The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1856-10-27

the freemaa's Jouradlo accusing Colonel FIRE.
mont of being Catholic also letter from
John Hughes, Roman Catholic Archbishop OF
New York, whining at the qnickness with which
the public saw through his disguise, and laid the
blame of McMaster's trash on his archepiscopal
| shoulders
We apprehend that the conspiracy which this
! correspondence shows us must exist between the
! rabid Protestant, Senator Erastus Brooks and
the rabid Catholic, the Archbishop of New York,
Tor the defeat of Colonel Fremont, and the eleva-
| ton of-not Mr.. Fillmore, he was sold out long
| go-but Mr.. Buchanan to the Presidency, con-
titutes one of the most startling features of this
| most extraordinary canvass.
II was, certainly, an unusual and shameful
thing for the religion of any candidate to be
brought in question. To think that in the nine
teenth century in the country of all others where
| there are most schools and most books, and more
| newspapers, and where there ought 10 be most
intelligence-in the only first rate nation where
| there is no distinction OF creeds known, but the
purest liberation prevails as fundamental law
of the land-to think that here in the light Of
gotten up against Presidential candidate, when
the very name OF such a retrogade step would
create a storm Of indignation in such countries
as France, England or Gcrmany--must bring
the blush to the cheek Of every patriotic citizen
of the republic. At the very time that Spain
(benighted Spain, as our parsons are pleased TO
call ber.) is shaking of her allegiance to the
Pope, and France is endowing Protestant schools,
and Sardinia is proclaiming universal federation,
the United States-prop pador.-are stumbling
backward, and public journals and public men
are borrowing the bgoted language Of the mid
die ages, and reviving the blind principles which
kindled the fires of Smithfeld, and set in motion
the rack and the thumbscrews of the lnquisition.
Everywhere else there is progress; here, seeming
ly, retrogrcssion. Foreigners grow more enlight-
ened here, if the Brooks and Hughes plot sue
ceeds, We shall seem to be growing denser. HUI
manity and common sense are gaining ground
abroad; at home, they shall appear to be losing
it.
Then what disgraceful specsacles and Incl
dents this first commencement of disgrace in
wolves. What can We say OF the position into
which the Archbishop is thrust? For him to tell
US that he is innocent Of the charges brought so
coarsely and so brutally against Colonel Fro
mont by McMaster, is absurd. For, who Is
Mc,iaster that he should write letters at all,
that any newspaper would print, or any sane
person read? Why, the mans name would
never have been heard. but that be
is known as the editor and proprie-
tor Of the Archbishop's organ. 1t is solely to
his rcputc as the mouthpiece of the church Of
which the Archbishop is the head that he claims
the least notice. and that he knows this perfectly
well is apparent from the care with which he
signs himself Editor and Proprietor Of the Free
mans .journol." 1t was his design, palpably, to
create the impression that the false charge which
he uttered was really made by the authority Of
the Archbishop; and he knows, and the Archbi-
.hop knows. that so long as McSIastcr continues
To make that charge, great number Of persons
viii believe that it comes from the Archbishop
The subscribers Of the Columbus paper and those
of the Lockport paper win never sec the sneak
ing -emidcnial published by the Archbishop in
the Wall street commercial sheet they will take
1t FOR granted that McMaster made the charge in
the fulflment OF his regular duties as organ to
the Archbishop, especially as they sec McNIastcr
repeat it elsewhere, and il will operate on them
accordingly.
Now. does John Hughes think this an honora-
BILE proceeding FOR man of his rank and charac-
ter and cloth!
How docs be reconcile it to his conscience to
n -
church, the scolfcr at the holy mysteries of I
tholicism the gloss calumniator Of the Pope and
oil the hierarchy Efastus Brooks? Would the
Iopc--would any respectable Cardinal join
hands with a noted enemy Of the church,
Are we 10 think that there has been
secret reconciliation between these two men
that they have agreed to keep up the farce Of
insulting each other publicly, hut in private TO
be confcderatos in trickcry and falschood. We
confess tho facts look very much like it. And
our hearty sympathics arc due to every honest
and right-mindcd Catholic, who must Jc deeply
accommodation and cooperation between the
head Of the church and its most virucnt Sian
dcrcr, Senator Brooks.
With all the absurdity and wrongfulness of his
portion. however. We have no reason to suppose
that Archbishop Hughes is a wilful inventor and
propagation 81 falsehood. We therefore treat him
with more consideration than persons Of the cali
lGe of Senator Brooks deserve and We say that
the charge brought against Colonel Fremont Of
having been to Catholic church while living in
the house of Mrs. Cummings is false; and that
the other story about the groomsman is equally
fal-c, Col. Fremont having had none al his mar
rage. We now call upon the Archbishop 10
make good the ISLANDERS issued by person under
his authority, and who only spoke because the
Archbishop opened Lis mouth We call for the
evidence Of NrS. Cummings or her daughters!
| We call for the truth about the gIoomsman. We
want the truth, TIC truth. WIN bis trace let us
have ~