752 



SCIENCE. 



[N. S. Vol. XV. No. 384. 



alcohol is a food in the ordinary sense of that 

 term. The question of the supposed food value 

 of alcohol is a technical one for medical ex- 

 perts to determine, and not one which needs to 

 concern the men and women who are engaged 

 in the work of public instruction of children 

 and youth. For them it is enotigh to know that 

 its use as a beverage is injurious, and that all 

 authorities agree in deprecating the formation 

 of the drinls;ing habit and in commending all 

 practicable efforts through public instruction 

 to promote the cause of temperance." 



Professor Sedgwick appears to have fears 

 that a writer who desires to publish an ele- 

 mentary text -book on physiology and hygiene, 

 before he can obtain a publisher or a market 

 may have to secure the indorsement of Mrs. 

 Mary H. Hunt, etc. 



Anybody can write a text-book on this sub- 

 ject as far as the Scientific Department of the 

 Woman's Christian Temperance Union is con- 

 cerned, but the mothers in any community 

 have a perfect right to oppose their children 

 studying that book, if, in their judgment, it 

 fails to teach the whole truth against the most 

 destructive of human habits. They have a 

 right through organization to secure and pro- 

 tect this form of education for their children, 

 and to appoint one of their number to act with 

 them in searching for truth, and, aided by men 

 of science, to refuse indorsement to books that 

 do not contain the truth. I make no apology 

 for its being my fortune to have been thus 

 officially appointed, and woe is me if in this I 

 fail in aught of my utmost duty, for history 

 will show that organized motherhood in secur- 

 ing and protecting this education for all the 

 children of this nation has prevented the great- 

 est peril to our government of the people, 

 namely, the lack of capacity for self-govern- 

 ment resulting from the use of alcoholic drinls;s 

 and other narcotics. 



As to the piiblisher's part, I would say in this 

 connection: The publisher is a business man 

 who knows that his success depends upon his 

 supplies meeting the demands of the market. 

 If the condition prevails which Professor 

 Sedgwick describes, it is good evidence that 

 publishers have found that the American people 

 do not want their children to study what the 



publishers themselves call 'rum books,' and 

 that the indorsement of this department is a. 

 guarantee to the public that the books bearing 

 that indorsement are not of that character, 

 but instead contain the truths the people want 

 taught their children. Therefore, the writer 

 who wishes to put a 'rum book' upon the mar- 

 ket must find publishers who will ignore the 

 law of supply and demand; or he must per- 

 suade the people to allow their children to be 

 sacrificed to the Moloch of intemperance, 

 either for his personal gain or to avoid shock- 

 ing the sensibilities of scientific gentlemen 

 who see no place in physiology and hygiene 

 for warning against that disobedience of 

 hygienic law which causes, as Gladstone said, 

 more havoc to the human race than war, 

 pestilence and famine. 



No man has ever yet been able to present 

 a reasonable argument for opposing the tem- 

 perance education movement. The brewers 

 and distillers of course can not imagine any 

 other than a financial motive that could in- 

 duce the devotion and labor that have brought 

 this movement to its present position in this 

 country and the world. Hence they charge, 

 and have from the first, that it is a 'book 

 job.' And in the absence of reasonable ob- 

 jection other opponents reiterate this liquor. 

 dealers' charge. Professor Sedgwick falls 

 into line with them when he attempts to sup- 

 port his objection with a quotation from a 

 letter written, he says, by a representative of 

 a publishing house which charges that 'finan- 

 cial benefit' is the motive of the temperance 

 physiology movement. On reading that, I 

 at once wrote Professor Sedgv?ick asking for 

 the name of his informant and whether that 

 informant had submitted any evidence in sup- 

 port of his statement. Professor Sedgwick 

 I'eplied that he did not feel at liberty to give 

 the name of his informant who, he says, 'did 

 not submit any evidence bearing upon his 

 opinion.' In other words. Professor Sedg- 

 wick makes this accusation public without 

 examining the evidence for the same and 

 without knowing, so far as he reports, whether 

 any such evidence existed. If the man who 

 made this charge is reliable, why should he 

 be unwilling that Professor Sedgwick should 



