Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The commoner. (Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-1923 | View Entire Issue (Jan. 1, 1923)
Teaching Total' - . Abstinence During the fight for prohibition emphasis has necessarily been laid upon what the government can do, and friends of prohibition have suc ceeded in putting the GOVERNMENT squarely * against the use of intoxicating leverages. Leg islative action was, however, the result. I of a long period of educational work, during which the pmphasis was laid mpon MORAL SUASION. A large amount of literature was circulated con taining proof of the evils of alcohol when used as a beverage, and pledges were secured. This educational work MUST* CONTINUE; belief in the virtue of total abstinence is the basis of all legislative action against liquor. If the people are allowed to forget that alcohQl is a poison, a thing which ridbody needs and w'liich is like ly to develop a habit, always injurious and often destructive, we shall have a returp of The eVil in sometftew form. It behooves all of our churches, therefore, all religiousi organizations, and all institutions ot learning to increase rather than decrease their activities in encouraging total abstinepce. Every church ought to have a pledge book and all church members should be urged to pledge them selves neveT to use intoxicating liquor as a bev erage. Each Sunday School should keep such a book and enroll all the Sunday School children on the side of total abstinence. Why not adopt the same plan in colleges? What better service could the professors of a university, college, high school, or day school render, than to set an ex ample to the students by signing such a pledge as the following: ,“WE, THE UNDERSIGNED, PROMISE, GOD HELPING US, NEVER TO USE INTOXICATING LIQUOR AS A BEVER AGE." This question deserves attention just at this time when the pr^ss dispatches report dissipation among both students and professors. The Navy department is investigating the conduct of some of the Annapol s boys at a recent social gather ing in Philadelphia; and the morning papers of December 2Carried the following dispatch from Raleigh, N. C.: “Four instructors were dismissed from North Carolina State College tonight fol lowing the preferring of charges against them by students that they made wine in their' rooms. Previously the instructors had appealed from the dismissal ord§r but rescinded their action to night.” • Surely it Is time to renew agitation in behalf of total abstinence from intoxicating liquor. The churches'* are the natural leaders in any such movement; the Christian colleges should be sec ond and state institutions ought §not to be far behind. Of what moral value can a teacher be to a student if that teacher is violating the law and, by violating it, encouraging disrespect for government? Wherever the head or the heart has more influence than the throat, total absti nence is possible; where t2fe throat has more in fluence than the head and the heart, the person is not fit to teach. The Women’s Christian Temperance Union, the Anti-Saloon League, the Flying Squadron, Alcohol Education Associa tion, and the temperance comm’ttees of the vari ous churches are in a position to create a public sentiment which will compel (wherever compulsion is needed) active, affirma tive leadership on the part of those connected with religious and educational institutions. W. J. BRYAN. THE NORRIS RESOLUTION' * December 21* 1922.—Mr. E. L. Harvey, Exec. Secretary, Committee on Constitutional Instruc tion, National Security League, New York City. My dear Mr. Harvey: Answering your inquiry of December 15th, I beg to say that I am very much in favor of the main part of Mr. Norris’ resolution, that is, the part which has to do with the inauguration and the sessions of congress. The change in' the date of. the inauguration would not be of importance but for the fact that that date determines the date also for the hold ing of the first Session of congress. The change is desirable first, because the vote ought to be canvassed by a new congress rather than by the old congress, especially if ■there is no election in the electoral college and the duty of selection of Pres'dent falls upon the House. It'is entirely out of harmony with the spirit of our institu tions to allow a retiring congress to project it self through four years of an incoming admin is tration by permitting it to make the choice of the President, as it does where no candidate has a majority in the electoral college. Scarcely less important is it that congress should convene soon after electfon in order to give an early expression to the people’s wity. At present, the first regular sess‘on does not con vene until thirteen months after election. I pre sume this was due to the fact that time was given for the President to be notified and pre pare for the inauguration apd to martte the trip. As the date of the inaugural could not at that time be fixed earlier the margin of time between election and inauguration was utilised for the second session of congress. All the reasons that influenced the constitutional convention are now gone and it would be hard to frame an argument to justify the present arrangement. Besides putting congress to work soon after election, it is also important that n$ session should be held after the fall election. Repre sentations are most .to be trusted when the fear of election quickens their sense of responsibility. This is no reflection on congressmen and sena tors—it is merely recognition of what we ac tually find in human nature. Why can a roll call be demanded"? In order that members may be compelled to recdrd their votes for the bene fit of their constituents. Anyone acquainted with congress knows that it makes a great deal of difference, in the vote whether the vote is a matter of record. If the change proposed by Mr. Norris* resolution is made, th§, first session of congress will convene in January, two months after election', and the second session in January before the fall election. That enables congress to make its. Complete record before its members are called to account at a succeeding election. I believe it would be well to insert a prov sion to the effect that the second session must ad journ sine die at least one month before the dates of the fall elections. I have no objection to the second provision of the Norris resolution, providing for direct elec tion of candidates for President and Vice Presi dent, but the change which he proposes will be of -little value if the vote by states is retained. The change from election of electors to direct vote is not nearly so important as a change from election by states to election by districts, al though there is no reason why we should not have direct election by districts instead of elec tion by electors- Election by states gives the big states a large advantage over the little states and gives to the individual voter a rela tively larger influence than he would have if the vote was by districts. If, for instance, the vote of a state was so close that one vote dee ded it, that one vote would, in the state of New York, give forty-five units to his candidate while one voter in a small state might not give more than three units to the candidate of his choic* If the state is allowed two units and each d strict one, it brings the election nearer to the people and gives to the people of each congressional district the same proportional weight. I think it would be better, therefore, to let the stages elect two units, (one representing each senator) by a ma jority in the state at large and then^et each dis trict count as one unit—each district being con trolled by the majority in the district instead of being controlled by the total vote of the state. I think that it would be better, therefore, to vote by ^congressional districts than to have it a direct vote for President regardless of states or districts. If all lines were obliterated the temptation to fraud Vould be great in propor tion as one party was in complete control of the governmental machinery. To illustrate, the » Democrats Vould be at a d^advantage in some sections of the north while Republicans ^ould be at a like disadvantage in some sections of the south. Election by districts instead of by states would give us a very near approach to election by popular vote, without the danger that might come with election at large. t « Very truly yours, W. J. BRYAfN. Every department of the government, nation al and state, ought to be# compelled to justify its%existence and wherever there is an oppor tunity to consolidate them in the interest of economy and efficiency it ought to be done. Let every legislator make th's his slogan, and he is far on the way to solve thtf problem of re duced expenses of government. • \ The Republican newspapers are still engaged in trying to explain just what the overwhelm ing defeat of the Republicans in most of the states meant and just what causes led up to it. A big job like that requires a lot of time and effort. New Oligarchy The Americas Society for the Advancement of Science has presented to the American people a clean, clear cut issue which everyone can un derstand. In a resolution adopted at Cambridge. Massachusetts, in December.§ the Association (which claims to have a membership of 11.000 scientists > announced its belief in organic evolu tion In plant and animal life, including man. and added its protest against any discrimination against the teaching of evolution in the schools. It has been difficult to convince the Christian people that there Is an organised effort to use the public schools for the overthrow of the Bible. When the Bible was exluded from the schools— as it has been in many states—it was done on the ground that even the reading of It violated prohibition against the teaching of sectarianism. The public did not know that one of the real forces back of the exclusion was the atheism and agnosticism of those scientists who hare substi tuted Darwinism for the Mosaic account of crea tion. Having discarded the creation of min by separate act—creation Jor a purpose and as a part of God's plan, they have introduced and are teaching that which cannot be true except t>n the theory that the Bible is false. While the teaching has been open public attention has not been, until recently, called to its logical and ac tual influence upon the religious views of stu dents. v * The resolution passed at Cambridge make* the issue plain and the forty million Christians can now decide whether a band of eleven thousand scientists can demand pay for undermining the Christian religion in >ur schools. This i* a free country and anybody can be an atheist^ho wants to be. Anyone can be an agnostic IT he .pleases. These scientists are not denied the right to THINK what they please and to TEACH what they please. But they are not satisfied with that. Having assisted in prohibiting the teaching of religion they insist that they shall be permitted to draw salaries for teaching ir religion. They would dethrone the Bible -and enthrone science. Under the guise of teaching truth they circulate guesses and upon these un supported guesses frame a materialistic philoso phy of life. They attempt to set up an oligarchy in free America, the most tyrannical that has been at tempted in history. Political oligarchies are satisflied with the collection of money for the despots to spend and with the appointment or a fbw court favorites, but this oligarchy assumes to determine the most important of all ques tions, namely, manli attitude towards the Crea tor. It ascribes to man a brute origin and bids him trace his ancestry to the jungle. It mocks at the holiest things and then demands that the public shall tax itself to pay thfcse scientists for teaching Christian children what their‘parent* do not want taught. As the order compelling the Children of Israel to make bricks without straw hastened the day of their emancipation, so this arrogant and intolerant demand of a handful of scientists brings measureably nearer the day when those who deny God and sneer at the Bible will be compelled to build their ow& schools for the teaching of their godless doc trine. They are at liberty to organise them selves into the Ancient and Honorable Order of Apes—or if they do not like the ape. they can select some other animal as an object of ancestor worship; but they cannot laugh the Bible* out of the lilted States or, at public expense, poison the minds of the young. W. J. BRYAN. SHOAL WATER • •• /- - 0 . * —Kirby, in N. Y. World.