p. 334 | Untitled article

Pacific Press Publishing Company · New York · October 23, 1890

FromThe American Sentinel, Vol. 5, No. 42

A Candid Prohibitionist.

WRITING to the California Voice, Mr. John Robinson, of Guerneville, California, says:—

The Adventists do not ask that their day be selected as the day of rest, but demand that legislation on the matter be omitted entirely.

To this the Signs of the Times adds this comment:—

Adventists consistently oppose all Sabbath legislation. They have the privilege and right of a day of rest; no one ought to ask more. What hinders our Sunday-law people from resting on Sunday, if they so desire?

Again, Mr. Robinson, who, by the way, is a Prohibitionist, and not an Adventist, says:—

The “toiler” does not ask for this legislation, and no effort is being made to prevent the masses from resting one day in seven.

And this is simply a plain statement of a well-known fact: the demand for Sunday laws comes not from the working masses, but from those who are inspired by a mistaken religious zeal.

Of the Sunday-law plank in the Prohibition platform, the same gentleman says:—

You may proclaim as long and loudly as you desire that this plank does not mean Sunday law, but simply a day of rest, on Monday, Tuesday, or on any day, but so long as the masses believe it means Sunday, the effect will be the same, viz., to prevent the success of our party. The fact is, Sunday is the day generally intended; there is no use denying this. Sunday is a religious institution; laws to enforce a religious institution is religious legislation and will not be indorsed by a majority of the voters of this country.

Would that all Prohibitionists were as candid.