elevate and finally succeed in elevating to the Speaker's Chair a
man who is regarded as the impersonation of Northern Abolition-
ism and sectional doctrines. Is this Americanism ? Next, we
find there a small body of men, some forty or thereabouts, pro-
fessing to be the "Simon Pures" of the American party, one of
whom says it is a principle of his party to proscribe men on ac-
count of their religious opinions, and another says it is not. One
thinks citizens not native to the soil, should for ever be excluded
from all offices of honor, profit or trust—another advances and
advocates the contrary opinion. "Who shall decide when doc-
tors disagree ?"

Hear Mr. Eustis, one of these "Simon Pures," and a member
of the House of Representatives from Louisiana. He, (Mr. Eus-
tis,) in the course of his remarks in reply, on the 7th of January,
1856, to remarks made some days before by Mr. Bennett of Mis-
sissippi, said: "He would take occasion to state in a very few
words, the position occupied by the American party of Louisiana
on the subject of religion. That party in Louisiana held, and he
hoped to God it would be so held in every State of this Union,
as a cardinal maxim, that religious faith was a question between
each individual and his God, and they considered any attempt to
circumscribe or abridge religious freedom, was unworthy of our
great country and a violation of the organic law of the land. With
this spirit, the American Party of Louisiana had repudiated the
eighth article of the Philadelphia Platform, and he now repudiated
it in toto. He cared not what construction gentlemen in per-
fect good faith might be pleased to place upon that article. He
knew that gentlemen had said that they meant nothing by that
article—that the construction which they placed upon it could not
be considered offensive to American Catholics, and that therefore
it was inoperative. But the words were there—they were in white
and black, and were offensive and insulting to American Catho-
lics. If the American Party meant nothing by the eighth article,
they should erase it from their platform, for it was a blot on the
history of our country. That portion of their platform had driven
thousands from their ranks who coincided with them in other re-
spects; for the American people would never unite in a cru-
sade against American Catholics. He would rather that his right
arm should" wither than be connected with any party whose pur-
pose was to proscribe American Catholics in this great country.
Gentlemen had talked about the Papal power. It made him
blush when he saw the Protestant Church dragging its robes in
the mire of politics. The Legislatures were full of gentlemen
with black coals and white cravats, and even Congress contained
gentlemen of that cloth."

These are excellent sentiments, and as he states that thousands

29