Religious Liberty Notes by K. C. R.

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Takoma Park Station, Washington, D. C. · May 9, 1907

Religious Liberty Notes

By K. C. R.

THE following statements made by President Wheeler in his address to the graduating class of the University of California are worthy of being passed on to the readers of the REVIEW to be considered by any who may be tempted to slacken their energies because of the victories the Lord has given them thus far in defeating the foes of religious liberty: “When an army has captured the enemy’s camp, it is better not to fall upon the spoil, but to continue falling upon the enemy. When a man has achieved something, it is better not to stop for congratulations, but to move on. The achievement is to be treated as so much gathered headway, and the moment of victory is the moment of opportunity. . . . The leading runner in the dash dare not turn to watch his antagonist without periling the victory. Eyes were with purpose set in the front of heads, and they that make for the mountains must waste no time in gazing back toward the cities of the plain, or measuring the way they have passed. Salt is good, but salt is the pillar and emblem of the static, not the strenuous life. Remember Lot’s wife. They that really run the race, they that really live the life, set their eyes on the goal, and press on toward the prize of their high calling.”

Brother J. J. Nethery, of Alexandria, Egypt, sends the following interesting extract, entitled “The Sunday Drink,” which he found in an English paper: “The Sheffield licensing magistrates declared that persons whose three-mile walk on Sunday is taken with the object of obtaining a drink, are not entitled to the drink. Only those who walk for the sake of walking are entitled to a drink.” This is indeed a unique ordinance. One can but query how the magistrate will be able to determine whether the offending person walked to obtain the drink, or for the sake of walking, unless a little inquisition is established.

Colonel Glenn, commander of the Columbus, Ohio, Post, at the first dress parade of the spring, insisted that the civilian spectators should remove their hats in salute to the national flag. The Washington Post, of April 24, 1907, comments editorially on the incident as follows:—

“On what meat does this Colonel Glenn feed? Does he not know that the most precious thing that flag typifies is the liberty of the citizen to wear his hat in its presence, and the moment the citizen is coerced to do it homage, the flag is degraded to the hated and loathsome category that was held by Gessler’s cap? What would be a greater insult to the stars and stripes than to hail a free man before it and force him to do obeisance to it? Who but a man made for slavery would submit to the petty tyranny of an upstart army officer who orders him to bow to the flag or doff his hat to it?

“The liberty of the citizen adds a million times more glory to the flag of our country than all battle-fields over which it ever waved in victory—aye, the liberty of the citizen to stand covered in its presence. What is a patriotism that has to be coerced?—More worthless than a love that has to be bought.

“Understand us; we think it perfectly proper for the citizen to pay respect to the flag by uncovering in its presence, if he does it spontaneously, and without cant. That is all right; but to be forced to do it is as degrading as it is to the slave of the sultan to fall prostrate in his sovereign’s presence. A pretty citizenship we would have if the army is to be employed to harry the people and round them up and make them uncover in the presence of the flag, which typifies nothing if not the liberty of the citizen to wear or doff his hat as shall please him, and him alone. Patriotism is something of a matter of taste; it is always spontaneous if it be genuine, and it is no business of an army officer to prescribe a patriotic code for a free American citizen to observe. Mr. Secretary Taft is now at home, and he might do his country a very great service if he should teach army officers that the flag is for the citizen, and not the citizen for the flag.” K. C. R.