, 1870-02-17
THE CINCINNATI DECISION.

We published yesterday the decision and
opinions of the Superior Court Of Cincin-
nnti denying the power Of the Board of Edu-
ca.ion. Of that city, under the constitution
and laws Of Ohio, to repeal one resolution
passed by the game board, which required
the Bible to be read as religious opening
exercise in the public schools, and to pass
new resolution prohibiting all religious in
struction in the schools. The immediate
question before the Court was one Of law
whether the board Ind the power to
repeal its former resolution and to pass
new one OF opposite tenor.
It involves two ques.ions,-one Of State
law, and the other OF political wisdom, or.
a. some might term il. abstract right
which We ehall consider separately:
l. Az to the Law. Either the Board Of
Education had power to determine whether
! she Bible should be used in the schools, or
they had not. II they had not, then the
old resolution which they repealed, requir-
inc the Bible to be used in the schools,
was void, because passed by body having
no power to determine the question; and
m this assumption, If there Is any legal
reouirement that tho Bible be used in the
schools, it must exist in some statute Of the
State, or in the constitution. But it Is
not clnined that there is any State statute
or constitutional provision expressly requir-
ing that public schools shall be opened by
reading the Bible and singing. Tho prac-
. tica would have been voluntary on the part
! of the teachers, and might hare been con-
tinued or omitted, but for the requirement.
+ in express words by the Board Of Educa-
: non. No Judge would have the ha1di
= hood 10 say TINT a general declara
v ton in the constitution tha
i t.neligion is essential TO good govern
# ment" could be construed, By lis own IN
aided force, to require that public school
" should be opened with the reading Of tn
r. Bible, moro Than that they should be close
rs by this exercise, or by prayer, or the cate
chisp.
to Had the constitution even gone SO far
OF to declare it chief object Of the publ
ID schools to teach Protestant Christianity,
u would still have remained for some subo
dinnte Legislative body to indicate the pa,
id ticn!ar processes, ceremonies, times, AZ
te manner in which such Instruction should l
&C conveyed. 1t might be by making Bibl'
.ss lessons part Of tho course OF study
Ill much more thorough mode than readii
he the bible as an opening exercise.
1t is evident, therefore, that, but for Il
be ! original resolution Of The Board Of Educ
be tion. there would hare been no speci
nd enactment in existence requiring the 6cho.
7as Of Cincinnati to open with the reading
L. the Bible at NIL. And to claim that, IN
he absence Of all specific enactment, they
mt required to do SO, is absurd.
", The obligation Of the schools to open
,ut this manner depends on the validity Of t
at enactment or resolution OF the Bosrd
ser Education, which, in turn, depends on tn
power to pass it, which, in turn, is insep
tho able from their power to repeal It and
alsy pass ono of opposite or antagonlstlc ten
tho In short, 10 establish that there Is
.orc law wbateverin Cincinnati requiring scho
the to open with Bible reading, il is neoess
ttee to hold that the resolutions Of the Board
and Education to that effect ore valid law.
aino they are law, then the Board Of Educat
), on had power to determine whether The scht
they should open in that manner OF not; IN
10 to they had this power, they hed tho s,
l BY right to determine that they should
eless open in this manner 1s that thcs sho
4 BY There is no such thing rs 1egisla
tsolf, power existing to do thing, but moi
nem- undo it, unless, as in the case Of cha,
Coz vested rights intervene. There can b,
[eade Legislative discretion which is valid so
:clud- as it is exercised in favor Of one sect,
had a invalid Tic moment it Is exercised again