Year: 1874

l admit that passions like these. 30 in.
credible and 50 deeply seated 10 the ma


ure ot man. should not be wantonly pro-


voked. Certainly the magistrate or sem
ator who bases his public policy on a
characterization" Of them u not fit TO bear
the rule OF any country. The misczlcu-
latlon OF your statesman was so gross and
palpabie that it excites our special wonder
how any man Of common understanding
could have made it. The Wantcn viois-
ton under any circumstances of a COM
pact so sacred as that embodied in the
Federal Constitution was alone sufficient


to produce some feelings To violate IL
Tor the purpose Of breaking up impcrtaat
domestic relations in fifteen States. against


the will of the States themselves and of
all their people, was q most aggravatine
outrage. But to follow this with dec,


laratlon that 1T would be enforced by
negro massacre, laclted and led by the
authorities Of the government which the


victims themselves had built up TO pro-


tect them, was calculated to make the
coolest blood bill over. You yourself
tell Us that the neighborhood Of Auburn-
was intensely and not Ennalnrally sxcit-


ed" by the act of single negro in the
murder OF single family What, then,
must have been the natural indignation
OF Southern communities VIXEN they heard
themselves threatened with a general
slaughter? Yet Mr.. Seward, in counting
the consequences Of his measures, left all
these passions out of his calculation. 1t
Is hard 70 conceive how the dishonesty
Of breaking political trust could be coup
led with folly moro extreme.


Mr.. Stewards reputation must rest for
ever on the three things which maze him
especially notorious All the world over


HIS fame, so superior, in your opinion To
that OF the man who framed our laws and
administered them faithfully for three
quarters Of centuary, was not won as
they won theirs. He was remarkably
defective in nearly all the qualities which
gave so much grandeur to their charac-
ters. But he was unquestiona5ly greater
than any or all Of them put together on
The higher Law" ''The Irrepressible
Conflict" and The Little Bell" OF these


you touch the first in gingerly way, and


avoid ali mention Of the other tive. II


his theory and practice On these points


are Indeisnslbie, you wronged your coun-


try and yourself by calling HIM public


oeneiactor and setting him up as "a light
and landmark" to guide bis successors.


Your reference to the higher law might


be considered evSsive if it were not yours.


You Will excuse me, am sure, for saying
thatiyou attempted to explain it, and
your sneer At the opposition it met with
as mere outcry" again an obvious
truth, show that you understand nothing


about 1t. l transeribe your words:


1t was IN this speech also that he enun-
clated the doctrin of higher law than the
Constitution, which gave rise to an infinite
amount OF outcry from even very Sc
spectacle class Of people, who were shock
ed at the license thought to be implied by
such an appeal. But it seems to me that


no truth Is more obvious than this: That


all powers of government and legislation


are closely restrictive within 4 Limitation


beyond which they cannot pass without


beng stripped Of their force. This l'mita-


ton may be parely material, or it may be


morai but, IN either case its power is


similar If not the same. 1t is a familiar
story which is told in the book of Canute.


the great Danish conqueror Of Britain that
once, when his courters were vYing with
each other in magnifying their sense of
nus omnlPotence. be simply ordered his
enaIr 70 be approached 20 the advancing
tide ef the ocean and loudly commanded
the waves TO retire. The fatterers un-
derstood the hint, and were abashed by
tins whitening illustration Of the "higher
law"


From this it is apparent that you sun
pose the assertion Of the higher law to
have been mere warning against at
tempts of legislation and government to
overstep the material or moral limitations
which would strip them Of their force.
But this is parpable misconception.


You will surely admit that there never
was any question nor any argument pro
or con about the powers of government
and legislation 10 work miracles on the
maternal creation. Bid Mr.. Seward think
it necessary to deny that an act Of Con-
gress could make the sun change its ap-
pointed time for rising and setting. or
"bid the main food bate its usual height"
or invert the force of gravitatlon 50 that
the rain would fall upwards and the smoke
tumble DOWN. Never since the Begin
ming Of the world did such thoughts enter
q sane mind That the courtiers of King
Canute affected to believe In his power 10
stop the waves by royal order, and that
be proved the contrary BY actually trying
the experiment, Is childish fable,i never
treated as historic fact, much less as q
1wIthering illustration by any grown man
except yourself.


( Your Interpretation of the higher faw
IS operating TO fix moral limitations TO
legislative power is equally Inaccurate
You say that the limitation TO legislation
may be either purely material or it may
be moral but IN either case its power Il.
2 a.. the power of the limitatioD) is similar,
# not the sane" Here you mean, II you
mean anything, that rule Of civil CON
duct. enacted and prescribed by ths SUI
preme legislative authority Of an estab-
lished State, is ~ powerless IT opposed by
: moral objection as if it were in conflict
with 3 material ferce. on think il safe
70 affirm that the mere iniquity Of law
does, propTTG Uig0.e, defeat the intent Of
The laWgiver, In the same way that the
winds and tides are said to have defeated
Cauute's proclamation to the waves Of the
Northern Ocean. Reason and history
both contradict you. From the days Of
NImrod 10 the time oil Grant mankind
have been governed by laws as bad as the
;rusl poryersity Of their rulers could make
hem; but so far from being Intellectual,
he nations Of the earth have groaned
lhder them and struggled against themin
rain. Many recent enactments of Con-
ress are open TO the gravest moral oblec-
ions, but no jot or title of them falls to
he ground for that reason. The mia
nous combination of Yankee and negro
hisVes who now have the government Of
be Southern States IN their hands are
very day using their power to oppress
md plunder their subjects in ways which
mock all sense Of justice but their laws
re eremorselessly executed right is over
pe=ne and wrong revsls in its lnsolent tri-
lmph Here In Pennsylvania similar
lass Of mlsoreants have for years been
,reying like yultnTes on the PROSTATE
,ody Of the commonwealth. It would be
delightful discovery 10 find that their
nactments are stripped Of all force by
he self acting power Of the moral bmita-
ions which they transgTsss. But We have
70 hope OF such relief, or any relief at all.
)nly the other day, in a convention 10 re-
orm the constitution, an effort was made
o provide for the anuulment of future
IMMORAL laws upon judicial proof Of bsi-
,ery and fraud used 20 procure their pass
&c. The Convention voted 1t doWn.-
lour feIlow-diaeiples Of Mr.. Sewarl who
cad us here NOS only deny that there are
nv moral limitations, but they believe
bat none ought to be imposed eYeD IN the
.rossest cases Of the Worst laws known 70
,e passed by the most open, shane.ess,
nd impudent corruption.


The haaher law doctrine ia not an aeser-