, 1873-08-01
COL. JUSSE. m.
His Rejection by tho Common
Council.
The Question Of Religious Intolerance,


To Tie Editor AZ Tho Chicago Tribune:
61H: Tho lottor from Col JugHcn, In this
mornings TRIBUNE, nl,lat llnvo boon read by
many of TINT gontle1nan'a friends Will, surprise
and rogrot. It is qnoor performance. And I,
who know Col. JuBaon very WE'LL md havo high
respect for hia nblity, and II thorough belief in
his sincerity md honesty of purpose, Gun Bcarca-
ly holp accepting tho conclusion that, with re-
srcct to "rol!gioua intolerance" ho must DO III
that condition Which tho physlcaus call I" "tnor-
bd"
1Io hHa mover, SO far aa know, boon suspcct-
ell Of having "oilico on tho Brain" II ho hnB
evor ridden hobby, ho Inns tono it quietly. II
tho Josuits llayo ever dono him any llnrn,, no.
body las over l,enrl Of it. Aud why he should
| 80 to bounding them boforo thoy are all out of
tho roach Of Bismarck, is, to Bay lilo least Of 1t,
| passing strange.
was pleased to 500 his name sont into tho
Common Council na ono OF tho Noari1 Of Esluca-
| ton, because beloved his nomination waa, as
Daniel Webster would eny, Denomination lit to
10 made" think he ought to hayo boen con-
tirmcd: But can no moro beliove that ho owes
lia tofoat to "Jos uitical Influence in tho COM
mon Council u than eau believe that ho owod
his nomination to nntt-JoButical influence in tho
| Mayors Office. He was rejected simply because
| enough members did not vote for him; mud why
| while to inquire. Ono nuns roaBon for doing
| or not doing . thing may be worry good. Anoth-
or's may DO nttorly worthLoHB. Fortunately or
unfortunately, tho right of mAn TO vote, in tho
| pond upon Ills ability to reason correctly, or on
tho purity or Independence Of his motives. lie
votcB 10 he plcaBca mud 1t Ia not charitable, nor
oven juat, to attribnto bad motive, unlcss 1t Is
| in1iBputably apparont.
Mr.. Jusson adtnitH TINT tito rejection Of a
candidate for tho Board of Education il worry
| insignificant thing; but" continues he, "w]lcn
wo analyzo tho motive which cnusod tho rejcc-
tion, and find that religious intolerance, to say
tho lcast, Inns brought about tho result, thon,' T.
&c. Now, would not for moment irgin.tato
that Mr., 1usaen cannot express his ideas III as
plain English as either Queen victoria or proal-
don't Grant Is in tho habit Of using; but surely,
quoted if lo meant to bo understood, ho ii very
unhappy. Tho inference il plain oio,1gl, that
| lie Inns dono something which lo considers, and
indeed Ind, caita "q7n'alszing the mottyoa' of those
90 says (wthoat aey Slowing a Whatever Sss
| he finds (from such analysis) that ''neligiona
intolerance, to say tho least, las brought about
the IN is Is 70 sa h1 anr on
not mean Tint tho majority rejected him because
| Of his religious profession or bolcf aud yet
That s tho only meaning that can bo givou to his
words. Can 1t be that the excellent Colonel hna
candidates, Of attrbuting their defoRt to any
thing rath thai, personal objections OIL tho part
Of tho electors? It IS consoling. thoro can
ecarcoly DO doubt of it, to attribute ono's Do
I have known Iriahnlon who wished
tho % only reason IL tie ''f'se wo9ia why why
they wore not triumphantly elected was, that
Gormans who enjoyed measure Of happiness
under defoat, bocuuae; ;thero could ho no possible
reaaon for voting agaii,Bt tl,on except tho Know
Nothing reason tiiat they we're Gcrnlans Aud,
tho REASON why ho did not thon occupy certain
oi}lco in tho Chicago Court-I1ougo, was, that Ao
Ind tho misfortune to be born III Ills country.
Religious intolerance, Col. Jnnscn must know,
inato toloration ia gunrantoed by the OonHtitu-
ton. But no Ropublican Constitution can ever
guarantee d Buro election to any ol1lce 10 my
man. Electors, il tlloy arc free, vii! bo worry
5 to S'' allow IL t''y hos sass sGos and t. if ss 5
expression to their personal preferences or prof.
udicos, thero would soon to bo no help for it.
And suppose it iB genornlly understood (tllough
Col. Jnssen docs not Hcem to understand it)
that al olector may have very strong prejudico
againHs q candidate, without being at oil preju-
diced against tint candidates. religion or nation
aity. Il does not nppear that any n,cmbor Of
tho Common Council has my prejtldlco what
ever against Col; Jusson's religion, or haa boon
contrary, it would soom tGat tho motive I"
which cnllscd tho rejection Of the Colonel waa
the belief, moro or less we'll founded, tint he
! was intolorant. Looked at in tho light OF ILL
nois law and experience, tho rights of Jesuit
arc as sacred aud inyiolablo aB those
Of Froe-Mason, or IL Knight Of Pyth-
las, Or . Methodist. or Mormon, or
Jusaon Bees fit to bo '.iutolorant" !" towards tho
JcsuitH, ho has no right to expect that any friend
of that Order, or Of universal toloration will bc