The daily morning journal and courier. [volume] (New Haven, Conn.) 1894-1907, 1902-12-15
REV. DR.. SMYfH'S SERMON.
rTTIL ORDER ESTABLISHED IN
THIS COLONY IN 1880.

THIS COLONY IN 1889.
All People Then COassttu.ed One Class -
| There Was Civic Order bus Nos Or.
sanizatson SgIthta the Civic Order
striking Contrast with Present Com
dlsion-"Ciass HostIlttiss ahs Tares
whtch the Enemy sovvs in the Har-
vest Field OF Democracy"
The following is summary of DR.
smyth's sermon at Center church yes
: terday morning:
, Romans Is. II: Now I beseech you,
brethren. mark them which are caus-
ing the divisions and occasions of
stumbling, contE~ry to the doctrine
which We learned: and turn away from
| Them"
In the year 1888 all the free planters
OF this colony met In John Newman's
barn to establish such civil order as
might best conduce to the securing Of
the peace and purity Of the ordinances
! according to God" For my present
| purpose I do not call your attention to
! the fact that the first vote ever passed
in this town was unanimous, or that
our town government was established
according to God; ask you to note
this fact that at that time, when this
i town was founded, all the people con-
| stituted one class. There were natural
! differences between persons, but there
were no divisions between classes:
| there were no organizations Of men ac-
| cording to their trades, or segregations
| into social groups. There was at the
! beginning organization of the civic or
der, but not organizations within the
civic order.
| Not quite hundred and fifty years
later, in 1874, another town meeting
was held in New Haven. There were
then four churches on the Green, with
some ecclesiastical differences, and two
political parties, the Wings and the
+ Tories, besides the so-called "1ndiffer-
ents" or "F'lexibles." And there was
that day "a great struggle between
them" Organization of men into dis
| tinct groups within the community had
! begun; but there were no organiza-
tons of men by their trades or for
their class interests among the people
who then lived together in 466 dwelling
houses, and did their business and
gathered their harvests in 10S stores
and 1924 barns and shops.
| Now at the beginning of the TWEEN
tieth century. a hundred and more
years later, one of the most striking,
! yet usually overlooked contrasts with
the past, is the extent to which organi-
cation has been carried within the COM
munity. A powerful principle has been
working through the years to separate
men into classes, to segregate people
into distinct social groups, to form So
cieties, sets, clubs, unions by trades,
and various fraternities for the mutual
/ benefit of their members. The striking
feature of this development is not the
increase of population, but the hetero-
geneity of it; not the aggregate of our
prosperity, but the disintegration of So
! ciety through the internal organization
of its own elements and parts. Two
othe facts render still more significant
this paradox of the Reorganization Of
society through the separate organiza-
ton Of the parts. One is the increas-
ing difficulty of mutual understanding
between the different groups. Each Is
coming to have it's own dialect instead
of the common speech. DR.. Smyth
glanced at the illustration Of this fact
in the university world. where special
studies and sciences are separating
educated men into groups who do not
read the same books, think the same
thoughts, or seem often to write even
| the same English language. Besides
the difficulties of mutual understanding
and aid which may result from the iso-
lation Of various social sets DR. Smyth
referred to the labor-union world,
| within which the ruling ideas and sem
tlments are not our words concerning
economics, humanity or independence;
but leaders in that world are governed
by ideas which have grown out Of
their experience, and which it Is not
always easy for us to understand apart
from their industrial experience. The
other fact Of great moment is this;
tion and the labor union world has, or
tends to have, its own code of ethics.
The president of the largest labor fed
GRAFTON in this country, Mr.. Gompers,
referred to this fact in his reply to
Archbishop Irelands penetrating ques-
ton concerning the relation of union to
non union men.
DR. Smyth proceeded to show that SO
far as these moral codes of the separate
groups or unions related to the conduct
of the members toward one another, or
the interest of their class, they present.
ed many admirable features; many in
stances of individual sacrifices and even
Of heroic endurance for the good of the
class may be cited from the history, for
instance, of la bor-unionisn1. But here
We face another element of the prob
lem; what is the moral conduct of any
one class towards the other classes?
Granting that the moral code within
the group or union may be excellent,