The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1868-12-03
THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 1868.
The Religions views of Statesmen.

late Parliamentary elections in Great Britain,
q correspondence between Mr.. Gladstone and
his constituents, which is OF q character to
merit more than a passing notice. Its i'm
portance is enhanced by the fact that 1t has
also been the fate of Mr.. John Stuart Mill to
undergo similar discussion. We refer to the
letters written to each Of these gentlemen by
some of the electors of the districts which
they represented, asking them to state expli-
city their religious views. The tone of these
letters was rather dogmatical and the same
answer was returned by each Of the statesmen
interrogated, viz.:-Thst their religious sent.
ments were matters exclusively personal, and
not subject to the examination of their consti-
tuents. The attention Of our readers may
have been called TO the letters when published
q few days since. As this is a new feature in
political contests, and not unlikely to be con-
sidered q precedent to be followed in the
future, II is well to look at the question of the
right of the people TO investigate their rulers
faith. We think that Mr.. Mill, whose letter
Is by far the most sweeping carries his asser-
zion of the freedom of conscience too far for
popular privilege. He denies to the constitu-
snceis under any circumstances the right to
catechise the candidates for their suffrage as
10 their faith. We can see circumstances In
which suoh questions as those put to Mr.. Mill
would be eminsntly proper, and when he
would have been bound in honor to give to
them explicit answers. II the government of
a country is peculiar in Its character, and 80
situated as to rule over people Of any peou-
liar faith, and if the control Of the Church is
eonided to the State, our reason must assent
to such questions as those put to Mr.. Mill.
For instance, If Spain, under the old dynasty,
now happily overthrown, had had occasion to
elect Certes, we see that it would have been
proper for the inhabitants to ask a candidate
if he belonged to the Catholic or Protestant
faith. There the Church is a department of
the government, and one which the govern
ment is bound, by the custom of the land, to
guide. Hence it would be a judicious plan
for the people to see if their candidate was a
member OF the Church. In such case as
this such a question would be appropriate.
England, however, is not such land.
The State but nominslly governs the
Church. There are more dissenters than
there are ohurchmen, and Catholic, Protes-
tant, and Jew are alike entitled to a voice in
the government. Therefore, when Mr.. Glad
stone was asked If he leaned towards the
Church OF Rome, he very properly refused to
answer. Had he been in Spain, however, we
can see the propriety of the question.
Mr.. Mill was, however, asked on different
point. He was said to be deistioal In his be-
lief, and he was interrogated as to the truth of
such an assertion. Had his constituents
right to put that question We must answer
yes. We believe in the fullest possible toe-
rance of religious difference. 1t should not
matter, and it is not a proper subject for in
auiry, whether a candidate is a Catholic or
Protestant, Jew or Gentle, Baptist, Presbyte-
rian, Episcopalian, OF Quaker. Zach for his
faith is answerable to no man, and to exclude
a man from Office on account Of his belonging
to any particular church, or belonging to no
shurch, is gross wrong, and an in
vasien OF one of the cardinal principles of true
liberty. But when ma denies the existence
of q God, and declares his disbelief in a Su-
preme Being, then we say he is disqualified
from holding an ofaoe, and if the people be-
lieve he does entertain such doctrines they
have right to ask aud receive an answer. No
man can reasonably deny reply to so vital
q question; for should it be that he does deny a
God, then he cannot be public officer. He
does not recognize the validity or force OF
an oath. What to him do the solemn
words, $50 help me Gsd," amount toi
They are but idle sound. And as no
one can enter in Office until he has sworn tc
defend the laws of the land, IL follows that he
who cannot swear or affirm, and who denies
the very foundation OF the whole moral struc
ture, should not receive the votes of pso
ple who differ from him SO utterly, and tC
whom he can give no safeguard as 10 his CON
duct. The case stands the same as in that o
witness in court of justice. You caunO
ask him his religious views, You cannot ash
him If he is a Methodist or Reformed. But yor
can ask him If he believes in God and in
hereafter, and il he does not, his evidence
ceases to be admissible. The same test can b.
applied to officials. II they have belief in
Deity, then what may be their peculiar belle
Is not amenable to public criticism. If the.
deny that foundation Of all religion and me
rality. the people have right 70 ask II 1t b
No. and to demand an answer. While, there
fore. we esteem Mr.. Gladstone right In refus
], ing 10 be examined as to his peculiar faith
I, vat we deem the people acted properly l
ssking Mr.. Mill II he was Deist, and to thi