New-York tribune., 1841-11-23
THE TRIB N E.
For The Tribune.
The School No. il.

table, why discuss it at all ?" 7'ribune.
Nov large body of our citizens, taxed and CON
,lbuting to an institution Cor general imposes.
have an equal right to enjoy on equal terms I'm
your phrase, on ground a share of the bene-
fts Of such institution This, if not the same with
yosrs. is surely position no less iadispufabIe-
Why then DENY n share Of the School Fund TO the
Catholics of New-York2 When yen, sir or the
advocates of the School System, have assigned
u,, reason for this denial, shall account tor the
discussion. mistakenly Though it is ascri5ed to
Cato. Between admitting those fine maxins in
the abstract and observing them IN practice, there
Il. YOU must be aware, wide difference The
Common School monopolists would subscribe to
yonr constitutional truism without dcnur 1t is
another thing when It's operation threatens AFFECT
their interests. But, without discussing u prin-
ciplc, how can its application be asserted The
subject Of my letter, however, was not " Equal
Rights, much less was it Religious liberation.
leave these to the hypocritcs of both whose loud
professions are always in an inverse ratio to their
respect for liberty or religion. What did discuss
was the prejudice which scares away popular con-
sleration from the claims of the Catholics And
your strange misapprehension Certainly in you un-
intentionally shows the prevalence of this prejudice
and the expcdicncy of removing it before proceed
ing to the main question. Accordingly by u mode
Of argument which Burke called the best weapon
against Folly in authority, showed the absurdity
Of impulng to the Catholics of the present the
practices or propensties of those of remote and
barbarous times-tnat with equal reason our coins
might be held equivalent to those of that day of
tho same denomination, and the Trustees Of the
Common Schools expect still to buy sheep for
shilling.
Only fool would sat TO reasoning with folly and
insanity; and extreme fear and prejudice are not
mere rational. While our good, easy people can
be made to believe that Cathohc ascendency and
Pavai dominion are the aim and the inevitable
effect of the claHl in question, it is perfectly idle to
talk of reason or right The rights OF tho Catho-
lies III this matter have been already demonstrated
by public speaking and wiring but this, TO the
mass OF the community To have been not
only LOST, bul to have made Confusion con-
touud,d2' Why The voice of Law, it has been
Observed is lost amid the din of Arms. Even 50
is the voice of Reason and Justice drowned by the
cymbas Of the priests of Faction and Bigory.
First allay this false alarr,," and the public
mind will then be open 10 truth-accessble TO ar
sument Such, MIR. L was the plan and the pur-
pose Of Caio's preliminary letter. have dwet SO
uuch on explaining it, in hope of your cooperation.
Now permit me to conclude with word the
conduct Of Bishop Hughes. the other staple of the
monopolis's Ia my next, the rights and the rea-
sons Of the Catholics claim.
\ Bishop, it is said should not exhort his flock
to due exercise Of their political rights, even in de-
fence Of their spiritual interests. Why Is he
not (in this country citizen entrusted with the
same rights, owing like responsibilities with others
equally Interested in the common veal or wo?
By what authority then, reduce our clergymen 10
thc political level of slaves Moreover. are they
| lot pre- emincntly fitted to serve the Republic =
Where Is the ayman who can present equal quail
icaons for a statesman, that is, politician in the
proser and noble sense Certainly none whe
present equal guarantees tor integrity intelligence
and patriotism. The history of clerical statesmen
iasiifes at least generally, this observation and
ihedebatngs the Bishop question on the School
Fund affair afford striking instancc-discourses
where not only frecmen may learn their rights, but
Foidcars tn il duties AID parties their best poll
cy. A Clergyman Is Precluded by his calling from
POLITICAL Office or emelument. This disability is
The b 81 possible security for dsintercsedness aud
Independence Of conduct. The clercymans inter-
estis the prevalence OF COED laws and of order
that of he tract G poitician IS the reverse, who
fares best in troubled waters and, like the cormo-
Rant sreys latest ON the field of destruction. The
. clergyman. in "a word, is by professional necessity
+ $50 to spcull) man OF morality and moderation
, by education scholar; by office and habiiude
: phitan,hropist Is it wise to preclude such men
Gom our public affairs, while brawling wretches.
4 without knowledge or principle, are encouraged to
Tai,c their venai voices and permitted 10 deter
aiRe, as seit-liness ignorance may suggest, the
veghtiest interest OF tsc State g But the clcr-
( lyman Especially the CathoHc) yields undue in
aaencc So does the dcnlasogue. Further II
the measure be sOed-and the chances we have
@en are innumcrabiy for the clergyman s--the
,rester his influence the better. But politics is
ioi the proper business of priest The same
A5.is Of the physician, the lawyer-nay. # every
private rnaa in the community who has any basi-
hess. Politics is the business of no man, bscauss
( Ms or ought to be, the business OF every man.-
At all events Catholic ciergymen are ignorant of
tie world and this is one objection 10 their intiu-
t1ce ia the education OF our youth. If thus igno-
aai, how can their competition for political iniu.
sace become so formidable YOU affect TO appre
bend As to ,Acir mode OF educating, the obiec-
'@s are equally consistent. 1t is threadbare
Charge that Priests desire TO keep the children of
DER people in darkness-or, in the laconic phrase
Of certni,, Ia, divine who would raise some nap
@ihe expression, that they teach them isno-
nhceN Ter now when q Priest comes forward 70