The morning star and Catholic messenger. [volume] (New Orleans [La.]) 1868-1881, 1868-06-14
Retributive Justice.

SVNE 14) 1CVOs
Retributive Justice.
CONSISTENCY OF THE LOUISIANA PROTEST.
Nations have no future life, consequently,
their good or evil conduct must be rewarded
in this life. On the contrary, the individual
has q future life, and his reward and pun
ishment are generally reserved for,the next
life. And the saying that in what person
sins, in that shall he be punished, seems to
be true Of communities or states, as well as
of individuals. This truth was brought very
forcibly before our mind a few days ago, by
the reading of II protest purporting to be
presented by the white population of
Louisiana to Congress against the new
Constitution. One of the grievances COM
planned of, and which suggested these re-
marks, is the clause in the Constitution
which opens the public schools to the
colored population. AFTER stating the OBJ
jectionable article, the white people Of
Louisiana are supposed to say, " that it is
not fair or just that they should be obliged
to support schools into which their self-re
spect and social position prohibit them from
sending their children" This is given as q
sufficient reason why that article of the
Constitution should not be forced on the
people. For, certainly, it is not right orjust
to compel any community or any class of q
community to pay taxes to support institu-
tions which they cannot use.
But, alas, how are the mighty fallen! Is
it not humiliating to the so-called people of
Louisiana to be obliged to go on their knees
before Congress and beg the favors which
they, themselves, have persistently denied
Catholics, and enforce their claims to atten-
ton by urging the same reasons which
Catholics have been urging on them, but.
without effect, for a quarter of a century
Did it not seem in very bad taste IN this
so-called people of Louisiana to demand of
Congress as their right what they persist
emily refused to large proportion of their
own fellow-citizenss If it even were wrong
for Catholics to object to paying taxes for
the support of schools which they could not
use, how can it be right for the people of
Louisiana to object to it! Andif the people of
Louisiana were justified in forcing Catholics
to pay taxes under such circumstances, is
not Congress fully justified in forcing the
white people of Louisiana to do the same7
What was right and just on the part of the
State and municipal authorities of Louisiana
cannot be wrong and unjust on the part of
the Congress of the United States. And if
the reasons that have been urged ever since
the establishment of the public schools, on
our legislative bodies, both State and mu-
nicipal, by the Catholics of Louisiana, were
not sufficient to force them to relent the
smallest little from their unjust proscrip
similar reasons, urged by themselves under
like circumstances, will have a different
effect ON Congress? Perhaps Congress is
more lust and liberal than the Legislative
bodies of Louisiana. Or do these reasons
become more forcible in their hands than in
those of Catholics: Or is it that what was
just legislation ON their part to Catholics,
becomes intolerable persecution when APP
piled by Congress to themselves?
Gentlemen, your conduct does not seem
very consistent, nor does your condition de-
serve much sympathy. Your protest is the
strongest condemnation of your own con-
duct in regard to Catholics in relation to the
public school system, and most open con-
fession that your legislation on that matter
has been fagrantly unjust. Your protest
is founded on justice; but we protest against
your receiving redress from Congress unless
you are disposed to administer the like JUS
tice to your own fellow-citizens. We be-
lieve in the doctrine that you should be
willing to do unto others rs you would wish
others would do unto you; also, that the
measure with which you mete to others, it