Michigan Reports (Volume 118); Cases Decided in the Supreme Court of Michigan
Paperback
Currently unavailable to order
ISBN10: 1154280438
ISBN13: 9781154280432
Publisher: General Books
Pages: 248
Weight: 0.99
Height: 0.52 Width: 7.44 Depth: 9.69
Language: English
ISBN13: 9781154280432
Publisher: General Books
Pages: 248
Weight: 0.99
Height: 0.52 Width: 7.44 Depth: 9.69
Language: English
This historic book may have numerous typos, missing text or index. Purchasers can download a free scanned copy of the original book (without typos) from the publisher. 1900. Not illustrated. Excerpt: ... In reaching the foregoing conclusions I have received no direct aid from the decisions in other States passing upon a similar question. In the following cases the right to read the Bible in the schools was sustained: Moore v. Monroe, 64 Iowa, 367 (52 Am. Rep. 444); Spiller v. Inhabitants of Woburn, 12 Allen, 127; Donahoe v. Richards, 38 Me. 379 (61 Am. Dec. 256); Nessle v. Hum, 1 Ohio, N. P. 140. In State, ex rel. Weiss, v. District School Board, 76 Wis. 177 (20 Am. St. Rep. 41), the right to read the Bible in the schools was denied. Iu Board of Education of Cincinnati v. Minor, 23 Ohio St. 211 (13 Am. Rep. 233), it was held that the Cincinnati board of education had authority to exclude the Bible and all religious teachings from the public schools. In each of these cases the decision turned on the construction of the state constitution. None of those constitutions had language resembling the constitutional provisions of Michigan herein discussed. Moore v. Monroe, 64 Iowa, 367 (52 Am. Rep. 444), is an authority for the proposition that reading the Bible does not make the school a place of worship, within the meaning of the constitution. Two of the five judges who heard State, ex rel. Weiss, v. District School Board, 76 Wis. 177 (20 Am. St. Rep. 41), reached an opposite conclusion. If relator's right depended upon the constitutional prohibition against the passage of a law to compel a person to attend, erect, or support any place of worship, these authorities would be valuable. But as his right is clearly determined by other constitutional provisions, as I have herein indicated, these authorities afford no aid. I am glad to say, however, that my conclusion is supported by our greatest authority on constitutional law, who was especially familiar with the Constitu...
