This was an appealed case. The justice before whom it was
originally tried, imposed a fine on Glover, who appealed to the
Common Pleas. It was tried at Dedham on the 21st ult.
The complaint was that said Glover had been guilty of the crime
of Sabbath breaking, by delivering milk to his customers in
Boston on the 25th June last. The evidence to support the
complaint was from two gentlemen, Messrs. M'Clure and Vose. They
testified, that on the 25th June last they walked out in company
at 5, A.M. to see if they could discover any persons delivering
milk from carts--that they had not been long in pursuit, before
they descried a man, who descended from his vehicle, with a milk
vessel, and poured milk from it, which he delivered to a family
in their presence.--They approached him--enquired his name, and
from whence he came. He answered, from Quincy, and his name was
Glover.--They asked if he was in the habit of bringing milk to
Boston on the Sabbath. He told them he had been when the weather
was very hot. This was the evidence.
The complaint being for doing labour on the Sabbath in the county
of Norfolk, which was not labour of _necessity_ or _mercy_.
Churchill, for Defendant, in cross examining the witnesses,
enquired why they rose at so early an hour, on the 25th June, and
went to walk? They answered that it was partly to exercise, and
partly to perform their duty as professors of religion. They said
they had made up their minds that the moiety of the fines they
expected to receive, they would give to some charitable
institution.
The defence rested on two points--_First_, That no crime or act
was proved to have been committed in Norfolk county--_Secondly_,
If it should be proved that the act complained of had been
committed, it was an act of _necessity_ and _mercy_.
Counsellor Churchill entered with much spirit into the cause, and
evinced that he had bestowed upon it much thought and labour. He
gave an elaborate history of the Sabbatical Institution, and
stated the various opinions and laws as to the division of holy
time. He said that many families in Boston, both poor and rich,
depended on milk to feed their children--that a large proportion
of the people had no conveniences for keeping it from Saturday
night till Monday morning; that those who had no other way of
disposing of their milk, but by delivering it to those who would
suffer without it, performed an act embracing both _necessity_
and _mercy_; that those who sat up all night for the purpose of
being up before day, to fatten on those who were performing the
before-named charitable act, were like the Jews of old, who, when
the Saviour of mankind raised the dead and restored the blind to
sight, cried out, Crucify him! the Jews were but the M'Clures of
the present day.
The Judge (MITCHELL) charged the jury, that, if they had doubts
whether any offence were proved to have been committed, within
the county, they must acquit; or, if otherwise, and they were of
opinion that it was necessary to deal out milk on the Sabbath in
extreme hot weather, they must acquit. He stated that his
neighbours bought milk of him, and took it on Sunday as on other
days, and thought it no crime. He did not cast up the score,
receive the money and rub out the chalks on that day; but
apprehended that his conduct was virtually the same as that
charged upon the defendant. The defendant pursued his regular
course, and in doing so, he saved his property from waste, and
relieved many from disappointment and distress. The clergy ride
from town to town on the Sabbath, and the physicians ride without
molestation. The Sabbath is a day of rest--but in the exercise
of its duties, reason is to be regarded. Such worldly concerns as
can well be done on other days, ought not to be done on the
Sabbath--but if an ox fall into a pit, he must be taken out; that
if a clergyman has agreed to exchange with a brother, he may as
well ride a few miles on the Sabbath as to make a parade of going
on Saturday night.
The jury returned a verdict of--NOT GUILTY.
* * * * *
OBSERVANCE OF THE SABBATH. There has been lately, in some of the Boston
papers, a discussion of the question, whether the sailing of a steam boat
on the Sabbath is not a profanation.
We allude to this subject, at the present time, not for the purpose of
taking a side in the controversy, but merely to show in what manner this
day was formerly noticed in England, and our own country.
In England, during the reign of James the first, it was lawful for his
subjects to indulge in certain sports, such as dancing, archery, leaping,
vaulting, may-games, whitsun ales, and morris dances, on _Sunday_ after
evening service. But it was not lawful to have bear-baiting, bull-baiting,
interludes, and bowling.
In reign of Charles 1st a statute was passed, prohibiting a meeting out of
the parish, on the Lord's day, to enjoy these sports. A statute was
afterwards passed, prohibiting carriers and drovers from travelling, and
butchers from slaughtering or selling on this day. Afterwards all
tradesmen, artificers, workmen, laborers, or other persons, were prohibited
from exercising their callings on this day, excepting works of necessity
and charity, and dressing and selling meat in families, inns, cook-shops,
&c. selling milk before nine in the morning, and after four in the
afternoon, _selling mackerell_ before or after divine service, and
excepting also forty watermen, who may ply between Vauxhall and Limehouse.
By a statute of George 2d fish carriages were allowed to pass on Sundays,
whether laden or empty. During the reign of this King, the Court decided in
favor of a Baker, charged "with baking puddings and pies on the Lord's day
for dinner." The court considered the case as falling within the exceptions
of works of necessity and charity. "That it was better that one baker and
his men should stay at home, than many families and servants." Under George
3d Bakers were prohibited from making, baking or selling, excepting between
nine in the morning and one in the afternoon, and the person requiring the
baking carried or sent it to the place where it was to be baked. A law was
afterwards passed, permitting bakers to work, so far as may be necessary in
setting or superintending the sponge, to prepare the dough for the next
day's baking.
The provisions of the Colony and Province laws, on this subject, were
embodied in our State law of 1792, which prohibits every person from
keeping open his shop, ware-house, or work-house, on the Lord's day, &
from doing any labor or work, excepting that of necessity and charity, and
from attending concerts of music, dancing, &c. It likewise prohibits
travelling by drovers, teamsters, &c. visiting taverns, &c. during the time
included between the midnight preceding and the sun-setting of the Lord's
day. It likewise prohibits games, diversions, recreations on the land or
water, on the evening next preceding or succeeding the Lord's day. Under
the Colonial government, it was for some time made a question when the
Sabbath should be considered as commencing; but in 1645 it became a custom
to regard the evening of the last day of the week as the beginning of the
Sabbath. Several clergymen however considered Saturday afternoon as the
commencement of holy time.
The following extracts from our town records will show in what manner the
Sabbath was observed by our pious ancestors.
"1644.
"Ordered, that twoe be appointed every Lord's day, to walk forth
in the time of God's worshippe, to tak notice of such as either
lye about the meeting-house, without attending to the word or
ordinances, or that lye at home, or in the fields, without giving
good account thereof, and to tak the names of such persons, and
to present them to the magistrate, whereby they may be
accordingly proceeded against."
"1677.
"Whereas, there hath been several complaints of several persons
that doe profane the Sabbath, by unseasonable walking abroad even
at the time of publique service, &c.--the Selectmen have agreed
each of them to take their turns, with the constables to walk
abroad on the Lord's day, both forenoon and afternoone, morning
and evening, to redress such miscarriages as they shall at any
time meet withal."
But the following license granted by the selectmen in 1672, shows a much
greater liberality than is exhibited in these days.
"1672.
"Nathaniel Ingerson is allowed to sell beer and syder by the
quart, for the tyme whyle the farmers are a building of their
meeting-house, and _on Lord's days_ afterwards."
_Salem Observer_, July 14, 1827.
* * * * *
The interest, which is now felt in the subject of the Sabbath, renders the
following article, respecting the curiosity of Le Sage, worthy the
attention of the reader. It was extracted from a review of Le Sage,
published in Scotland about twelve years ago.
"At the time we are now speaking of the Sabbath was observed at
Geneva, with a gloom and austerity of which we, in Scotland can
probably form a more correct notion than the inhabitants of any
other country in Christendom. Le Sage felt some curiosity to know
whether the author of Nature still continued to impose on himself
the same law that originally marked the institution of the day of
rest. It would have puzzled the first philosopher in Europe to
think of any method by which this question could be brought to
the decision of experiment: but the ingenuity of our young
enquirer soon suggested an experiment.--He measured, with great
care, the increase of a plant day after day, in order to
discover whether it would cease growing on the Sabbath. The
result could not fail to solve the difficulty, and to convince
the young man, that though the work of Creation might terminate,
the work of Providence is never interrupted."
_Salem Observer_, 1829.
* * * * *
Sunday in Salem in 1838.