Spirit of Jefferson. [volume] (Charles Town, Va. [W. Va.]) 1844-1948, 1882-04-04
MIscEilAHE0VS.
COMMUNICATED.

.Ar! Editor I'm your issue of March 2Ist
appears q communication over the signature
OF b. As your columns are open to public
discussion wo beg to be allowed space to re-
view briefly the article of this Kabletown
correspondent.
In the FIRST place, why this criticism upon
a dead issue should be deemed necessary, is
not to us apparent, yet may be explained in
language of divine wisdom, ''O1t of tho
abundance of the heart the mouth speakoth."
Now, Mr.. Editor, having been born and
reared in the Democratic faith, We learn with
regret for the FIRST timo, that the great Dem
ocratic party when it declares in favor of
drunkenness, is but enunciating one of its
grent principles ESQ says b. All me All
me! It is a new idea to Us that the State
usurps an authority which does not belong to
It by right, when it undertakes to protect
those who are powerless to protect them
selves. Bat so it is in these days of Wanted
liberty, when to hecoms ameuAble to law,
human or divine, is TO bear the shackles of
slavery. Libeyty-let US pers1c this thought
Guiteau and GugsTsol, among its champions,
with Beecher its chief exponent.
Mr. Editor, it is the ~reeently developed
tendency to break away from all restraint
that is fllisg our land with a~postacy and
orime. 1t is this ignoring tho right to bind
men, By constitutional law, that has drawn a
long, black mark, extending for twenty
years, over tho pages of American history.
Truly, liberty is a good thing, rightly cxer-
eised but as wo would not 90 to the oon~
denned criminal to learn what should be
criminal law, BY the same process of reasons
Ing, We do not expect to find all Of our cit>
liens advocates Of sobricty. Once in our
lifetime we circulated a petition for sigma
lures to be presented to tho County Court,
praying that license might not bs granted to
eae Of our citizens 10 sell intoxicating drinks;
bst we do not remember that a single drunk
ard signed il. They wanted liberty, we re-
nember that distinctly. Waat would B.
thirk of q nan, suffering from some loathe.
some Infection, bsiag permitted to range at
large. It would not DO to put him in
bounds. Oh, no! that would be deprivinp
him Of his precious liberty but still the cry
is for liberty. Liberty to defsco the image
OF the Creator liberty to run the plowshare
OF ruin through the land liberty to deprive
wcncn and children Of the necessaries of
life. This tendency of this whole thing is TO
run into unhoundsd license. 1t will not do.
however, to give this msttcr a political con-
neotieR. Politics is corrupt enough, but az
q minister OF tho gospel once remarked, cit
won: do to put everything on the devil :" SO
neither will 1t DO for Is in this case, to un>
load upon tho Republican party. The trouble
lies back Of thia, Gs we have already inti>
mated, snd finds expression in efforts to
throw off tho restraints which once Influenced
tho cousoienocs OF msn. We, too, aro levers
OF liberty nat, however. of the nineteenth
csntury school, which renders a man = slave
to his cwn caTasl appetitss, making him a
dangerous foe to society and an enemy to his
own sOui. We wapt the liberty of vigorous
Esnhood, and to This end We Invoke the
strong arm of :ho Law to assist in correcting
those evils which hear So heavily upon soc;~
city. But, says E, if tho constitution of q
State has a right to prohibit its citizens the
usc of certain articles OF drink, il also has the
power to prevent them from using certain
articles of food, wearing apparel, &c. This
10 sheer nonsense. Whenever the dress Of a
citizen t~ransgreSses the rules Of d~oceucY, the
law and society have always claimed The
right to interfere so also with food, when
d~etrImeutsl. to the health of the community.
Aad why not ? for what is thu law created
it not to protect the life, health and property
Q tne e'tizeh. SENEx.