Sec. 14th repeals all preceding laws.

The act passed in 1797, besides increasing the penalties, as above noticed, directs one moiety of each penalty to be paid to the town in which the offence shall be committed, and the other moiety to the informer.

It also contains a new enacting clause, which forbids driving any hackney carriage into or from the town of Boston, on the Lord's day, without a certificate of permission for the driver and every passenger, from some justice of the peace in said town, on penalty of forfeiting his license for keeping said carriage for three years after committing such offence.

An act, passed by the Legislature of 1815, directs that the penalties shall go to the county and not to the town; and declares, that justices of the peace in the county shall have jurisdiction notwithstanding their remote interest as inhabitants of the county. It also increases some of the penalties; but, as I have not the act before me, I cannot mention the particulars.

This act was made in consequence of a decision by one of the judges of the supreme court, in Sept. 1814, that a justice could not try an offence against this act, committed in the town where the justice resides, as half the penalty then went to the town; and of course the justice was remotely interested in the event of the prosecution.

The decision here referred to was reserved for the opinion of the whole court; and, in Sept. 1815, after hearing claborate arguments on each side, the following points, among others of less general interest, were solemnly decided by the court, and the reasons delivered by the chief justice.

1. That a justice of the peace has no jurisdiction of an offence against this act, unless the offender lives, (i, e has his home,) within the county where the offence was committed.

2. That a justice of the peace is not authorized to receive a complaint and issue his warrant, on the Lord's day, for a violation of the law by travelling; and that an arrest made on that day pursuant to a warrant so issued, is illegal, and the officer making it a trespasser.

In deciding this point the court relied much on a comparison of the act, the provisions of which have been stated, with a preceding act, passed by the Legislature of 1782.*

Some remarks on these statutes may be expected on a future occasion.

I now proceed to give an abstract of the law of New Hampshire, on the same subject, passed in Dec. 1799, and taking effect March 1, 1800.

Sec. 1st prohibits all secular labor on the Lord's day, (works of necessity and mercy only excepted,) and all games, &c. on penalty of from one dollar to six dollars.

Sec. 2nd prohibits all travelling on the Lord's day, between sun

See Mass. Rep. vol züi, p. 324.

rising and sunsetting, (unless from necessity, or to attend public worship, visit the sick, or to do some office of charity,) under the same penalty.

Sec. 3rd prohibits tavern-keepers, &c. from suffering inhabitants of the same town to remain at the tavern on the Lord's day, under the same penalty, to be inflicted upon the tavern-keeper, and upon every such inhabitant spending the time at the tavern.

Sec. 4th makes it the duty of each town and district to choose at least two tythingmen annually, by ballot, men of good substance and sober life, whose duty it shall be to inform of all breaches of this act.

Sec. 5th punishes rude and indecent behavior within the walls of any house of public worship, on the Lord's day, by a fine of from fifty cents to six dollars.

Sec. 6th declares, that the oath of any tythingman, or selectman, shall be sufficient evidence, upon trial of any offence against this act, unless invalidated by other evidence.

Sec. 7th enacts, that parents, guardians, and masters, shall be liable for fines imposed on minors, under this act.

Sec. 8th provides, that it shall be lawful for any selectman or tythingman, within his precincts, to command assistance and forcibly to stop and detain any person, whom he shall suspect of travelling unnecessarily on the Lord's day, for such time as shall be requisite for demanding the cause of such person's travelling, his name and place of abode, and receiving the answer to such demands; and if the answer shall not be satisfactory, such tythingman or selectman shall have full power to detain in his custody such person, until a regular trial can be had, and to command the necessary aid therefor.

Sec. 9th punishes any person, who shall refuse to give aid to a selectman, &c. by a fine of from ce dollar to six dollars.

All

Sec. 10th punishes any person, who shall give a false answer to a tythingman, &c. by a fine of from one dollar to thirteen dollars. Sec. 11th makes it the duty of selectmen, as well as tythingmen, to inform of all breaches of this act. If any person be acquitted on trial, he recovers cost against the complainant, unless the complainant be a tythingman, or selectman. Every justice of the peace shall have power to bring before him any person offending against this act, and, upon his own view, or other sufficient evidence, to convict the offender and impose the fine. Anes go to the poor of the town, where the offences are committed. Sec. 12th provides, that any person, against whom a justice shall pronounce sentence under this act, shall have the right of appeal to the court of common-pleas. Any justice is authorized to give a license for travelling or labor, on the Lord's day, in any case, when he judges it to present a work of necessity and mercy; and such license shall be a bar to a prosecution; provided, howev er, if any person shall be prosecuted, who, although he had such license, neglected to give a sufficient reason to the tythingman, or to shew the license, he shall pay the costs.

Sec. 13th limits prosecutions to thirty days after the offence. Sec. 14th prescribes the form of a warrant for the collection of fines.

Sec. 15th prescribes the form of serving warrants.

Sec. 16th repeals all preceding laws on this subject.

The act closes with a recommendation to all ministers of the Gospel to read this act publicly, in their congregations, on the Lord's day next after the choice of town officers annually.

A law of Vermont, passed in March 1797, contains the following provisions on this subject.

Sec. 1st enjoins upon the people the observance of the first day of the week as a Sabbath, or day of rest from secular labors, and forbids all secular labor, (except such as necessity and acts of charity shall require,) between twelve o'clock of the night preceding and the sunsetting of the same day. It also forbids games, &c. all resorting to any public assembly unless for public worship, and all visiting from house to house, unless for religious conversation, or from motives of humanity and charity. The penalty is a a fine not exceeding two dollars.

Sec. 2nd punishes the wilful disturbance of public worship, by a fine of not less than five nor more than forty dollars.

Sec. 3rd punishes rude and indecent behavior within a house of public worship, under a penalty not exceeding two dollars.

Sec. 4th makes it the duty of grand jurors, tythingmen, and constables, to present all offences against this act.

Sec. 5th makes parents, &c. liable to pay the fines of their children, in consequence of conviction under this act.

Sec. 6th authorizes any justice of the peace to grant a permit, in writing, to any person who has necessary occasion to travel, &c. and such person conducting peaceably on the Sabbath, shall be exempt from any penalty.

Section 7th limits prosecutions, for offences against this act, to thirty days after they were committed.

An act was passed, in addition to the foregoing, Nov. 1801, which provides,

1. That no civil process shall be served between sunset on Saturday evening, and midnight after the Sabbath; and any supposed service, within this period, shall be void.

2. That no person, within this period, shall hold, or resort to, any ball, dance, or other public amusement, under penalty of a fine not exceeding two dollars.

All fines imposed by these acts are to be paid into the treasury of the town, where the offences were committed.

I propose hereafter to give an abstract of the laws of other states on this subject, and make such remarks as may occur.

A. B.

ON FUNERALS.

Sir, To the Editor of the Panoplist. Should the following be thought deserving of a place in your useful publication, you are at liberty to insert it; otherwise please to destroy it.

Ar a time when so much is doing to promote the cause of the Redeemer, and so many methods are suggested to obtain means for defraying Bible and Missionary expenses; the writer has often reflected on what he conceives the importance of diminishing expenses, usually attendant on funerals.

I would first mention the expense and trouble incurred, by the relatives of the deceased, in obtaining a mourning dress, as a preparation for the funeral. After the occurrence of a death, messengers are immediately despatched to procure articles of clothing. The tailor and mantua-maker and milliner are called; the house is in confusion; and the principal attention of each person is apparently directed to the single object of being suitably dressed on the occasion.

Might not almost any family, in tolerable circumstances, who have suitable attire to appear in the house of God, be furnished with badges of mourning, which would distinguish the mourners, and answer every good purpose of a mourning dress, at a very small expense? Many perhaps will say, the dress obtained for these occasions is not lost. I would ask, are not many articles ceremoniously worn a few times, and quickly thrown aside, the original expense of which, in a family of eight persons, might have purchased fifty Bibles, and promoted the spiritual good of as many families?

Another topic of animadversion is the practice of using wine and ardent spirits at funerals. This we may consider not only as useless and expensive, but as having a direct tendency to counteract the efforts of the friends of religion and morality to suppress the awful evil of intemperance. Might not the money which is expended in this way, be appropriated to better purposes, and, at the same time, many be preserved from that sin, which may render them miserable here and hereafter?

Are not the melancholy instances, which have been known to exist, of intemperate drinking at a funeral, sufficient to dissuade the friends of Christ from ever again laying this temptation before their fellow creatures?

The above remarks, the writer has cause to hope, do not all apply to the people of the capital of Massachusetts; but in many towns in the vicinity, the existence of these customs is still abundantly evident.

It is well known, that many people rely much on custom and are the loyal subjects of this tyrant. Of these the writer can hope but little; but to his Christian brethren in general he would say, "we hope better things of you."

W.

We seize this occasion to offer a few remarks, in addition to the suggestions of our correspondent. The subject of conducting funerals, in a suitable manner, has engaged the attention of many, among the most judicious persons in the community, and has been a frequent topic of conversation. Such persons see and regret the evils which have been mentioned. It is obvious, however, that no thorough alteration of an established custom can be expected, unless it be the result of combination. Very few men would think of doing differently from what their neighbors had done, unless it had been determined what to do before a death had actually taken place, and preparations for a funeral were immediately necessary; and very few men would be likely to determine beforehand, unless in consequence of united consultation. Hence, deliberate resolutions have been formed and entered into, by the principal inhabitants of some towns, with reference to the management of such funerals, as should subsequently occur in their respective families. In this way only can the public hope for a reform of the mischievous customs above referred to.

The expense incurred by the wealthy in purchasing a great deal of new clothing, preparatory to a funeral, may be, and often is, an unwise use of money; but when persons in straitened circumstances are induced by the tyranny of custom, as is sometimes the case, to contract debts of considerable magnitude, in order to appear in what they think a reputable manner, the effect is much more pernicious. In order to prevent unnecessary expense, and to remove the temptation to contract debts imprudently, the most wealthy and respectable inhabitants of a large town in Massachusetts agreed,that they would only wear some small badge of mourning, on the occasion of deaths in their families, but would not make any considerable change in their dress. If this example were extensively followed, it would be a great public benefit.

The practice of giving wine and spirits at funerals is not only a waste of money, but an entertainment so ill-timed and unappropri ate, that it is surprising it should ever have been adopted. How absurd is it to exhilarate the spirits, when the mind ought to be peculiarly solemn. How unnatural to destroy all distinction between the house of mourning and the house of mirth; or rather to change the house of mourning into the house of mirth, even while the lifeless remains of a departed friend are before the eyes. It will be urged, perhaps, that wine may be necessary as a cordial to relieve fatigue, and recruit the exhausted spirits. It is sufficient to answer, that if an individual should need a cordial, let it be taken in private, and not offered indiscriminately. The fact is, however, that of those who drink wine at funerals, not one in fifty has any seed of it. When it is customary to offer wine on these occasions, every observing man wust have seen a light, garrulous behavios, entirely unsuited to the solemnity of the event, which had called the company together. It is the tendency of all bad practices to grow worse and worse. Unless, therefore, a reform is bad in this particular, we may expect that funerals will become in our coun