Iowa County democrat. [volume] (Mineral Point, Wis.) 1877-1938, 1895-01-24

ton on church taxation, by saying
that its talk about the church Of Eng.
land is quite irrelevant.
The question at issue is simply: Is
it good or bad policy to tax church
property in this country, where there
is no state church, and where no
church has long history in growth OF
andowments there the editor Of The
Sun Is at sea about the English
church) and where the conditions are
totally different from other countrest
The policy that might work well in
England, might not work well in this
country. If The Democrat and The
Sun. do not think 80 in regard to Free
Trade, both must admit that our Re-
publican friends think SO; and, at
least for the present they are on top,
and this Is an argument they should
appreciate. This Is true in state and
in church.
We do not propose to defend or as
sail the English church. We are only
concerned about church taxes In this
country, and we do not see the bear
ing OF The Suns remarks In this re-
gard, unless he wants to say some
thing about the English church.
The Sun says that our criticism Is
hardly fair, In reference to its strict
ures about "the large portion of the
church being given up to fashion,
scandal" etc, etc. We do not see the
point or our lack Of fairness, when 1t
repeats this charge and tries to back 1t
up with proofs.
We only say this once for all-if
all this Is true which The Sun asserts,
then tax the churches out of exist
ence. And further, II church goers,
as u rule, are as bad rs The Sun de-
clares, 1t need not trouble itself much
about church taxes, as the churches
will fall to pieces, through their rot
tenness. But what puzzles us Is,
where does the editor of The Sun get
all this information. 1t Is striking
comment to make upon some of the
,,hinV n,tt ~ n tYu nd hn,
IL we may judge by his article, the ed
itor of The Sun has little or no sym :
pathy with churches; and how can he
know much about the inside working,
for she would not feign to be what he
is not" by church going, We accept
his and Webster's definition, and while
The Sun editor may have his faults, we
do not believe he is II hypocrite,
No sensible person would deny the
badness OF some who call themselves
Christians; but 30 long rs churches
grow, and enhance the value of real
estate, In every town, and are gladly
supported by the community, tall of
which would not be tho case ii they
were MS u rule what Tho Sun says) we
can fairly say u large portion of the
community do not agree with The Sun
on this point, and it only talks wildly.
What we called robbery of God, In
regard to this matter, is only quota
ton from scriptures, and which ore
full upon this point.
The sun talks about our forcing
people to church. This is not our
idea. We do not believe in religious
coercion any more than The Sun; but
in our Judgment this is not so much Il
religious rs u political question that
is, u policy of government.
II the argument of The Sun is
true, on our ground the anarchist is
forced to support II government which
he does not believe in; but neverthe-
less, the government FORCES him to
pay taxes for the PUBLIC COOP, rs Il
matter of public policy, So, we repeat.
this is II question of public policy. Is
1t best for the government to cncour,
age churches, which make for peace
and obedience to civil authority, by
tax exemptions or to tax them, SO MS to
cripple them in carrying on their work
The fact that the government up to
this time, has SO exempted them shows
that it regards churches rs good insti.
tutions in building up good citizen.
ship, and homes which are true foun.
dations of state government, and
without which 1t would fall to pieces
This is history
This one question may be stated
again in this way Would the city OF