New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1852-09-15
FRANKLIN rIRRCE Am CsrholiO
EMANCIPATION.

lonin. letter m rri,sseu ~ the rrAgeas test in
New. llaug shirr, was NFi,irn g. john b. W aftcn'
Tsq. of 600 cfs''~a y \
coNecnn a rhaf,t.y. lsly ~, i'l
u,ps,uSH Il a IN sa,slHlr At charge 'aout
embrace ucrr Sivct attack 'a reh, than TAT wiz
wh'rh tho whie papers have tceuei, IN frlailn " my
sentiments ppoa The rels ous tat ntsnea IN our SsN1
Corst.tuuan which Adopted In Nv, ani never
amended stree Tbs charge Ia oenirsdcscd BY s'ety
word snd act Of my lie having cerenee II ne res
hon IN any form. directly or colaieraly adVocated
the cal Of the Convention for The Amendment oi inc
Cop,ttuton witch assembled IN Novenber. 1850 aud
The n osi prominent object IN my oEn n'od, was 70
,t,ke out the unjust and odi0us provisions, commonly
called the religious and property quliaeAton tests
from our Fundamental law.
In hst'e your obeden1 servant ..-,
(signed) FRANK fIbhCE'
John T. Warren, ESQ, CooperstoWn, N. Y.
Remarks.
Mr.. Pierce gives very vehement con
,radiction of the "charge" "with which
the Wing papers have teemed," but is
careful not to say tStat charge nor what
Wing papers have teemed with it. The
impression intended to be conveyed by the
foregoing etter clearly is that Gen. Pierce
has been charged with opposing the call
Of a Convention, or opposing in that Con-
ven'ion the abolition Of the Catholic dis
abilities contained in the New Hampshire
Constitution. Yet this is wholly unfound-
ed, and raises a false. misleading issue
Mr.. Pierce would f4in conceal from his
readers the fact that this controversy was
commenced by one of hi. most eminent
supporters, and commenced with false
hood which nobody has now the hardihood
TO defend. Gen. p. was raised from the
depths Of obscurity to the altitude of
candidate for President on Saturday.
June 5th and or the Monday following
before the Wing papers had time to
..teem" with any charge" on the sub
ect, Mr.. President DALLAS, at a
Ratification Meeting in Philadelphia
said
"Ths ssper,ion against Pierce Of having favored the
Cath 1c test still retained 10 the Constitution OF New
HAMPSHIRE Is a weak Invention of frightened ensmy.
10 ssid Is was true Guch provision, excluding Caho-
lies from Occupying seat In the LesisAdre Or oecom,
pg Governor, engrsited on tee Constitution OF
that State bur Il was also rus That Levi Woodbury.
and Fra klln Pierce hsd Obtained the passage OF laws
providing for the holdng q two State Conventions 10
amend that Constitution. In both cases an amended
Constitution submitted 10 the vote Of the People,
Bat q n-o third bd1S requisite, eas dQ.Itsf by
oon5fsato7 of UAys and AboittoHists'
Here was direct charge of intolerance
and prescription for Religions sake, made
against the Wing party by one of the most
distinguished of Gen. Pierce's supporters.
Mr.. Dallas gives US no clue to the author
of the dispersion " he cOntradicts-doe
not say, where, when, or by whom, such
dispersion bod been uttered. Bat he
proceeds to refu,e it by stating that the
defeat of the Catholic Test rad been de-
ftated. a two-third vote beiOg requisite
and that such defeat was effected "by
combination of Wings AMI Abolitionists."
We were thus impelled to enter upon the
discussion In yindication of the Wing par
ty and we showed, by citing the votes of
Wing &c WINS for and of Pierce Democratic
towns strongly against the repeal, that Mr..
Dallas had stated what was not truE-that
the requirement of two third vote toamena
the Constitution had nowise affected the
question, Stree on boh occasions when the
question was submitted to the People, the
repeal had been voted down by a decided
majority, and that the majority who voted
for Catholic Emancipation was in large
measure composed of Wigs. We de-
manded of MIR. Dallas either n refutation
OF bis calumny or some attempt to support
and Justify ito but he has remained obsti
nately silent to this day.
The discussion thus opened proceeded,
and Mr.. Vim. +. Robinson in due time
went up to New Hampshire, carefully ex-
amined the records, and embodied the re-
suit of his investigations in a Speech.
That Speech we printed in fall, accompa.
nyiog il by conspicuous Editorial, in |
which we stated that Mr.. Robinson had. |
as we thought, established these propo- |
sitions
g That the Democratic party Of New Hampshire
has not al any tine manifested any general earnest
desire 10 expUpge the odlous and uDjusfsbe proscro
ror OF Catholic, from their State Constitution
= Tbss he Wig party Of New Hampshire kds not
as hfs been falsely asserted By Vios-President Da
las among others-resisied and defeated the Csns,u
iioDal sme ncmsnt required
ISAi Fran Kiln Pierce has not taken any such de-
eioed ard conspicuous pert in urging Catholic Enamel.
patton as bis friends have represented;
T. that the Whigs Of New. Hampshire csssa greater
Iropofiiopsfe vote for that Emancipation than TIE !
Den ocrai, al each Of the EectiOns wnen h was SUB.
mltisd 70 p pulAr vote; add
That tbs Democracy Of evHsmpshire might
md should I'm the help freely rendered by whiT.)
have long since amended their Consultation 80 As 10
place Catholics on an equal footing with PEOtss,sat
To the same effect were Mr.. Robinson's
eight propositions, embodied and sustained
IN his Speech, not charging Mr.. Pierce