Page:The American Cyclopædia (1879) Volume X.djvu/643

LORD'S DAY 637 Earties being violators of the law and in equal wilt, the law leaves them to suffer the conse- quences of their acts, and will not interfere to help either against the other. But other courts have decided that as the Sunday contract is by the statute made wholly void, neither party can make use of it as a defence to a suit brought to recover money paid or property delivered under it. The question as to what is covered by the exception of works of ne- cessity or charity has frequently been raised. Thus, when a defect in a highway endangered passengers, it was held in Massachusetts to be not only the right but the duty of the proper authorities to repair it on that day. In Pennsylvania, where a son hired a carriage to visit his father, it was declared to be a legal contract, there being no evidence that it was a mere "excursion of pleasure." And in Alabama it was held that a creditor might lawfully enter into a contract with his debt- or on Sunday, if he could satisfy a jury that it was necessary to do this on that day in order to save his debt or obtain indemnity. The question was once made whether marriage could lawfully be contracted or solemnized on the Lord's day, but the opinion appears to be universal that the Sunday laws have no appli- cation to either the contract or the ceremony. But it. now appears to be settled law, that there is no class of contracts and no acts of a business character which of themselves, and by their own nature, are works of necessity or charity ; while any act may be made so by cir- cumstances. Thus, even the solemn act of making a will is not one which may lawfully be made on Sunday, unless the circumstances of the case give to the execution of that will at that time the character of a work of necessity or charity ; while, as we have seen, even a bar- gain of business may be justified and made valid by necessity. In relation to the degree or kind of necessity required to justify an act, a consid- erable change in public opinion has unquestion- ably taken place. But not many years since prosecutions we're maintained for slaughtering animals for food in weather so hot, that if killed on Saturday the meat would be spoiled on Monday ; but now such things are never heard of. On one point, which has come before va- rious courts, there is as yet no settled law. If A makes a bargain with B on Sunday in viola- tion of law, and by an abuse of this bargain in- flicts an injury on B, has B no remedy ? Thus, if A hires B's horse for a specific journey on Sunday, B cannot recover the hire of the horse ; but if A goes four times as far and rides the horse to death, has B still no remedy ? So it has been held in some states, while in others the doctrine is, that while B acquires no rights under the contract, he has all his rights to re-- cover damages for the wrong done to him. This seems the better doctrine, and is in con- formity with the established principle that the Sunday laws are intended to prohibit and do prohibit only contracts and the transaction of business on that day, but are not intended to permit a man to commit with impunity on that day a wrong which, if committed on any other day, would expose him to punishment, or give the injured party a claim for damages. The extent of the Lord's day is not quite certain. Some of our statutes define it, but not all. In Connecticut it has been defined by the courts as extending only from daybreak to the clo- sing of day light 'on the Sunday. Generally in New England it is from sunset on Saturday to sunset on Sunday ; but for many purposes, and probably in most of the states for all purposes, it begins only at midnight between Saturday and Sunday and ends with the next midnight. Some of the state statutes contain exceptions, providing that the Sunday laws shall not apply to those who conscientiously observe Saturday as the sabbath, if they do not disturb others in their observance of Sunday. Formerly, a question was raised, not before the courts, but before congress, which pro- duced much excitement, and almost rose to the dignity of a political question, as to the running of the mails on Sunday. But it was practically settled by the system which now prevails through the country, by which the short and local mails do not run on Sunday, nor are the post offices generally open for delivery; but the long mails continue on their route, and the largest post offices are open a part of the day. Besides the Sunday laws above referred to, special regulations are made for the preserva- tion of order and quiet on the Lord's day, either by general statutes or by municipal reg- ulation. By these it is common to require the closing of the customary places of amuse- ment on that day, and also the places where spirituous or intoxicating liquors are kept for sale, and public sports, games, and plays are prohibited under penalties. As these regula- tions require observances more or less opposed to the practices which prevail in continental Europe, a strong disposition has been mani- fested, especially by the immigrant population, to contest them as unwarranted restraints upon liberty, and as interfering with the religious freedom which it is assumed is guaranteed by both federal and state constitutions. It is not to be denied that the right to require the ob- servance of a day as sacred on religious grounds, while a large portion of the political commu- nity does not assent to its sacred character, is not one to be conceded without question, nor one easily defended under constitutions which recognize religious equality, and under which therefore it would seem to be incompetent to compel any one to submit to observances on the sole ground that the religion of others re- quired them. But while no respectable court has denied the competency of the legislative requirements for the observance of the first day of the week, it has not generally been deemed necessary to place their decisions on the ground of the sacred character of the day, inasmuch as, on other and purely secular