The Influence of Sectarianism, Non-Sectarianism, and Secularism upon the Public Schools of Detroit and the University of Michigan, 1837-1900

Citation preview

TEE INFLUENCE OF SECTARIANISM, MON-SECTARIANISM, AND SECULARISM UrON TEE PUnLIC SCHOOLS OF DETROIT AND Te E UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN, 1837-1900.

t>7

Norman

Drachler

A Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the University of Michigan

Committee in Charge: Associate Professor Professor Professor Professor

Professor Claude A. Eggertsen, Chairman Stanley E. Dimond James B. Edmonson 7/illiam C. Trow Louis G. VanderVelde

Ann Arbor, Michigan 1951

R eproduced with permission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The author wishes to express his appreciation to the members of his committee for their helpful sug­ gestions.

He is particularly indebted to the committee

chairman, Professor Claude A.

Eggertsen, for his

encouragement, guidance, and counsel. The writer owes a special acknowledgment to the staff of the Burton Historical Collection of the Detroit Public Library for the aid it has given him in the gathering of data. The cooperation and assistance of my wife, Evelyn Drachler, is acknowledged with particular gratitude. N. D.

ii

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I.

Page

Michigan Public Schools, Secular or Non-sectarian? ................................... 1

II.

The Michigan Constitution, a Political Blueprint to Separate State and C h u r c h .......... 10

III.

Protestants Charge that Omission of the Bible from Public Schools is a Sectarian Act........... 29

IV.

Catholics Charge Schools are Protestant and Petition for the division of F u n d s .............. 41:

V.

Protestants Oppose Catholics in School Election Battle.................................. 56

VI.

Michigan Educators Defend the Bible in the Public Schools .............................. 66

VII.

A Rationalist Charges the University of Mic .igan with Sectarianism...................... 80

VIII.

Secularise Catholicism, and Nativism as Factors in Public Education..................... 107

IX. X. XI.

The Pfeiffer Case, A Symbol of Rising Secularism . . . . . . . ......................

120

Official Protestantism Defends NonSectarianism as Opposed to Secularism. . . . . .

138

The Adjustment of Sectarianism to Secular Demands......................................... 149

BIBLIOGRAPHY........................................... 157

iii

R eproduced with perm ission o f the copyright owner. F urther reproduction prohibited without permission.

CHAPTER I MICHIGAN PUBLIC SCHOOLS, SECULAR OR NON-SECTARIa N? In the past few years Americans have displayed an increased interest in the relationship of state, church, and public education.

Press and radio have brought to the atten­

tion of the public recent controversies over bills on federal aid to education which involved state and church; they have reported on supreme court decisions which related to this problem; and they have featured conflicts in the public schools over Bible reading and Christmas celebrations.

Since these

differences have been generally reported as news items and have not been presented in their historical setting, the im­ pression often has been gained that such issues were of recent origin and mere signs of disintegration of modern society.

A

consideration of clashes over religion and education in the light of our historical heritage may lead to a democratic solu­ tion of a recurrent and complex problem. A survey of American educational history reveals that controversies about the place of religion in education have been an integral part of our past.

Generations of Americans

have battled over solutions to the problem and have resolved them in harmony with their philosophy and needs.

This study

deals with the problems of state-church relationships in Mich­ igan as they have affected the Detroit Public Schools and the 1

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

2

University of Michigan from the beginning of statehood until the turn of the century, 1837-1900.

It is hoped that this

research will lead to a better understanding of Michigan*s educational past and will be of help in formulating a policy for contemporary needs. A number of students have helped to place the statechurch controversy in a national and historical setting.1 Curti has surveyed the social ideas of prominent American educators and has examined their personal philosophies as these have pertained to economic, political, and religious concepts.

Gabel, in a carefully documented study, reviewed

American educational policies relating to state and church and pointed to the inconsistencies which have prevailed in this area.

His findings inferred that a closer union between

education and religion is desirable. 0*Neill traced the historical background of the Ameri­ can state-church dilemma and came to the conclusion that recent decisions of the United States Supreme Court which have based their reasoning upon the theory of complete separation of church and state, are not in agreement with the First Amend­ ment of the United States Constitution.

O ’Neill regards the

^l w o o d Cubberley, Public Education in the United States, pp.178-81. New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1919; Merle Gurti, The Social Ideas of American Educators, pp.16-21. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1935; JV M. 0 1Neill", Reli­ gion and Education Under the Constitution, pp.22-41. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1949; R. Freeman Butts, The American Tradi­ tion in Religion and Education, pp.111-44. Boston: The Beacon .Press, 1950; Anson Phelps Stokes, Church and State in the United States, II, pp.5-67. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1950; Richard J. Gabel, Public Funds for Church and Private Schools, pp.265-300. Washington,D.C.: The Catholic University of America, 1937; Conrad Moehlman, School and Church: The American 2sz, pp.83-102. New York: Harper & brothers, 1944.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

3 decisions of the court as a threat to American liberties and as misrepresentation of the intention of the authors of the Constitution.

Butts refuted 0*Neill«s thesis flM concluded

that the separation of religion and education is an integral part of American tradition.

Butts also expressed the opinion

that a policy of "cooperation” between educational and reli­ gious institutions may lead to undesirable entanglements.

Con­

rad Moehlman's analysis of the American historical scene has led him to assert that the church has failed as an educator and that the secular school, the "American Way", has been ani still is the answer to our educational needs.

He rejected

the current attempts to return religious education into the public school and called upon the church to meet the religious requirement of modern society in its own sphere. The assertion of several students about the dominance of the Protestant church in American public education aided in the definition of the problem in this study.

As research

progressed it became evident that it should center upon the relationships of secularists and of denominational leaders and •^In addition to the national works pertaining to the subject of church and state, the author received special aid from the rich collections in the Burton Historical Collection of the Detroit Public Library and the Michigan Historical Col­ lection of the University of Michigan. Arthur Moehlman^ Pub­ lic Education in Detroit and Daniel Putnam1s The Development of Primary and Secondary Public Education in Michigan were of particular aid in making the local scene more meaningful. The survey, The University of Michigan, edited by Wilfred B. Shaw was helpful in the chapter pertaining to the University as was the biography of Henry Tappan by Charles M. Perry. The chapter on the Michigan constitutional conventions is based upon the official proceedings of the various conventions, but the Con­ vention of 1835 would not be as clear if it were not for the skillful compilation and interpretation of that body by Harold M. Dorr. Many church and state records were consulted but to these and other references mention will be given in the notes accompanying the study. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

4

groups to the public schools and to the University of Michi­ gan.

The year 1837 was chosen as the relative initial point

since it witnessed the admission of Michigan into the Union. The year 1900 was selected as a relative terminal point for it marked the end of a century-long battle and also witnessed the case of Pfeiffer v. Board of Sducation which resulted in the only Michigan State Supreme Court decision dealing with the relationship of religion and education. The study places its emphasis upon the connection be­ tween the Protestant church and the public school and exam­ ines the opinions, actions, and influences of Protestant citi­ zens, denominational groups, and official church newspapers upon public education in Michigan.

It analyzes the interpre­

tations which Protestant groups gave to the constitutional enactments pertaining to state and church.

It reviews the

attitudes of Protestants, Catholics, Jews, and secularists toward the use of the Bible in the school to determine what these groups meant when they spoke of a non-sectarian school system. This approach posed a series of questions:

Yuhat were

the attitudes of Protestant and Catholic churches toward the division of school funds?

What did spokesmen at the conven­

tions of Michigan educational groups say about religion and education?

How did clergymen feel toward the influence of

secularism upon the schools of Michigan?

How did settlers

from New England adjust to the increasing Catholic, German, and Jewish populations and their religious demands upon the public schools?

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

5 And, what were Michigan*s public schools, secular or nonsectarian?^* Since an understanding of the relationships between church and state is dependent upon the meanings given to certain terms, it is essential to define such concepts as ■^Only recently the Detroit Board of Education has met the conflict between secularism and non-sectarianism. On June 10, 1948, a citizen objected to the "character plan" of education employed in the Brady School and called for the "...removal of every trace of religious teachings." A year later, on October 11, 1949, the Gideon Bible Society of De­ troit petitioned the board to grant permission to present copies of The New Testament with Psalms and ffroverbs to all students in the Detroit schools from the fifth through the twelfth grades. To the first request the board replied that it would be difficult to carry on public education without recogni­ tion of religion and that, "the concept of God and religion and of the influence of an all-pervading Providence, apart from any formally recognized sect, is so much a part of the fabric of our life as a people that to remove it would be almost to destroy the fabric." The board concluded that broad religious concepts did not conflict with the separation of church and state and concluded that "...the founders of the American school system ruled out sectarianism but did not intend to rule out religion." Detroit Board of Edu­ cation Proceedings, August 24, 1948.

cJ

A year later the same board denied the request of the Gideons by stating that the distribution of the Bibles would be interpreted as sectarian and involve the community to controversy. "With full appreciation of the influence nationally of the Gideons and of the outstanding program in the distri­ bution of Bibles, and full recognition of the acceptance of the Bible by the great majority of Americans as the founda­ tion of their faith, the Board feels that it would be unwise to accept the offer made by the Gideons for the distribution of testaments through the schools because the version offered is acceptable only to some religious groups, and because, even if acceptable, its distribution would violate Supreme Court decisions and lead to unfortunate controversies which would disturb the harmonious religious atmosphere of the community." f~ Detroit Board of Education Proceedings, Octo­ ber 25, 1949.'

J

"

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

secularism, non-sectarian, and the separation of church and state*

The meaning given these terms may not, of course,

he similar to the interpretation given them hy participants in the educational period about to be discussed. Since Webster*s New International Dictionary defines secularism as, "any view of life, education, etc., or any policy or program referring to such, based on the premise that religion and religious considerations, as of God and a future life, should be ignorednor excluded," it is assumed that secularism is neither theistic or atheistic, and that it simply omits theistic thinking from its consideration. A secular school would, therefore, be an institution from which both religious control and religious materials would be removed. The meaning of non-sectarian is, of course, dependent upon the definition given to its antonym, sectarian.

Webster

defines sectarian as, "one limited to denominational or par­ tisan interests, a narrow or bigoted denominationalist,"

As

it applies to religion in the schools, a non-sectarian pro­ gram would not limit its religious views to any particular group or sect but would express principles representing the common denominator of all sects. We shall note that one of the main causes of dissen­ sion over religion in the public schools will center itself on the issue as to what the intention of the constitution was: (a) to promote secular schools with religion left en­ tirely to the schools, or, (b) to forbid only sectarian

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

influences in the school and retain broad religious and moral concepts. The meaning of the phrase, separation of church and state, is debatable and depends upon the interpretation given to the constitution.

Justice Felix Frankfurter of

the United States Supreme Court declared in the majority opinion of the McCollum case that, "separation is a require­ ment to abstain from fusing functions of Government and of religious sects, not merely to treat them equally."1 The problems raised in the preceding pages will be discussed in successive chapters.

Chapter II, "The Michi­

gan Constitution, a Political Blueprint to Separate State and Church," deals with the various constitutional enact­ ments pertaining to state and church and the discussions which centered upon their adoption.

The third chapter,

"Protestants Charge That Omission of Bible is a Sectarian Act," takes up the early struggle over the Bible in the Detroit schools.

r... Chapter IV, "Catholics Charge Schools

are Protestant and Petition for the Division of Funds," describes the Catholic claim that public schools are instru­ ments for the teaching of Protestantism and traces early efforts of Catholics to divide school funds. Chapter V, "Protestants Oppose Catholics in School Election Battle," concerns the Detroit City Election of 1853, 1People of the State of Illinois ex rel. Vashti Mc­ Collum, Appelant v. Board of Education of School District Ho. 71, Champaign County, Illinois et al, Supreme Court of the United States, No. 90, (1947), 16.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

8 wherein it was claimed that the Catholic Clergy had gained control or the nominations of the Democratic party in order to weaken the public schools.

The following chapter, "Michi­

gan Educators Defend the Bible in the Public Schools," reviews the attitudes teachers had toward the Catholic charge of sectarianism.

It also presents their views on moral and

religious education in the school.

Chapter VII, "A Ration­

alist Charges the University of Michigan with Sectarianism," i

traces the

of the University with various Protes­

tant denominations and considers the charges of S. B. McCracken that the University disregarded constitutional provisions pertaining to the relationship of church and state. Chapter VIII, "Secularism, Catholicism, and Hativism as Factors in Public Education," notes numerous demands for a secular school.

At the same time the nativist upsurge of

the American Protective Association, though aimed at Cathol­ icism, gave support to traditional school practices.

"The

Pfeiffer Case - A Symbol of Rising Secularism," is the ninth chapter and relates to the Bible controversy which reached the State Supreme Court.

Thedefenders of the Bible were

still the Protestants and

the opponents were German "free

thinkers" and Jews.

Chapter X, "Official Protestantism

Defends Non-sectarianism as Opposed to Secularism," devotes itself to the attitudes on public education as expressed at Protestant church conventions. The last chapter,

"The Adjustment of Sectarianism to

Secular Demands," reviews

the period covered and attempts to

draw some conclusions and to advance a few personal convictions.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

9

The hypothesis implicit in the chapter descriptions listed above is that in this period there was a distinct dominance of the Protestant church over the public schools that per­ sisted despite repeated attempts by secularists and Catholics to reduce it.

There is evidence that by 1900 secularists

and religious leaders who decried the non-sectarian policy of Protestants in public schools had met with limited suc­ cess and had put into practice the secular goal of the con­ stitution.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

CHAPTER II THE MICHIGAN CONSTITUTION, A POLITICAL BLUEPRINT TO SEPARATE STATE AND CHURCH Since participants on both sides of the controversy over religion and education often referred to the Michigan Constitution in support of their stand, it is important to review the five constitutional conventions— 1835, 1850, 1867, 1873, and 1907, to ascertain specific provisions re­ lating to state and church.

The first two constitutions

and the last, were approved by a popular vote.

The Con­

stitution of 1850 remained in force until 1908. THE CONSTITUTION OF 1855. Between the years 1830 and 1840 attempts were being made on a national scale to define the relationships between state and church.

Jacksonian democracy buttressed b y Jeffer­

sonian philosophy sought to establish a secular state whose prime obligation to religion was to guarantee freedom of worship to each individual.

A student of the national scene

sums up this trend, Mthe state...was as ecular institution, whose single obligation to religion was the guarantee of equal 10

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

11

rights to all faiths;

it had no title to intervene in the

private beliefs of individuals.1,1 When the Michigan constitutional convention met in Detroit in 1855 the delegates incorporated into the consti­ tution several sections which guaranteed religious liberty and they also adopted measures which were designed not to give to religion in general, nor to any denominational group in particular, any legal hegemony.

Edmonson, who has ana­

lyzed the constitutional provisions of the Michigan Consti­ tution as these applied to education, sustained this view on the Constitution of 1835.

"It is apparent," he said,

"that in the matter of the freedom of the state from sectar­ ian control of public education, Michigan took an advanced stand in the early history of its constitutional develop­ ment."2

Several sections of Article I of the Constitution

lend support to his view.

I

Sec. 4. Every person has a right to worship Al­ mighty God according to the dictates of his own conscience; and no person can of right be compelled to attend, erect, or support, against his will, any place of religious worship, or pay any tithes, taxes, or other rates, for the support I of any minister of the gospel or teacher of reli­ gion. Sec. 5.

354.

No money shall be drawn from the treasury

^-Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr., The Age of Jackson, p. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1946.

2J. B. Edmonson, The Legal and Constitutional Basis of a State School System, p. 12. Bloomington: Public School Publishing Company, 1926.

I R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

12

for the benefit of religious societies, or theolog­ ical or religious seminaries. Sec. 6. The civil and religious rights, privileges, and capacities of no individual shall be diminished or enlarged on account of his opinions or belief concerning matters of religion. The Constitutional Convention of 1835 was significant not only for the sections adopted but also for the proposals that it rejected.

There was, for instance, an interesting

and lively discussion at the convention over a resolution that representatives of the clergy be invited to open the daily sessions of the convention with a prayer.

The discus­

sion began when a delegate requested that "...the president invite the clergy of the city, alternately one from each denom­ ination, to attend the opening of the daily sessions of the convention."2 The resolution to invite the clergy was debated at several sessions.

An opponent of the proposal contended

that the presence of clergymen at the convention would result in a sectarian influence upon the delegates.

A proponent

of the resolution pointed out that this nation was founded upon prayer and that he would regret "...to have it go forth to the world that this convention was unwilling to sanction ^"Harold M. Dorr, The Michigan Constitutional Conven­ tions of 1855-36. p. 598. Ann Arbor: The University of Michi­ gan Press, 1940. 2Journal of the Proceedings of the Convention to form a Constitution for the State of Michigan, p. 19. Detroit: Sheldon MeKnight, 1835. 5Dorr, op. cit., pp. 123-27.

with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

a. practice so consistent with, reason, and. a due regard to the well being of our happy country. After several delays and a great deal of discussion the resolution to invite the clergy to open sessions with prayer was defeated.

In its place the convention passed a

compromise resolution sponsored by John Norvell, leader of the liberal democrats and one of the most influential per­ sonalities at the convention*

Norvell proposed that the

clergy be invited to offer prayer in behalf of the conven­ tion’s success but at their divine services and in their respective churches.

2

A much more important debate arose over the proposal '

of a delegate that there be included in the constitution the recognition of a Supreme Being and a belief in a future state of rewards and punishments.

Wilkins, the sponsor of this

resolution, prefaced his motion with the statement that he did not desire to unite state and church, but he believed that ”... every political community should recognize a Supreme Being, and a state of retribution.”® That no Person who acknowledges the Being of a God, and a future state of rewards and punishments, shall, on account of his religious sentiments, be disqual­ ified to hold any office or place of trust or profit under the state of Michigan. ■1-Dorr, op. cit., p. 126. 2Ibid., p. 103. Also see Harold M. Dorr, "Daily Prayer Michigan Alumnus, Quarterly Review, XLII, pp. 259-67. ®Harold M. Dorr, The Michigan Constitutional Conven­ tions of 1855-56, pp. 141-42. Ann Arbors The University of Michigan Press, 1940. 4Ibid., p. 141.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

14

It was feared that this resolution, although not of a sec­ tarian or denominational nature, would have given the state a theistic character and a position of superiority of some citizens over others. A lively discussion followed Wilkins' resolution with the majority of speakers expressing disapproval of the motion.

The denunciation of the move to give the state a

theistic nature by a delegate, Willard, is striking to say the least, and merits that it be quoted. Sir, I protest against the adoption of such an article into our constitution. I protest against it because it is anti-republican, anti-democratic, anti-liberal, anti-do-as-you-would-be-done-by, antithe-will-of-the-people. I do verily believe that nine tenths of the people of Michigan do not wish to prescribe a fellow being on account of his reli­ gious or irreligious belief; and I do know that a very large majority of my constituents do not wish it.... I go the whole hog for having every free white male citizen of the age of twenty-one years, who shall have resided in the state a certain stip­ ulated length of time, a voter, and every voter eligible to any office the people may think proper to bestow upon him, whether he believe in one God or twenty Gods, or no God.... Suppose a man's head is so thick and brain­ less (if you choose to call it so) that no evidence can be beaten into it which is sufficiently strong to convince him of the existence of an uncaused first Cause - of an unorganized, yet intelligent, immaterial Being, who existed from all eternity, in nothing, on nothing, and who did nothing until about six thousand years ago, at which time he cre­ ated not only this vast globe, and all that it in­ habits, but also myriads of worlds and living crea­ tures. - Suppose, I say, a man's head is so thick and brainless that he cannot comprehend nor believe in such an existence, and has the moral courage and honesty to acknowledge it when interrogated, shall he be debarred from testifying in courts of justice, and from holding an office of profit and trust, which his equally thick headed and sceptical

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

15 neighbors may wish to bestow upon him? Forbid it justice] Forbid it ye free-born sons of Michigan] Palsied be the tongue of him who shall advocate such doctrine, and perish the hand that shall put a vote in the ballot box in favor of him who shall do so] Mistake me not. I would eaually imprecate him who should attempt to deprive the most credu­ lous fanatic that ever disgraced human nature, of the least of his inalienable rights and privileges. No sir, let us have no proscriptive laws, either in favor or against religion, unless we mean to make liars and hypocrites of our posterity. Let religion stand or fall without the proscriptive intolerance of law. If it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; but if it be of man, it will surely come to naught.... In the name of mental liberty in the name of unborn millions of our posterity in the name of all that is near and dear to us, the liberty of conscience, - I protest against the resolution. Wilkins1 proposal to the constitution was not accepted. The discussion that arose over Section 5 in Article I has an important bearing upon the relation of religion and education.

One of the delegates contended that this

section, which prohibited the use of public funds for the benefit of religious societies, was similar to Section 4 in the same article which declared that "...no person can of right be compelled to...pay any tithes, taxes, or other rates, for the support of any minister of the gospel or teacher of religion.”

He asked therefore, that Section 5

be omitted from the constitution. William Woodbridge, the leader of the Whigs at the convention, supported the move to strike out Section 5.

He

stated that the chief difference between the two sections was that the latter prohibited the use of state funds for theological seminaries, a position with which he did not ^Dorr, op. cit., pp. 142-45.

R eproduced with permission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

16 agree*

Woodbrldge believed that theological seminaries were

for the common good and should be supported.

"If the Catho­

lics for instance," said Woodbriage, "should establish a college here, as was proposed, should not the Legislature have authority to replenish the Treasury of such an insti­ tution, if it was found to the general good, as it assuredly would be?"3* Delegate Ellis, however, argued that Section 5 was not the same as Section 4, that it involved a different prin­ ciple and should be included in the constitution.

He pointed

out that Section 4 pertained to individuals and the latter section to a group, or to the community.

Ellis maintained

that the state should not give preference to either individ­ uals

or groups wherever religion was concerned and that

state funds should not be used for the benefits of either. He believed that there might come a time when certain groups would appear before the Legislature and ask financial aid for sectarian purposes.

Section 5, said Ellis, would prevent

this and thus no taxes shall be laid upon the people "...ex­ cept for the common good."^

Another delegate, Hutchins,

pointed out that the people of Michigan were a religious people and that religious institutions will find backers at all times.

Although he favored religious seminaries, he did

not want them to receive state aid.

Section 5 was then approved.

"4)orr, o£. cit•, p. 285. 2Ibid. 3Ibid., p. 286.

with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

17 There were other signs at the Constitutional Con­ vention of 1835 which lead one to conclude that the policy to separate state and church was tin© bT. of the delegates.

gmalLscdf msqny

Thus there was a proposal, though not

acted upon, that ministers of the gospel be not permitted to hold office.^

A recommendation was also made tia t “no

person shall be deemed incompetent as a witness in any court, matter, or proceeding, on account of his opinions on the subject of religion...."

Although this motion was not

included in the constitution, yet its spirit prevailed in other sections. When the delegates d iscussed the wording of the state oath there w ere those who considered it appropriate that the words, Supreme Being, be included.

3

A delegate

Comstock, made a plea against any reference to a Divine Power. All tests were only calculated to make men hypo­ crites. He did not want himself to be deprived of equal rightswith others, because certain per­ sons would take upon themselves to say tla t he was not as orthodox as they were. When he looked for an honest man he did not enquire upon his belief, but upon his conduct in life. The viewpoint of Comstock prevailed at the convention and reference toGod was omitted from the official state oath. ^■Dorr, op.cit., p. 138. 2Ibld., p.146. 5Ibid., p.385. 4Ibid., p.386.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

18 THE REVISED CONSTITUTION OF 1850 When the Constitution of 1835 was revised in 1850 no major changes were enacted which concerned state and church. ARTICLE IV Sec.24. The Legislature may authorize the employ­ ment of a chaplain for the State Prison; but no money shall be appropriated for the payment of any religious service in either house or Legislature. Sec.59. The Legislature shall pass no law to pre­ vent any person from worshiping" Almighty God accord­ ing to the dictates of his own conscience; or compell any person to attend, erect, or support any­ place of religious worship, or pay tithes, taxes or other rates for the support of any minister of the gospel or teacher of religion. Sec.40. No money shall be appropriated or drawn from the treasury for the benefit of any religious sect or society, theological or religious seminary; nor shall property belonging to the State be appro­ priated for any such purposes. Sec.41. The Legislature shall not diminish or en­ large the civil or political rights, privileges and capacities of any person, on account of his opinion or belief concerning matters of religion. ARTICLE VI Sec.34. No person shall be rendered incompetent to be a witness on account of his opinions on matters of religious belief.JSection 24, in Article IV, permitting the employment of a Chaplain for the State -Prison, is the single innovation e affecting the relationships of state and church.

The pro­

hibitive clause regarding the payment for religious services in the legislature is still indicative of the policy to sep3-Report of the -Proceedings and Debates in the Conven­ tion to Revise tEe Constitution of the state of Michigan, 1850, pp.xxvi-xxxi. Lansing: R.W. Inglas, State Printers, 1850.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

19 arate state and church*

In later years, the proponents

of the Bible in the public school often referred to Sec­ tion 2l\. of the Constitution of l8f>0 and contended that the morals of our prisoners were better provided for than were those of public school children* At the Convention of l8£0 ministers were invited to open daily sessions with a prayer*

However, the dele­

gates paid for these services through personal contribu­ tions* Since the constitutions that were drawn up at the conventions in 1867 and 1873 did not receive majority approval, the Constitution of 1850 remained in effect until 1908*

The Conventions of 1867 and 1873 are important since

they represent the religious trend of the period* THE CONVENTION OF 1867 In 1867 Michigan again elected delegates to revise the state constitution*

At this convention certain changes

and additions were proposed which lead one to conclude that there was a desire on the part of the majority of the repre­ sentatives to give the constitution a more religious spirit* Although the constitution as a whole was defeated in the popular vote, nevertheless the proposed changes are of sig­ nificance*

It is generally agreed however that the rejection

was not due to the sections dealing with religion*"*" ^James V* Campbell, Outlines of the Political History of Michigan, p. 572* Detroit! Schober & Co., 187&*

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

2 0

PREAMBLE We, tiie people of the State of Michigan, grate­ ful to Almighty God, the Sovereign Ruler of nations, for civil and religious liberty, and acknowledging our dependence upon H-Jrh . f0r the continuance thereof, do ordain and establish the following Constitution.1 ARTICLE V Sec. 31. No money shall be appropriated or drawn from the treasury for the benefit of any religious sect or society, theological or religious seminary, or school under denom­ inational control, nor shall property belong­ ing to the state be appropriated for any such purposes. Each House of the Legisla­ ture shall provide for religious exercises at the opening of its daily sessions /""italics mine/? ARTICLE on EDUCATION Religion, morality, and knowledge, being neccessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged.5 The change discussion.

in the Preamble brought about a heated

There were those who desired that the Preamble

remain -unchanged and simply read:

"The People of the State

of Michigan do ordain this Constitution."

But Van Valken-

burgh, a delegate, led those who desired a change and won in the end. On June 27, 1867, Van Valkeriburgh informed the con­ vention that he had received a petition signed by the Rev. I>uffield, Bishop McCoskry, and others, requesting that the The Debates and Proceedings of the Constitutional Convention of the State of Michigan. 1867, I, p. iii. Lansing: John A. Kers & Co., Printers to the State, 1867. 2Ibid., p. xix. 5Ibid., II, p. 24

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

21

Preamble embody the recognition of Almighty God and that it also acknowledge 11*. .the lord Jesus Christ, who is the author of Christianity and has revealed God to man...."1 To the Honorable Constitutional Convention at Lansing: The undersigned, citizens of Detroit, respectfully represent, that as a state whose population is almost universally believers in the existence of God, and the truth and the in­ estimable value of Christianity, as the friend of the poor, the guardian of society, the pro­ moter of civilization, and the best police and defense against crime, it is our wish and in our judgment very desirable that in the Consti­ tution now being prepared, there should be a distinct recognition of Almighty God, the Father of our Lord Jesue Christ, as the great moral governor and arbiter of human affairs, an acknow­ ledgment of our dependence as a State and people upon His providence. We, therefore respectfully pray that a clause to this effect be introduced in the Preamble of the constitution to be submitted for adoption.... Following the reading of the above petition Van Valkenburgh introduced a substitute proposal for the preamble which incorporated the views advanced in the above petition. We, the people of the State of Michigan, humbly acknowledging Almighty God as the source of all authority and power in civil government, the Lord Jesus Christ as the Ruler among nations, and His revealed will as of supreme authority, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, pro­ vide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the inalienable rights and 3-The Debates and Proceedings of the Constitutional Convention of the State of Michigan, 1867, op. cit., 17 p. 585. ^Ibid., p. 585.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

^

22

blessings of* life, liberty and the pursuit of* happiness^to ourselves, our posterity, and all the inhabitants of the land, do ordain and es­ tablish this Constitution of the State of Michi­ gan. Several members of the convention contended that Van Valkenburgh’s substitute was sectarian in nature and discriminatory against many citizens of the state.

A dele­

gate, Nind, claimed that it would force citizens to sup­ port a constitution which contained religious concepts contrary to their faiths.

He said that, "this would be

the case with the Hebrews, the Unitarians, not saying any­ thing about the atheists whom some gentlemen may consider as outlaws."2

Another delegate, Parmer, charged Van Valken-

burgh’s proposal as sectarian in nature.

Parmer pointed out

that this was to be a constitution for all the people and not any particular sect or group. I have all reverance for the clergy when they reverance their calling; but I think we are under no more obligation to accommodate them particularly as a class, than to accommodate any other particular class of men, in fram­ ing a preamble for our constitution. We are making a constitution for the entire people of this state, not for any particular sect or sects.3 After a lengthy debate the preamble was finally accepted with the terms, Almighty God and Sovereign Ruler included, although Van Valkenburgh1s references to a "Christian ^~The Debates and Proceedings of the Constitutional Convention of the State of Michigan, 1867, II, op. cit., p. 855. 2 Ibid.. pp. 931-32. 3 Ibid., pp. 932-33.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

23

government" and the "Lord Jesus Christ" were omitted.

It

is significant that at the Convention of 1835 a proposal to acknowledge the recognition of a Supreme Being in the constitution was rejected; however, in 1867 the motion did carry and was included in the proposed constitution.1 TEB CONVENTION OF 1875 In 1873 the Governor

of Michigan appointed a Con­

stitutional Commission to draw up amendments for the Con­ stitution of 1850.

The Commission met, and insofar as

church and state were concerned, it did not approve any resolutions similar to those of the Convention of 1867, but followed instead the trend of 1835 and 1850.

A proposal

to include in the Preamble the phrase "grateful to Almighty God" was defeated and the Preamble of 1850 was retained.2 The State Senate reviewed the constitution submitted by the Commission and with slight alterations placed it before the people for approval.

Again the constitution proposed

was defeated in a popular vote and the Constitution of 1850 still remained in effect. One year before the Michigan Constitutional Conven­ tion of 1875 met and reversed the position of the Convention of 1867, there was formed in New York and Cincinnati a national organization which attempted to introduce an amend­ ment to the United States Constitution whereby our country 1Dorr, op. cit., p. 153. ^Journal of the Constitutional Commission, 1873, p • 169•

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

24

would, be proclaimed a Christian Nation.1

This organization

was called the Christian Amendment Movement backing of many prominent Americans.

had the

Its resemblance to

the Michigan Preamble of 1867 was quite striking. Memorial to the Honorable Senate and House of Representatives: We, citizens of the United States, respectfully ask your honorable bodies to adopt measures for amending the Constitution of the United States, so as to read, in substance, as follows: Y/e, the people of the United States, (humbly acknowledging Almighty God as the source of all authority and power in civil government, the Lord Jesus Christ as the Ruler among the na­ tions, His revealed will as the supreme law of the land, in order to constitute a Christian government) and in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tran­ quility, provide for the common defense, pro­ mote the general welfare - do ordain and estab­ lish this Constitution of the United States of America.2

Although the effort to give the national constitu­ tion a more religious spirit failed, it aroused a nation wide interest in the relationships between church and state. ^William George Torpey, Judicial Doctrines of Reli­ gious Rights in America,.p. 33. Ghapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press, 1948. ^Proceedings of the National Convention to Secure the Religious Amenoment of the Constitution of the United States, pp. vii-viii. Philadelphia: James B. Rodgers, Winters, 1872. N.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

25 Thejfodex, a rationalist journal published in Toledo, began a counter movement and urged the adoption of a "Religious Freedom Amendment" to the national constitution in order to bring religious liberty to all states in the Union. editor, Francis

The

E. Abbots regarded the "Christian Amend­

ment" as a step to suppress religious freedom in this coun­ try and as a threat to Christianity itself.

He called upon

the leaders of the movement to relinquish their aims and to be content with the equal rights they now enjoyed. If I wished to destroy Christianity in this country by unscrupulous means, I should encour­ age your attempt in every way; for the reaction that you will create will open the eyes of millions that Christianity and freedom are in­ compatible... .1 appeal to you most earnestly TO BE CONTENT WITH THE EQUAL RIGHTS YOU NOW ENJOY BEFORE THE LAW, without seeking to de­ stroy the rights, of others who are not Chris­ tians in belief.A THE CONSTITUTION OF 1907 In 1907 Michigan again elected delegates to a con­ stitutional convention.

This time the revised constitution

was approved by the people in 1908.

The new constitution

contained two new sections which merit our attention.

First,

the proposed Preamble of 1867 was adopted with slight changes, and second, a new section, the well known statement from the Ordinance of 1787, was added to the constitution. The Preamble, a controversial topic at former conven-? tions, again aroused a great deal of debate.

The point of

controversy was still whether there should or should not be some acknowledgment of God in the Preamble.

The proposed

xThe Index. Ill (February 10, 1872).

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

26 change was Introduced "by a delegate, Cranor, who expressed the hope that the State of Michigan "will never consent to be classed with the nations that forget God*"^We, the people of the State of Michigan, grateful to Almighty God for the blessings of freedom, and earnestly desiring to secure those blessings undiminished to our posterity, to that end do ordain and establish this Constitution.2 Following Cranor*s motion petitions for and against the change poured

in upon the convention floor*

Numerous

church groups throughout the state endorsed the proposed Preamble, and many petitions representing the Central Labor Union of Detroit, Progressive Thinkers of Michigan, Bohemian PTee Thinkers, and others opposed the change*

Cranor, who

spoke in behalf of the new Preamble, contended that it ex­ pressed a principle well established in most state constitu­ tions and that it was in harmony with American tradition* . "This is a Christian nation;" said Cranor, "it always has been a Christian nation, and always will be a Christian nation; Christianity is part and parcel of our system of government; we always have been so recognized.1^ Delegate Taylor spoke against Cranor*s proposal.

He

argued that the purpose of the convention was to frame a legal document and the more simple and direct one drew up the

proposed articles and "the less we mix into it of reli­

gion and politics, the better it seems it will appeal not only ^•Proceedings and Debates of the Constitutional Con­ vention of1 tlhe State of Michigan* 1507-08, I, p« 242, lLansing: Wynkoop Hallenbeck Crawford & Co•, 1907• 2Ibld.. p. 476. 5Ibid.. p. 700.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

27 to our constituents but to posterity.

a lengthy

debate Cranor*s motion was accepted witb slight modifica­ tions.

In presenting the constitution to the public the

following official statement was given ip behalf of the change which stressed the point that Michigan was one of the few states which had not recognized a Supreme Being in its constitution. The change was made to give recognition in the constitution of the Supreme Being. Similar recognition is found In the constitutions of forty-two of our sister states.2 The second change which concerns our topic was the addition of the famous statement from the Ordinance of 1787 to the Article on Education. Religion, morality, and knowledge being neces­ sary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and means of education shall forever be encouraged.® Although some delegates felt that the above section was unnecessary since public support of education was an established fact nevertheless the section was adopted with slight opposition.

It is this section that has often been

quoted by those who support the reading of the Bible and the observance of certain religious practices In the pub­ lic schools. Since this study ends about the year 1900, the Constitutions of 1835 and 1850 were the legal blueprints for the public schools.

The Conventions of 1867 and 1907

•^Proceedings and Debates of the Constitutional Con­ vention of the State of Michigan. 1907-08, I. pp. 701-702. 2Ibld, II, p. 1415. ^Ibid, I, p.244 R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

28 were indicative

of trends to link religion more closely

to tlie constitution.

Whether these trends were the results

of the controversies in public schools over the function of religion, or, whether this trend expressed a reaction against the heterogenous population which was increasing steadily, is of course, difficult to say.

A glance back

at the Conventions of 1835 and 1850 reveals that separation of church and state was more clear cut in those days.

It

does not necessarily mean that later generations could not make changes as they desired but if one

is to base his

conclusions upon the intent of the early ”founders” then complete separation of the state from the church was a definite pb^&ctrive.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

CHAPTER III PROTESTANTS CHARGE THAT OMISSION OF ‘wre BIBLE FROM PUBLIC SCHOOLS IS A SECTARIAN ACT In spite of the secular trend of the Michigan Con­ stitution of 1835, the efforts of certain Protestant groups to retain religious practices in tiie public schools was obvious from the early years

of our school history.

In 1842, seven years after the adoption of the Michi­ gan Constitution, the City of Detroit inaugurated a public school system.

Basing their claim on Article X, Section 2,

of the Michigan Constitution which assured the citizens of the newly created state that the legislature ".. .shall en­ courage, by all suitable means, the promotion of intellec­ tual, scientifical, and agricultural improvement,”1 civic minded citizens appealed to the state government for permis
t Documents of the State of Michigan, p . 400• Detroit: George Dawson, State printer, 1840.

R eproduced with permission o f the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

1 ■ I I I I

84 of the university.

Youth were to attend college not only for

instruction in science, literature, and arts, out also to imbibe correct ideas of moral truth, and just conceptions of their relations to other men, as well as their Maker."1 The policy followed by the regents was not regarded

I

by them as sectarian or denominational.

I

the early procedure of rotating the presidency of the univer-

I

sity among the professors of various Protestant denominational

I

groups was considered as an assurance against sectarianism.^

I

This viewpoint was supported by the various church groups of

I

the Protestant faith.

I

On the other hand,

In his study, The Influence of the Protestant Denomina-

; I

tionslon Higher Education in Michigan, Willis P. Dunbar dis-

, I

cussed the attitudes of the various denominational groups

I

towards the university.

I

groups concerned about the religious character of the institu-

I

tlon but they were also watchful lest one denomination seemed

I

to gain dominance in the faculty.

I

that as long as there remained an equal balance in the control

I

of the university among the several Protestant denominations

I

that higher public education remained non-sectarian.3

I I I I I

He revealed that not only were these

It was taken for granted

it Is evident that political considerations necessitated the policy advanced by the regents.

There were many in the state

1Francis W. Shearman, The System of Public Instruction and Primary School Law, p. 315. Lansing : State of Michigan, 1852. 2Ibid., p.316. ^Dunbar, op. cit., pp. 203-23.

R eproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

legislature who came from towns where denominational colleges existed, towns in which citizens looked with disfavor upon state support for the university.

Thus we found as late as

1850 some opposition to the university at the state constitutional convention.

A delegate compared themmber of graduates

from Albion Seminary with those of the university and favored the former,

he even expressed a desire that some sectarian

society take charge of the university at Ann Arbor rather "than to have no one taught in It. The report of the regents for 1842 seems best to sum up tne attitude of university officials regarding higher education and religion.

The statement was written by the Rev.

G-eorge Duffield, prominent citizen and later a promoter of the Christian Amendment to the constitution.

It was also signed

by the Rev. Martin Kundig, a Catholic priest, who then served as regent.

The statement revealed a definite policy on the

part of the regents, to retain a religious, Christian spirit at the university.

It also expresses the philosophy of those

who believed that broad religious principles could be intro­ duced in public education without sectarian influences. Theeestoahlishafint of a collegiate institution in a free State, and the conducting of its interests should ever be upon liberal principles and ir­ respective of all sectarian predilections and prej­ udices. Whatever variations of sect exist in the United States, the great mass of the population profess an attachment to Christianity, and as a free people avow themselves to be Christians. There is common ground occupied by them all, sufficient for cooperation in an institution of learning, and for the presence of a religious influence, devoid of any sectarian forms and peculiarities, so essential, ^•Report of the Proceedings and Debates in the Conto Revise the Constitution of the State of Michigan. 1850, o p . cit., p.v8i5. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

86 not only as the most efficient police, but also for the development and formation of the most valuable traits of youthful character and qualifications for future usefulness. Experiments made in other States, by catering to morbid prejudices of sectarians, have only embarrasea the institutions of the State, anri matured the growth of numerous and rival colleges, avowedly sectarian. Attempts made to exclude all religious influence whatever from colleges, have only rendered them the sectarian engines of an athe­ istical or infidel party or faction, and so offended and disgusted the majority of the population agreeing in their respect for a common Christianity, that they have withdrawn their support, confidence, and patron­ age, and left them to drag a miserable existence, till they invoked the presence and influence of the Christian religion in them. The only security that can be had for the avoidance of sectarianism, and the necessary and desireable influence of Chr.istianity, in the conduct of a collegiate institution intended to be the common property of the State, is to be sought in the character and the principles of the men who are placed over it, and held responsible for the administration. There are men to be found in all the different Christian sects, of sufficiently expanded views and liberal spirit and enlightened minds, devoid of the spirit of bigotry and narrow prejudices of sect and party, that can be selected and deputed to such a work, whose public service and philantropy, and whose loveeof country, and attach­ ments to the interests of their State and its entire population, will always furnish the best and only true guaranty aginst the evils of sectarianism.•*It is in this frame of reference that we need to place the first president of the University of Michigan, Dr. Henry P. Tappan, whose views on religion in higher education dif­ fered greatly from those of the regents and faculty and re­ sulted in later conflicts. Tappan came to the university from the East.

He had

spent several years traveling in Europe and had acquired respect for the Prussian educational system, especially for its universities.

A former member of the Dutch Reformed Church

^Joint Documents Accompanying the Journal of the House of Representatives of the ^tate of Michigan, At the annual of 1842, pp. 385-386. Detroit : Bagg & Harmon, Printers to State, 1842. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

87 lie -joined the Presbyterians in Ann Arbor.

However, lie was

not a strong denominationalist and made it his practice to attend and preach, in various churches.

This procedure was,

in his opinion, a wise policy to follow since it did not associate him too strongly with any particular group.

At the

same time, however, it did not provide him with any backing from any church group. Physically, Tappan was a tall,, impressive looking man.

Dressed in clothes which were not conventional for a

midwestern town, ana accompanied by a huge dog, he gave the impression of an aristocrat to a state which was seething with western democracy. Many people in Ann Arboraand elsewhere in the state interpreted his dignity as pomposity and his eastern accent and his use of the florid style of the period as affectations. To these people his sympathy and general culture and his admiration dfrEuropean insti­ tutions could be interpreted only as snobbishness, and by them the Tappan family was soon charged with being ‘aristocrats and exclusives*. 1 How could people think otherwise When it was learned that the Tappans served wine with their meals, and when it was rumored that Mrs. Tappan had remarked that they had come "to Mich­ igan as missionaries"!

And to make folks even more suspicious

the president had brought to Ann Arbor a Prussian scientist, who later married Tappan*s daughter. The above situations were sufficient to make Tappan a target for a press that was already aroused by the fact that the newly elected officer of the university called himself 1Charles M. Perry, Henry Phillip Tappan. Hiilosopher and University President, p. 188. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan hess, 1933.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

88

“Chancellor,” a "European term," Instead of presidentl by the Detroit Free Press«

Led

the Democratic press of the state

carried on a vicious campaign against him.

In 1854, only two

t

years after his arrival in Ann Arbor, the Lansing Journal in reporting a speech by Tappan took occasion to mock his diction, manners, and bearing. Of all the imitations of English aristocracy, German mysticism, Prussian imperiousness, and Parisian nonsensities, he is altogether the most completely foreignized specimen of an abnormal Yankee, we have ever seen. His thoughts, his oratory, his conversation, his social manners, his walk, and even his prayers, are senseless mimicries of the follies of a rotten aristocracy over the sea. The selection of Tappan h&d evidently been made. with the approval of all.

The regents who elected him were very co­

operative , and the various denominational groups expected that he would maintain the established religious balance in the selectlonobfpprbfessors.

Lest Tappan

t>« : >dnaware of

this practice, resolutions drawn up by religious bodies served as reminders.

Thus we find that the General Associa­

tion of Congregationalist Churches of Michigan, meeting in 1852, drew up a resolution stressing the role of religion in the university. That in the present state of the University of Mich­ igan it is proper for this association to express their earnest desire that the Institution shall con­ tinue to possess a high moral and religious character; and to declare that they would view any divorcement of the University from evangelical religion, in the appointment of its officers with the deepest concern and regret. ^ iPerry, Hengyi Phillip Tappan. Philosopher and University President, op. cit., p. 202. ^Dunbar, The Influence of the Protestant Denomi­ nations on Higher Education in Michigan, op. cit., p.210. Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

In a similar vein the Michigan Methodist Episcopal Church Conference meeting one year later, in 1853, declared: That we rejoice to see the prosperity of the Uni­ versity of Michigan, an honor to the State, and approve of the action of the Regents, undoubtedly coincident with the wishes of a vast majority of 5&eJpf?ple ot “ic^San, recognizing the need of Christian influence in the Institution, by the election of professors connected with the various denominations of Christians in the state.1 Tappan*s first years in Michigan were so engulfed in the expansion of the university and the building of a program close to his heart, that his differences with denominational groups were not too obvious.

He had aroused the enmity of

certain professors who were influential church members, but this was not to bear fruit until later.

On the other hand,

Tappan*s influence was seen in the report of the board of visitors for 1855, which stated that the University of Michi­ gan is a state institution, and not a sectarian body, that teaching positions should not be determined on the basis of religious affiliations.

"Ability to instruct, connected

with a known moral character, are qualifications which should recommend their possessor to the attention of the regents."2 The board stated that these qualifications may also be hnri by clergymen, but In accepting the job in a state institution, they must lay aside their robes “pro tempore" at least.

The

editorial writer of the Detroit Free Press, concurred in this decision. 1Dunbar, The Influence of the Protestant Denominations on Higher Education in Michigan, op. cit.. p. 210. 2Petroit Free Press. Jan. 17, 1855. 3Ibid.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

90

In 1856 the Methodist Episcopal Church adopted another resolution regarding the university and the normal school. These Institutions were praised for their work and true reli­ gious spirit, and the conference went on record to offer

its

support and approval to these institutions just so long as this policy was maintained.

This resolution was introduced

by Professor E. 0. Haven, a member of the university faculty and Tappan*s successor as president of the university.^ The first open opposition to Tappan*s administration from religious circles came in 1857.

In that year the Min­

utes of the Detroit Annual Conference of the Methodist Epis­ copal Church adopted a resolution charging the university with a decline in moral and religious spirit. The University of Michigan has heretofore received high commendation from the ministers of our church in their annual assemblies. Its number of pupils has increased at a rapid ration, but we are sorry to say that many of its friends have their fears that its moral and religious condition is such as greatly to impair its usefulness. Whether this institution, so nobly endowed, so well organized in its courses of instruction, so directly under the guardianship of the people of*the State, shall be a safe abode for the sons of Christian parents, dur­ ing the most important period of their education, it is for the future to show. Our earnest prayers shall be for its prosperity.2 The reason for this resolution mdy be attributed to several causes:

(1) Tappan*s opposition to denominational

appointment of professors; (2) the general opposition of denominational groups interested in their own colleges; (3) the personal opposition to Tappan of Professor Alexander ^Dunbar, The Influence of the Protestant Denomina­ tions on Higher Education in Michigan, op. cit., p. 295. 2Ibid.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

91

Winchell, a very influential member of the Methodist Church an Arbor

agreed.:: that a slander campaign was spread about Tappan’s character "to destroy his hold upon right-minded people."3 Insofar as the charges against the Methodist Church are concerned, there is some evidence to support the fears of Professor Douglas that influential Methodists were opposed to Tappan.

The newly-elected president, Haven, was a very

prominent Methodist and had many friends in the state.

Pro­

fessor Winchell, in a letter to Haven as early as June 1, 1859, four years before Tappan’s dismissal, indicated a desire to promote Haven’s election to the presidency. ^•Michigan Historical Collection, University of Michi­ gan, Alexander Winchell, University of Michigan Scrapbook of Haven Administration, MSS, p. 37. ^Barnard, Henry, ed., The American Journal of Edu­ cation, XIII (1863) 641. 3Ibid.. p. 646.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

99

My dear Professor, . ■ 1 still call yon professor for that Is the title which nature has designated for you unless... President be the more appropriate..•.i In another letter to Haven, Winchell suggests that a visit to Michigan by Haven would be advisable. her history of the university says:

Mins-Fdrr find in

"There is no doubt

that the Methodist Church was very much interested in Dr* H aven1s return, and aided it as much as possible...."^

Anri

Hegent H. Palmer in a letter to Sydney D. Miller, a leading alumnfcsuriao led the fight for Tappan's restoration, wrote: "I made up my mind after the first meeting that it would do no good to press Dr. Tappan's restoration.

The truth is there

was too much political influence from the connection of the Methodists."3

At their annual conference in September 1863,

the Methodists resolved that, although they did not wish to express an opinion on the removal of Tappan, they did wish to congratulate the university and the state on the election of Dr. Haven to the presidency of the university.^ Haven's conception of the role of religion in the ■university was quite different from Tappan1s.

It was also a

complete reversal of the stand that Haven took in 1854 on the ■^Michigan Historical Collection, University of Michi­ gan, Alexander Winchell, MSS correspondence. O

Farrand, Elizabeth M., History of the University of Michigan, p. 162, Ann Arbor: Register Publishing 5 ouse, 1885. n w 0. Haven,

S * Adams> "The Administration of Erastus The University of Michigan, Part I, op. cit., p.55.

^Minutes of the Detroit Annual Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church— Held September 1865. p. 29.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

100 Bible In tiie common schools*

In his inaugural address Haven

declared that the university should be a Christian non-sectar ian institution* I maintain. *• that a State University in this country should be religious. It should be Christian, without being sectarian. The great and common principles of morality, received by all Christians, should be sedulously taught scrupulously regarded, not merely as conventional rules, but as principles of divine truth*..The Holy. Scriptures should be read and explained, psalms and hymns of praise should be sung, and all who resort to the University for instruction should be encouraged to adhere faithfully to the usages of that branch of the Church of Christ with which they may be connected. Especially should the bonds of union between science and revelation be shown. The professors should be men capable of perceiving and illustrating the evidence of the divine origin of Christianity, in language, mathematics, animal life; in his­ tory and art, and in the mind of man. The er­ rors of the irreligious, ancient and modem, with their pernicious consequences should be fear­ lessly exposed... •I earnestly invoke, therefore, in behalf of the religious character of this University, the sympathy and hearty cooperation of all Christians of all denominations in the State. I assure them that the University shall cooperate with them, in teaching and enforcing and illustrating Christian faith and practice. The professors in this university must and will not consent to be deprived of the glorious satisfaction of being co-workers with Christ, in the divinely appointed enterprise of evangeli­ zing the world.1 The above point of view aeems

to. be a reversal of

Tappan's philosophy regarding the role of a university and its relation to the state.

In a letter to the Zion’s Herald,

the denominational newspaper which he had edited before assuming the presidency, Haven declared that the only depart■^Haven, E. 0., Universities in America, pp. 15-16*. Ann Arbor; C. G. Clark, JR. University of Michigan, 1863.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

101 ment that the university lacked to make it complete was a

as president, the Zion1s Herald

wrote an editorial entitled

11Secular Colleges Exeant" in which the editor said that Haven*s departure was clear evidence of the failure of secularism. What led to this step? It is a practical confession by one of the most experienced and successful col­ lege presidents, of the weakness and ultimate disso­ lution of State and Secular Colleges..,. It is a confession, also, that only ecclesiastical colleges, or at least, positively Christian evagelical colleges, can constantly and positivelu flourish. Between 1865 and 1869, the years of Dr. Haven’s administration, there was little opposition to his views. It Is unknown, of course, how much of Haven*s inaugural address was meant for actual school policy, and how much was for "popular consumption."

The course of study at the univer­

sity did not undergo any great change, and professors White, Cooley, Campbell, ana ouners went about teaching as usual. The only evidence of a religious stir was caused by Haven him­ self, when he occupied the pulpit in a Unitarian church for several Sundays.

Newspapers criticized him for this act.

On February 10, 1873, Sl.IBizlS(iSraieEkey»agSrBecbroicb-submitted to the Senate of the State of Michigan a memorial in which he charged the university with disregarding the constitution of the state by assuming a sectarian character.

After quoting

the articles of the state constitution which prohibited the use of state funds for the benefit of any religious sect or Michigan Historical Collection, University of Michiga Alexander Winchell, University of Michigan Scrapbook of Havem, Administration, MSS, p. 109. 2Ibid.,

p.42.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

102 society, or any theological or religious seminary*

Stephen

B. McCracken charged the university with disregarding the constitution*

He reviewed in his memorial the hiring of

professors according to denominational leanings anri pointed to teachers in the university who had displayed biased relig­ ious views 'in their teaching of history and moral philosophy. Particularly did MbCracken dwell on the addresses delivered da1 -'187IJ at the inaugural of President James B. Angell.

It

irked McCracken that the acting president of the university, in presenting Angell to the audience placed special emphasis upon the fact that Angell was “an earnest Christian."

Mc­

Cracken also became aroused over Angell*s references to re­ ligion in his inaugural address*

After defining the educa­

tional functions of the state, the newly elected president declared that these were the only objectives “which a Chris­ tian philosophy will justify." 1

McCracken also objected to

Angell*s remarks in which he urged the selection of faculty members on the basis of broad religious qualifications. In choosing members of the faculty care should be taken to secure, gifted, eamast, reverent men, whose mental and moral qualities will fit them to prepare their pupils for manly and womanly work in promoting our Christian civilization.2 After repeating the remarks of Angell which had a religious bearing, McCracken objected to the stand taken by the president that America was a Christian state.

There were

^Stephen B. McCracken, Religion in the University, pp. 1-4. Detroit: Free Press, 1873. 2Ibid.. p. 4.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

103 many citizens of the state, said McCracken, who were not mem­ bers of any dominant Protestant group and whose rights had to be defended.

Jews, free thinkers, and spiritualists were also

taxpayers and they did not consider themselves members of a Christian state. address_jT plainly intimates that none but those who have the Christian spirit should be chosen as teachers. It also assumes to define the civil structure of the °tate, as"Christian" when in fact.the Constitution of the State, which is the basis of the civil structure, is most careful to withold its assent from, or recognition of, any theological system.^* Since these beliefs of President Angell were made in ^

official capacity at a university function, McCracken felt own it his/ right to challenge their legality. These declarations it should be remembered , a appear in the inaugural address of the President of the University,.•• The address is on record as a ’standard paper, and if allowed to pass without protest will be accepted as having the imDlied assent of the people, and will be cited in the future to confirm the dangerous claim that is being simultaneously made in many parts of the United States — that the country has a fixed religious character by inheritance, and by the common practice and assent of the people — thus securing indirectly what some are now seeking to secure by direct means, through a religious amend­ ment to the Federal Constitution, namely, the es­ tablishment of a State religion. 2 As a result of McCracken’s appeal to the senate a committee was appointed to investigate these charges.

On

Monday, March 24, 1873, the committee met in Ann Arbor and questioned President Angell, some professors, McCracken, and others.

The university officials did not directly attempt •^•McCracken, Religion in the University, op. cit., p.2. ^Ibid., pp.4-5,

vide, p. 24.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

104 to refute the details of McCracken1s charges; they did, how­ ever, differ with him as to whether the "broad, religious spirit at the university meant existence of sectarianism.

It is

clear that in the eyes of McCracken, religious expression, in any form, even by inference, meant sectarianism.

Profes­

sor B. P. Cocker, the Rev. Andrew Ten Brook, among others, maintained that only denominational teaching could be termed as sectarian. McCracken, in rebuttal to the university, presented more fully his conception of sectarianism.

He was somewhat

bitter and sarcastic, and he made essentially the same state­ ments about the dominance of Protestants in the university, as were made by others in regard to public elementary schools. The astute committee and the learned doctors came near getting bewildered and losing their way over the meaning of the word '’sectarian". If we have an established religion in the State, and that religion is some one of the several organic divi­ sions of definitive Christianity, then all other forms of religious belief are sectarian as related to it. And if we have an established religion, who established it? If we have not an established reli­ gion, then all forms of religious belief are sec­ tarian as they are related to each other and to the whole body of society. If we have a "prevailing" religion then some may claim that all. forms of be­ lief outside of it are sectarian. But then, which, if either, of the organic divisions of Christianity is the "prevailing" one? Or, if we go back to the parent stem are not all of the sub-divisions that have sprung from it, sectarian, and is not the Catholic church the parent stem and the legitimate church? Or does the Methodist church claim to be the prevailing religion by virtue of being the larg­ est in point of numbers? In plain English, the proposition means just this: That the Puritan sects claim a monopoly of everything in the country— edu­ cation, institutional and civil--and they intend to assert it some day. They may equivocate, and finesse, and deny, and forsear, but this talk about broad , "liberal", "enlightened", "unsectarian" Christianity,

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

105

ignoring everything doctrinal, means the building up of a sentiment out of which shall grow, not far in the future, a modified hut unified creedal sys­ tem, that shall aspire to be the recognized reli­ gion of the country, and to dictate opinions to the people. The logic of the matter is, that this charmed circle of Puritan immaculacy is not sectarian, and that everything outside of it is. Suppose (an unsupposable case) that a Catho­ lic clergyman should be appointed to a professorship in the University— should not the President and Dr. Cocker alternate the "chapel11 exercises with him? Or, if such a one should chance to be chosen Presi­ dent of the institution, should he not have the first right, by virtue of his position of conducting the chapel exercises, and should not the Regents provide his sacred vestments, and should they not build for him an altar, and furnish it with candles, incense, and other requisites of the mass, and should not Dr. Cocker attend blm at mass and take charge of his wardrobe? How would these "unsectarian" saints relish this kind of "idolatry"? And yet, what would it be in principle more than they demand for themselves, and enjoy by pure assumption and usurpation? But, they may say, they represent the great majority of the people of the State: Doubted: but suppose they do? Have minorities not rights? And do they reflect that their practice is in the teeth of constitutional provisions assigned expressly to protect the rights of minorities?! The Senate Committee dismissed McCracken*s charges and supported the university*s religious attitudes and pol­ icy. We are unanimously of the opinion that the general charge of sectarianism is a mistaken one. The teachings of the University are those of a liberal and enlightened Christianity, and in the general and highest and best use of the term. This is not, in our opinion, sectarian. If it is, we would not have it changed. A school, a society, a nation, ■^McCracken, Religion in the University, o£. pit., pp. 14-15.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

106 devoid of Christianity, is not a pleasant specta­ cle to contemplate. We cannot believe the people of Michigan would denude this great University^ of its fair, liberal, and honorable Christian char­ acter, as it exists today. The findings of McCracken and those of the Senate Committee do not differ as to fact, but as to interpretation. McCracken was a rationalist, who intended to alter the views of a people who were saturated with religious beliefs, and to whom Christianity was synonymous with morality, good gov­ ernment, and justice.

The prevailing climate of opinion was

such that the legislature and the university were more anx­ ious to convince the public that there did prevail in the university a religious culture in the broadest Christian sense, than to refute charges of the existence of religious influence. ^■McCracken, Religion in the University, op. cit., p. 9. See also Journal of the Senate of the State of Michi­ gan. 1873, Part II, pp. 1965-2018. Lansing: W. S. George & Co., 1873, for a full report on the McCracken-University of Michigan controversy.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

CHAPTER VTII SECULARISM, CATHOLICISM, AND NATIVISM AS FACTORS IN PUBLIC EDUCATION McCracken’s demand for a secular policy at the University of Michigan foreshadowed a trend which, was ev­ ident in the United Statessbetween the years 1875 and 1900. It was the era which Professor Arthur Schlesinger has called the "critical period in American religion."-*-

These years

witnessed serious threats to accepted beliefs and dogmas. Darwinism, biblical criticism, an increasing study of other world faiths, industrialism,

all presented a challenge to

organized religion. This period saw the ..•■formation in 1873 of the Liberal Lwa.gue, whose spokesman was Francis E. Abbot, editor of the Index.

The Liberal League called for the taxing of church

property^ the discontinuance of chaplains in governmental agencies; the prohibition of the Bible in the schools; the abolition of judicial oaths; the withdrawal of Sunday and Sabbath laws; and the repeal of all legislation which pro­ posed to enforce "Christian morality."

Abbot urged liberals

to unite for the purpose of secularizing all national, state, and municipal governemental a g e n c i e s . I n a lofty tone Abbot ^•Arthur M. Schlesinger, "A Critical Period in American Religion, 1875-1900," Proceedings of the Massachusettss Historical Society, LXIV (June, 1932), 523-47. 107

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

108

called upon his fellow members to free the nation from church domination.1 Let us boldly and with high purpose meet the duty of the hour • Rouse, then to the great work of freeing America:' from the usurpations of the Church! Make this continent from ocean to ocean sacred to human liberty. Prove that you are a worthy descendant of those whose wisdom and patriotism gave us a consti­ tution untainted with superstitions; shake off your slumbers, and break the chains to which you have too long tamely submitted.2 It is difficult to ascertain how far-reaching was Abbot's call.

We do know that McCracken of Detroit was a

reader and contributor to the Index, and that there did exist a chapter of the Liberal League in Detroit.

There

seems to be little evidence, however, of the latter's in­ fluence in local or Michigan affairs. Francis Adams, a contemporary, described the rising secularism but expressed the belief that the majority of citizens were satisfied with the reading of the Bible in the schools.

He divided the opponents of the existing school

systemm into two groups: first, the denominationalists, who wished that the school funds be turned over to their charge pro rata, and second, the secularists, who proposed to exclude the Bible from the schools.

However he believed that "the pre­

vailing tone of the schools ...is Christian and Protestant,”® Philip Schaff ,"Church and State in the United States, Paperss of the American Historical Association,-II, 391-543. Hew York: G.P.Putnam's Sons, 1883. Slbid., 443-4. ^Fr ancis Adams, The Free School System of the United States, pp.159-60. London: Chapman and Hall, 1875.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

109

A survey of the reports of the meetings of the Mich­ igan State Teachers’ Association and the publications of the superintendents of public instruction does not reveal any major

chgnges in the attitudes or practices of the schools

insofar as religion and the Bible are concerned.

Thus we

find at the meetings of the Michigan State Teachers' Association in 1878 and 1377 attacks upon Catholics who wished to divide school funds, and a continued emphasis on the need for moral education in the schools.1

In 1876 when

President Grant advocated a national amendment to the consti­ tution to assure the separation of church and state, the Rev­ erend VV.D. Love, expressed concern to Michigan educatorss over President Grant’s stand.

Love was especially perturbed

since the proposed amendment might exclude the Bible from the public schools.

He restated the theory that this was

a Christian nation and that religious beliefs were part of our national life.2

In 1877 another speaker charged the

Catholics with spreading false rumors about the public schools being "godless” and "nurseries of vice," and urged listeners to be on guard against enemies of the American school system.^ In 1879 a lone voice at the Michigan State Teachers’ Association urged that ‘religious education be omitted from ^Transac tions of the Michigan State Teachers' Association, 1876, pp.77-3. Lansing, Michigan. 2Ibid., p.90. ^Annual Report of the Superintendent of Public Instruc­ tion, pp. 231-32. Lansing: W.S. George & Co., 1878.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

110

the public schools.

The speaker was the Reverend Kendall

Brooks, who contended that the constitution excluded the idea of a national religion, and that the school, a crea­ ture of the state, could not advance what the state was prohibited from doing.^

Brooks represented, however, a

minority viewpoint judging from the speeches and resolu­ tions adopted at the conventions. The issue of moral education and particularly the Bible were of such national interest that at the National Convention of Teachers held in Chicago in 1877, the topic was discussed and the group overwhelmingly adopted a reso­ lution favoring moral training and urged the continuance of Bible reading in the schools.

2

Resolved, That the attempt to separate the cultiva­ tion of moral and intellectual powers which pre­ vails to a certain extent in the school system of today, is unphilosophical, injurious to children, and dangerous to the state, and further, Resolved, That in the judgment of this association, the iilble should be recognized as the text-book of ethics, and that the word of God, which made free schools, should hold an honored pl^pe in them.3 Evidently some changes had taken place, in the schools for in 1887 we find Professor J. W. Ewing of Alma College, warning local educators of the dangers of secularization. Ewing spoke strongly in defense of religious training in the -^-Annual Report of the Superintendent of Public In­ struction. 1879, pp. 125-25. Lansing; W. W. George & Co., 1880

.

2W. A. McAtee, Must the Bible Go? A review of the Edgerton case in Wisconsin, 1890, Madison: Tracy, Gibbs, 1890.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Ill schools.

He said:

“The secularizing spirit has gone through

the cities and spread over the country to a great extent; but the public mind is becoming awakened and the moral pendulum is beginning to swing in the other direction."1 Although secularists during these years could boast of several court decisions which upheld boards of education that withdrew the Bible from the schools, it was generally conceded that school practices had not changed radically. Philip Schaff, prominent historian of the Protestant church, who addressed the American Historical Association in 1888, upheld the view that this was a Christian nation and ex­ pressed the opinion that four-fifths of the schools in the nation practiced reading of the Bible, the singing of hymns, and the recital of the Lord*s Prayer.^ On the whole the demand for secularization in the schools was the scattered protest of a few intellectuals rather than that of a mass movement.

Although, it is no

doubt true that this small group had a greater influence than its numbers, the measure of its influence upon the schools was limited. A greater pressure on the school came from forces which revived the nativist policies of the mid-century, whose Influence was extensive upon national politics and the school system.

One of the most vocal of these groups

1Fifty-first Annual Report of the Superintendent of Public Instruction of the State of Michigan, for the year 1887. p. 15. Lansing: Thorp & Godfrey. 1888. ^Schaff, Church and State in the United States, op. cit., p. 475.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

112 was The American Protective Association which was formed, in 1887.

This organization was strongly opposed to Catholicism,

it urged the curbing of immigration, and warned of the dan­ gers to the public schools.

It is estimated that this group

had a strength of about a million votes, mostly in the Repub­ lican party.

Although its membership was strongest in rural

Protestant areas the association was influential enough in Detroit to publish its

own organ, The Patriotic American,

to promote laws for the restriction of immigration, the exten­ sion of the time required for naturalization, compulsory public education for all children, and for prohibiting a "Romanist” from holding any position in the public school system.2

It would not be proper to label the American fro-

tective Association a Protestant organization, though its membership was composed largely of those from Protestant denominations, and some of its school policies were similar to those endorsed by Protestant churches. A review of state-church relationships indicates that there were years in which the underlying current of antagonism between religious groups burst forth in a pro­ nounced manner.

The election year of 1853 was such a year.

Another occasion was the year, 1870, when the Pope proclaimed the decree of papal infallibility.

This proclamation was fol­

lowed by a renewal of bitterness over the Bible in the schools, "foreigners,11 and the division of school funds.

The year 1892

proved to be another such year. -^-Stokes, Church and State II, op. cit., p. 399, %The Patriotic American, February 7, 1891.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

113

A series of events in 1892 relate to the unrest which stirred both the nation and Detroit.

These include

the national election, the celebration of the Columbus Centennial marked by huge Catholic parades in many cities, the emphasis on the part of Catholics that Columbus, the discoverer of America, was a Catholic, the controversy be­ tween two factions in the Catholic church over public school policies, and the signs of the coming depression of 1893-*All led to bitter anti-foreign feelings and stirred up nativist reactions.

The controversy between the two fac­

tions in the Catholic church over public school policy became especially tense when the Pope sent his personal emissary,, Monsignor Sattoli, to settle this controversy. The news that an Italian citizen was sent to settle an Ameri­ can school problem served to strengthen prejudice and ill feelings. The spark which kindled a heated controversy in Detroit between Protestants and Catholics was a resolution presented by a member of the Detroit Board of Education urging that only those candidates who were graduates of the public high school be hired as teachers.

The resolution expressed

the conviction that graduates from public schools were bet­ ter teachers in the common schools and should, therefore, be hired for the positions. Whereas. It has been thoroughly and satisfactorily demonstrated that teachers in our schools who have not received their education in our public schools do not show as good results in their work as those who have secured their education in our public schools; nofct be it

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

114

Resolved, That henceforth no person shall be eligi­ ble to teach in our public schools who has not received his or her entire education in our pub­ lic schools, and shall be a graduate of one of our high schools.1 Although Inspector:Coffin's resolution was tabled in May, 1892, in September of the same year it was evidently put into practice without formal adoption.

On September 22,

1892, the Proceedings of the Detroit Board of Education carried a long letter from the pastors of several Catholic churches protesting the action of the board of education in denying to graduates of parochial schools the right to par­ ticipate in the examinations for teacher placement.

The

board denied that religious motives were the cause of its action and explained that the policy to hire public high school graduates was one of long standing although not al­ ways observed.

Then the board hit back at its critics by

asserting that the public school was one institution which did maintain respect for peoples of all religions and that if discrimination was practiced in Detroit, it was on the part of the Catholic clergy which refused the sacraments to pupils who attended public schools. 2 The action of the board of education was the signal for a long and drawn out controversy in the local press. Dozens of letters for and against the board's action appeared in the press; editorials praised and censured the board; speakers denounced "Romanism"; and charged that certain board ^•Journal of Proceedings of the Board of Education of the Citv of Detroit, 182-93, May 24, 1892. ^Ibid., September 22, 1892.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

115 members were active associates of The American Protective Association filled the air. A leaflet which aroused wide anti-Catholic sentiment was a publication which described the policy of the Catholic church on public education.

A citation was taken from the

Official Calendar for September. 1892. of the local Church S.S. Paul and Peter which was used to prove the denial to a Catholic child the privileges of making his or her First Communion unless it had been11in continual attendance for two years in a Catholic Parochial School."1 Where shall I send my child? Shall it be to the Catholic School whence it shall return daily with the blessings of God upon its brow? Or shall it be to the Public School, where I am strictly for­ bidden to send it, and whence, after contact with Jew and Gentile, it will daily return to show but a greater loss of the blessings confirmed by Bap­ tism? Have I enough of the old Catholic spirit to send my child where its character will be formed Catholic and strong; or will I kneel down and sacrifice it to Mammon and pride? Shall van­ ity keep me from consulting my pastor before hurling my little pearls before the swine of irreligion?2 The Detroit press was divided on the action of the board.

The Detroit Journal supported the Board's policy,

while the Hews and Free Press condemned it.

The Journal

restated the board's position that students who were prod­ ucts of the public schools would make better teachers since they understood and appreciated these schools better.

5

1,1Has the Parent the Right to Direct the Education of the Child?” leaflet in Parson Notebook. I, in Burton Histori­ cal Collection, Detroit Public Library. 2

Church Calendar and Parish Society Bulletin. II, No. 10. S.'s’. Peter and Paul's (Jesuit), Detroit, Michigan. ^The Detroit Journal, October 14, 1892.

R eproduced

with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Tlie News, on tile other hand, ridiculed, the board*s step called it unfair to a large segment of the city population.^The Free Press labeled the board’s action as "protection run mad," evidently supporting the charges of those who claimed that the board’s policy was prompted by those of its members who followed the American Protective Association.

The Free

Press recalled the recent Columbus Day Celebration in the city and expressed sarcasm over the board’s action. The life and career of Columbus is essentially educational; but as Christopher was a foreigner and never graduated from the high school we do not see how Detroit pupils can consistently with their obligations to the board of education learn anything from his life or career.2 Letter writers on both sides of this issue were equally bitter in their comments.

Catholic citizens objected to the

discrimination shown on the part of the board to citizens who shared the cost of public school taxation. ^

Others charged

that the board's action was "an exhibition of the rankest kind of bigotry," and that its policy was adopted to satisfy 4 the American Protective Association and the Sons of America. Those who supported the board recalled the bitter charges of the Catholic clergy against the public schools, and expressed the opinion that if Catholics did not approve of public education and called its schools "godless", they ought to stay out of them.

A writer who signed himself

^■The Detroit News. October 14, 1892. ^The Detroit Free Press. October 17, 1892. ^Detroit Journal. October 8, 1892. ^The Detroit News, October 14, 1892.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

1 1 7

A Taxpayer”, charged that Catholicism spread illiteracy wherever it reigned* In defense of the public schools of the City of Detroit I want to ask what has Romanism done for Italy, Spain or Mexico, where on the average only 27 out of every 100 can read or write?*..Why do Catholics ask to be represented in our public schools? We don*t ask to run theirs Another letter writer protested against Catholic attitudes to public schools and declared that no Catholics should be permitted to teach in' the schools. They say our school is godless. What made it what they call godless? When the Bible was read there was a great howl, and when the Bible was taken out they howled again. What do they want anyway?... I say there should not be a Catholic teacher al­ lowed in our school tinder any consideration. Do you find one Protestant teacher in their schools?^ On October 27, 1892, a member of the board of educa­ tion proposed a resolution which slightly altered its policy on the hiring of teachers, although the change did not satisfy the Catholic citizenry.

The board approved the resolution

and ruled that hereafter all applicants for teaching posi­ tions would be required to take a series of examinations, except those students who were graduates from the public high school and had certificates of recommendation.

The close­

ness of the vote on the above resolution, nine to seven, revealed that the issue split the board into two camps. Church leaders from both Catholic and Protestant ^-Detroit Journal. September 30, 1892. ^Detroit Journal. October 4, 1892* ^Journal of Proceedings of the Board of Education, op. cit., November 10, 1892.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission

118

groups took part in the controversy.

The Reverend Father

Savage criticized the hoard of education for its policy on the hiring of teachers and Father Van Dyke called upon Catholic citizens to unite politically to remedy the situ­ ation. The recent decisions of the hoard of education against Catholics, shows the intense higotry of the hoard...Never forget a single name of the incom­ petent men of the hoard of education...There will he only one result to such movements, and that will he to force the Catholics, as an entire hody into some of the political camps.1 The Free Fress reported a speech hy the Rev. R. T. Savin, pastor of the Central Methodist Episcopal Church, who spoke on the evils of immigration.

Savin claimed that

most of our American criminals were foreign horn and that three-fourths of the "discharged convicts of Ireland find their way to America.”

Charging foreigners with a disre­

gard for the hospitality that America has shown them he bemoaned the fact that America has become the "garbage pit of the world.”^

The Detroit Journal reported on a Metho­

dist conference in Rock River, Illinois, which warned the people of America that our public schools were threatened "hy the very thing that Washington said would not he toler­ ated - foreign interference."^ To leave out the efforts of those citizens who made an effort to bring peace and good will to the embittered Detroit News, October 17, 1892. ^Detroit Free Press. October 17, 1892. ^Detroit Journal, October 11, 1892*

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

119

community would result in a distorted view.

Particularly

outstanding were several sermons "by the Reverend Reed Stuart, of the First Congregational Church, on "Religion and Educa­ tion."

Mr. Reed analyzed the existing conflicts and attrib­

uted these to partisanship on the part of both Catholic and Protestant groups.

He urged a secular policy for the schools

as the sole common ground on which all sects could meet.^* The statement on the school question issued by Monsignor Satolli, the Pope*s emissary, favored the liberal sector of the American Catholic church and softened the out­ spoken hostility of Catholic groups to the public schools. Although Satolli urged and supported parochial schools, he did not, on the other hand, condemn those Catholics whose children attended public school, but urged instead that Sun­ day Schools be erected for their benefit.

Satolli*s state­

ment led even the Detroit Journal to write an editorial on "A Wiser Vatican. Although there were some signs of increasing secular­ ism in the last quarter of the 19th century, it was evident that when controversies arose, Protestant hegemony was still making itself felt.

The American Protective Association with

its emphasis on narrow nativism and the exclusion of Catholic teachers from public schools, revived religious strifes and strengthened the determination of powerful Protestant groups to reject secularism in the schools. ^Detroit Free Press. December 12, 1892. ^Detroit Journal, December 18, 1892.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

CHAPTER IX THEL,PFEIFFER CASE, A SYMBOL OF RISING SECULARISM Hardly three years had elapsed since the school battle of 1892 when the Detroit Board of Education again became involved in a community-wide debate over the role of religion in the schools. former

This conflict differed from

controversies since it was no'': longer a Protestant-

■' Catholic Issue.

The Protestant churches wereostill involved,

but the opposition to religion in the schools arose from German "free thinkers" and Jews. In late 1895, Inspector Hall, a member of the Detroit Board of Education, introduced a resolution that each teacher •in the schools be required to read daily the Lord’s Prayer:: and call upon pupils in the classroom to repeat the prayer In unison.

Hall suggested that pupils whose parents objected

to this practice be excused from participating in the exer­ cises, although he expressed a belief in the need for the acknowledgment of a Supreme Being "who has in His bountiful munificence bestowed upon the children of this city the - blessings of a free, public education." ^

Inspector Hall's

resolution was referred to a committee which reported back to the board that although the members were sympathetic to Inspector Hall's views, they felt that at the time it would not prove to the best interests of the school to introduce lJour nal of the Proceedings of the Board of Ed-* ucation of the City of Detroit, 1895-6, p.152, October 24, 1S95 120

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

121 prayers.

The committee urged tliat the proposal be dropped

and the board concurred.^T&e issue of moral education raised by Inspector Hall was soon revived.

In June, 1896, the Committee on Text­

books and Course of Study brought in a lengthy report " on the role of religious and spiritual education in the schools.

It said

that this need had been felt for over a decade and that al­ though Detroit schools had promoted intellectual growth "there had been wanting sufficient attention to the promotion of those heart qualities which are absolutely needed for the proper development of character."2

The committee showed great

concern over the secular trend in the nation*s schools and dis­ played grief over the lack of ethics and morals. It has been truly said that the *educational systems of the United States have a strong and broad foundation in r eligion and morality. Its early record is true to law, to the welfare of the state, of society and of the individual. We must protect and improve this system for the good of all people. If we limit it to a narrow and exclusively material or secular system of instruction, the result will be the deterioration of the national type, and the loss of finer and firmer qualities which make citizens well balanced and symmetrical In character. Personal purity and un­ selfish conduct thrive in those who are alive in all their faculties, intellectual and moralI3 In light of the above needs the committee reported on ^-Journal of the Proceedings of the Board of Education bf the City of Detroit, 1895-96, October 28, 1895. 2Ibid., June 11, 1396. 3Ibid.,

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

122 a plan, promoted by a group of citizens of Chicago, which sought to bring moral ana spiritual values to the school. The Chicago Committee edited a book consisting of readings from the Bible.

This book, according to the committee, had

been approved by representatives of all faiths for its nondenominational character.1 On September 24 , 1896, the board of education approved by a vote of eleven to two the recommendation of the Committee on Text Books and Course of Study and de­ cided to purchase 4,000 copies of the book, Readings from the Bible. It was estimated that this number would provide twenty copies for each elementary schoolroom.2 The board*s decision brought a protest from several citizens, and on October 8, 1396, Inspector Liphardt moved that the board reconsider the decision to purchase Readings from the Bible. Several citizens appeared before the board to represent the Detroit Socialer Turn-Verein, an organization composed of citizens of German origin, which had adopted a resolution opposing the introduction of religion in the schools.

Inspector Liphardt questioned the legality of spend­

ing public funds for religious purposes and asked the

board

not to purchase these books until it received legal advice on the constitutionality of the act.

By a vote of 9 to 7

the board overrode all protests and the decision to purchase the books remained intact. ^Ibid., June 11, 1896. 2Ibid., 1896-97,

September 24, 1896.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

12 3

The press reported several meetings on the part of German citizens protesting the action of the board

spec­

ulated on the possibility of a legal move to stop this action.^ On October 22, 1896, the board of education was notified by the Acting Mayor of Detroit, George Beck, that he had re­ viewed the minutes of the last board of education meeting and the decision to purchase 4,000 copies of Readings from the Bible, did not meet with his approval* The law compels all citizens, irrespective of creed or of religious beliefs, to support our public schools* To introduce as a textbook any book which may conflict with, or give offense to the religious creed of any citizen, is un-American, unjust «nrj contrary to the letter and spirit of our institutions. There are books by the score which will teach the cardinal virtues, and, at the same time, give the required practice in reading without dragging in the Bible and levelling it to the position of a textbook. There are Sunday schools where the Bible can receive due and reverent attention. It has no place as a textbook in our public schools. Very respectfully, 2 George Beck, Acting Mayor. The board of education clung to its purpose and went ahead with its pl&ns to introduce the books.

At the same

time groups supporting the board’s action also became vocal. On October 24, 1896, the Michigan Christian Advocate, of­ ficial organ of the Methodist church, published an editorial, ’‘Bigotry Outdone,” in which the editor strongly condemned the action of that"certain class of German citizens” who objected to the Readings from the Bible.

The Advocate urged the board

^•Detroit Free Press. October 14, 1892. 3Journal of Proceedings of the Board of Education of of the City of Detroit. 1896-97. October 22, 1892.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

124 to resist any legal pressure on the part of the objectors. The Advocate scorned the arguments regarding the constitutional­ ity of religious teaching in the schools and asserted that the move was prompted by a hatred on the part of these citizens to Christianity.

“It springs from the hearts of men out of

sympathy with Bible truth, and who spare no pains to strike at the slightest semblance of Christianity.whenever ooportunity presents itself. "3As in former conflicts nativist feelings ran high. On Sunday, October 25, 1896, the Reverend J.LI. Patterson of the Westminster Presbyterian Church, devoted his sermon to the issue of the Bible in the schools.

He criticized Acting

Mayor Beck for his stand, and expressed satisfaction that the objectors to the book, Readings from the Bible, were largely “foreign born citizens."

The Free Press which reported the

sermon said that "in conclusion the Rev. liar. Patterson re­ ferred to the character of the opposition in strong language and he asked whether Detroit was to be run by atheists and secularists." The press reported on many sermons in Protestant churches devoted to the issue of the Bible in the schools.

All support­

ed the board of education and many groups promised financial support to aid the board if a legal battle should arise.

On

On November 1, 1896, several sermons were delivered in which ^Michigan Christian Advocate. October 24, 1896. 2

Detroit Free Press, October 26, 1896.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

■

125

1

the central theme again was that this is a Christian nation

■

and that foreign-born citizens were attempting to alter the

■

fabric of the national character.

I I

I ■ I I

This nation is a Christian nation. The Bible was In the schools in the first palce. Because here and there a few men oppose it, shall we change the whole character of our institutions? Ninety-nine out of every hundred who oppose it have not been here more than one generation.^

I

When the ministers of various Protestant churches

I

reported that the book in question had been endorsed by

|

clergymen of different faiths, we found, for the first time,

B

a letter

I

members were

in one of the local newspapers asking why non—church ignored in this matter.2

I

On November A2, 1896, the board of education met and

I

announced that it received many petitions from church groups

I

calling upon the board to disregard the veto of the acting

I

mayor and urging it to adopt Readings from the Bible. All the

I

petitions read were from Protestant churches: The PastorTs

I

Onion, representing the pastors of the Protestant churches,

I

the Detroit Women*s Christian Temperance Union, the Detroit

I I

Baptist Ministers, and many others. 3 If Catholic or Jewish

I

groups supported the measure they failed to send in resolu-

I

tions.

I

shown by thecommunity and proceeded with

I I

^Rev. R. J. Service, “Bible Readings in the Public Schools," Detroit Free Press. November 12, 1896.

I I I

The board expressed satisfaction in the support

^Ibid.,

its plans to

November 9, 1896.

5Journal of Proceedings of the Board of Education of the City of Detroit. 1896-97. November 12, 1896.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

126 introduce spiritual and moral instruction into the schools. The Detroit Free Press expressed its disapproval of the board’s plan and urged the latter to rescind its deci­ sion.

The editor disputed the theory of majority rule and

suggested that in matters pertaining to religion the rights of minority groups must be observed.

"Tomorrow," he said,

"or the next year the majority may be composed of a single sect, and the selections may be revised to suit the views of that particular sect."^The board of education ordered, in the meantime, that the books be read the last fifteen minutes of the school day.

A provision was also made that those pupils whose parents

objected to Readings from the Bible should be excused from attendance. On November 27, 1896, Rabbi Grossman, the religious leader of a local Jewish synagogue, was reported to be opposed to the board’s measure.

The rabbi charged that the board had

acted in great haste and that its proposal was regarded by his congregation as sectarian.

Then the rabbi revealed to

the press that he had written to many of the prominent Jews who were listed as endorsers of the book, and all denied their approval of it.

Several replies published by Rabbi

Grossman revealed how the Chicago Women’s Educational Union, the sponsors of Readings from the Bible, had quoted sentences and phrases out of context and misrepresented their true 2

opinions.

^Detroit Free Press, November 15, 1896. 2Ibld..

November 27, 1896.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

127 The fraudulent practice used to obtain endorsements for the book, although it did not relate to the issue of state and church, nevertheless served as a slight setback for • the proponents of Readings from the Bible* For a group pro­ fessing to spread morality, to descend to the use of unethical measures provided opponents with strong and effective weapons. Some s:ai-d , that since the books were sold to the board under a misapprehension, the publishers should take the books back even though the board had already stamped them with its official stamp.

The editor of the Free Press said, “it is

the purpose of the book, we have been told, to teach morality; but what sort of morality is taught by the fraud which has been practiced in getting it introduced.’*^ But the issue was centered upon the legality of teaching the Bible rather than upon the honesty of the sponsors or publishers,

One issue of contention was whether certain

passages in the book were sectarian.

Some groups charged

that much of the content of the book was Protestant dogma. This criticism was particularly resented by the Michigan Christian Advocate, especially when objections were raised against several sections in which Jesus Christ was extolled. We believe in strict non-sectarianism in the man­ agement of our public schools, but we do not be­ lieve that in a Christian land a few extremists, out of sympathy with the very elements which give a Christian character, "Should be allowed to define •^•Detroit Free Press. November 30, 1896

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

128

what sectarianism is. If it be sectarian to respect Jesus Christ, then the whole world is fast becoming sectarian. The handful of Detroit objectors, who seem to have the sympathy of one or two daily newspapers, should get into line with the procession.1 The opposition of Jewish citizens to the Readings from the Bible

drew the attention of several Protestant

ministers who devoted sermons to this subject.

The Reverend

Dr. Thoburn expressed consternation at the sight of “the descendants of Abraham joining hands with the socialists.” In a spirit of friendly warning he suggested that it ill became "that time and God-honored people to raise their voice against the corner stone of the only country which never persecuted them."^

The Reverend C.W. Blodgett

delivered a sermon on the “Jews and the Bible.”

He spoke of

America as a Christian nation and expressed regret that Jewish citizens did not appreciate its freedom.

He termed

the United States a “Bible land" and called upon recent set­ tlers to acquaint themselves with American customs and tra­ ditions. 3

The Reverend John Reid, a Presbyterian minister,

defined the issue as one between Christianity and infidelity. "It is," he said, “an endeavor to divorce our public schools from the spirit in which they were founded and from the end for which they were supported.

The whole question turns

upon the attitude of this land to the Christian faith."4 ^•Michigan Christian Advocate, December 5, 1896. ^Detroit Free Press. December 7, 1896. 3Ibid., December 14, 1896. 4Ibid.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

129

The Michigan Christian Advocate continued its sup­ port of the. hoard*s policy.

In one of its euitorials it

pointed to the existing gambling dens, the saloons, and the general vice of the day and attributed these to the secular influence in America. The present increase of crime in America is the direct outgrowth of the current laxity of sentiment and belief with respect.to the only restraints which can hold perverse, human nature in check, viz., the law of God, the certainties of punishment, and the realities of salvation through Jesus Christ. We charge upon the liberalism, spiritism, and noBibliasm of our day the responsibility for the present prevalence of sin and crime.1 The minutes of the board of education reveal that the public had not dropped the issue of the Bible.

Petitions

were placed before the board at each regular meeting.

The

minutes of December 22, 1896, contained a letter from the Detroit Women’s Christian Temperance Union commending the board for its policy and assuring the members of the organi­ zation’s support. ^

Similar aid came from the Men’s League of

Calvary of the Presbyterian church.3 On January 28, 1897, Attorney Baubie reported to the board of education that one Conrad Pfeiffer, a citizen of Detroit and the father of a pupil in a local public school, had brought suit against the Detroit Board of Education on the grounds that the book, Readings from the Bible, violated the constitution.

He asked the Circuit Court of Detroit

^•Michigan Christian Advocate, December 12, 1896. ^Proceedings of the Detroit Board of Education. 189697. p. 209. 3

Ibid., p . 223•

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

to halt the hoard's action.

The board passed a resolution

to meet the issue in court and obtained the services or an attorney "without expense."^ Both Pfeiffer and the Detroit Board of Education presented legal briefs before the Wayne Circuit Court out­ lining their positions.

Pfeiffer's attorney charged that

the book, Readings from the Bible, was used as a textbook in the common schools of Detroit; that it was a religious book; that it contained doctrines approved only by some sects; and, that its use by teachers will turn them into teachers of sec­ tarianism .

He also contended that the state constitution

prohibited the use of public funds for sectarian purposes and that the board's action was in violation of this consti­ tutional act.

Pfeiffer's attorney quoted from theipetltion

presented by Detroit citizens, Pfeiffer among them, urging the board to rescind its decision.

The petitioners condemned

the use of public funds for religious purposes and challenged the board's competency on matters pertaining to theistic needs. The members of the Board of Education were not chosen because of any supposed qualifications they might possess to direct the teaching of religion, and their views upon that subject should not be thrust upon the parents and children of the City of Detroit. We prefer that our children should be instructed in religion by accredited clegymen of our own choosing.2 The board of education, on the other hand, defended its •^Proceedings of the Detroit Board of Education. 189697, pp. 245-6. ^“Petition to the Circuit Court of Wayne County" filed December 28, 1896. The people ex. rel. Conrad Pfeiffer vs. Board of Education of the City of Detroit.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

policy by asserting that it was the legal representative of the state in matters pertaining to education, and, that in such capacity it had the power to select the books to be used in the schools. The board denied

that the book was

sectarian and pointed to the fact that

out of 30,000 pupils

attending its schools, only 200 applications were made by parents requesting that children be excused from listening to the readings; and, that the teaching of broad principles of religion was not contrary to the "laws and customs of this State."

The board also stated that the majority of citizens

and taxpayers were Christians, who believed in the existance of Almighty God and the obligations to worship God; it quoted the Ordinance of 1787 in support of its stand; and declared that from the beginning of statehood to the present, public schools included the Bible in their program and the various textbooks contained references to Almighty God and also "numerous teach­ ings in regard to therelations of man to Him.1,1 Qn May 8, 1897, Judge Carpenter of the Wayne County Circuit Court handed down his decision on the petition of Pfeiffer.

The judge ruled that the sole issue to be considered

was Triaether the introduction of the book, Readings from the Bible, was in violation of the Michigan Constitution.

He ruled that

the constitution expressly forbade the use of public funds for ^-“Reply of the Detroit Board of Education to the Petition ©f Conrad Pfeiffer," filed February 1, 1897, Circuit Court of Wayne County. The people ex. rel. Conrad Pfeiffer vs. Board of Education of.the City of Detroit.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

132 the support of teachers of religion, and that since the book, Readings from the Bible, was sectarian in content, the board*s action was illegal and the book should be removed from the school program.^The decision was lengthy and gave evidence of a great deal of study on the part of the jurist.

He reviewed consti­

tutional enactments and contended that their intention was clear and explicit so far as they pertained to church and state.

The -jurist stated that he considered the Bible a

religious work and since the book, Readings from the Bible. was composed of selections taken chiefly from the King James Version it was offensive to some citizens.

Judge Carpenter

raised the question as to what the book, Readings from the Bible, was to accomplish and concluded that regardless of the ob­ jectives held by the board of education, the end result would be the teaching of religion.

The judge took particular ex­

ception to the board’s provision that the book was to be read “without note or comment."

He denied that this would

exclude sectarianism . Can there be any doubt that the result of such action will tend to the acceptance by those pupils of the statements in the selections as true? If a book on political economy or any science were to be read to the pupils, without note or comment, would not the pupils accept the teachings of that book as true? Does not the fact that the teacher reads the book without note or comment warrant the pupil in believing that what is read is recommended to him as true? There can be but one answer to these questions . It may be suggested that the contents ^•Detroit Free Press. May 9, 1897.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

133 of the book are not taught to the pupils because it is simply read to them without note or comment.... Reading without note or comment is an unusual form of teaching. It may be an imperfect and incomplete form of teaching, but it is teaching, nevertheless, and equally within the constitutional prohibition.! The decision ruled that if religious teaching was forbidden by the constitution even the Bible could not be an exception.

Judge Carpenter concluded that it was impossible

to take the position that the Bible may be taught in the schools, "and other religious teaching excluded....

The

constitution prohibits all religious teaching in the schools, or it prohibits none."2

Upon the board’s claim that it in­

tended to teach morality and not religion, the jurist said: "Teaching religion at the expense of the taxpayers is for­ bidden by the constitution, and teaching morality is not commanded by it."3 In answer to the board’s contention that pupils whose parents objected to the readings of the Bible

were to be

excused from school, the judge replied that this was an unfair and discriminatory act.

Excusing children, according to the

justice, did not correct the practice. Those parents and those children have equal rights in the schools with the parents and the children of a different religious belief. By exempting them from attendance at the reading of the book, the children are simply deprived of the right of attend­ ing school, and receiving instruction during the ^•Detroit Free Press. May 9, 1897. 2Ibid. 3Ibid.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

regular school hours. Those who accept the doc­ trine of the hooks receive from the public a religious instruction which is denied to those who reject it.l On Monday, May 10, 1897, two days after Judge Car­ penter1s decision the Presbyterian Ministers’ Association of Detroit met and resolvBd that the board of education be urged to appeal the decision.

The ministers pointed out,

in their letter to the board, that when they had contributed money for the legal expenses involved in the Pfeiffer Case it was with the understanding that the board would appeal the case if necessary.2 The Detroit Board of Education met in special session on May 18, 1897, and, after reviewing the opinion of Judge Carpenter decided to appeal the ruling before the State Supreme Court* The appeal of the board of education was heard by the

Michigan Supreme Court in January, 1898*

In addition

to Pfeiffer’s attorney certain Jews of Detroit retained an attorney, Fred A. Baker, to present their objections to the board's religious policy.

After repeating the arguments

presented to Judge Carpenter in Detroit, the opponents of Readings from the Bible charged that the organization of a committee of Protestants for the defense of the book, the collection of money in various Protestant churches for the legal expenses, and the lack of support for the book on the Detroit Free Press. May 9, 1897. ^Proceedings of the Detroit Board of Education, 189697, pp.374-5.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

135

ol> Catholics or Jews were clear indications that this was a Protestant attempt to retain dominance in the public schools.

This last chargee, was particularly stressed by

P.A. Baker.

The Free Press in reporting on the presentation

before the court said: Hon. P.A. Baker in the course of the remarks declared with vehemence that the book is the last expiring effort of the protestants to cram the Bible down the throats of the people.1 The Detroit Board of Education reaffirmed its con­ tention that the book, Readings from the Bible, was not sectarian* that since it was read at the end of the school day children whose parents objected could leave; and that the intent of the framers of the constitution was to eliminate aenominationalism but not the broad principles of the Christian religion.

Basing his chief support upon the Or­

dinance of 1787, the board’s attorney claimed that the teach­ ing of the Christian religion was mandatory, since the Con­ stitution of Michigan derived its powers from this ordinance. ...it was the intention of the framers of this - ordinance that the Massachusetts system of schools, with their teaching of the Christian religion, should be forever established in the Northwest Territory; that Congress passed it with that in­ tention, and made provisions for its being carried out;... and that the constitution adopted the same view.2 In December, 1898, the Michigan State Supreme Court reversed the decision of Judge Carpenter by a 4 to 1 vote, Detroit Free Press. January 26, 1898. p. 582.

^Pfeiffer v Board of Education of Detroit. 118 Mich., -------------------------------------- ---------

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

and declared that the "board*s action.was legal.

The majority

of the court ruled that Bible reading, offering of prayer, and numerous references to "Almighty God and His attributes" were part of America*s heritage and were not denied by the Michigan Constitution.

"Does it harm one who does not,for

conscientious reasons, care to listen to readings from the Bible, that others are given the opportunity to do so^?" asked Judge Montgomery, author of the majority opinion.1 Reading from the Bible does not make a teacher, a religious teacher. The latter term could be applied only to a minister.

He

concluded his decision with the following statement: "I am not able to see why the extracts from the Bible should be proscribed, when the youths are taught no better authenticated truths of profane history. Justice Moore, who wrote the Singletdiasenisjaigx^pinion based his major argument upon the decision of Judge Car­ penter of Detroit.

Moore took issue with the stand of the

board of education that the Ordinance of 1787 called for the instruction of the Christian religion.

The justice questioned

the meaning of the term, "teachings of the Christian religion, and denied that there was any agreement upon this matter. If, under the ordinance of 1787 and the constitution, it is the duty of the school to teach religion, as counsel claim, it is not easy to see how the school can abdicate that function, and teach it to some of the pupils, and fail to teach it to the others.3 ^•tfeiffer v Board of Education of Detroit. 118 Mich.. p. 563. 2Ibid.. p. 569. 5Ibid., pp. 586-7

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Justice Moore concluded his decision with, a note of optimism which, aimed to refute the charges that American civilization was immoral, and that there was a special need for the school to teach religious values. Never at any time In the history of the world was there as much pune^religion as today. In no country in the world are religious truths more generally entertained than in our own. In no country in the world is there so compfete a sep­ aration of the church and state as with us. The growth of religious truth is encouraged by the growth of religious freedom. These things were recognized and acted upon by the framers of our organic law. The religious belief of all persons was not simply tolerated, but was placed upon an equality, by them.1 In spite of the board’s victory there evidently existed dissatisfaction with the book, Readings from the Bible for on December 22, 1898, the board of education passed a resolution that the books called Readings from the Bible "be gathered from thei different schools and the same be placed in the stockroom with the view of having the same exchanged for other books."2

Inspector Hall amended the

resolution to read that only the books "not in use" removed.

be

The board accepted Hall’s amendment, but the ...

general agreement on the resolution pointed to the existence of a growing secular influence which led to the removal of reading from the Bible in the Detroit public schools.

1Pfeiffer v Board of Education of Detroit. 118 Mich.. p. 595. 2

Proceedings of the Detroit Board of Education. 189899. p. 215.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

CHAPTER X OFFICIAL PROTESTANTISM DEFENDS NON-SECTARIANISM AS OPPOSED TO SECULARISM The interest, devotion, and influence of the Protes­ tant churches upon public education has been noted in pre­ ceding chapters.

It is of interest to observe the attitudes

about public schools expressed by Protestant leaders in state or nationalc hurch conventions.

The minutes, addresses,

and resolutions of such conventions indicate that the various churches sought to exert influence upon public education. Protestant sects between 1835 and 1900 were firmly opposed to parochial schools and favored strongly public ed­ ucation at the elementary level.

At the same time, they de­

sired that the public schools teach broad religious concepts, including the -Bible, and that they conduct daily prayers.

The

churches did occasionally differ in relation to the University of Michigan, especially in those instances where a particular denomination had a college of its own.

In general, however,

Protestant churches supported the university and expressed in­ terest in its moral and religious spirit.

The appointment of

ministers from various Protestant denominational groups as teachers in the university served a s a guarantee that higher education was in safe hands. In 1852, the year when Catholics appealed for the 138

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

139

division of school funds, Baptists expressed great satisfac­ tion with the progress

of the University of Michigan

wished it success in its endeavors

At the same time they

pointed out that our government was founded upon the Bible, which gave it a Christian character, and that it was of great importance that "the great, holy, and liberal prin­ ciples of the Gospel should be carried out in all depart­ ments of our national and state governments,"2

In the very

same year the Congregationalists met and praised the high moral and religious character of the University of Michigan, They also declared that they viewed "any divorcement of the University from evangelical religion in the appointment of its officials, with the deepest concern and regret,"3 In 1853 the Detroit Catholic Vindicator carried a report of a Methodist Conference which had adopted resolu­ tions concerning the University of Michigan and the public schools.

Both resolutions called for the teaching of Chris­

tian morals at lower and higher levels of education.

The

Methodists praised the regents for appointing as teachers in the university "Professors connected with various denom­ inations of Christians in the State."

They asserted their

opposition to sectarianism and concluded that they "deem it the duty of all Christians to unite in upholding our public schools and insisting that the highest principles

of morality

Proceedings of Baptist Convention. 1852, p. 5. ^Ibid., p . 6, ^Congregational Church, Minutes of 1852. p. 277,

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

be inculcated in them.”

The Vindicator interpreted the above

resolution as proof that Protestants used the schools for their own purposes, and declared that "these are sufficient proofs of the selfishness and disregard of public justice which influence these bodies.”1

Reilly, a Catholic writer, quotes Horace

Greeley as saying in the same year, "we believe the existence, popularity and usefulness of our schools have more to fear from Protestant assumption than from Catholic bigotry."2 A year later 3. R. Potter, Commissioner of Public Schools in Rhode Island, criticized Protestant domination in the public schools. In a lengthy report on Bible and Prayer3 in Schools, the commissioner expressed the opinion that if education was to prosper it must become non-sectarian in the fullest sense of the word.3 It Is said sometimes that this is a Protestant country, meaning, if they do not say it, that therefore, our Protestant religion should be taught in the schools.... If because Protestants first settled New England, the consciences of Catholics are not to be respected,then because Catholics first settled Maryland ..., the conscience of a Protes tant is not to be regarded in those states.... Has God appropriated any particular portion of the earth to any religion?4 In 1354 after the lively debates at the convention of the Michigan State Teachers1 Association on the Bible in the schools, the Methodist Episcopal Church met In Michigan and •^Detroit Catholic Vindicator, October 1, 1853. p.17.

2Daniel P. Reilly, Th e School Controversy (1391-93), Washington D.C.: Catholic University of America, 1943.

°EslH. Potter, Bible and Prayers in Schools, p.29. Providence: Knowles Anthony & Co, State Printers, 1855. 4Ibid., pp.22-23.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

adopted a report on education in the

public schools which

spoke for the need for non-sectarian influence in the schools The Methodists declared that this nation had drawn its social institutions from the Bible, and that its exclusion from the schools would be more harmful to the state tban to the church.

The conference report also mentioned the many sym­

bols of state government which were religious in nature and expressed the hope that the day would never come when this tendency would be altered. In a Christian country, a protestant Christian country, where our Public Instructions and laws are based upon the great principles of the Bible— the reading of the Bible and proper nonsectarian religious Instruction shall be excluded from our institutions of learning. And if existing laws are not favorable thereto, It is our duty to exert our influence to make them so.-*The last statement was one of few which posed the possibil­ ity that existing laws were opposed to religious influence. On some occasions various ministers expressed skepticism on the effectiveness of the public school to teach religion.

Some, like Bishop McCoskry, felt that this

was partly due to the indifference that church members, especially clergymen, displayed to the schools, and he urged greater interest on their part.

He said that Mthe

duty of every clergyman is to visit these schools.

He can­

not come there and Interfere with their studies, and teach the principles of our holy religion; but his very is a sermon.”2

presence

The Presbyterians^ who for a time explored

^•Methodist Episcopal Church. Minutes of 19th Session. p • 32 • ^Minutes, Methodist Episcopal Church. 1865, p. 60.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

the possibility of opening parochial schools, also urged their elders to visit the public schools more often, and to encourage the appointment of religious teachers and the intro duction of suitable books, "especially the Bible".1 This favorable attitude toward the public schools on the part of the Protestant churches seemed to prevail through out the years preceding and immediately following the Civil War.

However, after 1870 church members began to be con­

cerned about the dangers of secularism.

Skepticism, the

rejection of the supernatural, and the weakening of Chris­ tianity, were seen as tendencies of the age.^

The McCracken

incident of 1873, the publication of The Index, the formation of The Liberal

League, and the proposed Blaine Amendment

to the national constitution were all signposts of this new secularism.

Spokesmen for secularism, Protestant churchmen

among them, were gaining prominence and their publications became more and more numerous.

One of the popular volumes

of the period, Religion and the State» by the Reverend S. Spear dealt with the problem of the Bible in the schools, prayers, and existing Protestant influence.

The author

claimed that the function of the school was not to make or unmake Christians.

The school, he said, was not charged

with the responsibility to "predispose children to this or that form of religious faith". Detroit Tribune. June 3, 1867. P • 447.

^Minutes of the Methodist Episcopal Church. 1871. Ann Arbor: J. M. Arnold & Co., 1871.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

143

It does not propose a complete education, and does not propose a religions 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, It proposes a secular edu­ cation 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.-*Churchmen answered Spear by saying that they could not leave education entirely in the hands of government. They pointed to the fact that not only was denominationalism being ejected from institutions of higher learning, but Christianity Itself was being ejected.

This latter ten­

dency was the concern of the Methodist Episcopal Church when it pointed to this occurence in the University of Michi­ gan where ”even the halls of the university have been used for dancing purposes.11^

By 1879 the same church declared

that the state and church have separate functions In the educational system.

The former provided literary, scientific,

and technical training, and the latter, moral and religious culture. By and large the Protestant church maintained its former interest and support of the public schools, although on occasions it assumed the role of a friendly critic.

In

1S. Spear, D. D., Religion and the State or the Bible and the Public Schools, pp. 52-53. New York: Dodd, Mead & Co., 1876. p . 36.

^Minutes of the Methodist Episcopal Church, 1876, Detroit: J1. Ji. Arnold & Co., 1876.

p . 41.

^Minutes of the Methodist Episcopal Church. 1879, Lansing: W. S. George & Co., 1879.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

144

1884, the Committee on Christian Education and Christian Literature of the Michigan Protestant Episcopal Church declared: It is sufficient to say that so long as education provided by the public school is nearly or wholly secular, and so long as it is not mingled with denial in the sphere of Christian and Churchly training, we have no fears of any conflict between secular and religious training. The same conference, however, asserted that since the common schools were under the close scrutiny of the parent, there was no danger in sending their children there. But, when it came to sending students to a university, they advised their members to send their children to Albion Col­ lege, their denominational institution, and not to entrust them Mto a mixed faculty of a state university, which may be composed in part, at least, of agnostics and atheists11.2 In 1887 there met

In Washington, D.C. the National

Evangelical Conference which was attended by many prominent Protestant leaders and received with a great deal of national attention.

President Angell arffi tthe TPrlfrtggt&ht Episcbpal lead

es?>i Bishop Harris of Michigan attended the conference.

The

former was chairman of one of the sessions and the latter addressed the group.

At this meeting several spokesmen

stressed the dangers of secularism and a resolution was passed which was critical of Catholic encroachments upon American institutions.

p. 54.

The address of Bishop Harris received

^•Minutes of the Methodist Episcopal Church,1884, Eaton Rapids: Journal Steam Printing House, 1884. 2Ibid.. p. 90.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

145 special prominence and was quoted at the Michigan State Teachers * Association by speakers on the question of reli­ gion and the schools.

The Bishop was quoted on the dangers

of sectarianism and secularism upon education, ”1 live in a state whose Christian citizens have almost surrendered the common schools to the enemies of public education. YJho the enemies were was not quite evident, although the Bishop did say that the defense was to be carried on by "Anglo-Saxons”.

In light of his Importance as a state reli­

gious leader his words exerted great influence.

One notes

again a tendency on the part of the speaker to resort to nativism and an inclination to divide American society into two camps.

On the one side were the foreigners, the Catho­

lics, the socialists, and the opponents of the Sabbath and the Bible; while on the defensive were the Anglo-Saxons, the founders and builders of American civilization. Vast and hostile forces are being marshalled and firmly knit to attack all that we hold most dear.... We must be equally opposed to imperialism and socialism. This is a fit task for Anglo-Saxons, notwithstanding our enormous accretions from other races...The Bible, the Sabbath and liberty of con­ science must be defended, with Christ as our leader... Church and State must be separate... .Our common school system is the peculiar product of our AngloSaxon Christianity and we must stand for it against the very strong and dangerous attack of ultramontanism, (sic) which has taken advantage of our divisions to~banish the Bible from it, and then with savage inconsistency attacks it as Godless. •^Fifty-first Annual Report of the Superintendent of Public Instruction of the State of Michigan. 1887, pp. 15-16. Iansing: Thorp & Godfrey, State Binders, JLBob. ^Detroit Free Press. December 10, 1887.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

146 The latter attack, which was evidently aimed at Roman Catholics, was part of a national movement to defend the Bible and existing practices in the schools,

Philip

Schaff, prominent historian of the Protestant church in the United States, said in 1888 when he addressed the Amer­ ican Historical Association that Roman Catholics "must learn to appreciate Protestant Christianity, which has built up this country and made it great, prosperous and free."-*In the year 1892, when Detroit went through a bit­ ter Protestant-Catholic struggle, new trends on the part of certain Protestant groups, were in evidence.

The press gave

a great deal of prominence to a series of sermons given by the Rev, W, H • Davis of the First Congregational Church on the question of religion and the schools.

The Rev. Davis

advanced the proposition that church and state must be en­ tirely separated.

He opposed the separation of school funds

and supported the notion of a secular school.

As for the

Bible, he felt that it had no place in the schools and should be left to the individual home or sect.

“The schools”, he

said, belong to the masses and as the latter entertain all manners of religions it is safe policy to avoid touching upon religion in educational matters."2 The Michigan Christian Herald, ©aptis-tipubliea-fcipa5Jhatedn ±a£ Detroit, supported the stand of Dr. Davis and

Schaff, “Church and State in the United States", op. cit., pp. 473-7?. ^Detroit Free Press, November 14, 1892.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

called it a "striking indication of the sentiment in the religio-political discussions during the last twenty years." The newspaper added that a score of years ago, Dr. Davis1 stand would have cost him his pulpit.

The Herald discounted

the charge of godlessness made against the schools and chal­ lenged critics of public education to prove that children of parochial schools were more virtuous or better citizens. Ethical principles, such as reverance, obedience, truth, and righteousness, should be the responsibility of the school declared the editorial. How far the fundamental truths of Chris­ tianity will find place in public instruction and at what point we may stop short of being sectarian are delicate questions which tax the wisdom of our wisest and most discreet educators.1 It is clear that at the close of the nineteenth cen­ tury the role of the Protestant church as reflected in the Pfeiffer Case of 1896, and in nearly all general churchschool relations, the attitude of the Detroit churches on the role of religion in the school has not undergone any great change.

The desire to teach Protestant dogma in the

public school was as strong in 1896 as in earlier years.

It

may be recalled that sixty-five Protestants, representatives of the various churches, formed a city-wide committee to re­ tain the Readings from the Bible in ihe schools. Ministers of churches devoted their sermons to the cause of keeping the Bible in the schools.

Some of them re­

sorted to the Know-Nothing policy of putting dissenting gap Christian Herald, November 17, 1892.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

148

"foreigners" in their "proper places".

They repeated the

familiar strain that this was a Christian nation, and called upon immigrants to fall in line with American traditions. The arguments presented in defense of the Bible in the schools were not too far removed from those advanced in 1845, although by 1900 the proponents of secular education had gained strength.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

CHAPTER XI THE ADJUSTMENT OP SECTARIANISM TO SECULAR DEMANDS Before 1837 schools in Michigan and the country at large were usually religiously oriented educational insti­ tutions sponsored by various church groups.

To these

groups education and religion represented one integrated process to be carried on with zeal and determination.

Al­

though Americans had adopted a national constitution which was secular in character, the Protestant-theistic features of various existing agencies, the schools among them, did not change too quickly.

This tendency to retain Protes­

tant influence over the schools was especially true of those communities where the population was of a homogeneous nature, and where no one challenged traditional concepts and practices. In the original thirteen states, where schools had been in existence for longer periods of time, and where state constitutions had been adopted before state-church relationships had become sharpened, new legislation had to be devised when controversies, due to a shift in the make-up of the population, demanded such changes.

Legal steps to

enforce non-sectarianism were particularly true of such states as Massachusetts and New York.

In territories which

were established after 1830, attempts were made, at the time of statehood, to solve these church-state problems through constitutional legislation. 149

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Michigan was one of these frontier states which was admitted into the Union in 1837, and its founders were largely recent settlers who had left the eastern seaboard to build new homes in the west.

These settlers adopted a

constitution which defined the relationships between church and state, and provided for a school system in harmony with these views.

The discussions in Chapter II, bearing upon

the adoption of Michigan*s constitutions, especially the first one, presented evidence that the founders of the state were very sensitive to the state-church problem.

The debates

and decisions of the Constitutional Convention of 1835 lead to the conclusion that the intention of the delegates was not merely to assure non-sectarianism, but to exclude reli­ gion itself from the province of state agencies.

The refusal

on the part of the first convention to permit ministers of the various faiths to open its meetings with prayer, and the explicit prohibition in the Constitution of 1850 that "no money shall be appropriated for the payment of any reli­ gious service in either house of the Legislature" are indica­ tive of the trend which prevailed at the first constitutional conventions.

It can be said that the Constitution of 1835

was a more secular document than the one adopted in 1907. In spite of the high hopes that delegates of the first constitutional convention had for the avoidance of controver­ sies affecting church and state, it soon became evident that traditions were stronger than legal enactments.

For, before

ten years had elapsed, Protestants of Detroit were complaining that the elimination of the Bible from the local public schools

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

was a sectarian act and Catholics were contending that the reading of the Bible in the school was a definite mark of Protestantism, and that since the public school was denom­ inational in practice, school funds should be divided and each religious body be permitted to carry on its own school system. Chapters III, IV, and V describe the Protestant hegemony upon Michigan*s educational system.

Michigan*s

educational leadership in the persons of its superintend­ ents of public instruction, its members of board of educa­ tion, and its public school teachers were generally drawn from the various Protestant denominations.

At various

church conventions Protestant leaders expressed their sup­ port and admiration for the public school system and dis­ played an unusual Interest in the welfare of the University of Michigan.

Since official Catholic policy did not endorse

public education the schools were actually left in Protes­ tant hands.

It is only fair to say that if it had not been

for the early interest and leadership of the Protestant church to the schools of Michigan they would have been re­ tarded in growth and influence. Thus, the schools

of Michigan, which were designed

to operate under a secular constitution, were left to be administered by citizens, the majority of whom had a common, religious approach to education.

This traditional Protestant

heritage was marked by a firm belief that moral and religious education were inseparable.

Many Michigan educators, among

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

152

them several superintendents of public instruction, tended to group such concepts as irreligion. vice, and atheism under one category, and were of the opinion that, unless broad religious concepts were included in the curriculum, immorality, dishonesty, and corruption would result.

This

belief was linked to a methodology which was designed to achieve these moral and spiritual values; it consisted of the traditional reading of the Bible and the daily repeti­ tion of prayers. Equally strong, among Michigan educators, was the conviction that this was a Christian nation, founded and established by Protestant Christians, who had given this land a national Christian character, synonymous with Ameri­ can civilization.

The school, they argued, a creature of

that civilization, should, therefore, express and represent this Christian spirit.

In the early part of the nineteenth

century there were many references that America was a Protes tant nation.

However, with the influx of Catholics, the

term Christian nation became more popular.

It is clear, of

course, that Catholics did not agree with the concepts of Christianity practiced In the public schools.

The rights

of Jews, free thinkers, and others were ignored entirely. The proponents of the "Christian nation theory" cited national and state traditions to support their views; they pointed to the oath which was taken upon inauguration to public office; they quoted various laws on blasphemy enacted by the legislature; they spoke of the chaplains appointed by the national government; and they read from

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

those court decisions which gave strength to their conten­ tions.

These views were expressed by ministers of Protes­

tant churches, legislators, members of boards of education, and educators, to justify the retention of their religious teachings in the school curriculum. When differences over religion and education arose, and, as practices were being challenged upon constitutional grounds, the extremists of the above views began to air strong nativist feelings.

Instead of keeping to the merits

of their case they resorted to "scare" techniques.

They

lamented that the nation was being overrun by foreigners who did not show any appreciation for the land which had adopted them, and they warned Americans that these strangers were attempting to destroy the nation*s basic principles and to overthrow its established institution, the public school.

This technique was employed against the Catholics

in the battle of the 1850*s, and against the Germans and Jews in the Pfeiffer Case of 1896.

The above sentiments

were expressed not only by members of the Know-Nothing Party and the American Protective Association, but also by min­ isters of Protestant churches and members of the teaching profession. Detroit*s educational history discloses that, al­ though the Catholic clergy failed in its efforts to obtain public funds for the support of its own schools, it continued to be critical of the Protestant hegemony.

It charged that

the schools were Protestant, when the Bible was read in them,

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

154 and godless when it was removed.

This latter attitude to­

ward public education strengthened the position of many Protestants who contended that regardless of school policy, Catholics would remain the enemies of public education. While recognizing the contributions made by Protes­ tants to public schools, their efforts to retain in them a Protestant spirit and influence cannot be denied.

The views

of Superintendent Ira Mayhew on public education, which were approved by the state legislature, represented frank demands for the continuation of Protestant teachings in the schools. The speeches and documents of later superintendents of pub­ lic instruction, the strife of 1892, and the defense made by the Detroit Board of Education in the Pfeiffer Case, point to an unwillingness to relinquish Protestant control. When leaders spoke of a non-sectarian school system, whether they realized it or not, they meant an institution domina­ ted by Protestantism. A glance at the public schools between 1837 and 1900 reveals that their chief characteristic was adjustment to new conditions.

The educational scars of the seventy years covered

in this study were the growing pains of a great social insti­ tution.

At the same time, however, they reveal that Haven,

Tappan and McCracken were right in assuming that a non-sec tarian policy of religious teaching in the public schools was a contradiction of terms and would only lead to strife and disagreement.

Their thesis becomes increasingly strong when

one notes that the majority of conflicts which occurred in

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Michigan schools were not over secularism. tut over differ­ ences "between the various sects as to what non-sectarianism was.

Protestant leaders in public education were attempting

to achieve the difficult task of keeping religion in and sectarianism out of the public schools.

The series of dis­

putes and community upheavals which involved the public schools during seventy years point to the danger and fallacy of this course. The above policy was particularly difficult in Michigan, a state, whose political philosophy was inspired by Jefferson and Jackson, and whose schools were to be admin­ istered by a people who were bred and raised in a New England heritage stemming from Cheever and Cotton Mather.

And, if the

above combination were not difficult enough in itself, the social order had to withstand the test of adjusting to an ever increasing population of Catholics, rationalists, Jews and German "free thinkers".

Under such circumstances it is

not surprising that controversies arose, and at the same time it is a tribute to Americans that the public school survived and grew. The record of this period bears out the fact that it was simpler to draw up a political document, wherein state and church were to be separated, than it was to apply the theory to existing social institutions.

The writing of the

Michigan Constitution was the handiwork of a select few, while the administration of the schools called for the •cooperation of thousands. It must, of course, be remembered that the changes

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

156 which did come about in the schools particularly the secularizing tendencies of the latter half of the nineteenth century, also resulted from Protestant leadership.

It is true

that this group did not always win contemporary supoort, yet it was the influence and willingness of certain Protestant leaders to risk public scorn, which brought about many changes toward secularism in the schools.

Three leaders, Henry Tappan,

John D. Pierce, E. 0. Haven, each a minister of

a

Protestant

church, took a stand favoring the separation of religion and public education which jeopardized their positions in the community, yet they met the challenge with zeal and deter­ mination. Recognition must also be given to the free thinkers of the era, men like Francis E. Abbot, S. B. McCracken, Conrad Pfeiffer, and others.

Their faith in -American democracy,

their dissenting voices, and their zeal for secularism in education, led to a re-evaluation of the relationships of religion and education and which resulted in the establish­ ment of the public school as the unifying force in our American social order.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

bibliography

I.

Primary Sources A. Manuscripts

S.E. Douglas Papers, Burton Historical Collection, Detroit Public Library. Alexander Winchell Papers, Michigan Historical Collection, University of Michigan. B. Church Records Church Calendar and Parish Society Bulletin, II. wo.10. S.S. Peter ana Paul’s, 1892. (Jesuit) Detroit, Michigan. Congregregational Churches in Michigan. Minutes. 1849-92.

General Association

Journal of the Annual Conventions of the Methodist Epis­ copal Church in the Diocese of Michigan, 1850-1900. Proceedings of the Baptist Convention, 1852. 8c Gulley, Printers, 1852. C.

Detroit: Allen

Governmental Documents

Annual Report, Detroit Board of Education, 1842-1900. Annual Report of the Superintendent of Public Instruction of the State of Michigan, 1837-1900. The Debates and Proceedings of the Constitutional Convention of the State of Michigan, 1867, 2 vols. Lansing: John A. &err & Co., Printers to the State, 1867.

157

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

158

Documents Accompanying the Journal of the House of Representa­ tives or the State of Michigan at the Annual Session in 1838# Detroit: John S. Bags, 1838. Pp. vi/573. Documents Accompanying; the Journal of the House of Representa­ tives of the Stateof Michigan at the Annual Session in 1839. Detroit: John S. Bagg, 1839. fp>. 939. Documents Accompanying the Journal of the House of Representa­ tives of the State of Michigan at the Annual Session in 1840. 2 vols. Detroit: George Dawson, 1840. Pp. 1273. Documents Accompanying the Journal of the House of Representa­ tives of the State of Michigan at the Annual Session in 1841. vol. II. Detroit: George Dawson, 1841. Pp. 286. Documents Accompanying the Journal of the House of Representa­ tives of the State of Michigan at the Annual Session in 1842. Detroit: Bagg & H armon, 1842. Pp. vi/ 117. Documents Accompanying the Journal of the House of Representa­ tives of the State of Michigan at the Annual Session in 1847. Detroit: Bagg & Harmon, 1847. Pp. 589. Documents Accompanying the Journal of the Senate of the State of Michigan at the Annual Session in 1838. John S. b s.£S> 1838. Pp. v/ 531. Documents Accompanying the Journal of the Senate of the State of Michigan at the Annual Session in 1839. Detroit: John S. Bagg, 1839. Pp. v / 569. Documents Accompanying the Journal of the Senate of the State of Michigan at the Annual Session in 1840. 2 vol. Detroit: George Dawson, 1840. Pp. 1296. Documents Accompanying the Journal of the Senate of the State of Michigan at the Annual Session in 1841. Detroit: George Dawson, 1841. Vol. I. Pp. 610. Vol. II. Pp. v / 228. Documents Accompanying the Journal of the Senate of the State of Michigan at the Annual Session in 1842. Detroit: Bagg & Hannon, 1842. Pp. vi / 55. Documents Accompanying the Journal of the Senate of the State of Michigan at the Annual Session in 1843. Detroit: Ellis & Briggs, 1843. Pp. 82.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

159

Documents Accompanying tiie Journal of the Senate of the State of Michigan at the Annual Session in 1845. Detroit: Bagg & Harmon, 1845. £" No cumulative pagination Documents Accompanying the Journal of the Senate of the State of Michigan at the Annual Session in ~lft4.fi. Detroit: Bagg & Harmon, 1846. No cumulative pagination J Documents Accompanying; the Journal of the Senate of the State of Michigan at the Annual Session in 1847. Detroit: Bagg & Harmon, 1847. No cumulative pagination Documents Accompanying the Journal of the Senate of the State of Michigan at the Annual Session in 1849. Lansing: Munger & Pattison, 1849. Pp. iv / 132. Documents Accompanying the Journal of the Senate of the State of Michigan at the Annual Session in 1850. Lansing: R. W. Ingals, 1850. No cumulative pagination _y Documents Accompanying the Journal of the Senate of the State of Michigan at the Annual Session in 1859. Lansing: Hosmer & Kerr, 1859. £ No cumulative pagination _/ Documents Accompanying the Journal of the Senate and House of the Representatives of the State of Michigan, at the Annual Session of 1853. Lansing: G. W. Peck, 1853. No cumulative pagination J Documents of the Senate and House of Representatives at the Annual Session of the Legislature of 1844. Detroit: Bagg & Harmon, 1844. No cumulative pagination J Joint Documents Accompanying the Journal of the House of Representatives of the State of Michigan, at the Annual Session of 1841. Detroit: George Dawson, 1841. Pp. 610. Joint Documents Accompanying the Journal of the -House of Representatives of the State of Michigan, at the Annual Session of 1842. Detroit: Bagg & Harmon, 1842. Vol. II. PP. 441. Joint Documents Communicated to the Senate and House of Representatives of the State of Michigan, at the Annual Session of 1843. Detroit: Ellis & Briggs, 1843. Pp. 447.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

160

Joint Documents of the Legislature of the State of Michigan, at the Annual Session of 1849. Lansing: Hunger & Pattison, 1849, No cumulative pagination J Joint Documents of the Legislature of the State of Michigan. at the Annual Session of 1850. Lansing: R. W. Ingals, 1850. cumulative pagination J Joint Documents of the Legislature of the State of h scMfrarij at the Annual Session of 1851. Lansing: R. W. Ingals, 1851. £" Nocumulative pagination J Joint Documents of the Senate and House of Representatives at the Annual Session of 1846. Detroit: Bagg & Harmon, 1846. £~ No cumulative pagination J Joint Documents of the Senate and House of Representatives at the Annual Session of 1847. Detroit: Bagg & "Garmon, 1847. £" No cumulative pagination J Joint Documents of the Senate and .House of Representatives at the Annual Session 1848. Detroit: Bagg & Harmon, 1848. No cumulative pagination J Joint Documents of the State of Michigan for the year 1851. Vol. II. Lansing: Ingals, Hedges & Co., 1851. !_” No cumulative pagination JJ Joint Documents of the State of Michigan for the year 1852. Lansing: G. W. Peck, 1855. [_ No cumulative "" pagination J Joint Documents of the State of Michigan for the year 1854. Lansing! GeorgeW. Peck, 1855. No cumulative pagination Joint Documents of the State of Michigan for the year 1856. Lansing: Hosmer & Pitch, 1857. £ No cumulative pagination Joint Documents of the State of Michigan for the year 1857. Lansing: Hosmer & £err, 18587 No cumulative pagination

J

Joint Documents of the State of Michigan for the year 1860. Lansing! Hosmer & Kerr, 186l7 Z No cumulative pagination Joint Documents of the State of Michigan for the year 1862. Lansing! John A. Kerr & Co., 1863. ~[_ No cumulative pagination J Joint Documents of the State of Michigan for the year 1865.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

161 Lansing: John A. Kerr, & Co., 1864. cumulative pagination^/

/"No

Jo2nJt_DocTmen^ts__of_th£__State_of_Mich;igan_^or_th^_yearl864. Lansing: John A. Kerr & Co., 1864. /No trnnrn i at jy pagination_/ Journal of Proceedings. 1900.

Detroit Board of Education, 1871-

Journal of the Constitutional Commission of Michigan. s i n g ^ W . S . George & Co., 1873. Pp.vii/243.

Lan­

Journal of the Proceedings of the Common Council of the City of Detroit from January 2. 1844 to Feb-p-nary 27, iftSP.. Pp.1734. Journal of the Proceedings to Form a Constitution for the State of Michigan! Detroit: Printed by Sheldon HcKnight, 1835. Pp.viii / 224. Journal of the Senate of the State of Michigan, 1875. Part II, Lansing: W.S. George & Co., 1873. Pp.1107-2241. Michigan Reports. Supreme Court of Michigan, Vol.118. Chicago: Callaghan & Co., 1900. Pp.xxxiv / 759. Proceedings and Dehates of the Constitutional Convention of the State of Michigan, 1907-08. 2 vols. Lansing: Wyncoop. Eallenbeck Crawford Co., 1908. Ppl525. Report of the Proceedings and Debates in the Convention to Revise the Constitution of the State of Michigan, 1850. Lansing: R.Vvr. Ingals, 1850. Pp.xliii / 937. The Revised Statutes of the State of Michigan, Passed and Approved May 18, 1846. Detroit: Bagg & Harmon, 1846. Supreme Court of the United States. People of the State of Illinois ex rel. Vashti McCollum, Appelant v. Board of Education of School District No.71, Champaign County, Illinois et al. Washington D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1947. /Wo cumulative pagination/ D.

Periodicals

The American Journal of Education, XIII (1865). Coe, A. Cleveland. "Theology in the Public ^choolsy The North American Review, (March, 1881), 211.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

The Detroit Daily Advertiser, 1844, 1853. The Detroit Catholic Vindicator. 1853-56. The Detroit Free Press. 1853, 1855, 1859, 1863, December, 1887, September, 1892, 1896-98. The Detroit Journal, September-December, 1892. The Detroit Tribune. J-une, 1867. The Detroit News, September-December, 1892. Ingersoll, Robert G. "God in the Constitution," The Arena, (January, 1890), 119-30. The Index, 1870-74. McQuaia, B.J. "Religion in Schools," North .American Review, CXXXII (April, 1881), 32*. The Michigan Christian Advocate, 1896. The Michigan Christian Herald, 1844, 1845, 1853, 1854, 1892. The Michigan Journal of Education and Teachers1 Magazine, 1854-58. The Patriotic American, 1891 /incomplete/ Peabody, Andrew P. "The Bible in the Public Schools," Religious Magazine and Monthly Review, XLV (February, 1871),1137 Schlesinger, Arthur M. "A Critical Period in American Religion, Proceedings of the Massachusetts Historical Society, LXIV (June, 1932), Pp.523-47. Stebbins, R.P., D.D. "Peril and Vindication of Our Free Public Schools," Monthly Religious Magazine, XLIII (1870), 236 Wells, Judge Hexekiah G. "A Sketch of the Members of the Con­ stitutional Conventions of 1835 and 1850," Michigan Pioneer and Historical Collections, III, 37-40. Woodman, Hon. Elias S. "Reminiscences of the Constitutional Convention of 1850," Michigan Pioneer and Historical Collections. XVII, 345-350.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

163 E.

Pamphlets

.Anderson, Rev. W.C. Review of Dr. Scott’s Bible and Politics in the Light of Religion and the Law. San Franciscos Downs & Bacon, 1859. Pp.92. Angell, James B. "State Universities in the West," Johns Hopkins University, Studies in Historical and Political Science. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins Press. Pp.99. The Bible in the Common Schools. The Report of the Committee of the Board of Education of the*City of Detroit, on the Petition for the admission of the Bible into the the Public Schools of the City. Printed! by Harsha «nri Willcox, 1844. Pp.32. Bushnell, Horace. Common Schools— A Discourse on the Modifi­ cations Demanded by the Roman Catholics. Hartford: Case, Tiffany & Co., 1853. Pp.24. The Common School Controversy. Consisting of three letters of the Secretary of the Board.of Education of the States of Massachusetts in reply to charges against the Board. Boston: I.N. Bradley & Co., 1846. Pp.55. Common School System and Public Education, A Treatise on State Education. Submitted to the Public. Printed at the “Aurora*1 Office, Detroit, 1852. Pp. 18. Coolidge, C.W. The Relation of higher Education to the State, an address before the Alumni of Michigan university, June 27, 1878. Ann Arbor: Ann Arbor Printing Office, 1878. Pp.15. Crooker, Joseph Henry. The Bible in the Public Schools. State Journal Printing Co., 1890. Pp/l8.

Boston:

Frieze, Henry S. A Memorial Discourse on the Bjfe and Services of Rev. Henry P. Tappan, Ann Arbor: The University. Pp.45, Frieze, Henry S. "The Relation of the State University to Re­ ligion”, University of Michigan, Semi-Centennial Cele­ bration, 1837-87. Ann Arbor: Published by the Univer­ sity of Michigan, 1888. Gregg, Rev. David. Public Schools Vs. Parochial Schools, a speech before Evangelical Alliance, September D , 1888 Massachusetts: Pratt Brothers, 1888. Pp.16.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

164 Haven, E.O. Common Schools, Unsectarian* A discourse de­ livered at the M.E. Church at Ann Arbor, Michigan March 6, 1853. Ann Arbor: Washtenaw Whig Press, 1853. Fp.21. •

Universities in America, an Inaugural Address, '■'ctober 1, 1863. Published byt he University of Michigan. Ann Arbor: C.G. Clark, Jr., 1863. Pp.31.

LicAtee, W.A. Must the Bible Go? A review of the Edgerton Bible Case in Wisconsin— 1890. Madison: Tracy Gibbs, 1890. Pp.72. McCorkle, Win. A. 1828-88.

A History of the Presbytery of Detroit,

McCracken, S.B. Religion in the University, being a review of the subject as agitated before the legislature of Michigan during the session of 1873. Detroit: Free Press. Po.22. Proceedings of the National Convention to secure the Religious Amendment of the Constitution of the U.S. Philadelphia: James B. Rodgers, 1872. Pp.72. Sykes, James N. Common vs. Catholic Schools. Hews & Co., 1853. Pp.27.

Boston:

J.M.

Tappan, H.P. Review of His Connection with the University of M ichigan. Detroit: The Detroit P'ree Press, 1864. Pp.52. _____.

The University: its Constitution and its Relation, Political and Heligious, A Discourse delivered June 22, 1858. Ann Arbor: Printed by S.B. McCracken, 1858. Pp.36.

Webster, Daniel. A Defence of the Christian Religion ana of the Religious instruction of the Young, wew *ork: Mark !S. Newman, 1844. Pp.72. Winchell, Alexander. Amemorial discourse on the life and services of ^ev. Erastus Otis Ha en. Ann ^rbor: The University, 1882. Pp.57. Williams, Rev. W.B. Christian and Secular Education, Chicago: L.R. Donnelly & ^ons, 1896. Pp.SI

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

165 P.

Books

Adams, Charles K. The University of Michigan, The Sources of Its Power and Its Success. Ann -^-rbor: University of Michigan, 1896, Pp.24. _____.

Historical Sketches of the University of Michigan Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 1876, Pp.lv/56.

Adams, Prancis. London:

The Pree School System of the United States. Chapman and Hall, 1875. Pp.309.

Campbell, James V. Political History of Michigan. Detroit: Schober oc (-io"., 1876. Pp.xiv/764. Cheever, George B. Right of the Bible in our Public Schools. New York: Robert Carter 6c Brothers, 1854. Ppxii/303. Colwell, Stephen. The Position of Christianity in the United States in its Relations with our Political Institutions, and Specially with Reference to Religious Instruction in the Public Schools. Philadelphia: Lippincott, Grambo 5c bo., 1854. Pp.viii/175. Cooley, Thomas ^ . Michigan. 1885. Pp.viii/376.

Boston: Houghton, Mifflin & Co.,

Dorchester, Daniel. Christianity in the United States. York: Phillips & Hunt, 1884. Pp.795.

New

Dorr, Harold w. ed., The Hichigan Constitutional Conventions of 1855-36. Debates and Proceedings. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 1940. Pp.xi/626. Parmer, Silas. The History of Detroit and Michigan. Silas Parmer & ^o., 1834. Pp.zlvi/1024.

Detroit:

History of the University of Michigan. Parrand, Elizabeth & Ann Arbor: Register Publishing House, 1885. Pp.vi/300. Harcourt, Rev. R. The Great Conspiracy Against our American Public Schools. San Francisco: California News Co., 1890. Pp.325. Hassard, John R.G. Life of the Most Reverend John Hughes. New York: D. Appleton 2c C0., 1861. Pp.519. King, James M. Pacing the Twentieth Century. Union League Society, 1899. Pp.640.

New York:

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

166 Synett, A.S. Qhe Religion of the Republic. Cincinnati: CraustoiT^ Curtis, 1895. Pp.xxiii/852. I.iayhew, Ira. -*opular Kducation. New York: Brothers", i860. Pp.x/467.

Harper Sc

Minor, John D. et.al. x’he bible in the Public Schools. Argu­ ments 3.n. the case of -d-ohn D. Minor. Cincinnati: Robert Clarke Sc O0., 1870. Pp.420. Montgomery, Zaak. ’ The Poison Fountain or Anti-Parental Edu­ cation.. San Francisco: Published by the author, 1879. Pp.189. Muller, Rev. Michael. Public School Education. D.J. Sadlier & Co., 1880. Pp.vi/415.

New York:

0*Neill, J.M. Religion and Education Under the Constitution. New *or'ks Harper & brothers, 1949. Pp.xi1/538. Prall, William- PHe State and the Church. Yiihittakcer, 1900. Pp. 260.

New York:

Satolli, Francesco, Loyalty to Church and. State. John Mixrphy & °o., 1895. Pp.315.

Thomas

Baltimore:

Schaff, Philip. "Church and State in the United States" in Papers pP the American Historical Association, Vol.II. New Yor*kt G, P.Putnam* s Sons, 1888. Pp.555. Smith,

William L. Historical Sketches of Education in Michigan. Lansins: W »S. George Sc Co., 1881. Pp.iv/l57.

Spear, Sa.-uel T*. Religion and the State on the Bible and the Public SeKools. New York: Dodd Mead & Company, 1876. Pp.ix/3*93. Ten Brook, Andr-ew. American State Universities. Cincinnati: Robert Clarke Sc Company, 1875. Pp.viii/410. Thompson, Joseph P. Church and State in the United States. Boston: James R. Osgood & Co., 18731 Pp.166. White,

Andrew D\ Autobiography. 2 volumes. tury Corapany, 1906.

New York:

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Cen­

167

II.

Secondary Sources

Baron, Salo W. Modern Nationalism and -Religion. Harper & Brothers, 1947. Pp.x/362.

Hew York:

Bates, M. Searle. Religious Liberty, an Inquiry. Harper & Brothers, 1945. PP.xviii/604.

Hew York:

Bell, Sadie. The Church, The State, and Education in Virginia. Hii1adelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 1930. Pp.xii/796. Blanchard, Paul. American freedom and Catholic Power. The Beacon- Press, 1949. Pp.350. Blau, Joseph L. Boston:

Boston:

Cornerstones of Religious Freedom in America. i'he Beacon Press, 1949. Pp7viii/250.

Bower, william Clayton. Church and State in Education. University of Chicago Press, 1944. Pp. v/103.

Chicago:

Brown, S.W. The Secularization of American Education. Contributions to Education, Ho.49. Hew York: Teachers * College Columbia University, 1912. Pp.159-60. Brown, William Adams, & Sons, 1936. Butts, R. Freeman. Education. _____•

Church and State. Pp.vii/360.

Hew York:

Scribner

The American ‘ Tradition in Religion and Boston: ‘ -L'he Beacon Press, 1950. Pp.xi/230.

The College Charts Its Course. New jfork: Hill Book U0 ., 1939. Pp.v/464.

Catlin, George B. The Story of Detroit. Hews, 1926*1 Pp.xix/764.

Detroit:

McGrawThe Detroit

Confrey, Burton. Secularism in -“merican Education. Tts History. Washington D.C.: The Catholic °niversity of America, 1931. Pp.153. Cubberley, Ellwood P. Public Education in the United States. New York: Houghton Mifflin and Company, 1919. Pp.xxv/ 517. Curti, Merle. The Social Ideas of American Educators. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1935. Pp.xxii/615.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Curti, Merle. The Growth of American Thought, hew York: & Company, 1943. Pp.xx/848. .

Harp

Deferrari, Hoy J., ed., Essays on uatholic Education in the United States. Washington D.C.: The Catholic University of America Press, 1942. Pp.xi/556. Dilla, Harriette M. The rolitics of Michigan, 1864-78. York: Longman's Green & uo., 19127 Pp.285.

New

Doll, Louis W. The History of Saint Thomas Parish in Ann Arbor. Ann &rbor: The Ann Arhor Press, 1941. Pp.291. Dunbar, Willis P. Ihe Influence of the Protestant Denomina­ tions on Ki&her Education in Michigan (1817-1900). Unpublished Doctoral Dissertation, bniversity of Michigan, 1939. Pp.v/379. Edmonson, James Bartlett. The Legal and Constitutional Basis of a State School System. Bloomington: Public School Publishing Company, 1926. Pp.ix/205. Edwards, Newton and Hichey, Herman G. merican Social Order. Boston: 1946. Pp.xiv/880. Puller, George N. Michigan. Volume II. .Publishing Co., 1939.

The School in the AHoughton ^.ifflin Col Chicago:

The Lewis

Gabel, Richard J. Public Punas for Church and x-rivate Schools. Washington D.C: Catholic University of America, 1937. Pp.xiv / 858. Gabriel, Ralph Henry, the Course of American Democratic Thought. New Yoi»k: The ‘onald Press tJo., 1940. Pp.xi/452 Greene, Evarts B. Church and State. Tn£ianpolis: Foundation Press, 1947. Pp.vi / 48.

National

Hall, Arthur Jackson. Religious Education in the Public Schools of the State and City of New York. Chicago: University of Chicago, 1914. Pp.xi / 111. Hall, Thomas C. T‘h.e fteligious Background of American Culture. Boston; Little, -Drown and Co., 1930. Pp.xiv^348. Hamilton, Robert R. and JMort, Paul R. The ^aw and Public Education. Chicago: Foundation Press Inc.^ 1941V Pp.xxiv / 579.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

169

Hauser, Conrad A. Teaching Religion in the Public ‘-‘chool. New Yorks Round Table h-ess, 1942. Pp.xv/500. Hemans, Lawton T. History of Michigan. Lansing: Publishing Co.limited., 1916. Pp.278. Hinsdale, Burke A. Ann Arbor: 376.

The Hammond

History of the University of Michigan. Published by the university, 1906. Pp.xiii//

Howlett, Walter M. ed., Religion: The Dynamic of Education. New ^ork: Harper & Brothers, 1929. Pp.xi/l72. Jackson, George L. The Development of State Control of Public Instruction in Michigan. Lansing: MicHigan Historical Commission, 1926. Pp.381. Johnson, Alvin V/. and Yost, Prank H. Separation of Church and State in the United States. -Minneapolis: Univer­ sity of Minnesota Press, 1948. Pp.279. Johnson, Rev. reter Leo. Stuffed Saddlebags. The Life of Martin Kundig, Priest. Milwaukee; The Bruce Publishing Company, 1942. Pp.297. Limbert, P.M. Denominational Policies in Support of Higher Ed­ ucation.1..Contributions to ^ucation No,578. New 'York: Teachers’ College, Columbia LniVersity, 1929. Pp.242. McCormick, Rev. Leo J. Church-State Relationships in education in Maryland. Washington D. C .: Satholi'c* University, 1942. rp.xiii / 294. McLaughlin, Andrew C. History of Higher Bdcatjon in Michigan. Washington D.C.l Government Printing Lffice, 1891. Pp.179. Ivloehlman, Arthur H. Public -education in Detroit. Bloomington: Public School Publishing Go., 1925. Pp/265. Moehlman, Conrad -^l. comp. American Constitutions and Religion. Rochester: C.H. Moehlman, 1938. Pp.142. The Church as Educator. wew xork:. Hinds, Hayden & Eldridge inc., 1947. Pp.vii / 183.

•

School and Church: 1he American 'Way. Hew xork: Harper & brothers, 1944. Pp.x /178.

_

_

.

Perry, Charles Henry Philip Tappan, Ann Arbor: of Michigan Press, 1933. Pp.xi/475.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

University

Pilcher, Elijah E. Protestantism In Michigan. Detroit: R.D.S. Tyler & Co., 1878. ft).464'.' Pound, Arthur. Detroit. Dynamic City. tury co., 1940. Pp.397. Putnam, Daniel.

D. Aopleton-Cen­

The Development of Primarv and Secondar-v- -

Quaife, M.M., and Glazer, Sidney. Michigan. New York: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1948. Pp.viii / 374. Putnam, Daniel. A history of the Michigan State Normal School at Ypsilanti, Michigan, 1849-99! Ypsilanti: 1899. Pp.368. Reilly, Daniel P. The School Controversy (1891-95). Wash­ ington D.C.: Catholic University of America, 1943. Pp.x / 302. n Rosalita, Sister mary. Education in •ugtroit, Prior to 1850 Lansing: Michigan Historical Commission, 1928. £p7S64 •

No Greater Service. 1948. Pp.xx / 863

Detroit:

Evans-Winter-Eebb, Inc.

Schlesinger, Arthur M., Jr. The Age of ^ackson. Little, Brown & Co., 1945. Pp.x / 545.

Boston:

Shaw, Wilfred B. ed., The University of Michigan, An Ency­ clopedic Survey! Part 1, History and Administration. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan# 1941.PP.277/xx Shotwell, John -0. A history of the Schools of Cincinnati. Cincinnazi: The School Life Col, 1902. Pp.608. Sperry,

Willard L.ed., Religion and Education. Cambridge: Har­ vard University, 1945. pp. ix / 114.

Stokes, Anson Phelps. Church and State. x*ew York: Harper & Brothers, 1950. 3 volumes, -rp.ixix / 2671. Streeter, P.B. Political Parties in Michigan, 1837-60.Lansing Michigan Historical Commission, 1918. Pp.xxxiii/401. Tewksbury, Donald rG* The Pounding of American Colleges and Universities before the Civil War! hew *ork: Columbia University, 1932. Pp.x / 254.

with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

171 Thayer, V.T. Religion in Public Education, Viking -Press, 1932. Pp.x / 212.

w'ew York:

The

Thomas, Sister Evangeline. ftativism in the Old Northwest. Washington D.C.: Catholic University of America, 1936. Pp.vii / 270. Torpey, 7/illiam George. Judicial Doctrines of Religious Rights in Ataerica. Chapel Rill: The university of North Carolina rress, 1948. Pp.ix / 376. Zollman, Carl, American Civil Church Law, ^ew York: Columbia University, 1917. Pp.473.

Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.