Daily American organ. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1856, 1855-07-31

judiciary. If law involve a question of
morality, the Judicial opinion of the govern
ment not only makes it the duty Of the citizen
to obey the law, but it exonerates him from
any moral responsibility for his obedience. He
has agreed to submit questions of disputed
obligation to this tribunal. The presumption
is, that the tribunal has decided correctly. The
responsibility for any intrinsic immortality in
the law rests upon the tribunal and not
upon the citizen, who has in advance agreed
to submit questions Of controyerted legality to
its arbitrament
But Senator Hunter and his higher-law al
lies may say that court may decree obedi-
ence to law positively yiolative OF private
conscience To this we reply, that if "Chris-
tian individual" is Of such tender conscience
that he cannot comply with his own contract,
it is very unfortunate for him that he has ever
agreed to do so, and for him there are but two
remedies The first is the more simple. II is
to avail himself Of that invaluable right Of
expatriation indicated by the war of 1912,
and, like the Pilgrim fathers, seek some land
where the atmosphere and institutions are
more congenial to a sensitive conscience than
his own. The second is, to resist the govern
ment If he can associate with himself other
Christian individuals" sufficiently numerous
to overthrow the government, they may call
it successful revolution. If the government
succeeds in confirming the decision Of the ju-
dietary by the ultimate arbitration of arms, it
will call the resistance to law rebellion, and
the "Christian individuals" will be compelled
to submit to an immoral law, and, in their
opinion, to an immoral sentence.
But "Christian individuals" must under
stand with all others that they must abide by
the law, or quit the State. There is but one
alternative worthy freenen, to abide by and
maintain the laws, or to take up arms and
overthrow their government All intermediate
remedies of notification and conscientious dis
obedience are fit only for people who have not
the pluck or honesty to stand up to their con-
tracts
From this argument we think there are two
principles fairly deducible:
l. That "Christian individuals" may sub
nit without immortality to any law which an
agreed tribunal has decided to be in accordance
with the Constitution and divine law, although
that decision may differ from individual opin-
ion.
2. That christian individuals" not salts
fled with this decision, have a right-and arc
indeed under an obligation-to expatriate them
selves, rather than abide under a jurisdiction
in their opinion unjust and immoral.
We have made this argument as our protest
against the admission of Senator Hunter, which
is fraught with mischief proportionate to the
high authority of his character and station
We expect to see this unhappy admission
quoted against the friends of the Union and the
Constitution, and in justification of Theodore
Parker, Bedini, and Brownson.
We must acknowledge however, our obi
cations to the adventurous Commodore Saun-
ders, who, regarded as tho advocate Of the
rights of man, as understood by Anacharsis
Clootz and Benjamin Constant is yet shocked
by this proposition to allow every man to con-
sruc the law by his version of the Bible,
whether published at Douay, Geneva, or by
Brigham Young. We must, at the same time,
appealto our friends Of the Sentinel, who have
the political consistency of Mr.. Hunter in charge
during the recess, to respond in his defence.
The Sentinel was, we believe, very happy in
defending the proposition Of Mr., Hunter to
graduate the price Of the public lands the i'm
mediate effect of which would have been to
destroy and pervert the fund provided by the
States for the common purposes, to the par
ticular advantage of aliens and abolitionists.
Let us hear the Sentinel; or, rather, let us
hear Mr.. Hunter, in reply to the Commodore.
A Groan from an Old Line Wing of Ohio.
E,lIaunz - G-o,a Nosxa-l e..