The record-union. [volume] (Sacramento, Calif.) 1891-1903, 1892-02-18


following proposed amendment to the
Constitution of the United States:
ARTICLE XVI. No State shall pass any law
respecting an establishment of religion or
prohibiting the free exercise thereof, or use its
property or credit, or any money raised by
taxation, or authorize either TO be used for
the purpose of founding, maintaining or aid
ing, by appropriation. payment for services
expenses or otherwise, any church, religious
denomination or religious society," or any in
btltutlon, society or undertaking which is
wholly or In part under sectarian or ecclesi-
astical control.
In 1876 President Grant having advised
such an amendment, and in a message to
Congress invited the attention of that
body to it, after many forms of it were
submitted, the original one, introduced
by Mr.. Blaine, with some slight amend
ment, received the Endorsement of the
House of Representatives by the remark
ably emphatic vote Of $50 to 7, SO not vot-
ing, this being a two-thirds vote as re-
Quired by the Constitution. 1t then went
to the Senate and was debated and failed
to receive the necessary two-thirds vote,
the vote being q to Is, and the reason for
which it came from the House it applied
only to use of funds for public schools
and permitted by indirection, what it
claimed to condemn directly. In the
form given above the proposed amend
ment is believed to avoid the objections
raised, by friends of the principle in
volved, to the former one.
This new form is proposed by "The
National League for the Protection of
American Institutions" This associa-
ton was organized in 1889, and in that
year was incorporated under the laws of
New York. 1t now numbers many thou
sands of members, and at its head is John
Jay, the distinguished diplomatist,
author, lawyer and publicist of New
York, a grandson of the famous patriot
Chief Justice John Jay of the revolu-
tionary period, the friend of Washington,
the agent of the American revolutionists
in Europe, the author of the Constitu-
ton of New York, our first Minister to
England and the father of the famous
'Jay Treaty" with Great Britain.
DR.. James NJ. King of New York is the
Secretary of the new organization, and
among its directors and committees are
such names as II. II. Boysen, John D.
Slayback, William Fl. Parsons, Henry K.
Carroll, William Story, William Fellowes
Morgan, Cephas Brainerd, Dorman B.
Eaton and William Allen Butler. In it's
earliest list of membership we find some
of the foremost citizens, side by side, ir-
respective of party allegiance, such as
William II. Arnoux, Cornelius N Bliss,
d. f. Appleton, Abram S. Hewitt, Fred
erick d. Grant, A. w. Greedy. Mathew
Hale, Henry c. Lea, Joseph Medill, Levi
T. Morton, Vice-President of the United
States; Francis Parkman, Richard NJ.
Hunt, Andrew S. Draper, David S. Jor-
dan, ex-Justice William Strong, General
7. j. Morgan, William Allen Butler.
Albert j. Russell, Francis Wayland,
Frederick Law Olmstead, ex-President
Hayes, Horatio King, George William
Curtis, Austin Corbin, Arthur Gilman,
Cyrus w. Field, John CIafin, Edwin
Booth, Russell Sage, Charles Scribner.
Richard s. Storrs, Bancroft Davis, Will
lam E. Dodge, Judge Noah Davis, Horace
Porter, Rossiter Johnson, E. c.. Stedman.
and so on through more representative
list of American names than has been in
modern times appended to any associa-
ton roster.
The declarations ofthis league, its prin-
ciples and purposes are embodied in the
proposed amendment, or, in other words,
the separation of church and State, the
preservation of the free school system,
and the inhibition of sectarian appropri-
atoms. 1t is unquestionably the best
thought of the purest patriotism of the
nation, that it is the part of prudence and
wisdom to have such an amendment
adopted as a safeguard to American insti-
tutions, and to insure the country against
possible disturbing interjection of policies
that would cause angry friction and
possibly imperil the peace and harmony
under which prosperity and liberation
are promoted.
Itseems to us that there is no reason
able argument to be advanced against the
proposed amendment. The strongest
that can be made is that it trenches upon
the right of each State to conduct its do
nestle affairs as it sees fit. But it is be-
cause of the absence of constitutional pro-
hibition that there is a possible danger
that sectarian ambition may run to the
extent of imperiling national safety and
personal liberty. The reasons for the
amendment are not found in any antago-
nism. hatred or contempt for any relig-
ion; on the contrary, some of the best
arguments for the amendment are based
upon the undeniable truth that such
provision is the very best of protection
for churches, insuring to each perfect
freedom from political encroachment by
another.
We cannot close our eyes to the fact
that hot contests and violent contention
have rent the harmony of the people of
more than one State because of sectarian
appropriations and legislation. Against
all such this amendment is wisely
leveled. 1t means that it shall be more
plainly and emphatically declared that
Church and State shall be separate and