Daily American organ. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1856, 1855-01-27
AMERICAN ORGAN.
A Reply 10 the Letter of the Hon. Henry
A. Wise.
New York. Nov "a 1874

/ A. Wise.
/ New YORK, Nov. "a, 1854
To the Hon HENRY A. WIsE
| SIR: Admiration for your talents and confidence
IN your patriotism have induced me to peruse care
| fully, your recent manifesto against the so-caed
order of Know Nothings, do not pretend to
compete with you either in logical acumen or in
rhetorical display; but sense Of truth and Justice
and warm feeling of Americanism, induce me to
oiier some suggestions in regard to the positions
which you assume. The postnlate which you lay
down--that the laws of the United States declare
ana defend the liberties OF our people, that they
are free IN every sense, surprising in their fran
chises even the Magma Charta is undeniable; hut
II is literally OUR people whose liberties they de-
clare and defend. The Constitution of the United
States declares in its preamble that it was formed
by our ancestors to secure the blessings of liberty
to themselves and their posterity; and the whole
tenor of that instrument shows marked dlstinc-
tion between the condition of the native-born and
4 naturaiized citizen. In evidence of this, need
scarcely call your attention to the fact that no one
but native, or citizen at the time of the adop-
ton Of the constitution, is eligible to the Office Of
President or Vice President; and that prolonged
term Of residence is Indispensable qualification
for Senator or Representative in Congress- The
feeling OF caution and the sentiment Of nationality
which imposed these restrictions are recommended
by the approval OF our earliest PATRIOTS as well as
4 by our own sentiment of amor patre
II is true that Congress is empowered by the
j constitution to establish uniform rule of natu
ralizatlon;" but this is merely permissive--an au.
thorty TO be used as expcdiency may dictate " for
the general good, and by no means compulsory,
when the exercise of the franchises thus extended
as boon to the foreigner threaten to disturb our
!" domestic tranquility" / Ihold--and no argument
SO specious as to move me from the position-that
the institutions OF a country, its government, its
| laws, and its freedom, are as much an inheritance
| to its children as the property Of family; and
that, hence, as an American born citizen, have
rights more sacred than any which can be acquired
by the rule Of naturalization. 1t is true that pryi
leges of national character may be conferred
without injury, to all who in good faith become
citizens buteven this does not impair the right Of the
native to guard with jealousy the franchises which
he has inherited.
| accord fully with the principle established by
our Revolution, which recognises the right of ex-
patriation; but the assertion of this right by no
means impairs the superior right of native popu-
ation to fence and guard against the danger Of in
novation and encroachment the institutions of their
country. For the truth OF this position, appeal
neither to the sophstres of logic nor the deusive
figures of rhetoric but TO the natural feelings of
the human heart.
Your first objection to this mysterious order Is
its secrecy, and you ask "When there Is no neces-
sy to justify secret association for political ends,
what else justify it," Now, sir, with all your
erudition you must have read careIessly the his
tory Of the times not to be aware Of the strict sur
veillance which is exercised by contendng factions
in this country over the deliberations of their op-
ponents, as wen as the subtle devices which are
used by parties TO destroy the efficiency of -oppos
ing organizations. cannot accuse you, however
OF such negligence, for you admit, in the next SEN
tence, that caucus may sit in secret to consult
on the general policy of great public party
Bywhat right, then, confessing, as you do, to
ignorance Of the organization and objects of that
great American party whose success would seem
miraculous five did not understand the patriotic
principles which have induced to its popularity,
do You deny them the privilege of secret or pri-
vate consultation upon their general policyS take
you upon your own admissions, sir, which are con-
elusive against you this point If the necessity Of
secret organization can be established and that II Is
both necessary and convenient is, have no doubt,
entirely satisfactory to the members Of the organi-
zation which you denounce. They are the best,
the only true judges upon this subject, and the
right of hundreds Of thousands of natye-born Amer
leans 10 exercise the privilege Of secret caucus
cannot be denied on any sound rule of Democratic
principle. That you recognise such right and
oppose the practice, simply upon the ground that
It is unnecessary, appears from your labored essay
upon this point
After an exhibition Of statistics, which is partial
in its nature, but which, nevertheless, shows suf-
fcient balance Of Catholics and naturalzed citizens
to control any ordinary elections in this country,
| you ask, "Now, what has such a majority Of num-
bers and of wealth. Of natives and Of Protesants TO
fear from such mnorties Of Catholics and natural
ized citizensyn Why, sir, il is as ] have just
stated that in the excitement of party politics
small compact body Of voters may control the cleo
tons Of our country and in great measure dfc-
tate its policy. This your own experience as a
politician has doubtless taught you. You greatly
mistake however, the objects and purposes Of the
American party, II you suppose their opposition is
directed entirely against Roman Catholics and nat
uralized citizens. We look upon the demagogues
who, with selfish purposes, by fawning and fatte-
! ry, have fostered anti-American sentiments and
anti-Amcrican organizations among our adopted
citizens, for the sake of political advancement as
the chief sinners who are 70 endure the wrath of
the awakened Nemesis.
There are no men more earnest advocates Of re-
ligious freedom, or more decided opponents of
party corruption, than those who belong to the or
ganizations which you oppose. II Is not the rel
gion of the Catholic than that OF the Protest
ant TO which they object but IL is freedom for all
which they advocate--freedom from the tyranny
Of priestcraf, and freedom in our government
from all religious interference They are unwilling
that any church shall hold spiritual supremacy In
thSfs Ohhttu behtNbp hhu thtJ wv NV bthtft VIM
any man who Acknowledges a higher duty as Il re-
CARDS his political and social obligations TO church
organization, than that which he owes 10 the gov
ernment under which he lives, Is ft TO be an Amer
can citizen. This sir, s the argument whereupon
all alleged opposition 10 Roman Catholics Is found
ed. ] have italicsed the word Roman because IL
becomes necessary here 10 draw marked distinc-
tion-a distinction which the emissaries Of the Ro-
man Church are fast making for themselves--a dis
tinction which the American party fully recognizes
and which will free them, in the eyes Of the judi
cious, from every imputaton Of religious pcrsecu-
ton.
In confirmation Of this position, witness the
difficulties that have occurred between the Roman
priesthood and their Catholic congregations in va
rious sections Of our country the most recent Of
which, in the case Of the Rev. John Brady, Of
Hartford, Connecticut has excited universal sym
psthy sentiment which has no where been
more powerfully felt than among members of the
American organizations. In truth, the Catholic
congregations of the United States in their resis-
lance to the tyranny Of priestcraft, Of which we
have now but the beginning Of the end y viii