sanction of a Law? If, on the other hand,
they are a benefit to mankind; a good gift of Providence, as some seem
to think; why should we hamper their circulation? Why should we allow
one man the privilege of distributing such a blessing, and forbid
another who, no doubt, is equally zealous for the public good?

But this very system is a confession by public opinion, in its most
authentic form of expression, that the sale of intoxicating drinks is an
evil. "Only," we are told, "as it is a prevalent and deep-seated evil,
it must be _regulated_." But how can we regulate an irregularity? How
can you regulate an obstruction that is involved with the springs of a
machine, or the works of a clock? The only possible method obvious to
common sense, would be to remove the obstruction; and it would be
thought the most foolish speculation conceivable for one to spend his
ingenuity in contriving some way to keep the obstruction where it is,
and yet to keep the clock going as it ought. If it moved regularly, the
matter referred to would not be an obstruction; and if it did not, the
contrivance to keep it there would be a help to the obstruction. Now, I
consider this great vice of Intemperance a decided obstruction in the
clock-work of an individual man, or the more general mechanism of
society. It transforms a great many faces into bad dial-plates, disturbs
the pendulum of public order, makes people go much too fast, and renders
them liable to strike at all times. Now, if a man, or a community, can
be made to go just as well with it as without it, we certainly need no
legislation, for there _is_ no obstruction. On the other hand, if it is
essentially an irregularity, the only rational method is to get rid of
its accessories altogether. To enact some way in which the irregularity
shall work, is to confirm and sanction the irregularity. And the
license-system--for I wish to be plain and specific here--confirms and
sanctions the agents of intemperance. It indicates a way in which the
irregularity may work.

And not only is vice thus aided by the Law. The existence of such a
sanction engenders either an error or a moral wrong. For it indicates
that the sale of intoxicating drinks is a public benefit, which is
false; or, on the other hand, that it is lawful to uphold an evil. The
same principle carried out by individuals, would excuse almost any
fault. The man who steals a loaf of bread may contend that it is a
necessary expedient; and