Daily American organ. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1856, 1856-09-22

certainly delicate subject, that Oh man TenBion,
should not be permitted TO interfere with the ex.
po,ure Of fripon--a smooth and double-aced pre-
tsnder-who is actually the candidate OF a party
that puts Slavery, Popery and Rum" in the same
category OF contempt and hatred. IL such man
u or was Catholic, the world ought TO know IL
IL he was one, but is one no longer they have
right to know the period and the motives OF his
change. More particularly is this the case since
We have understood that Monsieur Fremont (pro
nounced Ffsymong) processes to frame his replies
on this subject 30 TO suit both parties, ana get
votes from both.
From the Preemana Journal Of the 18th.
:. More PROOF from Archbishop Hughes.
"sAyE HIM FROM HIS FRIENDS"
The Courier and Enquirer says that we cover
Mr.. Fremont with abuse. The Courier herein
says what is false 1t says, moreover, what can
be substantisted by no one line ever published in
our columns, except the mere statement of facts
taken from the prominent organs of his own party,
as TO the pledges he gave the anti-slavery Know
Nothngs, that, IL elected, he would carry out the
main features Of the Know-Nothing faction, and
would run as their candidate though supported by
no other party. We have uttered no personal
abuse of Mr.. Fremont On the contrary, knowing
what we know about him. on irrofragible testimo-
ny, of men and women, Catholics and non-Cath-
olics, who have known him well, we feel that in
what we have incidentally said of hun, it is we
who are defending his personal character against
indiscretOns Of his noisy political partisans, such
As the Times and Tribune. Their assertions, If
true, as to what he asserts, would not only render
II impossible for men who respect veracity to vote
for him. but would leave stigma on his personal
honor, for which no political success could COM
pensate.
To be of the Protestant or of the Catholic reli-
gion, or to be of none, or to have changed from
Protestant to Catholic from Catholic to Protest
ant il not to be admitted as any political test in
this country. Were any of our candidates for Office
to be opposed on the sole ground that from being
q catholic he had become Protestant, no one
would repudate and denounce such political pro.
scription sooner than We. But religion is one
thing, personal veracity is another. Were can
ddate for an Office Of responsible trust to prevari-
cate, and knowingly sustain alsehood, on a mat.
ter Of far less moment than religion, it might be
tho duty of any good citizen to denounce him to
the public. ,
As an illustration. Were candidate for high
and honorable Office to assert through fear of ridi-
cule, that he had never worn yellow waistcoat,
and were 1t notorious that he had worn yellow
waistcoats for years, and no other wastcoats but
yellow, and had maintained that yellow was the
proper color for a waistcoast and If the yellow
color of his wastcoat had played a conspicuous
part in some Accordingly memorable event of his
life, we would have before fact which, il COM
mented on only by opponents, would have been
looked on as mark of independence of mind ; but
being denied by himself becomes when proved, a
badge of damning baseness and lack Of veracity.
Now, In reference to Mr.. Fremont, assertions
have been made, as on his authority, by his warm
est political adherents that he denies ever having
been CATHOLIC, or ever having professed himself
~ such.
II papers and persons Indifferent or hostile to
Mr.. Fremont had commented on his religion, we
would admire his persistent abstinence from put
ting his name to any declaration on the subject
Not for all the honors that our countrymen could
shower upon US, would we respond to political
interrogation respecting our religion.
IL is an open question, at least, whether the
case is altered by the fact that his political parti
Sans vie with his Know-Nothing opponents in the
vehemence and unscrupulousness of their asser.
tons and denials. II is not to be supposed that
the political partisans of Mr.. Fremont regard him
with such Difference as to be guided by his wishes
not permit proiessed friends to take such liberties
with uA But, we are not prepared to exact the
same delicacy from Others with whom religion
may be less paramount affair.
SO far, then, from having heaped personal abuse
on Mr. f., we have exonerated him from the stig-
ma that would rest on him, were he really respon-
sble for the assertions that have been made by the
Daily Times and Others protesting to speak with
his consent and authority. Instead Of being
sponsible for the assertion that he was not at the
time of his marriage, and years afterwards, pro-
fessed Roman Catholjc-he ia only responsible
or else not responsible-(it may be an open ques-
tion)- for permitting the editor Of the Daily Times
and other partisans, to make the assertion in his
name, that he has never professed himself Ro
man Catholic Mr.. Fremonts partisans should
keep silent about his religion. If they viii not
they must tell the truth.