New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1851-11-20


pized exponent from the stigma Of counie-
nancipg aud indirectly proPoundihg doc
times which plainly Justify and lead to per
secutiou fer Faiths sake and the deml.
Of Freedom of Worship to those Of other
communious Surely, it's high time, Ii the
Catholic Church is to be indicated from
these irnouta,ions, that some authorized ex-
positor Of her principles should speak out in
her behalf. and on whom could this duty
be more fifty devolved than on hin whose
name has been hGnorably connected IN both
benispheres with the recognition and con-
meodation Of Civil and Religious Liberty
Archbishop HuGHEs did not see fit, on
Tuesday evening, to speak out on this sub
iect lie spoke indeed, in fcrci5le expOsi-
ton and recognition of the wrongs inflicted
BY Great Britain on Ireland, AnglO-Saxon
on Celt. Protestant on Catholic and in
much tina. he propounded under these heads
we could cor Italy concur. We could not
so clearly perceive the justice of his attack
on KosSuth and his evident intent TO excite
Irish and Catholic hostility agains. that no.
bic exile, because of a few words of COM
pliment to British character and British In
stitutons in his Speech at Southampton.
II is but fair to consider that kossuth Is
Hungarian ard fugitive, against whom
Austria has been trying to enforce a fug-
tive Slave law or compact with Turkey
ever since he entered her borders. and tina!
Great Britain has been foremost in sustain
ing in his behalf the doubtful chivalry of
the Sultan. and in procuring his ultimate
liberation. Whatever Ireland OF America
may say against England, has mouth IS
stopped with regard to her, except when he
can speak IN her praise. Should not these
obvious considerations have moved the
Archbishop to a more charitable constuc
ton Of that Southampton Speech! We do
think predisposition to find fault, and
10 make the most of every ground of cavil,
is evinced by tie Archbishop's criticisms on
kossuth's late speech
But as to Education, the Archbishop's
remarks are Of far more serious pOrtent.
We 90 not, of course, ailudc to his portrayal
of past injustice to the British Catholics in
the matter of Colleges and Education, nor to
his earnest appeal in behalf of the proposed
Catholic University in Ireland. With all
this we have no controversy. But when
he breaks ground against our Common
School system, or any system Of Educa-
ton under the guidance of the State, we
feel impelled to raise voice of dissent and
remOnstrance. His sheer at civil rulers as
having enough to do without turning |
schOclmasters, plainly indicates opposition
to any system whereby the State UNDER /
the children within its borders. When he /
SAYS that whenever Government UNDER J
takes Education" it says that parents I
are incapable of Judging about Education,
and that the State, forsoOth must step In .
and take care of it, he is stating the 4
position adverse to his own, and should be
very careful to state it fully and fairly. Has
he done it in this case? We certainly
believe he has not.
We are among the advocates of State
supported system of Popular Education,
because abundant experience has proved
that some parents are so INDECENT. others so
misery, and others again so dissipated or
Profigate, that they 'ciH not provide for the
due education of their children if they are
lei. entirely to their own individual prompt
ings in the matter. Admit that three
t0urfhs of the parents would properly edu-
cate their children if left 30 themselves,
the established fact that the other
fourth roufd not, is conclusive against the
Voluntary System VIII the Archbishop
point rs to Spain, to Italy, to Mexico. 10
Brazil, or some Catholic country wherein
Education as let alone BY the State, and
maintain that the children are there mere
generally and thoroughly educated than IN
our State of New-York, We hear much
of what Voluntary or Sacerdotal Education
might ard should do: let US have con-
yincing example of what it has done
But, SAYS the Archbishop
Whence IS this government, institution derived
IL bean N ceSpoi,c Prussia, under sovereign who
thought he could mold and manipulate society Just 4
as he pleased
No, Reverend Sir you read History /
backward ENGLAND was long
way ahead Of Prussia in adopting the State
;, stem Of Education; and we have heard
you publicly commend the multiplicity of
hfr school houses and by nalrahle infer