The Bridgeport times and evening farmer. (Bridgeport, Conn.) 1918-1924, 1920-09-17
YARNS AGAINST
INCREASES IN
J. STATES POWER

4 Wash r gtoTi, Sept. IL Robert
Biggs, Presid emit Of the Society of st.
Vincent de PasI, baltimore, and other
headers in Catholic philanthropfc ac-
hivity, sounded a warning against in
ecreasing the power of the State at
Fhe expense of the individual under
the guise of social legislation at the
second days session OF the National
Eonference of Catholic Charities at
the Catholic University OF America
Yesterday.
During the discussions consideration.
FWa5 also given to what was declared
20 be a tendency to encrOach on in
tdividual rights by restoring to- 1egis-
1atfon to promote social betterment
1nisdirected philanthropic move
nnenta
Edward J. Dooley, Justice, OF the
domestic Relations Court of Brook
E5yn, urged the establishment of
Family courts to safeguard the reia-
Ftions of the family the basic unit
tUf society
A social legislative program was
Proposed by the Rev Joseph Rainier,
Is. J., Regent of the School of Com
college, Cincinnati, who appealed to
fhe Catholics of the United States to
Make an active part in the enactment
pDf laws for the improvement of social
hconditions-
The right of the parent to the
pcustody and control of the children
gkaid Mr. Biggs, sis a primary natural
Fright in the parent, which cannot be
Eevaded or abridged by the State ex-
Ecept in those cases where the parent,
My his own vicious conduct or habi-
ktnal neglect of the child. jeopardizes
1ts future welfare, .,s Or "h Ter no1 tne
doower, enacts general legislation for
fhe protection of public health, pub
bic safety, public morals or the good
lof society as a whole. Any efforts on
THE part of the State to abridge the
natural rights of the parent are sub
Eject TO judicial control.
my personal experience as a law
yer convinces me that our courts
heverywhere have shown strong
ttendency to guard jealousy parental
sa-ights against direct attack and to
1put a heavy burden of proof upon
tshe State or upon agencies assailing
Whose rights; but they have not al
ways shown the same discriminating
Eaeaning when The attack is more in
Dsidfous and comes under the guise of
Ia general scheme of education, q
EgeneraI scheme for the regulation of
Rhours and places of labor, of places
rand character of amusements, and
other less benef1cent movements,
(which often have no better claim to
merit than they are backed by d
ksn1al1 burt insistent group of people
lwho easily convince themselves that
ethey have a divine commission to
tsave the race.
Here the attitude of the court
NFnOwS a fean1nR TO support enact
f1nents which are promulgated by a
s-co-ordinate branch of the Govern
li1nent (the legislative branch) which,
Theoretically at least has its mandate
lsdirect1y and recently from the
people,"
while, however, we may con-
I-rratu1ate ourselves on the safeguards
which the courts may furnish, wish
to remind you that We are face to
liface with a new order of things
! which is creating a distinct tendency
in the direction of increasing tn
power of the State at the expense OF
individual, under the guise of So
called social legislation.
I'VE have had an era. during which
men and women have entered the
field of social work in a never ending
stream; we have our schools of phil
taIithropy; we have foundations, enor-
| nously wealthy, surveying the
schools, Government departments.
and even our homes, and, when their
findings are not promptly accepted,