Hackett v. Brooksville Graded School Dist.

• Decision Date: 31 May 1905
• Citation: Hackett v. Brooksville Graded School Dist., 87 S.W. 792, 120 Ky. 60 (Ky. Ct. App. 1905)
• Parties: HACKETT v. BROOKSVILLE GRADED SCHOOL DIST. et al.
• Court: Kentucky Court of Appeals

87 S.W. 792

120 Ky. 60

HACKETT v. BROOKSVILLE GRADED SCHOOL DIST. et al.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

May 31, 1905

Appeal from Circuit Court, Bracken County.

"To be officially reported."

Suit by Thomas Hackett against the Brooksville graded school district and others.From a judgment of dismissal, plaintiff appeals.Affirmed.

Wm. A Byrne, for appellant.

E. L Worthington, for appellees

O'REAR J.

Appellant who resides in the town of Brooksville, and has children attending the Brooksville graded common school, brought this suit against the trustees and teachers of the school, seeking an injunction against the use of the English translation of the Bible, known as the "King James," or "Authorized Edition," and to prevent the teachers from opening the school with prayers or songs alleged to be of a denominational character.On full hearing the injunction was denied, and the petition dismissed.

To get at the exact question presented for decision on this appeal we will eliminate the allegation concerning worship of God by singing of sectarian songs.There was no proof whatever that any songs of any kind had been sung during the school year in which the suit was brought, nor was it either required or permitted.Whether it was permissible to have sung the songs complained of is not, therefore, a matter considered by the court.

Appellant invokes section 189 of the Constitution of Kentuckyandsection 4368, Ky. St. 1903, which read as follows:

"No portion of any fund or tax now existing, or that may hereafter be raised or levied for educational purposes, shall be appropriated to, or used by, or in aid of any church, sectarian or denominational school."Section 189, Const.

"No books or other publications of a sectarian, infidel or immoral character, shall be used or distributed in any common school; nor shall any sectarian, infidel or immoral doctrine be taught therein."Section 4368, Ky. St. 1903.

The Brooksville graded common school is maintained by the state by the imposition of taxes.It is open alike to all white children within certain ages who or whose parents are residents of the district.It is in no sense a sectarian, church, or denominational school.Section 189 of the Constitution was aimed not to regulate the curriculum of the common schools of the state, but to prevent the appropriation of public money to aid schools maintained by any church or sect of religionists.If the Constitution deals directly with the question of compulsory worship, it is in section 5, which reads as follows: "No preference shall ever be given by law to any religious sect, society or denomination; nor to any particular creed, mode of worship or system of ecclesiastical polity; nor shall any person be compelled to attend any place of worship, to contribute to the erection or maintenance of any such place, or to the salary or support of any minister of religion; nor shall any man be compelled to send his child to any school to which he may be conscientiously opposed; and the civil rights, privileges or capacities of no person shall be taken away, or in any wise diminished or enlarged, on account of his belief or disbelief of any religious tenet, dogma, or teaching.No human authority shall, in any case whatever, control or interfere with the rights of conscience."If, under the guise of public instruction, children should be required to attend schools where worship of God was compulsory, it would seem to be within the prohibition of that section.We find from the evidence in this case that, while chapters of passages from the Bible (King James translation) were read, and prayers were offered by the teachers at the opening of the school each morning, appellant's children, who are members of the Roman Catholic Church, were not required to attend during those exercises, nor were they or others who were conscientiously opposed to doing so required to participate in them.

Two questions are presented by the record for decision: (1) Does the offering of prayer to God in opening a school, such as was offered in the Brooksville school, make that school a "sectarian school," within the meaning of section 189 of the Constitution?(2) Is the King James translation of the Bible a "sectarian book," within the meaning of section 4368, Ky. St.?

The prayer that was offered, and which it is urged converted the school into a sectarian school, is as follows: "Our Father who art in Heaven, we ask Thy aid in our day's work.Be with us in all we do and say.Give us wisdom and strength and patience to teach these children as they should be taught.May teacher and pupil have mutual love and respect.Watch over these children, both in schoolroom and on the playground.Keep them from being hurt in any way, and at last, when we come to die, may none of our number be missing around Thy Throne.These things we ask for Christ's sake.Amen."It has not been pointed out to us wherein the prayer quoted is sectarian in its construction.The Reverend FatherJames A. Cusack, a witness for appellant, asseverates that, in his opinion, it is sectarian.But he admits that there is nothing in it repugnant to the doctrines of his religious belief (Roman Catholic).Nor does he claim that it is promulgated, authorized, or used by any sect of religionists whatever.As neither the form nor substance of the prayer complained of seem to represent any peculiar view or dogma of any sect or denomination, or to teach them, or to detract from those of any other, it is not sectarian, in the sense that the word is commonly used and understood, and as it was evidently intended in the section quoted.The constitutional convention, in framing the organic law for all the people of the state, must be presumed to have used ordinary words, not according to the peculiar views of a few, but as generally used.The word "sectarian," from the connection in which it is used, cannot be given the construction contended for by appellant, which seems to be that any form of prayer not authorized by a particular church is sectarian.

Though it be conceded that any prayer is worship, and that public prayer is public worship, still appellant's children were not compelled to attend the place where the worshiping was done during the prayer.The school was not "a place of worship," nor are its teachers "ministers of religion," within the contemplation of section 5 of the Constitution, although a prayer may be offered incidentally at the opening of the school by a teacher.Meetings of the General Assembly are opened by prayer, and other state institutions authorize the worship of God.They have never been regarded as fostering sectarian teachings.The complaint in this case goes only to the sectarian feature of the exercises, not because they were religious.It is not contended that it was the purpose of the Constitution to prevent worship, nor to prevent teachers in the public schools from assuming worshipful relations.The great aim was to keep church and state forever separate as distinct institutions; to prevent the government of one form assuming rightful control of the government of the other.Nor is it clear that it was intended to keep religion out of the school, though it is apparent that one aim, at least, was to keep the "church" out.The question is not presented, and is not, therefore, decided, whether any exercise which partakes incidentally of worship is prohibited.

The main question, we conceive to be, is the King James translation of the Bible, or, for that matter, any edition of the Bible, a sectarian book?There is, perhaps, no book that is so widely used and so highly respected as the Bible; no other that has been translated into as many tongues; no other that has had such marked influence upon the habits and life of the world.It is not the least of its marvelous attributes that it is so catholic that every seeming phase of belief finds comfort in its comprehensive precepts.Many translations of it, and of parts of it, have been made from time to time, since two or three centuries before the beginning of the Christian era.And since the discovery of the art of printing and the manufacture of paper in the sixteenth century a great many editions of it have been printed.There is controversy over the authenticity of some parts of some of the editions.And there are some people who do not believe that any of it is the inspired or revealed word of God.Yet it remains that civilized mankind generally accord to it a reverential regard, while all who study its sublime sentiments and consider its great moral influence must admit that it is, from any point of view, one of the most important of books.That it has drawn to its careful study and research into its history and translations so many profound scholars of history, is not to be wondered at.The result has been that, while many editions of the several translations have been made, those based upon the revision compiled under the reign of King James I, 1607-1611, and very generally used by Protestants, and the one compiled at Douay some time previous, and which was later adopted by the Roman Catholic Church as the only authentic version, are the most commonly used in this country.That the Bible, or any particular edition, has been adopted by one or more denominations as authentic, or by them asserted to be inspired, cannot make it a sectarian book.The book itself, to be sectarian, must show that it teaches the peculiar dogmas of a sect as such, and not alone that it is so comprehensive as to include them by the partial interpretation of its adherents.Nor is a book sectarian merely because it was edited or compiled by those of a particular sect.It is not the authorship nor mechanical composition of the book, nor the use of it,...