Carroll free press. [volume] (Carrollton [Ohio]) 1834-1861, 1856-08-28


bevna Roman Catholic. Ills father dying
when he wac Eve years old, be Eas educated
exclusiEslyin Protestant schools, and at the
age Of sixteen, was confirmed, Of his own mo-
ton and sincere conviction. in the Protestant
/ Episcopal Church, OF which he has continued
sEsT since to be a member. Not one OF his
own children has ever been sent to a ROman
Catholic School. though believe an adopted
daughter attended for some time the Seminary
at Georgetown, Of which The pupils are gener-
ally largely Protestant That this ought not
to be construed 10 his prejudice. even by the
most EealOus PrOtestanls, is sufficiently shown
By the fact that Mr.. Fillmore sent his own
daughter TO Catholic Seminary at Buffalo, for
the purpose Ofspecial instruetion-yet no oae
ever inferred from this circumstance that he
himself was not a protestant.
Col. FremOnPs marriage was celebrated by
Roman Catholic priest: but this was in con-
sequence ofthe difficulty, il not impOssibility
OF procuring any other clergyman to perform
it, The ceremony was in a private room, was
very short end simple, and did not imply any
assent on his part, or that of his wife, to the
doctrine Of The Roman Catholic church; nor
was either Of them required. or requested, on
that occasion. to give any pledge that their
children should be brought tup 10 that faith
They have all been baptized and educated in
the Protestant Episcopal Church
Thestatements which Alderman Fulmer of
this city, is said to bave Authorzed-lo the eff.
feet that in March, 1852, he saw Col. Fremont
joining in the ceremonies Of Roman Catholic
Church at Washington, and that iD a subse-
quent conversation with him at dinner, at
Browns Hotel, Col. Fremont declared himself
a Catholic and believer in the peculiar doc
trines ofthat Church, are entirely untrue.
Col. Fremont was not in the city Of Wash
ington at all during the year 1859, He left
New. York for California in NJ March. 1859. He
returned in the Steamer George Law, which
reached New York on the 9Th of March, 1859
and remaining in that city four days. he left
on the 10th in the steamer Africa, for Europe,
and did not return, until June, 1853. Iunder.
stand that Alderman Fulmer exhibits receipt
from Browns Hotel, dated March 7lh, 1859,
or four days board. This makes it certain
that the Alderman's stay there terminated on
the 7th, and that the alleged conv ersation must
have taken place previous to that date. But
as Col. Fremont did not reach New-Ycrk until
the 9th, it is impossible that he should have
been connected with them, especially as he
remained in New.YoTk. and did not visit Wash
iDgton at all. He has no recollection ofhaving
ever dined at Browns Hotel until this last win
ter since l84l, ,Or ofeVer having seen Alderman
Fulmer there or elsewhere.
The Alderman am informed, is a man
who would not be likely to make such stale
mentS unless he belieted them to be true. But
It is very certain he has fallen into a very gross
error somehow probably by mistaking some
other person. with whom he may have held
the conversation in question, for Col. Fremont.
He owes It TO bis own character, as we'll as to
justice, to take steps TO confirm or correct the
accuracy Of his recollection in this matter.
You may rely upon the entire authenticity
of the statements have thus made in reply to
your inquiry for the facts" In the present
'tate OF the public mind, and in view of the
earnest and Perseyering misrepresentation of
he truth, you may think it desirable that they ,
hOuld he generally known. II so, you are :
luite at liberty to make them public, and TO
ldd. they are given as the result Of conversa-
ion with Col. Fremont himself
lam, very truly, yours.
HENRY J. RAYMOND: