Mr. MORRILL. The argument assumes that that thing may occur. Now, there can be no such case as the honorable Senator supposes possibly happening. No jurisdiction at all attaches unless the child is destitute or vagrant or abandoned by the parent. If he has Catholic parents who have the custody and care of him, the law does not attach; no jurisdiction whatever attaches. When a case of des titution or vagrancy or abandonment does occur, and the law has the child in custody, my objection is to the interposition of any person on a sectarian ground interfering with the charity which the law has established for such a child. And I maintain that the condition of the child, its health, its education, its physical comforts are 1,000fold above the consideration which may be attached to any sectarian view whatever, and I resist at the threshold any attempt to interpose a sectarian claim against the general supervision of the State over the health and the condition of the child. Nothing could be more pernicious than such an interference. This is not a new question exactly. Here, upon a measure of general legislation that is independent of sect, which proposes to distribute the public charity for the general comfort and health of the entire community, without regard to sect, we have an attempt of a sect, I will not say for sectarian purposes I do not pretend to say that these people are not sincere and sincerely desirous of doing every thing, perhaps, for their own people that this bill proposes; but I should like to know whether it is a well settled principle of this country that any sect has a right to interpose its sectarianism against the general policy of the law..If it is a general policy of the law to provide for destitute and abandoned children in this way, I object to the interposition of any church or any sect upon any such ground. This is not a new question. It entered our schools in one section of the country. I think we had better keep it out of the schools. I thought so then, when that controversy went on, and i.regret to see it renewed here. It is a renewal of the old question. No sect in this country is privileged to interpose its authority for sectarian purposes against that policy which the law lays down to be sound for the public weal; and we are legislating now for the public weal. I do not wish to use any language which I should be sorry for afterward; but I was about to say that I think it particularly offensive that any sect should feel authorized to object against the establishment of such general policy on the ground that it would not be favorable to that particular sect. Sir, I deny that any sect or denomination in this country has the care especially of any portion of our population. I would be liberal, and the legislation of this District, I think, so far as I have had any connection with it, will show that I have totally disregarded any sectarian considerations. I would as soon confer this upon one sect as an other; still I hope I shall never fail to resist any attempt on the part of any particular sect to interpose its authority against general pol icy. And now I take occasion to remind my honorable friendfrom Maryland that those for whom he speaks here have not always been quite as disinterested I am afraid. I remem ber at their solicitation to have granted a charter which is absolutely exclusive in its character, which authorizes them to take within their jurisdiction children into an institution over which we have no power of visitation even, and there is no limitation in that authority to any particular sect; they may go any where, take any child that is destitute and without care. that they should be confined exclusively to those of their own particular religious faith; but the honorable Senator will find that by the provisions of that charter they are at lib. erty to go where they please, without regard to sect or denomination or the particular religious faith of the child, wherever they find destitution and want to relieve it; and we did not authorize any individual or sect to interpose against that authority. That is the principle which lies at the bottom of this public policy relieve suffering, relieve destitution and want wherever you find it to exist really; but you must find it to exist; you must either get the There was no suggestion then consent of the parent, or if you cannot get that, you must find destitution or want actually existing. In such a case relieve it, and allow no body for any purpose to interfere. That is the principle upon which this bill proceeds.