p. 13 | Signs of the Times, Vol. 33, No. 4. (1/23/1907)

MORAL FREEDOM.

By Editor

(Editorial, the Independent, July 9, 1903.)

We ought to have in America the broadest moral freedom. Our traditions and our institutions are favorable. The colonists who laid the foundations for the Republic were men who sought both religious and political liberty, and were not afraid to fight for the one or the other. The men of the Revolution and of the Constitutional Convention broke down the obstacles which centuries of class privilege had built in the way of men who would rise from humble station to position and success. The men of the Civil War destroyed the legal basis of slavery.

Yet, are we free? The question is not idle. Every now and again it is asked with serious intent, and almost any thoughtful man must hesitate before he answers. Many circumstances have conspired to raise this question anew in recent months. . . . The developments in commerce and industry have not been cheering to those who regard individual liberty as not only a sacred right, but also an indispensable utility.

These glaring failures to maintain the freedom which we profess to believe in are not, however, the ones to which most serious attention should be given. They are results of less obvious but far more dangerous tyrannies. LIBERTY IN THE LARGE SENSE IS NEVER LOST BY A PEOPLE UNTIL A SUBTLER KIND OF FREEDOM HAS DISAPPEARED. Freedom of speech, freedom within the sphere of private conduct, freedom of social intercourse,—these are the mental and moral foundations of economic and political liberty. When a people which has boasted of its liberties begins to realize that the right to work, the right to trade, and the right to vote may all be denied with impunity throughout the length and breadth of its territory, the time has come to inquire whether freedom of that more personal and subtle sort, which is the very atmosphere of personal independence, any longer exists.

Have We Freedom of Speech?

Have we, let us ask, any real freedom of speech in America? This startling question is asked by President Benjamin Ide Wheeler, in an "Atlantic Monthly" article on "A National Type of Culture." The answer which he gives is one to provoke a serious mood. The law permits freedom almost to the extent of license; but the thousands of organizations, which have sprung up to foster "causes" innumerable, have created a law outside the law, which is becoming more tyrannical than courts or Legislatures would in these days dare to be. What trade-unionist dares to speak his mind about the preposterous iniquities sometimes associated with sympathetic strikes? What politician dares to say what he thinks of the machine and the boss? What teacher in the public school dares to express his opinion of the text-books in history that are forced upon him by patriotic organizations, or the text-books in physiology that are forced upon him by "temperance inebriates"?

The truth, we fear, is that there has grown up in America A MORAL TYRANNY OF THE MULTITUDE OVER THE INDIVIDUAL, which is manifesting itself in many dangerous ways. The mob spirit, culminating in a lynching, is only the extreme manifestation of mass tyranny. The mischief begins whenever AN INDIVIDUAL, whosoever he is, HESITATES TO EXPRESS HIS INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT on any question of thought, morals, or policy, if it happens to differ from the "views" of his neighbors, or hesitates to live his own life in his own way for no better reason than that people will think him radical or queer.

MORAL FREEDOM, the spring and fountainhead of institutional liberty, has its SOURCE IN MORAL COURAGE; and moral courage exists only when men dare in good conscience to question the moral judgments, as well as the business or political judgments, of the majority. This is a fundamental ethical truth which "good" communities are ever in danger of forgetting. It is never in the interest of evil, but ALWAYS IN THE INTEREST OF A "CAUSE," THAT MEN SURRENDER MORAL FREEDOM. Men lynch to protect life and property. They hold their peace when iniquities are proposed in business or in politics, lest an industry or a party be imperiled. . . . The pity of it is that, in thus becoming INSINCERE IN A GOOD CAUSE, men become first COWARDS and THEN SLAVES, and so unable ever to strike a true and free man's blow for liberty.

LET MEN HONOR any institution or dogma they will; they have the right; but let the government honor only those principles which conserve, uphold, maintain, the equal rights of all. Altho the many, the vast majority, MAY honor the institution, its observance should never be made compulsory by the government, or by any association within the government. Only in guarding the rights of the individual are the rights of all conserved.

WHAT JESUS SAYS.

"If any man hear My words, and believe not, I judge him not; for I came not to judge the world, but to save the world." John 12: 47.

"Render to Cæsar the things that are Cæsar's, and to God the things that are God's." Mark 12: 17.

"My kingdom is not of this world; if My kingdom were of this world, then would My servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews; but now is My kingdom not from hence." John 18: 36.

"One is your Master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren." Matt. 23: 8.

"For the Son of Man is not come to destroy men's lives, but to save them." Luke 9: 56.

Government and Religious Rights

"It is not in the legitimate province of the Legislature to determine what religion is true or what false. Our government is a civil and not a religious institution. Our Constitution recognizes in every person the right to choose his own religion, and to enjoy it freely without molestation. THE PROPER OBJECT OF GOVERNMENT IS to protect all persons in the enjoyment of their civil as well as their religious rights, and NOT TO DETERMINE FOR ANY WHETHER THEY SHALL ESTEEM ONE DAY ABOVE ANOTHER, or esteem all days alike holy. What other nations call religious toleration, we call religious rights. They are not exercised in virtue of governmental indulgence, but as RIGHTS of which government can not deprive any portion of citizens, however small. Despotic power may invade those rights, but justice still confirms them."-United States Senate Report, 1829.

THE "SERVANT GIRL PROBLEM."

By Elsie M. Tade

(Elsie M. Tade, in The Voice.)

LET me make my contribution in the form of an incident.

"Mrs. Archer, how do you manage so well with your help?" said Mrs. Maxwell, as she took the offered seat on the veranda. "I have had an uncomfortable time this morning," she continued, as she saw Mrs. Archer's look of inquiry. "Jane is so saucy and disagreeable that I shall have to let her go soon, and she is the third girl I have had within the last six months. This morning the steak was underdone and the oatmeal was burned, and when I spoke to her about it, she snapped out something saucy and slammed the door as she went out. Harry certainly ought to start off with a good breakfast these warm, trying days, and, altho he didn't say anything, I knew he didn't enjoy the bill of fare," and tears stood in Mrs. Maxwell's eyes as she spoke.

"My dear," said Mrs. Archer, "there must be some way out of this terrible difficulty. I do not believe that it is so bad that it can not be remedied;" and her low laugh was very comforting. "Will you let me be your mother confessor and ask you a few questions?"

"As many as you please."

"Well, then, where does Jane sleep?"

"Sleep?" Mrs. Maxwell's eyes expressed astonishment. "Why, in the little attic room with the dormer window!"

"When do you have your dinner?" continued Mrs. Archer.

"At five o'clock, when Harry returns from the office."

"Does Jane ever have any company?"

"No, I told her I didn't allow her followers, much less to receive company in my kitchen, and her family lives some distance in the country."

"Now," interrupted Mrs. Archer, "you've given me material enough for any number of sermons, but I don't think I can help you more than by giving you my own way of working, and I have learned much of it by sorry experience.

"In the first place, I try to give my servant a good room, one that I should not hesitate to sleep in myself, if necessary. It is on the second floor, at the head of the kitchen stairs. Just before Mary came, it received a thoro renovating with the rest of the house. A few simple pictures, a rug, an ornament or two besides the ordinary furnishings, made the room wonderfully attractive, and when Mary fully realized that it had been prepared for her, and that even the vase of flowers had a welcome, tears came into her eyes and her eloquent thanks followed me all the way down-stairs.

"During these summer days we have our dinner in the middle of the day, for that gives Mary a little time in the afternoon and does not necessitate a hot fire in the kitchen range for getting tea. We find we all enjoy it just as much, for my husband gets a regular dinner at the restaurant, as does yours. Of course for the winter we alter our plan. It seems best, as the children are at school.

"Mary has one evening in the week as her own, on which she may either receive a friend or go out to spend the evening. I find that usually a word from me will stop any acquaintance that is undesirable. Sunday evening she usually gets out to church, for I consider that a privilege no servant ought to be denied. We all try to respect her rights; even Rob and Nellie think twice before they step on her newly-mopped floor, but she'd excuse most anything in 'thim blissid children,' I think.

"When the hard work of the week comes, I try to make the extras as light as I can, and I think she sees and appreciates it. Now, to sum up my sermon," laughed Mrs. Archer, "I try to bear in mind that my servant is made on the same immortal plan as myself. Of course, I can not make a confident of her, or invite her to meet my friends or discuss Dante in my parlor. Her education has not been such that she would enjoy it. But I try to make her feel that I am her friend, and that I am alive to her best interests; that when she is doing my housework she is doing me service in the best sense of the word. If I am interested in her welfare it will naturally follow that she will be interested in mine.

"Of course, things do not always go smoothly, but it makes such a difference if a little patience and a gentle word of praise are used to lighten a hard day's work. I want my servant to feel that I trust her; that is an education. In short, as the great mainspring of it all, I try to observe the Golden Rule."

WHEN WILT THOU SAVE THE PEOPLE?

When wilt Thou save the people? O God of mercy, when? Not kings and lords, but peoples! Not thrones and crowns, but men! Flowers of Thy heart, O God, are they; Let them not pass like weeds, away, Their heritage a sunless day. God save the people!

Shall crime bring crime forever, Strength aiding still the strong? Is it Thy will, O Father, That man shall toil for wrong? No! say Thy mountains; No! Thy skies; Man's clouded sun shall brightly rise, And songs ascend instead of sighs. God save the people!

When wilt Thou save the people? O God of mercy, when? The people, Lord, the people, Not thrones and crowns, but men! God save the people; let them share Childhood and love with angels fair. From sin and bondage and despair, God save the people!

INFECTIONS FROM KISSING ANIMALS.

THE disgusting and dangerous fondling and kissing of beasts can not be effectually opposed, perhaps, on the whole; but some persons may be benefited by the repetition of warnings against the numerous infections which that practise is liable to incur, such as hydatids from dogs, diphtheria from cats and pigeons, and from cats the obstinate and loathsome diseases of ringworm and favus. Dr Leviseur suggests this warning in the Medical Record from having had occasion repeatedly to trace individual cases, as well as small epidemics, of both ringworm and favus to their source in the endearment of cats. He gives two recent cases, with particulars, of both cat and child. Favus, he states, is a disease peculiar to mice, from which the cat gets it.—American Analyst.

HE SHALL PROVIDE.

By Mrs. Emma S. Bromley

SUMMER's long hours and myriad flowers Give bees full scope to fill the hive; On leaves and seeds of all the weeds Do countless birds and insects thrive.

Great wisdom that wee squirrels have, Nor fret through storms lest summer's chance Should fail, when frost bites open burrs To lay at their feet God's providence. MRS. EMMA S. BROMLEY.

HOW THE WOMEN DID IT.

THE Cincinnati Times-Star gives the following instance of a saloon closed by knitting: “ ‘Never had but one saloon in our town, and the ladies knit that one out,’ said a gentleman who lives in Moor’s Hill, Ind.

“ ‘What,’ exclaimed the astonished delegate; ‘knit it out?’ Yes; when the saloon was started, the women formed in relays and went and took their knitting to the saloon. Of course that knocked business higher than a kite. It was not long before that saloon had to be closed, and since that time no man has ever had the nerve to start another.’ ”—Pacific Ensign.

A GRANDMOTHER'S RECIPE.

TAKE one cupful of usefulness, one cup of love for mother, another cup of love for your little brothers and sisters, a whole pound of wishes to make other people happy, and a very small teaspoonful of wishing to be happy yourself. Beat it all up together, and see if it does not make the nicest kind of an afternoon for anybody. Aunt Jemima suggests that it should be served while fresh. —Selected.

THE CROSS.

By German

SOME with Jesus are delighted While He speaks of joys to come, Thinking that to them is plighted After death a happy home; But the cross, when He declares it, "None but he who takes and bears it, Can My true disciple be;" Few, how few, to this agree. —German.

CHRISTIANITY AND EARTHLY POWER.

By Thomas Babington Macaulay

(From Macaulay’s Essay on “Southey’s Colloquies.”) See 1 Samuel, chapters 4 and 5.

THE ark of God was never taken till it was surrounded by the arms of earthly defenders. In captivity, its sanctity was sufficient to vindicate it from insult, and to lay the hostile fiend prostrate on the threshold of his own temple. The real security of Christianity is to be found in its benevolent morality, in its exquisite adaptation to the human heart, in the facility with which its scheme accommodates itself to the capacity of every human intellect, in the consolation which it bears to the house of mourning, in the light with which it brightens the great mystery of the grave. To such a system it can bring no addition of dignity or of strength, that it is part and parcel of the common law.

It is not now for the first time left to rely on the force of its own evidences and the attractions of its own beauty. Its sublime theology confounded the Grecian schools in the fair conflict of reason with reason. The bravest and wisest of the Cæsars found their arms and their policy unavailing, when opposed to the weapons that were not carnal and the kingdom that was not of this world. The victory which Porphyry and Diocletian failed to gain is not, to all appearance, reserved for any of those who have, in this age, directed their attacks against the last restraint of the powerful and the last hope of the wretched.

The whole history of Christianity shows that she is in far greater danger of being corrupted by the alliance of power, than of being crushed by its opposition. Those who thrust temporal sovereignty upon her, treat her as their prototypes treated her Author. They bow the knee, and spit upon her; they cry “Hail!” and smite her on the cheek; they put a scepter in her hand, but it is a fragile reed; they crown her, but it is with thorns; they cover with purple the wounds which their own hands have inflicted on her; and inscribe magnificent titles over the cross on which they have fixed her to perish in ignominy and pain.

DEATH OF SELF, A DIVINE PARADOX.

By S. T. H. Berry

ALL that God is doing in the world in any way He is doing by dead people. God uses us in proportion as we are dead,—dead to self, dead to selfish pleasure, dead to the world, dead to human praise or blame, dead to personal interest,—dead to everything but God, who dwells within, giving life. “It is no longer I that live, but Christ liveth in me,” so that self is dead beyond the hope of a resurrection, and Christ liveth thru all the powers of my being and absolutely controls those powers for His own purposes. “For me to live is Christ.” Blessed deadness! Glorious living! Happy freedom! “God forbid that I should glory save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world.” Then I do not care for the world; its pleasures have no power to entice me, its riches I count but dross, its applause is a hollow mockery, its society, its ease, its praises, I have not the faintest desire to enjoy, its persecutions have no power to swerve me from my purpose. “The world is crucified unto me,” it has no use for me, it had no use for my Master; it despised Him, it killed Him; it despises me, it may kill me. Dead! Dead to everything but God, to be used by Him as He wills.

Let no man think that this death to self is easily secured. It is the most difficult part of a satisfactory religious experience. Self dies hard. Crucifixion means rough handling, humiliation hard to endure; it means solitude and agony, the assaults of demons and men; it means the piercing spike and the darkening heavens; but, thank God, it also means resurrection, triumph, and God’s glory. “Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone; but if it die, it bringeth forth much fruit.”

S. T. H. BERRY.

Church and State Power

By Philip Schaff

"Secular power has proved a satanic gift to the Church, and ecclesiastical power has proved an engine of tyranny in the hands of the State."—Philip Schaff.

ANNUAL MEETING OF THE CALIFORNIA-NEVADA CONFERENCE.

THE thirty-sixth annual meeting of the California-Nevada Conference of Seventh-day Adventists will convene at San Jose, Cal., January 25, 2:30 P.M., at their church near the corner of Colfax and Delmas Ave., continuing until January 29, 1907.

Each church should at once elect their delegates at the ratio of one delegate for the church and an additional one for every twenty members.

A full delegation at this session is earnestly desired.

W. T. KNOX, President, E. A. CHAPMAN, Secretary.

Overland Limited

Chicago 68 Hours

Electric Lighted Equipment

World’s Events Telegraphed, Train Daily

Unexcelled Dining Service

Observation---Parlor---Cafe Cars

Drawing-room---Stateroom Sleepers

Through without Change

Across Great Salt Lake and High Sierra by Daylight

Fastest Time---Most Direct Route

VIA

Southern Pacific

Bank of Mountain View

By Editor

If you haven't already done so, why don't you drop us a postal asking us to send you a copy of our monthly paper, "The Bank of Mountain View Journal." It is very interesting. It is full of good ideas, and it is free to you for the asking. If you live in the East, send for a copy and see how we do it in California. We still hold ourselves ready to furnish you with information about Mountain View. Write us.

Address

Bank of Mountain View

Mountain View, Santa Clara County, California

Wanted: Young Woman for Nurses’ Course

WANTED.—Young woman between 20 and 30 years of age, of good Christian character to take the nurses’ course. Exceptional opportunity for the right party. For information, address, Santa Barbara Sanitarium, 118 W. Figueroa St., Santa Barbara, Cal.

NEW YORK AND PHILADELPHIA, VIA NIAGARA FALLS.

An attractive way is via the Grand Trunk-Lehigh Valley Route; double track; solid trains. Write Geo. W. Vaux, A. G. P. & T. A., Grand Trunk Railway System, 135 Adams Street, Chicago, for particulars.

INDIVIDUAL COMMUNION CUPS

Send for FREE catalogue and list of over 4,000 churches using our cups.

Sanitary Communion Outfit Co.

64th Street, Rochester, N. Y.

Wanted: Graduate Hydrotherapy Nurse

WANTED.—One lady nurse, graduate in hydrotherapy methods. Give experience, place of graduation, age, and wages expected. Address, with stamp for reply, Santa Barbara Sanitarium, 118 W. Figueroa St., Santa Barbara, Cal.

Liberty of Conscience and Worship

"Liberty of conscience requires liberty of worship as its manifestation. To grant the former and to deny the latter, is to imprison conscience and to promote hypocrisy and infidelity. Religion is in its nature voluntary, and ceases to be religion in proportion as it is forced. God wants free worshipers, and no others."—Dr. Philip Schaff.

A MATTER OF EDUCATION.

By Editor

In speaking of a proposed organized effort against Sunday-closing, a Florence (Colo.) paper says:

“In every state and territory of the Union except California and the District of Columbia, the sabbath is protected by law. Some ten years ago the lower house of the Colorado Legislature passed a bill annulling all sabbath legislation, but the better sentiment of the upper house saved the State from the disgrace. In most communities there are people opposed to the Christian sabbath, but in few, if indeed in any, are they the majority. Their power for evil comes from those who profess friendship but lack honest principle. If all Christians, with those professedly in sympathy with them, were united, these evils could be suppressed.”

The matter of “disgrace” is a matter of education. If our Colorado contemporary believes that the teachings of Christ is a disgrace, believes that the First Amendment to the Federal Constitution is a disgrace, believes that the granting of equal rights to all is a disgrace, then Colorado was saved from disgrace. But as long as men live of varied minds and varied beliefs, as long as the God of right and justice lives, so long is it a disgrace of the deepest dye for any State to hold on her statute book any Sabbath law. Moreover, it is a disgrace for any Christian to ask the Legislature of any State to pass a sabbath law. By the very asking he declares either that his sabbath is not divine, or that he has not faith in Christ’s power to save His own.

Freedom of Religion Without Coercion

By Thomas Jefferson

Almighty God hath created the mind free; all attempts to influence it by temporal punishments or burdens, or by civil incapacitations, tend only to beget habits of hypocrisy and meanness, and are a departure from the plan of the holy Author of our religion, who, being Lord both of body and mind, yet chose not to propagate it by coercion on either, as was in His almighty power to do.—Thomas Jefferson.

FRANCE AND THE VATICAN.

By Editor

[Under the above title the Argonaut, of San Francisco, of date December 29, gives the following, to us, very fair statement of the relations between the Papacy and France, and we reproduce for the benefit of our readers. It may help to correct some of the statements of the daily press.—Ed. S. of T.]

SEVERAL readers have requested us to state briefly the questions at issue between France and the Vatican. Altho the situation is very complicated, and much clouded by disputes as to the exact issues, this is a fair statement in brief according to our understanding.

Napoleon in 1801, as First Consul of France, made a contract with the Vatican called the Concordat. Prior to that time, after the fall of the monarchy, the French Revolutionary Government had practically overthrown all public religious observances. By the Concordat it was provided that France should officially recognize the Roman Catholic Church; that the Government of France should select all Roman Catholic bishops in France; that these selections should be subject to the approval of the Vatican. And here is one of the disputed points—whether the Vatican had a veto or whether lack of approval meant a veto. The Concordat also provided that the governmentally selected bishops should appoint the lesser clergy, and that the State should pay the salary of the archbishops, bishops, and lesser clergy. Thus the Roman Catholic Church in France became practically a part of the State. Its prelates and ministers were appointed by the State and were paid by the State. The State also paid out the people's money to the Protestant and Jewish congregations, but naturally, a much smaller amount than the scores of millions paid out to the Roman Catholic clergy.

For more than a hundred years the Vatican has chafed under the Concordat, and there have been perpetual complaints from the pope over the unfairness of that document. The Republican government therefore determined to begin the separation of Church and State by ostensibly acceding to the complaints of the Vatican. There were many Roman Catholic schools thruout France which were conducted by religious orders, were not supported by the State, and not under the Vatican or diocesan rule. As they were outside of the Concordat, they did not come under the protection of that document. In 1901 the Waldeck-Rousseau government passed the "Associations Bill," directing all these religious corporations to file lists of their members, pupils, financial conditions, etc., whereupon licenses would be issued to them, legalizing their existence. As these religious corporations had no standing under the Concordat, and were only indirectly under Vatican control, there was no legal impediment to this action. The French Government allowed it to be understood that the cause for its action was the inculcation of ideas hostile to republican government in these religious schools.

The noted Church of the Madeleine, Paris, which Napoleon attempted to turn into a "Temple of Glory." Cost, $3,000,000 in building, from 1764 to 1832; 354 feet long, 141 feet broad, and 100 feet high; bronze doors 16 feet wide, 34½ feet high.

The religious corporations very generally refused to comply with the law. Out of 17,000 monastic or religious organizations nearly 8,000 were dissolved because they defied the law. Many of them established their schools in the United States and other countries.

An incident which seems to Americans a trifle greatly envenomed the dispute between the French government and the Vatican. President Loubet while in Rome visited the King of Italy and did not visit the pope. The reason is plain. The Vatican holds that the Italian government is a usurping one, and that the Roman States belong to the Pope as their temporal sovereign. If President Loubet had visited the Vatican, the pope would have insisted on being treated as reigning sovereign of the Roman States; this would have implied that President Loubet believed the King of Italy to be a usurper. France and Italy are friendly. Hence President Loubet wisely did not call at the Vatican.

The final step in the separation of Church and State began about a year ago, when the

Chamber of Deputies by a two-thirds majority formally adopted the bill separating the Church from the State. This bill provides that the State does not recognize, salary, or subsidize any particular form of worship; that where church property was originally purchased with money raised by individuals or congregations, religious associations should be formed, in which such property should vest. In the United States title to such property is vested in the bishops. Concerning church property purchased originally by or originally belonging to the State, the bill provides that each such piece of property shall vest in the State, and that the State shall loan it to a religious association made up of its congregation for the purpose of holding religious services; that instead of paying regular salaries from the State to the clergymen, pensions shall be paid by the State to the older clergymen only.

All of the foregoing seems to Americans simple and just. We in this country believe that Church and State should be separate. That belief is strong also in Great Britain and Ireland, as the disestablishment of the Irish Church and of the Anglican Church have been burning questions for many years. It is probable that within twenty years there will be no established church in the British Empire. Even Spain has recently shown signs of cut-

ting loose from the Vatican in the matter of the regulations concerning marriage; this is the first step toward disestablishment. Why then there should be such excitement among Roman Catholics thruout the world over this domestic concern of France, it is difficult to understand. If the French government is confirming the title of certain Roman Catholic congregations in France to the property which originally belonged to them, and if it is causing to revert to itself property which originally belonged to it, where is the harm? The Roman Catholic Church in France, as a corporation holding property, is one thing. The Vatican in Italy, as a corporation holding property, is another. Spiritually, the Church in France and Italy may be the same thing. As a property owner, taxpayer, and citizen, it can not be. This view must appeal to every Roman Catholic in the United States, where the Church has thrived wonderfully with a complete disassociation from the State. Do American Roman Catholics, for example, believe that Pope Pius X owns the Cathedral of Notre Dame on the Island in the Seine, where it has been the property of the French government since Louis VII laid the first stone

in 1163? And if so, does Pope Pius X own St. Patrick's Cathedral on Forty-ninth Street and Fifth Avenue, New York City? And if so, does he own St. Mary's Cathedral in San Francisco?

MEN BOUGHT AND SOLD.

By T.

IN Elizabethtown, Ky., a man was recently sold to a farmer for nine months for one dollar. The man was charged with "vagrancy," and they have a statute in that state permitting such persons to be sold for a given time to the highest bidder.

This may seem like an innocent occurrence, but if a man may be sold for nine months, what is to hinder selling him for the term of his natural life? And if a man may be sold for "vagrancy" it is easy to find other excuses for selling men. No matter how honest or industrious a man may be, if he is overtaken by a misfortune that renders him weak or defenseless, he is liable to be sold.

Lurking under the shadow of this apparently innocent thing is the principle that makes it possible for one class of men to permanently enslave another. To keep ourselves free, it is necessary constantly to keep in mind the basic principles of freedom and eternally contend for them. Vagrancy is to be properly dealt with, but we can not afford to deal with it in such a way as to lay the foundation for slavery. You may say that there is no immediate danger; but if we sow the seed to-day, we must surely reap the fruit to-morrow.

LABOR SUPPORTS CHURCH FOR SUNDAY ENFORCEMENT.

A SIGNIFICANT development of recent years has been the appearance of a clerical delegate in the central labor councils of many of the cities of the country. The Presbyterian Church has initiated this innovation for "getting next" to organized labor, and so far it is confined almost entirely to that church, but it is very likely to extend to other churches. In view of the increasing activity of trades-unionists for a compulsory weekly rest-day, and of the clergy for compulsory "Sabbath" observance, it has not been difficult to foresee what would be one of the first and foremost objects for the promotion of which this affiliation and cooperation of the church and organized labor would be employed. And what has been expected in the matter by students of the compulsory rest-day Sabbath movement is beginning to appear.

One of the cities in which a clerical delegate sits in the central labor council is Brooklyn, N. Y., and at the meeting of the Brooklyn Central Labor Union, on Sunday, November 11, "the Rev. Warren H. Wilson, fraternal delegate from the Brooklyn Presbytery, who said he had been instructed to do so by a committee representing in the largest sense every minister in Brooklyn," appealed to the body for its cooperation with the clergymen of Brooklyn in their movement for the suppression of Sunday theaters, making the somewhat remarkable declarations that "ORGANIZED LABOR, and not the organized church, is the TRUE CHAMPION OF SABBATH OBSERVANCE," and "religion does not need a Sabbath, and the Sabbath was not established for worship, but labor does need it, and the Sabbath has been kept thru the centuries in the interests of labor." After speeches by union delegates, which "demonstrated that they were not averse to going on record in favor of the closing of theaters on Sunday, but wanted to go further," a resolution was adopted declaring that "the Central Labor Union demands the enforcement of the Sunday laws, especially as to Sunday theaters and retail stores, and we pledge our cooperation to the ministerial committee on Sunday closing, and that a copy of this resolution be sent to the Deputy Commissioner of Police of Brooklyn."

The demand for the enforcement of the Sunday laws, especially with reference to retail stores as well as theaters, was made because in the discussion following Rev. Wilson's appeal, delegates urged that this be done. In the course of the discussion, which "was interesting," one delegate "said that a law should be passed forbidding the payment of wages on Saturday, for the reason that men who were paid on Saturday had no time in which to make their purchases except on Sunday. That was one reason why shops were open on that day."

In reporting the action of the union, the "Brooklyn Eagle" said that "as a matter of fact, organized labor has always opposed Sunday labor, and has put a tax on the employer who desired the services of his workmen on the first day of the week, by insisting that double wages must be paid for services on that day."

But this form of opposing Sunday labor is by no means the same thing as that of "the enforcement of the Sunday laws."

After the meeting, Rev. Wilson informed a reporter "that he had visited the Brooklyn Actors Union and the Stage Employees Union in the interests of Sunday closing, and had been courteously received. Most of the members at the meetings were in favor of closing on that day of the week. Altho the stage employees receive double pay for the work, one of the officers said he would rather forego it than work on Sunday."

In his appeal to the Central Labor Union, Rev. Wilson said that in their movement for the closing of the theaters on Sunday the ministers "were animated not by doctrinal reasons, which never long held them together on Sunday-closing, but by moral and industrial facts. The moral fact is that the theater which breaks the law on Sunday presents a baser and more degrading exhibition, and that on that day it is attended very largely by children and young people. The industrial reason is that the whole gospel of labor declares that the restriction of the hours of labor results in the lifting of the rate of wages. The labor gospel is eight hours for six days a week, and the action of the ministers is level with the purposes of organized labor and consistent with every principle cherished by the Central Labor Union. Organized labor, and not the organized church, is the true champion of Sabbath observance. Religion does not need a Sabbath, and the Sabbath was not established for worship; but labor does need it, and the Sabbath has been kept thru the centuries by Jews and Christians alike in the interests of labor. Sabbath-keeping was the first recognition of fixed hours of labor. Religion is inextinguishable, and in times of the greatest oppression religion still thrives; but the interests of labor are dependent upon, and may be deprived of, such privileges as a day of rest and shorter hours throuot the week."

In this appeal the "fraternal delegate" from the Brooklyn Presbytery went far in his bid for the support of organized labor in behalf of Sunday enforcement—so far, in fact, that he virtually surrendered and demolished the very thing for which he and the church stand in this matter and in behalf of which his appeal was inspired—the theological and dogmatic Sabbath. Even in their eagerness for the cooperation and support of organized labor in the maintenance and enforcement of the "sabbath," the clergy should be careful that they do not overreach themselves and thrust the deadly blade, even of fact, beneath the fifth rib of the very institution they are seeking to maintain and enforce.

SOME OF THE YEAR'S TRAGEDIES.

FROM the Chicago Tribune, of January 1, to which the press of the country is indebted for its careful record and compilation of statistics and events, we take the following facts:

There were of legal hangings or executions in the country, 123, the same as last year. Of these 35 were in the North, and 88 in the South; 45 were whites, 76 Negroes, and 2 Indians. The crimes for which these victims were hanged were murder, 115; rape, 8.

The number of lynchings for 1906 was 69, 3 more than last year.

Murders, reported by telegraph last year to December 26, were 9,350, 138 more than 1905. There was a large increase of "hold-up" murders, and double murders; 19 of the murderers were women. Double murders number 280; triple murders, 96; quadruple murders, 44; quintuple murders, 30. And there were three cases where even more were killed at a time.

The steady increase of suicides continues. The record runs from 5,340 in 1899 to 10,125, almost double in 1906. Of these 7,242 were men and 2,883 women. Nearly one-half of these—4,561—were caused by despondency, and 2,338 from domestic troubles and love disappointments. Among professional men physicians head the list, numbering 39.

In embezzlements there was a large increase over 1905. That year it was $9,613,172; in 1906, $14,739,653, by far the heaviest of any year since 1894.

The fire losses greatly exceed those of 1905. The amount for the year is estimated at $352,000,000.

In 34 of the larger cities there were 134 persons killed in automobile accidents, and 494 injured; 159 smaller towns add to this 75 killed and 337 injured; a total of 209 killed and 831 injured.

There were killed on steam railroads during the year, not including employees, 3,295, and injured 9,561; on the electric roads, including employees, 674 killed and 2,953 injured. An appalling record.

The loss of life from various disasters is reported as follows: Fires, 1,184; drownings, 2,985; explosions, 623; falling buildings, 483; mines, 599; cyclones and storms, 719; lightening, 205; electricity, 176; earthquakes, 2,452 (probably nearer 5,000).

The Tribune says that "it may well be known in the future as the year of disaster."

Continue reading: Right to Differ