I AMERICANISM. LETTER OF HON 1 . F. S. EDWARDS, TO HIS CONSTITUENTS. FELLOW CITIZENS: The near approach to an important political contest, involv- ing issues of the deepest moment to the welfare and prosperity of the country, and the confused and to some extent discordant condition of parties, make the occasion appropriate for the presentation of certain faHs for your intelligent consideration. We have witnessed with regret the bitter hostility to the principles ofthe American Party from many highly intelligent and much esteemed friends, who, we honestly believe, are well persuaded of the necessity of the American Movement, and who in their candor cherish a sincere hope that its princi- ples may yet be successful. To all such, we most earnestly invoke a careful review of the matters which we propose to submit to your consideration. Fortunately, very few, if any, reasons will be required at our hands, other than such as are demanded by the merits of the facts themselves. In an investigation when truth is the sole purpose, we should always institute a careful and rigid comparison between the parties who are contestants. In no other way can we arrive at a safe, or even just conclusion. It sometimes happens, as in this case, that the evils complained of are of such imper- ceptible growth, that we learn to look upon them with a degree of complacency, if not of satisfaction. Such is the influence of association. It is only when we combine the various evils of corruption and crime, that we become startled at the growth of error. This duty we have endeavored to perform; with what result, the future must determine. NATIVE AND FOREIGN PAUPERS. By the census of 1850, we learn that during the year ending on the 30th of June, 1850, the number of persons who wer® a c AP& participants in the public funds of the different States, was 134,972; of this number 68,538 were offoreign birth, and 66,- 434 Americans. The sum expended by the several States for the maintenance of these paupers, was $2,954,806, or $21 90 to each person; making the sum of $1,501,882 expended by ourjpeojple for the support of foreign paupers. It will be per- ceived that the number of foreign paupers exceeds those of native 2,104; but when we take into consideration the fact that the population of the native far exceeds that of the foreign born, the disproportion will be greatly enhanced. Ifwe com- pare the native and foreign paupers with the native and for- eign population, we shall then see the exact proportion: Paupers. Proportion, Native Population 21,031,569 66,434 1 to 317 Foreign “ 2,240,535 68,538 v 1 to 32 Here, it will be perceived, there is one pauper to every 32 foreigners in the united States, while there is but one pauper to 317 American born. All of these calculations are based upon the census of 1850, and to our mind furnish incontesta- ble evidence that the rapid increase of taxation is to a great extent due to foreign immigration We have made an investigation, so far as we were compe- tent from the materials before us, of the proportion of paupers in several of the States of Europe, and find that they amount to about twenty live per cent, of the whole population. During the year 1848, in the Kingdom of Great Britain, one out of every eight persons were paupers. Nearly the same proportion was found to exist in the Netherlands. It is apparent that one of the principal causes of emigra- tion to this country, is the poverty and pauperism which pre- vail in all the dynasties of Europe, and that the chief cause of pauperism and crime here, is indiscriminate immigration. Many of our unfortunate yet worthy citizens are reduced to the necessity of appealing to the private and public charities of the land, in consequence of an overwhelming influx of for- eign paupers to this country. It has been tested by experi- ence, that American laborers cannot compete with foreign labor; and unless we are prepared to give a preference to an alien and foreign sentiment, we must discourage immigration. It will be noticed that the census returns of 1850 only show the number of persons supported at the public expense in those States ana counties where by law this duty devolves upon them. This calculation has no reference to private charities, or the support of the poor and indigent in private hospitals and benevolent institutions. It is, however, sufficient for our purpose. Since 1850, as every reader of the current events well understands, immigration has increased at a fear- 3 ful rate. In our own State, during the year 1853, there were supported 280,666 paupers, at an expense of $1,009,74:7 65. If we adopt the same ratio, furnished by the census of 1850, between the native and foreign paupers, namely, ten foreign- ers to one native, we shall see that in 1853, of the paupers supported at the public expense, 252,000 were foreigners, at an expense of $84:5,000. In the city of New-Orleans, during the year 1853, there were received into the Charity Hospitals 13,759 paupers, of whom 12,333 were ot foreign birth, and 1,534: Americans. According to the census of 1850, during that year there were but 423 foreign paupers for the entire State of Louisiana. We have no doubt but the same proportion between the native and foreign paupers will be found to exist in all the other cities of the Union. In this connection it is proper to consider 1STATIVE AND FOREIGN CRIME. The census of 1850 contains a statement of the whole num- ber of persons convicted for crime in the United States, during the year ending June, 1850. By this we learn that there were 27,000 convictions, of which 13,000 were native and 14,- 000 foreign born, being 1,000 more foreigners than natives. When we consider that the American population is 21,031,- 560, and the foreign population only 2,250,535, we find that the proportion of the foreign born criminals is one to 154 per- sons, while in the native there is but one criminal to 1,619, making the proportion as one to ten. If the same proportion existed in the native population as in the foreign, the number of persons convicted for crime would have been, for the year 1850, 145,415. One criminal to every 154 persons in the United States, would certainly constitute a state of society, to say the least, not very agreeable. Another illustration may be given: During the year 1850, in Connecticut, the number of convictions for crime were 850; 545 were natives and 305 foreigners. In Illinois, during the same year, there were 316 convictions; of these 127 were native and 187 foreigners. In Maine there were 744 convictions; 284 were natives and 460 foreigners. In Massachusetts, the number of convictions was 7,250; of this number, 3,336 were natives, and 3,884 were foreigners. In Missouri there were 908 convictions for crime; 242 were natives, and 665 foreigners. In our own State there were 10,279 convictions; 3,962 were natives, and 6,317 for- eigners. In Vermont the convictions were 76 ; 34 were natives and 45 foreigners. We have prepared the following table, as showing the proportion of foreign to native born convic- tions in the following States: JMia+m Foreign* •- - . . jKWetgw. In Maine o to 1 in Kentucky 6 to 1 In Mississippi 5 to I in New- York 3 to 1 ' (/A * t 4 in Tennessee 15 to 1. In Vermont 8 to I In South Carolina... 28 to 1 In Alabama, 50 to 1 In Georgia 6 to l In Indiana.... 4 to 1 If we look at the capital convictions, we shall find that there exists a still greater proportion of foreign executions to those of native. Out of two hundred and twenty executions which took place during the year to which we have referred, in seven States, viz., New-York, Pennsylvania, Louisiana, Missouri, New-Jersey, Massachusetts and Maryland, there were 139 foreigners to 82 natives. When, however, we con- aider from whence this foreign population comes—who they are—whatever of astonishment we may manifest at once dis- appears. They are the paupers, the felons from the workhouses and prisons of Europe. Schooled to crime and indolence at home, they "become intolerable pests upon the body politic. Hence it is that the various governments of Europe find it both cheaper, and safer to pay their expenses to this country than to support them at the public expense, or go through the forms of trial and conviction and sentence to the prisons. When they are landed upon our shores, they are destitute of character and means. To obtain the means of living, they betake themselves at once to their peculiar avocations. Hot content with individual action, they lead others, fresh from the poor houses, but poor like themselves, to embark in a course of crime. During the year 1851, in the State of Mas- sachusetts, there were confined in the various prisons 1,832 natives and 2,615 foreigners. In 1853, there were 2,117 na- tives and 3,142 foreigners. During these three years the native prisoners increased 265, while the foreign increased 527 — showing most conclusively that the increase of crime and pau- perism is owing solely to the great increase of foreign pauper and criminal immigration. CRIME AND PAUPERISM CONSIDERED. We have, we think, demonstrated from the data given by the census reports, that the proportion of foreign paupers and criminals is as ten foreigners to one native. How what are the fruits of such a system ? Are you, fellow citizens, content to balance your influence with one of these men ? Are you willing that the tide should roll on, until your property be- comes mortgaged to defray the expenses of pauper and crimi- nal support? Viewed as a business matter—of dollars and cents—it must occur to you that there is no real benefit to be derived from a class of people who impoverish the State.and corrupt the morals of society. When any one of these pests commits a crime, by our laws they must be tried by your juries, and kept, if convicted, at the public expense. It is you who pay nearly, if not all, of these expenses, a sum, yearly, sufficient to provide the means of education to all om own unfortunate poor children. The citizens of my own county need no other illustration of the truth of this statement than the one presented by the very able report of the Superinten- dents of the Poor for the past year. In that report it will be seen that the same ratio of foreign and native paupers is maintained, and that the expenses for the support of the poor have increased within the last five years from about the sum of Id,000 to nearly 110,000. The money demanded to defray the expense of convictions and the support of paupers, is de- rived by taxation levied upon property. No one for a moment questions that the great bulk ol the revenue for this purpose, comes from the native born citizens. It should also be remembered, that incident to pauperism and crime, follow drunkenness and disease. An examination of the jails and work houses of the State clearly shows that the largest proportion of those confined for breaches of the peace and against good morals, are foreigners of dissipated habits. These grades of crime, by some considered unimpor- tant, are, in onr judgment, more deleterious to the good order and well being of society, and more dangerous to the pros- perity of business, than grave offences punishable by death. Slight offences are often committed, and the morals of society corrupted because they are too often unnoticed, and too fre- quently forgotten. Table showng the number and cost of Foreign Paupers in the several Stai -L-,- +v^*„ Nativej Florida, 12 147 State. Maine, New-Hampshire, Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Island, Connecticut, New-York, New-Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia. North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, Foreign paupers. 950 747 1611 9,247 1,445 465 40,580 576 5,653 128 1,903 185 18 329 Cost for’n paupers. $26,600 33,557 229,759 25,865 23,906 553,918 22,407 113,060 3,274 30,333 5,513 559 8,782 1 , paupers 4,653 2,553 2,043 6,530 1,115 1,872 19,275 1,816 2,591 4,933 1,913 1,313 978 Alabama, Mississippi, Louisiana, Texas. Tennessee, Arkansas, Kentucky, Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, Iowa, Wisconsin, 12 11 12 390 11 8 155 609 541 322 411 1,729 35 497 147 531 27,318 337 331 8,431 25,578 12,329 25,597 23,217 30.962 1786 10.998 64 352 248 133 7 994 97 971 1,904 1,243 100 68,538 $1,501, £ w 5 ' * o • An examination of the hospitals and prisons of the princi- pal cities of the United States, will show that a large propor- tion of those confined for petty crimes are foreigners.. We have been able to procure only the following reliable statistics : Jersey City Prison , for 1854. Americans ...— 44 Colored - ? Foreigners 1,043 The census of the House Agent for the month of December, exhibits the follow- ing result: Americans - 577 Foreigners -— 1,745 Colored 143 Philadelphia Alms House: Americans ------ 914 Foreigners — . 1,044 Police Statistics for Philadelphia < Americans - 443 Foreigners — ---- - 1,509 California Police statistics. Americans — - 195 Foreigners. 305 I " \ ' ^ood, Mayor The following letter iron! the Hod. Fernando , of the city of New-York, will explain itself: Mayor’s Office, Nkw->’,oRk.» l January 2 , 1855 . ) Hi 8 MXCKLLKXCY FRANKLIN F1KRCK, VRK8IDBRT OK THE UNITED STATRS : Dear Sir: There can be no doubt that, for many years, this port has been made a sort of penal colony for felons and paupers, by the local au- thorities of several of the continental European nations. The desperate character of a portion of the people arriving here from those countries, together with the increase of crime and misery among that class of our population, with other facts before us ; prove, conclusively, that such is the case. it is unnecessary to refer to the gross wrong thus perpetrated upon this city. It requires from me no allusion to the jeopardy of our lives and property from this cause. Men who, by a long career of crime and des- titution, have learned to recognize no laws, either civil or natural, cannot fail to produce feelings of terror at their approach. The inherent right of every community to protect itself from dangers -arising from such immigration, cannot be questioned. New-York has submitted to it long enough. The disease and pauperism arriving here almost daily, from abroad, is, of itself, a sufficient evil ; but when to it i3 added crime, we must be permitted to remonstrate. We ask the inter- ference pf the General Government. As it is its duty to protect us from* foreign degression, with ball and cannon, so is it its duty to protect us against enemy more insidious and destructive, though coming in an- other form. I call your attention to this subject, hoping it wiil receive from you that action which its very great importance to the whole country demands. I am very truly yours, Ae . FERNANDO WOOD, Mayor. What answer did the President return to this appeal ? Not any. It did not suit his purpose, or those whose instrument he is, to do so. No action of the General Government, in his opinion, was necessary to correct this growing evil. Notwith- standing their “ long career of crime and destitution ”—their disregard of all laws, civil or natural, they are by our laws entitled to become citizens, and to enjoy the same privileges which belong to the native born. Is such a system just? Is it right ? These are questions which it is well that you should answer, and now. You concede that there is an error some- where—you acknowledge that there should be a remedy. Who is it that proposes to correct the evils ? Is it the Demo- cratic party? Is it the Republican party? No, gentlemen, it is neither of these. From whom, then, is the reform to come ? If it ever takes place, it must be through the agency of the American Party. Will you, then, lend us your influence and good will to accomplish so worthy a purpose? Or will you unwittingly continue to gratify demagogues and unprincipled E artisan leaders? Must Congressional legislation tend, year y year, to encourage the importation of pauperism, ci*ime and destitution? 7 THE BEMEDY. It should be recollected, that the class of immigrants who come to our shores at this time, with few exceptions, are en- tirely different in character, education, and means, from those who, in the early history of the country, made this their home. We would interpose no checks against the free immigration of all well disposed foreigners. We would invite them to make this land their future home; to adopt our habits, cus- toms, and mode of thinking—in fact to become Americanized, and after a suitable period of probation, sufficient to induct them into the history of our laws and Constitution, and to wean them from the land of their birth and its associations, extend to them the right of citizenship. That we may forever guard against imposition from a different class of foreigners, we would impose such safeguards as the exigency demands. At present it is well known that we have no laws by which any foreigner may be excluded. It is a matter of no moment that the individual has been convicted of the grossest crimes —-we do not possess the means to reject him: here he may re- main until the commission of some overt act by which he may be dealt with under our laws. We would, in the first place, so modify our present laws, as to require all foreigners who come to our shores to bring with them a passport, and they should not be allowed to leave the ship in which they made the passage, until they have taken upon themselves a solemn oath, renouncing all allegiance to all foreign powers, and until they swear further that it is their intention bona fidely to become an inhabitant of the United States; this requirement, as a matter of course, will not apply to those whose object is travel: in that case the passport would indicate the purpose of the individual in coming to this country. The passport should be procured from one of our consuls, and should describe the purpose of the individual in coming to this country, and should contain the various requirements which we intend to demand of the holder before he is allowed to land on our shores. The captain, or officer, in command of every ship, should be compelled, under certain restrictions, to refuse to take on board all persons who were without such passport duly signed by one of' our consuls or ministers. This requisition on our part would be no more than what England, France, Bussia, and the other dominant powers of Europe, now require of all persons who are not natives. Before he can put his toot on their soil he must exhibit his passport, and that passport must recite the purpose of his visit By this means they regulate immigration; they may say who and who may not land upon their shores. But with us the case is v en- tirely different: millions may land every day, and there is no power to arrest them. In regard to our consuls and all other persons that shall be authorized to give passports, they should be instructed by our government to give them to no persons except those who are of “ sound health, both of mind and body, of good character for sobriety and honesty,” and upon proof that the person so applying has never been convicted of any crime. They should refuse passports to all rebellious or seditious persons—to all who in their opinion are likely to become a charge upon the people of this country as paupers. If these suggestions were adopted as the law of the land, very many of the evils which now afflict us would be removed. FOREIGN IMMIGRATION. The r number of Foreigners who ar- rived in this country up to 1850. is as follows 1 From 17S0 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 Total for 00 years, 2,739,329 From June 1. 1850, to Dee. 31, 1851, the number of foreign immigrants ar riving in this countrv^was "558,000 In the year 1852 S: ' 375,000 In the year 1853 *368,000 In the year 1854 500,000 * Total for four vears. 1,801,000 Total for 60 years, 2,739,329 Total to 1854, 4,540,329 If we assume the immigration for the last two years at 400,000 per year, making a total of 800,000. we shall have a total of 5,340,329. Is not this growth of ioreign immigration an alarming fea- ture to American institutions? Will it be said that we are unjust when we ask you to aid us in turning back this de- structive tide of immigration from almost every country under the sun ? If you do not come np with your influence and do what you may to arrest it3 further progress, this little stream, which from 1790 to 1810, comprising a space oftwenty years, of only six thousand per year, will expand into an ocean stream, which will in its course sweep away your boasted in- stitutions and even the very name of liberty and freedom. It should be borne in mind that our previous calculations of pauperism and crime were based upon the census of 1850,when the foreign population was only about one half of the forego- ing estimate, and consequently the per centum of crime be- tween the native and foreigner ought to be rated with refer- ence to the present influx. If America is to become the future home of all the criminals and paupers of Europe; if we are to become the dispensers of justice to all criminals, and a charity hospital to all the pau- pers of the Old World, let it be so understood; and we may in that event throw about our institutions some checks which 9 for a time may protect them from the baneful influence of this contaminating element. In 1854, it will he seen, the number of foreign immigrants to this country was 500,000; of which 307,639 arrived in the city of New-York. This number far exceeds the entire population of many of the States of the Union. Ifthese people had all settled upon any one ofthe Terri- tories, the result would have been the creation of several States with domestic institutions peculiar to themselves. It will be seen by the table which we have given, that in several of the States the foreign population exceeds that of the native; and when they shall all become citizens under our loose and par- tial laws, we may expect a great change of legislation. 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. State. White popu- Excess of Ratio Louisiana, 225,491 374,509 '•2 lation. immigrants. of, &c. Maryland, 417,943 82,057 11-S Arkansas, 162,189 337,811 3 Michigan, 395,071 104.929 IX Alabama, 426,514 73,486 1 Mississippi, f 295,718 204,282 m California, 91,635 418.385 5 New-Hampshire, 317,458 182,544 IX South Carolina, 274,583 226^437 15-6 New-Jersey, 465,509 34,491 i Connecticut, 363,099 136,901 l>s Rhode Island, 143,875 354,125 4 Delaware, 71,169 328,831 7 Texas, 154,034 345,966 3 Florida, 47,203 452,717 10 Vermont, 213,402 186,598 IX Iowa, 191,881 308,119 3 Wisconsin, 304,756 195,244 IX It cannot be forgotten that the last Congress passed an act for the organization of the Territories ofNebraska and Kansas. To one feature only of that act do we now propose to call your attention. By the provisions of that bill, the right to vote was granted to every immigrant who might make these Ter- ritories his home—no distinction was made between the native and foreigner. As a further inducement for colonizing Kan- sas and Nebraska, the bill provides that each settler shall be entitled to a certain number of acres of land in his own right. Now what we desire to impress upon your consideration, is the course which future legislation shall assume in regard to our present unorganized territories. If the principle pro- claimed by these organic acts is to be the future policy of the government in respect to all other territories, it will be only necessary to cause the acts to be published in the prisons and poor-houses of Europe, to cause an immediate immigration sufficient to populate all the unsettled territories of the Union. We had supposed these rich and fertile territories to be a part of our own inheritance, and as such to descend to those who should of right claim them. It requires but one additional act on the part of government to perfect the scheme; that is, to appoint an agent clothed with full power to visit the prisons and poor-houses ofEurope, proclaiming the provisions of these bills, and tender to each of the wretched beings a deed ofone hundred and sixty acres of land, on condition that he emi- grate to this country and vote the Democratic ticket. This will have the anticipated purpose of those pure patriots who are known as the authors of this bill ot abominations; and if, as we are informed, immigration is 44 a good thing,” let us h ave the full benefit of the blessing at once. Industry and perse- verance on the part of the agent of the general government might secure for us at least six to ten millions of these mise- rable outlaws on society. The pest-houses and prisons of Europe might at once be emptied into our lap. This number would very materially aid us in populating our rich unsettled territory and furnish a most agreeable material for respecta- ble society. Our only regret is, that those who are so much in love with this theory cannot be compelled to enjoy undis- turbed the full benefit which, such a state of things would confer. We have seen that the immigration of 1850 was equal to the population of three States like Arkansas, three equal to Iowa and Texas, two to Louisiana, four to Rhode Island, five to California, seven to Delaware, and ten to Florida; and under the provisions of the Nebraska and Kansas bill, it would be an easy matter to create ten new States, with an additional representation in the Senate of twenty. If the ratio of immi- gration continues to increase for the next ten years as it has since 1850, the increase will be sufficient to settle eighty States equal to the State of Florida, thirty equal to Rhode Island, sixteen equal to Louisiana, and eight equal to Maryland, North Carolina. South Carolina. Georgia, Michigan, Mississippi, Vermont, Alabama, New-Hanipshire, and New-Jersey. The Senatorial representation of foreigners, in this event, will reach one hundred and sixty members, and cannot be less than twenty i n a body composed now of but sixty-two mem- bers. ’ Is it not time we gave a passing consideration to the coun- sels of Washington—44 Against the insidious wiles of foreign influence—-I conjure you to believe me, fellow citizens—-the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake, since history and i-xmrlmce prove that foreign infnunve is one of the most baneful foes of a Republican government'' In an- other letter, dated November 17$ 1 794-, addressed to the elder Adams, lie said : 44 My opinion with respect to immigration is, except ofuseful mechanics, and some particular descriptions of men and professions, there is no need of encouragement.” Again in a letter dated January 20, 1790, he says: 44 It does not accord with the policy of this government to bestow offices, civil or military, upon foreigners, to the exclusion of our citi- zens.”- In another letter, addressed to G. Morns, dated White Plains, July 24, 1=778, he says : 44 Baron Steuben, I now find, is also wanting to quit- hi^ inspectorship for a command in the 11 line. This will be productive ot mud discontent. In a word, though I think the J3aron excellent officer, I do most de- Tomiv wish we naa nOc h single foreigner among us, except the iiarouh # Lafayette, who acts upon very different prin- cipled from those which govern the rest.” In another letter, Jffav IT, 1TTT, addressed to Eichard Lee, he says: “ I l -^e liberty to ask you what Congress expects I am to do taira. -my foreigners that have at different times been with the m«, "‘mk of field officers? These men have promoted to the u. merest binds ‘them attachment to the comu* w after they have toiled in Our officers think it extreme^ " Tr losses, to have strangers the service, and have sustained man > and activity of pnt over them. * * * It is by the by a few our people that the cause must be supported, ana ^ ^ hungry adventurers.” * * * * * > The illustrious Jefferson, like Washington, also gave ex- pression to sentiments worthy of his great lame. In his notes on "Virginia, he says: “ They, the foreigners, will bring with them the principles of the governments they have imbibed in early youth, or, if able to throw them off,* it will be in ex- change for an unbounded licentiousness, passing, as is usual, from one extreme to another. It would be a miracle were they to step precisely * at thepoint of temperate liberty . Their prin- ciples, with their language, they will transmit to their child- ren. In proportion to their number, they will share with us in the legislation. They will infuse into it their spirit , warp and bias its direction , and render it a heterogeneous , incoherent , and distracted mass. I may appeal to experience during the present contest for a verification of these conjectures; but if they are not certain in event, are they not possible, are they not probable? Is it not safer to wait with patience for the attachment of population desired or expected ? May not our government he more homogeneous, more peaceful, more dura- ble? I hope we may find some means in future of shielding ourselves from foreign influence, political, commercial, or in whatever form it may he attempted. I wish there were ow> ocean of fi/re bet/ween this and the Old World! These are the sentiments of as pure patriots as ever lived; they are the sentiments proclaimed this day by the American Party. Can any other paitv now before the American people for support, claim such high authority in support of its prin- ciples ? Does any intelligent, honest man question for a mo- ment where Washington and Jefferson would have stood were they now living ? Here is their record, and here is ours : what they saw and feared from foreign influence, has come to pass. Madison, the great constitutional expounder, has also left us his record in support of the principles ofthe American*Party. 12 He said: « Foreign influence is a Grecian horse to the Repub- lic we cannot be too careful to exclude its entrance. Da- niel Webster, the constitutional defender, said that there is an imperative necessity for reforming the naturalization laws of the P United States.” Andrew J ackson also left us_an opin- ion founded upon an experience of many yeais. He says. « It is time that we should become a little more Amencan^ed, and instead of feeding the paupers and laborers of England, feed our own; or else^n a Short time, by our present policy, W VhetmLiclnTaSv°^[^Ifoliy recognize the correctness of ably presented by the fathers of the Constitution! We believe that there should be some change to correspond with their principles, and that immediately. We are opposed to postponing action, or making ® S secondary to any other public measure They are in our Son the most important of those which now agitate the country, and should receive that consideration winch t y deserve. INFLUENCE OF FOREIGNERS IN OUR ELECTIONS. ££%sS£xftnx here in 1850 were as follows: , 7l) 5 J Natives of Ireland. ?61,719 1 Natives of Seetland. :: fg The fable which we have prepared below shows the popular vote ofM the States, at (he last Pres dential elecborJ together with the foreign population and vote in each. This comparison is not what it should he, owing to the fact that3 the census of 1850, we have no reliable data upon which to base a comparison: it will, nevertheless, illustrate our posi- tion quite a“ P well as though the increased population was added: France, 54,1369 Wales of all other countries, 95,0 l2 States . Popular Foreign rote in pop’la’n 1852. in 1850, Maine, 81,182 N. Hampshire, 62,o39 Vermont, 43,839 Mass., 132,936 Rhode Island, 16,005 Connecticut, Hew-York, New-Jersey. Penn’a, Delaware, Maryland, Virginia, M. Carolina, 522,294 83,221 486,216 12,672 75,153 129,545 78,861 31,695 14,527 33,688 163,598 23,832 38,374 655,224 59,814 5,243 51,000 22,953 2 , 6; 5 Foreign Fropor.l vote in of for’n 1850. to native votes. For. Na.t' 5,282 1 to 14 2,376 1 to 21 5,614 1 to 7 27,266 1 to 3yz 3,972 1 to 3 6,562 1 to 9 109,204 1 to 3Yt 9,802 1 to 7 60,550 1 to 8% 874 1 to 13 ,502 1 to 8 4,825 1 to 26 1 427 1 to 184 I Georgia, Florida, Alabama, _ Mississippi, TiOuisiana, Texas, Tennessee, Kentucky, Ohio, Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, Iowa, Wisconsin, California, Arkansas, 51,365 6,452 7,193., 2,740 41,919 7,492 43,424 4,782 35,902 67,308 18,547 17,620 115,916 5,638 111,139 31,401 353,429 218,099 82,939 54,593 183,134 55,537 145,497 111,860 65,586 76,570 16,847 20,968 64,712 110,471 74,736 21,628 19,574 1,468 1,075 I 456 1 1,248 1 797 1 11,218 1 2,936 1 949 1 5,223 1 36,349 1 9,097 1 9,256 1 18,660 1 12,761 1 3,494 1 18,411 1 10,000 1 244 1 to 46 to 14 to 32 to 53 to 2 W to 5 to 121 to 22 to 6 td to to 6 to 4 to 4i to 2K 1 to 6 to 90 18 13 From this statement it appears that in Iowa and Missouri the foreign vote is one-fourth; in Rhode Island, Massachusetts, and New-York, one-third; in Wisconsin and Louisiana, about one-half; in Texas, one fifth; in California, Illinois and Ohio, one sixth; in Michigan, Maryland, Pennsylvania and Con- necticut, from one-eighth to one-ninth; and in Yermont and New-Jersey, one-seventh. Here are fifteen States in which the foreign vote exercises a controlling influence, at any time capable of producing results either for or against any party or party measures. With this large vote in the several States, it should no longer excite our wonder why parties have striven with such questionable means to secure its influence. But it should awaken in us an effort for correction. This statement demonstrates another fact. The tide of immigration is con- stantly flowing west and south-west. It is in this direction that all our territories lie, and it is here that we are met by the ever swelling wave of immigration. Those rich and fertile plains are as surely the home of the foreigner, as that our present policy is allowed to continue. We notice, as a fact, that in all the border States, Louisiana, Texas, Arkansas, Missouri, Wisconsin, Illinois, Michigan and Ohio, there is a large foreign influence which most seriously -affects the elective franchise. Those to be settled will partake still more of foreign influence. These are results which every man may calculate for himself : the facts and the evidence are before him. It is not the fault of the American Party that full and certain reforms have not taken place. In every in- stance where there was a probability of success, the attempt has been made; but such is the tenacity of party discipline, and the anxiety to forget the evils to which we have alluded, in the hope of gaining to their purpose the foreign vote, that we fear the errors of the past are but the prelude to evils more alarming than any yet which have occurred. Even that sa- cred law of “ self-preservation ’’ .for once is forgotten in the solicitude to self-aggrandize this man and that man, leaders of their respective parties. Justice to ourselves, to our posterity, demands that we should avert, by some legal enactments, a danger so impending to our institutions, domestic and public. FOREIGN INFLUENCE IN OUR CITIES. We have been so frequently saluted by the opposition presses with the cry that there was no danger from this ele- ment, that many, yesrvery many, of our most worthy citizens, actually believe that there is no apparent reality in the charges brought forward by the American party. It is only when we look into the record that these appeals from interested sources are silenced, and the justice of our principles manifested. In 14 the foliowing cities it will be seen that the foreign population: becomes alarming. The foreign vote in several is nearly equal to that of the native. These statistics, however, were taken in 1850, and do not show the relative vote of parties since the birth of the American Party: Native population. Albany, 31,162 Baltimore, 130,491 Boston, 88,498 Buffalo, majority, Chicago, 13,693 Cincinnati, 68,658 Native Foreign Foreign vote, population, vote. 4,453 16,591 2,370 18.642 35,492 5,070 12.642 46,677 6,668 1 1,956 15,682 2 , 2 - 9,937 54,541 7,793 44 J Detroit, 11,055 Louisville, 25,079 Milwaukee, 7,181 Mobile, 9,565 N. Orleans, 60,470 New-York, 277,752 -Phil’a, 286,346 St. Louis, 36.529 1,579 3,582 1,026 1,366 7,210 39,822 40,906 5,218 9,923 12,461 42,782 4,086 48,601 235,733 121,699 38,397 1,417. 1 ,780 6,111 583 6,948 33,090 17,371 5,485 In the cities of* Chicago, St. Louis and Milwaukee, the for- eign vote exceeds that of the native; and in the city of Buffalo there is a clear majority of 1800 over all Americans, while in many others it nearly equals the native. When this vote is considered with reference to the influence which a large party always confers, such as an invitatiomto office seekers, disap- pointed ambition and corrupt partizans, it becomes actually fearful. By this means they control all local elections, and thus secure to themselves a large proportion of offices, which, under the lessons taught by Washington, Jefferson, and others, belong to our own citizens. Not alone is this exclusiveness of office conlined to local elections; it impresses itself upon all our State and National contests, and is potently felt in all our executive appointments. It is a notorious fact, demonstrated by every day’s experience, that nearly all the municipal offices In our cities are held by men alien in principle to the institu- tions of our country. Yet with this astounding knowledge before us, the evil is constantly increasing under the patron- age of men and parties who profess to be guided in all their political actions by a sincere desire for the good of the coun- tryv There is an evident mistake somewhere: either men and parties are dishonest; else are they living under an erroneous belief of what constitutes the true policy of this Government. In either event, the danger is the same. If the laws upon the subject of citizenship remain as they are at present, immigra- tion must increase; they are a direct hid to all the prisoners And paupers of Europe to make this fair land their future borne. Our public lands in the territories of Kansas and Nebraska are published to the world as a reward to the im- migrant. With such a precedent as is furnished in that bill, it becomes a difficult matter to make the necessary correction in the laws of the territories to be hereafter organized. INFLUENCE OF FOREIGN VOTERS IN THE LAST PRESIDENTIAL CONTEST. We shall attempt to prove, by facts and figures furnished by the census returns of 1850, and those of subsequent date, that General Pierce was elected through the influence of for- eign votes. Tl>e whole vote of Pierce was - - - 1 ,60 2.663 “ Scott “ - - - 1 ,385,9% * j&orce'e majority. - - - - 216.673 Foreign vote. ...... 367,320 Pierce’s vote, ------ 216,673 150,647 It will be seen that the foreign vote exceeds the majority given to Pierce by 150,647. It may be said now that this foreign vote was not all given to Pierce. How was it at the date of that contest? Did any intelligent man then pretend to claim any such vote for Gene- eral Scott ? Was there a single voter to be found who for one moment supposed that Gen. Scott obtained even the surplus 150,647. The fact is notorious, as the Buffalo Democrat of that date stated, that the entire foreign vote was cast for Gen. Pierce, and that it would always be given to the Democratic party so long as that party was recognized by name as a De- mocratic party. We do n’t pretend to give the precise w'ords, for we have not the paper before us; but such was the sub- stance of an artice which, for its singularity, then impressed itself upon our mind. Another view of this question may be presented. Every one of our readers can call to his aid the fact that for weeks prior to the Presidential contest, it was considered extremely doubtful where this foreign vote would be given. The friends of Gen. Scott claimed to have secured the good wishes of His Grace, f Hughes, while the friends of Gen. Pierce, on the other hand, claimed, with equal confidence, that they nad secured it, until within a few days prior to the election, when it became perfectly obvious that Gen. Pierce, or his friends, had given higher and more important pledges than Gen. Scott. WeTiave not forgotten the humiliating spectacle of a Presidential aspirant itinerating from one end of the Union to the other, making use of honied expressions to please the ear of the alien and the foreigner, and how it was confidently predicted that he had been successful. Heither have we for- gotten how it was said and believed that negotiations in due form, “ between high contracting parties,” were entered into touching the quid pro quo , in case the foreign vote was cast for Gen. Pierce; and how, after the contest was ended, and President Pierce in the executive chair, there seemed to be corroboration to this statement, by the appointment of Mr. Campbell as Postmaster General, Mr. Soule as Minister to Spain, and Mr. O’Conner as District Attorney ofthe Southern District of the State of Hew-York, all Roman Catholics. We mention these facts more for the pui pose of showing with what celerity the foreign vote can be made to operate, than, with any view to pass upon the- faults of any party, for in that contesf we were all alike the subject of censure. If, then, as we think, there can. be n6 reasonable doubt of the fact, that the foreign vote is capable of being concentrated and directed as one person, it is all powerful *&'§d sufficient as ]?£- tween two parties such as the old Wing and Democratic, of controlling every election—of making every President for all time to come. The following table will show the force of this vote when concentrated: , . States. Foreign Foreign Pierce’s Elect’l Wisconsin, 110,471 15,783 U.418 popular.. vote, maj’ty vote for Iowa, 20,968 2,990 1,180 Pierce. Rhode Island, 23,832 3,404’ 1,109 New-York. 655,224 63,317 • 27,201 35 Connecticut, 38,374 5.482 2,890 Pennsylvania. 303,105 43,300 19,446 27 Delaware, 5,243 749 25 Maryland, 6.1,011 7,287 4,945 8 New-Jersey, 59,804 8,543 5,749 Louisiana, 07,30.8 9,615 1,392 6 California, 21,628 10,000 5,694 Missouri. 76,570 10,938 7,698 9 — Illinois, 111,860 15,980 15,653 11 258,548 120.094 Ohio, '218,099 31,157 10,694 23 5 4 4 6 3 7 4 152 p|It is apparent from this calculation, that in each of these States the foreign vote exceeded that of the majority given to Gen. Pierce. These fourteen States cast an electoral vote of one hundred and fifty-two, sufficient to determine the next Presidential contest. If only one-half of this vote had been cast for Pierce, the result would have been different. We might continue our calculations in regard to all the States, and show the predominating influence of foreigners in our elections, but we fear we have already trespassed too much upon your kind attention. The recent contest in the House of Representatives upon the election bill for the District of Columbia, is an evidence that this sentiment of being more Americanized has found favor with many intelligent citizens in all parts of the Union. Our action upon that measure, and proposed action upon the bill now before the House, for a modification of our naturalization laws, in connection with the contest now before us, is the only excuse we have to offer. In reference to the other exciting measures of the day, we shall in our place take an early opportunity to prd&ent the views we entertain at length. I remain your most obedient servant, F. S. EDWARDS.