New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1855-09-12


treat them. The devOtees Of Bacchus have
made many noisy protsstatiOns against this mode
Of charscterizing the contents Of their fsvorite
cup, though they have been extremely
difbsent in Offering reasons against its
Justice But a. the currents OF thought apon
the question gradually cut deeper channels IN the
public conscience, and society begins to carry out
IFS convictions into practical and effective meas
ures of relief from the evil. their adversares find
themselves driven TO the necessity OF making the
best possible defense. They have triaed with the
question, enjoyed their liquor, laughed at their
opponents and supposed ali the while that this
temperance warfare was mere sham-hsht, and
that nobody seriously contemplated coming to
lusty. blood-earnest blows. But the illuson has
Iassed away and they now find themselves in the
vortex Of deadly and desperate battle, struggling
aud fighting for life In this crisis the writer IN
The Westminster Rerie,c comes laundering to the
rescue, with a vast parade of science and the
fainting friends of alcohol take heart and profess
to be greatly encouraged. But it is all vain;
whatever may be their numbers or strength,
." they are doomed TO be yanquished, for their
d" cause is unholy.'
The leading purpose of The Hestminsters article
is TO relieve alcohol OF the odium which attaches to
it as poison, and procure for it the consideration
and responsibility which belong to food This ne
attempts by first aboring to prove that IS food,
and then assuming that be has established his point,
intsrring that il is not spOson We have disposed
of his claim 10 regard il food in our former art
cIes: whatever it may be it certainly is not food
If the positive essential relation of alcohol TO the
human constitution be not that of IN injurious
agent. if il be truly and intrnsicay an alimentary
principle how comes it that for hundreds Of years
even when governments had but dim apprecia
ton of their duties as promoters of the public
welfare and protectors of individual rights, 1t has
forced itsefnto universal legal notice has been
object of marked and peculiar legislation has taken
a separate and independent place upon the statute
book. and been honored by jurisprudence of its
own. 1t amounts TO nothing TO say in this con-
ne ction that it is the excessive use the
.'abuse," of Alcohol that has compelled society
to frame restrictive laws for the control of its
commerce. Foods also have been used to excess,
have been abused, but society has been driven
to no legislation in sef-defense from evils spring
ing from this source. If Alcohol were food il
would follow the law Of food and get the
treatment Of food. That public experience
of it is such that it has been long signal
lied by especial governmental trammels and
restraint, proves that it is not of that char
acter But if not then what is it and how in
relation to the livisg system shall it be charac-
terized, grouped, classified
We know of but one word in the language de-
scriptiye of its effects, and that is the term poi
son. Webster says a poison is " any agent c.
pable of producing morbid, nOxiOVs or dan
gerOus effect upon aaything endowed with
life" That the physiological influence of al
cOhOlic liquors is "mOrbid" and "ncxious"
who can deny and that it produces these ef-
fects in so decided degree as to be danger
"ous" our reviewer himself bears testimony;
it therefore properly belongs to the list Of poi
sens. But it is objected that alcohol 10 not
" intrinsically" or essentially" PosOn-not
a poison when moderately used, but only 80
when taken in excessive quantities or abused.
This is the old trick. TOe Rip Van Winkle OF
The Rtrieu attempts to reanimate d contest that
was settled in this country quarter Of a ecu
fury sgO-sO 10 discriminate between the linn
tied and excessive use of alcohol that while
the latter is repudiated the former may be
commended He presses it as question Of guam
tity, on the ground that quantitative differences
often involve differences of kind-that alcohol In
large quantity may produce one effect, which is
poisonous, while in small quantities it produces
another effect which is not So To all this we
reply: Alcohol is ranked as poison for the same
reason that other poisOns are so ranked, because
of its morbid" noxious," and dangerous" eff
fects upon the living system. Alcohol is poison
for the same reason, TO the same extent and under
the same limitations as other polsOns and the tenn
perance reformers have never claimed anything
else. They only take Alcohol as they find it, cata-
logued with this class Of substances and properly
belonging there-no more really poison than
they-no less really so than they just as essen
TALLY and ntrinsically poison as any other is or
can be- That it produces different kinds Ofedects
when taken in different quantities is not doubted
and the same is equally true of all other pOisOns
II we refer TO the treatses on ToIicology and
Materia Medica we shall find described the diff
ferent kinds of effects produced by psisons in
different quantities. Alcohol is no exception to
the rule, and DR.. Carpenter, whom the reviewer
csmbats, recognizes fully and describes dis .
tnctly the various effects produced BY different
quantities of liquor. But because arsenic ia /
small quantities produces only irritation of the
ey eIids and sweled face, while in larger doses
it causes Inflammation Of the alimentary pas
sages; or because prussic acid in minute guam