The weekly pioneer and Democrat. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn. Territory) 1855-1865, 1861-01-04

Important Nov ement in Massachusetts,.
1t has been denied by the sectionalists,
that the Massachusetts personal liberty"
laws are in conflict with the constitution
and laws of the United States. We have
before us an opinion on that subject which
few men will dare to gainsay-an opinion
signed by thirty>6ve of the foremost men
in Massachusetts, declaring their solemn
judgment upon the points involved in this
question. They appeal to the people of the
State to remove the offensive laws from the
statute books, and to do right, as becomes
honest men and citizens of the United
States. We would gladly print this i'm
portant and able address, could we find
space, but can only make very brief ex-
tract - .....,.-r. .. o-.,..
=. Fellow citizens of Massachusetts,
we are forced by these considerations solemn
ly to declare, that we believe the State of Mas.
sachuseets has violated our great national com.
pact, by laws now on her statute books, which
are in conflict with the Constitution of the
United States.
= = Fellow citizens, it is consistent with
the duty We owe to our common country, to
our State and to ourselves that such laws should
be permitted longer to exist? II.
We know it is doubted by some whether the
present is an opportune moment to abrogate
them. It's said: ave grant these laws are
wrong, but ioiN you repeal them under Mreat?''
We onawnr no We wOuld do nOfhinu undor q
threat. We would repeal them under our own
love of right; under our own sense of the sa-
credness of compact; under our own convic.
ton of the inestimable importance of social or.
der and domestic peace /; under our feeling of
resp nsibility to the memory of our fathers
and the welfare of our children, and not under
any threat. We would not be prevented from
repeating them by any conduct of others, if
such repeal were in accordance with our own
sense of right.
Z. The address from which these extracts
are made, occupies nearly two columns in
the Boston Courier, and is full of argument
and of cogent reasons in favor of repeal of
the obnoxious laws of the State, and of an
honest fulfllment of the compact with sis
ter States. To show the influence to which
the opinion is entitled, we append the names
Of the signers, all of whom are eminent citi
zens, and some of them able jurists and con-
stitutional lawyers. Before the mature
judgment of such men, the whole brood of
sectional politicians in Massachusetts, may
well stand abashed. The signatures are as
follows:
Lemuel Shaw, Boston; Benjamin R. Curtis,
Boston; Joel Parker, .Cambridge; Joseph Grin
nell, New Bedford; Isaac Davis, Worcester;
Henry ]. Gardner, Boston; George Putnam,
Roxbury; James Savage, Boston; George Pea.
body, Salem; Homer Bartlett, Lowell; George
Tieknor, Boston; Jared Sparks, Cambridge;
Albert Fearing, Boston; Henry W. Clapp,
Greenfield; Nathaniel Wood, Fitchburg; Chas.
T. Russell, Cambridge; George T.. Rice, Wor.
cester; Edward Dickinson, Amherst; Levi Lin
CON- Worcester; William Bsylies, Bridgewater;
Sidney Bartlett, Boston; John H. Clifford, New
Bedford; Emory Washburn, Cambridge; James
jackson, Boston; Theophilus Parsons, Cam.
bridge; James Walker, Cambridge; Edward A.
Newton, Pitts6eld; Charles B.. Goodrich, Bos.
ton; j. G. Abbott, Lowell; Winslow Warren,
Plymouth; James NJ. Beebe, Boston; Linus
Child, Lowell; John Aiken, Andover; H. w.
Bishop, Lenox; William G. Bates, Westfeld.