The Manitowoc tribune. [volume] (Manitowoc, Wis.) 1866-1878, 1872-05-02
To reform the intemperate.

No great progress will be made in cur
ing intemperance in drinking by pro-
hibitory and penal legislation until we
come to treat the drinker as RESPONSE
BILE being, and subject him to restraint
and to some substantial moral suasiop.
The persevering avoidance of this is
striking feature in all the anti-liquor agi-
tation and legislation. 1t treats the
drinker as an innocent man slnned
against by having temptation set before
him. 1t assumes that every person would
be correct and useful if not exposed to
temptation by the sellers of liquor. and
therefore, t hat if these shall be suppress
ed, everybody will be totally atstinent,
and therefore will be good, industrious,
thrifty, good family providers and so on.
And upon this assumption it holds the
sellers guilty of all the improvidence.
laziness and wotthlessness of drinking
men, and advocates laws to make them
accountable for it.
It even treats the drinker as having
just cause of complaint against the man
he bought his drink of, and as witness
against him. Upon the same theory of
the responsibility of the man who drink
when after course of scottish, selfish
worthlessness he dies, it is held that the
seller should account to his family in
money damages as if he would have been
a valuable husband and father if the sell
Ter had not tempted him.
Without seeking in the least to plug
the vent of this wrath against the seller,
It's results are not SO perfect as to debar
US from the consideration of moral and
coereiye influences to be applied to the
drinker. And first we may remark that
while it might be very nice to have the
world so costructed that there should be
no temptation to do evil, and so that all
should do perfectly right because there
was no opportunity to do other wise, yet
this world was not created on that plan.
On the contrary, men women and chill
dren are thrown into temptations of var
ious kinds, some of them much worse
than the temptation to drink. Yet they
are not held unnaccountable. They are
expected to resist temptation. That is
virtue, And if they yield to it they are
held guilty.
Is there any reason why the drinker
should not be held accountable as well as
all other sinners? None can be given
The temptation to drink is no greater
than that of other indulgences. But in
others he is held responsible, and thus
there is moral and cercive influence
held over him while in drinking he is
held to be the irresponsible victim, and
therefore the moral and cercive inhu-
ence is wanting. The hard drinker re-
ceives virtually license for his selfish
indulgence. The theory is lacking in
truth, morality. and justice. and there
fore it could not be expected to succeed
1t is wrong at the very starti2g point, in
assuming that the drunkard would be all
right if liquor could be kept from him.
On the contrary the taking to drink is
proof of a constitutional moral defect,
which would be pretty sure to find some
other outlet or to lead to worthlessness
in some other way if there were.no liquor.
Likewise with the grosser forms of
drunkenness. Where men spend all their
wages for drink, and leave their families
to want, and even spend the earnings of
their wives and children for drink, these
men have defect in their natures. Their
selfish sensuality takes this form; but it
is much more probable that their natur-
al worthlessness made them sots, than
that drink make them good for nothing.
But an agreement of all as to which
was the cause of the sottishness-the
mans original nature or the liquors.
not at all requisite to the consideration
of the application of coercive and moral
influences to the drinker. Upon either
theory of the cause these preventive
means are just as necessary and just as
affective. And they are equally proper
whether it be assumed that the drinker
is helpless, irresr onsible victim, or
man morally accountable.
As to the place where preventive or
remedial measures shall come in, there
surely can be no more difficulty in finding
that, than in finding where cause has
accrued for damages to the family Of the
drunkard. In every case where there is
ground for notice to the seller that he
must not sell liquor to person because
he is injuring himself and his family and
in every case where there is ground for
suing the seller for consequential injuries
to the drinkers family, there is a case for
the interpo>ition of authority to take
charge Of the drinker himself If be is
morally unaeeountable, is subject
for the public guardianship. II he is
morally accountable, he is . subject for
the pubic's reformatory treatment. And