Weekly Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1853-1861, 1855-05-17

Ia the abstract, nor has Il anything I'd say I'D
extenuation Of the abuses which sometimes
spring from the exercise of arbitrary poverty
the master. It may suit the purposes of the
Journal to try to attach to the Democratic
party-the party of the Constitution and the
laws-the odium which prevails against
shareholders but such a course is not recon-
mendel by either eandor or equity.
The Journal says that the Fugitive Slave
Law IS violation of every principle of jus
tice and right, but it means, that the surren'
der of fugitive slaves has that character 1t
is the act to be done, and not the manner of
doing it, which gives force and point to the
denunciations of the abolition press. The
Democratic party ara not welded to the par
ticular provisions of the present law. All
they ask is that the Constitution should be
observed IN good tuitl, and this law was en-
acted TO carry one of It's clauses into effect
But Il the free States would show will
ingness to enforce this clause fully and eff
cieHtly bv some other law, the South
would not complain, and the Democratic
party would certainly be content. The South
ern States ask from the North an honest COM
pliance with n bargain made Tor mutual ben
eft, and the National Democracy are ready
to comply; they stand by the Constitution
and the faithful performance of contracts.
But the Journal and its compeers, as was
plainly intimated by its reference to SHY
LOCKS bond, would resort to quirks and tech
nicalities in order to avoid the execution Of
the solemn compact entered into by our
fathers.
The Constitution of the United States is
the "barbarous'' thing. the jews bond, which
excites the ire of Abolitionists. In answer
to the challenge Of the Journal, we reply,
tbas the Fusitiye Slave, Law is not more
"barbarous " than the Federal Constitution,
whose provisions it was framed to carry into
effect
In addition, the present law IS no worse in
substance than the law Of 1893, which con-
templated the summary proceedings,
so much complained Of now. The law of
passed with great unanimity by a Congress,
composed Of revolutionary patriots and mem
bers of the Convention which framed the
Constitution. With these facts before us how
utterly reckless and irreverant is the follow
inc language of the Journal: "Judge Loring
is the victim to the vile and reasonable fana-
ticism' Of the slaveites who, treacherous to
justice, humanity, religion, and the principles
of the Constitution of the United States, and
the self-evident truths set forth in the De-
claration Of independence, imposed such ig-
noble ,luties upon him." Every expression
of abuse here used is as applicable to WASH
IzGToS as to WEBSTER.
At the time that Judge LORING acted as
commissioner, how could he know that he
was committing an oGense which subjected
him To removal ? The Fugitive Slave Law
had from early times been sustained by the
Supreme Court OF Massachusetts,. Judge
STORY, the great luminary, had expressly de-
clared in his Commentaries, that the Const
tuition contemplated summary proceeding
and not trial by jury, and the whole curren
of legal opinion was in favor of the vAlidity
Of the law.
Judge LoaISe had every reason to believ,
that he was sustained by the laws of Massa
chusetts as expounded by her greatest iurist
and 50 he was. But he was punished becaus
public sentiment had changed since 1850
Judicial decisions must change and veer an,
ebb, and flow with the whims of the mol
This IS the sJ0u naFs doctrine. Judge MAR
SHALL said that he knew no greater ours
which Heaven could infict on suffering peo
> pie, than dependant bench Of justice. Bu
the eompeers of Mr.. HISS are farin advanc
of such an old fogy; and they have in tn
words Of the National Iateligeneey, when wri
ting on this very subject, proclaimed them
selves the abettors OF state of things it'll
better than mObocracy.'