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dismissal ord§r but rescinded their action to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.
