The Washington herald., 1912-01-29

gave an address on Judicial Religious
LEGISLATION" The speaker was followed
with deep interest by the large audience
present, who frequently gave open express
sion OF their hearty APPROVAL Of the prin-
ciples set forth AT the close OF Mr. Jones
address there was an animated general
discussion by a dozen or more members
of the audience. A unanimous vote OF
thanks was extended TO the speaker OF
the hour for his earnest work in behait
Of individual and constitutional renglous
liberty in the District or Columbia ana
throughout the nation. The speaker said:
The particular judicial religious les-
islatIon 10 which invite your attentlon
is that which has been enacted by the
courts in establishing Sunday laws In
the United States, against the Protestant
and Christian principle, and the Aneri-
can and constitutional principle, OF the
complete separation Of religion and the
civil power. For, beyond all question:
Sunday laws are religious laws, and TO
sustain them is decidedly to maintain
a union Of the religious and the civil
power
The History.
Sunday laws originated in that dark
intrigue between Constantine and the
bishops. when, N the language OF Draper
"It was the ambition Of Constantine
TO make theology a branch OF politics.
It was the hope Of every bishop in the
empire 10 make politics a branch OF
theology" The result was the original
union OF church and state, with the full
Sunday legislation was the key to the
Those original Sunday laws were spe-
cifically religious, and this 10 the express
exclusion OF every other considerat ton,
temporal, civil, or physical. When these
laws were extended TO. the strict prohibit
ton OF civil transactions of every kind
on Sunday" the penalty of "sacrilege"-
not crime-that WAS incurred by viola
tion OF the laws IS indisputable evidence
of the religious nature and intent OF
When. in A. d. 5sS, a council at Orleans
declared that what should be lawful or
clusively Of ecclesiastical Jurisdiction" IN
the nature OF things the penalty incurred
by disregard of the Sunday laws as de-
fined by a council at Macon, in Gaul, in
4. d. 5S5, distinguished these laws as
exclusively religious and ecclesiastical.
That penalty was the double and cumu-
lative one of, first, the wrath OF Cod,
and, second. the unappeasable anger OF
the clergy"
In England James l. as head of the
church and defender of the faith, by his
Book of Sports" relieved the people
from the extreme pressure of the Sun
day laws. Indulgence of the sports"
on Sunday became so excessive, that in
the reign Of Charles the justices of the
for a restraint OF the excesses. But
when the lord chief justice and another
judge issued an order to that effect they
were reproved by the archbishop, who
was sustained by the King. and were re-
uuired to revoke their order because II
was an invasion of the episcopal juris-
diction."
When those same Sunday laws OF Eng
land were extended to the English colo
mics in America and were intensified as
in New England by the Puritans. the eX
IRENE and exclusively religious nature Of
these laws was such as to cause them to
become forever proverbial. And in the
colony Of New York the Sunday law de-
clsred that the proclamation OF that day
was the great scandal of the Christian
These exclusively religious Sunday laws
or the colonies were inevitably the Sun
day laws OF the original States here. by
the TACT that within an hour July 4,
lif6l. those very colonies became these
States.
Decisions of state Supreme Courts.
Now the decisions of the supreme
courts of those original States sustain
those original Sunday laws on their orig
iEal religious grounds; and then to eVade
the constitutional prohibition of religious
legislation, in defiance of the funda-
mental maxim that ''the intent of the law
maker Is the law" these courts commit
the act Of judicial religious legislation
by declaring that those religious laws
are civil regulations"
This manifest straddling Of the issue
II is possible to make some allowance
for in those cases, from the fact that all
those original States except Rhode Is
land had established religions; and IL is
too much to expect that those courts,
even at the enormous expense OF judi
cial religious legislation, could make
clean break with tradition. But in the
cases of the later States II is impossible
TO make any such allowance. All OF
these were. Territories, and became
States, absolutely free from any govern
mental recognition Of things religious;
and in the clear light OF American and
constitutional religious liberty gained and
established under the splendid leadership
OF Jefferson, Madison, and WASHINGTON.
Thus the later States arose, having no
establishments nor any recognition Of re-
ligion, and with their constitutions dis
tinctly prohibiting any such thing. Yet
by sheer force of traditionalism, the Sun
day laws of the States that had estab-
the legislation OF all the later States.
whose true traditions and whose original
constitutions forbade any establishment
of religion or recognition Of things relig-
ious.
Here. then, is the genesIogy Of all the
Sunday laws of all the American States.
The Sunday laws Of the later States are
only the repetition OF the Sunday laws
Of the original States, which were only
the identical Sunday laws of the colonies,
which were the Sunday laws OF England.
which were the Sunday laws of papal
Rome. And from their original in Rome
TO their final in these latest States. in
every generation they have been nothing
else. than exclusively religious both in
origin and intent.
And yet, in the face of the principle
and provision of constitutions prohibit
ing such laws, and in defiance of the fun
damental maxim of law itself, the SUI
preme courts in all these later States
have made these Sunday laws 10 be con
stitutionaP' by giving TO them a foreign,
false, and unthought-of intent and mean
ing; said intent and meaning being
civil sanitary" and even pathological,
instead of what by every item of evil
dence in the case they are-exclusively
religious, originally, genealogically, theo-
logically. and logically.
In perfect illustration Of this is the
statement OF the Supreme Court Of Ohio
10 the effect that the Sunday law could
not stand for a moment in that State in
the presence of the principle of sapara-
tion OF church and state and the consti-
tutionai prohibition 'if its sole founda-
By the unanimous evidence Of history.
law. and fact. the sole foundation" OF
Sunday laws has always been religious.
The very statute which the Ohio court
code under the title OF ''Ohenses Against
ReIirion and Morality" Never in the
world was there enacted a Sunday law
with any other than religious intent. And
the intent of the lawmaker is the law
A law can have no meaning beyond
the intent of those who made IT," THE
law must be construed according TO the /
intention OF the lawmaker." Therefore, |
IN truth, in fact, and in law. the Sunday
law Of Ohio is unconstitutionsl; and this, |
that the Sunday law could not stand |
for a moment in the presence of the |
constitution, IF the sole ground" were
exactly what il is-religious.
and the maxims Of law. the court pro-
ceeded to legislate the Sunday law into 4