human government, and commanded us to be subject to it. Such
government, with all its unavoidable imperfection and errors, on the
whole is beneficial--indispensable--we could not do without it.--And
rarely, very rarely indeed, is there a single instance of an
individual man, here or beyond the Potomac, whom Law has injured
_more_ than it has benefited. Even if that Law unjustly takes away
his liberty or his life, it may have done him more good than injury;
his liberty or his life might have been sooner and more cruelly
destroyed without it. It would be hard to prove the contrary, in any
one case that ever existed or ever will, here or elsewhere.

The best and wisest Laws ever enacted by man, or that ever will be
enacted by man, may sometimes operate hardly, even destructively,
upon some particular persons. An innocent man may be accused of
murder, tried, convicted, and sentenced to ignominious execution.
But, _what then_? May this man, who _knows_ his innocence, justly
arm himself with deadly weapons, and kill the officer who would
execute the sentence of the Law upon him,--and thus get out of his
hands? May this innocent man's neighbors, who know his innocence as
well as he, "_lawfully interpose their own persons_" betwixt him and
the officer of Law, and thus rescue him?--and may they do this,
because they have decided for themselves, that this is not a case
"_where the administration of justice is concerned_?" If so, then
all Law and Government must soon come to an end, and anarchy, mobs
and confusion reign! If so, then each man becomes really his own
Lawmaker, and when _he thinks_ the Law unjust towards him, may
resist it unto blood! If one man is at liberty to "_be fully
prepared for_ his own defense," and calling the legal officer an
"assailant," or an "assassin," may resist the execution of one law
which he deems hard upon him, then another man may do the same thing