Weekly North Carolina standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1850-1858, 1855-08-22
q be- gtanaar0..
RALEIGH. SATURDAY. AUGUST 49, 1855.
MEssRs. RAYNER AND BARRINGER.,

ing the last Presidential canvass formed alliance
with the Roman Catholic Church. by which, as is
alleged, the votes of that Church were secured to
Gen. Pierce and Cabinet Office conferred on a Ro-;
man Catholic in return; and we have already shown,
in the judgments of all intelligent and unpreiudiced
persons the utter groundlessnesso the charge But
Mr. Rayner is attempting, not only to break theforce
Of the facts which have come to light but he is en-
deavoring, through one of his organs the Raleigh
Star to percer the facts and change the assaes and
this of itself renders it necessary t',-' -I--I
rive TO the whole matter fuller and more thorough
investigation Besides the character of the Demo-
cratic party and the good name of the Republic are
involved and this foul stain upon both should be
wiped off whatever may be the consequences to
those who have been prominently instrumental in
preferring such charge. The author OF so grave
charge should be held to a rigid account, and con-
den.ned or acquitted as may be just and right. The
elections are over-the preudices and passions Incl
dent to them have somewhat subsidized; and the pub
lie mind is therefore, in a. better condition than twas
while the charge being circulated to receive the
evidence and to decide upon it fairly and impartial
". The traducer of his country's honor cannot
hope to escape that Judgment which, in the calm
ness of sober thought, virtuous people never fail
to render .-.. .-. = = ,s-~,- -. g.
We think there can be no room for doubling the
fact, that Mr.. Rayner, in all his public speeches,
from the adjournment of the Philadelphia Conyen-
ton up to the day of the election, declared the
authority of Mr. Barringer, that the Popes Nuneio
said to him. at lsgtfi9 that he could tell him aco
WOULD 6e-not acAo wAs-a member Of Gen: Pierce's
Cabinet. Here is the turning point in the whole
matter; and now for the proofs. We make the fol-
(,o, ,ococ
high character for veracty and integrity there is
in the State, who heard Mr.. Rayner at Weldon, on
the 10th July: s g., 'yt. ..-.. d. ,
"Mr Ravner said, Iveharge upon the Democracy
a bargan-a corrupt understanding with the Cath
olc Cnurch during the last Presidential election, by
which the support of the latter pledged and car
re in consideration of high political prefeiment to
member of that Church. r, The bargain was made
and who dares deny it here? " i'll any one do 50
Here Mr. R. paused for denial. do not, however
state that Gen. Pierce party to it him self, or
acquainted with this infamous alliance. dare
say he is innocent of any personal participation in
the matter. But repeat, there was corrupt bar
gain between the Democracy and the Catholic Church.
by which the aid of the latter secured, and in
consideration thereof Cabinet appointment con-
ferred Now, will any one present deny t2 dare
any one to do so-for hold in my hands conciusire
evidence of the charge. "a voce-"I deny it;
bring forward your proof You deny it? Now,
IL -
and must decide according to the evidence-and
what is it? Here it is, tuH, pointed unequicocoh
1t is letter from the Hon. d. NJ. Barringer, Ex-
Minister to the Court of Madrid, an extract from
which l will read to you. Let ME, however, prem
ise that Mr.. Barringer is no Know Nothing; and
hence the charge of its being Know Nothing lie
cannot attach to it. Meeting with Mr.. Ellis some
time since in Washington City, he remarked to me
- Rayner. you must get me out OF this Pope Nun
clio difficulty, as have charged the Democracy with
borrr l,thn rifU Gprt9
Ireped; 'Barringer told me just what stated to
you, that the Pope's Nunco told him who would be
member of Gen. Pierce's Cabinet before it was
known by him, or generally in Madrid. But will
get MIR. Barringer's statement IN writing. l saw
Barringer afterwards and mentioned the matter to
him. He reiterated his statement, and at my request
furnished it to in writing, and here is an extract
from this letter. Il quote from memory.] Before
it generally known in Madrid, ard while it was
yet sub ject OF onjecture who would compose the
Presidents Cabinet the Popes Nuncio told me, at
private party in Madrid, upon my informing him
of my ignorance on the subject, that he knew one
who would be member of the Cabinet, and named
Mr. Campbell, of Pa, Catho-lc--remarking he was
gratifed at the influence the Catholic Church eXer
ted in that country a voice give us the date
Of that conversational Here Mr.. Rayner turned
over the letter time two, and replied that the
date had not been furnished him. After Mr.. Rayner
had concluded his speech the gentleman who had
denied his bribery and corruption charge, went into
.iie SedHu anu dSkeO ioT d COpy VI .
letter. Mr. Rayner said .Certainly ly-but don't you
think it would be violation of courtesy for me to
do so? 1t is private letter. Certainly not re-
piled the gentleman after having made public
use Of it, Mr. Rayner then said it would all appear
In the next American Organ and SO no copy was
furnished" .y.-s--13 u =. + >sss x
This, be it borne in mind, was on the Goth, July.
On the 18th and 21st Of july the Raleigh Register,
one of Mr.. Rayners organs promised that this let
ter thus used by Mr.. Rayner, would be " forthcou,-
ing in day ortwo "-thatis the entire letter would
be published but instead of being published at
length here, where the charge was being circulated
and having effect thc publication was made in the
American Organ" printed in Washington City,
er, as we have heretofore shown, wrote to- Mr.. Ellis
on the subject, under date 10th Juy-Mr. Barringel
having written to him the 9th July, from Niagar:
Falls. We epnblish at length, in another column
from the Raleigh Star, Mr.. Rayner's letter to Mr.
Ellis. Mr. Rayner states it viii be observed, in ont
place in that letter, that he had received "a Jea
days since letter from Mr.. Barringer; and in an
other place he says the letter had just been re
cered." Mr. Ellis, too, must have received Mr.. Rayn
ers letter on the 2lst; and he therefore, kept i
back from the public for five days. Why this delay
Was it not that the sander might do its work p
that the people of North Carolina might not see Mr.
Barringer's correction until after the eecton?t lie
falr-mnded mon decide And why was not the en-
re letter of Mr.. Barringer, Of the 9th, published
Was it not because Mr.. B. censured Mr. r. therein
and cOmn11ineI fbny be brI him