THE LAST OF THE TRIALS IN RHEA COUNTY, TENNESSEE.
FROM Chattanooga Times specials concerning the recent trials of Seventh-day Adventists at Dayton, Tenn., for Sunday labor, we cull some interesting items. These last cases were brought up November 4, and the results were quite different from those tried at the July term. The people have been receiving some wholesome education on the subject of religious liberty vs. tyranny. The despatch of November 4 says:— Prior to the action brought against them at the July term of this court, very little was heard of the Adventists. They are proverbially hard-working, steady, sober, and industrious men, and it has been ascertained that not a single case of breach of the peace, or the commission of any offense whatever against the law of the land, has ever been committed by any member of the Adventist fraternity during their residence here. It was also stated that when court was called in the morning a number of prominent attorneys were present, and a large number of the residents of the village of Graysville, where the Seventh-day Adventist academy is located. The population of this village is estimated at 450, half of whom are Adventists, most of them being farmers. The Times report continues as follows:— In his address to the grand jury, Judge Parks described at length the nature of the various offenses that were likely to be brought before them. He remarked that there were too many frivolous cases presented by the grand jury, and the county generally had to pay the costs. More proof should be required in these minor cases than in cases of more grave import before they were brought into court. He called special attention to the nefarious traffic in grand jury witness tickets, and said that fee grabbers were in some places everlastingly hanging around the grand jury room; they seek to have certain witnesses summoned in order to speculate on their tickets. In the afternoon several motions were heard, but no matters of special interest were brought forward. During these proceedings Elder Gillett and his wife sat in a far corner of the court room, surrounded by a number of members of the Adventist fraternity. Their dress, demeanor, and general appearance were shown up in marked contrast to the majority of those around them. Without exception, the Adventists were neat and clean in their attire, and had faces ruddy with the glow of health, while the average Rhea County court habitue is unkempt and has a Nebuchadnezzar look about him, and is bathed in an odor of moonshine whisky. He nevertheless makes a witness of far more intelligence than would be accredited to him by his appearance. Elder Gillett is a great favorite in Dayton. There did not appear to be any reputable citizen who has a word to say against him; in fact, they all spoke in his favor. He is sixty-five years of age, and has resided in Graysville for eleven years, having removed from Monroe, Wis. He is a carpenter by trade, but works very little, as he is well off. He lives in a pretty farmhouse, and devotes his attention to the Adventist school and church. Elder E. R. Gillett's case was next called, and he was ready for trial, but it appeared that the state was not. At the last term of court he begged that his case might be heard, but it was continued. Judge Lewis Shepherd, of Chattanooga, and Hon. Henry C. Snodgrass, of Sparta, appeared for the defense in this case, and urged immediate trial. This is the first Adventist case in which an attorney has appeared for the defense, and a great deal of interest was manifested. However, after repeated calls, the witness in the case, who is said to be a baker in Dayton, could not be found, and the case was continued until to-morrow morning. Elder Gillett was asked what charges had been brought against him. He replied: “I really do not know exactly what it is. I have not farmed any on Sunday to my knowledge, as I am not a farmer. I believe, however, they will say that I actually planted one dozen raspberry slips on Sunday. That is the violation of the law that I think I shall have to answer to.” It is the consensus of opinion that the decisions and sentence by Judge Parks at the last term of court were fair, impartial, and just, and that, while the majesty of the law was maintained in each instance, it was also evident that justice had been tempered with mercy. Attorney-General Fletcher appears to consider that any further prosecutions are unnecessary, as no more indictments have been found, although the number of Adventists has not decreased, and their methods continue to be substantially the same. Of the proceedings on the following day (November 5), the Times says:— To-day the last of the Adventist cases was swept from the docket, and appearances indicate that the wave of fanaticism and prejudice that has been sweeping over Rhea County has subsided. The appearance of Ex-Congressman H. C. Snodgrass and Judge Lewis Shepherd, who volunteered in these cases, created marked interest. They both spoke at some length, dwelling on the unconstitutionality of the law. On this point Mr. Snodgrass is reported as follows:— So far as I am concerned, the very law is obnoxious. I believe it is a violation of the organic law of the land. I believe that if the highest court in the land should ever have an opportunity to pass upon it, it would be repealed. They have as much right if they believe that the seventh day is the day they ought to keep holy as you have to keep the first day. One man believes in sprinkling, another in immersion. These are the same things; it is simply a difference in opinion; it is simply the exercise of a judgment and a conscience. Some governments said to which church you should belong and what money you should pay to the church; and to raise your voice against these decrees was certain death; and this statute on our books is a relic of the past; it is a part of barbarism—it is a part of the Dark Ages. Why, the idea of such a law in a free country like this, where a man believes he is serving God by keeping Saturday, and he is doing his duty to both God and man to rest on the seventh day. It is a violation of personal liberty to handicap him. Continuing, says the report, Mr. Snodgrass argued that the law was a violation of the bill of rights, and concluded by telling the jury that, regardless of this question, they should acquit the defendant, as the one act proven was not sufficient to constitute the offense charged in the indictment. Judge Shepherd followed in a forcible and logical address, taking the position that Sunday legislation of the character before the court was dangerous to the well-being of society, and that the principle actuating it was alien to the spirit and genius of our form of government. He illustrated how, under the protection of such illogical and illiberal laws, a portion of society might be made to suffer grievous wrong. The judge's address proved him to be a man of broad, catholic, and patriotic conceptions of the relations governing human society, and made a strong impression on the jury and audience. He charged the jury that a single act did not constitute a nuisance, provided it was not committed in an open, flagrant, and notorious manner. A verdict of “not guilty” was brought in. The case of E. R. Gillett was then called. This case was continued from yesterday, on account of the absence of the witness. The witness again failing to appear, the case was thrown out of court. The closing comment of the Times, though brief, is comprehensive and to the point:— This ends, for the time being, at least, one of the most celebrated struggles for religious liberty ever waged on American soil. It has been a valuable object lesson to the people of Rhea County. The scenes and incidents attending the trial of these people, their submission to what has seemed the harsh and arbitrary operations of the law, the speeches made, the literature produced—all these things have tended to throw light upon the dark places, and a perceptible spirit of liberality and tolerance for other people's rights is now seen and felt.