Virginia Argus

FOR THE ARGUS.

AN ANSWER TO THE QUERIES PROPOUNDED BY "CITIZEN," IN LAST FRIDAY'S ARGUS.

If gaming is a vice, it ought to be punished as a vice. In many cases the oath of insolvency defeats the intention of punishment. The sinner thus evades the penalty and sins again.

If gaming is not a vice, then no punishment ought to be inflicted, and therefore the laws which contemplate punishment are impolitic and unjust.

If gaming ought to be tolerated as a rational amusement, why not compel those who enjoy the amusement to make recompense to the public by way of tax?

Prosecutions for gaming originate either from the presentments of grand juries, or by information of the commonwealth's attorneys. The issuing of a capias instead of a summons, would be more likely to ensure the execution of the law. The defendant as in all other cases, might enter into bail bonds or recognizances, and thus avoid imprisonment, until a verdict was rendered.

The law at present commands that the offender should be publicly sold or hired out, (which comes to the same thing,) to the highest bidder—this, by some is thought unconstitutional, and by others a degrading; therefore it is not executed. This single disgrace disgraces the Virginia code; and it is a wonder that the philanthropy and patriotism of "Citizen" did not prompt him to say something concerning it. Does he not think that a little confinement would accord better with the principles which he advocates? than public sale, succeeded by bondage?

If gaming destroys the morals, health and industry of the people, and "Citizen" insists, the issuing of a capias against an offender, would neither be "to patronize a system, and innovations which are set up on the ruins of civilization, decorum and piety," nor would it be deemed unconstitutional, grievous or offensive to arrest an offender and hold him until he gives security for his appearance.

The hints of Civis which appeared in the Enquirer, were not a commentary. A few facts were stated which "Citizen" has not denied, before he publishes other queries or remarks; it is hoped he will take one side or the other—if he says that gaming is a vice and deserves punishment, and moreover, that the existing laws require no amendment, then he will say, that the offender ought to be sold to the highest bidder, to satisfy one mode of punishment, & also, that the same offender may at once relieve himself from the other, which is the least grievous, by the oath of insolvency, and thus defeat the intention of the law.

CIVIS.