The American Sentinel, Vol. 7, No. 31
To govern their own spirit and deal righteously among themselves is a greater anPage 1
Earlier text: To govern their own spirit and deal righteously among themselves is a greater anA School of Conscience.
By F. W. HOWE
UNDER this heading appears the following editorial in a recent number of the Churchman of this city (New York):— Certain gentlemen in the vicinity of Paris, Tennessee, believing that Saturday is the day on which men ought to worship, not only claim the right to observe that day religiously, but also claim the right to carry on their usual farm and other business on Sunday, in violation of the State Sunday law. In the exercise of their first claim they have been unmolested, but in the exercise of the second they have been arrested, convicted, fined $25 apiece, and, in default of payment, have been lodged in jail. One of them who has previously served three months in jail for similar offenses, writes to the National Religious Liberty Association of Chicago, complaining that it would take all their small property to meet the demands of persistent fines, and that the judge, in answer to the protest that they were conscientious in this matter, replied: “Let them educate their consciences by the laws of Tennessee.” At first-blush this judicial fiat seems oppressive. But there would seem to be a distinction to be drawn between a law which violates conscience, and a law which simply limits conscience. Unless these seventh-day religionists take the clause, “Six days shalt thou labor,” as literally as, “The seventh day is the Sabbath,” they can hardly complain that the State Sunday law violates their consciences. A law compelling them to work on Saturday might be open to that objection, but the Sunday law only abridges their liberty to toil and get gain, to five days in the week, which is the price they are called upon to pay for having a peculiar conscience. The Tennessee Sunday law being what it is, the Sunday earnings of seventh-day Tennesseeans would seem to be liable to confiscation in the shape of fines, and the judge gave good advice, when he said, in this particular, “Let them educate their consciences by the laws of Tennessee.” The Churchman does not usually much concern itself with matters outside of the Episcopal Church, the would-be “Catholic Church of America.” And when it does indulge in any comment upon external affairs, it is wont to do so in a very modest, benevolent way; as the foregoing extract bears witness. Yet, “it would seem” that it were hard for our esteemed Churchman to disguise the self-satisfied, supercilious composure with which he regards the judicial crime against “these seventh-day religionists” who have consciences sufficiently “peculiar” to dare obey God rather than man. It is in vain that this organ of a church which is synonymous with formal, legalized ecclesiasticism, attempts to conceal its satisfaction over the occurrences mentioned, and its complete indorsement of the tyrannical laws which caused them. And it takes this attitude without a blush, “first,” last, or anywhere. Observe the gracious admission that a law compelling these “gentlemen” to work on Saturday might be open to the objection that it would violate their conscience; still it would be only an “objection”—nothing very serious, to the Churchman. If one of these “seventh-day Tennesseeans” should happen to be in the neighboring State of Georgia, and were “compelled to work on Saturday” in the chain-gang under the penalty of bloody stripes and lifelong scars if he refused245 fused, doubtless it would seem to the Churchman an exceedingly proper thing for the humane officers of civil law to interpret that clause, “Six days shalt thou labor,” very literally. And the poor violator of the “venerable day of the sun” would scarcely be given his choice of “one day in seven” for rest. But “the Tennessee Sunday law being what it is,” “a law which simply limits conscience” in that it “only abridges their liberty to toil and get gain, to five days in the week,” as a matter of course, “the Sunday earnings of seventh-day Tennesseeans would seem to be liable to confiscation in the shape of fines and “good advice.” Shame upon the unworthy subterfuge that these poor farmers who have to toil for their daily bread could earn $25 apiece every Sunday! Shame upon America’s four hundred years of vaunted civilization that compels the victims of religious intolerance to lie in filthy jails until their fines shall be fulfilled at twenty-five cents a day! It is true that one or two who were able to pay their fines, refused to do so because they would not acknowledge the jurisdiction of the court. “At first blush” it always seems that a man who puts himself in this position deserves his fate. The law must take its course. So long as it remains on the statute books, good or bad, it must be enforced. No man has the moral right to urge a claim of conscience in defense of an act which violates the equal civil rights of every other man. Let us apply this logic: There is to-day in this year of grace, 1892, upon the statute books of Maryland, in the city of Washington, D. C., unrepealed by our enlightened nineteenth century Congress, a civil law which requires that any man who shall publicly deny his belief in, or blaspheme, the Holy Trinity, shall be bored through the tongue; and if he repeatedly persists in this course he must suffer death. Is this law enforced now? Bless you, no; because that law, you know, was intolerant, destructive of the rights of conscience, you know, and was derived from the old Church and State establishment of colonial days. My dear friend, we have progressed since then. Probably, in certain directions. But this description is every whit true of the Tennessee Sunday law. Like the other, it was designed as an instrument of religious persecution under civil auspices, and is enforced in no other way. In the testimony in the cases referred to by the Churchman, not one of the neighbors of these “seventh-day Tennesseeans” could be persuaded to say that his civil rights had been violated because another had quietly plowed his corn, away from the public road, on Sunday. No one had been disturbed, nor was it shown according to the indictment that these “seventh-day religionists” had created “a public nuisance.” Yet there was not found wanting a jury that could be influenced by religious bigotry to convict them, nor a judge who was not ready with his “good advice.” It is always thus when civil law usurps jurisdiction over religious questions. Civil law never did, never does, do this of its own will; but as Judge Hammond said in the King case (another laurel in the crown of Tennessee), “by a sort of factitious advantage the observers of Sunday have secured control of legislation, and persistently adhere to that advantage.” The motive is purely religious, the judge and jury are its tools. The Churchman is obliged to admit that the Sunday law abridges liberty of action to one man in matters wherein he does not “abridge,” nor “limit,” nor “violate” the liberty of his fellow man. Where is the warrant for this abridgment, either in the Bible, the Constitution of the United States, or in the sublime declaration of Jesus Christ: “Render unto Cæsar the things that are Cæsar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s”? In an adjoining editorial, the Churchman sheds forth this complacent dictum: “The great error in the Puritan theology was the abandonment of the truth of a common corporate fellowship . . . in the brotherhood of Christ and the fatherhood of God.” The reflecting mind can scarce repress the sentiment that there is possibly as much of pious cant coupled with Pharisaic intolerance in modern formalism as in any variety that flourished four hundred years ago. Occasionally it is well to take a look in the direction we are drifting. F. W. HOWE. He insisted that it was due to the religious sentiment of the country that the World’s Fair should be closed on Sunday.—From report of Senator Colquitt’s speech on the sundry civil bill. WHAT does the senator mean by “the religious sentiment of the country?”—that’s the question. So far as we can learn, the only expression of sentiment in favor of Sunday closing that has been heard thus far comes in the form of petitions from about two million religionists belonging chiefly, if not altogether, to the so-called evangelical churches. Assuming that these petitioners represent the entire body of their several churches there still remain the Roman Catholics, Lutherans, Protestant Episcopalians, Unitarians and Universalists who have either not declared themselves at all on the subject or else have spoken in favor of open Sundays. The numeral strength of these communions, according to the census of 1890, is as follows:— Roman Catholics........................................8,277,039
Lutherans...............................................1,086,048
Protestant Episcopalians.................................480,176
Unitarians (est.).........................................20,000
Universalists.............................................42,952
Totals..............................................9,906,215 This is nearly half of the 21,757,171 recorded communicants of all the churches in America. If these be added to the large body of persons of “religious sentiment” who are not communicants of any church and the larger number of evangelical churches who do not favor closed Sundays, it will be seen that Senator Colquitt has spoken loosely in speaking for “the religious sentiment of the country.” The “religious sentiment of the country” is not, so far as the record shows, in favor of closing the Fair on Sunday. But suppose it were. Do we understand Senator Colquitt to say that 55,000,000 of citizens are bound to surrender their consciences into the keeping of the remaining 10,000,000? That is bad democracy and worse republicanism. The majority rules in republics.—Chicago Evening Post. Neither Gospel Nor Temperance.
By A. Delos Westcott
THE Union Signal has quoted from the pen of John G. Woolley a definition of gospel temperance, which the editors pronounce “the best definition” they have heard. The first part of this definition is perfectly proper; but the last sentence discloses the fact that the “undying enthusiasm” which has for some time been displayed in an effort to force the gospel upon people by law, is not yet dead. Mr. Woolley says:— And when a Christian man stands up and votes the will of God touching drink into the ballot box, and does it for His sake and in His name, though he stands alone among a million, and against overwhelming odds of policy or politics or worldly wisdom, I call that gospel temperance.
Mr. Woolley and the Union Signal may call this gospel temperance as much as they please, but the fact is, it is neither gospel nor temperance. It may be the gospel of some people, but it is not the gospel of Christ. That gospel does not require the aid of civil law. It can succeed without it. Says the Apostle Paul: “I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ; for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth.” The gospel is not the power of the State; it is the power of God; and in order for any one to be able to be saved by it, it is necessary for him to believe. As human laws can not force men to believe, the State can never force any one to be benefited by the gospel. To undertake to force the gospel, or any part of it, upon people by law, is to undertake to substitute the power of the State for the power of God’s Spirit. And as no one could make such an attempt until he had first lost his faith in the power of God, it is a virtual declaration that the power of the State is more efficient than the power of God. It is, in short, a denial of the power of God. The work of Christianity is to be accomplished, “not by might [margin, army], nor by power, but by my Spirit, saith the Lord of hosts.” This shows that the power of God’s Spirit and the power of the State are distinct and separate powers, and that they are opposed to each other, in the sense that they do not co-operate in religious work. The gospel is to be applied to men’s hearts by the power of the Holy Ghost; instead of having its outward forms forced upon them by the power of civil law. No government ever did or ever can, by enactment, help Christianity in the slightest degree. All seeming help which has come from a246 source has sooner or later been turned into a curse. This truth is written in letters of blood on every page of history. The apostle declares that the gospel is the power of God. Consequently when the power of the State is substituted for the power of God to enforce an observance of the outward forms of the gospel upon men, it is not the gospel at all which is enforced, but a counterfeit of the gospel. Paul speaks of those who are “having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof”; which shows that “godliness” consists of two things—form and power. Some people seem to think that if they only get the “form” from the Bible, it matters little where they get the power; and so they petition and vote for the power of the State to enforce gospel temperance, and gospel morality, and anything and everything that they think is gospel. But as the gospel is the power of God and is not the power of the State, or of its armies, it is impossible to vote gospel temperance, or anything else pertaining to the gospel, into the ballot box. The gospel never went into the ballot box, and there is no power on earth that can put it in. The gospel goes into men’s hearts when it goes anywhere, and it does not go by “the gateway of politics.” As there is no gospel in Mr. Woolley’s definition, so also, there is no temperance. Temperance is self-control, and not external legal control. A man who does not drink simply because he can get no liquor is no more temperate in the sight of God than the man who lies drunk in the gutter. Temperance is a Christian grace to be acquired through the working of God’s Spirit; and you may as well talk about legislating faith, virtue, knowledge, patience, godliness, brotherly kindness, and charity into an individual as to talk about legislating temperance into him. But you say “there are some people who are temperate while they do not believe in the gospel at all.” This seems to be true; just as many persons appear to possess the other Christian graces without believing in Christianity. Our only explanation for this is, that God is so merciful that he helps even those who disregard his claims, and does not permit them to fall under the complete control of Satan, that his goodness may still lead them toward repentance. Some persons have more natural force of character and self-control than others; but the forlorn and helpless wrecks of humanity which we see all about us at the present time, should shake our confidence in the moral power of man when separated from his Creator. God only is good, and all goodness proceeds from him. The gospel is the medium through which he proposes to impart his power to fallen men—that power which alone can give them the victory over the forces of evil in the world. There is no safety outside of God’s plan. “Without me,” says Christ, “ye can do nothing.” But the Scripture says in plain words that temperance is a fruit of the Spirit of God (Gal. 5: 22, 23); and Mr. Woolley admits that it belongs to the gospel when he calls it “gospel temperance.” It is just as impossible to have the fruits of the Spirit in an individual who has not the Spirit as it would be to gather grapes from thorns or figs from thistles. The carnal mind does not bear the fruits of the Spirit; hence it is worse than foolish to talk about forcing people by law to be temperate. If these people would search their Bibles with the right spirit, they might find out what kind of a tree temperance grows on, and then they would give up their effort to compel a corrupt tree to bear spiritual fruit. And if the energy that is consumed in the effort to influence legislation and secure the aid of the civil power to force the gospel upon men, were put forth in proclaiming the gospel as God directs, the Holy Spirit would attend their efforts in such measure that they would not need to be ashamed of the results. Paul said, “I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ, for it is the power of God;” but when he spoke about those who were “having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof,” he said, “from such turn away.” A gospel which denies the power of God by entrusting the civil power to establish its claims, we have need to be ashamed of, for it will never succeed. Its supporters may succeed in securing control of the civil power; they may succeed in persecuting to the death every one who disagrees with their notions of religion; but they will not succeed in converting any one to God, or in making the world any better. If the prohibitory movement has no other end in view than to aid temperance, then the sooner it goes down the better; first, because the State has no right to meddle in any way with that which belongs to the gospel; and, second, because it is impossible to force people to possess the fruits of the Spirit of God. The only legitimate object which the movement can have is the protection of peaceable citizens from the incivilities of the drinker. This is on the principle that the Government should prohibit that which experience has shown to be a necessary and almost invariable cause of crime. The prohibition movement can properly have no more relation to temperance than it has to faith, charity, or patience. And the sole object of government is the protection of each citizen against the incivilities of others. A. DELOS WESTCOTT. No Constitutional Authority.
HON. WM. C. OATES, of Alabama, speaking upon the Sunday closing proviso attached to the World's Fair appropriation in the sundry civil bill, said: “But, sir, Congress has no police power which it can exercise in the State of Illinois. Suppose that the money is voted in its present shape, accepted, and used by the Fair Association or Commission, and afterwards the conditions be not observed, would the United States have any recourse? None whatever. It absolutely has no power to enforce either of the conditions proposed. This is but another illustration of the utter want of constitutional authority for this proposed legislation. The Supreme Court in the case of United States vs. DeWitt, 9 Wallace Reports, held that an act of Congress, which is a police regulation, is without legislative authority except when it excludes territorially all State authority, as in the District of Columbia. Within State limits it can have no constitutional operation.” THE Register, Red Bank, N. J., publishes the following in reference to the Sunday law crusade now in progress at Atlantic Highlands:— “The people of Atlantic Highlands have formed a Law and Order League to put down all Sunday traffic which is in violation of the Sunday laws of the State. If the Law and Order League mean business, let them begin their work by having the officials of the Central railroad arrested for Sunday traffic. Let them arrest the captains and officers of the steamboats that ply between New York and Atlantic Highlands. Let them arrest all the travelers who use the boats and trains on Sunday, for such traveling is against the law. If they really believe in what they say, they will do this, and they won’t arrest the poor Italian fruit sellers, and barbers, and newspaper dealers, until they have made examples of the rich and powerful corporations. If they allow the rich corporations to violate the law while they seek to punish poor and uninfluential people for doing the same, they will prove themselves to be arrant humbugs, and to be without moral courage. If the Sunday Blue Laws are to be enforced, enforce them against everybody, rich and247 poor alike, the man who rides out with his team as well as the man who hires a livery rig; the man who sells railroad tickets as well as the man who sells bananas. If the Law and Order people mean to carry out the law, let them carry it out impartially and treat everybody alike.” Only an Engine of State.
By Robert Robinson
No instance can be produced of pure Christianity attempting to subvert civil government; on the contrary, it is intrusted with a conciliating plan of universal peace between secular and sacred things by Jesus Christ. The corrupters of Christianity deprived it of this noble plea; they bartered purity for power, exchanged argument for authority, and made scandalous truck of all the truths and virtues of religion for the seals of a prince and the keys of a gaol. They invented words of inexplicable mystery, and inflicted penalties upon those who could not interpret their dreams—they cast innumerable canons, and with these destroyed the lives and liberties and properties of their peaceable brethren—they armed priests with secular power, and covered the barbarous use of it with infinite pomp—they excited princes to hate, persecute, banish, and burn, their subjects for matters of conscience—they thought lay subjects beneath their notice, kings above law, and themselves above kings. To their conduct it is owing that most great men consider religion as nothing more than an engine of State.—Robert Robinson. 1823. It has not been heretofore understood that this country had a national religion, but instantly, upon the legislation by Congress which shows that to be a fact, there are found those who not only realize it but do not hesitate to say so, in so many words. The Christian Standard says: “And, indeed, that which is precious in our national heritage centers in our national religion.” That religion is the religion of which Sunday observance is the distinguishing mark, and that mark all its followers must receive. A careful study of the tenth chapter of Revelation is of much value in this connection. The Mid-Continent Magazine, for June, contains an article on "Religious Liberty," in respect to which the magazine says editorially:— "In the days of our fathers there existed only one opinion as to religious liberty, but civilized human nature finally rebelled against compulsion in religion, as well as other matters, and to-day we enjoy much greater freedom from the tyranny of the Church—thanks largely to societies, such as the National Religious Liberty Association, the secretary of which, Mr. A. O. Tait, has treated us to a very able article on the subject in this issue." It seems that the president of the American Sabbath Union is summering in Bar Harbor. A special dispatch to the World says: “The non-observance of Sunday at Bar Harbor shocks Mr. Shepard, and it is rumored that he is going to bring the old neglected Blue Laws to the front again, and have things closed up on the Lord’s day. An excursion of over fifteen hundred people was in town to-day (Sunday) from all along the Maine Central Railway, and it hurt Mr. Shepard’s feelings to see them.” The Church Bulletin, of South Chicago, has in its issues of June 24 and July 1, a very accurate statement of the facts connected with the arrest and imprisonment of Seventh-day Adventists in Tennessee, together with a sound exposition of the principles involved, and an earnest plea for civil equity, pure and undefiled. IN Keyport, N. J., a citizen’s protective association has been formed to defend the Sunday cases brought by the Sabbath Union committee in their effort to enforce the Sunday laws. THE Mayor and the ministers of Freeport, Ill., are at swords' points on the Sunday observance question. The Mayor has permitted Sunday baseball and other Sunday diversions, and the ministers are denouncing him from their pulpits. THE Christian Union says of the proposed congressional appropriation for the World's Fair:— It remains to be seen, however, whether the Fair Managers will accept the condition that goes with it. This condition consists of a proviso, introduced in the Senate, amusingly enough, by Senator Quay, of Pennsylvania, ordering that the Fair shall be absolutely closed on Sunday. The proviso of Senator Peffer, of Kansas, that no intoxicating liquor should be sold within the Fair grounds, was defeated in the Senate. It may fairly be considered a matter of doubt whether it is the province of Congress to determine anything more than the economic expediency of such an appropriation. But if provisos are to be made, Senator Peffer's seems to us wiser and more conducive to good morals than Senator Quay's. For, as the Christian Union has all along contended, the effect of the absolute closing of the Fair on Sunday would be to swell the attendance upon, and profits of, the beer saloons, theaters, and vicious resorts of the city; while, with the machinery stopped and the commercial features and incidental attractions of the Fair closed, the grounds and art galleries might be open, even at a cheap price, with positive benefit to Sunday visitors. This would be a compromise which the advocates of Sunday closing by act of Congress, have again and again declared they would not accept, and, on the other hand, it would not meet the principle involved, namely, that of entire non-intervention in a religious matter. Whether he shall show his exhibit or not on Sunday should be a matter of choice with each exhibitor, as it would be any other day of the week. And with those who attend, whether they do or not should be a matter of personal choice, and, properly, no legislation of any kind could interfere. The only positive authority having jurisdiction would be the corporation representing the stockholders and owners. THE propriety of Sunday bicycle riding has become a matter for the decision of the courts in Connecticut. The following special dispatch appears in the New York Sun from Bridgeport, Conn.:— “At Fairfield to-day a case came before Justice John L. Morehouse, which not only interests thousands of wheelmen in Connecticut, but also will be watched closely by those who are in favor of enforcing the old Blue Laws. On complaint of Grand Juror J. D. Toomey, a young crockery merchant of this city, who presides in Fairfield, was arrested charged with several offenses, one of them being ‘that on July 17, the same day being the Sabbath and the Lord’s day, the said Osborne did indulge in the vain sport and recreation of riding a certain vehicle known as a bicycle, greatly to the disturbance of the peace, and contrary to the statute in such cases made and provided.’ “Osborne was riding from his store to his home when arrested. “Stratford residents are also interested in the suit, as the good and quiet old town has recently been invaded by a horse railway, over which cars are run on the Sabbath, greatly to the annoyance and disturbance of the remnants of previous generations. Thousands of Bridgeport working men and their families patronize the line every Sunday, and wander for hours on the broad streets, which are shaded by magnificent elms. The Stratford authorities have succumbed to the influence brought to bear, until all the ice cream saloons, cigar stores, and drug stores have been closed on the Lord’s day. “Yesterday one of the old-time residents, whose wife was seriously ill, tried unsuccessfully to induce a druggist to open his doors in order that a necessary dose of medicine might be obtained. As the applicant for drugs had been one of the foremost in compelling the druggist to take a rest on the Sabbath, he was allowed to take one of the horrid horse cars to this city.” The little State of New Jersey seems anxious to make for itself a reputation in the strict enforcement of Sunday laws. A dispatch from Atlantic Highlands says:— “Most of the people here are greatly incensed over an attempt to enforce the old Blue Laws of New Jersey. Last Saturday all the ice cream saloons, restaurants, news stands, barber shops, fruit stands, and cigar stores were ordered to close on Sunday. Even the butchers and fish dealers were requested not to open Sabbath morning, or to deliver goods ordered the day before. “On Sunday most of the small dealers were closed, not a cigar sold to strangers. But one ice cream dealer adopted the New York liquor dealers’ practice, and kept his back door open. “All the drug stores were open, but sold no cigars, and scarcely any soda water. The news dealers were permitted to deliver papers to customers, but not to sell on the streets. “There are fifteen thousand people here, and this law does not please them. “Another ordinance passed by the mayor and commissioners is that no Sunday bathing be allowed after 9 A. M. Last Sunday all but one of the bathing establishments were closed, and the hundreds who went down to this one place could not be accommodated. Many walked a mile and over along the beach to Neversink Park, where they could bathe, but had no bath houses to disrobe in.” THE Washington Post under the title “District Blue Laws,” has the following:— Some of the queer old Blue Laws in the District of Columbia will soon receive a raking over in a memorial to Congress which is being prepared by Mr. Edward Ramsay. He said:— “Another old law, with hoary and aged whitened whiskers, is one that makes it a crime in the District of Columbia to deny belief in the Holy Trinity. The penalty provided is imprisonment without fine. I imagine that should this obsolete law be suddenly enforced, the Washington penal institutions would soon be overcrowded in a most alarming manner. While President of the United States, John Quincy Adams violated this law daily. You know he was a Unitarian, and attended that service every Sabbath day.” “The old Blue Law here in reference to the observance of Sunday is also very strict. Under its operations should it be enforced, there would be no gas or electric lights on Sunday nights, no street cars running, newspapers circulated, nor drug stores open. For the first offense the penalty provided is a heavy fine, and for each succeeding one imprisonment without fine. Like General Grant,” concluded Mr. Ramsay, “I believe in enforcing these laws to the letter, and then their repeal would certainly be brought about. The law-makers themselves would suffer thereby, and they would quickly disappear from the statute books.” Yet, notwithstanding, Congress hastens to pass “Blue Laws” for the World’s Fair. The Mankato Ledger says of the passage of the Sunday closing proviso: “It will be a fine victory for the ultra wing of the church people. Their success in this direction will only embolden them to take more active steps toward the enactment of religious legislation having for its object the recognition of Sunday and an enforced attendance by every person of a suitable age, upon Sunday worship. This to be sure is antagonistic to the principles of the Declaration of Independence, and a direct contradiction of the claim that Church and State are independent of each other in the United States. It remains to be seen if the church people who comprise only a fifth of the sixty-five millions of people that make up the population of this Nation, can control and dictate a certain line of policy to the other four-fifths of the population.” That they are already thinking of following up the advantage gained is shown by the words of Rev. J. D. Sand, of Pittsburg, who says of the action of Congress in the World's Fair matter that it “suggests to the Christian's mind that if this may be done so may other needful measures. The Church is gaining power continually and its voice will be heard in the future much oftener than in the past.” JOHN GRIFFITH, Founder of the Hankow Mission, Central China—By William Robson, of the London Missionary society. 12mo, 160 pages, fully illustrated, cloth extra, 75 cents. JOHN BRIGHT, the Man of the People—By Jesse Page, author of “Bishop Patterson,” “Samuel Crowther,” etc. 12mo, 160 pages, fully illustrated, cloth extra, 75 cents. ROBERT MOFFAT, the Missionary Hero of Kuruman—By David J. Deane, author of “Martin Luther, the Reformer,” etc. 12mo, 160 pages, fully illustrated, cloth extra, 75 cents. BISHOP PATTERSON, the Martyr of Melanesia—By Jesse Page. 12mo, 160 pages, fully illustrated, cloth extra, 75 cents. FAVORITE BIBLE STORIES FOR THE YOUNG—With numerous illustrations. 16mo, handsomely illuminated board covers, 50 cents.; cloth extra, 75 cents. THE POCKET ATLAS OF THE WORLD—A comprehensive and popular series of maps, illustrating physical and political geography, with geographical statistical notes, 54 double maps, cloth, $1.00. JOHN WILLIAMS, the Martyr of Erromanga—By Rev. J. J. Ellis. 12mo, 160 pages, fully illustrated, cloth extra, 75 cents. CRUDEN’S CONCORDANCE—A dictionary, and alphabetical index to the Bible. Cloth, $1.25. Sheep, $2.50. WILLIAM CAREY, the Shoemaker who became a Missionary—By Rev. J. B. Myers, Association Secretary Baptist Missionary Society. 12mo, 160 pages, fully illustrated, cloth extra, 75 cents. HENRY M. STANLEY, the African Explorer—By Arthur Montefiore, F. R. G. S. Brought down to 1889. 12mo, 160 pages, fully illustrated, cloth extra, 75 cents. JAMES CHALMERS, Missionary and Explorer of Rarotonga and New Guinea—By Wm. Robson, of the London Missionary Society. 12mo, 160 pages, fully illustrated, cloth extra, 75 cents. THOMAS J. COMBER, Missionary Pioneer to the Congo—By Rev. J. B. Myers, Association Secretary Baptist Missionary Society. 12mo, 160 pages, fully illustrated, cloth extra, price, 75 cents. THE NEW BIBLE ATLAS AND GAZETTEER, with 16 colored maps by W. and A. Keith Johnson, and a very elaborate gazetteer, giving information about nearly every place which is marked upon the maps, with scripture references. 4to, cloth, $1.50. ROBERT MORRISON, the Pioneer of Chinese Missions—By Wm. J. Townsend, Sec. Methodist New Connexion Missionary Society. 12mo, 160 pages, fully illustrated, cloth extra, 75 cents. MEMOIRS OF EDWIN BAINBRIDGE.—The subject of this memoir is the young English tourist who met his death at the dreadful volcanic eruption of Tarawera, New Zealand, on the 10th of June, 1886. 12mo, 160 pages, fully illustrated, cloth extra, 75c. GINN’S CLASSICAL ATLAS—4to, cloth, $2.50. This work contains 23 colored maps, which were projected and executed by the late A. Keith Johnson, with a complete index. The above named books will be sent post-paid on receipt of price. PACIFIC PRESS PUBLISHING COMPANY 12th & Castro Streets, 43 Bond Street,
OAKLAND, CAL. NEW YORK. THIS legislative ignominy has been brought upon the Nation,—and those of its citizens who know what has been done, and they are not few, stand abashed before the world, with arms reversed and the colors of civil liberty trailing in the dust. Care will be taken that from this humiliation they shall know no release, neither as it is thrust upon them in this form nor as it will be in other shapes. The victory is won but the war is not over. The World's Fair management threaten to secure a reversal, next winter or before, of the Sabbath-closing action just taken by both Houses of Congress. We must therefore keep up the agitation and education which will make such a reverse impossible. Several generals in our great war were dismissed because they did not know how to follow up a victory. Let not the friends of the Sabbath neglect to follow up our great victory by local attacks on Sunday toll and traffic and turmoil. This is the very time to attack Sunday saloons and suppress Sunday ball games and Sunday excursions, and to urge those engaged in Sunday traffic to move for their own emancipation. Yes, in this emancipated country to use the tyranny of misapplied civil law to “urge,” Christian men and patriotic citizens “to move for their own emancipation.” And this is “the greatest moral victory since emancipation.” It is the Chicago Directory that has authority rightfully in this matter, and this both Congress, and Commission, and Statesman all well know. But if this Directory should dare to exercise its rightful and lawful authority! But if,—and what then? If the Chicago Directory should seriously propose such a folly as the refusal of the conditioned appropriation, the national Commission, representing the United States, which would be thus insulted, would veto such madness, as it has the power to do, at its autumn meeting, on whose second day, October 6, a hearing on Sabbath closing has been appointed, which it may be well to utilize in order that the rule for the Sabbath closing of the gates, which Congress has required its Commission to make, may be promptly and strongly made; and also, if possible, a further veto, that logically follows, of the opening of the World's Fair grounds in advance of the Fair for Sunday picnics. This is a new theory of the prerogative of Congress and the committees of its appointment. It seems when Congress makes an appropriation, saddled with whatever obnoxious or destructive provisions, it is not only “folly” and “madness” for the unfortunate recipient to refuse its acceptance, but a committee, appointed by Congress, may veto this refusal and compel its acceptance, provisos and all. Certainly under such a theory it would be a terrible thing to fall under governmental favor. And so it is, and will be from this time on,—for the Government has taken sides in the Great Controversy, and it has taken the wrong side. THE August Arena contains the second installment of Mr. Reed’s Brief for the Plaintiff in the interesting discussion of Bacon vs. Shakespeare. Whatever may be said of the abstract merits of the case, no one can fail to be impressed with the ingenious and powerful array of evidence thus far adduced in behalf of Lord Bacon as the author of the plays. Perhaps the most startling as well as the most interesting disclosures, however, are yet to come. In the September number Mr. Reed will answer objections, not only those that have been brought forward in previous public discussions of the subject, but others advanced in his own private correspondence with scholars and literary men on both sides of the Atlantic. Other leading papers in the August Arena are by United States Senator James H. Kyle, Hon. Geo. Fred Williams, M. C., Hon. Wm. T. Ellis, M. C., Gail Hamilton, Mary A. Livermore, Louise Chandler Moulton, Helen H. Gardener, Frances E. Willard, Mrs. Gen. Lew Wallace, Frances E. Russell and the editor of the Arena. In addition to these papers, there is a brilliant symposium on Women’s Clubs in America, to which eleven leading American women contribute. THE Senate, on July 14, and the House, on July 19, adopted the following, which, on Aug. 5, received the signature of the President of the United States:— And it is hereby declared that all appropriations herein made for, or pertaining to, the World's Columbian Exposition are made under the condition that the said Exposition shall not be open to the public on the first day of the week, commonly called Sunday; and if the said appropriations be accepted by the corporation of the State of Illinois, known as the World's Columbian Exposition upon that condition, it shall be, and it is hereby made, the duty of the World's Columbian Commission, created by the act of Congress of April 25, 1890, to make such rules or modification of the rules of said corporation as shall require the closing of the Exposition on the said first day of the week, commonly called Sunday. THE Congress of the United States, both Houses, supposed to be composed of the picked intellect of the country, men of broad education, trained intelligence, the choice of the statesmanlike ability of the forty-four States of the Union, have, by a large majority, adopted a measure respecting the establishment of religion.