Wheeling register. [volume] (Wheeling, W. Va.) 1878-1935, 1881-02-15

proach upon the Lord Jesus Christ and
his apostles" Into this question can
not 20 now. II is enough to say now
that We do not need to denounce al
drinking of wine as either sinful or i'm.
proper. Very few can 90 30 far as that.
The drinking is not improper when con.
sidered alone-it may become 30 from
its relations and effects. One can sure
ly say, 81 do not think it proper for
me-" without casting any reflection on
Christ and his apostles. As to Christ,
indeed, and his apostles, there is no
evidence they ever drank wine except
sacramentally or incidentally. / can
find nothing in these six reasons, apart
or together, that justifies the Doctors
fierce attack on the Total Abstinence
system. II / ask why / should cease to
persuade men for the reasons that seem
appropriate to me, to abstain wholly
from the use OF Intoxicating liquors, 1
am told by this lecture-because. First,
some persons use untenable argument
in seeking the same end; second, be-
cause some people assume that moder-
ate drinking leads to drunkenness;
third, because some persons tail to dis
crlminate between distilled and ferment-
ed liquors; fourth, because some people
say that alcohol in any quantity is a
poison; fifth, because some people might
suppose pledge can take the place OF a
moral sense; and sixth, because some
people in condemning all wine drinking
cast reproach on Christ and his Apos.
ties although there is no proof they ever
used wine as beverage. Is this con-
elusive reasoning May l not say in
view OF such argument without denying
the great ability Of the lecturer when
discussing other subjects that his dis.
cussion OF this one is exceedingly strong
in the use of words and exceedingly
weak in argumentH.
The avowed object OF the lecture is to
prove that the total abstinence system
will not and should not prevail; but
when we note how little bearing the
reasons assigned have upon the pro-
posed end, we are justified in suspect
ing that the real object was to make
plea in behalf OF what is called moder-
ate drinking. There 10 grouCd for this
suspicion in the conclusion of the lee
ture, where, speaking Of the system he
could accept as right and likely to sue
coed, he says: "Such system would
be found in the exclusion of distilled Ii
quors from common use as a beverage,
both by public opinion and by law, and
the wise regulation in society and in the
State OF the use OF vinous and malt Ii
quors."
Now the theory Of moderate drinking
is plausible and we hesitate none to say
that if men would use only drinks that
are not hurtful and in strictly moderate
quantities, there would be no drunken
ness and not OF the resulting evils OF
which we complain and no demand for
prohibitory laws. But in practice, there
is no word in the language that has
proved quite 30 deceptive and destruc-
tive of men as that same smoothly
sounding word moderate. No definition
can be made of it that can be given
practical application. About all the
mischief that has ever arisen from the
use OF intoxicating liquors was born un-
der the deceitful patronage OF moderate
drinking. This devil in the disguise OF
an angel has draegep down to infamy
the men who stood noblest among the
noble in the pulpit, at the bar, on the
bench in places OF business and in the
most refined society.
The discourse was concluded with
short argument for legal prohibition of
the traffic in all liquors that intoxicate.