- 
 
 7 
 
 3L 
 
 > 
 
Opu j Zbc xaniverstts of Cbicago 
 
 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN THE 
 
 PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF THE STATE 
 
 AND CITY OF NEW YORK 
 
 A HISTORICAL STUDY 
 
 A DISSERTATION 
 
 SUBMITTED TO- THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF ARTS 
 
 AND LITERATURE IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF 
 
 DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY 
 
 (the graduate divinity school: religious education) 
 
 BY 
 
 ARTHUR JACKSON HALL 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS 
 CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 
 
THE UNIVEESITY OF CHICAGO PRESS 
 CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 
 
 Agents 
 THE CAMBRIDGE UNIVERSITY PRESS 
 
 LONDON AND EDINBURGH 
 
 THE MARUZEN-KABUSHIKI-KAISHA 
 
 TOKYO, OSAKA, KYOTO 
 
 KARL W. HIERSEMANN 
 
 LEIPZIG 
 
 THE BAKER & TAYLOR COMPANY 
 
 NEW YORK 
 
Ubc Wnivcxslty ot Cbicaao 
 
 -RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN THE 
 PUBLIC SCHOOLS OF THE STATE 
 AND CITY OF NEW YORK 
 
 A HISTORICAL STUDY ^ 
 
 A DISSERTATION 
 
 SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF ARTS 
 
 AND LITERATURE IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF 
 
 DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY 
 
 (the graduate divinity school: religious education) 
 
 v/ 
 
 BY 
 
 ARTHUR JACKSON HALL 
 
 THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO PRESS 
 CHICAGO, ILLINOIS 
 
 Uri'-- 
 
•5- 
 
 Copyright IQ14 By 
 The University of Chicago 
 
 All Rights Reserved 
 
 Published June 1914 
 
 JUN 2/ !9!4 
 
 ©Ci;A3746 Y- 
 
 Composed and Printed By 
 
 The University of Chicago Press 
 
 Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A. 
 
TO 
 
 MY FATHER AND MOTHER 
 
 Who First Led Me in The Way 
 of Knowledge and 
 
 to 
 
 MY WIFE 
 
 The Inspiration of After Years 
 
CONTENTS 
 
 PAGE 
 
 Bibliography vii 
 
 PART I 
 
 CHAPTER 
 
 I. Education under the Dutch Regime 3 
 
 II. Education under the English Regime 10 
 
 III. Education under the Auspices op the Society por the Prop- 
 
 agation of the Gospel 16 
 
 IV. Educational Movements of the Early Nineteenth Century 21 
 V. Elementary-School Books of the Eighteenth Century . 26 
 
 PART II 
 
 VI. The Rising Consciousness of Sectarianism in Education . 39 
 
 VII. The Final Legal Status of Sectarian Instruction . . 48 
 
 VIII. The Religious Conception of Education in Process of 
 
 Modification 63 
 
 IX. The Reading of the Bible in the Public Schools . . 73 
 
 X. The Philosophic Aspects of the Question .... 95 
 
BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 I. REFERENCES TO ORIGINAL MATERIAL 
 
 Albany Records. Consulted for this thesis only as quoted in Pratt's Annals. 
 An Honest Appeal to Every Voter. Pamphlet, Public Library, New York City. 
 Arguments, Points, and Amendments of N. G. Green to Proposed Education Law 
 
 before New York Legislature, 1899, on behalf of Catholic interests of the 
 
 State of New York. 
 Barnard, American Journal of Education. 
 Brinsly, Ludus Liter arms. 
 
 Clews, Elsie, Educational Legislation and Administration of the Colonial Govern- 
 ments. 
 Coote, English School-Master. 
 Debate on Amendment re Religious Instruction in Free Schools and Charitable 
 
 Institutions. Revised Record of Constitutional Convention, 1894, V, 3, 
 
 959-86. 
 Decision of the State Superintendent of Common Schools on the Right to Compel 
 
 Catholic Children to Attend Prayers, etc. Pamphlet, Public Library, New 
 
 York City. 
 Dilworth's Speller, ed. 1771. 
 Evans, American Bibliography. 
 
 Fernow, Berthold, Records of New Amsterdam from 1653-1674. 
 Hasse, Index to Documents of the State of New York. 
 Hastings, Ecclesiastical Records of New York. 
 Hoole, "The New Discovery of the Old Art of Teaching," Barnard's Journal, 
 
 V, 17. 
 Laws of the State of New York, especially for the years 1842, 1843, 1844, 1851, 
 
 1871, 1897, 1901. 
 Memorials, Petitions, Pamphlets, Speeches, etc. 
 Minutes of Common Council of City of New York. 
 New England Primer, reprint of ed. 1777. 
 New York City: Report of the Commissioners of the Public School Money for 
 
 1841. Pamphlet, Public Library, New York City. 
 New York City: Report of the Committee .... Relative to the Use of the Bible 
 
 in the Public Schools of the City. Pamphlet, Public Library, New York 
 
 City. 
 O'Callaghan, E. B., Documents Relative to the Colonial History of the State of 
 
 New York, Procured by J. R. Brodhead. 
 
 , Laws and Ordinances of New Netherlands 1638-74. 
 
 , Register of New Netherland. 1626-74. 
 
Vlll BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 Pettis, S., An Address from an Instructor to His Scholars; Pronounced at 
 
 Woodstock, April 14, 1804. 
 Pratt, Annals of Public Education in the State of New York from 1 626-1746. 
 Preston, "What the Catholics Want," Forum, V, 1. 
 Proceedings of the Board of Aldermen, New York City. 
 Proceedings of the Board of Assistants, New York City. 
 Public School Society — Annual Reports. 
 Records of New Amsterdam, 1653-1674. 
 Report on Petition of Certain Roman Catholics of New York, Utica, Syracuse, 
 
 etc., re Instruction of Their Children, Assembly Document 97, 1853, 
 
 V,4- 
 Reports of State Superintendent of Public Instruction. 
 Savage, J. W., Remarks in Assembly, April 5, 1854, upon the Bill "Amending 
 
 the Common School Law" so That No Part of the Common School Fund Shall 
 
 Be Appropriated to the Support of Sectarian Schools, etc. Pamphlet, 
 
 Public Library, New York City. 
 The Legislature of New York Hoodwinked by the Romanists. 1858. Pamphlet, 
 
 Public Library, New York City. 
 Van Laer, A. J. F., New York. Van Rensselaer Bowier Manuscripts. 
 Walsh, "Religious Education in the Public Schools of Massachusetts/' 
 
 American Catholic Quarterly Review, V, 29. 
 
 II. REFERENCES TO SECONDARY MATERIAL 
 
 Brodhead, J. R., History of the State of New York. First Period 1609-64. 
 "Bible Reading in the Public Schools in the United States," Report of U.S. 
 
 Commissioner of Education i8gy-g8, V, II, p. 1539. 
 Bluntschli, Theory of the State. 
 Bolton, History of the Church in Westchester County. 
 Bourne, History of the Public School Society. 
 Brown, E. E., The Making of Our Middle Schools. 
 Bushnell, H., Common Schools; Discourse on the Modifications Demanded by the 
 
 Roman Catholics. 1853. 
 Butler, N. M., "Religious Instruction and Its Relation to Education," Educa- 
 tional Review, V, 18, p. 425. 
 Butler, Nathaniel, "The Moral and Religious Element in Education," Religious 
 
 Education, V, I, pp. 88 f . 
 Central Conference of American Rabbis. Why the Bible Should Not Be Read 
 
 in the Public Schools. New York, 1906, Bloch Publishing Co. 
 Cheever, G. B., Right of the Bible in Our Public Schools. 1854. 
 Clark, R. W., The Question of the Hour: the Bible and the School Fund. 1870. 
 Coe, G. A., "Moral and Religious Education from the Psychological Point of 
 
 View," Religious Education, V, III, pp. 165 f. 
 Colwell, S., The Position of Christianity in the U.S., in Its Relations with Our 
 
 Political Institutions, etc. 1854. 
 
BIBLIOGRAPHY IX 
 
 Cooley, Constitutional Limitations, 2d ed. 
 
 Crooker, J. H., "Moral and Religious Instruction in our Public Schools," 
 
 Problems in American Society. 1889. 
 De Garmo, "Present Status of Religious Instruction in England, France, 
 
 Germany, and the United States," Christian Knowledge Lectures. 1900. 
 Dorchester, D., Romanism versus the Public School System. 1888. 
 Dunshee, History of the School of the Reformed Protestant Dutch Church in the 
 
 City of New York. 
 Durant, H. F., Defence of the Use of the Bible in the Common Schools, etc. 
 
 1859. 
 
 Dutton, S. T., "Religious and Ethical Influences of the Public School," 
 Religious Education, V, I, pp. 47 f . 
 
 Earle, Child Life in Colonial Days. 
 
 Eggleston, The Transit of Civilization. 
 
 Fisher, G. P., "Cardinal Manning and Public Schools," Forum, V, VII, pp. 
 119 f. 
 
 Fitch, C. E., The Public School. History of Common School Education in New 
 York from 16 33-1 go 4. 
 
 Ford, The New England Primer. 
 
 Gibbons, J., Cardinal, and others, "Two Sides of the School Question," Pro- 
 ceedings of N.E.A., 1889, pp. inf. 
 
 Hawks, F. L., Contributions to the Ecclesiastical History of the United States of 
 America. 
 
 Hecker, "Catholics and Protestants Agreeing on the School Question," Catholic 
 World, February, 1881. 
 
 Henry, J., An Address upon Education and Common Schools, Delivered at Coopers- 
 town, Ostego Co., September 21, 1843. Public Library, New York City. 
 
 Humphreys, Gospel in North America. 
 
 Hurlbut, E. P., A Secular View of Religion in the State, and the Bible in the 
 Public Schools. 1870. 
 
 Johnson, Old-Time Schools and School-Books. 
 
 Littlefield, Early Schools and School-Books of New England. 
 
 MacQuary, H., "The Bible in the Public Schools," in his Topics of the Times. 
 1891. 
 
 Manning, Cardinal, "The Bible in the Public Schools," Forum, V, VIII, pp. 
 
 52 f. 
 Mayo, A. D., What Does the Bible Represent in the American Common School? 
 
 1874. 
 Mayo, A. D., and Vickers, T., The Bible in the Public Schools. 1st ed. 1870. 
 Mead, E. A., The Function of the Public Schools in the Scheme of Human Welfare. 
 Meriwether, Our Colonial Curriculum. 
 
 Mott, T. A., "The Church and the Public School," Proceedings ofN.E.A., 1901. 
 O'Callaghan, Laws and Ordinances of New Netherland. 1638-74. 
 , History of New Netherland. 
 
X BIBLIOGRAPHY 
 
 Palmer, A. E., The New York Public School. 
 
 Patton, W. W., Purely Secular Public Schools; Address on the Bible and Public 
 
 Schools, September 24, 1876. 
 Politics and the School Question; Attitude of the Republican and Democratic 
 
 Parties. 1876. 
 Prince, J. F., "The Bible in Education," Educational Review, 1898. 
 Randall, History of the Common School System of the State of New York. 
 Spear, S. T., Religion and the State, or, The Bible and the Public Schools. 
 Strong, Josiah, Religion and the Public Schools. Pamphlet, Congregational 
 
 Sunday School Publishing Society. 
 Strong, T. M., The History of the Town of Flatbush. 
 "The Bible in the Schools," The Nation, November 18, 1869; January 6, 1870; 
 
 February 17, 1870. 
 Thiry, J. H., History of the Early Schools in Long Island. 1904. 
 Thomson, J. P., Shall Our Common Schools Be Destroyed? 1870. Pamphlet, 
 
 Public Library, New York City. 
 Tuer, History of the Horn-Book. 
 Tufts, J. H., "Moral Training in the Public Schools," Religious Education, V, 
 
 III, pp. 125 f. 
 Ullman, D., Amendments to the Constitution of the United States. 1876. 
 
 Pamphlet, Public Library, New York City. 
 Van Vechter, E., Early Schools and Schoolmasters of New Amsterdam. 
 Watson, F., The English Grammar Schools to 1660: Their Curriculum and 
 
 Practice. 
 Wilson, R. R., New York; Old and New. Its Story, Streets, and Landmarks. 
 Woolsey, Political Science. 
 
 III. STATE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS ON BIBLE READING AND 
 RELIGIOUS EXERCISES IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 Maine Decision. 1854. Maine Reports, 38, pp. 379-413. 
 Massachusetts Decision. 1866. Massachusetts Reports, 12 Allen, 127. 
 Ohio Decision. 1872. Ohio Reports, 23, pp. 211-54. 
 Iowa Decision. 1884. Iowa Reports, 54, pp. 367-70. 
 Wisconsin Decision. 1890. Wisconsin Reports, 76, pp. 177-221. 
 Michigan Decision. 1898. Michigan Reports, 118, pp. 560-95. 
 Nebraska Decision. 1902. Nebraska Reports, 65, pp. 853-85. 
 Kansas Decision. 1904. Kansas Reports, 69, pp. 53-58. 
 Kentucky Decision. 1905. Kentucky Reports, 120, pp. 608-31. 
 Texas Decision. 1908. L.R.A. (N.S.), 8960; 109 S. W. Reports, 115. 
 Illinois Decision. 1910. Illinois Reports, 245, pp. 334 _ 7 8 5 cf. 93 111. 61; 95 
 111. 263; 137 111. 296; 121 111. 297. 
 
PART I 
 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION INCORPORATED IN THE SCHOOLS 
 
CHAPTER I 
 EDUCATION UNDER THE DUTCH REGIME 
 
 There can be no reason to suppose that the conception of education 
 entertained by the Dutch colonists in New Netherland was any different 
 from that which prevailed in the Fatherland. The country alone was 
 new; the people and their modes of thinking still belonged to the old 
 world. The founders of New Amsterdam had brought with them the 
 institutions of their native land. We are justified therefore in going 
 back to Holland for our introduction to Dutch education in America. 
 Only a few years before the colonists inaugurated their first school the 
 Synod of Dort, held in 1618-19, had given expression to the settled con- 
 viction of the Dutch mind respecting the education of youth, an opinion 
 which had been slowly maturing since the beginning of the Reformation. 
 One of the resolutions on this subject, passed November 30, 161 8, reads 
 as follows: "Schools, in which the young shall be properly instructed in 
 the principles of Christian doctrine shall be instituted not only in cities, 
 but also in towns and country places where heretofore none have existed. 
 The Christian magistracy shall be requested that well-qualified persons 
 may be employed and enabled to devote themselves to the service; and 
 especially that the children of the poor may be gratuitously instructed, 
 and not be excluded from the benefit of the schools. In this office none 
 shall be employed but such as are members of the Reformed church, 
 having certificates of an upright faith and pious life, and of being well 
 versed in the truths of the Catechism. They are to sign a document, 
 professing their belief in the Confession of Faith and the Heidelberg 
 Catechism, and promising that they will give catechetical instruction to 
 the youth in the principles of Christian truth according to the same. 
 The schoolmasters shall instruct their scholars according to their age and 
 capacity, at least two days in the week, not only by causing them to 
 commit to memory, but also by instilling in their minds an acquaintance 
 
 with the truths of the Catechism The schoolmasters shall take 
 
 care not only that the scholars commit these catechisms to memory, but 
 that they suitably understand the doctrines contained in them. For 
 this purpose, they shall suitably explain to everyone, in a manner 
 adapted to his capacity, and frequently inquire if they understand them. 
 The schoolmasters shall bring every one of the pupils committed to their 
 
 3 
 
4 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 charge to the hearing of the preached Word, and particularly the preach- 
 ing on the Catechism, and require from them an account of the same" 
 (quoted in Dunshee, 2d ed., p. 4. For full titles of sources see special 
 bibliography). 
 
 The Synod of Dort, whose Canons were everywhere accepted by the 
 Dutch people as one of the symbols of their faith, thus provided for the 
 religious education of children and youth. Religion and education were 
 considered inseparable. "The principles of Christian doctrine" were to 
 be an essential and indispensable part of the subject-matter of instruc- 
 tion. We shall now proceed to show how this conception of education 
 was brought over into the new world and incorporated in the schools set 
 up by the Dutch in the colony of New Netherland. The accessible data 
 on this topic fall into two general classes: the religious motive in educa- 
 tion, and religious material in education. 
 
 The motive that actuated the Dutch colonists may be seen, first, in 
 the stipulations of official documents. In the charter of freedoms and 
 exemptions granted by the West India Company, June 7, 1629, to all 
 patroons, masters, or private persons who should plant colonies in New 
 Netherland, the following condition is specified: "The Patroons and 
 colonists shall in particular, and in the speediest manner, endeavor to 
 find out ways and means whereby they may supply a minister and school- 
 master, that thus the service of God and zeal for religion may not grow 
 cool and be neglected among them" (N.Y. Col. Doc, II, 557). With a 
 few verbal changes the same decree was re-enacted in the freedoms and 
 exemptions of 1630 (N.Y., Col. Doc. I, 99). 
 
 In consequence of disagreement between the Nine Men and the 
 Director, in 1649, the former presented a memorial and remonstrance to 
 the States-General of Holland, setting forth "the reasons and cause of 
 the great decay of New Netherland," and "in what manner New Nether- 
 land should be relieved." Under the latter head is found the following 
 complaint: "There ought to be also a public school provided with at 
 least two good teachers, so that the youth, in so wild a country, where 
 there are so many dissolute people, may, first of all, be well instructed 
 and indoctrinated not only in reading and writing, but also in the 
 knowledge and fear of the Lord" (N.Y. Col. Doc, I, 317). 
 
 The religious motive in education is also seen in a civil ordinance 
 relative to the public catechizing of the children in the church, passed by 
 the Director-General and Council, March 17, 1664: "Whereas, it is 
 highly necessary and of great consequence that the youth, from their 
 childhood, is well instructed in reading, writing and arithmetic, and 
 
EDUCATION UNDER THE DUTCH REGIME 5 
 
 principally in the principles and fundaments of the Christian religion 
 .... so that in time such men may arise from it, who may be able to 
 serve their country in Church or in State .... they [Director-General 
 and Council] have deemed it necessary to recommend the present school- 
 master, and to command him, so as it is done by this, that they (Pietersen, 
 the Principal, and Van Hoboecken, of the branch school on the Bouwery) 
 on Wednesday, before the beginning of the sermon, with the children 
 intrusted to their care, shall appear in the Church to examine, after the 
 close of the sermon, each of them his own scholars, in the presence of the 
 reverend ministers and elders who may there be present, what they, in 
 the course of the week, do remember of the Christian commands and 
 catechism, and what progress they have made" (O'Call., Laws of N.N. , 
 461; Dunshee, p. 30). 
 
 In the next place, the religious motive in education is seen in the 
 requirement that all teachers be licensed by the civil and ecclesiastical 
 authorities (Pratt's Ann., p. 69). In support of this proposition are 
 offered the following extracts from the original records: 
 
 " On motion — the Attorney-General is commanded, to go to the house of 
 Jacob Van Corler [Corlear], who has, since some time, arrogated to him- 
 self to keep school, and to warn him that Director-General and Council 
 have deemed it proper to send him a supersedeas till he shall have solicited 
 and obtained from the Director-General and Council an act in propria 
 forma. 19 February, 1658" {Alb. Rec, XIV, 114; quoted in Pratt's 
 Ann., p. 19). 
 
 "In Council, 19 March, 1658 
 
 "Presented a petition of burgomasters and schepens of this city, 
 soliciting, that Jacob Van Corlear, who, on the 19 February last, was 
 interdicted by the Director-General and Council to keep school, might 
 be permitted it in the city. The apostil was — 
 
 "School-keeping and the appointment of schoolmasters depend 
 absolutely from the jus Patronatus in virtue of which Director-General 
 and Council interdicted school-keeping to Jacob Van Corlear, as having 
 arrogated it to himself without their orders, in which resolution they do 
 as yet persist" (Alb. Rec, XIV, 151; quoted in Pratt's Ann., p. 20). 
 
 "Andreas Hudde appeared before the Director- General and Council, 
 and solicited a license to keep school, received for answer that the Council 
 shall ask upon his proposal the opinion of the Minister and the Consis- 
 tory. Done in New Amsterdam, 31 December, 1665" (Alb. Rec, IX, 
 309; quoted in Pratt's Ann., p. 19). 
 
6 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 After the capitulation of New Amsterdam the government of the 
 province passed into the hands of the English. The Dutch people, 
 however, still remained in the country and kept up their church and 
 their school. By the articles of capitulation they were allowed "the 
 liberty of their consciences in divine worship and church discipline, with 
 all their accustomed jurisdiction with respect to the poor and orphans" 
 (O'Call., Hist. N.N., II, 533). This privilege was ratified by William 
 III (charter of incorporation of the Dutch church, 1696), with the plain 
 specification that the minister and deacons should have the right to 
 nominate and appoint a schoolmaster and such other officers as might be 
 needed by the congregation over which they presided (Dunshee, p. 37). 
 Notwithstanding, the English governors attempted to assert their 
 authority and to prevent any Dutch minister or schoolmaster from 
 exercising his calling "without a special gubernatorial license" (Dunshee, 
 p. 37). Lord Cornbury succeeded in breaking up the Dutch schools on 
 Long Island, and, with like intent, proceeded against the school of the 
 Dutch church in New York City. But this was a strong and influential 
 congregation, and so the Governor's attempt was stoutly and success- 
 fully resisted. The subsequent minutes bearing on the subject are 
 lacking, until January 5, 1726. At that time the Consistory engaged 
 Barent de Foreest to give "instruction not only in the Low Dutch 
 language, but also in the elements of Christian piety" (Dunshee, p. 38). 
 The contention of the Dutch for the right to appoint their own school- 
 masters can be assigned probably to no other reason than their unwill- 
 ingness to have their children brought under the influence of the Church 
 of England, and their settled determination to have them indoctrinated 
 in the principles of the Reformed faith. This no doubt explains the 
 requirement under the Dutch regime that all schoolmasters be licensed 
 by the civil and ecclesiastical authorities. 
 
 Again, the religious motive in education is seen in the character and 
 qualifications demanded of schoolmasters. Director Stuyvesant wrote 
 to the Classis of Amsterdam "for a pious, well-qualified and diligent 
 schoolmaster." In response to this request the Directors of the West 
 India Company wrote, February 16, 1650: "We appoint, at your request, 
 a schoolmaster, who shall also act as comforter for the sick. He is con- 
 sidered an honest and pious man, and shall embark at the first oppor- 
 tunity." On April 15 of the same year the Directors wrote: "The 
 schoolmaster for whom you solicited comes in the same vessel with this 
 letter. The Lord grant that he may for a long time exemplify the 
 favorable testimony which he carried with him from here, to the 
 
EDUCATION UNDER THE DUTCH REGIME 7 
 
 edification of the youth" (Alb. Rec, IV, 23, 30; quoted in Pratt's 
 Ann., p. 10). 
 
 From a letter by the Directors of the West India Company to Peter 
 Stuyvesant, May 2, 1661, announcing the appointment of Evert Pieter- 
 sen schoolmaster in New Amsterdam, is taken the following extract: 
 "Whereas, we have deemed it necessary to promote religious worship, 
 and to read to the inhabitants the word of God, to exhort them, to lead 
 them in the ways of the Lord, and console the sick, that an expert person 
 was sent to New Netherland, in the city of New Amsterdam, who at the 
 same time should act there as chorister and schoolmaster; so it is, that 
 we, upon the good report which we have received about the person of 
 Evert Pietersen, and confiding in his abilities and experience in the 
 aforesaid services, together on his pious character and virtues, have, on 
 your Honor's recommendation, and that of the magistrates of the city of 
 New Amsterdam, appointed the aforesaid person as consoler of the sick, 
 chorister and schoolmaster, at New Amsterdam, in New Netherland, 
 which charge he shall fulfil there, and conduct himself in these with all 
 diligence and faithfulness; also we expect that he shall give others a 
 good example, so as it becomes a pious and good consoler, clerk, chorister 
 and schoolmaster" (Alb. Rec, VIII, 321; quoted in Pratt's Ann., p. 18). 
 Besides bringing into prominence the "pious character and virtues" of 
 the said Evert Pietersen as a condition of his appointment to the school 
 in New Amsterdam the foregoing extract enumerates the other offices 
 with which the schoolmaster of that period was almost uniformly 
 burdened, all of which in their turn required that he be a man of religious 
 disposition. It was demanded of the schoolmaster that he be a man of 
 pious character because it was deemed "necessary to promote religious 
 worship, and to read to the inhabitants the word of God," etc. 
 
 Religious material in education finds abundant illustration in the 
 subject-matter of instruction. The following extracts are offered in 
 support of this proposition : 
 
 Articles of agreement with Johannes Van Eckkelen, accepted school- 
 master and chorister of Flatbush, 1682: "II. When the school begins, one 
 of the children shall read the morning prayer, as it stands in the cate- 
 chism, and close with the prayer before dinner; in the afternoon it shall 
 begin with the prayer after dinner, and end with the evening prayer. 
 The evening school shall begin with the Lord's Prayer, and close by 
 singing a psalm. 
 
 "III. He shall instruct the children on every Wednesday and Satur- 
 day in the common prayers, and the questions and answers in the cate- 
 
8 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 chism, to enable them to repeat them the better on Sunday before the 
 afternoon service, or on Monday, when they shall be catechized before 
 the congregation" (Strong's History of Flatbush, p. in). Practically 
 this same agreement was made nearly one hundred years later, 1773, by 
 the town of Flatbush with one Anthony Welp (Strong's History of 
 Flatbush, p. 115). 
 
 In January, 1726, Barent de Foreest was engaged schoolmaster for 
 the Collegiate Dutch Church, New York City. By agreement "the 
 school was to be opened and closed with prayer and singing, and the 
 children, according to their capacity, were to be taught to spell and read 
 and write and cipher, and also the usual prayers in the catechism. 
 
 "On Saturday morning they were to be prepared to repeat to the 
 minister the Lord's-Day portion in the catechism, which was to be 
 subject of discourse the following day, so as to be able to recite it in 
 the church. 
 
 "Every Monday the scholars were to be publicly catechized — 'and 
 on Wednesdays, when there was preaching, he and the scholars were to 
 come to church in a body. 
 
 "None but edifying and orthodox textbooks were to be used, such as 
 would meet with the approbation of the Reverend Consistory" (Dun- 
 shee, p. 39). 
 
 In 1733, Gerrit Van Wagenen became the successor to Barent de 
 Foreest. By the terms of agreement he was required to teach "the 
 principles of the true Reformed religion," "the usual prayers and the 
 Heidelberg Catechism" (Dunshee, p. 43). 
 
 In 1 810, James Forester entered upon his duties as master of the 
 school of the Collegiate Church. He was to teach among other things 
 reading in the New Testament, the Old Testament, and the Heidelberg 
 Catechism (Dunshee, p. 71). 
 
 Henry Onderdonk, Jr., a New York historian of the first half of the 
 nineteenth century, describes the Dutch primers as follows: "Religion 
 was the leading idea in Dutch teaching. I have a Dutch Primer, or 
 A.B.C. Book, as it is called (Amsterdam), similar to our New England 
 Primer. It has a large rooster on one page, and a picture of a Dutch 
 school on the other. The master has a cap on his head and a bunch of 
 twigs in his hand. The class stands before him and the other boys are 
 seated at their desks. After a very little spelling, succeeds the Lord's 
 Prayer, Creed, Decalogue, Morning and Evening Prayer, Grace before 
 
EDUCATION UNDER THE DUTCH REGIME Q 
 
 and after meat. The instruction is altogether religious, which feature 
 (I suppose) is retained in our Catholic schools to this day" (Pratt's 
 Ann., p. 117). 
 
 The religious element in Dutch education is therefore clearly seen, on 
 the side of motive, in the stipulations of official documents, in the 
 licensing of schoolmasters, and in the character and qualifications 
 demanded of teachers; on the side of material, it finds sufficient and 
 conclusive illustration in the subject-matter of instruction. 
 
CHAPTER II 
 EDUCATION UNDER THE ENGLISH REGIME 
 
 The English people had known no other kind of education than 
 religious. Prior to the Reformation education was by the church and 
 for the church. The Reformation, so far as concerns education, had 
 merely transferred the seat of authority from the pope and his bishops to 
 the king and his bishops. The school became one of the strong arms of 
 Protestantism and one of the principal means of popularizing the new 
 propaganda. 
 
 During the first half of the seventeenth century the Bible formed the 
 center of instruction. By the more advanced pupils it was to be read in 
 Greek and Hebrew, as well as in English. It was also used devotionally 
 every morning at the opening, and every afternoon at the close, of school. 
 Care was also taken to instruct the children in the doctrinal grounds of 
 religion, and for this purpose the Catechism, the Creed, the Ten Com- 
 mandments, and the Lord's Prayer were called into requisition (Watson, 
 The English Grammar Schools to 1660, chaps, i-iv). 
 
 The principal pedagogical writers of this period were John Brinsly 
 and Charles Hoole. They may be relied upon to represent the ideals, as 
 well as the practice of the best sort of schoolmasters of their time. John 
 Brinsly wrote his Ludus Literarius, or The Grammar School, in 161 2. 
 According to the title-page (2d ed., 1627), his object was to show "how to 
 proceede from the first entrance into learning, to the highest perfection 
 required in the Grammar Schools." The Psalms in Meter is recom- 
 mended as one of the first reading books for children (p. 17); the pupil 
 should not be allowed to enter the grammar school until able to read 
 perfectly the New Testament in English (p. 13); and a knowledge of 
 Greek and Hebrew is strongly commended, because it will enable its 
 possessor to read the Bible in the original (pp. 223, 244). The special 
 fitness of the New Testament as an introduction to the Greek language is 
 urged, because it was written by the Lord himself, both in matter and 
 words, and because, together with the Old Testament, it constitutes the 
 Book of books and gives men the opportunity of seeing with their own 
 eyes rather than to rest upon the assurances of others (p. 226). 
 
 Chap, xxii has the following title: "Of knowledge of the grounds of 
 Religion and training up the schollers therein." The first paragraph 
 
EDUCATION UNDER THE ENGLISH REGIME II 
 
 thus sets forth the author's view: "Now that we have thus gone thorow 
 all the way of learning, for whatsoever can be required in the Grammar 
 schooles; and how to lay a sure foundation, both for the Greeke and the 
 Hebrew, that they may be able to go on of themselves in all these by 
 their own studies : it remaineth that we come yet to one further point, 
 and which is as it were the end of all these. That is, how schollers may 
 be seasoned and trained up in Gods true Religion and in grace; without 
 which all other learning is meerely vaine, or to increase a greater con- 
 demnation. This one alone doth make them truely blessed, and sanc- 
 tifie all other their studies" (p. 253). 
 
 In carrying out the view just set forth, children are to be instructed 
 in "all the grounds of religion and chiefe Histories of the Bible," and the 
 substance, doctrines, proofs, and uses of the sermons (p. 253; references 
 from ed. of 1627). 
 
 But greater still, perhaps, was the influence of Charles Hoole upon 
 the education of his time. The Usher's Duty and The New Discovery of 
 the Old Art of Teaching were composed by him in 1637, and, together with 
 a little pamphlet on The Petty Schools, were published in 1659 (Barnard's 
 Journal of Education, XVII, 191; entire work reprinted in vol. XVII of 
 this Journal). 
 
 On the founding of "Petty Schools," Hoole says: "The Petty School 
 is the place where, indeed, the first principles of all religion and learning 
 ought to be taught" (ibid., XVII, 204). 
 
 Under "How a child may be taught to read any English book per- 
 fectly," Hoole says, "in order to hold to the sure foundation of religious 
 instruction, I have caused the Lord's Prayer, the Creed, and the Ten 
 Commandments to be printed in the Roman character, that a child 
 having learned already to know his letters and how to spell, may also be 
 initiated to read by them, which he will do the more cheerfully if he be 
 also instructed at home to say them by heart" (ibid., XVII, 202). 
 
 The whole school is to be divided into four forms, or grades. The 
 lessons of the first form are to be in the Primer. The second form, 
 learning to spell, is to be instructed from The Single Psalter. The third 
 form, learning to read, has its lessons in the Bible. The fourth form is 
 to be instructed from such "profitable English books" as may be sug- 
 gested by the master and provided by the parents (ibid., XVII, 205). 
 
 On the afternoons of Tuesdays and Thursdays, and on Saturday 
 mornings, the master must hear his pupils recite "the graces, prayers 
 and psalms, and especially the Lord's Prayer, the Creed, and the Ten 
 Commandments (which are for that purpose set down in the New 
 
12 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 Primer) very perfectly by heart." When these have been mastered, the 
 pupils may proceed to other catechisms, but they must be " such as agree 
 with the principles of Christian religion" {ibid., XVII, 206). 
 
 Hoole now passes on to discuss education in the higher grades. 
 When children, who are imperfect in reading English, are brought to the 
 grammar school, this defect may be overcome by having them read a 
 chapter every morning and noon in the New Testament. Also to help 
 their memories at this time they may be required to commit parts of 
 such psalms as the "master thinks suitable to their "shallow apprehen- 
 sions" {ibid., XVII, 225). 
 
 Schools of the fourth form come under the instruction of the master. 
 In the lower forms the pupils have been under the usher. The master 
 must be careful to keep, as well as diligent to add to, what has been 
 acquired. In order to do this, "Every morning read six to ten verses (as 
 formerly) out of the Latin Testament into English, that thus they may 
 become well acquainted with the matter and words of that most Holy 
 Book; and after they are acquainted with the Greek Testament, they 
 may proceed with it in like manner" {ibid., XVII, 267). 
 
 The fifth and sixth forms are to read daily a dozen verses out of the 
 Greek Testament. 
 
 The section on "The Master's Method" concludes by asking the 
 blessing of God upon the teacher's planting and watering so that our 
 young plants may grow up in "all godliness and good learning, and 
 abound in the knowledge of our Lord Jesus Christ, whom only to know 
 is eternal life" {ibid., XVII, 282). 
 
 Chap, vii of Scholastic Discipline has the following title: "Of exer- 
 cising scholars in the Scriptures. Of using daily prayers and singing 
 psalms. Of taking notes at sermons, and examination after sermons." 
 
 Besides reading part of a Latin or Greek chapter, prescribed in all the 
 forms, an English chapter was to be read every morning and night. 
 This exercise was to be performed by one of the boys and followed by 
 the others in their English or Latin Bibles. After the reading they were 
 to sing a psalm in Latin, then repeat the admonitions at the end of 
 Nowel's Catechism, concluding the whole with a prayer. 
 
 It is recommended that the master meet his pupils at school every 
 Lord's day in the morning about an hour before church time, and instruct 
 them in the doctrines of the catechism, and, after a psalm sung and 
 prayer said, attend them to church. After the sermon they are to 
 return to the school again, when the pupils are to be questioned on what 
 they have heard of the sermon. The day's exercise is to be concluded 
 
EDUCATION UNDER THE ENGLISH REGIME 1 3 
 
 "with the singing of a psalm and devout prayers, and charging your 
 scholars to spend the rest of the time in reading the Scriptures and such 
 religious books as tend to their further profiting in Christian piety" 
 {ibid., XVII, 309). 
 
 This is the educational atmosphere from which the English colonists 
 migrated and which was destined to give life and form to their system of 
 instruction in the new world. So much space has been given to the 
 situation in England, because only in this way can we understand the 
 educational procedure in English colonial New York. And this is all 
 the more true, since, on this latter subject, there is great paucity of 
 material. But such data as may be found will amply justify our expec- 
 tations, as I shall now proceed to show. 
 
 The religious character of education in the colony of New York after 
 the establishment of English supremacy and under the influence of the 
 English ideal may be seen first of all in the custom of licensing school- 
 masters. The instructions to Governor Dongan, given at Windsor, 
 May 29, 1686, contained the following regulation: "And wee doe 
 further direct that noe Schoolmaster bee henceforth permitted to come 
 from England and to keep school within Our Province of New York, 
 without the license of the said Archbishop of Canterbury; and that noe 
 other person now there or that shall come from other parts, bee admitted 
 to keep school without your license first had" {N.Y. Col. Doc, III, 372). 
 With the substitution of the Bishop of London for the Archbishop of 
 Canterbury this same direction is given to Governor Henry Sloughter, 
 January 31, 1689 {ibid., 688); to Governor Fletcher, March 7, 1691-92 
 {ibid., 821); to Governor Bellemont, August 31, 1697 {ibid., IV, 288); 
 and to Governor Hunter, December 27, 1709 {ibid., V, 135). 
 
 The meaning of this license is altogether unequivocal. Each of the 
 instructions referred to above contains a clause like the following: "You 
 shall take especial care that God Almighty be devoutly and duly served 
 throughout your Government, the Book of Common Prayer as it is now 
 established read each Sunday & Holy-day and the blessed Sacrament 
 administered according to the Rites of the Church of England, You shall 
 be carefull that the Churches already built there be well and orderly kept 
 and more built as the Colony shall by God's blessing be improved and 
 that besides a competent Maintenance to be assigned to the Minister of 
 each Orthodox Church a convenient house be built at the Common 
 Charge for each Minister and a competent proporcion of land assigned 
 him for a Glebe and exercise of his Industry" {ibid., Ill, 821; see also 
 each of the references above). 
 
14 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 It is therefore without question that the government intended to 
 reduce the religious practices of the colony to conformity with the Church 
 of England, and that the schoolmaster was to be a means to that end. 
 Education was to be indoctrination. 
 
 However, this regulation fell into disuse during the administration of 
 Governor Hunter. The last license of which there seems to be any 
 record was issued by him to Allane Jarratt, 17 12. A bill to revive the 
 custom was introduced into the legislature, 1745, but found its quietus 
 in the Committee of the Whole (Pratt's Ann., p. 142). But in the 
 eighteenth century, as will be shown in the next chapter, the Society for 
 the Propagation of the Gospel took the initiative which had been exer- 
 cised by the legislature, and education in the colony became dominated 
 by the English ideal as it had not been hitherto. 
 
 Again, the religious character of education in English colonial New 
 York finds further confirmation in the character and qualifications 
 demanded of schoolmasters. There is not a great deal of information 
 to be found on this topic, but the following extract from the address of 
 the mayor, aldermen, and commonality of the city of New York to his 
 Excellency, Governor Cornbury, relative to a teacher for the new free 
 school of the city, will illustrate not only what kind of schoolmaster was 
 wished, but also the point of view of leading statesmen of the time, as 
 well as the regulation regarding license. Speaking of securing a fit person 
 to assume charge of the school recently provided for by act of the legis- 
 lature, the address proceeds as follows: "Wherefore that so good a 
 worke may not suffer by delay nor fail of its desired end Wee the said 
 Mayor Alderman & Commonality become most humble Supplicants to 
 your Excellency that you would be pleased to help on the structure 
 whose foundation you have already laid in Representing our Want of a 
 School Master with all the difficult Circumstances thereof to the Right 
 Reverend and no less Honourable my Lord of London and in Requesting 
 his fatherly Care and Concern for us therein and by his Lordships means 
 that of the Society for propagating the Gospel in foreign parts in Order 
 to our being supplied from thence with a person of good learning pious 
 life and vertuous Conversation of English Extract and mild temper to 
 be our said School Master" (Pratt's Ann., p. 86). 
 
 Even from these scant data it is evident that the English of colonial 
 New York attempted to carry out in their educational policy the ideals 
 which obtained in the home country. What these ideals were has been 
 sufficiently illustrated in the writings of John Brinsly and Charles Hoole. 
 And how the English of New York attempted to embody them in their 
 
EDUCATION UNDER THE ENGLISH REGIME 1 5 
 
 educational practice has been exemplified in the gubernatorial license 
 demanded of all teachers and in the "pious life and vertuous conversa- 
 tion" required of all masters of schools. The pious character of the 
 teacher was very properly recognized as an indispensable factor in the 
 educational process, and the schoolmaster's license was a sure lever in 
 the hands of the church by which it might lift the educational structure 
 to a religious and ecclesiastical basis. 
 
CHAPTER III 
 
 EDUCATION UNDER THE AUSPICES OF THE SOCIETY FOR THE 
 PROPAGATION OF THE GOSPEL 
 
 After the free-school act of 1702 nothing whatever, in the form of 
 legal provision, was done for the encouragement of primary education 
 during the remainder of the colonial period (Pratt's Ann., p. 95; Hasse's 
 Index to Doc. of the State of N.Y., p. 209, under "Public Schools." 
 This list of documents passes from 1702 to 1798 direct). The place of 
 colonial and municipal authority was now largely superseded by the 
 venerable Society for the Propagation of the Gospel, which, from its 
 organization in 1701 down to the period of the Revolution, carried on, 
 for that time, a very considerable educational work in the colony. It is 
 the purpose of this chapter to show something of the nature and extent 
 of this work. 
 
 Daniel J. Pratt, Annals of Public Education in the State of New York 
 (pp. 111-14), has compiled .a list of the Society's schoolmasters employed 
 in the Province of New York. This list is based on the Abstracts of 
 Proceedings of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel and Bolton's 
 History of the Church in Westchester County (pp. 126, 351). Besides 
 catechists and those engaged in the teaching of Indians, there are forty- 
 nine bona fide schoolmasters exercising their calling in seventeen towns 
 located in seven different counties. The counties occupied were Albany, 
 Queens, Suffolk, Montgomery, New York, Richmond, and Westchester. 
 
 As an illustration of the Society's educational work are offered the 
 following extracts from Humphreys' Gospel in North America: "The 
 Society were sensible nothing could be more convenient than the opening 
 of Schools in this Place. The whole Island was divided into three 
 Precincts, they appointed a schoolmaster for each. Mr. Brown taught 
 School in the South Precinct, Mr. Dupuy in the North, and Mr. William- 
 son in the West. Mr. Dupuy did not keep School long; Mr. Potts 
 succeeded him. Afterwards in the Year 1 7 1 5 , Mr. Taylor was appointed, 
 and continues still teaching School; and several Accounts have been sent 
 to the Society, that he teaches above 40 Scholars, without any Con- 
 sideration but the Society's Bounty" (p. 219). 
 
 "The Society have from their first Establishment, paid Salaries to 
 several Schoolmasters in this Government. Mr. Gilderslieve at Hemp- 
 
 16 
 
UNDER SOCIETY FOR PROPAGATION OP THE GOSPEL 1 7 
 
 sted in Long-Island, and Mr. Taylor in Statten-Island, have been 
 mentioned already. Mr. Huddlestone was appointed Schoolmaster in 
 New- York City, in the Year 1709; he taught 40 poor Children for the 
 Society's Allowance only Mr. Glover was appointed School- 
 master at West-Chester in the Year 17 14, and afterwards Mr. Forester; 
 he teaches between 30 and 40 Children, Catechises on Saturday and 
 Sunday, which is certified by the Minister and chief Inhabitants of that 
 Town. Mr. Cleator was settled Schoolmaster at Rye, in the Year 1704; 
 he teaches about 50 Children to Read and Write, and instructs them in 
 the Catechism. And Mr. Denton hath been lately appointed School- 
 master at Oysterbay in Long-Island" (pp. 228, 229). 
 
 This educational work was undertaken in response to a real need in 
 the colony. In spite of all the agitation of the subject of which the 
 original records give evidence, there is reason to believe that in actual 
 practice achievement was far behind promise and precept. One of the 
 Society's missionaries, a Rev. Mr. Thomas, reporting the situation in 
 Long Island, 1709, writes as follows: "That there was a great Want of 
 Schools, the younger People and Children were growing up in a miserable 
 Ignorance, for want of being taught to read; and he could not perform 
 one Part of his Pastoral Office, Catechising, for want of a Schoolmaster 
 to teach the Children to read. The Society appoint Mr. Gilderslieve 
 Schoolmaster there, in the Year 17 13, and allowed him a Salary to teach 
 the poorer Children Reading, Writing, and the Rudiments of Arithmetic. 
 The Vestry of this Parish wrote the Society a Letter on this Occasion, 
 wherein they say : ' Without your Bounty and Charity, our poor Children 
 would undoubtedly want all Education; our People are poor, and 
 settled distantly from one another, and unable to board out their 
 Children'" (Humphreys, p. 224). 
 
 The need of schools and schoolmasters in the colony is still further 
 exemplified by the following extracts : 
 
 "As to Catechists or School-masters, the Society have, as their 
 Ability would permit, answered many Demands upon them on that 
 Head also, .... By continuing Mr. William Huddleston's Salary of 
 10 £ per Ann. for his care of the School at New York (the Maintenance 
 of which was before uncertain and precarious); By granting 10 £ per 
 annum each to Mr. Francis Williamson and Mr. John de Puy, for their 
 Pains in the School-way at Staten Island, so satisfactory to the worthy 
 Missionary there, the Reverend Mr. Aeneus Mackenzy, and so beneficial 
 to the People as appears by an address of the Justices of Richmond 
 County, dated June 13, 1712, and by coming to a unanimous resolution, 
 
1 8 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 that Three more should be forthwith allowed the Society's Pay, as 
 Catechists or School-masters; one for the town of Hampstead in Long 
 Island, at iof per Annum, upon the Request of Mr. John Thomas, 
 Missionary there, who represents the Children thereof, for want of 
 Letters and Education, as wild, uncultivated and unimproved, as the 
 soil was when their Forefathers first had it" (Pratt's Ann., p. 104). 
 
 Rev. Mr. Milner, sending his report from Westchester, 1726, has this 
 to say about the school: "The school is still vacant, and deprived of a 
 teacher, but (he) petitions the Society to continue their bounty to some 
 worthy person who shall be chosen schoolmaster; as the school is a 
 nursery for the church, and of great service in these parts which request 
 is accordingly granted" (Bolton, Hist, of Church, etc., p. 71). 
 
 Rev. James Westmore, minister of the Parish of Rye, Westchester 
 County, writing to the secretary of the Society, 1727, after speaking of 
 several poor private schools, goes on to say: "But there is no public 
 provision at all for a school in this parish, except what the Honorable 
 Society allow Mr. Cleator, nor is there any donations or benefactions to 
 the minister or schoolmaster, besides what I have mentioned, nor is there 
 any library besides the Honorable Society's" (Bolton, p. 250). 
 
 "Mr. Mackenzy, the Society's Missionary in Staten Island in the 
 Province of New York, having informed them how much they wanted 
 School-Masters, to instruct the children of the English, Dutch, and 
 French, in the said Island, and having recommended Mr. Adam Brown, 
 and Mr. Benjamin Drewit, for that Purpose, the Society made choice of 
 them both" (Pratt's Ann., p. 104). 
 
 As to the nature of the schools fostered by the Society for the Propa- 
 gation of the Gospel, it is necessary to remark that they were both secular 
 and religious. They were intended to give a primary education under 
 religious influence. In support of this proposition, the following refer- 
 ences are cited: 
 
 "The Society sent Quantities of Paper for the Use of the School, 
 Catechisms, and large Numbers of Common-Prayer-Books, which proved 
 of great Benefit to the younger People. The Youth was instructed, 
 made their Responses regularly at Church, and Divine Worship was per- 
 formed with more Knowledge and Decency" (Humphreys, p. 225). 
 
 "Besides the Missionaries there has been a great Demand upon them 
 for Catechists and School-Masters to Instruct not only the Servants and 
 Slaves but also the Children of the Planters, especially the poorer sort, 
 in Reading, Writing and the Principles of the Christian Religion, as 
 Taught and Professed in the Church of England" (Pratt's Ann., p. 104). 
 
UNDER SOCIETY POR PROPAGATION OP THE GOSPEL 1 9 
 
 A schoolmaster is appointed at Rye, "who shall be allowed 5£ per 
 Annum, on a certificate that he has taught 30 such, the Bible, the 
 Catechism, and the Use of the Liturgy" (Abstract of Proceedings, etc., 
 1712-13, p. 40; quoted in Pratt's Ann., p. 105). 
 
 "From Mr. Huddleston, Schoolmaster at New York, That he teaches 
 50 poor children on the Society's Bounty to read and write, and instructs 
 them in the Church Catechism, many of which are now fit for any Trade " 
 (Pratt's Ann., p. 105). 
 
 "Mr. Noxon, the schoolmaster, writes from New York, August 6, 
 1738, That he hath upwards of fifty poor Children, whom he teaches to 
 read, write and cipher upon the Society's Charity; and brings to Trinity 
 Church on Wednesdays, Fridays and Holy Days, to be catechised. He 
 adds, there is a great want of Common Prayer-Books and Psalters" 
 (Pratt's Ann., p. 106). 
 
 The Society's abstracts for 17 14 contain the following item: "To 
 these donations the Society added two dozen prayer books for Mr. 
 Huddleston, with the old version of the singing, and as many of Lewis' 
 Church catechism, for exercise in his school or on mornings of the Lord's 
 days, (when not only his own scholars, but several of the young people 
 of the town, of both sexes, came willingly to be informed) one dozen 
 bibles with the common prayer and the new version of psalms, twenty- 
 five psalters, and fifty-one primers, all which he requested as contributing 
 mightily, to the spreading the good work he has in hand, having taught 
 besides British children, six hundred Dutch and French, to read and 
 write English" (Bolton, Hist, of the Church, etc., p. 204). 
 
 From the evidence already given there can be no question that the 
 Society's schools taught reading, writing, and ciphering, but that they 
 were distinctly religious and ecclesiastical in aim is still further authen- 
 ticated by the following extract from the instructions for schoolmasters 
 employed by the Society: 
 
 "I. That they well consider the End for which they are employed by 
 the Society, viz. The instructing and disposing Children to believe and 
 live as Christians. 
 
 "II. In order to this End, that they teach them to read truly and 
 distinctly, that they may be capable of reading the Holy Scriptures, 
 and other pious and useful Books, for informing their Understandings 
 and regulating their manners. 
 
 "III. That they instruct them thoroughly in the Church-Catechism; 
 teach them first to read it distinctly and exactly, then to learn it per- 
 fectly by Heart; endeavoring to make them understand the Sense and 
 
20 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 Meaning of it, by the Help of such Expositions, as the Society shall 
 send over. 
 
 "IV. That they teach them to Write a plain and legible Hand, in 
 order to the fitting them for useful Employments; with as much Arith- 
 metic, as shall be necessary to the same purpose. 
 
 "VI. That they daily use, Morning and Evening, the Prayers com- 
 posed for their Use in this Collection with their Scholars in the School, 
 and teach them the Prayers and Graces composed for their Use at Home. 
 
 "VII. That they oblige their Scholars to be constant at Church on 
 the Lord's-Day Morning and Afternoon, and at all other Times of 
 Publick Worship; that they cause them to carry their Bibles and Prayer 
 Books with them, instructing them how to use them there, and how to 
 demean themselves in the several Parts of Worship; that they be there 
 present with them, taking Care of their reverent and decent Behavior, 
 and examine them afterwards as to what they have heard and learned" 
 (Pratt's Ann., p. 109). 
 
 The facts set forth in this chapter go to show the extent and nature 
 of the educational work carried on in the Province of New York by the 
 Society for the Propagation of the Gospel. Since colonial and municipal 
 interest had waned, the Society came in to supply a real educational need. 
 There was no other educational agency in the colony at that time so 
 conspicuous in its activities for the public good. Yet, as we have seen, 
 the ultimate purpose of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel was 
 other than educational, and reading and writing were taught the children 
 merely as a gateway to the Bible and Catechism and the Prayer-Book. 
 The end sought was religious education. 
 
CHAPTER IV 
 
 EDUCATIONAL MOVEMENTS OF THE EARLY NINETEENTH CENTURY 
 
 Hasse enumerates the following church schools operative in the city 
 of New York for the greater part of the first quarter of the nineteenth 
 century, and some of them continuing still longer: Christ Church, 
 Bethel Baptist Church, Scotch Presbyterian Church, First Presbyterian 
 Church, German Lutheran Church, Methodist Episcopal Church, St. 
 Michael's Church, First Baptist Church, Episcopal Charity School, 
 Reformed Dutch, St. Peter's Church Free School, St. Patrick's Cathedral 
 Free School (Index to Doc. of State o/N.Y., under "Private and Parochial 
 Schools"). How widely these schools were established throughout the 
 state it is perhaps now impossible to tell, but there is no reason to suppose 
 that the city of New York enjoyed a monopoly of this good work. These 
 church schools were for the education of the poor and were, as a matter 
 of course, religious in aim and method. 
 
 In 1805 a corporation was formed in the city of New York, known at 
 first as the Free School Society, afterward as the Public School Society. 
 Its original object was the education of the children of the poor who did 
 not belong to, or were not provided for by, any religious denomination. 
 But feeling that this restriction unnecessarily limited their sphere of 
 usefulness, this society in 1808, received authority from the legislature 
 to educate all children who were proper objects of gratuitous instruction. 
 The Free School Society of the city of New York was one of the most 
 conspicuous educational agencies of the state until in the year 1853 it was 
 merged into the general system of common instruction (Ann. Reports 
 and Manuscript Records in custody of N.Y. Historical Society Library). 
 
 The early records of this Society clearly indicate its position on the 
 question of religious instruction in the schools of the people. Instruction 
 was to be religious but not sectarian. The following extracts from the 
 Society's address to the public, 1805, will illustrate this point: 
 
 "While the various religious and benevolent societies in this city, 
 with a spirit of charity and zeal which the precepts and example of the 
 Divine Author of our religion could alone inspire, amply provide for the 
 education of such poor children as belong to their respective associations, 
 there still remains a large number living in total neglect of religious and 
 moral instruction, and unacquainted with the common rudiments of 
 
 21 
 
22 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 learning, essentially requisite for the due management of the ordinary- 
 business of life" (Bourne, History of the Public School Society, p. 6). 
 
 "It is proposed, also, to establish, on the first day of the week, a 
 school, called a Sunday School, more particularly for such children as, 
 from peculiar circumstances, are unable to attend on the other days of 
 the week. In this, as in the Common School, it will be a primary object, 
 without observing the peculiar forms of any religious Society, to inculcate 
 the sublime truths of religion and morality contained in the Holy 
 Scriptures" (Bourne, p. 7). 
 
 The attitude of the Society is still further and fully illustrated by the 
 following extracts from its annual reports: 
 
 "While the Trustees have been thus engaged in communicating, to 
 the understandings of the children, the elements of useful knowledge, 
 they have not been unmindful of the importance of imbuing their minds 
 also with a sense of moral and religious obligation. 
 
 "The afternoon of every Tuesday, or third day of the week, has been 
 set apart for this purpose; and the children have been instructed in the 
 catechisms of the churches to which they respectively belong. This 
 pious office is performed by an association of highly respectable females, 
 who are in profession with the different religious denominations in the 
 city. The number of children, educated in the peculiar tenets of each 
 religious community, is, at the present, as follows: Presbyterians 271, 
 Episcopalians 186, Methodists 172, Baptists 119, Dutch Church 41, 
 Roman Catholic 9" {Ninth Annual Report, 1814, not paged). 
 
 "The office of communicating religious instruction to the children, 
 by teaching them the Catechisms of their respective Churches, is still 
 performed by the Association of benevolent females, who are zealously 
 engaged in it" {Tenth Annual Report, 1815). 
 
 "The children continue to receive the advantages of religious instruc- 
 tion, communicated to them from the catechisms used in the respective 
 churches to which they belong, in the manner mentioned in the report of 
 last year" {Eleventh Annual Report, 181 6). 
 
 Speaking of the Society's work, the report says: "It has happily 
 brought the means of education within the reach of all classes of people; 
 and, gradually diffusing among them the light of knowledge and of 
 religion, must have a powerful tendency to ameliorate the condition of 
 Society and to advance the best interests of our country" {Twelfth 
 Annual Report, 181 7). 
 
 "With gratitude we acknowledge a donation of 61 Bibles, and 50 
 Testaments from the New- York Auxiliary Bible Society, and of 25 
 
EDUCATIONAL MOVEMENTS OF NINETEENTH CENTURY 23 
 
 Bibles, from the New- York Bible Society" {Fourteenth Annual Report, 
 1819). 
 
 "No new books for the instruction of children in the Free-Schools, 
 have been introduced during the past year. The Scripture lessons con- 
 tinue to be used with all the advantages contemplated at the time of 
 their adoption, and it affords satisfaction to find a book so useful, becom- 
 ing popular over the continent of Europe, and to hear of its being 
 introduced in South America" {Eighteenth Annual Report, 1823). 
 
 From the extracts cited above it appears evident that the Free School 
 Society was deeply interested in the religious instruction of the children, 
 although from the beginning it recognized the importance of avoiding 
 sectarian differences. 
 
 The religious motive in the founding of common schools is clearly 
 evidenced by the public utterances of prominent statesmen of the time. 
 In his message to the legislature, 1787, Governor Clinton said in part: 
 "Neglect of the education of youth is one of the evils consequent upon 
 war. Perhaps there is scarce anything more worthy your attention than 
 the revival and encouragement of seminaries of learning; and nothing 
 by which we can more satisfactorily express our gratitude to the Supreme 
 Being for his past favors — since piety and virtue are generally the off- 
 spring of an enlightened understanding" (quoted by Randall, History 
 of the Common School System of the State of N.Y., p. 8). 
 
 Governor Tompkins in his legislative message, 1810, declared his 
 conviction as follows: "I cannot omit this occasion of inviting your 
 attention to the means of instruction for the rising generation. To 
 enable them to perceive and duly to estimate their rights; to inculcate 
 correct principles and habits of morality and religion; and to render 
 them useful citizens, a competent provision for their education is 
 all-essential" (Randall, p. 15). 
 
 In 1 81 1, Governor Tompkins, by act of legislature, appointed a com- 
 mission of five to report a plan for the establishment and organization of 
 common schools. This report was presented to the legislature, Feb- 
 ruary 17, 181 2, and embodied the main features of the common-school 
 system up to 1840. The following extracts will show the remarkable 
 influence of the religious motive: 
 
 "To rescue man from that state of degradation to which he is 
 doomed, unless redeemed by education; to unfold his physical, intel- 
 lectual, and moral powers; and fit him for those high destinies which his 
 Creator has prepared for him, cannot fail to excite the most ardent sen- 
 sibility of the philosopher and the philanthropist." 
 
24 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 After pointing out relation of education to good morals and free 
 government, the report proceeds as follows: "The Commissioners think 
 it unnecessary to represent in a stronger point of view the importance 
 and absolute necessity of education, as connected either with the cause 
 of religion and morality, or with the prosperity and existence of our 
 political institutions." 
 
 This education is to be provided by the establishment of common 
 schools spread throughout the state. "This appears to be the best plan 
 that can be devised to disseminate religion, morality, and learning 
 throughout a whole country." 
 
 As to what should be taught in these schools the report says: 
 "Reading, writing, arithmetic, and the principles of morality are 
 essential to every person, however humble his situation in life. Without 
 the first, it is impossible to receive those lessons of morality which are 
 inculcated in the writings of the learned and pious; nor is it possible 
 to become acquainted with our political constitutions and laws, nor to 
 decide those great political questions which ultimately are referred to 
 the intelligence of the people. Writing and arithmetic are indispensable 
 in the management of one's private affairs, and to facilitate one's com- 
 merce with the world. Morality and religion are the foundation of all 
 that is truly great and good; and are, consequently, of primary im- 
 portance." 
 
 The commission is solicitous as to the introduction of proper books 
 into the contemplated schools. " Much good is to be derived from a ju- 
 dicious selection of books, calculated to enlighten the understanding not 
 only, but to improve the heart. And as it is of incalculable consequence to 
 guard the young and tender mind from receiving fallacious impressions, 
 the Commissioners cannot omit mentioning this subject as a part of the 
 weighty trust reposed in them. Connected with the introduction of 
 suitable books, the Commissioners take the liberty of suggesting that 
 some observation and advice touching the reading of the Bible in the 
 schools might be salutary. In order to render the sacred volume pro- 
 ductive of the greatest advantage, it should be held in a very different 
 light from that of a common school book. It should be regarded as a 
 book intended for literary improvement, not merely, but as inculcating 
 great and indispensable moral truths also. With these impressions the 
 Commissioners are induced to recommend the practice introduced into 
 the New York Free Schools, of having select chapters read at the opening 
 of the school in the morning, and the like at the close in the afternoon. 
 This is deemed the best mode of preserving the religious regard which is 
 due to the sacred writings." 
 
EDUCATIONAL MOVEMENTS OF NINETEENTH CENTURY 25 
 
 "And the Commissioners cannot but hope that that Being who rules 
 the universe in justice and in mercy, who rewards virtue and punishes 
 vice, will most graciously deign to smile benignly on the humble efforts 
 of a people in a cause purely His own; and that He will manifest His 
 pleasure in the lasting prosperity of our country" (entire document 
 reproduced in Randall, pp. 17-23). 
 
 A bill embodying this report was passed by the legislature 1812 and, 
 as stated above, remained in force till about 1840. As the report of a 
 legislative commission it is evidence of the first order in support of the 
 contention that the common schools were founded, in part at least, from 
 a religious motive, and that religious instruction was to form a part of 
 their curriculum. 
 
CHAPTER V 
 ELEMENTARY-SCHOOL BOOKS OF THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 
 
 We have already seen in the preceding chapters the use of religious 
 material in the schools in the form of psalters and catechisms, as well as 
 in the reading of the Bible itself. It is the purpose of the present chapter 
 to take a step farther in advance, and show the religious character of the 
 more important school books of the colonial period and the early days 
 of the republic. 
 
 One of the best authorities on this subject (Johnson, Old-Time 
 Schools and School-Books, p. 185) gives the following very interesting 
 summary: "John Locke, in 1690, said of elementary education in 
 England, 'The method is to adhere to the ordinary road of the Horn- 
 book, Primer, Psalter, Testament, and Bible; these are the only books 
 used to engage the liking of children and tempt them to read.' 'The 
 ordinary road' was the same here. There were three reading classes in 
 the schools — 'The Psalter Class' for beginners, next 'The Testament 
 Class,' and thirdly 'The Bible Class,' which went through about two 
 chapters at each school session and was expected to spell the words in 
 the portions read. For a long time spelling-books were lacking, and 
 they did not become common much before 1750; but after that time for 
 fully three-quarters of a century the spelling-book was almost the sole 
 resource of the school children for elementary instruction. Advanced 
 readers were in the market in the early years of the republic, but readers 
 for the beginners seem to have been thought unnecessary. Thus the 
 spellers of the forefathers did double duty as spelling-books and prim- 
 ers, and were a much more important institution than they have ever 
 been since." 
 
 Disregarding, as not calling for further consideration, psalters, Tes- 
 taments, and Bibles, our present study will be confined to hornbooks, 
 primers, spelling-books, and readers. The hornbook consisted of a small 
 sheet of paper pasted on a board and covered with transparent horn as 
 a protection for the printing underneath. It had its beginnings in the 
 Middle Ages and persisted far down in the eighteenth century. It was 
 advertised in a Philadelphia newspaper so late as 1770 {Pennsylvania 
 Gazette). The alphabet, the Lord's Prayer, some verses of Scripture or 
 
 26 
 
ELEMENTARY-SCHOOL BOOKS OF EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 27 
 
 moral precepts, and some stanzas of poetry composed its course of study 
 (Tuer, History of the Horn-Book). 
 
 The hornbook was widely used in this country as well as abroad. 
 The chief evidence of this fact is the advertisements of booksellers in the 
 newspapers of such cities as Boston, New York, and Philadelphia. The 
 New York Gazette of November 6, 1738 advertises hornbooks for sale. 
 The New York Gazette Revived 'in the Weekly Post-Boy has a similar 
 advertisement on June 27, 1748; also in the issue of July 25, 1748; also 
 
 in 1753. 
 
 An interesting advertisement is found in the New York Weekly Post- 
 Boy of August 19, 1745: "John Hinsliew, Book seller advertises Past 
 Board Books to answer the End of Hornbooks for little children." The 
 fact that the "Book seller" wishes the people to know that he has some- 
 thing that will serve as a satisfactory substitute for hornbooks seems 
 good evidence to the effect that the latter were in use at that time, or 
 had been, not a great while before. 
 
 The primer is an expanded hornbook, and for its origin goes back to 
 the Romish Abecedariums of the fifteenth century. It figured largely in 
 the English Reformation and was very early brought to the American 
 Colonies (Ford, New England Primer, pp. 1-12). Primers were adver- 
 tised in the New York papers certainly as early as 1738 {New York 
 Gazette, November 6, 1738). Similar advertisements are found in the 
 New York Weekly Post-Boy, December 24, 1744, December 2, 1745; the 
 New York Mercury, September 30, 1754, October 14, 1754, June 7, 1756, 
 July 18, 1757. There were also the New York Primer published 1747 
 (New York Evening Post, September 7, 1747), Church of England Primer 
 (New York Gazette Revived in the Weekly Post-Boy, June 27, 1748), 
 and, in Pennsylvania, at least, there were Quaker and Presbyterian 
 Primers (Pennsylvania Gazette, January 6, 1742). 
 
 But the queen of them all was the New England Primer. It was 
 first published in Boston, between 1687 and 1690, by Benjamin Harris. 
 It seems to have been a success from the beginning, as a second and 
 enlarged edition was printed in 1691 (Ford, p. 16). Its circulation was 
 enormous. Paul Leicester Ford, in his scholarly work on the subject 
 (p. 19), thus describes its great popularity. "For one hundred years 
 this Primer was the school-book of the dissenters of America, and for 
 another hundred, it was frequently reprinted. In the unfavorable 
 locality (in a sectarian sense) of Philadelphia, the accounts of Benjamin 
 Franklin and David Hall show that between 1749 and 1766, or a period 
 of seventeen years, that firm sold thirty-seven thousand, one hundred 
 
28 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 copies. Livermore stated in 1849 that within the last dozen years 
 '100,000 copies of modern editions .... have been circulated.' An 
 over-conservative claim for it is to estimate an annual average sale of 
 twenty thousand copies during a period of one hundred and fifty years, 
 or total sales of three million copies." 
 
 But our chief concern is in the distribution of the Primer in the 
 Province of New York. And while there is not the wealth of evidence 
 that some might wish, there is perhaps no student of the subject who 
 does not feel morally certain of the wide use of the New England Primer 
 in the New York of the eighteenth century. Nor are we left to con- 
 jecture. Evans' American Bibliography (III, No. 6726) contains the 
 following interesting announcement: 
 
 "The New England Primre (sic) Improved, por the More Easy 
 Attaining the True Reading of English, to Which Is Added, the 
 Assembly op Divines Catechism. 
 
 "New York: Printed and sold by James Parker, in Beaver-Street, 
 
 1750." 
 
 This is the earliest known date at which the New England Primer 
 was printed in New York City, but it was advertised for sale as early as 
 1748, July 25, in the New York Gazette: "Writing Books for School- 
 Boys, New England Primers; Church of England Primers; Horn- 
 Books." Also the advertisements of primers in general, referred to 
 above, are in point here. It is an interesting fact that by far the larger 
 number of these advertisements do not designate any particular primer. 
 Their names were well known. Designation was therefore unnecessary. 
 But the New England Primer was the most notable of them all, and, 
 without doubt, was in every advertiser's collection. Now the fact that 
 the New England Primer was published and advertised by booksellers 
 in New York is conclusive evidence of its use in that section of the 
 country. 
 
 In the course of its long and popular career the New England Primer 
 suffered many minor alterations at the hands of printers and publishers, 
 yet through all retained unmistakable marks of its identity. Despite 
 incidental changes, it usually contained the alphabet, easy syllables 
 for children, sentences of moral and religious instruction, the rhymed 
 alphabet, or short poems illustrating each letter, Lord's Prayer, Creed, 
 and Catechism. Except the alphabet and words for spelling, it was 
 exclusively a religious book, and its widespread use throughout the 
 eighteenth century warrants a more detailed statement of its contents 
 (see Ford's Introduction). 
 
ELEMENTARY-SCHOOL BOOKS OF EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 29 
 
 I have in hand a reprint of the edition of 1777. Immediately after 
 the title-page the reader comes to two prayers: "The young Infant's or 
 Child's morning prayer"; "The Infant's or young Child's Evening 
 Prayer," both by Dr. Watts. These prayers are followed by six pages 
 of letters, syllables, and spelling. Then comes the "rhymed alphabet." 
 Each letter is illustrated by a little cut and a rhymed couplet, such as 
 the following: 
 
 A. "In Adam's Fall B. "Heaven to find, 
 
 We sinned all." The Bible Mind." 
 
 Every couplet of the twenty-four is religious in its tone, and nearly every 
 one a reference to the Bible. This, however, was not the case in editions 
 prior to 1740 (Ford, p. 46). Next follows a series of questions with such 
 answers as Adam, Eve, Noah, Job, Jesus Christ, Son of God, etc. The 
 alphabet of lessons fills the next two pages, each one of which is a quota- 
 tion from the Bible. Now come the Lord's Prayer, the creed, Dr. 
 Watts's Cradle Hymn, and verses for children. These last cover seven 
 pages and start off with the following: 
 
 "Though I am young a little one, 
 If I can speak and go alone, 
 Then I must learn to know the Lord, 
 And learn to read his holy word. 
 'Tis time to seek to God and pray 
 For what I want for every day: 
 I have a precious soul to save, 
 And I a mo rtal body have, 
 Tho' I am young yet I may die, 
 And hasten to eternity: 
 There is a dreadful fiery hell, 
 Where wicked ones must always dwell: 
 There is a heaven full of joy, 
 Where godly ones must always stay: 
 To one of these my soul must fly, 
 As in a moment when I die." 
 
 After ten more pages of varied religious material comes "The 
 Shorter Catechism, Agreed upon by the Reverend Assembly of Divines 
 at Westminster." This in turn is followed by "Spiritual Milk For 
 American Babes, Drawn out of the Breasts of both Testaments for their 
 Souls Nourishment. By John Cotton." After this "Spiritual Milk" 
 comes "A Dialogue between Christ, Youth, and the Devil." This array 
 of religious and theological pabulum reaches a fitting conclusion with 
 
30 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 advice to children by the Reverend and Venerable Nathaniel Clap, of 
 Newport, Rhode Island: "Good children should remember daily, God 
 their Creator, Redeemer, and Sanctifier; to believe in, love and serve 
 him; their parents to obey them in the Lord; their bible and catechism; 
 their baptism; the Lord's day; the Lord's death and resurrection; their 
 own death and resurrection; and the day of judgment, when all that are 
 not fit for heaven must be sent to hell. And they should pray to God in 
 the name of Christ, for saving grace." 
 
 Coote's English School-Master was one of the earliest so-called 
 spelling-books, published first in 1590. It contained about seventy-two 
 pages, of which eighteen were given to a "Short Catechism, necessary 
 observations of a Christian, prayers, and psalms" (Littlefield, Early 
 Schools & School-Books of New England, p. 120). According to the 
 author just quoted (p. 119) this book was extensively used in the New 
 England schools of the seventeenth century. While positive evidence is 
 lacking, there seems no reason to doubt its use in New York as well. 
 
 About a century later than Coote's School-Master, 1708, was pub- 
 lished an interesting textbook for schools, called The History of Genesis. 
 It was composed of short narratives from the first book of the Bible. Its 
 title-page reads in part as follows: "The History of Genesis. Being an 
 Account of the Holy Lives and Actions of the Patriarchs; explained 
 with Pious and Edifying Explications, and illustrated with near Forty 
 Figures. Fitted for the Use of Schools, and recommended to Teachers 
 of Children, as a Book very proper for the learning them to read English, 
 and instructing them in the right understanding of these Divine His- 
 tories" (Johnson, p. 45). 
 
 Neither of the two books named in the paragraphs above was a 
 speller in the strict sense of the word. They are mentioned here because 
 they were introductory to that class of school books, and show as well as 
 any the religious character of the instruction, which was characteristic 
 of the time. 
 
 The speller that was most widely used in the eighteenth century was 
 Dilworth's A New Guide to the English Tongue. This was published in 
 1740, and for about fifty years enjoyed unrivaled popularity. That it 
 found a place in the schools of New York is placed beyond the per- 
 adventure of doubt. The following newspaper advertisements of book- 
 sellers are quite conclusive: New York Mercury, June 27, 1748, July 22, 
 1754, November 8, 1762, and New York Gazette and Weekly Mercury, 
 June 25, 1770. One of these advertisements says: "Dilworth's Spelling 
 Book: very cheap by the dozen." Another reads : "Dilworth's Spelling- 
 Book by the Wholesale." No doubt there are numerous advertisements 
 
ELEMENTARY-SCHOOL BOOKS OF EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 3 1 
 
 which have not come to notice, but those referred to above cover a period 
 of twenty-two years and can have no explanation apart from a very 
 general demand for the book in question. 
 
 The conviction that Dilworth's Speller was very widely used in the 
 Province of New York, and that it is typical of the school books of the 
 period calls for some account of its contents. As indicating the general 
 character of the book and the educational spirit of the times, the follow- 
 ing extracts from the preface will be suggestive: 
 
 "It has been a general and true Observation, that with the Reforma- 
 tion of these Realms, Ignorance has gradually vanished and the increase 
 of Learning amongst us, who take the Word of God for a Lantern to our 
 Feet, and a Light to our Paths. Thus, 
 
 "They who grop'd their Way to Virtue and Knowledge in the Days 
 of Darkness and implicit Zeal, were taught little more than to mumble 
 over a few Prayers by Heart, and never called upon to read, much less 
 permitted to enquire into the Truth of what they professed. But 
 
 "Since the Sunshine of the Gospel of Jesus Christ has risen amongst 
 us; since we are loosed from the Bands of Ignorance and Superstition; 
 since every Protestant believes it to be his Duty to promote Christian 
 Knowledge; certainly it will be confessed, that all Improvements in 
 Learning ought to be encouraged; and consequently that they deserve 
 our particular Regard, who study to make the first Steps therefore firm 
 and easy. For human Prudence teacheth, That a good Beginning is the 
 most reasonable Prospect of a good Ending. Therefore, 
 
 "As we boast of greater Advantages than our Forefathers, let us take 
 care, lest we frustrate the great Work begun amongst us, by negligent 
 Prosecution of our Duty: For I would have you well assured, that it is 
 as bad to learn the first Rudiments of Literature under wrong and 
 depraved Habits, as not to learn them at all. For, the Man seldom 
 clears himself of these ill Faculties, which are contracted in his tender 
 Age: So, says Solomon, Train up a Child in the Way he should go, and 
 when he is old he will not depart from it" (p. iv). 
 
 The first part of the book covers seventy-six pages. The plan of 
 instruction is to give several pages of letters and syllables, followed by 
 short reading lessons of two or three pages. Here is a sample page of 
 the reading: 
 
 "Shew me the right Way, O Lord, and guide me in it. 
 "0 think not on my past Sins; but think on me, O Lord, for my good. 
 "All the Paths of the Lord are True to such as keep his Laws. 
 "He that doth love the Lord shall dwell at Ease; and his Seed shall have 
 the Land." 
 
32 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 "Put thy Trust in God, and he will help thee. 
 
 "It is a good Thing to give Thanks, and to call on the Name of the Lord. 
 "Let us sing Psalms to the Lord our God. 
 
 "When thou shalt make a Vow to the Lord thy God, thou shalt not be slack to 
 pay it." 
 
 "That which is gone out of thy Lips, thou shalt keep: And if a Man vow to 
 
 the Lord, he shall keep his Oath. 
 "Let us stand fast. Let us strive to be good. 
 "Charge them that are Rich in this World, that they do good, and be glad to 
 
 give" (p. 19). 
 
 The second and third parts of the book are taken up with a table of 
 useful words and a study of grammatical construction. Part IV is "An 
 useful Collection of Sentences in Prose and Verse, Divine, Moral, and 
 Historical." Many of these "verses" are much like the following: 
 "Repentance, though it is not to be rested in as any Satisfaction for Sin, 
 or any Cause of the Pardon thereof, which is the Act of God's free Grace 
 in Christ; yet it is of such Necessity to all Sinners, that none may expect 
 Pardon without it" (p. 130). 
 
 Part V consists wholly of "Forms of Prayer for Children, on several 
 Occasions." The purpose of these prayers, according to the preface, is 
 to teach the pupils "that all their Dependence is on God, by whom we 
 live, and move, and have our Being" (p. ix; all references to ed. of 1773). 
 
 The year 1783 witnessed the first spelling-book by an American 
 author. It bore the ponderous title of The First Part of a Grammatical 
 Institute of the English Language, by Noah Webster. This book super- 
 seded Dilworth's Speller and for a time outrivaled all competitors. Its 
 circulation was so extensive that the author, during the twenty years he 
 was compiling his famous dictionary, was able handsomely to support 
 himself and family from the proceeds of its sale, although his premium 
 was less than one cent per copy. 
 
 From the point of view of religious material, Webster's Speller stands 
 in striking contrast with Dilworth's. The former, however, while pre- 
 dominantly moral, was not destitute of religious instruction. The first 
 43 pages were devoted wholly to spelling. At this point reading lessons 
 are interspersed. The following is an example of its religious tone: 
 
 "No man may put off the law of God; 
 My joy is in his law all the day. 
 O may I not go in the way of sin! 
 Let me not go in the way of ill men" (Johnson, p. 176). 
 
ELEMENTARY-SCHOOL BOOKS OF EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 33 
 
 The last twelve pages of the book are devoted to a A Moral Cate- 
 chism." The following question and answer may be considered religious 
 as well as moral: 
 
 " Q. Is pride commendable ? 
 
 "A. By no means. A modest, self-approving opinion of our own 
 good deeds is very right — it is natural — it is agreeable, and a spur to 
 good actions. But we should not suffer our hearts to be blown up with 
 pride; for pride brings upon us the ill-will of mankind, and displeasure 
 of our Maker" (Johnson, p. 180). 
 
 Speaking of the changes in the revised edition of 1829, Clifton 
 Johnson says: "The Moral Catechism was omitted, and so were the 
 scattered religious and ethical lessons" (p. 181). 
 
 As indicating the scarcity of elementary readers during the first years 
 of the nineteenth century, also as evidence of the wide use at that time 
 of the Testament as a reading-book, I reproduce a part of the preface to 
 Leavitt's Easy Lessons in Reading, New Hampshire, 1823: "The 
 compiler has been excited to the present undertaking by representations 
 that there is no reading book to be found at the book stores, suitable for 
 young children, to be used intermediately, between the Spelling-Book 
 and the English or American Reader. The Testament is much used for 
 this purpose; and on many accounts, it is admirably adapted for a 
 reading book in schools. But it is respectfully submitted to the experi- 
 ence of judicious teachers, whether the peculiar structure of scripture 
 language is not calculated to create a tone ? I am persuaded it would 
 be better to place a book in the hands of learners, written in a more 
 familiar style" (quoted in Johnson, p. 240). 
 
 The Franklin Primer had been published in 1802. It was intended 
 as a substitute for the New England Primer, "which has of late become 
 almost obsolete." The little volume contained "a variety of tables, 
 moral lessons and sentences, a concise history of the World, appropriate 
 Hymns, and Dr. Watts and the Assembly of Divines' Catechisms" 
 (Johnson, p. 234). 
 
 In 1808, The Child's Instructor was published at Philadelphia. The 
 following paragraphs will indicate its religious tone: 
 
 " Good boys and girls go to church. Do you go to church ? Billy 
 went to church, and so did Betsey. The church is the house of God; 
 and God loves little children when they go to church." 
 
 "When you go to church you must sit still, and hear what the 
 preacher tells you; he tells you to be good children and love your 
 parents, and then God will bless you." 
 
34 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 "Do you know who makes it rain? I will tell you: God makes it 
 rain. You see that dark cloud rising in the west ? That cloud will bring 
 thunder and lightning and rain. You need not be afraid; God makes it 
 thunder; and he will not let it hurt you if you are good" (Johnson, p. 237). 
 
 These little books may or may not have been used in New York State. 
 They are mentioned here to indicate the spirit of the times, and as 
 illustrative of the school books of the period. 
 
 Two very popular Advanced Readers were published by Caleb 
 Bingham, Boston: The American Preceptor, 1794, and The Columbia 
 Orator, 1797. In the course of time The Columbia Orator displaced the 
 Bible in the schools, which was then read as a devotional exercise at the 
 opening of the morning, and close of the afternoon, session (Littlefield, 
 
 P- 156). 
 
 Clifton Johnson thus describes the character of these readers: 
 "Most of the early reading books drew their material largely from 
 British sources, and American contributions were for a long time mainly 
 from the speeches of the Revolutionary orators. Typical subjects were: 
 Frailty of Life, Benevolence of the Deity, Popery, Rules for Moderating 
 Our Anger, Reflections on Sun Set, Character of a Truly Polite Man, 
 The Child Trained Up for the Gallows. These and the rest of their 
 kind were all ' extracted from the books of the most correct and elegant 
 writers.' The books were also pretty sure to contain selections from the 
 Bible, and some had parts of sermons. Indeed, nearly all the matter 
 was of a serious, moral, or religious character" (p. 277). 
 
 About 1790 Noah Webster published a reader, called The Little 
 Reader's Assistant. The title-page of a 1791 edition reads in part 
 as follows: 
 
 "I. A number of Stories, mostly taken from the history of America, 
 and adorned with Cuts. 
 
 "II. Rudiments of English Grammar. 
 
 "III. A Federal Catechism, being a short and easy explanation of 
 the Constitution of the United States. 
 
 "IV. General Principles of Government and Commerce. 
 
 "V. The Farmer's Catechizm, containing plain rules of husbandry" 
 (Johnson, p. 269). 
 
 This statement of the contents of The Little Reader's Assistant offers 
 not the slightest suggestion of religious material. And the final part, 
 "The Farmer's Catechizm," would perhaps be the last place where we 
 should expect to find it. The following question and answer then will 
 be somewhat of a surprise: 
 
ELEMENTARY-SCHOOL BOOKS OF EIGHTEENTH CENTURY 35 
 
 "Q. Why is farming the most innocent employment? 
 
 "A. Because farmers have fewer temptations to be wicked than 
 other men. They live much by themselves, so that they do not see so 
 many bad examples as men in cities do. They have but little dealings 
 with others, so that they have fewer opportunities to cheat than other 
 classes of men. Besides, the flocks and herds which surround the 
 farmer, the frolicks of the harmless lambs, the songs of the cheerful birds, 
 and the face of nature's works, all present to the husbandman examples 
 of innocence, duty, simplicity and order, which ought to impress good 
 sentiments on the mind and lead the heart to God" (quoted in Johnson, 
 p. 276). 
 
 Recollections of Fifty Years Since (Astor Library, New York), by 
 Ezekiel Bacon, constitutes an interesting side light on this curriculum of 
 study. Ezekiel Bacon was born in Boston, Massachusetts, in 1776. He 
 was graduated from Yale College, 1794, and shortly afterward entered 
 the legal profession. In 1816 he went to Utica, New York, where he 
 remained a resident until his death in 1870. He represented his adopted 
 state in the legislature, became judge of the Court of Common Pleas, and 
 was member of the state constitutional convention of 1821. So, while 
 he was a New Englander by birth and training, he was thoroughly 
 identified with the state of his adoption, and acquainted with its educa- 
 tional history. The address in question was delivered at Utica, 1843, to 
 the Young Men's Association of the city (Appleton's Cyclopaedia of 
 American Biography). Recollections of fifty years since that date take 
 the reader back to the close of the previous century. Speaking of the 
 common schools, Mr. Bacon says: 
 
 "The time is well recollected (for the speaker was one of the subjects 
 of their stinted instructions) when little beyond Dillworth's Spelling 
 Book, the New England Primer, teaching by a double process the first 
 letter of the alphabet, and the first doctrine of the creed, through the 
 instrumentality of the first poetical distich that the young minstrels of 
 future times were taught to jingle together — 
 
 1 In Adam's fall 
 We sinned all,' 
 
 when these recondite volumes, together with the Psalter, and in process 
 of time and intellectual juvenile development, the other portions of the 
 Bible, constituted about the whole of the science of common school 
 reading then taught." 
 
 To this was added writing and a meager amount of arithmetic. 
 
36 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 This, he says, was the general range and grade of what was esteemed to 
 be a good country common-school education fifty years since. 
 
 As to the intellectual education of the female portion of the popula- 
 tion during the last century, the address continues: "How little more 
 have we to say than that they learned at their transient country schools, 
 taught by some smart spinster, to read passably in the Bible; to repeat 
 there, and on Saturday or Sunday evenings at home, the Shorter Cate- 
 chism, which, if they fully understood when they had got through it, 
 they certainly had sharper intellects than had some of their teachers; to 
 get by heart Watt's Spiritual Songs; scrawl a miserable hand writing; 
 and if deemed apt proficients and ambitious of teaching others in their 
 turn, to dig out their way through the first four rules of Arithmetic." 
 
 The books so briefly described in this chapter are intended to illus- 
 trate the spirit that brooded over elementary education during the period 
 under consideration. Some of them may not have been used in New 
 York, but the books used in that province could not have been essen- 
 tially different. They contained an amount of religious material, and 
 displayed a religious spirit and motive that strike astonishment to the 
 investigator of the present day. The elementary-school books of the 
 eighteenth century therefore make an important contribution to our 
 subject. They reinforce the arguments and make strong the position 
 advocated in the chapters gone before, that religious education was 
 incorporated in the schools of the State and City of New York from the 
 days of the first settlement down through the early decades of the 
 republic. 
 
PART II 
 RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION EXCLUDED FROM THE SCHOOLS 
 
CHAPTER VI 
 THE RISING CONSCIOUSNESS OF SECTARIANISM IN EDUCATION 
 
 We have seen how, from the first settlement of the Province of New 
 York, public education was carried on in the atmosphere of religion, being 
 actuated by the religious motive, and constituted so largely of religious 
 material. We have also seen the spirit and purpose of religion wrought 
 into the foundations of the common-school system of the state. But in 
 the closing years of the first quarter of the nineteenth century conditions 
 arose which made sectarian education a problem in the consciousness of 
 the people, and which were destined to have far-reaching results on the 
 final solution of the question. It is the purpose of the present chapter 
 to show how the problem arose in the consciousness of the people and 
 what was the first verdict of public opinion in relation to the subject. 
 
 In 1813 the legislature passed a law (for basis of historical statement 
 following see Annual Report of Free School Society, 1824) specifying the 
 participants of the school fund apportioned to the City of New York. 
 The organizations named were the Free School Society, the Orphan 
 Asylum Society, the Economical School Society, the African Free School, 
 and "such incorporated religious societies in said city, as now support 
 or hereafter shall establish Charity Schools within the said city, who 
 may apply for the same" (Laws of New York, 36th session, p. 38). Soon 
 after the passage of this law, encouraged by its proffer to "incorporated 
 religious societies," a number of religious bodies in the city established 
 schools and were admitted to participation in the fund. By the sixth 
 section of the law the several societies therein named participants in the 
 fund were prohibited from using any portion of their respective shares for 
 any purpose except the payment of teachers. 
 
 In 181 7 the legislature passed an act allowing the Free School 
 Society the privilege of using what surplus there might be left, after the 
 payment of teachers, to the erection of school buildings, the education of 
 schoolmasters on the Lancasterian plan, and to all needful purposes of 
 common-school education. This special privilege was granted the Free 
 School Society because it had been organized for the sole purpose of 
 educating the poor, and because its property must ever be devoted to 
 this object. The fact that the Society had a surplus, after the payment 
 
 39 
 
40 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 of teachers, was due to the economy of the Lancasterian system of 
 instruction. 
 
 In 1820 Bethel Baptist Church opened a school in the basement of 
 its building, in Delancey Street, for the reception of poor children of all 
 denominations. The following year they drew from the school fund on 
 basis of the law of 1813. And in 1822 the trustees of the said church 
 obtained from the legislature the passage of a law allowing them the 
 same privilege, which, five years before, had been granted the Free 
 School Society. Alone among all the religious societies, this church now 
 had the right to use its surplus for the erection of new buildings, education 
 of teachers, etc. 
 
 The passage of this law immediately alarmed the trustees of the Free 
 School Society, and also a number of religious societies in the city. It 
 was believed that the door had been opened wide for the perversion of 
 the school fund, that the church receiving the privilege above mentioned 
 would be strongly induced to employ poor teachers at a cheap rate in 
 order that there might be a surplus for the erection of buildings, and 
 that the buildings thus erected would belong to the church and not to 
 the public and would probably be devoted to other purposes than those 
 of the education of poor children. On account of this alarm memorials 
 from the Free School Society, from trustees of a number of church 
 schools, and from the corporation of the city were presented to the 
 legislature in 1823, praying the repeal of that section of the law which 
 granted special privilege to Bethel Baptist Church. 
 
 The educational project of Bethel Church was working injury to the 
 Free School Society. They were drawing scholars from the Society's 
 schools and so diminishing its share of the school fund, which was 
 apportioned to each school according to the number of scholars taught. 
 The Bethel schools also drew large amounts of the fund appropriated to 
 the city, thus leaving a smaller balance to be divided among other 
 institutions of the city. Notwithstanding this, the free schools would 
 have continued to be useful and the Society would not have pressed its 
 opposition to the Bethel schools, but for the fact that other denomina- 
 tions began to manifest a disposition to follow the example of the Bethel 
 Church, "to the extent of enlarging their schools, so as to receive for 
 instruction poor children generally, without restricting themselves as 
 heretofore, to those of their own particular congregations. A school of 
 this discription has been opened in Grace Church, under the pastoral 
 care of Rev. Mr. Wainwright; another for the education of female 
 children, by the Congregational Church in Chamber-street; and a third 
 
RISING CONSCIOUSNESS OF SECTARIANISM IN EDUCATION 41 
 
 will soon be opened by the Dutch Church, in the large rooms in Harmony- 
 Hall, at the corner of William, in Duane-street " {Nineteenth Annual 
 Report of the Free School Society) . 
 
 The Free School Society was now no longer satisfied with the repeal 
 of the special privilege granted to the Bethel Baptist Church, but began 
 to advocate a law restricting all church schools to the poor children con- 
 nected with their respective congregations. At this time also the Society 
 began to advocate the view that the school fund was purely of a civil 
 character and for a civil purpose, and that it should never go into the 
 hands of an ecclesiastical body or religious society. Th'is position was 
 unanimously indorsed by the city corporation, mayor, and aldermen, 
 and also by a number of clergymen and boards of trustees of religious 
 societies in the city (for the basis of the historical statement given thus 
 far, see Annual Report of the Free School Society, April 30, 1824). 
 
 As the result of the activity of the Free School Society the legislature 
 passed a law, November 19, 1824 {Laws of New York, p. 338, sec. IV), 
 conferring upon the Common Council of the City of New York the right 
 to name the schools which should be allowed to participate in the school 
 fund. The scenes of conflict were thus transferred from Albany to the 
 Council Chamber of the city corporation. 
 
 The church schools had made a hard fight. Their representatives at 
 Albany had exhausted every argument to ward off the repeal of the 
 privileges which had been granted them (Bourne, History of Public School 
 Society, p. 73). They were equally insistent in presenting their claims 
 to the Common Council, when the matter was brought before that body 
 in 1825. Memorials were presented to the Council from the trustees of 
 the charity schools attached to the Reformed Protestant Dutch Church, 
 the First Protestant Episcopal Charity School, the trustees of the 
 Methodist Episcopal Church, and the trustees of St. Patrick's Cathedral 
 and St. Peter's Church. (These memorials may be found in Archives of 
 New York City-Hall, Collection of April 11, 1825.) There was consider- 
 able feeling against the Free School Society, as is shown by the following 
 extract from the memorial of the Reformed Protestant Dutch Church: 
 
 "That from a law passed by the Legislature of this state at their last 
 extra session, your Memorialists perceive that your honorable Board 
 have the power to designate the institutions or schools, which shall be 
 entitled to receive any portion of the Common School Fund, and to 
 prescribe the limitations and restrictions under which it shall be received. 
 
 "From other unquestionable sources, your Memorialists have also 
 learnt, that strenuous and indefatigable efforts have been, and still are 
 
42 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 making, in a certain quarter, under the pleasing, though fallacious mask 
 of unlimited philanthropy, to monopolize to themselves the exclusive 
 right of educating the poor. To subserve this end they have not been 
 content to exhibit to the public view what has been and what might be 
 the extent of their own labors in the field of gratuitous education — they 
 have attempted to prostrate the claims of their competitors, by con- 
 descending indiscriminately to brand them with odious epithets, and to 
 undervalue their usefulness, by representations not consistent with a 
 strict narrative of truth." 
 
 The memorials of the trustees of the First Protestant Episcopal 
 Charity School is not so bitter in its insinuations, but just as strong in 
 its advocacy of what it considers to be the rights of the people for whom 
 it speaks. They wish to receive from the public fund according to the 
 statute of 1 8 13, and should any deviation from this plan be sanctioned, 
 they have, they think, special claim for consideration. Their school 
 dates back to 171 1, being, they think, the first establishment for gra- 
 tuitous instruction in the city. It has extended useful education to 
 multitudes of poor children connected with the parish of Trinity Church. 
 They had been admitted to participation in the public fund at the 
 passage of the law in 1813, and this assistance had enabled them to 
 double their accommodations. They believe the portion of the public 
 fund fallen to them has been "faithfully, efficiently, and exclusively 
 applied, as required by the Act which granted it." They therefore beg 
 to be included in the schools named to receive the public bounty. 
 
 The other memorialists were equally insistent in their claim to receive 
 a part of the school fund, as a matter of right. 
 
 The spirit and purpose of the Free School Society seem to be fairly 
 represented by the following paragraph from a memorial addressed to 
 the legislature at the regular session of 1824: "Your memorialists believe 
 that this amendment of the existing law is recommended by many con- 
 siderations of sound policy; and, among these, not the least is, that the 
 interests of the whole Christian community will be best promoted by 
 encouraging the principle that each religious society is bound to provide 
 for the education of their own poor children, and that, if they attempt 
 to do more, they ought to do it at their own expense, and not to look to 
 the funds of the State for assistance" (Bourne, p. 69). 
 
 The minutes of the Common Council of the city of New York for 
 April n, 1825, contain the following item: "The Committee on Laws to 
 whom had been referred the fourth section of the Act of Legislature 
 
RISING CONSCIOUSNESS OF SECTARIANISM IN EDUCATION 43 
 
 relating to Common Schools in this City passed 19th November 1824 
 together with sundry memorials on the subject presented a report which 
 was read and the consideration thereof postponed. It was ordered that 
 three hundred Copies of the Report and fifty Copies of the Law reported 
 by the Committee be printed in pamphlet form for the use of the Mem- 
 bers" (vol. 53, p. 346, New York City-Hall Library). 
 
 The matter was finally taken up by the Council, April 28, 1825, and 
 the law reported by the committee was passed. The first section of this 
 law was to the following effect: " Be it ordained by the Mayor, Aldermen 
 and Commonality of the City of New York in Common Council con- 
 vened, Pursuant to the authority vested in them, by the act of the 
 Legislature of the State of New York, entitled An Act Relating to Common 
 Schools in the City of New York, passed November 19th, 1824, that the 
 institutions, which shall be entitled to receive of the Commissioners of 
 the Common School Fund, payable to and raised in the said City, are 
 hereby designated to be, The Free School Society of New York, The 
 Mechanics' Society, The Orphan Asylum Society, and the Trustees of 
 the African Free School" (Minutes of the Common Council, vol.. 54, p. 
 100, New York City-Hall Library). 
 
 The report of the Committee on Laws, to which was referred the act 
 of the legislature, relative to the distribution of the school fund in New 
 York City, and which was presented to the Council, April 11, 1825, as 
 stated in the minutes cited above, is a document of the greatest impor- 
 tance. (The original copy is in the Custodian's office, New York City- 
 Hall. There is also a printed copy in the possession of the Astor Library, 
 New York City, and a reprint in the appendix to Bourne's history.) 
 This committee heard both sides of the great question and its report gives 
 a summary of the argument, which is invaluable to the historian. As to 
 the fulness with which the subject was discussed in their presence, the 
 committee reports as follows: "The various institutions, which have 
 been established for, or have undertaken from the best of motives, the 
 relief of this portion of our inhabitants (poor children), have been rep- 
 resented before your committee, and their respective claims to a par- 
 ticipation in the public bounty, have been urged on the part of their 
 delegates, by all the obligations and motives, which could be drawn from 
 the sources of piety and philanthropy, and with all the force and energy 
 of the most persuasive eloquence, and the most cogent argument." 
 
 The institutions in question, the report continues, are of two classes: 
 the churches and religious societies, many of which maintain charity 
 
44 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 schools; and societies whose members belong to the various denomina- 
 tions and whose sole object is the gratuitous education of the poor, the 
 chief of which was the Free School Society. 
 
 On behalf of the churches, the committee affirms, it has been main- 
 tained that their charity schools are of long standing, that they have 
 enjoyed the fostering care of the legislature, that the children are taught 
 the usual elementary branches with an efficiency comparable to that of 
 the other institutions. It is emphasized also that in the church schools 
 the children receive the advantages of religious instruction, and that for 
 this the churches receive no compensation. It is urged also, in this 
 connection, that religion is the only foundation of private happiness, 
 sound morality, and capacity for public usefulness. They deny any 
 intention of promoting sectarian influences, but affirm that no religious 
 instruction can be given without taking some specific form or system, 
 and thus, to some extent, becoming sectarian, and "that it is better to 
 have a community of conscientious sectarians than a community of 
 nothing-arians." 
 
 The advocates of the churches further insist that their schools, like 
 those under the lay corporations, will be subject to constant supervision 
 on the part of the city commissioners, that there should be no danger of 
 a church establishment on account of the assistance they receive from 
 the state, inasmuch as the rendering of such assistance is altogether 
 different from endowing or intrusting them with public funds, without a 
 specified object. No such danger, it was claimed, is felt by the general 
 or state government from the habit of employing chaplains. They affirm 
 also the impossibility of giving religious instruction in the homes of the 
 class of children who attend the charity schools, that the trustees of the 
 Free Schools are conscious of this and so teach the children under their 
 care some religion: "but of that kind and in that degree which is calcu- 
 lated to meet the views of numerous and influential sects of christians." 
 The delegates of the churches therefore contend that "this sectarian 
 tendency, if it be an evil, is now kept within reasonable limits, by 
 encouraging all religious denominations alike — whereas by placing its 
 now divided forces, into a more concentrated form, its native intensity 
 would be excited, and the consequences would be fatal to the body or 
 association which it might infect." 
 
 On behalf of the lay corporations, formed indiscriminately of all 
 religious persuasions, it is insisted, according to the committee, that the 
 school fund, soon to become very large, should not in any degree be 
 placed under clerical influence. The convention of 1777, or that of 
 
RISING CONSCIOUSNESS OF SECTARIANISM IN EDUCATION 45 
 
 1821, would never have sanctioned a proposition to tax the people for 
 the support of religion, and the Common Council should now profit by 
 their example and be guided by the same spirit. For the churches to 
 participate in the public fund would be in violation of that prevalent rule 
 of civil policy, which forbids all connection between matters of church 
 and state. It is further maintained that a part of this fund is raised by 
 tax, and that any portion of it turned into sectarian channels would 
 compel one portion of the community, contrary to its wishes, to support 
 the religious convictions of another portion of the community; that to 
 pay teachers of sectarian schools from this fund in no sense differs from 
 paying the clergymen of their congregations. When we are told that 
 religion is taught in the church schools, it must be remembered that the 
 catechisms and confessions of the churches are taught, and that these 
 various creeds and dogmas cannot be all equally true and equally entitled 
 to support. Preference therefore should be given the system which 
 seems the best, and public support wholly denied all others. Any other 
 plan would involve unjust and unjustifiable taxation. But no such 
 discrimination is possible. The principles that would admit one to 
 the public bounty would admit all alike. In this connection, "it is 
 strongly urged that true religion requires and admits of no aid from the 
 secular power; that her only resources are from Heaven and the con- 
 tribution of willing hearts; that she seeks only for protection and not 
 for support; and that the arm of the state, though strong, has no potency 
 or legitimate control beyond such protection." It is further maintained 
 that the school fund is purely of a civil character and should not be 
 allowed to pass into the hands of any corporation not answerable to the 
 civil authorities, and that it would be "a violation of a fundamental 
 principle of legislation, to allow the funds of the state, raised by a tax 
 on the citizens, designed for civil purposes, to be subject to the control 
 of any religious corporation." 
 
 It was also contended on the part of the lay corporations that they 
 caused to be communicated to their pupils reading lessons and catechisms, 
 in the original language of the Bible, and such familiar aspects of human 
 duty as children can best understand. Specific sectarian instruction is 
 left to parents and churches and Sunday schools. 
 
 These are among the chief arguments presented by the lay corpora- 
 tions in opposition to the religious societies in order to prevent their 
 participation in the school fund. 
 
 The attitude of the committee toward the subject referred to them is 
 very sympathetically expressed in the following paragraphs: 
 
46 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 "Your Committee have thus, with a single desire of truth, laid before 
 the Common Council, the result of their inquiries, and the substance of 
 the communications that have been made to them. 
 
 "In the performance of this duty, they have felt all the importance 
 and responsibility of the task assigned to them, and while they would 
 willingly have retired from the appointment, and do each individually 
 wish, that the Legislature had passed the necessary law on this subject, 
 on the recent application to them for that purpose, yet your Committee 
 cannot permit themselves to hesitate or falter in the course of public 
 duty, when that course is plainly manifest to their understandings. 
 Your Committee will not conceal, either, their own private and personal 
 wishes, at the commencement of their duties, that the well-organized 
 churches and religious societies in our city, might be permitted to con- 
 tinue in the reception of a part of this fund as heretofore. But the 
 weight of the argument, as urged before them, and which they have 
 endeavored to condense in this report, and the established constitutiona, 
 and political doctrines which have a bearing on this question, and the 
 habits and modes of thinking of the constituents at large of this Board 
 require, in the opinion of your Committee, that the Common School 
 Fund should be distributed for civil purposes only, as contradistinguished 
 from those of a religious or sectarian description." 
 
 The action of the Common Council has already been stated. The 
 recommendation of the committee was adopted and an ordinance passed, 
 denying the church schools any further participation in the public fund. 
 This result had not been foreseen by the Free School Society when it took 
 up the controversy against the Bethel Baptist Church. The problem 
 involved in state support of church schools had only gradually taken 
 shape in the minds of the people. The state legislature on April 8, 1801, 
 had passed an act dividing the school money of the city among its differ- 
 ent religious denominations to be invested by them, the annual interest 
 to be used in the maintenance of schools. And there had been no ques- 
 tion of the propriety of the charity schools under church supervision 
 drawing from the public bounty. Without a challenge they had enjoyed 
 this advantage from the first passage of the law in 18 13. Nor was there 
 any thought of the discontinuance of this mode of procedure until the 
 controversy with Bethel Baptist Church was already far advanced. 
 There seems to have been three stages in this awakening of consciousness. 
 In the first place, on account of the special privilege granted them by 
 the legislature, the Bethel Schools were working injury to the schools of 
 the Free School Society. The first effort therefore was for the repeal of 
 
RISING CONSCIOUSNESS OF SECTARIANISM IN EDUCATION 47 
 
 this special privilege. -Apparently, as yet, there was no thought of ask- 
 ing the legislature to withdraw support from church schools. But 
 Bethel Church contended earnestly for the vantage ground already 
 gained, and other churches manifested a disposition to follow her example 
 and to extend their school work beyond the borders of their respective 
 congregations. This induced the Free School Society to take the second 
 step forward, and to ask the legislature to limit church schools to the 
 children of their respective congregations. It was just at this stage of 
 the controversy that the Free School Society began to express the opinion 
 that to allow church schools participation in the public fund had been a 
 mistake from the beginning, that a fund raised for civil purposes should 
 not be placed at the disposal of a religious organization. As the appre- 
 hension of this principle took definite shape in consciousness, the contro- 
 versy reached its third and final stage. A strict application of the 
 principle of religious liberty had prostrated the claims of the churches. 
 The opinion of the law committee that the "Common School Fund 
 should be distributed for civil purposes only" was enacted into law, and 
 thus was completed the first chapter in the exclusion of religious educa- 
 tion from the public schools of the State and City of New York. 
 
CHAPTER VII 
 THE FINAL LEGAL STATUS OF SECTARIAN INSTRUCTION 
 
 Among the church schools excluded from the public bounty in 1825 
 was the Roman Catholic Benevolent Society. It was hardly to be 
 expected that the verdict of the Common Council on that occasion 
 would be accepted as final. Catholic persistence is too well known. 
 We are not surprised then that six years later, March, 1831, the Catholic 
 Benevolent Society applied to the Council for a part of the public fund 
 to assist in the support of its Orphan Asylum School. Encouraged by 
 this movement of the Catholics, the trustees of the Methodist Charity 
 School presented a similar application later on in the same month 
 (Bourne, pp. 124 f.). According to the proceedings of the Board of 
 Aldermen, August 3, 1831, the ordinance of July 14, 1828, relative to the 
 distribution of the common-school fund, was revived and re-enacted. 
 The following amendment was also adopted with a majority of one vote: 
 "To add to the number of Societies or Schools named in said law, the 
 New York Catholic Benevolent Society; which additional Society shall 
 be entitled to a portion of the Common School money, for such orphan 
 children as are or shall be taught in the school, and maintained in the 
 Orphan Asylum House, in Prince street, at the expense of said Society; 
 and the said school be subject moreover to all the provisions, limitations 
 and restrictions, recited and prescribed in and by said ordinance" 
 {Proceedings of the Board of Aldermen, I, 256). 
 
 This enactment was then sent to the Board of Assistants for its 
 concurrence, and was referred by it to the law committee. The report 
 of this committee was received September 19, 1831, and attempted to 
 deal with the constitutionality of the ordinance as passed by the Board 
 of Aldermen (Board of Assistants, Doc. XXI, September 19, 1831). 
 According to the report the constitution of the state, 1821, provides that 
 the school fund "shall be inviolably appropriated and applied to the 
 support of common schools throughout this State." The question then 
 to be decided was, What is a common school ? The law committee gave 
 the following answer to this question: "A school to be common ought to 
 be open to all, and those branches of Education, and those only, ought to 
 be taught in it, which tend to prepare a child for the ordinary business 
 
 48 
 
FINAL LEGAL STATUS OP SECTARIAN INSTRUCTION 49 
 
 of life. If religion be taught in a school it strips it of one of the char- 
 acteristics of a Common School, as all religious and sectarian studies 
 have a direct reference to a future state, and are not necessary to prepare 
 a child for the Mechanical or any other business. No school can be 
 common unless parents of all religious sects, Mohammedans and Jews, 
 as well as Christians, can send their children to it, to receive the benefits 
 of an education without doing violence to their religious belief. 
 
 "Your Committee cannot, therefore, find a more correct and accurate 
 definition of the term Common School, than to call it a school in which 
 nothing but the rudiments of an English education are taught to all who 
 are admitted to it, which is open to every child that applies for admis- 
 sion, and into which all can be admitted without doing violence to their 
 religious opinions, or those of their parents or guardians." 
 
 In the light of this definition the report of the law committee passes 
 on to speak of the Roman Catholic Benevolent Society. It is considered 
 to have strong marks of sectarianism about it. Regular membership in 
 the Society is confined to Catholics, and its government is exclusively 
 under the direction of that religious sect. And although the organization 
 is open for the reception of destitute and unprotected orphans without 
 any distinctions, yet all participants of its bounty "are exclusively 
 instructed in the doctrines of the Roman Catholic Religion." 
 
 The constitution of the state, the report continues, guarantees to all 
 mankind, without discrimination or preference, the free exercise and 
 enjoyment of religious profession and worship. This is a recognition of 
 complete religious freedom, so long as its exercise does not appear incon- 
 sistent with the peace and safety of the state. The appropriation of the 
 public funds therefore to the support of the schools which teach the 
 doctrines and tenets of religious sectarianism seems a palpable violation 
 of the constitution. The attempt to raise by taxation a fund for the 
 support of any religious sect would unhesitatingly be denounced as an 
 infringement of the chartered rights of the people. But there seems to 
 be no difference in principle whether such a fund be raised for the support 
 of a particular church, or for the school in which the doctrines of that 
 church are taught as a part of the system of education. In one case, a 
 regular ordained ministry is paid for its instruction from the pulpit; in 
 the other, teachers are paid for the same kind of lessons, delivered in a 
 different manner. 
 
 It is the opinion of the committee that the school fund should be so 
 disposed that all denominations, Jews, Deists, and unbelievers of every 
 sect may derive the benefits thereof without doing violence to their con- 
 
50 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 sciences. It is poor consolation to be able to hold whatever religious 
 views one wishes, while at the same time compelled to support doctrines 
 to which one is diametrically opposed. 
 
 To admit asylums to the public bounty will, the committee thinks, 
 open the school fund to any institution where children are taught 
 gratuitously, and so to every phase of religious opinion and infidelity. 
 This would be in direct violation of the principle established by the 
 Common Council in 1825, denying participation in the public fund to all 
 sectarian schools and institutions. The disregard of that principle now 
 will give rise to a religious and antireligious party, and the union of the 
 church and state will be fostered. Taxation for the support of religion 
 is contrary to the constitution, and in violation of conscientious scruples. 
 
 So the committee reported the ordinance referred to it as unconsti- 
 tutional, and recommended that it be so amended as to exclude from 
 participation in the school fund all institutions not comprised under the 
 definition of "common school" as given above. This of course meant 
 the exclusion of the Roman Catholic Benevolent Society. 
 
 Nevertheless the recommendation of the committee was not adopted. 
 The Board of Assistants concurred in the ordinance which had already 
 passed the Board of Aldermen, and the measure became a law. The 
 Roman Catholic Benevolent Society had won its contention. To this 
 extent the law of 1825 had been repudiated, but the Council justified 
 itself in the view of the public by urging as an exception the peculiar 
 nature of an orphan asylum. As a verification of this statement, and so 
 indicating the attitude of the Public School Society, relative to the 
 question under consideration, the following extract from its annual 
 report for 1832 (p. 6) is suggestive: 
 
 "It has again become necessary to advert to the strenuous and con- 
 tinued efforts that are making to obtain a diversion of a portion of the 
 school tax from the legitimate object for which it is raised, to the support 
 of church and sectarian schools. During the past year, the Catholic 
 Orphan Asylum Society, applied to the Corporation to be admitted 
 among the recipients of this fund. The application was opposed by the 
 Trustees of the Public Schools, on the ground so often, and heretofore so 
 successfully urged. Nevertheless this case was deemed an exception to 
 the general rule, and admitted accordingly. The committee of the 
 Corporation to whom the application was referred, [this was before the 
 Board of Aldermen.] in their report on the subject, fully acknowledged 
 the soundness of the 'cardinal principles' adopted in the law of 1825, 
 which went entirely to exclude Church and Sectarian Schools from any 
 
FINAL LEGAL STATUS OF SECTARIAN INSTRUCTION 5 1 
 
 participation in this Fund, but urged the peculiar character of an Orphan 
 Asylum, as presenting a strong claim on public sympathy and support. 
 .... The claims of an Institution so meritorious as the one in question, 
 might have prevented opposition, had it not been for the pressing con- 
 viction, that the admission of the Asylum would induce others, under 
 circumstances entirely dissimilar, to renew their applications for a por- 
 tion of School Money. This consideration was urged upon the Corpora- 
 tion — but was met with the assurance that the full recognition of the 
 correctness of the 'cardinal principles' established by the law of 1825, as 
 set forth in the report of its committee, forbid any hope of success on the 
 part of Church Schools." 
 
 The apprehensions of the Public School Society, relative to the 
 probable activity of other church schools, were not without foundation. 
 The application of the Methodists for their charity school had not been 
 granted by the Common Council. But now, encouraged by the success- 
 ful petitions of the Catholics for their orphan asylum, the Methodist 
 Episcopal Church made application, in behalf of the orphan and destitute 
 children attending the school under its management, for a participation 
 in the school fund. This petition was on the point of being granted, 
 when the earnest protests of the Public School Society came in to prevent 
 its culmination (Annual Report of Public School Society, 1832, p. 7). 
 
 The position of the Public School Society in its opposition to the 
 Catholic Benevolent Society is well defined in the address of the former 
 to the public, giving the reasons for its remonstrances against the petition 
 of the Roman Catholic Benevolent Society for admission to a common 
 participation in the school fund (quoted in Bourne, p. 127). The 
 petition of the Catholics is considered contrary to the fundamental prin- 
 ciples of liberty and equal rights, and to the constitution of the state. 
 The power of taxing the whole community is given for the benefit of the 
 whole community, and so far as possible the benefits procured by such 
 taxation should be enjoyed by all. The city corporation has no right to 
 constitute a privileged class, however benevolent it may be. But the 
 society in question is a closed corporation — its membership is exclusively 
 Roman Catholic, and its beneficiaries practically confined to that 
 denomination. Furthermore it is contended that the system of educa- 
 tion at this institution is so combined with religious instruction as to 
 deter, from conscientious scruples, many parents and guardians from 
 taking advantage of the opportunities it offers. Notwithstanding these 
 very persons may be taxed for the support of the institution in question. 
 "But the objection to this principle extends much further; it embraces 
 
52 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 all, of every persuasion, who have conscientious scruples about paying 
 their money for the support of any particular faith or who, if they have 
 not such scruples, derive no benefit from the expenditure, and regard it 
 as an abuse." 
 
 The further statement is made that while there were many reasons, 
 in 1825, why one harmonious system of education, under the direction of 
 one body of men, was to be preferred to "incongruous and irresponsible 
 institutions," it was none of these that procured the victory over sec- 
 tarian views, which brought about the revolution that eventuated. 
 "That proceeded from the conviction that the school fund ought not to 
 be diverted, in whole or in part, to the purposes of sectarian instruction, 
 but should be kept sacred to the great object, emphatically called 
 Common Education." 
 
 It appears then that, while the Roman Catholic Benevolent Society 
 was admitted to a participation in the school fund, it was the orphanage 
 plea that won consideration. The principle of religious liberty, so 
 warmly advocated by the Public School Society, was admitted by the 
 Board of Aldermen, and recognized by that body as still in force. The 
 "cardinal principles" of 1825, denying to church schools the right of 
 participation in the school fund, were still unchallenged by the law- 
 making powers. 
 
 Nearly ten years elapsed before the attention of the public was again 
 focused on the question of sectarian education. It was in 1840, when the 
 Roman Catholics once more petitioned the Council for participation in 
 the public fund in part support of their church schools. The annual 
 report of the Public School Society, 1841 (p. 5), affords the following 
 historical account: 
 
 "The hope entertained in the last report, that the efforts made by a 
 religious denomination in our city, to obtain a portion of the school monies 
 for the support of seminaries under their own exclusive management, 
 would cease, the Trustees regret to say, has been wholly disap- 
 pointed. So far from yielding to the emphatic language of a unani- 
 mous decision of the Board of Assistant Aldermen, and uniting in a 
 magnanimous effort to extend the benefits of the Public Schools to the 
 children of their own denomination, they again appealed to our municipal 
 authorities. After a minute and careful examination of the whole sub- 
 ject by the Board of Aldermen, accompanied by a lengthened debate, 
 thrown open to all parties interested, and a thorough examination of 
 several of the schools, this application like the other was rejected by a 
 
PINAL LEGAL STATUS OF SECTARIAN INSTRUCTION 53 
 
 vote, with a single exception, unanimous. Undeterred by these repeated 
 failures, and apparently unconvinced of the injustice of the claim they 
 set up, they have applied to the state legislature, for what they term 
 redress, with what success remains yet to be seen." 
 
 The petition of the Catholics, together with the remonstrances of the 
 Public School Society and of other societies and individuals were referred 
 by the Board of Assistants to the Committee on Arts and Sciences and 
 Schools. This committee reported on April 27, 1840 {Journal and 
 Documents of the Board of Assistants, vol. 15, pp. 335 *•)■ Tne report 
 affirms that on the part of the Catholics it was contended that the 
 schools connected with their churches were established for the education 
 of the poor connected with their respective congregations, although 
 children of other denominations were not excluded. It was further 
 stated that no religious tests were required for admission and that no 
 attempt was made to alter the religious views of children of parents not 
 connected with the Catholic church. 
 
 Objection was raised by the Catholics against the public schools. 
 It was claimed that no religious instruction was communicated there; or, 
 if any was given, it reflected upon doctrines of the Catholic church. It 
 was further urged by the petitioners that they were taxed, along with 
 other citizens in order to provide the school fund, and that they were 
 therefore entitled to enjoy its advantages. They were however pre- 
 vented from this for conscience' sake. Catholics could not send their 
 children to schools in which the religious doctrines of their fathers were 
 exposed to ridicule. 
 
 On behalf of the Public School Society "it was contended that any 
 appropriation of the School Money, to any religious denomination for 
 the purpose of educating the children of that denomination was 
 foreign to the design of the Common School system, as organized by 
 law, hostile to the spirit of the constitution, and at violence with the 
 nature of our free institutions." 
 
 In the opinion of the committee there were two questions to be 
 answered: Did the Common Council under existing laws have a legal 
 right to appropriate any portion of the school fund to religious corpora- 
 tions? In the second place, Would such an appropriation "be in 
 accordance with the spirit of the constitution, and the nature of our 
 government?" 
 
 The Council has power, the report continues, to designate the 
 "Institutions and Schools" which shall participate in the school fund. 
 
54 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 To understand the meaning of this phrase recourse is had to a historical 
 survey of public instruction in the city. It is the opinion of the com- 
 mittee "that the only authority under which religious societies partici- 
 pated in the School Fund, was contained in the act of 1813; and that 
 this act was repealed by the legislature [November 19, 1824] with the 
 full intention that religious societies, as such, should no longer receive 
 any portion of the School Money from the Public Treasury, even for the 
 purpose of supporting Common Schools." 
 
 In regard to the spirit of the constitution, the report goes on to say 
 that the people of the state are divided into innumerable religious sects, 
 each desirous of making converts to its opinions. In the old world this 
 disposition had led to persecutions and martyrdoms, to the stake, the 
 gibbet, and the prison. To prevent the recurrence of these abhorrent 
 scenes in our own country, the constitution of the United States and 
 those of the several states have in some form declared "that there should 
 be no establishment of religion by law; that the affairs of the State 
 should be kept entirely distinct from, and unconnected with those of the 
 Church; that every human being should worship God, according to the 
 dictates of his own conscience; that all Churches and religions should be 
 supported by voluntary contribution; and that no tax should ever be 
 imposed for the benefit of any denomination of religion, for any cause, 
 or under any pretense whatever." 
 
 The opinion of the committee in regard to teaching religion in the 
 public schools is stated in very decided language. This is what they say: 
 "If religious instruction is communicated, it is foreign to the intentions 
 of the school system, and should be instantly abandoned. Religious 
 instruction is no part of a common school education. The church and 
 the fireside are the proper seminaries, and the parents and pastors are 
 the proper teachers of religion. In their hands, the cause of religion is 
 safe. Let the public schoolmaster confine his attention to the moral 
 and intellectual education of the young committed to his charge, and he 
 fully performs the duty of his profession, discharges the trust reposed in 
 him as a public agent, and fulfils his obligation as a citizen." 
 
 The report concludes by expressing the conviction that as the 
 petitioners come before the Council in the capacity of a religious denomi- 
 nation, they have not, in that capacity, made out a valid claim to 
 participation in the school fund. The intentions of the legislature, the 
 expressed will of the people, and the requirements of the constitution all 
 demand that the school fund be sacredly appropriated to "the purposes 
 of free and common secular education." 
 
FINAL LEGAL STATUS OF SECTARIAN INSTRUCTION $$ 
 
 The report just under consideration takes us a very decided step in 
 advance of any position heretofore advocated. It is an unhesitating 
 commitment to the policy of a "common secular education." Instruc- 
 tion in religion is "no part of a common school education," and if there 
 be such in the schools, it should be "instantly abandoned." 
 
 It is interesting to note the changed attitude of the churches since the 
 controversy of 1825. At that time they were opponents of the Public 
 School Society and were more intent upon having their schools sub- 
 sidized by the state than upon espousing any such abstract principle as 
 religious liberty. The situation is different now. With hardly an 
 exception they are backing up the contention of the Public School 
 Society and are lifting their voices in protest against the diversion of the 
 school fund. It was a battle of the giants. The Catholic churches were 
 thoroughly aroused. Mass meetings were being held among the con- 
 stituents of that denomination and wide excitement prevailed. (See 
 speech of Hiram Ketchum before Common Council, printed in Bourne, 
 p. 239.) It was their settled purpose to fight the issue to a finish, as 
 may be inferred from the fact that when denied their petition before the 
 Board of Assistants they turned to the Board of Aldermen, and, when 
 again defeated before that body, they turned to the legislature of the 
 state. They were contending for what they considered to be their 
 rights. By paying their taxes they had made their contribution to the 
 school fund. But they were not enjoying the advantages of this fund, 
 because they could not for conscience' sake send their children to the 
 public schools. They could see no reason why they should not receive a 
 portion of the public bounty, and even based their plea on the principle 
 of religious liberty and rights of conscience. (See speech of Bishop 
 Hughes, reprinted in Bourne, pp. 202 ff.) 
 
 But arrayed against the Catholic petitioners were the Public School 
 Society and many of the prominent churches of the city. These latter 
 organizations had a vision now they had not enjoyed in days gone by. 
 It was now evident to them that the granting of the Catholic petition 
 would be a violation of the rights of conscience. They were now aban- 
 doned to the principle that public money should not be committed to 
 the charge of any religious body whatsoever. In substantiation of the 
 statement regarding the changed attitude of the churches the following 
 remonstrances against the petition of the Catholics are called in evidence: 
 
 The Remonstrance of the Trustees of the Several Congregations of 
 the Methodist Episcopal Church, March 6, 1840, heartily concurs in 
 the policy of confining the school fund to non-religious bodies, and looks 
 
56 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 upon the granting of the petition of the Catholics as a perversion of that 
 fund, notwithstanding the fact that on a former occasion they had 
 petitioned for a similar privilege {Journal and Documents of the Board of 
 Assistants, XV, 378). 
 
 The Remonstrance of the East Broome Street Baptist Church, 
 March 25, 1840, regards accession to the petition in question injurious 
 to the best interests of the community and destructive of the present 
 popular and highly efficient public schools {ibid., p. 382). 
 
 The Remonstrance of the Ministers, Elders, and Deacons of the 
 Reformed Protestant Dutch Church claims that to allow the Catholics 
 participation in the school fund would grant special privilege to one 
 denomination and give it peculiar advantages of proselytism, and create 
 an odious union between church and state. It would be in " direct 
 opposition to a great principle of our government, and destructive of the 
 present admirable and efficient mode of general instruction ' ' {ibid.,p. 384) . 
 
 The Remonstrance of the Ministers, Elders, and Deacons of the 
 Reformed Dutch Church in Broome Street, March, 1840, declares that 
 the petition of the Catholics calls for "an act, alike repugnant to common 
 justice, the genius of our institutions, and the design for which the fund 
 was created." Granting the petition would bring about two of the most 
 odious features of a religious establishment: special governmental favor 
 to a particular sect, and taxing the whole people for the support of a 
 part {ibid., p. 387). 
 
 The Remonstrance of the Consistory of the Reformed Presbyterian 
 Church, April 7, 1840, affirms that for the Council to grant the Catholic 
 petition would be "directly contributing to the support and perpetuation 
 of the faith and practice of a particular religious sect; an act which 
 would be at variance with the whole spirit of our civil institutions, 
 involving a prostitution of the School Fund itself, and tending to create 
 a privileged class in society, to the detriment of the others entitled to 
 equal rights" {ibid., p. 389). 
 
 It will not now be necessary to consider the application of the 
 Catholics to the Board of Aldermen, as the issue was fought out before 
 that body with the same arguments and on the same grounds which had 
 been presented to the Board of Assistants. We can therefore pass on to 
 the final stage of the controversy. 
 
 The defeat of the Catholics before both branches of the Common 
 Council in nowise affected their convictions as to the distribution of the 
 school fund. They were more determined than ever before. They 
 
FINAL LEGAL STATUS OF SECTARIAN INSTRUCTION 57 
 
 were now nerved for the conflict. A central executive committee was 
 formed, also a committee of two in each ward to carry out in the various 
 localities of the city the measures recommended by the central com- 
 mittee. The Catholic movement, thus thoroughly organized, proceeded 
 at once to hold meetings and circulate petitions (Bourne, pp. 350 f.). It 
 was their intention to approach the state legislature, and thus invoke in 
 behalf of their cause the intervention of the highest tribunal of the land. 
 Its memorial was presented to the senate in the spring of 1841, which, 
 together with the remonstrance of the Public School Society, was 
 referred by that body to the Secretary of State, John C. Spencer, who 
 made his report on April 26 (Randall, History of the Common School 
 System of New York, p. 124). It was a very able and elaborate discus- 
 sion of the relation of the state to religious and sectarian instruction. 
 His fundamental position is that the state should extend education to 
 all classes, that they may be qualified to exercise the duties and pre- 
 rogatives of citizenship. The report in question has such great impor- 
 tance for our subject that it seems necessary to reproduce the following 
 lengthy extracts: 
 
 "It is very true that the government has assumed only the intellectual 
 education of the children of the state, and has left their moral and 
 religious instruction to be given at the fireside, at the places of public 
 worship, and at those institutions which the piety of individuals may 
 establish for the purpose. But it is believed that in a country where 
 the great body of our fellow citizens recognize the fundamental truths of 
 Christianity, public sentiment would be shocked by the attempt to 
 exclude all instruction of a religious nature from the public schools; and 
 that any plan or scheme of education in which no reference whatever was 
 had to moral principles founded on these truths would be abandoned by 
 all. In the next place, it is believed such an attempt would be wholly 
 impracticable. No books can be found, no reading lessons can be 
 selected, which do not contain, more or less, some principles of religious 
 faith, either directly avowed or indirectly assumed. Religion and 
 literature have become inseparably interwoven, and the expurgation of 
 religious sentiments from the production of orators, essayists, and poets 
 would leave them utterly barren. 
 
 "Viewing the subject then practically, it may be regarded as a 
 settled opinion in all schemes of education intended for the youth of this 
 country, that there must be of necessity a very considerable amount of 
 religious instruction. The Trustees of the Public School Society have 
 
58 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 probably no more in their schools than could be well avoided. While 
 they profess, and doubtlessly sincerely, their readiness to omit every- 
 thing that may be justly regarded as offensive, they yet maintain, and 
 properly, that education is imperfect without inculcating moral and 
 religious principles; and hence they allow the reading of the Scriptures 
 or portions of them, and inculcate the leading principles of Christianity. 
 But it is impossible to conceive how even these principles can be taught, 
 so as to be of any value without inculcating what is peculiar to some one 
 
 or more denominations, and denied by others Even the reading 
 
 of the text of our common translation of the Scriptures, is objected to by 
 many, on account of its being, as they allege, erroneous and imperfect, 
 while others deem its perusal by children, without explanation, positively 
 injurious. Even the moderate degree of religious instruction which the 
 Public School Society imparts, must therefore be sectarian; that is, it 
 must favor one set of opinions, in opposition to another or others; it is 
 believed that this always will be the result, in any course of education 
 that the wit of man can devise." 
 
 This leads to the dilemma "that while some degree of religious 
 instruction is indispensable, and will be had, under all circumstances, it 
 cannot be imparted, without partaking to some extent of sectarian 
 character." It is proposed to solve this dilemma by recourse to the 
 fundamental law of the state, which guarantees "to all mankind" within 
 its borders "the free exercise and enjoyment of religious profession." 
 In harmony with this law no legislation had been passed by the state in 
 any way connected with religious faith and profession. 
 
 " On this principle of what may be termed absolute non-intervention, 
 may we rely to remove all the apparent difficulties which surround the 
 subject under consideration. In the theory of the Common School law 
 which governs the whole State, except the city of New York, it is fully 
 and entirely maintained; and in the administration of that law, it is 
 sacredly observed. No officer, among the thousands having charge of 
 our Common Schools, thinks of interposing by any authoritative direc- 
 tion, respecting the nature or extent of moral or religious instruction to 
 be given in the schools. Its whole control is left to the free and unre- 
 stricted action of the people themselves, in their several districts 
 
 The practical consequence is, that each district suits itself, by having 
 such religious instruction in its school as is congenial to the opinions of 
 its inhabitants; and the records of this department have been searched 
 in vain, for an instance of a complaint of any abuse of this authority, in 
 any of the schools out of the city of New York It is manifest 
 
FINAL LEGAL STATUS OF SECTARIAN INSTRUCTION 59 
 
 that the great source of the difficulties in the city of New York arises 
 from a violation of this principle" {Report of the State Superintendent, 
 January 6, 1842). 
 
 The report proceeds further to say that the Public School Society 
 stands in the way of the direct management of the schools by the people. 
 That Society, it is contended, engrosses the public education of the city, 
 and makes impossible the action of small masses, as in the interior of the 
 state. Under such circumstances the only possible application of the 
 principle of non-intervention is by the total abandonment of all religious 
 instruction. In a community composed of so many different religious 
 sects no other method of procedure can hope to be acceptable to all. If, 
 however, the degree and kind of religious instruction could be left to the 
 choice of parents, in small masses, the chief cause of dissatisfaction and 
 conscientious objection would be removed. The policy here recom- 
 mended finds corroboration in the experience of twenty-five years in the 
 school districts of the interior. This principle can be applied in the city 
 of New York only by depriving its present system of its character of 
 universality and exclusiveness, and by making it possible for small 
 masses to give expression to their interests and opinions. In this way 
 every denomination may enjoy its "religious profession " in the education 
 of its youth (ibid.). 
 
 To carry out the suggestion of his report, Secretary Spencer drew up 
 a bill, the purport of which was to extend to New York City the principle 
 that prevailed throughout the state. A board of education was to be 
 elected by the people consisting of representatives from each ward. 
 This board was to have complete supervision of the system of public 
 education in the city, and to act in co-operation with the Public School 
 Society in the management of its schools (ibid.). But contrary to the 
 expectations of the advocates of this measure, it failed to pass the 
 legislature (Bourne, p. 426). 
 
 The Public School Society had not been inactive. It had strenuously 
 opposed the effort to induce the legislature to modify the educational 
 system of the city. Secretary Spencer's report and the measure he pro- 
 posed met with its unqualified opposition. The reply of the Society and 
 its friends was made through the Commissioners of School Moneys for 
 the City of New York, who presented their annual report to the Super- 
 intendent of Public Instruction, May, 1841. Exception was taken to 
 what Secretary Spencer had said about the necessity of public education 
 being sectarian: 
 
 "In adopting a system of general education at the public expense, 
 
60 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 the object of the State was to give its youth such an education as would 
 fit them to discharge the civil obligations of this life, leaving it to their 
 natural and ecclesiastical guardians, to prepare them, through a parental 
 and spiritual ministry, to render their account in another world. There 
 ought to be, and there must be, some common platform on which all the 
 children may obtain their secular education, who are destined to act as 
 citizens of the same republic. To that general training, all the children 
 are entitled; but it is the public who are to determine on its particulars 
 and conditions, and not the parents who may claim it for their offspring." 
 
 The object of the school fund is to provide "for a civil purpose 
 exclusively, not to prepare the path to any designated place of worship. 
 .... This State has never yet asserted the power to tax its people for 
 ecclesiastical objects; and if its sovereignty comprehended such a power, 
 the rights of conscience require that the religion of the tax-payer be 
 recorded on the assessment roll and his contribution be dealt to the 
 encouragement of his own communion." 
 
 It will be seen from the extracts just gone before, that the Public 
 School Society is occupying the same old ground. It is still making 
 sectarianism the paramount issue. 
 
 In the following year, 1842, the matter was again brought before the 
 legislature. This time the measure originated in the assembly. It was 
 referred to the committee on colleges, academies, and common schools, 
 which committee reported February 14, 1842. The report recognizes 
 the complaint that the Public School Society has a monopoly of public 
 education in the city. It considers furthermore that the public schools 
 have failed to accomplish the objects contemplated in their establish- 
 ment. A great number of parents are unwilling to intrust the education 
 of their children to these schools, and nearly half of the citizens of the 
 metropolis protest against the system and demand its modification. 
 The remedy offered by the committee was in the nature of a bill, which 
 contained the principal features suggested the year before by Secretary 
 Spencer (Report reprinted in Bourne, p. 501). 
 
 The chairman of the committee, Mr. Maclay, of New York City, 
 defended his measure before the assembly by saying there were only two 
 classes of persons in New York as related to the subject — the one satisfied 
 with, and the other opposed to, the present school system. To the 
 former — largely the Public School Society — the bill proposed to leave 
 schools as they were; to the latter, it gave schools under the same 
 regulations as existed in other parts of the state (Bourne, p. 518). The 
 bill passed the legislature on April 11, 1842. 
 
FINAL LEGAL STATUS OF SECTARIAN INSTRUCTION 6 1 
 
 The discussion of the school question before the legislature had one 
 important difference from the consideration of that subject before the 
 Common Council. Before the former it took a broader scope. There 
 was a fuller recognition of the needs and rights of all members of the 
 community. The Public School Society was a philanthropic organiza- 
 tion worthy of the highest praise. Its record of benevolence was perhaps 
 unsurpassed. But it seemed to fancy that its system of education was 
 unsusceptible of improvement, and, while splendidly advocating the 
 principle of civil and religious freedom, at the same time it represented 
 a policy of mild coercion. It could not, or would not, understand why 
 the Catholics refused to draw the water of knowledge from the educa- 
 tional cisterns which it had dug. But in the discussion before the 
 legislature, on the part of the opponents of the system of education then 
 prevailing in the city, sectarianism seems to have been forgotten, or at 
 least suppressed. The necessity of providing for all the poor children of 
 the city was the paramount issue, regardless either of Catholicism or 
 Protestantism. 
 
 But the religious question was not omitted from the new law. For 
 twenty years now it had been a matter of contention, of irreconcilable 
 strife. The controversy of these twenty years at last finds a mandatory 
 voice in the legal provision refusing all moneys to schools allowing 
 sectarian teaching. The language of that law, so far as it appertains to 
 our subject, will be of interest in this connection: 
 
 " An Act to extend to the city and county of New York the provisions 
 of the general act in relation to common schools. 
 
 " Section 14. No school above mentioned, or which shall be organ- 
 ized under this act, in which any religious sectarian doctrine or tenets 
 shall be taught, inculcated, or practised, shall receive any portion of the 
 school moneys to be distributed by this act, as hereafter provided; and 
 it shall be the duty of the trustees, inspectors, and commissioners of 
 schools in each ward, and of the deputy (county) superintendent of 
 schools, from time to time, and as frequently as need be, to examine and 
 ascertain, and report to the said board of education, whether any reli- 
 gious sectarian doctrine or tenet shall have been taught, inculcated, or 
 practised in any of the schools in their respective wards; etc." 
 
 Section 15. No school shall be entitled to a portion of the school 
 fund "in which any religious sectarian doctrine or tenet shall have been 
 taught inculcated, or practised, or which shall refuse to permit the visits 
 and examinations provided for by this act" (Laws of New York, 1842, 
 pp. 187, 188). 
 
62 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 In 1843, April 18, the above act was amended. So far as relates to 
 religious instruction, sec. 15 was modified by inserting immediately 
 after "or practised" the following words: "or in which any book or 
 books containing any sectarian compositions shall be used in the course 
 of instruction" (Laws of New York, 1843, p. 294). 
 
 This provision, denying participation in the public fund to all 
 schools in the city of New York in which there was taught sectarian 
 instruction of any character, has been repeatedly re-enacted (Laws of New 
 York, 1844, p. 494; 1851, p. 745; 1871, p. 1271) and was finally incor- 
 porated in the charter of Greater New York in 1897 (ibid., 1897, III, 
 411), and in the revision of 1901 (ibid., 1901, III, 491). But this restric- 
 tion applies only to the city of New York. The laws of the state have 
 been searched in vain for any general act relative to religious or sec- 
 tarian instruction in the schools at large. There seems to be no such act. 
 The decisions of the State Superintendent relative to this subject will 
 be discussed in a later chapter. 
 
CHAPTER VIII 
 
 THE RELIGIOUS CONCEPTION OF EDUCATION IN PROCESS OF 
 MODIFICATION 
 
 The religious character of common-school education down through 
 the first quarter of the nineteenth century has been quite fully demon- 
 strated. It is the purpose of this chapter to trace, so far as the data will 
 allow, the changing attitude of educational thinkers and of educational 
 practice, relative to religious instruction in the public schools, for the 
 remainder of the century. A good starting-point is afforded by An 
 Address from an Instructor to His Scholars, pronounced at Woodstock, 
 New York, April 14, 1804 (Samuel Pettis; in Astor Library, New York 
 City). The author of this address was very probably the master of a 
 private school, but his attitude toward religion is none the less illustrative 
 of what must have been the prevailing custom in the public institutions 
 of the time. It is gratifying to note that the instructor in question shows 
 a very warm attachment for his pupils. He regrets that the time of 
 separation has come: "Having labored for a considerable time in your 
 education, received a compensation equal to my services, augmented by 
 a laudable ambition in you, and finding myself unhappily arrived at a 
 parting moment; I cannot feel my duty discharged otherwise than by 
 offering you a few hints by way of advice." 
 
 He now goes on to address them on what he calls "the one thing 
 needful," and here we shall let Mr. Pettis speak to us in his own words: 
 "It is upon God, that we are dependent for every blessing; it is from this 
 great source, that we derive life, breath, and every enjoyment ; and it is 
 owing to his beneficent hand, that we live in a country, where every 
 material necessary to perfect the happiness of man, is profusely scattered 
 in our way." Considering our material blessings and religious oppor- 
 tunities, "our hearts, if not adamant, cannot but feel a desire to bless 
 his holy name, and are ready to acknowledge it the greatest ingratitude 
 not to render him our thankful and constant services, for his goodness to 
 us, and for those distinguished favors, which we are permitted through 
 his beneficent hand to enjoy. I cannot conclude this paragraph, without 
 calling upon you to seek the Lord in the days of your youth, before the 
 stroke of death, to which, you are every moment liable, shall deprive 
 you of that invaluable privilege. Follow, I beseech you, with suitable 
 humility the glorious examples and heavenly precepts of the divine 
 
 63 
 
64 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 Philanthropist of Nazareth; which, when all the vanities of this life shall 
 disappear, like an empty vision, will be the only comfort to make your 
 passage through the floods of death, free from the most unhappy 
 consequences." 
 
 Discussing the advantages of learning to read, Mr. Pettis says it 
 affords us "the satisfaction of searching the divine volume for ourselves, 
 which enables us from our own observation to become acquainted with 
 our several duties to God and our fellow men." Continuing his discus- 
 sion of the value of the various parts of the curriculum, we are informed 
 that "astronomy .... is a sublime and useful science; it is well 
 calculated to exercise the mind upon the greatness of the Almighty's 
 power, in creating and moving the heavenly bodies, and is well adapted 
 to humble the proud heart of man." 
 
 In the next place, the pupils are reminded of the duty of improving 
 "the few remaining hours" allotted to their trust in such a manner that 
 they may be able and willing to give an account unto God, having added 
 to the measure of their talents to that degree, that they may receive the 
 reward of "well done, good and faithful servant," and enter into the joys 
 of immortality. 
 
 The address concludes by telling the pupils that they are now 
 launched upon the tempestuous sea of life. They are therefore asked to 
 take religion for their compass and director, truth for their pilot, love 
 and contentment for their companions; they are to aim at the greatest 
 glory of the heavenly Father, then with propriety they may look for the 
 haven of perfect happiness in the world to come. 
 
 This schoolmaster could hardly be accused of holding the secular 
 view of education. Nor, considering the evidence already adduced in 
 the early chapters of this discussion, is it possible to think he was an 
 exception to the general custom of his time. On this account he is intro- 
 duced here, that we may be reminded of the thoroughly religious charac- 
 ter of public education at the beginning of a century, which in the course 
 of its passing decades witnessed almost a complete reversal of this 
 earlier point of view. 
 
 The first step in this development, it seems, was taken by the Public 
 School Society. From the first it attempted to make education religious 
 without being sectarian. Its records furnish abundant evidence of this 
 fact, and it may be well to present the matter in the language of the 
 annual reports: 
 
 "The Trustees are aware of the importance of early religious instruc- 
 tion; and although the nature of their association and its true interests 
 
MODIFICATION OF RELIGIOUS CONCEPTION OE EDUCATION 65 
 
 require that none but such as is exclusively, general and scriptural in its 
 character, should be introduced into the schools under their charge, they 
 require from the teachers stated returns of the number of their scholars 
 who attend at the various Sunday schools or places of worship on the 
 Sabbath" (Annual Report, 1827, p. 14). 
 
 "The Trustees have endeavored to keep in view the great object of 
 the Society— the general diffusion of education, without regard to 
 political or religious distinctions; — composed of persons of various 
 opinions, they have permitted neither party, nor sectarian feeling to 
 mingle in their deliberations, or influence their conclusions. Hence it 
 may be safely inferred, arises the confidence which the community repose 
 in the Society, and its Board of Trustees" (ibid., 1831, pp. 2 f.). 
 
 "The constitution of the Society and public sentiment wisely forbid 
 the introduction into their schools of any such religious instruction as 
 shall favor the peculiar views of any sect, and the Trustees endeavor so 
 carefully to guard them in this respect as to give no just cause of com- 
 plaint, leaving this subject where it rightfully belongs, to the parents 
 and guardians of the children. They wish however, not to be under- 
 stood as regarding religious impressions in early youth as unimportant; 
 on the contrary, they desire to do all which may with propriety be done, 
 to give a right direction to the minds of the children entrusted to their 
 care. Their schools are uniformly opened with the reading of the 
 scriptures, and the class books are such as recognize and enforce the great 
 and generally acknowledged principles of Christianity. A large propor- 
 tion of our schools attend the various Sunday schools of the city, by 
 direction of their parents, and the Trustees are happy to bear testimony 
 to their great usefulness, believing them to be very valuable auxiliaries 
 to the cause of public instruction" (ibid., 1838, p. 7). 
 
 In confirmation of the claim of the Public School Society, as set forth 
 in the extracts given, may be cited the words of the deputy superin- 
 tendent of the county and city of New York in report to the state 
 superintendent of common schools, December 31, 1842. This is his 
 testimony: "Into the 'schools of the Public School Society, the fell spirit 
 of sectarianism has indeed never entered. Their foundations have been 
 laid upon the broad basis of Christianity. In morals and religion, the 
 Bible without note or comment, has from the first been their rule and 
 guide, and standard. But catechisms, and sectarian books are rigidly 
 excluded — the object being to sow the seeds and principles of divine 
 truth, by a daily morning lesson from the sacred word" (Report of State 
 Superintendent for 1842, p. 255). 
 
66 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 These extracts need no further explication. They make plain the 
 general attitude of the Public School Society. It believed in a general 
 and fundamentally religious education, but eschewed all sectarianism as 
 a thing impossible from the nature of its organization, being composed 
 of various denominations; and as inconsistent with the genius of Ameri- 
 can institutions. But this was the first step in the exclusion of religious 
 education from the public schools. 
 
 Another step in this movement was somewhat strangely taken by the 
 Public School Society. This Society had championed the integrity of 
 the public educational fund and had declared war against every foe of 
 its sacred devotion to the exclusive ends of a common-school education. 
 It had entered the controversy in 1822, when Bethel Baptist Church gave 
 evidence of having unholy designs against the school money, and had 
 hardly laid the armor down until the law of 1842 brought the matter to 
 a final solution. The chief enemy during all this time were the Catholics 
 and the slogan of the Public School Society was the civil character of the 
 school fund and the sectarian nature of the Catholic schools. The 
 Catholics were to be denied participation in the public bounty, because 
 they were giving a sectarian education. But what if the Public School 
 Society were giving a similar kind of education? What right then 
 would its schools have to the fund sacredly set apart for the purposes of 
 a common secular education? In their Twenty-Sixth Annual Report 
 they had said that "funds raised by an equal tax, for promoting general 
 literary education cannot, without a gross violation of the plainest rules 
 of propriety and sound policy, be diverted from that channel, to propa- 
 gate the dogmas of a religious sect, or further the interests of a political 
 party" (p. 3). The Catholics were not slow to recognize their point of 
 vantage, and so hurled against their great enemy, the Public School 
 Society, the counter charge of sectarianism. The Public School Society, 
 the Catholics said, was giving a sectarian education and therefore, 
 according to its own argument, had no right to the school fund. In this 
 way the burden of proof was laid upon the Public School Society. It 
 must free itself of the imputations of the Catholics, and this it was found, 
 could only be done by the expurgation of its school books. 
 
 This charge of sectarianism against the Public School Society was 
 very boldly made in the course of the controversy of 1840. After the 
 petition of the Catholics had been denied by the Board of Assistants, the 
 former issued an address to the public, August 10, 1840. On the ques- 
 tion of school books they make the following declaration: 
 
 "Besides the introduction of the Holy Scriptures without note or 
 
MODIFICATION OF RELIGIOUS CONCEPTION OF EDUCATION 67 
 
 comment, with the prevailing theory that from these even children are 
 to get their notions of religion, contrary to our principles, there were, in 
 the class-books of those schools, false (as we believe) historical state- 
 ments respecting the men and things of past times, calculated to fill the 
 minds of our children with errors of fact, and at the same time to excite 
 in them prejudice against the religion of their parents and guardians. 
 These passages were not considered as sectarian, inasmuch as they had 
 been selected as mere reading lessons, and were not in favor of any par- 
 ticular sect, but merely against the Catholics. We feel it is unjust that 
 such passages should be taught at all in schools to the support of which 
 we are contributors as well as others. But that such books should be 
 put into the hands of our own children, and that in part at our own 
 expense, was in our opinion, unjust, unnatural, and, at all events, to us 
 intolerable" (Bourne, p. 335). 
 
 Just one month before, this question had been discussed in the 
 Freeman's Journal by Rev. Dr. John Power, Vicar-General of the 
 diocese of New York (reprinted in Bourne, pp. 228 f.). After discussing 
 the objectionable character of the books used in the schools of the Public 
 School Society and the attitude of that body toward the common-school 
 fund, Dr. Power proceeds as follows: 
 
 "The objections to our claims to a due portion of the school fund 
 are, I think, urged in bad faith. It is said that the State cannot lend 
 itself to the support of sectarian principles. But recollect, sir, that this 
 objection is urged by those whose conduct is truly sectarian, as far as 
 regards the management of the public schools. This, I think, I have 
 abundantly proved." 
 
 The Public School Society responded to these charges on the part of 
 the Catholics by appointing a committee, May 1, 1840, to ascertain and 
 report whether the books used in the public schools contained anything 
 derogatory to the Roman Catholic church. A very earnest effort was 
 made to secure the co-operation of the Catholic clergy in this movement, 
 but without success. The trustees however persevered in their efforts 
 and the final result was a very considerable expurgation of the textbooks 
 used in the schools under their management (Bourne, pp. 325 f.). Their 
 report for 1840 speaks of the repeated official offers they had made to 
 expunge from the school books whatever might be objectionable, after 
 thorough examination, to the most scrupulous conscience (p. 7). The 
 report of the following year, discussing the dissatisfaction of the Catholics 
 with the system of public education as then conducted, proceeds to show 
 how the Public School Society had endeavored to remove every reason- 
 
68 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 able obstacle. With this end in view the trustees of the Society had 
 resolved upon the expurgation of the school books of "every passage 
 casting imputations upon the doctrines, practices, or characters, as such, 
 of the Roman Catholic Church, or its members." But despite all this, 
 they have to lament that the friendship and confidence of the Catholics 
 had not been won to the public schools (p. 7). 
 
 Sufficient has been said, I think, to show that the charge of the 
 Catholics against the Public School Society was not without foundation. 
 There were books containing objectionable passages. This was frankly 
 acknowledged by the Society itself, and the task of expurgation was 
 industriously taken up. And the point for which we contend here is 
 simply this: the work of expurgating the school books was another step 
 in the exclusion of religious instruction from the public schools, not only 
 because the books were expunged of all doctrines and tenets that per- 
 tained to the Catholic church, but because this movement on the part of 
 the Public School Society marked a more decided commitment, in practice 
 as well as theory, to the principle of non-sectarianism in education. 
 
 About this time another step in the movement toward secularism in 
 public education, somewhat parallel to that just described in the Public 
 School Society, was being taken in the state department of public 
 instruction. The Superintendent of Common Schools, in his report for 
 1846 (pp. 46-50), gives rather a full discussion of district libraries, relative 
 to the question of sectarianism. He reminds the trustees that, while 
 they have the authority to select these libraries, they must exercise this 
 authority under a standing regulation of the department of common 
 schools, passed and promulgated when the law authorizing the purchase 
 of libraries was first passed. The regulation in question discounte- 
 nanced the purchase of "works imbued with party politics, and those of 
 a sectarian character, or of hostility to the Christian religion." The 
 report for 1846 then proceeds to call attention to the interpretation of 
 the said regulation at the time of its promulgation. The interpretation 
 reads as follows: 
 
 "1. No works written professedly to uphold or attack any sect or 
 creed in our country, claiming to be a religious one, shall be tolerated in 
 the school libraries. 
 
 "2. Standard works on other topics shall not be excluded because 
 they incidentally and indirectly betray the religious opinions of their 
 authors. 
 
 "3. Works avowedly on other topics, which abound in direct and 
 unreserved attacks on, or defense of, the character of any religious sect, 
 
MODIFICATION OF RELIGIOUS CONCEPTION OF EDUCATION 69 
 
 or those which hold up any religious body to contempt or execration, by 
 singling out or bringing together only the darker parts of its history or 
 character, shall be excluded from the school libraries." 
 
 The report goes on to speak of the full and free toleration of all 
 phases of religious belief guaranteed in the constitution of the country. 
 In accordance with this fundamental law, the prohibition, called for by 
 the statute and enforced by the department, had not been intended to pro- 
 duce but to prevent injustice and to prevent majorities from encroaching 
 upon the rights and interests of minorities. Individuals have the right 
 to spend their money and devote their exertions, as they please, in order to 
 propagate their religious faith and creed, but any such interference on 
 the part of the state would wound the religious sensibilities of its citizens 
 and violate a highly cherished principle of the fundamental law. It is 
 the opinion of the superintendent that no work which, in the slightest 
 degree, is sectarian should be allowed in the school libraries. The 
 district library should be regarded as common neutral ground where 
 all may meet divested of "offensive and defensive armor," and where 
 the Trinitarian should not be denounced as idolatrous, nor the Unitarian 
 charged with heresy. Furthermore it is the opinion of the superintend- 
 ent that, if this prohibition be disregarded and the libraries made the 
 receptacles of works of a controversial character, such marked public 
 indifference would be encountered as to leave no hope of sustaining and 
 perpetuating the usefulness of these institutions. 
 
 This ruling of the state superintendent was in line with the general 
 movement away from the religious conception of education, which had 
 obtained so largely at the beginning of the century. To all intents and 
 purposes this was an effort to exclude sectarianism from the district 
 libraries. So far as we know, the thought of the department of common 
 schools looked not beyond such an immediate result. But, aside from 
 the question whether there can be religious education after all sectarian- 
 ism has been removed, the consequence of the movement in question 
 could not have come short of narrowing down the thoroughly religious 
 conception of education, so popular in former decades. 
 
 In his report for the year 1849 (pp. 22 if.) the State Superintendent 
 outlines what he considers necessary for the improvement of the common 
 schools. Teachers of the highest practical grade of qualifications, the 
 regular and constant attendance of every child, the course of instruction 
 systematized and extended so as to accomplish a thorough English 
 education — all these are indispensable to the best interests of the com- 
 mon schools. Furthermore it is the opinion of the Superintendent that 
 
70 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 a sound and pure Christian morality should pervade all the teaching of 
 the schools of the state. Education of heart and head must keep equal 
 pace. Correct principles, right motives, and good habits must early be 
 implanted in the youthful mind — '"grow with its growth and strengthen 
 with its strength." Too much care cannot be taken to make the influ- 
 ences of the elementary schools elevating and ennobling. To accom- 
 plish this, teachers of doubtful morality must be excluded from the desk 
 and those secured whose "daily lessons and deportment shall inculcate 
 and foster the great truths of humanity, integrity, conscientiousness and 
 benevolence." There is no need whatsoever of any reference to denomi- 
 national distinctions and sectarian differences. "The foundations of 
 character, usefulness and happiness, may be laid in those enduring and 
 comprehensive principles of Christian ethics and morality which lie 
 without and above the pale of mere theology: and this is the province of 
 the common school, so far as its means are adequate and its jurisdiction 
 extends." 
 
 Alongside this declaration may be placed the decision of the State 
 Superintendent of Common Schools on the right to compel Catholic 
 children to attend prayers, and to read or commit portions of the Bible 
 as school exercises (October 27, 1853). It is the case of Rev. Dr. Quigley, 
 of Schaghticoke versus Margaret Gifford and others (see pamphlet in 
 Astor Library, New York City). The complaint states that on the 
 " 8th day of August last, Margaret Gifford, a common school teacher in 
 South Easton, Washington county, ordered William Callaghan, a pupil 
 aged twelve years, ' to study and read the Protestant Testament ' : that 
 on his declining so to do on the plea ' that he was a Catholic and did not 
 believe in any but the Catholic Bible,' said teacher consulted the Trustees 
 on the subject: that on the 9th of August, she again required the boy to 
 'read out of the unauthorized edition' [meaning King James's version]: 
 that on his declaring 'his unwillingness to disobey the orders of his 
 parents and violate the precepts of his religion,' the teacher chastised 
 him severely with her ferule and then expelled him ignominiously from 
 the school." 
 
 In discussing the question Superintendent Randall affirms his belief 
 that intellectual and religious education should proceed hand in hand, 
 but states that the realization of this ideal in the common schools of the 
 country had met with serious practical obstacles. The government, 
 realizing the necessity of universal education for the maintenance of 
 civil and political institutions and not willing to rely upon the voluntary 
 effort of individuals, had undertaken to organize and support a general 
 
MODIFICATION OF RELIGIOUS CONCEPTION OF EDUCATION 7 1 
 
 school system. The common schools therefore were clearly a govern- 
 ment institution, and to introduce into them a course of religious instruc- 
 tion conformable to the views of any particular denomination would 
 be tantamount to a religious establishment. It was also impossible to 
 formulate a course of religious instruction which would be acceptable to 
 all, and to divide the school moneys among the various sects for the 
 establishment of schools in which they might teach respectively their 
 various creeds "would be, in the sparsely inhabited country districts, to 
 divide the children within the territory convenient for attendance on a 
 single school, and in which the support of all the inhabitants is frequently 
 scarcely adequate, with the aid of the public moneys, to sustain a single 
 efficient school into a dozen or more schools." 
 
 The following paragraph deserves to be given in the Superintendent's 
 own words: "In view of the above facts, the position was early, dis- 
 tinctly, and almost universally taken by our statesmen, legislators and 
 prominent friends of education — men of the warmest religious zeal and 
 belonging to every sect — that religious education must be banished from 
 the common schools and consigned to the family and the church. If felt 
 that this was an evil, it was felt that it was the least one of which the 
 circumstances admitted. Accordingly, instruction in our schools has 
 been limited to that ordinarily included under the head of intellectual 
 culture, and to the propagation of those principles of morality in which 
 all sects, and good men belonging to no sect, can equally agree. The 
 tender consciences of all have been respected." 
 
 The report of 1849 and the decision of Superintendent Randall, 
 1853, come to the same conclusion. The former considers that the 
 province of the common school, in laying the foundations of character, 
 is to inculcate the "comprehensive principles of Christian ethics and 
 morality." The latter affirms that the logic of history calls for the 
 banishment of religious education from the common schools, and admits 
 only of the "propagation of those principles of morality in which all 
 sects, and good men belonging to no sect, can equally agree." 
 
 In line with the conclusions just reached are all the subsequent 
 decisions of state superintendents. We will let two of them speak here 
 in their own language. In 1866, Superintendent Rice handed down the 
 following decision: "A teacher has no right to consume any portion of 
 the regular school hours in conducting religious exercises, especially 
 where objection is raised. The principle is this: Common schools are 
 supported and established for the purpose of imparting instruction in 
 the common English branches; religious instruction forms no part of 
 
72 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 the course. The proper places in which to receive such instruction are 
 churches and Sunday schools, of which there is usually a sufficient num- 
 ber in every district. The money to support schools comes from the 
 people at large, irrespective of sect or denomination. Consequently, 
 instruction of a sectarian or religious denominational character must be 
 avoided, and teachers must confine themselves, during school hours, to 
 their legitimate and proper duties" (circular on Bible Reading and 
 Religious Exercises in the Public Schools, published by Commissioner of 
 Education, A. S. Draper, 1906). 
 
 In connection with an important decision on the subject, Superin- 
 tendent Weaver (in office 1868-71) made the following pronouncement: 
 "The object of the common school system of this State is to afford means 
 of secular instruction to all children over 5 and under 21 years of age, 
 resident therein. For their religious training the State does not provide, 
 and with it does not interfere. The advantages of the schools are to be 
 free to them all alike. No distinction is to be made between Christians, 
 whether Protestants or Catholics, and the consciences of none can be 
 legally violated. There is no authority in the law to use, as a matter of 
 right, any portion of the regular school hours in conducting any religious 
 exercise, at which the attendance of the scholars is made compulsory" 
 (ibid.). 
 
 These decisions, together with others to the same effect, were col- 
 lected and published in 1906 by Commissioner of Education A. S. 
 Draper. They may be considered therefore to represent the present 
 policy of the Department of Education of the state of New York. They 
 indicate the distance traveled from 1804 to 1906. According to these 
 decisions and deliverances, formal religious instruction and the more 
 obtrusive forms of religious motive are no longer to be given place in 
 the schoolroom. An address from an instructor to his scholars, calling 
 attention to their religious responsibilities and pointing out the religious 
 value of the various branches of study, would meet with official censure. 
 The highest school authority of the state has declared such an exercise 
 to be out of harmony with the purpose and program of common-school 
 procedure. Religious instruction and worship in the public schools of 
 the state are now taboo. 
 
CHAPTER IX 
 
 THE READING OF THE BIBLE IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 After the legislature had enacted the law of 1842, denying the dis- 
 tribution of the public fund to schools in which sectarian doctrines and 
 tenets should be taught, the controversy, from that time on, regarding 
 religious instruction, centered around the reading of the Bible in the 
 schools. It is the purpose of the present chapter to trace the develop- 
 ment of this controversy and to take note of the changing emphasis of 
 public opinion relative to the subject. We have already seen that the 
 Bible was in the schools of New York from its earliest settlement by the 
 Dutch and English. We have seen also that the law of 1842, while 
 excluding all sectarian instruction from the schools, made no reference 
 to the Bible question. It virtually left the whole subject in the immedi- 
 ate hands of the people of the districts and the officers they might elect 
 to take charge of the local management of schools. It is therefore a 
 matter of interest to understand something of how the people regarded 
 theuse of the Bible in the schools and something of the extent of its use 
 during the second quarter of the nineteenth century. 
 
 We cannot feel that our information on this subject is complete, but 
 such statistics as we have are worthy of consideration. In the year 1826 
 the New Testament was used as a reader in the schools of 168 towns; it 
 was used in 216 towns in 1829; 200 towns in 1831; in 166 towns in 1832; 
 in 124 towns in 1835; 101 towns in 1837; and in 109 towns in 1838. 
 Just four other books had a wider circulation in the schools at this time. 
 They were an English Reader, DabolPs Arithmetic, Murray's Grammar, 
 and Webster's Spelling-Book. In 1838, they took precedence of the 
 Testament in the following order: DabolPs Arithmetic was used in 457 
 towns, the English Reader in 437 towns, Webster's Spelling-Book in 227 
 towns, and Murray's Grammar in 209 towns {Annual Report of the 
 Superintendent of Common Schools of the State of New York, for 1829, p. 
 58; for 1831, p. 71; for 1838, p. 147). 
 
 After the law of 1842 had settled the question of sectarian instruction, 
 there was a decided effort to increase the use of the Bible in the schools. 
 And this, in the first place, by official act. On February 7, 1842, Samuel 
 Young was appointed Secretary of State, in which capacity, also, he 
 served as Superintendent of Common Schools (Randall, p. 139). To an 
 
 73 
 
74 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 inquirer, some time in the year of his appointment (referred to in Report 
 of State Superintendent of Common Schools, January 12, 1843, p. 255), he 
 set forth his views on the use of the New Testament in the common 
 schools. In this communication Superintendent Young expressed his 
 regard for the New Testament as in all respects a suitable book to be 
 read daily in the schools, and earnestly and cordially recommends its 
 general introduction for that purpose. It has value as a reading-book, 
 because of the purity and simplicity of its English, but he finds even a 
 greater value in the moral influences it is capable of exerting. Education 
 is something more than instruction. It includes the training and 
 disciplining of all the faculties, it is the systematic and harmonious 
 development of the future man for usefulness and for happiness. "It 
 must be based upon knowledge and virtue; and its gradual advancement 
 must be strictly subordinated to those cardinal principles of morality 
 which are nowhere so clearly, and distinctly, and beautifully inculcated 
 as in that book from which we all derive our common faith. The highest 
 and most finished intellectual cultivation, in the absence of careful and 
 sound moral discipline, can never accomplish the great end and aim of 
 education. It 'plays round the head, but comes not near the heart.' It 
 may constitute the accomplished sceptic, the brilliant libertine, the 
 splendid criminal — but can never bestow upon mankind the benefactors 
 of the race, the enlightened philosopher, the practical statesman, the 
 bold and fearless reformer. The nursery and family fireside may 
 accomplish much; the institutions of religion may exert a pervading 
 influence; but what is commenced in the hallowed sanctuary of the 
 domestic circle, and periodically inculcated at the altar, must be daily 
 and hourly recognized in the Common Schools, that it may exert an 
 ever-present influence — enter into and form part of every act of the 
 life — and become thoroughly incorporated with the rapidly expanding 
 character." 
 
 In no other book, he continues in substance, shall we find lessons of 
 innocence, virtue, purity, and integrity comparable to those already 
 endeared, we may hope, to the best affections of the children, in the New 
 Testament. There is no more exalted standard by means of which 
 parents and teachers may discharge their solemn responsibility of form- 
 ing and molding the character of children committed to their care. The 
 direction which the susceptible mind of the child may assume in the 
 neglected district school may be fraught with consequences which shall 
 bring about permanent advancement of society, or which may cast a 
 withering and hopeless blight over the fairest prospects of humanity. 
 
READING OF THE BIBLE IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS 75 
 
 The communication concludes as follows.: "But I have said enough 
 in illustration of the paramount importance which I attach to moral and 
 relig'ous culture in our schools; and I trust no objections will be inter- 
 posed to the general introduction and daily use of the Testament, not 
 only in yours, but in every other school in the State" (quoted in Randall, 
 p. 194). 
 
 It will be noted that this communication from Superintendent Young 
 is not an order demanding the use of the Testament in the schools, but 
 rather an earnest and cordial recommendation to that effect. Its actual 
 introduction was intrusted to the disposition of the people in the local 
 districts. 
 
 At the request of Superintendent Young in 1843, the Superintendent 
 of Wayne County, P. D. Green, submitted a report on the use of the 
 Bible in the common schools. It was published in the Annual Report of 
 the State Superintendent for that year (pp. 667-69), and begins with the 
 following interesting paragraph: "In the selection of books to be put in 
 the hands of the young, the greatest care ought assuredly to be used. 
 No book should be recommended until, not only its literary merits shall 
 have been fully ascertained, but also its moral tendency and its probable 
 influence upon the formation of the youthful character. In regard to 
 the use of the Bible as a text-book, it seems strange that any objection 
 should ever have been urged. Setting aside its moral worth, its literary 
 merit places it among the first, if not the very first, of those books which 
 it is proper to introduce into our common schools. There is no book 
 extant so distinguished for its pure Saxon Language as the Bible. It 
 may in truth be called a splendid exemplification of our mother tongue. 
 Its style at once pure, clear and forcible, renders it easy of understanding, 
 and fits it in an eminent degree for the use of the young. As a book for 
 critical, rhetorical exercises, it would be invaluable. Its variety of style, 
 its life-like delineation of character and simple narration of events, the 
 clearness and energy of the didactic portions, and the unequalled sub- 
 limity of other parts, give to the Bible the highest claim upon the atten- 
 tion of such as would become thoroughly acquainted with the nature 
 and power of our language." 
 
 In the next place, the report discusses the value of the Bible from the 
 point of view of historical study. It is regarded as the only source of 
 information for the three thousand years after creation. After this we 
 are told that the highest value of the Bible consists in the fact that it is 
 the word of inspiration from on high, containing precepts and instruction 
 of the utmost importance to man as an accountable being. Such is the 
 
76 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 constitution of man that he cannot reach his proper rank and dignity 
 on the basis of a mere intellectual education. His moral and religious 
 faculties must be cultivated, and no book can afford such aid as the 
 Bible. It is the standard in matters of religion, also of whatever is just 
 and upright in character and sound in morals. The study of the Bible 
 therefore cannot fail of exerting a highly beneficial influence upon the 
 young. It should be read in the schools daily in a reverent and solemn 
 manner. Teachers should show proper regard for it as a book of divine 
 inspiration. In this way it will be greatly beneficial both to pupils and 
 teachers. In corroboration of this view, Mr. Green refers to the opinions 
 of others and says: "Very many teachers whom I have consulted have 
 most fully acquiesced. They uniformly testify, that whenever the 
 Bible is introduced and treated as the Word of God, its purifying and 
 ennobling influence is seen both in teacher and pupils." 
 
 The report also calls attention to the value of the Bible for devotional 
 exercises in the morning, and concludes with the following statement: "I 
 would therefore suggest, that the Bible be recommended as a text-book 
 for the more advanced classes, and that its general adoption in our com- 
 mon schools for purposes of worship, be strongly urged." 
 
 The two reports named above — that of Superintendent Young and 
 that of P. D. Green, of Wayne County — recognize the value of the Bible 
 for literary, moral, and religious culture, and were no doubt effective in 
 the wider use of the sacred volume in the common schools. 
 
 The second influence making for the wider use of the Bible at this 
 time is seen in the effort made to increase the moral value of common- 
 school education. This was in the year 1843, and had its beginning in 
 the special appointment from the State Superintendent of Francis 
 Dwight, Deputy of Albany County, to report on the condition of moral 
 education in the schools. After pointing out the great need of such 
 education, Mr. Dwight proceeds to suggest how it may be effected. In 
 part the mode of procedure is as follows: "The opening of the schools by 
 the teacher reverently reading a short passage from the Bible, and 
 repeating in concert with his pupils a few great moral precepts, relating 
 to the various duties to parents, to each other, and to God, has become 
 the custom of almost every school in this county. Its happy and power- 
 ful influence has been acknowledged by many teachers, discipline becom- 
 ing easier and more efficient, and duty more cheerfully done" {Report of 
 State Superintendent for 1843, p. 130). 
 
 The Deputy of Montgomery County, in report to the State Superin- 
 tendent in 1843, urges the importance of moral education in the schools. 
 
READING OF THE BIBLE IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS 77 
 
 Not the social circle, nor the Sunday school, nor the pulpit can accom- 
 plish this work. At least, in his opinion, they have not done so. It is 
 the moral principles of the Bible which he wishes taught, and expresses 
 his great satisfaction with Superintendent Young's circular recom- 
 mending the New Testament as a textbook in the schools (ibid., pp. 
 
 435 Q- 
 
 The two deputies of Delaware County in their report to the State 
 
 Superintendent, 1843 (p. 230), flatter themselves that there has been a 
 decided improvement in the condition of moral education in the schools 
 of the county within the past year. In their last report they regarded 
 the schools of the county as exerting only a negative influence upon the 
 morals of society. The Scriptures, and especially the New Testament, 
 are considered the best system of morality extant, and a thorough 
 acquaintance with the pure precepts of this admirable book cannot help, 
 they think, but exert a beneficial influence in the formation of character. 
 It thus becomes indispensable to the proper education of the children of 
 this republic. In their first visits to the schools of the county, they were 
 surprised to find that in very many instances the Scriptures were not 
 even used as a textbook, and were not to be found in the schools. But 
 at the present time, the report continues, they are used daily and almost 
 universally, not so much as a textbook for reading exercises, as a book of 
 standard rules for the regulation of conduct. 
 
 The Deputy of Livingston County, reporting to the State Superin- 
 tendent in 1843 (p. 342), expresses his conviction of the necessity of good 
 morals and the early inculcation of moral principles. Accordingly he 
 had made it his duty to find out to what extent these principles were being 
 inculcated and practiced in the schools. He found that the Scriptures 
 were read in but few schools during the previous year. The past fall the 
 matter was discussed at conventions, and, through fear of sectarianism, 
 an attitude adverse to their introduction into the schoolroom was mani- 
 fested on the part of some. This difficulty was obviated and the reading 
 of the Scriptures secured by recommending to teachers that they be read 
 without comment. He is now able to report that during the last summer 
 (1843) nearly all the schools in the ten towns visited listened daily, as a 
 morning exercise, to the reading of the Bible. 
 
 In this connection should be mentioned a state convention of County 
 Superintendents, held at Syracuse, 1845. The following resolution was 
 proposed: "Resolved, That this Convention regard the introduction of 
 the Bible into schools as an object earnestly to be desired; but that the 
 time and manner in which this object is to be accomplished is a question 
 
78 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 which ought to be decided by the inhabitants of the districts; and that 
 in all measures for the promotion of moral and religious culture in our 
 schools, sacred regard ought to be had for the rights, and tenderness 
 manifested toward the scruples and prejudices of all." This resolution, 
 with the modification that county superintendents urgently use their 
 influence for the daily reading of the Bible in all the schools of the state, 
 was unanimously adopted (Randall, pp. 200, 207). 
 
 All this time, however, in the City of New York, there seems to have 
 been a strenuous effort going on to exclude the Bible from the schools. 
 The law of 1842 had decided against all sectarian books and sectarian 
 teaching, and the warfare against the Bible was now proceeding on the 
 ground that it was a sectarian book. The report of the Superintendent 
 of Schools for the City and County of New York to the State Superin- 
 tendent, 1843, was a bitter cry against this movement. He declares it 
 to be one of the unhappy consequences of the new law that "the Bible 
 has been banished in several instances, while it has never been permitted 
 to enter most of the district schools that have been organized." And 
 while he does not wish to be regarded as holding the view that common 
 schools should be converted into religious assemblies, nevertheless he 
 thinks they should, in the broad sense of the term, be Christian 
 schools, and therefore the banishment of the Bible therefrom cannot 
 be regarded otherwise than striking at the very foundations of our 
 school edifice. 
 
 Describing the actual situation, the report goes on to speak of one of 
 the ward schools, where a large majority of the pupils were children of 
 Catholic parents. The Douay version of the Bible, for a time, was 
 allowed to be read on every alternate morning. But it was not long till 
 the school officers of the ward yielded to the objections against both 
 versions, and both were thus discontinued. 
 
 The report further affirms: "I have stated in my report to the Board 
 of Education that the Bible was banished from the Manhattenville 
 Academy in June last, upon the pretext, contained in a written order, 
 that it is a sectarian book ! In the same report I have enumerated the 
 several district schools into which it has never been allowed to enter. 
 The number, as compared with the whole, you will perceive is large" 
 (Annual Report of the State Superintendent for 1S43, pp. 415-17). 
 
 The report named above was made in 1843. The following year a 
 pamphlet, entitled An Honest Appeal to Every Voter, was circulated in 
 the City of New York (in the Astor Library). This brief document has 
 value, showing not only something of the effort to exclude the Bible from 
 
READING OF THE BIBLE IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS 79 
 
 the schools, but also how the question had become complicated with 
 politics. The circular begins with exclamations of horror: 
 
 "This is the question! the great question! which, most of all, concerns 
 the voters of this city, at the approaching election. All other questions 
 are insignificant compared with this. Shall a foreign Pope, through his 
 sworn vassal, Bishop Hughes, deprive our children of the Bible in the 
 Public Schools? Let every American father and mother ponder this 
 question. 
 
 "The deed is done! The Holy Bible is condemned! and expelled 
 from thirty-three schools! and Americans and Protestants have been 
 found base enough to buy up the Irish Roman Catholic votes, by tamely 
 submitting to this outrage, and have themselves perpetrated this deed 
 of infamy! 
 
 "The new school law, which has already taxed our citizens a Quarter 
 Of A Million Dollars! for new schools, from which the Holy Bible is 
 excluded, was passed at the dictation of Bishop Hughes and other Roman 
 Catholic Priests, who it is notorious were closeted with Maclay and 
 other corrupt and infidel politicians, when the law was framed thus to 
 rob our children of the Bible in our schools!" 
 
 The report of the City Superintendent to the Board of Education is 
 inserted at this point. It goes on to show that the Bible had been 
 termed a sectarian book by the commissioners and inspectors of certain 
 of the ward schools and that on this ground had been excluded from 
 thirty-three of these schools. All this is regarded wholly contrary to 
 law. The circular continues again: 
 
 "And now, fellow citizens of any and every party, if you have read 
 this official report of the Superintendent of Common Schools for the 
 City and County of New York, it becomes you to act at the coming 
 election as if the Bible in the schools depended upon your single vote. 
 
 "Ask yourselves whether any republic ever existed or flourished 
 without the Bible! Is freedom any where found upon the earth at the 
 present hour, in any country where the Bible is a prohibited book? 
 Can a child be educated for a citizen of America, who is not taught to 
 reverence the Bible ? Is there any sanctity in an oath in our Courts of 
 Justice, unless the Bible is venerated as the Book of God ? And whose 
 property, liberty, or life would be safe, for a single hour, if men are not 
 taught to regard the Bible with reverence and awe?" 
 
 The charge is made by the circular that the Democratic party is in 
 collusion with the Catholics, and that to them, as a reward for their 
 support, had been promised the exclusion of the Bible from the public 
 
80 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 schools. Voters are called upon to ignore party ties and cast their ballot 
 for the best interest of their native land and for the Bible in the public 
 schools. The circular does not seem to have been written in the interest 
 of any party, but rather in behalf of the Bible in the schools. And 
 though it may have been in the nature of campaign literature, the subject 
 discussed must have been a point at issue, else the pamphlet would have 
 been to no purpose. It seems therefore unquestionable evidence that, 
 on the ground of being a sectarian book, the Bible was in some measure 
 being excluded from the public schools of the City of New York, and 
 that this movement was complicated with politics. 
 
 George B. Cheever, D.D., writing in New York City, 1854, fully 
 corroborates the implications of the circular just described. He thus 
 characterizes the political aspects of the question: "It is impossible, and 
 perhaps it would be useless, in this place, to go into a history of the 
 introduction of the Romish and political element into the management 
 of a system of public education, that ought to be so high and sacred 
 above all sectarian and political intrigue. We will not enter on the 
 detail of the conflicts fought, the schemes presented, the influences used, 
 the conferences of the school authorities with Bishop Hughes, the sub- 
 mission to his inspection of all the school literature for consideration, the 
 disgraceful blackening of the school books by Romish expurgation, and 
 the partial and temporary giving up of the school system to the dictation 
 of Romish priests" (The Bible in Our Common Schools, p. 229). 
 
 As an illustration of the procedure which had for its object the exclu- 
 sion of the Bible from the schools, the following written order from the 
 trustees, served upon a teacher of New York City, will be instructive: 
 " Sir By unanimos vote of the trustees Last Meeting all Sederian Books 
 is Requisted to Bee Removed from the School as it is thaught the Bill one 
 it is Requisted to Bee Removed" (quoted in Cheever, p. 217). 
 
 The spelling, capitals, and want of punctuation in this order from 
 the "trustees" do not very highly recommend the qualifications of at 
 least some of the men who at this time were in control of public education 
 in the metropolis of the empire state. It is nevertheless another link in 
 the chain of evidence against the use of the Bible in the schools. 
 
 The report of the Superintendent of Schools for the County and City 
 of New York, the pamphlet entitled An Honest Appeal to Every Voter, 
 and the statements of George B. Cheever, all agree in the opinion that, 
 consequent upon the law of 1842, an effort was made in the City of New 
 York to exclude the Bible from the public schools of that municipality, 
 on the ground of its being a sectarian book. But, as one might expect, 
 
READING OF THE BIBLE IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS 8 1 
 
 this was only one side of the question. Fortunately we have a special 
 report from the Board of Education, dealing with the matter from the 
 point of view of that body. It is the report of the special committee on 
 the communications of the County Superintendent, relative to the use 
 of the Bible in the public schools of the city (in the Astor Library, dated 
 December n, 1844). 
 
 We are informed by this special committee that the superintendent 
 in question had presented two reports to the board — one on October 30, 
 another on November 13, 1843. It is claimed that he showed ignorance 
 of the law denning his duty, and consequently had gone considerably 
 beyond his powers, the climax of his arrogance being reached when he 
 reported the schools of the fourth and fourteenth wards as having for- 
 feited all claim to the school fund, because of neglecting to read the 
 Scriptures at the opening of the morning session. The report continues: 
 "Although the Bible is not read at the opening of all the schools, it 
 cannot be said to be excluded from any one of them; any child may 
 bring his Bible without let or hindrance. The ward officers are in no 
 instance prevented from introducing the Bible into their schools, if they 
 
 should think proper to do so All that the friends of the Bible 
 
 have ever asked from the State in its behalf, is that every legal obstacle 
 to its free use may be removed and that the schools may not be pro- 
 hibited from using it. The power of propagating the Gospel, with its 
 sanctifying and hallowing influences, was never intended to be wielded 
 by Legislative authority, in any form or under any circumstances." 
 The report further continues: "It is the opinion of your Committee, 
 that the use or non use of the Bible in the schools, is left by the law 
 entirely at the discretion of the officers elected in the several wards, and 
 the several societies and corporations who participate in the apportion- 
 ment, and they are all at liberty to pursue such a course as their own 
 sense of duty and the peculiar circumstances of their schools may dictate 
 to them, as most expedient." 
 
 It was contended that the only authority of the Board in this connec- 
 tion was to withdraw the apportionment from schools in which religious 
 sectarian tenets or doctrines are taught, inculcated, or practiced, or in 
 which any books of a sectarian character are read. It was further 
 maintained that comparatively there were only a small number of ward 
 schools in the city in which the "salutary custom" of reading the Bible 
 did not prevail. And these schools were made up almost wholly of 
 Catholic children, whose parents hitherto had been unwilling to send them, 
 and while sectarian teaching was not allowed, "Bible lessons and Scrip- 
 
82 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 ture histories are among their class books." The Committee considers 
 this to be a matter of congratulation, especially when it is remembered 
 that "all the other schools in the city are permitted to enjoy unmolested 
 all the advantages which may be derived from the public reading of a 
 chapter in the Bible, once or twice a day." 
 
 The following resolutions were recommended for adoption: 
 11 Resolved, That the Board of Education has no power under the 
 present law to determine what books shall be read in the public or Ward 
 schools in this city or county, that power being left entirely in the hands 
 of the school officers of the several Wards, and the trustees or managers 
 of the several schools or societies, who are authorized by law to share in 
 the apportionment of the school moneys. 
 
 "Resolved, That the Board of Education do hereby recommend to 
 the trustees and managers of all schools under their supervision, the 
 reading of a chapter from the Bible, without note or comment, at the 
 commencement of each of their morning and afternoon sessions, this 
 resolution not being intended as a recommendation of any particular 
 version of the Holy Scriptures." 
 
 It is plain to see that the Board of Education and the City Superin- 
 tendent were not in accord on the question of reading the Bible in the 
 schools. Apparently the Superintendent was a representative of the 
 extreme Protestant view, which held that, at all hazards, the King James 
 version of the Scriptures should be read in the schools. The Board of 
 Education, whatever its political affiliation may have been, represented 
 a more liberal view. It held, as stated above, that the use or non-use of 
 the Bible was a matter that pertained to the officers of the district, and 
 that they should determine from the particular circumstances of their 
 schools what might be most expedient in any given case. Nevertheless 
 the Superintendent "advised, counselled, recommended, and remon- 
 strated, terminating his official labors by invoking the interposition of 
 the Legislature" (quoted in Cheever, p. 216) to preserve the Bible from 
 being turned out of the schools. In response to his efforts an amend- 
 ment to the school law was passed, May 7, 1844, to the following effect: 
 "But nothing herein contained shall authorize the board of education to 
 exclude the holy scriptures without note or comment, or any selections 
 therefrom, from any of the schools provided for by this act. But it shall 
 not be competent for the said board of education to decide what version, 
 if any, of the holy scriptures without note or comment, shall be used in 
 any of the said schools; provided that nothing herein contained shall be 
 so constructed as to violate the rights of conscience as secured by the 
 
READING OF THE BIBLE IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS 83 
 
 constitution of this state and the United States" (Laws of New York, 
 1844, last part of sec. 12, p. 494). 
 
 This provision was also embodied in the act of 1851, to amend, con- 
 solidate, and reduce to one act the various acts relative to the common 
 schools of the City of New York (Laws of New York, 1851, p. 745). It 
 was likewise embodied in the charter of Greater New York in 1897, and 
 in the revision of 1901. The subsequent laws of the State of New York 
 have been searched in vain to find any modification in this statute. It 
 is therefore presumed that the provision of 1844, relative to the reading 
 of the Bible in the public schools of the City of New York, is still in 
 force. 
 
 It must be noted, however, that the law of 1844 is wholly negative in 
 its character. It confers no powers, but simply denies to the Board of 
 Education the right to exclude the Bible from the schools. What was 
 the occasion of this law is hard to ascertain, as there seems to be no 
 evidence of any such move on the part of the board. Jurisdiction in the 
 matter was left just where it was before — ■in the hands of the people of 
 the districts. A former judge of the Supreme Court thus characterizes 
 the act in question: "That statute, however, did not direct or recom- 
 mend the reading of the Bible in the schools, but only forbade the 
 commissioners of schools to exclude it, by such confused phraseology as 
 makes it difficult of interpretation—enacting a muddle to quiet a muss 
 existing between the Protestants and Catholics, on the subject of scrip- 
 ture reading in the city schools" (Hurlbut, A Secular View of Religion in 
 the State, p. 32). 
 
 Reference has already been made to the state convention of County 
 Superintendents, held at Syracuse, February 3, 1845. In a speech at 
 this convention, on behalf of the Bible in the schools, Dr. D. M. Reese, 
 Superintendent from the County and City of New York, declared that 
 in spite of the recent law the controversy was still pending in the city he 
 represented. On his last official visit to the schools, he found thirty- 
 three of these institutions organized under the new law, from which the 
 Bible had been excluded as a sectarian book. After representing these 
 facts to the ward officers, and finding that they would take no action in 
 the matter, he notified the Board of Education that the schools in ques- 
 tion had forfeited their right to the public money. But these schools 
 for the time being had continued to share in the public bounty. His 
 next move had been to bring the subject to the consideration of a public 
 meeting, at which over five thousand had been present. The matter 
 was then brought before the common council, and an ordinance was 
 
84 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 passed, denying any share in the public money to all schools from which 
 the Bible had been excluded (Randall, pp. 202, 204). 
 
 For the next ten years after 1845, according to official evidence, the 
 reading of the Bible in the schools seems to have progressed without any 
 considerable interruption. The Superintendent of Common Schools for 
 the County and City of New York reported in 1850 as follows: "The 
 practice of opening the schools by reverently reading a portion of the 
 sacred Scriptures, is in general use. There are, however, some few excep- 
 tions — but in the schools where this good custom prevails, no one 
 objects; and in the few where the custom does not prevail, they are not 
 the more prosperous on that account. The common sentiment of the 
 community is in favor of reading the Bible without note or comment, at 
 the opening of the schools in the morning" (Annual Report of the State 
 Superintendent for 1850, p. 120). 
 
 In 1852 the Superintendent of the County and City of New York, 
 after speaking of the exclusion by law of all books inculcating sectarian 
 dogmas, continues his report as follows: "The sacred Scriptures are not 
 included in this category; and while the Board, at their discretion, feel 
 at liberty to allow or disallow the work of any mere man, they would not 
 use compulsory measures with regard to this good book, but content 
 themselves by recommending its reverent use at the opening of the 
 
 schools in the morning of each day It is gratifying to observe 
 
 that very few schools are without this book of books" (Annual Report of 
 the State Superintendent, dated January 28, 1852, p. 131). 
 
 Again the Superintendent from New York City and County reports 
 in 1855 that "with very few exceptions, the several schools are opened 
 at nine o'clock a.m. by reading the Scriptures, after which the Lord's 
 Prayer is reverently repeated by the pupils, after the teacher, and a 
 hymn of praise and thanksgiving sung, accompanied by the piano ; after 
 which the pupils are remanded to their respective class-rooms" (Annual 
 Report of the State Superintendent, December 1, 1855, p. 131). 
 
 But we are not to suppose that the reading of the Bible in the schools 
 was now unchallenged. In 1854 a bill was introduced in the legislature 
 for the daily reading of the Bible in the common schools of the state. 
 In the remarks of Hon. Joseph W. Savage, of New York City, in favor 
 of the bill (pamphlet in Astor Library, New York City), it is alleged that 
 "we have heretofore, legislated in some measure to please at least one 
 sect. We have permitted what any other nation in the world that 
 recognizes the Christian religion, would never have allowed. We have 
 suffered the Bible to be banished from many of our State Schools, have 
 
READING OF THE BIBLE IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS 85 
 
 shut out from the children of those schools, the very book that all 
 denominations of Christians make the foundation of their faith, and 
 strange as it may seem, out of tenderness toward the consciences of a 
 Christian sect." 
 
 In discussing this matter further, Mr. Savage continues: "We first 
 excluded the New England catechism, this was yielded as soon as it was 
 objected to because it was sectarian, and inculcated a particular creed. 
 We then excluded all books in which there was any religious discussion. 
 This was yielded for the same reason. We then excluded all books that 
 spoke harshly of the Roman Catholic creed. Though this is a protestant 
 
 country, we yielded that too But we have done more than this, 
 
 we have banished from some of our schools, some of the choicest English 
 literature because it was offensive to the Roman Catholic taste. We 
 have excluded impartial history because it spoke of the despotism of the 
 Roman Church. We have mutilated books, and have blotted clearly 
 authenticated facts, for fear of offending the conscience of this denomina- 
 tion or of exciting prejudice against the career of that Church in times 
 long past. In this we have committed a grievous error." 
 
 The bill however failed of passage, as no record of it is found in the 
 laws of the state. It was merely an episode in the long- continued con- 
 troversy about reading the Bible in the schools, and is referred to here 
 merely as evidence that the question was still alive in 1854. 
 
 An echo of this controversy comes to our ears again in 1858. In that 
 year a pamphlet written by a "New-Yorker" was circulated through the 
 city. It attempts to give a review of the school legislation of the state, 
 and charges that the legislature had been hoodwinked by the Romanists, 
 so as to pass educational legislation in their favor. It charges also that 
 the Board of Education was under the control of the Catholics of the 
 city, and that consequently the Bible was being put out of the schools. 
 It is stated that by recent resolution of the officers of the Fourth Ward, 
 embracing a district of forty thousand inhabitants, four school buildings, 
 and fifty-four teachers, the Bible had been voted out of the schools of this 
 section. It is the opinion of the writer of this pamphlet that the Board 
 of Education had authority to enforce the reading of the Bible in the 
 schools, and that the action of the ward officers was illegal. 
 
 The responsibility of this situation is laid upon the Romanists, and 
 the voters of the city are called upon to change the personnel of the 
 Board of Education. It is alleged that the Romanists have made the 
 matter a party question, in order to keep themselves in power. A 
 member of the Board, who was asked by the writer why he had voted 
 
' 86 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 against the Bible, replied: "I am not opposed to the reading of the 
 Bible in the schools — only I had no time to see how my party stood on 
 the question." 
 
 This writer, while reflecting an unsettled situation in regard to 
 reading the Bible in the public schools, is, after all, extreme in his view. 
 The Romanists were against the Bible in the schools, but they were not 
 alone in this contention. The "New-Yorker" has not come up to the 
 full measure of the principle of religious liberty. He does not seem to 
 have sufficient regard for the rights and privileges of his Roman Catholic 
 fellow-citizens {The Legislature Hood-winked by the Romanists, Astor 
 Library). 
 
 This then seems to be the status of Bible-reading in the public schools 
 of New York. For the state at large there is no legal enactment. And 
 the special provision for the City of New York, to say the least, is con- 
 siderably elastic in its nature. It confers upon the Board of Education 
 no authority to introduce the Bible into the schools, but simply denies it 
 the right of excluding the Bible and of determining the kind of version 
 used. There were those at the time who contended that the law in 
 question did empower the Board of Education to put the Bible in the 
 schools, but the measure itself is plain, and such an interpretation 
 can have no other source than the bias of partisan feeling. The real 
 law on the subject seems to be public opinion. Whether or not the 
 policy be sound, the legislature of the state has left the matter of reading 
 the Bible in the public schools to the arbitrament of the people, and has 
 conferred upon the State Superintendent only the right of an appellate 
 jurisdiction. The inhabitants of the various districts, according to the 
 conception of the law, were to be the governors of the common schools, 
 and up to 1844, when the provision relative to the Bible was passed, 
 there seems to have been no other thought than that the majority should 
 rule (see Randall, p. 205). It remains now to follow in some measure 
 the development of public opinion and to set forth the bearings upon the 
 subject in question of the appellate jurisdiction of the State Superin- 
 tendent of Public Instruction. 
 
 As a matter of fact opinion on the subject of reading the Bible in 
 the schools has been divided since the beginning of the controversy in 
 1842. The best we can do therefore is to represent both sides of this 
 opinion, with some intimation as to which side has grown in popular 
 favor. The opinion which advocates the reading of the Bible in the 
 schools is well represented by George B. Cheever, D.D. His argument 
 was presented to the public, in 1854, in a book of three hundred pages 
 
READING OF THE BIBLE IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS 87 
 
 {Right of the Bible in Our Public Schools) . Cheever was born in Hallowell, 
 Maine, 1807. He was graduated from Bowdoin College in 1825, and 
 from Andover Seminary, 1830. In 1839 he became pastor in New York 
 City, where he remained a resident until his retirement in 1870. He was 
 distinguished for his vigorous application of orthodox principles to ques- 
 tions of practical interest (Appleton's Cyclopaedia of American Biogra- 
 phy). The opinion of Mr. Cheever is of peculiar significance here, 
 because of his residence in New York City during the very years the 
 controversy was so hot. He maintains that the Bible is being banished 
 from the schools out of deference to the Roman Catholic conscience, and 
 that this procedure means legislation against all other sects who reverence 
 the word of God and desire its use in the system of common-school 
 education. Such a prospect he considers altogether displeasing, and 
 takes up his pen in opposition to the movement. His argument, as 
 relates to the Bible, is condensed in a brief paragraph of the Introduction, 
 which reads as follows: 
 
 "We propose to show that such a course [exclusion of the Bible from 
 the schools] would be contrary to Divine law, and to all just and equal 
 human law; contrary to the obligations of benevolence; contrary to the 
 rights, and injurious to the welfare of the whole country; contrary to the 
 principles of civil and religious freedom; contrary to long settled Chris- 
 tian precedent and custom, and to the expressed will, wishes, and 
 judgment of the Christian community; contrary to our best local 
 statutes; contrary to the decisions of the wisest statesmen, the most 
 illustrious patriots, and the most learned jurists of our land; and contrary 
 to the history and fundamental principles and provisions of our free 
 school system, as established by the State and supported by the people" 
 
 (p. x). 
 
 The contrary opinion is well represented in A Secular View of Religion 
 in the State, by E. P. Hurlbut (Albany, N.Y.: Joel Munsell, 53 pp., 
 1870), and Religion and the State, by S. T. Spear, D.D. (New York: 
 Dodd, Mead & Co., 393 pp., 1876). The former writer was an ex- judge 
 of the Supreme Court of the State of New York. His opinion therefore 
 is worthy of that respect which is due to the voice of authority. Not 
 that Mr. Hurlbut's opinion is necessarily free from all objection, but 
 simply that he speaks on the subject with the knowledge of a legal expert. 
 He lays the foundation of his argument in the conception of the state. 
 His view will be found in the following paragraphs: 
 
 "There exist but two pure, original sources of governmental author- 
 ity: one professedly derived from the Supreme Divine Power, and 
 
88 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 exercised by divine right, which is theocracy; while the other is earthly 
 and human, deriving all authority from the people, and is based on their 
 consent; which is democracy. In the former the ruler is vicegerent of 
 Heaven; while in the latter he is the mere servant of the people. The 
 one is a minister of the Divine Will; while the other only executes the 
 will of the people. The right divine is, of course, a mere assumption; 
 but this assumption, believed and acquiesced in by a nation, becomes a 
 
 reality, and, in general, a dreadful one In a theocracy, the state 
 
 is little or nothing — the church everything; or in other words, the church 
 is the state; while in a democracy the state is everything, and the church 
 is nothing, so far as law, or legal recognition is concerned. The church 
 exists as the offspring of public sentiment, without giving law, or law 
 given to it" (pp. 6, 7). 
 
 Again Mr. Hurlbut says: "Now in matters of state there cannot 
 exist a more perfect contradiction than arises between the theories, on 
 the one hand, that the church is everything and the state nothing, or 
 only its mere instrument; and on the other, the state is everything and 
 the church nothing, except a mere volunteer, to aid lawful authority by 
 its moral and religious influence. A free and spontaneous religion may 
 help to support the state, by the moral strength which it may confer on 
 the citizen who is a pillar of the state; but the least drop of religion 
 legally allied to the state, like the water in Father Tom's punch, spoils 
 the state" (p. 7). 
 
 It is pointed out in the next place that the American government is a 
 constitutional, democratic republic, founded purely on popular consent, 
 and recognizing no source of power but the people. It acknowledges no 
 spiritual power on earth and confines its ministrations to man's temporal 
 relations. Its citizens as such are obligated only to be faithful to the 
 state and just to one another. In religion they are left free to form their 
 own opinions — it is a secret between them and their God. "All religious 
 sects are equal and equally disregarded by the law. The citizen is not 
 known as a religionist, but only as a man" (p. 8). 
 
 Applying this theory of the state to the reading of the Bible in the 
 public schools, Mr. Hurlbut contends that the law of 1844, had it been 
 perfectly consistent, would have excluded the Bible as a sectarian book. 
 That it is a book calculated to arouse prejudice and strife is not a matter 
 of speculation, but a matter of history. Already thousands have been 
 offended and the path of progress strewn with the obstructions of fruit- 
 less controversy. Mr. Hurlbut sets forth his fundamental objection as 
 follows : " The philosophical democrat objects to its introduction, because 
 
READING OF THE BIBLE IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS 89 
 
 he would avoid the religious element in all matters of state concern, never 
 forgetting, whatever his religious creed may be, that he is a member of 
 a democratic, and not of a theocratic state. Whatever he may have 
 personally, his state has no God, no Bible, no church, no religion. He 
 sees at once the incongruity of the religious element in a state school, 
 and would utterly exclude it. Certain men of science object against the 
 Bible, that it conveys false notions of astronomy, and of the earth's 
 geological history; and it is enough that they honestly so object, to make 
 its use in the schools injurious, how ingeniously soever they may be 
 answered by the clergy. Some men of culture and of elevated taste, do 
 not perceive the great sublimity and beauty even in the poetry of the 
 Bible, that is vaunted by its admirers; and although they might tolerate 
 the book of Job, would by no means agree that the master of a school 
 should read Solomon's song, or the fourth chapter of Ezekiel, to their 
 sons and daughters. It is enough to make a quarrel that they so object, 
 and a quarrel kills the school" (p. 37). 
 
 The paragraph above is supplemented by the statement that there 
 can be no peace among the sects with the Bible in the schools. The 
 Jewish parent objects to the reading of the New Testament. The 
 Catholic objects to what he calls the Protestant version. And this is to 
 say nothing of the friends of the " positive philosophy," the advocates of 
 a progressive theory of creation, and the disciples of Darwin who, 
 because they have no religion, may be considered to have no rights, 
 and may thus be taxed to support schools in which doctrines are taught 
 antagonistic to their beliefs (pp. 38-39). 
 
 We shall now proceed to state the opinion of Rev. S. T. Spear, D.D. 
 (Religion and the State). His book is a thorough and masterly treatment 
 of the subject. It conveys the impression that the author has met the 
 issue fairly and answered the main questions involved with perfect 
 candor and ample learning. There seem to be no distortion of facts and 
 no juggling with words. And the opinion of Dr. Spear is all the more 
 interesting and appropriate to our subject, inasmuch as he was a pastor 
 in Brooklyn, New York, and lived in the midst of the controversy which 
 he discusses in his book. His view of the functions of civil government, 
 as related to religion, may be illustrated by the following: "Those who 
 drew the plan of our National Government built the system upon the 
 principle that religion and civil government were to be kept entirely 
 distinct; and, for the most part, all the State governments are con- 
 structed upon the same theory. The general character of both is that 
 they neither affirm nor deny any doctrine in respect to God and that they 
 
90 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 command no duty as a religious duty. They deal with the temporal 
 rights and obligations of citizenship, without any reference to the ques- 
 tion whether the citizen is a religionist or not. His religious faith is no 
 part of his citizenship and no criterion of his rights. It confers upon 
 him no immunities and imposes no disabilities He is not for- 
 bidden to be an atheist and not commanded to be a Christian. He 
 forfeits no rights by being the one and gains none by being the other; 
 and as between these two extremes of opinion, the State does not under- 
 take to decide which is the true and which is the false opinion. Such is 
 the great American principle in respect to the sphere of civil govern- 
 ment. This principle, being the exact antipodes of State theology 
 admits of no reconciliation with it" (p. 117). 
 
 How the introduction of the Bible into the schools violates the 
 "great American principle" is suggested in the following summary: 
 "The result then that we reach from this analysis of the question is 
 simply this: — that, by using the Bible in the public schools, unless the 
 use be merely that of a reading-book, an American State, founded on 
 the principle of the strictest impartiality towards all religious sects and 
 of making no discrimination between them, undertakes to create and 
 does create a religious establishment in these schools at the public 
 expense, and after the Christian model, either Protestant or Catholic 
 in its specific type, and to this end affirmatively determines all the 
 questions and institutes all the agencies necessary to make it a fact. 
 This, in plain English, is just what the proposition means, and what 
 those demand who advocate it. The public school is what it is 
 by State authority; and so far as religion is there, whether as a 
 matter of instruction, or worship, or both, it is there by this authority, 
 and there established by being included in a State school system" 
 (p. 86). 
 
 Space will be taken for one more extract, with which we shall con- 
 clude the opinion of Dr. Spear: "The public school," he says, "is not a 
 Church, or a synagogue, or a theological seminary; but a piece of State 
 machinery, organized and supported for purely temporal ends — as really 
 as a court of justice, a constitutional convention, or a legislative body. 
 Its function is not to make or unmake Christians, or predispose children 
 to this or that form of religious faith. It does not propose a complete 
 education; and does not propose a religious education at all, either 
 partial or complete. It proposes to do a certain thing, on the ground of 
 its necessity and utility to the State, and to stop there, by not entering 
 that field which lies beyond the purview of civil government. In short, 
 
READING OF THE BIBLE IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS 91 
 
 it proposes a secular education, and that only — an education that would 
 be needful and useful in this life, if there were no God and no future for 
 the human soul" (p. 52). 
 
 The extracts given above from Hurlbut and Spear are in full accord. 
 In their opinion the state is wholly secular, created only for the temporal 
 interests of man, and should in no sense undertake the task of religious 
 instruction. Complete separation of church and state leaves no place 
 for the religious use of the Bible in the public schools. 
 
 It remains now to note what contribution the decisions of state 
 superintendents have made to the legal status of the Bible in the schools. 
 In 1871 (Laws of New York, 1871, chap. 461) by act of legislature, there 
 was created a Board of Education for Long Island City, to have the 
 general control and local supervision of the public schools of that munici- 
 pality. That body proceeded to pass the following provision: "The 
 daily opening exercises shall consist of the reading of a portion of the 
 Holy Scriptures, without note or comment." Whereupon a threefold 
 appeal was addressed to the State Superintendent of Public Instruction, 
 Abram B. Weaver. The appellants were the Board of Trustees of the 
 First Ward of Long Island City, and two private citizens of that city. 
 The ground of appeal on the part of the board of trustees was that the 
 enforcement of the provision in question compelled the pupils to be 
 present at the reading of the Bible in the school, under penalty of expul- 
 sion in case of non-attendance at such reading, and that the regulation 
 had been directed to be enforced against the protest of the trustees, 
 many of the pupils, and their parents and guardians. In the case of the 
 two private individuals, the appeal was grounded on the fact that their 
 children had been expelled from school for refusing, in obedience to their 
 parents, to attend when the Bible was being read. 
 
 In handing down his opinion, Superintendent Weaver takes occasion 
 to say that the question involved in the appeals before him is not new in 
 the school history of the state. Trustees had often claimed the right to 
 enforce the attendance of pupils upon religious exercises in the schools 
 over which they had charge, but that his predecessors in office, as well as 
 himself, had uniformly held that no such right legally existed. Here he 
 cites the decision of Superintendent Spencer in 1839, and of Superin- 
 tendent Rice in 1866, and then proceeds to pass judgment on the case 
 before him, as follows: 
 
 "The action of the Board of Education of Long Island City, in 
 directing the reading of a portion of the Bible as an opening exercise in 
 the schools under their charge, during school hours, and in excluding 
 
92 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 pupils from those schools, or any of them, on the ground of declining to 
 be present at the reading, has been without warrant of law. 
 
 "All persons, otherwise entitled to attend any of the schools of Long 
 Island City, and who have been and are excluded therefrom for refusal 
 to be present at the reading of the Bible therein, have had the right to 
 be admitted to such schools upon the same footing as other pupils right- 
 fully attending them; and it is, therefore, the duty of the said Board of 
 Education to see that the right of all such persons, in that respect, is 
 accorded to them" (circular on Bible Reading and Religious Exercises in 
 the Public Schools, issued by Commissioner of Education, A. S. Draper, 
 February i, 1906). 
 
 This decision was handed down, June 5, 1872. Twelve years later, 
 application was made to State Superintendent, W. B. Ruggles, for 
 advice in regard to religious exercises in the schools of Orangetown, 
 Rockland County. The application was from the Board of Education 
 of Union Free School District Number Four, and represents that they 
 "wish to move unerringly, but firmly, in the matter of sustaining the 
 reading of Scripture and prayer as a part of the exercises in opening the 
 daily sessions of our public school"; that they have "not required the 
 children of non-Protestant families to participate in repeating Scripture 
 or the Lord's prayer, but have simply required them to behave with 
 decorum." It is further stated that a number of Catholic families "ask 
 that their children be allowed to remain outside until the devotional 
 exercises are concluded," and that "this interference causes much dis- 
 order outside of the room, and the subsequent entrance of these pupils 
 causes a loss of time and disturbance to class work" (circular on Bible 
 Reading and Religious Exercises in the Public Schools). 
 
 In handing down his decision Superintendent Ruggles refers to the 
 constitutional provision of the state, guaranteeing to all mankind the 
 free exercises and enjoyment of religious profession and worship. He 
 then proceeds to call attention to the heterogeneous character of the 
 population in reference to religious belief and the manifest impossibility 
 of arranging a course of religious instruction for the schools acceptable 
 to all sects. In view of this situation, he says: "The only alternative, 
 therefore, to preserve the benefits of the constitutional guarantees, in 
 letter and spirit, and to secure to all absolute equality of right in matter 
 of religious predilection, must be, however reluctantly the conclusion is 
 arrived at, to exclude religious instruction and exercises from the public 
 schools during school hours" (ibid.). 
 
READING OF THE BIBLE IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS 93 
 
 He now refers to decisions of his predecessors in office. Hon. John 
 A. Dix, 1838, is quoted as follows: "I have heretofore decided that a 
 teacher might open his school with prayer, provided he did not encroach 
 upon the hours allotted to instruction; and provided that the attendance 
 of the scholars was not exacted as a matter of school discipline" (ibid.). 
 
 Superintendent John C. Spencer, 1839, having occasion to pass upon 
 the question, made the following pronouncement: "Prayers cannot form 
 any part of the school exercises or be regulated by the school discipline. 
 If had at all they should be had before the hour of 9 o'clock, the usual 
 hour of commencing school in the morning, and after 5 in the afternoon" 
 
 (ibid.). 
 
 Superintendent Ruggles now continues his statement: "The prin- 
 ciples laid down in these early decisions have been followed by every one 
 of my predecessors in office, no distinction having been made between 
 Scripture reading and prayers, but each having been held, in separate 
 and distinct appeals, to constitute no legitimate part of the business of 
 the public schools. They will be my guide and govern my action in all 
 cases of like nature which may come officially before me" (circular on 
 Bible Reading and Religious Exercises in the Public Schools). 
 
 This decision was given on May 27, 1884. It was indorsed in 1906, 
 as well as all similar decisions prior to that date, by Commissioner of 
 Education, A. S. Draper, and set forth as the settled policy of the 
 Department of Education, in all matters pertaining to reading the Bible 
 in the schools. 
 
 In regard to the authority attaching to the decisions of the State 
 Superintendent, and the means of their enforcement, our information 
 comes from Mr. Frank B. Gilbert, Chief of Law Division of the New 
 York State Education Department. In a personal letter, December 7, 
 1910, Mr. Gilbert writes as follows: "The Commissioner of Education 
 in this state exercises jurisdiction in respect to appeals brought to him by 
 aggrieved parties from the action of the boards of education or trustees 
 in the several school districts of the state. When a decision is made by 
 him upon such an appeal it is conclusive. If in a particular case he 
 decides that a board is wrong in requiring the compulsory attendance of 
 pupils upon religious exercises which are established as a part of the 
 school curriculum, his order is binding and may be enforced against such 
 board by removal for failure to comply therewith or by withholding the 
 public money from the district." 
 
 There have been no court decisions in the State of New York for the 
 reason, it seems, that all appeals have been addressed to the State 
 
94 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 Superintendent of Public Instruction. The decision of this department 
 then must represent the legal status of Bible reading in the public 
 schools, and they have been, as we have seen, uniformly against the use 
 of the Bible, in these institutions, during school hours. The reading of 
 the Scriptures, we are told, can "constitute no legitimate part of the 
 business of the public schools." We conclude then that from the point 
 of view of the principle of religious liberty, so ably represented by 
 Hurlbut and Spear, and from the point of view of the decisions of the 
 state superintendents, the Bible as a religious book is an outlaw in the 
 public schools of the State and City of New York. 
 
CHAPTER X 
 THE PHILOSOPHIC ASPECTS OF THE QUESTION 
 
 Recalling the argument thus far, it will be remembered that for 
 about two hundred years after the settlement of New York what may be 
 called common-school education was very largely religious, both in its 
 ideals and in the materials employed. It was a conception brought to 
 this country by the Dutch and the English, and is probably to be traced 
 back to the fundamental principle of the Protestant Reformation. The 
 priesthood of all believers called for the education of the masses. The 
 individual must learn to read that he might be able to enter the temple 
 of truth which was represented by the Scriptures, and there, without 
 temporal or earthly mediary, worship at the altar of his God. This 
 religious conception of education flourished in New York for about fifty 
 years after the Declaration of Independence. About this time, as we 
 have seen, the movement of exclusion began. In the controversy con- 
 nected with the Bethel Baptist Church, which was terminated in 1825, 
 the principle of religious liberty, as related to public education, was first 
 clearly enunciated. There were those now among the people who 
 apprehended that the school fund was purely of a civil character, and 
 that to divert any portion of it for purposes of religious instruction was 
 contrary to the spirit of our republican institutions. In 1842 this 
 principle was embodied into law. Henceforth in the City of New York 
 no school could participate in the public fund, in which religious sec- 
 tarianism should be inculcated or practiced. In the country districts, 
 as our study has shown, the matter still remained in the hands of the local 
 school authorities, but it is hard to doubt that the situation in the 
 metropolis must have exerted a potent influence throughout the state 
 at large. 
 
 From 1842 down to the present time, the subject of religious educa- 
 tion in the public schools has centered around the reading of the Bible. 
 Opinion on the question has been divided, but it is believed that the 
 principle of religious liberty has won an increasing number of adherents 
 and advocates, and that in consequence of this and other considerations 
 the number of those who oppose the religious use of the Bible in the 
 public schools has been constantly growing. The only law on the matter 
 applies to the City of New York, and is purely negative in its character. 
 
 95 
 
96 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 It merely denies to the Board of Education the right to exclude the 
 Bible from the schools. The real law on the subject is found in the 
 decisions of the state superintendents. These, as we have seen, have 
 uniformly declared that the Bible, as a religious book, has no place in 
 the schoolroom. To say that the Bible may be read in the schoolhouse 
 before or after school hours, as some superintendents have done, is 
 wholly aside from the question at issue. The school authorities have no 
 jurisdiction over those hours, and the fact that the reading of the Bible 
 occurs in the school building, rather than in some place outside, is purely 
 incidental. But the uniform decision of the state superintendents has 
 been that the religious use of the Bible constitutes no part of a common- 
 school education, and that such a use is therefore illegal. 
 
 In the meantime we have seen the character of common-school 
 education undergoing a process of change. The religious conception has 
 been abandoned, and in its place has come the notion of a purely secular 
 education. This, however, does not mean an irreligious or godless educa- 
 tion, but simply one that is free from direct religious instruction, and 
 especially from sectarianism. In the broad sense it may be even more 
 religious than it was in the days of the Primer and the Catechism. 
 
 Aside therefore from the law of 1842 precluding the inculcation and 
 practice of sectarian tenets, and the subsequent amendment of 1844 
 denying to the Board of Education the right to exclude the Bible from 
 the schools of the metropolis, we arrive at the following conclusion: 
 religious instruction and the reading of the Bible have been officially 
 excluded from the public schools of the State and City of New York. 
 If they still remain in some schools, as they do, it is a survival of the old 
 theory that this question is to be settled by the inhabitants and officers 
 of the various school districts. But whenever objection is raised to this 
 procedure, religious instruction, or Bible reading, comes under the 
 prohibition of the state Department of Education, and is henceforth 
 illegal. This exclusion of the Bible and religious instruction from the 
 public schools has come as a result of an ever stricter application of the 
 principle of religious liberty. The public school as an institution of civil 
 government can take no part in religious instruction, but must forever 
 be dedicated to the cause of common secular education. This has been 
 the verdict of history in the State of New York. 
 
 We shall now proceed to inquire, in a brief way, whether this verdict 
 is justifiable in the light of the prevalent conception of the American 
 state and the ideals of religious education. 
 
 Writers on political science make a very proper distinction between 
 
PHILOSOPHIC ASPECTS OF THE QUESTION Q7 
 
 the modern, and the ancient and mediaeval states. The ancient state 
 was comprehensive. It embraced the entire life of man in religion, law, 
 morals, art, culture, and science. There was no recognition of the 
 spiritual freedom of the individual and ministers of religion were public 
 officers. The Middle Ages recognized a dualism of church and state 
 and symbolized the functions of each respectively in the spiritual and 
 temporal swords. The mediaeval state was regulated by theological 
 principles, and its ruler was the vicegerent of God. The church, which 
 was symbolized by the spiritual sword, was considered to be higher than 
 the state, as the spirit is higher than the body. It took charge of the 
 education of the young, exercised authority over science, dominated 
 kings and princes, and exalted the clergy high above the laity. 
 
 The modern state has become conscious of limitations to its rights 
 and powers. It no longer claims control of religion, art, or science. 
 Religion is left to voluntary initiative, and the priesthood is wholly an 
 ecclesiastical office. Instead of being founded on theocratic conceptions, 
 it is founded by human means on human nature. Instead of being 
 regulated by theology, its principles are determined by the human 
 sciences of philosophy and history. It feels itself independent of the 
 church and makes no distinction between clergy and laity. It allows 
 and protects freedom of belief and abstains from all persecution of dis- 
 senters. It delivers science from ecclesiastical authority, and regards 
 the school as a civil institution, and leaves only religious education to 
 the care of the church. (This comparison is based on Bluntschli, Theory 
 of the State, Book I, chap, vi.) 
 
 The relation of religion to the state is, in a general way, defined by 
 Bluntschli, as follows: "The modern idea of the State is not religious, 
 but not therefore irreligious, i.e., it does not make the State depend upon 
 religious belief, but it does not deny that God has made human nature, 
 and that His providence has a part in the government of the world. 
 Modern political science does not profess to comprehend the ways of 
 God, but endeavors to understand the State as a human institution. All 
 theocracy is repellent to the political consciousness of modern nations. 
 The modern State is a human constitutional arrangement. The author- 
 ity of the State is conditioned by public law, and its politics aim at the 
 welfare of the nation (the commonweal), understood by human reason, 
 and carried out by human means" {op. cit., p. 61). 
 
 It seems therefore, according to Bluntschli, that there is to be no 
 union between religion and the modern state. And whatever may be 
 true of European countries, this view finds ample illustration in American 
 
98 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 politics. Here in theory and almost wholly in practice church and state 
 are in separation. This of course has not always been the case. Colonial 
 legislation exhibited many features of discrimination against various 
 religious beliefs and professions. It was the multiplication of sects, the 
 devotion to a common cause, on the part of all the people, during the 
 perilous years of the Revolutionary War, and the general liberal thought 
 of the times that brought forth on this American continent the principle 
 of religious liberty in such perfection that we have not only religious 
 toleration but religious equality. A writer of great ability thus speaks 
 of the development of the secular state: "It has come out of the slowly 
 accumulating experiences of mankind, as the political spirit has care- 
 fully and laboriously gone forward in its earnest quest for a government 
 that at the same time shall be best for the individual and for society, 
 that shall give the Church the largest possibilities and the State the 
 greatest political efficiency. The Secular State is, too, the creation of 
 religious men, who have persevered in their course with noble heroism in 
 the face of persecutions, and who have worked with large views of 
 humanity and in obedience to the manifest teachings of history to fash- 
 ion a government where politics shall be free from religious hatreds, and 
 where the Church shall be free from the despotisms and corruptions of 
 politics. We may lament, we may denounce; but the Secular State is 
 the expression and the outcome of a resistless tendency which will crush 
 any man or institution that stands in its way and attempts to impede 
 its progress" (Crooker, Problems in American Society, p. 211). 
 
 The constitution of this country, which, according to its own words, 
 emanates from "the people of the United States," declares itself to be 
 "the supreme law of the land." All the powers conferred and all the 
 limitations imposed by this document rest upon the sovereign authority 
 of the people. Its purpose, as stated in the preamble, was "to form a 
 more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquillity, pro- 
 vide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure 
 the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity." It is therefore 
 a human constitution, devoid of theocratic taint and having in view only 
 the temporal welfare of the people. Religion is wholly excluded from 
 its scope. On this point there can be no question. The words of the 
 constitution are decisive: "But no religious test shall ever be required 
 as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States" 
 (Art. VI, sec. 3). And this declaration is supplemented by the first 
 amendment: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment 
 of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." What Spear says is 
 
PHILOSOPHIC ASPECTS OF THE QUESTION 99 
 
 therefore true: "The whole subject of religion is totally withdrawn from 
 the jurisdiction of the General Government, not only by not being 
 included in its powers, but by being expressly excluded therefrom" 
 (Religion and the State, p. 210). 
 
 Turning now to the constitutions of the various states of the Union, 
 instead of discussing them separately in their different provisions relating 
 to the profession and practice of religion, we shall quote at length from 
 a learned jurist of our country. Thomas M. Cooley, formerly judge of 
 the Supreme Court of Michigan, gives the following summary: "He 
 who shall examine with care the American constitutions will find nothing 
 more fully stated or more plainly expressed than the desire of their 
 authors to preserve and perpetuate religious liberty, and to guard against 
 the slightest approach towards the establishment of inequality in the 
 civil or political rights of citizens, based upon differences of religious 
 belief. The American people came to the work of framing their funda- 
 mental laws after centuries of religious oppression and persecution, 
 sometimes by one party or sect and sometimes by another, had taught 
 them the utter futility of all attempts to propagate religious opinions by 
 rewards, penalties, or terrors of human laws. They could not fail to 
 perceive, also, that a union of Church and State, like that which existed 
 in England, if not wholly impracticable in America, was certainly opposed 
 to the spirit of our institutions, and that any domineering of one sect 
 over another was repressing to the energies of the people, and must 
 necessarily tend to discontent and disorder. Whatever, therefore, may 
 have been their individual sentiments upon religious questions, or upon 
 the propriety of the State assuming supervision and control of religious 
 affairs under other circumstances, the general voice has been, that per- 
 sons of every religious persuasion should be made equal before the law, 
 and that questions of religious belief and religious worship should be 
 questions between each individual man and his Maker, of which human 
 tribunals are not to take cognizance, so long as the public order is not 
 disturbed, except as the individual, by his voluntary action in associating 
 himself with a religious organization, may have conferred upon such 
 organization a jurisdiction over him in ecclesiastical matters" (Con- 
 stitutional Limitations, 2d ed., p. 512). 
 
 Nothing therefore is more evident than that in America the principle 
 of religious liberty is fully established. It is recognized in the state and 
 national constitutions, and is therefore part of the fundamental law of 
 the land. It is then not to be doubted that in this country church and 
 state are separate and distinct. But religious instruction and Bible 
 
IOO RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 reading in the public schools is a palpable violation of this principle. 
 The rights of conscience in respect to religion are constitutionally guar- 
 anteed to American citizens. And for the state to undertake to do in 
 the schoolroom what it repudiates in the church is to be guilty of a gross 
 inconsistency. The exclusion of religious instruction from the public 
 schools is the inevitable logic of that full religious liberty which the 
 American state guarantees to its citizens. 
 
 Of course it may be a question whether the principle of religious 
 liberty is a final solution of the relation of church and state. It were 
 mere presumption to say that it is. What new light may come with the 
 unfolding years, and what new and unforeseen situations may demand 
 are all beyond the ken of human vision. We only know there is nothing 
 in present conditions to justify the prophet of the future to speak of a 
 certain day to come when religious liberty will be no more. 
 
 It is also a question whether the religious education of the children is 
 not a matter of such great importance as to override the considerations of 
 religious liberty. As a mere abstraction, of course, religious liberty is 
 not to be contended for. But when we consider the practical worth of 
 freedom of conscience in the lives of the people, and when we consider 
 also that the religious education of the children may be accomplished by 
 other means than the public schools, we shall not lightly set aside that 
 liberty of conscience which has so slowly come to light through the lapse 
 of the ages and which has cost such infinite toil and suffering. Indeed, 
 as Professor Woolsey affirms, no other plan than the complete separation 
 of church and state is possible in the states of America, "as long as all 
 confessions are equal before the law, as long as freedom to found churches 
 is open to all, and as long as the conception exists that a church is a 
 spiritual body, acting on the state only by the moral and religious forces 
 of individual persons" (Political Science, II, 467). Then, too, we have 
 to remember that history is replete with evils resulting from the union 
 of church and state. How else shall we explain the wars against the 
 Albigenses and the Hussites, the Thirty Years' War, and the English 
 Rebellion? This unholy union has forced unwilling compliance with 
 ceremony and ritual, punished with death those who opposed the state 
 church, refused Dissenters a seat in parliament, and denied them the 
 right to take degrees in the universities. It has intensified religious 
 hatred among the people and poured contempt upon all classes of Non- 
 conformists. It has worked injury to the religious establishment itself, 
 weakening the motives for religious activity, taking away the inde- 
 
PHILOSOPHIC ASPECTS OP THE QUESTION IOI 
 
 pendence of the clergy, and making religious livings the gift of the state. 
 It has exiled loyal citizens from their native land, has fostered hypocrisy 
 by inducing men to sign articles of faith in which they did not believe, 
 has given rise to the inquisition, and filled the earth with persecutions 
 and bloody murder (see Woolsey, Political Science, II, 500). Surely men 
 have a right to stand in dread of a policy which has wrought such vast 
 iniquity in the world. Nor can there be surprise at the widespread 
 feeling that it were better to bear the ills we have in the exclusion of 
 religious instruction from the schools, than to fly to others which have 
 been intolerably worse in the past and which promise nothing better for 
 the future. 
 
 Alongside this view of the state we may very properly place the 
 Catholic conception of education. Here so far as possible we shall let 
 Catholic writers speak in their own words. Rev. Thomas S. Preston, 
 writing in the Forum of 1886 (I, 161-71) under the title of "What the 
 Catholics Want," thus defines the view of that religious body: "With us 
 Catholics the question of education is a part of our religious duty. Our 
 faith commands us to instruct our children in accordance with the prin- 
 ciples of our creed. We are bound in conscience to do so; and if we are 
 restrained from doing so, we possess not the freedom to practice our 
 religion. If there were a law forbidding us to do so, we could not obey 
 that law, since our consciences would demand that 'we should obey God 
 rather than man.' " 
 
 He now proceeds to enumerate the various factors involved in 
 Catholic education, and we are told that: 
 
 1. Responsibility of education falls upon the parents. They may 
 use the aids Providence has given them, and must obey the spiritual 
 pastors whom God has set over them. The state has no right to inter- 
 fere here. 
 
 "2. We hold also that religion cannot be divorced from education. 
 .... In the instruction of children we believe that it is our duty to 
 teach them the truths of our faith while we open their minds to the light 
 of natural science. It is our conscientious conviction that the elimina- 
 tion of religion from a course of education is really to inculcate atheism, 
 and to seek to banish God, who is the fountain of all light, from the young 
 heart and mind. Religion in education cannot be simply let alone as 
 an unknown quantity. It must either be ignored, or fully taught, or 
 partially taught." In the opinion of Mr. Preston, it should be fully 
 taught, as one must believe that his creed is all true and in no part 
 superfluous. 
 
102 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 3. They believe also that morality, in the common acceptance of the 
 term, is so bound up with religion that no moral principles can be 
 taught without it. 
 
 He now proceeds to ask for the mode of accomplishing this end, and 
 finds the answer thus: unite religious training with the education of 
 the young. But the heterogeneous character of religious belief in this 
 country precludes any common basis of instruction. This requires the 
 exclusion of religious teaching from the schools. And there is, he 
 thinks, no way by which this radical defect can be made up. The Sunday 
 school is inadequate. The daily school is the only place that will satisfy 
 the demands of religious education, but this institution has been secular- 
 ized. So he continues: 
 
 "There remains then only one way by which the principles we hold 
 sacred can be subserved, and the freedom to practice our religion granted 
 to us. This is the establishment of denominational schools, in which 
 from early childhood the truths of revelation and of the Divine law may 
 be impressed upon the growing powers of the young mind. These 
 powers will grow for good or for evil, for truth or for error. In this way 
 every religious denomination would be able to provide for its own 
 children, and to preserve what it professes to hold dear. And we will 
 say that every denomination must do this, or be instrumental in its 
 own destruction by the neglect of the most ordinary means of 
 self-preservation. 
 
 "The public schools are godless. We say this with no intention of 
 speaking ill of them, nor of ignoring their real merits. All their merits 
 we appreciate. But they are, and must be godless, as neither the 
 existence of God nor His revelation to man can be taught in them. 
 They have only one end in view, and can have no other. This is the 
 direction of the mind and all the impulses of the heart to the needs of 
 time at the expense of eternity." 
 
 To be taxed for the support of schools not according to their con- 
 science is regarded as a species of persecution. It is not just, he thinks, 
 for Catholics to be taxed for the support of public schools when they 
 cannot for conscience' sake send their children and when they are 
 obliged to pay out heavy sums for the maintenance of parochial 
 schools. This of course is nothing short of a plea to be relieved 
 of the school tax. 
 
 The Catholic view of education is further illustrated by two extracts 
 taken from journals of that denomination, published in the city of 
 New York: 
 
PHILOSOPHIC ASPECTS OF THE QUESTION 103 
 
 "We have no wish to see the common school system, that is, a system 
 of public schools for all the children in the land at the public expense, 
 broken up, and are quite willing to do our part towards sustaining it. 
 We see no radical objections to its remaining with all its present machin- 
 ery, provided that the schools for the children of Catholics be separated 
 from the schools for Protestants or non-Catholics. Appropriate to the 
 support of Catholic schools the proportion of the public money according 
 to the number of children they educate, and leave the selection of 
 teachers, the studies, the discipline, the whole internal management, to 
 the Catholic educational authorities, and you may, in all other respects, 
 in all prudential matters, let them remain, as now, under public control 
 and management, and public boards, regents, commissioners, and 
 trustees, if you will" (New York Tablet, November 27, 1869). 
 
 But this would be a parochial school at the expense of the state, and 
 only a public school in name. 
 
 The second organ referred to above declares itself as follows: "The 
 Catholic solution of this muddle about Bible or no Bible in schools, is 
 'Hands off!' No State taxation or donation for any schools. You look 
 to your children, and we will look to ours. We don't want you to be taxed 
 for Catholic schools. We do not want to be taxed for Protestant, or for 
 godless schools. Let the public-school system go to where it came 
 from — the devil. We want Christian schools, and the State cannot tell 
 us what Christianity is" {Freeman's Journal, December n, 1869). 
 
 The statements given above may very properly be supplemented 
 from a more recent writer. Walsh, in the American Catholic Quarterly 
 Review, January, 1904, in his article on "Religious Education in the Public 
 Schools of Massachusetts," takes occasion to set forth the Catholic con- 
 ception of education (XXIX, 93 ff., n 6-1 7 in particular). In assigning 
 the reason why Catholics have set up the parochial school, he says it is 
 neither disloyalty to the state idea nor because the secular education of 
 the common schools is insufficient. " But because in the common schools 
 the State authorities have refused to give or to allow the moral and 
 religious training that the parents of ... . children rightfully and 
 consistently demand. Because the education of the common school is 
 not a complete education, since it ignores the most important part of all 
 education, namely, of the soul. Because the idea of education in the 
 common schools does not harmonize with the unchanging and unchange- 
 able Christian idea of education. What is that idea ? The cultivation of 
 the child for life's destiny and life's work. The child. Not some paper 
 doll or waxen plastic model, nor indeed the beautifully imagined darling 
 
104 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 flower or ethereal sort of creature that we hear so much about in later 
 days, but the child of flesh and blood 
 
 "The child cannot be divided and separated into physical, intel- 
 lectual, moral and spiritual parts, except by a purely mental or meta- 
 physical process that has no corresponding reality, but everything that 
 happens to the child, from its first breath, is cultivating or educating the 
 child in all four aspects. One part cannot be given to the parent, another 
 to the street, and a third to the school, a fourth to the Church, but the 
 whole child is cultivated by each one of these agencies, and the least lack 
 of harmony between them in purpose or means has its effect upon the 
 whole child." 
 
 The object of education is described as follows: 
 
 "For life's destiny. Once admit the Divine creation and Divine 
 destiny the common non-religious school is bad, for as Ruskin once said: 
 'It does not tell the child whence it came, whither it is going and how to 
 get there.' The whole view of education, of the value of one or other 
 factor and method in education depends in a large measure upon one's 
 conception of life's destiny. For the Christian there can be but one, 
 expressed in those words of the Divine teacher: 'I am the way, the 
 truth, the life. I am the light of the world. You are the children of 
 your Father who is in heaven,' hence sons of God. For life's work. 
 Yes, the school must teach the child the dignity of work, cultivate, for 
 work, all the powers of senses, mind, will and soul." 
 
 Mr. Walsh closes his statement with the following summary: 
 
 "We plead for a school in which the atmosphere will be Christian; 
 we plead for a school in which the teacher will be Christian and not 
 neutralize, much less destroy, the influence of home and Church. We 
 plead for a school where the books will be Christian in tone, spirit and 
 substance; we plead for a school in which the Bible, as a book of revealed 
 religion and the inspired word of God to mankind, may be read with note 
 and comment and interest and instruction by one who believes in it 
 as such." 
 
 Without commenting in detail on the Catholic conception of educa- 
 tion just set forth, it is sufficient for our purpose to note that they 
 contend for a strictly religious education, and that religious education 
 from their point of view means Catholic education, instruction in the 
 tenets and practices of the Catholic church. If such were the character 
 of the public schools, Catholics would be the last to raise objection. 
 But this cannot be, hence Catholics have asked to be relieved from the 
 school tax, or to be allowed a proportionate share of the school fund. 
 
PHILOSOPHIC ASPECTS OP THE QUESTION 105 
 
 And certainly it is no transgression of the rules of charity to say that this 
 would be Catholic education at the expense of the public. But the 
 chief point in the Catholic contention is this: their war against the 
 public schools is in the last analysis a war against the character of the 
 American state. It is war against that theory of the state, which looks 
 upon its function as comprising only the temporal interests of man and 
 which leaves all matters of religious profession and worship to the 
 voluntary initiative of the people. A secular state, if true to its principle, 
 can have only a secular school. 
 
 It remains now to consider the question of religious instruction in 
 the schools from the point of view of the ideals of religious education. 
 Religious education is concerned primarily with the end to be accom- 
 plished, the means and agencies are altogether of secondary considera- 
 tion. It therefore does not unduly exalt either Bible reading or religious 
 instruction, but places the emphasis on the development of character. 
 In a general way, therefore, its ideals are comprised in the comprehensive 
 aim of making Christian manhood and Christian womanhood. In the 
 actual work of religious education it is necessary to distribute this aim 
 over the various periods of growth and to state specifically what is 
 wished to be done at each stage of development, but in every case the 
 ultimate object to be obtained looks forward to the maturity and fixity 
 of Christian character. It is now this broad aim of religious education 
 in the light of which we propose to sit in judgment on the purpose and 
 program of the public school. 
 
 At the very outset we are confronted by the charge that the public 
 school is irreligious and godless. From the point of view of religious 
 education this is a groundless accusation, even though there may be no 
 formal religious instruction and no reading of the Bible in these public 
 institutions. When we consider the large number of school teachers 
 who are active Christians, when we consider the high moral and religious 
 motives by which they are actuated and the invigorating school atmos- 
 phere created by their earnestness, it is impossible to believe that this 
 charge which comes from Catholic sources is anything but a "windy 
 suspiration of forced breath." The absence of formal religious instruc- 
 tion and the reading of the Bible no more makes the school godless than 
 the absence of these exercises from the bank, the factory, and the store 
 makes these institutions godless. An able writer hits off the situation 
 in the following graphic way: "A shoemaker is not 'godless' because he 
 refrains from pronouncing the benediction when he delivers a pair of 
 shoes to his customer. Enough that his leather is good, his thread strong, 
 
106 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 his work thorough, and his promises are punctually kept. The same 
 principles apply to a schoolmaster. As long as he does his proper work 
 of teaching aright the branches of knowledge committed to him, and his 
 intercourse with his pupils conforms to the spirit of Christian morals, 
 there is no taint of profaneness to be attached to him or to his function" 
 (Geo. P. Fisher, Forum, VII, 131). 
 
 It is gratifying to recall that, despite all the criticism derogatory of 
 the public school, no one has yet thought to object to the presence of 
 religion in these public institutions. The distinction is worth while. 
 Religion is a life. It expresses itself on the manward side in the moral 
 virtues. Now, however much we may withold our sanction from the 
 program of theological indoctrination, there can be no objection to the 
 exercise, in the schools, of love, sympathy, truthfulness, reverence, 
 courage, and all the higher virtues of life. If then religion abounds in 
 the schoolroom, we can afford, I think, to be reconciled to the inevitable 
 fact that the theological indoctrination must be given elsewhere. If 
 from the religious point of view there is to be any campaign for the 
 improvement of the school, let the emphasis be here: more religion in 
 the schools and not more religious instruction. In the meantime we can 
 take satisfaction in the fact that, so long as religion is found in the 
 schools, whoever charges them with being godless is guilty of mis- 
 representation. 
 
 In this connection some word should be said in defense of the view 
 that the Bible should not be used in the schools as a religious book. 
 There seems no escape from the conviction that the great majority of 
 those who advocate the use of the Bible in the schools have in mind its 
 religious value. They are contending for the Bible in the schools either 
 as a symbol of religion, or as a manual of religious instruction, or as a 
 book of religious worship. In this way they hope to create the spirit of 
 reverence and impart the knowledge of religion. All this is supposed to 
 be accomplished by the reading of ten or twenty verses a day, without 
 note or comment. The purpose indeed is praiseworthy, but the method 
 is inadequate. From the point of view of a thorough religious educa- 
 tion, it is impossible to believe that such a use of the Bible can be attended 
 with any great value. On the other hand it is easy to see how it may be 
 nothing more than a worthless form, leaving not a trace of good upon 
 the minds and hearts of the pupils. Religious education, which has in 
 view the end to be accomplished and not the means, cannot possibly 
 look with favor on any such procedure. And yet many of the advocates 
 of the Bible in the schools seem to feel that their whole work is accom- 
 
PHILOSOPHIC ASPECTS OP THE QUESTION 107 
 
 plished when once the sacred volume is introduced into these institutions. 
 The suspicion is aroused that, perhaps unconsciously to themselves, they 
 are looking upon the Bible as a kind of fetich, a book of magic power, 
 that they expect its mere presence in the school to work the miracle of 
 transformation. But surely they are leaning upon a broken reed. 
 There is no justification for what they expect. The Bible is invaluable 
 for religious education, but not such a use of it as they recommend. 
 Religious education raises the voice of protest. It refuses to be satisfied 
 with such a makeshift. It therefore has little to regret in the exclusion 
 of the Bible from the schools. It believes that the school has suffered 
 no loss and the Bible no injury nor insult. So long as religion abides in 
 the schoolroom, it is content to have its symbol removed. Regardless 
 of the means, it proposes to be satisfied with religious development, and 
 refuses to call any institution godless which succeeds in making even a 
 small contribution to such a gracious work. 
 
 We turn now to consider the question of what we have a right to 
 expect of the schools, from the point of view of religious education. 
 There must be no scoffing at religion, no ridicule of the church, no 
 depreciation of moral and spiritual values. In no jot or tittle must they 
 undermine the best influences of the home and the church. But it seems 
 needless almost to make this remark, since there is not the slightest 
 ground for believing that any such opposition exists, or is likely to exist. 
 
 We insist also that the aim of the public school shall be bigger than 
 the intellectual. In this thesis a certain prominence has been given to 
 the secular school, and properly so. But by such an institution we mean 
 only a school devoted to the ordinary branches of public instruction, and 
 in no sense a school dominated by materialistic ideals and purposes. A 
 division of labor in the work of education has its justification. The 
 public school has a right to recognize the limitations and restrictions 
 placed upon its program of instruction. We cannot rightfully expect of 
 this institution to give a complete education. But we do demand that 
 it be conscious of its relations to the home and the church. While it 
 may of right lay emphasis on the division of labor, it must not narrow its 
 ideal to the limited sphere of its immediate operation. It should no 
 more forget the agencies of religious education than these latter should 
 forget the public school. In a word, while it may rightfully have in 
 mind, a definite intellectual aim, it should hold in view the whole of life, 
 and should therefore allow itself to be inspired by the moral and religious 
 ideal, and should relate itself to all proper agencies for the cultivation of 
 the higher life. 
 
108 RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 There are also some who insist that the public school should give 
 instruction in what they call a common basis of religion. This being 
 free from sectarianism, as they think, should meet with the approval of 
 all. Aside from the question whether religious instruction reduced to its 
 lowest terms would be sectarian, it cannot be forgotten that such instruc- 
 tion is still religious and that, as such, it comes under the ban of the 
 principle of religious freedom. And, besides, such schemes are usually 
 nothing more than feeble attempts to teach morality. It is true they 
 insist that the existence of God should be inculcated, and this would be 
 religious instruction. But what is the use of teaching public-school 
 pupils the existence of God ? They do not question it, and all we need 
 to ask of the public school is that it shall give no occasion for denial of 
 this religious conviction, but rather take it for granted in its method of 
 instruction. (For such a scheme of religious education see Proceedings 
 of N.E.A., 1901.) The only value, in my opinion, of such schemes 
 of instruction is the emphasis they place on moral education. We 
 have, I think, a right to ask of the public schools that they seek first the 
 moral development of their pupils. 
 
 In this connection also it may be insisted that the public school 
 consider the claims of the Bible as a book of history and literature. 
 This of course is not a religious question, and religious considerations can 
 have no part in determining such a use of the Bible. It must be settled 
 very largely from the point of view of the possibilities of the school 
 curriculum in any given case. Yet we must believe that it is just as 
 desirable to teach the history Of the ancient Hebrews, as that of any other 
 ancient people, and that such a course of instruction would be just as 
 truly educative as a study of either the Greeks or the Romans. 
 
 And the value of the Bible as a book of literature is beyond question. 
 In its finest passages it is unsurpassed by the world's greatest masters. 
 Its literary range also is very wide, extending from the simple story to 
 the profound and complex drama. It is therefore easily adapted to the 
 interests and capacities of all grades. Such a use of the Bible will be free 
 from most of the objections raised against it in the past. It does not 
 involve exposition and interpretation, of which the different sects are so 
 much afraid. In the hands of a skilful teacher it does not infringe on 
 the prerogatives of religious liberty, inasmuch as the Bible as literature 
 does not mean religious instruction, nor touch upon the grounds of 
 religious belief. In short, the literary use of the Bible in the schools 
 calls for no religious interpretation and no explication of theological 
 difficulties. 
 
PHILOSOPHIC ASPECTS OF THE QUESTION IO9 
 
 De Quincey makes a distinction between the literature of knowledge 
 and the literature of power. In this connection he thus characterizes 
 Milton's Paradise Lost: "What you owe to Milton is not any knowledge 
 of which a million separate items are but a million advancing steps on 
 the same earthly level. What you owe is power; that is expansion and 
 exercise where every pulse and each separate influx is a step upwards — a 
 step ascending as upon Jacob's ladder from earth to mysterious altitudes" 
 (quoted by Prince, Educational Review, II, 357). These words of De 
 Quincey are pre-eminently true of the Bible. This book through the 
 centuries has been a means of elevation and expansion and power. From 
 this fountain the great writers of the ages have drunk, and through them, 
 like waters of life, it has flowed out through many diversified channels 
 and has thus been distributed in many parts of the earth. 
 
 Such a use of the Bible could not fail to be of great value to our 
 young people, especially those of high-school age. There is no danger 
 that the literary use of the Bible will lessen their appreciation of the 
 sacred volume. The effect should be opposite. As Professor Moulton 
 has said : " An increased apprehension of outer literary form is a sure way 
 of deepening spiritual effect." 
 
 In conclusion we will consider briefly the religious opportunity of the 
 public school and the contribution it is actually making to the higher life 
 of the pupils. And from this point of view even the ordinary studies, 
 such as reading, writing, grammar, etc., are not to be despised. They 
 open the gateway to knowledge; they make accessible the experiences 
 of the race, embodied in the great literatures of the world, and so make 
 possible the enlargement and enrichment of life. And besides, there is 
 an immediate interest and an immediate advantage to be gotten from 
 these studies if they be pursued with diligence. If it be objected that 
 this advantage lies only in the direction of moral development, the 
 sufficient answer will be that for this period of life, at least, moral con- 
 duct is religion in action. 
 
 But the religious possibilities of the higher branches of the public 
 school are beyond the region of dispute. Nature-study and elementary 
 science bring the pupil face to face with problems which may become a 
 moral inspiration and a religious incentive. The devout mind believes 
 that God touches men through the earth and sea and sky, and all the 
 forms of life. Such a study means a larger acquaintance with the realm 
 of nature, and, while it need not involve any direct religious instruction, 
 it should elevate mind and heart and fill the soul with the true and the 
 
IIO RELIGIOUS EDUCATION IN NEW YORK PUBLIC SCHOOLS 
 
 good. As one writer has said: "The study of nature, in her wonderful 
 and beautiful forms, is truly ethical." 
 
 Likewise history, biography, and literature easily lend themselves to 
 the cultivation of the higher life. It would seem impossible for any 
 earnest teacher to treat these subjects in the schoolroom without making 
 an impression for heroism and truthfulness and righteousness. They 
 bring the pupils in contact with the best phases of life and can hardly fail 
 to exert a broadening, refining, and elevating influence. "In literature 
 the true teacher has an agency that, rightly used, lends to the richest 
 development of religious thought. The hope, the sacrifice, the heroisms 
 and fidelities, that literature has enshrined in its most perfect art, form 
 the subject-matter for religious inspiration to every earnest student" 
 {Proceedings of N.E.A., 1901, p. 547). 
 
 It is still a mooted question as to whether formal moral instruction 
 should be given in the schools. But there can be no question as to the 
 importance of cultivating the moral virtues in these public institutions. 
 It is sometimes said that moral instruction gives only what the pupils 
 already have, and therefore what they do not need. It is pointed out 
 that religious and moral instruction in Germany have not produced the 
 most gratifying results. So it is contended that the public school should 
 cultivate moral sentiments and habits, and develop the moral nature of 
 its pupils. And we must acknowledge that what the pupils need most 
 of all is moral disposition and power, and that any scheme of moral 
 education is a failure which comes short of this perfect work. However, 
 a complete statement of the problem will include not only moral habits, 
 but moral ideas and ideals. The cultivation of moral habits and the 
 inculcation of moral ideas should proceed hand in hand. This makes 
 conduct intelligent. But there is something higher even than a stock 
 of faultless moral habits. It is the apprehension of the ideal. The 
 ideal is the sun that illumines the pathway of life. Without it, however 
 good the habits may be, life is in darkness and bondage. When, however, 
 the ideal is apprehended, habits may be passed under review and modified 
 as necessity may demand. Now, in this connection, the chief point is 
 this: the public school affords a splendid opportunity for the cultivation 
 of moral habits, the inculcation of moral ideas, and the discovery of 
 moral ideals. The life and work of the school furnish occasion for the 
 cultivation of moral habits; and biography, history, and literature afford 
 the means for the inculcation of moral ideas and ideals. And these are 
 all the more effective, perhaps, because incidentally and informally given. 
 Such is the opportunity of the school in respect to moral education, and 
 
PHILOSOPHIC ASPECTS OF THE QUESTION III 
 
 that this opportunity is being extensively utilized hardly admits of doubt. 
 It is to be hoped, however, that in the near future there shall be no pos- 
 sible room for doubt. 
 
 Finally, it is believed the public school exerts a wide influence for 
 good through the personality of its teachers. This is the most important 
 factor in education. Religion and morality incarnate in the teacher are 
 worth more than all else besides. Emerson well said, "It is little matter 
 what you learn, the question is with whom you learn." It is impossible 
 to exaggerate the personal agency. The following sentiments are fully 
 indorsed: "The most potent of all forces is the personal life of the 
 teacher. Young lives are easily molded and directed by the strong, 
 earnest life of a Christian teacher. If our schools are taught by men and 
 women of sound ethical and spiritual lives, devoted in the most con- 
 scientious way to the work of building up in the children the highest 
 elements of worthy manhood and noble womanly character, shall we not 
 have met the most important condition of religious education ?" {Pro- 
 ceedings of N.E.A., 1901, p. 548). 
 
 It must therefore be freely acknowledged that the public school is a 
 very important ally in the work of religious education. Its contribution 
 to this worthy end is not to be despised. Yet, after all, the public school 
 has its severe limitations. As we have said, it cannot give a complete 
 training. The great burden of religious education still rests upon the 
 agencies of the home and the church, and there is no prospect that this 
 burden will soon be shifted to other shoulders. Neither the church nor 
 the home can escape its tremendous task, its gigantic responsibility. 
 May there be no shirking of the task, no evasion of the responsibility! 
 Nay, rather let this demand be met with large equipment, with ample 
 intelligence, with unfailing courage, and with passionate devotion. 
 
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 030 218 987 
 

 SawL^LCONGRESS 
 
 Q.MM 987 o 
 
 Hollinger Corp. 
 pH8.5