in Politics Issue" this torture was quite common before the church and state were separated. There was a time, not so long ago, when church people thought that they ought to save the souls of their fellow men by force. Are church people any better informed nowadays that they never make mistakes and know of a surety what brand of politics to preach in church, and what kind of blue laws the Lord of the universe wants them to enforce? "We much prefer to keep church and state separate, letting the church preach, and letting all men as citizens decide upon what laws to enact, enforce, and repeal in regular political manner. "We are anxious to join the Moral and Civic Alliance of Endicott - as soon as it is divorced from the church. We will then aid it in every way that we can, by publicity, and personal support. But we must repeat that the idea of meeting in Protestant churches when the organization is supposed to be democratic in character, is a fatal blunder. We asked a member point-blank, 'Would you yourself attend these meetings and give it your support if such meetings were held in a Roman Catholic church or a Jewish synagogue, or home of any other nonProtestant creed?' This stunned him for an instant, and he hesitatingly admitted that he would be very reluctant to meet in a non-Prot estant church, or join an organization that was conceived in and announced from a non-Protestant pulpit. The Alliance men readily admit that it is hopeless to expect that Greek and Roman Catholics, Jews, and nonchurch members will join this political organization that was born in a church building, and is being run as a religio-political organization. Again we endorse a Moral and Civic Alliance that is kept clear from ecclesiastical domination, and will thus appeal to all loyal Americans for law enforcement and clean politics." This editorial is to the point. Many of the Protestant pulpits are cursed with political preachers who are substituting the policeman's club for the cross of Christ. They are dragging their churches into politics and lowering the standards of Christianity. The clergymen are organizing their churches into moral and civic alliances for the purpose of bringing pressure to bear upon the politicians who do not subscribe to their religio-political measures. While these alliances assume a civic aspect in name, yet they are the churches dressed, up in disguise to deceive the public. If the churches came. out openly in religious garb, they would be rebuffed and their proposals would be resented, hence this camouflage on their part. The churches have been a terror in politics in the past, and it is surprising how slow some people are in learning the lessons of the past. We read their history of terror and say: "If we had been in the days of our fathers, we would not have been partakers with them in the blood of the prophets," and then we immediately forget what manner of persons we are, and "fill up the measure of our fathers in bloodguiltiness. Human nature never changes unless by the grace of God. A political religion is always unsanctified. Christianity has to corrupt itself before it enters politics. The mere formal profession of belief in religion is no guaranty against religious bigotry and tyranny. Religion and religious obligations are not matters of civil law and authority, but purely matters of faith and conscience. Unless these religious organizations retreat from the arena of politics, they are going to lose their prestige and influenc over the hearts of men. The churches can ill afford to descend into the political arena, and thus substitute the sword of Cæsar for the cross of Christ, and the force of law for the power of love. Loyalty to the Greatest Document of the Land O By A. R. Bell NE hundred thirty-six years ago the most wonderful document ever written by the hand of man, outside the Scriptures, was adopted and submitted to the thirteen States for ratification. The Declaration of Independence had been made eleven years before. These two documents, one announcing fundamental truth, declaring, "All men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed:" the other guaranteeing these inalienable rights to all alike, and reserving to the people all power not delegated to the United States, these two are the Magna Charta of the nation, the source of her power and greatness. And we believe the founding fathers were led of God in the course they pursued, and in the documents they produced, to the end that this land of ours should take its place in the world as a nation of prophecy, the grand climax, if you please, of the gigantic struggle for religious liberty begun by the Reformers of the sixteenth century. We rejoice in the fact that in this great nation of ours the rights of the individual are safeguarded by the provision that " Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; and that as announced by the Father of his Country, "Every man who conducts himself as a good citizen, is accountable alone to God for his religious faith, and should be protected in worshiping God according to the dictates of his conscience." Today we offer heartfelt gratitude to God for the benefits we enjoy under the Stars and Stripes. We thank God for liberty, civil and religious. We thank God for a country that recognizes the rights of conscience. We are proud of our country; proud of her history; proud of her exploits; proud of her institutions: proud of her traditions. We pledge ourselves to be loyal and true to her. We are proud of the Stars and Stripes. We plight our troth to the principles for which our flag stands. We pray God for a continuance of the mercies and blessings enjoyed under the protection of its ample folds. "Long may our land be bright Great God, our King." But we must not forget that "eternal vigilance is the price of liberty." Here in Oregon we are in danger. A law was passed on the referendum that is a denial of our individual rights and liberties, and also a denial of our religious rights. The law is called, "The Compulsory Education Law." It ought to be called, "A Monopoly of Education by Law." This law has in it the destruction of every private school, sectarian or nonsectarian, and purposes to force every child into the public school. In this it purposes to take the place of the parent, and dictate what kind of education the child shall have, and also where he shall receive it. To us, as parents, our children belong first, and not to the State. It is the malienable right of the child to receive an education; and it is the parent's inalienable right, under God, to provide that education. This law practically gives the State control of the child through all the elementary grades, and during the formative period of his life; and as it is fundamentally wrong to teach religion in the public school, the law debars the child from religious training, which in the church school keeps step through the grades with the other branches of learning. The law is a violation of the great doctrine of human rights. It is a violation of both State and Federal Constitutions, which forbid the State legislature and the national Congress to pass any law aiming at the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. This law prohibits the teaching of religion in all the elementary grades. The law is an invasion of our inherent rights as parents, and should be repealed by the people, or declared unconstitutional by the courts. Legislators Protectors of Liberty and Defenders of Justice By W. F. Martin N the senate chamber, in the great capitol building out in the State of California, is inscribed a most excellent motto. Even the gold-tipped dome, flung high in the skies, is not more precious, nor is its symbol of greater value. Here is the motto, just as it is inscribed in Latin over the desk of the lieuenant governor, who is ex-officio president of the senate, and who presides over that rather sedate body of forty men: "Senatoris est civitatis libertatim tueri," a liberal translation of which would be: "It is the duty of the legislators to protect the liberties of the people." This is excellent. Ideas are mighty. The idea that the liberties of the people ire sacred, laid the foundation for a great nation. That same idea has caused that nation to expand until it reaches From the western shore of one sea to the astern shore of another and a greater ea. The mountains of that nation are eared and dedicated to liberty. The alleys are scooped out and leveled to be he homes of people who love freedom. From the easternmost point of land which catches the first rays of light, to where the setting sun slowly sinks outside the Golden Gate, the land is peopled with men and women born to be free. Just under the motto named above, stands a magnificent painting in oil, of Washington. Looking down on the senators as they work, planning and debating, passing laws to regulate the commerce of the land, providing for travel on the highways, and the navigation of the streams of the State, stands this portrait of the Father of the Country. Sometimes pressure has been brought to bear by certain elements in the nation to cause these men to forget and to trample upon the liberties of the people. As much or more than any State, this far Western republic, if I may so call it, has turned a deaf ear to these insidious demands. California has largely kept itself free from religious intolerance. and from oppressive enactments. Why should it not? The great original of the elegant portrait once declared, "If I had the least idea of any difficulty resulting from the Constitution adopted by the convention of which I had the honor to be president when it was formed, so as to endanger the rights of any religious denomination, then I never should have attached my name to that instrument. . . . Every man who conducts himself as a good citizen, is accountable alone to God for his religious faith, and should be protected in worshiping God according to the dictates of his own conscience." If the California Solons and legislators of other States will ever heed W these words, and always remember the motto worthy to be written in gold, n oppressive measures will ever be enacted no matter how strong the pressure may be from those who regard not the rights and liberties of their fellow men. "It is the duty of the legislature to protect the liberties of the people." May this banner never be lowered, nor its senti ments be trampled on by the heel of the oppressor. What Is Americanism? By S. B. Horton E hear very much in recent years about Americanism; but what is Americanism? Is this generation of selfish profiteering competent to answer? Will an answer from this era of inconsiderateness regarding "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" suffice? We believe not. The only answer as to what true Americanism is, ethically speaking, is to be found from the history of its source. We are fortunate today, however, in having patriotic statesmen who are sufficiently informed on the subject of Americanism to make us familiar with it. For example, in his inaugural address, President Harding said in part: "Standing in this presence, mindful of the solemnity of this occasion, feeling the emotions which no one may know until he senses the great weight of responsibility for himself, I must utter my belief in the divine inspiration of the founding fathers. "Surely there must have been God's intent in the making of this New World Republic. Ours is an organic law which had but one ambiguity, and we saw that effaced in a baptism of sacrifice and blood, with union maintained, the nation supreme, and its concord inspiring. "We have seen the world rivet its hopeful gaze on the great truths on which the founders wrought. We have seen civil, human, and religious liberty verified and glorified. "In the beginning the Old World scoffed at our experiment; today our foundations of political and social belief stand unshaken, a precious inheritance to ourselves, an inspiring example of freedom and civilization to all man kind. Let us express renewed and strengthenes devotion, in grateful reverence for the immorta beginning, and utter our confidence in the su preme fulfilment." Vice-President Coolidge on a differ ent occasion, discussing various defini tions of Americanism, said: "Much has been said of Americanism as the need of America. . . . So we here in Americ need a deeper understanding of Americanism and a firm practice of it. It is the American ism of the American Constitution, the belie that our Government should fulfil the guaran ties of our Declaration of Independence, tha life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness shoul be as much in the mind of modern statesmen a they were in the minds of the pioneers of Amer ican liberty. There is but one ark upon whic our national faith may rest secure, it is ou Constitution." These are splendid statements of Amer icanism, to which might be added a por tion of former Vice-President Marshall' farewell address to the Senate, Marel 4, 1921. He said in part: "I sprang from the loins of men who helpe to lay the foundations of the Republic. At m birth my father placed upon my baby brow th coronal of a free-born American citizen. In m youth I was taught that if I wore it worthily no prince nor potentate nor electorate could ad to or detract from the honor of that roys coronet. "I may have failed, but I have tried to kee the faith. I have never doubted that, so fa as the principles of civil government are cor (Concluded on page 61) T Tennessee Legislature Rejects Sunday Bill Banning Sports HE senate of the Tennessee Legislature killed the Sunday bill which aimed to place under the ban, commercialized Sunday baseball and golf playing in Tennessee. The vote against the bill was 17 to 11. According to the newspaper accounts, the debate in the senate lasted more than two hours, and was the most heated that has taken place in the senate during the present session. The Tennessean says that "the fight against the bill centered chiefly upon the grounds that morals and religion could not be legislated upon the people," and that the bill, if enacted into law, would invade "the personal rights of all citizens of the State." The Tennessean continues: "Senator Washington, of Davidson, opened the fight upon the bill with the statement that the measure would not only affect baseball, but would make it possible to convict hundreds of the best citizens of every big city for playing golf on Sunday. "The Davidson senator explained that the bill covered all sports where collections or admissions were charged. In the case of golf, caddies are paid by the round, and thus every lawyer, doctor, banker, and business man that bends over his desk during the week and attempts to build or hold his health through golf on Sunday afternoons, could be sentenced to gail, according to Senator Washington. "To pass the bill would break down the greatest instrument of health ever invented for the banker, business man, and thousands of thers. Under the provisions of the bill I could go into the courts and convict every man in the State that plays golf, when you and I know that they violate no laws of God,' stated Washington in vehement terms. "Senator L. D. Hill, of White County, spoke fervently against the passage of the bill, stating that it hit at every fiber of the freedom of he people for which the United States of America stood. Following the White County senator's speech, which he delivered standing near the enter of the room, trembling with the emotion hat characterized his speech, the arguments were mostly of a religious character. "Christ came not to enslave and not to hind the people,' spoke Senator Hill. 'Our needs are not so much legislation to force people into religion, but more teaching and practice of the laws of the Son of God,' he continued. "Senator Bennett stated that he had never seen a baseball game on Sunday, and hoped that he never would, yet he did not favor the passage of any bill that strikes so heavily at a person's rights and moral beliefs. "Senator Wiseman exhibited a petition from 474 church members of Murfreesboro, asking for the passage of the bill, but added that he 'challenged any man, Christian, pagan, or atheist, to show any single principle in all Holy Writ that would ask a civil government to enact such legislation.' . . ... "Senator T. Y. English broke the serious aspect of the argument with a humorous but strong argument in favor of killing the measures. In answering several speakers who had recited their family ancestry and church membership before declaring against the bill, told of his years in France with five children at home. He declared against the bill on the grounds that so much legislation to force such tendencies was demoralizing the country. "He recalled an incident in his home when a minister was to visit them on Sunday. The youth's mother dressed the boy and warned him against going to the creek. 'Five minutes later he was in the creek, and probably would never have thought of it on the cold day, had his mother not ruled against it,' concluded the senator. "Senator Hake declared that the move was going too far' toward restricting personal liberty and in forcing moral beliefs upon a people." At a preliminary hearing on this bill, conducted by the Senate Judiciary Committee and the House Social Welfare Committee in the Hermitage Hotel Assembly room, where 200 people were present, the Lord's Day Alliance, the National Reform Association, and the Ministerial Association of Nashville furnished speakers to defend the Sunday bill. Hon. Malcolm R. Patterson, former governor of Tennessee and a leader in Anti-Saloon League work, attacked the Sunday bill in decisive terms, claiming that the right of the American people would be imposed upon should such |