In order that I may be clearly understood, I will reiterate tho foregoing argument.  Before the adoption of the Federal constitution, the states were to a great extent sovereign and independent, and of course were in a condition to settle terms on which to form a more perfect union.  The North and the South, otherwise, the slave-holding and the non-slaveholding states met in convention to settle those terms.  The North in convention conceded to the South the right to hold slave property; and the sole right of making all laws necessary for the regulation of slavery.  It was thus, we see, by a solemn contract or agreement, that the South acquired exclusive right to control domestic slavery within her borders.  What right then, have the citizens of free states, to intermeddle with it?  They have none, as long as the Federal Constitution is the supreme law of the land.  The union of these states is based on that instrument, and whenever we cease faithfully to observe its provisions, the Union must necessarily cease to exist.  All interference then on the part of the North, endangering the rights or injuriously affecting the interests of the South in slave property, is a violation of the supreme law of the nation.  I need not say more; the argument must be clear to every one; and I think the duty of all concerned equally clear.

Ralfe, referring to the adoption of the Federal Constitution, says, “It was no easy task to reconcile the local interests and discordant prepossessions of different sections of the United States, but it was accomplished by acts of concession.”  Madison says, “Mutual deference and concession were absolutely necessary,” and that the Southern States never would have entered the Union, without concession as to slave property.  And Governor Randolph informs us, “That the Southern States conceived their property in slaves to be secured by this arrangement?”

We are also informed by Patrick Henry, Chief Justice Tiglman, Chancellor Kent, Henry Clay, Daniel Webster, Justice Shaw, Chief Justice Parker, Edward Everett and others, that no union of these states ever could have taken place, had not the right to hold slave property, and the sole right to control that property been conceded to the southern States.  And, Edward Everett, moreover, tells us that the northern States “deemed it a point of the highest policy, to enter with the slave states into the present Union.”  The reader will observe, that a majority of the authorities referred to, are northern men of the highest distinction.

I remarked in the preceding pages, that whoever invades the rights of the South in her slave property, violates the law of the land, and is guilty of a civil trespass; and I will now prove from the sacred record, that in opposing the civil laws of their country, they violate the laws of God, and consequently are guilty of a moral trespass.  The primitive church of Christ was, under all circumstances, and at all times, subordinate to the civil authorities.  They never stopped to inquire whether the laws were good or bad, just or unjust; their business was to obey the laws and not to find fault with them.