, 1873-03-23
DRIVER, M'ALLIsTER. AND TIE CHRISTIAN
ADV0CATE


taken text from tho refusal Of Judge III
Allister to grant surcrseacas in the Drive
case to read tie Judge q pretty severe lesso
1n tue mora1ities. although it takes the sam
general view as tie Judge in ono respect
will be remembered that tho latter, after Eta'
ing tie points upon which he based his refus:
to grant tie WRIT indtlged in some sentiment.
moralz;ng, which had no special counectio
with tho law Of the case. It is thi
brief screel which las aroused til
-:dcocate- While inaor6ing the genera
statement, tho ADVOCATE does not heaI
ta:c to read the Judge Il eevero personal lecture
which must lead tho reader to infer that th'
Judge breaches what he does not practice. Iha
our readers may IaEo q clear comprehension O.
tie main point 1nado By the Jrdge. with which
,ho .d:oca!c coilacides, VIC reproduce tho closing
paragraph OF the decision:
Ills [Dzivers crime like jorty OF all those com
nL::eI Iy violence upon the persons Of Others WI:
cfcl y the excessive Of strong drinkr. This thu
record eancssscy Eho"a So far as this case is con-
c.=ue3 society," Jaiy 10 1ercerc its responsibility
~ Fay az; linn suffer tue penalties OF the law So
h. 1nst- AEl the warning uttere1 by lis crime, his
trial! and his rc.loid will be forgotten like the voicez
Of Ill ugly dream.
Thcpur7ort. if not the intent, ofthis statement,
which the Adc0ca:c substantially indorses, Is to
nnft the responsibility Of crime from the per
son rho commits it to the shoulders OF society,
because society allows the use OF strong drinks,
Which, of course, places the responsibility no.
where. We confess TIC are little surprised to
eco such doctrine as this advanced blythe Chris
tion -3drocote, or any other advocate Of Christi
.nity. VIC had supposed tho doctrine of per-
eonal responsibility to DO oneof the fundamental
elements, the very groundwork Of it's faith, and
that without this cardinal principle, there would
be little efficiency in the Christian system. Most
certainly, in all its appeals to Sinners the evan
Eelical pulpit insists upon this doctrine as vital
point. They are told, with great carnestneBs
end emphasis, that it will be no excuse for them
because other mon sin; to put it fti]l more
e:rongly, it will be no excuse even because some
members Of churches sin. They are told that all
the goodness OF society cannot savo them, and
that ell the badness Of society cannot excuse
them, This lesson is earnestly Impressed upon
them TINT thoy ere responsible for themselves
md that they must answer for them
selves in the Day OF Judgment This is the
teaching Of the D,ble. It is tho teaching OF all
religionists and theologians, from the Fathers
of the Church to those who are to-day standing
In the Christian pulpits. Else why vas q con-
science implanted in the human breast to infal-
1iblv indicate what Is good and wha. ia evil?
An illustration which affords parallel case
will answer our purposes. The Lord Gre
eted tho Garden OF Eden and filed it
full OF Ill pleasant things which were
gocdly to the oye and taste, and
created man aud the lover animals to live in it
aud enjoy them. Having done this, he filed
f&g tree with fruit and hung its branches with
k,tation, and, knowing the frailties Of Eve and
dam informed them OF the fatal consequences
WHICH must ensue from eating it. Meanwhile
they had everything in abundance which could
minister to the enjoyment of the aenses-a
pleasant sights, delicious perfumes. agreeable
s,unds, nEd dainty yands, and nothing to do
but to enjoy them, without care, without work.
without troublesome people about them, without
taxes to pay, or any OF the annoyances and
misfortnnes which distract their descendants |
But here the fruit Of the tree OF good aud
Evil constantly hanging before them, and, to in
crease the temptation, tile Devil was allowed to
Rccost Eve III an alluring form Of speech, and |
Invite Ter to cat of tho fruit with the assurance
thnt it would result in no harm to her. The weak
Aday,, xrarn p,,p;.1,,5
equally by banislmo'lt from paradise and coll I
dcmnation to lifelong labor. Now, according
to the doctrine of tho Christian Adroccte So
cicty Was responsible, in part. for the fall OF
Adam, and Eve, aud not they themselves. Tue
only eocietr OF that tinao Ues tho Lord and the
Devil. mud, according to this doctrine, tho Lord
end the Devil must share the responsibility. II
tue Lord had not allowed the temptation to OK
lst and to allure tue curious nnd dcklo Eve daT
1lter dag, aud it he had not allowed tho |
then most certainly Eve lad not fallen. | {
aud VIC might nll of us to thia day havo
been Tearing fis-!cayes and living without work.
Do vo understand tic Adcocate to carry OFT its .
'octEiRe to its logical aud analoecal conclu-
:ionso Ii Eo. do ro understand it as ready to
ay the responsibility Of Eye'a ain upon the Lord
nd ac1uit That unfortunate woman of all blame L
Il the prclniseB7 There is certainly no differ c
nee that can zee in tho moral bear
nga of tho two cases. In tho ono E
ase, it Tas an apple; in the other, | c
be juice Of rye. Tho forms OF the tcmpta-
ions difTor. but the principle involved is tho y
ame. If those who now provide temptation 4
. Sin are responsible, then those nho provided =
re with temptation are also responsible. On
1e other hand, il the Adcocake holds Eve A
olely responsible for the commission Of r
u, after yielding to temptation, then Ger =
'inly is the Nan solely responsible who ~
elds to temptation and commits murder :,
: any other crime. Tho doctrine which q,
10 Adrocate has advanced is applicable r,
} every degree Ct crime. If society is respon- :.