Worcester daily spy. [volume] (Worcester [Mass.]) 1850-1888, 1854-11-07

present pretensions, that he has ''never been in
favor of the Fugitive Slave law" that his life
is not " covered with the badges of the slave
holder !" and that he has been improperly
classed among those who favored the execu-
ton of that law, and supported the compro-
mise Of 1850.
In 1851 resolves concerning slavery were re-
ported by Joint Committee of the two Hous-
es, and they passed the Senate, as the record
willshow. They were three in number The
first afhrms the opposition of Massachusetts, to
slavery, and her devotion to the Unioa and
also her desire that the general government
may be freed, so far as it can constitutionally
be done, from the odium of supporting slavery.
The thirl resolve discaims for herself, and de-
MES to any other State, the right to nullify
the laws of the land. The second resolve is
altogether the most important of the three,
having reference to the time (1S5l) when it
was on the carpet. 1t contains protest
against the Fugitive Slave law, " as hostile to
the sentiments of Christianity, and abhonent
to the feelings Of the people Of this Common
wealth" A motion was made, it is believed
by Caleb Cushing, to lay these resolves on the
table. 1t was the test vote which decided
their fate, and the yeas and nays were taken.
Mr.. g. voted in facor Of the motion, and thus
helped to defeat the resolves altogether. Mr..
Gushing, before the close of the session, in a
public speech, reioiced over the defeat of these
resolves while the friends of freedom mourn
ed that the Legislature of Massachusetts, at
its next session after the passage OF the Fugi-
tive Slave law, had failed to express the senti-
ments of her people in regard to it.
In the session of 1852, resolves on the SUBJ
ject of slavery were again introduced into the
House, and received the support of all its An
ti-Slavery members. On the 23d of April, for
the purpose of killing off these resolves, an
effort was made, believe successfully, indef-
nitely to postpone them, or a motion to that
effect. Mr.. G. voted in the affirmative At
the same session, an attempt was made to pro-
cure the enactment of law, which would
give such protection as a State might give, to
her citizens when claimed as slaves. The OBJ
ject of its friends was to secure some legal
investigation, so that freemen might be in
some measure secured from fraudulent seiz-
ure. A bill for that purpose, called ga bill
further to protect personal liberty passed the
Senate. In the House, on the question of or
dering it to third reading, Mr.. G.. voted,
"No." The bill having passed that stage, by
a vote las yeas to l4l nays, motion was
made, by an enemy to it, 10 reconsider the
vote, and, on that question the record shows,
that Mr.. g. voted in favor of reconsideration.
In the same session of the Legislature, on
the question of contributing to erect monu-
ment at Philadelphia, the subject of slavery
being incidentally introduced. Mr.. G.. is re-
ported by the papers Of his party to have said
" with warmth 3" 8" that he would 20 as far as
any man for Union men and Union measures"
All parties in the country except few Garri-
son men, who do not vote, always avowed
themselves to be in favor of the Union, But
the terms &c Union men and Union measures"
as used at that date, had more restricted
meaning, as every one knows. BY Union
measures were meant the compromises of 1850,
and by Union men were meant, they who sup
ported those measures.
But let Mr.. Gardner be judged not by his
acts only, but, by accompanying declarations
also, which fully interpret those acts, If they
do not speak plainly to every mans mind for
themselves.
Notonly did Mr.. Gardner sustain, by all his
votes, the Fugitive Slave law, but he also de-
Tended it with all his powers of argument. In
proof of this, the testimony of highly re-
spectacle member OF that Legislature is com
municated to the public. 1t is as follows
WORCESTER, Oct. 81, 1854
HoS. CHARLES ALLEN: Dear SRI have been re-
quested to you, my recollection of Mr. Henry j.
Garlners COURSE in the Legislature of 1852 regard to
the Fugitive Slave Bill in the Legislature Of that
year, and remember Mr.. Gardner very WE'LL as an active
and prominent member from Boston. introduced during
which, were the following:
ResoUed That the Act Of 1885, known as the Fugitive
Slave Law, is opposed alike to the doctrines of Christian
ity and to the fundamental maxms of free government
that is unconstitutional unjust and oppressYe and that
it ought to be speedily aud forever repealed.
ResotOed, That Massachusetts, protests against the de-
livery into Slavery of men found upon her SOIL and under
the jurisdiction of her laws in the actual enjoyment Of
freedom; especially without due process of law and with
out trial by Jury before legally constituted Judicial ri
bunal.
Before the final vote the last of thes, Resolves was
modified, by striking out the word sespecially.n
remember, that in the debate upon these Resolves Mr.
Gardner spoke in defence Of the constutionay of the
Law and in opposition the Resolves The question
taken upon their indefinite postponement. 1 know MIR.
Gar liner did not vote against it, and think
ton Of the Journals will shew that he voted in favor of
such postponement. His speech, well remember made
in reply to some remarks of my own and of the
gumens used by him, are now, fresh in my memory l
cannot think Mr.. Gardner would deny this assertion on
being reminded Of the facts
l am, Sir,
Yours, with the highest respect,
GEO r. HoAR.
There is much other evidence, of like
character, showing clearly, the past position
of Mr.. G. on this question.
The rescue of Shadrach, in 1851, by few
colorcd men, will be remembered, and also,
/, the ado made by President Fillmore, on that
occasion. He thought the Union endangered
by the sudden act of few friends of the flu
gitive, and issued his unnecessary, ridiculous.
and insulting Proclamation. "Union Men,
in the language of the day, rushed to his aid,
and the City Government of Boston passed
resolutions in support of his action. MIR. G.,
not satisfied with the Resolves, as they were
drawn up by gentleman, whose love of the
Compromises was unquestioned, out stripped
| his compeers, in his eagerness to sustain the
President, and TO yindicate the Fugitive Slave
Law.
The whole proceeding has been published in
the newspapers within few DAYS, and there
IS no need OF extending this communication
by inserting it. There has also been repub-
hshed, within the same period, the call for
| public meeting, for the purpose of nominating
Mr.. Webster tor the Presidency, signed by
! Henry ]. Gardner, B. r. Curtis, Samuel A.
Elliot, and other intense "Union men,
This call was issued in 1851, and vet Mr.. G.
says she has never voted for man who ia
vored the Fugitive Slave Bill" But it is time
to pause. These ''badges of the stakeholder"
will surely "cover" from beginning to end, a
much longer political ''life' than MIR. Cards
ner's. 1t would be cruel to cucumber it with
the weight of another layer of adornments like
| these.
No notice has yet been taken of Mr.. G.'s
complaint, that he is charged with belonging
to the body guard of the Marshall, when Sims
was consigned to slavery. There is every rea.
son to believe that the information commuui.
Gated to me on this point, was substantially
true, and that Mr.. G. did offer his aid on that
| occasion. Why should he not? He was
supporter of the compromises, of which the
| Fugitive law, as the late Mr.. John Davis tru-
| ly said, in speech in the Senate January
28th, 1852, "became from its passage, alto.
pether the most i'm mortar t If onx roaas,,r. ~,