Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1857-07-09
Temperance Column,
THE MORAL RIGHT
To Drink and Sell Spirituous Liquors.
BY REV. THEO. l.. CuYLER.


ton, or to pursue any course, the influence
of which is certainly, and inevitably hurt
full to his ncighbor man. I have right to
do many things which, as man of principle
I ought not to do. I have legal right to
do many things which would be hurtful to
elf,-such as the consumption of opium,
or even the taking of arsenic. But have
no moral right to commit self-destruction.
I have legal right to attend Il c til eatre
occasionally Or regularly. There is 10 civil
law to forbid my entering that ensnarins
place of entertainment. No policeman stands
guard to repel mc-no officer of justice dares
to eject me while my conduct is orderly
and quiet But as minister of Gods words,
l have no moral right to go there, not mere
ly because may see and hear there what
shall pollute my memory for days and years,
but because that whole garnished and gilt
tering establishment, with its bewildering
attractions, is to many young man chande-
liered and crimsoned hell, the very yawning
malestrom of moral death. The dollar which
I give at the entrance is my contribution to-
wards sustaining an establishment whose
dark foundations rest on the murdered souls
of thousands of my fellow-men. Their blood
stains its walls, and from the seats of that
"pit" they have gone down mayhap to
lower pit where no sounds of mirth ever
come. And now, l ask you what right have
I to enter place where the tragedies that
are played off before me by painted men and
women are as nothing to the fearful TRACE
dies of ruined souls that are enacted in all
parts of that house every night? What
right have I to give the sanction of my ex-
ample to such haunts of folly and vice, and
by walking into the theatre myself, aid to de-
coy otherslthere likewise.
"Now, on the same principle, (not of SELF
preservation, for of that I am not now speak
iug,) but on the principle of avoiding what
is hurtful to others, what right have l to
sustain those magazines of death, where poi
sonous drinks are sold?' What right have I,
as lover of God and a man, to petition for
them, or to sustain that traffic in any shape
or manner? If a glass of wine on my table
will entrap some young man, or some one
whose inclination is very susceptible to alco-
holic stimulant, into dissipation, what right
have to set that trap for his life? Whatright
have to throw over that drinking practice
the sanction of my usage and influence, so
that he shall go away, and acknowledge me
his tempter, and quote me as his authority
for shining? 1fthe contents of that spark
ling glass shall make my brother to stumble,
he stumbles over me. I am an accomplice
in the wrong. If he goes away from my
table, and commits some outrage under the
effects Of that stimulant, I am, to certain
degree, guilty of that outrage. The blow
he struck was mine; the oaths he uttered in
his debauch were, to certain degree, my
blasphemies I have partnership right in
them. But for me, he might not have ut
tered them, and by giving him the incentive
the angusge q septaFe pats si The efs Bottle
to his neighbors lips is accountable for
what comes from those lips under the inhu-
ence of the exciting draught, and is account
able too for what the maddened and bewil-
dered man may do during his temporary
insanity.
But in the next place, if it be wrong for
good men to set before others an example of
drinking alcoholic drinks, how much more is
it wrong to offer them directly as a matter
Of merchandise and traffic Here too I wish
to present the moral argument. That the
sale Of alcohol is legalized in many of our
States, do not deny. I see that, and l
know it, and weep over it. Under the ex-
isting regulations of the commonwealth in
which | reside, the traffic in Intoxicating
drinks is made legal, and for certain specific
sums men have 'license"-as it is techni-
cally tcrmed-to dispose of alcoholic drinks
in certain quantities to be drank as bever-
age. They have license-a legal permis-
sion. But in spite of the ridicule that has
lately been levelled at the doctrine, submit
whether there be not in existenc higher
law than the enactments of this common
wealth? [ submit whether the infinite Je-
hovah of Hosts be not mighticr Potentate
than the governor of any state, or the coun-
Gil of any city? And in the primal statute
book of the universe | read this anathema-
whose thunderbolt no human hand can stay
-" Woe unto him urho putteth the bottle to
his neiyhbor !" This is the divine declara.
ton, however men may sophisticate them
selves or delude each other.
The full import and powers of license
to "put the bottle' to neighbor's lips, is
greatly misunderstood and overrated Will
"license" free mans conscience from the
legitimate effects of that which he is doing
Will that make reparation to man for the
loss of his money, time, character, health and
soul? Will that make reparation to the fam.
ly robbed of protection, and to the commu-
nifty robbed of its real wealth, the name and
strength of its patriot sons Will that IL
cense sooth the widow, whose outward bad
ges of mourning are but faint emblcms of
the darkness that hangs like night upon her
broken spirit? Is there any traficker in
strong drink who means to take his license
up to the Judgmcnt.bar? If so, I entreat
him to look well, and see whose "image and
superscrption it bears" He may then find
that fatal document countersigned in blood,
and registered with the tears of the lost in