The Newtown bee., 1907-03-22

To the Editor of The Churchman's:
 I cannot but think that the Rev MI eously reported in the account which you give of his remarks in your paper of January 4, but if not so much the worse for MT Mckenzie.
 The "pilgrims" of Plymouth were a much more moderate people than the ''Puritans' of the Bay Colony. Capt Miles Standish was one of the most trusted and respected of the pilgrims, but was never a "member of the | Church. In "the Bay' he could not have held any place whatever for that | reason.
 Our ancestors of the Bay Colony were a very noble people, but, like most others, they had great weakness es. What they did for the cause of civil liberty is renown sufficient for the men of any one generation, and that renown will not be increased, but has been rather dimmed, by such ab- surb claims as that they were "the most liberal people of modern times, ]" or that they preserved Christmas. In their day there was no such thing as religionists who had power to control matters as they pleased and as to Christmas the record is as follows:
 Under the date of May II, 1859 c'Records of the Colony of Massachu- setts Bay in New England,' Vol. ",
 
 enacted: "For preventing disorders arising in several places within this Jurisdiction, by reason of some still observing such festivals as were super stitiously kept in other countries, to the great diShonor of God and offence of others, it is therefore ordered by this court and the authority thereof, that whOsoever shall be found observ- ing any such day as Christmas CT the like, either by forbearing of labor, feasting, or any other way, upon any such accounts as aforesaid, every such person so offending shall pay for every such offence five shillings, as fine to the cOuntry.'
 It is quite probable that this law may have been especially aimed at M able house at Noodles Island and cele brated Christmas boisterously, perhaps with the firing of cannon as well as bounteous cheer; but this law was passed in the later years of the protec torate, when the law of the colony was certainly not in opposition to the ideas of the ruling power in England.
 The very next year, however, was that of the Restoration, and Charles the Second was king. In 1865 Samuel Maverick was in America as one of four royal commissioners charged with wise the colonial governments, and on the 24th of May, 1865, these commits l in a letter to the general court | of Massachusetts,g gave memorandum | of twenty six changes which they pro- | posed. in his majesty's name, to be | made in "Book of General Laws and | Liberties concerning the inhabitants l of the Massachusetts, among which l was the following:
 't15. That, page the same 1881, the l penalty for keeping Christmas, being | directly against the law of England, | may be repealed" (Vol. ", Part II, page 212).
 This and other demands of the con- were afterwards renewed | by the Board of Council for Trade | and Plantation, MT Solicitor and Mr1 A ttorney General" but it was not un- til sixteen years after the first demand | that hesitating and reluctant sub- | was made by the order of the | general court, May 27, 1881, by their l ordering "the law against keeping | Christmas to be left out," (Vol. V, l page 322). Even then they would not | repeal it in terms.
 THOMAS J. PARKER.
 Boston, January g, 1879.