« VorigeDoorgaan »
single fact, derived from Liebig or any body else, that would justify an affirmative answer.
He stated, indeed, on the authority of Liebig, that “those who abstained from alcohol required larger quantities of starch and sugar, etc.”
1. I admit the fact, but I deny the inference. A man who chews or smokes tobacco will require less food than if he abstained. But why ? Not because tobacco supplies the place of fuel, or makes him really warmer, but because it is a narcotic and antiseptic, and thus opposes a change of matter-i. e. lessens life, and therefore wear and tear. who sleeps with his bed-curtains closely drawn, and inhales little oxygen and a good deal of foul air, will want a lesser breakfast than if the normal amount of vital action had gone on in sleep. But why? Not because carbonic acid supplies the place of food, but because it prevents the change of matter, and lessens vitality. In the same way, alcohol narcotizes the human blood, or, to translate the facts stated by Liebig from the technicalities of chemistry into a formula you will all understand, Alcohol robs the blood of oxygen d--of that element of fresh vital air which nature designed to unite with the prepared elements of the fuel food or the metamorphosed and waste matter of the tissues. Hence, as demonstrated by the experiments of Prout, Fyfe, and Vierordt, on measuring the quantity of carbonic acid exhaled from the lungs after the use of alcoholic drinks, it was found to be lessened for many hours ; thus showing that waste matter had been retained in the system, unburnt up, and the vital stream consequently defiled.
2. However, even if the use of alcohol did warm the body as a kind of fuel, there would be several fatal physiological objections to its use. As a nervine stimulant it wastes the vital force, as an acrid and corrosive poison it injures or inflames all the tissues it touches, and as a chemical agent it deprives the blood of a needful purifying element, using up for its own decomposition that which was intended for a distinct ond different purpose. It cannot be wise, therefore, to use as a chemical article of fuel that which first sets fire to the house, which lowers the vitality of the inhabitant, which keeps the living current unventilated, which injures the most delicate and important structures, and, in short, lowers the whole tone of the system.
3. It is very true, that as a mere element of fuel, a certain weight of alcohol would give out a greater amount of heat than starch and sugar. But Dr. Lankester here acts the part of a partial or ignorant judge-he misdirects the jury, who in this case are no wiser than juries generally. The human body is not a mere furnace for fuel, but a delicate and living organism. The fuel is for the body, not the body for the fuel; and hence we must wilfully admit nothing within its living structure that would injure, disturb, or destroy. Moreover, we are not bound to use starch and sugar merely. If comparisons are to be drawn, we must not exclude any of the natural articles; we must not select that fuel in regard to heat-producing-power which is lowest, and exclude that which is highest, as Dr. Lankester has done. Compare the innocent and cheap oil (and we have always oil, or fat, in the human blood, prepared by the liver) with the dear and acrid alcohol, and we shall find a decided advantage in the natural over the artificial, the innocent over the noxious. Where, after poisoning the organism first-alcohol would keep up the heat of the body for 65 hours,—the same weight of oil would keep up the heat for 87 hours! Or to change the form of illustration, where a given amount of alcohol would, being burnt, raise the temperature of 9,000lbs. of water one degree, the same weight of oil would raise the temperature one degree of above 12,000lbs. of water! If, therefore, gentlemen, you would warm your water, both cheaply and well,-in short, boil your kettle without burning it, you must avoid alcohol, and accept the innocent and natural element provided for you by the All-wise. Depend upon it, Nature understands this question much better than
4. Experience—with which all true science must harmonize-confirms my position, Here we have overwhelming testimony, from persons who have tried the two systems in the most severe climates. William Cobbett, M.P., speaking in 1819 of his experience of the severe winters of Canada, says :
“It is said, as an excuse for the use of spirits, that they keep out the cold. Let a man
d One frequently borrowed from Dr. Lees's writings without acknowlegement: as in W. Lovett’s excellent book on Physiology, and elsewhere,
once persuade himself of thát, and he will soon find that they keep off the heat ! That they drive out the heat is very certain ; for in the northern parts of America, where the cold is so great that people are frequently frost-bitten, and are compelled to have their feet or hands cut off, it is a caution always given to those who are likely to be exposed to the severity of the weather, not to drink any spirits before they go out. And, tho I hav known many persons frozen to death, and a great many more to have their limbs cut off, I hardly recollect a single instance in which the suffering party had not taken spirituous liquors on his way, or before he went out. .... I have a hundred times gone out shooting or hunting upon the snow along with others, each of whom took a canteen of rum, while I took none. I used to suck the snow, which they told me would give me the pleurisy; but I found that I never had the pleurisy, and that many of them had. And as to ability to travel and bear the cold, tho many of my companions were much stronger and more active than myself, I always found that, the end of the day, I was the freshest, and by far the most cheerful of them all.”
Dr. Scoresby, in his evidence before parliament, and he had been engaged 21 years in the whale fishery,-in reply to the question, Then you conceive it to be a fallacious opinion that spirits are necessary in cold climates ?”—answers, “Certainly; they are decidedly injurious.” Cooper, the American writer on naval matters, speaking of the sealers beyond Cape Horn, says—“Coffee is better, any day, than all the rum and whisky ever distilled.” Mr. Dana, the author of Two years before the mast, says:-"I never knew a sailor in my life who would not prefer a pint of hot coffee or chocolate on a cold night, to all the rum afloat. They all say that it (the rum) warms them only for a time.” You are all familiar with the important fact, that the men engaged in the recent Arctic Expedition were ordered to abstain. Dr. Sir John Richardson, as the result of his experience in the frigid regions of the North, says :-"I am quite satisfied that spirituous liquors diminish the power of resisting cold. Plenty of food, and sound digestion, are the best sources of heat ?
5. Nay, gentlemen, even the very instinct of nature--the voice of God, as it weredeclares that we are right. Sailors who went out accustomed to their grog, -who, in ordinary circumstances and climates would mutiny if deprived of it,—there experienced an alteration of their tastes. “Wine, or spirits,” says Sir John Richardson, “we soon ceased to care for, while the craving for tea increased.” Thus also, very often, consumptive patients using the Cod-liver oil, acquire a distaste for wine—the use of those substances being incompatible when circulating in the blood. Nature prefers the innocent oil to the artificial spirit.
6. I am aware of an attempt to evade the force of one set of facts to which I have referred you—the diminution in the quantity of carbonic acid after the use of alcohol, and its great subsequent increase, showing that the system was ridding itself, as fast as possible, of the waste matter which the use of alcohol had kept in. It is a very poor attempt, indeed, for it only meets one half the case; it consists in the allegation. that tho less gas is breathed out, more vapor is exhaled thrö the skin, owing to the alcohol containing more hydrogen tho less carbon than natural food. I answer, that matters not on the whole, since it is certain that oil does give out, when burnt up, more heat than alcohol, and therefore, as the given quantity of oxygen inbreathed can not use both substances at once, in the fact of uniting with the less valuable (not to say poisonous) fuel, the body must be less
This agrees with the test of the thermometer--and certainly the mercury will not lie for any hypothesis—whether of Lees or Lankester. Dr. Davy, F.R.S., in his experiments on the Temperature of Man, found that even three glasses of wine perceptibly lowered the heat of the body; while after four or five glasses the reduction was most strongly marked.
Gentlemen, I have now done with the fallacies of our last opponent. I should have been glad if he were present to answer for himself. We do not fear discussion, we invite it; for we feel that we are right, and that we occupy the Vantage ground of Truth. Let our opponent, then, forget his 'tender mercies,' for we do not need them. The Tree of Temperance, we believe, like the mystic Igdrasyll of our Scandinavian ancestors, has its roots in the Divine Life and order of the Universe, and the more fiercely the winter tempests of opposition may sweep against it, the more deeply will it strike its roots into the soil of the Eternal Truih, and in the good time coming, put forth a fairer and a fuller foliage, and extend a more refreshing shade and protection to the generations that shall
NOTE ON PROFESSOR CARPENTER's Essay.
A medical friend who saw the Newspaper Report of the preceding address, has directed my attention to a discrepancy between the statements of Baron Liebig cited in my lecture, and a passage in Dr. Carpenter's Essay on Alcoholic drinks. We need only observe, here, that in statements concerning the most recent chemical facts and experiments, I shall unhesitatingly in the absence of positive evidence) prefer the authority of Liebig to that of any mere amateur or writer, or any second-rate chemist.
The Essayist (§. 111-113) makes the heat-producing power of alcohol compared with oil, as 378 to 394. This reduced to a lower proportion, leaves the matter thus :
Alcohol to Oil (according to Liebig) is as 65 to 87.
Alcohol to Oil (according to Carpenter), say, 65 to 68. Now, says Dr. C., this difference between 378 and 394 (or 65 to 68), is more than compensated for by the combustion of oxygen with hydrogen giving out more heat than the combustion of oxygen with carbon. Considered, therefore, in the light of fuel [simply], Alcohol is superior to oleaginous substances.-A spirit lamp gives more heat than an oil lamp.”
This last illustration would alone make us doubt the accuracy of the main statement, for in the case of the Spirit lamp, the fuel may be more rapidly combustible simply because of its tenuity or the adaptation of the lamp? Of two specimens of coal, as of two sorts of oil,-or of one grate or lamp as compared with another,--the same may be said in a rough way.
The heat, in the same space of time, owing to several conditions, may vary, without at all proving that (the conditions of combustion given) a certain weight of pure oil will not produce as much heat as the same weight of spirit. Now Experience has shown that these conditions of combustion for supplying the normal heat to the body, do exist in the case of oil-in short, that the body is constructed as an Oil-lamp, and can burn up oil fast enough. When chemists have got so good a lamp, the comparison will hold, but not before.
The statements of Dr. C. seem opposed alike to the experiments of Dalton, Despretz, and Liebig. The great English Chemist states, that, “generally, the combustible gases give out heat nearly in proportion to the oxygen they consume.” If so, oil must have a decided advantage over spirit, since, according to Turner, 90 parts of Oil consume 272 parts of Oxygen, where alcohol consumes but 222—a difference of above a fifth. According to Liebig, where lib. of alcohol consumes 362 volumes of oxygen, lib. of Fat consumes 511-thus showing it to be also the best protector of the body by using up the extra amount of oxygen inbreathed in cold seasons. Further, Despretz’s experiments led him to conclude that, in burning, (equal quantities of oxygen being assumed) hydrogen evolves less heat than most other substances. When the combustion of hydrogen gas produced 2578 degrees of heat, carbon gave out 2967.
With these facts and statements before us, we very respectfully dissent both from Prof. Carpenter and Dr. Lankester, and while referring them on this special point to Baron Liebig for satisfaction, we must repeat our proposition—that the theory of Organic Chemistry as propounded by the great German thus far, is in perfect harmony with the theory and experience of Teetotalers.
(From Wallbridge Lunn's Council of Four.)
LANGUAGE.—Gold-leaf to blazon our knowlege and cover our ignorance.
IGNORANCE.— The leaden sword with which the mass of mankind are compelled to fight the social battle.
A dark place where poor people are allowed to grope about, till they hurt themselves or somebody else.
SHOP.—The bellows of the industrial organ, the blower of which is paid better than the artist who executes the composition.
The saddle on which Capital rides Labor. NAPOLEON.—A false son of the Republic, who murdered his mother to gain possession of her estate.
Monk.—A man who commits himself to prison for being religious.
BALL-ROOM.—A confined place, in which poor creatures are committed by Fashion to hard labor.
TOBACCO.- A triple memento mori ;-dust for the nose, ashes for the mouth, and poison for the stomach.
EMIGRATION.-A quack medicine, prescribed for the cure of discontent.
BANK.—A gilt barge on the Canal of Credit, in which grandees are carried forward by the labor of the horses on the towing-paths.
WINE.-Spurs to make the brain gallop.
LAWYER.—A scavenger whom Society employs to scrape up mud, and then complains of for being dirty.
TOLERATION.—The generosity of doing nothing.
WAGES.- A collar round the neck of modern serfs, by which they proclaim their independence.
LABOR.--A corn-field where thieves get the harvest and the owners get the gleanings.
MENAGERIE.-A grand concourse of Adam's nominees, dispersed from Paradise and re-assembled in Limbo.
WOMAN.— The sunny half of Earth.
PUSEYISM.--A proposal to impose the weight of the Fathers upon the Weakness of the Children, Dr. Lees.
The Passions of the Human Soul. By CHARLES FOURIER. Translated from the French,
by the Rev. John REYNELL MORELL: with Critical Annotations, a Biography of Fourier, and a general Introduction, by Hugh DOHERTY. In two volumes, 8vo. London: H. Bailliere, 219, Regent Street. 1851.
v our previons volume (p. 469) we fully characterized this important and most
interesting work. We gave insertion to a translation of several sections prior
to publication, and are now rejoiced to see that Mr. Morell and his Coadjutor have executed the task they proposed, and been enabled to bring the work before the British Public. No more important contribution to the literature of Social Science has appeared for many years, and we trust that these handsome volumes will not only be admitted into many of our Book Clubs and Public Libraries, but will be studied by our Thinking, and especially by our Young Men, everywhere. The genius of Fourier was of a notable kind, equally colossal in its width and wonderful in its microscopic minuteness. No
man, for the last five hundred years, has gathered up and united so many of the scattered facts of human nature and social life as he. The wit, originality, boldness, and satire of Fourier make this work more amusing than a novel. Social Science and the Organization of Labor. By James HOLE. Chapman, 142,
Strand, London. 1851.
This cheap work is a repul ition of the able Lectures on Social Science' which have appeared in the present and previous volume of The Truth Seeker, with the addition of a valuable Introduction and an elaborate Appendix,—themselves worth all the money charged for the volume. The mottos of the book express its object, the longer one reminding us of the social doctrine of Pythagoras, that “ by action, as well as thought, both the Individnal and the State should represent in themselves an image of the Order and Harmony by which the world is upheld and regulated.” Surely the time must come, when Social Conflict shall give place to the only civilizing condition—that of Social Concert or Co-operation.
Christian Socialism and its Opponents, "The Edinburgh Review '--'The Eclectic'-and
The Reasoner.' A Lecture delivered before the society for promoting Working Men's Associations, 76, Charlotte St., Fitzroy Square. By J. M. LUDLOW, Esq., Barrister at Law. London: J. W. Parker, West Strand. 1851.
Mr. W. R. Greg's article on ‘English Socialism' in the Edinburgh Review, will have done great good, if only by exciting wider attention to a subject that forms the Idea of the Age, and which must be now, not only thoroly discussed by literary men and politicians, but tested by full and various practical experiments amongst the People. The Social Idea is fast spreading, and has reached some of our greatest Thinkers and our most powerful Writers,—such, for example, as Professor Maurice of King's College, and Mr. Kingsley, the author of two of the most remarkable books of our time-'Alton Locke' and ‘Yeast.' We do not think highly of the reasoning of the article in the Edinburgh; there is absolutely nothing in it that will touch Socialisin harmfully, tho somewhat which may confirm it. But in the lecture of Mr. Ludlow, there is quite enough of calm reasoning and statistical fact to neutralize the assault of the Edinburgh Reviewer, had it been