BAD LAWS by W. N. G.

Pacific Press Publishing Company · Oakland, California · Jun 23, 1898

FromSigns of the Times, Vol. 24, No. 25.

BAD LAWS.

By W. N. G.

THERE was a time when well-meaning people thought that the proper way to keep men from evildoing on Sunday was to compel them to go to church. The same principle lies in the laws that forbid certain acts on that day that are deemed proper on other days. The former is but one step, and a logical step, further than the latter. The following from the London Daily Mail is worthy of consideration:—

“Very few members of the Church of England are aware that the bishops have still the power to oblige them to present themselves at church on every Sunday in the year, as well as on no less than twenty-eight saints’ days. Moreover, they could oblige them to fast at least a dozen times a year, if they felt so inclined. The act under which this power is held by the bishops is one passed when people apparently were given to cock-fighting and other profane amusements on the Sabbath, in the reign of Edward, A.D. 1551. Many years later another and more stringent law was enacted, but that has been repealed, while, curiously enough, the older law is still in the statute-book. The latter says:—

“ ‘Forasmuch as, at all tymes, men be not so myndeful to lawde and praise God, so readie to resorte and heare Godde’s hollie worde, as their bounden dewtie doth require; therefore, to call men to remembrance of their dewtie, it hath been provided that there shoulde be certaine days appointed wherein Christians shoulde cease from all other kynde of labour and applie themselves onlye unto the aforesaide hollie works.’”

“And if people should not obey willingly, then it is: ‘lawful to all archebusshoppes and busshoppes to enquire of every persone that shall offend in the premisses, and to punishe each offender, and to enjoyne him such penaunce as shall be thought mete.’”

“It might be thought that this law is quite obsolete, but it is not so. Corresponding with the power of the bishops to enforce attendance, there is a duty to provide accommodation for every parishioner. Quite recently a reformatory boy was refused admission to church by one of the church wardens, and an action was brought against the latter. The judge decided in favor of the boy, and, in giving judgment, he said that tho the courts can no longer fine a man for not going to church on Sundays, the bishops can ‘admonish’ him if he refuses to go, and he would then be compelled to pay the whole costs of the proceeding.”

Bad laws do not down very easily, while there is a disposition to enforce them. And as long as there is in the world a disposition to compel men in religious matters, the resort to available law for that purpose will be deemed a righteous act. As long as such laws are allowed to remain on the statute-books, there is a likelihood of their being called into action. While the law mentioned in the foregoing extract from the Mail, is deemed by many to be “quite obsolete,” it would be very difficult to procure its repeal. There is a Sunday law of Charles II. that provides for men’s being placed in the stocks for doing common labor on that day. This law is also deemed “quite obsolete,” yet we occasionally hear of overzealous churchmen appealing to it for the punishment of those who conscientiously differ from their ideas of Sabbath observance. It is quite common to boast of our progress in the matter of religious liberty, but the persistent effort on the part of professed reformers to secure laws on the same lines of these old statutes of Great Britain is evidence that the spirit of intolerance is again forging to the front. W. N. G.