The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1896-04-03

From the Trensury-McRne, OF Ar
kansas, Would Build the Wall
Between Church and State So
High that Religious Fanaticism
Would Never Be Able to Over
leap 1t.
WASHINGTON, April 2.-The ques-
ton of appropriation of public money
for private Or sectarlan institutions.
which was debated for several days
during the consideration of the District
of Columbia appropriation bill in con-
nection with some appropriations for
charitable Institutions in Washington,
was fought over four hours in the
house today. On the former occasion
the contest was managed by Mr.. Lin
ton, who is one of the pronounced A. P,
A. members. This contest was sue
cessful, and by a vote of 14S to 135
the bill was recommitted.
Today the bone of contention was
the Howard university, colored insti-
tuition of Washington, for which an
appropriation of $32.60O was inserted
in the sundry civil bill yesterday on
motion of Mr.. Evans Rep) of Ken
lucky. There was no opposition and
no debate on the item yesterday.
Today Mr.. Hainer (RepJ of Nebras-
ka, in whose temporary absence the
amendment was adopted yesterday.
rallied his forces against the appro-
priation on the ground that 1T was both
a private and a sectarin institution, a
- L -,
by the university. The appropriation
was coupled with a proviso that no
part OF Ii should be used for religious
teaching, but Mr.. Hainer insisted that
it could not be denied that it was in q
sense religious institution.
Mr.. Cannon. Mr.. Evans and other
members, who supported the amend
mention the other hand, declared they
were opposed to appropriating public
money for seotarian institutions, but
argued that the proviso freed it from
this criticism. Politics, of courss, were
injected literally into the debate, Mr..
Savers and Mr.. Hepburn being espec-
| tally prominent. Each insisted that
his party was more particularly the
friend of the biz ok man. The house
voted Q29 to 1853 to retain the appro-
priation, thus, in a measure, reversing
its action when the district bill was
that 107 Republicans, IS Democrats
| and 5 Populists voted for the bill.
and 55 Republicans, AZ Democrats and
Populists against it.
The sundry civil bill as amended was
passed.
Tomorrow the house will take up the
conference report on the Cuban resolu-
tons
THE PROCEEDINGS.
Several minor bills were passed by
unanimous consent before the consid-
Grafton of the sundry civil appropria-
ton bill was resumed in the house to-
| day.
The resolution of inquiry presented
by Mr.. Hit, chairman of the foreign
affairs committee. was adopted with
out debate, calling on the president, if
not incompatible with public interest
to transmit to the house copies of all
dispatches. notes and kilograms in the
state department from December l.
1895, until the present time. relative to
the mediation or intervention by the
United States in the affairs of Vene-
Zuela, together with all correspondence
with foreign governments relating to
the same topic Hit stated his COM
mattee had unanimously reported the
resolution.
SUNDRf CIVIL BILL.
The sundry civil bill was then taken
up. Under an arrangement entered
into. Mr. Haines (Rep) of Nebraska
was given an opportunity to attack
the amendment adopted yesterday APP
propriating $4,000 for the Howard uni
yersity.
It was Mr.. Haines who led the sue
cessful fight against appropriations for
sectarian charitable institutions in. the
District of Columbia appropriation
bill.
Mr.. Haines explained that the
amendment was adopted yesterday
while he was temporarily absent from
the hall, and without opposition in a
way which made it seem probable that
| 1T is not obnoxious to the appropria-
lions committee. He thought mem
hers had
UNWITTINGLY AGREED
to it yesterday without realizing its
! far-reaching character and signifi-
canoe. This WIS a private institution
! and every candid person must adm t
! that il was also sectarian. Twice this
| session the house had placed itself on
| record against appropriating one dol
J lar for sectarian institutions The
! house had gone farther and had de-
clared against appropriating for any
/ private purpoSe. He read from the
/ prospectus of the institution to show
that it was a Christian university and
maintained as it's most favored depart
ment a school of theology. This was
an institution for the further education
of the colored people. Why should
cofored people be given their education
at public expense if white people were
not? What excuse could members
give? He favored higher education
/ but the government had no right to
single out particular sect, race, creed
or social class.
FAvoRITISM HAS NO PLACE
in any intelligent republic. He
charged that the institution was en-
gagged in missionary work in Africa.
Il submit said he, that our mis-.
sionary work had better be done al
home. We cannot justify our actor
in appropriating money for evangeliz
ing the people of Africa"
This was an insiduous attempt tt
commit congress again to a principle
that had in the past taken million:
upon millions from the Golfers of the
government for the benefit of sectariar
institutions. From 1871 to 1896, in the
| District of Columbia alone, $13,000.0 0
had been given to sectarian institu