Evening star., 1896-03-02
SUNDAY REST BILL
A Hearing on It by the House Dis
trict Committee.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION
Several Speakers Present Reasons
Why 1t Should Not Pass.
OTHER LOCAL MEASURES

The House District committee gave q
hearing today on the Sunday rest bill. This
BILL introduced by Mr.. Morse of Massachu-
setts, provides as follows: ffr@-ai'~
That on the first day of the week, known
as the Lords day. set apart by general con-
sent in accordance with divine appointment
as day Of Test and worship, 1t shall be
unlawful to perform any labor, except
works of necessity and mercy and work by
tfose who religiously observe Saturday, If
performed in such a way as not to involve
or disturb others: also to open places Of
business or traffic, except in the case of
drug stores for the dispensing of medicines;
also to make contracts or transact other
commercial business; also to engage in
noisy amusements or amusements for gain,
or entertainments for which admittance
fees are charged: also to perform any court
service. except in connection with arrests
of criminals and service of process to pre-
vent fraud.
See. 2. That the penalty for violating any
provision of this act shall be fine of not
less than $40 for the first offense; for sec
ond or subsequent offenses. a fine not ex-
ceeding $40 and Imprisonment for not less
than ten nor more than thirty days. and
one years forfeiture of license. if any is
held by the offender or his employer
Sec. =: That this act shall take effect upon
its passage.
Some Objections Stated.
Mr.. Allen Moon of Washington objected
to the bill as being distinctly religious in
character and violative of the provision of
the Constitution, in that it creates re-
lisious establishment. 1t prohibits the free
exercise of religion and the rights of other
classes to worship.
Mr.. Remsburg of Kansas. vice president
ci the Secular Union of America, said this
b:li is of Importance to people in other
cities. 1t is far-reaching in it's operations.
1t establishes a dangerous precedent. 1t is
an entering wedge for religious Legislation
10y Congress. This nation as founded by
the fathers is purely a secular nation 1t
was not founded on the Christian religion
IflS bill is not in support of the Fourth
commandment. which is divine law en-
tlrely. but is rather opposed to it. That
&C mmanGnent refers to The seventh day.
and that is the day called Saturday. The
week contains but seven days, and the
tlrst day of the week is Sunday.
Gen. Birney's Argument.
Gen. William Birney of Washington said
he Is d strict Presbyterian. and believes in
religion as conducive of good order. How
ever, he l. convinced that an ecclesiastical
government is the worst which can rule a
nation. Most of the prosecutions in his
tory were conducted by men extremely con-
scie;itious and anxious to convince Their
fellow mea of the necessity of salvation
rms Dill IS but preliminary move OH
the part of those people who desire to es-
tabllSh the doctrine of God in the Con-
Stitutlon. The bill is a crude one 1t was
prepared by Clergyman of the class
above mentioned At the outset the l.:lI
makes statement of fact that is vigorous
~ contested, TO wit, that the first day
Is the Lords day. 1t is not for Congress
tc say what day the Lord set apart for
His own day. The bill sets apart this .iay
as DAY Of rest. and history does not show
mat II was ever used as a day of rest.
II may have been used as a day of wor-
snip. he would advocate abolishing Sun
day, but would let people alone to do as
they please on Sunday. The old law of
maryland as to Sunday in the District is
IN force, but is not enforced. because it is
llnnract!cable. To enforce this bill would
prevent man from having cup Of hot
conee on Sunday morning, because the
COOK could not work; he could not get a
morning paper. could not ride on Il street
car. and preacher. who works har.i On
Sunday and works for money, would be
debarred from preaching. The bill .hakes
peaceful town on Sunday, and there is no
call for this bill.
What the Bakers Want.
Mr.. NJ. J. Bishop representing the Bakers,
Assembly, Knights of Labor, favored the
general principles of the bill, although not
approaching it from religious stand
to operate for their relief. because it is not
necessary for the community that they
should labor on Sunday
would you advise stopping the street
cars on Sunday asked Chairman Bab-
cock.
No. and the bill does not go to that ex-
tent replied Mr.. Bishop.
When asked why the bakers do not regu-
late the matter for themselves he said it
would be better to relieve the s,uatlon by
Lori III
Bishop said the bakers could prepare
enough bread ahead to last over Sunday
so 1T would not be necessary to work on
that day.
Mr.. Samuel p. Putnam, president of the
American Secular Union opposed the bill
on account of its religious character. The
bill is of national Importance. He presented
arguments on the same line of those urged
by MIR. RemSburg He said Congress has
no right TO recognize the Divine appoint
ment of Sunday. The bill is not only a
religious bill. but Il sectarian religious bill.
The hill puts too much power in the hands
of one man when il says that the judge of
the court shall decide what is religious
observance of Sunday. If the Judge decides
in favor of any one class of Christianity
his decision is Sectarian.
Rev. Mr. Howard Favored the Bill.
Rev. w ]. Howard of the Sunday League
and a Baptist pastor favored the bill. One
evil it is designed to correct is the enforce
ment of contract labor in the streets on
Sunday. Colored laborers are often re-
quired to work on Sunday by threats of
being discharged if they refuse
Rev. Mr.. Howard was asked what class
of labor he would permit ON Sunday.
He said hotels. railroads. the mails and
telegraph companies should be operated.
How about the street carS:' asked
Chairman Babcock
"Oh. they ought to run: / use them ny
self. replied MIR. Howard, amid the laugh
ter of the spectators.
4 Religious Measure.
MIR. W. A. Croffut, representing the Secu-
lar League of this city, said his league
would favor protecting the workingmen
but the pending bill would not accomplish
the design. There are existing laws which
Will do this. No one would attempt how
ever. to enforce the extreme law. but some
one might try to enforce the law proposed
by the pending bill.
Mr.. Croffut opposed the bill on the
general grounds of it's being religious
measure and in opposition to the spirit of
the Constitution. He hoped the day would
come in the District. as it has come in
Ohio. when it will be lawful to make con-
tracts on Sunday.
This bill ought to be entitled a law to
promote quarrels," said Mr.. Crofflt. TT
would simply tend 10 put 1t in the power of
busybodies to annoy their neighbors by
petty prosecutions