Then of taxes on imports.  Buying and selling, and carrying from country to country, is good and innocent.  But government, if I trade here, will take occasion to squeeze money out of me.  Very well.  I shall deliberate whether I will cease trading, and deprive them of the opportunity, or go on and use my wealth to reform them.  ’Tis a question of expediency, not of right, which my judgment, not my conscience, must settle.  An act of mine, innocent in itself, and done from right motives, no after act of another’s can make a sin.  To import, is rightful.  After-taxation, against my consent, cannot make it wrong.  Neither am I obliged to smuggle, in order to avoid it.  I include in these remarks, all taxes, whether on property, or imports, or railroads.

A chemist, hundreds of years ago, finds out how to temper steel.  The art is useful for making knives, lancets, and machinery.  But he knows that the bad will abuse it by making swords and daggers.  Is he responsible?  Certainly not.

Similar to this is trading in America,—­knowing government will thus have an opportunity to increase its revenue.

But suppose the chemist to see two men fighting, one has the other down,—­to the first our chemist presents a finely tempered dagger.

Such is voting under the United States Constitution—­appointing an officer to help the oppressor.

The difference between voting and tax-paying is simply this:  I may do an act right in itself, though I know some evil will result.  Paul was bound to preach the gospel to the Jews, though he knew some of them would thereby be led to add to their sins by cursing and mobbing him.

So I may locate property in Philadelphia, trade there, and ride on its railroads, though I know government will, without my consent, thereby enrich itself.  Other things being equal, of course I shall not allow it the opportunity.  But the advantages and good results of my doing so, may be such as would make it my duty there to live and trade, even subject to such an evil.

But on the other hand, I may not do an act wrong in itself to secure any amount of fancied good.

Now, appointing a man by my vote to a pro-slavery office, (and such is every one under the United States Constitution,) is wrong in itself, and no other good deeds which such officer may do, will justify an abolitionist in so appointing him.

Let it not be said, that this reasoning will apply to voting—­that voting is the right of every human being, (which I grant only for the sake of argument,) and innocent in itself.

Voting under our Constitution is appointing a man to swear to protect, and actually to protect slavery.  Now, appointing agents generally is the right of every man, and innocent in itself, but appointing an agent to commit a murder is sin.

I trade, and government taxes me; do I authorize it?  No.