no greater curse can ever befall any church
than an accumulation of property. Let the
church use its money and means from day to
day, without accumulating a large amount
of property, or large endowments. I know
the wisest men in a large number of denomi-
nations have held the accumulation of prop-
erty to be an abuse; I know that in my own
denomination, one of the most distinguished
ministers of the Presbyterian church declared,
in his quaint language, that wherever there
was a bag in a church there was a Judas to
carry it. He was opposed to the accumula-
tion of property by the church, and I think
he was right. I am, therefore, opposed to
striking out this article.
Mr. THOMAS. And I will state another
reason why I am opposed to striking out this
article. To do so would be to throw open
the door wide for all the churches in the State
of Maryland (you can hardly count the de-
nominations now) to hold just as much real
estate as they please, and as they can get,
until in the course of time they will own
half your landed property, if people choose
to give it to them, and then you will find
every denomination down to your Legislature
lobbying to get that property exempted from
taxation. There is a provision in our code
now exempting a certain amount of church
property from taxation, and if they get this
enormous power in their hands of holding as
much real estate as people may choose to give
them, you will find the State of Maryland
rather backward in raising revenue. In
that light I am opposed to striking out this
article.
Mr. DANIEL. I do not see the force of the
objection just urged to striking out this arti-
cle. Certainly the State of Maryland can
regulate the matter of taxation, so that be-
yond a certain amount of property churches
shall be taxed as others are, and if they find
that exemption abused, they can say the
whole of the property shall be taxed.
I am in favor of striking out, for I think
this article as it stands, like some other arti-
cles in this bill of rights, is striking at min-
isters and religious denominations as such. I
think we ought to get rid of all such invidi-
ous distinctions. I believe there are none on
earth who ought to be more entrusted with
property, and who can be more safely en-
trusted with it, than ministers and religious
denominations. And I believe if there are
any men who ought properly to hold office
they are ministers and religious persons. I
think we are going to too great an extreme
in carrying out the principle embodied in this
article. And I want to see struck out of our
Constitution all those articles that make dis-
tinctions against ministers, because it is
making a distinction to some extent agains
religion as such.
Mr. THOMAS. Does the gentleman desire to
make churches land-brokers ? |
Mr. DANIEL. I think if the churches were
land-brokers the business would be in great
deal better hands, and a great deal better
conducted than it is now. I cannot see the
reason why every other corporation in the
State can amass any amount of property it
pleases, and can dispose of it in any way it
pleases, without your pretending to restrict
them; and yet, if a poor little church en-
deavors to accumulate a little property so as
to provide for a dark day, and to help its
ministers, and to help a little in its church
arrangements, you find the State coming in,
and by the sanction of its organic law, saying
these people, because they are ministers and
members of churches, are not fit to be trusted
to hold property. I think it is wrong in
principle. I think we ought to remove all
these barriers; and that such men ought to
be encouraged to hold office and to hold
property.
I believe one of the evils of the times that
have brought about the present unhappy
state of affairs, is, that we have legislated too
much to exclude religion from our laws and
Constitutions, both State and National; that
we have not enough acknowledged the exist-
ence of God, and been guided by His rules
in our State and National affairs. I am in
favor of everything that will encourage and
promote churches and disseminate religious
doctrines, that will help to sustain and build
up churches. Look throughout the country
and see the debt of the churches, and how
hard it is to build up a new church. Now,
if you would allow churches to accumulate
some property in this way, they might not
only have enough to sustain themselves,
bill 'could help some other poorer churches in
their day of distress, and their time of an-
guish and trouble. I think they arefit to be
entrusted with this power; or that it is at
least safe to leave the matter under the con-
trol of the Legislature.
Mr. CUSHING. The remarks of my col-
league (Mr. Daniel) who has just spoken,
would convince us, I think, if we agreed
with him, that this article ought to remain
exactly as it is, if it be not even more stringently
drawn. The gentleman has told us
that because we have not recognized the
Christian religion in oar laws and our Con-
stitutions we are now being punished for it.
I fully agree with my colleague in that, and
I think that in acknowledging the Christian
religion, we should endeavor as far as we
can, to bring it back as near as possible, to
the views of its founder. His directions to
the first ministers of the gospel were not to
accumulate goods and property, to take no
thought for the morrow, to take not even
bread for the second day with them.
Now, in the history of the Christian reli-
gion, wherever churches and religious denom-
inations have accumulated property they have
been thorns in the side of all good govern- |
