Washington standard. [volume] (Olympia, Wash. Territory) 1860-1921, 1861-03-09
Gov. Banks for Concession.

A"S Ao'o"HHS SNCi~SC AOLA CIlc Nulc-
dictory message of Gov. Banks, to the
Legislature of Massachusetts,, delivered
on the occasion of his retiring Jan. Sd,
commends itself to every patriot and
lover of the Union. Read it!
I do not hesitate to say, that as q
Government, in every sense, Massachu-
sctts has been faithful to her constitu-
tional duties. 1t is because she has
been thus faithful, that desire to see
her legislation in harmony with her acts.
1t is because l do not like to sec her
Representatives in Congress, and her
sons everywhere, put upon the dcfen-
sive when they have just cause to be
proud of her acts; it is because, in the
face of her just claims to high honor,
l do not love to hear unjust rcproaches
cast upon her fame, that say, as 1 do,
in the presence Of God, and with a heart
filled with the responsibilities that must
rest upon every American citizen in
these distcmpered times, l cannot but
regard the maintenance of a statute,
whether constitutional or not, which is
so unnecessary to the public service,
and so detrimental to the public peace,
as an incxcusablc public wrong. fhope
by common consent it may be removed
from the statutc-book, and such guar
antccs as constitutional freedom de-
mands be sought in new legislation.
1t is said, know with some reason,
that no change would satisfy men
engaged in treason and rebellion. We
ought to remember, however, that
South Carolina presents this class of
laws in her countcrtcitcd Declaration of
independence, as the first great wrong
her people have suffered, ahd that re-
moval will obviatc her first cause of
complaint, which is made the basis of
every other substantive grievance.
1t is said, also, that the time is not
propitious, that it docs not become
Massachusetts to act under threats.
Every State maintains it's own dignity
by doing what is right. A State that,
under threats Of coercion, does what is
wrong, does not greatly suter IN compare
son WiM another, that Mnder similar plea
refuses to do what is right; there is diff
ference in process, but the difference
in results is not worth contest. Besides,
this is not an accepted American doc
trinc.
When France refused to pay an in
dcmnity secured to us by treaty, under
prctcncc that she had been threatened
with war by President Of the United
States, her excuse was not received as
sufficient explanation. The Prcsi-
dent threatened her again. Congress
supported his declarations by q war
appropriation, and England, as arbitia-
tor, compelled France to fulfill her
treaty stipulations. In fact, the comfy
of States furnishes 10 good reason for
not doing what is right; and rulers arc
permitted less than others to swcrve
under the influence of bribcs or meila-
ces from the direct and exact line of
right.
The topic presents considerations of
policy also. The difficulty in govern
mcnt, as in life, is to ascertain what is
right. 1t is easier to follow the line of
right, than it is to divine it, as wisdom
is higher quality than courage; and
the world is full of proofs that an OBJ
stinate adherence to that which is im-
practicable, indcfcnsiblc, and inmate
rial, often compels the trucst and bold
est men to surrender that which is Just
in itself and vital to their cause. Our
experience in this regard will not diff
fer from that of other men,
There arc men suddenly lifted from
indulgence to affluencc, who never for
got poverty in the presence of plenty.
So men long accustomed to rough gov
crnmcnt do not readily comprehend
the policy of rulers, and reluctantly
surrender the imperfect machinery OF
opposition for the greater powers and
higher honors of administration. There
may be equal advantages in the right
of Opposition or administration, accord
ing to the preferences or constitutions
of men, but it will be difficult for the
same persons or party to monopolizc
both. If We claim tho right to admin
lister law, let us abandon the machinery
intended to ObStruct 1t.
Cancellation and coercion are trim pc'r-
crs. They grow out of and into each
other, and neither is perfect by itself
alone. "WEo demands equity must do
equity" is a maxim as cd as the civil
law, not merely because it is justice,
but because it is power also. And yet.
I believe that so little difference Of
opinion-not as men, perhaps, or par.
ties, as to which Misrepresentation and
excitement may mislead US, but as to