The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1856-1888, 1874-07-04

we fancy they would make it quite h5: for
any Of their neighbors who might by oarc!ess
ness cn-an much more by design-maintain
a retail rum shop in their neigLborho0d.
The recent case Of the King rs. Siders Illus
trated with what energy and how eaectually
an employer may - 70 for an offender against
the prohibition law, and with what approval
on the part Of the public. -whensoever be IS
i~ncommoded in his business by the violation
of the law.
To return to the question of profit and we
have remarked, that will soon solve itself. But
the question strikes Us thus If it l. not
profitable, why do they manufacture spirits in
all supervising countries, and why have they
continued so to do for a great number of years
It is certain that the Mauritius and PHILIPPINE
islanders who manufacture spirits-and get q
good price for it-can afford to sell sugar at a
less price than we can in the markets u which
we are obliged to resort. In other words,
whilst we are losing money at eighty or ninety
dollars per ton for sugar, they add to the credit
side Of their account the price of the rum, and
may make a proft-certainly do make a less
loss.
But it is said, the whole manufacture is pre-
judicial to mankind, and therefore SO wicked
that Ito use the expression of an esteemed friend
who was laboring with us) 50 the vengeance o.
God viii overtake this people if they permit
distillation within their borders" This is GER
tainly putting the case very strong and if true,
it is a clincher. 1t is, however, a subject that
it is almost impossible to argue upon, since no
man can with any certainty predict where or
how the vengeance Of the Almighty will oyer
take any man or nation. A man may invoke,
but cannot direct nor prophesy Gods vengeance.
But it is certain that every civilized nation on
the earth does distill, and those which do the
most of it certainly seem to meet with a reason
bic share of prosperity though misfortune
may sometimes fall upon them as it does on good
men. 1t may seem peurile to state such re-
marks as quoted above, yet very good and quite
sensible men have made them in our hearing
during the past week, and many will recognize
them, though the words may appear more pecu-
liar and less valuable when printed and read
quietly than when spoken in the heat of con-
versation, or defamation, for it can scarcely
be called argument.
Is it SO apparent that distillation is wicked?
We will not advert to the fact that our proper
ton would be merely as the rill to the ocean,
and call that an argument, since if 1T is 4
sin, the smallness Of our share in the general
sin will be no excuse for US. But if the only
use for alcohol was to drink, those with whom
we are endeavoring to reason might stand on q
frmer ~footing-and doubtless on still frmer
footing if. in addition to its being used only as
n beverage, it was also certain that all who
drink must and do fall into excess. But if
distIllation is a sin, does it not follow that those
who sell molasses to the distiller are partakers
in his crime You are not to manufacture
opium, which is valuable as a medicine, or
grow poppies to manufacture it, because many
aye, thousands-injure themselves by it. 1t is
a sin to make brandy hence to make wine
hence also to grow grapes to be made into wine
and by a parity OF reasoning is it not sinful
to make barrels or bottles to hold the wine
or spirits, or even TO saw slaves out of which
to make the barrels? War is an evil, and in
the opinion of many n sin therefore to manu-
Gacture arms and ammunition is a sin.
Blu: in truth, is there any consistency in our
vehemently Directing on principle to the manu-
%facture of pure spirits at home, (and for fear
| that some of us might drink it, whilst we
continue to import large quantities of spirits
from abroad, the sale of which we authorize
and regulate?