The Norfolk Virginian. [volume] (Norfolk, Va.) 186?-189?, 1896-12-06
A Reply from Timothy.

ASuitok iNpfIOik NlTSlntQn.
lnasmuch as this little correspondence
OF ours Is shrinking from the magnitude
or the broadside shot made Mt first by
the opposite party to n mere fusilade
with blank cartridges just for sake of
pleasantly. l would improve INV onnor-
tunity to furnish my part of the fun
In an honest effort to serve truth as
best can. n
King Alcohol" is Indeed OF quite adj
Vanced age, II he was coeval with Noah
survived the flood the other after the
Hood who survived the birthstone and
nre that destroyed Sodom and Gomor-
ran. Had God willed the destruction of
this iiendish agent that had done SO
much evil In the world why did he al
low him to escape the water on the one
hanu or the fire on the other? l would
not hold out the idea by any wording
Oh the foregoing sentence that God
would In any sense exercise special
providence over evil for the harm of
HIS creatures or the destruction of His
people. But the burden of my heart in
oil this controversy is to get at some
system whereby we may know the mind
OF GOD; his plans of dealing with the
world, His plan of operating His Church
on the earth, and the plan of duty He
mas mapped out Cor His faithful SER
wants on the earth. We cannot serve
COD by going to orphan asylums and
almshouseS and prisons and Denitentl
aries and inqurng of the Inmates what
particular cause brought them there.
ana then go to work on the inanimate
clement OF the perverted instrument of
Their downfall for Its destruction. If
KING Alcohol' was contemporary with
the antcdiluvians and the postdiliyiaus
IL Is reasonable to suppose he will be
coeval with man to the limit OF his D-o-
baton on the earth / say this not to
gladden. the hearts of those who wish
TO drink whiskey us long as they live.
but to fix an axiom to serve as n coIlat-
eral In the calculation of better truths.
The mere destruction or clements could
never please the mind of the Almighty
but. on the contrary, this kind of pro
ceuufe would thwart His plan In the re-
demption and salvation of the world ly
grace and faith. 1t would explode the
theory OF free agency and the doctrine
OF practical goodness In the economy of
mans salvation.
In the communication by the oppositc
party In The Virgininn or yesterday. the
Following language occurs: "Ther. arr
TWO great levers In the lard--one to-
manufacture liquor. the other to destroy
1t. Every one has his hand on one o,,
the other of these levers" Now. II j.,
difficult to see how this Is to be demon
Strated as true proposition. Is every
man In the state engaged In the liquor
business one way or another? I think
there are thousands I'm our midst who
can hold up their hands as In no way
connected with the manufacture OF
liquor or Its destruction by drinking a
or otherwise. But for sake or argument
admit that n man could destroy Il
Would 1t be In keeping with Gods plan
To do SO? With respect to things nro.
nounced unclean In the New Testament.
such language as this Is used: "rouch
not, taste not, handle not"-not destroy
1t. When II was reported that taree
were growing in the wheat. the language
used in reply was: Let both grow to.
Fether until the harvest"--nOy dpsirov
The lever destruction theory would
be more lmpracticable than might al
irst be supposed. There are great II
not insurmountabie, obstacles I'm the
way. ] need not mention them here.
but let 1t suffice to say that to become
mad, as 1t were, with men. elements and
politics. might be to put those working
this lever in an attitude OF insane bel
ligerency that would cause angels TO
blush and the Master to say: Eye know
not OF what manner Of spirit We are"
Further. the Introduction of the lever
theory into this discussion brinCs the
subject into the range of mechanics
where there are other machines Than
the lever to he considered. Archlmedes
The ancient mathematician. declared
mat ne could move the earth were he
provided with place to rest his lever
There are four things. then, entering In
10 this great process the lever. the ful-
crum. the object to be moved and the
motive power. The will of the manu-
facturcr. or seller. or consumer, or of
all three combined, Is the fulcrum The
nature of the case Is such that the
thing 10 he moved and the fulcrum arc
so attached by certain laws that these
two are united and become, so to speak,
Identical I'm mechanics, and the process
Is signal failure. 1t can't work
Now, II becomes clear that this theory
is incorrect. The thing TO be moved Is
the human WILL and II Is as strong n q