V.
' "The tendency of Uemoermfff i toiceird ttt titration of the Indumlriom elaf,t he tacrtatt of thtir comfort , themnterttan oflhetrdi?iUlyftht tttabltiluntnt f thtir ftctr."
BY ROBEUT WILLIAMSOX, Jr.
UKCOIiKTOX, jV. C.,-DECBMBEU 1, 1841.
VOLUME V, NO. 27.
N E W T EIIMS
OF
THE LINCOLN REPUBLICAN
TERMS OF PUBLICATION.
Th C Iiixcoi.x Kepdblicas is published every
Wednesday at 2 50, if paid in a ilvantc, or 3 if
payment be delayed three months.
.i subscription received for a less term than
twelve months.
No piper will be discontinued but at the opliuo
ft'ti3 Editor, until all arrearages arc paid.
A failure to order a discontinuance, will be con
ideieJ a new engagement.
- TERMS OF ADVERTISING. '
AnvfcHT isememts will bo inserted conspicuous
ly for 1 00 per square for the first in.seition, and
25 coutai for each continuance. Oou if and Judicial
Advertisements will be charged 25 per ci-nU' more
than the above prices. A deduction of 33j per
rent, from the regular prices will be made toycarly
advertisers.
The number of insertions must be noted on the
manuscript, or they will be chaigcd until a discon
tinuance is ordered.
, TO CORRESPONDENTS.
To insure prompt attention to Letters addressed
0 the Editor, the postage should in all cases be paid.
From the Globe,
MR. NICHOLSON, OF TENNESSEE.
The brief -speech of Mr. Nicholson at
Ihe festival given to Mr. Polk, condenses
very strongly some parts of. the political
conduct of the late Cabinet, and their
Whig friends, to whom' they ow ed their
fitalions. We think it would do good if
the Democratic press would spread his tes
timony of the doings under his eye at
Washington before their readers.
Correspondence of the Kuoxville Jlrgus.
Nashville, Oct. 25, IS 11.
You will find in the Union an account
of the dinner given to Gov. Polk last
Saturday, at the Nashville Inn. The
Governor's speech was the best I ever
heard from him. It will be reported at
length hereafter. Mr. Nicholson also
nadc a short speech at the table, in reply
to a toast complimentary to the Democratic
portion of the Tennessee delegation i:i
Congress, a hasty report of which, as I
presume none will appear elsewhere, I
Jake pleasure in sending yoa far publica
tion. Mr. Nicholson said l.e had much cause
to regret that the lateness of the time as
well as the arrangement of the committee
would not permit him to do more than to
tender to his fritnds present his warmest
acknowledgments for the compliment,
unmerited as it was, which lliey had just
paid to him. He would have been pleased
at an opportunity to review with some care
the leading measures of the late extraordi
nary, and to Federalism disastrous, session
f Congress.
(The cries of "go on," "go on." from
- the crowd rose so loud and enthusiastic,
that Mr. N. continued his remarks.)
- He said he would not resist the calls of
his friends to proceed, but he should not
pursue the course of remarks which he
would have followed under more favorable
circumstances, lie would add nothing to
the very able and eloquent review of the
measures of the extra session which had just
lieen made by Governoi Polk. During the
few moments lie should address his friends,
he would hold up other matters to their
view, connected with the new Administra
tion Mr. N. said, that he considered it sus
ceptible of demonstration that ev ery profes
sion aud promise which the Whig orators
inadp to the people during the canvass for
the Presidency in Tennessee had been
grossly violated by the party since they
came into power. He had borne an humble
part in that canvass, and he felt assured
that he understood the leading professions
by which they had obtained ihe confidence
of the people. He would be fully borne
out by all present when he asserted that
much capital had been made by attributing
to lh Democrats the odious doctrine that
"to the victors belong the spoils," and by
promising to reform that abuse. He asked,
if all did not now know that that promise
had been most shamefully violated. He
asserted that proscription for opinion's
sake had luen practised since the -1th of
March last with a most unsparing and cruel
hand. Not only had honest, faithful, and
capable officers been removed on account
of their politics in every section of the
country .to make room for hungry office
seekers, but in some instances old veteran
patriots, who had risked their lives in battle
for their country, had been cruelly pro
scribed for the heinous sin of being Demo
crats. He referred to the heartless course
of that butcher, Ewing, as he had been
termed, in removing honest officers to
make places for brawling politicians. He
said that it was not surprising that Mr.
Ewing knew so little about the condition
of the Treasury Department his time had
been loo much employed in proscribing
honest officers and rewarding partisan
friends, to allow him to attend to the
duties of his office. He referred to the
character of Mr. Ewing'a report to Con
gress, pointed to its blunders and stated the
fact that Mr. Ewing had himself made a
euppleroctital report admitting an error of
half a million of dollars. lie next referred
to ihe proscriptions in the Post Office
Department by Mr Granger he said that
Mr. Granger had carried on a brisk busi
ness in removals, averaging over one hun
dred per week, and always taking care to
appoint first rate Whigs, and very often the
very worst men he could select. lie said
it was found towards the close of the ces
sion that Mr. Granger was calling on Con
gress for nearly half a million of dollars,
to get this department out of debt; nobody
at Washington was surprised at all who
knew how busily employed the Postmaster
General had been in the "glorious" work
of reforming postmasters and clerks, and
noon? was astonished to hear that his
Department was deranged aud in debt.
He believed it was notorious that Mr.
Granger had hot spared time from his daily
business of deciding the claims of applicants
for office, to make settlements with those
postmasters removed; he had understood,
and had no doubt nf the fact, that very
many of the potsmasters removed haJ
money in their hands, which they were
anxious to pay over, but Mr. Granger
could not find lime to receive it. He had
seen an advertisement of one of them in
the papers, notifying Mr. Granger that he
had a considerable sum of public money,
and requesting him to relieve him of it.
It was not strange, said Mr. N. with such
a Postmaster General, the Department
should be in debt, tnd that it should be
quartered upon the Treasury.
Mr. N. said he should not pursue the
subject of proscription through the other
Departmenss hw regarded it now as fully
settled by the practice of the party in
power, that the officers of the country are
regarded by them as spoils to be fought
for in elections.
Mr. N. next referred to the clamor
which was raised in the Presidential elec
tion on the subject of extravagance in the
expenditures. He said, no one present
could have forgotten how economical the
whig orators promised to be when they get
into power. They denounced the waste
fulness of Mr. Van Buren, and promised
great retrenchment; all would remember
how industriously the misrepresentations
of Mr. Ogle as to the White House had
been circulated; he would not speak harsh
ly of Mr. Ogle as he was dead but his
inventory of the royal splendor of the pal
ace was fresh in the minds of all. Well,
said Mr. N. he had been in the White
House and his whig friends might be sur
prised to be told that all the splendid furni
ture was still there there were the look
ing glasses "as big as a poor man's planta
tion," there were the gorgeous curtains,
the candelahras, the chandelier?, &, above
all, there were those famous 'gold spoons,
all, all were still there in the use of the
whig President but that was not all; he
said that six thousand dollars had been ex
pended since the whigs came into power
to add to ihe furniture of the While House.
W ho, said Mr. N. did not suppose, during
the canvass, that those evidences of royal
extravagance and splendor would be 'pro
scribed' by the economical whins; but not
so; they were still in the While House, &
there, they would remain.
Mr. N. said, it would be remembered
that the whig orators had relied upon the.
gross amount of the annual expenditures to
sustain the charge of extravagance ajrainst
Mr. Van Btiten. They had promised to
bring ilowu these amounts by vast re
trenchments to the standard of the "econo
.mical" administration of John Q. Adams.
Thev contended that fifteen millions of
dollars, annually, would be enough for
them when they got into power. Well,
said Mr. N. we can now bring these pro
mises to the test of experience. Provis
ions for the expenses of the year have been
made, and instead of fifteen, we find them
very near thirty millions for the first year
of whig economy. This, said lie, is an
increase of nearly eiht million over the
expenditures of the lasi year of Mr. Van
Burcn's administration, and nearly double
the amount which we were promised
would be sufficient. The whigs had pro
fessed to be much in favor of "low taxes
and high wages" we had already the
proof of their love of "low taxes" in the
new Tariff bill, which has been so ably
dissected to-day, and w e had no doubt, that
we should find their profession in favor of
"high Wages" equally fallacious. He
should be greatly disappointed if the taxes
were not raised still higher, and the ex
penditures swelled still farther in the fu
ture policy of the pariy, it Cap!. Iyler did
not head them.
Mr. N. said, that he would not pursue
the subject of broken promises further, as
he knew he was violating an arrangement
of the Committee. He would be glad,
however, to say something in defence of
Captain Tyler.
(The cries of "go on," "go op." were
again renewed with great warmth.)
Well then, said Mr. N. 1 will "go on"
a few moments longer, and trust the com
mittee will pardon me. He said, that it
was clear that Captain Tyler was not 'head
ed,' but he was greaily mistaken if anoth
er celebrated Captain was not. If the
whigs were correct in attiibuting their late
disastrous defeats to Captain Tyler's ve
toes, then we must admit that he is an ex
ceeding great Captain. Hut the whigs
who entertain such opinions, do Mr. Ty
ler too much credit. As much as Mr. N
approved and applauded the two vetoes, he
could not admit that they were the main
cause of our late astounding victories. He
attributed these victories to the effect pro
duced upon the public mind by the system
of measures adopted at the extra session.
Mr. N. said, he had heard some surprise
expressed at the fact, that in the late elec
tions there was a great falling off in whig
votes, whilst there was but a small increase
of the Democratic votes over those of lasi J
rtovemoer. J ne wings seemeu to ne su.
prised that so very many of their friends
were absent from the polls at the Jate elec
tions. He said, it was true, that great
numbers of them did come up missing at
the late election, and he should be as much
surprised, if every man of them were ever
again heard of he did not believe that
they had ever lived except in the shape of
Pipe Layers, and he had no idea that they
could ever be found so long as the elec
tions were conducted with any thing like
honesty. Pipelaying had, no doubt, turn
ed out to be a very expensive business. It
certainly had been carried on very exten
sively, and he had believed for some time,
that if all the illegal votes could have been
purged in the Presidential election, that
Mr. Van Buren would now be the Presi
dent. But as things had turned out, the
Pipe Layers had got their reward, whilst
their employers had reaped nothing but
disappointment and exposure. .
Mr. N. said he would not trespass long
er on the patience of his friends; he begged
pardon of the committee of arrangements
for having violated their wishes, in saying
a few words in compliance with the call of
his friends, lie would lender a sentiment,
which he was sure would meet a hearty
response from all present. It was
The Federal Constitution!: As it was
made by tVashinglon and Madison as it
was expounded by Jefferson and Jack
son; not as it would be made and ex
pounded by a Congressional caucus dicta
tor. From the Alecklenburg'Jeffersonian.
DEMOCRATIC STATE CONVENTION.
We mentioned in a brief paragraph in
our last week's paper, thai the Democratic
State Central Committee had issued a
Card, calling a Convention of our party to
meet in Raleigh on the 10th January next,
to norninue a candidate for Governor, and
to adopt such, other measures of organiza
tion as will prepare us for the conflict in
North Carolina next summer.
The article counter to this project, which
appeared in our paper of the 2nd inst.,
was prompted not only by our own views
on the subject, but also by the expressed
sentiments of a large number of our most
intelligent aud influential political friends in
this section of ihe State. It was intended,
however, merely to throw out suggestions
for the consideration of our party in other
portions of the Statu, and to ascertain the tr
views on the subject of a Convention
The call of the Central Committee sets
this inquiry at rest, and we now buckle on
our armor, and call upon our Democratic
friends in Western North Carolina to pre
pare for duty.
The Federalists in our State may bluster
and bonst of their strength, and the harmo
ny and firmness of tiier party : their
friends did ihe same previous to the late
elections in New York, Georgia, Maryland,
&c, and we now see how much Democra
cy need fear such artillery what lule
credit is due to Whig boasting. And we
are well satisfied, fro.o the lone of popular
sentiment in Western North Carolina ;
fro: the numerous and important defections
from Whigery that we hear of almost
every day, that union and concerted and
vigorous action on ihe part of the Demo
cracy, arc alone needed to redeem our
State from the sway of Federalism. Why
should it be otherwise, when State after
Siatp, whoso citizens were even more
enthusiastically wed to conquering Whige
ry in 1810 than our own, are deserting ihe
standard of ihe piebald faction, and ranging
themselves under the spotless banner of
Jeffersonian Democracy ? North Caro
lina is Democratic by an overwhelming
majority, when a fair expression of the
political opinions of her voters can be had.
This our opponents know; and hence iheir
efforts at humbugery and false issues
hence their party drill and secret clubs to
spread false charges and mislead the igno
rant and unthinking. They are organized
like a band of well-disciplined soldiers
We must meet them by organization, by
concert of action, and now is the time to
commence the work.
We call upon our friends in the Western
Counties to prepare for the conflict. Let
us have a full representation in the Con
vention at Raleigh on ihe 10th January.
Every County should be represented.
Look at our opponents : they are active
and persevering ever ready to give a few
ilavs and suffer a little etnense far th nd-
j vancement of their bad cause : and cannot
we, who are "engaged in a good and glori
ous work, emulate their example in these
particulars I We should remember that
"eternal vigilance is the price of liberty,"
and that no people can be free long, who
entrust the guardianship of their rights and
liberties in unfaithful or incompetent
hands. -
Up, then, Democrats ! call public
meetings in every County without delay,
and appoint Delegates who will go to
Kaleigh to represent you. If none can be
got to go who are able to bear the expense,
let the necessary sums to carry them to the
Convention and home again be raised by
contributions ; by all means, let us have a
full Convention to speak the voice of the
whole Slate.
w Since the above was in type, we received
in the Raleigh Standard of Wednesday,
last, the following notice:
"State Democratic Convention. The
Secretary to ihe laie Central Committee
of the Democratic Party of North Carolina,
having contersed with many of the most
prominent individuals in our ranks, called
a Convention, to meet in Raleigh, on the
10th of January ensuing. Since the call
of the said Convention, he has conversed
with others, who differ in regard to the
place at which the Convention shall meet.
He has requested us to withdraw said
notice, and slate that when the place shall
have been designated, he will give notice
thereof."
The location of the Convention being
ihus unsettled, we would beg respectfully
to urge upon our eastern friends the impor
tance of bringing it farther Wjest than Ra
leigh say at Salisbury. The reasons in
favor of this location are numerous, and
must be too obvious to need discus-
Foit the Lincoln Republican.
TO EPISCOPOS.
Dear Sir :
Some weeks ago you pub
lished an article in the Republican which !
I intended to notice before riow, but cir
cumstances, beyond my control, prevented
me. You say, in that article, "There is
one writer (who flourished in the fourth,
and in ihe 1st part of the 5th century)
who . is frequently quoted as favoring
Presbyterian ordination ; but if the wri
tings of St. Jerome be examined, he will
be found an advocate for Episcopacy."
You then quote one or two passages upon
which you seem to rely as proof of your
assertion. Now, sir, Jerome is remarka
bly explicit on this point; lie gives his
opinion clearly and fully about Episcopa
cy. Hear his language, "Let us diligent
ly attend to the words of the Apostle, say
ing that thou ma est ordain Elders in
every city, as I have appointed thee.
Who, discoursing in what follows, what
sort of Presbyters ate to be ordained saith,
if any one be blameless, the husband of
one wife, &c, afterwords adds: "For a
Bishop must be blameless, as the steward
of God ; a Presbyter, therefore, is the
same as a Bishop ; and before there were,
by the devil's instinct, parlies in religion,
and it was said among the people, I am of
Paul, and 1 of A polios, and 1 of Cephas,
the Churches were governed by the com
mon council of Presbyters." iov there
is no reason to suppose, as you have done,
that this change took place in the govern
ment of the Church by Bishops instead
of Presbyters, when this dispute first
arose at Corinth. Jerome does not say it
did; and as proof that he did not mean it
did, he quotes scripture, that was written
after the first Epistle to the Corinthians, to
prove the identity of Presbyters and Bish
ops in the Apostolic Church. The whole
tenor of Jerome's remarks, on this point,
forbids your construction of language.
Jerome's, object is to show that among ihe
ancients, the Apostles and primitive chris
tians, Presbyters and Bishops were the
same; but you make him say, that among
the ancients, they were distinguished,
Bishops were superior. His meaning
evidently is, that this change was made
after the Apostles' days. Jerome says a
gain -'If any suppose, that it is merely
our opinion, and not that of the Scriptures,
that Bishops and Presbyters are the same,
j let him read the words of the Apostles to
the Philippians, Paul and Timothy, the
servants of Jesus Christ, to all the taints
in Christ Jesus, that are at Philippi, with
the Bishops and Deacons. Philippi is a
city of Macedonia; and certainly in one
city there' could not be more than one
Bishop, as they are now styled. He says
again "It is written in the Acts of the
Apostles, that when the Apostle came to
Miletus, he sent to Ephesus and called
the Presbytetj of that Church, to whom,
among other things, he said, "Take heed
to yourselves and to all the flock, over
whom the Holy Ghost hath made you
Bishops." Here observe di'igently (he
says) that calling together the Presbyler3
of one rity, Ephesus, he afterards styles
the same persons Bishops. Tkese things
I have written to show, he says, that
among the ancients Presbyters ard Bishops
were the same. "But by little and little,
that all the seeds of dissension might be
plucked up, the whole care was devolved
on one." As, therefor?,; the Presbyters
know, that by the custom of the Church,
they are subject to him, who is their
President, bo let Bishops know that tViey
are above Presbyters, more by the custom
of the Church, than by the true dispensa
tion of Christ." He denies that Deacons
are an order of Ministers altogether. He
says "Who can endure it, that a Minister
of tables and widows, should proudly
exalt himself above those, at whose pray
ers the body and blood of Christ is made."
Here Jerome teaches that Deacons were
appointed to attend to the secular matters
of the Church, and not to preach the gos
pel. Such, sir, are some of the sentiments
of Jerome on the subject of Episcopacy.
Do you say that he here advocates Episco
picy ? He does indeed advocate an Epis
copacy ; but it is an Episcopacy devised
and brought in by man, to remedy schism.
And like many other man inventions, it
has been a most prolific source of schism ;
ever since its introduction into the Church,
it has been a bone of contention. What a
lesson has God taught the Church in this
instance ? The very remedy has fed and
nourished the disease ; the antidote has
become the poison.
Several distinguished Episcopalians have
frankly admitted that Jerome taught the
identity of Presbyters and Bishops in an
cient times, Apostolic times, and that
BL-hops, as now styled, came in after
wards. . Bilson,. . Willel, Dr. Saravia,
Jewel, Morton and Whitaker, all admit
ted it. With what grace can Episcopos,
in the face of it all, assert that Jerome is
an advocate of Episcopacy ?
Yrou say again, Sir, "Here then we
have the united testimony of the histo
rians of the Church for the first four hun
dred years, that the christian Church in
Europe, &c. was governed by three orders
of Ministers." This assertion is truly
amazing!!! I do not suppose you will
find many, even of the most, rash and
bigotted of your sect, who will go as far
as this. The great Chillingworth has
learned to speak much more modestly and
cautiously on this point than Episcopos,
it seems. He says, "I, for my part after
a long and (as I verily hope and believe)
impartial search after the true way of
eternal happiness, do profess plainly, that
I cannot find any rest for the sole of my
feet but upon this rock only, viz : the
Scripture. I see plainly and with my
own eyes Popes against Popes; Councils
against Councils; some fathers against
others; the same fathers against (hem
selves ; the consent of the fathers of one
age against the consent of the fathers of
another age." Dr. Sherlock jays "the
fathers many times contradict themselves
and each other." But Episcopos says,
"We have iheir united testimony for four
hundred years. Now, sir, who is cmitled
to our confidence, Chillingworth and
Slieilock, or Episcopos? How do they
read so differently in the same books and
writings? Will Episcopos explain this
point You find the fathers all united;
Chillingworth finds them divided. How
is it !
You say again, "If the Bishops owed
their distinction to their ambition, would
we not have some evidence left us on the
pages of history cf their usurpation !
Here "you press the idea that we have no
record in history of any complaints of the
usurpation of Bishops. Your Bishop,
before you, did the S3inc thing ; he boldly
asserted that there was not a syllable of
any complaint of aggressions by ' the
Bishops any where to be found. These
asseriions are wonderful, coming as they
do, from the mouths of Christian Minis
ters. That impartial historian. Dr. Mo
shtim, says, speaking of the arrogance
and ambition of the Bishops of the 3rd
century. "This is testified in such ample
manner, by the repealed complaints of
many of the most respectable writers of
the age, that truth will not permit us to
spread the veil, which we would other
wise be desirous, to cast over such enormi
ties of an order so sacred." Is there no com
plaints here ! How have you gotten over
this plain passage of history ? Is the
historians entitled to no credit!
Hermas says, "As for those, who had
their rods green, but yet cleft ; they are
such as were always faithful and good ;
but they had some envy and strife amongst
themselves concerning dignity and pre
eminence.' -
Cyprian says . of one, who had been
made Bishop, "Instead of using violence,
as a certain person in this case hath done,
to be made a Bishop, he suffered violence,
&c." He says again, "Unless you can
think him a Bishop, who, when another
was ordained by sixteen of his brother
Bishops, would obtrude upon the Church
a spurious and foreign Bishop ordained by
a parcel of renegadoes and deserters ; and
that by canvassing anJ intriguing for it.'
Is there nothing like ambition and usurpa
tion recorded here by uypnan r Uregory ,
Nazianzen says, "These conveyors of the
Holy Ghost, these preachers of peace to
all men, grew bitterly . outrageous and
clamorous against one another in the midst
of the Church, mutually accusing each
other, leaping about as if they had been
mad, under the furious impulse of lust of
power and dominion. This was not the
effect of piety, but of a contention for
thrones." "Would to God there was nr
prelacy ; no prerogative of place ; no
tyrannical privileges ; that by virtue alone
we might be distinguished." Now, sir.
with these facts before yon how can you
so repeatedly and so positively assert, that
no such facts exist. This is what we have
not yet been able to explain satisfactorily
to ourselves. We cannot see hotr chris
tian men can conscientiously make such
statements ; but we forbear, hoping that
you may dear up the matter.
. PRESBUTEROS.
For tub; Lincoln Republican.
REPLY TO EPISCOPOS.
No. VI.
Mr. Willia-hson;
In pursuance of our
design we are now to investigate the claims
of high Churchmen to the support of the
first and purest ages of Christianity.
St. Barnabas, StT Clement, Ilermas, St.
Ignatius, and St. Polycarp who immediate
ly succeeded the apostles and wrote previ
ously to the time of Justine Martin are cal
led Apostolical Fathers; and those who
succeeded them beginning with Papias and
Justin Martin down, we suppose, till about
the fourth century were called Primitive
Fathers. How ever, we are not able to say
what year the title was withheld, nor
whether all who wrote in favor of Christi
anity within the prescribed lime were cal
led Fathers.
Let it be borne in mind that the doctrir.o
of prelatists is, that Christ instituted an or
der of ministers in the Church superior to
the order of presbyters, originally called
apostles, but subsequently bishops, and
that these are invested with the exclu
sive right of ordination and government.
We have seen that the word bishop and
presbyter are used interchangeably for the
same officer in the Church. This is admit
ted by the most learned high Churchmen
themselves.. Still they maintain that the
Church received prelacy from the nand of
Christ and that it is of divine right. To
prove this they go to antiquity, and allege
that the Church, practiced this form of go
vernment "for ff teen hundred yearn" that
"all antiquity is in its favor. The pro
cess of argument is to begin with the fourth
or third century, and proceed up to the
time of the apostles. But in this process
the whole force of their reasoning denendi
upon the erroneous assumption . that the.
arutpK nf ihe ministrv were original! v whnt
they find them in the fourth century. In
opposition we allege that nothing like En
glish prelacy was known in the Church for
at least two centuries after the apoostles.'
1. We find during the period mention
ed, that the terms bishop and presbyter
were used in the same sense in which they
were employed in the apostolic age.
In the epistle of Clemens Ho man us, we
have the following: "The apostles going