American Lancaster gazette. [volume] (Lancaster, Ohio) 1855-1860, 1855-11-29

uehl DeHtOCF0Etc cdnulualeI WnOm you
knew to be his superior. In the exercise
of your rights as citizen. you prescribed
(pardon the use of your own word, the
whole Whig party, you prescribed that
portion ofyour own party who would not
submit to caucus dictation. AS Senator
OF the United States you assisted in exclud-
ing Abolition members Of the same body
from place on any its committees; and
now, sir, will you tell me in what respect
you are less liable to the charge of pro-
scription than l am? say that will not
vote for foreigner or Catholic. You
say that you will not vote for Wing, or a
Democrat who runs against the party nom
inee; and you will not even let an Aboli-
ZIONIST serve on committee. l have
heard it said, 'oh yes, you can vOte as you
please, you may voto against a foreigner.
just as we'll as against an Aboltionist, but
it Is very improper to form combinations to
, exclude foreigners from Office"
have no particular objection TO such
reasoning when it comes from some half
Aedged lawyer who knows no more of his
profession as a science, than he does of
volcanoes in the moon, and who has only
a vague idea that somewhere in the law
combinations ara declared illegal, but when
a man Of fair ability utters such things the
conclusion is inevitable that e has very
little respect for the intelligence Of his
hearers. 1t is impossible for a political
party TO exist without combination. All
the objects OF party are effected through
combinations. You combined with Madi
son, Monroe, Jackson, Van Bureh, Polk
and Pierce-excuse me for mentioning the
last-as | did the same thing hope you
will acquit me Of malice in the alusion.-
That man will confer favor shall not
soon forget who eovinceS me that it is not
Just as fair to combine for tho purpose of
excluding foreigners from Office, as it is
f6r the purpose of exalnling Wings or re-
beilious Democrats. You con,ended your
self With assertion and made no attempt at
proof. 1t is We'll f0r your reputation that
you did SO. Many persons will believe
what you say withou. putting themselves
to the trouble of examination; whereas, if
you had attempted an argument you would
certainly LaEe exposed to the most indif-
fercht inquirer the weakness of your posi-.
ton. No learning. and 10 ingenuity coul /
have saved you from mor:fying failure.
You acknowledge an act upon the prin.
ciple that it is right to exclude Mr.. Garri.
son and his disciples from every Office un.
der tho government down to the fourth
corporal in the militia, Because they sib-
scribe 10 the a!rocious sentiment that "thc
Constitution of the United States is COW
enant with death, and an agreement with
He'll"
g claim that tits right to exclude from
: Office those members of the Catholic church
l who deny the supremacy Of the constitu-
Y ton. and acknowledge the power of the
: Pope to release them from all obligation tc
t support it..
A You refase to support a Wing because
r you believe his construction of the pow
y ers of Congress under the constitution or
a roneous.
: | refuse to support foreigner because
o (among other thihgs) not one in five thou
: sand has ever read the constitution, ant
+ not one in fifty thousand understands it.
r provisions
: Now, sir, this is an exact statement o
: your position and of mine. Both Of us
g doubtless, can give many other reasons fo
: the faith that is in us; but this is thu
d ground d-work upon which the whole su
n perstrGctare is reared. If yours is the off
! spring of patriotic devotion to liberty ant
= the constitution, by what magic does hiin'
become intolerance prescription, ant
! reckless disregard of constitutional duty
d 1t is true you do not assert that there il
h anything unconstitutional in the American
1t platform. Your position is too high, ant
n you could not afford so to trifle with you
n reputation; but you give to others will
fewer scruplcs, and less to losei the sane
d ton of your silence. AS long as your op
g ponents confined themselves ID genera
e denunciations of the American Order a
e unconstitutional, they got along smoothly
d enough. Some people took it for grantee
. they knew what they were saying, and be
}, lieved them. But specifications are dan
e gerous things when error is to be sustain
n ed. Two clauses are relied upon; the frs
l. is
l "But no religious test shall ever be re
/ quire1 as qualification for any office o
d public trust under the United States"
t. This clause relates entirely to the oatj
9 which must be taken by public officers
- 1t places no restriction upon the voter
= impose no obligation. The Legislature
d denied tho right Of requiring any religion
i oath from an officer after his election b,
l. the people, but the people themselves re
- tain an unlimited discretion, and it is en-
d tirely with them to decide whether man
d religious opinions shall be any bar to hi
l. advancement. This relates to elections b
N the people. The whole Congress canno
ir red lire any test oath which tho consisten
Sc cy of the officer did not require, but i
u Executive appointments it is different
y The Senate alone can reject his nominees
u for their religious opinions, as well as 70
}. any other cause, which in their judgmeu
lie renders the nominations improper. Unde
ID the constitution the, people have the un
re- qualified right to reject any candidate 70
at their suffrages on account of his religion.
$, The Senate have the unqualified right
l. reject any nomination sent to them by th
/ President, on account Oft religion Of III
,r nominee. We propose as voters to excl