Montgomery County sentinel. [volume] (Rockville, Md.) 1855-1974, 1855-09-15
1)ohteal
Letter of Hon. ID. M. Barringer.--Im-
portant Correspondence.


portant Correspondence.
The Raleigh On. CO Standard, of the
9th of September, contains lengthy cor
respondence between Hon. Kenneth
Rayner and Hon. Daniel NJ. Barringer,
both Of North Carolina, on Mr.. Rayner's
version of conversation between Mr..
Barringer and the Pope's Nuncio a.
Madrid, on the subject Of the appoint
ment ef a member of the cabinet of Pres
ident Pierce. As this correspondence is
of somednportance, owing to the fact
that Mr.. Rayner's version of the CONVEX
sation alluded to has been used as an ac-
cusation against the President and the
democratic party, we have deemed it
right to spread MIR. Barringers letter
before our readers. The letter of Mr..
Rayner, to which Mr. Barringer replies,
is dated at Raleigh ON the 9Th of August,
and was directed to that gentleman at
Saratoga, where it did not reach him,
but was forwarded to him at Sharon
Springs, New York, from which place
he wrote his answer. Mr. Rayner re-
fers at length to a conversation between
himself and Mr.. .Barringer, at g Var
boro's hotel, about Christmas last" in
which, after talking about the Catholic
church in Spain-its ceremonies, its in
dulgences, its denial of burial to Pro-
testants, &C., &c.-Mr Rayner 1--WE
copy from his letter. said:
g In the course Of the conversation |
said that consid cred the Romish re-
ligion to be utterly incompatible with the
the existence Of free government; that
their assumptions of power in this coun-
try began to be alarming; that as you
were not in the country at the last pres
idential election you were probably not
well acquainted with the influences
which prevailed in deciding it; but that
there was very little doubt that the Po-
man Catholic vote in the North was
given to Mr.. Pierce in pursuance of an
arrangement with Archbishop Hughes to
that effect. You replied, You have no
idea how well posted they are in Europe
in regard to what is going on in this
country" Why, sir (said you, the
Pope's Nuncio at Madrid told me of
Campbell, Of Pennsylvania, being a
member of the cabinet before I had ever
heard of it, and before it was known in
MaJrid.' ] remarked, that was proof
there had been a bargain that the Roman
Casholc vote should be given to Mr..
Pierce, and that that church should have
o seat in the cabinet, &c. You then
went on to state the incidents connected
with the Nuncio's conversation with you /;
that it was at party given by one of
the members Of the cabinet in Madrid /;
that the Nuneio came up to you, stated
to you the fact of Mr. Campbell, Cath
Ole, being member of Mr. Pierce's
cabinet, and expressed his qualification
that his church was so strong and inAu-
ential in the United States as to obtain
such an honor"
Mr.. Rayner then states that he used
this fact in his public speeches, Gas he
did not consider it at all private or con-
fidehtial !" and so he says he told Mr..
b. when he met him at Baltimore. We
copy again:
You said nothing of tic date of this
conversation-whether it was before the
4th of March, 1853, or after that time
True, the impression left on my mind by
the conversation with you was that it was
before the 4th of March but | never so
stated in any public speech Ihave made
for did not then, nor do | now, think
that makes any sort of difference. =
Whether before or after the 4th of March
mattered not to me; for the point which
| always made in abiding to it was, that
the Pope's Nuncio, being put in posses
sion of the information before the United
States minister had heard of it, and be-
fore the public in Madrid had received
the news, was humiliating reflection to
every patriotic American; and afforded
proof that the bargain had baen agreed
on before the election, and that the bar
gain had been fulfilled"
He then says the anti-American
press has endeavored to evade the force
of this statement of mine by contempt
ible bubble as to whether the Nuncio's
communication to you was before or after
the 4th of March, 1885," and because
of this, as well as for other reasons, he
appeals to Mr.. Barriuger "to calmly
review with me the circumstances, the
history, Of this matter-to request Of you
that you will refresh your memory in re-
gard to the minute details-and let us
see, if we cannot, by process of fair
logical deduction, arrive at conclusion
little different from that which, in the
unwillingness of your kind nature to
judge harshly in any quarter, you may
have arrived at the time of your CONVEX
sation with the Nuncio"
Mr.. Rayner then goes on to cross-ex-
anime Mr.. Barringer by series Of
questions, which we have not time now
to copy; but which are so forcibly replied
to by Mr.. Barringer, that the reader
will readily ascertain their purport from
a perusal of his mastery letter which is
subioined linton.
SHARON SPRINGS, N. Y, Aug %, 1855.
DEAR SIR II have this day received
your letter dated 7th instant, but post
marked Raleigh, 18th instant, and also
postmarked Saratoga 9th, whence it has
been forwarded to me at this place, where
have been since the 10th of this month.
refer to these dates and facts for the
purpose of accounting for any seeming
delay in answering your letter--a delay