title: The church and the saloon-keeper.
text: Z «r? cc cc. cc c c c cr v cc <c c C25«C^ < c cc c c < c < <: c< c C  I, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. CCCCC cc v. c < s cc ( c C ecsC r «c C <jcs-cC CCi ! cc < oie: oc^c  <T« c c ^ r c c r <*<3 C «L^ c < c c c «r <rc < c < C ■c <.< CC^< c c . < *r . <r < c C( • c <r \ CCC' 4 1_ c c •'. CCc - < <L C  cic c< c <r jtr, <y*£ <r c <c •<- c ^ ,OC CC c f<< «L«c. < «c cc<r < «< c «:c cc< < c < c c< C C < c C < c c« «: ■ <■ < c 4 p. c < c«c <, c c r< < • c. <r c< 5 C CC< 41 ^ ■ ( o< cc §& sv « ^ c c . c *- c <_ <. £^i <fcci r c « «SL C C 4 r c «r< I c <rc *BCl c c ft c cc ^d c c m 1" C <i <r ^ < C <■ : c cz< «~ c <r c: c «r «r C cc x c cc c cc ^d^ c c ^^ OCC €KL C C r < C <■ t C (C'C ^CL c c c <■ Z < cc«c ^B^~ c_ C r ' C ^ <c<< 5 C C cc < «| C <*r<< . ^ c <- - < € *!£< V *r* - cv.c " -c «KZ < i«Cx< c c: c «c cc «T < <3t<C c c ■ c c c «, c «<< c <^ <- < .< «: <■ , ^t> c c o «r c< «cr «r<< c c <j.-<r "* t - c<c ^L ^K<< C C c O - <<t CC r ^ V^ •^ <^SRr cc c cc c ^c c -c <r~ C C C«L. c c£ <C Otco< c r cc CC r d. c c OCCc < CC c CLC&c c^ c cc CTCccc <^ c cifiC< < c C«Tc. Oterc c C^< c < < <: r; <l mm C c __ <T4MS <: < ^ CO: < <m^. <jCcc c <d C C <*L<I CC <ZCc^ c rcccx ^^ cere «r cS ^ ot-C: c^V S c<: c c « P c<c «c ^ C 4 < ^«S& C « ^ ^ C « ^ «Tc c * s ^> Jw- ^^ <7 c ' c <" <T< <^ 7 c r/ C ^ c< ^4 , C C <T C^c 3 .^^"^ 5T cc (Xcrc c ^<TC C< c « «^*C-C cc « <s <^^lc Cc « o <o4K[^c CC «- c C^I^C^ CC <s 5 ^Sb^?" cc c<r ^^^^^ < : cc < ^3^ r c ^cc c <:c CC ^^^^^ c ^^J^L^c c CC ^IKJ ' <<? < ^BCc c CC- .c ^HtTc ( cc ^^^^ C CC < ^ ^JJK. c cc « t- ^KT*r c cc C- ^Htc c cc ■^ ^iTC ' CC c c <rr CCcc <. ^ CCc c CCc< cc<<r: c <r c- « c cc c<rc^ cc cc c cc cc <i C (CC c CC CC <cc < c c c <f C Cx _ c CC CC cc c<r cc. CC cc Cc c< cc <r< i C ' 'CCc «. Co ^'CCc c.< ' Cc^ CC 0. C C< C C4 C< - •. < c ■ _> C c _ -• c: C^ _ C C <4< c cc- c MOTTO'.— "The Jew has to be burned."'' Nathan the Wise, Gotthold Ephraim Lessing. THE CHURCH AND THE SALOON-KEEPER. A NEW DOCTRINE. Confiscation of Property Legalized in form of High License. AUTO-DA»FE WILL FOLLOW. M. S/jAFFE. Copyright 1894 by M. S. Jaffe, San Jose, Cal. All Rights Reserved. Price, lO Cents. SAN JOSE, CAI,. Press of Smith & Eaton, 1894. Wri' AN INDISPENSABLE HOUSEHOLD REMEDY. Jaffe's Electric %M^Mi Pain Expeller. A sure and speedy cure for all aches and pains, colds, catarrh, rheumatism, neuralgia, gout, varicose veins, hives, colic, cramps, and in fact for most ailments of man or beast. An indispensable household article. It is an internal and external remedy and so harmless it can safely be given an infant, and so powerful that a few doses will effect a cure. Guaranteed as represented or money refunded. M. S. Jaffee, Manufacturer and Proprietor, San Jose, California. A FEW OUT OF THOUSANDS OF TESTIMONIALS. Endorsed by Physicians. Being acquainted with the formula of Jaffee's Electric Pain Expeller and knowing the therapeutic action of each of the ingredients of which it is composed, and having prescribed it repeatedly in my practice, as well as used it in my family with the best results, I cheerfully recommend it as a remedy very suitable for all such ailments as Mr. Jaffee, the proprietor, recommends it. C. A. E. Hertel, M. D. 40 Magnolia Ave., San Jose, Cal. What the Leading Druggist of Santa Cruz Says. Mr. M. S. Jaffee, Dear Sir: I take pleasure in saying that Jaffee's Electric Pain Expeller is having a splendid sale with us. It is certainly giving better satisfaction than any medicine we have ever sold. It does all you claim for it, at least this is. What people say who buy it, and would not be without it. Yours truly, J. G. Tanner. Neuralgia and Rheumatism. C. W. Kellogg, Esq., of Wilmingford & Co., 216 California St., San Francisco, writes that a few applications of Jaffe's Electric Pain Ex- peller cured him of neuralgia and rheumatic pains of many years standing. Cure for Sore Throat. Hon. H. E. Schilling, 191 Delmas Ave., Mayor of the City of San Jose: — I will state I have used Jaffe's Electric Pain Expeller and find it an invaluable remedy for the cure of sore throat and rheumatic aches and pains. Lumbago. Dr. H. A. Spencer, of San Jose, writes: — While I do not favor the introduction of proprietary medicines, I must acknowledge that Jaffe's Electric Pain Expeller gave me immediate relief from a severe attack of Lumbago. A Boon for Mother and Children Dr. M. S. Jaffe, Dear Sir: — I want to say a few words about your Electric Pain Expeller. I suffered for six years from varicose veins; a few applications gave me perfect relief. I cared my four months old baby of cramps by giving it two drops in warm water and sugar. I am subject to nervous spells, and by taking one dose I obtain immediate relief. I use it for my little ones for colds, cholera morbus, and all indispositions. I cheerfully recommend it to mothers as an invaluable remedy. Mrs. W. Vogel. Pleasant Ave., San Jose, Cal. What a Well Known Attorney Says. I cheerfully recommend Jaffe's Electric Pain Expeller to all who desire relief from the pains and ills it is advertised to alleviate. I have used it in my family for neuralgia, croup, soreness in the chest, and for the pain resulting from varicose veins and have found it a speedy and harmless remedy. J. E. RICHARDS. Attorney at Law, Porter Block, San Jose, Cal. A Positive Remedy for Colds. Mr. C. M. Wooster of the well-known real estate firm of Wooster & Ensign writes: San Jose, Aug. 17, '49 Mr. M. S. Jaffe. Dear Sir:— After one year's use of your Electric Pain Expeller as a general family remedy, I am pleased to state voluntarily that it has proven itself to be a very useful and abundantly remedial medicine for the ordinary ailments of the body. It is the most positive remedy for a cold that I have ever used. Yours truly, C. M. Wooster. For Sale by all Reliable Drug Stores. If your druggist does not keep it, have him order it for you; take no other, or order direct. A NEW DOCTRINE. With an incalculable amount of literature and 300,000 votes, the Prohibitionists are working masterly to dig up every grapevine, annihilate every distillery, and burn every brewery in the land. Just why these interesting people are so actively engaged in the good work is not very clear except to themselves, and they appear to think that what good reasons they may possess for the faith that is in them, are too sacred for the everyday vulgar gaze. At any rate, the world never hears any rational arguments advanced to sustain their position. It might be well, therefore, to inquire whether or not the industries which produce intoxicating beverages are in themselves evil. Is it immoral to use intoxicants? It is generally recognized in these days that the morality or immorality of a thing is fixed by common consent. For instance, we of California reprobate murder; but the Fije Islander was not considered a man until he could boast the killing of a fellow-being. A Bushman is not entitled to the consideration of the men of his tribe until he has whipped his mother. Common consent among civilized people, therefore, makes immoral what is regarded as quite the proper thing by the common consent of less refined people. What has common consent to say about the morality of the use of that form of stimulants known as intoxicating liquors? Without an exception, all nations of antiquity used strong drink in one form or another. Among modern nations, the same is true, with the exception of the Mohammedans, who refrain from wine, but as they use more dangerous stimulants, their appear to be the exception that proves the rule. Among English-speaking people, the prohibition craze claims a hand full of victims, descended mostly from hard-faced old Puritan ancestors, who were so short sighted in this matter of temperance that their pastors, notably Johnathan Edwards, and Catton Mather, were in the habit of retailing "hard cider" to the members of their flock, and netting a fair income thereby. Common consent therefore throws its weight against the assumption that the liquor business is of itself immoral. All nations and all times have used intoxicating beverages, and found them good, and with the exception of the Mohammedans and a few Christian fanatics, the universal opinion at the present time seems to be that intelligence, by common consent, does not declare the use of intoxicating stimulents immoral. Thus their use is as moral as the use of any of the luxuries with which mankind could as well do without. But the occidental enthusiast will object to any code of morals founded upon common consent. He will tell us that his ethical code comes from God, and point to his Bible. It might be of interest, therefore, to inquire what God has to say on the subject in that invaluable book. Moses, surely an authority, was certainly not a Prohibitionist. He does not appear to think that God wanted him to be, either. Wherever and whenever he gave commands regarding the official acts of the priesthood, they are directed to use no strong drinks; but outside of this no prohibitory statutes, either for priest or people, exist in the Laws of Moses. Isaiah, when he wants to upbraid the weakness of his people, complains that their wine is adulterated with water, and the Psalmist informs us, and certainly he was in a position to speak from experience, "That wine gladdens the heart of man. In fact, the ancient Jews were led quite away from prohibition by their divinely-given statutes, and were so addicted to strong drink that the public banquet was called mishteh. "A drinking season." When we turn to the New Testament, the outlook is scarcely more encouraging for our Prohibitionist friends. The very first public act that God in the form of man did, was to make wine on a scale, and in a manner entirely unheard of before his time. As to the quality of this wine much has been written, said and vaporized. The modern commentator, whose flippant knowledge of Greek enables him to explain away many knotty problems of biblical lore, but stops short of the Greek alphabet, tells us that this wine was "unfermented." The Bible, however, says the wine "was good." Now, as a matter of fact, but one kind of wine was known to the Hebrews, and that was the fermented juice of the grape. It remained for the nineteenth century parson to discover anything out of the way with that good wine, which gl Addened the heart of the governor, at that famous marriage of Cana. Saint Paul was at one with his master when it came to the question of intoxicating beverages. He councils moderation, not prohibition. So did the early Christians, so do all rational Church people to this day. Thus it will be seen that the use of intoxicating beverages is not of itself immoral. From an economic point of view, the Prohibitionist looks at the "liquor evil" through magic glasses. Statistics are called up whose magic sophestry will prove everything from the interesting fact that more infants are smothered in the slums of London on Saturday nights (due to the extraordinary amount of drunkenness on the part of the parents on the evenings in question) to the startling assertion that the drink bill of America cannot be expressed in heavens knows how many ciphers; and when ciphers fail, the Prohibitionist, the magnitude of the evil, becomes appalling. But strange to say, the people of America consume alarming quantities of beef, pork, and mutton, and vegetables beyond measure. The number of ciphers to express the monetary value of these commodities would cause those of the Prohibitionist, imposing though they are, to pale at their own insignificance. While the Prohibitionist's figures are paling, it might be well to remember that in most cases, strong drink is a luxury, although to the hard worker of hand or brain stimulants in one form or another become necessities. But think of the stupendous amount expended annually by the ladies of America for bonnets, that are not only ruinously expensive, entirely unnecessary, but grotesquely hideous. Their only excuse for being is that they are things of beauty. They aren't things of beauty. They are only an expense to the American people. The time and energy expended upon them is wasted just as surely as is the time and energy expended upon the production of intoxicating drink. Thus, from an economic point of view, the business of the milliner is just as reprehensible as is that of the distiller. The same might be said of the gum-manufacturer, candy-maker, in fact everyone who serves the world by producing luxuries. It is to luxuries, however, that we owe the progress of the world. What are the luxuries of one age become the necessities of the next; and whatever tends to arouse the energies of mankind cannot be called, from an economic standpoint, an evil. If the liquor business is not wrong in itself, would it not be a wrong to throw all those engaged in this industry out of employment? It is estimated that 20 percent of the people of California are engaged in the production of intoxicating beverages. Why should these men be thrown out of employment since neither from a moral nor an economic standpoint can their business be condemned? There is nothing else for these men to do. Thousands are out of employment in California, and could the Prohibitionist dig up the grape vines, burn the breweries and annihilate the distilleries what would he do with the thousands who at present gain their livelihood by means of these industries? Were not the ranks of the Prohibition party made up of such broad liberal-minded men, one might be tempted to believe that the members of the party, collectively and individually, lose sight of the fact that it is not the liquor business; but its abuse is to be reprobated. And while recognizing the broad liberality of these active workers in the good cause, it might be well to acquaint ourselves with the class of minds that go to make up the brain power of the Prohibition party. Surprising as it may seem, in view of the fact the Moses and the prophets, Christ and the apostles, the early church, and the Protestant church down to within seventy-five years, all sanctioned the moderate use of intoxicating beverages, it is the nineteenth century representatives of the Prince of Peace who demand the utter annihilation of the liquor trade. These good people turn their Sunday schools into prohibition kindergartens; and their pulpits into lecture platforms, that the day may be hastened when the liquor traffic shall be entirely prohibited. And of the 300,000 honest prohibitionists in America, who "vote 'er straight" year after year, with a cheerful resignation that excites admiration, it is safe to say that 250,000 of them belong to the American Evangelical churches. Now these 250,000 representatives of the earthly kingdom do not represent the whole church by any means, any more than the fanatics who burned Jews, witches and Quakers with so much pure enjoyment and cussedness represented the whole church of their time. When we hear our brethren of the Prohibition ranks speaking of burning saloons, etc., one is strongly impressed with the thought that it is only a step from the saloon to the saloon-keeper himself. The fanaticism of these people is the same, and comes from the same class of minds as made possible the honors of the middle ages. Just what Christ would say to this state of affairs were he to appear suddenly among us, is difficult to determine. What he did do when he came some 2,000 years ago was to make it exceedingly unpleasant for certain gold bugs who had usurped comfortable places in the temple. The Evangelists, however, neglect to give us a list of the drinking places that he closed up during his short but active, and highly interesting career. In view of the fact that his comfortably-well-off nine-teenth-century representatives, many of whom, besides being ardent prohibitionists, resemble in many other respects that class of Jewish gentlemen, who "thanked God that they were not like other men," Christ might find three years entirely too short a time in which to do missionary work among his self-styled followers; and the poor saloon-keepers might be passed by entirely unnoticed by the great reformer, even as they were on that memorable first visit. Before fanatics took the helm to guide the ship of state into the harbor of temperance, there was no saloon question. The saloon-keeper was as much respected as any other merchant in the community in which he lived. When discrimination was introduced, the desirable class of liquor merchant found that he could not compete with less scrupulous dealers. He either went out of business, or stooped to the methods of his neighbor. Gradually by a process of natural selection the modern saloon-keeper was evolved. In most cases he is a beautiful specimen. His creators, the restriction advocates, must be proud of him. Gradually the worst element of political parties began to recognize in the licensed saloon a source of almost unlimited power, and inexhaustible revenue. The saloon-keepers, especially those who keep sporting resorts, generally command votes, are supported by politicians, and made bosses. They are high-license men and will even vote the Prohibition ticket if the political situation requires, because they can continue their business anyway, and any official interfering with them will be discharged as incompetent, without any undue ceremony. Many instances of dealers who attempt to carry on the liquor business in a conscientious as well as legitimate way; being ruined by the continually increasing and constantly changing liquor laws could be given. One of my own experiences in which I nearly lost all that I had invested in the business, is a good case in point. The family Wine & Liquor Store which I have been conducting for the last five years in San Jose (this being my first venture in that line) is governed by the same principle as any other well-managed business house in the city. My wares are for sale and patronage is solicited; but I permit no gambling, dice shaking, or treating in my place of business, and under no circumstance is liquor ever given or sold to drunken men or minors. When I started in business the city license was $100, county license $96, and government revenue $25 a year. Shortly after that the Council (the solid 6) to be able to crowd one man out of the liquor business appointed an ordinance that each liquor dealer to continue his business must have the signatures of the majority of the frontage property holders of the block, and furnish $2,000 bonds. Two men, one at that time traveling in Europe, and the other a church member and money lender, had control of the block in which my store is located. The orthodox money lender refused point blank to sign my petition. As a result, I should have been obliged to give up my business and lose everything had not the other gentleman opportunity returned from Europe and signed my petition. Many others were not so fortunate. Some of them had to pay very dearly for their signatures and a great many had to give up their business. Of many instances the havoc that these restrictions caused to saloon-keepers, I will relate one. Mr. Greenman, who at that time was the proprietor of the Club Saloon on Santa Clara street, was totally ruined and driven to suicide by that ordinance. In his block a prominent church man had control, and of course did not sign his petition. Mr. Greenman kept an orderly place and was well liked by the people; but all his efforts and those of his sympathetic neighbors had no effect on this pious, Christian gentleman. He refused to allow his fellow-man to make a living. The result was that after about two years struggling, Mr. Greenman committed suicide. Before the next following city election a higher license movement to bring the city license to $500 a year, was put up by the politicians and agitated by the church people. Most of the candidates pledged alliance to both parties, and afterwards compromised the city license to $200 a year. A little later, another movement was started to raise the county license. After much struggling it was compromised to $20 a year and $1,000 bonds. By the next election a Sunday closing campaign was started to keep the soloons closed from 5 P.M. Saturday till 11 A.M. Monday. All the attention of the voters were concentrated on that point and as a matter of course some candidates pledged loyalty to both parties. The Liquor Dealers Association was sure of 5 Councilmen in their favor; but in the end two candidates who received the liquor dealers' support went back on them. The Sunday law, which was adopted with a compromise, instead of closing the saloons at 5 p.m. Saturday closed them at 10 p.m. Next came the county election with a movement for closing all the saloons in the county on Sunday, and naturally one of the Supervisors who was supported by the Liquor Dealers turned traitor. During the reign of the Sunday Law in San Jose restaurants and private clubs came into existence, which sold the vilest liquors; and saloon keepers with political influence practically continued their business as before. Business in town diminished, even picnics and excursions from San Francisco and surrounding went to other places, while crime, drunkenness and poverty increased. Through the efforts of business men at the last election, the repeal of the Sunday Law was submitted to the people, and in spite of all the agitation of the fanatics and prayers on election day in churches the Sunday Law was repealed by a majority of the people. We are again on the eve of an election and sorehead politicians and fanatics assisted by an unpatriotic press are trying to carry their point by agitating on the Sunday closing and high license issue. Under such circumstances, when the minds of the people are directed to such minor issues, a decent, patriotic municipal government is impossible. We only have to look to large cities like San Francisco, New York, etc., to see that the restriction of the liquor dealers gives the unscrupulous politicians a good weapon to gain their point and to police commissioners and blackmailers princely revenues. Who can blame the liquor dealers when they organize themselves for protection, and vote only for such men as will stand by them. The commonwealth owes to every citizen the privilege of making a living, and when he is discriminated against, he will naturally retaliate. Church people may be assured that nothing pleases those who fatten off of the abuses of the liquor business, so much as high license and prohibition. A few moments devoted to each of these methods of restriction will prove this. High license not only takes the liquor question into politics, but it makes the retailer entirely dependent upon the wholesaler. The first assumption is apparent to anyone acquainted with the methods that are employed each year to drag new saloons into each campaign, for the purpose of either blinding the people to more important issues, or to put the power of blackmail into the hands of unscrupulous politicians and newspapers. The second, making the retailer entirely dependent upon the rich wholesaler, is the most directly disastrous to the cause of true temperance. In a high licensed community much capital is required to start a saloon. Generally a man with capital does not care, under existing conditions, to engage in the retail business. At any rate nine-tenths of the saloons are conducted by comparatively poor men. No matter how poor or irresponsible a man may be, he can always find some wholesaler who is willing to start him in the saloon business. He goes to the wholesaler, who nine times out often is an influential politician, explains matters, has money advanced to pay his license, has his petition and bonds to open a saloon signed through the influence of the whole saler, and last but not least has his stock advanced by agreeing to pay for it out of the profits of the business. Under such circumstances, who can wonder that the saloon man finds his stock made up of poisonous concoctions purchased at most ruinous prices? He does not complain, for he owes all, license, petition and stock to the man whom the law has put in a position to take advantage of his poverty. As a result, the customer suffers. He must pay the license, the ruinous price paid by the saloon man for his stock and the saloon man's profits. The saloon man, on his part, is compelled to use every inducement to sell his liquors, using fair means and foul; for he must support himself and family, his creditor must be paid, and that matter of license satisfied some way. Thus do abuses creep in. The high license does not, nor is it expected to close all the saloons, and if a community is to have liquor at all, what does it matter whether it is supplied from one saloon or from a dozen? High license is not going to remedy the matter. It is cutting at the tail of the monster intemperance, while the source, the head of it all, is ignored. But this phrase of the question will be considered further on. High license, therefore, tends only to exaggerate the abuse of a business which the ravings of fanatics have succeeded in making disreputable; and which for no other reason has passed largely from the hands of men who could be counted upon to work in the cause of true temperance, into the hands of those who do not scruple to do what fanaticism has almost compelled saloon-men to do, run the business for all there is in it, in order that the extraordinary expenses, under which it is carried on, may be met. Wherever prohibition is attempted it is as responsible as high license for the abuse of the liquor trade. Wherever it has been tried it has met with failure, always from the same cause: the impossibility of enforcing laws that are not sanctioned by public opinion. But are we to let intemperance run riot? By no means. The use of common-sense methods will check the evil, and in time practically eradicate it. The great trouble with these earnest, though thoughtless workers for temperance, is that they mistake the effect for the cause. They strike at the saloon on the corner, not the appetites of the men who put it there. If fifty men are patronizing that saloon, and you remove it by prohibition or high license, you but drive the fifty men to some other saloon. You might as well attempt to remove their appetite for meat by closing the butcher-shop, as to remove the appetite for stimulants by closing the saloon. Next, the people of the community should be made to recognize that stimulents are absolutely necessary to many engaged in hard or laborious work. They should see that the wants of these men are properly attended to. If a man spends five hours of the morning in digging a ditch, the chances are that he will feel the need of a glass of grogg at noon. Reformers should see to it that saloons conducted on the same principle as other retail houses, are furnished so that the laborer can get his grogg without being subject to the many temptations that hang about the license saloon. Large, airy rooms should be opened, furnished with the best of liquors, temperance drinks, periodicals, and in fact everything that goes to make up the modern club. The "saloon evil" would then receive a blow harder than the associated temperance societies of the world will ever be able to give it. The present generation being thus provided for, attention should be turned to the next. Someone has said that the best way to educate a man is to begin with his grandfather. In our case, we could begin with the individual as a schoolboy or girl. Education should be compulsory. When the child is too poor to go to the public schools, he should be educated as are the cadets at West Point. Good citizens are of vastly more importance to a country than good soldiers. To the present curriculum should be added lectures on stimulents and narcotics. Were the use of alcohol in the use of these commodities properly understood by the masses, the temperance question would be settled for good and for all. Under the system proposed, it could be settled in two generations. It is a great question, this of intemperance, and one that this generation must settle; but its evils are only exaggerated by the shortsighted methods of bigotry. In view of these facts it behooves citizens to take a common sense view of the liquor question, and to use their influence to take the whole question out of local politics. It should be settled by Congress, and the patriotism of the people of America is appealed to, to see that this is done. No Bar Should be Without 4f§ The Healthiest Bitters in the World BEING COMPOSED OF PERUVIAN, CASCARA, LARCH AND WILD CHERRY BARKS, SARSAPARILLA AND DANDELION ROOTS, BUCHU, CAPSICUM, HONEY, AND THE BEST CALIFORNIA SHERRY WINE. These ingredients are recommended by the highest medical authorities for Malaria, Liver and Kidney Troubles, Dyspepsia, Constipation, Alcoholism, Nervous Prostration, Tobacco Toxemia and general debility. Indigestion & Chronic Constipation, many years standing cured. Dr. M. S. Jaff, Dear Sir: — I unhesitatingly recommend your Intrinsic Tonic as a most effective remedy for long standing cases of indigestion and chronic constipation. After suffering for many years, I was cured sound and well by the use of five bottles. Yours very truly, William G. Griffith, Real Estate Office, 17 N. First St. M.S. Jaff, Dear Sir: — It gives I am great pleasure to inform you that your medicine cured me of a bad case of general debility and nervousness resulting from too much use of tobacco. My condition was so bad that my stomach would not retain any food. After using three bottles of your Intrinsic Tonic I gained 17 pounds and was restored to perfect health. Yours truly, Eugene Evans, Barber, 94 N. First St., San Jose, Cal. Kidney and Liver Complaint Cured. Dr. M. S. Jaffe, San Jose, Cal., Dear Sir: — I wish to add my testimonial to the many that you have in regards to the merits of your medicine. I have been for many years a sufferer from Liver and Kidney disease, have doctored with prominent specialists in San Francisco and San Jose, but instead of being benefitted, I gradually grew worse, until a friend induced me to try your preparation. After using one bottle of your Intrinsic Tonic in connection with your Pain Expeller, I was greatly relieved and now am enjoying the blessings of good health. P. Puivlran, Williams Road, Santa Clara Co. PRICE $1 a Bottle, to the Trade $8 per Dozen. All Druggists. Carroll & Carroll. Special Agents, no. 305 market st. SAN FRANCISCO, CAL. ST. 2»>  •-> 3> > 3>2>I> J> >> e» > V - >3 , » S> > > >— 3Q>» :> > 5" »>>> > > v - t> 3 > y * :» 3 3 JS3 ► s> * J3> > > > :>>> ^ > •"^ ► ^> > 3 > > *> ->-'3 > _>. "> :> ^> >3 >' :> _> 3» > 3 » J> > ; <=> »> 3 J> > - > > >> ^^ - > 2> > \3 j>yy> ^> > ■> ->_3 >> » J> 3 > ^ > >  J* * > > ^> > ^ O 3 > :> : > : ?3 ? j> > ;> >  > > -> Jj -? 33 -k V ■ t ^^H y> > > 53ft ^^^^* 1> - > ) > N »•" 3 ' -^^^5^ &? J2^ ) _^^H ► *>j - ■> i >: ? J8B> » ) ' » > 2X>3> A> > >' V? 3 ^»o: > J*^ ^».>^ > 3S >>>- > , > ^ >-• >> .j > > »  > ^ > >>v> -^-3 ' ;"). ^>»3D > -► i > 5 *^m P' -.3 > >.} J> -*\ — i^^B >J ^> >-J» >» >J> »"5^fc » > >1K» > > Jfi^ ^fe» > > > 5i 3i ■j j^p > ^ L» ^£ 3» } V»r >I3* jl^ ^ ^> '•• > ^^k ->-* >za P.-^ >>" 5S*Z3te5^.v)23^^ j> ^ 9b* - *^BBT>~V>'vv r V^^K ^ 3 v>" ^»»3S» > - :^%^»- > ^._J L^^K^X^ ,.>. } 2 f^^^2> "4 >■ * k sJUK>^ » >~^. -^^ Jfe>5>^ >j — fc"^t^^* ->• ;> * M \ ^-3fe>»» >> > K '^OpP»3> >> > -~£.3K>9g9» L>> g^^ ^^ :^»j> ^ -= ; ^^ Z»^»^k -> ^ > > ^- > > 2B ■»>'^r> ->\ ^ ^ ^> ^D ^> JO J> 3. Z> ^: J> >^ 3^ >> » > > > _>3 >J> M ■L3 ),-, >: ^fc > > >; > > j>j> ^ j>j> - > > j> >' j> j* y> > ■■•' : ■ ^?->^^-»'^3 ffifl "• ^ : ^ • ■ IrJI NHI ^ p^^i M^wE^G? 3^»^s B£/a|Big ■''■-■" wBiHSHwaiaffi ■BHR^Sh 1. -ft Hi. 