Mississippi leader. (Jackson, Miss.) 1892-1895, 1893-06-27
PUBLIC CONDUCT.
Powerful Argument Against Nation
allied Drink Traffic by an
Able Writer.

as In Opposition to the Principles OF
Nationalist as Well as Prohibition
ists-An Article That should be
Read Everywhere.
In an article entitled THE Liquor
Question and it's Solution" in Demo
rests Magazine for June, John Lloyd
Thomas makes an argument against
the Naturalization of the Drink Traffic
which it will be found difficult to an
swer. 1t will be seen from the follow
ing extract that he opposes it from the
standpoint of nationalistio principles as
well as from that of prohibition. 1t is
the strongest argument we have yet
seen against the specious proposition
that is just now receiving some sup
port, and we cannot see how Bellamy
himself, the chief apostle of nationalism,
can refute the argument much less any
Prohibitionist
Mr.. Thomas says: Another solu-
tion, which has recently received more
consideration than it merits, and which
to the unutterable disgust of many
Prohibitionists, has received quasi
endorsement from some whose convic-
tions take shape from their financial
tions, is that which proposes to ma
tionalize the liquor business make it
a government monopoly remove the
inducement of profit by the public con-
duct of the liquor business at cost
price The Gothenberg system Is
quoted in support of this solution, in
spite of two facts; first, that they are
very dissimilar in character: and Sec
ond, that the Gothenberg system has
proved utterly futile as a preventive OF
intemperance and consequent crime
and pauperism.
There are two insuperable reasons
why the Prohibitionist can never con-
sent to ''nationalized drink traffic" !"
First, II remains ''the drink traffic" a
traffic in alcoholic poison FOR beverage
purposes, a poison which is just as
deadly when furnished by a govern
ment agent, as when sold by the slum
grog-seller. If it is urged that adul-
teration will not be so common as now,
it is sufficient to answer that no ingred-
lent in generally sold intoxicants is so
poisonous as the alcohol itself. No con-
scientious Prohibitionist will ever con-
sent under any circumstances to the
sale of alcoholic poison as beverage.
1t should be las some of the ablest
medical scientists of the world have de-
clared) prescribed only under the grav-
est sense of responsibility, sold in the
pharmacy only, and under the strictest
provisions governing the sale of pois-
ons.
The second objection to national
lied drink traffic is that it is nation
allied" One apologist for this solution
has fcebly tried to cover its shame by
comparing NATURALIZATION to mo Ii
cense," and urges that since Prohibi-
tionists favor mo license and the abo-
lition of the internal revenue tax as
step toward ultimate suppression, they
can with equal consistency favor ma
tionalization" as step toward Prohibi-
ton. The utter imbecility of this conn
parison will be perceived at a glance.
The Prohibitionist favors the abolition
of license and revenue laws in order tC
divorce the government from all com
plicity with the liquor traffic. To the
statement sometimes made, that this
would result in free whisky and
consequent unbridled excess, the Pro-
hibitionist has replied, The restrictive
features of liquor laws could remain in
force; but, even if the results should be
prophesied, better by far free whisky
sold without completely of govern
ment than a traffic In human lives in
which the government is a guilty part
ner, and receives profit on every as
sassination.' Naturalization" on
the contrary, continues the govern
mental assassination; and instead of
divorcing the nation from completely in
the evil business, divorces the other
partner and continues the business
alone. The Prohibitionist, under pres
ent circumstances, can truthfully de-
clare that he has entered his unavail-
ing protest against the joint operation,
and is an unwilling victim, rather than
a contributing agent to the shame.
Should he consent to the ''nationaliza-
ton solution, he would be crimsoned
with the blood of the slain, and guilty
with others of the murder Certainly
the Prohibitionist will never be shared
in such a net, no matter how he may
have mistakenly oonfided in those who
spread the net.
But the Nationalist, if he under
stands the spirit of Nationalism, should
be as strongly opposed to this heresy
as is the Prohibitionist. The political
economy on which the Nationalist
bases his theory of government is
From all according to ability, to all
according to needs" 1t is a scientifi-
cally demonstrated truism that alcoholic
poison diminishes the ability of pro-
ducers; that it destroys physical vigor,
and dwarfs the mental energies; that
its cursed effects are not confined TO
the drinker, but transmitted to his
progeny. Certainly no intelligent
Nationalist will subscribe to the heresy
which would nationaliZe traffic whose
inevitable effects would be to reduce
production by destroying the ability of
producers.
Again, Nationalism benefcently pro-
vides ITO all according to needs" Let
it be noted needs" not wants"
Needs are those things which are re-
uuired for physical sustenance, mental
recreation, and moral development.
The future Nationalism may indeed
provide food, clothing, rest, harmless
fuxuries, education, and such helpful
diversions as will recreate, cultivate,
develop, and produce the perfect man.
But Nationalism will never minister to
the debased passions, the debauched
cravings, the bestial instincts of men,
who. by past vicious habit, or because
of the vices of their ancestors, are
cursed with animal desires. Will Ma
tionalism provide prize-fghts for the
brutal, gambling -hells for the vicious,
houses of ill-fame for the bestial? Ger
tainlv not; and IL is equally unreason-
able to expect Nationalism to provide
alcoholic or opium poison for the de-
bauchec. 'Nationalize the liquor
traffic" is one of the most unreasonable
illogical. and fraudulent ofall the solu-
4:.s. x.,L:ol, 49, ipAvita hlv doomed to