Obrázky stránek
PDF
ePub
[graphic][merged small]

Praying to the God of Heaven, Contrary to the King's Commandment

It is not right to do right in the wrong way. It was right that Jesus should be king: it was wrong to seek to make Him king by force. It is right that men should pray it would be wrong to attempt to force them to pray. It is right that men should come to church: it would be wrong to force any one to come to the sanctuary. You can by force compel a man to pay his debts. Is that compelling him to be honest? The very attempt to force men to be religious destroys the temper which alone makes religion possible. Jesus Christ himself would never consent to reign over the soul by mere force. If you would force men to Christ, you could not force Christ to men.- -Joseph Parker, D. D.

Our legislators are not sufficiently apprised of the rightful limits of their power; that their true office is to declare and enforce only our natural rights and duties, and to take none of them from us. No man has a natural right to commit aggression on the equal rights of another; and this is all from which the laws ought to restrain him; every man is under the natural duty of contributing to the necessities of the society; and this is all the laws should enforce on him; and, no man having a natural right to be the judge between himself and another, it is his natural duty to submit to the umpirage of an impartial third. When the laws have declared and enforced all this, they have fulfilled their functions, and the idea is quite unfounded that on entering into society we give up any natural right. Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to Francis W. Gilmer, June 7, 1816.

Civil liberty, the great end of all human society and government, is that state in which each individual has the power to pursue his own happiness according to his own views of his interest and the dictates of his conscience, unrestrained except by equal, just, and impartial laws.- Sharswood's Blackstone, 127, note 8.

OKLAHOMA SUNDAY LAW DECISION

66

IN 1915 G. J. Krieger and his son were arraigned before the Blaine County (Oklahoma) court, charged with Sabbath breaking." The offense alleged against them was exposing merchandise for sale on Sunday.

The defense of the Kriegers was that, being Seventh-day Adventists, and regularly and strictly refraining from labor and business on the seventh day, they were exempt under the Sunday law of that State from any penalty for Sabbath breaking on account of selling or exposing for sale articles of merchandise on Sunday.

Under the ruling of the county court the defendants were not allowed to prove the facts of their religious belief and practice; and so being without any defense which the court would recognize, they were convicted, and a fine was assessed against them. The prosecuting attorney insisted, and the lower court ruled, that "servile labor" did not include merchandising, and that therefore the only question before the court was, Did these men expose merchandise for sale on Sunday? If so, they were guilty, regardless of the fact that they uniformly, strictly, and conscientiously observed another day as the Sabbath.

Convicted of Sabbath Breaking

The case being decided against them in the county court, the defendants took an appeal to the criminal court of appeals, before which the case was argued in 1916 by Attorneys William O. Woolman and Cyrus Simmons, counsel for the plaintiffs in error, and by Attorney Boardman, of Oklahoma City, for the State.

Judge Woolman opened the case by showing that the Kriegers were law-abiding citizens and of good standing in the community where they live. He said in part:

66

The plaintiffs in error regularly close their businesses every Saturday and do not perform any business on that day, nor do they permit their employees to do any business for them. On account of their religious belief, they regard that day as the Sabbath. On Sunday, the first day of the week, it has been their custom to open their store and sell merchandise. Because of this fact, some of the residents of Hitchcock who are not friendly to the Kriegers, had them indicted. The plaintiffs in error offered to prove at the trial that they belong to a class of religionists who conscientiously keep the seventh day for the Sabbath. The trial judge refused to allow the plaintiffs in error to

53

[graphic]

DANIEL IN THE DEN OF LIONS

"My God hath sent His angel, and hath shut the lions' mouths, that they have me: forasmuch as before Him innocency was found in me; and also ce, O king, have I done no hurt." Dan. 6:22.

prove their religion as a defense, which was excepted to, and the ruling of the trial court has been incorporated in the legal brief, and the Honorable Court of Appeals is asked to pass upon the action of the trial court in refusing to allow the accused to prove their religion as a constitutional defense. We hold that the plaintiffs in error are not guilty according to law and the evidence of the case."

Judge Simmons, of Knoxville, Tenn., then addressed the court in behalf of the plaintiffs in error. He said, in part:

"May it please the Court. We believe the indictment in this case is subject to serious legal criticism. We do not believe that the indictment, according to the statute, legally defines and identifies the offense charged against the plaintiffs in error.

66

Section 2404 of the Harris & Day Code, found on page 15 in the brief, reads as follows: 'Sunday to be observed. The first day of the week being by very general consent set apart for rest and religious uses, the law forbids to be done on that day certain acts deemed useless and serious interruptions of the repose and religious liberty of the community. Any violation of this prohibition is Sabbath breaking.'

[ocr errors]

'The indictment charges that the plaintiffs in error, on Sunday, the 20th day of June, a. D. 1915, did knowingly, wilfully, unlawfully, intentionally, and publicly expose for sale certain merchandise therein mentioned.

No Offense at Common Law

"At common law it is not an offense or a crime to sell merchandise on Sunday. In order for the indictment to legally define and identify the offense complained against, it should not only allege that the plaintiffs in error on a certain Sunday exposed merchandise for sale, but it should further state that such an act was 'deemed useless' and a 'serious interruption of the repose and religious liberty of the community. This the indictment has failed to do.

"We contend that under this Sunday law it is not a crime simply to expose on Sunday merchandise for sale. It must be alleged in the indictment, and it must be proved at the trial, that such an exposure of merchandise for sale, on the day prohibited, was not only useless,' but that it was a 'serious interruption of the repose and religious liberty of the community.'

Not Guilty, Because of Exemption

"The plaintiffs in error are not guilty, because they rightfully come within the exception of the statute.

[graphic]

66

THEIR MEETING PLACE DISCOVERED

Christians, Worshiping in a Cave, Seized by Officers of the Law

As to getting the law of the land to touch our religion, we earnestly cry, 'Hands off! leave us alone!" Your Sunday bills, and all other forms of Actof-Parliament religion, seem to me to be all wrong. Give us a fair field and no favor, and our faith has no cause to fear. Christ wants no help from Cæsar. I should be afraid to borrow help from government; it would look to me as though I rested on an arm of flesh, instead of depending on the living God. Let the Lord's day be respected by all means, and may the day soon come when every shop shall be closed on the Sabbath; but let it be by force conviction, and not by force of policemen; let true religion triumph by the power of God in men's hearts, not by the power of fines and punishments.-C. H. Spurgeon.

I am not a theologian. It may be fortunate for all except myself that I am not. I have due regard for the observance of the Sabbath, and I believe that it should be observed, but I do not believe in legislation compelling one to do it. ...

No man has a right to set himself up as the moral standard of all the community, or of any part of the community except himself. As to the use of the Sabbath day, every man, so far as personal acts that do not include any acts of lawlessness are concerned, should be the guardian of his own morals.- Senator Weldon B. Heyburn, of Idaho, in a short speech before the Senate, May 26, 1911, printed in the Congressional Record, pp. 1569-1571.

Chief Justice Terry, of the supreme court of California, in declaring enforced Sunday observance unconstitutional, said: "The enforced observance of a day held sacred by one of the sects, is a discrimination in favor of that sect, and a violation of the freedom of the others. . . . Considered as a municipal regulation, the legislature has no right to forbid or enjoin the lawful pursuit of a lawful occupation on one day of the week, any more than it can forbid it altogether."-9 California, 502.

« PředchozíPokračovat »