The New York herald. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1840-1920, 1844-06-24
TO THE PUBLIC.

| TO THE PUBLIC.
| AT a meeting of Catholic citizens of Philedel-
phia, held at the Cathedral on the evening of June
| 18th, 18f4--the Hon. ARCHIBALD RANDALL was
called TO the Chair, and William A. Stokes, was
appointed Secretary.
| On motion Of Dr. l.. G.. Nancrede, seconded by
Professor w. Il. Homer, twas
Resolved. That COMMITTEES Of five, including the Chair.
and Secretary be appointed to prepare an address in
Dr. Nancrede, Mr. Charles Repper, and DIR. F.
| >. Eckard, were named as members OF the Com
mittee.
JUNE 20, 1874.
AT an adjourned meeting, Mr.. Stokes, from the
COMMITTEES appointed at previous meeting, report,
| ed an address which was read, and on motion OF
Mr. Lewis Ryan, seconded by Mr.. d. Eagle, II was
unanimously
Resolved, That the address be approved adopted and
published.
Address OF the Catholic Laity Of Philadel-
u, Phia.
FELLOW CITrzENs:-The calamties which have
recently beialen us, are already known to you al
through the public papers, which have also made
you some what acquainted with their immediate oc'
cast on. 1t was thought proper by the Honorable
Court of Quarter Sessions, to direct the attention OF
the Grand Jury OF May Term, to these events, and
to request of them tull and accurate investigation
OF their cause; in consequence OF which, they ex-
amined number OF witnesses, and at length on the
10Th inst, made presenment, signed by seventeen
of their number.
We must confess our surprise at the avowal of
the Grand Jury, in the presentment that they ne
eessarily depended on Er parte evidence" in the
investigation of public facts regarding the comma
nifty at large, into which 1t was plainly their duty to
inquire most fully, as they were instructed by the
Court; and encouraged 10 do, with assurances OF
protection to all witnesses whose attendance might
be sought or offered
We conceive that it was their duty to hear the
evidence both sides, in regard to all facts con-
nected with the late Iiots and we regret that "e1
parte eudenCe" should have been received In mat
- liz ,,ta~ ,,arx. hi pftn 6of an
nor any particular charge had been laid before
them. Ns1
They seem to have assumed that one party were
rioters and the other the assailed and to have con
sequently, taken the evidence OF the latter, with
out summOning the others before them to hear
their accounts of the transaction, and thus, we are
not surprised. at the result OF their Investigations
Speaking of the causes which led to the riots, the
Grand Jury ascrlbe them
"To the efforts Of portion of the community to ex
cude the Bible from our Public Schools Tho Jury are
Of opinion that these Efforts in some measure gave rise to
the formation OF new party which called and held pub
lie meetings in the District Of Remington in the peaceful
of the sacred rights and privileges guaranteed TO
every citizen by the Constitution and laws OF our State
and Country These meetings rudey disturbed and
fired upon by band Of lawess irresponsible men,
Of whom had resided in country only for short
unoendng citizens led TO immediate retaliation and
was followed up by subsequent acts Of aggression in
violation and open defiance OF all law" ~ yid.
We regret that the Grand Jury had not the mora
courage to utter, in distinct terms. what they are
! now avoW ed and admitted to have meant. They
have, in the paragraph just quoted, without using
nation with an attempt to exclude the Bible from
| the public schools" and they have also, though
more guardedly, insinuated that they 8. have at
tempted to interfere with the sacred rights and
st.tution and Laws of our State" These charge.
are wmfownded. If the Grand Jury, on what IL
avOwed to have been " er plrte testimony came
to these conclusions, it was their duty to have pre-
nfAd nt yfad
| portion of the community" with specific charges
against them, to the end that they might be triet
and punished. If they did not come to these con
clusions, they have stated what they know, to be
both in the manner of its Investigations and conclu
sions, has gwen great reason for complaint, no
only to the $1,000 citizens whom they have con
demned without hearing, but to every man in thu
community who respects the laws and desires tina
Its administrators shall be both ,cise and pure.
In the name and in behalf of the Catholic com
munty, we explicitly deny that they have at am
time, or In any manner made any effort to ex
clude the Bible from the public schools" In the
never designed, desired, or attempted to excud,
the Bible from the schools. We have uniformly
contended, not only for ourselves, bur on behal
Of our Protestant and Jewish brethren, for the
fullest freedom Of conscience both for children anc
adults in schools or elsewhere.
We confidently refer to the letter OF the Righ
Reverend, the Bishop of Philadelphia to the Con
trolleIs of the Public Schools, dated Nth Novem
whose name he spoke, only asked the liberty o.
| using the version Of the Blole, approved Of anc
authorized IN their own communion. Speaking Of
the school regulations, he says
Among them (the regulations) | am informed is
that the teachers shall read and be read the Bi
ble by which it ia unders Iod the version published by
command Of King James TO this regulation we are orce'
view as authoritative version which is rejected by tn,
Church. 1t is not expected that should state in detail
the of this rejection shall only say that
persuaded that several books Of Divine Scripture
ed in that version, and the meaning of the original tex
prove either Position since do not ask you to adop
the Catholic version for general use but we feel war
ranted in claiming that our conscientious scrues to re
Directors Of the Public Schools have thought their duty
to provide Catholic children with the Catholic version
too much for US to expect the same measure Of JUS
| tice 7"
From this it is clear that no attempt was made by
the Catholic body, or their official and authorised
representative, "to exclude the Bible from Tho
Schools" The use,- by themselves, OF their owr
] version was asked In neghborng city, where
the Catholic faith prevails, and where. peace ant
harmony on this subject have always existed, Cath
olics their own Bible, and Protestants theirs. Ii
the Catholic city of Baltimore, both sides are pro
| ected, and neither side is oppressed.
| The Board of Control. acceded to the Bishop
request, but with restriction which virtually null
fled the concession, by adopting the following Re
soluions
Resolved That no children be required to attend Of
unite in the reading Of the Bible in the public Schools
whose parents are conscentously opposed thereto.
Resolved That those children whose parents consci
enousy prefer and desire any particular version Of tn,
Bible, without note comment, be furnished with the
| same"
| Although the words, "without note or comment, y
excluded the Catholic version, which is always
companied by a few notes, the Bishop, or the Ca.
thollc community, made no complaint, being con-
tent that the children exempted from the use
of the version to which they were conscienously
opposed, and relying the good faith of the Drec-
tors, and teachers, execute the regulations OF the
| Board No further action was had on this subject
on the part of Catholics, until the month of March
of the present year, when a pamphlet porporng to
be reply to the letter OF Bishop Kenrick pub
lished by Rev. w. Cotton, Chaplain in the United
States Navy, Editor of violent political newspa,
/ per, and leading member of the Protestant AS.
| ISOLATION" In the meantime it had been ascertain.
ed that the regulations were not attended to in
veral or most OF the schools ana mat the conscen-
ed, in many instances, by attempts to force them
to the Protestant version. Under those circum-