THE SUNDAY AMENDMENT TO THE CONSTITUTION OF CALIFORNIA.
What California Papers Are Saying.
WANTS NO SABBATARIAN LAW.
[From the Sacramento Bee of Jan. 12, 1907.] THE Legislature would make a mistake should it pass any Sunday law. Such a measure has been prepared by certain Sabbatarians. It is designed to put a stop to all outdoor games and sports on the Christian sabbath, and to prevent the hiring of horses, automobiles, or any other vehicle; also to close saloons on that day. California once had such a Sunday law, but it remained for many years a dead letter on the statute books. Then a spasmodic attempt was made to enforce it, chiefly against saloons, but with such unsatisfactory results that the Legislature repealed the law. The sentiment of the great majority of the people of this State is unquestionably against any sort of Sunday legislation. And some of our churches and clergymen do not object to such wholesome outdoor sports and recreations as baseball, or to driving, or automobiling, and like harmless pleasures, provided religious duties be observed. The old puritanical spirit of intolerance has comparatively few adherents in California, her people as a whole, believing in leaving everybody free to worship on any day that suits him best, or not to worship at all. And a Sunday law necessarily interferes with the civil rights and religious faith of the Jewish people, who do not observe the Christian sabbath, and are as much entitled to consideration and respect as any other class of citizens. [From the Sacramento Union, Jan. 21, 1907.] THE proposed Sunday law will come up for consideration in a few days. The Union has already expressed its opinion of such legislation, and it adheres to that opinion and reiterates it. If such a measure could advance the interests of religion,—and religion is vital to this and to every other community,—if it could in any way whatever guarantee a day of rest to those who need it without infringing upon inalienable rights, it would be welcomed by every good citizen, and its passage would be hastened and urged. But it can not do these things. It can not do anything but unadulterated mischief. It can not soften any of the hardships of modern commercial life, but it can be the prolific cause of heartburnings, resentments, and illegalities. It would be a calamity and the never-ending source of dissensions, discords and injustices. It is not easy to believe that the Legislature can be so far seduced from the path of common sense as to countenance such a measure as this. It would be received with deep-seated indignation by the state at large as an unwarrantable interference with liberty and as an aggravation of the existing situation. It would do more to render religion unpopular than anything that could be devised and to rob our churches of the influence that they possess and that they can increase only by moral suasion and precept.