some other Commissioner, or else carried off with no further mock trial. I think it would have been done; but Commissioner Loring was ready to do the work demanded of
him, and earn his twofold pay.
The conduct of the Governor requires some explanation. The law of Massachusetts was cloven down by the sword of the Marshal; no officer could be found to serve the writ of personal replevin, designed by the Massachusetts Legislature to meet exactly such cases, and bring Mr. Burns before a Massachusetts court. The Governor could not be induced to attend to it: Monday he was at the meeting of the Bible Society; Thursday at the meeting of the Sunday Schools. If the United States Marshal had invaded the sovereignty of South Carolina, where do you think her Governor would have been?
The conduct of the Mayor of Boston deserves to be remembered. He had the police of the city in Court Square, aiding the kidnapper. It was not their fault. They served against their will. Captain Hayes, of the police, that day magnanimously resigned his charge.[1] The Mayor called out the soldiers at great cost, to some one.
- ↑ Here is the note of Mr. Hayes to the city authorities; one day his children will deem it a noble trophy:—
"Boston, June 2, 1854
"To His Honour the Mayor and the Aldermen of the City of Boston:—
"Through all the excitement attendant upon the arrest and trial of the fugitive by the United States Government., I have not received an order which I have conceived inconsistent with my duties as an officer of the police until this day, at which time I have received an order which, if performed, would implicate me in the execution of that infamous 'Fugitive Slave Bill.’
"I therefore resign the office which I now hold as a Captain of the Watch and Police from this hour, 11 a.m.
"Most respectfully yours,
"Joseph K. Hayes."
Commissioner himself consented to be at his post until midnight of Saturday, to give his official service for the object—I repeat, in view of
all these considerations, the conclusion must come home irresistibly to every candid mind, that there was one personage who, officially or individually, in this connection either did do, or left undone, something
whereby his interference became essential to a less painful termination of this case.
"Respectfully,
