New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1852-10-12


If the Concord record in an able speech, whose
facts and figures have been answered by the
orators and press of the LOco-Foco party only by
v;olent personal abuse of the author The fact
that this is the only answer they can make may
excuse them in the estimation ofthat class who
hold that all is fair in politics, but VIII hard'
" answer with those who desire the truth.
The Satanic Press for the last two or
three davs has furnished the latest, and
perhaps weakest attempt, yet made TO
in the claims set up for PIERCE by his
hackers, in regard TO the test question his Is
a correspondence between Mr.. PIERCE and Mr.
CE,s. O'CoyoR. Conscious of the weakness
Of their card the LocO-Foco managers OF The
Press referred TO raise an immense sulphurous
smoke in the Editorial columns of that impair
rial sheet. 10 attract attention from the facts,
and cover the retreat Of Mr.. OCoSoR aud
Gen. PIERCE. The substance of the cOrreSpOn-
dence which is to obliterate the record, and es-
tablish forever the liberalty Of Gen. PIERCE
is. that in November 1851, q gentleman named
FLoop. residing in Arkansas, makes bet with
another as to whether Roman Catholics were
excluded from office in the State of New
Hampshire. or prohibited from taking office by
the Constitution or Law of that State AMI It
was agreed to leave the decision To Mr.. O'COy-
OR. who was written to, and not being exactly
posted in the matter sent the letter TO Gen.
PIERCE. That gentleman, after cOgtating on
the subject from Dec. 1851. to March 1882,
writes as follows:
CONCORD " H.
Q. To Cidrlts OC0Hor, Esq, Ntr- York CRY:
My DEAR SIR-You must have been SURPRISED at my
failure 10 answer your letter OF Dec. 81. The iact s
wss ashamed 10 make the confession which truth would
tbou have demanded At the time OF the adoption OF
our Sete Constitution. in l74 the religious test was IN
ored 10 repel taunts that had been flung out after the
French alliance. that there was also to be an alliance
with the French religion. and the establishment OF II
here Ry the Convention of 1891 the provision was re
iccted by decided vote, end the rejection was ratified
hy ma oriiy Of the people; hut tyothiris vote be-
ing REQUIRED for the adoption OF the amendment, the
odious feature still retained IL place.
In the Convention of 1850 consisting OF about 20
members the vote 10 strike out this es wa almost en-
frcly unsninuui- think not more than siN members
voting in the negative The amendment OF the Cons,i
iuticn in this Ftspect submitted % tn people AZ
the 0tc election pnd although We are not IN t1e receipt
is TO be no longer disgraced by such provision in it,
Il hope TO visit New-York in May, md TO have OPP
portuny to renew the pleg amt acquaintance It was my
good fortune TO make with you many year since.
With the highest respect, your fn'nd
"FalNN Pierce
Mr.. O'CoSoR forwarded this letter to Mr..
FLooD, with note Of his own, enormously as
suring him that the disqualification OF Cath
olics in New-Hampshirc had been removed.
After the nomination Mr.. orc. wrote to Nj.
FLooD for the letter, and now publishes it with
great flourish of trumpetS as evidence OF the
truth Of the LOcO-FocO statements and OF the
fasity of those put forth in Mr.. RonrsoS $
speech. The letter amounts to just this: That
in March last, in writing to IN eminent Catholic,
Gen PIERCE expressed himself ashamed of the
religioustest-or,i in other words, ashamed Ofthc
bigotIy Of his party Asmuch might have been
learned from Mr.. RoBNsoS's speech, for he re-
Ports Gen. i. as pronOuncing the test a stigma
upon the State, aud it Is fair to presume that
he was ashamed OF it. With all this noise, how
ever, not one single statement OF Mr.. ROBIN
son is disproved, or even denied. He has not
said that the General was not ashamed OF the
bigotry of his party, but that he took no act.
i've part in removing the cause Of that shame
But if the Generals shame and modification
were so very profound why did he not make
it manifest What was he doing all the
time from the receipt of that letter in Deem
her, 1851, to the Election in March, 1852
Where are the meetings he called the speeches
lie made 10 remove that stigma from his native
Statel Gen. PIERcE is man OF some note
and influence in New Hampshire-is said in.
deed To rule the State as Isaac HUI former
ly dd--ard if b. had done anything in
tie way OF rOusing up the people to u
sense Of their duty, is it TO be supposed thdt
there would have been no record OF the
fact i'll the journals Of the day When he
desired to dragon and crush Mr.. HALE, he
went enerectlcally 10 work TO accomplish his
object v hen John ArwooD was to be put
down for daring 10 have a conscience or an
opinion of Lis own the General did palpable
service in the cause next his heart by going
about the State addressing the people, and the
traces of his labor are left in the newspapers
of the time, and the results were seen in the
defeat OF Mr.. Atwood
Mr.. O'CoSOR and TIE Satanic Press place
great stress on the fact that at the time PIERCE
wrote biz letter he was not a candidate and did
not expect to be candidate for the Presidency.
Ifso it would prove that he looked only TO his
bisoted party in New Hampshire for prcferment
never dreaming that the twO-thrds rule OF q
Baltimore Convention would suddenly trans
fom him into an available candidate for the