The Sun.
London, England, 1841-11-15 00:00:00

Monday, he was busy picking oakum Was
that a punishment to inflict upon a Shop-
keeper of Edinburgh for such a paltry of-
fence? Was it not a well-known fact that hun-
dreds of respectable people went into druggists'
shops on their way to church to piJrchase
lozenges? Why, then, did these gentlemen not
prosecute Mr. Duncan and Flockhart, and Mr.
Baildon, and Mr. Butler? Why did they not
shut up the New Club, and the United Service
Club ? The fact was, that those self-righteous in-
dividuals were fast bringing Christianity and the
Gospel of peace into contempt and hatred. For
his own part,- he would rather be an infidel than
the prosecutors of this poor man on such a
miserable charge, and under such circumstances,
that his. poor child would, in all human proba-
bility, be dead before he came out. It might be
a short road to the eldership to give information
upon this poor man; but he doubted very much
ifit was the quickest way to Heaven.-.-(Hear.)
Mr. BANKS also expressed himself strongly
against the oppression v►hich had been practised
in this case.

Mr. MACAULAY said, that 'when he first saw
this case mentioned in the newspapers, he
doubted if it really could be true; but he had
since made some inquiry into the case, and he
must say, that never in the whole course of his
life had he heard of one more iniquitous than
this. He agreed with Mr. Robertson that the
persons who countenanced such prosecutions
were doing great injury to the cause of religion.
Why, where was the great heinousness of the
case ? Was purchasing sweeties on Sunday any-
thing so very rare ? He was satisfied that even
the Lord Provost ate sweeties on the Sunday ;
but whether they directed his attention away
from the sermon or not he could not say.—
(Laughter.) Was it not a fact that many gentle-
men were in the habit of buying lozenges as they
went along to church ? For his part, he must
confess to having done so. He supported the
motion of Mr. Renton.

Mr. GRIERSON wished the case had been of a
different description before such exorbitant
charges had been incurred. He was perfectly
astonished to find that a minister of the Church
of Scotland had gloried in his place in the Pres-
bytery that he had prosecuted a poor man under
such circumstances, and had boasted that it
would be a long time before the man would be
able to pay the fine by selling sweeties. Shame
be to the man whose lips could utter such a sen-
tence l—(Hear, hear.) Could they not have got
some other case than this, if they must prose-
cute? Were there not hundreds of public-
houses open in the district, out of which they
could have got a strong case, the prosecution of
which would have been sanctioned by public
opinion ?

The LORD PROVOST could not allow the ques-
tion to be any longer discussed, without entering
his protest against the charge of tyranny and
oppression having been exercised against this
man for keeping his shop open during Divine
Service. He could not shut his eyes to the fact,
that it was a crime both by the law of God and
man to buy and sell during Divine Service on
Sunday. It was reported to the Magistrates,
that the keeping open of such shops was a grow-
ing evil, and one which ought to be remedied.
It was not wished that more rigour than neces-
sary should be used; but it was thought that as
this man kept his shop open exactly in front of
Mr. Guthrie's church, setting at defiance, as
it were, all moral feeling, he should be made
an example of. Mr. Macaulay had asked him
whether he did not occasionally eat sweetmeats
himself on Sunday.—(Laughter.) Perhaps he
did; but certainly he did not purchase them on
the Sunday. Some gentlemen had talked of
apothecaries' shops, as if they were on the same
footing as the shop of this man. There was
a great distinction. Human life might often
depend upon a druggist's shop being open
on Sunday. If such a daring and wilful
violation of the law of God, however, were not
put down as the one in question, all reverence
for the Sabbath w ould soon be lost. He could
not go along with the feeling of Mr. Robertson,
who certainly spoke as he always spoke—strongly.
He hoped, however, that in this case he had
spoken more strongly than sincerely, when he
said that he would rather be an infidel than en-
gage in punishing the violation of the Sabbath.
Mr. ROBERTSON—I said rather than have been
guilty of persecuting this man.
After some further discussion, the Council
unanimously agreed to the following motion,
suggested by Mr. Loa•an:—" That the proceed-
ings in the case of the Procurator Fiscal against
Butters, for the profanation of the Sabbath, to•
gether with .the Fiscal's account of expenses,
should be laid before the Lord Provost's Com-
mittee, witbi a-view to'determine whether or not
it was a case inwhich the Fiscal was entitled to
make any charge in the shape of fees."