CHAPTER XIV.
THE LAWS AGAINST GAMING IN VARIOUS COUNTRIES.
The Gaming Table: Its Votaries and Victims, In all Times and
Countries, especially in England and in France | ||
14.
CHAPTER XIV.
THE LAWS AGAINST GAMING IN VARIOUS COUNTRIES.
1. ANCIENT ROME.
IN ancient Rome all games of chance, with the exception of five which had relation to bodily vigour, were absolutely prohibited in public or private. The loser could not be sued for moneys lost, and could recover what he might have paid, such right being secured to his heirs against the heirs of the winner, even after the lapse of 30 years' prescription. During 50 years after the loss, should the loser or his heirs neglect their action, it was open to any one that chose to prosecute, and chiefly to the municipal authorities, the sum recovered to be expended in that case for public purposes. No surety for the payment of money for gambling purposes was bound. The betting on
Cicero, in his second Philippic, speaks of a criminal process (publicum judicium) then in force against gamblers.
The laws of ancient Rome were, therefore, very stringent on this subject, although, there can be no doubt, without much effect.
2. FRANCE.
At the time of the French Revolution warlike games alone conferred the right of action, restricted, however, in cases of excessive losses; games
By the present law of France no judicial action is allowed for gambling debts and wagers, except in the case of such games as depend upon bodily skill and effort, foot, horse, and chariot races, and others of the like nature: the claim may be rejected if the court considers it excessive; but moneys paid can never be recovered unless on the ground of fraud. The keepers of gaming houses, their managers or agents, are punishable with fine (100 to 6000 francs) and imprisonment (two to six months), and may be deprived of most of their civil rights.
3. PRUSSIA.
By the Prussian Code all games of chance, except when licensed by the state, are prohibited. Gaming debts are not the subjects of action; but moneys paid cannot be sued for by losers. Wagers give a right of action when the stakes consist of cash in the hands of a third person; they are void if the winner had a knowledge of the event, and
4. AUSTRIA.
In Austria no right of action is given either to the winner or the loser. All games of chance are prohibited except when licensed by the state. Cheating at play is punished with imprisonment, according to the amount of fraudulent gain. Playing at unlawful games, or allowing such to take place in one's house, subjects the party to a heavy fine, or in default, to imprisonment.
5. ITALY.
The provisions of the Sardinian Civil Code are similar to those of the French, giving an action for moneys won at games of strength or skill — when
6. BAVARIA.
By the Bavarian Code games of skill, and of mixed skill and chance, are not forbidden. The loser cannot refuse to pay, nor can he recover his losses, provided the sport be honestly conducted, and the stakes not excessive, having regard to the rank, character, and fortune of the parties. In cases of fraudulent and excessive gaming, and in all games of mere chance, the winner cannot claim his winnings, but must repay the loser on demand. In the two latter cases (apparently) both winner and loser are liable to a fine, equal in amount, — for the first time of conviction, to one-third of the stakes; for the second time, to two-thirds; and for the third time, to the whole: in certain cases the bank is to be confiscated. Hotel and coffee-house keepers, &c., who allow gambling on their premises, are punished for the first offence by a fine of 50 florins; for the second, with one of 100 florins; for the third, with the loss of the license. The punish
Although, therefore, cheating gamblers are liable to punishment in Bavaria, it is evident that gambling is there tolerated to the utmost extent required by the votaries of Fortune.
7. SPAIN.
Wagers appear to be lawful in Spain, when not in themselves fraudulent, or relating to anything illegal or immoral.
8. ENGLAND.
In England some of the forms of gambling or gaming have been absolutely forbidden under heavy penalties, whilst others have been tolerated, but at the same time discouraged; and the reasons for the prohibition were not always directed against the impropriety or iniquity of the practice in itself; — thus it was alleged in an Act passed in 1541, that for the sake of the games the people neglected to practise *archery, through which England had become great — `to the terrible dread and fear of all strange nations.'
The first of the strictly-called Gaming Acts is one of Charles II.'s reign, which was intended to check the habit of gambling so prevalent then, as before stated. By this Act it was ordered that, if any one shall play at any pastime or game, by gaming or betting with those who game, and shall lose more than one hundred pounds on credit, he shall not be bound to pay, and any contract to do so shall be void. In consequence of this Act losers of a less amount — whether less wealthy or less profligate — and the whole of the poorer classes,
The Act of Queen Anne, by its sweeping character, shows that gaming had become very virulent, for by it not only were all securities for money lost at gaming void, but money actually paid, if more than £10, might be recovered in an action at law; not only might this be done, within three months, by the loser himself, but by any one else --together with treble the value — half for himself, and half for the poor of the parish. Persons winning, by fraudulent means, £10 and upwards at any game were condemned by this Act to pay five times the
There were, besides, two curious provisions; — any one assaulting or challenging another to a duel on account of disputes over gaming, should forfeit all his goods and be imprisoned for two years; secondly, the royal palaces of St James's and Whitehall were exempted from the operation of this statute, so long as the sovereign was actually resident within them — which last clause probably showed that the entire Draconian enactment was but a farce. It is quite certain that it was inoperative, and that it did no more than express the conscience of the legislature — in deference to *principle, `which nobody could deny.'
After the lapse of many years — the evil being on the increase — the legislature stirred again dur
Thus stood the statute law against gaming down to the year 1845, when, in consequence of the report of the select committee which sat on the subject, a new enactment was promulgated, which is in force at the present time.
It was admitted that the laws in force against gaming were `of no avail to prevent the mischiefs which may happen therefrom;' and the lawgivers enacted a comprehensive measure on the subject. Much of the old law — for instance, the prohibition of games which interfered with the practice of *archery — was repealed; also the Acts of Charles II., of Queen Anne, and a part of that of George II. — Gaming houses, in which a bank is kept by one or more of the players, or in which the chances of play are not alike favourable to the players — being declared unlawful, as of old. Billiards, bagatelle, or
`In order to constitute the house a common gaming house, it is not necessary to prove that any person found playing at any game was playing for any money, wager, or stake. The police may enter the house on the report of a superintendent, and the authority of a commissioner, without the necessity of an allegation of two householders; and if any cards, dice, balls, counters, tables, or other instruments of gaming be found in the house, or about the person of any of those who shall be found
The penalty of cheating at any game is liability to penal servitude for three years — the delinquent being proceeded against as one who obtains money under false pretences. Wagers and bets are not recoverable by law, whether from the loser or from the wager-holder; and money paid for bets may be recovered in an action `for money received to the defendant's use.' All betting houses are gaming houses within the meaning of the Act, and the proprietors and managers of them are punishable accordingly.
The existing law on the gaming of horse-racing is as follows. Bets on horse-races are illegal; and therefore are not recoverable by law. In order to prevent the nuisance which betting houses, disguised under other names, occasioned, a law was passed in 1853, forbidding the maintenance of any house, room, or other place, for betting; and by the new Metropolitan Traffic Regulation Act, now
The laws relating to horse-racing have undergone curious revisions and interpretations. `The law of George II.'s reign, declaring horse-racing to be good, as tending to promote the breed of fine horses, exempted horse-races from the list of unlawful games, provided that the sum of money run for or the value of the prize should be fifty pounds and upwards, that certain weights only might be used, and that no owner should run more than one horse for the same prize, under pain of forfeiting all horses except the first. Newmarket, and Black Hambledon in Yorkshire, are the only places licensed for races in this Act, which, however, was also construed to legalize any race at any place whatever, so long as the stakes were worth fifty pounds and upwards, and the weights were of the
The extent to which gambling has been carried on in the street by boys was shown by the following summary laid before the Committee of the House of Commons on Gaming, in 1844: —
- Convicted.
- Discharged.
- 1841
- .. ..
- 305
- .. ..
- 68
- .. ..
- 237
- 1842
- .. ..
- 245
- .. ..
- 66
- .. ..
- 179
- 1813
- .. ..
- 329
- .. ..
- 114
- .. ..
- 185
- — —
- — —
- — —
- 879
- 278
- 601
Boys apprehended for gaming in the streets —
Only recently has any effectual check been put to this pernicious practice. It is however enacted by the New Gaming Act, that — `Every person play
On this provision a daily paper justly remarks: — `A statute very much needed has come into force. Persons playing or betting in the streets with coins or cards are now made amenable to the 5th George IV., c. 83, and may be committed to gaol as rogues and vagabonds. The statutes already in force against such rogues and vagabonds subject them, we believe, not only to imprisonment with hard labour, but also to corporal punishment. In any case the New Act should, if stringently administered, speedily put a stop to the too common and quite intolerable nuisance of young men and boys sprawling about the pavement, or in corners of the wharves by the waterside, and play
CHAPTER XIV.
THE LAWS AGAINST GAMING IN VARIOUS COUNTRIES.
The Gaming Table: Its Votaries and Victims, In all Times and
Countries, especially in England and in France | ||