So much for the “police power,” generally considered. But what of its relation to gambling, if any? If the practice is neither a crime nor a trespass, then it is not rightfully subject to public regulation. I have demonstrated to the candid judgment that, of itself, gambling is not essentially wrong. I insist that, at least, in the absence of fraud and chicane, it is neither sinful, nor criminal. To gamble with another is not to assault his person or property by main force. To wager or bet upon the laws of chance, deceit aside, is not to kill, maim, rob, or cheat your fellow man; the players freely participate in the hope of gain or for amusement. Then wherein is the action either felonious or tortious? Why should the police power interfere? That it cannot properly do so, under our institutions, is conceded by Mr. Tiedeman. He is an able and accomplished lawyer, and recognized by the profession as an authority on the subject. But it may be said, the effects are injurious, and for that reason the state may forbid the practice. That gambling is “necessarily and essentially” injurious to society, I deny. As a pastime, it is innocent, as a principle of action it permeates the business world. If an amusement, it may be abused to the detriment of certain individuals, but the abuse of a thing, innocent in itself, does not make that thing a crime. When an occupation, it is but natural that the laws of chance should operate unevenly: to the advantage of some and to the disadvantage of others. Uniformity of success in affairs is impossible. Throughout the business world, in every department of human activity, the losers but bear a fixed proportion to the winners. Some must fail that others may succeed. Such is the law of existence, as society is constituted to-day. We are not now concerned with ideals. The realities suffice for my purpose. Chance is at present the great motive power of the world. It sustains hope, and stimulates endeavor. Through its operation men are enriched and nations aggrandized. That some meet with disaster and encounter misfortune does not prove that appeals to chance are criminal in their nature, nor that such appeals are “necessarily and essentially” injurious to the state. Consistently, therefore, gambling cannot be forbidden because in its pursuit some persons are fool-hardy and others unfortunate.