Romanism versus the public school system

Preface

IN writing my late book, Christicmity in the United States from the Earliest Settlement to the Present Time,^ mucli material came into my hands which could not be appropriately introduced into that volume, but which is of value to American citizens.

Yaluable articles in the editorial and other columns of the Christian Union, in May, June, and July, 1888, have rendered much aid to the author.

The recent amtation of the Cathohc school contest, in Boston and elsewhere, prompted me to enter into the discussion, for the benefit of my own congregation, and also for the public at large. The result is this little book, which I hope will help to an understanding of the questions involved ; questions soon more fully to engross public attention.

The discussion, it is hoped, will commend itself to all as candid and fair, if not as sharp and severe as

* Phillips & Hunt, 805 Broadway, New York city. 800 pages, Bvo, 1888.

4 Pkeface.

some M^ould desire. Yet it is not wanting in positiveness.

There are points of radical divergence, indicating that two peoples are struggling in the womb of the nation. Vituperation and abuse cannot settle these points, but may postpone the settlement. In some localities the contest is hot. The author has decided views, and he does not intend to put either shavings or kerosene upon the fire, but rather the solid fuel of facts and principles.

Many American citizens do not yet seem to realize the need of awakening to these matters. The history, the expansion, and present proportions of this contest have, therefore, been sketched at considerable length, that all eyes may be fully opened. Wliile the author does not share in the alarm of many good people, as to the country at large, he does, nevertheless, think that there are localities (and the number will soon be increased) where the case is urgent. Our greatest fear is from the political maneuvering of Rome.

Daniel Doechester.

Boston, Mass. (Roslindale P. 0.), Nov. 1 0, 1 888.

Contents

PAGE

Preface 3

Section 1. Its Inception 9

" 2. The Expansion 20

" 4. Attempts at Compromise 55

" 7. Recent Papal Acts and Utterances enforcing

the Parochial School System 94

*' 8. Statistical Exhibits of the Parochial Schools

of Romanism in the United States. ........ 120

PART II. Questions Involved in the Contest

1. As to the Right and Duty of tlie State to Educate. . . 135 3. As to Religious Instruction in the Public Schools. . . 150 3. As to a Parochial School System for all Parties 171

6 Contents.

PAGE

4. As to whether tlie Public School Funds can be

Divided 186

5. As to whether, as a Matter of Comity, we ought not

to find some way to Divide the School Funds. . . 204

6. Is a Compromise Possible ? 211

7. Can both Parties patronize the Public Schools Harmo-

niously, and on what Basis ? 224

8. What may we expect Romanists to do in the Future,

and how shall we Preserve our School System ? . 238

9. As to the Pretensions of Rome as an Educator 243

(1.) The Historic Record of Rome in Respect to Education 244

(2.) Rome's Record in Respect to Education in the

United States 255

(3.) The Quality of the Education afforded by the Roman Catholic Church , 258

(4.) The Roman Catholic Church does not Believe in

the Education of the Masses 291

10. Has Romanism Adopted a More Enlightened and

Liberal Policy in our Times and in our Country ?. . 295

PART I.

HISTORY OF THE CONTEST.

PART I.

History of the Contest.

SECTION L Its Inception*

A SKETCH of the history of the Eoman Catholic school contest will help American citizens to more fully understand the character and proportions of this great struggle, and the unyielding spirit with which it is pushed. The struggle had its origin in the city of New York, and Bishop Hughes was its first conspicuous Roman Catholic champion.

Many may be surprised to learn that the first appeal for a division of the public school funds in this country was made by a Protestant denomination, and the first sectarian division actually made was to that body. The other Protestant Churches, instead of objecting, attempted to obtain their share of the public school funds. At that early period, and back into the last century, it was a common thing for legislative bodies to grant pecuniary aid to the higher educational institutions, such as academies and colleges, many of which had grants of public lands. These were not aided out of public school funds raised by taxation, but they were denominational institutions and were officially aided.

There is one instance in which specially-designated school funds were divided in the interest of a sectarian school of a Protestant denomination, the other Protestant bodies assenting, and even desiring to receive their share also. This occurred before the Roman Catholic school contest came on, and before the American people saw what it might lead to. That very act was the means of opening the eyes of Protestants to see the practical results of such a course — the destruction of the common school system. It was this act which Bishop Hughes, of N^ew York, cited when he made his first demand for a part of the school money for Roman Catholic schools.

It should be premised that in the early part of this century, prior to the establishment of the common school system for the State of New York, which occurred in 1812, the raising and distribution of school funds was by methods very different from those of more recent years, and more irregular. The whole matter varied greatly in different counties and localities, many things being left optional. In the city of New York the school funds could then be distributed among certain schools and societies named hj the Legislature, and such incorporated religious societies as then supported or might thereafter establish charity schools. This system was defective on account of the inequality of the distribution, the absence of inspection and accountability, and a liability to abuse.

It was while this system was in operation that an organization which for about a half a century performed a most beneficent work was formed in the city of 'New York.

The New York Public School Society

was an association of benevolent gentlemen, formed in 1805, for the education of poor and neglected children. In its schools probably a half million of children received the elements of a sound education connected with instruction in the holy Scriptures. It was largely aided by the School Fund of the State. Besides educating poor and forsaken children, it performed two other important services — it trained up many excellent teachers and watched over the general interests of the educational cause. This latter function brought it before the public on many very important occasions. Its annual expenditures amounted to about $130,000.

The first ripple of disturbance in the management of this society, it should be said, came from the

Protestant denominations, when the Baptist Bethel Church, in 1823, sought and obtained its share of the public money for its schools. An agitation was awakened all the steps of which need not now be distinctly traced ; but the question went to the Legislature in some form, where it was argued, and a provision enacted that once in every three years the Common Council might name such schools and institutions as should be entitled to receive the school moneys, the city Corporation being still responsible to the State for the faithful application of its funds. The disbursement of the greater part of the funds was intrusted to the Public School Society, incorporated for the purpose, which, in addition to the public moneys, obtained other loans from life membership fees, etc. By the act of the Legislature, the question of a division of the funds was to be decided by the Board of the City Corporation. That body appointed a committee to hear the parties to the case. It is remarkable that the Episcopalians, Methodists, Baptists, and Roman Catholics, at that time, sought for a participation in the School Fund, just as the Roman Catholics have since done. After the hearing, the committee made a report which settled the principle for the time, that sectarian schools were not to be sustained or aided from the public money. This decision seems to have " convinced every body of the impolicy and injustice of such a division of the school money, except the Roman Catholics."

In 1831 the " Roman Catholic Benevolent Society " succeeded in obtaining, through the " Sisters of Charity," the grant of $1,500, which has been annually made by the Corporation of the city for a long series of years, for the orphan asylum schools under their care, notwithstanding the opposition of the Public School Society. This, however, did not satisfy the Roman Catholics,

Up to 1840 the Public School Society had established about one hundred schools ; but the Catholics continually complained that Protestant ideas were more or less inculcated in the public schools. The Romanists had then had a considerable number of parochial schools in operation for, probably, twenty years, and the number was constantly increasing.

It is correctly claimed by intelligent Roman Cathlics that this controversy did not begin with them, but Math the Baptist Bethel Church already referred to. They also justly claim that certain influential Protestants, at the opening of this controversy, gave them encouragment. Among these the distinguished Rev. Dr. Eliphalet Nott, for a very long period president of Union College, at Schenectady, is cited as one who was open in the advocacy of a denominational school system, by which each denomination would share, in due proportion to its pupils in schools, in the common school fund. He is said to have even advocated the providing of schools for children of different nationalities.

Eev. De. Nott and Hon. William H. Sewaed.

Dr. JSTott had been the tutor, and was the life-long friend and adviser, of Hon. William H. Seward, and freque%tlj expressed his views on the school question to that eminent statesman, during his occupancy of the gubernatorial chair of the State of New York.

Governor Seward, it is said, on one occasion requested Dr. l^ott to reduce his views to writing, promising to embody them in a message to the Legislature and to recommend their adoption. This he did in 1839, before Bishop Hughes had entered into the contest, and the Governor, in his message to the Legislature in January, 1840, presented the subject in the following remarkable passages :

Although our system of public education is well endowed, and has been eminently successful, there is yet occasion for the benevolent and enlightened action of the Legislature. The advantages of education ought to be secured to many, especially in our large cities, whom orphanage, the depravity of parents, or some form of accident or misfortune seems to have doomed to hopeless poverty and ignorance. These intellects are as susceptible of expansion, of improvement, of refinement, of elevation, and of direction as those minds which, through the favor of Providence, are permitted to develop themselves under the influence of better fortunes ; they inherit the lot to struggle against temptations, necessities, and vices ; they "are to assume the same domestic, social, and political relations; and they are born to the same ultimate destiny.

The children of foreigners, found in great numbers in our populous cities and towns, and in the vicinity of our public works, are too often deprived of the advantages of public education in consequence of prejudices arising from differences of language or religion. It ouglit never to be forgotten that the public welfare is as deeply concerned in their education as in that of our own children. I do not hesitate, therefore, to recommend the establishment of schools in which they may be instructed by teachers speaking the same language with tliemselves - and professing the same faith. There would be no iiiequahty in such a measure, since it happens from tlie force of circumstances, if not from choice, that the responsibilities of education are in most instances confided by us to native citizens, and occasions seldom offer a trial of our magnanimity, by committing that trust to persons differing from ourselves in language or religion. Since we have opened our country and all its fullness to the oppressed of every nation we should evince wisdom equal to such generosity by qualifying their children for the high responsibilities of citizenship. *

Tliese passages do not present the grounds on which Roman Catholics base their claims, namely, the riglits of conscience, as obedient children of

Eome, and the equal rights of citizenship ; nevertheless they open the door sufficiently wide to admit what the Romanists ask for.

Father Schneller, pastor of the Roman Catholic Church at Albany, after conversation with Governor Seward and other officials at the State-House, wrote to the Very Rev. Dr. Power, then administering the concerns of the New York diocese during the absence of Bishop Hughes in Europe, expressing the opinions entertained in Albany, that if petitions were presented asking for the participation of Catholic schools in the School Fund the measure could be carried. The trustees of the Catholic churches in New York city were called together and the subject laid before them. Dr. Power visited Albany and, from personal interviews, inferred the probability of success. Returning to New York, a Roman Catholic Association was formed in order to secure uniformity and concert of action. Weekly meetings were held, and a petition for a share of the School Fund was presented to the Board of Assistant Aldermen. Nor were the Catholics the only parties in this movement. Other religious bodies also participated. The Board denied these petitions, but the agitation continued, with much diversity of sentiment and recrimination. A Catholic paper, T/w Truth- Teller, charged the leaders with political designs, which was like a fire-brand thrown into the already excited meetings.

Bishop Hughes.

At this time a stronger hand took up the contest. In 1838 Rev. John Hughes was appointed coadjutor bisho]^ of the New York diocese, on account of the failing health of Bishop Dubois. To obtain pecuniary aid for his diocese Bishop Hughes visited Europe in 1839, returning early in July, 1840, at the time when the school contest was well under way. An important meeting was held by the Catholics on the 20th of July, the Yery Bev. Dr. Power presiding, and Bishop Hughes, for the first time, addressed his people on the subject, advising careful but firm action. August 10 the Roman Catholics issued an address to the public, to which the Public School Society made a reply, ^n a general meeting, on the 21st of September, the Catholics adopted a petition to the Common Council for relief, complaining of the sectarian character of the public schools, on account of which the Catholics had been compelled to erect schools of their own, which they offered to submit to the conditions of the law in regard to religious teaching. They specified seven Catholic schools which they prayed the Council " to designate as among the schools entitled to participate in the Common School Fund, upon complying with the requirements of the

18 Romanism vs. The Puclic School System.

law," or " for such other relief as should seem meet.'" Tills petition was followed by two remonstrances, one by the trustees of the Public School Society, and the other by a committee of the pastors of the Methodist Episcopal churches of the city.

At this time the Protestants had fully thought out the question of the integrity of the public scliool system, and had reached the conclusion that there could be no successful maintenance of that system, if the funds were divided among the different denominations. That would end the system.

The Debate.

The Corporation determined to have the question discussed before the full P)oard of Aldermen and Assistant Aldermen, which was done in the evenings of Oct. 28 and 29, 1840. In behalf of the Catholics Bishop Hughes appeared. In behalf of the Public School Society, Tlieodore Sedgwick, Esq., and Iliram Ketchum, Es(]. On subsequent evenings Kevs. Drs. Thomas E. Bond, Nathan Bangs, and David Reese, M.D., appeared for the Methodist Episcopal Church. Rev. Dr. Gardner Spring, for the Presbyterians ; and

Rev. Dr. Knox, for the Dutch Reformed Church.

When the others had ended Bishop Hughes replied at length, from which, in justice to the Rouian Catholics, an extract is given : —

It is the glory of tins country that when it is found that a wrong exists there is a power, an irresistible power, to correct the wrong. They have represented us as contending to bring the Catholic Scriptures into the public schools. This is not true. They have represented us as enemies to the Protestant Scriptures, without " note or comment ; " and on this subject I know not whether their intention was to make an impression on jonr honorable body or to enlist a sympathetic echo elsewhere ; but, whatever their object was, they have represented that even here Catholics have not concealed their enmity to the Scriptures. Now, if I had asked this honorable Board to exclude the Protestant Scriptures from the schools, then there might have been some coloring for the current calumny. But I have not done so. I say, Gentlemen of every denomination, keep the Scriptures you reverence, but do not force on me that which my conscience tells me is wrong.

I may be ^yrong, as you may be ; and, as you exercise your judgment, be pleased to allow the same privilege to a fellow-being who must appear before our common God and answer for the exercise of it. I wish to do nothing like what is charged upon me ; that is not the purpose for which we petition this honorable Board. In the name of the community to which I belong I appear here for other objects ; and, if our petition is granted, our schools may be placed under the supervision of the public authorities or even of commissioners to be appointed by the Public School Society ; they may be put under the same supervision as the existing schools, to see that none of those phantoms, nor any grounds for those suspicions, which are as uncharitable as unfounded, can have existence in reality. There is, then, but one simple question — Will you compel us to pay a tax from which we can receive no benefit, and to frequent schools which injure and destroy our religious rights in the minds of our children, and of which in our consciences we cannot approve ? This is the simple question. ^

Roman Catholics have claihied that their position in this stage of the contest has been misunderstood, DeCourcj says : f

While they proposed to keep their own schools they proposed to conform them to the law, to subject tliem to State supervision, to arrange the instruction according to the State requirements, and did not ask for the exclusion of the Bible from the schools of the Public School Society, but asked for their share of the public money.

Pending the decision, negotiations for a compromise were interchanged, in which the Catholics offered to appoint no teachers except such as the Public School Society upon examination should find duly qualified ; to afl[:ord every facility for visitation and inspection to the duly-appointed agents of the Board ; to guard against abuses, and to render their schools in every respect free from objection. The Public School Society also offered terms — to let the schools be attended and managed as they were carried on, but to strike out of the school-books all pas-

* Eeport, p. 4. Also works of Archbishop Huglies.

+ History of the Catholic Church in the United States, p. 417.

sages to which the Catholics objected, and to have only such passages of the Bible read as are translated the same way in the Protestant and Romish versions. But no agreement was reached ; and so, after numerous hearings, negotiations, and visitations of the schools, the case was decided adversely to the Roman Cart;holics, Jan. 12, 1841. But the Catholics did not rest their case at this point.

Hon. John C. Spencee.

Petitions were thenceforth drawn up and presented to the Legislature, headed by Bishop Hughes. The memorial was referred by the Senate to Hon. John C. Spencer, Secretary of State and ex-officio Superintendent of Public Schools. The report of Mr. Spencer proposed an entire change in the system: that a Commissioner of Public Schools was to be elected in each ward of the city ; to these Commissioners the Public School Society was to be transferred, and the general School Laws of the State were to be extended to the city. The Commissioners were to receive and apply the public moneys to the support of the public schools, which were to be placed under their control.

Seeing that it was impossible to carry their measure for a participation in the" Public School Fund the Catholics advocated Mr. Spencer's proposition, on the

22 Romanism m. The Public School System.

ground that it was tlie least objectionable system they could get, and at least possessed the merit of excluding sectarianism from the schools. The Catholics favored the measure ; Protestants opposed it. Controversy ran high. The newspapers were full of it. A disgraceful " hull of excotmnunicatlon^'' from "Tristram Shandy" appeared in the Journal of Comnurce. The result in the Legislature was the postponement of the question from May, IS-il, to January, 1842, in order that the intervening State election might afford an expression of the popular sentiment.

In the election followmg (November, 1841,) Governor Seward narrowly escaped defeat, because of the stand he had taken on the school question. The Catholics ran independent candidates for the Legislature in New York city, because both the political parties held mixed positions on .the school question, not making it an issue, and 2,200 votes were cast for the independent ticket — a significant lesson to the old parties. In his message Governor Seward reiterated the views uttered the previous year, recommended the abolition of the Public School Society and the creation of a Board of Commissioners, to be elected by the people, whose duty it should be "to apportion the school moneys among all the schools, including those now existing, which shall be organized and conducted in conformity to its general regulations and the laws of the State iu the proportion of the number of pupils instructed."

His recommendations were in substance adopted. The school system of the State w-as extended to New York city. This led to the formation of " Ward Schools," under the direction of officers chosen in each ward, while those of the Public School Society remained under its control, the two systems operating side by side. As might have been expected, however, experience soon demonstrated that such a plan was attended wath many difficulties. Tliis led the Public School Society to propose to retire fi'om the scene, M'hich was allowed ; and on the 22d of July, 1853, it transferred its schools and property to the Corporation of the city, to be managed by the Corporation's Board of Education, just as the ward schools were administered. The surrender was made after fortyeight years of valuable service to poor and neglected children, and after a long resistance against the demands of the Romish hierarchy, under the leadershi]^ of Bishop Hughes. At that time the Bible had been ejected from more than eighty of the public schools in New York city. The Romanists had not succeeded in obtaining a division of the School Fund for the benefit of their sectarian schools; but the disbanding of the Public School Society was a Roman Catholic triumph. In this contest Bishop Hughes managed with consummate tact, persistence, and ability, sustaining his cause in the Municipal Council and in the Legislature, and teaching tlie politicians the value of the Roman Catholic vote — a Lesson which they soon learned to appreciate.

End of the Public School Society.

On the occasion of the delivery of the Public School Society property to the Corporation of the city Hiram Ketchum, Esq., delivered an appropriate address, in which he used the following language :

Now, my friends, I have to say here, and I hope that it will pass throughout the country, that there is no satisfying the Roman Catholics on this subject ; aijd here 1 would proclaim loud enough, if I could, to bo heard in California, that the Roman Catholic pi-iesthood are opposed to Protestant children and Roman Catholic children sitting side by side in common schools and learning from the same forms. That is the objection. They did not want to expel the Bible ; they did not want to blot out the offensive passages ; but they wanted to separate their children from the Protestant children of the country, and to receive a portion of the School Fund to enable them to educate their children by themselves. For this object, we may rely upon it, the Roman Catholic priesthood will steadily and perseveringly exert themselves. I say the " priesthood ; " for I do not believe the Roman Catholic laity desire any such separation. They, with us, desire that the children of this republic may study side by side in common schools, in order that they may have the advantage of all that union of sentiment and feeling that grows from boyish intimacy.

Mr. Ketchum terminated his speech with the following serious M-ords, which deserve to be well pondered by every friend of our public schools ; ill fact, by every true friend of the country :

In this great struggle, which is to shake the country from Maine to California, we must stand up and oppose error with all our force, and cleave it down in its place, and preserve the purity and integrity of our institutions. For, if this republic is not preserved, where shall we go ? What shall we do 'i What wall there be left for our children ? Let us, then, contend always for the right, being assured that such labor is never finally lost.

2G Romanism vs. The PuiiLic School System.

SECTION II. The l^jcpansioji

SOON after the closino- np of tlie Public Sdiool Society the New York Independent s;iid :

Now the question is, Are our public schools still to be tampered with at the iustig-ation of Romish priests? And how far is this pusillanimous compliance Muth their demands on tlie part of our School Connnissioners to be cari-ied ? Shall the whole sj'stem be first sacrificed and then Romanized? The object of this crusade against the public schools is, first, to bring them into contempt and suspicion, as irreligious and ungodlj^, and, next, to build up Romish schools on theii' ruins.

The instinctive hatred and jealousy of Romanism against the Bible teach us very clearly the power of an education in which scriptural truth is an element and a fixture.

"Expel the Bible from our schools!" exclaimed Mr. Choate. "Never, so long as a piece of Plymouth Rock remains big enough to make a gun-fiint out of!"

The Amen<xm and Foreign Christian Union the

same year said :

Not content with the right which the Roman Catholic Church has, in connnon with every other religioQS denomination in the land, to establish as many schools as she can, at her own expense, and conduct them in any manner she pleases, she has the presumption to think that Protestants will consent to the destruction of our public schools — conducted, as at present, on a non-sectarian basis — and to allow her a share of the public school funds proportionate, not to the taxes which Roman Catholics pay (which are for the most part very far less than those of the Protestants), but to the number of children which they have, or which they may be able to gather into their schools. In other words, they wish to make Protestants contribute largely, directly or indirectly, to sustain tlieir sectarian schools.

There is unmistakable evidence that a concerted movement has been set ■ on foot which ramifies throughout every portion of our country where a public school system exists. The agitation has been commenced and prosecuted with vigor at Boston, I^ew York, Newark, N. J., Detroit, Chicago, Cincinnati, Pittsburg, and Baltimore. It is the old war-cry of Rome against all education except what is carried on under her own control and direction. The first charge against the public schools was that they were " sectarian," because the Bible was read daily at the opening and closing of them. Well, after having succeeded in getting a faithful superintendent put out of office, and a tool of the priest chosen in his place, and the Bible banished from eighty schools, the charge is now made that the public schools are "godless."

After the act of 1842 Bishop Hughes devoted himself more fully to the establishment of Catholic schools for Catholic children, calling to his aid in the work of instruction the Brothers of the Christian schools and the ^isterlioods of the Church. The Romanists have paid their proportion of taxes for the support of the public schools, in which tliey say " thej cannot conscientiously educate their children," and at the same time have provided parochial schools of their own.

It has been stated by a good authority that in the year 1853 the Roman Catholics demanded State aid for their schools in eight different States — Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Michigan, Ohio, California. Since that time the demand has been repeatedly made elsewhere in some form.

In the same year that the Public School Society surrendered its property in New York city, in Michigan, and Ohio, the subject was carried to the polls, but the result was unfavorable to the Romanists. The existing school law was sustained by large majorities, the German Catholics in great numbers standing with the Protestants. The attempt was repeated in Maryland. Hon. Mr. Kearney, member of the Legislature from Baltimore, introduced into that body a bill, accompanied with a flourishing report, to make a similar division of the school moneys, as asked for in New York city. The movement met with great opposition in Baltimore, one-fourth part of whose population were Roman Catholics. An immense mass-meeting was held in the hall of the Maryland Institute. Addresses of great power were delivered by Rev. Drs. Plummer, Fuller, Johns, and others, and the proposed measure was unanimously condemned.