Evening star. [volume] (Washington, D.C.) 1854-1972, 1927-03-17
BACKGROUND OF EVENTS
BY PAUL Y. COLLINS.

largely following English common
| law, but there is little uniformity i'm
their acts, and, of course they can.
| not ieglSlate as to the mail.
| Prior to our Revolution, the Colonies
were subject to English law and Eng.
ilsh traditions. based upon the union
! or church and state. Under those
conditions, any criticism of church
| tenets became sedition, for the King
was head of the church, and the King
relgned by divine right-or claimed
/ TO do so. Criticism of what the
| churches taught was treason against
that divine institution-the throne.
| Not only the King. but all Anglican
bishops, ruled by divine right" So
it was held that christianity was
more than a part of the law"-it was
the law. Blackstone says: Where
| the former determination of the case
is most evidently contrary to reason.
1t is not law; much more If it be con-
trary to divine law" To deny any,
thing orthodox was to deny the very
foundation on which the government
| rested. 1t was optional, therefore,
whether one labeled certain utter
| ances as blasphemy, sedition or trea-
| son.
In 1912 Connecticut passed an act
establishing the death penalty for
| for blasphemers:" Bible texts were
| cited in justification.
When Roger Williams was Danish
! ed from Massachusetts in 1886 for
"blasphemy. it was. according to the
| court. because ANY one who should
| obstinately assert that the civil
magistrate might not intermeddle
even to stop church from appstacy
and heresy" must be banished.
Roger Williams set up his church
| in Rhode Island 10 demonstrate the
legality. under the Bible, of htoler.
| ance." and he entered into a vigorous
defense of his "blasphemous attack
| on intolerance"
In single case in Connecticut. in
| 1912, 10 witches were hanged, as
| logical necessity under the juridical
Interpretation of blasphemy A cen.
fury later Blackstone wrote, ITO
| deny the possibility-nay. the actual
| existence-of witchcraft and sorcery
| is at once fatty to contradict the re-
vealed will of God in various passages
| of both the Old and New Testaments
The law of 1912 Tin the absence of
later legislation was appealed to IN
the case of the State of Connecticut
against Michael Y. Mockus. who, In
1916, spoke bIasphemously in q lee
ture in Waterbury. His lecture was
in the Lithuanian language. He was
convicted in police court, appealed TO
the district court and there the case
was so long drawn out by his law
yers that, in the intricacies, it
was allowed. to go over to another
term without adjusting the bail bond,
and defendant failed to return. The
case is undecided. except by a book
of 455 pages written by defendant
lawyer discussing it's principles. De
PENDANT apparently justified his sur.
name.
In the Virginia Convention of 1916.
George Mason drew the Declaration
of Rights which included the follow
ing on liberation:
THAT religion or the duty which we
owe to our Creator, and the manner of
discharging it, can be directed only by
reason and conviction, not by force or
violence; and, therefore, that all men
should enjoy the fullest federation I'm
the exercise of religion. according To
the dictates of conscience, unpublished
and unrestrained by the MAGISTRATE
unless. under the cover of religion
any man disturb the peace, the happi-
ness or safety of society. and that II
is the mutual duty of all to practice
Christian forbearance. love and charity
toward each other"
James Madison felt that that was
not quite as definite as 1t should be.
lest it should be twisted so as to OPP
press religious sects. under the excuse
that they disturbed the peace. the
happiness or safety of society,"" lie
proposed this amended form:
THAT religion, or the duty we owe
our Creator, and the manner of dis
charging it, being under the direction
of reason and conviction only, not Of !.
violence or compulsion, all men are
equally entitled to the full and free
exercise of it, according to the dictates
of conscience; no man or class of men
ought, on account of religion, to be
invested with peculiar emoluments or
privileges, nor subjected to any pen
alties or disabilities, unless under color
of religion this preservation of equal
liberty and existence of the State be
manifestly endangered
Scurrilous expressions of blasphemy
are not religion" hence are not JUS
titled in law.
Neither the Mason nor the Madison
proposal was accepted, for the clergy
opposed separation of church and
state, but later, when the Constitu-
ton was adopted, they bore fruit.
Nevertheless, when any one denies
that the United States recognizes
Diety, all that is necessary is to show
that which is Caesars" and point to
its inscription. TN God we trust"
tCopyright. 1897. by Paul ". C~llinsJ