M<g*j§Ylft'gj. 




••^aA*)^ 



WHAT 



SHALL I DRINK? 



REUBEN D. MUSSEY, M.D., LLJ). 











WHAT SHALL I DRINK ? 




REUBEN D. MOSEY, M.D., LL.D. 

.ATE PROFESSOR OF ANATOMY AND SURGERY AT DARTMOUTI 
LEGE, AND OF SURGERY AT THE MEDICAL COLLEGE 
OF OHIO; AUTHOR OF " HEALTH : ITS 
FRIENDS AND ITS FOES," ETC. 




v -;:> 

> 



PUBLISHED BY THE 

AMERICAN TRACT SOCIETY, 

28 Cokniiill, Boston. 



DEO. C . BAND &• A V I i: Y, 

ITEREO'trrtRS A N L> PRINTERS, 

BOSTON. 



WHAT SHALL I DRINK? 



This question, so commonly put by the 
dyspeptic to his physician, often results in 
far-reaching consequences. A distinguished 
practitioner confined his patients to coffee, 
and a bit of meat, for breakfast ; and to 
steak, with brandy and water, for dinner. 
Nothing more was to be eaten till the 
breakfast of the next morning. The dys- 
pepsia was relieved by the long abstinence 
from food, but the dinner's drink made 
many drunkards. 

Multitudes of physicians at the present 
time prescribe distilled or fermented liq- 
uors for dyspepsia, to be taken indefinitely, 
without the suggestion that, from prolonged 



4 WHAT SHALL I DRIXK1 

medicinal use, an appetite for liquor may 
be contracted, which no human skill can 
permanently control. 

Dr. S. G. Howe, Superintendent of the 
South Boston Institution for the care of 
Idiots, reported to the Legislature of Massa- 
chusetts, " In a large proportion of cases, 
alcohol is either directly or indirectly con- 
cerned in the production of the idiocy with 
which the State is burdened." 

In the Report of the Lunatic Hospital at 
Columbus, Ohio, for 1861, Dr. Hills, the 
physician, says of one of his patients, that 
his father, in the first part of married life, 
was strictly temperate, and had four chil- 
dren, all yet remaining healthy and sound. 
From reverses of fortune, he became dis- 
couraged and intemperate for some years, 
having in this period four children, two 
of whom we have now received into the 
asylum. A third one was idiotic, and the 
fourth epileptic. He then reformed in 
habits, had three more children, all now 



WHAT SHALL I DRINK 1 5 

grown to maturity, and to this period re- 
maining sound and healthy." * 

The appetite of the confirmed intemperate 
is capable of showing a fearful intensity, 
absorbing the weightiest moral considera- 
tions. Dr. Macnish records the following 
reply of an intemperate man to his friend : 
" Your remarks are just, — they are indeed 
too true, — but I can no longer resist temp- 
tation. If a bottle of brandy stood at one 
hand, and the pit of hell yawned at the 
other, and I were convinced that I would 
be pushed in as soon as I took one glass, I 
could not refrain. You are very kind ; I 
ought to be very grateful for so many kind, 
good friends ; but you may spare your- 
selves the trouble of trying to reform me ; 
the tiling is out of the question." f 

Men of rare talents and extensive attain- 
ments may acquire the habit of drinking 
to such an extent as to rely on alcoholic 

* Dr. J. Ray, "Mental Hygiene," pp. 45, 46. 
t '• Anatomy of Drunkenness," chap. 14. 



6 WHAT SHALL I DRIXK1 

excitement in their greatest mental efforts. 
" Pitt, during the latter years of his life, if 
not before, never encountered the labor 
and excitement of a parliamentary debate, 
without enormous libations of port wine. 
Two or three bottles of a night, accompa- 
nied by a beefsteak, Avas the usual allow- 
ance, and undoubtedly he would have been 
powerless without it. It would have re- 
quired a stronger constitution than Pitt's 
to stand the wear and tear of such duties 
and such habits beyond the age of forty- 
live. 

" A better example, both in morals and 
hygiene, was exhibited by his illustrious 
compeer, Burke, who met the same kind of 
demand upon his energies by no stronger 
stimulus than hot water. He lived into 
his sixty-eighth year." * 

Alcoholic drinks contain a stimulus which 
makes them convenient in temporary de- 
pression or prostration, as from a shock or 

* " Mental Hygiene," p. S6. 



WHAT SHALL I DRINK 1 7 

a wound. " Give strong drink to him who 
is ready to perish ; " but the habitual use 
for a length of time is capable, in innumer- 
able instances, of prostrating the most gi- 
gantic intellects. The appetite thus gen- 
erated is but rarely cured. Most of those 
who have consented to enter an institution 
on the principle of entire abstinence from 
liquor, on finding their general health re- 
cruited, are perfectly confident of their 
power to resist temptation. " They say 
they feel perfectly well, have not the slight- 
est desire for drink, and, therefore that 
further seclusion would be not only unnec- 
essary, but prejudicial to their mental and 
bodily health." Hays Dr. Ray, "The 
amazing confidence they express in their 
future security, is one of the curious traits 
of this condition. A great many have 
come under my observation, but I never 
knew one, not even of those who had re- 
peatedly fallen, and had most deplored 
their infirmity, to express any apprehension 



8 WHAT SHALL I DKINK1 

of falling again. On the contrary, from 
the moment when they begin to resume 
their proper consciousness until they leave 
the hospital, the burden of their story is, 
that they are safe for ever after, that not 
the slightest danger exists of their disre- 
garding the terrible lessons of experience." 

What an appetite ! Serpent-like, it can 
lie quiet and unobserved till waked into 
activity by a single sip of liquor, when, in 
a moment, it throws a coil around its vic- 
tim, which becomes tighter and tighter, till 
his struggles are powerless. 

If an alcoholic beverage, by the daily 
repetition, can in many instances cause the 
indomitable appetite for liquor, is it the 
best medicine we possess for dyspepsia ? 
We have tonic barks and roots ; we have 
soda, carbonate of ammonia ; we have iron, 
the muriate of which is, to a great extent, 
a preventive of erysipelas, gangrene, and 
phlebitis ; we have bismuth and arsenic ; 



WHAT SHALL I DWSK > 



we have iodine, chlorine, bromine, and 
strychnine. 

In intermittent fevers, some physicians 
combine quinine with some preparation of 
alcohol to increase its efficacy. Surgeon 
George Derby, in his report, 23d Massa- 
chusetts Volunteers, Department of North 
Carolina, June 1, 1863, remarks, " My 
confidence in this remedy (quinine) is very 
great. I am sure it has saved many lives 
in my regiment. I give it in simple water, 
without the addition of either whiskey or 
sulphuric acid. Although the solution is 
imperfect, I have never found it a serious 
objection." 

In a report to Brigadier General W. A. 
Hammond, Surgeon-General U. S. Army, 
made by one of the medical inspectors of 
the United States army, under date of 
June 16, 1863, the following opinion and 
statements are made : — 

" In prostration from heat or excessive 
labor, positive cases of coup-de-soleil (sun- 



10 WHAT SHALL I DRINK ? 

stroke) and general prostration affecting 
the mucus membranes of the air-passages 
as well as of the intestinal canal, I consider 
carbonate of ammonia as one of the most 
valuable of stimulants. 

" In the campaign of one year ago in Ten- 
nessee, through Nashville, Shiloh, Corinth, 
and North Alabama, I am persuaded that 
the alcoholic drinks acted unfavorably 
upon the diarrhoea that affected most of 
the troops. Other medical officers have 
expressed the same opinion. 

" The treatment by astringents, in some 
forms of the diarrhoea, was of little perma- 
nent value, till the alterant effect of mercu- 
rials was secured. . . . The soldiers 
needed antiscorbutics and aromatics, and 
when they could be secured, the corps re- 
alized a good degree of health. 

"In the entire range of my medical obser- 
vation, as a medical officer of the army, I 
have seen but one case of mercurial saliva- 
tion. One medical officer in the field in- 



WHAT SHALL I DRINK ? 11 

formed me that he had had a half dozen 
very slight cases of ptyalism ; the most se- 
vere was from six grains of blue mass, 
given with other cathartic medicine. 

"In the Western army, to my knowledge, 
there has prevailed a severe stomatitis (sore 
mouth), for which mercurials would have 
been held responsible, had any been given, 
attributed, however, to the tendency to 
scurvy. 

" I have the honor to be, 
Very respectfully, 

Your obedient servant, 

W. II. MUSSEY, 
Med. Inspector, U. S. A." 

The concurrent testimony of our army 
surgeons is in support of the opinion that 
diarrhoea is the bane of our army, whether 
in camp or in motion. Dr. 0. E. Gibbs, of 
Freswsburgh, N. Y., has a paper, copied 
by the " Boston Medical and Surgical Jour- 
nal," of August 20, I860, from the Cin- 
cinnati " Lancet and Observer," in which 



12 WHAT SHALL I DRINK* 

he considers the "'hard-tack,' salt pork, 
and poor beef," without a supply of vege- 
tables, as its origin. He gave the persul- 
phate of iron, in the dose of one to five 
grains, with a little opium, two or three 
times a day. It was continued twice a 
day for one, two, or three weeks, to prevent 
a return of the complaint. Some patients 
would bear a two or three grain pill of 
opium with benefit during convalescence. 
Dr. John Davis, of Cincinnati, in the wt Lan- 
cet and Observer" for October, 1862, had 
reported several cases of successful treat- 
ment of diarrhoea, although Dr. Gibbs says 
that he had not seen Dr. Davis's paper when 
he began the use of it. The experiments 
of Lallemand, Perrin, and Duroy, three 
distinguished French chemists, go to show 
that the alcohol of distilled and fermented 
liquors, when taken into the stomach, 
passes into the blood without being decom- 
posed, and is ultimately cast out by the 
kidneys, the skin, and the lungs, undecom- 



WHAT SHALL J DRINK1 13 

posed alcohol still. While in the blood, 
it interfered with the disloclgemeiit of the 
waste and worn-out materials, by lessening 
the quantity of them, in the form of carbonic 
acid from the lungs, and urea by the kid- 
neys, to give place to new materials received 
from the taking of fresh quantities of food. 
Prout and Percy, as well as Lallemand 
and his fellow-chemists, found that alcoholic 
drinks retarded these processes. So did 
Prof. N. S. Davis, of Chicago, and also that 
the vital temperature was diminished. It 
is well known that persons in liquor who 
are exposed in cold weather are particularly 
liable to frost-bite. Sir John Ross, in his 
long Arctic voyage, from 1829 to 1833, 
which was remarkable in its exposures 
and hardships, and for the fact that of a 
crew of twenty-three persons only three 
•died, attributes this exemption to unusual 
precautions, and especially to abstinence 
from intoxicating drinks. He says, " It is 
difficult to persuade men, even though they 



14 WHAT SHALL I DRIXK1 

should not be habitual drinkers of spirits, 
that the use of these liquors is debilitating, 
instead of the reverse. The immediate 
stimulus gives a temporary courage, audits 
effect is mistaken for an infusion of new 
strength ; but the slightest attention will 
show how exactly the reverse is the result. 
It is sufficient to give men under hard and 
steady labor a draught of the usual grog, 
or a dram, to perceive that often in a few 
minutes they become languid, and as they 
term it, faint, losing their strength in real- 
ity, while they attribute it to the continu- 
ance of their fatiguing exertions. He who 
will make corresponding experiments on 
two equal boats' crews, rowing in a heavy 
sea, will soon be convinced that the water- 
drinkers will far outdo the others. 

" It is not that 1 am declaring myself an 
advocate for temperance societies, whatever 
may be their advantage, nor that I am desir- 
ous of copying a practice lately introduced 
into some ships, under whatever motives ; 



WHAT SHALL I DRINK 1 15 

but were it in my power, in commanding a 
vessel, I would exclude the use of grog on 
the mere grounds of its debilitating effects, 
and independent of any ulterior injury it 
may do, reserving it for those cases alone 
in which its use may be deemed medicinal, 
or for any special reason useful." 

Mr. Edward Dusseault, of Somerville, 
Mass., crossed the African desert in I860. 
In a letter to his friend, G-. L. F., of Boston, 
dated at Timbuctoo, June 10, 1860, he 
makes the following statement : " The next 
day (the seventh after leaving Algiers), our 
water had become so bad that I could 
scarcely endure the wetting of my lips with 
it, much less to drink it. The whole of our 
company, excepting about fifteen, then used 
wine and other liquors, and endeavored to 
prevail on me to do the same ; but, much 
to their astonishment, I steadily refused, 
notwithstanding the formidable summing 
up of all its wonderful properties as a pre- 
ventive against African diseases. 



16 WHAT SHALL 1 DRINK 1 

" The sequel show show little the workings 
of secret agencies are sometimes known, 
for the result was, that all who used wine 
died soon after reaching Timbuctoo. Out 
of the eighty-two who left Algiers, there are 
ouhj sixteen left ! So much for the benefi- 
cial effects of ' moderate drinking; ! ' I 
am free to say that I consider it due, in a 
very great measure, to my being a teetotaler, 
that I have escaped the maladies to winch 
I have been exposed since leaving home. 
We finally reached Timbuctoo, having con- 
sumed fifteen days in crossing the entire 
desert." 

W. A. Hammond, M. D., Surgeon Gener- 
al U. S. A., published in 18(33, a volume 
of 604 pages, on Hygiene, "with special 
reference to the military service." 

He considers alcohol as food. As a pre- 
liminary remark, Dr. H. says that " the 
chief reason why the advocates of a total 
prohibition of the employment of alcoholic 
liquors have been unable to carry con vie- 



WHAT SHALL I DRTNK1 17 

tion to those to whom they have addressed 
themselves, is, that their remarks have 
mainly consisted of invectives, and that 
whatever facts they have brought forward 
have been altogether based upon the im- 
moderate use of the agents in question." 

Prof. N. S. Davis, in the " Chicago Medical 
Examiner" for October 1863, has remarked 
upon the foregoing statement as follows: 
" For fifty years, this has been the uniform 
reply of the advocates of alcoholic liquors 
as beverages, to all arguments, whether 
founded on statistical facts, showing the 
relative power of physical endurance be- 
tween those who use and those who do not 
use alcohol ; the relative ratio of sickness 
and mortality, or on direct physiological ex- 
periments. To show by actual results of 
labor in every department of human toil, 
whether in the harvest-field, the workshop, 
the brick-yard, the army, or the navy ; 
whether in summer or in winter; whether 
under the burning rays of a torrid sun, or 



18 WHAT SHALL I DRINK! 

midst the icebergs of the arctic regions, 
that those who use alcoholic beverages, 
whether fermented or distilled, actually do 
a less average amount of labor, are capable 
of less physical endurance, and suffer a 
higher ratio of attacks of sickness than 
those who, under exactly the same circum- 
stances, wholly abstain from such liquors, 
is to deal mainly in " invectives " is it ? To 
prove, by direct experiment, that alcohol 
enters the blood unchanged, disturbs and 
perverts the sensibility and action of the 
nervous structures, depresses the elemen- 
tary properties of all the tissues, thereby 
retarding organic changes, and disturb- 
ing the natural play of those affinities, by 
which nutrition, disintegration, and secre- 
tion are effected ; and is finally evolved 
again from the economy as alcohol* from 
the lungs, kidneys, etc., is also dealing 
mainly in "invectives," we suppose. 

" To show by the physiological action of 
alcohol, and by innumerable cases, taken 



WHAT SHALL I DRINK ? 19 

from every rank of human society, that the 
habitual, moderate use of alcoholic drinks 
leads, in nine cases out of every ten, to the 
' immoderate ' use of the same is also 
dealing in ' invectives.' Well, be it so for 
the present. Immediately following the 
paragraph quoted above, our author pro- 
ceeds as follows : ' No one can . for a 
moment deny that alcoholic liquors, when 
used in excessive amount, are not only 
injurious to the individual, but are also 
in the highest degree pernicious to society. 
. . . But are such facts to influence 
us against the proper use of all beverages 
which contain alcohol ? . . . Do we 
reject mutton because some one has killed 
himself by eating too heartily of mutton- 
chops ? ' 

" We certainly should not condemn the 
proper use of an article merely because its 
abuse produced injurious effects. But we 
can not help asking, whether the W. A. 
Hammond, M. D., author of the work be- 



20 WHAT SHALL I DRINK1 

fore us, ever heard of a certain Order, No. 
6, excluding calomel from the supply-table 
of the army, because it had been used ' im- 
moderately ' by some of the army-surgeons, 
issued by W. A. Hammond, M. D., .Surgeon- 
General of United States Army ? 

" Without wasting words, however, on 
minor matters, let us first see what are the 
actual effects of alcohol on the human 
system, as shown by the experiments and 
researches of Drs. Percy, Prout, Booker, 
Lallcmand, Hammond himself, and others, 
as collated in the chapter under considera- 
tion. They may be summed up as follows : 

"1. The alcohol taken into the stomach 
is rapidly absorbed into the blood, circulat- 
ed with it throughout the whole system, 
and is eliminated chiefly through the lungs 
and kidneys ; being readily detected, by the 
proper tests, both in the vapor of the breath 
and in the urine. 

"2. While in the blood, it produces an 
exhilarating eifect upon the brain and ner- 



WHAT SHALL I DRINK % 21 

vous centers, causing thereby disturbance in 
the mental operations and sensibilities of 

the patient. 

" '■). Its presence in the blood diminishes 
the aggregate amount of eliminations from 
the several excretory organs of the body, 
doubtless by diminishing both structural 
disintegration and secretion. 

" These propositions may be considered 
as well settled by a great variety of experi- 
ments and observations, both in Europe and 
America. But the practical inferences to 
be drawn from them are still the subjects 
of much controversy. Thus, a class of 
chemico-physiologists, embracing Liebig, 
Moleschott, Hammond, — the author of the 
work before us, — and many others, claim 
that, because the presence of the alcohol 
in the human system diminishes the aggre- 
gate amount of eliminations, and causes an 
increase in the^weight of the body, provided 
the digestion of other food goes on as usual, 
it actually supplies the place of food. 



22 WHAT SHALL I DRINK! 

" Thus, on page 539 of the work before 
us, Dr. Hammond says, ' We have seen that 
it takes the place of food, and that the 
weight of the body increases under its use. 
Any substance which produces the effects 
which we have seen to attend on the use of 
alcohol, even though it is not demonstrable 
at present that it undergoes conversion 
into tissue, is food ; ' and on the next page 
we find a quotation from Moleschott, as 
follows : ' Alcohol is a savings-bank for the 
tissues, — if the expression will be under- 
stood. He who eats little and drinks moder- 
ately of alcohol, retains as much in his blood 
and tissues as he who, in corresponding 
relations, eats more and drinks neither 
beer, nor wine, nor brandy.' It is on this 
assumption, that alcohol is a substitute for 
food, that our author and others of the 
same physiological school base nearly all 
their reasoning in favor of the general use 
of alcoholic compounds as beverages. It is 
mainly on this same assumption, thr.t a very 



WHAT SHALL I DRINK ? 23 

large class of medical writers and prac- 
titioners base their recommendation of 
alcoholic drinks in the treatment of numer- 
ous important diseases. Hence the ques- 
tion, whether this assumption or inference 
is correct ; whether it legitimately follows 
from the premises or facts proved, is one 
of the highest importance in its relations 
to physiology, therapeutics, and social life. 
Plainly and concisely stated, the premises 
and the inference are as follows: — 

"1. It is definitely proved, by a great 
variety of experiments, that under the 
influence of alcohol, other things being 
equal, the sum total of the excretions or 
eliminations from the lungs, skin, kidneys, 
bowels, etc., are diminished, and the body 
gains in weight. This is the premise from 
which it is inferred. 

" 2. That such diminution of elimination 
is caused by the alcohol retarding the natu- 
ral disintegration of the tissues, while the 
processes of assimilation and construction 



24 WHAT SHALL I DRINK ? 

of tissues is allowed to continue; and that 
thereby the alcohol acts the part of actual 
food. 

" Thus, the naked question is evolved : 
whether a retardation of the natural disin- 
tegration of tissue and elimination of the 
resulting effete matter are actually equiva- 
lent to, or will physiologically compensate 
for, a certain amount of assimilation and 
nutrition ? Dr. Hammond, and the advo- 
cates of the use of alcoholic beverages, 
generally assume the affirmative ; but is 
their position in consonance with the known 
and acknowledged laws which govern the 
nutrition and disintegration of living- 
tissues ? It is universally conceded, that 
living organized animal structures are com- 
posed of organic atoms or cells, none of 
which remain permanent, but each of which 
serves its purpose, and gives place to a new 
one. It is further generally conceded, that 
the performance of every functional act or 
display of force, whether mental or physi- 



WHAT SHALL I DRINK ? 25 

cal, is attended by more or less displace- 
ment of these atoms. It is this constant 
displacement of old organic atoms that 
renders a regular supply of food or ingesta 
necessary to the maintenance of life in all 
the higher orders of animals. This con- 
stant atomic change being a physiological 
law of the organization, taking place under 
the guidance of an inherent vital affinity, 
can not be retarded, except by directly im- 
pairing or weakening the affinity itself, or 
by introducing some new agent possessing 
a stronger affinity for some of the atoms 
composing the tissues than is possessed by 
oxygen, or whatever naturally effects the 
primary steps of disintegration. To do 
either of these manifestly induces a patlio- 
lugical condition incompatible with the 
continuance of health. For every intelli- 
gent physiologist knows, that on the con- 
stant display of vital affinity in the or- 
ganic or atomic changes taking place in 
the tissues, depends the development of 



26 WHAT SHALL I DRINK! 

caloric to maintain animal temperature ; 
the generation of nerve sensibility ; the 
elaboration of the secretions ; and, indeed, 
all the distinctive phenomena of animal 
life. Hence, whatever agent introduced 
into the blood, in a healthy state of the 
system, is capable of retarding the process 
of disintegration, must, if persisted in, 
necessarily produce either disease, or per- 
verted nutrition, or both. Dr. Hammond 
himself sees, at least partially, this conclu- 
sion, as is evident from the following, from 
page 540 : ' Alcohol retards the destruc- 
tion of tissue. By this destruction force is 
generated, muscles contract, thoughts are 
developed, organs secrete and excrete. 
Food supplies the material for new tissue. 
Now, as alcohol stops the full tide of this 
decay, it is very plain that it must furnish 
the force ivhich is developed after it is 
ingested. How it does this is not clear.' 

" Here is a full acknowledgment of the 
fact, thai to retard the metamorphosis or dis- 



WHAT SHALL I DltlNKl 27 

integration of the tissues is to retard, in the 
same ratio, all the force-producing processes 
or organic functions of animal life. True, 
he attempts to escape from the dilemma by- 
supposing that the alcohol itself comes to 
supply the force which its presence prevents 
the natural atomic changes in the tissues 
from generating ; but how it does this, he 
frankly confesses, ' is not clear.' 

" His attempt, on the next page, to ex- 
plain the matter by saying, ' it is not at all 
improbable that alcohol itself furnishes the 
force directly, by entering into combination 
with the products of tissue decay, whereby 
they are again formed into tissue, without 
being excreted as urea, uric acid, etc.,' is not 
only destitute of proof, but unfortunately 
in direct conflict with the results of a well- 
devised series of experiments by Lallemand, 
Perrin, and Duroy, which show that all 
the alcohol taken is ultimately eliminated 
through the excretory organs, unchanged. 
The same is confirmed by Dr. Hammond's 



28 WHAT SHALL I DRINK ? 

own experiments, during which the alcohol 
was generally detected both in the breath 
and the urine some time after it was absorb- 
ed from the stomach. 

" Thus, turn whichever way they will, 
those who advocate the doctrine, that a 
retardation of disintegration is equivalent 
to nutrition, involve themselves in difficulty. 
Indeed, the proposition itself is a physiolog- 
ical absurdity. If it were true, it would 
only be necessary to find some substance 
that would arrest the processes of tissue 
disintegration entirely, and we might live 
on without the necessity or expense of eating 
at all. Indeed, if alcohol is capable of 
retarding tissue destruction, and at the 
same time of furnishing the required force 
itself, what is to hinder a man from living 
on it indefinitely ? Whether fascinated by 
the beautiful theory of Hammond or not, 
many a poor fellow has practically tested it, 
but has generally been unfortunate enough 
to have the experiment cut short by a (it of 



WHAT SHALL I DRINK 1 29 

delirium tremens. We have thus far pur- 
sued the subject as though the experiments 
cited by our author actually proved that 
alcohol retarded the disintegration of 
tissues ; but they really prove no such 
thing. They simply show that, while 
alcohol is present in the system, the sum 
total of eliminations is diminished, and the 
weight of the body increased, provided the 
visual supply of ordinary food has been con- 
tinued. Whether the diminished excre- 
tions are owing to retarded disintegration 
of tissues or to the direct action of alcohol 
on the excretory organs, whereby their 
power to perform their respective functions 
becomes impaired, is a question open for 
discussion ; and one to which we may recur 
at some future time. 

"The only remaining ground on which 
alcohol can be claimed as food, in any sense, 
is that originally put forth by Liebig, and 
quoted approvingly by our author, namely, 
that, like other hydro-carbonaceous sub- 



30 WHAT SHALL I DBINK1 

stances, it furnishes material for respiration. 
This, however, is also directly disproved by 
all the experiments cited in the chapter 
before us ; by a series of experiments per- 
formed by myself, and reported to the 
Annual Meeting of the American Medical 
Association, in 1851 ; and by a great variety 
of facts derived from observation. It is 
evident that alcohol can act as respiratory 
food only by entering into combination with 
the oxygen ; the resulting products of 
which would be carbonic acid gas and 
water; and, as a consequence, we should 
have an abundance of carbonic acid exhaled 
from the lungs, and an increased tempera- 
ture of the system. Whereas the experi- 
ments cited by our author all show a dimi- 
nution of carbonic acid in the exhaled air 
and the presence of alcohol unchanged; 
while those reported by myself show a posi- 
tive decrease of temperature while under 
the influence of that agent. There are 
several other items in this chapter we had 



WHAT SHALL I DRINK? 31 

intended to notice, but time will not permit 
at present. We have written enough to 
show the utter fallacy of the main positions 
of the author; in his effort to convert what 
he acknowledges in the outset to be a 
' violent poison,' into beneficial food and 
drink. That part of the chapter commend- 
ing the use of tobacco, is founded on the 
same fallacies, and exhibits the same 
absurdities. 

" Indeed, his direct definition of food 
necessarily destroys all distinction between 
aliments and poison, — between food and 
medicine. After stating that the presence 
of alcohol in the system diminishes the 
destruction of tissue, and causes the body 
to increase in weight, he says, ' Any sub- 
stance which produces the effects which we 
have seen to attend on the use of alco- 
hol, even though it is not demonstrable at 
present that it undergoes conversion into 
tissue, is food.' Now, it is well known 
that opium, and probably, all the other 



32 WHAT SHALL I DRIKK1 

narcotics, diminish the organic changes ; 
and, if taken in moderate doses, allowing 
appetite and digestion to continue, the 
body increases in weight. The same results 
have been known to accompany the use of 
arsenic, and other acknowledged poisons. 
Would Dr. Hammond, therefore, call opium 
and arsenic food ? To do so would only be 
equalled in absurdity by the following re- 
mark of Liebig, gravely quoted as author- 
ity by our author : — ' The use of spirits is 
not the cause, but an effect of poverty. It 
is an exception to the rule when a well-fed 
man becomes a spirit-drinker.' Such an 
assertion, m this country, where a loaf of 
bread costs but a trifle more than a glass 
of whiskey or a mug of beer, and where 
men are almost as frequently seen stagger- 
ing in broadcloth as in rags, will scarcely 
produce any other effect than to excite a 
smile at the theoretical vagaries of men em- 
inent in some departments of science." 
A friend, who for many years has been 



WHAT SHALL I DRINK* 33 

untiring in the cause of temperance, writes : 
" The law is silent ; temperance societies 
are inefficient ; and the nation is now fast 
drifting toward the abysses of imtemper- 
ance, and we need more power, — pulpit- 
power, — the power of God to waken us to 
action in this terrible crisis. My dear sir, 
I beg you to take your pen, and tell cler- 
gymen what they have done and what they 
can do." Are not clergymen bound, as 
by a solemn oath, to preach the gospel ? 
and is it no part of the gospel to preach 
upon " righteousness, temperance, and 
judgment to come " ? Let ministers store 
their minds with facts on the temperance 
reform for the last half century, and espe- 
cially with indubitable facts on the prostra- 
tion, by alcoholic drink, of the intellectual 
faculties, the moral sense, the shortening of 
life, and the blackness of darkness threat- 
ened in God's Word. We have seen," 
says that friend, " thirteen dram-shops de- 
molished by a couple of sermons from a 



34 WHAT SHALL I DRWK1 

young preacher. We fix no limits to the 
power of an honest pulpit." 

On entering the study of medicine, 
Haller renounced wine for ever, that he 
might be certain to avoid the abuse of it.* 
If our medical men would imitate this 
prince of physicians and founder of physi- 
ology, as he has been fairly styled, how 
rapid would be the progress of our profes- 
sion. What must be the influence upon 
thousands of men in our armies if the spirit 
ration is allowed, or if liquor can be sold to 
them with that one word, "food," associat- 
ed ? Do mustard and Cayenne pepper act as 
food in stimulating the stomach to a sense 
of increased heat ? Does the whipping of 
a horse stuck in a mud-pit, causing extra 
exertion to get out, act as food, in giving 
strength and activity to his muscles ? Who 
can estimate the amount of moral respon- 
sibility incurred by those physicians who 
prescribe alcoholic liquor to be taken indef- 

* " Physic and Physicians," Vol. I, p. 298. 



WHAT SHALL I DRIXK1 35 

initely for chronic stomach disorders, or 
those medical men in high places, who allow 
their names to figure for months upon the 
title-page of a monthly medical journal, in 
praise of Bourbon whiskey, as if it were 
one of the greatest blessings ever conferred 
upon the human family ? 



