The record-union., 1891-02-13
MORE SUNDAY Law.
Another Correspondent Expresses His
Views.
Arguments Why the Legislature
Should Not Pass the Pro-
posed Bill.

EDS. REcoBD-UNIoN: Allow me lit
Tie space to notice the question of q. Sun
day law, which is now before the Legis-
lature of our State. If this is question
to be left to the viii of the people, we
have only to refer to the contest between
the Republican and Democratic parties
few years ago over this question, when
the people decided against the Sunday
law, and the Republican party that had
allowed it to be placed in their platform,
by giving Democratic majority of over
1900. If the Republican party desire to
see another party come into power at the
next election, let the present Republican
Legislature pass Sunday law But
regard the question as one of greater mo-
ment than the rise or fall of any political
party. 1t is question of right. Is such
Q law In harmony with the principle OF a
free Republic land of liberty? Is it i'm
accordance with justice?
The United States Constitution saws:
congress shall make no law establishing
rehglon or interfering with the free exer-
else thereof" This is the true principle
OF religious liberty. To avoid this the
advocates for Sunday law will say. as did
Mr.. Thomson at the NJ. E. Church South
last Sunday night, that it is civil Sab
path" Every one ought to know that
keeping a Sabbath has nothing to do with
clyliity. A man may work, ride, hunt or
Iish all day Sunday and be just as civil as
the man that does none of those tbings
but attends church; the difference, if any'
is purely religious one. The keeping
or bookkeeping of a rest day has NOTHING
TO do with being civil. Mr. Thomson
admits this by all his arguments For
instance, he says: Such as Christ made.n
The Christian Sabbath" Again he
SAWS. ''lha Stnrplx Sc,
r inclined and who would like to attend
church on Sunday is prevented from do
ing so by his neighbor, who keeps omen
on Sunday, thus forcing the other to do
SO or lose his share of the trade. The de-
sire is to protect the one bv co,nneIlino
the other to close"
what does he propose the law for? To
protect the religions inclined from civil
competition i'll trade? May not the man
go TO church without any Sunday Ia,yp
Certainly, but his neighbor does not
choose to go, but chooses To pursue his
civil occupation, which is his civil right.
Inc Sunday law proposes to deprive him
OIL the civil right in the interest Of those
religiously inclined. Suppose there was
aSeventh-Day Adventist, Jew or Bap-
tist Keeping store in the place, and de-
sired to close it on Saturday, being 'sre-
hgiously inclined" Well. they san. .slet
him do So" But is he not entitled to n
law to protect him? He certainly has as
much right to demand a law to compel
his competitors in trade to close their
places of business when he wants to 90 to
church as they have to compel him to
close when they want to go. Then the
Jew has as much right to demand law
10 compel ali places of business closed on
The days OF atonement or other davs con-
nected with his religion, when he desires
to close his place of business. Thus it is
easily seen that Sunday laws, instead of
being civil are the reverse of that, and de-
pr1ye people OF their civil rights.
MI. thomson argues that because the
first article OF the United States ConstittI-
lit ION allows the President of the Uuited
States ten days in which to consider bills
passed by Congress, Sundays excepted. ;,
therefore our fathers enacted a Sunday
law" we are willing Mr.. 7. should
leaves the President at full liberty to