enders them so dreadful.
The difference between death by simple poison, and death by habitual
intoxication, may extend to the whole difference between everlasting
happiness and eternal death."

And, say the New York State Society, at the head of which is the
Chancellor of the State, "Disguise that business as they will, it is
still, in its true character, the business of destroying the bodies and
souls of men. The vender and the maker of spirits, in the whole range of
them, from the pettiest grocer to the most extensive distiller, are
fairly chargeable, not only with _supplying_ the appetite for spirits,
but with _creating_ that unnatural appetite; not only with supplying the
drunkard with the fuel of his vices, but with _making_ the drunkard.

"In reference to the taxes with which the making and vending of spirits
loads the community, how unfair towards others is the occupation of the
maker and vender of them! A town, for instance, contains one hundred
drunkards. The profit of making these drunkards is enjoyed by some half
a dozen persons; but the burden of these drunkards rests upon the whole
town. We do not suggest that there should be such a law, but we ask
whether there would be one law in the whole statute-book more
_righteous_ than that which should require those who have the profit of
making our drunkards to be burdened with the support of them."

Multitudes who once cherished the fond anticipation of happiness in this
life and that to come, there is reason to believe, are now wailing
beyond the reach of hope, through the influence of ardent spirit; and
multitudes more, if men continue to furnish it as a drink, especially
sober men, will go down to weep and wail with them to endless ages.

* * * * *

"But," says one, "the traffic in ardent spirit is a lawful business; it
is approbated by law, and is therefore right." But the keeping of
gambling houses is, in some cases, approbated by human law. Is that
therefore right? The keeping of brothels is, in some cases, approbated
by law. Is that therefore right? Is it human law that is the standard of
morality and religion? May not a man be a notoriously wicked man, and
yet not violate human law? The question is, Is it right? Does it accord
with the divine law? Does it tend in its effects to bring glory to God
in the highest, and to promote the best good of mankind? If not, the
word of God forbids it; and if a man who has the means of