The Portland daily press. [volume] (Portland, Me.) 1862-1921, 1880-07-16
The Evils of i obacco.
Mr.. w. c. Prime Explains the Matter and
also Discusses some other Luxuries.

In one of his Lonesome Lake papers in the
Journal of Commerce Mr.. Prime writes
Coffee, tea, tobacco. the three luxuries which
have delighted and enlightened mankind, have
all three evoked the highest talent of artists.
probably because they are alike Injuries
which make men and women contemplative
receptive, ready to appreciate and calm to ell
JOY whatever is beautiful. The Turk drinks
his coffee from an exquisite fngan held by a
zerf on which Saracen art exharsts its rich
ness. The Chinaman takes his tea from an
egg she'll cup of wonderful fineness emblaz-
oned with symbols of peace, home loves, good
wishes, in enamels rivalling sapphires, and
rubies, and emeralds. The North American
Indian, however little he knows of sculpture,
carves his red pipe-bowl into some shape to
please his eye, while the civilized smoker en-
ploys sculpture and painting to decorate his
enjoyment.
There are some men afflicted with the idea
that these luxuries ought to be eradicated;
| who worry themselves to death and write
| newspaper articles, because people drink tea
and coffee and smoke tobacco. don't know
| whether any of the anti-tea and coffee men
are left alive, but some anti-tobacco men still
| contrive to sustain existence.
No anti-tobacco man has yet invented rea-
son against smoking which is not equally
strong against cream, water ices, iced water
| apple pie or doughnuts.
The doughnut is good subject of compari-
son. The prevalence of doughnut eating in
| the interior Of New York and northern New
England is appalling Medical science which
does not agree about tobacco is generally
down on doughnuts. And doughnuts in the
morning! Think of them. In northern New
England few breakfast tables have been set
| for fifty years, public or private, without
doughnuts. If up country gravestones told
the truth, you would find ten saying "died
of doughnuts,' where one said "died of to-
| bacco.'
The anti-tobacconist is fond Of appealing to
the statements of unknown medical men who
have said tobacco is unhealthy He knows
| perfectly well that for every one such there
are two to ten medical men who deny that
it is unhealthy. Medical science is that only
on which doctors agree The weight of medi-
ca! men is in favor of smoking. We are not
talking about excessive use of tobacco. Cold
water in excess is poison. Milk in excess is
deadly, All medical men agree that dough-
nuts are unhealthy.
| 1T is an expensive luxury" Yes, accord
ing to the tobacco you smoke What if it is?
That is no reason why man who has the
money to spend should not spend it for tobac-
co, or doughnuts, or fine clothing or beautiful
and pleasant things The argument may ap-
| ply to the man who spends more than he
| ought, but is bosh when carried to the extreme
that all expense for luxuries is wrong. The
men who use this argument against tobacco
exhibit its fallacy in their own persons, clothed
in luxuries where rough undyed gar rments
| would answer all their needs. 1t is one of the
notions of communism, which is unable to see
the stagnation of equality in property. The
arts of beauty, of making objects of luxury,
are the support Of modern civilizations. Re-
press expenditures to buying mere necessities
| OF life, and one factory of cotton goods would
supply the wants now supplied by ten; ninety
| per cent of the labor would be thrown out Of
employ; commerce would cease; governments
| would perish.
The duty of the man who has money to
spend it on reasonable luxuries is beyond
question, unless we agree to reduce life to bar
barIc conditions, forbid all the refnements
and adornments of civilization live in huts
clothe ourselves in skin and undyed woolen
| stuffs in winter, and dispense with all clothing
in August. No, we can't accept any argument
that our expenditures must be reduced to the
| bare necessities of life. We were made, by a
| good maker, with powers of enjoyment. Taste,
| smell, sight, hearing, touch, are all given not
| only as means OF life, but as means of receiv-
ing pleasure, qualification, delight. To be
| happy in the use of the senses is Gods blessed
| gift to humanity. Some enjoy pie, cake,
| doughnuts; some enjoy tobacco. The expense
| is no argument against the man who having
the money wherewith to buy doughnuts or to-
| Dacco as he prefers, or both il he likes both
| buys and smokes tobacco.
| But the anti-tobacco man says it makes a
| bad odor. He omits to say that it is bad to his
nose There is no greater impertinence than
| this OF making your nose the governing nose in
| society. 1t is probable that a large majority
of noses in America, Europe, Asia and Africa.
and IN each country taken separately, regard
| the odor OF tobacco as very agreeable. But
that is nothing to the argument. 1t only proves
that odor is matter OF individual taste. If
the odor is dsagreeable to you, that is a first
rate argument that you should keep your nose
| out of the way of tobacco smoke. 1t is also a
| good argument against smoking in public
places. But It is no argument against smoking
| at Lonesome Lake. You think it an evil that
| away up on the mountain, three thousand feet
| high, IN the free winds, any one can smoke to-
bacco. Confine your attention to this point
1t Is good way to get at the abstract question
Of the right or wrong of smoking tobacco You
will observe that all nasal considerations here
are to be determined by my nose and not yours
and your argument on odor is not applicable
Do hear you say that it is a bad odor and
| ought to dislike it? Pardon me, but that is a
common sort of impertinence. Nothing is
more ridiculous than to insist on our tastes as
good, and other peoples, which differ from
ours, as bad. Your nose is not to be poked in.
to other peoDle's business. Probably you have
always thought no one had right to 90 into
society with perfumes disagreeable to you.
and that you had perfect right to use musk
or violet or geranium or anything that you
think people ought to like. 1t is a great
blunder. My nose is for my guidance and
| qualification, not for yours. That is Gods
law, given with human senses
| The odor of tobacco is not only pleasant TO
me, and pleasant to pretty much every one of
the visitors to the cabin, but it is pleasant to
the most lovely inhabitants of the woods
around. Ii on any sunny afternoon of sum
| mer you visit us among the mountains Won
may see sight to do your heart good When
we SIT IN the soft air on the piazza smoking
| quietly, there are gorgeous butterflies, such as
| cupid might well love, which scent the aroma
! from afar, and come lowering around, and
light on our boards and moustaches, for they
| love the delicious odor.
But you say tobacco stupefies the intellect
and senses Nonsense, man. Don't talk All
| Surdities. 1t makes dull intellects brilliant
and gives brilliant intellects new yigor. II
rests the weary, refreshes the worn, consoles
the depressed. For every profound thinker
l .
teacher, poet, philosopher, preacher, every
man who has benefited the human race by
his Intellectual labor, for every one of these
| whom you can name as not smoker of to-
bacco you yourself know two or four or ten
who smoked. Your argument is so thoroughly
and stupidity untrue that it never could have
been uttered by one whose intellect did not
need the wakening influence of tobacco
Perhaps you say smoking leads to drink
ing" have heard anti-tobacco men say So
This is another absurdity, without shadow
Of truth. Smoking allays thirst. Doughnuts
lead TO drinking. You can't eat two without
taking drink, and if there is any cider
around you will be tempted. If there is no
cider yoa will be drinking beer or whiskey or
something bad for you. No one can drink
cold water with doughnuts. They don't 60
together in reason. This argument is good
against doughnuts, but not worth a cent
against tobacco.
"But some men who smoke also drink"
Yes, and some who smoke work, and study
and visit the poor, and are charitable and
useful; and pray. Try the argument on that
proposition and see what it is worth. After
all do you drop back ON the last resort of the