he should presume to pass so sweeping and so peremptory a sentence
of condemnation on a compact made by the fathers of the Republic and
ratified by the people of the United States? For our part, if we wished
to find "the higher law," we should look neither into the Dark Ages nor
into his conscience. We had infinitely rather look into the great souls
of those by whom the Constitution was framed, and by every one of whom
the very compact which Mr. Seward pronounces so infamous was cordially
sanctioned.

"Your Constitution and laws," exclaims Mr. Seward, "convert hospitality
to the refugee from the most degrading oppression on earth into a crime,
but all mankind except you esteem that hospitality a virtue." Not
content with thus denouncing the "Constitution and laws," he has
elsewhere exhorted the people to an open resistance to their execution.
"It is," says he, in a speech at a mass-meeting in Ohio, "written in the
Constitution of the the United States," and "in violation to divine
law,[209] that we shall surrender the fugitive slave who takes refuge at
our fireside from his relentless pursuer." He then and there exhorts the
people to resist the execution of this clear, this unequivocal, this
_acknowledged_, mandate of the Constitution! "Extend," says he, a
"cordial welcome _to the fugitive who lays his weary limbs at your
door_, and DEFEND HIM AS YOU WOULD YOUR HOUSEHOLD GODS."

We shall not trust ourselves to characterize such conduct. In the calm,
judicial language of the Chancellor of his own State such proceeding of
Mr. Seward will find its most fitting rebuke. "Independent, however,"
says Chancellor Walworth, "_of any legislation on this subject either by
the individual States or by Congress_, if the person whose services are
claimed is in fact a fugitive from servitude under the laws of another
State, _the constitutional provision is imperative that he shall be
delivered up to his master upon claim made_." Thus far, Mr. Seward
concurs with the chancellor in opinion; but the latter continues--"and
any state officer or private citizen, who owes allegiance to the United
States, and has taken the usual oath to support the Constitution
thereof, cannot, WITHOUT INCURRING THE MORAL GUILT OF PERJURY, do any
act to deprive the master of his right of recaption, when there is no
real doubt that the person whose services are claimed is in fact the
slave of the claimant."[210] Yet, regardless of the question whether the
fugit