Evening star., 1961-12-24
Sunday CIosino Law

Congratulations on your
December 16 editorial, I'm
enforceable Blue Law" AS
you say. it certainly would be
ridiculous to leave such a
confusing law on the statute
books. The Sunday closing
law is somewhat like the tar
If in that it is supported by
the Virginia Retail Merchants
Association to curtail the
competition from large drug
department stores and dis
count department stores. The
association is composed of
5000 members. of which
about 1000 have five en-
ployeS, or less, and since they
are unable to compete eff
GENTLY, they run to the State
government for protection.
which takes the form of a
Sunday closing law rather
than protective tariff.
President Kennedy has pro-
posed a retraining program
to ease the adjustment for
industries that are unable to
compete with the European
Common Market, and per-
haps a similar program
should be set up for small
retail merchants. but a Sum-
day closing law is not the
answer. Let us stand by the
principle of free competition
and the open market. Wide
open Sunday selling is high
ly desirable and would be
supported by a majority of
the people if there were a
referendum on the subject.
One reason the Republican
candidates for the House of
Delegates carried Fairfax
County was because they
forthrightly indorSed repeal
of the Sunday law.
Charles w. Cobb, Jr.
\ * x
Because large numbers Of
consumers do not like to feel
that their rights" are re-
Stricted, there is naturally
much criticism of the Sun
day closing law. However,
many of these folks forget
that there are a substan-
tial number of other people
who also have a stake in the
closing law. Perhaps a short
review of its background
would be helpful.
The beginnings of the law
in the latter part of the 18th
century are obscure, though
the original enactment prob
ably had something to do
with religious observance. AS
time passed, however, it be-
came a social law to insure
a day of rest for those who
work. This fact is made
quite clear by the proviso
that if an individual observes
the seventh day of rest, then
he may work on Sunday and
no one can object.
Until 1860 the wording of
the law was quite simple. It
stated that no work could
be done except "in house
holds or other works of ne
cessity or charity" There
were often minor exceptions.
In my judgment the law
would have been better if it
had been left as it was.
The amendments we're
made at the 1860 session,
however, in response to a
Statewide demand, largely
from retail merchants asso-
Citations, Chambers of Com
merce, some labor groups,
and a few religious organi-
cations, although the latter
were very much in the mi
nority. The reason for this
demand for Tightening day
of-reSt laws is, incidentally,
not confined to Virginia.
Over 40 States have passed
similar laws for similar
reasons.
These people wanted the
law clarified so everyone
would know what was not a
work of necessity" They
wanted the law clarified be-
cause they wanted it en-
forced. They wanted it en-
forced because the problem
of Sunday operation was be-
coming a most serious social
problem. Unlimited selling
seven days a week was be-
ginning to become the GUS
tom in many sections of the
State requiring large num-
berS of people to work alb
normally long hours, at in
creaSing costs which were be-
ing translated into higher
prices for the consumer.
All of the amendments in
serted for clarification we're
not perfect; some were a bit
ridiculous, at least to me.
They need to be reviewed