THE SENATE SUNDAY-LAW DISCUSSION.
By John D. Bradley
PERHAPS the most significant point in this last instance of Sunday legislation by Congress—the provision for closing the proposed exposition at Portland, Oregon, on that day—was the appeal to precedent in justification of the legislation. The chief, and about the only, argument in behalf of the Sunday-closing amendment was that "the Senate and Congress have once adopted this principle, have once recognized the sabbath," and that "Congress ought not to recede from that proposition," that "Congress, once having taken that stand, ought not to recede from it." Here we have revealed the danger of this thing. One violation of principle affords an excuse and justification for another; an evil principle once adopted, an evil precedent once established, is always ready to justify more and more violation of principle, and to lead further and further into the course of evil, and prevent return therefrom. So Congress having committed itself to the evil principle of "sabbath" legislation, the ready argument and contention now is, when it is asked to recommit itself and go further, that already it has "taken that stand," and "ought not to recede from it." And thus precedent blocks the return to principle. And what measure in recognition and enforcement of the "sabbath" may not be justified by "this principle" which "the Senate and Congress have once adopted"? Ah! and what measure of any sort, for the maintenance and enforcement by the Congress of the United States of religion or anything pertaining thereto, does not have in it a basis and precedent?