New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1871-08-03
HIBITUAL DRUNKARDS.

A bill was recently introduced into the
House of Commons by DR.. Dalrymple NJ. p,
providing for tho detention and management
of habtual drunkards. Tho means proposed
were the forcible confinement OF the patient in
an ASYLUM or sanitarium, on the certificate OF
"two physicians that he was incapable Of self
control, and was dangerous to himself or
Others" The bill was withdrawn, but not
until it had called forth vehement discussion
not only in Parliament but from the press
Mr. Bruce Home Secretary replied to the
largo and powerful deputation who urged
the matter ON the attention Of Government, that
gamblers and seducers could with equal justice
be incarcerated as devoid of self-contrOl and
dangerous to the community. And the press
with one accord cried out against charging
the opportunity for the Imprisonment of sane
men. already so abused in England and this
country. Popular attention, however, both in
England and on the Continent is directed to
the working of our Sanitariums for Inebriates,
and the truth which we have 80 long urged
that drunkenness is disease, and should be
treated as such, forces itself with the strength
of conviction every day on the public mind.
"Habitual drunkards,n says The London Da'ly
Nccs, care objects of pity rather than repro
"bation and the State, instead of fning them
d" five shillings when they are found drunk in
"the streets, would do better to help them to
ga cure.n
We doubt, however, if any such forcible
means Of cure as that involved in DR.. Dali
rymple's bill will ever effect it's purpose. Our
Sanitarians-the most successful at least-only
admit voluntary PATIENTS and depend upon the
quckened sense of manhood, honor, gentle
manly instincts as much as upon physical
means as remedial agents. tricked and
barred prisoner is in no sense en- parole. In
DR.. Parrish's eminently successful institution
at Media, the patients had no check but honor
to deter them from escape, and we believe in
but one instance has such attempt ever been
made. 1t is quite true that in many cases the
habitual drunkard lives only to be terror
and destruction to wife and children, but even
in the EXTREMIST examples, the right of incar-
ceration belongs to legal authorities and should
not DO placed in the hands of interested rela-
tives or physicians. We have had too much
difficulty in remedying that error in the treat
ment of the insane to perpetuate or extend IT,
Besides this, our English friends make q
mistake In deferring the cure OF drunkenness
as physical ailment until it Is habitual. The
diseased stomach and nervous system are most
likely, at this latest stage, beyond cure The
remedy should be applied when the first
symptoms of the deadly, insatiate thirst begin
to show themselves; or, still better, the pre-
vention before the inherited curse comes to
the light at all. In short, as we have often
urged before, the management of drunken
ness in the next generation lies in the hands
of Intelligent parents rather than of ply
scians. If child has father or grand.
father who "took his glass, and took it
safely" that child should be guarded from
its cradle; if it is girl, shattered nervous
system and morbid intellect and passions are
most probably its inheritance; if boy, cpl
lepsy, or q brilliant intellect, genial social
characteristics, and the memorable thirst for
liquor.