, 1883-10-25
Sunday Repeal Law.

Brooks, Copley, Goodell. Hungate,
Laudrum, Lloid. Miles, Ping, Stitzel,
Speaker; absent, Blackwell, Warner
1t will be brought up again in an
other form Mr.. Kuhn advocated the
measure in the following remarks:
Mr.. Speaker. the object Of law Is TO
protect liberty and secure morality.
These objects are indispensable, and
the people that We are here to repre-
sent favor each, and the question for
Us to consider is how best to secure
both, with the least sacrifice
There was = time when our legisla
lures were disposed to brush away all
plea on behalf of liberty as buncombe,
but that day has passed, and the
work Of all legislatures should be to
develop a people capable of self
government.
An honorable small body Of men,
possessed with large ideas of how
others should spend Sunday, framed
and passed a law, the provisions of
which is to compel the citizens of this
Territory to conform to such ideas on
the subject. and the bill now under
consideration contemplates the re-
peal of that law, which for two years
has been on our statute books, and of
its results you, gentlemen, we'll know
Has it been a success? Has 1t met
with favor anywhere, by any class!
Is is respected or its provisions en-
forced? And is it desirable to have
it remain? We think not, and, there
fore, urge its repeal. First, because
it is not safe in thereby, and because
it is in violation Of the fundamental
principles of our government; and
again, because it is class Legislation,
and against the poor, in favor of the
rich. That honorable small body of
great men who enacted the Sunday
law were pleased TO tell us that in
this free land of ours the liberties of
our people could not be trampled on,
and that this act would protect the
poor man in all his rights, equally
with the rich; and that it was made
the special duty of all officers to see
its provisions enforced.
This bill should pass, because it re-
peals law that is unsafe in theory,
and in violation of the fundamental
principles of our government, mas
much as it attempts to interfere with
the vested rights of all American citi-
zens by specially providing how they
shall spend Sunday. As we'll attempt
to fix by Legislative enactment what
our citizens shall think, speak or
read on Sunday, or what they shall
wear on that or any other day. Such
enactments are beyond the reach or
power of constitutional Legislation,
and whenever such legislation ie at .
tempted, it must OF necessity fail of
enforcement IL our people cannot
be trusted with such rights they
should not be trusted with the GOV
ernment regarding the lives, property
or liberties of the people. Another
reason why this theory is not safe and
why it must ever be Ineffective, is:
because it is not, and never can be i'm.
partial, but must always be subject to
bias. The law which this bill is ia.
tended to repeal is unfaib because it
is class legislation Of the worst type.
The advocates Of the law, tell us that
as it now stands it closes the doors Of
business places, saloons and grog-
geries on Sunday and requires men
to abstain, one day In seven; but is
that so? We think not; and why ?
Because its provisions are partial, and
in favor Of the class who can have
all the liquor that they desire sent to
their rooms at hotels, or served at
their meals, and against class whs
cannot afford such luxuries. IT is a
question between a bottle for a dol
lar and drink for ten cents. Can
anything be more unjust, unfair, and
partial, and hence of necessity in
effective, than u law that provides
that a saloon in hotel may sell its
commodities all the day Sunday, and
the business place or saloon next door
must close its doors? Is there any
justice in such enactmentsi Do the
friends Of the law imagine that there
is court of justice anywhere in this
Territory, or in any part of the na-
ton, that would hold the provisions
of such law as the one we seek to
repeal constitutional? Iii Justice to
them we viii say they do not. Then
why, Mr.. Speaker, should it remain
on our statute books? Why continue
this farce OF closing the front doors
and admitting all customers by the
back doors? Did I hear some one
say, THAT is giving 1t away!" Never
fear, there is no need for that; for in
their wisdom that small body of
honorable men, who gave us this law
made provision that it should be the
special duty 81 all officers to make
complaint OF any violation thereof.
And again, that provision is one of
the worst features of the existing
law, and opens the door for the Of
ticers to levy blackmail by closing the
front door of the place of business,
for there are at least some officers
that can be persuaded that they are