In quitting this topic, I cannot forbear to remark that the assault on me for my disclaimer of all constitutional obligation, resting upon me as Senator or citizen, to aid in enslaving a fellow-man, or in surrendering him to Slavery, comes with ill grace from the veteran Senator from Virginia, a State which, by its far-famed resolutions of 1798, claimed to determine its constitutional obligations, even to the extent of openly declaring two different Acts of Congress null and void; and it comes even more strangely from the venerable Senator from South Carolina, a State which, in latter days, has arrayed itself openly against the national authorities, and which threatens nullification as often as babies cry. Surely the Senator from South Carolina, with his silver-white locks, would have hesitated to lead this assault upon me, had he not for the moment been entirely oblivious of the history of the State which he represents. Not many years have passed since an incident occurred at Charleston, in South Carolina,--not at Boston, in Massachusetts,--which ought to be remembered. The postmaster of that place, acting under a controlling Public Opinion there, informed the head of his Department at Washington that he had determined to suppress all _Antislavery_ publications, and requested instructions for the future. Thus, in violation of the laws of the land, the very mails were rifled, and South Carolina smiled approbation. But still further. The Postmaster-General, Mr. Kendall, after prudently alleging, that, as he had not seen the papers in question, he could not give an opinion of their character, proceeded to say that he had been _informed_ that they were inflammatory, incendiary, and insurrectionary, and then announced:-- "By no act or direction of mine, official or private, could I be induced to aid knowingly in giving circulation to papers of this description, directly or indirectly. _We owe an obligation to the law_, but a _higher_ one to the communities in which we live; and if the former be perverted to destroy the latter, _it is patriotism to disregard them_. Entertaining these views, I cannot sanction, and will not condemn, the step you have taken."[85] [85] Letter of Postmaster-General to Postmaster at Charleston, S. C., August 4, 1835: Niles's Weekly Register, 4th Ser. Vol. XII. p. 448. Such was the approving response of the National Government to the Postmaster of Charleston, when, for the sake of Slavery, and without any constitutional scruple, he set himself against an acknowledged law of the land. And yet the venerable Senator from South Carolina now presumes to denounce me, when, for the sake of Freedom, and in the honest interpretation of my constitutional obligations, I decline an offensive service.