The Hawaiian gazette., 1877-12-05

substantially in accord with them on this ques-
ton, comprise the vast majority of all the in
habitants of this Kingdom. We may like it
o: not as we choose, but the fact remains never
theless, and it is useless to deny as it is fool
ish to ignore it. If any persons are disposed
to deny our statement on this point, we would
take the liberty of calling their attention to
the results of every attempt that has ever
/ been made in the Legislature to either abolish
/ or materially amend the present law, and par
ticularly to the last experiment that was tried
/ in that line and what came of it. The occur
renee is comparatively recent and no doubt
! quite fresh III the minds of many of our read
ers We need not remind them of the action
the Legislature took in the premises.
! Let us now look at the law as it stands, and
see wherein, if at all, it is faulty, and what
improvements, if any, would be expedient.
AS is probably known to most of our readers,
all the Legislation on this subject now existing
in the Hawaiian Kingdom is contained in what
is known as Chapter XXXV of the Penal Code
and consists OF six sections OF these, section
2 contains the whole spirit and substance of
the law and IS the only one calling for any
special discussion. Section forbids the dis
turbance of "any religious assembly or assem-
bly, for religious worship" and provides the
moderate penalty of fine not exceeding fif-
teen dollars or Imprisonment for not more
than thirty days for the offence. We presume
no decent person whatever will object to the
propriety of such an enactment, or desire to
see it repealed We think, however, it might
be well if the law allowed a somewhat heavier
penalty for wifu! and aggravated cases of this
offense. Section 2 being the one which con-
tains the whole pith and marrow of the act,
and the one from which the other sections are
but logical and necessary deductions we will
give it in full 1t is follows: The
Lords day is taboo. All worldly business,
amusements and recreation are forbidden
on that dav; and whoever shall keep open
his shop, store, warehouse, or workshop, or
'' shall do any manuer of business, labor or
"work, except only works of necessity and
= charity, or be present at any dancing, pub
Z" lie amusement, show or entertainment, or
" Lords day shall be punished by fine not
exceeding ten dollars"
Section 3 prohibits the keepers of hotels,
inns, billiard saloons, etc., and retailers of
spirituous liquors, from entertaining persons
other than travellers on the Lords day, and
in short, except for the purpose of providing
for the wants of the travelling public, closes
them up for the day.
Section forbids the serving or executing of
any civil process on the Lords day, and de-
clares such service or execution void.
Section requires the proper public officers
to inquire into and inform of all violations of
the law, and see diligently to its enforcement
Section defines the Lords day to mean
the first day of the week.
The third section, limiting and defining the
duties and privileges of innkeepers and keep
ers of public houses generally, though per-
haps little strict in its terms, is not essen
TALLY different from the laws on the same
subject in several States of the American
Union. We cannot learn that it works any
! practical injustice to any one, and do not see
that it stands in any especial need of amend
ment.
Sections 4, 5 and do not seem to us to re-
| quire any consideration at our hands. They
refer to certain matters of detail, which, if
Sunday is to be a legal holiday at all, follow
almost as matter of course.
Let us turn back then to Section and ex-
anime its provisions somewhat in detail,
"The Lords day is taboo" We do not al
together like the phraseology of this clause.
Instead of the "Lord's day." we should pre-
| fer to say the first day of the week, or Sunday,
while the word taboo 3" does not strike us
at all pleasantly; though perhaps in this
country and for this people, it may convey
the intended meaning as we'll or better than
any other one word. These however are minor
matters, and hardly worth dwelling upon.
Let lis then proceed with our examination
of the section. All worldly business, amuse-
"ments and recreations are forbidden on that
"day."
This appears to us altogether too general
and sweeping: it undertakes a great deal
more than any law can possibly accomplish,
which is always unwise, and it is moreover
Objectionable on the score of its indetiniteness
We suppose there need not be much doubt
about what constitutes worldly business"
but who shall undertake to say what is meant
by worldly amuselhents and recreations"
Is dancing, singing and playing Oh instru-
ments; are games of cards, dice, dominoes,
checkers or chess is walking, riding or driv-
ing, swimming, sailing or rowing; is laugh
ing, talking and joking worldly subjects
in short, what is and what is not rorIcly
amusement and recreation? Is it lawful to
ride to church but not to ride to friends
house? May we play on the melodeon but
not on the accordeonl Is singing Old Hun
dred legal and singing Old Dog Tray, misde-
meanor? Who shall decide these things?
The law is at fault, also in that it fails to
make any distinction between acts performed
in the most public and ostentatious manner
and those performed in the quietude and Sc
clusion of ones home between those which
annoy other people and interfere with their
enjoyment of the day as the Christian Sab