Herald and news. [volume] (West Randolph, Vt.) 1878-1943, 1898-09-22

weeks AGO communication appeared,
signed I'll. +. F. in answer TO my
| former article, "A Sumptuary Law, F"
/ having reference to the question OF
prohibition. | wish to congratulate
/ the author on having made the very
best of a weak case. His article con-
tanned much more ofargument and less
of rant than is common to the adyo-
Gates of prohibition. Not all the right
is ON one side in this matter, nor all
the wrong. Points can be made Tor
both sides. Some of these can be an
swered conclusively and some cannot.
| All the points should be considered,
given proper weight and a balance
| should be struck before any man
should proclaim himself either in favor
or opposed to prohibition. AS the
question is further discussed and new
points brought out or old ones are seen
in new light it is entirely proper for
any one to change his opinion.
In this article / do not propose to
take up any new points, but merely TO
direct attention TO some OF the errors
OF fact, Judgment and opinion that L
perceive IL. +. F." labors under. He
saws at the outset that the very caption
of my former communication was mis-
leading. That is a small matter any
way, but my critic is mistaken, that Is,
if the definition given in Webster's I'M
abridged is accepted as authority.
Webster says that sumptuary laws are
laws intended TO regulate, restrain or
limit the expenditures of citizens for
apparel, food. furniture, etc. laws
which forbid the use of certain articles.
If that doesn't cover our prohibitory
law my friend Is the first TO discover IL.
IL. F.Fr admits that the law does have
"a little sumptuary tendency" which
he says Is justified by .'extreme neces-
sity." 1t Is perfectly proper to char
acterize the prohibitory law as sumpt-
uary law.
NV prohibition friend says that |
"claim that only one out OF every one
hundred of moderate drinkers ever
reaches the drunkard's stage" Gov
eminent statistics, he says, show one
million habitual drunkards. and he
wakes sarcastic at me for making any
such preposterous statement What l
did say was: 1--WE all know many men
WIZ ctttAu ui.h III tuC Coutthuiiitf, WIZ
are respected for their ability, charac-
ter and worth. who sometimes drink
with moderation. They will, in nine
ty-nine cases out of "A hundred, live
temperate lives and die honored."
But government statistics" knock this
statement endwise, says my opponent.
Now know ii is always ruleable in Il
controversy when things are not going
your way to floor your antagonist with
an appeal to government statistics.
Sometimes this Is conclusive-and
sometimes not. A great deal Is charged
up to government statistics that they
are not guilty OF, and yet il is doubtful
ii any more unwarranted claim was
ever made than that they ever gave
any basis for any such statement as
that there were million habitual
drunkards in this country. Manifestly.
since government statistics" are not
gifted with second-sight or the power
of clairvoyance the only way any such
information could be CLEANED for the
benefit of the public would be by actual
inquiry. Does IL. I. F.n have any
recollection of being Intercepted by
the census taker as follows: Are you
an habitual drunkard ?" care there
any such in your family?n Pretty soon
government statistics will be APP
pealed TO to show that there are one
hundred thousand horse thieves and
ten thousand murderers in this coun-
try-and with just as much basis in
fact as that they show million habit
ual drunkarls. There are of course
no such statistics as my friend alleges.
lie would not say that he had ever seen
them anywhere except in some rabid
temperance tract or speech. That
there are not million drunkards or a
tenth part of that number no thinking
man will claim. when he stops to
think. That there are drnnkarcs and
many of them it would be idle TO dis
pute, but their number is not legion. as
seen in the disordered nightmare of
al. +. F."
My critic does not explain how such
men as Mckinley, Dewey and other of
our greatest heroes can do such a
wicked, awful thing as to occasional
ly drink glass of liquor and still re-
tain the love and respect of their fell |
About how many of
our great public men does IL. +. F."
suppose are teetotalers, and how much |
higher are they esteemed on account |
of It? My friend tries to hitch up the |
total abstainers with those who are |
carrying on the great reforms of the /
world, but he would, l am sure, hard
ly try to make that the test. Are there |
not great and coed men who are not |
teetotalefs?
Il. +. f." thinks that if any man is
able to drink in moderation without |
injury to himself he ought to abstain
for the sake of others OF less viii pow
er. Ii Il. +. F.r can 90 in bathing in !
water over his Head without getting
drowned would he think he ought to
keep out because some other man who
can't swim loses his life? A peculiar
truly.
To my query, Why not prohibit card
playing because sometimes some card
nlavers 0amble? nv friend renlies