72 MINUTES OF THE SYNOD OF THEhonestly endeavoring to find the truth and to come into closecontact with the life, teaching, character, and requirements <strong>of</strong>the Lord Jesus. We fully realize there is a true s<strong>of</strong>tening <strong>of</strong>the heart. To us it is one <strong>of</strong> the greatest signs, which inspiresus with every possible hope. Thus we realize there has beenprogress and fruitage. There are opportunities before theChurch <strong>of</strong> Christ, and the Church cannot afford to halt for amoment."The Board asks the <strong>Synod</strong> this year for $3,000.00. The secretarywas appointed to represent the Board before the CoordinatingCommittee and S. E. Greer to represent the Board onthe floor<strong>of</strong> <strong>Synod</strong>.The terms <strong>of</strong> F. M. Wilson, R. W. Duncan, Dr. SusanWiggins, John Calderwood, and Mrs. J. T. Mitchell expire withthis meeting <strong>of</strong> <strong>Synod</strong>, and their successors should be appointed.Respectfully submitted,FRANK L. STEWART, Secretary.The Committee on Obtaining Citizenship for CovenanterAliens, Item 22 <strong>of</strong> Unfinished Business, reportedthru its Chairman, F. M. Wilson. The report was adoptedand is as follows:REPORT OF COMMITTEE ON OBTAINING CITIZENSHIP OF ALIENSCircumstances seemed to make it unnecessary to call a meeting<strong>of</strong> the Committee. Late _ in the year 1928 the chairman <strong>of</strong>the Committee, accompanied by Robert Clarke, went to Washingtonto interview the Department <strong>of</strong> Citizenship. Having procuredintroductions, we appeared at the department and had afriendly and satisfactory interview on the entire subject. Welearned that the law <strong>of</strong> our nation requires applications fornaturalization to be made and decided upon in the Federal orState District Courts.The Department at Washington has no part in the procedureuntil the papers come up to the Department to be issued underinstructions from the Federal or State District Court.The Chairman <strong>of</strong> your Committee was assured that if thecourts pass an application for citizenship, there will be no oppositionto the issuing <strong>of</strong> the papers by the Department <strong>of</strong>Citizenship in Washington.Respectfully submitted,J. S. Martin submitted FINDLEY the report M. WILSON, <strong>of</strong> the Chairman special committeeto answer the question submitted by Dr. H. L. Smith<strong>of</strong> Bloomington, Indiana. The report was adopted as awhole and is as follows:
REFORMED PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH 73AN ANSWERTo the queries propounded to this <strong>Synod</strong> in the memorandumsubmitted by Pr<strong>of</strong>. Lester H. Smith, <strong>of</strong> our Bloomington, Indianacongregation:While a number <strong>of</strong> questions are raised in the memorandumbrought to this <strong>Synod</strong> by a member <strong>of</strong> the Bloomington, Ind.,congregation through the session <strong>of</strong> that congregation and theIllinois Presbytery and by the <strong>Synod</strong> referred to your Committeefor answer, they are, in the judgment <strong>of</strong> your Committee,all included in the following question which was numbered Ein this memorandum:E. Since the Covenanters registered, by refusal to vote,their disapproval <strong>of</strong> the refusal by the Constitutional Conventionto insert in the Constitution a recognition <strong>of</strong> God and <strong>of</strong> HisChrist, should they continue this form <strong>of</strong> protest when theSupreme Court <strong>of</strong> the United States, which has become the interpreter<strong>of</strong> the meaning <strong>of</strong> what the people desired to expressin their Constitution and laws, has said that this is a Christiannation ?Preliminary to the direct answer to this question we wouldhave you note that neither the value <strong>of</strong> political dissent as ameans to an end nor what should or should not be terms <strong>of</strong>ecclesiastical communion are raised in this question. The onething we are asked to determine is whether the decision <strong>of</strong> theSupreme Court referred to is, in effect, the achievement legally<strong>of</strong> that which we aimed to achieve by our position <strong>of</strong> politicaldissent. With this said by way <strong>of</strong> introduction we would answer:1. The decision <strong>of</strong> the Supreme Court referred to in thememorandum is what is generally termed an "obiter dictum"decision; that is, a decision not <strong>of</strong> the real question at issue,but a pronouncement that would help to a right decision <strong>of</strong> thatquestion, which question was, whether the Act <strong>of</strong> Feb. 26, 1885,"to prohibit the importation and migration <strong>of</strong> foreigners andaliens under contract or agreement to perform labor in theUnited States," applies to a contract between an alien minister<strong>of</strong> the Gospel residing out <strong>of</strong> the United States, and a religioussociety known as the Holy Trinity Church incorporated underthe laws <strong>of</strong> the state in which this society was located. Thedecision <strong>of</strong> the Court was that the Act was meant merely toprohibit the influx <strong>of</strong> cheap unskilled labor into our countryand that it could not possibly have been the intent <strong>of</strong> Congressin enacting this statute to prevent the maintenance <strong>of</strong> the Christianreligion in our country, since ours is a Christian nation.Whatever bearing, therefore, this pronouncement or "obiter dictum"decision, so called, may have on the character <strong>of</strong> our nation,and it admittedly has a bearing on it, in the very nature <strong>of</strong> thecase it cannot have the weight that such a decision would have,meant religion dhism, had not this 2. the the Mohammedanism, The case in nation a the only before Christian United sense Christian the nation. in States court or which any was been is other Christianity that court false direct the rendering dominant, religion. one rather <strong>of</strong> whether than The prevailing decision unde- Budor