That Unwritten Agreement.
By R. M. CAVINESS
BISHOP FOSTER urges that there was an “unwritten agreement” made between the observers of Sunday and the observers of the seventh day; that the former came to America first and established the keeping of Sunday; that the latter in coming afterwards tacitly agreed to keep the laws. By this “unwritten agreement” the keepers of the seventh day were bound to keep Sunday also. This mode of reasoning is worthy only of the Papacy and the Inquisition. It is the argument of tyranny; but let us see how it would work in another case. When America was discovered the Indians were the undisputed owners of the continent. So far as the whites were concerned, the Indians established themselves here first. They had certain “unwritten” laws regulating warfare, the chase, and social life. A solemn council determined the fate of the captives taken in war. Certain ceremonies were performed before undertaking the chase. The women were obliged to do all the drudgery, that the men might the better be prepared for war and the chase. By the working of these “unwritten” laws Sunday was as much used for the chase as any other day. In fact, they “had no Sunday.” Now when the Mayflower landed a small company at Plymouth, did not these individuals tacitly agree to keep the laws of the red men? When William Penn bought land of the Indians was it not the “unwritten agreement” that whoever should settle on this land would keep the laws of the red man? Whenever settlers came to America would they not be bound by this “unwritten agreement” to keep Sunday as the Indians kept it? How is this, anyway, Mr. Foster? Do not the Indians’ claims antedate yours? Then, too, the whites were in the minority. They were not even one-seventh of one per cent. of the population. R. M. CAVINESS.
Keokuk, Iowa.