Randolph, of Virginia,
+submitted a plan of government. It contained no
+allusion to fugitive slaves. On the same day, Mr. Charles
+Pinckney, of South Carolina, submitted another plan.
+This last provided for the surrender of fugitive criminals,
+but was silent about fugitive slaves. On the 15th of June,
+Mr. Patterson, of New Jersey, submitted a third plan.
+This also provided for the surrender of fugitives from
+justice, but not from bondage. On the 18th, Mr. Hamilton
+announced his plan, but the fugitive slave found no place
+in it. On the 26th of June, the Convention, having agreed
+on the general features of the proposed Constitution in the
+form of resolutions, referred them to "a committee of detail,"
+for the purpose of reducing them to the form of a
+Constitution. In these resolutions, there was not the most
+distant allusion to fugitive slaves. On the 6th of August,
+the committee reported the draft of a Constitution, and yet,
+strange as you may deem it, the provision without which,
+you tell us, the Constitution could not have been adopted,
+was not in it, although there was in it a provision for the
+surrender of fugitive criminals. For three months had the
+Convention been in session, and not one syllable had been
+uttered about fugitive slaves. At last, on the 29th of<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_8" id="Page_8">[Pg 8]</a></span>
+August, as we learn from the minutes, "It was moved
+and seconded to agree to the following proposition, to be
+inserted after the 15th article: 'If any person, bound to
+service or labor in any of the United States, shall escape
+into another State, he or she shall not be discharged from
+such service or labor in consequence of any regulation subsisting
+in the State to which they escape, but shall be
+delivered up to the person justly claiming their service or
+labor,' <i>which passed unanimously</i>." Really, Sir, I find in
+this record but little evidence of the perplexity which distressed
+our wise men, or of the great compromise between
+the North and South, on which you dwell. The 15th
+article, referred to above, was the article providing for the
+surrender of fugitives from justice, and this suggested the
+idea, that it would be well to provide, also, for the surrender
+of fugitive slaves. In an assembly consisting almost
+exclusively of slaveholders, the idea was exceedingly relished;
+and without a word of opposition, the suggestion
+was unanimously adopted. From Mr. Madison's report
+we learn that, the day before, Messrs. Butler and Pinckney
+had informally proposed that fugitive slaves and servants
+should be delivered up "like criminals." "Mr. Wilson [of
+Penn.]. This would oblige the Executive of the State to do
+it at the public expense. Mr. Sherman [of Conn.] saw no
+more propriety in the public seizing and surrendering a slave
+or servant than a horse." (<i>Madison Papers</i>, p. 1447.)
+The subject was here dropped. The next day the motion
+was made in form, and, as Mr. Madison says, "agreed to,
+<i>nem. con.</i>" From the phraseology of the motion, and
+the objections of Messrs. Wilson and Sherman, it was perfectly
+understood that the obligation of delivery was imposed
+on the States, and that no power was intended to be
+conferred on Congress to legislate on the subject. Messrs.
+Wilson and Sherman's objections arose from no moral
+repugnance to slave-catching, but from the inconvenience
+they apprehended the <i>State</i> authorities would be subjected
+to; and Mr. Wilson perhaps spoke from experience, as his<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_9" id="Page_9">[Pg 9]</a></span>
+own State had at that very time a law for catching and
+returning fugitive slaves from other States. The idea,
+therefore, that this agreement was a <i>compromise</i> between
+the North and South is wholly imaginary, and you, Sir,
+must have mistaken some recent fulminations from the
+Southern chivalry for the "deliberate declarations" which
+you suppose were made in the Convention. Believe me,
+Sir, no members of the Convention ever declared they
+would not enter into the Union, unless it was agreed to
+surrender fugitive slaves, for the obvious reason, that the
+Northern slaveholders required no threats from their
+Southern brethren to consent to a compact convenient to
+both. It is very true, Sir, that there were compromises,
+and that there were "deliberate declarations," but they
+had no reference to the surrender of runaway slaves. I
+have pointed out your historical mistake, not because it
+has the remotest bearing on your justification, but because
+you seem to think that it has.</p>
+
+<p>The first great compromise was between, not the North
+and the South, but the small and the large States. The
+one claimed, and the other refused, an equality of suffrage
+in the national legislature. It was at last agreed, that the
+suffrage should be equal in one house, and according to
+population in the other. This was the first compromise.
+Then came the question, What should constitute the representative
+population? The Southern States had more
+slaves than the Northern, and the former insisted that
+slaves should be included in the representative population.
+This would have given the Southern States an unfair
+preponderance in Congress. Moreover, a portion of the
+Southern States were engaged in the African slave-trade,
+and, of course, every slave landed on their shores would
+increase their political power in Congress. To reconcile
+the North to slave representation, it was offered that <i>direct
+taxation</i> should be proportioned to representation. But the
+North was reluctant, and, as usual, was bullied into a compromise.
+Mr. Davie, of North Carolina, made a "deliberate<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_10" id="Page_10">[Pg 10]</a></span>
+declaration":&mdash;"He was sure that North Carolina would
+never confederate on any terms that did not rate them (the
+slaves) at least as three fifths. If the Eastern States meant,
+therefore, to exclude them (the slaves) altogether, the business
+was at an end." (<i>Madison Papers</i>, p. 1081.) This
+threat, and others like it, settled the matter. The compromise,
+of three fifths of the slaves to be included in the
+representative population, was accepted on the motion of <i>a
+New England member</i>; and the consequence is, that the
+slave States have now twenty-one members in the lower
+house of Congress more than they are entitled to by their
+free population. This was the second compromise. There
+was still a third, far more wicked and detestable, and effected
+by the "deliberate declarations" of Southern members.
+The "committee of detail" has been already mentioned.
+It consisted of Messrs. Rutledge of South Carolina,
+Randolph of Virginia, Wilson of Pennsylvania, Ellsworth of
+Connecticut, and Gorham of Massachusetts. This committee,
+it will be recollected, were to reduce to the <i>form</i>
+of a Constitution the resolutions agreed on by the Convention.
+Neither in the resolutions themselves, nor in the
+discussions which preceded their adoption, had any reference
+been made to a guarantee for the continuance of the
+African slave-trade. Nevertheless, this committee, of their
+own will and pleasure, inserted in their draft the following
+clause:&mdash;"No tax or duty shall be laid by the legislature
+on articles exported from any State, <i>nor on the migration
+or importation of such persons as the several States shall
+think proper to admit, nor shall such migration or importation
+be prohibited</i>." To understand the cunning wickedness
+of this clause, it must be recollected that Congress
+was to have power to regulate foreign commerce, and commerce
+between the States; and hence it might, at a future
+time, suppress both the foreign and domestic commerce in
+human flesh, or it might burden this commerce with duties.
+Hence this artfully expressed perpetual restriction on
+the power of Congress to interfere with the traffic in human<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_11" id="Page_11">[Pg 11]</a></span>
+beings. As this grand scheme was concocted in the committee,
+and not in the Convention, it may be interesting to
+inquire into its paternity.</p>
+
+<p>In the debates which ensued on this clause, Mr. Ellsworth,
+one of the committee who reported it, "was for
+leaving the clause as it now stands. <i>Let every State import
+what it pleases.</i> The morality or wisdom of slavery
+are considerations belonging to the States themselves.
+<i>What enriches a part enriches the whole</i>, and the States
+are the best judges of their particular interests. The old
+Confederation had not <i>meddled</i> with this point, and he did
+not see any greater necessity for bringing it within the
+policy of the new one." "As slaves multiply so fast in
+Virginia and Maryland that it is <i>cheaper</i> to raise than to
+import them, whilst in the <i>sickly</i> rice-swamps foreign supplies
+are <i>necessary</i>, if we go no farther than is urged [a
+proposal to permit the trade for a limited time], we shall
+be unjust towards South Carolina and Georgia. Let us not
+intermeddle." (<i>Madison Papers</i>, pp. 1389, 1391.) This
+gentleman was one of your "very wise men"; and his
+mantle has recently fallen upon other wise men from the
+East. Mr. Wilson, another member of the committee, objected.
+"All articles imported," said he, "are to be taxed;
+slaves alone are exempt. This is, in fact, a bounty on
+that article." The clause was referred to another committee,
+who modified it, by limiting the restriction to 1800.
+It was moved to guarantee the slave-trade for twenty
+years, by postponing the restriction to 1808. This motion
+was <i>seconded</i> by Mr. Gorham, another member of
+the committee. Mr. Randolph, also of the committee,
+was against the slave-trade, and opposed to any restriction
+on the power of Congress to suppress it. Two of
+the committee, then, we find, were against the trade,
+and three, Messrs. Rutledge, Ellsworth, and Gorham, for
+perpetuating it. And now, Sir, what were the inducements
+which prevailed on the two wise men from the
+East to yield their consent to a proposition so wicked and<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_12" id="Page_12">[Pg 12]</a></span>
+abominable? We are, of course, not informed what passed
+in the committee, but we can well imagine, from the language
+used by the chairman and others in the Convention.
+Said Mr. Rutledge, "If the Convention thinks North Carolina,
+South Carolina, and Georgia will ever agree to this
+plan [the Federal Constitution] unless their right to import
+slaves be untouched, the expectation is <span class="smcap">VAIN</span>. The people
+of those States will never be such fools as to give up so
+important an interest." In other words, "Gentlemen of
+the North, no Union without the African slave-trade."
+Said Mr. Charles Pinckney, "South Carolina can never receive
+the plan [of the Constitution] if it prohibits the slave-trade.
+In every proposed extension of the powers of Congress,
+that State has expressly and watchfully excepted
+that of meddling with the importation of negroes." (<i>Madison
+Papers</i>, p. 1389.) Mr. Charles C. Pinckney "thought
+himself bound to declare candidly, that he did not think
+South Carolina would stop her importations of slaves in
+any short time." Thus you see, Sir, that the "deliberate
+declarations" to which you allude were made in reference
+to the continuance of the African slave-trade, and not, as
+you suppose, to the catching of fugitive slaves. Two New
+England gentlemen of the committee yielded to these declarations,
+and sacrificed conscience and humanity for the
+sake of the Union, and the consideration that what enriched
+a part enriched the whole. Happily, in this case, Southern
+bluster was met by Southern bluster, and it is owing to
+Virginia, and not to the virtue and independence of New
+England, that the Constitution was rescued from the infamy
+of granting a solemn and perpetual guarantee to an accursed
+commerce.</p>
+
+<p>In Virginia, the slaves, as Mr. Ellsworth remarked, multiplied
+so fast, that it was <i>cheaper</i> to raise than import them.
+She was then, as now, a breeding State for the Southern
+markets. Hence, her delegates were as ready to bluster for
+protection, as the South Carolina delegates were for a free
+trade in men and women. Of course, the <i>motives</i> assigned<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_13" id="Page_13">[Pg 13]</a></span>
+were patriotic, not selfish. Mr. Randolph "could never
+agree to the clause as it stands. He would sooner <span class="smcap">risk
+the Constitution</span>." (<i>Madison Papers</i>, p. 1396.) Mr.
+Madison would not consent to the continuance of the traffic
+till 1808. "Twenty years will produce all the mischief
+that can be apprehended from the liberty to import slaves.
+So long a term will be more dishonorable to the American
+character, than to say nothing about it in the Constitution."
+(<i>Madison Papers</i>, p. 1427.) Mr. Mason from Virginia denounced
+the traffic as "infernal." (<i>Madison Papers</i>, p.
+1390.) The result of all these threats on each side was, as
+usual, a compromise, by which Congress was prohibited
+from suppressing the foreign and internal commerce in slaves
+for twenty years, and was left at liberty to do as it might
+see fit, after that period. After twenty years the foreign
+trade was suppressed, and North and South Carolina and
+Georgia remained in the Union! Virginia, as well as the
+other Slave States, is greatly interested in the home slave-trade,
+and that has <i>not</i> been suppressed, although Congress
+has full power over it.</p>
+
+<p>It does not appear from Mr. Madison's report what reply
+was made in the Convention to the Virginia objections,
+but in his speech in the Convention of his own State, he
+tells us,&mdash;"The gentlemen from South Carolina and Georgia
+argued in this manner: We have now liberty to import
+this species of property, and much of the property now
+possessed had been purchased or otherwise acquired in
+contemplation of improving it by the assistance of imported
+slaves. What would be the consequence of hindering
+us in this point? The <i>slaves</i> of Virginia would rise
+in value, and we should be obliged to go to your markets."
+(<i>Elliott's Debates</i>, III. 454.) Certainly, Sir, these South
+Carolina and Georgia delegates were "very wise men,"
+and their predictions are now history, and the planters of
+Georgia, South Carolina, Mississippi, and Louisiana buy
+slaves of the Virginia breeders. But what shall I say of
+the wise men from the East? This horrible compromise,<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_14" id="Page_14">[Pg 14]</a></span>
+this guarantee of the African slave-trade for twenty years,
+was carried by the votes of the Massachusetts and Connecticut
+delegates, and would have been defeated, had
+they had the courage and virtue to have voted against it.</p>
+
+<p>I have indulged in this long digression, to show that the
+clause in the Constitution respecting fugitive slaves was
+not, as you represent it, the great compromise of the Constitution,
+the key-stone of the Union, and that our slaveholding
+fathers were not, as you suppose, greatly perplexed,
+nor their consciences deeply wounded, by the existence
+of slavery in all the States of the confederacy with
+one exception. Having disposed of your history, I return
+to your logic.</p>
+
+<p>Whether the constitutional injunction to surrender fugitive
+slaves was a compromise or not, is of no practical importance.
+The clause speaks for itself, and prescribes no
+mode by which the title of the claimant shall be ascertained,
+while it expressly implies that the title shall be established
+before the surrender is made. Hence, the fair presumption
+is, that the title to a <span class="smcap">MAN</span> shall be proved, with at least as
+much certainty and formality as the title to a horse. Had
+you, Sir, in your law, provided that a Virginian shall not
+come to Boston, and there seize and carry off a husband,
+wife, or child but by the same process, and on as strong
+evidence, as he may now seize and carry off a horse which
+you claim as your own, instead of finding your name a
+byword and a reproach, you would have been honored and
+applauded by your fellow-citizens, and returned to Congress
+by a triumphant vote; nor is there a syllable in the Constitution
+which prohibits or discountenances such a mode of
+deciding the title to a human being. It is in vain, then,
+Sir, that you plead your "constitutional obligation" in justification
+of your most detestable law. But, as if one
+wrong could justify another, you plead in your excuse the
+law of 1793, and you ask in your simplicity of those who
+condemn your law if they do not perceive that they are
+"denouncing their fathers." Well, Sir, were our fathers<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_15" id="Page_15">[Pg 15]</a></span>
+infallible? Pity it is, Sir, that you were not on the floor
+of Congress when that body declared the African slave-trade
+to be <span class="smcap">PIRACY</span>. You might then, Sir, have risen in
+your place, and inquired, "Do you not perceive that you
+are denouncing your fathers, who were very wise men, and
+who guaranteed for twenty years the very traffic which
+you now proclaim to be piracy?" Pity it is, Sir, that
+you did not stand by the side of your patron on Plymouth
+Rock, and whisper in his ear, "Do you not perceive that
+you are denouncing our fathers?" when he declared, "In
+the sight of our law the African slave-trader is a <span class="smcap">PIRATE</span>
+and a <span class="smcap">FELON</span>, and in the sight of Heaven an offender beyond
+the ordinary depth of human guilt." Mr. Webster
+is better versed in constitutional history than you are, and
+he well knew that some of our fathers "deliberately declared
+they would not enter a Union" in which they were
+to be debarred from pursuing this piratical, felonious, guilty
+traffic. Our fathers were mostly slaveholders, and yet you,
+Sir, unconsciously denounce both their morality and intelligence,
+when you affirm the institution of slavery to be
+"wrong and unwise." And yet all who presume to find
+fault with your cruel, unjust, wicked law are guilty forsooth
+of denouncing their fathers!</p>
+
+<p>You tell us that the Convention of 1787 "<i>agreed that
+the new Constitution should have nothing to do with slavery</i>."
+I have not been so fortunate as to find the record of
+this agreement, but if such a compact was indeed made,
+then seldom, if ever, has a solemn covenant been more
+grossly and wickedly violated. Is it, Sir, in virtue of this
+agreement, that you voted to fine and imprison every conscientious,
+humane citizen who may refuse, at the command
+of a minion of a commissioner, to join in a slave
+hunt? Did this agreement confer on the holders of slaves
+an enlarged representation in Congress? Was it in pursuance
+of this agreement that the importation of slaves was
+guaranteed for twenty years? Did this agreement authorize
+the Federal government to enter into negotiations with<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_16" id="Page_16">[Pg 16]</a></span>
+Great Britain and Mexico for a mutual surrender of runaway
+slaves? Was it in pursuance of this same agreement,
+that our government negotiated with Russia and Spain to
+prevent emancipation in Cuba,&mdash;a traitorous conspiracy
+with despots against the rights of man? How, Sir, was
+this agreement illustrated, when Daniel Webster, as Secretary
+of State under John Tyler of glorious memory, made a
+demand on Great Britain for the surrender of the slaves of
+the Creole, who had gallantly achieved their liberty, and
+taken refuge in the West Indies? How comes it, Sir, that
+under this agreement an act of Congress secures to the
+Slave States officers in the navy in proportion to the number
+of their slaves? How is it, that under this agreement
+colored men are seized in the District of Columbia, under
+"the exclusive jurisdiction" of the Federal government on
+the <i>suspicion</i> of being slaves, and, when that suspicion is
+rebutted by the non-appearance of any claimant, are sold
+as slaves for life, to pay their jail-fees? Perhaps it would
+be denouncing our fathers, to say that Messrs. Webster and
+Cass may search the archives of Austria in vain for any act
+so utterly diabolical as this, perpetrated by a government
+which it was agreed "should have nothing to do with slavery."
+Was it to carry out this famous agreement that
+the Federal government officially declared through its
+Secretary, Mr. Calhoun, that Texas was annexed to preserve
+the institution of slavery from the perils that threatened
+it?</p>
+
+<p>Once more, Sir. We all know that the slaveholders regard
+the free blacks as dangerous to the subordination of
+their slaves, and are contemplating their forcible removal.
+Think you, Sir, Mr. Webster was mindful of the agreement
+you have discovered, when, on the 7th of last March,
+in his place in the Senate, he proposed his magnificent
+scheme of taxing the whole nation untold millions to give
+additional security to property in human beings? "If,"
+said the Massachusetts Senator, "any gentleman from the
+<i>South</i> shall propose a scheme of colonization to be carried<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_17" id="Page_17">[Pg 17]</a></span>
+on by <i>this government</i> upon a large scale, for the transportation
+of free colored people to any colony or <i>any place in
+the world</i>, I should be quite disposed to incur almost any
+degree of expense to accomplish the object." The magnitude
+of the scheme, and the cost at which it is to be accomplished,
+are thus hinted:&mdash;"There have been received
+into the treasury of the United States <span class="smcap">EIGHTY MILLIONS</span> of
+dollars, the proceeds of the sales of the public lands ceded
+by Virginia. If the residue should be sold at the same
+rate, the whole aggregate will exceed <span class="smcap">TWO HUNDRED MILLIONS</span>
+of dollars. If <i>Virginia and the South</i> see fit to
+adopt any proposition to <i>relieve</i> themselves from the free
+people of color among them, they have my free consent
+that the <i>government</i> shall pay <i>them</i> any sum of money out
+of the proceeds which may be adequate for the purpose."
+Will you, Sir, please to point out the article of the agreement
+of 1787, which, while it restricts Congress from having
+any thing to do with slavery, sanctions an appropriation
+not exceeding two hundred millions of dollars, for the purpose
+of strengthening the institution of slavery, by <i>relieving</i>
+the slaveholders from the presence of free people of
+color, and forcibly transporting to any place in the world
+hundreds of thousands of native-born Americans, who have
+as good a constitutional right to the pursuit of life, liberty,
+and happiness on their native soil, as Mr. Webster himself?
+Mr. Webster, it seems, now views the subject of negro colonization
+in precisely the same light that he did thirty
+years since, although his <i>intentions</i> on this, as on various
+other points, have undergone marvellous changes. We
+learn from a Massachusetts paper (<i>Congregationalist</i>, 6
+July, 1849), that this gentleman was in 1822 appointed by
+a public meeting to draft a constitution for the State Colonization
+Society. After considerable discussion in the committee
+he rose and said, "I must leave. I understand the
+whole project. It is a scheme of the slaveholders to get
+rid of their free negroes. I will have nothing to do with
+it."<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_18" id="Page_18">[Pg 18]</a></span></p>
+
+<p>And how, Sir, as a member of Congress, have <i>you</i> fulfilled
+this agreement to have nothing to do with slavery?
+Not only have you required "good citizens," when commanded,
+to hunt and catch slaves, but you have even fixed
+a money value on every slave. If a master fails to recover
+his fugitive slave through the agency, "direct or indirect,"
+of any citizen, you give him an action for damages. In
+all other cases of trespass, the damages sustained by the
+plaintiff are assessed by a jury according to the evidence.
+You kindly save the master the trouble of proving the
+value of his lost property, and give him out of the pockets
+of the defendant $1,000, no matter whether the slave was
+sick or well, young or old. If a woman escapes with a
+child at the breast, the master is to have $2,000! Recollect,
+Sir, this is for <i>damages</i> to the slaveholder; the trespasser
+is to pay to the government, which was to have nothing
+to do with slavery, another thousand dollars, and to be incarcerated
+six months. Either, Sir, you have wholly mistaken
+the nature of the "agreement," or the slaveholders,
+through the aid of their Northern auxiliaries, have, in defiance
+of the agreement, rendered the Federal government a
+mighty engine in protecting, extending, and perpetuating
+the stupendous iniquity of human bondage.</p>
+
+<p>Your first excuse for voting for the recent slave-catching
+law, after relying on your "constitutional obligation," is,
+that it is "<i>practically more favorable to the fugitive than
+the law of 1793</i>"!!! The Southern lawyers, then, who
+drafted the bill, were a set of blunderers, and your constituents
+are blockheads for blaming you for legislating against
+human rights, when, in fact, you were loosening the bonds
+of the oppressed, and facilitating escape from the prison-house.
+Your assertion may well excite astonishment at
+the South as well as the North, till your <i>proof</i> is known,
+and then, indeed, astonishment will be exchanged for ridicule.
+You tell us, "the <i>evidence</i> of such an assertion may
+be found in the fact, that by the old law every magistrate
+in Massachusetts, amounting to several hundreds, and so in<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_19" id="Page_19">[Pg 19]</a></span>
+the other States, were authorized and required to cause the
+arrest of any fugitive, examine into his case, and deliver
+him to the claimant, if he was proved to be a slave; while
+under the new law that power is <i>limited</i> to the justices of
+the United States' courts, and to the commissioners appointed
+by them, not exceeding, perhaps, on an average,
+six or eight persons in each State." So it seems the slave-catchers
+had formerly no difficulty in finding a magistrate
+among hundreds to aid them, but that now, before they
+hunt a slave, they must hunt and catch a United States
+judge, or a commissioner of six or eight in a whole State.
+Truly a hard case, and yet the slaveholders themselves set
+the very trap in which they have been caught, and thus it
+is that, through their folly, and your generosity in not
+pointing out to them the blunder they were committing,
+the new law is more favorable to the fugitive than the
+old one. Surely, Sir, it could not have been more perilous
+to the young West Indian judge to meddle with "reasons,"
+than it is for you. Either, Sir, you voted for the law
+without reading it, or you have forgotten its provision. Be
+assured, the Southern lawyers were as well acquainted as
+yourself with the fact, that a few individuals, termed
+"commissioners," had been appointed by the United States
+courts to perform certain ministerial acts; and that, as these
+men were now to be promoted to the office of slave-catching
+judges, they would be wholly inadequate in number to
+lend efficient aid to the hunters of men. Hence, they inserted
+in the third section of the bill, the following enactment,
+which has strangely escaped your recollection, viz.:&mdash;"And
+it is further enacted, that the Circuit Courts
+of the United States, and the Superior Courts of <i>each</i> organized
+Territory of the United States, <span class="smcap">SHALL</span> from time to
+time <span class="smcap">ENLARGE THE NUMBER OF COMMISSIONERS</span> with a view
+to afford reasonable facilities to reclaim fugitives from labor,
+and to the prompt discharge of the duties imposed by this
+act." So that, instead of six or eight commissioners in a
+State, we are to have as many hundreds, if needed. Nor<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_20" id="Page_20">[Pg 20]</a></span>
+is this all. By the second section, the power possessed by
+the Circuit Courts to appoint commissioners is for the first
+time conferred on the <i>Territorial</i> courts, so that there shall
+be no lack of slave-catching judges in Oregon, Utah, and
+New Mexico. Instead of your six or eight commissioners
+in a State, your law contemplates that there shall be one or
+more in <i>each county</i>; for the fifth section provides, that,
+"the better to enable the said commissioners to execute
+their duties faithfully and efficiently, ... they are hereby
+authorized and empowered, within their <i>counties respectively</i>,"
+to appoint one or more persons to execute their
+warrants. So it seems we are to have an unlimited number
+of judges and executioners. These executioners, expressly
+appointed to catch slaves, and of course among the
+most worthless and degraded of the community, are one
+and all invested with the power of a high sheriff to call
+out the <i>posse comitatus</i>, not merely in his own county, but
+in every hamlet in the State, and require "good citizens,"
+under pain of fine and imprisonment, to join him in his execrable
+hunt. Really, Sir, your "evidence" that the new
+law is more favorable to the fugitive than the old one falls
+short of demonstration.</p>
+
+<p>You thus apologize for not giving the alleged fugitive a
+trial by jury. "There was no more trial by jury provided
+for under the old law than under the new law. The claim
+of a jury trial is entirely <i>new</i>; never thought of till modern
+discussions of the subject begun. For fifty-seven years our
+fathers and we have been living under the laws which provided
+no such thing, and now one which makes no such
+provision is denounced in unmeasured terms as cruel and
+inhuman. Where have we all been living for half a century?"
+Surely, Sir, it is a most logical reason for not
+changing a wicked law, that it has been in force for fifty-seven
+years. Strange that the legislators of Massachusetts
+did not perceive the force of this reasoning when they
+abolished the laws for hanging witches and whipping
+Quakers. Permit me, Sir, to ask, Where had <i>you</i> been liv<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_21" id="Page_21">[Pg 21]</a></span>ing
+when <i>you</i> declared it to be the <i>duty</i> of Congress to give
+the fugitive a trial by jury, although for fifty-seven years
+such a trial had been denied him? You probably forgot,
+Sir, when giving the above "reason," that, not long before
+you took your seat in Congress, you had, as a member of
+the Massachusetts Legislature, voted for the following resolution,
+viz.:&mdash;"We hold it to be the duty of that body
+[Congress] to pass such laws only in regard thereto as will
+be maintained by the public sentiment of the free States,
+where such laws are to be enforced, and which shall especially
+secure all persons, whose surrender may be claimed
+as having escaped from labor and service in other States,
+the right of having the validity of such claim determined
+by a jury in the State where such claim is made." So it
+seems that, while in Boston, you esteemed it the <i>especial
+duty</i> of Congress to grant the fugitive a trial by jury, but
+that in the atmosphere of Washington you acquired new
+views of moral philosophy.</p>
+
+<p>Suffer me, Sir, also to inquire, Where had Mr. Webster
+been "living for half a century," when, on the 3d of last
+June, he introduced into the Senate a bill amendatory of
+the act of 1793, granting the alleged fugitive a trial by
+jury whenever he shall make oath that he is not the slave
+of the claimant?</p>
+
+<p>Another of your "reasons" is, that your law does <i>not</i>
+suspend the <i>habeas corpus</i>, and in proof of its innocence in
+this respect, you refer to the opinion of "legal authority of
+the highest kind," viz. Mr. Crittenden, of Kentucky. It
+is very true that the words <i>habeas corpus</i> are omitted in
+your law, as the word <i>slave</i> is in the Constitution, but in
+neither case is the omission of any practical importance.
+You must be aware, Sir, that whenever a person is in the
+custody of another, if sufficient ground be shown to render
+it probable that the custody is illegal, the writ is granted
+as a matter of right. But why is it granted? That the
+court may at its discretion, according to circumstances, remand
+or discharge the prisoner. Take away from the<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_22" id="Page_22">[Pg 22]</a></span>
+court the discretionary power to discharge, and the writ is
+rendered an idle form. Your law, you say, does not suspend
+the <i>habeas corpus</i>; it is guiltless of such an enormity.
+A man who is carrying off one of our citizens in chains,
+may indeed be served with the writ, and he brings his
+prisoner before the court, and he produces a paper for
+which he paid $10, and reads from your law, that this
+paper, called a certificate, "shall be conclusive," and "shall
+prevent all molestation of said person or persons by any
+<i>process</i> issued by any court, judge, or magistrate, or other
+person whomsoever." It is because the word <i>process</i>, instead
+of <i>habeas corpus</i>, is used, that your law does not suspend
+the writ of freedom! In vain may the prisoner plead
+that he is not the person mentioned in the certificate; in
+vain may he offer to show that the certificate is a forgery;
+in vain may he urge that the man who signed the certificate
+was not a commissioner. The little piece of paper
+costing ten dollars is to save the slave-catcher from "all
+molestation," not because the writ of <i>habeas corpus</i> is suspended,&mdash;O,
+no! but in consequence of the words "any
+process"!</p>
+
+<p>You refer to two objections, which you say are made to
+your law, and endeavour to refute them; viz. the onerous
+obligations imposed upon the marshal, and the penalties
+attached to an attempt "to assist in the rescue of the slave
+after he has been proved to be such." You have evinced
+your discretion in confining yourself to only four objections
+made to your law; viz. the denial of a jury trial, the suspension
+of the <i>habeas corpus</i>, the duties of the marshal,
+and the penalties imposed on an attempt to rescue the slave
+<i>after</i> judgment. With what success, and with what "reasons,"
+you have combated the first two has already been
+seen. As to the last two, they scarcely merit an answer,
+and hence you have selected them. If the obligations of
+the marshal are onerous, he has voluntarily assumed them
+by accepting the office. If, in a civilized country, a man
+attempts forcibly to rescue a prisoner in the custody of the<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_23" id="Page_23">[Pg 23]</a></span>
+law, he must expect to be punished. There are many
+weighty objections to your law which you have not
+thought it expedient to notice. Permit me to supply your
+omission, and to tell you why your law is so intensely odious.
+And here let me again remind you of the true issue
+between you and the people. It is not now the constitutional
+power of Congress under the decision of the Supreme
+Court to pass a law for the recovery of fugitive slaves,&mdash;this
+is conceded. The odium you have experienced,
+and against which you have appealed to the public, is
+caused by your having voted for a law which, in its details,
+violates the Constitution, and outrages justice and humanity.
+Throughout your long and labored apology, you avoid
+grappling with these charges. You vindicate the denial of
+a jury trial only on the ground that it has been denied for
+fifty-seven years, and on the authority of Mr. Crittenden
+affirm that the <i>habeas corpus</i> is not suspended; but you
+avoid the constitutional and moral objections urged against
+your law.</p>
+
+<p>By the Constitution, fugitive slaves are to be restored to
+those, and those only, who are legally entitled to their services.
+The means of ascertaining whether a man is a
+slave, whether he has fled from his master, and whether
+the claimant is legally entitled to him, are not defined by
+the Constitution. It is now intrusted to the discretion of
+Congress to specify these means, but of course that discretion
+ought to be exercised in accordance with the Constitution,
+with justice, and with humanity. The complaint
+against you is, that you have voted for a law which outrages
+them all, and against this complaint you have failed
+to offer the shadow of a vindication.</p>
+
+<p>A Virginian comes to Boston, and there seizes one of the
+inhabitants as his slave. The man claimed declares the
+claim to be false and fraudulent. Here, then, is an issue
+both of law and of fact between two men equally entitled
+to the protection of law; for the man claimed is on every
+presumption of law and justice to be regarded as free, till<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_24" id="Page_24">[Pg 24]</a></span>
+the contrary is proved. The issue between these two men
+is, I have said, one of fact and of law. Is the person
+seized the man he is said to be? This is a question of
+fact. Admitting his identity, is he a slave, and, if so, does
+he belong to the claimant? These are both questions of
+law, resting upon facts to be proved. Those familiar with
+the reports of Southern courts know that the title to slaves
+is a frequent matter of litigation, involving intricate questions
+respecting the validity of wills, the construction of
+deeds, the partition of estates, and the claims of creditors.
+By carrying a slave into a free State, the owner forfeits his
+title to him while there, and cannot reclaim him; and
+hence the acts of the claimant himself may be involved in
+the issue. And now, Sir, I ask, have you ever known, or
+can you conceive of, any issue at law respecting the title
+to property so awfully momentous to a defendant as the
+one we are considering? Were your son or daughter the
+defendant in such an issue, would you not rejoice to purchase
+a favorable judgment by the contribution of the last
+cent of your great wealth? Let us, then, proceed to inquire
+what provision <i>you</i>, in the fear of God and the love
+of justice and humanity, have made for the trial of this
+tremendous issue,&mdash;an issue on the result of which all the
+hopes of a fellow-man for the life that is, and for that which
+is to come, are suspended.</p>
+
+<p>In the first place, What is the pecuniary value of the
+plaintiff's claim to <i>himself</i>?&mdash;for it would be an insult to
+humanity to estimate in dollars and cents the blessings of
+liberty and of the conjugal and parental relations to the
+unhappy defendant. You have yourself fixed the value
+of the plaintiff's claim at <i>one thousand dollars</i>. So far,
+then, the issue is, by your own showing, within the constitutional
+guarantee of trial by jury in all suits at common
+law where the matter in controversy is of the value of
+<i>twenty</i> dollars. But is the claim made by the plaintiff "a
+suit at common law"? What is a <i>suit</i>? The Supreme
+Court thus answers the question:&mdash;"We understand<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_25" id="Page_25">[Pg 25]</a></span>
+it [a suit] to be the prosecution or pursuit of some <i>claim</i>,
+demand, or request. In law language, it is the prosecution
+of some demand in a court of justice." (6 <i>Wheaton</i>, 407.)</p>
+
+<p>It seems, then, that the Virginian, in claiming an inhabitant
+of Boston as his slave, in fact brings <i>a suit</i> against
+him for services due worth one thousand dollars. Now
+remember, Sir, the fugitive is not to be delivered up, as a
+mass of flesh, or inanimate matter, belonging to the claimant,
+but as a debtor, in the phraseology of your own law,
+"<i>owing</i> service or labor." The suit is brought for service
+or labor <i>due</i>, and the Constitution provides that the person
+so owing service or labor shall be delivered to him to
+whom the same is "<i>due</i>." And now, is this suit for service
+due "a suit at <i>common law</i>"? Again let the Supreme
+Court answer. "The phrase <i>common law</i>, found in this
+clause [the clause guaranteeing a jury trial], is used in contradistinction
+to equity and admiralty and maritime jurisdiction.
+It is well known, that, in civil causes in courts of
+equity and admiralty, juries do not intervene, and that
+courts of equity use the trial by jury only in extraordinary
+cases, to inform the conscience of the court. When, therefore,
+we find that the amendment requires that the right of
+trial by jury shall be preserved in suits at common law,
+the natural conclusion is, that this distinction was present
+to the minds of the framers of the amendment. By <i>common
+law</i>, they meant what the Constitution denominated,
+in the third article, 'law'; not merely suits which the
+common law recognized among its old and settled proceedings,
+but suits in which legal rights were to be ascertained
+and determined, in contradistinction to those where equitable
+rights alone were recognized, and equitable remedies
+were administered.... In a just sense, the amendment,
+then, may be construed to embrace <i>all suits</i> which are not
+of equity and admiralty jurisdiction, <i>whatever may be the
+peculiar form</i> which they may assume to settle legal
+rights." (3 <i>Peters</i>, 446.)</p>
+
+<p>If there be meaning in words, these authorities settle the<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_26" id="Page_26">[Pg 26]</a></span>
+case, and your law is in palpable violation of the amendment
+to the Constitution securing a trial by jury in suits
+at common law where the matter in controversy exceeds
+twenty dollars in value. Think not, Sir, that I am misrepresenting
+the Supreme Court. I know well that the
+<i>dicta</i> I have quoted have reference to <i>white</i> men, and that
+they have been virtually set aside in decisions respecting
+black men. I well know, that, in our model republic,
+law and justice and morality are all cutaneous. But admitting
+that the Supreme Court have stultified themselves,
+and virtually denied, that, where a suit was brought for
+the services of a <i>black</i> man, the Constitution required a
+jury trial, recollect, Sir, that not in one single instance has
+the court decided that the Constitution <i>prohibited</i> such a
+trial. But if not prohibited, then Congress are permitted
+to accord such a trial, and <i>both you and Mr. Webster have
+declared that Congress had a right to grant such a trial,
+and ought to grant it</i>. In voting, therefore, for a law
+denying such a trial, you made a voluntary surrender to
+the slaveholder of the security which such a trial would
+have afforded to multitudes of your poor, ignorant, oppressed
+fellow-men. For this act of cruelty and injustice,
+committed against your own late conviction of duty, what
+is your justification? Why, that the blacks had been
+already deprived of the right of trial by jury fifty-seven
+years!</p>
+
+<p>Let us now see what tribunal you have substituted for
+a jury in the trial of one of the most momentous issues
+that can engage the attention of a court of justice. You
+have provided for the appointment of an indefinite number
+of judges, each of whom is to have exclusive jurisdiction
+of these issues, and from whose judgment there is to be no
+appeal. The Constitution declares, "The judges, both
+of the Supreme and inferior courts, shall hold their offices
+during good behaviour, and shall, at stated times, receive
+for their services a compensation, which shall not be diminished
+during their continuance in office." These judges<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_27" id="Page_27">[Pg 27]</a></span>
+are appointed by the Senate, on the nomination of the
+President. Your herd of judges, called commissioners, are
+appointed by the courts, and hold office during pleasure,
+and instead of receiving a salary, are rewarded by a rule
+the infamy of which, it is believed, belongs to your law
+exclusively,&mdash;a rule which doubles their compensation
+whenever they decide in favor of the rich plaintiff, and
+<i>against</i> the poor and friendless defendant. But perhaps
+you will deny that these men are judges; for, if judges,
+their appointment is palpably unconstitutional. Let us
+hear the Supreme Court, at a time when it was deemed
+expedient to maintain that the persons who executed the
+law of 1793 were <i>judges</i>. "It is plain, that, where a
+claim is made by the owner out of possession for the delivery
+of a slave, it must be made, if made at all, <i>against
+some other person</i>; and inasmuch as the right is a right of
+property, capable of being recognized and asserted by proceedings
+<i>before a court of justice between parties adverse to
+each other</i>, it constitutes, in the strictest sense, a <i>controversy</i>
+between parties, and a case arising under the Constitution
+of the United States, within the express delegation of judicial
+power given by that instrument." (16 <i>Peters</i>, 616.)
+Hence your commissioners are, in the <i>strictest sense</i>,
+judges, exercising "judicial power" delegated by the
+Constitution.</p>
+
+<p>You pronounce Mr. Crittenden "legal authority of the
+highest kind." This legal authority understands the sixth
+section of your law as providing that each commissioner
+"shall have judicial power and jurisdiction to hear, examine,
+and decide the case in a summary manner." Now, if
+a man, having judicial power and jurisdiction to decide
+controversies between parties adverse to each other, in controversies
+arising under the Constitution and within the
+express delegation of judicial power given by that instrument,
+is not a judge, do tell us who is one. Once more,
+Sir, Mr. Crittenden says, "The legal authority of every
+tribunal of exclusive jurisdiction, where no appeal lies, is<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_28" id="Page_28">[Pg 28]</a></span>
+of necessity conclusive upon every tribunal; and therefore
+the judgment of the tribunal created by this act is conclusive
+upon all other tribunals." So your commissioner is
+not only a judge, but he constitutes a tribunal of exclusive
+jurisdiction, and his judgment is binding even upon the
+Supreme Court of the United States. And yet, Sir, you
+must deny that this omnipotent commissioner is a judge,
+or you must admit, that, in the mode of his appointment,
+you have flagrantly violated the Constitution of your
+country.</p>
+
+<p>It has been most wickedly asserted by our proslavery
+presses and our proslavery politicians, that the surrender
+of fugitives from labor and fugitives from justice are similar
+proceedings. The surrender of a fugitive slave involves
+two questions, that of identity and that of property;
+and the law makes the decision of the commissioner on
+both points final and conclusive upon every State and
+Federal court in the land. The surrender of a fugitive
+criminal involves only the question of personal identity.
+The Governor of the State issues his warrant for the apprehension
+and delivery of a certain person proved to him
+to be charged with felony. If the officer arrests the wrong
+person, he does it at his peril, and a writ of <i>habeas corpus</i>
+would immediately release the person wrongfully arrested.
+Again, it is most fraudulently maintained, that, if the wrong
+person is by the commissioner adjudged a slave, he may
+sue for his freedom in a Southern court! Should he do so,
+the exhibition of the commissioner's certificate is by law
+declared to be conclusive <i>upon all tribunals</i>. But even
+supposing that a Southern court, in defiance of law, should
+go behind the certificate, how is a free colored person from
+the North, working under the lash on a Mississippi plantation,
+to prove his freedom? How is he to fee a lawyer?
+How is he to get into court? If once there, where are
+his witnesses? They are his friends and acquaintances of
+his own color residing in the North. How are they to be
+summoned to Mississippi? Should they venture to enter<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_29" id="Page_29">[Pg 29]</a></span>
+the State, they would be imprisoned, and perhaps sold into
+slavery; or even if permitted to enter the court-room, their
+testimony would by law be excluded, against the claims
+of a white man. How despicably profligate, then, is the
+assumption of the advocates of your law, that any injustice
+committed under it would be repaired by Southern
+courts!</p>
+
+<p>It was not enough, it seems, that the wretched defendant
+in this momentous issue should be subjected to the
+jurisdiction of a judge unknown to the Constitution, holding
+his office by a prohibited tenure, incapable of being
+impeached, and bribed to decide in favor of the plaintiff
+by the promise of double fees, but the very trial allowed
+him must be a burlesque on all the forms and principles
+of juridical justice. The plaintiff, without notice to the
+defendant, prepares himself for trial, and when his affidavits
+or witnesses are all ready, he seizes the unsuspecting
+victim in the street, and puts him <i>instanter</i> on his defence.
+Had the wretched man been accused of some atrocious
+crime, he might have demanded bail, and would have been
+permitted to go at large to seek for counsel, to look for
+witnesses, and to prepare for trial at some future day, of
+which he would have due notice. But no such privilege
+is allowed a man who is accused of <i>owing service</i>. One
+of your commissioners has already decided that the law
+does not permit him to bail the prisoner. The slave power
+rides in triumph over all the barriers erected by the wisdom
+of ages for the protection of human rights. The
+defendant is brought, generally in irons, before your commissioner
+judge, who is required "to hear and determine
+the case of <i>the claimant</i> in a summary manner." The
+law seems not even to imagine the possibility of any defence
+being made on the part of the defendant. It makes
+no provision for such a defence,&mdash;no assignment of counsel,
+no summons for witnesses. We shall see presently,
+that if the plaintiff makes out a <i>prim&acirc; facie</i> title, satisfactory
+to the commission, it is all the law requires. Let me<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_30" id="Page_30">[Pg 30]</a></span>
+now call your attention to the practical working of your
+diabolical law. A man named Rose was lately seized at
+Detroit, and brought before a commissioner as a fugitive
+slave. I copy from the newspaper report. "Mr. Joy
+(counsel for defendant) moved a postponement of the trial
+to a future day, to enable Rose to produce his papers to
+establish his right to freedom, which papers he had <i>sworn</i>
+were in Cincinnati. The counsel for the claimant denied
+that the commissioner had any authority under the law to
+grant a postponement. The commissioner agreed with
+the counsel for the plaintiff, that <i>he had no authority to
+postpone the trial</i>; and he further declared, that, <i>even were
+the papers by which Rose was manumitted present, he
+could not under the law receive them in evidence</i>."</p>
+
+<p>Utterly devilish as was this decision, it was sound
+law. The plaintiff had proved his title satisfactorily, and
+this being done, the commissioner was bound by the express
+words of the law to grant the certificate. He had
+no right to admit rebutting evidence. It was sufficient to
+prove that the prisoner had been the slave of the claimant's
+father, and that the claimant was the heir at law of
+his father. This of itself was satisfactory, and therefore
+the commissioner had no right to admit in evidence the
+very deed of manumission granted by the father to the
+slave. The framers of the law had been as explicit as
+they dared to be. "Upon satisfactory proof being made
+by deposition or <i>affidavit</i>, to be taken and certified, &amp;c.,
+or by other satisfactory testimony [of course, in writing,
+and <i>ex parte</i>], and with proof, also by affidavit, of the
+<i>identity</i> of the person," &amp;c., the defendant is to be surrendered.
+Not a hint is given that any testimony may
+be received to rebut the <i>satisfactory</i> proof given by the
+plaintiff. You have, moreover, Sir, provided a species of
+evidence never before heard of in the trial of an issue.
+By the tenth section, the claimant may go before a judge
+or court in Texas, and there make proof by affidavit that
+<i>his</i> slave has escaped. Whereupon, the court or judge<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_31" id="Page_31">[Pg 31]</a></span>
+is to certify that the proof is satisfactory. A record of this
+satisfactory proof, together with a description of the fugitive,
+is to be made, and a certified transcript of this record,
+"being exhibited to any judge, commissioner, or other officer
+authorized," &amp;c., "<i>shall</i> be held and taken to be full
+and conclusive evidence of the fact of escape, and that the
+service or labor of the person escaping is <i>due</i> to the party
+in such record mentioned." Here all defence is taken
+from the defendant. Should he summon a host of witnesses
+to prove his freedom, not one could be heard;
+should he offer a bill of sale from the claimant to another,
+it could not be received; should he produce a deed of
+manumission, acknowledged and certified in a Southern
+court, it would be waste paper. And thus a man's freedom
+is to be sacrificed on an affidavit made a thousand
+miles off. What, Sir, would you think of a law that
+would authorize the seizure and sale of your property to
+satisfy a debt which any man in California might think
+proper to swear, before a Californian judge, was <i>due</i> from
+you to him?</p>
+
+<p>Such, Sir, is the <i>trial</i> which you, the representative of
+Boston, a descendant of the Pilgrims, and "a gentleman of
+property and standing," have accorded to the poor and
+oppressed. Did the Constitution require such a prostitution
+of justice, such an outrage of humanity, at your hands?
+I need not be told that some of your commissioners have
+not construed your law as strictly as did the Detroit functionary.
+Thanks to the force of public opinion, and to the
+zeal of some benevolent lawyers, whose hearts were not
+padded with cotton, in some instances defendants have
+been permitted to call witnesses in their behalf; and some
+regard has been paid to the ordinary principles of justice.
+But in all such instances, the spirit of the law and the
+intentions of its framers have been frustrated.</p>
+
+<p>And now let us listen to your "reason" for justifying all
+the atrocities and abominations of your law. You gravely
+tell us, "The entire population of the North has acqui<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_32" id="Page_32">[Pg 32]</a></span>esced
+in the law of 1793, without thinking itself exposed
+to the charge of barbarity, and I have only to say, that I
+do not think the charge any more just now." Certainly,
+Sir, the young colonial judge could not have given a reason
+less logical or satisfactory. You must be an inattentive
+observer of passing events, if you are ignorant that the
+law of 1793 has again and again been denounced as iniquitous,
+that some of the States have prohibited their officers
+from assisting in its execution, that numberless petitions
+have been presented to Congress for its repeal, and
+that you yourself, instead of acquiescing in it, solemnly declared
+it to be the duty of Congress so far to alter the law,
+as to grant the alleged fugitive a trial by jury. Yet the
+law of 1793, wicked as it was, was justice and mercy
+compared with yours. The trials under that were almost
+invariably before judges of the State courts, not appointed
+like your commissioners for the vile and only purpose of
+reducing their fellow-men to bondage. There judges were
+not confined to <i>ex parte</i> evidence, were not compelled to
+receive "as full and conclusive" affidavits made in distant
+States, and by unknown persons. For the most part, they
+honestly endeavoured, by a patient investigation according
+to the ordinary rules of evidence, and by holding the plaintiff
+to strict legal proof, to supply the want of a jury.</p>
+
+<p>David Paul Brown, Esq., of Philadelphia, in a letter of
+last November, affirms that for the last thirty years he has
+been engaged as counsel in almost every important fugitive
+case brought before the judges and courts of Philadelphia,
+and he tells us, "thanks to those upright and impartial and
+independent judges by whom the rights of the parties were
+finally determined," he knows of no instance in which a
+colored person was, in his opinion, wrongfully surrendered.
+But he adds, "I have known <span class="smcap">HUNDREDS</span> who have been
+illegally and unjustly claimed." This experienced lawyer,
+commenting on your law, justly says it allows "<i>ex parte</i>
+testimony to be received against the alleged fugitive, which,
+upon no principle known to the common law, could be re<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_33" id="Page_33">[Pg 33]</a></span>ceived
+upon the claim to a horse or a dog." About four
+weeks after the date of this letter, Mr. Brown was called to
+defend an alleged fugitive "illegally and unjustly claimed,"
+not before one of the "upright and impartial and independent"
+Pennsylvania judges, but before one of your ten-dollar
+slave-catching judges. I beg you to mark the result.</p>
+
+<p>On the 21st of December, a colored man was arrested in
+the street in Philadelphia, without warrant, and accused of
+stealing chickens. He was thrust into a carriage, driven to
+the State-House, carried into an upper room, and handcuffed.
+In this state he was detained till a commissioner
+arrived. The name of this executor of your law is worthy
+of remembrance. <span class="smcap">Edward D. Ingraham</span> ought to be as
+much endeared to slave-catchers, as Judge Jeffries was to
+James the Second.</p>
+
+<p>By some means, the arrest became known, and counsel
+appeared for the prisoner. Your commissioner was informed
+that the prisoner had only been seized an hour and
+a half before, and had not heard the charge against him;
+that his counsel had had no time to learn the plaintiff's
+case, nor to prepare for the defence; that there were persons
+residing at a distance, some in New Jersey and some
+in Wilmington, who would be important witnesses in his
+behalf. On these grounds, a motion was made for a continuance.
+And what, Sir, do you suppose was the reply
+made by the slave-catching judge to this motion? "<span class="smcap">The
+hearing is to be a summary one: let it proceed.</span>" No
+doubt you fully participate in Mr. Webster's indignation
+against Austrian barbarity; but see no barbarity in this accursed
+proceeding against a <i>colored</i> American. The hearing
+did proceed, and James S. Price, on behalf of the plaintiff,
+swore that the prisoner was Emery Rice, the man
+claimed, but knew nothing further about his being a slave,
+except that he had seen him riding the claimant's horse.
+Had <i>heard it said</i> the prisoner was a slave. This was the
+amount of the testimony on behalf of the claimant. Any
+honest jury, nay, any honest judge, would instantly have<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_34" id="Page_34">[Pg 34]</a></span>
+decided in favor of the prisoner. Not so <span class="smcap">Mr. Edward D.
+Ingraham</span>. The counsel for the defendant asked again for
+a postponement, and founded the motion on the <i>oath</i> of the
+defendant, that he could procure six persons, naming them,
+to testify to his freedom. A delay of <span class="smcap">ONE HOUR</span> was asked
+for. This was refused, and the judge(!) sent for a certificate
+to sign. During the delay thus occasioned, one of the
+six persons named by the defendant appeared, and swore
+that he had known the prisoner all his life. That he was
+not Emery Rice, but Adam Gibson; that he was a freeman,
+having been manumitted by the will of his late master.
+Mr. Brown produced a copy of the will of the late
+master, and it so far confirmed the testimony of the witness.
+Another person in the crowd now came forward, and
+swore that he also knew the prisoner, and that he was a
+free person, and that he was Adam Gibson. But all was
+in vain. The commissioner signed the certificate, and,
+with an obtuseness of intellect which marked him as a fit
+subject for a commission of lunacy, declared, "He had no
+doubt of the identity of the prisoner with the slave Emery
+Rice, and that <i>all other proceedings must be before the
+courts of Maryland</i>, whither he would send him."<a name="FNanchor_1_1" id="FNanchor_1_1"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_1" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> And
+so the prisoner, without seeing his wife and children, whom
+he had that morning parted from unsuspicious of danger
+and unconscious of crime, was hurried off at the expense of
+our glorious model republic, under an escort of officers,
+who delivered him, not to the courts of Maryland, but to
+Mr. William S. Knight, the reputed owner. But Mr.
+Knight told the officers, "You have brought me a wrong
+man; this is not Emery Rice; this man is no slave of
+mine." And so Adam Gibson returned to Philadelphia,
+and is now a living illustration of the abominable iniquity
+of one of the most accursed laws to be found in the statute-book
+of any civilized nation.</p>
+
+<p>You do not think your law more barbarous than that of<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_35" id="Page_35">[Pg 35]</a></span>
+1793. Let me further enlighten you. Judge McLean of
+the Supreme Court, in his opinion delivered last May in
+the case of <i>Norris</i> v. <i>Newton et al.</i>, remarks,&mdash;"In regard
+to the arrest of fugitives from labor, the law [act of
+1793] <i>does not impose any active duties on our citizens
+generally</i>"; and he argues in defence of the law, that "it
+gives no one a just right to complain; he has only to refrain
+from an express violation of the law." In other
+words, the law only required individuals to be passive spectators
+of a horrible outrage, and did not compel them to be
+active participators in other men's villany. Now, what
+says your law? Why, that every commissioner may appoint
+as many official slave-catchers as he pleases, and that
+each of these menials may "summon and call to their aid
+the <i>by-standers</i> or <i>posse comitatus</i> of the proper county,
+when necessary to insure a faithful observance of the
+clause of the Constitution referred to in conformity with
+the provisions of this act, <span class="smcap">AND ALL GOOD CITIZENS ARE HEREBY
+COMMANDED TO AID AND ASSIST</span> in the prompt and efficient
+execution of this law, whenever their services may be required."
+And what is the fate you have provided for the
+"good citizen," who, believing slavery to be sinful, cannot,
+in the fear of God, "aid and assist" in making a fellow-man
+a slave? Any person "who shall aid, abet, or assist"
+the fugitive "directly or indirectly" (cunning words) to
+escape from such claimant, as, for instance, refusing to join
+in a slave-hunt when required, shall be fined not exceeding
+$1,000, be imprisoned six months, and pay the claimant
+$1,000. I hope, Sir, you are now able to perceive that
+your law has a pre&euml;minence in barbarity over its predecessor.
+And now, Sir, please to recollect, that party discipline,
+aided by the influence of Messrs. Webster and Clay,
+and the factory and cotton interest of Boston and New York,
+could not procure for this atrocious law the votes of <i>one
+half</i> the members of the House of Representatives. Of
+two hundred and thirty-two members, only one hundred
+and nine dared to place their names on an enduring and<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_36" id="Page_36">[Pg 36]</a></span>
+shameful record, while many basely deserted their seats,
+fearing alike to vote either for or against it. You, Sir, following
+Mr. Webster's advice, "conquered your prejudices,"
+and in company with <i>two</i> more Northern Whigs, one of
+them a native of Virginia, cast your vote for this bill of
+abominations. But, although you voted for the law, you
+do not wish your constituents to suppose you approved of
+it. "It will not, I trust, be inferred from any thing I have
+said, that I consider the law which has passed unexceptionable.
+There are amendments which I strongly desire
+to be introduced into it." What are the exceptionable features
+of the law, what are the amendments you desire, you
+refrain from specifying. But you tell us that you would
+have labored for these amendments "had it been possible,
+but every body knows that it was <i>impracticable</i>." You
+allude to the <i>previous question</i>, which prevented both discussion
+and amendments. But why, then, did you vote
+for an objectionable bill which could not be amended?
+Here, again, we have one of your unfortunate reasons.
+"I deem conformity to the design of the Constitution more
+important than the objectionable details of the bill." So,
+by your own confession, had there been no previous question,
+you would have swallowed the bill with all its objectionable
+details, out of reverence for the <i>design</i> of the
+Constitution, although that design neither embraced nor
+required a single one of those details. Did you, Sir, vote
+<i>against</i> the previous question? On this point you are silent,
+and the minutes afford no information; but <i>if</i> you did,
+your vote was a most remarkable aberration from your proslavery
+course in Congress. <i>After</i> the previous question
+had been seconded, it was moved to lay the bill on the
+table. Had this motion been carried, you might have
+introduced another bill, omitting the "objectionable details,"
+but you voted with the slaveholders. The slaveholders
+then moved that the bill be read a third time.
+Had this been lost, there would have been a chance of
+correcting the "objectionable details." Again you voted<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_37" id="Page_37">[Pg 37]</a></span>
+with the slaveholders, and a third time, also, on the main
+question.</p>
+
+<p>I will now, Sir, call your attention to the disastrous influence
+which your law has exerted on the <i>moral sense</i> of
+the community. Says Coleridge, "To dogmatize a
+crime, that is, to teach it as a doctrine, is itself a crime."
+Of this crime of dogmatizing crime, Mr. Webster, and most
+of our cotton politicians, and, alas! many of our fashionable,
+genteel divines, are guilty; nor are you innocent, Sir,
+who in your law require "<span class="smcap">GOOD</span> citizens" to aid in hunting
+and enslaving their fellow-men.</p>
+
+<p>In former years, and before Mr. Webster had undergone
+his metamorphosis, he thus, in a speech at New York, expressed
+himself in regard to the antislavery agitation at
+the North. "It [slavery] has arrested the <i>religious feeling</i>
+of the country; it has taken strong hold of the consciences
+of men. He is a rash man indeed, little conversant with
+human nature, and especially has he a very erroneous estimate
+of the character of the people of this country, who
+supposes that a feeling of this kind is <i>to be trifled with or
+despised</i>." This gentleman has become the rash man
+shadowed forth in his speech, and is trifling with and despising
+the religious feeling of the North. In his street
+speech in Boston, in favor of slave-hunting, he avowed
+that he was well aware that the return of fugitives "is a
+topic that must excite prejudices," and that the question for
+Massachusetts to decide was, "whether she will conquer
+her own prejudice." In his letter to the citizens of Newburyport,
+he sneeringly alludes to the "cry that there is a
+rule for the government of public men and private men
+which is superior to the Constitution," and he scornfully
+intimates that Mr. Horace Mann, who had objected to your
+law as wicked, would do well "to appeal at once, as others
+do, to that high authority which sits enthroned above the
+Constitution and the laws"; and he gives an extract from
+a nameless English correspondent, in which the writer remarks,
+"Religion is an excellent thing except in politics,"<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_38" id="Page_38">[Pg 38]</a></span>
+a maxim exceedingly palatable to very many of our politicians.
+Aware that the impiety of this sentiment was not
+exactly suited to the meridian of Massachusetts, he says
+his friend undoubtedly meant "a fantastical notion of religion."
+Of course, he regards the religious prejudice
+against hunting and enslaving men as springing from a fantastic
+notion of religion. Yet, with a strange fatuity, he
+confesses that "the teaching of Christ and his Apostles is
+a sure guide to duty in <i>politics</i>, as in any other concern of
+life," utterly oblivious of the fact, that the "higher law,"
+which he ridicules, was proclaimed in that very teaching.
+Christ taught, "Fear not them [magistrates] who kill the
+body, but are not able to kill the soul, but rather fear <span class="smcap">Him</span>
+who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell." What
+taught the Apostles? "We must obey God, rather than
+man." Such teaching it was, that gave birth to "the noble
+army of martyrs," and this very teaching will induce
+multitudes of Christians at the present day to hazard fines
+and imprisonment rather than obey the wicked injunctions
+of your law. It was this same teaching which, on the publication
+of your law, induced numerous ministers of Jesus
+Christ, and various ecclesiastical assemblies, to denounce it
+as wicked, and obedience to it as rebellion against God.
+This expression of religious sentiment alarmed both our
+politicians and our merchants. How could the one expect
+Southern votes, or the other Southern trade, if the religious
+people at the North refused to catch slaves? Hence arose
+a mighty outcry against the blending of religion with politics,
+and most fearful were the anathemas against the parsons
+who desecrated the pulpit by preaching politics, that
+is, preaching that people ought to obey God rather than
+the Fugitive Slave Act. Such men were, in the language
+of one of the New York commercial journals, "clerical
+preachers of rebellion," and their congregations were exhorted
+to "leave them to naked walls." But the leaven
+was at work, and an antidote was greatly wanted. Supply
+of course follows demand, and forthwith there was a sud<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_39" id="Page_39">[Pg 39]</a></span>den
+advent of cotton clergyman, preaching against rebellion,
+and cunningly confounding a conscientious, passive
+disobedience with forcible resistance. Their sermons, in
+which virtually</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">"The image of God was accounted as base,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">And the image of C&aelig;sar set up in its place,"<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>were received with mighty applause by the very men who
+had been striving to save the pulpit from all contaminating
+contact with politics, and the reverend preachers of cotton
+politics were elevated into patriots, and their disquisitions
+against the "higher law" were scattered on the wings of
+the commercial press broadcast over the land.<a name="FNanchor_2_2" id="FNanchor_2_2"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_2" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> The theology
+which holds that the allegiance we owe to civil government
+binds the conscience to obedience to its mandates,
+is the same with which Shakspeare's assassin quieted his
+scruples when acting under the royal command,&mdash;"If a
+king bid a man be a villain, he is bound by the indenture
+of his oath to be one."</p>
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_40" id="Page_40">[Pg 40]</a></span></p>
+<p>It is amusing to observe with what awful reverence our
+merchants and brokers regard the sanctity of human law,
+when it commands them to catch slaves; a reverence not
+always felt by them for the statute of usury when the
+money market is tight.</p>
+
+<p>A vast deal of nonsense and impiety has been recently
+thrown upon the public in relation to the "higher law,"
+by men who had political and pecuniary interests depend<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_41" id="Page_41">[Pg 41]</a></span>ing
+on the good-will of the slaveholders. The whole subject
+is perfectly simple and intelligible, and has been intentionally
+misrepresented and mystified.</p>
+
+<p>Human government is indispensable to the happiness
+and progress of human society. Hence God, in his wisdom
+and benevolence, wills its existence; and in this
+sense, and this alone, the powers that be are ordained by
+him. But civil government cannot exist, if each individual
+may, at his pleasure, forcibly resist its injunctions.
+Therefore Christians are required to <i>submit</i> to the powers
+that be, whether a Nero or a slave-catching Congress. But
+obedience to the civil ruler often necessarily involves rebellion
+to God. Hence we are warned by Christ and his
+Apostles, and by the example of saints in all ages, in such
+cases, not to obey, but to submit and suffer. We are to
+hold fast our allegiance to Jehovah, but at the same time
+not take up arms to defend ourselves against the penalties
+imposed by the magistrate for our disobedience. Thus the
+Divine sovereignty and the authority of human government
+are both maintained. Revolution is not the abolition
+of human government, but a change in its form, and its
+lawfulness depends on circumstances. What was the
+"den" in which John Bunyan had his glorious vision of
+the Pilgrim's Progress? A prison to which he was confined
+for years for refusing obedience to human laws. And
+what excuse did this holy man make for conduct now
+denounced as wicked and rebellious? "I cannot obey,
+but I can suffer." The Quakers have from the first refused
+to obey the law requiring them to bear arms; yet have they
+never been vilified by our politicians and cotton clergymen,
+as rebels against the powers that be, nor sneered at for
+their acknowledgment of a "higher" than human law.
+The Lord Jesus Christ, after requiring us to love God and
+our neighbour, added, "There is none other commandment
+greater than these"; no, not even a slave-catching act of
+Congress, which requires us to hunt our neighbour, that
+he may be reduced to the condition of a beast of burden.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_42" id="Page_42">[Pg 42]</a></span>
+Rarely has the religious faith of the community received
+so rude a shock as that which has been given it by your
+horrible law, and the principles advanced by its political
+and clerical supporters. Cruelty, oppression, and injustice
+are elevated into virtues, while justice, mercy, and compassion
+are ridiculed and vilified.</p>
+
+<p>But lately, the business of catching slaves was regarded
+as one of the lowest grades of scoundrelism. Now, great
+pains are taken by our gentlemen of property and standing
+to ennoble it; and men of eminence in the legal profession
+are stooping to take the wages of iniquity, and lending
+themselves to consign to the horrors of American slavery
+men whom they know to be innocent of crime. Nay, we
+have seen in New York a committee of gentlemen actually
+<i>raising money by voluntary contribution</i> to furnish a slave-catcher
+with professional services gratis;&mdash;a free gift, not
+to mitigate human misery, but to aggravate the hardships
+of the poor and friendless a thousandfold. Can men of
+standing in the community thus openly espouse the cause
+of cruelty and oppression, and, from commercial and political
+views, trample upon every principle of Christian benevolence,
+without corrupting the moral sense of the people
+to the extent of their influence? When gentlemen club
+together to hire a lawyer to assist a slave-catcher, no wonder
+that the commercial press should teem with the vilest
+abuse of all who feel sympathy for the fugitive. One of
+the most malignant proslavery journals in New York is
+edited by your colleague and fellow-Whig, the Honorable
+Mr. Brooks, and his brother. I copy, Sir, for your consideration,
+the following article from the <i>New York Evening
+Express</i>, published during the late trial in that city of
+Henry Long, an alleged fugitive:&mdash;</p>
+
+<p>"Two fugitive cases are now before our courts; one
+that of the negro Henry Long, and the other that of three
+white Frenchmen, under the extradition treaty with France.
+The negro's case makes a great deal of noise, because he
+is black; the three white Frenchmen are hardly heard of.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_43" id="Page_43">[Pg 43]</a></span>
+The three white French people pay their own counsel:
+they may have committed a robbery in Paris, or may not;
+are perhaps innocent, though possibly guilty; but here
+they are on trial, with no chance of a trial before a jury!
+If they are sent back, and are convicted, they go to the
+galleys, and are slaves for life. The negro, Henry Long,
+lucky fellow for being black! lives in clover here, and has
+one of the best speakers in the city, on the best fee, interests
+all the Abolitionists in all quarters, who contribute
+money freely for his defence, and if he is returned, leaves
+here canonized as a martyr, and goes back to the condition
+he was born in, to fatten on hog and hominy, better fed
+and better clothed than nine tenths of the farm laborers in
+Great Britain. Another consideration strikes us, and that
+is, the cost of defending Long will buy his freedom three
+times over. The very fee of his counsel would purchase
+his freedom. But to buy him and pay for him, <i>not steal</i>
+him, would leave no room for agitation. And where does
+this money come from, that cares for Long and neglects
+the three Frenchmen? From England, in the main, we
+believe. The Abolitionists here do not <i>contribute it</i>."</p>
+
+<p>It would be difficult to find in the Satanic press a more
+clumsy piece of malignant falsehood. We have here, from
+the same pen, and in the same article, the assertions, that
+the Abolitionists, in all quarters, we are assured, "contribute
+money freely for his defence"; and then the money,
+it is believed, comes mainly from England. "The Abolitionists
+here do not contribute it." To contribute money
+for the legal defence of a fugitive is <i>stealing him</i>. The
+cost of defending Long amounted to three times the price
+that would be asked for him. Long, after his return, sold
+in Richmond for $750; of course his defence cost $2,250.
+To whom, and for what, was this money paid? Long
+could not be bought in New York, all advances for the
+purpose being peremptorily repulsed. His counsel's fee
+was $300, being all contributed in New York, and about
+$100 of it being raised by the free colored people. While<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_44" id="Page_44">[Pg 44]</a></span>
+$300 were thus raised to give Long the chance of a legal
+defence, gentlemen of the New York Union Safety Committee,
+of which your colleague has the honor of being a
+member, contributed $500 to aid the slave-catcher in reducing
+to bondage a man unaccused of crime!</p>
+
+<p>I am inclined to believe, Sir, that you have little cause
+to congratulate yourself, that, in voting for the Fugitive
+Slave Law, you have advanced the cause of truth, justice,
+humanity, or religion.</p>
+
+<p>A refusal to <i>obey</i> your wicked law has been artfully represented
+as a determination to <i>resist</i> its execution. Very
+few of our white population have intimated the most distant
+intention of resorting to illegal violence. Very many
+ecclesiastical bodies have denounced your law as so iniquitous,
+that they could not in conscience obey it; but I
+challenge you to point to a <i>single instance</i> in which such
+a body has recommended forcible resistance. To the vast
+accumulation of impiety uttered in support of your law
+has been added a fiendish ridicule of the benevolent and
+Christian feeling arrayed against it. It is true, that some
+of our free blacks and fugitives have declared, that they
+would, at the hazard of their lives, defend themselves
+against the kidnapper. Whatever may be thought of the
+wisdom of such a determination, be assured it will tax
+your logical powers to the utmost to prove that God has
+conferred the right of self-defence exclusively upon white
+men. The slave is a prisoner of war, and instead of being
+protected by law, he is subjected by it to every conceivable
+outrage. When murdered, his owner seeks in the courts
+<i>damages</i> at the hands of the murderer, as he would for the
+death of his horse. For no possible injury committed on
+his person, either by his owner or others, can he receive
+compensation, although the law may profess to punish
+cruelty to him as to other animals. Now it has never been
+regarded as immoral, by those who admit the right of self-defence,
+for a prisoner of war to effect his escape by slaying
+his guard. All this, I know, will horrify a certain class<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_45" id="Page_45">[Pg 45]</a></span>
+of our divines and politicians. But let them be patient.
+I am not laying down a doctrine, but stating <i>facts</i>, which
+they may disprove if they can. Let them remember, that
+all the slavery which they delight to find in the Bible was
+the slavery of <i>white</i> men, and that the Roman slaves in
+the time of Christ, whose bondage, we are told, he and his
+Apostles approved, were held by the <i>right of war</i>. White
+Americans have been held as slaves by the same holy and
+Scriptural tenure. Let us, then, inquire how the escape
+and resistance of white slaves have heretofore been regarded.
+In 1535, the <i>white</i> slaves in Tunis alone amounted
+to twenty thousand. Cervantes, who had himself been a
+slave in Algiers, says in his writings, "For liberty we
+ought to risk life itself; slavery being the greatest evil
+that can fall to the lot of man." Acting upon this precept,
+he himself, while a slave, planned a general insurrection of
+the slaves. Yet Cervantes was recognized as a faithful
+son of the Church, and the license prefixed to his works
+declares they contain nothing contrary to the Christian
+religion. The Annual Register for 1763 announces, that,
+"last month, the Christian slaves at Algiers, to the number
+of four thousand, rose and killed their guards, and massacred
+all who came in their way." The insurrection was
+suppressed, but no one in Europe denounced the insurgents
+as bloodthirsty wretches, nor regarded their effort as
+an impious and anti-Christian rebellion against the powers
+ordained of God. In the reign of Elizabeth, one John Fox,
+a slave on the Barbary coast, slew his master, and, effecting
+his escape with a number of his fellow-slaves, arrived in
+England. The queen, instead of looking upon him as a
+murderer, testified her admiration of his exploit by allowing
+him a pension.<a name="FNanchor_3_3" id="FNanchor_3_3"></a><a href="#Footnote_3_3" class="fnanchor">[3]</a></p>
+
+<p>Washington Madison performed a similar exploit on
+board an American coast slaver, and arrived, with a large
+number of his fellow-slaves, in the British West Indies.<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_46" id="Page_46">[Pg 46]</a></span>
+Mr. Webster, then Secretary of State, officially demanded
+of the British government the surrender of this heroic man
+as a <span class="smcap">MURDERER</span>.</p>
+
+<p>In 1793, there were one hundred and fifteen American
+slaves in Algiers, held by as perfect and Scriptural a tenure
+as any slave is now held in any part of our wide republic.
+Had one of these slaves made his escape by killing his
+Algerine master, would any of our patriotic divines, would
+any gentleman of the "New York Union Committee of
+Safety," would even Mr. Webster himself, have pronounced
+him a murderer? Had the captain of a British ship favored
+his escape, and given him a passage to Boston, would your
+colleague, the Honorable Mr. Brooks, have accused him of
+slave-stealing? Is it not possible, Sir, that, with very many
+of our casuists and moralists, questions of conscience are
+decided according to the tincture of a skin?</p>
+
+<p>I will now ask your attention to some of the political
+consequences resulting from the late measures in which
+you rejoice, and for which you voted. No sooner had
+Congress made the required concessions to the slave power,
+than the advocates of those measures claimed the glory of
+having given peace to the country, and perpetuity to the
+Union. Mr. Webster, as one of the chief agents in this
+blessed consummation, received the congratulations of a
+crowd in Washington. In his reply he observed,&mdash;"Truly,
+gentlemen, the last two days have been great
+days. A work has been accomplished which dissipates
+doubts and alarms, puts an end to angry controversies, fortifies
+the Constitution of the country, and strengthens the
+bond of the Union.</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">'Now is the winter of our discontent<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Made glorious summer;....<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">And all the clouds that lowered upon our house<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">In the deep bosom of the ocean buried.'"<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>The glorious summer anticipated by the orator proved
+cold and brief, and if the lowering clouds were indeed
+buried in the ocean, the sea has given up its dead. Never<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_47" id="Page_47">[Pg 47]</a></span>
+before, since the organization of the government, has such
+a tempest of indignation swept over the land. Never before,
+in a single instance, has there been manifested throughout
+the religious portion of the community, of all creeds
+and names, such a settled determination in the fear of God
+to withhold obedience to a law of the land. The sentiments
+of the great mass of the people of the free States,
+exclusive of the commercial cities, are briefly but emphatically
+embodied in a resolution of the Common Council of
+Chicago, viz.:&mdash;"The Fugitive Slave Act recently passed
+by Congress is revolting to our moral sense, and an outrage
+on our feelings of justice and humanity, because it disregards
+all the securities which the Constitution and laws
+have thrown around personal liberty, and its direct tendency
+is to alienate the people from their love and reverence
+for the government and institutions of our country."</p>
+
+<p>How far the clouds which hovered over our house have
+been dissipated, let the recent rout of Mr. Webster's party
+in Massachusetts testify. Let his own declaration, a month
+after the <i>peace</i> measures were adopted, that the Union was
+passing through a <i>fiery trial</i>, testify.<a name="FNanchor_4_4" id="FNanchor_4_4"></a><a href="#Footnote_4_4" class="fnanchor">[4]</a> How far the work
+of the two days has fortified the Constitution, let the recent
+law of Vermont, denounced as an utter nullification of
+the Constitution, because it rescues the alleged fugitive
+from the hands of the commissioner, and gives him a jury
+trial before a State court, testify. When rumors were rife
+that Mr. Webster intended to repudiate his own thunder,
+the Wilmot Proviso, the <i>New York Herald</i>, the chief
+Northern organ of the slaveholders, promised that, if the
+Senator would indeed pursue a course so patriotic, a grateful
+country would, at the next election, place him in the
+Presidential chair. But scarcely had the acts advocated
+by Mr. Webster been consummated, than the <i>Herald</i>, with
+sardonic malice, announces,&mdash;"The predictions of Mr.
+Clay, that the Compromise Bill would speedily conciliate
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_48" id="Page_48">[Pg 48]</a></span>all parties, and restore the era of good feeling, were exactly
+the reverse of the actual consequences. Mr. Webster has
+been cast overboard in Massachusetts. General Cass has
+been virtually condemned in Michigan. Mr. Dickinson,
+the President, and his cabinet, have been routed in New
+York. Mr. Phelps has been superseded in Vermont.
+Whilst in Ohio, Illinois, Iowa, and Wisconsin, the Free-Soilers
+have carried off the booty." And he winds up with
+declaring, that the next President "can't be Fillmore nor
+Webster."</p>
+
+<p>If the "peace measures" have strengthened the bond of
+the Union, what mean all the meetings lately held to <i>save
+the Union</i>? Why is the tocsin now sounded by the very
+authors and friends of the measures? How comes it that,
+in Boston itself, the chairman of a Union meeting contradicts
+the exulting and jubilant shout of triumph uttered by
+the Secretary of State, and makes the following doleful
+announcement:&mdash;"The Union, and consequently the existence
+of this nation, is menaced, and unless there is a
+great and general effort in their support, we may soon behold
+the mighty fabric of our government trembling over
+our heads, and threatening by its fall to crush the prosperity
+which we have so long and happily enjoyed." So relaxed
+has become the bond of our Union, that one hundred
+gentlemen of property and standing in New York have,
+under the style and title of "The New York Union Committee
+of Safety," assumed the onerous task of taking it
+into their safe-keeping. "Committees of safety" are associated
+with times of peril and anarchy, and are never
+wanted when alarms have ceased, angry discussions ended,
+the Constitution fortified, and the bond of union strengthened.</p>
+
+<p>In this universal panic, in this dread entertained, especially
+in Boston, by Mr. Webster's friends, of soon seeing the
+mighty fabric of our government trembling over their
+heads, it may, Sir, be consolatory to you and others to
+know how so dire a calamity may be averted. The chiv<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_49" id="Page_49">[Pg 49]</a></span>alric
+Senator from Mississippi&mdash;the gentleman who threatens
+to hang one Senator if he dare place his foot on the
+soil of Mississippi, who draws a loaded pistol on another,
+and for a third bears a challenge to mortal combat&mdash;was
+lately in the city of New York. The Committee of Safety
+found him out, and lauded him for his fearless discharge of
+duty, and his fervor and devotion to the Union, and welcomed
+him to the commercial emporium in the name of all
+who appreciate the blessings we enjoy, and are willing to
+transmit them to their children. The worthy and conciliatory
+gentleman very appropriately communicated to the
+committee having the Union in charge the conditions on
+which alone it could be saved, notwithstanding its bond
+had so recently been strengthened. These conditions are,
+we learn, four in number.</p>
+
+<p>1. "The Fugitive Slave Bill passed by Congress shall
+remain the law of the land, and be faithfully executed."</p>
+
+<p>Both you and Mr. Webster admit that the Constitution
+permits a jury trial to the fugitive. Should Congress, in
+its wisdom, and in obedience to the wishes of the great
+mass of the Northern population, and in the exercise of its
+constitutional power, elevate property in a human being to
+the same level with that in a horse, and permit a jury to
+pass upon the title to it,&mdash;<i>the Union must be dissolved</i>.</p>
+
+<p>2. "The Wilmot Proviso, that monstrous thing, shall not
+be revived." It was not courteous, certainly, in Mr. Foote
+thus to characterize Mr. Webster's thunder. The claim to
+this thunder was made in his speech, September, 1847, at
+the Springfield Convention, which nominated him for
+President; and the Convention, in his presence, thus declared
+their devotion to his missile. "The Whigs of Massachusetts
+now declare, and put this declaration of their
+purpose <i>on record</i>, that Massachusetts will never consent
+that Mexican territories, however acquired, shall become a
+part of the American Union, unless on the <i>unalterable</i> condition
+that there shall be neither slavery nor involuntary
+servitude, otherwise than in punishment for crime." The<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_50" id="Page_50">[Pg 50]</a></span>
+next year Mr. Webster launched his thunder over the Territory
+of Oregon, and thus in his speech (10th August,
+1848) vindicated it from the character now given to it by
+Mr. Foote:&mdash;</p>
+
+<p>"Gentlemen from the South declare that we invade
+their rights when we deprive them of a participation in
+the enjoyment of territories acquired by the common services
+and common exertions of all. Is this true? Of what
+do we deprive them? Why, they say that we deprive
+them of the privilege of carrying their slaves as slaves into
+the new territories. Well, Sir, what is the amount of
+that? They say, that in this way we deprive them of
+going into this acquired territory with their property.
+Their property! What do they mean by this 'property'?
+We certainly do not deprive them of the privilege of going
+into those newly acquired territories with all that, in the
+general estimate of human society and common and universal
+understanding of mankind, is esteemed property.
+Not at all. The truth is just this. They have in their
+own States peculiar laws which create property in persons....
+The real meaning, then, of Southern gentlemen,
+in making this complaint, is, that they cannot go into the
+territories of the United States carrying with them their
+own peculiar law, a law which creates property in persons."</p>
+
+<p>So the Wilmot Proviso was no monstrous thing at all,
+as applied to Oregon. When the question came up of
+applying this same Proviso to New Mexico and California,
+Mr. Webster discovered in these Territories a certain peculiarity
+of physical geography and Asiatic scenery which
+he had not discovered in Oregon, and which, he found,
+rendered it a physical impossibility for Southern gentlemen
+to carry there "a law which creates property in persons,"
+and he therefore gave them full liberty to carry their law
+into those vast regions, if they could. But at the very
+moment of giving this liberty to Southern gentlemen, he
+courageously warned them that his thunder was good con<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_51" id="Page_51">[Pg 51]</a></span>stitutional
+thunder, and would be used whenever necessary.
+"Wherever there is an <i>inch of land</i> to be stayed back from
+becoming slave territory, I am ready to insert the principle
+of the exclusion of slavery. I am pledged to that from
+1837,&mdash;pledged to it again and again, and I will perform
+those pledges." So, should we get another slice of Mexico,
+or annex Cuba or St. Domingo, Mr. Webster would revive
+the Wilmot Proviso, and then <i>he</i> will be the means,
+if he succeeds, of dissolving the Union!</p>
+
+<p>3. The next condition announced to the Safety Committee
+is,&mdash;"No attempt shall be made in Congress to prohibit
+slavery in the District of Columbia."</p>
+
+<p>Now it is the opinion of Mr. Webster, that Congress has
+the constitutional right, not merely to attempt, but actually
+to effect, the exclusion of slavery in <i>all</i> the Territories of the
+United States. The District of Columbia being placed by
+the Constitution expressly under "the exclusive jurisdiction"
+of Congress, the <i>constitutional</i> right to abolish slavery
+there has rarely been questioned; but it has been contended
+that good faith to the States which ceded the District
+forbids such an act of constitutional power. Hence,
+in 1838, a resolution was introduced into the Senate declaring
+that the abolition of slavery in the District would
+be "a violation of good faith," &amp;c. What said Mr. Webster?
+"I do not know any matter of fact, or any ground
+of argument, on which this affirmation of plighted faith
+can stand. I see nothing in the act of cession, and nothing
+in the Constitution, and nothing in the transaction, implying
+any limitation on the authority of Congress."<a name="FNanchor_5_5" id="FNanchor_5_5"></a><a href="#Footnote_5_5" class="fnanchor">[5]</a></p>
+<p><span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_52" id="Page_52">[Pg 52]</a></span></p>
+<p>4. The last condition on which the Union can be
+preserved is,&mdash;"No State shall be prevented from coming
+into the Union on the ground of having slavery." This
+is an unkind cut at Mr. Webster, since he has again and
+again pledged himself against the admission of slave States.
+Even so early as 1819, he advocated, in a public meeting
+at Boston, a resolution declaring that Congress "possessed
+the constitutional power, upon the admission of any new
+State created beyond the limits of the original territory of
+the United States, to make the prohibition of the further
+extension of slavery or involuntary servitude in such new
+State a condition of admission. That, in the opinion of
+this meeting, it is just and expedient that this power
+should be exercised by Congress upon the admission of all
+new States created beyond the original limits of the United
+States." In his New York speech, in 1837, he averred,
+"When it is proposed to bring new members into the political
+partnership, the old members have a right to say on
+what terms such new partners are to come in, and <i>what they
+are to bring along with them</i>." In his Springfield speech,
+he insisted, "There is no one [he forgot Mr. Foote and
+his other Southern friends] who can complain of the North
+for resisting the increase of <i>slave representation</i>, because it
+gives power to the minority in a manner inconsistent with
+the principles of our government." So late as 1848, he
+proclaimed on the floor of the Senate, "I shall oppose all
+such extension [slave representation] at all times and under
+all circumstances, even against all inducements, against all
+combinations, against all compromises."</p>
+
+<p>The State of Georgia, in her convention of December
+last, added a <i>fifth</i> condition to those stated by Mr. Foote
+as indispensable to the preservation of the Union, viz.:&mdash;"No
+act suppressing the slave-trade between the slaveholding
+States." Unfortunately for Mr. Webster, he is
+here, for the fifth time, virtually held up as a disorganizer,
+and an enemy of the Union; for in his speech in the Senate
+(6th February, 1837) he remarked,&mdash;"As to the point,<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_53" id="Page_53">[Pg 53]</a></span>
+the right of regulating the transfer of slaves from one State
+to another, he did not know that he entertained any doubt,
+because the Constitution gave Congress the right to regulate
+trade and commerce between the States. Trade in
+what? In whatever was the subject of commerce and
+ownership. If slaves were the subjects of ownership, then
+trade in them between the States was subject to the regulation
+of Congress."</p>
+
+<p>Mr. Webster declared, that the work of the two days
+in which he rejoiced had fortified the Constitution, and
+strengthened the bond of the Union; and yet we are now
+solemnly warned, by the very men and party with whom
+he is acting, that the bond is to be severed, should Congress
+pass any one of five laws, all and each of which he,
+the great expounder, declares the Constitution authorizes
+Congress to pass. So it seems the great peril to which we
+are exposed, the course which is to make the fabric of our
+government to tremble over the heads of the people of
+Boston, is, not the violation of the Constitution, nor the
+breach of its compromises, nor the invasion of the rights
+of the South, but the exercise by Congress of powers
+which Mr. Webster declares to be undoubtedly constitutional.
+The Abolitionists supposed they were following
+a safe guide when they confined themselves, in their petitions
+to Congress for legislative action against slavery,
+exclusively to such measures as they were assured, by the
+eminent expounder, were strictly constitutional. The Abolitionists
+have sympathized with this gentleman in the obloquy
+he incurred, in common with themselves, for holding
+opinions unpalatable to the slaveholders, and for maintaining
+the constitutional rights of Congress. Because he
+insisted, in the Senate, on the power of Congress over
+slavery and the slave-trade in the District of Columbia,
+Mr. Rives, of Virginia, was so unkind as to say, that the
+gentleman from Massachusetts, "if it so pleased his fancy,
+might disport himself in tossing squibs and firebrands about
+<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_54" id="Page_54">[Pg 54]</a></span>this hall; but those who are sitting upon a barrel of gunpowder,
+liable to be blown up by his dangerous missiles,
+could hardly be expected to be quite as calm and philosophic."
+Because he presented antislavery petitions, and
+insisted on the duty of Congress to consider them, Mr.
+King, of Alabama, affirmed that the course which the Senator
+from Massachusetts had taken had "placed him at the
+head of those men who are inundating Congress with their
+petitions." Strange as it may now seem, Mr. Cuthbert, of
+Georgia, told Mr. Webster to his face in the Senate, "The
+gentleman had uniformly been opposed to all those measures
+which tended to quiet the country and heal those
+sectional dissensions which distract the Union."<a name="FNanchor_6_6" id="FNanchor_6_6"></a><a href="#Footnote_6_6" class="fnanchor">[6]</a> Surely,
+when the Abolitionists have so long made Mr. Webster
+their polar star in all constitutional questions, and have
+incurred with him the accusation of tossing squibs and
+firebrands, and of opposing measures which tended to quiet
+the country and settle sectional dissensions, they had a
+right to expect from his friends a larger share of compassion
+and forbearance than they have experienced.</p>
+
+<p>It would seem, Sir, that, in the late treaty of peace between
+the North and the South, it has been agreed and
+understood, that every power granted by the Constitution,
+whereby slavery can be protected, extended, and perpetuated,
+is to be actively enforced; and that every power
+which might be used for curtailing human bondage, however
+unquestionable may be its grant, shall for ever remain
+dormant, under the penalty of an immediate dissolution of
+the Union. This, Sir, is the treaty which our commercial
+cities are glorifying; this is the treaty which has turned
+our "winter of discontent" into "glorious summer." And
+think you, Sir, that the slaveholders, having eyes, see not,
+and having understandings, perceive not, the haberdashery
+patriotism which rejoices in such a treaty, and denounces as
+"fanatics," "vipers," and "woolly-headed philanthropists,"
+all who do not confess it to be a glorious consummation?<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_55" id="Page_55">[Pg 55]</a></span>
+The Southern papers tell us that our Union meetings are
+got up to "sell a little more tape and flannel"; and they
+remark, "It is very queer that Union meetings are held
+only in places which trade with the South." Out of regard
+to their Southern brethren, a member of the British
+House of Commons was insulted in Faneuil Hall by a portion
+of the Boston people, and forthwith the <i>New Orleans
+Delta</i>, instead of gratefully acknowledging the compliment,
+remarks, that their "good Union-loving friends in Boston
+are now solacing the South with sugar-plums in the shape
+of resolutions and speeches, and spice in the form of a row,
+got up on the occasion of the first appearance of George
+Thompson, an imported incendiary and hireling agitator.
+Such manifestation possesses an advantage which doubtless
+constitutes no small recommendation with our good brethren
+of Boston,&mdash;it is very cheap. The <i>cottoncratical</i>
+clerks and warehousemen may raise a hubbub in Faneuil
+Hall, but the fanatics can slay them at the <i>polls</i>."</p>
+
+<p>It is some consolation to those who are now suffering all
+the contempt and opprobrium which can be thrown both
+upon their heads and their hearts, because they have refused
+to follow Mr. Webster in the devious paths in which
+it has lately been his pleasure to walk, that they have by
+their constancy and firmness extorted from their Southern
+antagonists a tribute which is not paid to their revilers.
+Said Mr. Stanley, of Virginia, in his speech in the House
+of Representatives last March, speaking of a certain class of
+Northern politicians,&mdash;"I would say, with a slight alteration
+of one of Canning's verses,&mdash;</p>
+
+<div class="poem"><div class="stanza">
+<span class="i0">'Give me the avowed, erect, and manly foe,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Open I can meet, perhaps may turn, his blow;<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">But of all the plagues, great Heaven, thy wrath can send,<br /></span>
+<span class="i0">Save, O, save me from a <i>dough-face friend</i>!'"<br /></span>
+</div></div>
+
+<p>In closing this long letter, permit me to advert to the
+opinion expressed abroad of your Fugitive Law. Mr. Webster
+thought it convenient to quote the sentiment of a
+nameless correspondent, as to the mischievous mixture of<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_56" id="Page_56">[Pg 56]</a></span>
+religion with politics. Possibly the opinion of Dr. Lushington,
+one of the Lords of the Privy Council, Judge of the
+Vice-Admiralty Court, and the negotiator, on the part of
+Great Britain, of a recent treaty with France, may be entitled
+to at least equal weight. This gentleman, in a
+private letter to an English friend, and not intended for
+publication, thus speaks of your law:&mdash;"No one can feel
+more sincerely than myself, abhorrence of the Fugitive
+Slave Bill,&mdash;a measure as cruel and unchristian as ever
+disgraced any country." An Irish liberal, writing from
+Dublin, says,&mdash;"I long looked to your country as the ark
+of the world's liberties. I confess I hope for this no longer.
+The Fugitive Slave Bill is a shocking sample of the depravity
+of public sentiment in the United States. So atrocious
+a measure could not have passed into a law, if the
+majority of the people had not actively assented, or passively
+consented. Here, by the preponderating influence
+of our aristocracy, a small, but compact body, measures are
+often carried into laws that are very distasteful to multitudes;
+but such a mean, vile law as the Fugitive Slave
+Bill could not pass in England."</p>
+
+<p>The English press, Whig, Tory, and Radical, is indignant
+at the atrocities of your law. The taunt of our slaveholders,
+that the English had better reform abuses at home,
+is thus met by a radical journal (<i>The People</i>):&mdash;"The
+Americans laugh at us when we speak of American slavery,
+so long as so many of our fellow-subjects in England and
+Ireland are perishing from starvation through monarchical
+and aristocratical tyranny. We answer, that the Americans
+<i>know</i> that the men and women who lift up their
+voices against American slavery are the enemies of British
+tyranny and oppression."</p>
+
+<p>Your law, Sir, degrades the national character abroad;
+its excessive servility to Southern dictation excites the contempt
+of the slaveholders for the easy, selfish virtue of their
+Northern auxiliaries, while its outrages upon religion, justice,
+humanity, and the dearest principles of personal free<span class='pagenum'><a name="Page_57" id="Page_57">[Pg 57]</a></span>dom,
+under pretence of preserving the Union, weaken the
+attachment of conscientious men for a confederacy which
+requires such horrible sacrifices for its continuance. All
+these evils might have been easily avoided by a law satisfying
+every requirement of the Constitution, and yet treating
+the alleged fugitive as a <span class="smcap">MAN</span>, and granting him the
+same protection as is accorded to an alleged murderer.
+God gave you, Sir, an opportunity for which you ought to
+have been grateful, of illustrating your Puritan descent by
+standing forth before the nation as an advocate of justice
+and freedom, and of the rights of the poor and oppressed.
+Through a blind devotion to a political leader, you rejected
+the palm which Providence tendered to your acceptance,
+and have indelibly associated your name with cruelty and
+injustice. Had you retired from the notice of the public,
+as you did from the suffrages of the electors, you had acted
+wisely. In an evil hour for yourself, you stood forth as
+the champion of the Fugitive Slave Law. Its enemies rejoice
+in your rashness, for your feeble apology has rendered
+its deformities more prominent, and, by failing to vindicate,
+you have virtually confessed its abominations. May you
+live, Sir, to deplore the grievous error you have committed,
+and, by your future efforts in behalf of human freedom and
+happiness, atone for the wound they have received at your
+hands.</p>
+
+<p style="text-align: right;">
+HANCOCK.</p>
+<p>
+February, 1851.<br />
+</p>
+
+
+<div class="footnotes"><h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_1_1" id="Footnote_1_1"></a><a href="#FNanchor_1_1"><span class="label">[1]</span></a> See report in the <i>New York Tribune</i>, 25th December, 1850.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_2_2" id="Footnote_2_2"></a><a href="#FNanchor_2_2"><span class="label">[2]</span></a>In one of the most celebrated of these sermons, we find the
+following broad assertion:&mdash;"If God <i>has</i> left to men the choice of the
+<i>kind</i> of government they will have, he has <i>not</i> left it to their
+choice whether they will obey human government or not. He has
+<i>commanded</i> that obedience." Our rulers command us, when required by a
+commissioner's agent, to aid in hunting and seizing our innocent
+fellow-men, and delivering them into the hands of their task-masters.
+That the reverend preacher would render a cheerful obedience to such a
+mandate, there is little doubt. We read that the Jewish rulers, "The
+chief priests and Pharisees, had given a <i>commandment</i>, that, if any one
+knew where he (Jesus) was, he should show it, that they might take him."
+Strange is it, that of the college of Apostles there was but one "good
+citizen," who rendered obedience to the powers ordained by God; all the
+others suffered death for their wilful, deliberate defiance of the laws
+and the magistrates of the land. As a specimen of the teaching of these
+cotton divines, I quote from this same admired sermon the following
+precious piece of information, viz.:&mdash;"Nor is it true that the <i>fugitive
+slave</i> is made an <i>outlaw</i>, and on that ground justifiable for bloody
+and murderous resistance of law. He is under <i>the protection of law</i>;
+and if any man injures him, or kills him, the law will avenge him, just
+<i>as soon as it would you or me</i>." To deny the truth of this solemn
+declaration, made in the house of God, would be, in the reverend
+gentleman's estimation, but a portion of "that perpetual abuse of our
+Southern brethren" of which he complains. He must, however, permit us to
+call his attention to the following advertisements respecting a <span class="smcap">FUGITIVE
+SLAVE</span>, published in the Wilmington Journal of the 18th of October last,
+in pursuance of a law of the State of North Carolina.</p>
+
+<p>"<i>State of North Carolina, New Hanover County.</i>&mdash;Whereas complaint upon
+oath hath this day been made to us, two of the justice of the peace for
+the State and County aforesaid, by Guilford Horn, of Edgecombe County,
+that a certain male slave belonging to him, named <span class="smcap">Harry</span>,&mdash;a carpenter by
+trade, about 40 years old, 5 feet 5 inches high, or thereabouts, yellow
+complexion, stout built, with a scar on his left leg (from the cut of an
+axe), has very thick lips, eyes deep sunk in his head, forehead very
+square, tolerably loud voice, has lost one or two of his upper teeth,
+and has a very dark spot on his jaw, supposed to be a mark,&mdash;hath
+<i>absented</i> himself from his master's service, and is <i>supposed</i> to be
+lurking about in this County, committing acts of felony or other
+misdeeds: These are, therefore, in the name of the State aforesaid, to
+command said slave forthwith to surrender himself, and return home to
+his master; and we do hereby, by virtue of the act of Assembly in such
+case made and provided, intimate and declare that if the said slave
+Harry doth not surrender himself, and return home immediately after the
+publication of these presents, that any person or persons may <span class="smcap">KILL</span> and
+<span class="smcap">DESTROY</span> the said slave by such means as he may think fit, without
+accusation or impeachment of any crime or offence for so doing, and
+without incurring any penalty or forfeiture thereby.
+</p><p>
+"Given under our hands and seals, this 29th day of June, 1850.
+</p>
+<p><br />
+"JAMES T. MILLER, J. P.<br />
+</p><p><br />
+"W. C. BENTTENCOURT, J. P.<br />
+</p>
+<p>
+"<span class="smcap">One hundred and twenty-five dollars reward</span> will be paid for the
+delivery of said <span class="smcap">Harry</span> to me at Tonsott Depot, Edgecombe County, or for
+his confinement in any jail in the State, so that I can get him; or one
+hundred and fifty dollars will be given for his <span class="smcap">Head</span>. He was lately
+heard from in Newbern, where he called himself Henry Barnes (or Burns)
+and will be likely to continue the name or assume that of Coppage or
+Farmer. He has a free mulatto woman for a wife, by the name of Sally
+Bozeman, who has lately removed to Wilmington, and lives in that part of
+the town called Texas, where he will likely be lurking.
+</p><p><br />
+"GUILFORD HORN.<br />
+
+</p><p>
+"<i>June 29, 1850.</i>"</p></div>
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_3_3" id="Footnote_3_3"></a><a href="#FNanchor_3_3"><span class="label">[3]</span></a> For the facts on this subject, see the admirable work by Charles
+Sumner, entitled "White Slavery in the Barbary States."</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_4_4" id="Footnote_4_4"></a><a href="#FNanchor_4_4"><span class="label">[4]</span></a>Letter to Union Meeting in New York, 28th Oct., 1850.
+</p></div>
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_5_5" id="Footnote_5_5"></a><a href="#FNanchor_5_5"><span class="label">[5]</span></a>On the 10th of January, 1838, Mr. Clay moved in the Senate the
+following resolution, viz.:&mdash;"Resolved, that the interference by the
+citizens of any of the States with a view to the abolition of slavery in
+this District, is endangering the rights and security of the people of
+this District; and that any act or measure of Congress designed to
+abolish slavery in this District would be a violation of the faith
+implied in the cession by the States of Virginia and Maryland, a just
+cause of alarm to the people of the slaveholding States, and have a
+direct and inevitable tendency to disturb and endanger the
+Union."&mdash;Passed, 38 to 8, Mr. Webster voting in the negative. <i>Senate
+Journal</i>, <i>2 Sess. 25 Cong.</i>, p. 127.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_6_6" id="Footnote_6_6"></a><a href="#FNanchor_6_6"><span class="label">[6]</span></a>Speech, June 8, 1836.</p></div>
+</div>
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+<pre>
+
+
+
+
+
+End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of A Letter to the Hon. Samuel Eliot,
+Representative in Congress From the City of Boston, In Reply to His Apology For Voting For the Fugitive Slave Bill., by Hancock
+
+*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK LETTER TO HON. SAMUEL ELIOT ***
+
+***** This file should be named 31191-h.htm or 31191-h.zip *****
+This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
+        https://www.gutenberg.org/3/1/1/9/31191/
+
+Produced by Meredith Bach, Odessa Paige Turner and the
+Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net
+(This book was produced from scanned images of public
+domain material from the Google Print project.)
+
+
+Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
+will be renamed.
+
+Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
+one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
+(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
+permission and without paying copyright royalties.  Special rules,
+set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
+copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
+protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark.  Project
+Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
+charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission.  If you
+do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
+rules is very easy.  You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
+such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
+research.  They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
+practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks.  Redistribution is
+subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
+redistribution.
+
+
+
+*** START: FULL LICENSE ***
+
+THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
+PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
+
+To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
+distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
+(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
+https://gutenberg.org/license).
+
+
+Section 1.  General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works
+
+1.A.  By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
+and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
+(trademark/copyright) agreement.  If you do not agree to abide by all
+the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
+all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
+If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
+terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
+entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
+
+1.B.  "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark.  It may only be
+used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
+agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.  There are a few
+things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.  See
+paragraph 1.C below.  There are a lot of things you can do with Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
+and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.  See paragraph 1.E below.
+
+1.C.  The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
+or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works.  Nearly all the individual works in the
+collection are in the public domain in the United States.  If an
+individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
+located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
+copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
+works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
+are removed.  Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
+Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
+freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
+this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
+the work.  You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
+keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.
+
+1.D.  The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
+what you can do with this work.  Copyright laws in most countries are in
+a constant state of change.  If you are outside the United States, check
+the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
+before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
+creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
+Gutenberg-tm work.  The Foundation makes no representations concerning
+the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
+States.
+
+1.E.  Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
+
+1.E.1.  The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
+access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
+whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
+phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
+copied or distributed:
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+1.E.2.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
+from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
+posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
+and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
+or charges.  If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
+with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
+work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
+through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
+Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
+1.E.9.
+
+1.E.3.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
+with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
+must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
+terms imposed by the copyright holder.  Additional terms will be linked
+to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
+permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
+
+1.E.4.  Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
+work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
+
+1.E.5.  Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
+electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
+prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
+active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm License.
+
+1.E.6.  You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
+compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
+word processing or hypertext form.  However, if you provide access to or
+distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
+"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
+posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
+you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
+copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
+request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
+form.  Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
+
+1.E.7.  Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
+performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
+unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+1.E.8.  You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
+access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
+that
+
+- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
+     the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
+     you already use to calculate your applicable taxes.  The fee is
+     owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
+     has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
+     Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.  Royalty payments
+     must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
+     prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
+     returns.  Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
+     sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
+     address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
+     the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
+
+- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
+     you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
+     does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+     License.  You must require such a user to return or
+     destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
+     and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
+     Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
+     money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
+     electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
+     of receipt of the work.
+
+- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
+     distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+1.E.9.  If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
+forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
+both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
+Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark.  Contact the
+Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
+
+1.F.
+
+1.F.1.  Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
+effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
+public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
+collection.  Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
+"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
+corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
+property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
+computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
+your equipment.
+
+1.F.2.  LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
+of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
+liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
+fees.  YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
+LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
+PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3.  YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
+TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
+LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
+INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
+DAMAGE.
+
+1.F.3.  LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
+defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
+receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
+written explanation to the person you received the work from.  If you
+received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
+your written explanation.  The person or entity that provided you with
+the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
+refund.  If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
+providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
+receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.  If the second copy
+is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
+opportunities to fix the problem.
+
+1.F.4.  Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
+in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
+WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
+
+1.F.5.  Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
+warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
+If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
+law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
+interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
+the applicable state law.  The invalidity or unenforceability of any
+provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
+
+1.F.6.  INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
+trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
+providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
+with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
+promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
+harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
+that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
+or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
+work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
+Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
+
+
+Section  2.  Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
+electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
+including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.  It exists
+because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
+people in all walks of life.
+
+Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
+assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
+goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
+remain freely available for generations to come.  In 2001, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
+and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
+To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
+and the Foundation web page at https://www.pglaf.org.
+
+
+Section 3.  Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
+Foundation
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
+501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
+state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
+Revenue Service.  The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
+number is 64-6221541.  Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
+https://pglaf.org/fundraising.  Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
+permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
+
+The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
+Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
+throughout numerous locations.  Its business office is located at
+809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
+business@pglaf.org.  Email contact links and up to date contact
+information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
+page at https://pglaf.org
+
+For additional contact information:
+     Dr. Gregory B. Newby
+     Chief Executive and Director
+     gbnewby@pglaf.org
+
+
+Section 4.  Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
+spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
+increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
+freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
+array of equipment including outdated equipment.  Many small donations
+($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
+status with the IRS.
+
+The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
+charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
+States.  Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
+considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
+with these requirements.  We do not solicit donations in locations
+where we have not received written confirmation of compliance.  To
+SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
+particular state visit https://pglaf.org
+
+While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
+have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
+against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
+approach us with offers to donate.
+
+International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
+any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
+outside the United States.  U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
+
+Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
+methods and addresses.  Donations are accepted in a number of other
+ways including including checks, online payments and credit card
+donations.  To donate, please visit: https://pglaf.org/donate
+
+
+Section 5.  General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.
+
+Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
+concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
+with anyone.  For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
+Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
+
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
+editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
+unless a copyright notice is included.  Thus, we do not necessarily
+keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
+
+
+Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
+
+     https://www.gutenberg.org
+
+This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
+including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
+subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
+
+
+</pre>
+
+</body>
+</html>
diff --git a/31191.txt b/31191.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b70b52f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/31191.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,2211 @@
+The Project Gutenberg EBook of A Letter to the Hon. Samuel Eliot,
+Representative in Congress From the City of Boston, In Reply to His Apology For Voting For the Fugitive Slave Bill., by Hancock
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+
+Title: A Letter to the Hon. Samuel Eliot, Representative in Congress From the City of Boston, In Reply to His Apology For Voting For the Fugitive Slave Bill.
+
+Author: Hancock
+
+Release Date: February 5, 2010 [EBook #31191]
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: ASCII
+
+*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK LETTER TO HON. SAMUEL ELIOT ***
+
+
+
+
+Produced by Meredith Bach, Odessa Paige Turner and the
+Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net
+(This book was produced from scanned images of public
+domain material from the Google Print project.)
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+  A
+  LETTER
+  TO
+
+THE HON. SAMUEL A. ELIOT,
+
+REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE CITY OF BOSTON,
+
+in reply to his
+
+  APOLOGY FOR VOTING FOR THE FUGITIVE
+  SLAVE BILL.
+
+BY HANCOCK
+
+
+  BOSTON:
+  WM. CROSBY & H. P. NICHOLS,
+  111 WASHINGTON STREET.
+  1851.
+
+
+
+
+CAMBRIDGE:
+
+METCALF AND COMPANY,
+
+PRINTERS TO THE UNIVERSITY.
+
+
+
+
+A LETTER, &c.
+
+
+SIR;--
+
+An English courtier procured a colonial judgeship for a young dependant
+wholly ignorant of law. The new functionary, on parting with his patron,
+received from him the following sage advice,--"Be careful never to
+assign reasons, for whether your judgments be right or wrong, your
+reasons will certainly be bad." You have cause to regret that some
+friend had not been equally provident of your reputation, and intimated
+that it was only expected of you to vote for Mr. Webster's measures, but
+by no means to assist him in vindicating them. You did, indeed, vote
+precisely as those who procured your nomination intended you should;
+yet, on your return home, you found your name had become a byword and a
+reproach in your native State. Another election approached, but you
+declined submitting your recent course to the judgment of the electors,
+and withdrew from the canvass. But although the people were thus
+prevented from voting against you, they persisted in speaking and
+writing against you. Anxious to relieve yourself from the load of
+obloquy by which you were oppressed, in an evil hour you rashly appealed
+to the public through the columns of a newspaper, and gave the "reasons"
+of your vote for the Fugitive Slave Law. You had a high and recent
+example of the kind of logic suited to your case. You might have
+indulged in transcendental nonsense, and talked about the climate,
+soil, and scenery of New England and the wonders of physical geography,
+and, assuming that negroes were created free, you might have contended
+that, in voting for a law to catch and enslave them, you had avoided the
+folly of reenacting the law of God. Reasons of this sort, you and others
+had declared, "had convinced the understanding and touched the
+conscience of the nation." Instead of following an example so
+illustrious and successful, you assign "reasons" so very commonplace,
+that the most ordinary capacity can understand them, and so feeble, that
+the slightest strength can overthrow them.
+
+Your first "reason" is, that the delivery of fugitives is a
+constitutional obligation. By this you mean, that, by virtue of the
+construction of a certain clause in the Constitution by the Supreme
+Court, Congress has the power to pass a law for the recovery of fugitive
+slaves. Well, Sir, does this constitutional obligation authorize
+Congress to pass _any_ law whatsoever on the subject, however atrocious
+and wicked? Had you voted for a law to prevent smuggling, in which you
+had authorized every tide-waiter to shoot any person suspected of having
+contraband goods in his possession, would it have been a good "reason"
+for such an atrocity, that the collection of duties was "a
+constitutional obligation"? You are condemned for voting for an
+arbitrary, detestable, diabolical law,--one that tramples upon the
+rights of conscience, outrages the feelings of humanity, discards the
+rules of evidence, levels all the barriers erected by the common law for
+the protection of personal liberty, and, in defiance of the
+Constitution, and against its express provisions, gives to the courts
+the appointment of legions of slave-catching judges. And your "reason"
+for all this is, that the delivery of fugitives is "a constitutional
+obligation"! The "obligation" is not in issue. Please to understand,
+Sir, that it is not denied. It is for the _manner_ in which you profess
+to have discharged the obligation that you are censured, and be it
+remembered, that not one of the obnoxious provisions of your law is
+required by the Constitution. You go on and attempt to enlighten your
+constituents as to the history of this constitutional obligation. As the
+obligation affords you no apology for the iniquitous features of your
+law, its history is, of course, mere surplusage, and serves no other
+purpose than to divert the attention of your readers from yourself.
+About two thirds of your apology is occupied with an historical
+disquisition, which has as much to do with your vindication as the
+question respecting the existence of a lunar atmosphere. I will not,
+however, withhold from you whatever benefit you may derive from either
+your logic or your history, but will give each a fair and honest
+examination. You inform the public that, at the time the Constitution
+was formed,
+
+     "Slavery had been abolished in some of the States, and still
+     existed in others. Here seemed an insurmountable incompatibility of
+     interests, and nothing perplexed the wise men of that day--and they
+     were _very_ wise men--so much as this topic. At last they agreed
+     that the new Constitution should have nothing to do with it; that
+     the word _slavery_ should not be mentioned in it, and that it
+     should be left to the States themselves to establish, retain, or
+     abolish it, just as much after the adoption of the Constitution as
+     before. But in order to secure the existence of the institution to
+     those States who preferred it, it was agreed that the persons
+     escaping from labor to which they were bound, in one commonwealth,
+     and found in another, should be returned to the State from which
+     they had fled. The provision was necessary for the preservation of
+     this interest _in statu quo_. It did not extend slavery. It kept it
+     where it already was, and where it could not have continued if
+     every slave who escaped North was at once free and irreclaimable.
+     The members of the confederacy from the South saw this distinctly,
+     and _deliberately declared_ that they could not and would not enter
+     a union with States who would tempt away their slaves with the
+     prospect of immediate and permanent freedom.... The Constitution
+     was adopted with this provision, and it could not have been adopted
+     without it."
+
+Thus we learn from you, Sir, that when the Constitution was formed,
+"slavery had been abolished in some of the States." It is a pity you did
+not vouchsafe to tell us which of the States had thus early and
+honorably distinguished themselves. Of the thirteen American States in
+1787, how many, Sir, had _by law_ abolished slavery? NOT ONE. Your "some
+States" consisted of MASSACHUSETTS alone. And how was slavery abolished
+there? Not by any express prohibition in her constitution, nor by any
+act of her legislature. Fortunately, her constitution, like that of most
+other States, contained a general declaration of human rights, somewhat
+similar to the "rhetorical abstraction" in the Declaration of
+Independence. Two or three years before the Federal Convention
+assembled, a young lawyer, perceiving that the declaration in the
+constitution had inadvertently made no exclusion of the rights of men
+with dark complexions, brought an action for a slave against his master
+for work done and performed. An upright and independent court, not
+having the fear of our Southern brethren before their eyes, decided that
+the slave was a MAN, and therefore entitled to the rights which the
+constitution declared belonged to _all_ men, and gave judgment for the
+plaintiff. In this way, Sir, was slavery abolished in Massachusetts, and
+hence the delegates from Massachusetts in the Convention were the only
+ones who represented a _free_ State. And now, Sir, what becomes of your
+"insurmountable incompatibility of interests" arising from the fact that
+"slavery had been abolished in some States and still existed in others,"
+which you tell us so much perplexed the wise men of that day? We shall
+see, Sir, that on questions touching human bondage the Massachusetts
+delegation seem to have been slaveholders in heart, and did not partake
+of the perplexity which troubled the wise men. With the exception of
+that delegation, there were not probably half a dozen members of the
+convention who were not slaveholders.
+
+It would seem from your historical review, that the clause in the
+Constitution respecting fugitive slaves was the grand compromise
+between the North and the South, without which "the Constitution could
+not have been adopted"; and that to this clause we owe our glorious
+slave-catching Union. You fortify this wonderful historical discovery by
+appealing to the "deliberate declarations" of Southern members, that
+they "would not enter a union with States who would tempt away their
+slaves," &c. It is to be regretted that you have not deemed it expedient
+to refer to the records of these declarations, as other students of our
+constitutional history are wholly ignorant of them. Suffer me, Sir, to
+enter into a few historical details, for the purpose of vindicating the
+liberty I take to differ with you as to the accuracy of your statements.
+
+The Convention met in Philadelphia, 25th May, 1787. On the 29th of the
+same month, Mr. Randolph, of Virginia, submitted a plan of government.
+It contained no allusion to fugitive slaves. On the same day, Mr.
+Charles Pinckney, of South Carolina, submitted another plan. This last
+provided for the surrender of fugitive criminals, but was silent about
+fugitive slaves. On the 15th of June, Mr. Patterson, of New Jersey,
+submitted a third plan. This also provided for the surrender of
+fugitives from justice, but not from bondage. On the 18th, Mr. Hamilton
+announced his plan, but the fugitive slave found no place in it. On the
+26th of June, the Convention, having agreed on the general features of
+the proposed Constitution in the form of resolutions, referred them to
+"a committee of detail," for the purpose of reducing them to the form of
+a Constitution. In these resolutions, there was not the most distant
+allusion to fugitive slaves. On the 6th of August, the committee
+reported the draft of a Constitution, and yet, strange as you may deem
+it, the provision without which, you tell us, the Constitution could not
+have been adopted, was not in it, although there was in it a provision
+for the surrender of fugitive criminals. For three months had the
+Convention been in session, and not one syllable had been uttered about
+fugitive slaves. At last, on the 29th of August, as we learn from the
+minutes, "It was moved and seconded to agree to the following
+proposition, to be inserted after the 15th article: 'If any person,
+bound to service or labor in any of the United States, shall escape into
+another State, he or she shall not be discharged from such service or
+labor in consequence of any regulation subsisting in the State to which
+they escape, but shall be delivered up to the person justly claiming
+their service or labor,' _which passed unanimously_." Really, Sir, I
+find in this record but little evidence of the perplexity which
+distressed our wise men, or of the great compromise between the North
+and South, on which you dwell. The 15th article, referred to above, was
+the article providing for the surrender of fugitives from justice, and
+this suggested the idea, that it would be well to provide, also, for the
+surrender of fugitive slaves. In an assembly consisting almost
+exclusively of slaveholders, the idea was exceedingly relished; and
+without a word of opposition, the suggestion was unanimously adopted.
+From Mr. Madison's report we learn that, the day before, Messrs. Butler
+and Pinckney had informally proposed that fugitive slaves and servants
+should be delivered up "like criminals." "Mr. Wilson [of Penn.]. This
+would oblige the Executive of the State to do it at the public expense.
+Mr. Sherman [of Conn.] saw no more propriety in the public seizing and
+surrendering a slave or servant than a horse." (_Madison Papers_, p.
+1447.) The subject was here dropped. The next day the motion was made in
+form, and, as Mr. Madison says, "agreed to, _nem. con._" From the
+phraseology of the motion, and the objections of Messrs. Wilson and
+Sherman, it was perfectly understood that the obligation of delivery was
+imposed on the States, and that no power was intended to be conferred on
+Congress to legislate on the subject. Messrs. Wilson and Sherman's
+objections arose from no moral repugnance to slave-catching, but from
+the inconvenience they apprehended the _State_ authorities would be
+subjected to; and Mr. Wilson perhaps spoke from experience, as his own
+State had at that very time a law for catching and returning fugitive
+slaves from other States. The idea, therefore, that this agreement was a
+_compromise_ between the North and South is wholly imaginary, and you,
+Sir, must have mistaken some recent fulminations from the Southern
+chivalry for the "deliberate declarations" which you suppose were made
+in the Convention. Believe me, Sir, no members of the Convention ever
+declared they would not enter into the Union, unless it was agreed to
+surrender fugitive slaves, for the obvious reason, that the Northern
+slaveholders required no threats from their Southern brethren to consent
+to a compact convenient to both. It is very true, Sir, that there were
+compromises, and that there were "deliberate declarations," but they had
+no reference to the surrender of runaway slaves. I have pointed out your
+historical mistake, not because it has the remotest bearing on your
+justification, but because you seem to think that it has.
+
+The first great compromise was between, not the North and the South, but
+the small and the large States. The one claimed, and the other refused,
+an equality of suffrage in the national legislature. It was at last
+agreed, that the suffrage should be equal in one house, and according to
+population in the other. This was the first compromise. Then came the
+question, What should constitute the representative population? The
+Southern States had more slaves than the Northern, and the former
+insisted that slaves should be included in the representative
+population. This would have given the Southern States an unfair
+preponderance in Congress. Moreover, a portion of the Southern States
+were engaged in the African slave-trade, and, of course, every slave
+landed on their shores would increase their political power in Congress.
+To reconcile the North to slave representation, it was offered that
+_direct taxation_ should be proportioned to representation. But the
+North was reluctant, and, as usual, was bullied into a compromise. Mr.
+Davie, of North Carolina, made a "deliberate declaration":--"He was
+sure that North Carolina would never confederate on any terms that did
+not rate them (the slaves) at least as three fifths. If the Eastern
+States meant, therefore, to exclude them (the slaves) altogether, the
+business was at an end." (_Madison Papers_, p. 1081.) This threat, and
+others like it, settled the matter. The compromise, of three fifths of
+the slaves to be included in the representative population, was accepted
+on the motion of _a New England member_; and the consequence is, that
+the slave States have now twenty-one members in the lower house of
+Congress more than they are entitled to by their free population. This
+was the second compromise. There was still a third, far more wicked and
+detestable, and effected by the "deliberate declarations" of Southern
+members. The "committee of detail" has been already mentioned. It
+consisted of Messrs. Rutledge of South Carolina, Randolph of Virginia,
+Wilson of Pennsylvania, Ellsworth of Connecticut, and Gorham of
+Massachusetts. This committee, it will be recollected, were to reduce to
+the _form_ of a Constitution the resolutions agreed on by the
+Convention. Neither in the resolutions themselves, nor in the
+discussions which preceded their adoption, had any reference been made
+to a guarantee for the continuance of the African slave-trade.
+Nevertheless, this committee, of their own will and pleasure, inserted
+in their draft the following clause:--"No tax or duty shall be laid by
+the legislature on articles exported from any State, _nor on the
+migration or importation of such persons as the several States shall
+think proper to admit, nor shall such migration or importation be
+prohibited_." To understand the cunning wickedness of this clause, it
+must be recollected that Congress was to have power to regulate foreign
+commerce, and commerce between the States; and hence it might, at a
+future time, suppress both the foreign and domestic commerce in human
+flesh, or it might burden this commerce with duties. Hence this artfully
+expressed perpetual restriction on the power of Congress to interfere
+with the traffic in human beings. As this grand scheme was concocted in
+the committee, and not in the Convention, it may be interesting to
+inquire into its paternity.
+
+In the debates which ensued on this clause, Mr. Ellsworth, one of the
+committee who reported it, "was for leaving the clause as it now stands.
+_Let every State import what it pleases._ The morality or wisdom of
+slavery are considerations belonging to the States themselves. _What
+enriches a part enriches the whole_, and the States are the best judges
+of their particular interests. The old Confederation had not _meddled_
+with this point, and he did not see any greater necessity for bringing
+it within the policy of the new one." "As slaves multiply so fast in
+Virginia and Maryland that it is _cheaper_ to raise than to import them,
+whilst in the _sickly_ rice-swamps foreign supplies are _necessary_, if
+we go no farther than is urged [a proposal to permit the trade for a
+limited time], we shall be unjust towards South Carolina and Georgia.
+Let us not intermeddle." (_Madison Papers_, pp. 1389, 1391.) This
+gentleman was one of your "very wise men"; and his mantle has recently
+fallen upon other wise men from the East. Mr. Wilson, another member of
+the committee, objected. "All articles imported," said he, "are to be
+taxed; slaves alone are exempt. This is, in fact, a bounty on that
+article." The clause was referred to another committee, who modified it,
+by limiting the restriction to 1800. It was moved to guarantee the
+slave-trade for twenty years, by postponing the restriction to 1808.
+This motion was _seconded_ by Mr. Gorham, another member of the
+committee. Mr. Randolph, also of the committee, was against the
+slave-trade, and opposed to any restriction on the power of Congress to
+suppress it. Two of the committee, then, we find, were against the
+trade, and three, Messrs. Rutledge, Ellsworth, and Gorham, for
+perpetuating it. And now, Sir, what were the inducements which prevailed
+on the two wise men from the East to yield their consent to a
+proposition so wicked and abominable? We are, of course, not informed
+what passed in the committee, but we can well imagine, from the language
+used by the chairman and others in the Convention. Said Mr. Rutledge,
+"If the Convention thinks North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia
+will ever agree to this plan [the Federal Constitution] unless their
+right to import slaves be untouched, the expectation is VAIN. The people
+of those States will never be such fools as to give up so important an
+interest." In other words, "Gentlemen of the North, no Union without the
+African slave-trade." Said Mr. Charles Pinckney, "South Carolina can
+never receive the plan [of the Constitution] if it prohibits the
+slave-trade. In every proposed extension of the powers of Congress, that
+State has expressly and watchfully excepted that of meddling with the
+importation of negroes." (_Madison Papers_, p. 1389.) Mr. Charles C.
+Pinckney "thought himself bound to declare candidly, that he did not
+think South Carolina would stop her importations of slaves in any short
+time." Thus you see, Sir, that the "deliberate declarations" to which
+you allude were made in reference to the continuance of the African
+slave-trade, and not, as you suppose, to the catching of fugitive
+slaves. Two New England gentlemen of the committee yielded to these
+declarations, and sacrificed conscience and humanity for the sake of the
+Union, and the consideration that what enriched a part enriched the
+whole. Happily, in this case, Southern bluster was met by Southern
+bluster, and it is owing to Virginia, and not to the virtue and
+independence of New England, that the Constitution was rescued from the
+infamy of granting a solemn and perpetual guarantee to an accursed
+commerce.
+
+In Virginia, the slaves, as Mr. Ellsworth remarked, multiplied so fast,
+that it was _cheaper_ to raise than import them. She was then, as now, a
+breeding State for the Southern markets. Hence, her delegates were as
+ready to bluster for protection, as the South Carolina delegates were
+for a free trade in men and women. Of course, the _motives_ assigned
+were patriotic, not selfish. Mr. Randolph "could never agree to the
+clause as it stands. He would sooner RISK THE CONSTITUTION." (_Madison
+Papers_, p. 1396.) Mr. Madison would not consent to the continuance of
+the traffic till 1808. "Twenty years will produce all the mischief that
+can be apprehended from the liberty to import slaves. So long a term
+will be more dishonorable to the American character, than to say nothing
+about it in the Constitution." (_Madison Papers_, p. 1427.) Mr. Mason
+from Virginia denounced the traffic as "infernal." (_Madison Papers_, p.
+1390.) The result of all these threats on each side was, as usual, a
+compromise, by which Congress was prohibited from suppressing the
+foreign and internal commerce in slaves for twenty years, and was left
+at liberty to do as it might see fit, after that period. After twenty
+years the foreign trade was suppressed, and North and South Carolina and
+Georgia remained in the Union! Virginia, as well as the other Slave
+States, is greatly interested in the home slave-trade, and that has
+_not_ been suppressed, although Congress has full power over it.
+
+It does not appear from Mr. Madison's report what reply was made in the
+Convention to the Virginia objections, but in his speech in the
+Convention of his own State, he tells us,--"The gentlemen from South
+Carolina and Georgia argued in this manner: We have now liberty to
+import this species of property, and much of the property now possessed
+had been purchased or otherwise acquired in contemplation of improving
+it by the assistance of imported slaves. What would be the consequence
+of hindering us in this point? The _slaves_ of Virginia would rise in
+value, and we should be obliged to go to your markets." (_Elliott's
+Debates_, III. 454.) Certainly, Sir, these South Carolina and Georgia
+delegates were "very wise men," and their predictions are now history,
+and the planters of Georgia, South Carolina, Mississippi, and Louisiana
+buy slaves of the Virginia breeders. But what shall I say of the wise
+men from the East? This horrible compromise, this guarantee of the
+African slave-trade for twenty years, was carried by the votes of the
+Massachusetts and Connecticut delegates, and would have been defeated,
+had they had the courage and virtue to have voted against it.
+
+I have indulged in this long digression, to show that the clause in the
+Constitution respecting fugitive slaves was not, as you represent it,
+the great compromise of the Constitution, the key-stone of the Union,
+and that our slaveholding fathers were not, as you suppose, greatly
+perplexed, nor their consciences deeply wounded, by the existence of
+slavery in all the States of the confederacy with one exception. Having
+disposed of your history, I return to your logic.
+
+Whether the constitutional injunction to surrender fugitive slaves was a
+compromise or not, is of no practical importance. The clause speaks for
+itself, and prescribes no mode by which the title of the claimant shall
+be ascertained, while it expressly implies that the title shall be
+established before the surrender is made. Hence, the fair presumption
+is, that the title to a MAN shall be proved, with at least as much
+certainty and formality as the title to a horse. Had you, Sir, in your
+law, provided that a Virginian shall not come to Boston, and there seize
+and carry off a husband, wife, or child but by the same process, and on
+as strong evidence, as he may now seize and carry off a horse which you
+claim as your own, instead of finding your name a byword and a reproach,
+you would have been honored and applauded by your fellow-citizens, and
+returned to Congress by a triumphant vote; nor is there a syllable in
+the Constitution which prohibits or discountenances such a mode of
+deciding the title to a human being. It is in vain, then, Sir, that you
+plead your "constitutional obligation" in justification of your most
+detestable law. But, as if one wrong could justify another, you plead in
+your excuse the law of 1793, and you ask in your simplicity of those who
+condemn your law if they do not perceive that they are "denouncing their
+fathers." Well, Sir, were our fathers infallible? Pity it is, Sir, that
+you were not on the floor of Congress when that body declared the
+African slave-trade to be PIRACY. You might then, Sir, have risen in
+your place, and inquired, "Do you not perceive that you are denouncing
+your fathers, who were very wise men, and who guaranteed for twenty
+years the very traffic which you now proclaim to be piracy?" Pity it is,
+Sir, that you did not stand by the side of your patron on Plymouth Rock,
+and whisper in his ear, "Do you not perceive that you are denouncing our
+fathers?" when he declared, "In the sight of our law the African
+slave-trader is a PIRATE and a FELON, and in the sight of Heaven an
+offender beyond the ordinary depth of human guilt." Mr. Webster is
+better versed in constitutional history than you are, and he well knew
+that some of our fathers "deliberately declared they would not enter a
+Union" in which they were to be debarred from pursuing this piratical,
+felonious, guilty traffic. Our fathers were mostly slaveholders, and yet
+you, Sir, unconsciously denounce both their morality and intelligence,
+when you affirm the institution of slavery to be "wrong and unwise." And
+yet all who presume to find fault with your cruel, unjust, wicked law
+are guilty forsooth of denouncing their fathers!
+
+You tell us that the Convention of 1787 "_agreed that the new
+Constitution should have nothing to do with slavery_." I have not been
+so fortunate as to find the record of this agreement, but if such a
+compact was indeed made, then seldom, if ever, has a solemn covenant
+been more grossly and wickedly violated. Is it, Sir, in virtue of this
+agreement, that you voted to fine and imprison every conscientious,
+humane citizen who may refuse, at the command of a minion of a
+commissioner, to join in a slave hunt? Did this agreement confer on the
+holders of slaves an enlarged representation in Congress? Was it in
+pursuance of this agreement that the importation of slaves was
+guaranteed for twenty years? Did this agreement authorize the Federal
+government to enter into negotiations with Great Britain and Mexico for
+a mutual surrender of runaway slaves? Was it in pursuance of this same
+agreement, that our government negotiated with Russia and Spain to
+prevent emancipation in Cuba,--a traitorous conspiracy with despots
+against the rights of man? How, Sir, was this agreement illustrated,
+when Daniel Webster, as Secretary of State under John Tyler of glorious
+memory, made a demand on Great Britain for the surrender of the slaves
+of the Creole, who had gallantly achieved their liberty, and taken
+refuge in the West Indies? How comes it, Sir, that under this agreement
+an act of Congress secures to the Slave States officers in the navy in
+proportion to the number of their slaves? How is it, that under this
+agreement colored men are seized in the District of Columbia, under "the
+exclusive jurisdiction" of the Federal government on the _suspicion_ of
+being slaves, and, when that suspicion is rebutted by the non-appearance
+of any claimant, are sold as slaves for life, to pay their jail-fees?
+Perhaps it would be denouncing our fathers, to say that Messrs. Webster
+and Cass may search the archives of Austria in vain for any act so
+utterly diabolical as this, perpetrated by a government which it was
+agreed "should have nothing to do with slavery." Was it to carry out
+this famous agreement that the Federal government officially declared
+through its Secretary, Mr. Calhoun, that Texas was annexed to preserve
+the institution of slavery from the perils that threatened it?
+
+Once more, Sir. We all know that the slaveholders regard the free blacks
+as dangerous to the subordination of their slaves, and are contemplating
+their forcible removal. Think you, Sir, Mr. Webster was mindful of the
+agreement you have discovered, when, on the 7th of last March, in his
+place in the Senate, he proposed his magnificent scheme of taxing the
+whole nation untold millions to give additional security to property in
+human beings? "If," said the Massachusetts Senator, "any gentleman from
+the _South_ shall propose a scheme of colonization to be carried on by
+_this government_ upon a large scale, for the transportation of free
+colored people to any colony or _any place in the world_, I should be
+quite disposed to incur almost any degree of expense to accomplish the
+object." The magnitude of the scheme, and the cost at which it is to be
+accomplished, are thus hinted:--"There have been received into the
+treasury of the United States EIGHTY MILLIONS of dollars, the proceeds
+of the sales of the public lands ceded by Virginia. If the residue
+should be sold at the same rate, the whole aggregate will exceed TWO
+HUNDRED MILLIONS of dollars. If _Virginia and the South_ see fit to
+adopt any proposition to _relieve_ themselves from the free people of
+color among them, they have my free consent that the _government_ shall
+pay _them_ any sum of money out of the proceeds which may be adequate
+for the purpose." Will you, Sir, please to point out the article of the
+agreement of 1787, which, while it restricts Congress from having any
+thing to do with slavery, sanctions an appropriation not exceeding two
+hundred millions of dollars, for the purpose of strengthening the
+institution of slavery, by _relieving_ the slaveholders from the
+presence of free people of color, and forcibly transporting to any place
+in the world hundreds of thousands of native-born Americans, who have as
+good a constitutional right to the pursuit of life, liberty, and
+happiness on their native soil, as Mr. Webster himself? Mr. Webster, it
+seems, now views the subject of negro colonization in precisely the same
+light that he did thirty years since, although his _intentions_ on this,
+as on various other points, have undergone marvellous changes. We learn
+from a Massachusetts paper (_Congregationalist_, 6 July, 1849), that
+this gentleman was in 1822 appointed by a public meeting to draft a
+constitution for the State Colonization Society. After considerable
+discussion in the committee he rose and said, "I must leave. I
+understand the whole project. It is a scheme of the slaveholders to get
+rid of their free negroes. I will have nothing to do with it."
+
+And how, Sir, as a member of Congress, have _you_ fulfilled this
+agreement to have nothing to do with slavery? Not only have you required
+"good citizens," when commanded, to hunt and catch slaves, but you have
+even fixed a money value on every slave. If a master fails to recover
+his fugitive slave through the agency, "direct or indirect," of any
+citizen, you give him an action for damages. In all other cases of
+trespass, the damages sustained by the plaintiff are assessed by a jury
+according to the evidence. You kindly save the master the trouble of
+proving the value of his lost property, and give him out of the pockets
+of the defendant $1,000, no matter whether the slave was sick or well,
+young or old. If a woman escapes with a child at the breast, the master
+is to have $2,000! Recollect, Sir, this is for _damages_ to the
+slaveholder; the trespasser is to pay to the government, which was to
+have nothing to do with slavery, another thousand dollars, and to be
+incarcerated six months. Either, Sir, you have wholly mistaken the
+nature of the "agreement," or the slaveholders, through the aid of their
+Northern auxiliaries, have, in defiance of the agreement, rendered the
+Federal government a mighty engine in protecting, extending, and
+perpetuating the stupendous iniquity of human bondage.
+
+Your first excuse for voting for the recent slave-catching law, after
+relying on your "constitutional obligation," is, that it is
+"_practically more favorable to the fugitive than the law of 1793_"!!!
+The Southern lawyers, then, who drafted the bill, were a set of
+blunderers, and your constituents are blockheads for blaming you for
+legislating against human rights, when, in fact, you were loosening the
+bonds of the oppressed, and facilitating escape from the prison-house.
+Your assertion may well excite astonishment at the South as well as the
+North, till your _proof_ is known, and then, indeed, astonishment will
+be exchanged for ridicule. You tell us, "the _evidence_ of such an
+assertion may be found in the fact, that by the old law every magistrate
+in Massachusetts, amounting to several hundreds, and so in the other
+States, were authorized and required to cause the arrest of any
+fugitive, examine into his case, and deliver him to the claimant, if he
+was proved to be a slave; while under the new law that power is
+_limited_ to the justices of the United States' courts, and to the
+commissioners appointed by them, not exceeding, perhaps, on an average,
+six or eight persons in each State." So it seems the slave-catchers had
+formerly no difficulty in finding a magistrate among hundreds to aid
+them, but that now, before they hunt a slave, they must hunt and catch a
+United States judge, or a commissioner of six or eight in a whole State.
+Truly a hard case, and yet the slaveholders themselves set the very trap
+in which they have been caught, and thus it is that, through their
+folly, and your generosity in not pointing out to them the blunder they
+were committing, the new law is more favorable to the fugitive than the
+old one. Surely, Sir, it could not have been more perilous to the young
+West Indian judge to meddle with "reasons," than it is for you. Either,
+Sir, you voted for the law without reading it, or you have forgotten its
+provision. Be assured, the Southern lawyers were as well acquainted as
+yourself with the fact, that a few individuals, termed "commissioners,"
+had been appointed by the United States courts to perform certain
+ministerial acts; and that, as these men were now to be promoted to the
+office of slave-catching judges, they would be wholly inadequate in
+number to lend efficient aid to the hunters of men. Hence, they inserted
+in the third section of the bill, the following enactment, which has
+strangely escaped your recollection, viz.:--"And it is further enacted,
+that the Circuit Courts of the United States, and the Superior Courts of
+_each_ organized Territory of the United States, SHALL from time to time
+ENLARGE THE NUMBER OF COMMISSIONERS with a view to afford reasonable
+facilities to reclaim fugitives from labor, and to the prompt discharge
+of the duties imposed by this act." So that, instead of six or eight
+commissioners in a State, we are to have as many hundreds, if needed.
+Nor is this all. By the second section, the power possessed by the
+Circuit Courts to appoint commissioners is for the first time conferred
+on the _Territorial_ courts, so that there shall be no lack of
+slave-catching judges in Oregon, Utah, and New Mexico. Instead of your
+six or eight commissioners in a State, your law contemplates that there
+shall be one or more in _each county_; for the fifth section provides,
+that, "the better to enable the said commissioners to execute their
+duties faithfully and efficiently, ... they are hereby authorized and
+empowered, within their _counties respectively_," to appoint one or more
+persons to execute their warrants. So it seems we are to have an
+unlimited number of judges and executioners. These executioners,
+expressly appointed to catch slaves, and of course among the most
+worthless and degraded of the community, are one and all invested with
+the power of a high sheriff to call out the _posse comitatus_, not
+merely in his own county, but in every hamlet in the State, and require
+"good citizens," under pain of fine and imprisonment, to join him in his
+execrable hunt. Really, Sir, your "evidence" that the new law is more
+favorable to the fugitive than the old one falls short of demonstration.
+
+You thus apologize for not giving the alleged fugitive a trial by jury.
+"There was no more trial by jury provided for under the old law than
+under the new law. The claim of a jury trial is entirely _new_; never
+thought of till modern discussions of the subject begun. For fifty-seven
+years our fathers and we have been living under the laws which provided
+no such thing, and now one which makes no such provision is denounced in
+unmeasured terms as cruel and inhuman. Where have we all been living for
+half a century?" Surely, Sir, it is a most logical reason for not
+changing a wicked law, that it has been in force for fifty-seven years.
+Strange that the legislators of Massachusetts did not perceive the force
+of this reasoning when they abolished the laws for hanging witches and
+whipping Quakers. Permit me, Sir, to ask, Where had _you_ been living
+when _you_ declared it to be the _duty_ of Congress to give the fugitive
+a trial by jury, although for fifty-seven years such a trial had been
+denied him? You probably forgot, Sir, when giving the above "reason,"
+that, not long before you took your seat in Congress, you had, as a
+member of the Massachusetts Legislature, voted for the following
+resolution, viz.:--"We hold it to be the duty of that body [Congress] to
+pass such laws only in regard thereto as will be maintained by the
+public sentiment of the free States, where such laws are to be enforced,
+and which shall especially secure all persons, whose surrender may be
+claimed as having escaped from labor and service in other States, the
+right of having the validity of such claim determined by a jury in the
+State where such claim is made." So it seems that, while in Boston, you
+esteemed it the _especial duty_ of Congress to grant the fugitive a
+trial by jury, but that in the atmosphere of Washington you acquired new
+views of moral philosophy.
+
+Suffer me, Sir, also to inquire, Where had Mr. Webster been "living for
+half a century," when, on the 3d of last June, he introduced into the
+Senate a bill amendatory of the act of 1793, granting the alleged
+fugitive a trial by jury whenever he shall make oath that he is not the
+slave of the claimant?
+
+Another of your "reasons" is, that your law does _not_ suspend the
+_habeas corpus_, and in proof of its innocence in this respect, you
+refer to the opinion of "legal authority of the highest kind," viz. Mr.
+Crittenden, of Kentucky. It is very true that the words _habeas corpus_
+are omitted in your law, as the word _slave_ is in the Constitution, but
+in neither case is the omission of any practical importance. You must be
+aware, Sir, that whenever a person is in the custody of another, if
+sufficient ground be shown to render it probable that the custody is
+illegal, the writ is granted as a matter of right. But why is it
+granted? That the court may at its discretion, according to
+circumstances, remand or discharge the prisoner. Take away from the
+court the discretionary power to discharge, and the writ is rendered an
+idle form. Your law, you say, does not suspend the _habeas corpus_; it
+is guiltless of such an enormity. A man who is carrying off one of our
+citizens in chains, may indeed be served with the writ, and he brings
+his prisoner before the court, and he produces a paper for which he paid
+$10, and reads from your law, that this paper, called a certificate,
+"shall be conclusive," and "shall prevent all molestation of said person
+or persons by any _process_ issued by any court, judge, or magistrate,
+or other person whomsoever." It is because the word _process_, instead
+of _habeas corpus_, is used, that your law does not suspend the writ of
+freedom! In vain may the prisoner plead that he is not the person
+mentioned in the certificate; in vain may he offer to show that the
+certificate is a forgery; in vain may he urge that the man who signed
+the certificate was not a commissioner. The little piece of paper
+costing ten dollars is to save the slave-catcher from "all molestation,"
+not because the writ of _habeas corpus_ is suspended,--O, no! but in
+consequence of the words "any process"!
+
+You refer to two objections, which you say are made to your law, and
+endeavour to refute them; viz. the onerous obligations imposed upon the
+marshal, and the penalties attached to an attempt "to assist in the
+rescue of the slave after he has been proved to be such." You have
+evinced your discretion in confining yourself to only four objections
+made to your law; viz. the denial of a jury trial, the suspension of the
+_habeas corpus_, the duties of the marshal, and the penalties imposed on
+an attempt to rescue the slave _after_ judgment. With what success, and
+with what "reasons," you have combated the first two has already been
+seen. As to the last two, they scarcely merit an answer, and hence you
+have selected them. If the obligations of the marshal are onerous, he
+has voluntarily assumed them by accepting the office. If, in a civilized
+country, a man attempts forcibly to rescue a prisoner in the custody of
+the law, he must expect to be punished. There are many weighty
+objections to your law which you have not thought it expedient to
+notice. Permit me to supply your omission, and to tell you why your law
+is so intensely odious. And here let me again remind you of the true
+issue between you and the people. It is not now the constitutional power
+of Congress under the decision of the Supreme Court to pass a law for
+the recovery of fugitive slaves,--this is conceded. The odium you have
+experienced, and against which you have appealed to the public, is
+caused by your having voted for a law which, in its details, violates
+the Constitution, and outrages justice and humanity. Throughout your
+long and labored apology, you avoid grappling with these charges. You
+vindicate the denial of a jury trial only on the ground that it has been
+denied for fifty-seven years, and on the authority of Mr. Crittenden
+affirm that the _habeas corpus_ is not suspended; but you avoid the
+constitutional and moral objections urged against your law.
+
+By the Constitution, fugitive slaves are to be restored to those, and
+those only, who are legally entitled to their services. The means of
+ascertaining whether a man is a slave, whether he has fled from his
+master, and whether the claimant is legally entitled to him, are not
+defined by the Constitution. It is now intrusted to the discretion of
+Congress to specify these means, but of course that discretion ought to
+be exercised in accordance with the Constitution, with justice, and with
+humanity. The complaint against you is, that you have voted for a law
+which outrages them all, and against this complaint you have failed to
+offer the shadow of a vindication.
+
+A Virginian comes to Boston, and there seizes one of the inhabitants as
+his slave. The man claimed declares the claim to be false and
+fraudulent. Here, then, is an issue both of law and of fact between two
+men equally entitled to the protection of law; for the man claimed is on
+every presumption of law and justice to be regarded as free, till the
+contrary is proved. The issue between these two men is, I have said, one
+of fact and of law. Is the person seized the man he is said to be? This
+is a question of fact. Admitting his identity, is he a slave, and, if
+so, does he belong to the claimant? These are both questions of law,
+resting upon facts to be proved. Those familiar with the reports of
+Southern courts know that the title to slaves is a frequent matter of
+litigation, involving intricate questions respecting the validity of
+wills, the construction of deeds, the partition of estates, and the
+claims of creditors. By carrying a slave into a free State, the owner
+forfeits his title to him while there, and cannot reclaim him; and hence
+the acts of the claimant himself may be involved in the issue. And now,
+Sir, I ask, have you ever known, or can you conceive of, any issue at
+law respecting the title to property so awfully momentous to a defendant
+as the one we are considering? Were your son or daughter the defendant
+in such an issue, would you not rejoice to purchase a favorable judgment
+by the contribution of the last cent of your great wealth? Let us, then,
+proceed to inquire what provision _you_, in the fear of God and the love
+of justice and humanity, have made for the trial of this tremendous
+issue,--an issue on the result of which all the hopes of a fellow-man
+for the life that is, and for that which is to come, are suspended.
+
+In the first place, What is the pecuniary value of the plaintiff's claim
+to _himself_?--for it would be an insult to humanity to estimate in
+dollars and cents the blessings of liberty and of the conjugal and
+parental relations to the unhappy defendant. You have yourself fixed the
+value of the plaintiff's claim at _one thousand dollars_. So far, then,
+the issue is, by your own showing, within the constitutional guarantee
+of trial by jury in all suits at common law where the matter in
+controversy is of the value of _twenty_ dollars. But is the claim made
+by the plaintiff "a suit at common law"? What is a _suit_? The Supreme
+Court thus answers the question:--"We understand it [a suit] to be the
+prosecution or pursuit of some _claim_, demand, or request. In law
+language, it is the prosecution of some demand in a court of justice."
+(6 _Wheaton_, 407.)
+
+It seems, then, that the Virginian, in claiming an inhabitant of Boston
+as his slave, in fact brings _a suit_ against him for services due worth
+one thousand dollars. Now remember, Sir, the fugitive is not to be
+delivered up, as a mass of flesh, or inanimate matter, belonging to the
+claimant, but as a debtor, in the phraseology of your own law, "_owing_
+service or labor." The suit is brought for service or labor _due_, and
+the Constitution provides that the person so owing service or labor
+shall be delivered to him to whom the same is "_due_." And now, is this
+suit for service due "a suit at _common law_"? Again let the Supreme
+Court answer. "The phrase _common law_, found in this clause [the clause
+guaranteeing a jury trial], is used in contradistinction to equity and
+admiralty and maritime jurisdiction. It is well known, that, in civil
+causes in courts of equity and admiralty, juries do not intervene, and
+that courts of equity use the trial by jury only in extraordinary cases,
+to inform the conscience of the court. When, therefore, we find that the
+amendment requires that the right of trial by jury shall be preserved in
+suits at common law, the natural conclusion is, that this distinction
+was present to the minds of the framers of the amendment. By _common
+law_, they meant what the Constitution denominated, in the third
+article, 'law'; not merely suits which the common law recognized among
+its old and settled proceedings, but suits in which legal rights were to
+be ascertained and determined, in contradistinction to those where
+equitable rights alone were recognized, and equitable remedies were
+administered.... In a just sense, the amendment, then, may be construed
+to embrace _all suits_ which are not of equity and admiralty
+jurisdiction, _whatever may be the peculiar form_ which they may assume
+to settle legal rights." (3 _Peters_, 446.)
+
+If there be meaning in words, these authorities settle the case, and
+your law is in palpable violation of the amendment to the Constitution
+securing a trial by jury in suits at common law where the matter in
+controversy exceeds twenty dollars in value. Think not, Sir, that I am
+misrepresenting the Supreme Court. I know well that the _dicta_ I have
+quoted have reference to _white_ men, and that they have been virtually
+set aside in decisions respecting black men. I well know, that, in our
+model republic, law and justice and morality are all cutaneous. But
+admitting that the Supreme Court have stultified themselves, and
+virtually denied, that, where a suit was brought for the services of a
+_black_ man, the Constitution required a jury trial, recollect, Sir,
+that not in one single instance has the court decided that the
+Constitution _prohibited_ such a trial. But if not prohibited, then
+Congress are permitted to accord such a trial, and _both you and Mr.
+Webster have declared that Congress had a right to grant such a trial,
+and ought to grant it_. In voting, therefore, for a law denying such a
+trial, you made a voluntary surrender to the slaveholder of the security
+which such a trial would have afforded to multitudes of your poor,
+ignorant, oppressed fellow-men. For this act of cruelty and injustice,
+committed against your own late conviction of duty, what is your
+justification? Why, that the blacks had been already deprived of the
+right of trial by jury fifty-seven years!
+
+Let us now see what tribunal you have substituted for a jury in the
+trial of one of the most momentous issues that can engage the attention
+of a court of justice. You have provided for the appointment of an
+indefinite number of judges, each of whom is to have exclusive
+jurisdiction of these issues, and from whose judgment there is to be no
+appeal. The Constitution declares, "The judges, both of the Supreme and
+inferior courts, shall hold their offices during good behaviour, and
+shall, at stated times, receive for their services a compensation, which
+shall not be diminished during their continuance in office." These
+judges are appointed by the Senate, on the nomination of the President.
+Your herd of judges, called commissioners, are appointed by the courts,
+and hold office during pleasure, and instead of receiving a salary, are
+rewarded by a rule the infamy of which, it is believed, belongs to your
+law exclusively,--a rule which doubles their compensation whenever they
+decide in favor of the rich plaintiff, and _against_ the poor and
+friendless defendant. But perhaps you will deny that these men are
+judges; for, if judges, their appointment is palpably unconstitutional.
+Let us hear the Supreme Court, at a time when it was deemed expedient to
+maintain that the persons who executed the law of 1793 were _judges_.
+"It is plain, that, where a claim is made by the owner out of possession
+for the delivery of a slave, it must be made, if made at all, _against
+some other person_; and inasmuch as the right is a right of property,
+capable of being recognized and asserted by proceedings _before a court
+of justice between parties adverse to each other_, it constitutes, in
+the strictest sense, a _controversy_ between parties, and a case arising
+under the Constitution of the United States, within the express
+delegation of judicial power given by that instrument." (16 _Peters_,
+616.) Hence your commissioners are, in the _strictest sense_, judges,
+exercising "judicial power" delegated by the Constitution.
+
+You pronounce Mr. Crittenden "legal authority of the highest kind." This
+legal authority understands the sixth section of your law as providing
+that each commissioner "shall have judicial power and jurisdiction to
+hear, examine, and decide the case in a summary manner." Now, if a man,
+having judicial power and jurisdiction to decide controversies between
+parties adverse to each other, in controversies arising under the
+Constitution and within the express delegation of judicial power given
+by that instrument, is not a judge, do tell us who is one. Once more,
+Sir, Mr. Crittenden says, "The legal authority of every tribunal of
+exclusive jurisdiction, where no appeal lies, is of necessity
+conclusive upon every tribunal; and therefore the judgment of the
+tribunal created by this act is conclusive upon all other tribunals." So
+your commissioner is not only a judge, but he constitutes a tribunal of
+exclusive jurisdiction, and his judgment is binding even upon the
+Supreme Court of the United States. And yet, Sir, you must deny that
+this omnipotent commissioner is a judge, or you must admit, that, in the
+mode of his appointment, you have flagrantly violated the Constitution
+of your country.
+
+It has been most wickedly asserted by our proslavery presses and our
+proslavery politicians, that the surrender of fugitives from labor and
+fugitives from justice are similar proceedings. The surrender of a
+fugitive slave involves two questions, that of identity and that of
+property; and the law makes the decision of the commissioner on both
+points final and conclusive upon every State and Federal court in the
+land. The surrender of a fugitive criminal involves only the question of
+personal identity. The Governor of the State issues his warrant for the
+apprehension and delivery of a certain person proved to him to be
+charged with felony. If the officer arrests the wrong person, he does it
+at his peril, and a writ of _habeas corpus_ would immediately release
+the person wrongfully arrested. Again, it is most fraudulently
+maintained, that, if the wrong person is by the commissioner adjudged a
+slave, he may sue for his freedom in a Southern court! Should he do so,
+the exhibition of the commissioner's certificate is by law declared to
+be conclusive _upon all tribunals_. But even supposing that a Southern
+court, in defiance of law, should go behind the certificate, how is a
+free colored person from the North, working under the lash on a
+Mississippi plantation, to prove his freedom? How is he to fee a lawyer?
+How is he to get into court? If once there, where are his witnesses?
+They are his friends and acquaintances of his own color residing in the
+North. How are they to be summoned to Mississippi? Should they venture
+to enter the State, they would be imprisoned, and perhaps sold into
+slavery; or even if permitted to enter the court-room, their testimony
+would by law be excluded, against the claims of a white man. How
+despicably profligate, then, is the assumption of the advocates of your
+law, that any injustice committed under it would be repaired by Southern
+courts!
+
+It was not enough, it seems, that the wretched defendant in this
+momentous issue should be subjected to the jurisdiction of a judge
+unknown to the Constitution, holding his office by a prohibited tenure,
+incapable of being impeached, and bribed to decide in favor of the
+plaintiff by the promise of double fees, but the very trial allowed him
+must be a burlesque on all the forms and principles of juridical
+justice. The plaintiff, without notice to the defendant, prepares
+himself for trial, and when his affidavits or witnesses are all ready,
+he seizes the unsuspecting victim in the street, and puts him
+_instanter_ on his defence. Had the wretched man been accused of some
+atrocious crime, he might have demanded bail, and would have been
+permitted to go at large to seek for counsel, to look for witnesses, and
+to prepare for trial at some future day, of which he would have due
+notice. But no such privilege is allowed a man who is accused of _owing
+service_. One of your commissioners has already decided that the law
+does not permit him to bail the prisoner. The slave power rides in
+triumph over all the barriers erected by the wisdom of ages for the
+protection of human rights. The defendant is brought, generally in
+irons, before your commissioner judge, who is required "to hear and
+determine the case of _the claimant_ in a summary manner." The law seems
+not even to imagine the possibility of any defence being made on the
+part of the defendant. It makes no provision for such a defence,--no
+assignment of counsel, no summons for witnesses. We shall see presently,
+that if the plaintiff makes out a _prima facie_ title, satisfactory to
+the commission, it is all the law requires. Let me now call your
+attention to the practical working of your diabolical law. A man named
+Rose was lately seized at Detroit, and brought before a commissioner as
+a fugitive slave. I copy from the newspaper report. "Mr. Joy (counsel
+for defendant) moved a postponement of the trial to a future day, to
+enable Rose to produce his papers to establish his right to freedom,
+which papers he had _sworn_ were in Cincinnati. The counsel for the
+claimant denied that the commissioner had any authority under the law to
+grant a postponement. The commissioner agreed with the counsel for the
+plaintiff, that _he had no authority to postpone the trial_; and he
+further declared, that, _even were the papers by which Rose was
+manumitted present, he could not under the law receive them in
+evidence_."
+
+Utterly devilish as was this decision, it was sound law. The plaintiff
+had proved his title satisfactorily, and this being done, the
+commissioner was bound by the express words of the law to grant the
+certificate. He had no right to admit rebutting evidence. It was
+sufficient to prove that the prisoner had been the slave of the
+claimant's father, and that the claimant was the heir at law of his
+father. This of itself was satisfactory, and therefore the commissioner
+had no right to admit in evidence the very deed of manumission granted
+by the father to the slave. The framers of the law had been as explicit
+as they dared to be. "Upon satisfactory proof being made by deposition
+or _affidavit_, to be taken and certified, &c., or by other satisfactory
+testimony [of course, in writing, and _ex parte_], and with proof, also
+by affidavit, of the _identity_ of the person," &c., the defendant is to
+be surrendered. Not a hint is given that any testimony may be received
+to rebut the _satisfactory_ proof given by the plaintiff. You have,
+moreover, Sir, provided a species of evidence never before heard of in
+the trial of an issue. By the tenth section, the claimant may go before
+a judge or court in Texas, and there make proof by affidavit that _his_
+slave has escaped. Whereupon, the court or judge is to certify that the
+proof is satisfactory. A record of this satisfactory proof, together
+with a description of the fugitive, is to be made, and a certified
+transcript of this record, "being exhibited to any judge, commissioner,
+or other officer authorized," &c., "_shall_ be held and taken to be full
+and conclusive evidence of the fact of escape, and that the service or
+labor of the person escaping is _due_ to the party in such record
+mentioned." Here all defence is taken from the defendant. Should he
+summon a host of witnesses to prove his freedom, not one could be heard;
+should he offer a bill of sale from the claimant to another, it could
+not be received; should he produce a deed of manumission, acknowledged
+and certified in a Southern court, it would be waste paper. And thus a
+man's freedom is to be sacrificed on an affidavit made a thousand miles
+off. What, Sir, would you think of a law that would authorize the
+seizure and sale of your property to satisfy a debt which any man in
+California might think proper to swear, before a Californian judge, was
+_due_ from you to him?
+
+Such, Sir, is the _trial_ which you, the representative of Boston, a
+descendant of the Pilgrims, and "a gentleman of property and standing,"
+have accorded to the poor and oppressed. Did the Constitution require
+such a prostitution of justice, such an outrage of humanity, at your
+hands? I need not be told that some of your commissioners have not
+construed your law as strictly as did the Detroit functionary. Thanks to
+the force of public opinion, and to the zeal of some benevolent lawyers,
+whose hearts were not padded with cotton, in some instances defendants
+have been permitted to call witnesses in their behalf; and some regard
+has been paid to the ordinary principles of justice. But in all such
+instances, the spirit of the law and the intentions of its framers have
+been frustrated.
+
+And now let us listen to your "reason" for justifying all the atrocities
+and abominations of your law. You gravely tell us, "The entire
+population of the North has acquiesced in the law of 1793, without
+thinking itself exposed to the charge of barbarity, and I have only to
+say, that I do not think the charge any more just now." Certainly, Sir,
+the young colonial judge could not have given a reason less logical or
+satisfactory. You must be an inattentive observer of passing events, if
+you are ignorant that the law of 1793 has again and again been denounced
+as iniquitous, that some of the States have prohibited their officers
+from assisting in its execution, that numberless petitions have been
+presented to Congress for its repeal, and that you yourself, instead of
+acquiescing in it, solemnly declared it to be the duty of Congress so
+far to alter the law, as to grant the alleged fugitive a trial by jury.
+Yet the law of 1793, wicked as it was, was justice and mercy compared
+with yours. The trials under that were almost invariably before judges
+of the State courts, not appointed like your commissioners for the vile
+and only purpose of reducing their fellow-men to bondage. There judges
+were not confined to _ex parte_ evidence, were not compelled to receive
+"as full and conclusive" affidavits made in distant States, and by
+unknown persons. For the most part, they honestly endeavoured, by a
+patient investigation according to the ordinary rules of evidence, and
+by holding the plaintiff to strict legal proof, to supply the want of a
+jury.
+
+David Paul Brown, Esq., of Philadelphia, in a letter of last November,
+affirms that for the last thirty years he has been engaged as counsel in
+almost every important fugitive case brought before the judges and
+courts of Philadelphia, and he tells us, "thanks to those upright and
+impartial and independent judges by whom the rights of the parties were
+finally determined," he knows of no instance in which a colored person
+was, in his opinion, wrongfully surrendered. But he adds, "I have known
+HUNDREDS who have been illegally and unjustly claimed." This experienced
+lawyer, commenting on your law, justly says it allows "_ex parte_
+testimony to be received against the alleged fugitive, which, upon no
+principle known to the common law, could be received upon the claim to
+a horse or a dog." About four weeks after the date of this letter, Mr.
+Brown was called to defend an alleged fugitive "illegally and unjustly
+claimed," not before one of the "upright and impartial and independent"
+Pennsylvania judges, but before one of your ten-dollar slave-catching
+judges. I beg you to mark the result.
+
+On the 21st of December, a colored man was arrested in the street in
+Philadelphia, without warrant, and accused of stealing chickens. He was
+thrust into a carriage, driven to the State-House, carried into an upper
+room, and handcuffed. In this state he was detained till a commissioner
+arrived. The name of this executor of your law is worthy of remembrance.
+EDWARD D. INGRAHAM ought to be as much endeared to slave-catchers, as
+Judge Jeffries was to James the Second.
+
+By some means, the arrest became known, and counsel appeared for the
+prisoner. Your commissioner was informed that the prisoner had only been
+seized an hour and a half before, and had not heard the charge against
+him; that his counsel had had no time to learn the plaintiff's case, nor
+to prepare for the defence; that there were persons residing at a
+distance, some in New Jersey and some in Wilmington, who would be
+important witnesses in his behalf. On these grounds, a motion was made
+for a continuance. And what, Sir, do you suppose was the reply made by
+the slave-catching judge to this motion? "THE HEARING IS TO BE A SUMMARY
+ONE: LET IT PROCEED." No doubt you fully participate in Mr. Webster's
+indignation against Austrian barbarity; but see no barbarity in this
+accursed proceeding against a _colored_ American. The hearing did
+proceed, and James S. Price, on behalf of the plaintiff, swore that the
+prisoner was Emery Rice, the man claimed, but knew nothing further about
+his being a slave, except that he had seen him riding the claimant's
+horse. Had _heard it said_ the prisoner was a slave. This was the amount
+of the testimony on behalf of the claimant. Any honest jury, nay, any
+honest judge, would instantly have decided in favor of the prisoner.
+Not so MR. EDWARD D. INGRAHAM. The counsel for the defendant asked again
+for a postponement, and founded the motion on the _oath_ of the
+defendant, that he could procure six persons, naming them, to testify to
+his freedom. A delay of ONE HOUR was asked for. This was refused, and
+the judge(!) sent for a certificate to sign. During the delay thus
+occasioned, one of the six persons named by the defendant appeared, and
+swore that he had known the prisoner all his life. That he was not Emery
+Rice, but Adam Gibson; that he was a freeman, having been manumitted by
+the will of his late master. Mr. Brown produced a copy of the will of
+the late master, and it so far confirmed the testimony of the witness.
+Another person in the crowd now came forward, and swore that he also
+knew the prisoner, and that he was a free person, and that he was Adam
+Gibson. But all was in vain. The commissioner signed the certificate,
+and, with an obtuseness of intellect which marked him as a fit subject
+for a commission of lunacy, declared, "He had no doubt of the identity
+of the prisoner with the slave Emery Rice, and that _all other
+proceedings must be before the courts of Maryland_, whither he would
+send him."[1] And so the prisoner, without seeing his wife and children,
+whom he had that morning parted from unsuspicious of danger and
+unconscious of crime, was hurried off at the expense of our glorious
+model republic, under an escort of officers, who delivered him, not to
+the courts of Maryland, but to Mr. William S. Knight, the reputed owner.
+But Mr. Knight told the officers, "You have brought me a wrong man; this
+is not Emery Rice; this man is no slave of mine." And so Adam Gibson
+returned to Philadelphia, and is now a living illustration of the
+abominable iniquity of one of the most accursed laws to be found in the
+statute-book of any civilized nation.
+
+[1] See report in the _New York Tribune_, 25th December, 1850.
+
+You do not think your law more barbarous than that of 1793. Let me
+further enlighten you. Judge McLean of the Supreme Court, in his opinion
+delivered last May in the case of _Norris_ v. _Newton et al._,
+remarks,--"In regard to the arrest of fugitives from labor, the law [act
+of 1793] _does not impose any active duties on our citizens generally_";
+and he argues in defence of the law, that "it gives no one a just right
+to complain; he has only to refrain from an express violation of the
+law." In other words, the law only required individuals to be passive
+spectators of a horrible outrage, and did not compel them to be active
+participators in other men's villany. Now, what says your law? Why, that
+every commissioner may appoint as many official slave-catchers as he
+pleases, and that each of these menials may "summon and call to their
+aid the _by-standers_ or _posse comitatus_ of the proper county, when
+necessary to insure a faithful observance of the clause of the
+Constitution referred to in conformity with the provisions of this act,
+AND ALL GOOD CITIZENS ARE HEREBY COMMANDED TO AID AND ASSIST in the
+prompt and efficient execution of this law, whenever their services may
+be required." And what is the fate you have provided for the "good
+citizen," who, believing slavery to be sinful, cannot, in the fear of
+God, "aid and assist" in making a fellow-man a slave? Any person "who
+shall aid, abet, or assist" the fugitive "directly or indirectly"
+(cunning words) to escape from such claimant, as, for instance, refusing
+to join in a slave-hunt when required, shall be fined not exceeding
+$1,000, be imprisoned six months, and pay the claimant $1,000. I hope,
+Sir, you are now able to perceive that your law has a preeminence in
+barbarity over its predecessor. And now, Sir, please to recollect, that
+party discipline, aided by the influence of Messrs. Webster and Clay,
+and the factory and cotton interest of Boston and New York, could not
+procure for this atrocious law the votes of _one half_ the members of
+the House of Representatives. Of two hundred and thirty-two members,
+only one hundred and nine dared to place their names on an enduring and
+shameful record, while many basely deserted their seats, fearing alike
+to vote either for or against it. You, Sir, following Mr. Webster's
+advice, "conquered your prejudices," and in company with _two_ more
+Northern Whigs, one of them a native of Virginia, cast your vote for
+this bill of abominations. But, although you voted for the law, you do
+not wish your constituents to suppose you approved of it. "It will not,
+I trust, be inferred from any thing I have said, that I consider the law
+which has passed unexceptionable. There are amendments which I strongly
+desire to be introduced into it." What are the exceptionable features of
+the law, what are the amendments you desire, you refrain from
+specifying. But you tell us that you would have labored for these
+amendments "had it been possible, but every body knows that it was
+_impracticable_." You allude to the _previous question_, which prevented
+both discussion and amendments. But why, then, did you vote for an
+objectionable bill which could not be amended? Here, again, we have one
+of your unfortunate reasons. "I deem conformity to the design of the
+Constitution more important than the objectionable details of the bill."
+So, by your own confession, had there been no previous question, you
+would have swallowed the bill with all its objectionable details, out of
+reverence for the _design_ of the Constitution, although that design
+neither embraced nor required a single one of those details. Did you,
+Sir, vote _against_ the previous question? On this point you are silent,
+and the minutes afford no information; but _if_ you did, your vote was a
+most remarkable aberration from your proslavery course in Congress.
+_After_ the previous question had been seconded, it was moved to lay the
+bill on the table. Had this motion been carried, you might have
+introduced another bill, omitting the "objectionable details," but you
+voted with the slaveholders. The slaveholders then moved that the bill
+be read a third time. Had this been lost, there would have been a chance
+of correcting the "objectionable details." Again you voted with the
+slaveholders, and a third time, also, on the main question.
+
+I will now, Sir, call your attention to the disastrous influence which
+your law has exerted on the _moral sense_ of the community. Says
+Coleridge, "To dogmatize a crime, that is, to teach it as a doctrine, is
+itself a crime." Of this crime of dogmatizing crime, Mr. Webster, and
+most of our cotton politicians, and, alas! many of our fashionable,
+genteel divines, are guilty; nor are you innocent, Sir, who in your law
+require "GOOD citizens" to aid in hunting and enslaving their
+fellow-men.
+
+In former years, and before Mr. Webster had undergone his metamorphosis,
+he thus, in a speech at New York, expressed himself in regard to the
+antislavery agitation at the North. "It [slavery] has arrested the
+_religious feeling_ of the country; it has taken strong hold of the
+consciences of men. He is a rash man indeed, little conversant with
+human nature, and especially has he a very erroneous estimate of the
+character of the people of this country, who supposes that a feeling of
+this kind is _to be trifled with or despised_." This gentleman has
+become the rash man shadowed forth in his speech, and is trifling with
+and despising the religious feeling of the North. In his street speech
+in Boston, in favor of slave-hunting, he avowed that he was well aware
+that the return of fugitives "is a topic that must excite prejudices,"
+and that the question for Massachusetts to decide was, "whether she will
+conquer her own prejudice." In his letter to the citizens of
+Newburyport, he sneeringly alludes to the "cry that there is a rule for
+the government of public men and private men which is superior to the
+Constitution," and he scornfully intimates that Mr. Horace Mann, who had
+objected to your law as wicked, would do well "to appeal at once, as
+others do, to that high authority which sits enthroned above the
+Constitution and the laws"; and he gives an extract from a nameless
+English correspondent, in which the writer remarks, "Religion is an
+excellent thing except in politics," a maxim exceedingly palatable to
+very many of our politicians. Aware that the impiety of this sentiment
+was not exactly suited to the meridian of Massachusetts, he says his
+friend undoubtedly meant "a fantastical notion of religion." Of course,
+he regards the religious prejudice against hunting and enslaving men as
+springing from a fantastic notion of religion. Yet, with a strange
+fatuity, he confesses that "the teaching of Christ and his Apostles is a
+sure guide to duty in _politics_, as in any other concern of life,"
+utterly oblivious of the fact, that the "higher law," which he
+ridicules, was proclaimed in that very teaching. Christ taught, "Fear
+not them [magistrates] who kill the body, but are not able to kill the
+soul, but rather fear HIM who is able to destroy both soul and body in
+hell." What taught the Apostles? "We must obey God, rather than man."
+Such teaching it was, that gave birth to "the noble army of martyrs,"
+and this very teaching will induce multitudes of Christians at the
+present day to hazard fines and imprisonment rather than obey the wicked
+injunctions of your law. It was this same teaching which, on the
+publication of your law, induced numerous ministers of Jesus Christ, and
+various ecclesiastical assemblies, to denounce it as wicked, and
+obedience to it as rebellion against God. This expression of religious
+sentiment alarmed both our politicians and our merchants. How could the
+one expect Southern votes, or the other Southern trade, if the religious
+people at the North refused to catch slaves? Hence arose a mighty outcry
+against the blending of religion with politics, and most fearful were
+the anathemas against the parsons who desecrated the pulpit by preaching
+politics, that is, preaching that people ought to obey God rather than
+the Fugitive Slave Act. Such men were, in the language of one of the New
+York commercial journals, "clerical preachers of rebellion," and their
+congregations were exhorted to "leave them to naked walls." But the
+leaven was at work, and an antidote was greatly wanted. Supply of course
+follows demand, and forthwith there was a sudden advent of cotton
+clergyman, preaching against rebellion, and cunningly confounding a
+conscientious, passive disobedience with forcible resistance. Their
+sermons, in which virtually
+
+    "The image of God was accounted as base,
+    And the image of Caesar set up in its place,"
+
+were received with mighty applause by the very men who had been striving
+to save the pulpit from all contaminating contact with politics, and the
+reverend preachers of cotton politics were elevated into patriots, and
+their disquisitions against the "higher law" were scattered on the wings
+of the commercial press broadcast over the land.[2] The theology which
+holds that the allegiance we owe to civil government binds the
+conscience to obedience to its mandates, is the same with which
+Shakspeare's assassin quieted his scruples when acting under the royal
+command,--"If a king bid a man be a villain, he is bound by the
+indenture of his oath to be one."
+
+[2] In one of the most celebrated of these sermons, we find the
+following broad assertion:--"If God _has_ left to men the choice of the
+_kind_ of government they will have, he has _not_ left it to their
+choice whether they will obey human government or not. He has
+_commanded_ that obedience." Our rulers command us, when required by a
+commissioner's agent, to aid in hunting and seizing our innocent
+fellow-men, and delivering them into the hands of their task-masters.
+That the reverend preacher would render a cheerful obedience to such a
+mandate, there is little doubt. We read that the Jewish rulers, "The
+chief priests and Pharisees, had given a _commandment_, that, if any one
+knew where he (Jesus) was, he should show it, that they might take him."
+Strange is it, that of the college of Apostles there was but one "good
+citizen," who rendered obedience to the powers ordained by God; all the
+others suffered death for their wilful, deliberate defiance of the laws
+and the magistrates of the land. As a specimen of the teaching of these
+cotton divines, I quote from this same admired sermon the following
+precious piece of information, viz.:--"Nor is it true that the _fugitive
+slave_ is made an _outlaw_, and on that ground justifiable for bloody
+and murderous resistance of law. He is under _the protection of law_;
+and if any man injures him, or kills him, the law will avenge him, just
+_as soon as it would you or me_." To deny the truth of this solemn
+declaration, made in the house of God, would be, in the reverend
+gentleman's estimation, but a portion of "that perpetual abuse of our
+Southern brethren" of which he complains. He must, however, permit us to
+call his attention to the following advertisements respecting a FUGITIVE
+SLAVE, published in the Wilmington Journal of the 18th of October last,
+in pursuance of a law of the State of North Carolina.
+
+"_State of North Carolina, New Hanover County._--Whereas complaint upon
+oath hath this day been made to us, two of the justice of the peace for
+the State and County aforesaid, by Guilford Horn, of Edgecombe County,
+that a certain male slave belonging to him, named HARRY,--a carpenter by
+trade, about 40 years old, 5 feet 5 inches high, or thereabouts, yellow
+complexion, stout built, with a scar on his left leg (from the cut of an
+axe), has very thick lips, eyes deep sunk in his head, forehead very
+square, tolerably loud voice, has lost one or two of his upper teeth,
+and has a very dark spot on his jaw, supposed to be a mark,--hath
+_absented_ himself from his master's service, and is _supposed_ to be
+lurking about in this County, committing acts of felony or other
+misdeeds: These are, therefore, in the name of the State aforesaid, to
+command said slave forthwith to surrender himself, and return home to
+his master; and we do hereby, by virtue of the act of Assembly in such
+case made and provided, intimate and declare that if the said slave
+Harry doth not surrender himself, and return home immediately after the
+publication of these presents, that any person or persons may KILL and
+DESTROY the said slave by such means as he may think fit, without
+accusation or impeachment of any crime or offence for so doing, and
+without incurring any penalty or forfeiture thereby.
+
+"Given under our hands and seals, this 29th day of June, 1850.
+
+"JAMES T. MILLER, J. P.
+
+"W. C. BENTTENCOURT, J. P.
+
+"ONE HUNDRED AND TWENTY-FIVE DOLLARS REWARD will be paid for the
+delivery of said HARRY to me at Tonsott Depot, Edgecombe County, or for
+his confinement in any jail in the State, so that I can get him; or one
+hundred and fifty dollars will be given for his HEAD. He was lately
+heard from in Newbern, where he called himself Henry Barnes (or Burns)
+and will be likely to continue the name or assume that of Coppage or
+Farmer. He has a free mulatto woman for a wife, by the name of Sally
+Bozeman, who has lately removed to Wilmington, and lives in that part of
+the town called Texas, where he will likely be lurking.
+
+"GUILFORD HORN.
+
+"_June 29, 1850._"
+
+It is amusing to observe with what awful reverence our merchants and
+brokers regard the sanctity of human law, when it commands them to catch
+slaves; a reverence not always felt by them for the statute of usury
+when the money market is tight.
+
+A vast deal of nonsense and impiety has been recently thrown upon the
+public in relation to the "higher law," by men who had political and
+pecuniary interests depending on the good-will of the slaveholders. The
+whole subject is perfectly simple and intelligible, and has been
+intentionally misrepresented and mystified.
+
+Human government is indispensable to the happiness and progress of human
+society. Hence God, in his wisdom and benevolence, wills its existence;
+and in this sense, and this alone, the powers that be are ordained by
+him. But civil government cannot exist, if each individual may, at his
+pleasure, forcibly resist its injunctions. Therefore Christians are
+required to _submit_ to the powers that be, whether a Nero or a
+slave-catching Congress. But obedience to the civil ruler often
+necessarily involves rebellion to God. Hence we are warned by Christ and
+his Apostles, and by the example of saints in all ages, in such cases,
+not to obey, but to submit and suffer. We are to hold fast our
+allegiance to Jehovah, but at the same time not take up arms to defend
+ourselves against the penalties imposed by the magistrate for our
+disobedience. Thus the Divine sovereignty and the authority of human
+government are both maintained. Revolution is not the abolition of human
+government, but a change in its form, and its lawfulness depends on
+circumstances. What was the "den" in which John Bunyan had his glorious
+vision of the Pilgrim's Progress? A prison to which he was confined for
+years for refusing obedience to human laws. And what excuse did this
+holy man make for conduct now denounced as wicked and rebellious? "I
+cannot obey, but I can suffer." The Quakers have from the first refused
+to obey the law requiring them to bear arms; yet have they never been
+vilified by our politicians and cotton clergymen, as rebels against the
+powers that be, nor sneered at for their acknowledgment of a "higher"
+than human law. The Lord Jesus Christ, after requiring us to love God
+and our neighbour, added, "There is none other commandment greater than
+these"; no, not even a slave-catching act of Congress, which requires us
+to hunt our neighbour, that he may be reduced to the condition of a
+beast of burden. Rarely has the religious faith of the community
+received so rude a shock as that which has been given it by your
+horrible law, and the principles advanced by its political and clerical
+supporters. Cruelty, oppression, and injustice are elevated into
+virtues, while justice, mercy, and compassion are ridiculed and
+vilified.
+
+But lately, the business of catching slaves was regarded as one of the
+lowest grades of scoundrelism. Now, great pains are taken by our
+gentlemen of property and standing to ennoble it; and men of eminence in
+the legal profession are stooping to take the wages of iniquity, and
+lending themselves to consign to the horrors of American slavery men
+whom they know to be innocent of crime. Nay, we have seen in New York a
+committee of gentlemen actually _raising money by voluntary
+contribution_ to furnish a slave-catcher with professional services
+gratis;--a free gift, not to mitigate human misery, but to aggravate the
+hardships of the poor and friendless a thousandfold. Can men of standing
+in the community thus openly espouse the cause of cruelty and
+oppression, and, from commercial and political views, trample upon every
+principle of Christian benevolence, without corrupting the moral sense
+of the people to the extent of their influence? When gentlemen club
+together to hire a lawyer to assist a slave-catcher, no wonder that the
+commercial press should teem with the vilest abuse of all who feel
+sympathy for the fugitive. One of the most malignant proslavery journals
+in New York is edited by your colleague and fellow-Whig, the Honorable
+Mr. Brooks, and his brother. I copy, Sir, for your consideration, the
+following article from the _New York Evening Express_, published during
+the late trial in that city of Henry Long, an alleged fugitive:--
+
+"Two fugitive cases are now before our courts; one that of the negro
+Henry Long, and the other that of three white Frenchmen, under the
+extradition treaty with France. The negro's case makes a great deal of
+noise, because he is black; the three white Frenchmen are hardly heard
+of. The three white French people pay their own counsel: they may have
+committed a robbery in Paris, or may not; are perhaps innocent, though
+possibly guilty; but here they are on trial, with no chance of a trial
+before a jury! If they are sent back, and are convicted, they go to the
+galleys, and are slaves for life. The negro, Henry Long, lucky fellow
+for being black! lives in clover here, and has one of the best speakers
+in the city, on the best fee, interests all the Abolitionists in all
+quarters, who contribute money freely for his defence, and if he is
+returned, leaves here canonized as a martyr, and goes back to the
+condition he was born in, to fatten on hog and hominy, better fed and
+better clothed than nine tenths of the farm laborers in Great Britain.
+Another consideration strikes us, and that is, the cost of defending
+Long will buy his freedom three times over. The very fee of his counsel
+would purchase his freedom. But to buy him and pay for him, _not steal_
+him, would leave no room for agitation. And where does this money come
+from, that cares for Long and neglects the three Frenchmen? From
+England, in the main, we believe. The Abolitionists here do not
+_contribute it_."
+
+It would be difficult to find in the Satanic press a more clumsy piece
+of malignant falsehood. We have here, from the same pen, and in the same
+article, the assertions, that the Abolitionists, in all quarters, we are
+assured, "contribute money freely for his defence"; and then the money,
+it is believed, comes mainly from England. "The Abolitionists here do
+not contribute it." To contribute money for the legal defence of a
+fugitive is _stealing him_. The cost of defending Long amounted to three
+times the price that would be asked for him. Long, after his return,
+sold in Richmond for $750; of course his defence cost $2,250. To whom,
+and for what, was this money paid? Long could not be bought in New York,
+all advances for the purpose being peremptorily repulsed. His counsel's
+fee was $300, being all contributed in New York, and about $100 of it
+being raised by the free colored people. While $300 were thus raised to
+give Long the chance of a legal defence, gentlemen of the New York Union
+Safety Committee, of which your colleague has the honor of being a
+member, contributed $500 to aid the slave-catcher in reducing to bondage
+a man unaccused of crime!
+
+I am inclined to believe, Sir, that you have little cause to
+congratulate yourself, that, in voting for the Fugitive Slave Law, you
+have advanced the cause of truth, justice, humanity, or religion.
+
+A refusal to _obey_ your wicked law has been artfully represented as a
+determination to _resist_ its execution. Very few of our white
+population have intimated the most distant intention of resorting to
+illegal violence. Very many ecclesiastical bodies have denounced your
+law as so iniquitous, that they could not in conscience obey it; but I
+challenge you to point to a _single instance_ in which such a body has
+recommended forcible resistance. To the vast accumulation of impiety
+uttered in support of your law has been added a fiendish ridicule of the
+benevolent and Christian feeling arrayed against it. It is true, that
+some of our free blacks and fugitives have declared, that they would, at
+the hazard of their lives, defend themselves against the kidnapper.
+Whatever may be thought of the wisdom of such a determination, be
+assured it will tax your logical powers to the utmost to prove that God
+has conferred the right of self-defence exclusively upon white men. The
+slave is a prisoner of war, and instead of being protected by law, he is
+subjected by it to every conceivable outrage. When murdered, his owner
+seeks in the courts _damages_ at the hands of the murderer, as he would
+for the death of his horse. For no possible injury committed on his
+person, either by his owner or others, can he receive compensation,
+although the law may profess to punish cruelty to him as to other
+animals. Now it has never been regarded as immoral, by those who admit
+the right of self-defence, for a prisoner of war to effect his escape by
+slaying his guard. All this, I know, will horrify a certain class of
+our divines and politicians. But let them be patient. I am not laying
+down a doctrine, but stating _facts_, which they may disprove if they
+can. Let them remember, that all the slavery which they delight to find
+in the Bible was the slavery of _white_ men, and that the Roman slaves
+in the time of Christ, whose bondage, we are told, he and his Apostles
+approved, were held by the _right of war_. White Americans have been
+held as slaves by the same holy and Scriptural tenure. Let us, then,
+inquire how the escape and resistance of white slaves have heretofore
+been regarded. In 1535, the _white_ slaves in Tunis alone amounted to
+twenty thousand. Cervantes, who had himself been a slave in Algiers,
+says in his writings, "For liberty we ought to risk life itself; slavery
+being the greatest evil that can fall to the lot of man." Acting upon
+this precept, he himself, while a slave, planned a general insurrection
+of the slaves. Yet Cervantes was recognized as a faithful son of the
+Church, and the license prefixed to his works declares they contain
+nothing contrary to the Christian religion. The Annual Register for 1763
+announces, that, "last month, the Christian slaves at Algiers, to the
+number of four thousand, rose and killed their guards, and massacred all
+who came in their way." The insurrection was suppressed, but no one in
+Europe denounced the insurgents as bloodthirsty wretches, nor regarded
+their effort as an impious and anti-Christian rebellion against the
+powers ordained of God. In the reign of Elizabeth, one John Fox, a slave
+on the Barbary coast, slew his master, and, effecting his escape with a
+number of his fellow-slaves, arrived in England. The queen, instead of
+looking upon him as a murderer, testified her admiration of his exploit
+by allowing him a pension.[3]
+
+[3] For the facts on this subject, see the admirable work by Charles
+Sumner, entitled "White Slavery in the Barbary States."
+
+Washington Madison performed a similar exploit on board an American
+coast slaver, and arrived, with a large number of his fellow-slaves, in
+the British West Indies. Mr. Webster, then Secretary of State,
+officially demanded of the British government the surrender of this
+heroic man as a MURDERER.
+
+In 1793, there were one hundred and fifteen American slaves in Algiers,
+held by as perfect and Scriptural a tenure as any slave is now held in
+any part of our wide republic. Had one of these slaves made his escape
+by killing his Algerine master, would any of our patriotic divines,
+would any gentleman of the "New York Union Committee of Safety," would
+even Mr. Webster himself, have pronounced him a murderer? Had the
+captain of a British ship favored his escape, and given him a passage to
+Boston, would your colleague, the Honorable Mr. Brooks, have accused him
+of slave-stealing? Is it not possible, Sir, that, with very many of our
+casuists and moralists, questions of conscience are decided according to
+the tincture of a skin?
+
+I will now ask your attention to some of the political consequences
+resulting from the late measures in which you rejoice, and for which you
+voted. No sooner had Congress made the required concessions to the slave
+power, than the advocates of those measures claimed the glory of having
+given peace to the country, and perpetuity to the Union. Mr. Webster, as
+one of the chief agents in this blessed consummation, received the
+congratulations of a crowd in Washington. In his reply he
+observed,--"Truly, gentlemen, the last two days have been great days. A
+work has been accomplished which dissipates doubts and alarms, puts an
+end to angry controversies, fortifies the Constitution of the country,
+and strengthens the bond of the Union.
+
+    'Now is the winter of our discontent
+    Made glorious summer;....
+    And all the clouds that lowered upon our house
+    In the deep bosom of the ocean buried.'"
+
+The glorious summer anticipated by the orator proved cold and brief, and
+if the lowering clouds were indeed buried in the ocean, the sea has
+given up its dead. Never before, since the organization of the
+government, has such a tempest of indignation swept over the land. Never
+before, in a single instance, has there been manifested throughout the
+religious portion of the community, of all creeds and names, such a
+settled determination in the fear of God to withhold obedience to a law
+of the land. The sentiments of the great mass of the people of the free
+States, exclusive of the commercial cities, are briefly but emphatically
+embodied in a resolution of the Common Council of Chicago, viz.:--"The
+Fugitive Slave Act recently passed by Congress is revolting to our moral
+sense, and an outrage on our feelings of justice and humanity, because
+it disregards all the securities which the Constitution and laws have
+thrown around personal liberty, and its direct tendency is to alienate
+the people from their love and reverence for the government and
+institutions of our country."
+
+How far the clouds which hovered over our house have been dissipated,
+let the recent rout of Mr. Webster's party in Massachusetts testify. Let
+his own declaration, a month after the _peace_ measures were adopted,
+that the Union was passing through a _fiery trial_, testify.[4] How far
+the work of the two days has fortified the Constitution, let the recent
+law of Vermont, denounced as an utter nullification of the Constitution,
+because it rescues the alleged fugitive from the hands of the
+commissioner, and gives him a jury trial before a State court, testify.
+When rumors were rife that Mr. Webster intended to repudiate his own
+thunder, the Wilmot Proviso, the _New York Herald_, the chief Northern
+organ of the slaveholders, promised that, if the Senator would indeed
+pursue a course so patriotic, a grateful country would, at the next
+election, place him in the Presidential chair. But scarcely had the acts
+advocated by Mr. Webster been consummated, than the _Herald_, with
+sardonic malice, announces,--"The predictions of Mr. Clay, that the
+Compromise Bill would speedily conciliate all parties, and restore the
+era of good feeling, were exactly the reverse of the actual
+consequences. Mr. Webster has been cast overboard in Massachusetts.
+General Cass has been virtually condemned in Michigan. Mr. Dickinson,
+the President, and his cabinet, have been routed in New York. Mr. Phelps
+has been superseded in Vermont. Whilst in Ohio, Illinois, Iowa, and
+Wisconsin, the Free-Soilers have carried off the booty." And he winds up
+with declaring, that the next President "can't be Fillmore nor Webster."
+
+[4] Letter to Union Meeting in New York, 28th Oct., 1850.
+
+If the "peace measures" have strengthened the bond of the Union, what
+mean all the meetings lately held to _save the Union_? Why is the tocsin
+now sounded by the very authors and friends of the measures? How comes
+it that, in Boston itself, the chairman of a Union meeting contradicts
+the exulting and jubilant shout of triumph uttered by the Secretary of
+State, and makes the following doleful announcement:--"The Union, and
+consequently the existence of this nation, is menaced, and unless there
+is a great and general effort in their support, we may soon behold the
+mighty fabric of our government trembling over our heads, and
+threatening by its fall to crush the prosperity which we have so long
+and happily enjoyed." So relaxed has become the bond of our Union, that
+one hundred gentlemen of property and standing in New York have, under
+the style and title of "The New York Union Committee of Safety," assumed
+the onerous task of taking it into their safe-keeping. "Committees of
+safety" are associated with times of peril and anarchy, and are never
+wanted when alarms have ceased, angry discussions ended, the
+Constitution fortified, and the bond of union strengthened.
+
+In this universal panic, in this dread entertained, especially in
+Boston, by Mr. Webster's friends, of soon seeing the mighty fabric of
+our government trembling over their heads, it may, Sir, be consolatory
+to you and others to know how so dire a calamity may be averted. The
+chivalric Senator from Mississippi--the gentleman who threatens to hang
+one Senator if he dare place his foot on the soil of Mississippi, who
+draws a loaded pistol on another, and for a third bears a challenge to
+mortal combat--was lately in the city of New York. The Committee of
+Safety found him out, and lauded him for his fearless discharge of duty,
+and his fervor and devotion to the Union, and welcomed him to the
+commercial emporium in the name of all who appreciate the blessings we
+enjoy, and are willing to transmit them to their children. The worthy
+and conciliatory gentleman very appropriately communicated to the
+committee having the Union in charge the conditions on which alone it
+could be saved, notwithstanding its bond had so recently been
+strengthened. These conditions are, we learn, four in number.
+
+1. "The Fugitive Slave Bill passed by Congress shall remain the law of
+the land, and be faithfully executed."
+
+Both you and Mr. Webster admit that the Constitution permits a jury
+trial to the fugitive. Should Congress, in its wisdom, and in obedience
+to the wishes of the great mass of the Northern population, and in the
+exercise of its constitutional power, elevate property in a human being
+to the same level with that in a horse, and permit a jury to pass upon
+the title to it,--_the Union must be dissolved_.
+
+2. "The Wilmot Proviso, that monstrous thing, shall not be revived." It
+was not courteous, certainly, in Mr. Foote thus to characterize Mr.
+Webster's thunder. The claim to this thunder was made in his speech,
+September, 1847, at the Springfield Convention, which nominated him for
+President; and the Convention, in his presence, thus declared their
+devotion to his missile. "The Whigs of Massachusetts now declare, and
+put this declaration of their purpose _on record_, that Massachusetts
+will never consent that Mexican territories, however acquired, shall
+become a part of the American Union, unless on the _unalterable_
+condition that there shall be neither slavery nor involuntary servitude,
+otherwise than in punishment for crime." The next year Mr. Webster
+launched his thunder over the Territory of Oregon, and thus in his
+speech (10th August, 1848) vindicated it from the character now given to
+it by Mr. Foote:--
+
+"Gentlemen from the South declare that we invade their rights when we
+deprive them of a participation in the enjoyment of territories acquired
+by the common services and common exertions of all. Is this true? Of
+what do we deprive them? Why, they say that we deprive them of the
+privilege of carrying their slaves as slaves into the new territories.
+Well, Sir, what is the amount of that? They say, that in this way we
+deprive them of going into this acquired territory with their property.
+Their property! What do they mean by this 'property'? We certainly do
+not deprive them of the privilege of going into those newly acquired
+territories with all that, in the general estimate of human society and
+common and universal understanding of mankind, is esteemed property. Not
+at all. The truth is just this. They have in their own States peculiar
+laws which create property in persons.... The real meaning, then, of
+Southern gentlemen, in making this complaint, is, that they cannot go
+into the territories of the United States carrying with them their own
+peculiar law, a law which creates property in persons."
+
+So the Wilmot Proviso was no monstrous thing at all, as applied to
+Oregon. When the question came up of applying this same Proviso to New
+Mexico and California, Mr. Webster discovered in these Territories a
+certain peculiarity of physical geography and Asiatic scenery which he
+had not discovered in Oregon, and which, he found, rendered it a
+physical impossibility for Southern gentlemen to carry there "a law
+which creates property in persons," and he therefore gave them full
+liberty to carry their law into those vast regions, if they could. But
+at the very moment of giving this liberty to Southern gentlemen, he
+courageously warned them that his thunder was good constitutional
+thunder, and would be used whenever necessary. "Wherever there is an
+_inch of land_ to be stayed back from becoming slave territory, I am
+ready to insert the principle of the exclusion of slavery. I am pledged
+to that from 1837,--pledged to it again and again, and I will perform
+those pledges." So, should we get another slice of Mexico, or annex Cuba
+or St. Domingo, Mr. Webster would revive the Wilmot Proviso, and then
+_he_ will be the means, if he succeeds, of dissolving the Union!
+
+3. The next condition announced to the Safety Committee is,--"No attempt
+shall be made in Congress to prohibit slavery in the District of
+Columbia."
+
+Now it is the opinion of Mr. Webster, that Congress has the
+constitutional right, not merely to attempt, but actually to effect, the
+exclusion of slavery in _all_ the Territories of the United States. The
+District of Columbia being placed by the Constitution expressly under
+"the exclusive jurisdiction" of Congress, the _constitutional_ right to
+abolish slavery there has rarely been questioned; but it has been
+contended that good faith to the States which ceded the District forbids
+such an act of constitutional power. Hence, in 1838, a resolution was
+introduced into the Senate declaring that the abolition of slavery in
+the District would be "a violation of good faith," &c. What said Mr.
+Webster? "I do not know any matter of fact, or any ground of argument,
+on which this affirmation of plighted faith can stand. I see nothing in
+the act of cession, and nothing in the Constitution, and nothing in the
+transaction, implying any limitation on the authority of Congress."[5]
+
+[5] On the 10th of January, 1838, Mr. Clay moved in the Senate the
+following resolution, viz.:--"Resolved, that the interference by the
+citizens of any of the States with a view to the abolition of slavery in
+this District, is endangering the rights and security of the people of
+this District; and that any act or measure of Congress designed to
+abolish slavery in this District would be a violation of the faith
+implied in the cession by the States of Virginia and Maryland, a just
+cause of alarm to the people of the slaveholding States, and have a
+direct and inevitable tendency to disturb and endanger the
+Union."--Passed, 38 to 8, Mr. Webster voting in the negative. _Senate
+Journal_, _2 Sess. 25 Cong._, p. 127.
+
+4. The last condition on which the Union can be preserved is,--"No State
+shall be prevented from coming into the Union on the ground of having
+slavery." This is an unkind cut at Mr. Webster, since he has again and
+again pledged himself against the admission of slave States. Even so
+early as 1819, he advocated, in a public meeting at Boston, a resolution
+declaring that Congress "possessed the constitutional power, upon the
+admission of any new State created beyond the limits of the original
+territory of the United States, to make the prohibition of the further
+extension of slavery or involuntary servitude in such new State a
+condition of admission. That, in the opinion of this meeting, it is just
+and expedient that this power should be exercised by Congress upon the
+admission of all new States created beyond the original limits of the
+United States." In his New York speech, in 1837, he averred, "When it is
+proposed to bring new members into the political partnership, the old
+members have a right to say on what terms such new partners are to come
+in, and _what they are to bring along with them_." In his Springfield
+speech, he insisted, "There is no one [he forgot Mr. Foote and his other
+Southern friends] who can complain of the North for resisting the
+increase of _slave representation_, because it gives power to the
+minority in a manner inconsistent with the principles of our
+government." So late as 1848, he proclaimed on the floor of the Senate,
+"I shall oppose all such extension [slave representation] at all times
+and under all circumstances, even against all inducements, against all
+combinations, against all compromises."
+
+The State of Georgia, in her convention of December last, added a
+_fifth_ condition to those stated by Mr. Foote as indispensable to the
+preservation of the Union, viz.:--"No act suppressing the slave-trade
+between the slaveholding States." Unfortunately for Mr. Webster, he is
+here, for the fifth time, virtually held up as a disorganizer, and an
+enemy of the Union; for in his speech in the Senate (6th February, 1837)
+he remarked,--"As to the point, the right of regulating the transfer of
+slaves from one State to another, he did not know that he entertained
+any doubt, because the Constitution gave Congress the right to regulate
+trade and commerce between the States. Trade in what? In whatever was
+the subject of commerce and ownership. If slaves were the subjects of
+ownership, then trade in them between the States was subject to the
+regulation of Congress."
+
+Mr. Webster declared, that the work of the two days in which he rejoiced
+had fortified the Constitution, and strengthened the bond of the Union;
+and yet we are now solemnly warned, by the very men and party with whom
+he is acting, that the bond is to be severed, should Congress pass any
+one of five laws, all and each of which he, the great expounder,
+declares the Constitution authorizes Congress to pass. So it seems the
+great peril to which we are exposed, the course which is to make the
+fabric of our government to tremble over the heads of the people of
+Boston, is, not the violation of the Constitution, nor the breach of its
+compromises, nor the invasion of the rights of the South, but the
+exercise by Congress of powers which Mr. Webster declares to be
+undoubtedly constitutional. The Abolitionists supposed they were
+following a safe guide when they confined themselves, in their petitions
+to Congress for legislative action against slavery, exclusively to such
+measures as they were assured, by the eminent expounder, were strictly
+constitutional. The Abolitionists have sympathized with this gentleman
+in the obloquy he incurred, in common with themselves, for holding
+opinions unpalatable to the slaveholders, and for maintaining the
+constitutional rights of Congress. Because he insisted, in the Senate,
+on the power of Congress over slavery and the slave-trade in the
+District of Columbia, Mr. Rives, of Virginia, was so unkind as to say,
+that the gentleman from Massachusetts, "if it so pleased his fancy,
+might disport himself in tossing squibs and firebrands about this hall;
+but those who are sitting upon a barrel of gunpowder, liable to be blown
+up by his dangerous missiles, could hardly be expected to be quite as
+calm and philosophic." Because he presented antislavery petitions, and
+insisted on the duty of Congress to consider them, Mr. King, of Alabama,
+affirmed that the course which the Senator from Massachusetts had taken
+had "placed him at the head of those men who are inundating Congress
+with their petitions." Strange as it may now seem, Mr. Cuthbert, of
+Georgia, told Mr. Webster to his face in the Senate, "The gentleman had
+uniformly been opposed to all those measures which tended to quiet the
+country and heal those sectional dissensions which distract the
+Union."[6] Surely, when the Abolitionists have so long made Mr. Webster
+their polar star in all constitutional questions, and have incurred with
+him the accusation of tossing squibs and firebrands, and of opposing
+measures which tended to quiet the country and settle sectional
+dissensions, they had a right to expect from his friends a larger share
+of compassion and forbearance than they have experienced.
+
+[6] Speech, June 8, 1836.
+
+It would seem, Sir, that, in the late treaty of peace between the North
+and the South, it has been agreed and understood, that every power
+granted by the Constitution, whereby slavery can be protected, extended,
+and perpetuated, is to be actively enforced; and that every power which
+might be used for curtailing human bondage, however unquestionable may
+be its grant, shall for ever remain dormant, under the penalty of an
+immediate dissolution of the Union. This, Sir, is the treaty which our
+commercial cities are glorifying; this is the treaty which has turned
+our "winter of discontent" into "glorious summer." And think you, Sir,
+that the slaveholders, having eyes, see not, and having understandings,
+perceive not, the haberdashery patriotism which rejoices in such a
+treaty, and denounces as "fanatics," "vipers," and "woolly-headed
+philanthropists," all who do not confess it to be a glorious
+consummation? The Southern papers tell us that our Union meetings are
+got up to "sell a little more tape and flannel"; and they remark, "It is
+very queer that Union meetings are held only in places which trade with
+the South." Out of regard to their Southern brethren, a member of the
+British House of Commons was insulted in Faneuil Hall by a portion of
+the Boston people, and forthwith the _New Orleans Delta_, instead of
+gratefully acknowledging the compliment, remarks, that their "good
+Union-loving friends in Boston are now solacing the South with
+sugar-plums in the shape of resolutions and speeches, and spice in the
+form of a row, got up on the occasion of the first appearance of George
+Thompson, an imported incendiary and hireling agitator. Such
+manifestation possesses an advantage which doubtless constitutes no
+small recommendation with our good brethren of Boston,--it is very
+cheap. The _cottoncratical_ clerks and warehousemen may raise a hubbub
+in Faneuil Hall, but the fanatics can slay them at the _polls_."
+
+It is some consolation to those who are now suffering all the contempt
+and opprobrium which can be thrown both upon their heads and their
+hearts, because they have refused to follow Mr. Webster in the devious
+paths in which it has lately been his pleasure to walk, that they have
+by their constancy and firmness extorted from their Southern antagonists
+a tribute which is not paid to their revilers. Said Mr. Stanley, of
+Virginia, in his speech in the House of Representatives last March,
+speaking of a certain class of Northern politicians,--"I would say, with
+a slight alteration of one of Canning's verses,--
+
+    'Give me the avowed, erect, and manly foe,
+    Open I can meet, perhaps may turn, his blow;
+    But of all the plagues, great Heaven, thy wrath can send,
+    Save, O, save me from a _dough-face friend_!'"
+
+In closing this long letter, permit me to advert to the opinion
+expressed abroad of your Fugitive Law. Mr. Webster thought it convenient
+to quote the sentiment of a nameless correspondent, as to the
+mischievous mixture of religion with politics. Possibly the opinion of
+Dr. Lushington, one of the Lords of the Privy Council, Judge of the
+Vice-Admiralty Court, and the negotiator, on the part of Great Britain,
+of a recent treaty with France, may be entitled to at least equal
+weight. This gentleman, in a private letter to an English friend, and
+not intended for publication, thus speaks of your law:--"No one can feel
+more sincerely than myself, abhorrence of the Fugitive Slave Bill,--a
+measure as cruel and unchristian as ever disgraced any country." An
+Irish liberal, writing from Dublin, says,--"I long looked to your
+country as the ark of the world's liberties. I confess I hope for this
+no longer. The Fugitive Slave Bill is a shocking sample of the depravity
+of public sentiment in the United States. So atrocious a measure could
+not have passed into a law, if the majority of the people had not
+actively assented, or passively consented. Here, by the preponderating
+influence of our aristocracy, a small, but compact body, measures are
+often carried into laws that are very distasteful to multitudes; but
+such a mean, vile law as the Fugitive Slave Bill could not pass in
+England."
+
+The English press, Whig, Tory, and Radical, is indignant at the
+atrocities of your law. The taunt of our slaveholders, that the English
+had better reform abuses at home, is thus met by a radical journal (_The
+People_):--"The Americans laugh at us when we speak of American slavery,
+so long as so many of our fellow-subjects in England and Ireland are
+perishing from starvation through monarchical and aristocratical
+tyranny. We answer, that the Americans _know_ that the men and women who
+lift up their voices against American slavery are the enemies of British
+tyranny and oppression."
+
+Your law, Sir, degrades the national character abroad; its excessive
+servility to Southern dictation excites the contempt of the slaveholders
+for the easy, selfish virtue of their Northern auxiliaries, while its
+outrages upon religion, justice, humanity, and the dearest principles of
+personal freedom, under pretence of preserving the Union, weaken the
+attachment of conscientious men for a confederacy which requires such
+horrible sacrifices for its continuance. All these evils might have been
+easily avoided by a law satisfying every requirement of the
+Constitution, and yet treating the alleged fugitive as a MAN, and
+granting him the same protection as is accorded to an alleged murderer.
+God gave you, Sir, an opportunity for which you ought to have been
+grateful, of illustrating your Puritan descent by standing forth before
+the nation as an advocate of justice and freedom, and of the rights of
+the poor and oppressed. Through a blind devotion to a political leader,
+you rejected the palm which Providence tendered to your acceptance, and
+have indelibly associated your name with cruelty and injustice. Had you
+retired from the notice of the public, as you did from the suffrages of
+the electors, you had acted wisely. In an evil hour for yourself, you
+stood forth as the champion of the Fugitive Slave Law. Its enemies
+rejoice in your rashness, for your feeble apology has rendered its
+deformities more prominent, and, by failing to vindicate, you have
+virtually confessed its abominations. May you live, Sir, to deplore the
+grievous error you have committed, and, by your future efforts in behalf
+of human freedom and happiness, atone for the wound they have received
+at your hands.
+
+HANCOCK.
+
+February, 1851.
+
+
+
+
+
+End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of A Letter to the Hon. Samuel Eliot,
+Representative in Congress From the City of Boston, In Reply to His Apology For Voting For the Fugitive Slave Bill., by Hancock
+
+*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK LETTER TO HON. SAMUEL ELIOT ***
+
+***** This file should be named 31191.txt or 31191.zip *****
+This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
+        https://www.gutenberg.org/3/1/1/9/31191/
+
+Produced by Meredith Bach, Odessa Paige Turner and the
+Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net
+(This book was produced from scanned images of public
+domain material from the Google Print project.)
+
+
+Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
+will be renamed.
+
+Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
+one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
+(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
+permission and without paying copyright royalties.  Special rules,
+set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
+copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
+protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark.  Project
+Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
+charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission.  If you
+do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
+rules is very easy.  You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
+such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
+research.  They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
+practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks.  Redistribution is
+subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
+redistribution.
+
+
+
+*** START: FULL LICENSE ***
+
+THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
+PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
+
+To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
+distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
+(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
+https://gutenberg.org/license).
+
+
+Section 1.  General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works
+
+1.A.  By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
+and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
+(trademark/copyright) agreement.  If you do not agree to abide by all
+the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
+all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
+If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
+terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
+entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
+
+1.B.  "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark.  It may only be
+used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
+agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.  There are a few
+things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.  See
+paragraph 1.C below.  There are a lot of things you can do with Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
+and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.  See paragraph 1.E below.
+
+1.C.  The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
+or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works.  Nearly all the individual works in the
+collection are in the public domain in the United States.  If an
+individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
+located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
+copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
+works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
+are removed.  Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
+Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
+freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
+this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
+the work.  You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
+keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.
+
+1.D.  The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
+what you can do with this work.  Copyright laws in most countries are in
+a constant state of change.  If you are outside the United States, check
+the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
+before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
+creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
+Gutenberg-tm work.  The Foundation makes no representations concerning
+the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
+States.
+
+1.E.  Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
+
+1.E.1.  The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
+access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
+whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
+phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
+copied or distributed:
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+1.E.2.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
+from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
+posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
+and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
+or charges.  If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
+with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
+work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
+through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
+Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
+1.E.9.
+
+1.E.3.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
+with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
+must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
+terms imposed by the copyright holder.  Additional terms will be linked
+to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
+permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
+
+1.E.4.  Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
+work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
+
+1.E.5.  Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
+electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
+prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
+active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm License.
+
+1.E.6.  You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
+compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
+word processing or hypertext form.  However, if you provide access to or
+distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
+"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
+posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
+you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
+copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
+request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
+form.  Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
+
+1.E.7.  Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
+performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
+unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+1.E.8.  You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
+access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
+that
+
+- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
+     the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
+     you already use to calculate your applicable taxes.  The fee is
+     owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
+     has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
+     Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.  Royalty payments
+     must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
+     prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
+     returns.  Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
+     sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
+     address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
+     the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
+
+- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
+     you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
+     does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+     License.  You must require such a user to return or
+     destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
+     and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
+     Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
+     money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
+     electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
+     of receipt of the work.
+
+- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
+     distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+1.E.9.  If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
+forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
+both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
+Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark.  Contact the
+Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
+
+1.F.
+
+1.F.1.  Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
+effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
+public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
+collection.  Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
+"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
+corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
+property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
+computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
+your equipment.
+
+1.F.2.  LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
+of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
+liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
+fees.  YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
+LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
+PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3.  YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
+TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
+LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
+INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
+DAMAGE.
+
+1.F.3.  LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
+defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
+receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
+written explanation to the person you received the work from.  If you
+received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
+your written explanation.  The person or entity that provided you with
+the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
+refund.  If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
+providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
+receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.  If the second copy
+is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
+opportunities to fix the problem.
+
+1.F.4.  Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
+in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
+WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
+
+1.F.5.  Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
+warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
+If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
+law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
+interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
+the applicable state law.  The invalidity or unenforceability of any
+provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
+
+1.F.6.  INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
+trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
+providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
+with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
+promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
+harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
+that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
+or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
+work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
+Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
+
+
+Section  2.  Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
+electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
+including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.  It exists
+because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
+people in all walks of life.
+
+Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
+assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
+goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
+remain freely available for generations to come.  In 2001, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
+and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
+To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
+and the Foundation web page at https://www.pglaf.org.
+
+
+Section 3.  Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
+Foundation
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
+501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
+state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
+Revenue Service.  The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
+number is 64-6221541.  Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
+https://pglaf.org/fundraising.  Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
+permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
+
+The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
+Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
+throughout numerous locations.  Its business office is located at
+809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
+business@pglaf.org.  Email contact links and up to date contact
+information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
+page at https://pglaf.org
+
+For additional contact information:
+     Dr. Gregory B. Newby
+     Chief Executive and Director
+     gbnewby@pglaf.org
+
+
+Section 4.  Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
+spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
+increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
+freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
+array of equipment including outdated equipment.  Many small donations
+($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
+status with the IRS.
+
+The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
+charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
+States.  Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
+considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
+with these requirements.  We do not solicit donations in locations
+where we have not received written confirmation of compliance.  To
+SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
+particular state visit https://pglaf.org
+
+While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
+have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
+against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
+approach us with offers to donate.
+
+International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
+any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
+outside the United States.  U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
+
+Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
+methods and addresses.  Donations are accepted in a number of other
+ways including including checks, online payments and credit card
+donations.  To donate, please visit: https://pglaf.org/donate
+
+
+Section 5.  General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.
+
+Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
+concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
+with anyone.  For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
+Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
+
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
+editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
+unless a copyright notice is included.  Thus, we do not necessarily
+keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
+
+
+Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
+
+     https://www.gutenberg.org
+
+This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
+including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
+subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
diff --git a/31191.zip b/31191.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..070f7a1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/31191.zip
diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6312041
--- /dev/null
+++ b/LICENSE.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements,
+metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be
+in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES.
+
+Procedures for determining public domain status are described in
+the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org.
+
+No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in
+jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize
+this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright
+status under the laws that apply to them.
diff --git a/README.md b/README.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..9447e25
--- /dev/null
+++ b/README.md
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
+Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for
+eBook #31191 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/31191)