Smyrna times., 1855-04-18

nlclous! III SO, and the Legislature deems
them an evil of sufficient magnitude, then they
may rightfnlly prohibit their sale. Rut unless
the "Reporter" admits that his guns. nistols,
&c. &c, stand on the same footing as alcoholic
drinks, as beverage-that is, nevey useful
dtt0ayS PerniciouS-then no fair parallel can
be drawn between them; and a law man he
passed for the prohibition of the one that wonld
not on the same principle, prohibit the other.
Again. when guns and pistols are used by sober
villains tor guilty purposes, they are used as
mere instruments to work out the evil purnoses
of heart already corrupted, and fatally bent
on mischief, and then with all this eorrunt;o,
anu desperate wickedness of heart-often pro-
uuced by the use of alcoholic drinks. There
yet fingers about the lost soul some holier inn
Presslons of earlier and better DAYS. and often
that wicked heart has not the reckless darinp
to perpetrate the act it had already conceived.
I'LL all sense OF conscience and moral RESPONSE
blllty is drowned by repeated draughts liquor.
Such was the case of Wood in PHILADELPHIA.
who murdered his daughter-such was the case
with Newman in Queen Anne's-sucb was tbe
case with the COsden murderers, and such has
been the case a thousand times. Now mark
the edltference-these drinks are not used merely
as instruments for the purpose of working ont
evil purposes already dwelling in the heart. os
guns, pistols, NC, sometimes are. But the use
"f these drinks cOrrupts the heart, and fills il
with evil passions and hellish intentions. dis.
arms conscience, dethrones judgment, subverts
and destroys or greatly impairs the moral G,cul-
ties OF the mind, and is, in fact, the fountain
from which vast amount of human depravity
springs, and 1t does indeed make guns and MIS-
tolls dangerous; and they are very seldom dan
gerous without it.
Well, Mr.. Reporter, did you know before
hand what my answer would be this lime -
Really, when commenced my examination of
your editorials, had no conception that amorp
your many peculiar mental characteristics and
gIits' that should have the gift Of prophecy to
contend with! The Editor makes great deal
OF capital, because. he says, changed his pro-
position little. Let the reader Judge if there
was untalrness or injustice to him in the chance.
chose to argue the question on this syllogism;
Whatever is morally aud civlly wrong NAV
be prohibited.
:" The sale OF intoxicating drinks, as a bev.
erage, is both morally and cIvily wrong; there
tore, The sale ot intoxicating drinks, as a bev-
erage may be prohibited"
His own proposition is as follows:
"An act in itself not either morally or civllv
H., l..
without an unjustifiable cncroachment anon the
natural rights OF man, and that the mere act of
selling intoxicating liquor is not, in itself.
either morally or clvilly wrong
From these propositions he argued that the
sale of these drinks could not properly be pro-
hlbited. Now, wherein was injury or iniustice
done to him by the change! Do you not Der
celve that the whole force of his reasoning de-
Pends upon the assumption "that the selling of
intoxicating liquor is not, in itself either NOR.
ally or clVllIy wrong! DO you not perceive
that IT | successfully establish my second pro-
position, that the sale Of intoxicating drinks as
beverage is beth morally and cvllly wrong.
then his argument is completely swept away.
and Is lett with no more strength than a rope of
sand. But | wish the " Reporter" to know
nay, he already knOwS and feels that ask no
tavors and beg no quarters of him. If he
means anything by his propositions, he means
the sale and use of intoxicating drinks as a
LeVerage. He is making an argument against
law which only prohibits their sale as JeU-
erage--and though he does not speak of their
sale Il beverage, but of their sale generally,
yet | repeat, that if he does not mean as a bev-
erage, then his whole argument is without
point or meaning, and is wholly inapplicabe to
the subject which he is sdiscussing, namely: the
Prohibit9ry Law recently passed by the Lcgis-
latuTe of Delaware. If he does not mean his
argument to apply to their sale as a beverag ge,
then it is indeed a miserable begging of the
question, which did not think that even the
"Reporter," with all his recklessness and te-
merty, would dare descend to. Then | say
that his proposition "that the mere act of SELL
ing Intoxicating liquor, as beverage, is not in
itself either morally or civlly wrong" is Who'll
ly false and untcnable. | have already, in my
last article, proved it false to the satisfaction of
every candid reader, by proving the converse Of
it true. The "Reporter" may take as many
detached portions of my arguments and build
up syllogyms to laugh at as he pleases, bat all
this is not argument. He may stuffup as many
men of straw as he pleases, and then wax en-
ceedingly valiant in cutting them about but he
knows and feels that the hook is in his Jaws
that after all his buster and parade, his hops,
and skips, and jumps, and turns, and twists, that
have made his editorials against the prohibitory
law perfect literary curiosity, that here in the
point upon which he prided HIMSELF where he
did pretend to make some show of argumenthe
has committed the blunder of building up his
superstructure upon false premises, all his labor
depends upon his sustaining this proposition,
that the mere act ofselling intoxicating liquors,
as a beverage, is not in itself either morally or
nj IL. 1