Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1863-10-13

| ishmcnt upon the gambler. ilc wis h"t-'
sCTe Int he would favor o lawt5 hang the pro-
f~essional gambler and put the better IN the
Penitentiarv. But he did not think any legs:
la,ion would arrest the evil of gambling. just
as we'll attempt to stop the flow of the waters
| OF James river rs 10 prevent men from gam
i'm. But if you will proceed in leGiSiatlns
On this subject. nc hoped the bill would be
thoroughly considered, and that all the expe.
r;ence of the gentleman from Petersburg, ana
Of other gentlemen, would be obtained to guide
US in rhe matter. lie, therefore, moved thai
the hill be recomni:ted';o the Committee Tor
Courts of Justice. in order tha. it might be
perfected, if possible 10 dose. ,
NJ. CoGuILL could not see the necessity OF
recommittins the till :, tho Committee for
Courts of Justice. The Senator from Crais
iltr. W1G.EY) and the SenGto- i:om Peters
Lure IMr. CoLLIEg) were both members Of
that committee, and the committee have had
she haneSr of ali the experience and the IN
formation possessed by those gentlemen. IT.
leei, the proposition OF lie Gentleman from
! Petersburg, 70 license gambling. had been
made in the ecnmiuce and rejected ana if
the Senator from Craig had anything to offer,
why did he not bring 1t before the copmitree
at the proper :irne. or FIRING it M the notice ct
the Senate! Why wsit till this late hour and
move n recommitment of the bill? With
regard Ia licensing gambling, he MIR. COG
HiLL) was opposed TO any such scheme. lie
you'd never consent 10 legalizcv vice, and place
! the pnguarded and unsuspecting victim on the
SAME footing with the Seducer and the tempter.
The gambler. it Is well known. keeps Il large
retinuc 70 aid him in entrarpins his victim I;
and when the man who has been brought
within the meshes of the gambler, under the
law 70 license gambling the victim Is placed
IN the same footing with the gambler. lie
could never give bis support to such q mea-
sure. He hoped the Senate would not recon-
nit the bill. =.
Mr.. JOHNSON was in favor Of the bill and
! of auv legal measure whiek would put a stop
u gambling. The cit: of Richmond is crowd
ell with fro establishments and night alter
nirh, men 90 there who have charge Of large
sums of money: the youth Of the country and
the officers If the courts are there: all betting
and souandering large surls Of money. These
gambling houses are making p~rincely for
tunes. And it becomes the duty Of the Leg
stature 10 arrest, and put down, if possible.
this growing evil. Ii has been objected that
This Law IS not stringent enough. This law
conf ,catcs the property o. the ln:-1 wh' rents
and the man who occupies lh" gambling
house. Although it may not put Il stop 70
y,mbling. let u, pass the Law it will certainly
ia some rod: and ifit does no. DO as much
~ desired, the matter will only stand as he.
fore. Something must be done 10 mbatc tie
vice. These gambling establishments, with
their thousands Of dollars at command, are
running up the ~prices-thc ppor widow and the
soldiers wife have 70 come into competition
with these establishments in the markets OF
this city: the gambler can pay any price. hnt
the poor woman must 90 without. Ii should
be the duty of the Legislature TO pat a stop to
this, as far as possible. Let u, therefore,
pass this bill: a recammitmcnt OF it will do
no good. The bill will certainly repreSs the
evil of gaming, and he hoped the Senate would
pasI the Jill.
The question on recommitting the ill was
taken, and the motion was rejected.
Mr.. MARSHALL objected 10 the passage OF
the bill. lie had found that legislation was
utterly inadequate to stop the vice OF gam
bling. 1t is inherent in the human heart
It accompanies man in all his relations OF
life. Human laws have never succeeded IN
ran7cs-ing the vice. We have the "x?eri-
ence of hundreds Of years OF legislation on
this %salicct. and all Of no avail and here Sc
are t '-dI" t~rcaiing o7er the same old grou"d.
Ali legislation has failed heretofore. and tbs
law will also be Il failure. We have ",ncr
matters &C Importance before us. Let us dis
cuSs them, and lasislate an them. But this
vice Of gan'ng can only he. reached by pub
Iici:v. No legislation can prevent the lndul-
aetce of this vice. lie knew something Of
n" evils Of gaming. In earlier days h" had
list his money at short games" with his
experience Of the evil cffectsof gaming, and
the incisiciency Of legislation to arrest the
vice. he hoped the Senate would pause III Il
matter against which ali former legislation
had proved abortive.
Mr.. TAYLOR. Of Montgomery, held that be-
cause the law would not prevent the evil. was
no argument why legislation should not he
had. IF we look To the laws on our stat
ute books. we would find that there are
many statutes against murder: and we find
also that murder has not lccn suppressed !:
rct this is no reason why Legislation should
not lie Ind to punish murder. II is SAID, too,
II we license gambling and make the visitors
To these establishments register their names,
public opinion will come in and arrest the
OWL. Why. sir, in the case what can be easier
than for, the visitor TO register his name rs
John Smith or John Brown? Let gambling
become 4 licensed profession. and the profess
s;onal gambler will be placed upon n level
with other pursuits. Mr.. r. was ast0nishcd,
too, to find THAT this law had been likened %
the Maine Liquor Law. lie saw no analogy
between the two laws. The Maine Liquor
Law prevented you fran eating and drinking
Ia a certain extent. This law Furnishes men
who are running the youth Of our country by
inducing them to follow this vice. He would
cxterminatc gaming. lie would punish muir
Ter by hanging, and he would punish the
gambler, under this bill, with all the pains
and penalties Of the law.
The question on the passage Of the bill was
then taken aid decided in the affirmative by
tic following vote:
AYEs--Mcssrs. Anderson, Armstrong, Bales,
Ball, Carson, Christian of Augusta, Chris
tian, Of Middlcsex, Coghiil. Day, Dickinson,
Douglas, Dulaney, Frazier, Garnett Guy, Hart,
johnson, Jones, Lawson, Lewis, Nash, Nee
son. Newton, Newman, Of Madison, Newman,
Of Mason. Peters. Randolph. Saunders, Shriv-
or. Stevenson. Snitlcr, Taylor. Of Montgomery,
Taylor of Norfolk City, Wiley, Witten-35.
NoEs-Messrs. Collier, Logan, Marshall,
Seddon-l.
On motion Of Mr.. HART, the hill was sent
% the House Of Delegates, for their concur
renee.
The PRESIDENT appointed Mr.. HART to com
intricate the bill to the House Of Delegates.
ELL TO REGULATE PRICES.
The bill TO regulate prices was taken up,
and Mr.. GUY concluded his argument against
the bill. lie believed that the bill would re-
ducc the production of the great nccessaries
Of lie, because it would. induce the producer
to turn his attention to the production of arti-
cles fancy and Of minor Importance, in which
larger profits could be realized. 1t seemed 10
him, if the experiment now proposed to be in
augurated in Virginia, resulted disastrous!y in
the French revolution, it could not result
otherwise here. If a law of this character
could operate a~dvaptageously anywhere it GER
tainly should be expected TO do so amongst the
French people, where laws are obcyed without
question and without COMPLAINT. Here with