The Wheeling daily register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1864-1878, 1869-12-01
contemplated as il is now BY the ex !.

contemplated as 1t IS now by the ex--
press langusgeof that instrument.
He then quoted the custom OF. public
schools of other countries and the grants
of State authority for establishing
schools in the United States. Athens
and Oxford, Ohio, were among the in
stances to show that religious instruc-
was contemplated.
In conclusion he said these resolutions
forbid all religious Instruction., as ]
before remarked. They are in substance
reputation, not only of christianity
but of all religion in the broadcast sense
of which the term is susceptible. They
clearly constitute such O case as was sup.
posed by the Court in pronouncing the
opinion in the Girard will case, but from
which that case was distinguished.
desire to adopt and to submit to the
Court, as part of my argument, every
word OF the great argument Of Mr.. Web
ster In that case, an argument that
was not answered or denied by the
Court, so far as its conclusions were con-
cerRed. The holding of the Court that
christianity might be taught in the
Orphans College by pious laymen
avoided his conclusions without contro-
verting his premises. The argument
occupied three hours.
Judge Stallo spoke two hours yester-
day for the defense, and will conclude
today. He said Christianity was no
part of the law of the State, for if it
were, certain duties peculiarly Christ
ian must be epjoined upon citizens on
certain rights which none but Christians
possess. The observance of certain vir-
tues, usually called Christian, are en-
joined by the State, not because they
are Christian, but because they are
essential for the good order of society.
The State enforces no duty as Christian
duty. Christians hold no civil Tightsin
preference over persons protesting other
creeds, or no creed. The Jew, for in
stance, has the same rights as Christ
ian, the same remedies for wrongs; can
sue; hold property, hold office, and vote.
His synagogue is exempt from taxation
the same as the Christians church.
He quoted the case of Bloom vs.. Rich
ards, second Ohio reports, sections three
and eighty-seven. He said it was no
objection, but on the contrary a recon-
mendation to legislative enactment
based on justice and public policy that
it be found to coincide with the pre-.
cepts of pure religion, but, neverthe-
less, the power to make law rests in
the legislative control over things tenn
peral, net spiritual, for no power over
things spiritual ever has been delegated
to the Government, while there is any
preference of one religion over another,
as the statute would giveupon the above
hypothesis, is directly prohibited by the
Constitution. Christianity was no part
of the common law of Ohio now, as was
tho case with Massachusetts,, Now
York and Virginia once, but not
in Ohio today, thanks to the followers
of Protestant Roger Williams, Catholic
Charles Carroll and Infdcl Thomas JEFF.
ferson. To show the diversity of opin-
ion which existed among Christians on
the authenticity of the New Testament,
he quoted from Rev. Samuel Richard
sons book. He said it was not little
curious to see how nearly this summary
of the Presbyterian divine agreed with
certain propositions advanced bya Jesuit
father of this city in recent lecture on.
the Bible, though the Interior conclu-
sions of the two widely diverged. The
of Ohio cannot judge he-
tween them, nor can the Board of Els3-
cation of the city of Cincinnati be She
Judge. The honest convictions of kDt1
these men ought to be respected by the
State of Ohio.