Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1886-03-07


that communism to which you refer
the ordinary drinker finds it a little
more inconvenientt to secure his beverage,
let him charge that Inconvenience 10 the
right party and be willing to undergo 1t
in order that the greatest evils-tbose
of national ruin and Of wholesale
poverty and distress-may be avoided.
This idea is carried out in reference to
many other things; why not IN this
matter so fraught with veal or woe?
Would you, gentlemen, allow vicious
tempter unlimited privileges in your
household when you knew that his only
design was to get your sons money by
defeating proper education and corrupt
ing morals? Has government no
rights IN loco PARENTS
.. The assertion you make relative
to personal liberty, the good of the
State, and the usages Of civilized Gov
ernments" is unaccompanied by any
proof, even attempted. What PROOF
YOU can give remains in the dark.
Hence, Of course, there is no removal
from our mind of those ideas in which
we have been educated-yiz., that 50
far from the law being in antagonism
&" to liberty" &C., it is in the present
endangered condition the only way to
preserve true personal liberty and the
true welfare Of the State. The law
maxim Sic Ntere tho nj non dtlenpm
ldedas" $50 use your own as not to in
iure your neighbors) will apply here
with great force. Liberty is not
license. Its greatest enemy Is the idea
Of unlimited do-dS-yoV-please-ism, m
less there accompany that idea the re-
straint drawn from the rights of ones
neighbor. Governments are Instituted
for the benefit of the governed.
Their design should be to protect one
citizen as well as another. The average
mother has as many rights as the ave-
rage liquor-yender. If the vending be
proved to be dangerous to the safety OF
the many it ought to be suppressed.
Any other doctrine leads to the danger
of the communistic fanaticism which
you so Justly abhor. If | can upon
the principle Of personal liberty engage
in a commerce whose inevitable effect is
to injure my country, what is to re-
strain me from saying my liberty de-
mands that be allowed to do as |
please relative to carrying concealed
weapons or establishing a gambling
saloon?
3. Your resolution in regard to the
right of the Government A" to regulate
the quantity and quality of food, drink,
or raiment that a citizen shall consume
or wear" is so manifestly in accord
with our views that we feel obliged to
YOU for stating the matter so clearly as
being the doctrine Of your association.
! must be equally emphatic in the hope
that you will accord truth to the propo-
sition that man found offering the
market as good beef the flesh Of an ami
nal that had died from disease, or in
bis store molasses that had been i'm
pregnated with poison, or clothing
that had been upon a smallpox
patient should be abated as
nuisance. The right to select my
own food and raiment by no means car
RES with it the right to try to induce
NY neighbor to take poison as food or
an infected fabric for raimelt. | sup
pose it is equally clear that my right
even as to myself has some limit, I'M
less the idea Of personal liberty in
cludes the right of suicide. Hence it
results that the law sought interferes
in no conceivable way with your doc
t1ine Of the right Of rational selec-
ton.
4. Your teaching in regard to the
absence Of right in majority to ignore
the rights Of minority can but claim
our assent. The worst tyranny the
world has witnessed has been that of
a thoughtless multitude. But we re-
spectfully ask, Has a minority the right
TO ignore the JVyt claims of a majority
Is not the true doctrine found in the
decision of Chief-Justce fancy and
other celebrated jurists, to the effect
that society has right to prohibit in
diyiduals from traffic plainly proved
TO be injurious to the very objects Of
the social compact? We would further
respectfully submit that the horrors OF
communism are the legitimate ont
cropping Of such destruction Of reason
and mature judgment as to the rights
of others as belongs to practice that
Of using intoXicants) which inevitably
destroys the legitimate functions Of
brain-power. You are readers of his
tory. gentlemen. Take its lessons on
this subject.
.. The remaining resolutions you
publish. as well as the quotation from
Governor Seymour, must be regarded
as containing features that We regret to
see.
If you intend to say that the recent
legislation has in it any prospective
coniiscation Of valuable property, we
oin issue and ask for proof. Is mans
house and lot coniiscated when the city
authorities forbid the establishment Of
fsh.guano factory; II you intenI to
assert that in countries where fermented
wines are used " literally there is les,
drunkenness than where they are not
50 used, We again cal. proof, and are
compelled to say that abundant tcsti-
mony has been adduced to make
our skepticism as 10 Jour correct
ness on this point reach so nearly
positive assertion Of the contrary ef-
fact that we must be excused from
agreement with you until the informl-
ton be positively proved. The extract
from Governor Seymour has very little
to do with the present issue in Virginia,
for If the Governor were alive and
should study the provisions Of the
local-option law, h. would see that no.
ting is attempted beyond the plainest
and most legitimate functions Of a fair
and equitable government. The asser-
ton that "intemperance cannot be eX-
tirpated by prohibitory laws " does
not convey to my mind that no attempt
should be made to destroy, or at least
lessen. the temptation. Is theft extir-
pated from Charlottesville by the law {:
! ct would YOU have no law f0rbiddng