The Brattleboro daily reformer. (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1913-1955, 1919-09-29
Parsons and Puritans.
(Rutland Herald.l

1t has been stated with some acer-
bity that the ministers who began the
big row about Sunday baseball in Brat
tleboro did not act on previous games be-
cause they were on their vacations. 1t
was added that the devil usually never
takes vacation. Outside of the com
things. it is probably true that minis
tiers are much like yoters-more or less
spasmodic in their attack.
That game after game had been
played in Brattleboro on Sunday with
out protest is no more remarkable than
the fact that the voter sleeps on the
job for q year at a stretch and then
complains because the men to whom he
delegates public business. do not do so
well as they ought.
The Herald's objection to these per
iodical ~ ministerial erusades r. against
Sabbath violation-and it is violation,
according to the LAWS that they are
not conducted with any regard for pub
lie sentiment or with any proposal of
common ground on which all lawabid-
ing and orderloving citizens can meet.
In connection with the Brattleboro
affair, it has also been noted that a
| ministerial lobby has always opposed
amending or repeating the Sunday law,
| taking the probably impossible ground
| that it should remain on the books and
| be literally enforced. This also is prob.
ably contrary to the majority opinion
of Vermonters today and is certainly
calculated to excite bitter class antag-
onisms if it were seriously enforced.
Law is the expression of the peo-
pies majority will, and no law will
ever be respected that is imposed upon
people contrary to that majority's sen
! timent. This is practical view of the
| problem that has never seemed to ap.
| peal to the parsons and puritans, whose
| interpretations of Sabbath sanctity are
| based on their own conceptions of bib
/ zeal y-interpretations which
are not shared by their brethren of tht
| Roman Catholic church, for instance, OIL
1 by very large proportion of church
members and members of church socie
ties, or by those unaffiliated with the
churches, constituting, as the Herald
believes, the majority of our citizen
ship.
/ If, therefore, the present Sunday Law
is not respected by the majority of tn
voters, by what right do our legisla
tors refuse to modify or amend it? TIL,
answer lies in the ministerial ant
churehly lobby, which makes relig
ious issue of it and practically 'tdares'
the legislator to go on record in favo
of what they call can invasion of tn
/ New England Sabbath. Thus, if tn
, previous reasoning is correct, they sue
ceed in forcing legislatures to continu
on the statute books of the state a Law
which is repugnant to a majority of it
people-clearly an act of public and of
, fetal hypocridy much worses in TIL
Herald's opinion, than playing ball o.
Sunday.
In this connection, The Herald doe
not need to take ground for or agains
the right or wrong of playing ball, gol
or marbles on Sunday or of pursuin
any business which has become pan
, tial necessity through custom and cor
' venience. 1t is straight question o
: public honesty which is raised and
| should be fought out on its merit
without any moral or religious coel
cieR on the part of the parsons or tn
puritans.
S As 1t shapes up from the Brattlebor
y case, 1T is not question of morals c
religion but of popular government.