this colony the sole and exclusive right of regulating the internal government and police of the same."

Connecticut, June 14, 1776.--" Saving that the administration of government, and the power of forming governments for, and the regulation of the internal concerns and police of each colony, ought to be left and remain to the respective colonial legislatures."

New Hampshire, June 15, 1776.-" Provided, the regulation of our internal police be under the direction of our own Assembly."

New Jersey, June 21, 1776.—“ Always observing, that whatever plan of confederacy you enter into, the regulating the internal policy of this province is to be reserved to the colony legislature."

Maryland, June 28, 1776.-"Provided the sole and exclusive right of regulating the internal government and police of this colony be reserved to the people thereof."

South Carolina implies the same.

The colonies would come into the Union only on certain conditions, expressed above; and, as these conditions were nearly or quite universal among the colonies, can it be supposed that any of these conditions were surrendered by the delegates, or disregarded by the Constitution? Certainly not. And each state now belonging to this Union has the same right to prohibit labor in its territory on Sunday, whether in relation to the mail and Post-offices, or other things, that the several colonies had. Besides these reserved rights, they now have, and always have had, a natural and an inherent right to forbid the doing of those things which lead to crime and immorality,—and to encourage and protect those things which conduce to a quiet, orderly, and moral life; and who ever doubted that the Sabbath, duly observed, tends to promote peace, virtue, good order, intelligence, and morality among a people?

Hence, as well as from the caution with which the States finally adopted the Constitution, it is evident that they never intended to give to Congress power to interfere with their internal legislation, in relation to morality and religion; and, least of all,

to authorize them to compel the citizens of the States to trample on the Sabbath, a boon guarantied to them before the Constitution existed, and which has never been surrendered. In accordance with this sentiment, is an opinion expressed, in a petition to Congress on the same subject, in 1828 and 1829, and signed, with others, by the Hon. John Cotton Smith, viz.: "The General Government has not the constitutional power to authorize the violation of the Sabbath."

Sabbath-breaking tends to deteriorate the sense of moral obligation, and to open the floodgates of iniquity; therefore, the states have not only the right, but they are in duty bound to forbid and to prevent it. And Congress not only has the right, but is also in duty bound to forbid and prevent it, in the District of Columbia, and in all her Territories.

The Hon. Wilson H. Lumpkin, of Georgia, says: "All nuisances, which tend to annoy the community, or injure the health of the citizens in general, or corrupt the manners and morals of the people, subject their authors to severe penalties." And who cannot see that Sabbath-breaking tends to annoy the community, injure the health of those who enjoy no day of rest, and corrupt the manners and morals of the community?

Then it is clear, if the states have not only the right, but are in duty bound to prevent this immorality, this nation has no right to contravene the rights and wishes of the several states. For, in the language of the Hon. T. Frelinghuysen, on license laws, it may be said, "Men can hardly avoid looking up to the halls of legislation for standards of duty; they expect to find models there that may be safely followed. * * * * Men will not take time to question the moral power of a legislature to make that right which God declares wrong. * * * * If they can plead, that in their practice they conform to law, it is all fair weather with them, and you cannot easily convince them that they do wrong. * * * * You cannot reach the consciences of men standing behind this authority." And, so long as the people can shield themselves behind national law, requiring labor on Sunday, it will be almost or quite useless to attempt either to control their actions, by state laws, or by moral suasion reach their consciences, so as to induce them to "remember the Sabbath day to keep it holy."

General Legislation of Congress.

Michigan.-It can easily be shown that this law is in direct opposition to the general legislation of Congress, and the uniform practice of this government. In giving laws to Michigan, when a Territory, Congress declare, "that, in every community, some portion of time ought to be set apart for relaxation from worldly care and employments, and devoted to the social worship of Almighty God, and the attainment of religious and moral instruction, which are in the highest degree promotive of the peace, happiness, and prosperity of a people." And they further provide that the first day of the week shall be kept and observed by the good people of the Territory as a Sabbath, holy day, or day of rest from all secular employments. (Bishop McIlvaine's Thanksgiving Sermon.) How does this reasoning condemn the law in question! What stronger or more forcible arguments can be used to show its immorality and unconstitutionality than are found in this wise legislation for the Territory of Michigan? Do not Congress here most indignantly and eloquently rebuke their own legislation? And ought such contradictory acts as this, and the law complained of, to remain on their statute books? Is not here evidence that the obnoxious clause was introduced without due consideration of its bearing on the Sabbath, and the moral condition of the nation?

It is discovered on examination that Congress did not directly enact this law. It was done by their regularly constituted agents, the Governor and Judges of the Territory, whose duty it was to make the laws for said territory, and report them to Congress. See "An ordinance for the government of the territory of the United States, north-west of the Ohio river."

"The Governor and Judges, or a majority of them, shall adopt and publish in the district, such laws of the original States, criminal and civil, as may be necessary, and best suited to the circumstances of the district, and report them to Congress from time to time; which laws shall be in force in the district until the organization of the general assembly therein, unless disapproved of by Congress." Congress never disapproved of this law, which accords with laws on this subject in many of the original States. So of course it may be said to be their act.

Whatever one does by another, is, in law, considered as having been done by himself. January, 1839.

Bill of Rights.

Florida.-Extract from the bill of rights for the government of Florida, while a territory.-"To the end that the inhabitants may be protected in their liberty, property, and religion, no law shall ever be valid which shall impair, or in anywise restrain the freedom of religious opinions, professions, and worship.”— (Gordon's Digest, section 1134.)

Here Congress declares invalid any law “which shall impair or in anywise restrain the freedom of religious opinions, professions, and worship." And the law requiring Postmasters to labor on Sunday, if it do not restrain the freedom of religious opinions and professions, certainly does of "worship;" for how can one enjoy religious worship, while compelled to deliver letters, papers, &c.? Both of these laws cannot be binding, any more than in the case of Michigan.

Arkansas.-The following clause is found in the bill of rights for the government of the Territory of Arkansas.-"No law shall be made which shall lay any person under restraint, burden, or disability, on account of his religious opinions, professions, or mode of worship."—(Gordon's Digest, section 1122.)

By the law requiring labor on Sunday, the consistent Christian Postmaster is constrained to abandon his office, or he is restrained in his religious opinions and privileges. The two laws are not consistent with each other. Let it ever be remembered, that wherever Congress speaks of religion, in connection with our rights and happiness, it means the Christian religion. It does not distinguish between the different denominations of Christians, but it does between Christianity and anti-Christianity, as is evident from what has already been said, and from the laws both of the States and of the Union.

District of Columbia.-See Story's Appendix, U. S. Laws, chap. 86, sec. 1st, from which it appears that the District was to be governed by the laws then (February 27, 1801) existing in the States of Maryland and Virginia. Now if, on examination,

it shall appear that these two States had, at that time, laws against Sabbath desecration, which is more than probable, and laws favoring the Christian religion,* two things already commented upon will appear still more evident, viz., that whenever Congress speaks of religion, it means the Christian religion and that Congress itself, while making laws for the government of its Territories, (as well as the States, while making laws to govern themselves,) believed that it had the right to require the people in said Territories to observe the Christian Sabbath. And, if they had such right, which few if any will deny, then certainly the law requiring labor in the Post-office Department is utterly void.

Powers of Congress-Post-offices.

"Congress shall have power to establish Post-offices and postroads." It is well known that, from this clause in the Constitution, it is claimed that Congress derives all its powers in relation to this department. Two constructions have been, by able commentators, given to this clause; one quite restricted, limited, and the other liberal. Among the advocates of the former, were Thomas Jefferson and President Monroe, and more recently a large portion of the south, (as expressed by their Legislatures in relation to "incendiary publications" passing through the mail ;) and among the advocates of the latter are Mr. Justice Story and others, referred to in his commentary on the Constitution, from which the following is an extract, specifying some of the things which the advocates of the latter construction claim, as naturally and properly inferential from the clause above given: "In the same manner, to establish Post-offices and postroads is to frame and pass laws, to erect, make, form, regulate, and preserve them. Whatever is necessary, whatever is appro

* The law of Maryland referred to above, is as follows, viz.: "No person whatsoever shall work or do any bodily labor on the Lord's day, commonly called Sunday; and no person having children, servants, or slaves, shall command, or wittingly or willingly suffer any of them to do any manner of work or labor on the Lord's day, (works of necessity and charity always excepted,) nor shall suffer or permit any children, servants, or slaves, to profane the Lord's day by gaming, fishing, fowling, hunting, or unlawful pastime and recreation." Then follows the penalty.