Basic HTML Version
Removing the Temptation
205
liquors are considered a necessary evil!—
The Review and Herald,
November 8, 1881
.
Under the Protection of the Law
—The licensing of the liquor
traffic is advocated by many as tending to restrict the drink evil. But
[206]
the licensing of the traffic places it under the protection of law. The
government sanctions its existence, and thus fosters the evil which it
professes to restrict. Under the protection of license laws, breweries,
distilleries, and wineries are planted all over the land, and the liquor
seller plies his work beside our very doors.
Often he is forbidden to sell intoxicants to one who is drunk or
who is known to be a confirmed drunkard; but the work of making
drunkards of the youth goes steadily forward. Upon the creating of
the liquor appetite in the youth the very life of the traffic depends.
The youth are led on, step by step, until the liquor habit is established,
and the thirst is created that at any cost demands satisfaction. Less
harmful would it be to grant liquor to the confirmed drunkard, whose
ruin, in most cases, is already determined, than to permit the flower
of our youth to be lured to destruction through this terrible habit.
By the licensing of the liquor traffic, temptation is kept con-
stantly before those who are trying to reform. Institutions have been
established where the victims of intemperance may be helped to
overcome their appetite. This is a noble work; but so long as the sale
of liquor is sanctioned by law, the intemperate receive little benefit
from inebriate asylums. They cannot remain there always. They
must again take their place in society. The appetite for intoxicating
drink, though subdued, is not wholly destroyed; and when tempta-
tion assails them, as it does on every hand, they too often fall an
easy prey.
The man who has a vicious beast, and who, knowing its dispo-
sition, allows it liberty, is by the laws of the land held accountable
for the evil the beast may do. In the laws given to Israel the Lord
directed that when a beast known to be vicious caused the death
of a human being, the life of the owner should pay the price of his
carelessness or malignity. On the same principle the government that
licenses the liquor seller should be held responsible for the results
[207]
of his traffic. And if it is a crime worthy of death to give liberty to
a vicious beast, how much greater is the crime of sanctioning the
work of the liquor seller!