網頁圖片
PDF
ePub 版

ions are the same in legal effect as in Kentucky. (Const. of West-Va. art. 2, sec. 9.) But all teachers employed in the public schools of this State shall read or cause to be read at least one chapter from the Bible, in a language understood by the scholars, every day at the opening of the school, and inculcate the duties of piety, morality, and respect for the laws and government of this country. (School Laws of West-Va. 1866, sec. 29.)

Sec. 24. Ohio, MICHIGAN, ILLINOIS, MISSOURI, OREGON, MINNESOTA, and DELAWARE.—What has been stated of Kentucky will apply equally to all of these States. (Const. of Ohio, art. 1, sec. 7; Const. of Mich. art. 4, secs. 39–41; Const. of Ill. art. 13, secs. 3 and 4; Const. of Mo. art. 13, secs. 4 and 5; Const. of Oregon, art. 1, secs. 2–

Const. of Minn. art. 1, secs. 17 and 19; Const. of Dei. art. 1, secs. 1 and 2.)

SEC. 25. INDIANA.-The constitutional provisions are the same in substance as in the foregoing States. (Const. of Ind. art. 1, secs. 2-7.) But the Bible sball not be excluded from the public schools of the State. (Com. School Laws of Ind. 1865, sec. 167.)

SEC. 26. Iowa.—The constitutional provisions are much like those in Alabama, and the same in legal effect. (Const. of Iowa, art. 1, secs. 3 and 4.) But the Bible shall not be excluded from any school or institution in this State, under the control of the Board, nor shall any pupil be required to read it contrary to the wishes of his parent or guardian. (School Laws of Iowa, 1864, ch. 8, sec. 1.) The spirit of this law, it seems to us, is more

7;

that 56

consistent with the Constitution of the State than is the West-Virginia or Indiana law on the same subject.

SEC. 27. WISCONSIN. — The constitutional provisions are the same in legal effect here as in Alabama. (Const. of Wis. art. 1, secs. 18, 19.) But the Constitution of this State also, in reference to district schools, provides

no sectarian instruction shall be allowed therein." (Id. art. 10, sec. 3.) We think, however, that this provision is unnecessary, as what it provides for would naturally follow from the other provisions.

SEC. 28. CALIFORNIA.—The provision in the Constitution of California on this subject is similar to that in the Constitution of New-York, and the same in legal effect. (Const. of Cal. art. 1, sec. 4.) No. books, tracts, papers, catechisms, or other publications of a sectarian or denominational character shall be used or distributed in any school, or shall be made a part of any school library; neither shall any sectarian or denominational doctrine be taught therein. (Revised School Law of Cal. 1866, sec. 60.) We think our friends in California have the true idea of religious liberty.

SEC. 29. Kansas.—No religious sect or sects shall ever control any part of the common school or university fund of the State. (Const. of Kansas, art. 6, sec. 8.)

SEC. 30. PRAYER IN SCHOOL.-The law is pretty much the same in all the States on this subject. We find it everywhere written in blank. Nothing is more certain, however, than that prayer is allowable when no

one objects to it; but it should always be perfectly free from sectarianism. Prayer, if made in the schools established by the State, should be made in the spirit of the laws of the State. But here is the difficulty. It is next to impossible for an individual who is sectarian to speak and act in every instance in the spirit of laws that are not sectarian. The law, generally speaking, regards all sects and persuasions with perfect impartiality; any teacher who can do the same thing and in the same spirit, we think, may reasonably expect to be permitted to open or close his school with prayer without serious objection. But, in the language of the Constitution of Virginia, “it is the mutual duty of all to practice Christian forbearance, love, and charity toward each other.” The teacher should practice forbearance, love, and charity toward the scholars and toward their parents, and he should respect their opinions and wishes, precisely as he would have his own respected by them. If he can do this sincerely, he will probably be permitted to open or close his school with or without reading and prayer, just as he may deem most agreeable. We hope that no teacher who knows the law will cease praying through fear. The other and better way will be to make the spirit and the prayer harmonize with the law, and then“ walk in the light."

CHAPTER IV.

CORPORAL PUNISHMENT_PARENT AND CHILD.

SEC. 1. The rights of parents result from their duties. Parents are bound to maintain and educate their children; the law has given them such authority, and in the support of that authority a right to the exercise of such discipline as may be requisite for the discharge of their sacred trust. This is the true foundation of parental power, and the parent's right to correct, to this end and to this extent, has never been disputed by Church or State. “He that sparetb his rod hateth his son; but he that loveth him chasteneth him betimes.” (Prov. 13: 24.) Indeed, this power of the parent over the person and liberty of the child was sometimes carried to a most atrocious extent. The punishment for disobedience to parents, under the Jewish law, was death. “ And they shall say unto the elders of his city, This our son is stubborn and rebellious, he will not obey our voice; he is a glutton, and a drunkard. And all the men of his city shall stone him with stones that he die.” (Deut. 21: 18-21.)

SEC. 2. The Persians, Egyptians, Greeks, Gauls, and Romans allowed to the fathers absolute dominion over their offspring ; but the Romans, according to Justinian, exceeded all other people, and the liberty and the lives of the children were placed within the power of the father. “Jus autem potestatis, quod in liberos habemus, proprium est Romanorum, nulli enim alii sunt homines, qui talem in liberos habeant potestatem, qualem nos habemus.” (Inst. Just. lib. 1, tit. 9, sec. 3.) The power of the father over the life of the child was greatly weakened in public opinion by the time of Augustus, under the silent operation of refined manners and cultivated morals. It was looked upon as obsolete when the Pandects were compiled. Bynkershoek was of opinion that the power ceased under the Emperor Hadrian, for he banished a father for killing his son. The Emperor Constantine made the crime capital as to adult child

In the age of Tacitus the exposing of infants was unlawful; but merely holding it to be unlawful was not sufficient. When the crime of exposing and killing infants was made capital, under Valentinian and Valens, then the practice was finally abolished, and the paternal power became itself subject to the standard of reason and of our own municipal law, which admits only the jus domestice amendationis, or the right of inflicting modcrate correction under the exercise of a sound discretion. (2 Kent's Com. 203 ; Taylor's Elements of the Civil Law, 395; Gibbon's History, vol. 8, pp. 55-57; Sallust, Bel. Cat. ch. 39; Tacit. de Mor. Ger. ch. 19; Bynkershoek Opera, tome 1, p. 346; Heinec. Syn. Antiq. Rom.

ren.

« 上一頁繼續 »