Arizona silver belt., 1889-09-14
STATEHOOD Vs. THE SCHOOL QUESTION
 INNEW MEXICO.

C1OOlOAo VI o-S VI llbOly 10 AOW III session in Santa Fe, but soon after the
 convention organized and business
 was announced in order, Demetrle
 Perez, of Socorre county, sprung the
 school question which, like Banquo's
 ghost, so utterly deSolates the hearts
 of both Protestants and Roman Cath
 olics, because 1t will not down at
 either's bidding; and as evidence that
 the apparitien has come to stay until
 the final vote, yea or nay, by the peo-
 pie at the polls, 1t has entered more
 extended area than that of Santa Fe
 and now pervades the whole Territory.
 Archbishop J. B. Salpointe, through
 the columns of the Las Vegas Optic,
 voices the position of the Catholic
 church as in favor of a religious at
 mosphere prevailing the school room,
 and as his church cannet hope to be
 allowed the disbursement of the en-
 tire school tax, he asks, "Give us an
 organic school law, which will be
 truly unsectarian by giving to every
 denomination equal rights both In the choice of teachers and in the matter fof religious Instructions. The rev erend prelate further says, "Let the State see to if that the teacher is com petent to give the secular instruction required, but let his religious and moral character be determined by those whose children will be intrusted to his care or by their chosen repre- sentatives."
 In subsequent issue of the Optic exChief Justice s. B. Axtell has re- joinder to the Bishop, of column in length, in which the following ap- pears: 1.-The Bishop says, Let the State determine who IS competent to teach the secular branches, and the church who is competent to teach the religious branches The teacher would hold two certifcates-one from the State and one from the church. He would be responsible to both, and might be removed by either. This would not be a common school, and is not the American system. With our mixed population, it IS entirely inn practicable. Under our great organic law, it is clearly unconstitutional, for it unites church and State.
 "The State has no right to provide for religious institutions. However strong the argument may be, that re- ligion is absolutely indispensable to the welfare of the people, the State can neither provide for its teaching nor its support. The fact that very large majority of the people of this Territory are Cathollcs ought not to have any weight in the settlement of the question of common schools. Should we adopt such a rule it would be too iuctuating. Populations con stantly change.
 "The right of every individual to worship, or not to worship, must be left to the dictates of his own con- and not to the opinions of a majority of his neighbors,
 Il do not know that anybody se- riously disputes the right, even of an ignorant and bigoted parent, to shape the religious convictions of hls child, but 1 do most seriously and earnestly dispute the right of the State to inter- fere by any system ofreligious schools.
 The Santa Fe Democrat also vigor- ously criticises the Archbishop's views upon the school question. The editor the belief ''that free schools are for the sole purpose of educating the head" To this the Optic 'emphat- lcally differs and says: "Witbout ge- ing into discussion that would be almost lnterminable, we call his atten- ten to the fact that some of the most thoughtful educators Tn the East, men who are devoted heart and soul to the school system, are deplonng the growing tendency of that system to materialism. It. is painfully ap- parent to them that the education of the heart Is being sacrificed to the ed ucation of the mind, and the work turned out by this vast system year after year is demonstrating this fact with growing force. The Optic does not agree with Bishop Salpointe in his conclusions, and it has repeatedly put itself on record in very emphatic terms as being in favor of a system of free, non-sectarian schools, but it pro- tests agalnst the theory that such schools are for the education of the mind alone, without reference te the development of the moral and relig- ious nature of the pupil"
 Should the convention refuse to adopt clause embracing the views of the Archbishop, the constitution will meet the opposition of the church at the polls, and on the other hand if his views are accepted by the convention,