[Illustration: REV. W. G. BROWNLOW. ]

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 THEIRTRUE COLORS. 

BY

WILLIAM G. BROWNLOW, EDITOR OF "BROWNLOW'S KNOXVILLE WHIG. "

 "----Go to your bloody rites again: Preach--perpetuate damnation in your den; Then let your altars, ye blasphemers, peal With thanks to Heaven, that let you loose again, To practice deeds with torturing fire and steel, No eye may search, no tongue may challenge or reveal!"

 THOMAS CAMPBELL. 

Nashville, Tenn. :PUBLISHED FOR THE AUTHOR. 1856. 

ENTERED, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1856, byWILLIAM G. BROWNLOW, In the Clerk's office of the District Court for the Middle District ofTennessee. 

Dedication. 

TO THE YOUNG MEN OF AMERICA. 

YOUNG GENTLEMEN:--Almighty God has conferred on you the peculiar honorand the eminent responsibility of preserving and perpetuating theliberties of this country, both civil and religious. That the Americanpeople are on the eve of an eventful period, will not be doubted by anysane man, who can discern the "signs of the times. " Indeed, it is anevery-day remark, that, as a nation, we are in the midst of a crisis. If, however, a crisis ever did exist in the affairs of this Nation, since its independence was first achieved, which called upon the NATIVEAND LEGAL VOTERS of the country to watch with sleepless vigilance overtheir blood-bought liberties, that crisis must be dated in the year ofour Lord, ONE THOUSAND EIGHT HUNDRED AND FIFTY-SIX! The greatCommonwealth of Humanity, in behalf of the momentous interests of Truth, Liberty, and Religion, calls upon the present generation of YOUNG MEN, who will have the issues of a coming revolution to meet, to qualifythemselves for the task. 

There never was a time known, since the dark days of the Revolution, when the civil and religious liberties of this country were so muchendangered as at the present time. This danger we are threatened withfrom _Foreign influence_, and the rapid strides of _Romanism_, to whichwe may add _Native treachery_, connived at, as they are, by certainleading demagogues of the country, and a powerful and influentialpolitical party, falsely called _Democrats_, who seek the Foreign andCatholic vote, and are willing to obtain it at the expense of Liberty, and the sacrifice of the Protestant Religion!

The great criminal of the nineteenth century, the PAPAL HIERARCHY, isnow on trial before the bar of public opinion, having been arraigned bythe AMERICAN PARTY. You are called on to decide, YOUNG MEN, as you wieldthe balance of power, whether this Criminal, arraigned for treasonagainst God, and hostility to the human race, deserves the execrationsof all honest and patriotic men, and avenging judgments of a righteousGod! In order to decide this grave question, YOUNG _Gentlemen of theNineteenth Century_, you are to consider the inevitable tendency of theprinciples of the Church of Rome--the actual results of these tendenciesas embodied in history--the indictment brought in by the AMERICAN PARTY, and the testimony of the witnesses. When you have intelligentlyconsidered the part the self-styled _Democratic Party_ has acted in thisinfamous drama, you will feel it to be your duty to indict thecorporation claiming the right to be called the Great Democratic Party, as _accessory_ to the treason, crimes, and infamy, of the aforesaidPapal Hierarchy!

To you, then, Gentlemen, is this brief work most affectionatelyinscribed by

 THE AUTHOR. 

PREFACE. 

For the last twenty-five years, the writer of this work has employedmuch of his time in the reading and study of the controversy betweenRoman Catholics and Protestants. And those who have been subscribers tothe paper he has edited and published for the LAST SEVENTEEN YEARS, willbear him witness that he has kept up a fierce and unceasing fire againstthat dangerous and immoral _Corporation_, claiming the right to becalled the HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH. This he has done, and still continuesto do, because he believes firmly that the system of Popery, as taughtin the standards of the Church of Rome, as enforced by her Bishops andPriests, and as believed and practised by the great body of Romanists, both in Europe and America, is at war with the true religion taught inthe Bible, and is injurious to the public and private morals of thecivilized world; and, if unchecked, will overturn the civil andreligious liberties of the United States. Such, he believes, is itstendency and the design of its leaders. 

Popery is deceitful in its character; and the design of this brief workis, in part, to drag it forward into the light of the middle of thenineteenth century, to strip the flimsy vizor off its face, and to bringit, with all its abuses, corruptions, and hypocritical Protestantadvocates, before the bar of enlightened public opinion, for judgment inthe case. Roman Catholics misrepresent their own creed, their Church, and its corrupt institutions. The most revolting, wicked, and immoralfeatures of their _holy and immutable system_, are kept out of sight byits corrupt Clergy, and Jesuitical teachers; while, with a purpose to_deceive_, a _Protestant sense_ is attached to most of their doctrinesand peculiarities. By this vile means, they designedly _misrepresentthemselves_, and impose on the public, by inducing charitable anduninformed persons to believe that they are not as profligate as theyare represented to be. This game has been played with a bold hand in_Knoxville_, for the last twelve months, and it is being played in everycity and town in the South and West, where Romanism is being planted. One object, then, of this _epitomized_ work, setting forth theboastings, threats, and disclosures of leading Catholic organs andBishops, as to their real principles and designs upon this country, suffered to go forth in their more excited moments, or unguarded hours, is, to spread before the people, in a cheap form, true Popery, and tostrip it of its _Protestant garb_, which it has for the time beingassumed. 

An additional reason for bringing out this publication, at thisparticular time, is, to expose a corrupt bargain entered into by theleaders of the Catholic Church, and the leaders of a corrupt anddesigning political party, falsely called the Democratic party. One ofthe most alarming "signs of the times" is, that while Protestantministers, of different persuasions, only two brief years ago, couldpreach with power and eloquence against the dogmas and corruptingtendencies of _Romanism_, and pass out of the doors of their churches, receiving the compliments and extravagant praises of their entirecongregations, let one of them now dare to hold up this Corporation as adangerous foreign enemy--let him warn his charge against the influenceof Popery, or but only designate the Catholic Hierarchy as the "man ofsin" described in the Scriptures, and one half of his congregation aregrossly insulted: they charge him with meddling in politics; and, by wayof resentment, they will either not hear him again, or they will starvehim out, by refusing to contribute to his support!

The hypocritical and profligate portion of the Methodist, Presbyterian, Baptist, and Episcopal membership in this country, are not so muchmisled by Popery, as they are influenced by _party politics_, and are inlove with the _loose moral code_ of Romanism. It lays no restraints ontheir lusts, and gives a loose rein to all their unsanctified passionsand desires. Backslidden, unconverted, or unprincipled members ofProtestant Churches, find in Popery a _sympathizing irreligion_, adaptedto their vicious lives; and hence they fall in with its disgustingsuperstitions and insulting claims. They are, therefore, ensnared withthe delusions of Popery, of _choice_. In other words, Popery is asystem of mere human policy; altogether of Foreign origin; Foreign inits support; importing Foreign vassals and paupers by multipliedthousands; and sending into every State and Territory in this Union, amost baneful Foreign and anti-Republican influence. Its old _goutified_, immoral, and drunken Pope, his Bishops and Priests, are _politicians_;men of the world, earthly, sensual, and devilish, and mere men ofpleasure. Associated with them for the purpose, in great State andNational contests, of securing the Catholic vote, are the worst class ofAmerican politicians, designing demagogues, selfish office-seekers, andbad men, calling themselves _Democrats_ and "Old-Line Whigs!" Thesepoliticians know that Popery, as a system, is in the hands of a Foreigndespotism, precisely what the Koran is in the hands of the Grand Turkand his partisans. But corrupt and ambitious politicians in thiscountry, are willing to act the part of traitors to our laws andConstitution, for the sake of profitable offices; and they are willingto sacrifice the Protestant Religion, on the ancient and profligatealtar at Rome, if they may but rise to distinction on its ruins!

The great Democratic party of this country, which has degenerated into a_Semi-Papal Organization_, for the base purposes of power and plunder, now fully partakes of the intolerant spirit of Rome, and is acting itout in all the departments of our State and General Governments. WhatRomanism has been to the Old World, this Papal and Anti-Americanorganization seeks and promises to be to this country. What is Popery inRoman Catholic Europe? It is as intolerant in politics as in religion:it taxes and oppresses the subjects and citizens of every country; itinterdicts nations; dethrones governors, chief magistrates, and kings;dissolves civil governments; suspends commerce; annuls civil laws; and, to gratify its unsanctified lust of ambition, it has overrun wholenations with bloodshed, and thrown them into confusion. So it is withthis "_Bogus_" Democracy: it wages a war of extermination against thefreedom of the press, and against the liberty of speech, the rights ofhuman conscience, and the liberties of man: hence its indiscriminateproscription of all who dare to unite with the AMERICAN PARTY, or openlyespouse their cause. Popery aims at universal power over the bodies andsouls of all men; and history proclaims that its weapons have beendungeons, racks, chains, fire, and sword! The _bastard_ Democracy of thepresent age has united with the Prelates, Priests, Monks, and Nuns ofRomanism, and is daily affiliating with hundreds of thousands of thevery off-scourings of the European Catholic population--stimulating themto deeds of violence, and to the shedding of blood! To-day, they sustaina _Baker_ in the foul murder of a _Poole_, in New York, because he was amember of the so-called Know-Nothing party, which had just routed, in anelection, this Foreign Locofoco party! To-morrow, we find this same vileparty, its editors and orators, sustaining a Foreign Catholic Mob inLouisville, Ky. ; and the members of the same party, in surroundingStates, exulting over the murder of Protestant Americans! And in thenext breath, as it were, we find these sons of Belial, falsely called_Democrats_, after reaching the power they lusted after in Philadelphia, sending up shouts over the lawless deeds of a Foreign Catholic riot, which made the ears of every American citizen to tingle!

Under the guidance of an ALL-WISE PROVIDENCE, the Protector of ourRepublic, and of the Protestant Religion, it is in the power of the freeand independent voters of these United States to cause this enemy's long"_arm to be clean dried up, and his right eye to be utterly darkened_, "by elevating to the two first offices within the gift of the world, MILLARD FILLMORE and ANDREW J. DONELSON!

I am, candid Reader, your fellow-citizen, W. G. BROWNLOW. 

 KNOXVILLE, July, 1856. 

AMERICANISM CONTRASTED

WITH

Foreignism, Romanism, and Bogus Democracy. 

INTRODUCTORY CHAPTER. 

 The Creed of the American Party--The Platform misrepresented by Mr. Watkins--Official Vote on the adoption of the new Platform--What the Abolitionists and Democrats say of the Platform--Seceders from the Nominating Convention, and their Address. 

Lord Byron, just as the war of Greece approached, said: "It is not oneman, nor a million, but the _spirit of liberty_ which must be spread;"and, carrying out the same bold idea of liberty, he continues, "It istime to act;" or, in the language of the Know Nothing salutation, "It istime for work;" for "what signifies _self_, if a single spark of thatgenius of liberty worthy of the past, can be bequeathed unquenchably tothe future?" In the language of a fair poetess:

 --"Our country is a whole, Of which we all are parts; nor should a citizen Regard his interests as distinct from hers: No hopes or fears should touch his patriot soul, But what affects her honor or her shame. "

The civilization--the nationality--the institutions, civil andreligious--and the mission of the United States, are all eminentlyAmerican. Mental light and personal independence, constitutional union, national supremacy, submission to law and rules of order, homogeneouspopulation, and instinctive patriotism, are all vital elements ofAmerican liberty, nationality, and upward and onward progress. Foreignimmigration, foreign Catholic influence, and sectional factionsnourished by them--and breeding demagogues in the name of _Democracy_, by a prostitution of the elective franchise--have already corrupted ournationality, degraded our councils, both State and National, weakenedthe bonds of union, disturbed our country's peace, and awakenedapprehensions of insecurity and _progressive deterioration_, threateningultimate ruin! To rescue and restore American institutions--to maintainAmerican nationality, and to secure American birthrights, is the missionand the sole purpose of the AMERICAN PARTY--composed of conservative, patriotic, Protestant, Union-loving, native-born citizens of everysection, and of every Christian denomination--self-sacrificing patriots, who prefer their country, and the religion of their fathers, and of theBible, to a factious name, a plundering political organization, and aninfamous Papal hierarchy!

The paramount and ultimate object of our AMERICAN ORGANIZATION is tosave and exalt the Union, and to preserve and perpetuate the rights andblessings of the Protestant religion. We contend that Americanprinciples should mould American policy; that American mind should ruleAmerican destiny; that all sectional parties, such as a party _North_, or a party _South_, should be renounced; that all sectional agitations, such as are kept up by Abolitionists, Free Soilers, and BlackRepublicans, should be resisted; that Congress should never agitate thesubject of domestic slavery, in any form or for any purpose, but leaveit where the Constitution fixes it; that as the destiny of the countrydepends on the mind of the country, intelligence should rule; that theballot-box should be purified, and corrupt Romanism and foreigninfluence checked; that any allegiance "to any foreign prince, potentate, or power"--to any power, regal or pontifical, should berebuked as the most fatal canker of the germ of American independence;that every citizen should be encouraged to exercise freely his ownconscience; and that the popular mind should be enlightened, and thepopular heart rectified, by proper and universal Christian education. This is the essence of the American creed; and when methodized into aPolitical Decalogue, it constitutes the _Ten Commandments_ of theAmerican party. 

In this connection, and at this point, we will give the much-abusedPlatform of the American party, adopted at the session of the NationalCouncil, February 21, 1856. Examine the Platform, and answer to yourconscience the question: What true American head can disapprove--whatpure American heart can revolt? Can men taking their stand on thisPlatform be the enemies of civil and religious liberties? Can eithercivil or religious liberties rest secure on any other grounds? And mustnot those "Bogus" Democrats and Anti-Americans, therefore, who wage waragainst this citadel of American birthrights, act as enemies to theFederal Constitution, enemies to the Union, to the mental independenceof American citizens--enemies to the Protestant religion, and enemies, consequently, "to civil and religious liberty?"

 PLATFORM OF THE AMERICAN PARTY. 

 1st. An humble acknowledgment to the Supreme Being for his protecting care vouchsafed to our fathers in their successful Revolutionary struggle, and hitherto manifested to us, their descendants, in the preservation of the liberties, the independence, and the union of these States. 

 2d. The perpetuation of the Federal Union, as the palladium of our civil and religious liberties, and the only sure bulwark of American Independence. 

 3d. _Americans must rule America_, and to this end, _native_-born citizens should be selected for all State, Federal, and municipal offices, or government employment, in preference to all others: nevertheless, 4th. Persons born of American parents residing temporarily abroad, should be entitled to all the rights of native-born citizens; but, 5th. No person should be selected for political station, (whether of native or foreign birth, ) who recognizes any allegiance or obligation of any description, to any foreign prince, potentate, or power, or who refuses to recognize the Federal and State constitutions (each within its sphere) as paramount to all other laws, as rules of political action. 

 6th. The unqualified recognition and maintenance of the reserved rights of the several States, and the cultivation of harmony and fraternal good-will between the citizens of the several States; and to this end, non-interference by Congress with questions appertaining solely to the individual States, and non-intervention by each State with the affairs of any other State. 

 7th. The recognition of the right of the native-born and naturalized citizens of the United States, permanently residing in any Territory thereof, to frame their constitution and laws, and to regulate their domestic and social affairs in their own mode, subject only to the provisions of the Federal Constitution, with the privilege of admission into the Union whenever they have the requisite population for one Representative in Congress. _Provided always_, that none but those who are citizens of the United States, under the constitution and laws thereof, and who have a fixed residence in any such Territory, ought to participate in the formation of the constitution, or in the enactment of laws for said Territory or State. 

 8th. An enforcement of the principle that no State or Territory ought to admit others than citizens of the United States to the right of suffrage, or of holding political office. 

 9th. A change in the laws of naturalization, making a continued residence of twenty-one years, of all not hereinbefore provided for, an indispensable requisite for citizenship hereafter, and excluding all paupers, and persons convicted of crime, from landing upon our shores; but no interference with the vested rights of foreigners. 

 10th. Opposition to any union between Church and State: no interference with religious faith or worship, and no test-oaths for office. 

 11th. Free and thorough investigation into any and all alleged abuses of public functionaries, and a strict economy in public expenditures. 

 12th. The maintenance and enforcement of all laws constitutionally enacted, until said laws shall be repealed, or shall be declared null and void by competent judicial authority. 

 13th. Opposition to the reckless and unwise policy of the present administration in the general management of our national affairs, and more especially as shown in removing "Americans" (by designation) and conservatives in principle, from office, and placing foreigners and ultraists in their places: as shown in a truckling subserviency to the stronger, and an insolent and cowardly bravado toward the weaker powers: as shown in reöpening sectional agitation, by the repeal of the Missouri Compromise: as shown in granting to unnaturalized foreigners the right of suffrage in Kansas and Nebraska: as shown in its vacillating course on the Kansas and Nebraska question: as shown in the corruptions which pervade some of the departments of the government: as shown in disgracing meritorious naval officers through prejudice or caprice; and as shown in the blundering mismanagement of our foreign relations. 

 14th. Therefore, to remedy existing evils, and prevent the disastrous consequences otherwise resulting therefrom, we would build up the "American party" upon the principles hereinbefore stated. 

 15th. That each State Council shall have authority to amend their several constitutions, so as to abolish the several degrees, and institute a pledge of honor, instead of other obligations, for fellowship and admission into the party. 

 16th. A free and open discussion of all political principles embraced in our platform. 

The HON. MR. WATKINS, a renegade from the American ranks, in EastTennessee, delivered a speech in Congress on the 6th of May, 1856; whichspeech we find reported in the _Washington Union_--a speech whichbetrays an utter ignorance of the point he undertook to discuss. It isdue to _his betrayed constituents_ that we should expose his ignorance, and the blundering fallacy of his attempts to justify his turning_Locofoco Cataline Judas Sag-Nicht_! He says, as reported by hispolitical organ-grinder:

 "But, sir, the platform recently adopted by the Philadelphia Convention cannot receive my approbation. I cannot support Mr. Fillmore, or any other distinguished Whig, upon that platform. The only solitary plank in the Philadelphia platform of June, 1855, was the twelfth section--that section which denied to Congress the right to interfere with slavery in the Territories, declaring the doctrine of non-intervention, and of popular sovereignty in the Territories. But, sir, that plank in the platform was stricken out by the convention recently held, and the sixth resolution of the platform then adopted substituted in its place. And what does that resolution endorse? Is there any non-intervention in the sixth resolution of the Philadelphia platform? Is there any denial of the right of Congress to interfere upon the subject of slavery in the sixth resolution of the Philadelphia platform? Certainly not. "

In lieu of the _June_ platform, we have this _February_ platform. TheJune platform contained _no such denial to Congress_, as is here allegedby Mr. Watkins, of the right to interfere with slavery in theTerritories! And it is marvellous, indeed, that a grave Member ofCongress should undertake to discuss Platforms, which he had eithernever read, or the purport of which, if he had ever read them, he hadeither wholly forgotten, or lacked the sense to comprehend! The twelfthsection of the June Platform says:

 "And expressly _pretermitting any expression of opinion_ upon the power of Congress to establish or prohibit slavery in any Territory, it is the sense of this National Council, that Congress OUGHT NOT to legislate upon the subject of slavery within the Territories of the United States. "

Thus, instead of _denying_ to Congress the right to interfere withslavery in the Territories, as erroneously and recklessly charged bythis new-born Democrat, all opinion on that subject was "_expresslypretermitted_" in the June Platform! Mr. Watkins was in such a hurry tojoin the Forney, Pierce, and Catholic Democracy, that he did not stop toexamine even the Platform which most disgusted him! But this is not theworst blunder which he committed in that speech. He turned to the newPlatform, and asked, with an air of triumph:

 "Is there any non-intervention in the sixth resolution of the (new) Philadelphia platform? Is there any denial of the right of Congress to interfere with the subject of slavery in the sixth resolution of the (new) Philadelphia platform?"

And he answers, "_Certainly not!_" The ignorant man, it would seem, onlyread as far as to the sixth section of the new Platform; and even _that_section contains a direct affirmative answer to his question; which, inorder to place the American party in a false position, he answers, "_Certainly not!_"

Now, we ask such as may have noticed his _misrepresentations_, to read a_little further on_, at least to the end of the 7th section of this newPlatform, and see where it leaves Mr. Watkins! Turn back to the 7thsection, and it will be seen that this section, instead of"_pretermitting any opinion_" on the question, announces the doctrinethat the citizens of the United States permanently residing in theTerritories, have a "_right_" to frame their Constitution and laws, andto regulate their domestic affairs in their own mode, subject only tothe provisions of the Federal Constitution!

The _New York Evening Post_, a Pierce and foreign Democratic organ, thusalludes to the action of the Convention which nominated FILLMORE andDONELSON:--

 "The 12th section of the June Platform, it is true, had been abrogated; BUT IT HAD BEEN REPLACED BY ANOTHER, MEANING PRECISELY THE SAME THING!"

The _Cincinnati Gazette_, an Abolition, Anti-American Foreign sheet, came out in opposition to the American nominees, in its issue of Feb. 29th, 1856, on account of the _Pro-slavery_ character of the newPlatform. The Gazette says:--

 "We are glad that the action of the Convention _proved so decided as to leave no doubt as to the character of the Platform_. THE LATTER IS CLEARLY AND DECIDEDLY PRO-SLAVERY AND NEBRASKA, _and in this respect corresponds precisely with the_ PRINCIPLES OF THE PIERCE DEMOCRACY! _Fillmore and Donelson_ are therefore presented to the American people as candidates for the Presidency and Vice Presidency, ON A THOROUGH AND DECIDED NEBRASKA PRO-SLAVERY PLATFORM, and the citizens of Northern States are asked to vote for them!"

The _New York Tribune_, whose editor was a prominent member of thePittsburgh Black Republican Convention, and who is violent in hisopposition to FILLMORE and DONELSON, says:

 "The object of the Know Nothings has dwindled down to this--TO DEFEAT THE REPUBLICAN PARTY! That is to say, this is the object of those who have managed the Philadelphia Convention, and nominated Mr. Fillmore. I have diligently inquired for a member who voted for _Banks_ for Speaker, and now supports _Fillmore_; but up to this time--more than three days after the nomination--I have not heard of one. That sort must be scarce!"

The following is the OFFICIAL vote on the adoption of the new Platformby the National Council, which met four days previous to the NominatingConvention:

 NEW HAMPSHIRE--_Nays_--Messrs. Colby and Emery. 

 MASSACHUSETTS--_Yeas_--Messrs. Ely, Weith, Brewster, Robinson, and Arnold. _Nays_--Messrs. Richmond, Wheelwright, Temple, Thurston, Sumner, Allen, Sawin, and Hawkes. 

 CONNECTICUT--_Nays_--Messrs. Sperry, Dunbar, Peck, Booth, Holley, and Perkins. 

 RHODE ISLAND--_Yeas_--Messrs. Chase and Knight. _Nays_--Messrs. Simons and Nightingale. 

 NEW YORK--_Yeas_--Messrs. Walker, Oakley, Morgan, Woodward, Reynolds, Chester, Owens, Sanders, Whiston, Nichols, Van Dusen, Westbrook, Parsons, Picket, Campbell, Lowell, Sammons, Oakes, Seymour, Squire, Cooper, Burr, Bennett, Marvine, Midler, Stephens, Johnson, Wetmore, Hammond, and S. Seymour. _Nay_--Mr. Barker. 

 DELAWARE--_Yeas_--Messrs. Clement and Smithers. 

 MARYLAND--_Yeas_--Messrs. Codet, Alexander, Winchester, Stephens, and Wilmot. _Nays_--Messrs. Purnell, Ricaud, Pinkney, and Kramer. 

 VIRGINIA--_Nays_--Messrs. Bolling, McHugh, Cochran, Boteler, Preston, and Maupin. 

 FLORIDA--_Yea_--Mr. Call. 

 NEW JERSEY--_Yeas_--Messrs. Deshler, Weeks, Lyon, and McClellan. 

 PENNSYLVANIA--_Yeas_--Messrs. Freeman, Nelclede, Gossler, Smith, Gillinham, Hammond, Wood, Gilford, Pyle, Farrand, and Williamson. _Nays_--Messrs. Johnson, Sewell, Jones, Parker, Heistand, Kase, Kinkaid, Coffee, Carlisle, Crovode, Edie, Sewell, and Power. 

 LOUISIANA--_Yeas_--Messrs. Lathrop and Elam. _Nays_--Messrs. Harman and Hardy. 

 CALIFORNIA--_Yeas_--Messrs. Wood and Stanley. 

 ARKANSAS--_Yea_--Mr. Logan. _Nay_--Mr. Fowler. 

 TENNESSEE--_Yeas_--Messrs. Brownlow, Bankhead, Zollicoffer, Burton, Campbell, Donelson, Harris, Bilbo, and Beloat. _Nays_--Messrs. Nelson, Reedy, and Picket. 

 KENTUCKY--_Yeas_--Messrs. Stowers, Campbell, Raphael, Todd, Clay, Goodloe, and Bartlett. _Nays_--Messrs. Shanklin, Jones, Carpenter, Gist, and Underwood. 

 OHIO--_Yeas_--Messrs. White, Nash, Simpson, and Lippett. _Nays_--Messrs. Gabriel, Olds, Ford, Barker, Potter, Stanbaugh, Rodgers, Spooner, Hodges, Kyle, Lees, Swigart, Allison, Fishback, Thomas, Corwine, Chapman, Ayres, and Johnson. 

 INDIANA--_Yeas_--Messrs. Sheets and Phelps. _Nay_--Mr. Meredith. 

 MISSOURI--_Yeas_--Messrs. Edward, Fletcher, and Hockaday. _Nay_--Mr. Breckenridge. 

 MICHIGAN--_Yea_--Mr. Wood. 

 WISCONSIN--_Yeas_--Messrs. Lockwood, Cook, Chandler, and Gillies. 

 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA--_Yeas_--Messrs. Ellis and Evans. 

 ILLINOIS--_Yeas_--Messrs. Danenhower and Allen. _Nays_--Messrs. Jennings and Gear. 

 IOWA--_Nays_--Messrs. Webster and Thorrington. 

 _Yeas_--108. _Nays_--77. 

We will close this chapter by giving the delegates who seceded from theNominating Convention, with the Address published by them on theoccasion. That recession was a more inconsiderable affair than has beenrepresented by the foreign party of this country. The author of thiswork was the Chairman of the large Committee on Credentials, andreported TWO HUNDRED AND SEVENTY-SEVEN delegates, which report wasreceived without opposition, as to numbers. Of these, _forty-two_ onlyseceded, viz. : 13 out of 28 from Ohio; _one_ of two from New Hampshire;6--all--from Connecticut; 2 out of 13 from Massachusetts; _one_ out of 3from Illinois; 7 out of 27 from Pennsylvania; _one_ out of 4 from RhodeIsland; 5--all--from Michigan; 5--all--from Wisconsin; _one_--all--fromIowa; 42 out of 277--not a _sixth_, and but little over a _seventh_ ofthe whole!

ADDRESS. 

The seceders or "bolters" made the following address, to which theyappended their States and names. What they say of the _Louisiana_delegates, we have explained in another portion of this work:

 "The undersigned, delegates to the nominating Convention now in session at Philadelphia, find themselves compelled to dissent from the principles avowed by that body; and holding opinions, as they do, that the restoration of the Missouri Compromise, as demanded by a majority of the whole people, is a redress of an undeniable wrong, and the execution of it, in spirit at least, indispensable to the repose of the country, they have regarded the refusal of that Convention to recognize the well-defined opinion of the country, and of the Americans of the free States, upon this question, as a denial of their rights and a rebuke to their sentiments; and they hold that the admission into the National Council and nominating Convention, of delegates from Louisiana, representing a Roman Catholic Constituency, absolved every true American from all obligations to sustain the action of either of the said bodies. 

 "They have therefore withdrawn from the nominating Convention, refusing to participate in the proposed nomination, and now address themselves to the Americans of the country, and especially of the States they represent, to justify and approve of their action; and to the end that a nomination conforming to the overruling sentiment of the country in the great issue may be regularly and auspiciously made, the undersigned propose to the Americans in all the States to assemble in their several State organizations, and elect delegates to a Convention to meet in the city of New York, on Thursday, the 12th day of June next, for the purpose of nominating candidates for President and Vice President of the United States. "

 OHIO--Thos. H. Ford, J. H. Baker, B. S. Kyle, W. H. C. Mitchell, E. T. Sturtevant, O. T. Fishback, Jacob Ebbert, Wm. B. Allison, H. C. Hodges, L. H. Olds, W. B. Chapman, Thos. McYees, Charles Nichols. 

 NEW HAMPSHIRE--Anthony Colby. 

 CONNECTICUT--Lucius G. Peck, Jas. E. Dunham, Hezekiah Griswold, Austin Baldwin, Edmund Perkins, David Booth. 

 MASSACHUSETTS--Wild. S. Thurston, Z. R. Pangborn. 

 ILLINOIS--Henry S. Jennings. 

 PENNSYLVANIA--Wm. F. Johnston, S. C. Kase, R. M. Riddle, T. J. Coffey, John Williamson, J. Harrison, S. Ewell. 

 RHODE ISLAND--E. J. Nightingale. 

 MICHIGAN--S. T. Lyon, W. Fuller, W. S. Wood, P. P. Meddler, J. Hamilton. 

 WISCONSIN--D. A. Gillis, John Lockwood, Robt. Chandler, G. Burdick, C. W. Cook. 

 IOWA--L. H. Webster. 

THE ELECTION OF BANKS--THE SLAVERY QUESTION. 

One of the issues in the Presidential contest now going on, is the_slavery question_. A. O. P. X. Y. Z. Nicholson, of the WashingtonUnion, who canvassed this State in opposition to Scott, and shed his_crocodile_ tears before every crowd he addressed, because so good a manas Fillmore, who had stood firm for the _rights of the South_, had beenset aside by an ungrateful Convention at Baltimore, to give place toScott, the favorite of _Seward_--this miserable hypocrite, we say, nowcomes out and says, "Fillmore's abolitionism will suit the North. "

The Central Democratic Committee for East Tennessee, in a call for aDistrict Convention at Clinton, in May last, through the _KnoxvilleStandard_, conclude said call in this language:

 "The time has again arrived when the national Democracy must rally to their country's call and preserve the Constitution as it is in its purity, and perpetuate the union of the States from the rain which the _Black Republican Party of the North_, aided by THEIR KNOW-NOTHING ALLIES OF THE SOUTH, would bring upon them. By order of the

 "CENTRAL COMMITTEE. "

The _Sag-Nicht Convention_ held at Somerville, on Thursday the 8th ofMay, and which selected D. M. Currin as their Electoral candidate, adopted the following resolution:

 "_Resolved_, That we have been appointed by the Democracy of this Electoral District to organize to fight, in the coming Presidential election, the BLACK REPUBLICANS AND KNOW-NOTHINGS. _Resolved_, That we _can_ beat them, and we _will_ do it. _Resolved_, That we will cordially receive the _co-operation of all Old-Line Whigs_ who will assist us in carrying out these resolutions. "

Now, the charge is here made that the Know-Nothings of the South are theallies of the Black Republicans of the North. This is the impressionintended to be made, first by these _concealed calumniators_ atKnoxville, and afterwards by the _open and avowed slanderers_ of thesame party at Somerville! With such _wholesale lying_ as is displayed inboth of these cases, we have but little patience: we only give theirlanguage, to show their recklessness in making such an issue. Andalthough this Foreign party claim to be the guardians of Southerninterests, we propose to show, before we conclude this chapter, thatthey are themselves the "allies of the Black Republicans of the North, "and are giving them more "aid and comfort" than all the other parties inthe country!

FRANCIS P. BLAIR, former editor of Gen. Jackson's organ at Washington, was the President of the Black Republican Convention at Pittsburg, inFebruary last! _John M. Niles_; Democratic Senator in Congress, wasPresident of the Black Republican Convention held in Connecticut! In thePittsburg Convention, over which Blair presided, PRESTON KING, ABIJAHMANN, DAVID WILMOT, and JACOB BRINKERHOFF, Old-Line Democrats, figuredconspicuously. 

For two long and cold winter months, the Democrats, both North andSouth, voted for _Richardson_, of Illinois, for Speaker, a violent_anti-slavery man_, whose speeches _against_ slavery, and in _favor_ ofAbolitionism, were matters of record in the Congressional Globe, andwere delivered on the floor of Congress so late as 1850! The _immortal_75 Democrats did not cease to vote for this man _Richardson_, until GEN. ZOLLICOFFER, of Tennessee, read his speeches upon him, in the presenceof his friends!

On the 2d of February, SAMUEL A. SMITH, of Tennessee, a DemocraticRepresentative in Congress, _renewed_ his motion to adopt the PLURALITYRULE. His proposition, which it was evident would elect _Banks_, wascarried by Black Republican votes, who went for it in a body. This wouldstill not have elected _Banks_, but for the fact that the following_Democrats_ voted for the odious plurality rule: _Clingman_, _Herbert_, _Hickman_, _Jewett_, _Kelley_, _Barclay_, _Bayard_, _Wells_, _Williams_, and SAMUEL A. SMITH! Mr. Clarke was the only American who voted for theodious rule!

MR. CARLILE, a national American, of Virginia, before the vote was takenupon this plurality rule, offered the following substitute for it:

 "_Resolved_, That the HON. WM. AIKEN, a Representative from the State of South Carolina, be, and he is hereby declared Speaker of the Thirty-Fourth Congress. "

GOV. AIKEN is a sound Southern Democrat--never was any thing else--butCOL. SMITH _objected_, and demanded the _previous question_, which cutoff MR. CARLILE'S resolution, and which was to prevent its adoption! Thecandidate of the Democratic party, at that time, MR. ORR, immediately_withdrew in favor of_ GOV. AIKEN, upon the introduction of MR. CARLILE'S resolution; and to _prevent Aiken's election_, SAMUEL A. SMITHcut off said resolution by a call of the previous question!

Banks was elected by _one_ vote, and this could not be accomplisheduntil SEVEN DEMOCRATS got _behind the bar_, and refused to vote at all!These were HICKMAN, PARKER, and BARCLAY, of Pennsylvania; CRAIG, ofNorth Carolina; TAYLOR, of Louisiana; RICHARDSON, of Illinois; andSEWARD, of Georgia! Any _two_ of these _Southern_ Democrats could havemade AIKEN Speaker, but they did not want him--they knew Banks to be a_Democrat_, if he were a Black Republican--and to elect him, theybelieved would give them the strength of that odious party in the comingcontest. 

We have before us the _Washington Union_ of Sept. 27th, 1853, giving, editorially, a glowing account of the Massachusetts Democratic StateConvention, reporting the speech of Nathaniel P. Banks, of Waltham, concluding that report in these words:

 "Mr. Banks emphatically and decidedly, on his own part, and on that of the _Democrats of Massachusetts_, disclaimed the truth of the rumors in certain newspapers that an arrangement had been entered into with another political party in the Commonwealth concerning the distribution of State offices. It was his and this Convention's and all true Democrats' desire, belief, and determination, that Henry W. Bishop should be elected governor of Massachusetts, and that the other Democratic State officers should also be elected. He was not afraid of defeat, and less afraid of _Whig success_, which, to judge by its recent effects, was simply equivalent to a defeat. [Applause. ]"

It may be said, and doubtless will be, that _Banks_ has allied himselfwith the Republicans. But Banks says he has _always been a Democrat_, and that he was _nominated as a Democrat in his district_. And certainit is, that he was elected Speaker by DEMOCRATS, under the _compulsion_of an odious plurality rule, and the _gag_ of the previous question!

It will be said, and said truthfully too, that SIX AMERICANS FROM THENORTH voted for MR. FULLER, of Pennsylvania. So they did; and in doingso, they voted for a sound national and conservative man. But did thisjustify _Southern_ Democrats in _dodging_ the question, and therebyelecting a Black Republican Speaker? Gov. Aiken was the candidate of the_seven_ Democrats--he was not the candidate of the _six_ Americans!Democracy, moreover, had refused to vote for an American under anycircumstances, and had, on the first day of the meeting of Congress, passed a resolution insulting the whole American party, in caucus! Wewould have seen them banished to the farthest verge of astronomicalimagination, before we would have voted for any man that favored thatinsulting resolution!

In 1847, by a _unanimous vote_, both branches of the Legislature of NewHampshire adopted resolutions denunciatory of the institution ofslavery, and approving of the Wilmot Proviso. These resolutions werereported to the House, by the Representative from Hillsboro, the nativetown of _Gen. Pierce_, and were in the _handwriting_ of Pierce!

On the 2d of October, 1847, the Democratic Soft-Shells, who are now thesupporters of Pierce's administration, and fill the offices he has todispose of in New York, held a State Convention, and declared their"_uncompromising hostility to slavery_" in a string of resolutions theyadopted and ordered to be published. 

On the 16th of February, 1848, a Democratic State Convention for NewYork convened at Utica, to appoint Delegates to the National Conventionto nominate candidates for President and Vice President, at which astring of anti-Southern resolutions were adopted, denouncing "_slavery_or _involuntary servitude_, " as repugnant to the genius ofRepublicanism. 

On the 18th of July, 1848, the Democratic Soft-Shells held amass-meeting in the park of New York, and, by way of making perfecttheir organization against General Cass, declared, by resolutions, their"_uncompromising hostility to slavery or involuntary servitude!_"

On the 13th of September, 1848, a Democratic mass-meeting convened atBuffalo, in New York, and, in a general Abolition jubilee, adoptedresolutions condemning and denouncing the institution of slavery!

In 1852, while the contest was going on between Pierce and Scott, the_Washington Union_ said, editorially:

 "THE FREE-SOIL DEMOCRATIC LEADERS OF THE NORTH, ARE A REGULAR PORTION OF THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY; AND GENERAL PIERCE, IF ELECTED, WILL MAKE NO DISTINCTION BETWEEN THEM AND THE REST OF THE DEMOCRACY IN THE DISTRIBUTION OF OFFICIAL PATRONAGE, AND IN THE SELECTION OF AGENTS FOR ADMINISTERING THE GOVERNMENT!"

The Black Republicans recently held a meeting in New York, at which_Benjamin F. Butler_, of "pious memory, " and Van Buren Swartwoutnotoriety, presided! On his right hand sat, as Vice President of themeeting, _Moses H. Grinnell_, one of the Democratic "pipe-layers" of1840, whom this Van Buren Attorney-General Butler made efforts to sendto the State prison! Another Vice President, gravely looking on, andarranged in dignified grandeur upon the stand, was John W. Edmonds, ex-"blanket contractor" in a large swindle, and a practicalspiritual-rapper! A third and last Vice President was the notorious _Dr. Townsend_, the sarsaparilla man, who has not yet wound up hiscontroversy with a man of the same name, as to who is the greatestrascal in the way of manufacturing this medicine!

Among the other officers, secretaries, and prominent men in the meeting, was _C. A. Dana_, of the Tribune office, a _Fourierist_, who, at apublic meeting on a former occasion, toasted "Horace Greeley, CharlesFourier, and Jesus Christ!" Prominent in the meeting was _C. A. Stetson_, of the Astor House, an _Amalgamationist_. Henry J. Raymond, the Abolition editor of the Times, and _Rudolph Garrigue_, a noisyGerman Abolitionist, looked and acted as though they believed thesalvation of the Union depended upon the success of the Republicans! Afellow who made frequent motions, an Irishman by the name of _McMorrow_, had served an apprenticeship of twelve months in the State prison, forbreaking open a store after night! The principal speaker, who spoke fortwo hours on the subject of slavery, was the notorious _Bingham_, anitinerant Abolitionist from Ohio. It was a queer medley of men, parties, principles, and characters--two-thirds of all the active partisans inthe meeting having held offices in the ranks of Democracy! And still, that party boasts of its Northern wing being sound upon the slaveryquestion. 

And here is the resolution of the 8th of January _Democratic_ Conventionin Ohio, appointing delegates to the Cincinnati Pow-wow:

 "_Resolved_, That the people of Ohio now, as they have always done, look upon slavery as an evil, and unfavorable to the development of the spirit and practical benefits of free institutions; and that, entertaining these sentiments, they will at all times feel it to be their duty to use all power clearly given by the terms of the national compact, to prevent its increase, to mitigate, _and finally eradicate the evil_. "

To show, just here, where Tennessee Democrats stand upon the infamousWilmot Proviso question, we give the following extract from a recentnumber of the _Nashville Patriot_:

 JAMES K. POLK, who, in 1847, approved the Oregon bill, which contained this odious and unconstitutional clause: next in order is

 CAVE JOHNSON, now President of the Bank of Tennessee, who voted for the same bill which Mr. Polk sanctioned: next we have

 AARON V. BROWN, an aspirant before the Cincinnati Convention, who did likewise: then comes

 JULIUS W. BLACKWELL, a star whose light has been quenched in obscurity, but who voted with his colleagues for the Oregon bill in '47: next in the procession of Southern men "dangerous to the South" is

 BARCLAY MARTIN, President Pierce's U. S. Mail Agent, who cast a similar vote: following him we have

 LUCIEN B. CHASE, author of the History of the Polk Administration, at present a resident of New York city, but at the time he exhibited himself as "a dangerous man to the South, " a representative in Congress from this State: he is succeeded by

 FRED. P. STANTON, for ten years a Democratic Congressman from the Memphis district: he voted for the Oregon bill, with the Wilmot Proviso annexed: behind him in the march is

 ALVAN CULLOM, a Democratic Congressman, who has squatted on the _other_ side of one of his native mountains in the fourth district, and been quiescent for some years: he was one of the Tennessee "dangerous men:" he voted twice for the Wilmot Proviso: in the same category is

 GEORGE W. JONES, in the language of another, the "goose which cackles at the door of the Treasury vault:" notorious as a Southern supporter of the Squatter Sovereignty doctrine, with two votes on record in favor of the Wilmot Proviso. He may be reckoned as _very_ "dangerous to the South:" last, but not least in this dread array of "dangerous men, " is

 ANDREW JOHNSON, the present Governor of Tennessee, and Cincinnati aspirant: he voted _three_ times for the Wilmot Proviso, and so doubtful are his doctrines on the slavery question, that many slaveholding members of his own party regard him as _extremely_ "dangerous to the South. "

By the way, in 1842, this same _Gov. Johnson_ was a Senator in our StateLegislature, and introduced the following _Abolition_ resolutions, commonly called his _White Basis System_:

 "_Resolved, by the General Assembly of the State of Tennessee_, That the basis to be observed in laying the State off into Congressional districts shall be the voting population, WITHOUT ANY REGARD TO THREE-FIFTHS OF THE NEGRO POPULATION. 

 "_Resolved_, That the 120, 083 qualified voters shall be divided by eleven, and that each eleventh of the 120, 083 of qualified voters shall be entitled to elect one member in the Congress of the United States, or so near as may be practicable without a division of counties. "

The position of Gov. Johnson is this: he wishes the State entitled toher slave representation _as a State_, but _in her own borders_ therepresentative districts are to be made according to her whitepopulation! In other words, he desires the State to retain her _ten_Congressmen, representing both her white and slave population, butwishes them appointed throughout the State without regard to the slavepopulation: so that the county containing ten thousand whiteinhabitants, and double that number of slaves, should be entitled to nomore representation than the county containing _ten_ thousand whiteinhabitants and no slaves!

We heard Johnson last summer, in his debate with Gentry, in Campbellcounty, contend that the county of Campbell should have the samerepresentation in Congress as the county of Shelby, which he stated hadFIFTEEN THOUSAND NEGROES! He appealed to the prejudices and passions ofthe poor--inquired of the hard working-men of that county how they likedto see their wives and daughters _offset_, in enumerating the strengthof the county, by the "_greasy negro wenches of Shelby, Davidson, Fayette, Sumner and Rutherford counties_. " He made a real, stirringabolition appeal to the poor, and non-slaveholding portion of the crowd, which was in the proportion of _ten to one_ of that county, to arraythem against the rich, and especially against the owners of largenumbers of slaves. He told them that these Negro wenches belonged to thelordly slaveholders of Middle and West Tennessee, and that as ourConstitution now is, these wenches were placed on an _equality_ with thefair daughters and virtuous wives of laboring men. On this ground headvocated his infamous amendment to the Constitution, which wouldincorporate his "White Basis" scheme!

This is a rank Abolition measure, and fraught with more danger to theSouth than any thing proposed by the whole brood of Abolitionists, FreeSoilers, and Black Republicans at the North. Already the South is weakenough, and not at all able to vote with the North in our NationalLegislature. The effect of this scheme is to deprive the South ofone-third of her strength in Congress. Not only is this the effect, butit is the design of the mover. We hold that Johnson is a Free Soiler, and has been for years. It is stated by his Northern Democratic friends, that when he quit Congress, he came home to run for Governor--with adetermination, if defeated, to remove to some of the NorthwesternStates, and take a new start! Had he been defeated by Maj. Henry in1853, he would now be a Black Republican in one of the Free States, running for office! And yet the propagator of this infamous Abolitiondoctrine of a "White Basis" representation--this demagogue who arraysthe poor against slaveholders, is the man for the ultra guardians of theslave interests of the South! A man who would not own negroes when hecould, but loaned his money out at interest, and left his wife anddaughters to do their own work--a man who is at heart and in hisdoctrines a rank Free Soiler--a man who has only remained in the Southto _experiment_ upon office-seeking! This is the man that Georgia, Alabama, Virginia, Mississippi, and Carolinas, rejoiced to see electedGovernor of a Southern slave State!

It was seeing the position of Johnson on this question that induced the"_Democratic Herald_" in Ohio, in June, 1855, thus to notice our racefor Governor:

 "TENNESSEE. --An animated contest is going on in this good old Democratic State for Governor, and the largest crowds flock to hear the candidates that ever attended political meetings since the Hero of New Orleans used to address the masses in person. The present incumbent, Andrew Johnson, is the Democratic candidate, and a _Mr. Gentry_, a _pro-slavery_ renegade from the Federal Whig ranks, is the opposing candidate, brought out by a Know Nothing conclave. This man is on the stump abusing the Catholics, and denouncing them for their tyranny, while he openly advocates the _slavery doctrines of Southern Niggerdom_! On the other hand, his competitor, Gov. Johnson, well and favorably known to our leading Democrats of Ohio, HAS NO SYMPATHIES WITH SLAVERY, and is the advocate of such amendments to the Federal Constitution as will give all power to the people, and EFFECTUALLY PUT DOWN THE INSTITUTION OF SLAVERY!"

Now, this showing up of Democracy, on the Slavery question, may look_shabby_ to many ultra Southern men, and it may induce them to chargethat the Democratic party are _inconsistent_. We defend them against thecharge of _inconsistency_, and maintain that what would be called_inconsistency_ here, is nothing but _Democracy_. For instance, A. O. P. Q. X. Y. Z. Nicholson, the editor of the great official organ ofDemocracy at Washington, said, editorially, and "by authority, " so lateas 1855:

 "IT IS NO PART OF THE CREED OF A DEMOCRAT, AS SUCH, TO ADVOCATE OR OPPOSE THE EXTENSION OF SLAVERY. HE MAY DO THE ONE OR THE OTHER, IN THE EXERCISE OF HIS RIGHTS AS A CITIZEN, AND NOT OFFEND AGAINST HIS DEMOCRATIC FEALTY!"

Precisely so! A man may advocate the _abolition_ of slavery where itexists; he may, as a Black Republican, arm himself with Sharpe's rifle, and go into Kansas, and shoot down pro-slavery men, and still be aconsistent Democrat, if he vote for the party, and stand by the nomineesof the party conventions! Hence, all the factions at home and fromabroad--all religions--all the ends and odds of God's creation are nowassociated together, and are battling in the same unholy cause, in thename of _Democracy_!

And further to exhibit the inconsistency of this Democratic and Foreignparty, it will be recollected that, in 1844, they nominated SILASWRIGHT, of New York, for Vice-President, to run on the ticket with COL. POLK--a position he declined, because he would not agree to be _secondbest_ on the ticket. In a letter to JAMES H. TITUS, ESQ. , bearing dateApril 15, 1847, MR. WRIGHT says:

 "If the question had been propounded to me at any period of my public life, Shall the arms of the Union be employed to conquer, or the money of the Union be used to purchase Territory now constitutionally free, for the purpose of planting Slavery upon it, I should have answered, No! And this answer to this question is the Wilmot Proviso, as I understand it. _I am surprised that any one should suppose me capable of entertaining any other opinion, or giving any other answer as to such a proposition. _"

Now, if SILAS WRIGHT, one of the great "Northern lights" of Democracy, held these sentiments in 1847, what must they have been in 1844, whenthat party sought to elevate him to the second office within the gift ofthe nation? But we are just reminded of what is said in "the law and theprophets, " that is to say, "_It is no part of the creed of a Democrat_, AS SUCH, _to advocate or oppose the extension of slavery!_" What aparty!

[From the Knoxville Whig for Sept. 22, 1855. ]

TO REV. A. B. LONGSTREET, PROFESSOR OF METHODISM, ROMANISM, AND LOCOFOCOISM. 

REVEREND SIR:--I see a _pastoral address_ of yours, to "MethodistKnow-Nothing Preachers, " going the rounds of the Locofoco Foreign SagNicht papers of the South, occupying from four to six columns, accordingto the dimensions of the papers copying. I have waded through yourlearned address, and find it to be one of more ponderous magnitude thanthe Report made to the British House of Commons, by Lord North, on asubject of far greater interest! And as I am one of the class of men youaddress, notwithstanding your great advantage over me in point of ageand experience; and as no one has made a _formal_ response to your_pious warnings_, it will not be deemed insolent in me to take you up. 

My first acquaintance with you was in 1847, at an Annual Meeting of theGeorgia Conference, held in Madison; and although the impressions madeupon my mind by you, on that occasion, were any thing but favorable toyou, as a man, still, I am capable, as I believe, of doing you justice. I supposed you then to be the rise of sixty years, certainly in your_dotage_ and among the _vainest_ old gentlemen I had ever met with. Youobtained leave, as I understand, by your own seeking, to deliver alecture to the Conference, upon the subject of _correctly reading andpronouncing the Scriptures_. I was in attendance, and listened to youwith all the attention and impartiality I was capable of exercising. Ithought it a little _presumptuous_ for any one man to assume to teachmore than one hundred able ministers how to read and pronounce theinspired writings; and the more so, when I knew that several of thenumber were presidents and professors in different male and femalecolleges, and that many others of them were graduates of the bestliterary institutions in the South. Still, my apology for you was, thatyou was a vain old gentleman, and that to listen to you, respectfully, was to obey the Divine teaching of one who has taught us to "bear theinfirmities of the weak. " Your _samples_, both of reading andpronunciation, were amusing and novel to me. And so far as I couldgather the prevailing sentiment, it was, that to adopt your style wouldrender the reading of the Scriptures perfectly ridiculous. 

In your address to "Methodist Know-Nothing Preachers, " I discover thatyou are still the man you were at Madison, in 1847: you have a greatdeal to say about _yourself_, and make free use of the personal pronounI! _I_ advise--_I_ believe--_I_ am satisfied--_I_ will not agree--_I_warn and caution--_I_ fear, or _I_ apprehend, etc. To parse thedifferent sentences in your partisan harangue syntactically, little elseis necessary but to understand the _first person singular_, and torepeat the rule as often as it occurs: a peculiarity which characterizesevery paragraph in your labored address. Beside, the frequent use of thepronouns _I_, _me_, _my_, _mine_, etc. , too frequently occur to be worthestimating. And it will be seen, upon examination, that not merely theverbiage, but the sentiment, is thus egotistic throughout, exhibiting adegree of arrogance and self-importance, only to be met with in a_Clerical Locofoco_, used by bad men for ignoble purposes. To carry outthe idea of your _vanity_, you say in the winding up of your address:

 "And now, brethren, have _I_ or Mr. Wesley hit upon one good reason why you should not have joined the Know-Nothings? If either of _us_ have, then _I_ beseech you to come from among them. If _we_ have not, there is yet another in reserve which, if it does not prevail will show--or prove to my satisfaction at least--that if _an angel from heaven_ were to denounce your order, you would cleave to it still. "

Any other man but yourself would, from considerations of _modesty_, havegiven JOHN WESLEY the preference, in this connection, and come in as_second best_. But no, you are _first in place_, and, in your ownestimation, in _importance_ likewise, as a religious teacher. 

I have no doubt you consider yourself a much greater man than JohnWesley ever was; and in proof of this, I need only cite what you havesaid in reference to Mr. Wesley's opposition to Romanism:

 "Even good old John Wesley caught the spirit of the times, and wrote that letter, from which it appears he thought if the Catholics got into power, they would abuse Protestants. What abuse they could have heaped on them, greater than they heaped on Catholics, short of cutting their throats, I cannot conceive. "

The only superior you acknowledge is CARDINAL WISEMAN, a bigoted RomanCatholic, and you seem to knock under to him quite reluctantly, and notwithout informing the public that you have been a laborious student forforty years, and "_a profound thinker_. " Here is your praise:

 "I have been a pretty severe student for near forty years, and a laborious, if not _profound thinker_ for a long time; but when I compare myself in intellectual stature with that man, I shrink in my own estimation to the insignificance of a mite. "

So much by way of noticing vanity. You are a literary and theologicalstar of the first magnitude! You are an encyclopedia of the learning, science, patriotism, and religion of the country! Sir, if you possesseda little more _sheep-faced modesty_, and could exhibit a little less of_lion-headed impudence_ than you do, you would be a much more useful, not to say successful minister of the New Testament!

Sir, you have taken the field in opposition to Know-Nothingism, _professedly_ through your deep and abiding concern for Christianity, and the interests of Methodism. You say:

 "You cannot surely be so weak as to suppose you can crush Romanism by Know-Nothing agencies; but you have almost ruined Methodism by them already. 

 "Now the ruler of this nation is spoken evil of by your party continually, and therefore, in the judgment of Wesley, I might stand up in the pulpit and defend him. "

The truth is, you are influenced alone by partisan political feelings;and occupying a position in a Mississippi College, in the midst ofFire-eating Disunion Progressive Democracy, you desire to please them, rather than serve the interests of your country or Church. To take thestump, or the pulpit, in defence of _Frank Pierce_ and his corruptadministration, would be a pleasant talk to you, who have been, all yourlife-time, an inveterate Locofoco in politics, and "a profound thinker"in favor of its iniquitous measures and principles. In your earlypolitical training, you have been swayed by interest and popular favor, and in most cases at the expense of truth, just as you now are, in yourmad vindication of Romanism. A tool for others to work with, till youhave found yourself in a condition to use such tools as you yourselfhave been, you are now a trimmer and weathercock, leading on men of lesssense than yourself, to such distinction as interest and ambition maydictate!

Sir, you take the ground, throughout, that there is no danger ofCatholics in this country, and that they do not seek to establish theirreligion. Here is a specimen of your logic:

 "Thank God no religious sect can tyrannize over another in this country, so long as they all respect the Federal Constitution. Until we see, then, the Catholics treating that instrument with disrespect, it is madness to entertain fears of them and worse than madness to form combinations against them. "

Now, sir, the foregoing statement is untrue, and in making it you couldnot have been sincere. You are a man of too much sense, and of too muchinformation, to believe what you are wickedly trying to palm uponothers. Brownson's Quarterly Review, the most able, as well as the mostauthentic organ of Catholicism in the United States, employs thefollowing language to the American people--mark it:

 "_Are your free institutions infallible?_ Are they founded on _Divine right_? This you deny. Is not the proper question for you to discuss, then, _not_ whether the Papacy be or be not compatible with republican government, but whether _it be or be not founded in Divine right_? If the Papacy be founded in Divine right, it is supreme over whatever is founded only in human right, and then your institutions should be made to harmonize with it: not it with your institutions!!! The real question, then, is not the compatibility or the incompatibility of the Catholic Church with _democratic institutions_, but, Is the _Catholic Church the Church of God_?

 "Settle this question first. But in point of fact, _democracy is a mischievous dream, wherever the Catholic Church does not predominate_, to inspire the people with reverence, and to teach and accustom them to obedience to authority. "

Here is still plainer language from the Roman Catholic Bishop of St. Louis:

 "Heresy and unbelief are crimes; and in Christian countries, as in Italy and Spain, for instance, where all the people are Catholics, and where the Catholic religion is an essential part of the law of the land, they are punished as other crimes. "

Here is what the _Boston Pilot_ says, a Catholic paper of high standing:

 "_No good government can exist_ without religion, and there can be no religion without an _inquisition_, which is wisely designed for the promotion and protection of the _true faith_. "

Here is the _Shepherd of the Valley_, published under the eye and withthe approbation of the Bishop of St. Louis:

 "The Church is, of necessity, intolerant. Heresy she endures when and where she _must_; but she hates it, and directs all her energies to its destruction. If Catholics ever gain an immense numerical majority, religious freedom in this country is _at an end_: so say our enemies--_so say we_. "

And here is what the _Rambler_ says, a devoted Catholic periodical, highin the confidence of the Bishops and Priests of that Church:

 "You ask if he (the Pope) were lord in the land, and you were in the minority, if not in numbers, yet in power, what would he do to you? That, we say, would entirely depend on circumstances. If it would benefit the cause of Catholicism, he would tolerate you--if expedient, he would imprison you, banish you, fine you, probably he might even hang you; but, be assured of one thing, he would never tolerate you for the sake of the 'glorious principles' of civil and religious liberty. "

I could give other quotations of this character, which have met your eyelong since, but I forbear, as they would extend my letter beyond thelimit I have prescribed for myself. These are the publications which, inpart at least, have given rise to the Know-Nothing organization, socordially hated by you. 

You say there is no danger of injury to our institutions from the rapidstrides of Romanism. Allow me to ask your attention to the followingremarkable political prediction by the Duke of Richmond, lateGovernor-General of Canada, and a British noble, who declared himselfhostile to the United States on all occasions. Speaking of ourGovernment, this deadly enemy said:

 "It will be destroyed; it ought not, it will not be permitted to exist. " "The curse of the French revolution, and subsequent wars and commotions in Europe, are to be attributed to its example; and so long as it exists, no prince will be safe upon his throne; and the _sovereigns of Europe are aware of it_; and they have _determined upon its destruction, and have come to an understanding upon this subject, and have decided on the means to accomplish it_; and they will eventually succeed by SUBVERSION _rather than conquest_. " "All the low and surplus population of the different nations of Europe will be carried into that country. It is and will be a receptacle for the bad and disaffected population of Europe, when they are not wanted for soldiers, or to supply the navies; _and the governments of Europe will favor such a course_. This will create a surplus and majority of low population, who are so very easily excited; and they will _bring with them their principles_; and in nine cases out of ten adhere to their ancient and former governments, laws, manners, customs, and religion; and will transmit them to their posterity; and in many cases propagate them among the natives. These men will become citizens, and, by the constitution and laws, will be invested with the right of suffrage. " "Hence, _discord_, _dissension_, _anarchy and civil war will ensue_; and some popular individual will assume the government, and restore order, and the sovereigns of Europe, the emigrants, and many of the natives will sustain him. " "The Church of Rome has a design upon that country; and it will in time be the established religion, and will aid in the destruction of that Republic. " "I have _conversed with many of the sovereigns and princes of Europe, and they have unanimously expressed these opinions relative to the government of the United States, and their determination to subvert it_. "

But, sir, after eulogizing Catholics for their devotion to religioustoleration in this country, you make two assertions, touching theMethodist Church, for which I wish to arraign you, and for which theauthorities of said Church ought to arraign you, under that section ofour Discipline which forbids _railing out against our Doctrines andDiscipline_. You say:

 "And if I were to take the stump against you, I would say to the honest yeomanry of the country. 'Good people, if you think your liberties will be _any safer in the hands of Methodists than Catholics, you are vastly mistaken_. '

 "I would add, in humiliation but in candor, 'You have ten thousand times more to fear, just at this time, from Methodists, than Catholics; simply because the first are more numerous than the last, because the first are actually in the field for office, while the last are not. '"

If you have this opinion of the Methodist Church, you cannot be anhonest man and remain within her jurisdiction. You ought to leave hercommunion forthwith, and go over to Rome; and in doing this, you would_not have far to go_! Occupying the position you do, and holding thesentiments you do, I would not send a child to any school or collegeover which you might preside. Nor do I think any Protestant parent orguardian ought to patronize any school under your care. Your influence, whatever you may possess, is against the Protestant faith, and in favorof Catholicism. In a word, you are a dangerous man in a Republicangovernment. 

Upon the subject of religious toleration by the Catholics, you seem tohave fallen into the same error adopted by the Hon. Mr. Stephens, ofGeorgia--a man for whom you have great regard now, but who, in the daysof _Clay Whiggery_, was a stench in your Locofoco nostrils! Mr. Stephensmade the assertion, in a public speech in Augusta, that "the CatholicColony of Maryland, under Lord Baltimore, was the first to _establish_the principle of free toleration in religious worship. " The Colony ofMaryland was a Catholic Colony, and the "Toleration Act" was written byLord Baltimore himself. That Act is dated 21st April, 1649, when LordBaltimore was in the zenith of his glory. Here is the language of that"Act" of religious toleration:

 "Denying the Holy _Trinity_ is to be punished with _death_, and confiscation of land and goods to the Lord Proprietary, (Lord Baltimore himself!). Persons using any reproachful words concerning the Blessed Virgin Mary, or the Holy Apostles or Evangelists, to be fined £5, or in default of payment to be publicly whipped and _imprisoned, at the pleasure_ of his Lordship, (Lord Baltimore himself!) or of his Lieutenant-General. " _See Laws of Maryland, at large, by T. Bacon_, A. D. 1765. 16 and 17 _Cecilius's Lord Baltimore_. 

God deliver us from such toleration! _Death_ was the penalty forexpressing certain religious opinions, not acceptable to Lord Baltimoreand the Holy Catholic Church! Fines and _whipping at the post_ was thepenalty for speaking against the image-worship of the Catholic Church. But I need not pursue this subject further: the _onus propandi_ is onyour side. 

Speaking of Mr. Wesley, you say:

 "If Wesley were alive, what would he think of your midnight plots, and open tirades against Papists? But a letter of his has been going the rounds of the newspapers, which the Know Nothings obviously think gives the sanction of that good man to their movement. Not so. Mr. Wesley was not the man to write as inconsistently as their version of this letter makes him write. "

Why, sir, Mr. Wesley goes much further in his political opposition toRoman Catholics than the American party have ever proposed to go. TheAmerican party say only that they will not vote for Catholics, or putthem in office, because their principles are antagonistic to the spiritof Republican institutions. Mr. Wesley lays down the comprehensive, but_true doctrine_, in this very letter, that "_no government not RomanCatholic ought to tolerate men of the Roman Catholic persuasion_. " Andto show how fully and clearly he sustains this position, I quote fromhis letter at length. You will find the letter in Vol. 5, page 817, ofWesley's Miscellaneous Works, dated January 12th, 1780. It wasoriginally addressed to the Dublin Freeman's Journal. Here is what Mr. Wesley says, in the very letter you seek to _deny out of_:

 "I consider not whether the Romish religion is true or false: build nothing on one or the other supposition. Therefore, away with all your common-place declamation about intolerance and persecution for religion! Suppose every word of Pope Pius's creed to be true! Suppose the Council of Trent to have been infallible; yet I insist upon it that no government not Roman Catholic ought to tolerate men of the Roman Catholic persuasion. 

 "I prove this by a plain argument--let him answer it that can--that no Roman Catholic does or can give security for his allegiance or peaceable behavior. I prove it thus: It is a Roman Catholic maxim, established not by private men, but by public council, that 'No faith is to be kept with heretics. ' This has been openly avowed by the Council of Constance; but it has never been openly disclaimed. Whether private persons avow or disavow it, it is a fixed maxim of the Church of Rome. But as long as it is so, nothing can be more plain than that the members of that Church can give no reasonable security to any government for their allegiance and peaceable behavior. Therefore, they ought not to be tolerated by any government, Protestant, Mohammedan, or Pagan. You say, 'Nay, but they take an oath of allegiance. ' True, five hundred oaths; but the maxim, 'No faith is to be kept with heretics, ' sweeps them all away as a spider's web. So that still no governors that are not Roman Catholics can have any security of their allegiance. 

 "Again, those who acknowledge the spiritual power of the Pope can give no security of their allegiance to any government; but all Roman Catholics acknowledge this: therefore they can give no security for their allegiance. The power of granting pardons for all sins--past, present, and to come--is, and has been for many centuries, one branch of his spiritual power. But those who acknowledge him to have this spiritual power can give no security for their allegiance, since they believe the Pope can pardon rebellion, high treason, and all other sins whatever. The power of dispensing with any promise, oath, or vow, is another branch of the spiritual power of the Pope: all who acknowledge his spiritual power must acknowledge this. But whoever acknowledges the dispensing power of the Pope, can give no security for his allegiance to any government. Oaths and promises are none: they are as light as air--a dispensation makes them null and void. Nay, not only the Pope, but even a priest has power to pardon sins! This is an essential doctrine of the Church of Rome. But they that acknowledge this, cannot possibly give any security for their allegiance to any government. Oaths are no security at all; for the priest can pardon both perjury and high treason. Setting their religion aside, it is plain that, upon principles of reason, no government ought to tolerate men who cannot give any security to that government for their allegiance and peaceful behavior. But this, no Romanist can do; not only while he holds that 'no faith is to be kept with heretics, ' but so long as he acknowledges either priestly absolution, or the spiritual power of the Pope. 

 "If any one pleases to answer this, and set his name, I shall probably reply. But the productions of anonymous writers I do not promise to take any notice of. 

 "I am, sir, your humble servant, "JOHN WESLEY. 

 "CITY ROAD, January 12, 1780. "

But, sir, you know as well as any living man that the history of theChurch, from the days of the first Pope down to the iniquitous reign ofPius IX. , sustains Mr. Wesley in his views on this subject, andjustifies the steps taken by the American party. Notwithstanding theoft-repeated profession of Catholic liberality and Romish toleration, sotriumphantly paraded by you, and other interested aspirants andunprincipled demagogues, the Catholic Church has invariably shownherself to be destitute of both, whenever she had the opportunity ofusing them. Sir, _intolerance_ is an element of her faith, and_persecution_ a specimen of her piety; and no man knows it better thanyou do. In taking upon herself the obligation of "true obedience to thePope, " the Catholic Church imposes upon herself a task that provesbeyond all doubt she cannot, under any circumstances, remain faithful tothat obligation, and yet maintain "allegiance" to such a government asours!

Sir, I have no patience with a Protestant minister who stands forth asthe apologist of Catholicism; nor have I any confidence in one who doesit, provided he is a man of _intelligence_, as I admit you to be. Theonly excuse I can render for your strange and inconsistent conduct is, that you are in your dotage; that you are a violent old partisan; andthat you are the tool of designing demagogues, infamous disunionists, and unmitigated repudiators. I shall not be at all surprised to hearthat you have apostatized from the Methodist Church, and gone over tothe Roman Catholics. I learn from the Little Rock Gazette, a Democraticpaper, that but the other day, Gov. E. N. Carway, of Arkansas, a memberof the Methodist Church, had actually apostatized from Methodism, andthe Protestant faith, and united with the Roman Catholics. And whatmakes his defection from the faith of his fathers still more notorious, his organ is down upon the Protestant clergy in bitter and unrelentingdenunciations! I believe that _you_ are preparing to go over to theRoman Catholics; and to justify your change, when the time comes, younow assert, "in humiliation but in candor, " you say, that the people"have _ten thousand times more_ to fear from Methodists than fromCatholics. " If you believe this, you ought to leave the Methodist Church_instantly_, even without the formalities of a withdrawal orexpulsion--even though you should be denied admittance into the CatholicChurch! I deny that we have "_ten thousand times more to fear_" from the_Devil_ than we have from the Catholics; and according to your argument, _the Methodists are worse than the Devil_! This, their most bitterrevilers and enemies do not believe; and for obvious reasons. TheMethodist Church has no St. Bartholomew's Day, with its rivers of bloodstaining her garments: she never indiscriminately slaughtered theAlbigenses, or Waldenses, or Huguenots: she never established aninfernal Inquisition: she never lit up the fires of Smithfield: neverburned the Holy Bible, and prohibited, upon pain of eternal death, theprinting and circulating of God's word; and last, but not least, she hasnot sought to keep the people in ignorance. Wherever Methodism has beenplanted, the people have become great and happy. If you please, wherever_Protestantism_ has prevailed, the people have been prosperous andhappy. But look to Old Spain, Italy, the German Confederacies, Sardinia, Naples, Austria, Belgium, Portugal, Bavaria, Baden, South America, andMexico, where Romanism is the established religion, and the places ofher influence are a hissing and a by-word in the eyes of the civilizedworld! Protestantism has done more for the world in the last hundredyears than the Roman Catholic Church has for the _eighteen hundredyears_!

Sir, the Puritans, of New England; the Hollanders, of New York; theQuakers, Lutherans, and German Reformed, of Pennsylvania; the Baptists, of Rhode Island; the Episcopalians and Presbyterians, of Virginia; theLutherans and followers of Wesley and Whitefield, of Georgia; theHuguenots and Episcopalians, of the Carolinas; and the Seceders inseveral of the States, who were the religious pioneers of these States, were all Protestants and Know Nothings; and if they were living, theywould be ashamed of you and your teachings. They selected thiswilderness country as their home, in order that they might enjoy thosereligious privileges from which they had been debarred in the old world, by the very Church and people you are seeking to vindicate. 

But you will say, as you have done in substance, that this is no longerthe characteristic of Romanism. Why is it not? Has she ever changed forthe better? When did she renounce her doctrines and practices? Never!Rome is the same tyrannical system now, where she has the power, thatshe ever has been, and for ever must be. Wo to this land of ours, ifever Rome gets the ascendancy here! Her creed is the same here and now, in this respect, that it has everywhere been, and must always be. It isher boast that she is always right, and knows no change. She practicesher unholy inquisitorial and Jesuitical doctrines in this country, asfar as she can and dare act them out. Her whole system is adverse to ourrepublican institutions and she hesitates not to declare it. She haspublicly burned our Bible in different States in this Union, andrecently, in New York and Pennsylvania. Archbishop Hughes, the Head ofthe Catholic Church in this country, has taken an oath, administered bythe Pope of Rome, of which this is a part:

 "Heretics, schismatics, and rebels to our said Lord (the Pope) or his aforesaid successors, I will, to my utmost power, _persecute and wage war with_. "

The Church of Rome declares all who are not its members to be heretics. It is painful, in view of all these things, to see an old Protestantminister, whose head has been withered by the frosts of seventywinters, openly in the field advocating a Church whose Bishops, Priests, and members are "drunken with the blood of saints. "

There is but one remaining feature of your singular address to KnowNothing Methodist Preachers to be replied to, and I am through. Youassail the new party on the score of its _secrecy_, and of its_concealment_ of its acts from the public. Had this objection come fromany one but a Methodist Preacher, and a known advocate of_Class-meetings being held with closed doors_, I would now dispose of itwithout occupying as much space as I shall do in my concluding remarks!

Notwithstanding all the _secrecy_ in the new Order of Know Nothings hasbeen set aside by the act of the National Council which created it; andnotwithstanding our members tell all about their Councils, where andwhen they meet, and our orators read out and publish to the world ourobligations, rules, and principles, it is still objected that ours is asecret Order, liable to be used for bad purposes; that we travel aboutwith dark lanterns; that our proceedings are not restrained by thewholesome check of public opinion!

Now, this, the great objection to our Order, comes from men who belongto Lodges of Free Masons and Odd Fellows, and who have taken all the_binding_ oaths attached to the different _degrees_ of these respectiveOrders! The same objection is urged against the American party, by menwho belong to the Order of Sons of Temperance, who have deemed a _rigidsecret organization_ necessary to combat successfully a _domestic_ evil!It is urged in bitterness against the Order, by demagogues andpartisans, who have acted for years with the _secret politicalconclaves_ of their respective parties, who have held their meetingswith _closed doors_--kept their _places_ of meeting a profoundsecret--and when they have adjourned, they have enjoined _secrecy_ uponall present! Last, but not least, this _secret feature_ is urged againstthe American organization by the vile apologists for the CatholicChurch, and its corrupt Priesthood and membership, in this country. These demagogues know that the Roman Catholic Church is a _secretsociety_, directed by a talented, designing, and villainousHIERARCHY--absolutely controlled by an _anti_-Republican Priesthood, toa degree which has never been exercised by any political party in theknown world! The _Confessional_ is a secret tribunal, before which everymember of that Church is required to make known, not only _immoral_actions, but every thought and purpose of the heart, and upon pain ofincurring the anathema of the Church, which is equivalent to a sentenceof eternal damnation! The corrupt order of JESUITS, the infamous societyof SAN FEDESTI, and the infinitely infernal society of IRISH RIBBONMEN--these are all oath-bound societies of the Catholic Church, connected directly with the horrid operations of the "_HolyInquisition_. "

Now, I put the question to any man of reason and common sense, if RomanCatholics and their _patriotic Democratic_ admirers and advocates, inthis country, are not the last men on earth who should object to the_secret_ doings of the order of Know Nothings, even if their secrecywere kept up? Every Roman Catholic in the known world is under theabsolute control of a secret society, by considerations not only of a_temporal_, but of an ETERNAL WEIGHT!

But I am not done with these _Democratic_ opposers of SECRECY. TheConvention which formed the Constitution of the United States, sat inthe old State House in Philadelphia, _with closed doors, from the 25thof May to the 17th of September_, wanting only eight days of fourmonths. That body of men had a Doorkeeper and Sergeant-at-arms, bothunder oath, to keep their doors barred, and all their proceedings asecret. So says Mr. Jefferson's biography! And such men as Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Madison, Franklin, Harrison, Hancock, Hopkins, andothers, composed that body! During the war of the Revolution, GeneralWashington, Generals Lee, Wayne, Marion, and others, organized a _secretAmerican Society_, with its branches extending from North to South, having their _passwords_, _signs_, and _grips_, and writing to eachother in figures, and "an unknown tongue, " as the Know Nothings havebeen doing, and all, too, with a view to oppose Foreign intrigues andoppressions! It is as well known as any political truth, that GeneralWASHINGTON, at the time of his death, was the _President_ of theCincinnati Society, a secret political society, in which, we see itstated on unquestionable authority, no man was eligible to membershipunless he was a _native American_. The _Columbian Order_, known as the"_Tammany Society_, " was a secret political society, and highlyinfluential, and maintains its existence to this day, and without dangerto the liberties of the country. Gen. SAM HOUSTON publishes to the worldthat himself and Gen. JACKSON were members of this Society. What say the_anti_-Americans to all these facts? Do they believe that Gen. Washington, or Jackson, would have united with any association or ordernot purely American? Would either have entered into any politicalleague, when _secrecy_ was enjoined, if he had not approved of theprinciple of secrecy in political associations? Never! From thecharacters of Washington and Jackson--the sacrifices they made for theircountry, united with their fervid patriotism, and their known preferencefor every thing _American_, I do not doubt for one moment, that if theywere both now living, they would unite with the veritable Order of KnowNothings!

I believe the hand of God to be in this very movement, and as much inthe _secrecy_ of it, in the outset, as in any other feature. I regardthe movement as one growing out of a great crisis in the affairs of ourcountry, and a precursor of a sound, healthful, and vigorousnationality, and which will ultimately prevent the liberties of thiscountry from being destroyed, by the machinations of such demagogues andfactionists as now seek to _excuse_ Romanism, and fellowship ForeignPauperism. Secret societies are only dangerous to despots and tyrants, and history shows that these above all others have made war upon them. They have denounced and proscribed Masonry in every quarter of theglobe, where they have had the power. The Pope, with the aid of hisCardinals, has crushed the ancient order of Free Masons in hisdominions. There is not a Masonic Lodge in Italy. In our own country, not a single Catholic is to be found associated with the order of FreeMasons; and why? Masonry is founded upon the Bible, and requires thereading of the Protestant Bible in all its Lodges, and this don't suitRomanism. We state these general and historical facts, without knowingany thing of our own knowledge of Masonry. 

In the young and growing city of Knoxville, it is within our ownknowledge, that many of the Irish Catholics attached themselves to theOrder of the Sons of Temperance, with a view, as they said, of throwingaround them the wholesome restraints of the Order. On the first visit ofa priest to the city, commonly called "Father Brown, " these IrishCatholics began to drop off one by one, until not one of them is now inthe Order, and most of those who were, are daily seen drunk in ourstreets. Indeed, some of them in withdrawing had the candor toacknowledge that the priest required them to do so! And why? Because, inall the Divisions of the Sons of Temperance here, we have the ProtestantScriptures read, and have Protestant prayers offered up. This don't suitthe Church of Rome!

 I have the honor to be, very truly and frankly, W. G. BROWNLOW. 

TO THE RIGHT REVEREND AARON V. BROWN, M. S. 

SIR:--I have received by mail a pamphlet copy of your "Letter to theBishops, Elders, and _other_ Ministers, Itinerant and _Local_, of theMethodist Episcopal Church South, " covering twenty-eight octavo pages. Ithank you for a copy of your _Pastoral_ address; and I am happy to beable to _infer_ from its teachings that you have made a profession ofreligion, before taking upon yourself "Holy Orders. " I suppose the_time_ of your conversion, you date back to the memorable period whenyou "saw sights" on Mount Pisgah, and had conferred on you the degree of_Modern Seer_, and entered upon the duties of "High Priest" ofDemocracy! As I am one of the parties addressed, and the customs of theChurch and the country require a response to so grave a document, I havefelt it incumbent upon me to perform the task. I may style this the_Last_ epistle of Aaron, the Priest, and illustrious Chief of ForeignCatholic Sag Nicht Locofocoism!

My first impulses were, upon reading your address, to call for your_credentials_, and to examine into your _authority_ for assuming todictate to the entire Ministry of the Southern portion of the MethodistChurch. You must either enter the Ecclesiastical ring under the_imposition of the hands_ of BISHOP SOULE or _Andy Johnson_. If BISHOPSOULE ordained you for the Ministry, and set you apart as theLieutenant-General of the Methodist Episcopal Church South, thepresumption is that he examined you on doctrinal points, and upon allquestions affecting the government of the Church, as was his duty, andis our custom, and that he found you orthodox! It follows, as a matterof course, that you renounced your heresy you advocated in the HartfordConvention, held at Nashville, and that you obtained forgiveness forthat and numerous other "sins of omission and commission"--aye, for thewhole catalogue of your inward and outward iniquities, which so_eminently_ disqualified you for the work of the Ministry! But if _AndyJohnson_ ordained you for the work, of which there is no sort of doubt, the Church South, through me, protests against your authority, andutterly refuses to submit to your teachings. Our Church does not agreewith Johnson on the "White Basis" issue, or the great question ofslavery; and in proof of this, I cite to the fact of her separation fromthe North, in 1844, upon this very question. She has within her boundsof communion, rich men and poor, educated and uneducated, and isunwilling to unite with him in arraying the poor against the rich, orthe unlearned against the learned. Nor does our Church believe thatJesus Christ was a Locofoco, as Johnson asserts in his Inaugural, andheld that Christianity and Democracy, in converging lines, led to thefoot of Jacob's Ladder, and thence to heaven, _via_ Mount Pisgah, fromwhose lofty summit you first beheld the promised land!

It therefore follows, that, in presenting yourself as a spiritual leaderin the Church, called to the work, as you have been, by _Andy Johnson_, your case is fully met by a quotation from Job:

 "Now there was a day when the sons of God came to present themselves before the Lord, and _Satan_ came also among them. "

A second passage, from the Book of Jeremiah, meets your case, and leavesno doubt that the inspired Prophet had you in his eye:

 "We have heard the pride of Moab, (he is exceedingly proud, ) his loftiness, and his _arrogance_, and his pride, and his haughtiness of heart. 

 "I know his wrath, saith the Lord; but it shall not be so; his _lies_ shall not so effect it. "

To be candid with you, Gov. Brown, I regard your address, under all thecircumstances, as a display of the most brazen-faced assurance and themost unmitigated impudence I ever met with in my life! I have known foryears that you were capable of great presumption, but in this insolentand dictatorial address you surpass _yourself_--you positively out-HerodHerod! In the whole history of the country, and of parties, I venturethe assertion, that a parallel piece of impudence, and downrightbold-faced assurance, cannot be pointed to, as the act of any partisan. It is really past all belief, if I had not your production before me. But more of this hereafter. 

Copies of your pamphlet were distributed through the aisles and seats ofthe Annual Conference room in Nashville, and have been sent all over theSouth, to members of other Conferences. Your _proof-sheet_ was seen tendays before the meeting of the Middle Tennessee Conference, and your"work of faith and labor of love" was ready for distribution when theConference first convened, but you held it back till the Conference wasready to adjourn, and to a period so late, that a reply, if one had beendeemed necessary, could not be made. This was _cowardly_, and in keepingwith your political tactics and code of morals. In saying that this wasin keeping with your code of morals, I allude to the _Woodberryaffair_. 

I shall now take up your address, Governor, and wade through itstwenty-eight pages of double-distilled Sag Nichtism, sublimatedimpudence, and concealed advocacy of _Romanism_, mixed up withcontradictions, false assertions, and glaring absurdities, as it is, from beginning to end. In the opening paragraph, you predicate yourright to instruct the "Bishops, Elders, and other Ministers" of theentire Church, South, upon the real or assumed fact, that you are "Theson of a now sainted father, who for forty years ministered at youraltars, the co-laborer of that noble band of Christian ministers, who, under Asbury and Coke, founded your Church in America!"

Alas, that any "sainted Father" should be represented by so degenerate ason--an irreligious son--not a member of any Church--but having thehardihood, in the face of those who know the facts, to disguise himselfin the priestly robes of a "sainted Father"--like an ass in a lion'sskin, to _bray out_ against better men than himself, or, like a wolf insheep's clothing, to _steal into the fold_, where that Father wasaccustomed to minister in holy things, and with soft and honeyed words, and hypocritical teachings, and Satan-like misrepresentations, seek whomhe may devour! You tell the "Bishops, Elders, and other Ministers, " thatyou really "approve" their "creed, " and, what is still moresoul-cheering, you have "witnessed their growth and progress for years, with the highest satisfaction. " This is very _condescending_ in the "sonof a now sainted father!" It is quite flattering! But these "Bishops, Elders, and other Ministers, " would receive all this with a greaterdegree of allowance, if they did not believe that your generouspatronage, so lavishly bestowed upon them and their "creed, " wasprompted by a principle of which _selfishness_ is the soul! Theybelieve, and so express themselves in conversation, that your forcedsmile of approbation, your reluctant eulogy, have both been wrung fromyou, because you are a sycophantic partisan suitor for patronage, in theway of votes for your party. These Clergymen whom you address, think ita great pity that the "son of a now sainted father" should exhibit somuch "satisfaction" at witnessing their prosperity, in _theory_, andmanifest not one particle in _practice_. They think that you would be inyour proper place, to be found among the _mourners_, instead of the_teachers_ in their Church; and that it is high time, considering yourage in life, and the extent of your iniquities, that you should be foundupon your knees, in an altar full of fresh straw, at an old-fashionedCamp-Meeting, asking the pious to pray for you, and God, for the sake ofthe forty years labors of "a now sainted father, " to have mercy uponyou, and save your sinful old soul from that death that never dies. 

Why, Sir, the Devil himself would blush to perpetrate such an act ofarrogance as you have done, in thus volunteering your advice to the"Bishops, Elders, and other Ministers, " of the Methodist Church. An oldpolitical party hack, who is not now, and never was, a member of anyChurch--an intriguing old sinner, who never even attends Church, andwho, in this respect, shows that he neither fears God, respects theChristian Sabbath, nor "approves the creed" of any orthodoxdenomination, to be lecturing a numerous body of Clergymen, as to whatthey ought or ought not to do, it is the culmination of all that iscalled effrontery! The "Bishops, Elders, and other Ministers" of theMethodist Church, wish the _evidence_ of your conversion to God, beforethey consent to obey you, as "having the rule over them. " Your approvalof their "creed, " and the "satisfaction" with which you have witnessedtheir progress, is not sufficient to satisfy their doubting minds, aslong as you continue to ride into Nashville on Sabbath, and retailpolitical slang at the INN, or read Sag Nicht papers at the _UnionOffice_, to the neglect of the house of God, and the evil example setbefore young men, against the statute in such cases made and provided!We must, as Ministers, hear you relate your experience, in a regularclass-meeting. Nay, more, knowing your _raising_, and your ability to"deceive, even the very elect, " we must see you down upon yourmarrow-bones, surrounded by noisy and zealous officials, pounding you onthe back, and exclaiming, as in the days of your "sainted father, " _Prayon, Aaron_! We must hear you _groan_--we must see your sinful old bosom_heave_--we must witness the falling of _big tears_, as you publiclyconfess and manfully repent of your misdeeds--of the whole catalogue, ofall the inward and outward iniquities of your past life--your sins ofomission and commission, which God knows are more numerous than thehairs upon your old sinful head! I say we must see all this, and evenmore, before we can have faith in your teachings, as big as even a grainof mustard seed!

But you are the "son of a now sainted father"--you derive great"satisfaction" from the "growth and progress" of Methodism--you"approve" the Methodist "creed"--and hence, a glorious future awaits theMethodist Church: _provided_ always, that her "Bishops, Elders, andother Ministers" hearken to and obey your teachings, a thing they arevery certain not to do, in the matter under consideration. It is amelancholy fact, that many of the sons of Methodist, and otherMinisters, are very wicked and unpromising men; and it is equally true, and certainly notorious, that where they turn out to be sinners, theyare sinners above all offenders, dwelling either at Jerusalem orelsewhere! I have no hesitancy in pronouncing you as _hard a case_, in amoral point of view, as ever came before the Church, and the onlyappropriate reply her ecclesiastical dignitaries can make to youraddress, is to appoint a day of fasting and prayer to God, for yourconversion, to be observed throughout her borders. I now, as theappointed organ of the Church, set apart the first day of January, 1856, and I pray you, as one desiring the salvation of your soul, to be in thespirit and in a proper frame of mind on that day! Humble yourself beforeGod--tell him that you were in error in stealing the livery of Heaven toserve the Devil in! Tell him that you are an old worn-out politicalhack--that you have grown gray in the service of sin--that during thewhole of a somewhat eventful life, your labors have been in the dirtiestpools of party politics--that you have been insincere and unscrupulousin all your teachings and acts--that you stand before the people ofTennessee publicly branded by _eight_ respectable and reliable citizensof Wilson county, as a _falsifier_ in the Know Nothing controversy ofthe past summer--and that you are sorry for having come forth steeped tothe nose and chin in political profligacy, to lecture grave Clergymenupon subjects you ought to set at their feet and learn lessons about!Tell your God, what he doubtless knows, that though the "son of a nowsainted father, " you are as full of devils as ever Mary Magdalenewas--that like the "Imps of Sin, " in Milton, these "yelp all around"you--that this is no reflection upon a "now sainted father, " whoseseeming neglect of your early training grew out of his continual absencefrom home, as is the case with most Methodist Preachers, --aye, tell yourGod, that once out of this scrape, you will never be caught in anotherof the kind! You say, "From the foundation of our government, it has been a conceded and settled doctrine, that the various religious denominations should not, as such, intermeddle with the political contests of the day. No instance is now remembered where they have done so!"

This is a remarkable sentence, and partakes of the nature of your Wilsoncounty assertions! The history of the Church, and of the world, contradicts every word of the foregoing, and demonstrates that the"settled doctrine" of the Catholic Church, has ever been, as it stillis, to "intermeddle with the political contests of the day. " I willtrouble you with two instances in which "religious denominations, assuch, " have been guilty of what you deny. The Albany (N. Y. ) StateRegister, a paper which usually does not say what it cannot maintain, states that ARCHBISHOP HUGHES has issued a mandate, _commanding_ allCatholics in the Albany District, in the exciting State election nowcoming off, to cast their votes for Mr. Crosby for the Senate. But RomanCatholics, you falsely tell us, never "intermeddle with the politicalcontests of the day:" O no!

The other "instance now remembered, " is the one in which you were acandidate for a seat in the Legislature of Tennessee, in the county ofGiles: this was, according to my recollection, in 1831, or a quarter ofa century ago. At that time, there was a small Manual Labor School inGiles, which had been incorporated by the Legislature, and at the headof which was a _Presbyterian_. The gentleman who ran against you, if nota member of the Presbyterian Church, "approved" their "creed, " and"witnessed their growth and progress for years with the highestsatisfaction. " _You_ charged upon the stump that the Presbyterians wereseeking to establish their religion by law, to unite Church andState--appealed to the Methodist and Baptist to put them down byelecting you, with a promise that you would check their march bycounter-legislation--and you were elected upon this issue. At the sametime, as the oldest inhabitants of Giles know, there were not fiftyPresbyterians in the county! But "no instance is remembered" in whichone sect has intermeddled with another--O no! You say:

 "In the mutations of parties in this country, a new one has lately arisen, to which, I apprehend, more of the Methodist ministers have attached themselves, at least in the State of Tennessee, than might have been expected. This party, known as the Know Nothings, is so _peculiar_ in its organization, that it seems strange to me that any minister or professor of religion should be willing longer to continue in it. "

Your apprehensions are well-founded, when you suppose that a very largeproportion of the Methodist ministers in Tennessee are either members ofthis new party or sympathize with it. And, sir, more of the ministers ofother denominations than you seem to be aware of, have either attachedthemselves to this party, "in the mutations of parties, " or act with it, and endorse its aims and objects, than you have yet dreamed of! And "itseems strange" to these ministers, and thousands of the purest and bestlaymen in the Protestant ranks, "that any minister or professor ofreligion should be willing longer" to oppose the principles of thisparty, or array themselves under the black flag of Papal Rome, and ofthe pauper emigrants with whom she is flooding our land! But, sir, theobject of your Address is, to persuade if you can, and if not, _todrive_, by motives of fear, the Clergy of the Methodist Church fromtheir position on this great American and Protestant question. Alas, howlittle does the "son of a sainted father" understand the material heattempts to work upon! Methodist ministers are free men, the equals ofother moral and upright men in heroic virtues, and far in advance ofthat of politicians in Tennessee who believe parties in religion, as inpolitics, are only "held together by the cohesive power of publicplunder, " and who assume to direct public opinion from a principle, ofwhich _selfishness_ is the Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end!Sir, the violence, bitterness, and the very inflammatory tone, not tosay language, of your Gallatin, Lebanon, and Columbia speeches, areenough, it seems to me, to _nauseate_ every good and conservativecitizen, and to disgust every "Bishop, Elder, and other Ministers, Itinerant and Local, of the Methodist Episcopal Church, South. " Even inthis Address, you insult these ministers on every page. I see not howany preacher, with a true Protestant and American heart in him, can readthis address of yours through, without rising up from his seat andsaying: "I have voted with this Anti-Protestant and Anti-American partyfor the last time. "

In warning Methodist ministers to withdraw their sanction andapprobation of Know Nothingism, you say:

 "I therefore call upon them this day to come out of these lodges, and never return to them: at all events, never return to them until all _secrecy_, all their bits of red paper, (indicating _blood_, even by the selection of color, ) all their signs and signals, are utterly abolished and dispensed with. I call upon them to do this, and to do it forthwith--by their hopes of heaven--by their obedience to the word of God--by their allegiance to the Constitution and laws of their country--to come out from any party which has adopted a mode and plan of organization so fatal to the peace of society, and the progress of true religion. "

What egotism! _You_ call upon them! You make a freer use of the personalpronoun _I_, than even old Parson Longstreet, the Know Nothing slayer ofMississippi. To parse your different sentences syntactically, nothingelse is necessary but to understand the first person singular, and torepeat the rule. Not only your verbiage but your sentiment is thusegotistic throughout!

Your appeal to the ministers to come out of this organization, on theground of its _secrecy_, is a species of demagoguism, the moredisgusting when it is considered that you are a _Free Mason_, and have, by all the arts and blandishment of your nature, sought to induceministers to go into that organization. But, then, there is no violationof law or the Constitution in _Masonry_--"fatal to the peace of societyand to the progress of true religion"--no, nothing! Understand me: I amnot opposed to Masonry. 

On this subject of the Romish creed, which you excuse, and even_advocate_, you admit that there are "_alleged_ abuses, " which haveprompted the Protestant Churches to unite themselves with this newOrder! Then you insultingly tell these Churches this tale:

 "But they ought to have remembered, that even a virtuous indignation can never justify _proscription and persecution_: these bring no remedy to the real or supposed evils, but are sure to increase and aggravate them. These errors in faith, and abominations in practice, if they really exist, were known to the Wesleys, and Cokes, and Asburys, who founded your Church: to the Lees, the Bruces, the Capers, the Logan Douglasses, the Summerfields, and the Bascoms, who subsequently extended and adorned it. But they never proposed to kindle, in this enlightened age of Christianity, the consuming fires of RELIGIOUS PERSECUTION. "

Now, sir, every distinguished "founder" of the Methodist Church you havenamed, from WESLEY to BASCOM, has written and preached against the"errors in faith, and abominations in practice, " of the Romish Church, and they each and all have taken this very ground upon the religiousissues. I have heard _three_ of these men preach, and I am familiar withthe writings of the rest, and know whereof I speak. 

You _intentionally_ deceive and misrepresent the American party, whenyou charge that they seek to proscribe one class of our citizens--thatthey desire to interfere with the rights of conscience--and to say _how_men should worship God. Why don't you inform your readers thatArchbishop Hughes, and other Catholic Bishops, were the first tointroduce religion into political discussion in this country? This wouldnot suit your purposes--it suits your objects, taste, and inclinationbetter, to slander the American party by wholesale, and to charge uponits members the atrocities committed by your foreign and pauper allies. We only choose to vote against them, and to vote for American-borncitizens and Protestants: which is as much our _right_, as it is theright of these foreign Catholics to vote against and proscribe AmericanProtestants. For this, you and your villainous associates exhaust thewhole vocabulary of Billingsgate upon the American party. What is theiroffence? Why, they simply place certain questions before personsdesiring to act with them, which they think, at least, may affect thenational welfare, and before the people of the Union, and ask theiropinion of these questions at the ballot-box. The American party hasalways denied, and I again reiterate the denial, that we do, at allproscribe, or in any way interfere with, any class of our foreigncitizens, save that we propose to send _convicts_ from European prisonsback to their own native and infamous dens, as fast as they landhere--but these are not _citizens_ of ours. I appeal to our Platform, and our Book of Constitutions, and I offer to any man a handsomereward--any man who will produce in either a statement containing theproscription you falsely charge against us. I now say, Gov. Brown, either do this, or cease your empty vaporing against the _proscriptive_features of our system, as you are pleased to style it. You declaim mostlustily in favor of religious liberty for Catholics, which you know wedo not propose as a party to interfere with; and this you plead for atthe altar of Methodist "Bishops, Elders, and other Ministers, " who knowthere is no religious liberty for Protestants where Catholics have thepower to prevent it! You plead in the most plaintive tones for therights of foreign Catholics to be sworn into good citizens in less than_one year_ after they land here, but do not seem to remember theAmerican Protestant wives and children, who have to subsist on charityduring our severe winters, in consequence of their husbands and fathersbeing elbowed out of employment by the competition of foreign pauperlaborers!

Sir, the American party, if in power, would put a stop to thatproscription from office that has always characterized the party withwhich you act, and which has made the present Administration so very andso justly odious to the country. Proscription, indeed! Was there eversuch _glaring_ and _actual_ proscription for the sake of religious andpolitical creeds committed as by the present Administration? Theinfamous Sag Nicht party with which you act, and of which you are aleader and a High Priest, though the "son of a now sainted father, " hasapplied the political guillotine to almost every man in office who hasdared to differ with them in their high estimate of foreign paupers andCatholic vagabonds, in many instances turning out native-bornProtestants, and filling their places with foreign Catholics. And yet, with a degree of effrontery that throws the Devil far into the shade, you turn round and charge the American party with proscription, and askthe "Bishops, Elders, and other Ministers, " of the Methodist Church, "bytheir hopes of heaven--by their obedience to the word of God--and bytheir allegiance to the Constitution and laws of their country, " to comeout from a party so proscriptive! Why, sir, you out-Herod old Herodhimself! Your teachings contrasted with your practice, would cause acrimsoned negative to settle on the cheeks of old Pilate! And still youare the "son of a now sainted father"--you "approve" the "creed" ofMethodism, and have "witnessed its growth and prosperity for years, withthe highest satisfaction!"

You quote from the Declaration of Independence, to show that tolerationshould be extended to Catholics and foreigners, and then insultinglyadd, as if you supposed no Methodist minister had ever perused thewritings of Mr. JEFFERSON:

 "These are the words of Mr. Jefferson, but the immortal sentiment springs directly from the word of the living and true God. No: persecution at the stake, or by exclusion of Catholics from office, is not the weapon to be wielded by the Protestant Churches. "

_You_ know that the notes of warning given to his countrymen by the sageof Monticello, and the great APOSTLE of American Democracy, are inharmony with the doctrines of the Know Nothing party. But you choose toconceal this fact from the "Bishops, Elders, and other Ministers" of theMethodist Church, in the vain hope that their numerous pressing andofficial engagements will not allow them time to look up the documents. In Mr. Jefferson's Notes on Virginia, written in 1781, and published in1794, pages 124-5, I find the following _Know Nothing doctrine_:

 "But are there no inconveniences to be thrown into the scale against the advantage expected from a multiplication of numbers by the importation of foreigners? It is for the happiness of those united in society to harmonize, as much as possible, in matters which they must of necessity transact together. Civil government being the sole object of forming societies, its administration must be conducted by common consent. Every species of government has specific principles. Ours, perhaps, are more peculiar than those of any other in the universe. It is a composition of the freest principles of the English constitution, with others derived from natural right and natural reason. To these nothing can be more opposed than the maxims of absolute monarchs. Yet _from such we are to expect the greatest number of immigrants_. They will bring with them the _principles of the government they leave, imbibed in early youth_: or, if able to throw them off, it will be in exchange for an _unbounded licentiousness, passing, as is usual, from one extreme to another. It would be a miracle were they to stop precisely at the point of temperate liberty_. These principles, with their language, they will transmit to their children. In proportion with their numbers, they will share with us the legislation. They will infuse into it their spirit, warp and bias its directions, and render it a heterogeneous, incoherent, distracted mass. _I may appeal to experience during the present contest for a verification of these conjectures. _ But if they be not certain in event, are they not possible? are they not probable? Is it not safer to wait with patience twenty-seven years and three months longer for the attainment of every degree of population desired or expected? May not our government be more homogeneous, more peaceable, more durable?"

Again, Mr. JEFFERSON, whilst our Minister to the Court of St. Cloud, addressed a letter to JOHN JAY, dated November 14, 1788, in which heuses this language:

 "With respect to the _Consular_ appointments, it is a duty on me to add some observations, which my situation here has enabled me to make. I think it was in the spring of 1784, that Congress (harassed by multiplied applications from foreigners, of whom nothing was known but on their information, or on that of others as unknown as themselves) came to the resolution that the interest of America would not permit the naming of any person, not a citizen, to the office of Consul, or Agent, or Commissary. _Native citizens, on several valuable accounts, are preferable to aliens, or citizens alien-born. _ Native citizens possess our language, know our laws, customs and commerce, have general acquaintance in the United States, give better satisfaction, _and are more to be relied on in a point of fidelity_. To avail ourselves of our native citizens, it appears to me advisable to _declare, by standing law_, that no person but a native citizen shall be capable of the office of Consul. This was the rule of 1784, restraining the office of Consul to native citizens. "

In 1797, Mr. JEFFERSON drafted a petition to the Legislature ofVirginia, on behalf of the citizens of Amherst, Albemarle, Fluvana, andGouchland Bounties, in which he uses the following language:

 "Your petitioners further submit to the two Houses of Assembly, whether the safety of the citizens of this Commonwealth, in their persons, their property, their laws and government, does not require that the capacity to act in the important office of _Juror, Grand or Petty, civil or criminal_, should not be restrained in future to native citizens, or such as were citizens at the date of the Treaty of Peace which closed our revolutionary war; and whether ignorance of our laws, and natural partiality to the countries of their birth, are not reasonable causes for declaring this to be one of their rights incommunicable in future to adopted citizens. "--_Jefferson's Writings, Vol. IX. , page 453. _

Now, Sir, answer me in candor, are you not ashamed of having quoted Mr. JEFFERSON, and of having so basely misrepresented his position on thisgreat American question? Did not Mr. JEFFERSON propose to carry hisopposition to foreigners much farther than the American party now do?

But, you vile old demagogue, though "son of a now sainted father, " I amdetermined you shall not escape the indignant powers of those "Bishops, Elders, and other Ministers, " whom you have wickedly sought to deceive. It is known to you, and to the world, in what veneration all AmericanDemocrats hold the Virginia Resolutions of 1798 and '99, and the fame ofMr. MADISON, who was the ruling spirit of that session of theLegislature. That Legislature passed the following Resolution, which youmay find by consulting Henning's Statutes at Large, Vol. 2, New Series, page 194:

 "That the General Assembly, nevertheless, concurring in opinion with the Legislature of Massachusetts that every Constitutional barrier should be opposed to the introduction of foreign influence into our National Councils, --_Resolved_, That the Constitution ought to be so amended that _no foreigner, who shall have acquired the right, under our Constitution and laws, at the time of making the amendment, shall hereafter be eligible to the office of Senator or Representative_, in Congress of the United States, nor to _any office in the Judiciary or Executive_. Agreed to by the Senate, Jan. 16, 1799. "

I shall next consider two extracts from your Address, under one generalhead, relating to the _temporal_ power of the Pope. You say:

 "But the genius of sophistry may fly to the rescue of Know-Nothingism, by pretending that it is not on account of _his religion_ that the Catholic is to be excluded from office, but because he is subjected, not merely to the spiritual but the _temporal dominion_ or jurisdiction of the Pope. No error has been wider spread than this. "

Again:

 "A late distinguished Senator from Georgia, (Mr. Berrien, ) in a recent address to the public, has copied a letter of Mr. Wesley, which may require a few observations. That letter was dated in January, 1780. All its conclusions were founded on the ASSUMED AND POPULAR OPINION of that day, that the Pope _did_ claim a civil jurisdiction beyond his own dominions--that he _could_ absolve the subjects of other governments from their oaths of allegiance, and _that there was_ a principle in one of the tenets of that Church, that Catholics were justified in not keeping faith with heretics. Against these ASSUMED AND POPULAR OPINIONS, the Catholics of England in that day, as they now do in this country, were solemnly protesting. "

This is a modest way of giving Mr. Wesley the _lie_, but it isnevertheless quite _direct_, and is the more surprising, as it comesfrom the "son of a now sainted father, " who was a follower of Wesley, a"co-laborer of that noble band of Christian ministers" he wasinstrumental in starting out into the world--aye, the son of a "fatherwho, for forty years, ministered at the altars" this same Wesleyerected! In holding up John Wesley as the _vile calumniator_ of theCatholic Church in England, it is well enough, Governor, to be modestabout it, and cautious in the selection of your words, as you areaddressing a class of men who believe in John Wesley, as a faithful manof God, and one incapable of misrepresenting the Catholics of England, the Pope of Rome, or any other sect or individual! John Wesleyministered at the sacred altars of religion for more than sixty years;he had with him the power of God, and the witness that he pleased Him;and the last words he uttered, with his hands clasped, and his eyesraised toward heaven, were these: "_The best of all is, God is withus!_" And yet the sons and grandsons in the gospel, of this veneratedand sainted man of God, are insulted in Tennessee, by being told by an_impertinent old sinner_, and a _vile old party hack_, that he was ALIAR, while living, and the _slanderer of the Catholic Church_, now thathe is no more! If Mr. Wesley "_assumed_" falsehoods in reference to theRomish Church in England, he either did it in _ignorance_, or with _aguilty knowledge_ of the fact. He was a man of too much learning andinformation for his friends to get him out of such an indictment under aplea of ignorance. He is therefore, though dead, A WILFUL LIAR, according to "Ex-Gov. A. V. Brown, " for the Governor goes on to arguethe cause against him, and, on page 19 of his address, quotes _Catholic_authority to _prove_ him a liar! Shame on the "son of a now saintedfather, " and on the _holy seer of Pisgah_! O! Aaron, thou priest ofcorrupt Democracy, you need not endeavor to gull "bishops, elders, andother ministers, " with your _whining cant_, while you thus traduce theirgreat spiritual head, who, under God, taught them the lessons ofsalvation!

Gov. Brown, go with me, as one of the admirers of John Wesley, to thehumble dwellings of the miners of Cornwall, to the homely tents of thecolliers of Kingswood and Newcastle, and to the equally humble workshopsof the manufacturers of Yorkshire, in England, who are rejoicing in Godtheir Saviour that a Wesley was ever born into the world, and ask themif they believe him capable of slandering the Catholics! Go with meamong the backwoodsmen of North America, and examine them in their lonetents--go among the honest and virtuous settlers on our Westernfrontiers, amid the interminable forests of the far off West, whosethousands are brought into the fold of Christ, through theinstrumentality of Wesleyan ministers, and ask them if they think thefounder of their Church was _a wilful liar_!

Go with me to the rich pastures and luxuriant harvest-fields of your ownnative Middle Tennessee: enter the neat cottages and stately mansions ofthat glorious division of our State, and ask the intelligent andeducated females, who are rejoicing in God, in hope of future andeternal life, through the prayers and sermons of Wesleyan ministers, asinstruments in the hands of God, if they believe the founder of theirChurch was _a wicked calumniator_! Go to the islands of the sea, to theburning sands of Africa, and ask the benighted converts from heathenism, through the instrumentality of Wesleyan ministers, if they believe thevenerable founder of their Church was a man of truth!

Enter the dwellings of the rich and fashionable planters of theSouth--ride around their sugar and cotton plantations, among the sablesons and daughters of Africa, and witness the blessed fruits of thepious life, Christian integrity, and triumphant death of John Wesley!Come over to East Tennessee, Governor, and enter the log-cabins of thevirtuous, happy peasantry of the "hill country, " and ask them whetherthey believe Mr. Wesley or your Catholic authorities, touching thetemporal power of the Pope of Rome!

Alas! Gov. Brown, the Reformation dawned with LUTHER in Germany, but thesun of its glory rose with Methodism in England; the first streaks of_Protestant_ light were seen on the horizon of the sixteenth century, but the meridian sun of the Reformation dawned in all his brightness onthe Wesleys and Whitefield! But America has been the land of the gloryand triumph of the doctrines of the man you labor to convict of theawful sin of lying!

But you deny that the Pope of Rome, in _temporal_ matters, claims whatMr. Wesley attributed to him in the letter copied by Senator Berrien. You also deny that the Popes claim and have exercised the right tointerfere with matters of government, and the right to absolve theirfollowers in other countries, and under other governments, from theirallegiance to such rulers and governments. I will proceed to vindicateMr. Wesley, and, by the proof, saddle the lie on you! Whilst John wasKing of England, he had the "Magna Charta, " the great charter securing, among other things, the right of trial by jury, wrung from him at thepoint of the bayonet. This great charter was annulled by Pope Innocent. Here is the proof:

 "While the king was employed in the siege of Rochester, he received the pleasing intelligence, that according to his request the charter had been annulled by the pontiff. Innocent, enumerating the grounds of his judgment, insists strongly on the violence employed by the barons. If they really felt themselves aggrieved, they ought, he observes, to have accepted the offer of redress by due course of law. They had preferred, however, to break the oath of fealty, which they had taken, and had appointed themselves judges to sit upon their lord. They knew, moreover, that John had enrolled himself among the crusaders; and yet they had not scrupled to violate the privileges which all Christian nations had granted to the champions of the cross. Lastly, England was become the fief of the holy see; and they could not be ignorant that if the king had the will, he had not at least the power, to give away the rights of the crown, without the consent of his feudal superior. He was therefore bound to annul the concessions which had been extorted from John, as having been obtained in contempt of the holy see, to the degradation of royalty, the disgrace of the nation, and to the impediment of the crusade. At the same time he wrote to the barons, re-stating his reasons, exhorting them to submit, requesting them to lay their claims before him in the council to be held at Rome; and promising that he would induce the king to consent to whatever might be deemed just or reasonable, to take care that all grievances should be abolished, that the crown should be content with its just rights, and the clergy and people should enjoy their ancient liberties. "--_Lingard's History of England_, vol. Ii. , page 71. 

Will it be said that this was not interfering with _temporal_ matters?Will it be said that the right of trial by jury was a _spiritual_matter? Will it be said that the tyranny of King John, and hisoppressions, of which the barons justly complained, were _spiritual_matters? No sensible advocate of Romanism will say this!

The next instance of an interference by the Pope in temporal affairs, towhich I shall call your attention, Governor, is his excommunication ofElizabeth, Queen of England. She was immediately preceded on that throneby her sister Mary, who was a Catholic. For no other reason than thatElizabeth was a _Protestant_, and would not submit her rights andkingdom to the control of the Pope, Pius V. Thundered forth at herdevoted head the following anathema, from his throne at the Vatican, situated at the foot of one of the seven hills upon which Rome is built:

 EXCOMMUNICATION AND DEPOSITION Of QUEEN ELIZABETH OF ENGLAND. 

 "Pius, etc. , for a future memorial of the matter. He that reigneth on high, to whom is given all power in heaven and on earth, committed one Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, _out of which there is no salvation_, to one alone upon the earth, Peter the Prince of the Apostles, and to Peter's successor, the Bishop of Rome, to be governed in _fulness of power_. Him alone he made prince over all people, and all kingdoms, to pluck up, destroy, scatter, consume, plant and build, etc. But the number of the ungodly hath gotten such power, that there is now no place left in the whole world which they have not essayed to corrupt with their most wicked doctrines. Amongst others, Elizabeth, _the pretended Queen of England, a slave of wickedness_, lending thereunto her helping hand, with whom, as in a sanctuary, the most pernicious of all men have found a refuge; this very woman having seized upon the kingdom, and monstrously usurping the place of the supreme Head of the Church in all England, and the chief authority and jurisdiction thereof, hath again brought back the same kingdom to miserable destruction, which was then newly reduced to the faith, and to good order. For having by strong hand inhibited the true religion, which Mary, the lawful queen, of famous memory, had, by the help of this See, restored, after it had been formerly overthrown by King Henry VIII. , a revolter therefrom, and following and embracing the errors of _heretics_, she hath removed the royal council, consisting of the English nobility, and filled it with obscure men, being heretics; hath oppressed the embracers of the Roman faith, hath placed impious preachers, ministers of iniquity, and abolished the sacrifice of the mass, prayers, fastings, distinction of meats, a single life, and the rites and ceremonies; hath commanded books to be read in the whole realm, containing manifest heresy, etc. She hath not only contemned the godly requests and admonitions of princes concerning her healing and conversion, but also bath not so much as permitted the Nuncios of the See to cross the seas into England, etc. We do, therefore, out of the fulness of our apostolic power, declare the aforesaid Elizabeth, being heretic, and a favorer of heretics, and her adherents in the matter aforesaid, to have incurred the sentence of anathema, and to be cut off from the unity of the body of Christ. And, moreover, we do declare her to be deprived of her pretended title to the kingdom aforesaid, and of all dominion, dignity, and privilege whatsoever; and also the nobility, subjects, and people of the said kingdom, and all others which have in any sort sworn unto her, to be for ever absolved from any such oath, and all manner of duty or dominion, allegiance and obedience; as we also do, by the authority of these presents, absolve them, and do deprive the same Elizabeth of her pretended title to the kingdom, and all other things aforesaid. And we do command and interdict all and every one of the noblemen, subjects, people, and others aforesaid, that they presume not to obey her, or her admonitions, mandates, and laws; and those who shall do the contrary, we do innodate with the like sentence of ANATHEMA. 

 "Given at St. Peter's at Rome, in the year 1569, and the fifth of our pontificate. "--_Dowling's History of Romanism_, p. 564. 

One more: Sixtus V. Thunders his bull of excommunication at this sameQueen of England--incites Philip of Catholic Spain to make war againsther country--and graciously _gives_ the British Isles to Philip! Here isthe bull of Pope Sixtus:

 "We, Sixtus the Fifth, the universal shepherd of the flock of Christ, the supreme chief, to whom the government of the whole world appertains, considering that the people of England and Ireland, after having been so long celebrated for their virtues, their religion, and their submission to our see, have become putrid members, infected, and capable of corrupting the whole Christian body, and on account of their subjection to the impious, tyrannical, and sanguinary government of Elizabeth, the bastard queen, and by the influence of her adherents, who equal her in wickedness; and who refuse, like her, to recognize the power of the Roman Church: regarding that Henry VIII. Formerly, for motives of debauchery, commenced all these disorders by revolting against the submission which he owed to the Pope, the sole and true sovereign of England; considering that the usurper Elizabeth has followed the path of this infamous king, we declare that there exists but one mode of remedying these evils, of restoring peace, tranquillity, and union to Christendom, of re-establishing religion, and of leading back the people to obedience to us, which is, to depose from the throne that execrable Elizabeth, who falsely arrogates to herself the title of Queen of the British Isles. Being then inspired by the Holy Spirit for the general good of the Church, we renew, by the virtue of our apostolic power, the sentence pronounced by our predecessor, Pius the Fifth and Gregory the Thirteenth, against the modern Jezebel: we proclaim her deprived of her royal authority, of the rights, titles, or pretensions to which she may lay claim over the kingdoms of Ireland and England, affirming that she possesses them unlawfully and by usurpation. We relieve all her subjects from the oaths they may have taken to her, and we prohibit them from rendering any kind of service to this execrable woman; it is our will, that she be driven from door to door like one possessed of a devil, and that all human aid be refused her; we declare, moreover, that foreigners or Englishmen are permitted, as a meritorious work, to seize the person of Elizabeth and surrender her, living or dead, to the tribunals of the inquisition. We promise to those who shall accomplish this glorious mission, infinite recompenses, not only in the life eternal, but even in this world. Finally, we grant plenary indulgence to the faithful who shall willingly unite with the Catholic army which is going to combat the impious Elizabeth, under the orders of our dear son Philip the Second, to whom we give the British Isles in full sovereignty, as a recompense for the zeal he has always shown toward our see, and for the particular affection he has shown for the Catholics of the Low Country. "--_De Cormenin's History of the Popes_, p. 262. 

Here is what Macaulay, a reliable historian, says of the baneful effectsof Romanism:

 "From the time when the barbarians overran the Western Empire to the time of the revival of letters, the influence of the Church of Rome has been generally favorable to science, to civilization, and to good government. But, during the last three centuries, to stunt the growth of the human mind has been her chief object. Throughout Christendom, whatever advance has been made in knowledge, in freedom, in wealth, and in the arts of life, has been made in spite of her, and has everywhere been in inverse proportion to her power. The loveliest and most fertile provinces of Europe have, under her rule, been sunk into poverty, in political servitude, and in intellectual torpor, while Protestant countries, once proverbial for sterility and barbarism, have been turned, by skill and industry, into gardens, and can boast of a long list of heroes and statesmen, philosophers and poets. Whoever, knowing what Italy and Scotland naturally are, and what four hundred years ago they naturally were, shall now compare the country round Rome with the country round Edinburgh, will be able to form some judgment of the tendency of Papal domination. The descent of Spain, once the first among monarchies, to the lowest depths of degradation, the elevation of Holland, in spite of many natural disadvantages, to a position such as no commonwealth so small has ever reached, teach the same lesson. Whoever passes, in Germany, from a Roman Catholic to a Protestant principality, in Switzerland from a Roman Catholic to a Protestant canton, in Ireland from a Roman Catholic to a Protestant county, finds that he has passed from a lower to a higher grade of civilization. On the other side of the Atlantic the same law prevails. The Protestants of the United States have left far behind the Roman Catholics of Mexico, Peru, and Brazil. The Roman Catholics of Lower Canada remain inert, while the whole continent round them is in a ferment with Protestant activity and enterprise. "--_Macaulay's History of England_, vol. I. , p. 37. 

I must be permitted to add, just here, that in 1848, when the people ofFrance expelled Louis Philippe from the throne in Paris, and establisheda Republic, the present old drunken, goutified debauchee, Pope Pius IX. , hurled at the French nation a fearful bull of excommunication, anddenied them the right of revolution! Was this interfering in temporalmatters? But no longer ago than the year 1854, this same old vagabond, Pope Pius, issued orders absolving his followers from all allegiance tothe Sardinian Government, because that government chose to abolish theinfamous monasteries, which had been so long supported at the expense ofan oppressed people! Was this not interfering in temporal matters? Icould multiply authorities, Governor, to an indefinite extent, sustaining Mr. Wesley's views, and falsifying all you say, but thiswould swell my reply beyond what I intended in the outset. Let me callyour attention to Brownson's Review, for July, 1853, where you will findall this power, and even more, claimed for the Pope, over temporalsovereigns and their subjects, the world over! This _Review_ is theacknowledged organ of _Archbishop Hughes_, the head and front of theCatholic Church in North America. 

You state that our Declaration of Independence absolved from everypossible obligation to the Pope in temporal matters. Your language is:

 "The moment it was read and proclaimed from old Independence Hall in Philadelphia, obedience in temporal matters, if it ever existed, ceased for ever, as to every native-born son in America. "

You further add that the Constitution of the United States set aside alltemporal power of the Pope in this country, and that if any doubtsremain, the finishing touch is given by the following oath ofnaturalization, taken by our naturalized citizens:

 "I do solemnly swear that I will support the Constitution of the United States, and that I do _absolutely and entirely_ renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, or state, or sovereignty _whatever_. "

Sir, do you suppose that the "Bishops, Elders, and other Ministers, "whom you have the impudence to address, are all fools? Do you supposethey are men of no reading or information? If they know any thing, theycertainly know that the oath of naturalization they, the Catholics, take, weighs no more with them than a feather. A Catholic can evade theforce of any oath, by a _mental reservation_. Here is what Sanchez says, the very highest Catholic authority, whose teaching, including thisinterpretation of oaths, has been endorsed by the Council of Trent:

 "It is lawful to use _ambiguous terms_ to give the impression a different sense from that which you understand yourself. A person may take an oath that he has not done such a thing, though in fact he has, by saying to himself it was not done on a certain day, or before he was born, or by concealing any other similar circumstances; which gives another meaning to it. This is extremely convenient, and always very just, when necessary to your health, honor, or prosperity. "

In addition to this, let me tell you, if you never before knew the fact, that Judge Gaston, a distinguished Jurist, and a gentleman of excellentcharacter, though a rigid Roman Catholic, of North Carolina, wasappointed to a seat upon the Supreme Bench of that State. TheConstitution of that State, unlike those of almost all other States, requires every Judge to take an oath, among other things, that HEBELIEVES IN THE TRUTH OF THE PROTESTANT RELIGION. Mr. Gaston asked timeto think over the matter--he repaired to the Archbishop at Baltimore, doubtless obtained a dispensation--wrote back to Raleigh from there, that he would take the oath--returned, and in due time solemnly sworethat _he believed in the truth of the Protestant Religion_. He died inRaleigh, one of the Judges of the Supreme Court--but lived and died aRoman Catholic!

During the past month, in this city, W. G. McAdoo, the Attorney Generalfor this Judicial Circuit, had some Irish Catholics brought before theGrand Jury, to testify in cases of unlawful gaming and the retailing ofardent spirits. The Clerk swore them on a common English Testament, andthey returned to the Jury room, and testified that they knew of nocases! The Attorney for the Commonwealth then procured the _CatholicDouay Bible_, with a large _Cross_ upon its outside, swore them uponthis--sent them in, and they _disgorged_, telling of various cases, andenabling the Jury to find bills against even some of their own folks! Anoath, then, is nothing with strict Roman Catholics, who believe theirPriests can absolve them from the obligations of any and all oaths. Fornotwithstanding your denial of the fact, it is notoriously true, thatthe members of the Catholic Church believe their Priesthood to exercise, by Divine right, the power to fix and determine their eternal destiny. Nay, every Roman Catholic in the known world is under the absolutecontrol of the Catholic Priesthood, by considerations not only of atemporal, but an eternal weight. This is what gives their Priesthoodsuch power and influence in elections; an influence they are using inevery State, against the American party. And it is this faculty ofconcentration, this political influence, this power of the Priesthood tocontrol the Catholic community, and cause a vast multitude of ignorantforeigners to vote as a _unit_, and thus control the will of theAmerican people, that has engendered this opposition to the CatholicChurch. It is this aggressive policy and corrupting tendency of theRomish Church; this organized and concentrated political power of adistinct class of men; foreign by birth; inferior in intelligence andvirtue to the American people, and not their religion and form ofworship, objectionable as these are known to be, which have called forththe opposition of the American party to the Catholic Church. 

But, sir, you occupy several pages in copying and commenting upon theseveral oaths administered to the members of the American party--oathswhich, as you tell us, are revolting in their character, and lead to theindiscriminate proscription of all foreigners. I meet all yourconjectures and wild speculations in reference to these several oathsand obligations, by saying, just here, that I have taken them all, andthat they express my sentiments and feelings to the very letter; and Iam willing, for the remainder of my days, to go before an acting Justiceof the Peace, for the county of Knox, and have all three of these oathsadministered every Monday morning, upon the "Holy Bible and Cross. "

You have failed, in your zeal to advocate Romanism and oppose theAmerican party, to tell the "Bishops, Elders, and other Ministers, " whomyou address, that we resort to our oaths and obligations to combatsuccessfully the most powerful oath-bound organization the world everknew. The oath of every _Roman Catholic Bishop_ and _Archbishop_ bindshim to absolute and unquestioned obedience, not only to the present Popebut to his successors, "canonically coming in, " and to "oppose andpersecute" all who do not submit to his authority! The oath of every_Priest_ binds him to the Church of Rome "as the chief head and matronabove all pretended Churches throughout the whole earth, " and to"further her interests more than his own earthly good. " The oath of the_Jesuit_ binds him to the Pope, as "Christ's Vicar-General, " by "all thesaints and hosts of heaven, " and to "denounce and disown any allegianceas due to Protestants, or obedience to any of their inferior magistratesor officers. " The oath of the _San Fedisti_, a secret Order establishedby the Papal government in 1821, binds them to sustain "the Papal altarand throne, and to exterminate heretics, without pity for the cries ofchildren, or of men and women. " The oath of the _Irish Ribbon Men_, anOrder established by the Papal government, and introduced into thiscountry by _Bedini_, the Pope's Nuncio, but a few years ago, binds him"to extirpate all heretics, and all the Protestants, and to walk intheir blood to the knees. " Is it not time to take the alarm, Governor, and to combine to resist all these secret oath-bound associations, whichnow threaten us with the loss of all that freemen and ProtestantChristians hold dear on earth?

It is a matter of utter astonishment to find a great political party inthis country, most of whom are native-born Protestants, taking sideswith a foreign Church, whose designs against this country, according tothe avowals of the Duke of Richmond, lately Governor-General of Canada, are of the most wicked and fearful character! Speaking of thisgovernment, the Duke said in a public address, on our northern border:

 "It will be destroyed: it ought not, and will not be permitted to exist. The curse of the French revolution, and subsequent wars and commotions in Europe, are to be attributed to its example; and so long as it exists, no prince will be safe upon his throne; and _the sovereigns of Europe are aware of it_, and they have _determined upon its destruction, and have come to an understanding upon this subject, and have decided on the means to accomplish it_; and they will eventually succeed, by SUBVERSION _rather than conquest_. All the low and surplus population of the different nations of Europe will be carried into that country. It is and will be a receptacle for the bad and disaffected population of Europe, when they are not wanted for soldiers, or to supply the navies; _and the governments of Europe will favor such a course_. This will create a surplus and majority of low population, who are so very easily excited; and they will bring with them their principles, and in nine cases out of ten adhere to their ancient and former governments, laws, manners, customs, and religion, and will transmit them to their posterity; and in many cases propagate them among the natives. These men will become citizens, and by the Constitution and laws will be invested with the right of suffrage. Hence, discord, dissension, anarchy, and civil war will ensue; and some popular individual will assume the government, and restore order, and the sovereigns of Europe, the emigrants, and many of the natives, will sustain him. The Church of Rome has a design upon that country; and it will in time be the established religion, and will aid in the destruction of that Republic. _I have conversed with many of the sovereigns and princes of Europe; and they have unanimously expressed these opinions relative to the government of the United States, and their determination to subvert it. _"

The monarchs of Europe, says the Duke of Richmond, will aid in sendingus a surplus of "low, excitable, bad, and disaffected men, " who willbring with them their principles, and will adhere to their foreignnotions of government, laws, manners, customs, and religion--and thatreligion Catholic; and yet _you_, the "son of a now sainted father, " ofProtestant raising, have the brazen effrontery to call upon the"Bishops, Elders, and other Ministers" of an American Protestant Churchto aid you, your corrupt party, and the monarchs of Europe, indestroying both our government and Church!

Sir, it is passing strange that Protestant Christians and their childrenshould be found side by side with you, Bishop Hughes, Gov. Johnson, andthe thousands of bad men who are seeking to build up a Roman Hierarchyin this free country of ours! What do you promise the country andyourselves, if Romanism proves successful in this contest? The historyof the past informs us that Rome has slain 1, 000, 000 of Albigenses andWaldenses; 1, 500, 000 Jews, in Spain; 3, 000, 000 Moors, in Spain. Francewill never forget St. Bartholomew's Night, when 100, 000 souls perishedin Paris alone! The blood of Protestants has fertilized the soil ofEngland, Germany, and Ireland. I mean by this, that enough of Protestantblood has been shed to _enrich_ all the poor lands of England, Germany, and Ireland, if it were properly distributed. In all, the authenticrecords of the Romish Church show, (and of this she makes her boast, )that she has put to death SIXTY-EIGHT MILLIONS of human beings, for noother offence than that of being _Protestants_ in their religious faith!Average each person slain at four gallons of blood, and medical writerssay a healthy person yields more, and it makes TWO HUNDRED ANDSEVENTY-TWO MILLIONS OF GALLONS!--enough to overflow the banks of theMississippi, and destroy all the cotton and sugar plantations inMississippi and Louisiana!

But you argue, in your blasphemous publication, that this is no longer acharacteristic of the Romish Hierarchy. Why is it not? Has she everchanged for the better? When did she ever renounce these doctrines andpractices? Never, no, never! Hers is the same tyrannical systemnow--where she has the power--that it always has been, and always mustbe, in the very nature of things! It is her boast, and the boast of herstandard authors, that she is always right, and knows no change! And woto this land of ours, if ever Rome gets the ascendancy here! Her wholesystem is adverse to our Republican institutions, and she hesitates notto declare it! _Brownson_ says in his Review:

 "Let us dare to assert the truth in the face of the _lying world_, and, instead of pleading for our Church at the bar of the State, _summon the State itself to plead at the bar of the Church, its divinely constituted judge_. "

No wonder, sir, that the American people are aroused! Such bold andstartling avowals are calculated to arouse and unite the somewhatdivided bands of Protestant Christians; to wake up a host of Luthers, Calvins, Cranmers, and Wesleys; to bind together "the heretics condemnedin a mass. " The very latest thing I have seen is the "Pastoral Letter"of the Bishops of the Province of St. Louis, just issued. That documentexplicitly says:

 "We maintain the superiority of the _spiritual_ over the _temporal_ order. We maintain that the temporal ruler is _bound_ to conform his enactments to the Divine law. We maintain that the Church is the supreme judge of all questions concerning faith and morals; and that in the determination of such question, the _Roman Pontiff, Vicar of Jesus Christ_, constitutes a tribunal from which there is no appeal; and to whose award all the children of the Church must yield obedience. "

Now, sir, after this authoritative and official announcement, I don'twant to see any more of your wire-drawn distinctions between spiritualand temporal allegiance to the Pope. These Bishops say that both arealike binding. Nor do I want to see any more of your malignant effortsto fix the _lie_ upon Mr. Wesley, for affirming in Europe, during thepast century, what the Bishops of the United States have announced, in aPastoral Address, in the present day!

Pope Pius IX. Has, by a special act, made the Virgin Mary the specialpatron of these United States; but the Protestants of this country havealso made a decree, and that decree is, that Jesus Christ, and not theVirgin Mary, shall be the patron of these United States. 

And I am happy to have it in my power to inform you, notwithstanding theinfluence of your Address, that the "Bishops, Elders, and otherMinisters" of the Methodist Church, both North and South, are ready tomake a common, determined, prayerful effort to save our native land fromthe threatened slavery of submission to the decisions of the Council ofTrent, and the equally corrupt conventions of Progressive Democracy!

Assuming what is notoriously _false_--that the Know Nothings are infavor of all measures fatal to the South, and destructive to theConstitution--you ask on page 25 of your _infinitely infernal_ Address:

 "What if a proposition be pending to repeal the Fugitive Slave Law--the Kansas and Nebraska law--the rejection of a State asking admission into the Union, because its constitution may tolerate slavery?"

You know, sir, that the 12th Plank in the Philadelphia Platform of theAmerican party is a safer guaranty upon this slavery question, and theperpetuity of existing laws, than is to be found anywhere in the creedsof political parties. Here it is in full:

 "The American party having arisen upon the ruins, and in spite of the opposition of the Whig and Democratic parties, can not be held in any manner responsible for the obnoxious acts or violated pledges of either; and the systematic agitation of the slavery question by those parties having elevated sectional hostility into a positive element of political power, and brought our institutions into peril, it has therefore become the imperative duty of the American party to interpose, for the purpose of giving peace to the country, and perpetuity to the Union. And as experience has shown it impossible to reconcile opinions so extreme as those which separate the disputants, and as there can be no dishonor in submitting to the laws, the National Council has deemed it the best guaranty of common justice and of future peace, to abide by and maintain the existing laws upon the subject of slavery, as a final and conclusive settlement of that subject in spirit and in substance. 

 "And regarding it the highest duty to avow their opinions upon a subject so important, in distinct and unequivocal terms, it is hereby declared as the sense of this National Council, that Congress possesses no power, under the Constitution, to legislate upon the subject of slavery in the States where it does or may exist, or to exclude any State from admission into the Union, because its Constitution does or does not recognize the institution of slavery as a part of its social system; and expressly pretermitting any expression of opinion upon the power of Congress to establish or prohibit slavery in any Territory, it is the sense of the National Council that Congress ought not to legislate upon the subject of slavery within the Territories of the United States, and that any interference by Congress with slavery as it exists in the District of Columbia, would be a violation of the spirit and intention of the compact by which the State of Maryland ceded the District to the United States, and a breach of the national faith. "

In the "wild hunt" for territory by the progressive Democracy, and theirefforts to settle our Western lands with foreigners who are to a manFree Soilers and Abolitionists, the South has more to fear than from allother considerations. What is Gov. Johnson's iniquitous Homestead Bill, but a bid for foreigners? He proposes to give to the heads of familiesone hundred and sixty acres of land, thus _hiring_ all the convicts andpaupers of Europe to come and settle in our Western States andTerritories! Sir, but let your progressive, sublimated, double-distilled, converging-lines, Johnsonian Democracy bring into thisUnion one million of Spanish Papists--black, brown, sorrel, andtawny--under the guise of acquiring Cuba for the South: let them bringeight hundred thousand French and English Papists, under the name ofacquiring Canada for the North: let them bring two millions of MexicanPapists--brown, tawny, red and black, being a mixture of all colors andall nations--under the specious pretence of "extending the area offreedom"--let all this be done--and your party, made up of nativetraitors, and foreign vagabonds, and Catholic paupers, are aiming atit--let it be done, I say, and farewell to liberty, and all that issacred in this country! With five millions of Papists in our midst--fourmillions and a half being of foreign birth, and four millions speaking aforeign language--all taught from infancy to hate and detestProtestantism as a crime--an American party would become an absolutepolitical necessity. Well do the Free Soil papers comprehend thismatter. Hear the infamous but influential _Chicago Tribune_, one of yourDouglass organs--one of your foreign Catholic organs. I quote from thepaper itself:

 "It is now a well-attested fact, that Atchison is a member of the Superior Order of the Spangled Banner, or Know Nothings, and that his infernal villainy in Kansas has been carried on under the protection and patronage of the lodges in Western Missouri. This is a matter that all men in the North should understand, that Northern voters may be exceedingly cautious how they give countenance or support to an Order that, in any of its phases or localities, is capable of producing such results. It is further said, that the members of that Kansas Legislature, now outraging all sense of right and justice by their devilish enactments, are the chosen men of the affiliated Know Nothings in Missouri and Kansas, who back then up in whatever thing they do. Atchison and his gang are the friends of the Order, and through it and Southern Know Nothing support they are sure that their efforts to establish a despotism in the Territory, if necessary, at the point of the bayonet, will be successful. These facts account for many things heretofore inexplicable, and they develop the true reason of the hostility of the border-ruffians to the foreign immigration that would, under other circumstances, people that vast and fertile country west of the Missouri. "

Thus it appears that a host of _lousy_ foreigners, fresh from theemigrant ships, in which they are brought over to this country as_ballast_--having the right to vote conferred upon them by an infamous_progressive_ Democratic feature in the Kansas Bill, were expected toget the control of affairs in Kansas. It further appears, however, thatSenator Atchison and his pro-slavery associates supposed that, thoughfresh from their farms, and crossing the line of their State into thenew Territory, they too had the right to vote without being_naturalized_ in Kansas. Hence, in the estimation of this Sag Nichtorgan at Chicago, a great outrage is committed upon Germany, Ireland, and Italy!

Sir, you need not lay the flattering unction to your soul, that you candrive the clergy generally from the noble stand they have taken uponthis great question. Nor need you suppose, for one moment, that theAmerican party are conquered, though defeated in several States in therecent elections. The party will remain true to its ends. Though it failto command office, it cannot fail to exercise large power. Office is notalways strength; but sometimes, nay, frequently, as in the case of thepresent Administration, weakness, as time will prove! The aim of theAmerican party is, by fair party means, to correct a great social eviland political wrong; and if they cannot do that, to mitigate the eviland the wrong; if they cannot do that, to prevent its _furtherincrease_; and if neither can be done, why, then I confess to you, theparty will have failed. But, sir, if such a failure take place, restassured that the "Bishops, Elders, and other Ministers" of the MethodistChurch, South, will not help to bring about such a failure! We canafford to let such minions of party as you are, rave and rant, andpublish their expositions, and issue their warnings to Churches: theywill all serve to swell our ranks. All true American hearts, not chainedto the car of party, or bound down by the cords of plunder, think alikeupon the great questions that have called the American party intoexistence. Little do we regard the slanders of the pensioners of party. Let their speeches and publications teem with wholesale slanders of ourcreed: the political jockeyism of these thimble-riggers, as in your owncase, is too apparent!

From Maine to the shores of the Pacific the country is convulsed withintense excitement upon this subject. Shall Americans govern themselves, or shall Foreigners, unacquainted with our laws, and brought up undermonarchical governments, rule? Shall those who are temporally andspiritually subject to a foreign prince be our legislators, post-masters, foreign ministers, and military leaders, and change ourlaws as they are directed by the Pope of Rome? Such results the Americanparty have set out to prevent. The present excitement will not cease;true Americans and Protestants will labor and pray until our distractedcountry shall be redeemed from the influence of civil and ecclesiasticaltyranny. 

Now, Governor, I have noticed all your charges, arguments, and appeals, but one, and that is the allegation that Methodist clerical KnowNothings are _conspirators_. Your argument is--and I wish to representyou correctly--"The offence of conspiracy is not confined to theprejudicing of a particular individual; it may be to injure publictrade, to affect public health, or to _violate public policy_. "

You cite Blackstone's Commentary, and other English Law Books, tosatisfy the Clergy as to the _law of conspiracy_. This done, youoverwhelm them with this sage and logical conclusion:

 "The gist of the offence of conspiracy consists in a confederacy to do an _unlawful act_, and the offence is complete when the confederacy is made. "

I will concede, for the sake of the argument, that this is sound law, and that yours is a logical deduction. Nay, I will concede more--I grantthat it is an unlawful act for native Americans, and ProtestantChristians, whether ministers or laymen, to resolve, or swear, as weKnow Nothings have all done, that we will not vote for Catholics andForeigners for public offices! I take the ground you do, that a man'svote is not his own, and that it is only to be disposed of by theleaders of the party with which he may act!

And now, if you and I, both great men, and _Doctors of Law_, are correctin laying down the law, and the _privilege of voters in this freecountry_, what an infamous body of conspirators the Democrats are, andhave always been! For a quarter of a century, they have conspired tokeep the Whigs out of office--have succeeded in doing so most of thattime--and have kept thousands of them who are poor from becoming rich!More recently, they have conspired with Abolitionists, Free Soilers, Fourierites, Spiritualists, Roman Catholics, Irish, French, and Germanpaupers, and all manner of European convicts, to keep the American partyout of office, and have succeeded in Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Illinois, Texas, and other States--therebydepriving the Americans of "lots" of money and honors, both of whichthey need, and both of which are their _birthrights_!

The "Bishops, Elders, and other Ministers, " whom you address, inopposition to the great sin of _conspiracy_, would more cheerfully unitewith you to enforce law and order, and to prosecute offenders, but forthe fact that the _Abolition wing of your party_ once conspired againstthem, to deprive their wives, children, widows, and orphans, of theirlawful portion of the great Book Concern in New York, and they werecompelled to punish the conspirators, at great expense, however, in theDistrict and Supreme Courts of the United States!

But, Sir, upon the subject of _oaths_, you are eloquent, apt in yourquotations of Scripture, and evince great learning in the legalprofession! You charge that "Know Nothingism is both unchristian andunlawful, because of its _oaths_, which have no Scripture warrant fortheir administration!" One of your quotations from the Bible is this:"Swear not at all: neither by heaven, for it is God's throne: nor by theearth, for it is his footstool. " Your mind has undergone a great changeupon the subject of _oaths_ and _hard swearing_, since the 21st ofJune, 1845, when you delivered your celebrated "Mount Pisgah" speech atAthens. You then advised the people of the State to administer "horribleoaths, " and to swear by the "_heavens_, " aye, "God's throne. " But thenyou were a Know Nothing. Here is what you say in your _revised_ copy ofthat memorable speech:

 "Go up with me in imagination and stand for awhile on some lofty summit of the Rocky Mountains. Let us take one ravishing view of this broad land of liberty. Turn your face toward the Gulf of Mexico: what do you behold? Instead of one lone star faintly shining in the far distant south, a whole galaxy of stars of the first magnitude are bursting on your vision and shining with a bright and glorious effulgence. Now turn with me to the west--the mighty west--where the setting sun dips her disk in the western ocean. Look away down through the misty distance to the shores of the Pacific, with all its bays, and harbors, and rivers. Cast your eyes as far as the Russian Possessions, in latitude fifty-four degrees and forty minutes. What a new world lies before you! How many magnificent States to be the future homes of the sons and daughters of freedom! But you have not gazed on half this glorious country. Turn now your face to the east, where the morning sun first shines on this land of liberty. Away yonder, you see the immortal old thirteen, who achieved our independence; nearer to us lie the twelve or fifteen States of the great valley of the Mississippi, stretching and reposing like so many giants in their slumbers. O! now I see your heart is full--it can take in no more. Who now feels like he was a party man, or a southern man, or a northern man? Who does not feel that he is an American, and thankful to Heaven that his lot was cast in such a goodly land? When did mental vision ever rest on such a scene? Moses, when standing on the top of Mount Pisgah, looking over on the promised land, gazed not on a scene half so lovely. O! let us this day _vow_ that whatever else we may do, by whatever name we may be called, we will never surrender one square acre of this goodly heritage to the DICTATION of any king or potentate on earth. SWEAR IT! SWEAR IT! my countrymen, and let HEAVEN RECORD THE VOW FOR EVER!"

In conclusion, Governor, suffer a few words of advice, and I will bringthis letter, already too long, to a close. You are advanced in years, nay, you have grown gray in the service of sin, and political intrigues;and at most you have not long to live. Cease your political aspirations, and turn your attention to future and eternal things! You have been amember of our State Legislature; subsequently, a member of Congress; andmore recently the Governor of our State; honors and stations, to say theleast of it, equal to your merits and talents!

As a true "son of a now sainted father, " from whom you have beenseparated for many years, so demean yourself in future, that you may notbe separated, world without end! Humble yourself before God; confessyour numerous sins; and instead of lecturing God's ministers upon thesubject of party politics, ask them, with tears in your eyes, to prayfor you! Exercise a living faith in Christ, who came down from heaven, and made upon the cross a full, perfect, and sufficient sacrifice, oblation, and satisfaction, for the sins of the whole world. Thusobtaining forgiveness, cease your Sunday discussions on politicalsubjects; attend at the house of God, and set an example to otherungodly Sag Nichts, and lead a new and different life!

Very respectfully, your obedient servant, W. G. BROWNLOW, _A Local Methodist Minister. _

GOVERNOR JOHNSON AND EDITOR EASTMAN. 

On the 9th of October, 1855, and while the Legislature was in session atNashville, we delivered a speech to an immense crowd on the PublicSquare; which, after certain preliminary remarks, we will give to thepublic, just as it was spoken. The reason why the call was made on us todeliver the speech was, that we had, the previous weeks, delivered thesame, in _substance_, at Shelbyville and Clarksville, and the Americanparty at Nashville hearing of it, and approving what was said, desiredus to repeat it; and, to be candid, we desired to repeat it there andthen!

Mr. Wise, of Virginia, gained great notoriety, in the spring of 1855, byhis abuse and blackguardism, heaped upon the American party. He wassuccessful; and Johnson, of Tennessee, whose ambition was to gain a moreinfamous notoriety, profiting by the example of Wise, plunged into thelowest depths of Billingsgate, and piled his vulgar epithets upon theparty _indiscriminately_. Wise, then, like all inventors andoriginators, has had numerous _imitators_, and among the most successfulof these are Johnson, of Tennessee; Stephens, of Georgia; and Clingman, of North Carolina. But as an adept in low Billingsgate slang, coarseblackguardism, and as a slanderer and maligner of better men thanhimself, Johnson has excelled his patron, Wise, and left far in theshades of the distant caverns of abuse, both Stephens and Clingman!

To prepare the public mind for the degree of severity we used inreference to the Governor of the State, we will introduce as many as_five_ different extracts from his speeches, in his late canvass forGovernor, at Murfreesboro' and Manchester; as reported by his partisanorgan, the _Nashville Union_, and his _pliant tool_, its Abolitioneditor, _E. G. Eastman_:

 "THE DEVIL, HIS SATANIC MAJESTY, THE PRINCE OF DARKNESS, WHO PRESIDES OVER THE SECRET CONCLAVE HELD IN PANDEMONIUM, MAKES WAR UPON ALL BRANCHES OF CHRIST'S CHURCH. THE KNOW NOTHINGS ADVOCATE AND DEFEND NONE, BUT MAKE WAR UPON ONE OF THE CHURCHES, AND THUS FAR BECOME THE ALLIES OF THE PRINCE OF DARKNESS. "--[Speech of ANDREW JOHNSON, at Murfreesboro'. 

 "A DENOMINATION LIKE THIS, TO SET UP AS THE GUARDIANS OF THE RELIGION AND MORALS OF THE COUNTRY! A DENOMINATION BOUND TOGETHER BY SECRET AND TERRIBLE OATHS: THE FIRST OF WHICH, ON THE VERY INITIATION, FIXES AND REQUIRES THEM TO CARRY A LIE IN THEIR MOUTHS. "--[Speech of ANDREW JOHNSON, at Murfreesboro'. 

 "SHOW ME THE DIMENSIONS OF A KNOW NOTHING, AND I WILL SHOW YOU A HUGE REPTILE, UPON WHOSE NECK THE FOOT OF EVERY HONEST MAN OUGHT TO BE PLACED. "--[Speech of ANDREW JOHNSON, at Manchester. 

 "THEY ARE LIKE THE HYENA, AND COME FROM THEIR LAIR AFTER MIDNIGHT TO PREY UPON HUMAN CARCASSES. "--[Speech of ANDREW JOHNSON, at Manchester. 

 "I WOULD AS SOON BE FOUND IN THE CLAN OF JOHN A. MURRELL AS IN A KNOW NOTHING COUNCIL. "--[Speech of ANDREW JOHNSON, at Manchester. 

The _blackguard_ and _calumniator_ using this language, was elected by amajority of two thousand votes: that majority being cast by _Foreignersand illegal voters_; and consequently, his competitor, COL. GENTRY--thanwhom there is not a more talented, patriotic, and honorable gentleman inTennessee--was fairly and justly elected. This, then, is the languageused by the Governor of Tennessee, _towards a majority of the legalvoters of the State_! Under these circumstances, we made the speech thatfollows, to an immense crowd on the Square: the correspondence precedingwhich, will explain itself:

 NASHVILLE, Oct. 10th, 1855. 

 W. G. BROWNLOW, ESQ. :

 _Dear Sir_:--The undersigned, having heard your speech on the Square, last night, respectfully request that you embody the substance of the same, and publish it in the Knoxville Whig. The desire to see it in print is very general; and those who heard it approved its severity, without it were such as were bitter against the American party. 

 Your friends, CHARLES G. SMITH, JOHN MORRISON, F. M. BURTON, ROBT. S. NORTHCUTT, SAML. DAVIS. 

 NASHVILLE, Oct. 13th, 1855. 

 MESSRS. SMITH, MORRISON, AND OTHERS:

 _Gentlemen_:--Your note requesting me to publish the substance of my remarks on the Square, last Tuesday night, has been received, and I would have replied sooner, but for my absence at Shelbyville. I have now made the same speech at Clarksville, Nashville, and Shelbyville; and my only regrets are, that my engagements prevent me from delivering the same speech at every point in this State, where Gov. Johnson held me up as the "High Priest of the Order, " and argued therefrom the _want of respectability_ for the Order. In addition to your request, I have had verbal applications from many gentlemen to publish my remarks--gentlemen who have been mild and moderate throughout their political course. I shall, therefore, comply with your request and theirs, at my earliest convenience. 

 I hold that no man's position in life should shield him from the rebukes he may merit by his bad conduct; and as for the present Governor of Tennessee, his wholesale abuse of the American party, towards whose members, without a single exception, he has indulged in language which ought not to be tolerated within the precincts of Billingsgate, no epithet is too low, too degrading, or disgraceful, to pay him back in. 

 Respectfully, &c. , W. G. BROWNLOW. 

FELLOW-CITIZENS:--The occasion which has called you together to-night, is the special appointment of our young friend, Mr. Crowe, to whoseeloquence we have all listened with pleasure. I have made no appointmentto speak here; nor have I prompted the loud and long calls made upon me, this evening, by this large Nashville audience. I shall speak to you;but not upon the _issues_ of the late canvass, nor upon those of theapproaching canvass of 1856. I will discuss _Andrew Johnson_ and _E. G. Eastman_; and if they are in the assembly, I hope they will come forwardand take seats on this stand, that I may have the pleasure of lookingthem full in the face, as I denounce them in unmeasured terms: which ismy purpose to-night, let the consequences be what they may!

On a memorable night in August, after it was understood that _AndrewJohnson_ was reëlected to the office of Governor, a procession wasformed in Knoxville, composed of the worst materials in that young andgrowing city--such as drunken, red-mouthed Irishmen, lousy Germans, andinsolent negroes, with three or four men of respectable pretensionsthrown in, to exercise a controlling influence over these bad materials. This riotous mob halted in front of my dwelling, in East Knoxville, and_groaned_ and _sang_ for my especial benefit: all which was naturalenough--as they had triumphed over me in the election of a Governor. Itook no offence at their rejoicing over the election of Gov. Johnson, asI told them; and for the reason, that I knew them to be of that class ofmen who would _actually need the exercise of the pardoning power_, atthe hands of the present Governor, to release them from thepenitentiary, before his present term of service would expire!

From my humble dwelling, this _beautiful_ procession marched to theColeman House, on Gay street, yelling like devils, and insulting theinmates of every house they passed. "Huzza for _Andy McJohnson_!"exclaimed one. "Three cheers for _Andy O'Johnson_!" exclaimed another. While, to cap the climax--"Well done, my _Johnsing_ and the _WhiteBastard_, " (meaning _Basis_, ) exclaimed a drunken negro! Halting infront of the Coleman House, the Governor elect mounted a goods box, andunder feelings of great excitement, hatred, and malice, delivered aspeech abusive of the whole American party, excepting none, in coarse, bitter language, in a style peculiarly his own--adapted alone to thefoul precincts of Billingsgate--rounding his periods with a diabolicaland infernal _grin_, alone suited to a display of oratory by a landpirate!

I reported this slanderous speech--not in as offensive style--as it wasdelivered; for his _looks_ and _grins_ no man can report on paper. Ialso wrote the substance of what he said to Major Donelson, in a letter, of which I shall have something more to say before I leave this stand. Just here, I will repeat what the Governor did say, and what I reportedhim to have said in my paper. I wish this large audience to hear medistinctly, and to recollect the points I make; for I shall wind up onthe Governor and his miserable tool, _Eastman_, with a degree ofseverity you have not been accustomed to, but which shall be warrantedby the facts in each case. 

Gov. Johnson said this new party of self-styled Americans professed tohave organized with a view to purify and reform the old politicalparties. A beautiful set, said he, to reform! The Order of Know Nothingswas composed of the worst men in the Whig and Democratic parties. As a_sample_ of these men, he pointed out _Andrew J. Donelson_, byname--exclaiming as often as twice, _Who is Andrew J. Donelson?_ He is asoured, office-seeking, disappointed politician, who has been kicked outof the Democratic party. To illustrate his views more fully, he told thecrowd to imagine a large gang of _counterfeiters_ out there! and anequally large gang of _horse-thieves_ out yonder! Take from these twocompanies the worst men in their ranks, form a third party of these, andyou have a representation of this Know Nothing party. This was abeautiful party to propose reform, or to speak of other parties beingcorrupt! He was interrupted repeatedly; and I think I may safely say, among hands, they gave him the d----d lie fifty times! James M. Davis, arespectable mechanic, asked him if he would say that to Major Donelson'sface? He replied, that he heard the hissing of an adder, or a goose, andwent through with certain stereotyped phrases you have all heard fromhis lips. This call upon him by Mr. Davis was not named in my newspaperreport, nor in my letter to Major Donelson. Indeed, I did not anticipatea denial of his abuse. 

Now, fellow-citizens, it was in this connection, as well as in the mostoffensive language, that Gov. Johnson introduced the name of Andrew J. Donelson, repeating it more than once, emphasizing upon it, andrepeating it with scorn and bitterness. This is the report, _insubstance_, I made of his speech through my paper, and in a letter Iaddressed to Major Donelson. And to the truth of my report, there areone hundred respectable gentlemen in Knoxville who will make oath uponthe Holy Bible. There are now a half-dozen respectable gentlemen in thiscrowd who were in the street at Knoxville on that occasion, and heardevery word the Governor said, and will sustain me in my account of it. Among these I will name Messrs. White and Armstrong, members of theHouse, Senator Rogers, Col. James C. Luttrell, and Mr. Fleming, theeditor of the Knoxville Register. 

Well, gentlemen--and I am proud to have an opportunity of vindicatingmyself before so large a Nashville audience as this is--I say MajorDonelson came to Nashville, after receiving intelligence of the abuse ofthe Governor, and was seen walking these streets with a _large andhomely stick_ in his hand, looking _grum_, as any gentleman would dounder the circumstances. The friends of Gov. Johnson seeing what wouldlikely be the result of this affair, asked for, and very properlyobtained that letter, with a view to laying it before their slanderousand abusive Executive officer, that he might _lie out of what he said_about an honorable and brave man; and thereby avoid the disgrace of acudgelling! Did he lie out of the scrape? He did: aye, he _ingloriouslylied out_ of what he had said--leaving Major Donelson no ground for anydifficulty with him: although the Major had a right to suppose that anyman base enough to make such charges, would have no hesitancy in lyingout of his disreputable and cowardly abuse. I therefore pronounce yourGovernor, here upon his own dunghill, an UNMITIGATED LIAR ANDCALUMNIATOR, and a VILLAINOUS COWARD, wanting the _nerve_ to stand up tohis abuse of better men than himself!

But it will be said that the Governor _proves_ me a liar, by a citizenof Nashville, who was present at Knoxville and heard his speech. That isso, but I prove both him and his witness liars, by a multitude ofwitnesses who were also present, and who are gentlemen of the firststanding. But who is it that testifies that I have lied? It is _E. G. Eastman_, the editor of the Sag Nicht organ in this city. And who is _E. G. Eastman_? He is a dirty, lying, and unscrupulous Abolitionist, fromMassachusetts, who once conducted an Abolitionist paper either in thatState, or the State of New Hampshire. He was brought out to this Stateto lie for the unscrupulous leaders of his party. He is paid for_telling_ and _writing_ falsehoods, and would, if the interests of hisparty required it, and a consideration were paid him in hand, _swearlies_ as readily as he would write them down for publication. He is apoor devil, as void of truth and honor as he has shown himself to be ofcourage and resentment. He edits a low, dirty, scurrilous sheet; and, like his master, Gov. Johnson, never could elevate himself above thelevel of a common blackguard. No epithet is too low, too degrading, ordisgraceful to be applied to the members of the American party, byeither of these Billingsgate graduates. Decent men shun coming incontact with either of them, as they would avoid a night-cart, or othervehicle of filth. As some fish thrive only in dirty water, so theNashville Union and American would not exist a week out of theatmosphere of slang and vituperation. A fit organ, this, for all whoarrange themselves under the dark piratical flag of Andrew Johnson andhis progressive Democracy. I am the more specific in reference to_Eastman_, because I understand he is in this assembly!

But, fellow-citizens, I am not yet through with this Knoxville speech ofthe Governor. Maj. Donelson visited Knoxville, one month after thisslanderous speech was made against him; he visited there upon theinvitation of the American party, to address a Mass Meeting. I waitedupon Maj. Donelson, upon his arrival, and found him at the house ofDoct. Curry. I told the Major that I was tired of having questions ofveracity between me and Governors and Ex-Governors of Tennessee, andthat I desired that others should state to him what had been said by theGovernor. Accordingly, different gentlemen, citizens of character, informed him that they were in the crowd and heard Johnson, and that hedid say all that was attributed to him, both in the letter he hadreceived from me, and in the two Knoxville papers. Consequently, whenMaj. Donelson made his speech next day, he denounced the Governor as amiserable calumniator, and refuted his villainous charges, in a mannerbecoming the occasion, and with a frankness which carried with it aconviction of its truth, and gave satisfaction to his numerous friends. 

And now, gentlemen, I take occasion to state, that there is no longer anadjourned question of veracity between me and Johnson and Eastman. Theissue is between Johnson and Eastman, on the one hand, and variousrespectable gentlemen of Knoxville, on the other hand. Either theGovernor and his man Friday have basely lied, or a number of thecitizens of Knoxville and vicinity, have testified to what is false. Iassert, once more, that the Governor and his dirty Editor have lied outof the villainous abuse the former heaped upon better men than himself. And if their friends are willing to see them remain under the charge, the American party are satisfied with the settlement of the question. 

Fellow-citizens, while I am on the stand, I will notice some otherpoints personal to myself. And before I enter upon these, I will callyour attention to the wholesale abuse of the Governor, of somethirty-five or forty thousand voters in Tennessee. In his Murfreesboro'speech, he asserted that "_the Devil, his Satanic Majesty, presides overall the secret conclaves_" held by the Know Nothings, and that "_theyare the allies of the Prince of Darkness_. " I quote from his printedspeeches from memory, but it will be found that I quote correctly. Inthat same speech, he asserts that all Know Nothings are "_bound byterrible oaths to fix and carry a lie in their mouths_!" In hisManchester speech, I believe it was, he called all members of the newparty "_Hyenas_, " and "_huge reptiles, upon whose neck the feet of allhonest men ought to be placed_. " And in this same speech he says he"WOULD AS SOON BE FOUND IN A CLAN OF JOHN A. MURRELL'S MEN, AS IN A KNOWNOTHING COUNCIL!"

What an imputation upon nearly one half of the legal voters ofTennessee! He has used the most odious terms his _limited_ knowledge ofthe English language would enable him to employ, to deride, defame, insult, and blackguard every man who has joined the new party, or daresto act with them in politics. In the plenitude of his bitter andsupercilious arrogance, Andrew Johnson has indulged in language againstthe entire American party, which would not be tolerated within theprecincts of Billingsgate, or the lowest fish-market in London. And fromJohnson to Shelby counties, during the entire summer, this low-flung andill-bred scoundrel, pursued this same strain of vulgar and disgustingabuse. And whether speaking of the most enlightened statesman, thepurest patriot, or the most pious clergyman, he pursued the same strainof abuse. With him, a vile demagogue, whose daily employment is toadminister to the very worst appetites of mankind, no virtue, no honor, no truth, exists anywhere, but in the breasts of such as are eithercorrupt enough or fool enough to follow him, and a few malignantfalsifiers who worship at his shrine. He is a wretched and vile catererto the morbid foreign and Catholic appetite of this country. "It is adirty bird that fouls its own nest, " says the proverb; and it applies tothis man Johnson with as much force as to the dirtiest of the featheredtribe. 

 "Where is the wretch, so lost, so dead, Who never to himself hath said, This is my _own_, MY NATIVE LAND!"

He now disgraces the Executive Chair of this gallant State. Most ofGod's creatures, human and brute, have an attachment to "HOME, SWEETHOME;" but here is a contemptible and selfish demagogue who discards allsuch feelings, and would transfer his country and home to strangers andoutlaws, to European paupers and criminals, if he could thereby receivea temporary election, or receive a pocket-full of money. For such awretch I have no sympathy, and no feelings but those of scorn andcontempt, and hence it is that I speak of him in such terms. 

On every stump in Tennessee, he held me up as "the High Priest of theOrder, " representing Col. Gentry as _my_ candidate. Since I came toMiddle Tennessee, I have been informed that he pointed to the fanciedfact that I was the head of the Order, as an evidence of _its utter wantof respectability_. Turning up his nose, and grinning significantly, hewould inquire, _Who is William G. Brownlow?_

Now, gentlemen, since he makes this issue of _respectability_ with me, Iwill accept it. Since he throws down the glove, I will take it up, and Iwill show you that he is the last man on God's green earth to call inquestion the respectability of other men, or their families! It would beboth cruel and unbecoming in me to speak of what the dishonest andvillainous relatives of Gov. Johnson have done, if he conducted himselfprudently, and did not abuse others with such great profusion. I am notaware of any relative of mine ever having been hung, sent to thepenitentiary, or being placed in the stocks. I have no doubt thatpersons related to me, directly or remotely, have deserved such a fatelong since. There is not a man in this vast assembly who can say, andtell the truth, that he has no mean kin. Can Gov. Johnson say so?Rather, can he say he has any other kind? He is a member of a numerousfamily of Johnsons, in North Carolina, who are generally THIEVES andLIARS; and though he is the best one of the family I have ever met with, I unhesitatingly affirm, to-night, that there are better men than AndrewJohnson in our Penitentiary! His relatives in the Old North State, havestood in the Stocks for crimes they have committed. And his _own borncousin_, Madison Johnson, was hung in Raleigh, for murder and robbery! Itold him of this years ago, in Jonesboro', and he denied it, and put meto the trouble of procuring the testimony of Gov. John M. Morehead toprove it! The Governor was petitioned to pardon Madison Johnson, anddeclined, as he knew he suffered justly. This explains why this_scape-gallows_ has been so bitter against Whig and Know NothingGovernors. They have been so unfeeling, as to suffer his dear relativesto _pull hemp without foothold_, when a jury of twelve honest men havesaid that they deserved death! Is he not one of the last men living totalk about a want of respectability on the part of any one? Certainly heis!

Well, gentlemen, Johnson is again the Governor of Tennessee; but if hecould be mortified, he would have the mortification to know that he isthe Governor with a majority of the _legal native votes of the State_cast in opposition to him. We all committed one capital blunder in thelate canvass, and that alone defeated Gentry, and elected Johnson. Wecopied from the Book of Pardons a list of FORTY-SEVEN names of culpritspardoned out of our State Prison by Johnson--some for negro-stealing, some for counterfeiting, house-breaking, rape, and other _Democratic_measures--more pardons than all his "illustrious predecessors" evergranted. In copying this list, we said to the voters of the State thatJohnson had spoken his honest sentiments when he said he preferredbeing among a clan of Murrell men, to being found in a Know NothingCouncil; and in the same breath we assured them that if Gentry waselected, he would let all such rascals stay in prison as long as thecourts of the country decreed they should. And while thousands ofhonorable, high-minded men voted for Johnson, under the lash of party, or because they were blinded by his glaring demerits, it is not to bedisguised that all the _petit larceny_ and _Penitentiary men_ in theState voted for him. There never was a time in Tennessee when there werenot five thousand voters who either _had been stealing_, or _intended tosteal_! These would naturally look to where they would find a friend, inthe event of their being overtaken by justice. In the person of AndrewJohnson, they felt assured of "a friend indeed, because a friend in_need_. " He had publicly told them that he preferred the company ofMurrell men to the society of the most respectable lawyers, doctors, preachers, farmers, and mechanics in the State, who met in certaincouncils. The fact of his turning so many Murrell men out of the StatePrison, and of his having been _raised up in such society_, left nodoubt of the sincerity of his profession!

In conclusion, fellow-citizens, if Gov. Johnson cannot lawfully canvassthe State a _third_ time for the office he now fills, I hope theLegislature will legalize such a race by a special act, and I propose tobe the candidate against him. I will show the people of the State in hispresence, from the same stand, who are Murrell men, and who are not ableto look honest men in the face!

If I have said any thing to-night offensive to your Governor, or any ofhis friends or understrappers in this city, they know where to find me. When I am not on the streets, I can be found at No. 43, on the lowerfloor of Sam Scott's City Hotel, opposite the ladies' parlor. I shallremain here for the next ten days only, and whatever punishment any onemay wish to inflict upon me, it must be done in that time. I say this, not because I seek a difficulty, but because I don't intend it shall besaid that I made this speech and took to flight!

I thank you, gentlemen, for the patience with which you have heard me ina matter personal to myself, and I hope you are prepared to acquit me oflying in the Donelson case, although Gov. Johnson and Editor Eastmanbear testimony against me. I thank you, and now bid you good night!

 * * * * *

We beg leave to add, that in March, 1842, Andrew Johnson laid hold of usin a speech in Blountville, when we were in Jonesborough, distant twentymiles. He held up a picture or drawing of us, and accompanied it withmany abusive remarks. In turn, we held him up in the Whig of the 29th ofthe same month, and gave his _pedigree_ in full, and with it a_representation of his cousin Madison Johnson, under the gallows_ inRaleigh!

The first Monday in April following, Johnson spoke in Jonesborough, anddenied _most solemnly that he ever had a relative by the name of MadisonJohnson--denied that a man of that name had ever been hung inRaleigh--and asserted that the man hung there in 1841 was by the name ofScott--a nephew, he said, of General Winfield Scott!_ This bold denial, made in the presence of a large and anxious crowd, overwhelmed us _forthe time being_, as Johnson was raised in the vicinity of Raleigh, andhad learned his trade there. He was supposed to know, and for the momentwe were branded with falsehood. To aid him in his war upon us, the"_Jonesborough Sentinel_, " Johnson's organ, came out upon us, andnoticed his denial of our charge and his speech, in an article of whichthe following is an extract:

 "Brownlow said, some time back, that Col. Johnson had a cousin hung in North Carolina. The Colonel developed the fact the day he used up or skinned Brownlow alive in Jonesborough, _that instead of its being his cousin, it was the nephew of Gen. Winfield Scott_, now a _quasi_ Coon candidate for the Presidency. Brownlow _is so silent_!"

After this, the Sentinel noticed us again, and this notice drew outWESTON R. GALES, the then editor of the Raleigh Register, in thefollowing:

 EDITORIAL COMPLIMENTS. 

 "We find the following editorial in the 'Jonesboro' (Tenn. ) Sentinel, ' a Locofoco print, in relation to the editor of the 'Jonesboro Whig:'

 "BROWNLOW made an awkward attempt last week to caricature a person who was hung some years ago in North Carolina, whom he termed the cousin of Col. JOHNSON. But it turns out to have been the nephew of Gen. WINFIELD SCOTT, a distinguished Coon leader. Poor BROWNLOW!--it ought to be his time next. Wonder how many hen-roosts he robbed last summer?"

 "We have nothing to do with whose time it is to be hung next, nor with the number of hen-roosts robbed, nor by whom robbed, but we will take occasion to correct the 'Sentinel' as to the person hung here 'some years ago. '

 "In the spring of 1841, a man named MADISON JOHNSON was hung in this place for the murder of HENRY BEASLEY, but we were not aware that he was any relation of Col. JOHNSON, if it be meant thereby Col. R. M. JOHNSON, of Kentucky. He was, however, connected with A. JOHNSON, the candidate for Congress in the Jonesboro' District, MADISON and he being first cousins. 

 "The last man hung in this place by the name of SCOTT, was MASON SCOTT, in 1820, and if the 'Sentinel' means to reflect upon the Whig party by saying he was a nephew of Gen. WINFIELD SCOTT, a 'distinguished Coon leader, ' we are willing for him to indulge in such misstatements. 

 "IF THE 'SENTINEL' HAD TAKEN THE TROUBLE TO CONSULT MR. A. JOHNSON ON THE SUBJECT, HE WOULD HAVE SATISFIED HIM OF THE FACTS, AS HE WAS IN THIS CITY ABOUT THE TIME MADISON WAS EXECUTED. "

It will be seen, that while Johnson was uttering his _solemn but falsedenial_ at Jonesborough, he _knew he was lying_, for he was in Raleigh"_about the time Madison was executed!_"

But we told our friends to hold on, to have patience, and to give ustime, and we would make good our charge. Accordingly, in the same issuein which we brought out this extract from the Raleigh Register, wepublished the following letter from Gov. MOREHEAD, in answer to one wehad written him:

 RALEIGH, 24th April, 1843. 

 [EXECUTIVE OFFICE. ]

 "DEAR SIR--I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of yours of the 14th inst. , requesting me to inform you what was the name of the man hung in Raleigh in the spring of 1841. 

 "His name was MADISON JOHNSON. His case was taken to the Supreme Court, and you will find it reported, December Term, 1840, vol. 1st, page 354, Iredell's Reports. 

 "He was hung for the murder of Henry Beasley. A strong effort was made to procure a pardon for him; but believing his case a clear murder, I refused to grant it. 

 "The only man named Scott that was ever convicted of murder at this place, was Mason Scott, in 1820. 

 "You will find his case reported in the reports of the Supreme Court, January Term, 1820, 1st Stark's Reports, page 24. 

 "I am not aware that any other man named Scott was ever convicted of a capital offence in this county. 

 "I have the honor to be

 "Your most ob't serv't, "J. M. MOREHEAD. "

 "Rev. W. G. BROWNLOW. "

In conclusion, after this letter appeared, and Johnson was elected, hesent an appointment to Raleigh, for a speech--attended there, andblackguarded and vilified "Morehead and Brownlow" for two hours. He madethe _letter_ of Morehead the pretext for his abuse, but the real causewas the Governor's refusal to _pardon his cousin_. Johnson was there toprocure his pardon, and brought every appliance to bear within hispower, but the North Carolina Governor was inflexible in the dischargeof his sworn duty! We do not make the point against Johnson that he has_mean kin_, only so far as it may _offset_ his abuse of others, for whoof us are without mean kinsfolks? But our point is, his _deliberatelying_ before a Jonesboro' audience!

From the Knoxville Whig of Dec. 1, 1855. ]

GOVERNOR JOHNSON'S THANKSGIVING DAY. 

As the sixth of the present month has been set apart by our Governor, tobe observed as a day of prayer and thanksgiving to Almighty God for hisnumerous and unmerited mercies conferred upon the people of our Stateand nation; and as it is desirable that the different sects shall act inconcert on the occasion, and at least pray "with the understanding, "that is to say, _appropriately_, we have been at the trouble to preparea form of prayer for the occasion. This we do in no irreverend spirit, but in all candor and sincerity, after this wise:

ALMIGHTY and everlasting God, in whom we live, and move, and have ourbeing: we, thy needy creatures, render thee our humble praises, for thypreservation of us from the beginning of our lives to this day of publicthanksgiving, and especially for having delivered us from all thedangers and afflictions of the year about to close. By thy knowledge, most gracious God, the depths were broken up during the past seed-timeand harvest, and the rains descended: while by night the cloudsdistilled the gentle dew, filling our barns with plenty: thus crowningthe year with thy goodness, in the increase of the ground, and thegathering in of the fruits thereof. And we beseech thee, O most mercifulFather, give us a just sense of this great mercy: such as may appear inour lives, by an humble, holy, and obedient walking before thee all ourdays!

To thy watchful providence, O most merciful God, we are indebted for allour mercies, and not any works or merit of ours; for many of us enteredinto the scramble to elevate to the Executive Chair of the State thepresent incumbent, with a perfect knowledge that he had abused thy Son, JESUS CHRIST, our Lord, on the floor of our State Senate, as a swindler, advocating unlawful interest: we knew that he had voted in Congressagainst offering prayers to thee: we knew that he had opposed thetemperance cause, which is the cause of God and of all mankind: we knewthat he had vilified the Protestant religion, and slandered theProtestant clergy, defending and eulogizing the corruptions of theRoman Catholic Church, throughout the length and breadth of our State;yet such was the force of party ties, O most mighty God, that we wentinto the support of our INFIDEL GOVERNOR blind, and, by our zeal in hisbehalf, gave the lie to our professions of piety, rendered ourselveshateful in the eyes of all honest and consistent men, meriting a degreeof punishment we have never received! We do most heartily repent, Omerciful God, for these shameful sins: we humble ourselves in lowestdepths of humility, and ask forgiveness of a God whom we have justlyprovoked to anger, and the forgiveness of our insulted brethren, whom wehave wickedly blackguarded, to the great injury of the cause of Christ!

O most merciful God, who art of purer eyes than to behold iniquity, turnnot a deaf ear to our supplications on this day, because the day hasbeen set apart by a Governor who really does not subscribe to theChristian religion; does not attend Divine service; who swearsprofanely; and has insulted Heaven and outraged the feelings of allpious Christians, by teaching the blasphemous sentiment thatChristianity is of no higher or holier origin than his Democracy! Havemercy, our Father and God, upon that portion of this congregation whohave endeavored to find peace to their souls by travelling along the"converging lines" of a spurious Democracy, in search of the foot of"Jacob's Ladder, " and give them repentance and better minds! And dothou, O God of pity, show all such, that instead of ascending to heavenon an imaginary "Ladder, " they are chained fast to the Locomotive ofHell, with the Devil for their Chief Engineer, the Pope of Rome asConductor, and an ungodly Governor as Breakman; and that, at more thanrailroad speed, they are driving on to where they are to be eternallypunished by Him whom thou hast appointed the Judge of quick and dead, thy Son JESUS CHRIST, our Lord. Amen!

[From the Knoxville Whig of May 24, 1856. ]

THE FOREIGN SPIRIT ILLUSTRATED. 

The following correspondence will explain itself, whilst it will serveto show the spirit which governs this Bogus Foreign Catholic Democracy:

 RICHMOND, April 21, 1856. 

 REV. AND DEAR SIR:--It cannot be unkind in me, though personally unknown to you, to address you on a subject in which our peace as citizens is alike concerned. I see in the Fincastle Democrat of 18th inst. What purports to be a review of an article of yours in the Knoxville Whig of 5th inst. , in which I suppose, from the remarks contained in the Democrat, I have been very, _very_ severely handled by you, for an offence I never committed. You will allow me to say, sir, that I have no recollection of ever writing or speaking a disrespectful word of you in all my life, but, on the contrary, have frequently spoken approvingly of much you have written. Such being the fact, you will not be surprised to learn how deeply I regret that the purest innocence on my part has failed to be a protection against personal abuse. That you have been misled by some person, is to my mind very plain, and if, through the influence of another, you have inflicted a wound upon one that never harmed you, nor ever designed to harm you, is it not within the range of a generous nature--of an honest man--to repair the injury by at once giving up to the injured party the name of the deceiver, or publish him to the world as authority for the assault, and let him assume its responsibilities?

 In a change of circumstances, I should feel bound, by the honor of a man, to do that much, and in my present relation to the case I ask nothing more. It is perhaps due to you to be informed, that I have not seen your article, nor do I know a word it contains, and it is due to myself to say that I knew nothing of the article in the Democrat assailing you, till I saw it in print some hundred of miles from home, where I have not yet arrived after an absence of nearly two months. On the subject of dues, I may add that it is due to the public that the name of the deceiver be given them. I of course suppose him to be a man of great personal courage, ready to assume all his own responsibilities. In conclusion, permit me to say, that any effort on your part to aid in concealing the hand that uses the dagger in the dark, will detract largely from the estimate I have placed upon your character, as a man without hesitation or fear, when the claims of justice are presented. My address is Fincastle, Botetourt Co. , Va. , and I am very respectfully, S. D. HOPKINS. 

 * * * * *

 KNOXVILLE, May 21st, 1856. 

 REV. S. D. HOPKINS:

 SIR--Through the weakness, mismanagement, and culpable remissness of the contemptible Jesuit now at the head of the Post Office Department, and his numerous lackeys--all of whom you sustain in their politics--a letter written by you one month ago was received a few days since, while I was absent at a Know Nothing Convention, aiding my political brethren in placing before the people of this Congressional District an electoral candidate, to aid in the great Christian and patriotic work of overthrowing the corrupt, profligate, unprincipled, Foreign Catholic Bogus Democratic party, of which _you_ are a member, and in the service of which you are an editor! But my delay in replying to your letter shall be atoned for in the _length_ and _plainness_ of my reply. 

 It is true, sir, that I published an editorial in my paper, of some severity against you; but the article was in _reply_ to a low, cowardly, and abusive editorial against me in the "Fincastle Democrat, " of which you are the editor. And "you will allow me to say, sir, " that at the time this attack was made upon me in _your_ paper, I never had said a word about you or your paper in my life, either "good, bad, or indifferent;" and "if through the influence of another you have inflicted a wound upon one that never harmed you, is it not within the range of a generous nature--of an honest man"--to repair the injury by taking back the article, and apologizing through the same medium for the injury? If, however, you believe you have not "been misled by some person, " and have done me no more than justice in that abusive article, hold on to it. Having made oath that the horse is _fifteen feet high_, allow of no correction!

 In all frankness, you must permit me to say, that I believe you expected to find in the office on your return to Fincastle, a letter from me demanding your authority for admitting into your paper such an article against me, who, as you very well knew, up to that hour had never said one word, publicly or privately, against you or your paper. I think you concluded to _take the start of me_, and thus to _forestall_ me, by writing from Richmond some twenty-four hours before you would arrive at home!

 In your paper of the 18th of April, issued only three days before this letter was written at Richmond, an editorial of half a column appears, in which _your_ paper styles me a "notorious blackguard"--a "bullying blackguard"--an "unwanted and lying man"--who "is mean enough to lie, cheat, or even steal"--a man "wearing the garb of righteousness to serve the Devil in;" and in the same article, the case of a Locofoco editor, who was involved in a shooting scrape on account of his attack upon a lady, is actually attributed to ME! Although you are a Reverend Methodist Preacher, and a grave and dignified Steam Doctor, conducting one of the organs of the Foreign and Anti-American party in Virginia, you must pardon me for saying, as I now do, that in calling upon me for my authority for what I had said in reply to the unmitigated abuse of _your_ paper, you have proven to my mind, that if you do not possess the cool and collected impudence of the _Devil_, you are at least possessed of the lion-headed impudence of an unprincipled Sag Nicht partisan, hired to do the dirty work of an equally unprincipled and dirty organization!

 But it is due to the history of this controversy that I should say, this second attack upon me sets forth that you are from home, and that "the _Junior_ is responsible for the article. " This might be credited, if, on your return home, you had protested against such abuse, but it seems from your silence to have met with your heart's approval, and gave "general satisfaction, " at least to _you_! It is true that you were absent at the time of both these publications, but it does not follow, as a matter of course, that you were not the veritable author, and that they did not find their way to the "Democrat" office at the same time and in the same way that your "Baltimore Correspondence" got there. The "Junior, " as he styles himself, claims the fraternity; and were it not that he is too well known in Fincastle for any sane man to believe that _he_ wrote the articles, he might have the credit (if credit there be attached to it) of so low, malicious, and lying articles. But he is known in Fincastle to be a brainless man, and to be incapable of writing a paragraph on any subject. He is known to have no use of language, and to be incapable of applying epithets to any one. So that, if _you_ did not write these articles, they were manufactured at "Irish Corner, " in Fincastle, your "Junior" not being able to do it, for the reason that he is wholly incapable. My opinion is, that the articles were manufactured by the "Great Mogul" of the Anti-American party in your town, and if he will only avow himself the author, I will make some disclosures upon him that will make him wish himself back in "Swate Ireland, " where he "lives, and moves, and has his being;" no disclosures are necessary--his books, and his person, damn him to everlasting infamy. He has the filthiest-looking mouth, and the most offensive breath, of any man in the Valley of Virginia. No man who knows him will meet him square on the pavement, or place himself in a position, if it can be avoided, of meeting a breeze from that great reservoir of all nastiness, his mouth! It is really a wonder how any human being can LIVE, and emit all the time a stream of such overwhelming and uninterrupted STENCH! You must permit me to christen this man as the But-Cut of Original Sin, and the Upper-crust of all Nastiness!

 It may not set well upon your stomach, that being a "Minister of the Gospel, and having the care of souls, " I should seem not to place implicit confidence in your denial of any participation in this unprovoked war upon me. I will be candid with you, and though it is possible for me to be mistaken in my views, still, if I am, I am honestly deceived. I have no confidence in the moral honesty and Christian integrity of any Protestant Preacher, of any denomination, in this country, who openly arrays himself against the American party, and takes the side of the Catholics, Foreigners, and self-styled Democrats associated with them. Nor will I hear one such preach or pray, if I know him to be such, and can get out of his hearing. The growing light and improvements of this age forbid that an intelligent and pious man and minister should identify himself with that party. And the fiery genius, corrupting tendencies, and uncompromising intolerance of that party, are rapidly driving good and true men out of the party. 

 There never was a time since the division of parties in this country, when I had so little confidence in what is called the Democratic party as at present; and as at present organized and constituted, I believe it to be the most corrupt organization. It is made up of the odds and ends of all factions and parties on the continent, and is one of the most anomalous combinations of fanaticism, idolatry, prostitution, crime, and absurdities conceivable! The _isms_ composing the party of which you are a member, are: Abolitionism; Free-soilism; Agrarianism; Fourieritism; Millerism; Radicalism; Woman's Rightsism; Mobism; Mormonism; Spiritualism; Locofocoism; Higher-Lawism; Foreign Pauperism; Anti-Americanism; Roman Catholicism; Deism, and modern Sag Nichtism! All this tide of fanaticism and error, originating North of Mason and Dixon's Line, went for Pierce in the last Presidential contest: they are with that party now, against the American party; and it is bad company in which to find a Protestant minister! Yet, miserable Protestants hesitate not to commend these enemies of the natural rights of man, and of the Christian religion, as being just as good Christians as their neighbors!

 "Oh! judgment, thou hast fled to brutish beasts; And men have not their reason!"

 But, Doctor, why were you at Baltimore? Why, sir, during the past year, you and other conscientious Methodists took it into your heads to arraign a young man who was travelling your circuit, Mr. Hall, and, for the Church's good, to have him expelled, whose great sin was that he was a _Know-Nothing_, or sympathized with the Order! The authorities of the Church, after a patient hearing of the whole case, pro and con, acquitted the young man. You followed him up to the Annual Conference, as the representative of and attorney for Sag Nichtism. The Conference acquitted the young preacher again, and sent him to an enlightened circuit in Maryland. This so offended you, and your patriotic, not to say _pious_ associates, that, for the Church's good, they resigned their stewardship in the Church, and were so offended at the course of the Presiding Elder, _Rev. M. Goheen_, than whom there is not a more modest, unassuming, conservative Christian gentleman in the Valley of Virginia, that, at a recent Quarterly Meeting there, they refused to attend church, or to hear him preach. This is just the spirit that actuates your party, everywhere. 

 You demand of me the name or names of such person or persons as have given me information in reference to you. Reconsider this demand, if you please, and ask yourself if, under all the circumstances, it is not a cool piece of impudence. I have published nothing about you upon the authority of others, but upon my own authority and responsibility. You _suspect_ some of your neighbors for writing to me, and hence you make this demand. It is true, I have friends in Fincastle, and some of these write to me, and when I publish any thing about you, or any one of your associates, and give these friends of mine as authority, I will give you their names, if called upon to do so; or I will assume the responsibility myself. What I have said in reply to the wicked, slanderous, and cowardly assault upon me, in the dirty paper controlled by you, I have said upon my own responsibilities, as a man, and as a member of the same Church to which you belong; and whether my "peace as a citizen" is preserved or destroyed, I am not the man to be intimidated or driven from my position. My failure to give you the names of any citizens of your vicinity, who may have written me private letters, relating to your war upon young Hall, the Circuit Preacher, "will detract largely from the estimate you have placed upon my character. " This I am sorry to hear, as I do not wish to fall below the "estimate" placed upon my character in the two issues of your paper, now before me! This would be reaching "a lower deep, " as the poet classically styles it!

 Now, sir, I have a letter from a town in Virginia, not far distant from Fincastle, written by a gentleman of as "great personal courage" as you or myself, who states, that a gentleman who was present at the trial of Rev. Mr. Hall, heard you make the assertion, on that occasion, that you alone were responsible for all the editorials that appeared in the "Democrat, " and that the "Junior" partner was not! If you think proper to make an issue with this gentleman, you can have his name!

 I am, Dr. Hopkins, your humble servant, W. G. BROWNLOW, _Editor of the Knoxville Whig. _

[From the Knoxville Whig. ]

TO STEPHEN TRIBBLE. 

VILLAINOUS SIR:--Letters from my friends in the West inform me that youare making a full team in the service of the Devil, Locofocoism, andcrime, in portions of Missouri and Kentucky! You have recently heldforth in Charleston, a pleasant post-village, the capital of Mississippicounty, Missouri, about six miles south-west of the "Father of Waters!"In that town you undertook to inform the good people, the Circuit Judgebeing present, _who I am_, and to demonstrate that I am not entitled tocredit in any thing I say! You claimed to have once lived in EastTennessee--to know the people and the country--and to have known WilliamT. Senter and James Y. Crawford, two other Methodist preachers, whose_pedigrees_ you pretend to give!

Mr. Senter was an able man--a moral and upright man--and a WhigRepresentative in Congress, from the District you represented _in thejail of Sullivan county_, for a long time previous to your being_branded in the hand and on the cheeks_, for MANSLAUGHTER, theparticulars of which I will remind you of before I close this familiarletter! Mr. Senter could have gone to Congress longer, but voluntarilyretired. Mr. Crawford was a brother-in-law to Mr. Senter, and was apreacher of respectable talents, and in good standing in his Church. They are both in their graves, beyond the reach of your malice, wherethe sound of your infamous voice, and the words of your lying tongue, can never penetrate their ears! But I am still above ground, dailykicking, and making war upon the Locofoco Paupers and Foreign Catholics, as well as Native Traitors, with whom you are associated, and with whomyou act in politics. I acknowledge myself to be game for you to huntdown!

You are now a _Campbellite preacher_ as well as a _Sag NichtMissionary_; and the garb of religion you wear, gives a degree of weightto your falsehoods and slanders, among strangers, that they otherwisewould not have. The idea of "_Stev Tribble_, " who ingloriously fled fromthis country for crimes he could not meet in open court, being apreacher, and itinerating through the West, "in search of the lost sheepof the house of Israel, " is so ridiculous, as scarcely to be believed atall, although there is no doubt but what he has been regularly installedin Kentucky, and now has the "care of souls. "

Why, you unmitigated old villain, your whole career, from your "youthup, " has been one of crime and revolting blackguardism. While a boy anda young man, where Hoss's school was taught in Washington county, yourvulgar conversation, immoral practices, indecent habits, andblackguardism, disgusted the entire neighborhood, and rendered you soodious that no decent family would board you! All the waters of thefar-famed _Jordan_, in the palmiest days of that bold stream, were notsufficient to wash your sins away! If the Lord Bishop of London were to_immerse_ you as often as "seventy times seven, " in the waters of "boldJordan, " and in the name of the holy Trinity, you would still remainwhat you were when you fled from this country to avoid the extremepenalty of the law--one of the greatest scoundrels for whom Christ died!

Yourself and half-brother _Havron_ were confined in Blountville Jail, for the murder of _William Humphreys_, a promising young man, whom youbrutally assaulted and murdered in open daylight in the streets ofKingsport, in Sullivan county, and without provocation! _You_ were triedand convicted of _manslaughter_, and branded in the _hand_ and on the_cheek_. After being branded, you _bit the letters out of your hand_, and _clawed them out of your face_, but the _scars_ are to be seen inboth. Indeed, I have been written to, to know why these scars are onyour face! I take this method of answering those inquiries; andpublishing them in my "Whig, " which has a circulation of 5, 000, and our"Campaigner, " which circulates 7, 000 copies, I shall be able tointroduce you to as many persons as may have heard you preach myfuneral. 

While in the Blountville Jail, with your half-brother, Havron, whoseblow killed Humphreys, after you had weakened him, you caught hold ofthe jailor, Montgomery Irvin, and held him in a scuffle, when he enteredthe room with your dinner, until Havron made his escape. Havron wouldhave pulled hemp, had he not escaped; and had our penitentiary systemexisted at that time, you would have been sentenced for life! But youwould not have remained there longer than the past summer, as we have aGovernor who pardons out all such men, and has more sympathies for themthan any other Executive Officer in the nation. You have a half-brotherwho is a Sag Nicht member of our Legislature, and a great friend andsupporter of our Governor and his foreign associates, and he could haveturned you out and procured for you an office if you had remained. Butthen you followed the teachings of "the spirit" of Sag Nichtism, inleaving between two days, and emigrating to Kentucky, as many precioussouls would never have "heard the word, " or had their sin washed away, but for you!

In an unmentionable and disgraceful enterprise, you became possessed ofa _broken leg_, and were mean enough to abscond without paying the billof your physician, Dr. Patton, whose unremitting attention saved youfrom your grave, and from the clutches of the Devil, sooner than the oldfellow was prepared for your reception! If you had the honor of a firstclass thief, you would pay this medical bill out of the proceeds of thefirst public collection you take up, either in Missouri or Kentucky. Andif you suffer it to go unpaid until your infinitely infernal career iswound up, the Day of Judgment will disclose the manner of your breakingyour leg! If I were you, I would sooner pay this bill now, than to beasked in the great day how my leg was broken!

Disgraced as you are, unprincipled and villainous, you have gone intoKentucky, taken upon yourself "holy orders, " and married a wife, imposing most shamefully upon the family into which you married. Thewoman you have thus imposed upon, would be justifiable now, in the eyesof both God and man, in forsaking you and applying for a divorce. And nocourt or jury would refuse her application, when made acquainted withyour character. 

It is a remarkable fact--one that I desire to call, not so much to yournotice, as to the notice of the public generally--that while all themembers of this Foreign Democratic party are by no means villains, destitute of principle; yet, all the assassins, cut-throats, thieves, and hypocrites in the country have crowded into the ranks of that party!Fawned upon, fostered and pampered by the villainous leaders, demagogues, and tricksters of the party, who need the services of allsuch scavengers, you are encouraged to act with them. These leaders, whoare really no better than you are, _generously_ admit you to afellowship, and _courteously_ acknowledge all such abandoned rascals tobe their equals! Such men, to a great extent, now constitute thefree-democracy of the country--they desecrate the ballot-box--disgustdecent men wherever they come in contact with them--blaspheme the nameof God--and swear that they will either rule or ruin the country!

But, Sir, it was said of a certain man in the Scriptures, that he was a"sinner above all the sinners that dwell in Jerusalem. " So it may inperfect truth be said of you, that you are a scoundrel above all thescoundrels in the hateful ranks of Sag Nichtism. You deserve, for yourdepraved course of life, a greater punishment than you have received orare likely to receive in this life. The guilt of foul calumny, of themost black and odious kind, attaches to every sentence uttered by yourlying tongue. Guilt, the offspring of fiend-like malice, shamefullyfalse, deeply corrupt, and badly matured: perfidy, dishonesty, and rankpoison--hot incense of murder, theft, inhuman spoliation, and deep, darkforebodings of damnation have been rooted and grounded in your heart, for lo! these many years! Dark despair, endless death, inexpressiblemisery, manifold, and worse than death, follow in the ghastly train ofyour crimes, and riot in your corrupt bosom, as with infernaldrunkenness of delight! The record of your deep depravity, of your utterwant of principle, and of your ten thousand villainous exploits, is_stereotyped_ upon the burning sands of eternity, and stamped on theimperishable walls of the _rotunda_ of the Devil's Hell, to which youare driving at railroad speed! In upper East Tennessee, where you areknown, it would disgrace an _Algerine Bandit_ to sit and hear youpretend to preach! _You_ pretend to preach Christ and him crucified, and_immerse_ persons in the name of the Trinity! Shrouded in the _sackclothand ashes_ of disgrace, enclosed in a _vault_ filled to the brim with_buried and putrefied venality_, and steeped to the very nose and chinin crime, how dare you attempt to preach!

I repeat, you vile slanderer of the living and the dead, that, injustice to the cause of God and of civilization, I will keep spread theunfurled banner of your infamy on every breeze, and cause it to float inthe atmosphere of every State in this Union, until your very _name_becomes a mockery and a by-word! And I call upon the people of Kentuckyand Missouri to ring the loud knell of your infamy, from steep to steep, and from valley to valley, until their swelling sounds are heard instartling echoes, mingling with the rush of the criminal's torrent, andthe mighty cataract's earthquake-voice!

 W. G. BROWNLOW, _Editor of the Knoxville Whig. _

 June 7th, 1856. 

AN EXPOSE OF ROMAN CATHOLICISM. 

The following articles, setting forth the DESIGNS and TENDENCY ofRomanism in the United States, appeared in the "KNOXVILLE WHIG" of Mayand June, 1856, and will speak for themselves. The writer has opposedthe Papal Hierarchy for twenty years; and in a series of articles, nowfiled in a number of the "JONESBOROUGH WHIG, " published _sixteen yearsago_, he _predicted_ that the very state of things we are now realizingwould come upon us as soon as the year 1860, and that the party callingitself by the revered name of _Democrat_, would identify itself withpolitical Romanism!

THE CATHOLIC QUESTION. --NO. I. 

 The American Party and the Religious Test--The Louisiana Delegation and the Gallican Catholics--The vote of the Philadelphia Convention to admit the Louisiana Delegates--The American Councils in Louisiana--Catholics proper cannot be true citizens of a Republic. 

It is sometimes said by the Anties, that the American party, at theirlate Philadelphia Convention, dismissed the Catholic Question from theirplatform, and that they admitted into their Council a CatholicDelegation from Louisiana. We were in that Convention, from the hour ofits opening until its final close, and we deny both statements. Thefifth and tenth sections of the platform adopted at Philadelphia, andfor which we voted, are in the following words, and they express all ourplatform says upon that subject:

 5th. No person should be selected for political station, (whether of native or foreign birth, ) who recognizes any allegiance or obligation of any description to any foreign prince, potentate, or power, or who refuses to recognize the Federal and State Constitutions (each within its sphere) as paramount to all other laws, as rules of political action. 

 10th. Opposition to any union between Church and State; no interference with religious faith or worship, and no tests oaths for office. 

The American party was against political Romanism--against all whoacknowledge any allegiance to a foreign Prince, Potentate, or Power; orwho acknowledge any authority on earth, higher and more binding thanthe Constitutions of our States, and General Government. And those whoare familiar with the temporal assumptions of Popery, and the politicalintrigues of the Order of Jesuits, can have no other feelings than thoseof disgust, upon hearing the Locofoco demagogues of the country cry outagainst the American party for their opposition to the poor Catholics!Against Popes confined to _Rome_, we make no war; but against Popesusurping civil and spiritual authority, in America, we protest mostsolemnly, and intend to make war, unrelenting and unceasing war!

The Louisiana Delegation, five in number, were _two_ Methodist--_one_Old School Presbyterian--one Episcopalian--and the other, Mr. Eustes, amember of Congress, not a member of any Church. Those gentlemenpresented their credentials for admission, and they were objected to, because Roman Catholics were admitted into the Order by the LouisianaState Council. A warm debate ensued, on a motion to admit theDelegation, on their credentials, which finally prevailed, by yeas 67, nays 50, many of the members having left for their lodgings, because ofthe lateness of the hour, and of their fatigue. _We_ were in favor oftheir admission, and so was Mr. Nelson, of East Tennessee, and we bothclaim to be _ultra_ Protestant, if the reader please. 

The "Catholicism" of Louisiana, we wish it borne in mind--that is theGallican wing of the Church--is a very different species of"Catholicism" from that of our Irish and German Hierarchy taught in thiscountry, under the training of Archbishop Hughes and Monseigneur Bedini, the Pope's villainous Nuncio. The French Gallican Church has so littlerespect for the Pope of Rome, that when the King of Sardinia was inParis, less than twelve months ago, though he was under the interdict ofa Papal Bull of excommunication from Pius IX. , the Gallican Archbishopsof Pius, and other Priests associated with them, visited him regularly, and tendered him unbounded courtesies and honors. The Gallican wing ofthe Catholic Church of France is liberal, as well as hostile to theinsulting claims and pretensions of the Pope. But it is diluted stillmore with liberality, and with opposition to these claims of the Pope, among the French Creoles of Louisiana. Most of them, though RomanCatholics by name, from being educated in the forms of the Roman Church, have just about as much respect for Rome, and confidence in the Pope, aswe have, and God knows that is very little. They denounce Papal Bulls, interdicts, and Nuncios. They throw off all temporal and spiritualallegiance to the Pope--the civil authorities of the United States withthem are supreme--they are American born--and hence, our platform doesnot exclude them, and consequently they were admitted at Philadelphia, or, which is the same, their representatives. 

In 1652, under Louis XIV. , the Gallican clergy met in Paris, and adoptedthe following point: "That the Pope has no power, of _Divine right_, tointerfere with the temporal affairs of independent States. " Thus, theCatholics of Louisiana rejecting the doctrine of the temporal power ofthe Pope, are not proscribed by the American party. They constitute asound portion of the American party. 

Mr. Lathrop, a Presbyterian Elder, and a Delegate from Louisiana, readto the Convention from the ritual of the subordinate organizations ofthe American party of Louisiana, and showed that, while it admittedthose to membership who professed the Roman Catholic religion, ITREQUIRED OF THEM THE DENIAL OF ALLEGIANCE TO ANY TEMPORAL AUTHORITY NOTCOGNIZABLE IN THE STATE AND UNITED STATES CONSTITUTIONS; and from eachsecured a pledge, UPON OATH, that they would not divulge the secrets ofthe Order! He defended the Louisiana Catholics, as being true Americans, recognizing no civil or spiritual power in their Priests, and resistingevery attempt, whether by a Bishop or Priest, to interfere with theinstitutions of our country. He cited cases which had occurred inLouisiana, of controversies between the Clergy and Laity, for thecontrol of Church property, and the decisions of courts over whichGallican Catholic Judges presided, in favor of titles and controlvesting in Trustees, the Laity. He showed that the native Catholics ofLouisiana were the friends of common schools, and the advocates ofpopular education. He proclaimed aloud that the native Catholics of hisState recognized no persons as proper depositaries of office, whoacknowledged an allegiance to any person, civil or ecclesiastical, superior to that of the laws and Constitution of our country. Heproclaimed that the Nuncios of the Pope of Rome hated these LouisianaCatholics, with a more perfect hatred than they did the "apostleheretics" called Protestants! This speech was received with unboundedapplause, the question was called, and, as we have before stated, it wassanctioned, very properly too, by a vote of 67 to 50!

The American party not only advocate religious toleration, but religiousliberty, which is a very different thing. Toleration is not the word inour vocabulary--it does not express enough, because it implies the rightto _permit_ or _prohibit_. We contend for LIBERTY, the meaning of whichis, that men are not responsible _to each other, to Popes, Bishops, orPriests_, for their religious opinions or practices, and thatconsequently religion is not a subject of toleration. 

The Catholics, proper, have taken an oath of allegiance to the Pope ofRome, a "foreign prince, potentate, and power, " and their obligations tohim are higher, more sacred, and more binding, than any obligationsthey can take upon them to support the laws and Constitution of thiscountry. These are the men that we refuse to vote for, or put in office. They are not and cannot be true Americans. The oaths of the priests bindthem to war upon all Protestant sects, and upon all Republican powers ofGovernment. These oaths bind them to the foot of the Papal Throne; andwith these oaths upon their souls, they cannot be true citizens of thisRepublic without perjury. And if guilty of perjury, the State prisonshould be their residence. 

In our next, we shall consider this subject more at length, inconnection with the oath of allegiance to our country, and the Catholicevasion of that oath. 

THE CATHOLIC QUESTION--No. 2. 

 Ambiguous terms in swearing--The case of Judge Gaston--Temporal power of the Pope--Catholic authorities in Europe--The spirit of the Catholic press in America!

We are told by the Democratic sympathizers with the Catholics, that allCatholic emigrants to this country take an oath of allegiance to theUnited States upon becoming naturalized. Yes, they do, and the oathafter it is taken, has no more weight with them, than has aregular-built Know Nothing speech. 

Here is a paragraph from SANCHEZ, the highest authority in the CatholicChurch, Pope Pius only excepted. This writer, "by authority, " shows howthis oath of allegiance is evaded by a mental reservation:

 "It is lawful to use ambiguous terms to give the impression a different sense from that which you understand yourself. A person may take an oath that he has not done such a thing, though in fact he has, by saying to himself it was not done on a certain day, or before he was born, or by any other similar circumstances, which gives another meaning to it. This is extremely convenient, and always very just, when necessary to your health, honor or prosperity. "

Here, then, we have it from the highest Catholic authority, thatCatholics are absolved from all allegiance to this government, becausethey take the oath of allegiance without committing perjury, by the holyprocess of a mental reservation--the use of "ambiguous terms, " settingforth one thing while they swear another! We have no doubt that ChiefJustice TANEY, a devoted Catholic of Baltimore, and now at the head ofthe Supreme Court of the United States, took his oath of officerequiring him to support the Constitution, with this same mentalreservation. We have no doubt that those Catholic Judges upon theFederal Bench in several States in the Union, and those CatholicAttorney Generals, appointed to office by Mr. Pierce, so understoodtheir oaths of office, and of allegiance! And the practice ofPost-Master General Campbell, a bigoted Catholic, and a member of theorder of Jesuits, proves that he so understood his oath to support theConstitution. As true Catholics, they are bound to swear with thismental reservation, because they could not owe allegiance to agovernment of "heretics, " such as they believe ours to be. As Catholics, they are bound to overthrow our Constitution, and aid in the destructionof our government. 

It is a matter of history that when the Legislature of North Carolinaelected Judge GASTON to the Supreme Bench in that State, he hesitated asto whether he would take the oath or not. And why? He was, although anable man, and in all the private relations of life a most excellent man, a decided and devoted Roman Catholic. This is not all. The oath of aJudge in that State, which is not common in other States, requires theman taking it to avow his belief in the Protestant religion. JudgeGaston asked for a few days to consider--he went instantly to Baltimore, as was believed, to consult the Catholic Bishop, who then residedthere--obtained a dispensation, as was supposed--wrote back that hewould accept the office--returned, was qualified, and to the day of hisdeath was on the Bench! This affair illustrates Romanism. And what Romewas, she is, and always will be. Can Rome change? Can the Ethiopianchange his skin, or the leopard his spots?

Here is what Philopater, an approved Catholic authority of the firstgrade, says, touching the principle in controversy:

 "All theologians and ecclesiastical lawyers affirm that every Christian government, as soon as it openly abandons the _Romish faith_, is instantly degraded from all power and dignity: all the subjects are absolved from the oath of fidelity and obedience which they have taken, and they may and ought, if they have the power, to drive such government from every Christian State, as an apostate, heretic, and deserter from Jesus Christ. This certain and indubitable decision of all the most learned men is perfectly conformed to the most apostolic doctrines. "

Our Locofoco advocates of Romanism deny that the Pope lays claim to thesupremacy charged by the American party. On this point, we desire thatthe Catholics may speak for themselves. One of their standard writers, FARRARIS, in his Ecclesiastical Dictionary, a work endorsed by theirCouncil of Bishops and Cardinals, under the article headed "Pope, " usesthis emphatic and expressive language:

 "The Pope is of such dignity and highness, that he is not simply man, but, as it were, God, and the vicar of God. Hence the Pope is such supreme and sovereign dignity, that, properly speaking, he is not merely constituted in dignity, but is rather placed on the very summit of dignities. Hence, also, the Pope is rather father of fathers, and he alone can use this name, because he only can be called father of fathers: since he possesses the primacy over all, is truly greater than all, and the greatest of all. He is called most holy, because he is presumed to be such. On account of the excellency of his supreme dignity, he is called bishop of bishops, ordinary of ordinaries, universal bishop of the Church, bishop of diocesan, of the whole world, divine monarch, supreme emperor, and king of kings. "

PETER DENS, of Maynooth College notoriety, whose "Theology" is thehighest Catholic authority known this side of the Vatican at Rome, givesentire the Bull of Pope Sixtus V. Against the King of Navarre and thePrince of Conde, whom he styles the _sons of wrath_. In this Bull, issued in the year 1585, he says:

 "The authority given to Saint Peter and his successors, by the immense power of the eternal King, _excels all the power of earthly kings and princes_. It passeth uncontrollable sentence upon them all. And if it find any of them resisting God's obedience, it takes more severe vengeance on them, casting them down from their thrones, however powerful they may be, and tumbling them down to the lowest parts of the earth, as the ministers of aspiring Lucifer. "

Here is what _Daniel O'Connell_ said so late as 1843, and he was a trueCatholic and a true exponent of this faith:

 "You should do all in your power to carry out the intentions of His Holiness the Pope. Where you have the electoral franchise, give your votes to none but those who will assist you in so holy a struggle. 

 "I declare my most unequivocal submission to the Head of the Church, and to the hierarchy in its different orders. If the Bishop makes a declaration on this bill, I never would be heard speaking against it, but would submit at once unequivocally to that decision. They have only to decide, and I close my mouth: they have only to determine, and I obey. I wish it to be understood that _such is the duty of all Catholics_. "--_Daniel O'Connell_, 1843. 

Here comes one of the Pope's organs in France:

 "A heretic, examined and convicted by the Church, used to be delivered over to the secular power and punished with death. Nothing has ever appeared to us more necessary. More than one hundred thousand persons perished in consequence of the heresy of Wickliffe; a still greater number for that of John Huss; and it would not be possible to calculate the bloodshed caused by Luther; and it is not yet over. "--_Paris Univers. _

 "As for myself, what I regret, I frankly own, is that they did not burn John Huss sooner, and that they did not likewise burn Luther; this happened because there was not found some prince sufficiently politic to stir up a crusade against Protestants. "--_Paris Univers. _

But here is the Pope himself arguing with the authorities alreadyquoted:

 "The absurd or erroneous doctrines or ravings in defence of liberty of conscience, is a most pestilential error--a pest, of all others, most to be dreaded in a State. "--_Encyclical Letter of Pope Pius IX. , Aug. _ 15, 1852. 

Now, let us hear their organs in our own country:

 "Heresy and unbelief are crimes, and in Christian countries, like Italy and Spain for instance, where all the people are Catholics, and where the Christian religion is an essential part of the law of the land, they are punished as other crimes. "--_R. C. Archbishop of St. Louis. _

 "For our own part, we take this opportunity of expressing our hearty delight at the suppression of the Protestant chapel at Rome. This may be thought intolerant, but when, we would ask, _did we ever profess to be tolerant of Protestantism_, or favor the doctrine that Protestantism _ought to be tolerated_? On the contrary, we hate Protestantism--we detest it with our whole heart and soul, and we pray that our aversion to it may never decrease. We hold it meet that in the Eternal City no worship repugnant to _God_ should be tolerated, and we are sincerely glad that the enemies of truth are no longer allowed to meet together in the capital of the Christian world. "--_Pittsburg Catholic Visitor_, 1848. 

 "No good government can exist without religion; and there can be no religion without an _Inquisition_, which is wisely designed for the promotion and protection of the true faith. "--_Boston Pilot. _

 "You ask, if he (the Pope) were lord in the land, and you were in a minority, if not in numbers, yet in power, what would he do to you? That, we say, would entirely depend on circumstances. If it would _benefit the cause of Catholicism_, he would tolerate you--if expedient, he would imprison you--banish you--possibly, _hang you_--but be assured of one thing, he would never tolerate you for the sake of the _'glorious principles' of civil and religious liberty. _"--_Rambler. _

 "Protestantism of every form has not and never can have any rights where Catholicity is triumphant. "--_Brownson's Quarterly Review. _

 "Let us dare to assert the truth in the face of the lying world, and, instead of pleading for our Church at the bar of the State, _summon the State itself to plead at the bar of the Church, its divinely constituted judge_. "--_Ibid. _

 "I never think of publishing any thing in regard to the Church without submitting my articles to the Bishop for inspection, approval, and endorsement. "--_Ibid. _

In view of the foregoing, and other facts and arguments which we willhereafter present, we cannot be mistaken in our views of RomanCatholicism. We cannot tamely surrender our dearest rights asProtestants, without a struggle. We cannot cry peace, peace, when thereis no peace!

 "Protestantism, of every kind, Catholicity inserts in her catalogue of moral sins; she endures it when and where she must; but she hates it, and directs all her energies to effect its destruction. "--_St. Louis Shepherd of the Valley. _

 "Religious liberty, in the sense of a liberty possessed by every man to choose his religion, is one of the most wretched delusions ever foisted on this age by the father of deceit. "--_The Rambler_, 1853. 

 "The Church is of necessity intolerant. Heresy she endures when and where she must, but she hates it, and directs all her energies to its destruction. If Catholics ever gain an immense numerical majority in this country, religious freedom is at an end. So say our enemies. So say we. "--_Shepherd of the Valley. _

 "The liberty of heresy and unbelief is not a right.... All the rights the sects have, or can have, are derived from the State, and rest on expediency. As they have, in their character of sects hostile to the true religion, no rights under the law of nature or the law of God, they are neither wronged nor deprived of liberty, if the State refuses to grant them any rights at all. "--_Brownson's Review, Oct. , 1853_, p. 456. 

 "The sorriest sight to us is a Catholic throwing up his cap, and shouting, 'All hail, Democracy!'"--_Ibid, October, 1852_, pp. 554-8. 

 "We think the 'masses' were never less happy, less respectable, and less respected, than they have been since the reformation, and particularly within the last fifty or one hundred years, since Lord Brougham caught the mania of teaching them to read and communicate the disease to a large proportion of the English nation; of which, in spite of all our talk, we are often the servile imitators. "--_Shepherd of the Valley, Oct. 22, 1853. _

THE CATHOLIC QUESTION--No. 3. 

 The Catholic Church supreme over all authorities--Meddling in Political Contests--Brownson's Review and the Boston Pilot reflecting the sentiments of that Church--Protestants advocating Romanism--The Nashville Union in 1835. 

The Anti-American, Foreign-loving, Catholic admirers of the Locofocoschool of politics, everywhere seek to frighten native Protestantcitizens with the bugbear cry of religious proscription. But letAmericans and Protestants watch with increased vigilance both the Romanand Locofoco Jesuits around them. To call the damnable and accursedsystem of political intrigue practised for past centuries by the RomanChurch by the term _Religion_, is a solemn mockery of the hallowed word. Religion teaches love and obedience to God, and the legally constitutedauthorities of the country. Romanism teaches fear of and obedience to acrowned potentate called the Pope, and opposition to all Protestantgovernments, as worthy to be cast down to hell! The one tends to freeand ennoble the soul: the other to enslave and debauch every faculty ofman's nature which likens him to the Almighty! The one is republican:the other is barbaric, and at war with every principle of freegovernment!

The American party does oppose and denounce Romanism _as a politicalsystem at war_ with American institutions; and we here ask candid men toweigh the evidence we shall adduce to sustain this charge. We shallquote none other than Roman Catholic authority--the organs ofRomanism--so as out of their own mouths to condemn them. Brownson'sReview is the accredited organ of Romanism in the United States. Heostentatiously parades the names of the Archbishops and Bishops on thecover of his Review, to give it the stamp of authority, and asserts inthe work:

 "I NEVER THINK OF PUBLISHING ANY THING IN REGARD TO THE CHURCH WITHOUT SUBMITTING MY ARTICLES TO THE BISHOP FOR INSPECTION, APPROVAL, AND ENDORSEMENT. "

Let us then look to his pages for an exposition of the doctrines of hisChurch. In the January number for 1853, he says:

 "For every Catholic at least, the Church is the supreme judge of the extent and limits of her power. She can be judged by no one; and this of itself implies her absolute supremacy, and that the temporal order must receive its laws from her. "

The uniform practice of the Church of Rome has been, and still is, toassert her power--not in _words_, but in _deeds_--to GIVE OR TAKE AWAYCROWNS--to depose ungodly rulers, and to absolve their subjects fromtheir "horrible" OATHS OF ALLEGIANCE!

Again, in the July number for 1853, Brownson says:

 "The Church is supreme, and you have no power except what you hold in subordination to her, either in spirituals or in temporals.... You no more have political than ecclesiastical independence. The Church alone, under God, is independent, and she defines both your powers and hers. "

 "They have heard it said from their youth up that the Church has nothing to do with politics; that she has received no mission in regard to the political order. "

 "In opposing the nonjuring bishops and priests, they believed they were only asserting their national rights as men, or as the State, and were merely resisting the unwarrantable assumption of the spiritual power. If they had been distinctly taught that the political authority is always subordinate to the spiritual, and had grown up in the doctrine that the nation is not competent to define, in relation to the ecclesiastical power, its own rights--that the Church defines both its powers and her own, and that though the nation may be, and ought to be, independent in relation to other nations, it has, and can have, no independence in the face of the Church, the kingdom of God on earth: they would have seen at a glance that support of the civil authority against the spiritual, no matter in what manner, was the renunciation of their faith as Catholics, and the actual or virtual assertion of the supremacy of the temporal power. "

In the same number, page 301, he says:

 "She (the Church) has the right to judge who has, or has not, according to the law of God, the right to reign: whether the prince has, by his infidelity, his misdeeds, his tyranny and oppression, forfeited his trust, and lost his right to the allegiance of his subjects; and therefore whether they are still held to their allegiance, or are released from it by the law of God. If she have the right to judge, she has the right to pronounce judgment, and order its execution: therefore to pronounce sentence of deposition upon the prince who has forfeited his right to reign, and to declare his subjects absolved from their allegiance to him, and free to elect themselves a new sovereign. "

We might multiply authorities of this kind on this point, to an almostindefinite extent, from the debate between Bishop Hughes and Mr. Breckenridge, and the controversy between Hughes and Erastus Brooks, butit is wholly unnecessary. 

As early as 1844, the Catholics took their stand as a body in the arenaof political strife; and the illustrious CLAY and the virtuousFRELINGHUYSEN were the victims of their particular hostility. Mr. Frelinghuysen was the President of the Board of Foreign Missions, andthis was made the _excuse_ for the bitter animosity of the Catholicpress, and of the clergy and membership of the Catholic sect, againstMr. Clay. Brownson, in his July number for 1844, in the very heat of thecontest, thus assailed Mr. Clay:

 "He is ambitious, but short-sighted. He is abashed by no inconsistency, disturbed by no contradiction, and can defend, with a firm countenance, without the least misgiving, what everybody but himself sees to be a political fallacy or logical absurdity.... He is no more disturbed by being convinced of moral insensibility, than intellectual absurdity.... A man of rare abilities, but apparently void of both moral and intellectual conscience.... He is, therefore, a man whom no power under that of the Almighty can restrain; he must needs be the most dangerous man to be placed at the head of affairs it is possible to conceive. "

The Boston Pilot, another Catholic organ, published under the eye of theBishop, discloses _the same plot_, in its issue for the 31st of October, 1844, only six days before the election! Here is what this organ said:

 "We say to all men in the United States, entitled to be naturalized, become citizens while you can--let nothing delay you for an hour--let no hindrance, short of mortal disease, banish you from the ballot-box. To those who are citizens, we say, vote your principles, whatever they may be--never desert them--do not be wheedled or terrified--but vote quietly, and unobtrusively. Leave to others the noisy warfare of words. Let your opinions be proved by your deliberate and determined action. We recommend you to no party; we condemn no candidate but one, and he is Theodore Frelinghuysen. We have nothing to say to him as a Whig--we have nothing to say to Mr. Clay or any other Whig, as such--but to the President of the American Board of Foreign Missions, the friend and patron of the Kirks and Cones, we have much to say. We hate his intolerance--we dislike his associates--and shudder at the blackness and bitterness of that school of sectarians to which he belongs, and amongst whom he is regarded as an authority. "

Protestants! do you hear that? Old Line Whigs! do you hear that? If so, do you think that Americans are warring upon civil and religiousliberty, when they take an oath that they will rebuke such infamoussentiments? These appeals of Brownson, Hughes, and the Pilot, had theeffect to defeat the Clay ticket in New York, and that State lost himhis election. The Catholics were all at the polls, and voted for Polkand Dallas. On the 9th of November, 1844, Frelinghuysen wrote to Mr. Clay as follows:

 "More than 3, 000, it is confidently said, have been naturalized in this city (New York) alone since the first of October. It is an alarming fact that this foreign vote has decided the great questions of American policy, and contracted a nation's gratitude. "

And after they achieved the victory of 1844, Brownson came out with thisavowal:

 "Heretofore we have taken our politics from one or another of the parties which divide the country, and have suffered the enemies of our religion to impose their political doctrine upon us; but it is time for us to begin to teach the country itself those moral and political doctrines which flow from the teachings of our own Church. We are at home here, wherever we may have been born; this is our country, and as it is to become THOROUGHLY CATHOLIC, we have a deeper interest in public affairs than any other of our citizens. The sects are only for a day; the Church for ever. "

When Gen. Cass made his speech in the Senate, in 1852, in favor of freeworship and the rights of conscience for Americans abroad, reflecting onthe Catholics by name, Brownson came out in his October number, andsaid:

 "We are glad to see Gen. Cass laid on the shelf, for we can never support a man who turns radical in his old age. "

In the same number, Brownson continues:

 "The sorriest sight to us is a Catholic throwing up his cap and shouting, 'All hail, Democracy!'"

This too at the very time he was supporting the Democratic party in thePresidential contest! He would sooner have heard the cry, "All hail, Catholicism!" and he was only using Democracy as an instrument toadvance his primary wish!

We offer no comments on the foregoing extracts, of our own, but leaveevery reader to judge for himself. The price of liberty is eternalvigilance. We apply the remark to religious as well as civil liberty. All we ask of the people is to be vigilant. Do not support men at theballot-box who are in league with these enemies of our Republic, and ofthe Protestant religion!

Behold the enemy is at our gates! A foreign priest has been lecturinghere in Knoxville, within the last ten days, avowing sentiments similarto these, and claiming that this country would ultimately become aCatholic country! The crisis is approaching! Rouse up, Americans, andhasten to your country's salvation! Not a moment is to be lost! GOD ANDOUR COUNTRY, must be the watchword of every Christian and patriot, ofevery political party in the land. America expects us all to do ourduty!

And is there no cause for alarm?

Eighteen months ago, a Protestant minister, Baptist, Methodist, orPresbyterian, might expose Romanism, and warn his congregation againstits corrupting influences, for hours at a time--come down out of hispulpit, and his congregation would, without distinction of party, say, "Well done, good and faithful servant!"

But let him now dare _allude_ to Romanism--he offends one-half of hiscongregation--he is _preaching_ politics--they will hear him no more; orforsooth, which is more common, they will withhold his support andstarve him out! Are not these signs alarming?

But here in Tennessee, _Protestant_ Tennessee, on the 15th of May, 1855, the _Nashville Daily Union_, the organ of the self-styledDemocratic party, came out at the Capital of the State with this daringbroadside against the Protestant clergy and their religion:

 "A Church that can boast of an existence of thirteen centuries--passing through all the various vicissitudes of her eventful career unscathed, can certainly show, with all her atrocious barbarity, many bright spots which may be placed in favorable contrast with the Protestant Church, with its thousand and one wrangling sects. Men are beginning to see through the transparent gauze that veils this Know-Nothing movement. They are beginning to ask 'What has Protestantism done for the world? What has she done to alleviate and elevate the down-trodden? Is the race any better off for having accepted her faith? THESE REVEREND HYPOCRITES--these scribes and pharisees, are treading on a terrible volcano. They will find their treasonable schemes and infernal plotting against the liberties of man tried and condemned by the pure light of God's own truth and love, which shines and throbs in every pulsation of humanity's heart. If Protestantism prove recreant to her high trust, she will have to pass the ordeal of enlightened public opinion and be consigned to her merited obscurity. 

 "Popery, with all its crimes against God and man, adapts itself to the times and to the circumstances, and thus saves itself from being absorbed in the mass of conflicting elements. "

THE CATHOLIC QUESTION--No. 4. 

 A Catholic Priest the Minister from the Rivas-Walker Government--Nicaragua, Texas, and Gen. Jackson--Bishop Hughes and Orestes Brownson--Buchanan bidding for the Catholic vote--A. H. Stephens, of Georgia--Lord Baltimore and Religious Toleration. 

Three months ago, PARKER H. FRENCH arrived in Washington, as theRepresentative of the Walker Government of Nicaragua--an American-borncitizen and a Protestant--but the Government declined to recognize him, upon the ground that Walker's Government was not established even _defacto_. Since then, our Government has recognized Walker's Government, and endorsed his war upon Costa Rica, although the former objection ofour Government lies with as much force against such recognition now asit did three months ago. That the approach of the Cincinnati Convention, and the importance of conciliating the "Young American" wing, and theFilibustering division of the Democratic party, had great influence inproducing this recognition, there can be no sort of doubt. But a stillmore palpable reason why this Government gave its sanction to theRivas-Walker Government is, that PADRE VIJIL, the second Minister senthere, is a ROMAN CATHOLIC PRIEST, and a shrewd Spaniard--betterunderstands the influences that prevail at Washington. When we rememberthat a Roman Catholic, and a member of the Order of Jesuits, is a memberof Pierce's Cabinet, the Postmaster-General--and when we remember thatDemocracy now, without the Catholic-Foreign vote, is almost a nullity inthe United States, we have a clear solution of this preference given theSpanish priest, PADRE VIJIL, over the American citizen, but a few weeksafterwards! As a sign of the times, the fact is one worthy of note. Itshows, at least, that when Protestantism cannot prevail with theAdministration of Pierce, Roman Catholicism can; and that hence, when weproclaim the power of the Pope, even in America, we but utterdemonstrable facts. Romanism is even carrying Democracy from all its oldwayside land-marks. In December, 1836, GEN. JACKSON sent a specialmessage to the Senate of the United States, in relation to a propositionto recognize the new Government of Texas, and he gave reasons _against_it, which are exactly applicable to this Rivas-Walker affair:

 "Upon the issue, " he says, "of this threatened invasion by Mexico, the independence of Texas may be considered as suspended; and were there nothing peculiar in the relative situation of the United States and Texas, our acknowledgments of its independence at such a crisis could scarcely be considered as consistent _with that prudent reserve with which we have heretofore held ourselves bound to treat all similar questions_. "

The existing Government of Nicaragua is in a far more critical conditionnow than that of Texas was in 1836, when Gen. Jackson went on to say:

 "It becomes us to beware of a too early movement, as it might subject us, however unjustly, to the imputation of seeking to establish the claim of our neighbors to a territory, with a view to its subsequent acquisition by ourselves. Prudence, therefore, seems to dictate that we should still stand aloof, and maintain our present attitude, if not until Mexico itself, or one of the great foreign powers, shall recognize the independence of the new Government, at least until the lapse of time or the course of events shall have proved, beyond cavil or dispute, the ability of the people of that country to maintain their separate sovereignty, and to uphold the Government constituted by them. Neither of the contending parties can justly complain of this course. By pursuing it, we are but carrying out the long-established policy of our Government--a policy which has secured to us respect and influence abroad, and inspired confidence at home. "

But Romanism is rapidly leading Democracy to the Devil! ArchbishopHughes--the head and front of the Papal Hierarchy in this country--hasopenly declared the grand aim and object of the Catholic Church is "TOMAKE ROME THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FOR THE WHOLE WORLD!" This sameArchbishop is now engaged in raising an immense fund, for the avowedpurpose of ESTABLISHING A COLLEGE IN ROME, for the education of a highorder of Priests and Jesuits for the United States; the Roman Pontiffdeeming the education of Priests defective if obtained in this land ofliberty! This same Archbishop Hughes has now actively enlisted for thePresidential contest, for 1856, in order, to use his own language, "TOBREAK THE SPINAL CORD OF THE AMERICAN PARTY. " The Irish Catholic vote isto be fused with the Black Republicans in the North, to prevent thesuccess of the Fillmore ticket, and the Irish and German Catholic voteis to be cast for Democracy in the South and North-West--the Archbishopstipulating for special legislation for Rome, and for promoting thismammoth college!

ORESTES BROWNSON, a leading Catholic authority, and the editor ofArchbishop Hughes's organ--one of the most zealous as well as ableadvocates of Romanism in America--declares: "THE POPE IS MY INTERPRETEROF THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES!" The Supreme Court atWashington is subordinate to the Vatican, situated at the foot of oneof the seven hills upon which Rome is built! Through the influence ofthe _Jesuit_ who is a member of Pierce's cabinet, the Papal Nuncio, whowas sent from Rome two years ago, clothed with _foreign_ authority, wasreceived by our government at Washington, and sent around the lakes tothe North-West at government expense; and allowed to adjudicate upon asecular question AFFECTING TERRITORIAL JURISDICTION in the great Stateof New York!

Mr. Buchanan, one of the several candidates before the CincinnatiConvention for the Presidential nomination, said, in a public speech inBaltimore, just before the meeting of that Convention, _by way ofbidding for the Catholic vote_:

 "In the age of religious bigotry and intolerance, Lord Baltimore was the first legislator who proclaimed the sacred rights of conscience, and established for the government of his colony the principle, not merely of toleration, but perfect religious freedom and equality among all sects of Christians. "

Lord Baltimore was a Catholic; and with a view to enlist the sameinfluence, HON. ALEXANDER H. STEPHENS, of Georgia, sent forth apublished speech last summer, from which we make the following extract:

 "The Catholic colony of Maryland, organized under the auspices of Lord Baltimore, was the first to establish the principle of free toleration in religious worship on this continent. 

 "The Colony of Maryland afforded protection to _all_ persecuted sects. "

Now, in order to judge of Mr. Buchanan's "_perfect religious freedom andequality_, " and Mr. Stephens's "_principle of free toleration_, " let usexamine an Act passed April 21, 1649, when Lord Baltimore was in thezenith of his power:

 "Denying the Holy _Trinity_ is to be punished with _death_, and confiscation of land and goods to the Lord Proprietary (Lord Baltimore himself!) Persons using any reproachful words concerning the Blessed Virgin Mary, or the Holy Apostles or Evangelists, to be fined £5, or in default of payment to be publicly whipped and _imprisoned, at the pleasure of_ his Lordship, (Lord Baltimore himself!) or of his Lieutenant-General. " _See Laws of Maryland at large, by T. Bacon, A. D. 1765. _ _16 and 17 Cecilius's Lord Baltimore_. 

S. F. STREETER, Esq. , of Baltimore, is the author of a work entitled"_Maryland two hundred years ago_. " In this work, at page 26, Mr. Streeter says:

 "The policy of Lord Baltimore, in regard to religious matters in his colony, has, in some particulars at least, been misapprehended and therefore misstated. The assertion has long passed uncontradicted, that toleration was promised to the colonists in the first conditions of plantation; that the rights of conscience were recognized in a law passed by the first assembly held in the colony; and that the principal officers from the year 1636 or '37, bound themselves by on oath not to molest on account of his religion any one professing to believe in Jesus Christ. I can find _no authority_ for _any_ of these statements. Lord Baltimore's first and earlier conditions of plantation breathe not a word on the subject of religion: no act recognizing the principle of toleration was passed in the first or in any following assembly, until fifteen years after the first settlement, at which time (1649) a Protestant had been appointed Governor, and a majority of the Burgesses were of the same faith; and when, _for the first time_, a clause involving a promise not to molest any person professing to believe in Jesus Christ, the words "and particularly a Roman Catholic, " were inserted by the direction of Lord Baltimore in the official oath. "

McMahon, the tried friend of Lord Baltimore, speaking on this samesubject, says:

 "The proprietary dominion (Lord B. 's) had never known that hour, (when there was opportunity to persecute. ) The Protestant religion was the established religion of the mother country, and any effort on the part of the Proprietary (Lord B. ) to oppress its followers would have _drawn down destruction on his government_. The _great body_ of the colonists were themselves Protestants, and, by their _number_ and their participation in the government, they were fully equal to their own protection, and _too powerful_ for the Proprietaries in the event of an open collision. "

Thus it will be seen that in Maryland, as everywhere else, in all pastages, so far as toleration is concerned, it was granted _to_Catholics--never _by_ them. 

THE CATHOLIC QUESTION--No. 5. 

 Popish aims at supremacy--Avowals by distinguished Catholics--The order of Jesuits--Startling disclosures and authentic references!--The strength of Romanism in the United States!

The Romish hierarchy aims at supremacy in the Church and the State. Itis nothing more nor less than a great _political_ system, arrogating toitself the right to sway the spiritual and temporal concerns of men--aright it claims to have derived from God, and that therefore the RomishChurch is above all, and may rule all. Hence the conspiracy against ourgovernment emanating from the Vatican, and planned by the Pope, hisCardinals and Bishops, in the late grand council at Rome! They there andthen resolved on affecting the objects of the _Leopold Foundation_, established in Vienna, May 13, 1829, to support Catholic missionaries inthe United States. Every member of this Society--and its branches arenumerous, being scattered over the whole earth--agrees to offer prayersdaily to _St. Leopold_, and every week to contribute as much as a_crucifix_. The valley of the Mississippi has been surveyed and mappedby the Jesuits, under the directions of the Vatican, and PopishCardinals in Europe are boasting of the certainty of their subjectingthis land of freedom at no distant day to papal supremacy! Rev. Dr. JAMES, an eminent clergyman of England, says:

 "The Church of Rome has determined to compensate herself for her losses in the old world, by her conquest in the new. "

Hence, too, a Papal editor in Europe conducting a Catholic organ, andadvising vigorous measures for the extension of Papal power, says:

 "We must make haste--the moments are precious--America may become the centre of civilization. "

The Rev. Dr. Reze, of Detroit, a priest of distinction, who is now incustody at Rome, a few years since, writing from Michigan to his master, the Pope, says:

 "We shall see the truth triumph--the temple of idols overthrown--the seat of falsehood brought to silence--and all the United States embraced in the same faith of that Catholic Church, wherein dwell truth and temporal happiness. "

A Catholic priest in Indiana told a Protestant minister, an ableMethodist clergyman, in a controversy, "The time will come whenCatholics will make Protestants wade knee-deep in blood in the valley ofthe Mississippi!"

Bishop England, one of their master-spirits in this country, in a letterto the Pope written from Charleston, and which was so good that hisHoliness caused it to be published, said:

 "Within thirty years, the Protestant heresy will come to an end. If we can secure the West and South, we will take care of New England. "

This same dignitary said to his brethren at Vienna in that memorableletter, by way of advice and encouragement:

 "All that is necessary is money and priests, to subjugate the mock liberties of America. "

The Jesuits profess to be a more devoted branch of the Pope's army thanany other order. The Abbe De Pradt, formerly Roman Archbishop atMalines, calls them "the Pope's zealous militia:" another correctlycalls them "the Pope's body-guard, organized for the express purpose ofdefending the Papal See, and undertaking a spiritual crusade againstheretics. " Pius VII. , in his Bull of August 7, 1814, reëstablishing theorder, which Clement XIV. Had suppressed, says: "We would be guilty of agreat crime, " if, amid the dangers threatening the Papal interests, and"if, placed in the barque of Peter, tossed and assailed by continualstorms, we refused to employ the vigorous and experienced rowers whovolunteer their services in order to break the waves of a sea whichthreatens every moment shipwreck and death. "

The presumption is, that "these vigorous and experienced rowers who thusvolunteer their services, " have some moving principle, some hiddenspring, which moves with that oneness and constancy under alldiscouragements. The watch does not show the spring that sets it inmotion: who that looks at its face and observes the movement of thehands will doubt that it is there, and that they move in proportion tothe strength or weakness of that spring?

The old Romans used to swear their soldiers: the Roman Church swearseven her private members. Read the following from the creed: "I solemnlypromise, vow, and _swear_ true obedience to the Roman bishop, " &c. "Thistrue Catholic faith, out of which there is no salvation, &c. --I promise, vow, and _swear_ most constantly to hold and profess the same, whole andentire, with God's assistance, to the end of my life, and procure, asfar as lies in my power, that the same shall be held, taught, andpreached by all who are under me, " &c. "I also profess and undoubtedlyreceive all other things delivered, defined, and declared by the sacredcanons and general councils, and particularly by the holy Council ofTrent; and, likewise, I also condemn, reject, and anathematize allthings contrary thereto, and all heresies whatsoever, condemned, rejected, and anathematized by the Church. "

The Jesuits are more strict, subservient, devoted to the Vatican, thanany other wing of the Catholic Church. In the second volume of theconstitutions of the Jesuits, under the heading of _obedience tosuperiors_, is written:

 "You shall always see Jesus Christ in the General. "

 "You shall obey him in every thing. Your obedience shall be boundless in the execution, in the will and understanding. You shall persuade yourselves that God speaks in his mouth: that when he orders, God himself orders. You shall execute his command immediately, with joy and with steadiness. "

 "You shall be in his hands a dead body, which he will govern, move, place, displace, according to his will. "

Under these teachings, says ARNAULD, a student in a college of Jesuitsstated, on hearing of the implicit obedience of another:

 "I would have done still more. Were God to order me, through the voice of my superior, to put to death father, mother, children, brothers, and sisters, I would do it with an eye as tearless and a heart as calm as if I were seated at the banquet of the Paschal lamb. "

Andrew B. Cross, of Baltimore, in a recent publication, says:

 "As early as 1624, the University of Paris charged them with being governed by 'secret laws. ' In 1649, Palafox, Bishop of Angelopolis, in his letter to Innocent X. , accuses them of having 'a secret constitution, hidden privileges, and concealed laws of their own. '"

What will our Democratic Protestant opposers of Know Nothing _secretlodges_ say to this? What will our Democratic advocates of Popery say tothe principles of such an organization, and to its "horrible oaths?" Buthear the Roman Catholic King of Portugal, in his manifesto to hisBishops, in 1759, only ninety-seven years ago:

 "In order to form the union, the consistency, and the strength of the society, there should be a government not only monarchical, but so sovereign, so absolute, so despotic, that even the Provincials themselves should not have it in their power, by any act of theirs, to resist or retard the execution of the orders of the General. By this legislative, inviolable and despotic power; by the profound devotedness of the subjects of this company to mysterious laws with which they are not themselves acquainted; by the blind and passive obedience with which they are compelled to execute, without hesitation or reply, whatever their superiors command, " &c. 

But our Democratic anti-Know Nothings not only object to our havingformerly kept our ritual concealed, but especially to our denial of theexistence of our organization. Let them procure a copy of the secretinstructions of the Jesuits, styled "_Secreta Monita_, " and in thepreface they will find these _lovely_ words:

 "The greatest care imaginable must be also taken that these instructions do not fall into the hands of strangers, &c. ; if they should, _let it be positively denied that these are the principles of the society_, " &c. 

But again:

 "Auquetil, in the fourth volume, page 333, of his History of France, gives an account of the celebrated case of the bankruptcy of the Rev. Father Jesuit La Valette, the Jesuit agent, for three million francs. Their ships had been taken by the English; the bankers in Marseilles, who had accepted bills of exchange to the amount of one and a half millions, required prompt payment. They wrote to De Sacy, the General Procurator of the Missions; he wrote to the General at Rome, but the General died at the same time; and before a new General could be elected, and an order sent to pay the money, the Fathers had become bankrupt, and suits were instituted. After delay and manoeuvre on their part, the case came on unexpectedly in 1760. All the Jesuits were accused. They tried to lay the guilt upon La Valette, but the bankers charged that all the Jesuits were under the General, and La Valette was only agent. In this sad condition they proposed to prove, according to their constitutions, that as a society their body possessed nothing, that all belonged to each college-house, convent, &c. The proposal of the Jesuits was accepted. On the 8th of May, 1761, after trial, the Parliament condemned the General and all the society to pay bills, costs, damages, &c. , which they did without selling any of their property. 

 "It was in this evil hour to the Jesuits that their constitutions, which had been acted upon for two hundred years in secret, were brought to light. Rules and constitutions maybe in existence and acted upon, when it would be impossible to obtain a copy from any one who was sufficiently advanced in the order to be trusted with a copy. "

It will astonish American Protestants to be told how numerous, influential, and strong the Catholics are in this land of liberty! Theyhave 7 archbishops, 40 bishops, 1704 priests, 1824 churches, 21colleges, 37 ecclesiastical institutions for the education of priestsand Jesuits, 117 female academies, all of which are, in reality, _Convents_. Nuns, priests, and Jesuits are the professors, teachers, andmatrons; and, strange to say, _Protestant_ young ladies are their chiefsupporters!

The Romish Hierarchy is far more numerous in _Protestant_ America, thanin any Catholic country on earth. Their strength in America equals whatit is in Ireland, Scotland, and England combined! How extensive is thisreligious organization in our land: how subtle! Its ramifications areall so many _arteries_, which receive their life's blood from the heartat Rome, and return it there by its regular palpitations! It is nowconcentrating its _arteries_ at Washington City, and is promised "aidand comfort" from the great Democratic party--a party fast becoming thefoe of true liberty, and of the evangelical Protestant faith. 

THE CATHOLIC QUESTION--No. 6. 

 The Oath of a Bishop--Oath of a Priest--Oath of a Jesuit--Oath of a San Fedisti--Oath of an Irish Ribbon-man--The Romish Curse!

In this chapter we will exhibit the "_horrible oaths_" of the variousgrades of Catholics, from a _Bishop_ down to a _private member_--even tothe "Irish Ribbon-men, " thousands of whom swarm the United States. Tothese we will add the oath of the "Order of San Fedisti, " an infamoussecret society established in Italy, and introduced for the first timeinto this country by that prince of murderers, _Bedini_, the Pope'sNuncio; who was honored with a steamer at the expense of our government, Pierce at its head, to sail round our northern lakes, organizing theseinfamous societies. Last of all, we give the ROMISH CURSE, which is infull force and power in all Catholic countries, and is even pronouncedpublicly in our large cities, upon renegades from the Catholic faith. 

These oaths will be found commencing on page 42 of "A Treatise of thePope's Supremacy. By REV. ISAAC BARROW, D. D. Second American Edition, 1844. " By this author, the Latin is given and then translated. The same, in part, will be found in the debate between MR. BRECKENRIDGE, of thePresbyterian Church, and ARCHBISHOP HUGHES, and by the latter publiclyacknowledged to be genuine, before a Baltimore audience who heard thediscussion!

But these particular forms of oaths in question, which recklessCatholics and unprincipled Democrats deny, were published in England byArchbishop Usher, whose correctness and reliability is equal to that ofany man. These oaths will be found in a volume entitled "Foxes andFirebrands, " from a collection of papers by Archbishop Usher, and it isthere stated that "it remains on record at Paris, among the Society ofJesus, " and was drawn up in that form to URBAN VIII. , in 1642, when herevived the bull of Pious V. , which had slumbered seventy-three years. These oaths, as published, contain nothing which is not taught by Popesand Councils, Priests and Jesuits. Examine these _oaths_, and this_curse_, and answer us the question, Can men taking them, andsubscribing to their doctrines, make citizens of this Republic?

OATH OF THE BISHOPS. 

 "I, G. N. , elect of the church of N. , from henceforth will be _faithful_ and obedient to St. Peter the Apostle, and to the holy Roman Church, and to our lord, the lord N. Pope N. , and to his successors canonically coming in. I will neither advise, consent, nor do any thing that they may lose life or member, or that their persons may be seized or hands anywise laid upon them, or any injuries offered to them, under any pretence whatsoever. The counsel which they shall intrust me withal by themselves, their messengers, or letters, I will not knowingly reveal to any to their prejudice. I will help them to defend and keep the Roman Papacy and the royalties of St. Peter, saving my order against all men. The legate of the Apostolic see, going and coming, I will honorably treat, and help in his necessities. The rights, honors, privileges, and authority of the holy Roman Church, of our lord the Pope, and his aforesaid successors, I will endeavor to preserve, defend, increase, and advance. I will not be in any council, action, or treaty, in which shall be plotted against our said lord and the said Roman Church, any thing to the hurt or prejudice of their persons, right, honor, state, or power; and if I shall know any such thing to be treated or agitated by any whomsoever, I will hinder it all that I can; and as soon as I can, will signify it to our said lord, or to some other, by whom it may come to his knowledge. The rules of the Holy Fathers, the Apostolic decrees, ordinances, or disposals, reservations, provisions, and mandates, I will observe with all my might, and cause by others. Heretics, Schismatics, and Rebels to our said lord, or his aforesaid successors, I will to the utmost of my power persecute and oppose. I will come to a council when I am called, unless I am hindered by a canonical impediment. I will, by myself in person, visit the threshold of the Apostles every three years; and give an account to our lord, and his aforesaid successors, of all my pastoral office, and of all things anywise belonging to the state of my church, to the discipline of my clergy and people, and, lastly, to the salvation of souls committed to my trust; and will, in like manner, humbly receive and diligently execute the Apostolic commands. And if I be detained by a lawful impediment, I will perform all things aforesaid by a certain messenger hereto specially empowered, a member of my Chapter or some other in ecclesiastical dignity, or else having a parsonage; or in default of these, by a priest of the diocese; or in default of one of the clergy, (of the diocese, ) by some other secular or regular priest of approved integrity and religion, fully instructed in all things above mentioned. And such impediment I will make out by lawful proofs, to be transmitted by the aforesaid messenger to the Cardinal proponent of the holy Roman Church, in the Congregation of the Sacred Council. The possessions belonging to my table, I will neither sell nor give away, mortgage nor grant anew in fee, nor anywise alienate, no, not even with consent of the Chapter of my Church, without consulting the Roman Pontiff. And if I shall make any alienation, I will thereby incur the penalties contained in a certain Constitution put forth about this matter. 

 "So help me God, and these holy Gospels of God. "

OATH OF THE PRIESTS. 

 "I, A. B. , do acknowledge the ecclesiastical power of his holiness; and the mother Church of Rome, as the chief head and matron above all pretended churches throughout the whole earth; and that my zeal shall be for St. Peter and his successors, as the founder of the true and ancient Catholic faith, against all heretical kings, princes, states, or powers repugnant to the same; and although I, A. B. , may follow, in case of persecution or otherwise, to be heretically despised, yet in soul and conscience I shall hold, aid, and succor the mother Church of Rome, as the true, ancient, and apostolic Church. I, A. B. , further do declare not to act or control any matter or thing prejudicial unto her, in her sacred orders, doctrines, tenets, or commands, without leave of its supreme power or its authority, under her appointed; and being so permitted, then to act and further her interests more than my own earthly good and earthly pleasure, as she and her Head, his Holiness, and his successors have, or ought to have, the supremacy over all kings, princes, estates, or powers whatsoever, either to deprive them of their crowns, sceptres, powers, privileges, realms, countries, or governments, or to set up others in lieu thereof; they dissenting from the mother Church and her commands. "

OATH OF THE JESUITS

 "I, A. B. , now in the presence of Almighty God, the blessed Virgin Mary, the blessed Michael the Archangel, the blessed St. John the Baptist, the holy apostles St. Peter and St. Paul, and all the saints and hosts of heaven, and to you my ghostly father, do declare from my heart, without mental reservation, that his Holiness Pope ---- is Christ's Vicar General, and is the true and only Head of the Catholic or universal Church throughout the earth; and by the virtue of the keys of binding and loosing, given to his Holiness by my Saviour Jesus Christ, he hath power to depose heretical kings, princes, states, commonwealths, and governments, all being illegal without his sacred confirmation, and that they may safely be destroyed: THEREFORE, to the utmost of my power, I shall and will defend this doctrine, and his Holiness' rights and customs, against all usurpers of the heretical (or Protestant) authority whatsoever; especially against the now pretended authority and Church of England, and all adherents, in regard that they and she be usurpal and heretical, opposing the sacred mother Church of Rome, I do renounce and disown any allegiance as due to Protestants, or obedience to any of their inferior magistrates or officers, I do further declare the doctrine of the Church of England, the Calvinists, Huguenots, and of others of the name Protestants, to be damnable, and that they themselves are damned, and to be damned, that will not forsake the same. I do further declare, that I will help, assist, and advise all or any of his Holiness' agents, in any place wherever I shall be, in England, Scotland, and Ireland, or in any other territory or kingdom I shall come to, and do my utmost to extirpate the heretical Protestant's doctrine, and to destroy all their pretended powers, regal or otherwise. I do further promise and declare, that notwithstanding I am dispensed with, to assume any religion heretical, for the propagating of the mother Church's interest, to keep secret and private all her agents' counsels, from time to time, as they intrust me, and not to divulge, directly or indirectly, by word, writing, or circumstance, whatever, but to execute all that shall be proposed, given in charge, or discovered unto me, by you my ghostly father, or any of this sacred convent. All which, I, A. B. , do swear, by the blessed Sacrament I am now to receive, to perform, and on my part to keep inviolable; and do call all the heavenly and glorious host of heaven to witness these my real intentions to keep this, my oath. In testimony hereof, I take this most holy and blessed sacrament of the Eucharist, and witness the same further with my hand and seal, in the face of this holy convent this day--An. Dom. , etc. "

OATH OF THE SAN FEDISTI. 

 "I, Son of the Holy Faith, No. --, promise and swear to sustain the altar and the Papal throne, to exterminate heretics, liberals, and all enemies of the Church, without pity for the cries of children, or of men and women. So help me God. "

OATH OF THE IRISH RIBBON-MEN. 

 "I, Patrick McKenna, swear by Saints Peter and Paul, and by the blessed Virgin Mary, to be always faithful to the Society (of Ribbon-men); to keep and conceal all the secrets, and its words of order; to be always ready to execute the commands of my superior officers, and, as far as it shall lie in my power, to extirpate all heretics, and ALL THE PROTESTANTS, and to walk in their blood to the knee! May the Virgin Mary and all saints help me! To-day, the 2d of July, 1852. 

 "PAT. MCKENNA, _from Tydavenet_. "

The following are the curses pronounced by the Papal Church against allwho leave it for any Evangelical Church:

THE ROMISH CURSE. 

 "By the authority of God Almighty, the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, and the undefiled Virgin Mary, mother and patroness of our Saviour, and of all celestial virtues, Angels, Archangels, Thrones, Dominions, Powers, Cherubim, and Seraphim; and of all the Holy Patriarchs, Prophets, and of all the Apostles and Evangelists, of the Holy Innocents, who in the sight of the Holy Lamb are found worthy to sing the new song of the Holy Martyrs and Holy Confessors, and of all the Holy Virgins, and of all Saints together with the holy elect of God; may he, ----, be damned. We excommunicate and anathematize him from the threshold of the Holy Church of God Almighty. We sequester him, that lie may be tormented, disposed, and be delivered over with Dathan and Abiram, and with those who say unto the Lord: 'Depart from us, we desire none of thy ways:' as a fire is quenched with water, so let the light of him be put out for evermore, unless he shall repent him and make satisfaction. Amen!

 "May the Father, who creates man, curse him! May the Son, who suffered for us, curse him! May the Holy Ghost, who is poured out in Baptism, curse him! May the Holy Cross, which Christ, for our salvation, triumphing over his enemies, ascended, curse him!

 "May the Holy Mary, ever virgin and mother of God, curse him! May St. Michael, the advocate of the Holy Souls, curse him! May all the Angels, Principalities, and Powers, and all Heavenly Armies, curse him! May the glorious band of the Patriarchs and Prophets curse him!

 "May St. John the Precursor, and St. John the Baptist, and St. Peter, and St. Paul, and St. Andrew, and all other of Christ's Apostles together, curse him! And may all the rest of the Disciples and Evangelists, who, by their preaching converted the universe, and the holy and wonderful company of Martyrs and Confessors, who by their works are found pleasing to God Almighty, curse him! May the holy choir of the Holy Virgins, who for the honor of Christ have despised the things of the world, damn him! May all the saints from the beginning of the world to everlasting ages, who are found to be beloved of God, damn him!

 "May he be damned wherever he be, whether in the house, or in the alley, or in the water, or in the church! May he be cursed in living and dying!

 "May he be cursed in eating and drinking, in being hungry, in being thirsty, in fasting, and sleeping, in slumbering, and in sitting, in living, in working, in resting, and * * * and in blood-letting. 

 "May he be cursed in all the faculties of his body!

 "May he be cursed inwardly and outwardly! May he be cursed in his hair; cursed be he in his brains, and in his vertex, in his temples, in his eyebrows, in his cheeks, in his jaw-bones, in his nostrils, in his teeth and grinders, in his lips, in his shoulders, in his arms, in his fingers!

 "May he be damned in his mouth, in his breast, in his heart, and purtenances, down to the very stomach!

 "May he be cursed in his reins and his groins; in his thighs, in his genitals, and in his hips, and in his knees, his legs, and his feet, and toe-nails!

 "May he be cursed in all his joints, and articulation of the members; from the crown of his head to the soles of his feet may there be no soundness!

 "May the Son of the living God, with all the glory of His Majesty, curse him! And may heaven, with all the powers that move therein, rise up against him, and curse and damn him; unless he repent and make satisfaction! Amen! So be it. Be it so. Amen!"

Now, we ask all candid men whose eyes have not been blinded by the dustof Popery and Democracy, can a Bishop or Priest, a Jesuit or Catholic, with these oaths upon their souls, be true American citizens? Notwithout the guilt of perjury, as black as the altar of a RomanConfessional! And if guilty of such perjury, the penitentiary should betheir canonical residence for life! Strange to say, however, the ChiefJustice of the United States, Roger B. Taney, is a Roman Catholic! Gen. Pierce's Postmaster-General, James Campbell, is both a Roman Catholic, and a member of the Order of Jesuits, having taken this very oath! RomanCatholics are now on the Federal Bench in the United States: RomanCatholics fill the offices of Attorneys-general; Roman Catholicsrepresent this Government abroad; and Roman Catholics fill post-offices, land-offices, and a variety of offices at home, out of which Protestantswere driven by Pierce's Administration, to make room for them!

LETTER FROM THOMAS A. R. NELSON, ESQ. 

This gentleman, an able lawyer of East Tennessee, a member of thePresbyterian Church, and a member of the American party, was nominatedan Elector for the State of Tennessee at large, by the American StateConvention at Nashville, in February last. Though an ardent American--agreat friend of _Mr. Fillmore_--and a member of the late PhiladelphiaConvention, and aided in the nomination of _Maj. Donelson_, he has beenreluctantly compelled to decline the position of Elector. Under date ofMay 30, 1856, he addressed a letter of nine columns, of great force andability, to _Messrs. A. W. Johnson, Robert C. Foster, 3d. , John H. Callender, William N. Bilbo, Sam'l. Pritchett, and E. D. Farnsworth, State Executive Committee of the American Party, Nashville, Tennessee_, declining the position. Although we regret his inability to serve, as dothe whole party in this State, yet, if his letter could be placed in thehands of every voter in the State, we would be willing to risk thecontest without further discussion. Such is our estimate of thisdocument. For the benefit of "Old Line Whigs, " and such Democrats as aredisposed to excuse and apologise for Romanism, we give the fourconcluding columns of this letter. The five preceding columns are mainlyoccupied with an outline and defence of the action of the PhiladelphiaNominating Convention, and a discussion of the slaveryquestion--questions we had discussed in this work before this documentcame to hand. Mr. Nelson concludes thus:

 "The Foreigners and Catholics were directly appealed to in the Presidential elections of 1848 and 1852. Who does not remember that, immediately preceding the election in 1844, fraudulent naturalization papers were manufactured in New York? Who has forgotten the Plaquemines fraud in Louisiana? Who has not heard of the abuse of Mr. Frelinghuysen for no other cause than that he was the President of the American Bible Society?

 "But, without dwelling upon other illustrations, look to the Democratic platform of 1852, and read the 8th section of the third resolution, which is in the following words:

 "'That the liberal principles embodied by Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence and sanctioned in the Constitution, which makes ours the land of liberty and the asylum of the oppressed of every nation, have ever been cardinal principles in the Democratic faith, and every attempt to abridge the present privilege of becoming citizens and the owners of soil among us, ought to be resisted with the same spirit which swept the alien and sedition laws from our statute books. '

 "During the last election in Tennessee, it was often said by Democrats that they were just as much opposed to the immigration of foreign criminals and paupers as members of the American party, but would not attach themselves to the latter because of their objections to its organization. But the Democratic Platform of 1852 contains no exception against criminals and paupers. The naturalization laws have, in practice, been found inadequate to their exclusion, and the platform, in effect, avows unqualified adherence to them without _abridgement_ or modification. 

 "These laws are, in substance, declared to have '_ever been cardinal principles_ in the Democratic faith. ' By its own avowal, the Democratic party is responsible for giving encouragement to the whole policy of foreign immigration. If that policy has flooded the country with criminals and paupers; if it has produced riots and bloodshed in our large cities; if it has endangered the religious as well as the civil liberty of Protestants; if it has swelled the ranks of Abolition and fanned the flame of Agitation--the Democratic party, by its own avowal, is amenable at the bar of public opinion for these astounding and deplorable results. Reckless of consequences, it has persevered in a system hazardous to the stability of our institutions, because that system has annually swelled the number of its adherents, and increased the chances of its perpetual ascendency. 

 "Without adverting to the census tables, or repeating those familiar facts connected with the statistics of immigration which have been so extensively published, it is sufficient to observe that, under this continued patronage of the Democratic party, the immigration of foreigners has increased from a few thousands, twenty years ago, to nearly half a million in 1854. 

 "But the Democratic party cannot justly claim the exclusive honor of projecting or carrying out the system. More than twenty years ago, the Duke of Richmond declared, in substance, that he had conversed with most of the sovereigns and princes of Europe; that they were jealous of the influence of our republican institutions upon their own Government; that they did not expect to conquer us as a nation, but designed the subversion of our Government by the introduction of the low and surplus population of Europe among us; that 'discord, dissension, anarchy, and civil war would ensue, and some popular individual would assume the government and restore order, and the sovereigns of Europe, the emigrants, and many of the natives, would sustain him. ' He also said, in speaking of the United States, that 'the Church of Rome has a design upon that country, and it will, in time, be the established religion, and will aid in the destruction of that republic. '

 "These statements of the Duke of Richmond are abundantly corroborated by other declarations, as well as the most undeniable facts which have occurred since their promulgation. 

 "I have in my possession, among various others, two small books published by 'the American and Foreign Christian Union, ' 156 Chambers street, New York, the one entitled 'Foreign Conspiracy, ' the other, 'Startling Facts, ' both of which, as I infer from their contents, were written in the year 1834, long before the American party had an existence. The work entitled 'Foreign Conspiracy' is composed of a series of articles originally published, over the signature of Brutus, in the New York Observer. They now appear with the name of the author, SAMUEL F. B. MORSE. His object in writing the work was to arouse public attention to the efforts then being made in Europe to propagate the Catholic religion in the United States, and to show its danger to our republican institutions. He traces the origin of the Leopold Foundation in Austria, under the especial patronage of the Emperor at Vienna on the 12th May, 1829, and shows that one of its leading objects was 'to promote the greater activity of Catholic missions in America. '

 "The letter of Prince _Metternich_ to Bishop Fenwich, of Cincinnati, under date, Vienna, April 27, 1830, is set out at length; and, in that letter, the Prince informs the Bishop, among other things, that the Emperor 'allows his people to contribute to the support of the Catholic Church in America. ' Numerous quotations are made from the letters of Foreign Bishops in the United States to their patrons at home, and, among the rest, on page 85, is the following statement, made by one of them, in regard to the people of the United States: 'We entreat all European Christians to unite in prayer to God for the conversion of these unhappy heathen and obstinate heretics. ' But, forbearing to multiply quotations from this little work, admirable in most of its positions, my main object, in citing it, was to make the following extract, from page 15 of the preface, taken by the author from the lectures of the celebrated Frederick Schlegel, delivered at Vienna in 1828, where that distinguished foreigner says, 'The true nursery of all these destructive principles, the revolutionary school for France and the rest of Europe, has been North America. Thence the evil has spread over many other lands, either by national contagion or by arbitrary communication;' and also the following quotation, from page 118 of Mr. Morse's book: 'Austria, one of the Holy Alliance of sovereigns, leagued against the liberties of the world, has the superintendence _of the operations of Popery in this country_. '

 "In the tract entitled 'Startling Facts for American Protestants, ' written in the year 1834, by REV. HERMAN NORTON, Corresponding Secretary of the American Protestant Society, from pages 27 to 39, an account is given of a London pamphlet entitled 'New Plan of Emigration, ' the production of a Roman Catholic gentleman, a London Banker; in which a project for occupying the North Western States with the Roman Catholic population of Europe, is unfolded, together with _a map of the country_, and, among other things, it is said, on page 29: 'The first settlements should be made in those fertile prairie districts situated on the southern sides of the Canadian lakes, _where slavery is unknown_. On page 28, the objects of this society, as set forth in this pamphlet, are stated to be, "'1. To provide the means for colonizing the surplus Roman Catholic population of Europe in our Western States. 

 "'2. To do this in such a way as to create a large demand for articles of British manufacture. 

 "'3. _To make Romanism the predominant religion of this country. _'

 "The census tables will show that, since these plans were set on foot, in England and in Europe, to break down our government, there has been an astonishing increase in the foreign immigration to this country. Great as it was prior to the Revolutions in Europe in 1848, it has been amazingly augmented since that time. Millions of foreign money have been collected in Europe and expended since the organization of the society for the propagation of the faith, at Lyons in France, about the year 1822, in the United States. While an Austrian Emperor has had the charge, in a good degree, of the propagation of the Catholic religion in the United States, the public authorities in various parts of Europe have defrayed the expenses of their criminals and paupers to this country, as was clearly shown by Congressional investigations. 

 "What do these facts prove? Why, that the declaration of the Duke of Richmond, that the crowned heads of Europe intended to subvert our government, was true. What more do they prove? Why, that the effort to establish the Catholic religion in this country has, for more than twenty years, been conducted with steady perseverance, until the Catholics, who, in 1850, were more numerous, as the census compendium shows, than any one denomination of Methodists, are now no doubt stronger than all the Methodists put together, and stronger than any other denomination of Protestants. 

 "While these publications have been before the American people for more than twenty years, Democratic leaders have received, with open arms, the swarms of foreigners who have settled upon our shores. What care _they_ for the slavery question, when they have seen this foreign immigration, according to the plan concerted in England, settling in the non-slaveholding States, and every year increasing the Abolition power? What care they for the Protestant religion, if the Catholics can only give them the numerical strength at the ballot-box? What regard have _they_ for the preservation of our liberties, when European despots are seeking to undermine them, if those despots only send such myrmidons as will shout hosannas to Democracy and drive from the polls peaceful American citizens who oppose them? Is the preservation of the Union a matter of any consequence to them? Do they not in vision behold its scattered fragments and contemplate new confederacies, with hosts of new offices and millions of spoil?

 "Can any one doubt that the Democratic party is in league with all the dangerous elements that have disturbed and are continuing to disturb our once peaceful and happy country, and that they stickle at nothing when votes are at stake?

 "Look to their conduct in running Mr. Polk as a tariff man in the North, and an anti-tariff man in the South! Look to the two lives of Cass. Look to their equivocal position as to slavery and the Union. Look to their appeals to foreigners and Catholics by name in the elections of 1844 and 1852, and probably in 1848. Look to their alliance with Free Germans and Fourierites, Free Soilers and Secessionists. And, above all, look to the miserable cant with which they raise the hue and cry of persecution in favor of the Catholics, and, indirectly, deny to Protestant ministers the right to make war upon a huge corporation, calling itself a church, dealing in human souls, reeking with the blood of martyrs, and begrimed with more than ten centuries of oppression. 

 "No wonder that they have vilified and denounced the American party with every term of opprobrium that our vocabulary can furnish. No wonder they talk of dark lanterns and secret oaths and midnight assemblies. No wonder that they strive to frighten their followers with the notion that the American party is a raw-head and bloody bones, which should be shunned and avoided. For, if honest men of that party will only take the trouble to shake off the control of their leaders: to think, examine, to read, reflect, and act for themselves, there are thousands of Democrats in the South who would scorn, like the American party, an alliance with Abolitionists, and there are tens of thousands of Protestant Union-loving Democrats everywhere, who have only confided in, to be deceived and betrayed by, their leaders, and, if they discover, as it is hoped they will, that they have brought them to the crumbling verge of an awful precipice, they have patriotism enough and Protestantism enough to break away from them rather than make the awful plunge. 

 "I regret that I am admonished by the length to which I have extended this communication, that I cannot now discuss the Catholic question, as I had hoped to do at the outset, and I shall present only a few disjointed remarks in connection with it. 

 "The American party does not seek to impose any religious test such as prevailed in the reign of Charles II. , when two thousand Non-conformist ministers were driven from their pulpits, or such, as in the same reign, was imposed upon Roman Catholics and continued from 1673 to 1828. The American party does not propose that any religious test, of any kind, shall be imposed by law, upon any person whatever, but it does seek to organize a public sentiment on the Catholic question, just in the same mode that, in times past, parties have sought to organize public sentiment upon the tariff question--the bank question--the internal improvement question--the temperance question, and every other question which has been the subject of difference. If it is lawful to say, I will not vote for you because you are a Whig, it is equally lawful to say--I will not vote for you because you are a foreigner. If it is lawful to say, I will not vote for you because you are a Democrat, it is equally lawful to say, I will not vote for you because you are a Catholic. 

 "Neither does the American party propose, in the slightest degree, to interfere with any of the rights secured to Roman Catholics, in common with others, by the Constitution. If they choose to worship a great DOLL as the Virgin Mary--to burn tall wax-candles in daylight--to pray to God in an unknown tongue--to believe that a simple wafer is the actual body, and common wine the very blood of our Saviour--to enforce the celibacy of the clergy--to worship the host--to believe that old toe-nails and pieces of wood are precious relics--to prevent their people from reading the Bible--to refuse to send their children to Protestant schools--to retain the confessional and the nunnery--to pin their faith to unauthenticated traditions--to assert that theirs is the only true Church, and to perpetrate a thousand ridiculous mummeries--the members of the American party with one accord will say, molest them not, disturb them not, trouble them not; the religious privileges of this country are as free to them as they are to us, and we will not, by law or by violence, interrupt or interfere with them in the slightest degree. But knowing that the Catholic Church was for a thousand years allied to the State; that it claimed dominion, in temporal as well as spiritual affairs, over the kings of the earth; that it regards the Pope as the Vicegerent of the Almighty; that he wears the tiara as the symbol of his power in heaven, earth, and hell; that Romanists treat all other professions as heretics; that its Archbishops, Bishops and Priests are sworn to persecute all who differ with them; that the persecuting spirit of that Church has been displayed, for centuries, in the most odious acts of cruelty as well as the most despotic tyranny that ever cursed the earth; that fire and faggot, confiscation and torture have been its favorite weapons; that no age, or sex or condition has been exempt from its inhuman butcheries and demoniac lusts; that it exterminated the Albigenses and Waldenses; that it caused the gutters of Paris to run with human blood on St. Bartholomew's day; that it lighted the fires of Smithfield; that through the instrumentality of Tyrconnel and Catholic and Irish Rappadees, it perpetrated the inhuman atrocities of the Irish Massacres; that, it drove the Huguenots from France, and the Puritans from England; that it has delighted in the chains and dungeons of the Inquisition, and shouted, with fiendish exultation, at the cries and groans of the victims in the _auto da fe_; that no republican government has ever flourished under its sway; that it regards ignorance as the mother of devotion, and denies the obligation of an oath; that it gave rise to the Order of Jesuits, the most detestable sect that the earth has ever seen; that, in the midst of the blaze of the nineteenth century, it has burned the Bible in America and imprisoned men and women in Europe for no other offence than that of reading it; that, abusing the freedom of the press and speech secured in the United States, it unblushingly avows that all Protestantism is heresy--that it is a crime--and punished in _Christian countries like Spain and Italy_ as a crime; that it has banished the Bible from Protestant schools, when under its control; that it has intermeddled in political elections, and is struggling for political power; that it wears a mask and claims to be harmless in this country for present effect, although it has never renounced one of its dogmas in any authoritative mode; that it is typified, in the Bible, as the Man of Sin and the Great Whore of Babylon; that it comes to us as an angel of light, but is allied with the Prince of Darkness: knowing all these things, and believing that the Roman Catholic Church, now that it is covered with the broad wings of Modern Democracy, partakes of its meat and is pampered by its patronage, is, infinitely, the most dangerous political power with which the people of the United States have ever been compelled to grapple, the American party invites all who love national liberty more than Democracy; who prefer civil and religious freedom to the spoils of office; who revere the memory of Tyndale, Luther, and Calvin; of Cranmer, Latimer, and Ridley; of the seven Bishops; of Fox; of the Puritan fathers; of Wesley and Hall; of the Reformers and Protestants of every name, and, more than all, of our revolutionary ancestors, to burst the fetters of party and come to the rescue of their bleeding country, bleeding at every pore from wounds inflicted by Democratic hands, amidst the jeers of European despots, the shouts of foreigners in our midst, and the taunts and sneers of Catholics and Jesuits all around us!

 "Let not Protestant ministers be intimidated by the impudent assaults of a venal press, or the fierce denunciations of infuriated politicians, from doing their whole duty in the pulpit and at the polls. No Presbyterian has ever denied to a Methodist the right to question his religious faith, and no Methodist will dispute the right of other denominations to impugn his creed. Methodists have assailed the Presbyterian doctrine of election. Presbyterians, in turn, have assailed their ideas of perfection and falling from grace. Both have controverted the Baptists' views of immersion, and all have denied the Episcopalians' doctrine of _apostolic succession_. These and many other points of difference have, from the foundation of our government, often been the subjects of earnest, protracted, and excited discussion; but when did any American Protestant ever deny to another American Protestant the constitutional right to differ with him in opinion, and to express that difference through the press, in the pulpit, or any other constitutional mode? Yet, it has been reserved for Democratic presses to attempt, for electioneering purposes, to curb the free spirit of Protestant ministers: to denounce them as "REVEREND HYPOCRITES;" and, when beholding at home and abroad, on the land and on the sea, among Christians and Pagans, in the halls of legislation, in churches and schools, in free speech, and in a free press, and in ten thousand other forms, the magnificent and glorious results of the Reformation, to ask, with impudent assurance, 'WHAT HAS PROTESTANTISM DONE FOR THE WORLD?' Not satisfied with the storm of execration which such an infamous interrogatory produced, the Nashville Union and American, the leading Democratic paper in Tennessee, in a very abusive article entitled '_What has it accomplished?_' under date of April 26, 1856, thus speaks, among other things, of what he styles 'the Know Nothing Organization:'

 "'_It has done more than this: it has gone into the Church and_ CONVERTED THE PULPIT INTO A POLITICAL ROSTRUM--_it has turned the attention of the ministry from_ THE PEACEFUL PATHS OF CHRISTIANITY TO THE ARENA OF POLITICAL TURMOIL--_it has pulled down the banner of the Cross, and placed in its stead_ THE RED FLAG OF INTOLERANCE AND PROSCRIPTION. '

 "While Protestant ministers, in the enjoyment of the rights secured to them by the Constitution, have, as before stated, often engaged in controversies with each other as to their differences in matters of Church government and speculative faith, they have, with one accord, from the foundation of the government, preached and published their views against the Roman Catholic Church--which arrogates a superiority over them all, and stigmatizes them as sects--long before the American party ever had an existence. But because, in the course of events, it has become necessary for politicians to inquire what effect an acknowledgment of the temporal supremacy of the Pope may have upon our free institutions, the Democratic party--if it is to be judged of by its organ--would gag the Protestant clergy, deny to them a right which they have always exercised, and, if they dare to oppose the colossal strides of Rome, denounce them as having converted the pulpit into a _political rostrum_, ' and as having raised '_the red flag of Intolerance and Proscription_. '

 "It is not for me to prescribe, nor do I desire to dictate the duty of Protestant ministers; but if, in the combined efforts which the Catholics have been making under the patronage of European despots and noblemen, and the encouragement of Democratic demagogues in our own country, they see that this tremendous corporation has planted its footsteps in all our large cities--is possessing itself of the North-West and the Mississippi valley--and is encircling them, as it were, with a wall of fire: if they see that the newspapers and periodicals of that corporation have published doctrines in this free country which they would scarcely avow in the Roman Catholic countries of Europe: if, in one word, they believe that they are to be persecuted and exterminated by Catholics, or take care of themselves before it is too late--then Protestant ministers, agreeing as they do in all great doctrines, and differing only as to those which are not absolutely essential, will cease to disagree among themselves, at least until after they avert a common danger, and will rally as a band of brethren to resist, in such mode as they may deem proper, the encroachments and the insults of Rome, and all her satellites and allies. 

 "If I do not greatly err in the estimate which I place upon the Protestant clergymen of America, the Democratic party and the Catholics will discover, sooner or later, that the same spirit which caused the Protestant fathers to brave the perils of the BOOT and the STAKE: to stand, without flinching, before such miscreant judges as _Jeffreys_ and _Scroggs_: to yield two thousand pulpits and look beggary and starvation in the face, rather than compromise with conscience; and, above all, to risk the untried dangers of the ocean and settle among savages--will nobly animate their descendants, and they will act in a manner worthy of themselves and of the great cause which is intrusted to their keeping. 

 "Never was a more unfounded charge made against any party than that of _proscription_ against the American party. It is only the political feature--the allegiance to the Pope of Rome--which we have felt called upon especially to oppose: leaving it to Protestant ministers to expose, if they choose, the absurdity of Catholic theological tenets. 

 "It is a historical fact that the Romish clergy of France in 1682, under the lead of Louis XIV. , made a declaration that 'Kings and sovereigns are not subject to any ecclesiastical power by the order of God in temporal things, and their subjects cannot be released from the obedience which they owe them, nor absolved from their oath of allegiance. ' The doctrine of this declaration is called indifferently 'the Gallican, or the French, or the Cis-Alpine doctrine. That of the Court of Rome is called the Italian, or trans-Alpine doctrine. "

 "Under the solemn assurance of the Louisiana delegation that the native Catholics of Louisiana do not acknowledge the temporal supremacy of the Pope, they were admitted to representation in the American Council and Convention, and this fact abundantly proves that there is no desire to _persecute_ Catholics for their religion, but only a determination to resist their political doctrine, which, although denied by Mr. Chandler in Congress, has been incontrovertibly established by the history of that Church for ages, the avowals of Mr. Brownson, the rebuke of Mr. Chandler by the Dublin Tablet, and other overwhelming proofs. 

 "In concluding this letter, it would, perhaps, be proper to dwell upon the claims of Messrs. Fillmore and Donelson to the support of the American people of all parties; but their characters are so well known, and I have already so extended my remarks, that I deem it unnecessary to observe any thing more than that Mr. Fillmore, by the faithful discharge of his duty, won the most cordial approbation of his political enemies as well as political friends, and had the confidence of the whole country when he retired from office, and has done nothing since to destroy it; while Maj. Donelson, as our Minister to Texas, to Prussia, and to Denmark, sustained the dignity of our country and acquitted himself with honor--denounced the unhallowed proceedings of the Southern Convention--struggled manfully, as the Democratic editor of the Washington Union, in behalf of the Compromise, and never withdrew from it until May, 1852, when, so far as I understand his course from his public acts, being unwilling to 'blow hot and cold' on the slavery question, and to aid the Democratic party in wearing a Northern and a Southern face, he indignantly retired from it, and subsequently attached himself to the American party in the hope that it could carry on his most cherished object--the preservation of the Union. 

 "The object of selecting an old-line Whig and an old-line Democrat, was to nail to the counter the charge that the American party is the Whig party in disguise, and to induce, if possible, conservative men of both the old parties to unite and rescue the country from Democratic misrule. 

 "Hundreds, thousands of Democrats in Tennessee, acting upon their own impulses and without concert with their leaders, attached themselves to the American party, but under the abuse of the leaders withdrew from it. Although, personally, I have no claims upon the Democracy, and have been always opposed to that party, yet I would respectfully observe that first impressions are often the best, and if such Democrats will take the trouble faithfully and honestly to examine the questions of the day for themselves, uninfluenced by the dictation of party leaders on either side, they will, doubtless, find many and cogent reasons to return to their first love. 

 "But to such of the old-line Whigs as have not already gone over to the Democratic party, I do feel that I have the right through this or any other medium to address a few words. It is well known that I have been a Whig from my boyhood, and until I attached myself to the American party about twelve months ago; and that, in some form or other, I have labored in behalf of the Whig cause from my youth up--in good report and evil report, in prosperity and in adversity, and without fee or reward. And, with great deference to the opinions of others, I would inquire what has any old-line Whig to gain, either for his country or himself, by listening to the seductive flatteries of Democracy, as he looks upon the dismembered fragments of the Whig party, or sits, like Marius, amid the ruins of Carthage? What party is it that has brought about the desolation you behold? To whose strategy was it owing that the once impregnable city was betrayed and surrounded, and its lofty battlements levelled with the dust? What foul coalition circumvented you, and whose pestilential breath is now whispering in your ear? Has that party against which you have fought for twenty years--which you have regarded as essentially corrupt and dangerous to the Union--all at once, and by some magical and unknown process, been cleansed of its impurities, and does it stand before you clothed in a white and spotless robe? What are some of the reasons why you opposed it?

 "It denounced proscription for opinion's sake before it came into power, but kept the guillotine in continual motion afterwards. It rebuked any interference with the freedom of elections, and then denied its doctrine, and sought in countless ways to control them. It charged the administration of John Quincy Adams with reckless extravagance, and has expended as much, or nearly as much, of the public treasure in one year as he did in the course of his administration. It was favorable to _a_ bank, a judicious tariff, and internal improvements by the general government, but has crushed beneath its iron heel the whole American system. It promised a gold and silver currency, and told the farmers that they and their wives should have 'long silken purses, through the interstices of which the yellow gold would shine and glitter, ' but has given us instead more than thirteen hundred State bonds, with a capital of more than three hundred millions. It has united the purse and the sword by means of its odious Sub-Treasury. It trampled beneath its feet the broad seal of the State of New Jersey, and encouraged Dorr's rebellion. 

 "It annexed Texas and California, and has strengthened the Abolition power. It sustains the frequent use of the veto, and under the name of Democracy delights in the exercise of monarchical prerogative. It proclaimed in 1844 and 1845, that not a thimblefull of blood would be shed by any war growing out of the annexation of Texas, when that war sacrificed thousands of lives, and has cost us millions in money and land. It boasted, in regard to the Oregon question, that we must have '54° 40´ or fight, ' but swallowed its own words, and in later times has attempted to retrieve its courage by the sublime and magnificent bombardment of Greytown! It ordered General Taylor into the heart of the Mexican country with a feeble force, and when his victories had won the grateful plaudits of his countrymen, it had the unparalleled meanness, while he was still fighting our battles, to censure the capitulation of Monterey. It had the baseness to call General Scott from the head of a victorious army, and to attempt to disgrace him in the eyes of his own country and the world. It denounced Judge White as a renegade, General Harrison as a coward, Mr. Clay as a blackguard, and General Scott as a fool. And, without repeating what has been already urged in regard to its attitude upon the slavery question and the other topics that have been discussed, I submit to the old-line Whigs that there is no principle which the Democratic party sincerely holds in common with them, and that they should unite with us in the effort to man the ship of State with officers and men devoted to the Constitution and true to the Union, in the hope that it may be rescued from the whirlpools and breakers among which it has been so recklessly conducted. 

 "Having expressed myself with the independence which should characterize a freeman, I cannot expect that a party which has dealt in the most unmitigated denunciation of wiser and better men than myself, will permit my observations to pass with impunity, but I shall be amply compensated for their abuse if abler tongues and pens will improve upon these hurried remarks, and teach our Democratic traducers that they cannot continue, without just retaliation, their unjustifiable assaults upon the American party. 

 "Yours respectfully, "THOS. A. R. NELSON. "

PROSCRIBING FOREIGNERS--FOREIGN IMMIGRATION--FOREIGN PAUPERS ANDCRIMINALS--FOREIGNERS ELECTED GEN. PIERCE--OPINIONS OF GREAT MEN. 

The issue which most disturbs the Sag-Nicht Foreign Catholic LocofocoDry-rot _patriots_, of the present day, in connection with theprinciples of the American party, is their _proscription_ offoreign-born citizens. If the reader will turn back to the PhiladelphiaPlatform, and consult the 3d, 4th, 5th, and 9th sections of thatinstrument, it will be seen that the American party really proscribeonly those who are proscribed by the _Constitution of the UnitedStates_, and the laws defining the rights of foreign-born citizens. TheAmerican party demand the enactment of laws upon this subject more_definite_, and in accordance with the provisions of the Constitution. 

The only _positive_ work which the Constitution does, in regard toforeigners, is to _proscribe_. It contains but five clauses touching thesubject: four of these are PROHIBITORY, and the other is simply_permissive_. There is no guaranteeing clause whatever. We must bepardoned for recalling the very language of the Constitution--for inthis _progressive_ age, our "Young American" generation is fast losingsight of the plainest features of that document: which, withFillibustering, Fire-eating agitators, is _Old Fogyism_! Let theConstitution speak for itself:

Section 5, Article II. Of the Constitution says: "No person, except anatural-born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time ofthe adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office ofPresident. " That is proscription. 

Section 3, Article XII. , says: "No person constitutionally ineligible tothe office of President shall be eligible to the office ofVice-President of the United States. " That is proscription. 

Section 8, Article I. , says: "No person shall be a Senator who shall nothave attained the age of thirty years, and been nine years a citizen ofthese United States. " That is proscription. 

Section 2, Article I. , says: "No person shall be a Representative whoshall not have attained the age of twenty-five years, and been sevenyears a citizen. " This is proscription. 

These are the disabilities imposed upon Foreigners after they have beenmade citizens. But, more than this, the Constitution leaves itdiscretionary whether to make them citizens at all. It simply confersthe power--_simply permits_. Here is the remaining clause, to which wehave alluded:

Section 8, Article I. , says: "Congress shall have power to establish auniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject ofbankruptcies throughout the United States. "

But let us notice the matter of foreign emigration to this country. Inthat fragment of a nation, composed of three and a quarter millions, which accomplished the American Revolution, there were in the UnitedColonies, in the year 1775, just 20, 000 more foreigners than now comeinto this country in six months!

The progress of emigration into this country, as shown from the StateDepartment at Washington, is after this fashion:

In the year 1852, 375, 000In the year 1853, 368, 000In the year 1854, the returns of the first six monthswarrant the estimate for the entire year of 500, 000 ---------The aggregate, for the first four and a half years ofthis decennial term, is 1, 801, 000

There is no reason for believing that the vast immigrationof this year will diminish. In fact, there is nolimit to its rate of progress but the means of conveyance. Now, then, we have upon this basis an aggregatefor the six years and a half intervening betweenthis period and 1860, of 3, 250, 000 ---------Making for the current ten years, the astounding aggregateof 5, 051, 000

Let Americans charge continually that the righteous ground upon which itplants itself is, THAT AMERICANS SHALL RULE AMERICA. Let them point thevoters of the country to solid facts, from which there is no escape. Tell them that the emigration to this country, according to the Censusrecords at Washington, was:

 From 1790 to 1810 120, 000 " 1810 to 1820 114, 000 " 1820 to 1830 203, 979 " 1830 to 1840 778, 500 " 1840 to 1850 1, 542, 850

--and that statistics show that during the present decade, from 1850 to1860, in regularly increasing ratio, nearly four millions of aliens willprobably be poured in upon us. 

Point to the fact, that from this immigration spring nearly four-fifthsof the beggary, two-thirds of the pauperism, and more than three-fifthsof the crime of our country; that more than half the public charities, more than half the prisons and alms-houses, more than half the policeand the cost of administering criminal justice, are for foreigners, --andlet the demand be made, that national and State legislation shallinterfere, to direct, ameliorate, and control these elements, so far asit may be done within the limits of the Constitution. 

Let Americans everywhere, and at all times, charge home and force uponthe attention of the people the alarming fact that if immigrationcontinues at the above rates, in thirty years from this time thepopulation of this country will exceed that of France, England, Spain, Portugal, Sweden, and Switzerland, all combined; that in fifteen yearsthe foreign will outnumber the native population; that in 1854 thenumber of foreign immigrants was 500, 000, of which 307, 639 arrived atthe port of New York; that the white population of North Carolina isonly a little over 500, 000--so that enough come to settle a State aspopulous as North Carolina in a year. Set forth the statistical facts, as shown by the last Census, that the immigration of 1854 was more thanequal to the white population of either one of eighteen States of thisUnion; and in proof, point them to the following startling facts:

A. Table comparing the white population of the States thereinenumerated, with the foreign immigration of 1854, and showing the excessof foreign immigrants for this year above the respective population ofthe several States. 

 White population. Excess ofStates. Immigrants. Arkansas 162, 189 337, 811Alabama 426, 514 73, 486California 91, 635 418, 365South Carolina 274, 563 226, 437Connecticut 363, 099 136, 901Delaware 71, 169 328, 831Florida 47, 203 452, 717Iowa 191, 881 308, 119Louisiana 225, 491 374, 509Maryland 417, 943 82, 057Michigan 395, 071 104, 929Mississippi 295, 718 204, 282New Hampshire 317, 456 182, 514New Jersey 465, 509 34, 491Rhode Island 143, 875 356, 125Texas 154, 034 345, 946Vermont 213, 402 186, 598Wisconsin 304, 756 195, 244

Analyze this table, and show from it that the foreign immigration of1854 was sufficient to have settled three States equal to Arkansas, three equal to Iowa, three equal to Texas, two to Louisiana, four toRhode Island, five to California, seven to Delaware, or ten to Florida;so that under the principle of the Kansas and Nebraska act, whileimmigrants continue pouring in upon us at the present rate, we may havewithin one year ten new States applying for admission into the Union, entitled to their twenty Senators in the United States Senate; and yetthis would be but the Senatorial representation of 500, 000 foreigners. 

Let the light of truth be heard upon the great question of immigration, and let the people see that if the ratio of immigration continues as ithas been since 1850, during the ten years from 1850 to 1860 there willhave come four millions of foreigners into this country--enough tosettle eighty States equal to Florida, thirty-two equal to Rhode Island, sixteen equal to Louisiana, or eight equal to Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Michigan, Mississippi, Vermont, Alabama, NewHampshire, or New Jersey. So the Senatorial representation of foreignersmay reach one hundred and sixty members in the United States Senate, andcannot be less than twenty in a body composed of but sixty-two membersrepresenting thirty-one States. 

UNITED STATES COAST SURVEY--FOREIGNISM AND NATIVEISM. 

The reader will find below a list of the names of the employees in theCoast Survey, classified according to birth, and their respectivesalaries:

Natives. Salary. | Foreigners. Salary. |E. Nutty $1, 200 | J. E. Hilgard $2, 200J. T. Hoover 600 | S. E. Werner 1, 419J. H. Toomer 519 | C. A. Schott 1, 500J. E. Blackenship 500 | J. Main 1, 100R. Freeman 350 | G. Rumpf 1, 000H. Mitchell 1, 000 | J. Weisner 900H. Heaton 700 | L. F. Pourtales 1, 500R. S. Avery 660 | S. Hein 2, 500J. Kincheloe 339 | J. Welch 1, 565G. C. Blanchard 339 | A. Brschke 1, 408R. E. Evans 339 | ---- Balback 639R. L. Hawkins 1, 200 | ---- Lendenkehl 782W. McPherson 700 | W. P. Schultz 704W. M. C. Fairfax 1, 800 | G. McCoy 2, 000M. J. McClery 1, 600 | A. Rolle 1, 700---- Poterfield 1, 000 | G. B. Metzenroth 1, 095L. Williams 860 | J. C. Koudnip 939John Key 782 | J. Rutherdall 526---- Martin 751 | J. Barrett 375B. Hooe 419 | J. Vierbunchen 1, 095F. Fairfax 500 | P. Vierbunchen 281H. McCormick 156 | T. Hunt 704E. Wharton 1, 100 | J. Missenson 626J. Knight 1, 700 | R. Schelpass 469F. Dankworth 1, 700 | C. Ramkin 313J. V. N. Throop 1, 252 | F. White 960R. Knight 939 | D. Flyn 600C. A. Knight 626 | T. Kinney 525G. Mathiot 1, 800 | C. Kraft 420S. Harris 519 | B. Neff 526S. D. O'Brien 1, 059 | A. Maedell 1, 095A. Geatman 704 | -------H. Tine 626 | $31, 867C. B. Snow 1, 000 |J. Smith 593 |G. Hitz 313 |J. Cronion 519 |A. W. Russell 1, 300 |---- Tansill 660 |V. E. King 720 |F. Holden 500 |J. Mitchell 331 |W. Bright 216 | ------- | $24, 429 |

The whole number of natives, 43; number of foreigners, 31. Amount paidnatives, $24, 429; amount paid foreigners, $31, 867. The average salary ofthe natives is $568 12 per year; of the foreigners, $1, 029 98 peryear--nearly double that of the natives. Is not this _favoritism_ to theforeigner, and _discrimination_ against the native? The disbursingofficer, S. Hein, receives $2, 500. 

The result of the last Presidential election was controlled by _foreignvotes_, beyond all question. Look at the figures--see how they footup--and see that the country is controlled by foreigners:

 Electoral Foreign Foreign Pierce's vote forStates. Population. Vote. Majority. Pierce. 

New York, 655, 224 93, 317 27, 201 35Pennsylvania, 303, 105 43, 300 19, 446 27Maryland, 51, 011 7, 287 4, 945 8Louisiana, 67, 308 9, 615 1, 392 6Missouri, 76, 570 10, 938 7, 698 9Illinois, 111, 860 15, 980 15, 653 11Ohio, 218, 099 31, 157 16, 694 23Wisconsin, 110, 471 15, 781 11, 418 5Iowa, 20, 968 2, 995 1, 180 4Rhode Island, 23, 832 3, 404 1, 109 4Connecticut, 38, 374 5, 482 2, 870 6Delaware, 5, 243 749 25 3New Jersey, 59, 804 8, 543 5, 749 7California, 21, 628 10, 000 5, 694 4 -------- ------- ------- ---- 258, 548 120, 094 152

RECAPITULATION. 

Pierce's vote, 1, 602, 663Scott's vote, 1, 385, 990 --------- 216, 673Foreign vote, 367, 320Pierce's majority, 216, 673 --------- 150, 647

The foreign vote exceeded Pierce's majority over Scott, 150, 647 votes. 

It is thus demonstrated that in each of these fourteen States theforeign vote was larger than the majority given for General Pierce; andit is also demonstrated that the aggregate foreign vote of thesefourteen States is more than twice the whole number of General Pierce'smajorities in said States. If even one-half of the foreign vote had beengiven to General Scott, he would have been elected instead of GeneralPierce!

The following New York City statistics set forth the amount of _crime_committed in that city for six months ending in June, 1855:

 "It appears that the number of arrests made during that time were 25, 110. Of these, no less than 9, 755 were for intoxication and disorderly conduct combined; and 7, 025 for crimes that had their origin in the dram-shops, to wit:

 "Assault and battery, disorderly conduct, vagrancy, &c. The greatest number of arrests were in June, showing that during the hot weather, as is generally the case, more liquor was drank. The birth-place of the criminals, for two months, was as follows:

 United States, 1, 750 Ireland, 5, 117 Germany, 1, 010 All other places, 4, 847

 "It needs no argument to prove if there had been no intoxicating liquor sold in that city, a large portion of the crimes and the misery resulting therefrom would have been prevented. "

MORE INSTRUCTIVE STATISTICS. --The Jersey City Sentinel of the 22d ult. Publishes statistics of crime and pauperism in Jersey City and HudsonCounty, as follows:

 "Number of inhabitants in Jersey City, 21, 000, viz. : natives, 13, 000; Irish, 5, 000; other foreigners, 4, 000. Number of persons who have been confined in the city prison, 4, 100, viz. : natives, 75; Irish, 3, 550; other foreigners, 475. Number of persons confined in the county jail at present, 68, viz. : natives, 2; Irish, 58: other foreigners, 8. Of 188 persons who have been inmates of the Almshouse, none have been natives, and no foreigners except Irish. Of 723 who received aid from the Poor-master, 2 were natives, and 721 were Irish. "

We will now submit, as authorities, some names which ought to haveweight with the American people, and which demonstrate, beyond allcontradiction, that we have had "Know Nothings" in our country informer days, if they were not called by that name! Here are the wordsand sentiments of these "dark-lantern patriots:"

 "Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence, (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens, ) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake. It is one of the most baneful foes of a Republican government. "--WASHINGTON. 

 "I hope we may find some hope in future of shielding ourselves from foreign influence, in whatever form it may be attempted. I wish there were an ocean of fire between this and the old world. "--JEFFERSON. 

 "Foreign influence is a Grecian horse to the republic: we cannot be too careful to exclude its entrance. "--MADISON. 

 "There is an imperative necessity for reforming the Naturalization Laws of the United States. "--DANIEL WEBSTER. 

 "It is high time we should become a little more Americanized, and instead of feeding the paupers and laborers of England, feed our own; or else, in a short time, by our present policy, we shall become paupers ourselves. "--ANDREW JACKSON. 

 "I agree with the father of his country, that we should guard with a jealousy becoming a free people, our institutions, against the insidious wiles of foreign influence. "--HENRY CLAY. 

 "Our naturalization laws are unquestionably defective, or our alms-houses would not now be filled with paupers. Of the 134, 000 paupers in the United States, 68, 000 are foreigners, and 66, 000 natives. The annals of crime have swelled as the jails of Europe have poured their contents into the country, and the felon convict, reeking from a murder in Europe, or who has had the fortune to escape punishment for any other crime abroad, easily gains naturalization here, by spending a part of five years within the limits of the United States. Our country has become a Botany Bay, into which Europe annually discharges her criminals of every description. "--JOHN M. CLAYTON, United States Senator. 

Forty years ago, this subject came up in the Congress of the UnitedStates, and that far-seeing statesman and patriot, JOHN RANDOLPH, ofVirginia, made a speech, from which we take the following extract:

 "How long the country would endure this foreign yoke in its most odious and disgusting form he could not tell, but this he would say, that if we were to be dictated to and ruled by foreigners, he would much rather be ruled by a British Parliament than by British subjects here. Should he be told that those men fought in the war of the Revolution, he would answer, that those who did so were not included by him in the class he adverted to. That was a civil war, and they and we were at its commencement alike British subjects. Native Britons, therefore, then taking arms on our side, gave them the same rights as those who were born in this country, and his motion could be easily modified so as to provide for any that might be of this description, but no such modification, he was sure, would be found necessary, for this plain reason, to wit:

 "Where were the soldiers of the Revolution who were not natives? They were either already retired or else retiring to that great reckoning where discounts were not allowed. If the honorable gentleman (opposing the proposition) would point his finger to any such kind of person now living, he would agree to his being made an exception to the amendment. It was time that the American people should have a character of their own, and where would they find it? In New England and in Virginia only, because they were a homogeneous race--a peculiar people. They never yet appointed foreigners to sit in that house (of Congress) for them, or to fill their high offices. In both States this was their policy: it was not found in, nor was it owing to their paper constitutions, but what was better, it was interwoven in the frame of their thoughts and sentiments, in their steady habits, in their principles from the cradle--a much more solid security than could be found in any abracadabra which constitution-mongers could scrawl upon paper. 

 "It might be indiscreet in him to say it, for, to say the truth, he had as little of that rascally virtue, prudence, he apprehended, as any man, and could as little conceal what he felt as affect what he did not feel. He knew it was not the way for him to conciliate the manufacturing body, yet he would say that he wished with all his heart that his bootmaker, his hatter, and other manufacturers, would rather stay in Great Britain, under their own laws, than come here to make laws for us, and leave us to import our covering. We must have our clothing home-made, (said he, ) but I would much rather have my workmen home-made, and import my clothing. Was it best to have our own unpolluted republic peopled with its own pure _native_ republicans, or erect another Sheffield, another Manchester, and another Birmingham, upon the banks of the Schuylkill, the Delaware, and the Brandywine, or have a host of Luddites amongst us--wretches from whom every vestige of the human creation seemed to be effaced? Would they wish to have their elections on that floor decided by a rabble? What was the ruin of old Rome? Why, their opening their gates and letting in the rabble of the whole world to be their legislators!"

 "If (said he) you wish to preserve among your fellow-citizens that exalted sense of freedom which gave birth to the Revolution--if you wish to keep alive among them the spirit of '76, you must endeavor to stop this flood of immigration! You must teach the people of Europe that if they do come here, all they must hope to receive is protection--but that they must have no share in the government. From such men a temporary party may receive precarious aid, but the country cannot be safe nor the people happy where they are introduced into government, or meddle with public concerns in any great degree. "

 * * * * *

 "This (said Mr. Randolph) is a favorable time to make a stand against this evil (immigration, ) and if not _this_ session, he hoped that in the _next_ there would be a revisal of the naturalization laws. "

A few short epistles from the pen of Gen. WASHINGTON, and we will closethis chapter. These we take from the "Papers of Washington by Sparks. "George Washington, justly styled the "father of his country, " was agreat and good man--a primitive Know Nothing--a praying Protestant--andwithal, the man who was "first in war, first in peace, and first in thehearts of his countrymen. " Here are the honest sentiments of this man:

 TO RICHARD HENRY LEE. 

 "MORRISTOWN, May 17, 1777. 

 "DEAR SIR:--I take the liberty to ask you what Congress expects I am to do with the many foreigners they have at different times promoted to the rank of field-officers, and, by the last resolve, two to that of colonels.... These men have no attachment nor ties to the country, further than interest binds them. Our officers think it exceedingly hard, after they have toiled in this service and have sustained many losses, to have strangers put over them, whose merit, perhaps, is not equal to their own, but whose effrontery will take no denial.... It is by the zeal and activity of our own people that the cause must be supported, and not by a few hungry adventurers.... 

 "I am, &c. , "G. WASHINGTON. "

[Vol. IV. , p. 423. ]

 * * * * *

 TO THE SAME. 

 "MIDDLEBROOK, June 1, 1777. 

 "You will, before this can reach you, have seen Monsieur Ducoudray. What his real expectations are, I do not know; but I fear, if his appointment is equal to what I have been told is his expectation, it will be attended with unhappy consequences. _To say nothing of the policy of intrusting a department, on the execution of which the salvation of the army depends, to a foreigner who has no other tie to bind him to the interests of this country than honor_, I would beg leave to observe that by putting Mr. D. At the head of the artillery, you will lose a very valuable officer in General Knox, who is a man of great military reading, sound judgment, and clear conceptions, who will resign if any one is put over him.... I am, &c. , "G. WASHINGTON. "

[Vol. IV. , p. 446. ]

 * * * * *

 TO GOUVERNEUR MORRIS, ESQ. 

 "WHITE PLAINS, July 24, 1778. 

 "DEAR SIR:--The design of this is to touch cursorily upon a subject of very great importance to the well-being of these States: much more so than will appear at first view. I mean _the appointment of so many foreigners to offices of high rank and trust in our service_. 

 "The lavish manner in which rank has hitherto been bestowed on these gentlemen, will certainly be productive of one or the other of these two evils--_either to make us despicable in the eyes of Europe, or become a means of pouring them in upon us like a torrent, and adding to our present burden_. 

 "But it is neither the expense nor trouble of them that I dread: there is an evil more extensive in its nature and fatal in its consequences to be apprehended, and that is the driving of all our own officers out of the service, and throwing not only our army but our military councils entirely into the hands of foreigners. 

 "The officers, my dear sir, on whom you must depend for the defence of this cause, distinguished by length of service, their connections, property, and military merit, will not submit much, if any longer, to the unnatural promotion of men over them who have nothing more than a little plausibility, unbounded pride and ambition, and a perseverance in application not to be resisted but by uncommon firmness, to support their pretensions: men who, in the first instance, tell you they wish for nothing more than the honor of serving in so glorious a cause as volunteers, the next day solicit rank without pay, the day following want money advanced to them, and in the course of a week want further promotion, and are not satisfied with any thing you can do for them. The expediency and the policy of the measure remain to be considered, and whether it is consistent with justice or prudence to promote these military fortune-hunters at the hazard of your army. 

 "Baron Steuben, I now find, is also wanting to quit his inspectorship for a command in the line. This will be productive of much discontent to the brigadiers. In a word, although I think the Baron an excellent officer, _I do most devoutly wish that we had not a single foreigner among us, except the Marquis de Lafayette_, who acts upon very different principles from those which govern the rest. Adieu. 

 "I am most sincerely yours, "G. WASHINGTON. "

[Vol. VI. , p. 13. ]

 * * * * *

 TO JOHN ADAMS, VICE-PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES. 

 "PHILADELPHIA, Nov. 27, 1794. 

 "DEAR SIR:--... My opinion with respect to immigration is, that except of useful mechanics and some particular description of men or professions, there is no need of encouragement. I am, &c. , "G. WASHINGTON. "

[Vol. XI. , p. 1. ]

 * * * * *

 TO J. Q. ADAMS, AMERICAN MINISTER AT BERLIN. 

 "MOUNT VERNON, Jan. 20, 1799. 

 "SIR:--... You know, my good sir, that it is not the policy of this country to employ aliens where it can well be avoided, either in the civil or military walks of life.... There is a species of self-importance in all foreign officers that cannot be gratified without doing injustice to meritorious characters among our own countrymen, who conceive, and justly, where there is no great preponderancy of experience or merit, that they are entitled to the occupancy of all offices in the gift of their government. 

 "I am, &c. , "G. WASHINGTON. "

[Vol. XI. , p. 392. ]

 * * * * *

 SAME DATE, TO A FOREIGNER APPLYING FOR OFFICE. 

 "DEAR SIR:--... It does not accord with the policy of this government to bestow offices, civil or military, upon foreigners, to the exclusion of our own citizens. Yours, &c. , "G. WASHINGTON. "

[Vol. XI. , p. 392. ]

 * * * * *

 INSTRUCTIONS OF THE SECRETARY OF WAR TO THE INSPECTOR-GENERAL. 

 "WAR DEPARTMENT, Feb. 4, 1799. 

 "... For the cavalry, for the regulations restrict the recruiting officers to engage none _except natives_ for this corps, and those only as from their known character and fidelity may be trusted. "

[From the Knoxville Whig for March, 1856. ]

WHO IS MILLARD FILLMORE?

A Brief history of the American nominee for the Presidency is this: Hewas born in the year 1800, in Cayuga county, New York, and is nowfifty-six years of age. His father was then, as he now is, a farmer, inmoderate circumstances; and now lives in the county of Erie, a shortdistance from Buffalo. The limited means of the family prevented the oldgentleman from giving his son Millard any other or better education thanwas obtained in the imperfect common schools of that age. 

In his sixteenth year, Mr. Fillmore was placed with a merchant tailornear his home to learn that business. He remained four years in hisapprenticeship, during which time he had access to a small library, improving the advantages it offered by perusing all the books thereincontained. Judge Wood, of Cayuga county, pleased with his intellectualadvancement, urged him to study the profession of the law; and as hispoverty was the only obstacle in his way, Judge Wood advanced him thenecessary means, relying upon his making a lawyer, and being able by thepractice of the profession to refund the money again. With a portion ofthis money young Fillmore bought his unexpired time, which was for thewinter, and he pursued his legal studies with energy and success, in theoffice of the noble Judge. 

In 1822, he removed to Buffalo, where he was admitted to the bar. Hisobject in removing to Buffalo was to complete his studies and to obtaina license. This accomplished, he removed to Aurora, not far from wherehis parents resided, and there commenced the practice of his profession. The confidence of his neighbors in his integrity and abilities was suchthat he found himself in the midst of a lucrative practice at once. In1826, he was married to Miss Powers, the daughter of a clergyman in thevillage of Aurora, and this excellent woman lived to see him electedVice-President of the United States. 

In 1829, Mr. Fillmore was elected from the county in which he marriedand where his parents lived to the General Assembly of New York, and forthree years continued a member of this body, distinguishing himself byhis energy, tact, and wisdom in legislation. Through his energy andspeeches, _Imprisonment for Debt_ was abolished, and this so increasedhis popularity throughout the State, that it was apparent that he couldbe elected to any office in the gift of the people of that State. 

In 1829, he was admitted a counsellor in the Supreme Court of New York, and in 1832 he removed to Buffalo, where he settled permanently andenlarged his practice as an attorney. In 1832, he was elected arepresentative in the 23d Congress, in which he served with industry andcredit to himself and his district. At the end of his term he renewedthe practice of the law, of choice, but, in 1836, was prevailed on toagain serve his district in Congress; and in the celebrated New Jerseycontested elections, distinguished himself. He was chosen to the nextCongress by the largest majority ever given to any man in the district;and as Chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means, acquired areputation that any man might be proud of. 

At the close of the 27th Congress, his friends were anxious for hiscontinuance in public life, but he declined. And in his address to hisconstituents, dated at Washington, July 11th, 1842, he says:

 "Pardon the personal vanity, though it be a weakness, that induces me to recur for a moment to the cherished recollections of your early friendship and abiding confidence. I cannot give vent to the feelings of my heart without it. It is now nearly fourteen years since you did me the unsolicited honor to nominate me to represent you in the State Legislature. Seven times have I received renewed evidence of your confidence by as many elections, and, at the expiration of my present term, I shall have served you three years in the State and eight years in the National Councils. I cannot recall the thousand acts of generous devotion from so many friends, without feeling the deepest emotions of gratitude. I came among you a poor and friendless boy. You kindly took me by the hand and gave me your confidence and support. You have conferred upon me distinction and honors, for which I could make no adequate return, but by honest and untiring effort faithfully to discharge the high trust which you confided to my keeping. If my humble efforts have met your approbation, I freely admit, next to the approval of my own conscience, it is the highest reward which I could receive for days of unceasing toil and nights of sleepless anxiety. I profess not to be above or below the common frailties of our nature. I will therefore not disguise the fact, that I was highly gratified at my first election to Congress; yet I can truly say that my utmost ambition has been gratified. I aspire to nothing more, and shall retire from the exciting scenes of political strife to the quiet employments of my family and fireside, with still more satisfaction than I felt when first elevated to distinguished station. "

During this same year he returned to the practice of his profession, and, in 1844, the Whig State Convention of New York put him innomination for the office of Governor, in opposition to Silas Wright. This was the only conflict in which he ever suffered defeat, and therace was close. In 1847, without seeking or desiring the highlyresponsible office, he was elected Comptroller of the Finances of theState, and removed to Albany, where he discharged the duties of theoffice with great credit to himself and usefulness to the State, resigning the office in February, 1849, to enter upon the duties of theoffice of Vice-President, to which he had been called by the election in1848. Gen. Taylor dying, he became President, and every patriot in theland remembers and admires the history of his administration. Gen. Cassand other distinguished Democrats said his career had been one ofgenuine patriotism, honor, and usefulness; and Gov. Wise, upon the stumpin Virginia, characterized it as "Washington-like;" while the Democraticpapers and orators, from Maine to California, declared that he ought tohave been nominated in lieu of Gen. Scott, because he was one of thebest men in America. 

He is now in Europe, familiarizing himself with the workings of thedespotic governments of that country. Before leaving, almost one yearago, he told his friends, in answer to questions relating to thepresidency, not to start any newspapers for his benefit--not to publishany documents--not to make any speeches, or even electioneer--and added, that if the American people nominated him, of their own free will andaccord, he would accept their nomination, and if elected, he would servethem to the best of his abilities. His nomination, therefore, under thecircumstances, is a great honor, and shows the implicit confidence thereal people have in the integrity, patriotism, and qualifications of theman. That he will go into the presidential chair almost by acclamation, we have not the shadow of doubt. 

As to Mr. Fillmore's chances, we consider them excellent, and growingbrighter every day. The indications are now very clear that he willobtain a _plurality_, if not a _majority_ vote, in most of the NorthernStates; and under the most unfavorable circumstances, he will be sure todivide the electoral vote of the South, so as to carry more States thanMR. BUCHANAN. Virginia, South Carolina, Mississippi, and Alabama, arethe only four States we concede to the Cincinnati nominee and _one_ ofthese, we confidently expect to carry. Georgia and Arkansas we set downas doubtful, and we contend that Buchanan can't get either of themwithout a severe struggle. 

We then make this estimate, and claim as certain for FILLMORE andDONELSON the following States, viz. :

 Massachusetts 13 Rhode Island 4 New York 35 New Jersey 7 Pennsylvania 27 Maryland 8 Kentucky 12 Tennessee 12 North Carolina 10 Louisiana 6 Missouri 9 California 4 Delaware 3 Florida 3

This makes a total of 157--_eleven, _ more than is necessary to anelection. This is not an extravagant, but a very fair estimate. Thefriends of the American ticket have a right to feel encouraged. Withproper exertions our ticket will carry. Let every American considerhimself a sentinel upon the watch-tower--let every friend of the partydo his duty, and the result will not be doubtful. And let all whobelieve that "Americans ought to rule America, " take courage--"the skiesare bright and brightening. "

As it regards MR. FILLMORE'S Americanism, _that_ is settled--he has beena Protestant American _fifteen years in advance_ of the party, as it nowexists. The Hon. J. T. HEADLEY, Secretary of State of New York, delivered a speech at the Capital of his State, March 7th, 1856, inwhich he spoke of Mr. Fillmore in the following language:

 "Now, in the first place, he was an American years before those who denounce him ever thought of Americanism. The Police constable of Newburg elected last year on the American ticket, told me, that years ago, when that well-known conflict occurred between the citizens of Buffalo and the foreign population, that a combination was formed called the "_American League_. " The members of this League entered into _a solemn compact to stand together and fight together for the rights of Americans_. This constable was at the time an humble mechanic in Buffalo, and he said that _he constantly met Mr. Fillmore (who was a member of that League with him) at the Council Room_. Thus you see that those who would arrogate to themselves the title of Americans, and yet carp at Mr. Fillmore as wanting in American sentiment, are really recent volunteers compared with him. Mr. Fillmore carried his American principles still farther and became (so an officer in the same order informs me) _a member of the United Americans_. He has always been a true American, _he is now, and ever will be_, and is worthy to move at the head of the glorious column over which floats the flag bearing the inscription, 'Americans shall rule America. '"

After the defeat of MR. CLAY, in 1844, MR. FILLMORE addressed him thisnoble _American_ letter:

 "BUFFALO, Nov. 14, 1844. 

 "MY DEAR SIR:--I have thought for three or four days that I would write to you, but really I am unmanned. I have no courage or resolution. All is gone. The last hope, which hung first upon the city of New York, and then upon Virginia, is finally dissipated, and I see nothing but despair depicted upon every countenance. 

 "For myself, I have no regrets. I was nominated for Governor much against my will, and though not insensible to the pride of success, yet I feel a kind of relief at being defeated. But not so for you or the nation. Every consideration of justice, every feeling of gratitude conspired in the minds of honest men to insure your election, and though always doubtful of my own success, I could never doubt yours, till the painful conviction was forced upon me. 

 "The Abolitionists and _Foreign Catholics have defeated us in this State_. I will not trust myself to speak of the vile hypocrisy of the leading Abolitionists now. Doubtless many acted honestly and ignorantly in what they did. But it is clear that Birney and his associates sold themselves to Locofocoism, and they will doubtless receive their reward. 

 "_Our opponents, by pointing to the Native Americans and to Mr. Frelinghuysen, drove the Foreign Catholics from us and defeated us in this State. _

 "But it is vain to look at the causes by which this infamous result has been produced. It is enough to say that all is gone. I must confess that nothing has happened to shake my confidence in our ability to sustain a free government so much as this. 

 "MILLARD FILLMORE. "

But here is one other letter, written to ISAAC NEWTON, just before MR. FILLMORE left the United States for Europe. A more patriotic letter, breathing more of the genuine American spirit, we have never met with:

 "BUFFALO, N. Y. , Jan. 3, 1855. 

 "RESPECTED FRIEND ISAAC NEWTON:--It would give me great pleasure to accept your kind invitation to visit Philadelphia, if it were possible to make my visit private, and limit it to a few personal friends whom I should be most happy to see; but I know that this would be out of my power, and I am therefore reluctantly compelled to decline your invitation, as I have done others to New York and Boston, for the same reason. 

 "I return you many thanks for your information on the subject of politics. I am always happy to hear what is going forward, but, independent of the fact that I feel myself withdrawn from the political arena, I have been too much depressed in spirit to take an active part in the late elections. I contented myself with giving a silent vote for Mr. Ullman, for Governor. 

 "While, however, I am an inactive observer of public events, I am by no means an indifferent one, and I may say to you in the frankness of private friendship, that I have for a long time looked with dread and apprehension at the corrupting influence which the contest for the foreign vote is exerting upon our elections. This seems to result from its being banded together, and subject to the control of a few interested and selfish leaders. Hence it has been a subject of bargain and sale, and each of the great political parties of the country have been bidding to obtain it, and, as usual in all such contests, the party which is most corrupt is most successful. The consequence is, that it is fast demoralizing the whole country; corrupting the very fountains of political power; and converting the ballot-box--that great palladium of our liberty--into an unmeaning mockery, where the rights of native-born citizens are voted away by those who blindly follow their mercenary and selfish leaders. The evidence of this is found not merely in the shameless chaffering for the foreign vote at every election, but in the large disproportion of offices which are now held by foreigners at home and abroad, as compared with our native citizens. Where is the true-hearted American whose cheek does not tingle with shame and mortification to see our highest and most coveted foreign missions filled by men of foreign birth to the exclusion of native-born? Such appointments are a humiliating confession to the crowned heads of Europe that a Republican soil does not produce sufficient talent to represent a Republican nation at a monarchical court. I confess that it seems to me--with all due respect to others--that, as a general rule, our country should be governed by American-born citizens. Let us give to the oppressed of every country an asylum and a home in our happy land, give to all the benefits of equal laws, and equal protection; but let us at the same time cherish, as the apple of our eye, the great principles of constitutional liberty, which few who have not had the good fortune to be reared in a free country know how to appreciate and still less how to preserve. 

 "Washington, in that inestimable legacy which he left to his country--his farewell address--has wisely warned us to beware of foreign influence as the most baneful foe of a republican government. He saw it to be sure in a different light from that in which it now presents itself; but he knew it would approach us in all forms, and hence he cautioned us against the _insidious wiles of its influence_. Therefore, as well for our own sakes, to whom this invaluable inheritance of self-government has been left by our forefathers, as for the sake of unborn millions who are to inherit this land--foreign and native--let us take warning of the Father of his Country, and do what we can justly to preserve our institutions from corruption and our country from dishonor, but let this be done by the people themselves in their sovereign capacity by making a proper discrimination in the selection of officers, and not by depriving any individual--native or foreign-born--of any constitutional or legal right to which he is entitled. 

 "These are my sentiments in brief; and although I have sometimes almost despaired of my country when I have witnessed the rapid strides of corruption, yet I think I perceive a gleam of hope in the future, and I now feel confident, that when the great mass of intelligence in this enlightened country is once fully aroused, and the danger manifested, it will fearlessly apply the remedy, and bring back the government to the pure days of Washington's administration. Finally, let us adopt the old Roman motto, '_Never despair of the Republic. _' Let us do our duty, and trust in that Providence which has so signally watched over and preserved us for the result. But I have said more than I intended, and much more than I should have said to any one but a trusted friend, as I have no desire to mingle in political strife. 

 "Remember me kindly to your family, and believe me truly your friend, "MILLARD FILLMORE. "

In March, 1851, LEWIS CASS, than whom there is not a more devotedpartisan in the Democratic ranks, delivered a speech on the floor of theUnited States Senate, in the course of which he paid the following justcompliment to Mr. Fillmore's integrity, and to his efficiency in"_pacifying the country_, " while he was President. We quote from theCongressional Globe, and hold it up as a withering rebuke to those"lesser lights" of Democracy, who are now defaming this pure andpatriotic statesman:

 "The Administration has placed itself high in the great work of _pacifying the country_, and they received the meed of approbation from political friends and political foes. _I partake of the same sentiment. _ I do them justice. But I am a Democrat, and, God willing, I mean to die one. This is a Whig administration, but there is no reason I should not do them justice; and I do it with pleasure, in this great matter of _the salvation of this country_--if I may say so. I have done so; shall continue to do so, whatever sneers their papers may contain; for I do it not for their sake, but _for the sake of their country_. "

The _Democratic Review_--the highest Democratic authority in the UnitedStates--for December, 1855, commenting upon the Compromise Measures of1850, thus spoke of Mr. Fillmore, in a moment of candor, long before Mr. Fillmore was nominated by the American party for the Presidency:

 "Momentous events were transpiring. The agitation of the question of slavery was paramount in the public mind. In this crisis, it was well that so reliable a man as Mr. Fillmore was found in the Presidential chair. The safety and perpetuity of the Union were threatened. Already had fanaticism raised its hydra-head. Schemes and 'isms' leaped from a thousand ambuscades. The enemies of the Union started forth on every side--Abolitionism here; secessionism there; acquisition and filibusterism elsewhere. These were the formidable elements of misrule with which the Executive had to cope. How well he met, and how entirely he for the time overcame these enemies of the peace of the republic, we leave the historian to relate; but our retrospect would be incomplete and disingenuous, did we not accord the meed of praise justly due to high moral excellence and intellectual and administrative honesty and talent, as developed in the administration of Mr. Fillmore. "

Since the foregoing was prepared for the press, Mr. Fillmore's letter ofacceptance has come to hand, greatly to the annoyance of the Democraticand anti-American fuglemen and politicians. We congratulate the countryupon the patriotic, national, and _truly American_ spirit which pervadesthis chaste and well-written document. It is just what we expected from_one of the very first men in the Nation_. His reference to his pastcourse as a guaranty for the future is well-timed. _Sectional_legislation he is opposed to; and sectional agitation he will use hisinfluence to suppress. We ask every man into whose hands this work shallfall, to read this admirable letter for himself: it is worthy of the manand the times; nay, it is the letter of a patriot and a statesman--

 "Who for his country feels alone, And loves her weal, beyond his own. "

 [COPY. ]

 PHILADELPHIA, Feb. 26th, 1856. 

 _To the Hon. Millard Fillmore_:

 SIR:--The National Convention of the American party, which has just closed its session in this city, has unanimously chosen you as the candidate for the Presidency of the United States in the election to be held in November next. It has associated with you Andrew Jackson Donelson, Esq. , of Tennessee, as the candidate for the Vice-Presidency. 

 The Convention has charged the undersigned with the agreeable duty of communicating these proceedings to you, and of asking your acceptance of a nomination which will receive not only the cordial support of the great national party in whose name it is made, but the approbation also of large numbers of other enlightened friends of the Constitution and the Union, who will rejoice in the opportunity to testify their grateful appreciation of your faithful service in the past, and their confidence in your experience and integrity for the guidance of the future. 

 The undersigned take advantage of this occasion to tender to you the expression of their own gratification in the proceedings of the Convention, and to assure you of the high consideration with which they are yours, &c. 

 ALEXANDER H. H. STUART, ANDREW STEWART, ERASTUS BROOKS, E. B. BARTLETT, WM. J. EAMES, EPHRAIM MARSH. 

 _Committee, &c. _

 PARIS, May 21st, 1856. 

 GENTLEMEN:--I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter informing me that the National Convention of the American party, which had just closed its session at Philadelphia, had unanimously presented my name for the Presidency of the United States, and associated with it that of Andrew Jackson Donelson for the Vice-Presidency. This unexpected communication met me at Venice on my return from Italy, and the duplicate, mailed thirteen days later, was received on my arrival in this city last evening. This must account for my apparent neglect in giving a more prompt reply. 

 You will pardon me for saying that when my administration closed in 1853, I considered my political life as a public man at an end, and thenceforth I was only anxious to discharge my duty as a private citizen. Hence I have taken no active part in politics. But I have by no means been an indifferent spectator of passing events; nor have I hesitated to express my opinion on all political subjects when asked; nor to give my vote and private influence for those men and measures I thought best calculated to promote the prosperity and glory of our common country. Beyond this I deemed it improper for me to interfere. But this unsolicited and unexpected nomination has imposed upon me a new duty, from which I cannot shrink; and therefore, approving, as I do, of the general objects of the party which has honored me with its confidence, I cheerfully accept its nomination, without waiting to inquire of its prospects of success or defeat. It is sufficient for me to know that by so doing I yield to the wishes of a large portion of my fellow-citizens in every part of the Union, who, like myself, are sincerely anxious to see the administration of our government restored to that original simplicity and purity which marked the first years of its existence; and, if possible, to quiet that alarming sectional agitation, which, while it delights the Monarchists of Europe, causes every true friend of our own country to mourn. 

 Having the experience of past service in the administration of the Government, I may be permitted to refer to that as the exponent of the future, and to say, should the choice of the Convention be sanctioned by the people, I shall, with the same scrupulous regard for the rights of every section of the Union which then influenced my conduct, endeavor to perform every duty confided by the Constitution and laws to the Executive. 

 As the proceedings of this Convention have marked a new era in the history of the country, by bringing a new political organization into the approaching Presidential canvass, I take the occasion to reaffirm my full confidence in the patriotic purposes of that organization, which I regard as springing out of a public necessity, forced upon the country, to a large extent, by unfortunate sectional divisions, and the dangerous tendency of those divisions towards disunion. It alone, in my opinion, of all the political agencies now existing, is possessed of the power to silence this violent and disastrous agitation, and to restore harmony by its own example of moderation and forbearance. It has a claim, therefore, in my judgment, upon every earnest friend of the integrity of the Union. 

 So estimating this party, both in its present position and future destiny, I freely adopt its great leading principles as announced in the recent declaration of the National Council at Philadelphia, a copy of which you were so kind as to enclose me, holding them to be just and liberal to every true interest of the country, and wisely adapted to the establishment and support of an enlightened, safe, and effective American policy, in full accord with the ideas and the hopes of the fathers of our Republic. 

 I expect shortly to sail for America; and, with the blessings of Divine Providence, hope soon to tread my native soil. My opportunity of comparing my own country and the condition of its people with those of Europe, has only served to increase my admiration and love for our own blessed land of liberty, and I shall return to it without even a desire ever to cross the Atlantic again. 

 I beg of you, gentlemen, to accept my thanks for the very flattering manner in which you have been pleased to communicate the results of the action of that enlightened and patriotic body of men who composed the late Convention, and to be assured that

 I am, with profound respect and esteem, Your friend and fellow-citizen, MILLARD FILLMORE. 

 Messrs. Alex. H. H. Stuart, Andrew Stewart, Erastus Brooks, E. B. Bartlett, Wm. J. Eames, Ephraim Marsh, _Committee_. 

WHO IS ANDREW J. DONELSON?

This gentleman being now the nominee of the American party for theoffice of Vice-President, naturally attracts much of public attention;and as a matter to be looked for, and not at all to be regretted, drawsdown upon him great abuse and slander from the hireling editors of thecorrupt party opposing him. We will let a neighbor of Major Donelson, who has had access to his papers, and who has prepared and published inthe _Nashville Banner_ a sketch of his life, answer the questionpropounded at the head of this chapter:

 "MR. DONELSON is the second son of Samuel Donelson, deceased, who was the brother of the late Mrs. Jackson. His eldest brother died in 1817, soon after the Creek War, in which he participated as a soldier under General Jackson. His death was announced to Mr. Donelson by General Jackson in the following terms: 'Whilst we regret his loss, he has left us the endearing recollection that there was not a stain upon his character. He has performed his duty here below, and has taken his flight to realms above, as unspotted as an angel. What a lesson he has given us! How delightful to dwell upon the idea that he has walked in the paths of virtue during his whole life, without a blemish on his character, and that all his friends may recount his acts with pride and pleasure!' The younger brother is still living in the paternal mansion, and was a member of the last Legislature of Tennessee. The mother of these children afterwards married Mr. James Sanders, of Sumner county, Tennessee, and is still enjoying good health. She is the only daughter of Gen. Daniel Smith, who was one of the surveyors of the line between Virginia and North Carolina, and succeeded Gen. Jackson in the Senate of the United States. 

 "General Smith had an important agency in shaping the early history of Tennessee--having represented a portion of the people in the North Carolina Legislature, and in the Convention which ratified the Constitution of the United States. He was also Secretary of the Territory, and a member of the Convention of 1796. He was a native of Virginia, and emigrated to Tennessee soon after he had surveyed the line between that State and North Carolina, having, while in the execution of that service, seen the fine lands in Middle Tennessee. He settled the lands upon which his grandson, Henry Smith, now resides; and built the mansion, which is still there, at a period when the men engaged in quarrying the rock had to be guarded from the attacks of the Indians. 

 "The father of Samuel Donelson, Col. John Donelson, was also a native of Virginia, and at onetime a Representative of one of her oldest counties, Pittsylvania, in the House of Burgesses. He possessed in an eminent degree the respect of the Provincial Governor of that Commonwealth, from whom he received the appointment of Indian Commissioner about the year 1770; and it is to his bold and enterprising spirit that we are in a great measure indebted for the Indian Treaties which extended the settlements of Virginia through Kentucky to the Ohio river. He left Port Patrick Henry in 1779, descending the Tennessee river with all his family, in boats built on the Holston, and came up the Cumberland in those boats as high as the Clover Bottom, encountering incredible toils and dangers. Three years afterwards, in 1793, in conjunction with Col. Martin, he concluded an Indian Treaty, by which the settlements on the Cumberland river were greatly benefited; but he had, previously to his departure from Virginia, under a contract with Georgia, explored the country, and run the line between that State and North Carolina, as far west as the Mississippi river. After settling his family near the present site of the Hermitage, he was killed by the Indians, on a journey to Kentucky, near the Big Barren River, at the advanced age of 75. 

 "Samuel Donelson was a lawyer by profession, and the intimate friend and associate of Gen. Jackson, after whom he named his son Andrew, who was born on the 25th of August, 1800. On the second marriage of his mother, this son was taken into the family of the General, who became his guardian and patron; and he remained the most of his time with him until he was prepared to enter the Cumberland College. After finishing his studies at this school, Gen. Jackson obtained for him a Cadet's warrant, which enabled him to enter the Military Academy at West Point, in 1816. He was one of the first class which was graduated under the superintendence of Col. Thayer--finishing the course of studies in three, instead of four years; as is customary. Throughout his service at West Point, he was distinguished for his proficiency in mathematics, and for the facility with which he mastered all the studies which appertain to military science. No higher proof need be adduced of this fact, than the position assigned to him by the Board of Examiners and Visitors, when he graduated. He was placed No. 2, in a class of great merit, notwithstanding he had the studies of two years to pass through in one year, and was recommended to the Department of War for a commission in the Engineer Corps--a compliment accorded only to the most distinguished of the class. 

 "After obtaining his commission, Mr. Donelson was ordered to the Western frontier to build a fort; but before he reached this destination, the War Department, on the application of Gen. Jackson, allowed him to accept the appointment of Aide-de-camp in the staff of the General. In this capacity he attended the General when he took possession of the Floridas, and remained with him until the latter resigned his commission in the army. 

 "At this period, Mr. Donelson seeing no prospect for rapid promotion in the corps of Engineers, and sharing the conviction then so prevalent in the army, that the conclusion of the war with England had shut the door for a long time to come against those military enterprises which are so tempting to the officer and soldier, and feeling also that he could be more useful in the pursuits of civil life, turned his attention to the study of law. He accordingly resigned his commission; and after attending the course of law lectures in the Transylvania University, then under the presidency of Dr. Holly, he received his license, and appeared at the Nashville bar in 1823, having formed a partnership with Mr. Duncan. Circumstances, however, soon occurred, which withdrew him in a great degree from the practice. General Jackson was again in the field as a candidate for the Presidency, and needed the services of a confidential friend to aid him in repelling the bitter assaults which were made upon his character and services. Animated by a deep sense of gratitude, no duty could be more pleasing to Mr. Donelson than that of contributing his labor to advance the great popular movement which aimed, by the elevation of his benefactor and friend, to promote the highest interests of the country. He therefore cheerfully entered again into the General's family, and travelled with him to Washington City after the elections in 1824. Those elections devolved the choice of President upon the House of Representatives. Mr. Adams was the successful candidate, although Gen. Jackson had a much larger popular vote, and was evidently the favorite of the people. 

 "As is well known to the country, the result of that election gave increased force to the sentiment which had placed Gen. Jackson in nomination. The efforts of his friends throughout the Union became more active, and were never abated until the decision of the House of Representatives in 1824 was reversed, and Gen. Jackson placed in the Presidential chair. During these four years, Mr. Donelson, who had married in 1824, settled upon his plantation adjoining the Hermitage, and continued there to promote the cause he had espoused so warmly in the beginning. 

 "When the elections of 1828 were over, Gen. Jackson insisted upon the acceptance by Mr. Donelson of the post of private Secretary. Mr. D. Accordingly set out with him in the winter of 1828 for the city of Washington, taking with him his wife, whom he had married in 1824. This lady was the youngest daughter of Capt. John Donelson, and was invited by Gen. Jackson to do the honors of the White House--a position which she held throughout the greater portion of his Presidency. 

 "It was in this capacity that Mr. Donelson endeared himself still more than ever to the Hero of the Hermitage. He spent the prime of his life, from 1828 to 1836, in his service, and he felt himself amply rewarded by the knowledge he thus acquired of public men and measures. 

 "At the close of Gen. Jackson's Presidency, Mr. Donelson declined to take office under Mr. Van Buren, being anxious for a respite from public affairs, and to enjoy the pleasures of his farm; upon which he remained until he was called unexpectedly to take a part in the negotiation which brought Texas into our Union. It was upon this theatre that he displayed the judgment and tact which brought him prominently before the country as a man that understood the public interests, and knew how to take care of them. 

 "The commission appointing Mr. Donelson Minister to Texas is dated the 16th of September, 1844. Mr. Calhoun, then Secretary of State, in the letter enclosing the commission, says:

 "'The state of things in Texas is such as to require that the place (Charge d'Affaires) should be filled without delay, and to select him who, under all circumstances, may be thought best calculated to bring to a successful decision the great question of annexation pending before the two countries. After full deliberation, you have been selected as that individual; and I do trust, my dear sir, that you will not decline the appointment, however great may be the personal sacrifice of accepting. That great question must be decided in the next three or four months; and whether it shall be favorable or not, will depend on him who shall fill the mission now tendered you. I need not tell you how much depends on its decision for weal or woe to our country, and perhaps the whole continent. It is sufficient to say that, viewed in all its consequences, it is one of the first magnitude; and that it gives an importance to the mission at this time, that raises it to the level with the highest in the gift of the Government. 

 "Assuming, therefore, that you will not decline the appointment, unless some insuperable difficulty should interpose, and in order to avoid delay, a commission is herewith transmitted, without the formality of waiting your acceptance, with all the necessary papers. '"

President Polk, after this, confided an important and most criticalforeign negotiation to Major Donelson; and his estimate of the prudence, discretion, and ability with which Major Donelson discharged his trust, appears from a letter to Major D. From the Hon. John Y. Mason, President Polk's Secretary of War, dated August 7th, 1845. From thatletter, complimentary from beginning to end, we copy only this portion:

 "The services which you have rendered your country in the delicate negotiations intrusted to you, are justly appreciated. _Your prudence, discretion, and ability have inspired the President with a confidence which would make him feel much more at ease if that delicate task could be in your hands. _

 "It gives me great pleasure to assure you that _the publication of your official correspondence will give you a most enviable reputation for the highest qualities of a statesman and diplomatist_. 

 "The President unites in the kindest regards, with your friend, "J. Y. MASON. "

PRESIDENT PIERCE'S opinion of Major Donelson may be learned from thefollowing letter, written by him to the Major when the latter was theeditor of the _Washington Union_, the National Organ of the Democraticparty:

 "CONCORD, May 30, 1851. 

 "MY DEAR SIR: I rejoice that the leading organ of our party is now under your control, and regard the change as most auspicious at this juncture. There is a great battle before us--a battle for the Union--a battle for the ascendency of the principles, the maintenance of which so nobly signalized the administration of General Jackson. THE TONE, VIGOR, AND STATESMANLIKE GRASP _which you have brought to the columns of the Union are not merely important, they are_ ABSOLUTELY INDISPENSABLE _in this crisis_. 

 "With great respect, your friend and servant, "FRANK. PIERCE. "

The following article is from the _Nashville Union_, of October 15, 1844, the Tennessee Organ of Democracy, published within a few miles ofwhere Major Donelson lives, and has passed most of his life. Thisarticle shows what opinion was entertained of him before he became a_Know-Nothing_:

 "The diplomatic agency of this government in Texas is, at this moment, the most important mission abroad; although it ranks with those of the second class, its high and important duties require the talents of one every way qualified for the first foreign mission on the globe. 

 "_We congratulate the administration on having been able to secure the services of one so eminently qualified in all respects for the station, whose thorough knowledge of the relations subsisting between the two countries, and whose intimate acquaintance with the prominent statesmen of this and that government, will place him in the enjoyment of advantages which cannot fail to secure to us the most desirable results. _

 "Major Donelson leaves his plantation near the Hermitage to-day--proceeding overland to the Mississippi river on his way to the Texan Capital--and we cannot but participate in the painful emotions with which the word 'farewell' will be exchanged between himself and his venerable patron, friend, and relative, 'The Sage of the Hermitage. '

 "In view of the advanced age of General Jackson, it is more than probable that they may never meet again. A relationship next to that of father and son, if, indeed, it be not equally near and dear, will be severed perhaps for ever. And we feel assured that nothing short of a sense of DUTY TO HIS COUNTRY could have induced an acceptance of the mission. Nor, for this patriotic reason, would the aged veteran advise him to decline it. 

 "Major D. Leaves a host of good and true friends, who will continue to have an abiding solicitude for his health and happiness, and for his early and complete success in 'extending the area of freedom. '"

Mr. Clayton, Secretary of State under Gen. Taylor, wrote to MajorDonelson, announcing the expiration of the diplomatic relations betweenthe United States and Germany, (where the Major was stationed, ) andclosed with the following complimentary expressions:

 "I am directed by the President to express to you his entire approbation of your conduct, and I cannot take leave of you in your public character without adding my testimony to that of the President to the ability and faithfulness with which you have discharged the arduous and delicate duties which your mission imposed upon you. 

 "JOHN M. CLAYTON. "

The Democratic party having always boasted that Gen. Jackson wasunsurpassed in his keen and unerring insight into the characters of men, we must be permitted to call their attention to a clause in the _LastWill and Testament_ of Gen. Jackson, as recorded in the county ofDavidson. This clause sets forth the estimate placed upon Mr. Donelsonby the old General, after this fashion:

 "HERMITAGE, June 7, 1843. 

 ... "I bequeath to my well-beloved nephew, Andrew J. Donelson, son of Samuel Donelson, deceased, the elegant sword presented to me by the State of Tennessee, with this injunction, that he fail not to use it when necessary in support and protection of our glorious Union, and for the protection of the constitutional rights of our beloved country, should they be assailed by foreign enemies or _domestic traitors_. This, from the great change in my worldly affairs of late, is, with my blessing, all that I can bequeath him, doing justice to those creditors to whom I am responsible. This bequest is made as a memento of the high regard, affection, and esteem I bear for him as a _high-minded, honest, and honorable man_. "

And now, to show that Gen. Jackson had not changed his opinion of theMajor, we give about the last epistle he ever wrote to him, as it bearsdate but a few days previous to his death:

 "HERMITAGE, May 24, 1845. 

 "MY DEAR ANDREW: I received last night your affectionate letter of the 15th inst. , with the enclosed for your dear Elizabeth, which I sent forthwith, and your kind letter of the 13th this morning. Your family were here yesterday. All well, but looking out for you hourly. I assured Elizabeth that you could not leave your mission before the Texan Congress acted upon the subject with which you were charged. I shall admonish her to be patient and await your return, which will be the moment your honor and duty will permit. 

 * * * * *

 "My dear Andrew:--What may be my fate God only knows. I am greatly afflicted--suffer much, and it will be almost a miracle if I shall survive my present attack. I am swollen from the toes to the crown of the head, and in bandages to my hips. 

 "How far my God may think proper to bear me up under my weight of afflictions, he only knows. But, my dear Major, live or die, you have my blessing and prayers for your welfare and happiness in this world, and that we may meet in a blissful immortality. 

 "Your affectionate uncle, "ANDREW JACKSON. "

While editor of the _Washington Union_, Major Donelson frankly admitted, in his account of the election in Tennessee, between Gov. Campbell andGen. Trousdale, that the latter owed his defeat to his opposition to theCompromise measures, and his sympathies with the Disunionists. In the_Hartford_ Convention held in Nashville, the Major appeared in person, and denounced the whole concern as a blow at the Union, and its primemovers and advocates as _traitors to their country and to theConstitution_. These _Secession_ Democrats, headed by A. V. Brown, Eastman & Co. , are uncompromising in their hatred of the Major, and theynever will forgive him, while he remains true to the Union of theseStates, and the Constitution as it is, which will be to the latest hourof his earthly existence! Had he never opposed the _treasonable_ designsof the Nashville Convention--and had he not advocated the doctrines ofthe American party, these same men would now be loud in his praise, asthe relative, the political student, and the _successor_ of the Sage ofthe Hermitage!

[From the Knoxville Whig of June 14, 1856. ]

BUCHANAN NOMINATED AT CINCINNATI. --DISPERSION OF FALSTAFF'S ARMY!

The Cincinnati Anti-American, Anti-Protestant, Foreign Catholic, Locofoco Pow Wow, has met--transacted its appropriatebusiness--nominated old Federal James Buchanan, of Pennsylvania, for thePresidency, and Robert C. Breckenridge, of Kentucky, for the VicePresidency--and dispersed: dealing largely in the old game of _brag_, asto the _nationality_, _soundness_, and _ability_ of their ticket; whenit is notorious, that they have at the head of their ticket one of themost vulnerable men in the nation; an old political hack, who has been"every thing by turns and nothing long;" advocating and opposing all theleading measures which have agitated the country for the last fortyyears, as we shall show in the sequel!

They had an awful time at Cincinnati! They organized by calling to thechair, temporarily, the notorious _Sam'l. Medary_, the Abolition editorof the Ohio Statesman. Either the anti-slavery forces were in themajority, or the "odds and ends" of all parties represented in theConvention desired to conciliate the Abolition and Black Republicanwings of their _Foreign Corporation_!

The Missouri Delegation were refused their seats, and they openlyrebelled, forcing their way into the Convention with _clubs_, knockingdown and cruelly mangling the head and shoulders of the poor doorkeeper!From this, it would seem that they were doing business with _closeddoors_! Wonder if they had a _password_! Had they "signs and grips, "other than those by which they made themselves known to the_doorkeeper_?

Did they carry with them "dark-lanterns?" Not they--they are opposed toall _secrecy_--they are opposed to all disorderly conduct--they are the"harmonious Democracy, " and labor alone for the good of the country, andof posterity! What a farce their Cincinnati Convention was! And whathypocrites they are!

But two full sets of Delegates appeared from New York, and claimed theirseats; these were _Hards_ and _Softs_--Pierce and_anti_-Pierce--Nebraska and _anti_-Nebraska--pro-Slavery and_anti_-Slavery, _Filibustering Foreign Catholic Democrats_! Beingunable to agree among themselves, and the Convention not wishing to_offend_ either of these wings of the "great Harmonious DemocraticParty, " they rejected both delegations! This was having a bad effect, asa portion of each delegation was out of doors cursing the majority, andmaking threats as to what they would do. So the Convention reconsideredtheir cases, and ADMITTED BOTH DELEGATIONS TO SEATS. They thenprogressed "harmoniously, " much after the style of a rickety old cart ona hill-side, drawn by a balky horse, whose driver curses him when atfault, and curses him when faultless. 

Frequently the scenes of confusion and excitement were alike disgustingand alarming. The friends of Douglass, Pierce, and Buchanan, were alikebitter, and each disposed to ruin the party if they should fail to gettheir man nominated. The anti-slavery portion of the Convention weremuch incensed against the South for the "_lam-basting_" given to_Senator Sumner_ by _Representative Brooks_, for words spoken in debate. One of Buchanan's men boasted that the assault of Brooks on Sumner hadgained _twenty_ votes for "Old Buck!" And others of the Buchanan wing, out of doors, were stating that they had reliable evidence that "OldBuck" did not approve the assault, while Pierce and Douglass did! Wehave no doubt that this sort of influence, added to Buchanan's _knownhostility to slavery_, secured for him the nomination. And, as ifdesirous to atone for the sin against the South of nominating an old_Anti-Slavery Federalist_, they came into a Southern State, Kentucky, and selected a young and inexperienced politician, Mr. Robert C. Breckenridge, for the Vice Presidency. As Breckenridge is brave, and haschallenged his man for a _duel_, they can now turn about and appeal tothe Church-going folks to sustain their ticket _for what_ they imploredthem to repudiate the Whig ticket in 1844! Besides, Breckenridge_approves_ the basting of Sumner by Brooks, and this will _offset_Buchanan's opposition to that _Southern Democratic measure_!Breckenridge has another virtue, which aided in securing his nomination. Though the nephew of those _able Know-Nothing Presbyterian Preachers_ ofthat State, he has the independence to come out in opposition to them, and the insulting claims set up by _Protestants generally_, and toadvocate and defend the Roman Catholics. 

The "rich and racy" scenes that came off in the Convention, we willleave our several friends from Nashville, who were there as reporters inthe Convention for the American papers, to set forth. With more truththan poetry, the "unterrified Democracy" convened at Cincinnati can say, "Our army swore terribly in Flanders!" And how could it have beenotherwise? The Convention was large--composed of several hundreddelegates, drawn together from all sections of the country, East, West, North, and South--"held together by the cohesive power of publicplunder"--and representing every variety and shade of opinion known andheld under the much abused but comprehensive name of Democracy! Nor wasthe moral and personal character of the Convention less mixed andmany-colored than was its politics. 

In looking over the proceedings of this coalition and combination ofBogus Democrats, Foreign Pauper Advocates, and anti-Protestant lovers ofReligious Liberty, we have looked in vain for the names of distinguishedTennesseeans, who ought to have been second best, to say the least ofit, in the ballots for a nomination! It was that Aaron V. Brown, "theson of a now sainted father, " was put in nomination for the office ofVice President, by a Mr. Brown, supposed to be his nephew; but making norun at all, he was taken off the track instantly--rubbed down and saltedaway!

But Andrew Johnson, who was to have been nominated for the first officewithin the gift of the American people and no mistake, (!) was not evennamed, and some say he was not even thought of for the position. We hadsupposed that there existed among the leaders of the self-styledDemocracy, a determination to doom to utter extinction the light thathas guided the children of Political Reform in Tennessee, and throughoutthe known world, and now we know it! The opposers of intellectualemancipation, of "Jacob's Ladder Democracy, " so superior toChristianity, have triumphed at Cincinnati, and trampled under foot, with impunity, the soul-stirring doctrine of "converging lines. " Thenext steps with these "enemies of righteousness" will be the rack, thegibbet, and a second edition of the infernal inquisition! Will thefriends of the "White Basis" Governor of Tennessee tamely surrendertheir dearest rights to these Cincinnati _crusaders_, without a singlestruggle? Will they allow the saddle of Federal domination to be quietlythrown on their backs? Ye Greene county delegates forbid it!

But Johnson is doomed to an inglorious retirement from public life. Hecan console himself with the reflection, that rank only degrades--wealthonly impoverishes--ornaments but disfigure him! The man who discoveredthat the Bogus Democracy of the nineteenth century leads fallen sinfulman to the throne of God, needs no office to elevate him. These JohnsonDemocrats enjoy the pure religion of Democracy--a religion which entersthe closet--pours forth its supplications in private, feeds the poor, clothes the naked--inflames not the prejudices of Protestant sects--ismodest and unassuming in its demeanor--is charitable and kind to thepersecuted and pious Catholics--bears with the infirmities of ForeignPaupers--is not ambitious and designing, seeking to accomplish vastschemes by doubtful means!

While Old Federal Buck was nominated on the seventeenth ballot, aftermuch excitement, wrangling and abuse, young Breckenridge, whose onlymerit is his having challenged the Hon. Francis B. Cutting, of New York, to fight a duel, two years ago, was nominated on the second ballot. Theballot for a candidate for the Vice Presidency resulted as follows:

 John C. Breckenridge, of Kentucky, 55 John A. Quitman, of Mississippi, 59 Linn Boyd, of Kentucky, 33 Benjamin Fitzpatrick, of Alabama, 11 Aaron V. Brown, of Tennessee, 29 Herschel V. Johnson, of Georgia, 31 Thomas J. Rusk, of Texas, 2 Wm H. Polk, of Tennessee, 5 J. C. Dobbin, of North Carolina, 13

A second ballot was entered into, when Hon. John C. Breckenridge, ofKentucky, was unanimously chosen. 

Tennessee, in voting for a Presidential candidate, voted SIX times forPierce, and EIGHT times for Douglass, and never came over to old FederalBuck until they could do nothing for Pierce or Douglass. Buck seems tohave been a fill for Tennessee! But now, the Tennessee Democracy say:

 "With hounds and horn, At rosy morn, We _Bucks_ a hunting go!"

Well, we Americans will get after Old Buck's venison too, and betweenthis and November next, many will be the steak we shall eat out of hisold Federal carcass. It is venison worthy of the chase, for

 ----"Finer or fatter Ne'er roamed in the forest, Or smoked in a platter. "

So--

 "Hi, ho, Chevy, Hark away, hark away, tantivy, Here rests the burthen of my song, This _time_ a stag must die. "

But Democracy have commenced their old game of brag, by puffing theirticket as a national and conservative ticket, the very thing theydenied. Now let us look into the soundness and nationality of the HEADof the ticket. We have before us a copy of a work published in 1839, byRobert Mayo, M. D. , entitled, "Political Sketches of Eight Years inWashington, in four parts. " This work has gone through various editions, having been published by Fielding Lucas, Jr. , of Baltimore; GarretAnderson, of Washington; J. R. Smith, of Richmond; Carey, Hart & Co. , ofPhiladelphia, and by others in New York and Boston. On page 38 of thiswork, which Mr. Buchanan has never contradicted, he is reported to havedenounced the visions, patronage, and corruptions of the DemocraticAdministrations, while he, Buchanan, was a member of the Old FederalParty. 

On page 6 of this work, in the preface, the author says, in speaking ofBuchanan before he turned Democrat:

 "The declarations of some of these new disciples of Democracy in past times are striking enough. MR. BUCHANAN of PENNSYLVANIA, while he acted in his true character, DECLARED THAT IF HE HAD A DROP OF DEMOCRATIC BLOOD IN HIS VEINS, HE WOULD LET IT OUT! He put his royal declaration on paper, and it has risen up against him. "

A recent brief memoir of Mr. Buchanan, put forth in Pennsylvania, statesthat he was elected to the Legislature in 1815, where he distinguishedhimself by those exhibitions of intellect which gave promise of futureeminence. The Lancaster _Register_, published in the immediate vicinityof Mr. Buchanan's residence, asks _by whom_ was he elected? and thussupplies the record for 1815:

 ASSEMBLY. 

 For JAMES BUCHANAN, Federal 3051 " Molton O. Rogers, Democrat 2502

The memoir sets forth that Mr. Buchanan was elected to Congress in 1820, and that he retained his position in that body for ten years, voluntarily retiring. 

The Lancaster _Register_ inquires if he were elected as a _Democrat_, and answers the inquiry by the following historical facts:

 CONGRESS. 

 1820--James Buchanan, Federal 4642 " Jacob Hibsman, Democrat 3666 1822--James Buchanan, Federal 2153 " Jacob Hibsman, Democrat 1940 1824--James Buchanan, Federal 3560 " Samuel Houston, Democrat 3046 1826--James Buchanan, Federal 2760 " Dr. John McCamant, Democrat 2307 1828--James Buchanan, Jackson 5203 " William Hiester, Adams 3904

The Lancaster _Register_ then pursues its criticism as follows:

 "On the 4th of July, 1815, Mr. Buchanan, when he was a candidate for Assembly on the _Federal ticket_, delivered 'an oration' in Lancaster, in which he showed his _love_ of Federalism and _hatred_ of Democracy, by attacking the Administration of James Madison. He said:

 "'Time will not allow me to enumerate all the other evils and wicked projects of the Democratic administration. '

 "And again, in the same oration, he said:

 "'What must be our opinion of an opposition whose passions were so dark and malignant as to be gratified in endeavoring to blast the character and imbitter the old age of Washington? After thus persecuting the saviour of his country, _how can the Democratic party dare to call themselves his disciples_?'"

And who does not recollect, in Tennessee, with what force and effectJAMES C. JONES used to point out JAMES BUCHANAN as one of the _rank oldFederalists_ who had come over to the Democratic ranks, and was battlingwith _Col. Polk_, side by side, while he was consuming half his time inabuse of the Federal party? When the Democratic candidate for Congressin this District, JULIUS W. BLACKWELL, charged _Federalism_ upon theWhig party, who does not recollect with what effect and spirit JOHN H. CROZIER ran over the list of ODIOUS OLD FEDERALISTS, then fighting underthe Democratic flag, among them naming out JAMES BUCHANAN? And will notthe files of the KNOXVILLE POST, edited by Capt. JAMES WILLIAMS, showhow he held up JAMES BUCHANAN and others as an _old Federalist of thefirst water_?

On the subject of _Slavery_ the memoir is not definite, and theLancaster Register comes to its aid by publishing the followingproceedings of a public meeting held in that city on the 23d ofNovember, 1819:

 "WHEREAS, the people of this State, pursuing the maxims and animated by the beneficence of the great founder of Pennsylvania, first gave effect to the gradual abolition of slavery by a national act, which has not only rescued the unhappy and helpless African within their territory from the demoralizing influence of slavery, but ameliorating his state and condition throughout Europe and America; and whereas, it would illy comport with those humane and Christian efforts to be silent spectators when this great cause of humanity is about to be agitated in Congress, by fixing the destiny of the new domains of the United States: therefore, "_Resolved_, That the representatives in Congress from this district be and they are hereby most earnestly requested to use their utmost endeavors, as members of the National Legislature, to prevent the existence of slavery in any of the Territories or new States which may be created by Congress. 

 "_Resolved_, As the opinion of this meeting, that as the Legislature of this State will shortly be in session, it will be highly deserving of their wisdom and patriotism to take into their early and most serious consideration the propriety of instructing our representatives in the National Legislature to use the most zealous and strenuous exertions to inhibit the existence of slavery in any of the Territories or States which may hereafter be created by Congress; and that the members of Assembly from this county be requested to embrace the earliest opportunity of bringing this subject before both Houses of the Legislature. 

 "_Resolved_, That, in the opinion of this meeting, the members of Congress who at the last session sustained the cause of justice, humanity, and patriotism, in opposing the introduction of slavery into the State then endeavored to be formed out of the Missouri Territory, are entitled to the warmest thanks of every friend of humanity. 

 "_Resolved_, That the proceedings of this meeting be published in the newspapers in this city. 

 "JAMES HOPKINS, WM. JENKINS, JAMES BUCHANAN. "

 "The foregoing resolutions being read were unanimously adopted, after which the meeting adjourned. (Signed)

 WALTER FRANKLIN, Ch'n. 

 "Attest--WM. JENKINS, Sec'y. "

The "Perry County Democratic Press, " for April 9th, 1856, an able paperpublished at Bloomfield in Pennsylvania, shows up the _Federalanti-slavery, anti-Democratic, turn-coat character_ of Mr. Buchanan, after this fashion:

 JAMES BUCHANAN'S SOMERSETS. 

 "No man in the United States has turned his political coat as often as James Buchanan. He has espoused the principles of every party that has had an existence since the memorable Hartford Convention, and has been on all sides of political questions. 

 "A brief reference to his history will establish conclusively our assertions. "

 HIS FEDERALISM. 

 "He entered political life in 1814 as a rank Federalist, and by the Federal party he was elected to the Legislature of the State. He was re-elected in 1815, defeating Molton C. Rogers, the Democratic candidate, and afterwards one of the Supreme Judges of the State. 

 "In 1820, he was the Federal candidate for Congress, and was elected over Jacob Hibsman, the Democratic candidate, by 976 majority. In 1822, he was reëlected over the same man by 813 majority. In 1824, he was the Federal candidate for Congress, and elected over Samuel Houston, the Democratic candidate, by 519 votes. In 1826, he was re-elected over Dr. John McCamant, the Democratic candidate, by 453 votes. His majorities were becoming less each time, and in order to satisfy his Federal friends of his fidelity to the party, he had to declare that 'if he had a drop of Democratic blood in his veins, he would open them and let it out. '"

 HE BECOMES A DEMOCRAT. 

 "Two years after this, he changed his coat and became a full-blooded Democrat, and ran for Congress as the Democratic candidate, and was elected by virtue of General Jackson's popularity. He was afraid to run a second term, and he declined. "

 HIS TEN CENT SPEECH. 

 "In 1843, in the United States Senate, he made a speech advocating the principle that ten cents is a sufficient compensation for a day's labor. Hence he is called 'Ten Cent Jimmy. '

 "In 1845, he became Secretary of State under Polk's administration, and consented to give away about half of the Territory of Oregon to the British government, after he had proven that they had not a spark of title to it. 

 "He extolled the Federal administration of John Adams, and endorsed the abominable Alien and Sedition laws of the Federal reign of terror. He bitterly denounced the administration of that pure Democrat, James Madison, and ridiculed what he termed the follies of Thomas Jefferson. "

 HIS SLAVERY SOMERSETS. 

 "In 1819, at a meeting in Lancaster, he reported resolutions favoring resistance to the extension of slavery and the admission of the State of Missouri as a slave State. 

 "In 1847, he wrote to the Democracy of Berks county, saying that the Missouri Compromise had given peace to the country, and that instead of repealing it he was in favor of its extension and maintenance. 

 "In 1850, in a letter to Col. Forney, he rejoiced over the settlement of the slavery agitation by the passage of the compromise measures during Fillmore's administration, and hoped that before a dissolution of the Union he might be gathered to his fathers, and never be permitted to witness the sad catastrophe. 

 "In 1852, he wrote to Mr. Leake, of Virginia, concerning Fillmore's compromise measures of 1850, which had been passed by Congress, and said, 'that the volcano has been extinguished, and the man who would apply the firebrand to the combustible materials still remaining, will produce an eruption that will overwhelm the Constitution and the Union. "

 BUCHANAN'S LAST SOMERSET. 

 "On the 28th of December, 1855, about three months ago, Mr. Buchanan, in a letter to John Slidell, of Louisiana, says: 'The Missouri Compromise is gone, and gone for ever. It has departed. The time for it has passed away, and the best, nay, the only mode now left of _putting down_ the fanatical and reckless spirit of the North is to adhere to the existing settlement without the slightest thought or appearance of wavering, and without regarding any storm which may be raised against it. "

Here, then, is an authentic record--if the reader please, a GILT-FRAMEPENNSYLVANIA LOOKING-GLASS, in which the Democracy of the South whoadmire the nominee of the late Cincinnati Convention can _see him as heis_! Heretofore, to use the language of Holy Writ, they have seen him"through a glass darkly, but now face to face. " Here they see himstanding erect upon the floor of the United States Senate, in all thepride of that _aristocracy_ which has characterized his course in life, and giving vent to the old and bitter feelings of the _royalists_ inPennsylvania, by advocating the _oppressive British doctrine_, that TENCENTS PER DAY _is enough for a poor white man as a day-laborer_! Andhere, too, our hard-fisted working-men, North and South, can see whatsort of a man the Democracy are asking them to vote for for thePresidency!

In his Fourth of July oration in 1815, delivered in the hearing of animmense crowd, and afterwards published in all the leading papers ofPennsylvania, Mr. Buchanan came out as a _Know-Nothing_, which he hasnow to repudiate in stepping upon the _Anti-American Catholic Platform_prepared for him at Cincinnati! Here is what he said in that celebratedoration:

 "The greater part of those foreigners who would not be thus affected by it, have long been the warmest friends of the party. They had been _one of the great means of elevating the present ruling_ (Democratic) party, and it would have been ungrateful for that party to have abandoned them. To secure this foreign feeling has been the labor of their leaders for more than twenty years, and well have they been paid for their trouble, for it has been one of the principal causes of introducing and continuing them in power. Immediately before the war this foreign influence had completely embodied itself with the majority, particularly in the West, and its voice was heard so loud at the seat of government, that President Madison was obliged either to yield to its dictates or retire from office. The choice was easily made by a man who preferred his private interests to the public good, and therefore hurried us into a war for which we were utterly unprepared. "

And then again:

 "We ought to use every honest exertion to turn out of power those weak and wicked men whose wild and visionary theories have been tested and found wanting. Above all, we ought to drive from our shores foreign influence, and cherish American feeling. Foreign influence has been in every age the curse of republics--its jaundiced eye sees every thing in false colors--the thick atmosphere of prejudice by which it is ever surrounded, excluding from its sight the light of reason. Let us then learn wisdom from experience, and for ever banish this fiend from our country. "

And here is what JACKSON thought of BUCHANAN. The Democratic Washingtoncorrespondent of the New York Evening Post, who was favorable to thenomination of Pierce, makes this statement--a statement we have oftenheard before, and never heard contradicted:

 "On the night before leaving Nashville to occupy the White House, Mr. Polk, in company with Gen. Robert Armstrong, called at the Hermitage to procure some advice from the old hero as to the selection of his cabinet. Jackson strongly urged the President-elect to give no place in it to Buchanan, as he could not be relied upon. It so happened that Polk had already determined to make that very appointment, having probably offered the situation to the statesman of Pennsylvania. This fact induced Gen. Armstrong subsequently to tell Jackson that he had given Polk a rather hard rub, as Buchanan had already been selected for Secretary of State. 'I can't help it, ' said the old man: 'I felt it my duty to warn him against Mr. Buchanan, whether it was agreeable or not. Mr. Polk will find Buchanan an unreliable man. I know him well, and Mr. Polk will yet admit the correctness of my prediction. '

 "It was the last visit ever made by Mr. Polk to the old hero when this unavailing remonstrance was delivered, but the new President, long before the end of his administration, had reason to acknowledge its propriety and justice, and in the diary kept by him during that period may still be read a most emphatic declaration of his distrust of Mr. Buchanan. Every one is aware of two marked instances in which, as Secretary of State, the latter failed to support the policy of the administration, viz. , on the question of the tariff of 1846, and the requisition of the ten regiments voted by Congress for the Mexican war. On both of these measures he was known to be opposed to the wishes of Mr. Polk. "

_Mr. Charles Irving_, the Democratic editor of the Lynchburg Republican, and a delegate at Richmond in the State Convention, thus disposes of Mr. Buchanan in a long and able letter, dated May 7th, 1856:

 "If silence during the battle constitutes a claim for office, how can the South expect Northern statesmen to uphold her banner, when abolitionists are seeking to tear it to tatters? If an ability to get free-soil votes makes a candidate available, and that species of availability is recognized as a merit at the South, Northern statesmen should court free-soilers, and not struggle with them, if they wish to be Presidents. Such availability may be very desirable to those who wish success alone, but those who look to the interests of the country may well be excused if they prefer a different standard. I certainly _prefer_ that the South shall PREFER the selection, not only of a sound man, but that she shall vote for the nomination of no man upon any such ground of availability. The coming election must settle the slavery agitation. I do not wish a single free-soiler to vote the Democratic ticket, nor will I willingly afford them the slightest excuse for so doing. A prominent North-West Democrat told me to-day, that the nomination of Mr. Buchanan would enable Trumbull, Wentworth, and other free-soilers to come back into the party. I am not anxious to get back such characters. These are some reasons for not preferring Mr. Buchanan. 

 "But there is still another reason. That reason is in his record. To carry the entire South, we must have not only a sound man, but one who is above impeachment--whose record is as stainless as the principles he advocates. Is such the case with Mr. Buchanan? Let the record answer. 

 "On the 27th of December, 1837, Mr. Calhoun submitted to the Senate that celebrated series of resolutions, the great objects of which were to set forth with precision and force the constitutional rights of the slaveholding States, and to attract to their support an enlightened public opinion against the attacks of Northern fanaticism. The second resolution was in these words: (Calhoun's Works, volume 3, page 140. )

 "'_Resolved_, That in delegating a portion of their powers to be exercised by the Federal Government, the States retained severally the exclusive and sole right over their own domestic institutions and police, and are alone responsible for them, and that any intermeddling of any one or more States, or a combination of their citizens, with the domestic institutions and police of the others, on any ground or under any pretext whatever, political, moral, or religious, with a view to their alteration or subversion, is an assumption of superiority not warranted by the Constitution, insulting to the States interfered with, tending to endanger their domestic peace and tranquillity, subversive of the objects for which the Constitution was formed, and, by necessary consequence, tending to weaken and destroy the Union itself. '

 "Mr. Morris of Ohio, who was then the only avowed Abolitionist in the Senate, moved to strike out the words 'moral and religious. ' Had the motion prevailed, the effect would have been to encourage agitation in the form in which it would be most likely to be fatal to the South. It would have been a direct encouragement to the Abolitionized clergy of the North to take the very course which was taken by the 'three thousand and fifty divines' who, in 1854, sacrilegiously assumed, 'in the name of Almighty God, and in his presence, ' to denounce the repeal of the Missouri Compromise as 'a violation of plighted faith and a breach of a national compact. ' Subsequent events have abundantly attested the truth of what Mr. Calhoun said, when arguing against the motion, 'that the whole spirit of the resolution hinged upon that word _religious_. '

 "The vote taken on Mr. Morris's amendment stood as follows: (Congressional Globe, volume 6, page 74. )

 "Yeas--Messrs. Bayard, BUCHANAN, Clayton, Davis, McKeon, Morris, Prentiss, Robbins, Ruggles, Smyth of Indiana, Southward, Swift, Tipton, and Webster--14. 

 "Nays--Messrs. Allen, Black, Brown, Calhoun, Clay of Alabama, Clay of Kentucky, Cuthbert, Fulton, Hubbard, King, Knight, Linn, Lumpkin, Lyon, Nicholas, Niles, Norvell, Pierce, Preston, Rives, Roane, Robinson, Sevier, Smyth of Connecticut, Strange, Walker, Wall, White, Williams, Wright, and Young--31. 

 "The fifth resolution to which Mr. Calhoun here referred, and which he justly regarded as the most important of all, and struggled most perseveringly to have passed without amendment, was strictly as follows:

 "'Resolved, That the intermeddling of any State or States, or their citizens, to abolish slavery in this District, or in any of the Territories, on the ground, or under the pretext, that it is immoral or sinful, or the passage of any act or measure of Congress, with that view, would be a direct and dangerous attack on the institutions of all the slaveholding States. '

 "This resolution covered the whole premises. It met the issue boldly and fully. No Southern Democrat can hesitate to say that it embodied a great truth, to which events have borne emphatic testimony. Mr. Clay, of Kentucky, moved to strike it out, and insert the following as a substitute:

 "'Resolved, That when the District of Columbia was ceded by the States of Virginia and Maryland to the United States, domestic slavery existed in both of those States, including the ceded territory; and that, as it still continues in both of them, it could not be abolished within the District without a violation of that good faith which was implied in the cession, and in the acceptance of the territory, nor unless compensation were made for the slaves, without a manifest infringement of an amendment of the Constitution of the United States, nor without exciting a degree of just alarm and apprehension in the States recognizing slavery, far transcending, in mischievous tendency, any possible benefit which would be accomplished by the abolition. ' (Congressional Globe, vol. 6, page 58. )

 "The utter insufficiency of this temporizing amendment scarcely need be pointed out. Objectionable as it was in conceding to Congress the constitutional power to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia, and declaring against the exercise of that power only on the ground of inexpediency, it was still more so in this, that it made no reference whatever to the territories of the United States. The passage of Mr. Calhoun's resolution would have committed the Senate, not only against the abolition of slavery in the District of Columbia, but against the application of the Wilmot Proviso and kindred measures to the Territories. Mr. Clay's amendment was entirely silent on the subject. It is true, that in another resolution which he proposed to have adopted as an additional amendment, it was declared that the abolition of slavery in the Territory of Florida would be highly inexpedient, for the principal reason 'that it would be in violation of a solemn compromise made at a memorable and critical period in the history of this country, by which, while slavery was prohibited north, it was admitted south of the line of thirty-six degrees thirty minutes north latitude. ' The defect in the first amendment can hardly be considered by Southern men as remedied by another which recognized the binding force of the Missouri Compromise. 

 "On the question to strike out Mr. Calhoun's resolution, and insert Mr. Clay's as an amendment, after it had been modified by striking out the part relating to compensation for slaves, the vote stood--yeas 19, nays 18. (Congressional Globe, vol. 6, page 62. ) _Mr. Buchanan's name stands recorded in the affirmative. _

 "On a subsequent occasion, Mr. Calhoun, with a view to infuse vitality into Mr. Clay's amendment, moved to insert that any attempt of Congress to abolish slavery in the Territories, 'would be a dangerous attack upon the States in which slavery exists. ' Mr. Buchanan opposed the amendment, and it was in reply to his speech that Mr. Calhoun made the remarks which may be found in the third volume of his works, pages 194 to 196, and which he commenced by saying that 'the remarks of the Senator from Pennsylvania were of such a character that he could not permit them to pass in silence. '

 "From these votes, and this language of Mr. Buchanan, it is clear:

 "1st. That he was not opposed to the _religious_ agitation of the slavery question--a species of agitation which Mr. Calhoun justly regarded as more fatal than any other. 

 "2d. That he recognized the constitutional power of Congress to abolish slavery in the District of Columbia, opposing its existence only on the ground of its inexpediency--a proposition which the position of Mr. Van Buren shows affords no reliable protection to Southern institutions. 

 "3d. That he refused to commit himself fully on the great question as to the power of Congress over the Territories of the United States, and as far as he did go, evidently left it to be understood that the abolition of slavery by Congress in those Territories would be no attack on the States in which it exists. '

 "If his opinions, in these respects, have undergone any material change, the country has not yet been authoritatively apprised of the fact. The reflections cast by him on the institution of slavery, in one of his speeches in England, and the studied design he has manifested to keep aloof from the excitement growing out of the repeal of the Missouri Compromise, are not well calculated to inspire confidence, that if his views have undergone any change, it has been a change for the better. "

After thus disposing of the _slavery issue_, _Mr. Irving_ thus turns tothe _Tariff Question_:

 "So much for the slavery issue. How does Mr. Buchanan stand upon the tariff? Will the Sentinel say that he is sound, or justify his 'low wages' speech? How does he stand upon the French Spoliation bill, which President Polk and President Pierce vetoed? Everybody knows that he was in favor of it. How does he stand upon the Pacific Railroad? He declared himself in favor of an appropriation of public money to build it, as is notorious. In fact, is there a single Federal measure except that of the United States Bank, upon which he is not recorded against Democratic principles? How can we hope to carry the united South with such a record? Will Southern Democrats overlook this record? Will Northern Nebraska men overlook this ignoring of Pierce and Douglass? Is there no danger that in admitting the abolitionist Trumbull, we may not dishearten the gallant Douglass? Is there no fear that in reinstating the free-soil Hickman, who is in favor of Reeder, we may not palsy the arm of Richardson? In fine, is there no fear that in hoping for free-soil aid, we may not lose the few real friends the South has in the North? It is evident to the commonest understanding, that the first step of Northern Black Republicanism is to kill off all those influential men at the North, like Pierce or Douglass, who have actively participated in the fight for our rights. Is not the South aiding them in this first step, when it not only ignores its own sons, but also ignores, upon the ground of availability, those Northern men identified with the late Kansas-Nebraska bill? This is a question the South would do well to ponder. If Mr. Buchanan is to be nominated, and Pierce and Douglass in the North ignored, let the responsibility rest elsewhere than upon the State of Virginia. He may be, and probably is sound, but these are times when more than ordinary caution is necessary. It may become the duty of the South to support him. When that time arrives I can discharge the duty; but I do think that the reasons above stated exempt me from any blame for not advocating him until that responsibility devolves upon me. Very respectfully, CHAS. IRVING. 

The Southern Dough-faces of the Foreign Catholic party pretend to holdMr. Fillmore responsible for a letter he wrote more than twenty yearsago, in which he answers certain interrogatories in reference toslavery, _affirmatively_, and in opposition to the extension of slavery!The _latest_ record of Buchanan is in 1844, and proves him to be anABOLITIONIST OF THE BLACKEST DYE. About the last speech he ever made inCongress, was IN OPPOSITION TO SLAVERY, in secret session of the Senate, just before Mr. Polk, in opposition to the wishes of Gen. Jackson, gavehim a seat in his cabinet. This speech will be found in theCongressional Globe for 1844, an extract from which is in these_explicit_ and _memorable_ words:

 "In arriving at the conclusion to support this treaty, I had to encounter _but one serious obstacle_, AND THAT WAS THE QUESTION OF SLAVERY. Whilst I have ever maintained, and ever shall maintain, in their full force and vigor, the constitutional rights of the Southern States over their slave property, I yet feel a strong repugnance by any act of mine to extend the limits of the Union over a new slaveholding territory. After mature reflection, however, I overcame these scruples, and now believe that the acquisition of Texas will be the means of limiting, not enlarging, the dominion of slavery. 

 "In the government of the world, Providence generally produces great changes by gradual means. There is nothing rash in the counsels of the Almighty. May not, then, the acquisition of Texas be the means of gradually drawing the slaves far to the South to a climate more congenial to their nature; and may they not finally pass off into Mexico, and THERE MINGLE WITH A RACE WHERE NO PREJUDICE EXISTS AGAINST THEIR COLOR? The Mexican nation is composed of Spaniards, Indians, and Negroes, blended together in every variety, who would receive our slaves on terms of perfect social equality. To this condition they never can be admitted in the United States. 

 "That the acquisition of Texas would ere long convert Maryland, Virginia, Kentucky, Missouri, and probably others of the more Northern Slave States, into free States, I entertain not a doubt.... 

 "But should Texas be annexed to the Union, causes will be brought into operation which must inevitably remove slavery from what may be called the farming States. From the best information, it is no longer profitable to raise wheat, rye, and corn, by slave labor. Where these articles are the only staples of agriculture, in the pointed and expressive language of Randolph, if the slave does not run away from his master, the master must run away from the slave. The slave will naturally be removed from such a country, where his labor is scarcely adequate to his own support, to a region where he can not only maintain himself, but yield large profits to his master. Texas will open an outlet; and slavery itself may thus finally pass the Del Norte, and be lost in Mexico. One thing is certain, the present number of slaves cannot be increased by the annexation of Texas. 

 "I have never apprehended the preponderance of the slave States in the councils of the nation. Such a fear has always appeared to me visionary. But those who entertain such apprehensions need not be alarmed by the acquisition of Texas. More than one-half of its territory is wholly unfit for the slave labor; and, therefore, in the nature of things must be free. Mr. Clay, in his letter of the 17th of April last, on the subject of annexation, states that, according to his information--

 "'The Territory of Texas is susceptible of a division into five States of convenient size and form. Of these, two only would be adapted to those peculiar institutions (slavery) to which I have referred; and the other three, lying west and north of San Antonio, being only adapted to farming and grazing purposes, from the nature of their soil, climate, and productions, would not admit of these institutions. In the end, therefore, there would be two slave and three free States probably added to the Union. '

 "And here permit me to observe, that there is one defect in the treaty which ought to be amended if we all did not know that it is destined to be rejected. The treaty itself ought to determine how many free and how many slave States should be made out of this territory. "

On the 11th of April, 1826, James Buchanan, who is now being supportedby _Southern slaveholders_, made a speech in Congress, _eleven yearsafter_ his Fourth of July oration, from which the following is taken:

 "Permit me here, Mr. Chairman, for a moment, to speak upon a subject to which I have never before adverted upon this floor, and to which, I trust, I may never again have occasion to advert. I mean the subject of slavery. I BELIEVE IT TO BE A GREAT POLITICAL AND A GREAT MORAL EVIL. I THANK GOD, MY LOT HAS BEEN CAST IN A STATE WHERE IT DOES NOT EXIST.... IT HAS BEEN A CURSE ENTAILED UPON US BY THAT NATION WHICH MAKES IT A SUBJECT OF REPROACH TO OUR INSTITUTIONS. " (See Gales and Seaton's Register of Debates, page 2180, vol. Ii. , part 2. )

MORE BUCHANAN ANTECEDENTS. 

When a "_Uniform Bankrupt Law_" was enacted by Congress, after theelection of General Harrison, there were on the files of the JudiciaryCommittee of the Senate _fifty-one petitions_, praying for the passageof such a law. Twenty-nine of these were from New York, five from NewJersey, three from Ohio, two from Indiana, two from Massachusetts, and_one_ from each of the States of Tennessee and Mississippi. There were_twenty-five_ other petitions praying for "_A General Bankrupt Law_;"_fifteen_ of which were from New York, and eight from Pennsylvania; andhow will the Democracy like to see it hereafter proven that BUCHANANpresented these petitions, and voted for the law? If it shall turn outthat "Old Buck" did really go for the "odious Bankrupt Law, " let hisfriends defend him on the ground that his _State_ desired it, and hadalways favored the measure!

In the House of Representatives, in Congress, January 3, 1815, _Mr. Ingersoll_, a notorious Democrat from Pennsylvania, and a _Boy Tory_ ofthe war of the Revolution, from the Committee on the Judiciary, reporteda bill to establish _a uniform law of Bankruptcy throughout the UnitedStates_! If these facts should not turn out to be a sufficientjustification of _Mr. Buchanan's course_, provided he went for thisBankrupt Law, let his friends present these facts, and show that he wasin good old Federal Democratic _company_:

NUMBER 1. On the 5th of September, 1837, Mr. Van Buren's _Democratic_Secretary of the Treasury made a report to Congress, praying the passageof a _uniform Bankrupt Law_, which was referred to the Committee on theJudiciary. 

NUMBER 2. On the 13th day of January, 1840, _Mr. Norvell_, a DemocraticSenator from Michigan, moved that the Judiciary be instructed to inquireinto the expediency of reporting a bill for the establishment of a_General Bankrupt Law_. 

NUMBER 3. On the 22d of April, 1840, _Garret D. Wall_, a flamingDemocratic Senator in Congress, reported certain amendments to aBankrupt Law, from a minority of the Committee; which were referred tothe Senate's select Committee, and reported by Mr. Wall, and passed--21to 19--and sent to the House. 

NUMBER 4. In the Senate, July 23, 1841, _Mr. Nicholson_, a DemocraticSenator from Tennessee, delivered an able speech in favor of a uniformsystem of Bankruptcy, and moved to amend the bill then pending, byinserting "BANKS AND OTHER CORPORATIONS;" which motion was lost by avote of 34 to 16. 

NUMBER 5. That great light of Democracy, _Col. Richard M. Johnson_, lateVice-President of the United States, wrote and spoke in favor of aGeneral Bankrupt Law. In a letter of his, now before us, datedWashington, January 18, 1841, he says, speaking of such a law: "_Myopinion is that it will redound to the honor of our country. _"

But we will do Mr. Buchanan justice, by stating that he said he wouldvote _against_ the Bankrupt Law of 1840, because he did not like itsfeatures. When Mr. Webster spoke in favor of the law, and of thecharacter of the _petitioners_, many of whom presented their petitionsthrough Mr. Buchanan, the latter spoke on the 24th of February, 1840;and, to satisfy Mr. Webster and others that he was not opposed to the_principle_ in former days, stated, "_He came to the other House ofCongress, many years since_, A FRIEND OF A BANKRUPT LAW. The subject wasbefore the House when he entered the body twenty years ago. " He added, "He was _open to conviction_, and might change his purpose!"

Thus, it will be seen that Mr. Buchanan, in this, as in every thingelse, _was on both sides_! And how does it look in a Presidentialcandidate, to have supported a _General Bankrupt Law_ for the relief of_rich, extravagant, and aristocratic_ gentlemen, and then to turn roundand advocate "ten cents per day" for poor folks and laboring men? Itwill look rather bad; but, then, Sag Nicht Democracy can go any thing!This old "ten cents per day" champion of Democracy advocated, in so manywords, the reduction of all paper money prices to the real Cuba standardof solid money! We take extracts from his speech, which will be found inthe Appendix to the Congressional Globe, page 135:

 "In Germany, where the currency is purely metallic, and the cost of every thing is REDUCED to a hard money standard, a piece of broadcloth can be manufactured for fifty dollars; the manufacture of which in our country, from the expansion of paper currency, would cost one hundred dollars. What is the consequence? The foreign French and German manufacturer imports this cloth into our country, and sells it for a hundred. Does not every person perceive that the redundancy of our currency is equal to a premium of one hundred per cent. In favor of the manufacturer?"

 "No tariff of protection, unless it amounted to prohibition, could counteract this advantage in favor of foreign manufactures. I would to heaven that I could arouse the attention of every manufacturer of the nation to this important subject. "

 "What is the reason that, with all these advantages, and with the protective duties which our laws afford to the domestic manufacturer of cotton, we cannot obtain exclusive possession of the home market, and successfully contend for the markets of the world? It is simply because we manufacture at the nominal prices of our inflated currency, and are compelled to sell at the real prices of other nations. REDUCE OUR NOMINAL STANDARD OF PRICES THROUGHOUT THE WORLD, and you cover our country with blessings and benefits. "

 * * * * *

 "The comparative LOW PRICES of France and Germany have afforded such a stimulus to their manufactures, that they are now rapidly extending themselves, and would obtain possession, in no small degree, even of the English home market, IF IT WERE NOT FOR THEIR PROTECTING DUTIES. While British manufactures are now languishing, those of the continent are springing into a healthy and vigorous existence. "

How will the _Free Trade Democracy_ of the South relish these"protecting duties" of an old Federal politician? They are about asconsistent in their support of the Cincinnati nominee as "Clay Whigs"are, when they know that Buchanan was the only man living who had it inhis power to do Clay justice, in reference to the "bargain and intrigue"calumny, and obstinately refused!

CLAY AND BUCHANAN. 

In 1825, Mr. Buchanan, then a member of the House, entered the room ofMr. Clay, who was at the time in company with his only messmate, Hon. R. P. Letcher, also a member of the House, and since Governor of Kentucky. Buchanan introduced the subject of the approaching Presidentialelection, Letcher witnessing what was said; and after that, when Mr. Clay was hotly assailed with the charge of "bargain, intrigue, andcorruption, " notified Mr. Buchanan of his intention to publish theconversation, but was induced, by the _earnest entreaties of Buchanan_, to forbear. And Mr. Clay died with a letter in his possession, fromBuchanan, which, if published, as it should be, would place Buchananwithout the pale of Democracy, and disgrace him in the eyes of allhonorable men. _That_ letter, too, would explain why Gen. Jackson had noconfidence in him, and was opposed to his taking a seat in Polk'scabinet. Let it come!

_Keep it before the People_, That it was the vote of James Buchananwhich, in the Senate, in 1832, secured the passage of the "BlackTariff, " so offensive to the "Free Trade" Democracy of Tennessee, SouthCarolina, and other Southern States, and which Gov. JONES threw up toCol. Polk with so much effect in their race of 1843!

_Keep it before the People_, That the Cincinnati Platform unblushinglyaffirms that "the Constitution does not confer upon the Federalgovernment authority to assume the debts of the several States, contracted for local internal improvements, or for other Statepurposes;" while the Democratic members of Congress annually violatethis principle by voting away hundreds of acres of public lands to theStates, for purposes of railroads and other improvements. 

_Keep it before the People_, That the same Platform hypocriticallyasserts, that "it is the duty of every branch of our Government toenforce and practice the most rigid economy in conducting our publicaffairs;" when the expenditures of Pierce's administration are TWENTYMILLIONS PER ANNUM over that of MILLARD FILLMORE!

_Keep it before the People_, That the 8th of the series in this Platformdeclares, that "the attempt to abridge the privilege of becomingcitizens and owners of soil amongst us ought to be resisted with thesame spirit which swept the alien and sedition laws from our statutebook:" and then the hypocritical builders of the platform turned aboutand nominated James Buchanan, who commenced public life as the advocateof the "alien and sedition laws, " and sustained, in and out of Congress, the Federal party, who passed these laws. 

_Keep it before the People_, That the Cincinnati Platform, which pratesso loudly about the privilege of becoming "owners of the soil, " andwhich rebukes all efforts to amend our naturalization laws as oppressiveto foreigners, nominated a man for the Presidency who spoke publicly inthis language: "Above all, we ought to drive from our shores foreigninfluence, which has been in every age the curse of republics!"

_Keep it before the People_, That this Cincinnati Platform pledgesitself to the "Acts known as the Compromise Measures, " and then resolves"to resist all attempts at renewing, in Congress or out of it, theagitation of slavery;" while the second best nags before the Conventionwere Douglass and Pierce, who brought forward the bill repealing theMissouri Compromise line, and opening up anew the slavery agitation, while Pierce signed the bill and adopted it as an Administrationmeasure!

_Keep it before the People_, That this same Platform asserts, as anindispensable article of the Democratic faith, that "the proceeds of thepublic lands ought to be sacredly applied to the national objectsspecified in the Constitution;" and yet a majority of the Democracy, inone branch of Congress, unhesitatingly voted for a bill introduced byRobert M. T. Hunter, a leader of "the most straitest sect" of DemocraticPharisees, which proposed to give away the whole body of the publiclands to squatters, at the nominal price of ninepence an acre, and atfive years' credit!

_Keep it before the People_, That this same platform deprecates a policywhich legislates for the few at the expense of the many; yet itsbuilders nominated a man for the Presidency who has avowed himself onthe floor of the Senate in favor of reducing the wages of poor white mento the Cuban standard of TEN CENTS per day!

_Keep it before the People_, That this Cincinnati Platform utterly failsto come up to that high Southern standard, which the country looked forfrom a party so lavish of promises, and that it has deliberately andcompletely shirked the slavery issue, the only apology for which isfound in their having nominated an old anti-slavery Federalist. 

_Keep it before the People_, That JAMES BUCHANAN was opposed to the warof 1812, but is in favor of the next war--while a Federalist he wasconservative in his views, but is now square upon a FilibusteringPlatform--his nomination, an overture to the Sumner Wing of Democracy, is the very nomination for the Nullifiers, Fire-eaters, and Disunionistsof the South--that while we cry North, shout South, every faction isunited. 

THE CINCINNATI VICE PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE. 

_John C. Breckenridge_, of Kentucky, is now the Democratic candidate forthe Vice Presidency; and in our devotion to the _head_ of the ticket, wedo not wish to neglect the _tail_. Mr. Breckenridge is a good speaker, and is about as good a selection as his party could make. He has notbeen long enough in public life to attain any experience as a statesman, nor has he been guilty of any great indiscretion in his shortCongressional career. He will be unable to carry Kentucky for his party, though he has some elements of strength. Standing out in violentopposition to his relatives upon the _Know Nothing_ issues, he will beacceptable to all Foreigners, and the Catholics in particular! Being onthe very best of terms with _Cassius M. Clay_, and voting with theEmancipationists of Kentucky, he will be rather acceptable to theAnti-Slavery men than otherwise! He was a zealous supporter of the billin Congress appropriating a million or two dollars to works of InternalImprovement, which was _vetoed_ by Pierce. That bill provided $50, 000for the improvement of the Kentucky River, to which he urged anamendment insisting on $150, 000. This will give him strength with theDemocracy of the North and North-West, who advocated the doctrine ofInternal Improvements by the General Government!

On May 20th, 1856, the _Charleston Mercury_ came out advising the Southas to the selection of candidates, which advice, if adhered to, wouldprove ruinous alike to Buchanan and Breckenridge. A brief extract fromthat article is in these words:

 "A man unsound on Slavery, Free Trade, and Internal Improvements, or whose opinions are shrouded in treacherous ambiguity--such a man, be he Black Republican or Democrat, is unworthy of her support. To vote for either, is to give away her influence, to be used against her. It is to stultify principle, and be the instrument of her own undoing. "

This doctrine would get very much in the way of such men as _Toombs andStephens_, of Georgia, and other Anti-Internal Improvement Democrats, but they can excuse Breckenridge on the ground that he acquiesced in theveto of Pierce, and was possibly only trying to make a little capital athome, which is common with Democracy. Besides, Mr. Breckenridge beingraised a _Clay Whig_, and representing the Ashland District as aDemocrat, should be allowed to pass over the _Jordan_ of Democracy bydegrees!

His name can be used advantageously in this contest in another respect. While Mr. Buchanan was Mr. Clay's most vindictive enemy, traducer, andcalumniator, Mr. Breckenridge can be held up to the Clay Whigs, ashaving announced to the House of Representatives the death of Mr. Clay, in language and sentiments branding Buchanan as a malignant slanderer, without mentioning his name, by the character he gave to Clay! Closinghis eulogy upon Mr. Clay in these words, Mr. Breckenridge evidentlylooked with the eye of prophecy at the slanders of Buchanan, therecollection of which would "cluster" around his grave:--

 "Every memorial of such a man will possess a meaning and value to his countrymen. His tomb will be a hallowed spot. Great memories will cluster there, and his countrymen as they visit it may well exclaim:

 "Such graves as his are pilgrim shrines-- Shrines to no creed or code confined; The Delphian vales, the Palestines, The Meccas of the mind. "

If we mistake not, this young Breckenridge is the nephew of the Rev. John Breckenridge, formerly of Baltimore, and pastor of the PresbyterianChurch. If so, he is the nephew of the Rev. Robert Breckenridge, thetalented and staunch advocate of the American party. The venerable uncleof this young man, whilst pastor of the Church in Baltimore, was a mostformidable opponent of the Roman Catholic religion, and is the man whoconducted the debate with Archbishop Hughes, in 1836, which we now havebefore us, in a large volume of 550 pages. Of course _Bishop Hughes_will require the young man to repudiate his uncle's views and charges inopposition to the Papal religion; and this, we should think, he will dofor the sake of the Catholic vote in America!

From the Knoxville Whig of June 14, 1856. 

PROGRESSIVE DEMOCRACY--ITS LEGITIMATE FRUITS. 

The following important document we take from the NationalIntelligencer, of January 22, 1851. It was signed and published bygentlemen irrespective of parties--FORTY-FOUR Senators andRepresentatives in Congress. It will be a _curiosity_ to those of ourreaders who may have forgotten its well-timed and patriotic pledges. Howunfortunate it has been for the country, and especially the publictranquillity, that the determination and counsels of these men were, inan evil hour, departed from, and flagrantly violated by the demagoguesof the self-styled Democratic party! To the violation of this solemnpledge by the repeal of the Missouri Compromise line, and the reöpeningof the Slavery agitation by the introduction of the Kansas-Nebraskabill, intended to elevate that miserable little demagogue, _Stephen A. Douglass_, to the Presidency, we are indebted for all the scenes ofbloodshed in Kansas, to the angry slavery discussions in Congress, andthe disgraceful scenes of riot being almost daily enacted there!

Several copies of the following Declaration were circulated in Congress, and obtained a number of signatures in both halls; but no other list wasever published, that we know of, besides this, which, it will be seen, was headed by the illustrious HENRY CLAY:

 "The undersigned, members of the thirty-first Congress of the United States, believing that a renewal of sectional controversy upon the subject of slavery would be both dangerous to the Union and destructive of its objects; and seeing no mode by which such controversy can be avoided, except by a strict adherence to the settlement thereof effected by the Compromise Acts passed at the last session of Congress, do hereby declare their intention to maintain the said settlement inviolate, and to resist all attempts to repeal or alter the acts aforesaid, unless by the general consent of the friends of the measure, and to remedy such evils, if any, as time and experience may develop. And, for the purpose of making this resolution effective, they further declare that they will not support for the office of President, Vice-President, Senator, or Representative in Congress, or as a member of a State Legislature, any man, of whatever party, who is not known to be opposed to the disturbance of the settlement aforesaid, and to the renewal, in any form, of agitation upon the subject of slavery. 

 "Henry Clay, C. S. Morehead, Robt. L. Rose, W. C. Dawson, Thos. J. Rusk, Jere. Clemens, James Cooper, Thos. C. Pratt, Wm. M. Gwin, Samuel A. Elliot, David Outlaw, O. H. Williams, J. Philips Phoenix, A. M. Schemerhorn, Jno. R. Thurman, D. A. Bokee, Geo. R. Andrews, W. P. Mangum, Jeremiah Morton, R. I. Bowie, E. C. Cabell, Alex. Evans, Howell Cobb, H. S. Foote, Wm. Duer, Jas. Brooks, A. H. Stephens, R. Toombs, M. P. Gentry, H. W. Hilliard, F. E. McLean, A. G. Watkins, H. A. Bullard, T. S. Haywood, A. H. Shephard, Daniel Breck, Jas. L. Johnson, J. B. Thompson, J. M. Anderson, John B. Kerr, J. P. Caldwell, Ed. Deberry, H. Marshall, Allen F. Owen. "

The _rowdyism_ and _treachery_ of Democracy never intended to abide bythis pledge--and hence their "disturbance of the settlement aforesaid, "by opening up anew this villainous "agitation upon the subject ofslavery. " This violation of a solemn pledge has introduced into Kansascivil war, caused bloodshed, the shooting down of men in cold blood, andoverrun that country with contending parties, called "_Friends ofFreedom_" and "_Border Ruffians_, " armed with Sharpe's rifles, Colt'srevolvers, bowie-knives, and clubs, mixed with Bibles!

All this really affords an illustration of the domineering insolence ofDemocratic Abolitionism--an element in our Federal Government which willstop at no extremity of violence, in order to subdue the people of theSlave States, and force them into a miserable subservience to itsfanatical dominion. And it is worthy of note, that the shooting ofSheriff Jones and others in Kansas, occurred immediately after thearrival of the _New Haven Emigrant Rifle Company_! This, too, calls tomind forcibly the very delectable _conversational speechifying_ thattook place at the New Haven Rifle Meeting, among the pious villains whofigured most conspicuously. As it is short, we give it entire:

 Rev. Mr. Dutton (pastor of the church. )--One of the deacons of this church, Mr. Harvey Hall, is going out with the company to Kansas, and I, as his pastor, desire to present him a Bible and a Sharpe's rifle. (Great applause. )

 E. P. Pie. --I will give one. 

 Stephen D. Purdee. --I will give one for myself, and also another one for my wife. 

 Mr. Beecher. --I like to see that--it is a bold stroke both right and left. (Great laughter. )

 Charles Ives. --Put me down for three. 

 Thomas R. Trowbridge. --Put me down for four. (Continued laughter. ) Dr. J. I. Howe. --I will subscribe for one. 

 A gentleman said that Miss Mary Dutton would give one. 

 Dr. Stephen G. Hubbard. --One. 

 Mr. Beecher here stated that if twenty-five could be raised on the spot, he would pledge twenty-five more from the church at Plymouth--fifty being a sufficient number for the whole supply. (Clapping of hands all over the house. )

 Prof. Silliman now left Mr. Beecher to speak for the bid, and sat down to enjoy the occasion. 

 Mr. Killem. --I give one. 

 Mr. Beecher. --_Killem_--that's a significant name in connection with a good Sharpe's rifle. (Laughter. )

After this, this clerical vagabond, Beecher, blessed the weapons, andencouraged the party to go forth and "do or die" in the sublime "causeof nigger freedom!" In all human probability, sweet Mary Dutton's riflemay have sped the ball that pierced the side of Sheriff Jones, theofficer of the law, while in the honest discharge of a sworn duty!Subsequent murders, where pro-slavery men were shot down with theserifles, we attribute to the _omen_ that Beecher found in his name"_Killem_"--it is a significant name in connection with Sharpe's rifle. The real assassins shoot down their men, and with their _rifles_ and_Bibles_ flee; but _she_ who unfrocked herself by furnishing a rifle, and _he_ who gave and blessed the weapon of death, are here to acceptthe thanks of their admirers and partisans. Let sweet Mary and her_beloved_ pastor be crowned with wreaths of deadly night-shade, andconsigned to one cell in Sing Sing prison!

But the success of Ruffianism in Kansas, in the hands of those vileAbolition Democrats, has emboldened members of the same party tointroduce it in the Federal Capital. But the other day, MR. SUMNER, ofMassachusetts, made, in his place in the U. S. Senate, one of the mostincendiary and inflammatory speeches ever uttered on the floor of eitherHouse of Congress! The vocabulary of Billingsgate was exhausted indenouncing all who dared to justify the institution of slavery--using, over and over again, such terms as "hireling, picked from the drunkenspew of an uneasy civilization in the form of men, " &c. The languagemade use of was disgraceful to the vile Abolitionist himself, and to theSenate, of which he never ought to have been a member. There was nolimit to the personal abuse in which the villainous Senator indulged, norestraint to the vile epithets coined in his insane head; and the verynatural consequence was, a personal chastisement of Mr. Sumner, in theSenate chamber, by Mr. Brooks, a Representative from South Carolina, anda relative of Judge Butler, the gentleman abused in his absence, which, for its severity, never was equalled in Washington. Mr. Sumner was theaggressor, because he poured out the vials of his wrath upon not onlyJudge Butler, a distinguished Senator, but upon the whole State of SouthCarolina. 

We do not justify the selection of a _time_ and _place_ by _Mr. Brooks_, for punishing this Massachusetts Abolitionist; but we should despise theson of South Carolina who could hear his native State arraigned in suchtemper and language, without feeling intensely, and _manifesting_ thatfeeling at a proper time and place. Indeed, it would be strange if aSouth Carolinian did not resent the arrogant, insulting, andcontemptuous tone which Mr. Sumner saw fit to indulge in towards SouthCarolina in general, and her Senator in particular! We know JudgeButler--we have seen him on the Bench, in the discharge of the duties ofa Circuit-Judge--we have seen and heard him in the Senate Chamber, wherehe has served for years, with credit to himself and honor to his State. He is an accomplished man, and a most amiable and honorable gentleman. His character is unblemished; he stands deservedly high; he is agentleman of urbane and courteous demeanor, and is beloved, esteemed, and respected, by all _gentlemen_ who know him or associate with him. Besides, he is an old man, gray-haired, and palsied; and, whetherpresent or absent, deserved to be treated as a gentleman. 

Northern men may not expect to vilify the South in this way, withouthaving to atone for it. Men who profess to belong to the peace party, ought not to employ language that will provoke a fight, and then shieldthemselves behind their non-resistant defences. They voluntarily putthemselves upon the platform of _resistance_--they pass insults, andthey must submit to the consequences. We have just finished the perusalof a case in Æsop's Fables, exactly in point. It is the case of a_trumpeter_ taken prisoner in battle. He claimed exemption from thecommon fate of prisoners of war, in ancient times, on the ground that hecarried no weapons, and was, in fact, a non-combatant, belonging to thepeace party! "Non-combatant, the Devil!" exclaimed the opposing party, pointing to his trumpet, as preparations were being made to put him todeath, "Why, Sir, you hold in your hands the very instrument whichincites our foes to tenfold furies against us!"

But this fight between the parties has to come, and it should begin atWashington, and if not in the halls of Congress, at least in the_streets_ of the Federal city. Let the battle be fought there, and notin _Kansas_, and let it fall upon the villainous agitators of theSlavery question, and the _Democratic_ disturbers of the Compromises ofthe Constitution. Let it come _now_, that it may be fought out andsettled, and not left to _posterity_, to curse and crush the risinggeneration!

Mr. Brooks is a Democrat, and an anti-Know Nothing. Mr. Sumner is aDemocrat--was elected by the votes of the Democrats, over that noble anddignified Whig, Mr. Winthrop, and his election was hailed throughout theUnion as a Democratic triumph!

Massachusetts, irrespective of parties, seems to have taken greatoffence at this occurrence, and to have held indignation meetings, andwas to have had _Legislative_ action upon the subject. We tellMassachusetts that she is alone to blame, for sending such a man to theUnited States Senate. There was a great debate in the Senate twenty-fiveyears ago, in which Daniel Webster and Gov. Hayne met each other andgrappled like giants, as they were. The State of South Carolina, in thatday, though represented by an able, patriotic, and great man, came off_second best_. The Senator from Massachusetts, of that day, was an ablestatesman, a Constitutional lawyer of unsurpassed abilities, and, withal, a cautious gentleman, and rose above the low blackguardism of aSumner and a Wilson. When _taunted_ by the Senator from South Carolinawith _Federalism_, and opposition to some of the features of the War of1812, the great Webster presented Massachusetts before the Senate andthe Union, in such a manner that men of all sections bowed down andworshipped her. Standing erect with the flash of his eagle eye, heexclaimed, "There is Boston, and Concord, and Lexington, and BunkerHill"--let them testify to the loyalty of Massachusetts to this gloriousUnion! Not only did Mr. Webster come out of that controversy with SouthCarolina with the admiration of every man in the country, but with therespect and admiration of Calhoun, Hayne, McDuffie, and all thehigh-toned statesmen of the South. And why? Because he was not a Sumner, a Wilson, or an _Abolition Blackguard_. Times have changed--a differentman takes the place of a Webster, with only the memory of an insultingspeech and a broken head! Let Massachusetts send men to the UnitedStates Senate who can and will demean themselves like gentlemen, andgentlemen from the South will appreciate them, while they differhonestly with them on great questions. 

What wonderful _progress_ Democracy is making in the country! _First_, Democracy quarrelled and jowered over the election of a Speaker twomonths, and finally, by the introduction of the _Plurality Rule_, causedBanks, a Black Republican, to be elected. And as if determined to atonefor this wear of time and money, they have brought about a series offights, which, before they are disposed of, will cost the governmenthalf a million of dollars!

_First_ then, William Smith, an ex-Governor of the State of Virginia, and member of the House of Representatives, assailed and beat the editorof the _Evening Star_, in December last, in the street. 

_Second_, Albert Rusk, a member of the House of Representatives fromArkansas, assailed and beat the editor of the New York _Tribune_ in thegrounds of the capitol, immediately after leaving the House ofRepresentatives. 

_Third_, Philip T. Herbert, of Alabama, a member of Congress fromCalifornia, shot down and killed an Irish Catholic waiter at Willard's, and is now under bonds to appear before the Court and await his trialfor such crime as they may adjudge him to have committed. 

_Fourth_, Preston S. Brooks, a member of the House of Representativesfrom South Carolina, assails and beats unmercifully a Senator fromMassachusetts, when occupying his seat in the Senate of the UnitedStates. 

_Fifth_, Mr. Bright knocked down the doorkeeper, for an inconsiderableoffence. Here, then, we have five breaches of the peace in five months, by Democrats upon Democrats, although the "Boston Pilot, " a Catholicorgan, falsely charges that some of the parties making these assaultsare "Know Nothings. " We congratulate the Democratic party upon theprogress of its leading members! They are sinking by swift descent intobarbarism, and bringing the country to ruin. And in keeping with allthis, they have tried to nominate for the Vice-Presidency a man whoopenly proposed in Congress the repeal of our neutrality laws, so as tobring a general fight!

It will not do to say that _Sumner_ is not of the Democratic party, because he is a regular-built Free-Soiler and Black Republican: theWashington _Union_ settled this point in 1852, when it uttered thesememorable words:

 "The Free-soil Democratic leaders of the North are a regular portion of the Democratic party, and General Pierce, if elected, will make no distinction between them and the rest of the Democracy in the distribution of official patronage, and in the selection of agents for administering the government. "

The rules of the Senate forbid personalities in debate, and it was thesworn duty of its Locofoco President, Mr. Bright, to have called Mr. Sumner to order for his abuse of Judge Butler. But as far back as thirtyyears ago, under the auspices of JOHN C. CALHOUN as presiding officer, adecision was made to the effect that the presiding officer of the Senatewas neither bound nor had he the power to call Senators to order! Thatpower, according to his decision, belonged wholly to the Senateitself----thus delivering over the minority of that body to "the tendermercies" of the majority! The object of Mr. CALHOUN at the time was toplay into the hands of a combination which had been formed to break downthe Administration of John Quincy Adams, and to cripple Henry Clay. Theinstrument used was the sarcastic, irritating, and personal rhetoric ofJohn Randolph, then a member of the Senate. To this end, Randolph wassuffered to deliver in the Senate a long succession of tirades, disgraceful to the Senate, abusive of New England and of Henry Clay. Here is a specimen of Randolph's abuse, which led to a duel between himand Mr. Clay:

 "This man, (mankind, I crave pardon, ) this worm, (little animals, forgive the insult, ) was raised to a higher life than he was born to, for he was raised to the society of blackguards. Some fortune--kind to him, cruel to us--has tossed him to the Secretaryship of State. Contempt has the property of descending, but stops far short of him. She would die before she would reach him: he dwells below her fall. I would hate him, if I did not despise him. It is not WHAT he is, but WHERE he is, that puts my thoughts into action. The alphabet which writes the name of Thersites, blackguard, squalidity, refuses her letters for him. That mind which thinks on what it cannot express, can scarcely think on him. An hyperbole for MEANNESS would be an ellipsis for CLAY. "

This was pleasing to Mr. Calhoun and the dominant party in the Senate, and his decision which tolerated it never was questioned by anyauthoritative precedent, until MILLARD FILLMORE was electedVice-President. With characteristic independence, he determined that aprecedent so unreasonable and absurd should not be binding on him as thepresiding officer of the Senate. He therefore, on assuming the duties ofhis office, delivered an address to the Senate, in which he informedthat body that he considered it his sworn duty to preserve decorum, andwould _reverse_ the rule which had so long prevailed, that Senators werenot to be called to order for words spoken in debate! The Senate orderedthis address to be entered at large on their journals, as an evidence oftheir endorsement of its doctrines; and there it is now, recordedevidence of the patriotism, high sense of decorum, and senatorialdignity of that great and good man, MILLARD FILLMORE. 

STRENGTH OF PARTIES IN TENNESSEE. 

OFFICIAL VOTES OF THE STATE. 

The following tables exhibit the official vote of Tennessee forPresident in 1852, for Governor in 1853, and for Governor in 1855, ascompared at the capital of the State, and will be valuable as a tablefor reference. In the last contest, when the _Know Nothing issues_ werefully made, causing all the _latent blackguardism in the Democraticranks to be fully developed_, it will be seen that _Andrew Johnson_received 67, 499 votes, and _Meredith P. Gentry_ 65, 342, leaving Johnsona majority of 2, 157, a falling off of 104 votes from his majority over_Maj. Henry_ two years before that. It will also be perceived that thevote of the State at this last election is an increase of 8, 260 over thevote two years previous. Of this increase, _Col. Gentry_ gets 4, 182, hisvote exceeding _Maj. Henry's_ by that much, while Johnson's increaseupon his own vote two years previous was 4, 078. 

It is a moderate calculation to say that Johnson received at least twothousand _foreign and illegal votes_; while we are within bounds when wesay that at least 5, 000 old-line Whigs refused to vote for _Col. Gentry_--demonstrating beyond all doubt that a majority of the legalvoters of the State were opposed to Johnson and his party. 

In the contest now being waged, _Fillmore and Donelson_ will carry theState by a majority ranging from _three_ to _five_ thousand votes, despite the low Billingsgate slang and vile blackguardism that may beheaped upon them and their supporters. And as this calculation is madein _June_, five months in advance of the election, we must ask thoseinto whose hands this work shall fall without the limits of Tennessee, to bear it in mind, and when they get the returns in November, to giveus credit for our sagacity or our want of sagacity!

The contest will be fierce and bitter, exceeding any former politicalbattle witnessed in the State. If the orators and editors of theself-styled Democratic party have not greatly reformed in the space ofone year, but little argument will be adduced, but little gentlemanlycourtesy manifested; and instead of facts, figures and arguments, bitterinvective, low blackguardism, and Billingsgate abuse of secretorganizations, dark lanterns, and Protestant clergymen, will be theorder of the day. In this _congenial_ work, all the conglomeration ofignorant men, foreign paupers, and fag-ends and factions, stylingthemselves _Democrats_, will engage!

But to the official vote of the State:

_Popular Vote of Tennessee--Official. _

 EAST TENNESSEE. 

 1852. 1853. 1855. 

Counties. Scott. Pierce. Henry. Johnson. Gentry. Johnson. 

Anderson 602 267 648 379 772 333Bledsoe 464 209 469 303 404 361Blount 827 566 1146 734 1069 789Bradley 547 778 562 1085 644 1021Campbell 313 251 356 445 507 383Carter 585 139 721 294 768 238Claiborne 503 519 620 707 756 744Cooke 743 196 867 383 929 422Grainger 852 477 998 767 1327 621Greene 780 1301 902 1915 989 1985Hawkins 778 831 805 1180 887 1158Hamilton 774 648 786 972 966 1044Hancock 241 336 221 532 264 589Jefferson 1168 307 1396 639 1697 444Johnson 365 93 392 184 400 215Knox 1863 565 2279 770 2560 695McMinn 796 866 799 965 909 953Meigs 141 442 118 561 97 588Marion 453 292 476 357 554 468Monroe 805 847 739 900 851 1005Morgan 240 222 229 260 219 358Polk 272 470 249 527 385 676Rhea 300 307 270 358 298 415Roane 820 678 912 755 1002 769Sevier 621 80 824 133 964 120Scott 199 127 186 182 121 259Sullivan 260 1114 361 1407 601 1403Washington 565 853 967 1069 847 1338 ------ ------ ------ ------ 19, 298 18, 763 21, 787 19, 394

MIDDLE TENNESSEE. 

Counties. Scott. Pierce. Henry. Johnson. Gentry. Johnson. 

Bedford 1390 1356 1359 1257 1630 1293Cannon 453 727 445 803 458 859Coffee 205 722 274 824 294 880Davidson 2617 2058 2597 1963 3132 1783De Kalb 559 588 632 610 560 738Dickson 323 607 357 743 388 745Fentress 153 411 166 504 129 616Franklin 330 1133 356 1224 394 1302Giles 1303 1447 1301 1468 1312 1439Grundy 44 327 58 374 22 425Hardin 643 808 671 827 745 775Hickman 241 839 263 812 223 1053Humphreys 263 471 341 501 354 543Jackson 1170 803 1154 995 1122 1131Lawrence 547 583 523 731 524 845Lewis 43 186 66 182 34 243Lincoln 606 2297 617 2322 402 2521Maury 1324 1799 1238 1731 1444 1793Montgomery 1260 993 1309 1004 1502 881Marshall 666 1340 671 1282 678 1310Macon 617 374 553 341 540 424Overton 345 1039 431 1282 290 1528Robertson 1013 769 1183 763 1256 804Rutherford 1495 1313 1407 1243 1435 1288Smith 1742 520 1735 546 1572 644Stewart 533 725 479 718 563 785Sumner 825 1563 806 1425 780 1740Van Buren 107 165 110 205 90 228Warren 344 922 402 1093 393 1153Wayne 666 380 709 430 687 535White 949 518 974 634 978 694Williamson 1583 763 1502 710 1621 688Wilson 2248 923 2241 995 2290 937 ------ ------ ------ ------ 26, 930 30, 550 27, 842 32, 623

WEST TENNESSEE. 

Counties. Scott. Pierce. Henry. Johnson. Gentry. Johnson. 

Benton 340 485 393 465 475 453Carroll 1498 649 1469 663 1567 694Decatur 400 315 408 285 353 429Dyer 508 411 476 373 442 483Fayette 1006 1034 1011 1006 1151 940Gibson 1570 901 1514 1024 1618 1213Hardeman 717 1024 651 1025 619 1123Henderson 1193 511 1301 593 1230 734Henry 899 1516 891 1496 871 1738Haywood 790 732 726 785 803 762Lauderdale 330 277 319 252 354 297McNairy 921 872 1016 984 915 1059Madison 1426 819 1261 795 1448 788Obion 431 644 547 792 407 865Perry 325 314 387 329 320 450Shelby 1824 1628 1545 1435 1831 1477Tipton 357 565 284 527 424 566Weakley 783 1149 733 1279 885 1411 ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ ------ 58, 802 57, 123 14, 932 14, 108 15, 713 15, 482 57, 123 ------Scott's majority, 1, 679

 East Tennessee, 19, 298 18, 763 21, 787 19, 394 Middle Tennessee, 26, 930 30, 550 27, 842 32, 623 ------ ------ ------ ------ 61, 160 63, 421 65, 342 67, 499 61, 160 65, 342 ------ ------ Johnson's majority 2, 261 2, 157

_Fillmore and Donelson Electoral Ticket. _

As a matter of reference, and that none may mistake the American Ticketon the day of the election, we give it as agreed upon and matured by ourparty:

FOR THE STATE. 

HON. NEILL S. BROWN, of Davidson. HORACE MAYNARD, of Knox. 

FOR THE DISTRICTS. 

1st District--N. G. TAYLOR, of Carter. 2d " MOSES WHITE, of Knox. 3d " REESE B. BRABSON, of Hamilton. 4th " W. P. HICKERSON, of Coffee. 5th " ROBERT HATTON, of Wilson. 6th " W. H. WISENER, of Bedford. 7th " C. C. CROWE, of Giles. 8th " J. M. QUARLES, of Montgomery. 9th " ISAAC R. HAWKINS, of Carroll. 10th " JOSEPH R. MOSBY, of Fayette. 

This is an able ticket, and greatly superior to the opposing ticket, asour readers will bear us witness when they hear the parties in debate. Most of these gentlemen have consented to serve on the ticket at greatpersonal sacrifices; and like their chief, Mr. FILLMORE, they haveundertaken to serve their party and country "without waiting to inquireof its prospects of success or defeat. " And all the reward they seek isto be able to conduct the struggle to a victorious consummation inTennessee, and this we feel confident they will do. The battle inTennessee will be hotly contested, but it is by no means doubtful. Tennessee for the last twenty years, and in five preceding presidentialcontests, has refused to range herself under the black banner ofLocofocoism; and now that that banner is doubly infamous by being raisedand cheered by Catholics, foreigners, and paupers of every clime, it isfair to presume she will spurn the flag!

THE BLACK REPUBLICAN NOMINEES. 

The Black Republican Party, in their recent Convention at Philadelphia, have nominated JOHN CHARLES FREMONT, of California, for the Presidency, and Ex-Senator WILLIAM L. DAYTON, of New Jersey, for the VicePresidency!

This man Fremont is no statesman--has no experience in politicallife--has not the first qualification for this eminent and responsiblestation--and his nomination has not been made upon any plausible pretextwhatever. He is an Engineer by profession--once penetrated with hiscompanions to the Pacific coast, across the Rocky Mountains--is theson-in-law of _Tom Benton_--is a Free Trade Locofoco, and an avowed FreeSoiler. 

The following letter addressed by Fremont to the great TabernacleAbolition meeting in New York, last spring, is full and explicit, anddefines his position on the slavery question:

 "NEW YORK, April 29, 1856. 

 "GENTLEMEN: I have to thank you for the honor of an invitation to a meeting this evening at the Broadway Tabernacle, and regret that other engagements have interfered to prevent my being present. 

 "I heartily concur in all movements which have for their object 'to repair the mischiefs arising from the violation of good faith in the repeal of the Missouri Compromise. ' I am opposed to slavery in the abstract and upon principle, sustained and made habitual by long-settled convictions. 

 "While I feel inflexible in the belief that it ought not to be interfered with where it exists under the shield of State sovereignty, I am as inflexibly opposed to its extension on this continent beyond its present limits. 

 "With the assurance of regard for yourselves, "I am very respectfully yours, "J. C. FREMONT. "

 "Messrs. J. D. Morgan and others. "

In addition to this, Fremont is the representative of _aggression_: heis a _Filibuster_, and the exponent of a civilization above allconstitutions, and all laws. The fact that Seward, Chase, Giddings, andsuch men--able anti-slavery men, and experienced politicians, werepassed over, is proof that they were not governed by _principle_, butseek to shift the issue, and to make it personal and sectional. Takeinto the account, moreover, the fact that Dayton, a man of moderatetalents, is a sort of _Protective Tariff Locofoco_, the advocate ofForeign Pauper labor, and the largest liberty for _Catholics_, and itgives to the ticket a considerable degree of interest. 

The leading men in the Convention were reckless and unprincipleddemagogues, of the Locofoco school of politics, including the BritishFree Trade policy, Filibusterism, etc. , whose only aim is place andplunder. Their Free-soil principles, outside of their radical purposes, are scarcely skin deep!

By many well-informed men, no doubts are entertained now, that thenomination of Fremont and Dayton has been the result of an intriguebetween Seward and Archbishop Hughes; and from a resolution of theirplatform, as reported by the Committee on Resolutions, we attach creditto this inference. It will bring the Buchanan party at the North toterms, as they are likely to be the only sufferers from this ticket. Itwill be managed in future alone with an eye to the _aid_ of Buchanan!

We take the following notice of Fremont from the Charleston (S. C. )Standard, and consider it every way reliable:

 "Mr. Fremont will be destined to play a distinguished part in the drama, and his history and character therefore will, doubtless, become subjects of considerable importance. He is generally regarded as a native of Charleston, but of this we have occasion to doubt. Many gentlemen here, who knew him in early life, concur in saying that he was born in Savannah. Up to within a short time prior to his birth, his mother was a resident of Norfolk, in Virginia, and it is generally asserted that his parents resided in Savannah before they became settled in Charleston; however this may have been, it is at least conceded that he first came into notice in this city. His prospects here were not particularly promising, but he attracted the attention of some philanthropic gentlemen, who provided the means for his entrance and instruction in the Charleston College. His progress there was not remarkable, and when his class graduated he was not considered entitled to a diploma. He was afterwards recommended as a proper person to take charge of the night-school of the Apprentices' Library Association; but, though his attainments were sufficient, and his address particularly acceptable to the Directors of that Institution, he was not as attentive as he might have been, and the school fell through. He afterwards procured, through Mr. Poinsett, a situation as instructor of junior officers on board a vessel of war bound to the Pacific, and in this condition is said to have acquitted himself well. He afterwards acquired some knowledge of civil engineering, and filling unimportant positions in connection with one and another public work, was at length brought to notice and distinction by his connection with Mr. Nicholet in his Survey of the Mississippi Valley, and from that marched steadily on to the Rocky Mountains, and a renown that has placed his name before the country. 

 "From the records of his early life, it would seem that he had talent, and was quite addicted to naval reading, but was wayward, and if not indolent, was inefficient in the tasks undertaken at the instance of other people, and up to the time of his entrance upon his duties as instructor in the naval school, had hardly made up his mind whether he would be a man of character or a blackguard. He was fond of dress, however, and the records of the court still show that he wore a suit of clothes which he was afterwards compelled to declare on oath his inability to pay for, in order to avoid inconvenient restrictions upon his personal liberty; but chance gave a proper direction to his abilities; he had the latent energy of character to act up to his opportunities, and he has really presented a career which any one might regard with satisfaction. It is certainly to be regretted that he should lend himself to the uses of a party so reckless and subversive, not only of the Union but of the rights of that section to which, if capable of sentiments of patriotism, he might be supposed to feel attachment; but the prospect of the Presidency would be a sore trial to the probity of most men, and we find nothing in the antecedents of Mr. Fremont to cause a feeling of disappointment that he should yield to the allurements of power. 

 "He is commended for his attentions to his mother, and they were certainly exemplary. She was poor, and after he determined to behave himself and work like a man, he made her as entirely comfortable as there was the reason to believe his circumstances permitted. "

POSTSCRIPT. --Mr. Fremont turns out to be a Roman Catholic, and to havebeen raised one, and this explains the readiness of Bishop Hughes toabandon Buchanan, and go over to Fremont. It also explains why it isthat so many _German Catholic papers_ are coming out for Fremont, in thelarge cities, and in the North-Western States. 

In 1850, Fremont held a seat in the United States Senate, for the spaceof about three months, and during that time sought to introduce aCatholic Priest to open their services with prayers, and was successfulto some extent. He also attended service at the Catholic Church. The_Washington Star_, of the 19th June, 1856, gives the followingexposition of facts, in reference to Fremont and his religion:

 "A SORT OF A CATHOLIC. --We take it for granted that among the informal pledges extracted by delegations in George Law's Convention, from Col. Fremont, there was not one against the Catholic Church; insomuch as, up to the recent birth of his aspirations for the Presidency, he always passed in Washington for a good enough outside Roman Catholic; that being the Church in which he was reared. He was married in this city, it will be remembered, by Father Van Horseigh, a clergyman of his Church--not of that of his wife's family. "

The Republicans sought to incorporate into their platform a plank inopposition to the _Religious Proscription_ of the American party, so asto suit the taste of Romanists generally; but Thaddeus Stevens, whoknows Pennsylvania as well as any man living, implored them not to doso, and stated that such a course, with Fremont as their nominee, wouldlose them Pennsylvania by 50, 000 votes!

It turns out, however, that Fremont, as the anti-American, anti-Protestant candidate, with Mr. Dayton on the ticket, equallyanti-American, and devoted to Romanism, will sweep the Catholic vote inthe United States. Catholics may favor Buchanan in such Southern Statesas do not run a Fremont ticket, but in all the Northern andNorth-Western States, the Fremont ticket will ruin the Buchanan ticket. 

This question, taken in connection with the Slavery issue, and theFilibustering issue, narrows the contest down to one between Fillmoreand Fremont. Buchanan is defeated, and the Southern fire-eaters see andfeel it! The _Atlanta_ (Ga. ) _Intelligencer_ comes out and states, thatif Buchanan can't be elected, it prefers Fremont to Fillmore! And theSouth Carolina and Mississippi Disunionists openly avow, that they wishthis to be the last contest of the kind. They are for Buchanan orFremont, over Fillmore, because they believe the election of either willhave the glorious effect to bring about a dissolution of the Union! Inthe same breath they admit that Fillmore will labor to perpetuate theUnion, and that his election will have the effect to prolong itsexistence a few brief years!

Southern men, and Northern men, Union men, and national, conservativemen, of all parties, can now see _where_ we are driving to, and _who_they should support for the Presidency. Let them guard against thesedemons of Popery--these incarnate fiends of the Free Soil faith--thesefanatics of a sectional cast--these slimy vultures of Secession--thesebogus Democrats--and these infinitely infernal traitors to theConstitution and the Union!

 "Col. Fremont was educated in and graduated from St. Mary's College, in Baltimore, a Roman Catholic Institution. He was brought up in the Catholic Faith, and is a Catholic. He married a daughter of Col. Benton. Miss Benton was a Presbyterian. They were married by a clergyman of that denomination; but a Catholic priest made a fuss about it as being null, void, and heretical, and the ceremony was re-performed by him!"--_Auburn American. _

The _American_ might have added, that Fremont is the son of a _CatholicFrenchman_, the son of a _Catholic mother_, and was reared underCatholic influence. Nay, Fremont educates his children at the RomanCatholic Institution at Georgetown, in the District of Columbia! Theplacing of such a candidate before the public, seems especially designedto defy public sentiment, and mock the Protestant American feeling ofthe country! We had expected the Catholics, with Bishop Hughes at theirhead, in a few years more, to come out openly, and run a Catholic forthe Presidency, but we had not supposed them bold enough to attempt itin 1856. To show beyond all doubt that the nomination of Fremont was theresult of a coalition between Seward and Hughes, more in reference tothe _Catholic question_ than the _Slavery issue_, we present the recordof Fremont in the United States Senate--his _ultra-Pro-Slaverycourse_--his voting against justice to the Colonization Society, and_seven hundred and fifty_ captured slaves--his opposition to theabolition of Slavery in the District of Columbia!

HE IS EXTREME SOUTHERN AND PRO-SLAVERY. 

John C. Fremont held a seat in the United States Senate, in 1850, forthe space of a few months. During that time he made no speeches; indeed, he has scarcely ever been known to utter any sentiments, or sanction anyopinions. Yet his votes, as a member of the Senate, did make for him arecord; and it is this record that will stare him in the face as long ashe lives--a record in direct conflict with his present professions andposition before the country:

 LOOK AT IT!--JOHN C. FREMONT'S STATESMANSHIP. 

 [From the Congressional Globe--Vol. 21, part 2d, p. 1803, etc. ]

 "IN SENATE OF UNITED STATES, Sept. 11, 1850. 

 "Mr. Underwood, of Kentucky, called up the bill for the relief of the American Colonization Society. The slaves that were recaptured on the barque Pons were turned over to the Colonization Society, by the authority of the United States, sent to Liberia, and there kept at the expense of the society for one or two years. Most of them were children of twelve, fifteen, and sixteen years of age. The society thinks that the expense of feeding, clothing, and educating these people, which was thus devolved on them by the action of the Government, ought to be repaid them. It was certainly an expense incurred by the society, through the action of the Government in throwing these young negroes upon them for maintenance, instead of taking them, as the Government was bound to do by law, and providing for them. That is the nature of the claim. They simply ask that so much shall be paid them as the society, from its own experience, pays in reference to its own emigrants. The claim was reported upon favorably two years ago. A similar report has again been made; and as the necessities of the society require that they should have the money, I hope, said Mr. U. , the Senate will consent to take up the bill. The Senate agreed to take up the bill, and proceeded to consider it as in Committee of the Whole. 

 "Mr. Turney asked for the reading of the report of the Committee. 

 "The Secretary read the report accordingly. It sets forth that a liberal construction of the act of Congress of March 3d, 1819, would require that the Government should provide for the support of these recaptured Africans, for a reasonable time after they had been landed in Liberia, and that it is beneath the dignity of the Government to devolve this duty upon the society. The petition of the executive committee of the society which the Committee incorporated in their report, states that on the 16th of December, 1845, the United States Ship Yorktown, Commodore Bell, landed at Monrovia, in Liberia, from the slaver Pons, seven hundred and fifty recaptured Africans, in a naked, starving, and dying condition, all of them excepting twenty-one being under the age of twenty-one. The United States made no provision for their support after they were landed.... 

 "The services of providing for the destitute negroes were not required to be performed by the society under their constitution, but the alternative was to leave these recaptured Africans to starve and die, and the society therefore cheerfully took charge of them, relying upon the Government of the United States to refund the cost to them. "

The question was discussed at length as to whether the United Stateswould pay these just and legal demands; and on the vote being taken forthe engrossment of the bill to a third reading, Mr. Fremont's name isfound recorded in the negative--as follows:

 "YEAS--Messrs. Badger, Baldwin, Bell, Chase, Clayton, Davis of Mass. , DAYTON, Dodge of Wis. , Dodge of Iowa, Douglass, Ewing, Felch, Greene, Hale, Hamlin, Jones, Mangum, Pearce, Pratt, Seward, Shields, Smith, Spruance, Sturgeon, Underwood, Wales, Walker, Whitcomb, and Winthrop--29. 

 "NAYS--Messrs. Atchison, Barnwell, Benton, Butler, Dawson, Dickinson, Downs, FREMONT, Hunter, King, Mason, Rusk, Sebastian, Soule, Turner, and Yulee--16. "

LOOK AGAIN!--On the 18th day of September, 1850, the bill to preventpersons from enticing away slaves from the District of Columbia wasunder consideration, and John P. Hale "moved that it be committed to theCommittee on the District of Columbia, with instructions _to so amend itas to_ ABOLISH SLAVERY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA. " On the vote beingtaken, FREMONT'S name was recorded in the NEGATIVE. (See Cong. Globe, 31st Congress, part 2, p. 1859. )

Such is Mr. Fremont's _record of Statesmanship_. It shows his nominationby the "_Republicans_" to have been a hollow mockery--"a dishonestfarce, "--an insult to the intelligence of the American people. 

We shall hereafter pursue the record of this "remarkable man. "

Bishop Hughes and Wm. H. Seward have been, for years, intimate personaland political friends. It is a part of the political history of NewYork, that Seward is alone indebted to Hughes for his reelection to theUnited States Senate. They are both now united in the support ofFremont, and they procured his nomination over Judge McLean, a pure andpatriotic man--for many years a _Methodist Class-Leader_, and an officerof a _Protestant Bible Society_. 

The coalition between Hughes, Seward and Fremont, is complete, and theevidence of the foul coalition and conspiracy will appear in full, in afew days, but not in time for us to get it into this work. We are rightglad of it, as it narrows the contest down to one between Fillmore andFremont, and especially at the North. 

In some of the Northern States, it is now conclusive that a _Buchanan_ticket will not be run, while in every Northern State where such aticket is run, it will be with no hope of success! Hughes and Sewardwill induce several States to drop Buchanan, and unite on Fremont, by_bargaining_ with them, and obligating themselves to give the Democracyhalf of the spoils. Already several _Southern_ Democratic papers aresaying, that if they can't elect Buchanan, they prefer Fremont toFillmore! This ought to open the eyes of all true patriots. 

OLD LINE WHIGS, AND THE MOTIVES GOVERNING SOME OF THEM!

In this free country of ours, gentlemen have a right to support anyPresidential or other ticket they may choose to support; and where theyare governed by pure motives in differing from a majority of theirneighbors and old political associates, no one has a right to complain. 

Some few gentlemen, known as "Old Line Whigs, " will not come into thesupport of the American ticket, but will even support the Democraticticket; and do it from an honest (though mistaken) belief that they canmost effectually serve the interests of the country by this course. Withsuch, we shall be the last man to raise a quarrel--claiming the right todo as we please in matters of the sort. But there are some men in theranks of the enemy now, who are governed by very different motives; andas these are quoted against the American party, or, as their refusal toact with the party is a matter of _boasting_ in the Democratic ranks, itis due to the cause of truth, and of the country, that they should beunderstood, that their efforts may be _appreciated_. 

Without intending to be tedious, we name JAMES C. JONES, of Tennessee, as at the head of the list of _Old Liners_, whose devotion to the_South_, and love of _liberty_, prevent him from supporting Fillmore andDonelson. This is the veriest _stuff_ in the political world! Gov. Jonescannot excuse the matter of his opposition to Millard Fillmore upon thegrounds he rests the case, in his Circular addressed to hisconstituents. The true secret of the matter must come to light, that oldWhigs and new Whigs, Americans and Democrats, may appreciate hismotives. 

Last fall, at the Fair in Jackson, in West Tennessee, in the house andat the bedside of ANDREW GUTHRIE, on being inquired of as to his futurecourse, the Governor became very much excited, and roundly asserted, that if the American party nominated _Fillmore_, he should go againsthim. ==> _Because Fillmore, in his appointment of persons to office inTennessee, did not consult him, but in many cases appointed his personalenemies!_ Mark, he did not pause to inquire _who_ might be the opposingcandidate to Mr. Fillmore. He was not then, as he is not now, governedby any _principle_ in the matter, but by _passion_. He is _against Mr. Fillmore_, under all circumstances, no matter who may oppose him! Andwhy? Because Mr. Fillmore did not suffer him to put his numerous _activefriends_ into fat offices under the General Government; to many of whomhe had made pledges while he was struggling for a seat in the UnitedStates Senate--where he ought never to have gone, and where the betterportion of those who aided in his election now regret having sent him!

But it is true, Fillmore and his Cabinet did refuse the extravagantdemands made for office by the Governor; and in no single instance didthey appoint men to office from Tennessee without consultation withBELL, GENTRY, and WILLIAMS; all three of whom were offensive to _Jones_. They had proven themselves to be worthy of consultation; the Governorhad not! This accounts, moreover, for the efforts of Jones at Baltimoreto defeat the nomination of Fillmore, and to procure the nomination ofScott--efforts which, unfortunately for the country, were but toosuccessful!

When the American party was organized in Tennessee, JONES had noobjection to the creed, and would have fallen into the ranks, but thenhe beheld _Gentry_ and _Brownlow_ in the party--men whom he despisedabove all others. He tried to prevent the nomination of Gentry forGovernor by letter-writing, and by seeking to get up a _Whig_Convention. Failing in these schemes, he threw himself into the arena, and _secretly_ damaged Gentry all he could, and played into the hands ofJohnson, who was only elected by a majority of some _two thousandvotes_!

We are not informed as to the course Gov. Jones will pursue in thiscontest, further than this, he will go against Fillmore. We predict thathe will support Buchanan. _Pride of character_ may keep him from it--ifhe have any of that commodity left, after his five years' residence atWashington! The platform upon which Buchanan has been placed by theCincinnati Convention, is a reiteration of violent and undying hostilityto every measure of public policy that was advocated by HENRY CLAY andthe Old Whig party. Jones still _professes_ an equally undying devotionto Clay and his principles. Moreover, Jones has, on every stump inTennessee, held up Buchanan as a _rank old Federalist_, a Pennsylvania_Abolitionist_, and as the _wicked traducer_, _violent calumniator_, and_malignant persecutor_ of Henry Clay--even attributing his promotion tothe Secretaryship of State, by Mr. Polk, to his _infamous agency_ infastening upon Mr. Clay the foul charge of "bargain, intrigue, andcorruption. " We confess that we are at a loss to see how Jones can fallinto the support of Buchanan. The _nomination_ of the man is a directinsult to Old Clay Whigs!

ALBERT G. WATKINS, the Representative in Congress from the FirstCongressional District of Tennessee, has gone over to Democracy, placinghis change upon the ground of his _great concern for the South_! We takeit that he will support Buchanan without hesitancy. This would placeWatkins before the country in his true colors, and reflect the likenessof the man with _daguerreotype_ accuracy!! With such a platform, andsuch a candidate on it, Watkins would have the appearance of a manwalking in one direction, with his head turned completely around, andhis face looking the other way! The incongruity of the platform, and thepeculiar reputation of Buchanan for political inconsistency, are alikeadapted to the history and incidents of Watkins's late canvass forCongress! The plain truth is, that the man so completely destroyedhimself, and was so ruinously exposed by his competitor, COL. TAYLOR, whom he beat only some two hundred votes, (and that by means that makehis seat in Congress one of _thorns_, ) that he could but go over toLocofocoism. And although he has, in former days, held up Buchanan onthe stump as an old Federalist, and as the reviler and persecutor ofHenry Clay, he can advocate him now with a better grace than he can lookhis Know Nothing constituents in the face! We cannot say of this man asPope said of Craggs:

 "Broke no promise, served no private end, Gained no title, and who lost no friend. "

WILLIAM G. SWAN, of Knoxville, is next on the list of "Old Line Whigs"who have gone over to the Foreign Catholic Democratic party, and ofwhose conversion the Democrats at a distance boast. Here they do notbrag; but on the other hand, some of the leaders, whose names we cansupply, authorize us to state that they do not want him, and will notreceive him. This man was twice beaten for the Legislature in thiscounty--never elected by the people to any position outside ofKnoxville--and became soured at the Whig party. He went for _Johnson andSag Nichtism_ last summer, and his loss is not regretted by the Americanparty in this county. 

But JOHN H. CROZIER, of Knoxville, has gone over to "Old Buck" and hisadmirers; and this is claimed as a change! This little man, _supremelyselfish_, was turned out of Congress five years ago, by JOSIAH M. ANDERSON, with the people at his back, for _taking too much mileage_, byseveral hundred dollars per session, for four years! He afterwardsdesired the Whig party to run him for Governor; but they were notwilling to undertake the _load_. He became soured, and last summer paida visit to some of the counties below, to avoid, as was believed, votingfor Gentry for Governor, and Sneed for Congress. He was formerly verybitter in his opposition to Democracy; and on many a stump has hedenounced _Buchanan_, and all others concerned in the "bargain andintrigue" slander of Clay, besides holding up "Buck" as a Blue-lightFederalist! At a recent Buchanan Ratification meeting in Knoxville, hemade a bitter speech against the American party!

These two men, Swan and Crozier, were active in getting up anorganization against us, in 1849, by heading a company which purchasedthe "_Register Establishment_, " of this city, at the head of which theyplaced one _john miller m'kee_, behind whom they and others concealedthemselves and wrote violent and abusive articles, through a controversyof two years. Driving the whole of them to the wall, as we did, in thecontroversy, they determined to _mob and tear down our office_; and witha view to this, those concerned deposited their _guns_, and other"implements of husbandry, " in the law office jointly occupied by thesetwo men, who have operated as _twin brothers_ for several years--eachsympathizing with the other in his political defeats! Those concernedwere deterred from this contemplated and well-arranged assault upon ouroffice, by COL. LUTTRELL, the Comptroller of the State, and othergentlemen of nerve, arming themselves with shot-guns, pistols, andhatchets, and taking their stand at our office!

Nothing daunted by this defeat, these _gallant_ lawyers, and_generous_--not to say _brave_--opponents betook themselves to thecounty of Anderson, in this Judicial Circuit, and with great difficultygot up an indictment against us, under an old statute, forgotten bygentlemen of the bar, for _advertising a Baltimore lottery scheme_; whenthey themselves, and their relatives, were dealing in the _Art Unionlottery_ in this city! They were most signally defeated in thatindictment; and, together with the two Williamses, brothers-in-law ofCrozier, sought to drive the business men of the place, and others, fromadvertising in our paper, or subscribing for it. Failing in this, theysought to prevent us from getting the Government advertising underFillmore's administration; and in this they failed, though this is theground of their hostility to Fillmore and his Cabinet, as well as toJohn Bell, M. P. Gentry, and C. H. Williams. 

The _Register_ fell through--was sold under the hammer for _twenty-twohundred dollars_--McKee ran away--and the company have had about FIVETHOUSAND DOLLARS to pay for him, which hurts prodigiously! Our WHIG hassteadily increased in favor with the people, and its circulation is nowTHE RISE OF FIVE THOUSAND--being the largest circulation that anypolitical or other journal ever attained in East Tennessee! Indeed, nopolitical weekly in Tennessee now has, or ever did have, a circulationequal to "BROWNLOW'S KNOXVILLE WHIG. "

A young man calling himself _Luther Patterson_, has been conducting aforeign Sag Nicht sheet at Kingston, called the "Gazetteer, " and whichhas gone by the board for the want of patronage. This little eight byten sheet has been editorially, and by means of anonymouscommunications, assaulting the writer of this work, and the editor ofthe _Register_, MR. FLEMING. Patterson paid a recent visit to thisplace; at which time Fleming met with him on the street, and publiclychastised him, applying the toe of a stiff boot to the _west end_ of hisperson, with some force. Patterson turned about and boasted in his paperthat he had the best of the fight. Our paper and Fleming's correctedthis false version of the affair, and gave the facts; whereuponPatterson sued out a writ in the Circuit Court for Fleming, for damagesdone to his person in said rencontre, laying his damages at $5, 000!Shortly after this he instituted a civil action against the publishersof the paper we edit, and another against us for the article we wroteagainst him; and these suits are now pending. 

These two _gallant_ attorneys, as we are informed, are employed ascounsel by Patterson--a young man who has no visible means of payinglawyers, but the _eagerness_ of these gentlemen to get after us wouldlead them to "work for nothing and find themselves. " In addition totheir several civil suits against several of us, they have sent theirman before the Grand Jury of Knox county, and made a presentment againstus for having _out-wrote_ their Sag Nicht editor! The object of thesesuits against the editors and publishers of the American papers here, isto _gag_ them, or to check their influence in this contest. But theyhave mistaken their men. Like other vipers, they will find, before thesematters end, that they bite a file--a file of good _American_ steel, andtempered to that degree of hardness that all their malignity, intenseand active as it is known to be, will not be able to prevail against it!

When we came to this city of Knoxville, in 1849, we sold our office atJonesborough, at private sale, to pay a _security debt_, and purchased anew press and materials on a credit. These we sent on to the care ofWILLIAMS & CO. , the brothers-in-law of Crozier, who kept about the onlycommission and forwarding house in Knoxville. We were detained atJonesborough four weeks by close confinement to our bed; and ourmaterials arriving here, these "Old Line Whigs, " who had alwaysprofessed friendship toward us, refused to give them house-room; and hadnot JAMES W. NELSON and others stepped forward and paid the charges, andprocured a house for them, the steamboat captain would have sold themout for the carriage!

These _magnanimous_ gentlemen, members of the learned profession of thelaw, next contrived, through certain influences they brought to bear, to turn us out of the only office we could rent in the city, and thusthey drove us _without the limits of the Corporation_, and compelled usto erect a temporary office upon our own lot, which we had bought on acredit. They were now at the end of their row. One was a candidate forCongress, the other for a seat in the Legislature. We pitched into both, and they were both defeated; but we do not claim that it was through ourinfluence. Like Cardinal Wolsey, however, they both had to bid"farewell, a long farewell, to all their greatness. " From the pinnacleof Congressional and Legislative honors, they have been precipitated tothe shades of private life, and to political obscurity. Their chiefambition now is, to play "fantastic tricks" in courts of justice, andbefore grand jurors, in the way of annoying those they have neither the_manliness_ nor _courage_ to call to an account upon their own hooks!

The established usage of _gentlemen_, when offended by a newspapereditor, is to exact personal satisfaction. To acknowledge that you arepersonally aggrieved, and then to retort in tricks behind the offender'sback, or words behind your privileges at the Bar, is to acknowledge thatone is either a _fool_ or a _coward_--perhaps both. A chief object inthis crusade against us is to gag us during this campaign, and kill usoff from the stump and the press; but they have certainly studied ourcharacter to but little purpose. And whatever line of policy theirprompters and associates of the Locofoco school may urge upon them, letthem be assured that they cannot muzzle criticism of their personal orpolitical delinquencies. It is a sacred duty to unmask the _renegade_, to expose the _traitor_, and to hold up the _demagogue_ to publicreprobation. That duty will be performed freely and fearlessly, by theauthor of this work, come weal or come woe. If these two "Knights of theRueful Countenance" kill and eat a dozen Know Nothings, we know onemember of the Order they will not affright into silence. For theircowardly assaults and their officious intermeddlings they may bare theirbacks to the lash. We will be with them to the bitter end, and will onlyforsake them in the _Gethsemane_ of their retreat!

Had we come here with press and type, in 1849, and agreed to becontrolled by these men and their particular friends, we could have been_the_ man for the times. Had we stooped to flirt and coquette and fawnand dance around these men, we could have had their endorsement, theirinfluence, and their money, to any reasonable extent. But we neithersought their friendship, nor coveted their adulations. We claim to havebeen made of such inflexible materials, as not readily to go through thetransmutations necessary to secure the kind regards of these men. We areno office-seeker, and desire no reward beyond the consciousness ofhaving performed our duty, and of having served our country to the bestof our ability. 

We take this occasion to repeat what we have heretofore said in ourjournal, that nearly every prominent man in the country, calling himselfan "Old Line Whig, " and now opposed to Fillmore and Donelson, isinfluenced by personal grievances, or a desire to get office--matterswith which the people have not the slightest concern. Their oppositionto the American ticket proceeds from personal hostility, either to thecandidates, some of the electoral candidates, or certain prominentadvocates of the ticket, and from no less unworthy motives. Of coursethere are exceptions to this rule. 

The idea of an Old Clay Whig supporting the Buchanan ticket is bothabsurd and ridiculous. To say nothing of the foul and malignant chargeof "bargain, intrigue, and corruption, " Buchanan labored to fasten uponClay, the Platform upon which the Cincinnati Convention has placedBuchanan repudiates every principle Clay contended for, and held assacred to the day of his death. On the contrary, the American party hasnot ignored one political tenet held by the Whig party, but has addednew ones; none of which are at war with the creed of Clay, or theConstitution of our country! To make short work of a long story, no manwho ever was a _true Whig_, and acted with that party _from principle_, can consistently go over to the _bogus_ Democracy of this day, and votefor Buchanan and Breckenridge!

Talk about a Clay Whig turning Sag Nicht! What an idea! What principledoes this Foreign Democratic party hold, that an Old Line Whig, or aconservative man, North or South, does not disapprove? What principleshave they ever held, the evil effects of which are not now standing outin bold relief as a monument of their shame, and to which they haveadded the unpardonable sin of making war upon NATIVE AMERICANPROTESTANTS?

In conclusion, the reader will please allow a few remarks PERSONAL tothe writer, and he is done--leaving the public to make their owncomments, and their own disposition of both this book and its author. Our life has been a public life--our cause a public cause. We have ourfaults, as most men have; and we have committed some errors, as most menhave. Our few acts of goodness and virtue, if any, we leave others tohunt up; our faults are subjects of criticism, and are viewed with a_jaundiced eye_ by our opponents. Through a course of _eighteen years_of editorial invective, (whether right or wrong, ) we claim to have beenactuated by none other than the best of motives. We have never beenprompted by ambition, malice, or a desire to make money. Our voice, which has echoed over many hills and through many valleys, has neverbeen heard in extenuation of guilt; has never been heard to plead thecause of the gambler, the swearer, the drunkard, the robber, or theassassin. Wherever vice has lifted its "seven heads and tenhorns"--wherever fraud has showed its thieving hand--wherever gamblinghas displayed its rotten heart--wherever demagogues have sought toimpose on the honest people--there have we tried to be conspicuous; notas their aider and abettor, but as their scourge, their accuser, andtheir unrelenting foe. And among this class of men are our most bitterfoes. What friends we have are to be found at the fireside ofvirtue--among sober, sedate, and thinking men, and among the brave andhonorable. We have never been the slave or sycophant of any man orparty, as our immense band of subscribers, numbering thousands, willbear us witness. 

And now, AMERICANS, while we look forward to the future with pleasinganticipations--while we rejoice in prospect of the final triumph ofwisdom, of reason, and of virtue, over audacious ignorance, palpablecorruption, canting hypocrisy, and caballing Democracy--God forbid thatwe should indulge the vain idea that we have nothing to do! Let everyfriend of American rights and Protestant liberties take a bold, adecided stand, vowing most solemnly that he will have no fellowship atthe ballot-box with the friends of that unpitying monster, a DEMOCRATICPAPAL HIERARCHY! Be active, be vigilant, and persevering, and the day isultimately ours!

 "Strike till the last armed foe expires; Strike for your altars and your fires; Strike for the green graves of your sires, God, and your native land!"

TO STEPHEN TRIBBLE--LETTER No. 2. 

SIR:--On the night of the 9th of June, 1856, you held forth in theCourt-House in Charleston, Mo. , taking myself, _Rev. Josiah McCrary_, the Methodist stationed preacher of that town, and Methodists generally, for your text. It would seem that the _touch_ I gave you, and a letterof mine read before a large congregation in Charleston, on Sabbathevening, June 8th, _have fully developed all the latent blackguardism ofyour early training and corrupt nature_! I will now place the record ofyour _infamy_ before the world in such a permanent form, and circulateit so extensively, that your low Billingsgate and vile blackguardism cannever harm any man or sect. I will make such a showing of you that nopersons of refined feelings or of any pride of character will hear youpreach or entertain you in future! I will remind many readers of theshowing up of your infamous character and conduct, by the editor of theLouisville Journal, ten or twelve years ago, and of the exposure of yourvillainous conduct by the _Rev. Mr. McNutt_, of Kentucky, through theNashville Advocate, some eight or nine years ago. 

I will only add the following article from my paper of the 21st June, 1856, as it completes your record, so far as Tennessee is concerned. Iwill only add, that you were driven out of McMinn County in EastTennessee, where you were preaching, lying, and drinking whiskey, yearsago. There and then, too, the records of the Sullivan County affair, certified to by the Clerk, were produced against you! But to the articlefrom my late paper:

STEPHEN TRIBBLE AGAIN. 

This old hypocrite and scoundrel has been denying in the pulpit that hewas ever convicted of manslaughter or branded! It turns out, also, thatthe old villain once joined the American party in West Tennessee! Andlast, but not least, it seems that he was turned out of both theMethodist and Presbyterian Churches before he became a Campbellitepreacher. A pretty disciple to be abusing honest men! But to the law andto the testimony:

 "ROANE COUNTY, June 3d, 1856. 

 "SIR:--In your issue of the 14th of May, you notice _Stephen Tribble_, and ask for information concerning him. He came to the lower end of Roane county from one of the upper counties of East Tennessee, and passed himself for an Arian preacher. I objected to his preaching in a meeting-house, and came near getting myself into a scrape. About that time a gentleman came from our upper country, and said he had seen his father apply the branding-iron to Tribble, and the smoke rose ten feet high! I then began to play on a harp of one string against him, and that was _a tribble_, whereupon he left between two days for Kentucky! He was once expelled from the Methodist Church, and afterwards he was expelled from the Presbyterian Church. If Tribble disputes what I say, all I ask is a chance to prove it. I live ten miles south of Kingston, near Barnardsville. Yours truly, "JOHN BLAIR. "

 * * * * *

 "PARIS, TENN. , June 6th, 1856. 

 "DEAR SIR:--I see in a late issue of yours that you are after a Reverend wolf, Stephen Tribble. I am personally acquainted with him, as I lived in Sullivan county when he was in the Blountville jail. I have heard him preach here, and deny from the stand ever having been in jail, when he and I had talked the whole matter over the day before. He is now about forty-eight years of age--has a scar on his cheek. He preached here monthly in 1846, and here it was that he joined the American party. He now resides either in Graves or Fulton county, Kentucky. One of his brothers told me last week that he now preaches at one point in Kentucky, and the rest of his time in Missouri. One of their preachers told me that he gets drunk and cuts up largely. Yours, with respect, "A. J. HICKS. "

To the foregoing letters we add a certified copy of the records of theCircuit Court of Sullivan county, and after this we shall leave this_old clerical debauchee_ to preach for such Sag Nichts as may feeledified by his ministry:

 "MONDAY, Sept. 24, 1827. 

 "State of Tennessee, First Circuit, Sullivan County Court: met according to adjournment. Present, Honorable Samuel Powell, Judge, &c. "

 "FRIDAY, Sept. 28, 1827. 

 "STATE _vs. _ STEPHEN TRIBBLE AND JOHN TRIBBLE. 

 "In this cause, the jury having retired yesterday to consider of their verdict, under the care of an officer, and the same jury, to wit: James Steele, Wm. Morgan, Joshua Miller, John Thomas, Wm. Hashman, John Wassum, Thomas Brown, Stephen B. Cawood, John K. Arnold, Thomas Fain, William Hughes, and William H. Biggs, returning to the bar, do say, they find the defendants not guilty of the murder, but they find them guilty of manslaughter as charged in the bill of indictment. Whereupon the defendants moved the Court for a rule to show cause why a new trial should be had, which rule is granted, and on argument said rule is discharged. It is therefore considered by the Court that for such offence the said defendants be imprisoned for the term of four calendar months: that they be branded with the letter M in the brawn of the thumbs of their left hands on to-morrow morning, and that they pay the costs of this suit or remain in custody until the same is paid. "

 * * * * *

 "STATE OF TENNESSEE, SULLIVAN COUNTY. 

"I, Jno. W. Cox, Clerk of the Circuit Court of Sullivan County, dohereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true, and perfect copy ofthe final judgment in the case of State _vs. _ Stephen Tribble and JohnTribble, as appears of record in my office. 

"Given under my hand at this office, the 10th of June, 1856. 

 "Jno. W. Cox, Clerk, "By A. J. Cox, Dep. Clerk. "

In conclusion, _Stephen_, I take my leave of you now, having introducedyou to the 5, 000 subscribers to the Whig, the 7, 500 subscribers to ourcampaign paper, and the _tens of thousands of readers_ of this book--awork which will exist and be referred to when I am in my grave, and youare in the hot embraces of the Devil! You will at least agree with methat _that_ was an evil hour for you when you travelled out of your wayto assail me before a strange audience in Missouri. 

 I am, &c. , W. G. BROWNLOW. 

 Knoxville, June 23d, 1856. 

A SERMON ON SLAVERY. 

 Delivered by the undersigned in Temperance Hall in Knoxville, on Sabbath, 8th of June, 1856, to a large and attentive audience, composed of citizens and strangers--some from the North and some from the South--occupying one hour and a quarter in the delivery. It is published as it was delivered, without an omission or an alteration. Respectfully, &c. , W. G. BROWNLOW. 

 TEXT. --"Let as many servants as are under the yoke count their own masters worthy of all honor, that the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed. "--1 Tim. Vi. 1. 

Whoever reflects upon the nature of man, will find him to be almostentirely the creature of circumstances: his habits and sentiments are, in a great measure, the growth of adventitious circumstances and causes;hence the endless variety and condition of our species. That race of menin our country known as Abolitionists, Free-soilers, or BlackRepublicans, look upon any deviation from the constant round in which_they_ have been spinning out the thread of their existence as adeparture from nature's great system; and, from a known principle of ournature, the first impulse of these fanatics is to condemn. It is thusthat the man born and matured in a free State looks upon slavery asunnatural and horrible, and in violation of every law of justice orhumanity! And it is not uncommon to hear bigots of this character, intheir churches at the North, imploring the Divine wrath to shower downthe consuming fires of heaven on that great Sodom and Gomorrah of theNew World, all that section of country south of Mason and Dixon's line, where this unjust practice prevails. 

When an unprejudiced and candid mind examines into the past condition ofour race, and learns the fact which history develops, as the inquirerwill, that a majority of mankind were _slaves_, he will be driven to themelancholy reflection, that the world, when first peopled by Godhimself, was not a world of freemen, but of _slaves_!

Slavery was really established and sanctioned by Divine authority amongeven God's chosen people, the favored children of Israel. Abraham, thefounder of this interesting nation, and the chosen servant of the MostHigh, was the owner of more slaves than any cotton-planter in SouthCarolina or Mississippi. That magnificent shrine, the gorgeous temple ofSolomon, commenced and completed under the pious promptings of religionand ancient Free-Masonry, was reared alone by the hands of slaves!Egypt's venerable and enduring pyramids were reared by the hands ofslaves! Involuntary servitude, reduced to a science, existed in ancientAssyria and Babylon. The ten tribes of Israel were carried off toAssyria by Shalmanezer, and the two strong tribes of Judah weresubsequently carried in triumph by Nebuchadnezzar to end their days inBabylon as slaves, and to labor to adorn the city. Ancient Phoeniciaand Carthage were literally overrun with slavery, because the slavepopulation outnumbered the free and the owners of slaves! The Greeks andTrojans, at the siege of Troy, were attended with large numbers of theirslaves. Athens, and Sparta, and Thebes--indeed, the whole Grecian andRoman worlds--had more slaves than freemen. And in those ages whichsucceeded the extinction of the Roman empire in the West, slaves werethe most numerous class. Even in the days of civilization and Christianlight which revolutionized governments, laboring serfs and abject slaveswere distributed throughout Eastern Europe, and a portion of WesternAsia--conclusively showing that slavery existed over these boundlessregions. In China, the worst forms of slavery have existed since itsearliest history. And when we turn to Africa, we find slavery, in allits most horrid forms, existing throughout its whole extent, the slavesoutnumbering the freemen at least three to one. Looking, then, to thewhole world, we may with confidence assert, that slavery in its worstforms subdues by far the largest portion of the human race!

Now, the inquiry is, how has slavery risen and thus spread over ourwhole earth? We answer, by the _laws of war_, _the state of property_, _the feebleness of governments_, the thirst for _bargain and sale_, the_increase of crime_, and last, but not least, _by and with the consentand approbation of Deity_!

These remarks may suffice by way of an introduction, and they will serveto indicate the course we intend to pursue, if the announcement of thetext has not already done that. _Let as many servants as are under theyoke count their own masters worthy of all honor_, &c. The word hererendered _servants_ means SLAVES, converted to the Christian faith; andthe word rendered _yoke_ signifies the _state of slavery_ in whichChrist and the apostles found the world involved when the ChristianChurch was first organized. By the word rendered _masters_ we are tounderstand the heathen masters of those Christianized slaves. Eventhese, in such circumstances, and under such domination, are commandedto treat their masters with all honor and respect, that the name of God, by which they were called, and the doctrine of God, to wit, Christianity, which they had professed, might not be blasphemed, mightnot be evil spoken of in consequence of their improper conduct. Civilrights are never abolished by any communication from God's Spirit; andthose fiery bigots at the North who propose to abolish the institutionof slavery in this country are not following the dictates of God'sSpirit or law. The civil state in which a man was before his conversion, is not altered by that conversion; nor does the grace of God absolve himfrom any claims which the State, his neighbor, or lawful owner may havehad on him. All these outward things continue unaltered: hence, if a manbe under the sentence of death for murder, and God see fit to converthim, he is not released from suffering the extreme penalty of the law!

The Church of Christ, when originally constituted, claimed no right, _asan ecclesiastical organization_, to interfere in any way with the civilgovernment. This was the principle upon which the Church was founded, asannounced by its immortal Head. When Christ was doomed by a cruel Romanlaw to its most ignominious condemnation, he did not so much as resistit, because _it was law_, nor did he complain of it as oppressive. 

 "Then Pilate entered into the judgment-hall again, and called Jesus, and said unto him, Art thou the King of the Jews?... Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews; but now is my kingdom not from hence.... To this end was I born, and for this cause came I into the world, that I should bear witness unto the truth. "--John xviii. 33-37. 

When Christ came into the world on the business of his mission, he foundthe Jewish people subject to the dominion of the Roman kingdom; and inno instance did he counsel the Jews to rebellion, or incite them tothrow off the Roman yoke, as do the vagabond philanthropists of theNorth in reference to the existing laws of the United States upon thesubject of slavery. Christ was, by lineal descent, "THE KING OF THEJEWS, " but he did not assert his temporal power, but actually refused tobe crowned in that right. 

Under the Roman law, human liberty was held by no more certain tenurethan the whim of the sovereign power, protected by no definiteconstitution. Slavery constituted the most powerful and essentialelement of the government, and that slavery was of the most cruelcharacter, and gave to the master absolute discretion over the lives ofthe slaves. Notwithstanding all this, Christ did not make war upon theexisting government, nor denounce the rulers for conferring such powers, although he looked upon cruel legislation in the light in which thecharacter of his mission required. And although the _Church itself_ wasnot what it should have been, in no instance did Christ ever denounce_that_. The only denunciations the Saviour ever uttered, were thoseagainst the doctors and lawyers, ministers and expounders of the Jewishcode of ecclesiastical law. 

But allow us to present the case of the Apostle Paul, as proof morepalpable and overwhelming, on this very point. He had been falselyaccused, cruelly imprisoned, and tyrannically arraigned; and that, too, before a licentious governor, an unjust and dissipated ruler, and anunprincipled infidel. The Roman law in force at the time arrested thefreedom of speech, denied the rights of conscience, and even forbade thefree expression of opinion in all matters conflicting with theprovisions of the laws of the Roman government. In his defence beforeFelix, Paul never so much as speaks of Roman law, though well acquaintedwith it, but "he reasoned of _righteousness_, and _temperance_, and the_judgment to come_. " Here was a suitable occasion to condemn theregulations and to question the authority of the villainous statutes ofRome; but instead of this, Paul plead his rights _under_ the unjustregulations of the law. He charged Felix with _official_ delinquency, with _personal_ crime, and, as a _man_, he held him up to public scorn, and threatened him with the vengeance of God! He appealed _to the law_, and justified himself _by the law_. He claimed the rights of a "_Romancitizen_"--demanded the protection due to a Roman citizen--and hescorned to find fault with the law, cruel and unjust as he knew it tobe. And the consequence was, that the licentious infidel who ruled, "_trembled_. "

The views we have here presented are not at all new, but have beenuniformly acted upon by evangelical Christians, in all ages of theworld. Since the days of St. Paul and Simon Peter, no reformer hasappeared who was more violent than that good and great man, MARTINLUTHER. JOHN CALVIN possessed a revolutionary spirit--he fought everything he believed to be wrong--he was unyielding in his disposition, andunmitigated in his severity. Yet neither of these great men ever madewar upon the existing laws of their respective countries. JOHN WESLEYwas the great reformer of the past century--he reformed the wholeecclesiastical machinery of the modern Church of Christ; and hisdoctrines, and manner of conducting revivals, are leading elements ofAmerican Christianity. But Mr. Wesley never made war upon the Englishgovernment, under which he lived and died. On the other hand, it is amatter of serious complaint among sectarians not friendly to the spreadof Methodism, that Wesley wrote elaborately against the war of theRevolution. He was devoted to law and order, and he deemed it areligious duty to oppose all resistance to existing laws. In histroubles at Savannah, Georgia, like Paul before the licentiousgovernor, he appealed _to the law_, and sought by every means in hispower to be tried _under_ the law, asking only the privilege of beingheard in his own defence! And it was, in all the instances we havementioned, "_that the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed_, "to quote the expressive language of the text, that existing laws havebeen adhered to by the propagators of gospel truth. 

The essential principles of the great moral law delivered to Moses byGod himself, are set forth in what is called the tenth commandment, inthe 20th chapter of Exodus: "Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbor's wife, nor his _man-servant_, nor his_maid servant_, nor his ox, nor his ass, nor any thing that is thyneighbor's. " Now, the only true interpretation of this portion of theWord of God is, that the species of property mentioned are _lawful_, andthat all men are forbid to disturb others in the lawful enjoyment oftheir property. "Man-servants and maid-servants" are distinctly_consecrated as property_, and guaranteed to man for his exclusivebenefit--proof irresistible that slavery was thus ordained by Godhimself. We have seen learned dissertations from the pens ofAbolitionists, saying, that the term "servant, " and not "slave, " is usedhere. To this we reply, that both the Hebrew and Greek words translated"servant, " mean also "slave, " and are more frequently used in this sensethan in the former. Besides, the Hebrew Scriptures teach us, that Godespecially authorized his peculiar people to _purchase_ "BONDMEN FOREVER;" and if to be in _bondage for ever_ does not constitute _slavery_, we yield the point. 

The visionary notions of piety and philanthropy entertained by many menat the North, lead them to resist the _Fugitive Slave Law_ of thisgovernment, and even to _violate the tenth commandment_, by stealing our"men-servants and maid-servants, " and running them into what they callfree territory. Nay, the _villainous piety_ of some leads them tocontribute _Sharpe's Rifles_ and _Holy Bibles_, to send the_uncircumcised Philistines_ of New England into Kansas and Nebraska, toshoot down the Christian owners of slaves, and then to perform religiousceremonies over their dead bodies! Clergymen lay aside their Bibles atthe North, and females, as in the case of that model beauty, _HarrietBeecher Stowe_, unsex themselves to carry on this horrid and slanderouswarfare against slaveholders of the South! And English travellers, steeped to the nose and chin in prejudices against this government andour institutions, have written books upon the subject. The Halls, Hamiltons, Trollopes, and Miss Martineaus, _et ed omne genus_, all havemisrepresented us! These English writers all denounce slavery, andeulogize _Democracy_; as if an Englishman could be a Democrat, in themodern, vulgar sense of the term, and be a consistent man!

But we do not propose, in this brief discourse, to enter into anydefence of the African slave trade. Although the evils of it are greatlyexaggerated, its evils and cruelties, its barbarities, are not justifiedby the most ultra slaveholders of this age. The vile traffic wasabolished by the United States, even before the British Parliamentprohibited it. All the powers in the world have subsequently prohibitedthis trade--some of the more influential and powerful of them declaringit _piracy_, and covering the African seas with armed vessels to preventit!

This trade, which seems so shocking to the feelings of mankind, datesits origin as far back as the year 1442. Antony Gonzales, a Portuguesemariner, while exploring the coast of Africa, was the first to stealsome _Moors_, and was subsequently forced by Prince Henry of Portugal tocarry them back to Africa. In the year 1502, the Spaniards began tosteal negroes, and employ them in the mines of Hispaniola, Cuba, andJamaica. In 1517, the Emperor Charles V. Granted a _patent_ to certainprivileged persons, _to steal exclusively_ a supply of 4, 000 negroesannually, for these islands!

African slaves were first imported into America in 1620, a century aftertheir introduction into the West Indies. The first cargo, of twentyAfricans, by a Dutch vessel, was brought up the James River, intoVirginia, and sold out as slaves. England then being the most commercialof European nations, engrossed the trade; and from 1680 to 1780, therewere imported into the British Possessions alone, TWO MILLIONS OFSLAVES--making an average annual importation of more than 20, 000! Andthe annual importation into America has transcended 50, 000! The Statesof this Union, north of Mason and Dixon's Line, commonly called the NewEngland States, were never, to any great extent, _slaveholding_; theirvirtuous and pious minds were chiefly exercised in _slave-stealing_ and_slave-selling_! To Old England our New England States owe theirknowledge of the art of slave-stealing; and to New England theseSouthern States are wholly indebted for their slaves. They stole theAfrican from his native land, and sold him into bondage for the sake ofgain. They kept but few of their captives among themselves, because itwas not profitable to use negro labor in the cold and sterile regions ofNew England. And when they enacted laws in the New England Statesabolishing slavery, they brought their negroes into the South and soldthem before their laws could go into operation! This is the true historyof slavery in New England. They stole and sold property which it was notprofitable to keep, and for which they now refuse all warranty. Andwhat few American ships are in the trade now, at the peril of piracy, are New England ships. 

The pious and religious portion of New England Abolitionists, we takeit, are the better portion, and in these we have no sort of confidence. Take, for example, the case of that great man, and powerful pulpitorator, STEPHEN OLIN, who came into Georgia, and was introduced into theministry by BISHOP ANDREW and his friends, and by this means married alady owning a number of slaves. He sold them all for the money, pocketedthe money, and returned to his congenial North; and when BISHOP ANDREWwas arraigned before the General Conference of 1844, because he hadmarried a widow lady owning a few slaves, this man OLIN appeared on thefloor, and spoke and voted against the Bishop! Dr. Olin had washed hishands of the sin of slavery--had his money out at interest--and he wasready to plead for the rights of the poor African! May we not exclaim, "Lord, what is man?"

We are acquainted with many of the leading Abolitionists of the Northconnected with the Methodist Church; and although we suppose they areabout as good as the Abolitionists of other denominations we have noconfidence in them. The most of them would enter their fine churches onthe Sabbath, preach for hours against the sin of slavery, shed theirtears over the oppressions of the "servile progeny of Ham, " in theseSouthern States; and on the next day, in a purely business transaction, behind a counter, or in the settlement of an account, cheat a Southernslave out of the _pewter_ that ornaments the head of his cane!

There is much in the political papers of the country calculated, if notintended, to fan a flame of intense warfare upon the subject of slavery, which can result in no possible good to any one. Those politicians whoare exciting the whole country, and fanning society into a lividconsuming flame, particularly at the North, have no sympathies for theblack man, and care nothing for his comfort. They only seek their ownglory. This political disquiet and commotion is giving birth to new andloftier schemes of agitation and disunion, among the vile Abolitionistsof the country, and to bold and hazardous enterprises in the States andTerritories. And many of our Southern altars smoke with the vile incenseof Abolitionism. We have scores of Abolitionists in the South, indisguise--designing men--some filling our pulpits--some occupying highpositions in our colleges--some editing political and religiouspapers--some selling goods--and some following one calling and someanother, who, though among us, are not of us, Southern men may restassured!

We endorse, without reserve, that much-abused sentiment of adistinguished South Carolina statesmen, now no more, that "slavery isthe corner-stone of our republican edifice;" while we repudiate, asridiculously absurd, that much-lauded, but nowhere-accredited dogma ofMR. JEFFERSON, that "all men are born equal. " God never intended to makethe _butcher_ a judge, nor the _baker_ a president, but to protect themaccording to their claims as butcher and baker. Pope has beautifullyexpressed this sentiment, where he has said:

 "Order is heaven's first law, and this confessed, _Some are_, and _must be_, greater than the rest. "

We have gone among the free negroes at the North--we have visited theirmiserable dwellings in Philadelphia, New York, Boston, and other points;and, in every instance, we have found them more miserable and destitute, as a whole, than the slave population of the South. In our SouthernStates, where negroes have been set at liberty, in nine cases out of tentheir conditions have been made worse; while the most wretched, indolent, immoral, and dishonest class of persons to be found in theSouthern States, are _free persons of color_. 

The freedom of negroes in even the Northern States, is, in all respects, only an empty name. The citizen negro does not vote, and takes good carenot to do so. The law does not interdict him this privilege, but if heattempt to avail himself of the privilege, he is apprehensive of"apostolic blows and kicks, " which the pious Abolitionists willadminister to him. All the social advantages, all the respectableemployments, all the honors, and even the pleasures of life, are deniedthe free negroes of the North, by citizens full of sympathy for thedown-trodden African! The negro cannot get into an omnibus, cannot entera bar-room frequented by whites, nor a church, nor a theatre; nor can heenter the cabin of a steamboat, in one of the Northern rivers or lakes, or enter a first class passenger car on one of their railroads. They arenot suffered to enter a stage-coach with whites, but are forced upon thedeck, whether it shall rain or shine--whether it be hot or cold. Industry is closed to them, and they are forced to live as _servants_ inhotels, or adopt the professions of barber, or boot-black, or openoysters in saloons, or sell villainous liquors to the lower classes ofGerman and Irish emigrants, who throng our large cities and towns. Thenegroes even have their _own streets_, and their own low-down kennels;they have their hospitals, their churches, their cars, upon which arewritten in large letters, "FOR COLORED PEOPLE!" Finally, they are forcedto have their own _grave-yards_--the _yellow_ remains of NorthernAbolitionists, and pious white men, refusing to mingle with thebleeching bones of the dead negro! While, in the South, they crowd thegalleries and back seats in our churches, travel in our passenger cars, and even _loan their money_ to our white men at interest! Such is anoutline of the contrast between free negroes at the North, and slaves atthe South. 

Let us turn again to the Holy Scriptures, and see whether or not theysustain or condemn the institution of slavery. The opposers of slaveryprofess to be governed alone by the teachings of the Bible, in their warupon this institution. It is vain to look to Christ or any of hisapostles to justify the blasphemous perversions of the word of God, continually paraded before the world by these graceless agitators. Although slavery in its most revolting forms was everywhere visiblearound them, no visionary notions of piety or schemes of philanthropyever tempted either Christ or one of his apostles to gainsay the LAW, even to mitigate the cruel severity of the slavery system then existing. On the contrary, finding slavery _established by law_, as well as an_inevitable and necessary consequence_, growing out of the condition ofhuman society, their efforts were to sustain the institution. Hence, St. Paul actually apprehended a "_fugitive slave_, " and sent him back to hislawful owner and earthly master!

Having already appealed to the authority of the Old TestamentScriptures, we turn to that of the New, where we learn that slaveryexisted in the earliest days of the Christian Church, and that both_masters_ and _slaves_ were members of the same Christian congregations. Slavery was an institution of the State in the Roman Empire, as it is inthe Southern States of this confederacy, and the apostles did not feelat liberty to denounce it, if, indeed, they felt the least opposition toit--a thing we deny. 

But, before we appeal to the irresistible authority of the NewTestament, we will submit a few only of a great many passages from theOld Testament--not having quoted as extensively as may have been deemednecessary:

 "And he said, I _am_ Abraham's servant. "--GEN. Xxiv. 34. 

 "And there was of the house of Saul a _servant_, whose name was Ziba; and when they had called him unto David, the king said unto him, Art thou Ziba? And he said, _Thy servant is he_. "--2 SAM. Ix. 2. 

 "Then the king called to Ziba, Saul's _servant_, and said unto him, I have given unto thy _master's_ son all that pertained to Saul, and to all his house. "--Verse 9th. 

 "Thou, therefore, and thy sons, and thy _servants_, shall till the land for him, and thou shalt bring in _the fruits_, that thy _master's_ son may have food to eat, &c. Now Ziba had fifteen sons and TWENTY SERVANTS. "--Verse 10th. 

 "I got me _servants_ and maidens, and had _servants born in my house_; also, I had great possessions of great and small cattle, above all that were in Jerusalem before me. "--ECCLES. Ii. 7. 

 "And he said, Hagar, Sarai's maid, whence camest thou? And she said, I flee from the face of my _mistress_ Sarai. "--GEN. Xvi. 8. 

 "And the Angel of the Lord said unto her, _Return to thy mistress_, and submit thyself to her hands. "--Verse 9th. 

The only comments we have to offer upon these passages are, first, oneindividual acknowledges himself the owner of twenty slaves! Another wasraising slaves, and having them born in his house!! And last, but notleast, the angel of God ordered the fugitive slave to return to herlawful owner!! High authority, this, for apprehending runaway slaves!

In reference to bad servants, we read in Prov. Xxix. 19:

 "A servant will not be corrected by _words_; for though he understand, he will not answer. "

The Scriptures look to the correction of servants, and really enjoin it, as they do in the case of children. We esteem it the duty of Christianmasters to feed and clothe well, and in cases of disobedience to _whipwell_. 

In the book of Joel, iii. 8, the _slave trade_ is recognized as ofDivine authority:

 "And I will sell your sons and your daughters into the land of the children of Judah, and they shall sell them to the Sabeans, to a people far off; FOR THE LORD HATH SPOKEN IT!"

 "Let every man abide in the same calling wherein he was called. Art thou called, being _a servant_? Care not for it; but if thou mayest be made free, use it rather. For he that is called in the Lord, being _a servant_, is the Lord's freeman; likewise also he that is called, being free, is Christ's servant. "--1 Cor. Vii. 20-22. 

 "_Servants_, be obedient to them that are your _masters according to the flesh_, with fear and trembling, in singleness of your heart, as unto Christ. Not with eye-service, as men-pleasers; but as the servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart. With good-will doing service, as to the Lord, and not to men: knowing that whatsoever good thing any man doeth, the same shall he receive of the Lord, whether he be bond or free. And, _ye masters_, do the same things unto them, forbearing threatening: knowing that your Master also is in heaven: neither is there respect of persons with him. "--Eph. Vi. 5-9. 

 "_Servants_, obey in all things your _masters according to the flesh_: not with eye-service, as men-pleasers; but in singleness of heart, fearing God. And whatsoever ye do, do it heartily, as to the Lord, and not unto men: knowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the inheritance; for ye serve the Lord Christ. "--Col. Iii. 22-25. 

 "_Masters_, give unto _your servants_ that which is just and equal: knowing that ye also have a Master in heaven. "--Col. Iv. 1. 

 "Let as many _servants as are under the yoke_ count their _own masters_ worthy of all honor, that the name of God and his doctrine be not blasphemed. And they that have _believing masters_, let them not despise them, because they are brethren; but rather do them service, because they are faithful and beloved, partakers of the benefit. These things teach and exhort. "--1 Tim. Vi. 1, 2. 

 "Exhort _servants_ to be obedient unto their _own masters_, and to please them well in all things; not answering again; not purloining, but showing all good fidelity; that they may adorn the doctrine of God our Saviour in all things. "--Titus ii. 9, 10. 

 "_Servants_, be subject to _your masters_ with all fear; not only to the good and gentle, but also to the froward. For this is thankworthy, if a man for conscience toward God endure grief, suffering wrongfully. "--1 Peter ii. 18, 19. 

We have but a single word of comment to offer upon these passages ofScripture. The original words used by the Greek writers, both sacred andprofane, to express slave; the most abject condition of slavery; toexpress the absolute owner of a slave, and the absolute control of aslave, are the strongest that the language affords, and are used in thepassages here quoted. If the apostles understood the common use ofwords, and desired to convey these ideas, and to recognize the relationsof master and servant, they would, naturally enough, employ the verywords used. To say that they did not know the primary meaning and _ususloquendi_ of the original words, is paying them a compliment we wish notto participate in! And to show that we are not singular in our views ofthe meaning expressed in the passages quoted, showing that they expressin the one case slaves, and in the other masters or owners, actuallyholding them as property, under the sanction of the laws of the State, we quote from the following authorities:

That great commentator, Dr. ADAM CLARKE, on 1 Cor. Vii. 21, says:

 "Art thou converted to Christ while thou art a slave--the property of another person, and bought with his money? _Care not for it. _"

The learned Dr. Neander, in his work entitled "Planting and Training ofthe Church, " in referring to _Onesimus_, mentioned in the epistle toPhilemon, says of him:

 "It does not appear to be surprising that a _runaway slave_ should betake himself at once to Rome. "

To the foregoing might be added other authorities of equal weight andimportance. 

It is a well-known historical fact, that slaveholders were admitted intothe APOSTOLIC CHURCHES; nor would this assumed position of the advocatesof slavery be at all denied by any intelligent and well-read men at theNorth, but for the fact that they think such an admission would decidethe question against abolitionists. We have given much attention to thissubject within ten years past, and we feel no sort of delicacy inexpressing our views and convictions, as revolting as they may be toNorthern men and Free-soilers, even among us. We believe that theprimitive Christians held slaves in bondage, and that the apostlesfavored slavery, by admitting slaveholders into the Church, and bypromoting them to official stations in the Church. And why do we believeall this? Because we are sustained in these positions by uninterruptedhistorical testimony!

Well, for the information of abolitionists and other anti-slavery mendispersed throughout the South, we assume that the fact of the apostlesadmitting into Church fellowship slaveholders, and promoting them topositions of honor and trust, shows that the simple relation of masterand slave was no bar to Church-membership. Masters and slaves, in thedays of the apostles, were admitted into the Church as brethren: theypartook in common of the benefits of the Church: they held to the samereligious principles: they squared their lives by the same rule ofconduct: acknowledged the same obligations one to another; andworshipped at the same altar. This was true of the first and succeedingcenturies, when the relations of master and slave, and the practice ofthe Church in reference thereto, were very much like they are in theSouthern States of our Union at present. But to the proof thatslaveholders were admitted into the apostolic Churches:

1. Historians all agree that slavery existed, and was general throughoutthe Roman empire, at the time the apostolic Churches were instituted. Wehave at our command the authorities to prove this, but to quote fromthem would swell this discourse beyond what we have intended. We willcite the authorities only; and anti-slavery men who deny our positioncan examine our authorities. See Gibbon's "Decline and Fall of the RomanEmpire, " vol. I. See "Inquiry into Roman Slavery, by Wm. Blair, "Edinburgh edition of 1833. See vol. Iv. Of "Lardner's Works, " page 213. See vol. I. Of "Dr. Robertson's Works, " London edition. Otherauthorities might be given, but these are sufficient, as they show thatslavery was a civil institution of the State; that the Roman lawsregarded slaves as _property_, at the disposal of their masters; thatthese slaves, whether white or colored, had no civil existence orrights, and contended for none; and that there were _three slaves to onecitizen_--showing something of a similarity between the Roman empire andour Southern States! Gibbon says that slavery existed in "every provinceand every family, " and that they were bought and sold according to theircapacities for usefulness, and the demand for laborers--selling athundreds of dollars, and from that down to the price of a beast ofburden! Now, it is notorious that the gospel made considerable progressamong the citizens of the Roman empire; and, as nearly every familyowned slaves, it is certain that slaveholders were converted andadmitted into the Church. It will not do to say that the poor, includingthe slaves, were alone converted to God, because the apostles makefrequent allusions to the receiving into the Church of intelligent, learned, and opulent persons. The learned DR. MOSHEIM, in his ChurchHistory, vol. I. , relating to the _first three centuries_, settles thisquestion most effectually. He says:

 "The apostles, in their writings, prescribe rules for the conduct of the rich as well as the poor, for _masters_ as well as _servants_--a convincing proof that among the members of the Church planted by them were to be found persons of opulence and masters of families. St. Paul and St. Peter admonished Christian women not to study the adorning of themselves with pearls, with gold and silver, or costly array. 1 Tim. Ii. 9: 1 Peter iii. 3. It is, therefore, plain that there must have been women possessed of wealth adequate to the purchase of bodily ornaments of great price. From 1 Tim. Vi. 20, and Col. Ii. 8, it is manifest that among the first converts to Christianity there were men of learning and philosophers; for, if the wise and the learned had unanimously rejected the Christian religion, what occasion could there have been for this caution? 1 Cor. I. 26 unquestionably carries with it the plainest intimation that persons of rank or power were not wholly wanting in that assembly. Indeed, lists of the names of various illustrious persons who embraced Christianity, in its weak and infantile state, are given by Blondel, p. 235 de Episcopis et Presbyteris: also by Wetstein, in his Preface to Origen's Dia. Con. Mar. , p. 13. "

A few reflections, by way of concluding, and we are through with ourdiscourse, already extended beyond the limits we had prescribed:

_First. _--There is not a single passage in the New Testament, nor asingle act in the records of the Church, during her early history, foreven centuries, containing any direct, professed, or intendeddenunciation of slavery. But the apostles found the institutionexisting, under the authority and sanction of law; and, in their laborsamong the people, masters and slaves bowed at the same altar, communedat the some table, and were taken into the Church together; while theyexhorted the one to treat the other as became the gospel, and the otherto obedience and honesty, that their religious professions might not beevil spoken of!

_Secondly. _--The early Church not only admitted the existence ofslavery, but in various ways, by her teachings and discipline, expressedher approbation of it, enforcing the observance of certain FugitiveSlave Laws which had been enacted by the State. And, in the various actsof the Church, from the times of the apostles downward through severalcenturies, she enacted laws and adopted regulations touching the dutiesof masters and slaves, _as such_. This, in our humble judgment, amountsto a justification and defence of the institution of slavery. 

_Thirdly. _--Our investigations of this subject have led us regularly, gradually, certainly, to the conclusion that God intended the relationof master and slave to exist. Hence, when God opened the way for theorganization of the Church, the apostles and first teachers ofChristianity found slavery _incorporated with every department ofsociety_; and, in the adoption of rules for the government of themembers of the Church, they provided for the rights of owners, and thewants of slaves. 

_Fourthly. _--Slavery, in the age of the apostles, had so penetratedsociety, and was so intimately interwoven with it, that a religionpreaching freedom to the slave would have arrayed against it the civilauthorities, armed against itself the whole power of the State, anddestroyed the usefulness of its preachers. St. Paul knew this, and didnot assail the institution of slavery, but labored to get both mastersand slaves to heaven, as all ministers should do in our day. 

_Fifthly. _--Slavery having existed ever since the first organization ofthe Church, the Scriptures clearly teach that it will exist even to theend of time. Rev. Vi. 12-17 points to "The Day of Judgment, " "The LastDay, " "The Great Day, " and the condition of the human race at that time, as well as the classes of persons to be judged, rewarded, and punished!A portion of this text reads, "And the kings of the earth, and the greatmen, and the rich men, and the chief captains, and the mighty men, andevery BONDMAN, and every FREEMAN, " etc. , will be there; evidentlyimplying that slavery will exist, and that the relations of master andslave will be recognized, to the end of time!