HOW SUNDAY LAWS ARE ENFORCED.

WE here present an account of a sufficient number and variety of cases in the history of the Arkansas Sunday crusade to show that the whole proceeding from beginning to end, was only an exhibition of the persecuting spirit.

FIRST CASE.

Elder J. W. Scoles.

Elder J. W. Scoles, a Seventh-day Adventist minister, had gone from Michigan to Arkansas in June, 1884, to assist in holding some meetings at Springdale, Washington county. As the result of the meetings, quite a number of persons adopted the faith of that body, and practiced accordingly. A church was organized in that place early in 1885, and the erection of a meeting-house was begun at once. In addition to his subscription to the enterprise, Elder Scoles agreed to paint the house when it should be ready. Further than this, we have the words of Elder Scoles himself, as follows: — “I volunteered to do the painting as my share of the work, in addition to my subscription. I worked away at the church at odd times, sometimes a half day and sometimes more, as I could spare the time. The last Sunday in April, 1885, in order to finish the work so I could be free to go out for the summer’s labor with a tent, and expecting to go the next day twenty miles, I went over to the church, and finished up a small strip of painting on the south side of the house, clear out of sight of all public roads; and here I quietly worked away for perhaps two hours, in which time I finished it, and then went home. It was for this offense that I was indicted.”

At the fall term of the Circuit Court held at Fayetteville, Mr. J. A.

Armstrong, of Springdale, was summoned before the Grand Jury. He was asked if he knew of any violations of the Sunday law. He said he did.

Grand Jury. — “Who are they?”

Armstrong . — “The ‘Frisco Railroad is running trains every Sunday.”

G. J. — “Do you know of any others?”

A. — “Yes; the hotels of this place are open and do a full run of business on Sunday, as on other days.”

G.J. — “Do you know of any others?”

A. — “Yes, sir ; the drug stores and barber shops all keep open, and do business every Sunday.”

G. J. — “Do you know of any others?”

A. — “Yes; the livery-stables do more business on Sunday than on any other day of the week.”

After several repetitions of the same form of question and answer, in relation to other lines of business, this question was reached: — G. J. — “Do you know of any Seventh-day Adventists who ever work on Sunday?”

A. — “Yes, sir.”

After getting from the witness the names of his brethren, indictments were found against five persons, all of whom were Seventh-day Adventists.

Elder Scoles was one of the five. The indictment read as follows: — “STATE OF ARKANSAS vs. Indictment. J. W. SCOLES. “The Grand Jury of Washington county, in the name and by the authority of the State of Arkansas, accuse J. W. Scoles of the crime of Sabbath-breaking, committed as follows; viz., the said J. W.

Scoles, on Sunday, the 26th day of April, 1885, in the county and State aforesaid, did unlawfully perform labor other than customary household duties of daily comfort, necessity, or charity, against the peace and dignity of the State of Arkansas. “J. P. HENDERSON , Prox. Att’y.”

Mr. Scoles was convicted. An appeal was taken to the Supreme Court of the State. October 30, 1886, the judgment of the Circuit Court was affirmed by the Supreme Court. Almost a score of cases essentially the same as the case of Elder Scoles, were held over in the different Circuit Courts of the State, awaiting the decision of the Supreme Court in his case.

The history of these cases and others is as follows: — SECOND CASE.

Allen Meeks , Star of the West, Ark.

Mr. Meeks had been a resident of Arkansas since 1856, with exception of one year. He had held the office of Justice of the Peace for a number of years both before and after the war. When he became a Seventh-day Adventist, he refused to hold the office longer, because its duties conflicted with his observance of the Sabbath.

Mr. Meeks was indicted at the July term of the Circuit Court, 1885, for Sabbath-breaking. He was arrested in November, 1885, and held under bonds of $500 for his appearance in January. The offense for which he was indicted, was planting potatoes on Sunday — the third Sunday in March, 1885. The work was done near Mr. Meeks’s own house, and not nearer than two and a half miles to any public road or any place of public worship.

On the day referred to, Mr. La Fever and his wife went to visit Mr. Meeks at his home, and found Mr. Meeks planting potatoes. Mr. Meeks quit his work, and spent the rest of the day visiting with Mr. La Fever. La Fever afterward reported Mr. Meeks to the Grand Jury; and as the consequence, Mr. Meeks was indicted as stated. The fourth Monday in January, Meeks appeared before Judge Herne. His case was laid over to await the decision of the Supreme Court in the Scoles case.

THIRD CASE.

Joe Mc Coy, Magnet, Cove, Ark.

Mr. McCoy moved from Louisville, Ky., to Arkansas, in 1873. He served as constable seven years, and two terms as Justice of the Peace, in Hot Spring county. In 1884, he became a Seventh-day Adventist. At the August, 1885, term of the Circuit Court in Hot Spring county, he was indicted for Sabbath-breaking, on the voluntary evidence of a Mr. Thomas Garrett. The particular offense with which he was charged, was plowing on Sunday. The witness was a Mr. Weatherford, a member of the Methodist Church. The work was done half a mile from any public road, and entirely away from any place of public worship.

Mr. Weatherford went into the field where Mr. McCoy was plowing, and spent several hours with him, walking around as he plowed. He was summoned as a witness in the case, by the Grand Jury. In September, 1885, Mr. McCoy was arrested, and held under bonds for his appearance. When he appeared at the February term of the court, his case, with others, was laid over to await the decision of the Supreme Court.

Mr. McCoy owned a small farm and team, and forseeing, as he thought, that they would soon be consumed in paying fines and costs, he could not in duty to his family and in harmony with his conscientious convictions of right and duty, allow all his property to go in that way; neither could he afford to lose a whole day every week. He therefore decided to abandon his farm, leaving it to satisfy the demands of the law against him in this case, and leave that country, hoping by this means to save at least his team and personal property. By the advice of Elder Dan T. Jones, and at his earnest request, Mr. Mc Coy returned to Hot Spring county, at the time for his appearance, February, 1887, and confessed judgment under the indictment. A portion of the cost was remitted, and the fine and a portion of the cost were paid by Elder Jones, and Mr. Mc Coy was released.

Mr. Mc Coy said to Elder Jones, with tears in his eyes, that while he was reckless and wicked, he was not molested; but as soon as he turned and tried to live a religious life, he was indicted and fined for it.

FOURTH CASE.

J. L. Shockey, Malvern, Ark.

Mr. J. L. Shockey was a Seventh-day Adventist who moved from Ohio in 1884, and settled on a piece of railroad land six miles north of Malvern, the county seat of Hot Spring county, Ark.

About the middle of April, 1885, Mr. Shockey was plowing in his field on Sunday, one and three quarter miles from any place of public worship, and entirely out of sight of any place of worship. He was observed by D. B.

Sims and C. B. Fitzhugh. He was reported to the Grand Jury by Anthony Wallace, a member of the Baptist Church. Sims and Fitzhugh were summoned as witnesses by the Grand Jury. Mr. Sims was hunting stock when he saw Mr. Shockey at work on Sunday. The Grand Jury found a true bill. Mr. Shockey was arrested September 14, 1885, and gave bond to the amount of $110 for his appearance at the February term of the Circuit Court in the Seventh Judicial District, held at Malvern. On the 1st day of February, 1886, Mr. Shockey appeared before Judge J. B. Wood. In the meantime, the Scoles case had been appealed to the Supreme Court; and at the request of the judge, the prosecuting attorney consented to continue the case, to await the decision of the Supreme Court.

FIFTH CASE.

James M. Pool.

James M. Pool, a Seventh day Adventist, was indicted for Sabbathbreaking at the fall term of the Circuit Court held at Fayetteville, beginning the first Monday in September, 1885.

He waived his right to jury trial. The only witness in the case was J. W.

Cooper. Cooper was a member of the Presbyterian Church, and professed sanctification. He went to Pool’s house on Sunday morning, to buy some tobacco, and found Pool hoeing in his garden, he so testified before the court, Judge Pittman presiding. The judge sustained the indictment, pronounced Pool guilty, and fined him one dollar and costs, amounting to $30.90.

SIXTH CASE.

James A. Armstrong , Springdale, Ark.

Mr. J. A. Armstrong moved from Warren county, Ind., to Springdale, Ark., in 1878. In September, 1884, he joined the Seventh-day Adventist church at Springdale. November, 1885, he was indicted by the Grand Jury for Sabbath-breaking. On the 13th of February, 1886, he was arrested by William Holcomb, deputy-sheriff of Washington county, and was held under bonds of $250 for his appearance at the May term of the Circuit Court. The particular offense upon which the charge of Sabbath-breaking was based, was digging potatoes in his field on Sunday. Millard Courtney was the prosecuting witness. Mr. Armstrong had a contract for building the school-house at Springdale. Mr. Courtney, tract for putting the tin roof on the school-house. From the house they went into the field, where Mr.

Armstrong was digging potatoes. There the business was all talked over, and the contract was secured for putting on the tin roof. Then this same Courtney became the prosecuting witness against Mr. Armstrong of Sabbath-breaking.

On the first Monday in May, Mr. Armstrong appeared before Judge Pittman, Circuit Judge of the Fourth Judicial District, at Fayetteville; and, waiving his right to jury trial, submitted his case to the court for decision.

Judge Pittman sustained the indictment. Fine and costs, amounting to $26.50, were paid, Mr. Armstrong was released.

SEVENTH CASE.

William L. Gentry.

Mr. Gentry had been a citizen of Arkansas since 1849. He had served as Justice of the Peace for eight years, and then refused to accept the office longer. He had served as Associate-Justice of the County Court for two years. He had been a Seventh day Adventist since 1877, — a member of the Seventh-day Adventist church at Star of the West, Pike county, Ark.

At the January term of the Circuit Court, in 1886, he was indicted by the Grand Jury for Sabbath breaking,the particular offense being his plowing on his own farm, July 2, 1886. He was arrested by the deputy-sheriff, and held under $500 bonds for his appearance at the July term of the Circuit Court. On the fourth Monday in July, Mr. Gentry appeared before Judge Herne, of the Eighth Judicial District. At his request, his case was continued, to await the decision of the Supreme Court in the Scoles case.

In the month of January, 1887, his case was called for trial, as the Supreme Court had sustained the decision of the Circuit Court in the Scoles case.

Mr. Gentry confessed judgment, but did not have the money to pay the fine and costs. Judge Herne ordered the defendant kept in custody until the fine and costs were paid. Mr. Gentry, having the confidence of the sheriff, was allowed the freedom of the town. On the last day of court, the sheriff notified him that unless the fine and costs were paid, he would “hire him out.” The laws of Arkansas provide that in cases where the parties fail to satisfy the fines imposed, they shall be put up by the sheriff, and sold to the highest bidder, the bids being for the amount of wages to be paid per day. They are then worked under the same rules and regulations as convicts in the penitentiaries. Mr. Gentry was sixty-five years old, and not wishing to submit to such barbarous treatment, paid two dollars, all the money he had, and gave his note for the remaining amount, $26.80.

EIGHTH CASE.

Ples. A. Pannell, Star of the West, Ark.

Mr. Pannell, a Seventh-day Adventist, was indicated by the Grand Jury in January, 1886, for Sabbath-breaking, the particular offense charged being his plowing in his field on Sunday. He was arrested, and held under bonds of $250 for his appearance. At his request, his case was laid over to await the decision of the Supreme Court in the Scoles case. At the January term, in 1887, that case having been decided adversely, he appeared, and confessed judgment. His fine and costs amounted to $26.80; and not being able to pay, he was kept in jail four days, and then informed that unless some satisfactory arrangements were made, he would be sold, and would have to work out his fine and costs at seventy-five cents a day, the law not allowing the sheriff in such cases to accept less than that amount. Mr.

Pannell paid two dollars in money, gave his note for $26.80, and was released.

NINTH CASE.

J. L. James, Star of the West, Ark.

Mr. James, a Seventh day Adventist, was indicted by the Grand Jury in January, 1886, for Sabbath-breaking. The particular offense was doing carpenter work on Sunday. The indictment was founded on the testimony of Mr. Powers, a minister of the Missionary Baptist Church. Mr. James was working on a house for a widow, near the Hot Springs Railroad. The work was done without any expectation of receiving payment, and wholly as a charitable act for the poor widow, who was a member of the Methodist Church. Mr. James worked in the rain to do it, because the widow was about to be thrown out of the house in which she lived, and had no place to shelter herself and family. Powers, the informer, lived about six hundred yards from where the work was done, and on that very Sunday had carried wood from within seven rods of where Mr. James was at work, and chopped up the wood in sight of Mr. James.

Mr. James was arrested, and gave the usual bond for his appearance in court. He appeared before Judge Wood at the January term of the Circuit Court of 1886. His case, with others, was laid over to await the decision of the Supreme Court in the Scoles case. The first Monday in February, 1887, his case was called for trial. As the Supreme Court had decided against Scoles, James confessed judgment; the regular fine and costs were assessed, and were paid by Elder Dan T. Jones, as the agent of Mr. James’s brethren at large.

TENTH CASE.

Allen Meeks, the second time.

At the January term in 1886, Mr. Meeks was indicted the second time. July 13, he was arrested on a bench warrant in the hands of William La Fever.

Meeks gave bonds for his appearance at the July term of court; the offense, fixing his wagon-brake on Sunday. He was reported to the Grand Jury by Riley Warren. Warren had gone to Meeks’s house on the Sunday referred to in the indictment, to see Mr. Meeks about hiring a teacher for their public school, as both of them were members of the school board of their district. In the course of their conversation, Mr. Meeks incidentally mentioned having mended his wagon-brake that morning. This was reported to the Grand Jury by Warren, and the indictment followed.

At the July term, this, with other cases mentioned, was held over to await the decision of the Supreme Court in the Scoles case.

At the January term in 1887, Meeks’s case was called. He confessed judgment; the usual fine and costs were assessed, paid by Meeks, and he was released.

ELEVENTH CASE.

John A. Meeks, Star of the West, Ark.

John A. Meeks, aged fourteen years, son of Edward L. Meeks, was indicted by the Grand Jury at the January term of the Circuit Court of 1886, for Sabbath-breaking. The offense was, shooting squirrels on Sunday. The place where the squirrels were shot was in a mountainous district entirely away from any public road, or any place of public worship.

He was reported by a Mr. M. Reeves. The sons of Mr. Reeves were hauling wood with a team on that same Sunday, and were present with the Meeks boy in the woods, and scared the squirrels around the trees for the Meeks boy to shoot. When the sport was over, the Meeks boy divided the game with the Reeves boys.

Then the father of the Reeves boys reported the Meeks boy, and he was indicted. His case was held over to await the decision of the Supreme Court in the Scoles case. At the January term in 1887, the boy confessed judgment, and was fined $5 and costs, and $3 county tax was assessed, amounting in all to $22 The fine was paid, and the boy was released.

TWELFTH CASE.

John Neusch , Magnet Cove Ark.

Mr. Neusch is a fruit-raiser. On Sunday, June 21, 1885, he was gathering early peaches which were over-ripe, and were in danger of spoiling. He was half a mile from any public road, and some distance from any place of public worship, and not in sight of either. The orchard was on the top of a mountain, and Mr. Neusch was not seen by any one except a brother and a Mr. Hudspeth. Mr. Hudspeth was with Mr. Neusch about one hour. He went to see him in behalf of a young man who had been working for him, and who, with others, had been caught stealing peaches from Mr. Neusch’s orchard on the preceding Sunday. Mr. Hudspeth offered Mr. Neusch pay for the peaches, if he would not report the young man. Mr. Neusch both refused to accept the money, and promised to say nothing about the offense, on condition that it should not be repeated.

February, 1886, Mr. Neusch was indicted for this offense of working on Sunday, as related. Neusch, having been advised that there was most probably an indictment filed against him, went to the county clerk, and made inquiry in regard to the matter. The clerk handed him a writ for his arrest, and Neusch took it to the sheriff, and gave bond for his appearance at court. In August, his case was laid over to await the decision of the Supreme Court in the Scoles case. As soon as that decision had been rendered, Neusch went and confessed judgment, and paid the fine and costs, amounting to $25. Mr. Neusch was an observer of the seventh day.

THIRTEENTH CASE.

F.N Elmore. Springdale, Ark.

Mr. F. N. Elmore was indicted at the March term of the Circuit Court of 1886, on the charge of Sabbath-breaking. The indictment charged him with violating the Sunday laws by working on Sunday, November 1, 1885. Mr.

Elmore was arrested in April, 1886, by Deputy-Sheriff Wm. Holcomb, and was held in $250 bail for his appearance in the May term of the Circuit Court. On the 4th of May, Mr. Elmore appeared before Judge Pittman, and waiving his right to jury trial, submitted his case to the court for decision.

Millard Courtney was the only witness examined. He testified that he had seen Mr. Elmore digging potatoes on the day above referred to, on the premises of Mr. J. A. Armstrong. This work was done by Elmore on the day when courtney took his friend to Armstrong to secure the contract for putting the tin roofing on the school-house; and that is how Courtney knew Elmore had worked on that day. Elmore was convicted. The fine and costs were $28.95. which was paid, and he was released. Mr. Elmore was a Seventh-day Adventist.

FOURTEENTH CASE.

William H. Fritz, Hindsville, Madison Co., Ark.

Mr. Fritz was indicted at the April term of the Circuit Court in 1886, for Sabbath-breaking, and held under $250 bonds for his appearance at the September term, at Huntsville. Mr. Fritz is a wood-workman, and the offense charged was for working in the shop on Sunday. The shop was in the country, and two hundred yards from the public road. The indictment was sustained. The defendant was fined one dollar and costs, amounting to $28. Mr. Fritz was a Seventh-day Adventist.

FIFTEENTH CASE.

Z. Swearingen.

Mr. Z. Swearingen was a member of the church of Seventh-day Adventists, who went from Michigan to Arkansas in 1879, and settled on a small farm eleven miles south of Bentonville, the county seat of Benton county. He and his son Franz, aged seventeen years, were indicted by the Grand Jury at the April term of the Circuit Court of 1886, upon the charge of Sabbathbreaking by “performing labor other than customary household duties of daily comfort, necessity, or charity, against the peace and dignity of the State of Arkansas, on February 14, 1885,” the same day being Sunday.

Both were arrested by F.P Galbraith, sheriff of Benton county, in May, 1886, and were put under bond of $250 for their appearance at the fall term of Circuit Court. September 27, 1886, the defendants appeared before Judge Pittman, of the Fourth Judicial District.

John G. Cowen, witness for the State, testified that he saw Mr. Swearingen and his son hauling rails on Sunday, the 14th day of February, 1885, as he returned from the funeral of Mrs. Boggett. Hon. J. W. Walker, attorney for the defendants, explained to the jury that the defendants conscientiously observed the seventh day of the week as the Sabbath, in accordance with the faith and practice of the church of which they were members. The prosecuting attorney stated to the jury that it was “one of those Advent cases.” The jury found the defendants guilty, as charged in the indictment.

As Mr. Swearingen did not have the money to pay the fine and costs for himself and son, amounting to $34.20, they were sent to jail until the money should be secured.

They were put in jail October 1, 1886. On the 13th of the same month, the sheriff levied on, and took possession of, a horse belonging to Mr.

Swearingen. The horse sold at sheriff’s sale, the 25th of the same month, for $26.50, leaving a balance against Mr. Swearingen of $7.70; yet both he and his son were released the same day that the horse was sold. On the 15th day of December, the sheriff appeared again on the premises of Mr.

Swearingen, and presented a bill for $28.95. Of this sum, $21.25 was for the board of Mr. Swearingen and son while in jail, and $7.70, balance on the fine. Mr. Swearingen had no money to pay the bill. The sheriff levied on his mare, harness, wagon, and cow and calf. Before the day of the sale, however, Mr. Swearingen’s brethren raised the money by donations, paid the bill, and secured the release of his property. One thing about this case is to be noted particularly: The witness upon whose testimony these people were convicted, said that he saw them hauling rails on Sunday, the 14th day of February, as he returned from the funeral of Mrs. Boggett. Now, the act under which this prosecution was carried on, became a law March 3, and was approved by the Governor, March 7. Consequently, they were convicted for work done seventeen days before the act was passed under which they were convicted.

SIXTEENTH CASE.

I. L. Benson.

Mr. Benson was not at that time a member of any church, made no pretensions to religious faith, and did not observe any day. He had the contract for painting the railroad bridge across the Arkansas River at Van Buren, Ark. He worked a set of hands on the bridge all days of the week, Sundays included. In May, 1886, Mr. Benson and one of his men were arrested on the charge of Sabbath-breaking. They were taken to Fort Smith, and arraigned before a Justice of the Peace. The Justice did not put them through any form of trial, not even to ask them whether they were guilty or not guilty, but read a section of the law to them, and told them he would make the fine as light as possible, amounting, with costs, to $4.75 each. They refused to pay the fines, and were placed in custody of the sheriff. The sheriff gave them the freedom of the place, only requiring them to appear at the Justice’s office at a certain hour. Mr. Benson telegraphed to the general manager of the railroad in regard to the matter. The general manager telegraphed to his attorney in that city, to attend to the cases.

Mr. Benson and his men appeared before the Justice for a hearing in their cases. It was granted, with some reluctance. The attorney, Mr. Bryolair, told the Justice it was a shame to arrest men for working on the bridge at the risk of their lives to support their families, when the public work in their own town was principally done on Sunday. A hearing was granted, and the trial was set for the next day.

They were not placed under any bonds at all, but were allowed to go on their own recognizance. The following day, a jury was impaneled, and the trial begun. The deputy-sheriff was the leading witness, and swore positively that he saw them at work on Sunday. The jury brought in a verdict to the effect that they had “agreed to disagree.” This was on Wednesday. The following Monday was set for a new trial. No bond was even at this time required. The defendants appeared at the time appointed, and pleaded not guilty. The justice, after giving them a brief lecture, dismissed the case.

Since that time Mr. Benson has become a Seventh-day Adventist. He would not have fared so easily had he been a Seventh-day Adventist when he was indicted.

SEVENTEENTH CASE.

James A. Armstrong, the second time.

On the 9th of July, 1886, Mr. Armstrong was arrested the second time, by A. M. Dritt, marshal of Springdale, for working on Sunday, June 27, and taken before the mayor, S.L. Staples. When brought before the mayor, Mr.

Armstrong called for the affidavit on which the writ was issued. The mayor stated that he himself had seen Mr. Armstrong at work in his garden on Sunday, and that Mr. A. J. Vaughn had called his attention to Armstrong while he was at work, and had said, “Now, see that you do your duty.”

This made an affidavit unnecessary. The case was tried before the mayor, acting as Justice of the Peace. A. J. Vaughn was the first witness.

Justice of the Peace . — “What do you know about Mr. Armstrong’s working on Sunday, June 27?”

Vaughn . “I did not see Armstrong at all that day; I only heard he was at work.”

J. I. Gladden was the next witness called.

Justice . — “What do you know about Mr. Armstrong’s working on Sunday, June 27?”

Gladden . — “While at the depot, I saw some one at work hoeing in Mr. Armstrong’s garden; but I do not know for certain who it was.”

Millard Courtney was the next witness called.

Justice . — “Tell us what you know about Mr. Armstrong’s working on the Sunday in question?”

Courtney . — “While on the platform of the depot, I saw some one hoeing in Mr. Armstrong’s garden. I am not positive who it was.”

Having failed to prove anything from the witnesses regularly summoned, the case was “rested,” while the marshal was sent out to find somebody else. He brought in Gideon Bowman, who was then questioned as follows: — Justice . — “Do you know anything about Mr. Armstrong’s doing work other than customary household duties of daily necessity, comfort, or charity on the Christian Sabbath, June 27?”

Bowman. — “I do.”

J. — “State what you saw.”

B. — “As I came into town, having been out east, in passing Mr.

Armstrong’s house, I saw him hoeing in the garden.”

J. — “Did you recognize this person to be J. A. Armstrong?”

B. — “I did.”

Here the prosecution rested the case, and Elder J. G. Wood assumed the cross-examination in behalf of the prisoner.

Wood . — “Mr. Bowman, you say you were coming along the road from the east when you saw Mr. Armstrong at work in his garden?”

B. — “I did.”

W. — “Were you coming to town?”

B. — “I was.”

W. — “About how long were you in passing Mr. Armstrong’s house? and what was the length of time you saw him at work?”

B. — “I can’t tell.”

W. — “Do you think the time to have been two minutes, or more?”

B. — “Don’t know; can’t tell.”

W. — “Could it possibly have exceeded one minute?”

B. — “I don’t know. It makes no difference. I am not here to be pumped.”

W. — “Mr. Bowman, we are only wanting the facts in the case. Are you sure it was Mr. Armstrong you saw hoeing? Might it not have been some other man?”

B. — “I am not mistaken. I know it was J. A. Armstrong.”

W. — “What was he doing?”

B. — “I told you he was hoeing.”

W. — “What was he hoeing? Was he hoeing corn, or hoeing out some potatoes for his dinner?”

B. — “He was hoeing; that is enough.”

At this point the Justice of the Peace interfered: — “It seems, Mr. Wood, that you are trying to make it appear that Mr. Armstrong was only digging a mess of potatoes for his dinner.

If that is so, and he was doing a work of comfort, necessity, or charity, he can prove it.”

W. — “If your honor please, Mr. Armstrong is not here to prove a negative. The law allows him to do such work as is of necessity, comfort, or charity; and until it is clearly proven that he has violated this law, which thus far has not been proven, it is unnecessary for him to offer proof. A man stands innocent until he is proven guilty.”

Justice . — “We proceed.”

W. — “Mr. Bowman, you say you were in the road when you saw Mr.

Armstrong?”

B. — “Yes.”

W. — “Do you remember whether there was a fence between you and Mr. Armstrong?”

B. — “Yes; there was. “ W. — “About what is the hight of that fence?”

B. — “Don’t know.”

W. — “Was it a board fence five boards high?”

B. — “Can’t say.”

W. — “Was there a second fence between the road and the garden, beyond the house and lot?”

B. — “I think there was.”

W. — “Was that second fence a board fence or a very high picket fence?”

B. — “I don’t know, nor don’t care. It makes no difference.”

W. — “I understand, then, that you don’t know. Well, Mr. Bowman, what time in the day did you see Mr. Armstrong in the garden?”

B. — “In the afternoon.”

W. — “About what time in the afternoon, — was it one or two o’clock, or later?”

B. — “It makes no difference. I am not here to be pumped. If you want to pump me any more, just come out on the street with me.”

W. — “Sir, I have no desire to pump anything but truth from you, and only wish to know the facts in this case. Was it about one or two o’clock in the afternoon, or about four or five? Please tell us about the time of day.”

B. — “It was between twelve noon and sunset. That is near enough.”

This closed the testimony in the case. Mr. Armstrong was declared guilty, and fined one dollar and costs, the whole amounting to $4.65. In default of the payment of his fine, the mayor, acting as Justice of the Peace, told him he would send him to the county jail, and allow him a dollar a day until the fine and costs were paid.

The marshal went at once to the livery-stable to get a team, and within four hours from the time of his arrest, Mr. Armstrong, in charge of the marshal, was on his way to jail at Fayetteville. He was locked up with another prisoner, with nothing but a little straw, and a dirty blanket about thirty inches wide, for a bed for both. The next night, he was allowed to lie in the corridor on the brick floor, with his alpaca coat for a bed, and his Bible for a pillow. The third night, a friend in town furnished him a quilt and a pillow. On the fourth night, his friend brought him another quilt, and thus he was made quite comfortable. On the fifth day, at noon, he was released.

When Mr. Armstrong returned to Springdale, the mayor notified him that his fine and costs were not satisfied, and that unless they were paid in ten days, an execution would be issued, and his property sold. Mr. Armstrong filed an appeal to the Circuit Court, the appeal was sustained, and he was released from further penalty.

EIGHTEENTH CASE.

J. L. Munson, Star of the West, Ark.

Mr. Munson, a Seventh-day Adventist, was indicted by the Grand Jury at the July term of the Circuit Court of 1886, for working on a Sunday in March, 1886. Mr. Munson was cutting briers out of his fence corner at the back of his field, one fourth of a mile from any public road, and one and one half miles from any place of public worship. He was indicted on the voluntary evidence of Jeff. O’Neal, a Free-will Baptist preacher. He was arrested November 3, 1886, and held under bonds of $300 for his appearance January, 1887. He confessed judgment, and Judge Herne assessed the legal fine of one dollar, with three dollars county tax. and costs, amounting to $14.20. This was paid by Mr. Munson, and he was released.

NINETEENTH CASE.

James M. Pool, the second time.

Mr. Pool was indicted the second time at the September term of court in 1886, and was held under bonds of $250 for his appearance May 16, 1887; and although the act under which these prosecutions were conducted, was repealed before the date of trial, Pool was tried under the indictment, and fined one dollar and costs, amounting to $28.40.

TWENTIETH CASE.

J. L. Shockey, the second time.

In August, 1886, Mr. P. Hammond, a member of the Baptist Church, appeared before the Grand Jury in Hot Spring county, and charged J. L.

Shockey with hauling rails and clearing land on Sunday,the first day of the week, July 11, 1886. The Grand Jury presented an indictment. On December 14, 1886, Mr. Shockey was arrested and taken to Malvern, locked up until the next day, when he gave the usual bond for his appearance at court, and was released. The work for which Mr. Shockey was indicted, was done on a new farm which he was opening up in the woods, three fourths of a mile from any public road, and more than a mile from any place of public worship, and not in sight of either. The witness, Mr. Hammond, passed by where Mr. Shockey was at work, and after he had gone some distance, returned, and spoke to Mr. Shockey about buying from him a Plymouth Rock rooster. The bargain was then made, Hammond agreeing to pay Shockey fifty cents for the rooster.

Shockey was indicted, and his case set for trial February 7, 1887. This case, with the one before mentioned and some others that had been held over to await the decision in the Scoles case, was called, and February fixed as the day of trial for all.

In the meantime, Elder Dan T. Jones, president of the Missouri Conference of Seventh-day Adventists, had an interview with the prosecuting attorney, Mr. J. P. Henderson, and explained the nature of all the cases, and showed him that the Adventists were faithful, law-abiding citizens in every respect, except in this matter of working on Sunday; that the defendants in cases were all poor men, some of whom were utterly unable to pay any fines and costs, and consequently would have to go to jail; and asked Mr. Henderson if he would be willing to remit a portion of his fees, which were ten dollars in each case, provided the remainder was raised by donations by the Seventh-day Adventists throughout the country, for the relief of their brethren.

Mr. Henderson replied that if these cases were of the nature of religious persecution, he would not feel justified in taking any fees. He said he would not be a party to any such action, but would want some time to investigation the cases, to satisfy himself that this was true. Upon investigation, he became so fully satisfied that the prosecutions were simply religious persecutions, that he generously refused to take any fees in any of the cases.

When the cases were called, the defendants confessed judgment, and the fine prescribed by law was assessed. The county clerk reduced his fees about one half; the sheriff, one half of his; and the prosecuting attorney, all of his, which reduced the total expenses about one half. The remainder was advanced from funds supplied by Seventh-day Adventists throughout the country, for the relief of their brethren in Arkansas.

TWENTY-FIRST CASE.

Alexander Holt, Magnet Cove, Ark.

Mr. Holt, a Seventh-day Adventist, was a medical student of the Memphis Hospital and Medical College, Memphis, Tenn.

In 1885 he was working on a farm in the northern part of Hot Spring county, Ark. At the February term of the Circuit Court in 1886, he was indicted for Sabbath breaking. The particular charge was working on Sunday, October 11, 1885.

C. C. Kaufman was the informer. Mr. Holt had worked one Sunday near a public road, but not nearer than a mile to any place of public worship.

Hearing that there had been an indictment found against him, Mr. Holt did not wait for the sheriff to come and arrest him, but went to the county seat, ten miles distant, taking a bondsman with him, and inquired of the proper officer if there was an indictment against him. The warrant for his arrest was then read to him by the deputy-sheriff. Holt gave bonds to appear at the August term of the Circuit Court, and was released.

At the August term of court, the case was laid over to await the decision of the Supreme Court in the Scoles case. February, 1887, Holt’s case was called for trial at Malvern. The Supreme Court having decided adversely, Holt confessed judgment, and paid the fine and costs, amounting to $28.

There were a number of other cases, but they are all of the same kind, — causeless arrests upon information treacherously obtained to vent religious spite.

We append also some statements of prominent citizens of Arkansas, who are not observers of the seventh day, in relation to the workings of that Sunday law, which show that our report of the cases is not “manufactured” in any particular.

The first is from Judge S. W. Williams, of Little Rock, an ex-judge of the State Supreme Court, and one of the foremost lawyers in the State: — “LITTLE ROCK, ARK., March 21, 1887.

Rev. Dan T. Jones. “SIR: As requested, I give you a short resume of the history of our Sabbath law of 1885. Up to the time of the meeting of the legislature in January, 1885, our Sunday law had always excepted from its sanctions the cases wherein persons from conscience kept the seventh day as the Sabbath. It had been the case for many years at the capital, that no Sabbath laws were observed by the saloonkeepers.

After the election of 1884, the newly-elected prosecuting attorney of that district, commenced a rigid enforcement of the law.

A few Jewish saloon-keepers successfully defied it during the session of the legislature. This led to the total and unqualified repeal of the conscience proviso for the seventh day in the old law.

This was used oppressively upon the seventh-day Sabbath Christians, to an extent that shocked the bar of the whole State. A test case was brought from Washington county. Our Supreme Court could not see its way clear to hold the law unconstitutional, but the judges, as men and lawyers, abhorred it. Judge B. B. Battle, one of the three judges, was, with Judge Rose and myself, a member of the standing committee on law reform of our State Bar Association. In our report, as you see, we recommended a change, which the Association adopted unanimously, Chief-Justice Cockrill and Associate-Justices Smith and Battle being members, present and voting. At the meeting of the General Assembly the next week (January, 1887), Senator Crockett introduced a bill repealing the obnoxious law, in so far as it affected those who keep holy the seventh day, still forbidding the opening of saloons on Sunday. “Truly yours, “SAM W. WILLIAMS.” In the following letter , Judge U. M. Rose, of the law firm of U. M. & G.

B. Rose, Little Rock, one of the leading lawyers in the State, and a member of the committee on law reform of the State Bar Association, gives his opinion of the reasons why the law was enacted, and also his views as a lawyer on the propriety of such legislation. We print his letter in full: — “LITTLE ROCK,ARK., April 15, 1887. “Rev. Dan T. Jones, “Springdale, Ark. “DEAR SIR: Yours received. The law passed in this State in 1885, and which has since been repealed, requiring all persons to keep Sunday as a day of rest, although they might religiously keep some other day of the week, was enacted, I think, to meet the case of certain Jews in this city who kept saloons and otherbusiness houses open on Sunday. It was said that those persons only made a pretense of keeping Saturday as a day of rest. Whether these statements were true or not, I do not know. The act of 1885 was found to work oppressively on persons believing as you do that Saturday is the Christian as well as the Jewish Sabbath; and hence its repeal. It was manifestly unjust to them as well as to Jews who are sincere in their faith. “You ask me to express my opinion as to the propriety of such legislation as that contained in the repealed act. Nothing can exceed my abhorrence for any kind of legislation that has for its object the restraint of any class of men in the exercise of their own religious opinions. It is the fundamental basis of our government that every man shall be allowed to worship God according to the dictates of his own conscience. It was certainly not a little singular, that while in our churches the command was regularly read at stated times, requiring all men to keep the Sabbath, which, amongst the Jews to whom the command was addressed, was the seventh day of the week, men should be prosecuted and convicted in the courts for doing so. As to the theological aspect of the matter, I am not competent to speak; but as a civil requirement, my opinion is that any legislation that attempts to control the consciences of men as to the discharge of religious duty, can only be the result of that ignorance and fanaticism which for centuries proved to be the worst curse that ever afflicted humanity. “Very respectfully yours, “U. M. ROSE.” Mr. E. Stinson is a farmer and teacher in Hot Spring county, and writes: — “MALCOLM, HOT SPRING COUNTY , ARK., March 27, 1887. “Mr. Jones. “DEAR SIR: In answer to your inquiry, will say that since the repeal of the exemption clause in our statutes, which allowed persons who kept another day than Sunday as Sabbath, to go about their ordinary work or business on that day, several indictments have been found in Hot Spring county. In each and every case the parties so indicted have been conscientious observers of the seventh day, so far as I know them. To my knowledge, others have worked on Sunday who did not observe the seventh day, and no bills were found against them. I believe the prosecutions to be more for religious persecution than for the purpose of guarding the Sunday from desecration. The men who have been indicted are all good moral men and law-abiding citizens, to the best of my knowledge.