Semi-weekly standard. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1853-18??, 1855-09-05

matively or,negatively. You will recollect, was
speaking of the danger from the Romsh church in
this eountry-its interference in our politics-Hs
having decided the Presidential election, &c. Your
remark in reply was by way of affirmation, as I'M
derstood it, viz that that church we'll posted
as to our affairs in this country-that the Pope's
Nunco at Madrid gave you the first information You
had of Mr.. CampbeIl's being u member of Mr..
Pierces Cabinet before you had received the news,
and while the construction of the Cabinet was In
doubt, and subject of conjecture in the puollc
mind there You will please allow me to ask OF you,
what was your object in making that remark to me
in immediate response to my suggestion, that the
election had been carried by the Roman Catholic
VOTE in pursuance Of understanding that that
church should be rewarded in return-ifit was not,
by corroborating my suggestion, and confirming me
in my impression? Why have mentioned it all, II
your view of the matter aoGS q mean your view at
the time Of oar conversation) tina, the Nuncio had
received his information through The ordinary chan
mel of the mail? and that the only way he could
have derived it Gin the absence of previous knowl-
edge unless resort to the still strained sup
position, than express forwarded to him, af-
ter the arrival of the steamer at European
port, in advance of tho mail.
assure you, my dear Sir, am by no means dis
posed criticse your letter to Mr.. Ellis matter
of oice Your reply to him well to me, fully
confirms my version OF your conversation. But IN
asruch you have gone out of the record (you
will please pardon for saying SOY to controvert
and destroy the force of the inference drawn by
botn of us-that this communication to you by the
Nunco confirmatory of the charge of previous
bargain which had been made-you cannot, hope,
find fault with my attempt, in standardization, to
show that inference moao is correct and y0wr in
ference then was incorrect You say in your letter
to Mr.. Ellis, you "did not at all suppose that he
the Pope's Nuncio) had any previous knowledge of
intention to appoint this gentleman to office, or
that he knew, or had any reason to believe it was
done in pursuance of any bargain intrigue to this
effect the part of any persons whatsoever" This
1 can we'll Understandable this remark, l do not
conceive, involves any issue between US, in regard
to opinion even. You say you "dad" not suppose
so; meaning of course, at the time the Pope's Num-
clio gave you the information. 1t is reasonable you
might not have attributed his prior knowledge to
the consummation of "any bargain or intrigue to
this effect" AS you had been for years out of the
country, and were not thoroughly conversant with
all the charges, issues and Inducements involved
in the Presidential eectionit is not probable that
you should have suspected foul play. In the next
sentence of your letter to Mr. Ellis, you say" the
inference made, was (referring, of course to the
time the communication was first made to you by
the Nuncio) that the appointment OF Catholic to
this high office being naturally cause of much in
terest AID satisfaction to the church of that fath
especial pains had been taken in some quarter to
communicate the earliest intelligence of that fact. to
the leading members of the Catholic Priesthood. "
1t natural that such should have been, at the time
the inference drawn by unsuspectng mind But
here, you will please allow me to request OF you
again, to try and refresh your memory. Of course,
you must have been surprised-having heard moth
ing of it yourselfand will you be good to try
ana reCOleCl, you enQulTeu Ol Nun lliC
source of his information, and what was his reply
whether there was then any Geographic communl-
cation to Madrld from HaVre or PariS-whether The
mails by the steamer had arrived at Madrid on that
evening. And in there Geographic
communication, and the mails had not arrived that
evcnng-will you suggest what other possible means
there could have been by which "especial pains to
communicate the earliest intelligence of that fact,
could have secured its transmission to Madrid-un-
less suppose an express in advance OF the mails,
had been despatched to Madrid Immediately on the
arrival of the steamer
You will pardon me for requesting you to be as
explicit as possible, for this reason The presses
and advocates of the Anti-American party are at
tempting to deduce strained inference from your
letter. They are trying to pervert your language
into testimony in their behalf They are trying to
use you, to combat and dsprove the reasonable in
ference nOoo to be drawn, from the communication
of the Nunc:o to you. They endeavoring to rep
resent you as saying, that you nOw entertain the
impressions which you say you had at that time,
the only way of accounting for the Nuncio's get
ting information before You the public in Madrid
received it. Some of the more malicious and SIAN
derous of the Anti American presses and partzans
affect to rely your letter as mpugning my We
racity, even.-Hoping and believing that you are
not willing that your name your letter should be
perverted to any such ends, think may appeal to
your justice we'll as to your generosity, to speak
out, and forbid any such unfair use to be made OF
what you have written. May l ask of you-do you
intend in your letter to say, that your opinion n0o
as, that there such understanding as that
referred to, in regard to the Roman Catholic vote
being given to Mr.. Pierce DO you intend to say
your opinions u.s. that the Pope's Nuncio had
&" no previous knowledge of an intention to appoint
Mr.. Campbell to ofice"-before the authentic &C
count reached Madrid? l should not ask you for
your present views these points, but for the fact
that the attempt is being made to represent you as
entertaining opinions similar to the impress
sons you were under, for the moment, when the
communication first made to you You will
subserve the Of truth, and be doing act of
justice to those who attempted to be wronged,
by speaking out plainly and unequiyocally on these
points.
In the concluding sentence of your letter to Mr.
Ellis you say, in ausion to an imperfect report
of my speech in Washngton"-you "wrote me a
note for the purpose of correcting the erroneous inn
pressons which might readily be made on the
public mind however unintentionally, from such
reference to casual conversation in social inter-
course, without written statement OF the facts.
False deductions have been drawn from tn part of
your letter. The impression is attempted to be |
made, that you requested me to publish the entire
letter. and that had nevertheless suppressed all but
one sentence Of it. You will bear me witness, you
made request of me- in your first letter to publish
the same. You first spoke of an inexact report |
of my remarks in Washington, which you had seen. |
You then go to repeat what you had said to me.
You then state what were your impressions at the
time" the Nuncio made the communication, very
nearly identical with what you said in your letter to
Mr.. Ellis. You conclude by saying &C if this subject
to be referred to at all again in public although
was not originally intended by me- it is but just
to all the parties concerned, that it should be pro-
pery understood and that this correction should be