A Treatise on Domestic Economy; For the Use of Young Ladies at Home and at School. Beecher Catharine Esther
in this Nation are in the habitual use of some one of these stimulants; and each person defends the indulgence by these arguments:
First, that the desire for stimulants is a natural propensity, implanted in man's nature, as is manifest from the universal tendency to such indulgences, in every nation. From this, it is inferred, that it is an innocent desire, which ought to be gratified, to some extent, and that the aim should be, to keep it within the limits of temperance, instead of attempting to exterminate a natural propensity.
This is an argument, which, if true, makes it equally proper to use opium, brandy, tea, or tobacco, as stimulating principles, provided they are used temperately. But, if it be granted that perfect health and strength can be gained and secured without these stimulants, and that their peculiar effect is to diminish the power of the system, in exactly the same proportion as they stimulate it, then there is no such thing as a temperate use, unless they are so diluted, as to destroy any stimulating power; and in this form, they are seldom desired.
The other argument for their use, is, that they are among the good things provided by the Creator, for our gratification; that, like all other blessings, they are exposed to abuse and excess; and that we should rather seek to regulate their use, than to banish them entirely.
This argument is based on the assumption, that they are, like healthful foods and drinks, necessary to life and health, and injurious only by excess. But this is not true; for, whenever they are used in any such strength as to be a gratification, they operate, to a greater or less extent, as stimulants; and, to just such extent, they wear out the powers of the constitution; and it is abundantly proved, that they are not, like food and drink, necessary to health. Such articles are designed for medicine, and not for common use. There can be no argument framed to defend the use of one of them, which will not equally defend all. That men have a love for being stimulated, after they have once felt the pleasurable excitement, and that Providence has provided the means for securing it, are arguments as much in favor of alcohol, opium, and tobacco, as of coffee and tea. All that can be said in favor of the last-mentioned favorite beverages, is, that the danger in their use is not so great. Let any one, who defends one kind of stimulating drink, remember, then, that he uses an argument, which, if it be allowed that stimulants are not needed, and are injurious, will equally defend all kinds; and that all which can be said in defence of tea and coffee, is, that they may be used, so weak, as to do no harm, and that they actually have done less harm than some of the other stimulating narcotics.
The writer is of opinion, that tea and coffee are a most extensive cause of much of the nervous debility and suffering endured by American women; and that relinquishing such drinks would save an immense amount of such suffering. But there is little probability that the present generation will make so decided a change in their habits, as to give up these beverages; and the subject is presented rather in reference to forming the habits of children.
It is a fact, that tea and coffee are, at first, seldom or never agreeable to children. It is the mixture of milk, sugar, and water, that reconciles them to a taste, which in this manner gradually becomes agreeable. Now, suppose that those who provide for a family conclude that it is not their duty to give up entirely the use of stimulating drinks, may not the case appear different, in regard to teaching their children to love such drinks? Let the matter be regarded thus:—The experiments of physiologists all prove, that stimulants are not needful to health, and that, as the general rule, they tend to debilitate the constitution. Is it right, then, for a parent to tempt a child to drink what is not needful, when there is a probability that it will prove, to some extent, an undermining drain on the constitution? Some constitutions can bear much less excitement than others; and, in every family of children, there is usually one, or more, of delicate organization, and consequently peculiarly exposed to dangers from this source. It is this child who ordinarily becomes the victim to stimulating drinks. The tea and coffee which the parents and the healthier children can use without immediate injury, gradually sap the energies of the feebler child, who proves either an early victim, or a living martyr to all the sufferings that debilitated nerves inflict. Can it be right, to lead children, where all allow that there is some danger, and where, in many cases, disease and death are met, when another path is known to be perfectly safe?
Of the stimulating drinks in common use, black tea is least injurious, because its flavor is so strong, in comparison with its narcotic principle, that one who uses it, is much less liable to excess. Children can be trained to love milk and water sweetened with sugar, so that it will always be a pleasant beverage; or, if there are exceptions to the rule, they will be few. Water is an unfailing resort. Every one loves it, and it is perfectly healthful.
The impression, common in this Country, that warm drinks, especially in Winter, are more healthful than cold, is not warranted by any experience, nor by the laws of the physical system. At dinner, cold drinks are universal, and no one deems them injurious. It is only at the other two meals that they are supposed to be hurtful.
There is no doubt that warm drinks are healthful, and more agreeable than cold, at certain times and seasons; but it is equally true, that drinks above blood heat are not healthful. If any person should hold a finger in hot water, for a considerable time, twice every day, it would be found that the finger would gradually grow weaker. The frequent application of the stimulus of heat, like all other stimulants, eventually causes debility. If, therefore, a person is in the habit of drinking hot drinks, twice a day, the teeth, throat, and stomach are gradually debilitated. This, most probably, is one of the causes of an early decay of the teeth, which is observed to be much more common among American ladies, than among those in European countries.
It has been stated to the writer, by an intelligent traveller, who had visited Mexico, that it was rare to meet an individual with even a tolerable set of teeth; and that almost every grown person, he met in the street, had merely remnants of teeth. On inquiry into the customs of the Country, it was found, that it was the universal practice to take their usual beverage at almost the boiling point; and this, doubtless, was the chief cause of the almost entire want of teeth in that Country. In the United States, it cannot be doubted that much evil is done, in this way, by hot drinks. Most tea-drinkers consider tea as ruined, if it stands until it reaches the healthful temperature for drink.
The following extract from Dr. Andrew Combe, presents the opinion of most intelligent medical men on this subject.7
"Water is a safe drink for all constitutions, provided it be resorted to in obedience to the dictates of natural thirst, only, and not of habit. Unless the desire for it is felt, there is no occasion for its use during a meal."
"The primary effect of all distilled and fermented liquors, is, to stimulate the nervous system and quicken the circulation. In infancy and childhood, the circulation is rapid, and easily excited; and the nervous system is strongly acted upon, even by the slightest external impressions. Hence slight causes of irritation readily excite febrile and convulsive disorders. In youth, the natural tendency of the constitution is still to excitement; and consequently, as a general rule, the stimulus of fermented liquors is injurious."
These remarks show, that parents, who find that stimulating drinks are not injurious to themselves, may mistake in inferring, from this, that they will not be injurious to their children.
Dr. Combe continues thus: "In mature age, when digestion is good and the system in full vigor, if the mode of life be not too exhausting, the nervous functions and general circulation are in their best condition, and require no stimulus for their support. The bodily energy is then easily sustained, by nutritious food and a regular regimen, and consequently artificial excitement only increases the wasting of the natural strength. In old age, when the powers of life begin to fail, moderate stimulus may be used with evident advantage."
It may be asked, in this connection, why the stimulus of animal food is not to be regarded in the same light, as that of stimulating drinks. In reply, a very essential difference may be pointed out. Animal food furnishes nutriment to the organs which it stimulates, but stimulating drinks excite the organs to quickened action, without affording any nourishment.
It has been supposed, by some, that tea and coffee have, at least, a degree of nourishing power. But it is proved, that it is the milk and sugar, and not the main portion
The writer would here remark, in reference to extracts made from various authors, that, for the sake of abridging, she has often left out parts of a paragraph, but never so as to modify the meaning of the author. Some ideas, not connected with the subject in hand, are omitted, but none are altered.