THE DARK DAY OF MAY 19, 1780.
A correspondent writes: “A statement is made in ‘Facts for the Times’ which I have not been able to find. It is Noah Webster’s statement respecting the dark day, said to be taken from his dictionary of the edition of 1869. Learned men tell me that there is no such edition, and deny that the sun was darkened in 1780. Where will I find the statement?” We would say to our correspondent that the “learned” men of whom he speaks are not so learned as they might be in regard to Webster’s dictionary and the dark day. We have lying upon our table the edition of 1869 from which the quotation in “Facts for the Times” is taken. On page 1556 he has this notice of the dark day:— “Dark Day, The. May 19, 1780;—so called on account of a remarkable darkness on that day extending over all New England. In some places persons could not see to read common print in the open air for several hours together. Birds sang their evening song, disappeared, and became silent; fowls went to roost; cattle sought the barn-yard; and candles were lighted in the houses. The obscuration began about ten o’clock in the morning, and continued till the middle of the next night, but with different degrees of duration in different places. For several days previous, the wind had been variable, but chiefly from the south-west, and the north-east. The true cause of this remarkable phenomenon is not known.” Since this occurrence, so striking a fulfillment of Matt. 24 : 29; Rev. 6 : 12, and other scriptures, has been urged as a sign of the near coming of Christ, there are found plenty of persons who are ready to “go back” on Noah Webster, and claim that there was nothing unusual or unnatural in that day, that it was all in accordance with natural law, and was no sign of anything. Those who lived at the time, and had as good a chance, at least, to mark all its strange features and unnatural manifestations, as people of the present time, were filled with awe at the occurrence, and for years, so long as the memory of it lasted, were unable to explain it; but their degenerate sons, the wondrous wise generation of the present, living nearly a hundred years from the occurrence, and having never seen anything of the kind, can see through it just as easy as they can tell why two and two make four. Thus a correspondent of the Inter-Ocean from Vermont, asks,— “Will you give the causes (and proof) of the ‘dark day’ in 1780, the 19th of May, I believe. An ‘Advent preacher’ has been preaching in this neighborhood, and alluded to it as a sign of the destruction of the world.” And the reply is given thus:— “The dark day of 1780 was produced by entirely natural causes, and was about as much a sign of the destruction of the world as of the advent of the potato-beetle. The darkness, said Dr. Samuel Tenney, of Exeter, N. H., was preceded by common clouds. Between these common clouds and the earth intervened another stratum of great thickness. As the stratum advanced the darkness commenced and increased with its progress. The uncommon thickness of this stratum was occasioned by two strong currents of wind from the southward and westward, condensing the vapors and drawing them in a northwest direction. The density of this strata was owing to the vapor and smoke it contained. These so-called dark days have not been uncommon, being known in 366 B. C.; 295 B. C.; 252 A. D.; 746, 775, 1732, 1762, 1780, 1783, 1807, 1816. The one was as prophetic as any other and no more so.” It would have been a little more to the satisfaction to any one who wishes to know the reasons of his faith, if the writer of the reply had stated where he found his evidence for all his assertions. And we would like a little light on such points as this: From what came that “stratum of great thickness”? Of what was it composed? How was it formed? This fellow’s explanation reads something like this: It was dark because there was great darkness. He simply states the fact in another form, and calls that an explanation. His statement needs explaining as really as the first. “The uncommon thickness of the stratum was caused by two strong currents of wind,” &c. How did those winds chance to come just then, and just when there were vapors to condense? And what caused the vapors? Then how could currents from the west and south draw the vapors in a north-west direction? Common philosophy would assign them, under such circumstances, a north-east direction. Our friend must be careful or he will make the dark day to be a greater phenomenon than we have ever claimed. But, further, we would ask how, according to the reply above given, the words of our Lord can ever be fulfilled. He says that the sun shall be darkened; and he means the literal sun; for he speaks of men and things on the earth in contrast with it; Luke 21 : 25; and he says that when it is thus darkened it is a sign of the end; for when we see these things come to pass, he tells us that we are to know that he is near, even at the doors. But according to the foregoing writer, there never can be any sign of this nature. He declares there never has been in the past; and suppose such a phenomenon should occur again; would it be a sign? Not in his eyes; for the hypothesis of vapors, winds, natural laws, and common occurrences, would instantly fly to his scoffing lips. But something of this kind is to constitute a sign; for the Lord himself has declared it; and we would like to ask the objector how a darkening of the sun should differ from that of 1780, to answer to the prophecy and constitute a sign? But, it is urged, there have been many such events, hence it can be no sign; and seven dark days are mentioned by our writer before 1780, and three since, for which, however, he forgot to give his authority. But how does it happen that nobody has seemed to pay any attention to these days, or make any account of them? and why is it that all fix upon May 19, 1780, as the only one worthy of special note, giving it by way of distinction, the title of The Dark Day? The answer is obvious. It occupies a pre-eminent position in this respect. It towers up far above all others as the one alone remarkable and note-worthy for its awful phenomena. But we are not left to decide the matter from this evidence alone; for our Lord has not only told us that such an event should occur as a sign of his coming, but he has told us also when it should occur. “Immediately after the tribulation of those days,” says Matthew. Mark is more definite and says, “In those days after that tribulation, the sun shall be darkened,” &c. Mark 13 : 24. The “days” are the days of papal supremacy, the 1260 years from 538 to 1798; the tribulation is the oppression of Christians by the Catholic power till restrained by the work of the Reformation. The tribulation may be said to have ceased in the early part of the 18th century. The “days” ended within two years of its close. Thus by the fixed terms of the prophecy we are shut up to a period less than a hundred years in length, and ending in 1798, in which to look for that darkening of the sun which was to be a sign of the Lord’s soon coming. Again, the darkening of the sun was to be the second great event to take place under the sixth seal. Rev. 6:12. The first and the one which marked the opening of that seal, was a great earthquake, shown to be, by comparison with the preceding seals, the great earthquake of Lisbon, Nov. 1, 1755. Between this point and the end of the papal period in 1798, the sun was to be darkened as a sign of the end. Here we are shut up to a period of time only forty-three years in length in which to look for that darkening of the sun which was the subject of the prediction. Now it matters not if our opponents should claim seven thousand dark days instead of seven, as notable as the one of 1780, it would not affect the prediction or the sign in the least degree. We care not how many nor what kind of dark days there may have been in other ages, we look for one which was to take place in that brief specified period as the predicted sign. We fix our eyes upon that time, and what do we behold? We find not only the darkening of the sun, as foretold, but we find a dark day so much more notable than all others, that it is set forth by way of pre-eminence as “the dark day,” while in general history all others are passed by in silence. From one point it is very strange that people can overlook considerations of this nature which are so decisive upon this question. From another, it is not. What a man doesn’t want to see he can very easily keep from seeing. But the lack both of inclination and ability we apprehend is accounted for by the prophet Daniel, when he says that “the wicked shall do wickedly, and none of the wicked shall understand.”