The Nevada journal., 1853-01-28

ideas of the moment. But it seems the
author was deliberate and sincere. -
Take the same principle in another form
A man does not dictate to another
what ho shall eat, but keeps from him
all food by co rcive means. Would not
the community say he " dictatedn star
walton to him would not the law ad-
judge him guilty of murder would
not the man be responsible for direct
act, controlling what the man should or
should not eat ? 1t makes no dfferen ce
whether you snatch the food from a
man mouth when his teeth are ready
to seize it, or whether you cut off his
sources of supply, and keep others from
furnishing it to him. In either case, the
dictation is absolute and decisive. The
principle is equally plain in reference to
what a man shall drink. To avoid this
naked principle has been enlisted all
the ingenuity of the Maineacs If we
have established our premise, our con-
clusion follows by default
But we rested the question on a graver
consideration, Will the Maine Law
not do moro injury to the temperance
cause, than good We earnestly be-
lieve it will 1t will excite animosities
in the community to temperance, Vital
temperance is on the wane in the older
states where the experiment has been
tried, and in its stead, political hobbies
have heen raised 50 careful review
of the matter has convinced us. Public
opinion will work The cure here, but the
stimulating effects Of such law auxilia>
ries will only give galvanized power.
which will relapse into supineness. 1t
is only about year ago when our streets
resounded with the believing and groans
Of beasts set in contest on the Sabbath,
and the shouts of the throngs who visit
ed such sports. Public opinion, unaided
or retarded by law, has abolished such
things, 1t is healthy remedy for all
public evils, and is executing its mission
here. We hope it will be let alone,
save by influences that act directly upon
it 1t is able to effect its own purposes.
When public opinion is in favor Of
moral reform it will not wait for legis-
lation. When it is not, you cannot le-
gislate it up to the point.
But if the Maine Law will not avert
the evils of intemperance, those evils in
whatever style presented, are not argu-
ments in its favor That is the issue
after all, for the beneficial effect Of the
law, is by no means conceded point
Every mail we get, brings testimonies to
the reverse. We could fill our paper
with them if we would A correspon-
dent, " Bostonian,n of the S. F. Herald,
writes under date of Dec. 10, speaking
of the municipal election s
"The Maine Liquor Law was used as
powerful ever in the election it still
remains almost a dead letter as far as
the city is concerned" -.
Another correspondent, Suffolk" of
the same date, says:
" That law has thus far proved the
ruin of every party and public man who
has had anything to do with fastening
it upon the State, with the exception of
some two or three men very favorably
situated. Nor has it done any good to
the cause Of temperance. There never
was more ardent spirits consumed in
Massachusetts, than at this time, and
the law has been in operation for FIVE
months,' &c. r W.
They both mention the subject Incl.
dentally among the current topics of the
day. Our Massachusetts exchanges
generally speak of the law as a failure.
Our private correspondence speaks OF
gin palaces we well know by reputation
that were shut up . day or two when
the law first passed, and then opened,
and have ever since been in full blast.
Yet men who claim to be moral reform
ers par excellence denounco those who
ask to still keep to moral suason that
has reformed millions, instead of resort
ing to law tyrannical in theory, and
imperative in practice, as the fdyorers
of all the mischiefs of intemp, rance.