THE people of Canada are having the experience of a campaign for compulsory Sunday observance. The principles involved are the same as are involved in like efforts in the United States. The arguments for and against such legislation are the same in the Dominion north of us as in our own country. The reasons why such tyranny should be opposed everywhere ought to be kept before the people, because the enemies of religious liberty are ceaseless in their endeavor to enforce the Sunday dogma upon all classes. A paper entitled, "Sunday Laws vs. the Laboring Man," is being circulated in Canada, by the friends of liberty of conscience, and, as the thoughts presented are of world-wide application, we reproduce some extracts. The author of the paper is Mr. George B. Thompson, of Hamilton, Ont.:—
The claim is repeatedly put forth by those who are strenuously urging that Parliament enact further laws favoring Sunday, that Sunday laws are wanted in order to secure for laboring men a day of rest. The secretary of the Lord's Day Alliance tells us that there are 150,000 laboring men in Canada who are now compelled to work on Sunday.
This statement is misleading, and serves to obscure the real issue. In the movement lurks the monster of religious legislation. The real thing that is sought after is the exaltation of the festival day, Sunday, and an enforcement of its religious character. Parliament is being asked to interpret the Bible, and settle by law the controversy as to which day is the Sabbath of the Fourth Commandment, and determine how all shall observe it, regardless of their convictions. But the true province, allow me to say, of governmental legislation, is not to settle religious controversies, and invade by law the sacred convictions of minorities, and determine the duty of citizens to the government of heaven, but to determine their duty to each other. It was the legislation upon religious questions which gave the world the Dark Ages with all the terrible work of the holy (?) Inquisition, by means of which savages were taught to shudder at the name of Christianity.
The laboring men of Canada are not compelled to labor on Sunday. Not a single son of toil is forced to do anything of the kind. No law, unless it be that of greed, makes any such demand. All who work do so from choice, and are paid for the labor performed. And their working does not interfere in the least with the worship of those who do not desire to work, choosing rather to observe the day. It is perhaps true that some of them might not be retained in their present positions if they refuse to work on Sunday. But this is no reason why Parliament should legislate on the question. There are a number of good citizens in Canada who lose their positions because they will not labor on Saturday, contrary to their convictions. Why should Parliament legislate in favor of a man who loses his job because he will not work on Sunday, any more than the man who loses his job because he will not work on Saturday? A religion that is not worth a man losing his job for, is not worth the effort of Parliament to enforce, for it will do no one any good, either in this world or in the world to come. Think of the martyrs. They asked for no legislation in their behalf.
But all the laboring men are not seeking for compulsory Sunday laws, as is claimed. This same claim was put forth by the clergy in the United States when Congress was being besieged to close the Columbian Exposition on Sunday. The claim was made that it was to help the laboring men, and that they desired it. But labor unions sent influential representatives to the hearing before Congress, such as Samuel Gompers, president of the American Federation of Labor, Thomas Morgan, and others, who stated that the working men did not want the exposition closed. That they had built it, had constructed its massive buildings, its beautiful parks and fountains, and they protested strongly against its gates being closed on the only day on which they could attend. Many laboring men in the Dominion feel the same concerning such legislation here.
A moment's consideration will show that Sunday laws are class legislation, discriminating against the laboring man in favor of the rich. The preachers composing the Alliance seem very solicitous to have all street-cars, excursion trains, etc., stopped on Sunday. Why is it any worse to ride in a street-car on Sunday, or to take the train and ride out in the country, than to go in a buggy, or in an automobile? It is perhaps true that many who can go nowhere else will in this way be led to go to church, and incidentally replenish its exchequer as opportunity offers. But going to church because you can go nowhere else, is like going home for the same reason. During the week many of the rich in our cities, who do not have to toil for bread in just the same way that the working man does, can go for an "outing" with their families. But the laboring man can not do this, and on Sunday, the only day on which he could go, he is deprived of the privilege.
But we are told that it is detrimental to health to work seven days in the week, and we must, therefore, have a day of rest. Well, there are a number of things that are detrimental to health, and if the Dominion starts in to legislate on health matters it has a wide field to explore. It is essential to good health to get the proper amount of sleep (which is rest in the truest sense). We should also eat the right kind of food, and at the proper time, and in the proper amount, and have it hygienically prepared and combined. It is proper that we diet for the dyspepsia, or have a limb amputated because of a diseased bone. Certain kinds of clothing are proper at different seasons of the year in order to have the proper protection against colds. Bathing is also necessary and very healthful, provided the temperature of the water is suited to the physical condition of the person. Many eminent physicians also tell us that it is detrimental to health to smoke. Shall Parliament legislate on all these questions, and countless others that might be mentioned? If not, why do so on the Sabbath question from the standpoint of health?
