Sunday Crusade in Bristol, Tenn., and Bristol, Va
8%Page 20
Sunday Crusade in Bristol, Tenn., and Bristol, Va.
By J. B. LOCKEN
LAST February the ministerial associations of Bristol, Tenn., and Bristol, Va., started a vigorous campaign for Sunday enforcement. Agitation for the Sunday closing ordinances began when the committee appointed by the ministerial association appeared before the mayor and commissioners with the request for the passage of an ordinance prohibiting the conducting of business on Sunday, on the ground that it was deleteriously affecting the morals of the city. After a consideration of two weeks the ordinance was passed, and its enforcement was held up until the Bristol, Va., council on May 4 adopted a resolution to assist the mayor in the enforcement of the Sunday ordinances passed in 1895, which had never been enforced. The commissioners of Bristol, Tenn., passed the ordinance on May 11, to become effective seventeen days later. Although the Bristol, Va., ordinance was supposed to become immediately effective, it was held up until similar action was taken in Bristol, Tenn. When it became evident that the Sunday "blue laws" would be enforced, we began a counter agitation. We first presented memorials of protest to the mayor and council of each city. We also wrote letters to the editor of the city paper, which started a general agitation. On the day the blue law was to have been enforced, we held a mass meeting, at which the president of the conference spoke on the subject of religious liberty, "Are Sunday Laws Constitutional? Are they American and Just?" The day before the meeting, we had a full-page announcement of the mass meeting in the city paper; and when the ministers of the city learned of this, they called a special meeting of their association, and at their Sunday morning services they warned their people not to attend the mass meeting. In spite of this, nearly three hundred were present. At the close of the meeting a resolution of protest against Sunday legislation was introduced, and adopted by a rising vote. One of the editors of the city paper came forward, requesting a full report of the lecture and the resolution. It was evident that our opposition had created a public sentiment against the enforcement of the blue law, for late Saturday night the city drug stores were notified that the21law would not be enforced until further notice. Tuesday we circulated the protest presented at the mass meeting, and in a few hours had the signatures of about fifty of the leading business men of Bristol, Va. The editor of the city paper, with the rest of his staff, headed the protest. It was placed in the hands of the mayor, who presented it to the city council that night at the regular session. Three ministers who represented the ministerial association, appeared before the council and urged the enforcement of the Sunday blue law. They were very urgent in their demands, and one of them went so far as to state that not to enforce the law would be anarchy. This the mayor and his council resented, whereupon the preacher offered a mild apology for his language; but the unwise course of the ministers caused the council to vote five to two to repeal the Sunday law. In a long letter to the editor of the city paper was presented the argument of the court of North Carolina in declaring the Sunday laws unconstitutional. No reply has been made to this letter, and we have heard favorable comments on every side on the arguments it contained, and on the full report of the lecture published, which has done much to mold public sentiment in favor of religious liberty. Hoping to correct a wrong impression that obtained among the ministers of the city, I appeared before the ministerial association asking permission to make a statement of our position. My request was granted. When I had finished, four of them were on their feet at once, and we had a most interesting time for about an hour in discussing the principles involved in Sunday legislation. At their next session I presented my request for membership in the association, with a written statement of the fundamental principles of our faith. Most of the ministers agreed that they would have to indorse these fundamental principles as stated, but they could see no way of granting my request because of our opposition to Sunday legislation. After an extended discussion of the subject, like the council before whom Paul appeared, they became divided, and my request was tabled for a week. This is where the matter rests at present, but all this agitation has given us an opportunity to present the principles of our message, both in the public press and before the ministers of the city. Our tent meeting is not quite so largely attended as last year, but we have a good interest, and the Lord is giving us a number of new Sabbath keepers. Elder C. R. Magoon and wife are assisting in the meeting, and their help is appreciated. The daily paper has given us liberal space for reporting our sermons, thereby enabling us to reach about twenty-five thousand persons with the message.