New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1852-07-21
GEN. SCOTT AND NATIvISM.

long known as the especial organ and
champion of the Federal school in poll
tics-that school of which the Pierce
Baltimore Convention affirms tina. it is dis
tinguished for "deeming no imposture too
monstrous for the public credulity." If
we believed that assertion to be true of any
party, we should certainly cite The Post
as an evidence in point, and not easily
gainsayed.
That paper knows perfectly well, beyond
q shadow Of doubt, that WINFIELD SCoTT
is not an advocate or adherent of Ma
tivism, yet it does not scruple, in the base
hope of gaining party advantage thereby,
to insinuate from day to day that he is.
1t knows that the Nativist Convention
which recently assembled to nominate a
President did not give one vote to Gen.
Scott, but nominated another candidate in
opposition to him.
1t knows that every Nativist journalwas
bitterly hostile TO Gen. SCOTS nomination
at Baltimore, and urged the selection of
anybody else in preference.
That paper supported with all its might
Heilrg Shaw for Senator from our uptown
District last fall, IS it had previously sup
ported him for Aldermen, though he is we'll
known to have been the Native can1i
date for Governor of Massachusetts since
1914. So it has supported other ex-Na-
tives who belonged to its party, and never
once dreamed of making their past Nativ-
ism an objection.
Gen. Scott never was a Native candi-
date; never gave Native vote. But he
did formerly believe, in view of the gross
abuses of our Naturalization Laws and the
violence at the polls in which immigrants
from Europe were conspicuous, that the
privileges of Naturalization ought to be
materially restricted if not wholly with
held in future. There is no concealment
on this head, no mystery about It, Gen.
Scott himselfsays, in the only letter he ever
wrote for publication in his own name on
this subj that he formerlyso believed and
professed; but that experience and renec-
ton have convinced him of his error. This
error he freely admits, and says expressly,
in his letter accepting the Wing nomina-
ton, that he would make no change in our
Naturalization Laws, except to make them
more liberal to those immigrants who have
periled their lives in the Military defense
of our country. There is not man alive
who disbelieves Gen. Scott on this point
there is not a man who can read who hon
estly apprehends that the privileges of Nat
uralization will be diminished. On the
contrary, should any change he made un-
der Gen. SCOTS Presidency, it will provide
for the more prompt and easy Naturaliza-
ton Of those immigrants who shall have
served our country in the field of battle
And this, which is sneered at by some OPP
ponents as unconstitutional, is no such
thing. The Constitution prescribes that
our Naturalization Laws shall be uniform.
Does that forbid the change proposed by
Gen. Scott If it did, it would equally
forbid the present law, which allows immi-
grants who come here under eighteen to be
naturalized without the two years notice
of intention which it exacts of all others.
If this is not an infraction of the constitu-
tional requirement, neither is the change
proposed by Gen. Scott. What the Con-
stitution insists on is equal opportunities
and conditions, and this is contravened by
neither of the rules under consideration
An act enfranchising one man because he
had fought for the country would be inval-
i'd; but an act prohering Naturalization to
all men who shall hereafter serve her IN
the tented field, would be clearly valid.
But in truth this whole subject of Nat
uralization Laws is dragged into the can
vass by Gen. SCOTS adversaries to arouse
prejudice and distract attention from the
real issues Of the canvass. Here are Gen.
Scott and Gen. Pierce, rival candidates for
President-which shall be chosenl Which
of them has more ably and usefully served
the Country Which has evinced the
greater capacity for future service Which
advocates the principles and measures more
conducive to the Nations enduring welfare
and prosperity! These are the questions
on the replies TO which the Election must
or should turn. And when the partisans
Of either candidate erdeevor to avoid them
and hinge the result GA something totally
irrelevant and immaterial-On an opinion
once entertained by Gen. Scott which he