New Ulm review. (New Ulm, Brown County, Minn.) 1892-1961, 1892-08-17
THE ARCHBISHOP'S STAN
Irelands Position on the School Question
Given out by Rev. Morey.
The PTslate Wants the Catholic Religion
Taught in the Schools.

He Admits, However, that protestants
Have q Right to Kick Against
Sisters as Teaehe1g.
The Minneapolis Tribune of Sunday
contains special from S iillwater which
needs ne introduction. It explains it
self and was as follows AS Rev. Il. ii.
Marey stepped off the train tonight on
his return from his annual vacation he
was met ~ 4 Tribune representative
with the query
Mr. Morey, What was there of inter-
est to the public in that famous inter
view between yourself and Archbishop
IreIand2'' ~
It was agreed upon between the arch
bishop and myself not TO say any thing
sof the interview, but as { see mention Of
it has been made in the Tribune, NAV
as well give you the facts in the case.
Two weeks ago Wednesday John @ 'Brien,
a director of ST. Michael's parish. asked
me If I would meet Archbishop Ireland
at his home the next day [ agreed and
Tuesday morning Mr.. O'Brien, Arch
bishop Ireland and myself were closeted
in Mr.. O'Brien's parlor. didn't know
the object Of the meeting until the arch
bishop branched out OH a talk Of the
school matter, crediting me with having
some interest in the question. He
charged the public schools with being
Goddess and professed a desire to intro
duce religious elements into them. I
suggested that when went to school We
recited the Lords prayer and read from
the Scripture, and asked how they we're
driven out. He confessed that it was
largely owing to Catholic protests.
q again suggested that committees of
all religious denominations meet and
formulate ritual to 5e used as a text
book continuing religious instructions
that would not be Objectionable to any
sect, and that no person of good morals
could object to. He objected on the
ground that I would not confess to the
Catholic idea, admitting that what the
Catholics wanted was the teaching of
religion in the schools. He cited an in
stance In which the. state legislated In a
matter Of religion, requiring the cbser-
vance of the Sabbath, and remarked that
the state did not do that for the sake of
religion, but to require the observance of
Sunday as a day of rest. He said
"Why not legislateimmediate1y in that
way in the matter of the publicschools,' 2
claiming that by such plan the state
would Immediately arrange religion
81 objected to the Sabbath as not being
a parallel case, the Sabbath being com
mon to both Catholics and Protestants,
but that the Catholic religion, which be
was advancing in his plans, was not com
mon to both Catholics and Protestants.
The archbishop frankl = admitted that the
Protestants' conscience had good reason
to be offended when sisters of charity
were introduced into the central public
school buildings and placed over Protest
ant children.
81 asked if / might infer from that
that the garb Of the sisters Of charity
had a teaching force. This he practical
| ly admitted.
seThe archbishop is a very astute ane
plausible talker. He makes a very ia.
vorable impression upon most people
but, as | said to him, his plan involves
the impossible condition of seeking reli-
gious instruction by the state in schools
which is contrary to the laws and condi.
tions Of the state. | suggested that this
plan was one that could stand only on
It's merits and In the eye OF the law this
religious clemens robbed it Of all merit.
He seemed confident that some com.
promise would be arrived at by which
the difficulties would be met I gained
from him the information that his efforts
are by no means considered at an end.
It was quite amusing to me on the after
noon Of the same day of our parochial
interview, to read IN the Tribune that the
archbishop had declined conference
with representative Of your paper on
the subject and preferred to talk about
the washouts, after his giving me an hour
and half in the morning. Archbishop
Ireland and I parted on quite friendly