of admission. He did not defend gambling--he could
not, he said, pretend to defend it--he only meant to deny the sweeping
aspersions of its foes. He spoke at great length, and sometimes his
logic was quite ingenious.

Mr. Green confined himself to a few facts, leaving the more minute part
of the discussion for a subsequent evening.

The Rev. John Chambers closed the proceedings by a few timely remarks,
in which he reviewed what he considered lawful and unlawful
pursuits--among these latter, he hoped to see the time that every vender
of intoxicating liquors would be placed in the same catalogue that
gamblers are by the recent law--imprisonment. He then referred to the
decorum of the audience, and expressed a hope that all the future
discussions would be listened to in the same spirit--that all the truth
possible may be elicited in reference to that terrible vice--gambling.

From the Inquirer.

The long-talked-of debate upon gambling and its tendencies, was
commenced last evening in the Lecture-room of the Chinese Museum. The
audience was large, and deep interest was manifested in the discussion.
Aboard of highly respectable gentlemen presided as Moderators, and Dr.
Elder officiated as chairman.

Mr. Freeman, the challenger, opened the debate, and proposed that the
question be met in a categorical form, thus:--Were the laws of the
different states which make gambling a Penitentiary offence unjust and
impolitic? Were they formed in good policy or not?

Mr. Freeman considered himself as honoured in being permitted to speak
before the meeting on the question. Fearful odds were against him; all
the ranks of battle were on the other side. The clergy, who were
accustomed to public speaking, were against him--as well as the editors
and the press. In the war now raging, the climate--the sickly climate,
was more dangerous than the shells and shot of the enemy--and in this
case, the sickly climate was the prejudice, the prejudice of opinion,
which was against the cause he espoused, or rather defended. Mr. F. also
referred to other influences against him. Mr. F. contended that even, if
the states in which such laws were passed, disliked the vice of
gambling--it was no reason why they should pass laws that were unjust
and impolitic.

Mr. F. contended, in opposition to such laws, that a man had a perfect
right to do what he pleased with his own things. Any legislation to the
contrary was tyranny. More mischief and immor