Earlier text: A Memory SystemThe Campaign in Washington
Further Developments in the Movement for Religious Instruction in the Public Schools
There has apparently been no abatement of interest on the part of the citizens of this city in the movement for the introduction of religious instruction into the public schools of the District of Columbia. One of the papers which has contained a large number of interviews and letters upon this subject, announced, about ten days ago, that all phases of the matter having been quite fully presented, it would close its columns to the discussion of the subject, unless in exceptional cases. But it seemed impossible to bring the discussion to a close, and some phase of the matter has been touched upon by one or the other of the daily papers of this city nearly every day since. In its issue of Friday, March 24, the Washington Post contained an editorial of considerable length, from which we take the following extracts as showing its general trend. The title of the editorial was— “Public Schools and Religious Teaching”
“It is quite natural that the effort to introduce religious instruction into the public schools should have failed to arouse popular support. It was an agitation which, in the Post’s opinion, had no adequate basis. The public schools are not, and never will be, religious institutions. There are private sectarian schools which exist because they make religious teaching a feature of their curriculum, and there are Sunday-schools innumerable which are established for the very purpose of supplying religious education. If these are not sufficient, or if they do not reach a large number of people, the remedy is not to be found in altering the public-school system. It is the duty of Christian people to enlarge the sphere of influence of their own institutions by inducing a larger attendance. . . .” “Our public-school system, even if it is not in the control of those who make religion a profession, is not a failure. It is not responsible for the increase of crime, if crime be on the increase, and we do not see that the community has suffered, even though Paley’s ‘Evidences of Religion,’ Baxter’s ‘Saints’ Rest,’ or Fox’s ‘Book of Martyrs’ has not been included with spelling-books, grammars, and histories. The very absence of professed religious teaching has, in fact, emphasized the moral influence which is exerted in the schools. “Under these circumstances, we repeat, it is not strange that the movement has failed to arouse popular sentiment. It is not necessary, it is not in accord with the American spirit, it is not based on logical grounds. Lacking these essentials, it must fail. With all efforts which tend to spread the cause of religion the Post is heartily in sympathy, but these endeavors must follow appropriate channels. Their sphere of activity is well defined, and it does not include the public schools.” “Religious Instruction in the Public Schools”
The same paper, in its issue of March 25, contained an able article with this heading, written by Rabbi Abram Simon, of the Washington Hebrew Congregation. This article occupied nearly three columns of space, and canvassed various phases of the subject quite fully. The standpoint from which Rabbi Simon wrote may be seen by the following extract:— “This is an American nation, and that adjective connotes the magnificent contribution of our nation to the treasure-house of civilization. ‘The introduction of religious instruction in the public schools’ is not so much a religious question as a question of American citizenship. Opposition to it must be made not as Baptists, Adventists, agnostics, liberals, Catholics, or Jews, but as Americans. Not political and religious toleration, but political and religious equality is the American idea.” After quite an elaborate argument upon the principles involved, Rabbi Simon submitted the following proposal, as being entitled to just as serious consideration as the movement which he was combating:— “Suppose we reverse the roles. Suppose a band of educators, after a conference, presents to the church authority the following resolutions: ‘Whereas, Crime is on the steady increase, and the church, though its work has been very effective thus far, has yet failed in retarding its progress; Resolved, That the absence of scientific methods and a neglect of scientific principles is in a measure responsible for this failure, and that we petition that in the Sabbath-schools the following be taught: (a) That law prevails everywhere, and that there is no chance; that ‘chances’ are as immoral and unscientific in church fairs as in lotteries, and that this spirit of gambling, of craving for money, of getting rich quick without having lawfully earned it, is the root cause of the increase of crime; (b) as in mathematics, so in morals, one and two never make anything else but three, and that a Q. E. D. is the sign indicating the work and worth of a solved problem in life; (c) that we present a lectionary, containing the extracts from ‘The Bible of Science’ as affecting conduct, and ask for its introduction, providing that a conscience clause be inserted so as to avoid the suspicion of scientific tyranny.’ Does not the parallel hold?” The Evening Star of Saturday, March 25, contained a communication from the originator of this movement, Dr. Randolph H. McKim, which, while professing to place before the public a statement of the real issue involved, in reality confused the issue, and attempted to beg the whole question. The following extracts from this communication will make this clear:— “Much of the discussion in the public press on the subject of moral and religious instruction in the public schools exhibits a grave misunderstanding of the question at issue. Let not the public be misled. There is no proposal to teach theology or any form of sectarianism. All the religious teaching asked for may be put into four lines, to wit:— “‘Thou shalt have no other God before me.’” “‘Thou shalt not make to thyself any graven image to adore it.’” “‘Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain.’” “‘Thou shalt remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy.’” “This is absolutely all that is asked for in the way of religious instruction, unless the Board, in their wisdom, see fit to adopt a brief exposition of the meaning of these four commandments. The other six commandments pertain entirely to man’s duty to his fellow man, and involve no theological proposition whatever.” Five propositions were laid down by Dr. McKim, containing in brief the arguments in favor of his plan. Two of them are as follows:— “Nor can parents be relied on to furnish this necessary moral education, for many of them are not able, and many more of them are not disposed, to give it.” “The day-school must therefore be enlisted.” A reply to this communication was prepared by the editor of the REVIEW, which appeared in the Evening Star of March 27, and which we give herewith in full:— “To the Editor of the Evening Star:— “In your issue of the twenty-fifth instant a leading promoter of the effort to secure the introduction of religious instruction into the public schools of this city attempts to state ‘the question at issue,’ and he says: ‘The gist of the whole controversy narrows itself down to this, Shall the first four of the ten commandments be taught? About the rest of the proposals of the conference there is practically no difference of opinion.’” “Permit me to say that the real issue in the conference between those who advocated and those who opposed this movement was not whether a certain number of the ten commandments should be taught, nor whether that certain number should be taught as they were spoken by God himself or as they have been edited for the catechism, nor whether they should be taught with or without ‘a brief exposition,’ such as the Board of Education may ‘in their wisdom see fit to adopt,’ but the real issue was whether it is within the legitimate province of the state to teach religion at all, either little or much.” “The majority of the committee of fifteen professed loyalty to the principle of the separation of church and state, but declared in favor of a union of religion and the state, and accordingly requested the state to undertake the work of giving religious instruction. The17minority took square issue with this position, declared that there was no difference in principle between a union of religion and the state and a union of church and the state, and that the introduction of religion into the public schools would be the introduction of the church into the public schools, and consequently a union of church and state. This is the real issue, and I hope the public will not be misled concerning it. In the settlement of the question which has been raised by this movement every citizen is compelled to decide whether he will take his stand with Jefferson and Madison and the other founders of this republic that ‘religion is essentially distinct from civil government, and exempt from its cognizance; that a connection between them is injurious to both;’ or whether he will utterly disregard the ‘new order of things’ established by this latest nation in its Constitution, and accept the principles and the arguments of Justinian and Charlemagne and James II, the advocates of ‘the old-world idea’ of the union of church and state. And this issue, the real one involved, is worthy of the most serious consideration on the part of every lover of liberty.” “When once the right of the state to give religious instruction has been granted, it is properly and wholly within the power of the properly constituted authorities to decide what commandments and what form of those commandments and what exposition of those commandments shall be taught. And if among the rights of the majority is the right to teach their religion, even against the protest of the minority, there is only one reply to be given to the recent inquiry of Charles Coppens, S. J. (in The New World of March 4, 1905): ‘Where Catholics are in the majority, can they not introduce by the same right the Catholic Scriptures with Catholic notes, the catechism of their church, and the ‘Lives of the Saints’?’ The logic of this Catholic priest is irresistible, if the one premise be granted.” “We commend to the earnest attention of all the people the words of James Madison in his masterly memorial against the proposal brought forward in his time, that the state should make provision for the teaching of religion: ‘The American theater has exhibited proofs that equal and complete liberty, if it does not wholly eradicate it (religious discord), sufficiently destroys its malignant influence on the health and prosperity of the state. If, with the salutary effects of this system under our eyes, we begin to contract the bounds of religious freedom, we know no name which will too severely reproach our folly.’” “The people of that time saw the evil of the principle, and repudiated the principle. I hope the people of Washington will exhibit the same wisdom.” Letters Upon the Subject
By W. W. P.
The Washington Post of Monday, March 27, devoted two columns and a half of its space to letters upon this subject, every one of which opposed the movement. One of these letters we reprint without abbreviation. It is as follows:— “EDITOR POST: In the Post of March 20 Mr. W. F. Crafts says that for seventeen years he has heard doleful predictions of a union of church and state, with medieval persecution, if Sunday laws were preserved, and religion was taught in the public schools. But he denies that church and state are in any way drawing together, and says there has been no religious persecution as the result of ‘Sunday laws.’ “The very fact that the recent interdenominational conference thought it necessary to preface nearly every pronouncement it made for the introduction of religion into the public schools with a statement disclaiming any intention of uniting church and state is good evidence that they themselves saw that there was, to all intents and purposes, a union of church and state in the thing which they were proposing. “And as to persecution under Sunday laws, it is sufficient to state that from 1885 to 1896, when, through the effort of such organizations as the National Reform Association, the American Sabbath Union, and the International Reform Bureau, with all of which Mr. Crafts has had much to do, there began to be a revival of Sunday legislation and the enforcement of Sunday observance by law, there were over one hundred Seventh-day Adventists in the United States, and about thirty in foreign countries, prosecuted under Sunday laws for quiet work performed on the first day of the week within their own premises, resulting in fines and costs amounting to $2,269.69, imprisonments totaling 1,438 days, and 445 days served in chain-gangs. Among the number were an uncle and an only brother of the writer. “Perhaps Mr. Crafts does not call this persecution, but merely ‘enforcing the law.’ But we regard it as persecution, and we are of the opinion that Mr. Crafts would also if he were in our place, or if Seventh-day Adventists should fine and imprison him and place him in the chain-gang if he refused to observe the seventh day. ‘Enforcing the law’ is all any extensive religious persecution has ever been. This is all Nebuchadnezzar did when he threw the three Hebrews into the fiery furnace. That there has not been more persecutions under Sunday laws of late years is not the fault of Mr. Crafts, for he has been a zealous worker for such measures. We have been doing what we could to prevent him and the religio-political organizations referred to from carrying out their plans. From another letter we make the following extract:— “EDITOR POST: The people of Washington may not realize that there is an organization here which boldly terms itself ‘Christian Lobby,’ with headquarters adjoining the Capitol grounds, which is seeking to introduce the Russian system of church and state into this government. It is quite startling to know that this organization has already so far fastened itself upon the great lawmaking body of this nation that it is able to publish its documents at public expense, and have them sent out under the franking system without postage.” In the same letter a paragraph is quoted from one of the documents entitled “Patriotic Studies,” which the letter states was “prepared by the International Reform Bureau, of Washington, D. C.” It reads thus:— “Most of all, the homes must be made to feel that the family is a divine government, a training-school for citizenship. And wherever children are not being so trained, on their very first petty crime, or better still, before it, they should be turned over to some institution or society which will give them this training, and so a fair chance.” It was stated in the letter that the author of this document (it is well known to our readers that Dr. W. F. Crafts is the head of this Reform Bureau) was one of those who were urging this movement for the introduction of religious instruction into the public schools, and it was shown that the logic of his principles, as stated in the quotation from the Senate document, would result, on the slightest pretext, in taking the children from the control of parents, and placing them wholly under the direction of the state. The letter closed as follows:— “I shall be greatly surprised if the people of Washington are ready to surrender to this intermeddling religious despotism their natural rights to teach and to hold their own children. Are the readers of the Post ready for the Russian system in this great free republic? If not, let them protest by voice and pen against the enforced teaching of religion in the public schools.” An Appeal to Religious Bigotry
Taking the editorials in the Post and the number and character of the communications printed in the papers as any proper indication of the drift of public sentiment, it became evident that there was not a very strong probability of the success of this movement. This evidently aroused the leaders to more aggressive action, and betrayed the originator of the movement into some indiscreet utterances, which were quite fully reported in the daily papers. The Washington Post of March 29 reported an address by Dr. McKim upon this subject, under the heading, in large type, “Scored by Dr. McKim; Pastor Arraigns Opponents of Religion in Schools.” The report of the Evening Star of the same date was headed “Denounced Opponents; Address of Dr. McKim before Churchmen’s League.” The Washington Times of the same date dealt with the address under this heading: “Dr. McKim Criticizes ‘Foes of the Sabbath’; Makes Strong Plea for Moral Instruction on Religious Basis in the Public Schools.” The following paragraphs taken from the reports will indicate the general character of the address:— “Rev. Randolph H. McKim, rector of the Epiphany Church, and a leader of the movement for religious instruction in the public schools, made a stirring address to the members of the Churchmen’s League, and the Brotherhood of St. Andrew of his church last night, in connection with the movement in which he is so deeply interested. He denounced those opposing the movement as seeking to destroy the Sabbath, and called for volunteers to help circulate petitions and stir up the people of the District. . . . Dr. McKim was very much in earnest, and his statements were most severe. He denounced the Jews and members of other denominations who opposed the18adoption of the resolutions at the meeting, and declared that they were attempting to break up the Sabbath. . . . It is his fervent wish, Dr. McKim declared, that the ideas of the Jews and the German Americans as to Sunday should not prevail in this country. The majority of the church-members in the District have been too lukewarm toward this matter. . . . No effort should be spared to arouse interest among the people in the matter of the proposed religious instruction in schools, and to do this properly, earnest, thinking men must come forward and volunteer their services for the work.” “Dr. McKim made an address, in which he scathingly arraigned the Jews and other sects allied with them in what he called an attempt to destroy the Sabbath, and who declared that under the Constitution this is not a religious country. . . . Dr. McKim said that the majority of church-members of the various denominations have been too lukewarm in their efforts, or have made no efforts at all, to arouse sentiment, and to obtain petitions to urge the introduction of religious teaching in the schools.” “The opponents of moral instruction on a religious basis in the public schools were severely criticized last evening in the lecture room of the Epiphany Church, by the Rev. Randolph H. McKim, rector of the church, and author of the resolution which has been the cause of so much discussion. ‘The Jews and other sects allied with them are making a determined effort to destroy the Sabbath,’ said Dr. McKim, and he scored their claim that this is not a religious country. ‘The government officially recognizes the supremacy of God,’ he declared, and pointed to the words, ‘So help me, God,’ contained in the oath taken by the president, and subscribed to thousands of times daily in the courts of the United States, as an illustration.” It will thus be plainly seen that, for lack of sound arguments in behalf of this movement, an appeal is being made to race prejudice and religious bigotry. It ought to be plain to any logical mind that if opposition to this movement to introduce religious instruction into the public schools may fairly be regarded as an attack upon the Sunday institution, it follows inevitably that this movement must in itself be an effort which is expected either directly or indirectly to build up the Sunday institution. The Leaflet and the Petition Work
Much interest has developed both among our own people and also among other friends of religious liberty in the circulation of the leaflet mentioned in our last report, and also in securing signatures to the Remonstrance which was printed in this paper last week. Twenty-five thousand copies of the leaflet have already been printed, and systematic work has been done toward placing a copy in every home in the city. Many copies of the leaflet have been sent through the mail to all those who occupy leading positions in both the national and the local government and courts, to the heads of departments, to the principals of schools, and to other leading citizens. Dr. Alexander Kent, pastor of the People’s Church, has taken an active part both in circulating the leaflet and in securing signers to the Remonstrance. One influential clerk in the Pension Department asked for a copy of the Remonstrance and secured nearly one hundred signatures by his own personal effort. Another man asked for six copies of the Remonstrance, which he wished to use in securing signatures. That this campaign of education is having its effect upon the public mind is indicated from the fact that a leading member of the Board of Education stated to one of our workers that when the proposal was first made to teach religion in the public schools, he favored the movement, but since giving consideration to the discussion of the question, he has come to entertain serious doubts as to the propriety of such a plan. A leading attorney, who is a lecturer in the Law Department of one of the universities, has written us a letter commending in strong terms the logical soundness of the arguments advanced in our Remonstrance. Many other citizens have expressed their approval of the work which we have endeavored to do in behalf of religious freedom. Several interviews have been had with different members of the Board of Education, who have all been supplied with copies of our leaflet and Remonstrance. At their regular meeting last week the question of religious instruction came up for consideration, but it was decided to postpone any action until all parties had time to present their petitions and arguments. We have received official notice from the acting secretary of the Board that should a hearing be granted those who favor the proposition, we shall be notified and given a like opportunity to be heard. In any case, our petitions will be considered. The further progress of this movement will be reported next week. The Nashville Agricultural and Normal School
By N. H. Druillard
We are receiving many letters containing inquiries in regard to this school. These greatly cheer and encourage us; for they tell that others, as well as ourselves, are interested in this new enterprise. Spring is here, and it has brought to our family plenty of hard work. There is much to be done to get the land ready for planting. Our farm of four hundred acres must receive a large amount of painstaking labor before it can be made to yield a support for teachers and any great number of students. We have nearly one hundred acres that can be put into some kind of crop this year. The rest will be used for pasture. The pasture land is very stony, and seems to be naturally adapted for producing thorn and brier bushes; so we have an abundance of them. We hope to be able to discipline and persuade it to grow blue-grass, instead of thorns, cactus, and prickly burs of all kinds. Some parts of the farm are not only stony, but wash badly, and the heavy rains rapidly carry the soil into the river, leaving the limestone rocks white and clean, making what are called here glades. Were it not for the stones, the washing would produce what are known in Nebraska as draws, or canyons. All this washing must be prevented in such a way that the stones may be covered with soil, and then sown to grass. We have sufficient timber for our fuel, fence posts, etc. Most of the large cedar trees were cut from the land two or three years ago, but there are several groves of fine young cedar, which are doing well. We have one pretty grove of different kinds of oak, maple, elm, hickory, walnut, etc. But some of these large trees are old and partially dead, covered with vines and mistletoe. As so much timber of all kinds was cut not many years ago, we have plenty of stumps, with all their train of evil. The Cumberland River touches the farm on the south and east, but its banks are high and rocky, so there is no danger of its carrying away the land, as so many rivers delight in doing. When our company bought the farm, we thought we knew where we would get the money to pay for it. We were to borrow a part, and the rest was due the different members from our various institutions. We felt sure that the payment of the land was practically provided for. We made the first payment with our borrowed money. We had three other instalments to make, then an old mortgage to deal with. As the time of the payments drew near, we found that our institutions could not let us have the money without embarrassment. We could not crowd these branches, for we had the same interest in their prosperity that we had in this. Often the way looked dark, and it seemed that there was nothing to do but sell part of the farm. Elder Haskell urged us not to do this. He felt that it meant a great loss and hindrance to the school. Sister White wrote us not to be discouraged, that God would open hearts to help us, and he did. Friends loaned us money without interest, or at a low rate, and we were able to meet each instalment, mortgage and all, a day or so before due. Now, as fast as our institutions can let us have the money, we can repay those who so kindly helped us in our time of great need. Our plan is to keep the farm so it will always be worth more than the price paid. In this way the money loaned to purchase it will be safe and secure. We will not borrow money to build or equip the school. We ask the friends of this cause to donate means for this. These donations are not to benefit any private individual nor company, but will finally belong to the Southern Union Conference. The teachers and many of the students will have to earn their support from the farm. It will be difficult to do this for a year or two, and it will take self-denial, courage, and perseverance. Our present family are willing to live very simply while working hard to prepare themselves to go to any field where duty may call, although the Mission Board may not be able to give them financial aid. If an army of our young people can be educated to engage in this work, many more of the needy, waiting fields can be supplied with laborers. Such an education can be gained better in a place like this than where there is that ease and comfort which many conveniences always give. So far we have been kept to our wits' end to know how to supply our bare necessities from our meager supplies. While we do not wish it to be always19thus, yet we are willing to take stern, but earnest discipline that we may become hardy, self-reliant workers, not fearing to enter the untried, difficult fields, nor becoming discouraged when we find that we can not obtain many things that in the past we have thought we could not do without. No doubt many who have visited our farm feel that it is almost worthless, and that it is a mistake to begin on land so worn and uncongenial, that it would have been better to locate on a farm which was under good cultivation, all ready to yield an abundant harvest. We thought so too once, but now we begin to see how much can be done on land just like this. Here we can have an object-lesson, and show what we can do by correct methods in farming. We were told that the Lord would be pleased to have the school located near Nashville. We can now see the wisdom of this. It is a great educational center all ready to be interested in the call of to-day,—country life, schools on the farm, manual and mental training—going hand in hand. Not one of us would locate anywhere else if we had the opportunity. Every day convinces us more and more that the Lord guided from the very first in planting the school in this place. If those connected with this school will walk humbly with God, many will be trained in it for service. Thousands Perishing
By L. N. Muck
Why do we say that thousands are perishing?—Because there are those right among us who know nothing of the message given to us as a denomination; because there are those who are ready for the message due the world at this time. The harvest is ready, but where are the reapers? Last fall at a council held at College View, Neb., it was decided that a vigorous campaign should be entered upon, and that each worker should make a special effort to put the message before the people. But the brethren said nothing about the thousands of blind people that know not the truth. Recently thousands of pages of literature have been printed, and sent out from the national capital to all parts of the world. This literature was printed especially for those who can see, not for the blind. How are the blind to receive these truths?—Through the avenues which God has opened. This class of people must be provided for. Can we not enter upon a general campaign for the blind in this country? It would take but a short time to get the truth into their hands. They are easily reached. In previous articles we have mentioned the condition of these people, and that literature is being prepared for them. But where is the money to print literature, and where are the young men and women who will go to the blind and lift them out of the pit into which they have fallen? Will you do this? We urge you to consider their needs, and to respond to our appeal at once. I rejoice with you to see the gospel go to dark Africa and other places; but, my friends, I beg you to lend your aid in giving the message to the blind. The door is open. Let us enter. Demands for something to read are increasing, but we must turn these inquiring souls away till you come to our aid with means. If God looks upon any work with more favor than he does another, I believe that the publishing work for the blind occupies the first place in his mind. Will you not let this work occupy the first place in your mind for a while? L. N. MUCK,
Editor of the Christian Record. Lewis and Clark Centennial Exposition and Oriental Fair
By F. M. Burg
THIS exposition will be held in the city of Portland, Ore., during the summer of the present year. It is “the first international exposition under the patronage of the United States government to be held west of the Rocky Mountains,” and is to be held in celebration of the acquisition of the Oregon Country, which originally comprised all of the present States of Oregon, Washington, and Idaho, and parts of Montana and Wyoming, an area of three hundred thousand square miles. This article is not intended as a detailed description of the fair, but to call the attention of the REVIEW readers to this, another opportunity for missionary effort which has come to the people through whom God is heralding the last warning message to the world. While this exposition is within easier reach of our people on the Pacific Coast, and appeals in a special way to them as a missionary opportunity, still the believers of present truth in other parts of the country will feel an interest in the matter, and will no doubt note with special interest the steps which have been taken by the Pacific Union Conference to interest the many visitors to the fair in the third angel’s message. It is estimated that one million people will visit the exhibit during the season, which suggests the importance of the opportunity we have in the event for sowing seed for the soon-coming harvest. The Pacific Union Conference Executive Committee at its meeting held at Mountain View in January spent considerable time in the study of this question, and laid some plans. A committee was appointed with power to prosecute the work in connection with the fair. This committee consisted of the following persons: A. J. Breed, W. R. Simmons, W. V. Sample, E. L. Stewart, and F. M. Burg. The conference committee also voted to request the Southern California Conference to release Elder William Ward Simpson to work in Portland during the season; and also further voted that a day be selected when an offering should be taken in all the churches of each conference in the Pacific Union to meet the expenses incident to the work, especially of procuring an adequate supply of literature. And since each conference in the Pacific Union is requested to send a worker, either a Bible worker or some one adapted to work with literature, a considerable amount of literature will be used, even though it be used judiciously, as is the aim; hence quite a sum should be raised when this special offering is taken. And one other thing might be mentioned which will interest our brethren and sisters, and which will also call for some means,—no large amount, however. It is the Rest Home, which will be fitted up in one of the exhibit buildings, where the many mothers who will visit the grounds with their little ones may find a place for retirement and rest. The fair commissioners very kindly and favorably considered our application, and courteously offered space to be used in this way. The Rest Home will be equipped with chairs, rockers, couches, cots or beds, etc., and put under the charge of some person of tact and adaptability, to receive and show Christian courtesy to the guests, and also who will watch for every opportunity to point the weary to the rest that may be found in the One who gave the great invitation. More might be written which would interest our people in regard to the work contemplated during the time of the fair. Perhaps, however, this is as much as would be consistent to write at this time. We will therefore call special attention to the time selected by the special fair committee when the offering should be taken in the churches of the Pacific Union Conference; namely, Sabbath, April 22. Please make special note of this; and let conference officers, church elders, and leaders of companies seek to interest everybody in this good work. Why not ask some friend interested in philanthropic work to give a little also? You have a good chance to appeal to him by laying before him the plan of establishing the Rest Home for mothers. Money that may come from outside the Pacific Union Conference will also be thankfully received. Remit to W. V. Sample, of the Pacific Press Branch Office, 285 Salmon St., Portland, Ore. Religious Liberty Notes
By K. C. Russell
The ministers of Traverse City, Mich., “have adopted stringent resolutions against Sunday funerals.” “Large funerals held on Sunday are desecrations of the day,” the resolutions say. Those who are engaged in circulating the petition in Washington against the introduction of religious teaching in the public schools are having some interesting experiences. A goodly number of prominent people do not hesitate to sign it, and some express the wish that they might sign such a petition many times. On the other hand, there are those who are bitterly opposed. One person threw the tract that we are using with the petition into the waste-basket, and another tore it to pieces in the presence of the solicitor. Some school-teachers who have been interviewed on the question are opposed to religious teaching in the schools, and do not see how it could be done, were they required to do so. Elder H. W. Reed, secretary of the Religious Liberty Department of the Wisconsin Conference, announces the following appointment of a religious liberty meeting: “The eighteenth of next month we are going to have a religious liberty meeting in Milwaukee. We have the program planned, but not printed. We are going to have a big meeting. A number of our ministers will take part. I am going there on the eleventh and carry cards and literature.”20 The following is an extract from a letter written by a Roman Catholic member of the Wisconsin Legislature. “While I do not agree with you that the Sunday is a relic of paganism, nor that it is the mark, or means, in any or all ages, of a union of church and state, I shall vote against the bill. As a Catholic I would have to recognize the right of conscience to others as well as myself.” A brother in Indiana who circulated the petition against the Sunday bills that were before Congress, says: “The filling of blanks of petition against Sunday legislation was a grand success in Patricksburg. With few exceptions, they were readily signed. It was certainly encouraging to see how the neighbors and friends stand in relation to religious liberty. Canvassing with the petition was a great help to all. Others would have readily added their names had space permitted.” Here are appended the words from a worker in New Mexico: “The work in Albuquerque looks encouraging. I visited some of the business men of the city while out with the petitions, and had several good talks with them. I found that quite a number of them were in favor of a Sunday law, and did not understand the principles of religious liberty. I expect to visit them again, and give them some reading-matter on this subject.” A press dispatch from Albany, N. Y., under date of March 22, reads: “Assemblyman Cox (Rep., Buffalo) proposed that the New York Sunday law shall be stricter. By a bill that he introduced to-day the hard-won clause permitting the sale and delivery of food stuffs before ten o’clock on Sunday mornings is repealed.” While there is some tendency to modify Sunday laws, there is also a tendency to restore them to something of the old-time strictness.