The Nevada journal., 1861-03-01
REPLY TO MIR. BRIERLY.

devoting the briefest space possible to his
long letters, published in the two last num-
bers of this paper.
A great many questions arise which we
will be obliged to pass by silently for want
of the necessary space, and because their
discussion would not interest the public in
the least, and what we do notice shall be
done as curtly as we know how to compress
the language.
We are willing to concede that the insti-
tutions of the colony of Maryland were rot
as liberal as We once thought they were. 1t
is common error into which the majority
of the American people, ourselves among
the number, have fallen. In its correction
we appreciate one benefit from the contro-
versy in which we find ourselves engaged.
The fact at which we have arrived is not,
however, Of any Importance to the argu-
ment.
Mr., Briefly complains, too, that we blum
dered in saying he said 10000 bibles in
1882, were imported from Holland and
Scotland. The error was unintentional,
andspartially corrected in an after sentence
where we wrote, sought to be imported -
We now proceed to answer such of his OBJ
jections as we deem of sufficient Importance
to justify 1t. But before doing so we must
express our surprise that one who assumes
to teach the powers of the Constitution
should tumble up the State and National
governments, as he does in his discussions.
Mr.. Briefly returns to the fact, as one of
great Importance, that Congress ordered an
importation of bibles in 1777, and urges it
as proof that government formed years
afterwards and by almost entirely other
men, is committed to Christianity The
soundness of such logic may be appreciated
by others, but we confess our inability to
concur. How the Constitution of the
United States, formed by sixty-two dele
gates, should take its character from, or be
made responsible for, the acts of twelve of
them, twelve years before, while acting as
representatives under another government
is beyond our comprehension, yet this
"early action" as Mr.. Briefly calls it, he
says % shows more conclusively than n later
one could do, what was the original bias of
the founders of the government" A sufii-
cient answer to this is already given, viz /:
that the men who sought to import bibles
were not the founders of the government,
but a very small share of them. Perhaps
the whole twelve may have voted against
the importatioD-weh have no means at hand
for learning. But admitting his assump-
tion to be true, is it not possible for body
of Christians, as the convention that formed
the Constitution is not proved to have been,
to deprive the government they were con-
structing of all power over religion, leaving
it where the matter might be reached more
readily, to State regulation? The posi-
bilty was demonstrated in an act by the
trainers of the Constitution, as we have
shown in previous article. They brought
with it to themselves in local govern
ment.
As considerable stress is laid upon the
fact that an old Continental Congress sought
to import bibles, we will give our opponent
the full benefit of all and more than he can
make of the act. Suppose the act had been
done under the present Constitution, and
that it was constitutional, can any one
demonstrate that the importation of any
other book instead would be unconstitu-
tional? If he can, that clause in the Con-
stitution where the authority is found has
been sadly overlooked by every student of
the American government. Would the i'm
portation of bibles by the present Congress
go to prove the American government a
Christian government, or that it vastly pre-
ferred the Christian religion over any other?
Congress imports the Italian bee. Does
this prove that the American Government
commits itself in favor of that insect in
preference to the common bee or that it
prefers Italian bee honey to molasses p
What power is there anywhere to prevent
the United States government from furn-
ishing the District of Columbia, and every
fort and dock-yard in the country, and
every vessel in the navy, with library, in
which shall be found the religious books of
every nation and people on earth
Mr.. Briefly argued in a lecture that the
importation of bibles was evidence that the
American government was a Christian gov
ernment and said # it had desired to rec
ognze Judaism the old Testament alone
would have been imported. He also went
farther and produced the fact that prayers
were called for by the early conventions and
congresses, as proof that the Christian rel-
gion was only to be countenanced by the
government, We showed that DR.. Raphael,
Jew, had been invited to pray in the SEN
ate, as proof that Senators thought no
discrimination was taught by the American
government. Mr. Briefly admits the Senate
thought Jewish Rabbi might Be inrited to
otfcidte as well as Il Christian minister
How does this comport with his declaration
that our government is committed to Chris
tidniy? Is DIR. Raphael Christian-a man
who believes Christ an imposter? We are