Anti-slavery bugle. [volume] (New-Lisbon, Ohio) 1845-1861, 1854-07-15
PLAN.

anti-slarcfy party in this country. Shareholders
will always have the advantage and profit by it,
until our political action is "suJstdntiaty yerota-
tionary". The slaveholding part ofthe constitution,
has gotto be formally abolished, or disre,;arded and
nullifed by state action.
The article Is from the pen Of the Corresponding
Editor of the .tnti-Slayery Standard. 1t furnishes
what quib;n,s have so long called fot "a plan"
ANltSLAvERY Politics.
There seems to have been n very general feeling
Of pleasure among decent men Of all parties at The
North, excluding only. the sordid wretches in each
whose instincts lead them to lick the hand of a
stakeholder, and to fix their flngs in the launches
of n dying slaye-with such exceptions, there an
pears to have been u unanimous satisfaction nj the
way in which Mr.. Sumner defended himself from
the attacks of the manufacturing Senators upon him.
1t was done with becoming spirit, dignity, sclEcom-
mand aud rhetorical force, and was altogether the
most satisfying thing Mr.. Sumner has done yet, as
a public man. His turning the tables upon South
carolina was unanswerable (which MIR. Butler as
good as admitted, and showed the: the Slavchold-
'erS had q monstrous beam to take out of their own
eyes before they had any claim to operate on the
mote In those of Massachusetts,. lie certainly de-
monstrated that where individual citizens of Mas
sachusetts had attempted (alas, in yain!) to make a
small crack il the United States Constitution, South
Carolina and ether Southern States had smashed it
all In pieces, and that by solemn cnactments and
organized political action Massachusetts, TO her
shimo be 1t spoken, has never vet deserved to be
put alongside IF South Carolina and Louisiana in
her maintenance of her State Rights against the
entertainments of the General Government. Ex-
cepting the Rescue of Shadrach and the attempt at
that of Burns 1.-THE only brave and spirited actions
In her history since the Revolution,O she has little
70 boast Of. Her Legislatures, Governors, Judges,
Mayors, Militia-men, all, have done their best to
ward off the abuse that has been hoaped upon her
and certainly all of them have shown as much
snI nrt ~ in a-, A4I NI W tn
could desire. What would our Sovereign Lords
have more? las not the Emancipation Of Shad-
rach been expiated by the Enslavcmcnt Of Sims
and of Burns? Is it not enough that we are at their
feet? .TTYl4I Is.uE.40 .IF.IsHTFN
Behold rcbellious virtue quite o'erthrown:
Behold ourfradie,. our wealth, our lives. your own"
But {. the same time that we admit the advan-
tage Mr.. Sumner had over his adSersnrics in the
temper, spirit and ability with which he stood his
ground against them, we must say that we think
that the substantial advantage i'll the argument
was on their side. The manner of putting the
question to him, directly and indirectly, WAS as I'M.
pertinent as it well could be; but its substance was
entirely pertinent and pat to the purpose. We
think that Mr.. Buffers question as to whether
Massachusetts would execute the Constitutional
requirements and return absconding slaves was II
very reasonable one, and that it was not precisely
met by Mr. Summers indignant disavowal of the
possibility of his doing such a thing in person. II
we understood Mr.. Summers Speech against the
CupltlNc LAW, IL lODk Cllnlun 5 stare ltlHlllS ground
that the Fugitive Clause was II com pact To be pruvi-
ded for by the several States and not by Congress.
On this ground, we believe, Mr.. Butlervoted agains,
the Bill. 1t was therefore Il very material question
on his part to ascertain whether or not Mlssacliu-
sets were willing to pass the laws necessary to the
%fultilment of this treaty with the other States, il
this law of Congress should be repealed. In his
IN lin speech. Mr.. Sumner only undertook to say
that Massachusetts would be ready, as she always
had been, to execute the requirements of the Con
.s~titution as she understood them. Now, this is the
very gist of the whole matter. What does Mnssa-
~causetts hold to be the requirements of tie Con-
s%ti:ution? What does Mr.. Sumner hold them 10
he? His personal repugnancc to doing u certain
Office would not necessarily imply that he was not
Willing to employ somebody else to do it. Many Il
.inan may believe in capital punishment, and APP
point by law in what cases it is to he inflicted, who
yet would shrink from assisting at an. execution.
But we might infer from his reply to Mr.. Touccy's
question that Mr.. Sumner himself does not admit
that the Constitution does provide for the rendition
of fugitiycs. We have never known him to take
this ground before. And it is possible, now, that
the report OF what lie said is imperfect. We rath-
or incline to the opinion that he meant that there
is nothing in the Constitution to obligo a man in
his private captcity to take part in such a rendition.
Though we hold ourselves that no law is fit to be
made which is not fit to be executed by every hon
est man within its jurisdiction. And we appre-
bend that this would be no bad test Of the mOruli-
" of laws. cad r--H. ...f-t .-.r .r
We think, however, untenablc as we believe such
u construction of the Constitution is, thatit ismuch
more easy to mrintain than the political ethics of
Mr.. Summers Speech. Ii is convenient, indeed, to
take the position that every man may construe the
Constitution for himself, and obey just as much rs
squares with his notions Of right and wrong. But
it is quite as convenient for South Carolina as for
Massachusetts, aud may be used to defend the
conduct Of the former against Mr.. lloar and our
coloured seamen quite as efectuaily as any possible
tbut, we fear, NOT ~probable) Legislation OF the latter
in the direction of selfrespect and self-protection.
Such n doctrine, whether Slaveholding Senators
will openly contradict it or not, is q simple abro-
Cation of the Constitution. a law that has no
definite meaning, which can be ascertaincd and
pronounced by some competent authority, is no law
at all. A Government established under IL Consti-
tuition which every State and every man can read
in different. senses and apply in perfectly opposite
directions, is no Government at all but a simple
anarchy. The slave clauses in the Constitution mean
something, and we conceive that the intentions of
the men that made them, and the unbroken line OF
decisions of judicial tribunals, to say nothing of the
all but unanimous consent of the inhabitants, from
the beginning, settle the question as to what they
mean. 1t is arguing the Nose off the face of the
Constitution to DEFY it. 1t is so patent to most
men that it requires all the personal confidence
they can feel in the honesty of the minds thathold
the contrary to believe in their sincerity. We
know that there are some of the best men and
truest Abolitionists who hold this doctrine, but we
can hardly wonder at their being regarded with
distrust and contempt by those who have no affec-
ton for their persons and no sympathy with their
opinions. We must say, that we think the position
into which Mr.. Sumner was driven, or which he
voluntarily took up, entirely untenable, and that
the Shareholders had MS much the better in the es-
.sence of the argument as he had in the temper,
spirit, courtesy. and rhetorical ability with which
he. presented his side of it. :
We hupe, and partly believe, that the time has
come for Anti-Slayery to be an integral element Of
NationalP Politics. Slavery has been so long enough
not an integral element, but the simple infegey
of them. But we trust that no part of the energies
of Anti Slavery politicians is 10 be expended in
the vain attempt to, prove that the Constitution
means anything other than it is generally believed
10 mean. 1t will be labour in vain and strength
spent for nought. 1t is useless to take any line of