2

All moneys paid by the subject to the support of public worship, and of the instructors in religion and morals, shall, if he require it, be uniformly applied to the support of the teacher or teachers of his own religious 3 denomination, if there be such whose ministry he attends upon; 4 otherwise it may be paid to the teacher or teachers of the parish or precinct where he usually resides.

[7]

right of electing their public teachers, and of contracting with them for their

support and maintenance."

1 " public teachers aforesaid,"

2 "public"

4 "provided there be any on whose instruction he attends;"

5 "towards the support of"

6 "in which the said moneys are raised."

3 "sect or"

7 A new clause was appended to this article by the convention, as follows:"And every denomination of Christians, demeaning themselves peaceably and as good subjects of the commonwealth, shall be equally under the protection protec of the law; and no subordination of any one sect or denomination to another shall ever be established by law."

It has already been remarked, that the third article, as it appears in the original report, was not made by Mr. Adams. In a letter written long afterwards, to Mr. Williamson, the historian of Maine, he gives, as a reason, "that he could not satisfy his own judgment with any article that he thought would be accepted; and, further, that some of the clergy, and graver persons than himself, would be more likely to hit the taste of the public."

The amended form of the article is said, in the address of the convention to the people, to have been "finally agreed upon, with much more unanimity than usually takes place in disquisitions of this nature." It was not, however, adopted without strong and vehement remonstrance, which was again manifested at the time of the popular ratification, and it never was quietly acquiesced in afterwards. Indeed, it may truly be said to be the only portion of the constitution which furnished a constant topic of dispute, until finally abandoned in 1833. The reason is obvious enough. Professing carefully to secure an equality among Christians of all denominations, it did yet, in practice, give a decided advantage to one sect over the rest. In this respect, a marked difference is perceptible between the original and the amended form of the article. The former broadly embraces men of all classes of religious belief, including the Catholic on one side, and the Deist on the other; and, doubtless, this was one of the most serious grounds of objection to it. For, even in the meagre journal that remains, it appears that, not content with the amended form, limiting the authority of the legislature to require provision to be made by the towns to the maintenance of public Protestant teachers, and confining the moneys to be raised to the support of such teachers, amendments were pressed, specifically excepting "Papists," and "Christians whose principles are repugnant to the constitution," or, "whose avowed principles are inconsistent with the peace and safety of society," from "the protection of the law." These amendments did not prevail, it is true; but the steadiness with which they were urged, is one among many indications here visible, how gradually the old puritan feeling was receding before the modern movement of religious equality.

The grievance to which this article gave rise was that, in addition to compulsory taxation, there were many cases in which the property of persons became liable to be used, against their will, for the benefit of forms of religious faith which they most disapproved; and latterly, by the construction of the courts, a limitation was made upon the power of selection, even among the IV. The people of this commonwealth have the sole and exclusive right of governing themselves, as a free, sovereign, and independent state; and do, and forever hereafter shall, exercise

churches of the denomination to which the contributor himself belonged. This occasioned so great uneasiness, as at last to require from the legislature of 1811 the passage of a law, designed partially to remedy the evil. The call of a new convention to revise the constitution, made necessary by the separation of Maine in 1819, furnished an opportunity for the revival of the controversy. All the abilities of that somewhat remarkable assembly became enlisted upon one or the other side, until the dispute finally settled into the ordinary form of a question between the old and the new, between conservatism and reform.

Mr. Adams, although at the time infirm, by reason of his great age, he being eighty-five years old, was a member of this convention. Yet on this subject he showed more interest than upon any other. The tendency of his mind will appear most clearly from the following extracts taken from the Report of the Debates:

"Mr. Parker, of Boston, rose, at the request of the gentleman from Quincy, who was unavoidably absent, to propose that, in the third article of the Declaration of Rights, the words, 'all men, of all religions, demeaning themselves as good subjects, shall enjoy the equal protection of the laws,' should be inserted instead of the words, 'men of every denomination of Christians.'

"Mr. Williams had no special objection to this proposition; but did not think it would meet the wishes of the people of this commonwealth.

"Mr. Parker withdrew the proposition."

Unable, from physical debility, to attend regularly, and still less to take an active part in the debates, Mr. Adams yet had this point so much at heart, that he made a new effort to get it before the body, at a later moment, as appears from the Journal.

"Mr. Boylston, of Princeton, at the suggestion of Mr. Adams, of Quincy, who was absent, offered a resolution proposing to alter the constitution, so that instead of every denomination of Christians,' &c. it should read, all men of all religions, demeaning themselves peaceably, and as good subjects of the commonwealth, shall be equally under the protection of the law.'

"Referred to the committee of the whole on the Declaration of Rights." On the 28th the resolution was taken up, and the following discussion took place:

"Mr. Boylston, of Princeton, said, that his object was entirely in a commercial relation. It was intended to invite foreigners to come to our shores, by the offer of equal protection to men of all religious opinions. As the constitution now stands, the offer of protection was confined to persons of the Christian religion.

"Mr. Hubbard read the second article of the Bill of Rights, which he thought made the most ample provision for the object.

"Mr. J. Davis, of Boston, opposed the resolution. He thought it would be better to leave it to legislative discretion. Persons of all religions have, in fact, full and equal protection.

"Mr. Quincy objected to the resolution, because it seemed to imply that persons of all religions were not now under the protection of the law. He showed on what ground he thought the object was fully provided for.

"The resolution was negatived."

It seems scarcely necessary, at this day, to show how entirely the reasoning of the objectors evaded the question at issue. In all probability the remark of Mr. Williams was correct, that the popular sentiment was not then ready to carry out the abstract principle, of total separation between church and state, even though it underlies the whole theory of republican government. Yet the very

and enjoy every power, jurisdiction, and right, which are not, or may not hereafter be by them expressly delegated to the United States of America, in congress assembled.

V. All power residing originally in the people, and being derived from them, the several magistrates and officers of government, vested with authority, whether legislative, executive, or judicial, are their substitutes and agents, and are at all times accountable to them."

VI. No man, nor corporation or association of men, have any other title to obtain advantages, or particular and exclusive privileges, distinct from those of the community, than what arises from the consideration of services rendered to the public; and this title, being in nature neither hereditary nor transmissible to children, or descendants, or relations. by blood, the idea

same amendment had been proposed by Dr. Price, in his Observations, published thirty-six years before!

In the convention of 1820, the conservative section, constituted, as it was, of a large proportion of the ability, learning, and weight of character in the commonwealth, prevailed so far as to retain the feature of compulsory taxation for the support of religious worship. But the article which, after great labor and contention, had been shaped in a form to meet the assent of a majority of that assembly, was decisively rejected by the people, when submitted for ratification. The matter remained unsettled from that period until the year 1833, when, through the power of amendment vested by the revised constitution in the action of two successive legislative assemblies, the following article received the assent of the requisite numbers, and was approved by the popular vote. Although it has worked some inconvenient change in the structure of religious societies, it cannot thus far be said to have been attended with those serious evils to the habits of worship which were predicted as about to flow from it:

"Art. 11. As the public worship of God, and instructions in piety, religion, and morality promote the happiness and prosperity of a people, and the security of a republican government, - therefore, the several religious societies of this commonwealth, whether corporate or unincorporate, at any meeting legally warned and holden for that purpose, shall ever have the right to elect their pastors or religious teachers; to contract with them for their support; to raise money for erecting and repairing houses for public worship, for the maintenance of religious instruction, and for the payment of necessary expenses. And all persons belonging to any religious society shall be taken and held to be members, until they shall file with the clerk of such society a written notice, declaring the dissolution of their membership, and thenceforth shall not be liable for any grant or contract which may be thereafter made or entered into by such society. And all religious sects and denominations, demeaning themselves peaceably, and as good citizens of the commonwealth, shall be equally under the protection of the law; and no subordination of any one sect or denomination to another shall ever be established by law."

of a man born a magistrate, lawgiver, or judge, is absurd and unnatural.1

VII. Government is instituted for the common good; for the protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness of the people; and not for the profit, honor, or private interest of any one man, family, or class of men; therefore, the people alone have an incontestable, unalienable, and indefeasible right to institute government; and to reform, alter, or totally change the same, when their protection, safety, prosperity, and happiness require it.2

VIII. In order to prevent those who are vested with authority from becoming oppressors, the people have a right, at such periods and in such manner as may be delineated in3 their frame of government, to cause their public officers to return to private life, and to fill up vacant places by certain and regular elections

4

IX. All elections ought to be free; and all the [male) inhabitants of this commonwealth, having sufficient qualifications, have an equal right to elect officers, and to be elected, for public employments.

X. Each individual of the society has a right to be protected by it in the enjoyment of his life, liberty, and property, according to standing laws. He is obliged, consequently, to contribute his share to the expense of this protection; and to give his personal service, or an equivalent, when necessary. But no part of the property of any individual can, with justice, be taken from him, or applied to public uses, without his own consent, or that of the representative body of the people. In fine, the people of this commonwealth are not controllable by any other laws than those to which their constitutional representative body have given their consent.

6

XI. Every subject of the commonwealth ought to find a certain remedy, by having recourse to the laws, for all injuries or wrongs which he may receive in his person, property, or character. He ought to obtain right and justice freely, and without being obliged to purchase it; completely, and without any denial; promptly, and without delay, conformably to the laws.

XII. No subject shall be held to answer for any crime or offence, until the same is fully and plainly, substantially and formally described to him. He cannot be compelled to accuse [himself,] or [to] furnish evidence against himself; and every subject shall have a right to be fully heard in his defence, by himself or his counsel at his election; to meet the witnesses against him face to face; to produce all proofs that may be favorable to him;2 [to require a speedy and public trial by an impartial jury of the country, without whose unanimous consent, or his own voluntary confession, he cannot finally be declared guilty, or sentenced to loss of life, liberty, or property.] 3

XIII. In criminal prosecutions, the verification of facts in the vicinity where they happen, is one of the greatest securities of the life, liberty, and property of the citizen.

[XIV.] No subject [of the commonwealth] shall be arrested, imprisoned, despoiled, or deprived of his property, immunities, or privileges, put out of the protection of the law, exiled, or deprived of his life, liberty, or estate, but by the judgment of his peers, or the law of the land.

XIV. [XV.] Every man 4 has a right to be secure from all unreasonable searches and seizures of his person, his houses, his papers, and all his possessions. All warrants, therefore, are con

1 "; or"

2 The last three parts of this sentence were placed by the convention in an order exactly reversed.

3 That which makes the fourteenth article in the report now follows, and is incorporated into the twelfth, with a single amendment, above noted.

The following addition, in lieu of the portion stricken out, completes the article as it appears in the constitution:

"And the legislature shall not make any law, that shall subject any person to a capital or infamous punishment, excepting for the government of the army and navy, without trial by jury."

4 "subject"