POOK\ PATE. ^?>14^ -lIIec3S r.is.;". -'.;:-- --=":: ™Z.S3 000b33Bt. H m Discards >d OUTLAWING THE ALMIGHTY OR Prohibition Carried to the High Court of Nature and Nature's God Sy /. Vance liussen Copyrighted and Published by JOHN J. McCarthy 241 Worthington Street Springfield, Mass. 1923 PRICE $1.00 m HOW PROHIBITION BREEDS LAWLESSNESS This diagram should make clear prohibition's connection with the much discussed question of lawlessness in America today. Let the entire diagram represent all the people in America of whatever nationality, or degree of loyalty to our country. The large outer circle (A) represents those who merit the ap- proval of organized society as being thoroughly law-abiding and living examples of a citizenry which shows the majesty and safety of the law. The next circle or stratum (B) represents those who are not bad but have tendencies to break the law for their own convenience, profit or pleasure, yet are largely held in check from wrong doing by the influence of those in circle A. The stratum (C) represents the lawless by nature and those who would soon be in stratum (D) as criminals except for the in- fluence of those in A and B. The smaller inner stratum are such as are so bad they do not yield to influences from the higher strata. Now note what happens when any material law evasion in stratum A occurs as in prohibition. The effect is far beyond that particular stratum, for those in stratum B who have been looking to A for example and influence, naturally release the brakes on their conduct with the excuse of "look at so-and-so, he's an ideal American citizen but is violating the prohibition law just as are thousands of others in his class." Thus does stratum B become less law-abiding than usual and their law- less tendencies are emphasized. So it is with the other strata of our population, each justifying his lawless acts by the con- duct of those in the stratum above him. Therefore, from cen- ter to circumference is found the spirit of increased lawless- ness which we are hearing so much about. The misfortune is that instead of stopping with the 18th amendment and the Volstead act, this lawlessness permeates and contaminates the respect for other laws. This pronounced disrespect for law is invited by those statutes which even the best of our citizenry feel are interfering with their inalienable rights, privileges and obligations. When our respected "law- yers, bankers and great manufacturers" violate the country's laws, what can be expected of other strata in organized so- ciety? The moral is obvious. Avoid too hasty and radical con- stitutional law. Also, when a legislative blunder be discovered let us seek to correct it before the majesty and security of all law are endangered. That is a saner and more patriotic course than to fanatically reject removing the error which is causing all the trouble. See Chapter IX for further discussion. 206TI4 FOREWORD BY THE AUTHOR Government officials have pointed out that it is no longer a question of whether one agrees with the 18th amendment and Volstead act; rather it is a question of observing and enforcing the law. The same officials meekly proclaim there is absolutely no chance of repealing the law, regardless of its being good or bad. As to the law observance and enforcement statement no loyal citizen can disagree. But as to the abject surrender, the author of this work has too much red blood of American born liberty to tamely run up the white flag. He believes that the American public once it real- izes the true facts will find a legal and orderly way of retracting its steps and getting onto a sound and constructive rather than fanatical and deceptive high- way to diminishing liquor abuses. After the reader has given this volume an unbiased and careful peru- sal, the author will be pleased to know the impres- sions. If you agree in the importance of the Ameri- can public knowing more about the fundamental prin- ciples rather than motives of prohibition, your co- operation in aiding to extend the information will be appreciated. If you disagree, your criticisms are likewise welcome, since the issues involved are of vital import to America — not only in the impending elec- tions, but to Americanism for generations to come. Anticipating the future by the history of recent years the author wishes to advise members of the anti-saloon league, that he is not a hireling of "the liquor interests/' He has never had any connection in any way whatsoever therewith, and does not re- ceive one red penny from these "moneyed brewery or distilling interests/' He is just an ordinary Ameri- can citizen like millions of others, who places princi- ple above frenzied zeal. His reward has already been received in penning his sincere convictions — in per- forming a duty as he saw it. September, 1923. J. V. R. INDEX CHAPTER I Seeking the Truth Pages 13-19 CHAPTER II Nature's Two Great Primary Laws Pages 20-24 -^ CHAPTER III Why Is Man Human Pages 25-31 CHAPTER IV Personal Responsibility and Evolution Pages 32-38 CHAPTER V Rights and Obligations Pages 39-46 CHAPTER VI -^Morality — Conscience — ^Will Pages 47-56 CHAPTER VII - Self-Control Versus Self-Indulgence Pages 57-68 CHAPTER VIII ^Prohibition and the Scripture Pages 69-77 CHAPTER IX ^ The Legal Side of Prohibition Pages 78-89 . CHAPTER X -^ Social, Moral and Economic Claims Pages 90-99 CHAPTER XI A/Light or Right Pages 100-109 CHAPTER XII Worthy Intent But Vicious Method Pages 110-120 Outlawing the Almighty PREFACE Man is impetuous; Nature deliberate. Man is fallible ; Nature unerring. Man is incompatible; Nature harmonious. Man is mighty; Nature supreme. Man experiments; Nature demonstrates. Man argues; Nature decides. Man proposes; Nature disposes. Man legislates total abstinence through prohibi- tion; Nature decrees — what? Chapter I. Seeking the Truth Truth crushed to the earth shall rise again. — [Bryant. In the perplexing controversy about prohibition would it not be some measure of relief if we could get our foundations of pro or anti upon something firm and substantial? The overwhelming majority appear agreed upon the sincere desire of bettering humanity and advancing civilization. But with prohibition as the method of accomplishing that worthy aim, endless argument and widely variant opinion begin. Surely there must be some sane, logical position that will withstand any and all logical assaults at any time un- der any and all circumstances. It would seem that we could not go far wrong in basing the case upon Nature and Nature's God. America has traveled far since 1492. In a mate- rial way it is an inspiring record from the landing of Columbus on through the 400 odd years of conquer- ing, developing and organizing the vast areas of re- sisting wilderness to our present powerful and com- plex nation. Spiritually and ethically it is a long step from those narrow vision days of Salem witchcraft and Puritanic persecutions and hangings of worthy God-fearing Quakers to such broader days of univer- sal brotherhood and charity as characterized Ameri- ca's part in the World War. Great though our achievements, they do not tran- scend the Almighty. Our successes have come through 13 working in harmony with His laws; our failures through transgression thereof. Issues, great or small, are ever amenable to these Divine laws and principles, quite regardless of man's intentions or interpreta- tions. Prohibition in principle is either right or wrong — is in harmony with Divine laws or is discord- ant. The sooner America learns for a certainty which, the better for all. Though well intentioned, events have proved that the Puritans in their persecutions were in discord with Divine laws of progress when they looped off the ears, burned holes with hot irons through the tongues, banished and hung those who, as Governor Endicott said, were condemned by their use of "thee" and **thou" in conversation. They were Quakers and the Puritan law said they must be pun- ished. Subsequent events proved that Divine law said no such a thing. But failure to learn the truth earlier caused great suffering, many unjust deaths, and in the measure of that ignorance retarded the progress of civilization. All of this was nothing new because man for ages had been creating laws out of harmony with Divine laws. It has been done since the days of our Pilgrim fathers, may be done today and possibly tomorrow. It would appear that our aim should be to profit from the history of experiences which have gone before, and avoid so far as possible further contravention of Divine law. The day may come when prohibition in America will be recognized along with the War of the Rebel- lion, the Civil War and the Great War as an epoch- making period in this great nation, affectively dubbed the land of the free and the home of the brave. Curiously enough these four great events concern the same simple but all important issue of liberty or bond- age. It required the Revolutionary War to convince 14 the mother country that America had reached its ma- jority and should be freed from parental dominance and dictation. The immortal words of Patrick Henry, "I know not what course others may take, but as for me, give me liberty or give me death,*' have continued to thrill loyal Americans to this day. The inevitable fact that a nation could not exist half free and half slave and endure when divided against itself is recorded in the history of the Civil War. The Great War saved the world from becoming a vassal of German Kulture and demonstrated that might does not make right. Prohibition, too, as the succeeding pages will clearly indicate, centers about this same issue of human liberty — liberty of choice, individuality, personal unfoldment. In principle it would abrogate the divinely endowed human rights of moral accountability and personal responsibility. In- deed, the very cornerstone of self-development is in question. Again America stands at the threshold of an- other struggle and again the essential issue is liberty. As in the former cases the forces are divided at the line of arbitrary power on one side and so-called in- alienable rights and privileges on the other. In the three first named epochs freedom from the yoke of serfdom came only through bloody and costly clash of arms which taxed the nation's strength, loyalty and endurance. Fortunately, there has been no general clash of arms in the present epoch and it is to be most de- voutly hoped and prayed such may be avoided. How- ever, the issue is there, has germinated, indeed has here and there reached fruition as attested by armed clashes, bloodshed and death in attempts at prohibi- tory enforcement. 15 On one hand is the indisputable logic and truth that a government will endure on the rock of law en- forcement or perish in the quicksands of lawlessness. On the other is that indomitable and invincible spirit of liberty in man for which death itself has no terrors. Rumblings of discontent are heard daily and great numbers feel that prohibition without a direct per- sonal vote is comparable to "taxation without repre- sentation" which brought on the Revolutionary War. Argument that the 18th amendment and Volstead en- forcement act were duly established through the reg- ular processes of legislation answers, but does not sat- isfy great numbers who are familiar with the meth- ods by which that "regular legislation*' was secured. Nor are these unsatisfied souls all "foreigners who ought to go back to the country from which they came if they do not like our laws.'* Neither are they all con- firmed drunkards. Investigation will disclose an as- tounding number who are true blue Americans and loyal citizens, many of whom use intoxicating liquors in no form. These while whole-heartedly behind tem- perance are unalterably opposed to prohibition. Their reasons therefor will appear further along. That the above is true is abundantly attested by the difficulties experienced in enforcement. To the thousands upon thousands who are violating the pro- hibitory law may be added as many more, who would not lift a finger to apprehend a citizen who technically violated the prohibition laws. Little wonder is it that the authorities are amazed at the spirit of lawlessness in evidence. However unpleasant, these are facts to be pondered well before it is too late. Wars have grown out of lesser beginnings. Great oaks from lit- tle acorns grow. These general statements are made, not to un- duly alarm, but as a challenge to the clear thinking of 16 an intelligent and enlightened nation. Too long have we evaded independent reason and action on the un- derlying principles of prohibition. Too long have loyal citizens and lav^makers been inveigled to refrain from speaking their honest thoughts and acting their convictions on the prohibition question, lest they be made to appear champions of drunkenness and evil. This is a condition in which no free and self-govern- ing nation should find itself. The degree to which it is tolerated is the measure of the troubles ahead. Viewed from another angle the motive behind prohibition is so worthy and the intent to eliminate crime, disease and human misery so obvious, that there is danger of overlooking the Divine law and fundamental principles involved. No normal minded man will seriously attempt to deny the curse and evil in the misuse of intoxicating liquors. The experiences and the history of the world are so crowded with the human wreckage in the wake of unbridled liquor habits that a long suffering public cries : *'Chain this demon, this fiend that is destroying our homes and enslaving mankind." It is a high compliment to an enlightened civilization to be inspired by this en- nobling motive or intent. But it is the very intensity of this worthy intent that endangers a clear vision of the natural principles concerned. It was this that led the Puritans astray in their persecutions. Motive, however good, does not al- ter in the slightest degree the working of natural or Divine laws. Poison taken into the human system will kill just as surely whether administered by a friend through error or by a criminal with malice afore- thought. So far as the laws governing that poison and the results are concerned. Nature is and ever must be consistent. She plays no favorites and doesn't weigh motives. The motive which prompts one to 17 jump to the rescue of a person drowning is worthy but the water will snuff out his life just as quickly, if he doesn't keep his head above it, as though he inten- tionally jumped in as a suicide. It is unnecessary to enlarge upon these examples familiar to and accepted by everyday experiences. The essential point as related to prohibition is that the motive back of it does not, nor can it ever, change the inherent principles involved; otherwise. Nature would be incongruous, self-contradicting. Too many have failed to differentiate between motives and principles. Some have been so occupied in enjoying the satisfaction in the worthy motive behind prohibi- tion that they have failed to analyze the principles. Natural principles or laws are as immutable as they are eternal. Motive is changeable. Man can modify motive but he cannot alter Nature's laws or principles such as the law of gravitation. Prohibition involves a principle as well as a motive. Mankind spent needless energy seeking perpetual motion. The motive was excellent as it meant increasd service to man. But perpetual motion involves a fundamental principle which man cannot control. This principle known as Nature's law of compensation frowns upon man's desire to get something for nothing, even though his motive be worthy. If it be shown that pro- hibition involves a Divine principle upon which Con- structive Nature frowns, may we, not unlike the would-be inventors of perpetual motion be wasting a lot of energy that might be better directed ? Does it not behoove American intelligence to more closely scrutinize the principles in this stupen- dous movement? If sound and in accordance with natural constructive laws, more light can do no harm ; in fact, is more likely to do infinite good. On the other hand, if the principles are unsound and ultimately 18 destructive, the sooner we realize it the better, so we may the sooner harmonize our worthy motives v/ith the forces which will bring the much-to-be-desired re- form. It would appear there is everything to gain and nothing to lose by turning on the most searching rays of light. In our search for light and truth let us avoid, so far as may be, bias, preconceived notions, dogmatism and narrowness of vision. It is easier to be prejudiced than to acquire knowledge and rise above it. The discussion of prohibition has been charac- terized to an unusual degree by acrimony, asperity and animosity. Indeed, it has approached the slan- derous and defamatory. Intemperate language and undependable figures have been hurled back and forth which have further obscured the truth instead of add- ing new light. The aim of this volume is to avoid those extremes and to give readers a dispassionate in- sight into the far-reaching principles which prohibi- tion involves. Things are essentially true or false in themselves and are not changed by opinions. One cannot believe in error sincerely enough to make it truth. Even martyrs establish but their own sincerity, not the truth of their belief. The ability of a people to seek the truth is the measure of their civilization and progress. There are times when silence may be sinful and un- patriotic, when the omission of what one's conscience feels a duty is as unpardonable as an error of com- mission. When the final chapter of this work is com- pleted, the author will feel he did his duty as he saw it. Without further delay, then, let us start from the beginning with Nature and follow closely her funda- mental laws and principles in whatsoever direction they may lead. 19 Chapter II. Nature's Two Great Primary Laws All are but parts of one stupendous whole, Whose body Nature is and God the soul. — [Pope. To whichever kingdom of Nature we turn, be it mineral, vegetable, animal or man, we find two pow- erful processes or forces in evidence. One of these is known to some scientists as the Law of Integration, by others as the Law of Growth and by still others as the Law of Evolution. To the writer the term. Na- ture's Constructive Principle, is most descriptive. Whatever we term it, the results are before our eyes every day in the year. In the vegetable kingdom this subtle force integrates matter into cells, cells into ag- gregates and aggregates into bodies which we recog- nize as trees, plants and vines. In this mysterious con- structive process of elaborating food, air, water and light, we see the life, the development and the growth of the myriad forms of vegetation. Likewise in the animal kingdom we see this same Constructive Principle starting with a single nucle- ated cell, expanding, multiplying and combining with others to form definite organs; finally these organs grouped into individual living organic entities. Then in turn under Nature's Constructive Principle the ani- mal life germ develops into the infant animal and thence on to full maturity. Even the lower mineral kingdom shows us the Constructive Principle by inte- grating and crystallizing of stone, of binding together in a solid mass, particles of rock, iron, gold, dia- mond, etc. 20 In the kingdom of man we note a still higher manifestation of the Constructive Principle. Here occurs the constructive unf oldment of the human soul, of human intelligence, of moral sentim.ent, of self conscientiousness, of aesthetic tastes and all those psychical attributes which exalt man above the king- doms below him. The writer wishes there might be a satisfactory way to pass over this somewhat technical and dry scientific data but it is necessary to grasp these fundamental factors as old as is the world itself, if we are to get the light for which we set out. The application to the problem under discussion is very vital and will become more obvious as we progress. There is, then, some great primary law or prin- ciple of Nature which integrates inorganic matter, such as minerals, organizes vegetable and animal mat- ter into living bodies, and as a crowning masterpiece makes possible the development and growth of not only the physical body but also those spiritual, mental and moral attributes distinctive to mankind. Let us call this fundamental force Nature's Constructive Principle. Inexorably opposed to this is another law, prin- ciple or force which disintegrates or tears down mat- ter in all four kingdoms of Nature. Science is pretty well agreed that there is no such thing as annihilation of matter but rather there is a change of form. An example is the burning of coal or wood. Heat, gases and ashes attend the combustion and those who should know point out that this typifies the indestructibility or conservation of matter and energy. There is no ground for quarrel here. But this second law or prin- ciple of Nature destroys not the matter itself but the specialized or individualized forms into which it was constructed by Nature. It is the fore-ordained oppo- nent of individualities since its manifestations are to 21 disintegrate or break dov/n that which has previously been built up. From the results ensuing, the most natural term by which to designate it is the Destruc- tive Principle of Nature. A huge boulder is exposed to the elements of frost, heat, wind and rain ; it eventually crumbles, los- ing its individuality as a boulder and the matter going back into the forms or combinations of matter from which it came. The mighty oak succumbs to the wood- man's ax and is burned, made into furniture or used for other purposes. Its identity or individuality has been destroyed. That monarch of beasts, the lion, is mortally wounded by a hunter. So far as his living physical identity is concerned, the Constructive Prin- ciple of Nature is arrested in its function and the De- structive Principle gains the ascendancy and finally results in death. Thus we have these two opposing forces or laws — one seeking to build up individuali- ties, the other to break them down. But what of these great processes in the kingdom of man? They apply with equal force so far as the physical body is concerned. In addition, there are those mental, spiritual and moral endowments to be built up or broken down by these relentless laws of construction or destruction. Make no mistake about this, for besides a physical individuality mortal man has individuality of mind, of spirit and of morals. Each and all of these are amenable to the same iden- tical processes of evolution or devolution, construc- tion or destruction. The growth and unfoldment of a noble and useful life such as Lincoln or an Edison typifies the Constructive principle. The thousands of disconsolate, broken-spirited individuals, the crowded insane hospitals and the too large population in our penal institutions attest the Destructive Principle at work in matters spiritual, mental and moral re- spectively. 22 Right here note a still further sharp line of cleav- age distinguishing man from the kingdoms below him in the evolutionary scale. In the latter these Principles of Construction and Destruction appear to be beyond the control of the individuality. That is, boulders, trees, animals integrate or grow, disintegrate or per- ish, so far as known without, or in spite of, conscious effort on their part. In other words, both principles appear automatic or involuntary so far as the individ- ual entities are concerned. But with the realm of m.an comes a profound change. With the transcend- ing soul attributes comes a personal responsibility. To man's shoulders is shifted the burden of invoking either the Destructive or Constructive processes. By endowing him with an intelligent soul the Great In- telligence, God or Nature appears content to let him work out his own salvation. Each individual may be aided or retarded in some measure by environment and by heredity. Yet re- gardless of environment and heredity the progress and development of each individual depends in the final analysis upon his own effort. He alone can say whether the Destructive or Constructive Principle shall be in the ascendancy so far as his personal self is concerned. To the extent that ancestors, friends or organized society can aid him in executing the Con- structive Law, to that extent do they assist him. Conversely, the extent that they prevent him from executing that law is the measure of his loss. Helpful influence and counsel will leave him a free and independent choice and will for self development and as he chooses must his progress be forward or back- ward — Constructive or Destructive. But the moment he is forced against his will one way or another, that moment he loses not only the initiative of will but also his free and independent choice, and is robbed of the 23 personal responsibility with which Nature endowed the kingdom of man as a natural birthright. Consist- ent choosing of the Constructive means continued growth, the rewards of Nature, and the approval of organized society. Consistent choosing of the Destruc- tive means continued decay. Nature's retributive jus- tice, and the disapproval of organized society. At this point arises a vital question to both the individual and to society. It is apparent that society must protect itself and to that end mark off certain lines beyond which if any individual goes in his De- structive downward path, he must expect a penalty which society names for its protection. But the vital issue is whether society should rob him of a free and independent choice and exercise of will power in ad- vance. Should society by force, if necessary, prevent him having any choice for fear he might choose wrongly? If he has no choice, whence his responsi- bility and opportunity for self development? With out opportunity for individual self development, whence the development of society itself, since it is but an aggregate of individuals? Is this the Con- structive or the Destructive Principle in action for both individual and ultimately society? Suppose the individual is guaranteed a free and independent choice and opportunity to exercise will power but society is guaranteed the right and duty of imposing penalties when wrong choices are made, would this be Constructive or Destructive? Here are pertinent questions to prohibition by means of which society hopes to prevent every individual in America from having a free and independent choice and the exercise of will power as to his beverage. For both the individual and society would you say prohibition is in accordance with the Constructive law or the De- structive law of Nature in its final analysis? 24 Chapter III. Why Is Man Human? The proper study of mankind is man. — [Pope. Too frequently man appears more animal than human. This, however, is his own responsibility and no default of his Divine brithright. God or Nature most generously endows every normal human being with faculties, capacities and powers that far tran- scend anything in the evolutionary scale below him. He has what is possessed by all the other kingdoms of Nature and in addition something exclusively his own. It is this exclusiveness and distinctness that Nature has decreed which makes him man. Just what is this something in addition? Note well the answer for therein lies a profound fact of Nature which no hu- man power, individual or collective, can vanquish. It has a direct connection with the principles back of prohibition. The four fundamental distinguishing marks are: 1. Self-consciousness as against consciousness. 2. Reason as against intelligence. 3. Independent choice as against enforced or au- tomatic selection. 4. Independent, self-conscious and rational will or volition. These are the great inherent cornerstones upon which human character is built. They are all lacking 25 in the animal kingdom, although in the highest devel- opment such as with some horses and dogs there are flashes foreshadowing what the kingdom of man is to bring. In animals, consciousness and intelligence may be highly developed but they are not self-conscious- ness nor reason. Self-consciousness enables us to know and understand ourselves and act knowingly and intentionally. By it we become aware of our re- lations and responsibilities to others. Simple con- sciousness, on the other hand, records demands from without the entity or intelligence as well as the de- mands from within like appetites, impulses, affections, emotions and instincts. Only man can reason deduc- tively and inductively. He reasons about his passions, desires, what he is and what he hopes to be in both this world and the next. To offset this the animal in- telligence is largely a reflex of physical miotives and demands. So is it with independent choice. The animal vir- tually has no independence and his choice, such as he has, becomes largely a reflex of his physical desires, affections, appetites and instincts. It lacks the abil- ity to reason out a selection to override appetites and desires. But in man's estate this independent choice rises to far-reaching results. Society and its laws hereto- fore have held us accountable as having a free and in- dependent choice as between good and evil. No plea of being "creatures of circumstances'* is accepted in the final analysis. Our fellow men assume we enjoy the power of independent choice. In fact, we encour- age them in that assumption, and our intelligence would be insulted for others to doubt our independ- ence. This rational and independent choice is the es- sential factor in making man individually responsible for his acts. If one has an opportunity to steal a sum 26 of money, he and he alone is assumed to have the choice of taking it or leaving it alone. The fourth primary difference between animal and man is rational will or volition. Here again that power in the animal kingdom h larr^^el;/ automatic in reflex action to the impulses, desires, instincts and ap- petites. But man has the pov/er to act independently, unaided or uninfluenced by others and this knowingly, rationally and with the ability to anticipate the natu- ral and logical results. Such is a very brief outline of these four higher, moral, ethical, psychical or soul attributes with which man alone is endowed. Upon his free and inde- pendent control and exercise of these attributes must he depend for individual responsibility, self develop- ment and happiness here and hereafter. Hence it must follow as day the night that whatever deprives him of these natural fundamental soul attributes robs him of the power to co-operate with Nature's Constructive Principle and even endan- ger his opportunity to achieve immortality. For em- phasis let this be restated : Whatsoever, or whosoever shall divest man of any one or more of these four soul attributes (self -consciousness, reason, independent choice and independent rational will or volition) upon which he depends for his personal responsibility, attacks the very vitals of his being. It cannot be oth- erwise for these are the working tools which God or Nature gave him with which to build a Temple of Character. If he does not use them properly his is the responsibility. But whoever robs him of any por- tion of this birthright is as much or more a menace to society and an enemy of mankind as is one who robs a bank or an orphan. Without these tools he is forced into Nature's Destructive Principle or devolution which would carry him back toward the animal king- 27 dom where the human soul attributes are not in evidence. With these irrefutable truths of Nature in mind let those who advocate prohibition square themselves first with their own self-consciousness and then with the great body of American people. Prohibition aims to abrogate the soul endowed attributes of free and independent choice and power of will regarding good and evil. That the rank and file of prohibitionists throughout the land have been unaware of these sig- nificant facts is unquestioned. Their intense and most commendable motive to help free mankind of alco- holic abuses has led them to overlook the fact which their own knowledge and experience proves, namely, that the reform of an individual finally gets down to that individual himself. To force him or rob him by law of a personal choice and exercise of will between good and evil gets nowhere except backward and is destructive. But v/ise council, education, logical reasoning and helpful influences may cause him personally to make a choice for good and to develop the will to execute. That gets somewhere, is constructive and in perfect accord with natural laws of individual progress and the evolution of society. Note that these soul at- tributes of choice and will are so primary in every in- dividual that Nature has implanted the instinct to guard them jealously. It is so-called second nature for every normal individual to resist force. This is common knowledge and is illustrated by the homely old adage: "You can lead a horse to water but you can't make him drink.'* Then, many advocates of prohibition have been confused by the different shades of meaning attached thereto. Doubtlessly, the majority are thinking more of the abuse of liquor than the use. Fire is a wicked 28 master but as yet no one has advocated the prohibi- tion of its use or of carrying matches. However, proper restrictions are provided by society against abuse. Water is another harsh master but a valuable servant so long as under control. Just because water out of control is an enemy to man, is no valid reason that we should legislate one criminal because he prop- erly uses it or transports it. Murder is a most serious crime but we do not prohibit the manufacture, sale, use or transportation of knives, clubs, firearms or poison with which murder may be committed. Hence pray tell why we prohibit the manufac- ture, sale or transportation of liquor. The crime of murder comes through the misuse of that which may be used without ill effect. May not the same be ap- plied to drunkenness? Then, finally, please explain why in the case of murder every man, woman and child is given a free and independent choice to com- mit that crime, while with drunkenness one is denied that choice. Can it be that society believes it a greater crime to take a glass of liquor as a beverage than to commit murder? If not, then why give man his birthright of free and independent choice and exercise of will power in one instance and rob him of it in the other? We properly have laws against the misuse (not use) of those things which cause murder, and one who transgresses them must suffer punish- ment. Then why not laws against the misuse (and not use) of liquor which may cause crime, punishing those who transgress the same? To argue that prohibition gives man independent choice to obey or violate its laws is evading the ques- tion. The choice upon which man's advancement or retrogression ever depends is the individual choice between the primary forces of good and evil — of con- struction or destruction. This is exactly what prohi- 29 bitionists would prevent by making the choice for him in advance. With the prohibitionist's favorite example of murder, the primary choice of good and evil and proper use of agents which may cause murder are left to the individual. Why trust the individual to choose between life and death to others but deny his responsibility of a glass of liquor within his reach? But says someone, "murder is so unquestionably accepted as wrong by mankind that all can be trusted with free and independent choice and will power. It is not true of drunkenness." Such an argument proves the importance of this entire chapter, namely, that progress is with and through these four soul attrib- utes of man, be it individual or collective. Through their proper exercise and functioning is the way of constructive progress. Through their enforced annulment or atrophy is destructive retrogression. Through years of experience, suffer- ing and death, carrying the burden of free choice and personal responsibility, mankind has come to a real- ization that murder is an unpardonable crime. But note that this achievement was not gained by destroying knives, firearms, poison, clubs or other agencies with which murder could be committed. In- stead it was gained by giving man access to these but holding him personally responsible for any abuse or misuse thereof. Murder is still committed, but the blame attaches to man's misuse of the things within his reach. That is, the man is held accountable and not the gun, poison or knife that was the agent used to commit murder. Then why should not the man who becomes a drunkard likewise be held accountable instead of the agent — liquor ? This explanation should clear the minds of some who have been arguing : "We prohibit murder, so why not prohibit liquor?" They are two different things. 30 There is a confusion of cause and effect. Particular- ly note that murder means wrong action. It means that man has made some choice and failed in will power, which proved to be destructive to life. But liquor doesn't mean anything of the kind. Millions of gallons could be manufactured and stored without do- ing harm to an individual or to society. Before the harm comes, man must misuse it or abuse it. In other words, liquor has the possibilities of great crime the same as clubs, guns, knives, fire and water, but it is not itself the crime. Yet prohibitionists appear to be holding liquor accountable instead of the man. Those who wish to use the murder argument in defense of prohibition should compare the crime of murder with the crime of drunkenness — if society will admiit getting drunk is a crime. That is as far as they can possibly go in logical argument. But to do this wouldn't be prohibition. Neither the 18th amendment nor the Volstead Act were necessary to make drunkenness or the abuse of liquor a crime. Ordinary laws to which society would subscribe, hold- ing the individual responsible for his acts would ac- complish it. That is the method by which civilization has advanced to its present status. Thus is seen how radically prohibition departs from the natural constructive way of progress. In- stead of working through the individual, endowed with the human soul attributes, prohibition attacks the inanimate agent, liquor, holding it accountable when it hasn't even the instincts of the animal or the vegetable kingdoms, much less the ability to think, reason and choose, as has a human being. Is prohi- bition a sane, logical course of progress for the human race? Is it constructive? Will it lead to the desired goal? Or is it simply emulating the searchers for perpetual motion? 31 Chapter IV. Personal Responsibility and Evolution A sense of duty pursues us ever. — [Daniel Webster. Those of us who take the Holy Bible seriously realize that from the beginning, man has been charged with the burden of personal responsibility. All are familiar with the story recorded in Genesis. Man was created a sinless and perfect being in the image of his Maker. And the Lord God "breathed in- to his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul." In the Garden of Eden he was given do- minion "over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air and over every living thing that moveth upon the earth." He was tempted to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil, and despite his perfection and purity he "fell" into sin. His Creator saw that in sinning, man had vio- lated his personal responsibility and hence forfeited his right to eternal life. Thus it became necessary to counteract this unfortunate violation of the original law of life or man would be "lost" forever and the creation end in failure. The whole scheme or plan of Christian salvation or redemption through the blood of Christ as accepted today is grounded on the belief that Jesus came to earth to minister, to suffer and to die an ignominious death as a voluntary per- sonal sacrifice for the sins of the world that sinful man might be restored to his lost estate and still progress to eternal life. All this because man failed in his responsibility. 32 The point to grasp is the fact that ever since the days of Adam, man has been carrying the burden of personal responsibility. Without this individual re- sponsibility the entire doctrine of Christianity and salvation as understood and unreservedly accepted to- day would be without foundation. It was because of this personal responsibility that it became possible for Adam to commit the first "sin." The Creator did not place the tree of knowledge of good and evil be- yond Adam's reach. Instead, Adam's attention was specifically called to it and he was given the power of free and independent choice. Yet prohibition aims to remove liquor entirely beyond the reach of man, giving him no choice and re- voking the item of personal responsibility in its use. There can positively be no responsibility without choice. Would prohibition advocates have us believe that the Creator made a serious blunder in not re- moving this tree root and branch which resulted in Adam's "fall?" There is further significance in the records that even after Adam's wrong choice and his fall and the coming of Christ to redeem mankind, that the Creator did not change His plan of allowing man independent choice and personal responsibility and exercise of will power. On the contrary, there was increased effort to have man realize his personal responsibility. Indeed, the Scripture informs us that the activities of Jesus by the spoken word, by parable, by miracle and by ex- ample were almost wholly confined to teaching man his Divine origin and his responsibilities if he would inherit the kingdom of God. No time was wasted in trying to remove the temptations of life and in revok- ing man's independent choice. Would prohibitionists have us believe that the Creator, after seeing Adam "fall," was again sadly 33 in error in not causing Jesus to spend his time elimi- nating temptations of evil instead of continuing man's freedom of choice and teaching personal responsibil- ity? The answer is vital, for either the Creator was wrong in His principle or prohibitionists are. One bases progress upon individual responsibility and in- dependent choice and will power, while the other would progress by removing temptation and making it impossible for man to choose lest he choose wrong- ly. That is, the latter would shift the burden of re- sponsibility from the individual to society as a whole, holding that society should create and enforce laws v/hich will remove the temptation of drunkenness. Apparently, organized society feels it can do what the Creator could not or in His infinite wisdom did not — namely, eliminate temptations of mankind. Right or wrong, it is an incontestable fact that God's working plan from first to last included this law of personal responsibility. Moreover, beneficent relig- ions and moral philosophies of all times and of all peoples have acknowledged this primary principle of responsibility in human development and progress. It is the essence of man's estate, for without it man would not be man. It binds him as much as the law of gravitation and cannot be dodged, evaded or defied without invoking the inevitable consequences such as attend the violations of any other natural laws. Whether we like it or not, Nature or God saw fit to place this burden of choice and responsibility upon man when endowing him with the four soul attributes explained in the preceding chapter. Upon his own effort must depend his progress or evolution. It is an individual work not to be delegated. Without the per- sonal work there can be no personal reward. Society or civilization itself is measured by the ability of the individuals which compose it, to assume that duty or 34 obligation of choice and personal responsibility. In other words, organized society can be no better, no worse, than the individuals of which it is composed. Clearly, the basis of progress or evolution is the individual. Now how can the individual develop, grow and attain if society puts him in close, artificial confinement where he surrenders his personal respon- sibility through elimination of temptation? Obvious- ly, if temptation be removed, man does not have to choose, and if no choice then no burden of personal responsibility. If organized society starts on this principle of removing temptation so man can be good and virtuous without exercising choice, will power and responsibil- ity between good and evil, just where will it stop? Figure out the details necessary to remove the temp- tation to murder, to lie, to steal, to commit arson, sui- cide, social evil, and the dozens of other sins to which mortal man may be tempted. The question is entirely fair to prohibitionists, for if they would eliminate the temptation of drunkenness, may we not expect the same procedure of elimination as a panacea for all other sins and evils to which mortal flesh appears to be heir? Then followed to its natural conclusion and granting for argument sake that these grevious temp- tations can be eliminated — what have we? Wouldn't we have a most disgusting race of spineless molly- coddles? Would we have a strong, vigorous, depend- able, intelligent, resourceful, moral and inspiring manhood and womanhood, or a mere aggregation of automatons, little better, if indeed as good, as the en- tities in the animal kingdom below man? Would such artificiality, the surrender of free and independent choice, personal responsibility and ability of will, be constructive or destructive to mankind? 35 Then again we are reminded of the natural, in- herent, personal responsibility of man by the funda- mental principles in civil and criminal jurisprudence in our country today. From the original indictment on through the evidence, rulings of the court, charge to the jury, finding of verdict and final judgment, the aim is to establish guilt or innocence, and if guilt, then the degree of "personal responsibility." The verdict, judgment and sentence pronounced v^ill give every man the benefit of whatever degree it can be shown that he was not responsible. That is, organized society accepts without question man's personal re- sponsibility in judging his proper relations with his fellow-men. Yet the same society now embarks upon a course of abrogating that responsibility through prohibition; itself assuming the responsibility by re- moving the temptation or possibility of evil via the 18th amendment and Volstead Act. To many it still remains strange inconsistency. As a matter of fact, the experience of ages would seem to indicate that it does not fit into Nature's stu- pendous plan of development and evolution. If we can believe our eyes it was a long struggle for Nature or Universal Intelligence to produce a product with the soul attributes of self-consciousness, independent choice, reason and independent will or volition, to whose shoulders could be shifted the burden of per- sonal responsibility. It was not attained in the min- eral, plant or animal kingdoms. Even to the time of Adam it is a fair question whether he "fell" into sin or had not yet evolved out of it. Certain it is that mankind has not yet evolved to perfection. Nature is never in haste. Yet who will deny that man has attained a higher sphere of devel- opment, mentally, spiritually and morally, than he occupied 5000 years ago? Simple mention of the 36 Great War and the voluntary sacrifices of the masses, which it involved, so "the world might be safe for democracy" should indicate how man is evolving to a higher status of altruism, responsibility and justice. Indeed, there is a glimmer of hope that mankind may yet evolve out of war into world peace. The liquor problem itself proves the onward march of evolution. Whether admitted or not, the fact is that under the old days of license and local op- tion man was gradually evolving to a keener sense of his personal responsibility. Abuse of liquor and drunkenness were more and more becoming taboo. Business concerns were holding their employees more closely to responsibility, whereas many remember the day when it was considered quite the thing for a sales- man to go out, drink a customer under the table and then get his signature on the dotted line below. Nature itself was taking care of this (slowly perhaps) but experience and observation were proving to man that it did not pay in the long run. Public opinion and society had reached that state of evolution where the average individual himself sensed the error of his way and vast numbers were practicing self control, even total abstinence, and this by their own choice, effort, responsibility and will — all in harmony with the Constructive Principle of life and Nature. Admit it or not, the truth is that increas- ing numbers every year by independent choice and will were refusing to go to their work with liquor on their breath. There was abundance of evidence that man was evolving to better things. That it was pos- sible to put prohibition on the statute books at all is abundant evidence that evolution was in progress as regards liquor. From this, society, or an alleged majority there- of, jumped to the conclusion that the process might be 37 completed in jig time by legislation, by laws that might transcend the Almighty's laws. The somewhat American tendency of haste and "going cross-lots" as- serted itself and prohibition became the law of the land, if not an observable fact. Whether slow, consistent Nature or hasty, vacil- lating man has the better plan remains to be seen. In any event, we witness the departure of American or- ganized society from Nature's constructive scheme of individual development of will power and personal responsibility. If America can demonstrate the ad- visability of removing temptation from sinfully-in- clined man, it may be possible to logically argue that the Creator was woefully negligent in not removing that historic tree from the Garden of Eden before turning Adam loose therein. 38 Chapter V. Rights and Obligations Better, though difficult, the right way to go, Than ^vrong, though easy, where the end is woe. — [Bunyan. Much that is logical and possibly more that is il- logical is heard about personal liberty and individual rights. The essentials of personal rights can be separated readily from the non-essentials by comparing them with obligations. Let no man make the sad mis- take of believing that Nature or Universal Intelligence so generously endowed him with certain rights and privileges without at the same time exacting some ac- companying obligations. Those who rant about their "rights" without thought of what they owe others have yet to learn there are people in this world besides their own dear selves who also have "rights." But let us analyze a little farther and see if we can discover the helpful Constructive Principle of Na- ture involved, so none may go astray from the funda- mentals. First, as to the inalienable rights and privileges with which every human soul is endowed. It is commonly admitted there are such even though they are not respected by others. Foremost in the list are right to individual life, to individual liberty and to the pursuit of happiness. These rights belong to man, for without them existence to the intelligent soul of man would be meaningless. They are a part of his very being and necessary for his individual development. No man nor power has a right to interfere with these 39 individualized inalienable rights and privileges so long as the individual in his use thereof does not interfere with another in his enjoyment of the same rights and privileges in his own behalf. Right here is where so many are prone to go astray from the fundamentals. The uncontrolled pursuit of life, liberty and happiness might easily lead to our in- terfering with the rights of others had not Nature pro- vided for it by going one step further. Certain obliga- tions, duties and responsibilities are just as unescap- able as our rights are inalienable. The decree of Nature is that they go hand-in-hand. Those are the simple principles by which we may measure personal rights and the pursuit of happiness. Thus we see the natural, logical reason why man may not lie, steal, murder and commit adultery or arson at will. These are impossible v/ithout interfering with the inalienable rights of others. The defense of society against those who refuse to recognize these responsi- bilities and obligations is to enact laws calling for pun- ishment of the guilty. Previous to prohibition there were such laws enacted and to a degree enforced, re- garding the misuse of liquor and drunkenness. As noted in the preceding chapter this plan or system was most perceptibly evolving to a higher type of personal responsibility, individual obligation and citizenship. But prohibition departed radically from these principles. The 18th amendment and Volstead Act ap- pear to have set up laws to punish an individual before he has interfered with the rights of others or violated in the slightest degree the obligations which Nature placed upon his shoulders. Indeed, it is a most perti- nent question if organized society itself has not violated the very obligations which it vrould impose upon the in- dividual. A^ the account with Nature now stands, the burden of proof is upon society to show that it has not 40 interfered with man's inalienable rights of liberty and pursuit of happiness. Society should prove that a man cannot physically manufacture, sell or transport any- thing beyond % of 1% alcoholic content (with minor modifications) without interfering with the inalienable rights of others. Just what is the material evidence that the mere act of transporting a jug of whiskey from New York to Boston has interfered with the rights or pursuit of happiness of others? Just how does it violate one's obligations to others if it be sold? Just how does the temperate drinking thereof by the purchaser interfere with the pursuit of happiness by his fellow men? Of course, under prohibition this is all illegal, and loyal citizens are expected to obey the laws. These questions by no means imply that the law of the land should not be obeyed. They certainly should and let none con- sider this chapter or the completed work a brief in be- half of law-breakers. Readers are especially warned against interpreting it as such. However, this need not deter us from seeking the truth, and if we find ourselves out of harmony with Nature's great fundamental laws of progress, to take such action as will, in due time, bring us back into line. Nations as well as individuals are not beyond the pos- sibility of error. If it be found that prohibition is a mistake, the wise and large thing for a nation, as for an individual, is to admit the error and turn attention to its correction. But how are the masses to learn more of the facts without a free and frank discussion such as this volume aims to present? Hence let us return to the question of rights and obligations. In the light of Nature's fundamental principles of unavoidable obligations and inalienable rights it will be noted that they bind one individual as much as another. That is, one might think the duties 41 and obligations he must continually observe in behalf of others are unfair. But let him remember that every other individual is, or should be, extending the same consideration to him. This brings out the fair question if the prohibition- ist is not decidedly transgressing Nature's law. He doubtlessly is pursuing his inalienable right to happi- ness in his activities to prevent his fellow men from getting a drink of liquor. But does he remember that Nature holds him accountable for not interfering with the rights of and the pursuit of happiness by others? If others abuse liquor that is their obligation violated. Is it not possible for a pronounced prohibitionist to go to the same excesses in disregarding the rights of others as does the drunkard ? The moment a man goes to excess in anything, the rights of others are in im- minent danger. So good a cause as religion itself can be carried to extremes and to a point where it not only interferes with the rights of others but also defeats the worthy motives involved since it arouses disgust and justifiable opposition. What is to be said of the extreme prohibitionists who spend their time in administrative and legislative chambers "pursuing happiness" by seeking to limit the rights and privileges of others ? What about the rights of legislators and congressmen to vote as their con- science dictates instead of being intimidated and vir- tually forced to vote as directed? That some of them are too weak to assert their independence does not change the principle involved which is that we have the inalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness so long as in securing them we do not inter- fere with, or jeopardize, the same rights to any other individual in his own behalf. The greatest service to society and to mankind is in the direction of further unfoldment of personal re- 42 sponsibility and holding? the individual morally ac- countable, rather than in taking responsibility away from him and allowing no chance to develop because of others choosing for him. It would seem we have quite enough people in our insane hospitals and penal insti- tutions already for whom society assumes the responsi- bility and the choice, without making an entire free and democratic country an asylum for weak-minded or a corrective institution for criminals. In trying to re- move temptation and the possibility of evil through use of liquor, prohibitionists come dangerously near the as- sumption that we are a nation of imbeciles and crimi- nals, not to be trusted with choice of good or evil nor personal responsibility. Then again is it not a significant fact that the di- rection of all other amendments to our constitution un- der which we have so markedly progressed have been to extend rather than limit personal responsibility and to further guarantee individual liberty ? Note the amend- ments extending the right of vote to citizens regardless of race, color, or previous condition of servitude ; that no state shall deprive any person of life, liberty or property without due process of law; that no man shall be held in involuntary servitude except as punish- ment for crime after due trial and conviction ; providing for a more direct voice of the individual in electing a president and a vice-president; enumerating certain rights in the constitution shall not be construed to deny others retained by the people ; that excessive bail, fines or punishment shall not be inflicted ; guaranteeing right to trial by jury; right to speedy and public trial by impartial jury and provision for witnesses and counsel; guarantee against seizure of private property for public use without just compensation and against compul- sion of being a witness against one's self; extending security to one's person, houses, papers and effects 43 against unreasonable search and seizure except by war- rants duly supported by oath ; giving the right to the people to keep and bear arms; guaranteeing freedom of religion, speech and press; and finally the 19th amendment extending to womanhood the personal re- sponsibility of franchise. Those who take the trouble to investigate will see that from the very beginning the constitution of the United States itself and all of the subsequent amend- ments (with one exception) have been in behalf of the inalienable rights to life, liberty and pursuit of happi- ness so long as it does not interfere with the rights of others. Right or wrong, this principle of giving people more responsibility has carried the American nation well to the front in the world family of nations. The policy must be constructive to succeed so well. But the one conspicuous amendment which differs radically in principle from all the others and the con- stitution itself is the 18th. Here for the first time in American history we find a diametrically opposite course so far as the individual is concerned. Personal responsibility for the right use of intoxicating liquors instead of being fastened more securely upon the in- dividual's shoulders is actually taken away from him altogether and assumed by organized society through the prohibitive measures for removing individual choice and the temptation to evil through drink. It will be observed that this amendment places every individual in the United States in the same class of incompetents when it comes to trusting their respon- sibility in the use of intoxicants. There is no reward for temperance, no incentive nor opportunity for de- velopment of self-control. All are assumed to be guilty or at least have potentialities of guilt. As with the school master who punishes all to secure the one offen- der, prohibition infringes upon the rights of all to 44 catch the few who lose their self-control and violate the obligations of their personal responsibility. Even physicians who daily have our lives in their hands would not be trusted to prescribe a little beer for the sick for fear the privilege might be abused. Trust them with our lives but not to prescribing beer ; think of the inconsistency! Daily papers record close sur- veillance of sacramental wines for fear some worshipper will get too much. It is a sad commentary upon the civilization of a people who find themselves in such in- congruous positions when attempting to govern them- selves. Distinguished statesmen point out that the further we go in the present direction, the more ap- parent it becomes that other sections of our liberty-giv- ing constitution are being threatened. Twisting of facts appears rampant. The nation's chief executive (the late and lamented Harding) chal- lenged a state (New York) to repeal its own state Mullan-Gage law. Ardent prohibitionists could not command language any too strong nor too bitter in con- demnation of New York's "rebellion." They overlooked the fact that a state still has some sovereign rights. In fact, the constitution does not give the states "rights" but rather from the beginning the states have reserved to themselves all rights except those given to the na- tional government and provided for in the constitution. New York's repeal of its own enforcement act did not legalize anything illegal in the federal law. Yet it showed up the possible conflict between federal and state enforcement measures as well as the accompany- ing opportunity for discord, distrust and friction. If New York is in rebellion in this matter what about those southern states that have adroitly and continu- ously defied the 15th amendment giving the right of franchise to the colored race ? Is one amendment more binding or more sacred than another? 45 Then note the spectacle America presents in adapt- ing the 18th amendment to the high seas and the re- sulting tension in our foreign relations. Even though a foreign country has specific laws requiring its ships to carry intoxicants our Supreme Court reached the con- clusion that they must come dry into America — and presumably return dry. Orders were given by our authorities to break foreign seals and confiscate in- toxicants found within our three mile limit except those for medicinal reserve. Do these things mean harmony, good will and world comity ? Law is law and apparently we are within our rights. The case is mentioned only as an example of where initial errors may eventually lead and the embarrassing conditions they may bring. Has it occurred to anyone that the underlying rea- son for all this, and more that is to come, may be be- cause we have embarked upon a course decreed by Na- ture as the Destructive Principle ? Evil and destruction are cumulative just as much as are good and construc- tion. One error is prone to lead to another. Here are lines of thought to challenge the intelligence and sober judgment of a naturally progressive and liberty -loving people. 46 Chapter VI. Morality — Conscience — Will There is a spectacle grander than the ocean and that is the conscience. — [Victor Hugo. From the remotest ages which history records, on through centuries of experience, to the present hour, mankind and nations have prospered or gone into decay- according as they co-operated with or opposed Nature's fundamental laws. This great primary fact is as true of things spiritual, moral and psychic as of material or physical. As surely as there are principles or forces which uncontrolled will tear down and destroy our physical bodies, so are there principles and forces that when they gain the ascendancy will tear down and dis- sipate intelligence, morality or character. Tuberculosis, fevers, cholera and other afflictions of the physical body if unchecked will overcome the natural constructive forces of resistance and the de- structive powers will continue the process of breaking down cell growth and functioning thereof until physical death may occur. In a similar way evil thinking and bad habits if uncontrolled gain the ascendancy in their destructive action on the mental and soul attributes of an individual until his mentality and morality are wrecked. In a mental and moral way, as w^ell as physi- cal, that process or activity which is given priority is what grows and develops. It is common experience that one misdeed prepares an easier path for another to fol- low. Conversely, a moral victory over temptation of 47 evil makes the individual that much stronger for the next conflict. Accordingly as each individual encourages the con- structive forces or tolerates the destructive activities to be in the ascendancy, so will he be rev/arded by Na- ture's law of compensatory justice or punished by her laws of retributive justice. This is universal and in- evitable. Thus the reason and logic appears in the statement that every individual is master of his own destiny. Exact justice will be rendered by Nature, God or Universal Intelligence — here or hereafter. "The mills of the gods grind slowly but they grind exceeding- ly fine." These generally admitted facts are mentioned as a gentle reminder to a somewhat hasty and to a degree thoughtless civilization which may jump at conclusions, and in its pride of success in harnessing new forces of Nature, as well as its pride of intellectual vanity of seeming achievement, does not "lose its head" and get the exalted notion that it is superior to the Almighty. There is a direct connection here with such repressive laws as prohibition. Preceding chapters have en- deavored to drive home the thought that Nature builds from individualities upward and outward and not from groups or races downward and inward. Nature's laws of progress and evolution are from within outward rather than the reverse. That is, funda- mental development is with individual entities, be it per- simmons, race horses or man. And this development is from within. Sprinkling sugar on the outside of a per- simmon will not alter the essential character of the **puckerness" within. Red is an admitted "fast" color, but painting a race horse therewith will not change his speed. Legislation in itself alone, of however com- mendable intent, cannot construct a temple of character and morality for man. 48 The great mystery of individual life, development and growth which has puzzled mankind in all ages is wrapped up in the process by which a chick is hatched from an egg. If we knew the why and whyfor of this simple manifestation of natural laws, we could fathom what ?.3 now counted as unknowable. That chick within the narrDw confines of the shell may have an intuition that there is a larger world outside for him just as man in his normal thoughtful moments has an inward im- pulse that this world is not all — that there are still greater possibilities ahead when he shall have crossed the Great Divide. Man in the larger outside world knows there are two ways that the chick may be brought into contact with a new world. Nature may be allowed to take the slow but evolutionary course from within or the process may be forced from without. Here we again recognize our immutable principles of Construction and Destruc- tion. The process from within outward is life to that little chick and a simple yet profound demonstration of Nature^s principle of constructive advancement or evolution. The other process of force from without by breaking the shell is death to the chick and the destruc- tive principle in operation. Now all this is analogous to man with the added complications that we are dealing with the higher soul attributes of the human soul — self -consciousness, inde- pendent choice, reason and will. As already elucidated, these are amenable to the same identical laws of con- struction and destruction. Nature's evolutionary method of development is from within the individual and not from force without as prohibitive laws of man would have us believe. Indeed, is it not apparent that organized society in this process of forcing morality, conscienciousness, choice and will upon the individual from without thereby robs that individual of the op- 49 portunity for self-development from within, and de- feats its own eiids ? To many it appears a higher mission for organized society as such, to foster the moral responsibility of the individual than to exert its energies demanding mere legal responsibilities. As judged by the standards of Nature, the latter is placing the cart ahead of the horse. Given a sense of moral responsibility, society need not fear the spirit of lawlessness or that the individual can- not move the burden of legal responsibility. Given morahty, laws would indeed be simplified ; likewise their enforcement. But given laws by no means simplifies morality and much less the enforcement thereof. Why does an intelligent citizenry insist upon defy- ing Nature's manifold examples of construction by try- ing to force or legislate morality into the individual from without as exemplified in prohibition? It would be just as logical to start building a house by putting on a roof before there is a foundation. Morality is the foundation upon which society should build if it is to have a structure which will endure the manifold temp- tations of man. Morality is impossible without the co- operation of the individual. But man is so constituted that force from without doesn't appear to make of him a very willing co-operator. In fact, force begets opposi- tion. Logically, prohibition destroys the very bridges by which organized society would cross the dismal and destructive stream of lawlessness. These bridges are moral accountability and personal responsibility, but- tressed by the human soul attributes of self-conscien- ciousness, reason, independent choice and will. Instead of repairing and strengthening these soul attributes of man by which the super-structure of morality and re- sponsibility are supported the destructive course is adopted of undermining and tearing them down. The 50 inevitable result to the bridges of accountability and responsibility are already in evidence. Organized so- ciety is becoming alarmed lest it be thrown into the de- structive stream of lawlessness. Sane logic counsels the repair of the foundations rather than the cursing of the bridges. Therefore, instead of depriving man of original choice, reason and will, it is plain horse sense to develop, improve, expand, enlarge and unfold them, to the end that he can the better carry an increasing burden of moral accountability and personal respon- sibihty. Each normal individual is endowed with a con- science, an inward conviction or acknowledgement of that which is good or bad. It is a spark of the Divine within us. This silent monitor passes judgment upon the thoughts and actions of each individual whatever he does or wherever he goes. The world is full of ex- periences to prove the impossibility of evading or run- ning away from one's own conscience. The principle of prohibition instead of allying itself with this ever pres- ent and powerful agency in each individual disregards it altogether and in a great measure actually opposes it. Prohibitionists must admit there are many people whose conscience does not discern wrong in moderate use of intoxicants above i/^ of 1 % alcoholic content. On the contrary, their conscience actually rebels against divesting the individual of choice, reason and will. Con- science says obey the country's laws but the same con- science says the laws are wrong. Here is a case of a house divided against itself. History informs us that sooner or later such a house must fall. Indeed, they are tumbling every day by the thousands as evidenced by violation of the prohibition statutes. But witness the transformation if prohibition were co-operating with conscience, that Divine spark. The individual conscience would advise obedience to the 51 country's laws. In addition it would declare for inalien- able rights and pursuit of happiness, so long as in the gaining thereof you do not interfere with the rights and happiness of others. Here we have a house united, obeying the law, exercising rights and pursuing happi- ness in perfect harmony and to the profound advance- ment of organized society. But this is a condition which prohibition makes impossible, since it recognizes con- science only from the standpoint of the country's man- datory laws. As it is working out in actual practice a premium is placed upon the evasion of the law. Both young and old instead of having an involuntary sense of wrong do- ing when managing to get a drink, really feel it more as an achievement. Unreasonable and unfortunate as this may seem, it is to be expected when one's con- science, "that silent but powerful voice within," says it is all right to maintain your inalienable rights and pursue individual happiness so long as you do not thereby interfere with others who are seeking the same rights and privileges. Thus prohibition enforcement finds itself arrayed against hundreds of thousands of just such cases where the conscience in all normal af- fairs is of high order and a credit to any nation. Obviously, the harmony which society is properly seeking can be obtained only in two ways, either modi- fying the country's laws or changing the conscience of the individual. Yet note that prohibition is not inter- ested in individual conscience except from a legal stand- point. It arbitrarily outlaws personal choice, reason and will, and thereby eliminates the possibility of reach- ing harmony through the development of individual conscience and morality. Outlawing these natural and essential soul attributes is the very thing that outrages the individual conscience. That is, the conscience can- not be changed until prohibition is changed and the 52 things removed that outrage it. Hence the conclusion that the only avenue to harmony is the changing of the prohibitory law. So long as individual conscience is arrayed against prohibition the bridges of morality and responsibility will continue to totter. To alter conscience is to re- store the foundation functions of choice, reason and will and the freedom to those individual rights and the pur- suit of happiness that do not interfere with others. But this would not be prohibition. Thus is suggested the destructive and discordant condition to which prohibi- tion condemns itself. At this point attention is called to the great en- couraging truth that individual conscience can be changed. How to change it for the better is the ques- tion to which organized society should be giving its at- tention. We have just seen how prohibition cannot pos- sibly change it except for the worse. Discussion of the details of development and growth of conscience would carry us beyond the limits of this volume. All that space here permits is to point out that so- ciety is now headed up a blind alley that leads nowhere unless it be to more uncertainty, darkness and trouble. The first task is to get out of this destructive course of pitfalls onto the solid highway of moral accountability and personal responsibility. This means that organized society should retrace its steps and get back to the leg- islative parting of the ways and secure a right start in harmony with the forces involved. All these forces are in the direction of individual development, growth and unfoldment, and not the course which stifles and an- tagonizes individual conscience, choice, reason and will. Let not society deceive itself in the belief and hope that the two roads will join later on. They are in diametri- cally opposite directions. 63 To anticipate the prohibitionists argument, and it is but an argument to confuse, let it be remembered that the natural constructive road by no means makes the conscience, choice, reason and will of a single individual supreme. There is the automatic check and safeguard that these must not go beyond the point where their ex- ercise interferes with another individual who is exer- cising the same soul attributes in his own behalf. Here is the duty and obligation of society. Here is where constructive legal encouragement or legal restraint, as the case may be, is to be applied. Here is where or- ganized society should function by stimulating every soul faculty to free and unrestrained expression and at the same time guarding similar protection to others. A policy of complete restraint, as in prohibition, is to stultify the faculties by which morality and responsi- bility are developed and without which progress is im- possible. The entire constitution and the subsequent amend- ments, except the 18th, have directed their efforts to guarding the development and growth of the human soul attributes. This guardianship gives the greatest latitude to individual conscience, choice, reason and will so long as their manifestations do not interfere with others. Of course, the guarantee is valueless unless there are legal and enforceable measures to punish those who, having been granted such liberty, abuse it to the discomfiture of others. Such is the legal mission to which American organized society has been giving its attention all these years. But prohibition changes the guardianship to dictatorship disregarding indi- vidual conscience, and abrogating the powers of choice, reason and will — this whether their exercise would be interfering with others or not. It is trial, conviction and sentence in advance of wrong doing. Is it so strange that a liberty-reared conscience feels outraged ? 54 Is it so surprising that prohibition apparently fails to prohibit ? Is it so astounding that we are drifting into a spirit of lawlessness ? Let no one argue that man still has choice, respon- sibility, etc, under prohibition since he can still patron- ize the bootlegger if he so desires. With real prohibi- tion under the Volstead act there would be no bootleg- ger, no possible opportunity to secure anything beyond 1/2 of 1 % alcoholic content. Enforce the law as all are urging and the individual will have no choice, even though he be a millionaire. Then just a word about the soul faculty or power of will. It is well known that those physical muscles are developed which are exercised. An arm tied in a sling for a few months loses much of its former strength. The same holds true of mental man. Train- ing, drilling or exercising the brain along any line of thought such as invention results in increasing strength or ability in that direction. A brain so educated, sees and grasps possibilities that do not exist to one not so developed. In precisely the same manner will and other soul faculties or powers of man develop or stagnate. If there is to be a strong will it must be educated, trained and exercised. Failure to exercise means loss of strength the same as with an unused arm or brain. Is it not true that the direction of prohibition is to eliminate the exercise of individual will power, by keep- ing liquor away from man, so his will, if it chances to be weak, may not be called upon to exert itself? By what process of reasoning does organized society reach the conclusion that it can deny mankind the exercise of will power as between good and evil and at the same time expect more individual self-reliance, dependability and the assumption of further burdens of moral ac- countability and personal responsibility? Can man stand still and go forward at the same time ? Can his 55 will be surrendered and he still have one to exercise ? A more logical course is for society to mark out a plan of training, instructing, drilling and exercising for weak-willed individuals so they may improve and in due time take their places beside those whose will powers are proof against temptation of Uquor abuses. Would not this be more practical and constructive than main- taining an army of officials to ferret out, search for and seize liquor temptation before man can be trusted to proceed on his everyday duties and enjoyment of Hfe? There is the further important fact that a will power once trained and educated is itself a protection against all manner of temptation and evil. If prohibi- tion could succeed in removing the temptation of liquor, the job of preventing evil and crime would only be started. All the other temptations of mortal mxan would have to be sought out and eliminated one by one, with the same odds of Nature to fight against as are appear- ing in the liquor undertaking. The mind cannot grasp the immenseness of such a task, much less the sort of a country or government we would have when the work was completed. But it is not so difficult to picture the training and progressive development of a will power in man with which he can march any time, anywhere to meet any or all of these same temptations and be trusted to give a good account of himself. This brings us to our next forward step, worthy of a chapter by it- self. 56 Chapter VII. Self-Control Versus Self-indulgence A charge to keep, I have A God to glorify, A never-dying soul to save, And fit it for the sky. — [Charles Wesley. Self-control is the master key to human prog- ress. It opens the way for each and every individ- ual to the richest and choicest treasures within, be it material, mental, moral, spiritual or psychical. Placed within the grasp of every normal man and woman who has reached the age of accountability, the key is too seldom applied. In the vast majority of cases it is like the conscience of a confirmed crimi- nal — good as new for it is seldom used. Yet the profound fact that each individual sooner or later will learn is, that he must use it, here or hereafter, or be condemned to eternal darkness. Nature pro- vides no other possible alternative. There is none. It is a veritable milestone in the journey of each human soul that must be passed if that soul is to persist. The ingenuity of man for ages has been en- gaged in establishing theories, philosophies, re- ligions and laws which would evade this milestone and allow man to excuse himself, to "sop his con- science" and allow him to continue his journey in the insidious belief that he can elude Self-control. Prohibition it would seem is America's most recent effort in a large way to thus abandon a responsibil- 57 ity placed upon individual man by the Creator. It would remove the temptation of liquor from his reach so he can progress without having to pass this milestone of Self-control. Since the days of Adam humanity has been marching down the highway of life. In an inces- sant, never-ending procession, it reaches this first great milestone where the road divides. To the left is a broad, inviting thoroughfare; to the right is a narrow and rough passage. The road to the left is Self-indulgence, to the right Self-control. Enough books (some profound, others less so) have been written to fill a small library, philosophizing, specu- lating, dogmatizing upon the fact that the majority of mankind chooses the left-hand route of Self-in- dulgence. This choice should not be so surprising for the road is wide, attractive, much traveled and all down grade. To follow it is little effort — simply the yielding of one's self to the force of gravity and to the spirit of delightful abandonment which ap- pears to be implanted in every soul. No man knows why the Creator elected to en- dow man with natural inclinations which urge him into ways of living that his own conscience tells him are evil. Nor do we know why He made the down- ward, destructive road of Self-indulgence so much more enticing than the difl^cult one of Self-control. Neither does man know why the Creator's plan makes it necessary for humanity to spend so much time and to exert so much personal effort in combat- ing these inherent tendencies that are forever push- ing man into the road of destruction. There are a lot of other things we do not know. But the significant fact is that the Creator also endowed man with an independent self-conscien- 58 tiousness which advises him unfailingly of the right and the wrong. He went even farther by implant- ing an instinct or desire in each human soul to reach out for better things. But through the law of compensation these better things are only for those who will pay the price. That price is the rough and up-hill road of Self-control. As this impulse for better things is individual and personal, so must the effort of Self-control be individual and personal. Each must personally travel the road and overcome the obstacles. There can be no sending of substitutes, no delegates in ad- vance to clear the way and reduce the grades. That this is true is axiomatic, and besides if it were pos- sible for others to dislodge the obstructions for those who would follow, the road to the right would have become a little more inviting through passing cen- turies. So far as we are able to judge, the relative attractiveness of the two roads (Self-indulgence and Self-control) remains the same today as in the days of Adam. If passing years show a higher percent- age of mankind choosing the road of Self-control (and how earnestly this is desired) it is due more to the unfoldment of Nature's plan and the Divine impulse for better things than to any new short cuts or easier grades on the strenuous path of Self-con- trol. These profound truths are old as the hills, yet they appear to have been lost to view by prohibi- tionists. Otherwise, they would not waste time and effort sending out an army of prohibition enforce- ment officials to clear the liquor obstacle from the road of Self-control so it may be more inviting and easier for each individual to travel. Personal effort or no personal reward is the plan of God or Nature. 59 Without this fundamental law where would be the logic of maintaining the Christian religion? If the labor could be delegated and the individual live a holy and righteous life without himself actually as- suming the responsibilities, then religion would in- deed be simple. We could merely delegate the priests and ministers to assume the responsibility of eternal life for our souls. This might appeal to some but it is not His plan. To delegate others to smooth out or assume responsibility of individual Self-control likewise sounds alluring and obviously had great appealing powers in prohibition. The doctrine seems to be : Let society and the law take the responsibility. It is but another clever plan of inventive man to dodge or evade individual Self-control. By it he would send forces ahead to clear the temptation of intox- icants from the pathway so he can slip past the milestone of Self-control without personal effort. This may be an exception but human experience is rich in testimony that Self-control is a personal labor and that any scheme of evasion is a snare and a de- lusion. Special attention is directed to the fact that prohibition is a plan to relieve man of the burden of Self-control in using or abusing intoxicants. It is difficult to see how any considerable portion of organized society can argue that eternal life can be earned only through development and exercise of Self-control in carnal appetites and desires, and how freedom from the liquor evil can be had by avoiding Self-control of those identical appetites and desires. Will those who sponsor such logic ex- plain why progress of man in one instance is depend- ent upon his exercise of Self-control and in the other 60 upon his non-exercise of that individual power. Does not the logic of the prohibition doctrine carry man farther away from the Self-control milestone which the Christian religion teaches that each individual must pass? Why does organized society aid and abet man in this subtle sophistry that there is an- other way around? True Christianity never advocates evasion of personal responsibility but it emphatically insists upon Self-control. Why doesn't society and church- anity likewise place the responsibility of Self-control upon the shoulders of each individual where Nature located it instead of attempting to remove it by law? Give man this responsibility and the ability to ex- ercise Self-control and there will be no need to dis- cuss prohibition. The motive and goal of prevent- ing crime and misery through abuse of liquor will be attained and in perfect accord with natural laws of progress. What the American public today is seeking, whether it knows it or not, is individual Self-control, moral accountability and personal responsibility. With intoxicants it chose the avenue of prohibition to get them. But analysis discloses, and experience will later demonstrate, that this road leads man away from Self-control by removing temptation. The pertinent question is how can we engage and master an adversary by running away from him. Thus comes the inevitable logic that our efforts are misdirected. A person cannot in one jump span the distance between New York and San Francisco. He must take the intermediate steps or their equivalent. So with total abstinence of liquor, if that is the desire of society. The jump from general use as beverage 61 to no use would seem impossible without the inter- mediate steps or their equivalent in individual de- velopment of Self-control, accountability and re- sponsibility. How are these to be developed by denying them to man? But when these are reached and passed, our goal is attained and prohibition un- necessary. Wishing and legislating will not get one across the continent. Neither will the thoughts or motives of what good he could do thereby, accomplish it. He must make a personal effort and pay the price. Similarly, wishing and legislating will not abolish the misuse of liquor, even though the motive be worthy. Individual man must make the personal effort and pay the price. That effort and price are Self-control, accountability and responsibility. Any device, scheme or plan that leads him away from these, be it in the name of prohibition or any other laws or philosophies, is only postponing the in- evitable. The irresistible logic is that the sooner America abandons its prohibitory panacea and gives attention to the development of individual Self-con- trol, moral accountability and personal responsibil- ity, the sooner will we be on the right road to dimin- ishing crime, evil and misery that misuse of intox- icants entails. Then there is the further stimulating truth that a victory for Self-control, accountability and re- sponsibility, is a tremendous forward stride toward the evils in all other temptations to which human flesh is heir. Social evil, robbery, forgery, arson, murder and dozens of other crimes, misdemeanors and bad habits yield to the same treatment. In fact, there is no other cure than through individual Self- control, accountability and responsibility. Man 62 thus triune armed can go forth into a world of temp- tation and come out unscathed. It should be the highest mission of organized society to give each individual every assistance and incentive to such a moral armament rather than v^aste needless time and effort trying to build stockades and barbed v^ire entanglements about him through removal of temp- tation by prohibitory laws. We must not overlook the fact that in fencing something away from man we thereby fence him within. If the prohibition panacea principle of guarding man from evil temptation is followed through for the multitude of destructive agents other than liquor, the protective maze of legal en- tanglement would have to be so dense and compli- cated that man would be hopelessly beyond rescue. If the imagination can be stretched to the point where these legal barriers could shield man from all temptation, then picture the sort of pitiable speci- men of humanity caged within. He would no longer be man, for like an imprisoned animal he would have nothing to do but depend upon others for the things which he did or should have done for himself previous to incarceration. A civilization that ac- cepts the dogma of making life easier to live, of doing for the individual what his development de- pends upon his doing for himself, is distinctly deca- dent and inevitably leads downward. Thus Nature blazons in indelible figures the fallacy of prohibi- tion. Everyday experiences of mankind in all ages since the beginning of time of which there is any authentic record, confirm Nature's law that desires, impulses, cravings, tendencies and emotions of the human soul cannot be annihilated, eradicated, 63 abolished or extinguished. They are a part of man and cannot be eliminated without destroying man's estate and making him something else. Water is two parts hydrogen and one part oxygen. To sep- arate either from the combination results in the destruction of the water itself; it becomes something else. Therefore, comes the self-evident conviction that it is a barren waste of time and energy to up- root and remove the primary and essential elements of the soul which makes man human. Nature's prescribed path of progress is not in that direction at all. Rather is it in the line of ac- quiring that quality and quantity of Self-control which will master, direct and govern the natural appetites, passions and desires of man. The truly masterful man is he who can give these inherent qualities the greatest latitude without permitting them to go beyond the line of constructive principles and become destructive. But how is this quality and quantity of Self-control to be developed if we accept the dogma of prohibition to avoid those things which require the exercise of Self-control? As well ex- pect an athlete to develop his muscles by going to bed for weeks and resting rather than a course of vigorous personal effort along constructive lines. Then let the advocates of temptation removal remember their task would not be ended with the avoidance of those appetites, desires and propen- sities of man's animal nature. Possibility of crime, evil and misery instead of stopping with the field of animal propensities extends on to other divisions of human nature. Take for example the emotion of anger in all its varying shades from rage, fury, hate and revenge on through jealousy and envy to mere displeasure or annoyance. Who will say that ex- 64 treme wrath, revenge or jealousy are not just as destructive to the individual, both physically and morally, as the indulgence of an appetite for intox- icants or social evil? These unchecked extremes of anger, revenge and jealousy are likewise freight- ed with the same possibilities of misery and death to others as are unbridled liquor habits. When they enter the home or office, harmony and progress de- part. Just as in the animal appetites the evasion of Self-control can never bring them under the master- ship of the individual. In Proverbs we read: "He that is slow to anger is better than the mighty and he that ruleth his spirit than he who taketh a city." To the destructive emotion of anger may be added that of fear in its varying degrees of dread, terror, despair, anxiety, despondency and suspicion. Also add the frailty of vanity either of person or of intellect; also selfishness, greed, self-pity, laziness and the whole human scale of destructive emotional habits and inclinations. Just where would pro- hibition begin and leave off in removing these temp- tations common to everyday life? They are laden with error, suffering and evil just as is the indul- gence of animal appetites. So worthy an emotion as religion may be in- dulged in to the point of the destructive principle. Here as everywhere the keynote is temperance and Self-control. In a word. Nature decrees that there is not a passion, emotion, ambition or desire of man, which in itself is right and proper, that cannot be allowed to grow and develop to a point which is destructive. All of these activities and attributes of Nature may and should be encouraged so long as they are constructive and in harmony with na- tural laws of development and progress. It is the 65 natural part of man's estate to work and earn his daily bread. The triumph over one task is an in- dividual achievement or momentum to encounter the next. So is it man's daily and natural estate to meet and master temptations and the human tend- encies and cravings, which, if indulged beyond con- trol, will develop and grow until they become de- structive, whether in themselves good or bad. One victory is an individual achievement or momentum to combat the next. But what is the magic wand that guarantees continued victory in this life struggle? It cannot be the dogma of prohibition for that would avoid the individual battle entirely through elimination or by robbing the individual of a choice or an opportu- nity to meet the enemy. Neither can it be a course of unbridled and uncontrolled indulgence which grad- ually weakens, breaks down and paralyzes the con- structive forces until the destructive are in com- mand. If not these extremes what then is the great re- storative? There is one and only one. It is Self- control. This is the great master key. Only by its use can we fulfill the destiny marked out in the plan of the Creator, or approach the teachings of the Master Jesus. For emphasis, let it be repeated that any religion, philosophy or law which would evade or temporize individual Self-control is a snare and a delusion. This sweeping decree of Nature includes the 18th amendment and Volstead Act regardless of their genuine and most commendable motive for good. This chapter would be incomplete without a re- minder to readers that Self-control in no way means self-suppression, emasculation or smothering of a 66 single impulse or desire in human nature. What it means, and all it means, is that these shall be so completely under the direction or control of the in- dividual that he can immediately by exercise of his will arrest, suspend, or convert these emotions, im- pulses, desires and tendencies into constructive energy. No practical or moral purpose was served by the barbarous Yogi system of Orientals in phys- ical torture of their person. The same is true of the Self-control evidenced by our American Indians in their stoicism, serenity and tranquility in the torture and multilations of their bodies. It does show re- markable will power and Self-control in withstand- ing pain to the physical body. But it has nothing to do with the development of mental and moral Self- control. Nor is it a duty or obligation a person owes himself or to anyone else. Soul mastery means more than mere physical mastery. The tranquility and Self-control for which man should strive is not that of inertia and stagna- tion but rather of action and service. There is no particular merit in sterile self-denial nor the mere act of abstaining. They may be of value at times as a means to an end but are never the goal itself. Once an individual gets his ideas organized about not doing something the temptation is strong to stop there and his life becomes negative and unproduc- tive. There is no such a thing as a negative virtue. At the final judgment we will not be asked what we abstained from doing, but rather what did we do. Life is not all of one piece and of unfruitful self-denial. At one time it may be fitting and proper to be gay; at another solemn. Some occasions may demand abstention, at others a degree of indulgence. Here is where the master key of Self-control opens 67 the right way to any and all circumstances. It safe- guards the art of living abundantly, of expression rather than repression. When one's faculties are busy in expression there is no need for repression, providing Self-control is there to at once arrest any action that approaches the destructive. The appli- cation of the foregoing to sterile prohibition is ob- vious and further comment is unnecessary. 68 Chapter VIII. Prohibition and the Scripture The Bible is a book of faith, and a book of doctrine, and a book of morals, and a book of religion, of special revelation from God; but it is also a book which teaches man his own individual responsibility, his own dignity, and his equality with his fellow-man. — [Daniel Webster. There is little in the Holy Bible to embolden prohibitionists. Their time and effort were better spent studying the Book of Books than inventing new heresies or doctrines contrary to the Great Law. The prohibitionist's iridescent dream of removing temptation from mortal man has no foundation in Scripture. To the reverse, from Genesis to Revela- tions temptations are distinctly recognized as a part of man's estate. To those who intentionally for profit or otherwise set themselves up as superior to the Creator and His laws, theirs is the responsibil- ity, and to them such a minor work as this volume can have little of interest. However, to the great numbers religiously inclined whose fairness and sound judgment have been lulled to sleep by the "song of the siren" this special chapter is dedicated. There is the faintest hope that some church leaders after reading this chapter and further re- flecting upon His teachings may become a little more tolerant and less vituperative — possibly catch a glimmer of the difference between Christianity and mere churchanity. The manner in which some of our good church people have jumped at Utopian 69 dreams of a certain organization with headquarters at Westerville O, and the financial and moral sup- port they have given that league has not greatly popu- larized the Christian spirit among ''poor sinners" whom the church is presumably aiming to reach. When Christian people become abusive in language and action and themselves set an example of intoler- ance, one reason is seen why church pews these days are not always occupied on the Sabbath. Let us first consider the elimination of tempta- tion to which principle prohibitionists are committed with reference to intoxicants. As explained in Chapter V of this work, God did not remove the tree of knowledge of good and evil from the garden of Eden, which temptation was too strong for Adam to resist. When Jesus came to earth "to save man from his lost estate," He did not teach the ejection of temptation. In the Sermon on the Mount He said to His disciples: "But I say unto you, that you re- sist not evil." This quotation has been variously interpreted, and unfortunately by some to mean that Jesus advised the disciples to yield themselves to evil. A fairer interpretation is to consider the en- tire sermon as instructions to His chosen representa- tives. As a climax He points out that if they will but follow His instructions they will have no time to bother with evil. That is, if one is busy living a life along constructive lines, the evil will take care of itself. But however interpreted, it is obvious that Jesus was not urging His disciples to spend their time and energy chasing temptation from the face of tne earth. As a matter of fact, Jesus himself was sorely tempted. We read in the fourth chapter of the Gospel according to Saint Matthew of his fasting 70 in the wilderness for forty days and being tempted of the devil to turn stones to bread and when taken to the exceeding high mountain and shown the king- doms of the world and their glories was tempted to rule over them. Again, Chapter 1 Epistle of James we read: "James a servant of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting. My brethen, count it all joy when ye fall into divers temptations. Knowing this that the trying of your faith worketh patience." That is, the tribes instead of being counseled to avoid temp- tation were definitely advised to accept such with joy since it gave them an opportunity to prove their faith and practice self-control. Further on in the same chapter is the following illuminating passage: "Blessed is the man that en- dureth temptation, for when he is tried, he shall re- ceive the crown of life .... But every man is tempted when he is drawn away of his own lust and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin, and sin when it is finished, bring- eth forth death. "Do not err my beloved brethren." Thus is attention drawn to temptation not as a curse but as an opportunity "and do not err my brethren." Note the choice given the brethren and the responsi- bility resting with them. There is no thought of re- moving temptation. In the first Epistle of Peter an apostle of Jesus, wherein he speaks of the manifold spiritual graces of God we read: "Wherein ye greatly rejoice, though now for a season if need be, ye are in heavi- ness through manifold temptations: That the trial of your faith being much more precious than of gold that perisheth, though it be tried with fire might be 71 found unto praise and honor and glory at the ap- pearing of Jesus Christ." Here, too, is temptation made the occasion of rejoicing, "more precious than of gold that perisheth," to the end that the "strang- ers scattered through Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia" may keep the faith and prove the blessings of self-control over self-indulgence. The first Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians in Chapter X records these significant words: "Where- fore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall. There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man : But God is faithful v^ho v^ill not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it." At- tention is here called to the responsibility on man, "take heed lest he fall." Also to the fact that temp- tations are common to man, as well as the further inspiring truth that with the temptation is provided a way of escape. There is not the faintest sugges- tion that temptation be destroyed, but on the con- trary it is stated that with the temptation is a way of escape. Every normal minded person who has reached the age of accountability has known in his own heart to this day that there is a way to escape any and all temptation. It is the way of faith and self-control as explained in the preceding chapter. There are plenty of other references to which we might refer as establishing the point that temp- tations are common to man. It would seem unneces- sary to go farther in convincing the reader that temptation is a part of the Creator's working plan, that it appeared with Adam, confronted Jesus and has remained with mankind to the present day. Further, that we are no more fitted to change His 72 plan of using temptation for man's development and "proving the faith" than we are to do a better week's work than did He as recorded in the first chapter of Genesis. Hence so far as the Scripture is concerned, the prohibition panacea of uprooting temptation and destroying it root and branch as re- gards intoxicants, would require a new version of the Holy Writ to comply with America's 18th amend- ment and Volstead Act. Nor can the alibi be entered that intoxicants are a new temptation that have come since Bible times with the progress of man and the new condi- tions. Back in the ninth chapter of Genesis we read: "And Noah began to be a husbandman and planted a vineyard. And he drank of the wine and was drunken." Indeed, the temperate use of wine appears to have been counted a blessing. In Chapter 104 of the Psalms, the meditation upon the mighty power and wonderful providence of God records: "He watereth the hills from His chambers. ... He causeth the grass to grow for the cattle and herb for the service of man And wine that maketh glad the heart of man, and oil to make his face to shine and bread which strengtheneth his heart." Ecclesiastes X, 19 says: "A feast is made for laughter and wine maketh merry." The first Epistle of Paul the apostle to Timothy mentions: "Drink no longer water but use a little wine for thy stomach's sake and thine often infirmities." Note the quali- fying word " little;" that is, use it, but do not abuse it. Then who is not familiar with the story record- ed in the second chapter of Saint John, of Christ turning water into wine at the marriage feast in 73 Cana of Galilee? That it would hardly pass muster of the Volstead ^ of 1% alcoholic content, we read in the same chapter: ''When the ruler of the feast had tasted the water that was made wine, and knew not whence it was, the governor of the feast called the bridegroom. And said unto him. Every man at the beginning doth set forth good wine ; and when men have well drunk, then that which is worse; but thou hast kept the good wine until now." A brief investigation on the part of a doubtful reader will give ample evidence that real intoxicants that intox- icated were known back in the days of Noah and since. Therefore strong drink is no new device of Satan to tempt mankind. Lest some readers become fearful that this chapter is aiming to justify drunkenness and evil through God's Holy Word, let us hasten to take stock of our whereabouts. To this point the chapter has intended to bring out the truth of three things: 1, God's plan of distinctly providing, and allowing to continue, temptation in various forms to mankind. 2, That there is a right and proper use of so-called intoxicants. 3, That alcoholic beverages are no new device of Satan to lead erring man astray. If there remains any doubt on these points the reader is urged to peruse the original Records more at length than this brief chapter makes possible. We now come to an equally potent fact. From cover to cover the Great Book is rich with references to the misuse of intoxicants and drunkenness. Only three or four typical references will be given; there are many more, Proverbs XX say: "Wine is a mock- er, strong drink is raging and whosoever is deceived thereby is not wise." Isaiah XXVIII : ''But they also have erred through wine and through strong drink 74 and are out of the way; the priest and the prophet have erred through strong drink, they are swallowed up of wine, they are out of the way through strong drink; they err in vision, they stumble in judgment.'* Isaiah LVI: "Yea they are greedy dogs which can never have enough Come ye say I will fetch wine and we will fill ourselves with strong drink and tomorrow shall be as this day and much more abundant/' In the Epistle of Paul to the Gala- tians. Chapter V: *'Now the works of the flesh are manifest which are these: Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness and such like of the which I tell you before as I have also told you in times past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. But the fruit of the spirit is love, joy, peace, meekness, long suffering, goodness, faith, temperance: against such there is no law." In these quotations as elsewhere in the Bible the evils pointed out are excesses, overindulgence and drunkenness. 'They err in vision and judg- ment." That is, the individual erred in his responsi- bility. There is no attack made upon, nor a re- sponsibility given, the temptation itself. Man and not the intoxicant is held accountable. Then "Against love, joy .... and temperance, there is no law." Temperance, of course, is not total abstinence. The law of God appears to look with favor upon temperance whereas prohibition does not. Until the days of the 18th amendment, indeed if not now, the vast majority of loyal American citi- zens would say: "Temperance in all things, every- where and always is a virtue." Many might venture 75 still further and proclaim: "Total abstinence in all things (as in eating) is suicidal and hence may or may not be a virtue. Why experiment with the doubtful when the certain is as obtainable. In other words, let us make our goal temperance and not total abstinence." Until the days of the 18th amendment an in- dividual who kept inviolate the ten commandments, given by God to the children of Israel and later re- newed by Jesus, was considered a good citizen, even good enough for an American citizen. Now he isn't unless he also keeps inviolate the 11th command- ment of prohibition, namely — "thou shalt not be tempted of strong drink." This apparent oversight of the Creator is surprising for He knew all about the harm that might follow the misuse of intoxi- cants. Knowing it. He did not even add the more temperate command, "thou shalt not drink intoxi- cating beverages." Such a command would have been more moderate because it did not forbid the manufacture, sale or transportation, and thus al- lowed the temptation to remain. But more amazing still is it that He (Psalm 104) "causeth the grass to grow for the cattle and herb for the service of man .... and wine that maketh glad the heart of man." Until the 18th amendment and the Volstead Act vast numbers of mankind really believed the Omniscience of God and did not question His wisdom in establishing nat- ural laws that turned fruit juices so easily into bev- erages beyond i of 1% alcoholic content. Is it not a fair question to ask prohibitionists if their dogma does not make a criminal of Nature and Nature's God? 76 The Holy Bible has interesting things to say about false prophets and "false teachers among you who shall bring in damnable heresies." The reading of Peter and Deuteronomy XIII will do no Chris- tian soul harm and might benefit prohibitionists. The passage in Isaiah V : "Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes and prudent in their own sight" might have significance as well as the ending of the Sermon on the mount: "Judge not that ye be not judged." The intent of this chapter, as already mentioned, is to direct the attention of sincere and worthy Americans, many of whom are endeavoring to keep His commandments, to underlying truths which may have thus far escaped them. The reader, himself, after due thought and such further investigation as he may choose to make, can decide whether the principle of prohibition and temptation removal is in accord with God's working plan for mankind. 77 Chapter IX. The Legal Side of Prohibition Extreme law, extreme injustice. — [Cicero. A government that sows to the wind, by itself as- suming the responsibilities, initiative and develop- ment that rightly belong to the individual, must sooner or later reap the whirlwind of disappearing in- dividual vital power and national destruction. No government, even for the sake of making its subjects more pliant and docile to its mandates, can ever ad- vance the cause of civilization by obstructing individ- ual effort and self-development. This is inevitable, for the whole can be no greater than the sum of its parts. If the parts are stunted and dwarfed, no recog- nized system of mathematics can elevate the aggre- gate above mediocrity. Progress for organized society is not in the direc- tion of dwarfing the individual but rather through en- lightenment, instruction and education assist him in individual growth and expansion. Thus through the unfoldment and enlargement of the individual parts does society in the aggregate reach forward to ever extending totals. From this it is obvious that a so- ciety, or a government, that itself assumes the obliga- tions of choice, conscience, reason and will power, in- exorably leads to advancing degeneracy of the indi- vidual. Furthermore, a society or a government can no more evade the penalties of its false philosophy than can an individual the final punishment of his own self-indulgence. 78 These are truths which America needs to ponder well, if "the land of the free and the home of the brave" is not to eventually degenerate into "a land of bondage and home of human automatons." The epi- fflemic of rushing to local, state and national interfer- /ence by law in matters that primarily concern the individual is fraught with grgat^anger. It is to in- dividual mentality and morality what the great white plague of tuberculosis is to material man. Both are insidiously destructive. That America is not alone in courting the brazen idol of centralized authority and control as a panacea for evil tendencies of mankind in no degree relieves her of the responsibilities and the obligations to civilization. It is no credit to America, favored with such marked opportunities and from whom so much was expected, to be found on the same road with the mailed fist of German bureaucracy or with the bolshevism of Russia. This comparison is intentionally inserted to shock the American public into a realization of the road it has been following in very recent years. Governmenf^ policies of trust busting instead of regulation, govern- ment ownership and direction of public utilities in- stead of individual initiative in service and function- ing, the socialistic dictum of government resposibil- ity for morals and habits of its subjects instead of individual accountability and personal responsibility^ — ^these are not so far removed from bureaucracy, socialism, bolshevism. Any difference is more of de- gree than principle. In both cases the fundamental error is the assumption by centralized authority of duties, obligations and efforts which the individual himself requires for development. Such are the lines of thought to which this chap- ter would direct the reader rather than a dissertation on mooted legal phraseology, infringements or incon- 79 sistencies. It is a matter of principles and not prop- aganda. It will be noted, of course, that the empha- sis instead of being placed upon the pleasures or "rights" of an individual is upon the advancement of organized society itself. That is, the goal sought is the J^ogress p1 _ cmJization,_ The individual Ts con- cerned only in so far as the inevitable part he must play in accordance with natural laws. But the fact of profound significance is that civ- ilization gets its initial impulse from the individual. As well attempt to render Shakespeare's tragedy of Hamlet with Hamlet omitted as to advance civiliza- tion without the individual. The 18th amendment and Volstead Act follow the iridescent rainbow of illu- sion that society or government itself impels the in- dividual. This doctrine assumes that organized so- -^ ciety has morality, chastity, virtue and purity not possessed by the individuals of which that society is composed. The tragedy is the delusion of appro- priating in name that which is not possessed in fact — a modernized version of Hamlet without Hamlet. In the fullness of time history may repeat itself by Nature again demonstrating that morality and virtue are subjects of individual development and unfold- ment from within rather than for legislative force from without; that the mission of law is to cherish, nourish and encourage this individual development instead of antagonizing and thwarting it. A civiliza- tion that adopts the latter hostile course thereby closes the door of progress against itself. Thus comes the importance of the legal side of prohibition — not alone in behalf of individual rights but also to the advantage of organized society. Analysis discloses that from this broad and most altruistic viewpoint of a better civilization, law as 80 such cannot evade certain duties, obligations and unal- terable relations to the individual, without suffering the consequences. As these were recognized or ignored in past ages has peace prevailed or war reigned, and the cause of civilization advanced or retarded. It is the age long struggle between indi- vidual liberty and centralized authority. The striking fact is that the individual inher- ently struggles for those things which will advance civil- ization while civilization itself lets loose forces to de- feat that worthy end. Indeed, it is nearly if not quite true that organized society is improving not through its own activities but in spite of them. The transcend- ing possibilities of progress, if organized society would work with and through the Divinely endowed soul attributes of conscience, choice, reason and will power in each normal individual, are enough to thrill and inspire patriotic and God-fearing men everywhere. Instead, we witness, for one reason or another men busily engaged in erecting legal bar- riers to individual development through such re- pressive measures as prohibition and proposed re- moval of temptation. Why, oh why, can we not profit by the history of what tyranny of authority has meant to civilization from the ancient days of Egypt, Rome and Greece, on through the centuries to the present hour! Back in 1858 John Stuart Mill penned that im- mortal essay on Liberty. Therein we read : "Society can and does execute its own man- dates; and if it issues wrong mandates instead of right, or any mandates at all in things with which it ought not to meddle, it practices a social tyranny more formidable than many kinds of political op- pression, since, though not usually upheld by such 81 extreme penalties, it leaves fewer means of escape, penetrating much more deeply into the details of life, and enslaving the soul itself .... There is a limit to the legitimate interference of collective opinion with individual independence; and to find that limit, and maintain it against encroachment is as indispensable to a good condition of human af- fairs, as protection against political despotism." As to what was meant by individual liberty we read farther along: "It comprises first the inward domain of consciousness; demanding liberty of conscience, in the most comprehensive sense; liberty of thought and feeling; absolute freedom of opinion and sentiment on all subjects, practical or speculative, scientific, moral, or theological Secondly, the principle requires liberty of tastes and pursuits; of framing the plan of our life, subject to such consequences as may follow without impediment from our fellow creatures, so long as what we do does not harm them even though they should think our conduct foolish, perverse, or wrong No society in which these liberties are not, on the whole, respected, is free, what- ever may be its form of government; and none is completely free in which they do not exist absolute and unqualified. The only freedom which deserves the name, is that of pursuing our own good in our own way, so long as we do not attempt to de- prive others of theirs, or impede their efforts to obtain it. Mankind are gi'eater gainers by suffering each other to live as seems good to themselves, than by compelling each to live as seems good to the rest." Again we read: "The likings and dislikings of society, or of some powerful portion of it, are thus the main thing which has practically de- termined the rules laid down for general observance, under the penalties of law or opinion. And in general, those who have been in advance of society in thought and feeling, have left this condition of things unassailed in principle, however they may have come into conflict with it in some of its details. They have occupied themselves rather in inquiring what things so- ciety ought to like or dislike, than in questioning whether its likings or dislikings should be a law to individuals. They pre- ferred endeavoring to alter the feelings of mankind on the particular points on which they were themselves heretical, rather than make common cause in defense of freedom, with heretics generally." 82 Such are the words of a deep thinker 70 years before the 18th amendment and Volstead Act. The apphcation to prohibition is so apparent further comment is unnecessary. In fact, the entire essay might well be substituted for the present chapter on the legal side of prohibition. His penetrating analy-' ; sis shows how society cannot invade human liberties of individual expression and development without itself thereby suffering the destructive consequences. ] Space forbids detailed review, except a few scintiK lating conclusions, fully backed up by cold logic in the essay itself. "But the peculiar evil of silencing the expression of an opinion is, that it is robbing the human race, posterity as well as the existing generation Silencing of discus- sion is an assumption of infallibility The hu- man faculties of preception, judgment, discriminative feeling, mental activity, and even moral preference, are exercised only in making a choice He who lets the world, or his own portion of it, choose his plan of life for him, has no need of any faculty than the ape-like one of imitation . . . Strong impulses are but another name for energy. Energy may be turned to bad uses; but more good may always be made of an energetic nature, than of an indolent and impas- sive one. The same strong susceptibilities which make the personal impulses vivid and powerful, are also the source from whence are generated the most passionate virtue, and the sternest self-control. It is through the cultivation of these, that society both does its duty and protects its interests. A person whose desires and impulses are his own is said to have a character. One whose desires and impulses are not his own has no character, no more than a steam engine has a character. .... "Persons of genius are, in small minority but in order to have them, it is necessary to preserve the soil in which they grow. Genius can only breathe freely in an at- mosphere of freedom There is no reason that all human existences should be constructed on some one, or some small number of patterns Human beings are not like sheep; and even sheep are not undistinguishably alike Different persons require different condi- tions for their spiritual development The same things which are helps to one person towards the cultivation of his higher nature, are hindrances to another In proportion to the development of his individuality, each person becomes more valuable to himself, and is therefore capable of being more valuable to others What- 83 ever crushes individuality is despotism, by whatever name it may be called, and whether it professes to be enforcing the will of God or the injunctions of men But the strongest of all the arguments against the interference of the public with purely personal conduct, is that when it does inter- fere, the odds are that it interferes wrongly, and in the wrong place." Again, let readers remember that the plea for individual liberty, development and unf oldment is in behalf of a better civilization, which the Almighty and not man decreed can come only through the in- dividual. Hence we see the necessity of that char- acter of laws which give individuality an opportu- nity to unfold if society itself is to benefit. Laws of however good intent or in the name of whatever cause, that check, repress or prevent the exercise of individual conscience, choice, reason and will power, are mental, moral and spiritual bondage to man, and are unavoidably retroactive upon that society which issued and enforced those mandates. America's marvelous forward strides since the signing of the .Constitution and the subsequent amendments, ex- cepting the 18th, are largely the result of the wise legislation therein which cherished and protected the^ rights of an individual to develop through ex- ercise of his normal tastes, desires and propensities, holding him accountable that in their exercise he did not interfere with others enjoying the same in their own right. The pronounced departure from this principle by the 18th amendment is the reason for this chapter on the legal_relation between organized society.and the individuaj^ Let it be distinctly understood that there is no attack upon enforcing law whether it be good or bad. Disrespect of law is progressively destructive to both society and the individual. This was master- fully presented by Attorney General Dougherty in 84 an address to the 1921 annual convention of the American Bar Association at Cincinnati. In part the press quoted him as saying: "From the standpoint of government the only sound view is that of law enforcement. Whatever differences of opinion exist in the views as to the wisdom of some of these laws can be of no concern to the agencies for law enforcement. The executive department cannot make the laws. It is equally true that it cannot nullify laws. To refuse or to neglect to enforce a valid enactment of the legislative department of government, or to enforce it mechanically or half-heartedly or to wink at its violation, is without justification on any sound theory of government. Those who ask it or expect it not only contribute to lawlessness but destroy the basis upon which their own security rests. Our safety and happiness lies in obedience to law by every man, woman and child within the domain of our Republic, and no one can undermine respect for law without being, to that extent, an enemy to law and or- derly government. As a citizen cannot choose what laws he will obey, so, likewise, those charged with law enforcement cannot choose what laws they will enforce. If laws are ob- noxious to the people it is in their province to repeal them. Until they are repealed they must be observed and enforced without fear or favor." Still more to the point so far as the 18th amend- ment and Volstead law are concerned is the following resolution adopted by the judicial section at the same American Bar Convention. "Reverence for law and enforcement of law depend main- ly upon the ideals and customs of those who occupy the vant- age ground of life in business and society. The people of the United States, by solemn constitutional and statutory enact- ment, have undertaken to suppress the age-long evil of the liquor traffic. When, for the gratification of their appetites, or the promotion of their interests, lawyers, bankers, great merchants and manufacturers, and social leaders, both men and women, disobey and scoff at this law, or any other law, they are aiding the cause of anarchy and promoting mob violence, robbery and homicide, they are sowing dragon's teeth, and they need not be surprised when they find that no judicial or police authority can save our country or humanity from reap- ing the harvest." This chapter in no way questions the soundness of the above logic nor does it assault the principles therein stated. The quotations are given for the 85 double purpose of emphasizing the supremacy of law and also the avenue of escape through repeal, or modification. Incidentally, it should prove a forceful reminder of the dangers in hasty, ill con- sidered and destructive legislation, especially when the mandates are placed in the fundamental law of a nation. As so well expressed by James Beck, Solic- itor General of the United States, at the above men- tioned Bar convention: "To paraphrase the saying of the Master — 'the laws were made for man and not man for the laws.' If the science of the law ignores the study of human nature and attempts to con- form man to the lav/s, rather than the laws to man, then its development is a very partial and imperfect one." It is this very partiality, imperfection and abso- lute defiance of the Almighty, as evidenced in pro- hibition, which this chapter and the entire work challenges without reserve. It would call to account an organized society that thus abuses the supremacy and nobility of law. America may study with profit the parable of the talents. In behalf of a higher civilization much has been given America. But dis- respect of human liberties, duties and responsibil- ities in the name of laws that are repressive to in- dividual development is a scant account of our stewardship. Little is the wonder that this same Nature-defy- ing society already finds itself being drawn into the vortex of a whirlwind of lawlessness. Distraught appeals on the majesty of the law are made by pro- hibition enforcement officials, by the attorney gen- eral, by the press, by the nation's Chief Executive, by guilty society itself. Even the august judiciary deems it necessary to warn "lawyers, bankers, great merchants and manufacturers and social leaders, both men and women," that they are "aiding the 86 cause of anarchy." The diagram on how prohibition breeds lawlessness, used as a frontispiece in this vol- ume, tells an interesting and pointed story. These notable men and women previous to the 18th amendment were counted as loyal, law-abiding citizens. Now they are among the many thousands who are under criminal indictment of violating the prohibition statutes and whose cases are still pend- ing, owing to the abnormal increase of revolt against authority and the consequent inability of the courts to adjudicate promptly. This only includes the fed- eral courts; add to it the avalanche of cases in lower courts and some slight idea is gained of why we are hearing so much about the spirit of lawlessness. Fin- ally, add to these the hundreds of thousands who are violating the 18th amendment or aiding and abetting others therein and who have not been arrested there- for, and we get a glimmer of the wholesale lack of reverence for this particular law. The disconcerting part is that this contempt of the prohibition statutes is by no means confined to the weak-minded and criminally-inclined. Instead, it is notably apparent among "bankers, lawyers and our great merchants and manufacturers." Even the skirts of the judiciary and the actual officers of law enforcement are not spotless. It is common knowl- edge that respected men in these callings are not averse to something stronger than ^ of 1% and are none too particular about ascertaining whether the stimulant was legally acquired. No disrespect to the judiciary nor to the servants of the law is here in- tended, any more than applies to bankers, great merchants, and our leading men and women. Yet it does show beyond controversy that lawlessness can- not be placed wholly at the door of bootleggers and 87 rum runners. To one bootlegger there must be many who patronize him and wink at the law. The prices charged and the fortunes being amassed through il- licit handling of intoxicants would be impossible without catering to those who occupy the vantage ground of life, in business and society. These leading men and women in most cases are leaders because of their energy, which Mill tells us is but another name for strong impulses, "through which more good can be accomplished than through indolent and passive natures." Here is the faintest suggestion, not a stated fact, that the characteristics which pushed such men and women forward areUot far removed from those that lead them to reason- able indulgence in liquors that may have been ille- gally acquired under the provisions of prohibition. If true, this might explain how the 18th amendment is making so many crirninals^out^of supposedly worth W Jiile ci tizens. Certain it is that our captains of industry have marked individuality and are least inclined to sur- render their desires, and impulses and appetites and allow others to choose their plan of life. They are outstanding individuals because they developed faculties, powers and capacities which prohibition would revoke. Perhaps sufficient time has not yet elapsed for these self-developed men and women to become mere cattle and meekly submit to fanatical or bigoted illusions and to autocratic authority. Per- haps they will eventually and perhaps they will not. Perhaps it isn't for the advancement of civilization that they did. It is possible that the world may yet sorely need men and women of strong individuality, whose individual energy and initiative will lead them to blaze new trails instead of tamely following, like 88 sheep, the beaten paths marked out for them by others. The unfortunate and truly alarming thing is the present violation of the prohibition law. It is a ques- tion of most vital import to the nation whether we should continue our efforts and expense to further perfect an unbreakable chain of legal restrictions by which society can hold these "great merchants and manufacturers" and other captains of industry in subjection or whether a better course might not be for society to modify its edict which is causing the trouble. One road or the other must be chosen, and that comparatively soon, if our whole legal fabric is not stripped to threads, and anarchy, even rebellion, invited. America can no more exist half law-abid- ing and half lawless'tHairshe could exist half free and half slave back in the days of the Civil war. The fervid mission of this volume is the two- fold one of awaterniTg the public to that fact, and advancing demonstrated jtruths of Nature! Vhich show the snare and the delusion in prohibition, as well as the inevitably destructive principles upon which it is founded. It is a plea for evolution that revolution may be avoided. It is an entreaty to the intelligence and the reasonable judgment of a demo- cratic people not to depart from the principles in the Constitution of their nation, for which countless thousands have fought and died — a Constitution that has heretofore drawn a sacred circle about the individual and defended the inherent attributes of the human soul. 89 Chapter X. Social, Moral and Economic Claims By far the best proof is experience. — [Bacon. Ere this the reader has doubtlessly observed that this volume has had little to say concerning the prohibition arguments pro and con usually aired in daily conversation. An attempt has been made to go beyond these and deal in fundamental prin- ciples which if better understood would leave no room for argument or disagreement. With the same unerring certainty that a banker with the right com- bination opens his vault, can one with the unvarying laws of Nature unlock the problems of prohibition or any other issue which concerns the individual and society. The "combination" is the same today as it was 100 years ago and the same as it will be 100 years hence. Nature is both methodical and depend- able. To grasp her methods and laws today is to know them tomorrow. Hence the effort in this work to follow her teachings rather than seek diversion in the mere opinions and arguments of vacillating man. Let us turn then to the alleged foundation upon which prohibitionists are attempting to build, name- ly, the social, moral and economic advantages in en- forced abstinence. An entire volume could be given on figures, comparative statistics and arguments as to whether America is better socially, is more moral or economically more sound than previous to the 90 18th amendment and Volstead act. The data if given without bias would be conflicting. Different people would draw different conclusions from a complete review of the same identical statistics. That is what the masses are doing today and is what they may continue to do so long as the evidence is measured by fallible man instead of by the eternal principles established by the Almighty. Prohibitionists seemed confident that through the 18th amendment and Volstead act, crime and death would receive a great body blow. Our penal and cor- rective institutions would be less needed. Officers of law would have less to do and our courts less clogged with criminal cases. They produce figures to prove those blessings. Yet others produce an equal array of statistics showing how there are more deaths, more in hospitals, more extension of jail facilities, more of- ficers, more congestion in courts under prohibition than previous to the 18th amendment. They challenge pro- hibitionists to prove that there is less crime, that people are any happier or more contented now than then. Im- posing figures are given to show that for every saloon closed in most of our cities there are now many "speak easies" or "kitchen dives." It is pointed out how much more difficult it becomes to reach and control these than the old time saloon which was licensed and in a measure under control of constituted authority. Thus the pro and the anti argue back and forth, each dig- ging up figures and statistics to prove his case. With exaltation prohibitionists point to the cases in practically every community where some in- dividuals, since prohibition, have become more de- pendable, treat their families better and are saving more money. "If prohibition isn't accomplishing good," they challenge, "then explain these facts and 91 others which can be seen daily by all.** The answer is simple though not always given. It is to grant the soundness of the argument — as far as it goes. But right here is where human frailty enters and pro- hibitionists err in centering attention upon only a part of the results which necessarily flow from the prohibition process. The fair minded will grant that the only safe way of judging the merits of pro- hibition or any other issue is to weigh all the results attending it and not stop with a single line of iso- lated results that may be but a small fraction of the aggregate. A complex process, such as prohibition, pro- duces, mixed results. When there are mixed results, some may be good and others bad. In other words, we may have a result that is most beneficient and benign following or growing out of a process. or ac- tivity that is indefensibly wrong and pernicious. This is so important a point as applied to prohibi- tion and is so seldom grasped that it may be worth while to give two or three examples for added clear- ness. Suppose a chemist to learn the action of a new compound feeds it to his child and the child dies as a result. The chemist gains the desired knowledge which in itself may be valuable and helpful to hu- manity, indeed, may lead to an important discovery to aid mankind. But would you say the method or process of obtaining this beneficient result was right? Suppose a father lacks funds to complete the education of a promising son and knows that with the death of an eccentric uncle the boy will come in- to possession of a large amount of money. The father causes the death of the uncle, the son is educated and 92 becomes a great inspiration to and benefactor of man- kind. In this case the father's primary motive was commendable and the results to the son and the world, in themselves, were helpful. But what of the other re- sults ? The method or process of obtaining the good re- sults was not only wrong and destructive but also crimi- nal, as the most radical prohibitionist would admit. Then suppose a psychologist desires to learn more of that fascinating subject of life beyond the grave. He has been told that those who bleed to death usually pass into a psychic state just previous to death in which they often see and talk with those who have gone be- fore. To gain more knowledge he takes one member of his family after another into his laboratory and bleeds them to death so he can question them as to what they see and hear as they draw near the valley of death. Here too, the dominant motive may be worthy and some of the results may be the gaining of new Hght which the whole world is seeking. If authentic information is gained that there is another life and that death does not end all, think of the comfort and courage thus given millions of troubled souls. But what of the other results that also attended the method or process of securing these beneficient re- sults? Every instinct of the soul rebels against the inhuman and unnatural method of securing those re- sults which in themselves were commendable. Better that the problem be left unsolved than to reach it through such unjust sacrifice. Thus we see how a complex method or process may produce mixed results, some of which results may be good and others wholly bad. There is the further thought that the desirable results may be secured through other methods which do not also carry the bad results. Refer to the examples above given and note the truth thereof. Still further, note the accompanying 93 corollary that from the standpoint of the individual, practically every worthy result may be approached through two different methods — ^the right and the wrong, the constructive or the destructive. In the light of this explanation the application to prohibition should be readily comprehended. As in the cases cited, the motive is worthy and some of the results obtained are commendable. These results and the motive are what prohibitionists parade before the public, and to a surprising degree have succeeded in di- verting attention away from the other results of the prohibitive process which are both bad and destructive. This volume freely admits the worthy motive behind prohibition and the value of the results which are bene- ficient. But instead of stopping here, it goes into an in- vestigation of the other accompanying results and shows their injury, evil, curse and calamity. Only by weighing all the results of the prohibition process are we able to intelligently and justly measure the merit therein. Earlier chapters have detailed how some of the re- sults flowing from prohibition are: To deny develop- ment of individual choice, reason and will power ; to out- rage conscience; to relieve the individual of moral ac- countability and personal responsibility; to align or- ganized society with the Destructive instead of the Con- structive Principle of Nature ; to disregard the inalien- able rights and privileges and obligations of each in- dividual; to set aside self-control, that master key of human progress ; to make a criminal of Nature ; to re- ject the working plan of the Almighty ; to foster law- lessness; and finally, to thwart individual unfoldment in this life in preparation for that which is to come. These are among the other inevitable results of prohi- bition and temptation removal. Weigh them in the balance against the seemingly beneficient results which 94 prohibitionists talk about. Then let each reader say for himself whether the prohibitive process is one to which an enlightened nation should continue to give its support. Does such a process or method with these mixed results lead to a higher or lower civilization? As in the case of the psychologist, might it not be better that the problem remain unsolved temporarily than to ap- proach it through the avenue of such sacrifices ? Bet- ter still, what about seeking a method that will lead to all, or more, of the alleged beneficial results now found in prohibition, without pulling down upon our heads all of the evil and naturally destructive results outlined? Why did not organized society legislate against drunkenness, the same as against murder, leav- ing man access to Hquor the same as to knives, clubs, poison, fire and water, but holding him accountable for his use thereof? Surely, these are fair and pertinent questions which can and will be answered if the public will cease worshipping the brazen idol of self-deceit, and demand the whole truth instead of a mere fraction. For the twofold object of brevity and the holding of this volume to fundamental principles, details of gross violations of the 18th amendment and Volstead act will be omitted. That prohibition as yet fails to prohibit is known to all who read the daily press, who reflect upon the thousands of violations that never reach the courts and the press and who have taken the trouble to review the making in homes of beverages be- yond the 1/2 of 1 % alcoholic content. If the friends of prohibition can see a moral victory in the accompany- ing effects upon adult and youth alike, their vision must match their wisdom which assumes to transcend that of the Almighty. In this connection the reader may be interested in a succinct editorial appearing in the Springfield (Mass) 95 Union entitled "The vicious enforcement circle." It reads : "One ultimately fatal principle appears to attend prohibi- tion, either as a federal or state or concurrent undertaking. Ef- forts to make it stronger only weaken it. Enforcement of the law constantly calls for more restrictions and these breed new weaknesses. The process of enforcement sets up a vicious circle in which every added effort to enforce the law increases its vio- lation; new steps are taken to check new violations and thus the inevitable course is toward the legal prohibition of all uses of alcohol and of all personal liberty and the actual defiance of law and assertion of personal liberty. "Undoubtedly, however, this process must go on until it reaches the logical end of absurdity, complete contempt for the law and complete failure to enforce it. More and more personal liberty will be under the ban of the law and more and more it will assert its-elf in contempt of the law. The Anti-Saloon League apparently has no other recourse than constantly to appeal for more and more restrictions. It is logically the only way it has to make prohibition a success, though in practice it makes it a failure. Incidentally, it is the only way the League officials can make a show of earning their salaries. They must go on de- manding more and more law to check violations of laws already enacted, thereby producing more and more violations, calling in turn for more and more laws. In such a process ultimately comes a critical point at which all law breaks down." The Herculean task of explaining all this is left to the optimistic prohibitionist who appears so sanguine as to the progress made in curbing lawlessness. It is true that prohibition is a comparatively new law to our country as a national edict. Yet this is offset by the large amount of money spent solely for its enforcement, and the young army of enforcement officials whose only duty is to enforce this particular law. In addition are a great many thousands of ordinary servants of the law whose instructions are to co-operate; also the powerful agent of publicity which in some ways is more effective than all else combined. Penalties, too, are severe, confiscating personal property and incarceration in prison. Even a murderer may leave all his property to heirs. An automobile in 96 which he is caught transporting bombs of destruction is not forfeited to the public treasury. But if he is transporting liquor, it is. The penalties for a violator of the Volstead act except paying the "supreme price" are more tyranical and inclusive than for the taking of human life. No single law has ever enjoyed greater latitude of power, official influence and financial backing than prohibition. Thus the argument of insufficient time to clean the country of booze loses some of its force. Then the much stressed point of economic savings also has another side. Here again are muxed results with prohibitionists directing attention only to those which are beneficient. All know how taxpayers are groaning under the burdens of taxation and how Con- gress is at its wits ends to provide money for meeting the nation's obligations. Under former revenue taxes the government has lost upwards of 300 millions of dol- lars annually in direct tax. This could have been trebled and given consumers in a legal manner better intoxi- cants for less money than they are paying today and paying illegally. What they are breaking the law to get today and even flirting with death to secure at $10 to $20 a quart shows the revenue possibilities of de- pendable goods legally handled. Not only do we scorn such revenue and fail to get the prohibition that we pay for, but we also are giving our citizenry a post- graduate course in lawlessness which means ever in- creasing expense, misery and death. Adding insult to injury taxpayers are required to provide the millions of dollars for the so-called enforcement of such an un- economic system. It is not unlike condemning a man to death and then requiring him to dig his own grave, erect the gallows and furnish the rope. Let us ever remember that money is not the meas- ure of the man nor of civilization. Does America wish 97 to further promote the world impression that we measure progress only in dollar marks ? Did the Naz- arene teach a gospel of money hoarding? What was meant in that passage about it being easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of God ? "But," says the prohibitionist, "what if taxes are greatly increased, the people can take the money they spent for booze and easily pay them." Do they ? The same argument holds for tobacco, chewing gum, tea and cofFee, candies, theaters, golf, baseball, automobiles, fiction and dozens of things which varying tastes seem to desire for breaking up the monotony of life. There is that in human nature which craves some sort of di- version for highest efficiency. One person will forego many things to indulge his particular taste, whether it be the pleasures of golf or the fellowship of sparkling wine. What is a satisfying diversion for one is ennui for others. But right or wrong, the fact remains that human nature rebels against others telling what that diversion shall be. Even more does it rebel against others telling how the money the individual has earned shall be spent. It may, and too often is, spent foolishly as the average person sees it. But that is something the individual must learn for himself. It is a part of his education for which he must pay the price. Unfortunately, others too frequently likewise pay a price for his ignorance. But that is a part of this life — of the brotherhood of man. None of us are all wise and perfect. Each is prone to some error for which in one way or another others suffer. Meantime all are advancing in knowledge and pay- ing some price therefor. To assume that this progress and knowledge can be legislated in complete defiance of human nature and Divine laws is to outlaw the Al- 98 mighty. These are among the other results of legis- lating what an individual can do with his money about which prohibitionists have little to say. Their motive of reducing the suffering through ignorant abuse of intoxicants is excellent but their remedy is worse than the disease. Humanity doesn't leap to Utopia in that sort of way. 99 Chapter XI. Might or Right Because right is right, to follow right Were wisdom in the scorn of consequences. — [Tennyson. Many there are who have noted the incongruity of America sending large forces to Europe to help uphold the same identical principles of human lib- erty which America herself today is attempting to grossly violate. Harsh as it may sound, the now discredited German dogma of "might makes right" was no worse in principle than is the doctrine of prohibition when followed to its natural conclusion. The issue in both cases is that of subjection and hu- man bondage through force. The Great War was a struggle between irreconcilable ideals. Individual liberty was arrayed against collective servitude; personal initiative and individual development against the tyranny of centralized authority. The German ideal was that of force and subjection, a philosophy that might can and does make right. This doctrine is nothing new. Its manifesta- tions have kept Europe at war for 2000 years. In fact, from earliest antiquity there has existed this same struggle between two opposing forces, each contending for the destiny of human intelligence. One of these forces has ever been the consistent champion of individual life, liberty and happiness. The other has as consistently labored to control and dominate the life, intelligence and development of 100 the individual, subjecting him to intellectual bond- age and servitude. A masterful description of these two forces is found in The Great Psychological Crime (page 376) edited by Florence Huntley: "One (force) has openly fostered the spirit of freedom and independence as a basic principle of individual and or- ganic human life. The other has covertly sought to reduce the individual to the status of a mere instrument in the hands and under the domination and control of an aggregate or- ganic will and design. The one has dignified and emphasized the individual to the status of a mere instrument in the hands itself and society. The other has persistently ignored the great fundamental fact of Nature, that the individual in his own right, as such, is invested with certain indefeasible at- tributes and certain inalienable rights, privileges and benefits which must be respected. "The one has recognized the fact that man's value to himself as an individual is the only sure and true measure of his value as an active, living factor in the social organism of which he is a part. The other has proceeded as if upon the assumption that man has but one value, namely, his value to the great aggregate body of which he is a part, and that his value, even in that capacity, is measured by the degree to which his individual will, intelligence and conscience are subject to the domination and control of that aggregate body." Though written against the psychological crime of hypnotism and mediumship, note the true picture drawn of the principles and forces at work in pro- hibition the same as they were in the Great War. On one hand are the inalienable rights and privi- leges of individuals to self-development, growth and happiness; on the other arbitrary and centralized force to subjugate and dominate the individual, even to his divinely endowed soul attributes of choice, conscience, reason and will. That this perennial struggle has ever been with mankind Huntley re- minds us in these words: "At the very cradle of humanity these two forces arrayed themselves in an irrepressible conflict. At that point the struggle began. From that point forward throughout all the subsequent ages, even to the present time, it has continued un- abated. At no time within the limits of authentic history has 101 the conflict reached a more critical stage than in this, the dawning of the 20th Christian century The one (force) develops individual intelligence, courage and perse- verance and a sense of individual responsibility through the power and process of a broad and liberal education. The other commands obedience and subjection." The reader cannot fail to note how accurately this portrays the fundamental causes of the Great War and likewise applies to prohibition. For cen- turies to come, posterity will laud the ennobling and successful role played by America and her allies against German dictation. But what will posterity have to say of America who resorted, in the name of prohibition, to the same subjecting principles of German Kulture, to enforce moral conduct? The psychology of force against individual will is well presented by Dr. George Crile in his Mechanistic Conception of War and Peace. We read: "But again the question rises: Can a people through force be given action-patterns against their will? Rome never succeeded in Romanizing the world. Rome tried to subjugate Belgium; Belgium is here, Rome has passed. Napoleon failed the Moors failed; England never assimilated the Irish, nor the Scotch; Russia the Poles; nor the Manchus the Chinese. . . . . Force creates action-patterns of opposition and of hatred." Yet in the face of world history American or- ganized society deludes itself with the vision of forc- ing action-patterns of personal conduct as regards choice of beverages, upon her unwilling people. Dr. Crile's deduction is already proving itself true as ap- plied to prohibition. The truth that force is creat- ing action-patterns of opposition is most obvious to us all, even to prohibitionists themselves. From the cradle to the grave, human nature gives evidence of that perverseness which appears bent upon doing what it is told it cannot. Parents 102 who have raised a family of children know how early in childhood this asserts itself. Indeed, the parents themselves are not inclined to be satisfied, without personal experience, that they cannot do a thing through simple reason of being told they can- not. Except for this trait in human nature Colum- bus would have failed to discover America and thousands of inventions to benefit mankind would not now be history. Force, whether in the name of German super- man, or in the name of prohibition to control per- sonal conduct, antagonizes the instincts of an indi- vidual soul that is born in freedom. As Germany failed to subjugate Belgium by force of might with the avowed intention of regeneration after the con- quest, so may America fail in the final analysis to conquer individual choice in personal habits by might of law, even though the alleged purpose is one of altruism and regeneration. A normal, worth while human soul born in a liberty-developed country must continue to reserve some instincts of doing things without, or regardless of, being forced. As to this dogma of centralized force against the conscience and will power of individuals, if America has forgotten the results in earlier history of nations, it would seem she might still remember Germany's experience in the recent Great War. Germany's extreme forces of tyranny, famine, tor- ture and suppression did not conquer the wills of wonderful Belgium, of France, of Poland, of Serbia, of England, of America herself. All these w^ere fighting for the inherent and inalienable rights and privileges of the human soul. Germany could not enfeeble the will of any nation which she invaded. All of them would rather die than submit. 103 History has demonstrated again and again that there is no despot so mighty that he can dominate a people who will not obey. Nature and every in- stinct of free men fight on the side of Right, rather than with Might. Perhaps the reader may experience some diffi- culty in seeing any essential similarity between ab- hored German might and morality-claimed prohibi- tion. If so, it is largely because he has been so in- terested in the motive of prohibition and in the good that would accrue to mankind if there were no drunkenness, that he has wholly overlooked the principle and method of the prohibitive process — a method and process that bring both good and bad results as explained in the preceding chapter. The unconvinced are reminded that what made Germany the enemy of the world was her materialistic way of riding rough shod over the higher principles of spiritual value. Her conception of the ethics of right and wrong had been warped by generations of teaching that might is right, that force constituted the acme of attainment. Her failure to recognize the innate rights, privileges, duties and instincts of the human soul, antagonized and embittered the whole world and lost Germany the war. What this chapter, reenforced by those pre- ceding, would emphasize is, that America, through prohibition, has, for the first time in her history, taken the first step upon this same road which led Germany to her downfall, just as it led other nations to destruction. Assumption by a nation or a govern- ment through law, and force if need be, of the con- trol and dictatorship of those rights, privileges and obligations which the individual himself must ex- ercise for his own development, has ever led down- 104 ward. This is exactly what the 18th amendment and Volstead Act would accomplish by nullifying the in- dividual soul attributes of conscience, choice, reason and will power. It would be a short, happy solution of many world problems today if we could legislate or force morality upon the masses. The Almighty decreed otherwise. It is fully as logical to seek leg- islative force for making every man, woman and child live a Christian life as to legislate the kind of beverage he shall use. The sad and disgraceful mistake Germany made was in the delusion that whatever she wanted she could get — by force. Justice and morality were trivial, and issues only for the old and weaklings. Before the supreme force of the government, the omniscient power of the Fatherland, must everything yield as dew before the sun. Cannot the reader see that America is following the same doctrine of get- ting what she wants — by force? That what she wants is worthy, doesn't alter the principle any more than when the psychologist bled his family to death to learn for mankind something more about life be- yond the grave. What would it profit America to gain real pro- hibition and thereby lose the soul attributes of her citizenry? Indeed, the alleged intention of Ger- many was to conquer the world and then regenerate it. America, too, even before she has conquered liquor in her own domain, has visions of ''forcing the whole world dry." Just as the Germans considered themselves chosen of God to stamp their superiority upon the world, so is there evidence that America thinks she is Divinely called to remove the tempta- tion of intoxicants from the face of the earth. Further note that America is choosing precisely the same 105 course as did Germany — not the recognition of moral accountability and individual rights, privi- leges and obligations of the human soul, but force. As judged from the visible success of enforcement to the time of this writing, America will get the same results as did Germany when she set out to prove that might is right. It is the old, old story of suppression, of out- raging the natural soul instincts and driving the in- dividual back into secret resentment and repression, instead of self-expression, self-control and self-de- velopment. It is the atmosphere of Might instead of Right in which he finds himself. He finds this power of might which subjugates his choice, conscience, reason and will power to a fixed and arbitrary stand- ard, just as oppressive as the military might of Ger- many because it places in bondage the attributes of the soul itself. The 1921 tercentenary of the landing of the Pilgrims at Plymouth Rock reminded Americans that it was this very character of oppression and repres- sion of individual choice, conscience, reason and will power, that caused these courageous and noble souls to seek a new and free country where they could worship God according to the dictates of their own conscience and assert their powers of self-develop- ment. In principle, the 18th amendment and Vol- stead Act annul the very doctrine of individual lib- erty for which our Pilgrim Fathers crossed a storm- tossed sea to establish. For more than 100 years thereafter they or those who followed them suffered trials, starvation and death. Then came from their sacrifices and steadfast- ness to principle that inspiring American Magna Charta known as the Declaration of Independence. 106 Into it their spirit breathed such sublime sentiment as: ''We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of hap- piness; that to secure these rights governments are instituted among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed; that whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government." The same living spirit of Divinely endowed rights, privileges and obligations for the individual soul are found in the preamble to our national Con- stitution: "We, the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our poster- ity, do ordain and establish this constitution for the United States of America." These ennobling sentiments are far removed from the spirit of Might. There is reverence for, and a mantle of protection drawn about, the human soul, with which ''the Creator endowed certain in- alienable rights and privileges." Not rights of in- terfering with the rights of others, but rights to happiness, self-expression and self-development making sure that in the gaining thereof these are not denied another in his own rights. From this high and exalted spiritual plane of Rights to individual growth and unfoldment we plunge through the 18th amendment and Volstead Act, to the sordid, materialistic sphere of forcing man by law, backed up by an armed host, to do those 107 things against which his conscience rebels. Indeed, he is commanded to circumvent Nature herself, as for example, to prevent fermentation of cider or other fruit juices, under penalty of lav^. Truly, the spirits of our Pilgrim ancestors v^ho started us so well, must proclaim : "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do." Prohibitionists appear to have overlooked the really important fact that the Almighty is more con- cerned in the destiny of the human soul, its develop- ment and unfoldment, than in any mighty mortal laws the enforcement of which would make a crim- inal of Nature. This development and unfoldment are impossible by denying the individual the exer- cise of the very soul attributes or tools which the Creator gave man with which to work out his own destiny. Many are sure to use these tools crudely, even destructively, but to take them away alto- gether, as in prohibition, is to rob man of his birth- right. The spirit in the Declaration of Independence, in the preamble to the Constitution, in the Constitu- tion itself and in the subsequent amendments, ex- cept the 18th, is to guard that birthright. It is the spirit of all constructive law which is founded on Right instead of Might. To secure this protec- tion, it is necessary to make the individual account- able and responsible for how he uses these soul at- tributes or tools given him with which to build a Temple of Character, but not to take them away from him entirely. To rob man of choice, con- science, reason and will power, as in prohibition, is to depart from the plan of the Creator and thereby defeat our own aims. That is how Germany and 108 other nations defeated themselves — by substituting Might for Right. The sooner frenzied fanaticism of Might through law gives place to calm and constructive work of Right, the sooner will America have less abuse of alcoholic beverages. This work of Right must be through such agencies as will enlist the moral accountability, personal responsibility, con- science and other soul characteristics of the individ- ual rather than in pushing to the front forces which are inherently hostile thereto. Is it not most sugges- tive that history shows where the course of Might was chosen, the end sooner or later was failure, that when the direction of Right was espoused, progress for civilization was finally recorded? Then why do prohibitionists dictatorially insist upon methods of Might instead of Right to place mankind on a high- er plane of moral accountability and ennobling spirituality? Why dictate instead of educate? 109 Chapter XII. Worthy Intent But Vicious Method And makes us rather bear those ills we have Than fly to others that we know not of. — [Shakespeare. The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Only the highway of effort leads Heavenward. The joy of individual achievement in our daily lives — of a worthy work well done — foreshadows the happiness that may be ours in the life yet to come. Deeds, not aims, count in the final analysis. How- ever worthy the aim or intent, it is impotant without the sustaining powers of the human soul. In this final chapter the author will follow the same sequence established in all that has preceded by giving prohibi- tion enthusiasts the benefit of the doubt. The ardent leaders and advocates will be given a spotless and untarnished motive or intent in their labors for the good of mankind. Hence let us freely grant their profound altruism, their fathomless anx- iety to relieve the world of intoxicating liquor abuses, and their solicitous concern for the destiny of the human soul. To the unprejudiced this surely is as liberal and tolerant as the example they themselves set. Concede then a worthy motive or intent to the n-th degree. The closing pages of Chapter II, plus the opening paragraph of this chapter, tell the story of motive or intent and their subordination to prin- ciples of Nature. Now, what about the method and the principles it invokes? If the reader has had the courage to fol- 110 low closely all the preceding chapters he will see how impossible and impracticable, in fact Nature-defying, are the principles of prohibition. Chapter II went into detail showing the two great fundamental laws or principles of Nature which are forever contending for sovereignty in the life of every intelligent soul. One is Constructive, the other Destructive, but with each individual rests the power and the initiative of conforming his life to the one or the other. The re- sponsibility is not that of priests, ministers, prohibi- tionists, politicians or potentates. But through his Divine birthright of the soul attributes of self-con- sciousness, choice, reason and will power, each nor- mal individual is accountable and responsible first to the laws of Nature and incidentally to society. This was explained in Chapter IV, as well as how upon his free and independent exercise of these individual soul attributes must he depend for his ability to co-operate with Nature's Constructive Principle and thereby ac- creditably discharge his obligation of responsibility to society and earn the rewards of self-development. Most unfortunately, the method of prohibition is to abrogate all four of these human soul attributes. As regards good and evil — free and independent choice and reason are denied man, his will power is discred- ited and conscience outraged. The specific human tools that Nature or the Almighty gave man to exer- cise, develop and become responsible for are taken away from him. Without them no individual can ever build a Temple of Character. The vicious method of prohibition is in society, as such, attempting to do the building for him by removal of temptation. Such suggested development and growth by proxy is con- trary to common sense and mocks the Divine plan of progress for the human soul. Personal effort or no personal reward is the decree of Nature. Her Con- Ill structive principle provides that individual con- science, choice, reason and will power which make man human, must be exercised or they will degener- ate and devitalize to a point where the individual is a mere machine or automaton and is little better than entities in the animal kingdom. This is the Destruc- tive and degenerating direction that prohibition (or any other proxy scheme of evading individual ac- countability) leads. If America desires a future race of spineless im- beciles she has only to follow the principles of the 18th amendment and Volstead Act. That end is in- evitable if her organized society continues long enough to follow a course of perfecting machinery with which to take over control of the human soul attributes so each individual will have to do nothing, be nothing, except what he's told. Continue the plan of temptation removal so man can be good without having to try, and you continue to evade the develop- ment of self-control and self-mastery which the Mas- ter, Jesus, taught are essential to man's well being — here and hereafter. The sophistry of prohibition is the more amaz- ing when one recalls it went into the Constitution of a much-paraded free country and under the guise of a higher civilization. The seductive danger comes in subtly holding attention to a few of the seemingly good results gained until the masses are so far along on the downhill road of suppression and soul destruc- tion that nothing short of a revolution can bring them back to Nature's Constructive Principle and the Crea- tor's plan of human progress. That is precisely what occurred in Germany as outlined in the preceding chapter. Generation after generation was taught the insignificance of the indi- vidual and the momentous importance of the whole, 112 or the Fatherland. Nothing mattered so long as the great ponderous machine of Kulture functioned in its alleged Divine mission of regenerating the whole world. The masses were soulless clods whose essen- tial duty was to meekly submit to the control, guid- ance and management of those in authority. The sad and calamitous truth was that the masses were deceived in the direction they were trav- eling. Their sacrifices, docile self-surrender, and re- linquishment of individual rights and privileges, were so gradual and accomplished in so plausible and subtle a manner that they did not realize how they were on a downward incline to destruction. It required the world's greatest war to convince them of their error. Thus we witnessed how the masses of a great nation were misled to their downfall. All was accomplished under the insidiously deceptive slogan of world regen- eration through German Kulture which magnified the machinery of authority but dehumanized the soul of an individual. Similarly, America proposes to save the world from liquor abuses under the guise of preventing drunkenness and evil by way of the 18th amendment and the great Volstead Act, which also magnify the machinery of authority and remove the human from humanity. Few nations ever received, and merited, the world-wide hatred, loathing and abhorrence given Germany during the war. Yet all that America need do to earn similar detestation is to continue in the line of prohibition for a few generations. Eliminate liquor, eliminate tobacco, eliminate labor or enjoy- ment on the Sabbath, eliminate one by one the many bad habits of individuals, eliminate merriment in the theaters if it chance to be provoked by reference to prohibition, eliminate tea and coffee and chewing gum, eliminate desires, cravings and impulses, elimi- 113 note work itself, as far as possible, eliminate charity and tolerance, eliminate hundreds of other things which enter into man's estate to make him human ! Of course, America cannot, no more than did Germany, transform the masses in one generation. It would require several to completely subdue and sub- ordinate the human souls of America's masses. The wholesale defiance of prohibition indicates the kind and powerful machinery of authority it is going to require if the conscience, choice, reason and will power of the average American are held in chains. Such a task is truly appalling. But why elect that destructive route? Why fol- low in the footsteps of German suppression? Why set up ponderous and costly machinery of centralized authority to do the work and assume the responsibilities which the individual should carry, ac- cording to the plan of the Creator? Why waste useless energy, time and money, try- ing to convince an intelligent people that the Creator was negligent in not removing temptation from the Garden of Eden, or that Nature and Nature's God are criminally liable for allowing fruit juices to so quick- ly exceed V2 of 1% alcoholic content? Why pollute a formerly spotless and exalted Con- stitution of a free and achieving people with such a destructive and Nature-defying doctrine? Why deny the human soul an opportunity of self- control, self -development and self-mastery? Why be deceived by the song of the siren that the easy road to morality is to legislate? Why tolerate the dogma that might through law makes right? Why permit ourselves to be decoyed into a posi- tion where to defend the natural attributes of the 114 human soul is to invite the stigma of championing drunkenness and evil? Why call upon the majesty of the law to justify the idiotic notion that the senseless agent, liquor, should be charged with responsibility instead of man himself ? Why assume that the entire American people must be protected against themselves after the same fashion as hospitals for the mentally unbalanced and corrective or penal institutions lend assistance by making choices and directing the energies of the un- fortunate inmates? Why repudiate a national policy in matters of conduct, that produced a Lincoln, an Edison, a Bell, a Roosevelt and thousands of other great and noble souls? Why incite a future war which, according to the records of world history, has unfailingly followed the continued suppression of the rights, privileges and obligations of the human soul? Why despotically impose the penalty of confiscat- ing property which is not done even in the high crime of murder? Why inflame the masses by emphasizing the aris- tocratic and un-American principle of denying the working man that which is attainable by the wealthy? Why enact laws which in the words of the august judiciary of the American bar association ''lawyers, bankers, great merchants and manufacturers, social leaders, both men and women," do not hesitate to scoff and disobey? Why crush individuality by creating exact legis- lative molds which would guarantee by the might of authority a sameness of all — be they virtuous or de- praved, healthy or morbid, gifted or idiotic, refined or coarse, faithful or false, saint or sinner? 115 Why delude ourselves with a vision of a higher civilization by removing the obstacles which the indi- vidual himself must overcome to learn self-control and self-mastery? Why force our way from without to the unfold- ment of man's morality when the Creator specifically provided that the only unf oldment in any of the four kingdoms of Nature (mineral, plant, animal and man- kind) which can be constructive is from within? Why interfere with the Divine plan on this earth which is for each individual, regardless of where he starts (through heredity or environment) to meet pleasures, joys, sorrows, temptations, duties, and master them to the extent of his ability, and to the degree of his success receive the rewards and bless- ings of this world and the one yet to come? Why follow the examples of Egypt, Rome and Germany in robbing humanity of its endowed tools of conscience, choice, reason and will power — only in the full possession of which is it even possible for the in- dividual to develop and civilization improve? Why deny exercise of these four essential soul attributes to all for the mere reason that a small per- centage have thus far continued to abuse them? Why annihilate an agent of temptation, the con- quering of which might mean progress and self-un- foldment to thousands when its removal is in no way a victory for those who might fail? Why not provide methods of assisting the weak- er and lending re-enforcements to his own forces, the combination of which will win a victory for the weak individual and hence for civilization? Why proceed, contrary to His teachings, as though this material life were all, when in fact it is but incidental, and why so stress what organized society can force an individual to do in this world 116 when what really counts is the victories the individ- ual himself can win here in preparation for the work he must take up Overthere ? Why be so absurd as to maintain that one can even get a chance to fight for a victory if the adver- sary (temptation) be annihilated in advance? Why become unduly alarmed because a few stumble and fall in the struggle, causing sorrow and suffering ? Isn't this world a battle ground to develop dependable soldiers for the next and isn't a degree of sorrow the earthly heritage of man? Why try to reverse the Creator's plan by legislat- ing Heaven to earth before we know who have earned and are entitled to the glories of His kingdom? Why not remember that it were better to endure such measure of evil, suffering and sorrow as cannot be constructively avoided, than to condemn a whole nation to a principle, plan, device, philosophy, religion or law which leads to the enforced destruction of the human soul through non-development of its four at- tributes of conscience, choice, reason and will power? Why discredit and distrust moral accountability in the individual himself and his personal responsi- bility when these are the very things which he must individually assume for his own progress and the final advancement of society? Why disgrace our Constitution by placing in it such provisions that one may keep the ten command- ments sacred and still be disqualified as a law-abiding American citizen? Why try to drive intelligent human beings into morality in precisely the same manner as dumb ani- mals are driven into a stockade? Why by law place the obligation upon an individ- ual of denying himself his inalienable rights, privi- leges and pursuit of happiness before he has inter- 117 fered with others in their pursuit of the same in their own rights? Why commit ourselves to a vicious enforcement circle where more and more restrictions must be im- posed upon the individual to prevent violations and thereby make more regulations to violate? Why place in our fundamental law an untenable and demoralizing doctrine which many of our most loyal and intelligent citizens fear to deny, yet cannot force themselves to accept? Why make such incongruous and destructive laws and then grieve about lawlessness? Why adopt the German method of deceiving and controlling the masses in the name of what they are led to believe is worthy, constructive and in the inter- ests of civilization? Why forget the history of ages and become so im- patient that mankind is making slow progress? Why attempt through legislative force to disprove human experience of all ages and all times that the sowing of extravagant hopes only means the harvesting of bit- ter disappointment? Humanity does not reach Utopia in one tremendous bound, as evidenced by the slow progress of the sustaining message of hope and promise brought by the Nazarene 19 centuries ago. Persecution, revolution, and harsh laws have failed these 19 centuries to force morality upon mankind. Man somehow insists, Topsy-like, in just growing up naturally. He loses here but gains there, with the sum of his experiences always carrying him ahead slowly, but ahead. Is prohibition and temptation re- moval to disprove all these experiences by showing that man can be quickly legislated other than what he is? Why, oh why, not tolerate the truth? 113 There are plenty of other whys that might be propounded. In all probability enough have already been given to busy the prohibitionist for a time in giving logical and constructive answers. This volume has exceeded the pages originally planned and only implied reference has been made to the solution of the liquor problem. Yet the sole aim of this work has been to arouse the American people to a realization of the great crime of humanity that the 18th amendment and Volstead Act have legalized. Once they see the destructive road which they have entered upon, there will be no doubt about their find- ing a way to leave it and get back onto the highway of constructive logic and Divine provision. America can be trusted to do the right thing, provided the agi- tators and intolerant souls, who perhaps mean well, do not prevent the citizenry from knowing the facts and, if knowing, the unrestrained and untarnished liberty of acting thereon. To aid in the consummation of that worthy goal is this volume given the public. Temperate language has been used throughout. The good aimed at in prohibition and the things apparently achieved are gladly admitted. The majesty of the law is particu- larly pointed out. The reader will note it is not even argued that prohibition is impossible, although the fundamental facts point most decisively in that direction. However, an unprejudiced reading of the volume may lead the careful thinker to see the folly and mis- fortune in following the principles of prohibition, even if it can be done. All of the possible good resulting therefrom would be far outweighed by the losses to humanity through the destructive method used of forcing morality upon the individual from without 119 instead of co-operating in a constructive way for its unfoldment from within. America's opportunity and mission instead of be- ing to follow the footsteps of other nations to destruc- tion by the suppression and domination of the indi- vidual is to follow the spiritual ideals of those noble pioneers as expressed in the Constitution which we reverence. Our trust, contrary to the 18th amendment, is to invoke those natural and constructive forces and agencies which will aid each human soul to aid itself in development and unfoldment. Our goal should be greater souls and more of them. That goal can never be reached through ever-increasing suppression by law or force, substituting material standards for spiritual. There are various palliatives for abuse of liquor, as well as for other bad habits. There is but one cure. It is the development within the individual of responsi- bility and self-control sufficient to withstand by his own efforts the allurements, enticements and tempta- tions of the world. That is the plan of Nature and Nature's God. In prohibition America is deluding her- self that she can improve upon the Creator's plans and is attempting to outlaw the Almighty. Shakespeare said : "What fools these mortals be !" FINIS 120