Daily American organ. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1856, 1856-07-02

what Il knows 10 be utterly ialse, - applied
10 the sdminisrssion Of Fornsy and Pierce !;
nor 10 u warranted by anything contained in
the Cincinnati platform, in saying, that If
elevated 10 power, the administration Of For
nsy and Buchanan would adopt the American
policy on this subject AT this point, we may
Be allowed 10 predict that before the first day
% January next, the main body Of the native
born members Of the present pseudo Demo-
cratic party, win change front upon the Anne
ricsn polieyf
II yin be demonstrated 1t the ensuing Presi-
Dental election that, not only those who are
guided BY thu German inndel philosophers Of
the Northwest but the Irish Catholics also Of
the whole country, xill cast their sufifHges for
the Frss-soil Fusion candidate. Col Fremont,
for President During the last lew years these
classes u nstaralizsd citizens have held the
balance of power. They gave the asosndency
10 the present dynasty In 1852, and they have
been courssd and promoted by this dynasty,
In the hope and prospect Of their future aid to
the so-cslled Democracy. But the German
philosophers. on the one hand, and Bishop
Hughes on the other, have now thought the
time propitious Cor carrying out their united
purpose Of destroying African slavery, for the
ben<dt q. foreign laborsrs. and the promotion
Of those Jesuit schemes ooncocted In foreign
lands for the subversisn Of American institu.
tions
Whenever the natiye-born portion Of the
present pseudo Democratic party shall realize
the truth Of our warnings on the subject of the
aims and purposes Of Jcsuitism, when they
shall see, % soon they win see, that the whole
foreign Catholic vote Of the country will be
cast IN the American head Of the Romish hier-
archy shall dircct--snd when they shall find,
as they soon viii find, that the whole power Of
that foreign vote shall he cast In favor Of that
class OF politicians who would turn this nation
into political pandemonium, they win eagerly
embrace the doctrines Of the American party.
As that time must come, we only hope and
pray that IL may come before ID shall be too
late TO rescue our institutions from the threat
ened destruction, by uaioa Of the nstive-born
sons Of America.
But we pass from this question to comment
upon another fAlschooi asserted by the Wash
ington Union In relation to Mr.. Fillmore and
the American policy. That press says
"To show the paternity Of Mr.. fillmore's policy
we quote one Of the Hartford Convention reaolu.
tons, as follows.
"'Rssoipsd, That no person who shall hereafter
be naturalixed shall be eligible IN member OF the
Senste or House Of Representatives Of the United
States, capable Of holding any civil Office under
the authority Of tho United States
"We do not propose 10 dwell on this remarkable
position but Il does seem strange that. after lay
ing down doctrine watch 10 completely cuts of
the immigrant from political rights, he should have
talked about standirg by the coasfifufion Of the
country. We thought the constitution contem.
plated uniform system of laws for the naturaliza-
ton Of immigrants, for the purpose Of securing TO
them the political privileges avid bene6ts Of cti-
Gems. Mr.. Fillmore, however, would defeat. this
feature In the constitution; whe Their by law Of
the Know-Nothing organisation verriding that In
strument, or by the repeal Of all naturalization
laws, we are not advised. Either process seems 10
us to be inconsistent with the high. regard for the
constitution which Mr.. Fillmore professss."
The Washington Union fal,ely attributes
the paternity Of this American doctrine, Of the
exclusion Of foreigners from Office, to the Hart
ford Convention. The writer Of that article
either knew when he wrote it that 1t was pal
pable falsehood, or his ignorance deserves COM
miseration. This doctrine has its foundation
in the Constitution itself, which excludes for
eigners from the highest Office in the gift of
the people. 1t has its justification in, the con-
stitutions Of nearly all the States, which con-
tain similar provisions
But we will present here pure, original De-
mocratic authority for this principle:
In 1897 (see vol. Q Jeffsrson's Works, page
458) Mr.. Jefferson himself drew up petition
to the Legislature Of Virginia, which was sign
ed by the citizens Of his own and adjoining
counties, suggesting a provision by law, de
claring-
"That the capacity to act In tho important enice
of Juror, grand or petty, civil or criminal should
be restrained in future to native citizens Of the
United States, or such were citizens at the date
of the treaty of peace which closed our Revolu.
tionary war
and offering as q reason therefor, that
"The ignorance Of our laws, and the natural
partially (of foregners) TO the countries Of their
birth. are reasonable causes for declaring this 10
be one of the rights incommunicable In future %
adopted citizens"
Is not this good Democratic authority
But we have further, and, we may add,
higher authority than the opinion Of Mr.. Jefier.
son alone, because 1t is the united opinion Of
both branches of the General Assembly OF Vir'
ginia, and that too Of that same Assembly
which passed the Virginia State-rights Demo.
cratic resolutions Of 1798-'9.t
On the 10th day of January, 1899, the House
of Delegates of Virginia passed this resolution,
which on the same day was agreed 10 by the