tion during the last fifty years have resembled in kind, if not in number, those of the mother country. The New Englanders, and the people of the Western States colonized chiefly by them, have generally been supporters of the Puritan view, while the Quakers of Pennsylvania have taken the lead in maintaining that the Lord's Day is not the Sabbath. On the Sabbatarian side, by far the most notable champion is the late Dr TIMOTHY DWIGHT, President of Yale College, New Haven, Connecticut, and a grandson of Jonathan Edwards: he devotes to the subject five sermons, Nos. 105-9, comprised in his Theology explained and defended (Middletown, Conn. 1818; 5 vols. 8vo: Reprinted at London in 1819, 1822, 1824, 1827, 1828, and 1840).* At Cambridge, Massachusetts, Dr RUFUS WYMAN of Roxbury had previously published, in 1816, Remarks on the Observance of the Lord's Day, as a Moral, a Positive, and a Civil Duty; in which year appeared also at Boston, Remarks on the Existing State of the Laws of Massachusetts respecting Violations of the Sabbath. On the other hand there were published at Philadelphia in 1822, Essays on the Observance of the Sabb at

* Dr Dwight is criticised by Fearon, pp. 183, 189; Domville, i. 127132; and Cox, pp. 185, 516, 530. Dr Hessey, in his Bampton Lectures, p. 246, characterises him as "an author who, whatever be his excellences, certainly wrote in a superficial manner, and without much acquaintance with antiquity, on the Lord's Day."

It deserves to be mentioned that an Act of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts "for the due observance of the Lord's Day," 8th March 1792, proceeds on a preamble of more than usual breadth of view :"Whereas the observance of the Lord's Day is highly promotive of the welfare of a community, by affording necessary seasons for relaxation from labour and the cares of business; for moral reflections and conversation on the duties of life, and the frequent errors of human conduct; for the public and private worship of the Maker, Governor, and Judge of the world; and for those acts of charity which support and adorn a Christian society: and whereas some thoughtless and irreligious persons, inattentive to the duties and benefits of the Lord's Day, profane the same by unnecessarily pursuing their worldly business and recreations on that day, to their own great damage as members of a Christian society; to the great disturbance of well-disposed persons; and to the great damage of the community, by producing dissipation of manners and immoralities of life: Be it therefore enacted," &c. This law not only prohibits work and travelling (except in cases of necessity or charity), together with recreations and sports, but enacts that "whereas the public worship of Almighty God is esteemed by Christians an essential part of the due observance of the Lord's Day, and requires the greatest decency and reverence for the due performance of the same," any person not prevented by weakness of body or other sufficient cause, who shall be absent for three months from public worship shall pay a fine of ten shillings. The obvious impracticability of enforcing such a clause makes one suspect that it was inserted to please the stricter party, by legislators who in reality believed they were going altogether out of their province in doing so.

Down to 1853 it was unlawful in Massachusetts to be present at any game, sport, play, or public diversion, except concerts of sacred music, on the evening of Saturday as well as of Sunday.

(12mo, pp. 48), intended, as the writer explains, "to discountenance the superstitious observance of what evidently never was enjoined by Divine authority as a Christian ordinance; but without affording, on the other hand, any encouragement to the libertine to spend that or any other portion of time in an idle, wanton, or licentious manner.'

Shortly before this time a wide-spread agitation against Sunday mails had arisen throughout the Union, and for the space of ten years petitions were presented in great abundance, but without effect, to the House of Representatives at Washington, praying for a legislative enactment to put an end to the transportation of mails, and the opening of post-offices, on the first day of the week. "These petitions," says Mr James Stuart in his Three Years in North America, " proceeded chiefly from the Presbyterians, who, it was observed, seemed to have forgotten that in the United States there is no national religion, and that the same principle which might lead to the prohibition of the transportation of mails on the Christian Sabbath might also extend the prohibition to the Jewish Sabbath." (Vol. ii. p. 16; 3d ed., Edin. 1833). At length a committee of the House was appointed to report on these petitions, Colonel R. M. Johnson of Kentucky being one of its members. Their Report, which was written by him, expressed opinions unfavourable to the petitioners, and received the approval of the House. From a copy of it given by Mr Stuart in the place referred to, the following passages are extracted:

"The memorialists regard the first day of the week as a day set apart by the Creator for religious exercises, and consider the transportation of the mail, and the opening of the post-offices on that day, the violation of a religious duty, and call for a suppression of the practice. Others, by counter-memorials, are known to entertain a different sentiment, believing that no one day of the week is holier than another. Others, holding the universality and immutability of the Jewish decalogue, believe in the sanctity of the seventh day of the week as a day of religious devotion; and, by their memorial now before the Committee, they also request that it may be set apart for religious purposes. Each has hitherto been left to the exercise of his own opinion; and it has been regarded as the proper business of government to protect all, and determine for none. But the attempt is now made to bring about a greater uniformity, at least in practice; and, as argument has failed, the government has been called upon to interpose its authority to settle the controversy.

Congress acts under a constitution of delegated and limited powers. The Committee look in vain to that instrument for a delegation of power, authorising this body to inquire and determine what part of time, or whether any, has been set apart by the Almighty for religious exercises. On the contrary, among the few prohibitions which it contains, is one that prohibits a religious test; and another, which declares that Congress shall pass no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free

exercise thereof. The Committee might here rest the argument upon the ground that the question referred to them does not come within the cognizance of Congress; but the perseverance and zeal with which the memorialists pursue their object seems to require further elucidation of the subject.

“The law, as it now exists, makes no distinction as to the days of the week, but is imperative that the post-masters shall attend at all reasonable hours in every day to perform the duties of their offices; and the post-master-general has given his instructions to all post-masters, that, at post-offices where the mail arrives on Sunday, the office is to be kept open one hour or more after the arrival and assorting of the mail; but, in case that would interfere with the hours of public worship, the office is to be kept open for one hour after the usual time of dissolving the meeting. This liberal construction of the law does not satisfy the memorialists. But the Committee believe that there is not just ground of complaint, unless it be conceded that they have a controlling power over the consciences of others. If Congress shall, by the authority of the law, sanction the measure recommended, it would constitute a legislative decision of a religious controversy, in which even Christians themselves are at issue. However suited such a decision may be to an ecclesiastical council, it is incompatible with a republican legislature, which is purely for political, and not religious, purposes.

"Why have the petitioners confined their prayer to the mails? Why have they not requested that the government be required to suspend all its executive functions on that day? Why do they not require us to exact that our ships shall not sail,-that our armies shall not march,-that officers of justice shall not seize the suspected, or guard the convicted? They seem to forget that government is as necessary on Sunday as on any other day of the week. It is the government, ever active in its functions, which enables us all, even the petitioners, to worship in our churches in peace. Our government furnishes very few blessings like our mails. They bear, from the centre of our republic to its distant extremes, the acts of our legislative bodies, the decisions of the justiciary, and the orders of the executive. Their speed is often essential to the defence of the country, the suppression of crime, and the dearest interests of the people. Were they suppressed one day of the week, their absence must often be supplied by public expresses, and, besides, while the mail-bags might rest, the mailcoaches would pursue their journey with the passengers.

It is the duty of this government to affirm to all,-to Jew or Gentile,-Pagan or Christian,-the protection and the advantages of our benignant institutions on Sunday, as well as every other day of the week. Although this government will not convert itself into an ecclesiastical tribunal, it will practise upon the maxim laid down by the Founder of Christianity, that it is lawful to do good on the Sabbath day. If the Almighty had set apart the first day of the week as time which man is bound to keep holy, and devote

exclusively to his worship, would it not be more congenial to the prospects of Christians to appeal exclusively to the great Lawgiver of the universe to aid them in making men better,-in correcting their practices by purifying their hearts? Government will protect them in their efforts. When they shall so have instructed the public mind, and awakened the consciences of individuals as to make them believe that it is a violation of God's law to carry the mail, open post-offices, or receive letters on Sunday, the evil of which they complain will cease of itself, without any exertions of the strong arm of civil power."

These views were advocated in The Christian Examiner for May 1829 (vol. vi. p. 226), in an anonymous article known to have been written by the Rev. ORVILLE DEWEY; and more strongly in The American Quarterly Review for September 1830 (vol. viii. p. 175). On the same side came forth a pamphlet entitled Sunday Mails; or Inquiries into the origin, institution, and proper mode of observance of the first day of the week, or Christian Sabbath (Philad. 1830; 8vo, pp. 36). This contains a reprint, in very close type, of Higgins's Hora Sabbaticæ (above, p. 332); part of the review of Bishop Kaye's Justin Martyr in The British Critic for January 1830 (above, p. 333); an Exposition of the Fourth Commandment, by Dr WILLIAM WHITE, Bishop of Pennsylvania, in his Lectures on the Catechism;* and extracts from Paley and others. On the other hand, the Presbyterians in many places formed themselves into societies for promoting the observance of the Christian Sabbath, held numerous "conventions" with the same object, reprinted the volumes of Mr Macbeth and Bishop Wilson (above, pp. 330, 335), and produced, themselves, a series of works, of which the following are some:-Essays on the Origin, Perpetuity, Change, and proper Observance of the Sabbath, by HEMAN HUMPHREY, D.D., President of Amherst College, Massachusetts (New York, 1829; 24mo, pp. 107).-Three Sermons on the Obligations, Duties, and Blessings of the Sabbath: To which are added, Remarks on the Report made to the House of Representatives of the United States, May 1830, on Sabbath Mails; by CHARLES JENKINS, Pastor of the Third Congregational Church, Portland, Maine (Portland, 1830; 18mo, pp. 116).-The North American Review, No. 68; article on Sunday Mails (Boston, 1830).—The Princeton Review, 1831; article on Sabbath Observance, in reply to that on Sunday Mails in The American Quarterly Review. This article is reprinted in the first series of Theological Essays from the Princeton Review, of which there is an American edition, and also one published at Edinburgh in 1856, royal 8vo. The matters chiefly discussed are the mean

*Dr Hessey, in his Bampton Lectures, p. 414, observes that Bishop White, in the Lectures above mentioned, p. 63, seq. "quite sees the difficulties in the way of allowing a patriarchal Sabbath. His testimony is useful, as showing that Dr Dwight's view is not universal in America. Bishop Seabury, of Connecticut, appears to agree very much with Dr Dwight. See his Discourses on various Subjects, Disc. vii. Obs. on History of the Sabbath, vol. i. p. 162, 1815."

ing of the phrase translated "keep holy" in the Fourth Commandment, the obligation of Christians to observe the Sabbath, and the powers of Congress in relation to that institution.-A Manual of the Christian Sabbath, by JOHN HOLMES AGNEW, Professor of Languages, Washington College, Washington, Pennsylvania; with an Introductory Essay by the Rev. S. MILLER, D.D. (Philad. 1832; 18mo, pp. 198).—Addresses on the Christian Sabbath, by the Rev. DANIEL O. MORTON (Windsor, Vermont, 1833; 12mo, pp. 132).—The Child's Book on the Sabbath, by the Rev. HORACE HOOKER (New York, 1835; 18mo, pp. 201).—A Book for the Sabbath, by J. B. WATERBURY (Andover, Mass., 1840; pp. 230); reprinted at London by the Religious Tract Society.-The Sabbath, by HENRY A. WORCESTER (Boston, 1840; 12mo, pp. 126).—The Sabbath: A Brief History of Laws, Petitions, Remonstrances and Reports, with Facts and Arguments, relating to the Christian Sabbath, by HARMON KINGSBURY (New York, 1840: post 8vo, pp. 391). Contents: I. History of Laws, Divine and Human, relating to the Sabbath: Law of God; Laws of States and Territories; Laws of Congress. II. Petitions and Remonstrances against Sunday Mails, accompanied with Committees' Reports, &c. (including Report by the Hon. Mr M'Creery, a member of Colonel Johnson's committee, in reply to the Report of the majority). Character and objects of these Memorialists. Memorials and Petitions in favour of Sunday Mails. Harmon Kingsbury's Petition against them, and Appendix. Executive Committee of the American Bethel Society. Congressional Sessions on Sunday. Governor Ellsworth. History of the Sabbath Union. III. Expediency of fearless and united effort. IV. Necessity for the Sabbath. V. Objections answered: 1. That there is no authority for the Sabbath; 2. That only the Jews are bound; 3. That the Ten Commandments have been abrogated; 4. That the New Testament does not require a Sabbath; 5. That there is no evidence that the day was changed; 6. That Deut. v. is opposed to Exod. xx.; 7. That this nation acknowledges no religion; 8. That works of public utility may be done on Sundays; 9. That Greece and Rome were as prosperous without as with religion; 10. That the Quakers are as moral without as with a Sabbath; 11. That literature is sufficient to secure morality; 12. That special judgments are not inflicted for national sins; 13. That Christians wish to unite Church and State; 14. That the framers of our government were sceptical; 15. That such sentiments will provoke persecution. VI. Appeal in behalf of the Sabbath. VII. Address to business men. VIII. Review of General Assembly's Report. IX. Address to Christians, patriots, and philanthropists.-The Christian Examiner for March 1841, vol. xxx. p. 92; article on the Sabbath, by the Rev. A. P. PEABODY (Boston, 1841).—An Argument for the Perpetuity of the Sabbath, by the Rev. A. A. PHELPS (Boston, 1841; 12mo, pp. 164).—Proceedings of the Sabbath Convention held at the City of Rochester, July 20th and 21st, 1842 (Rochester [N. Y.], 1842).—A Mother's Plea for the Sabbath; in a Series of VOL. II. 2 D