The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1904-12-03
OBSERVANCE OF SUNDAY.

were evidently, without pretense OF
cant, deeply religious, and the fact thai
There are such men in the Rapid Tran
sit service is a convincing proof of ex-
lcellent management. Both of them APP
proved of the most rigid enforcement
of the Sunday law, and further claim
ed that motorrnen and conductors had
the same right as other people to at
tend church, and, as a corollary, that
the service ought TO be suspended on
the Sabbath.
| This Introduction brings to mind a
prevalent error, from which excellent
American citizens are not free, and
that is the illogical intermixture of
religious with legal questions. The
government of the United States and
every state and Territory within its
limits are powerless, and rightly pow
erIess, to enforce religious observances,
or to interfere in. any manner with the
conduct of any citizen on Sunday or
week days, except to the extent that
the safety and comfort of the COM
n1unity are affected. There is no re-
ligious establishment in the United
States, where church and state are and
always have been entirely separated.
1t is this fact that has almost exter-
minated bigotry and intolerance, and
has enabled, it may not be said rival,
but competing, church organizations to
exhibit an almost unparalleled growth.
The rapid approach towards unity on
essentials. common to most forms of
worship, and the elimination of nom
essentials, is chiefly attributable to this
fact Our institutions have done more
towards the development of human
brotherhood. founded on the recogni-
ton of God and the moral law, than
all other forms of government COM
bfned. The result can be witnessed in
this Territory and in every part of the
mainland. One of the most noticeable
features in Honolulu, for instance, is
not only the absence of discord, but
the positive harmony between religious
bodies that differ widely in their
theologies and practices, but agree
upon those points that civilization it.
self treats as fundamental and of
transcendent. importance.
In the matter of Sunday observance,
apart from the features that touch the
body polite as a whole, Christian or
CARNATIONS are widely separated.
Some, while insisting upon public wor-
ship, are not opposed to but favor
and enjoyments that, from
the American or legal standpoint, may |
be classed as innocent and harmless. |
Others are more rigid and exact from |
their followers much stricter lives. |
Some believe in an exact ,Sabbatarian !
ism. Others are more liberal or more |
lax. Works of necessity are very linn |
tied in the estimation of some and |
more extended in the opinion of others. !
If the state could interfere in these
matters, to the extent that they affect |
only individual or social tconduct, end |
less discord would be the result and
the Eighteenth would replace the
twentieth Century, !
The provisions In the Federal Con-
stitution, which relate TO the subject
here discussed. are short and worth |
noting.
In Article s, Clause 3, it is provided:
mo religious test shall ever be requir- |
ed as qualification to any Office or
public trust under the United States"
The First Amendment declares: |
Congress shall make no law respecting |
an establishment of religion, or pro-
hibiting the free exercise thereof
The Bill of Rights in each state con- |
tains corresponding and even broader |
provisions. The subject has been dealt |
with in hundreds of decisions through |
out the Union and by our greatest |
jurists and law writers, such as Story, |
Cooley and Field, and it has become |
indisputable that neither Congress nor |
any State or Territory can interfere |
with the manner of keeping Sunday, |
except in those respects in which all !
religions are unanimous and which |
practically affect the people at large.
The subjoined extract from the case of
Watson VS.. Jones, decided by the Su-
preme Court of the United States. is
powerful in thought and rich in express
sion: In this country the full and free
right to entertain any religious belief,
to practice any religious principle, and
to teach any religious doctrine which
does not violate the laws of morality
and property, and which does not in
fringe personal rights, is conceded to
all. The law knows no heresy, is com
mitted to the support of no dogma, the
establishment of no sect
A special argument. arising from our
form of government and from +be