p. 6 | Note and Comment

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Takoma Park Station, Washington, D. C. · Sep 26, 1907

Note and Comment

THAT judges in their official capacity are not averse to settling the Sabbath question was shown recently at St. Paul, Minn., when Judge Hanft decided that “for legal purposes the sabbath day is Sunday.” The judge also made the startling declaration that the legislature “did not legislate for the minority.” We had supposed that one of the most sacred duties of legislators was to protect and guarantee the rights of the minority. This decision is a new principle in jurisprudence, and if carried out, would jeopardize every individual right, and make equity the plaything of majorities. But this very principle has long been advocated by members of the National Reform Association when discussing the rights of minorities in religious matters. Only last year at Winona Lake, Ind., two National Reform leaders informed the writer that while they were in the majority, they had a right to compel the people to observe their sabbath, and that when we [Adventists] were in the majority, we would have the same right to compel all to keep our Sabbath—a total denial of the most fundamental principles of religious liberty. Such a course would make conscience the football of the rabble, deprive the Almighty of obedience to his commands unless that obedience suited the whim of the majority; in short, put human majorities in the place of divine commands, exalting the creature above the Creator, and rekindling the fires of medieval persecution. All that is in the principles of the association; but this is the first time we have seen it so plainly stated by a member of the bar.