{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_28328/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_28328","id":"gutenberg_28328","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/28328","summary":null,"tags":["American Party","Campaign literature, 1865 -- American","Category: History - American","Category: Politics","Category: Religion/Spirituality","Tennessee -- Politics and government","United States -- Politics and government -- 1853-1857"],"text":"Produced by Bryan Ness, Josephine Paolucci and the Online\nDistributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net. (This\nbook was produced from scanned images of public domain\nmaterial from the Google Print project.)\n\n\n\n\n\n\n[Illustration: REV. W. G. BROWNLOW.]\n\n\n\n\nAMERICANISM CONTRASTED\n\nWITH\n\nForeignism, Romanism, and Bogus Democracy,\n\nIN THE LIGHT OF\n\nREASON, HISTORY, AND SCRIPTURE;\n\nIN WHICH\n\nCERTAIN DEMAGOGUES IN TENNESSEE, AND ELSEWHERE, ARE SHOWN UP IN THEIR\nTRUE COLORS.\n\nBY\n\nWILLIAM G. BROWNLOW,\n\nEDITOR OF \"BROWNLOW'S KNOXVILLE WHIG.\"\n\n        \"----Go to your bloody rites again:\n    Preach--perpetuate damnation in your den;\n    Then let your altars, ye blasphemers, peal\n    With thanks to Heaven, that let you loose again,\n    To practice deeds with torturing fire and steel,\n    No eye may search, no tongue may challenge or reveal!\"\n\n            THOMAS CAMPBELL.\n\nNashville, Tenn.:\nPUBLISHED FOR THE AUTHOR.\n1856.\n\nENTERED, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1856, by\nWILLIAM G. BROWNLOW,\nIn the Clerk's office of the District Court for the Middle District of\nTennessee.\n\n\n\n\nDedication.\n\n\nTO THE YOUNG MEN OF AMERICA.\n\nYOUNG GENTLEMEN:--Almighty God has conferred on you the peculiar honor\nand the eminent responsibility of preserving and perpetuating the\nliberties of this country, both civil and religious. That the American\npeople are on the eve of an eventful period, will not be doubted by any\nsane man, who can discern the \"signs of the times.\" Indeed, it is an\nevery-day remark, that, as a nation, we are in the midst of a crisis.\nIf, however, a crisis ever did exist in the affairs of this Nation,\nsince its independence was first achieved, which called upon the NATIVE\nAND LEGAL VOTERS of the country to watch with sleepless vigilance over\ntheir blood-bought liberties, that crisis must be dated in the year of\nour Lord, ONE THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED AND FIFTY-SIX! The great\nCommonwealth of Humanity, in behalf of the momentous interests of Truth,\nLiberty, and Religion, calls upon the present generation of YOUNG MEN,\nwho will have the issues of a coming revolution to meet, to qualify\nthemselves for the task.\n\nThere never was a time known, since the dark days of the Revolution,\nwhen the civil and religious liberties of this country were so much\nendangered as at the present time. This danger we are threatened with\nfrom _Foreign influence_, and the rapid strides of _Romanism_, to which\nwe may add _Native treachery_, connived at, as they are, by certain\nleading demagogues of the country, and a powerful and influential\npolitical party, falsely called _Democrats_, who seek the Foreign and\nCatholic vote, and are willing to obtain it at the expense of Liberty,\nand the sacrifice of the Protestant Religion!\n\nThe great criminal of the nineteenth century, the PAPAL HIERARCHY, is\nnow on trial before the bar of public opinion, having been arraigned by\nthe AMERICAN PARTY. You are called on to decide, YOUNG MEN, as you wield\nthe balance of power, whether this Criminal, arraigned for treason\nagainst God, and hostility to the human race, deserves the execrations\nof all honest and patriotic men, and avenging judgments of a righteous\nGod! In order to decide this grave question, YOUNG _Gentlemen of the\nNineteenth Century_, you are to consider the inevitable tendency of the\nprinciples of the Church of Rome--the actual results of these tendencies\nas embodied in history--the indictment brought in by the AMERICAN PARTY,\nand the testimony of the witnesses. When you have intelligently\nconsidered the part the self-styled _Democratic Party_ has acted in this\ninfamous drama, you will feel it to be your duty to indict the\ncorporation claiming the right to be called the Great Democratic Party,\nas _accessory_ to the treason, crimes, and infamy, of the aforesaid\nPapal Hierarchy!\n\nTo you, then, Gentlemen, is this brief work most affectionately\ninscribed by\n\n     THE AUTHOR.\n\n\n\n\nPREFACE.\n\n\nFor the last twenty-five years, the writer of this work has employed\nmuch of his time in the reading and study of the controversy between\nRoman Catholics and Protestants. And those who have been subscribers to\nthe paper he has edited and published for the LAST SEVENTEEN YEARS, will\nbear him witness that he has kept up a fierce and unceasing fire against\nthat dangerous and immoral _Corporation_, claiming the right to be\ncalled the HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH. This he has done, and still continues\nto do, because he believes firmly that the system of Popery, as taught\nin the standards of the Church of Rome, as enforced by her Bishops and\nPriests, and as believed and practised by the great body of Romanists,\nboth in Europe and America, is at war with the true religion taught in\nthe Bible, and is injurious to the public and private morals of the\ncivilized world; and, if unchecked, will overturn the civil and\nreligious liberties of the United States. Such, he believes, is its\ntendency and the design of its leaders.\n\nPopery is deceitful in its character; and the design of this brief work\nis, in part, to drag it forward into the light of the middle of the\nnineteenth century, to strip the flimsy vizor off its face, and to bring\nit, with all its abuses, corruptions, and hypocritical Protestant\nadvocates, before the bar of enlightened public opinion, for judgment in\nthe case. Roman Catholics misrepresent their own creed, their Church,\nand its corrupt institutions. The most revolting, wicked, and immoral\nfeatures of their _holy and immutable system_, are kept out of sight by\nits corrupt Clergy, and Jesuitical teachers; while, with a purpose to\n_deceive_, a _Protestant sense_ is attached to most of their doctrines\nand peculiarities. By this vile means, they designedly _misrepresent\nthemselves_, and impose on the public, by inducing charitable and\nuninformed persons to believe that they are not as profligate as they\nare represented to be. This game has been played with a bold hand in\n_Knoxville_, for the last twelve months, and it is being played in every\ncity and town in the South and West, where Romanism is being planted.\nOne object, then, of this _epitomized_ work, setting forth the\nboastings, threats, and disclosures of leading Catholic organs and\nBishops, as to their real principles and designs upon this country,\nsuffered to go forth in their more excited moments, or unguarded hours,\nis, to spread before the people, in a cheap form, true Popery, and to\nstrip it of its _Protestant garb_, which it has for the time being\nassumed.\n\nAn additional reason for bringing out this publication, at this\nparticular time, is, to expose a corrupt bargain entered into by the\nleaders of the Catholic Church, and the leaders of a corrupt and\ndesigning political party, falsely called the Democratic party. One of\nthe most alarming \"signs of the times\" is, that while Protestant\nministers, of different persuasions, only two brief years ago, could\npreach with power and eloquence against the dogmas and corrupting\ntendencies of _Romanism_, and pass out of the doors of their churches,\nreceiving the compliments and extravagant praises of their entire\ncongregations, let one of them now dare to hold up this Corporation as a\ndangerous foreign enemy--let him warn his charge against the influence\nof Popery, or but only designate the Catholic Hierarchy as the \"man of\nsin\" described in the Scriptures, and one half of his congregation are\ngrossly insulted: they charge him with meddling in politics; and, by way\nof resentment, they will either not hear him again, or they will starve\nhim out, by refusing to contribute to his support!\n\nThe hypocritical and profligate portion of the Methodist, Presbyterian,\nBaptist, and Episcopal membership in this country, are not so much\nmisled by Popery, as they are influenced by _party politics_, and are in\nlove with the _loose moral code_ of Romanism. It lays no restraints on\ntheir lusts, and gives a loose rein to all their unsanctified passions\nand desires. Backslidden, unconverted, or unprincipled members of\nProtestant Churches, find in Popery a _sympathizing irreligion_, adapted\nto their vicious lives; and hence they fall in with its disgusting\nsuperstitions and insulting claims. They are, therefore, ensnared with\nthe delusions of Popery, of _choice_. In other words, Popery is a\nsystem of mere human policy; altogether of Foreign origin; Foreign in\nits support; importing Foreign vassals and paupers by multiplied\nthousands; and sending into every State and Territory in this Union, a\nmost baneful Foreign and anti-Republican influence. Its old _goutified_,\nimmoral, and drunken Pope, his Bishops and Priests, are _politicians_;\nmen of the world, earthly, sensual, and devilish, and mere men of\npleasure. Associated with them for the purpose, in great State and\nNational contests, of securing the Catholic vote, are the worst class of\nAmerican politicians, designing demagogues, selfish office-seekers, and\nbad men, calling themselves _Democrats_ and \"Old-Line Whigs!\" These\npoliticians know that Popery, as a system, is in the hands of a Foreign\ndespotism, precisely what the Koran is in the hands of the Grand Turk\nand his partisans. But corrupt and ambitious politicians in this\ncountry, are willing to act the part of traitors to our laws and\nConstitution, for the sake of profitable offices; and they are willing\nto sacrifice the Protestant Religion, on the ancient and profligate\naltar at Rome, if they may but rise to distinction on its ruins!\n\nThe great Democratic party of this country, which has degenerated into a\n_Semi-Papal Organization_, for the base purposes of power and plunder,\nnow fully partakes of the intolerant spirit of Rome, and is acting it\nout in all the departments of our State and General Governments. What\nRomanism has been to the Old World, this Papal and Anti-American\norganization seeks and promises to be to this country. What is Popery in\nRoman Catholic Europe? It is as intolerant in politics as in religion:\nit taxes and oppresses the subjects and citizens of every country; it\ninterdicts nations; dethrones governors, chief magistrates, and kings;\ndissolves civil governments; suspends commerce; annuls civil laws; and,\nto gratify its unsanctified lust of ambition, it has overrun whole\nnations with bloodshed, and thrown them into confusion. So it is with\nthis \"_Bogus_\" Democracy: it wages a war of extermination against the\nfreedom of the press, and against the liberty of speech, the rights of\nhuman conscience, and the liberties of man: hence its indiscriminate\nproscription of all who dare to unite with the AMERICAN PARTY, or openly\nespouse their cause. Popery aims at universal power over the bodies and\nsouls of all men; and history proclaims that its weapons have been\ndungeons, racks, chains, fire, and sword! The _bastard_ Democracy of the\npresent age has united with the Prelates, Priests, Monks, and Nuns of\nRomanism, and is daily affiliating with hundreds of thousands of the\nvery off-scourings of the European Catholic population--stimulating them\nto deeds of violence, and to the shedding of blood! To-day, they sustain\na _Baker_ in the foul murder of a _Poole_, in New York, because he was a\nmember of the so-called Know-Nothing party, which had just routed, in an\nelection, this Foreign Locofoco party! To-morrow, we find this same vile\nparty, its editors and orators, sustaining a Foreign Catholic Mob in\nLouisville, Ky.; and the members of the same party, in surrounding\nStates, exulting over the murder of Protestant Americans! And in the\nnext breath, as it were, we find these sons of Belial, falsely called\n_Democrats_, after reaching the power they lusted after in Philadelphia,\nsending up shouts over the lawless deeds of a Foreign Catholic riot,\nwhich made the ears of every American citizen to tingle!\n\nUnder the guidance of an ALL-WISE PROVIDENCE, the Protector of our\nRepublic, and of the Protestant Religion, it is in the power of the free\nand independent voters of these United States to cause this enemy's long\n\"_arm to be clean dried up, and his right eye to be utterly darkened_,\"\nby elevating to the two first offices within the gift of the world,\nMILLARD FILLMORE and ANDREW J. DONELSON!\n\nI am, candid Reader, your fellow-citizen,\n\n     W. G. BROWNLOW.\n\n     KNOXVILLE, July, 1856.\n\n\nAMERICANISM CONTRASTED\n\nWITH\n\nForeignism, Romanism, and Bogus Democracy.\n\n\n\n\nINTRODUCTORY CHAPTER.\n\n     The Creed of the American Party--The Platform misrepresented by\n     Mr. Watkins--Official Vote on the adoption of the new\n     Platform--What the Abolitionists and Democrats say of the\n     Platform--Seceders from the Nominating Convention, and their\n     Address.\n\n\nLord Byron, just as the war of Greece approached, said: \"It is not one\nman, nor a million, but the _spirit of liberty_ which must be spread;\"\nand, carrying out the same bold idea of liberty, he continues, \"It is\ntime to act;\" or, in the language of the Know Nothing salutation, \"It is\ntime for work;\" for \"what signifies _self_, if a single spark of that\ngenius of liberty worthy of the past, can be bequeathed unquenchably to\nthe future?\" In the language of a fair poetess:\n\n              --\"Our country is a whole,\n    Of which we all are parts; nor should a citizen\n    Regard his interests as distinct from hers:\n    No hopes or fears should touch his patriot soul,\n    But what affects her honor or her shame.\"\n\nThe civilization--the nationality--the institutions, civil and\nreligious--and the mission of the United States, are all eminently\nAmerican. Mental light and personal independence, constitutional union,\nnational supremacy, submission to law and rules of order, homogeneous\npopulation, and instinctive patriotism, are all vital elements of\nAmerican liberty, nationality, and upward and onward progress. Foreign\nimmigration, foreign Catholic influence, and sectional factions\nnourished by them--and breeding demagogues in the name of _Democracy_,\nby a prostitution of the elective franchise--have already corrupted our\nnationality, degraded our councils, both State and National, weakened\nthe bonds of union, disturbed our country's peace, and awakened\napprehensions of insecurity and _progressive deterioration_, threatening\nultimate ruin! To rescue and restore American institutions--to maintain\nAmerican nationality, and to secure American birthrights, is the mission\nand the sole purpose of the AMERICAN PARTY--composed of conservative,\npatriotic, Protestant, Union-loving, native-born citizens of every\nsection, and of every Christian denomination--self-sacrificing patriots,\nwho prefer their country, and the religion of their fathers, and of the\nBible, to a factious name, a plundering political organization, and an\ninfamous Papal hierarchy!\n\nThe paramount and ultimate object of our AMERICAN ORGANIZATION is to\nsave and exalt the Union, and to preserve and perpetuate the rights and\nblessings of the Protestant religion. We contend that American\nprinciples should mould American policy; that American mind should rule\nAmerican destiny; that all sectional parties, such as a party _North_,\nor a party _South_, should be renounced; that all sectional agitations,\nsuch as are kept up by Abolitionists, Free Soilers, and Black\nRepublicans, should be resisted; that Congress should never agitate the\nsubject of domestic slavery, in any form or for any purpose, but leave\nit where the Constitution fixes it; that as the destiny of the country\ndepends on the mind of the country, intelligence should rule; that the\nballot-box should be purified, and corrupt Romanism and foreign\ninfluence checked; that any allegiance \"to any foreign prince,\npotentate, or power\"--to any power, regal or pontifical, should be\nrebuked as the most fatal canker of the germ of American independence;\nthat every citizen should be encouraged to exercise freely his own\nconscience; and that the popular mind should be enlightened, and the\npopular heart rectified, by proper and universal Christian education.\nThis is the essence of the American creed; and when methodized into a\nPolitical Decalogue, it constitutes the _Ten Commandments_ of the\nAmerican party.\n\nIn this connection, and at this point, we will give the much-abused\nPlatform of the American party, adopted at the session of the National\nCouncil, February 21, 1856. Examine the Platform, and answer to your\nconscience the question: What true American head can disapprove--what\npure American heart can revolt? Can men taking their stand on this\nPlatform be the enemies of civil and religious liberties? Can either\ncivil or religious liberties rest secure on any other grounds? And must\nnot those \"Bogus\" Democrats and Anti-Americans, therefore, who wage war\nagainst this citadel of American birthrights, act as enemies to the\nFederal Constitution, enemies to the Union, to the mental independence\nof American citizens--enemies to the Protestant religion, and enemies,\nconsequently, \"to civil and religious liberty?\"\n\n     PLATFORM OF THE AMERICAN PARTY.\n\n     1st. An humble acknowledgment to the Supreme Being for his\n     protecting care vouchsafed to our fathers in their successful\n     Revolutionary struggle, and hitherto manifested to us, their\n     descendants, in the preservation of the liberties, the\n     independence, and the union of these States.\n\n     2d. The perpetuation of the Federal Union, as the palladium of\n     our civil and religious liberties, and the only sure bulwark of\n     American Independence.\n\n     3d. _Americans must rule America_, and to this end,\n     _native_-born citizens should be selected for all State,\n     Federal, and municipal offices, or government employment, in\n     preference to all others: nevertheless,\n\n     4th. Persons born of American parents residing temporarily\n     abroad, should be entitled to all the rights of native-born\n     citizens; but,\n\n     5th. No person should be selected for political station,\n     (whether of native or foreign birth,) who recognizes any\n     allegiance or obligation of any description, to any foreign\n     prince, potentate, or power, or who refuses to recognize the\n     Federal and State constitutions (each within its sphere) as\n     paramount to all other laws, as rules of political action.\n\n     6th. The unqualified recognition and maintenance of the\n     reserved rights of the several States, and the cultivation of\n     harmony and fraternal good-will between the citizens of the\n     several States; and to this end, non-interference by Congress\n     with questions appertaining solely to the individual States,\n     and non-intervention by each State with the affairs of any\n     other State.\n\n     7th. The recognition of the right of the native-born and\n     naturalized citizens of the United States, permanently residing\n     in any Territory thereof, to frame their constitution and laws,\n     and to regulate their domestic and social affairs in their own\n     mode, subject only to the provisions of the Federal\n     Constitution, with the privilege of admission into the Union\n     whenever they have the requisite population for one\n     Representative in Congress. _Provided always_, that none but\n     those who are citizens of the United States, under the\n     constitution and laws thereof, and who have a fixed residence\n     in any such Territory, ought to participate in the formation of\n     the constitution, or in the enactment of laws for said\n     Territory or State.\n\n     8th. An enforcement of the principle that no State or Territory\n     ought to admit others than citizens of the United States to the\n     right of suffrage, or of holding political office.\n\n     9th. A change in the laws of naturalization, making a continued\n     residence of twenty-one years, of all not hereinbefore provided\n     for, an indispensable requisite for citizenship hereafter, and\n     excluding all paupers, and persons convicted of crime, from\n     landing upon our shores; but no interference with the vested\n     rights of foreigners.\n\n     10th. Opposition to any union between Church and State: no\n     interference with religious faith or worship, and no test-oaths\n     for office.\n\n     11th. Free and thorough investigation into any and all alleged\n     abuses of public functionaries, and a strict economy in public\n     expenditures.\n\n     12th. The maintenance and enforcement of all laws\n     constitutionally enacted, until said laws shall be repealed, or\n     shall be declared null and void by competent judicial\n     authority.\n\n     13th. Opposition to the reckless and unwise policy of the\n     present administration in the general management of our\n     national affairs, and more especially as shown in removing\n     \"Americans\" (by designation) and conservatives in principle,\n     from office, and placing foreigners and ultraists in their\n     places: as shown in a truckling subserviency to the stronger,\n     and an insolent and cowardly bravado toward the weaker powers:\n     as shown in reoepening sectional agitation, by the repeal of the\n     Missouri Compromise: as shown in granting to unnaturalized\n     foreigners the right of suffrage in Kansas and Nebraska: as\n     shown in its vacillating course on the Kansas and Nebraska\n     question: as shown in the corruptions which pervade some of the\n     departments of the government: as shown in disgracing\n     meritorious naval officers through prejudice or caprice; and as\n     shown in the blundering mismanagement of our foreign relations.\n\n     14th. Therefore, to remedy existing evils, and prevent the\n     disastrous consequences otherwise resulting therefrom, we would\n     build up the \"American party\" upon the principles hereinbefore\n     stated.\n\n     15th. That each State Council shall have authority to amend\n     their several constitutions, so as to abolish the several\n     degrees, and institute a pledge of honor, instead of other\n     obligations, for fellowship and admission into the party.\n\n     16th. A free and open discussion of all political principles\n     embraced in our platform.\n\nThe HON. MR. WATKINS, a renegade from the American ranks, in East\nTennessee, delivered a speech in Congress on the 6th of May, 1856; which\nspeech we find reported in the _Washington Union_--a speech which\nbetrays an utter ignorance of the point he undertook to discuss. It is\ndue to _his betrayed constituents_ that we should expose his ignorance,\nand the blundering fallacy of his attempts to justify his turning\n_Locofoco Cataline Judas Sag-Nicht_! He says, as reported by his\npolitical organ-grinder:\n\n     \"But, sir, the platform recently adopted by the Philadelphia\n     Convention cannot receive my approbation. I cannot support Mr.\n     Fillmore, or any other distinguished Whig, upon that platform.\n     The only solitary plank in the Philadelphia platform of June,\n     1855, was the twelfth section--that section which denied to\n     Congress the right to interfere with slavery in the\n     Territories, declaring the doctrine of non-intervention, and of\n     popular sovereignty in the Territories. But, sir, that plank in\n     the platform was stricken out by the convention recently held,\n     and the sixth resolution of the platform then adopted\n     substituted in its place. And what does that resolution\n     endorse? Is there any non-intervention in the sixth resolution\n     of the Philadelphia platform? Is there any denial of the right\n     of Congress to interfere upon the subject of slavery in the\n     sixth resolution of the Philadelphia platform? Certainly not.\"\n\nIn lieu of the _June_ platform, we have this _February_ platform. The\nJune platform contained _no such denial to Congress_, as is here alleged\nby Mr. Watkins, of the right to interfere with slavery in the\nTerritories! And it is marvellous, indeed, that a grave Member of\nCongress should undertake to discuss Platforms, which he had either\nnever read, or the purport of which, if he had ever read them, he had\neither wholly forgotten, or lacked the sense to comprehend! The twelfth\nsection of the June Platform says:\n\n     \"And expressly _pretermitting any expression of opinion_ upon\n     the power of Congress to establish or prohibit slavery in any\n     Territory, it is the sense of this National Council, that\n     Congress OUGHT NOT to legislate upon the subject of slavery\n     within the Territories of the United States.\"\n\nThus, instead of _denying_ to Congress the right to interfere with\nslavery in the Territories, as erroneously and recklessly charged by\nthis new-born Democrat, all opinion on that subject was \"_expressly\npretermitted_\" in the June Platform! Mr. Watkins was in such a hurry to\njoin the Forney, Pierce, and Catholic Democracy, that he did not stop to\nexamine even the Platform which most disgusted him! But this is not the\nworst blunder which he committed in that speech. He turned to the new\nPlatform, and asked, with an air of triumph:\n\n     \"Is there any non-intervention in the sixth resolution of the\n     (new) Philadelphia platform? Is there any denial of the right\n     of Congress to interfere with the subject of slavery in the\n     sixth resolution of the (new) Philadelphia platform?\"\n\nAnd he answers, \"_Certainly not!_\" The ignorant man, it would seem, only\nread as far as to the sixth section of the new Platform; and even _that_\nsection contains a direct affirmative answer to his question; which, in\norder to place the American party in a false position, he answers,\n\"_Certainly not!_\"\n\nNow, we ask such as may have noticed his _misrepresentations_, to read a\n_little further on_, at least to the end of the 7th section of this new\nPlatform, and see where it leaves Mr. Watkins! Turn back to the 7th\nsection, and it will be seen that this section, instead of\n\"_pretermitting any opinion_\" on the question, announces the doctrine\nthat the citizens of the United States permanently residing in the\nTerritories, have a \"_right_\" to frame their Constitution and laws, and\nto regulate their domestic affairs in their own mode, subject only to\nthe provisions of the Federal Constitution!\n\nThe _New York Evening Post_, a Pierce and foreign Democratic organ, thus\nalludes to the action of the Convention which nominated FILLMORE and\nDONELSON:--\n\n     \"The 12th section of the June Platform, it is true, had been\n     abrogated; BUT IT HAD BEEN REPLACED BY ANOTHER, MEANING\n     PRECISELY THE SAME THING!\"\n\nThe _Cincinnati Gazette_, an Abolition, Anti-American Foreign sheet,\ncame out in opposition to the American nominees, in its issue of Feb.\n29th, 1856, on account of the _Pro-slavery_ character of the new\nPlatform. The Gazette says:--\n\n     \"We are glad that the action of the Convention _proved so\n     decided as to leave no doubt as to the character of the\n     Platform_. THE LATTER IS CLEARLY AND DECIDEDLY PRO-SLAVERY AND\n     NEBRASKA, _and in this respect corresponds precisely with the_\n     PRINCIPLES OF THE PIERCE DEMOCRACY! _Fillmore and Donelson_ are\n     therefore presented to the American people as candidates for\n     the Presidency and Vice Presidency, ON A THOROUGH AND DECIDED\n     NEBRASKA PRO-SLAVERY PLATFORM, and the citizens of Northern\n     States are asked to vote for them!\"\n\nThe _New York Tribune_, whose editor was a prominent member of the\nPittsburgh Black Republican Convention, and who is violent in his\nopposition to FILLMORE and DONELSON, says:\n\n     \"The object of the Know Nothings has dwindled down to this--TO\n     DEFEAT THE REPUBLICAN PARTY! That is to say, this is the object\n     of those who have managed the Philadelphia Convention, and\n     nominated Mr. Fillmore. I have diligently inquired for a member\n     who voted for _Banks_ for Speaker, and now supports _Fillmore_;\n     but up to this time--more than three days after the\n     nomination--I have not heard of one. That sort must be scarce!\"\n\nThe following is the OFFICIAL vote on the adoption of the new Platform\nby the National Council, which met four days previous to the Nominating\nConvention:\n\n     NEW HAMPSHIRE--_Nays_--Messrs. Colby and Emery.\n\n     MASSACHUSETTS--_Yeas_--Messrs. Ely, Weith, Brewster, Robinson,\n     and Arnold. _Nays_--Messrs. Richmond, Wheelwright, Temple,\n     Thurston, Sumner, Allen, Sawin, and Hawkes.\n\n     CONNECTICUT--_Nays_--Messrs. Sperry, Dunbar, Peck, Booth,\n     Holley, and Perkins.\n\n     RHODE ISLAND--_Yeas_--Messrs. Chase and Knight. _Nays_--Messrs.\n     Simons and Nightingale.\n\n     NEW YORK--_Yeas_--Messrs. Walker, Oakley, Morgan, Woodward,\n     Reynolds, Chester, Owens, Sanders, Whiston, Nichols, Van Dusen,\n     Westbrook, Parsons, Picket, Campbell, Lowell, Sammons, Oakes,\n     Seymour, Squire, Cooper, Burr, Bennett, Marvine, Midler,\n     Stephens, Johnson, Wetmore, Hammond, and S. Seymour. _Nay_--Mr.\n     Barker.\n\n     DELAWARE--_Yeas_--Messrs. Clement and Smithers.\n\n     MARYLAND--_Yeas_--Messrs. Codet, Alexander, Winchester,\n     Stephens, and Wilmot. _Nays_--Messrs. Purnell, Ricaud, Pinkney,\n     and Kramer.\n\n     VIRGINIA--_Nays_--Messrs. Bolling, McHugh, Cochran, Boteler,\n     Preston, and Maupin.\n\n     FLORIDA--_Yea_--Mr. Call.\n\n     NEW JERSEY--_Yeas_--Messrs. Deshler, Weeks, Lyon, and\n     McClellan.\n\n     PENNSYLVANIA--_Yeas_--Messrs. Freeman, Nelclede, Gossler,\n     Smith, Gillinham, Hammond, Wood, Gilford, Pyle, Farrand, and\n     Williamson. _Nays_--Messrs. Johnson, Sewell, Jones, Parker,\n     Heistand, Kase, Kinkaid, Coffee, Carlisle, Crovode, Edie,\n     Sewell, and Power.\n\n     LOUISIANA--_Yeas_--Messrs. Lathrop and Elam. _Nays_--Messrs.\n     Harman and Hardy.\n\n     CALIFORNIA--_Yeas_--Messrs. Wood and Stanley.\n\n     ARKANSAS--_Yea_--Mr. Logan. _Nay_--Mr. Fowler.\n\n     TENNESSEE--_Yeas_--Messrs. Brownlow, Bankhead, Zollicoffer,\n     Burton, Campbell, Donelson, Harris, Bilbo, and Beloat.\n     _Nays_--Messrs. Nelson, Reedy, and Picket.\n\n     KENTUCKY--_Yeas_--Messrs. Stowers, Campbell, Raphael, Todd,\n     Clay, Goodloe, and Bartlett. _Nays_--Messrs. Shanklin, Jones,\n     Carpenter, Gist, and Underwood.\n\n     OHIO--_Yeas_--Messrs. White, Nash, Simpson, and Lippett.\n     _Nays_--Messrs. Gabriel, Olds, Ford, Barker, Potter, Stanbaugh,\n     Rodgers, Spooner, Hodges, Kyle, Lees, Swigart, Allison,\n     Fishback, Thomas, Corwine, Chapman, Ayres, and Johnson.\n\n     INDIANA--_Yeas_--Messrs. Sheets and Phelps. _Nay_--Mr.\n     Meredith.\n\n     MISSOURI--_Yeas_--Messrs. Edward, Fletcher, and Hockaday.\n     _Nay_--Mr. Breckenridge.\n\n     MICHIGAN--_Yea_--Mr. Wood.\n\n     WISCONSIN--_Yeas_--Messrs. Lockwood, Cook, Chandler, and\n     Gillies.\n\n     DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA--_Yeas_--Messrs. Ellis and Evans.\n\n     ILLINOIS--_Yeas_--Messrs. Danenhower and Allen. _Nays_--Messrs.\n     Jennings and Gear.\n\n     IOWA--_Nays_--Messrs. Webster and Thorrington.\n\n     _Yeas_--108. _Nays_--77.\n\nWe will close this chapter by giving the delegates who seceded from the\nNominating Convention, with the Address published by them on the\noccasion. That recession was a more inconsiderable affair than has been\nrepresented by the foreign party of this country. The author of this\nwork was the Chairman of the large Committee on Credentials, and\nreported TWO HUNDRED AND SEVENTY-SEVEN delegates, which report was\nreceived without opposition, as to numbers. Of these, _forty-two_ only\nseceded, viz.: 13 out of 28 from Ohio; _one_ of two from New Hampshire;\n6--all--from Connecticut; 2 out of 13 from Massachusetts; _one_ out of 3\nfrom Illinois; 7 out of 27 from Pennsylvania; _one_ out of 4 from Rhode\nIsland; 5--all--from Michigan; 5--all--from Wisconsin; _one_--all--from\nIowa; 42 out of 277--not a _sixth_, and but little over a _seventh_ of\nthe whole!\n\n\nADDRESS.\n\nThe seceders or \"bolters\" made the following address, to which they\nappended their States and names. What they say of the _Louisiana_\ndelegates, we have explained in another portion of this work:\n\n     \"The undersigned, delegates to the nominating Convention now in\n     session at Philadelphia, find themselves compelled to dissent\n     from the principles avowed by that body; and holding opinions,\n     as they do, that the restoration of the Missouri Compromise, as\n     demanded by a majority of the whole people, is a redress of an\n     undeniable wrong, and the execution of it, in spirit at least,\n     indispensable to the repose of the country, they have regarded\n     the refusal of that Convention to recognize the well-defined\n     opinion of the country, and of the Americans of the free\n     States, upon this question, as a denial of their rights and a\n     rebuke to their sentiments; and they hold that the admission\n     into the National Council and nominating Convention, of\n     delegates from Louisiana, representing a Roman Catholic\n     Constituency, absolved every true American from all obligations\n     to sustain the action of either of the said bodies.\n\n     \"They have therefore withdrawn from the nominating Convention,\n     refusing to participate in the proposed nomination, and now\n     address themselves to the Americans of the country, and\n     especially of the States they represent, to justify and approve\n     of their action; and to the end that a nomination conforming to\n     the overruling sentiment of the country in the great issue may\n     be regularly and auspiciously made, the undersigned propose to\n     the Americans in all the States to assemble in their several\n     State organizations, and elect delegates to a Convention to\n     meet in the city of New York, on Thursday, the 12th day of June\n     next, for the purpose of nominating candidates for President\n     and Vice President of the United States.\"\n\n     OHIO--Thos. H. Ford, J. H. Baker, B. S. Kyle, W. H. C.\n     Mitchell, E. T. Sturtevant, O. T. Fishback, Jacob Ebbert, Wm.\n     B. Allison, H. C. Hodges, L. H. Olds, W. B. Chapman, Thos.\n     McYees, Charles Nichols.\n\n     NEW HAMPSHIRE--Anthony Colby.\n\n     CONNECTICUT--Lucius G. Peck, Jas. E. Dunham, Hezekiah Griswold,\n     Austin Baldwin, Edmund Perkins, David Booth.\n\n     MASSACHUSETTS--Wild. S. Thurston, Z. R. Pangborn.\n\n     ILLINOIS--Henry S. Jennings.\n\n     PENNSYLVANIA--Wm. F. Johnston, S. C. Kase, R. M. Riddle, T. J.\n     Coffey, John Williamson, J. Harrison, S. Ewell.\n\n     RHODE ISLAND--E. J. Nightingale.\n\n     MICHIGAN--S. T. Lyon, W. Fuller, W. S. Wood, P. P. Meddler, J.\n     Hamilton.\n\n     WISCONSIN--D. A. Gillis, John Lockwood, Robt. Chandler, G.\n     Burdick, C. W. Cook.\n\n     IOWA--L. H. Webster.\n\n\nTHE ELECTION OF BANKS--THE SLAVERY QUESTION.\n\nOne of the issues in the Presidential contest now going on, is the\n_slavery question_. A. O. P. X. Y. Z. Nicholson, of the Washington\nUnion, who canvassed this State in opposition to Scott, and shed his\n_crocodile_ tears before every crowd he addressed, because so good a man\nas Fillmore, who had stood firm for the _rights of the South_, had been\nset aside by an ungrateful Convention at Baltimore, to give place to\nScott, the favorite of _Seward_--this miserable hypocrite, we say, now\ncomes out and says, \"Fillmore's abolitionism will suit the North.\"\n\nThe Central Democratic Committee for East Tennessee, in a call for a\nDistrict Convention at Clinton, in May last, through the _Knoxville\nStandard_, conclude said call in this language:\n\n     \"The time has again arrived when the national Democracy must\n     rally to their country's call and preserve the Constitution as\n     it is in its purity, and perpetuate the union of the States\n     from the rain which the _Black Republican Party of the North_,\n     aided by THEIR KNOW-NOTHING ALLIES OF THE SOUTH, would bring\n     upon them. By order of the\n\n     \"CENTRAL COMMITTEE.\"\n\nThe _Sag-Nicht Convention_ held at Somerville, on Thursday the 8th of\nMay, and which selected D. M. Currin as their Electoral candidate,\nadopted the following resolution:\n\n     \"_Resolved_, That we have been appointed by the Democracy of\n     this Electoral District to organize to fight, in the coming\n     Presidential election, the BLACK REPUBLICANS AND KNOW-NOTHINGS.\n     _Resolved_, That we _can_ beat them, and we _will_ do it.\n     _Resolved_, That we will cordially receive the _co-operation of\n     all Old-Line Whigs_ who will assist us in carrying out these\n     resolutions.\"\n\nNow, the charge is here made that the Know-Nothings of the South are the\nallies of the Black Republicans of the North. This is the impression\nintended to be made, first by these _concealed calumniators_ at\nKnoxville, and afterwards by the _open and avowed slanderers_ of the\nsame party at Somerville! With such _wholesale lying_ as is displayed in\nboth of these cases, we have but little patience: we only give their\nlanguage, to show their recklessness in making such an issue. And\nalthough this Foreign party claim to be the guardians of Southern\ninterests, we propose to show, before we conclude this chapter, that\nthey are themselves the \"allies of the Black Republicans of the North,\"\nand are giving them more \"aid and comfort\" than all the other parties in\nthe country!\n\nFRANCIS P. BLAIR, former editor of Gen. Jackson's organ at Washington,\nwas the President of the Black Republican Convention at Pittsburg, in\nFebruary last! _John M. Niles_; Democratic Senator in Congress, was\nPresident of the Black Republican Convention held in Connecticut! In the\nPittsburg Convention, over which Blair presided, PRESTON KING, ABIJAH\nMANN, DAVID WILMOT, and JACOB BRINKERHOFF, Old-Line Democrats, figured\nconspicuously.\n\nFor two long and cold winter months, the Democrats, both North and\nSouth, voted for _Richardson_, of Illinois, for Speaker, a violent\n_anti-slavery man_, whose speeches _against_ slavery, and in _favor_ of\nAbolitionism, were matters of record in the Congressional Globe, and\nwere delivered on the floor of Congress so late as 1850! The _immortal_\n75 Democrats did not cease to vote for this man _Richardson_, until GEN.\nZOLLICOFFER, of Tennessee, read his speeches upon him, in the presence\nof his friends!\n\nOn the 2d of February, SAMUEL A. SMITH, of Tennessee, a Democratic\nRepresentative in Congress, _renewed_ his motion to adopt the PLURALITY\nRULE. His proposition, which it was evident would elect _Banks_, was\ncarried by Black Republican votes, who went for it in a body. This would\nstill not have elected _Banks_, but for the fact that the following\n_Democrats_ voted for the odious plurality rule: _Clingman_, _Herbert_,\n_Hickman_, _Jewett_, _Kelley_, _Barclay_, _Bayard_, _Wells_, _Williams_,\nand SAMUEL A. SMITH! Mr. Clarke was the only American who voted for the\nodious rule!\n\nMR. CARLILE, a national American, of Virginia, before the vote was taken\nupon this plurality rule, offered the following substitute for it:\n\n     \"_Resolved_, That the HON. WM. AIKEN, a Representative from the\n     State of South Carolina, be, and he is hereby declared Speaker\n     of the Thirty-Fourth Congress.\"\n\nGOV. AIKEN is a sound Southern Democrat--never was any thing else--but\nCOL. SMITH _objected_, and demanded the _previous question_, which cut\noff MR. CARLILE'S resolution, and which was to prevent its adoption! The\ncandidate of the Democratic party, at that time, MR. ORR, immediately\n_withdrew in favor of_ GOV. AIKEN, upon the introduction of MR.\nCARLILE'S resolution; and to _prevent Aiken's election_, SAMUEL A. SMITH\ncut off said resolution by a call of the previous question!\n\nBanks was elected by _one_ vote, and this could not be accomplished\nuntil SEVEN DEMOCRATS got _behind the bar_, and refused to vote at all!\nThese were HICKMAN, PARKER, and BARCLAY, of Pennsylvania; CRAIG, of\nNorth Carolina; TAYLOR, of Louisiana; RICHARDSON, of Illinois; and\nSEWARD, of Georgia! Any _two_ of these _Southern_ Democrats could have\nmade AIKEN Speaker, but they did not want him--they knew Banks to be a\n_Democrat_, if he were a Black Republican--and to elect him, they\nbelieved would give them the strength of that odious party in the coming\ncontest.\n\nWe have before us the _Washington Union_ of Sept. 27th, 1853, giving,\neditorially, a glowing account of the Massachusetts Democratic State\nConvention, reporting the speech of Nathaniel P. Banks, of Waltham,\nconcluding that report in these words:\n\n     \"Mr. Banks emphatically and decidedly, on his own part, and on\n     that of the _Democrats of Massachusetts_, disclaimed the truth\n     of the rumors in certain newspapers that an arrangement had\n     been entered into with another political party in the\n     Commonwealth concerning the distribution of State offices. It\n     was his and this Convention's and all true Democrats' desire,\n     belief, and determination, that Henry W. Bishop should be\n     elected governor of Massachusetts, and that the other\n     Democratic State officers should also be elected. He was not\n     afraid of defeat, and less afraid of _Whig success_, which, to\n     judge by its recent effects, was simply equivalent to a defeat.\n     [Applause.]\"\n\nIt may be said, and doubtless will be, that _Banks_ has allied himself\nwith the Republicans. But Banks says he has _always been a Democrat_,\nand that he was _nominated as a Democrat in his district_. And certain\nit is, that he was elected Speaker by DEMOCRATS, under the _compulsion_\nof an odious plurality rule, and the _gag_ of the previous question!\n\nIt will be said, and said truthfully too, that SIX AMERICANS FROM THE\nNORTH voted for MR. FULLER, of Pennsylvania. So they did; and in doing\nso, they voted for a sound national and conservative man. But did this\njustify _Southern_ Democrats in _dodging_ the question, and thereby\nelecting a Black Republican Speaker? Gov. Aiken was the candidate of the\n_seven_ Democrats--he was not the candidate of the _six_ Americans!\nDemocracy, moreover, had refused to vote for an American under any\ncircumstances, and had, on the first day of the meeting of Congress,\npassed a resolution insulting the whole American party, in caucus! We\nwould have seen them banished to the farthest verge of astronomical\nimagination, before we would have voted for any man that favored that\ninsulting resolution!\n\nIn 1847, by a _unanimous vote_, both branches of the Legislature of New\nHampshire adopted resolutions denunciatory of the institution of\nslavery, and approving of the Wilmot Proviso. These resolutions were\nreported to the House, by the Representative from Hillsboro, the native\ntown of _Gen. Pierce_, and were in the _handwriting_ of Pierce!\n\nOn the 2d of October, 1847, the Democratic Soft-Shells, who are now the\nsupporters of Pierce's administration, and fill the offices he has to\ndispose of in New York, held a State Convention, and declared their\n\"_uncompromising hostility to slavery_\" in a string of resolutions they\nadopted and ordered to be published.\n\nOn the 16th of February, 1848, a Democratic State Convention for New\nYork convened at Utica, to appoint Delegates to the National Convention\nto nominate candidates for President and Vice President, at which a\nstring of anti-Southern resolutions were adopted, denouncing \"_slavery_\nor _involuntary servitude_,\" as repugnant to the genius of\nRepublicanism.\n\nOn the 18th of July, 1848, the Democratic Soft-Shells held a\nmass-meeting in the park of New York, and, by way of making perfect\ntheir organization against General Cass, declared, by resolutions, their\n\"_uncompromising hostility to slavery or involuntary servitude!_\"\n\nOn the 13th of September, 1848, a Democratic mass-meeting convened at\nBuffalo, in New York, and, in a general Abolition jubilee, adopted\nresolutions condemning and denouncing the institution of slavery!\n\nIn 1852, while the contest was going on between Pierce and Scott, the\n_Washington Union_ said, editorially:\n\n     \"THE FREE-SOIL DEMOCRATIC LEADERS OF THE NORTH, ARE A REGULAR\n     PORTION OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY; AND GENERAL PIERCE, IF\n     ELECTED, WILL MAKE NO DISTINCTION BETWEEN THEM AND THE REST OF\n     THE DEMOCRACY IN THE DISTRIBUTION OF OFFICIAL PATRONAGE, AND IN\n     THE SELECTION OF AGENTS FOR ADMINISTERING THE GOVERNMENT!\"\n\nThe Black Republicans recently held a meeting in New York, at which\n_Benjamin F. Butler_, of \"pious memory,\" and Van Buren Swartwout\nnotoriety, presided! On his right hand sat, as Vice President of the\nmeeting, _Moses H. Grinnell_, one of the Democratic \"pipe-layers\" of\n1840, whom this Van Buren Attorney-General Butler made efforts to send\nto the State prison! Another Vice President, gravely looking on, and\narranged in dignified grandeur upon the stand, was John W. Edmonds,\nex-\"blanket contractor\" in a large swindle, and a practical\nspiritual-rapper! A third and last Vice President was the notorious _Dr.\nTownsend_, the sarsaparilla man, who has not yet wound up his\ncontroversy with a man of the same name, as to who is the greatest\nrascal in the way of manufacturing this medicine!\n\nAmong the other officers, secretaries, and prominent men in the meeting,\nwas _C. A. Dana_, of the Tribune office, a _Fourierist_, who, at a\npublic meeting on a former occasion, toasted \"Horace Greeley, Charles\nFourier, and Jesus Christ!\" Prominent in the meeting was _C. A.\nStetson_, of the Astor House, an _Amalgamationist_. Henry J. Raymond,\nthe Abolition editor of the Times, and _Rudolph Garrigue_, a noisy\nGerman Abolitionist, looked and acted as though they believed the\nsalvation of the Union depended upon the success of the Republicans! A\nfellow who made frequent motions, an Irishman by the name of _McMorrow_,\nhad served an apprenticeship of twelve months in the State prison, for\nbreaking open a store after night! The principal speaker, who spoke for\ntwo hours on the subject of slavery, was the notorious _Bingham_, an\nitinerant Abolitionist from Ohio. It was a queer medley of men, parties,\nprinciples, and characters--two-thirds of all the active partisans in\nthe meeting having held offices in the ranks of Democracy! And still,\nthat party boasts of its Northern wing being sound upon the slavery\nquestion.\n\nAnd here is the resolution of the 8th of January _Democratic_ Convention\nin Ohio, appointing delegates to the Cincinnati Pow-wow:\n\n     \"_Resolved_, That the people of Ohio now, as they have always\n     done, look upon slavery as an evil, and unfavorable to the\n     development of the spirit and practical benefits of free\n     institutions; and that, entertaining these sentiments, they\n     will at all times feel it to be their duty to use all power\n     clearly given by the terms of the national compact, to prevent\n     its increase, to mitigate, _and finally eradicate the evil_.\"\n\nTo show, just here, where Tennessee Democrats stand upon the infamous\nWilmot Proviso question, we give the following extract from a recent\nnumber of the _Nashville Patriot_:\n\n     JAMES K. POLK,\n\n     who, in 1847, approved the Oregon bill, which contained this\n     odious and unconstitutional clause: next in order is\n\n     CAVE JOHNSON,\n\n     now President of the Bank of Tennessee, who voted for the same\n     bill which Mr. Polk sanctioned: next we have\n\n     AARON V. BROWN,\n\n     an aspirant before the Cincinnati Convention, who did likewise:\n     then comes\n\n     JULIUS W. BLACKWELL,\n\n     a star whose light has been quenched in obscurity, but who\n     voted with his colleagues for the Oregon bill in '47: next in\n     the procession of Southern men \"dangerous to the South\" is\n\n     BARCLAY MARTIN,\n\n     President Pierce's U. S. Mail Agent, who cast a similar vote:\n     following him we have\n\n     LUCIEN B. CHASE,\n\n     author of the History of the Polk Administration, at present a\n     resident of New York city, but at the time he exhibited himself\n     as \"a dangerous man to the South,\" a representative in Congress\n     from this State: he is succeeded by\n\n     FRED. P. STANTON,\n\n     for ten years a Democratic Congressman from the Memphis\n     district: he voted for the Oregon bill, with the Wilmot\n     Proviso annexed: behind him in the march is\n\n     ALVAN CULLOM,\n\n     a Democratic Congressman, who has squatted on the _other_ side\n     of one of his native mountains in the fourth district, and been\n     quiescent for some years: he was one of the Tennessee\n     \"dangerous men:\" he voted twice for the Wilmot Proviso: in the\n     same category is\n\n     GEORGE W. JONES,\n\n     in the language of another, the \"goose which cackles at the\n     door of the Treasury vault:\" notorious as a Southern supporter\n     of the Squatter Sovereignty doctrine, with two votes on record\n     in favor of the Wilmot Proviso. He may be reckoned as _very_\n     \"dangerous to the South:\" last, but not least in this dread\n     array of \"dangerous men,\" is\n\n     ANDREW JOHNSON,\n\n     the present Governor of Tennessee, and Cincinnati aspirant: he\n     voted _three_ times for the Wilmot Proviso, and so doubtful are\n     his doctrines on the slavery question, that many slaveholding\n     members of his own party regard him as _extremely_ \"dangerous\n     to the South.\"\n\nBy the way, in 1842, this same _Gov. Johnson_ was a Senator in our State\nLegislature, and introduced the following _Abolition_ resolutions,\ncommonly called his _White Basis System_:\n\n     \"_Resolved, by the General Assembly of the State of Tennessee_,\n     That the basis to be observed in laying the State off into\n     Congressional districts shall be the voting population, WITHOUT\n     ANY REGARD TO THREE-FIFTHS OF THE NEGRO POPULATION.\n\n     \"_Resolved_, That the 120,083 qualified voters shall be divided\n     by eleven, and that each eleventh of the 120,083 of qualified\n     voters shall be entitled to elect one member in the Congress of\n     the United States, or so near as may be practicable without a\n     division of counties.\"\n\nThe position of Gov. Johnson is this: he wishes the State entitled to\nher slave representation _as a State_, but _in her own borders_ the\nrepresentative districts are to be made according to her white\npopulation! In other words, he desires the State to retain her _ten_\nCongressmen, representing both her white and slave population, but\nwishes them appointed throughout the State without regard to the slave\npopulation: so that the county containing ten thousand white\ninhabitants, and double that number of slaves, should be entitled to no\nmore representation than the county containing _ten_ thousand white\ninhabitants and no slaves!\n\nWe heard Johnson last summer, in his debate with Gentry, in Campbell\ncounty, contend that the county of Campbell should have the same\nrepresentation in Congress as the county of Shelby, which he stated had\nFIFTEEN THOUSAND NEGROES! He appealed to the prejudices and passions of\nthe poor--inquired of the hard working-men of that county how they liked\nto see their wives and daughters _offset_, in enumerating the strength\nof the county, by the \"_greasy negro wenches of Shelby, Davidson,\nFayette, Sumner and Rutherford counties_.\" He made a real, stirring\nabolition appeal to the poor, and non-slaveholding portion of the crowd,\nwhich was in the proportion of _ten to one_ of that county, to array\nthem against the rich, and especially against the owners of large\nnumbers of slaves. He told them that these Negro wenches belonged to the\nlordly slaveholders of Middle and West Tennessee, and that as our\nConstitution now is, these wenches were placed on an _equality_ with the\nfair daughters and virtuous wives of laboring men. On this ground he\nadvocated his infamous amendment to the Constitution, which would\nincorporate his \"White Basis\" scheme!\n\nThis is a rank Abolition measure, and fraught with more danger to the\nSouth than any thing proposed by the whole brood of Abolitionists, Free\nSoilers, and Black Republicans at the North. Already the South is weak\nenough, and not at all able to vote with the North in our National\nLegislature. The effect of this scheme is to deprive the South of\none-third of her strength in Congress. Not only is this the effect, but\nit is the design of the mover. We hold that Johnson is a Free Soiler,\nand has been for years. It is stated by his Northern Democratic friends,\nthat when he quit Congress, he came home to run for Governor--with a\ndetermination, if defeated, to remove to some of the Northwestern\nStates, and take a new start! Had he been defeated by Maj. Henry in\n1853, he would now be a Black Republican in one of the Free States,\nrunning for office! And yet the propagator of this infamous Abolition\ndoctrine of a \"White Basis\" representation--this demagogue who arrays\nthe poor against slaveholders, is the man for the ultra guardians of the\nslave interests of the South! A man who would not own negroes when he\ncould, but loaned his money out at interest, and left his wife and\ndaughters to do their own work--a man who is at heart and in his\ndoctrines a rank Free Soiler--a man who has only remained in the South\nto _experiment_ upon office-seeking! This is the man that Georgia,\nAlabama, Virginia, Mississippi, and Carolinas, rejoiced to see elected\nGovernor of a Southern slave State!\n\nIt was seeing the position of Johnson on this question that induced the\n\"_Democratic Herald_\" in Ohio, in June, 1855, thus to notice our race\nfor Governor:\n\n     \"TENNESSEE.--An animated contest is going on in this good old\n     Democratic State for Governor, and the largest crowds flock to\n     hear the candidates that ever attended political meetings since\n     the Hero of New Orleans used to address the masses in person.\n     The present incumbent, Andrew Johnson, is the Democratic\n     candidate, and a _Mr. Gentry_, a _pro-slavery_ renegade from\n     the Federal Whig ranks, is the opposing candidate, brought out\n     by a Know Nothing conclave. This man is on the stump abusing\n     the Catholics, and denouncing them for their tyranny, while he\n     openly advocates the _slavery doctrines of Southern Niggerdom_!\n     On the other hand, his competitor, Gov. Johnson, well and\n     favorably known to our leading Democrats of Ohio, HAS NO\n     SYMPATHIES WITH SLAVERY, and is the advocate of such amendments\n     to the Federal Constitution as will give all power to the\n     people, and EFFECTUALLY PUT DOWN THE INSTITUTION OF SLAVERY!\"\n\nNow, this showing up of Democracy, on the Slavery question, may look\n_shabby_ to many ultra Southern men, and it may induce them to charge\nthat the Democratic party are _inconsistent_. We defend them against the\ncharge of _inconsistency_, and maintain that what would be called\n_inconsistency_ here, is nothing but _Democracy_. For instance, A. O. P.\nQ. X. Y. Z. Nicholson, the editor of the great official organ of\nDemocracy at Washington, said, editorially, and \"by authority,\" so late\nas 1855:\n\n     \"IT IS NO PART OF THE CREED OF A DEMOCRAT, AS SUCH, TO ADVOCATE\n     OR OPPOSE THE EXTENSION OF SLAVERY. HE MAY DO THE ONE OR THE\n     OTHER, IN THE EXERCISE OF HIS RIGHTS AS A CITIZEN, AND NOT\n     OFFEND AGAINST HIS DEMOCRATIC FEALTY!\"\n\nPrecisely so! A man may advocate the _abolition_ of slavery where it\nexists; he may, as a Black Republican, arm himself with Sharpe's rifle,\nand go into Kansas, and shoot down pro-slavery men, and still be a\nconsistent Democrat, if he vote for the party, and stand by the nominees\nof the party conventions! Hence, all the factions at home and from\nabroad--all religions--all the ends and odds of God's creation are now\nassociated together, and are battling in the same unholy cause, in the\nname of _Democracy_!\n\nAnd further to exhibit the inconsistency of this Democratic and Foreign\nparty, it will be recollected that, in 1844, they nominated SILAS\nWRIGHT, of New York, for Vice-President, to run on the ticket with COL.\nPOLK--a position he declined, because he would not agree to be _second\nbest_ on the ticket. In a letter to JAMES H. TITUS, ESQ., bearing date\nApril 15, 1847, MR. WRIGHT says:\n\n     \"If the question had been propounded to me at any period of my\n     public life, Shall the arms of the Union be employed to\n     conquer, or the money of the Union be used to purchase\n     Territory now constitutionally free, for the purpose of\n     planting Slavery upon it, I should have answered, No! And this\n     answer to this question is the Wilmot Proviso, as I understand\n     it. _I am surprised that any one should suppose me capable of\n     entertaining any other opinion, or giving any other answer as\n     to such a proposition._\"\n\nNow, if SILAS WRIGHT, one of the great \"Northern lights\" of Democracy,\nheld these sentiments in 1847, what must they have been in 1844, when\nthat party sought to elevate him to the second office within the gift of\nthe nation? But we are just reminded of what is said in \"the law and the\nprophets,\" that is to say, \"_It is no part of the creed of a Democrat_,\nAS SUCH, _to advocate or oppose the extension of slavery!_\" What a\nparty!\n\n\n\n\n[From the Knoxville Whig for Sept. 22, 1855.]\n\nTO REV. A. B. LONGSTREET,\n\nPROFESSOR OF METHODISM, ROMANISM, AND LOCOFOCOISM.\n\n\nREVEREND SIR:--I see a _pastoral address_ of yours, to \"Methodist\nKnow-Nothing Preachers,\" going the rounds of the Locofoco Foreign Sag\nNicht papers of the South, occupying from four to six columns, according\nto the dimensions of the papers copying. I have waded through your\nlearned address, and find it to be one of more ponderous magnitude than\nthe Report made to the British House of Commons, by Lord North, on a\nsubject of far greater interest! And as I am one of the class of men you\naddress, notwithstanding your great advantage over me in point of age\nand experience; and as no one has made a _formal_ response to your\n_pious warnings_, it will not be deemed insolent in me to take you up.\n\nMy first acquaintance with you was in 1847, at an Annual Meeting of the\nGeorgia Conference, held in Madison; and although the impressions made\nupon my mind by you, on that occasion, were any thing but favorable to\nyou, as a man, still, I am capable, as I believe, of doing you justice.\nI supposed you then to be the rise of sixty years, certainly in your\n_dotage_ and among the _vainest_ old gentlemen I had ever met with. You\nobtained leave, as I understand, by your own seeking, to deliver a\nlecture to the Conference, upon the subject of _correctly reading and\npronouncing the Scriptures_. I was in attendance, and listened to you\nwith all the attention and impartiality I was capable of exercising. I\nthought it a little _presumptuous_ for any one man to assume to teach\nmore than one hundred able ministers how to read and pronounce the\ninspired writings; and the more so, when I knew that several of the\nnumber were presidents and professors in different male and female\ncolleges, and that many others of them were graduates of the best\nliterary institutions in the South. Still, my apology for you was, that\nyou was a vain old gentleman, and that to listen to you, respectfully,\nwas to obey the Divine teaching of one who has taught us to \"bear the\ninfirmities of the weak.\" Your _samples_, both of reading and\npronunciation, were amusing and novel to me. And so far as I could\ngather the prevailing sentiment, it was, that to adopt your style would\nrender the reading of the Scriptures perfectly ridiculous.\n\nIn your address to \"Methodist Know-Nothing Preachers,\" I discover that\nyou are still the man you were at Madison, in 1847: you have a great\ndeal to say about _yourself_, and make free use of the personal pronoun\nI! _I_ advise--_I_ believe--_I_ am satisfied--_I_ will not agree--_I_\nwarn and caution--_I_ fear, or _I_ apprehend, etc. To parse the\ndifferent sentences in your partisan harangue syntactically, little else\nis necessary but to understand the _first person singular_, and to\nrepeat the rule as often as it occurs: a peculiarity which characterizes\nevery paragraph in your labored address. Beside, the frequent use of the\npronouns _I_, _me_, _my_, _mine_, etc., too frequently occur to be worth\nestimating. And it will be seen, upon examination, that not merely the\nverbiage, but the sentiment, is thus egotistic throughout, exhibiting a\ndegree of arrogance and self-importance, only to be met with in a\n_Clerical Locofoco_, used by bad men for ignoble purposes. To carry out\nthe idea of your _vanity_, you say in the winding up of your address:\n\n     \"And now, brethren, have _I_ or Mr. Wesley hit upon one good\n     reason why you should not have joined the Know-Nothings? If\n     either of _us_ have, then _I_ beseech you to come from among\n     them. If _we_ have not, there is yet another in reserve which,\n     if it does not prevail will show--or prove to my satisfaction\n     at least--that if _an angel from heaven_ were to denounce your\n     order, you would cleave to it still.\"\n\nAny other man but yourself would, from considerations of _modesty_, have\ngiven JOHN WESLEY the preference, in this connection, and come in as\n_second best_. But no, you are _first in place_, and, in your own\nestimation, in _importance_ likewise, as a religious teacher.\n\nI have no doubt you consider yourself a much greater man than John\nWesley ever was; and in proof of this, I need only cite what you have\nsaid in reference to Mr. Wesley's opposition to Romanism:\n\n     \"Even good old John Wesley caught the spirit of the times, and\n     wrote that letter, from which it appears he thought if the\n     Catholics got into power, they would abuse Protestants. What\n     abuse they could have heaped on them, greater than they heaped\n     on Catholics, short of cutting their throats, I cannot\n     conceive.\"\n\nThe only superior you acknowledge is CARDINAL WISEMAN, a bigoted Roman\nCatholic, and you seem to knock under to him quite reluctantly, and not\nwithout informing the public that you have been a laborious student for\nforty years, and \"_a profound thinker_.\" Here is your praise:\n\n     \"I have been a pretty severe student for near forty years, and\n     a laborious, if not _profound thinker_ for a long time; but\n     when I compare myself in intellectual stature with that man, I\n     shrink in my own estimation to the insignificance of a mite.\"\n\nSo much by way of noticing vanity. You are a literary and theological\nstar of the first magnitude! You are an encyclopedia of the learning,\nscience, patriotism, and religion of the country! Sir, if you possessed\na little more _sheep-faced modesty_, and could exhibit a little less of\n_lion-headed impudence_ than you do, you would be a much more useful,\nnot to say successful minister of the New Testament!\n\nSir, you have taken the field in opposition to Know-Nothingism,\n_professedly_ through your deep and abiding concern for Christianity,\nand the interests of Methodism. You say:\n\n     \"You cannot surely be so weak as to suppose you can crush\n     Romanism by Know-Nothing agencies; but you have almost ruined\n     Methodism by them already.\n\n     \"Now the ruler of this nation is spoken evil of by your party\n     continually, and therefore, in the judgment of Wesley, I might\n     stand up in the pulpit and defend him.\"\n\nThe truth is, you are influenced alone by partisan political feelings;\nand occupying a position in a Mississippi College, in the midst of\nFire-eating Disunion Progressive Democracy, you desire to please them,\nrather than serve the interests of your country or Church. To take the\nstump, or the pulpit, in defence of _Frank Pierce_ and his corrupt\nadministration, would be a pleasant talk to you, who have been, all your\nlife-time, an inveterate Locofoco in politics, and \"a profound thinker\"\nin favor of its iniquitous measures and principles. In your early\npolitical training, you have been swayed by interest and popular favor,\nand in most cases at the expense of truth, just as you now are, in your\nmad vindication of Romanism. A tool for others to work with, till you\nhave found yourself in a condition to use such tools as you yourself\nhave been, you are now a trimmer and weathercock, leading on men of less\nsense than yourself, to such distinction as interest and ambition may\ndictate!\n\nSir, you take the ground, throughout, that there is no danger of\nCatholics in this country, and that they do not seek to establish their\nreligion. Here is a specimen of your logic:\n\n     \"Thank God no religious sect can tyrannize over another in this\n     country, so long as they all respect the Federal Constitution.\n     Until we see, then, the Catholics treating that instrument with\n     disrespect, it is madness to entertain fears of them and worse\n     than madness to form combinations against them.\"\n\nNow, sir, the foregoing statement is untrue, and in making it you could\nnot have been sincere. You are a man of too much sense, and of too much\ninformation, to believe what you are wickedly trying to palm upon\nothers. Brownson's Quarterly Review, the most able, as well as the most\nauthentic organ of Catholicism in the United States, employs the\nfollowing language to the American people--mark it:\n\n     \"_Are your free institutions infallible?_ Are they founded on\n     _Divine right_? This you deny. Is not the proper question for\n     you to discuss, then, _not_ whether the Papacy be or be not\n     compatible with republican government, but whether _it be or be\n     not founded in Divine right_? If the Papacy be founded in\n     Divine right, it is supreme over whatever is founded only in\n     human right, and then your institutions should be made to\n     harmonize with it: not it with your institutions!!! The real\n     question, then, is not the compatibility or the incompatibility\n     of the Catholic Church with _democratic institutions_, but, Is\n     the _Catholic Church the Church of God_?\n\n     \"Settle this question first. But in point of fact, _democracy\n     is a mischievous dream, wherever the Catholic Church does not\n     predominate_, to inspire the people with reverence, and to\n     teach and accustom them to obedience to authority.\"\n\nHere is still plainer language from the Roman Catholic Bishop of St.\nLouis:\n\n     \"Heresy and unbelief are crimes; and in Christian countries, as\n     in Italy and Spain, for instance, where all the people are\n     Catholics, and where the Catholic religion is an essential part\n     of the law of the land, they are punished as other crimes.\"\n\nHere is what the _Boston Pilot_ says, a Catholic paper of high standing:\n\n     \"_No good government can exist_ without religion, and there can\n     be no religion without an _inquisition_, which is wisely\n     designed for the promotion and protection of the _true faith_.\"\n\nHere is the _Shepherd of the Valley_, published under the eye and with\nthe approbation of the Bishop of St. Louis:\n\n     \"The Church is, of necessity, intolerant. Heresy she endures\n     when and where she _must_; but she hates it, and directs all\n     her energies to its destruction. If Catholics ever gain an\n     immense numerical majority, religious freedom in this country\n     is _at an end_: so say our enemies--_so say we_.\"\n\nAnd here is what the _Rambler_ says, a devoted Catholic periodical, high\nin the confidence of the Bishops and Priests of that Church:\n\n     \"You ask if he (the Pope) were lord in the land, and you were\n     in the minority, if not in numbers, yet in power, what would he\n     do to you? That, we say, would entirely depend on\n     circumstances. If it would benefit the cause of Catholicism, he\n     would tolerate you--if expedient, he would imprison you, banish\n     you, fine you, probably he might even hang you; but, be assured\n     of one thing, he would never tolerate you for the sake of the\n     'glorious principles' of civil and religious liberty.\"\n\nI could give other quotations of this character, which have met your eye\nlong since, but I forbear, as they would extend my letter beyond the\nlimit I have prescribed for myself. These are the publications which, in\npart at least, have given rise to the Know-Nothing organization, so\ncordially hated by you.\n\nYou say there is no danger of injury to our institutions from the rapid\nstrides of Romanism. Allow me to ask your attention to the following\nremarkable political prediction by the Duke of Richmond, late\nGovernor-General of Canada, and a British noble, who declared himself\nhostile to the United States on all occasions. Speaking of our\nGovernment, this deadly enemy said:\n\n     \"It will be destroyed; it ought not, it will not be permitted\n     to exist.\" \"The curse of the French revolution, and subsequent\n     wars and commotions in Europe, are to be attributed to its\n     example; and so long as it exists, no prince will be safe upon\n     his throne; and the _sovereigns of Europe are aware of it_; and\n     they have _determined upon its destruction, and have come to an\n     understanding upon this subject, and have decided on the means\n     to accomplish it_; and they will eventually succeed by\n     SUBVERSION _rather than conquest_.\" \"All the low and surplus\n     population of the different nations of Europe will be carried\n     into that country. It is and will be a receptacle for the bad\n     and disaffected population of Europe, when they are not wanted\n     for soldiers, or to supply the navies; _and the governments of\n     Europe will favor such a course_. This will create a surplus\n     and majority of low population, who are so very easily excited;\n     and they will _bring with them their principles_; and in nine\n     cases out of ten adhere to their ancient and former\n     governments, laws, manners, customs, and religion; and will\n     transmit them to their posterity; and in many cases propagate\n     them among the natives. These men will become citizens, and, by\n     the constitution and laws, will be invested with the right of\n     suffrage.\" \"Hence, _discord_, _dissension_, _anarchy and civil\n     war will ensue_; and some popular individual will assume the\n     government, and restore order, and the sovereigns of Europe,\n     the emigrants, and many of the natives will sustain him.\" \"The\n     Church of Rome has a design upon that country; and it will in\n     time be the established religion, and will aid in the\n     destruction of that Republic.\" \"I have _conversed with many of\n     the sovereigns and princes of Europe, and they have unanimously\n     expressed these opinions relative to the government of the\n     United States, and their determination to subvert it_.\"\n\nBut, sir, after eulogizing Catholics for their devotion to religious\ntoleration in this country, you make two assertions, touching the\nMethodist Church, for which I wish to arraign you, and for which the\nauthorities of said Church ought to arraign you, under that section of\nour Discipline which forbids _railing out against our Doctrines and\nDiscipline_. You say:\n\n     \"And if I were to take the stump against you, I would say to\n     the honest yeomanry of the country. 'Good people, if you think\n     your liberties will be _any safer in the hands of Methodists\n     than Catholics, you are vastly mistaken_.'\n\n     \"I would add, in humiliation but in candor, 'You have ten\n     thousand times more to fear, just at this time, from\n     Methodists, than Catholics; simply because the first are more\n     numerous than the last, because the first are actually in the\n     field for office, while the last are not.'\"\n\nIf you have this opinion of the Methodist Church, you cannot be an\nhonest man and remain within her jurisdiction. You ought to leave her\ncommunion forthwith, and go over to Rome; and in doing this, you would\n_not have far to go_! Occupying the position you do, and holding the\nsentiments you do, I would not send a child to any school or college\nover which you might preside. Nor do I think any Protestant parent or\nguardian ought to patronize any school under your care. Your influence,\nwhatever you may possess, is against the Protestant faith, and in favor\nof Catholicism. In a word, you are a dangerous man in a Republican\ngovernment.\n\nUpon the subject of religious toleration by the Catholics, you seem to\nhave fallen into the same error adopted by the Hon. Mr. Stephens, of\nGeorgia--a man for whom you have great regard now, but who, in the days\nof _Clay Whiggery_, was a stench in your Locofoco nostrils! Mr. Stephens\nmade the assertion, in a public speech in Augusta, that \"the Catholic\nColony of Maryland, under Lord Baltimore, was the first to _establish_\nthe principle of free toleration in religious worship.\" The Colony of\nMaryland was a Catholic Colony, and the \"Toleration Act\" was written by\nLord Baltimore himself. That Act is dated 21st April, 1649, when Lord\nBaltimore was in the zenith of his glory. Here is the language of that\n\"Act\" of religious toleration:\n\n     \"Denying the Holy _Trinity_ is to be punished with _death_, and\n     confiscation of land and goods to the Lord Proprietary, (Lord\n     Baltimore himself!). Persons using any reproachful words\n     concerning the Blessed Virgin Mary, or the Holy Apostles or\n     Evangelists, to be fined L5, or in default of payment to be\n     publicly whipped and _imprisoned, at the pleasure_ of his\n     Lordship, (Lord Baltimore himself!) or of his\n     Lieutenant-General.\" _See Laws of Maryland, at large, by T.\n     Bacon_, A. D. 1765. 16 and 17 _Cecilius's Lord Baltimore_.\n\nGod deliver us from such toleration! _Death_ was the penalty for\nexpressing certain religious opinions, not acceptable to Lord Baltimore\nand the Holy Catholic Church! Fines and _whipping at the post_ was the\npenalty for speaking against the image-worship of the Catholic Church.\nBut I need not pursue this subject further: the _onus propandi_ is on\nyour side.\n\nSpeaking of Mr. Wesley, you say:\n\n     \"If Wesley were alive, what would he think of your midnight\n     plots, and open tirades against Papists? But a letter of his\n     has been going the rounds of the newspapers, which the Know\n     Nothings obviously think gives the sanction of that good man to\n     their movement. Not so. Mr. Wesley was not the man to write as\n     inconsistently as their version of this letter makes him\n     write.\"\n\nWhy, sir, Mr. Wesley goes much further in his political opposition to\nRoman Catholics than the American party have ever proposed to go. The\nAmerican party say only that they will not vote for Catholics, or put\nthem in office, because their principles are antagonistic to the spirit\nof Republican institutions. Mr. Wesley lays down the comprehensive, but\n_true doctrine_, in this very letter, that \"_no government not Roman\nCatholic ought to tolerate men of the Roman Catholic persuasion_.\" And\nto show how fully and clearly he sustains this position, I quote from\nhis letter at length. You will find the letter in Vol. 5, page 817, of\nWesley's Miscellaneous Works, dated January 12th, 1780. It was\noriginally addressed to the Dublin Freeman's Journal. Here is what Mr.\nWesley says, in the very letter you seek to _deny out of_:\n\n     \"I consider not whether the Romish religion is true or false:\n     build nothing on one or the other supposition. Therefore, away\n     with all your common-place declamation about intolerance and\n     persecution for religion! Suppose every word of Pope Pius's\n     creed to be true! Suppose the Council of Trent to have been\n     infallible; yet I insist upon it that no government not Roman\n     Catholic ought to tolerate men of the Roman Catholic\n     persuasion.\n\n     \"I prove this by a plain argument--let him answer it that\n     can--that no Roman Catholic does or can give security for his\n     allegiance or peaceable behavior. I prove it thus: It is a\n     Roman Catholic maxim, established not by private men, but by\n     public council, that 'No faith is to be kept with heretics.'\n     This has been openly avowed by the Council of Constance; but it\n     has never been openly disclaimed. Whether private persons avow\n     or disavow it, it is a fixed maxim of the Church of Rome. But\n     as long as it is so, nothing can be more plain than that the\n     members of that Church can give no reasonable security to any\n     government for their allegiance and peaceable behavior.\n     Therefore, they ought not to be tolerated by any government,\n     Protestant, Mohammedan, or Pagan. You say, 'Nay, but they take\n     an oath of allegiance.' True, five hundred oaths; but the\n     maxim, 'No faith is to be kept with heretics,' sweeps them all\n     away as a spider's web. So that still no governors that are not\n     Roman Catholics can have any security of their allegiance.\n\n     \"Again, those who acknowledge the spiritual power of the Pope\n     can give no security of their allegiance to any government; but\n     all Roman Catholics acknowledge this: therefore they can give\n     no security for their allegiance. The power of granting pardons\n     for all sins--past, present, and to come--is, and has been for\n     many centuries, one branch of his spiritual power. But those\n     who acknowledge him to have this spiritual power can give no\n     security for their allegiance, since they believe the Pope can\n     pardon rebellion, high treason, and all other sins whatever.\n     The power of dispensing with any promise, oath, or vow, is\n     another branch of the spiritual power of the Pope: all who\n     acknowledge his spiritual power must acknowledge this. But\n     whoever acknowledges the dispensing power of the Pope, can give\n     no security for his allegiance to any government. Oaths and\n     promises are none: they are as light as air--a dispensation\n     makes them null and void. Nay, not only the Pope, but even a\n     priest has power to pardon sins! This is an essential doctrine\n     of the Church of Rome. But they that acknowledge this, cannot\n     possibly give any security for their allegiance to any\n     government. Oaths are no security at all; for the priest can\n     pardon both perjury and high treason. Setting their religion\n     aside, it is plain that, upon principles of reason, no\n     government ought to tolerate men who cannot give any security\n     to that government for their allegiance and peaceful behavior.\n     But this, no Romanist can do; not only while he holds that 'no\n     faith is to be kept with heretics,' but so long as he\n     acknowledges either priestly absolution, or the spiritual power\n     of the Pope.\n\n     \"If any one pleases to answer this, and set his name, I shall\n     probably reply. But the productions of anonymous writers I do\n     not promise to take any notice of.\n\n     \"I am, sir, your humble servant,\n\n     \"JOHN WESLEY.\n\n     \"CITY ROAD, January 12, 1780.\"\n\nBut, sir, you know as well as any living man that the history of the\nChurch, from the days of the first Pope down to the iniquitous reign of\nPius IX., sustains Mr. Wesley in his views on this subject, and\njustifies the steps taken by the American party. Notwithstanding the\noft-repeated profession of Catholic liberality and Romish toleration, so\ntriumphantly paraded by you, and other interested aspirants and\nunprincipled demagogues, the Catholic Church has invariably shown\nherself to be destitute of both, whenever she had the opportunity of\nusing them. Sir, _intolerance_ is an element of her faith, and\n_persecution_ a specimen of her piety; and no man knows it better than\nyou do. In taking upon herself the obligation of \"true obedience to the\nPope,\" the Catholic Church imposes upon herself a task that proves\nbeyond all doubt she cannot, under any circumstances, remain faithful to\nthat obligation, and yet maintain \"allegiance\" to such a government as\nours!\n\nSir, I have no patience with a Protestant minister who stands forth as\nthe apologist of Catholicism; nor have I any confidence in one who does\nit, provided he is a man of _intelligence_, as I admit you to be. The\nonly excuse I can render for your strange and inconsistent conduct is,\nthat you are in your dotage; that you are a violent old partisan; and\nthat you are the tool of designing demagogues, infamous disunionists,\nand unmitigated repudiators. I shall not be at all surprised to hear\nthat you have apostatized from the Methodist Church, and gone over to\nthe Roman Catholics. I learn from the Little Rock Gazette, a Democratic\npaper, that but the other day, Gov. E. N. Carway, of Arkansas, a member\nof the Methodist Church, had actually apostatized from Methodism, and\nthe Protestant faith, and united with the Roman Catholics. And what\nmakes his defection from the faith of his fathers still more notorious,\nhis organ is down upon the Protestant clergy in bitter and unrelenting\ndenunciations! I believe that _you_ are preparing to go over to the\nRoman Catholics; and to justify your change, when the time comes, you\nnow assert, \"in humiliation but in candor,\" you say, that the people\n\"have _ten thousand times more_ to fear from Methodists than from\nCatholics.\" If you believe this, you ought to leave the Methodist Church\n_instantly_, even without the formalities of a withdrawal or\nexpulsion--even though you should be denied admittance into the Catholic\nChurch! I deny that we have \"_ten thousand times more to fear_\" from the\n_Devil_ than we have from the Catholics; and according to your argument,\n_the Methodists are worse than the Devil_! This, their most bitter\nrevilers and enemies do not believe; and for obvious reasons. The\nMethodist Church has no St. Bartholomew's Day, with its rivers of blood\nstaining her garments: she never indiscriminately slaughtered the\nAlbigenses, or Waldenses, or Huguenots: she never established an\ninfernal Inquisition: she never lit up the fires of Smithfield: never\nburned the Holy Bible, and prohibited, upon pain of eternal death, the\nprinting and circulating of God's word; and last, but not least, she has\nnot sought to keep the people in ignorance. Wherever Methodism has been\nplanted, the people have become great and happy. If you please, wherever\n_Protestantism_ has prevailed, the people have been prosperous and\nhappy. But look to Old Spain, Italy, the German Confederacies, Sardinia,\nNaples, Austria, Belgium, Portugal, Bavaria, Baden, South America, and\nMexico, where Romanism is the established religion, and the places of\nher influence are a hissing and a by-word in the eyes of the civilized\nworld! Protestantism has done more for the world in the last hundred\nyears than the Roman Catholic Church has for the _eighteen hundred\nyears_!\n\nSir, the Puritans, of New England; the Hollanders, of New York; the\nQuakers, Lutherans, and German Reformed, of Pennsylvania; the Baptists,\nof Rhode Island; the Episcopalians and Presbyterians, of Virginia; the\nLutherans and followers of Wesley and Whitefield, of Georgia; the\nHuguenots and Episcopalians, of the Carolinas; and the Seceders in\nseveral of the States, who were the religious pioneers of these States,\nwere all Protestants and Know Nothings; and if they were living, they\nwould be ashamed of you and your teachings. They selected this\nwilderness country as their home, in order that they might enjoy those\nreligious privileges from which they had been debarred in the old world,\nby the very Church and people you are seeking to vindicate.\n\nBut you will say, as you have done in substance, that this is no longer\nthe characteristic of Romanism. Why is it not? Has she ever changed for\nthe better? When did she renounce her doctrines and practices? Never!\nRome is the same tyrannical system now, where she has the power, that\nshe ever has been, and for ever must be. Wo to this land of ours, if\never Rome gets the ascendancy here! Her creed is the same here and now,\nin this respect, that it has everywhere been, and must always be. It is\nher boast that she is always right, and knows no change. She practices\nher unholy inquisitorial and Jesuitical doctrines in this country, as\nfar as she can and dare act them out. Her whole system is adverse to our\nrepublican institutions and she hesitates not to declare it. She has\npublicly burned our Bible in different States in this Union, and\nrecently, in New York and Pennsylvania. Archbishop Hughes, the Head of\nthe Catholic Church in this country, has taken an oath, administered by\nthe Pope of Rome, of which this is a part:\n\n     \"Heretics, schismatics, and rebels to our said Lord (the Pope)\n     or his aforesaid successors, I will, to my utmost power,\n     _persecute and wage war with_.\"\n\nThe Church of Rome declares all who are not its members to be heretics.\nIt is painful, in view of all these things, to see an old Protestant\nminister, whose head has been withered by the frosts of seventy\nwinters, openly in the field advocating a Church whose Bishops, Priests,\nand members are \"drunken with the blood of saints.\"\n\nThere is but one remaining feature of your singular address to Know\nNothing Methodist Preachers to be replied to, and I am through. You\nassail the new party on the score of its _secrecy_, and of its\n_concealment_ of its acts from the public. Had this objection come from\nany one but a Methodist Preacher, and a known advocate of\n_Class-meetings being held with closed doors_, I would now dispose of it\nwithout occupying as much space as I shall do in my concluding remarks!\n\nNotwithstanding all the _secrecy_ in the new Order of Know Nothings has\nbeen set aside by the act of the National Council which created it; and\nnotwithstanding our members tell all about their Councils, where and\nwhen they meet, and our orators read out and publish to the world our\nobligations, rules, and principles, it is still objected that ours is a\nsecret Order, liable to be used for bad purposes; that we travel about\nwith dark lanterns; that our proceedings are not restrained by the\nwholesome check of public opinion!\n\nNow, this, the great objection to our Order, comes from men who belong\nto Lodges of Free Masons and Odd Fellows, and who have taken all the\n_binding_ oaths attached to the different _degrees_ of these respective\nOrders! The same objection is urged against the American party, by men\nwho belong to the Order of Sons of Temperance, who have deemed a _rigid\nsecret organization_ necessary to combat successfully a _domestic_ evil!\nIt is urged in bitterness against the Order, by demagogues and\npartisans, who have acted for years with the _secret political\nconclaves_ of their respective parties, who have held their meetings\nwith _closed doors_--kept their _places_ of meeting a profound\nsecret--and when they have adjourned, they have enjoined _secrecy_ upon\nall present! Last, but not least, this _secret feature_ is urged against\nthe American organization by the vile apologists for the Catholic\nChurch, and its corrupt Priesthood and membership, in this country.\nThese demagogues know that the Roman Catholic Church is a _secret\nsociety_, directed by a talented, designing, and villainous\nHIERARCHY--absolutely controlled by an _anti_-Republican Priesthood, to\na degree which has never been exercised by any political party in the\nknown world! The _Confessional_ is a secret tribunal, before which every\nmember of that Church is required to make known, not only _immoral_\nactions, but every thought and purpose of the heart, and upon pain of\nincurring the anathema of the Church, which is equivalent to a sentence\nof eternal damnation! The corrupt order of JESUITS, the infamous society\nof SAN FEDESTI, and the infinitely infernal society of IRISH RIBBON\nMEN--these are all oath-bound societies of the Catholic Church,\nconnected directly with the horrid operations of the \"_Holy\nInquisition_.\"\n\nNow, I put the question to any man of reason and common sense, if Roman\nCatholics and their _patriotic Democratic_ admirers and advocates, in\nthis country, are not the last men on earth who should object to the\n_secret_ doings of the order of Know Nothings, even if their secrecy\nwere kept up? Every Roman Catholic in the known world is under the\nabsolute control of a secret society, by considerations not only of a\n_temporal_, but of an ETERNAL WEIGHT!\n\nBut I am not done with these _Democratic_ opposers of SECRECY. The\nConvention which formed the Constitution of the United States, sat in\nthe old State House in Philadelphia, _with closed doors, from the 25th\nof May to the 17th of September_, wanting only eight days of four\nmonths. That body of men had a Doorkeeper and Sergeant-at-arms, both\nunder oath, to keep their doors barred, and all their proceedings a\nsecret. So says Mr. Jefferson's biography! And such men as Washington,\nAdams, Jefferson, Madison, Franklin, Harrison, Hancock, Hopkins, and\nothers, composed that body! During the war of the Revolution, General\nWashington, Generals Lee, Wayne, Marion, and others, organized a _secret\nAmerican Society_, with its branches extending from North to South,\nhaving their _passwords_, _signs_, and _grips_, and writing to each\nother in figures, and \"an unknown tongue,\" as the Know Nothings have\nbeen doing, and all, too, with a view to oppose Foreign intrigues and\noppressions! It is as well known as any political truth, that General\nWASHINGTON, at the time of his death, was the _President_ of the\nCincinnati Society, a secret political society, in which, we see it\nstated on unquestionable authority, no man was eligible to membership\nunless he was a _native American_. The _Columbian Order_, known as the\n\"_Tammany Society_,\" was a secret political society, and highly\ninfluential, and maintains its existence to this day, and without danger\nto the liberties of the country. Gen. SAM HOUSTON publishes to the world\nthat himself and Gen. JACKSON were members of this Society. What say the\n_anti_-Americans to all these facts? Do they believe that Gen.\nWashington, or Jackson, would have united with any association or order\nnot purely American? Would either have entered into any political\nleague, when _secrecy_ was enjoined, if he had not approved of the\nprinciple of secrecy in political associations? Never! From the\ncharacters of Washington and Jackson--the sacrifices they made for their\ncountry, united with their fervid patriotism, and their known preference\nfor every thing _American_, I do not doubt for one moment, that if they\nwere both now living, they would unite with the veritable Order of Know\nNothings!\n\nI believe the hand of God to be in this very movement, and as much in\nthe _secrecy_ of it, in the outset, as in any other feature. I regard\nthe movement as one growing out of a great crisis in the affairs of our\ncountry, and a precursor of a sound, healthful, and vigorous\nnationality, and which will ultimately prevent the liberties of this\ncountry from being destroyed, by the machinations of such demagogues and\nfactionists as now seek to _excuse_ Romanism, and fellowship Foreign\nPauperism. Secret societies are only dangerous to despots and tyrants,\nand history shows that these above all others have made war upon them.\nThey have denounced and proscribed Masonry in every quarter of the\nglobe, where they have had the power. The Pope, with the aid of his\nCardinals, has crushed the ancient order of Free Masons in his\ndominions. There is not a Masonic Lodge in Italy. In our own country,\nnot a single Catholic is to be found associated with the order of Free\nMasons; and why? Masonry is founded upon the Bible, and requires the\nreading of the Protestant Bible in all its Lodges, and this don't suit\nRomanism. We state these general and historical facts, without knowing\nany thing of our own knowledge of Masonry.\n\nIn the young and growing city of Knoxville, it is within our own\nknowledge, that many of the Irish Catholics attached themselves to the\nOrder of the Sons of Temperance, with a view, as they said, of throwing\naround them the wholesome restraints of the Order. On the first visit of\na priest to the city, commonly called \"Father Brown,\" these Irish\nCatholics began to drop off one by one, until not one of them is now in\nthe Order, and most of those who were, are daily seen drunk in our\nstreets. Indeed, some of them in withdrawing had the candor to\nacknowledge that the priest required them to do so! And why? Because, in\nall the Divisions of the Sons of Temperance here, we have the Protestant\nScriptures read, and have Protestant prayers offered up. This don't suit\nthe Church of Rome!\n\n     I have the honor to be, very truly and frankly,\n\n     W. G. BROWNLOW.\n\n\n\n\nTO THE RIGHT REVEREND AARON V. BROWN, M. S.\n\n\nSIR:--I have received by mail a pamphlet copy of your \"Letter to the\nBishops, Elders, and _other_ Ministers, Itinerant and _Local_, of the\nMethodist Episcopal Church South,\" covering twenty-eight octavo pages. I\nthank you for a copy of your _Pastoral_ address; and I am happy to be\nable to _infer_ from its teachings that you have made a profession of\nreligion, before taking upon yourself \"Holy Orders.\" I suppose the\n_time_ of your conversion, you date back to the memorable period when\nyou \"saw sights\" on Mount Pisgah, and had conferred on you the degree of\n_Modern Seer_, and entered upon the duties of \"High Priest\" of\nDemocracy! As I am one of the parties addressed, and the customs of the\nChurch and the country require a response to so grave a document, I have\nfelt it incumbent upon me to perform the task. I may style this the\n_Last_ epistle of Aaron, the Priest, and illustrious Chief of Foreign\nCatholic Sag Nicht Locofocoism!\n\nMy first impulses were, upon reading your address, to call for your\n_credentials_, and to examine into your _authority_ for assuming to\ndictate to the entire Ministry of the Southern portion of the Methodist\nChurch. You must either enter the Ecclesiastical ring under the\n_imposition of the hands_ of BISHOP SOULE or _Andy Johnson_. If BISHOP\nSOULE ordained you for the Ministry, and set you apart as the\nLieutenant-General of the Methodist Episcopal Church South, the\npresumption is that he examined you on doctrinal points, and upon all\nquestions affecting the government of the Church, as was his duty, and\nis our custom, and that he found you orthodox! It follows, as a matter\nof course, that you renounced your heresy you advocated in the Hartford\nConvention, held at Nashville, and that you obtained forgiveness for\nthat and numerous other \"sins of omission and commission\"--aye, for the\nwhole catalogue of your inward and outward iniquities, which so\n_eminently_ disqualified you for the work of the Ministry! But if _Andy\nJohnson_ ordained you for the work, of which there is no sort of doubt,\nthe Church South, through me, protests against your authority, and\nutterly refuses to submit to your teachings. Our Church does not agree\nwith Johnson on the \"White Basis\" issue, or the great question of\nslavery; and in proof of this, I cite to the fact of her separation from\nthe North, in 1844, upon this very question. She has within her bounds\nof communion, rich men and poor, educated and uneducated, and is\nunwilling to unite with him in arraying the poor against the rich, or\nthe unlearned against the learned. Nor does our Church believe that\nJesus Christ was a Locofoco, as Johnson asserts in his Inaugural, and\nheld that Christianity and Democracy, in converging lines, led to the\nfoot of Jacob's Ladder, and thence to heaven, _via_ Mount Pisgah, from\nwhose lofty summit you first beheld the promised land!\n\nIt therefore follows, that, in presenting yourself as a spiritual leader\nin the Church, called to the work, as you have been, by _Andy Johnson_,\nyour case is fully met by a quotation from Job:\n\n     \"Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present\n     themselves before the Lord, and _Satan_ came also among them.\"\n\nA second passage, from the Book of Jeremiah, meets your case, and leaves\nno doubt that the inspired Prophet had you in his eye:\n\n     \"We have heard the pride of Moab, (he is exceedingly proud,)\n     his loftiness, and his _arrogance_, and his pride, and his\n     haughtiness of heart.\n\n     \"I know his wrath, saith the Lord; but it shall not be so; his\n     _lies_ shall not so effect it.\"\n\nTo be candid with you, Gov. Brown, I regard your address, under all the\ncircumstances, as a display of the most brazen-faced assurance and the\nmost unmitigated impudence I ever met with in my life! I have known for\nyears that you were capable of great presumption, but in this insolent\nand dictatorial address you surpass _yourself_--you positively out-Herod\nHerod! In the whole history of the country, and of parties, I venture\nthe assertion, that a parallel piece of impudence, and downright\nbold-faced assurance, cannot be pointed to, as the act of any partisan.\nIt is really past all belief, if I had not your production before me.\nBut more of this hereafter.\n\nCopies of your pamphlet were distributed through the aisles and seats of\nthe Annual Conference room in Nashville, and have been sent all over the\nSouth, to members of other Conferences. Your _proof-sheet_ was seen ten\ndays before the meeting of the Middle Tennessee Conference, and your\n\"work of faith and labor of love\" was ready for distribution when the\nConference first convened, but you held it back till the Conference was\nready to adjourn, and to a period so late, that a reply, if one had been\ndeemed necessary, could not be made. This was _cowardly_, and in keeping\nwith your political tactics and code of morals. In saying that this was\nin keeping with your code of morals, I allude to the _Woodberry\naffair_.\n\nI shall now take up your address, Governor, and wade through its\ntwenty-eight pages of double-distilled Sag Nichtism, sublimated\nimpudence, and concealed advocacy of _Romanism_, mixed up with\ncontradictions, false assertions, and glaring absurdities, as it is,\nfrom beginning to end. In the opening paragraph, you predicate your\nright to instruct the \"Bishops, Elders, and other Ministers\" of the\nentire Church, South, upon the real or assumed fact, that you are \"The\nson of a now sainted father, who for forty years ministered at your\naltars, the co-laborer of that noble band of Christian ministers, who,\nunder Asbury and Coke, founded your Church in America!\"\n\nAlas, that any \"sainted Father\" should be represented by so degenerate a\nson--an irreligious son--not a member of any Church--but having the\nhardihood, in the face of those who know the facts, to disguise himself\nin the priestly robes of a \"sainted Father\"--like an ass in a lion's\nskin, to _bray out_ against better men than himself, or, like a wolf in\nsheep's clothing, to _steal into the fold_, where that Father was\naccustomed to minister in holy things, and with soft and honeyed words,\nand hypocritical teachings, and Satan-like misrepresentations, seek whom\nhe may devour! You tell the \"Bishops, Elders, and other Ministers,\" that\nyou really \"approve\" their \"creed,\" and, what is still more\nsoul-cheering, you have \"witnessed their growth and progress for years,\nwith the highest satisfaction.\" This is very _condescending_ in the \"son\nof a now sainted father!\" It is quite flattering! But these \"Bishops,\nElders, and other Ministers,\" would receive all this with a greater\ndegree of allowance, if they did not believe that your generous\npatronage, so lavishly bestowed upon them and their \"creed,\" was\nprompted by a principle of which _selfishness_ is the soul! They\nbelieve, and so express themselves in conversation, that your forced\nsmile of approbation, your reluctant eulogy, have both been wrung from\nyou, because you are a sycophantic partisan suitor for patronage, in the\nway of votes for your party. These Clergymen whom you address, think it\na great pity that the \"son of a now sainted father\" should exhibit so\nmuch \"satisfaction\" at witnessing their prosperity, in _theory_, and\nmanifest not one particle in _practice_. They think that you would be in\nyour proper place, to be found among the _mourners_, instead of the\n_teachers_ in their Church; and that it is high time, considering your\nage in life, and the extent of your iniquities, that you should be found\nupon your knees, in an altar full of fresh straw, at an old-fashioned\nCamp-Meeting, asking the pious to pray for you, and God, for the sake of\nthe forty years labors of \"a now sainted father,\" to have mercy upon\nyou, and save your sinful old soul from that death that never dies.\n\nWhy, Sir, the Devil himself would blush to perpetrate such an act of\narrogance as you have done, in thus volunteering your advice to the\n\"Bishops, Elders, and other Ministers,\" of the Methodist Church. An old\npolitical party hack, who is not now, and never was, a member of any\nChurch--an intriguing old sinner, who never even attends Church, and\nwho, in this respect, shows that he neither fears God, respects the\nChristian Sabbath, nor \"approves the creed\" of any orthodox\ndenomination, to be lecturing a numerous body of Clergymen, as to what\nthey ought or ought not to do, it is the culmination of all that is\ncalled effrontery! The \"Bishops, Elders, and other Ministers\" of the\nMethodist Church, wish the _evidence_ of your conversion to God, before\nthey consent to obey you, as \"having the rule over them.\" Your approval\nof their \"creed,\" and the \"satisfaction\" with which you have witnessed\ntheir progress, is not sufficient to satisfy their doubting minds, as\nlong as you continue to ride into Nashville on Sabbath, and retail\npolitical slang at the INN, or read Sag Nicht papers at the _Union\nOffice_, to the neglect of the house of God, and the evil example set\nbefore young men, against the statute in such cases made and provided!\nWe must, as Ministers, hear you relate your experience, in a regular\nclass-meeting. Nay, more, knowing your _raising_, and your ability to\n\"deceive, even the very elect,\" we must see you down upon your\nmarrow-bones, surrounded by noisy and zealous officials, pounding you on\nthe back, and exclaiming, as in the days of your \"sainted father,\" _Pray\non, Aaron_! We must hear you _groan_--we must see your sinful old bosom\n_heave_--we must witness the falling of _big tears_, as you publicly\nconfess and manfully repent of your misdeeds--of the whole catalogue, of\nall the inward and outward iniquities of your past life--your sins of\nomission and commission, which God knows are more numerous than the\nhairs upon your old sinful head! I say we must see all this, and even\nmore, before we can have faith in your teachings, as big as even a grain\nof mustard seed!\n\nBut you are the \"son of a now sainted father\"--you derive great\n\"satisfaction\" from the \"growth and progress\" of Methodism--you\n\"approve\" the Methodist \"creed\"--and hence, a glorious future awaits the\nMethodist Church: _provided_ always, that her \"Bishops, Elders, and\nother Ministers\" hearken to and obey your teachings, a thing they are\nvery certain not to do, in the matter under consideration. It is a\nmelancholy fact, that many of the sons of Methodist, and other\nMinisters, are very wicked and unpromising men; and it is equally true,\nand certainly notorious, that where they turn out to be sinners, they\nare sinners above all offenders, dwelling either at Jerusalem or\nelsewhere! I have no hesitancy in pronouncing you as _hard a case_, in a\nmoral point of view, as ever came before the Church, and the only\nappropriate reply her ecclesiastical dignitaries can make to your\naddress, is to appoint a day of fasting and prayer to God, for your\nconversion, to be observed throughout her borders. I now, as the\nappointed organ of the Church, set apart the first day of January, 1856,\nand I pray you, as one desiring the salvation of your soul, to be in the\nspirit and in a proper frame of mind on that day! Humble yourself before\nGod--tell him that you were in error in stealing the livery of Heaven to\nserve the Devil in! Tell him that you are an old worn-out political\nhack--that you have grown gray in the service of sin--that during the\nwhole of a somewhat eventful life, your labors have been in the dirtiest\npools of party politics--that you have been insincere and unscrupulous\nin all your teachings and acts--that you stand before the people of\nTennessee publicly branded by _eight_ respectable and reliable citizens\nof Wilson county, as a _falsifier_ in the Know Nothing controversy of\nthe past summer--and that you are sorry for having come forth steeped to\nthe nose and chin in political profligacy, to lecture grave Clergymen\nupon subjects you ought to set at their feet and learn lessons about!\nTell your God, what he doubtless knows, that though the \"son of a now\nsainted father,\" you are as full of devils as ever Mary Magdalene\nwas--that like the \"Imps of Sin,\" in Milton, these \"yelp all around\"\nyou--that this is no reflection upon a \"now sainted father,\" whose\nseeming neglect of your early training grew out of his continual absence\nfrom home, as is the case with most Methodist Preachers,--aye, tell your\nGod, that once out of this scrape, you will never be caught in another\nof the kind! You say,\n\n     \"From the foundation of our government, it has been a conceded\n     and settled doctrine, that the various religious denominations\n     should not, as such, intermeddle with the political contests of\n     the day. No instance is now remembered where they have done\n     so!\"\n\nThis is a remarkable sentence, and partakes of the nature of your Wilson\ncounty assertions! The history of the Church, and of the world,\ncontradicts every word of the foregoing, and demonstrates that the\n\"settled doctrine\" of the Catholic Church, has ever been, as it still\nis, to \"intermeddle with the political contests of the day.\" I will\ntrouble you with two instances in which \"religious denominations, as\nsuch,\" have been guilty of what you deny. The Albany (N. Y.) State\nRegister, a paper which usually does not say what it cannot maintain,\nstates that ARCHBISHOP HUGHES has issued a mandate, _commanding_ all\nCatholics in the Albany District, in the exciting State election now\ncoming off, to cast their votes for Mr. Crosby for the Senate. But Roman\nCatholics, you falsely tell us, never \"intermeddle with the political\ncontests of the day:\" O no!\n\nThe other \"instance now remembered,\" is the one in which you were a\ncandidate for a seat in the Legislature of Tennessee, in the county of\nGiles: this was, according to my recollection, in 1831, or a quarter of\na century ago. At that time, there was a small Manual Labor School in\nGiles, which had been incorporated by the Legislature, and at the head\nof which was a _Presbyterian_. The gentleman who ran against you, if not\na member of the Presbyterian Church, \"approved\" their \"creed,\" and\n\"witnessed their growth and progress for years with the highest\nsatisfaction.\" _You_ charged upon the stump that the Presbyterians were\nseeking to establish their religion by law, to unite Church and\nState--appealed to the Methodist and Baptist to put them down by\nelecting you, with a promise that you would check their march by\ncounter-legislation--and you were elected upon this issue. At the same\ntime, as the oldest inhabitants of Giles know, there were not fifty\nPresbyterians in the county! But \"no instance is remembered\" in which\none sect has intermeddled with another--O no! You say:\n\n     \"In the mutations of parties in this country, a new one has\n     lately arisen, to which, I apprehend, more of the Methodist\n     ministers have attached themselves, at least in the State of\n     Tennessee, than might have been expected. This party, known as\n     the Know Nothings, is so _peculiar_ in its organization, that\n     it seems strange to me that any minister or professor of\n     religion should be willing longer to continue in it.\"\n\nYour apprehensions are well-founded, when you suppose that a very large\nproportion of the Methodist ministers in Tennessee are either members of\nthis new party or sympathize with it. And, sir, more of the ministers of\nother denominations than you seem to be aware of, have either attached\nthemselves to this party, \"in the mutations of parties,\" or act with it,\nand endorse its aims and objects, than you have yet dreamed of! And \"it\nseems strange\" to these ministers, and thousands of the purest and best\nlaymen in the Protestant ranks, \"that any minister or professor of\nreligion should be willing longer\" to oppose the principles of this\nparty, or array themselves under the black flag of Papal Rome, and of\nthe pauper emigrants with whom she is flooding our land! But, sir, the\nobject of your Address is, to persuade if you can, and if not, _to\ndrive_, by motives of fear, the Clergy of the Methodist Church from\ntheir position on this great American and Protestant question. Alas, how\nlittle does the \"son of a sainted father\" understand the material he\nattempts to work upon! Methodist ministers are free men, the equals of\nother moral and upright men in heroic virtues, and far in advance of\nthat of politicians in Tennessee who believe parties in religion, as in\npolitics, are only \"held together by the cohesive power of public\nplunder,\" and who assume to direct public opinion from a principle, of\nwhich _selfishness_ is the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end!\nSir, the violence, bitterness, and the very inflammatory tone, not to\nsay language, of your Gallatin, Lebanon, and Columbia speeches, are\nenough, it seems to me, to _nauseate_ every good and conservative\ncitizen, and to disgust every \"Bishop, Elder, and other Ministers,\nItinerant and Local, of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South.\" Even in\nthis Address, you insult these ministers on every page. I see not how\nany preacher, with a true Protestant and American heart in him, can read\nthis address of yours through, without rising up from his seat and\nsaying: \"I have voted with this Anti-Protestant and Anti-American party\nfor the last time.\"\n\nIn warning Methodist ministers to withdraw their sanction and\napprobation of Know Nothingism, you say:\n\n     \"I therefore call upon them this day to come out of these\n     lodges, and never return to them: at all events, never return\n     to them until all _secrecy_, all their bits of red paper,\n     (indicating _blood_, even by the selection of color,) all their\n     signs and signals, are utterly abolished and dispensed with. I\n     call upon them to do this, and to do it forthwith--by their\n     hopes of heaven--by their obedience to the word of God--by\n     their allegiance to the Constitution and laws of their\n     country--to come out from any party which has adopted a mode\n     and plan of organization so fatal to the peace of society, and\n     the progress of true religion.\"\n\nWhat egotism! _You_ call upon them! You make a freer use of the personal\npronoun _I_, than even old Parson Longstreet, the Know Nothing slayer of\nMississippi. To parse your different sentences syntactically, nothing\nelse is necessary but to understand the first person singular, and to\nrepeat the rule. Not only your verbiage but your sentiment is thus\negotistic throughout!\n\nYour appeal to the ministers to come out of this organization, on the\nground of its _secrecy_, is a species of demagoguism, the more\ndisgusting when it is considered that you are a _Free Mason_, and have,\nby all the arts and blandishment of your nature, sought to induce\nministers to go into that organization. But, then, there is no violation\nof law or the Constitution in _Masonry_--\"fatal to the peace of society\nand to the progress of true religion\"--no, nothing! Understand me: I am\nnot opposed to Masonry.\n\nOn this subject of the Romish creed, which you excuse, and even\n_advocate_, you admit that there are \"_alleged_ abuses,\" which have\nprompted the Protestant Churches to unite themselves with this new\nOrder! Then you insultingly tell these Churches this tale:\n\n     \"But they ought to have remembered, that even a virtuous\n     indignation can never justify _proscription and persecution_:\n     these bring no remedy to the real or supposed evils, but are\n     sure to increase and aggravate them. These errors in faith, and\n     abominations in practice, if they really exist, were known to\n     the Wesleys, and Cokes, and Asburys, who founded your Church:\n     to the Lees, the Bruces, the Capers, the Logan Douglasses, the\n     Summerfields, and the Bascoms, who subsequently extended and\n     adorned it. But they never proposed to kindle, in this\n     enlightened age of Christianity, the consuming fires of\n     RELIGIOUS PERSECUTION.\"\n\nNow, sir, every distinguished \"founder\" of the Methodist Church you have\nnamed, from WESLEY to BASCOM, has written and preached against the\n\"errors in faith, and abominations in practice,\" of the Romish Church,\nand they each and all have taken this very ground upon the religious\nissues. I have heard _three_ of these men preach, and I am familiar with\nthe writings of the rest, and know whereof I speak.\n\nYou _intentionally_ deceive and misrepresent the American party, when\nyou charge that they seek to proscribe one class of our citizens--that\nthey desire to interfere with the rights of conscience--and to say _how_\nmen should worship God. Why don't you inform your readers that\nArchbishop Hughes, and other Catholic Bishops, were the first to\nintroduce religion into political discussion in this country? This would\nnot suit your purposes--it suits your objects, taste, and inclination\nbetter, to slander the American party by wholesale, and to charge upon\nits members the atrocities committed by your foreign and pauper allies.\nWe only choose to vote against them, and to vote for American-born\ncitizens and Protestants: which is as much our _right_, as it is the\nright of these foreign Catholics to vote against and proscribe American\nProtestants. For this, you and your villainous associates exhaust the\nwhole vocabulary of Billingsgate upon the American party. What is their\noffence? Why, they simply place certain questions before persons\ndesiring to act with them, which they think, at least, may affect the\nnational welfare, and before the people of the Union, and ask their\nopinion of these questions at the ballot-box. The American party has\nalways denied, and I again reiterate the denial, that we do, at all\nproscribe, or in any way interfere with, any class of our foreign\ncitizens, save that we propose to send _convicts_ from European prisons\nback to their own native and infamous dens, as fast as they land\nhere--but these are not _citizens_ of ours. I appeal to our Platform,\nand our Book of Constitutions, and I offer to any man a handsome\nreward--any man who will produce in either a statement containing the\nproscription you falsely charge against us. I now say, Gov. Brown,\neither do this, or cease your empty vaporing against the _proscriptive_\nfeatures of our system, as you are pleased to style it. You declaim most\nlustily in favor of religious liberty for Catholics, which you know we\ndo not propose as a party to interfere with; and this you plead for at\nthe altar of Methodist \"Bishops, Elders, and other Ministers,\" who know\nthere is no religious liberty for Protestants where Catholics have the\npower to prevent it! You plead in the most plaintive tones for the\nrights of foreign Catholics to be sworn into good citizens in less than\n_one year_ after they land here, but do not seem to remember the\nAmerican Protestant wives and children, who have to subsist on charity\nduring our severe winters, in consequence of their husbands and fathers\nbeing elbowed out of employment by the competition of foreign pauper\nlaborers!\n\nSir, the American party, if in power, would put a stop to that\nproscription from office that has always characterized the party with\nwhich you act, and which has made the present Administration so very and\nso justly odious to the country. Proscription, indeed! Was there ever\nsuch _glaring_ and _actual_ proscription for the sake of religious and\npolitical creeds committed as by the present Administration? The\ninfamous Sag Nicht party with which you act, and of which you are a\nleader and a High Priest, though the \"son of a now sainted father,\" has\napplied the political guillotine to almost every man in office who has\ndared to differ with them in their high estimate of foreign paupers and\nCatholic vagabonds, in many instances turning out native-born\nProtestants, and filling their places with foreign Catholics. And yet,\nwith a degree of effrontery that throws the Devil far into the shade,\nyou turn round and charge the American party with proscription, and ask\nthe \"Bishops, Elders, and other Ministers,\" of the Methodist Church, \"by\ntheir hopes of heaven--by their obedience to the word of God--and by\ntheir allegiance to the Constitution and laws of their country,\" to come\nout from a party so proscriptive! Why, sir, you out-Herod old Herod\nhimself! Your teachings contrasted with your practice, would cause a\ncrimsoned negative to settle on the cheeks of old Pilate! And still you\nare the \"son of a now sainted father\"--you \"approve\" the \"creed\" of\nMethodism, and have \"witnessed its growth and prosperity for years, with\nthe highest satisfaction!\"\n\nYou quote from the Declaration of Independence, to show that toleration\nshould be extended to Catholics and foreigners, and then insultingly\nadd, as if you supposed no Methodist minister had ever perused the\nwritings of Mr. JEFFERSON:\n\n     \"These are the words of Mr. Jefferson, but the immortal\n     sentiment springs directly from the word of the living and true\n     God. No: persecution at the stake, or by exclusion of Catholics\n     from office, is not the weapon to be wielded by the Protestant\n     Churches.\"\n\n_You_ know that the notes of warning given to his countrymen by the sage\nof Monticello, and the great APOSTLE of American Democracy, are in\nharmony with the doctrines of the Know Nothing party. But you choose to\nconceal this fact from the \"Bishops, Elders, and other Ministers\" of the\nMethodist Church, in the vain hope that their numerous pressing and\nofficial engagements will not allow them time to look up the documents.\nIn Mr. Jefferson's Notes on Virginia, written in 1781, and published in\n1794, pages 124-5, I find the following _Know Nothing doctrine_:\n\n     \"But are there no inconveniences to be thrown into the scale\n     against the advantage expected from a multiplication of numbers\n     by the importation of foreigners? It is for the happiness of\n     those united in society to harmonize, as much as possible, in\n     matters which they must of necessity transact together. Civil\n     government being the sole object of forming societies, its\n     administration must be conducted by common consent. Every\n     species of government has specific principles. Ours, perhaps,\n     are more peculiar than those of any other in the universe. It\n     is a composition of the freest principles of the English\n     constitution, with others derived from natural right and\n     natural reason. To these nothing can be more opposed than the\n     maxims of absolute monarchs. Yet _from such we are to expect\n     the greatest number of immigrants_. They will bring with them\n     the _principles of the government they leave, imbibed in early\n     youth_: or, if able to throw them off, it will be in exchange\n     for an _unbounded licentiousness, passing, as is usual, from\n     one extreme to another. It would be a miracle were they to stop\n     precisely at the point of temperate liberty_. These principles,\n     with their language, they will transmit to their children. In\n     proportion with their numbers, they will share with us the\n     legislation. They will infuse into it their spirit, warp and\n     bias its directions, and render it a heterogeneous, incoherent,\n     distracted mass. _I may appeal to experience during the present\n     contest for a verification of these conjectures._ But if they\n     be not certain in event, are they not possible? are they not\n     probable? Is it not safer to wait with patience twenty-seven\n     years and three months longer for the attainment of every\n     degree of population desired or expected? May not our\n     government be more homogeneous, more peaceable, more durable?\"\n\nAgain, Mr. JEFFERSON, whilst our Minister to the Court of St. Cloud,\naddressed a letter to JOHN JAY, dated November 14, 1788, in which he\nuses this language:\n\n     \"With respect to the _Consular_ appointments, it is a duty on\n     me to add some observations, which my situation here has\n     enabled me to make. I think it was in the spring of 1784, that\n     Congress (harassed by multiplied applications from foreigners,\n     of whom nothing was known but on their information, or on that\n     of others as unknown as themselves) came to the resolution that\n     the interest of America would not permit the naming of any\n     person, not a citizen, to the office of Consul, or Agent, or\n     Commissary. _Native citizens, on several valuable accounts, are\n     preferable to aliens, or citizens alien-born._ Native citizens\n     possess our language, know our laws, customs and commerce, have\n     general acquaintance in the United States, give better\n     satisfaction, _and are more to be relied on in a point of\n     fidelity_. To avail ourselves of our native citizens, it\n     appears to me advisable to _declare, by standing law_, that no\n     person but a native citizen shall be capable of the office of\n     Consul. This was the rule of 1784, restraining the office of\n     Consul to native citizens.\"\n\nIn 1797, Mr. JEFFERSON drafted a petition to the Legislature of\nVirginia, on behalf of the citizens of Amherst, Albemarle, Fluvana, and\nGouchland Bounties, in which he uses the following language:\n\n     \"Your petitioners further submit to the two Houses of Assembly,\n     whether the safety of the citizens of this Commonwealth, in\n     their persons, their property, their laws and government, does\n     not require that the capacity to act in the important office of\n     _Juror, Grand or Petty, civil or criminal_, should not be\n     restrained in future to native citizens, or such as were\n     citizens at the date of the Treaty of Peace which closed our\n     revolutionary war; and whether ignorance of our laws, and\n     natural partiality to the countries of their birth, are not\n     reasonable causes for declaring this to be one of their rights\n     incommunicable in future to adopted citizens.\"--_Jefferson's\n     Writings, Vol. IX., page 453._\n\nNow, Sir, answer me in candor, are you not ashamed of having quoted Mr.\nJEFFERSON, and of having so basely misrepresented his position on this\ngreat American question? Did not Mr. JEFFERSON propose to carry his\nopposition to foreigners much farther than the American party now do?\n\nBut, you vile old demagogue, though \"son of a now sainted father,\" I am\ndetermined you shall not escape the indignant powers of those \"Bishops,\nElders, and other Ministers,\" whom you have wickedly sought to deceive.\nIt is known to you, and to the world, in what veneration all American\nDemocrats hold the Virginia Resolutions of 1798 and '99, and the fame of\nMr. MADISON, who was the ruling spirit of that session of the\nLegislature. That Legislature passed the following Resolution, which you\nmay find by consulting Henning's Statutes at Large, Vol. 2, New Series,\npage 194:\n\n     \"That the General Assembly, nevertheless, concurring in opinion\n     with the Legislature of Massachusetts that every Constitutional\n     barrier should be opposed to the introduction of foreign\n     influence into our National Councils,--_Resolved_, That the\n     Constitution ought to be so amended that _no foreigner, who\n     shall have acquired the right, under our Constitution and laws,\n     at the time of making the amendment, shall hereafter be\n     eligible to the office of Senator or Representative_, in\n     Congress of the United States, nor to _any office in the\n     Judiciary or Executive_. Agreed to by the Senate, Jan. 16,\n     1799.\"\n\nI shall next consider two extracts from your Address, under one general\nhead, relating to the _temporal_ power of the Pope. You say:\n\n     \"But the genius of sophistry may fly to the rescue of\n     Know-Nothingism, by pretending that it is not on account of\n     _his religion_ that the Catholic is to be excluded from office,\n     but because he is subjected, not merely to the spiritual but\n     the _temporal dominion_ or jurisdiction of the Pope. No error\n     has been wider spread than this.\"\n\nAgain:\n\n     \"A late distinguished Senator from Georgia, (Mr. Berrien,) in a\n     recent address to the public, has copied a letter of Mr.\n     Wesley, which may require a few observations. That letter was\n     dated in January, 1780. All its conclusions were founded on the\n     ASSUMED AND POPULAR OPINION of that day, that the Pope _did_\n     claim a civil jurisdiction beyond his own dominions--that he\n     _could_ absolve the subjects of other governments from their\n     oaths of allegiance, and _that there was_ a principle in one of\n     the tenets of that Church, that Catholics were justified in not\n     keeping faith with heretics. Against these ASSUMED AND POPULAR\n     OPINIONS, the Catholics of England in that day, as they now do\n     in this country, were solemnly protesting.\"\n\nThis is a modest way of giving Mr. Wesley the _lie_, but it is\nnevertheless quite _direct_, and is the more surprising, as it comes\nfrom the \"son of a now sainted father,\" who was a follower of Wesley, a\n\"co-laborer of that noble band of Christian ministers\" he was\ninstrumental in starting out into the world--aye, the son of a \"father\nwho, for forty years, ministered at the altars\" this same Wesley\nerected! In holding up John Wesley as the _vile calumniator_ of the\nCatholic Church in England, it is well enough, Governor, to be modest\nabout it, and cautious in the selection of your words, as you are\naddressing a class of men who believe in John Wesley, as a faithful man\nof God, and one incapable of misrepresenting the Catholics of England,\nthe Pope of Rome, or any other sect or individual! John Wesley\nministered at the sacred altars of religion for more than sixty years;\nhe had with him the power of God, and the witness that he pleased Him;\nand the last words he uttered, with his hands clasped, and his eyes\nraised toward heaven, were these: \"_The best of all is, God is with\nus!_\" And yet the sons and grandsons in the gospel, of this venerated\nand sainted man of God, are insulted in Tennessee, by being told by an\n_impertinent old sinner_, and a _vile old party hack_, that he was A\nLIAR, while living, and the _slanderer of the Catholic Church_, now that\nhe is no more! If Mr. Wesley \"_assumed_\" falsehoods in reference to the\nRomish Church in England, he either did it in _ignorance_, or with _a\nguilty knowledge_ of the fact. He was a man of too much learning and\ninformation for his friends to get him out of such an indictment under a\nplea of ignorance. He is therefore, though dead, A WILFUL LIAR,\naccording to \"Ex-Gov. A. V. Brown,\" for the Governor goes on to argue\nthe cause against him, and, on page 19 of his address, quotes _Catholic_\nauthority to _prove_ him a liar! Shame on the \"son of a now sainted\nfather,\" and on the _holy seer of Pisgah_! O! Aaron, thou priest of\ncorrupt Democracy, you need not endeavor to gull \"bishops, elders, and\nother ministers,\" with your _whining cant_, while you thus traduce their\ngreat spiritual head, who, under God, taught them the lessons of\nsalvation!\n\nGov. Brown, go with me, as one of the admirers of John Wesley, to the\nhumble dwellings of the miners of Cornwall, to the homely tents of the\ncolliers of Kingswood and Newcastle, and to the equally humble workshops\nof the manufacturers of Yorkshire, in England, who are rejoicing in God\ntheir Saviour that a Wesley was ever born into the world, and ask them\nif they believe him capable of slandering the Catholics! Go with me\namong the backwoodsmen of North America, and examine them in their lone\ntents--go among the honest and virtuous settlers on our Western\nfrontiers, amid the interminable forests of the far off West, whose\nthousands are brought into the fold of Christ, through the\ninstrumentality of Wesleyan ministers, and ask them if they think the\nfounder of their Church was _a wilful liar_!\n\nGo with me to the rich pastures and luxuriant harvest-fields of your own\nnative Middle Tennessee: enter the neat cottages and stately mansions of\nthat glorious division of our State, and ask the intelligent and\neducated females, who are rejoicing in God, in hope of future and\neternal life, through the prayers and sermons of Wesleyan ministers, as\ninstruments in the hands of God, if they believe the founder of their\nChurch was _a wicked calumniator_! Go to the islands of the sea, to the\nburning sands of Africa, and ask the benighted converts from heathenism,\nthrough the instrumentality of Wesleyan ministers, if they believe the\nvenerable founder of their Church was a man of truth!\n\nEnter the dwellings of the rich and fashionable planters of the\nSouth--ride around their sugar and cotton plantations, among the sable\nsons and daughters of Africa, and witness the blessed fruits of the\npious life, Christian integrity, and triumphant death of John Wesley!\nCome over to East Tennessee, Governor, and enter the log-cabins of the\nvirtuous, happy peasantry of the \"hill country,\" and ask them whether\nthey believe Mr. Wesley or your Catholic authorities, touching the\ntemporal power of the Pope of Rome!\n\nAlas! Gov. Brown, the Reformation dawned with LUTHER in Germany, but the\nsun of its glory rose with Methodism in England; the first streaks of\n_Protestant_ light were seen on the horizon of the sixteenth century,\nbut the meridian sun of the Reformation dawned in all his brightness on\nthe Wesleys and Whitefield! But America has been the land of the glory\nand triumph of the doctrines of the man you labor to convict of the\nawful sin of lying!\n\nBut you deny that the Pope of Rome, in _temporal_ matters, claims what\nMr. Wesley attributed to him in the letter copied by Senator Berrien.\nYou also deny that the Popes claim and have exercised the right to\ninterfere with matters of government, and the right to absolve their\nfollowers in other countries, and under other governments, from their\nallegiance to such rulers and governments. I will proceed to vindicate\nMr. Wesley, and, by the proof, saddle the lie on you! Whilst John was\nKing of England, he had the \"Magna Charta,\" the great charter securing,\namong other things, the right of trial by jury, wrung from him at the\npoint of the bayonet. This great charter was annulled by Pope Innocent.\nHere is the proof:\n\n     \"While the king was employed in the siege of Rochester, he\n     received the pleasing intelligence, that according to his\n     request the charter had been annulled by the pontiff. Innocent,\n     enumerating the grounds of his judgment, insists strongly on\n     the violence employed by the barons. If they really felt\n     themselves aggrieved, they ought, he observes, to have accepted\n     the offer of redress by due course of law. They had preferred,\n     however, to break the oath of fealty, which they had taken, and\n     had appointed themselves judges to sit upon their lord. They\n     knew, moreover, that John had enrolled himself among the\n     crusaders; and yet they had not scrupled to violate the\n     privileges which all Christian nations had granted to the\n     champions of the cross. Lastly, England was become the fief of\n     the holy see; and they could not be ignorant that if the king\n     had the will, he had not at least the power, to give away the\n     rights of the crown, without the consent of his feudal\n     superior. He was therefore bound to annul the concessions which\n     had been extorted from John, as having been obtained in\n     contempt of the holy see, to the degradation of royalty, the\n     disgrace of the nation, and to the impediment of the crusade.\n     At the same time he wrote to the barons, re-stating his\n     reasons, exhorting them to submit, requesting them to lay their\n     claims before him in the council to be held at Rome; and\n     promising that he would induce the king to consent to whatever\n     might be deemed just or reasonable, to take care that all\n     grievances should be abolished, that the crown should be\n     content with its just rights, and the clergy and people should\n     enjoy their ancient liberties.\"--_Lingard's History of\n     England_, vol. ii., page 71.\n\nWill it be said that this was not interfering with _temporal_ matters?\nWill it be said that the right of trial by jury was a _spiritual_\nmatter? Will it be said that the tyranny of King John, and his\noppressions, of which the barons justly complained, were _spiritual_\nmatters? No sensible advocate of Romanism will say this!\n\nThe next instance of an interference by the Pope in temporal affairs, to\nwhich I shall call your attention, Governor, is his excommunication of\nElizabeth, Queen of England. She was immediately preceded on that throne\nby her sister Mary, who was a Catholic. For no other reason than that\nElizabeth was a _Protestant_, and would not submit her rights and\nkingdom to the control of the Pope, Pius V. thundered forth at her\ndevoted head the following anathema, from his throne at the Vatican,\nsituated at the foot of one of the seven hills upon which Rome is built:\n\n     EXCOMMUNICATION AND DEPOSITION Of QUEEN ELIZABETH OF ENGLAND.\n\n     \"Pius, etc., for a future memorial of the matter. He that\n     reigneth on high, to whom is given all power in heaven and on\n     earth, committed one Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, _out\n     of which there is no salvation_, to one alone upon the earth,\n     Peter the Prince of the Apostles, and to Peter's successor, the\n     Bishop of Rome, to be governed in _fulness of power_. Him alone\n     he made prince over all people, and all kingdoms, to pluck up,\n     destroy, scatter, consume, plant and build, etc. But the number\n     of the ungodly hath gotten such power, that there is now no\n     place left in the whole world which they have not essayed to\n     corrupt with their most wicked doctrines. Amongst others,\n     Elizabeth, _the pretended Queen of England, a slave of\n     wickedness_, lending thereunto her helping hand, with whom, as\n     in a sanctuary, the most pernicious of all men have found a\n     refuge; this very woman having seized upon the kingdom, and\n     monstrously usurping the place of the supreme Head of the\n     Church in all England, and the chief authority and jurisdiction\n     thereof, hath again brought back the same kingdom to miserable\n     destruction, which was then newly reduced to the faith, and to\n     good order. For having by strong hand inhibited the true\n     religion, which Mary, the lawful queen, of famous memory, had,\n     by the help of this See, restored, after it had been formerly\n     overthrown by King Henry VIII., a revolter therefrom, and\n     following and embracing the errors of _heretics_, she hath\n     removed the royal council, consisting of the English nobility,\n     and filled it with obscure men, being heretics; hath oppressed\n     the embracers of the Roman faith, hath placed impious\n     preachers, ministers of iniquity, and abolished the sacrifice\n     of the mass, prayers, fastings, distinction of meats, a single\n     life, and the rites and ceremonies; hath commanded books to be\n     read in the whole realm, containing manifest heresy, etc. She\n     hath not only contemned the godly requests and admonitions of\n     princes concerning her healing and conversion, but also bath\n     not so much as permitted the Nuncios of the See to cross the\n     seas into England, etc. We do, therefore, out of the fulness of\n     our apostolic power, declare the aforesaid Elizabeth, being\n     heretic, and a favorer of heretics, and her adherents in the\n     matter aforesaid, to have incurred the sentence of anathema,\n     and to be cut off from the unity of the body of Christ. And,\n     moreover, we do declare her to be deprived of her pretended\n     title to the kingdom aforesaid, and of all dominion, dignity,\n     and privilege whatsoever; and also the nobility, subjects, and\n     people of the said kingdom, and all others which have in any\n     sort sworn unto her, to be for ever absolved from any such\n     oath, and all manner of duty or dominion, allegiance and\n     obedience; as we also do, by the authority of these presents,\n     absolve them, and do deprive the same Elizabeth of her\n     pretended title to the kingdom, and all other things aforesaid.\n     And we do command and interdict all and every one of the\n     noblemen, subjects, people, and others aforesaid, that they\n     presume not to obey her, or her admonitions, mandates, and\n     laws; and those who shall do the contrary, we do innodate with\n     the like sentence of ANATHEMA.\n\n     \"Given at St. Peter's at Rome, in the year 1569, and the fifth\n     of our pontificate.\"--_Dowling's History of Romanism_, p. 564.\n\nOne more: Sixtus V. thunders his bull of excommunication at this same\nQueen of England--incites Philip of Catholic Spain to make war against\nher country--and graciously _gives_ the British Isles to Philip! Here is\nthe bull of Pope Sixtus:\n\n     \"We, Sixtus the Fifth, the universal shepherd of the flock of\n     Christ, the supreme chief, to whom the government of the whole\n     world appertains, considering that the people of England and\n     Ireland, after having been so long celebrated for their\n     virtues, their religion, and their submission to our see, have\n     become putrid members, infected, and capable of corrupting the\n     whole Christian body, and on account of their subjection to the\n     impious, tyrannical, and sanguinary government of Elizabeth,\n     the bastard queen, and by the influence of her adherents, who\n     equal her in wickedness; and who refuse, like her, to recognize\n     the power of the Roman Church: regarding that Henry VIII.\n     formerly, for motives of debauchery, commenced all these\n     disorders by revolting against the submission which he owed to\n     the Pope, the sole and true sovereign of England; considering\n     that the usurper Elizabeth has followed the path of this\n     infamous king, we declare that there exists but one mode of\n     remedying these evils, of restoring peace, tranquillity, and\n     union to Christendom, of re-establishing religion, and of\n     leading back the people to obedience to us, which is, to depose\n     from the throne that execrable Elizabeth, who falsely arrogates\n     to herself the title of Queen of the British Isles. Being then\n     inspired by the Holy Spirit for the general good of the Church,\n     we renew, by the virtue of our apostolic power, the sentence\n     pronounced by our predecessor, Pius the Fifth and Gregory the\n     Thirteenth, against the modern Jezebel: we proclaim her\n     deprived of her royal authority, of the rights, titles, or\n     pretensions to which she may lay claim over the kingdoms of\n     Ireland and England, affirming that she possesses them\n     unlawfully and by usurpation. We relieve all her subjects from\n     the oaths they may have taken to her, and we prohibit them from\n     rendering any kind of service to this execrable woman; it is\n     our will, that she be driven from door to door like one\n     possessed of a devil, and that all human aid be refused her;\n     we declare, moreover, that foreigners or Englishmen are\n     permitted, as a meritorious work, to seize the person of\n     Elizabeth and surrender her, living or dead, to the tribunals\n     of the inquisition. We promise to those who shall accomplish\n     this glorious mission, infinite recompenses, not only in the\n     life eternal, but even in this world. Finally, we grant plenary\n     indulgence to the faithful who shall willingly unite with the\n     Catholic army which is going to combat the impious Elizabeth,\n     under the orders of our dear son Philip the Second, to whom we\n     give the British Isles in full sovereignty, as a recompense for\n     the zeal he has always shown toward our see, and for the\n     particular affection he has shown for the Catholics of the Low\n     Country.\"--_De Cormenin's History of the Popes_, p. 262.\n\nHere is what Macaulay, a reliable historian, says of the baneful effects\nof Romanism:\n\n     \"From the time when the barbarians overran the Western Empire\n     to the time of the revival of letters, the influence of the\n     Church of Rome has been generally favorable to science, to\n     civilization, and to good government. But, during the last\n     three centuries, to stunt the growth of the human mind has been\n     her chief object. Throughout Christendom, whatever advance has\n     been made in knowledge, in freedom, in wealth, and in the arts\n     of life, has been made in spite of her, and has everywhere been\n     in inverse proportion to her power. The loveliest and most\n     fertile provinces of Europe have, under her rule, been sunk\n     into poverty, in political servitude, and in intellectual\n     torpor, while Protestant countries, once proverbial for\n     sterility and barbarism, have been turned, by skill and\n     industry, into gardens, and can boast of a long list of heroes\n     and statesmen, philosophers and poets. Whoever, knowing what\n     Italy and Scotland naturally are, and what four hundred years\n     ago they naturally were, shall now compare the country round\n     Rome with the country round Edinburgh, will be able to form\n     some judgment of the tendency of Papal domination. The descent\n     of Spain, once the first among monarchies, to the lowest depths\n     of degradation, the elevation of Holland, in spite of many\n     natural disadvantages, to a position such as no commonwealth so\n     small has ever reached, teach the same lesson. Whoever passes,\n     in Germany, from a Roman Catholic to a Protestant principality,\n     in Switzerland from a Roman Catholic to a Protestant canton, in\n     Ireland from a Roman Catholic to a Protestant county, finds\n     that he has passed from a lower to a higher grade of\n     civilization. On the other side of the Atlantic the same law\n     prevails. The Protestants of the United States have left far\n     behind the Roman Catholics of Mexico, Peru, and Brazil. The\n     Roman Catholics of Lower Canada remain inert, while the whole\n     continent round them is in a ferment with Protestant activity\n     and enterprise.\"--_Macaulay's History of England_, vol. i., p.\n     37.\n\nI must be permitted to add, just here, that in 1848, when the people of\nFrance expelled Louis Philippe from the throne in Paris, and established\na Republic, the present old drunken, goutified debauchee, Pope Pius IX.,\nhurled at the French nation a fearful bull of excommunication, and\ndenied them the right of revolution! Was this interfering in temporal\nmatters? But no longer ago than the year 1854, this same old vagabond,\nPope Pius, issued orders absolving his followers from all allegiance to\nthe Sardinian Government, because that government chose to abolish the\ninfamous monasteries, which had been so long supported at the expense of\nan oppressed people! Was this not interfering in temporal matters? I\ncould multiply authorities, Governor, to an indefinite extent,\nsustaining Mr. Wesley's views, and falsifying all you say, but this\nwould swell my reply beyond what I intended in the outset. Let me call\nyour attention to Brownson's Review, for July, 1853, where you will find\nall this power, and even more, claimed for the Pope, over temporal\nsovereigns and their subjects, the world over! This _Review_ is the\nacknowledged organ of _Archbishop Hughes_, the head and front of the\nCatholic Church in North America.\n\nYou state that our Declaration of Independence absolved from every\npossible obligation to the Pope in temporal matters. Your language is:\n\n     \"The moment it was read and proclaimed from old Independence\n     Hall in Philadelphia, obedience in temporal matters, if it ever\n     existed, ceased for ever, as to every native-born son in\n     America.\"\n\nYou further add that the Constitution of the United States set aside all\ntemporal power of the Pope in this country, and that if any doubts\nremain, the finishing touch is given by the following oath of\nnaturalization, taken by our naturalized citizens:\n\n     \"I do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of\n     the United States, and that I do _absolutely and entirely_\n     renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign\n     prince, potentate, or state, or sovereignty _whatever_.\"\n\nSir, do you suppose that the \"Bishops, Elders, and other Ministers,\"\nwhom you have the impudence to address, are all fools? Do you suppose\nthey are men of no reading or information? If they know any thing, they\ncertainly know that the oath of naturalization they, the Catholics,\ntake, weighs no more with them than a feather. A Catholic can evade the\nforce of any oath, by a _mental reservation_. Here is what Sanchez says,\nthe very highest Catholic authority, whose teaching, including this\ninterpretation of oaths, has been endorsed by the Council of Trent:\n\n     \"It is lawful to use _ambiguous terms_ to give the impression a\n     different sense from that which you understand yourself. A\n     person may take an oath that he has not done such a thing,\n     though in fact he has, by saying to himself it was not done on\n     a certain day, or before he was born, or by concealing any\n     other similar circumstances; which gives another meaning to it.\n     This is extremely convenient, and always very just, when\n     necessary to your health, honor, or prosperity.\"\n\nIn addition to this, let me tell you, if you never before knew the fact,\nthat Judge Gaston, a distinguished Jurist, and a gentleman of excellent\ncharacter, though a rigid Roman Catholic, of North Carolina, was\nappointed to a seat upon the Supreme Bench of that State. The\nConstitution of that State, unlike those of almost all other States,\nrequires every Judge to take an oath, among other things, that HE\nBELIEVES IN THE TRUTH OF THE PROTESTANT RELIGION. Mr. Gaston asked time\nto think over the matter--he repaired to the Archbishop at Baltimore,\ndoubtless obtained a dispensation--wrote back to Raleigh from there,\nthat he would take the oath--returned, and in due time solemnly swore\nthat _he believed in the truth of the Protestant Religion_. He died in\nRaleigh, one of the Judges of the Supreme Court--but lived and died a\nRoman Catholic!\n\nDuring the past month, in this city, W. G. McAdoo, the Attorney General\nfor this Judicial Circuit, had some Irish Catholics brought before the\nGrand Jury, to testify in cases of unlawful gaming and the retailing of\nardent spirits. The Clerk swore them on a common English Testament, and\nthey returned to the Jury room, and testified that they knew of no\ncases! The Attorney for the Commonwealth then procured the _Catholic\nDouay Bible_, with a large _Cross_ upon its outside, swore them upon\nthis--sent them in, and they _disgorged_, telling of various cases, and\nenabling the Jury to find bills against even some of their own folks! An\noath, then, is nothing with strict Roman Catholics, who believe their\nPriests can absolve them from the obligations of any and all oaths. For\nnotwithstanding your denial of the fact, it is notoriously true, that\nthe members of the Catholic Church believe their Priesthood to exercise,\nby Divine right, the power to fix and determine their eternal destiny.\nNay, every Roman Catholic in the known world is under the absolute\ncontrol of the Catholic Priesthood, by considerations not only of a\ntemporal, but an eternal weight. This is what gives their Priesthood\nsuch power and influence in elections; an influence they are using in\nevery State, against the American party. And it is this faculty of\nconcentration, this political influence, this power of the Priesthood to\ncontrol the Catholic community, and cause a vast multitude of ignorant\nforeigners to vote as a _unit_, and thus control the will of the\nAmerican people, that has engendered this opposition to the Catholic\nChurch. It is this aggressive policy and corrupting tendency of the\nRomish Church; this organized and concentrated political power of a\ndistinct class of men; foreign by birth; inferior in intelligence and\nvirtue to the American people, and not their religion and form of\nworship, objectionable as these are known to be, which have called forth\nthe opposition of the American party to the Catholic Church.\n\nBut, sir, you occupy several pages in copying and commenting upon the\nseveral oaths administered to the members of the American party--oaths\nwhich, as you tell us, are revolting in their character, and lead to the\nindiscriminate proscription of all foreigners. I meet all your\nconjectures and wild speculations in reference to these several oaths\nand obligations, by saying, just here, that I have taken them all, and\nthat they express my sentiments and feelings to the very letter; and I\nam willing, for the remainder of my days, to go before an acting Justice\nof the Peace, for the county of Knox, and have all three of these oaths\nadministered every Monday morning, upon the \"Holy Bible and Cross.\"\n\nYou have failed, in your zeal to advocate Romanism and oppose the\nAmerican party, to tell the \"Bishops, Elders, and other Ministers,\" whom\nyou address, that we resort to our oaths and obligations to combat\nsuccessfully the most powerful oath-bound organization the world ever\nknew. The oath of every _Roman Catholic Bishop_ and _Archbishop_ binds\nhim to absolute and unquestioned obedience, not only to the present Pope\nbut to his successors, \"canonically coming in,\" and to \"oppose and\npersecute\" all who do not submit to his authority! The oath of every\n_Priest_ binds him to the Church of Rome \"as the chief head and matron\nabove all pretended Churches throughout the whole earth,\" and to\n\"further her interests more than his own earthly good.\" The oath of the\n_Jesuit_ binds him to the Pope, as \"Christ's Vicar-General,\" by \"all the\nsaints and hosts of heaven,\" and to \"denounce and disown any allegiance\nas due to Protestants, or obedience to any of their inferior magistrates\nor officers.\" The oath of the _San Fedisti_, a secret Order established\nby the Papal government in 1821, binds them to sustain \"the Papal altar\nand throne, and to exterminate heretics, without pity for the cries of\nchildren, or of men and women.\" The oath of the _Irish Ribbon Men_, an\nOrder established by the Papal government, and introduced into this\ncountry by _Bedini_, the Pope's Nuncio, but a few years ago, binds him\n\"to extirpate all heretics, and all the Protestants, and to walk in\ntheir blood to the knees.\" Is it not time to take the alarm, Governor,\nand to combine to resist all these secret oath-bound associations, which\nnow threaten us with the loss of all that freemen and Protestant\nChristians hold dear on earth?\n\nIt is a matter of utter astonishment to find a great political party in\nthis country, most of whom are native-born Protestants, taking sides\nwith a foreign Church, whose designs against this country, according to\nthe avowals of the Duke of Richmond, lately Governor-General of Canada,\nare of the most wicked and fearful character! Speaking of this\ngovernment, the Duke said in a public address, on our northern border:\n\n     \"It will be destroyed: it ought not, and will not be permitted\n     to exist. The curse of the French revolution, and subsequent\n     wars and commotions in Europe, are to be attributed to its\n     example; and so long as it exists, no prince will be safe upon\n     his throne; and _the sovereigns of Europe are aware of it_, and\n     they have _determined upon its destruction, and have come to an\n     understanding upon this subject, and have decided on the means\n     to accomplish it_; and they will eventually succeed, by\n     SUBVERSION _rather than conquest_. All the low and surplus\n     population of the different nations of Europe will be carried\n     into that country. It is and will be a receptacle for the bad\n     and disaffected population of Europe, when they are not wanted\n     for soldiers, or to supply the navies; _and the governments of\n     Europe will favor such a course_. This will create a surplus\n     and majority of low population, who are so very easily excited;\n     and they will bring with them their principles, and in nine\n     cases out of ten adhere to their ancient and former\n     governments, laws, manners, customs, and religion, and will\n     transmit them to their posterity; and in many cases propagate\n     them among the natives. These men will become citizens, and by\n     the Constitution and laws will be invested with the right of\n     suffrage. Hence, discord, dissension, anarchy, and civil war\n     will ensue; and some popular individual will assume the\n     government, and restore order, and the sovereigns of Europe,\n     the emigrants, and many of the natives, will sustain him. The\n     Church of Rome has a design upon that country; and it will in\n     time be the established religion, and will aid in the\n     destruction of that Republic. _I have conversed with many of\n     the sovereigns and princes of Europe; and they have unanimously\n     expressed these opinions relative to the government of the\n     United States, and their determination to subvert it._\"\n\nThe monarchs of Europe, says the Duke of Richmond, will aid in sending\nus a surplus of \"low, excitable, bad, and disaffected men,\" who will\nbring with them their principles, and will adhere to their foreign\nnotions of government, laws, manners, customs, and religion--and that\nreligion Catholic; and yet _you_, the \"son of a now sainted father,\" of\nProtestant raising, have the brazen effrontery to call upon the\n\"Bishops, Elders, and other Ministers\" of an American Protestant Church\nto aid you, your corrupt party, and the monarchs of Europe, in\ndestroying both our government and Church!\n\nSir, it is passing strange that Protestant Christians and their children\nshould be found side by side with you, Bishop Hughes, Gov. Johnson, and\nthe thousands of bad men who are seeking to build up a Roman Hierarchy\nin this free country of ours! What do you promise the country and\nyourselves, if Romanism proves successful in this contest? The history\nof the past informs us that Rome has slain 1,000,000 of Albigenses and\nWaldenses; 1,500,000 Jews, in Spain; 3,000,000 Moors, in Spain. France\nwill never forget St. Bartholomew's Night, when 100,000 souls perished\nin Paris alone! The blood of Protestants has fertilized the soil of\nEngland, Germany, and Ireland. I mean by this, that enough of Protestant\nblood has been shed to _enrich_ all the poor lands of England, Germany,\nand Ireland, if it were properly distributed. In all, the authentic\nrecords of the Romish Church show, (and of this she makes her boast,)\nthat she has put to death SIXTY-EIGHT MILLIONS of human beings, for no\nother offence than that of being _Protestants_ in their religious faith!\nAverage each person slain at four gallons of blood, and medical writers\nsay a healthy person yields more, and it makes TWO HUNDRED AND\nSEVENTY-TWO MILLIONS OF GALLONS!--enough to overflow the banks of the\nMississippi, and destroy all the cotton and sugar plantations in\nMississippi and Louisiana!\n\nBut you argue, in your blasphemous publication, that this is no longer a\ncharacteristic of the Romish Hierarchy. Why is it not? Has she ever\nchanged for the better? When did she ever renounce these doctrines and\npractices? Never, no, never! Hers is the same tyrannical system\nnow--where she has the power--that it always has been, and always must\nbe, in the very nature of things! It is her boast, and the boast of her\nstandard authors, that she is always right, and knows no change! And wo\nto this land of ours, if ever Rome gets the ascendancy here! Her whole\nsystem is adverse to our Republican institutions, and she hesitates not\nto declare it! _Brownson_ says in his Review:\n\n     \"Let us dare to assert the truth in the face of the _lying\n     world_, and, instead of pleading for our Church at the bar of\n     the State, _summon the State itself to plead at the bar of the\n     Church, its divinely constituted judge_.\"\n\nNo wonder, sir, that the American people are aroused! Such bold and\nstartling avowals are calculated to arouse and unite the somewhat\ndivided bands of Protestant Christians; to wake up a host of Luthers,\nCalvins, Cranmers, and Wesleys; to bind together \"the heretics condemned\nin a mass.\" The very latest thing I have seen is the \"Pastoral Letter\"\nof the Bishops of the Province of St. Louis, just issued. That document\nexplicitly says:\n\n     \"We maintain the superiority of the _spiritual_ over the\n     _temporal_ order. We maintain that the temporal ruler is\n     _bound_ to conform his enactments to the Divine law. We\n     maintain that the Church is the supreme judge of all questions\n     concerning faith and morals; and that in the determination of\n     such question, the _Roman Pontiff, Vicar of Jesus Christ_,\n     constitutes a tribunal from which there is no appeal; and to\n     whose award all the children of the Church must yield\n     obedience.\"\n\nNow, sir, after this authoritative and official announcement, I don't\nwant to see any more of your wire-drawn distinctions between spiritual\nand temporal allegiance to the Pope. These Bishops say that both are\nalike binding. Nor do I want to see any more of your malignant efforts\nto fix the _lie_ upon Mr. Wesley, for affirming in Europe, during the\npast century, what the Bishops of the United States have announced, in a\nPastoral Address, in the present day!\n\nPope Pius IX. has, by a special act, made the Virgin Mary the special\npatron of these United States; but the Protestants of this country have\nalso made a decree, and that decree is, that Jesus Christ, and not the\nVirgin Mary, shall be the patron of these United States.\n\nAnd I am happy to have it in my power to inform you, notwithstanding the\ninfluence of your Address, that the \"Bishops, Elders, and other\nMinisters\" of the Methodist Church, both North and South, are ready to\nmake a common, determined, prayerful effort to save our native land from\nthe threatened slavery of submission to the decisions of the Council of\nTrent, and the equally corrupt conventions of Progressive Democracy!\n\nAssuming what is notoriously _false_--that the Know Nothings are in\nfavor of all measures fatal to the South, and destructive to the\nConstitution--you ask on page 25 of your _infinitely infernal_ Address:\n\n     \"What if a proposition be pending to repeal the Fugitive Slave\n     Law--the Kansas and Nebraska law--the rejection of a State\n     asking admission into the Union, because its constitution may\n     tolerate slavery?\"\n\nYou know, sir, that the 12th Plank in the Philadelphia Platform of the\nAmerican party is a safer guaranty upon this slavery question, and the\nperpetuity of existing laws, than is to be found anywhere in the creeds\nof political parties. Here it is in full:\n\n     \"The American party having arisen upon the ruins, and in spite\n     of the opposition of the Whig and Democratic parties, can not\n     be held in any manner responsible for the obnoxious acts or\n     violated pledges of either; and the systematic agitation of the\n     slavery question by those parties having elevated sectional\n     hostility into a positive element of political power, and\n     brought our institutions into peril, it has therefore become\n     the imperative duty of the American party to interpose, for the\n     purpose of giving peace to the country, and perpetuity to the\n     Union. And as experience has shown it impossible to reconcile\n     opinions so extreme as those which separate the disputants, and\n     as there can be no dishonor in submitting to the laws, the\n     National Council has deemed it the best guaranty of common\n     justice and of future peace, to abide by and maintain the\n     existing laws upon the subject of slavery, as a final and\n     conclusive settlement of that subject in spirit and in\n     substance.\n\n     \"And regarding it the highest duty to avow their opinions upon\n     a subject so important, in distinct and unequivocal terms, it\n     is hereby declared as the sense of this National Council, that\n     Congress possesses no power, under the Constitution, to\n     legislate upon the subject of slavery in the States where it\n     does or may exist, or to exclude any State from admission into\n     the Union, because its Constitution does or does not recognize\n     the institution of slavery as a part of its social system; and\n     expressly pretermitting any expression of opinion upon the\n     power of Congress to establish or prohibit slavery in any\n     Territory, it is the sense of the National Council that\n     Congress ought not to legislate upon the subject of slavery\n     within the Territories of the United States, and that any\n     interference by Congress with slavery as it exists in the\n     District of Columbia, would be a violation of the spirit and\n     intention of the compact by which the State of Maryland ceded\n     the District to the United States, and a breach of the national\n     faith.\"\n\nIn the \"wild hunt\" for territory by the progressive Democracy, and their\nefforts to settle our Western lands with foreigners who are to a man\nFree Soilers and Abolitionists, the South has more to fear than from all\nother considerations. What is Gov. Johnson's iniquitous Homestead Bill,\nbut a bid for foreigners? He proposes to give to the heads of families\none hundred and sixty acres of land, thus _hiring_ all the convicts and\npaupers of Europe to come and settle in our Western States and\nTerritories! Sir, but let your progressive, sublimated,\ndouble-distilled, converging-lines, Johnsonian Democracy bring into this\nUnion one million of Spanish Papists--black, brown, sorrel, and\ntawny--under the guise of acquiring Cuba for the South: let them bring\neight hundred thousand French and English Papists, under the name of\nacquiring Canada for the North: let them bring two millions of Mexican\nPapists--brown, tawny, red and black, being a mixture of all colors and\nall nations--under the specious pretence of \"extending the area of\nfreedom\"--let all this be done--and your party, made up of native\ntraitors, and foreign vagabonds, and Catholic paupers, are aiming at\nit--let it be done, I say, and farewell to liberty, and all that is\nsacred in this country! With five millions of Papists in our midst--four\nmillions and a half being of foreign birth, and four millions speaking a\nforeign language--all taught from infancy to hate and detest\nProtestantism as a crime--an American party would become an absolute\npolitical necessity. Well do the Free Soil papers comprehend this\nmatter. Hear the infamous but influential _Chicago Tribune_, one of your\nDouglass organs--one of your foreign Catholic organs. I quote from the\npaper itself:\n\n     \"It is now a well-attested fact, that Atchison is a member of\n     the Superior Order of the Spangled Banner, or Know Nothings,\n     and that his infernal villainy in Kansas has been carried on\n     under the protection and patronage of the lodges in Western\n     Missouri. This is a matter that all men in the North should\n     understand, that Northern voters may be exceedingly cautious\n     how they give countenance or support to an Order that, in any\n     of its phases or localities, is capable of producing such\n     results. It is further said, that the members of that Kansas\n     Legislature, now outraging all sense of right and justice by\n     their devilish enactments, are the chosen men of the affiliated\n     Know Nothings in Missouri and Kansas, who back then up in\n     whatever thing they do. Atchison and his gang are the friends\n     of the Order, and through it and Southern Know Nothing support\n     they are sure that their efforts to establish a despotism in\n     the Territory, if necessary, at the point of the bayonet, will\n     be successful. These facts account for many things heretofore\n     inexplicable, and they develop the true reason of the hostility\n     of the border-ruffians to the foreign immigration that would,\n     under other circumstances, people that vast and fertile country\n     west of the Missouri.\"\n\nThus it appears that a host of _lousy_ foreigners, fresh from the\nemigrant ships, in which they are brought over to this country as\n_ballast_--having the right to vote conferred upon them by an infamous\n_progressive_ Democratic feature in the Kansas Bill, were expected to\nget the control of affairs in Kansas. It further appears, however, that\nSenator Atchison and his pro-slavery associates supposed that, though\nfresh from their farms, and crossing the line of their State into the\nnew Territory, they too had the right to vote without being\n_naturalized_ in Kansas. Hence, in the estimation of this Sag Nicht\norgan at Chicago, a great outrage is committed upon Germany, Ireland,\nand Italy!\n\nSir, you need not lay the flattering unction to your soul, that you can\ndrive the clergy generally from the noble stand they have taken upon\nthis great question. Nor need you suppose, for one moment, that the\nAmerican party are conquered, though defeated in several States in the\nrecent elections. The party will remain true to its ends. Though it fail\nto command office, it cannot fail to exercise large power. Office is not\nalways strength; but sometimes, nay, frequently, as in the case of the\npresent Administration, weakness, as time will prove! The aim of the\nAmerican party is, by fair party means, to correct a great social evil\nand political wrong; and if they cannot do that, to mitigate the evil\nand the wrong; if they cannot do that, to prevent its _further\nincrease_; and if neither can be done, why, then I confess to you, the\nparty will have failed. But, sir, if such a failure take place, rest\nassured that the \"Bishops, Elders, and other Ministers\" of the Methodist\nChurch, South, will not help to bring about such a failure! We can\nafford to let such minions of party as you are, rave and rant, and\npublish their expositions, and issue their warnings to Churches: they\nwill all serve to swell our ranks. All true American hearts, not chained\nto the car of party, or bound down by the cords of plunder, think alike\nupon the great questions that have called the American party into\nexistence. Little do we regard the slanders of the pensioners of party.\nLet their speeches and publications teem with wholesale slanders of our\ncreed: the political jockeyism of these thimble-riggers, as in your own\ncase, is too apparent!\n\nFrom Maine to the shores of the Pacific the country is convulsed with\nintense excitement upon this subject. Shall Americans govern themselves,\nor shall Foreigners, unacquainted with our laws, and brought up under\nmonarchical governments, rule? Shall those who are temporally and\nspiritually subject to a foreign prince be our legislators,\npost-masters, foreign ministers, and military leaders, and change our\nlaws as they are directed by the Pope of Rome? Such results the American\nparty have set out to prevent. The present excitement will not cease;\ntrue Americans and Protestants will labor and pray until our distracted\ncountry shall be redeemed from the influence of civil and ecclesiastical\ntyranny.\n\nNow, Governor, I have noticed all your charges, arguments, and appeals,\nbut one, and that is the allegation that Methodist clerical Know\nNothings are _conspirators_. Your argument is--and I wish to represent\nyou correctly--\"The offence of conspiracy is not confined to the\nprejudicing of a particular individual; it may be to injure public\ntrade, to affect public health, or to _violate public policy_.\"\n\nYou cite Blackstone's Commentary, and other English Law Books, to\nsatisfy the Clergy as to the _law of conspiracy_. This done, you\noverwhelm them with this sage and logical conclusion:\n\n     \"The gist of the offence of conspiracy consists in a\n     confederacy to do an _unlawful act_, and the offence is\n     complete when the confederacy is made.\"\n\nI will concede, for the sake of the argument, that this is sound law,\nand that yours is a logical deduction. Nay, I will concede more--I grant\nthat it is an unlawful act for native Americans, and Protestant\nChristians, whether ministers or laymen, to resolve, or swear, as we\nKnow Nothings have all done, that we will not vote for Catholics and\nForeigners for public offices! I take the ground you do, that a man's\nvote is not his own, and that it is only to be disposed of by the\nleaders of the party with which he may act!\n\nAnd now, if you and I, both great men, and _Doctors of Law_, are correct\nin laying down the law, and the _privilege of voters in this free\ncountry_, what an infamous body of conspirators the Democrats are, and\nhave always been! For a quarter of a century, they have conspired to\nkeep the Whigs out of office--have succeeded in doing so most of that\ntime--and have kept thousands of them who are poor from becoming rich!\nMore recently, they have conspired with Abolitionists, Free Soilers,\nFourierites, Spiritualists, Roman Catholics, Irish, French, and German\npaupers, and all manner of European convicts, to keep the American party\nout of office, and have succeeded in Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia,\nAlabama, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Illinois, Texas, and other States--thereby\ndepriving the Americans of \"lots\" of money and honors, both of which\nthey need, and both of which are their _birthrights_!\n\nThe \"Bishops, Elders, and other Ministers,\" whom you address, in\nopposition to the great sin of _conspiracy_, would more cheerfully unite\nwith you to enforce law and order, and to prosecute offenders, but for\nthe fact that the _Abolition wing of your party_ once conspired against\nthem, to deprive their wives, children, widows, and orphans, of their\nlawful portion of the great Book Concern in New York, and they were\ncompelled to punish the conspirators, at great expense, however, in the\nDistrict and Supreme Courts of the United States!\n\nBut, Sir, upon the subject of _oaths_, you are eloquent, apt in your\nquotations of Scripture, and evince great learning in the legal\nprofession! You charge that \"Know Nothingism is both unchristian and\nunlawful, because of its _oaths_, which have no Scripture warrant for\ntheir administration!\" One of your quotations from the Bible is this:\n\"Swear not at all: neither by heaven, for it is God's throne: nor by the\nearth, for it is his footstool.\" Your mind has undergone a great change\nupon the subject of _oaths_ and _hard swearing_, since the 21st of\nJune, 1845, when you delivered your celebrated \"Mount Pisgah\" speech at\nAthens. You then advised the people of the State to administer \"horrible\noaths,\" and to swear by the \"_heavens_,\" aye, \"God's throne.\" But then\nyou were a Know Nothing. Here is what you say in your _revised_ copy of\nthat memorable speech:\n\n     \"Go up with me in imagination and stand for awhile on some\n     lofty summit of the Rocky Mountains. Let us take one ravishing\n     view of this broad land of liberty. Turn your face toward the\n     Gulf of Mexico: what do you behold? Instead of one lone star\n     faintly shining in the far distant south, a whole galaxy of\n     stars of the first magnitude are bursting on your vision and\n     shining with a bright and glorious effulgence. Now turn with me\n     to the west--the mighty west--where the setting sun dips her\n     disk in the western ocean. Look away down through the misty\n     distance to the shores of the Pacific, with all its bays, and\n     harbors, and rivers. Cast your eyes as far as the Russian\n     Possessions, in latitude fifty-four degrees and forty minutes.\n     What a new world lies before you! How many magnificent States\n     to be the future homes of the sons and daughters of freedom!\n     But you have not gazed on half this glorious country. Turn now\n     your face to the east, where the morning sun first shines on\n     this land of liberty. Away yonder, you see the immortal old\n     thirteen, who achieved our independence; nearer to us lie the\n     twelve or fifteen States of the great valley of the\n     Mississippi, stretching and reposing like so many giants in\n     their slumbers. O! now I see your heart is full--it can take in\n     no more. Who now feels like he was a party man, or a southern\n     man, or a northern man? Who does not feel that he is an\n     American, and thankful to Heaven that his lot was cast in such\n     a goodly land? When did mental vision ever rest on such a\n     scene? Moses, when standing on the top of Mount Pisgah, looking\n     over on the promised land, gazed not on a scene half so lovely.\n     O! let us this day _vow_ that whatever else we may do, by\n     whatever name we may be called, we will never surrender one\n     square acre of this goodly heritage to the DICTATION of any\n     king or potentate on earth. SWEAR IT! SWEAR IT! my countrymen,\n     and let HEAVEN RECORD THE VOW FOR EVER!\"\n\nIn conclusion, Governor, suffer a few words of advice, and I will bring\nthis letter, already too long, to a close. You are advanced in years,\nnay, you have grown gray in the service of sin, and political intrigues;\nand at most you have not long to live. Cease your political aspirations,\nand turn your attention to future and eternal things! You have been a\nmember of our State Legislature; subsequently, a member of Congress; and\nmore recently the Governor of our State; honors and stations, to say the\nleast of it, equal to your merits and talents!\n\nAs a true \"son of a now sainted father,\" from whom you have been\nseparated for many years, so demean yourself in future, that you may not\nbe separated, world without end! Humble yourself before God; confess\nyour numerous sins; and instead of lecturing God's ministers upon the\nsubject of party politics, ask them, with tears in your eyes, to pray\nfor you! Exercise a living faith in Christ, who came down from heaven,\nand made upon the cross a full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice,\noblation, and satisfaction, for the sins of the whole world. Thus\nobtaining forgiveness, cease your Sunday discussions on political\nsubjects; attend at the house of God, and set an example to other\nungodly Sag Nichts, and lead a new and different life!\n\nVery respectfully, your obedient servant,\n\n     W. G. BROWNLOW,\n\n     _A Local Methodist Minister._\n\n\n\n\nGOVERNOR JOHNSON AND EDITOR EASTMAN.\n\n\nOn the 9th of October, 1855, and while the Legislature was in session at\nNashville, we delivered a speech to an immense crowd on the Public\nSquare; which, after certain preliminary remarks, we will give to the\npublic, just as it was spoken. The reason why the call was made on us to\ndeliver the speech was, that we had, the previous weeks, delivered the\nsame, in _substance_, at Shelbyville and Clarksville, and the American\nparty at Nashville hearing of it, and approving what was said, desired\nus to repeat it; and, to be candid, we desired to repeat it there and\nthen!\n\nMr. Wise, of Virginia, gained great notoriety, in the spring of 1855, by\nhis abuse and blackguardism, heaped upon the American party. He was\nsuccessful; and Johnson, of Tennessee, whose ambition was to gain a more\ninfamous notoriety, profiting by the example of Wise, plunged into the\nlowest depths of Billingsgate, and piled his vulgar epithets upon the\nparty _indiscriminately_. Wise, then, like all inventors and\noriginators, has had numerous _imitators_, and among the most successful\nof these are Johnson, of Tennessee; Stephens, of Georgia; and Clingman,\nof North Carolina. But as an adept in low Billingsgate slang, coarse\nblackguardism, and as a slanderer and maligner of better men than\nhimself, Johnson has excelled his patron, Wise, and left far in the\nshades of the distant caverns of abuse, both Stephens and Clingman!\n\nTo prepare the public mind for the degree of severity we used in\nreference to the Governor of the State, we will introduce as many as\n_five_ different extracts from his speeches, in his late canvass for\nGovernor, at Murfreesboro' and Manchester; as reported by his partisan\norgan, the _Nashville Union_, and his _pliant tool_, its Abolition\neditor, _E. G. Eastman_:\n\n     \"THE DEVIL, HIS SATANIC MAJESTY, THE PRINCE OF DARKNESS, WHO\n     PRESIDES OVER THE SECRET CONCLAVE HELD IN PANDEMONIUM, MAKES\n     WAR UPON ALL BRANCHES OF CHRIST'S CHURCH. THE KNOW NOTHINGS\n     ADVOCATE AND DEFEND NONE, BUT MAKE WAR UPON ONE OF THE\n     CHURCHES, AND THUS FAR BECOME THE ALLIES OF THE PRINCE OF\n     DARKNESS.\"--[Speech of ANDREW JOHNSON, at Murfreesboro'.\n\n     \"A DENOMINATION LIKE THIS, TO SET UP AS THE GUARDIANS OF THE\n     RELIGION AND MORALS OF THE COUNTRY! A DENOMINATION BOUND\n     TOGETHER BY SECRET AND TERRIBLE OATHS: THE FIRST OF WHICH, ON\n     THE VERY INITIATION, FIXES AND REQUIRES THEM TO CARRY A LIE IN\n     THEIR MOUTHS.\"--[Speech of ANDREW JOHNSON, at Murfreesboro'.\n\n     \"SHOW ME THE DIMENSIONS OF A KNOW NOTHING, AND I WILL SHOW YOU\n     A HUGE REPTILE, UPON WHOSE NECK THE FOOT OF EVERY HONEST MAN\n     OUGHT TO BE PLACED.\"--[Speech of ANDREW JOHNSON, at Manchester.\n\n     \"THEY ARE LIKE THE HYENA, AND COME FROM THEIR LAIR AFTER\n     MIDNIGHT TO PREY UPON HUMAN CARCASSES.\"--[Speech of ANDREW\n     JOHNSON, at Manchester.\n\n     \"I WOULD AS SOON BE FOUND IN THE CLAN OF JOHN A. MURRELL AS IN\n     A KNOW NOTHING COUNCIL.\"--[Speech of ANDREW JOHNSON, at\n     Manchester.\n\nThe _blackguard_ and _calumniator_ using this language, was elected by a\nmajority of two thousand votes: that majority being cast by _Foreigners\nand illegal voters_; and consequently, his competitor, COL. GENTRY--than\nwhom there is not a more talented, patriotic, and honorable gentleman in\nTennessee--was fairly and justly elected. This, then, is the language\nused by the Governor of Tennessee, _towards a majority of the legal\nvoters of the State_! Under these circumstances, we made the speech that\nfollows, to an immense crowd on the Square: the correspondence preceding\nwhich, will explain itself:\n\n                                   NASHVILLE, Oct. 10th, 1855.\n\n     W. G. BROWNLOW, ESQ.:\n\n     _Dear Sir_:--The undersigned, having heard your speech on the\n     Square, last night, respectfully request that you embody the\n     substance of the same, and publish it in the Knoxville Whig.\n     The desire to see it in print is very general; and those who\n     heard it approved its severity, without it were such as were\n     bitter against the American party.\n\n     Your friends,\n     CHARLES G. SMITH,\n     JOHN MORRISON,\n     F. M. BURTON,\n     ROBT. S. NORTHCUTT,\n     SAML. DAVIS.\n\n\n                                    NASHVILLE, Oct. 13th, 1855.\n\n     MESSRS. SMITH, MORRISON, AND OTHERS:\n\n     _Gentlemen_:--Your note requesting me to publish the substance\n     of my remarks on the Square, last Tuesday night, has been\n     received, and I would have replied sooner, but for my absence\n     at Shelbyville. I have now made the same speech at Clarksville,\n     Nashville, and Shelbyville; and my only regrets are, that my\n     engagements prevent me from delivering the same speech at every\n     point in this State, where Gov. Johnson held me up as the \"High\n     Priest of the Order,\" and argued therefrom the _want of\n     respectability_ for the Order. In addition to your request, I\n     have had verbal applications from many gentlemen to publish my\n     remarks--gentlemen who have been mild and moderate throughout\n     their political course. I shall, therefore, comply with your\n     request and theirs, at my earliest convenience.\n\n     I hold that no man's position in life should shield him from\n     the rebukes he may merit by his bad conduct; and as for the\n     present Governor of Tennessee, his wholesale abuse of the\n     American party, towards whose members, without a single\n     exception, he has indulged in language which ought not to be\n     tolerated within the precincts of Billingsgate, no epithet is\n     too low, too degrading, or disgraceful, to pay him back in.\n\n     Respectfully, &c.,\n\n     W. G. BROWNLOW.\n\nFELLOW-CITIZENS:--The occasion which has called you together to-night,\nis the special appointment of our young friend, Mr. Crowe, to whose\neloquence we have all listened with pleasure. I have made no appointment\nto speak here; nor have I prompted the loud and long calls made upon me,\nthis evening, by this large Nashville audience. I shall speak to you;\nbut not upon the _issues_ of the late canvass, nor upon those of the\napproaching canvass of 1856. I will discuss _Andrew Johnson_ and _E. G.\nEastman_; and if they are in the assembly, I hope they will come forward\nand take seats on this stand, that I may have the pleasure of looking\nthem full in the face, as I denounce them in unmeasured terms: which is\nmy purpose to-night, let the consequences be what they may!\n\nOn a memorable night in August, after it was understood that _Andrew\nJohnson_ was reelected to the office of Governor, a procession was\nformed in Knoxville, composed of the worst materials in that young and\ngrowing city--such as drunken, red-mouthed Irishmen, lousy Germans, and\ninsolent negroes, with three or four men of respectable pretensions\nthrown in, to exercise a controlling influence over these bad materials.\nThis riotous mob halted in front of my dwelling, in East Knoxville, and\n_groaned_ and _sang_ for my especial benefit: all which was natural\nenough--as they had triumphed over me in the election of a Governor. I\ntook no offence at their rejoicing over the election of Gov. Johnson, as\nI told them; and for the reason, that I knew them to be of that class of\nmen who would _actually need the exercise of the pardoning power_, at\nthe hands of the present Governor, to release them from the\npenitentiary, before his present term of service would expire!\n\nFrom my humble dwelling, this _beautiful_ procession marched to the\nColeman House, on Gay street, yelling like devils, and insulting the\ninmates of every house they passed. \"Huzza for _Andy McJohnson_!\"\nexclaimed one. \"Three cheers for _Andy O'Johnson_!\" exclaimed another.\nWhile, to cap the climax--\"Well done, my _Johnsing_ and the _White\nBastard_,\" (meaning _Basis_,) exclaimed a drunken negro! Halting in\nfront of the Coleman House, the Governor elect mounted a goods box, and\nunder feelings of great excitement, hatred, and malice, delivered a\nspeech abusive of the whole American party, excepting none, in coarse,\nbitter language, in a style peculiarly his own--adapted alone to the\nfoul precincts of Billingsgate--rounding his periods with a diabolical\nand infernal _grin_, alone suited to a display of oratory by a land\npirate!\n\nI reported this slanderous speech--not in as offensive style--as it was\ndelivered; for his _looks_ and _grins_ no man can report on paper. I\nalso wrote the substance of what he said to Major Donelson, in a letter,\nof which I shall have something more to say before I leave this stand.\nJust here, I will repeat what the Governor did say, and what I reported\nhim to have said in my paper. I wish this large audience to hear me\ndistinctly, and to recollect the points I make; for I shall wind up on\nthe Governor and his miserable tool, _Eastman_, with a degree of\nseverity you have not been accustomed to, but which shall be warranted\nby the facts in each case.\n\nGov. Johnson said this new party of self-styled Americans professed to\nhave organized with a view to purify and reform the old political\nparties. A beautiful set, said he, to reform! The Order of Know Nothings\nwas composed of the worst men in the Whig and Democratic parties. As a\n_sample_ of these men, he pointed out _Andrew J. Donelson_, by\nname--exclaiming as often as twice, _Who is Andrew J. Donelson?_ He is a\nsoured, office-seeking, disappointed politician, who has been kicked out\nof the Democratic party. To illustrate his views more fully, he told the\ncrowd to imagine a large gang of _counterfeiters_ out there! and an\nequally large gang of _horse-thieves_ out yonder! Take from these two\ncompanies the worst men in their ranks, form a third party of these, and\nyou have a representation of this Know Nothing party. This was a\nbeautiful party to propose reform, or to speak of other parties being\ncorrupt! He was interrupted repeatedly; and I think I may safely say,\namong hands, they gave him the d----d lie fifty times! James M. Davis, a\nrespectable mechanic, asked him if he would say that to Major Donelson's\nface? He replied, that he heard the hissing of an adder, or a goose, and\nwent through with certain stereotyped phrases you have all heard from\nhis lips. This call upon him by Mr. Davis was not named in my newspaper\nreport, nor in my letter to Major Donelson. Indeed, I did not anticipate\na denial of his abuse.\n\nNow, fellow-citizens, it was in this connection, as well as in the most\noffensive language, that Gov. Johnson introduced the name of Andrew J.\nDonelson, repeating it more than once, emphasizing upon it, and\nrepeating it with scorn and bitterness. This is the report, _in\nsubstance_, I made of his speech through my paper, and in a letter I\naddressed to Major Donelson. And to the truth of my report, there are\none hundred respectable gentlemen in Knoxville who will make oath upon\nthe Holy Bible. There are now a half-dozen respectable gentlemen in this\ncrowd who were in the street at Knoxville on that occasion, and heard\nevery word the Governor said, and will sustain me in my account of it.\nAmong these I will name Messrs. White and Armstrong, members of the\nHouse, Senator Rogers, Col. James C. Luttrell, and Mr. Fleming, the\neditor of the Knoxville Register.\n\nWell, gentlemen--and I am proud to have an opportunity of vindicating\nmyself before so large a Nashville audience as this is--I say Major\nDonelson came to Nashville, after receiving intelligence of the abuse of\nthe Governor, and was seen walking these streets with a _large and\nhomely stick_ in his hand, looking _grum_, as any gentleman would do\nunder the circumstances. The friends of Gov. Johnson seeing what would\nlikely be the result of this affair, asked for, and very properly\nobtained that letter, with a view to laying it before their slanderous\nand abusive Executive officer, that he might _lie out of what he said_\nabout an honorable and brave man; and thereby avoid the disgrace of a\ncudgelling! Did he lie out of the scrape? He did: aye, he _ingloriously\nlied out_ of what he had said--leaving Major Donelson no ground for any\ndifficulty with him: although the Major had a right to suppose that any\nman base enough to make such charges, would have no hesitancy in lying\nout of his disreputable and cowardly abuse. I therefore pronounce your\nGovernor, here upon his own dunghill, an UNMITIGATED LIAR AND\nCALUMNIATOR, and a VILLAINOUS COWARD, wanting the _nerve_ to stand up to\nhis abuse of better men than himself!\n\nBut it will be said that the Governor _proves_ me a liar, by a citizen\nof Nashville, who was present at Knoxville and heard his speech. That is\nso, but I prove both him and his witness liars, by a multitude of\nwitnesses who were also present, and who are gentlemen of the first\nstanding. But who is it that testifies that I have lied? It is _E. G.\nEastman_, the editor of the Sag Nicht organ in this city. And who is _E.\nG. Eastman_? He is a dirty, lying, and unscrupulous Abolitionist, from\nMassachusetts, who once conducted an Abolitionist paper either in that\nState, or the State of New Hampshire. He was brought out to this State\nto lie for the unscrupulous leaders of his party. He is paid for\n_telling_ and _writing_ falsehoods, and would, if the interests of his\nparty required it, and a consideration were paid him in hand, _swear\nlies_ as readily as he would write them down for publication. He is a\npoor devil, as void of truth and honor as he has shown himself to be of\ncourage and resentment. He edits a low, dirty, scurrilous sheet; and,\nlike his master, Gov. Johnson, never could elevate himself above the\nlevel of a common blackguard. No epithet is too low, too degrading, or\ndisgraceful to be applied to the members of the American party, by\neither of these Billingsgate graduates. Decent men shun coming in\ncontact with either of them, as they would avoid a night-cart, or other\nvehicle of filth. As some fish thrive only in dirty water, so the\nNashville Union and American would not exist a week out of the\natmosphere of slang and vituperation. A fit organ, this, for all who\narrange themselves under the dark piratical flag of Andrew Johnson and\nhis progressive Democracy. I am the more specific in reference to\n_Eastman_, because I understand he is in this assembly!\n\nBut, fellow-citizens, I am not yet through with this Knoxville speech of\nthe Governor. Maj. Donelson visited Knoxville, one month after this\nslanderous speech was made against him; he visited there upon the\ninvitation of the American party, to address a Mass Meeting. I waited\nupon Maj. Donelson, upon his arrival, and found him at the house of\nDoct. Curry. I told the Major that I was tired of having questions of\nveracity between me and Governors and Ex-Governors of Tennessee, and\nthat I desired that others should state to him what had been said by the\nGovernor. Accordingly, different gentlemen, citizens of character,\ninformed him that they were in the crowd and heard Johnson, and that he\ndid say all that was attributed to him, both in the letter he had\nreceived from me, and in the two Knoxville papers. Consequently, when\nMaj. Donelson made his speech next day, he denounced the Governor as a\nmiserable calumniator, and refuted his villainous charges, in a manner\nbecoming the occasion, and with a frankness which carried with it a\nconviction of its truth, and gave satisfaction to his numerous friends.\n\nAnd now, gentlemen, I take occasion to state, that there is no longer an\nadjourned question of veracity between me and Johnson and Eastman. The\nissue is between Johnson and Eastman, on the one hand, and various\nrespectable gentlemen of Knoxville, on the other hand. Either the\nGovernor and his man Friday have basely lied, or a number of the\ncitizens of Knoxville and vicinity, have testified to what is false. I\nassert, once more, that the Governor and his dirty Editor have lied out\nof the villainous abuse the former heaped upon better men than himself.\nAnd if their friends are willing to see them remain under the charge,\nthe American party are satisfied with the settlement of the question.\n\nFellow-citizens, while I am on the stand, I will notice some other\npoints personal to myself. And before I enter upon these, I will call\nyour attention to the wholesale abuse of the Governor, of some\nthirty-five or forty thousand voters in Tennessee. In his Murfreesboro'\nspeech, he asserted that \"_the Devil, his Satanic Majesty, presides over\nall the secret conclaves_\" held by the Know Nothings, and that \"_they\nare the allies of the Prince of Darkness_.\" I quote from his printed\nspeeches from memory, but it will be found that I quote correctly. In\nthat same speech, he asserts that all Know Nothings are \"_bound by\nterrible oaths to fix and carry a lie in their mouths_!\" In his\nManchester speech, I believe it was, he called all members of the new\nparty \"_Hyenas_,\" and \"_huge reptiles, upon whose neck the feet of all\nhonest men ought to be placed_.\" And in this same speech he says he\n\"WOULD AS SOON BE FOUND IN A CLAN OF JOHN A. MURRELL'S MEN, AS IN A KNOW\nNOTHING COUNCIL!\"\n\nWhat an imputation upon nearly one half of the legal voters of\nTennessee! He has used the most odious terms his _limited_ knowledge of\nthe English language would enable him to employ, to deride, defame,\ninsult, and blackguard every man who has joined the new party, or dares\nto act with them in politics. In the plenitude of his bitter and\nsupercilious arrogance, Andrew Johnson has indulged in language against\nthe entire American party, which would not be tolerated within the\nprecincts of Billingsgate, or the lowest fish-market in London. And from\nJohnson to Shelby counties, during the entire summer, this low-flung and\nill-bred scoundrel, pursued this same strain of vulgar and disgusting\nabuse. And whether speaking of the most enlightened statesman, the\npurest patriot, or the most pious clergyman, he pursued the same strain\nof abuse. With him, a vile demagogue, whose daily employment is to\nadminister to the very worst appetites of mankind, no virtue, no honor,\nno truth, exists anywhere, but in the breasts of such as are either\ncorrupt enough or fool enough to follow him, and a few malignant\nfalsifiers who worship at his shrine. He is a wretched and vile caterer\nto the morbid foreign and Catholic appetite of this country. \"It is a\ndirty bird that fouls its own nest,\" says the proverb; and it applies to\nthis man Johnson with as much force as to the dirtiest of the feathered\ntribe.\n\n    \"Where is the wretch, so lost, so dead,\n    Who never to himself hath said,\n      This is my _own_, MY NATIVE LAND!\"\n\nHe now disgraces the Executive Chair of this gallant State. Most of\nGod's creatures, human and brute, have an attachment to \"HOME, SWEET\nHOME;\" but here is a contemptible and selfish demagogue who discards all\nsuch feelings, and would transfer his country and home to strangers and\noutlaws, to European paupers and criminals, if he could thereby receive\na temporary election, or receive a pocket-full of money. For such a\nwretch I have no sympathy, and no feelings but those of scorn and\ncontempt, and hence it is that I speak of him in such terms.\n\nOn every stump in Tennessee, he held me up as \"the High Priest of the\nOrder,\" representing Col. Gentry as _my_ candidate. Since I came to\nMiddle Tennessee, I have been informed that he pointed to the fancied\nfact that I was the head of the Order, as an evidence of _its utter want\nof respectability_. Turning up his nose, and grinning significantly, he\nwould inquire, _Who is William G. Brownlow?_\n\nNow, gentlemen, since he makes this issue of _respectability_ with me, I\nwill accept it. Since he throws down the glove, I will take it up, and I\nwill show you that he is the last man on God's green earth to call in\nquestion the respectability of other men, or their families! It would be\nboth cruel and unbecoming in me to speak of what the dishonest and\nvillainous relatives of Gov. Johnson have done, if he conducted himself\nprudently, and did not abuse others with such great profusion. I am not\naware of any relative of mine ever having been hung, sent to the\npenitentiary, or being placed in the stocks. I have no doubt that\npersons related to me, directly or remotely, have deserved such a fate\nlong since. There is not a man in this vast assembly who can say, and\ntell the truth, that he has no mean kin. Can Gov. Johnson say so?\nRather, can he say he has any other kind? He is a member of a numerous\nfamily of Johnsons, in North Carolina, who are generally THIEVES and\nLIARS; and though he is the best one of the family I have ever met with,\nI unhesitatingly affirm, to-night, that there are better men than Andrew\nJohnson in our Penitentiary! His relatives in the Old North State, have\nstood in the Stocks for crimes they have committed. And his _own born\ncousin_, Madison Johnson, was hung in Raleigh, for murder and robbery! I\ntold him of this years ago, in Jonesboro', and he denied it, and put me\nto the trouble of procuring the testimony of Gov. John M. Morehead to\nprove it! The Governor was petitioned to pardon Madison Johnson, and\ndeclined, as he knew he suffered justly. This explains why this\n_scape-gallows_ has been so bitter against Whig and Know Nothing\nGovernors. They have been so unfeeling, as to suffer his dear relatives\nto _pull hemp without foothold_, when a jury of twelve honest men have\nsaid that they deserved death! Is he not one of the last men living to\ntalk about a want of respectability on the part of any one? Certainly he\nis!\n\nWell, gentlemen, Johnson is again the Governor of Tennessee; but if he\ncould be mortified, he would have the mortification to know that he is\nthe Governor with a majority of the _legal native votes of the State_\ncast in opposition to him. We all committed one capital blunder in the\nlate canvass, and that alone defeated Gentry, and elected Johnson. We\ncopied from the Book of Pardons a list of FORTY-SEVEN names of culprits\npardoned out of our State Prison by Johnson--some for negro-stealing,\nsome for counterfeiting, house-breaking, rape, and other _Democratic_\nmeasures--more pardons than all his \"illustrious predecessors\" ever\ngranted. In copying this list, we said to the voters of the State that\nJohnson had spoken his honest sentiments when he said he preferred\nbeing among a clan of Murrell men, to being found in a Know Nothing\nCouncil; and in the same breath we assured them that if Gentry was\nelected, he would let all such rascals stay in prison as long as the\ncourts of the country decreed they should. And while thousands of\nhonorable, high-minded men voted for Johnson, under the lash of party,\nor because they were blinded by his glaring demerits, it is not to be\ndisguised that all the _petit larceny_ and _Penitentiary men_ in the\nState voted for him. There never was a time in Tennessee when there were\nnot five thousand voters who either _had been stealing_, or _intended to\nsteal_! These would naturally look to where they would find a friend, in\nthe event of their being overtaken by justice. In the person of Andrew\nJohnson, they felt assured of \"a friend indeed, because a friend in\n_need_.\" He had publicly told them that he preferred the company of\nMurrell men to the society of the most respectable lawyers, doctors,\npreachers, farmers, and mechanics in the State, who met in certain\ncouncils. The fact of his turning so many Murrell men out of the State\nPrison, and of his having been _raised up in such society_, left no\ndoubt of the sincerity of his profession!\n\nIn conclusion, fellow-citizens, if Gov. Johnson cannot lawfully canvass\nthe State a _third_ time for the office he now fills, I hope the\nLegislature will legalize such a race by a special act, and I propose to\nbe the candidate against him. I will show the people of the State in his\npresence, from the same stand, who are Murrell men, and who are not able\nto look honest men in the face!\n\nIf I have said any thing to-night offensive to your Governor, or any of\nhis friends or understrappers in this city, they know where to find me.\nWhen I am not on the streets, I can be found at No. 43, on the lower\nfloor of Sam Scott's City Hotel, opposite the ladies' parlor. I shall\nremain here for the next ten days only, and whatever punishment any one\nmay wish to inflict upon me, it must be done in that time. I say this,\nnot because I seek a difficulty, but because I don't intend it shall be\nsaid that I made this speech and took to flight!\n\nI thank you, gentlemen, for the patience with which you have heard me in\na matter personal to myself, and I hope you are prepared to acquit me of\nlying in the Donelson case, although Gov. Johnson and Editor Eastman\nbear testimony against me. I thank you, and now bid you good night!\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nWe beg leave to add, that in March, 1842, Andrew Johnson laid hold of us\nin a speech in Blountville, when we were in Jonesborough, distant twenty\nmiles. He held up a picture or drawing of us, and accompanied it with\nmany abusive remarks. In turn, we held him up in the Whig of the 29th of\nthe same month, and gave his _pedigree_ in full, and with it a\n_representation of his cousin Madison Johnson, under the gallows_ in\nRaleigh!\n\nThe first Monday in April following, Johnson spoke in Jonesborough, and\ndenied _most solemnly that he ever had a relative by the name of Madison\nJohnson--denied that a man of that name had ever been hung in\nRaleigh--and asserted that the man hung there in 1841 was by the name of\nScott--a nephew, he said, of General Winfield Scott!_ This bold denial,\nmade in the presence of a large and anxious crowd, overwhelmed us _for\nthe time being_, as Johnson was raised in the vicinity of Raleigh, and\nhad learned his trade there. He was supposed to know, and for the moment\nwe were branded with falsehood. To aid him in his war upon us, the\n\"_Jonesborough Sentinel_,\" Johnson's organ, came out upon us, and\nnoticed his denial of our charge and his speech, in an article of which\nthe following is an extract:\n\n     \"Brownlow said, some time back, that Col. Johnson had a cousin\n     hung in North Carolina. The Colonel developed the fact the day\n     he used up or skinned Brownlow alive in Jonesborough, _that\n     instead of its being his cousin, it was the nephew of Gen.\n     Winfield Scott_, now a _quasi_ Coon candidate for the\n     Presidency. Brownlow _is so silent_!\"\n\nAfter this, the Sentinel noticed us again, and this notice drew out\nWESTON R. GALES, the then editor of the Raleigh Register, in the\nfollowing:\n\n     EDITORIAL COMPLIMENTS.\n\n     \"We find the following editorial in the 'Jonesboro' (Tenn.)\n     Sentinel,' a Locofoco print, in relation to the editor of the\n     'Jonesboro Whig:'\n\n     \"BROWNLOW made an awkward attempt last week to caricature a\n     person who was hung some years ago in North Carolina, whom he\n     termed the cousin of Col. JOHNSON. But it turns out to have\n     been the nephew of Gen. WINFIELD SCOTT, a distinguished Coon\n     leader. Poor BROWNLOW!--it ought to be his time next. Wonder\n     how many hen-roosts he robbed last summer?\"\n\n     \"We have nothing to do with whose time it is to be hung next,\n     nor with the number of hen-roosts robbed, nor by whom robbed,\n     but we will take occasion to correct the 'Sentinel' as to the\n     person hung here 'some years ago.'\n\n     \"In the spring of 1841, a man named MADISON JOHNSON was hung in\n     this place for the murder of HENRY BEASLEY, but we were not\n     aware that he was any relation of Col. JOHNSON, if it be meant\n     thereby Col. R. M. JOHNSON, of Kentucky. He was, however,\n     connected with A. JOHNSON, the candidate for Congress in the\n     Jonesboro' District, MADISON and he being first cousins.\n\n     \"The last man hung in this place by the name of SCOTT, was\n     MASON SCOTT, in 1820, and if the 'Sentinel' means to reflect\n     upon the Whig party by saying he was a nephew of Gen. WINFIELD\n     SCOTT, a 'distinguished Coon leader,' we are willing for him to\n     indulge in such misstatements.\n\n     \"IF THE 'SENTINEL' HAD TAKEN THE TROUBLE TO CONSULT MR. A.\n     JOHNSON ON THE SUBJECT, HE WOULD HAVE SATISFIED HIM OF THE\n     FACTS, AS HE WAS IN THIS CITY ABOUT THE TIME MADISON WAS\n     EXECUTED.\"\n\nIt will be seen, that while Johnson was uttering his _solemn but false\ndenial_ at Jonesborough, he _knew he was lying_, for he was in Raleigh\n\"_about the time Madison was executed!_\"\n\nBut we told our friends to hold on, to have patience, and to give us\ntime, and we would make good our charge. Accordingly, in the same issue\nin which we brought out this extract from the Raleigh Register, we\npublished the following letter from Gov. MOREHEAD, in answer to one we\nhad written him:\n\n                                    RALEIGH, 24th April, 1843.\n\n     [EXECUTIVE OFFICE.]\n\n     \"DEAR SIR--I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of yours\n     of the 14th inst., requesting me to inform you what was the\n     name of the man hung in Raleigh in the spring of 1841.\n\n     \"His name was MADISON JOHNSON. His case was taken to the\n     Supreme Court, and you will find it reported, December Term,\n     1840, vol. 1st, page 354, Iredell's Reports.\n\n     \"He was hung for the murder of Henry Beasley. A strong effort\n     was made to procure a pardon for him; but believing his case a\n     clear murder, I refused to grant it.\n\n     \"The only man named Scott that was ever convicted of murder at\n     this place, was Mason Scott, in 1820.\n\n     \"You will find his case reported in the reports of the Supreme\n     Court, January Term, 1820, 1st Stark's Reports, page 24.\n\n     \"I am not aware that any other man named Scott was ever\n     convicted of a capital offence in this county.\n\n     \"I have the honor to be\n\n     \"Your most ob't serv't,\n\n     \"J. M. MOREHEAD.\"\n\n     \"Rev. W. G. BROWNLOW.\"\n\nIn conclusion, after this letter appeared, and Johnson was elected, he\nsent an appointment to Raleigh, for a speech--attended there, and\nblackguarded and vilified \"Morehead and Brownlow\" for two hours. He made\nthe _letter_ of Morehead the pretext for his abuse, but the real cause\nwas the Governor's refusal to _pardon his cousin_. Johnson was there to\nprocure his pardon, and brought every appliance to bear within his\npower, but the North Carolina Governor was inflexible in the discharge\nof his sworn duty! We do not make the point against Johnson that he has\n_mean kin_, only so far as it may _offset_ his abuse of others, for who\nof us are without mean kinsfolks? But our point is, his _deliberate\nlying_ before a Jonesboro' audience!\n\n\n\n\nFrom the Knoxville Whig of Dec. 1, 1855.]\n\nGOVERNOR JOHNSON'S THANKSGIVING DAY.\n\n\nAs the sixth of the present month has been set apart by our Governor, to\nbe observed as a day of prayer and thanksgiving to Almighty God for his\nnumerous and unmerited mercies conferred upon the people of our State\nand nation; and as it is desirable that the different sects shall act in\nconcert on the occasion, and at least pray \"with the understanding,\"\nthat is to say, _appropriately_, we have been at the trouble to prepare\na form of prayer for the occasion. This we do in no irreverend spirit,\nbut in all candor and sincerity, after this wise:\n\nALMIGHTY and everlasting God, in whom we live, and move, and have our\nbeing: we, thy needy creatures, render thee our humble praises, for thy\npreservation of us from the beginning of our lives to this day of public\nthanksgiving, and especially for having delivered us from all the\ndangers and afflictions of the year about to close. By thy knowledge,\nmost gracious God, the depths were broken up during the past seed-time\nand harvest, and the rains descended: while by night the clouds\ndistilled the gentle dew, filling our barns with plenty: thus crowning\nthe year with thy goodness, in the increase of the ground, and the\ngathering in of the fruits thereof. And we beseech thee, O most merciful\nFather, give us a just sense of this great mercy: such as may appear in\nour lives, by an humble, holy, and obedient walking before thee all our\ndays!\n\nTo thy watchful providence, O most merciful God, we are indebted for all\nour mercies, and not any works or merit of ours; for many of us entered\ninto the scramble to elevate to the Executive Chair of the State the\npresent incumbent, with a perfect knowledge that he had abused thy Son,\nJESUS CHRIST, our Lord, on the floor of our State Senate, as a swindler,\nadvocating unlawful interest: we knew that he had voted in Congress\nagainst offering prayers to thee: we knew that he had opposed the\ntemperance cause, which is the cause of God and of all mankind: we knew\nthat he had vilified the Protestant religion, and slandered the\nProtestant clergy, defending and eulogizing the corruptions of the\nRoman Catholic Church, throughout the length and breadth of our State;\nyet such was the force of party ties, O most mighty God, that we went\ninto the support of our INFIDEL GOVERNOR blind, and, by our zeal in his\nbehalf, gave the lie to our professions of piety, rendered ourselves\nhateful in the eyes of all honest and consistent men, meriting a degree\nof punishment we have never received! We do most heartily repent, O\nmerciful God, for these shameful sins: we humble ourselves in lowest\ndepths of humility, and ask forgiveness of a God whom we have justly\nprovoked to anger, and the forgiveness of our insulted brethren, whom we\nhave wickedly blackguarded, to the great injury of the cause of Christ!\n\nO most merciful God, who art of purer eyes than to behold iniquity, turn\nnot a deaf ear to our supplications on this day, because the day has\nbeen set apart by a Governor who really does not subscribe to the\nChristian religion; does not attend Divine service; who swears\nprofanely; and has insulted Heaven and outraged the feelings of all\npious Christians, by teaching the blasphemous sentiment that\nChristianity is of no higher or holier origin than his Democracy! Have\nmercy, our Father and God, upon that portion of this congregation who\nhave endeavored to find peace to their souls by travelling along the\n\"converging lines\" of a spurious Democracy, in search of the foot of\n\"Jacob's Ladder,\" and give them repentance and better minds! And do\nthou, O God of pity, show all such, that instead of ascending to heaven\non an imaginary \"Ladder,\" they are chained fast to the Locomotive of\nHell, with the Devil for their Chief Engineer, the Pope of Rome as\nConductor, and an ungodly Governor as Breakman; and that, at more than\nrailroad speed, they are driving on to where they are to be eternally\npunished by Him whom thou hast appointed the Judge of quick and dead,\nthy Son JESUS CHRIST, our Lord. Amen!\n\n\n\n\n[From the Knoxville Whig of May 24, 1856.]\n\nTHE FOREIGN SPIRIT ILLUSTRATED.\n\n\nThe following correspondence will explain itself, whilst it will serve\nto show the spirit which governs this Bogus Foreign Catholic Democracy:\n\n                                    RICHMOND, April 21, 1856.\n\n     REV. AND DEAR SIR:--It cannot be unkind in me, though\n     personally unknown to you, to address you on a subject in which\n     our peace as citizens is alike concerned. I see in the\n     Fincastle Democrat of 18th inst. what purports to be a review\n     of an article of yours in the Knoxville Whig of 5th inst., in\n     which I suppose, from the remarks contained in the Democrat, I\n     have been very, _very_ severely handled by you, for an offence\n     I never committed. You will allow me to say, sir, that I have\n     no recollection of ever writing or speaking a disrespectful\n     word of you in all my life, but, on the contrary, have\n     frequently spoken approvingly of much you have written. Such\n     being the fact, you will not be surprised to learn how deeply I\n     regret that the purest innocence on my part has failed to be a\n     protection against personal abuse. That you have been misled by\n     some person, is to my mind very plain, and if, through the\n     influence of another, you have inflicted a wound upon one that\n     never harmed you, nor ever designed to harm you, is it not\n     within the range of a generous nature--of an honest man--to\n     repair the injury by at once giving up to the injured party the\n     name of the deceiver, or publish him to the world as authority\n     for the assault, and let him assume its responsibilities?\n\n     In a change of circumstances, I should feel bound, by the honor\n     of a man, to do that much, and in my present relation to the\n     case I ask nothing more. It is perhaps due to you to be\n     informed, that I have not seen your article, nor do I know a\n     word it contains, and it is due to myself to say that I knew\n     nothing of the article in the Democrat assailing you, till I\n     saw it in print some hundred of miles from home, where I have\n     not yet arrived after an absence of nearly two months. On the\n     subject of dues, I may add that it is due to the public that\n     the name of the deceiver be given them. I of course suppose him\n     to be a man of great personal courage, ready to assume all his\n     own responsibilities. In conclusion, permit me to say, that any\n     effort on your part to aid in concealing the hand that uses the\n     dagger in the dark, will detract largely from the estimate I\n     have placed upon your character, as a man without hesitation or\n     fear, when the claims of justice are presented. My address is\n     Fincastle, Botetourt Co., Va., and I am very respectfully,\n\n     S. D. HOPKINS.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n                                    KNOXVILLE, May 21st, 1856.\n\n    REV. S. D. HOPKINS:\n\n    SIR--Through the weakness, mismanagement, and culpable\n    remissness of the contemptible Jesuit now at the head of the\n    Post Office Department, and his numerous lackeys--all of whom\n    you sustain in their politics--a letter written by you one month\n    ago was received a few days since, while I was absent at a Know\n    Nothing Convention, aiding my political brethren in placing\n    before the people of this Congressional District an electoral\n    candidate, to aid in the great Christian and patriotic work of\n    overthrowing the corrupt, profligate, unprincipled, Foreign\n    Catholic Bogus Democratic party, of which _you_ are a member,\n    and in the service of which you are an editor! But my delay in\n    replying to your letter shall be atoned for in the _length_ and\n    _plainness_ of my reply.\n\n    It is true, sir, that I published an editorial in my paper, of\n    some severity against you; but the article was in _reply_ to a\n    low, cowardly, and abusive editorial against me in the\n    \"Fincastle Democrat,\" of which you are the editor. And \"you will\n    allow me to say, sir,\" that at the time this attack was made\n    upon me in _your_ paper, I never had said a word about you or\n    your paper in my life, either \"good, bad, or indifferent;\" and\n    \"if through the influence of another you have inflicted a wound\n    upon one that never harmed you, is it not within the range of a\n    generous nature--of an honest man\"--to repair the injury by\n    taking back the article, and apologizing through the same medium\n    for the injury? If, however, you believe you have not \"been\n    misled by some person,\" and have done me no more than justice in\n    that abusive article, hold on to it. Having made oath that the\n    horse is _fifteen feet high_, allow of no correction!\n\n    In all frankness, you must permit me to say, that I believe you\n    expected to find in the office on your return to Fincastle, a\n    letter from me demanding your authority for admitting into your\n    paper such an article against me, who, as you very well knew, up\n    to that hour had never said one word, publicly or privately,\n    against you or your paper. I think you concluded to _take the\n    start of me_, and thus to _forestall_ me, by writing from\n    Richmond some twenty-four hours before you would arrive at home!\n\n    In your paper of the 18th of April, issued only three days\n    before this letter was written at Richmond, an editorial of half\n    a column appears, in which _your_ paper styles me a \"notorious\n    blackguard\"--a \"bullying blackguard\"--an \"unwanted and lying\n    man\"--who \"is mean enough to lie, cheat, or even steal\"--a man\n    \"wearing the garb of righteousness to serve the Devil in;\" and\n    in the same article, the case of a Locofoco editor, who was\n    involved in a shooting scrape on account of his attack upon a\n    lady, is actually attributed to ME! Although you are a Reverend\n    Methodist Preacher, and a grave and dignified Steam Doctor,\n    conducting one of the organs of the Foreign and Anti-American\n    party in Virginia, you must pardon me for saying, as I now do,\n    that in calling upon me for my authority for what I had said in\n    reply to the unmitigated abuse of _your_ paper, you have proven\n    to my mind, that if you do not possess the cool and collected\n    impudence of the _Devil_, you are at least possessed of the\n    lion-headed impudence of an unprincipled Sag Nicht partisan,\n    hired to do the dirty work of an equally unprincipled and dirty\n    organization!\n\n    But it is due to the history of this controversy that I should\n    say, this second attack upon me sets forth that you are from\n    home, and that \"the _Junior_ is responsible for the article.\"\n    This might be credited, if, on your return home, you had\n    protested against such abuse, but it seems from your silence to\n    have met with your heart's approval, and gave \"general\n    satisfaction,\" at least to _you_! It is true that you were\n    absent at the time of both these publications, but it does not\n    follow, as a matter of course, that you were not the veritable\n    author, and that they did not find their way to the \"Democrat\"\n    office at the same time and in the same way that your \"Baltimore\n    Correspondence\" got there. The \"Junior,\" as he styles himself,\n    claims the fraternity; and were it not that he is too well known\n    in Fincastle for any sane man to believe that _he_ wrote the\n    articles, he might have the credit (if credit there be attached\n    to it) of so low, malicious, and lying articles. But he is known\n    in Fincastle to be a brainless man, and to be incapable of\n    writing a paragraph on any subject. He is known to have no use\n    of language, and to be incapable of applying epithets to any\n    one. So that, if _you_ did not write these articles, they were\n    manufactured at \"Irish Corner,\" in Fincastle, your \"Junior\" not\n    being able to do it, for the reason that he is wholly incapable.\n    My opinion is, that the articles were manufactured by the \"Great\n    Mogul\" of the Anti-American party in your town, and if he will\n    only avow himself the author, I will make some disclosures upon\n    him that will make him wish himself back in \"Swate Ireland,\"\n    where he \"lives, and moves, and has his being;\" no disclosures\n    are necessary--his books, and his person, damn him to\n    everlasting infamy. He has the filthiest-looking mouth, and the\n    most offensive breath, of any man in the Valley of Virginia. No\n    man who knows him will meet him square on the pavement, or place\n    himself in a position, if it can be avoided, of meeting a breeze\n    from that great reservoir of all nastiness, his mouth! It is\n    really a wonder how any human being can LIVE, and emit all the\n    time a stream of such overwhelming and uninterrupted STENCH! You\n    must permit me to christen this man as the But-Cut of Original\n    Sin, and the Upper-crust of all Nastiness!\n\n    It may not set well upon your stomach, that being a \"Minister of\n    the Gospel, and having the care of souls,\" I should seem not to\n    place implicit confidence in your denial of any participation in\n    this unprovoked war upon me. I will be candid with you, and\n    though it is possible for me to be mistaken in my views, still,\n    if I am, I am honestly deceived. I have no confidence in the\n    moral honesty and Christian integrity of any Protestant\n    Preacher, of any denomination, in this country, who openly\n    arrays himself against the American party, and takes the side of\n    the Catholics, Foreigners, and self-styled Democrats associated\n    with them. Nor will I hear one such preach or pray, if I know\n    him to be such, and can get out of his hearing. The growing\n    light and improvements of this age forbid that an intelligent\n    and pious man and minister should identify himself with that\n    party. And the fiery genius, corrupting tendencies, and\n    uncompromising intolerance of that party, are rapidly driving\n    good and true men out of the party.\n\n    There never was a time since the division of parties in this\n    country, when I had so little confidence in what is called the\n    Democratic party as at present; and as at present organized and\n    constituted, I believe it to be the most corrupt organization.\n    It is made up of the odds and ends of all factions and parties\n    on the continent, and is one of the most anomalous combinations\n    of fanaticism, idolatry, prostitution, crime, and absurdities\n    conceivable! The _isms_ composing the party of which you are a\n    member, are: Abolitionism; Free-soilism; Agrarianism;\n    Fourieritism; Millerism; Radicalism; Woman's Rightsism; Mobism;\n    Mormonism; Spiritualism; Locofocoism; Higher-Lawism; Foreign\n    Pauperism; Anti-Americanism; Roman Catholicism; Deism, and\n    modern Sag Nichtism! All this tide of fanaticism and error,\n    originating North of Mason and Dixon's Line, went for Pierce in\n    the last Presidential contest: they are with that party now,\n    against the American party; and it is bad company in which to\n    find a Protestant minister! Yet, miserable Protestants hesitate\n    not to commend these enemies of the natural rights of man, and\n    of the Christian religion, as being just as good Christians as\n    their neighbors!\n\n    \"Oh! judgment, thou hast fled to brutish beasts; And men have\n    not their reason!\"\n\n    But, Doctor, why were you at Baltimore? Why, sir, during the\n    past year, you and other conscientious Methodists took it into\n    your heads to arraign a young man who was travelling your\n    circuit, Mr. Hall, and, for the Church's good, to have him\n    expelled, whose great sin was that he was a _Know-Nothing_, or\n    sympathized with the Order! The authorities of the Church, after\n    a patient hearing of the whole case, pro and con, acquitted the\n    young man. You followed him up to the Annual Conference, as the\n    representative of and attorney for Sag Nichtism. The Conference\n    acquitted the young preacher again, and sent him to an\n    enlightened circuit in Maryland. This so offended you, and your\n    patriotic, not to say _pious_ associates, that, for the Church's\n    good, they resigned their stewardship in the Church, and were\n    so offended at the course of the Presiding Elder, _Rev. M.\n    Goheen_, than whom there is not a more modest, unassuming,\n    conservative Christian gentleman in the Valley of Virginia,\n    that, at a recent Quarterly Meeting there, they refused to\n    attend church, or to hear him preach. This is just the spirit\n    that actuates your party, everywhere.\n\n    You demand of me the name or names of such person or persons as\n    have given me information in reference to you. Reconsider this\n    demand, if you please, and ask yourself if, under all the\n    circumstances, it is not a cool piece of impudence. I have\n    published nothing about you upon the authority of others, but\n    upon my own authority and responsibility. You _suspect_ some of\n    your neighbors for writing to me, and hence you make this\n    demand. It is true, I have friends in Fincastle, and some of\n    these write to me, and when I publish any thing about you, or\n    any one of your associates, and give these friends of mine as\n    authority, I will give you their names, if called upon to do so;\n    or I will assume the responsibility myself. What I have said in\n    reply to the wicked, slanderous, and cowardly assault upon me,\n    in the dirty paper controlled by you, I have said upon my own\n    responsibilities, as a man, and as a member of the same Church\n    to which you belong; and whether my \"peace as a citizen\" is\n    preserved or destroyed, I am not the man to be intimidated or\n    driven from my position. My failure to give you the names of any\n    citizens of your vicinity, who may have written me private\n    letters, relating to your war upon young Hall, the Circuit\n    Preacher, \"will detract largely from the estimate you have\n    placed upon my character.\" This I am sorry to hear, as I do not\n    wish to fall below the \"estimate\" placed upon my character in\n    the two issues of your paper, now before me! This would be\n    reaching \"a lower deep,\" as the poet classically styles it!\n\n    Now, sir, I have a letter from a town in Virginia, not far\n    distant from Fincastle, written by a gentleman of as \"great\n    personal courage\" as you or myself, who states, that a gentleman\n    who was present at the trial of Rev. Mr. Hall, heard you make\n    the assertion, on that occasion, that you alone were responsible\n    for all the editorials that appeared in the \"Democrat,\" and that\n    the \"Junior\" partner was not! If you think proper to make an\n    issue with this gentleman, you can have his name!\n\n    I am, Dr. Hopkins, your humble servant,\n\n                              W. G. BROWNLOW,\n\n                                  _Editor of the Knoxville Whig._\n\n\n\n\n[From the Knoxville Whig.]\n\nTO STEPHEN TRIBBLE.\n\n\nVILLAINOUS SIR:--Letters from my friends in the West inform me that you\nare making a full team in the service of the Devil, Locofocoism, and\ncrime, in portions of Missouri and Kentucky! You have recently held\nforth in Charleston, a pleasant post-village, the capital of Mississippi\ncounty, Missouri, about six miles south-west of the \"Father of Waters!\"\nIn that town you undertook to inform the good people, the Circuit Judge\nbeing present, _who I am_, and to demonstrate that I am not entitled to\ncredit in any thing I say! You claimed to have once lived in East\nTennessee--to know the people and the country--and to have known William\nT. Senter and James Y. Crawford, two other Methodist preachers, whose\n_pedigrees_ you pretend to give!\n\nMr. Senter was an able man--a moral and upright man--and a Whig\nRepresentative in Congress, from the District you represented _in the\njail of Sullivan county_, for a long time previous to your being\n_branded in the hand and on the cheeks_, for MANSLAUGHTER, the\nparticulars of which I will remind you of before I close this familiar\nletter! Mr. Senter could have gone to Congress longer, but voluntarily\nretired. Mr. Crawford was a brother-in-law to Mr. Senter, and was a\npreacher of respectable talents, and in good standing in his Church.\nThey are both in their graves, beyond the reach of your malice, where\nthe sound of your infamous voice, and the words of your lying tongue,\ncan never penetrate their ears! But I am still above ground, daily\nkicking, and making war upon the Locofoco Paupers and Foreign Catholics,\nas well as Native Traitors, with whom you are associated, and with whom\nyou act in politics. I acknowledge myself to be game for you to hunt\ndown!\n\nYou are now a _Campbellite preacher_ as well as a _Sag Nicht\nMissionary_; and the garb of religion you wear, gives a degree of weight\nto your falsehoods and slanders, among strangers, that they otherwise\nwould not have. The idea of \"_Stev Tribble_,\" who ingloriously fled from\nthis country for crimes he could not meet in open court, being a\npreacher, and itinerating through the West, \"in search of the lost sheep\nof the house of Israel,\" is so ridiculous, as scarcely to be believed at\nall, although there is no doubt but what he has been regularly installed\nin Kentucky, and now has the \"care of souls.\"\n\nWhy, you unmitigated old villain, your whole career, from your \"youth\nup,\" has been one of crime and revolting blackguardism. While a boy and\na young man, where Hoss's school was taught in Washington county, your\nvulgar conversation, immoral practices, indecent habits, and\nblackguardism, disgusted the entire neighborhood, and rendered you so\nodious that no decent family would board you! All the waters of the\nfar-famed _Jordan_, in the palmiest days of that bold stream, were not\nsufficient to wash your sins away! If the Lord Bishop of London were to\n_immerse_ you as often as \"seventy times seven,\" in the waters of \"bold\nJordan,\" and in the name of the holy Trinity, you would still remain\nwhat you were when you fled from this country to avoid the extreme\npenalty of the law--one of the greatest scoundrels for whom Christ died!\n\nYourself and half-brother _Havron_ were confined in Blountville Jail,\nfor the murder of _William Humphreys_, a promising young man, whom you\nbrutally assaulted and murdered in open daylight in the streets of\nKingsport, in Sullivan county, and without provocation! _You_ were tried\nand convicted of _manslaughter_, and branded in the _hand_ and on the\n_cheek_. After being branded, you _bit the letters out of your hand_,\nand _clawed them out of your face_, but the _scars_ are to be seen in\nboth. Indeed, I have been written to, to know why these scars are on\nyour face! I take this method of answering those inquiries; and\npublishing them in my \"Whig,\" which has a circulation of 5,000, and our\n\"Campaigner,\" which circulates 7,000 copies, I shall be able to\nintroduce you to as many persons as may have heard you preach my\nfuneral.\n\nWhile in the Blountville Jail, with your half-brother, Havron, whose\nblow killed Humphreys, after you had weakened him, you caught hold of\nthe jailor, Montgomery Irvin, and held him in a scuffle, when he entered\nthe room with your dinner, until Havron made his escape. Havron would\nhave pulled hemp, had he not escaped; and had our penitentiary system\nexisted at that time, you would have been sentenced for life! But you\nwould not have remained there longer than the past summer, as we have a\nGovernor who pardons out all such men, and has more sympathies for them\nthan any other Executive Officer in the nation. You have a half-brother\nwho is a Sag Nicht member of our Legislature, and a great friend and\nsupporter of our Governor and his foreign associates, and he could have\nturned you out and procured for you an office if you had remained. But\nthen you followed the teachings of \"the spirit\" of Sag Nichtism, in\nleaving between two days, and emigrating to Kentucky, as many precious\nsouls would never have \"heard the word,\" or had their sin washed away,\nbut for you!\n\nIn an unmentionable and disgraceful enterprise, you became possessed of\na _broken leg_, and were mean enough to abscond without paying the bill\nof your physician, Dr. Patton, whose unremitting attention saved you\nfrom your grave, and from the clutches of the Devil, sooner than the old\nfellow was prepared for your reception! If you had the honor of a first\nclass thief, you would pay this medical bill out of the proceeds of the\nfirst public collection you take up, either in Missouri or Kentucky. And\nif you suffer it to go unpaid until your infinitely infernal career is\nwound up, the Day of Judgment will disclose the manner of your breaking\nyour leg! If I were you, I would sooner pay this bill now, than to be\nasked in the great day how my leg was broken!\n\nDisgraced as you are, unprincipled and villainous, you have gone into\nKentucky, taken upon yourself \"holy orders,\" and married a wife,\nimposing most shamefully upon the family into which you married. The\nwoman you have thus imposed upon, would be justifiable now, in the eyes\nof both God and man, in forsaking you and applying for a divorce. And no\ncourt or jury would refuse her application, when made acquainted with\nyour character.\n\nIt is a remarkable fact--one that I desire to call, not so much to your\nnotice, as to the notice of the public generally--that while all the\nmembers of this Foreign Democratic party are by no means villains,\ndestitute of principle; yet, all the assassins, cut-throats, thieves,\nand hypocrites in the country have crowded into the ranks of that party!\nFawned upon, fostered and pampered by the villainous leaders,\ndemagogues, and tricksters of the party, who need the services of all\nsuch scavengers, you are encouraged to act with them. These leaders, who\nare really no better than you are, _generously_ admit you to a\nfellowship, and _courteously_ acknowledge all such abandoned rascals to\nbe their equals! Such men, to a great extent, now constitute the\nfree-democracy of the country--they desecrate the ballot-box--disgust\ndecent men wherever they come in contact with them--blaspheme the name\nof God--and swear that they will either rule or ruin the country!\n\nBut, Sir, it was said of a certain man in the Scriptures, that he was a\n\"sinner above all the sinners that dwell in Jerusalem.\" So it may in\nperfect truth be said of you, that you are a scoundrel above all the\nscoundrels in the hateful ranks of Sag Nichtism. You deserve, for your\ndepraved course of life, a greater punishment than you have received or\nare likely to receive in this life. The guilt of foul calumny, of the\nmost black and odious kind, attaches to every sentence uttered by your\nlying tongue. Guilt, the offspring of fiend-like malice, shamefully\nfalse, deeply corrupt, and badly matured: perfidy, dishonesty, and rank\npoison--hot incense of murder, theft, inhuman spoliation, and deep, dark\nforebodings of damnation have been rooted and grounded in your heart,\nfor lo! these many years! Dark despair, endless death, inexpressible\nmisery, manifold, and worse than death, follow in the ghastly train of\nyour crimes, and riot in your corrupt bosom, as with infernal\ndrunkenness of delight! The record of your deep depravity, of your utter\nwant of principle, and of your ten thousand villainous exploits, is\n_stereotyped_ upon the burning sands of eternity, and stamped on the\nimperishable walls of the _rotunda_ of the Devil's Hell, to which you\nare driving at railroad speed! In upper East Tennessee, where you are\nknown, it would disgrace an _Algerine Bandit_ to sit and hear you\npretend to preach! _You_ pretend to preach Christ and him crucified, and\n_immerse_ persons in the name of the Trinity! Shrouded in the _sackcloth\nand ashes_ of disgrace, enclosed in a _vault_ filled to the brim with\n_buried and putrefied venality_, and steeped to the very nose and chin\nin crime, how dare you attempt to preach!\n\nI repeat, you vile slanderer of the living and the dead, that, in\njustice to the cause of God and of civilization, I will keep spread the\nunfurled banner of your infamy on every breeze, and cause it to float in\nthe atmosphere of every State in this Union, until your very _name_\nbecomes a mockery and a by-word! And I call upon the people of Kentucky\nand Missouri to ring the loud knell of your infamy, from steep to steep,\nand from valley to valley, until their swelling sounds are heard in\nstartling echoes, mingling with the rush of the criminal's torrent, and\nthe mighty cataract's earthquake-voice!\n\n                              W. G. BROWNLOW,\n\n                                  _Editor of the Knoxville Whig._\n\n     June 7th, 1856.\n\n\n\n\nAN EXPOSE OF ROMAN CATHOLICISM.\n\n\nThe following articles, setting forth the DESIGNS and TENDENCY of\nRomanism in the United States, appeared in the \"KNOXVILLE WHIG\" of May\nand June, 1856, and will speak for themselves. The writer has opposed\nthe Papal Hierarchy for twenty years; and in a series of articles, now\nfiled in a number of the \"JONESBOROUGH WHIG,\" published _sixteen years\nago_, he _predicted_ that the very state of things we are now realizing\nwould come upon us as soon as the year 1860, and that the party calling\nitself by the revered name of _Democrat_, would identify itself with\npolitical Romanism!\n\n\nTHE CATHOLIC QUESTION.--NO. I.\n\n     The American Party and the Religious Test--The Louisiana\n     Delegation and the Gallican Catholics--The vote of the\n     Philadelphia Convention to admit the Louisiana Delegates--The\n     American Councils in Louisiana--Catholics proper cannot be true\n     citizens of a Republic.\n\nIt is sometimes said by the Anties, that the American party, at their\nlate Philadelphia Convention, dismissed the Catholic Question from their\nplatform, and that they admitted into their Council a Catholic\nDelegation from Louisiana. We were in that Convention, from the hour of\nits opening until its final close, and we deny both statements. The\nfifth and tenth sections of the platform adopted at Philadelphia, and\nfor which we voted, are in the following words, and they express all our\nplatform says upon that subject:\n\n     5th. No person should be selected for political station,\n     (whether of native or foreign birth,) who recognizes any\n     allegiance or obligation of any description to any foreign\n     prince, potentate, or power, or who refuses to recognize the\n     Federal and State Constitutions (each within its sphere) as\n     paramount to all other laws, as rules of political action.\n\n     10th. Opposition to any union between Church and State; no\n     interference with religious faith or worship, and no tests\n     oaths for office.\n\nThe American party was against political Romanism--against all who\nacknowledge any allegiance to a foreign Prince, Potentate, or Power; or\nwho acknowledge any authority on earth, higher and more binding than\nthe Constitutions of our States, and General Government. And those who\nare familiar with the temporal assumptions of Popery, and the political\nintrigues of the Order of Jesuits, can have no other feelings than those\nof disgust, upon hearing the Locofoco demagogues of the country cry out\nagainst the American party for their opposition to the poor Catholics!\nAgainst Popes confined to _Rome_, we make no war; but against Popes\nusurping civil and spiritual authority, in America, we protest most\nsolemnly, and intend to make war, unrelenting and unceasing war!\n\nThe Louisiana Delegation, five in number, were _two_ Methodist--_one_\nOld School Presbyterian--one Episcopalian--and the other, Mr. Eustes, a\nmember of Congress, not a member of any Church. Those gentlemen\npresented their credentials for admission, and they were objected to,\nbecause Roman Catholics were admitted into the Order by the Louisiana\nState Council. A warm debate ensued, on a motion to admit the\nDelegation, on their credentials, which finally prevailed, by yeas 67,\nnays 50, many of the members having left for their lodgings, because of\nthe lateness of the hour, and of their fatigue. _We_ were in favor of\ntheir admission, and so was Mr. Nelson, of East Tennessee, and we both\nclaim to be _ultra_ Protestant, if the reader please.\n\nThe \"Catholicism\" of Louisiana, we wish it borne in mind--that is the\nGallican wing of the Church--is a very different species of\n\"Catholicism\" from that of our Irish and German Hierarchy taught in this\ncountry, under the training of Archbishop Hughes and Monseigneur Bedini,\nthe Pope's villainous Nuncio. The French Gallican Church has so little\nrespect for the Pope of Rome, that when the King of Sardinia was in\nParis, less than twelve months ago, though he was under the interdict of\na Papal Bull of excommunication from Pius IX., the Gallican Archbishops\nof Pius, and other Priests associated with them, visited him regularly,\nand tendered him unbounded courtesies and honors. The Gallican wing of\nthe Catholic Church of France is liberal, as well as hostile to the\ninsulting claims and pretensions of the Pope. But it is diluted still\nmore with liberality, and with opposition to these claims of the Pope,\namong the French Creoles of Louisiana. Most of them, though Roman\nCatholics by name, from being educated in the forms of the Roman Church,\nhave just about as much respect for Rome, and confidence in the Pope, as\nwe have, and God knows that is very little. They denounce Papal Bulls,\ninterdicts, and Nuncios. They throw off all temporal and spiritual\nallegiance to the Pope--the civil authorities of the United States with\nthem are supreme--they are American born--and hence, our platform does\nnot exclude them, and consequently they were admitted at Philadelphia,\nor, which is the same, their representatives.\n\nIn 1652, under Louis XIV., the Gallican clergy met in Paris, and adopted\nthe following point: \"That the Pope has no power, of _Divine right_, to\ninterfere with the temporal affairs of independent States.\" Thus, the\nCatholics of Louisiana rejecting the doctrine of the temporal power of\nthe Pope, are not proscribed by the American party. They constitute a\nsound portion of the American party.\n\nMr. Lathrop, a Presbyterian Elder, and a Delegate from Louisiana, read\nto the Convention from the ritual of the subordinate organizations of\nthe American party of Louisiana, and showed that, while it admitted\nthose to membership who professed the Roman Catholic religion, IT\nREQUIRED OF THEM THE DENIAL OF ALLEGIANCE TO ANY TEMPORAL AUTHORITY NOT\nCOGNIZABLE IN THE STATE AND UNITED STATES CONSTITUTIONS; and from each\nsecured a pledge, UPON OATH, that they would not divulge the secrets of\nthe Order! He defended the Louisiana Catholics, as being true Americans,\nrecognizing no civil or spiritual power in their Priests, and resisting\nevery attempt, whether by a Bishop or Priest, to interfere with the\ninstitutions of our country. He cited cases which had occurred in\nLouisiana, of controversies between the Clergy and Laity, for the\ncontrol of Church property, and the decisions of courts over which\nGallican Catholic Judges presided, in favor of titles and control\nvesting in Trustees, the Laity. He showed that the native Catholics of\nLouisiana were the friends of common schools, and the advocates of\npopular education. He proclaimed aloud that the native Catholics of his\nState recognized no persons as proper depositaries of office, who\nacknowledged an allegiance to any person, civil or ecclesiastical,\nsuperior to that of the laws and Constitution of our country. He\nproclaimed that the Nuncios of the Pope of Rome hated these Louisiana\nCatholics, with a more perfect hatred than they did the \"apostle\nheretics\" called Protestants! This speech was received with unbounded\napplause, the question was called, and, as we have before stated, it was\nsanctioned, very properly too, by a vote of 67 to 50!\n\nThe American party not only advocate religious toleration, but religious\nliberty, which is a very different thing. Toleration is not the word in\nour vocabulary--it does not express enough, because it implies the right\nto _permit_ or _prohibit_. We contend for LIBERTY, the meaning of which\nis, that men are not responsible _to each other, to Popes, Bishops, or\nPriests_, for their religious opinions or practices, and that\nconsequently religion is not a subject of toleration.\n\nThe Catholics, proper, have taken an oath of allegiance to the Pope of\nRome, a \"foreign prince, potentate, and power,\" and their obligations to\nhim are higher, more sacred, and more binding, than any obligations\nthey can take upon them to support the laws and Constitution of this\ncountry. These are the men that we refuse to vote for, or put in office.\nThey are not and cannot be true Americans. The oaths of the priests bind\nthem to war upon all Protestant sects, and upon all Republican powers of\nGovernment. These oaths bind them to the foot of the Papal Throne; and\nwith these oaths upon their souls, they cannot be true citizens of this\nRepublic without perjury. And if guilty of perjury, the State prison\nshould be their residence.\n\nIn our next, we shall consider this subject more at length, in\nconnection with the oath of allegiance to our country, and the Catholic\nevasion of that oath.\n\n\n\n\nTHE CATHOLIC QUESTION--No. 2.\n\n     Ambiguous terms in swearing--The case of Judge Gaston--Temporal\n     power of the Pope--Catholic authorities in Europe--The spirit\n     of the Catholic press in America!\n\n\nWe are told by the Democratic sympathizers with the Catholics, that all\nCatholic emigrants to this country take an oath of allegiance to the\nUnited States upon becoming naturalized. Yes, they do, and the oath\nafter it is taken, has no more weight with them, than has a\nregular-built Know Nothing speech.\n\nHere is a paragraph from SANCHEZ, the highest authority in the Catholic\nChurch, Pope Pius only excepted. This writer, \"by authority,\" shows how\nthis oath of allegiance is evaded by a mental reservation:\n\n     \"It is lawful to use ambiguous terms to give the impression a\n     different sense from that which you understand yourself. A\n     person may take an oath that he has not done such a thing,\n     though in fact he has, by saying to himself it was not done on\n     a certain day, or before he was born, or by any other similar\n     circumstances, which gives another meaning to it. This is\n     extremely convenient, and always very just, when necessary to\n     your health, honor or prosperity.\"\n\nHere, then, we have it from the highest Catholic authority, that\nCatholics are absolved from all allegiance to this government, because\nthey take the oath of allegiance without committing perjury, by the holy\nprocess of a mental reservation--the use of \"ambiguous terms,\" setting\nforth one thing while they swear another! We have no doubt that Chief\nJustice TANEY, a devoted Catholic of Baltimore, and now at the head of\nthe Supreme Court of the United States, took his oath of office\nrequiring him to support the Constitution, with this same mental\nreservation. We have no doubt that those Catholic Judges upon the\nFederal Bench in several States in the Union, and those Catholic\nAttorney Generals, appointed to office by Mr. Pierce, so understood\ntheir oaths of office, and of allegiance! And the practice of\nPost-Master General Campbell, a bigoted Catholic, and a member of the\norder of Jesuits, proves that he so understood his oath to support the\nConstitution. As true Catholics, they are bound to swear with this\nmental reservation, because they could not owe allegiance to a\ngovernment of \"heretics,\" such as they believe ours to be. As Catholics,\nthey are bound to overthrow our Constitution, and aid in the destruction\nof our government.\n\nIt is a matter of history that when the Legislature of North Carolina\nelected Judge GASTON to the Supreme Bench in that State, he hesitated as\nto whether he would take the oath or not. And why? He was, although an\nable man, and in all the private relations of life a most excellent man,\na decided and devoted Roman Catholic. This is not all. The oath of a\nJudge in that State, which is not common in other States, requires the\nman taking it to avow his belief in the Protestant religion. Judge\nGaston asked for a few days to consider--he went instantly to Baltimore,\nas was believed, to consult the Catholic Bishop, who then resided\nthere--obtained a dispensation, as was supposed--wrote back that he\nwould accept the office--returned, was qualified, and to the day of his\ndeath was on the Bench! This affair illustrates Romanism. And what Rome\nwas, she is, and always will be. Can Rome change? Can the Ethiopian\nchange his skin, or the leopard his spots?\n\nHere is what Philopater, an approved Catholic authority of the first\ngrade, says, touching the principle in controversy:\n\n     \"All theologians and ecclesiastical lawyers affirm that every\n     Christian government, as soon as it openly abandons the _Romish\n     faith_, is instantly degraded from all power and dignity: all\n     the subjects are absolved from the oath of fidelity and\n     obedience which they have taken, and they may and ought, if\n     they have the power, to drive such government from every\n     Christian State, as an apostate, heretic, and deserter from\n     Jesus Christ. This certain and indubitable decision of all the\n     most learned men is perfectly conformed to the most apostolic\n     doctrines.\"\n\nOur Locofoco advocates of Romanism deny that the Pope lays claim to the\nsupremacy charged by the American party. On this point, we desire that\nthe Catholics may speak for themselves. One of their standard writers,\nFARRARIS, in his Ecclesiastical Dictionary, a work endorsed by their\nCouncil of Bishops and Cardinals, under the article headed \"Pope,\" uses\nthis emphatic and expressive language:\n\n     \"The Pope is of such dignity and highness, that he is not\n     simply man, but, as it were, God, and the vicar of God. Hence\n     the Pope is such supreme and sovereign dignity, that, properly\n     speaking, he is not merely constituted in dignity, but is\n     rather placed on the very summit of dignities. Hence, also, the\n     Pope is rather father of fathers, and he alone can use this\n     name, because he only can be called father of fathers: since he\n     possesses the primacy over all, is truly greater than all, and\n     the greatest of all. He is called most holy, because he is\n     presumed to be such. On account of the excellency of his\n     supreme dignity, he is called bishop of bishops, ordinary of\n     ordinaries, universal bishop of the Church, bishop of diocesan,\n     of the whole world, divine monarch, supreme emperor, and king\n     of kings.\"\n\nPETER DENS, of Maynooth College notoriety, whose \"Theology\" is the\nhighest Catholic authority known this side of the Vatican at Rome, gives\nentire the Bull of Pope Sixtus V. against the King of Navarre and the\nPrince of Conde, whom he styles the _sons of wrath_. In this Bull,\nissued in the year 1585, he says:\n\n     \"The authority given to Saint Peter and his successors, by the\n     immense power of the eternal King, _excels all the power of\n     earthly kings and princes_. It passeth uncontrollable sentence\n     upon them all. And if it find any of them resisting God's\n     obedience, it takes more severe vengeance on them, casting them\n     down from their thrones, however powerful they may be, and\n     tumbling them down to the lowest parts of the earth, as the\n     ministers of aspiring Lucifer.\"\n\nHere is what _Daniel O'Connell_ said so late as 1843, and he was a true\nCatholic and a true exponent of this faith:\n\n     \"You should do all in your power to carry out the intentions of\n     His Holiness the Pope. Where you have the electoral franchise,\n     give your votes to none but those who will assist you in so\n     holy a struggle.\n\n     \"I declare my most unequivocal submission to the Head of the\n     Church, and to the hierarchy in its different orders. If the\n     Bishop makes a declaration on this bill, I never would be heard\n     speaking against it, but would submit at once unequivocally to\n     that decision. They have only to decide, and I close my mouth:\n     they have only to determine, and I obey. I wish it to be\n     understood that _such is the duty of all Catholics_.\"--_Daniel\n     O'Connell_, 1843.\n\nHere comes one of the Pope's organs in France:\n\n     \"A heretic, examined and convicted by the Church, used to be\n     delivered over to the secular power and punished with death.\n     Nothing has ever appeared to us more necessary. More than one\n     hundred thousand persons perished in consequence of the heresy\n     of Wickliffe; a still greater number for that of John Huss; and\n     it would not be possible to calculate the bloodshed caused by\n     Luther; and it is not yet over.\"--_Paris Univers._\n\n     \"As for myself, what I regret, I frankly own, is that they did\n     not burn John Huss sooner, and that they did not likewise burn\n     Luther; this happened because there was not found some prince\n     sufficiently politic to stir up a crusade against\n     Protestants.\"--_Paris Univers._\n\nBut here is the Pope himself arguing with the authorities already\nquoted:\n\n     \"The absurd or erroneous doctrines or ravings in defence of\n     liberty of conscience, is a most pestilential error--a pest, of\n     all others, most to be dreaded in a State.\"--_Encyclical Letter\n     of Pope Pius IX., Aug._ 15, 1852.\n\nNow, let us hear their organs in our own country:\n\n     \"Heresy and unbelief are crimes, and in Christian countries,\n     like Italy and Spain for instance, where all the people are\n     Catholics, and where the Christian religion is an essential\n     part of the law of the land, they are punished as other\n     crimes.\"--_R. C. Archbishop of St. Louis._\n\n     \"For our own part, we take this opportunity of expressing our\n     hearty delight at the suppression of the Protestant chapel at\n     Rome. This may be thought intolerant, but when, we would ask,\n     _did we ever profess to be tolerant of Protestantism_, or favor\n     the doctrine that Protestantism _ought to be tolerated_? On\n     the contrary, we hate Protestantism--we detest it with our\n     whole heart and soul, and we pray that our aversion to it may\n     never decrease. We hold it meet that in the Eternal City no\n     worship repugnant to _God_ should be tolerated, and we are\n     sincerely glad that the enemies of truth are no longer allowed\n     to meet together in the capital of the Christian\n     world.\"--_Pittsburg Catholic Visitor_, 1848.\n\n     \"No good government can exist without religion; and there can\n     be no religion without an _Inquisition_, which is wisely\n     designed for the promotion and protection of the true\n     faith.\"--_Boston Pilot._\n\n     \"You ask, if he (the Pope) were lord in the land, and you were\n     in a minority, if not in numbers, yet in power, what would he\n     do to you? That, we say, would entirely depend on\n     circumstances. If it would _benefit the cause of Catholicism_,\n     he would tolerate you--if expedient, he would imprison\n     you--banish you--possibly, _hang you_--but be assured of one\n     thing, he would never tolerate you for the sake of the\n     _'glorious principles' of civil and religious\n     liberty._\"--_Rambler._\n\n     \"Protestantism of every form has not and never can have any\n     rights where Catholicity is triumphant.\"--_Brownson's Quarterly\n     Review._\n\n     \"Let us dare to assert the truth in the face of the lying\n     world, and, instead of pleading for our Church at the bar of\n     the State, _summon the State itself to plead at the bar of the\n     Church, its divinely constituted judge_.\"--_Ibid._\n\n     \"I never think of publishing any thing in regard to the Church\n     without submitting my articles to the Bishop for inspection,\n     approval, and endorsement.\"--_Ibid._\n\nIn view of the foregoing, and other facts and arguments which we will\nhereafter present, we cannot be mistaken in our views of Roman\nCatholicism. We cannot tamely surrender our dearest rights as\nProtestants, without a struggle. We cannot cry peace, peace, when there\nis no peace!\n\n     \"Protestantism, of every kind, Catholicity inserts in her\n     catalogue of moral sins; she endures it when and where she\n     must; but she hates it, and directs all her energies to effect\n     its destruction.\"--_St. Louis Shepherd of the Valley._\n\n     \"Religious liberty, in the sense of a liberty possessed by\n     every man to choose his religion, is one of the most wretched\n     delusions ever foisted on this age by the father of\n     deceit.\"--_The Rambler_, 1853.\n\n     \"The Church is of necessity intolerant. Heresy she endures when\n     and where she must, but she hates it, and directs all her\n     energies to its destruction. If Catholics ever gain an immense\n     numerical majority in this country, religious freedom is at an\n     end. So say our enemies. So say we.\"--_Shepherd of the Valley._\n\n     \"The liberty of heresy and unbelief is not a right.... All the\n     rights the sects have, or can have, are derived from the State,\n     and rest on expediency. As they have, in their character of\n     sects hostile to the true religion, no rights under the law of\n     nature or the law of God, they are neither wronged nor deprived\n     of liberty, if the State refuses to grant them any rights at\n     all.\"--_Brownson's Review, Oct., 1853_, p. 456.\n\n     \"The sorriest sight to us is a Catholic throwing up his cap,\n     and shouting, 'All hail, Democracy!'\"--_Ibid, October, 1852_,\n     pp. 554-8.\n\n     \"We think the 'masses' were never less happy, less respectable,\n     and less respected, than they have been since the reformation,\n     and particularly within the last fifty or one hundred years,\n     since Lord Brougham caught the mania of teaching them to read\n     and communicate the disease to a large proportion of the\n     English nation; of which, in spite of all our talk, we are\n     often the servile imitators.\"--_Shepherd of the Valley, Oct.\n     22, 1853._\n\n\n\n\nTHE CATHOLIC QUESTION--No. 3.\n\n     The Catholic Church supreme over all authorities--Meddling in\n     Political Contests--Brownson's Review and the Boston Pilot\n     reflecting the sentiments of that Church--Protestants\n     advocating Romanism--The Nashville Union in 1835.\n\n\nThe Anti-American, Foreign-loving, Catholic admirers of the Locofoco\nschool of politics, everywhere seek to frighten native Protestant\ncitizens with the bugbear cry of religious proscription. But let\nAmericans and Protestants watch with increased vigilance both the Roman\nand Locofoco Jesuits around them. To call the damnable and accursed\nsystem of political intrigue practised for past centuries by the Roman\nChurch by the term _Religion_, is a solemn mockery of the hallowed word.\nReligion teaches love and obedience to God, and the legally constituted\nauthorities of the country. Romanism teaches fear of and obedience to a\ncrowned potentate called the Pope, and opposition to all Protestant\ngovernments, as worthy to be cast down to hell! The one tends to free\nand ennoble the soul: the other to enslave and debauch every faculty of\nman's nature which likens him to the Almighty! The one is republican:\nthe other is barbaric, and at war with every principle of free\ngovernment!\n\nThe American party does oppose and denounce Romanism _as a political\nsystem at war_ with American institutions; and we here ask candid men to\nweigh the evidence we shall adduce to sustain this charge. We shall\nquote none other than Roman Catholic authority--the organs of\nRomanism--so as out of their own mouths to condemn them. Brownson's\nReview is the accredited organ of Romanism in the United States. He\nostentatiously parades the names of the Archbishops and Bishops on the\ncover of his Review, to give it the stamp of authority, and asserts in\nthe work:\n\n     \"I NEVER THINK OF PUBLISHING ANY THING IN REGARD TO THE CHURCH\n     WITHOUT SUBMITTING MY ARTICLES TO THE BISHOP FOR INSPECTION,\n     APPROVAL, AND ENDORSEMENT.\"\n\nLet us then look to his pages for an exposition of the doctrines of his\nChurch. In the January number for 1853, he says:\n\n     \"For every Catholic at least, the Church is the supreme judge\n     of the extent and limits of her power. She can be judged by no\n     one; and this of itself implies her absolute supremacy, and\n     that the temporal order must receive its laws from her.\"\n\nThe uniform practice of the Church of Rome has been, and still is, to\nassert her power--not in _words_, but in _deeds_--to GIVE OR TAKE AWAY\nCROWNS--to depose ungodly rulers, and to absolve their subjects from\ntheir \"horrible\" OATHS OF ALLEGIANCE!\n\nAgain, in the July number for 1853, Brownson says:\n\n     \"The Church is supreme, and you have no power except what you\n     hold in subordination to her, either in spirituals or in\n     temporals.... You no more have political than ecclesiastical\n     independence. The Church alone, under God, is independent, and\n     she defines both your powers and hers.\"\n\n     \"They have heard it said from their youth up that the Church\n     has nothing to do with politics; that she has received no\n     mission in regard to the political order.\"\n\n     \"In opposing the nonjuring bishops and priests, they believed\n     they were only asserting their national rights as men, or as\n     the State, and were merely resisting the unwarrantable\n     assumption of the spiritual power. If they had been distinctly\n     taught that the political authority is always subordinate to\n     the spiritual, and had grown up in the doctrine that the nation\n     is not competent to define, in relation to the ecclesiastical\n     power, its own rights--that the Church defines both its powers\n     and her own, and that though the nation may be, and ought to\n     be, independent in relation to other nations, it has, and can\n     have, no independence in the face of the Church, the kingdom of\n     God on earth: they would have seen at a glance that support of\n     the civil authority against the spiritual, no matter in what\n     manner, was the renunciation of their faith as Catholics, and\n     the actual or virtual assertion of the supremacy of the\n     temporal power.\"\n\nIn the same number, page 301, he says:\n\n     \"She (the Church) has the right to judge who has, or has not,\n     according to the law of God, the right to reign: whether the\n     prince has, by his infidelity, his misdeeds, his tyranny and\n     oppression, forfeited his trust, and lost his right to the\n     allegiance of his subjects; and therefore whether they are\n     still held to their allegiance, or are released from it by the\n     law of God. If she have the right to judge, she has the right\n     to pronounce judgment, and order its execution: therefore to\n     pronounce sentence of deposition upon the prince who has\n     forfeited his right to reign, and to declare his subjects\n     absolved from their allegiance to him, and free to elect\n     themselves a new sovereign.\"\n\nWe might multiply authorities of this kind on this point, to an almost\nindefinite extent, from the debate between Bishop Hughes and Mr.\nBreckenridge, and the controversy between Hughes and Erastus Brooks, but\nit is wholly unnecessary.\n\nAs early as 1844, the Catholics took their stand as a body in the arena\nof political strife; and the illustrious CLAY and the virtuous\nFRELINGHUYSEN were the victims of their particular hostility. Mr.\nFrelinghuysen was the President of the Board of Foreign Missions, and\nthis was made the _excuse_ for the bitter animosity of the Catholic\npress, and of the clergy and membership of the Catholic sect, against\nMr. Clay. Brownson, in his July number for 1844, in the very heat of the\ncontest, thus assailed Mr. Clay:\n\n     \"He is ambitious, but short-sighted. He is abashed by no\n     inconsistency, disturbed by no contradiction, and can defend,\n     with a firm countenance, without the least misgiving, what\n     everybody but himself sees to be a political fallacy or logical\n     absurdity.... He is no more disturbed by being convinced of\n     moral insensibility, than intellectual absurdity.... A man of\n     rare abilities, but apparently void of both moral and\n     intellectual conscience.... He is, therefore, a man whom no\n     power under that of the Almighty can restrain; he must needs be\n     the most dangerous man to be placed at the head of affairs it\n     is possible to conceive.\"\n\nThe Boston Pilot, another Catholic organ, published under the eye of the\nBishop, discloses _the same plot_, in its issue for the 31st of October,\n1844, only six days before the election! Here is what this organ said:\n\n     \"We say to all men in the United States, entitled to be\n     naturalized, become citizens while you can--let nothing delay\n     you for an hour--let no hindrance, short of mortal disease,\n     banish you from the ballot-box. To those who are citizens, we\n     say, vote your principles, whatever they may be--never desert\n     them--do not be wheedled or terrified--but vote quietly, and\n     unobtrusively. Leave to others the noisy warfare of words. Let\n     your opinions be proved by your deliberate and determined\n     action. We recommend you to no party; we condemn no candidate\n     but one, and he is Theodore Frelinghuysen. We have nothing to\n     say to him as a Whig--we have nothing to say to Mr. Clay or any\n     other Whig, as such--but to the President of the American Board\n     of Foreign Missions, the friend and patron of the Kirks and\n     Cones, we have much to say. We hate his intolerance--we dislike\n     his associates--and shudder at the blackness and bitterness of\n     that school of sectarians to which he belongs, and amongst whom\n     he is regarded as an authority.\"\n\nProtestants! do you hear that? Old Line Whigs! do you hear that? If so,\ndo you think that Americans are warring upon civil and religious\nliberty, when they take an oath that they will rebuke such infamous\nsentiments? These appeals of Brownson, Hughes, and the Pilot, had the\neffect to defeat the Clay ticket in New York, and that State lost him\nhis election. The Catholics were all at the polls, and voted for Polk\nand Dallas. On the 9th of November, 1844, Frelinghuysen wrote to Mr.\nClay as follows:\n\n     \"More than 3,000, it is confidently said, have been naturalized\n     in this city (New York) alone since the first of October. It is\n     an alarming fact that this foreign vote has decided the great\n     questions of American policy, and contracted a nation's\n     gratitude.\"\n\nAnd after they achieved the victory of 1844, Brownson came out with this\navowal:\n\n     \"Heretofore we have taken our politics from one or another of\n     the parties which divide the country, and have suffered the\n     enemies of our religion to impose their political doctrine upon\n     us; but it is time for us to begin to teach the country itself\n     those moral and political doctrines which flow from the\n     teachings of our own Church. We are at home here, wherever we\n     may have been born; this is our country, and as it is to become\n     THOROUGHLY CATHOLIC, we have a deeper interest in public\n     affairs than any other of our citizens. The sects are only for\n     a day; the Church for ever.\"\n\nWhen Gen. Cass made his speech in the Senate, in 1852, in favor of free\nworship and the rights of conscience for Americans abroad, reflecting on\nthe Catholics by name, Brownson came out in his October number, and\nsaid:\n\n     \"We are glad to see Gen. Cass laid on the shelf, for we can\n     never support a man who turns radical in his old age.\"\n\nIn the same number, Brownson continues:\n\n     \"The sorriest sight to us is a Catholic throwing up his cap and\n     shouting, 'All hail, Democracy!'\"\n\nThis too at the very time he was supporting the Democratic party in the\nPresidential contest! He would sooner have heard the cry, \"All hail,\nCatholicism!\" and he was only using Democracy as an instrument to\nadvance his primary wish!\n\nWe offer no comments on the foregoing extracts, of our own, but leave\nevery reader to judge for himself. The price of liberty is eternal\nvigilance. We apply the remark to religious as well as civil liberty.\nAll we ask of the people is to be vigilant. Do not support men at the\nballot-box who are in league with these enemies of our Republic, and of\nthe Protestant religion!\n\nBehold the enemy is at our gates! A foreign priest has been lecturing\nhere in Knoxville, within the last ten days, avowing sentiments similar\nto these, and claiming that this country would ultimately become a\nCatholic country! The crisis is approaching! Rouse up, Americans, and\nhasten to your country's salvation! Not a moment is to be lost! GOD AND\nOUR COUNTRY, must be the watchword of every Christian and patriot, of\nevery political party in the land. America expects us all to do our\nduty!\n\nAnd is there no cause for alarm?\n\nEighteen months ago, a Protestant minister, Baptist, Methodist, or\nPresbyterian, might expose Romanism, and warn his congregation against\nits corrupting influences, for hours at a time--come down out of his\npulpit, and his congregation would, without distinction of party, say,\n\"Well done, good and faithful servant!\"\n\nBut let him now dare _allude_ to Romanism--he offends one-half of his\ncongregation--he is _preaching_ politics--they will hear him no more; or\nforsooth, which is more common, they will withhold his support and\nstarve him out! Are not these signs alarming?\n\nBut here in Tennessee, _Protestant_ Tennessee, on the 15th of May,\n1855, the _Nashville Daily Union_, the organ of the self-styled\nDemocratic party, came out at the Capital of the State with this daring\nbroadside against the Protestant clergy and their religion:\n\n     \"A Church that can boast of an existence of thirteen\n     centuries--passing through all the various vicissitudes of her\n     eventful career unscathed, can certainly show, with all her\n     atrocious barbarity, many bright spots which may be placed in\n     favorable contrast with the Protestant Church, with its\n     thousand and one wrangling sects. Men are beginning to see\n     through the transparent gauze that veils this Know-Nothing\n     movement. They are beginning to ask 'What has Protestantism\n     done for the world? What has she done to alleviate and elevate\n     the down-trodden? Is the race any better off for having\n     accepted her faith? THESE REVEREND HYPOCRITES--these scribes\n     and pharisees, are treading on a terrible volcano. They will\n     find their treasonable schemes and infernal plotting against\n     the liberties of man tried and condemned by the pure light of\n     God's own truth and love, which shines and throbs in every\n     pulsation of humanity's heart. If Protestantism prove recreant\n     to her high trust, she will have to pass the ordeal of\n     enlightened public opinion and be consigned to her merited\n     obscurity.\n\n     \"Popery, with all its crimes against God and man, adapts itself\n     to the times and to the circumstances, and thus saves itself\n     from being absorbed in the mass of conflicting elements.\"\n\n\n\n\nTHE CATHOLIC QUESTION--No. 4.\n\n     A Catholic Priest the Minister from the Rivas-Walker\n     Government--Nicaragua, Texas, and Gen. Jackson--Bishop Hughes\n     and Orestes Brownson--Buchanan bidding for the Catholic\n     vote--A. H. Stephens, of Georgia--Lord Baltimore and Religious\n     Toleration.\n\n\nThree months ago, PARKER H. FRENCH arrived in Washington, as the\nRepresentative of the Walker Government of Nicaragua--an American-born\ncitizen and a Protestant--but the Government declined to recognize him,\nupon the ground that Walker's Government was not established even _de\nfacto_. Since then, our Government has recognized Walker's Government,\nand endorsed his war upon Costa Rica, although the former objection of\nour Government lies with as much force against such recognition now as\nit did three months ago. That the approach of the Cincinnati Convention,\nand the importance of conciliating the \"Young American\" wing, and the\nFilibustering division of the Democratic party, had great influence in\nproducing this recognition, there can be no sort of doubt. But a still\nmore palpable reason why this Government gave its sanction to the\nRivas-Walker Government is, that PADRE VIJIL, the second Minister sent\nhere, is a ROMAN CATHOLIC PRIEST, and a shrewd Spaniard--better\nunderstands the influences that prevail at Washington. When we remember\nthat a Roman Catholic, and a member of the Order of Jesuits, is a member\nof Pierce's Cabinet, the Postmaster-General--and when we remember that\nDemocracy now, without the Catholic-Foreign vote, is almost a nullity in\nthe United States, we have a clear solution of this preference given the\nSpanish priest, PADRE VIJIL, over the American citizen, but a few weeks\nafterwards! As a sign of the times, the fact is one worthy of note. It\nshows, at least, that when Protestantism cannot prevail with the\nAdministration of Pierce, Roman Catholicism can; and that hence, when we\nproclaim the power of the Pope, even in America, we but utter\ndemonstrable facts. Romanism is even carrying Democracy from all its old\nwayside land-marks. In December, 1836, GEN. JACKSON sent a special\nmessage to the Senate of the United States, in relation to a proposition\nto recognize the new Government of Texas, and he gave reasons _against_\nit, which are exactly applicable to this Rivas-Walker affair:\n\n     \"Upon the issue,\" he says, \"of this threatened invasion by\n     Mexico, the independence of Texas may be considered as\n     suspended; and were there nothing peculiar in the relative\n     situation of the United States and Texas, our acknowledgments\n     of its independence at such a crisis could scarcely be\n     considered as consistent _with that prudent reserve with which\n     we have heretofore held ourselves bound to treat all similar\n     questions_.\"\n\nThe existing Government of Nicaragua is in a far more critical condition\nnow than that of Texas was in 1836, when Gen. Jackson went on to say:\n\n     \"It becomes us to beware of a too early movement, as it might\n     subject us, however unjustly, to the imputation of seeking to\n     establish the claim of our neighbors to a territory, with a\n     view to its subsequent acquisition by ourselves. Prudence,\n     therefore, seems to dictate that we should still stand aloof,\n     and maintain our present attitude, if not until Mexico itself,\n     or one of the great foreign powers, shall recognize the\n     independence of the new Government, at least until the lapse of\n     time or the course of events shall have proved, beyond cavil or\n     dispute, the ability of the people of that country to maintain\n     their separate sovereignty, and to uphold the Government\n     constituted by them. Neither of the contending parties can\n     justly complain of this course. By pursuing it, we are but\n     carrying out the long-established policy of our Government--a\n     policy which has secured to us respect and influence abroad,\n     and inspired confidence at home.\"\n\nBut Romanism is rapidly leading Democracy to the Devil! Archbishop\nHughes--the head and front of the Papal Hierarchy in this country--has\nopenly declared the grand aim and object of the Catholic Church is \"TO\nMAKE ROME THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FOR THE WHOLE WORLD!\" This same\nArchbishop is now engaged in raising an immense fund, for the avowed\npurpose of ESTABLISHING A COLLEGE IN ROME, for the education of a high\norder of Priests and Jesuits for the United States; the Roman Pontiff\ndeeming the education of Priests defective if obtained in this land of\nliberty! This same Archbishop Hughes has now actively enlisted for the\nPresidential contest, for 1856, in order, to use his own language, \"TO\nBREAK THE SPINAL CORD OF THE AMERICAN PARTY.\" The Irish Catholic vote is\nto be fused with the Black Republicans in the North, to prevent the\nsuccess of the Fillmore ticket, and the Irish and German Catholic vote\nis to be cast for Democracy in the South and North-West--the Archbishop\nstipulating for special legislation for Rome, and for promoting this\nmammoth college!\n\nORESTES BROWNSON, a leading Catholic authority, and the editor of\nArchbishop Hughes's organ--one of the most zealous as well as able\nadvocates of Romanism in America--declares: \"THE POPE IS MY INTERPRETER\nOF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES!\" The Supreme Court at\nWashington is subordinate to the Vatican, situated at the foot of one\nof the seven hills upon which Rome is built! Through the influence of\nthe _Jesuit_ who is a member of Pierce's cabinet, the Papal Nuncio, who\nwas sent from Rome two years ago, clothed with _foreign_ authority, was\nreceived by our government at Washington, and sent around the lakes to\nthe North-West at government expense; and allowed to adjudicate upon a\nsecular question AFFECTING TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION in the great State\nof New York!\n\nMr. Buchanan, one of the several candidates before the Cincinnati\nConvention for the Presidential nomination, said, in a public speech in\nBaltimore, just before the meeting of that Convention, _by way of\nbidding for the Catholic vote_:\n\n     \"In the age of religious bigotry and intolerance, Lord\n     Baltimore was the first legislator who proclaimed the sacred\n     rights of conscience, and established for the government of his\n     colony the principle, not merely of toleration, but perfect\n     religious freedom and equality among all sects of Christians.\"\n\nLord Baltimore was a Catholic; and with a view to enlist the same\ninfluence, HON. ALEXANDER H. STEPHENS, of Georgia, sent forth a\npublished speech last summer, from which we make the following extract:\n\n     \"The Catholic colony of Maryland, organized under the auspices\n     of Lord Baltimore, was the first to establish the principle of\n     free toleration in religious worship on this continent.\n\n     \"The Colony of Maryland afforded protection to _all_ persecuted\n     sects.\"\n\nNow, in order to judge of Mr. Buchanan's \"_perfect religious freedom and\nequality_,\" and Mr. Stephens's \"_principle of free toleration_,\" let us\nexamine an Act passed April 21, 1649, when Lord Baltimore was in the\nzenith of his power:\n\n     \"Denying the Holy _Trinity_ is to be punished with _death_, and\n     confiscation of land and goods to the Lord Proprietary (Lord\n     Baltimore himself!) Persons using any reproachful words\n     concerning the Blessed Virgin Mary, or the Holy Apostles or\n     Evangelists, to be fined L5, or in default of payment to be\n     publicly whipped and _imprisoned, at the pleasure of_ his\n     Lordship, (Lord Baltimore himself!) or of his\n     Lieutenant-General.\" _See Laws of Maryland at large, by T.\n     Bacon, A. D. 1765._ _16 and 17 Cecilius's Lord Baltimore_.\n\nS. F. STREETER, Esq., of Baltimore, is the author of a work entitled\n\"_Maryland two hundred years ago_.\" In this work, at page 26, Mr.\nStreeter says:\n\n     \"The policy of Lord Baltimore, in regard to religious matters\n     in his colony, has, in some particulars at least, been\n     misapprehended and therefore misstated. The assertion has long\n     passed uncontradicted, that toleration was promised to the\n     colonists in the first conditions of plantation; that the\n     rights of conscience were recognized in a law passed by the\n     first assembly held in the colony; and that the principal\n     officers from the year 1636 or '37, bound themselves by on oath\n     not to molest on account of his religion any one professing to\n     believe in Jesus Christ. I can find _no authority_ for _any_ of\n     these statements. Lord Baltimore's first and earlier conditions\n     of plantation breathe not a word on the subject of religion: no\n     act recognizing the principle of toleration was passed in the\n     first or in any following assembly, until fifteen years after\n     the first settlement, at which time (1649) a Protestant had\n     been appointed Governor, and a majority of the Burgesses were\n     of the same faith; and when, _for the first time_, a clause\n     involving a promise not to molest any person professing to\n     believe in Jesus Christ, the words \"and particularly a Roman\n     Catholic,\" were inserted by the direction of Lord Baltimore in\n     the official oath.\"\n\nMcMahon, the tried friend of Lord Baltimore, speaking on this same\nsubject, says:\n\n     \"The proprietary dominion (Lord B.'s) had never known that\n     hour, (when there was opportunity to persecute.) The Protestant\n     religion was the established religion of the mother country,\n     and any effort on the part of the Proprietary (Lord B.) to\n     oppress its followers would have _drawn down destruction on his\n     government_. The _great body_ of the colonists were themselves\n     Protestants, and, by their _number_ and their participation in\n     the government, they were fully equal to their own protection,\n     and _too powerful_ for the Proprietaries in the event of an\n     open collision.\"\n\nThus it will be seen that in Maryland, as everywhere else, in all past\nages, so far as toleration is concerned, it was granted _to_\nCatholics--never _by_ them.\n\n\n\n\nTHE CATHOLIC QUESTION--No. 5.\n\n     Popish aims at supremacy--Avowals by distinguished\n     Catholics--The order of Jesuits--Startling disclosures and\n     authentic references!--The strength of Romanism in the United\n     States!\n\n\nThe Romish hierarchy aims at supremacy in the Church and the State. It\nis nothing more nor less than a great _political_ system, arrogating to\nitself the right to sway the spiritual and temporal concerns of men--a\nright it claims to have derived from God, and that therefore the Romish\nChurch is above all, and may rule all. Hence the conspiracy against our\ngovernment emanating from the Vatican, and planned by the Pope, his\nCardinals and Bishops, in the late grand council at Rome! They there and\nthen resolved on affecting the objects of the _Leopold Foundation_,\nestablished in Vienna, May 13, 1829, to support Catholic missionaries in\nthe United States. Every member of this Society--and its branches are\nnumerous, being scattered over the whole earth--agrees to offer prayers\ndaily to _St. Leopold_, and every week to contribute as much as a\n_crucifix_. The valley of the Mississippi has been surveyed and mapped\nby the Jesuits, under the directions of the Vatican, and Popish\nCardinals in Europe are boasting of the certainty of their subjecting\nthis land of freedom at no distant day to papal supremacy! Rev. Dr.\nJAMES, an eminent clergyman of England, says:\n\n     \"The Church of Rome has determined to compensate herself for\n     her losses in the old world, by her conquest in the new.\"\n\nHence, too, a Papal editor in Europe conducting a Catholic organ, and\nadvising vigorous measures for the extension of Papal power, says:\n\n     \"We must make haste--the moments are precious--America may\n     become the centre of civilization.\"\n\nThe Rev. Dr. Reze, of Detroit, a priest of distinction, who is now in\ncustody at Rome, a few years since, writing from Michigan to his master,\nthe Pope, says:\n\n     \"We shall see the truth triumph--the temple of idols\n     overthrown--the seat of falsehood brought to silence--and all\n     the United States embraced in the same faith of that Catholic\n     Church, wherein dwell truth and temporal happiness.\"\n\nA Catholic priest in Indiana told a Protestant minister, an able\nMethodist clergyman, in a controversy, \"The time will come when\nCatholics will make Protestants wade knee-deep in blood in the valley of\nthe Mississippi!\"\n\nBishop England, one of their master-spirits in this country, in a letter\nto the Pope written from Charleston, and which was so good that his\nHoliness caused it to be published, said:\n\n     \"Within thirty years, the Protestant heresy will come to an\n     end. If we can secure the West and South, we will take care of\n     New England.\"\n\nThis same dignitary said to his brethren at Vienna in that memorable\nletter, by way of advice and encouragement:\n\n     \"All that is necessary is money and priests, to subjugate the\n     mock liberties of America.\"\n\nThe Jesuits profess to be a more devoted branch of the Pope's army than\nany other order. The Abbe De Pradt, formerly Roman Archbishop at\nMalines, calls them \"the Pope's zealous militia:\" another correctly\ncalls them \"the Pope's body-guard, organized for the express purpose of\ndefending the Papal See, and undertaking a spiritual crusade against\nheretics.\" Pius VII., in his Bull of August 7, 1814, reestablishing the\norder, which Clement XIV. had suppressed, says: \"We would be guilty of a\ngreat crime,\" if, amid the dangers threatening the Papal interests, and\n\"if, placed in the barque of Peter, tossed and assailed by continual\nstorms, we refused to employ the vigorous and experienced rowers who\nvolunteer their services in order to break the waves of a sea which\nthreatens every moment shipwreck and death.\"\n\nThe presumption is, that \"these vigorous and experienced rowers who thus\nvolunteer their services,\" have some moving principle, some hidden\nspring, which moves with that oneness and constancy under all\ndiscouragements. The watch does not show the spring that sets it in\nmotion: who that looks at its face and observes the movement of the\nhands will doubt that it is there, and that they move in proportion to\nthe strength or weakness of that spring?\n\nThe old Romans used to swear their soldiers: the Roman Church swears\neven her private members. Read the following from the creed: \"I solemnly\npromise, vow, and _swear_ true obedience to the Roman bishop,\" &c. \"This\ntrue Catholic faith, out of which there is no salvation, &c.--I promise,\nvow, and _swear_ most constantly to hold and profess the same, whole and\nentire, with God's assistance, to the end of my life, and procure, as\nfar as lies in my power, that the same shall be held, taught, and\npreached by all who are under me,\" &c. \"I also profess and undoubtedly\nreceive all other things delivered, defined, and declared by the sacred\ncanons and general councils, and particularly by the holy Council of\nTrent; and, likewise, I also condemn, reject, and anathematize all\nthings contrary thereto, and all heresies whatsoever, condemned,\nrejected, and anathematized by the Church.\"\n\nThe Jesuits are more strict, subservient, devoted to the Vatican, than\nany other wing of the Catholic Church. In the second volume of the\nconstitutions of the Jesuits, under the heading of _obedience to\nsuperiors_, is written:\n\n     \"You shall always see Jesus Christ in the General.\"\n\n     \"You shall obey him in every thing. Your obedience shall be\n     boundless in the execution, in the will and understanding. You\n     shall persuade yourselves that God speaks in his mouth: that\n     when he orders, God himself orders. You shall execute his\n     command immediately, with joy and with steadiness.\"\n\n     \"You shall be in his hands a dead body, which he will govern,\n     move, place, displace, according to his will.\"\n\nUnder these teachings, says ARNAULD, a student in a college of Jesuits\nstated, on hearing of the implicit obedience of another:\n\n     \"I would have done still more. Were God to order me, through\n     the voice of my superior, to put to death father, mother,\n     children, brothers, and sisters, I would do it with an eye as\n     tearless and a heart as calm as if I were seated at the banquet\n     of the Paschal lamb.\"\n\nAndrew B. Cross, of Baltimore, in a recent publication, says:\n\n     \"As early as 1624, the University of Paris charged them with\n     being governed by 'secret laws.' In 1649, Palafox, Bishop of\n     Angelopolis, in his letter to Innocent X., accuses them of\n     having 'a secret constitution, hidden privileges, and concealed\n     laws of their own.'\"\n\nWhat will our Democratic Protestant opposers of Know Nothing _secret\nlodges_ say to this? What will our Democratic advocates of Popery say to\nthe principles of such an organization, and to its \"horrible oaths?\" But\nhear the Roman Catholic King of Portugal, in his manifesto to his\nBishops, in 1759, only ninety-seven years ago:\n\n     \"In order to form the union, the consistency, and the strength\n     of the society, there should be a government not only\n     monarchical, but so sovereign, so absolute, so despotic, that\n     even the Provincials themselves should not have it in their\n     power, by any act of theirs, to resist or retard the execution\n     of the orders of the General. By this legislative, inviolable\n     and despotic power; by the profound devotedness of the subjects\n     of this company to mysterious laws with which they are not\n     themselves acquainted; by the blind and passive obedience with\n     which they are compelled to execute, without hesitation or\n     reply, whatever their superiors command,\" &c.\n\nBut our Democratic anti-Know Nothings not only object to our having\nformerly kept our ritual concealed, but especially to our denial of the\nexistence of our organization. Let them procure a copy of the secret\ninstructions of the Jesuits, styled \"_Secreta Monita_,\" and in the\npreface they will find these _lovely_ words:\n\n     \"The greatest care imaginable must be also taken that these\n     instructions do not fall into the hands of strangers, &c.; if\n     they should, _let it be positively denied that these are the\n     principles of the society_,\" &c.\n\nBut again:\n\n     \"Auquetil, in the fourth volume, page 333, of his History of\n     France, gives an account of the celebrated case of the\n     bankruptcy of the Rev. Father Jesuit La Valette, the Jesuit\n     agent, for three million francs. Their ships had been taken by\n     the English; the bankers in Marseilles, who had accepted bills\n     of exchange to the amount of one and a half millions, required\n     prompt payment. They wrote to De Sacy, the General Procurator\n     of the Missions; he wrote to the General at Rome, but the\n     General died at the same time; and before a new General could\n     be elected, and an order sent to pay the money, the Fathers had\n     become bankrupt, and suits were instituted. After delay and\n     manoeuvre on their part, the case came on unexpectedly in\n     1760. All the Jesuits were accused. They tried to lay the guilt\n     upon La Valette, but the bankers charged that all the Jesuits\n     were under the General, and La Valette was only agent. In this\n     sad condition they proposed to prove, according to their\n     constitutions, that as a society their body possessed nothing,\n     that all belonged to each college-house, convent, &c. The\n     proposal of the Jesuits was accepted. On the 8th of May, 1761,\n     after trial, the Parliament condemned the General and all the\n     society to pay bills, costs, damages, &c., which they did\n     without selling any of their property.\n\n     \"It was in this evil hour to the Jesuits that their\n     constitutions, which had been acted upon for two hundred years\n     in secret, were brought to light. Rules and constitutions maybe\n     in existence and acted upon, when it would be impossible to\n     obtain a copy from any one who was sufficiently advanced in the\n     order to be trusted with a copy.\"\n\nIt will astonish American Protestants to be told how numerous,\ninfluential, and strong the Catholics are in this land of liberty! They\nhave 7 archbishops, 40 bishops, 1704 priests, 1824 churches, 21\ncolleges, 37 ecclesiastical institutions for the education of priests\nand Jesuits, 117 female academies, all of which are, in reality,\n_Convents_. Nuns, priests, and Jesuits are the professors, teachers, and\nmatrons; and, strange to say, _Protestant_ young ladies are their chief\nsupporters!\n\nThe Romish Hierarchy is far more numerous in _Protestant_ America, than\nin any Catholic country on earth. Their strength in America equals what\nit is in Ireland, Scotland, and England combined! How extensive is this\nreligious organization in our land: how subtle! Its ramifications are\nall so many _arteries_, which receive their life's blood from the heart\nat Rome, and return it there by its regular palpitations! It is now\nconcentrating its _arteries_ at Washington City, and is promised \"aid\nand comfort\" from the great Democratic party--a party fast becoming the\nfoe of true liberty, and of the evangelical Protestant faith.\n\n\n\n\nTHE CATHOLIC QUESTION--No. 6.\n\n     The Oath of a Bishop--Oath of a Priest--Oath of a Jesuit--Oath\n     of a San Fedisti--Oath of an Irish Ribbon-man--The Romish\n     Curse!\n\n\nIn this chapter we will exhibit the \"_horrible oaths_\" of the various\ngrades of Catholics, from a _Bishop_ down to a _private member_--even to\nthe \"Irish Ribbon-men,\" thousands of whom swarm the United States. To\nthese we will add the oath of the \"Order of San Fedisti,\" an infamous\nsecret society established in Italy, and introduced for the first time\ninto this country by that prince of murderers, _Bedini_, the Pope's\nNuncio; who was honored with a steamer at the expense of our government,\nPierce at its head, to sail round our northern lakes, organizing these\ninfamous societies. Last of all, we give the ROMISH CURSE, which is in\nfull force and power in all Catholic countries, and is even pronounced\npublicly in our large cities, upon renegades from the Catholic faith.\n\nThese oaths will be found commencing on page 42 of \"A Treatise of the\nPope's Supremacy. By REV. ISAAC BARROW, D. D. Second American Edition,\n1844.\" By this author, the Latin is given and then translated. The same,\nin part, will be found in the debate between MR. BRECKENRIDGE, of the\nPresbyterian Church, and ARCHBISHOP HUGHES, and by the latter publicly\nacknowledged to be genuine, before a Baltimore audience who heard the\ndiscussion!\n\nBut these particular forms of oaths in question, which reckless\nCatholics and unprincipled Democrats deny, were published in England by\nArchbishop Usher, whose correctness and reliability is equal to that of\nany man. These oaths will be found in a volume entitled \"Foxes and\nFirebrands,\" from a collection of papers by Archbishop Usher, and it is\nthere stated that \"it remains on record at Paris, among the Society of\nJesus,\" and was drawn up in that form to URBAN VIII., in 1642, when he\nrevived the bull of Pious V., which had slumbered seventy-three years.\nThese oaths, as published, contain nothing which is not taught by Popes\nand Councils, Priests and Jesuits. Examine these _oaths_, and this\n_curse_, and answer us the question, Can men taking them, and\nsubscribing to their doctrines, make citizens of this Republic?\n\n\nOATH OF THE BISHOPS.\n\n     \"I, G. N., elect of the church of N., from henceforth will be\n     _faithful_ and obedient to St. Peter the Apostle, and to the\n     holy Roman Church, and to our lord, the lord N. Pope N., and to\n     his successors canonically coming in. I will neither advise,\n     consent, nor do any thing that they may lose life or member, or\n     that their persons may be seized or hands anywise laid upon\n     them, or any injuries offered to them, under any pretence\n     whatsoever. The counsel which they shall intrust me withal by\n     themselves, their messengers, or letters, I will not knowingly\n     reveal to any to their prejudice. I will help them to defend\n     and keep the Roman Papacy and the royalties of St. Peter,\n     saving my order against all men. The legate of the Apostolic\n     see, going and coming, I will honorably treat, and help in his\n     necessities. The rights, honors, privileges, and authority of\n     the holy Roman Church, of our lord the Pope, and his aforesaid\n     successors, I will endeavor to preserve, defend, increase, and\n     advance. I will not be in any council, action, or treaty, in\n     which shall be plotted against our said lord and the said Roman\n     Church, any thing to the hurt or prejudice of their persons,\n     right, honor, state, or power; and if I shall know any such\n     thing to be treated or agitated by any whomsoever, I will\n     hinder it all that I can; and as soon as I can, will signify it\n     to our said lord, or to some other, by whom it may come to his\n     knowledge. The rules of the Holy Fathers, the Apostolic\n     decrees, ordinances, or disposals, reservations, provisions,\n     and mandates, I will observe with all my might, and cause by\n     others. Heretics, Schismatics, and Rebels to our said lord, or\n     his aforesaid successors, I will to the utmost of my power\n     persecute and oppose. I will come to a council when I am\n     called, unless I am hindered by a canonical impediment. I will,\n     by myself in person, visit the threshold of the Apostles every\n     three years; and give an account to our lord, and his aforesaid\n     successors, of all my pastoral office, and of all things\n     anywise belonging to the state of my church, to the discipline\n     of my clergy and people, and, lastly, to the salvation of souls\n     committed to my trust; and will, in like manner, humbly receive\n     and diligently execute the Apostolic commands. And if I be\n     detained by a lawful impediment, I will perform all things\n     aforesaid by a certain messenger hereto specially empowered, a\n     member of my Chapter or some other in ecclesiastical dignity,\n     or else having a parsonage; or in default of these, by a priest\n     of the diocese; or in default of one of the clergy, (of the\n     diocese,) by some other secular or regular priest of approved\n     integrity and religion, fully instructed in all things above\n     mentioned. And such impediment I will make out by lawful\n     proofs, to be transmitted by the aforesaid messenger to the\n     Cardinal proponent of the holy Roman Church, in the\n     Congregation of the Sacred Council. The possessions belonging\n     to my table, I will neither sell nor give away, mortgage nor\n     grant anew in fee, nor anywise alienate, no, not even with\n     consent of the Chapter of my Church, without consulting the\n     Roman Pontiff. And if I shall make any alienation, I will\n     thereby incur the penalties contained in a certain Constitution\n     put forth about this matter.\n\n     \"So help me God, and these holy Gospels of God.\"\n\n\nOATH OF THE PRIESTS.\n\n     \"I, A. B., do acknowledge the ecclesiastical power of his\n     holiness; and the mother Church of Rome, as the chief head and\n     matron above all pretended churches throughout the whole earth;\n     and that my zeal shall be for St. Peter and his successors, as\n     the founder of the true and ancient Catholic faith, against all\n     heretical kings, princes, states, or powers repugnant to the\n     same; and although I, A. B., may follow, in case of persecution\n     or otherwise, to be heretically despised, yet in soul and\n     conscience I shall hold, aid, and succor the mother Church of\n     Rome, as the true, ancient, and apostolic Church. I, A. B.,\n     further do declare not to act or control any matter or thing\n     prejudicial unto her, in her sacred orders, doctrines, tenets,\n     or commands, without leave of its supreme power or its\n     authority, under her appointed; and being so permitted, then to\n     act and further her interests more than my own earthly good and\n     earthly pleasure, as she and her Head, his Holiness, and his\n     successors have, or ought to have, the supremacy over all\n     kings, princes, estates, or powers whatsoever, either to\n     deprive them of their crowns, sceptres, powers, privileges,\n     realms, countries, or governments, or to set up others in lieu\n     thereof; they dissenting from the mother Church and her\n     commands.\"\n\n\nOATH OF THE JESUITS\n\n     \"I, A. B., now in the presence of Almighty God, the blessed\n     Virgin Mary, the blessed Michael the Archangel, the blessed St.\n     John the Baptist, the holy apostles St. Peter and St. Paul, and\n     all the saints and hosts of heaven, and to you my ghostly\n     father, do declare from my heart, without mental reservation,\n     that his Holiness Pope ---- is Christ's Vicar General, and is\n     the true and only Head of the Catholic or universal Church\n     throughout the earth; and by the virtue of the keys of binding\n     and loosing, given to his Holiness by my Saviour Jesus Christ,\n     he hath power to depose heretical kings, princes, states,\n     commonwealths, and governments, all being illegal without his\n     sacred confirmation, and that they may safely be destroyed:\n     THEREFORE, to the utmost of my power, I shall and will defend\n     this doctrine, and his Holiness' rights and customs, against\n     all usurpers of the heretical (or Protestant) authority\n     whatsoever; especially against the now pretended authority and\n     Church of England, and all adherents, in regard that they and\n     she be usurpal and heretical, opposing the sacred mother Church\n     of Rome, I do renounce and disown any allegiance as due to\n     Protestants, or obedience to any of their inferior magistrates\n     or officers, I do further declare the doctrine of the Church of\n     England, the Calvinists, Huguenots, and of others of the name\n     Protestants, to be damnable, and that they themselves are\n     damned, and to be damned, that will not forsake the same. I do\n     further declare, that I will help, assist, and advise all or\n     any of his Holiness' agents, in any place wherever I shall be,\n     in England, Scotland, and Ireland, or in any other territory or\n     kingdom I shall come to, and do my utmost to extirpate the\n     heretical Protestant's doctrine, and to destroy all their\n     pretended powers, regal or otherwise. I do further promise and\n     declare, that notwithstanding I am dispensed with, to assume\n     any religion heretical, for the propagating of the mother\n     Church's interest, to keep secret and private all her agents'\n     counsels, from time to time, as they intrust me, and not to\n     divulge, directly or indirectly, by word, writing, or\n     circumstance, whatever, but to execute all that shall be\n     proposed, given in charge, or discovered unto me, by you my\n     ghostly father, or any of this sacred convent. All which, I, A.\n     B., do swear, by the blessed Sacrament I am now to receive, to\n     perform, and on my part to keep inviolable; and do call all the\n     heavenly and glorious host of heaven to witness these my real\n     intentions to keep this, my oath. In testimony hereof, I take\n     this most holy and blessed sacrament of the Eucharist, and\n     witness the same further with my hand and seal, in the face of\n     this holy convent this day--An. Dom., etc.\"\n\n\nOATH OF THE SAN FEDISTI.\n\n     \"I, Son of the Holy Faith, No. --, promise and swear to sustain\n     the altar and the Papal throne, to exterminate heretics,\n     liberals, and all enemies of the Church, without pity for the\n     cries of children, or of men and women. So help me God.\"\n\n\nOATH OF THE IRISH RIBBON-MEN.\n\n     \"I, Patrick McKenna, swear by Saints Peter and Paul, and by the\n     blessed Virgin Mary, to be always faithful to the Society (of\n     Ribbon-men); to keep and conceal all the secrets, and its words\n     of order; to be always ready to execute the commands of my\n     superior officers, and, as far as it shall lie in my power, to\n     extirpate all heretics, and ALL THE PROTESTANTS, and to walk in\n     their blood to the knee! May the Virgin Mary and all saints\n     help me! To-day, the 2d of July, 1852.\n\n     \"PAT. MCKENNA, _from Tydavenet_.\"\n\nThe following are the curses pronounced by the Papal Church against all\nwho leave it for any Evangelical Church:\n\n\nTHE ROMISH CURSE.\n\n     \"By the authority of God Almighty, the Father, Son, and Holy\n     Ghost, and the undefiled Virgin Mary, mother and patroness of\n     our Saviour, and of all celestial virtues, Angels, Archangels,\n     Thrones, Dominions, Powers, Cherubim, and Seraphim; and of all\n     the Holy Patriarchs, Prophets, and of all the Apostles and\n     Evangelists, of the Holy Innocents, who in the sight of the\n     Holy Lamb are found worthy to sing the new song of the Holy\n     Martyrs and Holy Confessors, and of all the Holy Virgins, and\n     of all Saints together with the holy elect of God; may he,\n     ----, be damned. We excommunicate and anathematize him from the\n     threshold of the Holy Church of God Almighty. We sequester him,\n     that lie may be tormented, disposed, and be delivered over with\n     Dathan and Abiram, and with those who say unto the Lord:\n     'Depart from us, we desire none of thy ways:' as a fire is\n     quenched with water, so let the light of him be put out for\n     evermore, unless he shall repent him and make satisfaction.\n     Amen!\n\n     \"May the Father, who creates man, curse him! May the Son, who\n     suffered for us, curse him! May the Holy Ghost, who is poured\n     out in Baptism, curse him! May the Holy Cross, which Christ,\n     for our salvation, triumphing over his enemies, ascended, curse\n     him!\n\n     \"May the Holy Mary, ever virgin and mother of God, curse him!\n     May St. Michael, the advocate of the Holy Souls, curse him! May\n     all the Angels, Principalities, and Powers, and all Heavenly\n     Armies, curse him! May the glorious band of the Patriarchs and\n     Prophets curse him!\n\n     \"May St. John the Precursor, and St. John the Baptist, and St.\n     Peter, and St. Paul, and St. Andrew, and all other of Christ's\n     Apostles together, curse him! And may all the rest of the\n     Disciples and Evangelists, who, by their preaching converted\n     the universe, and the holy and wonderful company of Martyrs and\n     Confessors, who by their works are found pleasing to God\n     Almighty, curse him! May the holy choir of the Holy Virgins,\n     who for the honor of Christ have despised the things of the\n     world, damn him! May all the saints from the beginning of the\n     world to everlasting ages, who are found to be beloved of God,\n     damn him!\n\n     \"May he be damned wherever he be, whether in the house, or in\n     the alley, or in the water, or in the church! May he be cursed\n     in living and dying!\n\n     \"May he be cursed in eating and drinking, in being hungry, in\n     being thirsty, in fasting, and sleeping, in slumbering, and in\n     sitting, in living, in working, in resting, and * * * and in\n     blood-letting.\n\n     \"May he be cursed in all the faculties of his body!\n\n     \"May he be cursed inwardly and outwardly! May he be cursed in\n     his hair; cursed be he in his brains, and in his vertex, in his\n     temples, in his eyebrows, in his cheeks, in his jaw-bones, in\n     his nostrils, in his teeth and grinders, in his lips, in his\n     shoulders, in his arms, in his fingers!\n\n     \"May he be damned in his mouth, in his breast, in his heart,\n     and purtenances, down to the very stomach!\n\n     \"May he be cursed in his reins and his groins; in his thighs,\n     in his genitals, and in his hips, and in his knees, his legs,\n     and his feet, and toe-nails!\n\n     \"May he be cursed in all his joints, and articulation of the\n     members; from the crown of his head to the soles of his feet\n     may there be no soundness!\n\n     \"May the Son of the living God, with all the glory of His\n     Majesty, curse him! And may heaven, with all the powers that\n     move therein, rise up against him, and curse and damn him;\n     unless he repent and make satisfaction! Amen! So be it. Be it\n     so. Amen!\"\n\nNow, we ask all candid men whose eyes have not been blinded by the dust\nof Popery and Democracy, can a Bishop or Priest, a Jesuit or Catholic,\nwith these oaths upon their souls, be true American citizens? Not\nwithout the guilt of perjury, as black as the altar of a Roman\nConfessional! And if guilty of such perjury, the penitentiary should be\ntheir canonical residence for life! Strange to say, however, the Chief\nJustice of the United States, Roger B. Taney, is a Roman Catholic! Gen.\nPierce's Postmaster-General, James Campbell, is both a Roman Catholic,\nand a member of the Order of Jesuits, having taken this very oath! Roman\nCatholics are now on the Federal Bench in the United States: Roman\nCatholics fill the offices of Attorneys-general; Roman Catholics\nrepresent this Government abroad; and Roman Catholics fill post-offices,\nland-offices, and a variety of offices at home, out of which Protestants\nwere driven by Pierce's Administration, to make room for them!\n\n\n\n\nLETTER FROM THOMAS A. R. NELSON, ESQ.\n\n\nThis gentleman, an able lawyer of East Tennessee, a member of the\nPresbyterian Church, and a member of the American party, was nominated\nan Elector for the State of Tennessee at large, by the American State\nConvention at Nashville, in February last. Though an ardent American--a\ngreat friend of _Mr. Fillmore_--and a member of the late Philadelphia\nConvention, and aided in the nomination of _Maj. Donelson_, he has been\nreluctantly compelled to decline the position of Elector. Under date of\nMay 30, 1856, he addressed a letter of nine columns, of great force and\nability, to _Messrs. A. W. Johnson, Robert C. Foster, 3d., John H.\nCallender, William N. Bilbo, Sam'l. Pritchett, and E. D. Farnsworth,\nState Executive Committee of the American Party, Nashville, Tennessee_,\ndeclining the position. Although we regret his inability to serve, as do\nthe whole party in this State, yet, if his letter could be placed in the\nhands of every voter in the State, we would be willing to risk the\ncontest without further discussion. Such is our estimate of this\ndocument. For the benefit of \"Old Line Whigs,\" and such Democrats as are\ndisposed to excuse and apologise for Romanism, we give the four\nconcluding columns of this letter. The five preceding columns are mainly\noccupied with an outline and defence of the action of the Philadelphia\nNominating Convention, and a discussion of the slavery\nquestion--questions we had discussed in this work before this document\ncame to hand. Mr. Nelson concludes thus:\n\n     \"The Foreigners and Catholics were directly appealed to in the\n     Presidential elections of 1848 and 1852. Who does not remember\n     that, immediately preceding the election in 1844, fraudulent\n     naturalization papers were manufactured in New York? Who has\n     forgotten the Plaquemines fraud in Louisiana? Who has not heard\n     of the abuse of Mr. Frelinghuysen for no other cause than that\n     he was the President of the American Bible Society?\n\n     \"But, without dwelling upon other illustrations, look to the\n     Democratic platform of 1852, and read the 8th section of the\n     third resolution, which is in the following words:\n\n     \"'That the liberal principles embodied by Jefferson in the\n     Declaration of Independence and sanctioned in the Constitution,\n     which makes ours the land of liberty and the asylum of the\n     oppressed of every nation, have ever been cardinal principles\n     in the Democratic faith, and every attempt to abridge the\n     present privilege of becoming citizens and the owners of soil\n     among us, ought to be resisted with the same spirit which swept\n     the alien and sedition laws from our statute books.'\n\n     \"During the last election in Tennessee, it was often said by\n     Democrats that they were just as much opposed to the\n     immigration of foreign criminals and paupers as members of the\n     American party, but would not attach themselves to the latter\n     because of their objections to its organization. But the\n     Democratic Platform of 1852 contains no exception against\n     criminals and paupers. The naturalization laws have, in\n     practice, been found inadequate to their exclusion, and the\n     platform, in effect, avows unqualified adherence to them\n     without _abridgement_ or modification.\n\n     \"These laws are, in substance, declared to have '_ever been\n     cardinal principles_ in the Democratic faith.' By its own\n     avowal, the Democratic party is responsible for giving\n     encouragement to the whole policy of foreign immigration. If\n     that policy has flooded the country with criminals and paupers;\n     if it has produced riots and bloodshed in our large cities; if\n     it has endangered the religious as well as the civil liberty of\n     Protestants; if it has swelled the ranks of Abolition and\n     fanned the flame of Agitation--the Democratic party, by its own\n     avowal, is amenable at the bar of public opinion for these\n     astounding and deplorable results. Reckless of consequences, it\n     has persevered in a system hazardous to the stability of our\n     institutions, because that system has annually swelled the\n     number of its adherents, and increased the chances of its\n     perpetual ascendency.\n\n     \"Without adverting to the census tables, or repeating those\n     familiar facts connected with the statistics of immigration\n     which have been so extensively published, it is sufficient to\n     observe that, under this continued patronage of the Democratic\n     party, the immigration of foreigners has increased from a few\n     thousands, twenty years ago, to nearly half a million in 1854.\n\n     \"But the Democratic party cannot justly claim the exclusive\n     honor of projecting or carrying out the system. More than\n     twenty years ago, the Duke of Richmond declared, in substance,\n     that he had conversed with most of the sovereigns and princes\n     of Europe; that they were jealous of the influence of our\n     republican institutions upon their own Government; that they\n     did not expect to conquer us as a nation, but designed the\n     subversion of our Government by the introduction of the low and\n     surplus population of Europe among us; that 'discord,\n     dissension, anarchy, and civil war would ensue, and some\n     popular individual would assume the government and restore\n     order, and the sovereigns of Europe, the emigrants, and many of\n     the natives, would sustain him.' He also said, in speaking of\n     the United States, that 'the Church of Rome has a design upon\n     that country, and it will, in time, be the established\n     religion, and will aid in the destruction of that republic.'\n\n     \"These statements of the Duke of Richmond are abundantly\n     corroborated by other declarations, as well as the most\n     undeniable facts which have occurred since their promulgation.\n\n     \"I have in my possession, among various others, two small books\n     published by 'the American and Foreign Christian Union,' 156\n     Chambers street, New York, the one entitled 'Foreign\n     Conspiracy,' the other, 'Startling Facts,' both of which, as I\n     infer from their contents, were written in the year 1834, long\n     before the American party had an existence. The work entitled\n     'Foreign Conspiracy' is composed of a series of articles\n     originally published, over the signature of Brutus, in the New\n     York Observer. They now appear with the name of the author,\n     SAMUEL F. B. MORSE. His object in writing the work was to\n     arouse public attention to the efforts then being made in\n     Europe to propagate the Catholic religion in the United States,\n     and to show its danger to our republican institutions. He\n     traces the origin of the Leopold Foundation in Austria, under\n     the especial patronage of the Emperor at Vienna on the 12th\n     May, 1829, and shows that one of its leading objects was 'to\n     promote the greater activity of Catholic missions in America.'\n\n     \"The letter of Prince _Metternich_ to Bishop Fenwich, of\n     Cincinnati, under date, Vienna, April 27, 1830, is set out at\n     length; and, in that letter, the Prince informs the Bishop,\n     among other things, that the Emperor 'allows his people to\n     contribute to the support of the Catholic Church in America.'\n     Numerous quotations are made from the letters of Foreign\n     Bishops in the United States to their patrons at home, and,\n     among the rest, on page 85, is the following statement, made by\n     one of them, in regard to the people of the United States: 'We\n     entreat all European Christians to unite in prayer to God for\n     the conversion of these unhappy heathen and obstinate\n     heretics.' But, forbearing to multiply quotations from this\n     little work, admirable in most of its positions, my main\n     object, in citing it, was to make the following extract, from\n     page 15 of the preface, taken by the author from the lectures\n     of the celebrated Frederick Schlegel, delivered at Vienna in\n     1828, where that distinguished foreigner says, 'The true\n     nursery of all these destructive principles, the revolutionary\n     school for France and the rest of Europe, has been North\n     America. Thence the evil has spread over many other lands,\n     either by national contagion or by arbitrary communication;'\n     and also the following quotation, from page 118 of Mr. Morse's\n     book: 'Austria, one of the Holy Alliance of sovereigns, leagued\n     against the liberties of the world, has the superintendence _of\n     the operations of Popery in this country_.'\n\n     \"In the tract entitled 'Startling Facts for American\n     Protestants,' written in the year 1834, by REV. HERMAN NORTON,\n     Corresponding Secretary of the American Protestant Society,\n     from pages 27 to 39, an account is given of a London pamphlet\n     entitled 'New Plan of Emigration,' the production of a Roman\n     Catholic gentleman, a London Banker; in which a project for\n     occupying the North Western States with the Roman Catholic\n     population of Europe, is unfolded, together with _a map of the\n     country_, and, among other things, it is said, on page 29: 'The\n     first settlements should be made in those fertile prairie\n     districts situated on the southern sides of the Canadian lakes,\n     _where slavery is unknown_. On page 28, the objects of this\n     society, as set forth in this pamphlet, are stated to be,\n\n     \"'1. To provide the means for colonizing the surplus Roman\n     Catholic population of Europe in our Western States.\n\n     \"'2. To do this in such a way as to create a large demand for\n     articles of British manufacture.\n\n     \"'3. _To make Romanism the predominant religion of this\n     country._'\n\n     \"The census tables will show that, since these plans were set\n     on foot, in England and in Europe, to break down our\n     government, there has been an astonishing increase in the\n     foreign immigration to this country. Great as it was prior to\n     the Revolutions in Europe in 1848, it has been amazingly\n     augmented since that time. Millions of foreign money have been\n     collected in Europe and expended since the organization of the\n     society for the propagation of the faith, at Lyons in France,\n     about the year 1822, in the United States. While an Austrian\n     Emperor has had the charge, in a good degree, of the\n     propagation of the Catholic religion in the United States, the\n     public authorities in various parts of Europe have defrayed the\n     expenses of their criminals and paupers to this country, as was\n     clearly shown by Congressional investigations.\n\n     \"What do these facts prove? Why, that the declaration of the\n     Duke of Richmond, that the crowned heads of Europe intended to\n     subvert our government, was true. What more do they prove? Why,\n     that the effort to establish the Catholic religion in this\n     country has, for more than twenty years, been conducted with\n     steady perseverance, until the Catholics, who, in 1850, were\n     more numerous, as the census compendium shows, than any one\n     denomination of Methodists, are now no doubt stronger than all\n     the Methodists put together, and stronger than any other\n     denomination of Protestants.\n\n     \"While these publications have been before the American people\n     for more than twenty years, Democratic leaders have received,\n     with open arms, the swarms of foreigners who have settled upon\n     our shores. What care _they_ for the slavery question, when\n     they have seen this foreign immigration, according to the plan\n     concerted in England, settling in the non-slaveholding States,\n     and every year increasing the Abolition power? What care they\n     for the Protestant religion, if the Catholics can only give\n     them the numerical strength at the ballot-box? What regard have\n     _they_ for the preservation of our liberties, when European\n     despots are seeking to undermine them, if those despots only\n     send such myrmidons as will shout hosannas to Democracy and\n     drive from the polls peaceful American citizens who oppose\n     them? Is the preservation of the Union a matter of any\n     consequence to them? Do they not in vision behold its scattered\n     fragments and contemplate new confederacies, with hosts of new\n     offices and millions of spoil?\n\n     \"Can any one doubt that the Democratic party is in league with\n     all the dangerous elements that have disturbed and are\n     continuing to disturb our once peaceful and happy country, and\n     that they stickle at nothing when votes are at stake?\n\n     \"Look to their conduct in running Mr. Polk as a tariff man in\n     the North, and an anti-tariff man in the South! Look to the two\n     lives of Cass. Look to their equivocal position as to slavery\n     and the Union. Look to their appeals to foreigners and\n     Catholics by name in the elections of 1844 and 1852, and\n     probably in 1848. Look to their alliance with Free Germans and\n     Fourierites, Free Soilers and Secessionists. And, above all,\n     look to the miserable cant with which they raise the hue and\n     cry of persecution in favor of the Catholics, and, indirectly,\n     deny to Protestant ministers the right to make war upon a huge\n     corporation, calling itself a church, dealing in human souls,\n     reeking with the blood of martyrs, and begrimed with more than\n     ten centuries of oppression.\n\n     \"No wonder that they have vilified and denounced the American\n     party with every term of opprobrium that our vocabulary can\n     furnish. No wonder they talk of dark lanterns and secret oaths\n     and midnight assemblies. No wonder that they strive to frighten\n     their followers with the notion that the American party is a\n     raw-head and bloody bones, which should be shunned and avoided.\n     For, if honest men of that party will only take the trouble to\n     shake off the control of their leaders: to think, examine, to\n     read, reflect, and act for themselves, there are thousands of\n     Democrats in the South who would scorn, like the American\n     party, an alliance with Abolitionists, and there are tens of\n     thousands of Protestant Union-loving Democrats everywhere, who\n     have only confided in, to be deceived and betrayed by, their\n     leaders, and, if they discover, as it is hoped they will, that\n     they have brought them to the crumbling verge of an awful\n     precipice, they have patriotism enough and Protestantism enough\n     to break away from them rather than make the awful plunge.\n\n     \"I regret that I am admonished by the length to which I have\n     extended this communication, that I cannot now discuss the\n     Catholic question, as I had hoped to do at the outset, and I\n     shall present only a few disjointed remarks in connection with\n     it.\n\n     \"The American party does not seek to impose any religious test\n     such as prevailed in the reign of Charles II., when two\n     thousand Non-conformist ministers were driven from their\n     pulpits, or such, as in the same reign, was imposed upon Roman\n     Catholics and continued from 1673 to 1828. The American party\n     does not propose that any religious test, of any kind, shall be\n     imposed by law, upon any person whatever, but it does seek to\n     organize a public sentiment on the Catholic question, just in\n     the same mode that, in times past, parties have sought to\n     organize public sentiment upon the tariff question--the bank\n     question--the internal improvement question--the temperance\n     question, and every other question which has been the subject\n     of difference. If it is lawful to say, I will not vote for you\n     because you are a Whig, it is equally lawful to say--I will not\n     vote for you because you are a foreigner. If it is lawful to\n     say, I will not vote for you because you are a Democrat, it is\n     equally lawful to say, I will not vote for you because you are\n     a Catholic.\n\n     \"Neither does the American party propose, in the slightest\n     degree, to interfere with any of the rights secured to Roman\n     Catholics, in common with others, by the Constitution. If they\n     choose to worship a great DOLL as the Virgin Mary--to burn tall\n     wax-candles in daylight--to pray to God in an unknown\n     tongue--to believe that a simple wafer is the actual body, and\n     common wine the very blood of our Saviour--to enforce the\n     celibacy of the clergy--to worship the host--to believe that\n     old toe-nails and pieces of wood are precious relics--to\n     prevent their people from reading the Bible--to refuse to send\n     their children to Protestant schools--to retain the\n     confessional and the nunnery--to pin their faith to\n     unauthenticated traditions--to assert that theirs is the only\n     true Church, and to perpetrate a thousand ridiculous\n     mummeries--the members of the American party with one accord\n     will say, molest them not, disturb them not, trouble them not;\n     the religious privileges of this country are as free to them as\n     they are to us, and we will not, by law or by violence,\n     interrupt or interfere with them in the slightest degree. But\n     knowing that the Catholic Church was for a thousand years\n     allied to the State; that it claimed dominion, in temporal as\n     well as spiritual affairs, over the kings of the earth; that it\n     regards the Pope as the Vicegerent of the Almighty; that he\n     wears the tiara as the symbol of his power in heaven, earth,\n     and hell; that Romanists treat all other professions as\n     heretics; that its Archbishops, Bishops and Priests are sworn\n     to persecute all who differ with them; that the persecuting\n     spirit of that Church has been displayed, for centuries, in the\n     most odious acts of cruelty as well as the most despotic\n     tyranny that ever cursed the earth; that fire and faggot,\n     confiscation and torture have been its favorite weapons; that\n     no age, or sex or condition has been exempt from its inhuman\n     butcheries and demoniac lusts; that it exterminated the\n     Albigenses and Waldenses; that it caused the gutters of Paris\n     to run with human blood on St. Bartholomew's day; that it\n     lighted the fires of Smithfield; that through the\n     instrumentality of Tyrconnel and Catholic and Irish Rappadees,\n     it perpetrated the inhuman atrocities of the Irish Massacres;\n     that, it drove the Huguenots from France, and the Puritans from\n     England; that it has delighted in the chains and dungeons of\n     the Inquisition, and shouted, with fiendish exultation, at the\n     cries and groans of the victims in the _auto da fe_; that no\n     republican government has ever flourished under its sway; that\n     it regards ignorance as the mother of devotion, and denies the\n     obligation of an oath; that it gave rise to the Order of\n     Jesuits, the most detestable sect that the earth has ever seen;\n     that, in the midst of the blaze of the nineteenth century, it\n     has burned the Bible in America and imprisoned men and women in\n     Europe for no other offence than that of reading it; that,\n     abusing the freedom of the press and speech secured in the\n     United States, it unblushingly avows that all Protestantism is\n     heresy--that it is a crime--and punished in _Christian\n     countries like Spain and Italy_ as a crime; that it has\n     banished the Bible from Protestant schools, when under its\n     control; that it has intermeddled in political elections, and\n     is struggling for political power; that it wears a mask and\n     claims to be harmless in this country for present effect,\n     although it has never renounced one of its dogmas in any\n     authoritative mode; that it is typified, in the Bible, as the\n     Man of Sin and the Great Whore of Babylon; that it comes to us\n     as an angel of light, but is allied with the Prince of\n     Darkness: knowing all these things, and believing that the\n     Roman Catholic Church, now that it is covered with the broad\n     wings of Modern Democracy, partakes of its meat and is pampered\n     by its patronage, is, infinitely, the most dangerous political\n     power with which the people of the United States have ever been\n     compelled to grapple, the American party invites all who love\n     national liberty more than Democracy; who prefer civil and\n     religious freedom to the spoils of office; who revere the\n     memory of Tyndale, Luther, and Calvin; of Cranmer, Latimer, and\n     Ridley; of the seven Bishops; of Fox; of the Puritan fathers;\n     of Wesley and Hall; of the Reformers and Protestants of every\n     name, and, more than all, of our revolutionary ancestors, to\n     burst the fetters of party and come to the rescue of their\n     bleeding country, bleeding at every pore from wounds inflicted\n     by Democratic hands, amidst the jeers of European despots, the\n     shouts of foreigners in our midst, and the taunts and sneers of\n     Catholics and Jesuits all around us!\n\n     \"Let not Protestant ministers be intimidated by the impudent\n     assaults of a venal press, or the fierce denunciations of\n     infuriated politicians, from doing their whole duty in the\n     pulpit and at the polls. No Presbyterian has ever denied to a\n     Methodist the right to question his religious faith, and no\n     Methodist will dispute the right of other denominations to\n     impugn his creed. Methodists have assailed the Presbyterian\n     doctrine of election. Presbyterians, in turn, have assailed\n     their ideas of perfection and falling from grace. Both have\n     controverted the Baptists' views of immersion, and all have\n     denied the Episcopalians' doctrine of _apostolic succession_.\n     These and many other points of difference have, from the\n     foundation of our government, often been the subjects of\n     earnest, protracted, and excited discussion; but when did any\n     American Protestant ever deny to another American Protestant\n     the constitutional right to differ with him in opinion, and to\n     express that difference through the press, in the pulpit, or\n     any other constitutional mode? Yet, it has been reserved for\n     Democratic presses to attempt, for electioneering purposes, to\n     curb the free spirit of Protestant ministers: to denounce them\n     as \"REVEREND HYPOCRITES;\" and, when beholding at home and\n     abroad, on the land and on the sea, among Christians and\n     Pagans, in the halls of legislation, in churches and schools,\n     in free speech, and in a free press, and in ten thousand other\n     forms, the magnificent and glorious results of the Reformation,\n     to ask, with impudent assurance, 'WHAT HAS PROTESTANTISM DONE\n     FOR THE WORLD?' Not satisfied with the storm of execration\n     which such an infamous interrogatory produced, the Nashville\n     Union and American, the leading Democratic paper in Tennessee,\n     in a very abusive article entitled '_What has it\n     accomplished?_' under date of April 26, 1856, thus speaks,\n     among other things, of what he styles 'the Know Nothing\n     Organization:'\n\n     \"'_It has done more than this: it has gone into the Church and_\n     CONVERTED THE PULPIT INTO A POLITICAL ROSTRUM--_it has turned\n     the attention of the ministry from_ THE PEACEFUL PATHS OF\n     CHRISTIANITY TO THE ARENA OF POLITICAL TURMOIL--_it has pulled\n     down the banner of the Cross, and placed in its stead_ THE RED\n     FLAG OF INTOLERANCE AND PROSCRIPTION.'\n\n     \"While Protestant ministers, in the enjoyment of the rights\n     secured to them by the Constitution, have, as before stated,\n     often engaged in controversies with each other as to their\n     differences in matters of Church government and speculative\n     faith, they have, with one accord, from the foundation of the\n     government, preached and published their views against the\n     Roman Catholic Church--which arrogates a superiority over them\n     all, and stigmatizes them as sects--long before the American\n     party ever had an existence. But because, in the course of\n     events, it has become necessary for politicians to inquire what\n     effect an acknowledgment of the temporal supremacy of the Pope\n     may have upon our free institutions, the Democratic party--if\n     it is to be judged of by its organ--would gag the Protestant\n     clergy, deny to them a right which they have always exercised,\n     and, if they dare to oppose the colossal strides of Rome,\n     denounce them as having converted the pulpit into a _political\n     rostrum_,' and as having raised '_the red flag of Intolerance\n     and Proscription_.'\n\n     \"It is not for me to prescribe, nor do I desire to dictate the\n     duty of Protestant ministers; but if, in the combined efforts\n     which the Catholics have been making under the patronage of\n     European despots and noblemen, and the encouragement of\n     Democratic demagogues in our own country, they see that this\n     tremendous corporation has planted its footsteps in all our\n     large cities--is possessing itself of the North-West and the\n     Mississippi valley--and is encircling them, as it were, with a\n     wall of fire: if they see that the newspapers and periodicals\n     of that corporation have published doctrines in this free\n     country which they would scarcely avow in the Roman Catholic\n     countries of Europe: if, in one word, they believe that they\n     are to be persecuted and exterminated by Catholics, or take\n     care of themselves before it is too late--then Protestant\n     ministers, agreeing as they do in all great doctrines, and\n     differing only as to those which are not absolutely essential,\n     will cease to disagree among themselves, at least until after\n     they avert a common danger, and will rally as a band of\n     brethren to resist, in such mode as they may deem proper, the\n     encroachments and the insults of Rome, and all her satellites\n     and allies.\n\n     \"If I do not greatly err in the estimate which I place upon the\n     Protestant clergymen of America, the Democratic party and the\n     Catholics will discover, sooner or later, that the same spirit\n     which caused the Protestant fathers to brave the perils of the\n     BOOT and the STAKE: to stand, without flinching, before such\n     miscreant judges as _Jeffreys_ and _Scroggs_: to yield two\n     thousand pulpits and look beggary and starvation in the face,\n     rather than compromise with conscience; and, above all, to risk\n     the untried dangers of the ocean and settle among savages--will\n     nobly animate their descendants, and they will act in a manner\n     worthy of themselves and of the great cause which is intrusted\n     to their keeping.\n\n     \"Never was a more unfounded charge made against any party than\n     that of _proscription_ against the American party. It is only\n     the political feature--the allegiance to the Pope of\n     Rome--which we have felt called upon especially to oppose:\n     leaving it to Protestant ministers to expose, if they choose,\n     the absurdity of Catholic theological tenets.\n\n     \"It is a historical fact that the Romish clergy of France in\n     1682, under the lead of Louis XIV., made a declaration that\n     'Kings and sovereigns are not subject to any ecclesiastical\n     power by the order of God in temporal things, and their\n     subjects cannot be released from the obedience which they owe\n     them, nor absolved from their oath of allegiance.' The doctrine\n     of this declaration is called indifferently 'the Gallican, or\n     the French, or the Cis-Alpine doctrine. That of the Court of\n     Rome is called the Italian, or trans-Alpine doctrine.\"\n\n     \"Under the solemn assurance of the Louisiana delegation that\n     the native Catholics of Louisiana do not acknowledge the\n     temporal supremacy of the Pope, they were admitted to\n     representation in the American Council and Convention, and this\n     fact abundantly proves that there is no desire to _persecute_\n     Catholics for their religion, but only a determination to\n     resist their political doctrine, which, although denied by Mr.\n     Chandler in Congress, has been incontrovertibly established by\n     the history of that Church for ages, the avowals of Mr.\n     Brownson, the rebuke of Mr. Chandler by the Dublin Tablet, and\n     other overwhelming proofs.\n\n     \"In concluding this letter, it would, perhaps, be proper to\n     dwell upon the claims of Messrs. Fillmore and Donelson to the\n     support of the American people of all parties; but their\n     characters are so well known, and I have already so extended my\n     remarks, that I deem it unnecessary to observe any thing more\n     than that Mr. Fillmore, by the faithful discharge of his duty,\n     won the most cordial approbation of his political enemies as\n     well as political friends, and had the confidence of the whole\n     country when he retired from office, and has done nothing since\n     to destroy it; while Maj. Donelson, as our Minister to Texas,\n     to Prussia, and to Denmark, sustained the dignity of our\n     country and acquitted himself with honor--denounced the\n     unhallowed proceedings of the Southern Convention--struggled\n     manfully, as the Democratic editor of the Washington Union, in\n     behalf of the Compromise, and never withdrew from it until May,\n     1852, when, so far as I understand his course from his public\n     acts, being unwilling to 'blow hot and cold' on the slavery\n     question, and to aid the Democratic party in wearing a Northern\n     and a Southern face, he indignantly retired from it, and\n     subsequently attached himself to the American party in the hope\n     that it could carry on his most cherished object--the\n     preservation of the Union.\n\n     \"The object of selecting an old-line Whig and an old-line\n     Democrat, was to nail to the counter the charge that the\n     American party is the Whig party in disguise, and to induce, if\n     possible, conservative men of both the old parties to unite and\n     rescue the country from Democratic misrule.\n\n     \"Hundreds, thousands of Democrats in Tennessee, acting upon\n     their own impulses and without concert with their leaders,\n     attached themselves to the American party, but under the abuse\n     of the leaders withdrew from it. Although, personally, I have\n     no claims upon the Democracy, and have been always opposed to\n     that party, yet I would respectfully observe that first\n     impressions are often the best, and if such Democrats will take\n     the trouble faithfully and honestly to examine the questions of\n     the day for themselves, uninfluenced by the dictation of party\n     leaders on either side, they will, doubtless, find many and\n     cogent reasons to return to their first love.\n\n     \"But to such of the old-line Whigs as have not already gone\n     over to the Democratic party, I do feel that I have the right\n     through this or any other medium to address a few words. It is\n     well known that I have been a Whig from my boyhood, and until I\n     attached myself to the American party about twelve months ago;\n     and that, in some form or other, I have labored in behalf of\n     the Whig cause from my youth up--in good report and evil\n     report, in prosperity and in adversity, and without fee or\n     reward. And, with great deference to the opinions of others, I\n     would inquire what has any old-line Whig to gain, either for\n     his country or himself, by listening to the seductive\n     flatteries of Democracy, as he looks upon the dismembered\n     fragments of the Whig party, or sits, like Marius, amid the\n     ruins of Carthage? What party is it that has brought about the\n     desolation you behold? To whose strategy was it owing that the\n     once impregnable city was betrayed and surrounded, and its\n     lofty battlements levelled with the dust? What foul coalition\n     circumvented you, and whose pestilential breath is now\n     whispering in your ear? Has that party against which you have\n     fought for twenty years--which you have regarded as essentially\n     corrupt and dangerous to the Union--all at once, and by some\n     magical and unknown process, been cleansed of its impurities,\n     and does it stand before you clothed in a white and spotless\n     robe? What are some of the reasons why you opposed it?\n\n     \"It denounced proscription for opinion's sake before it came\n     into power, but kept the guillotine in continual motion\n     afterwards. It rebuked any interference with the freedom of\n     elections, and then denied its doctrine, and sought in\n     countless ways to control them. It charged the administration\n     of John Quincy Adams with reckless extravagance, and has\n     expended as much, or nearly as much, of the public treasure in\n     one year as he did in the course of his administration. It was\n     favorable to _a_ bank, a judicious tariff, and internal\n     improvements by the general government, but has crushed beneath\n     its iron heel the whole American system. It promised a gold and\n     silver currency, and told the farmers that they and their wives\n     should have 'long silken purses, through the interstices of\n     which the yellow gold would shine and glitter,' but has given\n     us instead more than thirteen hundred State bonds, with a\n     capital of more than three hundred millions. It has united the\n     purse and the sword by means of its odious Sub-Treasury. It\n     trampled beneath its feet the broad seal of the State of New\n     Jersey, and encouraged Dorr's rebellion.\n\n     \"It annexed Texas and California, and has strengthened the\n     Abolition power. It sustains the frequent use of the veto, and\n     under the name of Democracy delights in the exercise of\n     monarchical prerogative. It proclaimed in 1844 and 1845, that\n     not a thimblefull of blood would be shed by any war growing out\n     of the annexation of Texas, when that war sacrificed thousands\n     of lives, and has cost us millions in money and land. It\n     boasted, in regard to the Oregon question, that we must have\n     '54 deg. 40' or fight,' but swallowed its own words, and in later\n     times has attempted to retrieve its courage by the sublime and\n     magnificent bombardment of Greytown! It ordered General Taylor\n     into the heart of the Mexican country with a feeble force, and\n     when his victories had won the grateful plaudits of his\n     countrymen, it had the unparalleled meanness, while he was\n     still fighting our battles, to censure the capitulation of\n     Monterey. It had the baseness to call General Scott from the\n     head of a victorious army, and to attempt to disgrace him in\n     the eyes of his own country and the world. It denounced Judge\n     White as a renegade, General Harrison as a coward, Mr. Clay as\n     a blackguard, and General Scott as a fool. And, without\n     repeating what has been already urged in regard to its attitude\n     upon the slavery question and the other topics that have been\n     discussed, I submit to the old-line Whigs that there is no\n     principle which the Democratic party sincerely holds in common\n     with them, and that they should unite with us in the effort to\n     man the ship of State with officers and men devoted to the\n     Constitution and true to the Union, in the hope that it may be\n     rescued from the whirlpools and breakers among which it has\n     been so recklessly conducted.\n\n     \"Having expressed myself with the independence which should\n     characterize a freeman, I cannot expect that a party which has\n     dealt in the most unmitigated denunciation of wiser and better\n     men than myself, will permit my observations to pass with\n     impunity, but I shall be amply compensated for their abuse if\n     abler tongues and pens will improve upon these hurried remarks,\n     and teach our Democratic traducers that they cannot continue,\n     without just retaliation, their unjustifiable assaults upon the\n     American party.\n\n     \"Yours respectfully,\n\n     \"THOS. A. R. NELSON.\"\n\n\n\n\nPROSCRIBING FOREIGNERS--FOREIGN IMMIGRATION--FOREIGN PAUPERS AND\nCRIMINALS--FOREIGNERS ELECTED GEN. PIERCE--OPINIONS OF GREAT MEN.\n\n\nThe issue which most disturbs the Sag-Nicht Foreign Catholic Locofoco\nDry-rot _patriots_, of the present day, in connection with the\nprinciples of the American party, is their _proscription_ of\nforeign-born citizens. If the reader will turn back to the Philadelphia\nPlatform, and consult the 3d, 4th, 5th, and 9th sections of that\ninstrument, it will be seen that the American party really proscribe\nonly those who are proscribed by the _Constitution of the United\nStates_, and the laws defining the rights of foreign-born citizens. The\nAmerican party demand the enactment of laws upon this subject more\n_definite_, and in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution.\n\nThe only _positive_ work which the Constitution does, in regard to\nforeigners, is to _proscribe_. It contains but five clauses touching the\nsubject: four of these are PROHIBITORY, and the other is simply\n_permissive_. There is no guaranteeing clause whatever. We must be\npardoned for recalling the very language of the Constitution--for in\nthis _progressive_ age, our \"Young American\" generation is fast losing\nsight of the plainest features of that document: which, with\nFillibustering, Fire-eating agitators, is _Old Fogyism_! Let the\nConstitution speak for itself:\n\nSection 5, Article II. of the Constitution says: \"No person, except a\nnatural-born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of\nthe adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of\nPresident.\" That is proscription.\n\nSection 3, Article XII., says: \"No person constitutionally ineligible to\nthe office of President shall be eligible to the office of\nVice-President of the United States.\" That is proscription.\n\nSection 8, Article I., says: \"No person shall be a Senator who shall not\nhave attained the age of thirty years, and been nine years a citizen of\nthese United States.\" That is proscription.\n\nSection 2, Article I., says: \"No person shall be a Representative who\nshall not have attained the age of twenty-five years, and been seven\nyears a citizen.\" This is proscription.\n\nThese are the disabilities imposed upon Foreigners after they have been\nmade citizens. But, more than this, the Constitution leaves it\ndiscretionary whether to make them citizens at all. It simply confers\nthe power--_simply permits_. Here is the remaining clause, to which we\nhave alluded:\n\nSection 8, Article I., says: \"Congress shall have power to establish a\nuniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of\nbankruptcies throughout the United States.\"\n\nBut let us notice the matter of foreign emigration to this country. In\nthat fragment of a nation, composed of three and a quarter millions,\nwhich accomplished the American Revolution, there were in the United\nColonies, in the year 1775, just 20,000 more foreigners than now come\ninto this country in six months!\n\nThe progress of emigration into this country, as shown from the State\nDepartment at Washington, is after this fashion:\n\nIn the year 1852,                                             375,000\nIn the year 1853,                                             368,000\nIn the year 1854, the returns of the first six months\nwarrant the estimate for the entire year of                   500,000\n                                                            ---------\nThe aggregate, for the first four and a half years of\nthis decennial term, is                                     1,801,000\n\nThere is no reason for believing that the vast immigration\nof this year will diminish. In fact, there is no\nlimit to its rate of progress but the means of conveyance.\nNow, then, we have upon this basis an aggregate\nfor the six years and a half intervening between\nthis period and 1860, of                                    3,250,000\n                                                            ---------\nMaking for the current ten years, the astounding aggregate\nof                                                          5,051,000\n\nLet Americans charge continually that the righteous ground upon which it\nplants itself is, THAT AMERICANS SHALL RULE AMERICA. Let them point the\nvoters of the country to solid facts, from which there is no escape.\nTell them that the emigration to this country, according to the Census\nrecords at Washington, was:\n\n      From 1790 to 1810     120,000\n        \"  1810 to 1820     114,000\n        \"  1820 to 1830     203,979\n        \"  1830 to 1840     778,500\n        \"  1840 to 1850   1,542,850\n\n--and that statistics show that during the present decade, from 1850 to\n1860, in regularly increasing ratio, nearly four millions of aliens will\nprobably be poured in upon us.\n\nPoint to the fact, that from this immigration spring nearly four-fifths\nof the beggary, two-thirds of the pauperism, and more than three-fifths\nof the crime of our country; that more than half the public charities,\nmore than half the prisons and alms-houses, more than half the police\nand the cost of administering criminal justice, are for foreigners,--and\nlet the demand be made, that national and State legislation shall\ninterfere, to direct, ameliorate, and control these elements, so far as\nit may be done within the limits of the Constitution.\n\nLet Americans everywhere, and at all times, charge home and force upon\nthe attention of the people the alarming fact that if immigration\ncontinues at the above rates, in thirty years from this time the\npopulation of this country will exceed that of France, England, Spain,\nPortugal, Sweden, and Switzerland, all combined; that in fifteen years\nthe foreign will outnumber the native population; that in 1854 the\nnumber of foreign immigrants was 500,000, of which 307,639 arrived at\nthe port of New York; that the white population of North Carolina is\nonly a little over 500,000--so that enough come to settle a State as\npopulous as North Carolina in a year. Set forth the statistical facts,\nas shown by the last Census, that the immigration of 1854 was more than\nequal to the white population of either one of eighteen States of this\nUnion; and in proof, point them to the following startling facts:\n\nA. Table comparing the white population of the States therein\nenumerated, with the foreign immigration of 1854, and showing the excess\nof foreign immigrants for this year above the respective population of\nthe several States.\n\n                White population.     Excess of\nStates.                               immigrants.\nArkansas        162,189               337,811\nAlabama         426,514                73,486\nCalifornia       91,635               418,365\nSouth Carolina  274,563               226,437\nConnecticut     363,099               136,901\nDelaware         71,169               328,831\nFlorida          47,203               452,717\nIowa            191,881               308,119\nLouisiana       225,491               374,509\nMaryland        417,943                82,057\nMichigan        395,071               104,929\nMississippi     295,718               204,282\nNew Hampshire   317,456               182,514\nNew Jersey      465,509                34,491\nRhode Island    143,875               356,125\nTexas           154,034               345,946\nVermont         213,402               186,598\nWisconsin       304,756               195,244\n\nAnalyze this table, and show from it that the foreign immigration of\n1854 was sufficient to have settled three States equal to Arkansas,\nthree equal to Iowa, three equal to Texas, two to Louisiana, four to\nRhode Island, five to California, seven to Delaware, or ten to Florida;\nso that under the principle of the Kansas and Nebraska act, while\nimmigrants continue pouring in upon us at the present rate, we may have\nwithin one year ten new States applying for admission into the Union,\nentitled to their twenty Senators in the United States Senate; and yet\nthis would be but the Senatorial representation of 500,000 foreigners.\n\nLet the light of truth be heard upon the great question of immigration,\nand let the people see that if the ratio of immigration continues as it\nhas been since 1850, during the ten years from 1850 to 1860 there will\nhave come four millions of foreigners into this country--enough to\nsettle eighty States equal to Florida, thirty-two equal to Rhode Island,\nsixteen equal to Louisiana, or eight equal to Maryland, North Carolina,\nSouth Carolina, Georgia, Michigan, Mississippi, Vermont, Alabama, New\nHampshire, or New Jersey. So the Senatorial representation of foreigners\nmay reach one hundred and sixty members in the United States Senate, and\ncannot be less than twenty in a body composed of but sixty-two members\nrepresenting thirty-one States.\n\n\nUNITED STATES COAST SURVEY--FOREIGNISM AND NATIVEISM.\n\nThe reader will find below a list of the names of the employees in the\nCoast Survey, classified according to birth, and their respective\nsalaries:\n\n\nNatives.                Salary. | Foreigners.                Salary.\n                                |\nE. Nutty                 $1,200 | J. E. Hilgard               $2,200\nJ. T. Hoover                600 | S. E. Werner                 1,419\nJ. H. Toomer                519 | C. A. Schott                 1,500\nJ. E. Blackenship           500 | J. Main                      1,100\nR. Freeman                  350 | G. Rumpf                     1,000\nH. Mitchell               1,000 | J. Weisner                     900\nH. Heaton                   700 | L. F. Pourtales              1,500\nR. S. Avery                 660 | S. Hein                      2,500\nJ. Kincheloe                339 | J. Welch                     1,565\nG. C. Blanchard             339 | A. Brschke                   1,408\nR. E. Evans                 339 | ---- Balback                   639\nR. L. Hawkins             1,200 | ---- Lendenkehl                782\nW. McPherson                700 | W. P. Schultz                  704\nW. M. C. Fairfax          1,800 | G. McCoy                     2,000\nM. J. McClery             1,600 | A. Rolle                     1,700\n---- Poterfield           1,000 | G. B. Metzenroth             1,095\nL. Williams                 860 | J. C. Koudnip                  939\nJohn Key                    782 | J. Rutherdall                  526\n---- Martin                 751 | J. Barrett                     375\nB. Hooe                     419 | J. Vierbunchen               1,095\nF. Fairfax                  500 | P. Vierbunchen                 281\nH. McCormick                156 | T. Hunt                        704\nE. Wharton                1,100 | J. Missenson                   626\nJ. Knight                 1,700 | R. Schelpass                   469\nF. Dankworth              1,700 | C. Ramkin                      313\nJ. V. N. Throop           1,252 | F. White                       960\nR. Knight                   939 | D. Flyn                        600\nC. A. Knight                626 | T. Kinney                      525\nG. Mathiot                1,800 | C. Kraft                       420\nS. Harris                   519 | B. Neff                        526\nS. D. O'Brien             1,059 | A. Maedell                   1,095\nA. Geatman                  704 |                            -------\nH. Tine                     626 |                            $31,867\nC. B. Snow                1,000 |\nJ. Smith                    593 |\nG. Hitz                     313 |\nJ. Cronion                  519 |\nA. W. Russell             1,300 |\n---- Tansill                660 |\nV. E. King                  720 |\nF. Holden                   500 |\nJ. Mitchell                 331 |\nW. Bright                   216 |\n                        ------- |\n                        $24,429 |\n\nThe whole number of natives, 43; number of foreigners, 31. Amount paid\nnatives, $24,429; amount paid foreigners, $31,867. The average salary of\nthe natives is $568 12 per year; of the foreigners, $1,029 98 per\nyear--nearly double that of the natives. Is not this _favoritism_ to the\nforeigner, and _discrimination_ against the native? The disbursing\nofficer, S. Hein, receives $2,500.\n\nThe result of the last Presidential election was controlled by _foreign\nvotes_, beyond all question. Look at the figures--see how they foot\nup--and see that the country is controlled by foreigners:\n\n                                                       Electoral\n                Foreign       Foreign     Pierce's     vote for\nStates.       population.      vote.      majority.     Pierce.\n\nNew York,     655,224         93,317      27,201          35\nPennsylvania, 303,105         43,300      19,446          27\nMaryland,      51,011          7,287       4,945           8\nLouisiana,     67,308          9,615       1,392           6\nMissouri,      76,570         10,938       7,698           9\nIllinois,     111,860         15,980      15,653          11\nOhio,         218,099         31,157      16,694          23\nWisconsin,    110,471         15,781      11,418           5\nIowa,          20,968          2,995       1,180           4\nRhode Island,  23,832          3,404       1,109           4\nConnecticut,   38,374          5,482       2,870           6\nDelaware,       5,243            749          25           3\nNew Jersey,    59,804          8,543       5,749           7\nCalifornia,    21,628         10,000       5,694           4\n             --------        -------     -------        ----\n                             258,548     120,094         152\n\nRECAPITULATION.\n\nPierce's vote,            1,602,663\nScott's vote,             1,385,990\n                          ---------\n                            216,673\nForeign vote,               367,320\nPierce's majority,          216,673\n                          ---------\n                            150,647\n\nThe foreign vote exceeded Pierce's majority over Scott, 150,647 votes.\n\nIt is thus demonstrated that in each of these fourteen States the\nforeign vote was larger than the majority given for General Pierce; and\nit is also demonstrated that the aggregate foreign vote of these\nfourteen States is more than twice the whole number of General Pierce's\nmajorities in said States. If even one-half of the foreign vote had been\ngiven to General Scott, he would have been elected instead of General\nPierce!\n\nThe following New York City statistics set forth the amount of _crime_\ncommitted in that city for six months ending in June, 1855:\n\n     \"It appears that the number of arrests made during that time\n     were 25,110. Of these, no less than 9,755 were for intoxication\n     and disorderly conduct combined; and 7,025 for crimes that had\n     their origin in the dram-shops, to wit:\n\n     \"Assault and battery, disorderly conduct, vagrancy, &c. The\n     greatest number of arrests were in June, showing that during\n     the hot weather, as is generally the case, more liquor was\n     drank. The birth-place of the criminals, for two months, was as\n     follows:\n\n     United States,               1,750\n     Ireland,                     5,117\n     Germany,                     1,010\n     All other places,            4,847\n\n     \"It needs no argument to prove if there had been no\n     intoxicating liquor sold in that city, a large portion of the\n     crimes and the misery resulting therefrom would have been\n     prevented.\"\n\nMORE INSTRUCTIVE STATISTICS.--The Jersey City Sentinel of the 22d ult.\npublishes statistics of crime and pauperism in Jersey City and Hudson\nCounty, as follows:\n\n     \"Number of inhabitants in Jersey City, 21,000, viz.: natives,\n     13,000; Irish, 5,000; other foreigners, 4,000. Number of\n     persons who have been confined in the city prison, 4,100, viz.:\n     natives, 75; Irish, 3,550; other foreigners, 475. Number of\n     persons confined in the county jail at present, 68, viz.:\n     natives, 2; Irish, 58: other foreigners, 8. Of 188 persons who\n     have been inmates of the Almshouse, none have been natives, and\n     no foreigners except Irish. Of 723 who received aid from the\n     Poor-master, 2 were natives, and 721 were Irish.\"\n\nWe will now submit, as authorities, some names which ought to have\nweight with the American people, and which demonstrate, beyond all\ncontradiction, that we have had \"Know Nothings\" in our country in\nformer days, if they were not called by that name! Here are the words\nand sentiments of these \"dark-lantern patriots:\"\n\n     \"Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence, (I conjure\n     you to believe me, fellow-citizens,) the jealousy of a free\n     people ought to be constantly awake. It is one of the most\n     baneful foes of a Republican government.\"--WASHINGTON.\n\n     \"I hope we may find some hope in future of shielding ourselves\n     from foreign influence, in whatever form it may be attempted. I\n     wish there were an ocean of fire between this and the old\n     world.\"--JEFFERSON.\n\n     \"Foreign influence is a Grecian horse to the republic: we\n     cannot be too careful to exclude its entrance.\"--MADISON.\n\n     \"There is an imperative necessity for reforming the\n     Naturalization Laws of the United States.\"--DANIEL WEBSTER.\n\n     \"It is high time we should become a little more Americanized,\n     and instead of feeding the paupers and laborers of England,\n     feed our own; or else, in a short time, by our present policy,\n     we shall become paupers ourselves.\"--ANDREW JACKSON.\n\n     \"I agree with the father of his country, that we should guard\n     with a jealousy becoming a free people, our institutions,\n     against the insidious wiles of foreign influence.\"--HENRY CLAY.\n\n     \"Our naturalization laws are unquestionably defective, or our\n     alms-houses would not now be filled with paupers. Of the\n     134,000 paupers in the United States, 68,000 are foreigners,\n     and 66,000 natives. The annals of crime have swelled as the\n     jails of Europe have poured their contents into the country,\n     and the felon convict, reeking from a murder in Europe, or who\n     has had the fortune to escape punishment for any other crime\n     abroad, easily gains naturalization here, by spending a part of\n     five years within the limits of the United States. Our country\n     has become a Botany Bay, into which Europe annually discharges\n     her criminals of every description.\"--JOHN M. CLAYTON, United\n     States Senator.\n\nForty years ago, this subject came up in the Congress of the United\nStates, and that far-seeing statesman and patriot, JOHN RANDOLPH, of\nVirginia, made a speech, from which we take the following extract:\n\n     \"How long the country would endure this foreign yoke in its\n     most odious and disgusting form he could not tell, but this he\n     would say, that if we were to be dictated to and ruled by\n     foreigners, he would much rather be ruled by a British\n     Parliament than by British subjects here. Should he be told\n     that those men fought in the war of the Revolution, he would\n     answer, that those who did so were not included by him in the\n     class he adverted to. That was a civil war, and they and we\n     were at its commencement alike British subjects. Native\n     Britons, therefore, then taking arms on our side, gave them the\n     same rights as those who were born in this country, and his\n     motion could be easily modified so as to provide for any that\n     might be of this description, but no such modification, he was\n     sure, would be found necessary, for this plain reason, to wit:\n\n     \"Where were the soldiers of the Revolution who were not\n     natives? They were either already retired or else retiring to\n     that great reckoning where discounts were not allowed. If the\n     honorable gentleman (opposing the proposition) would point his\n     finger to any such kind of person now living, he would agree to\n     his being made an exception to the amendment. It was time that\n     the American people should have a character of their own, and\n     where would they find it? In New England and in Virginia only,\n     because they were a homogeneous race--a peculiar people. They\n     never yet appointed foreigners to sit in that house (of\n     Congress) for them, or to fill their high offices. In both\n     States this was their policy: it was not found in, nor was it\n     owing to their paper constitutions, but what was better, it was\n     interwoven in the frame of their thoughts and sentiments, in\n     their steady habits, in their principles from the cradle--a\n     much more solid security than could be found in any abracadabra\n     which constitution-mongers could scrawl upon paper.\n\n     \"It might be indiscreet in him to say it, for, to say the\n     truth, he had as little of that rascally virtue, prudence, he\n     apprehended, as any man, and could as little conceal what he\n     felt as affect what he did not feel. He knew it was not the way\n     for him to conciliate the manufacturing body, yet he would say\n     that he wished with all his heart that his bootmaker, his\n     hatter, and other manufacturers, would rather stay in Great\n     Britain, under their own laws, than come here to make laws for\n     us, and leave us to import our covering. We must have our\n     clothing home-made, (said he,) but I would much rather have my\n     workmen home-made, and import my clothing. Was it best to have\n     our own unpolluted republic peopled with its own pure _native_\n     republicans, or erect another Sheffield, another Manchester,\n     and another Birmingham, upon the banks of the Schuylkill, the\n     Delaware, and the Brandywine, or have a host of Luddites\n     amongst us--wretches from whom every vestige of the human\n     creation seemed to be effaced? Would they wish to have their\n     elections on that floor decided by a rabble? What was the ruin\n     of old Rome? Why, their opening their gates and letting in the\n     rabble of the whole world to be their legislators!\"\n\n     \"If (said he) you wish to preserve among your fellow-citizens\n     that exalted sense of freedom which gave birth to the\n     Revolution--if you wish to keep alive among them the spirit of\n     '76, you must endeavor to stop this flood of immigration! You\n     must teach the people of Europe that if they do come here, all\n     they must hope to receive is protection--but that they must\n     have no share in the government. From such men a temporary\n     party may receive precarious aid, but the country cannot be\n     safe nor the people happy where they are introduced into\n     government, or meddle with public concerns in any great\n     degree.\"\n\n            *       *       *       *       *\n\n     \"This (said Mr. Randolph) is a favorable time to make a stand\n     against this evil (immigration,) and if not _this_ session, he\n     hoped that in the _next_ there would be a revisal of the\n     naturalization laws.\"\n\nA few short epistles from the pen of Gen. WASHINGTON, and we will close\nthis chapter. These we take from the \"Papers of Washington by Sparks.\"\nGeorge Washington, justly styled the \"father of his country,\" was a\ngreat and good man--a primitive Know Nothing--a praying Protestant--and\nwithal, the man who was \"first in war, first in peace, and first in the\nhearts of his countrymen.\" Here are the honest sentiments of this man:\n\n     TO RICHARD HENRY LEE.\n\n     \"MORRISTOWN, May 17, 1777.\n\n     \"DEAR SIR:--I take the liberty to ask you what Congress expects\n     I am to do with the many foreigners they have at different\n     times promoted to the rank of field-officers, and, by the last\n     resolve, two to that of colonels.... These men have no\n     attachment nor ties to the country, further than interest binds\n     them. Our officers think it exceedingly hard, after they have\n     toiled in this service and have sustained many losses, to have\n     strangers put over them, whose merit, perhaps, is not equal to\n     their own, but whose effrontery will take no denial.... It is\n     by the zeal and activity of our own people that the cause must\n     be supported, and not by a few hungry adventurers....\n\n                              \"I am, &c.,\n\n                                  \"G. WASHINGTON.\"\n\n[Vol. IV., p. 423.]\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n     TO THE SAME.\n\n                                    \"MIDDLEBROOK, June 1, 1777.\n\n     \"You will, before this can reach you, have seen Monsieur\n     Ducoudray. What his real expectations are, I do not know; but I\n     fear, if his appointment is equal to what I have been told is\n     his expectation, it will be attended with unhappy consequences.\n     _To say nothing of the policy of intrusting a department, on\n     the execution of which the salvation of the army depends, to a\n     foreigner who has no other tie to bind him to the interests of\n     this country than honor_, I would beg leave to observe that by\n     putting Mr. D. at the head of the artillery, you will lose a\n     very valuable officer in General Knox, who is a man of great\n     military reading, sound judgment, and clear conceptions, who\n     will resign if any one is put over him.... I am, &c.,\n\n                                    \"G. WASHINGTON.\"\n\n[Vol. IV., p. 446.]\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n     TO GOUVERNEUR MORRIS, ESQ.\n\n                                    \"WHITE PLAINS, July 24, 1778.\n\n     \"DEAR SIR:--The design of this is to touch cursorily upon a\n     subject of very great importance to the well-being of these\n     States: much more so than will appear at first view. I mean\n     _the appointment of so many foreigners to offices of high rank\n     and trust in our service_.\n\n     \"The lavish manner in which rank has hitherto been bestowed on\n     these gentlemen, will certainly be productive of one or the\n     other of these two evils--_either to make us despicable in the\n     eyes of Europe, or become a means of pouring them in upon us\n     like a torrent, and adding to our present burden_.\n\n     \"But it is neither the expense nor trouble of them that I\n     dread: there is an evil more extensive in its nature and fatal\n     in its consequences to be apprehended, and that is the driving\n     of all our own officers out of the service, and throwing not\n     only our army but our military councils entirely into the hands\n     of foreigners.\n\n     \"The officers, my dear sir, on whom you must depend for the\n     defence of this cause, distinguished by length of service,\n     their connections, property, and military merit, will not\n     submit much, if any longer, to the unnatural promotion of men\n     over them who have nothing more than a little plausibility,\n     unbounded pride and ambition, and a perseverance in application\n     not to be resisted but by uncommon firmness, to support their\n     pretensions: men who, in the first instance, tell you they wish\n     for nothing more than the honor of serving in so glorious a\n     cause as volunteers, the next day solicit rank without pay, the\n     day following want money advanced to them, and in the course of\n     a week want further promotion, and are not satisfied with any\n     thing you can do for them. The expediency and the policy of the\n     measure remain to be considered, and whether it is consistent\n     with justice or prudence to promote these military\n     fortune-hunters at the hazard of your army.\n\n     \"Baron Steuben, I now find, is also wanting to quit his\n     inspectorship for a command in the line. This will be\n     productive of much discontent to the brigadiers. In a word,\n     although I think the Baron an excellent officer, _I do most\n     devoutly wish that we had not a single foreigner among us,\n     except the Marquis de Lafayette_, who acts upon very different\n     principles from those which govern the rest. Adieu.\n\n                              \"I am most sincerely yours,\n\n                                 \"G. WASHINGTON.\"\n\n[Vol. VI., p. 13.]\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n     TO JOHN ADAMS, VICE-PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.\n\n                                    \"PHILADELPHIA, Nov. 27, 1794.\n\n     \"DEAR SIR:--... My opinion with respect to immigration is, that\n     except of useful mechanics and some particular description of\n     men or professions, there is no need of encouragement. I am,\n     &c.,\n\n                                    \"G. WASHINGTON.\"\n\n[Vol. XI., p. 1.]\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n     TO J. Q. ADAMS, AMERICAN MINISTER AT BERLIN.\n\n                                    \"MOUNT VERNON, Jan. 20, 1799.\n\n     \"SIR:--... You know, my good sir, that it is not the policy of\n     this country to employ aliens where it can well be avoided,\n     either in the civil or military walks of life.... There is a\n     species of self-importance in all foreign officers that cannot\n     be gratified without doing injustice to meritorious characters\n     among our own countrymen, who conceive, and justly, where there\n     is no great preponderancy of experience or merit, that they are\n     entitled to the occupancy of all offices in the gift of their\n     government.\n\n                                \"I am, &c.,\n\n                                    \"G. WASHINGTON.\"\n\n[Vol. XI., p. 392.]\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n     SAME DATE, TO A FOREIGNER APPLYING FOR OFFICE.\n\n     \"DEAR SIR:--... It does not accord with the policy of this\n     government to bestow offices, civil or military, upon\n     foreigners, to the exclusion of our own citizens. Yours, &c.,\n\n                                    \"G. WASHINGTON.\"\n\n[Vol. XI., p. 392.]\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n     INSTRUCTIONS OF THE SECRETARY OF WAR TO THE INSPECTOR-GENERAL.\n\n                                    \"WAR DEPARTMENT, Feb. 4, 1799.\n\n     \"... For the cavalry, for the regulations restrict the\n     recruiting officers to engage none _except natives_ for this\n     corps, and those only as from their known character and\n     fidelity may be trusted.\"\n\n\n\n\n[From the Knoxville Whig for March, 1856.]\n\nWHO IS MILLARD FILLMORE?\n\n\nA Brief history of the American nominee for the Presidency is this: He\nwas born in the year 1800, in Cayuga county, New York, and is now\nfifty-six years of age. His father was then, as he now is, a farmer, in\nmoderate circumstances; and now lives in the county of Erie, a short\ndistance from Buffalo. The limited means of the family prevented the old\ngentleman from giving his son Millard any other or better education than\nwas obtained in the imperfect common schools of that age.\n\nIn his sixteenth year, Mr. Fillmore was placed with a merchant tailor\nnear his home to learn that business. He remained four years in his\napprenticeship, during which time he had access to a small library,\nimproving the advantages it offered by perusing all the books therein\ncontained. Judge Wood, of Cayuga county, pleased with his intellectual\nadvancement, urged him to study the profession of the law; and as his\npoverty was the only obstacle in his way, Judge Wood advanced him the\nnecessary means, relying upon his making a lawyer, and being able by the\npractice of the profession to refund the money again. With a portion of\nthis money young Fillmore bought his unexpired time, which was for the\nwinter, and he pursued his legal studies with energy and success, in the\noffice of the noble Judge.\n\nIn 1822, he removed to Buffalo, where he was admitted to the bar. His\nobject in removing to Buffalo was to complete his studies and to obtain\na license. This accomplished, he removed to Aurora, not far from where\nhis parents resided, and there commenced the practice of his profession.\nThe confidence of his neighbors in his integrity and abilities was such\nthat he found himself in the midst of a lucrative practice at once. In\n1826, he was married to Miss Powers, the daughter of a clergyman in the\nvillage of Aurora, and this excellent woman lived to see him elected\nVice-President of the United States.\n\nIn 1829, Mr. Fillmore was elected from the county in which he married\nand where his parents lived to the General Assembly of New York, and for\nthree years continued a member of this body, distinguishing himself by\nhis energy, tact, and wisdom in legislation. Through his energy and\nspeeches, _Imprisonment for Debt_ was abolished, and this so increased\nhis popularity throughout the State, that it was apparent that he could\nbe elected to any office in the gift of the people of that State.\n\nIn 1829, he was admitted a counsellor in the Supreme Court of New York,\nand in 1832 he removed to Buffalo, where he settled permanently and\nenlarged his practice as an attorney. In 1832, he was elected a\nrepresentative in the 23d Congress, in which he served with industry and\ncredit to himself and his district. At the end of his term he renewed\nthe practice of the law, of choice, but, in 1836, was prevailed on to\nagain serve his district in Congress; and in the celebrated New Jersey\ncontested elections, distinguished himself. He was chosen to the next\nCongress by the largest majority ever given to any man in the district;\nand as Chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means, acquired a\nreputation that any man might be proud of.\n\nAt the close of the 27th Congress, his friends were anxious for his\ncontinuance in public life, but he declined. And in his address to his\nconstituents, dated at Washington, July 11th, 1842, he says:\n\n     \"Pardon the personal vanity, though it be a weakness, that\n     induces me to recur for a moment to the cherished recollections\n     of your early friendship and abiding confidence. I cannot give\n     vent to the feelings of my heart without it. It is now nearly\n     fourteen years since you did me the unsolicited honor to\n     nominate me to represent you in the State Legislature. Seven\n     times have I received renewed evidence of your confidence by as\n     many elections, and, at the expiration of my present term, I\n     shall have served you three years in the State and eight years\n     in the National Councils. I cannot recall the thousand acts of\n     generous devotion from so many friends, without feeling the\n     deepest emotions of gratitude. I came among you a poor and\n     friendless boy. You kindly took me by the hand and gave me your\n     confidence and support. You have conferred upon me distinction\n     and honors, for which I could make no adequate return, but by\n     honest and untiring effort faithfully to discharge the high\n     trust which you confided to my keeping. If my humble efforts\n     have met your approbation, I freely admit, next to the approval\n     of my own conscience, it is the highest reward which I could\n     receive for days of unceasing toil and nights of sleepless\n     anxiety. I profess not to be above or below the common\n     frailties of our nature. I will therefore not disguise the\n     fact, that I was highly gratified at my first election to\n     Congress; yet I can truly say that my utmost ambition has been\n     gratified. I aspire to nothing more, and shall retire from the\n     exciting scenes of political strife to the quiet employments of\n     my family and fireside, with still more satisfaction than I\n     felt when first elevated to distinguished station.\"\n\nDuring this same year he returned to the practice of his profession,\nand, in 1844, the Whig State Convention of New York put him in\nnomination for the office of Governor, in opposition to Silas Wright.\nThis was the only conflict in which he ever suffered defeat, and the\nrace was close. In 1847, without seeking or desiring the highly\nresponsible office, he was elected Comptroller of the Finances of the\nState, and removed to Albany, where he discharged the duties of the\noffice with great credit to himself and usefulness to the State,\nresigning the office in February, 1849, to enter upon the duties of the\noffice of Vice-President, to which he had been called by the election in\n1848. Gen. Taylor dying, he became President, and every patriot in the\nland remembers and admires the history of his administration. Gen. Cass\nand other distinguished Democrats said his career had been one of\ngenuine patriotism, honor, and usefulness; and Gov. Wise, upon the stump\nin Virginia, characterized it as \"Washington-like;\" while the Democratic\npapers and orators, from Maine to California, declared that he ought to\nhave been nominated in lieu of Gen. Scott, because he was one of the\nbest men in America.\n\nHe is now in Europe, familiarizing himself with the workings of the\ndespotic governments of that country. Before leaving, almost one year\nago, he told his friends, in answer to questions relating to the\npresidency, not to start any newspapers for his benefit--not to publish\nany documents--not to make any speeches, or even electioneer--and added,\nthat if the American people nominated him, of their own free will and\naccord, he would accept their nomination, and if elected, he would serve\nthem to the best of his abilities. His nomination, therefore, under the\ncircumstances, is a great honor, and shows the implicit confidence the\nreal people have in the integrity, patriotism, and qualifications of the\nman. That he will go into the presidential chair almost by acclamation,\nwe have not the shadow of doubt.\n\nAs to Mr. Fillmore's chances, we consider them excellent, and growing\nbrighter every day. The indications are now very clear that he will\nobtain a _plurality_, if not a _majority_ vote, in most of the Northern\nStates; and under the most unfavorable circumstances, he will be sure to\ndivide the electoral vote of the South, so as to carry more States than\nMR. BUCHANAN. Virginia, South Carolina, Mississippi, and Alabama, are\nthe only four States we concede to the Cincinnati nominee and _one_ of\nthese, we confidently expect to carry. Georgia and Arkansas we set down\nas doubtful, and we contend that Buchanan can't get either of them\nwithout a severe struggle.\n\nWe then make this estimate, and claim as certain for FILLMORE and\nDONELSON the following States, viz.:\n\n     Massachusetts   13\n     Rhode Island     4\n     New York        35\n     New Jersey       7\n     Pennsylvania    27\n     Maryland         8\n     Kentucky        12\n     Tennessee       12\n     North Carolina  10\n     Louisiana        6\n     Missouri         9\n     California       4\n     Delaware         3\n     Florida          3\n\nThis makes a total of 157--_eleven,_ more than is necessary to an\nelection. This is not an extravagant, but a very fair estimate. The\nfriends of the American ticket have a right to feel encouraged. With\nproper exertions our ticket will carry. Let every American consider\nhimself a sentinel upon the watch-tower--let every friend of the party\ndo his duty, and the result will not be doubtful. And let all who\nbelieve that \"Americans ought to rule America,\" take courage--\"the skies\nare bright and brightening.\"\n\nAs it regards MR. FILLMORE'S Americanism, _that_ is settled--he has been\na Protestant American _fifteen years in advance_ of the party, as it now\nexists. The Hon. J. T. HEADLEY, Secretary of State of New York,\ndelivered a speech at the Capital of his State, March 7th, 1856, in\nwhich he spoke of Mr. Fillmore in the following language:\n\n     \"Now, in the first place, he was an American years before those\n     who denounce him ever thought of Americanism. The Police\n     constable of Newburg elected last year on the American ticket,\n     told me, that years ago, when that well-known conflict occurred\n     between the citizens of Buffalo and the foreign population,\n     that a combination was formed called the \"_American League_.\"\n     The members of this League entered into _a solemn compact to\n     stand together and fight together for the rights of Americans_.\n     This constable was at the time an humble mechanic in Buffalo,\n     and he said that _he constantly met Mr. Fillmore (who was a\n     member of that League with him) at the Council Room_. Thus you\n     see that those who would arrogate to themselves the title of\n     Americans, and yet carp at Mr. Fillmore as wanting in American\n     sentiment, are really recent volunteers compared with him. Mr.\n     Fillmore carried his American principles still farther and\n     became (so an officer in the same order informs me) _a member\n     of the United Americans_. He has always been a true American,\n     _he is now, and ever will be_, and is worthy to move at the\n     head of the glorious column over which floats the flag bearing\n     the inscription, 'Americans shall rule America.'\"\n\nAfter the defeat of MR. CLAY, in 1844, MR. FILLMORE addressed him this\nnoble _American_ letter:\n\n                                    \"BUFFALO, Nov. 14, 1844.\n\n     \"MY DEAR SIR:--I have thought for three or four days that I\n     would write to you, but really I am unmanned. I have no courage\n     or resolution. All is gone. The last hope, which hung first\n     upon the city of New York, and then upon Virginia, is finally\n     dissipated, and I see nothing but despair depicted upon every\n     countenance.\n\n     \"For myself, I have no regrets. I was nominated for Governor\n     much against my will, and though not insensible to the pride of\n     success, yet I feel a kind of relief at being defeated. But not\n     so for you or the nation. Every consideration of justice, every\n     feeling of gratitude conspired in the minds of honest men to\n     insure your election, and though always doubtful of my own\n     success, I could never doubt yours, till the painful conviction\n     was forced upon me.\n\n     \"The Abolitionists and _Foreign Catholics have defeated us in\n     this State_. I will not trust myself to speak of the vile\n     hypocrisy of the leading Abolitionists now. Doubtless many\n     acted honestly and ignorantly in what they did. But it is clear\n     that Birney and his associates sold themselves to Locofocoism,\n     and they will doubtless receive their reward.\n\n     \"_Our opponents, by pointing to the Native Americans and to Mr.\n     Frelinghuysen, drove the Foreign Catholics from us and defeated\n     us in this State._\n\n     \"But it is vain to look at the causes by which this infamous\n     result has been produced. It is enough to say that all is gone.\n     I must confess that nothing has happened to shake my confidence\n     in our ability to sustain a free government so much as this.\n\n                                    \"MILLARD FILLMORE.\"\n\nBut here is one other letter, written to ISAAC NEWTON, just before MR.\nFILLMORE left the United States for Europe. A more patriotic letter,\nbreathing more of the genuine American spirit, we have never met with:\n\n                                    \"BUFFALO, N. Y., Jan. 3, 1855.\n\n     \"RESPECTED FRIEND ISAAC NEWTON:--It would give me great\n     pleasure to accept your kind invitation to visit Philadelphia,\n     if it were possible to make my visit private, and limit it to a\n     few personal friends whom I should be most happy to see; but I\n     know that this would be out of my power, and I am therefore\n     reluctantly compelled to decline your invitation, as I have\n     done others to New York and Boston, for the same reason.\n\n     \"I return you many thanks for your information on the subject\n     of politics. I am always happy to hear what is going forward,\n     but, independent of the fact that I feel myself withdrawn from\n     the political arena, I have been too much depressed in spirit\n     to take an active part in the late elections. I contented\n     myself with giving a silent vote for Mr. Ullman, for Governor.\n\n     \"While, however, I am an inactive observer of public events, I\n     am by no means an indifferent one, and I may say to you in the\n     frankness of private friendship, that I have for a long time\n     looked with dread and apprehension at the corrupting influence\n     which the contest for the foreign vote is exerting upon our\n     elections. This seems to result from its being banded together,\n     and subject to the control of a few interested and selfish\n     leaders. Hence it has been a subject of bargain and sale, and\n     each of the great political parties of the country have been\n     bidding to obtain it, and, as usual in all such contests, the\n     party which is most corrupt is most successful. The consequence\n     is, that it is fast demoralizing the whole country; corrupting\n     the very fountains of political power; and converting the\n     ballot-box--that great palladium of our liberty--into an\n     unmeaning mockery, where the rights of native-born citizens are\n     voted away by those who blindly follow their mercenary and\n     selfish leaders. The evidence of this is found not merely in\n     the shameless chaffering for the foreign vote at every\n     election, but in the large disproportion of offices which are\n     now held by foreigners at home and abroad, as compared with our\n     native citizens. Where is the true-hearted American whose cheek\n     does not tingle with shame and mortification to see our highest\n     and most coveted foreign missions filled by men of foreign\n     birth to the exclusion of native-born? Such appointments are a\n     humiliating confession to the crowned heads of Europe that a\n     Republican soil does not produce sufficient talent to represent\n     a Republican nation at a monarchical court. I confess that it\n     seems to me--with all due respect to others--that, as a general\n     rule, our country should be governed by American-born citizens.\n     Let us give to the oppressed of every country an asylum and a\n     home in our happy land, give to all the benefits of equal laws,\n     and equal protection; but let us at the same time cherish, as\n     the apple of our eye, the great principles of constitutional\n     liberty, which few who have not had the good fortune to be\n     reared in a free country know how to appreciate and still less\n     how to preserve.\n\n     \"Washington, in that inestimable legacy which he left to his\n     country--his farewell address--has wisely warned us to beware\n     of foreign influence as the most baneful foe of a republican\n     government. He saw it to be sure in a different light from that\n     in which it now presents itself; but he knew it would approach\n     us in all forms, and hence he cautioned us against the\n     _insidious wiles of its influence_. Therefore, as well for our\n     own sakes, to whom this invaluable inheritance of\n     self-government has been left by our forefathers, as for the\n     sake of unborn millions who are to inherit this land--foreign\n     and native--let us take warning of the Father of his Country,\n     and do what we can justly to preserve our institutions from\n     corruption and our country from dishonor, but let this be done\n     by the people themselves in their sovereign capacity by making\n     a proper discrimination in the selection of officers, and not\n     by depriving any individual--native or foreign-born--of any\n     constitutional or legal right to which he is entitled.\n\n     \"These are my sentiments in brief; and although I have\n     sometimes almost despaired of my country when I have witnessed\n     the rapid strides of corruption, yet I think I perceive a gleam\n     of hope in the future, and I now feel confident, that when the\n     great mass of intelligence in this enlightened country is once\n     fully aroused, and the danger manifested, it will fearlessly\n     apply the remedy, and bring back the government to the pure\n     days of Washington's administration. Finally, let us adopt the\n     old Roman motto, '_Never despair of the Republic._' Let us do\n     our duty, and trust in that Providence which has so signally\n     watched over and preserved us for the result. But I have said\n     more than I intended, and much more than I should have said to\n     any one but a trusted friend, as I have no desire to mingle in\n     political strife.\n\n     \"Remember me kindly to your family, and believe me truly your\n     friend,\n\n                                    \"MILLARD FILLMORE.\"\n\nIn March, 1851, LEWIS CASS, than whom there is not a more devoted\npartisan in the Democratic ranks, delivered a speech on the floor of the\nUnited States Senate, in the course of which he paid the following just\ncompliment to Mr. Fillmore's integrity, and to his efficiency in\n\"_pacifying the country_,\" while he was President. We quote from the\nCongressional Globe, and hold it up as a withering rebuke to those\n\"lesser lights\" of Democracy, who are now defaming this pure and\npatriotic statesman:\n\n     \"The Administration has placed itself high in the great work of\n     _pacifying the country_, and they received the meed of\n     approbation from political friends and political foes. _I\n     partake of the same sentiment._ I do them justice. But I am a\n     Democrat, and, God willing, I mean to die one. This is a Whig\n     administration, but there is no reason I should not do them\n     justice; and I do it with pleasure, in this great matter of\n     _the salvation of this country_--if I may say so. I have done\n     so; shall continue to do so, whatever sneers their papers may\n     contain; for I do it not for their sake, but _for the sake of\n     their country_.\"\n\nThe _Democratic Review_--the highest Democratic authority in the United\nStates--for December, 1855, commenting upon the Compromise Measures of\n1850, thus spoke of Mr. Fillmore, in a moment of candor, long before Mr.\nFillmore was nominated by the American party for the Presidency:\n\n     \"Momentous events were transpiring. The agitation of the\n     question of slavery was paramount in the public mind. In this\n     crisis, it was well that so reliable a man as Mr. Fillmore was\n     found in the Presidential chair. The safety and perpetuity of\n     the Union were threatened. Already had fanaticism raised its\n     hydra-head. Schemes and 'isms' leaped from a thousand\n     ambuscades. The enemies of the Union started forth on every\n     side--Abolitionism here; secessionism there; acquisition and\n     filibusterism elsewhere. These were the formidable elements of\n     misrule with which the Executive had to cope. How well he met,\n     and how entirely he for the time overcame these enemies of the\n     peace of the republic, we leave the historian to relate; but\n     our retrospect would be incomplete and disingenuous, did we not\n     accord the meed of praise justly due to high moral excellence\n     and intellectual and administrative honesty and talent, as\n     developed in the administration of Mr. Fillmore.\"\n\nSince the foregoing was prepared for the press, Mr. Fillmore's letter of\nacceptance has come to hand, greatly to the annoyance of the Democratic\nand anti-American fuglemen and politicians. We congratulate the country\nupon the patriotic, national, and _truly American_ spirit which pervades\nthis chaste and well-written document. It is just what we expected from\n_one of the very first men in the Nation_. His reference to his past\ncourse as a guaranty for the future is well-timed. _Sectional_\nlegislation he is opposed to; and sectional agitation he will use his\ninfluence to suppress. We ask every man into whose hands this work shall\nfall, to read this admirable letter for himself: it is worthy of the man\nand the times; nay, it is the letter of a patriot and a statesman--\n\n    \"Who for his country feels alone,\n    And loves her weal, beyond his own.\"\n\n     [COPY.]\n\n                                    PHILADELPHIA, Feb. 26th, 1856.\n\n     _To the Hon. Millard Fillmore_:\n\n     SIR:--The National Convention of the American party, which has\n     just closed its session in this city, has unanimously chosen\n     you as the candidate for the Presidency of the United States in\n     the election to be held in November next. It has associated\n     with you Andrew Jackson Donelson, Esq., of Tennessee, as the\n     candidate for the Vice-Presidency.\n\n     The Convention has charged the undersigned with the agreeable\n     duty of communicating these proceedings to you, and of asking\n     your acceptance of a nomination which will receive not only the\n     cordial support of the great national party in whose name it is\n     made, but the approbation also of large numbers of other\n     enlightened friends of the Constitution and the Union, who will\n     rejoice in the opportunity to testify their grateful\n     appreciation of your faithful service in the past, and their\n     confidence in your experience and integrity for the guidance of\n     the future.\n\n     The undersigned take advantage of this occasion to tender to\n     you the expression of their own gratification in the\n     proceedings of the Convention, and to assure you of the high\n     consideration with which they are yours, &c.\n\n                                    ALEXANDER H. H. STUART,\n                                    ANDREW STEWART,\n                                    ERASTUS BROOKS,\n                                    E. B. BARTLETT,\n                                    WM. J. EAMES,\n                                    EPHRAIM MARSH.\n\n                                    _Committee, &c._\n\n                                    PARIS, May 21st, 1856.\n\n     GENTLEMEN:--I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your\n     letter informing me that the National Convention of the\n     American party, which had just closed its session at\n     Philadelphia, had unanimously presented my name for the\n     Presidency of the United States, and associated with it that of\n     Andrew Jackson Donelson for the Vice-Presidency. This\n     unexpected communication met me at Venice on my return from\n     Italy, and the duplicate, mailed thirteen days later, was\n     received on my arrival in this city last evening. This must\n     account for my apparent neglect in giving a more prompt reply.\n\n     You will pardon me for saying that when my administration\n     closed in 1853, I considered my political life as a public man\n     at an end, and thenceforth I was only anxious to discharge my\n     duty as a private citizen. Hence I have taken no active part in\n     politics. But I have by no means been an indifferent spectator\n     of passing events; nor have I hesitated to express my opinion\n     on all political subjects when asked; nor to give my vote and\n     private influence for those men and measures I thought best\n     calculated to promote the prosperity and glory of our common\n     country. Beyond this I deemed it improper for me to interfere.\n     But this unsolicited and unexpected nomination has imposed upon\n     me a new duty, from which I cannot shrink; and therefore,\n     approving, as I do, of the general objects of the party which\n     has honored me with its confidence, I cheerfully accept its\n     nomination, without waiting to inquire of its prospects of\n     success or defeat. It is sufficient for me to know that by so\n     doing I yield to the wishes of a large portion of my\n     fellow-citizens in every part of the Union, who, like myself,\n     are sincerely anxious to see the administration of our\n     government restored to that original simplicity and purity\n     which marked the first years of its existence; and, if\n     possible, to quiet that alarming sectional agitation, which,\n     while it delights the Monarchists of Europe, causes every true\n     friend of our own country to mourn.\n\n     Having the experience of past service in the administration of\n     the Government, I may be permitted to refer to that as the\n     exponent of the future, and to say, should the choice of the\n     Convention be sanctioned by the people, I shall, with the same\n     scrupulous regard for the rights of every section of the Union\n     which then influenced my conduct, endeavor to perform every\n     duty confided by the Constitution and laws to the Executive.\n\n     As the proceedings of this Convention have marked a new era in\n     the history of the country, by bringing a new political\n     organization into the approaching Presidential canvass, I take\n     the occasion to reaffirm my full confidence in the patriotic\n     purposes of that organization, which I regard as springing out\n     of a public necessity, forced upon the country, to a large\n     extent, by unfortunate sectional divisions, and the dangerous\n     tendency of those divisions towards disunion. It alone, in my\n     opinion, of all the political agencies now existing, is\n     possessed of the power to silence this violent and disastrous\n     agitation, and to restore harmony by its own example of\n     moderation and forbearance. It has a claim, therefore, in my\n     judgment, upon every earnest friend of the integrity of the\n     Union.\n\n     So estimating this party, both in its present position and\n     future destiny, I freely adopt its great leading principles as\n     announced in the recent declaration of the National Council at\n     Philadelphia, a copy of which you were so kind as to enclose\n     me, holding them to be just and liberal to every true interest\n     of the country, and wisely adapted to the establishment and\n     support of an enlightened, safe, and effective American policy,\n     in full accord with the ideas and the hopes of the fathers of\n     our Republic.\n\n     I expect shortly to sail for America; and, with the blessings\n     of Divine Providence, hope soon to tread my native soil. My\n     opportunity of comparing my own country and the condition of\n     its people with those of Europe, has only served to increase my\n     admiration and love for our own blessed land of liberty, and I\n     shall return to it without even a desire ever to cross the\n     Atlantic again.\n\n     I beg of you, gentlemen, to accept my thanks for the very\n     flattering manner in which you have been pleased to communicate\n     the results of the action of that enlightened and patriotic\n     body of men who composed the late Convention, and to be assured\n     that\n\n     I am, with profound respect and esteem,\n\n     Your friend and fellow-citizen,\n\n                                    MILLARD FILLMORE.\n\n     Messrs. Alex. H. H. Stuart, Andrew Stewart, Erastus Brooks, E.\n     B. Bartlett, Wm. J. Eames, Ephraim Marsh, _Committee_.\n\n\n\n\nWHO IS ANDREW J. DONELSON?\n\n\nThis gentleman being now the nominee of the American party for the\noffice of Vice-President, naturally attracts much of public attention;\nand as a matter to be looked for, and not at all to be regretted, draws\ndown upon him great abuse and slander from the hireling editors of the\ncorrupt party opposing him. We will let a neighbor of Major Donelson,\nwho has had access to his papers, and who has prepared and published in\nthe _Nashville Banner_ a sketch of his life, answer the question\npropounded at the head of this chapter:\n\n     \"MR. DONELSON is the second son of Samuel Donelson, deceased,\n     who was the brother of the late Mrs. Jackson. His eldest\n     brother died in 1817, soon after the Creek War, in which he\n     participated as a soldier under General Jackson. His death was\n     announced to Mr. Donelson by General Jackson in the following\n     terms: 'Whilst we regret his loss, he has left us the endearing\n     recollection that there was not a stain upon his character. He\n     has performed his duty here below, and has taken his flight to\n     realms above, as unspotted as an angel. What a lesson he has\n     given us! How delightful to dwell upon the idea that he has\n     walked in the paths of virtue during his whole life, without a\n     blemish on his character, and that all his friends may recount\n     his acts with pride and pleasure!' The younger brother is still\n     living in the paternal mansion, and was a member of the last\n     Legislature of Tennessee. The mother of these children\n     afterwards married Mr. James Sanders, of Sumner county,\n     Tennessee, and is still enjoying good health. She is the only\n     daughter of Gen. Daniel Smith, who was one of the surveyors of\n     the line between Virginia and North Carolina, and succeeded\n     Gen. Jackson in the Senate of the United States.\n\n     \"General Smith had an important agency in shaping the early\n     history of Tennessee--having represented a portion of the\n     people in the North Carolina Legislature, and in the Convention\n     which ratified the Constitution of the United States. He was\n     also Secretary of the Territory, and a member of the Convention\n     of 1796. He was a native of Virginia, and emigrated to\n     Tennessee soon after he had surveyed the line between that\n     State and North Carolina, having, while in the execution of\n     that service, seen the fine lands in Middle Tennessee. He\n     settled the lands upon which his grandson, Henry Smith, now\n     resides; and built the mansion, which is still there, at a\n     period when the men engaged in quarrying the rock had to be\n     guarded from the attacks of the Indians.\n\n     \"The father of Samuel Donelson, Col. John Donelson, was also a\n     native of Virginia, and at onetime a Representative of one of\n     her oldest counties, Pittsylvania, in the House of Burgesses.\n     He possessed in an eminent degree the respect of the Provincial\n     Governor of that Commonwealth, from whom he received the\n     appointment of Indian Commissioner about the year 1770; and it\n     is to his bold and enterprising spirit that we are in a great\n     measure indebted for the Indian Treaties which extended the\n     settlements of Virginia through Kentucky to the Ohio river. He\n     left Port Patrick Henry in 1779, descending the Tennessee river\n     with all his family, in boats built on the Holston, and came up\n     the Cumberland in those boats as high as the Clover Bottom,\n     encountering incredible toils and dangers. Three years\n     afterwards, in 1793, in conjunction with Col. Martin, he\n     concluded an Indian Treaty, by which the settlements on the\n     Cumberland river were greatly benefited; but he had, previously\n     to his departure from Virginia, under a contract with Georgia,\n     explored the country, and run the line between that State and\n     North Carolina, as far west as the Mississippi river. After\n     settling his family near the present site of the Hermitage, he\n     was killed by the Indians, on a journey to Kentucky, near the\n     Big Barren River, at the advanced age of 75.\n\n     \"Samuel Donelson was a lawyer by profession, and the intimate\n     friend and associate of Gen. Jackson, after whom he named his\n     son Andrew, who was born on the 25th of August, 1800. On the\n     second marriage of his mother, this son was taken into the\n     family of the General, who became his guardian and patron; and\n     he remained the most of his time with him until he was prepared\n     to enter the Cumberland College. After finishing his studies at\n     this school, Gen. Jackson obtained for him a Cadet's warrant,\n     which enabled him to enter the Military Academy at West Point,\n     in 1816. He was one of the first class which was graduated\n     under the superintendence of Col. Thayer--finishing the course\n     of studies in three, instead of four years; as is customary.\n     Throughout his service at West Point, he was distinguished for\n     his proficiency in mathematics, and for the facility with which\n     he mastered all the studies which appertain to military\n     science. No higher proof need be adduced of this fact, than the\n     position assigned to him by the Board of Examiners and\n     Visitors, when he graduated. He was placed No. 2, in a class of\n     great merit, notwithstanding he had the studies of two years to\n     pass through in one year, and was recommended to the Department\n     of War for a commission in the Engineer Corps--a compliment\n     accorded only to the most distinguished of the class.\n\n     \"After obtaining his commission, Mr. Donelson was ordered to\n     the Western frontier to build a fort; but before he reached\n     this destination, the War Department, on the application of\n     Gen. Jackson, allowed him to accept the appointment of\n     Aide-de-camp in the staff of the General. In this capacity he\n     attended the General when he took possession of the Floridas,\n     and remained with him until the latter resigned his commission\n     in the army.\n\n     \"At this period, Mr. Donelson seeing no prospect for rapid\n     promotion in the corps of Engineers, and sharing the conviction\n     then so prevalent in the army, that the conclusion of the war\n     with England had shut the door for a long time to come against\n     those military enterprises which are so tempting to the officer\n     and soldier, and feeling also that he could be more useful in\n     the pursuits of civil life, turned his attention to the study\n     of law. He accordingly resigned his commission; and after\n     attending the course of law lectures in the Transylvania\n     University, then under the presidency of Dr. Holly, he received\n     his license, and appeared at the Nashville bar in 1823, having\n     formed a partnership with Mr. Duncan. Circumstances, however,\n     soon occurred, which withdrew him in a great degree from the\n     practice. General Jackson was again in the field as a candidate\n     for the Presidency, and needed the services of a confidential\n     friend to aid him in repelling the bitter assaults which were\n     made upon his character and services. Animated by a deep sense\n     of gratitude, no duty could be more pleasing to Mr. Donelson\n     than that of contributing his labor to advance the great\n     popular movement which aimed, by the elevation of his\n     benefactor and friend, to promote the highest interests of the\n     country. He therefore cheerfully entered again into the\n     General's family, and travelled with him to Washington City\n     after the elections in 1824. Those elections devolved the\n     choice of President upon the House of Representatives. Mr.\n     Adams was the successful candidate, although Gen. Jackson had a\n     much larger popular vote, and was evidently the favorite of the\n     people.\n\n     \"As is well known to the country, the result of that election\n     gave increased force to the sentiment which had placed Gen.\n     Jackson in nomination. The efforts of his friends throughout\n     the Union became more active, and were never abated until the\n     decision of the House of Representatives in 1824 was reversed,\n     and Gen. Jackson placed in the Presidential chair. During these\n     four years, Mr. Donelson, who had married in 1824, settled upon\n     his plantation adjoining the Hermitage, and continued there to\n     promote the cause he had espoused so warmly in the beginning.\n\n     \"When the elections of 1828 were over, Gen. Jackson insisted\n     upon the acceptance by Mr. Donelson of the post of private\n     Secretary. Mr. D. accordingly set out with him in the winter of\n     1828 for the city of Washington, taking with him his wife, whom\n     he had married in 1824. This lady was the youngest daughter of\n     Capt. John Donelson, and was invited by Gen. Jackson to do the\n     honors of the White House--a position which she held throughout\n     the greater portion of his Presidency.\n\n     \"It was in this capacity that Mr. Donelson endeared himself\n     still more than ever to the Hero of the Hermitage. He spent the\n     prime of his life, from 1828 to 1836, in his service, and he\n     felt himself amply rewarded by the knowledge he thus acquired\n     of public men and measures.\n\n     \"At the close of Gen. Jackson's Presidency, Mr. Donelson\n     declined to take office under Mr. Van Buren, being anxious for\n     a respite from public affairs, and to enjoy the pleasures of\n     his farm; upon which he remained until he was called\n     unexpectedly to take a part in the negotiation which brought\n     Texas into our Union. It was upon this theatre that he\n     displayed the judgment and tact which brought him prominently\n     before the country as a man that understood the public\n     interests, and knew how to take care of them.\n\n     \"The commission appointing Mr. Donelson Minister to Texas is\n     dated the 16th of September, 1844. Mr. Calhoun, then Secretary\n     of State, in the letter enclosing the commission, says:\n\n     \"'The state of things in Texas is such as to require that the\n     place (Charge d'Affaires) should be filled without delay, and\n     to select him who, under all circumstances, may be thought best\n     calculated to bring to a successful decision the great question\n     of annexation pending before the two countries. After full\n     deliberation, you have been selected as that individual; and I\n     do trust, my dear sir, that you will not decline the\n     appointment, however great may be the personal sacrifice of\n     accepting. That great question must be decided in the next\n     three or four months; and whether it shall be favorable or not,\n     will depend on him who shall fill the mission now tendered you.\n     I need not tell you how much depends on its decision for weal\n     or woe to our country, and perhaps the whole continent. It is\n     sufficient to say that, viewed in all its consequences, it is\n     one of the first magnitude; and that it gives an importance to\n     the mission at this time, that raises it to the level with the\n     highest in the gift of the Government.\n\n     \"Assuming, therefore, that you will not decline the\n     appointment, unless some insuperable difficulty should\n     interpose, and in order to avoid delay, a commission is\n     herewith transmitted, without the formality of waiting your\n     acceptance, with all the necessary papers.'\"\n\nPresident Polk, after this, confided an important and most critical\nforeign negotiation to Major Donelson; and his estimate of the prudence,\ndiscretion, and ability with which Major Donelson discharged his trust,\nappears from a letter to Major D. from the Hon. John Y. Mason,\nPresident Polk's Secretary of War, dated August 7th, 1845. From that\nletter, complimentary from beginning to end, we copy only this portion:\n\n     \"The services which you have rendered your country in the\n     delicate negotiations intrusted to you, are justly appreciated.\n     _Your prudence, discretion, and ability have inspired the\n     President with a confidence which would make him feel much more\n     at ease if that delicate task could be in your hands._\n\n     \"It gives me great pleasure to assure you that _the publication\n     of your official correspondence will give you a most enviable\n     reputation for the highest qualities of a statesman and\n     diplomatist_.\n\n     \"The President unites in the kindest regards, with your friend,\n\n                                    \"J. Y. MASON.\"\n\nPRESIDENT PIERCE'S opinion of Major Donelson may be learned from the\nfollowing letter, written by him to the Major when the latter was the\neditor of the _Washington Union_, the National Organ of the Democratic\nparty:\n\n                                    \"CONCORD, May 30, 1851.\n\n     \"MY DEAR SIR: I rejoice that the leading organ of our party is\n     now under your control, and regard the change as most\n     auspicious at this juncture. There is a great battle before\n     us--a battle for the Union--a battle for the ascendency of the\n     principles, the maintenance of which so nobly signalized the\n     administration of General Jackson. THE TONE, VIGOR, AND\n     STATESMANLIKE GRASP _which you have brought to the columns of\n     the Union are not merely important, they are_ ABSOLUTELY\n     INDISPENSABLE _in this crisis_.\n\n     \"With great respect, your friend and servant,\n\n                                    \"FRANK. PIERCE.\"\n\nThe following article is from the _Nashville Union_, of October 15,\n1844, the Tennessee Organ of Democracy, published within a few miles of\nwhere Major Donelson lives, and has passed most of his life. This\narticle shows what opinion was entertained of him before he became a\n_Know-Nothing_:\n\n     \"The diplomatic agency of this government in Texas is, at this\n     moment, the most important mission abroad; although it ranks\n     with those of the second class, its high and important duties\n     require the talents of one every way qualified for the first\n     foreign mission on the globe.\n\n     \"_We congratulate the administration on having been able to\n     secure the services of one so eminently qualified in all\n     respects for the station, whose thorough knowledge of the\n     relations subsisting between the two countries, and whose\n     intimate acquaintance with the prominent statesmen of this and\n     that government, will place him in the enjoyment of advantages\n     which cannot fail to secure to us the most desirable results._\n\n     \"Major Donelson leaves his plantation near the Hermitage\n     to-day--proceeding overland to the Mississippi river on his way\n     to the Texan Capital--and we cannot but participate in the\n     painful emotions with which the word 'farewell' will be\n     exchanged between himself and his venerable patron, friend, and\n     relative, 'The Sage of the Hermitage.'\n\n     \"In view of the advanced age of General Jackson, it is more\n     than probable that they may never meet again. A relationship\n     next to that of father and son, if, indeed, it be not equally\n     near and dear, will be severed perhaps for ever. And we feel\n     assured that nothing short of a sense of DUTY TO HIS COUNTRY\n     could have induced an acceptance of the mission. Nor, for this\n     patriotic reason, would the aged veteran advise him to decline\n     it.\n\n     \"Major D. leaves a host of good and true friends, who will\n     continue to have an abiding solicitude for his health and\n     happiness, and for his early and complete success in 'extending\n     the area of freedom.'\"\n\nMr. Clayton, Secretary of State under Gen. Taylor, wrote to Major\nDonelson, announcing the expiration of the diplomatic relations between\nthe United States and Germany, (where the Major was stationed,) and\nclosed with the following complimentary expressions:\n\n     \"I am directed by the President to express to you his entire\n     approbation of your conduct, and I cannot take leave of you in\n     your public character without adding my testimony to that of\n     the President to the ability and faithfulness with which you\n     have discharged the arduous and delicate duties which your\n     mission imposed upon you.\n\n                                    \"JOHN M. CLAYTON.\"\n\nThe Democratic party having always boasted that Gen. Jackson was\nunsurpassed in his keen and unerring insight into the characters of men,\nwe must be permitted to call their attention to a clause in the _Last\nWill and Testament_ of Gen. Jackson, as recorded in the county of\nDavidson. This clause sets forth the estimate placed upon Mr. Donelson\nby the old General, after this fashion:\n\n                                    \"HERMITAGE, June 7, 1843.\n\n     ... \"I bequeath to my well-beloved nephew, Andrew J. Donelson,\n     son of Samuel Donelson, deceased, the elegant sword presented\n     to me by the State of Tennessee, with this injunction, that he\n     fail not to use it when necessary in support and protection of\n     our glorious Union, and for the protection of the\n     constitutional rights of our beloved country, should they be\n     assailed by foreign enemies or _domestic traitors_. This, from\n     the great change in my worldly affairs of late, is, with my\n     blessing, all that I can bequeath him, doing justice to those\n     creditors to whom I am responsible. This bequest is made as a\n     memento of the high regard, affection, and esteem I bear for\n     him as a _high-minded, honest, and honorable man_.\"\n\nAnd now, to show that Gen. Jackson had not changed his opinion of the\nMajor, we give about the last epistle he ever wrote to him, as it bears\ndate but a few days previous to his death:\n\n                                    \"HERMITAGE, May 24, 1845.\n\n     \"MY DEAR ANDREW: I received last night your affectionate letter\n     of the 15th inst., with the enclosed for your dear Elizabeth,\n     which I sent forthwith, and your kind letter of the 13th this\n     morning. Your family were here yesterday. All well, but looking\n     out for you hourly. I assured Elizabeth that you could not\n     leave your mission before the Texan Congress acted upon the\n     subject with which you were charged. I shall admonish her to be\n     patient and await your return, which will be the moment your\n     honor and duty will permit.\n\n            *       *       *       *       *\n\n     \"My dear Andrew:--What may be my fate God only knows. I am\n     greatly afflicted--suffer much, and it will be almost a miracle\n     if I shall survive my present attack. I am swollen from the\n     toes to the crown of the head, and in bandages to my hips.\n\n     \"How far my God may think proper to bear me up under my weight\n     of afflictions, he only knows. But, my dear Major, live or die,\n     you have my blessing and prayers for your welfare and happiness\n     in this world, and that we may meet in a blissful immortality.\n\n                                \"Your affectionate uncle,\n\n                                    \"ANDREW JACKSON.\"\n\nWhile editor of the _Washington Union_, Major Donelson frankly admitted,\nin his account of the election in Tennessee, between Gov. Campbell and\nGen. Trousdale, that the latter owed his defeat to his opposition to the\nCompromise measures, and his sympathies with the Disunionists. In the\n_Hartford_ Convention held in Nashville, the Major appeared in person,\nand denounced the whole concern as a blow at the Union, and its prime\nmovers and advocates as _traitors to their country and to the\nConstitution_. These _Secession_ Democrats, headed by A. V. Brown,\nEastman & Co., are uncompromising in their hatred of the Major, and they\nnever will forgive him, while he remains true to the Union of these\nStates, and the Constitution as it is, which will be to the latest hour\nof his earthly existence! Had he never opposed the _treasonable_ designs\nof the Nashville Convention--and had he not advocated the doctrines of\nthe American party, these same men would now be loud in his praise, as\nthe relative, the political student, and the _successor_ of the Sage of\nthe Hermitage!\n\n\n\n\n[From the Knoxville Whig of June 14, 1856.]\n\nBUCHANAN NOMINATED AT CINCINNATI.--DISPERSION OF FALSTAFF'S ARMY!\n\n\nThe Cincinnati Anti-American, Anti-Protestant, Foreign Catholic,\nLocofoco Pow Wow, has met--transacted its appropriate\nbusiness--nominated old Federal James Buchanan, of Pennsylvania, for the\nPresidency, and Robert C. Breckenridge, of Kentucky, for the Vice\nPresidency--and dispersed: dealing largely in the old game of _brag_, as\nto the _nationality_, _soundness_, and _ability_ of their ticket; when\nit is notorious, that they have at the head of their ticket one of the\nmost vulnerable men in the nation; an old political hack, who has been\n\"every thing by turns and nothing long;\" advocating and opposing all the\nleading measures which have agitated the country for the last forty\nyears, as we shall show in the sequel!\n\nThey had an awful time at Cincinnati! They organized by calling to the\nchair, temporarily, the notorious _Sam'l. Medary_, the Abolition editor\nof the Ohio Statesman. Either the anti-slavery forces were in the\nmajority, or the \"odds and ends\" of all parties represented in the\nConvention desired to conciliate the Abolition and Black Republican\nwings of their _Foreign Corporation_!\n\nThe Missouri Delegation were refused their seats, and they openly\nrebelled, forcing their way into the Convention with _clubs_, knocking\ndown and cruelly mangling the head and shoulders of the poor doorkeeper!\nFrom this, it would seem that they were doing business with _closed\ndoors_! Wonder if they had a _password_! Had they \"signs and grips,\"\nother than those by which they made themselves known to the\n_doorkeeper_?\n\nDid they carry with them \"dark-lanterns?\" Not they--they are opposed to\nall _secrecy_--they are opposed to all disorderly conduct--they are the\n\"harmonious Democracy,\" and labor alone for the good of the country, and\nof posterity! What a farce their Cincinnati Convention was! And what\nhypocrites they are!\n\nBut two full sets of Delegates appeared from New York, and claimed their\nseats; these were _Hards_ and _Softs_--Pierce and\n_anti_-Pierce--Nebraska and _anti_-Nebraska--pro-Slavery and\n_anti_-Slavery, _Filibustering Foreign Catholic Democrats_! Being\nunable to agree among themselves, and the Convention not wishing to\n_offend_ either of these wings of the \"great Harmonious Democratic\nParty,\" they rejected both delegations! This was having a bad effect, as\na portion of each delegation was out of doors cursing the majority, and\nmaking threats as to what they would do. So the Convention reconsidered\ntheir cases, and ADMITTED BOTH DELEGATIONS TO SEATS. They then\nprogressed \"harmoniously,\" much after the style of a rickety old cart on\na hill-side, drawn by a balky horse, whose driver curses him when at\nfault, and curses him when faultless.\n\nFrequently the scenes of confusion and excitement were alike disgusting\nand alarming. The friends of Douglass, Pierce, and Buchanan, were alike\nbitter, and each disposed to ruin the party if they should fail to get\ntheir man nominated. The anti-slavery portion of the Convention were\nmuch incensed against the South for the \"_lam-basting_\" given to\n_Senator Sumner_ by _Representative Brooks_, for words spoken in debate.\nOne of Buchanan's men boasted that the assault of Brooks on Sumner had\ngained _twenty_ votes for \"Old Buck!\" And others of the Buchanan wing,\nout of doors, were stating that they had reliable evidence that \"Old\nBuck\" did not approve the assault, while Pierce and Douglass did! We\nhave no doubt that this sort of influence, added to Buchanan's _known\nhostility to slavery_, secured for him the nomination. And, as if\ndesirous to atone for the sin against the South of nominating an old\n_Anti-Slavery Federalist_, they came into a Southern State, Kentucky,\nand selected a young and inexperienced politician, Mr. Robert C.\nBreckenridge, for the Vice Presidency. As Breckenridge is brave, and has\nchallenged his man for a _duel_, they can now turn about and appeal to\nthe Church-going folks to sustain their ticket _for what_ they implored\nthem to repudiate the Whig ticket in 1844! Besides, Breckenridge\n_approves_ the basting of Sumner by Brooks, and this will _offset_\nBuchanan's opposition to that _Southern Democratic measure_!\nBreckenridge has another virtue, which aided in securing his nomination.\nThough the nephew of those _able Know-Nothing Presbyterian Preachers_ of\nthat State, he has the independence to come out in opposition to them,\nand the insulting claims set up by _Protestants generally_, and to\nadvocate and defend the Roman Catholics.\n\nThe \"rich and racy\" scenes that came off in the Convention, we will\nleave our several friends from Nashville, who were there as reporters in\nthe Convention for the American papers, to set forth. With more truth\nthan poetry, the \"unterrified Democracy\" convened at Cincinnati can say,\n\"Our army swore terribly in Flanders!\" And how could it have been\notherwise? The Convention was large--composed of several hundred\ndelegates, drawn together from all sections of the country, East, West,\nNorth, and South--\"held together by the cohesive power of public\nplunder\"--and representing every variety and shade of opinion known and\nheld under the much abused but comprehensive name of Democracy! Nor was\nthe moral and personal character of the Convention less mixed and\nmany-colored than was its politics.\n\nIn looking over the proceedings of this coalition and combination of\nBogus Democrats, Foreign Pauper Advocates, and anti-Protestant lovers of\nReligious Liberty, we have looked in vain for the names of distinguished\nTennesseeans, who ought to have been second best, to say the least of\nit, in the ballots for a nomination! It was that Aaron V. Brown, \"the\nson of a now sainted father,\" was put in nomination for the office of\nVice President, by a Mr. Brown, supposed to be his nephew; but making no\nrun at all, he was taken off the track instantly--rubbed down and salted\naway!\n\nBut Andrew Johnson, who was to have been nominated for the first office\nwithin the gift of the American people and no mistake, (!) was not even\nnamed, and some say he was not even thought of for the position. We had\nsupposed that there existed among the leaders of the self-styled\nDemocracy, a determination to doom to utter extinction the light that\nhas guided the children of Political Reform in Tennessee, and throughout\nthe known world, and now we know it! The opposers of intellectual\nemancipation, of \"Jacob's Ladder Democracy,\" so superior to\nChristianity, have triumphed at Cincinnati, and trampled under foot,\nwith impunity, the soul-stirring doctrine of \"converging lines.\" The\nnext steps with these \"enemies of righteousness\" will be the rack, the\ngibbet, and a second edition of the infernal inquisition! Will the\nfriends of the \"White Basis\" Governor of Tennessee tamely surrender\ntheir dearest rights to these Cincinnati _crusaders_, without a single\nstruggle? Will they allow the saddle of Federal domination to be quietly\nthrown on their backs? Ye Greene county delegates forbid it!\n\nBut Johnson is doomed to an inglorious retirement from public life. He\ncan console himself with the reflection, that rank only degrades--wealth\nonly impoverishes--ornaments but disfigure him! The man who discovered\nthat the Bogus Democracy of the nineteenth century leads fallen sinful\nman to the throne of God, needs no office to elevate him. These Johnson\nDemocrats enjoy the pure religion of Democracy--a religion which enters\nthe closet--pours forth its supplications in private, feeds the poor,\nclothes the naked--inflames not the prejudices of Protestant sects--is\nmodest and unassuming in its demeanor--is charitable and kind to the\npersecuted and pious Catholics--bears with the infirmities of Foreign\nPaupers--is not ambitious and designing, seeking to accomplish vast\nschemes by doubtful means!\n\nWhile Old Federal Buck was nominated on the seventeenth ballot, after\nmuch excitement, wrangling and abuse, young Breckenridge, whose only\nmerit is his having challenged the Hon. Francis B. Cutting, of New York,\nto fight a duel, two years ago, was nominated on the second ballot. The\nballot for a candidate for the Vice Presidency resulted as follows:\n\n    John C. Breckenridge, of Kentucky,      55\n    John A. Quitman, of Mississippi,        59\n    Linn Boyd, of Kentucky,                 33\n    Benjamin Fitzpatrick, of Alabama,       11\n    Aaron V. Brown, of Tennessee,           29\n    Herschel V. Johnson, of Georgia,        31\n    Thomas J. Rusk, of Texas,                2\n    Wm  H. Polk, of Tennessee,               5\n    J. C. Dobbin, of North Carolina,        13\n\nA second ballot was entered into, when Hon. John C. Breckenridge, of\nKentucky, was unanimously chosen.\n\nTennessee, in voting for a Presidential candidate, voted SIX times for\nPierce, and EIGHT times for Douglass, and never came over to old Federal\nBuck until they could do nothing for Pierce or Douglass. Buck seems to\nhave been a fill for Tennessee! But now, the Tennessee Democracy say:\n\n    \"With hounds and horn,\n    At rosy morn,\n    We _Bucks_ a hunting go!\"\n\nWell, we Americans will get after Old Buck's venison too, and between\nthis and November next, many will be the steak we shall eat out of his\nold Federal carcass. It is venison worthy of the chase, for\n\n    ----\"Finer or fatter\n    Ne'er roamed in the forest,\n    Or smoked in a platter.\"\n\nSo--\n\n    \"Hi, ho, Chevy,\n    Hark away, hark away, tantivy,\n    Here rests the burthen of my song,\n    This _time_ a stag must die.\"\n\nBut Democracy have commenced their old game of brag, by puffing their\nticket as a national and conservative ticket, the very thing they\ndenied. Now let us look into the soundness and nationality of the HEAD\nof the ticket. We have before us a copy of a work published in 1839, by\nRobert Mayo, M. D., entitled, \"Political Sketches of Eight Years in\nWashington, in four parts.\" This work has gone through various editions,\nhaving been published by Fielding Lucas, Jr., of Baltimore; Garret\nAnderson, of Washington; J. R. Smith, of Richmond; Carey, Hart & Co., of\nPhiladelphia, and by others in New York and Boston. On page 38 of this\nwork, which Mr. Buchanan has never contradicted, he is reported to have\ndenounced the visions, patronage, and corruptions of the Democratic\nAdministrations, while he, Buchanan, was a member of the Old Federal\nParty.\n\nOn page 6 of this work, in the preface, the author says, in speaking of\nBuchanan before he turned Democrat:\n\n     \"The declarations of some of these new disciples of Democracy\n     in past times are striking enough. MR. BUCHANAN of\n     PENNSYLVANIA, while he acted in his true character, DECLARED\n     THAT IF HE HAD A DROP OF DEMOCRATIC BLOOD IN HIS VEINS, HE\n     WOULD LET IT OUT! He put his royal declaration on paper, and it\n     has risen up against him.\"\n\nA recent brief memoir of Mr. Buchanan, put forth in Pennsylvania, states\nthat he was elected to the Legislature in 1815, where he distinguished\nhimself by those exhibitions of intellect which gave promise of future\neminence. The Lancaster _Register_, published in the immediate vicinity\nof Mr. Buchanan's residence, asks _by whom_ was he elected? and thus\nsupplies the record for 1815:\n\n     ASSEMBLY.\n\n     For JAMES BUCHANAN,   Federal    3051\n      \"  Molton O. Rogers, Democrat   2502\n\nThe memoir sets forth that Mr. Buchanan was elected to Congress in 1820,\nand that he retained his position in that body for ten years,\nvoluntarily retiring.\n\nThe Lancaster _Register_ inquires if he were elected as a _Democrat_,\nand answers the inquiry by the following historical facts:\n\n     CONGRESS.\n\n     1820--James Buchanan, Federal      4642\n       \"   Jacob Hibsman, Democrat      3666\n     1822--James Buchanan, Federal      2153\n       \"   Jacob Hibsman, Democrat      1940\n     1824--James Buchanan, Federal      3560\n       \"   Samuel Houston, Democrat     3046\n     1826--James Buchanan, Federal      2760\n       \"   Dr. John McCamant, Democrat  2307\n     1828--James Buchanan, Jackson      5203\n       \"   William Hiester, Adams       3904\n\nThe Lancaster _Register_ then pursues its criticism as follows:\n\n     \"On the 4th of July, 1815, Mr. Buchanan, when he was a\n     candidate for Assembly on the _Federal ticket_, delivered 'an\n     oration' in Lancaster, in which he showed his _love_ of\n     Federalism and _hatred_ of Democracy, by attacking the\n     Administration of James Madison. He said:\n\n     \"'Time will not allow me to enumerate all the other evils and\n     wicked projects of the Democratic administration.'\n\n     \"And again, in the same oration, he said:\n\n     \"'What must be our opinion of an opposition whose passions were\n     so dark and malignant as to be gratified in endeavoring to\n     blast the character and imbitter the old age of Washington?\n     After thus persecuting the saviour of his country, _how can the\n     Democratic party dare to call themselves his disciples_?'\"\n\nAnd who does not recollect, in Tennessee, with what force and effect\nJAMES C. JONES used to point out JAMES BUCHANAN as one of the _rank old\nFederalists_ who had come over to the Democratic ranks, and was battling\nwith _Col. Polk_, side by side, while he was consuming half his time in\nabuse of the Federal party? When the Democratic candidate for Congress\nin this District, JULIUS W. BLACKWELL, charged _Federalism_ upon the\nWhig party, who does not recollect with what effect and spirit JOHN H.\nCROZIER ran over the list of ODIOUS OLD FEDERALISTS, then fighting under\nthe Democratic flag, among them naming out JAMES BUCHANAN? And will not\nthe files of the KNOXVILLE POST, edited by Capt. JAMES WILLIAMS, show\nhow he held up JAMES BUCHANAN and others as an _old Federalist of the\nfirst water_?\n\nOn the subject of _Slavery_ the memoir is not definite, and the\nLancaster Register comes to its aid by publishing the following\nproceedings of a public meeting held in that city on the 23d of\nNovember, 1819:\n\n     \"WHEREAS, the people of this State, pursuing the maxims and\n     animated by the beneficence of the great founder of\n     Pennsylvania, first gave effect to the gradual abolition of\n     slavery by a national act, which has not only rescued the\n     unhappy and helpless African within their territory from the\n     demoralizing influence of slavery, but ameliorating his state\n     and condition throughout Europe and America; and whereas, it\n     would illy comport with those humane and Christian efforts to\n     be silent spectators when this great cause of humanity is about\n     to be agitated in Congress, by fixing the destiny of the new\n     domains of the United States: therefore,\n\n     \"_Resolved_, That the representatives in Congress from this\n     district be and they are hereby most earnestly requested to use\n     their utmost endeavors, as members of the National Legislature,\n     to prevent the existence of slavery in any of the Territories\n     or new States which may be created by Congress.\n\n     \"_Resolved_, As the opinion of this meeting, that as the\n     Legislature of this State will shortly be in session, it will\n     be highly deserving of their wisdom and patriotism to take into\n     their early and most serious consideration the propriety of\n     instructing our representatives in the National Legislature to\n     use the most zealous and strenuous exertions to inhibit the\n     existence of slavery in any of the Territories or States which\n     may hereafter be created by Congress; and that the members of\n     Assembly from this county be requested to embrace the earliest\n     opportunity of bringing this subject before both Houses of the\n     Legislature.\n\n     \"_Resolved_, That, in the opinion of this meeting, the members\n     of Congress who at the last session sustained the cause of\n     justice, humanity, and patriotism, in opposing the introduction\n     of slavery into the State then endeavored to be formed out of\n     the Missouri Territory, are entitled to the warmest thanks of\n     every friend of humanity.\n\n     \"_Resolved_, That the proceedings of this meeting be published\n     in the newspapers in this city.\n\n                                    \"JAMES HOPKINS,\n                                    WM. JENKINS,\n                                    JAMES BUCHANAN.\"\n\n     \"The foregoing resolutions being read were unanimously adopted,\n     after which the meeting adjourned. (Signed)\n\n                                    WALTER FRANKLIN, Ch'n.\n\n     \"Attest--WM. JENKINS, Sec'y.\"\n\nThe \"Perry County Democratic Press,\" for April 9th, 1856, an able paper\npublished at Bloomfield in Pennsylvania, shows up the _Federal\nanti-slavery, anti-Democratic, turn-coat character_ of Mr. Buchanan,\nafter this fashion:\n\n\n     JAMES BUCHANAN'S SOMERSETS.\n\n     \"No man in the United States has turned his political coat as\n     often as James Buchanan. He has espoused the principles of\n     every party that has had an existence since the memorable\n     Hartford Convention, and has been on all sides of political\n     questions.\n\n     \"A brief reference to his history will establish conclusively\n     our assertions.\"\n\n\n     HIS FEDERALISM.\n\n     \"He entered political life in 1814 as a rank Federalist, and by\n     the Federal party he was elected to the Legislature of the\n     State. He was re-elected in 1815, defeating Molton C. Rogers,\n     the Democratic candidate, and afterwards one of the Supreme\n     Judges of the State.\n\n     \"In 1820, he was the Federal candidate for Congress, and was\n     elected over Jacob Hibsman, the Democratic candidate, by 976\n     majority. In 1822, he was reelected over the same man by 813\n     majority. In 1824, he was the Federal candidate for Congress,\n     and elected over Samuel Houston, the Democratic candidate, by\n     519 votes. In 1826, he was re-elected over Dr. John McCamant,\n     the Democratic candidate, by 453 votes. His majorities were\n     becoming less each time, and in order to satisfy his Federal\n     friends of his fidelity to the party, he had to declare that\n     'if he had a drop of Democratic blood in his veins, he would\n     open them and let it out.'\"\n\n\n     HE BECOMES A DEMOCRAT.\n\n     \"Two years after this, he changed his coat and became a\n     full-blooded Democrat, and ran for Congress as the Democratic\n     candidate, and was elected by virtue of General Jackson's\n     popularity. He was afraid to run a second term, and he\n     declined.\"\n\n\n     HIS TEN CENT SPEECH.\n\n     \"In 1843, in the United States Senate, he made a speech\n     advocating the principle that ten cents is a sufficient\n     compensation for a day's labor. Hence he is called 'Ten Cent\n     Jimmy.'\n\n     \"In 1845, he became Secretary of State under Polk's\n     administration, and consented to give away about half of the\n     Territory of Oregon to the British government, after he had\n     proven that they had not a spark of title to it.\n\n     \"He extolled the Federal administration of John Adams, and\n     endorsed the abominable Alien and Sedition laws of the Federal\n     reign of terror. He bitterly denounced the administration of\n     that pure Democrat, James Madison, and ridiculed what he termed\n     the follies of Thomas Jefferson.\"\n\n\n     HIS SLAVERY SOMERSETS.\n\n     \"In 1819, at a meeting in Lancaster, he reported resolutions\n     favoring resistance to the extension of slavery and the\n     admission of the State of Missouri as a slave State.\n\n     \"In 1847, he wrote to the Democracy of Berks county, saying\n     that the Missouri Compromise had given peace to the country,\n     and that instead of repealing it he was in favor of its\n     extension and maintenance.\n\n     \"In 1850, in a letter to Col. Forney, he rejoiced over the\n     settlement of the slavery agitation by the passage of the\n     compromise measures during Fillmore's administration, and hoped\n     that before a dissolution of the Union he might be gathered to\n     his fathers, and never be permitted to witness the sad\n     catastrophe.\n\n     \"In 1852, he wrote to Mr. Leake, of Virginia, concerning\n     Fillmore's compromise measures of 1850, which had been passed\n     by Congress, and said, 'that the volcano has been extinguished,\n     and the man who would apply the firebrand to the combustible\n     materials still remaining, will produce an eruption that will\n     overwhelm the Constitution and the Union.\"\n\n\n     BUCHANAN'S LAST SOMERSET.\n\n     \"On the 28th of December, 1855, about three months ago, Mr.\n     Buchanan, in a letter to John Slidell, of Louisiana, says: 'The\n     Missouri Compromise is gone, and gone for ever. It has\n     departed. The time for it has passed away, and the best, nay,\n     the only mode now left of _putting down_ the fanatical and\n     reckless spirit of the North is to adhere to the existing\n     settlement without the slightest thought or appearance of\n     wavering, and without regarding any storm which may be raised\n     against it.\"\n\nHere, then, is an authentic record--if the reader please, a GILT-FRAME\nPENNSYLVANIA LOOKING-GLASS, in which the Democracy of the South who\nadmire the nominee of the late Cincinnati Convention can _see him as he\nis_! Heretofore, to use the language of Holy Writ, they have seen him\n\"through a glass darkly, but now face to face.\" Here they see him\nstanding erect upon the floor of the United States Senate, in all the\npride of that _aristocracy_ which has characterized his course in life,\nand giving vent to the old and bitter feelings of the _royalists_ in\nPennsylvania, by advocating the _oppressive British doctrine_, that TEN\nCENTS PER DAY _is enough for a poor white man as a day-laborer_! And\nhere, too, our hard-fisted working-men, North and South, can see what\nsort of a man the Democracy are asking them to vote for for the\nPresidency!\n\nIn his Fourth of July oration in 1815, delivered in the hearing of an\nimmense crowd, and afterwards published in all the leading papers of\nPennsylvania, Mr. Buchanan came out as a _Know-Nothing_, which he has\nnow to repudiate in stepping upon the _Anti-American Catholic Platform_\nprepared for him at Cincinnati! Here is what he said in that celebrated\noration:\n\n     \"The greater part of those foreigners who would not be thus\n     affected by it, have long been the warmest friends of the\n     party. They had been _one of the great means of elevating the\n     present ruling_ (Democratic) party, and it would have been\n     ungrateful for that party to have abandoned them. To secure\n     this foreign feeling has been the labor of their leaders for\n     more than twenty years, and well have they been paid for their\n     trouble, for it has been one of the principal causes of\n     introducing and continuing them in power. Immediately before\n     the war this foreign influence had completely embodied itself\n     with the majority, particularly in the West, and its voice was\n     heard so loud at the seat of government, that President Madison\n     was obliged either to yield to its dictates or retire from\n     office. The choice was easily made by a man who preferred his\n     private interests to the public good, and therefore hurried us\n     into a war for which we were utterly unprepared.\"\n\nAnd then again:\n\n     \"We ought to use every honest exertion to turn out of power\n     those weak and wicked men whose wild and visionary theories\n     have been tested and found wanting. Above all, we ought to\n     drive from our shores foreign influence, and cherish American\n     feeling. Foreign influence has been in every age the curse of\n     republics--its jaundiced eye sees every thing in false\n     colors--the thick atmosphere of prejudice by which it is ever\n     surrounded, excluding from its sight the light of reason. Let\n     us then learn wisdom from experience, and for ever banish this\n     fiend from our country.\"\n\nAnd here is what JACKSON thought of BUCHANAN. The Democratic Washington\ncorrespondent of the New York Evening Post, who was favorable to the\nnomination of Pierce, makes this statement--a statement we have often\nheard before, and never heard contradicted:\n\n     \"On the night before leaving Nashville to occupy the White\n     House, Mr. Polk, in company with Gen. Robert Armstrong, called\n     at the Hermitage to procure some advice from the old hero as to\n     the selection of his cabinet. Jackson strongly urged the\n     President-elect to give no place in it to Buchanan, as he could\n     not be relied upon. It so happened that Polk had already\n     determined to make that very appointment, having probably\n     offered the situation to the statesman of Pennsylvania. This\n     fact induced Gen. Armstrong subsequently to tell Jackson that\n     he had given Polk a rather hard rub, as Buchanan had already\n     been selected for Secretary of State. 'I can't help it,' said\n     the old man: 'I felt it my duty to warn him against Mr.\n     Buchanan, whether it was agreeable or not. Mr. Polk will find\n     Buchanan an unreliable man. I know him well, and Mr. Polk will\n     yet admit the correctness of my prediction.'\n\n     \"It was the last visit ever made by Mr. Polk to the old hero\n     when this unavailing remonstrance was delivered, but the new\n     President, long before the end of his administration, had\n     reason to acknowledge its propriety and justice, and in the\n     diary kept by him during that period may still be read a most\n     emphatic declaration of his distrust of Mr. Buchanan. Every one\n     is aware of two marked instances in which, as Secretary of\n     State, the latter failed to support the policy of the\n     administration, viz., on the question of the tariff of 1846,\n     and the requisition of the ten regiments voted by Congress for\n     the Mexican war. On both of these measures he was known to be\n     opposed to the wishes of Mr. Polk.\"\n\n_Mr. Charles Irving_, the Democratic editor of the Lynchburg Republican,\nand a delegate at Richmond in the State Convention, thus disposes of Mr.\nBuchanan in a long and able letter, dated May 7th, 1856:\n\n     \"If silence during the battle constitutes a claim for office,\n     how can the South expect Northern statesmen to uphold her\n     banner, when abolitionists are seeking to tear it to tatters?\n     If an ability to get free-soil votes makes a candidate\n     available, and that species of availability is recognized as a\n     merit at the South, Northern statesmen should court\n     free-soilers, and not struggle with them, if they wish to be\n     Presidents. Such availability may be very desirable to those\n     who wish success alone, but those who look to the interests of\n     the country may well be excused if they prefer a different\n     standard. I certainly _prefer_ that the South shall PREFER the\n     selection, not only of a sound man, but that she shall vote for\n     the nomination of no man upon any such ground of availability.\n     The coming election must settle the slavery agitation. I do not\n     wish a single free-soiler to vote the Democratic ticket, nor\n     will I willingly afford them the slightest excuse for so doing.\n     A prominent North-West Democrat told me to-day, that the\n     nomination of Mr. Buchanan would enable Trumbull, Wentworth,\n     and other free-soilers to come back into the party. I am not\n     anxious to get back such characters. These are some reasons for\n     not preferring Mr. Buchanan.\n\n     \"But there is still another reason. That reason is in his\n     record. To carry the entire South, we must have not only a\n     sound man, but one who is above impeachment--whose record is as\n     stainless as the principles he advocates. Is such the case with\n     Mr. Buchanan? Let the record answer.\n\n     \"On the 27th of December, 1837, Mr. Calhoun submitted to the\n     Senate that celebrated series of resolutions, the great objects\n     of which were to set forth with precision and force the\n     constitutional rights of the slaveholding States, and to\n     attract to their support an enlightened public opinion against\n     the attacks of Northern fanaticism. The second resolution was\n     in these words: (Calhoun's Works, volume 3, page 140.)\n\n     \"'_Resolved_, That in delegating a portion of their powers to\n     be exercised by the Federal Government, the States retained\n     severally the exclusive and sole right over their own domestic\n     institutions and police, and are alone responsible for them,\n     and that any intermeddling of any one or more States, or a\n     combination of their citizens, with the domestic institutions\n     and police of the others, on any ground or under any pretext\n     whatever, political, moral, or religious, with a view to their\n     alteration or subversion, is an assumption of superiority not\n     warranted by the Constitution, insulting to the States\n     interfered with, tending to endanger their domestic peace and\n     tranquillity, subversive of the objects for which the\n     Constitution was formed, and, by necessary consequence, tending\n     to weaken and destroy the Union itself.'\n\n     \"Mr. Morris of Ohio, who was then the only avowed Abolitionist\n     in the Senate, moved to strike out the words 'moral and\n     religious.' Had the motion prevailed, the effect would have\n     been to encourage agitation in the form in which it would be\n     most likely to be fatal to the South. It would have been a\n     direct encouragement to the Abolitionized clergy of the North\n     to take the very course which was taken by the 'three thousand\n     and fifty divines' who, in 1854, sacrilegiously assumed, 'in\n     the name of Almighty God, and in his presence,' to denounce the\n     repeal of the Missouri Compromise as 'a violation of plighted\n     faith and a breach of a national compact.' Subsequent events\n     have abundantly attested the truth of what Mr. Calhoun said,\n     when arguing against the motion, 'that the whole spirit of the\n     resolution hinged upon that word _religious_.'\n\n     \"The vote taken on Mr. Morris's amendment stood as follows:\n     (Congressional Globe, volume 6, page 74.)\n\n     \"Yeas--Messrs. Bayard, BUCHANAN, Clayton, Davis, McKeon,\n     Morris, Prentiss, Robbins, Ruggles, Smyth of Indiana,\n     Southward, Swift, Tipton, and Webster--14.\n\n     \"Nays--Messrs. Allen, Black, Brown, Calhoun, Clay of Alabama,\n     Clay of Kentucky, Cuthbert, Fulton, Hubbard, King, Knight,\n     Linn, Lumpkin, Lyon, Nicholas, Niles, Norvell, Pierce, Preston,\n     Rives, Roane, Robinson, Sevier, Smyth of Connecticut, Strange,\n     Walker, Wall, White, Williams, Wright, and Young--31.\n\n     \"The fifth resolution to which Mr. Calhoun here referred, and\n     which he justly regarded as the most important of all, and\n     struggled most perseveringly to have passed without amendment,\n     was strictly as follows:\n\n     \"'Resolved, That the intermeddling of any State or States, or\n     their citizens, to abolish slavery in this District, or in any\n     of the Territories, on the ground, or under the pretext, that\n     it is immoral or sinful, or the passage of any act or measure\n     of Congress, with that view, would be a direct and dangerous\n     attack on the institutions of all the slaveholding States.'\n\n     \"This resolution covered the whole premises. It met the issue\n     boldly and fully. No Southern Democrat can hesitate to say that\n     it embodied a great truth, to which events have borne emphatic\n     testimony. Mr. Clay, of Kentucky, moved to strike it out, and\n     insert the following as a substitute:\n\n     \"'Resolved, That when the District of Columbia was ceded by the\n     States of Virginia and Maryland to the United States, domestic\n     slavery existed in both of those States, including the ceded\n     territory; and that, as it still continues in both of them, it\n     could not be abolished within the District without a violation\n     of that good faith which was implied in the cession, and in the\n     acceptance of the territory, nor unless compensation were made\n     for the slaves, without a manifest infringement of an amendment\n     of the Constitution of the United States, nor without exciting\n     a degree of just alarm and apprehension in the States\n     recognizing slavery, far transcending, in mischievous tendency,\n     any possible benefit which would be accomplished by the\n     abolition.' (Congressional Globe, vol. 6, page 58.)\n\n     \"The utter insufficiency of this temporizing amendment scarcely\n     need be pointed out. Objectionable as it was in conceding to\n     Congress the constitutional power to abolish slavery in the\n     District of Columbia, and declaring against the exercise of\n     that power only on the ground of inexpediency, it was still\n     more so in this, that it made no reference whatever to the\n     territories of the United States. The passage of Mr. Calhoun's\n     resolution would have committed the Senate, not only against\n     the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia, but\n     against the application of the Wilmot Proviso and kindred\n     measures to the Territories. Mr. Clay's amendment was entirely\n     silent on the subject. It is true, that in another resolution\n     which he proposed to have adopted as an additional amendment,\n     it was declared that the abolition of slavery in the Territory\n     of Florida would be highly inexpedient, for the principal\n     reason 'that it would be in violation of a solemn compromise\n     made at a memorable and critical period in the history of this\n     country, by which, while slavery was prohibited north, it was\n     admitted south of the line of thirty-six degrees thirty minutes\n     north latitude.' The defect in the first amendment can hardly\n     be considered by Southern men as remedied by another which\n     recognized the binding force of the Missouri Compromise.\n\n     \"On the question to strike out Mr. Calhoun's resolution, and\n     insert Mr. Clay's as an amendment, after it had been modified\n     by striking out the part relating to compensation for slaves,\n     the vote stood--yeas 19, nays 18. (Congressional Globe, vol.\n     6, page 62.) _Mr. Buchanan's name stands recorded in the\n     affirmative._\n\n     \"On a subsequent occasion, Mr. Calhoun, with a view to infuse\n     vitality into Mr. Clay's amendment, moved to insert that any\n     attempt of Congress to abolish slavery in the Territories,\n     'would be a dangerous attack upon the States in which slavery\n     exists.' Mr. Buchanan opposed the amendment, and it was in\n     reply to his speech that Mr. Calhoun made the remarks which may\n     be found in the third volume of his works, pages 194 to 196,\n     and which he commenced by saying that 'the remarks of the\n     Senator from Pennsylvania were of such a character that he\n     could not permit them to pass in silence.'\n\n     \"From these votes, and this language of Mr. Buchanan, it is\n     clear:\n\n     \"1st. That he was not opposed to the _religious_ agitation of\n     the slavery question--a species of agitation which Mr. Calhoun\n     justly regarded as more fatal than any other.\n\n     \"2d. That he recognized the constitutional power of Congress to\n     abolish slavery in the District of Columbia, opposing its\n     existence only on the ground of its inexpediency--a proposition\n     which the position of Mr. Van Buren shows affords no reliable\n     protection to Southern institutions.\n\n     \"3d. That he refused to commit himself fully on the great\n     question as to the power of Congress over the Territories of\n     the United States, and as far as he did go, evidently left it\n     to be understood that the abolition of slavery by Congress in\n     those Territories would be no attack on the States in which it\n     exists.'\n\n     \"If his opinions, in these respects, have undergone any\n     material change, the country has not yet been authoritatively\n     apprised of the fact. The reflections cast by him on the\n     institution of slavery, in one of his speeches in England, and\n     the studied design he has manifested to keep aloof from the\n     excitement growing out of the repeal of the Missouri\n     Compromise, are not well calculated to inspire confidence, that\n     if his views have undergone any change, it has been a change\n     for the better.\"\n\nAfter thus disposing of the _slavery issue_, _Mr. Irving_ thus turns to\nthe _Tariff Question_:\n\n     \"So much for the slavery issue. How does Mr. Buchanan stand\n     upon the tariff? Will the Sentinel say that he is sound, or\n     justify his 'low wages' speech? How does he stand upon the\n     French Spoliation bill, which President Polk and President\n     Pierce vetoed? Everybody knows that he was in favor of it. How\n     does he stand upon the Pacific Railroad? He declared himself in\n     favor of an appropriation of public money to build it, as is\n     notorious. In fact, is there a single Federal measure except\n     that of the United States Bank, upon which he is not recorded\n     against Democratic principles? How can we hope to carry the\n     united South with such a record? Will Southern Democrats\n     overlook this record? Will Northern Nebraska men overlook this\n     ignoring of Pierce and Douglass? Is there no danger that in\n     admitting the abolitionist Trumbull, we may not dishearten the\n     gallant Douglass? Is there no fear that in reinstating the\n     free-soil Hickman, who is in favor of Reeder, we may not palsy\n     the arm of Richardson? In fine, is there no fear that in hoping\n     for free-soil aid, we may not lose the few real friends the\n     South has in the North? It is evident to the commonest\n     understanding, that the first step of Northern Black\n     Republicanism is to kill off all those influential men at the\n     North, like Pierce or Douglass, who have actively participated\n     in the fight for our rights. Is not the South aiding them in\n     this first step, when it not only ignores its own sons, but\n     also ignores, upon the ground of availability, those Northern\n     men identified with the late Kansas-Nebraska bill? This is a\n     question the South would do well to ponder. If Mr. Buchanan is\n     to be nominated, and Pierce and Douglass in the North ignored,\n     let the responsibility rest elsewhere than upon the State of\n     Virginia. He may be, and probably is sound, but these are times\n     when more than ordinary caution is necessary. It may become the\n     duty of the South to support him. When that time arrives I can\n     discharge the duty; but I do think that the reasons above\n     stated exempt me from any blame for not advocating him until\n     that responsibility devolves upon me. Very respectfully, CHAS.\n     IRVING.\n\nThe Southern Dough-faces of the Foreign Catholic party pretend to hold\nMr. Fillmore responsible for a letter he wrote more than twenty years\nago, in which he answers certain interrogatories in reference to\nslavery, _affirmatively_, and in opposition to the extension of slavery!\nThe _latest_ record of Buchanan is in 1844, and proves him to be an\nABOLITIONIST OF THE BLACKEST DYE. About the last speech he ever made in\nCongress, was IN OPPOSITION TO SLAVERY, in secret session of the Senate,\njust before Mr. Polk, in opposition to the wishes of Gen. Jackson, gave\nhim a seat in his cabinet. This speech will be found in the\nCongressional Globe for 1844, an extract from which is in these\n_explicit_ and _memorable_ words:\n\n     \"In arriving at the conclusion to support this treaty, I had to\n     encounter _but one serious obstacle_, AND THAT WAS THE QUESTION\n     OF SLAVERY. Whilst I have ever maintained, and ever shall\n     maintain, in their full force and vigor, the constitutional\n     rights of the Southern States over their slave property, I yet\n     feel a strong repugnance by any act of mine to extend the\n     limits of the Union over a new slaveholding territory. After\n     mature reflection, however, I overcame these scruples, and now\n     believe that the acquisition of Texas will be the means of\n     limiting, not enlarging, the dominion of slavery.\n\n     \"In the government of the world, Providence generally produces\n     great changes by gradual means. There is nothing rash in the\n     counsels of the Almighty. May not, then, the acquisition of\n     Texas be the means of gradually drawing the slaves far to the\n     South to a climate more congenial to their nature; and may they\n     not finally pass off into Mexico, and THERE MINGLE WITH A RACE\n     WHERE NO PREJUDICE EXISTS AGAINST THEIR COLOR? The Mexican\n     nation is composed of Spaniards, Indians, and Negroes, blended\n     together in every variety, who would receive our slaves on\n     terms of perfect social equality. To this condition they never\n     can be admitted in the United States.\n\n     \"That the acquisition of Texas would ere long convert Maryland,\n     Virginia, Kentucky, Missouri, and probably others of the more\n     Northern Slave States, into free States, I entertain not a\n     doubt....\n\n     \"But should Texas be annexed to the Union, causes will be\n     brought into operation which must inevitably remove slavery\n     from what may be called the farming States. From the best\n     information, it is no longer profitable to raise wheat, rye,\n     and corn, by slave labor. Where these articles are the only\n     staples of agriculture, in the pointed and expressive language\n     of Randolph, if the slave does not run away from his master,\n     the master must run away from the slave. The slave will\n     naturally be removed from such a country, where his labor is\n     scarcely adequate to his own support, to a region where he can\n     not only maintain himself, but yield large profits to his\n     master. Texas will open an outlet; and slavery itself may thus\n     finally pass the Del Norte, and be lost in Mexico. One thing is\n     certain, the present number of slaves cannot be increased by\n     the annexation of Texas.\n\n     \"I have never apprehended the preponderance of the slave States\n     in the councils of the nation. Such a fear has always appeared\n     to me visionary. But those who entertain such apprehensions\n     need not be alarmed by the acquisition of Texas. More than\n     one-half of its territory is wholly unfit for the slave labor;\n     and, therefore, in the nature of things must be free. Mr. Clay,\n     in his letter of the 17th of April last, on the subject of\n     annexation, states that, according to his information--\n\n     \"'The Territory of Texas is susceptible of a division into five\n     States of convenient size and form. Of these, two only would be\n     adapted to those peculiar institutions (slavery) to which I\n     have referred; and the other three, lying west and north of San\n     Antonio, being only adapted to farming and grazing purposes,\n     from the nature of their soil, climate, and productions, would\n     not admit of these institutions. In the end, therefore, there\n     would be two slave and three free States probably added to the\n     Union.'\n\n     \"And here permit me to observe, that there is one defect in the\n     treaty which ought to be amended if we all did not know that it\n     is destined to be rejected. The treaty itself ought to\n     determine how many free and how many slave States should be\n     made out of this territory.\"\n\nOn the 11th of April, 1826, James Buchanan, who is now being supported\nby _Southern slaveholders_, made a speech in Congress, _eleven years\nafter_ his Fourth of July oration, from which the following is taken:\n\n     \"Permit me here, Mr. Chairman, for a moment, to speak upon a\n     subject to which I have never before adverted upon this floor,\n     and to which, I trust, I may never again have occasion to\n     advert. I mean the subject of slavery. I BELIEVE IT TO BE A\n     GREAT POLITICAL AND A GREAT MORAL EVIL. I THANK GOD, MY LOT HAS\n     BEEN CAST IN A STATE WHERE IT DOES NOT EXIST.... IT HAS BEEN A\n     CURSE ENTAILED UPON US BY THAT NATION WHICH MAKES IT A SUBJECT\n     OF REPROACH TO OUR INSTITUTIONS.\" (See Gales and Seaton's\n     Register of Debates, page 2180, vol. ii., part 2.)\n\n\nMORE BUCHANAN ANTECEDENTS.\n\nWhen a \"_Uniform Bankrupt Law_\" was enacted by Congress, after the\nelection of General Harrison, there were on the files of the Judiciary\nCommittee of the Senate _fifty-one petitions_, praying for the passage\nof such a law. Twenty-nine of these were from New York, five from New\nJersey, three from Ohio, two from Indiana, two from Massachusetts, and\n_one_ from each of the States of Tennessee and Mississippi. There were\n_twenty-five_ other petitions praying for \"_A General Bankrupt Law_;\"\n_fifteen_ of which were from New York, and eight from Pennsylvania; and\nhow will the Democracy like to see it hereafter proven that BUCHANAN\npresented these petitions, and voted for the law? If it shall turn out\nthat \"Old Buck\" did really go for the \"odious Bankrupt Law,\" let his\nfriends defend him on the ground that his _State_ desired it, and had\nalways favored the measure!\n\nIn the House of Representatives, in Congress, January 3, 1815, _Mr.\nIngersoll_, a notorious Democrat from Pennsylvania, and a _Boy Tory_ of\nthe war of the Revolution, from the Committee on the Judiciary, reported\na bill to establish _a uniform law of Bankruptcy throughout the United\nStates_! If these facts should not turn out to be a sufficient\njustification of _Mr. Buchanan's course_, provided he went for this\nBankrupt Law, let his friends present these facts, and show that he was\nin good old Federal Democratic _company_:\n\nNUMBER 1. On the 5th of September, 1837, Mr. Van Buren's _Democratic_\nSecretary of the Treasury made a report to Congress, praying the passage\nof a _uniform Bankrupt Law_, which was referred to the Committee on the\nJudiciary.\n\nNUMBER 2. On the 13th day of January, 1840, _Mr. Norvell_, a Democratic\nSenator from Michigan, moved that the Judiciary be instructed to inquire\ninto the expediency of reporting a bill for the establishment of a\n_General Bankrupt Law_.\n\nNUMBER 3. On the 22d of April, 1840, _Garret D. Wall_, a flaming\nDemocratic Senator in Congress, reported certain amendments to a\nBankrupt Law, from a minority of the Committee; which were referred to\nthe Senate's select Committee, and reported by Mr. Wall, and passed--21\nto 19--and sent to the House.\n\nNUMBER 4. In the Senate, July 23, 1841, _Mr. Nicholson_, a Democratic\nSenator from Tennessee, delivered an able speech in favor of a uniform\nsystem of Bankruptcy, and moved to amend the bill then pending, by\ninserting \"BANKS AND OTHER CORPORATIONS;\" which motion was lost by a\nvote of 34 to 16.\n\nNUMBER 5. That great light of Democracy, _Col. Richard M. Johnson_, late\nVice-President of the United States, wrote and spoke in favor of a\nGeneral Bankrupt Law. In a letter of his, now before us, dated\nWashington, January 18, 1841, he says, speaking of such a law: \"_My\nopinion is that it will redound to the honor of our country._\"\n\nBut we will do Mr. Buchanan justice, by stating that he said he would\nvote _against_ the Bankrupt Law of 1840, because he did not like its\nfeatures. When Mr. Webster spoke in favor of the law, and of the\ncharacter of the _petitioners_, many of whom presented their petitions\nthrough Mr. Buchanan, the latter spoke on the 24th of February, 1840;\nand, to satisfy Mr. Webster and others that he was not opposed to the\n_principle_ in former days, stated, \"_He came to the other House of\nCongress, many years since_, A FRIEND OF A BANKRUPT LAW. The subject was\nbefore the House when he entered the body twenty years ago.\" He added,\n\"He was _open to conviction_, and might change his purpose!\"\n\nThus, it will be seen that Mr. Buchanan, in this, as in every thing\nelse, _was on both sides_! And how does it look in a Presidential\ncandidate, to have supported a _General Bankrupt Law_ for the relief of\n_rich, extravagant, and aristocratic_ gentlemen, and then to turn round\nand advocate \"ten cents per day\" for poor folks and laboring men? It\nwill look rather bad; but, then, Sag Nicht Democracy can go any thing!\nThis old \"ten cents per day\" champion of Democracy advocated, in so many\nwords, the reduction of all paper money prices to the real Cuba standard\nof solid money! We take extracts from his speech, which will be found in\nthe Appendix to the Congressional Globe, page 135:\n\n     \"In Germany, where the currency is purely metallic, and the\n     cost of every thing is REDUCED to a hard money standard, a\n     piece of broadcloth can be manufactured for fifty dollars; the\n     manufacture of which in our country, from the expansion of\n     paper currency, would cost one hundred dollars. What is the\n     consequence? The foreign French and German manufacturer imports\n     this cloth into our country, and sells it for a hundred. Does\n     not every person perceive that the redundancy of our currency\n     is equal to a premium of one hundred per cent. in favor of the\n     manufacturer?\"\n\n     \"No tariff of protection, unless it amounted to prohibition,\n     could counteract this advantage in favor of foreign\n     manufactures. I would to heaven that I could arouse the\n     attention of every manufacturer of the nation to this important\n     subject.\"\n\n     \"What is the reason that, with all these advantages, and with\n     the protective duties which our laws afford to the domestic\n     manufacturer of cotton, we cannot obtain exclusive possession\n     of the home market, and successfully contend for the markets of\n     the world? It is simply because we manufacture at the nominal\n     prices of our inflated currency, and are compelled to sell at\n     the real prices of other nations. REDUCE OUR NOMINAL STANDARD\n     OF PRICES THROUGHOUT THE WORLD, and you cover our country with\n     blessings and benefits.\"\n\n            *       *       *       *       *\n\n     \"The comparative LOW PRICES of France and Germany have afforded\n     such a stimulus to their manufactures, that they are now\n     rapidly extending themselves, and would obtain possession, in\n     no small degree, even of the English home market, IF IT WERE\n     NOT FOR THEIR PROTECTING DUTIES. While British manufactures are\n     now languishing, those of the continent are springing into a\n     healthy and vigorous existence.\"\n\nHow will the _Free Trade Democracy_ of the South relish these\n\"protecting duties\" of an old Federal politician? They are about as\nconsistent in their support of the Cincinnati nominee as \"Clay Whigs\"\nare, when they know that Buchanan was the only man living who had it in\nhis power to do Clay justice, in reference to the \"bargain and intrigue\"\ncalumny, and obstinately refused!\n\n\nCLAY AND BUCHANAN.\n\nIn 1825, Mr. Buchanan, then a member of the House, entered the room of\nMr. Clay, who was at the time in company with his only messmate, Hon. R.\nP. Letcher, also a member of the House, and since Governor of Kentucky.\nBuchanan introduced the subject of the approaching Presidential\nelection, Letcher witnessing what was said; and after that, when Mr.\nClay was hotly assailed with the charge of \"bargain, intrigue, and\ncorruption,\" notified Mr. Buchanan of his intention to publish the\nconversation, but was induced, by the _earnest entreaties of Buchanan_,\nto forbear. And Mr. Clay died with a letter in his possession, from\nBuchanan, which, if published, as it should be, would place Buchanan\nwithout the pale of Democracy, and disgrace him in the eyes of all\nhonorable men. _That_ letter, too, would explain why Gen. Jackson had no\nconfidence in him, and was opposed to his taking a seat in Polk's\ncabinet. Let it come!\n\n_Keep it before the People_, That it was the vote of James Buchanan\nwhich, in the Senate, in 1832, secured the passage of the \"Black\nTariff,\" so offensive to the \"Free Trade\" Democracy of Tennessee, South\nCarolina, and other Southern States, and which Gov. JONES threw up to\nCol. Polk with so much effect in their race of 1843!\n\n_Keep it before the People_, That the Cincinnati Platform unblushingly\naffirms that \"the Constitution does not confer upon the Federal\ngovernment authority to assume the debts of the several States,\ncontracted for local internal improvements, or for other State\npurposes;\" while the Democratic members of Congress annually violate\nthis principle by voting away hundreds of acres of public lands to the\nStates, for purposes of railroads and other improvements.\n\n_Keep it before the People_, That the same Platform hypocritically\nasserts, that \"it is the duty of every branch of our Government to\nenforce and practice the most rigid economy in conducting our public\naffairs;\" when the expenditures of Pierce's administration are TWENTY\nMILLIONS PER ANNUM over that of MILLARD FILLMORE!\n\n_Keep it before the People_, That the 8th of the series in this Platform\ndeclares, that \"the attempt to abridge the privilege of becoming\ncitizens and owners of soil amongst us ought to be resisted with the\nsame spirit which swept the alien and sedition laws from our statute\nbook:\" and then the hypocritical builders of the platform turned about\nand nominated James Buchanan, who commenced public life as the advocate\nof the \"alien and sedition laws,\" and sustained, in and out of Congress,\nthe Federal party, who passed these laws.\n\n_Keep it before the People_, That the Cincinnati Platform, which prates\nso loudly about the privilege of becoming \"owners of the soil,\" and\nwhich rebukes all efforts to amend our naturalization laws as oppressive\nto foreigners, nominated a man for the Presidency who spoke publicly in\nthis language: \"Above all, we ought to drive from our shores foreign\ninfluence, which has been in every age the curse of republics!\"\n\n_Keep it before the People_, That this Cincinnati Platform pledges\nitself to the \"Acts known as the Compromise Measures,\" and then resolves\n\"to resist all attempts at renewing, in Congress or out of it, the\nagitation of slavery;\" while the second best nags before the Convention\nwere Douglass and Pierce, who brought forward the bill repealing the\nMissouri Compromise line, and opening up anew the slavery agitation,\nwhile Pierce signed the bill and adopted it as an Administration\nmeasure!\n\n_Keep it before the People_, That this same Platform asserts, as an\nindispensable article of the Democratic faith, that \"the proceeds of the\npublic lands ought to be sacredly applied to the national objects\nspecified in the Constitution;\" and yet a majority of the Democracy, in\none branch of Congress, unhesitatingly voted for a bill introduced by\nRobert M. T. Hunter, a leader of \"the most straitest sect\" of Democratic\nPharisees, which proposed to give away the whole body of the public\nlands to squatters, at the nominal price of ninepence an acre, and at\nfive years' credit!\n\n_Keep it before the People_, That this same platform deprecates a policy\nwhich legislates for the few at the expense of the many; yet its\nbuilders nominated a man for the Presidency who has avowed himself on\nthe floor of the Senate in favor of reducing the wages of poor white men\nto the Cuban standard of TEN CENTS per day!\n\n_Keep it before the People_, That this Cincinnati Platform utterly fails\nto come up to that high Southern standard, which the country looked for\nfrom a party so lavish of promises, and that it has deliberately and\ncompletely shirked the slavery issue, the only apology for which is\nfound in their having nominated an old anti-slavery Federalist.\n\n_Keep it before the People_, That JAMES BUCHANAN was opposed to the war\nof 1812, but is in favor of the next war--while a Federalist he was\nconservative in his views, but is now square upon a Filibustering\nPlatform--his nomination, an overture to the Sumner Wing of Democracy,\nis the very nomination for the Nullifiers, Fire-eaters, and Disunionists\nof the South--that while we cry North, shout South, every faction is\nunited.\n\n\n\n\nTHE CINCINNATI VICE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE.\n\n\n_John C. Breckenridge_, of Kentucky, is now the Democratic candidate for\nthe Vice Presidency; and in our devotion to the _head_ of the ticket, we\ndo not wish to neglect the _tail_. Mr. Breckenridge is a good speaker,\nand is about as good a selection as his party could make. He has not\nbeen long enough in public life to attain any experience as a statesman,\nnor has he been guilty of any great indiscretion in his short\nCongressional career. He will be unable to carry Kentucky for his party,\nthough he has some elements of strength. Standing out in violent\nopposition to his relatives upon the _Know Nothing_ issues, he will be\nacceptable to all Foreigners, and the Catholics in particular! Being on\nthe very best of terms with _Cassius M. Clay_, and voting with the\nEmancipationists of Kentucky, he will be rather acceptable to the\nAnti-Slavery men than otherwise! He was a zealous supporter of the bill\nin Congress appropriating a million or two dollars to works of Internal\nImprovement, which was _vetoed_ by Pierce. That bill provided $50,000\nfor the improvement of the Kentucky River, to which he urged an\namendment insisting on $150,000. This will give him strength with the\nDemocracy of the North and North-West, who advocated the doctrine of\nInternal Improvements by the General Government!\n\nOn May 20th, 1856, the _Charleston Mercury_ came out advising the South\nas to the selection of candidates, which advice, if adhered to, would\nprove ruinous alike to Buchanan and Breckenridge. A brief extract from\nthat article is in these words:\n\n     \"A man unsound on Slavery, Free Trade, and Internal\n     Improvements, or whose opinions are shrouded in treacherous\n     ambiguity--such a man, be he Black Republican or Democrat, is\n     unworthy of her support. To vote for either, is to give away\n     her influence, to be used against her. It is to stultify\n     principle, and be the instrument of her own undoing.\"\n\nThis doctrine would get very much in the way of such men as _Toombs and\nStephens_, of Georgia, and other Anti-Internal Improvement Democrats,\nbut they can excuse Breckenridge on the ground that he acquiesced in the\nveto of Pierce, and was possibly only trying to make a little capital at\nhome, which is common with Democracy. Besides, Mr. Breckenridge being\nraised a _Clay Whig_, and representing the Ashland District as a\nDemocrat, should be allowed to pass over the _Jordan_ of Democracy by\ndegrees!\n\nHis name can be used advantageously in this contest in another respect.\nWhile Mr. Buchanan was Mr. Clay's most vindictive enemy, traducer, and\ncalumniator, Mr. Breckenridge can be held up to the Clay Whigs, as\nhaving announced to the House of Representatives the death of Mr. Clay,\nin language and sentiments branding Buchanan as a malignant slanderer,\nwithout mentioning his name, by the character he gave to Clay! Closing\nhis eulogy upon Mr. Clay in these words, Mr. Breckenridge evidently\nlooked with the eye of prophecy at the slanders of Buchanan, the\nrecollection of which would \"cluster\" around his grave:--\n\n     \"Every memorial of such a man will possess a meaning and value\n     to his countrymen. His tomb will be a hallowed spot. Great\n     memories will cluster there, and his countrymen as they visit\n     it may well exclaim:\n\n    \"Such graves as his are pilgrim shrines--\n      Shrines to no creed or code confined;\n    The Delphian vales, the Palestines,\n      The Meccas of the mind.\"\n\nIf we mistake not, this young Breckenridge is the nephew of the Rev.\nJohn Breckenridge, formerly of Baltimore, and pastor of the Presbyterian\nChurch. If so, he is the nephew of the Rev. Robert Breckenridge, the\ntalented and staunch advocate of the American party. The venerable uncle\nof this young man, whilst pastor of the Church in Baltimore, was a most\nformidable opponent of the Roman Catholic religion, and is the man who\nconducted the debate with Archbishop Hughes, in 1836, which we now have\nbefore us, in a large volume of 550 pages. Of course _Bishop Hughes_\nwill require the young man to repudiate his uncle's views and charges in\nopposition to the Papal religion; and this, we should think, he will do\nfor the sake of the Catholic vote in America!\n\n\n\n\nFrom the Knoxville Whig of June 14, 1856.\n\nPROGRESSIVE DEMOCRACY--ITS LEGITIMATE FRUITS.\n\n\nThe following important document we take from the National\nIntelligencer, of January 22, 1851. It was signed and published by\ngentlemen irrespective of parties--FORTY-FOUR Senators and\nRepresentatives in Congress. It will be a _curiosity_ to those of our\nreaders who may have forgotten its well-timed and patriotic pledges. How\nunfortunate it has been for the country, and especially the public\ntranquillity, that the determination and counsels of these men were, in\nan evil hour, departed from, and flagrantly violated by the demagogues\nof the self-styled Democratic party! To the violation of this solemn\npledge by the repeal of the Missouri Compromise line, and the reoepening\nof the Slavery agitation by the introduction of the Kansas-Nebraska\nbill, intended to elevate that miserable little demagogue, _Stephen A.\nDouglass_, to the Presidency, we are indebted for all the scenes of\nbloodshed in Kansas, to the angry slavery discussions in Congress, and\nthe disgraceful scenes of riot being almost daily enacted there!\n\nSeveral copies of the following Declaration were circulated in Congress,\nand obtained a number of signatures in both halls; but no other list was\never published, that we know of, besides this, which, it will be seen,\nwas headed by the illustrious HENRY CLAY:\n\n     \"The undersigned, members of the thirty-first Congress of the\n     United States, believing that a renewal of sectional\n     controversy upon the subject of slavery would be both dangerous\n     to the Union and destructive of its objects; and seeing no mode\n     by which such controversy can be avoided, except by a strict\n     adherence to the settlement thereof effected by the Compromise\n     Acts passed at the last session of Congress, do hereby declare\n     their intention to maintain the said settlement inviolate, and\n     to resist all attempts to repeal or alter the acts aforesaid,\n     unless by the general consent of the friends of the measure,\n     and to remedy such evils, if any, as time and experience may\n     develop. And, for the purpose of making this resolution\n     effective, they further declare that they will not support for\n     the office of President, Vice-President, Senator, or\n     Representative in Congress, or as a member of a State\n     Legislature, any man, of whatever party, who is not known to be\n     opposed to the disturbance of the settlement aforesaid, and to\n     the renewal, in any form, of agitation upon the subject of\n     slavery.\n\n     \"Henry Clay,\n     C. S. Morehead,\n     Robt. L. Rose,\n     W. C. Dawson,\n     Thos. J. Rusk,\n     Jere. Clemens,\n     James Cooper,\n     Thos. C. Pratt,\n     Wm. M. Gwin,\n     Samuel A. Elliot,\n     David Outlaw,\n     O. H. Williams,\n     J. Philips Phoenix,\n     A. M. Schemerhorn,\n     Jno. R. Thurman,\n     D. A. Bokee,\n     Geo. R. Andrews,\n     W. P. Mangum,\n     Jeremiah Morton,\n     R. I. Bowie,\n     E. C. Cabell,\n     Alex. Evans,\n     Howell Cobb,\n     H. S. Foote,\n     Wm. Duer,\n     Jas. Brooks,\n     A. H. Stephens,\n     R. Toombs,\n     M. P. Gentry,\n     H. W. Hilliard,\n     F. E. McLean,\n     A. G. Watkins,\n     H. A. Bullard,\n     T. S. Haywood,\n     A. H. Shephard,\n     Daniel Breck,\n     Jas. L. Johnson,\n     J. B. Thompson,\n     J. M. Anderson,\n     John B. Kerr,\n     J. P. Caldwell,\n     Ed. Deberry,\n     H. Marshall,\n     Allen F. Owen.\"\n\nThe _rowdyism_ and _treachery_ of Democracy never intended to abide by\nthis pledge--and hence their \"disturbance of the settlement aforesaid,\"\nby opening up anew this villainous \"agitation upon the subject of\nslavery.\" This violation of a solemn pledge has introduced into Kansas\ncivil war, caused bloodshed, the shooting down of men in cold blood, and\noverrun that country with contending parties, called \"_Friends of\nFreedom_\" and \"_Border Ruffians_,\" armed with Sharpe's rifles, Colt's\nrevolvers, bowie-knives, and clubs, mixed with Bibles!\n\nAll this really affords an illustration of the domineering insolence of\nDemocratic Abolitionism--an element in our Federal Government which will\nstop at no extremity of violence, in order to subdue the people of the\nSlave States, and force them into a miserable subservience to its\nfanatical dominion. And it is worthy of note, that the shooting of\nSheriff Jones and others in Kansas, occurred immediately after the\narrival of the _New Haven Emigrant Rifle Company_! This, too, calls to\nmind forcibly the very delectable _conversational speechifying_ that\ntook place at the New Haven Rifle Meeting, among the pious villains who\nfigured most conspicuously. As it is short, we give it entire:\n\n     Rev. Mr. Dutton (pastor of the church.)--One of the deacons of\n     this church, Mr. Harvey Hall, is going out with the company to\n     Kansas, and I, as his pastor, desire to present him a Bible and\n     a Sharpe's rifle. (Great applause.)\n\n     E. P. Pie.--I will give one.\n\n     Stephen D. Purdee.--I will give one for myself, and also\n     another one for my wife.\n\n     Mr. Beecher.--I like to see that--it is a bold stroke both\n     right and left. (Great laughter.)\n\n     Charles Ives.--Put me down for three.\n\n     Thomas R. Trowbridge.--Put me down for four. (Continued\n     laughter.) Dr. J. I. Howe.--I will subscribe for one.\n\n     A gentleman said that Miss Mary Dutton would give one.\n\n     Dr. Stephen G. Hubbard.--One.\n\n     Mr. Beecher here stated that if twenty-five could be raised on\n     the spot, he would pledge twenty-five more from the church at\n     Plymouth--fifty being a sufficient number for the whole supply.\n     (Clapping of hands all over the house.)\n\n     Prof. Silliman now left Mr. Beecher to speak for the bid, and\n     sat down to enjoy the occasion.\n\n     Mr. Killem.--I give one.\n\n     Mr. Beecher.--_Killem_--that's a significant name in connection\n     with a good Sharpe's rifle. (Laughter.)\n\nAfter this, this clerical vagabond, Beecher, blessed the weapons, and\nencouraged the party to go forth and \"do or die\" in the sublime \"cause\nof nigger freedom!\" In all human probability, sweet Mary Dutton's rifle\nmay have sped the ball that pierced the side of Sheriff Jones, the\nofficer of the law, while in the honest discharge of a sworn duty!\nSubsequent murders, where pro-slavery men were shot down with these\nrifles, we attribute to the _omen_ that Beecher found in his name\n\"_Killem_\"--it is a significant name in connection with Sharpe's rifle.\nThe real assassins shoot down their men, and with their _rifles_ and\n_Bibles_ flee; but _she_ who unfrocked herself by furnishing a rifle,\nand _he_ who gave and blessed the weapon of death, are here to accept\nthe thanks of their admirers and partisans. Let sweet Mary and her\n_beloved_ pastor be crowned with wreaths of deadly night-shade, and\nconsigned to one cell in Sing Sing prison!\n\nBut the success of Ruffianism in Kansas, in the hands of those vile\nAbolition Democrats, has emboldened members of the same party to\nintroduce it in the Federal Capital. But the other day, MR. SUMNER, of\nMassachusetts, made, in his place in the U. S. Senate, one of the most\nincendiary and inflammatory speeches ever uttered on the floor of either\nHouse of Congress! The vocabulary of Billingsgate was exhausted in\ndenouncing all who dared to justify the institution of slavery--using,\nover and over again, such terms as \"hireling, picked from the drunken\nspew of an uneasy civilization in the form of men,\" &c. The language\nmade use of was disgraceful to the vile Abolitionist himself, and to the\nSenate, of which he never ought to have been a member. There was no\nlimit to the personal abuse in which the villainous Senator indulged, no\nrestraint to the vile epithets coined in his insane head; and the very\nnatural consequence was, a personal chastisement of Mr. Sumner, in the\nSenate chamber, by Mr. Brooks, a Representative from South Carolina, and\na relative of Judge Butler, the gentleman abused in his absence, which,\nfor its severity, never was equalled in Washington. Mr. Sumner was the\naggressor, because he poured out the vials of his wrath upon not only\nJudge Butler, a distinguished Senator, but upon the whole State of South\nCarolina.\n\nWe do not justify the selection of a _time_ and _place_ by _Mr. Brooks_,\nfor punishing this Massachusetts Abolitionist; but we should despise the\nson of South Carolina who could hear his native State arraigned in such\ntemper and language, without feeling intensely, and _manifesting_ that\nfeeling at a proper time and place. Indeed, it would be strange if a\nSouth Carolinian did not resent the arrogant, insulting, and\ncontemptuous tone which Mr. Sumner saw fit to indulge in towards South\nCarolina in general, and her Senator in particular! We know Judge\nButler--we have seen him on the Bench, in the discharge of the duties of\na Circuit-Judge--we have seen and heard him in the Senate Chamber, where\nhe has served for years, with credit to himself and honor to his State.\nHe is an accomplished man, and a most amiable and honorable gentleman.\nHis character is unblemished; he stands deservedly high; he is a\ngentleman of urbane and courteous demeanor, and is beloved, esteemed,\nand respected, by all _gentlemen_ who know him or associate with him.\nBesides, he is an old man, gray-haired, and palsied; and, whether\npresent or absent, deserved to be treated as a gentleman.\n\nNorthern men may not expect to vilify the South in this way, without\nhaving to atone for it. Men who profess to belong to the peace party,\nought not to employ language that will provoke a fight, and then shield\nthemselves behind their non-resistant defences. They voluntarily put\nthemselves upon the platform of _resistance_--they pass insults, and\nthey must submit to the consequences. We have just finished the perusal\nof a case in AEsop's Fables, exactly in point. It is the case of a\n_trumpeter_ taken prisoner in battle. He claimed exemption from the\ncommon fate of prisoners of war, in ancient times, on the ground that he\ncarried no weapons, and was, in fact, a non-combatant, belonging to the\npeace party! \"Non-combatant, the Devil!\" exclaimed the opposing party,\npointing to his trumpet, as preparations were being made to put him to\ndeath, \"Why, Sir, you hold in your hands the very instrument which\nincites our foes to tenfold furies against us!\"\n\nBut this fight between the parties has to come, and it should begin at\nWashington, and if not in the halls of Congress, at least in the\n_streets_ of the Federal city. Let the battle be fought there, and not\nin _Kansas_, and let it fall upon the villainous agitators of the\nSlavery question, and the _Democratic_ disturbers of the Compromises of\nthe Constitution. Let it come _now_, that it may be fought out and\nsettled, and not left to _posterity_, to curse and crush the rising\ngeneration!\n\nMr. Brooks is a Democrat, and an anti-Know Nothing. Mr. Sumner is a\nDemocrat--was elected by the votes of the Democrats, over that noble and\ndignified Whig, Mr. Winthrop, and his election was hailed throughout the\nUnion as a Democratic triumph!\n\nMassachusetts, irrespective of parties, seems to have taken great\noffence at this occurrence, and to have held indignation meetings, and\nwas to have had _Legislative_ action upon the subject. We tell\nMassachusetts that she is alone to blame, for sending such a man to the\nUnited States Senate. There was a great debate in the Senate twenty-five\nyears ago, in which Daniel Webster and Gov. Hayne met each other and\ngrappled like giants, as they were. The State of South Carolina, in that\nday, though represented by an able, patriotic, and great man, came off\n_second best_. The Senator from Massachusetts, of that day, was an able\nstatesman, a Constitutional lawyer of unsurpassed abilities, and,\nwithal, a cautious gentleman, and rose above the low blackguardism of a\nSumner and a Wilson. When _taunted_ by the Senator from South Carolina\nwith _Federalism_, and opposition to some of the features of the War of\n1812, the great Webster presented Massachusetts before the Senate and\nthe Union, in such a manner that men of all sections bowed down and\nworshipped her. Standing erect with the flash of his eagle eye, he\nexclaimed, \"There is Boston, and Concord, and Lexington, and Bunker\nHill\"--let them testify to the loyalty of Massachusetts to this glorious\nUnion! Not only did Mr. Webster come out of that controversy with South\nCarolina with the admiration of every man in the country, but with the\nrespect and admiration of Calhoun, Hayne, McDuffie, and all the\nhigh-toned statesmen of the South. And why? Because he was not a Sumner,\na Wilson, or an _Abolition Blackguard_. Times have changed--a different\nman takes the place of a Webster, with only the memory of an insulting\nspeech and a broken head! Let Massachusetts send men to the United\nStates Senate who can and will demean themselves like gentlemen, and\ngentlemen from the South will appreciate them, while they differ\nhonestly with them on great questions.\n\nWhat wonderful _progress_ Democracy is making in the country! _First_,\nDemocracy quarrelled and jowered over the election of a Speaker two\nmonths, and finally, by the introduction of the _Plurality Rule_, caused\nBanks, a Black Republican, to be elected. And as if determined to atone\nfor this wear of time and money, they have brought about a series of\nfights, which, before they are disposed of, will cost the government\nhalf a million of dollars!\n\n_First_ then, William Smith, an ex-Governor of the State of Virginia,\nand member of the House of Representatives, assailed and beat the editor\nof the _Evening Star_, in December last, in the street.\n\n_Second_, Albert Rusk, a member of the House of Representatives from\nArkansas, assailed and beat the editor of the New York _Tribune_ in the\ngrounds of the capitol, immediately after leaving the House of\nRepresentatives.\n\n_Third_, Philip T. Herbert, of Alabama, a member of Congress from\nCalifornia, shot down and killed an Irish Catholic waiter at Willard's,\nand is now under bonds to appear before the Court and await his trial\nfor such crime as they may adjudge him to have committed.\n\n_Fourth_, Preston S. Brooks, a member of the House of Representatives\nfrom South Carolina, assails and beats unmercifully a Senator from\nMassachusetts, when occupying his seat in the Senate of the United\nStates.\n\n_Fifth_, Mr. Bright knocked down the doorkeeper, for an inconsiderable\noffence. Here, then, we have five breaches of the peace in five months,\nby Democrats upon Democrats, although the \"Boston Pilot,\" a Catholic\norgan, falsely charges that some of the parties making these assaults\nare \"Know Nothings.\" We congratulate the Democratic party upon the\nprogress of its leading members! They are sinking by swift descent into\nbarbarism, and bringing the country to ruin. And in keeping with all\nthis, they have tried to nominate for the Vice-Presidency a man who\nopenly proposed in Congress the repeal of our neutrality laws, so as to\nbring a general fight!\n\nIt will not do to say that _Sumner_ is not of the Democratic party,\nbecause he is a regular-built Free-Soiler and Black Republican: the\nWashington _Union_ settled this point in 1852, when it uttered these\nmemorable words:\n\n     \"The Free-soil Democratic leaders of the North are a regular\n     portion of the Democratic party, and General Pierce, if\n     elected, will make no distinction between them and the rest of\n     the Democracy in the distribution of official patronage, and in\n     the selection of agents for administering the government.\"\n\nThe rules of the Senate forbid personalities in debate, and it was the\nsworn duty of its Locofoco President, Mr. Bright, to have called Mr.\nSumner to order for his abuse of Judge Butler. But as far back as thirty\nyears ago, under the auspices of JOHN C. CALHOUN as presiding officer, a\ndecision was made to the effect that the presiding officer of the Senate\nwas neither bound nor had he the power to call Senators to order! That\npower, according to his decision, belonged wholly to the Senate\nitself----thus delivering over the minority of that body to \"the tender\nmercies\" of the majority! The object of Mr. CALHOUN at the time was to\nplay into the hands of a combination which had been formed to break down\nthe Administration of John Quincy Adams, and to cripple Henry Clay. The\ninstrument used was the sarcastic, irritating, and personal rhetoric of\nJohn Randolph, then a member of the Senate. To this end, Randolph was\nsuffered to deliver in the Senate a long succession of tirades,\ndisgraceful to the Senate, abusive of New England and of Henry Clay.\nHere is a specimen of Randolph's abuse, which led to a duel between him\nand Mr. Clay:\n\n     \"This man, (mankind, I crave pardon,) this worm, (little\n     animals, forgive the insult,) was raised to a higher life than\n     he was born to, for he was raised to the society of\n     blackguards. Some fortune--kind to him, cruel to us--has tossed\n     him to the Secretaryship of State. Contempt has the property of\n     descending, but stops far short of him. She would die before\n     she would reach him: he dwells below her fall. I would hate\n     him, if I did not despise him. It is not WHAT he is, but WHERE\n     he is, that puts my thoughts into action. The alphabet which\n     writes the name of Thersites, blackguard, squalidity, refuses\n     her letters for him. That mind which thinks on what it cannot\n     express, can scarcely think on him. An hyperbole for MEANNESS\n     would be an ellipsis for CLAY.\"\n\nThis was pleasing to Mr. Calhoun and the dominant party in the Senate,\nand his decision which tolerated it never was questioned by any\nauthoritative precedent, until MILLARD FILLMORE was elected\nVice-President. With characteristic independence, he determined that a\nprecedent so unreasonable and absurd should not be binding on him as the\npresiding officer of the Senate. He therefore, on assuming the duties of\nhis office, delivered an address to the Senate, in which he informed\nthat body that he considered it his sworn duty to preserve decorum, and\nwould _reverse_ the rule which had so long prevailed, that Senators were\nnot to be called to order for words spoken in debate! The Senate ordered\nthis address to be entered at large on their journals, as an evidence of\ntheir endorsement of its doctrines; and there it is now, recorded\nevidence of the patriotism, high sense of decorum, and senatorial\ndignity of that great and good man, MILLARD FILLMORE.\n\n\n\n\nSTRENGTH OF PARTIES IN TENNESSEE.\n\nOFFICIAL VOTES OF THE STATE.\n\n\nThe following tables exhibit the official vote of Tennessee for\nPresident in 1852, for Governor in 1853, and for Governor in 1855, as\ncompared at the capital of the State, and will be valuable as a table\nfor reference. In the last contest, when the _Know Nothing issues_ were\nfully made, causing all the _latent blackguardism in the Democratic\nranks to be fully developed_, it will be seen that _Andrew Johnson_\nreceived 67,499 votes, and _Meredith P. Gentry_ 65,342, leaving Johnson\na majority of 2,157, a falling off of 104 votes from his majority over\n_Maj. Henry_ two years before that. It will also be perceived that the\nvote of the State at this last election is an increase of 8,260 over the\nvote two years previous. Of this increase, _Col. Gentry_ gets 4,182, his\nvote exceeding _Maj. Henry's_ by that much, while Johnson's increase\nupon his own vote two years previous was 4,078.\n\nIt is a moderate calculation to say that Johnson received at least two\nthousand _foreign and illegal votes_; while we are within bounds when we\nsay that at least 5,000 old-line Whigs refused to vote for _Col.\nGentry_--demonstrating beyond all doubt that a majority of the legal\nvoters of the State were opposed to Johnson and his party.\n\nIn the contest now being waged, _Fillmore and Donelson_ will carry the\nState by a majority ranging from _three_ to _five_ thousand votes,\ndespite the low Billingsgate slang and vile blackguardism that may be\nheaped upon them and their supporters. And as this calculation is made\nin _June_, five months in advance of the election, we must ask those\ninto whose hands this work shall fall without the limits of Tennessee,\nto bear it in mind, and when they get the returns in November, to give\nus credit for our sagacity or our want of sagacity!\n\nThe contest will be fierce and bitter, exceeding any former political\nbattle witnessed in the State. If the orators and editors of the\nself-styled Democratic party have not greatly reformed in the space of\none year, but little argument will be adduced, but little gentlemanly\ncourtesy manifested; and instead of facts, figures and arguments, bitter\ninvective, low blackguardism, and Billingsgate abuse of secret\norganizations, dark lanterns, and Protestant clergymen, will be the\norder of the day. In this _congenial_ work, all the conglomeration of\nignorant men, foreign paupers, and fag-ends and factions, styling\nthemselves _Democrats_, will engage!\n\nBut to the official vote of the State:\n\n_Popular Vote of Tennessee--Official._\n\n                           EAST TENNESSEE.\n\n                      1852.              1853.                1855.\n\nCounties.        Scott.  Pierce.    Henry.  Johnson.    Gentry.  Johnson.\n\nAnderson          602     267        648     379          772     333\nBledsoe           464     209        469     303          404     361\nBlount            827     566       1146     734         1069     789\nBradley           547     778        562    1085          644    1021\nCampbell          313     251        356     445          507     383\nCarter            585     139        721     294          768     238\nClaiborne         503     519        620     707          756     744\nCooke             743     196        867     383          929     422\nGrainger          852     477        998     767         1327     621\nGreene            780    1301        902    1915          989    1985\nHawkins           778     831        805    1180          887    1158\nHamilton          774     648        786     972          966    1044\nHancock           241     336        221     532          264     589\nJefferson        1168     307       1396     639         1697     444\nJohnson           365      93        392     184          400     215\nKnox             1863     565       2279     770         2560     695\nMcMinn            796     866        799     965          909     953\nMeigs             141     442        118     561           97     588\nMarion            453     292        476     357          554     468\nMonroe            805     847        739     900          851    1005\nMorgan            240     222        229     260          219     358\nPolk              272     470        249     527          385     676\nRhea              300     307        270     358          298     415\nRoane             820     678        912     755         1002     769\nSevier            621      80        824     133          964     120\nScott             199     127        186     182          121     259\nSullivan          260    1114        361    1407          601    1403\nWashington        565     853        967    1069          847    1338\n                                  ------  ------       ------  ------\n                                  19,298  18,763       21,787  19,394\n\nMIDDLE TENNESSEE.\n\nCounties.        Scott.  Pierce.    Henry.  Johnson.    Gentry.  Johnson.\n\nBedford          1390    1356       1359    1257        1630     1293\nCannon            453     727        445     803         458      859\nCoffee            205     722        274     824         294      880\nDavidson         2617    2058       2597    1963        3132     1783\nDe Kalb           559     588        632     610         560      738\nDickson           323     607        357     743         388      745\nFentress          153     411        166     504         129      616\nFranklin          330    1133        356    1224         394     1302\nGiles            1303    1447       1301    1468        1312     1439\nGrundy             44     327         58     374          22      425\nHardin            643     808        671     827         745      775\nHickman           241     839        263     812         223     1053\nHumphreys         263     471        341     501         354      543\nJackson          1170     803       1154     995        1122     1131\nLawrence          547     583        523     731         524      845\nLewis              43     186         66     182          34      243\nLincoln           606    2297        617    2322         402     2521\nMaury            1324    1799       1238    1731        1444     1793\nMontgomery       1260     993       1309    1004        1502      881\nMarshall          666    1340        671    1282         678     1310\nMacon             617     374        553     341         540      424\nOverton           345    1039        431    1282         290     1528\nRobertson        1013     769       1183     763        1256      804\nRutherford       1495    1313       1407    1243        1435     1288\nSmith            1742     520       1735     546        1572      644\nStewart           533     725        479     718         563      785\nSumner            825    1563        806    1425         780     1740\nVan Buren         107     165        110     205          90      228\nWarren            344     922        402    1093         393     1153\nWayne             666     380        709     430         687      535\nWhite             949     518        974     634         978      694\nWilliamson       1583     763       1502     710        1621      688\nWilson           2248     923       2241     995        2290      937\n                                  ------  ------      ------   ------\n                                  26,930  30,550      27,842   32,623\n\n\nWEST TENNESSEE.\n\nCounties.        Scott.  Pierce.    Henry.  Johnson.    Gentry.  Johnson.\n\nBenton            340     485        393     465         475      453\nCarroll          1498     649       1469     663        1567      694\nDecatur           400     315        408     285         353      429\nDyer              508     411        476     373         442      483\nFayette          1006    1034       1011    1006        1151      940\nGibson           1570     901       1514    1024        1618     1213\nHardeman          717    1024        651    1025         619     1123\nHenderson        1193     511       1301     593        1230      734\nHenry             899    1516        891    1496         871     1738\nHaywood           790     732        726     785         803      762\nLauderdale        330     277        319     252         354      297\nMcNairy           921     872       1016     984         915     1059\nMadison          1426     819       1261     795        1448      788\nObion             431     644        547     792         407      865\nPerry             325     314        387     329         320      450\nShelby           1824    1628       1545    1435        1831     1477\nTipton            357     565        284     527         424      566\nWeakley           783    1149        733    1279         885     1411\n               ------  ------     ------  ------      ------   ------\n               58,802  57,123     14,932  14,108      15,713   15,482\n               57,123\n               ------\nScott's\n majority,      1,679\n\n\n    East Tennessee,               19,298  18,763      21,787   19,394\n    Middle Tennessee,             26,930  30,550      27,842   32,623\n                                  ------  ------      ------   ------\n                                  61,160  63,421      65,342   67,499\n                                          61,160               65,342\n                                          ------               ------\n          Johnson's majority               2,261                2,157\n\n\n_Fillmore and Donelson Electoral Ticket._\n\nAs a matter of reference, and that none may mistake the American Ticket\non the day of the election, we give it as agreed upon and matured by our\nparty:\n\nFOR THE STATE.\n\nHON. NEILL S. BROWN, of Davidson.\nHORACE MAYNARD, of Knox.\n\nFOR THE DISTRICTS.\n\n1st District--N. G. TAYLOR, of Carter.\n2d     \"      MOSES WHITE, of Knox.\n3d     \"      REESE B. BRABSON, of Hamilton.\n4th    \"      W. P. HICKERSON, of Coffee.\n5th    \"      ROBERT HATTON, of Wilson.\n6th    \"      W. H. WISENER, of Bedford.\n7th    \"      C. C. CROWE, of Giles.\n8th    \"      J. M. QUARLES, of Montgomery.\n9th    \"      ISAAC R. HAWKINS, of Carroll.\n10th   \"      JOSEPH R. MOSBY, of Fayette.\n\nThis is an able ticket, and greatly superior to the opposing ticket, as\nour readers will bear us witness when they hear the parties in debate.\nMost of these gentlemen have consented to serve on the ticket at great\npersonal sacrifices; and like their chief, Mr. FILLMORE, they have\nundertaken to serve their party and country \"without waiting to inquire\nof its prospects of success or defeat.\" And all the reward they seek is\nto be able to conduct the struggle to a victorious consummation in\nTennessee, and this we feel confident they will do. The battle in\nTennessee will be hotly contested, but it is by no means doubtful.\nTennessee for the last twenty years, and in five preceding presidential\ncontests, has refused to range herself under the black banner of\nLocofocoism; and now that that banner is doubly infamous by being raised\nand cheered by Catholics, foreigners, and paupers of every clime, it is\nfair to presume she will spurn the flag!\n\n\n\n\nTHE BLACK REPUBLICAN NOMINEES.\n\n\nThe Black Republican Party, in their recent Convention at Philadelphia,\nhave nominated JOHN CHARLES FREMONT, of California, for the Presidency,\nand Ex-Senator WILLIAM L. DAYTON, of New Jersey, for the Vice\nPresidency!\n\nThis man Fremont is no statesman--has no experience in political\nlife--has not the first qualification for this eminent and responsible\nstation--and his nomination has not been made upon any plausible pretext\nwhatever. He is an Engineer by profession--once penetrated with his\ncompanions to the Pacific coast, across the Rocky Mountains--is the\nson-in-law of _Tom Benton_--is a Free Trade Locofoco, and an avowed Free\nSoiler.\n\nThe following letter addressed by Fremont to the great Tabernacle\nAbolition meeting in New York, last spring, is full and explicit, and\ndefines his position on the slavery question:\n\n                                    \"NEW YORK, April 29, 1856.\n\n     \"GENTLEMEN: I have to thank you for the honor of an invitation\n     to a meeting this evening at the Broadway Tabernacle, and\n     regret that other engagements have interfered to prevent my\n     being present.\n\n     \"I heartily concur in all movements which have for their object\n     'to repair the mischiefs arising from the violation of good\n     faith in the repeal of the Missouri Compromise.' I am opposed\n     to slavery in the abstract and upon principle, sustained and\n     made habitual by long-settled convictions.\n\n     \"While I feel inflexible in the belief that it ought not to be\n     interfered with where it exists under the shield of State\n     sovereignty, I am as inflexibly opposed to its extension on\n     this continent beyond its present limits.\n\n     \"With the assurance of regard for yourselves,\n\n                                     \"I am very respectfully yours,\n\n                                         \"J. C. FREMONT.\"\n\n     \"Messrs. J. D. Morgan and others.\"\n\nIn addition to this, Fremont is the representative of _aggression_: he\nis a _Filibuster_, and the exponent of a civilization above all\nconstitutions, and all laws. The fact that Seward, Chase, Giddings, and\nsuch men--able anti-slavery men, and experienced politicians, were\npassed over, is proof that they were not governed by _principle_, but\nseek to shift the issue, and to make it personal and sectional. Take\ninto the account, moreover, the fact that Dayton, a man of moderate\ntalents, is a sort of _Protective Tariff Locofoco_, the advocate of\nForeign Pauper labor, and the largest liberty for _Catholics_, and it\ngives to the ticket a considerable degree of interest.\n\nThe leading men in the Convention were reckless and unprincipled\ndemagogues, of the Locofoco school of politics, including the British\nFree Trade policy, Filibusterism, etc., whose only aim is place and\nplunder. Their Free-soil principles, outside of their radical purposes,\nare scarcely skin deep!\n\nBy many well-informed men, no doubts are entertained now, that the\nnomination of Fremont and Dayton has been the result of an intrigue\nbetween Seward and Archbishop Hughes; and from a resolution of their\nplatform, as reported by the Committee on Resolutions, we attach credit\nto this inference. It will bring the Buchanan party at the North to\nterms, as they are likely to be the only sufferers from this ticket. It\nwill be managed in future alone with an eye to the _aid_ of Buchanan!\n\nWe take the following notice of Fremont from the Charleston (S. C.)\nStandard, and consider it every way reliable:\n\n     \"Mr. Fremont will be destined to play a distinguished part in\n     the drama, and his history and character therefore will,\n     doubtless, become subjects of considerable importance. He is\n     generally regarded as a native of Charleston, but of this we\n     have occasion to doubt. Many gentlemen here, who knew him in\n     early life, concur in saying that he was born in Savannah. Up\n     to within a short time prior to his birth, his mother was a\n     resident of Norfolk, in Virginia, and it is generally asserted\n     that his parents resided in Savannah before they became settled\n     in Charleston; however this may have been, it is at least\n     conceded that he first came into notice in this city. His\n     prospects here were not particularly promising, but he\n     attracted the attention of some philanthropic gentlemen, who\n     provided the means for his entrance and instruction in the\n     Charleston College. His progress there was not remarkable, and\n     when his class graduated he was not considered entitled to a\n     diploma. He was afterwards recommended as a proper person to\n     take charge of the night-school of the Apprentices' Library\n     Association; but, though his attainments were sufficient, and\n     his address particularly acceptable to the Directors of that\n     Institution, he was not as attentive as he might have been, and\n     the school fell through. He afterwards procured, through Mr.\n     Poinsett, a situation as instructor of junior officers on board\n     a vessel of war bound to the Pacific, and in this condition is\n     said to have acquitted himself well. He afterwards acquired\n     some knowledge of civil engineering, and filling unimportant\n     positions in connection with one and another public work, was\n     at length brought to notice and distinction by his connection\n     with Mr. Nicholet in his Survey of the Mississippi Valley, and\n     from that marched steadily on to the Rocky Mountains, and a\n     renown that has placed his name before the country.\n\n     \"From the records of his early life, it would seem that he had\n     talent, and was quite addicted to naval reading, but was\n     wayward, and if not indolent, was inefficient in the tasks\n     undertaken at the instance of other people, and up to the time\n     of his entrance upon his duties as instructor in the naval\n     school, had hardly made up his mind whether he would be a man\n     of character or a blackguard. He was fond of dress, however,\n     and the records of the court still show that he wore a suit of\n     clothes which he was afterwards compelled to declare on oath\n     his inability to pay for, in order to avoid inconvenient\n     restrictions upon his personal liberty; but chance gave a\n     proper direction to his abilities; he had the latent energy of\n     character to act up to his opportunities, and he has really\n     presented a career which any one might regard with\n     satisfaction. It is certainly to be regretted that he should\n     lend himself to the uses of a party so reckless and subversive,\n     not only of the Union but of the rights of that section to\n     which, if capable of sentiments of patriotism, he might be\n     supposed to feel attachment; but the prospect of the Presidency\n     would be a sore trial to the probity of most men, and we find\n     nothing in the antecedents of Mr. Fremont to cause a feeling of\n     disappointment that he should yield to the allurements of\n     power.\n\n     \"He is commended for his attentions to his mother, and they\n     were certainly exemplary. She was poor, and after he determined\n     to behave himself and work like a man, he made her as entirely\n     comfortable as there was the reason to believe his\n     circumstances permitted.\"\n\nPOSTSCRIPT.--Mr. Fremont turns out to be a Roman Catholic, and to have\nbeen raised one, and this explains the readiness of Bishop Hughes to\nabandon Buchanan, and go over to Fremont. It also explains why it is\nthat so many _German Catholic papers_ are coming out for Fremont, in the\nlarge cities, and in the North-Western States.\n\nIn 1850, Fremont held a seat in the United States Senate, for the space\nof about three months, and during that time sought to introduce a\nCatholic Priest to open their services with prayers, and was successful\nto some extent. He also attended service at the Catholic Church. The\n_Washington Star_, of the 19th June, 1856, gives the following\nexposition of facts, in reference to Fremont and his religion:\n\n     \"A SORT OF A CATHOLIC.--We take it for granted that among the\n     informal pledges extracted by delegations in George Law's\n     Convention, from Col. Fremont, there was not one against the\n     Catholic Church; insomuch as, up to the recent birth of his\n     aspirations for the Presidency, he always passed in Washington\n     for a good enough outside Roman Catholic; that being the Church\n     in which he was reared. He was married in this city, it will be\n     remembered, by Father Van Horseigh, a clergyman of his\n     Church--not of that of his wife's family.\"\n\nThe Republicans sought to incorporate into their platform a plank in\nopposition to the _Religious Proscription_ of the American party, so as\nto suit the taste of Romanists generally; but Thaddeus Stevens, who\nknows Pennsylvania as well as any man living, implored them not to do\nso, and stated that such a course, with Fremont as their nominee, would\nlose them Pennsylvania by 50,000 votes!\n\nIt turns out, however, that Fremont, as the anti-American,\nanti-Protestant candidate, with Mr. Dayton on the ticket, equally\nanti-American, and devoted to Romanism, will sweep the Catholic vote in\nthe United States. Catholics may favor Buchanan in such Southern States\nas do not run a Fremont ticket, but in all the Northern and\nNorth-Western States, the Fremont ticket will ruin the Buchanan ticket.\n\nThis question, taken in connection with the Slavery issue, and the\nFilibustering issue, narrows the contest down to one between Fillmore\nand Fremont. Buchanan is defeated, and the Southern fire-eaters see and\nfeel it! The _Atlanta_ (Ga.) _Intelligencer_ comes out and states, that\nif Buchanan can't be elected, it prefers Fremont to Fillmore! And the\nSouth Carolina and Mississippi Disunionists openly avow, that they wish\nthis to be the last contest of the kind. They are for Buchanan or\nFremont, over Fillmore, because they believe the election of either will\nhave the glorious effect to bring about a dissolution of the Union! In\nthe same breath they admit that Fillmore will labor to perpetuate the\nUnion, and that his election will have the effect to prolong its\nexistence a few brief years!\n\nSouthern men, and Northern men, Union men, and national, conservative\nmen, of all parties, can now see _where_ we are driving to, and _who_\nthey should support for the Presidency. Let them guard against these\ndemons of Popery--these incarnate fiends of the Free Soil faith--these\nfanatics of a sectional cast--these slimy vultures of Secession--these\nbogus Democrats--and these infinitely infernal traitors to the\nConstitution and the Union!\n\n     \"Col. Fremont was educated in and graduated from St. Mary's\n     College, in Baltimore, a Roman Catholic Institution. He was\n     brought up in the Catholic Faith, and is a Catholic. He married\n     a daughter of Col. Benton. Miss Benton was a Presbyterian. They\n     were married by a clergyman of that denomination; but a\n     Catholic priest made a fuss about it as being null, void, and\n     heretical, and the ceremony was re-performed by him!\"--_Auburn\n     American._\n\nThe _American_ might have added, that Fremont is the son of a _Catholic\nFrenchman_, the son of a _Catholic mother_, and was reared under\nCatholic influence. Nay, Fremont educates his children at the Roman\nCatholic Institution at Georgetown, in the District of Columbia! The\nplacing of such a candidate before the public, seems especially designed\nto defy public sentiment, and mock the Protestant American feeling of\nthe country! We had expected the Catholics, with Bishop Hughes at their\nhead, in a few years more, to come out openly, and run a Catholic for\nthe Presidency, but we had not supposed them bold enough to attempt it\nin 1856. To show beyond all doubt that the nomination of Fremont was the\nresult of a coalition between Seward and Hughes, more in reference to\nthe _Catholic question_ than the _Slavery issue_, we present the record\nof Fremont in the United States Senate--his _ultra-Pro-Slavery\ncourse_--his voting against justice to the Colonization Society, and\n_seven hundred and fifty_ captured slaves--his opposition to the\nabolition of Slavery in the District of Columbia!\n\n\nHE IS EXTREME SOUTHERN AND PRO-SLAVERY.\n\nJohn C. Fremont held a seat in the United States Senate, in 1850, for\nthe space of a few months. During that time he made no speeches; indeed,\nhe has scarcely ever been known to utter any sentiments, or sanction any\nopinions. Yet his votes, as a member of the Senate, did make for him a\nrecord; and it is this record that will stare him in the face as long as\nhe lives--a record in direct conflict with his present professions and\nposition before the country:\n\n     LOOK AT IT!--JOHN C. FREMONT'S STATESMANSHIP.\n\n     [From the Congressional Globe--Vol. 21, part 2d, p. 1803, etc.]\n\n                        \"IN SENATE OF UNITED STATES, Sept. 11, 1850.\n\n     \"Mr. Underwood, of Kentucky, called up the bill for the relief\n     of the American Colonization Society. The slaves that were\n     recaptured on the barque Pons were turned over to the\n     Colonization Society, by the authority of the United States,\n     sent to Liberia, and there kept at the expense of the society\n     for one or two years. Most of them were children of twelve,\n     fifteen, and sixteen years of age. The society thinks that the\n     expense of feeding, clothing, and educating these people, which\n     was thus devolved on them by the action of the Government,\n     ought to be repaid them. It was certainly an expense incurred\n     by the society, through the action of the Government in\n     throwing these young negroes upon them for maintenance, instead\n     of taking them, as the Government was bound to do by law, and\n     providing for them. That is the nature of the claim. They\n     simply ask that so much shall be paid them as the society, from\n     its own experience, pays in reference to its own emigrants. The\n     claim was reported upon favorably two years ago. A similar\n     report has again been made; and as the necessities of the\n     society require that they should have the money, I hope, said\n     Mr. U., the Senate will consent to take up the bill. The Senate\n     agreed to take up the bill, and proceeded to consider it as in\n     Committee of the Whole.\n\n     \"Mr. Turney asked for the reading of the report of the\n     Committee.\n\n     \"The Secretary read the report accordingly. It sets forth that\n     a liberal construction of the act of Congress of March 3d,\n     1819, would require that the Government should provide for the\n     support of these recaptured Africans, for a reasonable time\n     after they had been landed in Liberia, and that it is beneath\n     the dignity of the Government to devolve this duty upon the\n     society. The petition of the executive committee of the society\n     which the Committee incorporated in their report, states that\n     on the 16th of December, 1845, the United States Ship Yorktown,\n     Commodore Bell, landed at Monrovia, in Liberia, from the slaver\n     Pons, seven hundred and fifty recaptured Africans, in a naked,\n     starving, and dying condition, all of them excepting twenty-one\n     being under the age of twenty-one. The United States made no\n     provision for their support after they were landed....\n\n     \"The services of providing for the destitute negroes were not\n     required to be performed by the society under their\n     constitution, but the alternative was to leave these recaptured\n     Africans to starve and die, and the society therefore\n     cheerfully took charge of them, relying upon the Government of\n     the United States to refund the cost to them.\"\n\nThe question was discussed at length as to whether the United States\nwould pay these just and legal demands; and on the vote being taken for\nthe engrossment of the bill to a third reading, Mr. Fremont's name is\nfound recorded in the negative--as follows:\n\n     \"YEAS--Messrs. Badger, Baldwin, Bell, Chase, Clayton, Davis of\n     Mass., DAYTON, Dodge of Wis., Dodge of Iowa, Douglass, Ewing,\n     Felch, Greene, Hale, Hamlin, Jones, Mangum, Pearce, Pratt,\n     Seward, Shields, Smith, Spruance, Sturgeon, Underwood, Wales,\n     Walker, Whitcomb, and Winthrop--29.\n\n     \"NAYS--Messrs. Atchison, Barnwell, Benton, Butler, Dawson,\n     Dickinson, Downs, FREMONT, Hunter, King, Mason, Rusk,\n     Sebastian, Soule, Turner, and Yulee--16.\"\n\nLOOK AGAIN!--On the 18th day of September, 1850, the bill to prevent\npersons from enticing away slaves from the District of Columbia was\nunder consideration, and John P. Hale \"moved that it be committed to the\nCommittee on the District of Columbia, with instructions _to so amend it\nas to_ ABOLISH SLAVERY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.\" On the vote being\ntaken, FREMONT'S name was recorded in the NEGATIVE. (See Cong. Globe,\n31st Congress, part 2, p. 1859.)\n\nSuch is Mr. Fremont's _record of Statesmanship_. It shows his nomination\nby the \"_Republicans_\" to have been a hollow mockery--\"a dishonest\nfarce,\"--an insult to the intelligence of the American people.\n\nWe shall hereafter pursue the record of this \"remarkable man.\"\n\nBishop Hughes and Wm. H. Seward have been, for years, intimate personal\nand political friends. It is a part of the political history of New\nYork, that Seward is alone indebted to Hughes for his reelection to the\nUnited States Senate. They are both now united in the support of\nFremont, and they procured his nomination over Judge McLean, a pure and\npatriotic man--for many years a _Methodist Class-Leader_, and an officer\nof a _Protestant Bible Society_.\n\nThe coalition between Hughes, Seward and Fremont, is complete, and the\nevidence of the foul coalition and conspiracy will appear in full, in a\nfew days, but not in time for us to get it into this work. We are right\nglad of it, as it narrows the contest down to one between Fillmore and\nFremont, and especially at the North.\n\nIn some of the Northern States, it is now conclusive that a _Buchanan_\nticket will not be run, while in every Northern State where such a\nticket is run, it will be with no hope of success! Hughes and Seward\nwill induce several States to drop Buchanan, and unite on Fremont, by\n_bargaining_ with them, and obligating themselves to give the Democracy\nhalf of the spoils. Already several _Southern_ Democratic papers are\nsaying, that if they can't elect Buchanan, they prefer Fremont to\nFillmore! This ought to open the eyes of all true patriots.\n\n\n\n\nOLD LINE WHIGS, AND THE MOTIVES GOVERNING SOME OF THEM!\n\n\nIn this free country of ours, gentlemen have a right to support any\nPresidential or other ticket they may choose to support; and where they\nare governed by pure motives in differing from a majority of their\nneighbors and old political associates, no one has a right to complain.\n\nSome few gentlemen, known as \"Old Line Whigs,\" will not come into the\nsupport of the American ticket, but will even support the Democratic\nticket; and do it from an honest (though mistaken) belief that they can\nmost effectually serve the interests of the country by this course. With\nsuch, we shall be the last man to raise a quarrel--claiming the right to\ndo as we please in matters of the sort. But there are some men in the\nranks of the enemy now, who are governed by very different motives; and\nas these are quoted against the American party, or, as their refusal to\nact with the party is a matter of _boasting_ in the Democratic ranks, it\nis due to the cause of truth, and of the country, that they should be\nunderstood, that their efforts may be _appreciated_.\n\nWithout intending to be tedious, we name JAMES C. JONES, of Tennessee,\nas at the head of the list of _Old Liners_, whose devotion to the\n_South_, and love of _liberty_, prevent him from supporting Fillmore and\nDonelson. This is the veriest _stuff_ in the political world! Gov. Jones\ncannot excuse the matter of his opposition to Millard Fillmore upon the\ngrounds he rests the case, in his Circular addressed to his\nconstituents. The true secret of the matter must come to light, that old\nWhigs and new Whigs, Americans and Democrats, may appreciate his\nmotives.\n\nLast fall, at the Fair in Jackson, in West Tennessee, in the house and\nat the bedside of ANDREW GUTHRIE, on being inquired of as to his future\ncourse, the Governor became very much excited, and roundly asserted,\nthat if the American party nominated _Fillmore_, he should go against\nhim. ==> _Because Fillmore, in his appointment of persons to office in\nTennessee, did not consult him, but in many cases appointed his personal\nenemies!_ Mark, he did not pause to inquire _who_ might be the opposing\ncandidate to Mr. Fillmore. He was not then, as he is not now, governed\nby any _principle_ in the matter, but by _passion_. He is _against Mr.\nFillmore_, under all circumstances, no matter who may oppose him! And\nwhy? Because Mr. Fillmore did not suffer him to put his numerous _active\nfriends_ into fat offices under the General Government; to many of whom\nhe had made pledges while he was struggling for a seat in the United\nStates Senate--where he ought never to have gone, and where the better\nportion of those who aided in his election now regret having sent him!\n\nBut it is true, Fillmore and his Cabinet did refuse the extravagant\ndemands made for office by the Governor; and in no single instance did\nthey appoint men to office from Tennessee without consultation with\nBELL, GENTRY, and WILLIAMS; all three of whom were offensive to _Jones_.\nThey had proven themselves to be worthy of consultation; the Governor\nhad not! This accounts, moreover, for the efforts of Jones at Baltimore\nto defeat the nomination of Fillmore, and to procure the nomination of\nScott--efforts which, unfortunately for the country, were but too\nsuccessful!\n\nWhen the American party was organized in Tennessee, JONES had no\nobjection to the creed, and would have fallen into the ranks, but then\nhe beheld _Gentry_ and _Brownlow_ in the party--men whom he despised\nabove all others. He tried to prevent the nomination of Gentry for\nGovernor by letter-writing, and by seeking to get up a _Whig_\nConvention. Failing in these schemes, he threw himself into the arena,\nand _secretly_ damaged Gentry all he could, and played into the hands of\nJohnson, who was only elected by a majority of some _two thousand\nvotes_!\n\nWe are not informed as to the course Gov. Jones will pursue in this\ncontest, further than this, he will go against Fillmore. We predict that\nhe will support Buchanan. _Pride of character_ may keep him from it--if\nhe have any of that commodity left, after his five years' residence at\nWashington! The platform upon which Buchanan has been placed by the\nCincinnati Convention, is a reiteration of violent and undying hostility\nto every measure of public policy that was advocated by HENRY CLAY and\nthe Old Whig party. Jones still _professes_ an equally undying devotion\nto Clay and his principles. Moreover, Jones has, on every stump in\nTennessee, held up Buchanan as a _rank old Federalist_, a Pennsylvania\n_Abolitionist_, and as the _wicked traducer_, _violent calumniator_, and\n_malignant persecutor_ of Henry Clay--even attributing his promotion to\nthe Secretaryship of State, by Mr. Polk, to his _infamous agency_ in\nfastening upon Mr. Clay the foul charge of \"bargain, intrigue, and\ncorruption.\" We confess that we are at a loss to see how Jones can fall\ninto the support of Buchanan. The _nomination_ of the man is a direct\ninsult to Old Clay Whigs!\n\nALBERT G. WATKINS, the Representative in Congress from the First\nCongressional District of Tennessee, has gone over to Democracy, placing\nhis change upon the ground of his _great concern for the South_! We take\nit that he will support Buchanan without hesitancy. This would place\nWatkins before the country in his true colors, and reflect the likeness\nof the man with _daguerreotype_ accuracy!! With such a platform, and\nsuch a candidate on it, Watkins would have the appearance of a man\nwalking in one direction, with his head turned completely around, and\nhis face looking the other way! The incongruity of the platform, and the\npeculiar reputation of Buchanan for political inconsistency, are alike\nadapted to the history and incidents of Watkins's late canvass for\nCongress! The plain truth is, that the man so completely destroyed\nhimself, and was so ruinously exposed by his competitor, COL. TAYLOR,\nwhom he beat only some two hundred votes, (and that by means that make\nhis seat in Congress one of _thorns_,) that he could but go over to\nLocofocoism. And although he has, in former days, held up Buchanan on\nthe stump as an old Federalist, and as the reviler and persecutor of\nHenry Clay, he can advocate him now with a better grace than he can look\nhis Know Nothing constituents in the face! We cannot say of this man as\nPope said of Craggs:\n\n    \"Broke no promise, served no private end,\n    Gained no title, and who lost no friend.\"\n\nWILLIAM G. SWAN, of Knoxville, is next on the list of \"Old Line Whigs\"\nwho have gone over to the Foreign Catholic Democratic party, and of\nwhose conversion the Democrats at a distance boast. Here they do not\nbrag; but on the other hand, some of the leaders, whose names we can\nsupply, authorize us to state that they do not want him, and will not\nreceive him. This man was twice beaten for the Legislature in this\ncounty--never elected by the people to any position outside of\nKnoxville--and became soured at the Whig party. He went for _Johnson and\nSag Nichtism_ last summer, and his loss is not regretted by the American\nparty in this county.\n\nBut JOHN H. CROZIER, of Knoxville, has gone over to \"Old Buck\" and his\nadmirers; and this is claimed as a change! This little man, _supremely\nselfish_, was turned out of Congress five years ago, by JOSIAH M.\nANDERSON, with the people at his back, for _taking too much mileage_, by\nseveral hundred dollars per session, for four years! He afterwards\ndesired the Whig party to run him for Governor; but they were not\nwilling to undertake the _load_. He became soured, and last summer paid\na visit to some of the counties below, to avoid, as was believed, voting\nfor Gentry for Governor, and Sneed for Congress. He was formerly very\nbitter in his opposition to Democracy; and on many a stump has he\ndenounced _Buchanan_, and all others concerned in the \"bargain and\nintrigue\" slander of Clay, besides holding up \"Buck\" as a Blue-light\nFederalist! At a recent Buchanan Ratification meeting in Knoxville, he\nmade a bitter speech against the American party!\n\nThese two men, Swan and Crozier, were active in getting up an\norganization against us, in 1849, by heading a company which purchased\nthe \"_Register Establishment_,\" of this city, at the head of which they\nplaced one _john miller m'kee_, behind whom they and others concealed\nthemselves and wrote violent and abusive articles, through a controversy\nof two years. Driving the whole of them to the wall, as we did, in the\ncontroversy, they determined to _mob and tear down our office_; and with\na view to this, those concerned deposited their _guns_, and other\n\"implements of husbandry,\" in the law office jointly occupied by these\ntwo men, who have operated as _twin brothers_ for several years--each\nsympathizing with the other in his political defeats! Those concerned\nwere deterred from this contemplated and well-arranged assault upon our\noffice, by COL. LUTTRELL, the Comptroller of the State, and other\ngentlemen of nerve, arming themselves with shot-guns, pistols, and\nhatchets, and taking their stand at our office!\n\nNothing daunted by this defeat, these _gallant_ lawyers, and\n_generous_--not to say _brave_--opponents betook themselves to the\ncounty of Anderson, in this Judicial Circuit, and with great difficulty\ngot up an indictment against us, under an old statute, forgotten by\ngentlemen of the bar, for _advertising a Baltimore lottery scheme_; when\nthey themselves, and their relatives, were dealing in the _Art Union\nlottery_ in this city! They were most signally defeated in that\nindictment; and, together with the two Williamses, brothers-in-law of\nCrozier, sought to drive the business men of the place, and others, from\nadvertising in our paper, or subscribing for it. Failing in this, they\nsought to prevent us from getting the Government advertising under\nFillmore's administration; and in this they failed, though this is the\nground of their hostility to Fillmore and his Cabinet, as well as to\nJohn Bell, M. P. Gentry, and C. H. Williams.\n\nThe _Register_ fell through--was sold under the hammer for _twenty-two\nhundred dollars_--McKee ran away--and the company have had about FIVE\nTHOUSAND DOLLARS to pay for him, which hurts prodigiously! Our WHIG has\nsteadily increased in favor with the people, and its circulation is now\nTHE RISE OF FIVE THOUSAND--being the largest circulation that any\npolitical or other journal ever attained in East Tennessee! Indeed, no\npolitical weekly in Tennessee now has, or ever did have, a circulation\nequal to \"BROWNLOW'S KNOXVILLE WHIG.\"\n\nA young man calling himself _Luther Patterson_, has been conducting a\nforeign Sag Nicht sheet at Kingston, called the \"Gazetteer,\" and which\nhas gone by the board for the want of patronage. This little eight by\nten sheet has been editorially, and by means of anonymous\ncommunications, assaulting the writer of this work, and the editor of\nthe _Register_, MR. FLEMING. Patterson paid a recent visit to this\nplace; at which time Fleming met with him on the street, and publicly\nchastised him, applying the toe of a stiff boot to the _west end_ of his\nperson, with some force. Patterson turned about and boasted in his paper\nthat he had the best of the fight. Our paper and Fleming's corrected\nthis false version of the affair, and gave the facts; whereupon\nPatterson sued out a writ in the Circuit Court for Fleming, for damages\ndone to his person in said rencontre, laying his damages at $5,000!\nShortly after this he instituted a civil action against the publishers\nof the paper we edit, and another against us for the article we wrote\nagainst him; and these suits are now pending.\n\nThese two _gallant_ attorneys, as we are informed, are employed as\ncounsel by Patterson--a young man who has no visible means of paying\nlawyers, but the _eagerness_ of these gentlemen to get after us would\nlead them to \"work for nothing and find themselves.\" In addition to\ntheir several civil suits against several of us, they have sent their\nman before the Grand Jury of Knox county, and made a presentment against\nus for having _out-wrote_ their Sag Nicht editor! The object of these\nsuits against the editors and publishers of the American papers here, is\nto _gag_ them, or to check their influence in this contest. But they\nhave mistaken their men. Like other vipers, they will find, before these\nmatters end, that they bite a file--a file of good _American_ steel, and\ntempered to that degree of hardness that all their malignity, intense\nand active as it is known to be, will not be able to prevail against it!\n\nWhen we came to this city of Knoxville, in 1849, we sold our office at\nJonesborough, at private sale, to pay a _security debt_, and purchased a\nnew press and materials on a credit. These we sent on to the care of\nWILLIAMS & CO., the brothers-in-law of Crozier, who kept about the only\ncommission and forwarding house in Knoxville. We were detained at\nJonesborough four weeks by close confinement to our bed; and our\nmaterials arriving here, these \"Old Line Whigs,\" who had always\nprofessed friendship toward us, refused to give them house-room; and had\nnot JAMES W. NELSON and others stepped forward and paid the charges, and\nprocured a house for them, the steamboat captain would have sold them\nout for the carriage!\n\nThese _magnanimous_ gentlemen, members of the learned profession of the\nlaw, next contrived, through certain influences they brought to bear,\nto turn us out of the only office we could rent in the city, and thus\nthey drove us _without the limits of the Corporation_, and compelled us\nto erect a temporary office upon our own lot, which we had bought on a\ncredit. They were now at the end of their row. One was a candidate for\nCongress, the other for a seat in the Legislature. We pitched into both,\nand they were both defeated; but we do not claim that it was through our\ninfluence. Like Cardinal Wolsey, however, they both had to bid\n\"farewell, a long farewell, to all their greatness.\" From the pinnacle\nof Congressional and Legislative honors, they have been precipitated to\nthe shades of private life, and to political obscurity. Their chief\nambition now is, to play \"fantastic tricks\" in courts of justice, and\nbefore grand jurors, in the way of annoying those they have neither the\n_manliness_ nor _courage_ to call to an account upon their own hooks!\n\nThe established usage of _gentlemen_, when offended by a newspaper\neditor, is to exact personal satisfaction. To acknowledge that you are\npersonally aggrieved, and then to retort in tricks behind the offender's\nback, or words behind your privileges at the Bar, is to acknowledge that\none is either a _fool_ or a _coward_--perhaps both. A chief object in\nthis crusade against us is to gag us during this campaign, and kill us\noff from the stump and the press; but they have certainly studied our\ncharacter to but little purpose. And whatever line of policy their\nprompters and associates of the Locofoco school may urge upon them, let\nthem be assured that they cannot muzzle criticism of their personal or\npolitical delinquencies. It is a sacred duty to unmask the _renegade_,\nto expose the _traitor_, and to hold up the _demagogue_ to public\nreprobation. That duty will be performed freely and fearlessly, by the\nauthor of this work, come weal or come woe. If these two \"Knights of the\nRueful Countenance\" kill and eat a dozen Know Nothings, we know one\nmember of the Order they will not affright into silence. For their\ncowardly assaults and their officious intermeddlings they may bare their\nbacks to the lash. We will be with them to the bitter end, and will only\nforsake them in the _Gethsemane_ of their retreat!\n\nHad we come here with press and type, in 1849, and agreed to be\ncontrolled by these men and their particular friends, we could have been\n_the_ man for the times. Had we stooped to flirt and coquette and fawn\nand dance around these men, we could have had their endorsement, their\ninfluence, and their money, to any reasonable extent. But we neither\nsought their friendship, nor coveted their adulations. We claim to have\nbeen made of such inflexible materials, as not readily to go through the\ntransmutations necessary to secure the kind regards of these men. We are\nno office-seeker, and desire no reward beyond the consciousness of\nhaving performed our duty, and of having served our country to the best\nof our ability.\n\nWe take this occasion to repeat what we have heretofore said in our\njournal, that nearly every prominent man in the country, calling himself\nan \"Old Line Whig,\" and now opposed to Fillmore and Donelson, is\ninfluenced by personal grievances, or a desire to get office--matters\nwith which the people have not the slightest concern. Their opposition\nto the American ticket proceeds from personal hostility, either to the\ncandidates, some of the electoral candidates, or certain prominent\nadvocates of the ticket, and from no less unworthy motives. Of course\nthere are exceptions to this rule.\n\nThe idea of an Old Clay Whig supporting the Buchanan ticket is both\nabsurd and ridiculous. To say nothing of the foul and malignant charge\nof \"bargain, intrigue, and corruption,\" Buchanan labored to fasten upon\nClay, the Platform upon which the Cincinnati Convention has placed\nBuchanan repudiates every principle Clay contended for, and held as\nsacred to the day of his death. On the contrary, the American party has\nnot ignored one political tenet held by the Whig party, but has added\nnew ones; none of which are at war with the creed of Clay, or the\nConstitution of our country! To make short work of a long story, no man\nwho ever was a _true Whig_, and acted with that party _from principle_,\ncan consistently go over to the _bogus_ Democracy of this day, and vote\nfor Buchanan and Breckenridge!\n\nTalk about a Clay Whig turning Sag Nicht! What an idea! What principle\ndoes this Foreign Democratic party hold, that an Old Line Whig, or a\nconservative man, North or South, does not disapprove? What principles\nhave they ever held, the evil effects of which are not now standing out\nin bold relief as a monument of their shame, and to which they have\nadded the unpardonable sin of making war upon NATIVE AMERICAN\nPROTESTANTS?\n\nIn conclusion, the reader will please allow a few remarks PERSONAL to\nthe writer, and he is done--leaving the public to make their own\ncomments, and their own disposition of both this book and its author.\nOur life has been a public life--our cause a public cause. We have our\nfaults, as most men have; and we have committed some errors, as most men\nhave. Our few acts of goodness and virtue, if any, we leave others to\nhunt up; our faults are subjects of criticism, and are viewed with a\n_jaundiced eye_ by our opponents. Through a course of _eighteen years_\nof editorial invective, (whether right or wrong,) we claim to have been\nactuated by none other than the best of motives. We have never been\nprompted by ambition, malice, or a desire to make money. Our voice,\nwhich has echoed over many hills and through many valleys, has never\nbeen heard in extenuation of guilt; has never been heard to plead the\ncause of the gambler, the swearer, the drunkard, the robber, or the\nassassin. Wherever vice has lifted its \"seven heads and ten\nhorns\"--wherever fraud has showed its thieving hand--wherever gambling\nhas displayed its rotten heart--wherever demagogues have sought to\nimpose on the honest people--there have we tried to be conspicuous; not\nas their aider and abettor, but as their scourge, their accuser, and\ntheir unrelenting foe. And among this class of men are our most bitter\nfoes. What friends we have are to be found at the fireside of\nvirtue--among sober, sedate, and thinking men, and among the brave and\nhonorable. We have never been the slave or sycophant of any man or\nparty, as our immense band of subscribers, numbering thousands, will\nbear us witness.\n\nAnd now, AMERICANS, while we look forward to the future with pleasing\nanticipations--while we rejoice in prospect of the final triumph of\nwisdom, of reason, and of virtue, over audacious ignorance, palpable\ncorruption, canting hypocrisy, and caballing Democracy--God forbid that\nwe should indulge the vain idea that we have nothing to do! Let every\nfriend of American rights and Protestant liberties take a bold, a\ndecided stand, vowing most solemnly that he will have no fellowship at\nthe ballot-box with the friends of that unpitying monster, a DEMOCRATIC\nPAPAL HIERARCHY! Be active, be vigilant, and persevering, and the day is\nultimately ours!\n\n    \"Strike till the last armed foe expires;\n    Strike for your altars and your fires;\n    Strike for the green graves of your sires,\n        God, and your native land!\"\n\n\n\n\nTO STEPHEN TRIBBLE--LETTER No. 2.\n\n\nSIR:--On the night of the 9th of June, 1856, you held forth in the\nCourt-House in Charleston, Mo., taking myself, _Rev. Josiah McCrary_,\nthe Methodist stationed preacher of that town, and Methodists generally,\nfor your text. It would seem that the _touch_ I gave you, and a letter\nof mine read before a large congregation in Charleston, on Sabbath\nevening, June 8th, _have fully developed all the latent blackguardism of\nyour early training and corrupt nature_! I will now place the record of\nyour _infamy_ before the world in such a permanent form, and circulate\nit so extensively, that your low Billingsgate and vile blackguardism can\nnever harm any man or sect. I will make such a showing of you that no\npersons of refined feelings or of any pride of character will hear you\npreach or entertain you in future! I will remind many readers of the\nshowing up of your infamous character and conduct, by the editor of the\nLouisville Journal, ten or twelve years ago, and of the exposure of your\nvillainous conduct by the _Rev. Mr. McNutt_, of Kentucky, through the\nNashville Advocate, some eight or nine years ago.\n\nI will only add the following article from my paper of the 21st June,\n1856, as it completes your record, so far as Tennessee is concerned. I\nwill only add, that you were driven out of McMinn County in East\nTennessee, where you were preaching, lying, and drinking whiskey, years\nago. There and then, too, the records of the Sullivan County affair,\ncertified to by the Clerk, were produced against you! But to the article\nfrom my late paper:\n\n\nSTEPHEN TRIBBLE AGAIN.\n\nThis old hypocrite and scoundrel has been denying in the pulpit that he\nwas ever convicted of manslaughter or branded! It turns out, also, that\nthe old villain once joined the American party in West Tennessee! And\nlast, but not least, it seems that he was turned out of both the\nMethodist and Presbyterian Churches before he became a Campbellite\npreacher. A pretty disciple to be abusing honest men! But to the law and\nto the testimony:\n\n                                    \"ROANE COUNTY, June 3d, 1856.\n\n     \"SIR:--In your issue of the 14th of May, you notice _Stephen\n     Tribble_, and ask for information concerning him. He came to\n     the lower end of Roane county from one of the upper counties of\n     East Tennessee, and passed himself for an Arian preacher. I\n     objected to his preaching in a meeting-house, and came near\n     getting myself into a scrape. About that time a gentleman came\n     from our upper country, and said he had seen his father apply\n     the branding-iron to Tribble, and the smoke rose ten feet high!\n     I then began to play on a harp of one string against him, and\n     that was _a tribble_, whereupon he left between two days for\n     Kentucky! He was once expelled from the Methodist Church, and\n     afterwards he was expelled from the Presbyterian Church. If\n     Tribble disputes what I say, all I ask is a chance to prove it.\n     I live ten miles south of Kingston, near Barnardsville. Yours\n     truly,\n\n                                    \"JOHN BLAIR.\"\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n                                    \"PARIS, TENN., June 6th, 1856.\n\n     \"DEAR SIR:--I see in a late issue of yours that you are after a\n     Reverend wolf, Stephen Tribble. I am personally acquainted with\n     him, as I lived in Sullivan county when he was in the\n     Blountville jail. I have heard him preach here, and deny from\n     the stand ever having been in jail, when he and I had talked\n     the whole matter over the day before. He is now about\n     forty-eight years of age--has a scar on his cheek. He preached\n     here monthly in 1846, and here it was that he joined the\n     American party. He now resides either in Graves or Fulton\n     county, Kentucky. One of his brothers told me last week that he\n     now preaches at one point in Kentucky, and the rest of his time\n     in Missouri. One of their preachers told me that he gets drunk\n     and cuts up largely. Yours, with respect,\n\n                                    \"A. J. HICKS.\"\n\nTo the foregoing letters we add a certified copy of the records of the\nCircuit Court of Sullivan county, and after this we shall leave this\n_old clerical debauchee_ to preach for such Sag Nichts as may feel\nedified by his ministry:\n\n                                    \"MONDAY, Sept. 24, 1827.\n\n     \"State of Tennessee, First Circuit, Sullivan County Court: met\n     according to adjournment. Present, Honorable Samuel Powell,\n     Judge, &c.\"\n\n                                    \"FRIDAY, Sept. 28, 1827.\n\n     \"STATE _vs._ STEPHEN TRIBBLE AND JOHN TRIBBLE.\n\n     \"In this cause, the jury having retired yesterday to consider\n     of their verdict, under the care of an officer, and the same\n     jury, to wit: James Steele, Wm. Morgan, Joshua Miller, John\n     Thomas, Wm. Hashman, John Wassum, Thomas Brown, Stephen B.\n     Cawood, John K. Arnold, Thomas Fain, William Hughes, and\n     William H. Biggs, returning to the bar, do say, they find the\n     defendants not guilty of the murder, but they find them guilty\n     of manslaughter as charged in the bill of indictment. Whereupon\n     the defendants moved the Court for a rule to show cause why a\n     new trial should be had, which rule is granted, and on argument\n     said rule is discharged. It is therefore considered by the\n     Court that for such offence the said defendants be imprisoned\n     for the term of four calendar months: that they be branded with\n     the letter M in the brawn of the thumbs of their left hands on\n     to-morrow morning, and that they pay the costs of this suit or\n     remain in custody until the same is paid.\"\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n     \"STATE OF TENNESSEE, SULLIVAN COUNTY.\n\n\"I, Jno. W. Cox, Clerk of the Circuit Court of Sullivan County, do\nhereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true, and perfect copy of\nthe final judgment in the case of State _vs._ Stephen Tribble and John\nTribble, as appears of record in my office.\n\n\"Given under my hand at this office, the 10th of June, 1856.\n\n                                    \"Jno. W. Cox, Clerk,\n\n                                    \"By A. J. Cox, Dep. Clerk.\"\n\nIn conclusion, _Stephen_, I take my leave of you now, having introduced\nyou to the 5,000 subscribers to the Whig, the 7,500 subscribers to our\ncampaign paper, and the _tens of thousands of readers_ of this book--a\nwork which will exist and be referred to when I am in my grave, and you\nare in the hot embraces of the Devil! You will at least agree with me\nthat _that_ was an evil hour for you when you travelled out of your way\nto assail me before a strange audience in Missouri.\n\n                                  I am, &c.,\n\n                                    W. G. BROWNLOW.\n\n                                      Knoxville, June 23d, 1856.\n\n\n\n\nA SERMON ON SLAVERY.\n\n\n     Delivered by the undersigned in Temperance Hall in Knoxville,\n     on Sabbath, 8th of June, 1856, to a large and attentive\n     audience, composed of citizens and strangers--some from the\n     North and some from the South--occupying one hour and a quarter\n     in the delivery. It is published as it was delivered, without\n     an omission or an alteration. Respectfully, &c.,\n\n                                    W. G. BROWNLOW.\n\n     TEXT.--\"Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their\n     own masters worthy of all honor, that the name of God and his\n     doctrine be not blasphemed.\"--1 Tim. vi. 1.\n\nWhoever reflects upon the nature of man, will find him to be almost\nentirely the creature of circumstances: his habits and sentiments are,\nin a great measure, the growth of adventitious circumstances and causes;\nhence the endless variety and condition of our species. That race of men\nin our country known as Abolitionists, Free-soilers, or Black\nRepublicans, look upon any deviation from the constant round in which\n_they_ have been spinning out the thread of their existence as a\ndeparture from nature's great system; and, from a known principle of our\nnature, the first impulse of these fanatics is to condemn. It is thus\nthat the man born and matured in a free State looks upon slavery as\nunnatural and horrible, and in violation of every law of justice or\nhumanity! And it is not uncommon to hear bigots of this character, in\ntheir churches at the North, imploring the Divine wrath to shower down\nthe consuming fires of heaven on that great Sodom and Gomorrah of the\nNew World, all that section of country south of Mason and Dixon's line,\nwhere this unjust practice prevails.\n\nWhen an unprejudiced and candid mind examines into the past condition of\nour race, and learns the fact which history develops, as the inquirer\nwill, that a majority of mankind were _slaves_, he will be driven to the\nmelancholy reflection, that the world, when first peopled by God\nhimself, was not a world of freemen, but of _slaves_!\n\nSlavery was really established and sanctioned by Divine authority among\neven God's chosen people, the favored children of Israel. Abraham, the\nfounder of this interesting nation, and the chosen servant of the Most\nHigh, was the owner of more slaves than any cotton-planter in South\nCarolina or Mississippi. That magnificent shrine, the gorgeous temple of\nSolomon, commenced and completed under the pious promptings of religion\nand ancient Free-Masonry, was reared alone by the hands of slaves!\nEgypt's venerable and enduring pyramids were reared by the hands of\nslaves! Involuntary servitude, reduced to a science, existed in ancient\nAssyria and Babylon. The ten tribes of Israel were carried off to\nAssyria by Shalmanezer, and the two strong tribes of Judah were\nsubsequently carried in triumph by Nebuchadnezzar to end their days in\nBabylon as slaves, and to labor to adorn the city. Ancient Phoenicia\nand Carthage were literally overrun with slavery, because the slave\npopulation outnumbered the free and the owners of slaves! The Greeks and\nTrojans, at the siege of Troy, were attended with large numbers of their\nslaves. Athens, and Sparta, and Thebes--indeed, the whole Grecian and\nRoman worlds--had more slaves than freemen. And in those ages which\nsucceeded the extinction of the Roman empire in the West, slaves were\nthe most numerous class. Even in the days of civilization and Christian\nlight which revolutionized governments, laboring serfs and abject slaves\nwere distributed throughout Eastern Europe, and a portion of Western\nAsia--conclusively showing that slavery existed over these boundless\nregions. In China, the worst forms of slavery have existed since its\nearliest history. And when we turn to Africa, we find slavery, in all\nits most horrid forms, existing throughout its whole extent, the slaves\noutnumbering the freemen at least three to one. Looking, then, to the\nwhole world, we may with confidence assert, that slavery in its worst\nforms subdues by far the largest portion of the human race!\n\nNow, the inquiry is, how has slavery risen and thus spread over our\nwhole earth? We answer, by the _laws of war_, _the state of property_,\n_the feebleness of governments_, the thirst for _bargain and sale_, the\n_increase of crime_, and last, but not least, _by and with the consent\nand approbation of Deity_!\n\nThese remarks may suffice by way of an introduction, and they will serve\nto indicate the course we intend to pursue, if the announcement of the\ntext has not already done that. _Let as many servants as are under the\nyoke count their own masters worthy of all honor_, &c. The word here\nrendered _servants_ means SLAVES, converted to the Christian faith; and\nthe word rendered _yoke_ signifies the _state of slavery_ in which\nChrist and the apostles found the world involved when the Christian\nChurch was first organized. By the word rendered _masters_ we are to\nunderstand the heathen masters of those Christianized slaves. Even\nthese, in such circumstances, and under such domination, are commanded\nto treat their masters with all honor and respect, that the name of God,\nby which they were called, and the doctrine of God, to wit,\nChristianity, which they had professed, might not be blasphemed, might\nnot be evil spoken of in consequence of their improper conduct. Civil\nrights are never abolished by any communication from God's Spirit; and\nthose fiery bigots at the North who propose to abolish the institution\nof slavery in this country are not following the dictates of God's\nSpirit or law. The civil state in which a man was before his conversion,\nis not altered by that conversion; nor does the grace of God absolve him\nfrom any claims which the State, his neighbor, or lawful owner may have\nhad on him. All these outward things continue unaltered: hence, if a man\nbe under the sentence of death for murder, and God see fit to convert\nhim, he is not released from suffering the extreme penalty of the law!\n\nThe Church of Christ, when originally constituted, claimed no right, _as\nan ecclesiastical organization_, to interfere in any way with the civil\ngovernment. This was the principle upon which the Church was founded, as\nannounced by its immortal Head. When Christ was doomed by a cruel Roman\nlaw to its most ignominious condemnation, he did not so much as resist\nit, because _it was law_, nor did he complain of it as oppressive.\n\n     \"Then Pilate entered into the judgment-hall again, and called\n     Jesus, and said unto him, Art thou the King of the Jews?...\n     Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom\n     were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should\n     not be delivered to the Jews; but now is my kingdom not from\n     hence.... To this end was I born, and for this cause came I\n     into the world, that I should bear witness unto the\n     truth.\"--John xviii. 33-37.\n\nWhen Christ came into the world on the business of his mission, he found\nthe Jewish people subject to the dominion of the Roman kingdom; and in\nno instance did he counsel the Jews to rebellion, or incite them to\nthrow off the Roman yoke, as do the vagabond philanthropists of the\nNorth in reference to the existing laws of the United States upon the\nsubject of slavery. Christ was, by lineal descent, \"THE KING OF THE\nJEWS,\" but he did not assert his temporal power, but actually refused to\nbe crowned in that right.\n\nUnder the Roman law, human liberty was held by no more certain tenure\nthan the whim of the sovereign power, protected by no definite\nconstitution. Slavery constituted the most powerful and essential\nelement of the government, and that slavery was of the most cruel\ncharacter, and gave to the master absolute discretion over the lives of\nthe slaves. Notwithstanding all this, Christ did not make war upon the\nexisting government, nor denounce the rulers for conferring such powers,\nalthough he looked upon cruel legislation in the light in which the\ncharacter of his mission required. And although the _Church itself_ was\nnot what it should have been, in no instance did Christ ever denounce\n_that_. The only denunciations the Saviour ever uttered, were those\nagainst the doctors and lawyers, ministers and expounders of the Jewish\ncode of ecclesiastical law.\n\nBut allow us to present the case of the Apostle Paul, as proof more\npalpable and overwhelming, on this very point. He had been falsely\naccused, cruelly imprisoned, and tyrannically arraigned; and that, too,\nbefore a licentious governor, an unjust and dissipated ruler, and an\nunprincipled infidel. The Roman law in force at the time arrested the\nfreedom of speech, denied the rights of conscience, and even forbade the\nfree expression of opinion in all matters conflicting with the\nprovisions of the laws of the Roman government. In his defence before\nFelix, Paul never so much as speaks of Roman law, though well acquainted\nwith it, but \"he reasoned of _righteousness_, and _temperance_, and the\n_judgment to come_.\" Here was a suitable occasion to condemn the\nregulations and to question the authority of the villainous statutes of\nRome; but instead of this, Paul plead his rights _under_ the unjust\nregulations of the law. He charged Felix with _official_ delinquency,\nwith _personal_ crime, and, as a _man_, he held him up to public scorn,\nand threatened him with the vengeance of God! He appealed _to the law_,\nand justified himself _by the law_. He claimed the rights of a \"_Roman\ncitizen_\"--demanded the protection due to a Roman citizen--and he\nscorned to find fault with the law, cruel and unjust as he knew it to\nbe. And the consequence was, that the licentious infidel who ruled,\n\"_trembled_.\"\n\nThe views we have here presented are not at all new, but have been\nuniformly acted upon by evangelical Christians, in all ages of the\nworld. Since the days of St. Paul and Simon Peter, no reformer has\nappeared who was more violent than that good and great man, MARTIN\nLUTHER. JOHN CALVIN possessed a revolutionary spirit--he fought every\nthing he believed to be wrong--he was unyielding in his disposition, and\nunmitigated in his severity. Yet neither of these great men ever made\nwar upon the existing laws of their respective countries. JOHN WESLEY\nwas the great reformer of the past century--he reformed the whole\necclesiastical machinery of the modern Church of Christ; and his\ndoctrines, and manner of conducting revivals, are leading elements of\nAmerican Christianity. But Mr. Wesley never made war upon the English\ngovernment, under which he lived and died. On the other hand, it is a\nmatter of serious complaint among sectarians not friendly to the spread\nof Methodism, that Wesley wrote elaborately against the war of the\nRevolution. He was devoted to law and order, and he deemed it a\nreligious duty to oppose all resistance to existing laws. In his\ntroubles at Savannah, Georgia, like Paul before the licentious\ngovernor, he appealed _to the law_, and sought by every means in his\npower to be tried _under_ the law, asking only the privilege of being\nheard in his own defence! And it was, in all the instances we have\nmentioned, \"_that the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed_,\"\nto quote the expressive language of the text, that existing laws have\nbeen adhered to by the propagators of gospel truth.\n\nThe essential principles of the great moral law delivered to Moses by\nGod himself, are set forth in what is called the tenth commandment, in\nthe 20th chapter of Exodus: \"Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house,\nthou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor his _man-servant_, nor his\n_maid servant_, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thy\nneighbor's.\" Now, the only true interpretation of this portion of the\nWord of God is, that the species of property mentioned are _lawful_, and\nthat all men are forbid to disturb others in the lawful enjoyment of\ntheir property. \"Man-servants and maid-servants\" are distinctly\n_consecrated as property_, and guaranteed to man for his exclusive\nbenefit--proof irresistible that slavery was thus ordained by God\nhimself. We have seen learned dissertations from the pens of\nAbolitionists, saying, that the term \"servant,\" and not \"slave,\" is used\nhere. To this we reply, that both the Hebrew and Greek words translated\n\"servant,\" mean also \"slave,\" and are more frequently used in this sense\nthan in the former. Besides, the Hebrew Scriptures teach us, that God\nespecially authorized his peculiar people to _purchase_ \"BONDMEN FOR\nEVER;\" and if to be in _bondage for ever_ does not constitute _slavery_,\nwe yield the point.\n\nThe visionary notions of piety and philanthropy entertained by many men\nat the North, lead them to resist the _Fugitive Slave Law_ of this\ngovernment, and even to _violate the tenth commandment_, by stealing our\n\"men-servants and maid-servants,\" and running them into what they call\nfree territory. Nay, the _villainous piety_ of some leads them to\ncontribute _Sharpe's Rifles_ and _Holy Bibles_, to send the\n_uncircumcised Philistines_ of New England into Kansas and Nebraska, to\nshoot down the Christian owners of slaves, and then to perform religious\nceremonies over their dead bodies! Clergymen lay aside their Bibles at\nthe North, and females, as in the case of that model beauty, _Harriet\nBeecher Stowe_, unsex themselves to carry on this horrid and slanderous\nwarfare against slaveholders of the South! And English travellers,\nsteeped to the nose and chin in prejudices against this government and\nour institutions, have written books upon the subject. The Halls,\nHamiltons, Trollopes, and Miss Martineaus, _et ed omne genus_, all have\nmisrepresented us! These English writers all denounce slavery, and\neulogize _Democracy_; as if an Englishman could be a Democrat, in the\nmodern, vulgar sense of the term, and be a consistent man!\n\nBut we do not propose, in this brief discourse, to enter into any\ndefence of the African slave trade. Although the evils of it are greatly\nexaggerated, its evils and cruelties, its barbarities, are not justified\nby the most ultra slaveholders of this age. The vile traffic was\nabolished by the United States, even before the British Parliament\nprohibited it. All the powers in the world have subsequently prohibited\nthis trade--some of the more influential and powerful of them declaring\nit _piracy_, and covering the African seas with armed vessels to prevent\nit!\n\nThis trade, which seems so shocking to the feelings of mankind, dates\nits origin as far back as the year 1442. Antony Gonzales, a Portuguese\nmariner, while exploring the coast of Africa, was the first to steal\nsome _Moors_, and was subsequently forced by Prince Henry of Portugal to\ncarry them back to Africa. In the year 1502, the Spaniards began to\nsteal negroes, and employ them in the mines of Hispaniola, Cuba, and\nJamaica. In 1517, the Emperor Charles V. granted a _patent_ to certain\nprivileged persons, _to steal exclusively_ a supply of 4,000 negroes\nannually, for these islands!\n\nAfrican slaves were first imported into America in 1620, a century after\ntheir introduction into the West Indies. The first cargo, of twenty\nAfricans, by a Dutch vessel, was brought up the James River, into\nVirginia, and sold out as slaves. England then being the most commercial\nof European nations, engrossed the trade; and from 1680 to 1780, there\nwere imported into the British Possessions alone, TWO MILLIONS OF\nSLAVES--making an average annual importation of more than 20,000! And\nthe annual importation into America has transcended 50,000! The States\nof this Union, north of Mason and Dixon's Line, commonly called the New\nEngland States, were never, to any great extent, _slaveholding_; their\nvirtuous and pious minds were chiefly exercised in _slave-stealing_ and\n_slave-selling_! To Old England our New England States owe their\nknowledge of the art of slave-stealing; and to New England these\nSouthern States are wholly indebted for their slaves. They stole the\nAfrican from his native land, and sold him into bondage for the sake of\ngain. They kept but few of their captives among themselves, because it\nwas not profitable to use negro labor in the cold and sterile regions of\nNew England. And when they enacted laws in the New England States\nabolishing slavery, they brought their negroes into the South and sold\nthem before their laws could go into operation! This is the true history\nof slavery in New England. They stole and sold property which it was not\nprofitable to keep, and for which they now refuse all warranty. And\nwhat few American ships are in the trade now, at the peril of piracy,\nare New England ships.\n\nThe pious and religious portion of New England Abolitionists, we take\nit, are the better portion, and in these we have no sort of confidence.\nTake, for example, the case of that great man, and powerful pulpit\norator, STEPHEN OLIN, who came into Georgia, and was introduced into the\nministry by BISHOP ANDREW and his friends, and by this means married a\nlady owning a number of slaves. He sold them all for the money, pocketed\nthe money, and returned to his congenial North; and when BISHOP ANDREW\nwas arraigned before the General Conference of 1844, because he had\nmarried a widow lady owning a few slaves, this man OLIN appeared on the\nfloor, and spoke and voted against the Bishop! Dr. Olin had washed his\nhands of the sin of slavery--had his money out at interest--and he was\nready to plead for the rights of the poor African! May we not exclaim,\n\"Lord, what is man?\"\n\nWe are acquainted with many of the leading Abolitionists of the North\nconnected with the Methodist Church; and although we suppose they are\nabout as good as the Abolitionists of other denominations we have no\nconfidence in them. The most of them would enter their fine churches on\nthe Sabbath, preach for hours against the sin of slavery, shed their\ntears over the oppressions of the \"servile progeny of Ham,\" in these\nSouthern States; and on the next day, in a purely business transaction,\nbehind a counter, or in the settlement of an account, cheat a Southern\nslave out of the _pewter_ that ornaments the head of his cane!\n\nThere is much in the political papers of the country calculated, if not\nintended, to fan a flame of intense warfare upon the subject of slavery,\nwhich can result in no possible good to any one. Those politicians who\nare exciting the whole country, and fanning society into a livid\nconsuming flame, particularly at the North, have no sympathies for the\nblack man, and care nothing for his comfort. They only seek their own\nglory. This political disquiet and commotion is giving birth to new and\nloftier schemes of agitation and disunion, among the vile Abolitionists\nof the country, and to bold and hazardous enterprises in the States and\nTerritories. And many of our Southern altars smoke with the vile incense\nof Abolitionism. We have scores of Abolitionists in the South, in\ndisguise--designing men--some filling our pulpits--some occupying high\npositions in our colleges--some editing political and religious\npapers--some selling goods--and some following one calling and some\nanother, who, though among us, are not of us, Southern men may rest\nassured!\n\nWe endorse, without reserve, that much-abused sentiment of a\ndistinguished South Carolina statesmen, now no more, that \"slavery is\nthe corner-stone of our republican edifice;\" while we repudiate, as\nridiculously absurd, that much-lauded, but nowhere-accredited dogma of\nMR. JEFFERSON, that \"all men are born equal.\" God never intended to make\nthe _butcher_ a judge, nor the _baker_ a president, but to protect them\naccording to their claims as butcher and baker. Pope has beautifully\nexpressed this sentiment, where he has said:\n\n    \"Order is heaven's first law, and this confessed,\n    _Some are_, and _must be_, greater than the rest.\"\n\nWe have gone among the free negroes at the North--we have visited their\nmiserable dwellings in Philadelphia, New York, Boston, and other points;\nand, in every instance, we have found them more miserable and destitute,\nas a whole, than the slave population of the South. In our Southern\nStates, where negroes have been set at liberty, in nine cases out of ten\ntheir conditions have been made worse; while the most wretched,\nindolent, immoral, and dishonest class of persons to be found in the\nSouthern States, are _free persons of color_.\n\nThe freedom of negroes in even the Northern States, is, in all respects,\nonly an empty name. The citizen negro does not vote, and takes good care\nnot to do so. The law does not interdict him this privilege, but if he\nattempt to avail himself of the privilege, he is apprehensive of\n\"apostolic blows and kicks,\" which the pious Abolitionists will\nadminister to him. All the social advantages, all the respectable\nemployments, all the honors, and even the pleasures of life, are denied\nthe free negroes of the North, by citizens full of sympathy for the\ndown-trodden African! The negro cannot get into an omnibus, cannot enter\na bar-room frequented by whites, nor a church, nor a theatre; nor can he\nenter the cabin of a steamboat, in one of the Northern rivers or lakes,\nor enter a first class passenger car on one of their railroads. They are\nnot suffered to enter a stage-coach with whites, but are forced upon the\ndeck, whether it shall rain or shine--whether it be hot or cold.\nIndustry is closed to them, and they are forced to live as _servants_ in\nhotels, or adopt the professions of barber, or boot-black, or open\noysters in saloons, or sell villainous liquors to the lower classes of\nGerman and Irish emigrants, who throng our large cities and towns. The\nnegroes even have their _own streets_, and their own low-down kennels;\nthey have their hospitals, their churches, their cars, upon which are\nwritten in large letters, \"FOR COLORED PEOPLE!\" Finally, they are forced\nto have their own _grave-yards_--the _yellow_ remains of Northern\nAbolitionists, and pious white men, refusing to mingle with the\nbleeching bones of the dead negro! While, in the South, they crowd the\ngalleries and back seats in our churches, travel in our passenger cars,\nand even _loan their money_ to our white men at interest! Such is an\noutline of the contrast between free negroes at the North, and slaves at\nthe South.\n\nLet us turn again to the Holy Scriptures, and see whether or not they\nsustain or condemn the institution of slavery. The opposers of slavery\nprofess to be governed alone by the teachings of the Bible, in their war\nupon this institution. It is vain to look to Christ or any of his\napostles to justify the blasphemous perversions of the word of God,\ncontinually paraded before the world by these graceless agitators.\nAlthough slavery in its most revolting forms was everywhere visible\naround them, no visionary notions of piety or schemes of philanthropy\never tempted either Christ or one of his apostles to gainsay the LAW,\neven to mitigate the cruel severity of the slavery system then existing.\nOn the contrary, finding slavery _established by law_, as well as an\n_inevitable and necessary consequence_, growing out of the condition of\nhuman society, their efforts were to sustain the institution. Hence, St.\nPaul actually apprehended a \"_fugitive slave_,\" and sent him back to his\nlawful owner and earthly master!\n\nHaving already appealed to the authority of the Old Testament\nScriptures, we turn to that of the New, where we learn that slavery\nexisted in the earliest days of the Christian Church, and that both\n_masters_ and _slaves_ were members of the same Christian congregations.\nSlavery was an institution of the State in the Roman Empire, as it is in\nthe Southern States of this confederacy, and the apostles did not feel\nat liberty to denounce it, if, indeed, they felt the least opposition to\nit--a thing we deny.\n\nBut, before we appeal to the irresistible authority of the New\nTestament, we will submit a few only of a great many passages from the\nOld Testament--not having quoted as extensively as may have been deemed\nnecessary:\n\n     \"And he said, I _am_ Abraham's servant.\"--GEN. xxiv. 34.\n\n     \"And there was of the house of Saul a _servant_, whose name was\n     Ziba; and when they had called him unto David, the king said\n     unto him, Art thou Ziba? And he said, _Thy servant is he_.\"--2\n     SAM. ix. 2.\n\n     \"Then the king called to Ziba, Saul's _servant_, and said unto\n     him, I have given unto thy _master's_ son all that pertained to\n     Saul, and to all his house.\"--Verse 9th.\n\n     \"Thou, therefore, and thy sons, and thy _servants_, shall till\n     the land for him, and thou shalt bring in _the fruits_, that\n     thy _master's_ son may have food to eat, &c. Now Ziba had\n     fifteen sons and TWENTY SERVANTS.\"--Verse 10th.\n\n     \"I got me _servants_ and maidens, and had _servants born in my\n     house_; also, I had great possessions of great and small\n     cattle, above all that were in Jerusalem before me.\"--ECCLES.\n     ii. 7.\n\n     \"And he said, Hagar, Sarai's maid, whence camest thou? And she\n     said, I flee from the face of my _mistress_ Sarai.\"--GEN. xvi.\n     8.\n\n     \"And the Angel of the Lord said unto her, _Return to thy\n     mistress_, and submit thyself to her hands.\"--Verse 9th.\n\nThe only comments we have to offer upon these passages are, first, one\nindividual acknowledges himself the owner of twenty slaves! Another was\nraising slaves, and having them born in his house!! And last, but not\nleast, the angel of God ordered the fugitive slave to return to her\nlawful owner!! High authority, this, for apprehending runaway slaves!\n\nIn reference to bad servants, we read in Prov. xxix. 19:\n\n     \"A servant will not be corrected by _words_; for though he\n     understand, he will not answer.\"\n\nThe Scriptures look to the correction of servants, and really enjoin it,\nas they do in the case of children. We esteem it the duty of Christian\nmasters to feed and clothe well, and in cases of disobedience to _whip\nwell_.\n\nIn the book of Joel, iii. 8, the _slave trade_ is recognized as of\nDivine authority:\n\n     \"And I will sell your sons and your daughters into the land of\n     the children of Judah, and they shall sell them to the Sabeans,\n     to a people far off; FOR THE LORD HATH SPOKEN IT!\"\n\n     \"Let every man abide in the same calling wherein he was called.\n     Art thou called, being _a servant_? Care not for it; but if\n     thou mayest be made free, use it rather. For he that is called\n     in the Lord, being _a servant_, is the Lord's freeman; likewise\n     also he that is called, being free, is Christ's servant.\"--1\n     Cor. vii. 20-22.\n\n     \"_Servants_, be obedient to them that are your _masters\n     according to the flesh_, with fear and trembling, in singleness\n     of your heart, as unto Christ. Not with eye-service, as\n     men-pleasers; but as the servants of Christ, doing the will of\n     God from the heart. With good-will doing service, as to the\n     Lord, and not to men: knowing that whatsoever good thing any\n     man doeth, the same shall he receive of the Lord, whether he be\n     bond or free. And, _ye masters_, do the same things unto them,\n     forbearing threatening: knowing that your Master also is in\n     heaven: neither is there respect of persons with him.\"--Eph.\n     vi. 5-9.\n\n     \"_Servants_, obey in all things your _masters according to the\n     flesh_: not with eye-service, as men-pleasers; but in\n     singleness of heart, fearing God. And whatsoever ye do, do it\n     heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men: knowing that of the\n     Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance; for ye\n     serve the Lord Christ.\"--Col. iii. 22-25.\n\n     \"_Masters_, give unto _your servants_ that which is just and\n     equal: knowing that ye also have a Master in heaven.\"--Col. iv.\n     1.\n\n     \"Let as many _servants as are under the yoke_ count their _own\n     masters_ worthy of all honor, that the name of God and his\n     doctrine be not blasphemed. And they that have _believing\n     masters_, let them not despise them, because they are brethren;\n     but rather do them service, because they are faithful and\n     beloved, partakers of the benefit. These things teach and\n     exhort.\"--1 Tim. vi. 1, 2.\n\n     \"Exhort _servants_ to be obedient unto their _own masters_, and\n     to please them well in all things; not answering again; not\n     purloining, but showing all good fidelity; that they may adorn\n     the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things.\"--Titus ii. 9,\n     10.\n\n     \"_Servants_, be subject to _your masters_ with all fear; not\n     only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward. For this\n     is thankworthy, if a man for conscience toward God endure\n     grief, suffering wrongfully.\"--1 Peter ii. 18, 19.\n\nWe have but a single word of comment to offer upon these passages of\nScripture. The original words used by the Greek writers, both sacred and\nprofane, to express slave; the most abject condition of slavery; to\nexpress the absolute owner of a slave, and the absolute control of a\nslave, are the strongest that the language affords, and are used in the\npassages here quoted. If the apostles understood the common use of\nwords, and desired to convey these ideas, and to recognize the relations\nof master and servant, they would, naturally enough, employ the very\nwords used. To say that they did not know the primary meaning and _usus\nloquendi_ of the original words, is paying them a compliment we wish not\nto participate in! And to show that we are not singular in our views of\nthe meaning expressed in the passages quoted, showing that they express\nin the one case slaves, and in the other masters or owners, actually\nholding them as property, under the sanction of the laws of the State,\nwe quote from the following authorities:\n\nThat great commentator, Dr. ADAM CLARKE, on 1 Cor. vii. 21, says:\n\n     \"Art thou converted to Christ while thou art a slave--the\n     property of another person, and bought with his money? _Care\n     not for it._\"\n\nThe learned Dr. Neander, in his work entitled \"Planting and Training of\nthe Church,\" in referring to _Onesimus_, mentioned in the epistle to\nPhilemon, says of him:\n\n     \"It does not appear to be surprising that a _runaway slave_\n     should betake himself at once to Rome.\"\n\nTo the foregoing might be added other authorities of equal weight and\nimportance.\n\nIt is a well-known historical fact, that slaveholders were admitted into\nthe APOSTOLIC CHURCHES; nor would this assumed position of the advocates\nof slavery be at all denied by any intelligent and well-read men at the\nNorth, but for the fact that they think such an admission would decide\nthe question against abolitionists. We have given much attention to this\nsubject within ten years past, and we feel no sort of delicacy in\nexpressing our views and convictions, as revolting as they may be to\nNorthern men and Free-soilers, even among us. We believe that the\nprimitive Christians held slaves in bondage, and that the apostles\nfavored slavery, by admitting slaveholders into the Church, and by\npromoting them to official stations in the Church. And why do we believe\nall this? Because we are sustained in these positions by uninterrupted\nhistorical testimony!\n\nWell, for the information of abolitionists and other anti-slavery men\ndispersed throughout the South, we assume that the fact of the apostles\nadmitting into Church fellowship slaveholders, and promoting them to\npositions of honor and trust, shows that the simple relation of master\nand slave was no bar to Church-membership. Masters and slaves, in the\ndays of the apostles, were admitted into the Church as brethren: they\npartook in common of the benefits of the Church: they held to the same\nreligious principles: they squared their lives by the same rule of\nconduct: acknowledged the same obligations one to another; and\nworshipped at the same altar. This was true of the first and succeeding\ncenturies, when the relations of master and slave, and the practice of\nthe Church in reference thereto, were very much like they are in the\nSouthern States of our Union at present. But to the proof that\nslaveholders were admitted into the apostolic Churches:\n\n1. Historians all agree that slavery existed, and was general throughout\nthe Roman empire, at the time the apostolic Churches were instituted. We\nhave at our command the authorities to prove this, but to quote from\nthem would swell this discourse beyond what we have intended. We will\ncite the authorities only; and anti-slavery men who deny our position\ncan examine our authorities. See Gibbon's \"Decline and Fall of the Roman\nEmpire,\" vol. i. See \"Inquiry into Roman Slavery, by Wm. Blair,\"\nEdinburgh edition of 1833. See vol. iv. of \"Lardner's Works,\" page 213.\nSee vol. i. of \"Dr. Robertson's Works,\" London edition. Other\nauthorities might be given, but these are sufficient, as they show that\nslavery was a civil institution of the State; that the Roman laws\nregarded slaves as _property_, at the disposal of their masters; that\nthese slaves, whether white or colored, had no civil existence or\nrights, and contended for none; and that there were _three slaves to one\ncitizen_--showing something of a similarity between the Roman empire and\nour Southern States! Gibbon says that slavery existed in \"every province\nand every family,\" and that they were bought and sold according to their\ncapacities for usefulness, and the demand for laborers--selling at\nhundreds of dollars, and from that down to the price of a beast of\nburden! Now, it is notorious that the gospel made considerable progress\namong the citizens of the Roman empire; and, as nearly every family\nowned slaves, it is certain that slaveholders were converted and\nadmitted into the Church. It will not do to say that the poor, including\nthe slaves, were alone converted to God, because the apostles make\nfrequent allusions to the receiving into the Church of intelligent,\nlearned, and opulent persons. The learned DR. MOSHEIM, in his Church\nHistory, vol. i., relating to the _first three centuries_, settles this\nquestion most effectually. He says:\n\n     \"The apostles, in their writings, prescribe rules for the\n     conduct of the rich as well as the poor, for _masters_ as well\n     as _servants_--a convincing proof that among the members of the\n     Church planted by them were to be found persons of opulence\n     and masters of families. St. Paul and St. Peter admonished\n     Christian women not to study the adorning of themselves with\n     pearls, with gold and silver, or costly array. 1 Tim. ii. 9: 1\n     Peter iii. 3. It is, therefore, plain that there must have been\n     women possessed of wealth adequate to the purchase of bodily\n     ornaments of great price. From 1 Tim. vi. 20, and Col. ii. 8,\n     it is manifest that among the first converts to Christianity\n     there were men of learning and philosophers; for, if the wise\n     and the learned had unanimously rejected the Christian\n     religion, what occasion could there have been for this caution?\n     1 Cor. i. 26 unquestionably carries with it the plainest\n     intimation that persons of rank or power were not wholly\n     wanting in that assembly. Indeed, lists of the names of various\n     illustrious persons who embraced Christianity, in its weak and\n     infantile state, are given by Blondel, p. 235 de Episcopis et\n     Presbyteris: also by Wetstein, in his Preface to Origen's Dia.\n     Con. Mar., p. 13.\"\n\nA few reflections, by way of concluding, and we are through with our\ndiscourse, already extended beyond the limits we had prescribed:\n\n_First._--There is not a single passage in the New Testament, nor a\nsingle act in the records of the Church, during her early history, for\neven centuries, containing any direct, professed, or intended\ndenunciation of slavery. But the apostles found the institution\nexisting, under the authority and sanction of law; and, in their labors\namong the people, masters and slaves bowed at the same altar, communed\nat the some table, and were taken into the Church together; while they\nexhorted the one to treat the other as became the gospel, and the other\nto obedience and honesty, that their religious professions might not be\nevil spoken of!\n\n_Secondly._--The early Church not only admitted the existence of\nslavery, but in various ways, by her teachings and discipline, expressed\nher approbation of it, enforcing the observance of certain Fugitive\nSlave Laws which had been enacted by the State. And, in the various acts\nof the Church, from the times of the apostles downward through several\ncenturies, she enacted laws and adopted regulations touching the duties\nof masters and slaves, _as such_. This, in our humble judgment, amounts\nto a justification and defence of the institution of slavery.\n\n_Thirdly._--Our investigations of this subject have led us regularly,\ngradually, certainly, to the conclusion that God intended the relation\nof master and slave to exist. Hence, when God opened the way for the\norganization of the Church, the apostles and first teachers of\nChristianity found slavery _incorporated with every department of\nsociety_; and, in the adoption of rules for the government of the\nmembers of the Church, they provided for the rights of owners, and the\nwants of slaves.\n\n_Fourthly._--Slavery, in the age of the apostles, had so penetrated\nsociety, and was so intimately interwoven with it, that a religion\npreaching freedom to the slave would have arrayed against it the civil\nauthorities, armed against itself the whole power of the State, and\ndestroyed the usefulness of its preachers. St. Paul knew this, and did\nnot assail the institution of slavery, but labored to get both masters\nand slaves to heaven, as all ministers should do in our day.\n\n_Fifthly._--Slavery having existed ever since the first organization of\nthe Church, the Scriptures clearly teach that it will exist even to the\nend of time. Rev. vi. 12-17 points to \"The Day of Judgment,\" \"The Last\nDay,\" \"The Great Day,\" and the condition of the human race at that time,\nas well as the classes of persons to be judged, rewarded, and punished!\nA portion of this text reads, \"And the kings of the earth, and the great\nmen, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, and\nevery BONDMAN, and every FREEMAN,\" etc., will be there; evidently\nimplying that slavery will exist, and that the relations of master and\nslave will be recognized, to the end of time!","title":"Americanism Contrasted with Foreignism, Romanism, and Bogus Democracy in the Light of Reason, History, and Scripture;: In which Certain Demagogues in Tennessee, and Elsewhere,; are Shown Up in Their True Colors","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":94975}