CONCERNING SUNDAY OBSERVANCE.
By John D. Bradley
[From our Correspondent at Washington, D. C.] Sunday and the Inaugural Ball.
ACTION in behalf of Sunday observance marked the initial meeting of the Washington committee having in charge the arrangements for the coming Presidential inauguration. The fixing of the time for the inaugural ball seems to have been one of the chief items of business at the first meeting, held on December 7, of this body, which, by appointment of the President, is headed by Gen. John M. Wilson, and is said to be "thoroughly representative of the city of Washington." It was decided that the only possible night for the ball and inaugural reception was the night of March 4, "notwithstanding the fact that the next day will be Sunday," but that "the festivities must cease at midnight, so far as the dancing and music is concerned." A promenade will be allowed after that hour on the ground, as General Wilson declared that it is not improper to go visiting on Sunday. The committee decided that the music and dancing should be stopped promptly at midnight Saturday night, but that the doors should not be immediately closed; the idea being that those who wished to stay, engage in conversation, and admire the decorations, should be allowed to do so. The following statement concerning the matter is attributed to General Wilson: I think that the people can get their full enjoyment out of the evening without extending the festivities into the Sabbath. Instead of arriving at the ball at 10 or 11 o'clock, and dancing until 2 in the morning, or later, they can come at 8. That will give four hours for dancing, and will get everybody home at a reasonable hour. As the hands of the clock point to midnight, the band will play "Home Sweet Home." Of course, if the guests desire to stay longer, the lights will not be put out. There will be no objection to the people remaining and looking at the decorations, but there will be no more dancing. Doubtless appreciating the fact that the prospect of being restricted, after 12 o'clock, to standing around and admiring the decorations, will be apt to modify considerably the interest in the affair of those who usually take most interest and part in such affairs, the Washington Evening Star devoted an editorial to the matter, arguing that the holding of the affair on Saturday night entailed "the limitation necessarily imposed by the succession of Sun-7day," "the inaugural reception is not necessarily brought to a close any earlier than in other years;" that "merely the dancing and dance music must cease at midnight," and that "the dancing feature is not the most significant item of the occasion." The following general summary of the Sunday laws of the United States, and all territory under the jurisdiction of the United States, so far as such laws relate to labor, appears under the heading, "Sunday Labor," in an article on "Labor Legislation in the United States," which constitutes a portion of "Bulletin No. 54, of the Bureau of Labor, Department of Commerce and Labor," which bulletin has just recently been issued: All states and territories except Arizona, California, Idaho, Nevada, and the Philippine Islands have laws prohibiting the employment of labor on Sunday. In California, however, it is a misdemeanor for any employer to cause his employees to work more than six days in seven, except in cases of emergency. The Sunday labor laws usually make it a misdemeanor for persons either to labor themselves or to compel or permit their apprentices, servants, etc., to labor on the first day of the week. Exceptions are made in the case of household duties or works of necessity or charity. These exceptions are sometimes expressed in general terms and sometimes specified in detail. The excepted labor is usually that required in the sale of drugs, medicines, surgical appliances, milk, ice, soda water, newspapers, the letting of horses and carriages, undertakers' work, and railway transportation. In Colorado and Montana, barbering only is prohibited on Sunday, while in Alaska barbering is included among the excepted occupations. A number of states make special provisions for the running of railway cars on Sunday, such as specifying certain hours during which they may run, permitting the transportation of perishable goods, fruit, milk, etc., or leaving the regulation of the running of railway cars on Sunday to the discretion of the railroad commissioners. Nearly all the Sunday labor laws make exceptions in the case of members of religious societies, by whom any other than the first day of the week is observed as a Sabbath, provided they refrain from labor on that day. The writer of the article from which this extract is made, who is no doubt an attaché of the Labor Bureau, states in beginning that he includes "only those classes of laws which are of greatest public interest at the present time." "Sunday labor" is fifth in his classification of the fifteen subjects considered. This classification of Sunday laws as labor laws is a conspicuous instance, illustrative of a change which Sunday legislation is now undergoing in the public mind. Its real character is being ignored, and there is being imputed to it a character which it does not possess except by imputation. It is no longer "Sabbath" legislation, but "labor" legislation. No doubt it is possible in the course of time for religious statutes to issue in civil statutes having no religious character, for history furnishes examples; and so it may be that in time there can issue from Sunday legislation real, genuine labor legislation, but it certainly is an inexcusable disregard of the real character of most of the Sunday legislation existing to-day, to assume that it is labor legislation. The history and the text of these laws, and everything by which their character is to be determined, shows indisputably that whatever bearing they may have upon labor, they are "Sabbath" laws, and not "labor" laws—laws in the interests of the observance of the religious Sunday, and not laws in the interests of workers. Whatever benefit they are to labor, is incidental to their object, which is something else entirely. A Legal Adjunct to Sunday Observance.
From present indications, the Sunday institution is not to continue in a complete monopoly of the weekly holiday and rest period business, but will be obliged to share that function, as well as popular favor and the recognition and support of the law, with another institution of that sort. The Saturday half-holiday seems to be gaining strength and favor, and establishing itself as a recognized institution. A recent notable instance indicative of this, has been a decision of the Court of Appeals of the District of Columbia, rendered on December 7, in which, interpreting a section of the District Code, it is declared that "the statute divides the Saturday into two parts, one for business purposes and the other for a holiday," and that "every Saturday after 12 o'clock is a holiday for all purposes" in the District. The question at issue was over the computation of time allowed for appeals. "Counsel on each side of the case contended that the rule of the law that courts will not take notice of fractions of a day was applicable," but the court held that "the rule is no longer applicable that the law will take no note of fractions of a day," and that the Saturday half-holiday must not be included in the time allowed for the taking of an appeal. The decision stated that the question before the court was "a somewhat novel one, and necessarily so, since the establishment of the Saturday half-holiday is a comparatively recent institution." So we have here judicial recognition of the Saturday half-holiday as an established institution. This institution will be welcomed and supported by the champions of the Sunday institutions, so far as it may be a means of promoting the latter institution. They will doubtless regard it as being useful and desirable, as a sort of introduction and preparation for the advent of the "Sabbath," and as a means of removing the unholiness of industry to a proper and suitable distance from the sanctity which attaches to the hours of the Sunday institution. But they who may suppose that the champions of a Sunday "weekly rest" period will have any such feeling with regard to the Saturday holiday and rest period that they have with regard to the Sunday holiday and rest period, are much mistaken. Notwithstanding their constant use of the phrases, it is not "weekly rest" and "release from toil" that is the concern of these people, but a certain weekly period of time to which they attach a special religious character, very different to them from any and all other time in the week; and "weekly rest" and "release from toil" at some other time, never can appeal to them as it does with reference to the time covered by the Sunday institution. JOHN D. BRADLEY.