The Weekly comet. [volume] (Baton Rouge, La.) 1853-1855, 1854-07-16
Fp I'M m TN tentef
can Exciting question"

mr.. Coma Knowing That you
ore ever ready 70 do oven-landed jus
tiee, and that you are frank enough to
lay before de people, the arguments
both pro and eou in regard to all INIT
tofs Of public interest ! nm induced
to ask you TO publish the following re-
ply to an article, headed ms above,
which appeared in your paper Of the
7tl instant.
Your remarks in relation to "Tem-
perance lecturers" are rather severe
and CRATE very harshly on the cars Of
many of The citizens Of Baton Rouge,
whether their efforts are styled "mad-
ness or folly" the public appear to
have, by some means Or other, be-
come aware Of the madness CON
tained in strong drink, and Of the ''fol-
"" Of continuing TO pour il down their
Threats as is evidenced by tho action
Of our last Legislature in passing the
nv now under consideration this
very Legislature, being composed Of
persons, who, it is universally conee-
ded, had ample experience, in regard
10 tho doings and sayings Of his maies-
ty, King Alcohol
Il is generally conceded that in
morals, as in pl,ysio, violent evils re-
qaire violent remedies, and when the
| digger Is elevated to be plunged into
your bosom, YOU will not long debate
| The means Of avoiding tbs danger.
As to whether ardent spirits, drank
in moderation, Injuries the hunan sys-
TEN, Is not n matter OF much impor-
tanoe just now, because ut present
the effects Of "eroessipe drinking
calls for b remedy, aud olaims our UNI
divided attention.
Then to the auesticn--"shall the
bar rooms be closed r. Which gives
rise to two points for discussion, "lst
the principle involved md END the
result Of such movement" ! am vt q
loss to know to what article Of our
Federal Constitution you allude. 1t
is generally admitted that in our GOV
ornmont, every citizen has II right to do
rs he pleases, but there u u proviso,
"that he Is responsible for the conse-
auences Of his conduct" So il Il man
choose to pot drunk he ean do 70, but
| if in consequence Of his drunkness, he
takes ths life Of his nelghbor, be is re-
sponsible for bis conduct, and he would,
In vain, plead "the right to do as he
pleased"
But to cite case more Immediate
" pertinent to The issue. Our streets
arc free to the use md enjoyment Of
all cIasses Of citizens Then any in
Mitution or class Of men that would de-
bar them or any portion Of them, Of the
free and undistnrbed use Of our streets.
should bs held responsible for their
conduct. Now | have no desire to
mention names or localities, but can
you not think If many portions Of Che
town chat the ladies' dare not enter,
on account Of the blasphomies, and in
decenoies Of every description which
arc perpetually enacted by men con-
gregated in these shops? Tell us
not, then, that We violate the rights Of
dramselIcrs by closing their shops :
no they are infringing our rights and
We will, now attempt to stop any fur
Their Infringement.
There are certain rules Of conduct
which are admitted by all and their
violation is punished such rs the use
Of indecent language, promenading the
streets in state Of nature tic. These
things are frequently done in "coffee
houses" (where no coffee" was ever
made or sold) And why will you have
ausune men punished? Why not re-
move Of once the cnuse Of insanity Z!
It would certainly be more in accord
ance with humanity.
But You propose to remedy the ad,
mitted evil by wohibitory taz.--
Now ] cannot see the legal difference
between taking away rights, by tell
ing him he must dcslst; and telling
him he may do 80 and SO, but he must
first pay taz which amounts to an
absolute prohibitloa.
The closing Of grogshops il not a