In the Christian Statesman of April 11, Mrs. J. C. Bateham writes an article headed, “The Seventh-day Adventists and the Sabbath.” We propose to examine it in connection with another article written by her, on the same page, entitled, “Sabbath Rest and How to Maintain It.” In the first-mentioned article she says:—
“The Seventh-day Adventists are circulating in many of the States petitions to Congress against any legislation in favor of a day of rest. They say the ultimate intent of Blair’s Sunday-Rest bill is to compel people to attend church; that it is to help the Catholics; that a union of Church and State will be the result, and various other things, all of which are of course false.”
Yes, some of the Adventists are circulating that protest, and scores of other people, of all classes, are doing the same thing. Whether it is the intent of the Sunday-law advocates to get people to church, we shall see further on. Although many of the Catholics do not favor the Sunday-Rest bill, yet it is in the direct line of the fundamental principles of their church. That was the first church that ever asked a civil government to enforce an article of church discipline by the passage of a Sunday-Rest law. That law was the first step in a union of Church and State, which logically culminated in the tribunals of the Inquisition. That law was passed on the principle that the State has a right to define and protect religion, and that protection means compulsion.
“The proper object of government is to protect all persons in the enjoyment of their religious as well as civil rights, and not to determine for any whether they shall esteem one day above the other, or esteem all days alike holy.” “Let the National Legislature once perform an act which involves the decision of a religious controversy, and it will have passed its legitimate bounds. The precedent will then be established, and the foundation laid, for that usurpation of the divine prerogative in this country which has been the desolating scourge to the fairest portions of the Old World.” “All religious despotism commences by combination and influence, and when that influence begins to operate upon the political institutions of a country the civil power soon bends under it; and the catastrophe of other nations furnishes an awful warning of the consequence.” “Among all the religious persecutions with which almost every page of modern history is stained, no victim ever suffered but for the violation of what government denominated the law of God.”—U. S. Senate Report, 1829.
Mrs. Bateham says, “all” of these statements of the Adventists “are of course false.” What an easy matter it is for her to do away with the arguments of an opponent. “Of course.” That is all she needs to say, and the thing is settled. “Of course.” Isn’t that conclusive reasoning? What more could be asked for? Is she not a prominent official of the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union? and are not their decisions authoritative when they speak ex cathedra? She has traveled enough, and surely she ought to know whether a thing is so or not. But if she feels so assured that everybody will take it as a matter “of course” that “all” the statements made by the Adventists on this subject are “false,” why does she waste her precious time and the valuable space of the Statesman by noticing them at all? We apprehend she has met arguments backed up by evidence which she cannot refute, and that is why she asks the people to accept her statements as a matter “of course,” without any effort at reasoning or production of proof. She says further:—
“The bill is designed to save our State Sabbath laws from destruction as the result of the National Government having allowed postal and other work and interstate commerce on Sunday, and to secure a weekly day of rest to the laborers who are among the largest class of petitioners.”
Doctor Crafts also says in the same paper, that “the national law is needed to make the State laws complete and effective.”
This shows that when the national law is secured we shall stand in an entirely different relation to the State laws than we do at the present time. Many of the State laws are now practically useless, for reasons given above, hence they ask for a national law to make the State laws “effective.” Now listen to this:—
“If made into a law it will no more compel church-going than do our own State laws, and will have no more tendency to bring about a union of Church and State than these State laws under which we have lived since States were formed.”
That is to say, that when the State laws become “complete and effective” they will produce no different results than are seen at the present time, while they are incomplete and ineffective. In other words, because the horrors which attend a union of Church and State are not experienced while the union is ineffective, therefore there is nothing to be feared when it becomes effective. Still air never blows anybody away, therefore how can a cyclone be dangerous?
Mrs. Bateham says further, in her last-mentioned article:—
“Senator Blair’s Sunday-Rest bill, prepared at the request of the Woman’s Christian Temperance Union, and in response to the first two millions of petitions, is in the main entirely satisfactory to us.”
She must, then, regard it as a law that will do some good, else it would not be “entirely satisfactory” to her. Now, how must Sunday be kept in order to be beneficial according to the experienced judgment of Mrs. Bateham? She says:—
“I have spent many months in the countries of Europe and in the West Indies, and have traveled over a large portion of this country and of England, and have everywhere made a careful study of the Sabbath as affecting the people in their home life and national life, their mind and their bodies, their morals and their religion, and I everywhere find that the more carefully the day is kept as a day for rest and
Sunday Rest and Worship
By A. DELOS WESTCOTT
worship, by families and nations, the more they are prospered.”
Notice, it must be “kept as a day for rest and worship,” and by the Nation as well as by the family. Doctor Crafts and Joseph Cook agree with this sentiment precisely, and so do all the other leaders of the Sunday-law movement. Well, how must people use Sunday in order that it may be “kept as a day for rest and worship”? Mrs. Bateham answers:—
“We want it for the purposes for which God designed it when he bade us keep it holy, not for frivolity and amusement, not for sleep and idleness, not for the Sunday newspaper with its demoralizing literature, but for reading which is elevating and improving, including the word of God, and for attendance upon church services; a practice which I believe does more than almost anything else to insure prosperity in this world and happiness in the next.”
Dr. R. O. Post, at the Illinois State Sunday-law Convention for 1888, said:—
“There is no kind of recreation that is proper or profitable on Sunday, outside of the home or the sanctuary.”
Now let us put this argument together:—
1. The only kind of Sabbath observance that amounts to anything, or is at all satisfactory, is that which regards it “as a day for rest and worship.” “The experience of centuries shows that you will in vain endeavor to preserve Sunday as a day of rest, unless you preserve it as a day of worship,” says Joseph Cook.
2. Senator Blair’s Sunday-Rest bill “is in the main entirely satisfactory” to Mrs. Bateham and her co-laborers.
3. Therefore the spirit and intent of that bill must be to secure worship as well as rest, because that is the only kind of observance that is “entirely satisfactory.” And Mrs. Bateham tells us that this includes “reading which is elevating and improving, including the word of God,” and “attendance upon church services.”
If they will work to secure an amendment of the Constitution, the purpose of which is to maintain religious instruction in the public schools, and then compel all the children in the land to attend these schools to receive this instruction, why should they not compel them to attend church on Sunday and receive a little more of that same kind of instruction? Most assuredly they will. And if they will compel the children, why not the parents? Don’t the parents need moral and religious instruction as much as the children? If it is the duty of the State to take in hand the moral and religious training of her children, as a matter of civil policy, to insure her own preservation and prosperity in this world, is it not as clearly her duty to see that the parents are cared for in this same respect? This is the way they will reason.
Senator Blair’s Sunday bill is to “be construed, so far as possible,” in such a way as “to secure to the whole people . . . their mental and moral culture” on Sunday, and no one need tell us that they will not so construe it. But how are they going to attend to the moral culture of the people on Sunday unless the people go to the places provided for moral culture? To say that the spirit of the Blair Sunday bill enforces church attendance would be but a slight trespass upon language compared with the claim that the fourth commandment enjoins Sunday-keeping.
The more they deny that the prime object of all Sunday laws is to help the church, and to get people to church, the more do they expose the hypocrisy of their scheme. They claim that the State has a right to enforce any measure which will insure prosperity in this world, and Mrs. Bateham says, “Attendance upon church services [is] a practice which I believe does more than almost anything else to insure prosperity in this world.” What, then, is to hinder them from compelling people to go to church as soon as they get the power in their hands? Just nothing at all. If they believe it is right to attend church, they will have no trouble to persuade themselves that everybody ought to be compelled by law to do it. Here is their principle:—
“To compel men to do wrong, of course, is wrong; but to compel them to do right, is right.”—Pope Pelagius, A. D. 556.
The Blair Sunday-Rest bill and religious amendment contain every feature necessary to the establishment of a religious despotism in these United States. That the leaders in this movement are determined to succeed, and to make these laws “effective” does not admit of a doubt. If the laws in some of the States are to be made any more “effective” than they have already been, may Heaven protect from the fiendish persecutions of their bigoted inquisitors the poor Christian souls who, with Elijah and Daniel, Christ and his apostles, the prophets of the old dispensation, and the martyrs of the new, dare to serve God according to the dictates of their own consciences, and refuse to bear allegiance in the realm of morals and religion to any king but God.
A. DELOS WESTCOTT.
Some Inconsistencies of National Reform.
By E. E. Marvin
If the future work of National Reformers follows in the line indicated by their present utterances, it will present to the world one of the sublimest spectacles of inconsistency witnessed by modern times. One of the secretaries of the National Reform Association, Rev. M. A. Gault, in a decree against those who dissent from his theories, says:—
“Our remedy for all these malefic influences is to have the Government simply set up the moral [divine] law and recognize God's authority behind it, and lay its hand on any religion that does not conform to it” (i. e., the divine law.)
This is a “remedy” which possibly, like many other so-called remedies, would only aggravate the disease. Does Mr. Gault mean to assert that should the Government grant the National Reformers license to dose out their “remedy,” all will thereby be made righteous, and thus the millennium begin? This must be his thought, for the Bible says, “It shall be our righteousness, if we observe to do all these commandments before the Lord our God, as he hath commanded us.” Deut. 6:25. Now one of those commandments says, “Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain.” Jesus says, “Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.” Matt. 12:34. Then if a man blasphemes, it is because he has it in his heart. So then if this proposed “remedy” effects a cure for the man, it must change his heart.
Again, we are warned against the Joss-house and its idol worship. “The Government must establish a standard of religion or admit anything that is called religion,” and then “lay its hand on any religion that does not conform to it.” The first commandment says, “Thou shalt have no other gods before me.” Paul says, “Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth; fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry.” Col. 3:5. Now, we are exceedingly anxious to know how these doctors are going to apply their “remedy” to that particular form of idolatry which Paul warns against? A man does not “conform” to God's law when he covets; he is an idolater, and violates not only the tenth precept but also the first.
Do these men mean what they say? If they do, then they design to invent some means by which to control men's thoughts. If the patent has not run out perhaps Rome will loan them her inquisitorial machine, and although a little rusty from recent disuse, it would be an excellent appliance in the administration of their “remedy.” To be consistent, National Reformers should adopt this Papal plan as the most efficient process for the prohibition of free thought that has ever yet been devised.
Let us glance further to see the consistency of enforcing upon the citizens of the United States obedience to God's law. Paul says, “The carnal mind is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.” Rom. 8:7. Are not the great mass of citizens of the United States carnally minded?—Yes; and this is stating the case very mildly. Very well; then they can't “conform” to the law of God till they are converted and possess the Spirit of God. So these doctors, in their arrogant assumptions, have set themselves about the huge task of accomplishing an impossibility. O consistency! thou art a precious jewel, but as yet undiscovered in the realm of National Reform.
The gospel of Jesus Christ is the power of God unto salvation to everyone that believeth. Rom. 1:16. The good result of obedience to God's law can be secured only by faith, not by force. If the righteousness of the people is what the National Reformers indeed seek, why do they not apply the Lord's remedy, and not their own? The fact that they utterly repudiated Hon. Mr. McDougal's speech recommending to them the gospel for “malefic influences” is evidence that that is not what they seek; they want power, civil power, to enforce their “remedy.” “State and religion” is what they want, says Jonathan Edwards, and he continues, we “are going to have it.” It must come, says M. A. Gault, though the terrors of the “sword and the bullet” become agents in its accomplishment. Is it possible that the sentiments of this Jesuitical order are about to be crystallized into American fundamental law? Where are the champions of American rights? Let them herald the note of warning with trumpet tones, and let all true citizens realize that “eternal vigilance is the price of liberty.”
E. E. MARVIN.
Invites Malice and Tyranny.
By Rev. C. J. Bartlett
I REGARD the Blair Sunday bill as a distinct attempt to enforce by legislation the observance of Sunday, not merely as a day of rest, but as a day of religious worship. This fact, which is veiled in the opening clause of the bill, becomes apparent in the closing section. It is a piece of religious legislation, and being such is unconstitutional. Even were it designed to secure only the civil observance of the day, it is inexcusably faulty, since it in no adequate way defines what specific acts or classes of acts are violations of the law, but leaves it to the complaining witness to declare whether or not he has been “disturbed.” This invites malice and tyranny.
The wording of the bill is so vague as to permit it to be construed most arbitrarily and tyrannously. It is manifestly oppressive upon two142classes of our people, the Jews and the Seventh-day Adventists, whose religious convictions already compel them to observe the seventh day, and who would, by this bill, be obliged to keep two days in the week.
The bill will be supported by many well-meaning people who fail to perceive that it is subversive of political and religious liberty, and that it is the opening wedge for countless measures which will tend to recall us from American nineteenth-century freedom, to the intolerance and oppression that more than two centuries ago drove the protesting minority of the Old World to seek an asylum of liberty on the shores of New England.
The proposed amendment to the Constitution is an amusing composition, which, in section 1, provides against the establishing of religion in any State, and in section 2 provides for the establishment in each State of free public schools, in which shall be taught “the principles of the Christian religion.” Instead of an established Christian church, we are to have an established Christian school. And who shall decide on what are “the principles of the Christian religion,” when doctors of divinity disagree?—Rev. C. J. Bartlett, in Reason.
Is It Republican?
By J. W. Scoles
PRESUMABLY, most of the readers of the AMERICAN SENTINEL are accustomed to hearing the term “republican America” applied to our own beloved land. By this term we understand that the United States possesses a form of government which is distinctively republican. But a republic must be something in which each individual can take a common interest, therefore, a true republican government must be purely secular. It would be possible to conceive of a religious republic only upon the supposition that all men hold to the same points of religious faith and practice. But this is purely a supposition, and never has been and never can be true of our own or of any other earthly government. Consequently, we repeat that the highest conception of a true republic must be a government which is secular and only secular in its administration:
We are led to make these remarks on account of the growing tendency upon the part of many journals, especially some of a religious character, to regard the President as a sort of patriarch, or general high priest for the Nation. If these journals were of Roman Catholic persuasion, such sentiments would not appear strange, although in that case their allegiance would attach itself to the old gentleman who has his headquarters in the Vatican. But for American citizens to pick up any of the religious acts of the chief magistrate of the Nation, and assume that there is in, and by virtue of, these acts, a religious precedent established which it is necessary for us as good citizens to follow, is simply absurd. It is worse than absurd, it is wicked; because it is stepping from the light and progression of true political liberty backward into the mental darkness and moral degradation of Papal slavery. Because Washington, immediately after his inauguration, attended divine service, does that imply that all the citizens of the Government which he had just sworn to uphold, were to accept his example as conveying any official recognition of Christianity, or of any other religion, for that matter? Certainly not. Listen to his own statement, and see how widely he severed religion from the State. In his reply to certain Baptists who were fearful their religious rights would be encroached upon, he said:—
“Every man who conducts himself as a good citizen is accountable alone to God for his religious faith, and should be protected in worshiping God according to the dictates of his own conscience.”
And yet, judging from the intense anxiety which seems to have been manifested by some overzealous religionists in desiring that President Harrison should attend church on the centennial of Washington’s inauguration, it would seem that there must be some idea in their minds that by this act the President would bind a certain amount of religious obligation upon the people whom he represents. This idea is nonsensical in conception, and would be terribly unjust in its application. As well might it be argued that in case the President saw fit to be immersed in order to carry out certain individual religious convictions, it would be the bounden duty of every good citizen to go and be immersed likewise. A man is permitted to hold any religious view he chooses, and still be President of the United States, but he is not permitted, nor is it understood that by virtue of his official position he has any right, to dictate that others shall subscribe to his peculiar religious or irreligious ideas.
And this brings us to the consideration of the proclamation recently issued by President Harrison himself concerning the observance of April 30, the centennial anniversary of Washington’s inauguration. In the proclamation the statement is made that the “representatives of religious creeds, both Christian and Hebrew, have memorialized the Government to designate an hour for prayer and thanksgiving on that day.” And “in response to this pious and reasonable request” Benjamin Harrison, in his official capacity as President of the United States, does “recommend” that at a certain hour “the people of the entire country repair to their respective places of divine worship, to implore the favor of God,” etc. Some may think that this entire proceeding was eminently proper, and wonder why any objection should be raised, but there are certainly some who can see in such things as this the violation of the first principles of individual rights.
Supposing that the “representatives of religious creeds” did desire to spend an hour in prayer and thanksgiving on a certain day, did that make it necessary for a proclamation to that effect to be issued by the President? Even admitting that these individuals were “representatives” of the entire religious element of the country, and that that religious element constituted the majority of the population, that does not help the matter any unless we are prepared to concede that “might makes right,” and to deny entirely the individual rights of conscience when opposed to the conscience of the majority. The request for such a proclamation as this (although perhaps signed by many right-minded people) was virtually an attempt to coerce the worship of others besides themselves. If not, why did not these “representatives,” if they were representatives indeed, make the necessary announcements to their respective believers? This would certainly have been sufficient for the ones directly interested. The fact that they did not do so, but called upon the President instead, seems conclusive evidence of their desire to have others brought to acquiesce in their views by executive power.
But it may be said that the proclamation contained no reference to executive power; that it did not command, but simply “recommended.” Exactly; no command was made, because no legal right existed by which such a command could be given. So of the despotism of the church in the early centuries. It is a noticeable fact that at first the requirements of the church were merely requests, and then when the church began to have influence in the affairs of State the civil power was led to “recommend” that these desires be complied with, and these recommendations soon grew to be absolute commands, to disregard which was considered not only heresy against the church but treason against the Government as well. And it was by just such steps as this that the imperial or governing power became an imperious power and a tyrannical despotism, under the complete control of a combination of intolerant so-called “representatives of religious creeds.” Let the people of the United States take warning lest the use of executive power to “recommend” religious ceremonies becomes an abuse of that power to “command” individual conscience, a domain so sacred that even the power of civil authority should hesitate to invade it.
We have not written the above because we are opposed to Christianity, or to the service of God. Far from it; we believe in Christianity with our whole heart, and endeavor to practice its precepts, and it is because of the high standard set by our divine Lord that we do oppose all such abuse of the secular power. Christ said, “My kingdom is not of this world.” “Whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them.” These are our principles. Thanksgiving proclamations and all such proclamations as the one referred to, in fact, any proclamation coming from official source, requiring or recommending the worship of God, is a virtual attempt of Cæsar to exact the tribute which God alone has the right to require, and therefore we are opposed to it.
J. W. SCOLES.
“The Principles of the Christian Religion.”
By R. F. COTTRELL
WHAT are they? The amendment to the Constitution proposed by Senator Blair calls for the teaching of the principles of the Christian religion in the public schools. It also provides that no public money shall be appropriated to any school in which “the doctrines, tenets, belief, ceremonials, or observances peculiar to any sect, denomination, organization, or society, being, or claiming to be, religious in its character,” are taught.
Are not the principles of the Christian religion to be found, then, in all the controverted doctrines of the popular churches of the land? The reply is, “They are to be found only in the doctrines in which they are all agreed.” But on what are they all agreed? What principle or doctrine of Christianity is not denied by some of them? Is it all simmered down to the keeping of Sunday, “the wild, solar holiday of all pagan times”? If so, the Sunday-Rest bill is all that is needed as a guide.
R. F. COTTRELL.
A Sunday-Law Petition Claim
THE Denton (Texas) Chronicle of April 20 contains a screed on Sunday legislation, by a lady who signs herself Jenny Bland Beauchamp, in which she shows her ignorance of the question by the statement that “two hundred and forty thousand Knights of Labor and Associated Engineers signed the petition” for the passage of a Sunday law. That is a bigger claim than even Mr. Crafts ever made. If any more than two Knights of Labor ever signed the petition it has had a decided boom of late.
Advertisements.
ADVERTISING RATES made known on application. No advertisements of patent medicines, novelties, cigars, tobacco, liquors, novels or anything of a trivial, intemperate, immoral or impure nature accepted. We reserve the right to reject ANY advertisement.
The issues which this paper discusses are the “live questions” of the day, and the straightforward, consistent course of the SENTINEL has made for the paper thousands of friends in every State and Territory in the Union. It is a paper which is read, re-read, passed to the neighbors to read, and finally mailed to other friends. Only a small amount of space is given to advertisements, and the paper is therefore a valuable medium for advertisers.
Moral and Scientific Companion
MORAL AND SCIENTIFIC COMPANION, Florence, Arizona; illustrated, wide-awake; 25¢ per year. Ads 1c per word.
HISTORICAL ATLAS
By Robert H. Labberton
And General History.
By Robert H. Labberton.
1 Vol., 8x11 inches. 213 pages of text. 30 geographical charts. 198 progressive colored maps, in which every nation has, and always retains, its distinctive color.
HISTORY OF THE EAST, ........................................ 19 MAPS
HISTORY OF GREECE, ............................................. 17 MAPS
HISTORY OF ROME, ................................................ 26 MAPS
HISTORY OF MIDDLE AGES, ........................................ 35 MAPS
HISTORY OF MODERN TIMES, ....................................... 49 MAPS
HISTORY OF AMERICA, ............................................. 52 MAPS
“I had no sooner laid eyes on the work than I said, ‘I must have it.’” OLIVER WENDELL HOLMES.
“This book has something to say that every educated man wants to know.” REV. CHARLES S. ROBINSON.
“Such geographical pictures are the best and surest way of teaching history.” A. H. SAYCE, Professor of History, University of Oxford, England.
“The work is an extremely valuable one, from its comprehensiveness and its accuracy.” DR. JAMES MCCOSH.
“In my study you will find the great Unabridged in a rack at my right hand and the Labberton in a rack at my left.” LEW WALLACE.
“There is nothing to compare with it, especially in modern history.”—The Nation.
“Altogether the best thing of the kind published anywhere.” GEO. A. BACON, Syracuse High School.
“The book is simply incomparable.” ALFRED S. ROE, Worcester High School.
“No teacher or student can afford to be without it.” D. H. COCHRAN, Brooklyn Polytechnic Institute.
— ADOPTED BY —
New York City as a text-book in the Normal College.
Philadelphia as a text-book in the Boys' High School and Manual Training School.
Boston as a reference book in the High and Latin Schools.
The Government as a text-book at West Point and Annapolis.
The State Universities of Indiana, Illinois, Wisconsin, Minnesota, Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, etc.
Cloth, $3, Half-Sheep, $4, Half-Morocco, gilt edges, $5.
PACIFIC PRESS PUBLISHING CO.,
OAKLAND, CAL.
G. H. KRIECHBAUM,
DENTIST,
Office 854½ Broadway, Corner Seventh, Oakland.
Office Hours—9 to 12 A. M. and 1 to 5 P. M.
Rooms 17 and 18.
Pacific Business College
PACIFIC BUSINESS COLLEGE
320 POST ST., S. F.
Life Scholarship $75.
SEND FOR CIRCULARS.
Great Reduction in Pure Hide
GLUE
By calling at or addressing to 116 Front St., San Francisco, Cal., you will find it greater to your advantage by examining my stock of Glue before you purchase elsewhere. Ground and White Glue a specialty.
Also keep in Stock Pure Neat's-foot Oil
CAL. GLUE WORKS, M. HOLJE, Prop.
Cram's Superior Maps.
WANTED.—SALESMEN for Cram's Superior U. S. and World Map, State Maps, Charts, etc. They sell rapidly because the people need them, want them and will have them. Commission very liberal. For terms and territory, address their general agent.
A. K. ATTEBERRY,
KEENVILLE, ILLINOIS.
IN THE HEART
OF THE
SIERRAS
This Beautifully Illustrated Volume is acknowledged by all to be the finest work ever published on this coast, and represents the wonders of the
Yo Semite Valley, Big Tree Groves, Etc.,
As no other work does. The
FULL-PAGE ARTOTYPES
Are the most charmingly characteristic of any illustrations ever produced, and are perfectly true to life, having been photographed direct from nature.
THE WONDERFUL YO SEMITE
Is here presented in all its beauty and majesty, and a perusal of its pages will transport visitors back again, in memory, through all its
MARVELOUS SCENES;
While to those who have never taken the trip, this work will prepare them to anticipate the pleasure in store for them when a journey thither may be possible. Buy a copy for yourself, and send one to each of your friends.
Prices of New and Improved Edition.
Fine English Cloth, embossed in jet and gold, $3 25
Fine English Cloth, embossed in jet and gold,
gold Edges ........................................ 3 75
Full Sheep Library Style, marbled edges ............ 4 25
Half Morocco, gold edges ................................ 5 00
Full Morocco, gold edges ................................ 6 00
Where we have no agent we will send books, postage prepaid, at the above rates. Send money by draft, money order, or by registered letter.
PACIFIC PRESS PUBLISHING CO.,
Or 43 Bond St., New York. OAKLAND, CAL.
THE SENTINEL LIBRARY
Will contain articles on the various phases of the National Reform Movement, the Union of Church and State, Civil and Religious Liberty, etc. It is the design to reprint in this library some, and perhaps all, of the tracts in the package entitled, "Views of National Reform, No. 1," and also to furnish many entirely new numbers. Two new numbers are now ready, No. 4, entitled "The Blair Sunday-Rest Bill," and No. 5, "The Blair Educational Amendment," and many of the succeeding numbers will be equally as valuable and timely.
THE SENTINEL LIBRARY
Will be uniform in size (page about 5⅞ × 7½ inches). Each number will contain from 8 to 56 pages, and will have a neatly engraved cover design. Price, 75 cents per year of 25 numbers. The following numbers are now ready:—
No. 1. The National Reformed Constitution. Price, 3 cents.
No. 2. Religious Liberty. Price, 1 cent.
No. 3. The Evils of Religious Legislation. Price, 1 cent.
No. 4. The Blair Sunday-Rest Bill. Price, 7 cents.
No. 5. The Blair Educational Amendment. Price, 3 cents.
No. 6. The Purity of National Religion. Price, 1 cent.
Orders can be filled for back numbers at any time and in any quantity desired, as each number is printed from electrotype plates. Liberal discount when ordered in quantities. Address,
PACIFIC PRESS PUBLISHING CO.
Or 43 Bond St., N. Y. Oakland, Cal.
CIVIL
By Alonzo T. Jones
Government & Religion.
BY
ALONZO T. JONES,
One of the Editors of the American Sentinel.
Scriptural, Logical, Plain
and Forcible.
This important work shows clearly the relation that should exist between Church and State at the present time, as proven by the Bible and history of the past twenty-five centuries.
“CIVIL GOVERNMENT AND RELIGION”
Is a pamphlet of 176 large octavo pages. Price 25 cents. Millions of copies should be placed in the hands of thinking people AT ONCE. It clearly defines what position we, as American citizens, should sustain toward the effort now on foot to secure religious legislation. Address,
PACIFIC PRESS PUBLISHING CO.,
12th and Castro Sts., Oakland, Cal.
Or 43 Bond Street, New York.
Views of National Reform.
SERIES 1.
This is a pamphlet of 151 pages, and contains all that the package of 13 tracts formerly published under the same name contained. The volume is paged consecutively, has an index, so that any tract may be instantly referred to, and is much more convenient and attractive than when issued as a package of separate tracts. Price, 15 cents, with liberal discount when ordered in quantities.
Address, PACIFIC PRESS PUBLISHING CO.
Or 43 Bond St., N. Y. Oakland, Cal.
SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN
ESTABLISHED 1845
Is the oldest and most popular scientific and mechanical paper published and has the largest circulation of any paper of its class in the world. Fully illustrated. Best class of World Engravings. Published weekly. Send for specimen copy. Price $3 a year. Four months' trial, $1. MUNN & CO., PUBLISHERS, 361 Broadway, N.Y.
ARCHITECTS & BUILDERS
Edition of Scientific American.
A great success. Each issue contains colored lithographic plates of country and city residences or public buildings. Numerous engravings and full plans and specifications for the use of such as contemplate building. Price $0.50 a year, 25 cts. a copy. MUNN & CO., PUBLISHERS.
PATENTS
Patents may be secured by applying to MUNN & CO., who have had over 40 years’ experience and have made over 100,000 applications for American and Foreign patents. Send for Handbook. Correspondence strictly confidential.
TRADE MARKS.
In case your mark is not registered in the Patent Office, apply to MUNN & CO., and procure immediate protection. Send for Handbook.
COPYRIGHTS for books, charts, maps, etc. quickly procured. Address
MUNN & CO., Patent Solicitors,
GENERAL OFFICE: 361 BROADWAY, N. Y.
SOCIAL PURITY.
By John Harvey Kellogg
A vigorous and stirring address on SOCIAL PURITY by J. H. KELLOGG, M. D., SUPERINTENDENT OF THE LARGEST MEDICAL AND SURGICAL SANITARIUM IN THE WORLD. Fifth edition. Fiftieth thousand. Also contains a "Talk to Girls," by Mrs. E. E. KELLOGG, A. M., Associate Superintendent of Social Purity Department of the National Woman's Christian Temperance Union. This talk is full of helpful suggestions to mothers and their daughters respecting the means of promoting the development of a higher type of womanhood in the rising generation of girls. A copy should be placed in the hands of every man, woman and youth. 64 large octavo pages. Price, 15 cents; 20 copies, post-paid, $2.25. Address: PACIFIC PRESS PUBLISHING CO., Oakland, Cal.