Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1857-06-25
Law but an humble echo of this awful Sina-

ed voice to all grog-sellers: Thou shalt not
kill thou shalt not put the instrument of
death to thy nsighbor's lips. And it adds !:
If you do, I will have you punished, and
will have your liquors con6scated and de-
stroyed. And when we remember that over
two thousand lives are destroyed by liquor
in our country, every month, can we think
this too harsh? Can We not turn to the Ii
quor-dealers of the land and say to them,
with Neal Dow, and with Neal Dow's God !:
Thou shalt not kill As Christians, who
profess to revere the word of God, and to
make it the rule of our lives, can we not fall
in unhestitatingly with measure 80 much
in keeping with the Divine mind ?
And now, ,hlving answered the question, Is it
rightto pass such law? let me ask another:
Is it right to do anything else, under the
circumstances? Can We, in consistency with
the true design of civil government, and in
full fidelity to God, forbear enacting such a
statute? When you have carefully consider
cd what has. already been said, you will
scarcely be able, I imagine, to answer afir-
matively. Civil society, acting through its
constituted authorities, is moral agent, and
under moral obligations Heavens displea-
sure will rest upon it, if unfaithful in the
discharge of its duties. Dreadful calamities
have been inflicted upon civil communities
for their criminal conduct. And if the
Maine Law can do any thing toward the sup
preston Of intemperance, when other means
have failed, it is the duty of the State to put
it in operation. 1t is under moral obligation
from which it cannot escape. 1t is rather
late now, to begin to question the propriety,
legality and business of such Legislation. -
The grand principle involved in it is hoary
with years. 1t has always been practically
admitted. The community has always ex-
ercised the right of removing nuisances Ac-
cording to the laws of your own State, the
exercise of personal freedom in certain cases,
isgreatly restricted for the public benefit. An
individual sending, accepting, or even bear
ing challenge for the purpose of fighting a
duel, though no death ensues, can never be
eligible to any Office of trust, honor, or profit
in the State, and may be fined two hundred
dollars. If any person buys stolen property,
knowing it to be stolen, he is liable to be
punished. Counterfeiters may be fined,
whipped, pilloried, and imprisoned. Keep
ing lotteries is punished with imprisonment
and heavy fines. Public gaming tables can
be destroyed, and gamblers can be made to
pay two thousand dollars, one half of which
goes to the party sueing, and the other half
to the State. Monies staked by betting par
ties can be seized and applied to the use of
the poor by the county wardens. A tavern
keeper who permits gambling in his house
can be fined and imprisoned. A person
hunting in the woods with gun in the night
time, by freight, may be fined forty dollars.
If you will examine the revised statutes of
North Carolina, you will find many such ca
ses. And why then, should we wonder at
law which entirely prohibits, under certain
penalties, the manufacture and sale of in
toxicating liquors as beverage, by which
thousands of our citizens are annually de-
stroyed, the peace and happiness of multi
tude of families terribly marred, and society
heavily taxed The most astonishing feature
of the whole affair is, that the demon of in
temperance has been suffered, by an intelli-
gent and Christian community, to run at lib
erty so long!
Why should the friends of the license sys-
tenn object to the grand feature the Maine
Law, prohibition Our license laws are
prohibitory. They say to some that they
may sell, and to others, that they may not.
If the State can confer the right to sell, she
can withhold that right, and if she can with
hold it from one, she can withhold it from
another, and where shall we fix the limit to
the power? Justice Catron observes: "If
the State has the power of restraint by IL
censes to any extent, she has the discretion
ary power to judge of its limits, and may go
to the length ofprohibiting sales altogether"
The Maine Law, therefore, is merelya car
rying out of the principle on which the Ii.
cense system is based They both restrict
the liberties of the individual for the public
benefit. ..
But there is long array of cavils. We
are told that it is the work of the church,
and of moral suasion, to put down intemper.
ance. Why not say the same thing Of gam
bling, murder and counterfeiting, and op-
pose legislating with reference to these
things? Why not appeal to the consciences
of men, and put down every vice by moral
suasion, without enacting so many laws?-
The evils of the liquor-trafic are ten-fold
more terrible than those of gambling, and
yet We have chosen to prohibit gambling by
legal enactments. We have thought that
the end could not we'll be accomplished in
dependent of the civil law. Does any one
imagine that intemperance is more easily
controlled, or that it is not so much to be
dreaded? If so, he is sadly mistaken. It
calls for all the agencies of reformation that
we can command. The church has e1erted
an immense influence for the suppression Of
this destructive vice. Her mission is no.
BILE and God-like one with reference to all
moral evils. But there are multitudes who
keep away from the sound of her voice, and
cannot be brought fairly and directly under
her conservative and reforming power. She
cannot we'll bring the arm of discipline to
bear upon her own members until an intem-
perate habit is formed, and then to remove