practice, is not the surest way of getting rid of character and pursuits of a country distinguished the evil. and St. Michael's. for her men of letters, her enlightened merchants, "What would be said of a Boston gentleman and ex-governor, who should, in describing the national idiocracy of South Carolina, characterize her planters as rogues, who sold stones and brick-bats, concealed in bags of cotton by the pound-or, in describing her women, should select as a sample a Wassamasaw vender of eggs and wild ducks? These things will only suit the inmates of taverns and the caterers for the vulgar appetites of ribalds, of the lowest order. If Governor Wilson will seek the society of the wealthy and hospitable merchants of Boston, he will find scholars who will instruct him "When men whose opinions carry weight, from the elevated position they hold in society, promulgate sentiments dangerous and derogatory to its best interests, it is a public duty to offer a merited rebuke to this misuse of power over the public mind. There runs lurking through the letter of the gentleman whose name heads this article two preponderating characteristics-an attempt to sneer at the ecclesiastic character of the minister of the Gospel, to whom a large and respectable portion of our citizens look up as their spiritual guide, and whom they regard with reverence-and an effort to draw an invidious distinction between citizens by birth, and citizens by adoption. It is true, these sentiments are not directly avowed, and are in them--lawyers who will enlighten him-ladies whose selves so odious as not to be defended; but the morale of the whole letter, its odour is too distinct to be misunderstood. The insinuation that the Catholic sells prayers for the dead, and lends political aid to the living. from cupidity, is an inference not to be mistaken, from the language used. 'Perhaps Christian charity would have led to the imputation of nobler and purer motives to both the benefactors of religious institutions, and those who vouchsafe the prayers of the pious to him who gives alms. "My business is with the sectional and national reflections which tarnish this production of one so distinguished among the educated and liberal-hearted sons of the city of Charleston. "Take the following example: There may be such a thing as a national idiosyncrasy, I admit; indeed, our own country proves this. Where is the similitude between a keen, enterprising New England pedler of wooden clocks, and a Carolina planter. There is about as much likeness as you will find between a bale of cotton and a clock.' This is a sentiment of a distinguished lawyer, a former governor, and goes forth as a sample of the enlightened and liberal feelings of Charleston in regard to the people of New England, and as truly exemplifying the distinguished characteristics of the citizens of Charleston and Boston. They are a nation of venders of wooden clocks'-the other, of Carolina planters. education fit them both to adorn and illustrate the most polished society. He may rest assured that he would be no more exposed to the intrusion of a keen enterprising New England pedier of wooden clocks,' than he would be likely to meet, in the polished and courteous circles of Charleston society, a vulgar swaggerer of a tavern, or the hero or bully of a bar-room. In a word, Governor Wilson may be assured that a gentleman is the product of no one favoured clime, and whether he be a Carolina planter or a New England farmer, scholar or merchant, he is known and appreciated wherever he appears. A man of original and essential vulgarity, whatever fortunes may attend him, will never fail to betray his inherent qualities, which no station or title can efface. So much for your national idiocracy, which is a most signal failure at a worn-out, obsolete, and most pointless jeer. "He adds, speaking of a remark of Bishop England as an adopted citizen, this is bold language to use even if true.' Indeed! Then it is an extraordinary act of boldness in an adopted citizen to tell the truth, and but a modest liberty in a native to resort to a poor and low prejudice against his own countrymen-the very men who began and never deserted the conflict which made us a nation! Are our adopted citizens then so degraded that they cannot, but in trembling accents, speak the truth, while it is a royal prerogative of one whose parent destiny so happened as to bring him to light hereabouts, to "I presume the learned governor meant to sport with the well-established facts of history to speak of a national idiocracy or peculiarity of minister to the most untutored prejudices of the constitution-what he meant by idiosyncrasy' very dregs of society? for a Carolina gentleman is not so easily fathomed. Now, that vending would blush to be thought capable of confoundwooden clocks is a peculiarity of the New Eng-ing an educated, enterprising, public-spirited and and constitution, is so vulgar an estimate of the hospitable people, with any of the mere trading and huckstering classes that infest every society, | state by degrading prejudices, or disingenuous from dealers in wooden nutmegs to the wretches, sectional reflections. The national idiocracy' who, under the name of Carolina planters, sell alluded to, must have been a thoughtless jest, cotton-seeds and stones, for the real good fair which an enlightened lawyer and former dignato good. If there is indeed an order of nobility tary of this chivalric state would never seriously in this state, not even graced by ancient recol sanction-and it is to be hoped that so it will be lections of chivalric ancestry, or based upon su- estimated abroad, for the sake of the honour and perior piety, sobriety, and morality, but resting hospitality of our state. GREENE. upon the mere fact, common to the very negroes "N. B.-The papers, which published Gov. who clean their boots-which no merit can ever Wilson's address, will please insert this." attain if there is such an aristocracy, one thing is certain, that none will claim it more pertinaciously, or insist with more tenacity upon this 'insolent prerogative,' than those who feel conscious that they have no more available claim to distinction in the society in which they move.— And now, in conclusion, there does appear to be an effort to rally in opposition to Mr. Boyce, a party whose object is to decry and degrade that portion of our citizens who were not born in South Carolina. The plain statement of the lurking bias will be its best antidote, for none will more promptly and effectually silence such an attempt, than all of whom Carolina loves to boast as her cherished sons. The degraded and fallen only, who, having dissipated everything else, and having left only what they cannot get rid of, their accident of birth to boast of, will ever tarnish the illustrious fame of their native From the Charleston Courier of Jan. 4, 1841. TO JOHN L. WILSON, ESQ. "In your article in the Courier of the 1st instant, to Bishop England, you say, 'My friend now asked me if I had not heard of the large sum lately paid to one of the Catholic Churches, by Mr. Boyce, for an oratorio, which he was unable to attend, on account of his absence from town,' &c. Now, as members of the committee of the oratorio given at St. Mary's Church during the absence of Mr. Boyce from this city, we take this opportunity to say to you that the friend you allude to has misinformed you, as we know that Mr. Boyce has not contributed to said oratorio. "FRIENDS TO TRUTH." VINDICATION OF JUDGE GASTON. [The letter of Judge Gaston prefixed to the brief article written by Dr. England in his vindication, was copied from the Lexington (Va.) Gazette" into the United States Catholic Miscellany, No. 38, of Vol. XV., for 1836. The article itself, written in reply to the attack of the "Baltimore Literary and Religious Magazine" on the illustrious Catholic jurist of North Carolina, upon whose good fame death has since set a sacred and inviolable seal, appeared in the 41st No. of the same volume.] JUDGE GASTON. To the Editor of the Baltimore Gazette. SIR-May I ask the favour of you to publish in your valuable journal, for the information of your subscribers and the public generally, the letter of Judge Gaston, which will be found in the "Lexington (Virginia) Gazette," of the 5th inst., together with the introductory remarks of the editor of that paper. In making this request, I am prompted by the sole motive of contributing to the refutation of a calumny heretofore circulated in this city (where I believe it most wantonly originated) against one of the purest patriots and most enlightened jurists to be found in this or any other country, and a gentleman whom I have the pleasure of numbering among my personal and most esteemed friends. A SUBSCRIBER. From the Lexington (Va.) Gazette. HON. WM. GASTON. The reader will find below a letter from this gentleman to the editor of this paper, on the subject of the charge preferred against him by "Senex." of procuring, from the Bishop of Baltimore, an ecclesiastical permission to hold an office under the State of North Carolina, which the constitution of that state expressly disqualified him from holding; in other words, authorizing to commit perjury; for the Judge could not enter upon the duties of the office without first swearing to support the state constitution. We wish our motives in publishing this letter to be distinctly understood. We do not publish it for any bearing it may have upon the questions heretofore in controversy between "Senex" and ourselves; and that they furnish most, if not all, of the facts about which you inquire.* that is altogether incidental and undesign- I presume that you have received these, ed. We publish it simply from a sense of justice to Judge Gaston, to the elevated station he occupies, and to the state of North Carolina, which has conferred that station upon him, and whose fame is involved in that of her sons. Our paper has been made the vehicle of a calumny; it is proper, therefore, that it should be made the vehicle also of the refutation of that calumny. We had hoped to have been spared the necessity of publishing this letter. "Senex" knows that we employed the only means in our power to absolve us from the necessity, but unfortunately without success. We do not mean, by anything we have said, to reflect in the slightest degree upon the conduct of "Senex" in making this charge. His error, we sincerely believe, was one purely of the head, such as we are all liable to commit. The letter must satisfy every candid mind that the charge is wholly unfounded. The Judge's positive denial would be sufficient to prove this, particularly as the evidence by which it is attempted to be sustained is of the very weakest character. All who know Judge Gaston, know that his character is without reproach, and above suspicion. The high and most responsible station which he occupies by the election of his Protestant fellow-citizens, with whom he has spent his life, shows that his character is without a stain. If the charge is true, the Judge is not only a liar and a perjured scoundrel, but a "fool" too; for if the facts which he states are not true, would it not be the height of folly in him to publish them to the world, when their falsity can so easily be established? Would he not thus furnish unequivocal evidence of his guilt and that, too, to persons who would seize upon it with ferocious avidity? But with those who question the Judge's veracity we have no argument. The letter itself bears upon its face convincing proof of his candour. We commend it to our readers. Raleigh, December 29th, 1835. SIR-I had the pleasure of receiving yesterday, and not before, your letter of the 17th of October, addressed to me at this place. The number of the Lexington Gazette referred to in the letter as accompanying it, was forwarded to Newbern, the place of my residence, some time since. În consequence of the editorial article in the Gazette, I caused to be transmitted to you two newspapers containing a speech which I made in our late state convention. The publication to which the editorial article is an answer I have not met with. From the nature, however, of that answer I infer that it contains a vile charge, for my having obtained some ecclesiastical dispensation or permission to hold an office under the state of North Carolina, and relieving me from the guilt of perjury in violating my oath to support the constitution of the state. I know that a charge to this effect had been made in a periodical work published at Baltimore, called (I think) "The Religious and Literary Magazine;" for not long after the adjournment of the convention, and while I was yet here occupied with the duties of the Supreme Court, a copy of the Magazine containing such an accusation was sent on to me, and as I suppose, by the conductors of the work. It is not easy to determine when it is proper to come forth with a denial of a calumnious charge, and when it is most becoming to treat it with silent contempt. The accusation in question seemed to me so prepos terous, so ridiculous, that it was scarcely possible for me to notice it gravely without subjecting myself to ridicule, or the manifestation of a morbid sensibility. But I was saved from all difficulty in deciding on the course then to be pursued. The style of the article was so uncourteous, and the temper which it breathed so malignant, that self-respect utterly forbade me from paying any notice to it. But your inquiries, sir, are evidently prompted by a sincere desire to know the truth, and made in a manner that demands my respectful consideration. If, therefore, it will afford you any satisfaction to have my peremptory denial of the accusation, I have no hesitation in stating that it is wholly false. It is no doubt but a mere repetition of the Baltimore slander, and that professes to be mainly founded on the asserted fact, that I withheld my assent to be put in nomination for the office of Judge until after I had visited Baltimore. This allegation is itself utterly false. My lamented friend, Chief Justice Henderson, died in August, 1833. In a few days afterwards I was informed of the occurrence, and urged by gentlemen of the highest standing in the state, upon public grounds, to permit myself to be considered as willing to accept the vacant office, if it should please the Legislature to confer it. Strong reasons were *This unanswerable speech has been republished in pamphlet form, and is for sale. also presented for pressing an early decision. There were also difficulties in the way of an immediate determination, but these had no connexion whatever with constitutional scruples. I had had occasion, but a short time before, to examine for myself and to seek the best counsel to examine the disqualifications for office which some supposed the constitution denounced against the professors of the Roman Catholic faith. I was satisfied that my religious principles did not incapacitate me from taking the office. But there were personal considerations which compelled delay. It is unnecessary to set these forth,-but that which was last removed arose from pecuniary engagements which I had contracted, and which I feared the great sacrifice of emolument that would follow on quitting the bar might disable me punctually to comply with. Justice and honour required that a satisfactory arrangement of these matters should be concluded before I consented to be removed from the bar to the bench. This was done by an early day in September, and then I gave my written consent to be nominated for the vacant office, and my permission that this determination might be publicly known. A very laborious fall circuit closed in the first week of November. From it I went on a long-promised visit to see my daughter, who was settled in New York. I travelled by Norfolk and Baltimore, and passed one day at the latter place, and, as well as I recollect, one only. It had been supposed by several who took a deep interest in my receiving the appointment, that it would be bestowed without opposition. They had afterwards ascertained that this was a mistaken opinion, and had informed me before I left Carolina that doubts had been expressed on the constitutional question, and difficulties raised about it. Having an hour of leisure when at Baltimore, I wrote to one of my zealous friends residing at Raleigh, stating the views which I had taken of the constitutional question, and authorizing him to give publicity to them, that their correctness or incorrectness might be judged of. I have understood, and have no doubt of the fact, that this letter was read by my friend at his table in the presence of several distinguished gentlemen, among others the great and good John Marshall, and that copies of it were taken. This is the letter which has afforded the pretext for the falsehood (I hope a falsehood through mistake), that my assent to be put in nomination had been withheld until after I reached Baltimore. It is needless, surely, for me to go fur ther,—but I will add, that I never had any intercourse, verbal or written, direct or indirect, with the Bishop of Baltimore on the subject; and that I did not, directly or indirectly, confer with any individual belonging or professing to belong to the Catholic Church upon the subject (out of my own household) until after I had announced my unconditional assent to be put in nomination for the office. What use you may make of this communication I leave entirely to your sense of propriety. It is not a pleasant matter for any man of character or feeling to have a discussion entertained on the question whether he has or has not acted as a scoundrel and a fool; and I regard the wantonness with which men's characters are dragged before the public, the facility with which slanders are credited, and the rashness with which unfounded imputations are attributed by political or sectarian rancour, as among the worst vices of the age. If any public motive should require that the miserable calumny to which I have referred should be contradicted or repelled, you have here my authority for so doing. But [I trust] that a life of nearly threescore years has established for me a character, such as it is, that does not require to be defended or propped. I could wish, therefore, that I might be permitted to pass the remainder of my days in the quiet discharge of my duties, and that no further notice should be taken of this contemptible falsehood. You will, however, act in relation to it as your judgment shall direct. With very respectful sentiments, Your obliged and humble servant, Mr. C. C. Baldwin. THE HON. JUDGE GASTON. WE have this week received a little pamphlet of ten or eleven pages, purporting to be an extract from the "Baltimore Literary and Religious Magazine," for this month. It is entitled, "An Address to the American People," and comes from the senior editor of the Magazine itself, Rev. Robert J. Breckenridge. The nature of this address may be known from its introduction, which we give in words and figures and mode of print, exactly as we find it: "Hon. Mr. Gaston, of N. C.-Catholic Perfidy. -Prostitution of the Public Press. mitted to my hands, by that branch of the church of Jesus Christ, of which I am a member, I feel myself imperiously bound by a sense of what is due to myself, as well as to the cause of truth and public morality, to lay before my countrymen the following correspondence; for I am well aware, that the same religious principles which teach men to swear falsely, and keep no faith with those who, as they say, have no faith, will prompt those who are so tardy and reluctant to speak even in necessary explanation, when I am present and ready to reply, to be bold and prompt even in attack, when I am far away; nor can I doubt, that the prostitution of the public press to the Catholic superstition, which has wrought me so much injury, though so great injustice, in despite of all my personal efforts to the contrary, will lend itself to the same designs in circumstances more favourable to success. OFFICE OR PLACE OF TRUST OR PROFIT, IN THE CIVIL GOVERNMENT WITHIN THIS STATE.' Yet JUDGE GASTON, being and continuing a Papist, was appointed a judge under this constitution, and actually took the usual oaths to support that which he trampled under foot, even while he called God to witness, that he believed that to be true, which in his secret soul he was satisfied was false !! You will allow me, sir, to say, in my own defence, that I have been kicked into this Popish controversy, by the priests and others around me: that the case of Judge Gaston was no private matter, but a public and official act; that as such, it has been used as a strong and frightful illustration of the natural and necessary fruits of a false and bloody superstition, which is spreading in all directions in this country, and which foreign states and princes are conspiring to establish as the public religion of America; and that, in the whole case, the talents, public services, and private virtues of Judge Gaston have been fully admitted, indeed stated; but this act of his "I have then solemnly to call the attention of the American people to the facts established by the following papers, which will go far to show: 1. That the Roman Catholic religion not only admits, but approves of false swearing. when is undeniable and indefensible, and which, while Papists can gain advantage thereby. 2. That the political newspapers of the day, to some extent, applaud this tremendous principle; and, to a still greater extent, are grossly subservient to the religious sect which teaches and practises it!" The attention of the reader is directed first to the letter of Judge Gaston, of North Carolina, and the introductory remarks which precede it, both of which are taken from the "Lexington (Va.) Gazette," of February 5th, 1836. it persecutes on principle all who reject it, at the same time corrupts all who receive it. "If you will look at the article to which I have already alluded, you will discover that four grounds of defence set up by the friends of this gentlemen, are slightly examined: 1. That the provision in the Constitution of North Carolina was a mere dead letter. 2. That he was not bound to know what was meant by the terms Protestant religion,' as they were not defined either the oath he took was actually true; and that, though a Catholic, he might believe the Protestant religion to be true. 4. That he got a dispensation to take this oath. These were actual defences which I had heard suggested in his own state, by his own friends, over and over, during different directions, which I had then recently two journeys entirely across the state, in two taken. For the notice taken of them, I refer you to the printed article.”’ in the laws or constitution of his state. 3. That The letter of Judge Gaston, which we some time since copied, is then set forth, and it is followed by a very extraordinary production of Mr. Breckenridge, in the shape of a letter to the editor of the "Lexington Gazette," in which he complains that the Hon. Judge treated him with "contemptuous silence," when in his Magazine he charged the Judge with perjury, because he took the oath of office when he was elected to that station which he decorates by his talent and his virtue. He requests the editor will insert his "article of four or five pages" of attack, printed last July in his Magazine, entitled Judge Gaston, of North Carolina. Religious Liberty, Mental Reservation." He then proceeds to say, that Judge Gaston "continuing to be a Roman Catholic, swore that he believed the Protestant religion to be true;" to prove this, he quotes the thirty-gious second article of the old Constitution of the State of North Carolina: "This, sir, is the plain matter-of-fact of the case. By the thirty-second article of the late Constitution of North Carolina, it was provided, 'that no person who shall deny the being of God, OR THE TRUTH OF THE PROTESTANT RELIGION, or the divine authority either of the Old or New Testaments, or who shall hold religious principles incompatible with the freedom and safety of the state, SHALL BE CAPABLE OF HOLDING ANY have been a better excuse for the Judge He then appears to think that it would to have admitted that he got the dispensation, and acted under it, than to deny that he got it, and say that he took the oath without; and avows that he only repeats what he has learned, "admitting as relatively probable, what hundreds disposed to excuse the Judge repeated as true." tion, as it was inconvenient to him for many The Lexington editor declined the insercontroversy into his columns, and reasons, which he specifies, to admit reliamongst them the following: "But, sir, I would not entertain this controversy, if the Pope were to release me from my pledges, because it would exclude more useful and interesting matter from my paper, (a small weekly sheet,) and is entirely uncalled for, there being scarcely an individual in the county who does not consider the Church of Rome as a sink of iniquity, and the enemy of God and man. Why, sir, a good many of my subscribers stopped their papers, because I dared to defend the Cath |