Sunday and the California Federation of Labor
The California state Federation of Labor closed its fourteenth annual session on October 11, at Fresno. The state barbers’ organization had been working for a Sunday rest measure, but the “canvassing board” showed that the measure was defeated 15,770 to 11,143. “The report of the majority committees advocating one day of rest in seven, but not specifying Sunday, was endorsed.” Those who are working for a Sunday rest law, and who, without any exception so far as we are able to learn, are representatives of some religious body, have been claiming that the labor organizations were on their side, that labor was demanding Sunday rest laws. But whenever the exact facts are produced, they quite invariably show that the laboring portion of the country are in favor of a holiday one day in the week, but that they do not desire that this holiday shall be a specific “sacred” or “holy day.” It is certainly the right of any laboring man, under the constitution, and the laws, and the practice of our entire government, to have one day’s rest in seven, and to have any day in the week that he chooses. There is no law prohibiting this, and he can have it if he demands it. This is very clearly shown by the fact that there are thousands of seventh-day observers throughout the nation (and the number is constantly increasing), who religiously observe Saturday. This throws them out of joint with the rest of the world; and it is a much harder day, from the standpoint of business and occupation, for them to keep than Sunday. And yet they observe that day in almost every community in the nation, and none of them have met any difficulties that conscientious determination has not been able to overcome. This is a fact that can not be set aside, and it shows unmistakably that Sunday laws are not a necessity in order to give the conscientious man his day of rest. Now if the laboring men as a whole desire to have a holiday, they can demand it and get it, just as the labor-unions are demanding and getting higher wages, and other recognitions from the employers. But whenever the religious element steps in and undertakes to secure laws making Sunday a rest day, they are introducing a compulsory religious feature into the matter, and that is always fraught with danger. Men may talk very fluently about a civil Sunday; but Sunday, nevertheless, is the rival institution of the Lord’s Sabbath, and all legislation in its favor is bound to be religious legislation, even tho the men who are advocating it may not know of or understand the disguise. Let the fact again be emphasized that if the laboring men of California desire a Sunday rest law, they have not so expressed it in their properly constituted assemblies; and when they do finally come to take their stand in favor of such a law, it will be because they have been educated to that point by men who are working for such a measure from the religious standpoint. If left to themselves, labor would by a large majority prefer simply a holiday on which they might do as they please. They do not want a “holy day,” on which the way they shall occupy their time shall be prescribed to them.