"If I do not greatly err in the estimate which I place upon the Protestant clergymen of America, the Democratic party and the Catholics will discover, sooner or later, that the same spirit which caused the Protestant fathers to brave the perils of the BOOT and the STAKE: to stand, without flinching, before such miscreant judges as _Jeffreys_ and _Scroggs_: to yield two thousand pulpits and look beggary and starvation in the face, rather than compromise with conscience; and, above all, to risk the untried dangers of the ocean and settle among savages--will n.o.bly animate their descendants, and they will act in a manner worthy of themselves and of the great cause which is intrusted to their keeping.

"Never was a more unfounded charge made against any party than that of _proscription_ against the American party. It is only the political feature--the allegiance to the Pope of Rome--which we have felt called upon especially to oppose: leaving it to Protestant ministers to expose, if they choose, the absurdity of Catholic theological tenets.

"It is a historical fact that the Romish clergy of France in 1682, under the lead of Louis XIV., made a declaration that 'Kings and sovereigns are not subject to any ecclesiastical power by the order of G.o.d in temporal things, and their subjects cannot be released from the obedience which they owe them, nor absolved from their oath of allegiance.' The doctrine of this declaration is called indifferently 'the Gallican, or the French, or the Cis-Alpine doctrine. That of the Court of Rome is called the Italian, or trans-Alpine doctrine."

"Under the solemn a.s.surance of the Louisiana delegation that the native Catholics of Louisiana do not acknowledge the temporal supremacy of the Pope, they were admitted to representation in the American Council and Convention, and this fact abundantly proves that there is no desire to _persecute_ Catholics for their religion, but only a determination to resist their political doctrine, which, although denied by Mr.

Chandler in Congress, has been incontrovertibly established by the history of that Church for ages, the avowals of Mr.

Brownson, the rebuke of Mr. Chandler by the Dublin Tablet, and other overwhelming proofs.

"In concluding this letter, it would, perhaps, be proper to dwell upon the claims of Messrs. Fillmore and Donelson to the support of the American people of all parties; but their characters are so well known, and I have already so extended my remarks, that I deem it unnecessary to observe any thing more than that Mr. Fillmore, by the faithful discharge of his duty, won the most cordial approbation of his political enemies as well as political friends, and had the confidence of the whole country when he retired from office, and has done nothing since to destroy it; while Maj. Donelson, as our Minister to Texas, to Prussia, and to Denmark, sustained the dignity of our country and acquitted himself with honor--denounced the unhallowed proceedings of the Southern Convention--struggled manfully, as the Democratic editor of the Washington Union, in behalf of the Compromise, and never withdrew from it until May, 1852, when, so far as I understand his course from his public acts, being unwilling to 'blow hot and cold' on the slavery question, and to aid the Democratic party in wearing a Northern and a Southern face, he indignantly retired from it, and subsequently attached himself to the American party in the hope that it could carry on his most cherished object--the preservation of the Union.

"The object of selecting an old-line Whig and an old-line Democrat, was to nail to the counter the charge that the American party is the Whig party in disguise, and to induce, if possible, conservative men of both the old parties to unite and rescue the country from Democratic misrule.

"Hundreds, thousands of Democrats in Tennessee, acting upon their own impulses and without concert with their leaders, attached themselves to the American party, but under the abuse of the leaders withdrew from it. Although, personally, I have no claims upon the Democracy, and have been always opposed to that party, yet I would respectfully observe that first impressions are often the best, and if such Democrats will take the trouble faithfully and honestly to examine the questions of the day for themselves, uninfluenced by the dictation of party leaders on either side, they will, doubtless, find many and cogent reasons to return to their first love.

"But to such of the old-line Whigs as have not already gone over to the Democratic party, I do feel that I have the right through this or any other medium to address a few words. It is well known that I have been a Whig from my boyhood, and until I attached myself to the American party about twelve months ago; and that, in some form or other, I have labored in behalf of the Whig cause from my youth up--in good report and evil report, in prosperity and in adversity, and without fee or reward. And, with great deference to the opinions of others, I would inquire what has any old-line Whig to gain, either for his country or himself, by listening to the seductive flatteries of Democracy, as he looks upon the dismembered fragments of the Whig party, or sits, like Marius, amid the ruins of Carthage? What party is it that has brought about the desolation you behold? To whose strategy was it owing that the once impregnable city was betrayed and surrounded, and its lofty battlements levelled with the dust? What foul coalition circ.u.mvented you, and whose pestilential breath is now whispering in your ear? Has that party against which you have fought for twenty years--which you have regarded as essentially corrupt and dangerous to the Union--all at once, and by some magical and unknown process, been cleansed of its impurities, and does it stand before you clothed in a white and spotless robe? What are some of the reasons why you opposed it?

"It denounced proscription for opinion's sake before it came into power, but kept the guillotine in continual motion afterwards. It rebuked any interference with the freedom of elections, and then denied its doctrine, and sought in countless ways to control them. It charged the administration of John Quincy Adams with reckless extravagance, and has expended as much, or nearly as much, of the public treasure in one year as he did in the course of his administration. It was favorable to _a_ bank, a judicious tariff, and internal improvements by the general government, but has crushed beneath its iron heel the whole American system. It promised a gold and silver currency, and told the farmers that they and their wives should have 'long silken purses, through the interstices of which the yellow gold would shine and glitter,' but has given us instead more than thirteen hundred State bonds, with a capital of more than three hundred millions. It has united the purse and the sword by means of its odious Sub-Treasury. It trampled beneath its feet the broad seal of the State of New Jersey, and encouraged Dorr's rebellion.

"It annexed Texas and California, and has strengthened the Abolition power. It sustains the frequent use of the veto, and under the name of Democracy delights in the exercise of monarchical prerogative. It proclaimed in 1844 and 1845, that not a thimblefull of blood would be shed by any war growing out of the annexation of Texas, when that war sacrificed thousands of lives, and has cost us millions in money and land. It boasted, in regard to the Oregon question, that we must have '54 40' or fight,' but swallowed its own words, and in later times has attempted to retrieve its courage by the sublime and magnificent bombardment of Greytown! It ordered General Taylor into the heart of the Mexican country with a feeble force, and when his victories had won the grateful plaudits of his countrymen, it had the unparalleled meanness, while he was still fighting our battles, to censure the capitulation of Monterey. It had the baseness to call General Scott from the head of a victorious army, and to attempt to disgrace him in the eyes of his own country and the world. It denounced Judge White as a renegade, General Harrison as a coward, Mr. Clay as a blackguard, and General Scott as a fool. And, without repeating what has been already urged in regard to its att.i.tude upon the slavery question and the other topics that have been discussed, I submit to the old-line Whigs that there is no principle which the Democratic party sincerely holds in common with them, and that they should unite with us in the effort to man the ship of State with officers and men devoted to the Const.i.tution and true to the Union, in the hope that it may be rescued from the whirlpools and breakers among which it has been so recklessly conducted.

"Having expressed myself with the independence which should characterize a freeman, I cannot expect that a party which has dealt in the most unmitigated denunciation of wiser and better men than myself, will permit my observations to pa.s.s with impunity, but I shall be amply compensated for their abuse if abler tongues and pens will improve upon these hurried remarks, and teach our Democratic traducers that they cannot continue, without just retaliation, their unjustifiable a.s.saults upon the American party.

"Yours respectfully,

"THOS. A. R. NELSON."

PROSCRIBING FOREIGNERS--FOREIGN IMMIGRATION--FOREIGN PAUPERS AND CRIMINALS--FOREIGNERS ELECTED GEN. PIERCE--OPINIONS OF GREAT MEN.

The issue which most disturbs the Sag-Nicht Foreign Catholic Locofoco Dry-rot _patriots_, of the present day, in connection with the principles of the American party, is their _proscription_ of foreign-born citizens. If the reader will turn back to the Philadelphia Platform, and consult the 3d, 4th, 5th, and 9th sections of that instrument, it will be seen that the American party really proscribe only those who are proscribed by the _Const.i.tution of the United States_, and the laws defining the rights of foreign-born citizens. The American party demand the enactment of laws upon this subject more _definite_, and in accordance with the provisions of the Const.i.tution.

The only _positive_ work which the Const.i.tution does, in regard to foreigners, is to _proscribe_. It contains but five clauses touching the subject: four of these are PROHIBITORY, and the other is simply _permissive_. There is no guaranteeing clause whatever. We must be pardoned for recalling the very language of the Const.i.tution--for in this _progressive_ age, our "Young American" generation is fast losing sight of the plainest features of that doc.u.ment: which, with Fillibustering, Fire-eating agitators, is _Old Fogyism_! Let the Const.i.tution speak for itself:

Section 5, Article II. of the Const.i.tution says: "No person, except a natural-born citizen, or a citizen of the United States at the time of the adoption of this Const.i.tution, shall be eligible to the office of President." That is proscription.

Section 3, Article XII., says: "No person const.i.tutionally ineligible to the office of President shall be eligible to the office of Vice-President of the United States." That is proscription.

Section 8, Article I., says: "No person shall be a Senator who shall not have attained the age of thirty years, and been nine years a citizen of these United States." That is proscription.

Section 2, Article I., says: "No person shall be a Representative who shall not have attained the age of twenty-five years, and been seven years a citizen." This is proscription.

These are the disabilities imposed upon Foreigners after they have been made citizens. But, more than this, the Const.i.tution leaves it discretionary whether to make them citizens at all. It simply confers the power--_simply permits_. Here is the remaining clause, to which we have alluded:

Section 8, Article I., says: "Congress shall have power to establish a uniform rule of naturalization, and uniform laws on the subject of bankruptcies throughout the United States."

But let us notice the matter of foreign emigration to this country. In that fragment of a nation, composed of three and a quarter millions, which accomplished the American Revolution, there were in the United Colonies, in the year 1775, just 20,000 more foreigners than now come into this country in six months!

The progress of emigration into this country, as shown from the State Department at Washington, is after this fashion:

In the year 1852, 375,000 In the year 1853, 368,000 In the year 1854, the returns of the first six months warrant the estimate for the entire year of 500,000 --------- The aggregate, for the first four and a half years of this decennial term, is 1,801,000

There is no reason for believing that the vast immigration of this year will diminish. In fact, there is no limit to its rate of progress but the means of conveyance.

Now, then, we have upon this basis an aggregate for the six years and a half intervening between this period and 1860, of 3,250,000 --------- Making for the current ten years, the astounding aggregate of 5,051,000

Let Americans charge continually that the righteous ground upon which it plants itself is, THAT AMERICANS SHALL RULE AMERICA. Let them point the voters of the country to solid facts, from which there is no escape.

Tell them that the emigration to this country, according to the Census records at Washington, was:

From 1790 to 1810 120,000 " 1810 to 1820 114,000 " 1820 to 1830 203,979 " 1830 to 1840 778,500 " 1840 to 1850 1,542,850

--and that statistics show that during the present decade, from 1850 to 1860, in regularly increasing ratio, nearly four millions of aliens will probably be poured in upon us.

Point to the fact, that from this immigration spring nearly four-fifths of the beggary, two-thirds of the pauperism, and more than three-fifths of the crime of our country; that more than half the public charities, more than half the prisons and alms-houses, more than half the police and the cost of administering criminal justice, are for foreigners,--and let the demand be made, that national and State legislation shall interfere, to direct, ameliorate, and control these elements, so far as it may be done within the limits of the Const.i.tution.

Let Americans everywhere, and at all times, charge home and force upon the attention of the people the alarming fact that if immigration continues at the above rates, in thirty years from this time the population of this country will exceed that of France, England, Spain, Portugal, Sweden, and Switzerland, all combined; that in fifteen years the foreign will outnumber the native population; that in 1854 the number of foreign immigrants was 500,000, of which 307,639 arrived at the port of New York; that the white population of North Carolina is only a little over 500,000--so that enough come to settle a State as populous as North Carolina in a year. Set forth the statistical facts, as shown by the last Census, that the immigration of 1854 was more than equal to the white population of either one of eighteen States of this Union; and in proof, point them to the following startling facts:

A. Table comparing the white population of the States therein enumerated, with the foreign immigration of 1854, and showing the excess of foreign immigrants for this year above the respective population of the several States.

White population. Excess of States. immigrants.

Arkansas 162,189 337,811 Alabama 426,514 73,486 California 91,635 418,365 South Carolina 274,563 226,437 Connecticut 363,099 136,901 Delaware 71,169 328,831 Florida 47,203 452,717 Iowa 191,881 308,119 Louisiana 225,491 374,509 Maryland 417,943 82,057 Michigan 395,071 104,929 Mississippi 295,718 204,282 New Hampshire 317,456 182,514 New Jersey 465,509 34,491 Rhode Island 143,875 356,125 Texas 154,034 345,946 Vermont 213,402 186,598 Wisconsin 304,756 195,244

a.n.a.lyze this table, and show from it that the foreign immigration of 1854 was sufficient to have settled three States equal to Arkansas, three equal to Iowa, three equal to Texas, two to Louisiana, four to Rhode Island, five to California, seven to Delaware, or ten to Florida; so that under the principle of the Kansas and Nebraska act, while immigrants continue pouring in upon us at the present rate, we may have within one year ten new States applying for admission into the Union, ent.i.tled to their twenty Senators in the United States Senate; and yet this would be but the Senatorial representation of 500,000 foreigners.

Let the light of truth be heard upon the great question of immigration, and let the people see that if the ratio of immigration continues as it has been since 1850, during the ten years from 1850 to 1860 there will have come four millions of foreigners into this country--enough to settle eighty States equal to Florida, thirty-two equal to Rhode Island, sixteen equal to Louisiana, or eight equal to Maryland, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Michigan, Mississippi, Vermont, Alabama, New Hampshire, or New Jersey. So the Senatorial representation of foreigners may reach one hundred and sixty members in the United States Senate, and cannot be less than twenty in a body composed of but sixty-two members representing thirty-one States.

UNITED STATES COAST SURVEY--FOREIGNISM AND NATIVEISM.

The reader will find below a list of the names of the employees in the Coast Survey, cla.s.sified according to birth, and their respective salaries:

Natives. Salary. | Foreigners. Salary.

| E. Nutty $1,200 | J. E. Hilgard $2,200 J. T. Hoover 600 | S. E. Werner 1,419 J. H. Toomer 519 | C. A. Schott 1,500 J. E. Blackenship 500 | J. Main 1,100 R. Freeman 350 | G. Rumpf 1,000 H. Mitch.e.l.l 1,000 | J. Weisner 900 H. Heaton 700 | L. F. Pourtales 1,500 R. S. Avery 660 | S. Hein 2,500 J. Kincheloe 339 | J. Welch 1,565 G. C. Blanchard 339 | A. Brschke 1,408 R. E. Evans 339 | ---- Balback 639 R. L. Hawkins 1,200 | ---- Lendenkehl 782 W. McPherson 700 | W. P. Schultz 704 W. M. C. Fairfax 1,800 | G. McCoy 2,000 M. J. McClery 1,600 | A. Rolle 1,700 ---- Poterfield 1,000 | G. B. Metzenroth 1,095 L. Williams 860 | J. C. Koudnip 939 John Key 782 | J. Rutherdall 526 ---- Martin 751 | J. Barrett 375 B. Hooe 419 | J. Vierbunchen 1,095 F. Fairfax 500 | P. Vierbunchen 281 H. McCormick 156 | T. Hunt 704 E. Wharton 1,100 | J. Missenson 626 J. Knight 1,700 | R. Schelpa.s.s 469 F. Dankworth 1,700 | C. Ramkin 313 J. V. N. Throop 1,252 | F. White 960 R. Knight 939 | D. Flyn 600 C. A. Knight 626 | T. Kinney 525 G. Mathiot 1,800 | C. Kraft 420 S. Harris 519 | B. Neff 526 S. D. O'Brien 1,059 | A. Maedell 1,095 A. Geatman 704 | ------- H. Tine 626 | $31,867 C. B. Snow 1,000 | J. Smith 593 | G. Hitz 313 | J. Cronion 519 | A. W. Russell 1,300 | ---- Tansill 660 | V. E. King 720 | F. Holden 500 | J. Mitch.e.l.l 331 | W. Bright 216 | ------- | $24,429 |

The whole number of natives, 43; number of foreigners, 31. Amount paid natives, $24,429; amount paid foreigners, $31,867. The average salary of the natives is $568 12 per year; of the foreigners, $1,029 98 per year--nearly double that of the natives. Is not this _favoritism_ to the foreigner, and _discrimination_ against the native? The disbursing officer, S. Hein, receives $2,500.

The result of the last Presidential election was controlled by _foreign votes_, beyond all question. Look at the figures--see how they foot up--and see that the country is controlled by foreigners:

Electoral Foreign Foreign Pierce's vote for States. population. vote. majority. Pierce.

New York, 655,224 93,317 27,201 35 Pennsylvania, 303,105 43,300 19,446 27 Maryland, 51,011 7,287 4,945 8 Louisiana, 67,308 9,615 1,392 6 Missouri, 76,570 10,938 7,698 9 Illinois, 111,860 15,980 15,653 11 Ohio, 218,099 31,157 16,694 23 Wisconsin, 110,471 15,781 11,418 5 Iowa, 20,968 2,995 1,180 4 Rhode Island, 23,832 3,404 1,109 4 Connecticut, 38,374 5,482 2,870 6 Delaware, 5,243 749 25 3 New Jersey, 59,804 8,543 5,749 7 California, 21,628 10,000 5,694 4 -------- ------- ------- ---- 258,548 120,094 152

RECAPITULATION.

Pierce's vote, 1,602,663 Scott's vote, 1,385,990 --------- 216,673 Foreign vote, 367,320 Pierce's majority, 216,673 --------- 150,647