The Intermountain Catholic. (Salt Lake City [Utah] ;) 1899-1920, 1903-05-09
Conversations Of Our Club
By 0restes A. Browtson

siaving concluded the discussion re
.,arding a protective tariff, the debat
ars in last weeks chapter Of the con
versations, again took up the relation
ship of politics and religion. This
week the famous bred Scott case i:
discussed, and the position of Chic
Justice fancy, Catholic, in giving
judgment that might have been in &C
cordance with the law but was diamet
rically opposed to the tenets of his
religion, is criticized.
An interesting, but almost forgotten
event happened about the time these
conversations were published. The
government of the United States ap.
piled to the Canadian authorities for
the extradition on a charge Of murder
of an escaped slave who had killed
one of his pursuers in his flight to-
wards the free northIand. The Chief
Justice of Canada, in giving judgment
refused to follow the bred Scott case.
as a precedent, and gave utterance to
a remarkable criticism which created
great furore at the time. His con-
Guiding words were:
1--WE cannot look upon the bred
Scott case as good law. 1t seems to
me that in signing that Judgment the
learned Chief Justice of the Supreme
Court of the United States, by single
stroke of his pen destroyed an other
wise illustrious reputation"
Conversation VIII. (continued.)
''In so far as the civil order is con-
cerned, 1 concede it." said Winslow,
but the question. is not there. The
civil order cannot call a man to an
account for what it permits, but man
may, nevertheless, be accountable in
the spiritual order for things done in
the temporal. Mr. O'Flanagan says
well, that there are two orders, each
Independent and supreme in its own
order but it does not follow from this
that one order may not be dependent
in relation to another and superior
order. The temporal order is inferior
to the spiritual order and is on all
sides bounded by it. This is so not
by positive ordination, but in the very
nature of things, and even God him
self cannot make it otherwise. This
Is the point which, it seems to me,
some Catholics overlook. Brownson's
Review, in controverting the opinion
that free negroes, citizens of partic-
1lar state, are not citizens of the
United States, delivered by the chief
Justice in the bred Scott case, says:
We regret that in giving the opinion
If the court the learned judge did not
what he is taught by his re-
igion, namely, the unity of the race,
hat all men by the natural law are
equal, that negroes are men, and,
therefore, as to their rights, must be
as standing on the same foot
ng with white men, where there is no
positive or municipal law that de-
grades them To this Catholic jour-
lalist replies, with apparently general
that the reviewer would
10 well to remember that the chief
Justice occupies his seat to administer
he law according to the constitution
If the United States, not TO execute
he ordinances and DEGREES OF the
Council of Trent That reply, if it
means anything, means that "a Catho-
ic Judge is not bound in his official
character by his religion. Nobody is
silly enough to pretend that chief
Justice of the United States has it for
lis official duty to execute the ordi-
1ances and DEGREES of the Council of
Trent; but the question raised is,
whether a Catholic judge can admin
ster judicially the civil law or sit I'M
Ter a civil constitution that brings
MIN into conflict with the ordinances
and DEGREES, the doctrine and discip-
line of his church,"
ct is not certain that the objection
Of the reviewer is well founded" re-
Joined O'Flanagan, "and it may be,
that the opinion of the court is COM
patible with our religion. The Cath
olic journals argued well against the
reviewer, that Chief Justice fancy,
brought up a Catholic from his infan-
cy, should be presumed to know and
to respect his religion as we'll and as
much as a recent convert, notorious
for the eccentricity of his opinions.
and the grievous errors of all sorts
into which he has fallen in the course
of his life"