meetings from disturbance, and these are enforced when occasion requires. Indeed, I am not aware of any offence that is more promptly punished by the police than interference with religious worship, whether held in a church, in a private house, or even in the forest.

All the States have laws for the regulation of church property, and of that devoted to religious uses. In some States, every religious body, immediately on being organized, is pronounced de facto incorporated; and in none, generally, is there any difficulty in procuring an act of incorporation, either for churches or for benevolent societies. No State allows the oath of an atheist to be received in a court of justice, and in one only, in so far as I am aware, is that of a disbeliever in a future state of rewards and punishments received as evidence. That State is New York, where the law requires simply the belief in a state of rewards and punishments; in other words, if a man believes that there is a God who punishes men for evil actions, and rewards them for their good ones, whether in this world or in that which is to come, his oath will be received in a court of justice. Of course, the man who believes neither in the existence of God, nor in any sort of divine punishment, can not be sworn, nor can his testimony be allowed, in a court in that State.

CHAPTER X.

THE LEGISLATION OF THE STATES OFTEN BEARS FAVORABLY, THOUGH INCIDENTALLY, ON THE CAUSE OF RELIGION.

If there be no Established Church in any of the States at the present time, it is not, as we have shown, from any want of power in the States to create such an establishment, but, because it has been found inexpedient to attempt promoting religion in that way. Experience has shown that with us all such establishments have been, upon the whole, more injurious than beneficial. They have been renounced because, from the nature of the case, they could never be made to operate in such a way as not to do some injustice to one portion or other of the citizens.

To this general conviction we must ascribe what appears at first sight to be an anomaly: the fact that power to aid religion by legal enactment is expressly conferred in the Constitution of some of the States,* and yet that power is suffered to lie dormant, nor is there the least prospect *Maryland, New Hampshire, and South Carolina.

of its ever being exercised again. But although the States have thought it best for the interests of religion itself, as well as most equitable to all classes of the inhabitants, to relinquish all attempts to promote religion by what is called an establishment, yet they have deemed it neither unwise nor unjust to pursue the same end indirectly. Several instances of this kind have been stated already; we may notice a few more.

The States do much to promote education in all its stages, though in doing so they often assist the cause of religion, in what might be considered nearly the most direct manner possible. For instance, they aid colleges directed by religious men, and that, too, without stipulating for the slightest control over these institutions. On this we shall yet have occasion to speak more at large, and we introduce it here merely to indicate what the States are thus doing for Christianity in the way of concurrence with other bodies. Some States have given considerable sums to endow colleges at the outset. Others contribute annually to their support, and this while well aware that the colleges aided by such grants are under a decided religious influence. So is it also with the academies, of which there are several even in the smallest States, and many in the largest. Young men are instructed in the classics and mathematics at these, preparatory to being sent to college, and as many of them are conducted by ministers of the Gospel and other religious men, they are nurseries of vast importance both for the Church and for the State.

Again, by promoting primary schools, the States co-operate in promoting religion; for mere intellectual knowledge, although not a part of religion, greatly facilitates its diffusion by means of books. In the six New England States, it is long since provision was first made by law for the good education of every child whose parents choose to avail themselves of it; and, accordingly, hardly is there to be found an adult native of those States who can not read. Some uneducated persons there are, especially in Maine, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island, but they are few compared with what may be found in other lands. In all the six States, except Connecticut, each "town" is required to assess itself for as many schools as it may need. Connecticut has a school fund of above $2,000,000, yielding an annual revenue of above $112,000, and this maintains schools, a part of the year at least, in every school district of the State. In New York, Pennsylvania, and Ohio, there are efficient primary school systems in operation, supported by law, and capable of supplying all the youth with education. The State support consists partly of the interest of permanent State funds set apart for the purpose, partly of money raised in each of the townships by assessment. The systems pursued in

New Jersey and Delaware, though less efficient, are highly useful. Efforts are making in several of the Western States to introduce a like provision, and a good deal is done in the Southern States to educate the children of the poor, by means of funds set apart for that purpose.

The instruction given in the primary schools of the United States depends greatly for its character upon the teachers. Where these are pious, they find no difficulty in giving a great deal of religious instruction; where they are not so, but little instruction is given that can be called religious. The Bible is read in most of the schools.

Several of the States have liberally contributed to the establishment of asylums for the deaf and dumb, and for the blind, almost all of which institutions are under a decidedly religious influence. The governments of several States containing large cities, have done much in aid of the efforts of philanthropic individuals and associations for establishing Retreats or Houses of Refuge, where young offenders who have not gone hopelessly astray may be placed for reformation. These institutions have been greatly blessed.

Before concluding my remarks on the indirect bearing of the State legislation in America upon religion, I have a few words to say on one or two subjects connected with religion, but different from those already mentioned. One is marriage, which with us, is in a great degree a civil institution, regulated by the laws of each State, prescribing how it should be performed. In so far as it is a contract between the parties, under proper circumstances of age, consent of friends, sufficient number of witnesses, etc., it has, with us, no necessary connection with religion. In all the States it may take place if the parties choose, before a regularly ordained minister of the Gospel, and be accompanied with religious services. The civil power decides within what degrees of consanguinity and affinity it may take place. On this point, and this mainly, can any collision take place between the ecclesiastical and civil authorities. For instance, some churches pronounce marriage with a deceased wife's sister to be incestuous and unlawful. Such marriages, on the other hand, are expressly allowed by the laws of Connecticut, and are not forbidden by those of any other State excepting Virginia. In all cases of this kind, a man must make his election as to which he will obey-the Church or the State. As condemnation by the former subjects a man to no civil penalties, all that he can suffer is excommunication.

As for divorces, they are wholly regulated by the civil government, and fall within the jurisdiction of the States. In some they are allowed for very few causes; much more looseness of practice prevails in others. In South Carolina, I understand that no divorce.

has been granted since it became a State. In some States it be longs to the legislature to grant divorces, and in others to the courts of law.

What are called mixed marriages, or marriages between Protestants and Roman Catholics, which have given rise to so much trouble of late in some countries of Europe, occasion no difficulty with us. Marriage, by our laws, being a civil contract, is held valid at common law whenever the consent of the parties, supposing there is no legal impediment, is expressed in a way that admits of proof. The refusal of a priest to grant the nuptial benediction, or the "sacrament of marriage," except upon conditions to which the parties might not be willing to agree, would be of little consequence. They have only to go to the civil magistrate, and they will be married without the slightest difficulty. No Roman Catholic priest, or Protestant minister in the United States, would dare to refuse to perform the ceremony of marriage, unless for most justifiable reasons; for if he did, he would soon hear of it through the press, which is with us an instrument of correcting any little instances of tyranny or injustice.

CHAPTER XI.

IN WHAT CASES THE ACTION OF THE CIVIL AUTHORITY MAY BE DIRECTED IN REFERENCE TO RELIGION.

BESIDES the incidental bearing which the legislation of the individual States has upon religion, and which sometimes comes not a little to its help, there are cases in which the civil authority intervenes more directly, not in settling points of doctrine, but in determining questions of property; and these are by no means of rare occurrence where there are conflicting claims in individual churches. This, indeed, has happened several times, in reference to property held by large religious denominations. The first of these cases occurred in New Jersey, and on that occasion the courts decided upon the claims to certain property, urged by the Orthodox and the Hicksites, two bodies into which the Society of Friends, or Quakers, has been divided throughout the United States. And although the trial took place on a local cause, or, rather, for a local claim, yet the principle upon which it was decided affected all the property held by Quaker societies in the State.

The second case occurred in 1839, in Pennsylvania, where the Su

259 preme Court had to decide upon the claims of the Old and New School, to certain property belonging to the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church, on its being divided into two separate bodies, each of which assumed the name of the Presbyterian Church. Here the court had of necessity to decide which of the two ought by law to be considered the true representative and successor of the Presbyterian Church before its division. The decision, however, did not rest on doctrinal grounds, but wholly on the acts of the bodies themselves, the court refusing to take up the question of doctrines at all, as not being within their province. Not so in the case of the Quakers just referred to. There the court considered the question of doctrine, in order to determine which body was the true Society of Friends.

A few years ago a similar intervention of a law court occurred in the case of the Methodist Episcopal Church, North and South.

I apprehend that I have now said enough to place the nature of the mutual relations between Church and State in America fairly before the reader, and will dismiss the subject by giving some extracts from a communication which the late Hon. Henry Wheaton had the goodness to address to me, and which presents, in some respects, a résumé, or summary of what may be said on this subject:

"In answer to your first query, I should say that the State does not view the Christian Church as a rival or an enemy, but rather as an assistant or co-worker in the religious and moral instruction of the people, which is one of the most important duties of civil govern

ment.

"It is not true that the Church is treated as a stranger by the State.

"There are ample laws in all the States of the American Union for the observance of the Sabbath, the securing of Church property, and the undisturbed tranquillity of public worship by every variety of Christian sects. The law makes no distinction among these sects, and gives to no one the predominance over the others. It protects all equally, and gives no political privileges to the adherent of one over those of another sect.

"The laws of the several States authorize the acquisition and holding of Church property, under certain limitations as to value, either by making a special corporation for that purpose, or through the agency of trustees empowered under general regulations for that purpose. Without going into detail on this subject, it is enough to say that they proceed upon the principle of allowing the church to hold a sufficient amount of real and personal property to enable it to perform its appropriate functions, and, at the same time, to guard against abuse, by allowing too great an amount of wealth to be perpetually