Is This Temperance?

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Takoma Park Station, Washington, D. C. · Aug 26, 1909

Is This Temperance?

The leading exponent of the Catholic faith in this country, Cardinal Gibbons, frequently poses before the American public as an advocate of temperance. In an interview at Chicago, on August 4, he is quoted, however, as saying:—

However much I am in favor of total abstinence, I feel that in the large cities, such as Chicago, it would prove impracticable, and if laws providing for the revocation of licenses were enforced in these cities, I fear the result would be the surreptitious sale of liquor.

As it is against the interests of any community to have liquor sold at all, it must be admitted that it would be against the interests of any community to have it sold surreptitiously. But because it is a bad thing to have liquor sold surreptitiously, must we, to advance the interests of temperance, grant the right to sell it openly and in all kinds of quantities? Must we abolish the law protecting the coinage of the nation lest some men coin money surreptitiously? Must we abolish the law against incendiarism lest some men take it into their heads to burn a neighbor’s buildings surreptitiously? Must we grant to men and women the right to live together without a legal marriage bond, lest some do it surreptitiously? Must we remove the law against burglary lest some men burglarize surreptitiously? The necessity of bringing about right conditions by law is not contingent upon the possibility of some man’s evading the law—surreptitiously. Justice can not tolerate a wrong just because some men insist on doing that wrong thing—even surreptitiously. The menace of a wicked business can never be removed by licensing the business. The laws which a nation needs for the protection of its citizens can not be based upon the attitude of wicked men toward law. Wicked men will evade any law that stands between them and their evil purpose if they think they can do it so surreptitiously as to evade the consequences. Must we, then, abolish all law? The cardinal’s logic looks that way; but the interests of the people could hardly be conserved by following that kind of logic.