Religious Liberty Work in Oklahoma by I. A. Crane

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Takoma Park Station, Washington, D. C. · Mar 5, 1908

Religious Liberty Work in Oklahoma

By I. A. Crane

SINCE coming here early in January we have placed at different times such tracts as “Religious Liberty,” “Sunday Law,” “The Civil Sabbath,” “Prohibition and Sunday Legislation,” “The Liquor Traffic and Prohibition,” in the hands of every member of the legislature. About five thousand petitions have been received against the Sunday bill.

We have had the privilege of conversing with a number of these men upon this subject. This bill has the honor of having as many petitions presented against it as any yet introduced, if not more. Upon one occasion the chairman of the committee to which the bill was referred stated in open session that it had been so “completely snowed under” that it could not be found. In connection with the presentation of about thirty-five hundred petitions at one time, the following letter addressed to the speaker was read to the House:—

“DEAR SIR: I am herewith handing you over thirty-five hundred petitions against Senate Bill 58 or any other law relating to the Sabbath question. There is nothing in the Bible making Sunday the Sabbath, and no amount of legislation will make it such, or change any man’s opinion as to the same. Such a law would enter the realm of conscience, and would be contrary to the American principle of religious liberty as guaranteed by the Constitution.

“We heartily favor prohibition because the liquor traffic robs our homes, fills our poorhouses, insane asylums, and penitentiaries. It creates a class of citizens dangerous to life, property, and the peace and welfare of the State. Honest labor or harmless recreation upon Sunday, however, does nothing to endanger life, property, or the rights of conscience.”

The large roll of petitions attracted no little notice, and good attention was given to the reading of the letter. As far as I could see, there was no evidence of anything but approval.

I am now on the train for an appointment, having felt that it was useless to wait longer for the bill to be brought up. The chairman of the committee which now has the bill in charge seems to think that it will not be brought up. We have asked him to notify us if it is. We feel sure that good has been done in this effort, and that truth has been made known to many.

It is a sad fact that many, many honest people do not see the principle involved in Sunday legislation. May God help his people to improve every passing opportunity to make known the truth. Our work is not simply to defeat certain bills, but to make known the message. We are not to count our work done when we have secured what signatures we can to oppose a bill, but we must follow the interest awakened by these petitions by placing literature in the

hands of the people which will help them to understand the final results of this work. I am confident that we have a work which can not be put off without great loss. The great prohibition movement which is sweeping the country is a good thing, but unless we do our duty in showing the true principles involved, our enemies will attach Sunday laws to every temperance movement, and the victory gained for temperance will carry Sunday with it. It seems to me that we ought to make our position clear, that everybody should aid prohibition, and that all should oppose Sunday legislation. May God help each one in every place to do his duty.

I. A. CRANE.