The southern press. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1850-1852, 1851-12-11


ton or disqualification it may deem expedient,
by an alteration of the organic law, through an
appeal to the people.
| | merely state these facts, to show that the
Declaration of Independence was not at the
time, and has not since been, considered by any
rejecting man as an assertion OF individual
rights but of national Independence, founded on
the principles which it lays down. That cele-
braied instrument asserts NOTHING, in fact and
intention, but the right of any people to choose
their own governments. Accordingly, the peo-
Pile die choose their own government, by adopt
ing Con stitution which does not recognize the
doctrine that all men are created equal. They
had right to do so on the principle also as
serted in the very same declaration, as directly
derived from this very doctrine that all men are
created equal, and which assumes that il is the
right of the people to institute new govern
ment, laying its foundation on such principles,
and organizing its powers in such FORMS as to
them shall seem most likely to effect their safe
ty and happiness" Will any one presume to
say after this that the people of the United
States, when about to adopt the Constitution,
had not clear right to do as they thought
proper without the slightest regard to any pre-
vious declaration 1t is not for moment to be
presumed that the deputies representing the
Southern States in the Congress of the old con-
federation, would have assented to principle
which, in its practical application, would divest
IL IS h. ,,o1, Of tbair
property, and, at the same time, endanger their
safety. They were thinking of national indie
pendence. This idea of equality, as well as that
of republic, was an after thought.
But this adroit substitution of the Declaration
of Independence in place of the Constitution, is
comparatively trfle, compared with other prin-
cipes on which the Abolitionists have based
their opposition to that instrument, and the
rights of property which it guarantees These
are all comprehended in what is called the
higher law" which assumes that all other laws
are nugatory, when coming in competition with
the dictates of conscience. That the law of
God is supreme over all human laws, and that
conscience was intended to be its interpreter no
one, presume, will deny; and yet all must ac-
knowledge that if it is in itself, alone, sufficient
guide and restraint in directing the actions of
men, then it follows that all human laws, all
human institutions, for the protection of person
and property, are perfectly useless, and that all
systems of government are no better than
peevsh, vexatous restraints, without any cor
responding benefits. Thus we are, at one
plunge, brought back to the state Of nature,
where men have no other guides than reason and
conscience.
The naked question then, arising from this
doctrine of the higher law, is which is best; that
is to say. which is most conducive to human
happiness: state of nature, in which every man
other restraint, state of social organic ,tion,
where all are equally restrained by laws, which
they themselves have vountarilyadopted There
is no use in lodging these questions; +" to this
complexion il must come at last" 1t is not
merely whether the slave shall be tmancpated,
but whether the master shall be equally freed
from all restraints but that of conscience. In
such condition of things, every man becomes
his own lawgiver, and his own Judge, and thus
we are brought back to the state Of nature, be-
ing directed by conscience alone.
What would be the consequence Of being d.
rected by conscience alone, is easily to be gath
cred from n reference to the past history of
mankind. When Europe poured its millions of
princes, knights, and vagu bonds into Palestine.
to shed the blood of their fellow-creatures, and
offer up their own, there can be no doubt that
all acted according to the dictates of conscience
When the Albigenses-one of the most pious
and bameless sects since the days of the print
tive risians-were hunted like wild beasts,
and massacred by thousands by the equally
pious devotees of the ruling church, one acted
according to the dictates of conscience in cling
ing to their faith, even in the last hgonies of the
burning pile, while the other obeyed the dictates
of their conscienees in offering up the victims
When thous ands tens of thousands of Hugue-
nots were mnssacred in cold blood, by order of
the King of France, it is equally certain that he
acted in strict accordance with his conscience
and when Louis XIV revoked the Edict of
Nantz, and subjected millions Of his subjects to
p resolution and exile, he too was governed by
his conscience-ihat Is to say, Madame MAMIE
NON, his mistress, and PERE CHASE, his con-
fessor So, too, when JOHN HUss, and JEROME
of Prague, and JOHN RoDGEks, and Bishop LATI-
MER, and Archbishop CRANMER, and many more
were roasted by slow Gre---it was all done
strictly according to the dictates of conscience.
Those who suffered, and those who inflicted the
torture, both acted according TO their sense of
duty to their God. Lastly--for ! could fill a
volume with these llustrations-when the Pu
ritans of New England prosecuted poor Mrs
HUTCHINSON, for believing what neither she or
they could comprehendS and banished ROGER
WILLIAMS for maintaining the doctrine of free
toleration they followed this unerring guide,
and acted according TO their conscences-that
! ia fha % hiohar lou "