Grant County herald. [volume] (Lancaster, Wis.) 1850-1968, 1853-10-12
For the Grant County Herald.
Reply 10 SEA Farmer

Any body can ask question in half
a minute, that the wisest cannot answer
in an hour; bat will speak to some Of
ga farmers" questions as briefly as
can to advantage.
l. docs not eating too much, poison
people, as well as liquor drinking z" 1t
Injuries them but food is not like alco-
hol, poison. Alcohol, does not nour-
ish any part of the body. Food does.
Alcohol produces inflammation on the
tender tissues Of the body. Food does
not. That alcohol is poison is proved
by the examination Of the stomachs Of
those who have drank il, alter their
death, and by the testimony of the best
ply sicianS, by hundreds; and proba bly,
they all " ouid say tia ii is.
z. Would he proposed law prevent
insanity, idiocy, and pauperisln? Not
wholly. did not say ii would. But |
gave facts 10 show that the use of strong
drinks is the chaef cause OF them; and
hence corclude, that il we remove this
caatSe Of those evils they will be great
" diminished; and ga farmer" will adj
nit that il is reasonable 10 conclude that
Of you remove the cause. the principal
part of the effect will be prevented.
3. "Wil that stop eating and
drinking :" q no; friend, we do not
want to do that, nor any such thing
You seem not TO understand the fri -nds
Of the law perfectly. We do no: desire
10 restrain men from anything that is
right and good. Let them eat and drink
OF all that will promote their health,
strength and efficiency for useful labors
of body and mind. We do not sneak
about shily to do what we dare not do
directly" No sir; we dare to speak
out before the whole world, and tell men
that aicohot IS moi good for drank, and
should not be sold as such. We dare do
ii, because we have fasts by thousands
and The united testimony OF the oldest
judges in the case, To assure us that we
are III the right. We only seek TO pre-
vent evil and that the use of intoxica-
ting liquors as drink, is evil, We know
by abundant proof.
4. This law spares imported liquors
and should not our own manufactures be
equally favored, AT least 7" To this
question. ! say yes. But we sometimes
have to suffer an evil that we cannot
prevent without causing a greater evil.
Probably foreign liquors were spared by
the Maine law, TO avoid conflicting with
some Of the laws Oh regulations OF the
general government, because conflict
with Il EN-, in the then present state Of
the tie nperance cause, would do more
harm than the spdring Gf the liquors in
ques ion. hope they too will soon be
prohibited, and with the consent OF the
nation.
s.. us not liquor, property ?" How,
then, does taking and destroying ii agree
with the constitution where il says,
81 he property OF no person shall be ia
ken for public use without just compen-
sation therefor 2" 1t is property as
gamblers cards, dice or other instru-
ments for deirauding people are; and as
a counterieltrS engraving tools are, and
The burglars tools for picking locks,
and Inc robbers pistols are but these
articles may be lawfully taken from the
owners and destroyed, | believe, when
they are found to be used for criminal
purposes. 10 make men drunk is Grim
lnal and TO poison them at all with al
cohol, even ii You do not poison them SO
that they cannot go strait, or as TO make
them vomit, is also criminal and there
fore the means OF doing ii may lawfully
be taken Out Of the hands OF those who
intend To use them TO commit this crime.
Again, SIR, we do not propose to have
any mans property 'tahen FOR PUBLIC
USE" No, it is not that 1.-THE public"
may be benefited by '4he uSe' OF The
liquor, that it shou'd be taken from the
ow ner; but that the public may be sa-
we'd from INJURY by tie abuse OF it. No
man has IA right to keep pistol 10 shoot
You with and ii it can be shown that
your neighbor is doing ii, that pistol is
forfeited by that intention respecting It's
use. And just SO, liquor kept Tor the
purpose OF being sold for drink, and 50
lWuring people becomes, when we have
right laws, forfeited by thai Intention re-
speeding lis use.
"A farmer" doubts the right "to con-
troll mems appetites or morals by legis-
latlve enactment.." All, sir, what if
some man has az appetite for your wife
or daughter What il same one is inn
moral enough to take some OF your mo-
ney or horses? What ii some one gets
angry at you and has an appetite for re-
venge and slabs YOU? MOI control men,
appetites or morals by law Then what
are laws for? Why. that is the Only OBJ
Ject OF law; and what laws must effect
III some degree, or society cannot exist,
men being as they are, inclined 10 i'm
morality and the criminal indulgence OF
appetite.
am sorry for the need Of ssthe strong
arm OF the law" in this case but since
there are men that to gain dime viii
poison man to madness or to death and
mo more words will diSsuade them from
II, We must try what virtue there is in
harder things. CIvIs.
FrLLow TRAvELERs.-"W Won
helm NO t,u3 of tl,i. ,o,,J ~ o.. n