ployed, must be done _by permission_,--by the voluntary consent,
whether tacit, or openly expressed, of those by whom he is employed.
This of course confines him to what is, generally, common ground, among
his particular employers. In a republican country, where all his patrons
are republican, he may without impropriety, explain and commend to his
pupils, as occasion may occur, the principles of free governments, and
the blessings which may be expected to flow from them. But it would not
be justifiable for him to do this, under a monarchy, or in a community
divided in regard to this subject, because this question does not come
within the objects, for the promotion of which, his patrons have
associated, and employed him,--and consequently, he has no right, while
continuing their teacher, to go into it, without their consent. In the
same manner, an Episcopal teacher, in a private school, formed and
supported by Episcopalians, may use and commend forms of prayer, and
explain the various usages of that church, exhibiting their excellence,
and their adaptation to the purposes for which they are intended. He may
properly do this, because in the case supposed, the patrons of the
school are _united_ on this subject, and their _tacit consent_ may be
supposed to be given. But place the same teacher over a school of Quaker
children, whose parents dislike forms and ceremonies of every kind, in
religion, and his duty would be changed altogether. So, if a Roman
Catholic is entrusted with the instruction of a common district school,
in a community composed of many Protestant denominations, it would be
plainly his duty to avoid all influence, direct or indirect, over the
minds of his pupils, except in those religious sentiments and opinions
which are common to himself and all his employers. I repeat the
principle. _He is employed for a specific purpose, and he has no right
to wander from that purpose, except as far as he can go, with the common
consent of his employers._

Now, the common ground, on religious subjects, in this country, is very
broad. There are indeed, many principles, which are, in my view,
essential parts of Christianity, which are subjects of active
discussion among us. But setting these aside, there are other principles
equally essential, in regard to which the whole community are agreed; or
at least, if there is a dissenting minority, it is so small, that it is
hardly to be considered. Let us look at some of these pr