If more copies of this document are required, send to P. O- Box 2358, 
 
 New York. 
 
 HEAD and CIRCULATE. 
 
 SOME MATTERS OF INTEREST 
 
 FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF 
 
 EVERY AMERICAN VOTER, 
 
 WITHOUT REGARD TO PARTY, CREED 
 OR NATIONALITY 
 
 SYNOPSIS.—Selections from a startling political 
 and secret circular from Father Stephan to 
 Bishop Marty and the other bishops of the 
 Roman Catholic Church in the United States. 
 Assaults on President Harrison, Secretary 
 Noble, Commissioner Morgan and the National 
 Public Schools. 
 
 Also extracts from a pastoral letter signed 
 by the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Chicago, 
 and the bishops of Peoria, Alton and Belle¬ 
 ville, Ill., which was read on September n, 
 1892, in all the Roman Catholic churches of 
 Illinois, and which advises all Roman Catholics 
 to oppose at the polls the Common School laws 
 of that State. 
 
 Reference to other Conferences of the 
 Clergy and Societies in which education is 
 discussed. 
 
 The restriction of immigration advocated. 
 
 Petitions to Congress for signatures of 
 citizens. 
 
4 
 
\%1 \b'N \."3 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 (EXPLANATORY.) 
 
 A YY\ 
 
 It is not our purpose in this leaflet to attack any man’s religion, but 
 when the hierarchy of a church seeks to promote its interests by the use 
 of moneys belonging to all the people, through the enactment of special 
 laws, and by covertly advocating the election to public office of the can¬ 
 didates of a political faction, then it becomes the duty of every patriotic 
 citizen, without regard to his creed, nationality or party affiliations to 
 stamp with his vote his condemnation of such measures. 
 
 That the letter of Father Stephan is written for political purposes; 
 that in it he frankly confesses his animosity to President Harrison, Secre¬ 
 tary Noble and Commissioner Morgan, because they opposed his political 
 schemes, and that the document has been printed and circulated for the 
 purpose of influencing voters in this Presidential contest cannot be 
 doubted. 
 
 Through the entire letter the claim is maintained that wherever and 
 whenever the Roman Catholic church built and opened a school among 
 the Indians (and if among the Indians why not elsewhere and every¬ 
 where ?) it became the duty of the Federal Government to provide for its 
 support, and thus carry on sectarian education at the expense of the 
 nation. 
 
 Father Stephan (and here also we might include Archbishop 
 Feehan) does not seem to realize that in this country there is no state 
 religion and that moneys used for the support of any sectarian institution 
 should be provided by the denomination to which that institution belongs. 
 
 In connection with the subject of Indian schools it must be remem¬ 
 bered that the U. S. Government is primarily responsible for their support 
 and for the education of the Indians ; that the superintendents, teachers 
 and others connected with the National public schools are appointed 
 solely on their merits ; that they must undergo a civil service examina¬ 
 tion, and that no partisan or sectarian test can be applied . 
 
 ( 3 ) 
 
4 
 
 In addition to the regular appropriations for Government school 
 there has been set apart annually a large sum for cov tract s:hools under 
 control of various religious bodies. From 1886 to 1893 these appropria¬ 
 tions were #3,767,951, of which the Roman Catholic schools received 
 $2,366,416, or about sixty-five per cent., while for the year 1893 from the 
 sum of $525,881 appropriated they take $369,535, or over seventy percent. 
 
 The Baptists never participated in this fund, the Methodists do not 
 use it, and the Congregationalists and Presbyterians are about to discon¬ 
 tinue it. The appropriations for the two latter denominations this year 
 are less than $55,000. 
 
 In this paper special attention has been given to Father Stephan’s 
 letter on account of its National as well as its secret character, for with¬ 
 out mincing matters it boldly proclaims the policy and hopes of the 
 hierarchy. 
 
 The pastoral of Archbishop Feehan, while apparently intended for 
 the State of Illinois, is also National in its bearings, in that Presidential 
 electors, members of Congress ^nd a State Legislature are to be chosen, 
 the latter of which will vote for a U. S. Senator. The pastoral is con¬ 
 firmatory of all that is contained in Father Stephan's document relating 
 to education and is but another evidence—if that be required—of the 
 open and pronounced efforts of the Roman Catholic church to destroy 
 our Free School System. That the assault has been pre-arranged, is 
 systematic and is now being made all along the line, reference is hereby 
 made to a clipping from the New York Daily News , and to the session 
 of the German Roman Catholic Central Society of North America, held 
 at Dubuque, Iowa, September 18, 1892, at which Bishop Marty was the 
 orator of the day. 
 
 Undoubtedly there is more to follow, and it will not be surprising 
 to learn before election day that other dioceses have followed the example 
 of that of Chicago. 
 
 The Restriction of Immigration—a subject of vital importance—is 
 incidentally referred to and recent events have demonstrated beyond a 
 doubt the necessity for the adoption of some law that will effectually 
 accomplish this object. 
 
 You are also asked to sign a petition to Congress for its restriction. 
 
 And now in conclusion, dear reader and friend, (you who love 
 country better than party,) carefully read and study the matter herein 
 contained. Fvery word of it is authentic. The proof is in our possession, 
 
5 
 
 and we are ready to produce it when required, notwithstanding Father 
 
 Stephan’s denial of having written the letter. 
 
 It is sometimes hard to cut adrift from old party ties, but “ the way 
 
 of duty is the way of safety,” and we believe your patriotic impulses 
 
 will surmount party prejudices and in the end “all will be well.” God 
 
 rules. 
 
 T 
 
 THE AMERICAN PATRIOTIC LEAGUE, 
 
 4 Henry C. Parke, Secretary , 
 
 P. O. Box 2358, New York City. 
 Coe. John D. Graham, National Deputy. 
 
 * 
 
 'w 
 
FATHER STEPHAN’S LETTER. 
 
 In the Church News , published at Washington, September 
 ioth, 1892, Father Stephan denies having written this letter, 
 and says : 
 
 “ I noticed in the newspapers a statement that I had sent a confi¬ 
 dential pamphlet to all the priests in the United States. This is as silly 
 as it is false.” 
 
 However, the document is in our possession. The title 
 page is as follows : 
 
 “Report of Rev. J. A. Stephan, Director, to Right Rev. Bishop M. 
 Marty, President of the Bureau of Catholic Indian Missions, for the year 
 1891-92. Washington, D. C. Press of Gedney & Roberts Company, 
 1892.” 
 
 From it we cull the following : [The display is our own.] 
 
 (Page I.) 
 
 REPORT. 
 
 The: Bureau of Cathodic Indian Missions. 
 
 Washington, D. C., July 27th, 1892. 
 
 Right Reverend Dear Sir : 
 
 I have the honor to submit herewith my Annual Report, and in view 
 of the important events that have transpired during the past year, I feel 
 obliged to review at some length the relations of this Bureau with the 
 head of the Indian Office and other Government officials, more particu¬ 
 larly since July 1st, 1889, the day Mr. Morgan became Commissioner of 
 Indian Affairs. And in connection with this matter ! am constrained 
 to request that you will keep this report from the eye of the public; 
 not for the reason that the public should not know of the facts herein 
 stated, for these facts should be known of all men, and being known, I 
 am sure they would cause every good citizen of whatever party or religion 
 to marvel at the bigotry and intolerance which have crippled the hand 
 of the church in its work of educating and redeeming from paganism the 
 children of our Indian wards. But this is the year of a Presidential 
 election, and if this arraignment of the Indian office were given to 
 the public at this time party prejudice, perverting the judgment of 
 even the best of men, would denounce it as an attempt to furnish 
 partisan ammunition to one of the parties to the contest. This result, 
 I anticipate, that it may be obviated. I am, and for many years have been, a 
 
 ( 6 > 
 
7 
 
 member of the party to which the bigoted Commissioner, and the not 
 much less bigoted President belong ; and while I disparage their offi¬ 
 cial conduct and actions in the matter of this report, I deprecate the idea 
 that anything that I may feel it to be my duty to say to you in behalf of 
 our most righteous cause, and in protest against the efforts of canting public 
 i officers to drive us from one of our most loved fields of labor in behalf 
 
 of the Master, should be used in a campaign of party politics. Therefore, 
 to you, and through you to the other Bishops to whom the facts herein 
 contained should be made known, I respectfully transmit this report, 
 * with the caution I have included in this its introductory paragraph. 
 
 (Page 2.) 
 
 Prior to July ist, 1889, the most friendly relations existed between 
 this Bureau and all the officials with whom it transacted its business, and 
 the same harmonious relations would have continued to this day if Mr. 
 Morgan had not begun a crusade against our work, the particulars of 
 which will be detailed further on. 
 
 When the press of the country announced in June, 1889, that Mr. Mor¬ 
 gan was to succeed Mr. John H. Oberly as Commissioner of Indian Affairs, 
 I was informed in more than one way of some of the antecedents of Mr. 
 Morgan. I learned that he was a preacher and a member of what 
 is called the “ League for the Protection of American Institutions." 
 
 I ascertained also that he had been a public lecturer, and that the 
 subject of one of his lectures was “Rome Opposed to American 
 Institutions." ******* 
 
 Early in July, 1889, the late Father Willard, as Vice Director of this 
 Bureau, called at the Indian Office, and was plainly told by Mr. Morgan 
 that the Contract School System would be superseded ; that he (Morgan) 
 was opposed to the principle of supporting schools such as ours at Gov¬ 
 ernment expense, and that while he could not at that time abolish the 
 system, he would as rapidly as possible replace the church schools by 
 Government schools. ****** 
 
 Early in his administration he removed nearly all the Catholics he 
 found in the Government school service and in many instances filled 
 their places by the appointment of preachers to superintend his non- 
 » sectarian schools.* 
 
 I clearly saw that if this man were permitted to go on unchallenged 
 he would, within his four years’ term of office, close all our schools, and 
 the children upon whom so much labor had been spent would be forced 
 into his unfriendly proselyting schools. * * * * 
 
 To get this unfair and unfriendly man out of the Indian office, 
 and if possible have some fair-minded gentleman take his place, I 
 put forth every effort, beginning first with my address to His Eminence 
 the Cardinal and (Page 3) to some thirty Archbishops and Bishops at the 
 meeting in Baltimore at the time of the Centennial or Catholic Congress. 
 
 On^account of incompetency. 
 
8 
 
 That meeting unanimously agreed that something should be done, and 
 a committee consisting of Archbishops Ireland and Riordan was selected 
 to call on the President and lay before him our views on the appointment 
 of Mr. Morgan as Commissioner of Indian Affairs and, Mr. Dorchester 
 as Superintendent of Public Schools. Bishop Chatard, of Indiana, and 
 myself accompanied that committee. We called upon President Harrison 
 by appointment, and had a conference with him in the presence of Secre¬ 
 taries Blaine and Windom. At this interview the President stated 
 that he wanted the Indian children educated in Government 
 schools, thus endorsing Morgan’s policy in that respect, and 
 he denied our request to withdraw the nominations of Messrs. 
 Morgan and Dorchester, thus showing his preference for these two 
 men to the hierarchy and Catholics cf the country. In view of the 
 failure at the White House, the only course left me was to fight the con¬ 
 firmation of these men in the Senate. The history of that fight is too 
 recent and well-known to need comment, but I must remark that there 
 never had been a battle in the Senate that appeared more prom¬ 
 ising, and never was one lost more signally. * * * 
 
 Everything seemed to favor the defeat of his confirmation when 
 certain elements—I was told the President— entered into the contest 
 which changed the whole situation. Morgan adroitly raising the 
 religious issue, said there was a Romish conspiracy to defeat him, and 
 that the Jesuits wanted him punished for his public school system views ; 
 and through the aid of the (Page 4) American Le gue and kindred socie¬ 
 ties he succeeded in uniting in his support a sufficient number to confirm 
 him. He had the whole power of the administration, from the 
 President down, at his back, and the vast patronage of his own 
 office. ******* * 
 
 During the debates in both Houses, much was said in favor 
 of our system of schools ; and no opportunity was ever allowed to 
 pass to present their merits in the press of the country. The pur¬ 
 pose was to lose no ground. If we could not extend our work, we 
 hoped to maintain its Status Quo . * * * * 
 
 While contending for the appropriations above mentioned, we met 
 with much opposition, for the Senators and members were flooded with 
 remonstrances against granting aid to our schools, and the American 
 League, the Committees of One Hundred of Boston and Lynn, Mass., 
 sent on memorials protesting against such appropriations. * * 
 
 I publicly, in the press, charged Morgan with stirring up this oppo¬ 
 sition, and to this day he has not denied it. 
 
 This Commissioner never tires in his work of crippling us, and I 
 clearly foresaw that he would succeed in his purpose to destroy our sys¬ 
 tem of schools if allowed, and therefore I used all the influence I could 
 command to get the President and the Secretary of the (Page 5) In¬ 
 terior to interpose in our behalf, but failed. It will be seen by what 
 follows that they not only did not favor us, but on the contrary took the 
 
same view of the relations and the future of our schools as were put forth 
 by Mr. Morgan. 
 
 Note what the President, in his Annual Message, at the opening of 
 the 51st Congress, stated in regard to the contract schools : 
 
 “ The National schools for Indians have been very successful, and 
 should be so organized and conducted as to facilitate the transfer of the 
 schools to the States or Territories in which they are located. * * * 
 This condition of things will be attained slowly, but it will be hastened by 
 keeping it in mind. And in the meantime, that co operation between the 
 Government and the Mission schools, which has wrought much good, 
 should 1 e cordially and impartially maintained.” 
 
 He gave us not one word of hope that the schools built by us 
 upon the invitation of the Government would receive any support 
 from the National Treasury longer than up to the moment when the 
 National schools could be multiplied to replace ours, and in the 
 meantime we would be grudgingly given what we had been getting 
 from the previous administration. 
 
 In the first report of Secretary Noble we find several pages of 
 praise for the National schools, especially of Carlisle, and then this 
 follows : 
 
 “ This school system, with its attendant practices, is worthy of 
 adoption and expansion, until it may be made to embrace all the Indian 
 youth. * * * The National system may grow very rapidly 
 
 and yet others be most welcome as co-wotkers in this benevolent cause ; 
 
 but the National system should have precedence, and in the case 
 of conflict it should be preserved and advanced.” 
 
 Thus at the outset the President, the Secretary of the inte¬ 
 rior and the Commissioner of Indian Affairs were in entire accord. 
 The President would give us contracts in the meantime, while the 
 National schools were being multiplied; the Secretary wou Ed do 
 the same; but in case of conflict would give precedence to the 
 Government schools, and Morgan would do the rest. He would 
 build tht se schools alongside of ours, start the conflict, and the destruc- 
 * tion of our work was to follow. 
 
 (Page 6.) * * 
 
 The schools especially appropriated for, and which the Secretary 
 had in mind were Rensalaer, Banning and Black Feet. These appro¬ 
 priations were secured against great opposition , without Department 
 recommendation , and against the public protest of Commissioner Morgan 
 and his friends * * * and these schools now annually 
 
 receiving over $ 33,000 would not be in receipt of one cent of Govern¬ 
 ment aid to-day if it had not been for the action of Congress. * * * 
 
 [NoTF.—Father Stephan continues with the publication 
 of letters and complaints, in which Morgan is severely cen¬ 
 sured.] 
 
IO 
 
 (Page 13.) 
 
 So we had to return to Congress once more to perfect the 
 
 work begun at its first session, * * * and when the fight 
 
 opened at the second session of the 51st Congress we were ready for the 
 Morgans, McCords, Alliances, Leagues, etc., which we knew we had to 
 confront. ** ****** 
 
 The Congressional Record of that session will show with what 
 bitterness we were assailed, but never faltering, we pressed on and 
 secured the adoption of an item in the appropriation bid that 
 threw over every one of our schools and all other contract schools 
 the same protection and recognition that was awarded Carlisle or 
 any of the other Government schools. When the Indian Appropria¬ 
 tion Bill for that year became a law I felt that our work, so far as 
 Government aid was concerned, was more secure than it ever had been 
 before, and all that would be necessary in the future would be to watch 
 the encroachments into our territory, call the attention of Congress 
 to the same, and to see to it that money enough was voted from 
 time to time to carry on the work. * * * * * 
 
 (Page 17.) 
 
 I shall not attempt to enumerate all of the many difficulties we ex¬ 
 perienced during the first two years of Mr. Morgan’s administration. 
 Our letter-books are full of correspondedce showing that we had to con¬ 
 test every inch of ground ; that no favor was ever shown us. * * 
 
 (Page 28.) 
 
 Mr. Morgan should have been promptly answered that we did 
 not care what his policy was, nor what his specific orders from the 
 President were, a higher power than either, namely the Congress 
 of the United States, having put its seal of approval on the contract 
 system by granting appropriations for the schools at Banning and 
 Black Feet, and having incorporated an item in the Appropriation 
 Bill appropriating a sufficient amount of money to renew all the 
 contracts. * * * * * * * * * 
 
 [Notk. —The following quotation is from Mr. Morgan’s 
 letter to Father Stephan] : 
 
 (Page 29.) 
 
 ‘ I have in a separate communication suggested to you the desira¬ 
 bility of some official expression on your part of your disapproval, as a 
 Bureau, of any opposition on the part of schools under your charge to 
 Government schools.” 
 
 [Notk. —In reply to this, Father Stephan writes, on the 
 same page] : 
 
II 
 
 4 
 
 Mr. Morgan should have been told in answer to this to clean 
 before h?s own door, to stop his Captain Pratts and others from 
 villifying our schools; to make his Government schools such insti¬ 
 tutions as fathers could with safety send their daughters to; that 
 then no one would oppose his Government schools, even if we did 
 oppose as citizens their extension. * * * * 
 
 (Page 31.) 
 
 I have never visited the Indian Office since that unworthy 
 man became its head, nor did I ever find it necessary. * * 
 
 (Page 32.) 
 
 We will gain nothing by crying over the past, and we should 
 at once prepare for the future. Profiting by experience, we should 
 re-organize our Bureau, and so conduct at that such disaster as 
 has been its recent lot can never befall it again. * * 
 
 Faithfully yours, 
 
 [signed.] J. A. STEPHAN, 
 
 Director. 
 
 Rt. Ret. M. Marty, 
 
 President Board Catholic Indian Missions. 
 
ARCHBISHOP FEEHAN’S PASTORAL. 
 
 The [following are extracts taken from a pastoral letter 
 read in all the Roman Catholic churches in Illinois, on Sun¬ 
 day, September n, 1892 : 
 
 To the Clergy and Catholic People oj the Ecclesiastical Province of 
 
 Chicago . 
 
 Very Rev. and Rev. Dear Fathers. 
 
 Beloved Brothers of the Laity: — At a recent meeting, we, the 
 Archbishop and Bishops of the Ecclesiastical Province of Chicago, con¬ 
 sidered it to be our duty to address you on the subject of education. * * 
 
 In our country those who believe education to be essentially 
 religious seem at present to be a minority, but we are persuaded that all 
 Christians who have seriously meditated on the subject know that we 
 and those who in this agree with us are right. * * * 
 
 It is not right that we Catholics should have to contribute to 
 the support of both the public and parochial schools. For the 
 present, however, there seems to be no escape from the double 
 burden, for the law taxes us for the maintenance of the secular 
 schools and reason and conscience compel us to maintain our own 
 religious schools. * * * So shall it be with what we 
 Catholics are now doing in the United States. * * * * 
 
 In building, maintaining and perfecting our Catholic schools, we 
 are doing the most beneficent work American citizens can do. * * * 
 We call the attention of all pastors to the legislation of the last 
 Baltimore Council on Parochial Schools. * * * When we 
 
 consider what we have done and are doing to educate our Catholic chil¬ 
 dren while we also contribute to the support of public schools, It seems 
 Inexplicable to us that the Legislature of Illinois should have 
 enacted what is known as the Edwards Law; an insidious and 
 unjust law,- which under pretext of zeal for popular education is 
 really a violation of our most sacred rights as men and citizens. 
 * * * We DENOUNCE this law as a violation of our consti- 
 
tutiona* rignts ana no d that those who favor it are unwortny of tne 
 support of enlightened and fair-minded VOTERS. Let us use all 
 right and honorable means to have it repealed. 
 
 P. A. Feehan, Archbishop of Chicago. 
 
 J. L. Spaeding, Bishop of Peoria. 
 
 James Ryan, Bishop of Alton . 
 
 John Janssen, Bishop of Belleville . 
 
 Note.—T he Edwards Law of Illinois is very similar to 
 the Bennett Law of Wisconsin which was repealed over a year 
 ago, and the pen with which the Governor signed the repealing 
 act is now exhibited in a glass case for public admiration. 
 
 The politico-religious fight which resulted in the election 
 of 4 ‘ Bad-Boy’ ’ Peck as Governor of Wisconsin and a legis¬ 
 lature in sympathy with him was one of the most bitter ever 
 witnessed in this country. 
 
 The Bennett Law provides that ‘ ‘ Every child from seven 
 to fourteen years of age shall attend some public or private 
 day school for a period not less than twelve weeks in each 
 year,” and that “ no school shall be regarded as a school 
 under this act, unless there shall be taught therein 
 reading, writing, arithmetic and United States history 
 in the English language / 9 This is its entire substance. 
 
 The Edwards Law has been in force for more than 
 three years, and yet the Archbishop and Bishops have 
 only just discovered—ON THE EVE OF THE PRESIDEN¬ 
 TIAL ELECTION—that it is desirable to have this ob¬ 
 noxious law repealed. 
 
 It would seem difficult to find the reason in the law itself 
 for the denunciations of the Roman Catholic Bishops, and 
 coming as it does subsequent to the secret letter of Father 
 Stephan and prior to the hierarchial assemblages noted below, 
 would denote that it is simply the culmination of a plan 
 long since adopted to overthrow the Public School 
 System and divide the School Fund. 
 
14 
 
 The clipping from the New York Daily News , of September 
 14, 1892, hereinbefore referred to, reads thus : 
 
 The Bishops of the Dioceses, which cover the Ecclesiastical Pro¬ 
 vince of New York, met to-day at the residence of Archbishop Corrigan, 
 on Madison avenue. The Archbishop of New York presided and the 
 Secretary was the Bishop of Brooklyn. The serious controversy involv¬ 
 ing the question of the parish school and Catholic education, and as to 
 what can and shall be done for Catholic children who do not attend 
 Catholic schools, the laws against secret societies, the proposed Catholic 
 Lay Congress at Chicago, etc , will make up the programme of the discus¬ 
 sion, which, of course, will be kept private for some time to come. 
 The impression prevails among all well-informed Catholics that all of the 
 bishops of the province are in perfect accord with Archbishop Corrigan. 
 His strained relations with Archbishop Ireland did not spring from any 
 personal causes, it is stated. These distinguished metropolitans represent 
 rival factions in the church. The bone of canonical contention is 
 the school question, and incidental thereto the adoption of 
 exclusively American methods of education and training. 
 
 The following is from a telegraphic despatch found in the 
 New York Herald , of September 19, 1892 : 
 
 Dubuque, Iowa, September 18, 1892. —The Thirty-seventh Annual 
 Convention of the German Roman Catholic Central Society of North 
 America opened here to-day. * * * The orator of the day 
 
 was Bishop Marty, of Sioux Falls, S. D. His sermon was devoted almost 
 entirely to the objects of the German societies represented in the con¬ 
 vention. He referred briefly to the school question, holding that the 
 education of children, as at present conducted, was on the wrong plan. 
 There was no reference to the Fairbault system nor to Cohenslyism, but 
 it is intimated that both of these subjects may be considered by the 
 convention itself. 
 
 f 
 
PROMISCUOUS OR UNRESTRICTED 
 IMMIGRATION 
 
 Is a curse and furnishes this country with the most undesirable 
 class of population. From this primarily arises all the evils 
 with which politics, business and our social system are afflicted, 
 and we raise a warning voice to our fellow-citizens to shut the 
 gates before the servant becomes the master. 
 
 All this matter is food for serious reflection, 
 and we believe and trust—in the Providence 
 of God—that this little leaflet may open the 
 eyes of all to the necessity for prompt and 
 vigorous action. 
 
 H. C. PARKE, 
 
 Secretary . 
 
 P. O. Box 2358, New York.