Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The commoner. (Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-1923 | View Entire Issue (Jan. 1, 1916)
f 3pw7"-?!iim ' ijp'wvw (fMWWWf Wwj SJWfW" WpW The Commoner JANUARY, 1916 13 ttrmrT "" WP""" "' " PROHIBITION The following, address presents in substance tho line of argument followed by Mr. Bryan in tlio sixty speeches made in Ohio during the week of October 25th to 30th, 1915. Opposition to tho manufacture and sale of in toxicating liquors rests upon the proposition that alcohol is a poison which, taken into tho system, weakens the body, impairs the strength of the mind and menaces the morals. This proposition is either true or false; if it is false then the cause of prohibition fails, and not only the cause of prohibition, but all regulation of the liquor traffic. If this proposition is sound it will be difficult to find a valid reason for permitting the manufacture and sale of alcoholic liquors as a beverage. We challenge tho opponents of prohibition to meet us on this fundamental proposition. Will they accept the challenge? No! Because all history supports the doctrine that alcoholic drinks are injurious. If you will consult your Bibles you will find that 2500 years ago Daniel, a Hebrew captive in Babylon, asked that he might be permitted to prove the superiority of water over wine. The prince who was charged with tho care of Daniel and his three companions was instructed to feed them with the meat from the king's table and to furnish them wine such as the king used, but, yielding to the eloquent appeal of Daniel, the prince gave them ten days for the test and when the time was up he was compelled to admit that Daniel and his com panions were "fairer and fatter in flesh than all the children which did eat the portion of the Jdng's meat. . From that day to this the test has been going on and never once has it been de cided in favor of alcohol. uBut-you need not rest, on, the experience of thVipast; you can. test it today. Select, one hun dred young men from any country or from any clime no matter under what form of govern ment they live or what language they speak. Di vide them into groups of fifty each; let one group use alcoholic liquor and the other group drink water only, and those who drink water will .win the honors In the colleges, take the prizes on the athletic fields and prove their superiority in ev ery lino of business. UNCLE SAM'S CARE OF YOUTH If you visit the naval school at Annapolis, Maryland, you will find there more than eight hundred young men, the pick of the country, se lected from every congressional district in the United States. They are being trained at gov ernment expense for government service, and Uncle Sam is anxious that they shall show the maximum of efficiency and capacity. These young men are not allowed to use alcohol during their stay in the college. Why? Because the govern ment believes that alcohol is harmful. If the opponents of prohibition think that the use of alcohol is a benefit, why do they not attack the government's policy and compel the college au thorities to give alcohol to the students? And if alcohol is injurious, why is not every father and every mother as anxious aUJfct the welfare of a son as Uncle Sam is about the welfare of the boys entrusted to his care? But it is not neces sary to multiply illustrations. Experience has everywhere and always been against alcohol. It has been not only accused, but convicted, of be ing an enemy of the race. All hall to the drink of drinks to water, the daily need of every living thing! It ascends from the earth in obedience to the summons of the sun, and descends in showers of blessings. It gives of its sparkling beauty to the fragrant flower; its alchemy transmutes base clay into golden grain; it is the radian': canvass upon which the finger of the Infinite traces the rain bow of promise. It is the beverage that refresh es and brings no sorrow with It Jehovah looked upon it at creation's dawn and said "it is good." BUSINESS WORLD AGAINST INTOXICANTS It is so well known that the use of liquor is indefensible that the business world is throwing its influence against even the moderate use of alcoholic drinks. The man who drinks is the ,last one to find a job when employees are want ed .and the first one to lose his job when employ ees are-being dismissed. This economic pres sure is being brought to bear against alcoholic liquors throughout tho industrial world. If any of you think that drinking is a business advant age to any man anywhere, let mo suggest a test iwhich you can apply between now and election day, and if your vote is governed by the test you will vote for prohibition on next Tuesday. Hore is the test. Go to the best friend you have and ask him for a recommendation; tell him to make it as strong as possible. After he has said all tho good that he can of you let him write at the end of the recommendation three words write them in red ink so that they will bo sure to be seen "And he drinks." Then take the recom mendation to any man who has money enough to employ another and watch 'his face when he reads the recomme.nda'tion and then wait for a job. No brewer, distiller or saloon-keeper ever added those words to a recommendation given to a friend find such a recommendation -if you can. If tho men who make liquor and sell it know its effect well enough nevor to put in a recommendation that the man recommended drinks, why should anybody else think it an ad vantage in business? If you think that a saloon helps a town, an swer this question: Did you ever know a "wet" town to put the number of saloons on any slcn board or In any advertising literature? The number of banks, business houses, factories, col leges, schools all these are mentioned as at tractions, but not the number of saloons or the amount, spent in them. Why? If the use of alcoholic liquor is an injury and if this fact is universally known, why is its sale as a beverage licensed? The arguments against the saloon are as conclusive as tho arguments against alcohol itself. IF A BENEFIT, WHY THE TAX? . Let me pass on to you an argument which was given to me by a retired farmer in southern Ne braska. He moved into a village to spend the latter days of his life and soon after ho had reached the yillage was solicited to sign a peti tion for a man who wanted to open a saloon there. He refused to sign tho petition, and, when asked for his reason, replied that-the town did not treat the saloon keeper fairly. The ap plicant for a license had heard many other rea sons, but never having heard that one given be fore, he asked the man to explain. The explan ation was like this: "You want to start your sa loon for the benefit of the town, don't you?" "Yes," replied the would-be saloon-keeper. "You think it will bring trade to the town and improve business, don't you?" "Yes," said the man who wanted the license. "Well," said the farmer, "if your saloon will help the town, draw trade and improve business they ought to give you a bounty instead of making you pay a high price for the privilege of starting a saloon." Can you escape this logic? You know thai the saloon is not a legitimate business in the sense in which you apply that term to other business enterprises. If a grocer wants to open a store in your city, you welcome him as you do the man who wants to start a hardware store, a bank, a restaurant, a butcher-shop, or any other place of business, except the saloon. But if a man wants to start a saloon you meet him at the city limits and say t6 him, "you can not open a saloon in this city unless you pay the city $1105 a year, and even then you must submit to certain re strictions. The butcher-shop can open at any hour in the morning, but your saloon can not open before a certain hour. The restaurant can stay open as long as it wants to at night, but your saloon must close at a certain hour. Everybody- else can sell anything else to anybody at any time, but if you open a saloon in this town you must not only comply with the restrictions named, but you must agree not to sell anybodv under age or over-drunk. Why do you make this distinction between the man engaged in other business and the man running a saloon? Because you recognize that the saloon is an injury, and. therefore, you subiect it to different treatment from that accorded neonle in other business. THE ABSURDITY OF LICENSE How absurd it is to license a man to make men drunk and then fine men for getting dr.unk. I heard this illustrated many years ago and I know of no better illustration of the inconsist ency of the policy. A man said that it was Hkq, licensing a person to. spread the Itch through a town and then fining the people for scratching, i Suppose a man applied for a license to spread, hog cholera throughout this county; would you. give him a license? No. He could not bring, enough money into the county to purchase a li cense to spread disease among the hogs; why,, then, will you license a mnu to spread disease among human beings disease that destroys tho body, robs the mind of its energy and under mines tho morals of men? What excuse do the representatives of the! browery, distillery and saloon give for opposing prohibition? They formerly insisted that any. interference with the sale of alcoholic-liquor was an attack upon individual rights, but that argument has been so completely answered that we do not hear much of tho personal liberty plea now. No man can assert as a right thai which interferes with the equal rights of others; nol thor can any man insist that respect for his rights requires the toleration of a system that invades tho more sacred rights of others, No man can claim that his right to drink Intoxicate, lug liquor requires the licensing of a saloon which pollutes the locality in which It Is situ-, ated and brings want and misery and violence into tho homes around It. And I call you to witness that the brewer and the distiller understand the saloon; they are not willing to have a saloon located near them. As a rule they live In the fashionable part of tho city and would not sign a petition for tho loca tion of a saloon near where their families reside. They know It would reduce tho value of their property and Biibjeot their children to an objec tionable environment. No, they will not have a saloon near them, but they will locate their sa loons among tho poor, knowing full well when they do so that their saloons will absorb the money that their patrons ought to spend on wife and children. They not only impoverish the poor and multiply their sufferings, but they In crease the death rate among the children. Who will defend them bofore tho bar of God when they are confronted with tho violation of the commandment, "Thou shalt not kill?" AS TO COMPENSATION And yet wo are now told that society ought,, to reimburse the liquor dealer If prohibition causes him any financial loss! Superlative impudence! There are two answers to this insolent demand. Ono is that prohibition does not take from .the liquor dealer one foot of land that he now owns; it does not remove one brick from any building that he occupies. It simply requires him to pu. his land and building to a different use. .Will any man complain that you lessen the valuejpf his gun because you say that he must use it. on gamo and not on human beings? If you close a saloon, the building stands there as useful as ever, with tho possible exception of the fixtures. Let the saloon-keeper turn his building into a bakery and sell bread to the peo ple who have gone hungry because the money that ought to have bought bread has been used for drink. Will the brewer suffer? His build ing can be used for other purposes. In prohibi tion states breweries and distilleries have been converted into packing houses, pickle factories and into plants for the manufacture of non-alcoholic drinks. At Salem, Oregon, a brewery is now used for the manufacture of loganberry juice the substitute for grape juice in that state. I belive in conversion. The most import ant conversion is the conversion of the individ ual from sin to righteousness. Among the na tions the most important conversion is the prom ised conversion of the swords into plowshares, and in business I know of nothing better than the conversion of an alcohol plant into a factory for the production of something which is helpful and wholesome. But there is another answer to make to the demand for compensation. Let the liquor deal er compensate the mother for the son he has taken from her; let him compensate the wife for the husband of whom he has robbed her; let him compensate the children for the father whom he has first trans formed into a brute and then driven to suicide. Let him compensate those whom he has wronged by restoring to them the pricelosj value of homes ruined and lives wrecked, and then society will be glad to compensate him for whatever pecuni ary loss he iray suffer by the closing of a busi ness which he knew to be harmful a business which can not thrive except as the community suffers. .. Does the liquor dealer intend to make restitu-' tion for what he has taken in the past? No! Ho jii&tB.' uW w " .AvA jriMk&Ln. .tW-i.fcfl jMak '!' U?fij-j