CHARLES KINGSLEY ON GAMBLING.

Waikato Times, Volume XXXII, Issue 2578, 19 January 1889, Page 1 (Supplement)

CHARLES KINGSLEY ON GAMBLING.

The following , letter which i< quoted by the Irish Ecclesiastical Gazette, was addressed by the late Charles Kingsley to a public school boy who had put money into a sweepstake without thinking it wa.s wrong , :—'My dearest boy,—There is a matter which gave me great une.atiues.-; when you mentioned it. You sikl you had put into some lottery for the Derby, and had hedged to make safe. Now, nil this is bad, bud. nothing but bad. Of all habits gambling is the one I hate most and have avoided most. Of all habits it grows most on eager minds. Success and loss alike make it grow. Of all habits, however much civilised men may givu way to it, it is one of the most intrinsically savage. Historically, it lias been the peace excitement of the lowest brutes iu human form for ages past. Morally it ia unchivalrous and unchristian. (I) It gains money by the lowest and most unjust means, for it takes money out of your neighbour's pocket without giving iiiin anything in return. (2) It tempts you to use what you fancy your superior knowledge of a horses merits—or anything else to your neighbour's harm. If you know better than your neighbour you are bound to give him your advice. Instead, you conceal your knowledge to win from his ignorance ; hence come all sorts of concealments, dodges, deceits—l say tho devil is the only father of it. I'm tu;e, moreover, that the headmaster would object seriously to anything like a lottery, betting or gambling. 1 hope you have not won. I should not be sorry for you to lose. If you have won, I shall not congratulate you. If you wish to please me, you will give back to its lawful owners the money you have won. If you are a looser in gross thereby, I will gladly reimburse your losses this time. As you had put it, you could not in honour draw back till after the event. Now you can give back your money, saying that you understand that the head-master and I disapprove of such things, and so gain a very great moral influence. liccollect always that the stock argument is worthless. It is this : "Mytiiend would win from me if he ooulil, therefore I have an equal right to win from him." Nonsense. The same argument would prove that I have a right to maim or kill a man if only 1 gave him leave to maim or kill me if he cau and will. 1 have spoken my miud once and for all on a matter on which I have held the same views for more than twenty years.