The pilot and transcript. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1840-1841, 1840-10-26
,ublished on Bishop Engiand's letter, saws:


ed more uuenviable notoriety cannot be found in
the whole length s br adth OF the llnd VIOLIN ari-
Nv steps forth the assaier Of and not only ISLANDERS
| this universally esteemed and venerable Prelate,
but recklessly launches forth his anthemas on
the whole Catholic community, as deserving not
merely all the penalties of OUTLAWRY, but
as even fit candidates of the FELoN's CELL. and
the GIgBET."
The reader will perceive that my remark was,
that if the Catholics, body, should vot,
| for MIR. Van Buren,, under Bish ,p England's die
tation, it will become the duty of Professionals to
unite, not only to resist Mr.. Van Buren,, but to
resist Catholicism. This Bishop England con-
strues into declaration of determination Ano
the Catholic paper in Boston says it is an ane-
ing III penalties of OtstIatsIy and the felon's
cell and the gibbet. l would call the attention
Of the public to the definition OF the word ''rc-
.iSt." Webster says;
RESIST. V. t. 1. Literally, to stand against
TO Withstand; hence, 20 act in opp5,
oppose To strive against; to endeavor IL coun-
teract, defeat or Illustrate. To battle, to diSap-
point.
| Having seen the definition OF the word ''re-
sist,9 turn to the same authority for the mean
ing of the word F'Exterminate." Webster saws
EXTERMINATE. Y. t, l. To destroy utter
", TO drive away; to extirpatc. 2 To eradicate,
to root out; to extirpate. 3. To root out as
plants; to extirpate.
So much for Bishop England Now for his
Boston echo.
'OUTLAWRY." n. Putting a man out of
the protection OF law, or the process BY which a
man is deprived of that protection.
Now, beg the reader to compare my state
ment with this commentary of Bishop England
and his affiliated press Is there no difference
between the terms to 'resist and 'Sexterminate; -
Is my remark, that if from any cause, any re-
ligious sect shall combine, and throw their
weight, in body, in behalf of any political can
didate, it is an argument why e;hers, differing
with them in opinion, should be opposed to the
candidate whom they thus combine to support,
and that if the Catholics, under the influence OF
Bishop England's letter, or any other cause
whatsoever, shall unite in behalf of MIR. Van
Buren,, 1t will become the duty of every Protest
ant to unite, not only to resist Mr.. Van Buren,,
but to pssiSt Catholicism, a proposition to err
terminate the Catholics, ,r 10 pass sentence oil
outlawry on them'
Does my remark, that if Catholics should
SO unite, they should be resisted, mean that
they should te exterminated'-that they should
be utterly destroyed and driven away!-or,
that they should be eradscatcd, rooted out,
and sxtirpated?-or- that they shsuld be cast in
to the fclon's cell, or hang upon the gibbet; My
JseI, rat;on was but n. ASSERTION Cf D-iuc,nIe
having reference alike toProtestants as TO Cath
olics. It was declarxaon that whenever any
religious sect shall combine for political object
it becomes the duty Of others, differing with
them in opinion, to unite against them-to ''re-
sist" theR. 1t was declaration that whenever
any religious sect, Catholic Protestant, shall
endesvor to bring the poweg of the church into
politics-that whenever religiovs sect, Catho-
lie OF Protestant, shall endsavor to unite the
| Ckarch and State, it shall become the duty of
all other seets to oppose thai attempt. And
am sure-t that the respectable gentlemen who
sttire the Central Committee, did rot realize the
extent to which they have gOHe, when, in the
excitement of the moment, yieising to the pres
sure Of interested indivi Juals, they gave their
sanction to the charge, that the expression of
snch Rn.opinio0 on my part, was proposition to
deprive any ons of the right of 'EorshiPping God
in sus!i way a. his conscience may approve, and
50 change our laws and constitution as TO de
priyc anyone Of this 'eglori privilege" In this
the Committee have done me great injustice, and
it is to- be hoped, that they will live to the.
day, when they will regret it.
In The next place, the Committee say:
SsThe native and naturalixcd citizens ars
equally entitled to the blessings of our Ga
vernmept. All are equal, aad when straa-
ger takes up his abode hsre, and has *
| main. d among during the time prescribed By
the naturalization laws, he has right to be-
come citizen, and will be entitled TO the priyi-
! ieses of citizenship"
Now, in making this declaration in connection
with their disavowal of my editorial course, the
Committee have charged that have denied the
proposition by them asserted, and that | would
withhold equal privileges from nsturalzed citi-
zens, and deny the stranger who is among us the
right to become a citizen
In my prospectus, to which exception has
| been taken, said:
seThe right to become citizen oE the United
States, is boon which may give or with
| no at will. Ii we concede that those who are
now in the country, should be naturslized under
| eaisting laws, that is no reason why we should
MT repeal those laws and refuse TO naturalizt
others who may hereafter come"
Again, in my paper of the next day, which
must have been before the committee when they
prepared their address, say
owe have said nothing to which any foreign
err should take exception. We would act jusi l.
Ito all; and to those who now in the country
we would give all the privileges to viii h they
are entitled under our present lawsuit VIZ
would modify the law So as to protect insti
tutions from The controlling influence of thost
to como hereafter"
Now, is it not clear that these respectable gen
tlemsa, by lending the sanction of their names
to such charge against me because OF the shap,
in which it is put, it amounts to direct charge,