THE NATIONAL SABBATH CONVENTION AND THE BLAIR BILL.
By S. N. H.
IT was my privilege, in company with Elder A. T. Jones, to attend the Sunday Convention held at Washington, and to hear what was said before the Senate Committee to whom the Sunday Bill was referred. To me the meeting was, in many respects, very interesting and solemn,—solemn in view of the fact that we could see so clearly what we must soon meet, and how poorly prepared we are, as a people, for it. Those who are in favor of Sunday legislation are terribly in earnest. They mean all they have said in print about carrying the matter through. There are also some of the leading men in Congress who are as much in earnest as the people of the churches. There are many who have not investigated the subject so as to know the bearing of it, who think it a good thing, and see nothing objectionable in it, simply because they do not understand it. Then another thing was fully demonstrated, that there are none who see this matter in its true light, except those who view it in the light of prophecy. This places a responsibility on us such as rests on no other people, to give this light to the world. God holds us responsible. If, therefore, we fail to do our duty in this respect, we, as it will prove very soon, will be the principal sufferers. Everything was done that could be at the convention to give enthusiasm to the enterprise of securing the passage of the bill in Congress. The church where the convention was held was decorated with a strip of scarlet cloth, half a mile in length, on which was pasted the signatures of six and a half million petitioners for a Sunday law, and to us it was very significant. The letter of Cardinal Gibbons, which, it was claimed, represented the names of seven and a half million more, was used to show that everybody was in favor of the bill. Almost every association, either nominally or religiously observing the first day of the week as the Sabbath, was represented. Different men and women were chosen to represent the various interests of the country. These were mostly leading men in the different denominations. Some were railroad men. The Woman's Christian Temperance Union was represented, as well as the workingmen and other interests. It was evident that it was the leading men only who realized the nature of what they are doing. The convention continued day and evening for the time appointed, the 11th, 12th, and 13th of December. The speakers frequently referred to the long list of signatures as evidence of the interest taken in the move. The Seventh-day Baptists were represented by Professor Lewis, of Plainfield, N. J. He asked the privilege of speaking before the committee, but was referred, the same as we, to the Committee of the Sunday Convention, and it was recommended that we divide the time with them in coming before the committee. He negotiated with them, but we did not. We concluded that those who could not see any injustice in calling for a law that would bring25on an innocent, law-abiding class of citizens religious persecution, would not see that justice demanded that we have equal chance with them. This proved true in the case of Professor Lewis. They arranged for him to have eight minutes, while they as a body had two hours. This was in addition to an entire hearing they had had before in April. I could but think that this fittingly illustrated what treatment we will receive when they have the power in their hands to do as they please. It is unsafe to trust any man or class of men with the religious privileges that belong to others. And when any scheme is entered upon that has in it the spirit of oppression, it obscures the mind, perverts the judgment, and destroys in the soul those fine feelings of justice which alone exist in the heart of the true Christian. I think there were about fifty present before the committee. All were interested in the question, and nearly all in favor of the bill. There were, however, three classes who were opposed to it. One man represented the party of Free Thought Club in New York. The principles he laid down were good. They were to the effect that no nation had the moral right to legislate upon religious questions. And this was emphatically true in a Government with such a Constitution as our own. But his religious, or rather irreligious, views destroyed much of the force of what he had to say. The second party who opposed the bill were the Seventh-day Baptists, who were represented by Professor Lewis, and the third the Seventh-day Adventists. The representatives of those who favored the Sunday legislation had the floor first. I know of no society of any standing in the country that failed to have their representative here. Mr. Crafts, who seemed to be the leading man on the occasion, stated the rules by which the speakers were to be governed. It was that each delegate should have five minutes; but it was usually nearer ten. Finally, after the time was consumed, and the others had spoken, Professor Lewis was introduced to speak in behalf of the Seventh-day Baptists. He said some very good things, and they should have had weight, but it was evident that he was not prepared to answer all the critical questions that arose, and the disposition that was manifested not to appreciate the importance of such a question as the seventh day as the Sabbath. So it was claimed by Doctor Johnson, of Chicago, when he had gotten through, that Professor Lewis had given himself away, and also his position. This was done in answering the adroit questions put to him. His position was different from ours when taken in the light of religious legislation. After more time was taken up than was appointed for the hearing, Elder Jones was asked if he had anything to say. He said that he had considerable to say. When asked if he could say it in ten minutes, he replied that he could not. He stated that as the people he represented had been totally ignored in the matter (for assertions had been frequently made to the effect that there was no religious opposition to the bill, except a few Seventh-day Baptists, giving the impression that from their fewness they were of but little account), and that our position against the bill was on entirely different grounds from what had been presented, we ought to have more time. He then referred to the fact that our people numbered three times as many as the Seventh-day Baptists, and were far more effective, therefore we wanted more time in presenting our side of the question. He referred briefly to the extent of our work throughout every State and Territory in the Union, and to our publishing houses in the different parts of the world. Finally, after some discussion, it was decided that he should have one hour. He then had to go to the house for his books of reference. Brother Jones stated that he had three points to present: First, the Bible teaching on the subject; secondly, that it was just such a move as this which gave rise to the Papacy, which he would show by a few extracts from history; and thirdly, the practical workings of this, if it should pass. He had not proceeded far when he was questioned, and in fact argued with, so that one hour and a half was consumed and he had not had an opportunity to bring out any connected line of thought. As it will appear in print, we will not dwell on it here. We would say, however, that Senator Blair said that his arguments were logical. The hearing, which began at 10 and continued till after 4 P. M., forcibly impressed us with two things: First, that in a short time we will be brought before magistrates, where we shall experience more critical questioning than we have ever realized; and unless we are prepared by a thorough understanding of our position, we shall certainly fail. It is not simply such questions as, 'Why do you keep the seventh day as the Sabbath?' which no doubt will be asked; but, 'Why is it that you do not recognize the law requiring the observing of the first day as the Sabbath?' then perhaps such questions as this: 'If the principle of legal enforcement of the Sabbath was right in the former dispensation, why is not the same principle right now?' It might be illustrated by many other questions of like nature, which will require a clear understanding of the relation we sustain to the Governments of this world. It is a mistaken idea that we are ready for the times that are just before us because we have a theory of the general principles of the truth. The times that are before us are of such a nature that, unless we speedily gather up the rays of light that have been shining upon our pathway, we shall surely fail. There is light that we have not appreciated in the mission of the American Sentinel. This will be realized in the future as it has not been in the past. But the sad part of it is that many will realize this after they have made a fatal mistake, because they did not realize it in time to walk in the light, when it would have proved their salvation to have done so. There are widely different opinions in regard to the passing of the bill. Some are quite sure that it will not be passed; and this may be. But if it fails this winter, it will not be because it lacks men of influence to help carry it forward. There will be a determined effort made to have it pass. Its passage is only a question of time, if it fails now it will gather strength for a renewed effort at no distant day. Not only has Cardinal Gibbons given his individual name as one who is in sympathy with this move, but we understand there is at least one Roman Catholic on the committee of the Sunday Association. This committee is to further the interests of the Sabbath cause according to the Protestant and Catholic idea. Why should they not seek and secure the aid of those who first christened this heathen festival? They were the first ones who enforced it on Christians. Perhaps it will revive their past experience in this work, and teach Protestants how to do it. It may be the means of furnishing occupants yet to private rooms or cells, under their cathedrals and larger churches. And to have such powerful allies in this work, so dear to the hearts of a backslidden church, can they not afford to deny the first principles of Protestantism, for which the reformers bled and died? May God spare his people in this evil time. There is one thing that ought to convince all, viz., the position taken by Seventh-day Adventists over forty years ago respecting this nation in prophecy is now coming true in almost every particular. At that time there was no evidence of changing the Constitution of the United States so as to have a national religion, thus forming an image to the Papacy, but by the prophetic word. But now we have seen with our eyes, and have heard with our own ears them say to them that dwell on the earth that they should make an image to the beast that had a wound by the sword and did live. More than that, it has been responded to by more than six million signatures of those that dwell on the earth, and also by the beast itself. May God help us to prepare for what is coming on the earth, and be ready for the conflict which is just before us.