NEW YORK
35
NEW YORK
New Netherland, and the other emigrants and their
descendants who came within their influence in the
Province of New York, early learned the value and
reason of religious toleration. The Dutchmen in
America did not persecute for religion's sake.
The present civil relations of the Catholic Church to the State of New York and their history form an in- teresting study. The Dutch Colony of the seven- teenth century was officially intolerantly Protestant, but was, as has been noted, in practice tolerant and fair to people of other faiths who dwelt within New Netherland. When the English took the province from the Dutch in 1664, they granted full religious toleration to the other forms of Protestantism, and preserved the property rights of the Dutch Reformed Church, while recognizing its discipline. The Gen- eral Assembly of the province held in 1682 under the famous Governor Thomas Dongan, an Irish Catholic nobleman, adopted the Charter of Liberties, which proclaimed religious liberty to all Christians. Al- though this charter did not receive formal royal sanc- tion, the factof religioustolerationwas nevertheless uni- versally recognized. In 1688 the Stuart Revolution in England reversed this policy of liberality, and the Province of New York immediately followed the e.\- amplo of the mother-country in all its bitter intoler- ance and persecution by law of the Catholic Church and its adherents. In 1697, although the Anglican Church was neverformallyestal>li.shed in the Province of New York, Trinity Church was founded in the City of New York by royal charter, and received many civil privileges and the munificent grants of land which are the source of its present great wealth. The Dutch Reformed Churches continued, however, to enjoy their property and the protection of their rights un- disturbed by the new Anglican foundation, the inhabi- tants of Dutch blood being then largely in the ascend- ant. This condition continued many years, for it is a fact that, when the Revolution occurred in 1776, the majority of the inhabitants of the Province of New York were, contrary to general belief, not of English descent.
The political conditions at home, and also the long contest between England and France for the control of North .America resulted, as has been stated, in the enactment by the provincial legislature from time to time of proscriptive laws against the Catholic Faith and its adherents — laws which are savage in their malignity. Catholic priests and teachers were or- dered to keep away from the province or, if they by any chance came there, to depart at once. Severe penalties were provided for disobedience to these laws, extending to long imprisonment or even death. These laws were directed in many cases principally against the Catholic missionaries among the Iroquois, who were almost exclusively Frenchmen. They were adopted also, it is consoling to think, against the pro- test of many of the best of the colonial legislators and under the urging of authority, and were rarely en- forced. This was not so in the case of the unfortunate schoolmaster John Ury, however. In the disturbances and panic of the so-called Negro Plot of 1741 he was actually tried in New York and executed under these statutes for the crime of being a "Popish priest" and teaching his religion. Although it is held by some that Ury was not a Catholic priest. Archbishop Bayley gives good reason for believing the contrary, citing especially the fact that the record shows that he never denied the accusation at any time, and therefore died as a priest. The entire body of this legislation was formally repealed at the first session of the Legis- lature of the State of New York.
The condition of the few Catholics who dared pro- scription and persecution in the province of New York before the Revolution of 1776 was deplorable from a religious point of view. These Catholics must have been recruited in numbers from time to time from sea-
faring people, emigrants, Spanish negroes from the
West Indies, and at least part of the 7000 Acadians,
who were distributed along the Atlantic seaboard in
175.5 after the awful expatriation winch that devoted
people suffered, although the annals are almost bare of
references even to their existence. Father Farmer
from Philadelphia came to see the oppressed Catho-
lics during his long service on the missions between
1752-86, but his visits have no history. They had
no church or institutions of any kind. As Arch-
bishop Bayley truly said, a chapel, if they had had
means to erect one, would have been torn down. The
first mention of their public worship shows them hear-
ing Mass in a carpenter shop, and afterwards in a
public hall in Vauxliall Garden (a pleasure ground on
the Hudson near Warren Street), New York, between
the years 1781-8.3 when they had begun to take
heart because of the religious libertj' which was to be
theirs under the new republican government whose
arms had already triumphed over England at York-
town. Their number at this time was reported as be-
ing about two hundred, with only twenty odd com-
municants, as Father Farmer lamented.
The Revolution of 1 776 overthrew entirely the system of government churches and all religious proscrip- tion by law, and the State Constitution of 1777 pro- vided, as has been seen, for general religious liberty. The Legislature in 1784 carried out the declaration. It provided "that an universal equality between every religious denomination, according to the true spirit of the Con.5titution, toward each other shall forever prevail", and followed this by a general act providing for the incorporation of churches and religious soci- eties under clear general rules, few, simple, and easy for all. This law made a most unusual provision in aid of justice for the vesting in these corporate bodies immediately of "all the temporalities granted or de- vised directly to said church, congregation or society, or to any person or persons in trust to and for their use and although such gift, grant or devise may not have strictly been agreeable to the rigid rules of law, or might on strict construction be defeated by the opera- tion of the statutes of mortmain." It made provision also with great prescience for the protection of clergy- men from the exercise of arbitrary power by the lay directors of religious corporations by taking from the trustees of the church the power to fix the salary of the clergyman and by requiring the congregation to fix it at special meetings. To prevent abuses, however, and in accordance with legal tradition and precedent, restric- tions upon the amount nf nal est a I o and personal prop- erty which a church cuul'l ImM wen- maile, and the Courtof Chancery was|ilac((l ill lunl ml of all such mat- ters by requiring that annual n-po its shouUl be made by the churches to it. The final cl.ause of the act crystal- lized the principle of the Constitution, that, while the State protects and fosters religion in its beneficent work, it must not interfere in religious matters. It is as follows: "Nothing herein contained shall be con- strued, adjudged, or taken to abridge or affect the rights of con.science or private judgment or in the least to alter or change the religious constitutions or govern- ments of either of the said churches, congregations or societies, so far as respects or in any wise concerns the doctrine, discipline or worship thereof."
The Constitution of 1777 and the legislation of the Revolutionary period in aid of it are remarkable for deep sagacity and great grasp of princii)les, as well as for the conservative and sane treatment of the inno- vations and novelties which the radical changes in the government made necessary. This is the more re- markable when it is remembered that ( his Clonstit.ution was adopted in time of war by ddcgal cs who laid down their arms in most cases to join in t he (Icliheral ions upon it, and that the Legislature first met imnicdiHlely after the close of this war time. It was besides a ven- ture in an almost virgin fieH. Its wisdom, knowledge,
