Page images

ing scrutiny by our courts of law,” and at the bar of public opinion, completely vindicated from any such imputation. But, sir, I will tell you and the House to whom they are chargeable. To the gentleman himself and his Native American party. They begun them, and they carried them on to their end. When were they begun, and by whom Was it not by a party of Native Americans leaving their own homes and assembling in large numbers in the very midst of a settlement of Irish Catholics, and there, in the most outrageous manner, reviled their country and their religion, in terms that would have aroused to deeds of violence any American, if uttered against his country or his religion in a foreign land? Those Irishmen, it is true, may not have been in the possession of the best disciplined seelings or language; yet with all their religious zeal and fiery temper, they bore all the taunts and revilings of those who had come there to provoke them to a quarrel, nor offered any violence to any one until they believed their dwellings were attacked by the mob assembled in front of them, and who had threatened them with violence. Sir, the fact is beyond dispute that such was the beginning of those acts of violence, and that the first shot that was fired was in the market-house in Kensington, where the Native American party were assemled. The Catholics were not holding meetings for any purpose, at home or elsewhere—they were seeking no quarrel with Natives, but all attending to their own business in a quiet and peaceful manner. Why should they or their priesthood commit an outrage They did not do it. At no time did they assault any Native, nor destroy his dwelling, nor assault or destroy any Protestant church. No Native was killed but where the dwellings or churches of Catholics were being assaulted or destroyed. This could not have been, had they been acting offensively instead of defensively. These facts prove Stronger than words, that these outrages were begun by Native Americans, and carried on by them alone. Nay, sir, more than this. The first act of outrage and murder, the first dwelling and church that were burned, and all that followed them, were more attributable to the gentleman [Mr. LEVIN] himself than any other person, if they were not attributable to him altogether. He

* Under a law of the State each county is to pay for all property destroyed within its limits by a mob, subject, however, to the following, among other provisions, viz:

“No person or persons shall be entitled to the bonefits of ‘this aet, if it shall appear that the destruction of his or their * Droperty was caused by his or their illegal or improper con‘do’s.”—Purdon's Digest of Pennsylvania Laws, 7th edition , 860. ** 2 3 . Under this law, claims for property destroyed by the Native American mob of 1844, viz.: for two Catholic churches, two Catholic school houses, and a large number of dwellings and their contents, all owned or occupied by Catholics, have been thoroughly investigated by the court and juries of Philadelphia, and in no case has there been a shadow of proof. that the destruction of any of it “ was caused by the illegal or improper conduct” of any “Jesuit priest,” or Catholic of any station. On the contrary, they have been allowed to the amount of.......... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . § 04,750 Supposed yet to be assessed......... 5{).000 r - $254,750

I would also mention, that independently of all the sums paid by the city, county, and districts of Philadelphia to suppress these riots, the amount paid by the State to the troops engaged was $53,333. +

* * * * * * * * * * * * *

it was that began in Philadelphia to preach effectively a crusade against foreigners and Catholics. For some years previously, he had been delivering temperance lectures there, and I am free to say no doubt had done much good, and had thus gained the confidence and regard of a large class of citizens. When this subject began to fail him, he turned his influence with the people to political effect, and changed his lectures on temperance to addresses against foreigners, and particularly against Catholics and the Catholic religion, spreading throughout the community the most incendiary tirades ever promulgated by any man in the darkest ages, and based upon as unfounded charges. Nor was it by addresses alone, but through a newspaper called the “Sum,” he also uttered, from day to day, the outpourings of his spirit against foreigners and Catholics, unworthy of any age and any people; thus maddening the minds of his misguided followers, and causing all the bloodshed and incendiarism that followed. And what apology or explanation does my colleague offer for himself and his Native party, for all this destruction of life and property He says: “It is known to the country, that at a time when the rights even of the Irish Catholics in that district were invaded— aye, sir, after they had converted the church of St. Pinilip de Neri into a garrison—(and it surely ceased to be a church and became a garrison when arms and ammunition were placed within its walls)—when thus stripped of its sanctity, who defended and protected that fortress thus prepared to vomit its flames upon American citizens? I answer, the Native Americans. Everything had been done to infl me and infuriate the people. The “ Hibernia Greens,” with loaded muskets, were placed within that consecrated building. At this moment that noble-hearted and patriotic man, Thomas D. Grover, called at my house, and asked me to accompany him to that scene, in order that I might aid in saving the lives of those men, and preserve the church from destruction. We well knew that the character of a church is its best protection. If that will not protect it, arms never will in this country. When we walked to the rear of the church, we found two cannon loaded to the muzzle, one of them so aimed as to enter the window. Thomas 1). Grover mounted the one, I stepped upon the other, placing my foot upon the touchhole just as they were about to apply the torch. I then proclaimed that if that church fell, I would fall amidst its ruins. I pleaded for the safety of the Roman Catholic altar. I succeeded, with the aid of the Native Americans of the district, in ałłaying the popular excitement. We carried off the guns. We saved the church; and there it stands a monument of the protective power of Native Americans. We entered the basement of the building, incendiaries as we were, but we bore no torch, and there we found a “tinderbox,” with matches, and all needful preparation made to set it on fire,” This story of the tinder-box and matches having been found in the basement of St. Philip's church, as told by the gentleman, is a miserable explanation of his interrogatory to me on Saturday last, while speaking, and a still more miserable apology for the charge he now hangs upon it, that with these the Catholics intended to set fire to their own church. Why should they have done this? Had not the Catholic churches in Kensington and in the city both been fired and burnt to ashes before this in the face of the world by the Native Americans? Who had denied this? No; the torch of the incendiary was not lighted at a tinder-box, but at a fire kindled in the hearts of bad men by the teachings of the gentleman [Mr. LEVIN] and his friends, and he is hard pushed for an excuse for the attack on St. Philip's church when he tells us there was a tinder-box found in its cellar, and a number of armed men within its walls, Was that an excuse for his Native American

friends gathering for its destruction, that there was within it a tinder-box and a number of armed Catholic citizens? Had they no right to be there They were in their own house—not there to attack but to defend—defend their temples and their altars —and who would not defend them at a time, too, when armed bands of thousands roamed through the streets burning churches and dwellings, and murdering citizens, unrestrained by law, and apparently without the fear of God or man. “Was it a crime, under such circumstances, for these men to be there? The gentleman also tells us of his exploits in saving the church and those within it; how he and his friend, Thomas D. Grover, had harangued the mob assembled for its destruction, and “pleaded for its safety;” they even mounted the cannon pointed at its windows, which, but for their timely interference, would, in a few short minutes more, have blown it and all within it to atoms, Who brought these cannon there? Were they not the Native American party, of whom the gentleman was the acknowledged leader? Why was that mob there to destroy a Catholic church, filled with Catholic citizens? Was it not to carry into effect the teachings of their leader and his associates? Let the world judge. The gentleman says he quelled the mob—he mounted the cannon—he placed his foot upon the touchhole just as they were about to apply the torch, and thus saved the church and those within it ! Did he Then let me ask him, to whose voice did a mob ever listen, but to that of its leaders or associates ? or who ever controlled a mob but the men who made it? No better testimony could be had to prove the author of that mob than to know THE MAN who quelled its thirst for destruction and blood; who, amid its cheering, was carried away in triumph, mounted on its canhon. Shortly after this dispersion, the mob gathered again for the destruction of the church, or to make battle with the police and citizens assembled for its protection, and then and there it was General Cadwalader’s troops fired upon them and captured these very cannon. But, sir, why did the gentleman and his friends interfere to save St Philip's church? They had not interfered to save St. Michael's nor St. Augustine’s. They had not appeared before the mob in Kensington, when their guns were pointed at the Catholics and their dwellings, though they well knew of it all, and by their interference could have easily prevented or stopped the burnings and massacres there. I will tell the gentleman why he stopped the destruction of St. Philip's. The public mind was aroused from its lethargy, and the people throughout the city, and county, and State, were recovering from the paralysis into which the first shock of these unnatural scenes and doings had thrown them, and were gathering in their might, to bring to justice and punishment their authors, Churches and dwellings had been laid in ashes, and valuable and innocent lives sacrificed; the mob was increasing in numbers and audacity, and its leaders seemed to revel in the enjoyment of uncontrolled power of doing evil. My colleague, and the other leaders of their party, saw the rising storm —saw there was a point beyond which they dare not go; and, to save themselves, they saved St. Philip's church. Had that church been burnt, and those in

it murdered, I will tell my colleague from the first district, his friends and himself would very probably have been elevated to higher places than a seat on a cannon or in Congress. Such, sir, was the character, and such were the doings of the Native American party that the gentleman says “have been scorned and abused be: cause they loved their country better than they did party.” They love their country better than party! Why, sir, from the first rise of the party to the present day, it has been held in the market by its leaders, and again and again sold to the highest bidder. The records of the country will show how the leaders have held themselves for sale, and have actually sold themselves to the Whig party, like cattle in the market, transferring their votes by hundreds and thousands to certain Whig candidates, and in return receiving in payment Whig votes for cer. tain of their candidates. This bargain and sale of the party has been too notorious to need proof; and if it did, the records of all the elections in and about Philadelphia for the last few years bear ample and shameful evidence of the fact. Mr. LEVIN asked if there had been any bargaining in the third district. Mr. BROWN. Yes! These very Native American commissioners of Spring Garden, who have taken it upon themselves to instruct me, hold their seats by the purchase of hundreds of Whig votes, and giving in payment hundreds of Native votes to the Whig candidates for Governor and canal commissioner. Yet, in the face of all these evidences of selfishness and corruption, and in the face of his attempts now to transfer the Native party to his new allies of the South, the gentleman has the assurance to tell this House, that they love their country better than party. My colleague on the other side of the House [Mr. Dick Ey] says, “there is nothing in our State * Constitutions which prevents the Catholics when

“they get the power through the ballot-boxes, from

‘establishing the Catholic religion in the States; ‘and when they shall have obtained the majority, ‘what security shall we have against it?” There is an old saying, “when the sky falls we will catch larks.” What security have we that the Methodists, the Episcopalians, the Baptists, or the Presbyterians, may not get the controlling power in the States, and establish their own religion?—a majority of whom are increasing much faster in this country than the Catholics, with all the importations from foreign countries so much opposed and dreaded by my colleagues. In past ages, when the spirit of the Christian religion was not well understood or appreciated, it is true the Catholics did aspire to political domin. ion, and in particular countries, persecute those who differed from them; but if we look also to the history of the Episcopalians, of the Presbyterians and other Protestant or dissenting sects, has not the first of them sought and exercised political dominion also, and have they not nearly all persecuted each other? Have not the Episcopalians persecuted the Catholics and Dissenters in England? Have not the Presbyterians, on our own free soil, among the green hills of New England, persecuted those who dissented from them? What security have we, if any one religion shall succeed in obtaining the controlling power of numbers, that its friends will not estab:

[ocr errors]

lish it as the law of the land, and persecute all others? The security is the resistance to oppression, which has so recently crushed Nativism in this country—which is now deeply moving Italy— which has established itself in the United States, and which, I trust, will be diffused all over the world—the spirit that causes men to prefer to suffer death rather than be trampled upon by religious or political despotism. Other securities will be found in the more enlightened and tolerant spirit of the Christian religion, and that in the progress of mind and conflicts of opinion, no one religion is likely to acquire sufficient strength to outnumber all others, and tyrannize over them. My colleague draws largely on his imagination to form such a powerful and dangerous combination as he has done, under the direction of Mr. |Polk, to purchase Democratic votes and spread the Catholic religion over the United States. Brownson’s lectures, a conclave of bishops, and the treaty with Mexico, have all been drawn upon to carry out the idea. There is not, and ought not to be, any party political question involved in those missions. Mr. Polk, it is to be presumed, recommended them because he thought they would promote the interests of the country, and not that they would aid any religious or political party. The Catholics are not all Democrats. In Ohio they were arrayed not long since against the Democratic party, because, I suppose, their political feelings were that way inclined. In other places over the country they are divided between the olitical parties—most of them, no doubt, are $.a. and if this proscription of their religion is to be made a part of the creed of the Opposition, they will no doubt soon be all such. This attempt of my colleague over the way [Mr. Dick Ey] thus to drag this question into the party divisions of the House or of the country, to make political capital out of it, is deserving, in my opinion, the severest condemnation of both. I deprecate this whole system, come from where it may, that would array parties against each other on sectarian religious grounds. We have enough of bitterness now in our cup, and I trust in God we may never be made to drink any more of this poison than has already been forced to our lips by Native Americanism. If, however, it be all true that my colleagues have asserted of Rome, that the Pope, cardimals, and all else there of Catholicism and Jesuitism, are combined against us, and forming schemes to overthrow our republican institutions and establish their religion among us, why, sir, it is the very best reason in the world for sending a minister there to watch at the fountain head those movements and make them known to us. Where are we to send our ministers if not to places so pregnant with evil or good to our institutions and

our people? But there is no such danger to be apprehended; and there are abundant higher and nobler objects to induce us to send our minister there, and to occupy his attention when there. It is objected that we have no commerce with the Papal States, and therefore need no diplomatic agent. In this we have always been behind Great Britain. She has not sent her agents to look after her commerce in foreign countries, but to lead it there. By this means she has anticipated all other nations in the formation of favorable commercial relations with distant countries, and in extending her commerce every where over the world. It is time the United States should lead. We have followed Great Britain too long, and our commerce and our character have suffered too much by playing second part to our more enterprising rival. The awakening everywhere over the earth of new sources of commerce and of new political ideas, demand of us to send our agents far and wide, and have them wherever an American citizen or an American flag may be found. The cost is nothing compared to the advantage that will ultimately result to us and to the world. Independently of all commercial advantages, there are other and higher grounds for sending a minister to Italy. Where is the American heart that does not beat in unison with that of Pope Pius in his efforts for the amelioration of the condition of the Italians? Even supposing, as has been said, that he proposes no spiritual, and but little political reform, are not his efforts to improve the physical condition of his people worthy of American sympathy and American support? Yes, sir, there is enough, and more than enough, in all that is stirring the hearts and moving the Pope and the people of Rome and the Papal States, to induce us to send an American minister there, if for nothing else, to cheer on, with his presence, both Pope and peasant, who are struggling to improve the condition of their country, and again to raise its downtrodden people to the rank of men and freemen. Where is the American that would not rejoice to see the Italy of the present day, with all its deserted plains and ruined cities—with all its lazaroni, its sculptors and painters, so sneeringly intruded into this debate by my colleague from the first district—all rivalling again that Italy of classic memory, so dear to every lover of eloquence, of genius, of liberty, and of greatness? Where is the American that would not rejoice to see her towns and cities—ay, even the city of the Seven Hills—filled with manly Roman citizens, such as live in our memory, and to see her barren plains arrayed again in living green Where is the American citizen who would not rejoice to see the Roman soldier again on the theatre of the world, not fighting for extended empire as of old, but fighting for the extension of the empire of freedom

[merged small][merged small][merged small][ocr errors]




« ՆախորդըՇարունակել »