The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1850-12-17


may Il ssS Ss ss
IN s ~h is ao not Sspa even
this hour Of d.lnsss The people are waking nP % this
Geo .ia. e ~, rssss...s s;Pss.ly rely upon the e.
sasae, q iAs rx,oas pss, ~ ih,s i.t which sm pap
sony 10 Know ,hsi there ss come sncspoos 70 ibis general
reckon he great ~ Of The asSod Ep.oops
Chusch." f88
The object Of this writer is perfectly obvious Itisto
create the belief that the fugtive-slsve law s po
lica trick subserve the selfish ends OF dishouest poll
tcians and that the religious organs and the religious po
tons OF the community should unite TO repeal Or defeat
its operation. Never was blind ianatacsm more mis-
taken That law the offspring Of Necessity 1t Is
dictated by the constitution itsef il is the very touch
of the Union and whoever openly covery seeks
to nuiy subver is doing what in him lies to de-
sIoy the Union. He may profess the plausible motive
OF conscience religious duty, the higher law. to excuse
his but he engaged the work OF treason. call it
by what pharisacal name he will.
In the Advocate Of the 18th OF November. the editor
writes in the following strain "
Christianity docs no, require her votarie, to obey laws
that conflict with Gods law She does alow her
the peril q death in is ish.fa TOMS, 40.
dates are directly opposed to Gods word But she
s he 1 "si ss
may pass BY UNDECIDED bS, he must Dc Prssn,sd os al
ure Christ let him die at the Stake as did the martyr bat
Resistance is not only unchrstsn bu, in democratic
country wholly unwse 1.-THE majority are dissatisfied
inv are satisfied il Is ia vain for the minority to resist Lot
opinion and expression be free let any enactment be RI
s sad anS sa ha aso the
the minority submit, whether with or without personal
injury .a.
earnestly counsel pladsaos and Above
The system which they oppose Is one OF mlgnI sgahu
psead d sS eens. ana light Every Viola
ton Of right weakens their caase, and will tighten the let
The Christian, however. needs no counsel from srpsa
him M tao Of God dear and In psTasiD.. e =
well doing he is to commit his cause into the hands Of Him
aas " h hs' use nj
change odious features OF exceptonabe laws ct him
speak freely by Che tongue the press or 'Ae oa'eas'Sat
There is an odor OF sancti,y about this paragraph
which might almost deceive the very elect" II 10
worse in its influence than the open and abhoent doc
trines Of those wolves in Sleeps clothing who coun-
sci to direct violence Do not resist says the author
But Gods law fobids obedience to human laws-to hs
human law Die rather than yield Oppose it BY speak
ing writing, printing, in the Of conscience and re-
gon but do not resist! This is very ingenious mode
Of defeating law by not resisting it. Suppose fugitive
slave applies for relief and conceament from his mas
ter suppose the officer be resisted by violencs unto
death in executing the law what then Suppose the ed
tor OF the Advocate hear disposed persons advg the
reckless and the dsordery-who have such scrupes
he appeals toto evade the fugtvesave law, and to
defeat its operation: what then In all these cases.
what would he advise what would he do Do notre-
sst But the law is odioust is forbidden by the law OF
God to obey it. Die rather than dosohe higher law com
mands you obey it, but do not resist Such would be the
course Of the wriier-such would be his advice He
would not inculcae resistance to the law, but mere r
fcation The result is the same as would be produced
BY downright violence The law is defeated in both
We confess Of the two methods we think Mat by .
" strong hand" is the most manly and creditable.
The editor in his paper Of the Goth November. in
very elaborate review Of article written by the editor
Of the Indiana State Sentinel. among other things,
marks
al He admit. jury trial is denied where tho alleged
the ta make any prorision for trial sny0he Tho Sent-
he fed Blu, suppose he did no, dee .uppOs. 10
free born and raised Al the Noh what good viii the
bis friends. and under the lash q Be-. why
deny jury trial Is il secured where lew dollars arc a
value Of n one Ss.ana dollars Why then, nor sys a
The Sentinel tina, the ~ requires that The d
hat free man is TO- be delivered up yAc .1sl d.sia
s vasss ne ". ne: a % A. s. The
Sentinel and this law say, Petty ten dollar nefsrais
TO the delivery Of fugitive ju.oe But This impornnt
fact Is overlooked the fugitive from justice 10 kept In the
hands OF the law Till indicted by grand jury and tried
by petit Jury But the alleged Fugitive from slavery Il dig
cred tie hands of rssyonsib consasf, ph0 pt
hins handcsGs harry ham the ~earsst savs Gyk for
sale II the alleged fugitive were kept In the HANGS Of the
law till Jury, thar Jury hundreds OF miles from
his home and his friends, could sic upon his The i'm
stances would be nearly parallel Henry Clay did
propose that the claimant should give bond TO allow him
Jury trial. but the proposition met with but htle avor
This paragraph states the objection to the fugitvesave
law as fairly and as strongly have seen II stated.
on the ground Of not providing jury trial for parsons
claimed as fugitves under il. This is no doubt the
mos, vulnerable portion Of the law. in the general opinion
OF the North and we will in few words explain the
legal point and put it rest Trial by jury is certainly
the greatest bulwak OF personal freedom that the wis.
dom OF man has ever devised and hence it is viewed
with sort Of jealous veneraton by every man OF Anglo
Saxon blood. II is proud and noble institution, and
never can perish be restricted while men know their
rights and, knowing dare maintain them" But this is
not the question before Il is, why did not the fug
tive slave law provide jury trial for the alleged fug
tive either where he foundo in the State to which
he was to be removedi Those who ask this question
only betray their own ignorance. Let us suggest few
considerations which they seem never to have Known
When the federal constitution formed, each State
was perfectly free and independent OF each other, in