he Constitution."

Mr. Ashman, of Massachusetts, after reciting the clause in the
Constitution which demands the restoration of fugitive slaves, proceeds
as follows: "This reads very plainly, and admits of no doubt but that,
so far as fugitive slaves are concerned, the Constitution fully
recognizes the right to reclaim them from within the limits of the free
States. It is the Constitution which we have all sworn to support, and
which I hope we all mean to support; and I have no mental reservation
excluding any of its clauses from the sanction of that oath. It is too
late now to complain that such a provision is there. Our fathers, who
formed that entire instrument, placed it there, and left it to us as an
inheritance; and nothing but an amendment of the Constitution, or a
violation of our oaths, can tear it out. And, however much we may abhor
slavery, there is no way for honorable, honest--nay, conscientious--men,
who desire to live under our laws and our Constitution, but to abide by
it in its spirit."

In like manner, the Hon. S. A. Douglas, of Illinois, declares: "All I
have to say on that subject is this, that the Constitution provides that
a fugitive from service in one State, escaping into another, 'shall be
delivered up.' The Constitution also provides that no man shall be a
Senator unless he takes an oath to support the Constitution. Then, I
ask, how does a man acquire a right on this floor to speak, except by
taking an oath to support and sustain the Constitution of the United
States? And when he takes that oath, I do not understand that he has a
right to have a mental reservation, or entertain any secret equivocation
that he excepts that clause which relates to the surrender of fugitives
from service. I know not how a man reconciles it to his conscience to
take that oath to support the Constitution, when he believes that
Constitution is in violation of the law of God. If a man thus believes,
and takes the oath, he commits perfidy to his God in order that he may
enjoy the temporary honors of a seat upon this floor. In this point of
view, it is simply a question of whether Senators will be true to their
oaths and true to the Constitution under which we live."

Sec. II. _The attack of Mr. Sumner on the Constitution of his country._

If we have not noticed the arguments of Mr. Chase, of Ohio, it is
because they are reproduced in the celebrated speech of Mr. Sumner, and
because he has so fully indorsed the his