VEGETABLES V. BEEF.

Waikato Times, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 3097, 21 May 1892, Page 2

VEGETABLES V. BEEF.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir,—On Thursday of last week a Mr Beard, calling himself a " specialist in diseases of the brain, spine, and nervous system," advertised a controversy to be held in Cambridge, the subject being, " A Vegetable Diet v. Meat." Now, as the subject—if intelligently handled and discussed—is a most interesting one to all in search »l health and knowledge, many turned up, and, I am sorry to say, almost everyone in the hall gavo a unanimous verdict that the lecture was a farce. Mr Beard had two well-known residents to speak in support of his theory of vegetarianism, and, unfortunately for the opposite side, no ono seemed prepared. Mr Beard opened the ball by telling us that a meat diet was conducive to immorality, whereas a vegetable diet has the exact opposite effects ; in fact, according to him, should we all become vegetarians, most likely we should cease to be men —mera things. His whole opening was purely and simply a tirade against meat ; no information as to the real value of diet, nor anything that would benefit anyone. He certainly told us that in his own case, before he became a vegetarian, he was always sickly and ailing, troubled with indigestion, dyspepsia, &e., &c. But is that any reaso'i that his constitution and weakly nature being in such a bad state that he could not use good, wholesome, strengthening food such as most of us partake of, that flesh food is bad '! I say, No ! The consequence is that, instead of being able to do a good, honest day's work, pour Mr Beard has to go round the world " flycatching," as «no of the opposition speakers said. We also had from one of liis supporters a sort of half-humourous speech, tsllmg us he was not a vegetarian, but a lover of good meat, turkey, &c. This man wanted a cheap advertisement. Well, he should not. get it, so I let him alone. I may as well finish with the other one of Mr Beard's supporters. Ha was also one of the delicate, unhealthy ones who could not .stand a wholesome diet, and lie is a fair specimen of a vegetarian, looking very much as if a good, straight honest feed every now and then would do him a lot of good. Plato, Cicero, Nero, and a Job more of the old world were quoted by this very learned gentleman, but it was the same with him as Mr Beard—vegetables, vegetables, or death. Now, Sir, one of our old and respected churchmen was called 011 to sneak, and he told us a few simple facts. Ha told us he was a flesh-eater, and that he certainly did not think it had any tendency to make him immoral. He was a good age now, and felt like doing many years to come; in fact, his father, who was a flesheater, married hie third wife at 90. Not bad for beef, was it ? I don't think he informed 11s if his father brought up a large family after that. Perhaps he did ; I don't know. But let us take a serious view of the subject and see what others say re meat and vegetables. Letlmly on food says : — " Meat: There is hardly a class of individuals, however poor, who do not make a strong effort to obtain meat. It would seem, therefore, to be a necessary article of diet, and though the English nation are, as a rule, flesh-eaters, yet they don't eat as much meat as the French. Again, he says : " Carnivorous animals, for example, are not only stronger and more capable of prolonged exertion than hei'biverms ones, but they are also fiercer in their disposition as if force were superabundant." Lelhely goes on to say : " The Hindoo navvies who were employed in making the tunnel of the Bhore Ghat railway, and who had very laborious work to perforin, found it impossible to sustain their health 011 a vegetable , diet, but as soon as they took the common food of the English they were as well able 1 to work as the English." Now, again, MiBeard quotbd Scripture in support of his vegetarian theorv, but what do we find (Deut. chapter XII., 21st verse), " Thou shalt kill of thy herd and of thy flock which tho Lord hath given thee, as I have commanded thee." So, if we look as far back as Moses, we find that not only were the Jews flesh-eaters, but it was ordered by God to Moses on the Mount Sinai to teach the people how to kill their meat for human food. We were also told that the ancient Romans were vegetarians. Now, what do we find in the " Acta Divina," or Roman Gazette of 085, years after the building of Rome: "The fasces, with Sicinius XV., fined nie butchers for selling meat which had not been inspected by the overseers of the markets." This surely contradicts the statement that the Romans were vegetarians, If a vegetarian diet was intended for the human raoe, why should our Maker have endowed us with a stomach calculated to digest the flesh of animals and to convert it into aliment; and, further, to aid the stomach we are furnished with carniverous teeth, and to complete tho system of arrangements we have received a propensity having a specific organ prompting us to kill animals that we may eat them (quoted from George G ombe). Nowhere can I find Dr. Lethely advocate vegetable diets, but theu, perhaps, it is as Mr Board says " Doctors—ah I woll, they have lost faith in their own drug* now ; they are going in for electricity, and I say vegetables." Now, Sir, in my htimole opinion this lecturing on diets, lecturing to ladies only, and to men only is another of those " chevalier d'iudustriu " means of earniug a lazy living and imposing on the unwary, and lam afraid, from another advertisement the worthy (V) specialist distributes, and the offer he makes in it, that he is a dangerous man, and a man who, under the cloak of wellwishing to his fellow-men, is doing more injury to society than all the flesh-eaters put together. I think, myself, that it would show a better and more Christianlike spirit on Mr Beard's part if he were to try and gain an honest living by lecturing on " Phrenology," for instance, than scattering broadcast such advertisements as he does.—Yours truly, A Moral Beef-eater. Cambridge, May 17th.