New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1846-03-28

.lIed upon 10 decide whether the Empire State
.laIl be longer afflicted with the trsc IN ntoHlcal
No drinks Many of you are thoroughly convinced
4 The various evils and bitter wrongs winch ms
nsfic involves, and yet are moi qni'e assured o,
Se rightfulness and expediency OF putting an END
- II by Legislative enactment. Some Of you are
-zes,y and Justly jealous of all legislative encroach
ssent upon The domain OF conscience, and though
Issrjy disposed 10 secure the great and benetcenl
oh;ecs proposed by the friends of Temperance are
snnrehensive that the means they propose TO EN-
pioy ,,,,, ,-,., s., .oo.ao,,
And msHy error by the same example
Will rush into the State.
OF these views and feelings, the foes OF the Tenn
oerance cause are aware and hence cry OF com
puls;on aud bigotry is raised in various quarters
against those who advocate the suppression OF the
6ouor traffic by legal enactment
I The writer hopes, by fair discrimination OF the
,cianl basis of the law which has been obtained oy
be friends Of Temperance and in making Wnlch
sractcaly effective for the cause. they now ask
sour cooperation TO remove, at least from soitie
ynpds, the honest scruples they now entertain and
~ guard others against the idle preJudices Wnlcn
be enemies of our cause are seeking 70 create.
POSITION DEFINED
lot il be understood then that we do no. claim
me right of compelling men 10 be moral by legislative
s,,c,ments as the basis of the new law; nor do we
ak anv man 10 vote the antilicense provisions OF
hat law into effect the presumption OF his right
compel another 10 adopt his standard OF morality
The true basis OF this and every kindred act OF
sgislation is to be found among our relations, not
':morolists but as citizens and is just as broad
and solid as the foundations of civil government
In support Of this position, ask your critical and
Jpibera,e attention to the following train OF rea-
scaing.
FIRST PRINCIPLE.
|. We submit, as first principle, that every IN
r. ;aa IN
III those means which, from the nature OF thngs'
IRE absolutely necessary to secure the ends and Cd.
scs of its existence This principle is so sell
srident so necessary product Of the reasoning
hculty. that the mind which does not admit II nj
o,ce is bopeesiy beyond the reach of argument.
>. That civil government is rghtful existence,
Inc fact of your using the ballot, in any way is
suiScent acknowledg ment; and this tract is de-
dgped only for those who are the voluntary mem
osrs of civil society.
Il follows then that civil government is entitled
IN the use of all those means, which, from the nature
things, necessary TO secure the objects oil It's
existence.
SECOND PRINCIPLE STATED.
!. The great objects of civil government are the
proection of men n the enjoyment OF the rights oil
life liberty, and the pursuit of happiness In the
uursuit OF happiness is included protection in per-
on, property, and their concomtant rights.
But the traffic in intoxicating drinks actually
defeats. 10 very ETedt eNlcHi leHu' W "NSN'
lin their whole extent, these cardinal purposes OF
government
g. If these things are true, how can we avoid the
ccscusou that it is the clear right and imperative
duty Of the government 10 put an end 10 this traffic
CONCLUSION UNAVOIDABLE.
Ills impossible for the reader 10 escape the con-
iclusion 10 which we have conducted him. without
ABANDONING all just claim to the character oil a
friend of Temperance for, he must either aseer'
IL Irip he hoa in
character, rights that are more sacred than The
rights or even the existence Of civil government
lar ON the other hand, he must deny that the trafhc
In intoxicating drinks does defeat, tends TO de
hat the purposes of government; or, that lts pre-
,en,iou, by any means, is contamination 10 De
yshed and so, in this direction, he must so over
ue enemy.
But the candid friend of good morals, when he is
a,is6ed that the legal prohibition of the liquor
tnfic involves no violation Of human rights or the
fundamental principles of government or In other
words that 1T IS RIGHT will, of course, feel
himself bound to lend the whole influence OF his
yuce and vote to secure this result.
Thus we see, that 70 far as the nature OF govern
neni concerned there is firm basis for the legal
suppression of the traffic entirely, independent OF
moral considerations
OBJECTIONS CONSIDERED.
Bu, it may be asked Is this not a moral question,
,ier all Yes, we reply-after all and before all
= lisa moral question. As subjects of moral govern
nent il involves YOU the eravest responsibilities.
.hconnects itself with the most sacred relations and
mites of the present; il takes hold upon the soem-
siies Of Judgment and the awards of destiny. But
We must not forget that subject may al the same
tine involve considerations relating 10 our rights as
ctizens and our duties moraliets. The ends OF
uOral and civil law often coincident. The morGt
ar, for example, seeks TO protect life by the com
-and Thou shalt not kill and the declaration
no murderer hath eternal life abiding in him The
lard lac seeks 10 accomplish the same end by
threatening Imprisonment or death TO the murderer.
Why should il not be objected 10 laws relating 10
murder, that as his is moral subject, II does not
e within the province of civil government! So
ne moral law says, thou shalt not steal and the
:ivil law cries out by pain and penalty thou shalt
aN steal" But who ever objected that civil gov
unent was of its province in prohibiting theft
aace the moral law does tho same We know
lathe sentiment has been uttered even on the floor
S,he Assembly Chamber, that Legislators have no
ling TO do with moral subjects, but we can only
ukyour commiseration Of the stupidity which does
20, perceive that though government may have no
sing 10 do with mora! subjects considered as such
3rt is impossible that government should not have
lido with moral subjects, in SO far as they connect
semselves with the objects for which government
'sas instituted. Can the State OF n York pass
tngle law TO protect life, person or property with
%, having 10 do with moral subjects Or denying
ae right 10 legislate on moral subjects, whenever
ind wherever they really connect themselves with
lhe acknowledged purposes of government-upon
IsbaI foundation does the security OF government
Isst7 None. Upon such theory, its very claim &c
IIrigh,ul existence
{" Ia bascless as the fabric of vlsion'
CONCLUSIONS STATED.
We cannot fail to see then, that the traffic In In
aSicating drinks is not less properly subject Tor
legislative prohibition and penalty the ground OF
is being moral question than murder THEFT arson
erury; for they are all moral subjects of the high
~, character. We see, then, tina, the proper ques
Ion 10 be asked is not whether il is mora! or eco
lomical social or political, ecclesiastical or civil
al simply what relations it sustans TO the objects
Id government
And finally, though we conceive that governments
have nothing to do with moral subjects and regard
11hls only and simply in the character of civil or
Political question, its importance as such, affords
'mple ground for all the Legislation we desire,
TIE TRAFFIC. AT WAR WITH CIVIL GOVERNMENT.
The writer has thus far taken for granted his read
as conviction of the evils of this traffic, and his
sllmgness TO suppress it at the ballot'boN, Prov
sd this could be done in perfect consistency with
ne principles of just and liberal government But
amay be well 10 show that the citizen is not mere
FlsstleaJie in voting for the suppression of this
nitsc bui that he is bound by whatever is sacred
ahaman lie, by whatever is hallowed in social re
atoms by yhaieyer ia beautiful in order in q word