“MODERATION.”

Ashburton Guardian, Volume IV, Issue 820, 16 December 1882, Page 2

“MODERATION.”

The following is the text of a paper read by Mr S. E. Poyntz at the Olmrch of England Temperance Society meeting held last Tuesday night : “ The subject of this paper—viz., Moderate Drinking—is one which no doubt you have often individually argued, though still retaining diversified opinions regarding it. Nevertheless you will agree that it is one which will bear a large amount of future argument, affecting as it does and being as it undoubtedly is the mainspring from which emanate that dreadful curse of our social system, viz., drunkenness. Although some of the arguments I may use to-night may bo deemed extreme, yet I do not think I can be classed as a bigot, inasmuch as I hold that our cure for drunkenness, as a nation, must be effected by force of example and sound reasoning—more than by rabid denunciations (as is too often the case) of th se who have chosen to engage in the traffic, however pernicious, which is nevertheless a legalised trade. I shall now cursorily discuss this question of moderate drinking : first in its hereditary, then its medicinal aspect, and lastlyasto its example on the minds of others. The saying that ‘no man was ever born a drunkard’ has generally been accepted as as true ; but, my friends, the testimony of medical men goes far to prove the inaccuracy of its correctness. Dr Norman Kerr, a physician of eminence, in a paper on “ The Influence of Alcoholism of Parents on the Constitution and Health of their Children,” read before a meeting of the B itish Medical Association at Cambridge in 1880, fully illustrated the law of heredity in alcohol and its operation in the person of every member of certain families. He explained the probable manner in which the alcoholism of one or both parents affected the unborn child ; that the infusion of alcohol into the system, its effect on the blood, and the constant strain on the nervous system also affected the brain—assorting that the system of moderate drinking had a greater tendency to foster this law than would be the case with those who indulged in periodical fits of drunkenness. The only conclusion he could arrive at was to secure safety for the subjects of this dread law. All alcoholic beverages should be excluded from the sacred ordinances of religion as well as from the family hearth and social circle ; or, in other words, that total abstinence was the only remedy. This gentleman’s viev.s were supported by Dr Lunier and others. Now sir, thip seems to be a very .startling phase of the question, and one which those who pride themselves as moderate drinkers would do well to consider. How often are the well meant expostulations of abstainers met by such an ans wer as this: “Oh ! [’in all right ; I kaow when I’ve had enough ; you never saw me drunk, did you ? A glass or two will never hurt me or anyone else in moderation.” My •friends, with the awful possibility (remote as it may seem to you now) of your children inheriting your desire for indulgence, inherited perhaps to such a degree that though the parent might have lived a moderate man the child may become from the very law of heredity a drunkard —ls it not, I say ? Would it not be wise to for ever put from you what can only at the best give you momentary enjoyment, as it were ; whilst on the other hand it may leave you (unwittingly I grant) to consign another to a life of misery and ruin. But before I go any further, I would seriously :isk you to consider the question— Is there, or can there be such a thing as moderate drinking ? Putting on one side all sentimentalism, and, though unwilling to offend or wound the feelings of those who would indignantly repudiate the idea of being classed as drunkards, I must distinctly say a man must be either a total abstainer or a drunkard. There can be no middle course in the matter ; granted there are degrees of drunkenness as there are degrees of all other things in the world ; but where can you define the line of moderation ?it is simply an unknown quantity. Would you call a man a moderate drinker who could take two or three pints of alcohol of an evening and still have possession of his right senses, because he had attained this probably by years of incessant tippling ? Yet you daily see men of this class who boast they have never been drunk in their lives, and society calls them moderate men ; on the ether hand it brands, a man a drunkard who, through constitutional weakness or some other natural cause, loses his senses over a tithe of what the former can comfortably carry. Where then, I say, is the line ! It is, I think, open to question whether there is really such a thing as a moderate Irinker. In answer to those who object to the axiom that a man must be either a drunkard or a total abstainer, and that a line cannot be drawn at which excess begins between one glass and a dozen, and "who give as a contrary proof that neither can a line be drawn at which excess begins between one mutton chop and a dozen, or that because a man would be guilty of a disgusting vice if he ate a dozen chops at a sitting he should be koked upon witfi suspicion because he takes one—this seems to be a comparison that gives them no assistance whatever. If the question of alcohol is on all fours with the question of mutton chops, then the controversy is at an end. But there is no more common way of evading conclusions to which men .are being driven con ;erning one thing, than by making a forced analogy between it and something different. I ask is tsere anything in the effect of the few glasses of alcohol which carry a man to the limit of sober indulgence that at all answers to the unmistakable satiety which follows a hearty meal of chops and vegetables. It is only asking in another way whether the effect of a narcotic drug can correspond to that of food.* The usual criterion of sufficiency of food is <ha disappearance of the gratification of appetite. By a merciful ordinance proper indulgence is pleasure, and excess is pain. But can we say that the criterion of sufficiency and of sobriety in alcoholics is satiety and loss of pleasure ? The fact seems to bo that the bounds of sobriety are reached long before those of satiety would be reached under the ordinary laws of food and diink. But that is only one element of the peril. Alcohol, like opium, is not only capable in small quantities of disturbing the brain, but it possesses the fatal property of planting a fierce craving for itself in these who take it. Not in all who take it in moderation. We do not wait until a lion at large has killed everybody, or even a large majority of the population before we shoot it. Common sense will tell ns that what has bean frequently said of alcohol could not bo said, save in ludicrous exaggeration, of mutton chops. When it can be stated that ‘ abstainers from mutton chops have rescued innumerable men and women who had sunk into the vice of eating mutton and have saved a still larger number from that degredation when we can apos-

trophise vegetarians, as total abstainers are apostrophised, and tell persons who coniine themselves to garden produce that * they have achieved a great redemption for their fellow countrymen,’ it will be time enough to found important conclusions as to our duty upon the common relationship of brandy and mutton cutlets to the human frame. This is only another ‘ plausible lie of the devil,’ which has destroyed thousands of those who accepted it from the social opinion of their day the notion lhat alcohol can claim fellowship and analogy with simple natural food ; that the intoxication of alcohol is the same thing as gluttony in meat; that the ;vp oetite for the one is as natural and controllable as that for the other. This is the fatal error which underlies the dangerous serial drinking of these days, and to which I invite the earnest attention of all moderate drinkers. If alcohol possessed the character and exerted only the effect of ordinary food, the temperance reformation would be an impertinence and a superstition. But before the temperance movement achieved the great moral results with which it is credited, and before it could show any reason for its existence at all, it had been discovered . . that alcohol has specific relations to the j mental and moral nature of man, which' causes its use to be attended with serious peril. I now come to the medicinal phase. How often do you hear this—“Oh! the doctor ordered me a glass of brandy every day now and again to keep up my strength.” Now, sir, I would just ask the question—Did the doctor guarantee the purity, or even the ingredients comprising the prescription ? You will say—Does he do so in any prescription ? There is not so much need, for it is acknowledged'on all sides that no medicinal drugs are adulterated in the same manner as alcohol. You take the prescription with the idea that it is going to do you good. You obtain it of course where you expect to get the best, yet neither yourself nor the doctor knows what it is made ot, or, in fact, anything but that it bears the name. Can * any reasonable man expect that that he ! knows nothing of can do him good. Never- • tholes*, you daily hear such as this, * If it h d not been for that brandy I should have been a dead man.’ Is it not more reasonable to attribute the cure to some natural cause or other, than so readily to give the praise to an article you know Only by .name? But the worst feature of the . medicinal phase is the after effects. Too frequently it leads to continued drunkenness, .with all its attendant evils, fou all know that alcohol is a compound which, by its composition, of necessity creates an appetite or a desire for more. Moderate drinking, as it is called, is a standing testimony to this desire; but even the most moderate drinker will say, ‘I only taste when lam thirsty.’ The social customs of society, of which the moderate are the daily exponents, would i give the lie direct. You meet a friend you perhaps have not seen for years. Custom says*—‘You must drink.’ Half an hour j after you make a good business bargain, you must bind it with another drink. A short time elapses: something else turns up; another drink. And so the day rolls on. That little word Ifo is easily said, yet it is not thirst restrains you from saying it. The craving created drives you on (and strong indeed will bo the man who does not succumb sooner or later). A few days ago a surgeon in this . town, , when talking on the question of prescrib- •' ir.g alcohol, said, *ltis a decided mistake ; to prescribe alcohol. You recollect Mr So-and-So 1 You knew him some years ago. You recollect he was a great drunk- , ard, but has abstained for some years. ‘ He was lately ordered to take a little brandy by his medical adviser, and he is • now fast drifting into his old habits again.’ 5 This is no isolated instance. Many of you here may know similar ones. It is becoming an admitted fact among medical men that the prescription of alcohol as a medicine is wrong. As far back as 1830 the leading doctors of Manchester and Bradford called the use of intoxicating , liquors ‘ not only unnecessary but abao- ■ lately pernicious’ In 1839 a large body of physicians and surgeons signed the fol- ■, lowing declaration, namely, ‘ That wine, beer, or spirits are in no way beneficial to health; and we declare such stimulants • unnecessary and useless either in large or small quantities, while large doses (such as many would think moderate) are injuri- . . ous to every one.’ Later still, at a modi- ,■ cal gathering of the most learned physl- ; cians and surgeons at Cambridge in 1881, various doctors produced statistics, within . their own knowledge, regarding insanity ' ‘ caused by intemperance, many of the ~ victims having been known for years aa moderate drinkers at the outset. Dr Sutherland attributed 11 per cent, of these , cases to drink; Dr Hack Luke 12 to 13 per cent. Dr Fletcher Beach found pare ital intemperance caused insanity among patients under his care to the extent of 31 - 6 percent. Dr Eastwood at- ~ tributed 25 per cent, Dr Oreignton Browne, F.RS., out of 500 cases within his personal knowledge, he attributed 15 per cent, to drink. I now come to the question of Example, and although a mo- . derate man mav within himself feel secure ■ aud possibly live all hi* days a sober man, in what relation does he stand to those around him? Putting on one side the features of heredity, what must be the outcome of such an example to children, .: as seeing their parents taking daily beer to meals, or a social glass in the evening. Surely they would be devoid of reason if r they were to expect the young with such an example daily before them to loathe and detest it as they should. How often does an indulgent parent alio v his chila taste of ‘ papa’s glass,’ 1 tele heeding that they are laying the foundation for that craving which is the first step in the drunkard’s downward path. Yet there are your every day moderate drinkers. How many a drunkard who might have been holding a good position ■ to-day if asked could trace his present shameful position to the after dinner taste ; in fact, it seems almost a miracle if children so brought up do not become confirmed drunkards, more especially here in the colonies where youths Just verging into manhood are thrown so much more on their own resources than' at

Home. This possibility of ruining your children—not by being yourself a drunkard, mark you ; for in that case the pos- . sibility is lessened, the sight of a drunkard being in itself generally a sufjicient deterrent for any child —this, I say, should make any man calling himself a moderate drinker for ever give it up, and range himself on the side of total abstinence, if only to feel within himself thqt no act of his could in any way be construed as liable to lead the child to drink.

Presuming I am addressing a body of, Christian men and women, who by their lives and actions are looked up tp by others, what is the effect of moderate drinking peon society at large ? Does it not terfd to conffrra drinking habits amongst the people to many of

whom those habits are fraught with ter? rible danger ? It therefore necptnes important for the Christian to exarpine his nioderate drinking from an objective as well as from a subjective point of view. The subject is not disposed of if hep sjrp come to the cpnclusion that pur ffigffep

nature is pot impaired by such drinking, or, in other words, that it is not a sin to be a moderate drinker. Another question

remains; Is our higher influence impaired 1 Are we not becoming the unwilling auxiliaries of customs, the re-

spectability of which depends upon virtuous example, but the fatality of which for thousands cannot be averted by- such exaraph* I have heard it asserted by

many that alcoholic beverages are nutritious and strengthening ; and moderate drinkers look upon such as stimulants for bracing up the system against the constant

wear'and tfcsrsfltfe; made up, a# it is, of keen competition, severe struggle for existence, and all the attendants necessary in trying to keep pace with others in the race of life. They do not pretend to look upon alcohol with any great amount of enthusiasm. No doubt, they say, it is . an evil in many respects, but then it is a necessary one, and it only remains to make the best of the matter. Now, the question for consideration is : Does alcohol possess the virtue that is here claimed that alcohol will temporarily dissipate a feeling of weariness, and pr duce one of elasticity is not, of course, to be denied ; but that it can do more than this, or even do this without producing corresponding evils of equal or greater magnitude I most emphatically deny. The very word stimulant is antagonistic to this view. A stimulant is that which produces transcient increase of vital activity. Alcohol, as the veriest tyro in chemistry knows, cannot give strength ; any feeling of buoyancy it may produce is due, not to the accession of energy, but to an injurious draught upon the system which has put upon it a greater strain than it can legitimately or continuously bear. Now comes the question, is alcohol a stimulant at all 1 Undoubtedly alcohol is a narcotic poison. When taken in sufficient quantities to produce death, paralyses of the vital organa ensues, and when taken in doses, which produce helplessness only, the senses are dulled, the mind is stupefied, and the limbs refuse to perform their wonted functions. If then alcohol acts thus in large doses, is it probable that in small doses it will act as a stimulant, to the effect likely not only to differ in degree, but to be positively antagonistic in kind, according simply to the quantity taken ? It seems to be scarcely possible. But this theory, it may be urged, conflicts with the facts. Alcohol does stimulate when taken moderately r on,the, contrary,,alcohol acts m the early stages, precisely as it. might be expected to do, on the supposi-' tionthat it is a narcotic. The individual feels recruited it is true,:but not because he has drunk new life, but because his consciousness of the loss of energy is deadened. His ipspgue; is : unloosed, and he waxes eloquent; hot on account of his powers of imagination or conversation being stimulated- but on account of his nattir JLcax it joV/rfhd sahse Hjf propriety.? being narcotized. The facta do thus square with the theory, and then we arrive at the same conclusion that alcohol is not a stimulant. If, however, experience is to be made the test v it will speak more pp wer- ■ for Ahh' use-of' filed-' .hoi, be it regarded as a stimulant or not. Total abstainers have never been charge! ££a*by, and if they can, as they do, successfully take an active part in the affairs of life, it tends to show that.those.who attribute support or success'to their'use of wine and spirits are affording an illustration of a common fall&dy/ wnd the performance of their accustomed duties must be attributed to

other'causes:; TSvax the transitory feeling of exaltation caused by alcohol ceases in time ftoibi&prftducßfl'in >.the s,arre degree, and recourse must be had to larger quantities. This entails increasingly pernicious effects upon the system, and results, as I previously mentioned, in a vitiated appetite, and an unhappy craving which may lead to disastrous consequences, both physical and moral. If these statements do not meet with response in the hearts of my hearers, I will ask them to bear in mind the first text of the first temperance address, delivered by Dr Justin Edwards, now fifty years ago, namely— ‘ The person who never drinks liquor can never be a drunkard.’ Then, again, if we take statistics in relation to health and longevity comes another reason why moderate drinkers should become total abstainers., . From a report made to the ‘'Nat&tfal Temfiefftwice : Lfehgne at the annual meeting in 1881 we find that the statist's oPlhe* Whited 'RirtgS toil TeWpferi ance and General Provident Institution shdwithersapaio&vhlae of teetotal lives as compared with those of moderate drinker*.'// institution -jnfluresQits members in two sections, one of which are total abstainers, the other moderate drinkers. The two sections are exactly alike in every other respect, about 20,000 lives being insured in the general section, and 10,000 in the temperance section. Returns of the expected and actual claims in both sections for 15 years from 1864 to 1»79 show that in'the general section 3,450 deaths were expected, and 3,444 took place, while in the temperance section the expected deaths were 2,002, and the actual deaths only 1,433. At the Bradford Temperance Jubilee in June, 1881, the following comparative statement between Rechabltes and Oddfellows waSf/giWitfO-JW /-tSei/Beidiabites, i 1870 year : Average sickness, 5 days 20 hours ; death-rate/J 1 KihJ«fi ff>ayfi»4*te,: 3S 2d. Oddfellows : Average sickness, 14 days 5 hours ; death-rate, 1 in 48 ; payments, 13s 9d. In 1877 —The Rechabites : Average sickness, 4 days 7 hours ; death-rate, 1 in 100 ; payments, BssJd. Oddfellows: Average sickness, 12 days 12 hours; death-rate, 1 in 45 ; payments, 13s s£d. Or the average per 8 .years from 1870 to 1877 —Rechabites : . Average sickness, 4 days 2 hours ; death-rate, lin 141; payments, 5» 9Jd. Oddfellows : Average sickness, 13 days 10 hours; deathrate, 1 in 44; payments, 13s Id. I would like to say a‘few words to those among you who have not yet joined this your casting in your lot with us to-nighl and taking our pledge of total abstinence, For all must admit evil of drunkenness demands 4 a sharp and stringent remedy. To save the drunkard it is indispensible that he should be pre Tailed upon never to touch the drinl which has cursed him. It is an honorable thing for those of you who think yoi could drink in moderation to abstain ir order to give moral support to those whe cannot. There may be some of you here to-night who do not recognise this obliga tion personally to abstain. We, ai a body, undoubtedly contend foi the practice of total abstinence, and looking at all the circumstances, we believe that the total abstinence pledgi has a high value, and that those who havi not taken it (though perhaps practica abstainers) will both strengthen them selves and exert a greater influence upoi others by taking it. Some persons know ha - e an objection to a pledge, th adoption of it they hold to bp an admis Sjon that they have not sufficient flrmnes in themselves to prevent them from run ning into temptation. Paley expose this objection in the following words * I own myself a friend,’ he says, ‘to our 1 laying down rules to ourselves of this port and rigidly abiding by them. They may be exclaimed against as stiff, but they Ore often salutary. Indefinite resolutions of abstemiousness are apt to yield to extraordinary occasions, and extraordinary occasions to pccur perpetually. Whereas t|ie stricter the rule is the more tenacious ye grow of it, and many a man will abstain rather than break through it, who wpuld not easjly be brought to exercise the aafpe. from highpr ino- . liyes, not tp meption that when opr rule is onpe known, wp are provided with »n answer for every importunity.’ The practical abstainer will feel his will braced by the open and public avowal which it involved in the pledge that he has abjured intoxicants; and when it is known that he is pledged he will not be importuned to drink as when unpledged. Bis temptations will then be fewer, and his power

pltidgftJWi hmK*. ! rTkomaj wtyi *»*>. wembers of been intemperate, bv»t tfaeMtifaajdse &• co«of tbooe who have

been on the verge of intemperance, and some who have been grossly intemperate Now, the strong here support the weak, their example, their countenance, and their sympathy exert an invigorat ng moral influence upon them. The bonds of union are sources of power, and many stand firm under the pledge, who, if left alone, would undoubtedly fall. All the members of a total abstinence society are bound by invisible but strong cords, the sympathies of a common conviction, a common pledge, and a common purpose to invite them, they have a special interest in each other —and the consciousness of this is a safety rope ; it keeps many a one who may be unsteady from failin'* and being lost. But there is even more°than this. The pledge is a public testimony against the use of intoxicating drinks. Personal abstinence is no doubt a testimony too, but it is less public. There are many in different walks of life whose position in society gives them great influence, and who. though abstainers, have not by a pledge given a public avowal of their abstinence. If there are any here now, I ask you to enrol yourselves with me, and by so doing you will, in your several spheres, dispose many who are non-abstainers to think seriously of our principles. Remember that public opinion is influenced by public testimonies. Whfln public questions are being discussed, how powerfully do mass meetings toll on the mind of the community. The very sight of thousands brought together to raise their voices on behalf of some great principle attracts attention, awakens thought, creates sympathy. In a struggle such as we are engaged in, they who simply say, “ We wish drink was banished from the land, we wi-h the tyrant alcohol dethroned,” but who will make no public avowal of their principles, who will not come forward and take their place in the ranks of the great temperance army, will contribute little to the victory. For the sake then of others even if you have no fear of yourselves, I ask you once more to join our band, take the pledge of total abstinence, and show to the world at large, your faith, willingness, and determination to assist in building up a sober and Christian nation. My friends I have endeavored, though very indifferently, but to the best of my ability, to put before you a few facts, and should any who has beard them bo still proud to think they have only their own welfare to look after, and that their will and mind is strong enough to enable them to say ‘ Thus far.will I go, and no farther, let them, ponder on the words of the Apostle, ‘ Let him that thinkest he ■tandetli take heed lest he fall,' and for fear of unforseen trials coming upon them which even with all their self assurance might prove too many for them, I say to them take the words I mentioned in a former part of this paper, as your guiding star. ‘ The man who tastes no liquor, can never get drunk. ”