TOLERATION VERSUS RIGHTS.
By Editor
A SPECIAL Thanksgiving service was held at the Unitarian Church in this city, at which the subject of "Tolerance" was discussed by several prominent individuals. Rev. Dr. Wendte, pastor, discoursed on "Tolerance for Those Who Believe More Than We Do." Rev. Dr. Dodson's theme was "Tolerance for Those Who Believe Less Than We Do." U. S. Senator Perkins spoke on "Tolerance in Politics." Rabbi Friedlander's subject was "Russian Intolerance toward the Jews." The Catholic Church of St. Francis de Sales had been invited to participate in the services, and the pastor, Father McSweeney, being absent from the city, sent a letter, in which he expressed congratulations on the growth of religious tolerance, which made it possible for ministers of the different denominations to join in services on the same platform. Without special reference to the sentiments expressed on this occasion, we are reminded that toleration is a principle with which a free people cannot legitimately have anything to do. When a government assumes to merely tolerate, it assumes the right not to tolerate when it shall so elect. It is an erroneous idea, indulged by many church people, that minorities exercise rights by the mere grace of majorities. And such religious influences as are conscious of power to do otherwise generally pose as very kind indeed if they tolerate anything to which they are opposed. Toleration means the allowance of that which is not wholly approved. Rights are God-given; they do not spring from human might. Our government is based on the principle expressed in the Declaration of Independence: "We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable 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." Here is the assertion of a natural right, which it is the business of the government to "secure." It is in the most absolute sense a denial of the principle of mere toleration, which implies the granting of an unmerited favor. It is as much the business of the government to secure the rights of one citizen as of a million citizens,—of the minority as of the majority. This principle has often been recognized by nations when a single citizen was in trouble in a foreign land. No party loses any of its inalienable rights by falling into a minority; and no individual loses any of his inalienable rights though he stand alone in his political or religious views. W. N. G. (For other editorial notes see page 93.)