Maryland independent. [volume] (Port Tobacco, Md.) 1874-current, 1906-12-14
FRENCH TYRANNY.

To all appearances, France seem
to have, practically, religious wa
on hand. The difficulty grows ou'
Of the attempt Of that nation to sepa
rate church from State and the unfaii
manner in which the attempt is aboIt
to be made. The law Of the French
Republic, recently passed, now IA,
that if religious bodies consent to the
management Of their property al
cording to certain requirements cf
the sid law they may continue t.
use the same, otherwise it becomes
forfeited to the State. To our mind,
such drastic and tyrannical measure
rebuts all presumption of a govern
ment by the people and for the Peo-
pie, negatives the very first principle
of republic and savors Of monarchial
despotism. " hat right has the
French government, as a republic, to
impose any condition upon property
holders other than that they shall
contribute toward the support of the
nation. The religious bodies Of
France have acquired their property
by purchase, gift and devise, the
same as other corporations and indi-
viduals, and it seems most unjust
and unfair to place upon those asso
Citations, as regards their holding o
property, any harsher restriction
than are imposed on any other cor
poration or upon individuals. TIL
contention upon the part Of the gov
eminent is made, however, that tn
property held by the churches ha
been acquired by purchases mad
with money endowed by the Stat
and is, therefore, subject to any gov
ermental restriction. This argumen
is but a ruse. In granting endow
ments to religious bodies the govern
ment coupled the same with no limi
tations. # was a gift without
string to it, and the churches had
right to use it as they pleased, an
they did SO. And, besides, not all tn
church property in France was &C
quirsd through donations from tn
government: much of it was obsaine'
through gift from private individual
making the attempt of the Frenc
government to take it more heir
Gus than otherwise. The propose
plan is likened to the system of prop
erty holding by religious organizs
tons in this country, but such is nc
the fact. There is no comparison
In this country there is no restrictio
of the property rights Of any churcl
Perfect freedom is granted to ever
individual to worship God as b
pleases, and any religious denomini
ton can manage its property to su
the benevolent design of the organ
cation.
If any attempt to abridge such
privilege was made here, the walls G
the National Congress would not b
strong enough to resist the power c
popular resentment against such a
attempt to infringe upon propert
rights. The French governmer
seems to think, however, that hood
wink will do. The bare statemer
that the proposition is akin to til
method of this government in dealin
with the question, it seems, ough
to satisfy the French people, but i
this idea we believe the Frenc
Government is mistaken.
Here, all religious denominations cal
hold property and manage the sam
as in the Judgment of the manage
ment may seem best for the homo
and glory of the Most High. Ii
France, it is proposed, they shall not
The French people should see whore
in lies the difference, and they SHOULD
rebel, and every lover of a Republican
form Of government on the glob'
should encourage resistance to an.
attempt to abridge the rights of an!
religious denomination to manage it
own property.