Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1844-05-24
From the Philadelphia North American.
fuITIN DIIIT AnFI pIIIA Dfnuct


Editors of the newspaper press, out of Philade-
phia have been very generally mised by portion
of the press in the city, regards the true causes
of the recent Disturbances and the parties respon
sible for them. Excessive injustice is done on the
one hand, to the Native American party, by charg
ing it as such, with the breaches Of law which
have occurred and on the other hand, TO the inhab
tonts of the City Proper and the Districts actually
ddiaccnt, by fixing upon them generally the odium
Of acts committed by comparatively few persons
of the worst class With regard to the Native A
merican party, this press is not its organ, is not
thorzed TO speak for it, and not being identified
with it, can therefore claim to Judge impartally.
The first question is, 'oho began The riots
The second ,oly mere they begun2
The third ,oly ,oere they continued?
1t is a matter of history that meetings for every
imaginable purpose have been held of late in this
city, without any disposition on the part Of any one
to disturb the proceedings of them. Among these
meetings were conspicuousy those of the Irish
Repeal party. Although thousands of our fellow
citizens questioned the moral propriety of meetings,
having for their aim an interference between for
eign government and its own subjects, vet not one,
who disapproved, ever attempted to disturb their
proceedings. The legal right being acknowledged
to assemble peaceably for an interchange of opin-
ion or feeling, or the promotion of any object not
adverse to the laws, no one dreamed of opposing
the enjoyment of that right, no matter by whom
exercised. But us soon the Native Americans
began to hold their meetings, they encountered the
opposition of Irish residents, many of them doubt
less not even naturalzed. 1t is not to the point to
enquire whether the object of the Native American
party be just unjust, liberal illibera. 1t is
perfectly constitutional and legal, and that is suili
cent. The members had perfect right to assem-
bic peaceab)y in any public place. The eXpedicn-
cy of their doing So s another matter We agree,
so laros the meeting Of Tuesday afternoon was con-
cerned, that it was ineXpcdient But on the prcvi-
shown at the time why they should not meet where
they did. The ground belonged as much TO them
as to any other persons for the purpose of meeting
To disturb their meeting in any manner was
| gross violation Of decency and right. At that first
meeting then, the riots began and by whom were
| they commenced?
We think there is no difficulty in answering this
question The Native American meeting on Fri
day was disturbed by Irish men and women resi-
ding in the neghborhood. The Interference had
no other provocation than the assembling of the
meeting in that neighborhood. Was this sufficient
provocation? If Repeal meeting had been held
in any part of the city county, would the place
of meeting, if lawful, have been made the pretext
by antl-Repealers for an attack upon it? This is
fair mode Of viewing the case. What would have
been said, had Repeal meeting been disturbed
for such q cause? We leave those to answer who
have endeavorcd to eXtenuate the wrong of the
Irish on the day named. With regard to the ad-
journed meeting at the Washington market latter
the meeting in independence Square,) it was rash
= unwise, unnecessary, improper. 1t caused the re-
newal, was predicted Of the hostilities Of the
| former day. But then, again, 'cho renewed the
) hostilites; Again we are obliged to answer, the
Irish. 1t was they who recommended the battle
which they had begun If certain degree Of
provocation is chargeable on the other party, still
, the Irish were the first actual aggressors. They
had blood, but they were not satisfied They were
i1otnrnipnd n have cornnlpta ,cto
and to keep the ground for themselves, to the ex
clusion of every one who might differ from then
politically or religiously their resolution cos
what it might. We have thus stated by whom ant
why the riots begun. We have seen no othe
statement IN any quarter, although much has beer
said to mstify the truth and shift the responsibility
. With regard to the riots which succeeded tht
! attack upon the meeting of Tuesday, it is just t.
consider in turn what was the provocation no
that any provocation could the rioters-bu
to remember it is necessary to full understanding
of the case. a body of men had been peaceaby
: however imprudently, assembled for lawful pur
n pose They were fired upon, first by skulking as
;. sassins, and then more boldly by the same indvid
uas. Innocent men, the native inhertors of tn
. soil, were mercilessy shot down for no other OF
fence than the discussion of political question:
It This is the SOBER unvarnished truth Their friends
eXasperated by the outrage, resented it as far o
= they could at the moment The fever of excite
ment always contagious IN crowd, was caught b
n that class of worthless persons who are on tn
!, skirts of every community, ready for any mischie
q These finding preteXt for INDUCING their wicke
propensities, and the occasion to do so with impI
IS nifty, took up the affair where the Native Amer
e cans had left it. A small body of the latter, as
H. party, acted only for the time, and when frenzie
40 by the ruthless and bloody assault upon them, G
. the defensive. But even that small took no part
IT. the subsequent doings of the mob. The person
o. who fired the Churches were seen by numerous CT
4" liens; some of them were recognized as old col
u victs by the police; many Of them were boys; b.
- none Of them could be pointed out as known men
re bers of the American Party 1t was therefore
d. motley and depraved crowd that continued the
OTIS, which the Irish faction had begun.