AN ADDRESS TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

Hon. Mr. Gaston of N. C.-Catholic Perfidy.-Prostitution of the Public Press.

BEING On the eve of departing from the United States, in discharge of a public duty, committed 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.

I have then solemnly to call the attention of the American people, to the facts established, by the following papers; which go far to show-1. That the Roman Catholic religion, not only admits, but approves of, false swearing, when Papists can gain any 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. They follow:

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 N. Carolina, which the Constitution of that State expressly disqualified him from

holding-in other words, authorizing him to commit perjury, for the Judge could not enter upon the duties of the office without first swearing to support the State Consti

tution.

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 We do not publish it,for any bearing it may have upon the questions heretofore in controversy between Senex and ourselves: that is altogether incidental and undesigned. 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 calumy: it is proper therefore that it should be inade 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 any thing 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 liat 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 be not thus furnish unequivocal evidence of his guilt and that too, to persons who would seize upon it with ferocicus 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 latter 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 Newburn, the place of my residence, some time since. In 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. I presume that you have received these and that they furnish most, if not all, of the facts about which you enquire.

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 of my having obtained some ecclesiastical dispensations 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 his 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 ine,aud 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 preposterous-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 arti cle was so uncourteous, and the temper which it breathed só malignant, that self respect utterly forbade me from paying any notice to it.

But our enquiries, Šir, 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 also presented for pressing an early decision. There were difficulties in the way of an immediate determination, but these had no connection whatever with constitutional scruples. I 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 incapaciate 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 fol low on quitting the bar might disable me punctually to comply with. Justice, honor required that a satisfactory arrangement of these matters should be concluded before I consente- 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 bim to give publicity to them, that their correctness 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 further-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 immediate 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 rancor, 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 as it respects myself personally, I cannot but believe 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, I am, Sir,
Your obliged and obedient Servant,

Mr. C. C. Baldwin.

WILL. GASTON.

To the foregoing letter, which came into my hands, in the manner described in the one which follows; I immediately addressed to the Gazette, which published it, the following reply, under cover to a friend in Lexington, Va.

To the Editor of the Lexington Gazette:

Baltimore, February 19th, 1836.

SIR,-Some unknown person has sent to me through the post office, the fragment of a newspaper dated the 5th of this mouth, in which I find a long letter of JUDGF. Gaston of N. C. addressed to Mr. C. C. BALDWIN, and preceded by a column of editorial remarks. It is from a passage of JUDGE GASTON's letter only, that I am enabled to determine the name and location of the newspaper, a part of which has been sent me. It is from the same souree, that I learn he had been called to account by a previous article in your paper, under the signature of 'Senex;' and that his present letter is published on the responsibility, of the gentleman to whom it is addressed; and rather against the wishes of its author.

In the course of Judge Gaston's letter, he refers to the Baltimore Religious and Literary Magazine, as having been the vehicle of a charge similar to the one now hinted at by him; and indulges himself in such expressions, to justify his contemptuous silence under the accusations of that periodical, as were perhaps, natural under the circumstances. My right to address to you this communication, and to ask its publication in your paper, is founded in part on the fact, that I am the senior editor of the work in question, and the author of the article complained of; and in still greater part on the intrinsic and induring importance of the

matter in contest.

Then be pleased sir, to bear with me while I make a short and perfectly plain statement. In the "Baltimore Literary and Religious Mag azine," for July 1835, is an article of four or five pages, entitled, "JUDGE GASTON of N. Carolina Religious Liberty. Mental Reservation." I send you, along with this, a copy of the work, and ask the insertion of that article, in your paper. This I do the more readily, that all who choose, may see the real temper, manner, and end of that article; which Judge Gaston has so grossly misrepresented. It will then be seen, that the whole ground of defence set up by him, for the most extraor dinary act ever justified by a christian gentleman, is entirely evasive and irrelevant; and that the real ground of dissatisfaction with his conduct and religious principles, remains not only uncontradicted, but absolutely confessed.

JUDGE GASTON is a Roman Catholic. To that I have nothing to say. He is at full liberty, to believe and practice whatever religious rites, seem good in his own eyes; or none at all, if he so pleases. And God forbid that any should abridge him of his liberty. But sir, JUDGE GASTON s no right, either natura!, vil, or moral, to continue a Roman Cath