Evening star., 1955-10-13
PorochioI Schools

Inc recent ietCerS from ~. -.
Cleveland and Holton r. Small
are so misleading as to cause
one to wonder whether it is due
to prejudice or ignorance. I
would suggest to Mr.. Cleveland
that a study Of our constitu-
tional and social history for
the colonial period through the
adoption Of the Federal Con-
stitution In 1889 would be prof.
table for him. If he believes
that our founding fathers
intended that our American
school system should be non
partisan, nonsectarian and
democratic in the sense in
which he appears to be
using the term. The fact
is that at the time the
Constitution Was adopted.
Protestant churches were in
control Of education for the
great mass Of Americans and
the founding fathers did moth
ing to disturb this condition:
nor was the First Amendment
to the Constitution interpreted
as requiring that. children be
taught In nonsectarian schools,
as the practice mentioned con-
tinued for half a century or
more after the adoption 81 the
Constitution. Mr.. Small's pen
chant for the word smear" in
referring to any statements
made by those he regards as
his opponents is perhaps un-
derstandable, for that appears
to be the only form Of argu-
ment that he knows II the
letter he submitted is q fair
sample, e.g., Catholics are the
largest authorization group.
Catholic dogma Is q tighter
system Of thought control than
could be devised by any to-
talitarian, Catholics have sue
ceeded In evading the inspec-
tions designed to insure the
minimum requirements Of the
compulsory education laws, etc.
1t would be curious to hear Mr..
Small account for the fact that
the great majority Of Catholics
are enrolled In public schools,
but / suspect that Mr.. Small
does better with slogans than
he does with facts.
W.T.. McGraw.
~ e.
The letters Of Messrs. Cleve-
land and Small give an unfair
picture Of the discussion rela-
tive to the attitude Of the
Catholic hierarchy toward the
public school system. The care
full reader viii search In vain
for any statement that would
indicate that any member OF
the hierarchy would like to
abolish the public school sys-
TEN in this country. ] speak as
d layman who prefers to have
my three children educated in
Catholic schools where they
are taught fundamental reli-
gious truths that explain q
citizens duty to God and coun-
try and neighbor. It is my right
as q voter and q taxpayer to
send my children to these
schools that teach q belief in
the God whom our founding
fathers acknowledged when
drafting our Constitution and
form Of government.
It Is true that we want our
children to attend Catholic
schools, but IL is utterly unreal
sonable to infer from this that
we wish mont Catholics to at
tend our schools contrary to
their wish. In like manner, 1t
should be unthinkable that
. those who favor the public
schools would desire to compel
us to send our children to the
public schools contrary to our
wish. The people should In
form themselves Of the facts
in this question and not be
misled by biased statements.
Catholics are bearing an enor-
nous extra. burden to support
Catholic schools for their chill
dren,. and II this were not true
the average taxpayer would
have q much heavier tax
burden than he does now.
John A. Lacy, Sr.
- ~
Mr.. Smalrs assertion that
the Catholic educational sys-
tenn is evading many legally
required inspections which
insure fulfillment of minimum
educational requirements is
certainly fictitious. The edu-
cational standards, at all levels,
are fully as high in Catholic
schools as in any other schools
in the country. In most in
stances when q child is trans
ferred from q public to q paro-
chial school he must be placed
In q grade lower than he last
attended in public school.
b. =. - a. A.. H.