OCR Text |
Show I GOODWIN'S WEEKLY. 13 f A PLEA FOR JUSTICE. (By a Professor of an American University.) The object of this pamphlet is the consideration considera-tion of the prohibition movement whose aim is to prevent absolutely the manufacture, sale and use of all alcoholic beverages. The extension of this agitation, and the laws which it 'has succeeded in having enacted, will justify an investigation which this article is intended in-tended to foster. On the one hand is an industry which is one of the greatest, employing a vast army of men, contributing more largely than any other, in the way of taxation, to the support of the government, and that caters to a want that is practically coextensive co-extensive with what we call "civilization." On the other hand is a class of people who are convinced that to this traffic may justly be attributed at-tributed nearly all of the miseries of modern life, and who declare an uncompromising hostility to the business in every way in its manufacture, sale and use. It is an easy matter to appeal to a morbid sen-timontalism sen-timontalism in dealing with an issue which forms the substance of a reform. It is not so easy a matter to look at all that may be involved in the issue, or what may result if the issue is dealt with in a one-sided and unjust un-just manner. This appeal, then, is to intelligent and thoughtful thought-ful men and women to those, everywhere, who are willing to allow to others the same right of freedom that they claim for themselves. The fundamental argument of the Prohibitionists Prohibition-ists is that the use of alcoholic beverages is the principal cause of vioOr crime-and -pav-ar-ty--and that the only right way of dealing with the matter mat-ter is to prohibit, by stringent laws, rigidly enforced, en-forced, the making and sale and, consequently, 1 the use of such liquors. " Distinct issue is taken with both positions taken. First, it is not true that crime, vice, poverty, and insanity are, in the great majority of cases, caused by drunkenness. Second, it is not true that prohibition will prevent those evils. B And in the third place, the sacrifice of per- sonal freedom is too great a price for so doubtful a good. J In the first place, I contend that while drunk- H ennoss is one of the many causes of human un- H happiness, it is not the "Solo, nor the chief, cause. I The nations that are notoriously opposed to the use of alcoholic beverages are not any freer from the burden of misery than is our own. It is gen- erally admitted that Oriontal nations are not ac- customed to the use of alcohol but it has not I yet been observed that their lives are any hap-I hap-I pier than the lives of people in Christian lands. I And in our own country, while intemperance leads to the commission of crimes against persons, yet the most serious crimes against life and property I are affected by other causes. It would be tedious I to enumerate, in detail, the several causes of I crime. But let us select murder as a sample. The most awful and sensational crimes against human I life have, as a rule, been instigated by other feel-I feel-I ings than that of intoxication. Neither of our throe martyred Presidents was slain by a drunk-H drunk-H ard. Nor have the m.Q8t sensational crimes H against life beon induced by drunkenness. Jeal- H ousy is more of a menace to life and causes more murders and more mischief than does in-H in-H temperance. It is difficult to conjecture where the reason H of Prohibitionists is when, in view of the iiainer-H iiainer-H ous crimes against women and against property H that one thing alone, and that not the chief, is singled out as the cause of all human misfortune. The truth is, the charge is not true. The question of insanity is subject to the same consideration. Unquestionably, drunkenness may lead to insanity. So do some other excesses. The most reliable statistics of Insanity give as the causes: First, self-pollution and sexual excess. Second, religious fanaticism, or excessive zeal. And intemperance is given as the third cause, If the logic of Prohibition is to prevail it would be right to unsex mankind, or to forbid those religious re-ligious bodies whose practices or teachings lead to Insanity. This shows the fatuity of unscientific unscien-tific reasoning on a profound and intricate social problem. Let us glance at the probiem of poverty. What causes it? Are total abstainers, other things being be-ing equal, richer than those who are not? (I am not here referring to drunkards. That question ques-tion comes under another consideration.) It is well . attested, beyond the possibility of any 'dispute, 'dis-pute, that poverty, wherever and whenever it exists ex-ists whenever it becomes a general social condition, con-dition, is not in any sense attributable to the use of beer and wine. And any man whose opinion' has any value as a student of social economy knows that the causes, not cause of poverty are ' complex; are far beyond the reach of the human hu-man will; and defy any and every attempt at removal re-moval by any act of legislators. "What is the cause sui generis of human misery? What is the verdict of history and experience? ex-perience? Primarily, the lack of intelligence, the lack of moral energy, the lack of thrift and of prudence. And further, and not least, long established estab-lished customs and modes of living that defy reason rea-son and morals. It is illogical and unjust to single out instances of want, of crime and of ordinary wrong-doing, to intemperancerienliuman life for ages past-bears past-bears testimony to other things more productive of suffering. What shall we say about religious fanaticism? fan-aticism? which like a scourge has cursed nations and communities and families. No nation has been exempt from this awful evil. But what is the remedy? Legislation? Force? Only so far as to keep the right of the individual inviolate. The panacea for narrow mindednoss, for religious intolerance, is Education. Whenever a government has undertaken to rectify religious errors by force of law it has become be-come the abettor of persecution the friend of hypocrites, the ally of tyranny. Is society driven to the necossity of enacting drastic measures, such as are involved in absolute abso-lute prohibition, to curb or to prevent intemperance intemper-ance ? Is it the duty of the government to deprive every man of his personal freedom, because there are instances where men abuse their freedom? Is the church -as a moral function of society, to insist upon legislation taking he entire burden bur-den of ridding society of intemperance? Are there no other forces at work for sobriety, except prohibition? Is the American homo without power and influence for good? Is oducatlon powerless in forming habits of temperance and sobriety? Is the influence of woman for good, waning? Must the civil power stigmatize as a crime what is not a crime, and enact laws that convert honest men into hypocrites? These are questions that we cannot evade; and what and what answer shall we give to them? There are forces at work for temperance. What are they? First, everywhere, especially in Europe, there are rational laws regulating the sale of alcoholic liquors. A definite responsibility is placed on the person who retails liquors. In Germany, France and other European countries, drunkenness is not a crying evil. And if, in this country, the laws that are already enacted wore questions that wo cannot evade; and what answer an-swer shall we give to them? The prohibitionists wants to subdue intemperance intem-perance by destroying, in toto, the entire busi ness Cft manufacturing and selling the beverage. Hi Is the course suggested by a tempered judgment? 'mWm Are moral wrongs amenable to physical or civil MW1 force? For the sake of fortifying our position BB that a regulation of social evils is productive of llE more good and a preventative of more evil than , 1 rigorous prohibition, consider the prostitution of H woman which also means the prostitution of ; IB man. We call it everybody calls it "the social ' ijBi evil.' There are two, ways of dealing with it, IjBI repression and regulation. Which is more con- , ducive to the physical health and moral safety BB df a community? This subject is here referred ', EB to, not to discuss, but to illustrate the principle , that, even assuming the liquor traffic to be the " fl awful cause of human misery, there is a right, ,, fl and there is a wrong way of dealing with it. ', The spirit of Pharisaism has invaded the ranks : i Hi of prohibition. Its advocates assume that they : mm are perfectly virtuous and perfectly wise and j that all who differ from, them, especially every : I fK . man engaged in manufacturing or selling malt or 'K ardent liquors, is depraved beyond description, iB willing to aid in any crime, and foster any in- JB iquity. And those who drink, even in modera- iiB tion, are guilty of disobedlonce toward God. With- ills out entering into a religious argument, we may iflil ask, "What is the tenor of the teaching of the iB Bible, and what has been the attitude of Historic IBS Christianity toward the use of wine and beer?" , WSt- There is another fact to be remembered, and ; mm it is too important to bo ignored. And that is the IKf palpable impossibility of enforcing any prohibi- i jEol tory law in large cities, and especially in citieB IBb whore a largo foreign element resides. People IflR who come here from Germany, France, Italy, and IBK other European countries have been accustomed 'fflB JtQ use either wine prbeer jn thelr native homes, 3 MM and never even thought it was wrong to do so. iTIB In every land where the grape grows, wine is 'IB made and becomes an important article of com- iiB merce. And where barley and hops grow, beer HK is manufactured and consumed. The prohibi- 'fflra tionist says: "Those foreigners have no right to ylf drink if we forbid them." -ft Gentlemen, there are two things to be remom- "Bal bered. First, this is a republic a system of government that guarantees to every man an un- ' B molested right to pursue his own happiness if he '''Mm makes no criminal invasion of others' rights. JKai Second, any attempt to forcibly change the habits and customs of large numbers of people SB because you do not approve of them would entail 'vm a cost on the state that would bankrupt its treas- Bffi ury and corrupt its morals. ijflB In small cities a rigid enforcement of pTohibl- 19B tion is possible, although it is doubtful if it is , lfl really maintained. But in large cities it is sim- fBl ply impossible to maintain it. Thus, in Maine, MP Iowa, and Kansas, whore prohibition has beon fBl pretty well tested, the illicit traffic in beer, but ilif more especially in wine and spirituous liquors, is (1 J appallingly largo. "But," says the Prohibitionist, . "if prohibition does not prohibit, why does the ffiim liquor dealer object?" The question as ordinarily iffl.. propounded, shows the profound lack of judgment llll necessary to deal with any social problem, espo- daily such a problem as this. The liquor dealer MM may well say, "The fact is that men demand Wm some stimulating beverages. But you make, or -wm try to make It a crime to servo that demand. We . WM are not criminals, any more than you. And we M m simply insist upon the principle that our business shall be under the supervision and protection of reasonable laws. We believe that a discretionary H power should be given to those who are authorized wJ to Issue licenses, with authority to revoke any fflm license whenever they deem it advisable. We do Wm not stand for Intemperance. We stand for so- I Wm brlety, and for porsonal freedom. The American Wj republic can lei something about regulating the IM liquor traffic by (studying the laws of Germany. m In this strain the attitude of men whose interests jT are bound up in the liquor business may be made ' 'ff-f! 1, Known. It is dishonorable and humiliating for CffiO class of men to riso before tho public and make tho aspersion that the men who manufacture manufac-ture or sell malt or spirituous liquors are animated ani-mated by mere love of gain. Suppose that is true. Of whom is it not true? What is the banker in business for? And the grocer? The hotel keeper, and everybody, including the preacher? Tho love of gain lies back of every human ontqrpriso, and the man who does not possess it is noti above, but below, any good standard of worth. The honest acquisition acqui-sition of wealth is one of the highest proofs of mental exoallonce. There are two things that deserve our serious attention. Tho one is this: It is perilous to au-tliprize au-tliprize any human government to supervise the habits of its individual subjects or citizens. It matters not whether we call the government a republic or an autocracy. Tho essence of tyran- ny is always the same, and consists in suspending tho right of tho individual to regulate his own conduct, his own belief, his own religion. Man has suffered infinitely more from too much government, gov-ernment, from too much authority, than from too little. Governments are as prone to do wrong, to overstep their just limits, as individuals are. This is one great truth, and has a vital bearing on this subject. The othor is this: that the welfare wel-fare of society demands, not an unwelcome prohibition, prohi-bition, but a scientific and rational regulation of the business. It is tho duty of the patriotic citizens citi-zens to observe this truth and stand for it, and to remain unmoved by any turbulent reform whose motive may be right, but whose method is wrong. To abstain or not to abstain from using alcoholic alco-holic beverages is the right and duty of the individual. indi-vidual. It is not within the province of the civil authority to exercise its choice for the indiv? dual. , The groat . virtue of moderation which Pagan writers and Christian moralists have placed at the apex of human goodness is a generic, not a solitary, virtue. It is the quality which distinguishes distin-guishes virtue from vice, and goodness from evil. Lot us look to the State for the protection we need, and to the individual for the goodndss and honor due from him to others. |