Daily American organ. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1856, 1855-01-02

i population Of these States for that purpose OBJ
strlctng the laws for the naturalization Of foreign
crs, refusing to pass others 10 encourage Their
emigration hther.' @
would appeal to Mr.. Wisc's candor, and ask
him--Was that complained Of on the part Of the
Colonies, as matter of principle, INVOLVING any
question Of English liberty, or MS a mere matter Of
policyg Mr.. w. will hardly deny that II was urged
on the ground of policy--if so, 1t had special ref
crcnce to the time and tho circumstances, and the
condition of the country. At that time, we did
need population; the country was extensive and
sparsely settled there was great need felt for la
borcrs, mechanics, capitalists to subduc the conn-
! try, and promote the arts and improvements OF
civilized life. At that time, the African slave trade
was In full vigor. Any interference with that, ON
| the part Of the Crown, would, no doubt have been
considered grievance. But because they were grie-
vances then, Is no reason why they should nave
| been grievances Joreper The trainers OF the Con-
stitution thought not In regard TO tho latter, Tor
they provided for its discontnuance after 1908, and
the whole country has acquicsced in IL. Why.
| Because tho great increase Of tho slave popula-
| ton, together with the knowledge that there was
only portion Of the country adapted to slave Ia
Dor, convinced statesmen and people, too, that We
4 had as many as could DO uscfully employed Wen,
| the people Of this nation are beginning to think
/ pretty much the same way about foreigners. Be
cause il might have been considered good policy
to encourage the emigration Of foreigners In IT'S,
1
i same course now, than that the tolcration OF the
| African slave trade till 1903, Is reason why we
should remove all restrictions upon IL now. 1lr.
i w. will not deny that the policy OF nation il
1 changed by time and circumstance. But not only
1 arc time and circumstances different from what
they were in l776---but the character and conduct
| of the foreign immigrants are entirely changed.
| This cannot be denied. Up to within the last
thirty years. they an industrious, cntcrprsing,
aud orderly population, who came here to better
/ their condition in new country, where labor was
| scarce, food abundant, and liberty secure. There
was then no distinctive class organization among
4 them for political purposes; no concerted action
among them as foreign, neutrality-suspicious.
an American party; no disgracing the streets of
our cities with scenes of riot and bloodshed; no
1 driving and beating away peaceable and orderly
American citizens from the polls; no emptying the
prisons and almshouses of Europe upon shores;
no huckstering with parties, corupting the polti
cal morals Of the country, and selling the baotbox
for reward or the promise Of reward. Hence, no
one objected to their coming, receiving naturalza
ton after short probation, and enjoying all our
rights and privileges as fecmen. And so with
Roman Catholics In the early history OF the coun-
| try, when they were weak Ia numbers, they were
/ modest and unpretending. n.
! No Jesuit horde had then inundated the land
no Pope of Rome had then parceled out our coun-
| try into provinces over each of which was placed
some foreign minion of his own, claiming all the
church property therein as vcsting absolutely III
himself; no arrogant claim was then set up by
them that portion ofthe school fund in the States
should be specially appropriatcdto to them, to enable
| them to teach hatred to Professionalism; prelatc
\ of this church had then dared negotiate with the
1 leading men Of rival parties, as how, and for what
4 consideration the Roman Catholic vote should be
cast; no boatcd menial Of foreign potentate had
then dared to arraign before the nation, and chal
lenge controversy with grave Senators In Congress
for their efforts to procure from American citizens
| diving in foreign lands the same Christian burial
! foreigners receive in ours. And hence, no Pro-
/ testant was in favor of interfering with them, or
] denying them any Of the rights, privileges, and
/ immunities common to all.
And what has been the resulty These foreign
and Roman Catholic vipcrs, that we have taken
in our bosoms, and warmed into life and ener-
4 gy are now trying to fasten their fangs into our
! very vtals. And, as is the case with ingrati
i tude they TO hate US with the greater inten-
sity, ON account of the wrongs they have Inflicted
| on u.s. And, notwithstanding all this, there il, as
| net, no disposition with the Know -Nothings TO de-
privc them of any right secured to them by the
| Constitution and the laws, and defy their most
| violent opponents to show anything 10 the contra
ry. The Know-Nothings wage no war, but war
Of defence, in order to prevent their foreign and
Roman Catholic enemies from cheating them out OF
| their rghts-
i Mr.. Wise lays great stress on the fact that Ro
man Catholics fought in the same ranks with our
Protestant fathers in the Revolution; and that the
sgners of the Declaration Of Independence, ono Of
whom Carroll Of Maryland) was Roman Catholic,
gave pledge which bound them and us, their
heirs forever, to faith and hope in God, and TO
charity for each other tolerance in religion, and
TO, mutuality in political freedom" Exactyt Ex-
actlyl And thai pledge the Know-Nothings, II
understand them, are resolved to keep sacred and
inviolate foreveri pcacably and quietly, by means
Of the ballot box, II they can, but as trust and
hope, by shedding their hearts best blood u they
must. Charity for each other y Does Mr.. Wise
believe that tho Romish Church has this charity
for Proteetsnts? II he docs, let him read Brown
/ sons Review, sanctioned and endorsed by every
Romish bishop in this country; he will there see
that all Protestants are denounced as nfdels, and
atheists, and as without tho pale Of salvation.
| " federation In religion
| Does Mr.. Wise believe that Romanism, If IL had
the power would tolerate Protcstantism In this
| country for day? How can he believe So when
Il is fact in the history Of the times, that Roman
Catholic journal in st. Louis only few months
since, boldly declared, that when the Rornish
| Church obtained tho asccndancy, other religion
| would be tolerated? And this too under the eyes
OF the Bishop there, without reproofor denhl from
| him. win not Mr. Wise admit that liberty Of
Conscience in religious matters means the liberty
of worship in such form, under such ritual, and
with such faith as conscience dictates to be rightY
He certainly win and yet, docs he not know that
Archbishop Hughes, in his controversy with Sena-
| tor Cass arrogantly promulgated 10 the world,
| that " liberty Of conscience" meant nothing more
| than the liberty Of thought" and that II did not
necessarily imply the right Of corresponding ae-
| ton? "Mutuality in political ffeedomlV Does
| Mr. w mean sectaran or class mutuallty, or indi-
vidual mutuality? suppose, of course, he means
| the latter.
II be does docs Il not imply the right Of every
| ono to cast his vote In accordance with what his
judgement may suggest ns most conducive to the
public good And docs he not know, that the
Roman Catholic vote Of this country Is controlled,
and generally cast as unit according TO the dircc.
| tons Of the hierarchy Of that Church, Would
there be any mutually OF political freedom in
allowing the claim Of the Romish Church to ap
propriate portion OF the school fund to teach
their scctaran vicws--nnd deny the same privilege
| to the various Protestant denominations, who, by
| the way have never claimed Il IL IL this very