in the colonies, and nurtured it with their blood. They kindled the fire of freedom in the hearts of the American people, and when the time came to strike the blow they were not found wanting. Side by side with their American brothers they marched to death. Their blood flowed in one tide on the same field; they endured the same hardships, suffered the same privations; and whether in the starving camp, or on the toilsome march, stood together until the goal was won. You cannot tell their graves apart. They are mingled in death as they were mingled in life. The New-England Puritan and the Irish-Catholic sleep in the same trenches on the Revolutionary battle fields. This is what American records tell us, and they speak the truth. All the sophistry, logic, and contortion of facts, which the Scotch can use, cannot gainsay this. It is time the absurdity of their pretensions should be made manifest to the world. So rugged and callous are their consciences, that, in order to minister to their self-esteem, they hesitate not to steal from Ireland, any name that becomes good or great. To accomplish this, they will stop at no falsehood, however egregious. But, while they think they are lions, they are only daws in borrowed feathers. New York. WM. COLLINS. God Must Have His Place. In our last article, we said that Art, too, had lost her vocation. And how is it with politics? Has God His place there? Has religion any influence there? Or, does politics claim and exercise independence of God and religion? What is the relation of politics with the eternal principles of justice? Through politics men are struggling for the rights of men: do they take into account the rights of God, or do they leave Him and His rights out altogether? Do religious principles rule political principles? Why ask the question? Politics claim total separation from religion; or, if men do bring God into politics, or their political theories, it is too often only to use His name as the sanction of injustice. Is not this the case, even in our own country? Is not principle altogether disappearing from our politics? When appeal is made to the principle, is it not the veriest mockery? Is not the legislature of the "best government the world ever saw" a libel on law? Are not legislators and politicians, in the main, visionaries, fanatics, or knaves? Is not venality the very soul and life of our politics? Is not a price set upon principle? Is not a deadly moral miasma rising out of the corruptions of politics and spreading over the entire country? No one can deny it. No one can close his eyes to the appalling fact. And men, their faces white with fear, are looking towards the future, and listening for the dread step of anarchy that waits on the frontiers of nations till the barriers of law are down, then comes and sounds the tocsin of their doom. Politics cannot save us. The corrupt cannot regenerate the corrupt. Try as you may, by every law and measure, to ameliorate the social condition of a people, unless religion has the influence which she ought to have, your amelioration is a farce and a falsehood. Only religion can reach the heart of a people. Politics may affect the surface of society; religion alone goes deeper than the surface. And that nation which eschews religious principles from politics is near to ruin. Did we not, then, speak rightly when we said that our civilization should kneel down and kiss the cross? New Orleans Morning Star. The Land of Dreams. Он, say, hath the dome, that enshrined our youth, The palace of Hope and Peace and Truth, Alas, for the joys of those morning gleams! Oh, let us back to the land of dreams, The whirl and din from the mouths of men Forum and market, and voice and pen, We're waifs and strays for a pessimist's themes Whom the world can never miss : Oh, let us back to the land of dreams, For the land of dreams gives bliss! A Souvenir of M. Dupont. IN the month of August, 1862, the carriage entrance of M. Dupont's residence was opened to admit a small handcart, on which was stretched a poor woman. The day before, this unfortunate mother of five children, had such a terrible fall, and one of her legs was in such a condition, that the attending physician came to the conclusion that, there was an indispensable necessity that she should have at least six weeks' absolute.rest. Overcome with grief she said to a neighbor: "Carry me to M. Dupont's, and I will be cured." As they were coming into the yard, I happened to be with the man of God, who invited me to pray with him for the cure of this unfortunate woman. After the very first unction, the patient began to cry out: "I am cured!" M. Dupont asked her twice to kneel and thank the Holy Face for the favor she had just received; but she was so overjoyed that she heard nothing. She walked with frenzied rapidity through the room exclaiming, in a loud tone of voice," But I am cured! I told you I would be cured.' At last she left, forgetting to salute the persons who were present, and walking with a rapid gait through the streets, she went to announce the glad tidings to her husband. to me: M. Dupont did not forget the thanksgiving, and, at his suggestion, we recited the Te Deum. As I was about to retire, the Holy Man said "That is the second person to-day whom I have seen in such a state of joy. This morning a gentleman called here; he was no sooner cured, than he left precipitately, carrying off my hat for his; however, it is easy to see that their shapes are entirely different. I hope that when this gentleman will have discovered his error he will bring back my hat, and we will then take the time to recite a hymn of thanksgiving.' From the French of the Annals. A WITNESS. WOMAN'S BRAVERY.—In all ages courage on the battle field has been the theme of orators and poets, yet the courage of the warrior is not only a common and variable quality, but has often been surpassed by that displayed by women. Native valor, too, is sometimes inferior to that which is acquired. Frederick the Great ran like a coward out of his first battle. Flying on the wings of fear, he went a great distance from the field, and coming to one of his own strongholds reported that his army was destroyed. What was his surprise and mortification to learn that his men had gained a great victory. He never forgot the lesson taught and ever afterwards was conspicuous for steady courage in action. Many instances might be given of soldiers in the last war, who in their first fight were "lily-livered," but who afterwards faced with. dauntless front the gleaming steel; and, on the other hand, of some who were lion-hearted till taught by the pain of a wound the perils of a battle, and who then became notable cowards. Bravery in action, though more admired, is really not as great as that displayed in passive suffering. The woman who sticks to her post in the pestilential chamber is far braver than Alexander charging at the head of his cavalry. The Boston Montgomery Guards—1837. CAUSE GIVEN FOR THEIR FORMATION GROSSLY INSULTED SKETCH THE 12th day of September, 1837, was not a red-letter day for Boston, but one of crimson shame. The Montgomery Guards, Capt. Baxter, a native of the town, commanding them; the rank and file being principally American-born sons of Irishmen, and the others all naturalized citizens, were on that day subjected to the grossest insults, most aggravating assaults and injuries to their persons and soldierly instincts. A cowardly, vicious mob pelted them on the Common with all sorts of missiles, yelled the most opprobrious epithets at them, threw obstacles to their movements, surged them into humiliating disorder, tore down their marquee, and followed them through the streets with a continuance of similar hooting, assault and injury, until the Guards reached the shelter of their armory, near Faneuil Hall. The At the subsequent jury trial of these villanous assailants, it is no wonder that Judge Thacher, who sat in judgment on the case, characterized them as representatives of a "brutish mob," whose offence was so rank as to compel him to impose on them the extreme penalty of the law. The authorities of the state, with Gov. Edward Everett at their head, exhibited in various ways their abhorrence of such conduct, and spoke of their mortification in issued orders for stringent inquiry in relation to the misconduct of some of the troops who were on the Common that September day for inspection and review, as were the Montgomery Guards, in compliance with law and the command issued from the Adjutant-General's office of the state. local newspapers, in deprecating the assault on the Irish-American company, praised its members for their heroic patience and soldierly obedience in refraining from striking back at their persecutors, and thereby sparing the city from being the scene of a most bloody riot; but the Salem Advertiser, I find, gave freer vent in scathing sarcasm on the prevailing spirit in Boston, of which it said: "Verily, it is the seat of law, order, and refinement.' Our Mayor then was Hon. Samuel A. Eliot, but I find no published papers concerning any action taken by the Municipal officers, other than that of Constables Tallant, Pratt, and associates, to bring the members of the mobocracy to justice. But from the known character of Mayor Eliot, there is no question but what he felt deeply the humiliation of the occasion, and put forward, and with quiet intensity, all the means in his power to make the wrong right, and visit upon the rioters, whose misdeeds were so disgraceful to the whole city and all its citizens, the penalty their rascality earned for them. The first announcement I find, in my researches of the formation of the Montgomery Guards, appears in the Boston Daily Atlas of July 4th, 1837, in which the circumstance is noted that a new company, uniformed, is "added to the militia establishment of the city." The new corps had most appropriately assumed the title of the "Mont gomery Guards :" a name that should be held in the dearest veneration by every true American, because it was symbolic of the loftiest courage and patriotic sacrifice in the holy cause of the united colonies. "It seems," says the 1837 writer, "to be an event worthy of passing notice, and one to be rejoiced in by all lovers of good order. Recent events have shown us how invaluable the services of such corps are, and thereby we are taught the good policy of encouraging and fostering every attempt that may be made to increase the efficiency and improve the military education of the citizen soldiers." The burning of the convent, and the disgraceful scenes attendant on that outrageous affair and the Broad-Street riot, together with the mutinous and disloyal conduct of some of the militia, later on in the year, showed the need of a good conservative force, organized under the military laws of the commonwealth, to counteract the rampant spirit of Know-Nothingism, everywhere manifesting itself against the Irishman. The writer in the Atlas was confident that the Montgomerys were now an integral part of the force to be relied upon for the preservation of law and order in the hour of trouble. "The name they assumed and the reputation of the race from which the members sprung, were to be looked upon without a doubt." Said the Atlas: "If they have blood in their veins the least congenial to Montgomery, there certainly could not be a more appropriate name for a company of soldiers, than that which this corps has chosen. Few men have possessed so fully the characteristics of a noble soldier and a perfect gentleman as Montgomery, and now, just one hundred years from the date of his birth, namely, 1737, they have done themselves honor in revering his memory. The Boston writer continues his article in the daily, from which I quote, concerning the Irish-American hero: "Born in the north of Ireland, although not of the titled gentry, his family were of the landed class and most respected in the land. He had seen service as a commissioned officer from the time he was eighteen. In 1775 he was residing on his estate on the banks of North River, New York State. His military career had been marked with intrepidity, and he was a popular officer in the service; nevertheless on going from this country to England he resigned his commission. He had determined that if he were to follow the profession of soldier, it would be in the cause of American liberty rather than of British tyranny." [But what cared the prėjudiced Boston bigots for his fellow-countrymen's claim for veneration of his name and memory?] "When Bunker-Hill battle was fought the American Congress was glad to avail itself of his experienced service and patriotism. He was commissioned brigadier-general, and served under Major-Gen. Schuyler in Northern New York. His series of active duties and victories won by him included the capture of the important fort of St. John and Montreal City. This was while Gen. Washington was at Cambridge, Mass., and subsequently had started Arnold from the Kennebec River across the wilderness of Canada, for coöperation with the Northern New York troops in the view of capturing Quebec. But Schuyler was sick sad news for Washington, because he could not undertake the Quebec movement. 'Gen. Wooster,' wrote Gen. Wash |