New-York daily tribune., 1843-12-26
Political Abolition.

Political Abolition.
We publish on cur Last Page letter from
an Aboltionst,' based on the recent letter to US
from CAssIus M. CLAY. We have little room for
comment, nor do we think much needed In so
far as the writer objects or is astonished that Mr..
Clay and The Tribune, regarding Slavery an
evil, do not see fit to adopt and prescribe the
remedies for that evil proposed by his party, we
do not care to say any thing. We pursue that
course which we deem just, consderate and et-
fective, but we do not quarrel with the Aboltonsts
that they pursue very different one Let them be
faithful to their own convictions, but at the same
time be careful that their zeal oes not oyerruIc
their wisdom and far surpass their knowledge.
But with the Law logic SO toilsonely fabri-
Gated By our correspondent we have a very short
method. No man, he argues in substance, can
be bound by law to do, aid in, or consent to that
which Is morally wrong, and Of thts he is to be
his o,rn Judge Very we'll; the Quakera think IT
wrong to bear arms OF pay fine for refu,ing so
Csvsrnmert must net nors.raln them. Many
(as we do) believe the taking 11urnan Lille Tor
crime, bloody, brutal and mischievous let them
bring the murderer in Not Guilty or refuse to act
as jurors. Others, agaill-and their number is
by no means lnconsiderable-inss that all Hu-
man Government Is usurpatlon and wlckedness,
yet we make them pay taxes. 1t is a point OF
conscience with them not to pay taxes; we
know at least one who has been sent to jail be.
cause ne could not pay conscientiously. What
then Must Government defer to every mans
opinion Must it shrink out of the way when
ever an individual opinion crosses It's path
Above all-and here is the point raised by the
Abolitlonlsts-sha my assumption that the Gov.
eminent IS morally wrong in enc of its reouisi.
IONS justify me IN swearing to obey that Govern.
nent, IN order to obtain coveted post, and then
proceeding to disobey ii !? Il there be any solid
ground to stand upon III disobeying the requisi-
tons OF Government, is 1t not clearly that Of
those who refuse to vote / may say, I do not
recognize the night of ether men to bind he by
human laws-I will not be ruled By them - bu,
how can l take the oath to obey and preserve
lnviola.e the Constitution Of the United States,
and yet mentally purpose to disobey and violate
one of the most important stipulauons OF that
instrument, without which the Constitution would
probably have never been framed, or never
adopted What right have to pick and choose
which of its provisions ] will obey and which
disobey7 How could James g. Brney, for NJ
stance, take as President the oath to support the
Constitution, all the while intending not TO sup
port but to subvert certain parts OF it? Would
not this be perjury1 Would not every unper-
verted mind say to him. Sir, you should not have
accepted the Office if you deemed the oath so
wrongful. You might easily have refused it
And would MIR, Birney be any more cupable in
taking the oath to support the whole Constitution,
meaning all the while to subvert part Of il.
than could those ,cho By their rotes so!emnly IN
structed and directed Kim to do so +? in our
judgement, all who vote to make Mr.. Birney an
Abolition President vote to instruct him 10 com
NIT perjury, and are themselves guilty tunwit.
tingly) of suborna,ion OF perjury, just as much
as if their purpose were consummated Such
are our views stated at half the length Of our
correspondents. AS nothing new, has been ad
vanced on either side, we trust we may here
terminate the controversy.