Green-Mountain freeman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1844-1884, 1844-03-23
The Union still in Danger!

"Abolitlon Nu!lification,' and replies to our artl-
Gle of week before last with a zeal and clamor e..
qualled only by that of a certain people of old
when their 'craft was in danger"
The Waterman quotes the whole of the pre-
umble and resolution of the Liberty Convention,
and adds:
'tAnd now, to Illustrate the force of these rGsO-
lutions, let the reader apply them to 1VGr, which is
not only the legulized robbery of mems civil and
natural rights, but ~legalized murder; to Sunday
mails, which, in the judgment of Christians, are
violations of the law ofGodj or indeed to the lChOle
Constitution, on the ground that it is an imperfect
human institution, not based upon the divine law,
and in all its operations admits of every sort of sir
in the citizens Of the government"
Does the Constitution require Congress to de-
clare war and commit murder, or run the mails
on the Sabbath-or does it only give them the potc-
er to do it when the people call tor II? Can they
not be dispensed with without any alteration Of the
Constitution? But the surrendry clause of the
Constitution, as interpreted by the Supreme Court,
makes it obligatory upon US to give up fugitive
slaves.
Again we quote from the Watchman:
"Let US now say, that the Freeman urges, first,
that it is only a false construction of the Constitu-
ton which the Liberty party annuls. Unfortunate
ly it happens that the Supreme Court of the Uni
ted States has decided differently; and thus aboll-
ton Notification is precise ly like South Carolina
Notification"
A great Improvement this, Mr.. Waterman, up
ION your first edition. In that you said, "the Lib
erty Party, so called, adopts a doctrine of Nullif-
cation more dangerous than that of Mr.. Calhoun. .
Now you say, "aboli.tion Notification is precisely
like South Carolina Notification! p At this rate
you will soon be in the Liberty ranks: but before
you get there, we hope you will improve your
memory, SO as not to contradict yourself quite SC
soon.
"But in the second place, the Freeman claims
that this clause Of the Constitution is not morally
binding, nor even legally binding by the common
law, (because immoral, and expresses a great
deal of pious horror that p~rofessed christians will
not so regard it. The Supreme Court has decided
that it is legally binding, when properly executed
by Congress, and from that there is no appeal
Admit the positions of the Freeman, if you please
then these are good reasons for amending the con-
stitution, and good reasons to Justify a citizens
conduct to his. own conscience, ifhe shall disregard
this clause in the Constitution. They cannot jus.
tify Notification in a party or a State, as lega
act, for there is but one legal way of altering the
Constitution-tha is by amendment"
We asked the Watchman if he would call upol
n moral and christian community to condemn II
if, admitting the Constitution requires us to return
fugitive slaves, (Which we deny) we should de
clare such clause to be null and void, on the groun,
Of its inherent immortality? And we repeat tn
questionable not all writers on moral and interna
tional law declare, that a promise to commit
crime, even if sanctioned by the most solemn oath
is not binding; that the sin is not in breaking, Blu
in keeping such Il promise? The Waterman ad
mlts that this "may be a good reason to Justify
citizens conduct to his own conscience, if he sha
disregard this clause in the Constitution" Thi
is what we do-what was done by n thousand eli
liens Of the United States at the Buffalo Conver
tion;-resolved that the immortality of this clause
or this false construction, r~ather-made it bindin
upon them to disregard ito consider it a nulIity
Where is the mighty difference between an ind.
yidual refusing to obey this clause, on the groun
of its immortality, (Which the Watchman ~justifies
and a thousand individuals, or a party doing SO
Do not Liberty men expect to endure the pena
ties which our unrighteous laws may infict fc
their course? Do they resort to force to avoid tn
penalties of the infamous kidnapping law of 9S?-
Has not John Van Zandt of Ohio been stript {
his property and imprisoned, because he befriend
ed a few ~fugitives from slavery? Aud what cours
do his liberty friends pursue? Why, they ar
contributing throughout the country to bind u
his wounds, just as the good Samaritan ministere
to the wants of him who fell among thieves.
How often have the sons of Vermont gloried
the decision of Judge Harrington, that a bill
sale from God Almighty must precede the surrel
dry of a fugitive slave? This is just the groun
occupied by the Liberty Party. This same pos
ton was. taken repeatedly at Convention in Ma
sachusetts, made up irrespective of party, durir
the Latimer agitation last year, and no one ev,
thought of dissolving the Union.
One question to the Watchman-Would ~
surrender a fugitive staUe? No, you answer-aI
still believe the Constitution provides for SUI
surrendry. The men composing the Buffalo Co
vention said they would not, believing that Il
Constitution did not enjoin it upon them. He
is the difference. The Liberty men were hone
and humane enough to say it, and now the Viii
are endeavoring to make capital out oft
"FinaIIy, the Freeman boldly claims that t
Wings Of VermOnt-the Legislature of Vermont
has M the very deed which we charge u
on the Liberty party, and m it by a ST.
ute Of pains and penalties. Bravo! Hurrah
the Wings, then-why don't you? What nee