The Montgomery advertiser. [volume] (Montgomery, Ala.) 1885-1982, 1909-11-04
Letters to The Editor


REPLIES TO DIR. FLANCk
Rec. Mr.. sfnsett Answers HI. Mobile
! C-itje.
Editor The Advertiser:
In The Advertiser of October "a Rev.
~. a. Planck. ID. D., pastor OF Central
Presbyterian Church. OF Mobile. makes
| an attack upon me and the views whtcn
published in The Advertiser az ucto-
not correctly set forth the views which
| expressed, and while l do not pro-
pose to return rating for railing. nor
SHOULD be personal between DR.. Planck
| and myself. wish TO say few tafags
< touching the constitutional amendment
that VII help to place matters in toe
In relation to the acts. of the synod
/ OF Alabama of the Southern Presbyte-
| rfan Church those ministers whose con-
| sciences require then TO attend its an
nual meetings will probably remember
| that when its frst resolutions on tenn
On n i November II igos r.sc
and by parliamentary tactics secured
their adoption. For this 1 received the
thanks Of Mr.. Lander. the author Of
could not have secured their adoptisn
| but for my timely help. and the CONT
piiment Of being made y meInber OF
perance was given me, probably because
| OF this help. stand today by all the
acts OF synod, including its endorse
4 "
November rs, isos-the date OF Synod's
Pianck's statement. then, that my arrl-
! solemn and unanimous action OF the
Synod OF Alabama at its last session ~
Against DR.. Pianck,s statements '.Mr
Sinnott sees no hope save In q. return
to the old liquor sregirne.' and. The
present laws must be repealed to SAVE
the isSsSh IN a 81
! IL advocating Prohibition of liquor
| traffic by the State" and, "A thorouRh
sss tfs snOSa nHT s9
the Fuller bills.) l discussed no stat.
ueS but only the amendment, and did
this In the broadest and most thorongh
entity with brevity.
DR.. Planck,s attack shows such ig-
noranee Of sensttut,onat and adse Of stat rat
eretgnty. that find nothing In common
| between him and me In these matters,
and to attempt to answer all his points
| would require more space In your paper
than care to ask fGra At the riss OF
| repeating what Ifhaye already written
let me re-state my position.
on a broad and thorough view of 1t !
sincerely believe 1t 20. be inimtcal. to
some extent. to MEDICINE science, the
/ and the home. can leave the defense
OF the home to the anti-amendment
speakers, who will probably DO 1ui'
Justice to this feature In the amend
The first section of the amendment
i prohibits absolutely the manufacture OF
Of alcohol for medicine. science and the
mechanical arts and winA for sacrament
tai purposes This prohibits absolute
this, the making of alcohol and Of wine
that contains as low as Z per cent OF
alcohol or even loweS. 81
u facture. but permission to use. alcohol
wrong to make alcohol, it Is wrong g
! use alcohol for medicine. etc.. 1t Is
right to make 1t for medicine. etc. and
1t is wrong to prohibit absolutely It's
| manufacture for medicine. etc. Which
ever horn of this dilemma you take
There Is fallacy In, the FIRST section
81 Sure IN" Of this the rst time they read It
even though they may not be able To
. locate ii. Using the syllogisms of logic
The f,rst syliogism which is based on
the first clause of the first section is as
follows: The State should prohibit abb
sogtely the mapTfact 9Tos Cor is *.
ways wrong. evil, injurious :,
The use Of alcoholic liquors tof all
kinds Is always tSn ssa Wr9 sbeu sy prohb
solutely the manufacture OF alconohc
/, liquors (of all kinds.)
The second syllogism is based on me
! | second clause of the first section ana is
d The he State should permit the sale. IN
der due restrictions, Of those sraeles
/ The use of alcohol Is sometimes ben
: aHcial, as In medicine. science and the
mechanical arts and the use o. Mi ai
Therefore the State should permit the
sale of alcohol for medicine. etc.
, No fault can be found with the sec
) defective In Its second premise. VIZ, the
! use Of. alcohol Qncluding wine( Is al
! ways wrong. evil. Injurious Medicine
I cry out against 1t. The amendment 1t.
j self Joins medicine, etc, in TINS cry
j against this irst clause. IN pr sdho1
would be serious mistake to write II
: the constitution a prohibition tnat dc,
;, ponds for It's reason on premise tha'
Is fundamentally false.
q This amendment in this feature OF Il
e is the fruit Of false moral position u
a the past. Drunkenness Is one Of TN
I lighting It some have tried to place thu
: drinking of liquors containing ,alcoho
e in any proportion whatsoever IN th'
: same moral class as lying, stealing; etc
n The thief OF the robber who steals OF
s robs to the value of only one sent u
a thief or a robbsr as to quality ,s a,
e were one million dollars II cannon
e however he said that the man is
3 drunkard who swallows a spoonful o
e wine containing few drops o. aico
c hol.
r God has revealed in medicine. SET
e ence, mech anical arts and religion toa
J. there Is n wise and beneficial use n
/ alcohol (including winel. This use
5 wish to conserve. and do not propos
:. to shut my eyes to any truth that 60
makes known in his providence, how
ever heavy may be the pressure exert
ed by the self-constituted moral re
l. formers. In the temple OF temperanc
e / desire that no material shall De use
that will dissolve when touched by On
- first rain that falls. As do NOT destr
n that the saloon shall ever be round l
L - IL - N =