The wageworker., 1908-02-28
WHOLE HOG OR NONE.

The Wageworkers good friend, IL
Il. Hardy-than whom no finer gen
tleman of the old school is left with
us-continues his warfare on King
Alcohol, and as sort of side issue
to keep himself in good physical con-
bacco Mr. Hardy insists upon the
tctal prohibition of liquor right now.
and the very near prohibition of to-
bacco.
But why stop with these things?
Why not go right on and by the SIM
pie expedient of enacting law or
al, ordinance make each and every
cne of us the proper recipient of an
gelic wings, and thus save us from
the necessity of moral exertion? 1t
is just as easy as stumbling over a
Lroken scantling. All yon have to do
is to hitch an enacting clause to hui
n,anity. back it up with eonstable's
club-and there you are.
But, as We heretofore inquired, why
stop with whisky and tobacco? Why
rot prohibit coffee, which contains al
most as many varieties of poison as
Heinze has pickles? Why not prohibit
the luciolis oyster which is loaded to
tie gunwales with typhoid germs?
Why not prohibit tea, which has made
nervous wrecks of the good sisters?
Why not prohibit the baking of poor
and sour bread. which has driven
many husband and father to the
restaurants and thus to mis- gastrono-
mic doom? Why not cure all the ills
that distress us by legislative enact
ment?
let us proceed further and legislate
good into the minds and hearts of
men. What's the use OF wasting an
other nineteen hundred years trying
10 reform the world by preaching the
doctrines of the Man of Nazareth?
Every preacher in the land who is be-
seeching the aid of man-made law IS
confessing that the gospel of Jesus
AuIlSl Has idiOu. Anu hdNlAS shSso
confessed and sought the aid of legis-
lative enactment and the constabul-
ary's club, why not keep right on?
If we have a right to prohibit man
| from doing that which we deem IA
moral injury to him, have we not the
| right to compel, him to do that which
we deem a moral benefit to him? If
we may say that he shall not do this
and that on the Lords day, have we
not a right to say what he shall do?
! And If we say that a man shall not
visit a saloon in an orderly manner
within reasonable hours. shall we not
also say that he must visit the church
Of our particular belief at the hours
we deem reasonable? If we may by
law say what a man shall drink, shall
we not also say what he shall eat.
and wear, and think and dream?
| Why take any halfway steps in this
reform by statuatory enactment when
at once? We are going to wipe out
the whole drink evil by the mere en-
actment of an ordinance. 1t is SO
simple and so easy-on paper. For
nineteen hundred years the church
has been laboring under the delusion
that the Man of Nazareth laid down
Il plain and simple rule for the saving
OF humanity. for did He not say, And
! 1 if be lifted up, will draw all men
unto me.' And now we have found
what an awful mistake has been RAM
pant all these centuries. 1t has at
last dawned upon us that the gospel
or the Nazarene is helpless in the
face of modern sins, and that our only
salvation is a city ordinance and a
squad of special sneaks and spies.
Having discovered it let us act, and
at once. Let us enact the proper
ordinances. then we can close our
churches. dismiss our pastors, burn
our Bibles, recall our missionaries,
abandon our schools, and with folded
hands and sanctimonious faces we can