The Debate Continues 

PAPERS OF JUNE 2, 1894:
Still the papers continued to follow the exciting story each week.  On 2^nd June, another long editorial appeared in the Cumberland Mercury, arguing against the validity of the seventh-day Sabbath, and espousing the Sunday law. However, the editorial commenced with some interesting detail about the stocks.  It was entitled "TWO HOURS IN THE STOCKS" and in part, it said:

“A relic of barbarous (sic) agrees, it was naturally introduced into this fair land in the early days of the colony to keep a rigorous terror over the unfortunates, or desperadoes, whose lot it was to find a home, however unwillingly, on these shores.  The stocks are a very simple contrivance by which the knees are kept in such a cramped position that the prisoner, pinioned under them, is quite unable to rise or to relieve his position in any way, and it is understood to produce great pain and anguish.  The last stocks on exhibition in NSW were to be seen in the prison hulk Success, recently exhibited at the Circular Quay, Sydney, and prior to that, some old hands will remember a pair located on the Haymarket reserve…”

Then follows speculation about the Parramatta police manipulating the unfortunate men in those barbarous manacles.  The article goes on to say:
“…But one almost doubts if the advanced civilisation of the present century would have allowed this form of incarceration to two innocent men.  Rather might the public have taken up linch (sic) law and liberated their unoffending fellows, and smashed the stocks to smithereens…”

The Mercury reported on June 2, a meeting held in the Masonic Hall on Wednesday, where:
“Again an immense audience assembled, to hear Bro. Starr’s reply to Rev. H. Gainford’s sermon published in this paper…”

Among other things, the paper said:

“… Bro Starr referred to an extract from the Catholic Mirror, a challenge from Rome to Protestants to explain why they kept Sunday.  It was a challenge which never had been met.  The Catholic church claimed the divine right to change the day.  But no Protestants believed in the divine succession of the Pope; and in adopting the day ordained by the Catholic church, they were merely stultifying themselves…”

and the article went on to say:

“… It is an open secret that Mr Gainford intends to lose no time in returning to the charge to rout the foe”.  (However, there was no return printed in the subsequent papers).

The Mercury, June 2, page 4, reported on the Sunday meeting in the Town Hall under the heading: “MAYOR WITHERS INTERROGATES”.  This meeting was again attended by a large crowd of 450 people, music by the same group was again enjoyed and applauded.  The speakers were Pastor S. McCullagh and Bro. Daniells.  Questions were put by Mr J W Hill, Mr J Garland and Mayor Withers, but the two official speakers maintained their principle that the State had not the right to legislate for man’s conscience in regard to his religious beliefs.

The papers from this point on appear to have dropped the matter, but a groundswell of opinion continued to agitate for freedom of religion to be incorporated in the Constitution.  Adventists prepared and circulated a petition for signature, which was sent to the Australian Federation Convention.  It ran:

We, the undersigned adult residents of ………believing that Religion and the State should be kept entirely separate;  that Religious Legislation is subversive of good government contrary to the principles of sound religion, and can result only in religious persecution, hereby humbly but most earnestly petition your Honourable Body not to insert any religious clause or measure in the Constitution of the Australian Commonwealth which might be taken as a basis for such legislation, but that a declaration be made in the Constitution stating that neither the Federal Government nor any State Parliament shall make any law respecting religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

This clause came under close scrutiny at the Federal Convention in 1898.  It was voted, 25 in favour, and 18 against, that the principle of this petition should be included in the Constitution.

In the matter of the Constitution and the Petitions to Parliament, copies exist of two four page leaflets.  One is entitled: “Petition to Parliament.  Which shall we sign?, and the other is entitled:  “Governmental Recognition of God.  What does it mean?

The final clause dealing with this subject in the Constitution reads:

“116.  The Commonwealth shall not make any law for establishing any religion, or for imposing any religious observance, or for prohibiting the free exercise f any religion, and no religious test shall be required as a qualification for any office or public trust under the Commonwealth.”

The brothers, Harry and William Firth, undoubtedly went back to their orchards, still with the work ahead to clear their property of stumps, etc.  One wonders if they still worked on Sunday and rested on Saturday, rested on two days, or if they ever realised what effect their actions had on the Constitution of Australia.  History does tell us, however, that they eventually severed their connection with the Adventist church.  A Mrs Firth, with a lovely singing voice, continued to participate in the activities of the church for a long time.