There was nothing wrong (in teh eyes of most people at the time) with selling a living.. anad Sir T did it out of a need for ready money to pay Tom's debts..

but given his "moral" side, I find it unfair that he was willing to deprive Edmund of HIS income for soeme years to pay off Tom's debts. Surely fairer (even if not in the eyes of many at his time) to make the eldest son pay for his own follies.. by selling some other property if at all possible or by making Tom "work it off" somehow...
I dont agree that he could not at least maintain some control over Tom's spending... he is a Regency father (ie had much more authorty than a modern one) and the children (while they misbehaved when away from his influence) generally fell into line when he was at home...and He has the power of the purse.. THere is no evidence that Tom has any money of his own.. he would probaby be living on an allowance from his father so Sir T, knowing his bad habits could have kept him home by cutting off supplies...