Produced by Beth L. Constantine, David Moynihan, Charles Franks
and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team.
STUDY AND STIMULANTS;
OR,
THE USE OF INTOXICANTS AND NARCOTICS IN RELATION TO INTELLECTUAL LIFE,
AS ILLUSTRATED BY PERSONAL COMMUNICATIONS ON THE SUBJECT,
FROM MEN OF LETTERS AND OF SCIENCE.
EDITED BY A. ARTHUR READE.
INTRODUCTION.
The real influence of the intoxicants and narcotics in common use has
been a matter of fierce and prolonged controversy. The most opposite
opinions have been set forth with ability and earnestness; but the
weight they would otherwise carry is lessened by their mutually
contradictor-y character. Notwithstanding the great influence of the
physician's authority, people are perplexed by the blessings and
bannings bestowed upon tobacco and the various forms of alcohol.
What is the real influence of stimulants and narcotics upon the brain?
Do they give increased strength, greater lucidity of mind and more
continuous power? Do they weaken and cloud the intellect, and lessen
that capacity for enduring a prolonged strain of mental exertion which
is one of the first requisites of the intellectual life? Would a man
who is about to enter upon the consideration of problems, the correct
solution of which will demand all the strength and agility of his
mind, be helped or hindered by their use? These are questions which
are asked every day, and especially by the young, who seek in vain for
an adequate reply. The student grappling with the early difficulties
of science and literature, wishes to know whether he will be wiser to
use or to abstain from stimulants.
The theoretical aspect of the question has perhaps been sufficiently
discussed; but there still remains the practical inquiry,--"What has
been the experience of those engaged in intellectual work?" Have men
of science--the inventors, the statesmen, the essayists, and novelists
of our own day--found advantage or the reverse in the use of alcohol
and tobacco?
The problem has for years exercised my thoughts, and with the hope of
arriving at _data_ which would be trustworthy and decisive, I
entered upon an independent inquiry among the representatives of
literature, science, and art, in Europe and America. The replies were
not only numerous, but in most cases covered wider ground than that
originally contemplated. Many of the writers give details of their
habits of work, and thus, in addition to the value of the testimony on
this special topic, the letters throw great light upon the methods of
the intellectual life.
To each writer, and especially to Dr. Alex. Bain, Mr. R. E.
Francillon, Mark Twain, Mr. E. O'Donovan, Mr. J E. Boehm, Professor
Dowden, the Rev. Dr. Martineau, Count Gubernatis, the Abbe Moigno, and
Professor Magnus, who have shown hearty interest in the enquiry, I
tender my best thanks for contributing to the solution of the
important problem of the value of stimulants; also to Mr. W. E. A.
Axon for suggestive and much appreciated help. I should, however, be
glad of further testimonies for use in a second edition.
_January_, 1883.
CONTENTS.
I. Introduction
II. LETTERS FROM:
Abbot, The Rev. Dr.
Allibone, Mr. S. Astin
Argyll, The Duke of, F. R. S.
Arnold, Mr. Matthew
Ayrton, Professor
Bain, Dr. Alexander
Ball, Professor Robert S., LL. D., F. R. S.
Bancroft, Mr. Hubert Howe
Baxendell, Mr. Joseph, F. R. A. S.
Beard, Dr. G. M.
Bert, Professor Paul
Blackie, Professor John Stuart
Blanc, M. Louis
Boehm, Mr. J. E., R. A.
Bredencamp, Dr.
Brown, Mr. Ford Madox, R. A.
Buchanan, Mr. Robert
Buddenseig, Dr.
Burnaby, Captain Fred
Butler, Lieut. Col. W. F.
Burnton, Dr. Lauder, F. R. S.
Camp, Madame du
Carpenter, Dr. W. B., C. B., LL. D., F. R. S.
Chambers, Mr. William, LL. D
Childs, Mr. George W.
Claretie, M. Jules
Clarke, Mr. Hyde, F. S. S.
Collins, Mr. Wilkie
Conway, Mr. Moncure D., M. A.
Dallenger, Rev. W. H., F. R. S
Darwin, Professor
Dawkins, W. Boyd, M. A., F. R. S., F. G. S.
D'Orsey, The Rev. Alex. J. D., B. D.
O'Donovon, Mr. Edmund
Dowden, Professor, LL. D.
Edison, Professor
Ellis, Mr. Alex. J., F. R. S., F. S. A.
Everett, Professor
Fairbairn, Professor R. M.
Francillon, Mr. R. E.
Freeman, Mr. Edward A., D. C. L., LL. D.
Furnivall, Mr. F. J., M. A.
Gardiner, Mr. Samuel R., Hon. LL. D.
Gladstone, Rt. Hon. W. E., M. P.
Greville, Mdlle. II
Gubernatis, Count
Guenin, M. L. P.
Guy, Dr. William
Haeckel, Professor Ernst
Hamerton, Mr. Philip Gilbert
Hardy, Mr. Thomas
Harrison, Mr. Frederic
Henty, Mr. G. A.
Holmes, Mr. Oliver Wendell
Holyoake, Mr. George Jacob
Hooker, Sir J. D., F. R. S.
Howells, Mr. W. D.
Joule, Dr. J. P.
Lansdell, The Rev. Henry
Leathes, Rev. Stanley, D. D.
Lecky, W. E. H.
Lees, Dr. F. R.
Levi, Mr. Leone, F. S. A.
Lubbock, Sir John, Bart. M. P.
Magnus, Professor
Maitland, Mr. Edward, B. A.
Martin, Sir Theodore, K. C. B.
Martineau, The Rev. James, D. D.
Maudsley, Dr. Henry
May, Sir Thomas Erskine, K. C. B., D. C. L.
Mayor, Rev. John E. B., M. A.
Moigno, The Abbe
Morrison, Rev. J., D. D.
Mongredien, Mr. Augustus
Murray, Dr. J. A. H.
Murray, Mr. D. Christie.
Newman, Professor
Pattison, The Rev. Mark, B. D.
Payn, Mr. James
Pitman, Mr. Eizak
Plaute, M. Gaston
Plummer, The Rev. A.
Pocknell, Mr. Edward
Rawlinson, Professor George
Reade, Mr. Charles
Reed, Mr. Thomas Allen
Rodenberg, Dr. Julius
Russell, Dr. W. H.
Ruskin, Mr. John
Sen, Keshub Chunder
Simon, M. Jules
Skeat, Professor
St. Hilaire, M. Barthelemy
Spottiswoode, Mr. W., D. C. L., LL. D.
Siemens, Dr. C. W., D. C. L., F. R. S.
Smith, Mr. G. Barnett
Taine, M.
Trollope, Mr. Anthony
Thomson, Sir William, M. A., LL. D., D. C. L., F. R. S.
Trantmann, Professor
Tyndall, Professor, LL. D., F. R. S.
Tourgueneff, Mr. Ivan
Twain, Mark
Walford, Mr. Cornelius, F. S. S., F. I. A.
Watts, Mr. G. F., R. A.
Wilson, Professor Andrew, Ph. D., F. R. S. E.
Winser, Mr. Justin
Wurtz, M.
III. APPENDIX
TESTIMONIES OF:
Bennett, Dr. Risdon
Brooke, The Rev. Stopford A., M. A.
Bryant, William C.
Chambers, Dr. King
Fraser, Professor Thomas R.
Herkomer, Hubert, A. R. A.
Higginson, Colonel Thomas Wentworth
Howitt, William
Kingsley, The Rev. Charles
Martineau, Harriet
Miller, Professor
Proctor, Mr. R. A., F. R. S.
Richardson, Dr. B. W., F. R. S.
Sala, Mr. George Augustus
Temple, Bishop
Thompson, Sir Henry, F. R. C. S.
Williams, Mr. W. Mattieu, F. R. A. S., F. C. S.
Yeo, Dr. Bumey, M. D.
IV. CONCLUSION
STUDY AND STIMULANTS
THE REV. DR. ABBOT,
EDITOR OF THE "CHRISTIAN UNION," NEW YORK.
I have no experience whatever respecting tobacco: my general opinion
is adverse to its use by a healthy man; but that opinion is not
founded on any personal experience, nor on any scientific knowledge,
as to give it any value for others. My opinion respecting alcohol is
that it is a valuable and necessary ingredient in forming and
preserving some articles of diet--yeast bread, for example, which can
only be produced by fermentation--and that its value in the lighter
wines, those in which it is found in, a ratio of from 5 to 10 per
cent., is of the same character. It preserves for use other elements
in the juice of the grape. As a stimulant, alcohol is, in my opinion,
at once a deadly poison and a valuable medicine, to be ranked with
belladonna, arsenic, prussic acid, and other toxical agents, which can
never be safely dispensed with by the medical faculty, nor safely used
by laymen as a stimulant, except under medical advice. As to my
experience, it is very limited; and, in my judgment, it is quite
unsafe in this matter to make one man's experience another man's
guide: too much depends upon temperamental and constitutional
peculiarities, and upon special conditions of climate and the like.
1. I have no experience respecting distilled spirits; I regard them as
highly dangerous, and have never used them except under medical
advice, and then only in rare and serious cases of illness. 2. Beers
and the lighter wines, if taken before mental work, always--in my
experience--impair the working powers. They do not facilitate, but
impede brain action. 3. After an exceptionally hard day's work, when
the nervous power is exhausted, and the stomach is not able to digest
and assimilate the food which the system needs, a glass of light wine,
taken with the dinner, is a better aid to digestion than any other
medicine that I know. To serve this purpose, its use--in my opinion--
should be exceptional, not habitual: it is a medicine, not a beverage.
4. After nervous excitement in the evening, especially public
speaking, a glass of light beer serves a useful purpose as a sedative,
and ensures at times a good sleep, when without it the night would be
one of imperfect sleep.
I must repeat that my experience is very limited; that in my judgment
the cases which justify a man in so overtaxing his system that he
requires a medicine to enable him to digest his dinner or enjoy his
sleep must be rare; and that my own use of either wine or beer is very
exceptional. Though I am not in strictness of speech a total
abstinence man, I am ordinarily a water drinker.
LYMAN ABBOT.
March 11, 1882.
MR. S. AUSTIN ALLIBONE, NEW YORK.
I have no doubt that the use of alcohol as a rule is very injurious to
all persons--authors included. In about 17 years (1853-1870), in which
I was engaged on the "Dictionary of English Literature and Authors," I
never took it but for medicine, and very seldom. Moderate smoking
after meals I think useful to those who use their brains much; and
this seems to have been the opinion of the majority of the physicians
who took part in the controversy in the _Lancet_ about ten or
twelve years since. An energetic non-smoker is in haste to rush to his
work soon after dinner. A smoker is willing to rest (it should be for
an hour), because he can enjoy his cigar, and his conscience is
satisfied, which is a great thing for digestion; the brain is soothed
also.
S. AUSTIN ALLIBONE.
March 27, 1882.
THE DUKE OF ARGYLL, F. R. S.
In answer to your question, I can only say that during by far the
greatest part of my life I never took alcohol in any form; and that
only in recent years I have taken a small fixed quantity under medical
advice, as a preventive of gout. Tobacco I have never touched.
ARGYLL.
October 2, 1882.
MR. MATTHEW ARNOLD.
In reply to your enquiry, I have to inform you that I have never
smoked, and have always drunk wine, chiefly claret. As to the use of
wine, I can only speak for myself. Of course, there is the danger of
excess; but a healthy nature and the power of self-control being
presupposed, one can hardly do better, I should think, than "follow
nature" as to what one drinks, and its times and quantity. As a
general rule, I drink water in the middle of the day; and a glass or
two of sherry, and some light claret, mixed with water, at a late
dinner; and this seems to suit me very well. I have given up beer in
the middle of the day, not because I experienced that it did not suit
me, but because the doctor assured me that it was bad for rheumatism,
from which I sometimes suffer. I suppose most young people could do as
much without wine as with it. Real brain-work of itself, I think,
upsets the worker, and makes him bilious; wine will not cure this, nor
will abstaining from wine prevent it. But, in general, wine used in
moderation seems to add to the _agreeableness_ of life--for
adults, at any rate; and whatever adds to the agreeableness of life
adds to its resources and powers.
MATTHEW ARNOLD.
November 4, 1882.
PROFESSOR AYRTON
Has no very definite opinions as to the effects of tobacco and alcohol
upon the mind and health, but as he is not in the habit of either
taking alcohol or of smoking, he cannot regard those habits as
essential to mental exertion.
April 21, 1882.
DR. ALEXANDER BAIN,
LORD RECTOR OF ABERDEEN UNIVERSITY.
I am interested in the fact that anyone is engaged in a thorough
investigation of the action of stimulants. Although the subject falls
under my own studies in some degree, I am a very indifferent testimony
as far as concerns personal experience. On the action of tobacco, I am
disqualified to speak, from never having used it. As to the other
stimulants--alcohol and the tea group--I find abstinence essential to
intellectual effort. They induce a false excitement, not compatible
with severe application to problems of difficulty. They come in well
enough at the end of the day as soothing, or cheering, and also as
diverting the thoughts into other channels. In my early intercourse
with my friend; Dr. Carpenter, when he was a strict teetotaler, he
used to discredit the effect of alcohol in soothing the excitement of
prolonged intellectual work. I have always considered, however, that
there is something in it. Excess of tea I have good reason to
deprecate; I take it only once a day. The difficulty that presses upon
me on the whole subject is this:--In organic influences, you are not
at liberty to lay down the law of concomitant variations without
exception, or to affirm that what is bad in large quantities, is
simply less bad when the quantity is small. There may be proportions
not only innocuous, but beneficial; reasoning from the analogy of the
action of many drugs which present the greatest opposition of effect
in different quantities. I mean this--not with reference to the
inutility for intellectual stimulation, in which I have a pretty clear
opinion as regards myself--but as to the harmlessness in the long run,
of the employment of stimulants for solace and pleasure when kept to
what we call moderation. A friend of mine heard Thackeray say that he
got some of his best thoughts when driving home from dining out, with
his skin full of wine. That a man might get chance suggestions by the
nervous excitement, I have no doubt; I speak of the serious work of
composition. John Stuart Mill never used tobacco; I believe he had
always a moderate quantity of wine to dinner. He frequently made the
remark that he believed the giving up of wine would be apt to be
followed by taking more food than was necessary, merely for the sake
of stimulation. Assuming the use of stimulants after work to aid the
subsidence of the brain, I can quite conceive that tobacco may operate
in this way, as often averred; but I should have supposed that any
single stimulant would be enough: as tobacco for those abstaining
entirely from alcohol, and using little tea or coffee.
ALEXANDER BAIN.
March 6, 1882.
PROFESSOR ROBERT S. BALL, LL. D., F. R. S.,
ANDREWS PROFESSOR OF ASTRONOMY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF DUBLIN, AND ROYAL
ASTRONOMER OF IRELAND.
I fear my experience can be of little use to you. I have never smoked
except once--when at school; I then got sick, and have never desired
to smoke since. I have not paid particular attention to the subject,
but I have never seen anything to make me believe that tobacco was of
real use to intellectual workers. I have known of people being injured
by smoking too much, but I never heard of anyone suffering from not
smoking at all.
ROBERT S. BALL.
February 13, 1882.
MR. HUBERT HOWE BANCROFT,
SAN FRANCISCO.
In my opinion, some constitutions are benefited by a moderate use of
tobacco and alcohol; others are not. But to touch these things is
dangerous.
H. H. BANCROFT.
May 6, 1882.
MR. JOSEPH BAXENDELL, F. R. A. S.
I fear that my experience of the results of the use of stimulants will
not aid you much in your enquiry. Although I am not a professed
teetotaler or anti-smoker, practically I may say I am one: and when I
am engaged in literary work, scientific investigations, or long and
complicated calculations, I never think of taking any stimulant to aid
or refresh me, and I doubt whether it would be of any use to do so.
JOSEPH BAXENDELL.
February 20, 1882.
DR. G. M. BEARD,
FELLOW OF THE NEW YORK ACADEMY OF MEDICINE.
In reply to your enquiries, I may say--first: I do not find that
alcohol is so good a stimulant to thought as coffee, tea, opium, or
tobacco. On myself alcohol has rather a benumbing and stupefying
effect, whatever may be the dose employed; whereas, tobacco and opium,
in moderate doses, tea, and especially coffee, as well as cocoa, have
an effect precisely the reverse.
Secondly: there are many persons on whom alcohol in large or small
doses has a stimulating effect on thought: they can speak and think
better under its influence. The late Daniel Webster was accustomed to
stimulate himself for his great speeches by the use of alcohol.
Thirdly: these stimulants and narcotics, according to the temperament
of the person on whom they are used, have effects precisely opposite,
either sedative or stimulating; while coffee makes some people sleepy,
the majority of persons are made wakeful by it. Some are made very
nervous by tobacco in the form of smoking, while on others it acts as
a sedative, and induces sleep. General Grant once told me 'that, if
disturbed during the night, or worried about anything so that he could
not sleep, he could induce sleep by getting up and smoking a short
time--a few whiffs, as I understood him, being sufficient.
If I were to judge by my own experience alone--which it is not fair to
do--I should say that coffee is the best stimulant for mental work;
next to that tobacco and quinine; but as I grow older, I observe that
alcohol in reasonable doses is beginning to have a stimulating effect.
GEORGE M. BEARD.
March 13, 1882.
PROFESSOR PAUL BERT.
My views on tobacco and alcohol, and their action on the health, may
be summed up in the following four propositions:--
1.--Whole populations have attained to a high degree of civilization
and prosperity without having known either tobacco or alcohol,
therefore, these substances are neither necessary nor even useful to
individuals as well as races.
2.--Very considerable quantities of these drugs, taken at a single
dose, may cause death; smaller quantities stupefy, or kill more
slowly. They are, therefore, poisons against which we must be on our
guard.
3.--On the other hand, there are innumerable persons who drink
alcoholic beverages, and smoke tobacco, without any detriment to their
reason or their health. There is, therefore, no reason to forbid the
use of these substances, while suitably regulating the quantity to be
taken.
4.--The use of alcoholic liquors and of tobacco in feeble doses,
affords to many persons very great satisfaction, and is altogether
harmless and inoffensive.
We ought, therefore, to attach no stigma to their consumption, after
having pointed out the danger of their abuse. In short, it is with
alcohol and tobacco as with all the pleasures of this life--a question
of degree.
As for myself, I never smoke, because I am not fond of tobacco: I very
seldom drink alcoholic liquors, but I take wine to all my meals
because I like it.
PAUL BERT.
March 1, 1882.
PROFESSOR JOHN STUART BLACKIE.
My idea is, that work done under the influence of any kind of
stimulants is unhealthy work, and tends to no good. I never use any
kind of stimulant for intellectual work--only a glass of wine during
dinner to sharpen the appetite. As to smoking generally, it is a vile
and odious practice; but I do not know that, unless carried to excess,
it is in any way unhealthy. Instead of stimulants, literary men should
seek for aid in a pleasant variety of occupation, in intervals of
perfect rest, in fresh air and exercise, and a cultivation of
systematic moderation in all emotions and passions.
J. S. BLACKIE.
February 9, 1882.
M. LOUIS BLANC.
In answer to your letter, I beg to tell you that I do not know by
experience what may be the effects of tobacco and alcohol upon the
mind and health, not having been in the habit of taking tobacco and
drinking alcohol.
LOUIS BLANC.
March 9, 1882.
MR. J. E. BOEHM, R. A.
It will give me great pleasure if I can in any way contribute to your
so very interesting researches, and I shall be glad to know whether
you have published anything on the subject you have questioned me on.
I find vigorous exercise the first and most important stimulant to
hard work. I get up in summer at six, in winter at seven, take an hour
and a half's hard ride, afterwards a warm bath, a cold douche, and
then breakfast. I work from ten to seven generally; but twice or
thrice a week I have an additional exercise--an hour's fencing before
dinner, which I take at 8 p.m. I take light claret or hock to my
dinner, but never touch any wine or spirits at any other times, and
eat meat only once in twenty-four hours. I find a small cup of coffee
after luncheon very exhilarating. I smoke when hard at work--chiefly
cigarettes. After a long sitting (as I do not smoke while working
_from nature_), a cigarette is a soother for which I get a
perfect craving. In the evening, or when I am in the country doing
nothing, I scarcely smoke at all, and do not feel the want of it
there; nor do I then take at evening dinner more than one or two
glasses of wine, and I have observed that the same quantity which
would make me feel giddy in the country when in full health and
vigour, would not have the slightest effect on me when taken after a
hard day's work. I also observed that I can work longer without
fatigue when I have had my ride, than when for any reason I have to
give it up. I have carried this mode of life on for nearly twenty
years, and am well and feel young, though forty-eight. I never see any
one from ten to three o'clock; after that I still work, but must often
suffer interruption. I found that temperament and constitution are
rarely, if ever, a legitimate excuse for departure from abstinence and
sober habits. I have the conviction that in order to have the eye and
the brain clear, you ought to make your skin act vigorously at least
once in twenty-four hours.
J. E. BOEHM.
February 20, 1882.
DR. BREDENCAMP, ERLANGEN.
In reply to your letter, I am accustomed to smoke. If I do not smoke,
I cannot do my work properly; and it is quite impossible to do any
work in the morning without smoking. Strong drink I do not need at
all, but I drink two glasses of Bavarian beer, which contains very
little alcohol.
E. BREDENCAMP.
April 18, 1882.
MR. FORD MADOX BROWN, R. A.
I have smoked for upwards of thirty years, and have given up smoking
for the last seven years. Almost all my life I have taken alcoholic
liquors in moderation, but have also been a total abstainer for a
short period. My experience is that neither course with either
ingredient has anything to do with mental work as capacity for it;
unless, indeed, we are to except the incapacity produced by excessive
drinking, of which, however, I have no personal experience.
F. M. BROWN.
Feb. 28, 1882.
MR. ROBERT BUCHANAN.
I am myself no authority on the subject concerning which you write. I
drink myself, but not during the hours of work; and I smoke-pretty
habitually. My own experience and belief is, that both alcohol and
tobacco, like most blessings, can be turned into curses by habitual
self-indulgence. Physiologically speaking, I believe them both to be
invaluable to humankind. The cases of dire disease generated by total
abstinence from liquor are even more terrible than those caused by
excess. With regard to tobacco, I have a notion that it is only
dangerous where the vital organism, and particularly the nervous
system, is badly nourished.
ROBERT BUCHANAN.
March 7, 1882.
DR. BUDDENSEIG,
DRESDEN.
I have no decided opinion whatever as to the question you ask. I can
only say that I am a very small smoker, taking one or two cigars
daily, and I drink Rhine wine, but not daily, as most scholars or
those working with their brains generally do. There can be, I should
think, no question that immoderate use of alcohol produces most
destructive results.
E. BUDDENSEIG.
Feb. 20, 1882.
CAPTAIN FRED BURNABY.
In my humble opinion, every man must find out for himself whether
stimulants are a help to his intellectual efforts. It is impossible to
lay down a law. What would, perhaps, enable one man to write
brilliantly would make another man write nonsense. I myself, although
not an abstainer, should think it a great mistake to seek inspiration
in either tobacco or alcohol.
F. BURNABY.
March 2, 1882.
LIEUT.-COL. W. F. BUTLER.
In reply to your communication, asking for a statement of my
experience as to the effects of tobacco and alcohol upon the mind and
health, I beg to inform you that as I have not been in the habit of
using the first-named article at any period of my life, I am unable to
speak of its effects, mental or otherwise. With regard to alcohol, I
have found that although the brain may receive a temporary accession
to its production of thought, through the use of wine, etc., such
increased action is always followed by a decided weakening of the
thinking power, and that on the whole a far greater amount of
_even_ mental work is to be obtained without the use of alcohol
than with it.
W. F. BUTLER.
Feb. 18, 1882.
DR. LAUDER BURNTON, F. R. S.
I am unable to give you personal experience as to the use of tobacco,
inasmuch as I do not use it in any form. From observation of others it
appears to me that, when not used to excess, it is serviceable both as
a stimulant during work, and as a sedative after work is over.
LAUDER BURNTON.
Feb. 9, 1882.
MAXIME DU CAMP.
I have never been able to make any experiences on the influence of
alcohol upon the mind. I never drink it, and have never been tipsy. I
smoke very much, but only the pipe and cigarette. I take two meals
every day--one at eleven, consisting of a mutton chop, vegetables, and
a cup of tea. I make a hearty dinner at seven, and drink a bottle of
Bordeaux wine. I never work in the evening; and go to bed at half-past
ten. I think the use of tobacco very useless and rather stupid. As to
alcohol, I consider it very hurtful for the liver, and highly
injurious to the mind. The life of mental workers should be well
regulated and temperate in all respects. Bodily exercises, such as
riding, walking and hunting, are very necessary for the relaxation of
the mind, and must be taken occasionally. In my opinion, all
intellectual productions are due to a special disposition of the
cerebro-spinal system, upon which tobacco and alcohol can have no
salutary action. I fear that my answer will be of little help to you;
for in these matters I esteem theory nothing. There are, as the
Germans say, _idiosyncrasies_.
MAXIME DU CAMP.
Feb. 17, 1882.
DR. W. B. CARPENTER, C. B., LL. D., F. R. S.
In reply to your enquiry, I have to inform you that I have never felt
the need of alcoholic stimulants as a help in intellectual efforts; on
the contrary, I have found them decidedly injurious in that respect,
except when used with the strictest moderation. For about eleven years
of the hardest-working period of my life, that in which I produced my
large treatises on Physiology, edited the Medical Quarterly Review,
and did a great deal of other literary work, besides lecturing, I was
practically a total abstainer, though I never took any pledge. I
undoubtedly injured myself by over-work during that period, as I have
more than once done since under the pressure of official duty; but the
injury has shown itself in the failure of appetite and digestive
power. After many trials, I have come to the practical conclusion that
I get on best, while in London, by taking with my dinner a couple of
glasses of very light Claret, and simply as an aid in the digestion of
the food which is required to keep up my mental and bodily power. But
when "on holiday" in Scotland, or elsewhere, I do not find the need of
this. I have never smoked tobacco, or used it in any form. I need
scarcely say that I have never used any other "nervine stimulants."
You are at perfect liberty to make use of this communication.
WM. B. CARPENTER.
Feb. 17, 1882.
MR. WILLIAM CHAMBERS, LL. D.
In reply to your note, I have only time to say that I never used
tobacco in any form all my life, and I can say the same thing
regarding my brother, Robert.
WILLIAM CHAMBERS.
February 10, 1882.
MR. GEORGE W. CHILDS,
PHILADELPHIA.
I fear I shall be unable to add to your fund of information. Never
having used spirituous or vinous stimulants, or tobacco in any form, I
have no personal "experience" of the way they affect the mental
faculties of those who use them.
G. W. CHILDS.
Sept. 30, 1882.
M. JULES CLARETIE,
PARIS.
I should have been glad to reply to your question from my personal
experience, but I do not smoke, and have never in all my life drunk as
much as a single glass of alcohol. This plainly shows that I require
no "fillip" or stimulant when at work. Tobacco and alcohol may cause
over-excitement of the brain, as does coffee, which I am very fond of;
but, in my opinion, that alone is thorough good work which is
performed without artificial stimulant, and in full possession of
one's health and faculties. The reason we have so many sickly
productions in our literature arises probably from the fact that our
writers, perhaps, add a little alcohol to their ink, and view life
through the fumes of nicotine.
M. JULES CLARETIE.
Feb. 26, 1882.
MR. HYDE CLARKE, F. S. S.
As I am not an adherent of the teetotal abstinence movement, I beg
that everything I write may be accepted with this reservation. I have
never seen that any great thinker has found any help or benefit from
the use of stimulants-either alcohol or tobacco. My observations and
experiences are unfavourable to both classes of stimulants. In my own
case, I gave up smoking before my scientific work began. Alcoholic
drinks I used moderately, but I was a water drinker chiefly. Of late
years, from illness, I have given up alcoholic drinks; but were I in
full health, I should use them moderately. In the course of a public
life of about forty years, I have seen the ill-effects of drinking
upon many journalists and others; but it appears to me that smoking
produces still greater evil. A man knows when he is drunk, but he does
not know when he has smoked too much, until the effects of
accumulation have made themselves permanent. To smoking are to be
traced many affections of the eyes, and of the ears, besides other
ailments. I have heard much said in favour of smoking and drinking,
but never saw any favourable result. The communication of the evil
results of these stimulants to offspring appears to me to constitute a
further serious objection to them, I approve fully of your object, but
as I do not go to the length of total abstinence advocates, I am
desirous not to be misunderstood. Several years of my life were spent
in the East, and my experience there only confirms me the more. I have
known many drunkards among literary men, and the stimulants they took
never helped their work; and it was only because they were men of
exceptionally strong brain that their excesses did not incapacitate
them. There are many excesses of this kind that are equally
misunderstood by those who indulge in them, and by temperance writers.
There are, in fact, many men of enormous power, who can smoke and
drink all day long. They constitute no standard: so far as I have
seen, the consequences show themselves only in the offspring, though
in this case it must be taken into account, that the children are
sometimes born before a man's health has been seriously injured. A man
of exceptional strength misleads and encourages others to indulge.
HYDE CLARKE.
October 14, 1882.
MR. WILKIE COLLINS.
When I am ill (I am suffering from gout at this very moment) tobacco
is the best friend that my irritable nerves possess. When I am well,
but exhausted for the time by a hard day's work, tobacco nerves and
composes me. There is my evidence in two words. When a man allows
himself to become a glutton in the matter of smoking tobacco, he
suffers for it; and if he becomes a glutton in the matter of eating
meat, he just as certainly suffers in another way. When I read learned
attacks on the practice of smoking, I feel indebted to the writer--he
adds largely to the relish of my cigar.
WILKIE COLONS.
February 10, 1882.
MR. MONCURE D. CONWAY, M. A.
My experience of stimulants has been insufficient to enable me to
give any important opinion about them. As to tobacco, my strong hope
is that my own sons will never use it; but if they should develop
peculiar and excitable nerves, or become very emotional, or have much
trouble, it is so likely that they might take to some worse habit that
I would prefer they should smoke.
M. D. CONWAY.
February 22, 1882.
REV. W. H. DALLINGER, F. R. S.
I am not a pledged abstainer: I have used both tobacco and alcohol in
various forms. Neither is at all necessary to my vigour of either body
or mind. My use of tobacco has been but slight. I have never Used
alcohol for years. I could never think deeply after the use of
tobacco; I have felt a quickening of thought at times after a slight
use of good wine; but I know, from physiological evidence, what
practice has certainly proved, that no permanent benefit to either
body or mind must be sought from its use. I have employed it with
great benefit at times--that is, where it was better to afford the
exhaustion following a mere stimulant, than to submit to an exhaustion
which the stimulant could for the moment counteract. This is the only
advantage, save to the palate, that I have known to be derived
personally from the use of alcohol.
W. H. DALLINGER.
February 11, 1882.
PROFESSOR DARWIN.
I drink a glass of wine daily, and believe I should be better without
any, though all doctors urge me to drink wine, as I suffer much from
giddiness. I have taken snuff all my life, and regret that I ever
acquired the habit, which I have often tried to leave off, and have
succeeded for a time. I feel sure that it is a great stimulus and aid
in my work. I also daily smoke two little paper cigarettes of Turkish
tobacco. This is not a stimulus, but rests me after I have been
compelled to talk, with tired memory, more than anything else. I am 73
years old.
CH. DARWIN.
February 9, 1882.
W. BOYD DAWKINS, M. A., F. R. S., F. G. S.
PROFESSOR OF GEOLOGY, OWENS COLLEGE, MANCHESTER.
I have received your note asking about the effect of alcohol on my
health and work. I cannot say that they influence either; I find,
however, that I cannot drink beer when I am using my brain, and,
therefore, do not take it when I have anything of importance to think
about. I look upon tobacco and alcohol as merely luxuries, and there
are no luxuries more dangerous if you take too much of them. I find
quinine the best stimulant to thought.
W. BOYD DAWKINS.
February 16, 1882.
The Rev. ALEX. J. D. D'ORSEY, B. D.,
LECTURER ON PUBLIC READING AND SPEAKING AT KING'S COLLEGE, LONDON.
For my own part, I am decidedly averse to the use of tobacco and
stimulants. I am myself a total abstainer (not pledged), and I have
never smoked in my life. I always do my utmost to dissuade young and
old alike to abstain from even the moderate use of tobacco and
stimulants, as in the course of a long and laborious life, speaking
much and preaching without notes, I have always felt able to grapple
with my subject, with pleasure to myself and with profit, I trust, to
my hearers.
A. J. D. D'ORSEY.
March 17, 1882.
MR. EDMUND O'DONOVAN,
SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT OF THE "DAILY NEWS."
As far as my experience goes, the use of stimulants enables one at
moments of severe bodily exhaustion to make mental efforts of which,
but for them, he would be absolutely incapable. For instance, after a
long day's ride in the burning sun across the dry stony wastes of
Northern Persia, I have arrived in some wretched, mud-built town, and
laid down upon my carpet in the corner of some miserable hovel,
utterly worn out by bodily fatigue, mental anxiety, and the worry
inseparable from constant association with Eastern servants. It would
be necessary to write a long letter to the newspapers before retiring
to rest. A judicious use of stimulants has, under such circumstances,
not only given me sufficient energy to unpack my writing materials,
lie on my face, and propped on both elbows, write for hours by the
light of a smoky lamp; but also produced the flow of ideas that
previously refused to come out of their mental hiding places, or which
presented themselves in a flat and uninteresting form. I consider,
then, the use of alcoholic and other stimulation to be conducive to
literary labours under circumstances of physical and mental
exhaustion; and very often the latter is the normal condition of
writers, especially those employed on the press. Perhaps, too, in
examining into the nature of some metaphysical and psychological
questions the use of alcohol, or some similar stimulant, aids the
appreciation of _nuances_ of thought which might otherwise escape
the cooler and less excited brain. On the other hand, while travelling
in the East during the past few years, and when, as a rule,
circumstances precluded the possibility of obtaining stimulants, I
found that a robust state of health consequent on an out-door life,
made the consumption of alcohol in any shape quite unnecessary. In
brief, then, my opinion is, that at a given moment of mental
depression or exhaustion, the use of stimulants will restore the mind
to a condition of activity and power fully equalling, and in some
particular ways, surpassing its normal state. Subsequently to the
dying out of the stimulation the brain is left in a still more
collapsed situation than before, in other words, must pay the penalty,
in the form of an adverse reaction, of having overdrawn its powers,
for having, as it were, anticipated its work.
E. O'DONOVAN. Feb. 17, 1882.
PROFESSOR DOWDEN, LL. D.
I distinguish direct and immediate effect of alcohol on the brain from
its indirect effect through the general health of the body. I can only
speak for myself. I have no doubt that the direct effect of alcohol on
me is intellectually injurious. This, however, is true in a certain
degree, of everything I eat and drink (except tea). After the smallest
meal I am for a while less active mentally. A single glass even of
claret I believe injures my power of thinking; but accepting the
necessity of regular meals, I do not find that a sparing allowance of
light wine adds to the subsequent dulness of mind, and I am disposed
to think it is of some slight use physically. From one to two and a
half _small_ wine glasses of claret or burgundy is the limit of
what I can take--and that only at dinner--without conscious harm. One
glass of sherry or port I find every way injurious. Whisky and brandy
are to me simply poisons, destroying my power of enjoyment and of
thought. Ale I can only drink when very much in the open air. As to
tobacco, I have never smoked much, but I can either not smoke, as at
present, or go to the limit of two small cigarettes in twenty-four
hours. Any good effects of tobacco become with me uncertain in
proportion to the frequency of smoking. The good effects are those
commonly ascribed to it: it seems to soothe away small worries, and to
restore little irritating incidents to their true proportions. On a
few occasions I have thought it gave me a mental fillip, and enabled
me to start with work I had been pausing over; and it nearly always
has the power to produce a pleasant, and perhaps wholesome,
retardation of thought--a half unthinking reverie, if one adapts
surrounding circumstances to encourage this mood. The only sure brain
stimulants with me are plenty of fresh air and tea; but each of these
in large quantity produces a kind of intoxication: the intoxication of
a great amount of air causing wakefulness, with a delightful confusion
of spirits, without the capacity of steady thought; tea intoxication
unsettles and enfeebles my will; but then a great dose of tea often
does get good work out of me (though I may pay for it afterwards),
while alcohol renders all mental work impossible. I have been
accustomed to make the effects of tea and wine a mode of separating
two types of constitution. I have an artist friend whose brain is
livelier after a bottle of Carlowitz, which would stifle my mind, and
to him my strong cup of tea would be poison. We are both, I think, of
nervous organization, but how differentiated I cannot tell. My pulse
goes always rather too quickly; a little emotional disturbance sets it
going at an absurdly rapid rate for hours, and extreme physical
fatigue follows. My conviction is that no one rule applies to all men,
but for men like me alcohol is certainly not necessary, and at best of
little use. I have a kindlier feeling towards tobacco, though I am
only occasionally a smoker.
P.S.--Since writing the above, I have asked two friends (each an
intellectual worker of extraordinary energy) how alcohol affects them.
Both agreed that a large dose of alcohol stimulated them
_intellectually_, but that the subsequent _physical_ results
were injurious.
E. DOWDEN.
March 3, 1882.
PROFESOR EDISON.
I think chewing tobacco acts as a good stimulant upon anyone engaged
in laborious brain work. Smoking, although pleasant, is too violent in
its action; and the same remark applies to alcoholic liquors. I am
inclined to think that it is better for intellectual workers to
perform their labours at night, as after a very long experience of
night work, I find my brain is in better condition at that time,
especially for experimental work, and when so engaged I almost
invariably chew tobacco as a stimulant.
THOS. A. EDISON,
April 4, 1882.
MR. ALEX. J. ELLIS, F. R. S., F. S. A.,
PRESIDENT OF THE PHILOLOGICAL SOCIETY.
I am 67 3/4. I never took tobacco in any shape or form. For
twenty-five years I have taken no sort of stimulant, not even tea or
coffee. But for eight years in and amongst these twenty-five, but not
part of them, I took a little wine. This is eight years ago. I did not
find wine increased my power of work. I have led a working literary
life, always occupied, except when obliged to rest from over work. The
longest of these rests was three years, from 1849, while I was still
drinking wine. It is possible that wine may whip one up a bit for a
moment, but I don't believe in it as a necessity. I am not a
teetotaler or temperance man in any way, and my rejection of all
stimulants (my strongest drink being milk and much water) is a mere
matter of taste.
A. J. ELLIS.
February 22, 1882.
PROFESSOR EVERETT.
In reply to your letter, I have to say that I think all stimulants,
whether in the form of alcoholic drinks, tea or coffee, or tobacco,
should be very moderately used. For my own part, I have never smoked
or snuffed, and my daily allowance of alcoholic drinks is a so-called
pint bottle of beer or two glasses of wine. I have more frequently
suffered from nervous excitability due to tea or coffee, than from any
other kind of stimulant. I can compose best when my brain is coolest
and my digestion easiest. I do not believe in artificial stimulus to
literary effort.
J. D. EVERETT.
February 22, 1882.
PROFESSOR R. M. FAIRBAIRN,
CHAIRMAN OF THE CONGREGATIONAL UNION OF ENGLAND AND WALES.
I cannot say anything as to the effects of tobacco and alcohol upon
the health. I never use either, and so can only say that in my case
work has been done without their help. In the absence of data for
comparison as to the effects of indulgence and abstinence, it would be
foolish in me to express any comparative judgment; but it is only fair
to say that so far as I am capable of forming any opinion on the
matter, the abstinence has been altogether beneficial.
R. M. FAIRBAIRN.
February 16, 1882.
MR. R. E. FRANCILLON.
It so happens that your question belongs to a class of topics in which
I have taken much theoretical interest. For my general views, I cannot
do better than refer you to a paper of mine in the Gentleman's
Magazine of March, 1875, called "The Physiology of Authorship;" but I
fully agree with you that the settlement of the question can only
depend upon the collection of individual experience. I have
consciously studied my own, and can state it shortly and plainly. I am
a very hard, very regular, and not seldom an excessive worker; and I
find that my consumption of tobacco, and my production of work are in
'almost exact pro-portion, I cannot pretend to guess whether the work
demands the tobacco or whether the tobacco stimulates the work; but in
my case they are inextricably and, I believe, necessarily combined.
When I take a holiday, especially if I spend it in the open air, I
scarcely smoke at all; indeed, I find that bodily exercise requires no
stimulant of any kind whatever. If I read, I smoke little; but if I
produce, tobacco takes the form of a necessity, I believe--for I am
indolent by _nature_, and tobacco seems to me to be the best
machine for making work go with the grain that I can find. [Footnote:
The wisdom of occasionally using these various stimulants for
intellectual purposes is proved by a single consideration. Each of us
has a little cleverness and a great deal of sluggish stupidity. There
are certain occasions when we absolutely need the little cleverness
that we possess. The orator needs it when he speaks, the poet when he
Versifies, but neither cares how stupid he may become when the oration
is delivered and the lyric set down on paper. The stimulant serves to
bring out the talent when it is wanted, like the wind in the pipes of
an organ. "What will it matter if I am even a little duller
afterwards?" says the genius; "I can afford to be dull when I have
done." But the truth still remains that there are stimulants and
stimulants. Not the nectar of the gods themselves were worth the dash
of a wave upon the beach, and the pure cool air of the morning.--
Philip G. Hamerton, in _Intellectual Life_, p. 21.] I have a very
strong suspicion that if I did not smoke (which I find harmless) I
should have to conquer really dangerous temptations. As things are,
though I am a very moderate wine-drinker (spirits I never touch, and
abhor), alcohol, practically speaking, bears no appreciable part in my
life's economy. I believe that to some people tobacco is downright
poison; to some, life and health; to the vast majority, including
myself, neither one thing nor the other, but simply a comfort or an
instrument, or a mere nothing, according to idiosyncrasy.
My general theory is, that _bodily_ labour and exercise need no
stimulant at all, or at most very little; but that intellectual, and
especially creative, work, when it draws upon the mind beyond a
quickly reached point, requires being a non-natural condition
non-natural means to keep it going. I cannot call to mind a single
case, except that of Goethe, where great mental labour has been
carried on without external support of some sort; which seems to imply
an instinctive knowledge of how to get more out of the brain machine
than is possible under normal conditions. Of course the means must
differ more or less in each individual case; and sometimes the owner
of a creative brain must decide whether he will let it lie fallow for
health's sake, or whether for work's sake he will let life and health
go. I always insist very strongly upon brain work-beyond an uncertain
point-being _non-natural_, and, therefore, requiring non-natural
conditions for its exercise. I can quite believe the feat of the
Hungarian officer [Footnote: The surprising endurance of the Hungarian
officer, who lately swam a lake in Hungary, a distance of eleven
miles, is ascribed to his abstinence from alcohol and tobacco.--
_Thrift_, for February, 1882.] would be impossible to a man who
smoked or drank. But I cannot at all believe in that officer's powers
of writing, instead of swimming, with a mind at full stretch, for the
half of eleven hours. As to economy, tobacco costs me a good deal; but
I look upon it as the investment of so much capital, bearing better
interest than any other investment could bear.
R. E. FRANCILLON.
April 4, 1882.
MR. EDWARD A. FREEMAN, D. C. L., LL. D.
I can tell you nothing of the effects of smoking tobacco, having had
no experience. I tried once or twice when young, but, finding it
nasty, I did not try again. _Why_ people smoke, I have no notion.
If I am tired of work, a short sleep sets me up again. I really have
nothing to say about alcohol--I have never thought about it. I drink
wine like other people, and I find brandy an excellent medicine on
occasion. I used to drink beer, but some of the doctors say it is not
good for me, and some have recommended whisky instead; but I really
have no views on the subject. I have drunk wine and beer, as I have
eaten beef and mutton, without any theories one way or another.
E.A. FREEMAN.
October 29, 1882.
MR. F. J. FURNIVALL, M. A.