Daily American organ. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1856, 1855-09-13

with your views on the subject OF that charge, ana
without the knowledge OF the facts connected with
the conversation which possess, you might natu-
rally fall. | mentioned Il for one purpose--you
employ Il for another, without as think, any just
ground for doing 30. You are mistaken IN sup
posing that ever mentioned II to you at amy time
as contirlnatory of the political charge to which
you refer.
could not have done so, for never believe
10. 1t would have been absurd in me 10 believe
30, unless had imagined, as you seem 10 think,
hut which the facts do not sustain, that the Nunco
had previous knowledge that the appointment was
10 be made, and before il really was made The
first time ! saw, in what ! regarded as an imper-
feet report Of your speech at Washington, pub
lished in the Raleigh Register, the circumstance
Of this conversation used as proof of this charge.
FASTENED 10 correct the erroneous impression, in
my letter to you Of the 9th Of July at Niagara
Falls And when / saw that i was afterwards
quoted as authority for statement in 4th OF
July Grafton at Washington, for saying not only
that the Pope's Nuncio at Madrid gave me this
information; but that 1t was given even "before
the Cabinet of the President was known TO the
public here" in the United States--and that it was
used to establish in part, this charge of political
corruption, wrote TO the author, Mr. Ellis, TO
correct the statement, in letter which has been
published.
Ii was entirely proper, aud not out Of record, I"
that should state, AZ ] have done in the letters
on this subject, my own differences from the in
formation communicated TO me. 1t was essential
TO the whole truth for without it, erroneous i'm
pressions were being made, never intended by
ineand, in my opinion, not justified by the facts.
When this matter was referred to by us at Balti-
more In June last when met you but for short
time, did not at all suppose that it was to be
used In connexion with this charge, nor did ] sup
pose in our first conversation at Raleigh, that it
would be used for any purpose publicly. For al
though the conversations with you were not con-
fdential but In the freedom Of casual social inter-
course, j could not suppose would be quoted as
authority on such subject and for such pur-
pose, in public addresses, without written per-
mission and statement from me. In reply to your
inquiry, whether intend in my letter to say that
my opinion nor is that there was no such an
Outstanding as that referred TO in regard to the
Roman Catholic vote being given to Mr. Pierce, or
whether your opinion noV is that the Popes Nun
clio had no previous knowledge of an intention TO
appoint Mr. Campbell. / answer, unhesitatingly,
that my opinion has not changed, and that GER
tainly think the communication made to me by
che Popes Nuncio affords no proof Of such a
charge or understanding. Whether there be other
allegations and facts crcumstantia or Direct which
may be presented to sustain this charge or not,
am not aware. And, as an honest man, | am
bound to presume innocence until guilt is shown
Ia all cases and especially in matter affecting SO
deeply the honor Of the country as well as the high
parties Immediately implicated
You need not fear, my dear sir, that any unwil
lingness on my part that ! should be misrepre-
sented to the injury Of Mr.. Pierce or the Pope's
Nuncio, could operate to allow my name or opn-
ions to be used or perverted to your injury. wish
10 do justice to all and the cause of truth. Your
integrity or veracity is not in question. You state
what you believe TO be correct You only draw
an Inference, and form an opinion, from a fact
which you think il legitimate, but which /, with
necessarily better knowledge of the circumstail-
ces, feel confident IL erroneous aud il-founded.
As TO any supposed bias, political or otherwise,
contrary truth, understand 1t, il is cely
necessary to say that would scorn to allow il to
influence me. IL is hardly necessary for me to say
10 you and Others to whom am at all known, that
while have never been violent partisan or zealot,
| have always been consistent Wing in politics,
and in religious faith a Protestant. But in the one
and in the other, have endeavored To exercise a
spirit OF federation, az most congenial with truth
and sincerity in both. And IL while in active po-
litican life, though now, Tor some time past out OF
the vortex, have endeavorcd to practice tulera-
ton towards my opponents, | certainly will not
now abandon q spirit 80 essential TO republican
freedom, and especially at period in our affairs
when the nation needs the united efforts OF all her
conservative, patriotic, and truly national men Of
every party aud section, TO avert impending dan
gers which threaten our government and people,
in an especial manner, our own region of the
country.
As 10 several particulars which you report
Of our conversation in Raleigh, about the prsc-
tees and worship Of the Romish Church in Spain,
and especially as TO the statement that many, or
that any Pedestrians, denied the right Of Chris.
tian burial, being given over TO the dnatomists"
and as 10 the safe Of indulgence" il you mean
the sale Of indugences practised in, and before
the time Of the Reformation, and not the worship
of the Virgin and the Cross, constantly found in
public places of worship, aud often in the public
offices and streets, with inscriptions and placards
attached promising Indulgence for sius on condi.
tion Of prayer and payment Of certain moneys,
with which every traveller in Spain and some
other parts Of the Continent is fsmiar-and az
70 some other less important particulars 10 which
YOU refer In this part of your letter, can only
remark that there are several discrepancies
from what was really said and that you are evil
IDENTIFY mistaken, without intending 10 be so, In
several matters allude TO il also for the purpose
of showing how easy II Is to make inadyertent
mistakes, IN attempting TO report casual CONVEX
saton had in a cursory manner, and In the frank
ness Of social and friendly intercourse. Decming
this portion Of your letter irrelevant to the main
subject, and that my reply may not be too long, |
omit any further observation upon 1t.
As 10 that portion Of your letter which refers to
the publication OF mine 10 you OF the 9Th Of July,
/ have 70 say, that my desire and expectation was
that IL the subject was alluded TO again in public,
the correction should be made by publishing all
and not merely part Of the letter-the differences
made by me well as the facts stated--for think
that both were necessary TO the correction request
ed and just understanding of the matter. As,
however, similar statement was made in my let
ter 10 Mr.. Ellis, Of July 23d which has been pub
lished, do not now deem the publication Of the
one 10 you important. The copy Of il, which you
suppose you had forwarded to me was not the
same, but copy Of my letter to you of the 2oth
July, requesting the publication of that of the 9th
as soon as possible; Of which letter, however, ]
had retained copy when written
As TO the statement Of the Union OF July 2sth,
charging you with suppressing mylctters, &c, &C.,
! freely admit there was cause Of complaint. Aud
as soon as / saw notice Of IL in another paper,
(for did not see the Union itself sent a note,
dated July 30th TO the editors OF that paper, OF
which enclose copy. Whether it disappeared
or not in that paper ! do not know--but presume
not, from your eiter---snd therefore will again,
at once, forward a copy with request that i be
anI.ahsd 90 that fh. cffauziva nottou If Tho