Mexico weekly ledger., 1881-05-19

o3aifnarily should carefully
aYeidtevarH form Of alcohOic drink
nobodE , Gan deny: BE is, 2 diseased
nobody can deny. He is q diseased
man, and his restoration depends up-
on observance Of thfso restriction. |
But by what logic does this mans
duty, become mine? Because L. have
admitted total abstinence as q correct
principle in his case, am !, bound to
admit it as correct principle for all !?
Are the sick to be the norm Of the
we'll? Is the matter of diet to be
regulated by the needs Of the drunk
ard? Why then not by the needs of
the dyspeptic. All, but (say they)
1t is to save you from becoming a
Well, is the logic any way
improved by this explanation? You
would put me on sick regimen to
prevent me from becoming sick. Be-
cause total abstinence is absolutely
necessary to drunkard's recovery,
you would make it necessary. to one
that is not a drunkard. Do you not
see that if you are going to prove
your latter position, you must have
another premise than the former?
The two are wholly unconnected. 1t
is as much an offense to the moral
sense of the community to spread
over it the restriction of the drunkard,
as it would he to imprison it with the
Imprisonment of the thief, lest through
liberty all might fall into thieving.
The second moral error of the to-
tai abstinence theory is its assump-
ton that moderate drinking leads to
drunkenness. The millions upon
millions of the human race who have
been accustomed to drink wine and
who never knew drunkenness stand
up against this atrocious dogma,
and YET this dogma has become an
axiom with the total abstinence re-
formers and they disdain to argue it.
They are so determined to have it
true that they have performed the
paradoxical operation of putting the
moderate drinker in the place of the
drunkard as the criminal to be pun
ished with scorn and contumely.
This strange mixing of things re-
minds US Of the calling evil good and
good evil, which a high authority
makes mark of very deep depravi-
ty. But the principal shafts of the
total abstinence literature are not
directed against the drunkard but at
the moderate drinker. The drunk
ard is coded and pitied while the
moderate drinker is scourged. Now
this sort of moral jugglery cannot be
beneficial it distorts and perverts
judgment and involves moral dis.
tinctions in chaotic confusion; i,
overthrows the ordinary reason, that
is so useful in all the relations of life
and leads to clanish obedience to
ruling minds. 1t is the old trick ol
the Jesults to weary the intellect by
mazes, so that it may in sheer fatigue
seek to be guided by them.
The third moral error of the tota
abstinence theory is its want of dis
elimination among things that differ
E'erytnlng that has alcohol in il
must be taboed, as it all drinks ina
had alcohol in them had the same
effect. Brandy, hook and beer arr
alike devils-poisons. This assault
upon common knowledge is blum
der that has the proportions of ;
crime. To say that certain drinks
that are wholesome and beneficial arr
the same as certain other drinks tina
are pernicious and destructive is
moral outrage which the whole com
munity should Indignantly repel
Beers and unbranded wines are pro
moters of health and strength whel
used judiciously, especially by thos'
that are not robust. They are tonic
anti-scorbatic and gently stimulatin!
to digestion.
The fourth neral error of the to
tai abstinence system is its assertion
that all drinks that contain alcoho
are poisonous, and that the presenc
of alcohol in them justifies the con
: founding of such beverages. 1t ha
been clearly shown by DR.. Ansti
, that alcohol In small quantities is NO
, poison, but a food, stimulative to th
system in the same sense rs othe
/ foods. 1t is only alcohol in larg
quantities that is injurious. In ligt
wines and beers, where alcohol form
only from to 10 per cent. we nav
alcohol in the form best adapted fe
beneficial effects; while IN brandie:
3 runs, gins, whiskies and all distille
liquors, alcohol is in dangerous pre-
portions. To say, therefore, tbs
everything that contains alcohol
t poisonous is false assertion; {
f false as TO declare that fruit is po
sonous because prussic acid, which
f q deadly poison, is found in 1t. Tt
s truth is, that nature has in her allen
S bic turned a powerful and dangerot
| element into q beneficial minister I
human wants, and all nations ha,
f recognized this vital difference b,
/. tween a moderate and excessive vi
= of stimulants and have testified
y the wisdom Of using natures provi
It ions without abuse of them.
: The fifth moral error of the tot
= abstinence system is its dependent
If upon contract rather than on
J. moral sense. Instead Of regulatir
e a man. from within it would apply
: straight jacket. Instead of allowil
d free play Of the mans individual
n and then endeavoring to instruct al
J. educate the mans reason, it wou
d in the moment of mans emel gen
N tie up his conscience with a pled
J. which when that emergency is pas
d he will bear irksomely and endeav
r to nullify or evade. In this way I
ID pledge becomes. a most pernicio
y instrument for debauching conscient
y In the first place it manufactures
/; new sin-always dangerous expe
I ment, bringing about reactl
10 which sweeps the soul into real {
n from its Experience In, committi
D. constructed sin, and in tue seco
o. place, it gives a. ready excuse TOGO
n, science against the moral argame
lr for temperance by covering 1t, witt
~ suspicion of conyentialitY. 7
arbpledge, therefore, is always an inja
~ and never .. help to true morale
\ ! 4 = IL y q