p. 15 | Signs of the Times, Vol. 33, No. 8. (2/20/1907)

SENATE ORDERS REPORT ON SUNDAY OPENING AND BUSINESS OF POST-OFFICES.

By John D. Bradley

Washington, Jan. 13, 1907.

THE adverse report, during the last session of Congress, of the Senate Committee on Post-offices and Post-roads on the Crafts' Sunday bill "to prevent Sunday banking in post-offices in the handling of money-orders and registered letters" has not ended for the present Congress the matter of "Sabbath desecration" in the postal department of the government so far as the Senate and Mr. Crafts are concerned. On January 9, Senator Burkett, of Nebraska, submitted the following resolution (Senate Resolution No. 215, 59th Congress, 2d Session) in the Senate, which was immediately considered by unanimous consent and agreed to:

"Resolved, That the postmaster-general be directed to inform the Senate by what authority post-offices are required to be kept open on Sunday, together with the regulations of Sunday opening, as to the extent of the business that may be transacted, and also what provisions are made for clerical help, and whether postal clerks or carriers are required to work more than six days per week."

The form of this resolution does not leave in doubt the attitude with respect to the Sunday opening and Sunday business of post-offices which inspired it. Not only does it require the Postmaster-General to make the matter of the Sunday opening and Sunday business of post-offices the subject of a special report to the Senate, but it virtually challenges him to defend the practise upon which he is ordered to report. The form of the resolution is such as to imply that post-offices are required to be kept open on Sunday without proper authority. That this resolution of implied censure of the Postmaster-General for the Sunday opening of post-offices, which was presented by a Senator who is not a member of the Committee on Post-offices and Post-roads, is inspired from the same source as the bill "to prevent Sunday banking in post-offices," which for years has been one of the "moral measures" which "Christian lobbyist" Crafts and his Church-and-State lobby at Washington, the "International Reform Bureau," have sought to get through Congress, and which in their literature is termed the "Penrose-Sibley Bill," these gentlemen having been its introducers respectively in the Senate and House for a number of Congresses, may be inferred from the fact that Senator Burkett, if not identified with, is in close and sympathetic relations with the Church-and-State element represented by Mr. Crafts and his lobby.

The Senator was a speaker at a "Christmas Chautauqua on Reforms" held by this element at Pittsburg, Pa., from December 16 to 23, and at a "Reform Bureau Institute" presided over by Mr. Crafts and held at the headquarters of the "International Reform Bureau" in Washington from December 10 to 14, and from which those in attendance proceeded directly to the Pittsburg convention. It was given out as a special feature of the Pittsburg meeting that Senator Burkett would attend it and deliver an address. So there can be little doubt as to the source from whence the Senator's resolution was inspired. His bill having been "turned down" by the Senate Committee on Post-offices and Post-roads, Mr. Crafts, with that unabashed and untiring persistence which characterizes him in the pursuit of his Church-and-State aims, now seeks in another way to get at the "Sabbath desecration" in the postal department of the government.

In this latest move can be discerned the ultimate and real aim of Mr. Crafts in this matter. The measure which he has sought for years to get thru Congress, but which was disapproved by the Senate committee at the last session, went no further than to prevent "Sunday banking" in post-offices, as the handling of money orders and registered letters was termed in the measure. But it is evident from this resolution of Senator Burkett's that the prevention not only of "Sunday banking," but of SUNDAY OPENING OF POST-OFFICES AT ALL is desired and aimed at. A Washington newspaper remarks with reference to Senator Burkett and his resolution that "legislation will be enacted to close all post-offices in the United States on Sundays if it is within the power of Senator Burkett to accomplish it," and adds that "he holds that carriers and clerks are entitled to rest on that day; that business communications are not acted upon until the day following, and that most of those who hasten to the post-office on Sunday are silly girls looking for letters from sweethearts."

There can be no question but that the purpose here ascribed to Senator Burkett is the purpose which is behind not only his resolution, but which all the time has been behind Mr. Crafts' "Sunday banking" bill. But of course Mr. Crafts knew the hopelessness and impolity of demanding at the outset the entire closing of the post-offices on Sunday. He knew that the wise way to reach this end was to commence by demanding the suppression of that feature of the Sunday postal service which is most commercial in its character, and which many people could be persuaded was an unnecessary feature of that service, and then when this was suppressed by an act of Congress and the precedent of legislation against the Sunday postal service was established, the way would be prepared for going on to further restrictions and the ultimate end and aim of the entire suppression of the postal service on Sunday.

The adverse report (Senate Report No. 1426, 59th Congress, 1st Session) of the Committee on post-offices and post-roads of the Senate on the bill (S. 1653) to prevent Sunday banking in post-offices, was presented in the Senate by the chairman of the committee, Senator Penrose, on February 21, last, and was headed "Handling Money Orders and Registered Letters on Sundays." At the time, it was reported in a Washington newspaper that "the committee was almost unanimous in saying that THERE COULD BE NO GOOD REASON FOR CLOSING THE POST-OFFICE DIVISIONS AFFECTED BY THE BILL while permitting other divisions, such as mail deliveries and the sale of stamps, to

remain open," and that "THERE HAS BEEN NO DEMAND for the closing of these public conveniences," but the committee report itself merely stated that the committee, having considered the bill, "report thereon with a recommendation that it do not pass." But appended to, and made a part of, the report were "the views of the Post-office Department," as the committee termed it, in the form of a letter from the Postmaster-General to the chairman of the committee. This letter of the Postmaster-General expressing the views of the Post-office Department in the matter of the Sunday postal service, which, so far as the writer is aware, has never been published except in the committee report, is particularly pertinent in view of the adoption by the Senate of the Burkett resolution. The letter was written from the office of the Postmaster-General under date of Feb. 7, 1906, and reads as follows:

"My dear Sir: I have the honor to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of December 30, 1905, with which you enclosed a copy of Senate Bill 1653, entitled, 'A bill to prevent Sunday banking in post-offices in the handling of money-orders and registered letters.' You ask my opinion upon its merits."

"In reply I beg to state that the present regulations do not require postmasters to accept mail matter for registration, or to deliver registered matter, or to issue or pay money-orders on Sundays. They are left to exercise their discretion according to the needs and best interests of their respective local communities."

"When consideration is given to the fact that the operations of the postal service are almost as extensive on Sundays as on other days; that letters are written, postage stamps sold, mail matter received and delivered, collections made from street letter-boxes, and other use made of the facilities of the service, it would seem that such an absolute prohibition as that proposed in this bill might in many instances occasion hardship to the public."

"Such service as now rendered in the matter of receiving and delivering registered mail and in the issuance and payment of money-orders, in the discretion of postmasters is performed without the employment of any additional clerks beyond those required to be present in the post-office for the regular delivery of Sunday mail. The department does not encourage the extension of Sunday service in those branches."

"Very respectfully, "GEO. B. CORTELYOU, "Postmaster-General."

It will be observed from this letter that the views of the Post-office Department do not coincide with that of the Sabbatarian theocrats who are seeking to restrict and suppress the Sunday postal service. It will be observed also that in this letter, written about a year ago, and of which Senator Burkett and those behind his resolution are no doubt perfectly cognizant, he and they already have from the Postmaster-General substantially the information which they have succeeded in getting the Senate to order him to furnish, and likewise, that in this letter which was embodied in the report of its committee last February, the Senate already has from the Postmaster-General substantially the information which it has now ordered him to furnish it with. It will be interesting to see what response the Postmaster-General makes to the resolution.

The fact that the Sunday-law men continue to push their fight against the Sunday postal service of the government notwithstanding the attitude of the Post-office Department, and the defeat suffered in the action of the Senate Committee on Post-offices and Post-roads last February, shows how persistent and determined they are and will probably continue to be in the matter. And now that the Senate has in a measure lent itself to this fight by the adoption of the Burkett resolution, it has a standing, dignity, and importance which it has not hitherto had, and which will no doubt greatly encourage and accentuate the zeal and persistence of the misguided men behind it. It should have the effect also of accentuating the zeal and activity of those who are opposed to theocratical legislation. JOHN D. BRADLEY.

THE CLOSING OF SALOONS ON SUNDAY.

By Editor

THE Los Gatos "Mail" of January 10, in speaking of the proposed Sunday Amendment to the Constitution of California, and our Special thereon, refers to the object of the Amendment as "regarding Sunday as the Sabbath or legal day of rest from all labors." The "Mail" is in favor of the Amendment, and the editor speaks truly as to its object; it is to make Sunday the legal Sabbath, the religious day of the week, supported by civil law, a thing contrary to primitive Christianity, primitive Protestantism, primitive Americanism.

Regarding the position of Seventh-day Adventists, the "Mail" says:

"As a matter of course this sect would oppose any legislation making Sunday a day of rest, when bars, saloons, race-courses, stores, workshops, banking-houses, and other places of business, of any class or calling, shall not be open on the first day of the week, altho the same proposed amendment claims to exempt 'persons who conscientiously believe that the seventh day of the week should be observed as the Sabbath,' etc."

The position of Seventh-day Adventists is entirely apart from saloons, horse-races and similar places of resort. The SIGNS OF THE TIMES does not believe in religious legislation whether that legislation pertains to the Sunday or the Sabbath, Good Friday, or any other religious institution, right or wrong. And if we believed Sunday to be the Sabbath by divine authorization, we should oppose the legislation just as strongly and vigorously. If the proposed amendment should include the seventh day, we would just as persistently oppose it, and consistently we could not do otherwise. We are old-fashioned enough to believe that the Decalogue is not superseded; but we would oppose with all our power an amendment making that wonderful code a part of the Constitution or statute law of California.

We would do this for the simple reason that civil law can not enforce morality and spirituality, which are matters of motive and conscience, any more than it can determine by all the courts within its jurisdiction whether man "conscientiously believes that the seventh day of the week should be observed as the Sabbath." To endeavor to determine such questions as this, the Inquisition came into existence. Legislating upon religious questions will again bring in religious judges and tribunals and the Inquisition. Does the "Mail" want it? Has it thought into the question that far?

We believe in the closing of saloons, but the closing of saloons in this connection is a mere excuse. No Sunday law is a temperance measure. If there is temperance sentiment and vote sufficient to close the saloon one day, that same sentiment and vote could close it every day. Why not? If the saloon is evil one day, it is evil seven days. If it is evil for the community, the county, the State, one day, it is all days. To say that we will close it Sunday is to elevate the religious day, and say to the tempted youth, The saloon is all right six days of the week, only do not patronize it Sunday. There are purely economic reasons why the saloon should be legislated out of existence forever. It would be infinitely better for all peoples, all classes, all towns and cities, and the State or county or town could better afford to pay the saloon-keeper for his loss of business, which the license system has fostered, and banish the saloon, than it could to foster the saloon and take its toll from its ill-gotten gains.

We have no objection to a man's keeping Sunday. If that is what he desires to do, the right is his. If he wishes to close his place of business on that day, that is his right. If he wishes to keep that place of business open, he has that right. And we would be unchristian and unfair if we sought to limit him in these rights. He has the right to believe or not to believe. He may agree with us, or he may disagree. No human tribunal may pass upon his right. God reserves judgment to Himself at the last day.

The "Mail" admits that Sunday is as well observed here as in Eastern states where they have Sunday laws. It is. Every religious duty is a matter of heart and conscience. Why should we seek by civil law to make men law-breakers or hypocrites? Again the "Mail" observes:

"Such laws are not a union of Church and State."

Not a union of some one church with the State, granted; but a union of religion and religionists with the State which will, if operative, lead to as decided a persecution as any purely Church and State government ever knew. Let the Sunday-law regime obtain. Let it become as active and operative as our Sunday-law friends desire. Let the prosecutions go on galore. The courts would have to decide as to how Sunday should be kept; as to whose conception of Sunday should obtain, the Roman Catholic or the Puritan—to church service Sunday morning with sports and recreation in the afternoon, or church and quiet all day. Where would be the end? The more of law our Sunday-law friends obtained, the less of Gospel they would have; and this would develop, as it always has developed, into a religious tyranny, and the ruin of both Church and State. All these evil results are in the Sunday-law seed. Does not the "Mail" wish to keep the baneful weed out of California soil?

Shah of Persia Succeeded by Son

It is reported that the shah of Persia, Muzafar-Ed-Din, died January 8, and that his son Mohammed-Ali-Mirza, has succeeded him. Muzafar-Ed-Din took the throne in 1896. During his reign there was promise of considerable progress and development throut the kingdom.

American Bible Society Restores Office

The American Bible Society has reestablished the office of recording secretary, and the place has been filled by Henry O. Dwight, LL.D., who has had a wide experience in various foreign missions, especially in Turkey.

WHAT CATHOLICS EXPECT.

By Editor

The "Western Watchman" of December 13 prints an interview with Archbishop Farley, who has recently visited Europe, and especially Norway, Denmark, and Scotland. He tells us that he has hope of Northern Europe soon becoming Catholic.

The Catholic Church in America is rapidly drawing to itself the best element in the country, and that if Catholics were only true to themselves and the precepts of their religion, the day is not far distant when the mission of the Catholic Church will be filled throut the length and breadth of this republic.

Rev. Father Robert, one of their missionary workers, also says that "I used to count our converts by the hundred in the early days of my missionary life. I have stopped that system of computation long ago, and now count them by the thousand."

This one thing is favoring Catholicism, not only in this country, but in all the world,—they have a positive belief. They stand somewhere. They present something with the assurance of conviction, while Protestants have emasculated the Word of God thru higher criticism, and have nothing definitely positive to offer the soul that is seeking salvation.

Men throut the Protestant ranks are decrying dogmatic Christianity. Of course there is danger of too much dogma and dogmatic preaching, but it would be the greatest blessing to Protestantism that could come to her if she could be able to say in the language of the Scriptures so often repeated, especially by the beloved apostle, "FOR WE KNOW," and that is the assurance that God desires His church shall have.

Numbers Do Not Affect the Truth.

By Editor

All the world save one may hold to a doctrine or a theory, but that does not make the theory true. The one regarded by all the world as wrong may be right. He certainly is if he is on the side of God and His truth. This is the standard. Let us be careful to know, not what men say of the truth, but what the truth says; not what men say God means, but what He says, "rightly dividing the word of truth."

One of our watchful readers refers to a mistake in the SIGNS of January 23, which was corrected in the most of the edition. It was the line of poetry under the first illustration, "Christ or Diana." It should have read this way:

"Steadfast she looks to heaven, and breathes the sacred Name, Unmoved by lover's plea, or sword, or rack, or flame. O holy hope of God! O fearless faith divine! Undimmed by death, or time, or tears, immortal and sublime."

The Hearing at Sacramento.

As intimated in our last, the hearing before the Assembly Committee on Constitutional Amendments was held in Sacramento, Cal., Monday afternoon, February 4, on the proposed Sunday-law amendment to the constitution. That committee was composed of the following gentlemen: H. W. A. Weske, chairman, Miguel Estudillo, Chas. P. Cutten, A. M. Drew, E. W. Forbes, J. J. Wyatt, John M. Eshelman. But four members of the committee were present. Chairman Weske was very courteous, stating that the time had been divided between the proponents and opponents of the measure. Bishop Moreland was the chairman of the committee of Sacramento ministers who had the matter in charge advocating the measure, and C. M. Dunn, Esq., the framer of the measure, led out and took charge of the ministers who appeared in its behalf. One hour was given the proponents of the measure, one and one-fourth hours to those who opposed it, and one-fourth hour to the advocates of the measure in which to close. We had hoped to be able in this issue to lay before our readers some of the more important arguments on either side. This we shall have to postpone until our next. We have the verbatim notes, however, of the speeches on both sides. Suffice to say the advocates of the measure made their strongest appeal over two points; first, that it is not a religious measure, simply advocating a day of rest, which every one ought to have to do what he pleases with; and secondly, that thousands among the poor working-men were deprived of their liberty for lack of just such a law. It was also contended that the history of Sunday laws shows that they had been beneficial; that the Eastern and older States had them, and a higher degree of civilization existed in them; that California and Idaho are not yet emerged into that degree of civilization characteristic of the East. The attitude of these advocates indicates that they were glad to get anything if it could be called a Sunday law, seemingly, contending that it ought to be presented to the people so that they could have an opportunity to pass upon the Amendment to the Constitution. On the other hand, it was held that it is not a proper subject of legislation, and should not be legislated upon, according to American principles. We will deal with this more fully in the future, and we will present some of the strong, cogent arguments that were given in opposition to this un-American measure.

The Indian Senator.

An Alameda, Cal., correspondent, Mr. Milton Hess, writes us a kind letter, correcting an item in the SIGNS OF THE TIMES of February 6, concerning Hon. Charles Curtis, of the Senate of the United States. The SIGNS stated that he was the first full-blooded Indian to sit in the Senate, but our correspondent, who seems to be well acquainted with the facts, tells us that he has very little Indian blood, that his father was a white man and his mother a quarter Indian. But he does tell us that Mr. Curtis began life a poor boy and worked himself into a self-made man. We are thankful for this correction, glad that we have critical readers. We took the item from current news despatches.

"The only proper objects of civil government are the happiness and protection of men in the present state of existence; the security of the life, liberty, and property of the citizen; and to restrain and encourage the virtuous by wholesome laws equally extended to every individual; but the duty that we owe to our Creator, and the manner of discharging it, can only be directed by reason and conviction, and is nowhere cognizable but at the tribunal of the universal Judge. To judge for ourselves, and to engage in the exercise of religion agreeably to THE DICTATES OF OUR OWN CONSCIENCE, is an inalienable right, which, upon the principles on which the Gospel was first propagated, and the Reformation from popery carried on, can never be transferred to another."

Liberty of conscience requires liberty of worship as its manifestation. To grant the former and to deny the latter, is to imprison conscience and to promote hypocrisy and infidelity. Religion is in its nature voluntary, and ceases to be religion in proportion as it is forced. God wants free worshipers, and no others.

Sunday Law in Idaho.

Report has it that a strong effort is being put forth in Idaho to secure a Sunday law, and that a great majority of the citizens of that State are in favor of it. That same argument is put forth there as in California, that Idaho stands practically alone with a lower degree of civilization than the East, that the civilization there will be greatly elevated by placing a Sunday law upon their statute books. We wonder what the friends of religious liberty are doing in that State to enlighten the people, and show them just what a Sunday law means; to let them know what every good citizen ought to know, that the Sunday law will in no wise help civilize or lift the morals of the State to any higher plane. Religious laws of every kind have invariably and inevitably pressed the country adopting them back toward the age of cruelty, intolerance, and barbarism, unless it be that the sin of the people has been such that the laws themselves have proved dead letters, and then the laws themselves are a farce.

Hair-splitting Laws.

The Hon. Grove L. Johnson, who introduced the Sunday amendment in the Legislature of California, seems somehow wedded to the strange idea that the particular time at which a deed is done affects its criminality. He has introduced a bill which declares that a robbery between the hours of sunset and sunrise, or by means of a deadly weapon or any other means likely to do great injury, is robbery of the first degree. Of course the violence and assaults with deadly weapons should be dealt with; but any kind of robbery between sunset and sunrise is no worse than the same kind of robbery between sunrise and sunset. The proposed act provides that a man convicted of robbery in the first degree shall suffer death or confinement in the State prison for life. Just think of it! There might be robbery of very mild form, almost justified, considering the dire need of family necessities, with no intention to wrong any one on the part of the criminal, but simply the saving of the life of loved ones in mind, yet being performed between sunset and sunrise, it is robbery in the first degree and subject to death. It is a fit parallel to some of the Sunday laws in existence.

Sunday-law Revivals.

A despatch from Boston, of January 12, declares that the old Sunday laws have been revived with a rigor hitherto unknown, and that the police have been told to most rigidly enforce them. The first day after this order, one thousand arrests were made by the police. People of every sort and kind of trade were held up. Men having to do with the street-car tracks, oiling the switches, sanding the tracks, waiters in restaurants, boot-blacks, a Chinaman who was restoring to a man a collar that had been lost from the laundry bundle, men washing windows, a man driving an undertaker's wagon with a casket inside was held up, a young man driving a motor car,—in all about a thousand persons were called to account for doing some harmless thing that somebody else thought they ought not to do. And that is the character of the Sunday laws generally. Older states are enforcing them with bigoted religious zeal; new states are following after, yet claiming that they want no religious rest day.

It is difficult to understand our fiery contemporary, the Western Watchman, of St. Louis. Not long ago it advocated the absolute separation of Church and State. In its issue of January 10, it declares, "The union of Church and State, each being superior in its own legitimate sphere, is the ideal relation. All good men should be united in a good thing. Our Church and State should be distinct, but not separate, any more than the body and soul should be separate." But the trouble is that the church calls itself the soul, and that it is the duty of the body to absolutely submit to that soul, practically leaving it without any independence at all, and that is the Roman Catholic idea of Church-and-State relationship.

A Falling Away.

A correspondent sends us a report of the new Jewish synagog in New York, called the Free Synagog, of which a Rabbi Wise is in charge. He holds very lax ideas in regard to the Sabbath, and seems really to prefer Sunday, because he can get at all of his people at that time. Our correspondent writes us that he did not know that the Jews had so far departed from the Sabbath as that. We would say in reply that they have been departing for a good many years. Infidelity has simply honeycombed Jewish religion and traditions, as in the days of Christ, and has made void the law of God.

The Gospel of Self.

A number of papers have been sent us containing extracts or reports of sermons of Dr. Algernon S. Crapsey, recently separated from the Episcopal Church. He may be expected to say startling things, heretical things, and all sorts of things. It affects not the truth of God either way whatever he may say. Just now he seems to be preaching Dr. Crapsey and not the Gospel. The Bible is nothing to him, unless it agrees with his own views.

It is not a spasmodic faith or submission which develops Christian character; it is the constant, abiding trust in God. The one may bring forgiveness, for God is ever merciful; but the other puts Christ into the character. Let the prayer be, "Create in me a clean heart, O God; and renew a constant spirit within me." Ps. 51:10, margin.

Loyalty to God and the unchangeable principles of His truth is demanded now as never at any other age of the world. Men can never be helped by compromise of truth, or integrity. Let God and truth be first, and then they are our helpers.

Church in which Elder Strickland was holding service when the earthquake came.

Rear View of the S. D. A. Church after the Earthquake.

From a Photograph of Vesuvius in Action.—The world-renowned volcano, 10 miles from Naples, Italy, which has covered so many towns and cities with ashes, notable among which are Pompeii and Herculaneum, in A.D. 79. The former was buried 20 feet in loose ashes; the latter was covered with mud. The following years are noted for outbursts: 203, 472, 512, 685, 983, 1066, 1631, 1779, 1794, 1822, 1855, 1865, 1872, 1878, 1880, 1895, 1906. In 1822 it lost 800 feet of its height, the top becoming a great crater 3 miles in circumference and 1,000 feet deep. It is still active and disturbed, especially during the recent earthquake disturbances.