The Montgomery advertiser., 1909-10-24
,Lsfsers c TRs Editos
my. pa. pLANcx

n~ne~,. =. ss--s..,. c.-.t. <. & ss. si..ess: x.ess..Ds. osn"e." s' Editor The Advertiser:
 vexY remarkabie piece of cam Re.en 95ssrat9re has come to my no- rom . Prsebytertan minister. 1t ts In such acoeFd with the views of the pro-ltQuor crowd as to be adopted by them as part of their campaign It, It is evident .hst at less. 1s per ceat q the opponents of the arnend-
 msnt dseise a restoration of the sa-
 ssss. wss 1ay lk.s 0GiSsss, dirso,,on u'' .o De + [. the more rsmarkab,. because
 s s ss: ,s :ssh o f .s .hs synos os s
 Some Soav M Hs ,s: last session, or tIsr,cn whicn recorded the terrific. effects os the IT. nod @ sssrs l.. .sssineny i aeny'' against this eyil and recommends to all our peo- pas Sos ins Sss Sf al, isgitim,sSss ate sns.ns s.n
 mend that the. synod hereby express its htgh appreciation of the work done Iooy sns Anti Saloon League in behalf them ss the ss. ,ss Ss s. p.a1y psD
 1t that prompted the action of Synod. Remarkabie also as to It's discover mont conceais "an insidious attack upon the church of God" They who framed t. and they who vote for IL. enrs.,,sn eSnniys as the de;truction S,,,o of the be moderate in reviewing such as- and patriotism of that great body of amendment The author finds this treaoherous purpose tfor that Is what insidious means) lurking in law 70 contrfvsd ss to make it Impossible for ramentsi Wise 'nSaf Either to shs ss0rs Church S must violate law or 1t must perish. II cannot take advantage of the spec ial provision that excepts sacrament, combination of conflicting principles. Hence the amendment must be defeat ed In order that the present laws may mental wine causes the church to per ish. Think of tt: the life of the Chris tian church contingent upon the H. quor market. which the Fuller laws no hope save in a return, to the old be repealed to save the church ,o;H,..s, IL is hard E. to believe that so.sgpeil .gsi the existence of the Church of God de- bends upon conditions that nurture and sustain the horyid liquor traffic. nS oS hs sss ,vo s the 1hes S 1t is charged that the amendment is based. First. that the framers of the amendment were governed by this any purpose whatever is sin" And secondly. upon this principle. 'that the use of alcohol is sometimes" vir- tue. +t as4 ..
 These two contradictory premises the author says lie at the base of the amendment. He assumes that there could be no other reason influencing their structure. but that the manufac- itself: and that the use of 1t was "damning" sin. and could not be tol erated under any circumstance. This
 deny .Sat Ssry tSs S s Sassd ment no where intimates that the manufacture and use of alcohol Is In aSnse srOnsh the ~as opepatsons Shea Of the saloon, became an intoierable evii-- economic, social and moral. that pro- hibitive legislation became neces- cognizes the fact that there are ap- propriate uses of liquors that should be provided for. and this It does with sT ss snss, lssS ,Ss S, ssss into the amendment. creates himself the inconsistency that he charges. and then pictures Satan az having a gsod that his majesty was amused. was tempted to smile myself.
 It seems a totally new, thing to the author that . law can exist with ex- eeptions. II ts q prtneiple, ot p,ossi statutes admit exceptions that are, wise and just. Does not the law pos itiveiy forbid manslaughter. and at the same time justify nansiaoghterf Does not the holy commandment for bid all labor on the Sabbath and yet do we not teach that works of nee. where Is the inconsistency in forbid ding the noxious and dangerous use Of thing, and at the same time pro- tecting it's legitimate use? D
 There Is absolutely nothing here to affiiet the conscience of the church. or arrest any form of its worship. lest they might be mistaken as rep- resentative. His views are utterly re- ters with whom have official rela- ton. And I pity the resources of campaign managers who must resort
 lo the use of such vulnerable docu- ment-
 Mobile. Ala. Oct. e1. 1903.