The morning star and Catholic messenger. [volume] (New Orleans [La.]) 1868-1881, 1874-07-26
Protestant Intolerance.

y
cent date we learn that the Preacher
Meeting" of that city has raised quite
rumpus under the folio wing circumstanc e.
The Catholics of the place had petitione
- for the establishment of public free sch oc
at the Catholic church and under the su
70 pervision of it's clergy. The City Counci
70 referred the matter tc a committee, whic
y reported favorably, the following bein
o extracts from it's report:
Sec. s. Chap. 79, Code of Virginia
provides that no municipal or school authori
sles snall nave power to raise, OF appropriate
iunds, for the benefit of any school, which
Goes not form an integral part Of the Public
free school system as established by law.
ihere Is reason to believe that this school
can be Incorporated into the Public School
system OF the city, and made to constitute an
integral part of it; while at the same time, it
VIII practically remain in the hands of the
gentleman who now conducts it,. If this can
DE done, there will be nothing in the law to
prevent an appropriation, prayed for in the
petition.
Your committee would therefore recon-
mend TINT in addition to the allowed to
| the Public Schools, an additional sum of s.
| be allowed, which shall be for the benefit of
| the school at the Catholic Church-proyided
| however, that said school, before receiving he
| dement, OF any portion of said SUN, shall be so
organized as to constitute an integral part of
the Public School system of the city and
State"
Ibis report was adopted, and the Preach
ers' Meeting came back at the Council with
vehement protest and number of reso!u-
tons embodying their reasons for that
course. The following is the only one of
the number that appears to have any pre-
tense of FEASIBILITY:
l. Funds collected by general tax alton on hit
TO be appropriated for the unrestricted benefit
OF the whole community who pay the taxes.
Ibis is sheer impotence. Tho Preachers
knew well enough-none could know bet
ter-that the school fund " collected by
general taxation" was not habitually
appropriated in Lynchburg 4" for the unre
strlcted benefit of the whole communities
Nor dld they want it to be. 1t was there,
as 1t Is nearly everywhere else, so appro-
prlated as to actually exclude a large pro-
portion of the community, sometimes a
majority, from its benefits. The Preachers
knew well enough that the application
made at Lynchburg of the school fund |
absolutely prevented Catholic taxpayers
from sharing in the "beneft" of it. Yet |
they sanctinoniously turn up the whites of
their eyes aud invoke the very doctrine
which they were, by a very thin subterfuge.
silly violating. They apply money in such
a way that none but Infidels dare use it.
and then say that it is for the whole COM
munity and the whole community is at
liberty to avail itself of it. How those
little Pettifoggers in theology must have
rubbed their hands and chuckled at such a
smart little sophism ! But, still, it is the
one in vogue everywhere.
suppose the Government should PROVE
medical treatment and medicines for tn.
puohc and that one half of the peopl.
oelleved i'll the homeopathic system while
the other half had no confidence in any
hing but the allopathic doctrines. If the
public officials should in such case es-
,ablish nothing but homeopathic houses.
would that be for the "unrestricted- bene
it of the whole community - Of course
"onid IN once sense, since evey body 4,
mo chose could resort to these houses, bat II
reality it would be depriving all who i
Id not believe in that system, of their q
hare OF profit from the taxes. THE only c
'ay possible, in such a case, of appropria-
Ing FUNDS for the unrestricted ben eft of the
'hoIe community" would be to open just q
ush establishments as would afford relief +
D all by suiting the conviction of all. l.
And 1t is the same, thing in regard to
choo's. It's a subterfuge unworthy of an T.
onest man to say: " Here is school to q
'hlch you are at liberty to send your r
hlldren. There is nobody toprevent you;" c
hen the speaker knows that religious con- Fl
lotion or moral, or patriotic, or any other
onorable conviction will not permit the s
Yer to be accepted. 1t is really an insult O
make such a proposition. In that case
lch school is not for the unrestricted +,
snett of those who cannot use it. They q
e restricted--not by the law of man, it is Il
ue-out by the law of God, as seen by W
EN-. 3,
" hat makes the intolerance of these n
rotestant Infdels still greater on this oc- Il
sion is the fact that the proposed school le
as to admit children of all creeds and to III
strictly a mart of th,, nm hi 10 ocbooI -