Mr. Crafts and Seventh-Day Christians
Not long since a communication from Mr. Crafts in reply to a Mr. Cadman on “Cardinal Gibbons and the Sunday-Rest Bill,” appeared in a morning newspaper of Chicago. In that letter Mr. Crafts states that seventh-day Christians are guilty of “slanders,” “malicious misstatements and misquotations.” This letter of Mr. Crafts’ called out in the Chicago Morning Times, a letter from the Rev. J. W. Morton. Both of these letters are published in the Sabbath Recorder of August 15, from which we take this letter. The readers of the SENTINEL will be interested in the well put arguments of Mr. Morton:— In your paper of the 13th inst., the Rev. Wilbur F. Crafts, of the “American Sabbath Union,” charges seventh-day Christians with “malicious misstatements and misquotations” in reference to himself and the society he represents. As I am a Seventh-day Baptist I feel interested in this charge. I am not conscious, however, of having made any malicious statements about either him or his society, nor have I noticed anything of the kind in the Outlook, our denominational organ. But now that the question is up I want to call attention to a few misstatements and misquotations that Mr. Crafts and his co-workers have made. I do not say maliciously, but at least carelessly. 1. In the official notes of a hearing on the Sunday-Rest bill before Mr. Blair’s committee, December 13, 1888, Mr. Crafts says of Cardinal Gibbons’ letter, in the foot-note to page 18: “The letter is not equal in value to the individual signatures of the millions he represents, but no loyal Catholic priest or paper or person will oppose what has thus been indorsed.” In his letter to the Morning News he says that it was “distinctly said” that the letter “was not equivalent to the signatures of the whole Catholic Church, although it was hoped it would be equivalent to a negative indorsement by that church, in that the approval of the Cardinal, it was thought, would prevent opposition to the Sunday-Rest petition by any loyal Catholic.” Observe the difference. In the original the statement is absolute that no loyal Catholic will oppose the Cardinal’s letter. In the quotation “it was hoped” and “it was thought” that “the approval of the Cardinal” “would prevent opposition” “by any loyal Catholic.” Now what is this but gross misquotation and misrepresentation? 2. In the same document (page 124) Mr. Crafts says: “It would not be reasonable for legislatures to compel the ninety-nine one-hundredths of the population who do not regard Saturday as a sacred day to stop business for the less than one per cent. who do. If this were done, the Mohammedan immigrants of the future would soon be asking for laws halting industry on their sacred Friday also.” Now, here is an indirect, but none the less positive, assertion that observers of the Seventh day—Jews, seventh-day Adventists, and Seventh-day Baptists, desire the enactment of laws compelling others to keep Saturday holy. But Mr. Crafts ought to know that not one of either of these classes has ever petitioned for anything of the kind, while seventh-day Christians at least, have constantly and publicly declared their opposition to all civil Sabbath laws. Could there be a grosser misrepresentation than this? I do not say it is “malicious,” but it is unjust, injurious, and unworthy of a thoughtful Christian. 3. In the same document (page 22) Mrs. J. C. Bateham, a lady thoroughly indorsed by Mr. Crafts, in speaking of the great “half-mile” petition, says: “I do not know how many of these 7,000,000 have sent their individual signatures—it is said their are millions. I do know that nearly every State and Territory is represented, and that pasted on red cloth and arranged as drapery in the Foundry church of this city, for the American Sabbath Union now in session there, the petition is over half a mile in length, much of it in double columns; and yet this wonderful petition, doubtless by many millions the largest ever presented to this or any other government, is not yet full grown.” On page 24 these same 7,000,000 are said to have spoken “through their signatures.” These remarks refer to what Mr. Crafts calls “our half-mile double-columned petition,” which, he says, contains thousands upon thousands of individual signatures. Now Mr. Crafts must have known very well that Mrs. Bateham’s estimate of the number of these signatures was enormously exaggerated—that half-mile petition, though in double columns, could not have contained more than one hundred and sixty thousand2individual signatures, allowing sixty to each foot of double column, which is a very liberal allowance, indeed. Yet he allows the statement to go unchecked that it contained “several millions” and “was by many millions the largest ever presented to this or any other government.” As “field secretary” of the American Sabbath Union he ought to have corrected this egregious, published blunder long ago, but he has not. Seventh-day Christians are not “malicious” in their opposition to Sunday laws. They are as conscientious as Mr. Crafts himself, and he would do himself a great deal more credit by practicing a little more Christian charity than by sending sworn affidavits to religious bodies for the purpose of securing the “expulsion” of members who may have trodden on his theological or political corns.