Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1874-07-17
The school 0uest1sa.

BhATILEHOHO. july 10,
10 The Editor Of the Ph1uiJ Sir: II
you would he pleased to grant me space in
your columns, | should. wish 10 MAX q some
remarks concerning communication that
appeared In the last number Of the Record
aud Farmer, entitled "In regard 10 the su--
pension M Catholic children from the vii
laee sch'ois." Whether ihe ohipri Of the
writer nf said article WAS to gain sympathy
for what he cnnsideied bad cause or not,
do moi know but Of this | am certain.
that he has given one-sided view of the
question at issIe. lie has represented facts
IN false coiOrs, as seen through his own
glasses. In the first pisco there Is no per
sOnal difficulty between "unr school COM
mittee and the priest Of the Roman Cdtho-
lie church OF this village" The real diff
Guilty consists In this, that the school com
mitteo have made rules interfering with
the religious rights and duties Of atho-
lie children In the free public schools or
Brattleboro; and the priest and Catholic
people las in duty bOund) protest against
the enforcement Of such rules. Now it
will not do for the committee 10 saw that
they claim equal rights for all. and thai
they have no desire to "hamper the con-
sciences or prevent the devotions" of any,
when any fair minded person. any lover of
justice, eau see al glance that they have
acted IN opposition to such assertions. A.
every Catholic learns, even at his mothers
knee. and well understands, all Catholic.
are bound by the highest laws OF their
church to pay the same respect 10, and ob-
serve Ia the same manner. the holvdays a.
the Sundays, and In negiecting to do go he
neslects his religion, and thereby is guilty
OF sin. such being the case. and knowing
from Sacred Scripture that we are bound
TO hear and oOey the voice and commands
Of the church as those Of God himself |
ask, have not the committee. by expelling
from the schools the Catholic children
who in tho practice Of their religion attend
ed service on the feast of Corpus Christi,
hoiy day OF obligation, have they not, l
say, hRmpered the conscience aud prevent
ed the devotions Of said children? Be
sides, 1t IL well known tact which can ea-
silly lie proved, that on other occasions the
religion of Catholic children was tempered
with in al least one OF the schools of this
village, and that the high school. Is il not
interfering with our rights as Catholics, to
demand OF our children to Join in your
Protestant prayers7 Is that granting equal
rights to all Was il not lampering with
our rights TO demand OF our children, I'M
der threat OF expulsion, to procure Prot
estant BiblesG In tine, WAS it not endeav-
oring 10 bring odium on our religion to
tell, IN class. that it WAS the Catholics that
banished the Puritans out Of England.
when the person that made such an asser-
ton must have known it to be historically
false, or II she did not know il to be so
must have been scarcely capable OF hold
ing the position OF teacher in the most ad-
vanced school Of the village? As regards
the second part Of the communication re-
ferred TO- viz: about the right of parents
to Withdraw temporarily from school their
children for sufficient reason, ana concern
ing the argument brought to bear against
such right namely the storek0 eper aud his
clerk, all ! have to say is, when the COM
mitlee, like the storekeeper, can call the
public schools their own private property.
then thoy can treat the children 'as the
storekeer er can treat his boy but As long
as they are only entrusted with the care Of
what belongs TO others as well as to them
selves, then, l say, they ought to consult
the feelings OF others as well AS their own.
JUSTICE.