Teetotalism versus Science.

35

that Providence is perpetually preparing for the progressive development of science, and constantly educing permanent and universal good out of temporary and partial evil. Not that we are prepared to justify the perverse way in which men shut their eyes to the dawn of evidence-the attitude of hostility assumed against the beginnings of truth-the prejudice which intercepts the straight path of light-much less the authoritative tone and acrid disposition in which the earliest developments of temperance doctrine have been combated by reputed chemists, physiologists, and divines. But while we must concede and lament the frequent absence of a conscientious, truth-seeking mood in the writers against temperance, we can now clearly perceive that the very intensity and virulence of this opposition, by compelling to minute and exhaustive investigation, has necessarily resulted in a wider grasp of the entire subject, and stimulated to that series of varied and luminous experiments which now for ever displace the few and faint illustrations which constituted our original knowledge of the modus operandi of alcohol upon the living body. This fact, surely, furnishes an additional incentive to patience and toleration under controversial antagonism, so that, while avoiding what is unbecoming in the manner and motive of gainsayers, we may accept opposition as the best opportunity for promoting that truth which benefits and blesses in common the entire family of man.

The movement which has now become known as teetotalism, originated amongst the working classes of Lancashire in the year 1832; and the zealous missionary labours of its earliest advocates -especially of James Teare, Joseph Livesey, Thomas Swindlehurst, Henry Anderton, and Edward Grubb-quickly discipled many thousands of the hard-working men of the North to this new scheme of redemption from the thraldom and degradation of drink. Several important physical truths became manifest as the result of this grand practical induction: namely, that hard work could be done with greater ease, and with less subsequent fatigue, on the abandonment of alcoholic liquors; that the extremes of heat and cold could be better sustained; that body and temper were both improved; and that teetotalers enjoyed a comparative immunity from the pain and expense of sickness, to which, as limited drinkers, they had been strangers.

Earnestly commending these truths of experience to the working classes, the first apostles of temperance were soon obstructed by the mischievous authority of medical men, an authority which chimed in at once with interest and appetite; and the question before the public assumed the shape of alleged Science versus · Popular Reform. This compelled the temperance advocate to formulize his doctrine, to study chemistry and physiology, so that

he might challenge the opposer upon his own ground. Whether it was owing to this antagonism, or to the circumstance that the continental teachers of physiology were far better instructed in organic chemistry than the English doctors, the fact is certain, that while the profession abroad have generally treated the question of abstinence from alcohol in a respectful and philosophical spirit, the great body of medical men at home have dealt with it in so crude, dogmatic, and insolent a manner, as to call down upon themselves the most severe but merited exposures.* The role of the controversy has somewhat changed since then, but the temper of the profession is as intolerant as ever. The Medical Gazette,' in reviewing the French experiments, pronounces them all the more valuable, seeing that they are not contaminated with teetotal fanaticism.' Now since their philosophical conclusions coincide precisely with the original basis of the temperance doctrine, we must infer that the fanaticism' consists in contending for the practical application of the philosophy! The British Medical Journal' recently declares that the subject of the use of alcohol is daily becoming one of more importance. The question of its influence on the body in health, is being daily canvassed by the chemist and physiologist; and as far as their lights reach, it would seem that not only is alcohol not of service to the body, but is actually injurious.'

While vituperating teetotalers in the style just exhibited, the faculty, we learn, are preparing to abandon their untenable position in the field of science,' and to occupy the 'vantage-ground upon which the fanatics' themselves have stood so firmly and so long. We are certainly not disposed,' says the Medical Journal, to allow the chemist or the physiologist to settle a question of this kind, for there is one great authority, Experience, which is greater than theirs.' Whether they will fare any better in their new position, we may safely leave to the issues of time; but the declaration itself is a remarkable example of the tenacity of prejudice.

The formula of the teetotalers in 1832, and subsequently, was this: That alcohol is essentially an irritant and narcotic poison. That this brain poison is the intoxicating element alike of the fermented and distilled liquors used by the people, so productive of physical disease, social disorder, popular degradation, and premature death. That it is injurious in proportion to the frequency and amount of its consumption. That it enters the body as alcohol, excites violent reaction in every part of the circulation

* Vide Fallacies of the Faculty' in works of Dr. Lees (vol. i. and iii.), where an analysis of 230 pages will be found of the strangest blunders ever put forth by an educated faculty, including such men as Drs. Paris, Lankester, Barclay, and Chambers.

from

from the heart to the brain, and is eliminated as alcohol, in some measure from the breath and skin, and plentifully from the kidneys. Hence, therefore, as wanting in the two essential marks of innocency of action and capacity of assimilation, alcohol could not be ranked in the category of food.

The American Temperance Society was formed in the year 1826. Prior to that event, the remarkable accident to Alexis St. Martin had happened, of which the particulars are given in the first work named at the head of this article. Whilst the philanthropists were busy with their social and moral reformation, a physician in the Far West was experimenting upon a living man, into whose stomach an opening had been made, whereby, as through a window, could be seen, even when not felt, the irritating and disturbing action of alcoholics. When, in Britain, in 1833, the principle of abstinence from spirits was developed into teetotalism, and the absurd objection put forth that alcohol in wine was different from alcohol distilled out, Dr. Beaumont's book was received in the nick of time for confuting the distinction. The whole class of alcoholic liquors, whether simply fermented or distilled, may be considered as narcotics, producing very little difference in their ultimate effects on the system.' (P. 50.) It was also shown that the free use of any intoxicating liquors, when continued for some days, has invariably produced morbid changes in the stomach, visible to the naked eye.' (P. 239.)

This case greatly aided the temperance movement, and was used with vigour and skill in popular advocacy. In December, 1841, Mr. E. C. Delavan, of Albany, published, and circulated with a princely liberality, the Enquirer,' No. 1, containing Professor Sewall's Pathology of Drunkenness,' illustrated with coloured plates of the stomach, exhibiting the inflammatory action of strong drinks. These plates, with additional matter and drawings, were afterwards reproduced in England by Dr. Lees, in connection with his History of Alcohol.' In that work, and the 'Standard Temperance Library,' published in 1841, are to be found collected most of the facts and experiments then known concerning the behaviour of alcohol within the organism; but while very significant, they were unquestionably fragmentary.

In 1679, M. Courten, of Montpelier, injected two drachms of spirits of wine into the crural vein of a dog, which died in a very little time. The blood was concreted into a great many hard clots in the cava and right ventricle of the heart. Three drachms made another dog apoplectic, as if he were half dead. He grew giddy, reeled, and fell down. His eyes were red and fiery, his sight so dull that he did not seem to notice anything. In four hours' time he grew better. We injected into the crural vein of a dog five ounces of strong white wine, which made him very drunk,

drunk, and little different from what a less quantity of spirits of wine would have done.'*

In Dr. Beddoes' 'Hygeia' (1802) some curious experiments of Mr. Pilger and of the great surgeon, John Hunter, are recorded, but they cast no light on the course of alcohol in the body. The experiments of Dr. (now Sir B.) Brodie in 1811,+ and of Orfila, which simply confirm M. Courten's, and those of M. Flourens,‡ which show that alcohol disorders the action of walking or flying by its specific influence on the cerebellum,'-pretty nearly exhaust our information on this topic up to 1830. In that year Dr. Kirk, of Greenock, in his address to the Leven Temperance Society, details his examination of the brains of some men who had died after drinking, from which he had obtained by distillation a quantity of alcohol, still retaining the smell of whisky, and burning with a blue flame for several seconds. Dr. Ogston, of Aberdeen, confirmed this startling fact, by the examination of the brains of persons who had died under similar conditions. These last experiments seem to have suggested the subject for Dr. Percy's prize thesis in 1839; which is certainly one of the most important and satisfactory contributions ever made to our knowledge of the action of alcohol, and which has long been employed as a text-book by the few leading advocates of temperance who have taken the pains to study this question, as a barricade against the inroad of foreign theories which our medical and literary men have accepted in so servile a spirit, partly because they felt their own want of mastery of the subject, and partly because they fancied they had discovered an argument against the temperance reformers of their own country.

Dr. Percy established the following truths in that essay, beyond all reasonable cavil and contradiction :

:

1. That the distillation of the blood of dogs and men, after the injection of alcohol by the stomach, yielded a liquid, which dissolved camphor, and burnt with a blue flame.

2. That after the use of alcohol to the point of common intoxication, the substance of the brain yielded a larger measure of alcohol than a much greater weight of blood. "Indeed, it would almost seem that a kind of affinity existed between alcohol and the cerebral matter." (P. 104.)

3. "The rapidity with which alcohol may, under favourable circumstances, be absorbed from the stomach and conveyed to the brain, is remarkable."

4. "That alcohol may be detected in the blood, the urine, &c. It may be separated with great facility from the bile and liver." "I obtained the

urine of a man who was in a state of intoxication-he had taken in all about a bottle of whisky. [Half a pint of alcohol.] The urine was clear and of a pale straw colour. I subjected five ounces to distillation, and drew over one drachm, which was put into a test-tube, containing sub-carbonate of potass: instantly on agitation, a perfectly colourless stratum appeared, which dissolved camphor, and burnt with a blue flame."

5. Experiment viii., "illustrates the intensely irritant action of alcohol. The † Ibid., 1811.

* Philosophical Transactions,' 1712.

Recherches sur les Fonctions du Système Nerveux,' 1824.

dog

dog vomited frothy matter, strongly tinged with blood. The lungs were slightly congested. Dark blood was contained in all the cavities of the heart. The stomach bore the marks of the most intense inflammation. Solid viscera healthy." (P. 73.)

6. That alcohol can destroy life by shock upon the nervous centres. In experiment vi., "a full-grown spaniel dog was killed before the injection of less than two and a half ounces of alcohol into the stomach was completed. Never did I see every spark of vitality more effectually and more instantaneously extinguished." (P. 60.)

7. "On opening the chest, a decidedly alcoholic smell was perceived, as evidenced by Mr. Wright, my brother (who was ignorant of the experiment), and myself. Not only must alcohol have been conveyed to the brain, in the course of two minutes, but a quantity must have passed into the circulation, for the actual quantity yielded by the brain in this instance, equalled what I have in general obtained when the poison has been allowed much longer time for absorption. The blood furnished an abundant quantity. . . . . The empty condition of the stomach may serve to explain the extraordinary rapidity with which the alcohol produced its effects." (P. 62.)

Notwithstanding these experiments, we shortly after find Liebig and the French and German chemists and physiologists affirming, with a single exception, that alcohol is never eliminated by the secreting organs. This opinion was first given by Tiedemann and Gmelin, repeated by Woehler as a fact, afterwards echoed by a flock of writers on the Continent, and finally proclaimed as science by amateur physiologists in England. Certainly, error sometimes takes a good deal of killing.

Professor Schultz, in his work on 'The Rejuvenescence of Man' (Berlin, 1842), records some experiments which excited considerable attention, and led to others elsewhere. He states that alcohol stimulates the blood vesicles to an increased and unnatural contraction, which hurries them on to the last stage of development-that is, induces their premature death. The colouring matter is dissolved out of them, and the pale discs lose all vitality; whence less oxygen can be absorbed, and less carbon carried out. While congestion happens in the capillaries, irritation is present in the secreting organs, resulting in disordered function.' The later experiments of Böcker with spirits, wine, and beer (the results attested by the microscope), agree with these; and Dr. Virchow, the celebrated pathologist, concurs in the opinion that alcohol poisons the blood, and arrests the development, as well as hastens the decay, of the red vesicles.§

After this period, a numerous band of experimenters are found, all over Europe, busily endeavouring to determine the problem of the action of alcohol, amongst whom we may name as most successful,

*A l'exception de Klenke, qui a trouvé de l'alcool dans l'urine et dans la bile, les physiologistes avaient avancé que les organes sécréteurs, les reins en particulier, n'éliminent pas l'alcool.'-Lallemand, p. 73.

+ Journal des Progrès,' 1827, ii. 109.

See Dr. Barclay's assertion cited in Dr. Lees' works, i. p. clxv.

§ An abstract of these will be found in the works of Dr. Lees, vol. i. p. cciii. (1854).

Otto,