C. Edwards Lester, Life and public services of Charles Sumner: Born Jan. 6, 1811. Died March 11, 1874.

[25] it also. It violates the Constitution at pleasure, to build up new slaveholding States. It seeks perpetually to widen its area, while professing to extend the area of freedom. It has brought upon the country war with Mexico, with its enormous expenditures, and more enormous guilt. By the spirit of union among its supporters, it controls the affairs of government; interferes with the cherished interests of the North, enforcing and then refusing protection to her manufactures; makes and unmakes presidents; usurps to itself the larger portion of all offices of honor and profit, both in the army and navy, and also in the civil department; and stamps upon our whole country the character, before the world, of that monstrous anomaly and mockery, a slaveholding republic, with the living truths of freedom on its lips, and the dark mark of slavery printed on its brow.

And shall this Commonwealth continue in any way to sustain an institution which its laws declare to be contrary to natural right, to justice, to humanity and sound policy? Shall the Whigs support what is contrary to the fundamental principles of the party? Here the consciences of good men respond to the judgment of the court. If it be wrong to hold a single slave, it must be wrong to hold many. If it be wrong for an individual to hold a slave, it must be wrong for a State. If it be wrong for a State, in its individual capacity, it must be wrong also, in association with other States. Massachusetts does not allow any of her citizens within her borders to hold slaves. Let her be consistent, and call for the abolition of slavery wherever she is, to any extent, responsible for it, wherever she is a party to it, wherever it may be reached by her influence; that is, everywhere beneath the constitution and laws of the Federal Government. ‘If any practice exist,’ said Mr. Webster, in one of those earlier efforts which commended him to our admiration, his address at Plymouth in 1820—‘If any practices exist, contrary to the principles of justice and humanity, within the reach of our laws or our influence, we are inexcusable if we do not exert ourselves to restrain and abolish them.’

Certainly, to labor in this cause is far higher and nobler than to strive merely for a repeal of the Tariff, which was once mentioned as the tocsin to rally the Whigs. Repeal of Slavery under the Constitution and laws of the Federal Government is a more Christian and more potent watchword, because it embodies a higher sentiment, and a more commanding duty.

The time has passed when this can be opposed on constitutional grounds. It will not be questioned by any competent authority, that