Gallipolis journal. [volume] (Gallipolis, Ohio) 1837-1919, 1853-09-08

hibit the sale of liquors, it gave an au
thority that they did notpossess. H
doubted whether it was done in an
townships. Several voices named
townships where the prohibition haC
been made. "Akron, Rayenna, A
thens, Delaware. spirituous liquor
were necessary. George Washington
wrote to Congress complaining tha
there was not enough whisky for tht
use of the army. His opinions arr
worth something; and if these thing,
are facts, then it is wrong to call thost
who manufacture liquors hard names
He referred to the scripture argument
and said there was no authority in the
Bible for the Maine law. He had Of
fered reward to any one who would
prove an opposite position.
DR.. Jewett resumed. He quoted a
text, to show his side of the argument.
After some remarks about Washington,
and the use of liquor in former times,
he referred to the effects of liquor
drinking in the commission of crimes.
He asserted that three fourths of the
crimes of the country were committed
through the effects of using liquors.
When the use of cutlery shall produce
the proportion of crime and evil that
liquor does, he should go against cutlery.
He discussed the preventive feature and
demonstrated that we do legislate to pre-
Oe''t crime, as well as to punish. We
punish man for keeping more than a
certain amount of gunpowder in his
store. There may be fire and the fire
companies may be destroyed by the ex-
plosion, and great ruin may ensue.-
Now, because this may occur, we say
the man shall not keep powder over a
certain quantity there. This is preven-
tive Legislation. Some States have laws
putting guardian over the property of
men who are inclined to spend their
substance in liquor. This is preventive
Legislation. Congress has passed a
law against taking liquors to Indian
countries, and if found there, the liquors
may be seized and destroyed, and even
the boat that takes it there may be
seized. This is preventive Legislation.
Maine has not the honor of originating
this law. 1t belongs to General jack
son and to the Congress of the United
States.
Mr.. Beebe resumed. After passing
upon what had Just been said at some
length, he referred to the Bible srgu-
ment, and quoted verse in Ezra,
where, for the service of the Lord, they
were commanded to bring forth wine,
&c. He also referred to several passa-
ges in the Bible where the use of wine
was commended. His quotations were
extended and thorough on this point.
DIR. Jewett replied. He doubted
whether the churches and preachers of
Ohio sympathized with him in the fear
that they could get no wine for cum
The preachers were almost
in favor of the Maine law.
The fact that wines were tolerated then,
is no more evidence that it is right to
use it for common drink now, than
the fact that polygamy, which was
allowed then, is also right now. Who
advocates polygamy from this cause?-
He then went into brief examination
of the Maine law, and its general tend
ency and effects, and dwelt upon it with
much force and eloquence, and closed
with a devout wish that the people of
Ohio would take this subject into their
own hands, and enact the Maine law.
Mr.. Beebe closed the debate He
said the wish for the Maine law was a
wish and not Christian
one. He quoted from the Koran to
show that Mohammed cursed wine
and the money for which it should be
sold. He contrasted that with the
doctrines of the Bible, and said that
the Maine law would be anything but in
accordance with the precepts of that
book. He referred to some of the
previous arguments, and said h e
thought his constitutional position had
not been met and overcome. Of the
second part of the question, that which
referred to the moral and religious as
pect of the case, he left the people
10 Judge whether law that would array
one portion of community against an
other would be likely to promote these
ends. He insisted that no such law
could be enforced in Ohio, and that the
people would permit nothing of the sort
to be done.