INTOXICATING DRINKS.

Although it may not fall directly within the scope of our subject, yet it will, certainly, be introduced by many indirectly, and will be used by them as an argument against the removal of all Duties from Beer, Wine, and Spirits, on the ground that this will be injurious to the physical and moral state of the People, by tending to the increase of drunkenness.

Without entering deeply into this question, on which so much has been said and written on both sides, a few remarks, though merely superficial, may be here usefully introduced, if only to place the question in its true position, that those who are under the impression that, the taxation of intoxicating drinks will prevent the abuse of them, may disabuse their minds of any such simple delusion. Strange and incredible as it may seem to many, yet it is true that this impression so strongly pervades a large party in this country that, it is actually urged by them as their strongest objection to any Scheme of Taxation which proposes the abolition of these Duties!

This must, therefore, be treated as one of the Objections proper to be answered, notwithstanding it will appear to many to be too absurd to deserve a serious answer.

However, the answer shall be as serious as the nature of the Objection will admit of.

It is impossible to deny that the removal of all duties from beer, wine, and spirits, will have an immediate and direct tendency to increase the consumption. But this is quite as true when applied to tea, coffee, tobacco, and sugar; and, perhaps, the increase in the consumption of these will be in a much greater proportion. The cheapening of necessaries and luxuries, has an immediate and direct tendency to increase the consumption. This is a necessary consequence, but is not necessarily an evil, as the Temperance Advocates seem to imagine.

That that which is good in moderation becomes evil in excess, is a truth applicable to many other good things besides beer, wine, and spirits. But as it requires a power beyond the human to eradicate evil, the best way of proceeding is, to make the good as abundant as possible, that it may prevail over the evil. It seems as if this life were meant to be a trial between good and evil. A hard struggle we know it to be, and it appears to have been ordained, from the first, that it should be so. The Temperance Advocates seem to think that this is wrong, and they would have it, and think that they can make it, otherwise. They admit that, the human being is created a free agent, but they think that he should not be permitted to remain so on this particular occasion. They remember the words of Him who said that, all who believed in Him, and lived according to His words, should be strong enough to resist all evil,-should be strong enough to stand in their own strength, that is, in the strength which He would give them, for, as He also said: "Without me ye can do nothing." They say that, they believe in all this; but, at the same time they say-Do not trust yourself-take an oath that you will not trust yourself-call God to witness that you do not trust His Word-that you have greater faith in your own pledge to men, (for that is the real meaning of the pledge) than in His pledge to you;' and so, in token of their faith in their own pledge, they hang around the neck of their proselyte, a little silver medal, suspended to a little blue ribbon!

They would make the poor simpleton believe that, he may thus deprive himself of that free-agency, which, in this particular, was so improperly given to him, and that he may thus avoid the sin which, otherwise he is too weak to resist!

Now, what has been the result of these little schemes for fettering man's free will?

This question has been answered by Mr. George Lucas, one of the ruling members of the "United Kingdom Alliance for the Suppression of the Traffic in all Intoxicating Liquors as Beverages."

Here is his answer in his own words:-" "I have here an Abstract of the working of the Leeds Temperance Society, from its origin in 1851. I find, in 1837, there were in connection with it 14 branches, 29 weekly meeting-places, 118 speakers on the plan, a Temperance periodical issued, and a regular system of visiting established. Now, 13 of these branch societies have died out at one time or another, and I think now only 4 of them have an existence, while only one of them has made vital progress. The 29 meetings have been reduced to 3. No speakers' plan exists, no system of visiting, no publication is issued. During the whole of the existence of this society, there has been a zealous and able committee, near £4000 expended, the best advocates in the world commanded; but, in spite of all, these reverses have been endured; and none so much deplore it as those noble men who have labored to promote the cause. Take now a few facts respecting Woodhouse Society, the one with whose history I am most familiar. It was established 19 years ago, had an active committee, every means that ingenuity could devise to promote its success was employed during a space of ten years, when the committee took a solemn review, and were entirely dismayed. They had got the people with them, but they had gone back again, and could scarcely tell from whence their committee could be sustained. This was their condition after ten years of earnest and sacrificial industry had been devoted to the cause; and I am satisfied, so far as I have ascertained the facts relating to Gateshead, and the Temperance Societies in general, that this is a summary of their history in the kingdom."

Such is the testimony of an unexceptionable witness respecting the modern scheme for the regeneration of society!

Truly,—as said by Dr. John Barclay, of Leicester, in his admirable pamphlet on "Ale, Wine, Spirits, and Tobacco,”—“The first and only real Temperance Society was established a little more than 1800 years ago, and by that Society of Christianity we are bound to be temperate, not only in drink, but in everything."

The cost of the liquors consumed in the United Kingdom yearly, is estimated at £60,000,000. Accepting this estimate as not extravagant, and assuming that onethird of that sum represents the amount paid for the quantity worse than wasted in excess, in that drinking which does perceptible harm to the tippler, this gives £20,000,000 as the sum lost to the nation by excessive drinking; and of this sum so wasted, the Exchequer is supposed to gain, and does, in fact, receive from duties, about £5,000,000, leaving the yearly sum of £15,000,000 worse than thrown away by the working class of this country; the whole revenue derived from spirit duties. being about £11,000,000 annually. These estimates are sufficiently near the exact truth for the present purpose.

Now, what are the conclusions to be fairly drawn from these facts without reference to any party feeling in the Temperance Question?

The conclusions are these :

1. That £40,000,000 sterling represents the cost of the liquors annually, and not improperly, consumed in the kingdom.

2. That £20,000,000 sterling represents the cost of the liquors annually, and improperly, consumed in the kingdom.

3. That £5,000,000 sterling represents the revenue derived annually from the liquors so improperly consumed.

Can it be fair or wise to stop or impede the supply represented by £10,000,000, to those who do not improperly consume, for the purpose of stopping or impeding the supply represented by only £20,000,000, to those who do improperly consume?

Can it be just or wise in a Government to draw a yearly revenue of £5,000,000 from that which is known and admitted to be so improperly used?

There can be but one rational answer to these two questions. It cannot be fair or wise to commit an injury to the larger number, for the sake of doing a service to the smaller number. It cannot be just or wise to make a profit of that which is an admitted wrong. But would the sacrifice of the majority in this case save the minority? Would it even serve them? All experience has established, what reason without experience might have shown, that it could neither save, nor serve. It is so notorious as to be universally admitted that, notwithstanding all the enthusiasm and energy of the numerous Temperance Societies and Alliances, drunkenness among the working class greatly prevails. And yet, among the upper class, it is equally notorious and as universally admitted that, drunkenness is so greatly diminished that, to see a drunken gentleman or lady,-(the last especially) is quite a remarkable occurrence.

Why this distinction ? if it be a question only of human appetite, as the Temperance Advocates treat it. Ladies and Gentlemen are human beings, with human appetites quite as keen for sensual pleasures as their inferiors; and, certainly, are not restrained from gratifying the habit for drink by want of means or opportunity. And in what does the inferiority consist, but in the inferior power of restraining the appetite by the reason? The evidence of this is in the fact, and is admitted in the very argument of the Temperance Advocates.

They say ;-"tax spirits."