p. 78 | The Sunday Law by Editor

Seventh-day Adventist Missionary Society · Oakland, California · Feb 15, 1883

The Sunday Law.

By Editor

THE dominant party in California has been true to one pledge which it made before the election: it has repealed the Sunday Law. So far as the pretended "Christian Sabbath" is concerned, it is just what it is in law—dies non.

Final action on the Senate bill for its repeal was taken February 6, when the bill passed in the Assembly by the decisive vote of 47 to 21. For this result the people may thank the self-styled "Home Protectionists." Before either political party had conceived the idea of bringing the Sunday question into politics, the Protectionists of Oakland, under the instigation of certain ministers, announced their intention to form a third party and nominate a third ticket if neither of the old parties indorsed the Sunday Law in their conventions. They pledged themselves to vote for those candidates only who would pledge themselves to enforce the Sunday Law. The Democratic Convention met the issue squarely, by not only refusing to enforce that law, but by demanding its repeal. This decisive course for a time astonished all parties, and many of the members of that party trembled for the result. They thought their Convention had gone too far, and that certain defeat awaited them.

The Republicans were not left to any choice in the matter; the situation was such that they were compelled to join issue. They made a bid for the "church vote," which was supposed to be sufficiently influential to control the election. Their platform contained a feeble endorsement of the law, but it was supposed to be sufficient as a political, or rather policy, movement, and was hailed with a show of the wildest delight. But such manifestations were of short duration. As the campaign progressed, and it was made evident to the people that the law as it stood was unjust, infringing on both civil and religious liberty, the party organs weakened in its defense, and the majority against the law was unexpectedly large. We say "the majority against the law," for this was the only issue in the campaign.

We were not disappointed in the result. We warned the "Protectionists" at the commencement of their work that they were endangering the existence of the law. Dr. Hemphill, of Calvary Church, in San Francisco, took the same view of the matter, and predicted the repeal of the law if its friends forced it into politics. And the Chronicle warned the Republicans that to indorse the law was to court defeat. But the church party would not receive the warning. The fact presented itself before them that Mordecai the Jew, sat at the king's gate; while he occupied this place it was not enough that they were called to the banquet—that their idolized day of the sun sat in the place of honor. They demanded that the gallows be erected. Their demand was granted, with the same result that followed the demand of Haman.

The San Francisco Chronicle notices the first Sunday in that city after the repeal of the law. Its article closes as follows:—

"Fewer arrests were made yesterday for drunkenness than for several Sundays preceding, and hardly any arrests for any other offense. The repeal was commented on in sermons, both in the forenoon and evening; but as the unchained, roaring lion had utterly failed to furnish the shocking example that would have given the comments point, they fell somewhat flat. Altogether, the result went to indicate that there is a savor of barren honor in the ostentatious repeal of a statute that has been practically repealed every Sunday since its enactment, and that would continue so to be repealed even if Republican nausea had not cast the unwashed and the unterrified temporarily into Legislative office."

It would seem that the remark of one of the successful party was well made, when he was asked what he thought the effect of the repeal would be. He replied: "People have heretofore done as they pleased on Sunday, and they would do so if the law were repealed. There would be no perceptible difference."

But the agitation of the Sunday question is not ended. We have looked for all that has transpired, because the "sure word of prophecy" indicated that it would come. But the end is not yet reached. We look for more exciting times before the controversy comes to its close. And we give thanks to the God of Heaven that he has not left his waiting people in darkness, but has pointed out to them both the dangers and duties of the last days.