of the age—­who fell victims to the prevailing fascination of the gaming-table.  What destroyed Charles James Fox, as a statesman? Gambling! What brought the brilliant Sheridan to the grave?  Intoxication, brought on by the ill-starred luck of the ruined gamester? “Holland-house!” immortalized as the resort of genius, as well as for its orgies of dissipation, is not less renowned to infamy, as having been the “hell” of respectable gamesters.

There is a kind of democracy of crime, contended for by Mr. Freeman, that has its charms to the ears of the groundlings.  He is opposed to a law that punishes one class of gamblers only, instead of bringing all, within the focus of its penalties!  There is much truth in this.  Laws ought to be equal in their operation—­but if they cannot be equal, this is no reason why there ought to be no laws at all.  This conclusion is not warranted by any rule in logic or in government.

No man has a right to dispose of his property to the corruption of the public morals.  Mr. Freeman adduced the instance of a father having a right to disinherit one son and prefer the other.  This is not a parallel case.  The parallel would be a rich man leaving his fortune to found an Institution of demoralizing tendency—­say to teach you the art of cheating!  The laws would annul such a bequest.  Society has an original, inherent right to defend itself from all evil—­and that gaming is an evil, whether played with cards, lotteries, dice, stocks, or betting, not even Mr. Freeman could seriously deny.

In the late debate between these celebrated speculators,—­one reformed, the other confirmed in his vicious career—­it was observed, what a tower of strength truth gives to the man who espouses the just cause.  Mr. Green stood self-vindicated by his very position—­while the labour of Sisiphus devolved on Mr. Freeman.  But the stone would not stay rolled up hill.  It was no sooner at midway from the summit, but back it rolled upon its unfortunate and panting labourer.

The fostering power which intemperance derives from the excitements of the gaming-table, would itself prove an effectual argument against this monstrous infatuation, if no other existed.  But when we find intoxication, only one of a legion of vices that attend on it—­and that fraud, cheating, forgery, swindling, robbery, murder, and suicide, are its unfailing companions—­we may well marvel that it should find any man so reckless of public opinion, as to venture its championship.  Mr. Freeman went so far in this mad advocacy of his darling pursuit, as to justify suicide!  In this, however, he was perfectly consistent—­for if gaming of any kind is right, so is murder, robbery, and suicide.  In this, Mr. Freeman over-reached himself—­and by attempting too much, exposed the futility and weakness of his case.