The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1870-05-09
JUNIPER MORALS.

JUMPER MORALS.
From the Albany Euening Journal
The Rev. Charles B. Smythe is a lively
genius. He achieved notoriety by denounciug
the bare ballet in sermons more sensuous
than the sensational exhibitions he affected
to deplore. He has tasted the virtues of the
mixed product of the berry of the juniper
and the patient beast from Orange county,
pronounced them exceedingly valuable for
the stomachs sake, and promotiye of vigor
and steadiness to the nervous system He
has even run the gauntlet of the press and
the priests, and got nothing worse therefor
than an admonitery rebuke, which he ac-
cepts with all humility and kindly feeling.
We know not which to admire most, the
effort at exculpation of the presbyterial court,
or the frank acceptance of the censure by
the admonished minister. The committee
find certain facts of an unfavorable cha
racter, to wit:-The reverend gentleman
lunched on a Sabbath day, at a restaurant
in which a bar for the sale of intoxicating
liquor is kept during which he called for gin
and milk, and his guests followed: one uniting
with him in his favorite beverage, aud the
other preferring ale, and this in violation of
the excise law, which prohibits the sale even
of the juice of the juniper on the Sabbath
day. Not only this, but he actually paid his
BILL although too conscientious to do so on
the day sacredly consecrated to rest and
holy pursuits. No blessing was asked on
the repast, and, worse than all the rest, he
sent his son to decipher his manuscripts in
order that the Sun of Monday might blaze
with the light of his sermon. Certain sex
tenuatlng circumstances are found. The
first one gravely put forward is, "the &C
cused did not ask any of his guests to take
any intoxicating drinks" but simply said,
"What will you have?" Evidently, the COM
mittee do not frequent bar-rooms, either
on the Sabbath or any other day, or this dis
elimination would not have been made. Let
it be known, however, that ''What will you
have? ?" is pronounced by the committee who
tried Smythe to be an unobjectionable for
mula before bar, even though the response
be Immediately ''gin and milk" sale" or
any other article. The other extenuatng cir
cumstances are, tkat the accused was under
considerable degree of physical exhaustion,
that the quantity drank was not large, and
that he did not get intoxicated. In other
words, he was tired it was but tiny little
thing, at best, and all the possible conse-
quences did not follow. The committee then
proceed in very grave argument to decide
several delicate questions. Going to the
restaurant was indiscretion; calling for gin
was a temptation of the barkeeper to
break the Sabbath; it is lat least
very perilous' to drink gin and milk in a
restaurant, and it may, therefore, be ''fairly
| questioned" whether the accused did right or
| not, and his conduct was calculated to en-
| courage others in the use of intoxicating
liquors. 1t seems to be a matter of doubt,
with the committee, whether drinking gin
and milk is censurable or not, and whether 1T
| is proper TO imbibe it in company of reporters,
and thus lead them from the paths of recti-
| tude; but on the whole they conclude that he
is censurable, recommend that he be rebuked,
and made to promise to walk more circum-
specify. The reverend gentleman was equal to
the occasion afforded by the report of the COM
mittee. He believed ''the document had been
drawn up with great deal of care, kindliness
of feeling, and impartiality," and while he
would like to have had the Sun censured
sharply, yet he accepted it in the spirit in
which it was offered, and acknowledged the
distinction between the facts and the ex-
| tenuating circumstances, but thought these
latter would have justified mere admonition
and not rebuke. Nevertheless he submitted to
the judgment of the committee, expressed
his sorrow that he had given cause for the
| same, and promised to walk more circum-
specify in the future. And thus the farce
| closed, after the rebuke had been formally
administered. 1t is unfortunate for the
| Church that the Rev. Smythe had not been
in other hands. The result is more scanda-
lous than the original transaction. Such
shabby whitewash can never hide from view
the conduct it proposes to cover. Already
the attempt is made by scoffers to deduce
from the trial inferences derogatory to minis
terial character and church consistency But
the deduction is unwarranted. Smythe is an
exception to clerical coRduct, as is the tribu'
nal before which he appeared to ecclesiastlC
courts. Nowhere else could such result