In the fourth place, I will attempt to prove that those tricks that Mr. Green is in the habit of illustrating with cards, are entirely worthless; that they can not be reduced to practice; that if they can, it must be on persons wholly destitute of common sense; that an opinion that he can tell any cards by the back, is entirely untrue; that neither he nor any other man can do any such thing, unless the cards have been marked either by himself or some other person.
In the course of those proceedings, I shall take upon myself, for the benefit of the young and inexperienced who may be present, to make such developments as will be of lasting importance to them in their sojourn through this mazy world; for, as Mr. Calhoun once said of the Constitution of the United States, if there be any one man that loves innocent youth better than all others, I claim to be that man. To seduce one into any vicious habit when uncontaminated, is a thing I would scorn to do. And the pleasure which I feel, when I reflect upon it, of having actually saved some half dozen from ruin, is to me unspeakable. But for this I know I am never to be credited; for Mr. Green has informed us that the gambler is hardened, for he never goes to church, and if you reach him at all it must be with a penitentiary act.
But, pardon me, Messrs. Editors, this is not the time nor the place for the argument.
Yours, respectfully,
J.G. Freeman.
Mr. Green says he will inform me on to-morrow when it will suit to have the meeting.
Mr. Green, it will be seen by the following letter, has consented to meet his challenger in debate on the subject of gambling. We are glad of this, inasmuch as Mr. Freeman is said to be quite an intelligent gentleman, and stands at the head of his profession. The discussion, if conducted in a proper spirit, will be attended by good results.—ed.
For the Daily Sun.
Philadelphia, April 29, 1847.
Messrs. Barrett & Jones:—In the "Sun" of the 28th and 29th inst. are two communications, over the signature of J.G. Freeman, proposing to controvert my positions relative to the gamblers, and challenging me to a public discussion.
This individual called upon me after the publication of his first letter, and seemed to be honest in his intentions to defend his system of untold enormities. If the public, therefore, can be benefited, and my reformatory purpose in this particular promoted, as I suspect it will, I would rather court than avoid such an interview.