, 1875-06-20

1ueTo can DC uLLlo ACUDE LuAt tue 4Qeh. "
taxing church property will ultimately pre-
rail. It is only a question Of time At tn
outset it has formidable obstacles to encoun
ter, but these will disappear before the pro
gress Of calm investigation. At first, tht
proposal to tar church property meets I
strong and wen-nigh universal prejudice
growing out Of usage in the past. 1t strikes
the common mind as IN assault on religion
or, at least, as Withdrawing from it proper
foken of respect. Hitherto, tile State has
+ manifested its reverence for religion by e1-
! empting its institutions from the burdens Of
, taxation. This has been go long custom
I that departure from it shocks those who do
not rise above usage, and consult principle.
The parallel custom, only just laid aside, OF al-
lowing rulers to frank their letters WAS regard-
/ ed as well nigh right until the discussion Of
| cheap postage led men to see that every one,
high or low, should bear his part in the e1-
pense Of this Postal Department and now in
States even the President, must put the same
stamp on q letter that is required Of shop
girl Or Of on apprenice-boy. When once we
get at the underlying principle Of any sub
| ject, it proves to be aremorse1ess leveler, and
old distinctions in Church aud State find no
quarter. :.
The custom of exempting church property
comes down from the dayB when Church and
State were united, and when, on many sub
jects, the Church gave law to the State, and,
in the name Of God, had its OWL way in all
that Injured to its own advantage. Then the
Estate supposed itself bound to provide
revenues for the Church, nnd arranged
|)n system Of taxation for that pur-
pose. So long as this WIGS. done, it was
folly to tax church property. To do so
would be as if man were to take out Of one
pocket to put into the other. But now that
/ We have reached, in this land, the true prin~
ciple Of separating Church and State, VIC
))ought to accept all that is logically implied
When Christ said, ''nender unto Caesar the
)things which are Caesars" he took high and
advanced ground, and his Church, since the
primitive age, has been slow to occupy it.
Before tho time Of Constantine, it never
thought of soliciting pecuniary favors Of the
State. It won its worldwide victories with
its own resources, glad If the State would
but let it alone and forbear to persecute.
But from the day that it consented to be es~
tablished by the civil power, it has always
leaned, to some extent, upon the secular
arm; and it is 10th, even in this land, totally
to dissolve the connection. After being cut
off from direct aid, it clings to the indirect.
After losing its invitation to eat at the State
table, it humbly desires to be allowed to pick
the crumbs from the foort
But light is breaking in, and c1ear-sighted
and thoughtful Christians are advocating the
taxation ct church property precisely as any
other. The leading religious newspapers are
doing much to correct public sentiment. The
4doancs, in this city, the .lndependent and
the Christian Union, New York, and the
Congregationalist, at Boston, have ably sus~
tanned the view which We present. They are
the more to be commended in so doing when
it is remembered that they are ahead Of their
constituency, and are slowly educating them
out Of antiquated notions. Often it is
costly proceeding to run counter to relig-
ious prejudice, which good mon mistake for
But the course Of reform is onward, and one
after another men Of mind will espouse the
right, will demand and secure hearing, and |
will initiate awide discussion, which will carry
the popular vote. 4 few States OF the Union !
have already begun to tax church property, !
and the example will be contagious. As Con-
ventons shall be held for revising State Con |
stituions, the question will be regularly |
raised, the facts will be brought forward, the |
principle will be debated, and sentiment
will inevitably form favorable to the proposed |
change.
For, let 1t be considered how plain the case
is viewed from the side Of the State. The
political economist feels himself pressed with
the problem Of ta1aton. He wishes to make
that burden beT as equally as possible upon
MI tangible property. he finds that opinion
is unanimous ir favor Of taxing real estate,
by reason Of is value, its permanence, its
accessibility, a,d its easy control by the
civil officers. He naturally lays down the
principle that IL the real estate Of 1ocali-
y must be subjected to the Same
Tar, upon IN equitable assessment
Before the law-maker, studying the
taxable resources Of the community, it
IS Of no consequence to what use TINT real
estate is put. He 1egislates to tax it, on the
ground Of its Ipcuniary value as protected by
he Government, and not because it is wisely
'r unwisely, poltably or unprohtably, used
~ the owner or because it is employed
aggricu1turally, commercially, educatonal1y,
'r raligioualy. He has no right, in particular
:ase, to see anything else than a protected
piece Of proprty which ought to bear its fair 4.
ofthe expense Of the Government {
which protects it. But, to his amazement, {
le learns, On consulting the CENSUS tables,
hat On inmnse amount Of real estate il 1- {
:mpt from tnation, On the ground that it ia s
hurch profrty and property devoted to 6
purposes Of :ducation By religious sects and {
corporations Of such church property alone, '
he census ables OF 1870 report value of q
s354, ,483,58, Of which there is net down to t
llinois $2+6e4,2Ssl No doubt it is a low d
stinate. nd this is Kind Of q property t
apidly incraaing in value, for it is USUALLY