We copy tlie following froni the Report of fhe Executive Commitiee of the Michigan Anli-sJavery Society, publislied in tlie Sigiial of Liberty on the 13ih inst. 'The Lnw by which the free stnfps are required to re-enslave those wlio have flctl from the Southern prison house, is contrarv to btimnnity, to natural jnstice nnd to the rcvealcil will of God, and can therefore have no binding force ipon our citizens. The indications now are that it will soon meet wi'h the iato it UfcsferVÃ¶s and be eutirely disregarded."ilad we sef n suca a deca radon as (Jiis in a religious journa), we should hoyÃ© re garried il onlyns a moral sentiment, whirh if bclieved, itÃ¡ autljor had a right 1o publifh, and we fihouid not have assumed to controvert the principie it would incÃºlcate under such circumstiinces. It would Ãhen properly be regard - ed only as an expression of abliorrcnce oTtlie conseqoences that result from a civil cnactment and a desire that it should speed. ly be repcalcd. But appearin? as it does in a polit ical paper, and sanctioned by the nomos of those who avow that the principies of the Michigan Anti-slavery Society ore to be the basis of their politicol action, it must be reerarded as presenting a very diflerent aspect.-We cnnnot bnt lobk upon it as ah opm and bold dehuntiation of thÃ© CÃ¶nstitutltn uf tlie UhlteÃ States, ahd Ã¡h appeal tb po] t'-cal partjzans to come forward" and cid nhd cooperÃ³te in theresistanceofthe execuiion of the Jnws of the land. Such beiriff cur views of the matter we Teel constraincd to direct public attention to the subject. Thougj we heve never co-operated uiih tl, e pojiticnl abolitionislF, we have not bren amona inore who have trealed thom as acÃ¼ng under nny other influences than a desiie to promote the best interest of the north, and bmrfit and ""Prove tlie conditicn of the unibrtnnute slave. ye have only been apart frein thern iti our views of tlie best policy lo be ueed in accotnplishingr the benevolent and patnotic purposes ny which they have been actnatcd. No one rrgards with moreabhorence,theconFcq(iences of slavery npon the social, moral, politica!, and finoncml condition of the United SiaNs. thanwc do- and no one would be more assÃduoos mcarrying out to a successful terminntÃon. nny plan that ve should think as cqual to their feJcterminatiot;. But while sueh are our opin_ i'ons and feelings, we are not yet convinced that a political orgnnization is the meOiod tl.at should receive our support. We inake tlie.-e remarks vvith littlc expcctation that lliey w-fll nripet with tlie approval of tlie po]:ical abolitionists, but we hope tliey will be rr?nrded as Httered in candor and commend whÃ¡t may fol'.ow to be unprejudiced consideration of those with whoi.i we may difler in opiniÃ³n. The sentiment inculcated in tlie above extract, we cannot believe will rcceivo the sanetion of thÃ¶se to whom it is addresped. As we Iiave before said, it is revolulionary in itsciency, and enterlaming respect k. confidence in those who are attached to the liberty party, po called, we shall venture to review 'the doctrine Ã¯t disemÃnales in the contident belief that otir remarks will not be considcred by theni as presumptuous or made in the spirit f contention ond fault finding-. As we undereland Uie purport of ihoir lannfiiaire, it is nothing' lees thon a dcclaiaiion, ihorp h courhed in guarded language, fiat an eXecuÃ¼ve officer acting under the posi'ive enactmrnts of the Jand; is without authority to re-cns!ave a runaWay, and that tlie slave wouJd be justified in resistttjg evefn unto death, an attehipt to take lUttl Ã¯flto CÃ¼Stody, and a wc think, ns a corolnry it woul.I folloW that hts frleflda woulc be without blame sliould thry aid hiin in staymg the hnnd of his opnressor - or in o: her worde, it is a recommendation to the elave lo resist the execntive authority of the country, Ã¶nd to his friends to aid him in sucli resisiance as the Iaw is of no binding force. If we areinisiaKen m tne conception of jts import of conrse our remarks will be wil hout point, but assummg that it coiiveys the nieaniug we have ascribed to it, let us see how such a principie would opÃ©rate. -An nnalagous cose will aptly exhibitihe consequenccs of its adoption. 'At this time there are many among us vvho regard capital punishment ns "contrary to humanity, to natural justice, and to the revealed will of God' Ã¶nd perhaps coultl the majorily speak, the law placing the halter in the hands of the executioncr, wodd be so declared. But nevertheJess the law of the land yet declares the hfe of the murderer forfeitcd, anÃ¶ compels executive offieora to exact the penalty. Take the late case of Colt as an cxample. Ãn that instance it seemed to hare been almost the united wish of the community n which he lived, that the hand of the executive sln-uld be stayed by executive clemency, but il was against the stern intffrrify of the chiefmagistrate of the staie of New York, and had not self destruclion been pre ferred to the (errora of the gallows, the sheriff would have been required to exccufe the...ciiu ui i;iu vyourc ana e.vecuted Lolt. IV o w snppose the majority of the citizens of New York had regardcd capital pun;shment as contra ry to the sanctions, that are said not lo sustam the law for re-enslavin a fuitive from a slaye state, and in ilieir sympathies for H.e culprit, had rcsistcd bis execuÃ¼on, .woiild the hberty party have sustained tl)etn in theiracts? VVould such a procedure under bucIi circmnstances have been approvetl? Unless the civil compact and all political obliga: ion are to be disregarded opnn the suggestions of those who may chance to think them not based upon the law of God. Such a course of conÃ³uct could nol roceive the sanctioft of any one. If the private opiniÃ³n of a portion of oÃºr community would justify a mob in staving the handot tlie Jaw, tliere can be no secnrity left for tnose who happen not to concur witli tiiem in opiniÃ³n. ButJet us referiÃ³ anolher cxampÃ¯c where ihcre is a great diflbrence of opiniÃ³n ns '.o the ! jusfice nnd equality of a public law. The I nff is regardcd by the scuth as oppressive, Ijnpf, ond nat in iccord.-mce wilh ihc principie of( qual lig-lits as guaranteed by liie Constituâ tien and in din et violution of llie command i "to ]ove tliy neighbor as tJiysÃ©Ã¯f' The north cnienains antugonist opinions - vrLich is Ãn the j right, this is not place to decido, liut wh'ere c:in ihe Ã±iah be fouiitl Ã¨thong i le Ã¡bolitionis'p, who wijl sustnin tlie South Carolina nnllification doctrine. VVIien we offlie north , nre irrspufsing as is allec'ed, tipon tlie rigli!s ' tl. e slaveholdor. do one is reudy to justify Itirrn n a?suii)ing ll,e position that the laws otthelund have no binding fone - no one is willing o sustain ili tn in the doctrine that ihry are lo beG'isrfgnrdf-tl. And ivliy is il so, tha' a rnJe that is= approvcd in one cuse is not rqnally apphcable in ano'hcr ofa similar charo eter? Is it not wortiiy f c-onsKlcrnton, tvhnl it is, tliat operates 10 mnke fnen jtidgÃ¶ f o difil rcntly, where the sanie : principie is proponed to be applird to precisely ! similar caer?. JJoes it. not bccome ije Ãiberiy ' paity to reflreta moment in view of what we .have proÃenicd, beforc thoy rvc ifi their soiiction lo the doctrine tl.-at a minority breven a mnjority have tiie rig-lit to eetile tiic questiun iu n give'n vnsOf that lmrnnn rnactmpnts pnsscd bv tie consiituied li'fjisl.uive bodies of onr country nrc williout binding force, becanse Iliey OFsume llirm to bccontrary "lo liuniniii iy, npturaJ justice and the revealcd will of God." ShoÃ¼ld sucli a piinciple once gri a snrÃ¨ foot hold fnontr ns, (and Ihe repen lod acrounts of mobs iu oppDiiiion ta Anii-flnverv niceiinp:s, lyftchiiigis ricts nnd tumulrs thatfill our print?, lietoken lliat it is gaining ground) nnarchy and all of ifs ciMispqucnt evili, would inevitably fr-ooii be iipon ns. Let t once be understood i ihat the intr]pnt and chrjs'ion porlion of our poople ivopld esnetiun in nyone insiance the Ivioiauoii ur me lawd ot the lamÃ, and nrillier propertyor persons wouÃd hove any gÃ¼Ã¡rtfbtee ofsalety. Such are our opiniÃ³ns and sucb vc think wÃl! be the opinioiis of all who will not blind Iheir eyes by refnsingthe lighUvhen it militates against w'lmt they liave claimcd lo bc the paramount interest of Ihe coniumniLet uÃ¶ Ãiot lie understood Ãis snnccionin? slavfry or nny oÃ'tlie l.-.vs that oppertain to its continunnee or protect.ion, ih any thing we hÃ¡vesaid. We regrird ti cm botli as evils, and veare nnxoiis and rrady tu do any tlihiÃr consistfiu witli Uie best inleVests of the sinve nnd his niaster, Ão fcciire tlie iinnÃ¼iilation of slaverj', and repral llie lawa which Fusfain it. We are nuly t) oppupitfon Jo the piinciple tliat public enaelments should be ditirrpardecÃ¯, ! whÃ¼e they romain tipÃn the Statulo L'ook.- TJjeieniedy iÃ¡ repeal, not resistance.