>-• T> X^ '•■.^PMf^'' .o. ^. ♦^ ^ aP »I»!*^* '^ ■*\^ V^ (\\\ SR A'/i rt vi^ J j^—j m i li]p-^ *V«. VV (\\\ ^?< ///I o^ S 4 o n ^1 /-^ v\) (^\i\\im ta llulrrs.— (TjnJ Dutii ctiil its jCiiiiitatinES. "• a^f A DISCOURSE DELIVERED DECEMBER 22d, 1850, ON THE TWO HUNDRED AND THIRTIETH ANNIVERSARY LANDING OF THE PILGRIMS. BY WM. DELOSS LOVE, PASTOR OF THE HOWE STREET CHURCH, NEW HAVEN, CT, PUBLISHED BY REQUEST '^ NEW HAVEN: STORER & STONE, PRINTERS. 1851. ^8 /S- }, i/y? s B R M ^^ Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God ; the powers that bo are ordained of God. Whosoever therefore resisteth the pow- er, resisteth the ordinance of God. — Romans, xiii: 1,2. But Peter and John answered and said unto them, Whether it he right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye. For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard. — Acts, iv : ]9, 20. Then Peter and the other Apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men. — Acts, v : 29. These passages are all equally inspired. The duties which they teach therefore, cannot be inconsistent with each other. The command to obey earthly rulers, and that to obey God rather than men, imply no contradiction ; but since they cannot both be taken in the absolute, universal sense, the limitation must be with the first, not with the second. The obligation to obey God rather than men can have no ex- ception. That of being subject to "the powers that be," must always have exception when the commands of men stand opposed to those of God. This will appear if we examine the circum- stances which called forth the several passages of the text. The injunction, " Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers," was addressed to the Church originally planted at Rome, composed mostly of converted Jews. The Jews of that day had long suffered oppression from " the higher powers" of the Roman nation. There was among them a wide-spread disposition to re- volt. They knew that God was the especial Governor of their own people ; that He had from the time of Abraham been their God, while all the nations around them, some of whom had been their conquerors and oppressors, were absolute heathen. Esteeming themselves so superior to others in privilege and knowledge, so peculiarly the favorites of Heaven, the doctrine was prevalent among them that they ought not to obey heathen magistrates. It was their maxim to own no king but God, and under Him, no ruler but one of their own nation. For this their law gave some show of authority. " One from among thy breth- ren shall thou set king over thee : thou mayest not set a stranger over thee, which is not thy brother."* Josephus, the most eminent of their uninspired historians, says that the Pharisees were greatly opposed to heathen rulers, and so inculcated their views as to lead to open resistance and fighting. j- * Dent, xvii : 15. t Ant. xvii : 2. Believing, as the Jews did, that they were the people of God, it might be expected they would deem all other authority over them as usurpation. It is certain they were very refractory under the Roman yoke. In Jerusalem, for many years, nothing but fear of punishment kept them in tolerable subjection. Their turbulence in Rome grew to such a degree at one time, that the Emperor Claudius issued an edict banishing all Jews from the city. Even after the conversion of a Jew, it might be expected that he would be more or less influenced by his former views on this subject, and it might honestly be with him a question whether or to M hat extent he should obey heathen rulers. His doubt would be increased by the fact that the civil and religious insti- tutions of the heathen nations were united. Their whole system of religion was founded in idolatry. Idolatrous practices were thrust upon him by civil authority on every side. He might not readily make the distinction between being properly subject to " the higher powers" in all his civil relations, and not uniting in or countenancing the heathen worship. The Gentile as well as the Jewish converts of the Church at Rome would be likely to hesitate on this question. They would loathe the heathenism they had forsaken. Knowing that it was the national religion, and seeing it intermingled with every thing in the administration of the government, they would be in danger of improper resistance to governmental authority. The ditliculty of the question would be increased by the fact that the supremo authority of the Roman Empire was frequently passing from one person to another by the most foul and unjust means, and that " the higher powers" were generally of the most vicious charac- ter. To usurpation each emperor added tyranny. Caligula was murdered on account of his tyrannical conduct. Claudius, his successor, was poisoned to make place for Nero, the then reign- ing emperor, who proved to be one of the most depraved and beastly of men, and a most hardened and odious tyrant. Amid these agitations and changes consequent on vice and op- pression, while rebellions were frequent, and factions were nu- merous, especially among the unconverted Jews who would be more likely than others to influence the Christian Church, there was occasion for anxiety on the part of the Apostle, lest those to whom he addressed his letter should be drawn into improper po- sitions and political alliances, which would cause themselves need- less difficulties, and bring upon the cause they had espoused the reproach of worldly ambition and evil design against existing au- thorities. In this state of things, the command, " Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers," was a needful revelation of duty to the Christian Church. But it had respect, you will ob- serve, from the nature of the case, to their civil relations to the government under which they lived. While there were such frequeut changes in the supreme author- ity, brought about by such wicked means, and while every ruler was a tyrant, it was plainly tneir duty to take sides with none. While they had no power to establish another and better gov- ernment, factious opposition to the reigning powers would have been worse than useless to themselves, and a complete misinter- pretation of their religion. The command of obedience, however, did not have the least reference to any conduct where the will of God had been previ- ously revealed to the contrary. Otherwise it would have been a command counter to a command. The requirement to be subject to the higher powers, did not have reference to cases which after- wards occurred, where the supreme authority of the land de- manded of the Christians a renunciation of their religion and compliance with the doctrines and customs of heathenism. Of course, since God had forbidden idolatry, the command of sub- jection to the higher powers did not imply the duty of obedience to a heathen ruler when he enjoined idolatry. Christ had made it the duty of his disciples to confess him before men; the com- mand of his apostle therefore did not require of those disciples a denial of his nau>e in order to escape martyrdom. When bloody persecution came, the entire belief, profession and life, of every Christian, were constantly in disobedience to the higher powers. Still obedient in all other relations, there was not a moment when he did not disobey in respect to his religion. No human author- ity could make binding any infraction of the rights of a fellow creature. None could impose the obligation to violate the great law of love ; toward God, to love Him with all the heart ; toward men, to love them as ourselves. It was then no disputed doctrine with Jews or Christians, or even with many Heathen, that disobedience to civil authority is some- times a duty. It had come down to them, clothed with all authority and majesty, from their venerated ancestors. It was as memora- ble and old as Daniel in the lion's den, or as the fugitive slaves from Egypt. Hence, as the primitive Christians were themselves to be brought to the painful necessity of disobeying men in order to obey God, divine wisdom foresaw their danger, and temptation to open and entire rebellion, and kindly sent a revelation of duty precisely to meet the case. It did not abrogate what was before revealed, and what had been practiced by the holiest men. So far as it anticipated the day of persecution, it Avas rather supplementary to previous in- struction. It contemplated disobedience to the higher powers with the penalty of martyrdom, and therefore enjoined strict and unwavering obedience in every lawful relation and instance of command. In connection with the Apostle's direction to obey rulers, he further says, " They are God's ministers ;" that is, in his providence he directs and controls their appointment. But it can- not be that the Servant is superior to his Master. When God commands one thing, he does not change his command, even though all earthly rulers, ordained by him, issue a contrary edict. As the younger Edwards has said in his discourse on obedience to rulers, the Apostle in his direction to be subject to the higher 6 powers, " Only gives the general rules of obedience and submis- sion." It is plain there was no necessity at that time to specify the exception. But a notable case of exception is given in the remaining pas- sages of the text. As Peter and John, soon after the day of Pen- tecost, went up to the temple for prayer, they healed a lame man. The miracle drew together a large company of wondering people to whom Peter preached repentance and salvation through Christ. The rulers of the Jews were offended with his discourse, and put the apostles in prison. On the next day they brought them out for examination, when Peter affirmed that the impotent man was healed by the name of Jesus, and that in no other name could men be saved. Upon this the great council of the Jews consult as to what shall be done with Peter and John. They are at first in doubt, whether to put them to death, or to imprison them, or to scourge them, or whether simply to command them, as rulers of the people, that henceforth th^y speak no more in this name, and to threaten them with punishment if they disobeyed. They resolved upon the last course, and addressed to them their com- mand and threatening. " But Peter and John answered and said unto them, whether it be right in the sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye. For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard." Then the ru- lers further threatened them and let them go, not daring to punish them through fear of the people. Observe now the condition of the apostles. They were commanded to preach the gospel no more. The command was not advice. To it was attached a se- vere penalty. Disobedience might result in death. The com- mand issued from those in higli authority, the Sanhedrim of the Jews, a body of seventy-one or seventy-two of the chief person- ages of the land, to whom were intrusted the principal affairs of the nation. It was the same body, and doubtless they were the same men, before whom our Savior was arraigned, and by whom condemned before he was delivered to the Roman gover- nor. In their presence this same Peter had denied his Lord, in seeming obedience to his rulers. They possessed vast influence and power. To all their decisions at his trial and death Jesus had meekly complied. Such was the divine example before the apos- tles. What course now will they adopt? Will they in this case deem themselves obligated to be subject unto the powers that be ? They had previously received the command, "Go ye into 'all the world and preach the gospel to every creature." This command proceeded from the higher authority. It was the " higher law." The command of human rulers conflicts with that of God. God is right and men are wrong. He must be obeyed ; they must be disobeyed. The next we hear of Peter and John, they are gone unto their own company, with whom they are praying for grace and strength to disobey the higher powers. " They lifted up their voice to God with one accord and said, *** Lord behold their threatenings, and grant unto thy servants, that with all boldness they may speak thy word. ***And when they had prayed, the place was shaken where they were assembled together ; and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and they spake the word of God with boldness. *** And with great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus ; and great grace was upon them all." Few subjects for prayer have ever been signalized by the divine blessing as this relative to disobeying rulers. Soon the Sanhedrim begin to put their threats into execution. Violent hands are laid on the apostles, and they are committed to prison. " But the angel of the Lord by night opened the prison doors and brought them forth, and said, Go, stand and speak in the temple to the people all the words of this life." It is true, *' There is no povi^er but of God : the powers that be are ordained of God." Still, here is a repetition of the divine commad in di- rect opposition to the command of the higher powers. Hence, He who ordained the higher powers is not pleased when they command wrong, and has himself commanded that they should not be obeyed by doing wrong. Early in the morning the apos- tles entered into the temple and taught. They were arrested by the officers of government and brought before the council and the Senate or elders of the children of Israel. There they were charged with disobedience to the rulers. " Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said. We ought to obey God rather, than men." And they immediately charged the higher powers with the murder of Christ, and preached even to them the gospel they had by them been forbidden to proclaim. The Sanhedrim and Senate were cut to the heart, and took counsel to slay them. They did not however dare so much, but gave them a severe beating and another command not to preach, and let them go. Still these same apostles went on in disobedience to their tempo- ral rulers, " And daily in the temple, and in every house, they ceased not to teach and preach Jesus Christ.'' Observe, these apostles never used violence ; they never threat- ened bloodshed ; they carried no deadly weapons of defence ; but they firmly and to the last refused to do wrong ; they persisted in disobedience to the higher powers rather than violate conscience, and when the penalty for transgression of human laws was visited upon them, they offered no resistance, but meekly and quietly bore it all. Such, I contend, in similar circumstances, is the duty of all. The duty of subjection to the powers that be is general. Com- mands to disobey God, or do what is morally wrong, are always exceptions. On no other principle can the last two passages of the text be reconciled with the first. But it appears that ail are not of this opinion. It is held by some that the higher powers should always be obeyed without exception, unless it be where revolution and the overthrow of the existing government, and the establishment of other higher pow- ers are possible and justifiable. It is contended that the law of the powers that be is always the law of God ; that there is no_ higher law; that we are to obey the existing government come what may, lead to what it will; that we are to obey it, even by the violation of the law, "Thou shalt love thy neighbor as thyself;" that where governmental commands are laid upon us, we are to do them with no hesitation, taking it as granted, that thus we shall do right ; that we are to do what would otherwise be acknow- ledged wrong for the sake of the State, or the compact of States. But clearly such was not the course of the apostles. Their con- duct was directly the opposite. They had no hope or thought of overthrowing the existing government. When they were first forbidden to preach the gospel, they might have said, " This com- mand of the powers ordained of God is more recent than that of our Savior, and is the divine will. Christ never told us to preach when commanded by our rulers not to preach. We can leave the land and preach where these rulers have no authority. It is certainly very wrong for us rebel against the higher powers from whom we have ever received so many blessings, and who have for ages stood as mediator between God and the people." But they said no such. things. They exhorted one another with no eloquent speeches on the importance of civil government. They pronounced no encomiums on the State. They imaged no horrid pictures of human governments broken up, civil authority prostrate, and anarchy rampant through the nation. They, or at least their divine Master, was fully aware of these evils; but even to hazard them afforded no reason for the suppressson of the gos- pel, or the stepping aside from opposition to preach itsomevvhere else. It was sufficient for them to do right and leave governments and nations with the Lord. Here, however, it may be well to introduce the opinions of others, who certainly are qualified to judge if we hesitate at our own convictions. Let us begin with Calvin, the ablest writer and soundest reasoner of his age. He says, " In the obedience which we have shown to be due to the authority of governors, it is al- ways necessary to make one exception, and that is entitled to our first attention — that it do not seduce us from our obedience to Him, to whose will the desire of all kings ought to be subject, to whose decrees all their commands ought to yield, to whose maj- esty all their sceptres ought to submit. And, indeed, how pre- posterous it would be for us, with a view to satisfy men, to incur the displeasure of Him on whose account we yield obedience to men I * * * * If they command anything against Him, it ought not to have the least attention ; nor, in this case, ought we to pay any regard to all that dignity attached to magistrates ; to which no injury is done when it is subjected to the unrivalled and supreme power of God. On this principle, Daniel denied that he had committed any crime against the king in disobeying his impious decree, because the king had exceeded the limits of his office, and had not only done an injury to men, but, by raising his arm against God, had degraded his own authority. On the other hand, the Israelites arc condemned for having been too submis- sive to the impious edict of their king. For when Jerol)oamhad made his golden calves, in compliance with his will, they deserted the temple of God, and revolted to new superstitions. Their pos- terity conformed to the decrees of their idolatrous kings with the same facility. The prophet severely condemns them for hav- ing willingly walked after the commandment. * * * * Since this edict has been proclaimed by that celestial herald, Peter,-^ ' We ought to obey God rather than men' — let us console our- selves with this thought, that we truly perform the obedience which God requires of us, when we suffer any thing rather than deviate from piety."* The younger Edwards says, " The truth is, and the whole spirit of Scripture sustains it, that rulers are bound to rule in the fear of God and for the good of the people ; and if they do not, then in resisting them, we are doing God service."! President Dwight says. " Subjects are bound to obey magis- trates, when acting agreeably to the laws, in all cases not contrary to the will of God, as unfolded in the Scriptures. * * * * The directions of Peter and Paul cannot be supposed to require our obedience to those commands of a ruler, which are opposed to the law of God. Whether we should obey God rather than men, can never be seriously made a question of common sense, any more than by piety."J Dr. Emmons, in his discourse on obedience to civil magistrates, has the following : " It is the plain dictate of reason, that all submission to human authority is abso- lutely limited. * * * * Subjects have the right of private judgment, and may, in certain cases, refuse submission to those in authority, and even destroy them."|| When these words were uttered, the right of private judgment had a meaning that was not philosophized into mist, or frittered away to an echo ; the days had not come to scoft' at freedom of conscience, or at the obligation to obey it. Robert Hall, in comments on a part of our text, (Rom. xiii : 1,2,) declares, — ■" The limits of every duty must be determined by its reasons, and the only one assigned here, or that can be assigned for submission to civil authority, are its tendency to do good : whenever therefore this shall cease to be the case, submission becomes absurd, having no longer any rational view. But at what time this evil shall be judged to have arrived, or what remedy it may be proper to apply, Christianity does not decide, but leaves to be determined by an appeal to natural reason and right." We are not then to refuse obedience only where there is an express divine command to the contrary, but must appeal often " to nat- ural reason and right" for a decision of our duty. Thomas Ar- nold, in his sermon on Rom. xiii, speaking of human governments says, "They have commanded crime in some instances, and for- * Institutes of Religion, B. iv., chap. 20, sec. 32. t Works, vol. ii., p. 245. \ Theology, vol. 3, ser. c.\iT. || Works, vol. 2, ser. ix. 9 10 bidden what was a duty. In such cases, of course there can he no hesitation how we should act. We ought to obey God rather than man ; and disobedience to the government is but obedience to Him who is the Lord and Governor of us all." President Wayland, in his chapter on the duties of citizens, af- firms, " Passive obedience, in many cases, would be manifestly wrong. We have no right to obey an unrighteous law, since we must obey God at all hazards." But he discountenances resist- ance by force, and recommends, " Suffering in the cause of right."* Professor Hodge, in his commentary on Romans xiii, makes the following forcible remarks. "The obedience which the Scrip- tures command us to render to our rulers is not unlimited ; there are cases in which disobedience is a duty. This is evident, firsts from the very nature of the case. The comjnand to obey mag- istrates is, from its nature, a command to obey them as magis- trates in the exercise of their rightful authority. They are not to be obeyed as priests or as parents, but as civil rulers. No one doubts that the precept, 'Children, obey your parents in all things,' is a command to obey them in the exercise of their rightful pa- rental authority, and imposes no obligation to implicit and pas- sive obedience. A parent who should claim the power of a sov- ereign over his children, would have no right to their obedience. The case is still plainer with regard to the command, ' Wives submit to your own husbands.' Secondly, from the fact that the same inspired men who enjoin, in such general terms, obedience to rulers, themselves uniformly and openly disobeyed them when- ever their commands were inconsistent with other and higher obligations. ' We ought to obey God rather than men,' was the principle which the early Christians avowed, and on which they acted. They disobeyed the Jewish and heathen authorities whenever they required them to do any thing contrary to the will of God. There are cases, therefore, in which disobedience is a duty. * # * * " No command to do any thing morally wrong can be binding ; nor can any which transcends the rightful authority of the power whence it emanates. What that rightful authority is, must be determined by the institutions and laws of the land, or from pre- scription and usage, or from the nature and design of the office with which the magistrate is invested. The right of deciding on all these points, and determining where the obligation to obedi- ence ceases, and the duty of resistance begins, must, from the nature of the case, rest with the subject, and not with the ruler. The Apostles and early Christians decided this point for them- selves, and did not leave the decision with the Jewish or Roman authorities. Like all other questions of duty, it is to be decided on our responsibility to God and our fellow men." Two things in * Mor. Science, pp. 366-7, \ 11 these observations should be distinctly noticed. First, disobedi- ence to rulers is sometimes a duty. Secondly, the question, When ought we to disobey ? it is not for the civil authority to decide. The right and obligation to judge for ourselves we cannot disin- lierit or throw oti^ if we would. I add a few words from Dr. William R. Williams. "Christian patience must obey God, rather than man, and show itself, not by obeying the wrong law, and thus evading the penalty, but by breaking the law, to obey God, and then braving for man's sake penally of confiscation, incarceration and death, if exile can not release from it." These are brief extracts from the writings of many of the most eminent philosophers and theologians of dif- ferent ages and countries, on the question of submission to civil authorities. To their testimony might be added that of every noted commentator who has ever written on this subject. Whit- by, MacKnight, Doddridge, Clark, Gill. Bloomfield, Chalmers, Olshausen, Tholuck, Trollope, Stuart, Barnes, representatives of almost every Christian land, and of all the various schools in theology, hold but one language on this subject, and that, sub- stantially in the language of Prof. Stuart — " Nothing can be plainer than that the .subjection urged in Rom. xiii, cannot beex- tended to cases where the commission of a moral evil is de- manded." Or, in the words of Barnes on the same passage, — " There were cases when it was right to resist the laws. This the christian religion clearly taught. When the laws interfered with the rights of conscience, when they demanded the worship of idols, or any moral wrong, then it was their duty to refuse sub- mission." With such an amount of evidence before us, from men of such high intellectual worth and moral power, can we longer hesitate on this question ? But to the descendants of the Puritans, as many of you are, to those who cherish with sacred affection and honor the memory of our Pilgrim Fathers, there is yet another species of argument on this subject. What more shall I say, than to remind you of the reasons that impelled their immigration to this wilderness land, and remind you also that this day is the An- niversary of the JancUng of the Pilgrims on Plymouth Rock, to gain your assent to the doctrine, that, disobedience to tyrants over the conscience is the hallowed service of God. Two hundred and thirty years ago to-day, landed on these then inhospitable shores, far away at the world's end, a little company of one hundred souls, to find an asylum from religious oppression. Twice before had the attempt been made to plant colonies on the American Continent, but from mercenary and selfish purposes, and had failed. Our fathers came with the high and holy purpose of ser- ving God in their own generation, and of planting religious and civil institutions of freedom, which should perpetuate the full blessings of the gospel to all their posterity. In their native land they had been forbidden freedom of conscience. Some had been denied, as were Peter and John, the privilege of preaching the 12 word ; some had sufl'ercd imprisonment for opinion's sake ; some, rather than relinquish their religion, had chosen exile from their land and homes, with the penalty of death hanging over them if Ihey returned. In 1592, a law was passed in England requiring all persons to attend the established worship under penalty of banishment, and if they returned, of death. Among those who felt they could not conscientiously obey the law, were John Rob- inson and his congregation, in the north of England. They calmly but boldly determined to violate the lavv and suffer the penalty if they must. Finding it necessary to retract their pur- pose of disobedience, or be thrust into prison, or be forced aWay by the hand of violence from their native country, they chose exile in Holland. Once they attempted to sail, but after they were embarked, thi-ough the treachery of the captain of their vessel and a plot of English officers, they were led on shoi*e and put in prison. At length released, they made a second attempt. The men succeeded in making their escape, but at the cost of leav- ing, many of them, their wives and children ; the former to be dragged from one magistrate to another for abuse and trial ; the latter to suffer from fright and hunger and cold. But at last, through the mercy of God, they all arrived at their chosen place of banishment, and finally, by Divine Providence, many of them Were led to the land that now blesses us with homes, here, by vol- untary confederacy, to lay the foundations of free institutions and a free government. They were the first to break away from the oppressive institu- tions of the old world ; they made the first infraction upon the old doctrine, that government is for the benefit of rulers and sovereigns, and not for the people ; that thrones are for kings and not for subjects. They taught and demonstrated that there can be a church without a bishop, and a state without a king. De- scendants of the Pilgrims, children of the Puritans, while to-day the blood of your fathers courses your veins, are their spirit and principles enthroned in your hearts and governing your lives ? There is a subject now at is?ns with this American people, which may test us on this important question. Do you believe that all men are created free and equal, that they are endovVed'with in- alienable rights, among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness? How can you have ever heard of the Pilgrims, and «of believe it? You believe that '• God hath made of one blood all nations of men, for to dwell on all the face of the earth."* You believe therefore that man has no right because " He finds his fellow guilty of a skin Not colored his own ; and having power ' T' enforce the wrong, for such a worthy cause To doom and devote him as his lawful prey." You believe that God has done right to make all men brethren, * Acts, xvii, 26. 13 and that men can only do right by dwelling together as brethren ; that what God has ordained is best ; that no philosophy or system of expediency can make it better. You believe then that the col- ored man who was stolen from Africa, or whose father was sto- len, and who is now held a slave, has a right to himself, that by a deed received from the Almighty he oions himself. You believe that no human law can take away that right, that no enactments can crush out of the soul its inherent possession, that it can be forfeited only by crime. You would disdain yourselves to hold a fellow being as a slave ; your conscience would not rest, while in that relation, a single night. Any other spirit has not descended from the Pilgrims. But there are those who are equal to the wrong, not simply of holding and wishing to hold their fellow men in bondage, but of wishing to persuade or coerce you to help them hold their slaves and to restore them to bondage at public expense when they es- cape. " The powers that be" have attempted to legislate you in- to the duty of aiding to arrest the fugitive slave and restore him to his master.* More, you are forbidden to act toward him the part of the good Samaritan, with any hope of saving him from slavery. If this stolen and fugitive brother come to your door at midnight, begging for shelter and bread, you are commanded not to receive him with the design to conceal him from the blood hounds that may be on his track. Here lives beside you an un- fortunate fugitive. Since he dared to escape from slavery, he has married a virtilous woman, and is now rearing a happy fam- ily of children. He is moral and industrious. He has tasted the preciousness of the gospel ; he has passed from death unto life, and is now a freeman indeed. He is a brother with you in the same church. He is respected and beloved. His sphere of influ- ence and usefulness is by no means limited, especially among those whose color or blood could be no guarantee against Ameri- can slavery. He is devotedly attached to his wife and children, *" Sec. 5. And be it further enacted. That it shall be the duty of all marshals and deputy-marshals, to obey and execute all warrants and precepts issued under the provi- sions of this act, when to them directed ; * * * * * * * * *■ and all good citizens are hereby commanded to aid and assist in the prompt and efficient execution of this law, whenever their services may be required, as aforesaid, for that purpose ; and said warrants shall run and be executed by said offi- cers anywhere in the State within which they are issued. " Sec. 7. And be it further enacted, Tiiat any person who shall knowingly and wil- lingly obstruct, hinder, or prevent such claimant, his agent or attorney, or any person or persons lawfully assisting him, her, or them, from-arre^tingsuch fugitive from service or labor, cither with or without process as aforesaid ; * * * « * * * * or shall aid, abet, or assist such person, so owing service or la- bor as aforesaid, directly or indirectly, to escape from such claimant, his agent or attor- ney, or other person or persons, legally authorized as aforesaid ; or shall harbor or con- ceal such fugitive, so as to prevent the discovery and arrest of such person, after notice or knowledge of the fact that such person was a fugitive from service as aforesaid, shall, for either of said offences, be subject to a fine not exceeding one thousand dollars, and imprisonment not exceeding six months ; ***** and shall, moreover, forfeit and pay, by way of civil damages, to the party injured by such il- legal conduct, the sum of one thousand dollars for each fugitive so lost as afore- said ;" etc. 14 and all his affection is warmly reciprocated. Separation by vio- lence and forever, will crash hearts. But the slave-hunter comes. He has found his prey. If once his fatal grasp is fixed on that poor man, vain will be all the entreaties of love from those wed- ded hearts, for either justice or mercy. He will be torn from his family and friends and home ; the slaveholder's vengeance will consign him to some hard fate. You are called to assist in ar- resting your fugitive neighbor. His wife weeps scalding tears, and wrings her hands in anguish. His children scz'eam with ter- ror. Violent hands and deadly weapons are there. If you now obey the law, that man may prematurely die on some far South- ern field of hard toil, and be thrown into a careless grave, with no wife or children ever to know or mourn by his resting place. Will you now lift up your strong arms and clinch this neighbor and brother whom you are to love as yourself, to whom you are to do as ye would that men should do to you, and thrust him into cruel slavery which shall know no relief from anguish, no end but death ? The question is not whether you will buy him back from slavery. Will you return him to it ? Will you obey God or man 1 Man says, "Seize the slave ; curse him by your deed." God says, "Thou shalt not deliver unto his master the servant which is escaped from his master unto thee."* Can you deliver a fellow mortal into slavery ? Will your conscience suffer the enormity ? No ! Be worthy of your Pilgrim sires. Peaceably bear the penalty of a law that commands sin, as they did. Go to prison as they did. Go to prison as the apostles did. Die rather than do wrong. " But what," you say, " of the national compact ?" I have made no compact to return the fugitive.f I never will. If I had, * Deut. xxiii, 15, 16. t When I became a citizen of the U.S., and took the oath to be true and faithful to the Constitution, it was not understood by me or the imposer of the oath, that I thereby bound myself to assist in arresting and returning the fugitive slave, or became obligated not to extend to hmi that gospel beneficence which I would that others should bestow upon me in like circumstances. The obligations of my oath go no farther than was then understood by me and the imposer of the oath. The law of 1793, forthe recovery of fugitive slaves, laid upon the magistrates and other officers under the State govern- ments, the duty of carrying it into effect. But in the case of Priggs vs. the State of Penn- sylvania, eight or nine years ago, the Supreme Court of the United States decided that officers under the State governments were under no obligation to execute the law, and that Congress had no power to impose the duty upon them. After this decision, many of the Morthern States passed laws making it a crime for their officers to return or assist in returning the fugitive. Then there were no officers authorized to execute the law ex- cept a few under the United States' government. But according to said decision of the Supreme Court, the master was authorized to seize his slave wherever he found him, if without breach of the peace, and to carry him back without process, or trial, or proof that he was his property, of any kind whatever. Of course all persons were forbidden to prevent his so doing. But it was generally or universally understood that neither the Constitution nor the law of 93 required any mere citizen to catch the slaveholder's runaway property for him. Such being the facts, when I became a citizen of Conn., the imposer of the oath, be it the State or the General Government, was just as innocent o the thought as I was, that I then bound myself to be a slave catcher. The doctrine and the law that we must all hold ourselves in readiness to hunt down the fugitive, or to hunt down a freeman falsely declared to be a fugitive by some villain, 15 I would forswear it to-day. Compacts and laws that require me to sin, may take care of themselves ; and God will then take care of me and my country and my country's laws. Faith requires us to do right and trust in God. He is able to still the elements and make new nations and new worlds. Shall I, for these declarations, be charged with lawlessness ? 1 am ad- vocating the violation of no real law. Human laws must always be subservient to the divine. The Deity being independent may prescribe laws to himself, but man being dependent must abide by the laws prescribed to him by his Creator. If he wish to give those laws more particular definitions, they must never be enlarged beyond the original enactments. God, in a word, is the author of all law. And when human law transcends the limits prescribed by the Deity, and thereby contravenes the law of God, that mo- ment it loses the character of law, and is no longer binding on one of our race. Says Sir Wm. Blackstone, of the law of nature, " No human laws are of any validity if contrary to this." In- stancing the case of murder he says, " If any human law should allow or enjoin us to commit it. we are bound to transgress that human law, or else we must offend both the natural and the di- vine." Of the natural rights, life and liberty, he says again, " No human legislature, has power to abridge or destroy them, unless the man himself commit some act that amounts to a forfeiture." If then our laws impose upon us the feigned obligation to restore the fugitive slave to the claimant, we are bound to transgress those laws ; not by resistance ; not by shedding blood ; but by the re- fusal of obedience. And why should this be thought worse than for our Revolutionary Sires to refuse obedience to Great Britain ? Why is it worse than for the Puritans to worship God where they pleased, and not where royal authority commanded ? Why worse than to die martyrs to truth ? Why worse than for Soc- rates to drink the poisonous hemlock for instructing the Athenian youth ? No matter if it be urged that the covenant entered into by the States is of a solemn nature and made under peculiar cir- cumstances ; the Great Ruler has established a covenant — di prior covenant between us and the fugitive slave. No matter if it be said that the foundations of our government are laid deep and strong, and must not be moved ; there is a government whose foundations are laid deeper and stronger, and cannot be moved. Arnold was not bound to deliver his country to its enemies be- cause he had signed the traitor's oath. Nor was Judas bound to have received their birth since my oath was taken. Hence, I have made no compact to be a slave hunter. But, however this may be, even though I had taken an oath to re- turn the fugitive, I should be bound to violate or retract it, because it would be an un- lawful oath. As President Wayland remarks in his chapter on veracity !n respect to the future, " No man can be under obligation to violate obligation ; for this would be to suppose a man to be guilty for not being guilty. Much less can he be under obligatioa to violate his obligations to God." For a discussion of the animus imponentis, or obligation accordant to the mind of the one imposing the oath, see Quar. Chris. Spect. Vol. vii. No. 1. See also Dr. Paley and Pros. Wayland on " Promises." 10 betray his Master with a kiss, because he had bartered the Hfe of his Savior for thirty pieces of silver. Nor is the American citi- zen bound to remand the fugitive slave to chains, because he or his ancestors joined hands w^ith the tyrant to reduce God's free- men to bondage. " 'Tis a great sin to swear unto a sin, But greater sin to keep a sinful oath." Our argument on this subject has been as follows: First, it lias been shown from Scripture, that it is duty to obey God rather than men, and after this to be subject unto the higher powers ; that whenever the laws of God and men conflict, we should diso- bey men and peaceably sutler the penalty, or rather, obey God and then obey men by suffering the penalty. SeconJly, the tes- timony of the ablest ethical writers and moral philosophers, and of the profoundest Biblical scholars has been brought forward in favor of the same doctrine. Thirdly, it has been substantiated by the theory and practice of the Fathers of New England, the Pil- grims and Puritans. And fourthly, our duty has been, it is hoped, stated and illustrated by reference to the actual facts of our condition. If these positions are correct, then let us make no agreement or coinpact* wlierehy we shall he withheld fro7n the actual expression of our sentiments on all proper occasions. Let us enter into no league to suppress God's truth, " Though crushed to earth 'twill rise again, The eternal years of God are hers." If we have an unrighteous law or an unrighteous compact in our Constitution, while we obey it by suffering the penalty, not by doing its sin, let us boldly but calmly seek its change. Hu- man constitutions, like their authors, are imperfect. If the wicked rage, and the people imagine a vain thing, let us know that God can stop even the mouths of lions. If all we desire is not ac^ complished in our time, let us leave our work for God to finish when we are gone. * At the time this discourse was delivered, a call was in circulation for a meeting of the citizens of New Haven, ' to express their united opposition to any further agitation of the Compromise Measures adopted at the last Session of Congress, or of the subject of slavery in any form.' C 219 89^M I