Larger font
Smaller font
Copy
Print
Contents
  • Results
  • Related
  • Featured
No results found for: "".
    Larger font
    Smaller font
    Copy
    Print
    Contents

    REMARKS BY COL. ELLIOTT F. SHEPARD

    “I approach this subject with great reverence. When we come to deal with heavenly things, we should put aside earthly things, and should do very much as the Jews used to do in the temple at Jerusalem; before they made their offerings, before they entered upon the service, they prepared themselves by ablution and by prayer for the proper discharge of their duties. Now when we come to consider the Sabbath, that it rests upon the law of God, that it is a revelation to mankind which no one would have thought of, that we owe it entirely to our Father which is in heaven, we ought therefore to come with the same reverential spirit to its consideration ourselves.... We represent the Christian sentiment of the United States of America....CAR 41.2

    “We hope that Congress will maintain its dignity. We have resolved not to say one single word as to the constitutionality or unconstitutionality of this law before this committee; for to claim that it is unconstitutional here would be a reflection upon the committee, upon both Houses of Congress, and upon the President of the United States who approved this law. And you yourself very wisely took that last consideration entirely out from before the committee when you stated this was not the place to argue that question. Therefore we dismiss it without saying a single word....CAR 41.3

    “When our blessed Lord was incarnate in Palestine, he approved and magnified that law, saying, ‘I come not to destroy, but to fulfill.’ And then he gives another point on the Sabbath, which was, that the ‘Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath;’ and that ‘the Son of man,’ our Lord, ‘is Lord also of the Sabbath.’ In other words, it is a part of his patrimony, given to him by our Father who is in heaven, and every one who attempts to cut it off in any way robs Jesus himself....CAR 41.4

    “And on the other hand, when we talk of elevating the people and lifting them up higher, can we get any higher principle, or any higher method of doing this, than that which was adopted by our blessed Lord himself? Not at all. And is it not rather to be thought that these people who are especially consecrated to the service of God, are better able, through their consecration, and through their education, to inculcate what will best elevate the people, than those who are ignorant of that sort of connection, and approach the subject from a lower and entirely different standpoint?CAR 42.1

    “Now this day we are to present to you in brief speeches, the sentiments of the Christian Church and the common people of the United States in the various branches of that Church, and without any further introduction, I will ask that the roll should now be taken up.”CAR 42.2

    Joseph Cook, of Boston, closed his speech with these words:—CAR 42.3

    “Sunday is the tallest of the white angels now entering foreign lands. Shall we consent to allow Chicago now to rise up and stab this angel in the back, in our country? And shall we call down the goddess of liberty from the Capitol to assist at the murder? God forbid.”CAR 42.4

    Rev. T. A. Fernley, of Philadelphia, in his speech, told the committee that there was no authority for reconsidering the question, because there was no new evidence presented; that there was not a single new reason before the committee for opening the Fair on Sunday. And he said that therefore, “the only possible ground upon which you can reconsider this question is its unconstitutionality.” This confirmed the position that the chairman had refused to hear from us; so that everything they objected to from us, they got from somebody else.CAR 42.5

    They went on-not with heavenly arguments by any means-but proposing to “consider heavenly things.” They reined the committee up before the Judgment. Yes, “the Judgment will sit, and in that day it will be a consolation to know that you have acted right in the maintenance of the Sabbath to-day.” Here is part of a speech made by C. B. Botsford, President of the Massachusetts Sunday Protective League, before the committee:—CAR 42.6

    “Mr Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, and the friends and opponents of this measure: Allow me to call attention to one thing, and that is a fact to which we all assent. None of this company may be here in 1993. At that time all of us shall be of one mind in regard to the value and sacredness of the Lord’s day; for the sentence has gone forth, against every man, ‘Set thine house in order.’CAR 43.1

    ” ‘How fast they fall! Those we have known, As leaves from autumn branches grown, Are quickly seared.’CAR 43.2

    “But while men die, the nation lives. May the God of nations so guide us and our posterity that ‘America’ may be sung until the end of time.”CAR 43.3

    Another, Rev. C. C. Adams, of Boston, representing the Evangelical Alliance, struck a regular religious revival key, and rung in the regulation death-bed scene. Here it is:—CAR 43.4

    Mr. Durborow.-Rev. Adams, you will have three minutes.CAR 43.5

    Rev. Adams.-I represent, sir, the Evangelical Alliance of Boston and its vicinity, comprising over four hundred ministers, who have put this document into my hands, which I shall present to you at their request:—CAR 43.6

    ” ‘The Evangelical Alliance of Boston and vicinity beg leave to present their unanimous and earnest protest against the proposed repeal of the act requiring the gates of the Columbian Exposition to be closed on the Lord’s day. That act gave proper expression to the Christian judgment of this Christian nation, and its repeal would be a grievous injustice to our history, our character, and our hopes as a people.’CAR 43.7

    “This paper, sir, was passed unanimously, Dr. Lorimer being present at the meeting of the Evangelical Alliance.CAR 43.8

    “Mr. Chairman, when it pleased God to found this nation, he chose out of all the nations the very cream of the world,—the Huguenots of France, the Scotch and Scotch Irish of Scotland, the English, the Puritans, the Quakers, from England, the Dutch from Holland;-they came here and laid the foundation of this great Republic. The basis upon which they built was that of the Bible, the school, and the Sabbath. These, sir, are the great tap roots from which has sprung the great institutions of this country. To me it is a terrible thought that men would come now in this nineteenth century, after four hundred years of phenomenal progress, having attained to the position of being the richest and grandest nation of the world, that men would come now to hack at the root of that great fundamental principle of our government and of our people.CAR 43.9

    “Three weeks ago it was my painful duty to stand on the verge of eternity, and endeavor to hold back a great spirit that was about to leave me. My feet almost touched the water. One spirit had to go, and I had to stay in the darkness. I trust, sir, that it will be many years before you or any member of this committee shall stand where I did. I felt myself on the verge of eternity. But that day must come to each of us, and when it comes, sir, let me say to you, as a closing word on the side of the evangelical ministry of this country and the evangelical church of this country, it will be a pleasant recollection to come back to this period of your tremendous responsibility, and to feel that you, gentlemen, have stood by the side, and to the preservation, of God’s holy day.”CAR 43.10

    Rev. Green Clay Smith said:—CAR 44.1

    “The closer we adhere to the word of God as it has been interpreted for centuries by the wisest and best of men, following the good old path of our fathers, the better will it be for our nation and the human family....CAR 44.2

    “We come here to ask you courteously, but with earnestness not to abandon this law....CAR 44.3

    “Christ is looking on to see if his people will revere his name and respect the day he honored as his own, and teach all nations to follow it as he has commanded.”CAR 44.4

    The claim that this is a Christian nation, upon the authority of the decision of the Supreme Court of the United States, Feb. 29, 1892, was urged strongly and often; and that therefore Congress should close the Fair on Sunday as the Christian Sabbath. A printed argument(?) by a lawyer, a judge-S. B. Davis-of Terre Haute, Indiana, was sent up there, and distributed in piles on the tables of the committee, in which is the following:—CAR 44.5

    “The object of this brief is to call attention to the constitutional question raised on the Sunday laws, and to show that if it were granted that the act of Congress fell within the definition of a law, still there is no constitutional objection to it or to any legislation affecting Sunday.CAR 44.6

    “No longer ago than last February the Supreme Court of the United States, in an opinion delivered by Mr. Justice Brewer, unanimously decided that-CAR 44.7

    “ ‘This is a Christian nation.’CAR 44.8

    “ ‘Rector, etc., Church of the Holy Trinity vs. the U. S.’ Decided Feb. 29, 1892. This decision is based upon impregnable foundations, both legal and historical.CAR 44.9

    “The common law of England is the law administered in all of the courts, Federal [original illegible] State, except where modified by statutes.CAR 45.1

    “Blackstone says that ‘Christianity is a part of the laws of England.’ And it has been stated by courts of this country, frequently, that ‘Christianity is a part of the laws of the land.’CAR 45.2

    “The Supreme Court of the United States says, ‘This is a Christian nation.’ What is it to be a Christian nation? ‘It is a nation which is governed under Christian institutions in distinction from heathen or Mohammedan.’ The seventh day of time has been recognized by the great mass of people in the so-called Christian nations as a Christian institution, beneficial in its observance upon people, and a physical necessity. Therefore the governments, Federal and State, have incorporated it, in one form and another, into their laws.CAR 45.3

    “The real question, therefore, is, Shall the nation or the State set the example of violation of law? ...The conscience of the Christian world protests.”CAR 45.4

    And Herrick Johnson, D. D., of Chicago, speaking for the whole religious combination, in answer to a statement that this is not a Christian nation, said:—CAR 45.5

    “The second point of the Mayor: ‘This is not a Christian nation.’ [It was not the Mayor who said it, but this is immaterial.-A. T. J.] Here the Mayor of Chicago and the United States Supreme Court differ, the Supreme Court having decided last February in express terms that this is a Christian nation. The Mayor might give us points for running a municipal government, but on a question of constitutional law we prefer the Supreme Court.”CAR 45.6

    Rev. Dr. Hunter said:—CAR 45.7

    “Gentlemen: I am authorized to speak for one and a half million Christian Endeavorers, who have spoken in the majority of their more than two thousand societies from every State in the Union, in District and State Conventions....CAR 45.8

    “We hold that Congress was inside one of its legitimate functions when it conditioned the appropriation of two and one half million dollars upon the closing of the gates on Sunday; and with the Supreme Court of the United States, we hold that Congress had the right to take this action. Ours is a religious people. We hold that religion is a part of the common law. The Supreme Court of Feb. 29, 1892, says:—CAR 45.9

    ” ‘There is a universal language pervading them all, having one meaning. They affirm and re-affirm that this is a religious nation. These are not individual sayings, declarations of private persons; they are organic utterances; they speak the voice of the entire people.’ “CAR 45.10

    If anybody is inclined to think that that Supreme Court decision and declaration is of little consequence, I wish he had only been there to see and hear the use that was made of it, and how it was made the foundation of their claims and their efforts. 8For a copy and a full review of this Supreme Court decision, and the original legislation on this Sunday-closing question, see Sentinel Library, No. 53. [original illegible] Bond St., New York City, or Pacific Press, Oakland, California; price 15 cents.CAR 46.1

    The climax of the whole thing was reached, however, when Rev. F. H. McCarrell, of Pennslyvania, threatened the curse of God upon the whole nation, if their wishes in regard to Sunday were not complied with. Here are his words on this point:—CAR 46.2

    “There is just one general reason, Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee, I would like to give why the gates of this Fair ought to be kept closed on the Sabbath. If these gates are open on the Sabbath, it will be perilous to us as a nation, and it will be perilous to Chicago, and to the interests of the Fair. There is one thing we are to remember; and that is, that God still reigns. God is still on the throne. God has not abdicated; and he has declared that the nation or the kingdom that will not serve him shall perish. And more than this, we are to remember that the ten commandments are the very basis of all of our laws, national and State, which subserve our liberties and our rights.... Now here is the fourth commandment in the very heart of these ten commandments, and that has never been repealed any more than has the fifth commandment, or the sixth commandment, or the seventh commandment, or the eighth commandment. And therefore we are to remember that if we touch this commandment of God, standing thus in the very heart of these ten commandments, we touch the honor of God; we touch the law of God, for Christ has emphasized that fourth commandment. He said the Sabbath was made for man. What did he mean by that? He meant thereby that it was not made for the Jew only, but for man everywhere, in every age and in every condition. He said the Sabbath was made for man. It was made for man in all ages, in all time. He said the Sabbath was made for man; it was made for man’s highest good in every age of the world, for his good morally and physically.CAR 46.3

    “And there ore it is, dear friends, if we touch that fourth commandment, which lies at the very root of all other commandments, we touch the honor of God and the commandments of God. It has never been repealed, and if we touch that God will bring a curse upon us as a nation, because he distinctly told his people anciently that he would punish them for profanation of his Sabbath-day. And therefore it is, dear friends, that we as a nation cannot afford to touch this commandment. What it becomes us to do is, therefore, to set to the nations of the world a good example of the American Sabbath; set them an example of the Christian Sabbath; set them an example of the Sabbath as God has ordained it.”CAR 47.1

    Now the Constitution of the United States is the only thing in existence that gives to any member of Congress, senator, or representative, any power or authority. He owes his very existence, as a member of that body, to the Constitution. The Constitution defines his powers and the limitations of the exercise thereof. This is his only legitimate guide. That Constitution has not only not delegated to Congress any power in, over, or concerning matters of religion, but has specially prohibited it from exercising any power in, over, or concerning such matters.CAR 47.2

    But the undeniable record in this case shows that this committee of Congress did expressly and intentionally exclude from its consideration an argument based solely and exclusively upon the Constitution, and in this the committee did exclude from its consideration the Constitution itself; and instead of the Constitution, or questions or argument based upon the Constitution, which is the only authority for the action or even the existence of the committee or of Congress, the committee did sit in consideration of a religious question wholly, of “heavenly things” indeed, and did admit argument upon a religious basis only, from representatives of religious bodies only, all of which the committee is expressly prohibited by the Constitution from considering at all.CAR 47.3

    Could there possibly be a more complete reversal of the order of things established and intended by those who made our national government and its Constitution? Could there possibly be a more direct revolution than has been accomplished in this case, in its inception, in its conduct, and as it stands to-day?CAR 47.4

    As for ourselves personally, we are perfectly content to be shut out, with our arguments, from being heard by a committee of Congress, when, in order to do it, the committee is obliged to shut out the Constitution itself from its consideration. We have always stood with the Constitution, pleading its provisions as they stand, and as they were intended by those who made it. There is where we stand now and ever. And with the Constitution we are willing to be excluded from the consideration of Congress. Abiding by the Constitution as it is, and as it was intended to be, on this question, we are in most excellent company.CAR 48.1

    Following is the argument of Mrs. Marion F. Washburne before the committee, Jan. 12, 1893:—CAR 48.2

    Larger font
    Smaller font
    Copy
    Print
    Contents