The conduct of Lavengro with respect to drink may, upon the whole, serve as a model.He is no drunkard, nor is he fond of intoxicating other people; yet when the horrors are upon him he has no objection to go to a public-house and call for a pint of ale, nor does he shrink from recommending ale to others when they are faint and downcast.In one instance, it is true, he does what cannot be exactly justified; he encourages the Priest in the dingle, in more instances than one, in drinking more hollands and water than is consistent with decorum.He has a motive indeed in doing so; a desire to learn from the knave in his cups the plans and hopes of the Propaganda of Rome.Such conduct, however, was inconsistent with strict fair dealing and openness; and the author advises all those whose consciences never reproach them for a single unfair or covert act committed by them, to abuse him heartily for administering hollands and water to the Priest of Rome.In that instance the hero is certainly wrong; yet in all other cases with regard to drink, he is manifestly right.To tell people that they are never to drink a glass of ale or wine themselves, or to give one to others, is cant; and the writer has no toleration for cant of any description.Some cants are not dangerous; but the writer believes that a more dangerous cant than the temperance cant, or as it is generally called, teetotalism, is scarcely to be found.The writer is willing to believe that it originated with well meaning, though weak people; but there can be no doubt that it was quickly turned to account by people who were neither well meaning nor weak.Let the reader note particularly the purpose to which this cry has been turned in America; the land, indeed, par excellence, of humbug and humbug cries.It is there continually in the mouth of the most violent political party, and is made an instrument of almost unexampled persecution.The writer would say more on the temperance cant, both in England and America, but want of space prevents him.There is one point on which he cannot avoid making a few brief remarks - that is, the inconsistent conduct of its apostles in general.The teetotal apostle says, it is a dreadful thing to be drunk.
So it is, teetotaller; but if so, why do you get drunk? Iget drunk? Yes, unhappy man, why do you get drunk on smoke and passion? Why are your garments impregnated with the odour of the Indian weed? Why is there a pipe or a cigar always in your mouth? Why is your language more dreadful than that of a Poissarde? Tobacco-smoke is more deleterious than ale, teetotaller; bile more potent than brandy.You are fond of telling your hearers what an awful thing it is to die drunken.So it is, teetotaller.Then take good care that you do not die with smoke and passion, drunken, and with temperance language on your lips; that is, abuse and calumny against all those who differ from you.One word of sense you have been heard to say, which is, that spirits may be taken as a medicine.Now you are in a fever of passion, teetotaller; so, pray take this tumbler of brandy; take it on the homoeopathic principle, that heat is to be expelled by heat.You are in a temperance fury, so swallow the contents of this tumbler, and it will, perhaps, cure you.You look at the glass wistfully - you occasionally take a glass medicinally - and it is probable you do.Take one now.
Consider what a dreadful thing it would be to die passion drunk; to appear before your Maker with intemperate language on your lips.That's right! You don't seem to wince at the brandy.That's right! - well done! All down in two pulls.
Now you look like a reasonable being!
If the conduct of Lavengro with retard to drink is open to little censure, assuredly the use which he makes of his fists is entitled to none at all.Because he has a pair of tolerably strong fists, and knows to a certain extent how to use them, is he a swaggerer or oppressor? To what ill account does he turn them? Who more quiet, gentle, and inoffensive than he? He beats off a ruffian who attacks him in a dingle; has a kind of friendly tuzzle with Mr.
Petulengro, and behold the extent of his fistic exploits.
Ay, but he associates with prize-fighters; and that very fellow, Petulengro, is a prize-fighter, and has fought for a stake in a ring.Well, and if he had not associated with prize-fighters, how could he have used his fists? Oh, anybody can use his fists in his own defence, without being taught by prize-fighters.Can they? Then why does not the Italian, or Spaniard, or Affghan use his fists when insulted or outraged, instead of having recourse to the weapons which he has recourse to? Nobody can use his fists without being taught the use of them by those who have themselves been taught, no more than any one can "whiffle" without being taught by a master of the art.Now let any man of the present day try to whiffle.Would not any one who wished to whiffle have to go to a master of the art? Assuredly! but where would he find one at the present day? The last of the whifflers hanged himself about a fortnight ago on a bell-rope in a church steeple of "the old town," from pure grief that there was no further demand for the exhibition of his art, there being no demand for whiffling since the discontinuation of Guildhall banquets.Whiffling is lost.The old chap left his sword behind him; let any one take up the old chap's sword and try to whiffle.Now much the same hand as he would make who should take up the whiffler's sword and try to whiffle, would he who should try to use his fists who had never had the advantage of a master.Let no one think that men use their fists naturally in their own disputes - men have naturally recourse to any other thing to defend themselves or to offend others; they fly to the stick, to the stone, to the murderous and cowardly knife, or to abuse as cowardly as the knife, and occasionally more murderous.Now which is best when you hate a person, or have a pique against a person, to clench your fist and say "Come on," or to have recourse to the stone, the knife, - or murderous calumny?
