The Seattle post-intelligencer. [volume] (Seattle, Wash. Terr. [Wash.]) 1888-1914, 1891-02-21
DECIDEDLY uN-AMEsIcAN.

Dispatches in reference to the attitude
of Bishop Walsh and other Irish prelates
in regard to the pending political struggle
in their country are impressive of the diff
ference between American public opinion
and that of some other countries in con-
nection With such matters. 1t might be
presuinptuous to claim that we are right
and those who take anothe. view are
wrong, but in this case the difference is SO
striking as to be worth more than passing
notice.
In this country there is an overwhelming
popular sentiment, shared by believers in
every religious sect and creed, that every cit
izen has right, interchangeable from any
quarter, to consult only his own feelings,
preferences and judgment as to what public
assemblage he may or may not attend, to
hear and weigh the discussions Of political
topics. All religions are alike and equally
respected, to the extent that all, with
equal freedom. may be preached and
taught without interference by govern
mental authority, and every citizen, with
out molestion, may enjoy his own belief.
But allied with this, and akin to it, and
inextricable from it, is the idea that polit-
ical beliefs are also free, and that the indi-
vidual citizen must be left free to settle
them for himself, and free as to his man.
ner OF reaching a conclusion.
Or, rs the average citizen would more
pithily express it, if the state lets the
churches alone, the churches must let the
state alone. Non-interference must be
rigidly observed between state and church,
politics and religion, and both ways the
rule must he equally iniiexible in its
workings. On these points the concensus
of public opinion in this country is thor
oughly crystallized. This does not at all
imply that politicians, as individuals, may
not freely entertain and express their
opinions as to varying religious beliefs
and practices. nor that priests, preachers
or churchmen, as individuals, may not
labor for higher standard of morals in
politics, or criticise and oppose political
candidates because of their immortality.
These being the recognized and pro-
nounced views of the bulk Of the Ameri-
can people, the latest news from Ireland
operates as a surprise to most and shock
TO many American readers of it. That a
bishop officially should instruct his sub
ordinstes in the priesthood, as such. to
forbid the attendance by members of their
congregation at certain political meetings,
at the peril of being refused the comforts
and consultations of their religion, CRATES
harshly upon the American idea of pro-
priety, to say the least OF it.
That the prescribed meetings are held in
the interest of Parnell, politically, and
that Parnell stands convicted or is charged
with an act of immortality, cuts no proper
figure in the controversy. 1t is possible.
but need not be claimed, that between
Parneii and leaders in the cause that is IA
vored. or between him and speakers at the
meetings that are favored, there may be
no difference as TO this particular offense
except that lie has and they have not been
detected or charged. Nobody can guaran-
tee the contrary, but no such intimation is
necessary.
The only point is that the constituency,
If they are lit to attend any political meet
ings and exercise any part in politics,
should be left free, with al of the facts be-
fore them. to weigh, balance and decide
for themselves the charge and proof of
moral delinquency, and TO consider if his
guilt in that respect be established to their
satisfaction, whether and to what extent it
overbaianees his many virtues. his emf
nent and iong-eontinued services and sac
rihces, his genius for leadership and bis