New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1860-11-23
WHO VIOLATE THE contribution

break off-sOue time in the course Of next week.
As a foretaste thereof, he has written a letter,
which was duly printed in our last whereof the
following is the gist:
at syas nothing for in Massachusetts, TO di'cu" the
question Of the eIpedency nerpedenoy Of secession and to
endeHvor impress the Southern States the acedne oil the
Union long the State Of Massachusetts maintains a'y
Of legislation plainly contrary to the Constitution IN inc
very matter Of the special rights Of the Southern States oil ears
are closed to appeals behalf of the Union from To 'ueh
appeals the ready when duly regard the Con
uon ourves and not until then II will be competent 10
exhor other States respect and observe III that o'he
mesny enjoying the benefits OF the compact WITHOUT
dchagng obligations and that our audaon ofthc Union
alike odous and ridiculous while cling tot only as he
means Of exeng the power the Federal Government to the
posion oppression and Of fifteen States OF the Union
MIR. Gushing here lays down as general
principle that whoever would appeal to the Con-
titution in his own behalf against others, must
first obey the Constitution in all things: Very
well:
Many years ago-long before Massachusetts had
passed Personal Liberty bill-SOuth Carolina
enacted law under which citizens of Massa-
chusetts and other States arriving at Charleston
as seamen, stewards cooks, &c. of vessels, and
not even suspected of any intent to violate the
laws, were-in case they were of the colored
race-subected TO the indignty and outrage OF
being dragged from their respective vessels, shut
up in prison, and there kept until their captains
were ready to sail, when they were restored to
him on payment of a round bill of costs. Mas
sachusetts believed this gross violation of the
Federal Constitution, and undertook to test its
validity in the most loyal, quiet, unobjectonabe
Il. bar, amin nt
and conservative lawyers-Hon. Samuel Hoar-
to proceed to Charleston and there make case
under which to bring this act to the bar OF the
L. S. Supreme Court for authoritative adjudica-
ton.
Neither Massachusetts nor Mr.. II0ar had any
suspicion that this action would give Oflense.
They had no idea of doing anything but estab-
lish the most vital constitutional rights in the
most peaceful and inofensve manner. Mr.. Hoar
was 50 unsuspcious of what followed that he took
his daughter with him to Charleston. Yet he had
hardly found lodging in the city when-the ma
ture of his errand being noised about-an assem-
blage of the Cbiyary, which would here be called
mob, beset his hotel and compelled him, on
penalty of death, to hurry board steamer
and set his face northward in the brieest possible
time. He was told that the companOnship of
his daughter alone protected him from personal
and probably fatal violence The bare idea OF
allowing him to test before slaveholding Court
the legal rights Of citizens of Massachusetts was
utterly secuted Nobody in Charleston thought
of UNFOLDING him in so doing.
Now look at the other side: Congress
passed in 1850 a Fugitive Slave act which Mas
sachusetts believes to be unconstitutional and
knows to be tyrannica and unjust. She natu-
rally desires to contest its validity. She passes
an act to protect the Personal Liberty of her
inhabitants which is held to be counteractiOn
of the Fugitive Slave law. No Court of compe
tent Jurisdiction has pronounced this act unconsrtu
tional II South Carolina wishes to contest its va
lidy and Ia carry that contest up Ia the Court Of
asst resort We will warrant any agent or commits
sioner she may send to Boston the most coarte"'is
treatment from first 10 last and every drsiral Ia
clity in the prosecution of his errauG. .tj GOV.
Gist simply write by hun Ia Gov. Banks or Gov.
Andrew that he is dispatched on this business,
and We guarantee him az Kind as courteous as
honorable a reception aud treatment as man
along TO secure such treatment. If he does not
certify, when he returns. that he has had every
courtesy shown him ever, facility profered him,
We hereby stipulae to refund TO South Carolina
the reasonable and proper expenses OF bis jonr-
ney and pay him larl. Tor his time.
is net this fair offer! Does it not meet the
requirements of the case!
Mr.. Gushing tries Massachusetts behind her
back and condemns her without judge or Jury.
She deniurs to such verdict, aud asks fair
hearing before an authoritative if not impartial
tribunal. Is not sovereign State entitled to
this With Supreme Court mainly drawn
from the Slave States, why is it that those who
denounce the Personal Liberty acts as uneOnsti.
tutional never arraign them before that tribunal
They are eternally prating Of an urgent necessity
for their repeal when, if they be what these
conference.-the. Gushing neutrality-suspicious.
them, there is no possible need of such repeal.
An unconstitutional act is mere waste paper,
when there is tribunal able and ready 10 set
it aside. You might as well talk Of resisting the
inauguration of Douglas, Bell or Breckenridge az
of repeating such an act. Al that is needed s
to make case-or take up the first case where.
in wrong is done under color of such act-and
smash not only the obnoxious act, but ali others
like il, and prevent the enactment Of more such.
This is what Massachusetts tried 10 do in the
case of South Carolina, but South Carolina
evaded law by violence: This is what South
Carolina il invited to do in the ease Of Massa-
cbusetts. Why not