Meigs County telegraph. [volume] (Pomeroy [Ohio]) 1848-1859, 1851-12-16
his premises.

htS ptSHtoco'
VI. We are quite willing To leave 10 Time
The decision between our view Of The char.
acter and career of Kossuth and that of the
Archbishop, and we feel so fortified in our
conviction that we let lhe Archbishop's
sIaIemen. Of the case pass without remark.
We feel confident that almost any of US
have moro reason 10 dread being written
down 'humbug' by His,or than Louis
Kossuth. .f..
VII. We do not hold The Archbishop ac-
coun,able for everything that appears in The
Freeman's Jouraal. We accep, his own
explanation on that point. But Thai JJur-
nal speaks in the name Of Catholics and
CaihoIicI.y, and it is bitter and unsparing in
It's warfare on ,he adversares Of Despolism
in Europe and on the supporters Of the
Common School system here. In an article
opposing our Free School law last year, the
Editor said of its prospective repeal .,.r
at will not do away with the iniquitous and
prodigal system of free schools, as now by law
established, in this City. But it will at least give
US hope that If the people of the State shall be
delivered from this odiouS tax, the people of this
City will soon follow in demanding freedom
from schools that are moral nuisance, and have
no kind of claim on the confidence of the pub
lc," &C., &c.
| Now we did think that, as this 'Freeman's
Journal is openly advertised as the organ Of
Archbishop Hughes and weekly speaks as
with authority, in behalf Of Catholic Faith
and Principles, i, beloved The Archbishop
10 let the public know how far lis potent par
,isanship Of Nicholas, Meuernich and Hay i.
nau in Europe and its hostility 10 Common
Schools here, mel his appreciation. Was
this unreasonable Z
\ VIII. The Archbishop is an advocate not
only of Civil and Religious Liberty but Of
Universal Education, though in neither case
: after our pattern. He would have Religion
form part Of every child's educa,ion,-
Very goud-we concur in that view But il
is one thing to assume that each child should
be taught Religion, and quite another to
MAINTAIN that Religious dJgmas should be
taught in common schools. We desire and
intend that our own children shall be taught
Religion; we do mol desire that it shall be
taught them in Common Shoots. For this
we shall take them TO Church, 10 Sunday
8 School, 10 Bible Glass, or wherever else thsy
may be taught BY those who we believe wi
$ teach them Divine Truth in lis purity; whilt
i for the acquisition of Reading, Writing
T Arithmetic, &C., We shall send Them /,
Common or secular Schools. Why is no
= this distinction natural and just one How
0 cun man so wise as The Archbishop speal
9 Of our Common School Systemas as mot cal
J. .culaled 10 meet the requirements which
IS Catholic parents, al least. are bound TO fuI
. Gil toward their Catholic ohspring?" VIII!
y Rev. Sir il never pretended 10 do any sue
E thing You might as well obJectl lhaIird doe
nol wash, dress and vaccinate them Yo
% and your Clergy are expected, by Catholi
" parents, and they think divinely commits
y stoned, To teach their children Religion
G. Why should you find (uull with The School
2 for their owH proper work and not altemr
~ ling yoursl How, then, can you uss sue
o language as ibis
y 'It may suit other denominations to have the
D. children brought up without any admixture
~ Religious teaching in their education butt do
re- not suit u.s."
IS No, Sir Il does not sui, 'oIher demon
iflinalons' 10 have their children reared
We ignorance Of God and His laws, and W