ed it for America, for our own country, in view of our own peculiar responsibilities?

The men who founded it for America, and not for Rome; for the wants of our own country, and of those whose whole dependence is on God and the truth, and freedom of the truth everywhere, and not for those who depend upon the darkness, nor with reference to that system which can flourish only in exclusion of the light. It is an American system, not Austrian, nor Roman, nor European, that we are to support, and therefore an education under Divine Truth is needed. A merely secular education may be sufficient in Europe, where governments rule by bayonets, but not here, where government depends on the intelligence, morality, and religion of the people. Where another nation might flourish upon mere secularism, we should go down. We cannot divorce education from religion, and sustain the Republic.

A deliberate argument for the divorce of education from religion is so astounding an occurrence among a Christian people, that we do not wonder that those abroad, in whose

way such an argument may have happened to fall, should assert, as they have done, that the element of religion is absolutely not introducable into our educational system, on account of peculiarities in our habits, and in the theory and practice of our national and State governments. And then they base upon this prodigious misconception or falsehood, their conclusion, that after all, the exclusion of religion from a system of public education cannot be so very dreadful or dangerous a thing, if in a country like the United States the people can grow up without it, so religious and so prosperous.

Now, even our limited historical surveys will have shown that our educational system, so far from excluding religious principle, religious instruction, and a religious bias, has been for a longer time and to a greater extent, based upon the Bible, and carried forward with religious truth as its vital element, than any other educational system in the world. Our religion and prosperity as a people are owing to this reality, this religious educational training, and have not been gained or main

tained in the neglect or exclusion of religious truth. The rejection of the Bible and of all religious bias, from our systems of education, wherever attempted, or partially successful, is an innovation; a very daring and dangerous innovation, for the most part attempted and accomplished at the instigation of political demagogues, catering for Romish votes. We wish the people of England to understand this. We wish them to understand that till within a very few years the Bible and religion have been free in all our schools, and are so still by law, and in most places by custom; and that it is only by infidel, Romish, and political intrigue and management, that anywhere relig ious truth is shut out.

Singular Example of Sectarian Legislation against the Christian Sabbath.

IN their eager zeal against sectarianism, the history of the school system shows that our school authorities and legislators have sometimes run into the very evil they were so anxious to avoid. This is painfully manifest in a decision incorporated into the body of School Laws, and published in chapter VIII., having therefore the sanction of the State; a decision disposing of the Christian Sabbath as

follows:—“Schools may be kept on Sunday Subay for the benefit of those persons who observe La Saturday as holy time, and the teacher must be paid for that day by those who send to School."

The inconsiderateness and impropriety of this legislation, and its inconsistency with all

the provisions of the school laws against sectarianism, will appear manifest on a moment's consideration.

Indeed, if ever there was sectarian legislation, this is such. It singles out the Jews, and legislates in their behalf, constituting in reality for them a sectional and sectarian school, on the very ground of their sectarianism, and because of it. It takes them into a peculiar union with the State, and that, too, in defiance of the conscientious scruples of nearly all other denominations united. It is not only a profanation of the Christian Sabbath by law, but it goes the whole length of declaring that the Christian Sabbath has no divine sanction, is not a divinely-appointed day to be kept holy, but may properly be spent in a secular employment. It singles out the Jewish Sabbath as more holy than the Christian Sabbath, because it is a distinct provision for the profanation of the Christian Sabbath, by an employment for which the Jewish Sabbath is considered as too holy. It is not satisfied with leaving the Jews at liberty to do what they please, either on their Sab