Even as late as 1878, it was resolved by the Woman Suffrage Convention at Rochester, N. Y., "that as the first duty of every individual is self-development, the lessons of self-sacrifice and obedience taught woman by the Christian Church have been fatal, not only to her own vital interests but through her to those of the race." Influences were already at work, however, which have made the relations of platform and pulpit comparatively friendly in this respect.
The women of the North showed their patriotism, during the great war, by establishing and managing the Sanitary Commission, the Freedman"s Bureau, and the Woman"s Loyal National League. Important elections were carried in 1862 by the eloquence of Anna E. d.i.c.kinson, for the Republican party; and it has often since had similar help. The success of the Women"s Christian Temperance Union and other partly philanthropic and partly religious organisations, has proved the ability of women to think and act independently. Many of their demands have been granted, one by one; and public opinion has changed so much in their favour, that they ceased long ago to encounter any general hostility from the clergy in the Northern States.
Even there, however, women still find it much too difficult for them to enter a peculiarly easy, honourable, and lucrative profession. Their elocutionary powers are shown on the stage as well as the platform.
Their capacity for writing sermons is plain to every one familiar with recent literature. Their ability to preach is recognised cordially in the Salvation Army, as well as by Spiritualists, Quakers, Unitarians, and Universalists. Much of the pastoral work is done by women, in actual fact; and more ought to be. The Sunday-school, choir, social gathering, and other important auxiliaries to the pulpit are almost entirely in female hands. Women enjoy practically the monopoly of those kinds of church work for which there is no pay; and their exclusion from the kind which is paid highly, in the largest and wealthiest denominations, looks too much like a preference of clergymen to look after the interest of their own s.e.x. The most orthodox churches are the most exclusive; and the same forces which are driving bigotry out of the pulpits are bringing women in.
This reform is one of many in which a much more advanced position has been taken by New England and the far West than by the South; and the American Transcendentalists led public opinion in the section where most of them lived. In Great Britain the struggle has been carried on in the interest of the middle and lower cla.s.ses, and under much opposition from the cla.s.s to which most admirers of philosophy belonged. No wonder that one of the keenest critics of Transcendentalism was prominent among the champions in England of the oppressed s.e.x. John Stuart Mill declared, in his widely circulated book on _The Subjection of Women_, that "n.o.body ever arrived at a general rule of duty by intuition." He held that the legal subjection of wives to husbands bore more resemblance, as far as the laws were concerned, to slavery, than did any other relationship existing in Great Britain in 1869. He did not argue from any theory of natural rights, but pointed out the advantage to society of women"s developing their capacities freely. He also insisted on the duty of government not to restrict the liberty of any woman, except when necessary to prevent her diminishing that of her neighbours. This last proposition will be examined in the next chapter. The fact that Mill"s great work for freedom was done through the press, and not on the platform, makes it unnecessary to say more about him in this place.
II. Clergymen, like Transcendentalists, in England were generally conservative, or reactionary; and the friends of reform were much more irreligious than in America. Their appeal against the authority of Church and Bible was not to intuition but to science; and they were aided by Lyell"s demonstration, in 1830, that geology had superseded Genesis. Working-men were warned in lectures, tracts, and newspapers against immorality in the Old Testament; and even the New was said to discourage resistance to oppression and efforts to promote health, comfort, and knowledge.
The most popular of these champions against superst.i.tion and tyranny was Bradlaugh. He began to lecture in 1850, when only seventeen, and continued for forty years to speak and write diligently. His atheism obliged him to undergo poverty for many years, and much hardship. He charged no fee for lecturing, went willingly to the smallest and poorest places, and was satisfied with whatever was brought in by selling tickets, often for only twopence each. He once travelled six hundred miles in forty-eight hours, to deliver four lectures which did not repay his expenses. Many a hall which he had engaged was closed against him; and he was thus obliged to speak in the open air one rainy Sunday, when he had two thousand hearers. At such times his voice pealed out like a trumpet; his information was always accurate; opposition quickened the flow of ideas; and he had perfect command of the people"s English. His great physical strength was often needed to defend him against violence, sometimes instigated by the clergy. He had much to say against the Old Testament; but no struggle for political liberty, whether at home or abroad, failed to receive his support; and he was especially active for that great extension of suffrage which took place in 1867. His knowledge that women would vote against him did not prevent his advocating their right to the ballot; but it was in the name of "the great ma.s.s of the English people" that he was an early supporter of the cause of Union and Liberty against the slave-holders who seceded.
In 1866 he became president of the National Society of Secularists, who believe only in "the religion of the present life." Most of the members were agnostics; and one of Bradlaugh"s many debates was with Holyoake, the founder of secularism, on the question whether that term ought to be used instead of atheism. The society was so well organised that only a telegram from the managers was needed to call out a public meeting anywhere in England. Among Bradlaugh"s hearers in America in 1873 were Emerson, Sumner, Garrison, Phillips, and O. B. Frothingham. He won soon after a powerful ally in a clergyman"s wife, who had been driven from her home by her husband because she would not partake of the communion.
Mrs. Besant began to lecture in 1874, and with views like Bradlaugh"s; but her chief interest was in woman suffrage. Both held strict views about the obligation of marriage; and their relations were blameless.
Bradlaugh"s place in history is mainly as a champion of the right of atheists to sit in Parliament. He was elected by the shoemakers of Northampton in 1880, when oaths of allegiance were exacted in the House of Commons. Quakers, however, could affirm; and he asked the same privilege. As this was refused, he offered to take the oath, and declared that the essential part would be "binding upon my honour and conscience." This, too, was forbidden; but there was much discussion, not only in Parliament but throughout England, as to his right to affirm. His friends held two hundred public meetings in a single week, and sent in pet.i.tions with two hundred thousand signatures during twelve months. The liberal newspapers were on his side; but the Methodist and Episcopalian pulpits resounded with denials of the right of atheists to enter Parliament on any terms. Among the expounders of this view in leading periodicals were Cardinal Manning and other prominent ecclesiastics. They had the support of the Archbishop of Canterbury, as well as of many pet.i.tions from Sunday-schools. Public opinion showed itself so plainly that Brad-laugh was finally allowed by a close vote to make affirmation and take his seat. He was soon forced to leave it by an adverse decision of the judges, but was promptly re-elected.
Again he offered in vain to take the oath. After several months of litigation, and many appeals to audiences which he made almost unanimous, he gave notice that he should try to take his seat on August 3, 1881, unless prevented by force. It took fourteen men to keep him out; and he was dragged down-stairs with such violence that he fainted away. His clothes were badly torn; and the struggle brought on an alarming attack of erysipelas. A great mult.i.tude had followed him to Westminster Hall, and there would have been a dangerous riot, if it had not been for the entreaties of Mrs. Besant, who spoke at Bradlaugh"s request. His next move was to take the oath without having it properly administered. He was expelled in consequence, but re-elected at once.
Thus the contest went on, until the Speaker decided that every member had a right to take the oath which could not be set aside. Bradlaugh was admitted accordingly, on January 13, 1886; and two years later he brought about the pa.s.sage of a bill by which unbelievers were enabled to enter Parliament by making affirmation. The Irish members had tried to keep him out; but this did not prevent his advocating home rule for Ireland, and also for India. From first to last he fought fearlessly and steadily for freedom of speech and of the press. His beauty of character increased his influence. Mrs. Besant is right in saying: "That men and women are now able to speak as openly as they do, that a broader spirit is visible in the churches, that heresy is no longer regarded as morally disgraceful--these things are very largely due to the active and militant propaganda carried on under the leadership of Charles Bradlaugh."
III. Similar ideas to his have been presented ever since 1870 to immense audiences, composed mostly of young men, in Chicago, New York, Boston, and other American cities, by Robert G. Ingersoll. Burning hatred of all tyranny and cruelty often makes him denounce the Bible with a pathos like Rousseau"s or a brilliancy like Voltaire"s. He was decidedly original when he asked why Jesus, if he knew how Christianity would develop, did not say that his followers ought not to persecute one another. In protesting against subordinating reason to faith, Ingersoll says: "Ought the sailor to throw away his compa.s.s and depend entirely on the fog?" Among other characteristic pa.s.sages are these: "Banish me from Eden when you will, but first let me eat of the tree of knowledge!"... "Religion has not civilised man: man has civilised religion."... "Miracles are told simply to be believed, not to be understood."
Ingersoll is not merely a destroyer but an earnest pleader for what he calls the gospel of cheerfulness and good health, "the gospel of water and soap," the gospels of education, liberty, justice, and humanity. He regards "marriage as the holiest inst.i.tution among men"; but holds that "the woman is the equal of the man. She has all the rights I have and one more; and that is the right to be protected." He believes fully "in the democracy of the family," and "in allowing the children to think for themselves." He is not so much interested as Bradlaugh was in political reform and social progress, but has often taken the conservative side; and his speaking in public has been more like an occasional recreation than a life-work. Some of his lectures have had an immense circulation as pamphlets; and his Biblical articles in the _North American Review_ attracted much notice. He is never at his best, however, without an audience before him; and he sometimes writes too rapidly to be strictly accurate.
IV. A better parallel to Bradlaugh is furnished by Mr. B. F. Underwood, who was only eighteen when he began to lecture in Rhode Island. The great revival of 1857 was in full blast; and he showed its evils with an energy which called down much denunciation from the pulpit. He spoke from the first as an evolutionist, though Darwin had not yet demonstrated the fact. To and fro through the Connecticut valley went the young iconoclast, speaking wherever he could find hearers, asking only for repayment of expenses, and sometimes failing to receive even that. His work was interrupted by the war, in which he took an active and honourable part. When peace was restored, he studied thoroughly the _Origin of Species_ and the _Descent of Man_; and he began in 1868 to give course after course of lectures on Darwinism in New England, New York, and Pennsylvania. The new view had been nine years before the public, but had received little or no support from any clergyman in the United States, or any journal except _The Investigator_.
For thirty years Mr. Underwood has been busily propagating evolutionism on the platform, as well as in print. No other American has done so much to make the system popular, or has reproduced Herbert Spencer"s statements with such fidelity. He has taken especial pains to prove that "evolution disposes of the theory that the idea of G.o.d is innate," as well as of the once mighty argument from design. He has said a great deal about the Bible and Christianity, but in a more constructive spirit than either Bradlaugh or Ingersoll. He has discredited old books by unfolding new truth. Among his favourite subjects have been: "What Free Thought Gives us in Place of the Creeds," "The Positive Side of Modern Liberal Thought," "If you Take away Religion, what will you Give in its Place?" "The Influence of Civilisation on Christianity." He has always shown himself in favour of the interests of working-men, and also of women"s rights and other branches of political reform. During the twelve years ending in 1881, he lectured five or six times a week for at least nine months out of twelve, often travelling from Canada to Arkansas and Oregon. Occasionally he spoke every night for a month; but he has seldom lectured in summer, except when on the Pacific coast.
His lectures in Oregon in 1871 on evolution awoke much opposition in the pulpits. Two years afterwards he held a debate in that State against a clergyman who was president of a college, and who denounced evolution as in conflict with "the Word of G.o.d." Such views were then prevalent in that city; but in 1888 it was found by Mr. Underwood to have become the seat of the State University, where the new system was taught regularly.
Underwood, like Bradlaugh, has always challenged discussion, and he has held over a hundred public debates. The first was in 1867; and some have occupied twenty evenings. Most of his opponents have been clergymen; and a hundred and fifty of the profession were in the audience at one contest in Illinois in 1870. How much public opinion differs in various States of the Union is shown by the fact that nine years later the doors of a hall which had been engaged for him in Pennsylvania were closed against him, merely because he was "an infidel." His friends broke in without his consent; and he was fined $70. The first lecture which he tried to give in Canada was prevented by similar dishonesty.
Another hall was hired for the next night at great expense; but much interruption was made by clergymen; and when suit was brought for damages through breach of contract, the courts decided that bargains with unbelievers were not binding in Canada.
Both Bradlaugh and Underwood have usually spoken _extempore_, but both have been busy journalists. The American agitator wrote as early as 1856 for both _The Liberator_ and _The Investigator_. His connection with the latter paper lasted until the time when a serious difference of opinion arose between those aggressive unbelievers who called themselves "freethinkers," or even "infidels," and those moderate liberals who belong to the Free Religious a.s.sociation, and formerly supported _The Index_. This journal came in 1881 under the management of Mr. Underwood.
His colleague, Rev. W. J. Potter, was nominally his equal in authority; but I know, from personal acquaintance with both gentlemen, that the real editor from first to last was Mr. Underwood. It was mainly due to him that much attention was given, both in the columns of the journal and in the meetings of the a.s.sociation, to efforts for secularising the State. He was in charge of _The Index_ until it stopped at the end of 1886. In 1882 he held a discussion in Boston with the president of Williams College, and Professor Gray, the great botanist, on the relations between evolution and "evangelical religion." About four hundred orthodox clergymen were present. In 1897 Mr. Underwood was still in his original occupation. Early that year he lectured in Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio, New York, Connecticut, Rhode Island, Ma.s.sachusetts, and Canada. He now believes, like Emerson, in "a higher origin for events than the will I call mine."
V. The difference of opinion among liberals, just referred to, grew out of the agitation for a free Sunday, which had been begun by Frances Wright in 1828. A call for "an anti-Sabbath convention" in Boston was issued by some Transcendentalists in 1848, when men had recently been imprisoned in Ma.s.sachusetts for getting in hay, and in Pennsylvania for selling anti-slavery books. Churches were closed on Sunday against lecturers for any reform, however popular; and even the most innocent amus.e.m.e.nt was prohibited by public opinion. Only a moderate protest had any chance of a hearing; but Garrison and the other managers insisted in the call that "the first day of the week is no holier than any other,"
and refused to allow anyone who did not believe this to speak. Very little was said about what the Sunday laws really were; but most of the time was occupied with arguments that the Sabbath was only for the Jews, and that keeping Sunday is not a religious duty. This last a.s.sertion called out an earnest remonstrance from Theodore Parker; but his resolutions were voted down. The Garrisonians insisted, as usual, that the big end of the wedge ought to go in first; and their convention was a failure. Twenty-eight years went by without any protest of importance against Sunday laws in America.
Meantime the Free Religious a.s.sociation was organised in Boston by Unitarian clergymen who were indignant at the recent introduction into their denomination of a doctrinal condition of fellowship. The first public meeting, on May 30, 1867, called out an immense audience. Emerson was one of the speakers; and he held his place among the vice-presidents as long as he lived. A similar position was offered to Lucretia Mott, but she declined on the platform. Her reason was that practical work was subordinated to theological speculation by the announcement in the const.i.tution that the a.s.sociation was organised "to promote the interests of pure religion, to encourage the scientific study of theology, and to increase fellowship in the Spirit." These phrases were altered afterwards; but the a.s.sociation has always been, in the words of one of its leading members "a voice without a hand." Free religious conventions have regularly increased the confusion of tongues in that yearly Boston Babel called "Anniversary Week"; and there have been many similar gatherings in various cities; but not one in four of these meetings has given much attention to any practical subject, like the use of the Bible in the public schools. A vigorous discussion of the Sunday laws of Ma.s.sachusetts took place in 1876, under peculiar circ.u.mstances to be described in the next section; but there was no other until 1887.
_The Index_ started in 1870; but it was largely occupied with vague speculations about theology; and its discontinuance in 1886 left the a.s.sociation without any organ of frequent communication among its members, or even an office for business. Dr. Adler, who became president in 1878, tried to awaken an interest in unsectarian education, and especially in ethical culture; but he resigned on account of lack of support; and the Ethical Culture societies were started outside of the a.s.sociation. Comparatively few of its members took any interest in the pet.i.tions presented by its direction to the Ma.s.sachusetts Legislature in 1884 and 1885, asking for taxation of churches, protection of witnesses from molestation on account of unbelief, and rescue of the Sunday law from giving sanctuary to fraud. The president acknowledged in 1892 that there had been a "general debility for practical work." There seems to have been a lack of energy among the managers; and some of the members were too anxious to preserve their individuality, while others had too much regard for ecclesiastical interests. The Parliament of Religions next year, however, showed what good the a.s.sociation had done by insisting continually on fellowship in religion, and keeping its platform open to Jews, Hindoos, and unbelievers, as well as to Christians of every sect.
VI. Prominent among the founders of the Free Religious a.s.sociation was Francis E. Abbot, who lost his place soon after as pastor of an independent society, because the Supreme Court of New Hampshire decided, on the request of some Unitarians for an injunction against him, that his opinions were "subversive of the fundamental principles of Christianity. He was the first editor of _The Index_; and there appeared in April, 1872, his statement of what are generally recognised as
"THE DEMANDS OF LIBERALISM
"1. We demand that churches and other ecclesiastical property shall no longer be exempt from just taxation.
"2. We demand that the employment of chaplains in Congress, in State legislatures, in the navy and militia, and in prisons, asylums, and all other inst.i.tutions supported by public money, shall be discontinued.
"3. We demand that all public appropriations for educational and charitable inst.i.tutions of a sectarian character shall cease.
"4. We demand that all religious services now sustained by the Government shall be abolished; and especially that the use of the Bible in the public schools, whether ostensibly as a text-book or avowedly as a book of religious worship, shall be prohibited.
"5. We demand that the appointment, by the President of the United States, or by the Governors of the various States, of all religious festivals and fasts shall wholly cease.
"6. We demand that the judicial oath in the courts and in all other departments of the Government shall be abolished, and that simple affirmation under the pains and penalties of perjury shall be established in its stead.
"7. We demand that all laws directly or indirectly enforcing the observance of Sunday as the Sabbath shall be repealed.
"8. We demand that all laws looking to the enforcement of "Christian"
morality shall be abrogated, and that all laws shall be conformed to the requirements of natural morality, equal rights, and impartial liberty.
"9. We demand that not only in the Const.i.tutions of the United States, and of the several States, but also in the practical administration of the same, no privilege or advantage shall be conceded to Christianity or any other special religion; that our entire political system shall be founded and administered on a purely secular basis; and that whatever changes shall prove necessary to this end shall be consistently, unflinchingly, and promptly made."
He knew how unlikely it was that the a.s.sociation would agitate for anything; and in January, 1873, he published a call for organisation of liberal leagues, in order to obtain the freedom already asked. Such leagues were soon formed in most of the States, as well as in Germany and Canada. Among the members were Phillips, Garrison, Lucretia Mott, Higginson, and other famous abolitionists, Karl Heinzen and other radical Germans, several Rabbis and editors of Jewish papers, Inger-soll, Underwood, the editor of _The Investigatory_ and other active agitators, several wealthy men of business, Collyer, Savage, and other Unitarian clergymen. Hundreds of newspapers supported the movement; and eight hundred members had been enrolled before a convention of the National Liberal League met in Philadelphia, on the first four days of July, 1876. The managers of the International Exhibition in that city had already decided that it should be closed on Sunday, in violation of the rights, and against the wishes, of the Jews, unbelievers, and many other citizens. The Free Religious a.s.sociation had been requested in vain, at a recent meeting, to remonstrate against this iniquity. The League pa.s.sed a strong vote of censure without opposition, and appointed a committee to present a protest which had been circulated during the convention. Resolutions were also pa.s.sed a.s.serting the right of all Americans to enjoy on Sunday the public libraries, museums, parks, and similar inst.i.tutions "for the support of which they are taxed," and demanding "that all religious exercises should be prohibited in the public schools."
It was under the influence of this example that the Free Religious a.s.sociation held a special convention on November 15, 1876, to protest against the Sunday laws of Ma.s.sachusetts. A Jewish Rabbi complained that more than two thousand Hebrew children in Boston were prevented from keeping holy the day set apart for rest and worship in Exodus and Deuteronomy, and many of them actually obliged by their teachers to break the Sabbath. This was the effect of the law commanding them to go to school on Sat.u.r.day, which is that "seventh day" whose observance is required by the fourth commandment. Other speakers declared that no legislation was needed to ensure Sunday"s remaining a day of rest.
Mention was made of the fact that "any game, sport, play, or public diversion," not specially licensed, on Sat.u.r.day evening, made all persons present liable to be fined. This was already a dead letter; and the theatres had announced with perfect safety twenty years before, in their playbills, "We defy the law." A few months after this convention, its influence was shown in the opening of the Art Museum free of charge to the people of Boston, Sunday afternoons.
Thus the a.s.sociation began to co-operate with the National League; and the latter soon had the support of more than sixty local organisations.
The movement for establishing "Equal Rights in Religion" was uniting Liberal Christians, Jews, independent theists, Spiritualists, materialists, evolutionists, agnostics, and atheists. All were willing to call themselves "Freethinkers" and work together as they have never done since 1877. Then the League felt itself strong enough to call for "taxation of church property," "secularisation of public schools,"
"abrogation of Sabbatarian laws," and also for woman suffrage, as well as compulsory education throughout the United States. Steps were taken towards nominating Ingersoll on this platform for President of the Republic.
These plans had to be abandoned; the agitation subsided; and the harmony between lovers of liberty from various standpoints was lost. A fatal difference of opinion was manifest in 1878, in regard to those Acts of Congress called "the Comstock laws."
These statutes forbade sending obscene literature through the mails; and there had been more than a hundred recent convictions. Some of the prosecutions were said to have been prompted by religious bigotry; and there seems to have been unjustifiable examination of mail matter.
The most important question was whether the laws ought to be enforced against newspapers and pamphlets about free love and marital tyranny, which were not meant to be indecent but really were so occasionally. A publisher in Ma.s.sachusetts was sentenced in June, 1878, to two years of imprisonment for trying to mail such a pamphlet; but he was soon released. More severe punishment has been inflicted recently for similar offences. The majority of people in America and England favoured the exclusion by law of indecent literature from circulation; and this course has been considered necessary on account of the known frailty of human nature. The members of the Free Religious a.s.sociation were willing to have the Comstock laws changed, but not repealed; and they voted, early in 1878, to take no part in what threatened to be an unfortunate controversy. The League, however, was divided on the question whether these laws ought to be amended or repealed. Abbot, Underwood, and other prominent members declared that literature ought to be excluded from the mails or admitted according as it was intentionally and essentially indecent, or only accidentally so. Thus Ingersoll said: "We want all nastiness suppressed for ever; but we also want the mails open to all decent people." Other members held that the Comstock laws ought to be repealed entirely, and no restriction put on the circulation of any literature except by public opinion. This must be admitted to agree with the principle that each one ought to have all the liberty consistent with the equal liberty of everyone else; but this application of the theory cannot be considered politic in agitating for religious freedom.
The _Investigator, Truthseeker_, and other aggressive papers, however, called for complete repeal; and a pet.i.tion with this object received seventy thousand signatures.
The National League had voted, in 1876, that legislation against obscene publications was absolutely necessary, but that the existing laws needed amendment. The question whether this position should be maintained, was announced as the princ.i.p.al business to be settled in the convention which met at Syracuse on October 26, 1878. Mr. Abbot, the president, and other prominent officers declared that they should not be candidates for re-election if the position a.s.sumed two years before was not kept.
Scarcely had the convention met, when its management pa.s.sed into the hands of the friends of repeal. They allowed Judge Hurlbut, formerly on the bench in the Supreme Court of the State, to argue in favour of closing the mails against publications "manifestly designed or mainly tending to corrupt the morals of the young." Much respect was due to the author of a book which declared, in 1850, that married women had a right to vote and hold property, as well as that the State "cannot rightfully compel any man to keep Sunday as a religious inst.i.tution; nor can it compel him to cease from labour or recreation on that day; since it cannot be shown that the ordinary exercise of the human faculties on that day is in any way an infringement upon the rights of mankind." On Sunday morning, October 27th, it was agreed that the question of repeal or reform should be postponed until the next annual convention; but the decision was made a foregone conclusion that afternoon, when three-fifths of the members voted not to re-elect Mr. Abbot and other champions of reform. The defeated candidates left the convention at once, as did Mr. Underwood and many other members, Judge Hurlbut taking the lead. A new league was organised by the seceders; but it was not a success.
The movement for amending, but not repealing, the Comstock laws was given up; and most of those who had favoured it took sides with those who had refused to agitate. There was little interest in "The Demands of Liberalism" thenceforth among the Liberal Christians, Reformed Jews, Transcendentalists, and evolutionists. These and other moderate liberals refuse to call themselves "Freethinkers"; and they make little attempt at collective and distinctive action. The Free Religious a.s.sociation did nothing towards secularising the laws of Ma.s.sachusetts between 1876 and 1884. The agitation which began in the latter year ended on May 27, 1887, when the Sunday laws were discussed at Boston in a large and enthusiastic convention. The Legislature had just pa.s.sed a bill to legalise Sat.u.r.day evening amus.e.m.e.nts, as well as boating, sailing, driving, use of telegraph, and sale of milk, bread, newspapers, and medicines on Sunday; the signature of the Governor had not yet been given; but it was agreed that these changes must be made, and for the reason that the old restrictions could not be enforced. Judge Putnam, of the State District Court, told the convention that "the Sunday law, so called, has not in a long, long time been enforced," except by "a prosecution here and there"; and that if it were to be enforced strictly, the prosecutions would occupy nearly all the week. He opposed any restraint on "entertainments not of an immoral tendency." Mr.
Garrison, son of the famous abolitionist, declared that Sunday ought to be "the holiday of the week." Captain Adams, of Montreal, said: "This is not a mere question how much men may do or enjoy on Sunday: it is a question of human liberty, a question whether ecclesiastical tyranny shall still put its yoke on our necks." The tone was bold, but thoroughly practical from first to last.
An earnest protest against closing the Chicago Exposition on the people"s day of leisure was made by the F. R. A., in May, 1893; and an important victory in behalf of religious liberty was won in 1898 in Ma.s.sachusetts. The Sunday laws of this State have been so improved as to permit what are called "charity concerts," and are not made up entirely of ecclesiastical music, to be given for the pecuniary benefit of charitable and religious societies on Sunday evenings. The Legislature which met early in 1898 was asked by representatives of the Monday Conference of Unitarian Ministers, the Women"s Christian Temperance Union, and several other religious organisations to alter the law so as to prevent any but "sacred music" from being heard on the only evening when many people in Boston can go to concerts. The officers of the F. R.
A. made a formal request to be heard by a committee of the Legislature through counsel, who proved that the "charity concerts" were really un.o.bjectionable, and that the opposition to them was due entirely to zeal for an ancient text forbidding Hebrews to labour on Sat.u.r.day in Palestine.
The injustice of stretching this prohibition so far as to try to stop concerts on Sunday evenings in America was pointed out by representatives, not only of the F. R. A., but also of the International Religious Liberty a.s.sociation, which has been formed to protect Christians who have kept the Sabbath on the original day set apart in Exodus and Deuteronomy, from being punished for not prolonging their rest from honest labour over an additional day, first selected by an emperor whose decrees are not worthy of reverence. This a.s.sociation has offices in Chicago, New York City, Toronto, London, Basel, and other cities; and its principles are ably advocated in a weekly paper ent.i.tled the _American Sentinel_. Representatives of this organisation a.s.sisted those of the F. R. A. in forcing the "charity concerts" question to be decided on its own merits, independent of ancient texts. The members of the legislative committee made a unanimous report against suppressing these harmless amus.e.m.e.nts; and their opinion was sustained by their colleagues. This victory was duly celebrated at the annual convention of the F. R. A., in Boston, on May 27, 1898. Among the speakers that afternoon was the secretary of the I.R.L. A., who said: "If any nation under heaven has the right to confiscate one-seventh of my time, and tell how I shall and how I shall not use that, then the whole principle of inherent rights is denied, and it now is simply a matter of policy whether it shall not confiscate two-sevenths, three-sevenths, or seven-sevenths, and take away all my liberty."
Since 1878, the agitation for religious equality has been carried on mainly by materialistic atheists and agnostics, with some a.s.sistance from Spiritualists. These aggressive liberals continue to call themselves to Liberty in the Nineteenth Century.
"Freethinkers," and to support the _Investigatory Truthseeker_, and other papers which have much to say against Sunday laws, religious use of the Bible in public schools, and exemption of churches from taxation.
They often reprint "The Demands of Liberalism"; and one of these requests has been so amended in Canada as to ask for the repeal of "all laws directly or indirectly enforcing the observance of Sunday or the Sabbath." The attack on the Comstock laws has subsided; and no reference was made to them in 1897 in the call for a convention of the organisation which took the place of the whole system of national and local leagues in 1885. The name then chosen was "The American Secular Union." The words, "and Freethought Federation" were added in 1895, when two kindred a.s.sociations were consolidated. It was under strong and constant pressure from these aggressive liberals that the great museums of art and natural history in New York were thrown open on Sundays to longing crowds. One of the pet.i.tions was signed by representatives of a hundred and twelve labour organisations. The trustees of the Art Museum were induced to open it in the summer of 1891 by the contribution of $3000, which had been collected by some young ladies for meeting extra expenses. Thirty-eight thousand people took advantage, in August, 1892, of their first opportunity to visit the Museum of Natural History on their one day of leisure; and these visitors were remarkable for good behaviour. There has been a similar experience in the Boston Art Museum ever since the Sunday opening in 1877.
VII. An exciting contest took place at Chicago in 1893. More than fifty nations were co-operating with the people of every one of the United States in commemorating the discovery of America. Disreputable politicians had persuaded Congress to pa.s.s a bill, by which closing the Exposition on Sundays was made a condition of receiving aid from the National Treasury. The people of Chicago had given three times as much, however, as Congress; and there was much dissatisfaction among those citizens who had bought stock in the enterprise. The grounds had been kept open to visitors for some months, Sunday after Sunday, until the buildings were formally thrown open on May 1st; and the receipts had been liberal enough to prove that continuance of this course would be greatly to the advantage of these shareholders, while Sunday closing might result in heavy loss. During the first three Sundays of May the gates were kept shut by order of the Board of National Commissioners, made up of members from every State. Their action and that of Congress had been sanctioned by pet.i.tions bearing millions of signatures; but it is a significant fact that the alleged signers in Pennsylvania were three times as many as the entire population of the State. Many people had been counted again and again as members of different organisations; and this fraud was committed in other parts of the country. No attempt to find out what the people really wished was made except in Texas; and there the majority was in favour of opening the gates. Sabbatarians acknowledged publicly that they got little support from the secular press; and much opposition was made to them by some of the great dailies, as well as by the organs of aggressive liberalism.
Sunday after Sunday in May the gates were surrounded by immense crowds who waited there vainly, hour after hour. Many of them could evidently not come on other days; and the number was so large that the local directors, who had been elected by the shareholders, voted on May 16th for opening both gates and doors. This action was warmly approved by the leading citizens of Chicago at a public meeting; but Sabbatarians demanded that visitors be kept out by Federal bayonets. The National Commissioners, however, permitted the entrance of a hundred and fifty thousand people on the last Sunday of May. On Monday, the 29th, a judge of Hebrew race, in a State court, p.r.o.nounced the contract with Congress null and void, because the money had not been fully paid. He decided, accordingly, that there was no excuse for violating the Illinois law, which guaranteed the right of the citizens to visit on Sunday the park where the Exposition was held. This ensured the admission of visitors on June 4th, and for twenty of the remaining twenty-one Sundays. The Government buildings and many others, however, were closed; numerous exhibits, for instance, one of Bibles, were shrouded in white; machinery was not allowed to run; there were no cheap conveyances about the ground; and there was little opportunity to get food or drink. No wonder that the Sunday attendance was comparatively small; but there were one hundred and forty thousand paying visitors on October 22d and 29th.