December 6, 1918, exactly one week after the Hamilton
Board of Health once again imposed restrictions on public gatherings, the
patience and spirit of co-operation which had been shown by citizens were
starting to fray.
On that day, the city newspapers reported on two
segments of the community organizing to have the restrictions cancelled or at
least modified substantially. The retail community which was suffering
financial hardship was one of the communities, while the other involved
clergymen of various faiths hoping to be able to re-open their churches for
public worship.
Hamilton Board of Health chairman Norman Clark was
invited to attend a meeting convened by members of the retail community:
“The merchants will back up
the board of health to the best of their ability, believing that it has acted
with the best possible judgement with regard to the restrictions placed upon
the city since the recrudescence of the epidemic. This was the unanimous
resolution of a meeting of the merchants at the board of trade rooms this
morning, which Norman Clark, chairman of the board of health, was invited to
attend and to discuss the matter of early closing of the stores and other
restrictions.
TALKED IT OVER
“Lieut.-Col. R.A. Robertson
was in the chair, and Robert McLaren acted as secretary, and the large and many
of the smaller stores were represented. Prior to the arrival of Mr. Clark, a
discussion took place between the merchants, and a program asking for certain
modifications drawn up. This was read by Col. Robertson when Mr. Clark
appeared.
REMOVE BAN SATURDAY
“The merchants, he said,
were not criticizing the action of the board of health, and in calling this
meeting and inviting Mr. Clark, they were not actuated by any spirit of
animosity, but merely with the desire to show certain sides of the situation
which might not have presented themselves to the board of health. Closing at 4
o’clock was the cause of great loss to the merchants; nevertheless they were
willing to sacrifice themselves for the public interest. However, with regard
to the idea which actuated this regulation – that the store clerks should not
be forced to mingle with the crowds of factory hands going home at a later hour
– it was thought that the board of health had not given the matter the
consideration it deserved. Especially with regard to Saturday, it was felt
there would be no mingling of the shoppers with the factory workers in the
street cars since the factories closed down at 12, and the Saturday afternoon
shopping did not commence until a later hour.
“As to the congestion in the
stores, it was thought by the merchants that if the shopping hours were extended
over a longer time, the congestion would be greatly eased, both in the stores
themselves, and on the street cars.
NO DANGER
“ ‘We feel,’ said Col.
Robertson, ‘while we are anxious for the safety of the public, we must also
have a regard for their convenience. For this reason, we think that Saturday
should be open all day, which would not only be a convenience to the general
shoppers, but especially to clerks in offices who are practically unable to
shop during the week.’
AN INJUSTICE
“Another point put forward
was the injustice of allowing small stores to remain open after 4 o’clock. This
only resulted in a greater congestion in these stores, which was more harmful
than if the public were distributed all over the stores.
DRUG STORES TOO
“That drug stores should be
u7nder the same regulation was also thought to be a ridiculous ruling, since
their trade was required more than ever during the epidemic.
“ ‘One more kick,” concluded
Col. Robertson, ‘is that retail stores are the sole sufferers under the
regulations, and the factories escape. Why should people be denied the rights
of shopping because of factory employees?’
IN INTERESTS OF HEALTH
“In replying, Mr. Clark
stated that he could not possibly answer all these questions.
“ ‘I have answered questions
till I am black in the face,’ he said, ‘I have done absolutely no business, and
while the storekeepers talk of what they’re losing, I will say that I don’t any
business has suffered as much as mine has.’
“The whole situation, he
said, had been considered by the board of health, and it had a reason for
everything that was put into proclamation.
“ ‘If it were for me to
decide, I would say that the board of
health has done exactly what was right. Gentlemen, I don’t think you are
right,’ said Mr. Clark earnestly. ‘You are taking the same attitude as the
churches have done. The clergymen should be very careful what they say. They
have called us materialistic, but it seems to me that there is something very
materialistic in their arguments. We are up against a wall – you on the on
hand, the people on the other. I think that the citizens should take it in the
best spirit and endeavor to work it out as they can. Deputations are no good,
gentlemen. We want to have a representative from the board of trade at our
meeting this afternoon with the medical men, but we feel that the merchants
should endeavor to back us up. If the people of Hamilton themselves show us
that they won’t have these restrictions, then we will take the ban off. We
haven’t been doing this thing for ourselves.’
“With regard to the Saturday
proposition, Mr. Clark said that in his opinion, this was something which might
be considered by the board of health.
Colonel Robertson said he
thought this might be solve the problem of overcrowding directly after the ban
had been removed.
WITH THE BOARD
“At this juncture, T.H.
Pratt said: ‘Gentlemen, I am obliged to leave this meeting now, but I want to
say before I go that I think it would be a great mistake to keep the stores
open until 10 o’clock at night. I would strongly protest against it. Let us
back up the board of health.’ Said Mr. Pratt, as he left the room, to Mr.
Clark; ‘if you can satisfy every business man in this city, you are a genius,
and go to it.’
WILL BACK BOARD’
“F.R. Smith, of Oak Hall,
having heard the argument of Mr. Clark,
he was convinced that the board of health was doing every thing in its judgment
to combat the epidemic and he thought that the stores of the city should back
it up. This was the feeling in general of the meeting and Mr. Clark withdrew
after thanking all present very heartily for this action.
“ ‘At the first opportunity,
we will take the ban off,’ were his parting words. As he withdrew a hearty
clapping was accorded him.”1
1 “Lift
the Ban on Saturdays Ask Merchants : Board of Health Will Consider Request
Today : The Merchants Assured Chairman They Were With Board.”
Hamilton Herald. December 06, 1918.
Equally desiring the lifting
of restrictions of public gatherings were clergymen who took their concerns
directly to the board of health:
“Clergymen representing four Protestant
denominations – Anglican, Baptist, Methodist and Presbyterian – have forwarded
a letter to Dr. Roberts, M.O.H., in which they ask for a modification of the
closing order as it applies to churches. They point out that the street railway
company, merchants and manufacturers are permitted to operate under regulation
and think the same privilege should be extended to them.
WILL CONSIDER IT TODAY
“When asked what action
would be taken regarding the letter, Dr. Roberts, medical health officer,
stated that it would be laid before the board of health at a meeting which will
be held this afternoon. When asked if, in his opinion, the request would be
granted, Dr. Roberts declared to offer an opinion, stating that the whole
matter would be given careful consideration by the board.
“The letter follows :
“To the Medical Officer of
Health:
Dear Sir – Arising out of a
conversation with you this morning, we submit the following statement of our
views as to terms upon which we feel that the ban on churches might be lifted
and the rights of public worship restored .It is hardly necessary to say that
no body of public servants is more fully alive to the gravity of the present
epidemic than the clergy, who are in frequent attendance upon the sick, both in
hospitals and private homes. It is no spirit of ignorance or indifference to
the public welfare that we ask for a modification of the regulations regarding
churches, but in the conscientious conviction that, through the maintenance of
public worship, we render our highest service both to God and men.
“We do not base our claim
for open churches upon the democratic principles of freedom of conscience and
equal justice for all. The regulations, as they stand, seem to us to
discriminate unfairly against churches for two reasons:
“1. The street cars are
permitted to carry five passengers over their full seating capacity. If this be
consonant with the safeguarding of the public health, it cannot be reasonably
maintained that a congregation, however small, in a church, however large, is a
menace.
“2. The board of health has
extended to factories the principle of self-regulation, the right to make their
own arrangements for the good both of the public and their employees.
“Our request is that the
churches shall be treated on the same principle. While we believe it be the
general consensus of the medical opinion that the churches might safely be omitted
from the closing order, we are prepared, if this cannot be conceded, to limit
our congregations to half their normal size. Of course, every clergyman must
make his own arrangements to provide for this. Some of us would arrange that a
certain portion of the members of the congregation should attend only in the
morning, and others, only in the evening. Other clergymen will prefer to double
the number of services and halve the congregations.
“We believe that such
permission will go far towards allying the widespread discontent that is only
too apparent; that it would be in the interests of both public health and civic
peace.
“The earliest possible
consideration of our proposal will be much appreciated.
(Signed)
S. Daw
W.B. Tighe,
C.L. McIrvine.
W.H. Sedgewick
“Note the clergymen, whose signatures are attached, are
representatives of the Anglican, Baptist, Methodist and Presbyterian bodies. As
it has not been possible to consult all their brethren, they do not claim to
speak for anyone but themselves. Yet they have reason to believe that the
arrangement proposed would be acceptable to all.
“W.P.Robertson
(Acting as
secretary.)
“18 South West Avenue.
Will ENFORCE LAW
“According to present
indications, there is every possibility of a clash between officials of the
health department and some of the clergy next. Rev. Joseph Englert, rector of
St. Ann’s Roman Catholic church, informed a Herald reporter this morning that
he would hold public service Sunday next.
“ ‘So far as I know at
present time, service will be held in my church Sunday next,’ said Father Englebert.
“Dr. Roberts stated
positively yesterday that he would take all necessary steps to see that the
order prohibiting the holding of public meetings was strictly observed, and
when asked if violations of health laws would be summoned to court, stated that
the law gave him the right to call on police to see that his orders are carried
out, and that he was not out to collect fines, but to see that the law was
enforced.” 1
1 “City
Clergymen Ask for Modified Order : They Think That Board of Health Should
Permit Them to Hold Services, As It Allows Street Cars to Operate and Stores
and Factories to Remain Open : To Deal With Matter Today : Dr. Roberts Stated
That Their Request Would Be Carefully Considered, and Decision May Be Reached
This Afternoon”
Hamilton Herald. December 06, 1918.
The editor of the Hamilton
Herald, on December 6, 1918, gave support to both the retail and faith
communities in their efforts to ease restrictions placed by the board of health
:
“When the board of health issued its new
closing order a week ago, the Herald counseled citizens generally to draw upon
their stock of patience, bow to the board’s authority and observe the
regulations loyally. We still hold it to be the duty of citizens to observe the
regulations. But we would most respectfully urge upon the board of health, and
the committee of doctors which is acting in association with the board, to
consider whether the time has not come when the regulations can be relaxed in
some degree and changes made which would mitigate many cases of hardship.
Consideration might also be given to the possibility that in some details the
regulations actually operate to defeat the purpose in view.
“The order permitting
business places to be open after 4 p.m. with only the proprietor present to
serve customers appears to be a case in point. One of the object aimed at in
the regulations is the prevention of crowding; but the regulation we allude to results frequently in crowding
for, as it is impossible for one man to serve promptly all the customers that
enter his store, many have to wait and there is congestion. With two or more
salesmen, there would be comparatively few customers in the place at one time.
“And surely there would be
little or no danger in permitting certain religious services in churches if the
attendance were strictly limited. There are many persons to whom frequent and
regular communion is a religious duty of the highest importance, and a most
precious religious privilege. To cut them off unnecessarily from this means of
spiritual grace is an unfair exercise of authority. The question is whether the
order forbidding all religious services is necessary to the public health. We
do not believe it is. The prohibition of general congregational meetings may be
necessary, but surely not special communion services with only a few persons
present.
“It is to be hoped that the
health authorities will be able to see their way clear to reviewing the
regulations and making changes to those which cause unnecessary hardship. And
we hope also that the regulations as a whole will be relaxed as the epidemic
wanes. They should not be kept in force a day longer than necessary.”1
1 “Relax
the Regulations”
Hamilton Herald. December 06, 1918.
No comments:
Post a Comment