ON TRIAL FOR THE TRUTH by R. S. Owen

Pacific Press Publishing Company · Oakland, California · Mar 19, 1894

FromSigns of the Times, Vol. 20, No. 20.

ON TRIAL FOR THE TRUTH.

By R. S. Owen

SCENES have just transpired in Gainesville, Ga., which are replete with interest,—the trial of Elder W. A. McCutcheon and E. C. Keck. In the morning, before going to the court room, the members of the church and other brethren from a distance gathered in the house of worship to implore the blessing of God upon his servants in this trying hour. They had done nothing worthy of bonds or imprisonment, but had simply carried out their convictions of duty to God in keeping the seventh day, and worked, as he had commanded them, on the first day of the week. The authorities had undertaken to step in between them and their God to dictate as to what day they should render to him. They were to be brought before rulers for Christ's sake, and now they claimed his promise, "It shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall speak." Matt. 10:19.

A large concourse of people assembled to witness the trial, and when their case was called, the deepest interest was manifested. The law under which they were indicted was first read, which is as follows:—

"SEC. 4579. Violating Sabbath.—Any tradesman, artificer, workman, or laborer, or other person whatever, who shall pursue their business or work of their ordinary callings on the Lord's day (works of necessity or charity only excepted), shall be guilty of misdemeanor, and, on conviction, shall be punished as prescribed in section 4310 of this code."

Five witnesses for the prosecution were then sworn, and all testified substantially to the same thing, namely, that the defendants did, on the nineteenth day of November, 1893, being Sunday, work in the Seventh-day Adventist Church with saw, plane, and square, making school seats. No attempt was made to show that anyone was disturbed. No one had been molested or disquieted, only they had engaged in working on Sunday. This our brethren freely admitted, and even placed upon the witness stand one of the little kindergarten school desks which they had made upon that day. Witnesses for the defense simply testified to the usual occupation of the defendants, and that they were doing that work free for the school, which was to begin the next day. The defendants were then allowed one hour and a half to speak in their own defense. They had freedom in presenting the truth, and were listened to with the closest attention, not only by judge and jury, but by the large audience, among whom were doctors, lawyers, ministers, senators, and other men of influence.

Their first point was to show that they had not worked on the Sabbath, or Lord's day. (The law recognizes both Sabbath and Lord's day to mean the same.) The only authority qualified to decide which day the Lord claims as his is the Lord himself, and this he has revealed in his word. Therefore the Bible must settle this point. From this the speaker presented the testimony of the Bible, both of the Old and New Testaments, showing that the seventh day and no other had been blessed and set apart as holy to the Lord. This day was Saturday, which is recognized the world over as the seventh day of the week. It was clearly shown by the teaching of Christ and his apostles that they never observed or recognized any other day as the Sabbath, and that the law which enjoins the observance of that day is to remain in force as long as the heaven and earth remain.

It was the apostate Church of Rome that changed the observance from the seventh day and foisted the pagan Sunday, or "day of the sun"—the chief god of paganism—in place of the Sabbath of the Lord. Not only do facts show this, but the Catholic Church admits it, boasts of it, and flaunts it in the face of Protestants as a badge of her authority. The testimony of a Catholic priest was read, in which he offered a reward of a thousand dollars to any Protestant who would prove by the Bible that Sunday should be kept as the Sabbath.

It was further shown that the Sabbath is a sign of the true God, the Creator of the heavens and the earth, and that Sunday, the counterfeit sabbath, constitutes a sign or mark of the Papacy, and that for us, who know these things, to observe Sunday as the Sabbath would be to acknowledge the authority and receive the mark of that apostate power, represented by the beast of Rev. 13:1-10.

The second line of defense was the constitutional right of every man to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience. This right is guaranteed to every inhabitant of the State by the following words from the Constitution of the State of Georgia:—

"All men have the natural and inalienable right to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience, and no human authority should in any case control or interfere with the right of conscience.

"No inhabitant of this State shall be molested in person or property, or prohibited from holding any office or public trust on account of his religious opinion; but the right of liberty of conscience shall not be so construed as to excuse acts of licentiousness or justify practices inconsistent with the peace and safety of the State."

This was also shown to be the doctrine of the Bible, that worldly governments have no right to interfere with religious faith or observances. The thirteenth and fourteenth chapters of Romans were compared, showing that, while we are strictly enjoined to obey magistrates in civil matters, yet in matters of faith, as the observing of days, we are accountable only to God for our practice. "He that regardeth the day, regardeth it unto the Lord; and he that regardeth not the day, to the Lord he doth not regard it." Rom. 14:6. The distinction between civil and religious duties is clearly drawn by our Saviour in his reply to the question of the Pharisees about paying tribute. When the tribute money was brought, he asked, "Whose is this image and superscription?" So we may ask concerning the Sabbath, whose image and superscription does it bear? The State of Georgia says it is the "Lord's day," and we answer in the language of our Saviour, "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's."

It was further shown in the defense, as a matter, however, of minor importance compared with the great principles of truth involved in this case, that the defendants had not violated the law, even if Sunday was the Lord's day, for they were not engaged in their ordinary occupation, and what they were doing was a work of charity.

They had conscientiously observed the Sabbath according to the command of God, and they also had the God-given right to work six days. Should the jury find them guilty for this, and they be sent to the prison and the chain gang, this would only be a revival of persecution which has stained the pages of history of past ages.

Following the plea of the defendants, the acting prosecuting attorney made a speech of about one hour. He read largely from court decisions. He said he cared not whether Sunday came from the Catholic Church, from God, or the devil, the law must be obeyed. He claimed that we had full religious liberty, inasmuch as we were allowed to preach what we believe, and to keep the seventh day. His greatest freedom in speaking was when he turned from his unpleasant task of prosecuting those whom he believed to be sincere Christian men, and went to denouncing the prosecution of one of our brethren who had been fined for a similar offense (that of working on Sunday) in an adjoining county; that he declared to be the most unrighteous judgment he had ever witnessed.

Next came the judge's charge to the jury. This was so fair and impartial that we could but feel that the words were being dictated by the Spirit of God. When the jury retired to make up the verdict, it seemed to be the opinion of all that they would soon return with the verdict "not guilty," but hour after hour passed away, and for seventeen long hours they wrestled over the question, or until nine o'clock the next morning, when they were again called to their seats in the court room, and reported, "We are not agreed and are not likely to be." They stood six for acquittal and six for conviction. The judge then dismissed them, and appointed a new trial, to be held in May next. While nothing was gained in the way of deciding the case in the court, yet an opportunity has been afforded to bring the truth before a large number of people in a way that has made a deep impression. The Lord has worked wonderfully for his truth during this time of trial. Some are deciding to obey as the result, one of whom we believe will soon be a worker in the cause.

R. S. OWEN. Gainesville, Ga., Feb. 25, 1894.