Fayetteville observer. [volume] (Fayetteville, Tenn.) 1850-1966, 1855-11-15

them to make permanent settlements
teach them to reverence the ALTA
and hearthstone Of the freeman
encourage them to study the science
of self-government; let US breathe our
selves into them, and make them iden
tical with usin all lour interests and for
tunes; and thus we maysbecome the
dispensers of blessings to our race
without injury to ourselves.
But should've extend the time o.
naturalization to twenty-one years
perhaps twice the time of theil
average longevity after arriving here
then close all the doors of civil.
military, and political office against
them-drive all the naturalized for
eigners from all the fields of honorable
distinction-reproach them With hu-
initiation of birth and morals-to the
noble and aspiring among them, the
boasted fruit upon our tree of Liber-
erty would become as the fruit of
Sodom. Foreigners still might come;
but they would come as spectators
and sharpers, to gather up our wealth
by all the laws of avariee, and then
retire with their gains from the coun-
try. Others still might come-the
violent-the hardened-the Gesper-
ate, to annoy and distract our country.
But the noble spirit which sighs for
equality and independence, will stay
in Europe, and like the dying adder,
still lift its head to wound the heel
that crushes out its life. -
r We now pass to the question of
excluding Catholics from office. We
are Presbyterian by profession and
church connection, and we do not
stand before yon to defend the doc
trines of the Catholic Church; but
we do undertake to defend their
rights as American citizens. We
take high ground on this question:
we shall contend that the exclusion
of Catholic citizens, whether ofsnative
or foreign birth, from Office, is,
1st. Religious intolerance. 8a
I'd. An Invasion of the rights OF
the States, and dangerous to the peace
and existence of the government.
s 3d. Unjust. fsla-a
4th. Antichristian and impolitic.
LIST. Is it religious intolerance?
By the first constitution of our Pu-
ritan forefathers, none ssere atlo1oed
to cote, in civil matters, who did not
belong to the Church. History has
regarded this as undsspated religious
Intolerance. Had none been allowed
to hold eiviz office for the same rea-
son, history would have regarded
it as higher grade of intolerance,
because there is more eminence in
office than in the right of ballot; at
least, it vas so regarded by Kenneth
Raynor, of North Carolina. And
shall We now be told, after such pes
tilent dogmas have been buried for a
century, under the waves of Ameri-
can civilization, that the exclusion Of
Catholics from Office, either by law
or by party combination, is not relig-
ious Intolerance? that it is not say
ing to them, Give up your relig-
ion, or your right Of holding ofice9
1t needs no argument. 1t is nothing
but mere, sheer, bigoted intolerance,
and that Of the most malignant type.
No Presbyterian, Baptist, nor Meth
odist can give it softer name. But
we pass on.
I'd. IT is an invasion Of the rights
of the States, and dangerous to the
peace and existence of our govern
ment.. -, ss
: The delegates who formed our
Federal Constitution, were the repre-
sentatives Of the. various religious
sects in the different States, each
Jealous and pertinaeious of its relig-
ions RIGHTS. We are informed by
Justice Story (vol.ii.p- 9S, Sto. Const.,
ed. 1889 that our Federal Constitu-
ton never could have been adopted
without the clause, "No religious test
shall ever be required as qualifca-
ton to any office or public trust un-
der the United States" Not one vote
was recorded against this clause. L
still, however, did not allay the jeal-
ousy of the people; and in the hss'
article of the Amendments to the
Constitution, they inserted this pro
vision: ssCongress shall make no la7
respecting an establishments religion
or prohibiting the free exercise there
of. In commenting on these clauses
! l.Iastisaa ] Story SAYS; ly0l iii, p. 7S|l y
sto. Const,) I'm some Of the otate