The Facts in the Case

Seventh-day Adventist Publishing Association · Battle Creek, Mich. · Feb 21, 1871

The Facts in the Case.

Since the publication of our article in No. 5, entitled “A Very Poor Joke,” a friend in California has kindly sent us the facts upon which the article from the Crisis, there made the subject of criticism, was founded. We did not deny that the inhabitants of Alaska, the territory recently purchased by the United States from Russia, differ in their reckoning of time from the people of the United States. But we felt very certain that a statement containing so many inconsistencies must rest almost wholly upon a misconception of facts; and the information with which we have been furnished very fully sustains that conclusion. We have no wish, and still less have we any occasion, to misrepresent any matter in the slightest particular.

From the communication of our informant it appears that there are in Alaska about 10,000 communicants of the Greek church, most of whom came into the country from the Russian possessions in Asia, across Behring’s Straits, bringing with them the reckoning of time as found in Asia. They were consequently one day in advance of those inhabitants of the American continent who have received their reckoning of time westward around the world from Asia, instead of eastward across Behring’s Straits; and the day which to us is Saturday, is to them the first day of the week; and the one which we call Sunday, they reckon as Monday; and so on. These facts we have never denied. Let us now look at the statement of the Crisis respecting the ship’s crew, which upon one occasion visited Alaska. We quote, italicising such portions of the statement as we wish particularly noticed. The Crisis said: “On one occasion a ship’s crew arrived at Alaska, which had carefully kept the first day during their voyage; but found on their arrival that the Alaskans’ Sunday came a day earlier. The captain required his men to keep the same day as the Alaskans. The crew prosecuted the captain for requiring them to work on their Sabbath; and the case was tried in the California court, and a decision was given against the captain.”

This is the statement of the Crisis. What were the facts? We have received a copy of some of the proceedings of the court in which a case of this nature was tried, from which it appears that one John Johnson, shipped on board the American bark Cyane, D. R. Small, master, for a round trip from San Francisco, Cal., to Unalaska, in Alaska Territory, and return. While lying in the said port on the 26th of December, 1869, the master of the vessel ordered the said Johnson to perform secular labor, or leave the ship. This 26th of December was, according to the reckoning of the Alaskans, Monday; but according to the reckoning of the crew which had come from California, it was Sunday. Johnson refused to work, and was discharged. He brought suit against the vessel, and in the District Court of the United States for the District of California, in which cases of admiralty are tried, recovered his wages.

This is all that appears from the records. Compare this with the statements of the Crisis.

1. It says the crew had carefully kept the first day during their voyage. Nothing appears from the record that they were such zealous Sunday-keepers. This is all gratuitous on the part of the Crisis. They had simply preserved their reckoning from the standard of California, and found themselves, on arriving at Alaska, one day behind the inhabitants of that place, who had brought their reckoning from Asia.

2. It is said that the captain required his men to keep the same day as the Alaskans. The record speaks of only one of the crew, the said Johnson; and the requirement made of him was not to observe the day the Alaskans kept, but to work on the day he kept, because it was in Alaska a secular day. This is exactly the opposite of the statement made by the Crisis. Now we can easily conceive of a captain’s taking advantage of circumstances and requiring one of his crew to work on a day which he wishes to devote to rest. But we can hardly conceive of a captain who would compel his crew to conform to the religious observances of a different church on a foreign shore, and rest on a day they had not been in the habit of observing. Sea-captains are not generally such religious prodigies. We said we believed such a sea-captain to be a myth. We believe so still. When we can learn of such an one, composed of real flesh and bones, it will modify somewhat our ideas of human nature.

3. It is said that the crew prosecuted the captain. The record says it was one man, not a whole crew.

4. It stated that the case was tried in the California court. It should have said, in the District Court of the United States for the district of California; which conveys quite a different idea.

Respecting the difference in reckoning between the people of the United States and Alaska, and what day the latter should keep as the Sabbath, we need not speak, as that was fully discussed in the article of Eld. J. N. Andrews in last week’s Review.