Year: 1876

| have advocated an amendment to the Con-
stitution which shall prohibit the appropria-
tion of any public funds to the support of
sectarian schools. This amendment was to
make no distinction between Jew or Gentle,
Catholic or Protestant. Accordingly early in
the last session Mr.. Blaine introduced the
following as an amendment to the Constitu-
tion, 10 be submitted to the legislatures of
the several states after being adopted by two
thirds of each branch of Congress:


No State shall make any law respecting an estat-


istment OF religion prohibiting the free exercise
thereof; and no money raised by taxation in any
State for the support of public schools or derived
from any public fund therefor, any public lands
devoted thereto, shall ever be under the control of
| any religious sect denomination; nor shall any
money so raised or lands devoted be divided be-
| tween religious sects or denominations


This fair proposition called forth hostile
criticism from the Catholic press generally,
and many of the Democratic organs Joined
in the cry against it. The House, however,
after mulling over it until late in the session,
| adopted resolution submitting the amend
| ment as proposed by Mr.. Blaine to the
states. In the Senate it was referred to the
Judiciary Committee and it reported the
| following as an amendment instead of the
| Blaine draft:


Resolved, By the Senate and House of Representa-
tives wothirds of the members of each House con-
curing therein that the following article be pro-
posed to Legislatures OF the several States: An
amendment to the Constitution of the United States
which, when ratified by threetourths of said Leps-
latures, shall be valid as part Of said Constitution
namely


ARTICLE Is, Sec. 1. No State shall make any law
respecting an establishment of religion or prohibits
ing the Tree exercise thereof and religious test



pu9lc trust under any State. No public property,
o the PGP Ga any loan Of credit By or
territory district or municipal corporation Shall be
appropriated to or made or used for the support of
any school, educational other institution under
the control OF any religious Sect organization or de-
nomination. or where, in particular the creed or ten
ets or anv religious aDt-regious sect, organiza-
ton or denomination shall be taught; and no such
particular creed or tenets shall be read or taught in
any tShool en- or institution supported in whole in
appropriation or loan of credit shall be made to apy
reliSous or anti-Ielgous sect, organization de-
nomination, or to promote its interests or tenets
This act shall not be construed to prohibit the read
ing of the Bible in any school institution and it
erty already vested.


SEC. 2 Congress shall have the power by appro-
pirate legislation, provide or the prevention and
punishment OF violation of this article.


The above proposed amendment was dis.
cussed at length in the Senate aud defeated
by strict party, every Democratic Senator
coting against 1t.


The defeat of these amendments has been
scarcely noted by the secular press, but such
Catholic journals as we have seen do not fail
to express their delight thereat. In noticing
the Senate proposition, the Catholic Journal
published at Pttsburg, Pa, says:


We have no hesitation in saying that this article
was prepared with view. on the one hand, of pre-
Vrn oc fbar
being given to Catholics, and, the other of nsur-


ing the Bible permanent place in the public schools.
In regard to the first, want none of the public
money; the most we should ask, if an opportunity
were offered, would be exemption from taxation for
the pubic schools so long took from the State
the burden of educating our children. Nor are we
disposed to quarrel on this point. Our policy ia to
let the school question alone AND TIME AND LEsIs-
LATIoN WILL EITHER DESTROY THE SYSTEM OR
| PUT US IN POSITION IN WHICH OUR NUMBERS
AND INFLUENCE WILL DEMAND RESPECTFUL
| HEARING, that is at present denied us.



With reference to the second provision of the arti
cle-that of retaining the Bible in the schools-we
have nothing to object. The SCHOOLS ARE THEIRS
THEIR MAKING, THEIR FOSTERING, AND THEIR
PRoPPING UP; AND IF THEY WISH A MISERABLE
TRANSLATION OF BOOK which is full of "tbings
hard to be understood, which the unearned and un
stable wrest to their own destruction" to be put in
the hands OF their children, let them have it so
The Catholic journal speaks with the au-
thoritJ of the Bishop of the diocese where it
is published. The sentiments of hostility TO
the public school system so thinly disguised
ia the above extract, are the sentiments of
large majority of the intelligent co nmun-
cants of the Catholic church. There are
exceptions, but they are rare. Indeed, so
general is the feeling that the Catholic church
is hostile to our system of public schools that
Archbishop Purcell OF Cincinnati has deemed
it expedient to publish declaration setting
forth his position on the school question.
He first declares that his clergy have s'no
| Intention to interfere with YOUR public
school system" Have the Archbishop and
his clergy put themselves outside of the peo-
pie OF the United States that they speak of
the public schools ordained for all as s'gour
public schools?' Further along the prelate
assumes that the Catholic people of this
country by justice are entitled to exemption
from taxation for the support of other schools
than their own, or 10 have share of the
public school fund in proportion to their
| numbers, but adds that "this claim we are
disposed to waive in your favor" The en-
| tire drift of Archbishop Purcelrs declaration
| is to the effect that his church must sustain
schools of their own. Now, despite his dec
laration of non-hostility to the free school
system of the country, is it possible in
the nature of things that his followers


will quietly allow themselves to be
taxed to support schools which their
teachers regard with disfavor2 viii they


willingly contribute to the support of
schools to which they will not send their
children if their church is able to provide the
means of education? Will not the question of
division of the school fund be constantly
recurring, provoking angry discussion and
scenes of violence? Why not then, once for
ali, settle this question by constitutional
provision which will put the matter beyond
the power of agitation in the future9


The Democratic Senators think not. They


think it is better to keep the question open


TO agitate the public mind. What is their


motive? Is it bid for the votes of any par


ticular sectp Who will explain?


In New Gloucester the other day, men,


ber of the Democratic Town committee