Daily American organ. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1856, 1854-12-23

there during the Revolution would be have been
a foreigner In Virginia Certainly not and yet
he would have been every whit = much 20 a.
man born In England, Scotland, ireland, canada,
q the West Indies 30 that Il the time OF the 'or
alton Of the Federal Constitution we were common
people, without respect to the place OF birth the
government was the property, the clrthrighs Oh
those who made il and those who formed and
secured the adoption Of the constitution could not
be foreigners under It. Hence the only exclusion
from office of those not native 70 the sosf In the
consttution--the Presidency ofthe United States
does not apply to those who were citizens at the
time of its adoption SO much for the British sub
jects who took part In the war Of the Revolution
and the formation of the constitution.
To whom else does Mr.. Wise alindey To the
FrenchY On this question there always has been
great delusion In our country. The historical as
cociations growing out Of that French alliance are,
admit, such as should ever be productive Of ma
tional comfy, courtesy, and kindness but that We
rest under any burden Of gratitude towards the
French nation, 10 mere clap-tmp Ii was nothing
more than an alliance between two independent
nations TO fight a common enemy, France is az
much indebted to as we are to her. She aided
us In securing the treaty Of peace in 1888, which
did not give US our independence, but merely ac-
knowledged il on the part Of Great Britain; and we
aided her in humbling her old enemy. II was no
love Of liberty that induced the French govern
lncut 10 unite Win US III the war Will cuRmuo
and, AZ proof of this, in less than twenty years
afterwards, the impositions and exactions of the
same French government brought US TO the very
verge Of war with that nation. So much for the
French who aided In the war of the Revolution.
To whom else, then, does Mr.. Wise alludei
Does he refer to the examples Of individual heroism
and devotion to liberty, that induced Steuben, Pu-
lasld, De Kalb, Kosciusco, La Fayetto and Others,
to draw their swords IN that great struggle for free
domf To their memories be all praise and graft
tude forever, say! The nation never can indulge
In praisesh enough, feel gratitude warm enough,
build monuments tall enough, to do justice to
their memories and their names. As long as his
tory records deeds Of glory they will ever live as
flights and landmarks on the cliffs Of fame Had
these men continued In our country till the forma
ton Of the constitution they would not have been
foreigners to the government. Either OF them
would have been eligible to the presidency Of the
United States. And from time 70 time Congress
has shown its sense Of gratitude for their services
by voting to them and their descendants large
sums of money and grants of land. But ia it not
desecrating the memory Of those men, to compare
to them the hordes of paupers, felons, and con-
victs that are now inundating the land? Can Mr.
Wise himself think that the same argument APP
plies to boths
The next reply to Mr. Wiso's argument In favor
of foreigners, deduced from aid contributed by
them in the Revolution Is, confess, not original
with me. have seen it forcibly urged elsewhere,
but it is conclusive, and therefore allude TO 1t.
It is thisso far regards the associations of past
history we have az much cause to hate foreigners,
"a class, as to love them. Foreign soldiers were
hired in Germany, by England in the Revolution,
for the purpose Of being sent here to crush US.
And they were sent, and their devasations and free
booting conduct became 30 proverbial that to this
day their character is immortalized in the name Of
that insect--the Hcssian fy--whose ravages are
80 destructive to the farmers hopes. So far, then,
as regards the past while we ever should, as the
nation does cherish feeling Of gratitude for indi
vidusl instances Of devotion to our cause in the
war the Revolution, by foreigners yet class,
we have as much cause to dislike them as we have
to love them. I do not say we should dislike them,
merely because they are foreighers--I think we
should not but according to Mr.. Wises argument
we should.
Mr.. Wise, In the exuberance Of his fancy has
put into the mouth of the know Nothings," Ian
guage in inverted commas, which he assumes to be
exponent Of their views. Although It is hypothe
tically DONE yet the evident object is TO create the
impression, that this language bespeaks their sent
ments he assumes the Know Nothings" to say
70 foreigner-"w We arc now 10 independent Of you
that We are not compelled to allow you to enjoy
our republican privileges We desire the exclusive
use of human rights" &c. Now, does not Mr.. Wise
see--will he not, In his calm moments of reflection,
admit that these broad and sweeping chargcs-these
dogmatc assumptions, of what are the views and
and objects OF organization, of whose mysterious
uncertainty he has just been complaining-are en-
trely improper snd unjust aud contrary to all the
rules which Should govern a fair and manly contro-
yersys
This letter Of Mr.. Wise was designed to be
grave, dgnihed, and impartial discussion Of great
principles and am surprised that a man Of Mr..
Wises intellectual power should resort to mere as
sumptions in the want of facts and of proof am
surprised that a man of his generalship should
leave bis tanks 80 exposed, as he marches on In
hot haste to the object Of his attack. What proof
has Mr.. W., what right has he to assume that the
g Know-N othings" are not willing that foreigners
should enjoy our republican privileges" or have
the |" use Of human rightsin What arc our " re-
publican privileges What are human rights
under our institutional They are the thorough
snd common security Of life liberty, and property,
under the constitution and the laws. Has Mr.. w.
ever heard or seen any evidence of purpose on
the part Of the Know Nothings to restrict or
curtil the enjoyment Of these rights and privileges
by foreigners any more than by nativess Never,
never.
Has any purpose been evinced 10 impose addi-
tional taxes on them? None. To restrict them
in the freedom of speech, or Of the press None.
To interfere with the enjoyment Of their religious
Worship None. To deprive them of the right
OF TRIAL Dy Jufy--Of oi lHt right vi "uocus CUT
pusf None To sue and give evidence in our
courtsf None. To exclude them from the prac-
tice of the learned professional To deprive their
children Of the privilege Of education In our com
mon schools None. To prescribe them socially :
None, none, whatever. OF what, then, can Mr. Wise
complain, Does he allude merely TO the disposi-
ton TO extend the time Of their residence in the
country before naturalizationf If he does, then
he might with as much propriety say that the pre-
sent law, requiring five years residence, was de-
prving them Of republican privileges. For whether
II shall be Ave years. or twenty years, Ia nero
question of policy-the principle Is the same
Can Il be possible, that all Mr.. Wise's jeremisds
over the foreigners proceed from the growing pur-
pose 70 amend the naturalization lawss
He well knows that this question Of the qualif-
cation for suirrags-the question who are to COM
pose the body politics. matter Of mere munich
pal regulation, founded on expediency and good
policy alone. Are young men, under twenty-one
years Of age, excluded from the enjoyment Of our
republican privileges, or of human rights or, s
provided In acme Of the States, those who cannot
vote till they have paid tax Suppose, as stated
by Mr.. Wise, Nothings" resolve that they
will NOT vote for foreirners or Roman Catbolics--