The gaming table : its votaries and victims, in all times and countries,
especially in England and in France. Vol. 2 | ||
2. THE GAMING TABLE.
1. CHEVALIERS D'INDUSTRIE, OR POLITE SHARPERS.
CHEVALIERS d'industrie, or polite and accomplished sharpers, have always existed in every city, from the earliest times to the present. The ordinary progress of these interesting gentlemen is as follows. Their début is often difficult, and many of them are stopped short in their career. They only succeed by means of great exertion and severe trials; but they endure everything in order to be tolerated or permitted to exercise their calling. To secure credit they ally themselves with men of respectability, or those who pass for such. When they have no titles they fabricate them; and few persons dispute their claims. They are found useful for the pleasures of society, the expenses of which they often pay —
The `protector' next hands over his `young friends' to `executioners,' who fleece them for the common benefit of the confederates. They do not always wait for the coming of age of their young dupes in order to strike the grand `stroke.' When they find that the father of a family shudders at the idea of a public scandal, they immolate their victim at once — for fear lest he should escape from their hands. Of course they are always open to `capitulate' — to come to terms; and if the aid of the law is invoked they give in discreetly.
About a century ago there flourished at Paris one of these adventurers, who made a great noise
Sometimes he gave a concert for amateurs, elegant suppers for gay ladies, and special soirées for the learned and the witty. He was not particular as to the means of doing business; thus he trafficked in everything, — for the sale of a living, or the procuration of a mistress — for he had associates in all ranks, among all professions of men.
He had twenty Faro tables in operation every night, whilst his emissaries were on the watch for new arrivals, and for those who had recently come into property.
In general, rogues soon betray themselves by some stupid bungle; but such was not the case
Affable, insinuating to a degree, he might be compared to those brigands of Egypt who embraced their victims in order to strangle them.[1] He never showed more devotedness than when he meditated some perfidy, nor more assurance than when convicted of the rascality. Playing fast and loose with honour and the laws, he was sure to find, when threatened by the arm of justice, the female relatives of the judges themselves taking his part and doing their best to `get him off.' Such was this extraordinary chevalier d'industrie, who might
The following narrative elucidates a still more modern phase of this elegant `industry.' My authority is M. Robert-Houdin.
CAUGHT IN A TRAP.
M. Olivier de — — was a dissipated young gentleman. His family was one of the oldest and most respectable of the country, and deservedly enjoyed the highest consideration. M. Olivier de — — , his father, was not rich, and therefore could not do much for his son; the consequence was that owing to his outrageous prodigality the son was sorely pinched for means to keep up his position; he exhausted his credit, and was soon overwhelmed with debt. Among the companions of his dissipation was a young man whose abundant means filled him with admiration and envy; he lived like a prince and had not a single creditor. One day he asked his friend to explain the mystery of the fact that, without possessing any fortune, he
Chauvignac — such was the name of the friend thus addressed — was a card-sharper, and he instantly seized the opportunity to make something out of the happy disposition of this modern prodigal son, this scion of gentility. With the utmost frankness he explained to the young man his wonderful method of keeping his pockets full of money, and showed that nothing could be easier than for Olivier to go and do likewise in his terrible condition; — in short, on one hand there were within his grasp, riches, pleasure, all manner of enjoyment; on the other, pitiless creditors, ruin, misery, and contempt. The tempter, moreover, offered to initiate his listener in his infallible method of getting rich. In his frame of mind Olivier yielded to the temptation, with the full determination, if not to get money by cheating at cards, at any rate to learn the method which might serve as a means of self-defence should he not think proper to use it for attack — such was the final argument suggested by the human Mephistopheles to his pupil.
Taking Olivier to his house, he showed him a
Two days afterwards the professor returned to his pupil and invited him to accompany him on a pleasure trip. Olivier excused himself on account of his desperate condition — one of his creditors being in pursuit of him for a debt of one thousand
The party reached Boulogne and put up at the Hotel de l'Univers. On their arrival they were informed that no time was to be lost, as the count talked of leaving next day. The two travellers took a hasty dinner, and at once proceeded to the apartment of the Belgian millionnaire. Chaffard, who had preceded them, introduced them as two of his friends, whose property was situated in the vicinity of Boulogne.
M. le Comte de Vandermool was a man about fifty years of age, with an open, candid countenance. He wore several foreign decorations. He received the two gentlemen with charming affability; he did more; he invited them to spend the evening with him. Of course the invitation was accepted. When the conversation began to flag, the count proposed a game — which was also, of course, very readily agreed to by the three compères.
While the table was prepared, Chauvignac gave his young friend two packs of cards, to be substituted for those which should be furnished by the count. Ecarté was to be the game, and Olivier was to play, the two other associates having pretended
Olivier, almost out of his senses at the possession of eighty thousand francs, could not resist the desire of expressing his gratitude to Chauvignac, which he did, grasping his hand with emotion and leading him into a corner of the room.
Alas! the whole thing was only an infamous conspiracy to ruin the young man. The Belgian capitalist, this count apparently so respectable, was only an expert card-sharper whom Chauvignac had brought from Paris to play out the vile tragi — comedy, the dénouement of which would be the
Supper went off very pleasantly. They drank very moderately, for the head had to be kept cool for what had to follow. They soon sat down again at the card-table. `Now,' said the Parisian card-shaper, on resuming his seat, `I should like to end the matter quickly: I will stake the twenty thousand francs in a lump.'
Olivier, confident of success after his previous achievement, readily assented; but, alas, the twenty thousand francs of which he made sure was won by his adversary.
Forty thousand francs went in like manner. Olivier, breathless, utterly prostrate, knew not what to do. All his manœuvres were practised in vain; he could give himself none but small cards. His opponent had his hands full of trumps, and he dealt them to him! In his despair he consulted Chauvignac by a look, and the latter made a sign to him to go on. The wretched young man went on, and lost again. Bewildered, beside himself, he
At this point the horrible dénouement commenced. The pretended count stopped, and crossing his arms on his breast, said sternly — `Monsieur Olivier de — — , you must be very rich to stake so glibly such enormous sums. Of course you know your fortune and can square yourself with it; but, however rich you may be, you ought to know that it is not sufficient to lose a hundred thousand francs, but that you must pay it. Besides, I have given you the example. Begin, therefore, by putting down the sum I have won from you; after which we can go on.' . . .
`Nothing can be more proper, sir,' stammered out young Olivier, `I am ready to satisfy you; but, after all, you know that . . . . gaming debts . . . . my word . . . .'
`The d — l! sir,' said the pretended count, giving the table a violent blow with his fist — ' Why do you talk to me about your word. Gad! You are well entitled to appeal to the engagements of honour! Well! We have now to play another
`Sir! . . You insult me!' said Olivier.
`Indeed? Well, sir, that astonishes me!' replied the false Belgian ironically.
`That is too much, sir. I demand satisfaction, and that on the very instant. Do you understand me? Let us go out at once.'
`No! no! We must end this quarrel here, sir. Look here — your two friends shall be your "seconds;'' I am now going to send for mine.'
The card-sharper, who had risen at these words, rang the bell violently. His own servant entered. `Go,' said he, `to the Procureur de Roi, and request him to come here on a very important matter. Be as quick as you can.'
`Oh, sir, be merciful! Don't ruin me!' exclaimed the wretched Olivier; `I will do what you like.' At these words, the sharper told his servant to wait behind the door, and to execute his order if he should hear nothing to the contrary in ten minutes.
`And now, sir,' continued the sharper, turning
Olivier looked first at Chauvignac and then at Chaffard, but both the fellows only made signs to him to resign himself to the circumstances. He did what was ordered.
`That is not all, sir,' added the false Belgian; `I have fairly won money from you and have a right to demand a guarantee for payment. You must draw me short bills for the sum of one hundred thousand francs.'
As the wretched young man hesitated to comply with this demand, his pitiless creditor rose to ring the bell.
`Don't ring, sir, don't ring,' said Olivier, `I'll sign.'
He signed, and the villany was consummated. Olivier returned to his family and made an humble avowal of his fault and his engagements. His venerable father received the terrible blow with resignation, and paid the 100,000 francs, estimat-
AN ATTORNEY `DONE' BY A GAMBLER.
A turfite and gambler, represented under the letters of Mr H — e, having lost all his money at Doncaster and the following York Meeting, devised a plan, with his coadjutor, to obtain the means for their departure from York, which, no doubt, will be considered exceedingly ingenious.
He had heard of an attorney in the town who was very fond of Backgammon; and on this simple piece of information an elaborate plan was concocted. Mr H — e feigned illness, went to bed, and sent for a large quantity of tartar emetic, which he took. After he had suffered the operation of the first dose he sent for a doctor, who pronounced him, of course, very languid and ill; and not knowing the cause, ordered him more medicine, which the patient took good care not to allow to stay on his stomach.
On the second day he asked the doctor, with great gravity, if he considered him in danger, adding, `because he had never made a will to bequeath
The attorney, accordingly, was sent for — of course the very man wished for — the lover of Backgammon before mentioned. The good man came; he took the `instructions,' and drew up the last will and testament of the ruined turfite, who left (in the will) about £50,000, which no man ever heard of, living or dead.
The business being done, the patient said that if he had a moment's relaxation he thought he should rally and overcome the malady. The poor lawyer said if he could in any way contribute to his comfort he should be happy. The offer was embraced by observing that if he could sit up in bed — but he was afraid he was not able — a hit at Backgammon would be a great source of amusement.
The lawyer, like all adepts in such matters, was only too willing to catch at the idea; the board was brought.
Of course the man who had £50,000 to leave behind could not be expected to play `for love;' and so when Mr H — e proposed `a pound a hit or treble a gammon,' the lawyer not only thought it
They began again. Lost! `You have a cow in your paddock, haven't you? What's that worth?' asked Mr H — e. The attorney said £12. `Well, I'll set that sum by way of giving you a chance.' The game proceeded, and the poor lawyer, equally unfortunate, raved and swore he had lost his last shilling. `No, no!' said H — e,' you have not: I saw a hay-rick in your ground. It is of no use now that the horse and cow are gone — what is that worth?' £15, replied the at-torney, with a sigh. `I set £15 then,' said H — e.
This seemed to be `rather too much' for the lawyer. The loss of the hay-rick — like the last
Thereupon the sick man forgot his sickness, jumped out of bed, and gave the lawyer a regular drubbing, got the cheque for the £2000, — but the horse, cow, and hay he said he would leave `until further orders.'
A VERY CURIOUS STORY.
An Archbishop of Canterbury was once on a tour, when a genteel man, apparently in earnest conversation, though alone in a wood, attracted his notice. His Grace made up to him, and, after a little previous conversation, asked him what he was about.
Stranger. `I am at play.'
Archbishop. `At play? With whom? I see nobody.'
Sir. `I own, sir, my antagonist is not visible: I am playing with God.'
Abp. `At what game, pray, sir?'
Str. `At Chess.'
Abp. `Do you play for anything?'
Str. `Certainly.'
Abp. `You cannot have any chance, as your ad-versary must be so superior to you.'
Str. `He takes no advantage, but plays merely as a man.'
Abp. `When you win or lose, how do you settle accounts?'
Str. `Very exactly and punctually.'
Abp. `Indeed! Pray, how stands your game now?'
Str. `There! I have just lost!'
Abp. `How much have you lost?'
Str. `Fifty guineas.'
Abp. `How do you manage to pay it? Does God take your money?'
Str. `No! The poor are his treasurers. He always sends some worthy person to receive it, and you are at present his purse-bearer.'
Saying this, the stranger put fifty guineas into his Grace's hand, and retired, adding — `I shall play no more to-day.'
The prelate was delighted; though he could not tell what to make of this extraordinary man. The guineas were all good; and the archbishop applied
The archbishop, on his return, stopped at the same town, and could not help going in search of the chess-player, whom he found engaged as before, when the following dialogue ensued: —
Abp. `How has the chance stood since we met before?'
Str. `Sometimes for me — sometimes against me. I have lost and won.'
Abp. `Are you at play now?'
Str. `Yes, sir. We have played several games to-day.'
Abp. `Who wins?'
Str. `The advantage is on my side. The game is just over. I have a fine stroke — check-mate — there it is.'
Abp. `How much have you won?'
Str. `Five hundred guineas.'
Abp. `That is a large sum. How are you to he paid?'
Str. 'God always sends some good rich man when I win, and you are the person. He is remarkably punctual on these occasions.'
The archbishop had received a considerable sum
Such is the tale. Se non è vero è ben trovato.
SKITTLE SHARPERS.
`I know a respectable tradesman,' says a writer in Cassell's Magazine — `I know him now, for he lives in the house he occupied at the time of my tale — who was sent for to see a French gentleman at a tavern, on business connected with the removal of this gentleman's property from one of the London docks. The business, as explained by the messenger, promising to be profitable, he of course promptly obeyed the summons, and during his walk found that his conductor had once been in service in France. This delighted Mr Chase — the name by which I signify the tradesman — for he, too, had once so lived in France; and by the time he reached the tavern he had talked himself into a very good opinion of his new patron. The French gentleman was very
`As he insisted on paying Mr Chase for all the time consumed with him, and as his servant, of course, could not object, the party adjourned to the "Select Subscription Ground'' at once. In the ground there was a quiet, insignificant-looking little man, smoking a cigar; and as they were
`By a strange concurrence of events, it so happened that by random throws the Frenchman sometimes knocked all the pins down at a single swoop, though he clearly could not play — Mr Chase was sure of that — while the skilful player made every now and then one of the blunders to which the best players are liable. That the tradesman lost forty sovereigns will be easily understood; and did his tale end here it would have differed so little from a hundred others as scarcely to deserve telling; but it will surprise many, as
`It was the only case in my experience of the work going on smoothly after such a break. I never could account for it, nor could Mr Chase. Great was the latter's disgust, on setting the police to work, to find that the French nobleman, his servant, and the quiet stranger, were all dwellers within half a mile or so of his own house, and slightly known to him — men who had trusted, and very successfully, to great audacity and well — arranged disguise.'
A vast deal of gambling still goes on with skittles all over the country. At a place not ten miles from London, I am told that as much as two thousand pounds has been seen upon the table in a single `alley,' or place of play. The bets were, accordingly, very high. The instances revealed by exposure at the police-courts give but a faint idea of the extent of skittle sharping.
Amidst such abuses of the game, it can scarcely
2. PROFESSIONAL GAMESTERS AND THEIR FRAUDS.
A GAMBLING house at the end of the last century was conducted by the following officials: —
1. A Commissioner, — who was always a proprietor; who looked in of a night, and audited the week's account with two other proprietors.
2. A Director, — who superintended the room.
3. An Operator, — who dealt the cards at the cheating game called Faro.
4. Two Croupiers, or crow-pees, as they were vulgarly called, whose duty it was to watch the cards and gather or rake in the money for the bank.
5. Two Puffs, — who had money given to them to decoy others to play.
6. A Clerk, — who was a check on the Puffs, to
7. A Squib, — who was a puff of a lower rank, serving at half salary, whilst learning to deal.
8. A Flasher, — to swear how often the bank had been stripped by lucky players.
9. A Dunner, — who went about to recover money lost at play.
10. A Waiter, — to fill out wine, snuff candles, and attend the room.
11. An Attorney, — who was generally a Newgate solicitor.
12. A Captain, — who was to fight any gentleman who might be peevish at losing his money.
13. An Usher, — who lighted the gentlemen up and down stairs, and gave the word to the porter.
14. A Porter, — who was generally a soldier of the Foot Guards.
15. An Orderly-man, — who walked up and down the outside of the door, to give notice to the porter, and alarm the house at the approach of the constables.
16. A Runner, — who was to get intelligence of the Justices' meetings.
17. Link Boys, Coachmen, Chairmen, Drawers,
18. Common Bail, Affidavit Men, Ruffians, Bravos, Assassins, &. &.
It may be proper to remark that the above list of officials was only calculated for gambling houses of an inferior order. In these it is evident that the fear of interruption and the necessity for precaution presided over the arrangements. There were others, however, which seemed to defy law, to spurn at justice, and to remain secure, in every way, by the `respectability' of their frequenters. These were houses supported at an amazing expense — within sight of the palace — which were open every night and all night — where men of the first rank were to be found gambling away immense sums of money, such as no man, whatever his fortune might be, could sustain. `What, then,' says a writer at the time, `are the consequences? Why, that the undone part of them sell their votes for bread, and the successful give them for honours.
`He who has never seen the gamblers' apartments in some of the magnificent houses in the
`A new pack of cards is called for at every deal, and the "old'' ones are then thrown upon the floor, and in such an immense quantity, that the writer of this letter has seen a very large room nearly ankle-deep, in the greatest part of it, by four o'clock in the morning! Judge, then, to what height they must have risen by daylight.'
It is a melancholy truth, but confirmed by the history of all nations, that the most polite and refined age of a kingdom is never the most virtuous; not, indeed, that any such compliment can be paid to that gross age, but still it was refined compared with the past. The distinctions of personal merit being but little regarded — in the low moral tone that prevailed — there needed but to support a certain `figure' in life (managed by the fashionable tailor)[4], to be conversant with a few etiquettes of good breeding and sentiments of modern or current honour, in
BEATTIE'S Minstrel.
This fraternity of artists — whether they were to be denominated rooks,[5] sharps, sharpers, black-legs, Greeks, or gripes — were exceedingly numerous, and were dispersed among all ranks of society. [5] So called because rooks are famous for stealing materials out of other birds' nests to build their own.
The follies and vices of others — of open-hearted youth in particular — were the great game or pursuit of this odious crew. Though cool and dispassionate themselves, they did all in their power to throw others off their guard, that they might make their advantage of them.
In others they promoted excess of all kinds, whilst they themselves took care to maintain the utmost sobriety and temperance. `Gamesters,'
As profit, not pleasure, was the aim of these knights of darkness, they lay concealed under all shapes and disguises, and followed up their game with all wariness and discretion. Like wise traders, they made it the business of their lives to excel in their calling.
For this end they studied the secret mysteries of their art by night and by day; they improved on the scientific schemes of their profound master, Hoyle, and on his deep doctrines and calculations of chances. They became skilful without a rival where skill was necessary, and fraudulent without conscience where fraud was safe and advantageous; and while fortune or chance appeared to direct everything, they practised numberless devices by which they insured her ultimate favours to themselves. Of these none were more efficacious, be
When rendered thus secure of their prey, they began to level their whole train of artillery against the boasted honours of his short-lived triumph. Then the extensive manors, the ancient forests, the paternal mansions, began to tremble for their future destiny. The pigeon was marked down, and the infernal crew began in good earnest to pluck his rich plumage. The wink was given on his appearance in the room, as a signal of commencing their covert attacks. The shrug, the nod, the hem — every motion of the eyes, hands, feet — every air and gesture, look and word — became an expressive, though disguised, language of fraud and cozenage, big with deceit and swollen with ruin. Besides this, the card was marked, or
With wily craft the sharpers substituted their deceitful `doctors' or false dice; and thus `crabs,' or `a losing game,' became the portion of the `flats,' or dupes.
There were different ways of throwing dice. There was the `Stamp' — when the caster with an elastic spring of the wrist rapped the cornet or box with vehemence on the table, the dice as yet not appearing from under the box. The `Dribble' was, when with an air of easy but ingenious motion, the caster poured, as it were, the dice on the board — when, if he happened to be an old practitioner, he might suddenly cog with his fore-finger one of the cubes. The `Long Gallery' was when the dice were flung or hurled the whole length of the board. Some
A pair of false dice was arranged as follows: —
- Two fives
- Two fours
- Two threes
On one die,
- Two Sixes
- Two Fives
- Two Aces
On the other,
With these dice it was impossible to throw what is at Hazard denominated Crabs, or a losing game — that is, aces, or ace and deuce, twelve, or seven. Hence, the caster always called for his main; consequently, as he could neither throw one nor seven, let his chance be what it might, he was sure to win, and he and those who were in the secret of course always took the odds. The false dice being concealed in the left hand, the caster took the box with the fair dice in it in his right hand, and in the act of shaking it caught the fair dice in his hand, and unperceived shifted the box empty to
Two gambling adventurers would set out with a certain number of signs and signals. The use of the handkerchief during the game was the certain evidence of a good hand. The use of the snuff-box a sign equally indicative of a bad one. An affected cough, apparently as a natural one, once, twice, three, or four times repeated, was an assurance of so many honours in hand. Rubbing the left eye was an invitation to lead trumps, — the right eye the reverse, — the cards thrown down with one finger and the thumb was a sign of one trump; two fingers and the thumb, two trumps, and so on progressively, and in exact explanation of the whole hand, with a variety of manœuvres by which chance was reduced to certainty, and certainty followed by ruin.[6] [6] Bon Ton Magazine, 1791.
CHEATING AT WHIST.
In an old work on cards the following curious disclosures are made respecting cheating at whist: —
`He that can by craft overlook his adversary's game hath a great advantage; for by that means he may partly know what to play securely; or if he can have some petty glimpse of his partner's hand. There is a way by making some sign by the fingers, to discover to their partners what honours they have, or by the wink of one eye it signifies one honour, shutting both eyes two, placing three fingers or four on the table, three or four honours. For which reason all nice gamsters play behind curtains.
`Dealing the cards out by one and one to each person is the best method of putting it out of the dealer's power to impose on you. But I shall demonstrate that, deal the cards which way you will, a confederacy of two sharpers will beat any two persons in the world, though ever so good players, that are not of the gang, or in the secret, and "Three poll One'' is as safe and secure as if the money was in their pockets. All which will appear
Brief or short cards,
Corner-bend,
Middle-bend (or Kingston-bridge).
`Of brief cards there are two sorts: one is a card longer than the rest, — the other is a card broader than the rest. The long sort are such as three, four, five, six, seven, eight, and nine; the broad sort are such as aces, kings, queens, and knaves. The use and advantage of each are as follows: —
`Example: — When you cut the cards to your adversary, cut them long, or endways, and he will have a three, four, five, six, seven, eight, or nine at bottom. When your adversary cuts the cards to you, put them broadside to him, and he will naturally cut (without ever suspecting what you do) ace, king, queen, or knave, &., which is sufficient advantage to secure any game.
`And in case you cannot get cards of proper sizes ready-made to mix with others, you may shave them with a razor or penknife from the
`As Whist is a tavern-game, the sharpers generally take care to put about the bottle before the game begins, so quick, that a bubble cannot be said to see clearly even when he begins to play.
`The next is the corner-bend, which is four cards turned down finely at one corner — a signal to cut by.
`The other is vulgarly called Kingston-bridge, or the middle-bend. It is done by bending your own or adversary's tricks two different ways, which will cause an opening, or arch, in the middle, which is of the same use and service as the other two ways, and only practised in its turn to amuse you.
`The next thing to be considered is, who deals the cards, you or your adversary; because that is a main point, and from whence your advantage must arise. Suppose, for example,
- Sharpers,
- Partners,
A and B
- Bubbles, or Flats,
- Partners.
C and D
`When A or B is to deal, they observe the preceding deal to take up the tricks thus: —
1. A bad card. 2. A good card.
3. A bad card. 4. A good card. (Meaning the best and worst that fall in that list).
`When C or D deals, they must be taken up thus: —
1. A good card. 2. A bad card.
3. A good card. 4. A bad card.
`By this rule it is plain that the best cards fall to A and B every deal. How is it possible, therefore, that C and D should ever win a game without permission? But it would be deemed ill policy, and contrary to the true interest of A and B, to act thus every deal. I will, therefore, suppose it is practised just when they please, according as bets happen in company; though the rule with gamesters, in low life, is at the first setting out to stupify you with wine and the loss of your money, that you may never come to a perfect understanding of what you are doing. It may be truly said that many an honest gentleman has been kept a month in such a condition by the management
`Now you may imagine it not in the power of A and B to cause the tricks to be taken up after the manner aforesaid: there is nothing so easy nor so frequently practised, especially at Three poll One; for in playing the cards the confederates will not only take care of their own tricks, but also of yours, for the cards may be so played, and shoved together in such a manner, as will even cause you to take them right yourself; and if a trick should lie untowardly on the table, A or B will pay you the compliment of taking it up for you, and say — "Sir, that's yours.'' This operation will the more readily be apprehended by seeing it practised half a score times; when once you are aware of it, it will otherwise (I may say fairly) pass upon any person that has not been let into the secret. This being allowed, the next point and difficulty is to shuffle and cut.
`I say, that either A or B are such curious workmen, and can make a sham shuffle with a pack of cards so artfully, that you would believe they were splitting them, when at the time they will not displace a single card from its order! Such is the sharper's shuffling.
`Now, to cut the cards, a bend is prepared for you to cut to — the middle is the best; and it is odds but you unwarily cut to it; if not, slip is the word; but if you have no opportunity to do that neither, then deal away at all hazards, it is but an equal bet that they come in your favour; if right, proceed; if otherwise, miss a card in its course, and it brings the cards according to your first design; it is but giving two at last where you missed; and if that cannot be conveniently done, you only lose the deal, and there is an end of it.
`But when A or B is to cut, they make it all safe; for then they make the corner-bend, which any one that knows may cut to, a hundred times together.
`Piping at Whist. By piping I mean, when one of the company that does not play, which frequently happens, sits down in a convenient place to smoke a pipe, and so look on, pretending to amuse himself that way. Now, the disposing of his fingers on the pipe whilst smoking discovers the principal cards that are in the person's hand he overlooks; which was always esteemed a sufficient advantage whereby to win a game. There is another method, namely, by uttering words. "Indeed''
There can be no doubt that the act of sorting the cards is capable of giving an acute observer a tolerably accurate idea of his partner's or either of his opponents' hands; so that where cheating is suspected it would be better to play the cards without sorting them. The number of times a sorter carries a card to a particular part indicates so many of a suit; your own hand and his play will readily indicate the nature of the cards in which he is either strong or weak.
I now quote Robert-Houdin's account of
CARD TELEGRAPHY.
Although there are 32 cards in the game of Piquet, all of them may be designated by twelve different signs, namely, eight for the nature of the cards, and four for the colours.
At Ecarté, the number of the signals is still
If he looks
1. At his confederate, he designates A king.
2. At the play of his adversary . . . A queen.
3. At the stake . . . . . . . . . . . A knave.
4. At the opposite side . . . . . . . An ace. And whilst he indicates the nature of the cards he at the same time makes known the colour by the following signs: —
1. The mouth slightly open . . . . . Hearts.
2. The mouth shut . . . . . . . . . . Diamonds.
3. The upper-lip slightly pouting over the lower . . . . . . . Clubs.
4. The lower-lip drawn over the upper . . . . . . . . . . . Spades. Thus, if the Greek wishes to announce, for instance, the knave and ace of hearts, he successively directs
It is evident that this telegraphy may be employed at all games where there is a gallery. In effect, nothing is easier at Piquet than to indicate, by the aid of these signals, the colour in which the player should discard and that in which he should keep what cards he has.
These are the simplest signs; but some of the Greeks have a great number of them, to designate everything; and even sometimes to communicate and receive intelligence, when necessary. This telegraphy is so imperceptible that it is difficult to describe it, and altogether impossible to detect it.[7] [7] Tricheries des Grecs devoilées.
Robert-Houdin has exhausted the subject of card-trickery, in connection with that prestidigitation which, it seems, all card-sharpers cultivate, the description of which, however, is by no means so entertaining as the visible performance. I find, nevertheless, in his book, under the title of `Small Trickeries made innocent by Custom,' certain things alluded to which I can attest by experience.
I. At Whist, no communication whatever must
II. Any one with a good memory and endowed with quick perception may form a very accurate estimate of the hands held by all the players by remembering the tricks as they are played and turned down — all of a suit, or trumped. Cards `stick to-gether' most lovingly, and the ordinary shuffling scarcely alters their sequence; and so, if a trick has been taken by an ace over a king, for instance, and in the next deal you get the same king, you may be sure that the ace is either on your right or your left, according to the deal; of course, if you get the ace, then the same probability, or rather necessity, exists as to the king; and so on. Knave, queen, king, ace, of the same name, are almost sure to be separated in the deal between the four players, or one player will have two of them. The observation is a tax upon the faculties; but I am sure, quite sure, that the thing can be done, and is, when done, of material service; although, of course, the knowledge can be turned to account only by an
Whist is, decidedly, one of the fairest of games; but for that very reason, it is open to the greatest over-reaching, or, if you like, cheating.
With regard to dice, of course, they were and, doubtless, are still loaded. Such were formerly called `dispatches,' because they would `in five minutes dispatch £500 out of the pocket of any young man when intoxicated with champagne.'
Roulette and Rouge et Noir tables were and are so arranged as always to make the bank win at the will of the attendant, regulating them with a touch.
At Hazard, they used `low or high dice,' that is, with only certain numbers on them, high or low, — a pair of which every sharper always had in his possession, changing them with great dexterity. They also used `cramped' boxes, by which they `cogged' or fastened the dice in the box as they dropped them in, and so could drop them out with the required face upwards.
3. ANECDOTES OF THE PASSIONS AND VICISSITUDES OF GAMESTERS.
ALTHOUGH all the motives of human action have long been known — although psychology, or the science of soul and sentiment, has ceased to present us with any new facts — it is quite certain that our edifice of Morals is not quite built up. We may rest assured that as long as intellectual man exists the problem will be considered unsolved, and the question will be agitated. Future generations will destroy what we establish, and will fashion a something according to their advancement, and so on; for if there be a term which, of all others, should be expunged from the dictionaries of all human beings, it seems to be Lord Russell's word Finality. Something new will always be wanted. `Sensation' is the very life
The gamester lives only for the `sensation' of gaming. Ménage tells us of a gamester who declared that he had never seen any luminary above the horizon but the moon. Saint Evremond, writing to the Count de Grammont, says — `You play from morning to night, or rather from night to morning. All the rays of the gamester's existence terminate in play; it is on this centre that his very existence depends. He enjoys not an hour of calm or serenity. During the day he longs for night, and during the night he dreads the return of day.'
Being always pre-occupied, gamesters are subject to a ridiculous absence of mind. Tacitus tells us that the Emperor Vitellius was so torpid that he would have forgotten he was a prince unless people had reminded him of it from time to time.[8] Many gamesters have forgotten that they were husbands and fathers. During play some one said that the government were about to levy a tax on bachelors. `Then I shall be ruined!' exclaimed
This infatuation may be simply ridiculous; but it has also a horrible aspect. A distracted wife has rushed to the gaming table, imploring her husband, who had for two entire days been engaged at play, to return to his home.
`Only let me stay one moment longer — only one moment. . . . . I shall return perhaps the day after to-morrow,' he stammered out to the wretched woman, who retired. Alas! he returned sooner than he had promised. His wife was in bed, holding the last of her children to her breast.
`Get up, madam,' said the ruined gambler, `the bed on which you lie belongs to us no longer!' . . .
When the gamester is fortunate, he enjoys his success elsewhere; to his home he brings only consternation.
A wife had received the most solemn promise from her husband that he would gamble no more. One night, however, he slunk out of bed, rushed to the gaming table, and lost all the money he had with him. He tried to borrow more, but was
But it is to the gaming room that we must go to behold the progress of the terrible drama — the ebb and flow of opposite movements — the shocks of alternate hope and fear, infinitely varied in the countenance, not only of the actors, but also of the spectators. What is visible, however, is nothing in comparison to the secret agony. It is in his heart that the tempest roars most fiercely.
Two players once exhibited their rage, the one by a mournful silence, the other by repeated imprecations. The latter, shocked at the sang-froid of his neighbour, reproached him for enduring, without complaint, such losses one after the other. `Look here!' said the other, uncovering his breast and displaying it all bloody with lacerations.
It is only at play that we can observe, from moment to moment, all the phases of despair; from time to time there occur new ones — strange, eccentric, or terrible. After having lost quietly,
At Bayonne, in 1725, a French officer, in a rage at billiards, jammed a billiard-ball in his mouth, where it stuck fast, arresting respiration, until it was, with difficulty, extracted by a surgeon. Dusaulx states that he was told the fact by a lieutenant-general, who was an eye-witness.
It is well known that gamblers, like dogs that bite a stone flung at them, have eaten up the cards, crushed up the dice, broken the tables, damaged the furniture, and finally `pitched into' each other — as described by Lucian in his Saturnalia. Dusaulx assures us that he saw an enraged gambler put a burning candle into his mouth, chew it, and
The following strange but apparently authentic fact, is related in the Mercure François (Tome I. Année 1610).
`A man named Pennichon, being a prisoner in the Conciergerie during the month of September, 1610, died there of a wonderfully sudden death. He could not refrain from play. Having one day lost his money, he uttered frightful imprecations against his body and against his soul, swearing that he would never play at cards again. Nevertheless, a few days after, he began to play again with those in his apartment, and on a dispute respecting discarding, he repeated his execrable oaths. And when one of the company told him he should fear the Divine justice, he only swore the more, and made such confusion that there had to be another deal. But as soon as three other cards
In some cases the effect of losses at play is simply stupefaction. Some players, at the end of the sitting, neither know what they do nor what they say. M. de Crequi, afterwards Duc de Lesdiguières, leaving a gambling party with Henry IV., after losing a large sum, met M. de Guise in the court-yard of the castle. `My friend,' said he to the latter, `where are the quarters of the Guards now-a-days?' M. de Guise stepped back, saying, `Excuse me, sir, I don't belong to this country,' and immediately went to the king, whom he greatly amused with the anecdote.
A dissipated buck, who had been sitting all night at Hazard, went to a church, not far from St James's, just before the second reading of the Lord's Prayer, on Sunday. He was scarcely seated before he dozed, and the clerk in a short time bawled out Amen, which he pronounced A —
At play, a winner redoubles his caution and sang-froid just in proportion as his adversary gets bewildered by his losses, becoming desperate; he takes advantage of the weakness of the latter, giving him the law, and striving for greater success. When the luck changes, however, the case is re-versed, and the former loser becomes, in his turn,
Sometimes avidity makes terrible mistakes; many, in order to win more, have lost their all to persons who had not a shilling to lose. During the depth of a severe winter, a gamester beheld with terror the bottom of his purse. Unable to resolve on quitting the gaming table — for players in that condition are always the most stubborn — he shouted to his valet — `Go and fetch my great sack.' These words, uttered without design, stimulated the cupidity of those who no longer cared to play with him, and now they were eager for it. His luck changed, and he won thrice as much as he had lost. Then his `great sack' was brought to
In the madness of gaming the player stakes everything after losing his money — his watch, his rings, his clothing; and some have staked their ears, and others their very lives — instances of all which will be related in the sequel.
Not very long ago a publican, who lost all his money, staked his public-house, lost it, and had to `clear out.' The man who won it is alive and flourishing.
`The debt of honour must be paid: `these are the terrible words that haunt the gamester as he wakes (if he has slept) on the morning after the night of horrors: these are the furies that take him in hand, and drag him to torture, laughing the while. . . .
What a `sensation' it must be to lose one's all! A man, intoxicated with his gains, left one gaming house and entered another. As soon as he entered he exclaimed, `Well, I am filled, my pockets are full of gold, and here goes, Odds or -Even?' `Odds,' cried a player. It was Odds, and the fortunate winner pocketed the enormous sum just boasted of by the other.
On the other hand, sudden prosperity has
Many fine intellects among players have been brutified by loses; others, in greater number, have been so by their winnings. Some in the course of their prosperity perish from idleness, get deranged, and ruin themselves after ruining others. An instance is mentioned of an officer who won so enormously that he actually lost his senses in counting his gains. Astonished at himself, he thought he was no longer an ordinary mortal; and required his valets to do him extraordinary honours, flinging handfuls of gold to them. The same night, however, he returned to the gaming house, and recovered from his madness when he had lost not
UNFORTUNATE WINNING.
M. G — me was a most estimable man, combining in himself the best qualities of both heart and head. He was good-humoured, witty, and benevolent. With these qualifications, and one other which seldom operates to a man's disadvantage — a clear income of three thousand a year — the best society in Paris was open to him. He had been a visitor in that capital about a month, when he received an invitation to one of the splendid dinners given weekly at the salon. As he never played, he hesitated about the propriety of accepting it, but on the assurance that it would not be expected of him to play; and, moreover, as he might not again have so good an opportunity of visiting an establishment of the kind, he resolved to go — merely for the satisfaction of his curiosity. He had a few stray napoleons in his purse, to throw them — `just for the good of the house,' as he considered it — could hardly be called play, so he threw them. Poor fellow! He left off a winner of fourteen hundred napoleons, or about as many
LORD WORTHALL'S DESPERATE WAGER.
At a gambling party Lord Worthall had lost all his money, and in a fit of excitement staked his whole estate against £1000, at cutting low with cards, and in cutting exclaimed, —
Or Worthall's gone for ever and aye.'
He had the luck to cut the deuce of diamonds; and to commemorate the serious event, he got the deuce of diamonds cut in marble and had it fixed on the parapet of his mansion.
THE CELEBRATED THADDEUS STEVENS.
He was an inveterate gamester on a small scale, and almost invariably, after a day's duty in the House, would drop in at a favourite casino, and win or lose fifty dollars — that being the average limit of his betting.
A PROVIDENT GAMBLER.
A Monsieur B — , well known in Parisian life, having recently lost every shilling at a certain sporting club where play is carried on in Paris, went to the country, where his sister lent him £150. He won all back again, and got a considerable sum of money in hand. He then went to his hotel, to his bootmaker, and tailor, paid them, and made arrangements to be fed, clothed, and shod for ten years.
A MAGNIFICENT FORTUNE WASTED.
Lord Foley, who died in 1793, entered upon the turf with an estate of £18,000 per annum, and £100,000 ready money. He left with a ruined constitution, an encumbered estate, and not a shilling of ready money!
AN ENTERPRISING CLERK.
Lord Kenyon, in 1795, tried a clerk `for misapplying his master's confidence,' and the facts were as follows. He went with a bank note of £1000 to a gaming house in Osendon Street, where he won a little. He also won two hundred guineas
GAMBLING FOR RECRUITS FOR THE ARMY.
An Irish officer struck out a mode of gambling, for recruits. He gave five guineas bounty, and one hundred to be raffled for by young recruits, — the winner to be paid immediately, and to purchase his discharge, if he pleased, for £20. The dice — box was constantly going at his recruiting office in Dublin.
DOUBLING THE STAKES.
A dashing young man of large fortune, about the year 1820, lost at a subscription house at the West End, £80,000. The winner was a person of high rank. The young man, however, by doubling the stakes, not only recovered his losses, but in his turn gained considerably of his antagonist.
AN ANNUITY FOR A GAMBLING DEBT.
A fashionable nobleman had won from a young
SIR WILLIAM COLEPEPPER.
It is told of Sir William Colepepper that, after he had been ruined himself at the gaming table, his whole delight was to sit there and see others ruined. Hardened wretch — `Who though he plays no more, overlooks the cards' — with this diabolical disposition!
THE BITER BITTEN.
A certain duchess, of a ci-devant lord-lieutenant, who expected to make a pigeon of Marshal Blucher, was fleeced of £200,000; to pay which her lord was obliged to sell a great part of his property, and reside on the continent.
HUNTED DOWN.
A stout-hearted and gallant military baronet lost an immense sum at a celebrated gaming house; but was so fortunate as to recover it, with £1200 more. This last sum he presented to the waiters. He was pursued by two of the `play-
COMING OF AGE.
When Sir C — T — , a weak young man, with a large fortune, came of age, the Greeks, thinking him an excellent quarry, went to York Races, made him drunk and plundered him of a large sum. The next morning one of the party waited upon him to acquaint him of his loss — (£20,000 or £30,000), and brought bonds for his signature to that amount!
HEAVY LIABILITIES TO BEGIN WITH.
In the year 1799, when the Marquis of Donegal succeeded to the title on his father's death, his debts, principally to gamblers and money-lenders, amounted to two hundred and fifty thousand pounds sterling!
A GENTLEMAN TURNED BARBER.
In an old magazine I find the following curious statement: —
`There is now living in Barnaby Street, Carnaby Market, a man who, although exercising the menial office of penny barber, was in his younger days in possession of estates and personal property to a large amount, and is the only lineal descendant remaining of the very ancient family of the H — s of Bristol.
`His relations dying when he was young, he was placed under proper guardians, and received a liberal education, first at Westminster, and afterwards at Cambridge, suitable to his rank and fortune. When of age he converted his estates into money, and retired to Dublin, where he remained some time. He then made the tour of Europe, and returned to Ireland, where he went through all the scenes of dissipation to which young men are so much addicted, till at last he was beset by those harpies the gamblers, and stripped of his immense fortune in one single night!
`He then subsisted for some little time on the bounty of his undoers, who intended to make him one of them; but, not having sufficient address for the profession, he was dismissed and "left in the lurch;'' and most of his friends discarding him, he embarked with his last guinea for England. Here
PENSIONED OFF BY A GAMING HOUSE.
A visitor at Frascati's gaming house in Paris tells us: —
`I saw the Chevalier de la C — (a descendant of the once celebrated romance-writer) when he was nearly ninety. The mode of life of this old man was singular. He had lost a princely property at the play-table, and by a piece of good fortune of rare occurrence to gamesters, and unparalleled generosity, the proprietors of the salon allowed him a pension to support him in his miserable senility, just sufficient to supply him with a wretched lodging — bread, and a change of raiment once in every three or four years! In addition to this he was allowed a supper — which was, in fact,
A Mr R — y, son of a baronet, left Wattier's club one night with only £4 in his pocket, saying that he would look in at the hells. He did so, and, returning after three o'clock in the morning, offered to bet £500 that he had above £4000. The result proved that he had £4300, all won at gaming tables, from the small beginning of £4. He then sat down to play games of skill at Wattier's, and went home at six o'clock without a single pound! The same man subsequently won
A major of the Rifle Brigade, in consequence of gambling in London, by which he lost vast sums of money, went out of his senses and died a few years ago in an asylum. This occurred within the last ten or twelve years.
Says Mr Seymour Harcourt, in his `Gaming Calendar,' `I have myself seen hanging in chains a man whom, a short time before, I saw at a Hazard table!'
Hogarth lent his tremendous power to the portrayal of the ruined gamester, and shows it to the life in his print of the gaming house in the `Rake's Progress.'
Three stages of that species of madness which attends gaming are there described. On the first shock all is inward dismay. The ruined gamester is represented leaning against a wall with his arms across, lost in an agony of horror. Shortly after this horrible gloom bursts into a storm and fury. He tears in pieces whatever comes near him, and, kneeling down, invokes curses on himself. His next attack is on others — on every one whom he imagines to have been instrumental in his ruin. The eager joy of the winning gamester, the atten
HOW MANY GAMESTERS LIVE BY PLAY?
It is an observation made by those who calculate on the gaming world, that above nine-tenths of the persons who play live by it. Now, as the ordinary establishment of a genteel gamester, as he is commonly called, cannot be less than £1000 per annum, luck, which turns out equal in the long run, will not support him; he must therefore live by what they call among themselves the best of the game — or, in plain English, cheating.
So much for the inner and outer life of gamblers. And now I shall introduce Mr Ben. Disraeli, recounting, in the happiest vein of his younger days, a magnificent gambling scene, quite on a par with the legend of the Hindoo epic before quoted,[12] and which, I doubt not, will (to use the young Disraeli's own words) make the reader `scud along and warm up into friskiness.' [12] Chapter II.
A curious phrase occurs in the 9th chapter of
Although the scene of the drama is part of a novel, yet there can be no doubt of its being `founded on fact' — at any rate, I think there never was a narrative of greater verisimilitude.
`After dinner, with the exception of Cogit, who was busied in compounding some wonderful liquid for the future refreshment, they sat down to Ecarté. Without having exchanged a word upon the subject, there seemed a general understanding among all the parties, that to-night was to be a pitched battle — and they began at once, very briskly. Yet, in spite of their universal deter-mination, midnight arrived without anything very decisive. Another hour passed over, and then Tom Cogit kept touching the baron's elbow, and whispering in a voice which everybody could understand. All this meant that supper was ready. It was brought into the room.
`Gaming has one advantage — it gives you an appetite; that is to say, so long as you have a chance remaining. The duke had thousands, — for at present his resources were unimpaired, and he was exhausted by the constant attention and
`Our hero devoured — we use the word advisedly, as fools say in the House of Commons — he devoured the roast beef, and rejecting the hermitage with disgust, asked for porter.
`They set to again, fresh as eagles. At six o'clock, accounts were so complicated, that they stopped to make up their books. Each played with his memorandums and pencil at his side. Nothing fatal had yet happened. The duke owed Lord Dice about £5000, and Temple Grace owed him as many hundreds. Lord Castlefort also was his debtor to the tune of 750, and the baron was in his books, but slightly.
`Every half-hour they had a new pack of cards, and threw the used ones on the floor. All this time Tom Cogit did nothing but snuff the candles, stir the fire, bring them a new pack, and occasionally made a tumbler for them.
`At eight o'clock the duke's situation was worsened. The run was greatly against him, and perhaps his losses were doubled. He pulled up again the next hour or two; but, nevertheless, at ten o'clock owed every one something. No one offered to give over; and every one, perhaps, felt that his object was not obtained. They made their toilets, and went down-stairs to breakfast. In the mean time the shutters were opened, the room aired; and in less than an hour they were at it again.
`They played till dinner-time without intermission; and though the duke made some desperate efforts, and some successful ones, his losses were, nevertheless, trebled. Yet he ate an excellent dinner, and was not at all depressed; because the more he lost the more his courage and his resources seemed to expand. At first, he had limited himself to 10,000; after breakfast, it was to have been 20,000; then 30,000 was the ultimatum; and now he dismissed all thoughts of limits from his mind, and was determined to risk or gain everything.
`At midnight he had lost £48,000.
`Affairs now began to be serious. His supper
`When you play to win back, the fun is over: there is nothing to recompense you for your bodily tortures and your degraded feelings; and the very best result that can happen, while it has no charms, seems to your cowed mind impossible.
`On they played, and the duke lost more. His mind was jaded. He floundered — he made desperate efforts, but plunged deeper in the slough. Feeling that, to regain his ground, each card must tell, he acted on each as if it must win, and the consequences of this insanity (for a gamester at such a crisis is really insane) were, that his losses were prodigious.
`Another morning came, and there they sat, ankle-deep in cards. No attempt at breakfast now — no affectation of making a toilet, or airing the room. The atmosphere was hot, to be sure, but it well became such a hell. There they sat, in total, in positive forgetfulness of everything but the hot game they were hunting down. There was not a man in the room, except Tom Cogit, who could have told you the name of the town in which they
`Lord Castlefort rested with his arms on the table: — a false tooth had got unhinged. His Lordship, who, at any other time, would have been most annoyed, coolly put it in his pocket. His cheeks had fallen, and he looked twenty years older.
`Lord Dice had torn off his cravat, and his hair flung down over his callous, bloodless checks, straight as silk.
`Temple Grace looked as if he were blighted by lightning; and his deep-blue eyes gleamed like a hyæna.
`The baron was least changed.
`Tom Cogit, who smelt that the crisis was at hand, was as quiet as a bribed rat.
`On they played till six o'clock in the evening,
`Immense as this loss was, he was more struck — more appalled, let us say — at the strangeness of the surrounding scene, than even by his own ruin. As he looked upon his fellow-gamesters, he seemed, for the first time in his life, to gaze upon some of those hideous demons of whom he had read. He looked in the mirror at himself. A blight seemed to have fallen over his beauty, and his presence seemed accursed. He had pursued a dissipated, even more than a dissipated, career. Many were the nights that had been spent by him not on his couch; great had been the exhaustion that he had often experienced; haggard had sometimes even been the lustre of his youth. But when had been marked upon his brow this harrowing care? When had his features before been stamped with this anxiety, this anguish, this baffled desire, this strange, unearthly scowl, which made him even tremble? What! was it possible? — it could not
`In the darkness of his meditations a flash burst from his lurid mind, a celestial light appeared to dissipate this thickening gloom, and his soul felt, as it were, bathed with the softening radiancy. He thought of May Dacre, he thought of everything that was pure, and holy, and beautiful, and luminous, and calm. It was the innate virtue of the man that made this appeal to his corrupted nature. His losses seemed nothing; his dukedom would be too slight a ransom for freedom from these ghouls, and for the breath of the sweet air.
`He advanced to the baron, and expressed his desire to play no more. There was an immediate stir. All jumped up, and now the deed was done. Cant, in spite of their exhaustion, assumed her reign. They begged him to have his revenge, — were quite annoyed at the result, — had no doubt he would recover if he proceeded.
`Without noticing their remarks, he seated
`The duke, though sick at heart, would not leave the room with any evidence of a broken spirit; and when Lord Castlefort again repeated — "Pay us when we meet again,'' he said, "I think it very improbable that we shall meet again, my Lord. I wished to know what gaming was. I had heard a great deal about it. It is not so very disgusting; but I am a young man, and cannot play tricks with my complexion.''
`He reached his house. The Bird was out. He gave orders for himself not to be disturbed, and he went to bed; but in vain he tried to sleep. What rack exceeds the torture of an excited brain and an exhausted body? His hands and feet were like ice, his brow like fire; his ears rung with supernatural roaring; a nausea had seized upon
4. ATROCITIES, DUELS, SUICIDES, AND EXECUTION OF GAMBLERS.
THE history of all nations is but the record of their cupidity; and when the fury of gaming appears on the scene, it has never failed to double the insolence and atrocities of tyranny.
The atrocious gambling of the Hindoo Rajas has been related;[14] and I have incidentally adverted to similar concomitants of the vice among all nations. I now propose to bring together a series of facts specially elucidative of the harrowing theme. [14] Chapter II.
One of the Ptolemys, kings of Egypt, required all causes to be submitted to him whilst at play, and pronounced even sentence of death according to chance. On one occasion his wife, Berenice, pro
Tolomnius, King of the Veii, happened to be playing at dice when the arrival of Roman ambassadors was announced. At the very instant he uttered the word Kill, a term of the game; the word was misinterpreted by the hearers, and they went forthwith and massacred the ambassadors. Livy suggests that this was an excuse alleged after the commission of the deed; but gamesters are subject to such absence of mind that there is really nothing incredible or astonishing in the act. `Sire,' exclaimed a messenger to the Caliph Alamin, `it is no longer time for play — Babylon is besieged!' `Silence!' said the caliph, `don't you see I am on the point of giving checkmate?' The same story is told of a Duke of Normandy.
Wars have arisen from very trivial causes — among the rest gambling. Henry, the son of William the Conqueror, was playing at chess with Louis, the son of Philip, King of France. The
A gaming quarrel was the cause of the slap in the face given by the Duc Réné to Louis XII., then only Duc d'Orleans. This slap was the origin of a ligue which was termed `the mad war.' The resentment of the outraged prince was not appeased until he mounted the throne, when he uttered these memorable words: — `A King of France does not avenge insults offered to a Duke of Orleans.'
Many narratives of suicide committed by desperate gamblers are on record, some of which I now adduce.
SIR JOHN BLAND, OF KIPPAX PARK.
Sir John Bland, of Kippax Park, flirted away his whole fortune at Hazard. `He, t'other night,' says Walpole, ' exceeded what was lost by the late
LORD MOUNTFORD.
Lord Mountford came to a tragic end through his gambling. He had lost money; feared to be reduced to distress; asked for a government appointment, and determined to throw the die of life or death on the answer received from court. The answer was unfavourable. He consulted several persons, indirectly at first, afterwards pretty directly, on the easiest mode of finishing life; invited a dinner-party for the day after; supped at White's, and played at Whist till one o'clock of the New Year's morning. Lord Robert Bertie drank to him `a happy new year;' he clapped his hand strangely to his eyes. In the morning, he sent for a lawyer and three witnesses, executed his will, made them read it over twice, paragraph by paragraph, asked the lawyer if that will would stand good though a man were to shoot himself. Being assured it would, he said — `Pray stay, while I step into the next room;' went into the next room and shot him
A SUICIDE ROBBING PETER TO PAY PAUL.
Gamblers have been known to set as coolly and deliberately about blowing out their brains as if they had only been going to light their cigars. Lord Orford, in his correspondence with Horace Walpole, mentions two curious instances.
One of the fashionable young men of Lord Orford's day had been unhappily decoyed into a gambling house, where his passion for play became so great that he spent nearly the whole of his time in throwing the dice. He continued to gamble until he had not only lost a princely fortune, but had incurred a large amount of debt among his tradesmen. With the loss of his money, and the utter beggary which stared him in the face, the unfortunate victim of play lost all relish for life; and sought in death the only refuge he could fancy from the infamy and misery which he had brought upon himself. But whilst fully resolved on self — destruction, he thought, before carrying his fatal purpose into execution, he might as well do his tradesmen an act of justice, even if in so doing he
REVELATIONS OF A GAMBLER ON THE POINT OF COMMITTING SELF-MURDER.
The following is `A full and particular account of a person who threw himself into the Thames, from Blackfriars Bridge, on Wednesday, July 10, 1782; with the melancholy paper he left behind him, accounting to his wife and children for so rash an action.' It is said that several thousands of the papers were dispersed through London, and it is to be hoped that some of them might produce that good effect which seems to have been so anx-iously desired by the person who wished them to be distributed.
`Midnight, July 10, 1782.
`Whoever thou art that readest this paper,
`Reader, art thou of my own sex? Art thou a man? Oh, in whatever rank of life, whether high or low, — beware of gambling! Beware of so much as approaching an E O table! Had I ever met with such a dreadful warning as I now offer thee, I might perhaps have been saved from death — have been snatched from damnation. Reader, art thou a woman? Oh, whether rich or poor, whether wife, mother, sister, or daughter, — if thou suspect that the late hours, the feverish body, the disturbed mind, the ruffled temper, the sudden extravagance of him whom thou lovest, are caused by frequenting the gaming table, oh, fail not to discover thy sus-picions — fail not to remonstrate! Had but my dear wife remonstrated with me, when she saw me, in consequence of my winnings, indulge in expense, which she must have known I could not honestly afford, she would not now, within the next hour, be deprived of her husband — of the only support of herself and her three poor children in this world, — and deprived of him in a manner which effectually
`Yes, in less than an hour, coward as I am, I shall have deserted my duty and my family in this world; and, wretch as I am, shall have rushed into all the horrors of hell in another world, by drowning myself.
`By curiosity I was first led to the E O table. Ashamed to stand idle I put upon E, it came E; upon O, it came O. Fortune favoured me (as I foolishly called it), and I came away a winner. Something worse than curiosity, though hardly more dangerous, carried me to another table another night. My view in going was answered. My view was to win, and again I won in the course of the evening. Again I went, and again I won. For some weeks this was the constant story. Oh, happy had I lost at first! Now I went every night. Everything I ought to have done, neglected. Up all night, I was forced to lie in bed all day. The strength of my mind, which at this moment might save me, was hourly wasting away. My wife was deceived with continual falsehoods, to which nothing but her fondness for me blinded her. Even my winnings, with the expense and extravagance in
`But fortune, my new, my false deity, deserted me. My luck turned. I am undone! Ruined! A beggar! My wife and children will want a morsel of bread to eat. * * * * To destroy myself is the only way to preserve my family from want, and to keep myself from the gallows. This morning I absolutely hesitated whether I should not procure a sum of money with which to try my luck by forgery. Gamesters, think of that — forgery! O my dear wife, is not anything better than seeing me conveyed to Tyburn? Yes, it is better that before many hours you and your three helpless daughters should be hanging in tears (I little merit) over my lifeless, cold, and swollen body.
`Readers, farewell! From my sad and voluntary death, learn wisdom. In consequence of gaming I go to seek my destruction in the Thames. Oh, think in what manner he deserves to be punished who commits a crime which he is fully persuaded merits, and will not fail to meet, the severest punishment.'
The narrative proceeds to state that, `between one and two o'clock in the morning he took a sad farewell of this world, and leaped over Blackfriars Bridge. It pleased Providence, however, that he should be seen committing this desperate action by two watermen, who found his body after it had been a considerable time under water. In consequence of the methods used by the men of the Humane Society, he was at length almost miraculously restored to life and to his family. It is further stated that — `In consequence of the advice of a worthy clergyman he was restored to reason and to religion. He now wonders how he could think of committing so horrid a crime; and is not without hope that by a life of continual repentance and exemplary religion, he may obtain pardon hereafter. The paper which he wrote before he set forth to drown himself he still desires should be made as public as possible, and that this narrative should be added to it.
INCORRIGIBLE.
In the year 1799, Sir W. L — , Bart., finding his eldest son extremely distressed and embarrassed, told him that he would relieve him from all his
SUICIDE IN 1816.
In 1816 a gentleman, the head of a first-rate concern in the city, put a period to his existence by blowing out his brains. He had gone to the Argyle Rooms a few nights before the act, and accompanied a female home in a coach, with two men, friends of the woman. When they got to her residence the two men proposed to the gentleman to play for a dozen champagne to treat the lady with, which the gentleman declined. They, however, after a great deal of persuasion, prevailed on him to play for small sums, and, according to the usual trick of gamblers, allowed him to win at first, till they began to play for double, when there is no doubt the fellows produced loaded dice, and the gentleman lost to the amount of £1800! This
This exposure had such an effect on his feelings that he made an excuse to retire — did so — and blew out his brains with a pistol!
This rash act was the more to be lamented because it prevented the bringing to condign punishment, the plundering villains who were the cause of it.[16] [16] Annual Register, vol. lviii.
OTHER INSTANCES.
A gallant Dutch officer, after having lost a splendid fortune not long since (1823) in a gambling house at Aix-la-Chapelle, shot himself. It Russian general, also, of immense wealth, terminated his existence in the same manner and for the same cause. More recently, a young Englishman, who lost the whole of an immense fortune by gambling at Paris, quitted this world by stabbing himself in the neck with a fork. A short time previously another Englishman, whose birth was as high as his wealth had been considerable, blew his brains out in the Palais Royal, after having literally lost his last shilling. Finally, an unfortunate printer at Paris, who had a wife and five children, finished his earthly career for the same cause, by suffocating himself with the fumes of charcoal; he said, in his farewell note to his unhappy wife — `Behold the effect of gaming!'[17] [17] Ubi suprà.
IF I LOSE I SHALL COMMIT SUICIDE.
A young man having gambled away his last shilling, solicited the loan of a few pounds from
Still bent upon play, and greedy for the means to gratify his passion, the unhappy man, as if struck by a sudden thought, exclaimed — `I'll give you security — the clothes on my back are quite new, and worth eight guineas; you shall have them as security. Lend me two sovereigns on them.'
`Suppose you lose,' doggedly rejoined the other, `I cannot strip them off your back.' `Don't trouble yourself on that head,' replied the desperate wretch; `if I lose I shall commit suicide, which I have been meditating for some time, and you shall surely have my clothes. I shall return to my
The two sovereigns were advanced, and in ten or twelve minutes were lost. The keeper of the table demanded the clothes, and the unfortunate man stripped himself with the utmost coolness of manner, and wrapping his body in a worn-out greatcoat, quitted the place with the full purpose of committing self-murder. He did not direct his steps homeward, however, but resolved to ac-complish the horrid deed by suspending himself from a lamp-post in a dark lane near the place. While making the necessary preparations he was observed by a constable, who at once took him into custody, and on the following morning he was carried before the magistrate, where all the circumstances of the affair came out.
SUICIDE AT VERDUN.
During the great French War, among other means resorted to in order to ease the English prisoners at Verdun of their loose cash, a gaming table was set up for their sole accommodation, and, as usual, led to scenes of great depravity and
`IN AT THE DEATH.'
In 1819 an inquest was held on the body of a gentleman found hanging from one of the trees in St James's Park. The evidence established the
The three following stories, if not of actual suicide, relate crimes which bear a close resemblance to self-murder.
A GAMBLER PAWNING HIS EARS.
A clerk named Chambers, losing his monthly pay, which was his all, at a gaming table, begged to borrow of the manager's; but they knew his history too well to lend without security, and therefore demanded something in pawn. `I have nothing to give but my ears,' he replied. `Well,' said one of the witty demons, `let us have them.' The youth immediately took a knife out of his
A GAMBLER SUBMITTING TO BE HANGED.
The following incident is said to have occurred in London: — Two fellows were observed by a patrol sitting at a lamp-post in the New Road; and, on closely watching them, the latter dis-covered that one was tying up the other, who offered no resistance, by the neck. The patrol interfered to prevent such a strange kind of murder, and was assailed by both, and very con-siderably beaten for his good offices; the watchmen, however, poured in, and the parties were secured. On examination next morning, it appeared that the men had been gambling; that one had lost all his money to the other, and had at last proposed to stake his clothes. The winner demurred — observing that he could not strip his adversary naked in the event of his losing. `Oh,' replied the other, `do not give yourself any uneasiness about that; if I lose I shall be unable to live, and you shall hang me, and take my clothes
TWO GAMBLERS TOSSING WHO SHOULD HANG THE OTHER.
In the year 1812 an extraordinary investigation took place at Bow Street. Croker, the officer, was passing along Hampstead Road; he observed at a short distance before him two men on a wall, and directly after saw the tallest of them, a stout man, about six feet high, hanging by his neck from a lamp-post attached to the wall, being that instant tied up and turned off by the short man. This unexpected and extraordinary sight astonished the officer; he made up to the spot with all speed, and just after he arrived there the tall man, who had been hanged, fell to the ground, the handkerchief with which he had been suspended having given way. Croker produced his staff, said he was an officer, and demanded to know of the other man the cause of such conduct; in the mean time the
The magistrates, continues the report in the `Annual Register,' expressed their horror and disgust; and ordered the man who had been hanged to find bail for the violent and unjustifiable assault upon the officer; and the short one, for hanging the other — a very odd decision in the
Innumerable duels have resulted from quarrels over the gaming table, although nothing could be more Draconic than the law especially directed against such duels. By the Act of Queen Anne against gaming, all persons sending a challenge on account of gaming disputes were liable to forfeit all their goods and to be committed to prison for two years. No case of the kind, however, was ever prosecuted on that clause of the Act, which was, in other respects, very nearly inoperative.
GAMBLING DUELS IN THE YEAR 1818.
It so happened that almost every month of the year 1818 was `distinguished' by a duel or two, resulting from quarrels at gambling or in gambling houses.
January. `A meeting took place yesterday at an early hour, between Captain B — r — y and Lieutenant T — n — n, in consequence of a dispute at
January. `A meeting took place on the 9th instant, at Calais, between Lieut. Finch, 20th regiment of Dragoons, and Lieut. Boileau, on half-pay of the 41st regiment. Lieut. Finch was bound over, some days back, to keep the peace in England; in consequence of which he proceeded to Calais, accompanied by his friend, Captain Butler, where they were followed by Lieut. Boileau and his friend Lieut. Hartley. It was settled by Captain Butler, previous to Lieut. Finch taking his ground, that he was bound in honour to receive Lieut. Boileau's fire as he had given so serious a provocation as a blow. This arrangement was, however, defeated, by Lieut. Finch's pistol "accidentally'' going off, apparently in the direction of his opponent, which would probably have led to fatal consequences had it not been for the implicit reliance placed by Lieut. Boileau's friend on the strict honour of Capt. Butler, whose anxiety, steadiness, and gentlemanly conduct on this and every other occasion, were too well known to leave a
February 17. `Information was received at the public office, Marlborough Street, on Saturday last, that a duel was about to take place yesterday, in the fields contiguous to Chalk Farm, between Colonel Tucker and Lieut. Nixon, the latter having challenged the former in public company, for which and previous abuse the colonel inflicted severe chastisement with a thick stick. Subsequent information was received that the colonel's friends deemed it unnecessary for him to meet the challenger, but that his remedy was to repeat the former chastisement when insulted. It was further stated that a few half-pay officers, of inferior rank, had leagued together for the purpose of procuring others to give a challenge, and which it was the determination to put down by adopting the colonel's plan.'
February. `A captain in the army shook hands with a gallant lieut.-colonel (who had distinguished himself in the Peninsula) at one of the West End gaming houses, and Lieut. N — , who was present,
April. `A meeting was to have taken place yesterday in consequence of a dispute at play, between Captain R — n — s and Mr B — e — r, a gentleman of fortune; but it was prevented by the interference of the police, and the parties escaped. It
May. `In consequence of a dispute at a gaming table, on Monday night, in the vicinity of Piccadilly, Mr M — , who was an officer in the British service at Brussels, and Mr B — n, a medical man, met, at three in the morning, on Tuesday, in the King's Road. They fought at twelve paces. Mr B — n was wounded on the back part of the hand, and the affair was adjusted.'
July. `A duel was fought yesterday morning, on Wimbledon Common, between a Mr Arrowsmith and Lieut. Flynn, which ended in the former being wounded in the thigh. The dispute which occasioned the meeting originated in a gaming transaction.'
September. `A duel was fought this morning on Hounslow Heath, between Messrs Hillson and Marsden. The dispute arose in one of the stands at Egham races. The latter was seriously wounded in the left side, and conveyed away in a gig.'
November. `A duel originating, over a dispute at play was fixed to take place on Wimbledon Common, at daybreak, yesterday morning, but in
GAMING DUEL AT PARIS, 1827.
A medical student, named Goulard, quarrelled at billiards with a fellow-student named Caire. Their mutual friends, having in vain tried every means of persuasion to prevent the consequences of the dispute, accompanied the young men without the walls of Paris. Goulard seemed disposed to submit to an arrangement, but Cairo obstinately refused. The seconds measured the ground, and the first shot having been won by Goulard, he fired, and Caire fell dead. Goulard did not appear during the prosecution that followed; he continued absent on the day fixed for judgment, and the court, conformably to the code of criminal proceedings, pronounced on the charge without the intervention of a jury. It acquitted Goulard of premeditation, but condemned him for contumacy, to perpetual hard labour, and to be branded; and this in spite of the fact that the advocate-general had demanded Goulard's acquittal of the charge.
THE END OF A GAMESTER.
In 1788, a Scotch gentleman, named William Brodie, was tried and convicted at Edinburgh, for stealing bank-notes and money, with violence. This man, at the death of his father, twelve years before, inherited a considerable estate in houses, in the city of Edinburgh, together with £10,000 in money; but, by an unhappy connection and a too great propensity to gaming, he was reduced to the desperation which brought him at last to the scaffold. It is stated that his demeanour on receiving the dreadful sentence was equally cool and determined; moreover, that he was dressed in a blue coat, fancy vest, satin breeches, and white silk stockings; a cocked hat; his hair full dressed and powdered; and, lastly, that he was carried back to prison in a chair. Such was the respectful treatment of `gentlemen' prisoners in Scotland towards the end of the last century.
DUEL WITH A SHARPER.
A Monsieur de Boisseuil, one of the Kings equerries, being at a card-party, detected one of the players cheating, and exposed his conduct.
The insulted `gentleman' demanded satisfaction, when Boisseuil replied that he did not fight with a person who was a rogue.
`That may be,' said the other, `but I do not like to be called one.'
They met on the ground, and Boisseuil received two desperate wounds from the sharper.
This man's plea against Boisseuil is a remarkable trait. Madame de Staël has alluded to it in her best style. `In France,' she says, `we constantly see persons of distinguished rank, who, when accused of an improper action, will say — "It may have been wrong, but no one will dare assert it to my face!'' Such an expression is an evident proof of confirmed depravity; for, what would be the condition of society if it was only requisite to kill one another, to commit with impunity every evil action, — to break one's word and assert falsehood — provided no one dared tell you that you lied?'
In countries where public opinion is more severe on the want of probity and fair-dealing, should a man transgress the laws of these principles of human conduct, ten duels a day would not enable him to recover the esteem he has forfeited.
MAJOR ONEBY AND MR GOWER.
This duel originated as follows: — It appears that a Major Oneby, being in company with a Mr Gower and three other persons, at a tavern, in a friendly manner, after some time began playing at Hazard; when one of the company, named Rich, asked if any one would set him three half-crowns; whereupon Mr Gower, in a jocular manner, laid down three half-pence, telling Rich he had set him three pieces, and Major Oneby at the same time set Rich three half-crowns, and lost them to him.
Immediately after this, Major Oneby, in a angry manner, turned about to Mr Gower and said — `It was an impertinent thing to set down half-pence,' and called him `an impertinent puppy' for so doing. To this Mr Gower answered — `Whoever calls me so is a rascal. `Thereupon Major Oneby took up a bottle, and with great force threw it at Mr Gower's head, but did not hit him, the bottle only brushing some of the powder out of his hair. Mr Gower, in return, immediately tossed a candlestick or a bottle at Major Oneby, which missed him; upon which they both rose to fetch their swords, which were then hung in the room,
At the expiration of that time, Mr Gower said to Major Oneby — `We have had hot words, and you were the aggressor, but I think we may pass it over' — at the same time offering him his hand; but the Major replied — `No, d — n you, I will have your blood.'
After this, the reckoning being paid, all the company, excepting Major Oneby, went out to go home, and he called to Mr Gower, saying — `Young man, come back, I have something to say to you.' Whereupon Mr Gower returned to the room, and immediately the door was closed, and the rest of the company excluded — when a clashing of swords was heard, and Major Oneby gave Mr Gower a mortal wound. It was found, on the breaking up of the company, that Major Oneby had his great coat over his shoulders, and that he had received three slight wounds in the fight. Mr Gower, being asked on his death-bed whether he had received his wounds in a manner among
THE NEPHEW OF A BRITISH PEER.
In 1813, the nephew of a British peer was executed at Lisbon. He had involved himself by gambling, and being detected in robbing the house of an English friend, by a Portuguese servant, he shot the latter dead to prevent discovery. This desperate act, however, did not enable him to escape the hands of justice. After execution, his head was severed from his body and fixed on a pole opposite the house in which the murder and robbery were committed.
The following facts will show the intimate connection between gambling and Robbery or Forgery.
EDWARD WORTLEY MONTAGU AND THE JEW ABRAHAM PAYBA.
Edward Wortley Montagu was the only son of the celebrated Lady Mary Wortley Montagu, whose eccentricities he inherited without her genius. Montagu, together with Lords Taffe and Southwell,
DR WILLIAM DODD.
Le Sage, in his `Gil Blas,' says that `the devil has a particular spite against private tutors; `and he might have added, against popular preachers. By popular preachers I do not mean such grand old things as Bossuet, Massillon, and Bourdaloue. All such men were proof against the fiery darts of the infernal tempter. From their earliest days they had been trained to live up to the Non nobis Domine, `Not unto us, O Lord, but unto thy name, give glory.' All of them had only at heart the glory of their church-cause; though, of course,
The last-named, too, was another La Fontaine in simplicity, preparing for his grandest predications by sorrily rasping on an execrable fiddle. So, if the devil had lifted him up to a high mountain, showing him all he would give him, he would have simply invited him to his lonely cell, to have a jig to the tune of his catguts.
Your popular preachers in England have been, and are, a different sort of spiritual workers. They have been, and are, individualities, perpetually reminded of the fact, withal; and fiercely tempted accordingly. The world, the flesh, and the devil, incessantly knock at their door. If they fall into the snare it is but natural, and much to be lamented.
Dr Dodd had many amiable qualities; but his reputation as a scholar, and his notoriety as a preacher, appear to have entirely turned his head.
He had presented to him a good living in Bedfordshire; but the income thereof was of no avail in supplying his wants: he was vain, pompous, in debt, a gambler. Temptation came upon him. To relieve himself he tried by indirect means
Lord Chesterfield has been accused of a cold and relentless disposition in having deserted his old tutor in his extremity. But Mr Jesse says that he heard it related by a person who lived at the period, that at a preliminary examination of the unfortunate divine, Lord Chesterfield, on some pretence, placed the forged document in Dodd's hands, with the kind intention that he should take the opportunity of destroying it, but the latter wanted either the courage or the presence of mind enough to avail himself of the occasion. This, however, is scarcely an excuse, for, certainly, it was not for Dr Dodd to destroy the fatal document. If Lord Chesterfield had wished to suppress that vital evidence he could have done so.
Dr Johnson exerted himself to the utmost to try and save poor Dodd; but George III. was inexorable. Respecting this benevolent attempt of the Doctor, Chalmers writes as follows: —
Dr Johnson appears indeed in this instance to
All applications for the Royal mercy having failed, Dr Dodd prepared himself for death, and with a warmth of gratitude wrote to Dr Johnson as follows: —
`June 25, Midnight.
`Accept, thou great and good heart, my earnest and fervent thanks and prayers for all thy benevolent and kind efforts in my behalf. — Oh! Dr Johnson! as I sought your knowledge at an early hour in my life, would to Heaven I had cultivated the love and acquaintance of so excellent a man! — I pray God most sincerely to bless you with the highest transports — the infelt satisfaction of humane and benevolent exertions! — And admitted, as I trust I shall be, to the realms of bliss before you,
`To the Reverend Dr Dodd.
`Dear Sir, — That which is appointed to all men is now coming upon you. Outward circumstances, the eyes and thoughts of men, are below the notice of an immortal being about to stand the trial for eternity, before the Supreme Judge of heaven and earth. Be comforted: your crime, morally or religiously considered, has no very deep dye of turpitude. It corrupted no man's principles. It attacked no man's life. It involved only a temporary and reparable injury. Of this, and of all other sins, you are earnestly to repent; and may God, who knoweth our frailty, and desireth not our death, accept your repentance, for the sake of His Son Jesus Christ our Lord!
`In requital of those well-intended offices which you are pleased so emphatically to acknow
`I am, dear Sir,
`Your affectionate servant,
`SAM. JOHNSON. Next day, 27th June, Dr Dodd was executed.
CAPTAIN DAVIS.
Captain Davis was some time in the Life Guards, and a lieutenant in the Yeomen of the Household — a situation which placed him often about the persons of the Royal family. He was seldom known to play for less stakes than £50, often won or lost large sums, and was represented as a gentleman of extensive and independent fortune, although some of his enemies declared otherwise, and repeated anecdotes to confirm the assertion. He was at length committed for forgeries to an immense amount. To the fidelity of a servant he owed his escape from Giltspur Street prison — another fatal example of the sure result of gambling. Heir to a title — moving in the first society — having held a commission in the most distinguished of the Royal regiments — he was reduced to the alternative of an ignominious flight
DESPERATE CAREER OF HENRY WESTON.
Henry Weston was nephew to the distinguished Admiral Sir Hugh Palliser.
Having unlimited control of the large property of his employer, a Mr Cowan, during the absence of the latter from town, he was tempted first to gamble in the funds, wherein being unfortunate, he next went to a gambling house in Pall Mall, and lost a very large sum; and at length, gamed away nearly all his master's property.
In this tremendous result — lost to all intents and purposes — he made a supreme effort to `patch up' the ruin he had made. He forged the name of General Tonyn; and so dexterously, that he obtained from the Bank of England the sum of £10,000.
This huge robbery from Peter was not to pay Paul. Not a bit of it. It was to try the fickle
He lost this £10,000 in two nights.
Did he despair at this hideous catastrophe? Did he tear his hair — rush out of the room — blow his brains out or drown himself? Not a bit of it. He `set his wits to work' once more. He procured a woman to personate General Tonyn's sister — forged again — and again obtained from the Bank of England another large supply of ready cash — with which, however, he `went off' this time.
He was caught; and then only he thought of self-murder, and cut his throat — but not effectually. He recovered, was tried at the Old Bailey, and hanged on the 6th of July, 1796.
No doubt the reader imagines that the man of such a career was an old stager — some long-visaged, parchment-faced fellow the other side of forty at least. Well, this hero of the gaming table, Henry Weston, was aged only twenty-three years! What terrible times those must have been to produce such a prodigy!
To the judge who tried him Henry Weston sent a list of a number of professional gamblers, among them was a person of high rank. Weston,
ARTHUR THISTLEWOOD.
It seems that the wretched traitor Arthur Thistlewood, who paid the forfeit of his life for his crimes, had dissipated by gaming the property he had acquired by a matrimonial connection — £12,000. An unfortunate transaction at cards, during the Lincoln races, involved him in difficulties, which he found it impossible to meet; and he fled to avoid the importunities of his more fortunate associates. He was afterwards known only as the factious demagogue and the professed gambler!
FOUNTLEROY, THE FORGER.
Henry Fountleroy was a gentleman of rank, a partner in the banking house of Marsh, Sibbold, and Co., of Berners Street. He was convicted of having forged a deed for the transfer of £5450 long annuities, in fraud of a certain Frances Young. Like Thurtell, Fountleroy defended himself, and battled with the prejudicial reports circulated
I close this record of crime and misery by a few narratives of a more miscellaneous character.
GAMBLING FOR LIFE.
Marshal Grammont used to tell a story of three soldiers, who, having committed offences punishable by death, it was ordered that one of them should be hanged as an example, and the three were directed to decide which of them should suffer by throwing dice. The first threw fourteen, the second seventeen, and the last, taking up the dice as coolly as though he were engaged in a trivial game, threw eighteen! Thereupon he ex
This may appear `taking it very cool;' but I think the following cases of Englishmen' rather stronger.'
ONE OF MANY INSTANCES.
In the Times of February 11th, 1819, mention is made of a gang of nearly thirty persons, male and female, and all presenting the most shocking appearance of both want and depravity, who were brought to the Marlborough Street Office. Among these wretched beings was a woman named Hewitt, said to be the wife of one Captain Hewitt, a leader of the ton, Who, after ruining himself and family at the gambling table, ran away from them, and was not since heard of. His wife being left to herself, and having probably been tainted by his evil example, by an easy gradation became first embarrassed, then a prostitute, then a thief, and on the occasion above mentioned exhibited one of the most distressing spectacles of vice and misery that could be conceived.
TRURTELL THE MURDERER.
This man, it is well known, was executed for the murder of Weare. Thurtell was evidently no common man. His spoken defence, as reported, is one of the finest specimens of impassioned eloquence — perfectly Demosthenic. His indignation at the reports circulated in prejudice of his case was overwhelming. Nothing can be finer than the turn of the following sentence: — `I have been represented by the Press — which carries its benefits or curses on rapid wings from one extremity of the kingdom to the other — as a man more depraved, more gratuitously and habitually profligate and cruel, than has ever appeared in modern times.'
Touching his gambling pursuits, he said: — `I have been represented to you as a man who was given to gambling, and the constant companion of gamblers. To this accusation in some part my heart, with feeling penitence, pleads guilty. I have gambled; I have been a gambler, but not for the last three years. During that time I have not attended or betted upon a horse-race, or a fight, or any public exhibition of that nature. If
A MOST WONDERFUL END OF A GAMBLER.
In the Annual Register for the year 1766 occurs the following `circumstantial and authentic account of the memorable case of Richard Parsons,' transmitted by the high sheriff of Gloucestershire to his friend in London.
On the 20th of February, 1766, Richard Parsons and three more met at a private house in Chalfold, in order to play at cards, about six o'clock in the evening. They played at Loo till about eleven or twelve that night, when they changed their game for Whist. After a few deals a dispute arose about the state of the game. Parsons asserted with oaths that they were six, which the others denied; upon which he wished `that he
After this he was in great agony — chiefly delirious; spoke of his companions by name, and seemed as if his imagination was engaged at cards. He started, had distracted looks and gestures, and in a dreadful fit of shaking and trembling died on the 4th of March, just about a fortnight after the utterance of his terrible imprecation.
The worthy sheriff of Gloucestershire goes on to say that the man's eyes were open when he died, and could not be closed by the common method, so that they remained open when he was put into the coffin. From this circumstance arose a report that he wished his eyes might never close; `but,' says the sheriff, `this is a mistake; for, from the most creditable witnesses, I am fully convinced no such wish was uttered; and the fact is, that he did close his eyes after he was taken with the mortification, and either dozed or slept several times.
`When the body came to be laid out, it appeared all over discoloured or spotted; and it might, in the most literal sense, be said, that his flesh rotted on his bones before he died.'
At the request of the sheriff, the surgeon (a Mr Pegler) who attended the unfortunate man, sent in the following report: — `Sir, — You desire me to acquaint you, in writing, with what I know relating to the melancholy case of the late Richard Parsons; a request I readily comply with, hoping that his sad catastrophe will serve to admonish all those who profane the sacred name of God.
`February 27th last I visited Richard Parsons, who, I found, had an inflamed leg, stretching from the foot almost to the knee, tending to a gangrene. The tenseness and redness of the skin was almost gone off, and became of a duskish and livid colour, and felt very lax and flabby. Symptoms being so dangerous, some incisions were made down to the quick, some spirituous fomentations made use of, and the whole limb dressed up with such applications as are most approved in such desperate circumstances, joined with proper internal medicines. The next day he seemed much the same; but on March the 1st he was worse, the incisions discharged
On one occasion Justice Maule was about to pass sentence on a prisoner, who upon being asked to say why judgment should not be pronounced, `wished that God might strike him dead if he was not innocent of the crime.' After a pause, the judge said: — `As the Almighty has not thought proper to comply with your request, the sentence of the court is,' &.
A SAD REMINDER.
Every Englishman recollects the fate of that
GEORGE IV.
There are few departments of human distinction in which Great Britain cannot boast a `celebrity' — genteel or ungenteel. In the matter of gambling we have been unapproachable — not only in the `thorough' determination with which we have exhausted the pursuit — but in the vast, the fabulous millions which make up the sum total that Englishmen have `turned over' at the gaming table. I think that many thousands of millions would be `within the mark' as the contribution of England to the insatiate god of gambling.
I have presented to the reader the record of gambling all the world over — the gambling of savages — the gambling of the ancient Persians,
If the following be facts, vouched for by a writer of authority,[24] the results were most atrocious. [24] James Grant (Editor of the Morning Advertiser), Sketches in London.
`Every one is aware that George IV., when Prince of Wales, was, as the common phrase is, over-head-and-ears in debt; and that it was because he would thereby be enabled to meet the claims of his creditors, that he consented to marry the Princess Caroline of Brunswick. But although this is known to every one, comparatively few people are acquainted with the circumstances under which his debts were contracted. Those debts, then, were the result of losses at the gaming table. He was an inveterate gambler — a habit which he most probably contracted through his
`It was with the view and in the hope that marriage would cure his propensity for the gaming table, that his father was so anxious to see him united to Caroline; and it was solely on account of his marriage with that princess constituting the only condition of his debts being paid by the country, that he agreed to lead her to the hymeneal altar.
`The unfortunate results of this union are but too well known, not only as regarded the parties themselves, but as regarded society generally. To the gambling habits, then, of the Prince of Wales are to be ascribed all the unhappiness which he entailed on the unfortunate Caroline, and the vast amount of injury which the separation from her, and the subsequent trial, produced on the morals of the nation generally.'
5. ODDITIES AND WITTICISMS OF GAMBLERS.
OSTENTATIOUS GAMESTERS.
CERTAIN grandees and wealthy persons, more through vanity or weakness than generosity, have sacrificed their avidity to ostentation — some by renouncing their winnings, others by purposely losing. The greater number of such eccentrics, however, seem to have allowed themselves to be pillaged merely because they had not the generosity or the courage to give away what was wanted.
The Cardinal d'Este, playing one day with the Cardinal de Medicis, his guest, thought that his magnificence required him to allow the latter to win a stake of 10,000 crowns — `not wishing,' he said, `to make him pay his reckoning or allow him to depart unsatisfied.' Brantôme calls this `greatness;
`Guilty or innocent,' he says, `everybody was well received at the house of this cardinal, who kept an open table at Rome for the French chevaliers. These gentlemen having appropriated a portion of his plate, it was proposed to search them: `No, no!' said the cardinal, `they are poor companions who have only their sword, cloak, and crucifixes; they are brave fellows; the plate will be a great benefit to them, and the loss of it will not make me poorer.'
Vigneul de Marville tells us of certain extravagant abbés, named Ruccellai and Frangipani, who carried their ostentation to such a pitch as to set gold in dishes on their tables when entertaining their gaming companions! Were any of these base enough to put their hands in and help themselves? This is not stated by the historian. These two Italian abbés were ne plus ultras in luxury and effeminacy. In the reign of Henry IV., they laid before their guests vermilion dishes filled with gloves, fans, coins to play with after the repast, essences and perfumes.[25] I wonder if the delightful
[25] Mélanges d' Hist. et de Lit.
One day when Henry IV. was dining at the Duc de Sully's, the latter, as soon as the cloth was raised, brought in cards and dice, and placed upon the table two purses of 4000 pistoles each, one for the King, the other to lend to the lords of his suite. Thereupon the king exclaimed: — `Great master, come and let me embrace you, for I love you as you deserve: I feel so comfortable here that I shall sup and stay the night.' Evidently Sully was more a courtier than usual on this occasion — as no doubt the whole affair was by the king's order, with which he complied reluctantly; but he made the king play with his own money only. The Duc de Lerme, when entertaining Monsieur the brother of Louis XIII. at his quarters near Maestricht, had the boldness to bring in, at the end of the repast, two bags of 1000 pistoles each, declaring that he gave them up to the players without any condition except to return them when they pleased.[26] [26] Mem. de Jeu M. le Duc d'Orleans.
This Duc de Lerme was at least a great lord,
They tell of a certain lordly gamester who looked upon any money that fell from his hands as lost, and would never stoop to pick it up! This reminds us of the freedman Pallas mentioned by Tacitus, who wrote down what he had to say to his slaves, lest he should degrade his voice to their level — ne vocem consociaret![28] [28] Ann. l. xiii
`AN INSINUATING, ELEGANT GAMESTER.
Osterman, Grand Chancellor of Russia, during the reign of the Empress Anne, obtained information that the court of Versailles had formed a scheme to send an insinuating, elegant gamester,
The chancellor called on the duke to make the necessary communication, but the minister did not choose to be at home. The chancellor, then pretending to be suffering from a severe fit of gout, wrote to his sovereign, stating that he had important matter to reveal, but was unable to move, and the Duke of Biran was consequently ordered to wait on him by the empress. Osterman, affecting great pain, articulated with apparent difficulty these words — `The French are sending a gamester!' Thereupon the duke withdrew in a pet, and represented to the empress that the chancellor was delirious from the gout, and had really nothing to communicate.
The subject had long been forgotten by the duke, when an elegant, easy, dissipated marquis actually arrived. He had extensive credit on a house of the English Factory, and presently insinuated himself into the good graces of the duke, whom he soon eased of all his superfluous cash.
The chancellor became alarmed for the consequences, and resolved to try and play off the
The midshipman was forthwith made an ensign of the Guards, in order to entitle him to play at court. He set to work at once in accordance with his instructions, but after his own plan in the execution. He began with losing freely; and was, of course, soon noticed by the marquis, and marked as a pigeon worth plucking. The young Russian, however, forced him into high play, and he lost the greater part of his former gain. The marquis got nettled, lost his self-command, and proposed a monstrous stake, to the extent of his credit and gains, of which he thought he might make himself sure by some master-stroke of art. Accordingly, by means of a sleight, he managed to hold fifteen in hand, but his wily antagonist was equal to the
Once more the chancellor waited on the duke, and plainly told him that he had been anxious to guard him against the French gamester, purposely sent to fleece him, if he had had the patience to hear him. The duke then became outrageous, and wished to arrest the Frenchman as a cheat; but Osterman coolly said he had punished him in kind; and, producing a large bag, returned the duke's money, bidding him in future not to be so impatient when information was to be communicated by gouty persons.
The clever ensign was allowed to retain the rest of the spoil, with an injunction, however, never to touch a card again, unless he wished to end his days among the exiles of Siberia.
A PENITENT SONNET,
written by the Lord Fitz-Gerald[29] (a great gamester) a little
before his death, which was in the year 1580.
[29] This Lord Fitzgerald was eldest son to the Earl of Kildare, and died at the age of twenty-one.
The duty they do owe
To Him that did bestow the same,
And thousand millions moe.
When they the Main have lost,
Forgetting all the Byes that wear
With God and Holy Ghost.
But truly 'tis not so;
For all their frets and fumes in sin
They moneyless must go.
Than he that wrote this verse,
Who cries Peccavi now, therefore;
His oaths his heart do pierce.
That curse the luckless time
That ever dice mine eyes did see,
Which bred in me this crime.
I will offend no more,
In this most vile and sinful cast,
Which I will still abhor.'[30]
[30] Harl. Miscel.
LOVE AND GAMBLING.
Horace Walpole, writing to Mann, says: — `The event that has made most noise since my
This incident occurred in 1752, and reminds us of the marriage-scene described by Dryden in one of his tales, which was quoted by Lord Lyndhurst on that memorable occasion when he opposed Lord Campbell's Bill for the suppression of indecent publications, and made a speech which was more creditable to his wit than his taste, and perfectly horrifying to Lord Campbell, who inflicted a most damaging verbal castigation on his very sprightly but imprudent opponent.
`MANNERS MAKE THE MAN.
Mr Manners, a relation of the Duke of Rutland, many years ago, lost a considerable sum to a well-known gamester, who set up his carriage
SHARP PRACTICE — NOT BY AN ATTORNEY.
The commanding officer of a Militia regiment having passed an evening with several of his officers, carried one of them, who was much intoxicated, to town with him. How the rest of the night was passed was not known — at least to the young man; but in the morning the colonel slipped into his hand a memorandum of his having lost to him at play £700 — for which sum he was actually arrested on the parade the same day, and was compelled to grant an annuity to a nominee of the colonel for £100 per annum!
A GAMESTER TO THE BACK-BONE.
Archdeacon Bruges mentions a gentleman who was so thorough a gamester, that he left in his will an injunction that his bones should be made into dice, and his skin prepared so as to be a covering for dice-boxes![31] [31] A similar anecdote is related of a Frenchman.
FOOTE'S WITTICISMS.
A blackleg, famous for `cogging a die,' said that there had been great sport at Newmarket. `What!' said Foote, `I suppose you were detected, and kicked out of the Hazard room.'
F — d, the Clerk of the Arraigns, brought off Lookup when indicted for perjury. Foote, afterwards playing with him at Whist, said, `F — d, you can do anything, after bringing of Lookup. I don't wonder you hold thirteen trumps in your hand. The least he could do was to teach you the "long shuffle'' for your services.'
The Rev. Dr Dodd was a very unlucky gamester, and received a guinea to forfeit twenty if he ever played again above a guinea. This, among gamblers, is termed being tied up. When the doctor was executed for forgery a gentleman observed to Foote — `I suppose the doctor is launched into eternity by this time.' `How so?' said Foote, `he was tied up long ago.'
EFFECT OF A SEVERE LOSS AT PLAY.
Lord C — lost one night £33,000 to General Scott. The amiable peer, however, benefited by
PADDY'S DECISION.
Some gamblers duping a country fellow at the game called Put, in a public-house near St Pancras, one of them appealed to an Irishman who was looking on whether he had not three treys in his hand? `You had all that,' said Paddy; `and what's more, I saw you take them all out of your pocket.'
GAMBLING CAUSED BY GRIEF.
The Honourable Jesse Anker, in order to dissipate the gloom occasioned by the loss of his wife, whom he passionately loved, had recourse to gaming, by which, at different times, he lost considerable sums, but not so as to injure his property, which was very large, in any material degree. The remedy did not prove effectual; he shot himself at his lodgings at Bath.
A GAMBLER'S EXCUSE FOR NOT BEING A SECOND IN A DUEL.
A gentleman who had been called out, applied
`MORE FORTUNATE.'
Lord Mark Stair and Lord Stair were at play in a coffee-house, when a stranger overlooked the game, and disturbed them with questions. Lord Mark said — `Let us throw dice to see which of us shall pink this impudent fellow.' Lord Stair won. The other exclaimed — `Ah! Stair, Stair! you have been always more fortunate in life than I.'
CAPTAIN ROCHE.
Captain Roche, alias Tyger, alias Savage Roche, who stuck his gaming companion's hand to the table with a fork for concealing a card under it, happened to be at the Bedford Billiard-table, which was extremely crowded. Roche was knocking the balls about with his cue, and Major Williamson,
On leaving the place, the major expressed his astonishment at his rudeness, and wondered, out of so numerous a company, it was not resented. `Oh, sir,' said Roche, `there was no fear of that; there was not a thief in the room who did not suppose himself one of "the two or three gentlemen'' I mentioned.'
FARO AT ROUTS.
The following advertisement appeared in the Courier newspaper in 1794: —
`As Faro is the most fashionable circular game in the haut ton in exclusion of melancholy Whist, and to prevent a company being cantoned into separate parties, a gentleman of unexceptionable character will, on invitation, do himself the honour to attend the rout of any lady, nobleman, or gentleman, with a Faro Bank and Fund, adequate to the style of play, from 500 to 2000 guineas.
`Address, G. A., by letter, to be left at Mr Harding's, Piccadilly, nearly opposite Bond Street.
`N.B. — This advertisement will not appear again.' PROSPECT OF £5200 PER ANNUM FROM A CAPITAL OF £2000.
The following advertisement appeared in the Morning Chronicle in 1817: —
`Any person who can command Two Thousand Pounds in ready money, may advance it in a speculation which will realize at least £100 per week, and perhaps not require the advance of above one half the money. The personal attendance of the party engaging is requisite; but there will be no occasion for articles of partnership, or any establishment, as the profits may be divided daily.'
OF WHAT TRADE IS A GAMING-HOUSE KEEPER?
At a Westminster election the keeper of a notorious gaming house in St Ann's parish was asked, as usual, what his trade was, when, after a little hesitation, he said, `I am an ivory turner.'
THE GAME PLAYED IN THE COURT OF CHANCERY.
Mrs Law, executrix of George Law, late pro
THE ORIGINAL OF A RECENT PROPOSAL.
Not long since an advertisement appeared, and was noticed by several of the papers, purporting to enable any person to realize a large fortune by a small advance to the advertiser. It will readily be seen that the following is the original of the scheme, put forth in the Morning Chronicle, in 1818: —
`Important Offer. A gentleman of respectability has discovered a method of winning at any game of chance, fairly and honourably, to a certainty, by
GAME AND GAMBLING.
A gentleman celebrated for his quickness at repartee, when informed that a young nobleman of his acquaintance (remarkably fond of a fashionable game) had shot an immense number of red partridges, and also of the black game, which abounded on his estates, replied — `I am not in the least sur-prised; he was at all times, even when in London, devotedly attached to the game of Rouge et Noir.'
CATCHING A TARTAR.
`My skill at billiards,' says a confessing gamester, `gave me a superiority over most I met with. I could also hide my skill very dexterously, which is generally found a work of great difficulty, and judiciously winning or losing, I contrived to make it answer my purpose, — until one day, going to a
The splendid and fascinating game of Billiards seems to have been an English invention; and it became greatly in vogue during the reign of Louis XIV. of France, to whom it was recommended by his physicians as an exercise after meals.
It is said that Chamillard, who played with the king, entirely owed his political fortune to the skill which he displayed in this game. Billiards has not as yet been placed, like skittles and bowls, under the interdict of the police authorities, and it is difficult to see how they could venture upon so tremendous an experiment. The game seems to be more in vogue than ever, and doubtless heavy sums are lost and won at it. Billiard matches have during the last three years become quite one of the winter exhibitions, and particularly this season have the public shown their taste for the game. Perhaps the extraordinary performances of some of the first-class cueists have stirred up the shades of Kentfield's days, his homely game of cannons off list cushions and gently-played strength strokes; or by chance those that favour Marden's style, his losing hazards and forcing half balls, have revived once more, and we yearn with wonder to see the great spot strokes of
As a healthful exercise, and in its tendency to promote the physical development of the body, the game of Billiards is unsurpassed; but it is much to be regretted that it is generally-played in ill-ventilated and crowded rooms, often reeking with the pestilential fumes of tobacco, and not without the adjunct of frequent alcoholic potations. Moreover, there can be no doubt that many modern instances of billiard sharping occur, such as I have just quoted, in which the unwary are unscrupulously `fleeced.' I know of several.
`NOT KNOWING YOUR MAN.'
A certain high military character sat down to play with a Russian prince, who introduced loaded dice. The travelled Englishman lost every bet; for the Russian never missed his seven or eleven, and modestly threw only ten times. The supposed pigeon then took up the box with fair dice; and,
A BLIND GAMESTER.
John Metcalfe, much better known by the nickname of blind Jack of Knaresborough, was a celebrity at Harrowgate during the first quarter of the present century. This extraordinary man had been deprived of his eyesight at so early a period that he retained no idea of either light or vision; but his remaining faculties were so actively employed that few persons in the full enjoyment of sight have surpassed him in the execution of undertakings, which seemed particularly to require the exercise of that faculty. He traversed the neighbourhood without a guide or companion; surveyed tracts of country to plan and lay down roads, where none had ever been before; contracted for the building of bridges, and fulfilled his contracts without the assistance of another person, either as architect or superintendent of the work; became a guide to those who, possessing sight,
Such a man was sure to attract notice in any place or neighbourhood, but particularly at a place of general resort. Besides, he possessed a facetious mode of talking, and on several occasions exercised a practical sort of wit, which was equally certain of gaining patronage. Visitors of the highest rank treated him with kindness, and even familiarity; and as he never forgot himself, or trespassed upon those who thus favoured him, he continued in fashion as long as he lived, and terminated his singular career at more than 80 years of age.
Among his many exploits was the following. Various trials of his skill and activity were proposed by gentlemen who offered to support their opinions with their money. But Metcalfe had
A NOBLE LORD AND A COMMONER, IN 1823.
A young and wealthy commoner, who seemed to vie with the pea-green in the desperate folly of getting rid of a suddenly obtained fortune of £130,000 in ready money, as fast as possible, and whose relish for the society of legs, bullies, and fighting men was equally notorious, went to the Fishmonger's Hall Club late one morning, much flushed with wine. The well-lighted avenues directed him to the French Hazard table. There was no play going on at the time, but at the entrance of this pigeon, who before had been drawn of a good round sum, the box and dice were soon put in
DIAMOND CUT DIAMOND.
A party of players were assembled to throw for a stake, which was enormous. It was, however, agreed that the lowest throw should win. The players threw until one of them turned up two aces. All but one had thrown, and shouts of applause greeted the lucky caster, when the last who was to throw exclaimed — `Hold! I'll try and beat that.' . . .
Rattling the dice, he turned down the box on the table, and on lifting it up displayed the two dice one upon the top of the other, and both aces! He was therefore declared the winner.[34] [34] Menageana.
A TENDER MOTHER.
A French lady had an only child, a handsome young man, much addicted to gaming. He lost at one sitting £40,000, and being destitute of other resources, he joined a company of strolling players. They chanced some time afterwards to pass a short time at Worcester, near which his mother, who was considerably advanced in years, resided. The lady, though highly displeased with her son's life,
The feelings of the mother were so excited at the passages which closely applied to her son's conduct, that she exclaimed aloud, `Ay, there he is — the — the beggar — the scoundrel! Always the same — no change in him!' The delusion so increased at the fifth act, when Beverley lifts his hand to kill the child, that the lady in a most distressing tone cried out — `Wretch that thou art, don't kill the child — I'll take it home with me!'
TWO MASTERS OF THE ART.
A Frenchman who had become notorious for the unerring certainty with which he won from all who ventured to play with him, at length found himself unable to induce persons to sit down to the table with him, there being not the slightest chance of winning against his play. After being thus idle for some time, an Englishman, who had heard of his triumphs, expressed his readiness to enter the lists against him. They sat down, and played for three hours without intermission, and at the end
The problem was thus solved: both had been cheating during the whole night, and were exactly equal in dexterity, both being unconscious of the dishonest practices of each other; and the result was that each got up from the table with the same amount of money as he had when he sat down. The cheats cordially shook hands, apparently much gratified that they had at length ascertained how it had happened that neither could pluck the other.
6. THE GAMING CLUBS.
ON the subject of Clubs Mr Cunningham in his `Clubs of London,' and Mr Timbs in his `Club Life in London,' have said pretty well everything that we want to know, and by their help, and that of other writers, I shall endeavour to give an account of the gambling carried on in such places.
1. ALMACK'S.
`The gaming at Almack's,' writes Walpole to Horace Mann, `which has taken the pas of White's, is worthy of the decline of our empire, or commonwealth, which you please. The young men of the age lose ten, fifteen, twenty thousand pounds in an evening there. Lord Stavordale, not one-and-
Among the rules of the establishment, it was ordered `that every person playing at the twenty-guinea table do not keep less than twenty guineas before him,' and `that every person playing at the new guinea table do keep fifty guineas before him.' That the play ran high may be inferred from a note against the name of Mr Thynne, in the Club-books: — `Mr Thynne having won only 12,000 guineas during the last two months, retired in disgust, March 21st, 1772.' Indeed, the play was unusually high — for rouleaus of £50 each, and generally there was £10,000 in specie on the table. The gamesters began by pulling off their embroidered clothes, and putting on frieze great coats, or turned their coats inside out for luck! They put on pieces of leather (such as are worn by footmen when they clean knives) to save their laced ruffles; and to guard their eyes from the light, and to keep their hair in order, wore high-crowned straw hats with broad brims
2. THE COCOA-TREE CLUB.
This club was remarkable for high if not for foul play. Walpole, writing to Horace Mann in 1780, says: — `Within this week there has been a cast at Hazard at the Cocoa-tree (in St James's Street) the difference of which amounted to one hundred and fourscore thousand pounds! Mr O'Birne, an Irish gamester, had won one hundred thousand pounds of a young Mr Harvey of Chigwell, just started into an estate by his elder brother's death. O'Birne said, — "You can never pay me.'' "I can,'' said the youth, "my estate will sell for the debt.'' "No,'' said O'Birne, "I
3. GRAHAM'S CLUB.
This gaming club is remarkable for a scandal which made some noise at the time of its occurrence, and one version of which a writer in the Times has been at some pains to rectify. In Mr Duncombe's `Life' of his father occurs the following account of this curious transaction.
`In Graham's Club there was also a good deal of play, and large sums were lost and won among the noblemen and gentlemen who were its members. An unpleasant rumour circulated in town in the winter of 1836, to the effect that a noble lord had been detected in cheating by means of marked cards. The presumed offender was well known in society as a skilful card-player, but by those who had been most intimate with him was considered incapable of any unfair practice. He was abroad when the scandal was set afloat, but returned to England directly he heard of it, and having traced the accusation to its source, defied his traducers. Thus challenged, they had no alternative but to support their allegation, and it took this
`Lord de Ros, instead of prosecuting the four for a libel, brought an action only against Cumming, which permitted the others to come forward as witnesses against him. The cause came on in the Court of King's Bench before Lord Denman. The plaintiff's witnesses were Lord Wharncliffe, Lord Robert Grosvenor, the Earl of Clare, and Sir Charles Dalbiac, who had known and played with him from between 20 to 30 years, as a very skilful but honourable Whist player. The evidence of Mr Lawrence, the eminent surgeon, proved that Lord de Ros had long suffered under a stiffness of the joints of the fingers that made holding a pack
On this statement the Times' reviewer comments as follows: —
`If many old scandals may be revived with impunity, there are some that cannot. Mr Dun
`It is difficult to conceive a more inexcusable misstatement, for the case was fully reported,[36] and the public judgment perfectly coincided with the verdict. Lord de Ros was not abroad when the scandal was set afloat. He went abroad after the scene at Graham's had set all London talking, and he returned in consequence of a peremptory call from his friends. He was most reluctantly induced to take the required steps for the vindication of his character; and it is preposterous to suppose that any little coterie would have dreamt of accusing a man of his rank and position with the view of driving a skilful player from the field. His accusers were not challenged. Neither were they volunteers. They became his accusers, because they formed the Whist party at which he was first openly denounced. They signed a paper
`The evidence was overwhelming. Suspicions had long been rife; and on no less than ten or twelve occasions the marked packs had been examined in the presence of unimpeachable wit-nesses, and sealed up. These packs were produced at the trial. Several witnesses swore to the trick called sauter la coupe. It was the late Sir William Ingilby who swore that he had seen Lord de Ros perform it from 50 to 100 times; and when asked why he did not at once denounce him, he replied that if he had done so before his Lordship began to get blown upon, he should have had no alternative between the window and the door. Of course, every one who had been in the habit of playing
`The case was complete without the evidence of either of the original accusers, and the few friends of Lord de Ros who tried to bear him up against the resulting obloquy were obliged to go with the stream. When Lord Alvanley was asked whether he meant to leave his card, he replied, "No, he will stick it in his chimney-piece and count it among his honours.' ''
Having read through the long case as reported in the Times, I must declare that I do not find that the evidence against Lord de Ros was, after all, so `overwhelming' as the reviewer declares; indeed, the `leader' in the Times on the trial emphatically raises a doubt on the subject. Among other passages in it there is the following: —
`In the process of the trial it appeared that the
`The disclosures,' says Mr Grant,[27] `which took place in the Court of Queen's Bench, on the occasion of the trial of Lord de Ros, for cheating at cards, furnished the strongest demonstration that he was not the only person who was in the habit of cheating in certain clubs; while there were others who, if they could not be charged with direct cheating, or cheating in their own persons, did cheat indirectly, and by proxy, inasmuch as they, by their own admission, were, on frequent occasions, partners with Lord de Ros, long after they knew that he habitually or systematically
Lord de Ros was at the head of the barons of England. He was the son of Lord Henry Fitzgerald, and Lady de Ros, who inherited in her own right that ancient title, which dates from the reign of Henry III. He had studied at Eton and Oxford, and afterwards on the Continent, and there was not a more accomplished man in Europe. He possessed an ample fortune, was a member of several of the clubs — White's, Boodle's, Brookes', and Graham's, and one of the best Whist players in England.
It appears that at Graham's Club, at the commencement of the season, and before Lord de Ros came to town, whispers were circulated of unfair play, and various persons were supposed guilty. A determination was therefore formed that the club should be dissolved and reconstructed, leaving out the names of certain persons to whom suspicion attached. The main object of the master of the club, and of some of those who attended it for the purpose of professional gain, was that its character should be cleared. Not long after Lord de Ros
He was charged with being in the habit of marking the cards, the effect being to create a very slight and almost imperceptible indentation, and to make a ridge or wave on the back, so that a practised eye would be able, on looking at the right place, knowing where to expect a mark, to discern whether the ace was there or not. He was also charged with cheating by reversing the cut — that is, when the cards had come to him, after having been cut by his adversary, instead of putting the bottom card at the top, keeping the bottom card at the bottom, by some shuffling contrivance when he
`When he took up the two parcels of cards, after the operation of cutting the pack by his right-hand adversary, he was always attacked with a hacking cough, or what I may properly denominate, especially from the result it produced, a `king cough,' because a king or an ace was invariably its effect. The cough always came on at the most convenient moment to distract the attention of the other players, and was evidently indulged in for the purpose of abstracting their attention from the table and from the manœuvre he was about to perform. However, I never saw him "slip the card,'' and I never had cognizance of its execution, but certain it was that the ace or the king, which was at the bottom of the pack prior to the cut, invariably found its way to the same position after the cut, and hence was the turn-up card. With regard to the operation of dealing, his Lordship delivered the cards particularly slow, examining every card minutely towards its corners, as if looking for some mark.'
Many curious facts came out during the trial.
It was Mr Brooke Greville who admitted that he was a considerable winner at play — having `no
A Captain J. Alexander, half-pay R. N., declared that he had won as much as £700 at a time, having, however, to pay half to another partner; his winnings might be £1600 a-year. `I began to play,' he said, `about 25 or 28 years ago, and, expecting that I should be asked the question, I have looked into my accounts, and find that I am about £10,000 better than as though I had not played. That is a yearly average of £500.' He had, however, lost about £1000 during the previous year.
This Captain Alexander was asked how many hours he played before dinner, and he answered — `From three to five hours' — adding, however, that `he had played all night.' Then the counsel said, `I suppose you take but a slight dinner?' He replied: —
`Why, I generally make as good a dinner as I can get.' The learned counsel continued: —
`A small boiled chicken and a glass of lemonade, perhaps?' This seemed an offensive question, and the captain said, —
`I believe never, and (with increased earnestness of manner) mind, I deny the lemonade altogether; I never take lemonade. (Laughter, in which the noble lords on the bench joined involuntarily.)
Sir W. Ingilby entered into a description and practical illustration of the trick of sauter la coupe with a pack of cards, and it is said that the performance of the honourable baronet elicited demonstrations of laughter, which the judge suppressed, and even reprobated. Altogether, it must have been a most interesting and exciting trial.
As before stated, Lord Denman was the presiding judge; there was a special jury; the attorney-general, Sir W. Follet, and Mr Wightman appeared for the noble plaintiff; and the keen-witted and exquisitely polished Mr Thesiger (now Lord Chol-mondeley), Mr Alexander, and Mr W. H. Watson for the defendant. A great many of the nobility were present, together with several foreigners of distinction.
4. BROOKES' CLUB, IN ST JAMES'S STREET.
This was a house notorious for very high gaming, and was frequented by the most desperate of gamblers, among the rest Fox, Brummell, and Alderman Combe. According to Captain Gronow: —
At Brookes's, for nearly half a century, the play was of a more gambling character than at White's. . . . On one occasion Lord Robert Spencer contrived to lose the last shilling of his considerable fortune given him by his brother, the Duke of Marlborough. General Fitzpatrick being much in the same condition, they agreed to raise a sum of money, in order that they might keep a Faro bank. The members of the club made no objection, and ere long they carried out their design. As is generally the case, the bank was a winner, and Lord Robert bagged, as his share of the proceeds, £100,000. He retired, strange to say, from the fetid atmosphere of play, with the money in his pocket, and never again gambled. The lowest stake at Brookes' was £50; and it was a common event for a gentleman to lose or win £10,000 in an
5. WHITE'S CLUB.
White's Club seems to have won the darkest reputation for gambling. Lord Lyttleton, writing to Dr Doddridge, in 1750, says: — `The Dryads of Hogley are at present pretty secure, but I tremble to think that the rattling of a dice-box at White's may one day or other (if my son should be a member of that noble academy) shake down all our fine oaks. It is dreadful to see, not only there, but almost in every house in the town, what devastations are made by that destructive fury, the spirit of play.' A fact stated by Walpole to Horace Mann shows the character of the company at this establishment: — `There is a man about town, Sir William Burdett, a man of very good family, but most infamous character. In short, to give you his character at once — there is a wager in the bet-book at White's (a MS. of which I may one day or other give you an account), that the first baronet that will be hanged is this Sir William Burdett.' Swift says: — `I have heard that the
It was from the beginning a gaming club, `pure and simple.' The play was mostly at Hazard and Faro. No member was to hold a Faro bank. Whist was comparatively harmless. Professional gamblers, who lived by dice and cards, provided they were free from the imputation of cheating, procured admission to White's. It was a great supper-house, and there was play before and after supper, carried on to a late hour and to heavy amounts.
At White's they betted on every possible thing, as shown by the betting-book of the establishment — on births, deaths, and marriages; the length of a life; the duration of a ministry; a placeman's prospect of a coronet; the last scandal at Ranelagh or Madame Cornely's; or the shock of an earthquake! `A man dropped down at the door of White's; he was carried into the house. Was he dead or not? The odds were immediately given
According to Walpole — `A person coming into the club on the morning of the earthquake, in 1750, and hearing bets laid whether the shock was caused by an earthquake or the blowing up of powder-mills, went away in horror, protesting they were such an impious set that he believed if the last trump were to sound they would bet puppet-show against Judgment.'
And again: `One of the youths at White's, in 1744, has committed a murder, and intends to repeat it. He betted £1500 that a man could live
He also tells us of a very curious entry in the betting-book. Lord Mountford bets Sir John Bland twenty guineas that Nash outlives Cibber.' `How odd,' says Walpole, `that these two old creatures, selected for their antiquities, should live to see both their wagerers put an end to their own lives! Cibber is within a few days of eighty-four, still hearty, and clear, and well. I told him I was glad to see him look so well. "Faith,'' said he, "it is very well that I look at all.'' Lord Mountford would have been the winner: Cibber died in 1757, Nash in 1761.'
Hogarth's scene at the gambling house is taken at White's. `We see the highwayman, with his pistols peeping out of his pocket, waiting by the fireside till the heaviest winner takes his departure, in order to "recoup'' himself for his losings; and in the Beaux' Stratagem, Aimwell asks of Gibbet — "Ha'n't I seen your face at White's?'' "Ay, and at Will's too,'' is the highwayman's answer.'
According to Captain Gronow, George Harley Drummond, of the famous banking-house, Charing Cross, only played once in his whole life at White's Club, at Whist, on which occasion he lost £20,000 to Brummell. This even caused him to retire from the banking-house, of which he was a partner.
`Walpole and a party of friends (Dick Edgecumbe, George Selwyn, and Williams), in 1756, composed a piece of heraldic satire — a coat of arms for the two gaming clubs at White's — which was "actually engraven from a very pretty painting of Edgecumbe, whom Mr Chute, as Strawberry King at Arms,'' appointed their chief herald-painter. The blazon is vert (for a card-table); three parolis proper on a chevron sable (for a Hazard table); two rouleaux in saltire between two dice proper, on a canton sable; a white ball (for election) argent. The supporters are an old and young knave of clubs; the crest, an arm out of an earl's coronet shaking a dice-box; and the motto, Cogit amor nummi — "The love of money compels.'' Round the arms is a claret-bottle ticket by way of order.'
6. WATTIER'S CLUB.
This great Macao gaming house was of short
7. CROCKFORD'S CLUB.
This once celebrated gaming house is now `The Wellington,' where the rattle of knives and forks has succeeded that of dice. It was erected in 1827, and at its opening it was described as `the new Pandemonium — the drawing-rooms, or real hell, consisting of four chambers: the first an ante-room, opening to a saloon embellished to a degree which baffles description; thence to a small curiously-formed cabinet or boudoir, which opens to the
`It rose,' says a writer in the Edinburgh Review, `like a creation of Aladdin's lamp; and the genii themselves could hardly have surpassed the beauty of the internal decorations, or furnished a more accomplished maître d'hôtel than Ude. To make the company as select as possible, the estab-lishment was regularly organized as a club, and the election of members vested in a committee. "Crockford's'' became the rage, and the votaries of fashion, whether they like play or not, hastened to enroll themselves. The Duke of Wellington was an original member, though (unlike Blucher, who repeatedly lost everything he had at play) the great captain was never known to play deep at any game but war or politics. Card-tables were regularly
Crockford was originally a fishmonger, keeping a shop near Temple Bar. By embarking in this speculation he laid the foundation of the most colossal fortune that was ever made by play.
It was said there were persons of rank and station, who had never paid their debts to Crockford, up to 1844, and that some of his creditors compounded with him for their gambling debts. His proprietorship had lasted 15 or 16 years.
Crockford himself was examined by the committee of the House of Commons on the Gaming Houses; but in spite of his assurance by the members that were indemnified witnesses in respect of pending actions, he resolutely declined to `tell the secrets of his prison-house.' When asked whether a good deal of play was carried on at his club, he said: — `There may have been so; but I do not feel myself at liberty to answer that question — to divulge the pursuits of private gentlemen. Situated as I was, I do not feel myself at liberty to do so. I do not feel myself at liberty to answer that question.'
When asked to whom he had given up the house, he fenced in like manner, saying that he had given it up to a `committee' of about 200 gentlemen, — concerning which committee he pro
Being asked, `Do you think that a person is just as honourably bound to pay a debt which he loses upon a game of Hazard, as he would be to pay a bet which he loses on a horse-race?' Crockford replied — `I think most certainly he would honourably be bound to pay it.' — `Do you think that if the loser of a bet on a game at Hazard had no charge to make of any kind of unfairness, and he were to commence an action to recover that money back again, he would lay himself open to a charge in the world of having acted dishonourably?' The old gambler's reply was most emphatic, overwhelming, indignant — `I should take all the pains I could to avoid such a man.'
If this evidence was not satisfactory, it was, at any rate, very characteristic.
A few interesting facts came out before the par
It was said that Crockford gave up the business in 1840, because there were no more very high players visiting his house.
`A number of persons,' according to the admission of the Honourable Frederick Byng, `who were born to very large properties, were very nearly ruined at Crockford's.'
The sums won on the turf were certainly larger than those won by players at Crockford's; a man might lose £20,000 in one or more bets, to one or more persons; but against this he might have won an equivalent amount in small sums from 200 or more persons.[40] [40] This is not very clearly put, but the meaning is that much more money was lost at Crockford's than on the turf.
Some years previously to Crockford's retirement, it is said that he found the debts so bad that he was obliged to leave off his custom of paying cheques; and said he would cancel all previous debts, but that in future gentlemen would have to pay with money. He made them play for money instead of with counters, in consequence of the large sums that were owing to him upon those counters.
8. THE TRAVELLERS' CLUB,
next the Athenseum in Pall Mall, originated soon after the peace of 1814, in a suggestion of the late Lord Londonderry, then Lord Castlereagh, for the resort of gentlemen who had resided or travelled abroad, as well as with a view to the accommodation of foreigners, who, when properly recommended, receive an invitation for the period of their stay.[41] Here Prince Talleyrand was fond of a game at Whist. With all the advantage of his great imperturbability of face, he is said to have been an indifferent player. [41] Quarterly Review, No. cx. p. 481.
Rule 10 of the club directs, `that no dice and no game of hazard be allowed in the rooms of the club, nor any higher stake than guinea points, and that no cards be introduced before dinner.'
7. DOINGS IN GAMING HOUSES.
BESIDES the aristocratic establishments just described, there were numerous houses or places of resort for gambling, genteel and ungenteel. In vain did the officers of the law seem to exert their utmost vigilance; if they drove the serpent out of one hole it soon glided into another; never was the proverb — `Where there's a will there's a way' — more strikingly fulfilled.
COFFEE-HOUSE SHARPERS.
Sir John Fielding thus describes the men in the year 1776. `The deceivers of this denomination are generally descended from families of some repute, have had the groundwork of a genteel education, and are capable of making a tolerable
In 1792, Mr Br — gh — n, the son of a baronet,
In 1794, Mr — — was a billiard player of the first class, ranking with Brenton, Phillips, Orrel, and Captain Wallis, who were the leaders of the day in this noble game of skill, tact, and discretion.[43] Having accidentally sported his abilities with two other players, he was marked as a `pigeon' whom every preparation was made for `plucking.' Captain Cates, of Covent Garden celebrity, was pitted against him at the coffee-room billiard-table, during
The match was renewed at the ensuing Ascot meeting, at the rooms of the celebrated Simson, so much frequented by the Etonians — where Mr — — again obtained the victory, by 36 games to 17. Immense sums were sported on these occasions.
Mr — — resided at Windsor, and was surprised by a message on the Sunday evening preceding the Winchester races, purporting that a gentleman wished to see him on very particular business. It proved to be a request to play a match at Billiards during the races at Winchester, for which the parties offered 10 guineas for the journey. But it was explained to him that the match was of a particular kind, and must be played in a particular way — either to win or lose — so that those concerned might be sure of winning upon the whole, let the match terminate how it would! . . . .
This villainous proposal being made without the presence of a third person, Mr — — indignantly
MILLER'S GAMING HOUSE.
In 1796, one Thomas Miller was indicted for keeping a gaming house; and wished to have the matter settled summarily by admitting conviction; but Lord Kenyon, the presiding judge, chose to have evidence brought forward. John Shepherd, an attorney of the King's Bench, who had himself been plundered, stated that he was at the defendant's, Leicester Street, on a certain night, and saw Hazard played. Sometimes £20 or £30 depended on a throw. One morning between three and four o'clock, a gentleman came in much intoxicated. He had a great deal of money about him. Miller said — `I did not mean to play; but now I'll set to with this fellow.' Miller scraped a little wax with his finger off one of the candles, and put the dice together, so that they came seven every way. Seven was the main, and he could not throw anything but seven. A dispute arose, and the persons at the table gave it in Miller's favour. The young man said he had lost about £70.
He had often seen men pawn their watches and rings to Miller, and once a man actually pawned his coat, and went away without it! When articles were offered to be pawned, Liston, who was a partner in the concern, said — `I don't understand the value of these things well,' and he would then call Miller.[44] [44] Even at the present day it is said that other `articles' besides `valuables' are `left' with the marker at billiards `for a consideration.' A fine umbrella, very little used, was lately shown to me as having been sold for five shillings, by a marker; it probably cost twenty-five.
Miller said there was no disgrace in standing in the pillory for gaming. He could spare £500 out of his coffers without missing it. His gaming table was once broken up by a warrant from Bow Street, when he said it was too good a thing to relinquish, and he set up another, one large enough for 20 or 30 persons to sit at. They played at it all night, and on one or two occasions all the next day too, so that Miller said to witness on his return in the evening — `Some of the people are still here
`Gaming is a crime of greater enormity, and of more destructive consequences to society, than many which the laws of the country have made capital. What is the crime of stealing a sheep, or picking a pocket of a handkerchief, when placed in comparison with this crime, traced through all its consequences?
`With regard to those in the higher walks of life, experience tells us it often leads to self-murder and duelling, about gambling debts, which terminate in the total ruin of families once opulent, and reduce to beggary their innocent and helpless children; and as for those in a lower sphere of life, when they have lost their money, they often betake themselves to housebreaking and the high
With many other most excellent observations on the tendency of this selfish and avaricious vice, he concluded by sentencing Miller to a fine of £500, one year's imprisonment, and security for his good behaviour for seven years, himself in £500 and two others in £250 each, adding: — `It appeared that you played with loaded dice. The Court has not taken that into consideration, because it was not charged in the indictment.'
ATTACKS ON GAMING HOUSES.
In 1797 the Bedford Arms, Covent Garden, kept by one John Twycross, was attacked, under warrant. The gaming-room stood an hour's siege, for the doors were so plated with iron that the repeated blows of a sledge-hammer made no impression on them. The officers at length entered the back through the window. They found fifteen persons at table, but not actually playing, so no conviction could take place.
In the same year a party of Bow Street officers searched a gaming house at 19, Great Suffolk
In the previous year a party, mostly French emigrants, were taken at a house in Oxendon Street, with the table, cards, &. A city magistrate and a city officer had a dispute at cards, and a knock-down game ensued.
In 1799 the Marlborough Street officers apprehended at the gaming house, No. 3, Leicester Square, thirteen out of twenty persons, from the first floor, playing at Rouge et Noir. One of the gamblers, when they first entered, threw up the sash, and, stepping from the leads, fell into the area, and died in being conveyed to the hospital.
In the same year, two notorious gaming houses, Nos. 1 and 3, King's Place, were attacked, by authority of a search warrant. All the paraphernalia of the profession, as tables, dice, count-ers, &., were seized; but the inmates effected their
`SOMETHING HONOURABLE TO THE BRITISH FLAG.'
It is stated as highly honourable to the British flag that, among the gamesters of the first quarter of the present century, no Admirals were seen at the inferior tables. Their proper pride kept them from a familiar association with pursers, clerks, grocers, horse-dealers, linen-drapers, silk-mercers, masons, builders, timber-merchants, booksellers, &., &., and men of the very lowest walks of life.
COARSE LANGUAGE OF GAMESTERS.
`I heard those who, in another place, even in the most polished courts, would take a high rank for good breeding and gentlemanly education, at these tables make use of language which, I hope, Billingsgate itself would turn from with disgust.
BOASTED PROTECTION OF GREAT NAMES TO GAMING HOUSES.
`On one occasion I was at the Pigeon Hole, in St James's Square (since removed to King Street), when the apprehensions which the rapid sale of The Greeks (a work exposing the system) excited among the players were warmly debated. To my great astonishment, a person who I supposed was a proprietor, boasted the impenetrability of his house, and on what ground, think you? Why, on that of it having the countenance of the Lord Chief Justice of England! True or false, it seemed to revive the flagging spirits of its visitors. They knew better. Not even the warm feelings of a father would turn the scale of justice in the even hand of Lord Ellenborough.'
It must not, however, be taken for granted, merely because these fellows assert it, that the
FORTUNATE RISE OF A CLUB-HOUSE WAITER.
`A waitership at a club sometimes led to fortune. Thomas Rumbold, originally a waiter at White's gaming club, got an appointment in India, and suddenly rose to be Sir Thomas, and Governor of Madras! On his return, with immense wealth, a bill of pains and penalties was brought into
PLAY IN 1820.
According to the Morning Post of May 15, 1820, at one of the gaming houses at the West End, in one night, property to the amount of £50,000 is said to have changed hands.
ACCOUNT OF A GAME AT HAZARD.
The following account of a game at Hazard was given by a young man, who, in the year 1820, was decoyed into one of the gambling houses in the city, kept by one John Morley, who was convicted by the Lord Mayor, in the penalty of £200, `for keeping Hazard;' but who, it is stated, left this country for Ireland the moment proceedings were instituted.
`The house in question was to all appearance dovoted {sic} to the game of billiards, and most of those who frequented it engaged merely in that game. Through the agency of professed gamesters, who shared in the profits of the concern, those who
`The evidence of the young man was to the following effect: — He had been in Morley's house; the game of Hazard was played in the front room on the second floor; a door led into it from the landing-place, and another from the public billiard — room, which was the back room on the same floor; both these doors were during the time of play kept barred and locked, and never opened except to the voice of some person known to the master of the house. During the play the door was seldom or never opened, but before the play commenced there was an understanding given that proceedings were about to begin.
`In the centre of the room was a large circular table, over which a lamp was suspended, and round the table the players sat, in number, generally, from six to ten.
`The play commenced by one of the players taking the dice-box with two dice in it; two other dice were covered on the table, and might be substituted for those in the box, upon application to Morley, who acted as "groom porter.'' The person
`If he calls seven the main, and throws three and one, or six and four, the odds are two to one against him — inasmuch as there are only three ways each of throwing, the four and the ten and six wins, throwing the seven, that is, three on each
A number of young men, most of whom were clerks, were called to confirm the evidence as to the system, but none of them appeared.
In a letter published in the Times of July 22, 1824, we read as follows: —
`The action against the keepers of a certain
`After such "liberal'' entertainment, a visit to the French Hazard table, in the adjoining room, is a matter of course, when the consequences are easily divined. A man thus allured to the den may determine not to lose more than the few pounds he has about him; but in the intoxication of the moment, and the delirium of play, it frequently happens that, notwithstanding the best resolves, he borrows money on his cheques, which are known to be good, and are readily cashed to very considerable amounts. In this manner £10,000, £20,000, £30,000, or more, have been often swept away!
They left King Street about three years ago, when, in conjunction with T — — (a man who a few years ago took the benefit of the act, and subsequently took one or two "hells'' in Pall Mall, but has amassed full £150,000 of plunder) and A — — , who has £70,000 of plunder, they opened a club-house in Piccadilly, with a French Hazard bank of £10,000, when in a short time they divided between the four — after all their heavy expenses were covered — upwards of £200,000. In
PROGRESS IN THE GAMING TRADE.
In the minor gaming houses the players assembled in parties of from 40 to 50 persons, who probably brought on an average, each night, from one to twenty shillings to play with. As the money was lost, the losers fell off, if they could not borrow or beg more; and this went on sometimes in the winter season for 14 to 16 hours in succession; so that from 100 to 150 persons might be calculated to visit one gaming table in the course of a night; and it not unfrequently happened that ultimately all the money brought to the table got into the hands of one or two of the most fortunate adventurers, save that which was paid to the table for `box-hands' — that is, when a player won three times in succession. At these establishments the price of a box varied from one shilling to half-a-crown. Every man thus engaged was destined to become either a more finished and mischievous gambler, or to appear at the bar of the Old Bailey. The successful players by degrees improved their external appearance, and obtained admittance into
PLAY IN 1838.
About the year 1838 the gaming houses were kept open all day, the dice were scarcely ever idle, day or night. From Sunday to Sunday, all the year round, persons were to be found in these places, losing their money, and wasting away their very bodies by the consuming anxiety consequent on their position at the Hazard or Roulette table.
STATISTICS OF GAMBLING IN 1844.
The following facts came out in evidence before the committee of the House of Commons, in 1844.
Down to that year there were no less than 12 gaming houses in St James's and St George's. The play was higher in old times, but not so general.
`The increase of gambling houses was entirely the offspring of Crockford's.' Such was the opinion
Previously, in the clubs, the gambling was confined to a very high rate and to a very few people. The above-named witness said he `could have named all the gamblers in his early days at the clubs. No person coming into a room where Hazard was carried on would have been permitted to play for a small sum, and therefore he left it.'
The same gentleman remembered the time when gambling tables were kept in private houses.
`It is a fact that most of those who played very high were pretty well cleaned out.'
`Crockford increased gambling everywhere.' `Persons of the middling classes, butchers, and gentleman's servants went to the low gambling houses.'
These places held out inducements to robbery. `If a servant or shopman could scrape together
DESPERATION AT GAMING HOUSES.
The most particular inspection was made of the player's person by the gaming house keeper's spies, and even his dress was strictly observed. He was obliged, before entering the saloon, to deposit his great coat and cane, which might perchance afford the introduction of some weapon; and the elegance of the covering did not save him from the humiliation of having it taken from him at the door. The attempts which were sometimes made on the lives of the bankers led to these precautions — like the indignities which are practised only in prisons for the security of the unhappy inmates. It is certain that gamesters, reduced to desperation, and on the eve of committing suicide, have conveyed into these places infernal machines with an intention of de-stroying at once their cruel plunderers and themselves.
`DEVILISH DOINGS IN A "HELL.'' '
In `Doings in London,' a work published as
`A scandalous scene of violence, which often happens at these places, but seldom becomes publicly known, on account of the disgrace attending exposures, occurred lately at a low "hell'' in King Street, St James's. A gentleman who had lost considerable sums of money at various times, announced his full determination never to come to a place of the sort again with money. His visits, therefore, were no longer wanted, and so orders were given to the porters not to admit him again. About two o'clock on a subsequent night, which happened to be Saturday, he sought admittance, and was refused. A warm altercation ensued in the passage between him and the porters, which brought down some of the proprietors. One of them — a powerful man — a bankrupt butcher — struck him a tremendous blow, which broke the bridge of his nose, covered his face with blood, and knocked him down. On getting up he was knocked down again. He arose once more, and instantly received another blow, which would have laid him upon his back, but one of the porters by this time had got behind him, and as he was falling struck
GAFFING.
Gaffing is or was one of the ten thousand modes of swindling practised in London. Formerly it was a game in very great vogue among the macers, who congregated nightly at the `flash houses.' One of these is described as follows: — This gaffer laughed a great deal and whistled Moore's melodies, and extracted music from a deal table with his elbow and wrist. When he hid a half-penny, and a flat cried `head' for £10, a `tail' was sure to turn up. One of his modes of commanding the turn-up was this: he had a half-penny with two heads, and a half-penny with two tails. When he gaffed, he contrived to have both half-pence under his hand, and long practice enabled him to catch up in the wrinkles or muscles of it the half-penny which it was his interest to conceal. If `tail' was called a `head' appeared, and the `tail' half-penny ran down his wrist with astonishing fidelity. This ingenious fellow often won 200 or 300 sovereigns a night by gaffing; but the landlord and other men, who were privy to the robbery, and `pitched the
This gaffer contrived to `bilk' all the turnpikes in the kingdom. In going to a fight or to a race-course, when he reached a turnpike he held a shilling between his fingers, and said to the gatekeeper — `Here, catch,' and made a movement of the hand towards the man, who endeavoured to catch what he saw. The shilling, however, by a backward jerk, ran down the sleeve of the coat, as if it had life in it, and the gate-keeper turned round to look in the dust, when the tall gaffer drove on, saying — `Keep the change.'
A young fellow, who previously was a marker at a billiard-table, and who had the appearance of a soft, inexperienced country-lad, was another great hand at gaffing. There was a strong adhesive power in his hand, and such exquisite sensibility about it, that he could ascertain by dropping his palm, even upon a worn-out half-penny or shilling, what side was turned up. Indeed, so perfect a master was he of the science that Breslaw could never have done more upon cards than he could do with a pair of `grays' (gaffing-coins).
A well-known macer, who was celebrated for slipping an `old gentleman' (a long card) into the pack, and was the inheritor by birth of all the propensities of this description, although the inheritance was equally divided between his brother and himself, got hold of a young fellow who had £170 in his pocket, and introduced him to one of the `cock-and-hen' houses near Drury Lane Theatre, well-primed with wine. Gaffing began, and the billiard-marker before described was pitched upon to `do' the stranger. The macer `pitched the baby card,' and of course lost, as well as the unfortunate victim. He had borrowed £10 of the landlord, who was to come in for the `regulars;' but when all was over, the billiard-marker refused to make any division of the spoil, or even to return the £10 which had been lost to him in `bearing up' the cull. The landlord pressed his demand upon the macer, who, in fact, was privately reimbursed by the marker; but he was coolly told that he ought not to allow such improper practices in his house, and that the sum was not recoverable, the transaction being illegal.
How these spurious coins are procured is a question; but I am assured that they are still in
TOMMY DODD.
This is a mode of gambling very much in vogue at the present time. It is often played at public-houses among parties to decide who is to pay the reckoning. Each party turns down a half-penny, and, on uncovering it, the matter is decided as in `heads or tails.' Of course this expeditious method is also used in gambling for money. Not long ago a retired tradesman, happening to be in a public-house, where such things were connived at, allowed himself to be induced to play at Tommy Dodd with two low sharpers. They soon eased him of all the cash he had about him. A bright idea, however, occurred to him. `Stop a bit,' he said, `I must have my revenge. Just wait till I go home for more money.' The sharpers were rejoiced at the idea, and rubbed their hands with delight, whilst the tradesman went, as they felt sure, only to bring more money into their `till.' The man made all haste, for he was determined to have his revenge, and soon returned with a large bag of money, which he clinked on the table.
He first pulled out some coppers, telling them to choose from the lot the coins they would play with. They assented, although they did not seem `much to like it.' `And now,' said the tradesman, `let's set to business.'
The game proceeded with alternate success on both sides; but the tradesman went on doubling the stakes every time, whether he lost or won, and, of course, at length completely broke their bank, and went off with their money.
GAMBLING AT THE WINE AND OYSTER ROOMS, OR `SALOONS.'
The gambling which was carried on in the private rooms of the wine and oyster houses, about thirty years ago, and perhaps later, was just such as that which had so long flourished in the low vicinity of St James's. Indeed, the constant frequenters of the former had attained the most profound knowledge of the art of robbing at the West End gaming houses. The blacklegs visited the saloons every night, in order to pick up new acquaintances among the young and inexperienced. They were polite, well-dressed, gentlemanlike persons; and if they could trace anything `soft' in
CARDS THAT WOULD BEAT THE D — L HIMSELF!
A number of sharpers were detected in a trick by which they had won enormous sums. An Ecarté party, consisting of a nobleman, a captain in the army, an Armenian gentleman, and an Irish gentleman, sat down in one of the private chambers attached to one of the large wine and shell-fish rooms. The Armenian and the Irishman were partners, and were wonderfully successful; indeed, so extraordinary was their luck in turning up cards, that the captain, who had been in the town for some time, suspected the integrity of his competitors, and, accordingly, handled the cards very minutely. He soon discovered that there was an `old gentleman' (a card somewhat larger and thicker than the rest of the pack, and in considerable use among the legs) in the midst of them. The captain and his partner exclaimed that they were robbed, and the cards were sealed up, and referred to a card-maker for his opinion.
`The old saying,' said the referee, `that the cards would beat the card-maker, was never more true than it is in this instance, for this pack would beat not only me, but the very d — l himself; there is
The two `gentlemen' were immediately accused of the imposition, but they feigned ignorance of the fraud, refused to return a farthing of the `swag,' and, in their turn, charged the losers with having got up the story in order to recover what they had fairly lost.
GENEROSITY (?) OF A GAMING HOUSE KEEPER.
A young West Indian chanced one night to enter one of the gaming houses in London, and began trying his chance at Roulette. Fortune favoured him at first, and he won about a hundred pounds. Instead of leaving off he only became the more excited by his success, when his luck began to change, and he lost and lost until he staked the last coin he had in his pocket. He then pawned to the master of the table successively every ring and trinket he had, for money to continue the stakes. All in vain. His luck never returned; and he made his way down-stairs in a mood which may well be imagined. But what was his surprise when the master of the table came running after him, saying — `Sir, these things may
The moon was shining brightly at the time, and the young man swore by it, that he would never again enter a gaming house, and he kept his oath. Of course the generosity was but a decoy to entice the youth to further ruin.
HOSPITALITY OF GAMING HOUSES, AND POPULARITY OF CITY MEN AT THEM.
Joseph Atkinson and his wife, who for many years kept a gaming house at No. 15 under the Piazza, Covent Garden, gave daily magnificent play dinners, — cards of invitation for which were sent to the clerks of merchants, bankers, and brokers in the city. Atkinson used to say that he liked citizens — whom he called flats — better than any one else, for when they had dined they played freely, and after they had lost all their money they had credit to borrow more. When he had cleaned them out, when the Pigeons were completely plucked, they were sent to some of their solvent friends. After dinner play was introduced, and, till dinner
THE TRAFFIC IN HUSH MONEY.
Theophilus Bellasis, an infamous character, was well known at Bow Street, where he had been charged with breaking into the counting-house of Sir James Sanderson, Bart. Bellasis was some-times clerk and sometimes client to John Shepherd, an attorney of Bow Street; while at other times Shepherd was prosecutor of those who kept gaming houses, and Bellasis attorney. Sir William Addington, the magistrate, was so well aware that these two men commenced prosecutions solely for the purpose of hush money, that he refused to act. The Joseph Atkinson just mentioned at one time gave them £100, at another £80; and in this way they had amassed an immense sum, and undertook, for a specific amount, to defend keepers of gaming houses against all prosecutions!
WALKING OFF WITH A £200 BANK-NOTE.
The runaway son of an extensive linen-draper went to a gaming house in King Street, and pocketed a £200 bank-note from the table. He was
PERQUISITES OF GAMBLING HOUSE WAITERS.
A waiter in one of the gambling houses in St James's Street received in Christmas boxes above £500. A nobleman, who had in the course of a week won £80,000, gave him £100 of his winnings. He was said to have actually borrowed of the waiter the money which led to his extraordinary success!
PAUL ROUBEL.
Paul Roubel was a gaming house keeper, who seems to have been an exception to his class, according to the following account: — `A foreigner once applied for the situation of croupier at old Paul Roubel's, stating as his qualification that he could cut or turn up whatever card he pleased. The old man (for
TITLED GREEKS, OR `DECOYS.'
In all the gaming houses of any note there were unprincipled and reckless persons paid by the hellites, employed in various capacities, and for various purposes. Sometimes they played for the proprietors against any one who chose to put down his money; at other times, when there were no other individuals playing at all, they pretended to be strangers themselves, and got up sham games with the proprietors, with the view of practising a deception on any strangers who might be in the room, and by that means inducing them to put down their money. They were dressed in the most fashionable manner, always exhibiting a profusion of jewellery, and living in great splendour when they have any particular person
In some cases, in the higher class of gaming establishments, the Greeks, or decoys, being men of title or considerable standing in society, did not receive a fixed salary for seducing young men of fortune, but being in every case very needy men, they nominally borrowed, from time to time, large sums of money from the hell-keepers. It was, however, perfectly understood on both sides that the amount so borrowed was never to be repaid.[51] [51] Grant, Ubi suprà.
WHY CHEATS WERE CALLED GREEKS.
M. Robert-Houdin says that this application of the term `Greek' originated from a certain modern Greek, named Apoulos, who in the reign of Louis XIV. was caught cheating at court, and was condemned to 20 years at the galleys. I think this a very improbable derivation, and unnecessary withal. Aristotle of old, as before stated, ranked gamesters `with thieves and plunderers, who for the sake of gain do not scruple to despoil their best
`Bid the hungry Greek to heaven, to heaven he goes.'
Dr Johnson translated the words, `Bid him to h — l, to h — l he goes' — which is wrong. A difficulty is implied, and everybody knows that it is easier to go to the latter place than the former. It means that a needy Greek was capable of doing anything. Lord Byron protested that he saw no difference between Greeks and Jews — of course, meaning `Jews' in the offensive sense of the word. Among gamblers the term was chiefly applied to `decoys.'
GAMING TABLE SLANG AND MANŒUVRES.
Captain Sharp. A cheating bully, whose office it was to bully any `Pigeon,' who, suspecting roguery, refused to pay what he had lost.
St Hugh's bones. Dice. A bale of bard cinque deuces; a bale of flat cinque deuces; a bale of flat size aces; a bale of bard cater treys; a bale of flat cater treys; a bale of Fulhams; a bale of light graniers; a bale of gordes, with as many highmen
Do. To cheat.
Done up. Ruined.
Down-hills. False dice which run low.
Elbow-shaker. A gamester.
Fulhams. Loaded dice.
Fuzz. To shuffle cards closely: to change the pack.
Game. Bubbles, Flats, Pigeons.
Gull Gropers. Usurers who lend money to gamesters.
Greeks. Cheats at play.
Hedge. To secure a bet by betting on the other side.
High Jinks. A gambler who drinks to intoxicate his Pigeon.
Hunting. Drawing in the unwary.
Main. Any number on the dice from five to nine.
Paum. To hide a card or die.
Pigeons. Dupes of sharpers at play.
Vincent's Law. The art of cheating at cards, by the banker, who plays booty, Gripe, who bets, and
Vowel. To give an I. O. U. in payment.
Up-hills. False dice which run high.
SPECIMEN OF A QUASI GAMING HOUSE CIRCULAR.
`SIR, — I hope you will join with the rest of the parishioners
in recommending what friends you can to my shops. They shall
have good candles and fair play. Sir, we are a not gang of
swindlers,
Like other Gaming Houses,
We are men of character.
Our Party is,
Tom Carlos — alias Pistol,
Ned Mogg, — from Charing Cross,
Union Clarke, — — — — — —
A Frenchman, — The best in the world at sleight of hand.
My poor Brother,
and
Melting Billy,
Your humble Servant.
To the Church-Wardens, Overseers, and each
respectable inhabitant in the Parish.'
A card was enclosed, as follows: —
`* * * * * *
Gaming House Keeper,
and * * * * * * * * * to
The Honourable House of Commons
No. 7 and 8 * * * * * St, St James's.'
This circular was sent to Stockdale, the publisher, in 1820, who published it with the names in asterisks suppressed. It was evidently intended to expose some doings in high places.
8. THE DOCTRINE OF PROBABILITIES APPLIED TO GAMBLING.
A DISTINCTION must be made between games of skill and games of chance. The former require application, attention, and a certain degree of ability to insure success in them; while the latter are devoid of all that is rational, and are equally within the reach of the highest and lowest capacity. To be successful in throwing the dice is one of the most fickle achievements of fickle fortune; and therefore the principal game played with them is very properly and emphatically called `Hazard.' It requires, indeed, some exertion of the mental powers, of memory, at least, and a turn for such diversions, to play well many games at cards. Nevertheless, it is often found that those who do so give no further proofs of superior memory and
The gamester of skill, in games of skill, may at first sight seem to have more advantage than the gamester of chance, in games of chance; and while cards are played merely as an amusement, there is no doubt that a recreation is more rational when it requires some degree of skill than one, like dice, totally devoid of all meaning whatever. But when the pleasure becomes a business, and a matter of mere gain, there is more innocence, perhaps, in a perfect equality of antagonists — which games of chance, fairly played, always secure — than where one party is likely to be an overmatch for the other by his superior knowledge or ability.
Nevertheless, even games of chance may be artfully managed; and the most apparently casual throw of the dice be made subservient to the purposes of chicanery and fraud, as will be shown in the sequel.
In the matter of skill and chance the nature of cards is mixed, — most games having in them both elements of interest, — since the success of the player must depend as much on the chance of the
Under the name of the Doctrine of Chances or Probabilities, a very learned science, — much in vogue when lotteries were prevalent, — has been applied to gambling purposes; and in spite of the obvious abstruseness of the science, it is not impossible to give the general reader an idea of its pro-cesses and conclusions.
The probability of an event is greater or less according to the number of chances by which it may happen, compared with the whole number of chances by which it may either happen or fail. Wherefore, if we constitute a fraction whereof the numerator be the number of chances whereby an event may happen, and the denominator the number
The same may be said of the probability of failing, which will likewise be measured by a fraction whose numerator is the number of chances whereby it may fail, and the denominator the whole number of chances both for its happening and failing; thus the probability of the failing of that event which has 2 chances to fail and 3 to happen will be measured by the fraction 2/5.
The fractions which represent the probabilities of happening and failing, being added together, their sum will always be equal to unity, since the sum of their numerators will be equal to their common denominator. Now, it being a certainty that an event will either happen or fail, it follows that certainty, which may be conceived under the notion of an infinitely great degree of probability, is fitly represented by unity.
These things will be easily apprehended if it
To find the probability of throwing an ace in two throws with a single die. The probability of throwing an ace the first time is 1/6; whereof 1/6 is the first part of the probability required. If the ace be missed the first time, still it may be thrown on the second; but the probability of missing it the first time is 5/6, and the probability of throwing it the second time is 1/6; therefore the probability of miss
To this case is analogous a question commonly proposed about throwing with two dice either six or seven in two throws, which will be easily solved, provided it be known that seven has 6 chances to come up, and six 5 chances, and that the whole number of chances in two dice is 36; for the number of chances for throwing six or seven 11, it follows that the probability of throwing either chance the first time is 11/36, but if both are missed the first time, still either may be thrown the second time; but the probability of missing both the first time is 25/36, and the probability of throwing either of them on the second is 11/36; therefore the probability of missing both of them the first time, and throwing either of them the second time, is 25/36 x 11/36 =275/1296, and therefore the probability required is 11/36 + 275/1296 =671/1296, and the probability of the contrary is 625/1296.
Among the many mistakes that are committed about chances, one of the most common and least suspected was that which related to lotteries. Thus,
The doctrine of chances tends to explode the long-standing superstition that there is in play such a thing as luck, good or bad. If by saying that a man has good luck, nothing more were meant than that he has been generally a gainer at play, the expression might be allowed as very proper in a short way of speaking; but if the word `good luck' be understood to signify a certain predominant quality, so inherent in a man that he must win whenever he plays, or at least win oftener than lose, it may be denied that there is any such thing in nature. The asserters of luck maintain that sometimes they have been very lucky, and at other times they have had a prodigious run of bad luck against them, which whilst it continued obliged
Among the many curious results of these inquiries according to the doctrine of chances, is
The possible combinations of cards in a hand as dealt out by chance are truly wonderful. It has been established by calculation that a player at Whist may hold above 635 thousand millions of various hands! So that, continually varied, at 50 deals per evening, for 313 evenings, or 15,650
The chance is equal, in dealing cards, that every hand will have seven trumps in two deals, or seven trumps between two partners, and also four court cards in every deal. It is also certain on an average of hands, that nothing can be more super-stitious and absurd than the prevailing notions about luck or ill-luck. Four persons, constantly playing at Whist during a long voyage, were frequently winners and losers to a large amount, but as frequently at `quits;' and at the end of the voyage, after the last game, one of them was minus only one franc!
The chance of having a particular card out of 13 is 13/52, or 1 to 4, and the chance of holding any two cards is 1/4 of 1/4 or 1/16. The chances of a game are generally inversely as the number got by each, or as the number to be got to complete each game.
The chances against holding seven trumps are 160 to 1; against six, it is 26 to 1; against five, 6 to 1; and against four nearly 2 to 1. It is 8 to 1 against holding any two particular cards.
Similar calculations have been made respecting the probabilities with dice. There are 36 chances upon two dice.
It is an even chance that you throw 8. It is 35 to 1 against throwing any particular doublets, and 6 to 1 against any doublets at all. It is 17 to 1 against throwing any two desired numbers. It is 4 to 9 against throwing a single number with either of the dice, so as to hit a blot and enter. Against hitting with the amount of two dice, the chances against 7, 8, and 9 are 5 to 1; against 10 are 11 to 1; against 11 are 17 to 1; and against sixes, 35 to 1.
The probabilities of throwing required totals with two dice, depend on the number of ways in which the totals can be made up by the dice; — 2, 3, 11, or 12 can only be made up one way each, and therefore the chance is but 1/36; — 4, 5, 9, 10 may be made up two ways, or 1/8; — 6, 7, 8 three ways, or 1/12. The chance of doublets is 1/36, the chance of particular doublets 1/216.
The method was largely applied to lotteries, cock-fighting, and horse-racing. It may be asked how it is possible to calculate the odds in horse-racing, when perhaps the jockeys in a great mea
In answer to this a question may be proposed: — Suppose I toss up a half-penny, and you are to guess whether it will be head or tail — must it not be allowed that you have an equal chance to win as to lose? Or, if I hide a half-penny under a hat, and I know what it is, have you not as good a chance to guess right, as if it were tossed up? My knowing it to be head can be no hindrance to you, as long as you have liberty of choosing either head or tail. In spite of this reasoning, there are people who build so much upon their own opinion, that should their favourite horse happen to be beaten, they will have it to be owing to some fraud. The following fact is mentioned as a `paradox.'
It happened at Malden, in Essex, in the year 1738, that three horses (and no more than three) started for a £10 plate, and they were all three distanced the first heat, according to the common rules in horse-racing, without any quibble or equivocation; and the following was the solution: — The first horse ran on the inside of the post; the second wanted weight; and the third fell and broke a fore-leg.[54] [54] Cheany's Horse-racing Book.
In horse-racing the expectation of an event is considered as the present value, or worth, of whatsoever sum or thing is depending on the happening of that event. Therefore if the expectation on an event be divided by the value of the thing expected, on the happening of that event, the quotient will be the probability of happening.
Example I. Suppose two horses, A and B, to start for £50, and there are even bets on both sides; it is evident that the present value or worth of each of their expectations will be £25, and the probabilities 25/50 or 1/2. For, if they had agreed to divide the prize between them, according as the bets should be at the time of their starting, they would each of them be entitled to £25; but if A had been thought so much superior to B that the bets had been 3 to 2 in his favour, then the real value of A's expectation would have been £30, and that of B's only £20, and their several probabilities 30/50 and 20/50.
Example II. Let us suppose three horses to start for a sweepstake, namely, A, B, and C, and that the odds are 8 to 6 A against B, and 6 to 4 B against C — what are the odds — A against C, and the field against A? Answer: — 2 to 1 A against
A's expectation is 8
B's expectation is 6
C's expectation is 4
— —
18 But if the bets had been 7 to 4 A against B; and even money B against C, then the odds would have been 8 to 7 the field against A, as shown in the following scheme: —
7 A
4 B
4 C
— —
15
But as this is the basis upon which all the rest depends, another example or two may be required to make it as plain as possible.
Example III. Suppose the same three as before, and the common bets 7 to 4 A against B; 21 to 20 (or `gold to silver') B against C; we must state it thus: — 7 guineas to 4 A against B; and 4 guineas to £4, B against C; which being reduced into shillings, the scheme will stand as follows: —
147 A's expectation.
81 B's expectation.
80 C's expectation.
— —
311
Example IV. There are four horses to start for a sweepstake, namely, A, B, C, D, and they are supposed to be as equally matched as possible. Now, Mr Sly has laid 10 guineas A against C, and also 10 guineas A against D. Likewise Mr Rider has laid 10 guineas A against C, and also 10 guineas B against D. After which Mr Dice
Now, we wish to know what Mr Dice's advantage or disadvantage is, in laying these two last-mentioned wagers.
First, the probability of Mr Sly's winning both his bets is 1/3 of 14 guineas; and Mr Dice's expectation is 2/3 of 14 guineas, or £9 16s., which being deducted from his own stake (10 guineas), there remains 14s., which is his disadvantage in that bet.
Secondly, Mr Rider's expectation of winning his two bets is 1/4, and, therefore, Mr Dice's expectation of the 14 guineas, is 3/4, or £11 0s. 6d., from which deduct 10 guineas (his own stake), and there remains 10s. 6d., his advantage in this bet, — which being deducted from 14s. (his disadvantage in the other), there remains 3s 6d., his disadvantage in paying both these bets.
These examples may suffice to show the working of the system; regular tables exist adapted to all cases; and there can be no doubt that those who have realized large fortunes by horse-racing managed to do so by uniformly acting on some such principles, as well as by availing themselves of
The same system was applied, and with still greater precision, to Cock-fighting, to Lotteries, Raffles, Backgammon, Cribbage, Put, All Fours, and Whist, showing all the chances of holding any particular card or cards. Thus, it is 2 to 1 that your partner has not one certain card; 17 to 2 that he has not two certain cards; 31 to 26 that he has not one of them only; and 32 to 25 (or 5 to 4) that he has one or both — that is, when two cards are in question. It is 31 to 1 that he has three certain cards; 7 to 2 that he has not two; 7 to 6 that he has not one; 13 to 6 that he has either one or two; 5 to 2 that he has one, two, or three cards; that is, when three cards are in question.
With regard to the dealer and his partner, it is 57,798 to 7176 (better than 8 to 1) that they are not four by honours; it is 32,527 to 32,448 (or about an even bet) that they are not two by honours; it is 36,924 to 25,350 (or 11 to 7 nearly) that the honours count; it is 42,237 to 22,737 (or 15 to 8 nearly) that the dealer is nothing by honours.[55] [55] Proctor, The Sportsman's Sure Guide. Lond. A.D. 1733.
Such is a general sketch of the large subject included under the term of the calculation of probabilities, which comprises not only the chances of games of hazard, insurances, lotteries, &., but also the determination of future events from observations made relative to events of the same nature. This subject of inquiry dates only from the 17th century, and occupied the minds of Pascal, Huygens, Fermot, Bernouilli, Laplace, Fourier, Lacroix, Poisson, De Moivre; and in more modern times, Cournot, Quételet, and Professor De Morgan.
In the matter of betting, or in estimating the `odds' in betting, of course an acquaintance with the method must be of some service, and there can be no doubt that professional gamesters endeavoured to master the subject.
M. Robert-Houdin, in his amusing work, Les Tricheries des Grecs devoilées, has propounded some gaming axioms which are at least curious and interesting; they are presented as those of a professional gambler and cheat.
1. `Every game of chance presents two kinds of chances
which are very distinct, — namely, those relating to the person
interested, that is, the player; and those inherent
In the former there is what must be called, for the want of a better name, `good luck' or `bad luck,' that is, some mysterious cause which at times gives the play a `run' of good or bad luck; in the latter there is the entire doctrine of `probabilities' aforesaid, which, according to M. Houdin's gaming hero, may be completely discarded for the following axiom: —
2. `If chance can bring into the game all possible combinations, there are, nevertheless, certain limits at which it seems to stop. Such, for instance, as a certain number turning up ten times in succession at Roulette. This is possible, but it has never happened.'
Nevertheless a most remarkable fact is on record. In 1813, a Mr Ogden betted 1000 guineas to one guinea, that calling seven as the main, the caster would not throw that number ten times successively. Wonderful to relate! the caster threw seven nine times following. Thereupon Mr Ogden offered him 470 guineas to be off the bet — which he refused. The caster took the box again and threw nine, — and so Mr Ogden won his guinea![56] In this case there
3. `In a game of chance, the oftener the same combination has occurred in succession, the nearer we are to the certainty that it will not recur at the next cast or turn up. This is the most elementary of the theories on probabilities; it is termed the maturity of the chances.'
`Hence,' according to this great authority, `a player must come to the table not only "in luck,'' but he must not risk his money excepting at the instant prescribed by the rules of the maturity of the chances.'
Founded on this theory we have the following precepts for gamesters: —
1. `For gaming, prefer Roulette, because it pre-sents several ways of staking your money[57] — which permits the study of several. [57] `Pair, impair, passe, manque, and the 38 numbers of the Roulette, besides the different combinations of position' and `maturities' together.
2. `A player should approach the gaming table perfectly calm and cool — just as a merchant or tradesman in treaty about any affair. If he gets into a passion, it is all over with prudence, all over
3. `Every man who finds a pleasure in playing runs the risk of losing.
4. `A prudent player, before undertaking anything, should put himself to the test to discover if he is "in vein'' — in luck. In all doubt, you should abstain.'
I remember a curious incident in my childhood, which seems much to the point of this axiom. A magnificent gold watch and chain were given towards the building of a church, and my mother took three chances, which were at a very high figure, the watch and chain being valued at more than £100. One of these chances was entered in my name, one in my brother's, and the third in my mother's. I had to throw for her as well as myself. My brother threw an insignificant figure; for myself I did the same; but, oddly enough, I refused to throw for my mother on finding that I had lost my chance, saying that I should wait a little longer — rather a curious piece of prudence for a child of thirteen. The raffle was with three dice; the majority of the chances had been thrown, and 34 was the highest. After declining to throw
5. `There are persons who are constantly pursued by bad luck. To such I say — never play.
6. `Stubborness at play is ruin.
7. `Remember that Fortune does not like people to be overjoyed at her favours, and that she prepares bitter deceptions for the imprudent, who are intoxicated by success.'
Such are the chief axioms of a most experienced gamester, and M. Houdin sums up the whole into the following: —
8. `Before risking your money at play, you must deeply study your "vein'' and the different
M. Robert-Houdin got all this precious information from a gamester named Raymond. It appears that the first meeting between him and this man was at a subscription-ball, where the sharper managed to fleece him and others to a considerable amount, contriving a dexterous escape when detected. Houdin afterwards fell in with him at Spa, where he found him in the greatest poverty, and lent him a small sum — to practise his grand theories as just explained — but which he lost — whereupon Houdin advised him `to take up a less dangerous occupation.' He then appears to have revealed to Houdin the entertaining particulars which form the bulk of his book, so dramatically written. A year afterwards Houdin unexpectedly fell in with him again; but this time the fellow was transformed into what he called `a demi-millionnaire,' having succeeded to a large fortune by the death of his brother, who died intestate. According to Houdin the following was the man's declaration at the auspicious meeting: — `I have,' said Raymond, `completely renounced gaming. I am rich enough, and care no longer for fortune. And
A very proper speech, unquestionably, and rendered still more edifying by M. Houdin's assurance that Raymond, at his death three years after, bequeathed the whole of his fortune to various charitable institutions at Paris.
With regard to the man's gaming theories, however, it may be just as well to consider the fact, that very many clever people, after contriving fine systems and schemes for ruining gaming banks, have, as M. Houdin reminds us, only succeeded in ruining themselves and those who conformed to their precepts. Et s'il est un joueur qui vive de son pain, On en voit tous les jours mille mourir de faim. `If one player there be that can live by his gain, There are thousands that starve and strive ever in vain!'
9. THE HISTORY OF DICE AND CARDS.
THE knights of hazard and devotees of chance, who live in and by the rattle of the box, little know, or care, perhaps, to whom they are indebted for the invention of their favourite cube. They will solace themselves, no doubt, on being told that they are pursuing a diversion of the highest antiquity, and which has been handed down through all civilized as well as barbarous nations to our own times.
The term `cube,' which is the figure of a die, comes originally from the Arabic word `ca'b,' or `ca'be,' whence the Greeks derived their cúbos, and cubeía, which is used to signify any solid figure perfectly square every way — such as the geometrical cube, the die used in play, and the temple at
Plato tells us that dice and gaming originated with a certain demon, whom he calls Theuth, which seems very much like the original patronymic of our Teutonic races, always famous for their gambling propensity. The Greeks generally, however, ascribed the invention of dice to one of their race, named Palamedes, a sort of universal genius, who hit upon many other contrivances, among the rest, weights and measures. But this worthy lived in the times of the Trojan war, and yet Homer makes no mention of dice — the astragaloi named by the poet being merely knuckle-bones. Dice, however, are mentioned by Aristophanes in his comedies, and so it seems that the invention must be placed between the times of the two poets, that is, about 2300 years ago. At any rate the cube or die has been in use as an instrument of play, at least, during that period of time.
The great antiquity, therefore, of the die as an instrument of pastime is unquestionable, and the general reason assigned for its invention was the amusement and relaxation of the mind from the pressure of difficulties, or from the fatigues and toils of protracted war. Indeed, one conjecture is, that gaming was invented by the Lydians when under the pressure of a great famine; to divert themselves from their sufferings they contrived dice, balls, tables, &. This seems, however, rather a bad joke. The afflicted Job asks — `Can a man fill his belly with the east wind?' And we can imagine that plenty of tobacco to smoke and `chaw' would mitigate the pangs of starvation to an army in the field, as has been seriously suggested; but you might just as well present a soldier with a stone instead of bread, as invite him to amuse himself with dice, or anything else, to assuage the pangs of hunger.
Be that as it may, time soon matured this instrument of recreation into an engine of destruction; and the intended palliative of care and labour has proved the fostering nurse of innumerable evils. This diminutive cube has usurped a tyranny over mankind for more than two thousand
The use of dice was probably brought into this island by the Romans, if not before known; it became more frequent in the times of our Saxon ancestry, and has prevailed with almost unimpaired vigour from those days to our own.
The Astragalos of the Greeks and Talus of the Romans were, as before stated, nothing but the knuckle-bones of sheep and goats, numbered, and used for gaming, being tossed up in the air and caught on the back of the hand. Two persons played together at this game, using four bones, which they threw up into the air or emptied out of a dice-box (fritillus), observing the numbers of the opposite sides. The numbers on the four sides of the four bones admitted of thirty-five different combinations. The lowest throw of all was four aces; but the value of the throw was not in all cases the sum of the four numbers turned up. The highest in value was that called Venus, in which the numbers cast up were all different; the sum of them being only fourteen. It was by obtaining this throw, hence called basilicus, that `the King of
Dice were also made of ivory, bone, or some close-grained wood, especially privet ligustris tesseris utilissima, Plin. H. N.). They were numbered as at present.
Arsacides, King of the Parthians, presented Demetrius Nicator, among other presents, with golden dice — it is said, in contempt for his frivolous propensity to play — in exprobationem puerilis levitatis.'[58] [58] Justini Hist., lib. xxxviii. 9. 9.
Dice are also mentioned in the New Testament, where occurs the word cubeía (Eph. iv. 14), (`the only word for "gambling'' used in the Bible'), a word in very common use, among Paul's kith and kin, for `cube,' `dice,' `dicery,' and it occurs
Regarding the translation `sleight' in the A.V., this seems a correct enough rendering of the term as far as the sense of the passage goes, and comes very near the many ancient translations — `nequitia,' `versutia,' `inanis labor,' `vana et inepta (?) subtilitas,' &., of the Fathers. Luther has `Schalkheit,' — a word the meaning of which at his time differed considerably from our acceptation of the term. The Thesaurus takes Paul's cubeía (s.v.)
The ancient tali, marked and thrown as above described, were also used in divination, just as dice are at the present day; and doubtless the interpretations were the same among the ancients — for all superstitions are handed down from generation to generation with wondrous fidelity. The procedure is curious enough, termed `the art of telling fortunes by dice.'
Three dice are taken and well shaken in the box with the left hand, and then cast out on a board or table on which a circle is previously drawn with chalk; and the following are the supposed predictions of the throws: —
Three, a pleasing surprise; four, a disagreeable one; five, a stranger who will prove a friend; six, loss of property; seven, undeserved scandal; eight, merited reproach; nine, a wedding; ten, a christening, at which some important event will occur; eleven, a death that concerns you; twelve, a letter speedily; thirteen, tears and sighs; fourteen, beware that you are not drawn into some trouble or plot by a secret enemy; fifteen, immediate pros
Two singular facts throw light on the kind of dice used some 100 and 150 years ago. In an old cribbage card-box, curiously ornamented, supposed to have been made by an amateur in the reign of Queen Anne, and now in my possession, I found a die with one end fashioned to a point, evidently for the purpose of spinning — similar to the modern teetotum. With the same lot at the sale where it was bought, was a pack of cards made of ivory, about an inch and a half in length
Again, it is stated that in taking up the floors of the Middle Temple Hall, about the year 1764, nearly 100 pairs of dice were found, which had dropped, on different occasions, through the chinks or joints of the boards. They were very small, at least one-third less that those now in use. Certainly the benchers of those times did not keep the floor of their magnificent hall in a very decent condition.
A curious fact relating to dice may here be pointed out. Each of the six sides of a die is so dotted or numbered that the top and bottom of every die (taken together) make 7; for if the top or uppermost side is 5, the bottom or opposite side will be 2; and the same holds through every face; therefore, let the number of dice be what it may, their top and bottom faces, added together, must be equal to the number of dice multiplied by 7. In throwing three dice, if 2, 3, and 4 are thrown, making 9, their corresponding bottom faces will be 5, 4, and 3, making 12, which together are 21 — equal to the three dice multiplied by 7.
CARDS.
The origin of cards is as doubtful as that of dice. All that we know for certain is that they were first used in the East. Some think that the figures at first used on them were of moral import: the Hindoo and Chinese cards are certainly emblematic in a very high degree; the former illustrate the ten avatars, or incarnations of the deity Vishnu; and the so-called `paper-tickets' of the Chinese typify the stars, the human virtues, and, indeed, every variety of subject. Sir William Jones was convinced that the Hindoo game of Chaturaji — that is, `the Four Rajahs or Kings' — a species of highly-complicated chess — was the first germ of that parti-coloured pasteboard, which has been the ruin of so many modern fortunes. A pack of Hindoostani cards, in the possession of the Royal Asiatic Society, and presented to Captain Cromline Smith in 1815, by a high caste Brahman, was declared by the donor to be actually 1000 years old: `Nor,' said the Brahman, `can any of us now play at them, for they are not like our modern cards at all.' Neither, indeed, do they bear any remarkable resemblance to our own — the pack consisting of no
It was not before the end of the 14th century that cards became known in Europe; and it is a curious fact that the French clergy took greatly to card-playing about that time — their favourite game being the rather ungenteel `All Fours,' as now reputed; for they were specially forbidden that pastime by the Synod of Langres in 1404.
The ancient cards of both Spain and France, particularly the `court-cards,' exhibit strong marks of the age of chivalry; but here we may observe that the word is written by some ancient writers, `coate-cards,' evidently signifying no more than figures in particular dresses. The giving pre-eminence or victory to a certain suit, by the name of
The four suits of cards are supposed to represent the four estates of a kingdom: — 1. The nobility and gentry; 2. The ecclesiastics or priesthood; 3. The citizens or commercial men; 4. The peasantry or Husbandmen. The nobility are represented in the old Spanish cards by the espada, or sword, corrupted by us into `spades,' — by the French with piques, `pikes or spears.' The ecclesiastical order is pointed out by copas, or sacramental cups, which are painted in one of the suits of old Spanish cards, and by cœurs, or `hearts,' on French cards, as in our own — thereby signifying choir-men, gens de chœur, or ecclesiastics — from chœur de l'eglise, `the choir of the church,' that being esteemed the most important part or the heart of the church.
The Spaniards depicted their citizens or commercial men under dineros, a small coin, an emblem
With regard to the depicted figures of cards, each nation likewise followed its own inventions, though grounded in both on those ideas of chivalry which then strongly prevailed. The Spanish cards were made to carry the insignia and accoutrements of the King of Spain, the ace of deneros being emblazoned with the royal arms, supported by an eagle. The French ornamented their cards with fleurs de lis, their royal emblem. The Spanish kings, in conformity to the martial spirit of the times when cards were introduced, were all
The four knaves (called in French, valets or varlets) are four valiant captains — Ogier and Lancelot, the companions of Charlemagne, Hector de Gallard, and Lahire, the generals of Charles VII. The remainder of the pack equally presents a sort of martial allegory; the heart is bravery; the spade (espad, `sword') and the diamond (carreau, that is,
In accordance with this allegorical meaning, the function of the ace is most significant. It leads captive every other card, queen and king included — thus indicating the omnipotence of gold or mammon!
To the spirit that roams with banner unfurl'd
O'er the Earth and the rolling Sea —
And hath conquer'd all to his thraldom
Where his eye hath glanced or his footstep sped —
Who hath power alike o'er the living and dead —
Mammon![59] I sing to thee!
[59] Steinmetz Ode to Mammon.
Some say that the four kings represent those famous champions of antiquity — David, Alexander, Julius Cæsar, and Charlemagne; and that the four queens, Argine, Pallas, Esther, and Judith, are the respective symbols of majesty, wisdom, piety, and fortitude; and there can be no doubt, if you look attentively on the queens of a pack of cards, you will easily discern the appropriate expressions of all these attributes in the faces of the grotesque
Thus a pack of cards is truly a monument of the olden time — the days of chivalry and its numberless associations.
In addition to the details I have given in the previous chapter (p. 244) respecting the probability of holding certain cards, there are a few other curious facts concerning them, which it may be interesting to know.
There is a difference in the eyes of two of the knaves — those of diamonds and hearts, more apparent in the old patterns, suggesting the inference that they are blind. This has been made the basis of a card trick, as to which two of the four knaves presenting themselves would be selected as servants. Of course the blind ones would be rejected. A bet is sometimes proposed to the unwary, at Whist, but one of the party will have in his hand, after the deal, only one of a suit, or none of a suit. The bet should not be taken, as this result very frequently happens.
Lastly, there is an arithmetical puzzle of the most startling effect to be contrived with a pack of cards, as follows. Let a party make up parcels of cards, beginning with a number of pips on any card, and then counting up to twelve with individual cards. In the first part of the trick it must be understood that the court cards count as ten, all others according to the pips. Thus, a king put down will require only two cards to make up 12, whereas the ace will require 11, and so on. Now, when all the parcels are completed, the performer of the trick requires to know only the number of parcels thus made, and the remainder, if any, to declare after a momentary calculation, the exact number of pips on the first cards laid down — to the astonishment of those not in the secret. In fact, there is no possible arrangement of the cards, according to this method, which can prevent an adept from declaring the number of pips required, after being informed of the number of parcels, and the remainder, if any. This startling performance will be explained in a subsequent chapter — amusing card tricks.
Cards must soon have made their way among our countrymen, from the great intercourse that
Very soon, however, the evil consequences of their introduction became apparent. One would have thought that in such a tumultuous reign at home as that of our sixth Henry, there could not have been so much use made of cards as to have rendered them an object of public apprehension and governmental solicitude; but a record appears in the beginning of the reign of Edward IV., after the deposition of the unfortunate Henry, by which playing cards, as well as dice, tennis-balls, and chessmen, were forbidden to be imported.
If this tended to check their use for a time, the subsequent Spanish connection with the court of England renewed an acquaintance with cards and a love for them. The marriage of Prince Arthur
Cards were certainly much in use, and all ideas concerning them very familiar to the minds of the English, during the reign of Henry VIII., as may be inferred from a remarkable sermon of the good bishop Latimer. This sermon was preached in St Edward's church, Cambridge, on the Sunday before Christmas day, 1527, and in this discourse he may be said to have `dealt' out an exposition of the precepts of Christianity according to the terms of card-playing. `Now ye have heard what is meant by this "first card,'' and how you ought to "play'' with it, I purpose again to "deal'' unto you "another card almost of the same suit,'' for they be of so nigh affinity that one cannot be well "played'' without the other, &.' `It seems,' says Fuller, `that he suited his sermon rather to the time — being about Christmas, when cards were much used — than to the text, which was the Baptist's question to our Lord — "Who art thou?'' — taking thereby occasion to conform his
The habit of card-playing must have been much confirmed and extended by the marriage of Philip of Spain with our Queen Mary, whose numerous and splendid retinue could not but bring with them that passionate love of cards which prevailed in the Spanish court.
It seems also probable that the cards then used (whatever they might have been before) were of Spanish form and figure, in compliment to the imperious Philip; since even to this day the names of two Spanish suits are retained on English cards, though without any reference to their present figure. Thus, we call one suit spades, from the Spanish espada, `sword,' although we retain no similitude of the sword in the figure, — and another clubs, in Spanish, bastos, but without regard to the figure also.
Old Roger Ascham, the tutor of Queen Elizabeth, gives us a picture of the gambling arts of his day, as follows: — How will they use these shiftes when they get a plaine man that cannot skill of them! How they will go about, if they perceive an
It is evident from this graphic description of the process, that the villany of sharpers has been ever the same; for old Roger's account of the matter in his day exactly tallies with daily experience at the present time.
The love of card-playing was continued through the reign of Elizabeth and James I.,[60] and in the reign of the latter it had reached so high a pitch that the audiences used to amuse themselves with cards at the play-house, while they were waiting for the beginning of the play. The same practice existed at Florence. If the thing be
There is no reason to suppose that the fondness for this diversion abated, except during the short `trump or triumph of the fanatic suit' — in the hard times of Old Oliver — when undoubtedly cards were styled `the devil's books.' But, indeed, by that time they had become an engine of much fraud and destruction; so that one of the early acts of Charles II.'s reign inflicted large penalties on those who should use cards for fraudulent purposes.
`Primero was the fashionable game at the court of England during the Tudor dynasty. Shakspeare represents Henry VIII. playing at it with the Duke of Suffolk; and Falstaff says, "I never prospered since I forswore myself at Primero.'' In the Earl of Northumberland's letters about the Gunpowder-plot, it is noticed that Joscelin Percy was playing at this game on Sunday, when his uncle, the conspirator, called on him at Essex
Maw succeeded Primero as the fashionable game at the English court, and was the favourite game of James I., who appears to have played at cards, just as he played with affairs of state, in an indolent manner; requiring in both cases some one to hold his cards, if not to prompt him what to play. Weldon, alluding to the poisoning of Sir Thomas Overbury, in his Court and Character of King James, says: `The next that came on the stage was Sir Thomas Monson, but the night before he was to come to his trial, the king being at the game of Maw, said, "To-morrow comes
`It is evident that Maw differed very slightly from Five Cards, the most popular game in Ireland at the present day. As early as 1674 this game was popular in Ireland, as we learn from Cotton's Compleat Gamester, which says: "Five Cards is an Irish game, and is much played in that kingdom for considerable sums of money, as All-fours is played in Kent, and Post-and-pair in the west of England.''
`Noddy was one of the old English court games. This has been supposed to have been a children's game, and it was certainly nothing of the kind. Its nature is thus fully described in a curious satirical poem, entitled Batt upon Batt, published in 1694.
And deal himself three fives too, when he will;
Conclude with one-and-thirty, and a pair,
Never fail ten in Stock, and yet play fair,
If Batt be not that wight, I lose my aim.''
`From these lines, there can be no doubt that the ancient Noddy was the modern cribbage — the Nod of to-day, rejoicing in the name of Noddy, and the modern Crib, being termed the Stock.
`Ombre was most probably introduced into this country by Catherine of Portugal, the queen of Charles II.; Waller, the court poet, has a poem on a card torn at Ombre by the queen. This royal lady also introduced to the English court the reprehensible practice of playing cards on Sunday. Pepys, in 1667, writes: "This evening, going to the queen's side to see the ladies, I did find the queen, the Duchess of York, and another at cards, with the room full of ladies and great men; which I was amazed at to see on a Sunday, having not believed, but contrarily flatly denied the same, a little while since, to my cousin.''[61]
[61] Hombre, or rather El Hombre, or `The Man,' was so named as requiring thought and reflection, which are qualities peculiar to man; or rather, alluding to him who undertakes to play the game against the rest of the gamesters, emphatically called The Man. It requires very great application to play it well: and let a man be ever so expert, he will be apt to fall into mistakes if he thinks of anything else, or is disturbed by the conversation of those that look on. It is a game of three, with 40 cards, that is, rejecting the eights, nines, and tens of all the suits.
`In a passage from Evelyn's Memoirs, the writer
`Quadrille succeeded Ombre, but for a curious reason did not reign so long as its predecessor. From the peculiar nature of Quadrille, an unfair confederacy might be readily established, by any two persons, by which the other players could be cheated.
`While the preceding games were in vogue the magnificent temple of Whist, destined to outshine and overshadow them, was in course of erection.
Who first contrived the warlike sport of Chess;
Let nice Piquette the boast of France remain,
And studious Ombre be the pride of Spain;
When she can call delightful Whist her own.''
`All great inventions and discoveries are works of time, and Whist is no exception to the rule; it did not come into the world perfect at all points, as Minerva emerged from the head of Jupiter. Nor were its wonderful merits early recognized. Under the vulgar appellations of Whisk and Swobbers, it long lingered in the servants'-hall ere it could ascend to the drawing-room. At length, some gentlemen, who met at the Crown coffee-house, in Bedford Row, studied the game, gave it rules, established its principles, and then Edward Hoyle, in 1743, blazoned forth its fame to all the world.
`Many attempts have been made, at various times, to turn playing-cards to a very different use from that for which they were originally intended. Thus, in 1518, a learned Franciscan friar, named Murner, published a Logica Memorativa, a mode of teaching logic, by a pack of cards; and, subsequently, he attempted to teach a summary of civil law in the same manner. In 1656, an Englishman, named Jackson, published a work, entitled the Scholar's Sciential Cards, in which he proposed to teach reading, spelling, grammar, writing, and
`The kind of advertisements, now called circulars, were often, formerly, printed on the backs of playing-cards. Visiting-cards, too, were improvised, by writing the name on the back of playing-cards. About twenty years ago, when a house in Dean Street, Soho, was under repair, several visiting-cards of this description were found behind
`A curious and undoubtedly authentic historical anecdote is told of a pack of cards. Towards the end of the persecuting reign of Queen Mary, a commission was granted to a Dr Cole to go over to Ireland, and commence a fiery crusade against the Protestants of that country. On coming to Chester, on his way, the doctor was waited on by the mayor, to whom he showed his commission, exclaiming, with premature triumph, "Here is what shall lash the heretics of Ireland.'' Mrs Edmonds, the landlady of the inn, having a brother in Dublin, was much disturbed by overhearing these words; so, when the doctor accompanied the mayor down
All the pursuits of life, all the trades and occupations of men, have, in all times, lent expres
The fabrication of cards is a most important manufacture of France; and Paris and Nancy are the two places where most cards are made. The annual consumption of cards in France amounts to 1,500,000 francs, or £62,500; but France also supplies foreigners with the article, especially the Spanish, American, Portuguese, and English colonies, to the value of 1,000,000 francs, or £41,666. The government derives from this branch of French industry not much less than £25,000 annual revenue, that is, from 20 to 25 per cent. of the product. The duty on cards is secured and enforced by severe penalties.
English cards are about a third larger than the French. The double-headed cards are an English invention, and they are being adopted by the French. Their advantage is obvious, in securing the secrecy of the hand, for by observing a party in arranging his cards after the deal, the act of
The method of making playing-cards seems to have given the first hint to the invention of printing, as appears from the first specimens of printing at Haerlem, and those in the Bodleian Library.
`The manufacture of playing-cards comprises many interesting processes. The cardboard employed for this purpose is formed of several thicknesses of paper pasted together; there are usually four such thicknesses; and the paper is so selected as to take paste, paint, and polish equally well. The sheets of paper are pasted with a brush, and are united by successive processes of cold-drying, hot-drying, and hydraulic pressure. Each sheet is large enough for forty cards. The outer surfaces of the outer sheets are prepared with a kind of flinty
The cardboard, when all the printing is finished, is cut up into cards; every card is minutely examined, and placed among the `Moguls,' `Harrys,' or `Highlanders,' as they are technically called, according to the degree in which they may be faultless or slightly specked; and the cards are finally made up into packs.'[64] [64] Chambers's Cyclopædia.
Machinery has been called into requisition in card-playing. In 1815 a case was tried in which part of the debt claimed was for an instrument to cut cards so as to give an unfair advantage to the person using it. The alleged debtor had been most fortunate in play, winning at one time £11,000 from an officer in India. For an exactly opposite reason another machine was used in 1818 by the Bennet Street Club. It consisted of a box curiously constructed for dealing cards, and was invented by an American officer.
Another curious fact relating to cards is the duty derived from them. In the year 1775 the number of packs stamped was 167,000, amounting to between £3000 and £4000 duty. Lord North
This duty on cards went on increasing its annual addition to the revenue, so that about the year 1820 the monthly payments of Mr Hunt alone, the card-maker of Piccadily {sic}, for the stamp-duty on cards, varied from £800 to £1000, that is, from £9600 to £12,000 per annum. In 1833 the stamp-duty on cards was 6d., and it yielded £15,922, showing a consumption of 640,000 packs per annum. Much of this, however, was sheer waste, on account of the rule of gamesters requiring a fresh pack at every game.
In the Harleian Miscellany[65] will be found a sa
Which, by the stars, may happen to be true.'
[65] Vol. i. p. 177.
In vol. iv. of the same work there is another poem of the kind, entitled `The State Gamesters; or, the Old Cards new packed and shuffled,' which characteristically concludes as follows —
Never to play so high as for a Crown.'
Finally, as to allusions to gaming, the reader may remember the famous sarcasm of the late Earl of Derby (as Lord Stanley) some thirty years ago, comparing the Government to Thimble-riggers in operation.
10. PIQUET, BASSET, FARO, HAZARD, PASSE-DIX, PUT, CROSS AND PILE, THIMBLE-RIG.
PIQUET
is said to have derived its name from that of its inventor, who contrived it to amuse Charles VI. of France. The game was played with thirty two cards, that is, discarding out of the pack all the deuces, treys, fours, fives, and sixes. Regular piquet-packs were sold. In reckoning up the points, every card counted for its value, as ten for ten, nine for nine, and so on down to seven, which was, of course, the lowest; but the ace reckoned for eleven. All court cards reckoned for ten. As in other games, the ace won the king, the king the queen, and so on, to the knave, which won the ten. The cards were dealt at option by fours, threes, or twos, to the number of twelve, which
The game was also played as pool precisely ac-cording to the rules briefly sketched as above, the penalty for losing being a guinea to the pool.
Piquet required much practice to play it well. It became so great a favourite that, by the middle of the 18th century, the meanest people were well acquainted with it, and `let into all the tricks and secrets of it, in order to render them complete sharpers.' Such are the words of an old author, who adds that the game was liable to great imposition,
Evidently they did not `assume a virtue' in those days, `if they had it not.'
BASSET.
The game of Basset (in French Wassette) was considered one of the most polite games with cards, and only fit for persons of the highest rank to play at, on account of the great losses or gains that might accrue on one side or the other.
The sums of money lost in France at this game were so considerable that the princes of the blood were in danger of being undone; and after many persons of distinction were ruined the court of France thought fit to forbid Basset. Then Faro was invented; and both were soon introduced into England, and after three or four years' play here, they impoverished so many families, that Parliament enacted a suppression of both games, with severe penalties. The two games are, therefore, of historical interest, and deserve an explanation.
Basset was a sort of lottery. The dealer who kept the bank at Basset, having the sole disposal of the first and last card, and other considerable
In this game there was: 1. The Talliere, the banker, who laid down a sum of money to answer every winning card which might turn up. 2. The Croupiere, the assistant of the former, standing by to supervise the losing cards, — so that when there were many at play he might not lose by overlooking anything which might turn up to his profit. 3. The Punter, or every player. 4. The Fasse, that is, the first card turned up by the talliere, by which he gained half the value of the money laid upon every card of that sort by the punters or players. 5. The Couch, which was the first stake that every punter laid upon each card — every player having a book of 13 cards before him, upon which he must lay his money, more or less, according to his fancy. 6. The Paroli: in this, whoever won the couch, and intended to go on for another ad
The players sat round a table, the talliere in the midst of them, with the bank of gold before him, and the punters or players each having a book of 13 cards, laying down one, two, three, or more, as they pleased, with money upon them, as stakes; then the talliere took the pack in his hand and turned them up — the bottom card appearing being called the fasse; he then paid half the value of the stakes laid down by the punters upon any card of that sort.
After the fasse was turned up, and the talliere and croupiere had looked round the cards on the table, and taken advantage of the money laid on them, the former proceeded with his deal; and the next card appearing, whether the king, queen,
The talliere, if the winning card was a king, and the next after it was a ten, said (showing the cards all round), `King wins, ten loses,' paying the money to such cards as are of the winning sort, and taking the money from those who lost, added it to his bank. This done, he went on with the deal, it might be after this fashion — `Ace wins, five loses; ' `Knave wins, seven loses;' and so on, every other card alternately winning and losing, till all the pack was dealt but the last card.
The last card turned up was, by the rules of the game, for the advantage of the talliere; although a player might have one of the same sort, still it was allowed to him as one of the dues of his office, and he paid nothing on it.
The bold player who was lucky and adventurous, and could push on his couch with a considerable stake to sept-et-le-va, quinze-et-le-va,
Our English adventurers made this game very different to what it was in France, for there, by royal edict, the public at large were not allowed to play at more than a franc or ten-penny bank, — and the losses or gains could not bring desolation to a family; but in England our punters could do as they liked — staking from one guinea to one hundred guineas and more, upon a card, `as was often seen at court,' says the old author, my informant. When the couch was alpieued, parolied, to sept-et-le-va, quinze-et-le-va, trente-et-le-va, &., the punter's gains were prodigious, miracul-ous; and if fortune befriended him so as to bring his stake to soissante-et-le-va, he was very likely to break the bank, by gaining a sum which no talliere could pay after such tremendous multiplication.
However, it was `of so bewitching a nature,' says our old writer, `by reason of the several multiplications and advantages which it seemingly offered to the unwary punter, that a great many like it so well that they would play at small game rather than give out; and rather than not play at all would punt at six-penny, three-penny, nay, a twopenny bank, — so much did the hope of winning the quinze-et-le-va and the trente-et-le-va intoxicate them.'
Of course there were frauds practised at Basset by the talliere, or banker, in addition to his prescriptive advantages. The cards might be dealt so as not to allow the punter any winning throughout the pack; and it was in the power of the dealer to let the punter have as many winnings as he thought convenient, and no more!
It is said that Basset was invented by a noble Venetian, who was punished with exile for the contrivance. The game was prohibited by Louis XIV., in 1691, and soon after fell into oblivion in France, although flourishing in England. It was also called Barbacole and Hocca.
FARO, OR PHARAOH.
Although both Basset and Faro were forbidden in France, on severe penalties, yet these games still continued in great vogue in England during the 18th century, especially Faro; for the alleged reasons that it was easy to learn, that it appeared to be very fair, and, lastly, that it was a very quiet game. It was, however, the most dangerous game for the destruction of families ever invented. The Faro bankers seem to have employed some `gentlemen' to give a very favourable report of the game to the town, and so every one took it upon trust without further inquiry. Faro was the daughter of Basset — both alike notorious frauds, there being no one, except professed gamblers, who could be said to understand the secrets of these games.
Faro was played with an entire pack of cards, and admitted of an indeterminate number of players,
Suppose a person to put down 20s. upon a card when only eight are in hand; the last card was a cipher, so there were four places to lose, and only three to win, the odds against being as 4 to 3. If 10 cards only were in, then it was 5 to 4 against the player; in the former case it was the seventh part of the money, whatever it was, £1 or £100; in the latter case, a ninth. The odds from the beginning of the deal insensibly stole upon the player at every pull, till from the first supposed 4 per cent. it became about 15 per cent.
At the middle of the 18th century the expenses of a Faro bank, in all its items of servants, rent, puffs, and other incidental charges of candles, wine, arrack-punch, suppers, and safeguard money, &., in Covent Garden, amounted to £1000 per annum. Throughout this century Faro was the favourite game. `Our life here,' writes Gilly Williams to George Selwyn in 1752, `would not displease you, for we eat and drink well, and the Earl of Coventry holds a Pharaoh-bank every night to us, which we have plundered considerably.' Charles James Fox preferred Faro to any other game.
HAZARD.
This game was properly so called; for it made a man or undid him in the twinkling of an eye.
It is played with only two dice; 20 persons may be engaged, or as many as will. The chief things in the game are the Main and the Chance. The chance is the caster's and the main is the setter's. There can be no main thrown above 9, nor under 5; so that 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 are all the mains which are flung at Hazard. Chances and nicks are from 4 to 10. Thus 4 is a chance to 9, 5 to 8, 6 to 7, 7 to 6, 8 to 5, and 9 and 10 a
Nicks are either when the chance is the same with the main, as 5 and 5, 6 and 6, 7 and 7, and so on; or 6 and 12, 7 and 11, 8 and 12, where observe, that 12 is out to 9, 7, and 5, and 11 is out to 9, 8, 6, and 5.
The better to illustrate the game we shall give an example. Let 7 be the main named. The caster throws 5, and that is his chance; and so he has 5 to 7. If the caster throws his own chance he wins all the money set to him by the setter; but if he throws 7, which is the main, he must pay as much money as is on the table.
If, again, 7 be the main, and the caster throws 11, that is a nick, and sweeps away all the money on the table; but if he throws a chance he must wait which will come first.
The worst chances in the game are 4 to 10, and 7 is considered the best and easiest main to be thrown. It might be thought that 6 and 8 should admit of no difference in advantage to 7, but it is just the reverse, although 6, 7, and 8 have eight equal chances.
For 6, or sice, we have quatre-duce, cinque-ace, and two treys; for 8, we have sice-duce, cinque-trey, and two quatres; but the disadvantage is in the doublets required — two treys, two quatres; therefore sice-duce is easier thrown than two quatres, and so, consequently, cinque-ace or quatre-duce sooner than two treys.
`I saw an old rook (gambler),' says the writer before quoted, `take up a young fellow in a tavern upon this very bet. The bargain was made that the rook should have seven always, and the young gentleman six, and throw continually. To play they went; the rook won the first day £10, and the next day the like sum; and so for six days together, in all £60. Notwithstanding the gentleman, I am confident, had fair dice, and threw them always himself. And further to confirm what I alleged before, not only this gamester, but many more have told me that they desired no greater advantage than this bet of 7 to 6. But it is the opinion of most that at the first throw the caster hath the worst of it.
`Hazard is certainly the most bewitching game that is played with dice; for when a man begins to play, he knows not when to leave off; and
As this game is of a somewhat complicated character, another account of it, which appeared in the Pall Mall Gazette for Sept. 3, 1869, may not be unacceptable.
`The players assemble round a circular table, a space being reserved for the "groom-porter,'' who occupies a somewhat elevated position, and whose duty it is to call the odds and see that the game is played correctly. Whoever takes the box and dice places in the centre of the table as much money as he wishes to risk, which is at once covered with an equal amount either by some individual speculator, or by the contributions of several. The player (technically called the "caster'') then proceeds to call a "main.'' There are five mains on the dice, namely, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9; of these he mentally selects that one which either chance or superstition may suggest, calls it aloud, shakes the box, and delivers the dice. If he throws the exact number he called, he "nicks'' it and wins; if he throws any other number (with a few exceptions, which will be mentioned), he neither wins nor loses. The num
`The choice of a main is quite optional: many prefer 7 because they may make a coup at once by throwing that number or by throwing 11, which is a "nick'' to 7, but to 7 only. Shrewd players, however, prefer some other main, with the view of having a more favourable chance to depend upon of winning both stake and odds. For example, let us reverse what was mentioned above, and suppose the caster to call 5 and throw 7; he then will have 7 as his chance to win with odds of 3 to 2 in his favour.
`Such is the game of English Hazard, at which
`In addition to the fixed rules of English Hazard, there are several regulations which require to be observed. The round table on which it is played has a deeply bevelled edge, which is intended to prevent the dice from landing on the floor, which would be no throw. Again, if either die after having left the box should strike any object on the table (such as a man's elbow or stick) except money, it would be called no throw. Again, each player has the privilege of "calling dice,'' even when the dice are in transitu, which, if done, renders the throw void, and causes another set to be handed to the caster by the groom-porter.
`Some thirty years ago English Hazard was a favourite game in Ireland, and Dublin could boast of three or four hells doing a brisk trade. The most frequented and longest established was called "The Coal Hole,'' being situated on the coal quay. Here, at any hour after midnight, a motley company might be seen, each individual, however, well known to the porter, who jealously scanned his features before drawing back the noiseless bolts which secured the door. The professional gambler trying to live by his winnings, the fashionable swell finishing his round of excitement, the struggling tradesman hoping to avert impending bankruptcy, the prize-fighter, and, more conspicuous
"M.P. I think, Simpson, I dropped a note here last night — did you see it?
"Porter. Shure, then, mony a note was dropped here beside yours.
"M. P. Ah! but I mean out of my pocket. I did not lose it at play. It was for £20, one of Ball's Bank, and very old.''
`Hereupon the porter brought the senator into a corner, fumbled the note out of his fob, and, placing it in his hands, whispered, "Shure, I know it's yours, and here it is; but (looking cautiously round) wasn't it lucky that none of the jintlemin found it?''
`Another establishment much patronized in those days was in Nassau Street, where early in the evening unlimited Loo, never under "three and three,'' sometimes "six and six,'' might be indulged in, while a little later Roulette formed the attraction of an adjacent room, and still later at night all flocked down-stairs to the hot supper and rattling English Hazard. For one or two seasons St Stephen's Green lent one of its lordly mansions, formerly the residence of a cruel and witty Lord Chief Justice, to the votaries of fortune; here everything was done in grand style, with gilded saloons, obsequi
Passing over other less important games, called Biribi, and Kraps (played with dice), we come to Passe-Dix, which seems to demand some notice.
PASSE-DIX.
This game, considered the most ancient of all games of chance, is said to have actually been made use of by the executioners at the crucifixion of our Saviour, when they `parted his garments, casting lots,' Matt. xxvii. 35.
It is played with three dice. There is always a banker, and the number of players is unlimited.
PUT.
This was and doubtless still is the special card-game of our London sharpers. Many of these are men who have run through a fortune in the early part of their lives, by associating with gamblers and sharpers, set up for themselves, set honour and conscience at defiance, become blacklegs, and are scouted out of even the gambler's company; and, as a last resource, are obliged to resort to low pot-houses, robbing the poorest and most ignorant of society.
Behind the dupe there stood a confederate sharper, looking over the novice's hand, and telling
`The game of Put is played with an entire pack of cards, generally by two, and sometimes by four persons. At this game the cards rank differently from all others; a trey being the best, then a two, then an ace, then the king, queen, &. The game consists of five points. The parties cut for deal, as in Whist. The deal is made by giving three cards, one at a time, to each player. The non-dealer then examines his cards, and if he thinks them bad, he is at liberty to put them upon the pack, and his adversary scores one point to his game. This, how-ever, should never be done. Either party saying — "I put,'' that is, I play, cannot retract, but must abide the event of the game, or pay the stakes.
`The three being the best card, if the sharper can make certain of having a three every time his opponent deals, he must have considerably the best of the game; and this is effected as follows: — the sharper places a three underneath an old gentleman (a card somewhat larger and thicker than the rest of the pack), and it does not signify how much his
CROSS AND PILE.
Cross and Pile, so called because anciently English coins were stamped on one side with a cross, now bears the names, Head and Tail, and is a pastime well known among the lowest and most vulgar classes of the community, and to whom it is now confined; formerly, however, it held a higher rank and was introduced at Court. Edward II. was partial to this and other frivolous diver-sions, and spent much of his time in the pursuit of them. In one of his wardrobe `rolls,' or accounts, we find the following entries — `Item, paid to Henry, the king's barber, for money which he lent to the king to play at Cross and Pile, five shillings. Item, paid to Pires Bernard, usher of the
A half-penny is now generally used in playing this game; but any other coin with a head impressed will answer the purpose. One person tosses the half-penny up and the other cries at pleasure head or tail, and loses according to the result.
Cross and Pile is evidently derived from the Greek pastime called Ostra Kinda, played by the boys of ancient Greece. Having procured a shell, they smeared it over with pitch on one side and left the other side white. A boy tossed up this shell, and his antagonist called white or black,[68] as he thought proper, and his success was determined by the white or black part of the shell being uppermost. [68] In the Greek, núx kaì [h!]méra, that is, `night and day.'
It is the favourite game of the boys of London and the vicinity, now, however, considerably, if not entirely, discontinued through the vigilance of the police and the severity of the magistrates. Not long ago, however, I witnessed a sad and striking scene of it at Twickenham. It was on a Sunday morning. Several boys surrounded two players,
THIMBLE-RIG.
All races, fairs, and other such conglomerations of those whom Heaven had blessed with more
Some years ago a curious case was tried, exemplifying the mode of procedure. A Frenchman, M. Panchaud, was at Ascot Races, and he there saw the defendant and several other `gentlemen' betting away, and apparently winning `lots of sovereigns,' at one of these same thimble-rigs.
11. COCK-FIGHTING.
COCK-FIGHTING is a practice of high antiquity, like many other detestable and abominable things that still cling to our social fabric. It was much in vogue in Greece and the adjacent isles. There was an annual festival at Athens called `The Cock-fighting,' instituted by Themistocles at the end of the Persian war, under the following circumstances. When Themistocles was leading his army against the Persians, he saw some cocks fight-ing; he halted his troops, looked on, and said: — `These animals fight neither for the gods of their country, nor for the monuments of their ancestors, nor for glory, nor for freedom, nor for their children, but for the sake of victory, and in order that one may not yield to the other;' and from this topic
On one occasion during the Peninsular war, when an important point was to be carried by assault, the officers were required to say something encouraging to their men, in order to brace them up for the encounter; but whilst the majority of the former recalled the remembrance of previous victories, an Irish captain contented himself with exclaiming — `Now, my lads, you see those fellows up there. Well, if you don't kill them, shure they'll kill you. That's all!' Struck with the comic originality of this address, the men rushed forward with a laugh and a shout, carrying all before them.
Among the ancient Greeks the cock was sacred
It seems, then, that at first cock-fighting was partly a religious, and partly a political, institution at Athens; and was there continued — according to the above legend — for the purpose of cherishing the seeds of valour in the minds of youth; but that it was afterwards abused and perverted, both there and in other parts of Greece, by being made a common pastime, and applied to the purpose of gambling just as it was (and is still secretly) practised in England. An Attic law ran as follows — `Let cocks fight publicly in the theatre one day in the year.'[69] [69] Pegge, in Archœologia, quoting ælian, Columella, &.
As to cock-fighting at Rome, Pegge, in the same work, gives his opinion, that it was not customary there till very late; but that quails were more pitted against each other for gambling purposes than cocks. This opinion seems confirmed by the thankfulness expressed by the good Antoninus — `that he had imbibed such disposi
`One cannot but regret,' wrote Pegge in 1775, `that a creature so useful and so noble as the cock should be so enormously abused by us. It is true the massacre of Shrove Tuesday seems in a declining way, and in a few years, it is to be hoped, will be totally disused; but the cock-pit still continues a reproach to the humanity of Englishmen. It is unknown to me when the pitched battle first entered England; but it was probably brought hither by the Romans. The bird was here before Cæsar's arrival; but no notice of his fighting has occurred to me earlier than the time of William Fitz-Stephen, who wrote the Life of Archbishop Becket, some time in the reign of Henry II. William describes the cocking as the sport of school-boys on Shrove Tuesday. "Every year, on the day which is called Carnelevaria (Carnival) — to begin with the sports of the London boys, — for we have all been boys — all the boys are wont to carry to their schoolmaster their fighting-cocks, and the whole of the forenoon is made a holiday for the boys to see the fights of their cocks in their schoolrooms.'' The theatre, it seems, was their school,
`Although disapproved of by many, and prohibited by law, cock-fighting continued in vogue, patronized even by royalty, and commonly called "the royal diversion.'' St James's Park, which, in the time of Henry VIII., belonged to the Abbot of Westminster, was bought by that monarch and converted into a park, a tennis court, and a cockpit, which was situated where Downing Street now is. The park was approached by two noble gates, and until the year 1708 the Cock-pit Gate, which opened into the court where Queen Anne lived, was standing. It was surmounted with lofty towers and battlements, and had a portcullis, and many rich decorations. Westminster Gate, the other entrance, was designed by Hans Holbein, and some foreign architect doubtless erected the Cockpit Gate. The scene of the cruel diversion of cock-fighting was, however, obliterated before Anne's time, and the palace, which was a large range of apartments and offices reaching to the river, extended over that space.'[69] [69] Wharton, Queens of Society.
Cock-fighting was the favourite amusement of James I., in whose reign there were cock-pits in St James's Park, Drury Lane, Tufton Street, Shoe Lane, and Jermyn Street. There was a cock-pit in Whitehall, erected for the more magnificent exhibition of the sport; and the present room in Westminster in which her Majesty's Privy Council hold their sittings, is called the Cock-pit, from its being the site of the veritable arena of old.
Cock-fighting was prohibited by one of Oliver's acts in 1654; but with the return of Charles and his profligacy, the sport again flourished in England. Pepys often alludes to it in his `Diary.' Thus, Dec. 21, 1663, he writes: —
`To Shoe Lane, to see a cocke-fighting at a new pit there, a spot I was never at in my life; but, Lord! to see the strange variety of people, from Parliament man, by name Wildes, that was Deputy-Governor of the Tower when Robinson was Lord Mayor, to the poorest 'prentices, bakers, brewers, butchers, draymen, and what not; and all these fellows one with another cursing and betting. I soon had enough of it. It is strange to see how people of this poor rank, that look as if they had not bread to put in their mouths, shall
Again, April 6, 1668: —
`I to the new Cocke-pit by the king's gate, and there saw the manner of it, and the mixed rabble of people that came thither, and saw two battles of cockes, wherein is no great sport; but only to consider how these creatures, without any provocation, do fight and kill one another, and aim only at one another's heads!'
Up to the middle of the 18th century cock-fighting was `all the rage' in England. `Cocking,' says a writer of the time, `is a sport or pastime so full of delight and pleasure, that I know not any game in that respect which is to be preferred before it.'
The training of the pugnacious bird had now become a sort of art, and this is as curious as anything about the old `royal diversion.' A few extracts from a treatise on the subject may be interesting as leaves from the book of manners and customs of the good old times.
The most minute details are given as to the selection of fighting-cocks, the breeding of game
Was ever poor animal subjected to such indignity? The preparation of the other animal, the jockey, is nothing to it. But, to continue: —
`The second day after his sparring, take your cock into a fair green close, and, having a dunghill cock in your arms, show it him, and then run from him, that thereby you may entice him to follow, permitting him to have now and then a blow, and thus chafe him up and down about half an hour; when he begins to pant, being well-heated, take him up and carry him home, and give him this scouring, &.'
This training continued for six weeks, which was considered a sufficient time for `ordering a
`With a pair of fine cock-shears cut all his mane off close into his neck from the head to the setting on of the shoulders: secondly, clip off all the feathers from the tail close to his rump; the redder it appears the better is the cock in condition: thirdly, take his wings and spread them forth by the length of the first rising feather, and clip the rest slope-wise with sharp points, that in his rising he may therewith endanger the eye of his adversary; fourthly, scrape, smooth, and sharpen his spurs with a pen-knife; fifthly, and lastly, see that there be no feathers on the crown of his head for his adversary to take hold of; then, with your spittle moistening his head all over, turn him into the pit to move to his fortune.'
I should, perhaps, state that, instead of the natural spurs, long artificial ones of well-tempered steel were fixed to the cock's heels in later times, and these were frequently driven into the body of
The dreadful fight having come off, the following was the treatment prescribed for the fortunate conqueror.
`The battle being ended, immediately search your cock's wounds, as many as you can find. Suck the blood out of them; then wash them well with warm * * * * *, and that will keep them from rankling; after this give him a roll of your best scouring, and so stove him up as hot as you can for that night; in the morning, if you find his head swelled, you must suck his wounds again, and bathe them with warm * * * * *; then take the powder of herb Robert, and put it into a fine bag, and pounce his wounds therewith; after this, give him a good handful of bread to eat out of warm * * * * *, and so put him into the stove again, and let him not feel the air till the swelling be fallen.'
A cock sometimes took a long time to recover from his wounds — as, indeed, may be well supposed from the terrible `punishment' which he necessarily received; and so our professor goes on to say: — `If after you have put out your wounded
A poetical description of a cock-fight, by Dr R. Wild, written at the commencement of the last century, will give an idea of the `diversion.'
The match made up, and all that would had bet,
But straight the skilful judges of the play;
Brought forth their sharp-heel'd warriors, and they
Were both in linnen bags — as if 'twere meet,
Before they died, to have their winding-sheet.
Into the pit they're brought, and being there,
Upon the stage, the Norfolk Chanticleer
Looks stoutly at his ne'er before seen foe,
And like a challenger began to crow,
And clap his wings, as if he would display
His warlike colours, which were black and grey.
His active body, and in fury wreathes
His comely crest, and often with a sound,
He whets his angry beak upon the ground.
This done, they meet, not like that coward breed
Of æsop; these can better fight than feed:
To dig for pearls within each other's eyes.
E'en to the skill'd, whether they fought or no;
If that the blood which dyed the fatal floor
Had not borne witness of 't. Yet fought they more;
As if each wound were but a spur to prick
Their fury forward. Lightning's not more quick,
Or red, than were their eyes: 'twas hard to know
Whether 'twas blood or anger made them so.
I'm sure they had been out had they not stood
More safe by being fencèd in with blood.
Altho' their courage was full tried, their strength
And blood began to ebb.
(As if they did applaud themselves), now flapp'd.
And having lost th' advantage of the heel,
Drunk with each other's blood, they only reel.
From either eyes such drops of blood did fall
As if they wept them for their funeral.
And yet they fain would fight; they came so near,
Methought they meant into each other's ear
To whisper wounds; and when they could not rise,
They lay and look'd blows into each other's eyes.
When Norfolk cock had got the best of it,
And Wisbich lay a dying, so that none,
Tho' sober, but might venture Seven to One;
Contracting, like a dying taper, all
His strength, intending with the blow to fall,
Ventures a blow, and strikes the other blind!
Fights only guided by antipathies:
With him, alas! the proverb holds not true —
The blows his eyes ne'er saw his heart most rue.
At length, by chance, he stumbled on his foe,
Not having any power to strike a blow.
He falls upon him with his wounded head,
And makes his conqueror's wings his feather-bed;
Where lying sick, his friends were very chary
Of him, and fetch'd in haste a Pothecary;
But all in vain! His body did so blister
That 'twas incapable of any glyster;
Wherefore, at length, opening his fainting bill,
He call'd a scriv'ner and thus made his Will.
My body freely I bequeath to th' pot,
Decently to be boil'd. * * * *
Item: Executors I will have none
But he that on my side laid Seven to One;
And, like a gentleman that he may live,
To him, and to his heirs, my comb I give,
Together with my brains, that all may know
That oftentimes his brains did use to crow.
And to the coward I bequeath my heart.
To ladies that are light, it is my will
My feathers shall be given; and for my bill
I'd give 't a tailor, but it is so short,
That I'm afraid he'll rather curse me for 't:
I yield and give to Wisbich Cock the day!'[70]
[70] The passages left out in the Will, as marked by asterisks, though witty, are rather too gross for modern eyes.
To quote from Pegge once more: — What aggravates the reproach and disgrace upon us Englishmen, are those species of fighting which are called — "the battle royal and the Welsh main'' — known nowhere in the world, as I think, but here; neither in China, nor in Persia, nor in Malacca, nor among the savage tribes of America. These are scenes so bloody as almost to be too shocking to relate; and yet as many may not be acquainted with the horrible nature of them, it may be proper, for the excitement of our aversion and detestation, to describe them in a few words.
`In the battle royal, an unlimited number of fowls are pitted; and after they have slaughtered one another, for the diversion (dii boni!) of the otherwise generous and humane Englishman, the single surviving bird is to be esteemed the victor, and carries away the prize. The Welsh main consists, we will suppose, of sixteen pairs of cocks; of these the sixteen conquerors are pitted a second time; and, lastly, the two conquerors of these are
Moreover, this ungenerous diversion was the bane and destruction of thousands, who thus dissipated their patrimonial fortunes. That its attractions were irresistible is evident from the difficulty experienced in suppressing the practice. Down to a very recent date cock-fighting was carried on in secret, — the police now and then breaking into the secret pits, dispersing and chasing a motley crew of noblemen, gentlemen, and `the scum of rascaldom.'
The practice is very far from having died out; mains are still fought in various parts of the country; but of course the greatest precautions are taken to insure secrecy and to prevent the interference of the police.
In connection with cock-fighting I remember a horrible incident that occurred in the West Indies. A gentleman who was passionately fond of the sport, and prided himself on the victories of his
12. THE TURF, HISTORICAL, SOCIAL, MORAL.
IT appears that horse-races were customary at public festivals even as early as the times of the patriarchs. They originated among the eastern nations, who were the first to discover the physical aptitudes of the noble animal and the spirited emulation of which he is capable. The Persians, the Greeks, the Romans, in succession, all indulged in the excitement; and it is a curious fact that the Romans, like the English jockeys of the present day, rode in different colours.
Horce {sic}-racing began very early in England. Fitz-Stephen, who wrote in the time of Henry VIII., mentions the delight taken by the citizens of London in the diversion. In the reign of Queen Elizabeth it appears to have greatly flourished, and
Lord Herbert of Cherbury denounced the practice. `The exercise,' says this gallant philosopher, `I do not approve of is running of horses — there being much cheating in that kind, — neither do I see why a brave man should delight in a creature whose chief use is to help him to run away.' As far as the cheating is concerned, the philosopher may be right, but most assuredly his views of the horse do no credit to his Lordship's understanding.
It appears that the turf-men of those days went on breeding for shape and speed alone, without considering `bottom,' until the reign of Queen Anne; when a public-spirited nobleman left thirteen plates or purses to be run for, at such
The Merry Monarch, Charles II., had given cups or bowls, estimated at one hundred guineas value, and upon which the names of the winning horses, the winner, and jockey were usually engraved. William III. added to the plates, as did Queen Anne; but in 1720 George I. discontinued this royal encouragement to the sport, apparently through sheer meanness. Since that period `King's Plates' and `Queen's Plates' have been been {sic} paid in specie.
In the reign of Charles I. races were performed in Hyde Park; and until a very recent period `the Ring' in the Park was the rendezvous of gentlemen's servants, for the purpose of betting or making up their betting books.
Newmarket races were established by Charles II., in 1667. Epsom, by Mr Parkhurst, in 1711. Ascot, by the Duke of Cumberland, uncle to George III. Doncaster, by Colonel St Leger, in
The Jockey Club began in the time of George II. Its latest rules, by which races are regulated, were enacted in 1828.
Tattersall's, the `High Change of Horse-flesh,' was established by Richard Tattersall, near Hyde Park Corner — hence termed `The Corner' — in 1766, for the sale of horses. The lease of the ground having expired, the new premises at Brompton were erected, and opened for business, in 1803.
On the accession of Queen Victoria the Royal stud was sold for £16,476, in Oct., 1837.[71] [71] Haydon, Book of Dates.
Among the distinguished men who have supported the turf in this country may be mentioned George IV.[72] and William IV.; the late Duke of York; the Dukes of Richmond, Cleveland, Grafton,
On coming into office with Lord North, in 1783, Mr Fox sold his horses, and erased his name from several of the clubs of which he was a member. It was not long, however, before he again purchased a stud, and in October he attended the Newmarket meeting. The king's messenger was obliged to appear on the course, to seek one of the ministers of England among the sportsmen on the heath, in order to deliver despatches upon which perhaps the fate of the country might have depended. The messenger on these occasions had his badge of office, the greyhound, not liking that the world should know that the king's adviser was amusing himself at Newmarket, when he should have been serving him in the metropolis. But Charles Fox preferred the betting rooms to Downing Street.
Again, in the year 1790, his horse Seagull won the Oatlands stakes at Ascot, of 100 guineas (19 subscribers), beating the Prince of Wales's Escape, Serpent, and several of the very best horses of that year — to the great mortification of His Royal
Lord Foley, who died in 1793, entered upon the turf with a clear estate of £1800 a year, and £100,000 ready money, which was considerably diminished by his losses at Newmarket, Ascot, and Epsom.
The race-horse of this country excels those of the whole world, not only for speed, but bottom. There is a great difference, however, between the present race and that of fifty or sixty years ago; for in those days four-mile heats were the fashion. The sporting records at the end of the last century give the following exploits of horses of that and previous periods.
Childers, known by the name of Flying Childers, the property of the Duke of Devonshire, was looked upon as the fleetest horse that ever was bred. He was never beaten; the sire of this celebrated horse was an Arabian.
Dorimont, belonging to Lord Ossory, won prizes to the amount of £13,360.
Eclipse was allowed to be the fastest horse that ever ran in England since the time of Childers. After winning largely for his owner, he covered, by subscription, forty mares at 30 guineas each, or 1200 guineas.
Highflyer, by King Herod, was the best horse of his day; was never beaten, nor paid forfeit but once. His winnings amounted to above £9000, although he only ran as a three, four, and five years old.
Matchem stood high both as a racer and as the sire of many of our most favourite horses. As a stallion he realized for his master more than £12,000. He died in 1781, at the advanced age of thirty-three.
Shark won a cup value 120 guineas, eleven hogsheads of claret, and above £16,000 in plates, matches, and forfeits.[73] [73] Lord William Lennox, Merrie England.
Among recent celebrities must be mentioned Lord Stamford, who is said to have engaged Jemmy Grimshaw, a light-weighted jockey, at a salary of £1000 a year.
The most astounding `event' of late years was that of 1867, when the horse Hermit — previously represented as being in an unfit condition even to run, won the race — to the unspeakable ruin of very many, and inflicting on the late Marquis of Hastings the enormous loss of about £100,000, which, however, in spite of unseemly rumours and, it is said, hopes of that nobleman's ruin, was honourably paid, to the day and hour.[74]
But if ruin did not immediately come upon the young marquis, still the wound was deadly, inflicted as though with the ferocity of a demon. In his broken health and rapid decay sympathy was not withheld from him; and when a premature death put an end to his sufferings, and was speedily followed by the breaking up of his establishment and the dispersion of his ancestral effects, most men felt that he had, perhaps, atoned for his errors and indiscretions, whilst all united in considering him another unfortunate victim added to the long list of those who have sacrificed their fortune, health, and honour to the Gambling Moloch presiding over the Turf of England.[74]
[74] The `Odds' or probabilities of horse racing are explained in chapter VIII., in which the entire `Doctrine of Chances' is discussed.
Such are the leading facts of horse-racing in England. One cannot help observing that the sturdy strength and muscular exertions of an Olympic charioteer of old exhibit a striking con-trast to the spider-like form and emaciated figure of a Newmarket jockey.
Multa tulit, fecitque puer, sudavat et alsit.
Must suffer much, do much, in youth, indeed,
Must sweat and fag.'
This is literally true respecting the English jockey, whose attenuated form is accounted for in the following dialogue in an old work entitled `Newmarket, or an Essay on the Turf,' 1771.
`Stop, stop, old gentleman! I desire to speak a word to you; pray which is the way to — — .'
`I beg, sir, you will not interrupt me. I am a Newmarket jockey — am to ride in a few days a match, upon which there is a great deal depending, and I am now preparing.'
`Oh, I see now, you are a young man, instead of that old one for whom I mistook you by your wrappings; but pray, explain.'
`Why, your Honour must know that we jockeys,
`Indeed! Why, you go through a deal!'
`Ah, sir, a great deal indeed! Why, we sometimes lie hours and hours between two feather-beds — to melt away our extraordinary weight.'
`But will you give me leave to examine your present dress? Hum! Two flannel waistcoats, a thick cloth coat, a Bath surtout! It is a vast weight to carry this warm weather. I only hope you won't sink under it.'
`Never fear, sir, I do not doubt but I shall do very well.'
The rewards of victory were as plain and simple in the Grecian games as they were distinguishing and honourable. A garland of palm, or laurel, or parsley, or pine leaves, served to adorn the brow of the fortunate victor, whilst his name stood a chance of being transmitted to posterity in the strains of some lofty Pindar. The rewards of modern days are indeed more substantial and solid,
Again, in the exhibition of those useful and honourable Olympic pastimes of old, the cause of morality was not overlooked: — there was in them a happy union of utility, pleasure, and virtue. A spotless life and unblameable manners, a purity of descent by being born in wedlock through several
Nay, it was, and is, notorious that the word `jockey' has acquired the meaning of `to trick,' `to cheat,' as appears in all our dictionaries and in common parlance. What is the inference from this but that the winning of races is no absolute proof of the superiority of the horse — for whose improvement racing is said to be encouraged; but rather the result of a secret combination of expedients or arrangements — in a word, jockeying, that is, cheating, tricking. The only `moral' character required in the jockey is the determination to do whatsoever may be agreed upon or determined by those who are willing and able to give `a consideration' for the convenient accommodation.
But it is, or was, the associations, the inevitable concomitants, of the turf and racing that stamp it, not only as something questionable, but as a bane and infamy to the nation; and if there is one spot
The diversions of these plains have proved a decoy to many a noble and ingenuous mind, caught in the snares laid to entrap youth and inexperience. Newmarket was a wily labyrinth of loss and gain, a fruitful field for the display of gambling abilities, the school of the sharping crew, the academy of the Greeks, the unfathomable gulf that absorbed princely fortunes.
The amusements of the turf were in all other places intermixed with a variety of social diversions, which were calculated to promote innocent mirth and gaiety. The breakfastings, the concerts, the plays, the assemblies, attracted the circle of female beauty, enlivened the scene, engaged the attention of gentlemen, and thus prevented much of the evil contagion and destruction of midnight play. But encouragement to the gambler of high and low degree was the very charter of Newmarket. Every object that met the eye was encompassed with gambling — from the aristocratic Rouge et Noir, Roulette, and Hazard, down to Thimble-rig, Tossing, and Tommy Dodd. Every hour of the
The common people of England have been stigmatized (and perhaps too justly) for their love of bloody sports and cruel diversions; cock-fighting, bull-baiting, boxing, and the crowded attendance on executions, are but too many proofs of this sanguinary turn. But why the imputation should lie at the door of the vulgar alone may well be questioned; for while the star of nobility and dignified distinction was seen to glitter at a cock-match or on a boxing-stage, or near the `Ring' — where its proprietor was liable to be elbowed by their highnesses of grease and soot, and to be hemmed in by knights of the post and canditates for Tyburn tree — when this motley group alike were fixed in eager attention, alike betted on and enjoyed each blood-drawing stroke of the artificial spur, or blow of the fist well laid in — what distinc
The race-course at Newmarket always presented a rare assemblage of grooms, gamblers, and greatness.
Discuss the important point of six to one;
For, O my Muse! the deep-felt bliss how dear —
How great the pride to gain a jockey's ear!'[76]
[76] Wharton's Newmarket.
Newmarket fame was an object of ambition sought by the most distinguished personages.
Whips shall become the senatorial badge;
Till England see her thronging senators
Meet all at Westminster in boots and spurs;
See the whole House with mutual phrensy mad,
Her patriots all in leathern breeches clad;
Of bets for taxes learnedly debate,
And guide with equal reins a steed or state.'[77]
[77] Ibid.
And then at the winning-post what motley confusion.
Jabber harsh jargon from a thousand lungs.
Hoarse Boreas storms and Eurus works for vent,
And roar with elemental strife for birth.'[78]
[78] `The Gamblers.' Horace had said long before — Tanto cum strepitu ludi spectantur, `So great a noise attends the games!
The frauds and stratagems of wily craft which once passed current at Newmarket, surpassed everything that can be imagined at the present day. The intruding light of the morning was execrated by the nightly gamblers. `Grant us but to perish in the light,' was the prayer of the warlike Ajax: — `Grant us black night for ever,' exclaimed the gambler; and his wishes were consistent with the place and the foul deeds perpetrated therein.[79]
[79] The principal gambling-room at Newmarket was called the `Little Hell.'
Pandere res altâ terrâ et caligine mersas.
The turf-events of every succeeding year verify the lament of the late Lord Derby: —
`The secession from the turf of men who have station and character, and the accession of men who have neither, are signs visible to the dullest apprehension. The once national sport of horse-racing is being degraded to a trade in which it is difficult to perceive anything either sportive or
Nothing is more incontestable than the fact that the breed of English horses has not been really improved, certainly not by racing and its requirements. It has been truly observed that `what is called the turf is merely a name for the worst kind of gambling. The men who engage in it are as far as possible from any ideal of sporting men. It is a grim joke, in fact, to speak of "sport'' at all in their connection. The turf to them is but a wider and more vicious sort of tapis vert — the racing but the rolling of the balls — the horses but animated dice. It is difficult to name a single honest or manly instinct which is propagated by the turf as it is, or which does not become debased and vitiated by the association. From a public recreation the thing has got to be a public scandal. Every year witnesses a holocaust of great names sacrificed to the insatiable demon of horse-racing — ancient families ruined, old historic memories defiled at the shrine of this vulgarest and most vicious of popular passions.'
Among those who have sought to reform the
There can be no doubt, that, if Sir Joseph Hawley's propositions, as announced, be adopted, even in a modified form, they would go to the very root of the evil, and purify the turf of the worst of the present scandals.
It would require a volume, or perhaps many volumes, to treat of the subject of the present chapter — the Turf, Historical, Social, Moral; but I must now leave this topic, of such terrible national interest, to some other conscientious writer capable of `doing justice' to the theme, in all its requirements.
13. FORTUNE-TELLING BY CARDS (FOR LADIES).
IT must be admitted that this practice — however absurd in its object and application — does great credit to human ingenuity. Once admitting the possibility of such conjuring, it is impossible to deny the propriety of the reasonings deduced from the turning up, the collocation, or the juxta-position of the various cards, when the formalities of the peculiar shuffle and cut required have been duly complied with by the consulter.
The cards are first shuffled ad libitum, then cut three different times, and laid on a table, face upwards, one by one, in the form of a circle, or more frequently nine in a row. If the conjurer is a man he chooses one of the kings as his representative; if a woman, she selects one of the queens. This
The ninth card every way, that is, counted from the representative, is of the greatest consequence, and that interval comprises the `circle' of the inquirer, for good or for evil.
Now, all the cards have had assigned to them arbitrary, but plausible, characteristics. Thus, the ace of clubs (that suit representing originally the `fortunate husbandmen') promises great wealth, much prosperity in life, and tranquillity of mind — if it turns up within your circle, as before mentioned. King of clubs announces a man of dark complexion who is humane, upright, &., in fact, just the man for a husband. Queen of clubs is equally propitious as the emblem of a dark lady who would prove a paragon wife. Knave of clubs, a jolly good friend in every way. Ten of clubs always flurries the heart of the inquirer — especially
The suit of diamonds is by no means so satisfactory as the gem of a name would seem to indicate; but perhaps we must remember that this suit represented originally the commercial classes, and that probably this divination by cards was in-vented by some proud aristocrat in those times when tradesmen did not stand so high as they now do in morality, uprightness, &. The ace of diamonds puts you on the qui vive for the postman; it means a letter. It is only to be hoped that it is not one of those nasty things, yellow outside and blue within — a dun from some importunate butcher, baker, grocer, or — tailor. The king of diamonds shows a revengeful, fiery, obstinate fellow of very fair complexion in your circle; the queen of diamonds is nothing but a gay coquette, of the same complexion as the king, and not `over-virtuous' — a very odd phrase in use for the absence of virtue altogether; the knave of diamonds is a selfish, impracticable fellow; ten of diamonds is one of the few exceptions to the evil omens of this suit,
The suit of hearts, as previously explained, represented originally the ecclesiastical order, the jolly monks, churchmen of all degrees; how far the indications tally must be left to the ingenious reader to determine. The ace of hearts means feasting and pleasure; but if attended by spades, it foretells quarrelling; if by hearts it shows affection and friendship; if by diamonds, you will hear of some absent friend; if by clubs, of merry-making: the king of hearts denotes a not very fair man, good-natured, but hot and hasty individual, and very amorous; the queen of hearts promises a lady of golden locks (not necessarily `carrots'), faithful and affectionate; the knave of hearts is a particular friend, and great attention must be paid to the card that stands next to him, as from it alone you can judge whether the person it represents will favour your inclination or not, because he is always the dearest friend or nearest relation
The suit of spades originally represented the nobility, and the following are its significances in fortune-telling. The ace of spades wholly relates to love-affairs, without specifying whether lawful or unlawful — a pretty general occupation of the `nobility,' of course; it also denotes death when the card is upside down: the king of spades shows a man ambitious and successful at court, or with some great man who will have it in his power to advance him — but, let him beware of the reverse! the queen of spades shows that a person will be corrupted by the rich of both sexes; if she is handsome great attempts will be made on her virtue: the knave of spades shows a fellow that requires much rousing, although `quite willing to serve you' with his influence and patronage — like many a member in the case of his importunate constituents: the ten of spades is a card of caution, counteracting the good effect of the card near you: the nine of spades is positively the worst card in the whole pack; it portends dan
`The nine of hearts is termed the wish card. After the general fortune has been told, a separate and different manipulation is performed, to learn if the pryer into futurity will obtain a particular wish; and from the position of the wish card in the pack the required answer is deduced.
`The foregoing is merely the alphabet of the art; the letters, as it were, of the sentences formed by the various combinations of the cards. A general idea only can be given here of the manner in which those prophetic sentences are formed. As before stated, if a married woman consults the cards, the king of her own suit, or complexion, represents her husband; but with single women, the lover, either in esse or posse, is represented by his own colour; and all cards, when representing persons, lose their own normal significations. There are exceptions, however, to these general
`The ace of hearts always denoting the house of the person consulting the decrees of fate, some general rules are applicable to it. Thus the ace of clubs signifying a letter, its position, either before or after the ace of hearts, shows whether the letter is to be sent to or from the house. The ace of diamonds when close to the ace of hearts foretells a wedding in the house; but the ace of spades betokens sickness and death.
`The knaves represent the thoughts of their respective kings and queens, and consequently the thoughts of the persons whom those kings and queens represent, in accordance with their complexions. For instance, a young lady of a rather but not decidedly dark complexion, represented by the queen of clubs, when consulting the cards, may be shocked to find her fair lover (the king
Such is the scheme of fortune-telling by cards, as propounded in the learned disquisitions of the adepts, and Betty, or Martha, or her mistress can consult them by themselves according to the established method — without exposing themselves to the extortionate cunning of the wandering gipsies or the permanent crone of the city or village. They may just as well believe what comes out according to their own manipulation as by that of the heartless cheats in question. Your ordinary fortune-tellers are not over-particular, being only anxious to tell you exactly what you want to know. So if a black court card gets in juxta-position with and looking towards a red court card, the fair consulter's representative, then it is evident that some `dark gentleman' is `after her;' and vice versâ; and if a wife, suspecting her husband's fidelity, consults the cards, the probability is that her suspicions will receive `confirmation strong' from the fact that `some dark woman,' that is, a black queen, `is after her husband;' or vice versâ, if a husband consults the card-woman respecting the
It need scarcely be observed that fortune-tellers in any place are `posted up' in all information or gossip in the neighbourhood; and therefore they readily turn their knowledge to account in the answers they give to anxious inquirers.
Apart from this, however, the interpretations are so elaborately comprehensive that `something' must come true in the revelations; and we all know that in such matters that something coming to pass will far outweigh the non-fulfilment of other fatal ordinations. Of course no professional fortune — teller would inform an old man that some dark or fair man was `after' his old woman; but nothing is more probable than the converse, and much family distraction has frequently resulted from such perverse revelation of `the cards.' In like manner your clever fortune-teller will never promise half-a-dozen children to `an old lady,' but she will very probably hold forth that pleasant prospect — if such it be — to a buxom lass of seven-teen or eighteen — especially in those counties of England where the ladies are remarkable for such profuse bounty to their husbands.
As a general proposition, it matters very little what may be the means of vaticination or prediction — whether cards, the tea-grounds in the cup, &., — all possible events have a degree of probability of coming to pass, which may vary from 20 to 1 down to a perfect equality of chance; and the clever fortune-teller, who may be mindful of her reputation, will take care to regulate her promises or predictions according to that proposition.
Many educated ladies give their attention to the cards, and some have acquired great proficiency in the art. On board a steamer sailing for New York, on one occasion a French lady among the saloon-passengers undertook to amuse the party by telling their fortunes. A Scotch young gentleman, who was going out to try and get a commission in the Federal army, had his fortune told. Among the announcements, as interpreted by the lady, was the rather unpleasant prospect that two constables would be `after' him! We all laughed heartily at the odd things that came out for everybody, and then the thing was forgotten; the steamer reached her destination; and all the companions of the pleasant voyage separated and went their different ways.
Some months after, I met the young gentleman above alluded to, and among the various adventures which he had had, he mentioned the following. He said that shortly after his arrival in New York he presented a ten-dollar note which he had received, at a drinking-house, that it was declared a forged note, and that he was given into custody; but that the magistrate, on being conclusively convinced of his respectability, dismissed the charge without even taking the trouble to establish the alleged fact that the note was a forgery. So far so good; but on the following morning, whilst at breakfast at his hotel, another police-officer pounced upon him, and led him once more on the same charge to another magistrate, who, however, dismissed the case like the other.[84] [84] It appears that this is allowable in New York. The explanation of the perverse prosecution was, that the young gentleman did not `fee' the worthy policemen, according to custom in such cases.
Thereupon I said — `Why, the French lady's card-prediction on board came to pass! Don't you remember what she said about two constables being "after you''?'
`Now I remember it,' he said; `but I had positively forgotten all about it. Well, she was
Doubtless all other consulters of the cards and of astrologers can say the same, although all would not wisely conclude that a system must be erroneous which misleads human hope in the great majority of cases. In fact, like the predictions in our weather-almanacks, the fortune-teller's an-nounceements {sic} are only right by chance, and wrong on principle.
FORTUNE-TELLING FORTY YEARS AGO, OR, THE STORY OF MARTHA CARNABY.
A certain Martha Carnaby, a tidy but rather `unsettled' servant girl, some forty years ago went to an old fortune-teller, to have her fortune told, and the doings on both sides came out as follows, before the magistrate at the Bow Street police-court. The fortune-teller was `had up,' as usual, `for obtaining money and other valuables' from the former.
Miss Martha Carnaby said that this celebrated old fortune-teller had first gained her acquaintance by attending at her master's house, before the family had risen, and urging her to have her fortune
The poor deluded creature then stated that she attended punctually at the hour appointed, at the
Of course, and again, as usual, the magistrate
`The art of cartomancy, or divination by playing-cards, dates from an early period of their obscure history. In the museum of Nantes there is a painting, said to be by Van Eyck, representing Philippe le Bon, Archduke of Austria, and subse-quently King of Spain, consulting a fortune-teller by cards. This picture cannot be of a later date than the fifteenth century. Then the art was introduced into England is unknown; probably, however, the earliest printed notice of it in this country is the following curious story, extracted from Rowland's Judicial Astrology Condemned: — "Cuffe, an excellent Grecian, and secretary to the Earl of Essex, was told, twenty years before his death, that he should come to an untimely end, at
`The earliest work on cartomancy was written or compiled by one Francesco Marcolini, and printed at Venice in 1540.'[85] [85] The Book of Days, Feb. 21. In this work there is a somewhat different account of cartomancy to that which I have expounded `on the best authorities' and from practical experience with the adepts in the art; but, in a matter of such immense im
AMUSING CARD TRICKS.[86]
[86] These tricks appeared originally in Beeton's Christmas Annual, and are here reproduced with permission.
ALTHOUGH my work is a history of gambling, in all its horrors, and with all its terrible moral warnings, I gladly conclude it `happily,' after the manner of the most pleasing novels and romances, — namely, by a method of contriving innocent and interesting amusement with cards, without the `chance' of encountering the risks, calamities, and disgrace of gambling.
I was led to the investigation of this branch of my subject by the following incident. Being present at a party when a gentleman performed one of the tricks described, No. 7, the rest of the company and myself were all much surprised at the result, and urgently requested him to explain the method of his performance, which, however, he
PRELIMINARY HINTS.
I. Shuffling, in the simple and inoffensive sense of the expression, is an important point in all tricks with cards. For the most part, it is only a pretence or dexterous management — keeping a card or cards in your command whilst seeming to shuffle them into the pack.
Every performer has his method of such shuf
If a single card is to be held in command, place it at the bottom of the pack, which you hold in your left, and then, with your right thumb and middle finger, raise and throw successively portions of the pack, leaving the bottom card in contact with the fingers of the left hand.
With dexterity, any portion of the pack may be shuffled, leaving the remainder just as it was, by separating it during the process by inserting one or more fingers of the left hand between it and the portions shuffled.
II. Cutting — not in the sense of bolting at the sight of `blue,' though that is of consequence to card-sharpers — is of importance in all card tricks. In many tricks cutting the cards is only a pretence, as it is necessary for the success of the trick to replace them as they were; in technical terms, we must `blow up the cut.'[87] [87] This is the sauter la coupe referred to in the chapter on the Gaming Clubs, in the account of the trial of Lord de Ros. See `Graham's Club.'
There are several ways of performing this sleight-of-hand.
The cards being cut, and forming two lots on the table, smartly
snatch up the lot which should be placed on the other, with the
left hand, as shown in fig. 1.
Fig.1
This lot being taken up and the hand being in the position
shown in the figure, snatch up in like manner the other lot, and,
by a movement of the palm of the hand and the tips of the
fingers, pass the second lot under the first, as shown in fig.
2.
Fig. 2
The deception of the trick depends upon its dexterity, and this can only be acquired by practice. But really it may be dispensed with; for it is a curious fact that, in every case when the cards are cut, you may actually replace them just as they were without being observed by the spectators — for the simple reason that the ruse is not suspected,
The `gift of the gab' is in this case, as in many others, a very great resource. A striking remark or bon mot will easily mystify the spectators, and attract their attention from what you are doing. Hence all prestidigitators are always well stocked with anecdotes and funny observations; indeed, they talk incessantly: they speak well, too, and they take care to time the word accurately with the moment when their fingers act most energetically.
III. To slip a card. — To slip a card is to pretend to take the bottom card of the pack, and in reality to take the card which precedes it. To perform this feat without detection is a very simple affair, but it requires practice.
The pack of cards being held in the right hand,
Fig. 3
In this manner you may successively draw out several cards besides the last, and only draw the last as the sixth, seventh, &., which will serve to effect several interesting tricks to be explained in the sequel.
IV. To file the card.— To file the card is, when a card has been taken from the pack to pretend to place it about the middle of the pack, whilst, in reality, you place it at the bottom.
The pack must be held in the left hand, between the thumb and forefinger, so that the three other fingers be free. One of the middle cards should project a little. Then take the card to be filed between the forefinger and the middle finger of the right hand; advance the right hand from the left, and whilst the three disengaged fingers of the left hand seize and place the card under the pack, the thumb and forefinger of the right seize the projecting card before mentioned, so that it seems to be that card which you have slipped into the
Fig. 4.
TRICKS.
1. To tell a card thought of by a party after three deals. Take twenty-one cards of a pack, and deal them out one by one in three lots, requesting the party to think of a card, and remember in which lot it is.
Having dealt out the cards, ask the party in which lot the card is.
Take up the lots successively, and place the lot containing the card in the middle.
Deal out the cards again, and ask the party to state in which lot the card is; and proceed as before, placing the lot containing the card in the middle.
Deal out the cards in like manner a third time, proceeding as before.
Then deal them out as usual, and the eleventh card will be the one thought of, infallibly. This is the usual way of showing the card thought of; but, as the trick may be partly discovered by the counting, it is better to hold the cards in your hand, and take out the eleventh card, counting to yourself, of course, from the left hand, but pretending to be considering the guess.
This is apparently a most mysterious trick, although a necessary consequence of the position of the lot containing the card in the three deals.
2. The four inseparable kings.
Take four kings. Beneath the last place any two cards, which you take care to conceal. Then show the four kings and replace the six cards under the pack.
Then take a king and place it in the top of the pack, place one of the two other cards in the middle, and the other about the same place, and then, turning up the pack, show that one king is still at the bottom. Then let the cards be cut, and as three kings were left below, all must necessarily get
3. The barmaid and the three victimizers.
For this amusing trick you arrange the cards thus: Holding the pack in your hands, find all the knaves, place one of them next to your left hand, and the other three on the table. Then find a queen, which also place on the table. Then say: —
`Three scamps went into a tavern, and ordered drink. Here they are — the three knaves. "Who's to pay? I can't,'' said the first. "I won't,'' said the second. "I wish she may get it,'' said the third. "I'll manage it,'' said the first, the greatest rogue of the three. "I say, my pretty girl, haven't you some very old wine in your cellar?'' Here's the barmaid thus addressed by the rogue in question (showing the queen), and she replied: — "Oh yes, sir, prime old wine.'' "Let's have a bottle.'' [Off went the barmaid. Put the queen in your pocket.] "Now for it, my lads,'' said the knave in question; " `mizzle' is the word. Let's be off in opposite directions, and meet to-night; you
`When the poor barmaid returned [taking out the queen from your pocket] with the wine, great was her astonishment to find the room empty. "Lor!'' she exclaimed, "why, I do declare — did you ever! — Oh! but I'm not agoing to be sarved so. I'll catch the rogues, all of them — that I will.'' And off she went after them, as shown by placing her on, or at any rate, after the first.
`Now, to catch the three seemed impossible; but the ladies have always smiled at impossibilities, and wonders never cease; for, if you have the goodness to cut these cards, you will find that she has caught the three rogues.'
When the cards are cut, proceed in the usual way after cutting — not as required in the last trick; and taking up the cards, you will find the queen and three knaves together, which you take out and exhibit to the astonished audience.
Of course, one of these knaves is not one of the three first exhibited, but the one which you slipped on your left hand at first. There is no chance of
4. How to name every card in a pack successively turned up by a second party, and win every trick at a hand of Whist.
This is, perhaps, the most astonishing of all tricks with cards. Although it may be true that whatever puzzle one man invents, some other man may unravel, as before observed, I am decidedly of opinion that this trick defies detection. At the first blush it seems very difficult to learn; but it is simplicity itself in explanation.
Begin by laying out the cards in four rows according to the suits, all of a suit in a row side by side.
The cards must now be arranged for the trick. Take up the six in the top or bottom row, then the two in the next row, the ten in the third, and the nine in the fourth, placing them one upon the other in the left hand. Then begin again with the row from which you took the six, and take up the three. From the next row take the king. These numbers will be easily remembered with a little practice, amounting altogether to 30, made up thus — 6 and 2 are 8,
By repeating this addition a few times, it will be fixed in the memory.
Proceed by next beginning with the row next to the one from which you took the last card or the king, and take the eight; from the next row take the four; from the next the ace; from the next the knave. These cards make up 13. Therefore say, 8 and 4 are 12 and 1 are 13 — knave.
From the next row to that whence you took the knave, take the seven; from the next row take the five; from the next the queen. These cards make up 12. Thus, 7 and 5 are 12 — queen.
It thus appears that you have taken up thirteen cards consisting of the four suits, successively taken and being arranged as follows: — 6, 2, 10, 9, 3, king; 8, 4, 1, knave; 7, 5, queen.
Proceed in like manner with the remainder of the cards, beginning with the row next to that from which you took the queen, and take the six, then from the next row the two, and so on as before, making up another batch of 13 cards.
Repeat the process for a third batch, and finish with the remainder for the fourth — always remem
When the cards are thus arranged, request a party to cut them. This is only pretence; for you must take care dexterously to replace the cut just as it was before. Let them be cut again, and replace them as before. Your ruse will not be detected, simply because nobody suspects the possibility of the thing.
Now take up the pack, and from the bottom take the first four cards; handing the remainder to a party, sitting before you, saying — `I shall now call every card in succession from the top of the pack in your hand.'
To do this, two things must be remembered; and there is no difficulty in it. First, the numbers 6, 2, 10, 9, 3, king, &., before given; and next the suit of those cards.
Now you know the numbers by heart, and the suit is shown by the four cards which you hold in your hand, fan-like, in the usual way. If the first of the four cards be a club, the first card you call will be the six of clubs; if the next be a heart, the next card called will be the two of hearts, and so on
After a little private practice, you will readily and rapidly call, as the case may be, from the four cards in your hand: — the six of clubs, two of hearts, ten of diamonds, nine of spades, three of clubs, king of hearts, eight of diamonds, four of spades, ace of clubs, knave of hearts, seven of diamonds, five of spades, queen of clubs — and so on to the last card in the pack.
In the midst of the astonishment produced by this seemingly prodigious display of memory, say — `Now, if you like, we will have a hand at Whist, and I undertake to win every trick if I be allowed to deal.'
Let the Whist party be formed, and get the cards cut as usual — only taking care to replace them, as before enjoined, precisely as they were. Deal the cards, and the result will be that your thirteen cards will be all trumps. Let the game proceed until your opponents `give it up' in utter bewilderment.
This splendid trick seems difficult in description, but it is one of the easiest; and even were it ten times more difficult than it is, the reader will perhaps admit that it is worth mastering. Once committed to memory the figures are never forgotten, and a few repetitions, with the cards before you, will suffice to enable you to retain them.
5. Two persons having each drawn a card and replaced them in the pack, to guess these cards.
Make a set of all the clubs and spades, and another set of hearts and diamonds. Shuffle well each set, and even let them be shuffled by the spectators. Then request a person to draw a card from one of the sets, and another person to draw one from the second set.
You now take a set in each hand, presenting them to the two persons, requesting them to replace the drawn cards. You must pretend to present to each person the set from which he drew his card, but in reality you present the red set to the person who drew the black card, and the black set to the person who drew the red card.
Each person having replaced his card, you get each set shuffled. Then you take them in hand,
Of course you will have prepared the sets beforehand, and take care to alter the arrangement as soon as possible after the trick. But you can prepare the pack in the presence of others without their detecting it. Distribute the cards by dealing according to the two colours; take them up, and having placed the red set a little projecting over the black, set them down, and, pretending to cut them, separate the sets.
6. Twenty cards being arranged upon a table, a person thinks of two, and you undertake to guess them.
Lay out twenty cards of any kind, two by two,
Fig. 5.
— — — — — — — — — — -
| c | i | c | o | s |
— — — — — — — — — — -
| d | e | d | i | t |
— — — — — — — — — — -
| t | u | m | u | s |
— — — — — — — — — — -
| n | e | m | o | n |
— — — — — — — — — — -
All the letters of the words being thus covered, ask the party who has thought of the cards to tell you in which lines these cards are. If both are in the first line (cicos), they must be those on the two c's; if they are both in the second line, they cover the d's in dedit; both in the third line, they cover the u's in tumus; both in the fourth, they cover the n's in nemon.
If one be in the first line and the other in the
7. To tell a card thought of without even looking at the cards.
Take any number of cards, — say twenty. Pretend to shuffle them with the faces towards you, and remember the first card as you close the pack — suppose the ten of diamonds. Tell the party that the only condition you require is to be told the order in which the card is dealt out by you; in other words, he must tell you whether in dealing it comes out first, second, third, &.
Remembering your first card, you may then turn your back to him, and deal out the cards one by one, and one upon the top of the other, requesting him to think of a card and its order as before said.
Then take up the cards, and shuffle them repeatedly, by throwing a portion of them from the bottom to the top, taking care not to mix the cards or let any drop, and then let the party cut them as often as he pleases. Then, take the cards in
The reason of this trick is simply that by merely cutting the cards, and shuffling them in the way indicated, you do not alter the sequence of the cards. With regard to this sort of shuffling, I may say that it is simply cutting the cards — always preserving their
This is the trick I alluded to at the commencement of the chapter, the mode of performing which I succeeded in discovering. Of course any number of persons may think of cards, remembering their order, and the operator will tell them, in like manner.
8. A person having thought of one of fifteen cards pre-sented to him, to guess the card thought of.
Form three ranks of five cards each, and request a party to think of one of these cards, and tell you in which rank it is. Take up the cards of the three ranks, taking care to place the cards of the ranks in which is the card thought of between those of the two other ranks.
Make three more ranks as before. Ask the
Observe, however, you must not form each rank with five consecutive cards; but you must place the cards one by one, placing one successively in each rank; thus, one at the top on the left of the first rank, one below that first for the second rank, one below the second for the third rank, then one in the first, one in the second, one in the third, and so on.
This trick, which is very easy, always produces a great effect. It only requires a little attention, and it can never fail unless you make a mistake in arranging the cards, which, however, is too simple to admit of error.
9. Two persons having each drawn a card from a pack, and having replaced them, to tell these cards after the pack has been shuffled and cut by the spectators as often as they like.
The cards may be easily divided into two numerical parts, even and odd: by taking a king
10. Singular arrangement of sixteen cards.
Take the four kings, the four queens, the four knaves, and the four tens of a pack, and ask if there be any one in the company who can form a square with them in such a manner that, taken in any direction, from right to left, from the top to
Fig. 6.
11. The seven trick.
Make up the four sevens of a pack, and take seven other cards, no matter which, for another lot, and, presenting both lots, you say: — Here are two lots totally dissimilar; nevertheless, there is one of seven, and I declare it will be the first touched by any party present. Of course, when touched, you at once prove your words by exhibiting either the sevens or the seven cards — taking care to mix the cards into the pack immediately to prevent detection.
12. Infallible method for guessing any number that a party has thought of.
Take the first ten cards of a pack of 52 cards. Set out
these ten cards as shown below, so that the point A should
correspond to the ace, and to 1 — the point F to the card
representing the 6 — and E to the 10.
Thus prepared, you request a party to think of a card, and then you tell him to touch any number he pleases, requesting him to name it aloud. Then, adding the whole number of the cards to the number touched, you tell him to count backwards to himself, beginning with the card touched, and giving to that card the number of the one thought of. By counting in this way, the party will at length count the entire number on the card thought of, which you will thus be able to designate with certainty.
Example: — Suppose the card thought of is G. marking 7; again, supposing the one touched to be D, equal to 4; you add to this number the entire number of cards, which is, in this case, 10, which will make 14. Then, making the party count this sum, from the number touched, D to C, B, A, and so on, backwards, so that in commencing to count the number thought of, 7 on D, the party will continue, saying, 8 on C, 9 on B, 10 on A, 11 on K, 12 on I, 13 on H, and end with counting 14 on G; and you will thus discover that the number thought of is 7, which corresponds to G. Of course the party counts to himself, and only speaks to designate the point on which he stops,
Of course, the letters are only used to facilitate the explanation. The cards really form a sort of circle, beginning at 1 or the ace on the left, and then continuing with the 2, the 3, the 4, the 5, and so on, to the 10 below the ace; and, by necessity, the party must end his counting with the very card he thought of, beginning from the one he happens to point out.
13. The card that cannot be found.
Take any number of cards and spread them out fan-like in
your hand, as shown in fig. 7, faces fronting the spectators.
Fig. 7.
Ask one of them to select a card. You tell him to take it, and then to place it at the bottom of the pack. You hold up the pack, so that the specta
Then, pretending to take that card, you take the card
preceding it, and place it at a point corresponding to A in the
following figure.
Fig. 8.
You then take the card drawn, namely, the king of hearts, and place it at the point corresponding to B in the above figure. Finally, you take any two other cards, and place them at C and D. Of course, the cards are placed face downwards.
After this location of the cards, you tell the party who has chosen the card that you will change the position of the cards, by pushing alternately that at the point A to B, and that at D to C, and vice versâ; and you defy him to follow you in these gyrations of the card, and to find it.
Of course, seeing no difficulty in the thing, and believing with everybody that his card is placed at the point A, he will undertake to follow and find his card. Then performing what you undertake to do, you rapidly change the places of the cards, and
Having thus arranged the cards for a few moments, you ask the party to perform his promise by pointing out his card. Feeling sure that he never lost sight of it, he instantly turns one of the cards and is astonished to find that it is not his own. Then you say: — `I told you you would not be able to follow your card in its ramble. But I have done what you couldn't do: here is your card!'
The astonishment of the spectators is increased when you actually show the card; for, having made them observe in the first instance, that you did not even look at the drawn card, they are utterly at a loss to discover the means you employed to find out and produce the card in question.
14. Cards being drawn from a pack, to get them guessed by a person blindfolded.
At all these performances there are always amongst the spectators persons in league with the prestidigitator. In the present case a woman is the assistant, with whom he has entered into an arrangement
The performer takes a handkerchief and blindfolds the lady in question, and places her in the centre of the circle of spectators. Then spreading out the cards, he requests each of the spectators to draw a card.
He requests the first to give him the card he has drawn; he looks at it, and placing it on the table face downwards, he asks the lady to name the card, which she does instantly and without hesitation.
Of course this appears wonderful to the spectators, and their astonishment goes on increasing whilst the lady names every card in succession to the last.
It is, however, a very simple affair. Each card represents a letter of the alphabet, as we see by the figure, and all the performer has to do is to begin every question with the letter corresponding to the card.
Suppose the party has drawn the king of hearts. Its letter is A. The performer exclaims — `Ah! I'm sure you know this!' The A at once suggests the card in question. Suppose it is the ace of
Doubtless these specimens will suffice to suggest phrases for every other card. Such phrases may be written out and got by heart — only twenty-three being required; but this seems useless, for it does not require much tact at improvisation to hit upon a phrase commencing with any letter. However, it will be better to take every precaution rather than run the risk of stopping in the performance, whose success mainly depends upon the apparently in-spired rapidity of the answers. The performer might conceal in the hollow of his hand a small table exactly like the figure, to facilitate his
15. The mystery of double sight.
All the cards of a pack, or indeed any common object touched by a spectator, may be named by an assistant in the following way — whilst in another apartment, or blindfolded.
Take 32 cards and arrange them in four lines, one under
the other. You arrange with your assistant to name the first
line after the days of the week; the second will represent
the weeks, the third the months, the fourth the
years. The assistant is enjoined to count the days aloud,
and the first card by the left. The following is the entire
scheme: —
The cards being thus arranged, the party who has to guess them retires from the room. When
Suppose the card touched be one of those marked with the asterisks * ** ***; if it be the first, the associate says,; I give him eight days to guess it.' Then the medium, beginning with the upper line, that of the days, will at once be able to say that the card touched is the eighth of the first horizontal line, or the first of the eighth vertical line.
If it be the card holding the place of the number marked with two asterisks ** the associate says `three months,' and `seven years' for the one marked with three asterisks ***.
Thus, whatever card is touched, it will be easy to indicate it, by beginning with the line of days at the top, counting one from the left of the associate and medium.
Such is the simple process; and the following is the conventional catechism adopted by all the
With this collection of words and phrases, every existing object can be guessed, provided care be taken to classify them according to the following indications.
To operate, two persons must establish a perfect
understanding between them. One undertakes the questions, the
other the answers, the latter having his eyes perfectly
blindfolded. Both of them must thoroughly know the following
numbers with their correspondences: —
- 1. Now.
- 2. Answer or reply.
- 3. Name.
- 4. What is the object, or thing.
- 5. Try.
- 6. Again.
- 7. Instantly.
- 8. Which?
- 9. Quick.
- 10. Say.
- 20. Tell me.
- 30. I request you.
- 40. Will you.
- 50. Will you (to) me.
- 60. Will you (to) us.
Example: — Add the question of the simple number to the question of the decade or ten. Thus, in pronouncing the words `Say now,' 11 — for say is 10, and now is 1, total 11. This, therefore, forms question 11.
Again — `Tell me which number,' 28 — for `tell me' is 20, and `which' is 8, total 28.
Thirdly: — `I request you instantly,' 37; for `I request you' is 30, and `instantly' is 7, total 37.
All the expressions or words that follow are totally independent of the answer, and are only adapted to embellish or mystify the question as far as the audience is concerned. For instance:
Question 7. Instantly, what I have in my hand? Answer, A watch.
Question 9. Quick, the hour? Answer, nine o'clock.
Question 30, I request you (2) reply — the minutes. Answer, 32 minutes, that is 30 and 2, equal to 32.
It would be useless to give the entire correspondence invented for this apparently mysterious revelation, as a few specimens will suffice to show the principle. Say what I hold? A handkerchief. Say now what I hold? A snuff-box. Say, reply, what I hold? A pair of spectacles. Say and name what I hold? A box. Say and try to say what I hold? A hat. Say quickly what I hold? An umbrella.
It is obvious, from the preceding specimen, that a conventional catechism involving every object can be contrived by two persons, and adapted to every circumstance. The striking performances of the most notorious mesmeric `patients' in this line prove the possibility of the achievement. The `agent' who receives the questions in writing or in a whisper thus communicates the answer to the patient, who is laboriously trained in the entire encyclopædia of `common things' and things generally known; but it may happen that the question proposed by the spectator has been omitted in the scheme.
On one occasion, when the famous Prudence was the `patient,' and was telling the taste of all manner of liquids from a glass of water, I proposed `Blood' to the `agent.' He shook his head, said he would try; but it was useless. She said she `couldn't do it,' and the agent frankly admitted that it was a failure.
Now, if the mesmeric consciousness were really, as pretended, the result of mental intercommunication between the agent and patient, it is obvious that the well-known taste of blood could be communicated as well as any other taste. This experi
Should it happen that a spectator has discovered the method, the performers easily turn the tables against him. They have always ready a conventional list of common things; and the agent undertakes that his mesmeric patient will indicate them without hearing a word from him, even in another apartment. The agent then merely touches the object, and the patient begins with the first name in his list. The patient takes care to give the agent sufficient time, lest he should name the object next to be touched before the agent applies his finger, and thus, as it were, call for it rather than name it when touched, as required by the case.
16. Guessing.
Five persons having each thought of a different card, to guess five cards.
Take twenty-five cards, show five of them to a party, requesting him to think of one, then place them one upon the other. Proceed in like manner with five more to a second party, and so on, five parties in all, placing the fives on the top of each
Of course five persons are not necessary. If there be but one person, the card must be the first of the lot he points to.
It would be more artistic, perhaps, if you dispense with seeing the cards, making the lots up with your eyes turned away from the table. Then request the parties to observe in which lot their respective card is, and, taking the lots successively in hand, present to each the card thought of without looking at it yourself.
17. The Arithmetical Puzzle.
This card trick, to which I have alluded in a previous page, cannot fail to produce astonish
Hand a pack of cards to a party, requesting him to make up parcels of cards, in the following manner. He is to count the number of pips on the first card that turns up, say a five, and then add as many cards as are required to make up the number 12; in the case here supposed, having a five before him, he will place seven cards upon it, turning down the parcel. All the court cards count as 10 pips; consequently, only two cards will be placed on such to make up 12. The ace counts as only one pip. He will then turn up another, count the pips upon it, adding cards as before to make up the number 12; and so on, until no more such parcels can be made, the remainder, if any, to be set aside, all being turned down.
During this operation, the performer of the trick may be out of the room, at any rate, at such a distance that it will be impossible for him to see the first cards of the parcels which have been turned down; and yet he is able to announce the number of pips made up by all the first cards laid down, provided he is only informed of the number
The secret is very simple. It consists merely in multiplying the number of parcels over four by 13 (or rather vice versâ), and adding the remaining cards, if any, to the product.
Thus, there have just been made up seven packets, with five cards over. Deducting 4 from 7, 3 remain; and I say to myself 13 times 3 (or rather 3 times 13) are 39, and adding to this the five cards over, I at once declare the number of pips made up by the first cards turned down to be 44.
There is another way of performing this striking trick. Direct six parcels of cards to be made up in the manner aforesaid, and then, on being informed of the number of cards remaining over, add that number to 26, and the sum will be the number of pips made up by the first cards of the six parcels.
Such are the methods prescribed for performing this trick; but I have discovered another, which although, perhaps, a little more complicated, has the desirable advantage of explaining the seeming mystery.
Find the number of cards in the parcels, by subtracting the remainder, if any, from 52. Subtract the number of pip cards therefrom, deduct this last from the number made up of the number of parcels multiplied by 12, and the remainder will be the number of pips on the first cards.
To demonstrate this take the case just given. There are seven parcels and five cards over. First, this proves that there are 47 cards in the seven parcels made up of pips and cards. Secondly, subtract the number of pip cards — seven from the number of cards in the parcels; then, 7 from 47, 40 remain (cards). Thirdly, now, as the seven parcels are made up both of the pip cards and cards, it is evident that we have only to find the number of cards got at as above, to get the number of pips required. Thus, there being seven packets, 7 times 12 make 84; take 40, as above found (the number of cards), and the remainder is 44, the number of pips as found by the first method explained, — the process being as follows: — 52 -5 =47 -7 =40. Then, 7 x 12 =84 -40 =44.
In general, however, the first method, being the
18. To get a card into a pack firmly held by a party.
This trick strikingly shows how easily we may all be deceived by appearances.
Select the five or seven of any suit, say the seven of hearts, and handing the remainder of the pack to a party, show him the card, with your thumb on the seventh pip, so as to conceal it, saying: — `Now, hold the pack as firmly as you can, and keep your eye upon it to see that there is no trickery, and yet I undertake to get into it this six of hearts.' This injunction rivets his attention, and doubtless, like other wise people destined to be deceived, he feels quite sure that nobody can `take him in.' In this satisfactory condition for the operation on both sides, you flourish the card so as just to reach the level of the top of your hat (if you wear an Alpine scolloped, so much the better), and then, bringing down the card, rapidly strike it on the pack twice, uttering the words one, two, at each stroke; but, on the third raising of the card, leave it on the top of your hat, striking the pack with your hand — with the word three.
This trick may be performed in a drawing-room, if the
operator be seated, dropping the card behind his back, especially
in an easy-chair.
THE END.
The gaming table : its votaries and victims, in all times and countries,
especially in England and in France. Vol. 2 | ||