The times., 1899-08-13

! opportunity slavery was monumental ab-
surdity. Yet 1t had in It's favor deep
rooted traditiQps, antipsthies, and human
| predictions for whatever is fattering to
personal vanity, besides certain economic
arguments which had a practical sound.
| 1t was struggle between reason and ira
dition, ethics and economical perversion of
| truth; and 1t is likely to be renewed in
! one form or another for many generations
| to come.
But this discussion does not occupy the
| whole of this volume. In a chapter on
| The Exclusion of Clergymen From Civil
Ohice' is recorded a curious controversy
which ragged in Kentucky on this point.
| Here are some of the arguments:
One member objected because the committee
had incorporated a provision from the old con-
| stitution of 1799 that no minister of the Cos
pei should be eligible 10 seat in the General
| Assembly. Such an exclusion not only prescrib-
| ed the qualifications for the candidate, but it
| prescribed from any participation in the con-
| Germs OF government a large, intellectual, and
moral class Of the community. The dis
cusson of the exclusion of cergymen at last call
| ed out a memorial from two eminent ministers
| of Frankfort. Speaking for the clergy,
! they would even vote for the suspension of
| any clergyman who prostituted the influence of
| his ministerial character for the promotion of
| his personal ambition
On this point the author has this to
| say:
The practical effect Of the exclusion was to
restrain and exclude only worthy and consci-
| entious men.
There were, however reasons against such an
exclusion, based upon much higher ground The
| exclusion involved principles of civil and reli-
| gious freedom, and a violation of the doc
| tTine of equal privileges to all classes. :.
The State had no right TO define the character
ana functions Of clergymen. II the min
| lstcr OF religion was a priest, set apart from
ehz Df rhrse4s Il.
of his office-and by the very nature of his
| office he had peculiar traits which, it could be
| shown, were in any way incompatible with the
! political functions-there might then be some
4 good reason for debarring him from civil Office
! If, however, he was only of the people set
] apart for propounding the truth and dispensing
| the ordinances, with no other influence or power
/ than that of dscharging all his duty, clearly
! there could be no reasons for making any dis
/ tinction between him and other citizens in the
] privileges of citizenship. Did il not follow,
/ therefore, that to decide by the constitution Of
| the State that ministers OF the Gospel were in
! eligible 10 political Office, TO decide the
| great theological question against Protestants?
The controversy was lively one and it
| is the only one of its kind in the history
of State conventions. 1t was finally de-
cided that the convention refused to strike
out the exclusion by vote of seventy
| four to seventeen.
| Another Interesting chapter is that in
which the origin and history of dueling
| are described. AT the time when the desi-
rability of this custom was first question
ed there really seemed to be some good
arguments in its favor 1t was an cut
growth of a peculiar form of civilization.
1t was safeguard. Here are some of the
arguments pro and con:
Society (in Kentucky is preserved by a high
principle of honor, teaching to hold his
character and reputation dearer than life. Was
not dueling ''the fairest mode of fighting
| knownF' Although perfect equality between the
/ parties was unobtainable, dueling nearly
approached to equality than any other. 1t was
! "a high protection to females Northern papers
continually referred TO suits brought by women
| for breach OF marriage contracts and for Sian
| der. In Kentucky they were very rare.
| Dueling operated 4'as a restraint on the bully
in high lfe.' Dueling resulted in a saw
| Ing Of human life In the city OF Louisville.
whose population numbered $4,000, there had
been but two deaths from duels during seventy
+ yesTs-the whole period OF the city's existence.
| Where dueiing occurred men did not find it
necessary 10 carry arms, and consequently those
weapons could not be used in cases OF sudden
quarrel. Seconds must be procured, challenge
| sent, and time allowed the challenged party to
prepare himself This gave an opportunity for
the Intervention of friends who usually effected
compromise. II the parties had been armed,
street fight would have occurred, and the re-
suit would probably have been fatal. As long
as public sentiment remained unchanged IN
Kentucky dueling could be only suppressed by
substituting for it the common practice Of
carrying arms, and street fighting would be more
/ fatal than dueling. The feeling OF honor or
| chivalry which impels TO self-defence native
with the Kentuckian, and neither laws
/ constitutions could destroy it. Man is author
ized to protect the clothes on his back. Should
he not be permitted to protect his honor and his
character, his most important interests in life?
So much for the arguments in favor of
| the custom. These are the arguments
against it:
1t was not necessary that the State should
| be aecursed. either with street fights or with
duels. Legislation could be devised that would
suppress both, and oblige men to resort TO other
means OF settling their personal controversies.
! Formerly duels were frequent between with
/ families dependent them. But since the
adoption Of the law making all parties the
| ground, spectators as well participants equal
| " responsible in damages to the wife and chill
! dTen OF the man slain, not a married man had
F., been engaged in duel in Kentucky. Not
duel had been fought by the citizens OF Louis
! lana since the adoption Of the constitution Of
| ls45. Nor because Of the prohibition Of the
duel there had been slain in public
| counter, had private assassination prevailed
! to an unusual extent.
The history of various States during
| critical periods in their history is given
with some detail In some States peculiar
conditions created peculiar problems. Some
|
communities in recognizing the rights Of
married women. This came about through
the fact that in such regions as Ohio, Illi-
nois, and Michigan, in their early deveI-
opment, mems work was often forced on
women, and they certainly earned a share
in the homestead" Hence it was decreed
| by public sentiment and subsequently by
| law that the homestead should be exempted
from forced sale for debt that the wife and
| oh ha fnr-
| ther protection of the wife, the husband
was declared incapable of disposing of the
| homestead by any deed of conveyance with
out her consent.
! Perhaps the most interesting chapter
dealing with the making of States Is that
which tells the story OF California. In this
| Eldorado of the West as in no other State,
the people fully realized the fact that their
| opportunities were almost uneXampled,
and that 1t was of the utmost Importance
| that they should found the new Common
wealth on a good and firm basis. No State
| in the Union today is the object of more
personal devotion and State pride on the
part of her citizens than California.
Of course, the young State had a heated
| discussion over the negro. The anti-slay
cry discussion was at Its height and all
sorts of theories, tenable and untenable,
were advanced concerning a free negro
population. The matter was finally set
tied in California. very much as it has
been elsewhere, not by legislation but by
experience.
In the conduct of her State affairs IN
general. California was. and is. unique in
some respects. Mr.. Thorpe says of the
State as it was in 1S47-50:
| Obviously Congress had sadly neglected its
| duty. No people at the time Of seeking ad-
mission to the Union were more worthy of Fed
eral aid than the people OF California, and this