familiar with the literature of our enterprise as he is with that of Greece
, he never would have repeated criticisms and suggestions that have been answered over and over again during the last fifty years. As I turn over his essay, and find how tediously familiar we all are with his objections, I am reminded of Johnson
's objection to Goldsmith
's plan of travelling over Asia
in order to bring home valuable improvements: “Sir, Goldsmith
is so ignorant of his own country that he would bring home a wheelbarrow as a new and valuable invention.”
The address turns back on its path frequently, and repeats its chief criticisms again and again.
If we analyze it, I think it may be fairly summed up thus:--
1. Dr. Crosby
objects to the Total-abstinence theory and movement that it insults the example of Jesus; that its advocates undermine and despise the Bible
, while they strain and wrench it to serve their purpose; and he asserts that the “Total-abstinence system is contrary to revealed religion ;” and that the Bible
, correctly interpreted, repudiates total abstinence and such a Temperance crusade as has existed here for the last fifty years.
2. Dr. Crosby
objects to this movement as immoral as well as unchristian; and as “doing unmeasured harm to the community.”
He considers it as the special and direct cause of the “growth of drunkenness in our land, and of a general demoralization among religious communities;” asserts that it is exactly the kind of movement that rumsellers enjoy, and that it ought not to succeed, never will, and never can.
3. The pledge is unmanly, and kills character and self-respect.
4. The assertion that moderate drinking leads to drunkenness is untrue.
5. The total-abstainers bully and intimidate the community, and disgust all good, sensible men.