Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1876-03-20
ION. a Rtes.tnr

r,.,., -The House Committee on the
a r.; nas agreed. 1 understand. To report
: Ill eNenpting The churches from taxa
zion. The two millions to he raised for rev
Ell ne are to be imposed upon other property
holcers; the UDitCi States, the District, and
the churches being exempted. This sort OF
legislation Is the harbinger OF a brighter day;
of day when GCd will be acknowledged in
the consututfol, when no man will be eligi
Die To Office unless he shall confess the Sa-
viOur before men; and when the law shall
distinguish between the true church add
sects which are no churches. What nobleI
object can Ton gress propose to itself than To
establish and build up religion that only safe
basis of the state?
II has long been a matter OF deep regret to
every patriot that the trainers of the consti-
tution prohibited any direct legislation for
the church; but the object can be attained in
directly. \ caIOm is as effective as a straight
ball. IL would be unwise To appropriate
$50 OCO TO any church, or to all the churches
in the District; but the exemption from that
amount of tax on their property is quite as
beDetcent. The other property owners have
that amount to pay, IN addition to the tax on
their pr vac properly; that Is, they pay
$4,000 on behalf of the churches, which Is a
very moderate 1.-THE for religion, not equal to
what is paid to the church in England, or in
Austria or Italy. AS q churchman, / prefer
the methC1 by exemption TO that by sppro-
Trtation. Suppose the two millions revenue
were III collected from the property owners,
aDd $50 COO were donated 10 the churches,
being return OF the taxes paid by them, they
would be no better OFF tn lu than they are
would be that the available revenue would
fall short by $50, 600. How much better, then,
To let the other tax payers pay the proper
share of the churches.
Is there any man so dead to the claims of
religion as TO grumble because he is taxed tn
support it? Then the national capital is
better off without him than with him. Let
him migrate to some state or country where
the law suits him. Is he Jew. and does he
refuse 10 pay for The vast privileges of this
christian city? We can spare him. Is he
an infdel OF Moslem? Travel will give
him broader culture. Is he a cavillDg PHI
lOSopher who objects to ba sing the safe on
sound religion and thin ks churches ought not
directly or Indirectly to he supported by the
taXtI power? We have had enough of such
tdeo logists. Letthem leave the capital to the
haoitation of homogeneous population of
GOd-fearing men, guided by praying priest
hood leading lives of holiness and mana ging
the rapidly increasing real estate OF the
church.
There is another class of objectiors: tax
payers who claim the right TO select the
churches To which they make contributions.
To these | would lay: Are you consulted a.
10 what shall be done with the taxes col
iected? III not, why fret about the amount of
taxes paid for the churches? Your rulers
know best what ought to be done with the
money contributed by you. Besides, the
fact that there ere some churches so aban-
doned by the people that paying their share
of taxes would kill them shows that the tax
pay eTs. II they could, would let these die.
fortunately, Congress is there TO help these
weak sisters
By the act of June 90, 1874, a republican
Congress taxed churches as well as other
properly; bnt the democrats know better:
ard they will make many friends by their
course on this subject. IL may be true that
they love good old whisky; but, If they will
stand mp for laws to establish the church,
they can have a diSpens8tiOn for any minor
sin. They should bear In mind that, in this
country, party gains more votes by legis-
latirg in favor OF powerful and on1pacted
organizations than Is does by trying 10 pro.
mote what radicals call 1.-THE good of the
people," CHURCH AND STATE.