Skip to main content

Full text of "Political Science Of The State"

See other formats

CONFEDERATIONS.                                  221
posed. This project, when submitted to popular vote after
having been first discussed by the chambers in 1869, was
rejected by a slender majority of 5,511, and by thirteen out
of twenty-two cantons; the Catholic cantons and the canton
of Vaud (Lausanne) being decidedly opposed to it. The pro-
ject tended too much towards centralization (" unitarisme ")
to please the older and smaller cantons, and the new matter
bearing on religion was not suited to please all Catholics.
There was also a plan, ugly-looking and in principle false,
although not very dangerous, of a popular veto introduced
into the constitution to the effect that " federal laws and
resolutions, not urgent in their nature, are submitted to the
people for their adoption or rejection, if the demand to have
this done proceed from 50,000 active citizens, or from five
cantons." In regard to matters of religion the federal coun-
cil (bundesrath) proposed the following article: "Liberty of
conscience is guaranteed. No one can be disturbed in the
exercise of his political and civil rights on account of reli-
gious opinions, nor be constrained to perform a religious act.
No one is bound to pay imposts, the product of which is ap-
propriated to the expenses, properly so called, of a religious
confession or corporation to which he does not belong." By
this article, if adopted, a canton could no longer oblige a
citizen to baptize his children, nor to submit them to religious
and confessional instruction, nor make them go to the first
communion ; the citizen who refused to perform certain reli-
gious actg could no longer be put under a guardian; every
one could marry without religious forms ; he who would not
take an oath could neither be punished nor excluded from
civil employments.* As a sort of compensation, ecclesiastics
could be chosen into the chambers from which article 64
of the constitution of 1848 excluded them. But the Cath-
olic feeling and a dread of too great power in the federal
constitution were sufficient to cause the rejection of the re-
vised instrument, and the first cause acted with the more
* Remarks of A. Morin (u. s., iv., 226),