New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1852-09-27

c,.mm.d xsi,b the hslf-trI,ths and utter
faisehoods pu, forth in ,indicstIOn Of Pierce.
and has read nothing on the other side OF
the question. He tells the Archbishop tiia'
the repeal of the Test was
reported By Judge Woodbury., wm opposed ., NJ
CAdabtrisa, the Whis leader IN me an
was sub.e qusn,ly nominated By the Wings ataer can
6iis,e for GCTerocr
All this Is grossly untrue. Judge Wood
bury did not report the clause in question
ard Dir. Chamberlain n<rer opposed 1t.
But, after it had been adopted submitted
to The People, and By them rOted doon'
with all the Conventions amendments
the Convention reassembled, and propo-
s;tion was made to resubmit the repeal of
the Test TO the People at the election then
a, hard March, 50 which Mr.. Cham
berlain opposed, expressly on the ground
of popular prejudice against the general
course of the Convention whichwould en-
sure second defeat of this measure OF
iustice. He was oyerrued. and the ques-
ton resubmitted, and Catholic Emancipa-
ton again voted down, as he toresaw ana
predicted il would be. But so far was Mr..
Chamberlain from opposing the Repeal
that the town of Keene-which he repre-
sented-about the strongest Wing town ID
the State, while giving alarge majority Tor
Chamberlain for Governor, gave 2l7 votes
for the Repeal and none against 1t.
Mr.. Semmes bllnders on into several
more false staten ,nts, including this:
"Tbe reason why the Democratic party has never
succeeded In sboshpg the religious seit To- teal os
never yet had con.uuuonsl majority. Ice cOnst'tu'
ton cannot be amended unless tcoAras OF tne Peops
II ,he S,ate agree 20 the proposed amendment Az tue
5ubernstoiis election OF eoI toe Dem 'cf'c Noso a
- I5-lbe opposition vote (Whis and tree'soiD was
306e6"
Now iii, true that at that one Election OF
ISL. for the second time in more shan
twenty years, Mr.. Semmes's Democratic
party failed to elect Its Governor by clear
majority of the whole vote, simply because
it had repudiated its regularly nominated
candidate John Atwood and ran Gov.
Dinsmoor against him. and some OF At
wood's original friends failed TO desert him
At tie word Of command but it is false
that this. combined with the two.thirds
requirement. defeated Catl olic Emancipa-
ton. While the Pierce Democracy polled
27.425 votes for Governor al this time. the
entire vote for Catholic Emancipation was
but 1876. or less than half the Demo
critic vote, although Ii received thousands
of Wing votes. The two-thirds require
ment had not the east effect, as the affirm
alive vote was but little more than one.
third.
But the question was resubmitted, and
voted Oh by the People at the last March
Election and nor the Pierce Democracy
had a clear majority over all opposition
polling so 900 votes for their candidate
for Governor. Ofcourse, you say, Catholic
Emancipation came out ahead. Ofcomse it
didn't. There were now but 9,5G6 votes
in ell Tor Catholic Emanc patton, or less
than one third the Democratic vote alone,
though the stOunch Wing County of
Cheshire gave the largest majority for the
repeal, and the face of the poll clearly shows
that the Wings cast their full proportion
Of the affirmative vote. Democracy" cast
3O,999 votes but Catholic Emancipation
got but $500 from all quarters to 1909
against it. What effect could the two
thirds requirement have exerted upon this
result!
We blame no party exc usigely for the
nonrepeal Of the New Hampshire Test,
and excuse none. There is much latent
bigotry in that State, but not enough toup I
hold the prescription Of Catholics, If the
People had only been thoroughly awakened
to this issue. Six public meetings in favor
of Equal Justice to meu of whatever Re-
ligious Faith would have secured the de-
siIcd result. We blame Gen. Pierce, not
that be was uL friendly TO Catholic Emanci-
patton, bat that h. neglected to make rea-
sonable and seasonable efforts to secure 1t.
Half the labor he expended 10 crushing
John Atwood would have sufllced. At the
first trial, he might not have suspected the
strength Of tie Anti Catholic prejudice;
but the result of that trial deyeloo ped that
strength, and called for corresponding ef-
forts toOyercOme il. As the leader of the
dominant party in the State-a party under
very great obligations to Catholics-he
ought to have made those efforts, but did
not Had he called aud addressed a few
public meetings in favor of Catholic Eman-
cipation. and stimulated the journals under