ATJ
LIBERTY is not a thing of race or color; when it is made such, it becomes despotism for all the weak. AMS March 2, 1899, page 129.1
THE real question is not, What have I power to do? but, What ought I to do? To exercise power unlawfully leads surely to the loss of the power. AMS March 2, 1899, page 129.2
FREE government recognizes every man as a son of Adam, and Adam as a son of God. AMS March 2, 1899, page 129.3
EVERY real American of the first class, recognizes every other American as being on a legal equality with himself. AMS March 2, 1899, page 129.4
[Inset.] AMERICAN GOVERNMENT AMS IT SEEMS LIKELY TO BE SET UP IN THE PHILIPPINES. AMERICAN Government in the Philippines, without those constitutional safeguards of liberty which apply alike to individuals of every race and color and without the Declaration of Independence which affirms the principle upon which these safeguards are set up, would be something vastly different from American government as it has been understood for one hundred years past in the United States. But if the Declaration of Independence should be taken there, that part would have to be cut out which affirms that governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed, since it is not proposed to govern the natives by their voluntary consent at all. And the principles of government having been repudiated, the Constitution would be equally useless so far as concerns the security of the rights of the governed. Such a government would be in no sense free government. AMS March 2, 1899, page 129.5
ATJ
EVERYBODY knows that the Government of the United States was founded upon the Declaration of human rights. And though it is equally true, yet not everybody knows that this Declaration of human rights upon which the Government of the United States was founded, was deduced directly from Christianity. The principles of this Declaration were intentionally adopted from Christianity, by those who framed the Declaration, and were laid down as the basis of the Government of the United States, upon which this Government was to stand forever. AMS March 2, 1899, page 130.1
The two vital principles of that Declaration are, that “All men are created equal, and are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights, among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness;” and that “to secure these rights governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.” Thus this nation presented to the world every man first of all subject to the Creator and by the Creator endowed with inalienable rights. The founders of this nation, when discussing this before the people, said that these were the principles upon which the gospel was first propagated, and upon which the Reformation was carried on. They said that the Almighty God, being Lord of the human mind, and Lord only of the conscience, and having all power, chose not to propagate his religion by impositions of power upon the bodies or minds of people as was in his almighty power to do, but that he created the mind free, and that he left it free. AMS March 2, 1899, page 130.2
Thus and here for the first and only time in history the Christian principles of civil and religious liberty were intentionally chosen and established as the foundation of a nation. And thus from its beginning this nation has been the beacon light of liberty, civil and religious, “the classical land of religious liberty,” to all the world. Through these principles alone, in quietness and peaceful isolation, this nation has most powerfully influenced all other nations in the world and drawn them away from their former selves toward enlightenment and liberty. This was the wisdom and this the power of this nation in the eyes of all the other nations, who were compelled to say “Surely this is a wise and understanding people.” AMS March 2, 1899, page 130.3
But suddenly a change has come: and how great the change! a complete revolution in principle and practice. To-day the United States Government has abandoned the principles which were laid down as the foundation upon which the Government should stand, and by which alone it could be able or worthy to stand. The United States Government to day openly denies to people the equal right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; and is governing, and expects forever to govern, people without their consent. AMS March 2, 1899, page 130.4
To-day in this nation the Declaration of Independence which has ever been the pride and the ultimate source of appeal of every American, which has been taught to the youth as the sum of all earthly good, is ignored, belittled, explained away, set aside, and repudiated, by leading journalists, both religious and secular, by leading men of all professions, and by national representatives at the Capitol. The following passage from the Congressional Record, of Dec. 19, 1898, p. 330, is only a sample of much that has been said at the Capitol, all of which has been indorsed by the ratification of the treaty of peace:— AMS March 2, 1899, page 130.5
“MR. HOAR.—May I ask the senator from Connecticut a question? AMS March 2, 1899, page 130.6
“MR. PLATT, of Connecticut.—Certainly. AMS March 2, 1899, page 130.7
“MR. HOAR.—It is whether, in his opinion, governments derive their just powers from the consent of the governed? AMS March 2, 1899, page 130.8
“MR. PLATT, of Connecticut.—From the consent of some of the governed. AMS March 2, 1899, page 130.9
“MR. HOAR.—From the consent of some of the governed? AMS March 2, 1899, page 130.10
“MR. PLATT, of Connecticut.—Yes.” AMS March 2, 1899, page 130.11
Long ago it was written, “If the foundations be destroyed, what shall the righteous do?” So in this case, when the foundation is destroyed, what shall the people, even the people of other nations, do? AMS March 2, 1899, page 130.12
This nation which God established for the enlightenment of the human race upon the divine principle of human rights—when this nation abandons these principles in the eyes of all the nations, what then? Where then lies hope for the other nations who have never yet had any opportunity to have any benefit of these principles except as the principles by their own inherent power have forced themselves upon the other nations? There is the danger that is involved in this subject of human rights. Abraham Lincoln, when he was conducting that immortal contest in behalf of human freedom against human slavery in the United States, said, “Not only do I hate slavery because it is slavery, but I hate it in addition, because it leads so many good men to whittle away the Declaration of Independence.” AMS March 2, 1899, page 130.13
There is to-day the cry of “national expansion,” “imperial America.” This cry is a fact. The nation has entered upon her world’s career—no longer the career of the quiet and peaceable conquest of sound principles, but the career of conquest, and so of force. And when the defense of this new feature compels so many good men to explain away the Declaration of Independence and openly repudiate divine principle, there is in it all an element of danger to the world: and as in the days of Abraham Lincoln, it is a thing to be supremely hated. AMS March 2, 1899, page 130.14
Lord Salisbury, last November, in his speech to the world—for when the Prime Minister of Britain speaks he speaks to the world, and all the world listens—mentioning the fact that the United States Government had entered as a new element in world’s affairs and the Eastern question, said that this does not promise peace to the world. But that though that may be so, it promises only good to Britain—no harm to her, but it is not an element that makes for peace among the nations. AMS March 2, 1899, page 131.1
The nations themselves are staggering and about to fall, under the weight of the immense armaments which they are compelled to maintain because of the mutual anger and jealousies that have persisted for more than half a century. The tension is already so great that by the chief ones concerned it has been likened to a magazine with the train already laid, and every moment in danger of being touched with the fire. AMS March 2, 1899, page 131.2
All this being acknowledged to be so, what alone can be the effect of the entrance into this awful arena of this new world-power which, beforehand, the world is told by its chiefest spokesman, is not an element that will make for peace to the world? And above all, what alone can be the effect of it, when this new world-power enters that awful arena with the direct repudiation of its own fundamental and native principles which alone can make for peace, and which are the very principles of the Prince of Peace? AMS March 2, 1899, page 131.3
What alone can be the influence of this nation upon the world when it has repudiated the principles by which alone it has influenced the world for good, the principles which were its life, which were given to it for the world, and which alone can make for peace on earth and good will to men? AMS March 2, 1899, page 131.4
In all these things there is involved the great question of Human Rights. The American people must face this fact. They cannot ignore it and still regard human rights. And when this nation openly disregards human rights, what shall humanity do? AMS March 2, 1899, page 131.5
A. T. J.
ATJ
AN agitation to arouse public sentiment in favor of Sunday enforcement, is going on in the city of Pittsburg, Pa. There the churches and a large labor union—the Amalgamated Association of Iron and Steel Workers—have joined hands, and both labor and church parties are equally earnest in the movement. At a mass meeting held in February 19, resolutions were adopted denouncing the “Sabbath” work in certain mills of the city as being “unpatriotic, unconstitutional, and in direct opposition to the unalienable birthright of all toilers,” and pledging coöperation with the clergy “to stop this nefarious system by said firms.” A “monster mass meeting” of labor organizations is announced for some date in April, to further arouse public opinion against Sunday desecration. AMS March 2, 1899, page 131.1
The usual arguments were offered at this meeting in proof of the necessity of a weekly rest, and the usual effort made to set up a distinction in Sabbath observance on religious and civil grounds. No such distinction can exist in fact, since both civil and religious laws for Sabbath observance demand rest from secular employments as the foundation of the observance, and such weekly rest is itself distinctly a religious act. This has been made so by the act of God, and no amount of mass-meeting resolutions or of legislation can make it different. The Sabbath itself was created a religious institution, and no amount of argument or of legislation can give it a “civil” character. AMS March 2, 1899, page 131.2
The subject of Sabbath observance is everywhere inseparably bound up with varying religious views and practices of men and their convictions of conscience; and when the State steps in with its man-made law of Sabbath observance for one and all, the result can only be that far more harm will be done than good. In the matter of Sabbath legislation, human authority, power, and wisdom, come into conflict with divinity, and achieve only a failure as complete as their effort was unnecessary. AMS March 2, 1899, page 131.3
Sabbath observance is a law of God. To obey God’s law is the duty of one and all, and no human legislation is necessary to enable an individual to do his duty. Duty rests upon no such uncertain basis, and the law of God needs no such uncertain support. Let any individual decide to obey God’s law, and he will find support in that law itself. Duty is to do right without human assistance, the same as with it. The assistance necessary to right doing comes from God, and is amply sufficient for the demands of duty under all circumstances. AMS March 2, 1899, page 131.4
In Sabbath observance, as in any moral duty, men need look only to God, and they are bound to look to God rather than to man. Whoever looks away from the Creator and Author of the Sabbath, to man as a legislator concerning it, will surely be drawn into a snare. AMS March 2, 1899, page 131.5
“The Sabbath was made for man.” God made it and made it for man to-day, as in all other ages of time. Is the Sabbath then suited to man, just as God made it? It is if God knew enough to make it so; and as he made both man and the Sabbath, and is omniscient, there ought never any question to arise in any sane mind upon this point. Let the Sabbath and the law of observing it be as God has made it. Not to do so is to impugn the wisdom and authority of the Creator. AMS March 2, 1899, page 131.6