California a Storm-Center Just Now by W. A. C.

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Takoma Park Station, Washington, D. C. · Jan 28, 1909

California a Storm-Center Just Now

By W. A. C.

CALIFORNIA, as well as Washington, the capital of the nation, is a storm-center just now in the matter of Sunday legislation. A big battle is now on in that State over this question. The friends of Sunday legislation are unwilling that California should longer remain outside the fold. They are therefore putting forth tremendous efforts to wheel it into line, and hope for better success than they had two years ago. Referring to the campaign now on in this State, Elder J. O. Corliss, writing from Sacramento, the capital, says:—

“The fight this time will be the strongest and the hardest that we have ever had to meet, and unless the Lord gives wisdom and sustaining grace, the battle will be lost. A mighty effort is to be made. The W. C. T. U. is sending two of their brightest women to buttonhole legislators in behalf of their pet scheme. They said it was necessary, because ‘the Seventh-day Adventists are hard fighters; they have some good talkers, and their arguments appeal to the legislative mind.’”

Since the legislature convened January 4, three Sunday bills, and a proposed amendment to the State constitution making such legislation constitutional, have been introduced in the legislature. The promoters of this longed-for legislation knew that such a law as they desire would be useless without first securing a constitutional amendment, as such laws had been declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court of the State, and the last State Sunday law was repealed by the legislature in 1883. So the amendment has been introduced along with the proposed law.

Elder Corliss adds: “Strenuous efforts are being made here to pass these bills into law, because the friends of the movement are determined that California shall no longer be counted an alien in the matter of Sunday laws. When California swings into line, as they hope to have it do in this session of the legislature, there is no doubt that the national affair will come to the front, headed by the Sabbath Alliance, to have the general Sunday law for every State. Then the other States will be constantly amending their Sunday laws to make them more ‘ideal.’”

January 12 a bundle of petitions against Sunday legislation, which had been circulated by our people, bearing over 35,000 signatures, was presented in both the Assembly and the Senate. The Sacramento Bee, of January 12, under the heading, “Monster Petition Against Blue Laws,” referred to this matter as follows:—

“Names aggregating 35,535 were submitted to the Assembly this morning attached to a petition protesting against the passage of the Sunday Rest bill. The big petition was presented by Nat Coghlan, of San Francisco. This is the greatest number of names ever attached to any petition filed with the clerks of the House. The tens of thousands of names were attached to nearly as many petitions, and packed in a carton nearly two feet deep and long. The stupendous array of cognomens will not be published, but will be placed in the archives of the Assembly, to represent the work of the opponents of the Sunday Rest law. The names come from every county in the State.”

Exemptions for our people are made in both the principal Sunday bills introduced,—the one framed by Rev. G. L. Tufts, the Pacific Coast representative of Mr. Crafts’ International Reform Bureau,—and the proposed constitutional amendment; but we well know the value of such exemptions and why they are offered, and can not compromise ourselves and the truth by keeping silent upon the great issues involved in this conflict over the Sabbath question and the right to worship God according to the dictates of conscience, because of these apparent kindnesses and considerations shown us. In a letter addressed to Elder Corliss not long ago, Mr. Tufts said: “You need have no fear from this bill. I have framed it carefully. There is not an ecclesiastical or religious word in the bill. It is drawn for better citizenship only. We wish to secure the passage of the Sunday Rest law; and if you will agree not to circulate petitions, we will not do so. I am sorry we can not see the same regarding this law. I wish you could be convinced that the law would be an advantage to your church. This bill has been drafted with great care.”

But our people did not see matters as Mr. Tufts saw them, nor cease their opposition to the proposed Sunday legislation; so, in a sermon delivered in the United Brethren church in Sacramento, Sunday evening, January 10, he spoke of them as follows:—

“A year ago a pastor, mounted on his bicycle, was seen going from saloon to saloon getting signatures to a petition containing a protest against a Sunday rest law. The ministers of a certain sect are more active than the saloon men, I am sorry to say, in their opposition to this law. They are fighting more vigorously than the saloon men themselves.

“It was this comparatively insignificant body of religionists that successfully blocked Rest Day legislation at the legislature two years ago. It is not fair that this small body should control this great State. Of course, its people have their rights as well as we, and they will be protected fully by the law we propose. They have set up a man of straw. The evil they see is only imaginary. Their argument is wholly without foundation.

“There is every reason in the world for a Sunday rest law. It is indispensable to the building up of a great Christian kingdom. We must have a day of universal rest. It is only through Sunday observation that we can develop the spiritual side of our natures.”—Sacramento Bee, Jan. 12, 1909.

And yet Mr. Tufts would have us believe that the proposed law is not religious because “there is not an ecclesiastical or religious word in the bill.” This is only another demonstration of the fact that however Sunday laws may be worded, and however careful those who frame them may be to weed out from them all religious expressions, the advocates of such laws can not talk five minutes in favor of them without revealing that they are religious. And the spirit they manifest toward those who oppose the passage of these laws, and the false charges they make against them, show also their persecuting nature.

In conclusion Elder Corliss says: “We are getting the credit for destroying the sacredness of Sunday in California. We are to be cordially hated, I know, for our zeal in opposing Sunday laws. But let the worst come. We have gone too far now to back out. The Lord of glory is still at the helm of his church on earth.” And in view of the severe conflict in which they are engaged, and the great issues at stake, he requests our earnest prayers in their behalf.

W. A. C.