Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1844-03-29
ABOLITION MULTIPLICATION.

The Freeman rejons, and we cheerfully make q
sur -reioinder--and glad that the candor of
the Freeman allows us to do it briefly. One sin
gle admission places Modification in so clear light
that we waive other points. This is the admission
"The surrendery clause of the Constitution, as
interpreted by the Supreme Court, makes it oblga-
tory upon us to give up fugitive slaves"
This, then, is admitted to be the supreme law of
the land according to the decision of the supreme
tribunal; but the third party announces that they
will annul this lawthey will disregard it-they
will require every officer they elect to exclude
this part of the Constitution from his oath? What
is this, but an anti constitutional test what, but
Notification of the Constitution what, if carried
out fully, but treason?
The Freeman cannot escape these consequent
ces, can it escape the conclusion that the Con-
stitution may equally be violated SO far as it touch
es war; sabbath mails, and every other sin. 1t en-.
deavors to do SO by saying that these sins not
required Sir, are they not at least permited-and
does God hold men guiltess for known permitted
sins? But more under the Constitution, war and
sabbath mails are absolutely required, and these
sins are absolutely committed by the agents Of the
Constitution There is no escape from this.
The Freeman still sees no distinction between
the moral right of an individual to iorbear obedi-
to a sinful law, and the political right Of the same
! individuals to annul such law. None are SO
blind as those who ,UW not see. The individual
man forbear obedience, yet he annuls not the law
he will honor it by suffering the penalty, if one is
enforced, for conscience sake. The asserted po-
lticai right to a,nu does not follow from this but
rather it follows that when this party becomes a
state, and attempts TO enforce its dogma, it will be
treated as traitorous to the Constitution and com
PEELED to submission. Our moral rights come from
God, and he judges us. Our political rights arc
limited by the Constitution, and its tribunals car
and must Judge us in respect to these.
Let the third party have the Legislature If they
do one jot more than the Wings have lawfully
done already, they will forbid the officers of The
r Federal Government in Vermont from executing
the admitted constitutional laws Of Congress. Con
gress will insist on obedience Here comes clasl
perhaps the clash Of arms; aud one or the othe
must submit We are surprised if the Freeman
cannot see this men of ordinary sagacity canno
be so blind. Who would provoke a contest of thi
kind needlessly when without such contest ever
2 individual may refrain from violating his con
s science? No man is yet compelled to take an OF
f fee from the Federal Government which woul
: carry with it the necessity of arresting fugitiv
r. slave The error of the third party is, that
! wants the Offices, and at the same time refuse
v to do the duties of the Office.
Il The Freeman says it has quit the Wings "be
+, cause of their everlasting duplicity and hypocrs
upon this very subject of slavery" A good reG
son-J true. To your proofs; go to the statut
book 90 to the journals of Congress, and tell L
what your party can constitutionally do more tina
VIC w my parry HdS uohc vi 10 lS"uy W uO' ~
!, notorious sir, that the Wings of Vermont hay
" always assumed and maintained the highest col
e stitutonal ground on this subject-and yOu, 81
show it in this very discussion. Go to, with yol
!! base charges, prove them Have you been
It. miserable hypocrite ever since you were in I'll
re Wing ranks?
N In connexion with this the freeman insnuatt
g. that sell our principles for bread, and grudge
y poor fellow even a nibbo of treasury pap which
r says we have long lived on We cheerfully Al
o. knowledge the pap but we demand of the Free
N man to specify single departure from principle
IN from rectitude to obtain it The man has been f
lie miliar with us--he ought to knowhe does kno
whether in respect to himself when he establishC
himself as Wing editor, and in his late office,
were iiberal and we insist that if he can spec
m dereliction or an instance Of illiberality, he
OF now bound to do it. Our hit we acknowledge
ne be hard, and undignifed; but it smacked not
C. slanderous Injustice.