e--who is not visited by the ghost of
good times, the wraith of former fun, now and then; or one who does not
wonder whether it is worth the struggle and speculate on what the harm
would be if he took a few for old time's sake. The mental yearn comes
back occasionally long after the physical yearn has vanished. My
compliments to you strong-minded and iron-willed citizens who quit and
forget--but you don't! You may quit, but it is months and months before
you forget.

The ghost appears and reappears; but gradually, as time goes on, the
visits are less frequent--and finally they cease. The ghost has given
you up for a bad job. If any man has quit and has stuck it out for two
years he can be reasonably sure he will not be haunted much after he
enters his third year.

Mental impressions and desires last far longer than physical ones, and
by that time the mind has been reorganized along the new lines. Then
comes the sure knowledge that it is all right; and after that time any
man who has fought his fight and falls can be classed only as an idiot.
What, in the name of Bacchus, is there to compensate a man in drinking
again--after he has won his fight--for all the troubles and rigors of
the battle from which he has emerged victorious? If he had nerve enough
to go through his novitiate and get his degree, why should he
deliberately return to the position he voluntarily abandoned? What has
he been fighting for? Why did he begin?

_IV: Those Who Have Suffered in Vain_

Owing to a worldwide acquaintance among men who drink my personal
determination to quit still excites the patronizing inquiry, "Still on
the wagon?" when I meet old friends. That used to make me angry, but it
does not any more. I say, "Yes!" take my mineral water and pass on to
other things. But the position of those who quit and go back to it, and
seek to excuse the return by saying, "Oh, I only stopped to see whether
I could. I found it was easy; so I began again!"--now is that not the
sublimation of piffle? The fact that any man who salves himself with
this sort of statement--and hundreds do--did go back does not prove that
he could quit, but that he could not!

I can understand why a man, having tried both sides of the game, should
conclude that the rigors and restraints of not drinking overbalance the
compensations and take up the practice again; but I cannot understand
why a man should be so great a hypocrite with himself as to assign a
reason l