July 13, 1787.

FOR THE

No orderly person shall ever be molested on account of his worship.

AN ORDINANCE

GOVERNMENT OF THE TERRITORY OF THE UNITED STATES NORTHWEST OF

THE RIVER OHIO.1

ADOPTED IN THE CONTINENTAL CONGRESS, JULY 13, 1787.

ARTICLE I.

No person demeaning himself in a peaceable and orderly manner, shall ever be molested on account of his mode of worship or religious sentiments in the said territory.

ARTICLE III.

Religion, morality, and

ing a necessity, education

Religion, morality, and knowledge being neces

knowledge be- sary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged.

shall foreverbe encouraged.

2

Adoption of ordinance.

Articles to forever remain unalterable.

Erroneous

views.

1. While the Constitutional Convention was in session at Philadelphia, the Continental Congress, sitting under the Articles of Confederation, passed an ordinance July 13, 1787, 'for the government of the territory of the United States northwest of the river Ohio.' This territory was ceded by Virginia to the United States, and embraced the present States of Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Michigan, and Wisconsin. The same ordinance was afterwards extended to Tennessee, Alabama, and Mississippi. This ordinance provides for full religious liberty on the one hand, and for the cultivation of religion, morality, and education, as essential conditions of national prosperity." Schaff's "Church and State in the United States" (Ed. 1888), page 119. The articles above were among those which were to "forever remain unalterable." See Charters and Constitutions of the United States," volume ii, page 431.

2 It is maintained that the word "religion" in this article has reference specifically to the "Christian religion," and that provision is here made for the teaching of "Christian principles" in the public schools. No such idea, however, is contained in the article. The word "religion" as used in our early state documents, was a generic term, and had refer ence to all systems of belief in a superior power. A similar question arose about a year previous to the adoption of this ordinance, in the

very Assembly that ceded this territory to the United States the General Assembly of the State of Virginia. And in reporting this, Jefferson says: "Where the preamble declares that coercion is a departure from the plan of the holy Author of our religion, an amendment was proposed by inserting the word 'Jesus Christ,' so that it should read, a departure from the plan of Jesus Christ, the holy Author of our religion ; ' the insertion was rejected by a great majority, in proof that they meant to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and Mahometan, the Hindoo, and infidel of every denomination." "Works of Thomas Jefferson," volume i, page 45.

On the provision in question, which was afterwards incorporated in the Constitution of the State of Ohio, the Supreme Court says as follows: "If, by this generic word 'religion,' was really meant the Christian religion,' or 'Bible religion,' why was it not plainly so written? Surely the subject was of importance enough to justify the pains, and surely it was of interest enough to exclude the supposition that it was written in haste, or thoughtlessly slurred over. At the time of adopting our present Constitution, this word 'religion' had had a place in our old Constitution for half a century, which was surely ample time for studying its meaning and effect, in order to make the necessary correction or alteration, so as to render its true meaning definite and certain. The same word 'religion,' and in much the same connection, is found in the Constitution of the United States. The latter Constitution, at least, if not our own also, in a sense, speaks to mankind, and speaks of the rights of man. Neither the word 'Christianity,' 'Christian,' nor Bible,' is to be found in either. When they speak of religion,' they must mean the religion of man, and not the religion of any class of men. When they speak of all men' having certain rights, they cannot mean merely all Christian men.' Some of the very men who helped to frame these Constitutions were themselves not Christian men.

Good gov

Declaration

Assembly of
Virginia.

of the General

Religion

meant to com

prehend allbelievers or unbelievers of the Bible.

Decision of the Ohio Supreme Court.

Meaning of the word "re

ligion."

Government essential to re

protect it.

"The declaration is, not that government is essential to good religion, but that religion is essential to good government. Both propositions are true, but they are true in quite different senses. ernment is essential to religion for the purpose declared elsewhere in the same section of the Constitution, namely, for the purpose of mere ligion only to protection. But religion, morality, and knowledge are essential to government, in the sense that they have the instrumentalities for producing and perfecting a good form of government. On the other hand, no government is at all adapted for producing, perfecting, or propagating a good religion. Religion, in its widest and best sense, has most, if not all, the instrumentalities for producing the best form of government. Religion is the parent, and not the offspring, of good government. Its kingdom is to be first sought, and good government is one of those things which will be added thereto. True religion is the sun which gives to government all its true lights, while the latter merely acts upon religion by reflection.

No gover ment adapted to propagate

good religion.

State religion is some individual's religion.

Whose religion shall the state adopt?

To what extent will it go?

Religious instruction viola

tive of Ohio's Constitution.

Christianity

not a part of Ohio's common law.

Duty of the government to religion.

Encourage

ment given by

our government to religion.

"Properly speaking, there is no such thing as religion of state." What we mean by that phrase is, the religion of some individual, or set of individuals, taught and enforced by the state. The state can have no religious opinions; and if it undertakes to enforce the teaching of such opinions, they must be the opinions of some natural person or class of persons. If it embarks in this business, whose opinion shall it adopt? If it adopts the opinions of more than one man, or one class of men, to what extent may it group together conflicting opinions? or may it group together the opinions of all? And where this conflict exists, how thorough will the teaching be? Will it be exhaustive and exact, as it is in elementary literature and in the sciences usually taught to children? and, if not, which of the doctrines or truths claimed by each will be blurred over, and which taught in preference to those in conflict? These are difficulties which we do not have to encounter when teaching the ordinary branches of learning. It is only when we come to teach what lies beyond the scope of sense and reason'-what, from its very nature, can only be the object of faith that we encounter these difficulties." And the counsel (among them Hon. Stanley Matthews and Hon. George Hoadley) for the Cincinnati Board of Education under the Ohio Constitution containing the above provision, in their argument to the Supreme Court in this case, said :

"The State is, in Ohio, forbidden to interfere with, or exercise the office of, the church. Religious instruction and the reading of religious books, including the Holy Bible,' cannot be prosecuted in schools supported by the taxation of men of all religious opinions, without the violation of section 7, article I, and section 2, article 6, of the Constitution.

"Neither Christianity nor any other system of religion is a part of the law of this State. Bloom v. Richards, 2 Ohio State, 387; Thurman, Justice, in Mc Gatrick v. Wason, 4 Ohio State, 571; article II of the treaty with Tripoli, concluded by the administration of George Washington, November 4, 1796, 8 United States Statutes at Large, 155."

It is the duty of the state to "encourage" religion by giving every individual of whatever belief a full and impartial protection in the promulgation and exercise of his belief. As this has been the general policy of this government, we have as a result, better government and a better morality than any other nation. The encouragement of religion is an incident in insuring civil liberty, of which religious liberty and free thought are the most important branches. Religion in general has been encouraged to such an extent that America has been termed the "home of the persecuted;" for here the Jew or Mahometan has equal rights - even though through the inefficiency or prejudice of the internal police they may not always be protected as they should be-with the highest professor of Christianity in the land. The teaching of Christianity constitutionally has no right in our public schools, or in any of our public institutions.

A BIT OF HISTORY.

139

A BIT OF HISTORY.

The following, published in the Indianapolis "News" of February 1, 1893, gives, in condensed form, the history of the struggle for religious liberty which resulted in the establishment of the government of the United States upon the principle of religious freedom, or that of the separation of church and state:

The strug gle for religious liberty in brief.

"On June 12, 1776, a convention of the Colonial House of Burgesses, of Virginia, adopted a declaration of rights, composed of sixteen sections, every one of which, in substance, afterward found a place in the Declaration of Independence, and in the national Constitution. This was followed July 4 by the Declaration of Independence, written by Thomas Jefferson, of Virginia. The Declaration of Independence had no sooner been published abroad than the Presbytery of Hanover, in Virginia, at its first meeting, openly took its stand in the recognition of the new and independent nation, and addressed to the Virginia House of Assembly a memorial for the separation of the church and state. The Presbytery of Hanover was immediately joined by the Baptists and the Quakers, who sent up petitions to the same purpose. The Episcopalian Church was the established church of Virginia, and had been ever since the planting of the colony. The Episcopalians and the Methodists sent up counter memorials, pleading for a continuance of the system of established religion. Two members of the Assembly, Messrs. Pendelton and Nicolas, championed the establishment, and Jefferson, as ever, espoused the cause of liberty and right. After nearly two months of what Jefferson pronounced the severest contest in which he ever engaged, the cause of freedom prevailed, and December 6, 1776, the conflict. Assembly passed a law repealing all colonial laws and penalties prejudicial to dissenters, releasing them from any further compulsory contributions to the Episcopal Church, and discontinuing the State support of the Episcopal clergy after January 1, 1777. A motion was made to levy a general tax for the support of all denominations, but it was postponed till a future Assembly. To the next Assembly petitions were sent strongly pleading for the general assessment. But the Presbytery of Hanover, still supported by the Baptists and Quakers, was again on hand with a memorial, in which it referred to the points previously presented. In 1779 they defeated the bill, but at the first Assembly after the close of the war, in 1784, it was brought up again, this time with Patrick Henry as its leading advocate. It was entitled 'A Bill Establishing a Provision for Teachers of the Christian Religion.' James Madison stood with Jefferson. As the bill was about to pass, these two succeeded in carrying a motion to postpone it till the next session, but in the meantime, to have it printed and generally circulated. As soon as this had been accomplished, Madison wrote, also for general circulation and signature, a

A severe

Final victory in 1785.

The princi. ples wrought out in Virginia engrafted into the National

memorial and remonstrance to be presented to the next Assembly, in opposition to the bill. This remonstrance was so generally signed that the bill for a general assessment was not only defeated, but in its place there was passed December 26, 1785, 'An Act for Establishing Religious Freedom,' written by Thomas Jefferson.

"Now, during this very time, plans were being laid for the formation of a federal government for the American Union, to take the place of the helpless confederation of States, and it is not too much to say that to James Madison, more than to any other single person, except, perhaps, George Washington, is due the credit of bringing it all to a happy issue. These contests in Virginia, by which had been severed the illicit and corrupting connection between the church and Constitution. the state, had awakened the public mind, and prepared the way for the formation of a Constitution which would pledge the nation to a complete separation from all connection with religion in any way. Accordingly the Constitution, as originally proposed by the convention, declared on this point that 'No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.'"

Struggle

for religious liberty a part of national history.

An oppor tune time for the struggle.

Impor tance of the issue.

A nation worth while.

The struggle for religious liberty fought out in Virginia during the time of the Revolutionary War, and brought to so successful an issue, with the ultimate result of placing the stamp of religious liberty upon the national government itself, is as much a part of the history of the United States as is that of the war itself, and should be in every history of the United States. The struggle with Great Britain for civil liberty afforded an opportune time for the struggle for religious liberty. The friends and supporters of the religious establishment in Virginia desired civil liberty, or independence from the political yoke of a foreign power. To secure this, they needed the aid of the dissenters whom they had persecuted and oppressed under their religious establishment. The dissenters, conscious of the situation, by their protests virtually said, If you wish us to help you gain your civil liberty, you ought to grant to us our religious liberty.

In some respects this struggle for religious freedom carried on during the Revolutionary War, may be said to have been more important even, and more far-reaching in its results, than the war itself; for to the principles of religious liberty here established, more than to its national independence and its stand for civil liberty. have been due the real greatness and influence of this nation in the world. A new nation with the old religious despotism still clinging to it, would have been no great addition to the world's assets; but a nation founded upon the true principles of both civil and religious liberty, was something worth while.