Open Letter to the 64th Congress The 64th Congress of the United States takes up its duties at a most critical time in our national history. The world war and this nation's relation to it, as well as domestic problems The True Purpose of Government to You are not to inquire how your trade may be increased or how you are become a great and powerful people, but how your liberties can be secured; for liberty ought to be the direct end of your government. Liberty, the greatest of all earthly blessings, give us that precious jewel, and you may take everything else! The great and direct end of government is liberty. Secure our liberty and privileges, and the end of government is answered. If this is not effecually done, government. is an evil. Patrick Henry. in Elliot's "Debates on the Federal Constitution." Vol. III, pages 43, 44, 53, 54, 651. of intense moment, will require of this Congress perhaps as great if not greater intelligence, deeper patriotism, and calmer judgment than ever before demanded of any Congress, even when our country was itself convulsed with civil strife or its sovereignty threatened by foreign war. The survival of our liberties has been largely due to the rule loyally followed in the past of adhering strictly to the original American ideals in settling domestic problems as well as adjusting foreign relations. No Congress could be confronted with graver problems than those involving the foundation principles upon which the nation was established; and such are some of the issues with which the 64th Congress stands face to face. In this communication we beg to raise a question in regard to certain proposed legislation, contravening in our judgment the fundamental principles of American liberty. For example, we have reason to anticipate that an attempt will be made to persuade you to nullify the intent and purpose of the First Amendment to the Constitution. The "Intermountain Catholic," Salt Lake City, Utah, Nov. 6, 1915, had this item: Congressman-elect Siegel of New York will advocate the passage of a bill in the next Congress that will prohibit the use of the mails to any publication making it a practice to defame any creed, race, or religion. You will doubtless recall that in the 63rd Congress this very question was considered in the form of two bills (H. R. 20644 and H. R. 21183) referred to the House Committee on the Post Office and Post Roads, which conducted a hearing on the subject Feb. 1, 1915. It was held by the opponents of these measures that the legislation proposed was indefensible, inasmuch as it would enable the government to exercise indirectly a power which is not conferred upon it either directly or indirectly by the Constitution; namely, the power to control the press in favor of religion; and maintaining with Chancellor Kent that it has "become a Constitutional principle in this country, that 'every citizen may freely speak, write, and publish his sentiments, on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of that right, and that no law can rightfully be passed to restrain or abridge the freedom of speech, or of the press.'". Commentaries on American Law," James Kent, 1848, Vol. II, 6th edition, page 17. We respectfully submit that the principles of liberty are directly involved also in proposed legislation compelling the closing of barber shops in the District of Columbia on Sunday, and other similar measures. was The present Congress is not the first to be urged to enact laws of this character. In the 20th and 21st Congresses the subject of Sunday observance considered from every viewpoint, and it was decided by the statesmen of that day that the whole question belonged to the realm of religion, and that Congress could not determine for any citizen the duty of regarding one day above another. That this was the attitude of the fathers of our country may be drawn from the following excerpt from House Report on Sunday Mails, communicated March 4 and 5, 1830: It is perhaps fortunate for our country that the proposition [to enact Sunday legislation] should have been made at this early period while the spirit of the Revolution yet exists in full vigor.—“American State Papers," Class VII, page 229. Congress has uniformly decided against legislation of this character, regarding it as violative of that part of the First Amendment which provides that— Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech or of the press. Dangerous Combinations Extensive religious combinations to effect a political object are, in the opinion of the committee, always dangerous. If admitted, it may be justly apprehended that the future measures of the government will be strongly marked, if not eventually controlled, by the same influence. All religious despotism commences by combination and influence; and when that influence begins to operate upon the political institutions of a country, the civil power soon bends under it: and the catastrophe of other nations furnishes an awful warning of the consequence.Sunday Mails Report, in American State Papers, Class VII, page 225. We request, therefore, that the present Congress adhere strictly to the precedents of the past on this subject, and that our liberties be as jealously guarded by our national legislators during 1915-17 as they were by the lawmakers of three quarters of a century ago. Dec. 1, 1915. Most obediently, THE LIBERTY. "Proclaim liberty throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof." Lev. 25: 10. VOL. XI FIRST QUARTER, 1916 Is Liberty in Danger? The Price of Liberty CLAUDE E. HOLMES THOSE things that are most valuable should be guarded the closest. The liberty which we have in America is a legacy handed down to us from our forefathers. It was secured at the highest price that can be paid for earthly treasure the lives of thousands of our fellow men. Should it not be jealously guarded? These words by Samuel Coleridge can be appreciated by those who realize the value of liberty: Nor let any one falsely persuade himself that those who keep watch and ward for liberty are meddling with things that do not concern them, instead of minding their own business. For all men should know that all blessings are stored and protected in this one, as in a common repository. Here is the tradesman's security, the soldier's honor, the agriculturist's profit. Lastly, in this one good of liberty the religious will find the permission of their rites and forms of worship, the students their learned leisure, the aged their repose, boys the rudiments of the several branches of their education, maidens their chaste nuptials, matrons their womanly honor and the dignity of their modesty, fathers of families the dues of natural affection and the sacred privilege of their ancient home, every one their hope and their joy. To this one solicitude, therefore, let all other cares yield the priority." The Friend," page 74. No. I Said Samuel Adams: I would advise persisting in our struggle for liberty though it were revealed from heaven that nine hundred and ninety-nine were to perish and only one out of a thousand to survive and retain his freedom. One such freeman must possess more virtue and enjoy more happiness than a thousand slaves.Quoted in the Christian Advocate, June 25, 1914. Truly they became watchers and wards. for liberty. Knowing that eternal vigilance is the price of liberty, they placed hedge about it that is as secure as human power can make it. The purity of religion is best preserved by keeping it separate from government; and the surest means of giving to it its proper influence in society is the dissemination of correct principles through education.- James Bayard on the Constitution. May this immense temple of freedom [United States] ever stand a lesson to oppressors, a , an example to the oppressed, a sanctuary for the rights of mankind! - General Lafayette, in reply to a committee sent by Congress to express its gratitude for his service to this country. Liberty Not Properly Appreciated But the battle for liberty was fought on this continent a hundred years ago. We enjoy liberty today, scarcely thinking of the way in which it was obtained. Many have grown up believing that no other condition ever existed, and that freedom was always respected. Feeling that this liberty is safe and secure, they look with indifference and even contempt upon those who view with alarm the various inroads that are being made upon the liberty of our nation. Religious Liberty the Fruit of Division Religious liberty as we know it, grew largely out of the jealousies and fears of the many warring sects of colonial times. One denomination persecuted another. The established church of one State would put a ban upon the members of other churches in other States. As Madison stated, when debating the adoption of the federal Constitution in the Convention of Virginia: COL. RICHARD M. JOHNSON OF KENTUCKY, AUTHOR OF THE SUNDAY MAIL REPORTS Liberty cannot protect itself. The records of history testify that liberty has always been in danger. At times it was a stranger on earth. Its enemies are no less aggressive today than in ages gone by. Liberty must be jealously guarded. For years there have been discussions as to which religious denomination should be given the credit for establishing religious liberty in this country. But the real, vital question is, Who is going to protect and preserve the liberty that we now possess? Sects Combining to Destroy Liberty The multiplicity of sects which made way for religious liberty in the early days of our history, is rapidly becoming a menace to the same liberty today. At the present the many divisions of the Christian church are combining in great federations and associations. The power The sacred rights of mankind are not to be rummaged for among old parchments or musty records. They are written, as with a sunbeam, on the whole volume of human nature, by the hand of Divinity itself, and can never be erased or obscured by human power. That is what is called the law of nature, which, being coeval with mankind and dictated by God himself, is, of course, superior in obligation to any other. No human laws are of any validity if contrary to this. It is binding over all the globe, in all countries, and at all times.-Alexander Hamilton. Quoted in Christian Life and Character of the Civil Institutions of the United States," page 144. ཚ I am not one of those who believe that tyranny is a particle sweeter because it is the tyranny of a majority. I believe, with old Roger Williams, that there are two classes of things in this world - the things of the first table and the things of the second table. The things of the first table are those things which are between God and the individual man, and government has no right to touch them. If 99,999,999 of = the people out of 100,000,000 wanted to do anything in connection with them, and one man stood up in his right and said, “No,” then that one man's voice should restrain all the rest. Amongst these things are freedom of religion and various other things that will occur to your own minds.-John Sharp Williams, in Congressional Record, Jan. 30, 1913. created by such forces is being turned upon the civil government. Institutions that are purely religious are being incorporated into our civil law. One great organization comprising thirty leading religious bodies with a constituency of 19,000,000, at its last annual meeting adopted a resolution pro_viding — That we ask all public officials for better Sunday laws throughout all our States where such laws obtain, and express an urgent hope that at the earliest possible moment a Sunday law shall be enacted for the District of Columbia and the State of California, where no such laws exist.-Annual Reports of the Federal Council of the Churches of Christ in · America, for 1914, page 160. Another association, which has been. indorsed by many denominations, has for years been clamoring for the placing of "all the Christian laws, institutions, and usages of our government on an undeniable legal basis in the fundamental law of the land."- Christian Statesman, November, 1915. A Warning Against Religious Legislation A warning against movements of this character was sounded years ago by a Senate Committee: All religious despotism commences by combination and influence; and when that influence begins to operate upon the political institutions of a country, the civil power soon bends under it; and the catastrophe of other nations furnishes an awful warning of the consequence." American State Papers," Class VII, page 225. Sunday bills have already been introduced in our present national Congress. This has been the case for many years. Legislation on religious matters is dangerous. Legislators and judges will be obliged sooner or later to define religious dogmas and opinions; sects that are weak numerically will be discriminated against, and persecution and hypocrisy will eventually follow. Congress Cannot Define Religious Duties In giving its findings on a certain demand for legislation giving civil protection to Sunday, the House of Representatives agreed that if Congress shall, by the authority of law, sanction the measure recommended, it would constitute a legislative decision of a religious controversy, in which even Christians themselves are at issue. However suited such a decision may be to an ecclesiastical council, it is incompatible with a republican legislature, which is purely for political and not for religious purposes. If a solemn act of legislation shall, in one point, define the law of God, or point out to the citizen one religious duty, it may, with equal propriety, proceed to define every part of divine revelation, and enforce every religious obligation, even to the forms and ceremonies of worship, the endowment of the church, and the support of the clergy.— Id., page 229. Who can preserve the rights and liberties of a people when they shall be abandoned by themselves? Who shall keep watch in the temple when the watchmen sleep at their post? Who shall call upon the people to redeem their possessions and revive the republic when their own hands have deliberately and corruptly surrendered them to the oppressor and have built the prisons and dug the graves of their own friends? The dark picture, it is to be hoped, will never be applicable to the republic of America. And yet it affords a warning, which, like all the lessons of past experience, we are not permitted to disregard. America, free, happy, and enlightened as she is, must rest the preservation of her rights and liberties upon the virtue, independence, justice, and sagacity of the people. If either fail, the republic is gone.- Justice Story. Religion neither can nor should be maintained by governments nor made a political institution. Religion is born of faith and of the conscience, and faith and conscience alone should nourish it.- Francesco Crispi, ex-Prime Minister of Italy. Quoted in the American Advocate, April, 1899, page 152. SOME years ago the State of Tennessee gained an unenviable notoriety because. of a large number of Sunday cases, nearly all against observers of the seventh day of the week. The Declaration of Rights of that State provides: SECTION 3. That all men have a natural and indefeasible right to worship Almighty Naturally, observers of the seventh day feel that under this section of the Declaration of Rights they have equal rights with the observers of the first day, and that to require them to observe Sunday is directly to tax them one sixth of their God-given working time, in the interests. of that form or phase of religious worship of which Sunday observance is an essential part. Though the decisions of the courts of Tennessee have been against the view urged by the Adventists, the evident. sentiment of the people did not support the enforcement of the statute against a class in a manner and under circumstances that made it apparent that it was not civil law enforcement but religious persecution, and so for several years there were almost no such cases. But a few months ago five men living about seven miles north of Goodlettsville were indicted, charged with violating the State Sunday law. The trial was set for January 3, and of course we cannot report the outcome, though of that there can be little doubt. About the only defense is to plead the guaranty of the Declaration of In this chapel was established in 1685, by order of the king, the worship of the Church of England, despite the opposition of the colonial authorities. God according to the dictates of their own conscience; that no man can, of right, be compelled to attend, erect, or support any place of worship, or to maintain any minister against his consent; that no human authority can, in any case whatever, control or interfere with the rights of conscience; and that no preference shall ever be given by law to any religious establishment or mode of worship. |