The daily Argus. (Rock Island, Ill.) 1873-1877, 1875-05-17
xoaiay. May II. 1876.
From the Aledo Banner.
The Bible in the Public Schools.

out quite number Of criticisms, and /
have waited until suppose those who de-
sired 10 say anything on the subject, have
all been heard from. Before saying any
thing in reply, wish to say that l have
no desire to enter into a newspaper con-
troversy with any of the writers, and with
this reply will dismiss the subject. There
have been no less than five writers, who
have taken exceptions to my productions:
that is: Prof. j. r. Wylie, through the
columns Of the Aledo Record, and j. q.
Graham, o. p. Bester, Rev. j. II. Moore,
and "a. H." through the columns Of the
Banner With but slight exceptions,
these correspondents have used their liter
airy clubs with kindly spirit this l
shall not lose sight of in my reply. In
presenting the subject, was impressed
with its Importance, and, while was con
WINGED of the truths of all the propositions
that advanced, l do not ignore the force
of the arguments that have been urged
against them.
NV critics, who arraign me for "mon-
arch, a despot, priest, pope, an athe-
ist." &C., in their zeal, are far from agree
ing among themselves. But they general
" agree upon four propositions, to-wit:
LIST, They say that Christianity and the
Bible are part Of the common law of this
state.
I'd. That it is the duty of the state to
teach religion,
Sd. That majority in school district
ought to govern in all things.
4th. That religious conscience is violat-
ed by prohibiting the Bible from being read
in the schools for worship.
If the proposition is true, then l concede
the the second must stand. The third
proposition is inconsistent with the first
and second, and they cannot all be correct !;
and, if the first is true, then conscience
must yield to the law.
The first proposition is without any foun-
dation whatever. Christianity and the BIZ
Bile are not part of our law. If it were,
then every person who is not Christian, in
this country,is living in violation of the law
of the land. 1t is recognized principle of
jurisprudence that, for every violation
of law, there is a penalty attached. Now,
suppose my Rev. friend from Suezs should
find some one who repudiates the whole
doctrine, and should have him arrested fol
vialation Of the law; how will he have him
punished? / have no doubt but what my
friend will maintain that the Christian Law
requires compulsion. Let him try to gel
a fine or penalty imposed upon those who
do not observe this Christian law. A man
in this country, can repudiate the Bible
deny that there is a God refuse to be
baptized or partake of the sacrament Of
the Supper; without any fear of molesta
ton or punishment.
1t is urged that, because our statutes
prohibit polygamy, adultery, murder, &C.
that they therefore have adopted the bible
and Christianity as the law of the land
There would be just as much force in say
ing that we had adopted the Roman Cath
Ole religion as the law of our land, because
it as explicitly prohibits the same.
Christianity stands higher than any leg
islative enactments, 1t appeals to the con
science; to reason only. 1t takes Chris
tan people a long time to learn wha
Christ SO plainly taught, that His religion
was not of this world; that Christianity
could neither be established nor over
thrown by the sword nor by the Temporal
prince. 1t said, render to Caesar tn
things that belong to Caesar and to GoC
that which belongs to God" But l an
not left to argument alone in this. 1t ha
been adiudicated, in this country, that tn
Bible and the Christian religion are no
part of the common law; but l will nc
make any quotation, as what | would wis
w ody Ob ehAo 10 muOu DCllCl Sdiu Wy III
supreme court of Ohio, in the opinion tina
shall hereafter present.
will notice the second proposition: II
it the duty of the State to teach religion
Prof. Wylie asks the question, Has gov
eminent anything to do with religion?'
deny that the State has nothing to do wit
religion 1t has much to do with the sub
ject of religion; but not to instruct an
one in religious faith, or require of theI
any religious belief; but the government
is bound to protect every citizen in the Ell
joyment of his religious faith or belle
whether he be Christian, Jew, Mohamme
dan or Bhuddist, with the exception thu
the religionist must not interfere with th
rights of others in religious belief, nc
commit immoral acts in religious ooserVar
ces. Our law Furnishes the polygamist, no
because it is contrary to the Christia
faith, but because it corrupts public mol
ais; and so of adultery. Our laws for tn
observance of the Sabbath are police regu
lations, and are not dependent upon tn
Bible for their enforcement.
Judeg Thomson says, in Bloom VS. Rich
ards, I'd Ohio State Reports, page 39I, tina
Neither Christianity, nor any other sys
tenn Of religion is part of the law of thi
state" Again, on page 1872, he says
THE statute prohibiting common labor o
the Sabbath, could not stand for momen
as law of this state, if its sole foundatio
was the Christian duty of keeping that da
holy"
Again, the same Judge said, in the cas-
of McGotrich VS. Woson, 4th Ohio Stat
Reports, page 5Tl: 1T is no part of th
act against Sabbath breaking, to enforc
the observance Of a religious duty.
does not to any extent rest upon the groun
that it is immoral or irreligious to labor o
the Seventh day more than upon any otl
er day, 1t simply prescribes day G
rest, from motives of public policy, and a
civil regulation"
Mr.. Marbison, says: Religion is nc
within the purview of human government
and is distinct and exempt from its cogn
zance"
The third proposition is: That major
ity in school district ought to govern
all things.
Now, Brothers Moore and Wylie,
Christianity is a part and parcel of tn
common law of Illinois if the Bible is tn
common law of the land, aud religion mus
be taught by the State-or in the publ
schools-then the law imposes the duty o
every teacher to teach the Christian relig
ion in the public schools; and read tn
Bible, the great text book, for that purpos
how, then, do you say that majority c
the voters In district may, or shall, de
termine the question: Shall they instruC
the teacher not to do that which the la
says he shall do?
Ii these majority men are right, the
MIR. Bestor takes the proper position. Ii
says that IT maiOrity want 10 have th