The daily morning journal and courier., 1895-01-02

| COIpOIdtlOlHdu q Just sense or luS Sell
 erosity of those gentlemen, and fol
 that and for many other reasons were willing to do all they could to gratifS
 the gentlemen of the Church of Eng
 land consistent with the design of tht | founders, and particularly had givet l liberty to those students who had beer | educated in the Church of England ano were of that communion to be absent at those times when the sacrament was administered in that church, upon Christmas and some such other times as would not be an infraction of the
 general and standing rule of the col leGe." The argument of the president was thought to be satisfactory, and al
 the time no further concessions were
 made to the church people who were
 so clamorous for freedom. They were
 right, but the English speaking world
 did not then understand the princi-
 pies of religious freedom as applied
 either to educational institutions or to
 public worship. You will perceive,
 then, how the case stands. The disaf-
 fected minority was arguing for an
 education and for a freedom in the
 matter of the worship of the students
 entirely in advance of their own time.
 The dissatisfied minority is always the
 party pleading for freedom, whether in
 the church or in the state. The gov
 erning majority naturally does not oriticise it's own conclusions.
 The attitude of the college caused pr.
 Johnson to address President Clap a very impassioned letter. It was writ ten in February, 1754, and ia the course of it he writes as follows:
 ''The only point in question, as I humbly conceive, is whether there ought by right to be any such law in your college as either in words or by necessary consequence forbids the liberty we contend for.
 What we must beg leave to insist on is, that there ought not, and that it is highly injurious to forbid it, unless you can make it appear that you ever had a right to exclude the people of the church belonging to this colony from having the benefit of public edu- cation inyour college without their sub hitting to the hard condition of not being allowed to do what they believe in their concsIence it is their indispensa- ble duty to do, i. e., to require their children to go to church whenever they have pportunity-and a right to ac- cept and hold such vast benefaetions from gentlemen of the Church of England wherewith to support you such a law in exclusion of such liberty. Can you think these would ever have given such for such purpose2'
 This is the substance of Dr. Johnson's warm and impassioned plea. He was right in theory, right in principle, but mistaken as to what had been the common sentiment of the English speaking race They did not under stand religious liberty. This is the point to be remembered in the history of this debate. We can scarcely blame President Clap for not being above the level of his race and time and sur and Dr. Johnson himself right as he was in his plea, probably lid not know for the reporter was not hen abroad in the land) that just about l six months before the composition of | his letter q remarkable boy, named | Edward Gibbon. had been expelled | rom the University of Oxford because | le had become a Roman Catholic. So | t may be said, not in the way of com | but of fact, that both sides | n the controversy had certain meas | Ire of right What was right and | rue has become triumphant; what was | mistaken and false has been buried out | # sight
 But to come back to the church. Though the churchmen had at last seen heir hopes realized, and they could worship in the house of God according O their cherished and inextinguisha- lie convictions, the congregation did lot increase in any way to stimulate he hopes or to arouse the enthusiasm the people. In fact, our story Is still omewhat melancholy. While church. len were brave, persistent, determined nd vigilant, New Haven still remained bdurate In the year 1760 q am again ldebted to Dr. Stiles Itinerary)s 1t ap- ears the whole number of members of he Church of England in New Haven ras less than a hundred. No church aeord preserves their names, but I ave found them in Stiles, and will cad them: Enos Alling, 1; Stephen Hing, 3; stephen Mansfield, 5; Timothy onticu, 6; Timothy Bonticu, jr., 5; 3aac Doolittle, z: Benjamin Mugford
 William Punchard 4; John Daniel 1n, 2; Thomas Davis, 4; Benjamin anford, 5; John Leak, 5; Daniel Rus all, T; William Cable, 8; Timothy Ford,
 Joshua May, 8; Nicholas Leckmore,
 Stephen Bradley, 5; Mathers Noble,
 Thomas Dodd, 5; James Woodhouse,
 Jonathan Miles, T; Mrs. Greenough, ,
 John Read, 2. These members de- 0te the size of the families. The hole population, including 200 stu ents, was about 1,500. The people ere disheartened. Dr. Johnson, hose heart had been in New Haven z long, spoke out of the fullness of it
 a letter to Archbishop Seeker: t MT. Punderson,' said he. seems a ,ry honest and labOrious man, yet the l lurch at New Haven appears uneasy 2 i'd rather declining under his minis | y; occasioned, l believe, partly by 2 S want of politeness and partly by o s being absent so much, having five i
 six places under his care. l wish |
 was again in Groton, and some S liter person in his place and another r
 Guilford and Branford" a F+ Voou ha sai6 in trutb thnf tha fl