Virginia Argus. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1796-1816, 1804-05-30

continued invioate Our revolution did NOT abo-
hsh the prO,essorship5 OF WIN & Mary College
il has been changed frco' College 70 an Unver.
siry. and cid professorsh1s have been pus down
And yet by this change, as great as any which
has taken place in III church it hes been held in
'he court OF appeals ,haJ thc college isa9' dissolved
Il has been said THAI the pee,cnsions of the
church are Inconsistent wiIh tine BIZ Of Rig5ts.
Let the art,cle be produced The 10Th article Of
the Bin Of Rights relates not to tribor1i but S6-
ritual matters: 10 matters of firth and conscience
NOT OF b"oter:y. The general phrase usel in this
article iSnOt TO be taken in its utnoStex' The
Court of Appeals has decided in a case Common
ly called the case of county lcvies) that sensrsl
words used for some one purpose should not ap-
ply 70 all Other particnlar caSes.-rhe 9TH se{tion
OF the Bill OF Rights denies 10 all persons par i
GUAR privileges and ernolumeuts. Eur the rights
of the church do not come under either Of those
general descriptions of political favor They are
not fripi.eges, because they do nor confer on the
church right TO do, an Immunity from doing
any thing. They are not enlolgweafs because
they are not profit confined to particular persons.
1t Is admitted tina, a salary may be an snolnment,
but then it would require some new act Of the 20.
vernnent to confer it: whereas these occlesas-
tical rights have been already vested. Mr. Call
also asserted That this section applied to officers of
government only becauset says nothing, about
religion and because this Interpretation is sup
ported by the very best authority; the cotempo.
the very same convention, which had formed the
Bill of Rights.
From this series OF statements, Mr.. Cal con
Guided, that the nights were originally eested i'm the
church and that there was nothing in the &C; of
1901, nothing IN the reoo!p.ioT, nothing in the BIZ
Of Rights, which could drvest them. But even if
they did, this property would nor revert TO the
public: the pubiic would haze no right to consis
cate and sell II
Here Mr Call produced some English autho.
rites TO prove, that tins; does not escheas 20 the
crown. His conclusion was, that the property
would notIevert TO the public, but to the original
sellers
AS if our own system of jurisprudence would
not justify this violation OF church property, pre-
cedents have been sought for in other countries TO
sanction dhlsproceedirg. The ht,oraev General
at the discussion OF this case before former curt
introduced the faJe of the ecciesiasrical property
III France. with all the ressomings which have
been assigned by it's ablest advocate Nc Intosh,
TO justify It's conHscaton. If Nc. Intosde Oe re-
lied on authority, it would be sufficient 70
rebut 1t By the counter opinion oe Cnlonre. Eur
even from the positions al Nc Irtosh, no argu-
ments can be ga,hered TO ccun;e1ece the confs-
carton oF the Glebe lands in this state. His lsc
position IS, thai priesthood have only the usu-
frutt of the property without the right OF aleua-
lion; and that therefore the state has q right 10
conhscate it wi nout any injustice to the usufruc-
tuares. But. says Mr. Call is rot rsuculit it.
self property9 Is not lease properly Even fit
were otherwise, the position would rot be apDli-
cable to cur ecciesias.ical property; because in
france the property was given TO the o-iect5cO6
but mere il was given the eLiSiors society FOR
us own benefit Els %Gd. position is, that a sa-
larry in money NAV be taken away, why not then
land, il the OF land be substituted fora salary
IN money? This may be true. said Mr.. Gail but
IL does not apply. i may be just to'tale @ways
salary, but nos to take away properly already
purchased ana vested YET, however accurate
the rsasonings of Ny. Nc Intosh may hive been
on this bje4, yhe pa-ticularcaset to which ne sp
plies there. isvery different from our own. 1sr. In
trance ne asserts the properly was conferred by
the king; Calonne 2scribes IL TO privatcocn
tons But here all the Globes were not given by
the state, or individuals; bus most Of then1 were
acquired by the parishes 2dly nc Intoch was
speal;ing Of the powers OF convention Of the
people, who were called upon to form; cons:itu-
zion: here the question rea;cs TO she powers os
an ordinory legislature, AGING Under acOns,itut
on already formed. Surely the legislature, " ouli
have no power revoSc = gram 70 a. individual
for services: and where is the difference between
rewarding al individual and society for its ser
vices? The church was supposed 20 be 4 useful
society grant Of lands was made it. How
can the legislature then revoke thus grant; Can
IT resume the endowment Of VIM AVID Mary Col
le2e II they nave power in one casc they have it
in Others 31ly. Nc In5osh has pleaded the ext
sency OF the ,inies IN Justification Of the conGscat-
Ell property in Frarce. hut here what does the le.
gislature perform Without n single fault being
laid 70 tho church without the smallest inLeriai.
fcaticu being allowed to "; without even the
plausible pretext of policy ito property is TO
be swept away.
So far from the position being true, thar the
rig5fs of the church contrary to ,he Bill Of
Rights, it may De coutended, that thisre5eaiispaw
Is itself unconstitutional II IS contrary 70 the
Sd art Of the Bill Of Rights ard 10 the 10Th sec
art l. OF the federal constitution.--The first OF
these declares. that government. is or ought n
be. IN ,itnled for the common benefit, proretio1
and security Of tie people," &c. Now whar Kind
OF Irotefon security is that, where bv;Ucfl
property NAV be aid bold os bv the icgieiatuYc ;
whel' he rights that arc ues'cF in any society
NAV Is. completely destroyed without any inder
mica on. without s;n glc fault. without any plea
ofpubic necessity at IS declared in the 5eaion
OF the federal constitution above referred to "a.
mong any other things) that ono state shall
pass any e. Pos, fdcf2 law" Can any at he a
more opeu violation Of this clause OF the consti
tuition tnan the az Of 1907 The legislature f,si
vests certain rights in the church. and gftergayIs
passes Jaw, which is intended 70 oycrset b these
rights. lie hoped that the court wou,d ayes,
he "a. ttl... Ia