With every attempt to administer the Slave Act, it constantly becomes

more revolting, particularly in its influence on the agents it enlists.

Pitch cannot be touched without defilement, and all who lend themselves

to this work seem at once and unconsciously to lose the better part of

man. The spirit of the law passes into them, as the devils entered the

swine. Upstart commissioners, mere mushrooms of courts, vie and revie

with each other. Now by indecent speed, now by harshness of manner, now

by denial of evidence, now by crippling the defense, and now by open,

glaring wrong they make the odious Act yet more odious. Clemency, grace,

and justice die in its presence. All this is observed by the world. Not

a case occurs which does not harrow the souls of good men, and bring

tears of sympathy to the eyes, and those nobler tears which "patriots

shed o'er dying laws."

Sir, I shall speak frankly. If there be an exception to this feeling,

it will be found chiefly with a peculiar class. It is a sorry fact, that

the "mercantile interest," in unpardonable selfishness, twice in English

history, frowned upon endeavors to suppress the atrocity of Algerine

Slavery, that it sought to baffle Wilberforce's great effort for the

abolition of the African slave-trade, and that, by a sordid compromise,

at the formation of our Constitution, it exempted the same detested,

Heaven-defying traffic from American judgment. And now representatives

of this "interest," forgetful that Commerce is born of Freedom, join in

hunting the Slave. But the great heart of the people recoils from this

enactment. It palpitates for the fugitive, and rejoices in his escape.

Sir, I am telling you facts. The literature of the age is all on his

side. Songs, more potent than laws, are for him. Poets, with voices of

melody, sing for Freedom. Who could tune for Slavery? They who make

the permanent opinion of the country, who mould our youth,whose words,

dropped into the soul, are the germs of character, supplicate for the

Slave. And now, Sir, behold a new and heavenly ally. A woman, inspired

by Christian genius, enters the lists, like another Joan of Arc, and

with marvellous power sweeps the popular heart. Now melting to tears,

and now inspiring to rage, her work everywhere touches the conscience,

and makes the Slave-Hunter more hateful. In a brief period, nearly

one hundred thousand copies of Uncle Tom's Cabin have been already

circulated. But this extraordinary and sudden success, surpassing all

other instances in the records of literature, cannot be regarded as but

the triumph of genius. Better far, it is the testimony of the people, by

an unprecedented act, against the Fugitive Slave Bill.

These things I dwell upon as incentives and tokens of an existing public

sentiment, rendering this Act practically inoperative, except as a

tremendous engine of horror. Sir, the sentiment is just. Even in the

lands of Slavery, the slave-trader is loathed as an ignoble character,

from whom the countenance is turned away; and can the Slave-Hunter be

more regarded, while pursuing his prey in a land of Freedom? In early

Europe, in barbarous days, while Slavery prevailed, a Hunting Master

was held in aversion. Nor was this all. The fugitive was welcomed in the

cities, and protected against pursuit. Sometimes vengeance awaited

the Hunter. Down to this day, at Revel, now a Russian city, a sword

is proudly preserved with which a hunting Baron was beheaded, who, in

violation of the municipal rights of the place, seized a fugitive slave.

Hostile to this Act as our public sentiment may be, it exhibits no

similar trophy. The State laws of Massachusetts have been violated in

the seizure of a fugitive slave; but no sword, like that of Revel, now

hangs at Boston.

And now, Sir, let us review the field over which we have passed. We

have seen that any compromise, finally closing the discussion of Slavery

under the Constitution, is tyrannical, absurd, and impotent; that, as

Slavery can exist only by virtue of positive law, and as it has no

such positive support in the Constitution, it cannot exist within the

national jurisdiction; that the Constitution nowhere recognizes property

in man, and that, according to its true interpretation, Freedom and not

Slavery is national, while Slavery and not Freedom is sectional;that

in this spirit the National Government was first organized under

Washington, himself an Abolitionist, surrounded by Abolitionists, while

the whole country, by its Church, its Colleges, its Literature, and all

its best voices, was united against Slavery, and the national flag at

that time nowhere within the National Territory covered a single slave;

still further, that the National Government is a government of delegated

powers, and, as among these there is no power to support Slavery, this

institution cannot be national, nor can Congress in any way legislate

in its behalf; and, finally, that the establishment of this principle is

the true way of peace and safety for the Republic. Considering next the

provision for the surrender of fugitives from service, we have seen that

it was not one of the original compromises of the Constitution; that

it was introduced tardily and with hesitation, and adopted with little

discussion, while then and for a long period thereafter it was regarded

with comparative indifference; that the recent Slave Act, though many

times unconstitutional, is especially so on two grounds, first, as a

usurpation by Congress of powers not granted by the Constitution, and an

infraction of rights secured to the States, and, secondly, as the denial

of Trial by Jury, in a question of personal liberty and a suit at Common

Law; that its glaring unconstitutionality finds a prototype in the

British Stamp Act, which our fathers refused to obey as unconstitutional

on two parallel grounds,--first, because it was a usurpation by

Parliament of powers not belonging to it under the British Constitution,

and an infraction of rights belonging to the Colonies, and, secondly,

because it was the denial of Trial by Jury in certain cases of property;

that, as Liberty is far above property, so is the outrage perpetrated

by the American Congress far above that perpetrated by the British

Parliament; and, finally, that the Slave Act has not that support, in

the public sentiment of the States where it is to be executed, which is

the life of all law, and which prudence and the precept of Washington

require.

* * * * *

Mr. President, I have occupied much time; but the great subject still

stretches before us. One other point yet remains, which I must not leave

untouched, and which justly belongs to the close. The Slave Act violates

the Constitution, and shocks the Public Conscience. With modesty, and

yet with firmness, let me add, Sir,it offends against the Divine Law.

No such enactment is entitled to support. As the throne of God is above

every earthly throne, so are his laws and statutes above all the laws

and statutes of man. To question these is to question God himself. But

to assume that human laws are beyond question is to claim for their

fallible authors infallibility. To assume that they are always in

conformity with the laws of God is presumptuously and impiously to exalt

man even to equality with God. Clearly, human laws are not always

in such conformity; nor can they ever be beyond question from each

individual. Where the conflict is open, as if Congress should command

the perpetration of murder, the office of conscience as final arbiter is

undisputed. But in every conflict the same queenly office is hers. By

no earthly power can she be dethroned. Each person, after anxious

examination, without haste, without passion, solemnly for himself must

decide this great controversy. Any other rule attributes infallibility

to human laws, places them beyond question, and degrades all men to an

unthinking, passive obedience.

* * * * *

The mandates of an earthly power are to be discussed; those of Heaven

must at once be performed; nor should we suffer ourselves to be drawn

by any compact into opposition to God. Such is the rule of morals.

Such, also, by the lips of judges and sages, is the proud declaration

of English law, whence our own is derived. In this conviction, patriots

have braved unjust commands, and martyrs have died.

And now, sir, the rule is commended to us. The good citizen, who sees

before him the shivering fugitive, guilty of no crime, pursued, hunted

down like a beast, while praying for Christian help and deliverance, and

then reads the requirements of this Act, is filled with horror. Here

is a despotic mandate "to aid and assist in the prompt and efficient

execution of this law." Again let me speak frankly. Not rashly would I

set myself against any requirement of law. This grave responsibility

I would not lightly assume. But here the path of duty is clear. By the

Supreme Law, which commands me to do no injustice, by the comprehensive

Christian Law of Brotherhood, by the Constitution, which I have sworn to

support, I AM BOUND TO DISOBEY THIS ACT. Never, in any capacity, can

I render voluntary aid in its execution. Pains and penalties I will

endure, but this great wrong, I will not do. "Where I cannot obey

actively, there I am willing to lie down and to suffer what they shall

do unto me"; such was the exclamation of him to whom we are indebted for

the Pilgrim's Progress while in prison for disobedience to an earthly

statute. Better suffer injustice than do it. Better victim than

instrument of wrong. Better even the poor slave returned to bondage than

the wretched Commissioner.

There is, sir, an incident of history which suggests a parallel, and

affords a lesson of fidelity. Under the triumphant exertions of that

Apostolic Jesuit, St. Francis Xavier, large numbers of Japanese,

amounting to as many as two hundred thousand,--among them princes,

generals, and the flower of the nobility,--were converted to

Christianity. Afterwards, amidst the frenzy of civil war, religious

persecution arose, and the penalty of death was denounced against all

who refused to trample upon the effigy of the Redeemer. This was the

Pagan law of a Pagan land. But the delighted historian records, that

from the multitude of converts scarcely one was guilty of this apostasy.

The law of man was set at naught. Imprisonment, torture, death, were

preferred. Thus did this people refuse to trample on the painted image.

Sir, multitudes among us will not be less steadfast in refusing to

trample on the living image of their Redeemer.

Finally, Sir, for the sake of peace and tranquility, cease to shock the

Public Conscience; for the sake of the Constitution, cease to exercise

a power nowhere granted, and which violates inviolable rights expressly

secured. Leave this question where it was left by our fathers, at the

formation of our National Government,--in the absolute control of

the States, the appointed guardians of Personal Liberty. Repeal this

enactment. Let its terrors no longer rage through the land. Mindful

of the lowly whom it pursues, mindful of the good men perplexed by its

requirements, in the name of Charity, in the name of the Constitution,

repeal this enactment, totally and without delay. There is the example

of Washington, follow it. There also are words of Oriental piety,

most touching and full of warning, which speak to all mankind, and now

especially to us: "Beware of the groans of wounded souls, since the

inward sore will at length break out. Oppress not to the utmost a single

heart; for a solitary sigh has power to overturn a whole world."

End of Project Gutenberg's American Eloquence, Volume II. (of 4), by Various

American Eloquence, Volume 2 Studies In American Political History (1896) · 第 16 / 16 段