The Irish standard., 1897-05-08


ton was not to interfere with the use
Of the school for regular instruction In
the common school branches Of educa-
ton.
AS might be expected, the judges de-
eide that such religious instruction as
was impaired by the teacher is contrary
to the constitution Of the state, and that
the building in which the exercises were
carried on is a place of worship, within
the meaning of the law.
I'm the public schools say the
judges, "there are, of course, a multi
tude of religious sects, and diversity
Of opinion among them; and it was the
evident intent of the constitution to
keep the tender minds of the children,
who are to derive advantages from and
have the benefits of such institutions of
learning, free from the excitement
which :clashfng religious doctrines and
sectarian controversies are sure to pro-
duce."
They declare that the question for
them is not one between Catholics and
Rrotestants, but is entirely one of law,
and they cite several analogous cases
and the decisions rendered in other
states. They declare that sectartan
prayers and instruction constitute reli-
gious worship, and that this is prohibit
ed at any time of day in the public
schools, and is as much a violation Of
law outside school hours as within the
same, and they further assert that GOTH
er state institutions can have nothing to
do with religion or religious worship in
any form OF respect whatever
Any taxpayer, they say, can prevent
public school from being used for wor-
ship, as a public school is as completely
secular as any other institution of the
state, in which all the people alike have
equal rights and privileges.
Looking at this case in all it's aspects
we cannot see how the st. Cloud Judges
could have rendered any other decision.
They were solely governed by the law,
and interpreted the law bearing on the
case with the utmost impartiality.
Eve fully appreciate the value and i'm
portance of religious instruction of some
kind for the incubation of morality"
say the judges, but they are Of the opin-
ion that such instruction should be CIV
en- to the young in the churches, Sun
day and parochial schools, at social reli-
gious gatherings, and, above ali, by the
parents in the home circle. The decision
applies to Protestants and Catholics
alike, and it should be heeded by
them in all the public schools Of the
state for the sake of harmony and in
compliance with the law.
There are many public schools in the
state in which religious instruction Is
being constantly impaired, but as no
taxpayer enters complaint, as in the
Avon case, there is nothing said about
the matter. Not only is religious wor-
ship conducted during the five days Of
ligious exercises are carried on by the
Sunday school teachers. This we know
from personal experience, and we can
not see that any harm is done if no UNI
pleasantness arises between the resident
taxpayers over religious questions.
In the Minneapolis public schools
they are now using a book containing
extracts from the Bible, being the same
compilation in use in the Chicago
schools, and it seems that it is salts
factory to all denominations of Chris
tians. But what of the Jews and unbe-
levers? They also support the public
schools by taxation, and if they protest
against the use of these scriptural les
sons, and bring an action against the
board of education for the exclusion of
the book, we believe the court would Or
der the reading Of it discontinued.
They have Chapel in the State Uni
versity of Minnesota, and it is there pre-
any taxpayer objects to the holding of
any form of worship in that institution
of education it is probable that the
courts would listen to his complaint
and restrain the regents and president
of the university from permitting or
conducting any religious exercises with
in it's walls.
In commenting on the Avon case the
Milwaukee Citizen says" OF course the
force of this decision is to outlaw all
such arrangements in Minnesota as that
made some years ago at Farfbault. The
rather needless and unwise controversy
begun over the Faribau1t case was the
starting point of all the subsequent
acrimonies in the church. If it had
been sensibly perceived that the Fari-
bault arrangement could not, because
of it's Illegal character, be extended be-
yond special localities and if there were
NO personalities in the case, Rome and
the public would never have been i'm,
portuned with the controversy"
The St. Cloud judges in their decision
make not the slightest reference to the
Faribault plan, but they refer at con-
siderable length to the Edgerton Bible
case in Wisconsin, in which the editor
of the Citizen cut a prominent figure as
one of the attorneys for the plaintiff.