Fremont weekly freeman. [volume] (Fremont, Sandusky County, Ohio) 1850-1853, 1852-08-28

ges, and when CONTRARY to his advice the
subject was forced upon the people again, at
the next election-when as be foretold, it was
voted down. receiving about 1000 votes less
than the previous year-the town in which
he lived (Keene) did not give asingle vote
against it, hut gave ali votes for it. This
the slanderers of Mr.. CHAMBERLAIN know. The
Concord Patriot, of Jan. 3, 1851, says that
e Il s0as grdre question a0hether the Con-
uemtion hare tie dutkorityto make any fur
tier amendments after those nosO made shall
have been acted upon By the people" And yet
now they abuse and slander Mr.. Chamber
lain for taking the correct view ofthis grave
question
NEW DISCUSSION ON THE TEST.
Wen, the Convention was two days in sess-
ion, (June l6 and III and N that time
speeches were made upon this Catholic
Emancipation by Messrs Smith, Chamber
lain, Bell, Eastman, Woodbury., DC, dc; but
not one word did Franklin Pierce say during
the whole time.
GOV. D1SsMoRE's MESSAGE.
Nor is this all. In June, 1851, the Leg
5islature assembled, and Pierce's candidate
being elected Governor, delivered his mess
age to the Legislature. If Franklin Pierce
had asked him to put in paragraph ex-
pressing regret at the failure of the last trial,
and urging support in the new trial ordered,
he would undoubtedly have done it--but no,
in place of any such thing We have the fol-
lowing paragraph rejoicing over the defeat
of Catholic Emancipation, which was un-
doubtedly seen and approved by Mr.. Pierce
before it was delivered:
-Is is apparent from this decisive express
ion (says Gov Dinsmore) OF the popular will.
that the present Constitution is, in the main,
entirely satisfactory to large majority
of the people. This result also in
dicates the instructive lesson which may be
useful for our guidance hereafter, that no
material or important amendments to the
Constitution can be expected to 6nd accep-
tance with the people, which is anything
more than declaratory of their knoWn senti-
ments; and that it is always unsafe to assume
a knowledge of their opinions when they
have nos been distinctly pronounced y =
An occasional examination and discussion OF
the principles and forms of the fundamental
law, are not without their use, if they serve
no other purpose than to bring more clearly
to view the great merits of our old and well
tried Constitution, ard to give the people
another opportunity to rea6frm their strong
and undated attachment to IT," (Dinsmore's
Message, June. 1851.
If that is not direct approval of the peo-
pie in rejecting Catholic emancipation,
then am igaorant of what language means
Loco-Foco STATE CONVENTION.
In che same month (June, 1851. the Loco
Focos of New Hampshire held State Con-
Eention at Concord, to nominate candidates
for State officers to be elected the following
March, when the Anti Catholic test was to be
tried again. This convention passed a series
of resolutions rejoicing in the defeatof Catho-
lie emancipation. Here is the first resolution !:
ResolVed, That the representative of the
people. in convention assembled. congratulate
each other upon the stgaaE triumph of the
Democracy of New-Hampshire over all the
forms and combinations of hostile forces, with
which they have been obliged to contend in
the recent State election. That we behold
with pride and joyful satisfaction, the Demo
cratic party coming out from the midst Of the
perils which eneompassed it victorious over
eminity of open foes aud the Greachery of
supposed friends, its strength unimpaired, its
dignity uncompromised,- ITS honor antaratsh-
ed, and its fundamental doctrins unchanged
Now here we have the whole Loco-F Foco
Pierce Party of New-Hampshire represented
in State convention, and taking counsel of
Franklin Pierce at Concord. just after the de-
feat Of Catholic Emancipation at the previ-
GUS election and just after a new set of
amendments had been ordered to be sub
mitted to the people at the same time when
their candidates would be voted for; and yet
in their long string of resolutions on almost
every subject, they found net room for a sin
gle word in favor of Catholic Emancipation,
but rejoiced that their fundamental doctrines
bad been unchanged
THE DEMOCRAT ON PIERCE d. CO.
Indeed so well known was it that Franklin
Pierce and his party we're opposed to Cath
ole Emancipation, that The Concord Demo-
cYat, published in his own city, and Of course
read by him, in conspicuous editorial, pub
lished June II, 1851, says:
"THe future of that Convention IS directly
trGceabIs to those HunEer leaders, PIERCE
Atherton d Co, sUho were determined that 1t
should either be entirely subserVisnt to their par
tisdn views, or be aOhat 1t sUas, an aborti on.
They succeeded, and to them belongs the hon
or"
NOTHING DONE
Well, from April 1881 to March, 1852,
Catholic Emancipation was before the people
of this State. Yet during that period of elev-
en- months, Franklin Pierce never opened his
mouth in favor of the measure Neither he
nor his friends called any public meeting to
advocate it They saw that it had been vo-
ted down, two to one, the last election, and
that, therefore, it was incumbent on every
friend of liberal sentiments to bend every en-