Iowa County democrat. [volume] (Mineral Point, Wis.) 1877-1938, 1890-09-19

when we pay our taxes for the support of
the public free schools of this iand-we
do this gladly-we have right before
God and man to put up our school houses,
train our own teachers and support our
own schools. that our children may be
taught and trained in morals and religion
as our conScienceS tell us they ought TO be
taught and trained.
That is statement of the ground Of
Catholic and Lutheran objection to the
Bennett law, which Is clearly in couSon-
ance with both the letter and the spirit of
the federal constitution. 1t is not within
the power of the state to restrict the free
dom or conscience, even though 1t be done
under the guiSe of securing a national
tleSsing. No one denies the benefit of a
thorough assimilation of the mass of
foreign material which is constantly cast
upon the country. But there are ways
to do that within strictly constitutional
limits and it is being done everywhere
without the aid of the Bennett law as
rapidly as it is being done in Wisconsin
under the operation of the law. Hence it
is begging the question TO say such ieglS-
latIon Is necessary to produce assimilation.
There is no danger, either Immediate or
remote. that the p@ople who live III Amer
lea will ever be anything else b;t
Americans. All this talk about the danger
to establish an Ireland, a Germany. or a
Bohemia on America soil Is all tomtool-
cry and the meanSSt sort of clap-trap.
The real principal involved in the Ben
nett law is the right of the state to inter
fere with the private affairs of the indi-
vidual citizen. Any private gentleman
has the unquestioned right to maintain a
private school in he nome absolutely free
from state dictation. He has the right to
prescribe course of instruction for his
children, regardless whether of French.
German or Choctaw is included in the
course. and the state has no constitutional
power to Interfere with him. because he
Is simply exercising a right inherent
TO every American citizen. The paroChlat
school stands ON precisely the same foot
ing. It Is a private school maintained
bv an aggregation of private citizens for
their exclusive benefit They foot the
bills and consequently have the right to
prescribe the courSe of instructions for
those schooles The state has no more
right to invade the parochIal school than
1t has to invade private gymnasium and
direct that Il certain system NJ athln,lr eX-
erciSe should be enforced.
There is no one making kick az inst
the right of the state to prescribe a course
of instruction in Its own schools. The
free schools are public institutions. and are
subject to state domination. As long as
the citizen contributes his share of the tax
toward derraying the exp nses of the free
school, he has performed all the duty that
the st tie has a right to require OF HIM. If
he doeSn choose to avail himself of the
benefit Of these schools. it is his privl-
lege as an American citizen not 70 do so.
You can take horse to water but You eau I
make him drink unless he is SO inclined
to. Surely an American citizen ought to
have the same privilege of enjoyment
of inherent rights that a dumb animal
has.
If the principal involved in the Ben
nett law, the right of the state to invade
private concerns, is at once established,
who can fix limit to the scope of It's
operations? What affair of a private
nature can be kept sacred from govern
mental intrusion? What rights can the
citizen have that the government will be
bound to respect? There is a grave con
Stitutional question underlying this Ben
nett law which affects the personal liberty
of the citizen, and which the people of
Wisconsin should not overlook. The
Bennett law is ostensibly aimed at the
forign- bern element. Yet, in reality, 1t Is
a blow. at American citizenship. 1t is
subverslve of the fundamental principles
of American institutions, and is a menace
to popular government.