American Atheist Magazine Nov/Dec 1964

MEIICAI
TBEIST
/'I %bttf~M
Vol.6: No. 11 and 12
November-December,
(Picture from the Denver Catholic Register for January

14, 1965.) President Johnson's much heralded $1.5 billion
plan for federal aid to education hae just been sent to Congress. It is advertised as a new venture to encourage public
and parochial school cooperation to aid needy children and
cut through the Church-State impasse over government aid to
education. The program calls primarily for $1 billion to 'be
given public school districts enrolling children from needy
families.
1964
One Dollar
Aware that a substantial part of the "War on Poverty"

funds have already fallen into the hands of the Catholic
Church and being concerned about the remaining one-half
billion dollars from the President's plan that would be available to private and parochial schools, the Freethought
Society of America and POAU have joined forces in registering oppos it ion to this plan.
(See page 3])
1
"AttIIIIINf
oJWNlllHl',
MANACMMIN'r
(..or.,_.J,'~'_.,.,.TIII<,.,U
__AND CIIIC\ILATION
CM)
No
<l
...
=-..rt.IIJ.t.h.~.n
THE FREETHOUGHT SOCIETY OF AMERICA. 1Ne.

A Non-Profit and Non-Political Organization
_V::"~"'....
""'-IN_UI''''<'luu,_m,'''.I'CJl
.:=~-=..
.
(_."
,."u,_.ujoft{
'"':.::=-
,,400
,.""
2,200
l,I'7
In T.his Issue ..
Lower Court RuJ ing Against The Tax The Church Property Case
Page 1
Memorandum Opinion, Judge Wilson E. Barnes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
2
A Question Answered By Leonard J. Kerpelman, Corporation Counsel
" . . . . . . . . . .. 26
Tax Exempt Religious Property in Baltimore, Martin A. Larson. " . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 27
Church, Charity Real Estate Valued at $135 Billion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..
28
Tax-Exemption is Doomed, According to St. Petersburg Clergymen. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
.. .. ,. 29
President Johnson's $1.5 Billion School Aid Plan, Editorial
31
Horace Mann League Challenges State Aid to Church-Affiliated
Colleges, Editorial
33
Mixed Marriage Edict Oue Soon, Editorial
34
SCIENCE AND FREETHOlJGHT
A Physicist's
View of Ethics, Dr. George A. Fink ..................................
37
The Philosophy of Dr. Willard E. Edwards
43
The Perpetual Calender
44
Youth Section, Edited by Steve Wagner
45
Letters to the Editor
". . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
46
Advertisements
;
". . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 51
English History -- A Poem By Joseph E. Nutter. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Back Cover
The Christmas Myth. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Back Cover
Lemoin Cree, EditoFoin-Chief / Ralph Blois, AI Stahl, Henry Laing Watt, Associate
Editors /
Steve Wagner, Youth Section Editor.J Lou AIt, Stephen Burglund, Pearl Cline, Gus Goltz,
leonard Kerpelman, Virgil McClain, Stewart Smiley, Contributing
Editors /.
Publisher . 1MF. FREE1MOUGHT

Printed
bv..
SOCIETY OF AMERICA, INC.
GUSTAV BROUKAL FREETHOUGHT
PRESS.
The American Atheist is published monthly 11 months

per year (August - September combined) by the Freethought Society of America, Inc., a non-profit, nonool itie al, educational corporation.
Publication office
is at 2502 North Calvert Street, Baltimore, Maryland
21218. Subscription rate is $5. a year. students $3.
Second class postage paid at Baltimore, Maryland.
The American Athe ist,
Notice
In the area of separation of church and state there
have recently been three important developments,
all
revolving around the issue of government subsidy of
religion.
They are (1) The ruling of the lower court
against our suit brought before it to force the church to
pay its fair share of property taxes, (2) The suit brought
before the Maryland Courts by the Horace Mann League
challenging the constitutionality
of State aid to church
schools, and (3) Endorsement by the President's
1.5
Billion School Aid Plan of the ltshared time" programs,
in which private and parochial school students use
some facilities
of the public schools.
All three of
these issues are of major importance; their resolution
will have far reaching consequences.
Therefore, a
substantial part of this issue will be devoted to a discussion of these developments.
LOWER COURT RULING AGAINST

THE TAX THE CHURCH
PROPERTY CASE
In a Z4-page Memorandum Opinion filed by Judge
Wilson K. Barnes of the Circuit Court #2 of Baltimore
setting forth in detail the facts and the reasons for the
Court's ruling against the suit to force the church to
pay its' fair share of property taxes, Judge Barnes
declared that tax exemption of church property does not
violate the First or Fourteenth Amendment of the
Constitution of the United States.
He concluded, "
November-December1964
Baltimore, Maryland 21218
the exemption does not result in the establishment of

religion or in state action prohibiting the free exercise
thereof."
And, " ... there is no denial of due process
of law as prohibited to the States by the Fourteenth
Amendment to the Constitution of the United States."
We of course expected to lose this cas E in the lower
court, however, we disagree that tax exemption of
church property does not violate the First or Fourteenth
Amendment and contend that the exemption constitutes
a clear establishment of religion by the state, seriously
restricting the free exercise of religion. Free exercise
of religion is only a part of the important concept of
Religious Freedom which must include freedom from
religion as well as of religion.
Hence, it should be
obvious that we as Atheists and others not enjoying
this exemption are compelled to maintain places of
worship and ministries, a practice prohibited by the
Declaration of t1ights of the Maryland Constitution.
We have appealed this case to the State Appeals
Court for these reasons: (1) Our conscience is violated
in that we are forced to contribute to the maintenance
of institutions we do not attend or benefit from, and to
support beliefs to which we do not subscribe; (2) Our
case is a sound on e with considerable public support
in every state of the Union, particularly from religious
circles; and (3) We are convinced that the time is now
to bring this case before the United States Supreme
Court. Based on the nature of today's Court and its
language in the Prayer and Bible case, we a.e confident
that we will be successful in reaching the Court and,
once there, in having the tax exemption now granted
church property by all of the 50 states and the District
of Columbia d rclared unconstitutional.
We present here an edited reprint of the Memorandum
Opinion filed by Judge Barnes because the interest of
our subscribers is very great in this suit. In the AugSept. issue of The American Atheist we reprinted in
full the testimony of your editor who testified as an
Atheist when the suit was heard for its merits on July
1, 1964. At that time we stated that the intervention
of Lemoin Cree, his wife, and the Freethought Society
rf America as additional parties Plaintiff had saved
the suit from sinking into oblivion. Previous to July 1,
1964 Mrs. Madalyn E. Murray and her mother, the original plaintiffs, had irresponsibly (and illegally) fled the
state withou t making any provision for the continuation
of the suit-without
even notifying the lawyer in the
suit, Mr. Leonard J. Kerpelman. You will note in the
Opinion that our intervention and testimony AS AN
ATHEIST did indeed save the suit and had an affirmati ve bearing on it.
Page 1
The American Atheist,
MADALYN E. MURRAY, Trustee, and

LEDJ"IE MAYS,
*
*
Original Plaintiffs,
LEMOIN CREE and
MARIE CREE, his wife, and
FREETHOUGHT SOCIETY OF AMERICA>
IN THE
*
*
*
Intervening Plaintiffs,
vs.
LOUI~ L. GOLDSTEIN, Comptroller of the
Treasury of Maryland,
ALBERT W. WARD, Director,
State Department of Assessments,
ROBERT L. MAINEN, Supervisor of
Assessments of Baltimore City,
JOHN G. ARTHUR, Director of Assessments
of Baltimore City,
Original Defendants,
CIRCUIT COURT NO.2
*
*
*
*
OF
and
THE MOST REVEREND LAURENCE J. SHEHAN,
Roman Catholic Archbishop of
Baltimore, a Corporation Sole,
THE CONVENTION OF THE PROTESTANT
EPISCOPAL CHURCH OF THE DIOCESE
OF MARYLAND>
UNITED CHRISTIAN CITIZENS, INCORPORATED,
TEMPLE EMANUEL OF BALTIMORE, and
MARYLAND SYNOD OF THE LUTHERAN CHURCH
IN AMERICA,
Intervening Defendants.
BALTIMORE
CITY
*
*
*
No. A-38851
Docket 72-A
Folio 343
*
*
*
*
MEMORANDUM OPINION
The Original Bill of Complaint was filed in this Court on October 15, 1963
by Madalyn E. Murray, Trustee and Leddie Mays, the Original Plaintiffs, against the
Comptroller of the Treasury of Maryland, the Director of the State Department of
Assessments and Taxation, the Supervisor of Assessments of Baltimore City and the
Director of Assessments of Baltimore City.
Page 2
The prayers for relief were that:
November-December 1964
1. Article 81, Section 9(4) of the Annotated Code of Maryland

!~Ltion), (the "Maryland Code"), be declared
2.
The Original Defendants
Section 9(4) of the Maryland
(1957
unconstitutional.
be enjoined
from carrying
Code and from granting
out Article
any further
exceptions
81,
from
taxation under that Section.
3. The Original Defendants be directed to include upon their lists of

taxable property all houses and buildings
u8ed in connection therewith
used for public worship
and the grounds
appurtenant
and any ~arsonage
to such houses, buildings
and parsonages, and also be directed to levy and collect taxes upon such houses,
parsonages and grounds appurtenant
which are not used for religious
services
or for
public worship, and
4.
The Original Plaintiffs
The Court permitted
may have other and further relief.
five religious
bodies to intervene
Defendant. These were the Roman Catholic Archbishop

of the Protestant Episcopal
Citizens, Incorporated,
Church in The Diocese
Temple Emanuel
of Baltimore,
of Maryland,
of Baltimore,
as parties
the Convention
the United Christian
and the Maryland
Synod of the
Lutheran Church in America.

The Court also permitted
Lemoin Cree and Marie Cree, his wife, and Free-
thought Society of America to intervene

vention will receive additional
as additional
Plaintiff.
This inter-
comment later in this Opinion.
The Original Bill of Complaint

trustee and by Mrs. Mays, as taxpayers,
other taxpayers similarly situated.
States and of the State of Maryland
is a taxpayers
suit filed by Mrs. Murray,
on their own behalf
and on behalf
They allege that they are citizens

and are taxpayers
"State") and of the City of Baltimore

joint leasehold estate in the property
of the United
of the State of Maryland
1526 Winford Road, Baltimore

Defendants
as
of all
(the
(the "City") by virtue of their ownership
It is then alleged that the Original
parties
of a
City, Maryland.
have various duties in
Page 3
regard to the assessment and collection of taxable property in the State and City;
that taxes are levied by the Original Defendants against the property of the Original
Plaintiffs and are levied uniformly against all other like property owners whose
property is not exempted from taxation; that owner-s of property, like in kind and in
-z:
CI
z
Q
situation to the property of the Original Plaintiffs are not being taxed uniformly
ylith them by the Original Defendants but are being exempted from assessment and taxation where such properties are being used for public worship, i.e., pUblic religious
services, or are being used as parsonages in connection with such places of public
worship and appurtenant grounds, such exception being purportedly granted by Article
81, Sec. 9(4) of the Maryland Code; and, that these actions by the Original
Defendants place a direct detriment and financial burden upon the Original Plaintiffs
"whose tax burden is thereby increased for the sole purpose of aiding and supporting
the religious practices and religious institutions of others, since a decrease in the
taxable baSiS, does by law require an increase in the rate of taxation of those.
taxed. II
Five grounds of unconstitutionality
and invalidity under both the
Constitutions of the State and of the United States are then alleged~
1.
These are:
The acts of the Original Defendants contravene Article 36 of the
Declaration of Rights in the Maryland Constitution as they in direct effect compel

the Original Plaintiffs as taxpayers, and all other taxpayers, to maintain and
contribute to a place of worship or a ministry.
2.
These acts and prac'Uces violate Article 15 of the Maryland Declaration
of Rights providing for uniformity of tax assessments so that taxes may be imposed
upon all members of the connnunity for pUblic purposes only and the furtherance of
public worship is not a valid public purpose.
3. These acts, practices and statute deny. due process of law contrary to
Article 23 of the Maryland Declaration of Rights.
Page 4
NQvembeI'-Decem,ber1964
4.
o
Z
0.
These acts, practices
and statutes violate the First Amendment
Constitutiol: of the United States as made applicable
to the
to the states by the Fourteenth
:2:
:::)
CI
z:
~
r::c
Amendment
of That ~onstitution
in that they constitute
ment of religion and a law prohibiting
o
::!:
LI.I
5.
:2:
These acts, practices
a law respecting
an establish-
the free exercise thereof.
and statutes deny due process
of law under the
Fourteenth Amendment.
It is further alleged that declaratory
Declaratory
relief is re~uired under the Uniform
Judgments Act (Article 31 A, Sections 1-16 of the Maryland
injunctive relief is also re~uired and that the Original Plaintiffs
Code), that
have no ade~uate
remedy at law.
As the constitutionality
of a statute of the State is involved, the Attorney
General of Maryland was served with a copy of the Original Bill of Complaint
re~uired by Article 31 A, Section 11 of the Maryland
Code.
Answers were duly filed on behalf of the Original Defendants

of most of the Intervening
Defendants.
as
and on behalf
In general these Answers indicated no
knowledge in regard to the status or property holdings of the Original Plaintiffs

and denied the various legal conclusions
set forth in the Original Bill of Complaint;
in most of the Answers it was denied that the Original Plaintiffs
had sufficient
interest, fir.ancial or otherwise, to seek a declaratory
decree under the Uniform
Declaratory Judgments Act, that there was a justifiable
issue sufficient to give the
Original Plaintiffs
Section
9(4)
standing to obtain an injunction on the grounds that Article 81,
of the Maryland Code was unconstitutional,
that there was a case or
controversy within the meaning of Article III, Section 2 of the Constitution
of the
United States and that the exception under the Ma.ryland Statute was unconstitutional.
In the original answers filed on behalf of the Original Defendants,
was admitted that the Original Plaintiffs
it
were taxpayers of the State of Maryland.
This admission was withdrawn in an Amended Answer filed on June
25> 1964
with leave
of Court.
November .December 1964
Page 5
In the answer filed on behalf of Temple Emanuel of Baltimore, the interesting and novel defense is raised that not only is the exemption of the s~ogue
from taxation by Article 81, Sec. 9(4) of the Maryland Code constitutional, but that
a failure to except that place of public worship from taxation by the State and City
would result in "an unlawful and unconstitutional
abridgment of religious liberty,
the free exercise of religion and the separation of church and statell in violation
of the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States and
the Maryland Declaration of Rights.
The suit came on for hearing on its merits on July 1, 1964.
Leonard J.
Kerpelman, solicitor for the Original Plaintiffs asked leave of Court, in open Court
at the hearing, to move for the intervention of Lemoin Cree and Marie Cree, his Wife,
and of Freethought Society of America, ("Freethought Society"), an Ohio Corporation,
as additional parties Plaintiff, and for leave to file an Amended Bill of Complaint
setting up their position as taxp~ers
Mrs. Murr~
and their interest in the litigation.
and Mrs. Mays had removed themselves from the State of Maryland
to the state of Harlaii shortly prior to the hearing under circumstances which need
not be recited here.
The solicitors for the Original Defendants and for same of the
Intervening Defendants strenuously objected to the requested intervention of Mr. and

Mrs. Cree' and of the Freethought Society and the filing of an Amended Bill of
'
Complaint on their behalf.
The Court reserved its ruling on the motion at that
time and directed the hearing to proceed, subject to the exception of the Original
DetendSnts to the motion for intervention.
~~e testimony established the following:
(See American Atheist
lor
Aug-Sept.
con
t ad.ni.ng entire
testimony)
The Original Defendants offered the testim<my of John G. Arlhur ,aae of the
Original Defendants and Director of the Department of Assessments of Baltimore C.1ty
for the past 12 years.
Page 6
Prior-to being Director, he was DepUty D!~or
for U ~ea.rs.
November-December
1964
The American Atheist
of Assessments tor. 38 years in all.
lIe has been with the C1tyfe
~
~
o
devoted and well informed public servant.
=
::!l
Dep~ent
He is a
After describing his duties as Director,
which include the assessment of property in the City for tax purposes and the appli-
cation of the laws of the State in regard to such assessment, Mr. Arthur pointed out
:!iE
that the taxable basis in substantial part is determined by the assessments made by
his Department, the budget is formulated by the Budget Director, approved by the
Board of Estimates and is then submitted to the City Council of Baltimore City for
final action.
By the provisionS of the Baltimore City Charter, the City Council m~
eliminate or reduce items in the budget, but may not increase them.
amount of the City's Bu~get is determined, the tax
the principal part of the taxable basis is fixed.
After the final
rate on real property formiv~

The greater the amount of the
assessable basis is, the less each taxpayer has to pay on his own real estate as
Property which is exempt ~rom t~~tion
by law is not part of the assessable basisQ
At the request of the Attorney General, Mr. Arthur had assembled the
computer sheets of the City which showed the tax exempt property in the City as
exempted by Article 81, Section 9(4) of the Maryland C~de, as places of public
worship, parsonages, and appurtenant ground.
There are a number of other exemptions
from taxation in Section 9, including public property, j'l:aternalbeneficiary aasocf,a .

tions, hospitals, charitable institutions, etc., as will be later ')ointed out, but
the computer sheets offered as Agree,~ Exhibit 1, were confined to Subsection 4 of
Section 9.
Chrisoi-iancongregations were divided into two groups:
"Roman Catholic",
marked with a red check mark, and "Protestant" marked with a blue check mark.
Jewish congregations were marked with a green check mark.
While not purporting to
be an absolute check, the study is roughly accurate and shows the following total
assessments exempt in the levy for 1964 from taxation in the City under Article 81,
Section 9( 4) :
November-December
Protest.ant
Roman Catholic
Jewish
1964
$41,031,430
31,339,880
6,136,510
$78,507, 820
Page 1
The records of the City indicate the total assessable basis of the City
:II:
ia..
for 1964 as follows:
I
o
$2,263,708,768.00
578,997,400.00
All taxable real property

All tax exempt property
Total of all real estate, both
taxable and exempt
:II:
a:
$2,842,706,168.00
:E
Of the $578,997,400 total exempt property, $78,507,820.00 is exempt by

virtue of Article 81, Section 9(4) of the Maryland Code.
Mr. Arthur stated the methods used by the assessors of the Department in
arriving at values for the purposes of taxation.
There are the three usual methods
used in real estate appraisal and spelled out in the Manual issued by the State
Department of Assessments and Taxation, which, in time, is based on Boeck's Manual
for Appraisers.
In assessments for land, the comparable sales method is used, with
a front foot calculation in many instances and in some, but not many instances, a
unit value, based on an acreage valuation.
For determining the value of buildings,
the cost less depreciation method may be used.
If this method is used, the land
value is added to the value of the building as thus determined.
In some instances
a comparable sales value for the entire property may be used and in other instances
an income capitalization method with appropriate allocations as between land and
improvements, may be used.
Under the policy established by the State Department of Assessments and
Taxation, the final figure for purposes of taxation of land assessed by the methods
described is &::!fo of the current full cash value.
Mr. Arthur freely admitted that
assessment of property for taxation, even using the established methods outlined,
"is not an exact science".
Article 81, Section 9(4) provides:
"(4) Churches, parsonages, etc ,, - Houses and buildings
used exclusively for public worship, and the furniture _contained
therein, and any parsonage used in connection therewith and the
grounds appurtenant to such houses, buildings and parsonages and
necessary for the respective uses thereof."
Page 8
November-December
Baltimore Maryland 21218
.~
In applying this exemption, Mr. Arthur and the City Department of Assess-
-zii:
C)
ments have given the words IIpublicworshipll a comprehensive interpretation,
Houses.
:E
CI
buildings and appurtenant lands used for teaching or contemplating the beliefs of
philosophical system, regardless of whether that philosophical system includes a
,0
:E
belief in a Supreme Being, are considered to be exempt under Section 9(4) and such
exemptions are granted in the regular course of administering the tax laws.
For
example, the property used by the Baltimore Ethical Culture Society which does not
,
teach any belief in a Supreme Being, but which confines its teachings to moral and
ethical standards and educational purposes has been exempted under Section 9(4).
Property used by Buddhist organizations for their religious teachings are exempted.
The Philosophical College of Occult Science has had its property exempted under
Section 9(4).
Over objection and subject to exception, Mr, Arthur testified that
after ~aving heard Mr. Cree describe his p~ilosophical system, if app~ication were
made, the property ot t~e FreethougAt Society would be granted an exe~ption under
I
Section 9(4).
The State tax rate is 15 cents for $100 of assessed value.
This is levied
to protect the bond isses of the State.

By stipulations in Agreed Exhibit 4, it was agreed that the Roman Catholic
Archbishop of Baltimore is a corporation sole having title to, or being President of
COl~orations, having title to various properties of the Romand Catholic Church in
the City including 163 parishes or mission churches.
The history of the incorpora-
tion of the Convention of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the Diocese of Maryland
was agreed upon in Agreed Exhibit 3, its authorization to intervene was established
and a complete li~t of the properties of the Convention was given, with an aggregate
value of Diocesan properties in excess of $2,000,000.
Temple Emanuel, by stipula-
tion in Agreed 'Exhibit 5, is a Reformed Jewish Congregation incorporated under

Article 21 of the Maryland Code as a religious corporation, authorized to intervene
November-December
1964
Page 9
I'" '
I
in the suit.
Its property in the City is assessed as follows:

Land
Improvements
Total
$16,945.00
21,300.00
l38,245.00
By agreed Exhibit 6, it was stipulated that the Congregations of the

Maryland Synod of the Lutheran Church.in America had total assets of $35,356,581 of
which $13,637,275 were located in Baltimore City.
indebtedness.
This was subject to $247,625 of
Its right to intervene was not challenged.
It was established also that the property 2502 North Calvert Street,
Baltimore, Maryland was assessed for taxation for 1962 as follows:
Land
Improvements
Total
$ 1640.00
6600.00
$ 8240.00
On this assessment, State and City taxes of $353.50 (less a discount on

the City taxes of $3.41) were paid on January 24, 1964.
The individual assessments of the property occupied by the Cathedral of
Mary Our Queen, the property occupied by the synagogue of the Baltimore Hebrew
Congregation and the property occupied by the synagogue of the Har Sinai Congregation were given, but as these assessments all appeared to be in accordance With the
methods used by the Department, it is not necessary for this suit to give the
individual figures.
Subsequent to the completion of the testimony on July 1, 1964, Mr.
Kerpleman, in accordance with the Court's suggestion at the hearing, filed a fonmU
Petition for leave to file an Interlineated Amended Bill of Complaint and submitted
the proposed Amended 'Bill of Complaint.
Office on July 23, 1964.
These papers 'Were filed in the Clerk's
The only substantial charge in the Original Bill of Can-
plaint was the addition of Mr. and Mrs. Cree
and the Freethought Society as part!
Plaintiff and of a. new Paragraph 2-A setting out the properties of these new
Plaintiffs.
Page 10
Baltimore,
Maryland 21218
On August 10, 1964, the Court passed. an Order granting leave to Mr. and
Mrs. Cree and the Freethought
Society to intervene
as additional
parties Plaintiff,
allowing the filing of the Interlineated
Amended Bill of Complaint
the Order and providing
of all the parties
that the Answers
refiled as Answers to the Interlineated

party Defendant
25, 1964.
to file a Supplemental
No Supplemental
Answers have been filed.
standing as taxp8.yers to mnintain
2.
exclusively
to the Court for decision.
the present
and Intervening,
and parsonages
and necessary
have suf'f'Lc Lerr'.
in the affirmative,
from taxa.tion of "houses and buildings
for public worship, and the furniture

therewith
These are:
suit?
that Questicn 1 be answered
Does the exemption
used in connection
with leave to any
Answer to it, if filed on or ce t'or-eSeptember
Do the Pl8.intiffs, both Original
Assuming
voul.d be deemed to be
Amended Bill of Complaint
Six legal Cluestions are presented

1.
as of the date of
contained
and the grounds appurtenant

for the respective
therein,
used
and any parsonaGe
to such houses buildings
uses thereof"
as provided
in Article
81, Section 9(4) of the Maryland Code, violate Article 36 of the Declaration
of the Maryland
maintain
Constitution
or contribute
prohibiting
to maintain
the State fro~ compelling
of Rights
anY person to
any place of worship or ministry?
3. Does the exemptio~ violate Article 15 of the Maryland Declaration

Rights requiring
4.
uniformity
of
of taxation?
Does the exemption
violate Article
Rights prOhibiting
'the State from depriving
without due process
of law'?
23 of the l1J.!'ylandDeclaration
of
a cieizen of life, liberty or property
5. Does the exemption violate. the Fourteenth Amendment to the Cons'titutiop of the United States prohibiting
States, life, liber~y or property
6.
November-December
Does the exemption
1964
a State from denying a citizen of the United
without due process
of law?
violate the First Amendment
to the Constitution
of
Page 11
the United States,

prohibiting
Baltimore,
Maryland 21218
as made applicable to the states
by the Fourteenth Amendment
Congress (and nowthe General Assemblyof Maryland) from making any law"
"respecting the establisbIilent of religion
or prohibiting
the free exercf se 'thereof"?
The Court has concluded that Question 1 must be answered in the

and holds that the Original and Intervening Plaintiffs
taxpayers to maintain the present suit.
of the remaining questions,
negative.
The Court, however,has
plaintiffs
standing
as
concluded that ail
- Questions 2 through 6, - must be answered in the
The Court holds that the exemption violates
State or Federal.
have sufficient
no constituttonalprovision,
nle Bill of Complaint must be dismissed with prejudice,
required to pay the costs of this
and the
suit.
The Court's reasons for these conclusions follow.

L
The Plaintiffs,
both Original and Intervening,
have sufficient
,
standing to maintain the present suit.

The Defendants, both Original and Intervening,
none of the Plaintiffs
has sufficient
except for the Intervening Plaintiffs,Mr.

welL
but
and Mrs. Cree, of the City of Baltimore

the ownership of property hasbe
as well as the actual payment of taxes by all of the Plaintiffs.
sui t is a class suit,
The
on behalf of all taxpayers of" the State of "Marylandand of tb
City of Baltimore similarly

tinuation
suit,
standing as taxpayers of the State and,
As indicated in the statement of the facts,
established
have earnestly
standing to maintain this
clear to the Court that they have sufficient
'
situated
to have deciared void and to enjoin the con-
of the exemption from taxation
granted under Article
81, Section 9(4) of
Maryland Code.
Although the total
from taxation
all real estate
assessed value of real estate
in Baltimore
($578,997,400.00) is something over 20%of the total

in Baltimore ($2,842,706,168.00),
the exemption under Section 9 (4)
($78,507,820.00) is only approXimately 2.FY/a of that totala.ssessed
fJage 12
assessed value
va.lue. It is
approximately l3~
Jaltimore City.
5!
Baltimore,
Maryland 21218
of the total assessed value of tax exempt real estate in
a.
Q
While the impact upon the taxes of the individual plaintiffs is
probably not large, the impact on ~
taxpayers is sufficiently subSU4itial to
oaintain this suit as the testimony was clear that a reduction in the taxable basf s
raises the rate of taxation upon the property subject to taxation, mld increases the
taxes
those owning the property not exempt from taxation.

It is well settled in Maryland that where the statute and enf'cr-cemcrrt
of
it will increase the taxes of the complaining taxpayers, and this is alleged and
proved, as in the case at bar, taxpayers have established special damage, or special
interest, distinct from those of the general public enabling them to maintain a class
suit challenging the validity of the statute and its enforcement.
When, however, the statute and its enforcement benefit the taxp~ers
financially and r~duce the amount of their taxes, they have no standing ~
to challenge the financially beneficial statute.
taxpayers
Citizens Comwittee v. County
J.)
~ommissioners of Anne Arundel County, 233 Md. 398, 197 A. 2d 108 (1964, Horney,
See the review of the Maryland Cases on pages 401-~ of 233 Md.
A. 2d).
(Page 110 of 197
As indicated, the allegations and proof establish a financial injury to the
taxpayers, individually and as a class, which distinguishes the case at bar from the
Citizens Committee Case.
It was also suggested at the argument and in one of the Memoranda that
there was no standing in the plaintiffs, as taxpayers, to maintain a suit i~ the
Federal Court in view of the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in
Frothingham v. Mellon,
There are two answers to this suggestion:
1.
This suit is in the State Court and not in the Federal Court.
The
Maryland law clearly gives relief to taxpayers in a class ,action in this type of
situation.
November-Decemoer
1964
Page 13
2.
Both the Frothingham and Elliott cases involved suits by a single
taxpayer and were not brought as a class suit.
It seems doubt1'ul that they are
authority for holding that a taxpayer class action may not be entertained in the
federal courts, but as to this no opinion is e~ressed,
as none is necessary; it
involves a federal question best left to the decision of the federal courts.
The natural plaintiffs, both original and intervening, may also have a
special interest, different from the public generally.as active atheists, which
migh~ well give them sufficient status apart fram their status as taxpayers, to
maintain this suit in view of the decisions of the Supreme Court of the United S~
in Abington School District v. Schempp,
As to thiS, however, the Court expresses no opinion as none is necess~
since it too involves a federal question best left to the federal courts for
decision.
2, 3, and 4.
The ex
tion does not violate Articles 36 15 or 23 of
Declaration of Rights of the Maryland Constitution.

nle alleged violation of Articles 36, 15 and 23 of the Declaration of
Rights of Maryland Constitution may be considered together as.
of Maryland has already indicated that the exemption does not violate th,eseprovisions of the Declaration of Rights in Baltimore City v. Starr Church, 106 Md.
67 A. 261, (1907, Rogers,
J.).
Before considering the ~arr
Church Case, it will
helpful to consider the particular exemption under attack.

As already indicated, the exemption in question
9 of Article 81 of the Maryland Code.
Section 9 is headed
Exempt ions II There
II
then many subsections granting exemptions from State, County and City taxationof
which Subsection 4 is one. At the time of the filing of the Bill of Complaint m
suit there were 57 specific exemptions including the property of fraternal bene
associations, graveyards, war memorials, hospitals, charitable institutions,
Page 14
November-De
Baltimore,
Maryland 21218
educational and literary institutions, veteran's organizations, works of art, certain

historical societies, Boy Scouts, Girl Scouts, volunteer fire companies, Ruritan
International, state, county, city and federally exempt property and many other
exemptions.
As already indicated the exception under Subsection 4 is a small part of
the total assessed value of real estate in Baltimore City exempt from taY~tion under
Section 9.
An exemption from taxation similar to that granted by Section 9(4) has
existed in ~~ryland since the State began the general taxation of real estate by the
Act of 1797, Chapter 89, passed on JanuarJr 20, 1798. The exemption in that Act was:
"except property belonging to the State or the United States, houses for public
worship) burying grounds II.
TIus basic exemption has continued in each tax
b~atute adopted in Maryland since the original Act of 1797, Chapter 89 until the
present time.
Article 38 of the Declaration of Rights of the Maryland Constitution for
many years resuired the sanction of the General Assembly for any gift, sale or devise
of land Qr gifts or sales of personal property to take place after the death of the
Seller or Donor for the support or benef'L t of any Religious Sect, Order or Denommation "except always, any sale, gift, lease or devise of any quantity of land, not
e~ceeding five acres, for a church, meeting-house, or other house of worship, or
parsonage, or for a burying gromld, whiCh shall be improved, engaged or used o~lY
for such purpose. il
A constitutional amendment to Article 38 was adopted by the voters at the
election of November 2, 1948 which gave the General Assembly pOifer to require such
sanctionbut did not itself require such sanction without such a statute, to gifts
and conveyances subsequent to November 2, 1948.
It is thus seen that houses of worShip, parsonages and appurtenant ground
November-December
1964
Page 15
.,
have been exempt from taxation

for over 165 years.
and from legislative
The exemption
sanction and approval in,
has been uniformly
has not been the object of any substantial
applied and administered
attack heretofore.
In the case of ~l timore City v. Starr Church,
J.),
(1907, Rogers)
supra, the Court of Appeals
declar:i,ngunconstitutional,
a special act purportinG
under Articles
of houses of worship, parsonages

Judge Rogers,
of Maryland,
in cpnsidering and
15 and 33 of the Declaration
to grant a specific exemption
owned by a church of one denomination,
106 Md. 281, 67 A. 261
strongly
and appurtenant
speaking for the Court of Appeals,
of Rights,
for a particular property
indicated
that the general exempti
land was
stated at page 386 of 106 Md.:
lilt will not be denied at this late day that the Legislature
has the pover, within reasonable limits, to exempt certain species
or classes of property from taxation, when the public interests so
require.
This is actually done in the case of houses used
exclusively for public worship, and the grounds appurtenant thereto,
in the case of graveyards and cemeteries, and in the case of
hospitals? asylums and benevolent institutions.
(Code, 1904, Art.
81, sec. 4). The validity of provisions of this kind is too well
established to be nov questioned.
But it will be perceived in these
cases all the property of the class indicated is exempted.
The
LegiSlature does not exempt some houses of public worship and tax
others.
It does not exempt some gra.veyards and cemeteries, some
hospitals, and then tax otherproperties
of exactly the same kind.
It does not arbitrarily say that this particular house ofpublic
worship shall be exempt, but that one shall be taxed. On the
contrary, all property falling within anyone of the classes
mentioned in Sec. 4, is exempt.
There is therefore no arbitrary
discrimination between different properties of the same kind, but
all are treated alike.1I
There is no Maryland
case indicating
ment from the Starr case represents

It may be pointed
similar property
Pa~e 16
law on this subject.
out that the real property
houses of worship and parsonages,

of churches or parsonages
the Maryland
any 'different opinion an~this
st!
of churches not used for
but held for use or even for the future constru
is subject to real estate taxation
held by private persons.
to the same extent M
Baltimore,
Maryland 21218
There is nothing unusual about the Maryland exemption.
Indeed there is
a similar exemption in all of the other States of the Union, and in the District of
Columbia.
In 33 States, constitutional provisions expr~ssly provide for the exemp-
tion and in 15 of those States the constitutional lanGUage is mandatory.
In the
other States and the District of Columbia, there are statutory exemptions, as in
Maryland.
It is interesting to note that in the last two States to be recently
admitted to the Union - Alaska and Hawaii - there are similar exemptions.
See Van
Alstyne, "Tax Exemption of Church Property,tI 20 Ohio St. L. J. 461 (1959).

The opinion of the Court of Appeals in the Starr Church case indicating
the validity of the exemption involved in this suit, is in accord with the decisions
of every Court in the United States which has considered the question.
With such universal and long continued constitutional and legislative
practice in all of the States and the District of Columbia and with such unanimity of
judicial authority, this Court must hold that the exemption does not violate Articles
36, 15 or 23 of the Declaration of Rights of the Mar,yland Constitution.
5. The exemption does not violate the Fourteenth Amendment to the

Constitution of the United States prohibiting a State from denying citizens of the
United States, life, liberty, or property without due process of law.
It is well settled that the State may select its objects of taxation and
may decline altogether to tax certain kinds of property, as long as there is a
reasonable basis for the exemption.
In order to sustain exemptions from taxation granted by the legislative
branch of the State gover nmen t t 0 encourage or foster the public good, all that is
necessary is a showing of some fairly discernible relationship between the good of
the person receiving the exemption and the good of the community.
Mr. Justice Cardozo in Williams v. Baltim~~,
supra, a case arising in
Maryland and specifically considering a tax exernmtion

granted by the General Assembly
.-~
Z
Q
--
of Maryland, to a particular Railroad Company by the Acts of 1931, Chapter 497,
a.
Q
:l!:
::J
alleged to violate Article 15 of the Maryland Declaration of Rights, states at pages

40 and 41 of 289 u.s.:
CI
Z
c:c
liThe C.::>urts
of Maryland hold that the rule of uniform! ty
established by these provisions does not forbid the creation of
reasonable exemptions ;n furtherance of the public good.
It does not even prohibit an exemption in favor of an
individual as distinguished from one for the benefit of the members
of a class. All that it exacts in respect of the narrower exemption
is thepresence of a relation, fairly discernible, between the good;
of the individual and the good of the community.1I
IlC
Q
:l!:
loLl
==
As already pointed: out, the exemption of houses of worship, parsonages and

appurtenant land is only one of 57 exemptions which the General Assembly has
determined should be made for the public good.
These include hospitals, charitable
institutions, fraternal orders, veterans organizations, historical societies, the

Boy Scouts, the Girl Scouts and many others.
These exemptions produce socially
desirable results and most certainly have a fairly desirable relationship between
the exemption and the good of the community.
The Supreme Court of the United States has sustained a similar exemption
in the District of Columbia.
Gibbons v. District of "Columbia, 116 u.S. 404, 6 s.
Ct. 427, 29 L. Ed. 680 (1886, Gray, J.).

In regard to the power of Congress to provide for such an exemption, Mr.
Justice Gray speaking for the Court stated:
"*** the power of Congress, legislating as a local Legislature for the District, to levy taxes for district purposes
only, in like manner as the Legislature of a State may tax the
people of a state for state purposes, was expressly admitted,
and has never since been doubted. 5 Wheat. 318 (18 u.S. bk.
5 L. ed. 98)j Welsh v. Cook, and Mattingly v. District of
Columbia, 97 u.S. 541, 687 (Bk. 24, L. ed. 1112, 1098). In the
exercise of this power, Congress like any state Legislature
unrestricted by constitutional provisions, may at its discretion
wholly exempt certain classes of property from taxation, or may
tax them at a lower rate than other property. II
See also United states v. Department of Revenue of Illinois, 202 F.
757 (1962, N.D. Ill. three Judge Court, LaBuy, D.J.) sustaining,
Page 18
and constitutional,
a retailer's
ing to non-governmental
occupation
institutions
tax exemption accorded to persons sell-
operated for charitable,
religious,
or
educational purposes.
The three-Judge
Court, stated (at page 759):
liThe exemption accorded to non-governmental institutions

operated for charitable, religious and educational purposes is
not of recent origin, but is the continuance of an old and
well-established public policy. Article IX, Sec. 3 of the
Constitution of the State of Illinois S.n.A., provides that property used exclusively for charitable, religious and educational
purposes may be exempted from taxation by general law. The
Revenue Act of the State of Illinois, Secs. 500.1, 500.~J 500.7, ch.
120, expressly exempts from taxation property used for such
beneficent
objectives.
Many states of the Union have similarly
provided for such exemptions from taxation.
The federal government has also exempted the income of corporations organized and
operated exclusively for religious, charitable or educational
purposes.
26 U.S.C.A. Sec. 501(c).
Lle exemption of these institutions encourages their
existence and relieves the State of the heavy burden of maintaining and perfOrming these essential services. Article VIII, Sec. 3
of the Constitution of the State of Illinois forbids the use of
public funds in the 'aid of any church or sectarian purposes' nor
may 'any grant or donation of land, money or other personal
property ever be made by the state or any such public corporation,
to any church, or for any sectarian purpose. I Obviously, a distinct dissimilarity exists between religious institutions and
governmental bodies. While charitable and ecucational objectives
can, and are, performed through governmental units, the revenue to
support them is derived from the power and authority of the government to tax its citizens for the public welfare. But no caopulsory
process exists to exact contributions to non-governmental organizations dedicated to the moral, spiritual and physical well-being of
mankind.
The financial resources to accomplish their objectives
are derived from the concept of giving voluntarily --,without legal
obligation or compulsion.
This difference forms 0. reasonable basis
for a separate classification and the exemption, therefore, does
not discriminate against governmental bodies."
I
This decision was affirmed by the Supreme Court of the United States,
without opinion, in United States v. Department
of Revenue of Illinois,
371 U. S.
21, 83 S. Ct. 117, 9 L. Ed. 2d 95 (1962).

This Court must conclude that there is no denial of due process of law as
prohibited to the States by the Fourteenth
November-December
Hl64
Amendment
to the Constitution
of the ll. S)
Page 19
6.
z:
z:
a..
The exe
tion does not violate the First Amendment
of the United States, as made applicable
to the States by the Fourteenth
Amendment,
prohibiting
Congress
(and now the General Assembly
tlrespecting the establishment
of religion
or prohibiting
Question 6 was the one principally

ing and provocative
contained
Amendment
Supreme Court in Cantwell
that Amendment
J.)
majority
v. Connecticutl
embraces the liberties
or any other relevant
310 U.S. 296, 60 S. Ct. 900, 84 L. Ed.
guaranteed
concept
by the First Amendment."
v. Schespp,
supra.
This
The cases are reviewed in the
opinion of Mr. Justice Clark (217 of 374 U.S.).
exercisesll
of any cases,
since Cantwell by the Supreme
School District
question this holding
of the
of the Supreme Court of the
the discussion
simply held that tithe fundamental
holding has been followed

in Abington
Amendment,
upon the
upon the legislatures
of prior decisions
of the Fourteenth
one is met with
imposed the restrictions
in the First Amendment
'lrlithoutdiscussion
history
(1940, Roberts,
the free exercise thereof.
of this question,
United States to the contrary - or indeed, without

legislative
is "entd.re ly untenable
He suggests that to
and of value only as academic
This Court is of the opinion that the holding
and is still firmly of this opinion notWithstanding

this holding by Mr. Justice Brennan
the brilliant
in his concurring
opinion
considerat100
in Abington (253
258 of 374 U.S.).

This presently
the applicable
prevailing
Constitutional
doctrine,
however,
Page 20
J. J., dissenting)
has been assumed to ha
Law by the Court of Appeals
Curlett, 228 Md. 698, 179 A. 2d 698 (1962, Horney,

Prescott,
~y
argued in this case.
of the consideration
the curious idea that the Fourteenth
several States.
from making ~
question.
At the threshold
powers of Congress
of Maryland)
in both the majority
of Maryland in Murr
J., Brune, C.
and dissenting
opinions.
Court will ~te
Baltimore,
Iviarytand 21218
this same assumption for the purposes of this case.
It merely files
QI
~z
a caveat now, with a view to setting out its views in regard to this doctrine at a
QI
:=
Q
later time and in a different forum.
The questions then are presented as to whether the exemption results in
a::
!fanestablisbment of religionll or in state action IIpreventing the free exercise
thereof", as the first clause of the First Amendment states:

"Congress shall make no law restricting an establisbment
of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; ***."
The arguments of the parties present three widely different positions:
The flaintiffs, both Original and Intervening, take the position that
the exemption does result in an establishment of religion and in state action prohibiting the free exercise thereof.
The Original Defendants, and all of the Intervening Defendant~ except
Temple Emanuel, assert, that although the State of Maryland ~
power to impose
real estate taxation upon houses of worship, parsonages and appurtenant land, it
also has the power to exempt them and that the exemption in the case at bar is a
reasonable, proper and non-discriminatory exemption which does not re~ult in an
establisbment of religion or prohibit the free exercise thereof.
Temple Emanuel urges upon the Court thl.t, as properly interpreted in the
light of several recent decisions of the Supreme Court and their logical application
to the present problem, the State of Maryland has no power to impose real estate
taxes upon houses of worship, parsonages and appurtenant land as this would result in
prohibiting the free exercise of religion contrary to the provision of the First
Amendment.
This is a faSCinating thought, but the Court does not find it necessary
to pass upon this application of the First Amendment as it is not necessary for the
decision in this case.
The Court rejects the position advanced by the Plaintiffs
and holds that the exemption is a reasonable, proper and non-discriminatory

exemption which does not result in an establishment of religion or prohibit the
free exercise thereof.
November-December
1964
The First
the principle
Amendmentas presently
of government neutrality,
but also as between believers
construed by the SupremeCourt estab
not only between different
and non-believers.
"Religion and American Constitutions"

LawSchool of the University
An interesting
religious gr
recent bookanti
by Dr. Wilber G. Katz, Professor of law at
of Wisconsin, (the book is made up principally of
Professor Katz IS 1963 Rosenthal Lectures at NorthwesiErn University School of Law)

in his last
Chapter entitled
"Epilogue.
Neutrality
as of June 1963", states at
91:
"Through the foregOing lectures runs the theme that the
impact of the First Amendmenton religion is best understood in
terms not of church-state separation but of government neutrality.
neutrality not merely between sects, but also between believers
and nonbelievers.
This broad neutrality
is promoted by judicial
action checking legislative
aberrations in either direction. But
in many fields where laws affect religion inCidentally, the
promotion of neutrality requires affirmative provision for
religion.
Here legislatures
have been left with discretion; in
this area provisions affirmatively fostering religious freedom
are not invalid as "establishing" religion, but their omission
does not make the legislation
invalid as a restraint
on "free
exercise" of religion."
The exemption involved in the case at bar represents
not prohibited
by the First
Amendment. The Supreme Court indicated the validity
such an exemption in the District

supra, in 1886.
governmentneutr
Such validity
of Columbia in Gibbons v. District
is indicated
opinion in Abipgton on June 17, 1963.
by Mr. Justice
of Columbia,
Brennan in his cone
He sta.tes (301 and 302 of 374 U.S.):
"Nothing we hold today questions the propriet~ of certain

tax deductions or exemptions which inCidentally benefit churches
and religious institutions,
along with many secular charities and
nonprofit organizations.
If religious institutions
benefit, it
is in spite of rather than because of their religious character.
For religious institutions
simply share benefits which government
makes generally available to educational, charitable,
and
eleemosynary groups. There is no indication that taxing authorities
have used such benefits in any way to subsidize worship or foster
belief in God. And as amongreligious beneficiaries,
the tax
exemption or deduction can be truly nondiscriminatory, available
on equal terms to small as well as large religious bodies, to
popular and unpopular sects, and to those organizations which
reject as well as those which accept a belief in God.1I
Page 22
All other authorities,both
Baltimore
Maryland 21218
State and Federal, have sustaine.d the holding
that this type of exemption is constitutional and valid.

In Swallow v. United States, supra, there was a direct challenge to the
federal income tax exemption to religious institutions.
~is
failed in the United
States Court of Appeals fot tbe Tenth Circuit on December 12, 1963.
The Supreme
Court denied certiore.ri and alsr a rehearing.

This Court concludes that the exemption does not result in the establishment of religion or in state action proh.ibiting the free exercise thereof.
As indicated, this holding is as far as this Court need go, and it is as
far as it does go.
It may be added, however, that if the Supreme Court of the United States
decides to consider any ~
application of the provisions of the First Amendment in
regard to the exemption in the case at bar, there is much in the prior decisions of
the Supreme Court which gives aid and comfort to the position of Temple Emanuel.
It would appear that the Supreme Court would likely move in this direction.
In Murdock v. pennsylvan~a, 319 U.S. 105, 63 S. Ct. 891, 87 L. Ed. 1292
(1943), Douglas, J. speaking for the majority consisting of himself and Stone, C.J.,
Roberts, Black, Murphy and Rutledge, J.J. (Reed, Frankfurter and Jackson, J.J.
dissenting), indicated that the City of Jeannette, Pennsylvania, had no power to
impose upon a Jehovah's Witness promulgating his religious teachings and selling
(or giving away) religious books and pamphlets published by the Watch Tower Bible
&.Tract SOCiety, a rather small general license 'tax upon persons canvassing for or
soliciting for goods, paintings, pictures, wares or merchandise of any kind.
In dis-
cussing the activity of the "itinerate preacher", distributing tracts from door to
door, Mr. Justice Douglas indicated at page 109 of 319 U.S.:
"It has the same claim to protection as the more
orthodox and conventional exercises of religion."
.November-December
1964
Page 23
It would seem to follow from thiS,
-za::
religion
==
other rites
c:c
itinerant
:)
:)
=z
:)
II:
Baltimore Maryland 21218
that the more conventional e
in a house of worship where the sermons are preached and the sac
performed is also entitled
to the exemption from taxation given
preacher.
==
In his dissenting
1.&1
:::E
states
opinion, Mr. Justice
Reed, points
(133 of 319 U.S.):

"This late withdra.wal of the power of taxation over the
distribution
activit~es of those covered by the First Amendment
fixes what seems to us an unfortunate principle of tax exempt1on,
ca.pable of an indefinite extension."
Mr. Justice
Goldberg in his concurring opinion in Abington (306 of
374 U.S.) suggests that there Should be no hositility

prohibited
by the provisions
For the state
used for charitable
of the First
to the religious as t
tha
Amendment.
to exempt the property
pe
rea
of other
tha
purposes and decline. to exempt the property of housesof
parsonages and appurtenant land would indeed be an act of "hostH! ty toward

religious"
and would represent
which Mr. Justice
"a brooding and pervasive devotion to the
Greenberg indicates
would destroy the principle
is prohibited
of "neutrality"
amc
ing
me
Pm
by the First Amendment.
and would,
intervene on the side of the secular and nonMbeliever.

It ~
impossible,
also be pointed out that but for the exemption, it would
as a practical
matter,
to avoid discrimination
between tl1.eas
of the houses of worship, parsonages and appurtenant land as these asses

made by individuals
having various religious
area in which individual

Arthur in his testimony.
beliefs
from
judgment plays a substantial
maintain the required neutrality
taxation
as pointed out
by the State is far morecal
than any possible
system of taxation c
States and the United States do well not to enter this

Page 24
part,
Complete exemption of houses of worship, parse
appurtenant land from real estate
lys
--
well have the ~remonition that the ~rovis10ns of the First Amendment prohibit such
an entry as Temple Emanuel urges.
::2!
make this holding.
As
indicated, however, it is not necessary to
C)
=
Cl
Z
c::c
The Court passed and fUed
cc
a finaJ. decree in this suit, which effectuated
:E
w
:;:
the holdings in this Opinion, on December 14, 1964. The Decree indicated ':thatthis
Opinion would thereafter be filed.
The Clerk is directed to file this Opinion in
the suit.
Wilson K. Bames,
Judge
January 7, 1965
As a footnote to the Opinion, refers nee is made to

that part of the Opinion which states that church property is a small part of the total assessed value of
real estate in Baltimore City exempt from taxation and
that this is a long standing practice.
Neither the
amount of money involved nor tradition have any bearing in this case; the issue of constitutionality must be
met head on. As Justice Douglas has said in the
Prayer and Bible case,
" ... The most effective way to establish any

institution is to finance it ... FinanciIig a church
either in its strictly religious activities or in
its other activities is equally unconstitutional
as I understand the Establishment
Clause.
Budgets for one activity may be technically
separable from budgets for others.
But the
institution is an inseparable whole, a living
organism, which is strengthened in proselytizing
when it is strengthened in any department by
" ... contributions may not be made by the State

even in a minor degree without violating the
Establishment Clause. It is not the amount of
public funds expended ... it is the use to which
public funds are put that is controlling. For the
First Amendment does not say that some forms
of establishment are allowed; it says that no
law respecting an establishment
of religion
shall be made. What may not be done directly
may not be done indirectly lest the Establish.
ment Clause become a mockery. U
contributions flOm other than it. own members. f'
Along with Justice Douglas, Justice Black repeatedly states that "no law" means "no law." Yet, quoting
from the Opinion, "In 33 States, constitutional provisions expressly provide for the exemption and in 15
of those states the constitutional
language is mandatory." Obviously the states have taken it upon themselves to do much legislating in an area prohibited by
the Federal Constitution.
There seems little question
that this legislation of special laws by the states goes
far beyond the idea of neutrality and clearly constitutes an establishment of religion. In this connection
Justice Douglas has said,
November-December
1964
Building on thi s idea, let us take the case of a

church that saves enough money through tax exemption
to enter some kind of business.
This business mayor
may not be operated out of the actual tax-exempt property from which the original capital was obtained
through property tax exemptions. As referred to in the
Opinion, the federal government has also exempted the
income of church-owned
and/or operated businesses
in direct .competition with private enterprise constitutes
a federal subsidy of those businesses.
Agreement is
almost unanimous that this federal exemption is unconstitutional.
Agreement is not so uniform about the
unconstitutionality
of the state exemption of church
property. However, upon examination it is clear that
both exemptions are equally unconstitutional and more
and more churches are voluntarily requesting that they
be added to the tax roles.
(This activity is reported
in the OTHER AMERICANS NEWSLETTER for this
month.)
Page 25
Baltimore,
Maryland 21218
Actually the increased revenue that would be collected with equitable taxation of church property is not
small' , it is estimated between $3.5 and $7.0 million
per year in Baltimore City alone.
Nor is the entire
problem of tax exemption for church property and income
a small one. Dr. Eugene Carson Blake, Chief Administrative Officer of the United Presbyterian Church, Past
President of the National Council of Churches, has
warned, "With prudent management, the" churches ought
to be able to control the whole economy' within the
predictable future."
for the Di strict of Maryland in behalf of L

and his wife who are federal income taxpay
brief has been filed by our lawyer, Mr.Leon
pelman and the Justice Department's answer
received which is now being included in a
publication
entitled "The Church Tax Ca
special three-judge Federal court has been sel
hear the suit. No date has been set for this
but it is expected to occur in the near future.
'report the important developments as they occur
important suit.
The companion suit to the property suit is the "Unrelated Business Deduction" suit to force the church
to pay income tax on its income from businesses unrelated to its religious function.
This suit was filed
August 13, 1964 in the United States District Court
for the District of Maryland against the United States
of America and the District Director of Internal Revenue
Both the suit filed in the state court ch

exemption of church property and the suit filed
federal court challenging exemption of church
are necessary to end abuse of our tax syBtell
church.
We repeat: both litigations are of II
portance with far reaching implications. The
will be known as milestones in church-state
A QUESTION ANSWERED
BY
LEONARD J. KERPELMAN
CORPORATION COUNSEL
Lemoin Cree has spoken to me of the frequency with

which he is asked whether the revocation of the tax exemptions granted churches would also, by implication,
challenge the similar tax exemptions which are granted
to hospitals, universities, and various non-profit charitable
organizations -whose primary function is other than religious.
This is also the most frequent singly query which I
receive on the subject of the church tax cases.
The answer is, quite simply, that these other grants of
assistance are clearly sustainable under the theory that
they are "general welfare" legislation which valid under
the authority which state and federal legislatures have to
promote the general welfare of the public, in public matters.
Page 26
Religion, however, is placed by both state IIIIl

constitutions, in a different category. Congre88
States, it has been provided federally, "shall
respecting an establishment of religion'or pro .
fre~ exercise thereof". The State Constitutions
have similar provisions. Thus, in Maryland,"
may be required to contribute, -except on con
support of any ministry".
Religion, in other words is singled out, by our Constitutions, as a private matter, a matter of singularly
personal concern, a matter which cannot be the subject of
public action or public expense.
This is not so, for example, of a hospital, or a university, which are considered to perform, and indeed, without doubt (as to a free university), do perform public functions of an exceedingly important nature. That.is to say,
functions which affect the public welfare.
To put the proposition another way, the Constitution
provides that Congress shall make no law respecting an
establishment of religion. But the prohibition is unique as
to religion. It does prohibit a law respecting the establishmentof a hospital, university, a non-profit research foundation, a volunteer fire department, a veteran's home for the
aged, a boy scout office building, or a girl Scout cookie
drive (all of which are in Maryland, and legally will, remain tax exempt).
Of course, interesting other problems are raised (which
I understand you intend, in the future, to pursue), as borderline cases attempt to sidle up to seek the protection and
advantages which have been granted by tax exemption
statutes. Thus, the question arises as to when a supposed
educational institution run by a sectarian organization is in
fact no longer educational, but entirely religious; Likewise,
when is a "fraternal" organization serving private and not
public ends. When it excludes members because of race?
Or do such organizations really ever serve a public rather
than a private purpose?-They are all granted tax advantages.
What about those which are closely allied with
churches? Knights of Columbus, for example, \\hich owns
Yankee Stadium and pays no taxes on the profits? I don't
know all of the answers, but I do think that the questions
are very interesting.
Tax Exempt Religious Property in Baltimore

by Martin A. Larson
Baltimore, Maryland, is an interesting city for a

study of tax-exempt religious property. Although it
was the place in which Roman Catholic strength in
this country was first concentrated, and was given
American priority in 1858 by the Vatican over all
other dioceses in the United States, its population is
not predominantly Catholic now, nor has it been so
during the current century.
Baltimore has a large Negro community: it comprised 67,000 members in 1890. Negroes remained between 15% and 19% of the population until 1940.
Then they increased to 24% in 1950 and to 35%
(329,000) in 1960. Negroes are predominantly Protestant. One might have expected, therefore, an increase
in Protestant wealth and influence in the community.
The development has been the exact reverse.
Another distinctive factor is the large number of
Jews who settled in Baltimore after 1906. By 1936 the
two synagogues and 75 members (as noted in 1906)
had increased to 59 synagogues and 73,000 members,
making the Jews 16% of all communicants and 8.6%
of the population. Since 1936 the number of synagogues has declined to 40, but the influence and
wealth of the Jewish religious community remains
strong in proportion to its numerical strength.
Baltimore is notable for the number and size of its
churches and other religious properties, Jewish, Protestant and Catholic. There are 619 individual congregations of which 40 are Jewish, 70 Roman 'Catholic and
509 Protestant or other. The Jews have provided extraordinary facilities for care of their aged, having
built such facilities assessed at nearly $15 million.

Protestant churches are everywhere, though some are
extremely modest and others own no property at all.
Still others are spacious and a few are ostentatious.
It is, however, the Catholics who possess the bulk of
religious property which is concentrated in churches,
hospitals and sectarian schools. The magnificent, new
Cathedral of Mary Our Queen on North Charles St.
is assessed at $6,650,000. This structure alone is worth
one-fifth as much as 500 Protestant churches and parsonages combined.
TABLE I-REAL
ESTATE ASSESSMENTS
IN BALTIMORE
Classification
1964Basis
Taxable.
. ... $2,006,208,768
Exempt Categories: Total , , , , , '. , , , , ,
578,997,400
I. Federal,
22,667,510
2. State.,.
.,,,,,,,,
25,671,480
3. City (Including Public Schools), .
249,266,000
4. Churches, Synagogues, Parsonages, Church Schools, etc. , , , , ,
89,430,950
5. Colleges, Universities, etc. , ... , .
33,142,610
6. Cemeteries , , , , , , , , , , . , , , , , , , ,
4,577,530
7. Lodges, Benevolent and Cultural
Societies. .
,.,,.,,,. ,
7,858,110
8. Hospitals, Infirmaries, etc ... ,
43,216,020
9. Wholesale Produce Market " , . ,
552,400
10. Railroads , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
,,
16,539,770
II. Housing Authority . , , , , , , ,
.
39,284,940
12. Homes and Asylums , ,
17,393,720
13. Miscellaneous , , , . , , , , ,
,
8,060,970
14. Market Authority , , , , , . , ,
,,
4,212,760
15, Blind Persons,
1,124,790
16. Maryland Port Authority .. , ....
15,997,840
%of
Taxable
28.86
Omitted here, but soon available in the complete

POAU study, is a table noting numerical growth of
church bodies in Baltimore. It shows that the ratio of
all Catholic members receiving sectarian instruction in
the archdiocese rose from 10.5% in 1906 to 23.3% in
1964. At the later date, 83% of these were in full-time
denominational schools. Since this approximates the
proportion of persons in school in the United States
as a whole, we may infer that nearly all Catholic
youth are in sectarian schools or receiving religious
instruction in these institutions or in churches under
released time.
Development of the wealth of the various religious
groups is reflected in the following statistics: We have
assumed here that the 1936 dollar would have
shrunk to about 40 cents by 1964.
TABLE III-RELIGIOUS
PROPERTY IN BALTIMORE
.IN TERMS OF 1936 DOLLARS
(Allowing for an Inflation of 150%)
Per Capita Wealth 1964Valuations 1964Per Capita Wealth
Properties 1906
1936 in 1936 Dollars
In 1964S In 1936S
Protestant $ 98.42 $110
$18,219,636
$188
$ 75
Jewish
$\33.33
$ 49
$ 9,860,664
$616
S246
Catholic $ 29.85 $ 53
$29,607,456
$41I
SI64
REAL Protestant LOSS. .
S719,372
3.8%
REAL Jewish GAIN .
. .. $6,260,614
173.9%
REAL Catholic GAIN. . . . . . . . . .
$19,575,404
195.1%
This indicates that Protestant churches increased

in number from 424 to 509 and their adult membership from 172,313 to 242,500 while their total (real)
wealth decreased by 3.8% and their per capita investment from $110 to $75. While Catholic membership
was actually declining, the Catholic per capita investment increased from $53 to $164 and the total holdings from $10,032,052 to $29,607,456, or 195.1%.
The categories which pertain to this study are 4, 5,
6,7,8, 12 and 13. Number 13, "Miscellaneous," contains some items, principally Jewish charities, that
would be classed as religious. We note in Table II the
relative wealth of the three dominant religious groups:
TABLE II-THE
DIVISION OF RELIGIOUS PROPERTY

IN BALTIMORE
(Total Assessed Valuation:
$144,219,290)
Category'
Jewish
% Protestant
%
Catholic
%
4: Churches, etc. 7,416,360 5.14 34,661,780 24.03 47,352,810 32.83
5: Colleges, etc.
881,860 .61
786,060 .55. 7,884,950 5.47
6: Cemeteries
1,190,940 .83
138,050 .10
700,570 .49
7: Benev., etc.
175,040 .12 1,076,640 .75
926,510 .64
8: Hosp., etc.
56,940.04
7,267,560 5.04 12,323,980 8.55
12: Homes and
Asylums 11,096,940 7.69
608,400 .42 4,672,400 3.24
13: Miscel.
3,833,480 2.66 1,010,600 .70
157,420. 11
TOTALS 24,651,560 17.09 45,549,090 31.59 74;{)l8,640 51.33
Reproduced from the Church and State magazine" for Octo ber
published by POAU with permission of the editor.
Page 28
Baltimore,
Maryland 21218
Church, Charity Real Est

Valued At $135 Billion
THE EVENING SUN, BALTIMORE, JANUARY 29, 1965
Phoenix, Ariz., Jan. 29 (NANA).
Privately owned real estate in
the United States qualifying for
local tax exemption as some kind
of charity has an assessed value
of about $54,000,000,000and a true
value of approximately $135,000,000,000.
That estimate has been made
by Dr. Martin A. Larson, of Phoenix, a retired university professor
and former Detroit business man,
who has made an intensive study
of tax exempt property.
Dr. Larson said that about 60
per cent of the privately owned
real estate is owned by the
churches. other nonprofit organizations, such as fraternal groups,
charities and social groups, own
the remainder, he added.
Nationally, the value of tax-exempt property
has increased
from 12 per cent in 1931 to 30 per
cent today, he claimed.
"Point Of Desperation"
The figure "may in the reasonable future become 40 or 50 per
cent and when this has come to
pass, the burden upon residential
and business property will have
become oppressive to the point of
desperation," he added.
. He has listed the total visible
national religious wealth as follows: Jewish, $2,800,000,000 assessed value, $7,000,000,000actual
value; Protestant, $11,200,000,000
assessed, $28,000,000,000 actual,
and Catholic, $17,800,000,000 assessed, $44,500,000,000 actual.
An active churchman, Dr. Larson said he did not dig into the
tax exempt picture with the idea
of trying to put church buildings
on tax rolls and is very much
against taxing volun.!ary donations to churches and other tax
exempt organizations.
FInancial Empires
However, he declared ."the idea
that the sole activity of churches
should consist of religious worship
'has been replaced to a great extent by philosophy' capable of
transforming churches into vast
financial empires, enjoying a variety of tax preferences.
"If a private corporation enjoyed such benefits, it could drive

all competition into bankrupt-
ey."
.
L~said his study disclosed a
"complete census is impossible"
since there "is much hidden information that even the Government
in many instances does not have
the authority to demand.
"Churches and other nonprofit
organizations have enormous taxexempt revenues
identical to
those on which individuals and
corporations pay huge levies to
state and Federal authorities," he
charged.
Church-Owned Enterprises
"They own stocks, bonds, hotels, farms, book and department
stores, publishing houses, restaurants, television stations, newspapers, banks, land, theaters, a
ste.el mill, winery, nursing homes,
food processing
plants, citrus
groves, steamships, controlling interest in petroleum companies
and have big investments in aircraft corporations,"
he pointed
out.
"Different treatment is accorded various religious functionaries
under
the
Internal
Revenue
Code," he asserted. "This is in
violation of the First Amendment
to the United States Constitution
because
it give. preferential
treatment."
A church group he added: is
permitted "under the code to operate radio .and television stations
with complete immunity from
taxation. A private university in
Illinois bought hoteIsin California
with a $200,000down payment and
a $9,800,000mortgage.
"Educational
institutions may
operate a business tax free for
five years and during that period
the university made 'an interim
operating profit.' Then, for $700,000, it sold its equity to a church
in Chicago.
. "There is no essential difference between outright cash subsidies and preferential tax treatment for an activity which
operates in competition with normal tax - paying business and
which is in no way related to any
act of religious worhip," he
charged.
::-------
TAX-EX'EMPTION IS DOOMED,
CCORDING TO ST. PETERS8URG
CLERGYMEN
RONYOGMAN
Independent
Reporter
Two St. Petersburg ministers

yesterday
predicted
an end
someday to church tax-exemption privileges. Both agreed it
is impossible to tell when that
day will come.
The Rev. Paul Hortin,
of
Christ Methodist Church, gave
these reasons for his prediction:
rising secularism,
and government's unending pursuit of new
sources of revenue.
"Someday
church
property
will be taxed and I do not oppose the eventuality," Hortin remarked.
.'
The Rev. Vaughn M. Johnson,
of Fifth Avenue Baptist Church,
agreeing with Hortin, said the
problem is making sure that any
change will apply equally to all
groups.
One or two denominations now
have so much property, Johnson said, that he doubts anything can be done in the near
future to satisfy
all church
KI'Oups.
Johnson noted laws requiring
churches to 'pay taxes on inCome-producing property
ate
weakly enforced in man
y
areas. He said enforcement
of
such laws is made difficult because some property is used for
religious and non-religious purposes.
"That property which is used
specifically for worship
purpo;es should be continued taxexempt," said the Rev. John G.
Clarkson Jr., of St. Bede's EpiscopalChurch,
November-pece,mber
1964
"I am not" he said, "in favor of churehes becoming big

property - owning organizations
with tax exemption privileges."
"Religious schools, houses of
worship and hospitals are community-s e r v i n g
institutions
in the public interest and should
receive favorable treatment
as
long as favored industries and
educational
institutions
do,"
said Rabbi David Susskind, of
Temple Beth-El.
Rabbi Morris B. Chapman, of
Congregation B'nai Israel, said,
"On. the whole churches should
have their property exempt, but
when they are buying and seling property with a profit motif they should lose that privilege.
"It's a question
draw the line."
REV. PAUL HORTIN
REV. VAUGHN JOHNSON
Express
Their
Views
REV. JOHN CLARKSON
of where you
The tax exemption problem is

more than local in scope. In recent years more and 'more property has been going off the tax
rolls throughout the 50 states
because of denominational
and
non-profit exemptions.
Pinellas County Tax Assessor
Mac S. Haines has taken steps
to get tax-exempt property back
on the rolls.
As the volume of property going off the roles increases,
Haines argues, so does the burden to the remaining taxpayers.
Millions of dollars
are involved in the continuing controversy since there are many
"borderline" institutions.
Haines has argued,
"We're
not trying to penalize church
operations, but we have to give
equal treatment
to businesses
RABBI SUSSKIND
which compete with similar institutions which are on the tax

roll."
The assessor said failure on
his part to take a firm position
could lead to a spread of tax
exemption claims and a weakening of the tax base.
RABBI CHAPMAN
Dr. Eugene Carson Blake, former president, National Council

of Churches, has warned:
"A
government
with mounting tax
problems cannot be expected to
keep its hands off the wealth of
a rich church forever. "
Page 29
Church Tax Exemption

. The campaign to limit tax exemptions now granted to religious and
charitable institutions goes on apace.
Two Baltimore taxpayers have filed suit
in the federal district court to enjoin
further tax exemption for church income received from non-religious business activities. This means, in effect,
that if a church wishes to operate a
business enterprise it must pay taxes
the same as any other person or corporation.
This suit is a step in the direction of
a final determination of the whole perplexing problem of religious tax exemption. It is not fair that a business
venture should be tax free just because
its profits accrue to a religious body.
Nor is it fair that a group of persons
who associate themselves together for
religious purposes should be able to
have their organization's property declared tax exempt because it is put to
religious use. To permit thes~ tax exemptions is to force other tax ~yers t?
assume the burden of suppo tmg religious bodies with whom they are not
affiliated and to which they may be
opposed. That violates the Constitutional provision respecting an establishment of religion.
The favorite argument against lift:
ing this tax exemption which imposes
a heavy and unfair burden upon other
taxpayers is that it is against religion
to do so. This is completely false and
is circulated by those who wish to
shoulder some of their tax obligation
onto others. There is nothing in such
an effort that restricts in any W'ly the
priceless right to w 0 r s hip as one
chooses or to insist that the church of
our choice stand before the law on an
equal footing with every other denomination. The effort to make sense of
existing tax exemptions is not a move
against religion. It is simply a move toward justice.
The whole matter of religious tax
exemptions goes to the traditional
American effort to secure fair play for
everyone. It is unfair, to quote a simple
example, for Church "X" to enjoy a
tax exemption in Town "A" when its
communicants reside in Towns "B" and
"C." Such an exemption means that the
taxpayers of Town "A" are forced to
contribute to Church "X" a sum equal
to the taxes the church's congregation
should pay. Such exemptions are unfair, un-American, and, may we say,
scarcely compatible with the ideals of
religion.
Asbury Park Press Editorial R!lf)/64
Page 30
Interest
On Bonds
A tf' ~.f~eked
WASHINGTON
A U.S.
congressman has proposed

legislation which he said
would put church bonds "00
a par" with municipal and
state bonds.
Rep. Joe R. Pool, D-Tex
introduced a bill to provide
tax exemption for interest en
church bonds used in church
building programs. He point.
ed out that municipal and
state bonds are already tax
exempt.
"We provide tax exempt
status for bonds to build an
athletic stadium or sewer sY$o
tern" but tax the "building of
churches and sanctuaries," he
said.
The congressman argued
that his proposal would "relieve this inequity" by putting
church bonds "on a par with
tax-exempt municipal and
statebends,"
He said that church bonds
are a "tiny business" and the
loss in federal revenue by
such action would be small.
While church bonds generally
carry a higher interest rate,
Pool said, there has been no
default recorded in 25 years
and the market is steady.
Church of God
Gets land Offer
CLEVELAND.
TenD.
The 11 members of the
Countv
Court signed aDd
sented to Church oC God
cials 11~re vcsterday Il
offering
to make 30 ac:reI
land available for R new cb
world headquarters,
"The Rev. Wade Hortoa.
oral overseer of the church.
said Thursday
he w~
pointed,
em b a r r a s se d
shocked"
over failure bv
county to make the land
able to the church. wbicb
made its .headouarters
In
southeast
Tennessee
elty
many years.
He said county ]IIdge
Fulbright
had indicate.
county could provide no
than eight acres. perhaJII
for the headq uarters,
The petition
was ei
among
county court me
Thursdav
and all memba
the court signed it. y
a delegation
of Cleveland
ir.essmen met with church
cials to try to iron out
robleru.
At :i: I"C~Cllt
conventloe
Dallas, 'rex .. the church
'0
retain
its Cleveland
nuarters,
des pit e bids
Memphis.
Chattanooga aa4
lanta to have the church
f'rorn their cities.
Memphis
Mayor William
Ingram
Jr. said today
door
is st.ill open" for
chu rch 10 move 10 Mempblr.
A bill that would guard publications of tax-exempt groups

from income taxation has been introduced by Rep. Thomas a.
Curtis or J\li~"li.~ri.
I would suggest the taxa

of all property equall
whether church
or corporation.
-- Ulysses S. Grant
PRESIDENT JOHNSON'S
$1.5 SILL ION
SCHOOL AID PLAN
In the "u.s. War on Poverty " the Catholic church in
various American cities is receiving large sums for
participation in the program. In Chicago four Catholic
parochial schools received aid from the program (amount
unknown); the parochial school system of'-the Detroit
archdiocese received $191,572 to expand "services."
This fraud on the American tax payers issimiliar
to
those private, semi-private,
and govemmentprogranrs
which raise funds for the -Iess fortunate in foreign
countries. Often these funds and supplies are given to
Catholic church in various countries to distribute as it
pleases, thus helping it to .win converts.
Now President Johnson has sent to Congress a $1.5
School Aid PIal}. which most. agree is an extenuation of
the "War on Poverty" and will be. integrated accordingly. There is no doubt that theplan,if
it becomes law,
will further violate Church-State separation because it
openly encourages public and parochial school cooperation to aid needy children. and endorses the use and
expansion of shared-time programs. in-which private and
parochial school students use some facilities
of the
public schools.
The shared-time programs are already operative on
a large scale as are all teorts of other 'impositions by
the church on the public schools,including
the use of
public.financed, educational television and 'the staffing
of public schools by Catholic nuns.
The people of
Antonio, Colorado ate bemoaning the fact that people
are by-passing their town because its public school is
staffed by Catholic nuns.' Now it appears that of the
$1.5 billion proposed in the President's
plan, one-third
of this money is to be made available to private and
parochial schools to further these programs which constitute a very serious.. substantial,
and flagrant violaQ.onof the principle of separation of Church and State.
Baltimore, Maryland 2.1218

.
When the President't

plan was made public, our
organization, . the Freethought
Society of America,
joined POAU (Protestants
and Other Americans United
for the Separation of Church and State) in opposing
that part of the plan which would aid parochial schools.
This opposition was given national publicity.
The plan was advertised
by administration
spokesmen as one intended to cut through the Church-State
impasse which prevented the passage of a similar bill
proposed
by the late
President
Kennedy opposing
government aid to parochial schools.
Explaining how,
an administration
spokesman
said that if a state is
prevented by constitutional
provisions or statutes from
channeling
such assistance
to private and parochial
schools, the federal government would do it directly,
thus baring any state from refusing to include nonpublic
schools in the program. In short, incorporation of the
plan into the federal "War on Poverty"-a
program
already granting funds to the church=and federal control of the program are considered as justification
for
violating
state constitutions
protecting
against the
establishment
of a state religion.
But what about
viol ation of the federal cousti tution?
Obviously the plan is unconstitutional
even though
it is made to appear as simply a program to help all
children of impoverished
families,
in the words of
the President,
"to get all of the education they have
the ability to take."
Parochial school officials oontend
that the determination of the plan "to aid low income
school pi stricts" will enable it to by pass the ChurchState issue because qualification
for aid will ba the
degree of poverty in the school district and not the
kind of school in which the poverty situation exists.
Another way of avoiding the constitutionality
of the
plan is reflected in the Comments of Monsignor Frederick Hochwalt, director of the Department of Catholic
Welfare Conference.
He intimated that the President
might have been more emphatic in stating that the chief
beneficiary of education is the child and not the school.
If there is yet any question concerning the constitutionality of the plan or the intention of the church in
getting its hands on the plan's funds to further their
own parochial
schools,
consider the comments of
Monsignor William E. McManus, superintendent
of
Chicago's
Catholic
school s, the country's
fourth
largest school system which is already receiving support from the "War on Poverty" program. Quoting from
"The Register",
America's
National Catholic
Newspaper, for January 24, 1965,
Page 31
Baltimore,
The first major hearing (trial) has already occurred in both suits.
The Court has ruled
against the property exemption suit and it has
already been appealed to the Maryland Court of
Appeals.
A decision will soon be returned in
the Horace Mann League suit and it will be
appealed to the same court.
Both cases will
probably be he ard in the fall of 1965. Then,
the next step is appeal of both cases to the
United States Supreme Court.
There is every
indication that the Court will accept both cases,
probably linking them together more or less.
The decision returned by the Supreme Court must
be the same in both cases-either
win or lose!
Plaintiffs in both suits are confident that they
will be successful
in having the existing misuse of state tax funds that they
challenge
declared unconstitutional.
Both suits rest primarily on violation of the

First Amendment. Both contend that the exi eting misuse of tax funds does indeed constitute
an establishment
of religion.
The defendants
in the property exemption suit argue that no
such violation exists,
ignoring the fact that
churches
have become huge property-owning
organizations
with tax exemption privileges.
The National
Conference
of Christians
and
Jews puts assets of all charitable institutions,
at $54.8 billion, up 70% in the last 20 years,
and predicts they'll hit $100 billion by 1975.
Similarly the defendants
in the Horace Mann
League suit also argue that no such violation
exists because they (church schools) are not
church controlled and government aid is directed
HORACE MANN LEAGUE

CHALLENGES STATE AID TO
CHURCH-AffiLIATED
COLLEGES
The Horace Mann League, supported by elements of

the National Educational
Association,
and other property-owning, tax payers of Maryland have. brought suit
in Anne Arundel, Md. County Circuit Court challenging
the constitutionality
of state aid to four church-affiliated colleges in Maryland. Two of the schools are Catholic, College of Notre Dame, St. Joseph College; two
Ire Protestant, Hood College <United 'Church of Christ),
Western Maryland College (Methodist).
In this case
bondissues totaling $2.5 million for building purposes
are challenged.
Your editor's exp erience with two of the schoo 18
(one Catholic, one Protestant)
on a semi-professional
basis has been that (1) the schools are church controlled and do participate in religious activities-some
of them compulsory, (2) the religious influence exerted
in these schools does color the presentation
of the
interpretive subi ects and even the scientific subj ects,
and(3 lprevents the secular examination of the myth of
religion.
at secular activities,
ignoring the fact that in
all four church-affiliated
schools chapel attendance is compulsory and that religious influence
is exerted in the interpretive
and scientific
subjects-not
to mention the preventim of a
secular examination of the myth of religion. Unofficial sources report that well over 50 per cent
of our colleges
are still church affiliated to
some degree and that parochial
school s are
being built at a ratio of 4:1 over public schools.
The suit is very similar to the suit sponsored by the

Freethought Society of America challenging tax exempttion of church property.
Here are the simil arities
between the Horace Mann League suit and property
exemption suit.
Like the suit sponsored by the Freethought

Society of America challenging tax exemption of
church property, the Horace Mann League's
suit is brought before a state court (circuit
court) by property-owning,
tax payers of the
state of Maryland, backed up by
non-profit,
educational organization.
Maryland 21218
Both suits further argue. that they are denied

the protection of the 14th Amendment, being
deprived of property (taxes) without due process
of law.
Page 33
Both suits also advance the arguments that the

existing misuse of 'state tax funds violate two
of Maryland's Declaration
of Rights-one
prohibiting the compelling of tax payers to contribute to a place of worship and the other
forbidding allocating public funds for nonpu blic
purposes.
Both suits are vigorously opposed by the Catholic church and portions of other sects that
now enjoy great advantages
from the unconstitutional practices being challenged.
On the
other hand, both suits have widespread public
support from religious and secular circles alike.
The Register,
America's
National
Catholic
Newspaper,
comments on the Horace Mann
League Suit; " .. no matter which way it is de-
MIXED MARRIAGE
EDICT
DUE SOON
Finally the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that state laws
prohibiting sexual relations between races are unconstitutional. The ruling came when the Court overturned a Florida
statue prohibiting cohabitation between whites and colored
persons. Granted, the much overdue ruling is welcome and
important; however, the court failed to take the opportunity
to deal with two far more important issues. First, it did not
rule on the miscegenation laws, barring interracial marriages,
now enforced by 19 states.
Secondly, it did not rule on
"What is a Negro", an issue directly in question since one
of the plaintiffs was a Honduran, claiming to be part Irish.
The case had the potential to change American habits and
customs more than any other high court decision.
Page 34
Baltimore,
Maryland 21218
cided it is likely to become a landm

in Church-State
relations."
The same
reports that victory by the Horace Mann
would be di sastrous
to the
religious
..
-
The Church Tax Cases sponsored by

thought Society of America will also
as mil e ston e s in Church-State relation
tory in all
these cases .will crea
tablishment of separation of church
and an opportunity for the natural 110
secularism that heretofore has never
this nation.
Because of t~e far re
plications of these cases, victory m
disastrous
for those flagrantly
advantage
of these existing uncon
practices to further their own selfish
aims.
or.
Mixed couples in all 19 states are prepared

the miscegenation laws which are really "sla
dating back to the 1800's. A U.S. Supreme
laws barring interracial marriage 'nowappears
speci al three-j udge Federal Court sitting
Virginia will rule January 27 on a challenge
miscegenation law. The ACLUattomeys,
and Philip J. Hirschko of Alexandria, sai
prepared to take the case all the way to
Court. We think they will make it and will
overturn ing the Virginia law.
These laws barring sexual relations
between races are every bit as shamefulas
berg law, which forbade physical love
Jews. Once all such prescriptions are 0
have gone a long way. Yet, the be .
racial prejudice will have only been
cannot change the human heart. In replyto
"legislation
is not necessary to solve
you've got to change the heart," Dr. M
said last week in a lecture at Johns
Baltimore, Maryland:
"Racial injustice will not compI
til all are obedient to the un
cannot restrain the heart, Iut
heartless.
The law cannotm
but it can keep a man fromlyn
Baltimore,
Maryland 21218
lity and the danger of racial mixing take the trouble to enlighten themselves, we cannot eliminate racial prejudice.
In fact, it will not be overcome until we eliminate separate
races. Today all societies are color-conscience, not a very
encouraging situation.
Christianity, historically the white
man's religion, cannot be allowed to continue race as a
false criteria for human evaluation.
It certainly has in the
past.
-"YOU'VE GOT TO CHANGE THE HEART"

says Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
-News American Stalt Photo.
Although legislation cannot change the heart, education

can. Until we learn to fight our ingrown fears of sexual relations between the races, the end of the race problem will
not be in sight. Fear of mixed marriages is deeply rooted in
such notions as physiological incompatibility between the
races and fear that "rnongrelization" of the races would
somehowresult in an inferior human product.
These myths may be di sproven by scientific evidence.
Actually "mongrelization" of the races leading to a world
race in terms of "biological variation" is, contrary to the
myth,vitially important because it allows the total "gene
pool"to express itself. No program of ''Positive Eugenics"
wouldbe complete or worthwhile without provisions for race
mixing. The fear of race mixing can only be dispelled by
deliberate and open encouragement of interracial marriages
by informed teachers in possession of the scientific facts.
The law should encourage, not forbid, the intermingling of
"bloods" so that the prestige of the state can buttress a
basic scientific fact, permitting anthropology professors who
nowwhisper their defense of interracial marriages to shout
it fromhousetops. The abstract principles of Anthropology
must, through education, be vitalized.
Obviously, our
political and ethical leaders have a responsibility to follow
throughon such a plan.
The dominance of our world has begun to shift from the
whiteraces to the colored. The sooner we adjust to this
factthe better it will be for our children. Until the many
eamestliberals who half believe the myths of racial inequa-
Novembel'-Decem
her 1964
OU R POSITION is complete racial equality including

intermarriage between races leading to a World race. We are
the first to admit that races do differ in skin color, in frequency of blood-type distribution, in taste sensitivity, in
hairiness and perhaps in body smell (to cite only a few areas
where variations have been scientifically verified).
We
disagree that there is any innate differences between races
that can be measured by social adaptation or accomplishment
which cannot be explained in terms of social deprivation and
lack of equal opportunity.
Yet, this is a journal of freethought dedicated to the proposition that in free and open discussion among informed,
intelligent men, the truth is bound to prevail. Therefore, to
our friends and subscribers who do not believe in racial integration, we ask you not to cancel your subscription or write
us a bigoted letter but accept our invitation to present your
views either in the form of an article or a "letter to the
editor. " During the course of the year we hope to have a
lively discussion in every issue both pro and con on the
racial problem. We will employ all the scientific, sociological, and ethical information available to us to justify and
prove the need for complete integration of all races leading
to a World race. Equal opportunity will be provided for the
opp (Site point of view It could turnout to be quite an experience for us all!
To get the ball rolling we issue a direct challenge to the
editor of "The Thunderbolt" ("The White Man's Viewpoint,"
voice of the National States Rights party) P.O. Box 738,
Birmingham, Alabama and to the editor of "The Truthseeker",
edited by the late "Charlie Truthseeker Smith," Box 2832
San Diego, California - to justify and prove their antisemitic
and anti-negro points of view. "The Thunderbolt" is religiously oriented; "The Truthseeker,"
Atheist.
Both
publications
usually
support their racism with theory.
"The Truthseeker"
recently posed the question "Do
Negroes Stink?" and stated that if it were not for Christianity
we would be able to be told the truth. We ask that the present editor, James Hervey Johnson, tell us the truth. We
want to know! That not all agree with our position now or
in the past, we reproduce on the following page several
items from "The Thunderbolt" for Dec-Jan., 1965, edited by
Dr. Edward R. Fields. Comment, rebuttal anyone?
Page 35
The NEGRO
The APE
Scientists Say Negro Still In Ape Stage

Races Positively Not Equal
(1) The Nearo's
head shows .the archaic
form.
The front
of the Neg ro-s
skull
Is much smaller
white man's
thus giving
the Negro less
room for the higher
faculties,
such as affection.
self
.111 power, reason. j udgeaen t., apperception,orientation
and a fee Lf ng tor the relationship
of
aU ty to en vi rcneen t.
(2)Forlllatlon
determines
the amount ot intelligence
that
'li11F"be reflected
just
as the
shape ot a. ,lass
pitcher
determines
the size
and shape of the water in it. If this
were not
would
be no law governing
intelligence
and one organism
'would
r e f Lec t 8S much e Lnd as
regardless
of 1ts construction.
(3) The Negro's
whole
against
45 ounces
for
(4) In the Negro the
checks
the development
betore
puberty.
skull
capacity
the Caucasian
cranial
ot
bones
the brain
Is much undersize
brain.
(6) The Negro's
that
the
black
brain
weiahs
eyeball
is tinled
with
is 70 des reea as in
(7)Tbe Negro's
nose is concave
at the
inner
lining.
The lips
are everted
and
core or
be felted.
duct.
It
is
not
a true
yellow
as is the ap e-s , The jaws protrude
the ape. The white man's
tacial
angle
is
bridge
as is the ape's.
The nostrUs
turn
show the red mucous membrane.
size
and
there
another
80
35 ounces
are very thick

and the cranial
sutures
unite
earlY
In
and e mt at o s the sudden
stunting
ot the Negro intellect
(S)The Negro's
h af r Is flat
and without
a center
resembles
the wool of the lower
animals
and it can
enzt e of the Negro
so
than the
control,
person-
human
so tbat
as
11te.
11118
shortly
bair
the
Ya&',uh, Mar&e King,
but
tacial
82.
up and
show
the
red
(8) In the whi te man the a I veolar

arch
and palatine
area ot the mouth becue
shortened
and widened
and the tongue
became shortened
and more horizontallY
tlattened
which allows
tor Ireater
refin_ent
In pronunciation
whUe tbe Negro palate
and tongue
remained
ape like
(macrodont)
and he is unable
to
pronunce
sibilant
sounds.
sibilant
sounds
are unknown in Negro dialect.
(~) Tbe Neg rc carries
means ot indentif1cation
control
and is put out
stench
glands
as does the dog and
in place
of a name. This stench
when the Neg rc is exci ted.
(lO)The
black
skin of the Negro has nothing
matter
between
the true
and the scarf
skins.
are signs
of mental
and spiritual
inferiority
in his
(from
natural
state
these
extra
sweat
glands)
11I&1' ee
is
rve
partly
as a
under
to do with climate.
It is caused
by animal
coloring
It Is proven
the .orld over that
black
and yellow
akins'
and that no tine,ed
race can create
a civilization.
(11) A few mulattoes

may appear
to be brilliant
but thi s brilliance
never
allows
them to inl'eDt
or
crea.te
which shows they have not bridged
the .. gap between
the black
and white, for no archaic
torm can
become modern.
.
'..
. .
(12) The Negro is much closer
to the ape than any other
race physIcally
and consequently
mental I,. tor'
form must determine
mental
and moral
qualities
and like
must produce
like.
Every race is different
physice.Ily
and thereby
mentally.
With t~e Negro.
the. bodY
h encecaf nd
is the lowest
of al L
-c
(13) No' amoun t of 'imi taUoh

and ap ef ng will
nor will
education
or sYlllpathetic
aid.
fn.st1l1
a' c re at
>
t ve
'.'
r in Yen t1 ve "inst1n.ct
.
(14)The Negro' h as had just" 8,S long:as'the

white
'man .to develop,
.Tens of thousands
passed
by andthe
Negro has not produced
a civilization.
Where is his art,his
science.
What e t n at'e aspect
of civ1lization
has he contributed
to present
!1ay culture?
in to . the
Negro
.
of ,.ears have
his r.elicion?
(1S)'Ihe Negro has no morals.

He is not immo'ral but non-moral..
"i'tbout
the .hi te' lIan to contr~l
hi~
the Negro reverts
to savagery
and practices
torture,cruelty
and ".i.tchcraft.
The Negro is a natural
eannibal
and on his native
doo rpo s t may be found choice
cuts
of human flesh.
In Africa
the Nelro
even sell s his dead re l ati ves and "il1
eat. human tlesh.~ atter
it has becca e decompo sed.
(16)As the blaek
genes
of the Negro
ar~ 1II0re powerful
th8ll
white
genes
.," the Nelro
baa thereb,.
destroyed
every
white
civilization
that
he has cone in contact
with or has left
that
civ1lization
stagnant
and rotting
and dependent
upon the last
drop of white
blood
froll outside
to keep it loina.
(17)NegrO blood which differs
Egypt, India, carthage,
Greece.
and TUrkey.
.(18)Un18s8
the
will
completely
trom all other

Rolle, and caused
Negro race with

destroy
America.
its
deadly
human blood
and has a sickle
the ..deep animal
81 eep to fall
sickle
celled
blood
is
separated
shaped
cell
bas destro,.ed
upon China, portugal,
Sp ain
fro.
the
wbite
race
it
Mongrelization Of the Races Would Destroy

White Christian Civilization
wri"",.
"Nothing Is mo,. nrtaln.,

Jft
tho book of fate thon fhot
[N-.,o)
peoplo or. 10 1M 'fNi nor it
It 10.. cortoln tftat lhe two Meet.
eqyolly ' . , cannot lin 'n the
gov.rnmont. Nolu,., '"'bit, opIl'I'M
hovo drown 'nd.libl.
11M. of ell.,IIK".
lion berwHn tho",. It I. .tlll 'n _,
pow., to dl,.d tho
of
cipotion and d~.rtotlon
and In luch .Iow d,,'M,
os thet
evil will woor off In'."llWy"

(pago 164, Ufo, Writl,..
ond ~
Ions of Thoma. bHonon.
~, I. 1.
la,nor.
Pub. N.Y., 1132. UtwDry
(onOrMI).
p,.,"',
!NCK..w"
Baltimore
Maryland 21218
SCIENCE & fREETHOUGHT

up a program of scientific Atheism in which some students
In a scientific age such as ours the old ideas of blindly
specialize at humanities faculties of institutes and unifollowing traditional and religious dogma are no longer
versities?
Are scientists on the average, Atheists, as
adequate- not that they ever were. Today religion, ethics,
generally
believed,
or in pursuing their specialty do they
and social behavior are considered legitimate subjects for
tend
to
neglect
the'
development of their ethical and philoscientific exploration. In fact, since there is no reason to
sophical beliefs?
believe in a supreme being, Atheism is a more reasonable
hypothesis than religious belief.
Scientific Atheism and
scientificHumanism are legitimate terms. Therefore, a free- .
thoughtjournal such as ours should take great interest in the
To introduce our new science section to our readers, we
contributionthat science can make in refuting the old dogma present two excellent articles by scientific friends of the
ofthe past and developing humane ethical systems for the
society. The first article is by Dr. George A. Fink now of
futurewhich will afford a basis for a better way of life for Burlington, Iowa. Dr. Fink is well known in freethought,
all mankind.
humanist, and rationalist circles, having worked very closely
with Mr. Ralph S. Blois in these fields at one time. The
A science section will henceforth be a standard part of second article is really a reprint of the Congressional Record
ourmagazine. A myrid of subj ects beg for illumination.
in which "The Prepetual Calendar," devised by Dr. Willard
Forexample, is phylogenetic evolution a theory or a fact?
E. Edwards, is discussed.
Dr. Edwards' calendar is an
Is it important? Why is it opposed by religious believers?
excellent example of scientific freethought in action: tradiWhy
are religion and science incompatible and in what areas?
tional dogma is challenged and- a solution to a better way of
Are birth control pill s the best form of contraception or do life discovered.
In conjunction with this accomplishment
theycause cancer? Is it true that religion is a major causawe present the illuminating philosophy of this scientific
tivefactor in mental illness? Is it true that Russia has set freethinker.
A PHYSICIST'S VIEW OF ETHICS

By DR. GEORGE A. FINK
PROFESSOR
CONKLIN, in his article
-noes Science Afford a Basis for Eth?" in the October, 1939, issue of THE
IENTIFIC MONTHLY, showed that scidoesafford a basis for ethics hut did,
go ahead to outline. as I shall try to
a theory which can .serve as the skeln of a science of ethics.
Conklin is
ht in saying that ethics is natural in
'~n and has undergone an evolution
simple to complex. Further, such a
ral development of ethics is more
ful than any supernatural
developt could be. To' a limited extent I
that "As one group goes up through
r and higher social grades one finds
altruismreaches farther and takes in
people,until with some persons it
des the whole human race"; but I
that Conklin is using the word
altruism a bit loosely here.

It seems
better to say that as the minds of' persons become more highly developed their
interest in, and sympathy
for, others
broadens, but this interest and sympathy
is never really altruistic.
Ethics becomes more understandable
to me after making an analysis of its
supposed
base: altruism.
When
one
studies the evolution of ethics in particular, and human behavior in general,
it seems clear that selfishness is universal, obvious in many cases, disguised in
others, una voidable in all. Selfishness is
a good thing simply because it is necessary for the preservation and growth of
living things. Many will say that I am
"unethical"
in acknowledging
the pursuit of pleasure or happiness as my sole
aim in life, but they misuse the word.
They would be speaking more accurately

if they said that a hedonistic code of
ethics conflicts with their codes of ethics.
Pleasure is one of those things which
are too fundamental
to define in terms
of simpler things; one can only define it
by exemplification.
In general, one may
say that the exercise of any normal
function of the human body produces
pleasure. That statement is perhaps as
much a definition of norma!' function as
of pleasure.
Eating, drinking,
resting
and sexual intercourse are examples of
obviously normal bodily functions that
are normally pleasurable.
I f a pe~son
does not enjoy such elementary actions
in reasonable
amounts,
something
is
wrong with him or her, physiologically
or psychologically.
What other experIences one considers pleasant is depen-
Page 37
Baltimore,
Maryland 21218
A PHYSICISTS VIEW OF ETHICS

dent on oncs mental development.
training and habits, and in some cases these
experiences
may be fantastic
and apparcntly
unexplainable.
Thought
or consciousness
may he considered
to be the
highest
human
function
or bodily
pro-cess: Its performance,
accordingly,
should
gi,-e the highest
pleasure.
The fact that
many people
say that "thinking
is the
hardest
thing to do" indicates
how poorly developed
this function
is in them.
One who does not enjoy
thinking
has
not clone much of it, for thinking
is like
a game which one enjoys more. the more
practice
one has had and the better one
can
play.
Thinking
is, moreover,
a
pleasure. which,
like eating,
may be inrlulgcd In unwisely.
Overthinking
on a
useless ..subject,
or day-dreaminocan
.
b'
waste time Just as overeating
can cause
indigestion.
.On.e m~y say that the highest type of
thinking
IS that type called creative,
although
all thinking
is to some extent
creative.
Even a student
carefully
following the train of thought
of the author
of a text-book
is creating
anew for himself the ideas which may have been possessed
by millions
before
but are yet
fresh and unexplored
to him. There are
three
requirements
for creative
thinking: First, the mind must have ideas to
work with ; these require
experience and
reflection
to form.
Second,
the mind
must
hav~ imagination,
the ability
to
put these Ideas together
in new combinations.
Third,
the mind must have the
ability to recognize
the value in certain
of these combinations
which may appear
to have been formed
as if by accident
without
conscious
desi re or di rection.
. \11 three of these phases
of creative
thinking
have
evolved
naturally
from
lower forms of nervous
and mental activity.
It may then be expected
that
the exerci~e .of. imagination
will bring
pleasure.
This IS found to be true'
indeed, for s?me pe_ople the highest
type
of pl~asure IS obtained
from imaginative
tll1n~111g: Fo~ instance,
the use of. imagl1latIO~l In SCience, primarily
in the constrl!ctlOn
of theories,
is an essentially
sel~sh act performed
to gain pleasure,
;~s IS every other mental act. This is often
indirectly
admitted
by the
scientists
themselves
when
they
speak
of the
"beauty"
and "elegance"
of their thecries. To one able to appreciate
it, the
beauty of a, far-reaching
theory
may he
as great as that of the best painting
or
sculpture.
The
pleasure
derived
from
the creation
of the theory may also he
as great as that enjoyed
by the painter
or sculptor
or musician
and is of the
Page 38
same
intellectual
or mental
type.
I~"en the mass of unscientific

people,
\\'1.10 have never
consciously
created
a
scientific
theory,
and who
think
that
"facts"
are superior
to "theory,"
clo a
great
deal of theoretical
thinking
and
get pleasure
from it without
realizinz
th~ nature
of what they are doing.
Th~
th111gS that are called facts by those persons who claim to' be interested
only in
"practical
facts"
always
involve
some
theory
of the world
which
is so commonly accepted
that its theoretical
nature is unnoticed.
The common
idea of
an antithesis
between
theory
and facts.
or between
theory
ami practice,
is an
unfortunate
misconception.
The
most
practical
and labor-sa ving thing
in the
world
IS a good theory,
one that has
been vcr ificd and found
to work.
A.,;
for facts or .kno\Vle~lge. we have only a
set of sense .111~presslons which is organ~zed to a 111111ted extent
by means
of
Idca~ an.d. theories
of varying
degrees
of simplicity
and clearness.
The thin "
that,
alone.
makes
sense
impression';
have meaning
is that purest
and most
valuable
<;Jf all fictions,
the physical
world, which we postulate
as the cause
of the perceptions.
Without
this fiction
our perceptions
are meaningless,
in fact.
IVe w?uld not even have what most people, lllclll.dl11g 1110St philosophers
and
psychologists.
call crude
sense impres~Ions, but only have vague
feelings
of
comfort
or discomfort.
For
example.
one can not recognize
that the sensation
produced
by breathing
ammonia
vapor
~s a smell, not merely an unpleasant
feel111g of U1~kno\Vn origin,
without
having
had prevrous
experience
with ammonia
and th~ sense of smell, not even without
somethl.ng of a theory of the structure
of
~he. universe
and
of mankind's
place
111 It.
Imagination
and creativeness
are usua}ly thought
to be characteristics
of artists and not of scientists,
but this is an
error.
Art _n:a y be defi ned broadly
as a
h1~man activity
whose purpose
is the attamrnent
of pleasure
by the' artist and
~he fulfillment
of his emotional
desires.
fhe true scientist,
who is not a mere
techni~ian . or i:1Vestigator
of details,
is
an .artIst
111 this general
sense.
Imagination has been an important
feature
of
the
work
of the
greatest
scientists.
Newton's'
law of gravitation
is as much
a work
of creative
genius
as any of
Beethoven's
symphonies
are, although
it
was put forth
as a universal
law, and
has hacl abundant
verification
as such.
As Ha velock Ellis says in his c

"The Art of Thinking"
in "Th
of Life":
Science is nor the accumulation of
in the sense of piling up i olated fa
active organization of knowledge ...
is impossible without the widest rang
a Ill! most restless fertility of imagina
There
is a close connection
ethics
and esthetics.
Esthetics,
defined as the study of beauty, .
a study of pleasure, since beau
quality
which we attribute to
as the cause of the emotion of
the object gives us. Birkhoff h
oped a theory of esthetic measu
seems to be a promising he .
this
field.
His theory as
esthetic
value is associated WI
or the degree
of "unity-inity."
He limits himself to "f
ments of order, in contradi ti
connotative
elements of order,'
reasons
for pleasure
being
percei ving elements
of order
same
ill both cases. The
elements can not be taken ace
a formalistic
theory but are \
tant.
The fact that we all fi
ill familiar
and habitual thin
too frequent
repetition
beco
in!!. has a physical basis that
difficult
to explain in detail
delight in the new if it is not
new, and if there are some fa
tures
recognizable.
The pI
feel ill the recognition of old e\
new combinations
may be co
pleasure
in performing
the no
tion of thinking,
for the r
similarities
is one of the most
and most fundamental
types of
A person may be said to
in the direction of maximum
a way analogous to the accel
free mass in the direction of
mum gradient
of the gravi
tential
field. Of course the
ical problem is not as simple
ovous mechanical one. While
~Iaced at the same point in
tional
field will be accele
same direction,
different
same situation can act in difti
The explanation
in terms of
. ciple of maximum pleasure
ferent people, because of t
natures, give different values
sures to be derived from
1h
n
.1'
eo
e
y
le
H
cof
m
ng.
led
111
f a
XI'
poogalses
itathe
the
ys.
111-
ifing
leaous
modes of action possible in a 'given situation. In this way the maximum pleasure is obtained in different directions
by different persons. The gravitational
case would be similar to the psychological one if different masses were polarized in some way such that the components of the gravitational
field were
given different relative weights. A lil~e
caseis that of an electron in a magnetic
field. Electrons moving in different directions at the same point of the field
willexperience forces acting in different
directions. Here the difference in the
directions of motion of electrons corresponds to the difference in the psycholosical natures
of individual=
'The
"
physical
case is, still much simpler than
thepsychological one, since the electrons
vary only in velocity, a quantity having
three independent
components.
while
human beings vary in innumerable
distinct ways.
A - person for whom the
greatest pleasure is found in association
with people and in the feeling of power
that comes, from being a person in authority will attempt to become a leader
in business, politics or other fields. One
for whom the greatest pleasure is the
self-satisfaction that comes from doing
apparently unselfish things will become
a charitable 'person. And one, such as
I think I am, for whom the greatest
pleasure is found' in learning and in
understanding will naturally
become a
student and a scientist.
Although altruism,
strictly speaking,
doesnot exist, this concept is a convenient fiction which is often useful in the
concise description
of human actions.
Actions which are apparently
altruistic
or unselfish, and usually pass for altruism, have always appeared to me, on
dose study, to 'be efforts to satisfy some
obscure desire for self-approval.
The
person in question is often unaware of
thenature of his feeling of self-satisfaction,and he sincerely believes that he is
doing an unselfish act. This ability to
obtainpleasure from a superficially unselfishact, which is usually the result of
religious training that assumed the existenceof genuine altruism, is one of the
thingsthat enable fundamentally
selfish
peopleto live together more or less harmoniouslyin a society where immediate
selfish interests often conflict.
On a
higher,at least more abstract, level is an
understanding of the fact that to obtain
maximum pleasure from civilized life it
is necessary to curb one's immediate
selfishinterests in favor of higher selfishinterests which advance the welfare
of society, and incidentally
advance
one's own welfare.

The hope of the
world for a more perfect civilization lies
more in the growth of enlightened selfishness than in a Kingdom of God or in
any other hazy idea of a prophet.
What, then, is good and evil, if unselfishness is not good and selfishness is
not evil? We can not define absolute
and universal good and evil; we can onlv
define individual and relative goods and
evils, each completely valid only for one
person, at one time, although with some
modification
it may serve at' another
time or place. That which is good for
me now, for instance, is that which helps
me to grow, physically and mentally.
In general, the same is true for others,
though the details of what is good for
them will not be the same as for me,
In so far as I have developed beyond a
mere animal, my needs will be broader
been called religion has varied too much

with pe:-s<;m, time and place. However,
most religions fall into two classes which
overlap somewhat. First there are those
in".oIving a .belief in a divine Being or
Bemgs having material existence and
supe!"natural
po~~rs.
These
largely
consist of a prrmitrve cosmology colored
with such emotions as reverence, awe
and guilt.
The priests, prophets
and
medicine men who created the primitive
religions were the scientists
of their
clay, although the cosmologies contained
in their religions are incompatible with
the results of modern physics and astronomy.
In fact, a supernaturalism
which postulates the existence of a divine being not subject to the laws governing the rest of the world is basecl
on an essentially
unscientific
attitude
toward the world.
A supernatural
religion thus conflicts with science, even
though its adherents
try to avoid the,
conflict by saying that religion deals
only with spiritual things while science
deals
with material
things.
Second
there are those religions in which the
Cod has become an abstraction without
personal existence, and in which emphasis is laid on the relations of people to
the others among whom they live. Some
persons would call this type of religion
a code of ethics, and reserve the name
religion for the first .class, E\'Cn religions of this second class are in conflict with science to the extent that' they
are based on unscientific ideas of sin and
salvation.
and my idea of good will be higher than

the satisfaction
of animal instincts.
Is
it higher because 1 have a greater range
of experience and desires?
Or because I
realize that to live happily in an organized society I must consider the sometimes conflicting needs of others, and
must restrain some self-centered
desires
in order to satisfy desires for social pleasures? Or beca use I can see forward a
little into the future, and can restrain
a clesire for immedia te pleasure in order
to obtain a greater future happiness?
\Ve can go no farther than this, I think,
in trying to set an absolute standard of
good and evil. Each one of us has a set
of more or less well-defined
ideas of
A religion concerned only with spirgood and nil.
It is questionable
itual things, such as many people claim
whether a single concept of goodness
to have, is impossible, or at least futile.
can be formed consistent with all these
Exponents
of such a religion do not
ideas, or even representative
of a COI11clearly
realjze
what theyi mean by "spir- .
mon fundamental
notion in them. The
itual."
They
imagine
that
human
greatest good, of the greatest number is
thoughts
and
desires
are
purely
spircommonly considered a more admirable
itual
processes,
processes
that
have
no
ideal than
personal
happiness.
But
physical
basis,
because
they
are
not
why? Is there anything to the welfare
aware of the physical mechanism underof society beyoncl the welfare of its memIving mental processes.
Although
no
bers?
The state itself can not enjoy
one
knows
the
details
of
the
physical
anything, not even the happiness of its
basis of thinking. the absurdity of a becitizens. I disagree violently with those
lief
that there is no such basis should
nationalist
orators who imply that the
be apparent to anyone
who considers
state or nation has a life or consciousthe
fact
that
if
a
brain
is
rendered inness of its own superior to that of the
active or damaged by drugs, accident or
individuals who compose it.
other physical means, the spirit or mind
There is no Religion; there are only
associated
with it is invariably
dereligions. By that 1. mean that it is imstroyed or greatly changed. If physical
possible to frame a single definition of
, acts are really negligible to a religion,
religion consistent with all the religions
and only spiritual things are important,
that have been developed. in the history
of the human race, since that which has
then the religion becomes useless anu
Page 39
Baltimore, Maryland' 21218'
A PHYSIGISrrS VIEW OF ETHIc..~

academic; concerned only with unobservable things.
Actually, religionists are
always much concerned with human actions, which are physical phenomena if
nothing else.
Parallel with the evolution of religions has been the evolution of ideas of
Cod, beginning with material and personal gods possessing all the human desires and emotions of their worshippers.
and progressing up to supposedly immaterial beings having none of the qualities
of which their human creators
were
ashamed, yet still retaining the ability
to know and plan and act as human
beings do. The final stage in the transformation of the idea of God under the
influence of science is a supreme worldspirit, immaterial and spiritual in nature, without power to act directly on
the physical world.
The existence of
such a supernatural
being is a possibility that can not be disproved; but it is
meaningless and useless, since. by definition' it can never be observed. I know
of no higher power than human intelhgence, which has created all religions
and ideas of God.
The soul, as usually imagined, is as
supernatural
as God and as hard for a
true physicist to believe in. While I do
not think that I am merely a haphazard
collection of lifeless molecules, whatever
I am, or my mind is, more than that
clearly seems to be the result of the combination and organization
of molecules.
This result of combination is not matter
in the ordinary sense of something having mass, but it is material in the sense
that it can produce physical effects, and
it is affected by physical conditions in
the bodv. The fact that neither I nor
any one- else yet knows how consciousness results from the combination
of
molecules into cells and tissues is not a
valid argument that it cannot so result,
or even that we can never know how ..
An important role in many religions
is played by the concept of sin. This is
a fiction whose utility is limited by its
being based on a belief in standards of
good and evil that are thought to be
divinely ordained and absolute, but are
neither divine nor absolute, being traditional conclusions from old and verv
imperfect theories of human motivatio;l
and behavior. 'While I know of no theology in which ignorance is a sin, all the
so-called sinful acts I have observed
have been merely the result of ignorance
or limited understanding.
Even a crim-
Page 40
iual act performed

under the influence
of violent emotions is the result of the
inadequacy of a mind, because of incomplete development,
for performing
its
natural function of directing the body
with which it is connected.
Acceptance of the ideas of sin and'
guilt requires a belief in a free soul with
a complete knowledge of good and evil,
and with the power to choose between
them and' either resist or yield to temptations to sin. Since I have rejected the
usual ideas of the soul and sin it may be
expected that I also reject the idea of
"free will." This is true as far as ultimate belief in its existence is concerned.
bun the concept of a free will is a very
useful one which need not be abandoned
merely because it is false. Though usually based on a mistaken idea, free will
is one of our most valuable fictions, one
that is useful for the concise description
of the process by which we make the
multitude
of decisions
necessary
in
everyday life. Nearly the same idea is
expresse<;! bX Planck in "The Philosophy
of PhYSICS : "Our consciousness . . .
assures us that free will is supreme. Yet
...
we mig-ht say that looked at from
outside (objectiv~ly)
the will is causally
determined, and that looked at from inside (subjectively)
it is free."
The
more one's decisions are made by a free
will which is the result of rational
thought and of clear ideas of one's desires and of the consequences of one's
actions, rather than by an emotional
free will, the 1110re wise and intelligent
one can claim to be and the happier one
should succeed in being.
That every human action is a physical
phenomenon determined by present and,
indirectly,
by past physical conditions
is a conclusion that becomes more and
more certain as one studies the structure
of the human body and its behavior under varying conditions as a problem in
physics. Here I am using physics in the
general sense, the science of matter and
energy and their transformations,
to include all natural sciences such as chemistry and biology.
Determinism
seems
unquestionable,
and the existence of a
free will, an immaterial
soul or spirit
which can make decisions independent
of physical conditions, seems impossible
when one studies the process of making
decisions and attempts to analyze some
typical elementary
choices, and finds
that apparently
the choices depend on
present conditions and past history. In
Illy own case, the only one of

ha ve full and immediate know
ha ve many times made as im
and as scientific an analysis as
of my choices. Each time I was
to the conclusion t.iat the decisi
determined by the situation I fa
by my condition at the time, \\,1
dition was the result of previous
ence. When I have tried to
why I made a particular choice
been able to see memories of. past
ences which' inclined me one way
other, usually some each way,
the decision was the result of
forces, with the strongest final
ning out. By "forces" I do n
the usual mechanical forces of
but analogous
fictions which,
speaking, seem to cause phy
phenomena in the same. way
chanica! forces seem to cause
ical phenomena.
To describe one of even the
of these forces in terms of the s
and connections of the nerve cells
produce
the psychological ph
would be very difficult. It w
practically
impossible to desc
force in terms to the ultimate
structure of the body cells by m
some fundamental physical law
Dirac's wave equation for the
generalized to apply to all other
mental particles such as pro
neutrons. Yet I have faith that
ultimate physical explanation is
i11 principle, and is merely too
cated to carry out at present. Th
faith is appropriate here since m
in the possibility of ultimate
explanation lacks proof by ac
formance, although it is upheld
creasingly
detailed explanati
have been carried out.
Faith, I would say, is belief in
thing unproven or unprovable t
the believer pleasure. Beliefs i
the soul and immortality are g
amples of common faiths. Thou
not possess these faiths, I do have
and do not mean to imply that
to be avoided entirelv. For insta
of my faiths is the' fundament
of the physical scientist that t
verse is orderly and understanda
though this can never be c
proven, it is made plausible by
that many events and processes'
have been found to be orderly
derstandable, and it gives me gr
sure to believe it; the pleasure
I
T
tal
lie
eel
as
1el
n-
nut.
ve
n-
be
tat
r'!
nan
lcs
:ly
tal
len-
ees
(1,
xdo
rs,.
IS.
ne
lef
anticipation of the knowledge and power

to be gained by studying the universe.
In the same way, contemplation
of the
possibility of explaining "~Il physical
phenomena, even these. amazingly complex ones called vital phenomena,
by
means of a single unified theory gives me
a: wonderfully pleasant feeling of the
anticipation of power.
The problem of free will and ~hoi~t.:
becomes clearer if one approaches It SCIentifically, trying to' find the best explanation for a typic~l occ~lrrence sucl~
as two persons meeting with the same
situation or situations which are practically identical as far as essential co.r~ditions are concerned, but reacting differently. Three types of exylanatioll
may be offered: First, the ch;ilce 0 f reaction is absolutely
unpredictable,
~()
that no amount of knowledge of the Situation or of the people would make it
possible to predict the outcome.
Seeond, the choice is determined by the free
will or arbitrary choice of the persons
involved.
Third, the choice is determined by the physical conditions characteristic of the situation, and by the
relation of these conditions to the physical structure of the person meeting the
situation, which structure
is the result
of previous physical
condi tious.
In
more familiar terms, the choice is determined by the character
of the person
and the way the situation looks to him
in the light of his past experience.
The
first. which hardly deserves the name
explanation, denies without reason the
applicability of science to human actions. The second is quite simple and
doesnot obviously conflict with a' scientific study of human behavior, but requires the observed phenomena
constituting human actions to be separated
from all other observed phenomena. and
to be treated by an entirely different
method which is rendered
unsatisfactory by the admission of an unmeasurable factor that is observable only by
means of efforts produced without apparent relation to any past or present
circumstance.
Some people who ha vc faith in this
second way of explaining a choice betweenalternative courses of action, but
do not realize the full implications
of
suchan attitude, have tried to rationaliz~it, and give themselves an opening to
bring in free will, by seizing on the
Heisenberg principle
of uncertainty.
Theydo not know what kind of uncertainlythe principle deals with, yet they
imply that even the physicist has given

up determinism,
nppa n-ntly because UI1certainty sounds as if it is incompatible
with determinism.
ll eisenberg's
principle does not conflict with a deterministic view of physics.
It simply states
that conjugate dynamical variables c.an
not be measured
simultaneously
With
unlimited precision. This bars the possibility of measuring the exact present
condition of the universe, and then calculating its future conditions from the
results of the measurements,
even if the
rules of calculation were known. But it
does not cleny a causal connection between the present
and future.
The
Heisenberg principle is merely a precise
statement of the observed fact that there
is an unavoidable
interaction
between
the observing apparatus and the object
observed.
Probably the best example of an elementary
process to which the uncertainty principle applies is the collision
of an electron with a photon, called :1
Compton
collision.
Many
such collisions have been observed in cloud chambel's; in every thoroughly
investigated
case, energy and momentum were found
to be observed within the limits of accuracy of observation. Nothing is more
typical of deterministic
law than the
laws of the conservation
of momentum
and energy.
These laws relate fundamental physical properties of a system
at one time to those at another time in
the simplest possible way, by the relation of equality.
Though it is extremely important
in
individual
quantum
mechanical
processes, the uncertainty
principle becomes
unimportant
in the consideration
of
processes
involving
large numbers
of
atoms, as most bodily processes
do.
When large numbers are involved statistical laws apply with great accuracy.
The small discrepancies
between the results of observation and the predictions
of statistical law leave little room for
freedom of choice.
Closely related to free will is another
useful fiction - self-control.
Obviously
a man can not really control himself any
more than he can lift himself by his
bootstraps.
The idea is logically selfcontradictory,
but it often furnishes a
convenient abbreviated
way of describing an important psychological phenomenon.
The
common
expression,
"a
struggle
between
higher
and
lower
selves," is somewhat more accurate than
self-control,
but it assumes that higher
and. lower are absolutely defined, and it
is oversimplified
in that it neglects the
fact that the splitting into two selves
takes place in different ways on different issues. The exercise of self-control
in the usual situation requiring a decision is more accurately described as follows: A man having a complex mental
nature resulting from years of development and experience is confronted with
a situation in which he sees two fairly
distinct alternative
courses to pursue.
Some parts of his mind-psychological
forces or whatever you wish to call them
-tend
'to produce the choice of one of
the alternatives, while other parts of the
same mind tend the other way. In the
case of a situation
involving a moral
Issue, one at the courses is called yielding to temptation.
The other is called
resisting
temptation,
and the person
choosing it is said to have used selfcontrol.
The psychological
mechanism
operating is the same in a case involving no moral issue, say the choice of the
color of a hat, as in a case with a moral
issue, although the strength of the conflicting forces may be much less. The
choice that is made in any particular
case depends, exactly as one should expect, both upon the nature of the man
and of the situation" in which he finds
himself.
The development
of self-control
is
then nothing but mental development
and training
which
strengthens
that
side of the mind that tends in the general direction
of resisting
temptation,
Though the faculty of self-control
is
one of our highest faculties, ranking
with understanding
and intelligence, its
development by a long process of adaptation to environment
is an essentially
selfish process, as adaptation always is.
It is generally considered that a weIldeveloped faculty of self-control is necessary" for a well-balanced mind. With
this I agree, though I do not, believe in
self-control
as most people conceive of
it. I try to use as much self-control as
possible, because I believe that I will
enjoy life better and on a higher level
if I can be as much as possible conscious
of what I am doing, and for what purposes I am doing it, and choose my
course of action with regard for others
and for the future, rather than let habit
and thoughtless
emotion be my guide.
This is not to imply that emotion is to be
eliminated in favor of reason. Though
we may try to live by reason, it is .al;vays emotion that we live for. Reason-
Page 41

1I1g should be used to distinguished
between good and bad emotions, between
those, on one hand, that are short-sighted
or low or poorly developed and .those, on
the other hand, that are far-SIghted or
high or well developed and that do not
conflict with the happiness of others.
Reason is the means; emotion is the end.
The concept of self-control
may be
somewhat clarified by comparing it with
devices for controlling physical quantities such as temperature
or electrical
potential. There are three parts essential
to a controlling device: First, a standard
to which the variable can be compared.
directly or indirectly;
second, a means
for detecting deviations of the variable
from the standard;
third, a means for
correcting the deviations, which is actuated by the detecting means.
Self-control of conduct requires three similar
things: First, the existence of an idea
of a standard of conduct or of the particular phase of conduct to be controlled:
second. the ability to perceive deviations
of conduct from the standard; third, the
ability to make corrective
changes in
conduct in accordance with the perceived
deviations.
I do not think that I have proved anything
in the foregning
paragraphs.
chiefly because proof, as most people
conceive of it, is impossible.

Matters
of objective
fact have their accuracy
limited by the errors of measurement.
while a conclusion involving an abstract
idea has its certainty
limited by the
limited clarity of conception of the ideas
involved. To prove an abstract theorem
to another, olle can only indicate to him
the processes by which one became' convinced of its truth, and hope that he will
see the truth. Whether or not he does
see it. or thinks he sees it, will depend
on many factors' in his previous experience as well as on the absolute truth one
attributes to the theorem. My feeling is
,haf no truth exists in the conclusion of
a theorem that does not exist implicitly
in the definitions of the ideas involved.
When I derive a proof I am only completing, by exploring their implications,
the definitions of the ideas with which
I started. I see no self-evident truth in
axioms or postulates.
They are merely
disguised
definitions
which
describe
properties
of the entities we have invented.
Though there is no absolute
standard of truth a 11\- more than there
is an absolute stalHiard of good and
evil. there are two types of relative truth
that can be recognized.
One is internal
self-consistency,
such as a physical
theory or a branch of mathematics may
possess. The other is external consis-
REPRINTS AVAILABLEtcncy, such as the agreement 0

predictions f r0111a theory with t
sults of observation .. \ critical a
thus seems to leave nothing of
except lack of contradiction. y
concept of truth is one of our
and most useful fictions. one tI
could hardly dispense with. A t
may then be said to be true if it
elusion is consistent with and I
following
from its premises. I
particular
case. this consisten
logical connection must be jud
cording to the personal stan
the person desiring to know
the theorem is true or not. Th
l11any cases fairly general agre
be reached as to what is true or
just, in the end every man's tru
OWI1as is every man's justice.
Although
this article Ira.
partly in answer to that of P
Conklin, I think that I hare
the same spirit as he in tracing
ral development of the highest
thinking, including ethical thou
simple origins. In agreement
general thesis I may add that I
the 1,yriting of this essay a self
my part. I have obtained pIe
it already and hope to obtain
it in the future.
THE PHILOSOPHY OF DR. WILLARD E. EDWARDS

Whenever good people ask what my philosophy,
Ii gion is, or what I believe in, this is my reply:
creed,
or r~
I believe the hope of the world lies in fostering good health

(sounds mind in sound bodies), intelligence
(selection of the
fit and sterilization
of the unfit), and education (in ethics,
economics,
and the natural sciences,
not propagandai.. and
in the gaining
of international
justice,
honesty,
equal
opportunities,
good government, and better living conditions
for all.
I find in nature, science and art, and in all attempts to live
a good, useful, and moral life, all the religion I want.
I
believe that as people are freed from superstitious
beliefs,
they will achieve much greater wi sdom and understanding.
Each of us is the result of heredity, environment, and education, and these three factors should be of the best.
I believe
(maturity),
quest for
pressed in
the greatest
aim in life is self-development
and that the principal
impulse' of life is the
happiness.
Nowhere are these concepts
exthe Jewish or Christian Holy Scriptures.
HOW COMES EVIL? (compare
with Isaiah 45:7 and 45:5)
Ei ther God wants to aboli sh, and cannot;

Or he can, but does not want to;
Or he cannot, and does not want to.
If he wants to, out cannot, he is impotent.

If he can, but does not want to, he is wicked.
If he neither can, nor wants to,
He is both powerless and wicked.
But if God can abolish evil, and wants to,
Then how comes evil into the world?
Evil causes distress,

harm, injury, misery, pain,
A disastrous
earthquake,
tornado, tidal wave (
flood may be considered
evil.
However, these
"Acts of God" are simply the Forces of Nature
part of the "Laws of Nature" noted in the Dee
Independence.
Evil is more than the mere absence of good.
rudeness,
selfishness,
greed,
anger, injusti
dishonesty,
graft, religious fraud, quackery, sby
"legal standard" of honesty in business, and lu
Such attributes
of human nature a-e often found
many good traits in men and women.
Human love, appreciation,
self-restraint, and
do much toward nullifying evil. But since we
of heredity, environment, and education, it
our utmost to prevent the transmission of bad
greatly improve environment and the moral,
scientific education of all people.
~o
~l'
c-
(Not printed at Government expense)
(tongrcssional Record
United States
oj America
PROCEEDINGS
J~
.\.ND DEBATES
OF THE
82dCONGRESS,
FIRST
SESSION
The Perpetual Calendar
Jl
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
Jll
OF
11-
HON. JOSEPH R. FARRINGTON
of
111
D:l:LEGA,E FROM HAWAU
1)'
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
er
Wednesday, March 21, 1951
Dll
Mr. FARRINGTON. Mr. Speaker, I

am proposing in a bill that I have introduced today the adoption on New Year's
Day, 1956, of The Perpetual Calendar
devised by Willard E. Edwards, an electrical engineer of Honolulu.
Mr. Edwards has devoted many years
to the study of calendar reform. He was
born at Chatham, Mass., in 1903. He attended the Massachusetts Institute of
Technology and the University of Okla.
homa where he received his degree in
engineering. He later was a graduate
student at the University of Southern
California. He was called into the service or the Navy during World War II
and attained the rank of lieutenant commander. He has had extensive flying
and aeronautical experience, and is an
expert in radio and telephone communications. He now makes his home in
Honolulu.
111
111
The Perpetual Calendar of 12 months

and equal quarters Is regarded by Mr.
Edwards as the logical successor to the
13-month calendar proposed 20 years
ago by George Eastman of the Eastman
Kodak Co. At that time Mr. Eastman
was actively engaged in furthering the
adoption of a 13-month calendar to replace our present Irrational one. He regarded this movement as a natural evolution in modern life and succeeded in
getting more than 100 corporations to
&5~27~9M1
adopt the 13-period calendar for their

internal accounting purposes.
But auditing, inventories, production,
dividends, taxes, etc., are largely and increasingly being accounted for on a
quarterly basis, and most of these concerns have now returned to the customary calendar system. Thirteen cannot
be split into quarters, and a double system of bookkeeping proved too costly
and inconvenient in most cases.
Moreover, to the average individual;
13 identical months of 4 weeks each is
exceedingly monotonous, and the fact
that there are 13 Fridays-the-13th in
the 13-month calendar is very unattractive from a popular viewpoint. Also,
with the 1st and 15th always on Sundays, this would cause many monthly
and semimonthly payments to be postponed or advanced and would often
cause needless expense, confusion, and
embarrassment.
The Edwards Perpetual Calendar is described by its supporters as the simplest; the most practical, the easiest to
use and to remember of any equal-quarter calendar yet offered for adoption.
The Perpetual Calendar has regularity without monotony, contains 26 working days (plus Sundays) in each month,
and allows holidays and anniversaries to
fall always on the same day of the week,
year after year. This is accomplished
by the simple operation of removing 1
day out of 365 from the regular count
of the week after its adoption.
To begin with, New Year's Day, an
already well-known and internationally
celebrated holiday, is proposed not as
January 1 but as a "day apart." This

is like the "extra day" we now have on
crossing the date line from west to east,
Where two succeeding days of the week
occur with the same name. This system has been successfully employed at
the one hundred and eightieth meridian,
for our convenience in reckoning days,
ever since 1884 without any apparent
hardship occurring to anyone.
This "day apart" in The Perpetual
Calendar is thus taken care of painlessly
at the beginning of each year, allowing
the remaining 364 days to be divided
exactly into 52 weeks and into 4 quarters of 91 days each. It also becomes
the 3d day of a 3-day week end, since
it follows a Saturday and Sunday (December 30 and 31), and it will not interfere with church attendance. This is
more practical than having the "day
apart" at the end of the year, since such
an arrangement would interfere with
Sunday observance and cause a 4-day
holiday which would be too disruptive to
business.
The second day of the new year, a
Monday in The Perpetual Calendar, thus
becomes January 1 and will always be
the first business or working day of the
new year.
In fact, Monday is shown in this
calendar as the first day of every week,
with Saturday and Sunday at the end,
where a "week end" belongs. Three
arguments for this are that it is a real
and natural need of human nature to
rest after a period of work, the seventh
day was the Biblical day of rest, and in
actual business practice the week is al
CONGRESSION AL RECORD
ready considered as beginning on Monday. However, for those who prefer it
that way. l''l'Hj Perpetual Calendar may
\le readily printed with Sunday as the
nrst day.
In this up-eo-date calendar, the
month lengths fall into the easily remembered pattern of 30-30-31, and the
starting days into the well-known sequence of Monday-wednesday-Friday,
days on which many weeklyevents regularly occur. The day of the week for
any day in the year can be easily figured
in a few seconds by remembering "30,
30, 31; Monday, Wednesday, Friday."
No other rhyme or "jingle" is necessary
to compute any future date.
The first and the fifteenth, important
monthly and semimonthly payroll, billpaying and accounting days, always fall
on weekdays in The Perpetual Calendar.
This plan thus becomes tb~ most practical one for a new fixed up-to-date international civil calendar.
There is no unlucky Friday the 13th,
or Black Friday, in The Perpetual Calendar to worry the superstitious or to deter
them from business sales and the signing
of contracts. The elimination of this
ancient bugaboo will actually help in
many businesses. Executives know that
a great many people are not willing to
sign contracts, buy insurance or transact
business on a Friday the 13th. The
elimination of all Fridays the 1. .h on
this calendar has been favorably noted
and commented on by thousands of
people. This is important to businessmen. Even though they themselves are
955270-39541
not superstitious, their customers often

are.
Leap-Year Day in leap years comes
between June 31 and July 1, and is a
second day apart, the first day of the
second half-year. It is proposed as a
new international summer holiday but
may also be considered as a second Sunday. This is a great advantage, for if 2
days apart are to occur in any fixed
calendar, it is better for them to be rest
days than to be working days, both for
workers and for business accounting
purposes.
The Perpetual Calendar is offered to
the United Nations for international
adoption as the simplest and the most
practical of any 12-mol1thfixed calendar
yet proposed. It is an up-to-date civil
calendar, entirely suitable for everyday
business, social, judicial, governmental,
and school use. It has the main advantages of other proposals, but not their
inherent disadvantages.
If Congress and the United Nations
will definitely recommend that The Perpetual Calendar be universally adopted
beginning with 1956, there should be
plenty - : time between now and then to
prepare the American Ephemeris and
other advance publications.
There is no valid objection to the
adop .n of The Perpetual Calendar, and
nothing is accomplished by defending or
cherishing our present irrational calendar. We make progress through adopting better methods, and if human .ertia
and natural resistance to change can be
overcome, we may all be able to enjoy
"The Perpetual Calendar" is now Senate Bill 1142.

Adoption is being sought for 1967! Dr. Edwards informs us
that tile plan is srongly opposed by tile Seventh Day Adventist leaders and by Orthodox Jewish Rabbis. Apparently,
others approve tile plan; we certainly do.
Dr. Edwards asked us to inform all tile subscribers and
friends of tile Freethought about "The Perpetual Calendar."
This we have done. If you are as impressed by this plan
(imagine, a seculcr calendar') as we are, we invite you to
endorse and support this plan by writing to Congress and the
United Nations requesting its adoption. (See advertisement
section for "Perpetual Calendar" Post Card offer.)
the time- and money-saving convenience

of having a more useful calendar.
Reprinting 'The Perpetual CalendarIt.
self creates reader interest and provides
a clearer understanding of it. People
always like to look at it to see on what
day of the week their birthdays and
other anniversaries will alwayshll. It
is freely offered for the use of all nations
and races, and no permissionis necessary
in order to reproduce it.
Under unanimous consent, I ask that
The Perpetual Calendar be reproducedat
this point in the RECpRD.
The Perpetual Calendar is as follows:
THE
PERPETUAL
CALENDAR
"New Year's Day (a day apart from any week or

month) Is th~ flr.<t day of each veae, 0 holldor, follo"e4
by the 364day fixed calendar sbown below;
~r~IJ
January
February
March
F S S M
F S S M TW TF
WIT
TWIT
7--12
-1 2 I
12
56
34 58 9
1213 14 6 7 8 9 1011 12 4 5 6 7 8 810
1516 1718 1920 21 13 141516 1718 19 11 1213 14151 11
2425 2e 18 1920 2122
22123 2425 2627 ~20
2930
27
25 2627 2829
April
WT FIS
!~
I:~
~~I~
S MT
12 34 567
MIT
May
June
WT F S S M TW TF
12 l4 5-
8JI
-1
8 9 IOU 12 1314 6 7 8 9 1011 12 4 5 6 7

1516 17 J.~ 192021 1314 1516 1718 1 11 1213 141511j~
24 25 2627 2E 20 21 2223 2125 2e 18 1920 2122
1
2728 29 30
25 261272829
,:ilt
~I~
"LeapYear Day (8 second day apart) is observedODIJ

during leap years between June 31 and July III! the&j
day of the second half'year, a holiday.
October
'/d"l'
WIT FSS
Novemller
M TW T F SSM
December
TWTlsI
1234567--1234~----1
8 9 10 U12 13 14 67 8 9 10 1112 4 5 6 7
15161718192021
13141516171819
111213141
~~~2526272E~~~~242526~~=~
'These two year,days are definitely named and _
B definite purpose.
When considered apart from .,
eek, they allow the Calendar to beoome ~
perpetual.
With a day apart, the year's begun,

Followed by thirty, thirty, thirty
Months a lwcys start a certain way
On Monday, Wednesday, and Frid
Each quarter and each year the
is The Perpetual Calendar's aim.
ORIGINATOR
OF "THE
DR. WILLARD E.
PERPETUAL C
If
The American
Atheist
Baltimore,
YOU1H
Maryland
21218
SfCl10n
EDITED BY STEVE WAGNER
For my contribution this time I am enclosing a copy of one

of the worst anti-atheist
letters I have ever seen.
It was
printed in the Medford Mail Tribune, and was read by thousands.
I know for a fact that the Medford paper prints well-written
letters by intelligent
people, like yourself.
I urge you to
write a rebuttal to the enclosed letter as soon as possible.
It is not just
necessary.
If possible,
important
please
that this be done.
send us a carbon copy of your letter.
and we will look for it in the Medford paper.

you a clipping if it is printed.
I strongly urge that our subscribers
rebuttal effort.
Your letter
follows:
It is urgently
We will send
join us in an all-out
to the Medford paper should
be addressed
as
Editor,
The Medford Mail Tribune,
Medford, Oregon.'
KEEP PURE
To the Editor:
And now an authoritative newscast
came through that Madalyn Murray is adding to her
public "fame" by her activities.
The report alleges
that Madalyn is laboring to get prostitution liscensed
I 6U:-
V.S,
What next?
Do you recall she is ex-preaident of the freethinkers,
freeactors,
infidels and atheists?
What an exalted
aura must have pervaded their meetings, and what a
personnel the component members who should follow
their leader.
The Bible says, "A whore is a deep
ditch; and a strange woman is a narrow pit, "and the
Bible pronounces the direst woes on all who go her
way. In fact two horrid diseases,
gonorrhea and syphillis both have their origin directly from prostitution,
and are a direct visatation of Divine justice!
Being
both contagious and infectious, often times the innocent
also suffer the woes!
Pag
Baltimore,
Think of it! Madalyn wants a nation going that way:

Aren't all you freethinkers taken aback to have beans
so widely spilled
showing how far your "freedom
thoughts" really can take folks? "Led
devil It his will."
That's Madalyn!
captive
by the
Our founding fathers "left unstained

what there
they found, freedom to worship God."
What a freedom
this freethinker now wants spawned and hatched and
launched into our shores!
"An adulterous nation" to
be sure.
hI\.
Maryland 21218
LETTERS TO THE
OITOR
't in.llo.e\it'S l:\l\o.a.fueism \'lon.o.e"d.\l\

\ \\ao. 'SO\l
realized before all its components parts and qualifications? Want your blooming young daughters and sons to
ioin them? Take an objector's
advice, keep yourself
and yours free of their besmirchment.
"Keep thyself
pure. "
An added note.
The gist of the news item says
when Gus Hall was glibly answering questions before
some 500 students at Swarthmore College, one student
insisted on knowing the relationship
between communism and religion.
Suddenly Hall lost his veneer and
snapped, "I presume you are asking whether I believe
in God."
There was a moment of stillness,
then defiantly Hall declared,
"I do not believe in God."
He was booed so lustily that he had to scuttle from the
hal] by the back door. Thank God for the student booerst May their number be multiplied!
Come to consider
all the facts as they accumalate, isn't milatant atheism
brazen and wonderful!
Gus scuttles from the back door as the irate students
vociferously
boo; and Madalyn scuttles
by plane to
Hawaii to evade trouble with the courts and her irate
neighbors!
H. R. Bulman
.,. ~
Route =/t'l.J,-,
bOX
lJIedford,
3l~
0
Oregon
Samuel Untermeyer
(1858.1940)
Lecturer -
Jurist
Religion begins wbere reason leaves otf. Religion

unreasonable.
* * * *
Page 46
is
Dear Editor:
The hierarchy of the National Council of Churches do not
believe in the Christian Bible and do not believe in the
PROTESTANT Reformation.
This also applies to most
preachers who have attended theologicai schools since
America became an arsenal of marxism. They have made
"Protestant" a dirty word. These subversives have adeep
feeling of guilt when they approach their Catholic and Jewish
preachers because they think that they teach a lie. The
hierarchy of the Catholic Church and many priests do not IJe..
lieve in the teachings of the Christian Bible and they also
have a deep sense of guilt when they meet clergymen from
other demoninations.
The hierarchy of the Jews and many Rabbis do not believe the teachings of the old or Jewi sh Bible and they are
li ving and teaching a lie. Because of their sense of guilt,
all these groups of spiritual leaders succumb to the BIGLIE
of International Subversions.
This is evident when we consider that the top clergymen
of the three faiths entertain the Anti-Christian King and
allowed him to direct their activities.
Their spiritual bankruptcy is evidenced by everything they do or say, as for
example, their conduct before Lincoln Memorial in Augustof
1963. All of these characters fawned over their spiritaal
leader, Rustin, when they well knew that Rustin is a leader
of an international conspiracy to subvert and destroy America
and everything that decent people stand for. They knew
should have known that he had been convicted of crimesthat
are so hideous and filthy they cannot be reported in a pap
that goes into an American home.
Jenkin's,
Rustin's
and. BaKe-!:'
s Johnson tllmed out
light in the White House, and immoral, subversive clergym

have turned out the LIGHT of the world.
OSCAR WYCLIFHARM
Chicago, Ill'
November-December1
The American Athe ist
Baltimore Maryland ,21218

.Dear Editor:
Dear Editor:
I and many of my friends congratulate YOU for contesting

The October issue of The American Atheist received and
some of the things which have been going on with the use of absorbed.
tB;x funds. ~closed
are a few other matters which you might
WIsh to consider contesting.
First, I don't like your aiticle J. Edgar Hoover v. Dr.
Martin Luther King. Mr. Hoover enjoys an enviable reputation
Our Government is very much involved in religious activi- for his fainnindedness and long, efficient services iri our
ties abroad through the aid program.
F.B.I. I have read from more than one reliable source that
Dr. King is a communist, but that, manifested by his trouble
In some instances it is supplying very large sums of tax,
making tactics, he leans strongly to anarchism. Compare the
or public funds to religious schools. Included are schools at
mean expression on his face and his fiery eyes, with the
all levels, such as Catholic Universities, etc. This is being
amiable countenance of Mr. Hoover!
done in Africa and Latin America at least, and possibly in
other areas.
This involves direct financial grants to the
How in hell he was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize is
schools involved. Very substantial grants of funds are made,
beyond all comprehension. If anybody deserves it, it is our
In addition, volunteers of the Peace Corps are working faithful Mr. Hoover.
I
with religious institutions.

We are sending huge quanities of surplus agricultural
oonunodities abroad.
A large portion of these are being
distributed through religious organizations, ostensibly as a
convenient way to get the food out to needy people. The
argument is, officially, that all of this is in our nation~l
interest as it brings us political good will from abroad. However, distribution through religious organizations is not
necessary, for CARE is established in the same countries
or would readily establish there, and can handle the job without getting us involved in religious compromise. The Catholic Relief Service, called CARITAS in Latin American
countries, is one of the worst offenders. The Catholic service takes our surplus food, financed by all of the people in
the United States, and distributes it abroad (not ostensibly
hit in fact) as something provided by the Catholic Church,
and the latter openly uses this lever to bring in converts.
I either have, or have had and read, practically all of the

books you have listed.
Before you adopt the name, "The Free Humanist", it i!
advisable that you first ascertain whether or not the organization that published a magazine by that name, discontinued
business. My subscription to it expired about mid-December
1964. and I have not received a renewal notice. Cannot recall their address. I passed the last one along as I do the
many other rationalist and secular magazines to which I'VE
subscribed for many, many years.
Afterthought: . It just dawned upon me that yours IS the
organization that published the small magavine "Free Human
ist. ,I now recognize the names -' Blois, Alt, and McClain!
Edward G. Naege
La Feria, Texa
<Racist,
Segregationist,
Anti-Communist,
Anti-Anarchist,
The most likely result of all this activity of our government through religious institutions abroad is gradually to Anti-Socialist, Anti-Religious.)
break down the prohibition of mixing church and state - and
once the prohibition is dispensed with abroad, it will be
easier to ignore it in our own country.
Dear Mr. Cree:
One very much interested
Hollywood, Florida
These allegations are very serious and need documentation.

There is no doubt that some are true. It will be very difficult to determine the full extent of the involvement of foreign
aid programs in religious activities for such involvements
would understandably be cloaked in secrecy.
Anyone in
pos~6sion of such information is urged to communicate it to
us immediately, .
The Editor
Novembel'-December 1964
Please remove my name from your list of Associat

Editors and retum the two manuscripts \\hich ] submitte
to the previous editor.
FACT magazine has lost interest in the Cree-Murr,
dispute, so I won't be coming to Baltimore to interview YO!
I don't suppose there is any need to state explicitly tli
reasons for my dissociation from your organization; I dou
that you are a 1001, and if you are not a fool, you must reaIi
that your publication is antipathetic to peesonaaioh as m
Page'
I cannot work for, or with, an organization headed by an

employee of Fort Detrick; an organization which has no
compunction about seizing other persons' private mail and
printing it - whether the mail has been doctored or not; an
organi zation which claims to represent freethought but
prints only right-wing propaganda and refuses left-wing
propaganda as "too controversial;" an organization which
believes, or pretends to believe, charges made against a
Negro civil rights worker by the FBI and the Ku Klux Klan;
an organization which seems intent on antagonizing all
members who are not right-wing and encouraging the vilest
type of "white backlash;" an organization, in short, which
seems tailored, castrated, truncated and totalitarianized into
the dimensions sati sfaotory to the loyalty requirements
demanded by servants of the Fort Detricks and Buchenwalds
of our time.
Tolstoy wrote: "The most terrible superstition of all is
the affirmation that, superior to the duties of man to man,
there are higher duties to an invisible being. In theology,
the invisible being is called God. In politics, the invisible
being is called Government... The most frightful crimes.are
al ways committed at the behest of one or another of these
imaginary invisible beings." The only rebuttal to this was
the immortal words of Mr. Eichmann, "But I was only obeying
orders. " And there's another magazine, a few years older
than yours, devoted to proving that civil rights workers are
arming Negroes for revolt.
It's called "KILL" and is
published by a front organization of the American Nazi Party.
The Nazis are always interested in talented biologists who
believe in obeying orders; perhaps you can amalgamate .... ?
Robert Anton Wilson
Vernon, New Jersey
Mr. Wilson has objected to our not identifying ourselves

with Anarchy; both he and the previous editor of our magazine. Madalyn E. Murray, publically proclaim that they are
Anarchists.
We recognize Anarchy as a legitimate political ideal, but
feel that over attention to it is neither worthwhile or
justified
for our goals.
In fact, we have attempted to overcome the controversy
created for our organization
by Mrs.
Murray with her civil disobediance
and subscription
to
Anarchy. Our goal is to produce a true journal of freethought
with respect, and standing.
We see no reason to advocate
W?
Page 48
Baltimore,
Maryland 21218
one political belief over another. Even though we reeo

a strong and logical relationship
between Socialism
Humanism, right-wing propaganda and left-wing propag
have been and will be given equal opportunity for pres
tion. We have intentionally
avoided political theory and
continue
to do so until the Anarchy-controversy si
down so that W? can get on with our work--suceess in
Church Tax Cases is no small matter.
Expressing our concern for keeping controversy to a
mum for now in order to succeed in our work, we menti
to Mr. Wilson in a telephone conversation that we felt ~
letter words and profanity in general should be avoide
our magazine.
Repulsed by our unwillingness to oonici,
in unnecessary
and meaningless
controversy,
Mr. Wi
has now joined forces with Madalyn E. Murray and c
butes articles to her publication containing such word
"ass-hole"
and "mother-iucher":
Perhaps we didn't
Mr. Wilson's contributions
anyway.
Needless
to say, any charge that W? are not sympat
to the Civil Rights movement or to its brave leade~
contrary to what we have written.
We did no more than
port our bitter experiences
with and vital informati
public record on Mae Mallory, the civil rights leader to
Mr. Wilson refers.
We are returning Mr. Wilson's manuscripts to him
suggest that he document further criticism of us with ~
Dear Editor:
I most certainly want to answer Mr. Due's letter in
August -Septernber issue.
From his letter it is evident he is a Latter Day
perhaps a converted member or inherited, and as
cases, naive as to the real story that is Mormonism.
Here, of course, if you run for public office, andare
L.D.S., you have had it. You are black-balled, ridi
condemned and all sorts of trumped up charges are Ie
again st you with the most vi cious attack on character
then the saints are told how to vote and they, beinga
people, do as their leaders say.
I am sure that every free-thinker is well aware ofthe
that the Constitution was not written by "God-Fearing
and women". Thomas Paine, the first man to write the
gnize
~ and'
uinda
rentawill
liners
the
muuioned
four-
od in
"the United States of America" was actually

the Constitution and he spent most of his adult
for his views of religion.
Thomas Jefferson,
signers of the Constitution
was not affiliated
ligious organization.
Also, I don't recall ever
a woman being involved.
The Mormon population of the State
and when you speak of morals, the
themselves.
More liquor consumed per
state, more divorces, (3 of 5 marriages
the national average) and now, we have
of leading in suicides for the nation.
the author of
life in prison
one of' the
with any rereading about
of Utah numbers 75%

statistics
speak for
capita than any other
end in divorce to top
the unique distinction
ipaie
ilson
ontriIs as
need
betic
s is
re'n
of
hom
'ditor
your
aint,
most
e not
uled,
eled
. and
led
fact
men
ords
964
Either you haven't read your church rooks Mr. Due, or

they are different from mine. You no doubt have the edition
of the Book of Mormon with over 1,000 changes from the originals printed.
The Mormons were driven and persecuted
but you don't tell why.
You don't mention they were an
arrogant, intolerant,
non-lawabiding
class of people, who
when in Illinois and Missouri, stole and killed and performed
all sorts Glf diverse acts, and when brought beforetheir own
advocate Judge Joseph Smith, were told they had done nothing wrong. Joseph Smith is hailed as a martyr, yet he shot
three men before he was killed and then jumped to the window
of the jail and gave the masonic distress signal.
I wonder
why he didn't pray?
By calling themselves
Latter Day
Saints shows their rabid audacity.
In the Discourses.
of Brigham Young he states that Utah

was green and fertile and the grass was up to the horse's
knees - does that sound desolate.
Speaking of your Articles of Faith, how about the one that
states, "man shall be punished for his own sins and not for
Adam's transgressions".
What about the Negro, condemned
clear back to Cain and even now can't hold the Melchizedek
priesthood, the highest calling- in the Lord's church.
At the
dedication of the $7,000,000. Oakland temple, held the week
of November 16,1964, David O. McKay was asked by a reporter about the role of the Negro in the church and he is
reported as saying the Negro will not hold the priesthood in
his (McKay's) lifetime or the reporter's.
Strange, isn't it, he
knows beforehand if the Lord will give out a revelation.
While we are on the subject, have you ever lived in Utah
amongthe saints] have you had to rub shoulders with these
people, picked up the Lord, who wear the garments of the
JOOsthigh? Have you tried to rent an apartment or had your
diildrai sent home crying because
they belonged to the
wrong church, or no church; have you had any business
dealings with them? Have you seen the arrogance and crust
whm they come from a meeting in which they have just been
toldthey are the Lord's chosen anoi nted and they are going
Baltimore,
Maryland 21218
to rule the whole world, and

Have you been on a mission
gone out and told the people
repent and join the church or
and vent his wrath?
all others will row before them?

when you were just 19 years old
they are living in sin and better
God will with hold his blessings
They claim the church was established

by God himself,
through Joseph Smith and it is the one and only true church,
and all the others are just pretending.
The whole thing
hinges on whether or not Joseph Sm'ith had a vision. If God
was so hard up as to pick a visionary fanatic like Joseph
Smith, it is no wonder these superstitious
frightened mortals
believe this phoney jumble.
There used to be 12 apostles,
now there are 13, and isn't it strange Mr. Due that even
though. David O. McKay, the president,
literally walks and
talks with God (the late Henry D. Moyle made this statement
in the last conference he attended before his death) he has
to go to a hospital and be treated by mere men and have his
garments removed, even though they are there for protection.
Another bizzare thing about the church is money. If you
are a member but don't pay your tithing, you are not a member
in good standing.
It is surprising how many Mormons are on
State Welfare because the church refuses to help them. A
member can't go in the temple of the Lord unless he is a
good tithe-payer.
That tithing receipt is the passport to
heaven.
It is strange the Lord is so interested in money.
There must not be any in heaven.
The missionaries
tell people the anointed serve for nothing or a bare minimum.
Would you call McKay's. salary of
$12,950,00 annually from Beneficial Life Insurance Company
alone, which is the only one reported as paying taxes of the
numerous enterprises
he is either president or director of,
nothing or a bare minimum. And likewise, the other12 or 13?
Being a bishop is a coveted job too. As soon as he is picked,
the Lord showers him with blessings,
such as a certain percent of the tithing and expenses
incurred and he also becomes a psychiatrist,
counselor
in money matters and he
gets to advise all the young women, plus all the prestige and
worship.
Nice, huh?
Making an "ally" of your church is one of the most wayout statements you made. Mr. Due. Anyone not a member of
L.D.S. church and especially those who have heard the message and rejected it, have an apostate spirit and are of the
devil and free-thinkers
should be annihilated.
How about
asking an "official"
of the Mormon church for claims made
against them, or even of their own theories.
I made a few
myself, such as the Negro problem and polygamy.
I was
told not to delve into such deep doctrine, that answers to
those questions would be revealed later. Jerald Tanner who
wrote, "Mormonism"
a most up to date documented, factual
book on Mormon theory, asked some questions
and the replies he got were they were not interested, or the information
Page 49
was not available.

These letters are reproduced in the book.
He was even threatened
with a lawsuit if he printed the
information he did get.
I coul d go on and on. but from your letter you don't really
know enough about the church and you no doubt wouldn't understand, because I am an atheist and have the spirit of the
devil.
Incidentally,
why are you reading the atheist magazines?
It seems the Improvement Era, Relief Society
Magazine, or even the Childrens
Friend would be more
appropriate for you.
You may certainly
This nonsectarian
organization
is being honored
its humanitarian
activities
and its contributions
the American way of life. Its multi-service progr
touch every strata of our society and place it in
unique position.
Due to the nature of the Salvation Army's activiti
we in the Department, and the Stamp Advisory
mittee, feel that the issuance of this stamp in no
infringes on the principle of separation of Church
State.
print my name, Mr. Cree.
Sincerely
G. June Williams
Salt Lake City, Utah
Dear Editor:
I have today written Joseph Lewis re that matter of a
stamp to honor the Sal vation Army; perhaps a protest from his
organi zation and from ours will get this thing stopped in its
tracks.
It is a Commemorative stamp and is due for issuance
sometime this year.
yours,
Ira Kapen stein

Special Assistant to the
Postmaster
General
I have recently gotten several letters in different ne
papers protesting
issuance
of this commemorative s
That Kapenstein's
statement "that " ... the issuance of
stamp in no way infringes on the principle of separation
Church and State" is ridiculous, consider the following Ie
of mine appearing in the Durham Morning Herald, Saturd
January 9, 1965:
Salvation Army Stamp

To the Editor:
Mr. Kl inkert - the atheist politician in Wisconsin suggested to me that we seek an opinion of the office of the Attorney
General in D. C. re the honoring of a blatantly religious
group like the Army who believes
in "salvation"
of the
"soul"
and being "washed in the blood of the savior" and
other such bull - and who attempt to proselytize
with all
their might and use their humanitarism works to accomplish
same.
Perhaps a coordination of our efforts
might do it, or what do you think?
with those of Lewis
In reply to my protest to Ira Kapen stein, Special Assistant

to the Postmaster
General, I received the following letter:
Mr. Law ence C. Roush
P O. Box 1694
Wilson, North Carolina
27894
Dear Mr. Roush:
Thank you for your letter of December 27, 1964, concerning the stamp announced for issuance this year
to mark the 100th anniversary of the founding of the
Salvation Army.
I question the good judgment of the Post Office

partment
in their decision to issue a comrnemorati
stamp in 1965 honoring the Salvation Army lOOth
niversary. Several days ago the AP carried a news
lease to this effect and the department
therein refer
to the Army as being "nonsectar.an."
using this te
obviously to soften the impact. Even the most nai
student of religions knows that it is not nonsectari
nor is it nonreligious. The Red Cross is, of course, n
sectarian ...
but the Salvation Army definitely is n
The central theme of the Army is the doctrine
"salvation"
of "souls,"
preaching
that this is G
cure for man's "sins." It is true that it has done
great amount of humanitarian
work. But then, so h
the Quakers, Mormons and Seventh-Day Adventists
al, though perhaps theirs has had less efficient pr
coverage. The Salvation Army has as its principal
jective the spreading and perpetuation
of its own
culiar superstitions.
On these grounds the Post Offi
Department
is setting a dangerous precedent in
mitting our secular government to become an unwitti
media through which the Army can be assisted in .
program of proselytizing
and propagandizing. What
to prevent other religious groups from asking, jus'
ably, for commemorative
stamps to honor them a
The idea of a stamp to honor the Army of "salvati
is ridiculous and ought to be anathema to our see
government.
I would like to register, with this Ie
my vehement protest against this forthcoming acf
Wilson
Page 50
for
1S to
[rams
in a
A similar letter to a number of metropolitan newspapers

on our organization's letterhead and signed by you as president might be useful.
Lawrence C. Roush
P. O. Box 1694
Wilson, N. C. 27894
ties,
Com-
way
I and
Baltimore,
These letters are now being prepared and will be sent

shortly. We encourage others to register their protest with
the office of the Postmaster
General, Washington,
D. C.
20260 and in their local newspapers.
The Editor
Maryland 21218
Since Atheism is a belief that there is no God, and God is

only a mythological being, then I see no other choice but to
become a Humanist, in which Man would be the highest order
of the animal kingdom and be able to make his own life without the aid of a mythological God.
For myself, I have found Man the most wonderful, interesting and in some cases the most powerful entity I wish to
deal with. I have seen Man do most of the things that religion has contributed to God, and with the proper education
and t raining anyone can acquire a forceful and living belief
in Man himself, without all of the dogmas of the church.
I have found that the teachings of the Sages all say the
same thing whether it be Buddha, Confucius, Krishna, Jesus
or Mohammed. "Man Know Thyself".
Donald G. Tilton, President,

Dear Editor:
amp,
this
n of
stter
day,
De-
live
If you must change the name of the magazine, please do

not make it the Free Humanist. That word "Free" makes it
sound like some cheap backwoods journal containing ads for
trusses and cures for hemorrhoids. That name proved unsuccessful once - I don't know why it should be any better
the second time.
I would like to see it named The American Humanist.
This gets across the goals of the organization that you mentioned and it also contains a note of patriotism which will
always look good.
anrered
Paul King
Bedford, Massachusetts
.rrn
.ive
'ian
.on-
Dear Editor:
Was very glad to gee you are going to change the name of
your magazine, but want to express a negative vote for the
name you proposed in the October issue.
Free Humanist infers that the "other" humanists are not
free. This may be so, but I don't care for the inference.
Freethinker infers that organized religions are not free to
think in matters religious and this is so. Websters New World
Dictionary College Edition gives a very good definition of
freethinker I think. As for me, don't know what I am. I
accept the appelation "fuzzy minded liberal" or Pseudo
intellectual"
as put forth by my fasci st buddies at work.
Bob Fleming
Brecksville, Ohio
lot!
of
l's
! a
rve
et
ess
obpe-
ice
ering
its
is
ifi:o?
n"
'ar
"Scientific Psychical Research"

Merced, California
Dear Editor:
As a recent subscriber to your magazine, but an old timer
where a discussion of religious beliefs are concerned, I want
to commend you for your decision to change the name of your
magazine to "The Free Humanist". There is no doubt that
the use of the name 'Atheist' cuts deep into your fmances
and If I may say so the word God could as well be called
something else.
To use the word God today is just 01cJ,..
fashioned and only sends more people away from you. Since
the word God came down from heathen mythology some
6,000 years ago and my dictionary says that it means Energy,
Spirit or any deified person or object. why not superimpose
another word on as much of your magazine as possible, and
make it a more Scientific and educational organization.
Dear Editor:
I have been following the correspondence and letters
concerning the title of your magazine with much interest;. and
I had been intending to write to say that it might be ve
good policy to change its name back to The Free Humanist.
I see in the latest issue that you are now inclined to do this
and I most sincerely hope that this will become its name a
soon as possible.
Martin Larsoi
Phoenix, Arizon
iH
1964
Page 5
"('he American Atheist,
Dear Editor:
Just got the October issue and glad to see we are still
going strong. I hadn't heard anything from Baltimore since
August-September issue and didn't know if we were still in
rosiness or not.
I'm pleased to learn that the magazine is going back to
the old name "Free Humanist"-although I think its' original
name way back with issue #1 was even better - the "Freethinker". That's what Lou Alt called it when he first started
the magazine. It's true that I'm an atheist, but I see no
sense in using that name for the title of a magazine. By using it we put up a brick wall that prevents many people from
even reading it.
If I might make another suggestion.
I find the present
size of the American Atheist cumberson, and I'd like to see
us return to the smaller format. Maybe we didn't get as much
in the rook, but it was easier to handle and store.
Ralph S. Blois
Loves Park, Illinois
Baltimore,
Maryland 21218
And so, I am sure after changing the name everyone eo

cemed will benefit by it.
Arthur Gol'
Minneapolis, Minneso
Dear Editor:
The name The Free Humanist stinks!
Freethinker.
Recommend
The decision has been made.

"The American Atheis
will be renamed "The American Freethinker".
It will c
tinue to be "A Journal of Freethought Refuting the Dogma
Tradition and Religion."
It will be published bimon
, instead of monthly; however, the total amount of mater'
: contained will be the same, if not greater, as before. S
scription will continue at $5 per year.
The first issue fi
January-February
will arrive around the end of Febr
Improved regularity can be expected.
Dear Editor:
Today, I finally received the October issue of the American
Atheist.
In one of your articles you stated that you deem it wise
and necessary to discontinue calling the publication The
American Atheist.
It is the smartest move you can make. If you recall, sometime ago I asked you to ship 25 copies of the American
Atheist to a news stand here in Minneapolis.
Certain clergymen or religious brainwashed people noticed
it and put up a howl! The result: They were sent back to
you I presume.
of
This
space
the
"American
for advertisements
Over a year ago, I got this same news stand started with
the Humanist that is published in Yellow Springs, Ohio.
journal
I do know that they sold about 40 copies per month and am

sure a lot of the purchasers subscribed direct to the publishing house.
.
ments interesting.
I like the words American Atheist, and am not afraid nor

ashamed tk let people know that I am an atheist - and why I
profess atheism. However, it does hurt some people where
it hurts the most - in the pocketbook.
Atheist".
and the advertisements
is a standard feature
This
is
will reflect
a free thought
this - AND
NO OTHER - philosophy.
We encourage advertisement,
eueti solicit it. We think you will find our advertise-
~--------------
Rates
are 20 a word for per word advertisement.
Block advertisement
is sold at the rate of $100.00 per
page (fraction of page - % page or over - priced pro
portionally
at per page rate.)
BELIEVE
ne con-
OR
BURN!
God published a tale of a girl and a ghost,

Ot devils in pigs and His son on a cross,
~nd ordered our race to believe it or roast FOR HIS MERCY ENDURETH FOREVER!
Freethought paper, sample free:
r Goldie
APPEAL TO REASON
nnesota
(Steve Wagner, Editor)

1590 Fremont Dr.,
Thousand Oaks,
California 91360
BARGAIN: Amusingly profound freethought quotation

of famous philosophers. (Voltaire, Thoreau , Niet . sche
Darwin etc.) Nicely printed on durable 31,4x5W'cards
Perfect for display, stimulating conversations, uniqu
post cards etc. Sure to delight any freethinker.
20 for $1.00 - all different
50 for 2.00 - all different
100 for 3.00 - all different
John W. Webster
P. O. Box 1829
Milwaukee, Wiseons
nd The
READ THE RIPSAW (BIMONTHLY)
Goltz
consin
Atheist"
vill con)ogma of
iimonthlv
material
Subissue for
reo
A FREETHOUGHT
Sample lO.
Mrs. Ruth Krause, 1487 Nostrand Ave

Apartment 4 A, Brooklyn, New York 11
would like to contact Freethinker me
She is 38 years old, divorced, no chile
PAPER
THE RIPSAW
P. O. Box 3002 Sta. B
South Bend, Indiana
.~=-------------------------------~
Tebruory,
Ie Editor
Octogenerian Pearl Cline has donated her "Mourning for

DumbMankind" to our organization. It is an excellent
and stirring Freethought booklet of poetry. You can help
our organization by buying this book from us for $1.00
The price is right. Freethought Society of America,
2502 North Calvert Street, Baltimore, Maryland 21218.
ATHEIST, FREETHOUGHT, PHILOSOPHICAL, EVO

TION SCIENTIFIC BOOKS, Greatest list in history. I
32-p. catalog. Atheist, freethought leaflets, massive st<
35 different mind-openers, $1.00. Closeout list, atheist, j
thought scientific books, many are, out of print. 24-p. I
free. Truth Seeker Co., & Superior Books, Box 2832
Diego, California 92112.
"The Perpetual Calendar" Post Card. Designed to inform

the public of the advantages of this secular calendar originated by Dr. Willard E.- Edwards. 1O/ card under 50, 5/ card
over 50.
. AND
Freethought Sooiety of America

Street
~ment,
Dear Sirs:
~ature
tough:
ertise-
2502 North Calvert
I am enclosing my contribution
of $1.00 to our organization.
Please send me GREAT AMERICANS DISCUSS RELIGION and Thomas

Paine's AGE OF REASON.
ement.
.00 per
~d pro-
Send to:
Name:
---------------------------------------------------------------
Address:
City
State
Zip Code
ENGLISH HISTORY
When Queen Elizabeth first heard of the fork

Often dined with Earl of Essex not York
Said she, my fingers get so messy
I'll keep them more dressy
I'll use it with my beef, lamb and pork.
Said she, this invention is surely a great feat
More civilized, more refined and more meet
Priest told her must not do it
If she did she would rue it
God gave her fingers with which to eat.
So goon young Queen Bess was restrained
From eating with a fork she abstained
Although she could feast
Was under the priest
Till she died, eating with her fingers rem ained.
Although father had changed sacrificial thesis
Reduced all monasteries to small pieces
Sacrifice of the mass
Still very highest class
Ate the flesh, drank the blood of her Jesus.
My guests now each is using a fork
But the champaigne I still can uncork
My fingers are a mess
No more I'll confess
I will never be visited by the stork.
To die an old maid is my lot
Against bad faiiry Queen Mary I must plot
I will never marry
No heirs I will carry
My throne then will descend to a Scot.
Old England is not big enough for two queens
She will scheme for my throne, she is keen
It is her head or mine
Her pope is divine
She will never bring him back, 'twill be seen.
Freethought Society Of ~\merica

2502 Horth Calvert Street
Dear Sirs:
To virgin Mary I'll continue to pray

My own chapel is right here by my way
I respect my dear mother
Never was such another
They will keep me from going astray.
Joseph
E. Nutter, Octogenarian
~~~-------------
THE CHRISTMAS MYTH
In ancient Roman times December 25 was the festival of

the winter solstice.
It was the time when the days grew
shorter because the sun was at its furthest point either North
or South of the equator.
Since it was the custom of the conquering Romans to
adopt the religious holidays of the countries they had conquered to the same date as theirs and vice versa, Christ's
birthday was celebrated at the winter sol stice and so it came
to be that both concurring factions of religious thought, the
Romans with many Gods and the Christians with their one
God melted their customs into one with the course of history.
Dispelling various myths about Christmas, Reverend
Francis L. Filas, Chairman of Loyola University's theology
Department, said: "Joseph would have been unbelievably
hard-hearted and stupid to have taken his pregnant wife on a
four-day, 90-mile donkey ride so close to the anticipated
birth of the child. Mary would have been an unbelievably
irresponsible mother to make such a trip,"
Refuting the scripture's account of the birth f}f Jesus
during the winter time, Father Filas said: "Shepherds do
not watch over their flock at night except in the spring, the
time of the year when lambs are born.". (Compare, "shepherds abiding in the fields, keeping watch over their flock by
night-Luke 2:~) Story on Father Filas contained in the Los
Angeles-Herald-Examiner for Saturday, December 12, 1964.
So there! And a very merry Christmas and Happy New
Year to the friends and subscribers of the Freethought
Society of America. Thank you for bearing with us as we
manage to catch up in our publication efforts. Hopefully
1965 will see improved publication regul arity since we shall
publish bimonthly instead of monthly.
The Editor
Make checks
payable
FREETHOUGHT
SOC., OF AM., (for subscription)
or OTHER AMERICANS, INC., (for OA membership
or Legal Fund donation,)
I am interested in your organization and activities and desire the following:

_________ one year1s subscription to your magazine for which I enclose 05
_______ one year t s membership in OTHER AMERICl\NS Inc. for which I enclose 012
____
to simply contribute to your LEGAL FUND of Other .Wlericans for chur
state separation, enclosed ~
_
Date:
N~:
~D~S~:
CITY
STATE
Zip Code

American Atheist Magazine Nov/Dec 1964

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

American Atheist Magazine Nov/Dec 1964

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

MEIICAI

Vol.6: No. 11 and 12

(Picture from the Denver Catholic Register for January

Aware that a substantial part of the "War on Poverty"

THE FREETHOUGHT SOCIETY OF AMERICA. 1Ne.

Publisher . 1MF. FREE1MOUGHT

SOCIETY OF AMERICA, INC.

GUSTAV BROUKAL FREETHOUGHT

The American Atheist is published monthly 11 months

The American Athe ist,

LOWER COURT RULING AGAINST

Baltimore, Maryland 21218

the exemption does not result in the establishment of

The American Atheist,

Baltimore, Maryland 21218

MADALYN E. MURRAY, Trustee, and

CIRCUIT COURT NO.2

The prayers for relief were that:

The American Atheist,

Baltimore, Maryland 21218

1. Article 81, Section 9(4) of the Annotated Code of Maryland

The Original Defendants

Section 9(4) of the Maryland

Code and from granting

taxation under that Section.

3. The Original Defendants be directed to include upon their lists of

used for public worship

and the grounds

and any ~arsonage

to such houses, buildings

which are not used for religious

public worship, and

The Original Plaintiffs

The Court permitted

may have other and further relief.

Defendant. These were the Roman Catholic Archbishop

Church in The Diocese

the United Christian

and the Maryland

Lutheran Church in America.

Lemoin Cree and Marie Cree, his wife, and Free-

thought Society of America to intervene

comment later in this Opinion.

The Original Bill of Complaint

suit filed by Mrs. Murray,

on their own behalf

They allege that they are citizens

"State") and of the City of Baltimore

of the State of Maryland

1526 Winford Road, Baltimore

(the "City") by virtue of their ownership

It is then alleged that the Original

have various duties in

The American Atheist,

Baltimore, Maryland 21218

and invalidity under both the

The acts of the Original Defendants contravene Article 36 of the

Declaration of Rights in the Maryland Constitution as they in direct effect compel

These acts and prac'Uces violate Article 15 of the Maryland Declaration

The American Atheist,

These acts, practices

Baltimore, Maryland 21218

and statutes violate the First Amendment

Constitutiol: of the United States as made applicable