6 JUNE 1914, Page 15


Sfa,—I have read the article in your issue of May 23rd in which you say you do not think there is any abstract argument against betting except the argument of excess. I do not suggest that the players are the worse for indulging in Biz- penny whist, though this may not be a good example to the uneducated. But surely there is an abstract argument from the Christian point of view—viz., that it must be wrong to make a contract in which your hope to win is founded upon a corresponding loss to your neighbour. Paley puts it in a businesslike way when he says the gain to the winner is never so great as the loss to the loser. For instance, a man with a thousand pounds who loses five hundred, leaving him only a half of what he had possessed, suffers more than is gained by the addition of a half to his former possession.—I am, Sir