// ppgen source src.txt
// 20160427094015quinn
// projectID5745df1c56e16
// KD Weeks, Chris Curnow and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images generously made available by The Internet Archive)
// first edit: 10/17/2018
// source: https://archive.org/details/FoolsOfFortuneOrGamblingAndGamblers
// hacks
// override cell borders using, e.g., =nb= (no borders), etc.
// float table left using div and table id
// justify only the chapter descriptions in the TOC
// pseudo-markup to change font (black letter)
// had to hand-edit the final html to place pagination s in their proper places.
// .sr to overcome link problem resulting from restricted characters being left behind.
.dt Fools of Fortune or Gamblers and Gambling, John Philip Quinn
.de .toc { text-align: justify; text-indent: 2em; }
.de a:link { text-decoration: none; }
.de div.tnotes { padding-left:1em;padding-right:1em;background-color:#E3E4FA;border:1px solid silver; margin:1em 5% 0 5%; text-align: justify;}
.de .blackletter { font-family: "Old English Text MT", Gothic, serif;}
.de .epubonly {visibility: hidden; display: none; }
.de @media handheld { .epubonly { visibility: visible; display: inline; } }
.de .htmlonly {visibility: visible; display: inline;}
.de @media handheld { .htmlonly { visibility: hidden; display: none; } }
.de .pad2 { padding-left: 2em; }
.de .figcenter { margin-bottom: 1em; }
.de .quote { font-size: 95%; margin-top: 1.0em; margin-bottom: 1.0em; margin-left: 1em; }
.de div.box { margin: auto; border: 1px solid black; width: 60%; padding: 2em;}
.de div.tblleft { clear: left; float: left; max-width: 60%; padding: 1em; text-align: left; }
.de div.tbllft45 { clear: left; float: left; max-width: 45%; padding: 1em; text-align: left; }
.de #lefttable { margin: auto; margin-left: 0em; margin-right: 1em; width: 99%; border-collapse: collapse; }
.de #small {font-size: 85%; }
.de #correction { font-size: 90%; }
.de #races {font-size: 85%; margin-top: 1em; width: 100%; border-collapse: collapse; }
.de #figures {font-size: 85%; border-collapse: collapse; }
.de #combination {font-size: 85%; border-collapse: collapse; }
.de .ctr { vertical-align: top; text-align: center; }
.de .lft { vertical-align: top; text-align: left; padding-left: .5em; padding-right: .5em; }
.de .rgt { vertical-align: top; text-align: right; padding-left: .5em; padding-right: .5em; }
.de .mid { vertical-align: middle; }
.de .brm { border-right: medium solid; }
.de .top { vertical-align: top; }
.de .column-container { margin: auto; clear: both; }
.de .colleft { display: inline-block; text-align: left; vertical-align: bottom; width:23%; }
.de .colmiddle{ display: inline-block; text-align: center; vertical-align: bottom; width:50%; }
.de .colright { display: inline-block; text-align: right; vertical-align: bottom; width:23%; }
.de .column { display: inline-block; text-align: center; vertical-align: middle; width:48%; }
.sr h |'bbt br[tm] (c\d\d\d)'>=bb=|'bbt \1'> |
.sr h |'bbt br[tm] (c\d\d\d)'>=nb=|'bbt \1'> |
.sr h |'[bltrm ]+ (c\d\d\d)'>=nb=([A-Z\d┌└])|'\1'>\2|
.sr h |'[bltrm ]+ (c\d\d\d)' colspan='3'>=nb=([A-Z\d┌└])|'\1' colspan='3'>\2|
.sr h |'[bltrm ]+ (c\d\d\d)'>=nb=|'\1'> |
.sr h |'(c\d\d\d)' colspan='3'>=nb=([A-Z\d┌└])|'\1' colspan='3'>\2|
.sr h |'(c\d\d\d)'>=nb=|'\1'> |
.sr h |['[bltr ]+ (c\d\d\d)'>=blt=|'blt \1'> |
.sr t |=nb=| |
.sr t |=blt=| |
.nr break-wrap-at "-"
.sr h |#(\d+)-(\d+):Page_\d+.|\1-\2|
.sr h |'[^#]c_(\d+)\.(\d+)'|'#c_\1.\2'|
.sr h |'>\d+=toc=| toc'>\1|
.sr h |'([bltrc \d]+)'>=pad2=|'\1 pad2'>|
.sr t |☞ |->|
.de img.chap { width: 140px; }
.de @media handheld { .chap { width: 20%; } }
.de .sp4 { margin-top: 4em; page-break-before: always; }
//Begin quote
.dm start_quote
.if t
.in 2
.if-
.if h
.dv class='quote'
.if-
.dm-
//End Quote
.dm end_quote
.if h
.dv-
.if-
.if t
.in
.if-
.dm-
.dm underline $1
.if t
==$1==
.if-
.if h
$1
.if-
.dm-
.dm chaphead $1 $2 $3
.if t
.sp 4
.h3
$1 | $2
.if-
.if h
.li
.li-
.if-
.dm-
.dm sectionhead $1
.sp 2
.ce
$1
.dm-
.de ins.correction { text-decoration:none; border-bottom: thin dotted gray; }
.de .quote { font-size: 95%; margin-top: 1.0em; margin-bottom: 1.0em; }
.de .letter { font-size: 90%; margin-top: 1.0em; margin-bottom: 1.0em; }
.de .linegroup .group { margin: 0em auto; }
.sr t |\[oe\]|œ|
//.sr h |text-align: left; padding-right: 1em; }| text-align: justify; text-indent: 2em; }|
.sr h |'>=toc=| toc'>|
.sr t |=toc=||
//.sr h |text-align: left; text-indent: -1em;|text-align: justify; text-indent: 2em;|
.sr h |||
.sr h |||
.sr t ||=|
.sr t ||=|
// create errata table page references
.dm cref $1
.if t
$1
.if-
.if h
#$1:corr$1#
.if-
.dm-
// create markup
.dm corr_noid $1 $2
.if h
$2
.if-
.dm-
.dm corr $1 $2 $3
.if t
$3
.if-
.if h
$3$3
.if-
.dm-
.dm start_testimony
.if t
.in 8
.if-
.if h
.dv class='testimony'
.if-
.dm-
.dm end_testimony
.if t
.in
.sp 1
.if-
.if h
.dv-
.if-
.dm-
.dm start_summary
.fs 90%
.in 4
.ti -4
.dm-
.dm end_summary
.fs 100%
.in
.dm-
//Begin quote
.dm start_letter
.if t
.in 2
.if-
.if h
.dv class='letter'
.if-
.dm-
.dm end_letter
.if h
.dv-
.if-
.if t
.in
.if-
.dm-
//Begin quote
.dm start_quote
.if t
.in 2
.if-
.if h
.dv class='quote'
.if-
.dm-
//End Quote
.dm end_quote
.if h
.dv-
.if-
.if t
.in
.if-
.dm-
// Begin Poetry
.dm start_poem
.sp 1
.fs 95%
.nf b
.dm-
// End Poetry
.dm end_poem
.nf-
.fs 100%
.sp 1
.dm-
.pb
.pi
.dv class='tnotes'
.ce
Transcriber’s Note:
.if t
This version of the text cannot represent certain typographical
effects. Italics are delimited with the ‘_’ character as _italic_.
The location of images are given here as [Illustration: caption],
and merely [Illustration description], where no caption was given.
Those for full pages, as well as several full page tables,
have been moved to the nearest paragraph break.
.if-
.if h
.dv class='htmlonly'
Illustrations have been moved to the nearest paragraph break. Full
page illustrations, and several tables were included in the page
numbers, and have also been moved, with the page numbers removed
to avoid any confusion.
.dv-
.dv class='epubonly'
Illustrations,including full-page, have been moved to the nearest
paragraph break.
.dv-
.if-
Minor errors, reasonably attributable to the printer, have been
corrected. Please see the transcriber’s #note:endnote# at the end of
this text for details regarding the handling of any textual issues
encountered during its preparation.
.if h
.dv class='htmlonly'
Any corrections are indicated using an
highlight. Placing the cursor over the correction will produce the
original text in a small popup.
.il fn=cover.jpg w=60%
.dv-
.dv class='epubonly'
Any corrections are indicated as hyperlinks, which will navigate the
reader to the corresponding entry in the corrections table in the
note at the end of the text.
.dv-
.if-
.dv-
.bn 001.png
.il fn=i_frontis.jpg w=382px ew=60%
.ca John Philip Quinn
.bn 002.png
.h1
FOOLS OF FORTUNE
.nf c
OR
Gambling and Gamblers,
COMPREHENDING
A History of the Vice in Ancient and Modern Times, and in Both
Hemispheres; an Exposition of its Alarming Prevalence and
Destructive Effects; with an Unreserved and Exhaustive
Disclosure of Such Frauds, Tricks and Devices
as are Practiced by “Professional”
Gamblers, “Confidence Men”
and “Bunko Steerers.”
BY
John Philip Quinn,
WHO MODESTLY, YET WITH SINCERITY, TENDERS TO THE WORLD WHAT
HE HOPES MAY EXTENUATE HIS TWENTY-FIVE YEARS OF GAMING
AND SYSTEMATIC DECEPTION OF HIS FELLOW-MEN.
.nf-
.hr 30%
.nf c
WITH INTRODUCTIONS BY HON. CHARLES P. JOHNSON, EX-GOVERNOR OF MISSOURI,
AND REV. JOHN SNYDER, D. D., OF ST. LOUIS, AND CHAPTERS CONTRIBUTED
BY REVS. PROFESSOR DAVID SWING AND
ROBERT MCINTYRE, OF CHICAGO.
CHICAGO:
G. L. HOWE & CO.
1890.
.nf-
.bn 003.png
.sp 8
.nf c
Copyrighted, 1890,
By JOHN P. QUINN,
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
.nf-
.sp 8
.if h
.dv class='column-container'
.dv class='colleft'
.nf c
W. B. CONKEY,
BOOK MANUFACTURER,
CHICAGO.
.nf-
.dv-
.dv class='colmiddle'
.dv-
.dv class='colright'
.nf c
ELECTROTYPED BY
G. M. D. LIBBY,
CHICAGO.
.nf-
.dv-
.dv-
.if-
.if t
.nf c
W. B. CONKEY, \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ELECTROTYPED BY
BOOK MANUFACTURER, \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ G. M. D. LIBBY,
CHICAGO. \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ CHICAGO.
.nf-
.if-
.bn 004.png
.pn 5
.sp 4
.nf c
TO
Hon. Charles P. Johnson,
EX-GOVERNOR OF MISSOURI, AND AUTHOR OF THE ANTI-GAMBLING
LAWS OF THAT STATE;
THE CITIZEN,
WHO RECOGNIZES, AS A BOUNDEN DUTY, LOYALTY TO THE INTERESTS OF
SOCIETY AND THE STATE;
THE STATESMAN,
WHOSE EXPOSITION OF THE EVILS OF GAMBLING RESULTED IN
A LAW WHICH BRANDS THAT VICE AS A FELONY AND
ITS “PROFESSOR” AS A CRIMINAL.
THE LAWYER,
WHOSE FAME IS GROUNDED EQUALLY IN ABILITY AND
INTEGRITY, ARE THESE PAGES RESPECTFULLY
INSCRIBED BY
.nf-
.ll 68
.rj
THE AUTHOR.
.ll
.bn 005.png
.il fn=i_006.jpg w=384px ew=70% alt='WHICH WAY?'
.bn 006.png
.pn 7
.sp 4
.h2
PREFACE.
.sp 2
Of all the vices which have enslaved mankind, none can reckon
among its victims so many as gambling. Not even the baneful habit of
drink has blighted so many lives or desolated so many homes. Its fascination
is insidious and terrible, and its power is all the more to be dreaded
in that it appeals to a latent instinct in nearly every human breast. In
view of these considerations it appears strange that English literature
contains no authentic work specially devoted to this subject; while there
exists literally no exposition of its allurements and its dangers written
from the standpoint of one on the inside.
It is to fill this vacant place in literature that the author offers this
volume to the public. For a quarter of a century he has witnessed and
practiced every variety of gambling known to the professional. From the
shores of the Atlantic to the canons of Colorado, from the frozen lake of
the North, drained by the mighty Mississippi, to the sunken bayous that
skirt its delta, he has journeyed to and fro, plying his nefarious calling.
At times realizing the success of his schemes, at times a penniless wanderer,
he has tasted all the joys of a gambler’s career and drained to the
dregs the wormwood which lurks at the bottom of the cup of illusive,
hollow happiness. No art of the fair gamester is unknown to him, nor is
there any device of the sharper with which he is unacquainted. With
shame and remorse he confesses his fault, and it is in the hope of measurably
atoning for his wrong doing, that the present volume has been
prepared.
On the general question of the evil of gaming, there is no difference
of opinion among reflecting men. The problem is, how to check the
alarming increase of the vice? The pulpit fulminates denunciations of its
sinfulness; the press points out its folly; and the legislators affix penalties
to its practice. Yet gambling houses multiply and flourish, and the yawning
jaws of the “tiger” are daily closing upon fresh victims. The clergy
are powerless to restrain young men from tasting for themselves the fascination
.bn 007.png
.pn +1
of the green cloth; the public prints serve but to whet and stimulate
curiosity; and the professional gamblers openly set at defiance laws
which have long since become dead letters upon the statute books.
Where, then, is the remedy? In the opinion of the author, it is ready
at hand. Gaming-hells cannot prosper without new victims; show men
that success is impossible in an unequal contest between inexperience on
the one hand and skill and chicanery on the other, and the ranks of the
victims will soon be thinned through the lack of new recruits.
Curiosity has ever been peculiarly a characteristic of youth since the
day when the arch tempter wrought the downfall of the race through an
appeal to the desire for “knowledge of good and Young men are
anxious to investigate, to discover, to “find out for themselves.” Give
them a certain knowledge that loss is the inevitable consequence of entering
upon any designated path, and they will hesitate long before entering
upon that path. Satisfy their curiosity as to what is concealed behind a
closed door, and the chief temptation to open that door will be removed.
Herein consists what the author cannot but believe will make these
pages a powerful agency for good. In them are faithfully portrayed the
vicissitudes of a gambler’s wretched life, while at the same time they present
a full and true disclosure of all the dishonest artifices employed by
professionals to delude and victimize their dupes. It is not only a thirst
for excitement that leads men to gamble, another powerful incentive is
the hope of winning. Convince any man, young or old, that instead of
having a chance of winning he is confronted with a certainty of loss, and
he will place no wager. This is the conviction which must be brought
home to the intelligence and reason of every thoughtful man who carefully
reads the exposition of dishonesty which this book contains.
No graver responsibility can be conceived than that which rests upon
the shoulders of the parent to whom is intrusted the training of a young
man. Upon the manner in which is fulfilled this sacred trust, depends
not only the economic and moral value of the future citizen, but also the
welfare, for time and eternity, of a priceless human soul. The gaming
resort opens wide its doors, the entrance to which means ruin, of both
body and soul. Of what vital importance is it, therefore; that around the
youth of the Republic every safeguard should be thrown, and that they
should be shielded from temptation by exposing its fatuous character.
“Forewarned is forearmed.”
.bn 008.png
.pn +1
The volume is not only a recital of personal experience and an
embodiment of the lessons to be derived therefrom. It also presents a
history of gambling from remote antiquity, and a description of the vice
as practiced in every clime. The latter portion of the work is the result
of careful and painstaking research among the best sources of information
available, and is believed to be at once authentic and complete. It has
also been the aim of the author to add to the interest of Part II by imparting
to it, as far as practicable, a local coloring through incorporating a
succinct view of the vice of gaming, as conducted at the chief American
centres of civilization and commerce.
Rev. Professor David Swing, of Chicago, the eminent thinker, has
contributed an interesting chapter on the nature and effects of gaming,
and Rev. Robert McIntyre, of the same city, who has held spell-bound so
many audiences throughout the land, has added one in which he eloquently
and forcibly portrays the moral aspects of this soul-destroying
vice.
The author desires to return heartfelt thanks to those who have aided
him in his self-imposed task. He acknowledges his indebtedness for the
words of encouragement which he has received from the many eminent
clergymen and educators who have endorsed his work.
.if h
.il fn=i_009.jpg w=300px ew=70% alt='John Philip Quinn' align=r
.if-
.if t
.ll 68
.rj
_John Philip Quinn_
.ll
.if-
.ti 0
Chicago, 1890.
.bn 009.png
.pn +1
.sp 4
.h2
TABLE OF CONTENTS.
.ta l:60 r:10
Dedication. | #5#
Preface. | #7-9:Page_7#
Index. | #19-25:Page_19#
Introduction:—By Charles P. Johnson. | #26-28:Page_26#
\ \ \ \ \ \ ” \ \ \ \ \ \ By Rev. John Snyder, D. D. | #29-30:Page_29#
Autobiography of John Philip Quinn, | #33-64:Page_33#
The Three Stages of a Gambler’s Life, | #65:Page_65#
.ta-
.hr 10%
.nf c
PART I.
....Gambling Historically Considered....
.nf-
.hr 10%
.ta l:60 rb:10
CHAPTER I.
PRELIMINARY REMARKS, FOOD FOR REFLECTION.
=toc=Gaming Indefensible—A False Idea of Happiness—Oriental Knowledge of\
Ethics—Origin of the Gaming Instinct—Blackstone’s Definition of Gaming—Gambling\
and Commerce Contrasted—The Gambler’s Philosophy—His End—The\
Gaming Table an Incentive to Suicide—Gambling Subversive of Social\
Order—The Gamester an Ishmaelite—Hereditary Vice—The Practice Condemned\
by Legislative Enactment—Jewish and Egyptian Statutes—How Gaming\
was Regarded by the Greeks and Romans—The Code of Justinian—The\
Common Law and Statutes of England Compared—The Enactments of American\
Legislatures Examined and Compared—The True Theory of Repression | #67-73:Page_67#
CHAPTER II.
HEBREWS, PERSIANS, CHINESE AND JAPANESE.
=toc=The “Lot” Among the Hebrews—The Putative Sacred Origin of Gaming—Egyptian\
Legends—Mercury Gambling With the Sun—Artaxerxes and\
Paracletus—An Assassin’s Life at Stake—Gambling Prohibited by the Mohammedan\
Code—Gaming Among the Hindoos—Worship of the Goddess of\
Wealth—Ancient Dice Throwing—Antiquity of Loaded Dice—A Game For a\
Kingdom and a Wife—A Persian Legend—The Wrath of Duryodhana—The\
Vengeance of the Pandavas—Gambling Among the Chinese—Favorite Frauds\
Among the Celestials—Chinese Gambling Implements—The “Poetical” Game—Gaming\
Prohibited by Chinese Statutes—Oriental “Hells”—The Tan-Koon,\
the N’gan, and the Ho-Koon—Favorite Chinese Games—“Ching Low”—“Nim”—Women\
as Gamesters—How “Koo Yan” is Played—Betting on\
Enigmas—Frauds—“Striking the White —A Substitute For the Lottery—Cards\
and Dice Prohibited in Japan | #74-86:Page_74#
.bn 010.png
.pn +1
CHAPTER III.
ANCIENT AND MODERN GREEKS AND ROMANS, TURKEY IN EUROPE, AND ASIA\
MINOR.
=toc=Gaming a Factor in the Fall of Greece—Dicing at Athens—Gaming an Aid\
to Despotism—Encouraged by Alexander—Cocking Mains Among the Greeks—Origin\
of Dice—Roman Dice—Value of Throws—Odd Customs—Roman Laws\
Regarding Gaming—Infamous Character and Practices of Roman Gamblers-“Cogged\
Dice”—Ancient Writers Deplore the Prevalence of Dicing—Caligula\
as a Gamester—Claudius and Nero—Cato’s Infatuation for Play—Corruption of\
Children—Fighting Quails—Rome at the End of the Fourth Century—Skill in\
Gaming an Introduction to Society—Gambling a Cause of the Fall of the\
Empire—The Vice Universally Prevalent—Gambling Among the Modern\
Greeks—Tricks of Sharpers—Shifting the Cut—Methods of Stocking—The\
“Bridge”—Fraudulent Dealing—Crimping—Palming—Tricks of Confederates—The\
“Roof”—The Cold Deck—Finettes—Costieres—Marked Cards—The\
Bug—Pincers as a Gambling Implement—Strippers—The Chaplet—Degradation\
of the Turks and Modern Greeks—Gambling a Source of Poverty and Squalor—Wagering\
One’s Liberty as a Stake—Street Gambling—The “Comboloio”—A\
Water Jug as a Dice Box—Gambling Hells in Greece—A Multiplicity of\
“Joints”—Cheating Not Regarded as Disgraceful—False Bottoms—Perils of\
Travelers—Surprising Cleverness of the Greek Gamblers—Personal Reminiscences—An\
Ancient Gaming House—A Gambling Hell at Corinth | #87-94:Page_87#
CHAPTER IV.
GERMANY, RUSSIA, ROUMANIA, BULGARIA AND SERVIA.
=toc=Gambling among the Ancient Huns—Ancient German Warriors as Gamesters—Playing\
For One’s Liberty—Selling the Loser as a Slave—Modern Germany—Famous\
Gambling Resorts—The Gaming Season—The Games Played—The\
Growth of Homburg—The Blanc Brothers—A Venal Prime Minister—The\
First Roulette Wheel at Homburg—A Heavy Tax—The First Cure-Hall Built—A\
Great Gaming Company—A Gorgeous Resort—“The Temple of Fortune”—Gambling\
in the Balkan Peninsula—Gaming Among the Bulgarian and Servian\
Peasants—Playing for Bread and Milk—Gamins Gambling for Candy—Street\
Gamblers—Peripatetic Fakirs—“Doubles or Quits”—Gaming Preferred to\
Manual Labor—A Successful Gamester—Suicide and Starvation—“Tag Alek”\
A Hell in Belgrade—Scenes of Debauchery—The “Shades”—Lightly Clad\
Women as Attendants—Female Gamesters—The “Lurley”—Opium Smoking\
as an Adjunct to Gambling—A Dangerous Resort—Licensed Gambling—Large\
Revenues Enjoyed by Principalities—Baden Baden—Heavy Expenses and\
Enormous Profits—Wiesbaden and Ems—Spa—A President of a Council Leases\
His Mansion to a Gaming Company—The attractions at Wiesbaden—The Cure\
Hall—A Mixed State of Society—Blackmailing Courtesans—Beauties of Baden—The\
Conversation House—Gorgeous Appointments—Attractive Promenades—The\
Gambling Rooms at Baden—Heavy License Fees and Running Expenses—An\
Interesting Scene—Playing for High Stakes—The Cure Hall—Reckless\
Playing—Infatuated Women—A Ruined Gamester—A Cosmopolitan Assembly—Venturesome\
Spirits—A Woman’s Passion for Play—Characteristics at Ems—A\
Noted Croupier—A Checkered Career—Russian Society—Easy Morals—Aristocratic\
Debauchees—Gaming in Roumania | #95-112:Page_95#
.bn 011.png
.pn +1
CHAPTER V.
ITALY, MONTE CARLO, FRANCE, SPAIN, MEXICO, CENTRAL AND SOUTH AMERICA.
=toc=Gaming in Italy—At Naples, Under the Spaniards—Cardinal Zapata’s Prohibition—High\
Stakes and Heavy Losses—Monte Carlo—The Famous Casino—The\
Handiwork of Blanc—A Palace Built at the Expense of Dupes—The Tables\
and Their Games—Public Resorts and Private Clubs—French Disgrace—An\
Enormous Rental—The Hours of Play—A Meeting Place For Gamesters of all\
Nations—Are the Games Fair?—The Limit of the Stakes—A Trente et Quarante\
Table described—The Bank’s Advantage—Famous Gardens and Drives—An\
Ornate Theater—Free Musical Entertainments of Rare Merit—Hotels and Cafés—Depravity\
of the French Aristocracy—A Royal Gambler—Historic Reminiscences—Cards\
and Dice in the Louvre—Professional Gamblers Hired by a King—Reckless\
Prodigality—Fortunes Lost and Won—Efforts to Suppress Gambling\
in Paris—Spread of the Vice Among the French People—The Reign of Louis\
XIV—Licensed Gaming Houses—Gambling at the Mansions of Ambassadors—Hospitals\
Founded and Supported by Fees Paid for Gambling Licenses—Women\
Allowed to Play in Public Houses—Crime, Misfortune and Scandal—Frequency\
of Suicides and Bankruptcy—Fouche’s Enormous Revenue from the Sale of\
Licenses—Gamblers as Police Spies—Abolition of the License System—Gambling\
by high Officials of the Republic—Frascadi’s and the Circle des Etrangers—Loans\
Without Security—Suppers and Balls as Attractions at the “Hells”—Anecdotes\
of French Gamblers—A Resort For Noblemen, Mechanics and\
Loafers—French Usurers—French Women’s Love For Play—French Club\
Houses—Cheating at the Parisian Gambling Dens—“The Chaplet”—Stocking—A\
Snuff Box as a Shiner—Cold Decks—Marked Cards—Celebrated Frenchmen\
Ruined by Gambling—Shameful Stakes—The Reign of Napoleon III—Demoralization\
Caused by Gambling—Police Surveillance of Club Houses—Playing\
for Ready Money Stakes Prohibited—Sad Experience of a Proprietor\
of a Club—A Million Lost in Four Years—Profits of Baccarat Houses—High\
Sounding Names for Gaming Hells—French “Steerers”—Dishonest Play the\
Rule—Spanish Love For Gaming—Liberality of the Grandees of Ancient Times—Prodigality\
of the Duke of Lima—Gambling Universal and Open—Noblemen\
Who Live by Gaming—A Spanish Countess’ Shame—Women Who Conduct\
“Banks”—Gambling Dens in Madrid—Gambling a Characteristic Feature of\
the Latin Races—Mexico, Central and South America—Dice and Cards—Popularity\
of the Lottery—Publicity of Gambling in the Central and South American\
Republics—A Mexican Fandango—Mexican Gaming Booths—Chusa—Gaming\
the Favorite Amusement of All Classes | #113-137:Page_113#
CHAPTER VI.
ENGLAND.
=toc=Gambling at the time of the Crusades—The Reigns of Richard I and\
John—Dice Throwing among the Barons—Restrictions placed upon the Limit\
of Stakes among the Crusaders—Gambling During the Reign of Elizabeth and\
the Stuarts—Gaming in 1668—Practices of Sharpers—A Game with a King for\
the Bells of St. Paul’s—Cromwell’s Efforts to Suppress Gaming—Prevalence\
of the Vice Under Charles II—A Gamester’s Suicide—A Duke Loses £230,000\
in a Night—The Reign of George III—Fox’s Heavy Losses—Faro in the\
Houses of the Nobility—Decline of Gaming with Cards and Dice—Universality\
.bn 012.png
.pn +1
of Turf-Betting—Characteristics of English Gamesters—Gaming at Clubs and\
Coffee Houses—Vile Dens—White’s—Brooks’—Crockford’s—Fishmonger’s Hall—The\
Berkely Club—St. James’—Melton Mowbray—Stangers’—Cavendish—Leicester’s—Hertford’s—Description\
of a London “Hell” in 1824—A Successful\
Gambling House—Palatial Appointments—An Aristocratic Resort—Reckless\
Playing—Dean Swift’s Strictures on White’s—Titled Dupes—Inveterate\
Gamesters of High Degree—A Fortune Lost at Hazard—A Novel Betting Book—Strange\
Subjects for Wagers—Heartless Bets—Celebrities to be Found at\
Brooks’—Almack’s—Heavy Stakes—Pitt as a Gambler—Wilberforce and Gibbon\
at Almack’s—The Waiter’s Club—Dishonesty—Prevalence of Gambling in\
the Eighteenth Century—Ruin, Disgrace and Despair—Multiplicity of Gaming\
Rooms—The Official Staff of an English Gambling House in 1751—Gaming in\
Theatrical Green Rooms—Among the Lower Classes—The “Devil’s Walk”—Dangerous\
Dens—Dissolute Women as “Steerers”—“Quadrant” Clubs—London\
“Hells” in 1844—Gamblers “Following the Races”—The Eldorado\
at Doncaster—Unlimited Play at Warwick—Open Solicitation—A “Groom-porter”—English\
and French Hazard—The Proprietor’s Winnings—Vile Resorts—From\
Rags to Affluence—Infatuation and Ruin—A “Hell” Early in the\
Nineteenth Century—Plundering Drunken and Belated Players—Odds at Hazard—Provisions\
Against Police Raids—Bullying Patrons—Disgusting Scenes—Staking\
Apparel—Debauchery Run Riot—Various Grades of Gaming Houses—Fortunes\
for the Proprietors and Ruin for the Dupes—Subsidizing the Police—Force\
and Cunning—Steerers—Dishonest Servants—Friend Betraying Friend—The\
Nobility in League with Swindlers—Blacklegs at the Tables of the Aristocracy—Base\
Stakes—Fashionable Ladies as Gamesters—A Minister Conducting\
an Illegal Lottery—The South Sea Bubble—Lotteries and Their Debasing\
Effects—History of Ante-Gaming Legislation in England—Curious Evidence\
Given Before the House of Lords—Prosecutions for Keeping Gaming Tables—A\
Salesman’s Confession—Defects in Legal Administration—Gambling English\
Statesmen—Chevalier and Mad Ogle—Noted London Gamblers—Germain—Hughes—“Beau”\
Nash—“Whig” Middleton—Bennett—O’Kelly—Dick\
England—A Noteworthy Trial—Wilberforce and George Selwyn—Sir Philip\
Frances—Anecdotes of “Beau” Brummel | #138-182:Page_138#
.ta-
.hr 10%
.nf c
PART II.
....Gambling Historically Considered....
.nf-
.hr 10%
.ta l:60 rb:10
CHAPTER I.
PRELIMINARY REMARKS.
=toc=Gambling Spirit in the United States—The Features Which Characterize\
It—The Green Cloth and the Stock Exchange—Greed for Gain and a Spirit of\
Recklessness—“Margins” and Stakes—“Profits” and Winnings—Various\
Forms of Gaming—Bucket Shops—Policy Playing—The Louisiana Lottery—Aim\
of Part II—Gambling in “Hells” and on Fair Grounds—“Banking”\
Games—Their Popularity—Percentage of the Proprietors—“Draw” and “Stud”\
Poker—“Square” and “Brace” Houses—“Plucking Pigeons”—Dishonest\
Devices Employed at “Square” Houses—Tacit Toleration of Gambling Rooms—Poker\
a National Pastime—Gambling at Fashionable Clubs—Play at Semi-Private Club Rooms—Police\
.bn 013.png
.pn +1
Indifference—Itinerant Gamblers—Inefficiency of\
Prohibitory Legislation—The Johnson Law—Gambling and Drunkenness Twin\
Relics of Barbarism | #185-190:Page_185#
CHAPTER II.
FARO GAMBLING AND GAMBLERS.
=toc=Origin of Cards—Origin of Faro—Its Antiquity and Popularity—A Fruitful\
Source of Misery—Faro Compared to the Tiger—The Principles of the Game—Playing\
on a “System”—The Dealer and the “Looker-Out”—The “Plain”\
and “Running” Limit—“Parleeing” a Bet—The Lay-Out—The “Big Square”—The\
“Second Square”—The “Pot”—Method of Dealing in Germany—Invention\
of Dealing Boxes—“Soda” and “Hock” Cards—Mum—“Coppering” a\
Bet—A “Turn”—“Splits”—“Barring” a Bet—“Calling the Last Turn”—A\
“Cat Hop”—“String Bets”—“Cue Cards”—The Chances of the Game—Fraudulent\
Methods and Devices—”Side Strippers”—“Rakes”—“Hollows\
and Rounds”—“Squares and Rounds”—“Faked” Dealing Boxes—The “Screw\
Box”—The “Lever Movement, or End Squeeze”—The “Needle Movement”—The\
“Sand-Tell” Box—“Case Keepers”—The “Put-Back”—The\
“Hair Copper”—“Snaking” and the Various Methods Employed—The\
Card Punch—Marking the Edges—The “Odd”—Playing With Fifty-Three\
Cards—The “Double-Odd”—Other Schemes of Fraud—Incidents—Misadventure\
of a “Brace” Dealer—“Cappers,” “Steerers” and “Ropers”—Their\
Shameless Practices—A “Steerer’s” Benevolent Act—“Brace” Houses Opened\
by “Square”(?) Gamblers—Schemes of Rascally Confederates to Defraud One\
Another—“Throwing Off” a Game—A Unique Establishment—The Great\
“Hell” at Pueblo—Short Faro—Police Protection to Gambling—Devices for\
Defeating an Honest Raid—Personal Recollections—Deplorable Results of the\
Gambling Mania—Sad Fate of Prominent Professional Gamblers—A “Dip”—Heartlessness\
of the Blackleg | #191-213:Page_191#
CHAPTER III.
POKER AND POKER PLAYING.
=toc=Essentially an American Game—Its Great and Growing Popularity—Dangers\
of Its Insidious Fascination—Method of Play—Relative Value of the\
Hands—Definition of Technical Terms Employed—Frauds Practiced—Strippers—Briefs—“Stocking”—The\
Top Stock—Bottom Stock—Jog Stock—Palm\
Stock—False Shuffles—False Cuts—Running Up Two Hands—Crimping—Cold\
Decks—Marked Cards—Despicable Devices—Partnerships—Double Discard—Flushes,\
Fulls and Fours—Holding Out—The “Bug”—The Sleeve Hold Out—The\
Table Hold Out—The Vest Hold Out—Convexes and Shiners—The “Nail\
Prick”—“Second Dealing”—The “Telegraph”—A Sure Hand—Stud Poker—Incidents\
and Reminiscences | #214-242:Page_214#
CHAPTER IV.
SHORT GAMES.
=toc=Why Called “Short”—Rouge et Noir—The Lay-Out—Method of Play—The\
Enormous Preponderance of Chances in the Bank’s Favor—Schemes of\
Fraud—Barefaced Robbery—Doubles or Quits—Turning Up Jack—“Ropers”\
and ”—Comparative Popularity of the Game in America and Europe—Roulette—The\
.bn 014.png
.pn +1
Table and Wheel—How Bets are Made—Heavy Odds Against\
the Player—Various “Faked” Wheels Described—The “Double Centre”—Players\
at the Mercy of the Proprietors—Keno—How Played—“Rollers” and\
“Collectors”—The Percentage Exacted on Winnings—Fortunes Won With\
Keno “Globes”—Collusion with “Cappers”—Rolling Faro—The Wheel\
Explained—How Played on Fair Grounds, and How at Gaming Houses—The\
Natural Odds in Favor of the “Bank”—How the Wheel is “Faked”—Rival\
Gamblers—A Personal Reminiscence—High-Ball Poker—How and Where\
Played—The Proprietor’s Percentage—The “Square” and “Skin” Game—“Cappers”\
and “Pluggers” | #243-255:Page_243#
CHAPTER V.
VARIOUS CARD GAMES.
=toc=Seven-Up, or Old Sledge—Principles of the Game—Fraudulent Methods—Strippers—Briefs—Half\
Stock—The Whole Stock—Crimping—Marking the\
Edges—The High Hand—The Long Hand—The Short Hand—Holding Out—Marked\
Cards—Whist—Cold Decks—A Dupe’s Good Hand—Casino—“Canada\
Bill” as a Casino Player—The Use of “Paper”—Euchre—Strippers—Briefs—Stocking—Crimping—The\
“Bug”—Palming—The “High Hand” at Euchre—Cribbage—Various\
Schemes of Fraud—How Cards Are Trimmed For Cribbage—The\
“Telegraph”—Vingt-un, or Twenty-One—How Played—Devices of the\
Professional Blackleg—Confederated Rascals | #256-272:Page_256#
CHAPTER VI.
DICE AND THE DICE BOX.
=toc=Antiquity of Dice Throwing—The Sport Declining in Popularity—Hieronymus—The\
Game Explained—The “Bowl” and Dice—A Heavy Percentage\
Against Players—Deception and Trickery—Substitution of Dice—The “Spring\
Board”—Fraudulent Dice—Chuck-a-Luck—An “Old Army Game”—An Inexpensive\
Outfit—Method of Betting—How Greenhorns are Cheated—A Favorite\
Game for “Ringing In” Loaded Dice—Holding Out the Cubes—An Artful\
Device—The Work of a “Side Partner”—“Craps”—Personal Introduction to\
the Game—“Come, Seven or Eleven”—A Rather Expensive Experience—Mode\
of Play—Favorite Frauds at “Craps”—Substitution of Unfair Dice—Cubes\
Made of Sugar—The Police Foiled—Eight Die Case—A Gift Enterprise—The\
Prizes—Why they Cannot be Won—How Dupes are Defrauded—“Representing”—A\
Shameful Deceit—“Cappers”—Poker Dice—“Over and Under Seven”—How\
Played—Modes of Cheating—“Top and Bottom”—A Bold Scheme\
of Fraud—How Victims are Fleeced—Dice Tops—Grand Hazard—Heavy Odds\
Against an Impossible Contingency—The Use of “Ringers”—“Mustang”—Loaded\
Dice | #273-283:Page_273#
CHAPTER VII.
GAMES AT FAIRS AND CIRCUSES.
=toc=How Licenses are Obtained—The Directors’ Disgrace—Personal Experience—Collusion\
With the Authorities—Officers of the Law as Blackmailers—The\
Author’s Aim—The Needle Wheel—Its Construction—How Operated—The\
“Faked Element”—“Cappers” as an Adjunct—“Representing”—“Corona,”\
or “Mascot”—“Cappers,” “Bookkeepers” and “Suckers”—Nursing False\
.bn 015.png
.pn +1
Hopes—The “Wheel of Fortune”—Its Principle—Mode of Betting—“Playing\
for Prizes”—The “Six Number Wheel”—Defrauding Greenhorns—A Manipulator\
a Victim—The Board of Trade Wheel—The Squeeze Spindle—How\
Operated—Disadvantages of “Suckers”—A Reminiscence—The Discomfiture\
of a Countryman—Fraudulent Spindles—A Countryman’s Enforced Demand—Tivoli,\
or Bagatelle—The Game Explained—“Representing”—“Cappers”—The\
Jenny Wheel—The “Faked” Devices—The Profits of the Machine—The\
O’Leary Belt—Its Fraudulent Winnings—“Cappers”—Risks of the Operator—“Hap-Hazard,\
or Bee-Hive”—Box and Balls—An Unfortunate Experience—Miniature\
Race Track—Striking Machines—Top and Bottom Boxes—The\
Swinging Ball | #284-310:Page_284#
CHAPTER VIII.
GOLD BRICK AND BUNKO.
=toc=Ingenuity of the Gold Brick Swindlers—Inadequacy of Newspaper Explanations—The\
Victim’s Taciturnity—Three Confederates Necessary—A Small\
Capital Required—Selection of a Victim—Shameless Practices of Reputable\
Citizens—The “Miner”—The “Rockies”—The “Indian”—“Tom Jones”—Cupidity\
an Aid to Deception—“Mr. Jones” as an Amanuensis—The Nugget\
and the “Medicine Shop”—“Smoke Water”—A Tempting Bait—The “Miner”\
and Mr. Jones Fellow Travelers—The “Trailer”—A Duplicate Purchase of\
Acid—A Suspicious “Redskin”—“Sleepy Water”—Substituted Borings—A\
“Sucker” Over-reaching Himself—A Hasty Departure—“Every Bit True”—Dr.\
Snyder’s Experience With a Gold Brick Swindler—Bunko—Millions Won\
Through the Fraud—Its Methods Explained—The “Chart”—The “Steerer”\
and the “Sucker”—Heartless Scoundrels—The “Capper” and the “Dupe”—The\
“Send”—The “Trailer”—A Substituted Package—A “Bunko” Game at\
Eureka Springs | #311-332:Page_311#
CHAPTER IX.
CONFIDENCE GAMES.
=toc=Depravity of Confidence Men—Why they Succeed—Their Dupes—Misplaced\
Sympathy—Three Card Monte—Bogus Checks—Over Issue—“Dropping\
the Pigeon”—The Tobacco Box—Knife—“Padlock” and “Safe”—“Quarter\
Under Foot”—The “Shot Gun”—“Give Away”—“Five Cards”—Top and\
Bottom Boxes—Foot Racing—The “Shell Game”—“Dollar Store,” or “Drop\
Case”—Minor Confidence Games—The Grandmother Trick—The Soap Game—The\
Foot Race—“Flim-Flam” | #333-359:Page_333#
CHAPTER X.
GAMBLING STORIES AND PERSONAL REMINISCENCES.
=toc=Ruined by a Funeral—“Fly-Loo”—The “Top Stock” Beaten—A Woodsman\
Known by His Chips—The “Morning” Principle—A Friend’s Bad Faith—Influence\
of Money on Parental Disapprobation—Timidity of Professional\
Gamblers—“Old Black Dan”—Effects of a Sensitive Conscience—How an Old\
Scout Had an Ace “Full”—The Failure of a Telegraph Wire—A Queer Stake—Dan\
Rice’s Big Poker Game—A Discouraged Speculator—The Luck of a One-Eyed\
Man—Bottom Dealing—A Whiff For a Nickel—A Good Swimmer—A\
Hungry Trio—A Case of Mistaken Identity—The Would-Be Confederate Disappointed—Five\
Equal Hands—A Change of Demeanor | #360-380:Page_360#
.bn 016.png
.pn +1
CHAPTER XI.
MY WIFE.
=toc=Her Family—Parental Opposition to Our Marriage—Our Elopement—Our\
Marriage—Her Parents’ Anger—A Pitiful Appeal to Maternal Love—Our Married\
Life—Poverty and Affliction—A Dress for a Burial—Heart Yearnings—A\
Mother’s Regret—The Agony of Separation—My Wife’s Death Bed—Mutual\
Devotion—Unavailing Regrets—Taken Away From the Sorrow to Come | #381-386:Page_381#
CHAPTER XII.
LOCAL GAMBLING.
=toc=Celebrated Gamesters and Gaming Houses—Gambling in the “Hell” and\
the Policy Shop, on the Race-Track and the Exchange—Incidents—Biographical\
Reminiscences—Historical Facts—When, Where, and How Far Tolerated\
by the Authorities—Public Sentiment—Rise, Progress and Status of the Vice at\
Commercial Centres—Chicago—Laxity Versus Repression—Wentworth’s\
Famous Raid—Gambling Under Various Municipal Administrations—“Skin”\
Gamblers—Notorious Characters—The Gamblers’ Sad End—Players and their\
Characteristics—Present Status of Pool Selling—A Chicago Dealer’s Catalogue\
of Gambling Goods—St. Louis—Prevalence of the Gaming Mania—A Poker\
Hand as “Collateral” Security at a Bank—Famous Houses and their Proprietors—“Skin”\
Games—Sketch of Ex-Governor Charles P. Johnson—The Gambling\
Houses of New York—Street Gamins—The “Bowery”—Elegant Resorts—Low\
Dives—Coming Home From the Races—A New York Gambler’s Catalogue—Gambling\
at Newport—A Quiet House—San Francisco—Early Argonauts—Women\
as Dealers—A Gambler’s “Nerve”—Legislation—Famous Capitalists\
and Noted Gamblers—Mining Stocks—Chinese as Gamblers—Odd\
Games—The Chinese Lottery—Mongolian frauds—The California State Fair—A\
Perplexing Legal Question—New Orleans—Gambling Among the Creoles—The\
License System—Famous Resorts—Streets Named After Games—New\
Orleans Under Military Rule—Indirect License—The “Shakspeare Almshouse”—Keno—Negroes\
as Gamesters—The Louisiana Lottery—Policy Playing—The\
Cotton Exchange—Milwaukee—“Tom” Wicks—Saratoga—Morrissey’s\
Club House—The American Monte Carlo—Efforts to Suppress Gambling—Cincinnati—“Eph”\
Holland and Other “Sports”—The “Queen of\
Spades”—Cleveland—Municipal Policy—Perfunctory Raids—Salaries Paid to\
Employes—Capital Invested—Chinese Laundrymen—Gambling in Stocks and\
Grain—Mobile—Charleston—Curious Advertisements—The Charleston Club—Policy\
Playing—Computation Table—Facsimiles of “Slips”—Charleston Faro\
Banks—Austin—A Trusted Employe Disgraced—Negroes Defrauded—Hartford—A\
Fire in a “Hell”—A Raid—Policy—Quebec—The “Quebec Whist\
Club”—A Shameful Revelation—Kansas City—Buffalo—Early Gambling—Canal\
Street—Noted Professionals—Policy Playing—St Paul—The Gambler’s\
Luck—Minneapolis—“Brace” Games—Bucket Shops—Policy—Gambling at\
Home—Peoria—Indianapolis—The Union Depot—Springfield, Illinois—A\
“Pigeon Plucker” at a Private Club | #388-547:Page_388#
.bn 017.png
.pn +1
.ta-
.hr 10%
.nf c
PART III.
Forms of Gambling Tolerated by Public Sentiment—Arraignment of
the Nature and Effects of the Vice.
.nf-
.hr 10%
.ta l:60 rb:10
CHAPTER I.
THE TURF.
=toc=Evils of the Race-Course—Antiquity of Horse-Racing—Ancient and Modern\
Times Compared—Racing in England—Blacklegs on the Track—A “National\
Sport”—The American Turf—Colonial Days—Puritans and Cavaliers—Famous\
Tracks in New York—The National Association—The American Association—“Board\
of Review”—American Trotting Association—Racing at Sheepshead\
Bay—A National Vice—Betting on Races and Lottery Gambling Compared—The\
Duty of Congress—The Pool Room—Its Methods—A “Betting Book”—The\
“Book Maker’s Odds”—The “Combination Board”—The “Friendly Tip”—Depreciation\
of Turf Gambling—Never a Local Affair—Pool Room Habitues—Features\
Peculiar to the Track—The Lady Gambler—The Confidential Stake-holder\—“Skin”\
Games Outside the Track—“Dosing” Horses—Ways That\
are Dark and Tricks that are Vain—The Jockey—The Handicap Fraud—Officially\
Protected Crime—Effects of the Mania—A False Guide | #553-576:Page_553#
CHAPTER II.
THE EXCHANGE.
=toc=The Exchange of the Ancients—Royal Exchange—New York Chamber of\
Commerce—American Boards of Trade—Scope of the Exchange—“Speculating”\
and Gambling—“Corners”—The Operator and the Speculator—An\
Incident—The “Scalper”—The “Guerilla”—“Longs” and “Shorts”—“Forcing\
Quotations”—“Flying Kites”—“Puts,” “Calls,” and “Straddles”\
News—Tempting Bait—A Day’s Session on a Western Exchange—Regrets\
versus Stoicism—Interior Arrangement of a Great Mart—Extraordinary\
Judicial Powers—A Travesty on Equity—Bucket Shops—The Exchange as a\
Factor in Civilization—The “Clock” | #577-606:Page_577#
CHAPTER III.
NATURE AND EFFECTS OF GAMING.
By Rev. Professor David Swing | #607-608:Page_607#
CHAPTER IV.
ARRAIGNMENT OF GAMBLING IN ITS MORAL ASPECTS.
By Rev. Robt. McIntyre | #611-640:Page_611#
.ta-
.bn 018.png
.pn +1
.sp 2
.h2
INDEX.
.sp 2
.ix
Age, The, #216#, #217#, #218#.
Americans, why predisposed to gaming, #185#.
Ames, mayor, his policy toward Minneapolis gamblers, #534#.
“Ante,” #217#.
Augustus, as a gamester, #88#.
Austin, Texas, gambling at, #505# et seq.;
political influence of gamblers in, #507#.
Autobiography of Author, #33# et seq.
.ix-
.sp 1
.ix
Baccarat, as played in Paris clubs, #131#.
Baden Baden, #101#, #104#;
a visitor’s description of, #106#, #107#;
the effective government of Paris, #118#;
compared with San Francisco, #441#;
with Saratoga, #484#.
Bagatelle, see #Tivoli:TIVOLI#.
Banker, at faro, his duties, #193#.
“Bears,” #578#, #585#.
Bee-Hive, see #Hap-Hazard:HAPHAZARD#.
Belgrade, a gaming hell in, #98#.
Bennett, Richard, #176#.
Berkeley Club, #142#.
Betting Book, copy of a, #561#.
Blanc, Mons., mentioned, #114#, #116#, #118#.
Blind, The, #218#.
“Bluffing,” at poker, #216#.
Board of Exchange (San Francisco), #448#.
Boas, Lily, #47#.
Bogus Checks, #338#.
Book-Makers, #541#, #563#, #565#.
Bottom Dealing, #374#.
Bottom Stock, The, #222#.
Box and Balls, #305#, et seq.
“Breaking” Prices, #585#.
Bridge, The, #90#.
Briefs, among the Greeks, #90#;
at poker, #219#, #221#;
at old sledge, #259#;
at euchre, #266#;
at cribbage, #268#.
Brooks’, #142#, #147#, #180#.
Brown, Mayor, his policy toward gambling in Milwaukee, #480#.
.bn 019.png
Brummel, Beau, #180# et seq.
Bucket Shops, in Cincinnati, #490#;
in St. Paul, #531#;
in Minneapolis, #539#;
their origin, #595#;
an American institution, #596#;
character of their patrons, #597#;
compared with the Stock Exchange and the gaming hell, #598#;
how business is done at, #598#, #599#;
frauds practiced by, #600#.
“Buck,” The, at stud poker, #240#.
Buffalo, Gambling in, #517#.
“Bug,” The, among the Greeks, #91#;
at poker, #234#;
at euchre, #267#;
at cribbage, #268#;
at vingt-un, #271#.
Bulgaria, gaming in, #97#.
“Bulls,” #578#.
Bunko, #326# et seq.;
cappers at, #326#;
how played, #327#;
bunko chart, #328#;
list of prizes at, #329#;
frauds at, #329#, #332#;
cards sometimes used at, #332#.
Bunko Land, #424#.
Bunko Men, in Chicago, #401#, #403#.
Butler, Col., tolerates gambling, #461#.
Butler, Gen. B. F., his attitude toward gambling in New Orleans, #461#.
.ix-
.sp 1
.ix
California State Fair, gambling at, #452#.
Caligula, as a gamester, #88#.
“Call,” The, #216#, #218#, #585#, #586#.
Canton, gambling at, #83#.
Cappers, at high ball poker, #255#;
at the “eight die case,” #279#;
at “top and bottom,” #281#;
at the needle wheel, #287#;
at corona, #288#;
at tivoli, #298#;
at the O’Leary belt, #302#;
at bunko, #326#, #328#, #329#, #331#;
at three card monte, #334#;
at hap-hazard, #305#;
at miniature race track, #308#;
at the shell game, #349#, #350#.
“Capping a Chip,” #218#.
Card Punch, The, #204#.
Cards, surmises as to origin of, #191#.
Casino, #265#.
.bn 020.png
.pn +1
“Cat-Hop,” #195#.
Catalogue of Gambling Tools, #406# et seq.; 430 et seq.
Cato, his infatuation for gaming, #89#.
Chance, worshipped by gamesters instead of God, #618#.
Chances, at faro, #192#;
at rouge-et-noir, #246#;
at roulette, #248#, #249#;
at stud poker, #240#.
Chaplet, The, #92#, #129#.
Charity Hospital, (N. O.) The, built from lottery taxes, #473#.
Charles II, his reign an era of gaming, #139#.
Charleston (S. C.), history of gambling in, #497# et seq.;
stock and club gambling at, #499#;
faro gambling in, #503#;
lotteries and policy playing at, #500#.
Chevalier, Mons., #172#.
Chicago Board of Trade, #578#, #581#, #587#, #592#.
Chicago, Gambling in, in early days, #389# et seq.;
under Wentworth, #390#, #397#;
under Haines, #393#;
a sad story concerning, #395#;
under Ramsay and Sherman, #397#;
under Rice, #400#;
under Medill, #401#;
under Colvin, #401#, #402#;
successful, #404#;
salaries paid to employes of houses, #405#;
under Heath, #402#, #403#;
under Harrison, #403#;
under Roche, #404#.
Chinese, gambling among, #81#;
laws prohibit gaming, #83#;
a peculiar game with the, #84#.
Chinese Gambling, in San Francisco, #449#;
in Cleveland, #493#;
in Hartford, #509#, #510#.
Chuck-a-Luck (at dice) how played, #275#;
frauds practiced at, #275#, #276#;
a favorite game with negroes, #468#.
Chuck-a-Luck, wheel of, see #Wheel of Fortune:WHEEL#.
Cincinnati, gambling in, suppressed in 1886, #487#;
in war times, #487#;
in bucket shops, #490#.
Circuses, games at, #284#.
Claudius as a gamester, #89#.
Cleveland (O.), Gambling in, policy of municipality toward, #491#;
raids upon, #491#;
extent of, #492#, #493#.
Clock, The Gambling, See #Gambling Clock:GAMBLINGCLOCK#.
.bn 021.png
Clothing, staked at the card table, #155#.
Clubs, a cloak for gaming, #142# et seq.;
see also #Poker Clubs:POKERCLUBS#.
“Coal-Oil Johnnie,” #410#.
Cold Decks, among the Greeks, #91#;
at poker, #229#;
at whist, #263#, #264#.
Colors, at rouge et noir, #243# et seq.
Colvin (Mayor) H. D., his “wide open” policy, #401#, #402#.
Combination Board, A, #563#.
Combination Table, A, #501#.
Comstock Anthony, his efforts to suppress gaming, #485#.
Confidence Games, why they succeed, #332#.
Conversation House, at Baden Baden, #104#.
Convexes, #235#.
Coppering a Bet, #194#.
“Corners” on the Exchange, how originating, #579#;
how manipulated, #581#.
Corona, #287#.
Cotton Exchange (N. O.) The, #469#.
“Covering Shorts,” #585#.
Covington (Ky.) gambling at, #487#.
Craps, how played, #277#;
frauds practiced at, #277#, #278#;
a favorite game with negroes, #278#, #468#, #496#, #540#;
sugar “cubes” used in playing, #278#.
Cribbage, #267#;
frauds practiced at, #267#, #268#;
not a favorite game with gamblers, #269#.
Crimping, at poker, #228#;
at old sledge, #260#;
at euchre, #267#;
at cribbage, #269#.
Crockford’s, #106#.
Crown-House, an English, #157#.
Crucifixion, gamblers unmoved by, #621#.
Cue Cards, #198#.
“Cue-Keeper,” The, #201#.
Cure Hall, at Wiesbaden, #102#.
.ix-
.sp 1
.ix
Dakota, author runs brace game in, #38#.
Dan Rice’s Big Poker Game, #372#.
Davis’s (N. O.) Club-House, #456#.
Day-Watch, The, #208#.
Dealing Boxes, used at faro, #194#;
how constructed, ib.;
various fraudulent kinds of, #199#;
the first used, ib.;
the screw box, #200#;
the “lever” movement, #201#;
the needle movement, ib.;
the “sand tell,” ib.;
not always in good order, #206#.
.bn 022.png
.pn +1
Devil’s Walk, The, #151#.
Dice, Loaded, #276#.
Dice-Throwing, among the Hindoos, #75#;
among the ancients, #87#;
early frauds at, #88#;
among the Greeks, #93#;
antiquity of, #273#;
games of, #273#;
in English gaming houses, #154#-155;
at San Francisco, #444#.
Dice Tops, high and low, #282#.
“Dip,” defined, #212#.
Discard, at poker, #218#.
Discard, Double, see #Double Discard:DOUBLEDISCARD#.
Discouraged Speculator, A, #373#.
Dollar Store, #351#.
Dominoes, the Chinese game of, #451#.
Doncaster Races, betting at the, #149#, #151#.
Double Cuts, #225#;
Discard, #232#.
“Doubles or Quits,” see #Representing:REPRESENTING#.
Draw, The, at poker, #218#.
Dream-Books, #476#.
Drop Case, #351#.
Dropping the Pigeon, #341#.
.ix-
.sp 1
.ix
Effects of a Sensitive Conscience, #368#.
Eight-Die Case, #278#;
frauds practiced at, #278#, #279#;
chart used in, #279#.
Eldest Hand, The, see #Age:AGE#.
Elizabeth (of England), gaming during reign of, #139#.
Embezzlement, induced by gambling, #167#, #487#, #494#, #567#, #547#.
England, “Dick,” 177 et seq.
England, gambling in, #138# et seq.;
the aristocracy of, as gamesters, #142#.
English Clubs, Famous, #142#, #145#, #146#, #147#, #148#.
Euchre, its popularity, #266#;
frauds practiced at, #266#, #267#.
European Principalities, license of gambling by, #186#.
Exchange, The Commercial, a favorite mode of gaming, #185#;
historically considered, #577#;
classification of members of, #578#;
manipulation of prices in, #587#;
inconsistency of a Western, #594# et seq.;
a day’s session on, #590#;
its true mission, #601#.
.ix-
.sp 1
.ix
Fairs, games at, #284# et seq.
Fair Directors, their venality, #284#, #285#.
.bn 023.png
Fairchild, Gen. Lucius, lesson of a gaming house, #479#.
Failure of a Telegraph Wire, #370#.
False Cuts, #225#.
False Guide, A, #576#.
False Shuffles, #224#, et seq.
Fan Tan, #451#, #493#, #510#.
Faro, a popular American game, #188#;
its antiquity and supposed origin, #191#;
Rules of, #192#;
the lay-out in, #193#;
doctrine of character as applied to, #196#;
frauds practiced at, #197# et seq.;
how cards are marked for, #198#;
see also #Short Faro:SHORTFARO#.
Faro Boxes, see #Dealing Boxes:DEALINGBOXES#.
Faro Gambling, in New York, #420#;
at San Francisco, #439#;
at Austin, #506#;
at Minneapolis, #555#.
“Filling,” at poker, #218#.
Fishmongers’ Hall, #142# et seq.
Five Cards, #347#.
Flatboatmen, as gamblers, #455#.
Flim-Flam, #358#.
“Flushes, Fulls and Fours,” #232#.
Fly Loo, #361#.
Foot-Racing, #357#.
Forcing Quotations, #584#.
Fouche, as Minister of Police, #123#.
“Fours,” at poker, #217#.
Fox, Charles, as a gambler, #171#.
Francis, Sir Philip, #180#.
Friends, A, Bad Faith, #364#.
Frontier Police, The, #518#.
Full Hand, #215#.
.ix-
.sp 1
.ix
Gambler, The, three stages in his career, #65#;
falsity of his theories, #69#.
Gamblers, as police spies, #123#;
admitted to English society, #158#;
their defense as based upon the exchange, #186#;
itinerant, #190#;
professionals die paupers, #211#;
timidity of professional, #366#;
spendthrifts by nature, #468#;
political influence wielded by, #477#, #507#;
ashamed of their trade, #607#;
unmoved by the crucifixion, #621#;
heartlessness of, #621#;
an appeal to, #635# et seq.
Gambler’s Luck, The, #532#.
Gambling, indefensible, #67#;
its roots, ib.;
provocative of suicide, #69#;
subversive, of social order, #70#;
a prop of despotism, #87#;
a cause for the fall of Rome, #89#, #90#;
in France, #120#;
.bn 024.png
.pn +1
among English lower classes, #150#;
at English race courses, #151#;
legal aspects of in England, #168#;
police protection to, #210#;
a cause of suicide, #414#, #478#;
Heaven’s curse upon, #415#;
a cause of embezzlement, #487#, #494#, #507#, #547#;
a cause of murder, #528#, #546#;
its nature and effects, #607#, #614#;
a source of intellectual loss, #607#;
dethrones God, #618#;
degrades man, #620#;
destroys the soul, #626#;
religion the surest preventive against, #626#.
Gambling Houses, list of employes at in England, #149#;
a low class of English, #150#, #153#, et seq.;
banking games favorites at, #187#.
Gambling Clock, The, #603#.
Gambling Implements, catalogue of, #406#, #430#.
Gambling Stories, #360# et seq.
Games of Chance, growth of the passion for, #607#;
danger attending, #613#.
Gamestresses, Miss Trollope’s description of, #110#;
see also #Women:WOMEN#.
Garnier, Mons., mentioned 114.
Geneva, #101#.
George III (of England), Gambling during the reign of, #141#.
Gigs, #476#, #540#.
Give Away, #346#.
“Going Better,” #215#, #216#.
“Going In,” #215#, #231#.
Gold Bricks, #311# et seq.;
Rev. Dr. Snyder’s experience with, #318#.
Good Swimmer, A, #376#.
Grand Hazard, #282#.
Grand Opera House, Paris, #114#.
Grandmother Trick, The, #354#.
Greece, gambling in ancient and modern, #87#, et seq.
Greeks, a nation of Sharpers, #90#;
frauds practiced by, id., et seq.
“Groom-Porter,” duties of the, #153#.
Guerilla, The, #584#.
“Gunning,” Stocks, #585#.
.ix-
.sp 1
.ix
Haines, Mayor, his policy toward gambling, #393#.
“Hair-Coppers,” #202#.
Half Stock, The, #259#.
Handicap Fraud, The, #572#.
Hap-Hazard, explained, #303#;
how used, #303#, #304#;
the fake element in, #304#.
.bn 025.png
Harrison (Mayor) Carter H., his policy towards gamblers, #403#.
Hartford, Conn., history of gambling in, #508# et seq.;
raids in, #509#;
policy playing in, #510#.
Harvey, Miss May, #39# et seq.
Havana Lottery, The, #462#, #474#.
Hazard, French and Eng. games of, #152#.
Heath, Mayor, suppresses gambling in Chicago, #402#, #403#.
Heaven, The curse of, rests upon money won at gaming, #21#.
Hebrews, see #Jews:JEWS#.
Henry VIII, an unscrupulous gamester, #139#;
his reign an era of gambling, #140#.
Hieronymus, method of playing, #273#, #274#;
odds against players at, #274#;
frauds practiced at, #275#.
High and Low Dice Tops, see #Dice Tops:DICETOPS#.
High-Ball Poker, #255#.
High-Hand, The, at old sledge, #260#;
at euchre, #267#.
High-Low-Jack, see #Old Sledge:OLDSLEDGE#.
Hindoos, gambling among the, #75#;
a legend, #76# et seq.
Hock Card, The, #194#, #195#.
Holding-out, at poker, #233#, #241#;
at old sledge, #262#;
at euchre, #267#;
at cribbage, #268#;
at vingt-un, #271#.
“Hollows and Rounds,” #197#.
Homburg, #101#, #118#.
Horse-Racing, in England, #554#;
in America, #556#;
a national vice, #558#.
Hours of Play, at “hells,” #208#.
How an Old Scout Held an Ace Full, #369#.
Hoyle, his explanation of faro cited, #192#;
his doctrine of chances, #196#.
Hungry Trio, A, #376#.
Hutchinson, B. P., #606#.
.ix-
.sp 1
.ix
Indianapolis, gambling in, #545#, et seq.
Influence of Money on Parental Disapprobation, #365#.
Italian Society, vices of, #114#.
Italy, gaming in, #113#.
James Brothers, The, #36#.
James I (of England), gambling during the reign of, #139#.
Japan, games prevalent in, #86#.
Jenny Wheel, The, #299#;
the table used for, #298#.
.bn 026.png
.pn +1
Jews, gambling among, #71#, #74#.
Jockey, The, #571#.
Jog Stock, The, #223#.
John (of England), gaming during reign of, #138#.
Johnson, Ex-Gov. Chas. P., introduction by, #26#;
letter from endorsing author, #59#;
sketch of, #417#.
Jurisdicton (State and National), conflict of, #454#.
.ix-
.sp 1
.ix
Kansas City, (Kas.), gambling at, #514#.
Kansas City (Mo.), gambling in, #514#.
Keno, how played, #251#;
the “globe,” ib.;
percentage of the game, ib.;
frauds at, #252#;
large winnings by proprietors of, #252#;
a favorite game in New Orleans, #467#;
popular at Austin, #506#.
Kentucky State Lottery, #472#, #474#.
.ix-
.sp 1
.ix
Lay-Out, at faro, how arranged, #193#, #194#.
Legislation Against Gambling, #71#, #72#, #73#, #75#, #83#, #138#, #163#, #165#, #189#;
in Louisiana, #457#, #461#, #462#, #463#, #464#, #477#;
in Milwaukee, #481#;
in New York, #484#;
in Ohio, #491#, #492#;
in Texas, #508#;
in Minneapolis, #39#;
absolutely essential, #608#.
Levant, gambling in the, #92# et seq.
License of Gambling, by European principalities, #94#, #101#, #186#.
License System, The, of gambling, #457#, #461#, #462#, #463#, #464#.
Limit of Bets, at faro, #193#.
Loaded Dice, #283#.
Long Hand, The, #261#.
“Longs,” #584#.
Look-Out, at faro, his functions, #193#.
Lottery, The Chinese, #449#.
Lotteries, early, in New Orleans, #472#, #474#;
in Charleston, #500#.
Lottery Tickets, their sale in San Francisco, #445#.
Louisiana, the disgrace of the State, #187#.
Louisiana Lottery, a favorite among San Francisco citizens, #445#;
its origin, #462#;
evils of, #472#, #631#;
history of, #472# et seq.;
dividends paid by, #473#;
table of drawings in, ib.;
disposition of revenues from, ib.;
its sale of tickets in Cleveland, #493#;
its victims in Buffalo, #526#;
in Minneapolis, #542#;
as patronized at Peoria, #544#.
Luck of a One-Eyed Man, #374#.
“Lucky” Baldwin as a gambler, #443#.
.ix-
.sp 1
.ix
McGrath’s (N. O.) Club House, #460#.
Madrid, gambling at, #135#, #136#.
Magnetic Spindles, #293#.
“Making Good,” #215#.
Marked Cards, author’s success with, #44#;
at poker, #229#, #230#;
a game with, #241#;
in old sledge, #262#;
at euchre, #266#;
at cribbage, #271#.
.bn 027.png
Marking the Edges, #198#, #260#.
Martin, Samuel, a partner of author;
Sundry reminiscences of, #42# et seq.;
as a marked card player, #241# et seq.
Mascot, #287#.
Medill (Mayor) Joseph, his policy toward gamblers, #401#.
Mexican Monte, #506#.
Mexican National Lottery, #445#.
Mexico, curious gambling customs in, #136#, #137#.
Middleton Whig, #175#.
“Milking the Street,” #585#.
Milwaukee, Gambling in, #479# et seq.;
under O’Neill, #480#;
under Brown, ib.;
legislation against, #481#.
Miniature Race Track, #307#.
Mining Stocks, speculation in, #447#.
Minneapolis, Gambling in, #533# et seq.;
under Rand, #534#;
under Ames, #535# ib.;
under Pillsbury, #554#, #557#.
Minor Confidence Games, #353#.
Mistaken Identity, a case of, #377#.
Mobile, Gambling in, #494# et seq.
Mohammedan laws against gaming, #75#.
Monaco, suicides at, #69#;
gambling at, #116#.
Mongolians, see #Chinese:CHINESE#.
Monte Carlo, #114#;
the casino of, #116#;
house of play at, #117#;
character of games, #117#;
limit of bets, #118#;
season of play at, #119#;
compared with Saratoga, #212#;
with New Orleans, #462#.
Morning Principle, The, #363#.
Morrissey’s (John) N. Y. club house, #212#;
Saratoga club house, #483#;
same compared to Baden Baden, #484#.
Moscow, #111#.
Mound City (Mo.) author’s experience at, #236#.
Municipal Authorities, Relation of to public gambling, #189#, #190#.
Murder, caused by gambling, #528#, #546#.
Mustang, #283#.
Mutual Pools, #563#, #564#.
.ix-
.sp 1
.ix
Nail Prick, The, #237#.
Needle Wheel, The, #286#, #287#.
Negroes, as gamesters, #467#, #506#, #540#.
Nero as a gamester, #88#.
New Orleans, history of gambling in, #455# et seq.;
effect of civil war upon gambling in, #461#;
an American Monte Carlo, #462#;
number of gaming houses in, #467#;
table showing extent of gambling in, #477#.
New Orleans Cotton Exchange, #469#.
New York, Gambling houses of, #420#.
Newport (Ky.), Gambling at, #487#.
Newport (R. I.), Gaming at, #437#.
Night-Watch, The, #208#.
.bn 028.png
.pn +1
O’Leary Belt, The, explained, #300#;
fake element in, #301#;
devices used in connection with, #302#;
a favorite with itinerant gamblers, #303#.
O’Niell, Mayor, his policy toward gambling in Milwaukee, #480#.
Odd, The, #204#;
its advantage, #205#.
“Old Bailey” (England), The, gamblers at bar of, #155#, #159#.
“Old Black Dan,” #367#.
Old Sledge, how played, #256# et seq.;
frauds at, #258#.
Open Board of Trade, The, #595#.
“Original Hand,” The, #215#.
Original Louisiana Lottery, #445#.
Over-Issue, #340#.
Over and Under Seven, #280#.
.ix-
.sp 1
.ix
Padlock, The, #344#.
Pairs, Two, #217#.
Palm Stock, The, #224#.
Palming, among the Greeks, #91#;
at euchre, #267#;
at cribbage, #268#.
Parleeing, the term explained, #193#.
Partnerships, at poker, #222#, #223#, #228#, #231#;
at vingt-un, #271#.
Paupers, gamblers become, #211#.
Peoria (Ills.), gambling at, #543#.
Persians, gaming among, #74#.
Pillsbury, (Mayor) George S., attitude toward Minneapolis gamblers, #534#, #537#.
“Pluggers,” at high ball poker, #255#;
at San Francisco, #440#.
Poker, a so-called national pastime, #189#, #214#, #507#;
its defenders, ib.;
terms used at, explained, #215#, #217#;
frauds practiced at, #219# et seq.;
a favorite game in San Francisco, #442#.
Poker Clubs, #189#, #493#, #520#, #531#.
Poker Dice, #280#.
Poker Hands, their relative value, #217#;
as collateral for a loan, #411#.
Police, protection to gambling by the, #210#, #427#;
in New Orleans, #461#, #467#;
on the race track, #573#.
Policy-Playing, prevalence of in United States, #186#;
at San Francisco, #449#;
at New Orleans, #468#;
in Cleveland, #493#;
at Charleston, #500#;
in Hartford, #510#;
in Buffalo, #524#;
in Minneapolis, #539#.
Pool Rooms, at San Francisco, #445#;
in St. Paul, #529#;
in Minneapolis, #541#;
how business done in, #560#, #568#.
Privileges, sold on steamboats, #254#;
at fairs and circuses, #284#.
Produce Exchange (San Francisco), #448#.
Pueblo (Colorado), An immense gambling house at, #208#, #209#.
“Puts,” #585#.
Put-back, The, #202#.
.ix-
.sp 1
.ix
Quarter Under Foot, #345#.
.bn 029.png
Quebec, Gambling in, #511#.
Quebec Exchange, #513#.
Quebec Whist Club, its character, #512#.
Queer Stake, A, #371#.
Quinn, John Philip, autobiography of, #33# et seq.
Quinn, Mrs. May Harvey, courtship and marriage, #41#;
her death, #45#;
sketch of, #381#.
Quinn, Mrs. Lily, her letter to author, #60#;
author’s reply, #61#.
.ix-
.sp 1
.ix
Race-Tracks, sale of privileges at, #566#, #567#;
features peculiar to, #568#;
various frauds at, #570#, #572#.
“Rakes,” #197#.
Rake-Off, #219#.
Rumsey, Mayor, his toleration of gambling in Chicago, #397#.
Rand, Mayor, his policy towards Minneapolis gamblers, #534#.
Reflectors, #235#.
Religion, the surest preventive against gambling, #626#.
“Representing,” at “Eight Die Case,” #279#;
at the needle wheel, #287#;
at bunko, #327#, #329#, #330#.
Representatives, Congressional, exponents of average morality, #187#.
Rice, Mayor, his policy toward Chicago gamblers, #400#.
Richard I, gaming during reign of, #138#.
“Ringing-in,” see “#Cold Decks:COLDDECKS#,” “#Marked Cards:MARKEDCARDS#,” “#Chuck-a-Luck:CHUCKALUCK#,” “#Loaded Dice:LOADEDDICE#.”
Roche, (Mayor) John A., his policy gambling, #404#.
Roof, The, #91#.
Rolling Faro, #252#;
the fake element in, #253#;
percentage against players at, #253#.
Roman Laws Against Gaming, #71#.
Rouge et Noir, as played at Monte Carlo, #117#, et seq.;
a popular American game, #188#;
the game explained, #243#, et seq.;
odds against players, #242#, #245#;
different ways of betting at, #244#, #245#;
frauds practiced at, #245#, #246#;
steerers employed for, #246#.
Roulette, as played abroad, #117#;
bets at, #119#;
a popular American game, #188#;
how played, #247#;
odds at, #248#, #249#;
frauds practiced at, #249#, #250#.
“Royal Flush,” see #Sequence Flush:SEQUENCEFLUSH#.
Ruined by a Funeral, #360#.
“Running in,” #198#.
Running up Two Hands, #227#.
.ix-
.sp 1
.ix
St. Louis, Gambling in, #408#, et seq.
St. Paul, Gambling in, #527#.
Sacramento (Cal.) Gambling at, #452#.
Saddles, #476#, #540#.
Safe, The, #344#.
.bn 030.png
.pn +1
“Sanding” the Cards, #198#.
Sand Paper, as a means of fraud, #204#.
“Sand-Tell Box,” The, #198#, #201#.
San Francisco, Gambling at, #438#, et seq.;
compared with Baden Baden, #441#;
stock speculation at, #448#;
policy playing at, #449#.
Saratoga, compared with Monte Carlo, #212#;
gambling in, in early days, #482#;
racing at, #483#;
club-houses, #483#;
openly conducted, #485#;
raids upon, #486#;
public sentiment, #486#.
Scalper, A, #584#.
Second Dealing, at poker, #237#;
at cribbage, #271#.
“Seeing a Bet,” #216#.
“Send,” The, #337#.
Sequence, A, #217#.
Sequence Flush, #217#.
“Settling-Day,” #585#.
Seven Up, see #Old Sledge:OLDSLEDGE#.
Shakspeare (Mayor) Joseph, his plan for indirectly licensing gaming, #464#, #469#.
Shell Game, #348#.
Sherman, Mayor, his toleration of gambling in Chicago, #397#
Shifting the Cut, #225#, #267#.
“Shiners,” #235#.
Short Faro, #210#.
Short Games, #243#, et seq.
Short Hand, The, #261#.
“Shorts,” #584#.
Shot Gun, The, #346#.
Signing Up, at poker, #222#;
at whist 263.
“Single Pair,” A, at poker, #217#.
Sleeve Hold-Out, The, #234#.
“Snaking,” #202#, #203#.
Soap Game, The, #355#.
Society (N. Y.) for the Suppression of Vice, #486#.
“Soda” Card, The, #194#.
South Carolina Lottery, #499#.
Southern Indiana Penitentiary, author’s incarceration 55;
his discharge 60.
“Spieler,” The, #334#, #335#.
“Splits,” explained, #197#.
Springfield (Ills.), Gambling at, #548#, #549#.
“Squares and Rounds,” #198#.
“Squeal,” A, #585#.
“Squeeze,” A, #585#.
Squeeze Spindle, #291#;
faked element in, #292#;
sale of a, ib.;
a magnetic, #293#.
Stake Holder, The confidential, #569#.
Steerers, English, #157#;
at rouge-et-noir, #246#;
at faro, #207#, #208#;
in St. Louis, #410#.
Stocking, at faro, #197#, #198#;
at poker, #221#, #233#;
at euchre, #266#;
at cribbage, #268#.
Stock Exchange, Its influence on national morality, #186#.
.bn 031.png
Stock Gambling, its results, #448#;
in San Francisco, ib.;
at New Orleans, #469#;
in Cleveland, #493#;
at Charleston, #499#;
in Quebec, #513#;
in St. Paul, #531#;
its deplorable effects, #581#;
“slang” used in, #584#.
Straddles, #585#, #586#.
Striking Machine, #308#.
String bets, #195#.
Strippers, among the Greeks, #91#;
at faro, #197#;
at old sledge, #258#;
at euchre, #266#;
at cribbage, #268#.
Stud-Poker, #219#, #239#;
San Francisco, #444#.
Suicide, Gambling leads to, #69#, #414#, #478#;
because of failure of lottery prize, #625#.
Sure Hand, A, at poker, #219#, #238#.
Swinging Ball, The, #310#.
.ix-
.sp 1
.ix
Table Hold-Out, The, #235#.
“Taking a Flyer,” #585#.
Telegraph, The, #237#, #269#, #271#.
Three Card Monte, how-operated, #334#, et seq.;
railway conductors’ share in profits of, #336#.
“Three OF a Kind,” at poker, #217#.
“Throwing-off” a Partner, #209#.
Timidity of Professionals, #366#.
“Tipping the Hand,” #226#.
Tips on Races, #566#.
Tivoli, the machine explained, #295#;
the chart used in, #296#;
how played, #297#;
frauds at, #297#, #298#.
Tobacco Box, The, #343#.
Top and Bottom, at dice, #281#.
Top and Bottom Boxes, #309#.
Top Stock, The, #221#;
beating the, #362#.
Touts, #446#.
Turning Jack from Bottom, #262#.
.ix-
.sp 1
.ix
United States, Gambling in, #549#;
why gambling popular in the, #185#;
various modes of gaming practiced in, #185# et seq.;
policy playing in, #186#.
.ix-
.sp 1
.ix
Van Hennesy, gold brick swindle, #49#.
Vest Hold-Out, The, #235#.
Vingt-un, how played, #270#;
frauds practiced at, #271#.
.ix-
.sp 1
.ix
Washburne, Chief of Police, his war on gambling, #399#.
Wentworth, “Long John,” his mayoralty of Chicago, #390#, #397#.
Wheel of Fortune, #289#;
the faked element in, #290#.
Whist, Dean Swift’s opinion of, #149#;
not popular with gamblers, #263#;
frauds practiced at, #263#, #264#.
White’s (London), #142#, #144#, #149#, #180#.
Wiesbaden, #101#, #111#.
Wilberforce, as a gamester, #180#.
“Wild-Cat” Stocks, #447#.
Whole Stock, The, #260#.
Women, as gamesters, #107#, #123#, #127#, #130#, #158#, #440#, #569#;
as dealers, #441#.
.ix-
.bn 032.png
.pn +1
.sp 4
.h2 title='INTRODUCTION: Hon. Chas. P. Johnson'
INTRODUCTION.
.ce
By Hon. Chas. P. Johnson, Ex-Governor of Missouri.
.sp 2
It is now several years since I first met Mr. John Philip Quinn, the
author of this book. During my contact with him in a professional way,
I became well acquainted with him. During the necessary association
of professional duty, I became convinced that there were many good
qualities in Mr. Quinn, and all that was necessary to make a worthy
citizen of him was to induce him, if possible, to overcome the effects of
early experience and eschew, the indulgence of pernicious habits. With
no indications of inherent badness, he had supinely drifted into indulgences
that blunted his moral perceptions and weakened his will power. Chief
among these was the vice of gambling. As is well known to all reflecting
men, there is no more enervating and morally disastrous vice than this.
It seems to have, when enthralling a man peculiarly susceptible to its
fascinating allurements, a strength and tenacity surpassing all the other
vices to which society is a prey. It insidiously lures its victim in the
track of exciting indulgence, until every emotion and passion of the soul
becomes subject to its control and mastery. In its final assumption it
becomes a most relentless tyrant, making the will powerless to resist.
I found Mr. Quinn completely under the control of this vice, and recognized
the herculean effort he would be required to make to break from
its thralldom. However, I appealed to him to make the effort, and he
finally decided to attempt it. Circumstances were favorable to the success
of the effort, though at the expense of privation and disgrace.
Some time after Mr. Quinn’s determination to reform, having found it
difficult to make a living in St. Louis, he was induced to accompany a
traveling show in a tour through the Middle States. While stopping
at a town in Indiana, he met a couple of his former associates at one of
the hotels. A few days before this a farmer in that locality had been
swindled out of a large sum of money. These parties were arrested
as also was Mr. Quinn, and though he was only partially identified by
.bn 033.png
.pn +1
the victim, he was taken into custody, tried, convicted and sent to prison
at Jeffersonville, Indiana. He was so confident of his innocence that
he made no preparations for a defense. He was not aware of the
unreasonable prejudice that frequently exists in the jury box against one
charged with a certain kind of offence, be he ever so innocent. There was
no legal evidence warranting his conviction, but several offences of like
character of that charged against him had been lately committed in that
region of the country, and the community demanded a victim. He was
made one. I knew nothing about it until a week or more after it occurred.
His wife called upon me and related all the facts. I immediately undertook
an investigation of the case, and discovered without the shadow of a
doubt that Mr. Quinn was innocent of the crime of which he had been
convicted. I even traced the guilt home to other parties, and they were
arrested and brought to trial in the same locality where Mr. Quinn was
tried, and only escaped by a disagreeing jury, caused by the former statement
of the prosecuting witness. But the community in which these trials
took place were convinced of the wrong done Mr. Quinn and were anxious
to make reparation. In due time, as soon as the facts in full force
and tenor could be laid before Gov. Gray, of Indiana, he promptly
accorded the justice of a pardon to Mr. Quinn. Of course it was an outrage
that should never have occurred. The sufferings of Mr. Quinn during
his period of incarceration were most unendurable. Aside from the
degrading punishment and consequent disgrace, he suffered from the
poignant reflection that he was innocent and unable to have that justice
and protection given him which is the boast of our system of government.
But notwithstanding his unfortunate condition he seems to have kept a
courageous heart and turned his attention to his surroundings, drew
instruction therefrom, and will give to the world a graphic account of
prison life, which may be of benefit to the philanthropist and the legislator.
A more elaborate and unique work, perhaps, is his book on the
gaming vice, to which it is my desire these words should be prefixed. It
is peculiarly interesting to me, and replete with information. The subject
is considered in a way that leaves little, if anything to be said, either of
instruction or suggestion. This book should be in the hands of every
young man in our land. As a usual thing injustice of this kind sours
the temper of men and discourages them from striving to accomplish
higher and nobler aims in life. In Mr. Quinn’s case it had the opposite
.bn 034.png
.pn +1
effect. Since his release he has shown by his work and conduct this fact.
He seems stronger to-day in his determination to carry out his decision of
reformation than ever. Transferring his residence to another sphere, he
has already gained the confidence and esteem of his fellowmen, and is
fast broadening his field of usefulness. He is worthy of encouragement
in his work; my sincere wish is that he will liberally receive it.
.il fn=i_028.jpg w=300px ew=50% align=r alt='Chas. P. Johnson.'
.bn 035.png
.pn +1
.sp 4
.h2 title='INTRODUCTION: Rev. John Snyder'
INTRODUCTION.
.ce
By Rev. John Snyder, D. D., Church of the Messiah, St. Louis, Mo.
.sp 2
I am intensely interested in Mr. John Philip Quinn’s book on
Gambling. I met Mr. Quinn several years ago in St. Louis. I became
convinced that this book is the fruit of an earnest purpose to set before
the young men of this country the radical evils which so closely cling to
the gambling habit. I was especially pleased with the practical notions
which Mr. Quinn entertained respecting the wisest methods of reaching
and eradicating the evil. While he is himself convinced of the immorality
of gambling, he is conscious that the mere presentation of the moral
aspect of the vice will do little to arrest its growth in American society.
For the social gambler appeals to the theory of the absolute right of the
individual to dispose of his own property as he sees fit. Such a man says:
“Have I not just as much moral right to stake my money on the turn of
a card, as I have to use it in any other form of harmless enjoyment?”
This argument will be effective and even conclusive so long as society
entertains its present loose notions respecting the obligations of wealth. But
Mr. Quinn approaches the matter from another side. He shows the evil
and disreputable associations into which the gambler is inevitably thrown.
He speaks of the reckless use of money which the gambling habit engenders,
and shows how helpless the average business man really is in the
hands of the professional gambler. I claim to be a man of fair intelligence,
and yet I felt intellectually humiliated when Mr. Quinn demonstrated
to me, how easily I might be tricked out of my money, by the
shallow devices to which he says the ordinary gambler resorts when he
cannot rely upon what he calls “luck.” For illustration, he showed me
what appeared to be an ordinary pack of cards, but by the simplest
method in the world these cards had been so changed that he was able to
tell the denomination of every card by glancing at the back. Of course
the social gambler always asserts that he “plays with gentlemen,”
.bn 036.png
.pn +1
but the easiness of cheating offers a constant temptation on the part of
gentlemen, who are pressed in money matters, to resort to this method of
relieving themselves of their financial embarrassments.
I am convinced, then, that Mr. Quinn’s book will be of the utmost
value among the young people of this country. I am sure that the
gambling habit is doing more to undermine the character of our young
men than any form of vice in which they are likely to fall. The drinking
habit has been measurably controlled. Drunkenness has grown to
be disreputable. But in thousands of respectable, cultivated and virtuous
households, in this land, fathers and mothers are quite unconsciously
educating their boys into that pernicious habit of gambling, which will,
if not arrested, destroy the very roots of commercial life.
.il fn=i_030.jpg w=300px ew=50% align=r alt='John Snyder'
.bn 037.png
.pn +1
.sp 4
.h2 id=pt1
PART I.
.bn 038.png
.bn 039.png
.pn +2
.sp 4
.h3
AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF JOHN PHILIP QUINN.
.sp 2
Early education, family training, and circumstances often apparently
accidental are potent influences in the formation and moulding of character.
Yet not infrequently an event of seemingly little consequence may
overturn the best considered plans for a successful career and alter the
entire tenor of a man’s life. The invisible power “that shapes our ends,”
to-day, lifts one born in a humble station to a pinnacle of fame and
power, while to-morrow, it casts down from his exalted position the man
intoxicated by the fumes of the incense of popular adulation. The Scottish
bard puts this truth in those oft-quoted words:
.pm start_poem
“The best laid schemes of mice and men,
Gang aft aglee.”
.pm end_poem
This aphorism may be significantly applied to the lives of thousands.
It is true of my own career. However upright may have been my intentions
at the outset of life, they were early turned aside through the influence
of my surroundings and of a seemingly inborn propensity for
gambling. After a long and eventful experience, I have turned to a
better life. My past has not been without interest to those with whom I
have been brought in contact. It is here reviewed, not in a spirit of
braggart egotism, but with the earnest hope that it may prove a warning
to many, who are now bent upon a similar journey.
Biography is usually a simple and suggestive record, pointing its own
moral, and treating, as a rule, of the scenes and actions of that everyday
life, of which the subject forms a part. An autobiography should be,
of all others, sincere and candid, and its writer should
.pm start_poem
“Naught extenuate nor aught set down in malice.”
.pm end_poem
To those who may think that the publication of the life of so obscure
an individual as myself, and one, too, who for so many years has been
a social pariah, can be productive of neither interest nor profit, I would
say, that the eye of the fly is in many respects a more interesting study
than that of the eagle, and the light-house of more service to humanity
than the pyramids. A great artist once painted a wonderful picture. Of
one of the faces in that immortal work, it was said, to him: “that countenance
is ugly and revolting.” Thoughtfully gazing upon it, the artist
replied: “There is more of beauty in every human face than I can comprehend.”
.bn 040.png
.pn +1
So, in the life of every human being, there is at once more
of tender charity and vicious selfishness than can be portrayed in words.
If the record of my life shall prove an example to deter even a few
of those who are sporting upon the outer waters of that whirlpool whose
vortex is destruction;—if its recital shall serve to open the eyes of but
one of that vast host who are staking fortune, friendship, family affection,
honor, even life itself, in the vain pursuit of an illusive phantom,
this sketch will not have been written in vain.
I was born on the 19th day of March, 1846, three miles east of
Roanoke, in Randolph County, Mo. My father was a prosperous farmer
and stock raiser. He was a man of sound judgment, indomitable pluck,
tried courage, generous disposition, and staunch integrity, kind and
charitable to his neighbors, and a man whose “word was as good as his
bond.” He was deservedly held in high esteem in the community, which
he represented in the State Legislature during 1861-3. He owned some
twenty slaves at the time of President Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation.
No sooner had it appeared than he called them together, read the
proclamation aloud, and informed them that they were at liberty to go or
stay. A slave trader named John Robertson, who was present, at once
offered fifteen hundred dollars in gold for four of the men, which my
father promptly refused. The trader then offered each of the former
slaves fifty dollars to go with him, but my father peremptorily declared
that a million dollars could not buy one of them unless he or she voluntarily
chose to return to servitude.
My mother was a “gentlewoman” in what has been, to me, the
best sense of that often-abused term. Faithful to all her duties as a wife
and mother, her tender devotion to her children was the controlling
impulse of her life. Her generous self-sacrifice and her all but unlimited
capacity to forgive, none can know so well as the wayward son, who numbers
among his most bitter regrets to-day the recollection of the years of
anxiety and grief which he brought upon that mother’s head and of the
numberless pangs which he caused that mother’s heart.
The only early educational advantages that I enjoyed were those incident
to an irregular attendance upon an ordinary border State, district
school, presided over by a pedagogue whose scholastic attainments were,
directly, in an inverse ratio to his zeal as a disciplinarian, and who seemed
to think that ideas which could not find a lodgment in the head might be
forced to germinate from the back by dint of persistent application of the
rod. As a boy I was mischievous and wayward; a ringleader in all
“scrapes,” and the terror of the orderly. Indeed, my reputation as an
evil doer was so well established, and my name so thoroughly synonomous
with every species of boyish deviltry, that I was often compelled to bear the
blame of escapades which I had not conceived, and in which I bore no part.
.bn 041.png
.pn +1
At the time of which I am speaking, the principal diversions in
country districts in Missouri were horse-racing, card playing and other
amusements to which the element of a wager lent excitement. It was
naturally easy for a restless boy of my temperament and disposition to
contract the habit of gaming for such small sums of money as I could
command, or for other property of trifling value. But the passion of
gambling, above all others, fattens on what it feeds upon, and I soon
began to find my native village too narrow a field for the realization of
my ambition, and the few pennies of my schoolmates too small stakes to
satisfy my desire for acquisition. At the age of fourteen years, accordingly,
I left home without my father’s consent or knowledge, with a
view to enlarging my sphere of operations. I took with me one of his
horses, which might not only serve as a means of transportation, but also
stand me in stead in the unknown world with which I felt myself well
qualified to grapple. My life and habits, even as a child, had been so
erratic, that my absence from home excited no comment; indeed, it
awakened no anxiety, except in the tender breast of my gentle mother.
Upon reaching Kansas, I sold the horse, and entered boldly upon the
execution of my project, to lay the foundation of a colossal fortune,
through the (to me) alluring career of a gambler. Then followed what
might have been expected. Having watched the manipulations of a
three-card monte man, until I had satisfied myself that I could beat him
at his own game, I staked my all and—lost it. My only recourse then
was to apply to my father for relief. He sent me money with which to
return home, and in the same letter informed me of the serious illness of
my sister Laura. Like the prodigal, I returned to find a welcome, but in
time only to receive my sister’s last farewell.
The impression on me created by her death was but fleeting. I soon
recommenced gambling with the boys of the neighborhood, at first playing
poker for pennies, though the “ante” soon increased and the stakes
sometimes amounted to a dollar, which was considered high play for boys
in the country. Of course, I soon learned the slang of professional
gamblers and was otherwise rapidly fitting myself for my subsequent
career of knavery and disgrace.
Among those with whom I associated and played poker at Roanoke
in those days, were Ed. and Dod White, John Pruitt, Whit Tyrell, Tom
Walton, Bill Drinkard, Bob Holley and the Finney boys, all well known
in Randolph County.
About this time occurred an incident which made a lasting impression
upon me and aided in my initiation into the tortuous ways of the
confidence man and cheat. As I was leaving the village one morning for
a squirrel hunt, I fell in with a man who professed to be a billiard player.
He invited me to accompany him to Fayette, where he would—to use his
.bn 042.png
.pn +1
own expression—“throw a man off to me.” I assented with alacrity,
went with him to Fayette, and was there “thrown off” myself for all
that I was worth. The game was played in Charley King’s saloon and
billiard hall, and the man who played it was Sam Majors, afterward a
prominent lawyer and Member of Congress from Missouri.
I spent that night at Fayette, and on reaching home next morning
found that every spring and well on my father’s farm had been poisoned,
and that the entire family were violently ill from drinking coffee prepared
from the contaminated water. This villianous attempt at wholesale
poisoning resulted in the death of my only remaining sister Roma, the
manner of whose taking away, no less than the sad event itself, cast a
pervading gloom over our little family circle. For a time I was deeply
impressed; solemn thoughts of my past and future crowded upon my
brain, and I resolved to abandon my evil course, and to enter upon a new
life. But I was young; my nature was volatile; I was keenly alive to
the fascination of gambling; and even at that early age the habit had
acquired over me a power not easily broken. My surroundings, moreover,
were not of a nature either to promote reflection or encourage
better impulses. That portion of Missouri was at that time over-run by
bush whackers. Assaults and depredations were the rule, while robberies
and murders were of frequent occurrence. Bands of from ten to twenty
armed men were wont, from time to time, to ride through the streets of
Roanoke, and the clatter of horses’ feet, the firing of guns, and the yells
and oaths of demons in human form, converted a peaceful settlement
into a pandemonium.
Among other notorious characters who visited our village, I well
remember one desperate gang, armed to the teeth and flushed with
pillage, who one night alighted at my father’s grocery store for rest and
recreation. Among that band were the James boys, Bill Anderson, the
Younger brothers, and Tom Hunter. The party was quiet, even “gentlemanly,”
as that designation was then applied, inasmuch as they departed
without killing or robbing anyone. They played poker, and I can well
recall the cupidity awakened in my breast at the sight of the roll of bills
which they staked upon the game. The play ran well up into the
thousands, and never before had I seen such piles of money upon a table.
I was much impressed, nor was I able to divest myself of the idea that
money fairly won at cards was honestly earned. And, indeed, as compared
with the outrageous robbery of unoffending, defenceless citizens,
by marauding bands of armed ruffians which I saw constantly going on
about me, gambling seemed an innocent recreation. Over and again, during
those memorable years of the war, have I seen such gangs of desperadoes
forcibly enter my father’s homestead, and with a pistol leveled at
his head demand his cash. My father was determined, resolute and
.bn 043.png
.pn +1
brave, but more than once have I seen him forced to purchase his own
life and the lives of his family by partial submission to these threats.
I recall another incident of my early life, which occurred during the
war, and which is worthy of mention only so far as it may serve to
to what a degree of intensity my passion for gambling had developed.
The battle of Silver Creek, which was a short but spirited engagement,
was fought at night. In the morning I was sent with needed
supplies for the wounded to the Union camp, which was located only
three miles from my father’s store. After distributing the supplies, I
opened a game of poker with a party of soldiers in a store kept by one
Jas. T. Wallace. The appalling sights witnessed in the midst of the dead
and dying were powerless to restrain or curb a passion which was even
then stronger than death.
At the close of the war I felt myself a man and qualified to engage
in business. So at the age of twenty, I went to Keytsville, in Chariton
Co., Mo., and started a hardware store. I found myself unable, however,
to forego the amusement of gaming, nor could I reconcile myself to
the abandonment of my hopes of winning a fortune at the card table; I
therefore combined gambling with business (sadly to the detriment of the
latter), I divided my time between my own store and Dan Kellogg’s
saloon and gambling resort. Among my associates there were such well-known
gamblers as Bill and Tom Binford, Rives Williams, Jube Hurt,
French Blakey, besides many others. I remained at Keytsville for a
year, but failing to make any money by either legitimate or illegitimate
methods, I closed out my business and returned to Roanoke.
Here, in my native village, my next venture was to start a tonsorial
and bathing establishment. I had one bath-tub and one assistant. As I
knew nothing about shaving (except at cards), and one of the rules of the
shop was that when a customer was cut he need pay nothing, I was
glad to confine my operations to transient callers, relegating regular patrons
to the tender mercies of my assistant. As might have been expected,
no profits materialized, and after the business had dragged its miserable
length along for some twelve months, I spontaneously and cheerfully
abandoned it.
My next business move was the formation of a partnership with one
James Bird, familiarly known as “Slim Jim.” The firm was to manufacture
and sell piano dulcimers, for which, at that time, there was a great
and constantly increasing demand throughout that entire section. I
was the senior partner, and furnished the capital; Jim was the practical
man and had the experience; we united the two and the result may be
very briefly told. To facilitate delivery of the goods, I purchased a carriage,
horses and harness. I then went to St. Louis to buy materials to
be used in the manufacture of the instruments. Upon my return, I found
.bn 044.png
.pn +1
that “Slim” (it should have been “Slick”) Jim had been to Sedalia, Mo.,
where he had sold out the horses, carriage, etc., pocketed the proceeds,
and had secured a tolerably fair start on his way to California. I trust
that I may not be regarded as unduly revengeful if I frankly admit that
when, thirteen years later, my quondam partner was arrested by Detective
Henry Hutling while playing three card monte along the line of the
Chicago and Alton Railroad, I hastened to the scene of his misfortune,
and relentlessly made him disgorge by way of settlement, seventy-five
dollars in money, a gold watch and chain and a diamond pin.
In the year 1868, in company with my uncle Tom, my brothers
Sidney and Robert and a man by the name of Keen Viley, I went as far
west as the southern portion of Dakota. For several months we located
ourselves at Benton City, on the North Platte River. Here the mayor of
the “city,” one A. B. Miller, in conjunction with a man named Charles
Storms, conducted what is known in gamblers’ parlance as a “brace”
faro game; that is to say, players could win nothing except at the option
of the proprietor, and the latter lost only such trifling sums as might
serve as an allurement to continued and heavier play. In this establishment
I held the position of “case-keeper;” in other words, I kept the
record of the game. This was my first regular employment in a gambling
house. Life in the territory at that period was primitive in its comforts,
but decidedly exciting in its uncertainty. Our party slept in a
canvas tent, lined with slabs to about the height of three feet as a protection
against the stray bullets, which came, with unpleasant frequency,
from whence no one knew and went none could tell whither. During the
progress of the fusilade, no sleeper in any tent ever thought of raising
his head from his pillow, and the wisdom of lying perfectly still was
abundantly demonstrated by the many bullet holes in the upper part of
the canvas.
From Dakota I again gravitated to Roanoke, where I once more
embarked in business, this time in the custom shoe trade. Being utterly
ignorant of that, or any other business, I employed a shoe-maker who,
after the manner of his kind, made it a point of honor to fill himself with
whiskey every time he lasted a pair of boots. Naturally the business
languished, and I soon sought a more congenial pursuit.
Going to Columbia, Mo., I opened a saloon; not from any desire to
indulge my appetite in this direction, inasmuch as I can truthfully say
that I never drank any intoxicating liquor in my life. My chief aim was
to conduct a gaming establishment, for which the sale of liquor might
serve as a blind. While at Columbia I used to gamble—chiefly at faro
or poker—with the Hume’s boys, of whom there were six or seven with
Dr. Ed. Compton, Sam Reader, James I. Brewitt, the Jacobs boys,
Arthur Charleston, Jesse Forshay, Alex Bradford, Billy Booth, and many
others who have since attained local prominence.
.bn 045.png
.pn +1
Like other young men, I was not unsusceptible to feminine charms,
nor, wicked as I was, was I incapable of appreciating true womanly
worth. I first felt the afflatus of the “divine passion” when I met Miss
Fannie White, a fair maiden of Roanoke. For a time it seemed to me as
though the sun shone only through her eyes. I prosecuted my suit with
all the ardor of a first attachment, but the young lady’s parents promptly
and forcibly interposed. My reputation was notoriously bad and a marriage
between their daughter and myself was, they said, not to be thought
of. Thus the affair was nipped in the bud. For a time I felt the blow
keenly, and bitterly realized the disgraceful position which I occupied as
a suitor rejected for such a cause. Time, however, and a sort of sullen
resentment came to my aid. I succeeded in tearing from my heart the
hopes which I had formed, as an idol is wrenched from its pedestal, and
entered upon the vice of gaming with redoubled vigor.
But a few years later I formed an attachment for a beautiful and captivating
lady, the accomplished daughter of Dr. Wm. C. and Mrs. L. A.
Harvey, who enjoyed a position of social pre-eminence in the community.
Little May Harvey was a girl suited to fill the ideal conception of a
far better man than I. Of attractive form and feature, she was modest,
truthful, and a universal favorite with her acquaintances. That I should
presume to lift my eyes to such a girl was enough to excite the apprehension
of her parents, who at once became most bitter and unyielding
opponents. But, fortunately or unfortunately, I had a powerful advocate
in May’s own heart. In affairs of the heart young people are not always
disposed to brook parental interference. They are apt to regard themselves
as best qualified to judge of what will be for their own happiness,
and to constitute themselves the sole arbiters of their own destiny. My
affection for May was deep and true, and, which is a no less vital point,
it was thoroughly reciprocated. An engagement to May followed as a
matter of course; and, also as a matter of course, there followed an
insistent demand on the part of Dr. and Mrs. Harvey that the engagement
be suddenly and finally broken off. A most plausible excuse was found
in my arrest on an utterly false charge for highway robbery.
The facts connected with this episode in my life may prove not uninteresting
to the reader. A farmer by the name of Jesse B. Hudson, living
about five miles east of Roanoke, had been robbed of a large sum of
money by bush whackers. One of the robbers rode a horse belonging to
John Emery, which he had taken from a hitching post in the town while
Emery was on a spree. The horse was accidentally shot. Owing partly to
the existence of a neighborhood feud, and partly to my bad reputation,
I was arrested as a participant in the crime, and taken to Huntsville for
trial. There I gave bonds in the sum of $3,000 for my appearance when
wanted, two reputable farmers—W. H. Lockridge and Geo. Aulthouse—signing
.bn 046.png
.pn +1
my bond. Among the men suspected of the crime were such notorious
outlaws as the James boys, Quantrell, Anderson, Hunter, Clingman,
Lyons, and others, yet I was the only one arrested. At different times before,
while I was living at home, the bush whackers had aroused me at night
and ordered me to supply them with liquor from my father’s store. This
fact may have given rise to a suspicion that I was a member of the gang,
and may have led to my arrest. Be that as it may, my innocence was
easily established at the trial, and the jury promptly rendered a verdict
of acquittal.
May’s fidelity was unshaken by my arrest, and my vindication was
hailed by her with triumph. Shortly afterwards she was sent as a pupil
to the Convent of the Visitation at St. Louis, and peremptorily forbidden
by her parents to hold any communication with me. Similar instructions
were given to the Mother Superior and her assistants. The sisters
faithfully obeyed Dr. Harvey’s behest. Under these circumstances I had
recourse to strategem. I had followed her to St. Louis, where I had engaged
in gambling with many well-known sporting men of that city.
Calling at the convent I asked for an interview which was refused
by the Mother Superior. I had told the latter that I was from Roanoke,
Miss Harvey’s home. I had expected a refusal and was not unprepared.
Producing a package, I handed it to the convent Cerberus, and brazenly
informed that suspicious individual that I had been commissioned by the
young lady’s parents to convey it to her. The package contained a volume
of Longfellow’s poems and a pair of kid gloves. In one of the fingers
of the gloves was a neatly folded note, written on tissue paper, calling
attention to the fact that a letter was pasted between two of the book’s
pages. The scheme was well laid, as I thought, but failed to work. The
bundle was opened and examined by the Superior; its contents sent to
Mrs. Harvey, and the letter burned. My efforts to hold an interview
with my inamorata upon the streets proved equally fruitless, it not being
permitted to her to take her “daily walks abroad” unless accompanied
by a watchful attendant. Despairing of seeing her alone, I started with a
small party on a gambling tour to the far west, visiting Colorado and
Wyoming. The trip was uneventful, and I returned to Roanoke to find
that May had been at home and had been sent to school at Columbia,
Missouri. Thither I followed her, only to be again denied an interview.
Returning home, I forwarded to her as present from her mother, a box of
fruit. A portion of the core of one of the apples had been extracted, and
its place deftly filled by a letter written on extremely thin paper. No
suspicion was aroused by the receipt of the fruit, which was handed to
Miss Harvey. She examined every apple in the expectation of finding a
letter from me but failed to the right one. While sharing the
fruit with her schoolmates, one of them, in biting an apple, was surprised
.bn 047.png
.pn +1
to find a pin in her mouth; the mystery was solved, and the letter reached
its destination.
In due time I received an answer, full of love and encouragement,
showing that neither absence nor intimidation could conquer her faithful
spirit. To be near her I went to Columbia, where I opened a saloon and
resumed gambling. Every Sunday I was made supremely happy by
seeing her. About this time she received a letter from her mother severely
reprimanding her for encouraging my attentions. Smarting under this
rebuke she impulsively returned all my letters and presents, among which
was the engagement ring. This blow fairly overwhelmed me. To
accomplish what had now become the chief aim of my existence, any and
all means seemed to me justifiable. Accordingly, on the following Sunday
evening I attended the church at which I knew she would be present. At a
favorable moment I sank to the floor in a simulated swoon, and was
carried to the hotel by four men, whither was summoned a physician, who
made me four visits. Probably he suspected the sham, but he kept his
own counsel. The ruse had the effect desired. May’s sympathy was
aroused, a reconciliation followed, my presents and letters were again
accepted, and the engagement ring once more found a place upon her
finger.
To hope for the consent of her parents to our union was, we both
knew, to expect the impossible. We therefore laid our plans for an
elopement. About nine o’clock on the evening of an August day in 1870
we met at the appointed place of rendezvous. I was accompanied by a
friend, Frank Payne, who was to act as witness and best man. May
mounted behind me one of my father’s best saddle horses, and our little
party set forth in quest of some clergyman or justice of the peace to tie
the nuptial knot. After meeting with sundry rebuffs, and riding all
night, we reached Renick, a small town in Randolph county, about
eighteen miles from Roanoke. Here we found an accommodating magistrate
in the person of Esquire Butler. After Payne had sworn that Miss
Harvey was eighteen years old on August 24th, and therefore of lawful
age, the magistrate consented to perform the ceremony. That evening
we returned to the home of my father, who was living alone, my mother
having died on Oct 12, 1865.
Great was the sensation which our marriage created in our little
village, and greater the indignation of my bride’s parents. Dr. Harvey
promptly caused the arrest of Frank Payne for false swearing, and of
Esquire Butler for solemnizing the marriage. The prosecution of Payne
was soon dropped, but the magistrate did not escape so easily, being
sentenced to pay a fine of $300 and to be imprisoned in the county jail for
three months. Both these penalties, however, were soon afterward
remitted.
.bn 048.png
.pn +1
For two years we lived at Roanoke, my wife’s parents refusing to
recognize us even on the streets. At the end of that time we removed to
Moberly, Missouri, where I lived by gaming, finding all avenues of
respectable employment closed against me.
Among those with whom I gambled during this period were Joe
Woods, Si. Beatty, Levi Perkins, James F. Wallace, Bill Robertson, Pat
Carmody, Perry McDaniels, John Guy, Bill Williams, Dave White, and
Judge Worden.
While at Moberly I formed the acquaintance of one Sam Martin, a
jovial, good natured man, who first taught me the use of marked cards.
I found him a congenial companion, and during the eight years from 1873
to 1881 we were partners in gambling. In the latter year Martin’s health
failed and he had recourse to the waters of Hot Springs, where he
died in 1885, at the early age of thirty-five.
Perhaps I may be pardoned for relating here a few incidents of our
life at this time, which may serve to illustrate both Martin’s character and
my own. On one of our gambling expeditions we arrived at Columbia,
Missouri, and went to a hotel kept by Jim Hume. Placing a carpet
satchel upon the counter, Martin blandly demanded the best room in the
house. Being informed that the hostelry was full, he thrust his hand
into his empty vest pocket and offered to settle in advance. This audacious
piece of assurance won the confidence of the clerk, and we were
assigned to the parlor for the night. At the end of a week a bill for $12
was handed to Martin, who excused himself from payment by saying that
he had handed all his money to me, and that he would go and find me.
It was after dark before he came across me and explained the modus
operandi which he had devised. He was to lower the antique satchel
from the window of our room by a string upon receiving a signal from me
that I was below. I assented to the plan, and returning to the hotel, told
the landlord to go out and give the prearranged whistle. This he did,
and down came the string with the satchel attached, which was removed
by Hume and carried into the hotel office. Here it was opened in the
presence of a large crowd of “fakirs” who had been drawn to Columbia
by the fair then in progress. Its contents were found to be as follows:
item, one deck of cards; item, one pair of socks; item, one dirty collar;
item, one rock (for ballast). Sam’s wardrobe was regarded as unique,
but of hardly sufficient value to liquidate his bill. One of the amused
sporting men present proposed taking up a collection for Martin’s benefit.
The proposition was hailed with favor and twelve silver dollars soon
jingled on the counter. The landlord joined in the merriment, and in the
exuberance of his mirth offered to treat the crowd if someone would
fetch Martin to participate in the festivities of the occasion. Sam was
soon found, and a general jollification followed. When asked why he
.bn 049.png
.pn +1
had not paid his bill, he replied, “What for? Why, I could go to St.
Louis and board at the Lindell or Southern by paying for it.”
On the following day we started for St. Louis. On the train Martin
formed the acquaintance of an old gentleman, whom he courteously invited
to dine with him on reaching the refreshment station. The invitation
was accepted. Martin hurried through his meal and politely excused
himself to his companion. At the door he was asked for seventy five
cents; pointing towards the old gentleman, he said: “Father will settle.”
When his traveling acquaintance returned to the car he sought out Sam
and took a seat by his side. “Pretty good dinner for seventy-five cents,”
said Sam. “I should say so,” remarked the old gentleman. “I paid a
dollar and a half for yours and mine, and I want seventy-five cents.” At
this Martin started up in great apparent indignation, and in a loud voice
asked the conductor, “What sort of a man is that who keeps the eating
house? He has collected from both of us for our meal.” Before the
conductor could answer, the old gentleman exclaimed, “I want you to
give me that seventy-five cents that I paid out for your dinner.” Sam said
that he had no small change, but the old man assured him that he could
make change for “any sized bill.” I comprehended the situation and
quietly remarked, “Mr. Martin, this gentleman ought to be paid. I
have not enough money with me to cash your draft, but he should be
paid.” My companion at once perceived his opportunity. Producing
from under the lining of his hat a draft for $500, he said, “Now give me
$499.25 and you are paid.” Thinking that this was an attempt to
“bluff” him, the old gentleman reached down and pulled from his boot
leg a large roll of bills, from which he triumphantly counted out the
“change,” as he called it. Martin gave the conductor $20 to slow up
and we jumped off the train. The draft was, of course, utterly worthless,
but the old man apparently never made any effort to find either Martin
or myself.
At St. Louis we were moderately successful in the prosecution of our
nefarious enterprises, making frequent excursions into the adjacent
country.
Our next objective point was Texas. At Houston, Martin won
nearly $100 from a man by playing with marked cards. The dupe discovered
how he had been victimized and related the circumstances to a friend
giving a description of the man who had won his money. The next
morning a typical Texan called on Martin and said, “I am out making
collections this morning, and have a bill against you for exactly $96.50.”
Without saying a word, Martin opened his wallet, and counting out the
amount demanded, quietly handed it over to the “collector.” As an
argument, a six-shooter is more convincing than rhetoric.
.bn 050.png
.pn +1
During the Centennial year, Martin went east, visiting Philadelphia,
Baltimore and Washington. When he said good bye to me at St. Louis,
he said that he was going to wear either diamonds or shackles. A few
weeks later he wrote that it was shackles; he had been in jail three
days.
In September, 1876, I went to Philadelphia myself, to join Martin.
On arriving at his hotel I found that he was temporarily absent in Baltimore.
The second night after reaching Philadelphia I was invited by the
hotel clerk to take a hand in a game of poker. I found the cards were
marked, but as the marks were very familiar I said nothing, I found the
game exceedingly interesting and rose from the table a winner by $300.
I telegraphed Sam to return to Philadelphia at once, which he did. On
opening his valise, which he had left at his hotel in Philadelphia, he
found some of his cards missing. That afternoon the clerk of the house
came to him and apologized for taking a few decks of cards from his
valise, they being convenient for use. “That is all right,” said Sam
Martin; “you are at liberty to help yourself to them at any time, provided
my friend and myself can play in the game. I only carry them
with me because they are the Hart brand of cards and are “square.”
They are a protection to me when I play for a little amusement. They
won’t cheat me.”
Of course, every pack which he had was marked, and had laid the
foundation of a great financial success. None but his celebrated “Hart”
cards were used in the games at that hotel afterwards, and in less than
three weeks we had won at poker something over $3,000.
While in Philadelphia I formed the acquaintance of a man named
Anderson, who confided to me his troubles. He told me that he had
resided in the coal regions of Pennsylvania, where he had been involved
in a terrible fight, and that he was afraid to return. He offered me $100
if I would go down into that section and bring his family to Baltimore.
This I did, and in the evening of our arrival in the Maryland metropolis,
while Anderson and I were walking about the city together, we were
both arrested and locked up. The next morning a gentleman from the
place where my new acquaintances resided came to the jail and identified
Anderson as the man who had recently fled from that town with $3,000 of
his money. Of course, I was discharged. The gentleman from Pennsylvania
was profuse in his expressions of regret at my arrest, paid my
hotel bill, and gave me twenty dollars. I did not enjoy the experience,
however, and as the poker games at the Philadelphia hotel showed decided
symptoms of coming to an end, I determined to return to St. Louis.
But to revert to my life at Moberly. In 1874, feeling dissatisfied, I
made a trip to Hot Springs, where I passed a few months, but found little
opportunity of making money in the only way which I understood.
.bn 051.png
.pn +1
Accordingly, in the autumn of that year I went to reside at St. Louis.
There I was joined by my wife. Many times had I resolved to quit gambling,
but as often had my determination failed. The sight of my wife’s
sweet, patient face when I met her at St. Louis rekindled my desire to
reform and pursue some honorable vocation. The thought that I had
brought her to the shame of being a gambler’s wife was bitter. But I
overcame these reflections by arguing with myself after the manner
of those gamesters whose desire to reform is half hearted, being
founded on impulse rather than on principle. I had tried several
kinds of legitimate business and failed in each. Who would trust me in
any honest employment? How was I to provide for my wife, to say
nothing of myself? To these questions I could formulate no answer, and
hence it was that during the six years of my residence in St. Louis I
played at any and every game that promised to pay me money. In order
to preserve a semblance of respectability at home, I rarely gambled in
the city. Excursion boats, country towns, and county fairs formed the
theater of my gaming. That description of games known to professionals
as “brace” comprised those in which I engaged. My pursuits included
the use of marked cards, “squeeze spindles,” roulette, monte tricks, and
“bunko steering” for “brace” faro banks. When I could not win the
entire stake for myself, I was content to accept a percentage. Thus I
lived until April 29, 1880.
On the date last mentioned I was residing with my wife on an upper
floor at No. 1517 North Eighth Street. At about eleven o’clock in the
forenoon, as my wife was starting from home to carry aid to a former
servant who was at that time sick and destitute, her foot became entangled
in her clothing as she reached the head of the stairs and she fell headlong
to the foot of the flight. She was at once carried to her room and
placed upon her bed. Her eyes opened, and during a single moment of
consciousness she placed both hands upon her head and exclaimed,
“Where is John? O, mother! mother! you won’t forgive—you break
my heart!” She then added, “take down my hair; I am dying.” Respiration
ceased, and the loving, faithful heart that had for so many
years beat only for me was at rest.
That morning, her mother was returning from a three days’ visit at
St. Louis to her home in Roanoke; her father had just reached the
National Stock Yards at East St. Louis with two car loads of live stock;
and I was at Cote Brilliante Park, in training for a foot race with
“Hank” Wider, and Jim Bensley for a purse of $10,000. I was not
apprised of the great calamity which had befallen me until my return to
my desolate home that evening. I will not attempt to depict the emotions
of remorse, anguish, almost despair, which struggled for mastery in my
heart. There are sorrows too deep for tears and griefs too sacred to be
revealed.
.bn 052.png
.pn +1
I at once notified Dr. and Mrs. Harvey of the death of the daughter,
whose last, agonized cry had been for a mother’s forgiveness. My
preparations for the funeral completed, the form that had been so dear in
life and was so sacred to me, in its sleep of death was carried to Roanoke
and reverently laid to rest in the family burying ground. Revs. Talbot
and Johnson conducted the last sad religious rites.
The night following the funeral I passed under Dr. Harvey’s roof,
and for the first time in my life, was kindly entertained by my wife’s
parents. Soon after leaving the village, I arranged for the erection of a
suitable monument to mark the last resting place of my loved one.
The foot race for which I was in training at the time of my wife’s
death had been declared off, out of respect for my bereavement, and when
I returned to St. Louis I was without anything to engross my thoughts.
Then how many good resolutions did I form to abandon the vice, which
in the mood of repentance induced by my wife’s death, had grown not
only distasteful but actually abhorrent to me. I saw the degradation into
which I had fallen, and I resolved to make another effort to raise myself
from the slough into which I had sunk.
After remaining in St. Louis for about six months, in the fall of
1880 I went to Little Rock, Arkansas, where I stumbled across the Mabel
Norton theatrical troupe, then under the management of John Hogan.
The combination had become financially stranded, and I advanced the
necessary funds, taking the position of treasurer. After visiting the
principal towns in the valley of the Arkansas river, we went to Eureka,
where I severed my connection with the company and returned to my
evil courses, opening several gambling houses. Here I formed the acquaintance
of a number of persons who I initiated into the mysteries
of “brace” games with a view to their becoming of assistance to me in
the pursuit of my nefarious calling.
While I was at the last mentioned resort I wrote to Mrs. Harvey,
recommending the waters for the use of her invalid daughter. Mother
and daughter both visited the springs, and while there treated me with
kindness and even cordiality. Their visit constituted the second occasion
on which I was allowed to associate with any of the family except my
wife. I felt that I was never justly entitled to their consideration, yet
they always demanded my esteem, if not my affection.
I remained at Eureka Springs for seven months, encountering varying
fortunes, when I again returned to my old home in Roanoke.
In the early fall of 1881, I received a despatch from Jem Sanford, a
professional gambler, to come to Chicago. The dispatch conveyed a
proposition to “take in” the fairs then being held in the surrounding
country. The proposal I readily accepted, and going to Chicago I united
my fortunes with the redoubtable Jem. Together we visited many county
.bn 053.png
.pn +1
fairs in the states of Indiana, Illinois and Missouri. Our outfit consisted
of marked cards, dice, spindles, a hap-hazard, and other devices to
defraud the unwary. Considered solely from a money making standpoint
our jaunt was a successful one. No games involving large stakes
were played, but we reaped a constant harvest of small sums from the ignorance
and stupidity of the country people.
At Marion, Indiana, however, while I was running a game of “hap-hazard”
on the fair ground, the game was discovered to be “skin.” I
was arrested, tried, and fined $25. I paid the fine and left the place
without delay.
At the end of the fair season we returned to St. Louis. I had determined
to locate in Chicago and thither I went later in the autumn. There
I became a member of the commission firm of Stockton, Young & Co.,
who referred by permission to Wm. Young & Co., then the leading general
commission house of that city. I found operating on change different
from running a “squeeze spindle,” but the “squeezing” was effectually
accomplished in both cases. In the spring of 1882 the composition and
title of the firm was changed; Ben Demint was admitted to membership,
and the firm name became Stockton, Quinn & Co.
While a member of the firm, I was causelessly arrested for defrauding
a Mrs. Morgan out of $700. By way of defence I produced her receipt,
and was thereupon honorably discharged.
One day, while business was dull, Demint and I were chatting in
our office, when one of us (probably myself) proposed, in a spirit of deviltry,
to advertise for a wife. The suggestion was adopted, and the day
following the insertion of the advertisement we received fifty-six replies.
At the end of a week we had received answers from points as far distant
as New York and later from California and New Orleans. From the beginning
I regarded the whole project as a mere matter of passing sport.
Little did I think how potent an influence it was destined to exert over
my future life.
Among my correspondents was a handsome, petite Jewess, named
Lily Boas, whose acquaintance I formed, and by whom I was captivated at
once. On July 3, 1882, we went together to Milwaukee, where we were
married. My former experience in the matter of securing parental consent
had not been of a sort to encourage me to ask for it in this instance,
and as my fiance was content without it, we agreed to regard it as a needless
formality.
I was determined that my second wife should not be subjected to the
humiliating circumstances which had embittered the life of May. I determined
to abjure gambling then and forever. To remove myself from
the temptation, I determined to withdraw from business in Chicago, and
once more to take up my residence on my father’s farm. The monotony
.bn 054.png
.pn +1
and ceaseless toil of a farmer’s life were irksome to me, but I hoped to
find in them a refuge from my overweaning passion. Better the dullness
of a plodding routine than the fitful excitement of a gambler’s checkered
life; better an aching body than a ruined soul.
For a year I led a rural life, and in September, 1883, I removed to
St. Louis. There I found employment with McDonald’s Detective Agency,
whose proprietors I faithfully served for two years, retaining their confidence
at the termination of our relations. While with this concern, I
returned to my former pursuits, running games at fairs, picnics, etc., and
on excursion boats.
While living in St. Louis at this time, I became involved in two or
three transactions which brought me into some unpleasant notoriety. The
first was in connection with the sale of a saloon, known as the “White
Elephant,” on 6th Street, near Chestnut. I had an interest in this place,
jointly, with a man named Henry W. Huthsing. Huthsing sold out the
business to one Fred. Beckerer, of East St. Louis, for $1,900. Payment
was made in nineteen $100 four per cent. U. S. bonds, and my partner,
finding that the premiums and accrued interest amounted to $375 gave
Beckerer his check for that sum, greatly to the latter’s surprise. Becoming
dissatisfied with his bargain, the purchaser set up the claim that the
bottles and barrels in the place were chiefly filled with water, a statement
which was utterly untrue. He brought suit against us and caused our
arrest. Our experience before trial was not of a character seriously to
impress us with respect either for the administration of justice or for the
integrity of some of the legal luminaries of the St. Louis bar. We gave
bonds in $1,000 each, signed by Henry W. Godfrey, an old-time gambler
and well-known in the courts of that city. We retained as counsel ex-judge
Wm. Jones and C. R. Taylor, paying them retainers of $50 and
$100 respectively. When the case was first called, Jones demanded $50
additional, having ascertained that Taylor had received $100. The demand
was accompanied with a threat of withdrawing from the defense
and allying himself with the prosecution, and we complied with his
request. The case was continued, and soon afterward we gave Godfrey
$300 upon his representation that the prosecuting attorney, R. S. McDonald,
had agreed to dismiss the suit. What became of the money I
cannot tell, but Godfrey repeatedly told us that he had given McDonald
$250, and we supposed that the matter was settled. Several months later
we were surprised to learn that the case was about to be called again.
Huthsing was obliged to give Judge Jones his note for $100 to appear and
defend. The day before that set for the trial Jones wrote to Mrs. Huthsing
that the note must be paid at once or he would refuse to appear. The
money was not paid and we were accordingly deprived of the valuable
services of the “Hon.” (?) Judge Jones. I gave another attorney,
.bn 055.png
.pn +1
Col. Nat. Claibourn $10 to move for a continuance, which was
granted, and subsequently retained ex-Governor Charles P. Johnson, as
our attorney. The case was called on January 16, 1887, and at the
request of my counsel, I was granted a separate trial. At the suggestion
of Gov. Johnson, the evidence was submitted without argument to the
jury, who re-entered the court room in exactly nineteen minutes with a
verdict of acquittal. The case against Huthsing was then dismissed.
Thus the “White Elephant” was disposed of and the cheerful prophecy
of the St. Louis Globe-Democrat came to naught; that paper had said
before the trial, “the way things look, it appears that softly the cuckoo
is calling for Quinn to come up the road.”
Another unpleasant experience of mine while sojourning in St. Louis
was in connection with the Van Hennessey-Wolff “gold brick” swindling
case in 1885, in which one U. S. Wolff, of Madison, Indiana, was
defrauded of $5,000. The victim offered a reward for the apprehension
of the man who had defrauded him. The matter received wide publication
and attracted general attention. A detective named Page, came
to St. Louis with the papers necessary to secure the extradition of Van
Hennessey.
I knew Van Hennessey only too well, and had no reason to regard
him with affection. I had advanced to him some $1,200 to embark in
the business of running a Wild West show, no part of which sum had
been returned, and he had given me a note for $700, which I yet
hold. I had pawned my own watch and chain and my wife’s
diamond ear drops to obtain the money. The stock was to have
been mine, but I discovered too late that Van Hennessey and his brother
John had mortgaged it for its full value. While my child was ill I
asked John Hennessey for money with which to buy medicine, and was
refused, although I knew that he had several hundred dollars in his
pocket at the time. When the Indiana detective appeared upon the
scene I thought my time had come. I accordingly proposed to point out
his game, knowing that the man he wanted was in Tennessee. The
result was an arrangement that Page (the detective), one Backenstoe, and
my brother should proceed to Tennessee, where they should collect
my note and then allow Hennessey to go. The amount to be collected
was to be divided equally between Page and myself, after Backenstoe
had been reimbursed for the money he was to advance for expenses.
In the meantime, a wealthy man of Nashville, Tennessee, by the
name of Oscar F. Noel, had been swindled out of $6,000 by the gold
brick scheme, and when they arrived in Tennessee they found that Hennessey
was then engaged in a similar enterprise to defraud a man from Marietta,
Georgia. They soon found their man, whom my brother captured at
the point of a pistol. On their return trip they stopped at Nashville, where
.bn 056.png
.pn +1
Hennessey said that he could raise the $700. They placed him under the
care of my brother, and Page went out for a little while on “business.”
About ten o’clock that evening the latter returned with an officer, representing
the authorities of Nashville, to whom he turned over Hennessey, on
the charge of swindling Noel, receiving for his services in that connection,
it was said, the sum of $1,150. The Indiana requisition was returned and
Hennessey was tried, convicted, and sentenced to the Tennessee penitentiary
for a term of five years. After serving two years in prison Hennessey
was pardoned. He was brought to St. Louis a hopeless consumptive, and
died in a few days. The next result of the expedition was that Backenstoe
was “out” the money advanced for expenses. I found the amount of my
note to be a permanent investment, and my brother was obliged to pawn
his pistol to obtain money with which to get home. The detective, after
the manner of many of his class, “sold out” not only us, but his state as
well, and was probably well satisfied with himself.
This was the era when the gold brick swindlers were reaping a rich
harvest, and I was induced, through cupidity and vicious propensities, to
embark in that line of operations myself. I soon got into trouble.
In September, 1886, in company with a party known as “Doc”
Kerns, I was arrested at St. Louis, charged with attempting to sell
a bogus brick to one Bob Basket, of Howard County, Missouri.
While we were held in jail a Jew named Levi Stortz, a small manufacturer
of jewelry, came to the Four Courts and identified me as one
of the men from whom he had bought one of these fraudulent articles. A
formal charge was thereupon made me, and Kerns was liberated.
I was released on $1,500 bail, John Vittie becoming my surety. Ex-Governor
Johnson being absent from the city, John I. Martin was employed
as my attorney on the strength of his representations that he “could
influence” the judges. Stortz had sworn that he paid $3,700 for the bogus
brick on July 15. Mr. Martin and I went together to St. Paul, Minnesota,
where we obtained depositions from the proprietor of a hotel where I had
stopped, and from the cashier of the city water works, and several other
business men to the effect that I was in that city on July 12th, and for
two weeks thereafter.
Several months after my arrest, two men, named Frank Aldrich and
“Billy” Adkins called on me, and the former told me that he had been
the cause of my arrest. He said that he had induced Stortz to make the
charge because he had understood that I was endeavoring to have him
sent to the penitentiary. He added that he had offered $100 to a grocer
on Jefferson Avenue to go to the jail and identify me as the swindler who
had tried to defraud him in a similar way. The latter part of this story
was corroborated by Adkins, who said that he had been present at the
time. Aldrich also stated that he had endeavored to retain Governor
.bn 057.png
.pn +1
Johnson to assist in my prosecution, but that the latter had refused to
entertain the proposition. He went on to express his deep regret for all
this, saying that he wished to “bury the hatchet,” and as an earnest of
his desire to make atonement he handed me two ten dollar bills. Before
going to St. Paul I had myself retained Governor Johnson as counsel and
he forwarded a letter from Aldrich sent in his care, offering to establish an
alibi for me by swearing that I was with him in Chicago at the time
named by Stortz. This offer was indignantly rejected. All the facts
were brought to the notice of the prosecuting attorney, and as a result
the case was dropped.
I now come to the recital of the gloomiest chapter in my life’s history,
a chapter of legalized intimidation, of perjury and the subornation
of perjury, and of gross and wanton outrage upon personal liberty committed
in the name of justice and under the forms of law. I refer to my
arrest, trial and incarceration in the Southern Penitentiary of Indiana for
a crime of which I was as innocent as any of my readers and the perpetrators
of which, were to me entirely unknown. On August 7, 1887,
accompanied by “Doc” Kerns and John Forbes, I left St. Louis by way
of Terre Haute, at which place our party stopped for a few days. While
eating supper at a restaurant, two strangers, who afterwards proved to
be detectives, entered and accosted Kerns, who soon called me forward
and introduced me. These men, whose names were Vandeveer and Murphy,
placed us under arrest and took us to police headquarters, whither Forbes
was soon brought by Vandeveer and Chief Lawler.
Some two months before this a farmer by the name of Zach Deputy,
living near North Vernon, Ind., had been victimized by three confidence
men to the tune of $3,000, and it was this offense which was laid at our
door.
Upon our arrival at headquarters, an effort was made to extort
money from us under the guise of “a compromise.” Had we been
actually guilty, this would, of course, have been an attempt to compound
a felony, but for that, these zealous officials, who had been sworn to
enforce the law whose majesty they so flagrantly violated, cared
The proposition was declined, and we were searched, when it was disclosed
that our entire cash assets aggregated $8.65.
After we had been placed in jail, we were visited by an alleged lawyer
calling himself Thomas Harper, who was permitted to interview us
by the grace of the police authorities. He wanted $100 for services which
he offered to render in the capacity of attorney. We declined his proposal
and he indignantly spurned our suggestion that $10 were probably all
that his services were worth. On the following Sunday Vandeveer called
on us, but we refused to recognize him, and on Monday morning the
authorities telegraphed to Webb Benton, a North Vernon detective that
.bn 058.png
.pn +1
they were holding the men who had fleeced Deputy. On receiving the
telegram Benton took with him a livery stable keeper named Burge and
started to convey the tidings to the old farmer. He had previously offered
a reward of $200 for the arrest of the guilty parties, and was easily persuaded
to enter into a written contract to pay the sum of $300 if Benton
and Burge would point out to him the men who had robbed him. This
having been done, the trio went to Terre Haute, and the three prisoners
were brought before Deputy for identification. After he had looked us
thoroughly over, Benton asked him if he recognized us. The old man
shook his head, but pointing to Kerns said: “That man looks some like
one of them, but he is too small.” Thereupon Chief Lawler and Vandeveer
sent for Kerns and advised him to settle the matter by paying
$1,500. “Doc” replied that he had nothing to settle. Then the officers
suggested $1,000, but Kerns still proved obdurate. In order to secure
the $200 reward it was absolutely necessary that Deputy should identify
us as the men who had swindled him. To induce him to do this, Lawler
and Vandeveer told him that we had just robbed a country bank of $6,000,
and that if he would swear that we were the right parties, we would
gladly settle with him. This line of argument overcame his scruples and
he at once swore out warrants for us. It is, perhaps, unnecessary to add
that the $200 reward was promptly demanded and eventually paid.
The next day (Tuesday) we were arraigned for the preliminary
examination, Tom Harper, the alleged lawyer aforementioned, who had
indignantly shaken the dust of our cells off of his feet a few days before,
now appeared in the role of our attorney and asked for a continuance.
We promptly repudiated him, and Forbes told the court that we would
waive examination. Accordingly we were remanded to jail, and the next
day were taken to Brownstown, the county seat of the county in which
the crime had been committed. It was a slight mitigation of our condition
to be placed in the custody of Sheriff Wicks, whose kindness was in
delightful contrast to the blackmailing tactics of the police officials of
Terre Haute. Thomas Harper, Esq., who had so magnanimously volunteered
to ask for a continuance which we did not wish, easily obtained
possession of the watches taken from Kerns and Forbes by the police, and
retained them, alleging that he had a lien of $200 upon them for his professional
(?) services. They were subsequently redeemed by Al. Burkey,
of St. Louis, who paid that amount to the over-zealous practitioner, when
the watches were sent C. O. D.
At Brownstown we retained Lon Brenneman, a lawyer of some local
reputation. The next morning we telegraphed to Lieut. Governor Smith,
of North Vernon, who came to us at once, and agreed to appear in our
behalf. The Friday following, we had a preliminary hearing before a
justice of the peace. At that examination Deputy, under oath, identified
.bn 059.png
.pn +1
Kerns, because he was “bald-headed,” although he admitted that he was
smaller in stature and lighter in build than at the time when he alleged
that he committed the crime. He explained this discrepancy by swearing
that he believed the prisoner’s clothes were stuffed when he first saw
him, and added that on that occasion Kerns wore false whiskers. On
cross-examination the witness admitted having been instructed by Lawler
and Vandeveer to identify us as the men who had robbed him, because he
would thus recover his money and also admitted the making of the contract
with Burton and Burge. On this evidence we were held for trial on
September 12, in bonds of $3,000 each.
Gov. Smith, our counsel, strongly urged us to retain Jason B. Brown,
Esq., to which suggestion we assented. He himself went to Kansas
City and St. Joseph, Mo., to obtain depositions in our behalf. These
were secured from reputable citizens of those cities, and established the
fact that we were not in the state of Indiana at the time Deputy swore
that we had defrauded him.
The trial came off on the day appointed. Our consciousness of innocence
made us confident, and we asked for no delay. Deputy repeated
his story as told at the preliminary hearing, adding this time that when
he first saw us we all wore false whiskers and wigs and all had our clothes
stuffed out until we must have resembled a group of veritable Daniel Lamberts.
He not only made the same damaging admissions as before on
cross-examination, but also acknowledged that he had agreed to pay the
prosecuting attorney $500 in the event of our conviction, or 25 per cent.
of any money that we might pay by way of compromise.
Burge, the North Vernon liveryman, from whom the three swindlers
had hired rigs, swore that we looked like the precious trio. He also testified
to the fact that a gray horse was attached to one of the buggies. In
this latter statement he was corroborated by all the witnesses but one,
who, however, was positive in his identification of us. Others swore to
having seen us in the neighborhood about the time of the robbery. This
constituted the case for the state.
For the defence, were read the depositions taken in Missouri, which
have been already referred to as establishing an alibi on the part of Kerns,
and in addition witnesses were introduced in behalf of Forbes and myself,
who swore positively that we were both at St. Joseph, Missouri, on the
day when the complaining witness was defrauded. Among these were
Harry Trimble, now the clerk of Judge Baker’s court in Chicago, and
James Whitten, a responsible real estate owner of St. Joseph, both of
whom were well acquainted with me. It is worthy of remark that Mr.
Trimble was immediately arrested on the charge of perjury after giving
his testimony, but it is needless to add that he was never tried.
.bn 060.png
.pn +1
In addition, a number of prominent citizens of North Vernon who
had seen and remembered the men who had swindled Deputy were positive
that we were not the parties. Among these was a Mr. Curtis, a
wealthy stock man and the marshal of the town; another was a responsible
merchant, and yet another Mr. Douglas Snodgrass, proprietor of the
Snodgrass House at North Vernon, where the swindlers had stopped on
the day of the perpetration of the crime, and where one of them had
stayed for a week previously. The latter was by his wife,
mother and three sisters.
After being repeatedly urged by me, my counsel, Honorable Jason
B. Brown, called for the production of the contract between Deputy and
the prosecuting attorney, in which demand he was sustained by the court.
The attorney, Douglas Long, rising with flushed face and hang-dog air
admitted the existence of the contract but stated that it was not in his
power to produce it. This satisfied the court and the matter was not
pressed.
While the trial was in progress, I observed in the court room the
presence of a man whose name and residence were subsequently learned.
He was one Higgins, and he came from Detroit. It was also afterwards
ascertained that he had attended in the interest of Charles Stewart, Ed.
Rice and “Punch” Mason, the actual robbers. He appeared nervous
and deeply interested, and before the proceedings were over left the town,
ostensibly for Detroit, saying that he was going for the purpose of raising
money to clear the three innocent men then on trial. Although he did
not return, this incident furnished a clue to the guilty parties and their
whereabouts. After the rendition of the verdict, I laid these facts before
Sheriff Byrnes and warrants were obtained for the arrest of the parties
named.
Our trial consumed five days, and during its entire progress popular
sentiment against us ran very high. In the streets of Brownstown, the
demonstrations were almost riotous. Bonfires were lighted in the evening
and threats of violence were freely and openly made. The jurymen were
undoubtedly aware of these facts and were probably not uninfluenced by
them. We were informed that no man charged with crime, however innocent
he might be, could be acquitted in Brownstown “unless he brought
his jury with him,” and were asked to advance thirty-five dollars to be
used in “convincing” seven of the jurors.
After the evidence was all in, my counsel, Col. Brown, addressed
the jury in stentorian tones. His plea was alleged to be in our behalf,
but at its close I found it necessary to ask him on which side of the
case he had been speaking. The prosecuting attorney demanded a conviction
(in which he was ably seconded by the howling mob outside),
the jury, and the twelve “good men and true” withdrew from the courtroom,
.bn 061.png
.pn +1
ostensibly to weigh the evidence, but in reality to formulate a predetermined
verdict of guilty. Their foreman announced their conclusion
(?) upon their return, and the farce was over. For some unexplained
reason Col. Brown had retired from the room, during the absence of the
jury, and it devolved upon Lieut. Gov. Smith to make the stereotyped
motion for a new trial, which was promptly over-ruled.
The verdict fell with crushing effect upon my wife, who had been at
Brownstown throughout the trial, and whose natural grief at the conviction
of a husband whom she knew to be innocent, was rendered more
poignant by the reflection that she and her only child would be now
thrown upon the “cold mercy of an unfeeling world.”
I made a personal appeal to the presiding judges to defer sentence,
urging that I would be able to introduce additional and stronger proof of
my innocence, and in all probability to trace the parties really guilty.
My prayer was of no avail, and we were then and there sentenced to three
years’ imprisonment in the penitentiary at Jeffersonville. I forbear to
comment upon what I feel satisfied the reader will agree with me in regard
to the indecent haste of these proceedings.
That night we passed in the county jail, which was doubly guarded,
with a view to our protection against the angry, yelling crowd outside,
which surged backward and forward through the streets, rending the air
with demoniac shouts and clamoring for our execution by the light of the
great bonfire, whose livid flames danced fitfully upon the walls of our
prison. The next morning, in charge of Sheriff P. T. Byrnes, one of
nature’s nobleman, we started for Jeffersonville. We were permitted to
stop at the Snodgrass House, to say good bye to the family who, at the
risk of their own popularity and that of their hostelry had so zealously
yet fruitlessly identified themselves with our cause. They had
words for us in that hour of our and distress, and their generous
sympathy stirred us as nothing yet—not even the murderous mob,
thirsting for our blood—had stirred us; we broke down and wept. At
Seymour the train was boarded by that orator, that eminent
jurist, that advocate without a peer, the great, the only Col. Jason B.
Brown. Words of honeyed cheer fell from his lips like rain, but alas,
they were not as “water to a thirsty land.” We had lost faith in the
redoubtable Colonel, and his assurance that he would “have us out of
prison in a week” fell upon our ears like the hollow echo of a mocking
laugh.
Arriving at the penitentiary, we went through the customary routine.
The necessary descriptions were entered, the formal minute of our conviction,
the county from which received, the crime charged, length of sentence,
etc., etc., was made. We were given the regulation bath, duly
shaved by the convict barber, and then we donned the stripes, that badge
.bn 062.png
.pn +1
of infamy which burns into the soul as the branding iron into the quivering
flesh. We were assigned to labor in the shoe-shop.
I feel that it would be folly for me to hope to convey to the reader
who has never tasted of the bitterness of prison life even a faint idea of the
feelings of him who for the first time enters the gloomy gates of a penitentiary
to do the State involuntary service as a felon. The overwhelming
sense of shame, the sickening feeling of isolation from all that makes life
sweet, the bitter memories of the past that crowd, like a horde of mocking
demons, upon the brain—all these might well plunge into an agony
of despairing grief, a stouter heart than mine. Nor is the unvarying
routine of prison life calculated to draw a man from that self-contemplation
which is at once the most tiresome and the most dangerous of all mental
exercises. I shall never be able to recall without a shudder those
wearisome days of bootless toil, rendered all the more unbearable by the
alternation of those dark nights of loneliness;—nights whose bleak
shadows were deepened rather than dispelled by memories of home, of
wife and child, and of all that the heart holds dear. It is out of the utter
agony of such a life that the helpless soul turns to its Creator as its sole
remaining refuge, or in the bitterness of its torment curses even Him who
made it.
After Sheriff Byrnes had safely landed us in the penitentiary, he
proceeded to with the warrants for the arrest of Stewart,
Rice and Mason, for the purpose of securing requisitions for their surrender.
I had had a surfeit not only of Indiana justice but of Indiana lawyers
as well. I therefore wrote to St. Louis and retained the services of
Ex-Gov. Johnson. He came to the prison and learned from me all the
facts of the case. Forthwith he set about securing the extradition of the
guilty parties from Canada, whither they had fled.[A]
.fm rend=th
.fn A
In her anxiety to secure the release of her husband, Mrs. Kerns went to Detroit to see Higgins.
Stewart was there in Windsor, Can., where Mrs. Kerns and Higgins found him. He politely handed
her twenty dollars and told her to return home as “as every one must skin his own eel.” That was the
only satisfaction she obtained.
.fn-
.fm rend=th
It will not be out of place here to recount the heroic and magnanimous
(?) zeal which Col. Jason B. Brown displayed in our behalf in due
time. Some three weeks after our incarceration he made his appearance
at the penitentiary and requested an interview with us. He did not leave
us long in ignorance as to the object of his visit. He told us that old
Deputy had been in debt to the amount of about $6,000 before that
unlucky day, when, at one fell swoop, he lost both his $3,000 and his
confidence in mankind. “If,” said the Colonel, “Mr. Deputy’s debt
could be squared up, I could arrange to have you pardoned in about ten
days.” This generous proposal being “declined with thanks,” he suggested
$3,000, and later $2,000 as a sum the payment of which might at
.bn 063.png
.pn +1
once convincingly prove our penitence and measurably solace Mr. Deputy
under his existing weight of misfortune. Finding his mission fruitless
he left us, but subsequently opened a correspondence, in the course of
which he offered to accept $1,000, which sum he gradually reduced to
$300, as the price which we were to pay in consideration of being pardoned
for an offense which we had never committed. These letters, of course,
were read by Mr. James Patton, the warden of the prison, who advised
us to have nothing to do with Col. Brown, inasmuch as he was quite as
likely to oppose our pardon as to champion it.
Meanwhile, requisition papers had been obtained from the Governor
and sent to Detroit by Sheriff Byrnes. The Detroit authorities showed
great vigilance. A watch was placed upon the houses in that city where
the families of the guilty parties resided, as well as upon their accustomed
haunts. The result was that one night in November, 1887, Stewart and
Rice were arrested at their homes and Mason at a gambling hell.
Although a messenger was despatched to Rice to warn him of the impending
danger, the police were on the alert, and he was brought to headquarters
within a few hours after his confederates. Sheriff Byrnes was
notified and went to Detroit at once. For five weeks the rascals fought
extradition in the courts, and the sheriff was offered $1,000 to drop the
prosecution, an offer which he indignantly spurned.
While in jail, the prisoners were photographed. Rice was obstinate
and had to be held during the operation, in consequence of which the
picture obtained showed him with closed eyes and open mouth. Poor as
the likeness was, however, it was recognized by no less than ten persons
as that of the man who had stopped at the Snodgrass House in North
Vernon on the day when Deputy had been victimized. The other two
were easily identified, and Stewart was recognized as the man who had
boarded at that hotel for a week preceding the crime. When the Detroit
court finally directed the surrender of the prisoners to the Indiana authorities,
there ensued an attempt to rescue them by force, but the officers succeeded
in placing them in a wagon in which they were driven to the Indiana
State line. Albert Boebritz, a detective, and James J. Houston, a deputy
sheriff, both of Detroit, accompanied the party to Brownstown.
The best legal talent of the State, including such eminent advocates
as United States Senator Dan Voorhees and John Lamb, of Terre Haute,
were engaged for the defense. The trial was had in January, 1888. The
accused were positively identified by twenty-three reputable witnesses,
among them all the members of the Snodgrass family. The fact of their
driving out of town on the morning of the day of the robbery with two
of Burge’s teams, was also established, and a liveryman from Kentucky
testified to their having hired a rig from him.
.bn 064.png
.pn +1
It grieves me to say that the aged Deputy and Colonel Jason B. Brown
did not appear in a favorable light in connection with the investigation.
Relying upon the assurance that the nature of his evidence should be
kept secret, the old farmer went before the grand jury and identified the
men then accused, virtually admitting that he had lied while giving his
testimony at our trial. It was also learned afterwards that the unsophisticated
old man, under the tutelage of the astute Col. Jason B. Brown,
had received from Stewart and company $1,000 not to appear as a witness
against them at the trial, and had been promised the remaining $2,000
of his loss immediately upon their acquittal. Kerns, Forbes and myself
were brought from the penitentiary to testify that we were not within the
State at the time the crime was committed. Upon our parole to accompany
the officers quietly and make no attempt to escape, we were permitted to
go without hand-cuffs in custody of Deputy Warden Barnes and Mr.
Lemons, one of the guards. At Brownstown we were kindly treated,
occupying a private room in the sheriff’s house.
After the case of Stewart, Rice and Mason had been submitted to the
jury and that body had deliberated for thirty-six hours, a ballot showed
eleven for conviction and one for acquittal. Finally the jury returned,
announcing that an agreement was impossible and they were discharged.
It was understood that the final vote was nine to three in favor of conviction.
Sheriff Byrnes had predicted a disagreement from the first. He
had himself been offered $500 if he could induce the court to reduce the
prisoners’ bonds to $1,000 each, and afterward said that he had learned
that Philip Davis, one of the jurors, had been promised $300 and an
increase in his pension if he would “hang” the jury. It is unnecessary
to state that the sheriff rejected the offer, but the judge, Collins, saw fit,
of his own motion, to make the desired reduction. The prisoners then
gave bail and fled the country, their bonds being declared forfeited at the
next term of court.
The officers of the penitentiary now took an active interest in securing
our release. A strong petition for pardon based upon the allegation
of our innocence, was addressed to Governor Gray and was endorsed by
Senator Voorhees and John Lamb, counsel for Stewart, Rice and Mason,
who not only wrote to, but also personally called upon, the executive,
Governor Johnson of Missouri, rendered invaluable service in securing
favorable action upon the petition. He demanded, not clemency, but
justice. He had sifted and weighed all the evidence bearing upon the
case, and he spoke with no uncertain sound. Words such as his, prompted
by the deliberate judgment, unerring instincts and warm heart of one of
the greatest criminal lawyers of the Mississippi Valley, could not fail to
carry weight. The result was inevitable. The executive of the State in
whose so-called courts of justice we had suffered such a wrong,
.bn 065.png
.pn +1
restored to us our liberty and citizenship by his pardon. But to remove
from us the stigma of the felon, to atone for the weary months of suffering
which we had undergone, in a word, to put us back where we were
upon the morning of that day when we first became entangled in the
machinations of that diabolical plot,—these were boons which even this
great seal of the Sovereign State of Indiana could not bestow.
In a private letter written by Governor Johnson some months ago in
reference to this matter he says:
.pm start_letter
.ll 68
.rj
St. Louis, May 4, 1889.
.ll
Dear Sir:—Your letter of inquiry as to Mr. John Quinn is received. Permit me
to say in response, that if ever there was a case of judicial wrong and oppression, he
has the misfortune of affording the illustration. At the solicitation of his friends I became
his attorney after conviction and sentence, and visited him in prison, at Jeffersonville,
Indiana, where I heard the statement of the facts in his case. I immediately
went to work to find out the truth of the recital. I examined into the matter exhaustively
and became convinced of his innocence of the perpetration of the crime charged
against him. I collected all the facts and circumstances going to show that my opinion
was correct and worthy of consideration, and in laying them before Gov. Gray, of
Indiana, he righted a great wrong and pardoned him. He is not the first man in my
experience who has suffered so great a misfortune. I am very truly yours,
.ll 68
.rj
Chas. P. Johnson, Atty.
.ll
.pm end_letter
Of my prison life I care to say but little here. Not that my memory
of it has grown indistinct, or that I might not say something that would
awaken interest. To dwell upon it in detail in this place would swell to
too great dimensions a sketch which has already outgrown my original
intention. It is enough to say that I was what is known as a “good”
convict, respectful in my demeanor to the officials and yielding unhesitating
obedience to every command. I think that I do not exaggerate
when when I say that I won and retained the confidence of the officers,
from whom I received every kindness compatible with the necessarily inexorable
discipline of a penal institution. I shall always recall with
gratitude the generous words of encouragement repeatedly spoken to me
by the warden and his deputy and by many of the guards, and notably
from Messrs. Miller and Wilkinson. In the solitude of my workbench
and cell I had ample leisure to reflect upon the follies of my youth, and
the graver offences of my maturer years. My wasted life, with its miserable
vacillation of purpose, passed before me in all its shameful reality of
color. While cleaning out the rubbish from under my bench one day, I
picked up a battered Testament, upon the fly leaf of which were written
the words, “From your broken-hearted wife.” The entire sacred volume
contains no more touching epitome of a blighted existence than
was laid before me in this inscription, with its pregnant suggestion of
early love, girlish confidence, marriage, womanly love, home, perhaps
paternity, crime, misery, punishment, and, at the end, the despair of a
broken heart. But I do not intend to moralize. It is enough to say that
.bn 066.png
.pn +1
within those four stone walls in which I passed so many sleepless
nights, and behind that grated door which so effectually barred all communication
with the outer world, I felt the first emotions of what I still
believe to have been true penitence. To prove it such shall be the aim of
my future life. Acting under these newly found impulses, I became the
teacher of a Sunday school class, and was one of the ten convicts who
founded, under the supervision of Chaplain Bornhill, a Young Men’s
Christian within the prison walls. I was made assistant
librarian—under Mr. Martin, a lifetime prisoner—and entrusted with the
writing of a considerable proportion of prisoner’s letters to their friends.
I entered the penitentiary on Sept. 19, 1887, and just two months afterwards
I received the most severe blow of my life. It happened on
Thanksgiving day. On the recurrence of anniversaries such as this, one’s
mind naturally reverts to thoughts of home and kindred. On this particular
day I was lying upon my prison bunk, lost in a day dream of my
wife and child, when my musings were suddenly broken off by the abrupt
announcement of the death of my darling, my only, boy. The shock
of the awakening was too great for me to endure, and I fell senseless on
the stone pavement of my cell, nor was I able for days to realize the
overwhelming force of the blow that had stunned me.
I have already said that my wife was with me during my trial at
Brownstown. She also visited me twice during my imprisonment in the
penitentiary, and on both occasions had expressed unshaken confidence
in my innocence and had assured me of her unswerving fidelity to her
early love. Very precious to me were these pledges of undying constancy,
and on my part I had vowed that not even death itself should ever abate
my love for her. Her letters, down to April 15, 1888, overflowed with
tender sentiment. She gently chided me for even seeming to question her
devotion to me in my hour of darkest need. It may conceived, therefore,
with what mingled emotions of astonishment and grief I received from
her, on May 5, the following letter:
.pm start_letter
.ll 68
.rj
“Chicago, May 5th, 1888.
.ll
.ti 0
John:
Yours received. I had hoped your attorney would inform you of my intentions.
* * * I have studied long and earnestly, and have concluded that
this is best for me. I do this of my own free will. It was my intention to wait
until you were free, but it is best to be candid with you now. You know the way
we have lived in our six years of married life. There was nothing but sorrow and
poverty. You took me from a good home, to which I have returned, and I hope
you will leave me in peace. Heaven knows I pity you, but look deep into your heart,
and see if you can drag my young life further, as it has been. I don’t wish you to
blame anyone for this but myself, and I don’t wish to have further correspondence
with you. If you have anything further to say you can say it through your attorney;
but don’t expect a reply, as I have filed for a divorce. Wishing you good luck and
a speedy release, I am,
.ll 68
.nf r
Yours respectfully,
Mrs. Lily Quinn.”
.nf-
.ll
.pm end_letter
.bn 067.png
.pn +1
This blow, following close upon the death of my little boy, well nigh
prostrated me. I saw that I was also to lose my wife. Only the Searcher
of all hearts knows the depth of my affection for the mother of my child,
since whose death she had seemed doubly dear to me. The thought of
her had been, next to my newly found trust in an all-merciful Providence,
my main-stay amid the misfortunes which had engulfed me; and when I
had thought of my release from prison (and at what hour of the day did
I not think of it?), I had looked forward to her affectionate companionship
as the only refuge and solace of my earthly life.
I well knew on what grounds she would demand her divorce. The
State of Indiana had branded me as a convict, and this was enough, in the
eye of the law, to release her from a yoke which she had come to regard
as galling. Defence was impossible. Nor did I hope to be able to move
her heart by entreaty. Yet I could not forbear to write to her once again,
even if only to say farewell. As this last letter of mine embodies my inmost
feeling at the time, I venture to hope that the reader who has
honored me with his interest up to this point of my narrative may pardon
me if I transcribe it here. It ran as follows:
.pm start_letter
.ll 68
.rj
“Jeffersonville Penitentiary, May 13, 1888.
.ll
.ti 0
My Dear Wife:
I feel that I cannot say anything to do justice in this case. But as an act of justice
to God and our child in heaven; to you in Chicago, to myself in the penitentiary, I
will make this feeble effort.
I am alone in my little home—a cell of 6 by 8 feet,—suffering my own afflictions,
and knowing it is far beyond my power to touch your strange heart in sympathy;
after what you have done to one you once loved, and one who loves you still.
I do not blame you for trying to get my attorney to impart the sad information to
me, for your own conscience’s sake. I know it was a hard trial to tell me what you
have written, knowing I am innocent of the crime for which I am placed here.
You tell me you did it with your own free will. Let us not question the cause, but
the effect. It is—that much we know. You say: “Heaven knows I pity you.” If
this is what you call pity, Heaven forgive those who despise. You say, “I took you
from a good home, and from a father and mother who love you.” You ask me to look
deep into my heart; that I have done. Never did I forsake a friend while in
trouble.
Let me ask you to seek seclusion in your own unhappy reflection. Sit down
quietly and let conscience penetrate the deepest recesses of your heart, and you will
right this terrible wrong. You act as though God was asleep, and his all-merciful care
was dormant.
You say you do not wish any further correspondence with me. Are you so cruel
after exchanging so many testimonials of affection with me during the past six years?
There is a letter in the office, addressed “Dear Wife” to you. There is a little boy
above us, looking down on us both.
You have clung to me in many trials of adversity, and have proved to be a brave,
sweet little woman. I have neglected God for you, and it may be better that this has
happened now, for the day might come when I would be dependent on you, and you
cast me into the poor house.
.bn 068.png
.pn +1
When I go out of this prison I shall begin a new life; as the woodsman in the
forest hews out a new home. Where, I do not know, but will trust to the kind hand
of Providence to direct me. You conclude your letter by saying you wish me “good
luck and a speedy release.” I thank you for that. You know I am overpowered,
I surrender. I am not a William Tell, and feel that any attempt to keep your
affections would be ineffectual.
I have had many trials. I have dwelt in the mansion of sorrow and pain. I have
associated with the neglected and forsaken here, and have listened to the sad stories
of those whom their wives have forsaken, with tears in my eyes. But the husbands of
these wives were guilty.
But that my own dear wife, whom I love so devotedly, should forsake me in the
hour of trouble, when she knows I am innocent, is a heaviness of sorrow of which
there can be no avoidance,—the severity of a mental torture from which there can be
no escape. It forms a complication of horrors that will impel me to a convict’s grave.
Since you have turned from this scene of distress, it has shown me that interest
alone moves you, since by your actions you punish misfortune as crime, and raise crime
to a level with misfortune. Have you forgotten the last night in the jail at Brownstown,
where you said you would never forsake me, knowing that I was not guilty?
Did you not tell Mrs. Withy you would never forsake me? No, never; that I had
been so good to you? And so many letters I have received to the same effect. Your
letter before the last one addresses me as “Dear husband.” * * * Quite a change
in so short a time.
Let us hope that mamma, Georgie and papa may some time occupy one of
those beautiful mansions prepared by the Friend of sinners, which will prove as
happy as the one at 1405 Olive Street, four years ago the 29th of last April, when our
child was born. O, wife; if you could only stand at the foot of my old straw bed and
hear my cries, you would weep for me.
Did we then think that this would ever happen? No, no, no. If I had thought
so, you would have heard the cries and groans, and witnessed the streaming tears, and
more than mortal anguish of a broken-hearted husband, who is now in the penitentiary,
innocent, yet forsaken by the mother of his child, my wife.
The fatal blow falls hard upon me. In this hour of my deepest woe, weakness
seems to have seized upon me for my total destruction. Every poisoned shaft, which
malice could invent, has been hurled against me.
Our child has been dead nearly six months, and I have not yet heard the story of
his sickness. You began it in one of your letters (now before me) when the doctor
came in and told you that he would not live thirty-six hours. You screamed, and the
poor little darling put his arms around your neck and said: “Mamma, don’t cry; I
won’t die.” You then walked him over and showed him my picture, and asked him
who it was. “That’s my papa,” was the reply. * * *
When I realize that you know I am innocent and utterly powerless, I shrink with
pain to think that the wound of my child’s death has only began to heal when it is
made to bleed afresh from the blow of an iron hammer in the hands of my wife, the
mother of my child. * * *
You have filed an application for divorce. Now comes the struggle. I love you
too well to oppose it if you ask for it. If you have asked for it because I am in the
penitentiary, change your complaint, for you will have to make oath, and you know I
am innocent, to which you must swear. * * * Place it upon any other grounds
and I will sign the necessary papers.
Of course it is nothing to you now whether I stay here or not. I may tell you
that Mrs. Forbes and Mrs. Kerns will be here to meet their husbands at the old iron
.bn 069.png
.pn +1
door, and take them back to their affection. Who will meet me and take my hand?
I will stand alone. Where will I go? * * * If you won’t come send Fankie (an
adopted boy). I will let him tell me what to do.
May God forgive and direct you in the path of virtue and truth, is the prayer of
your affectionate husband.
.ll 68
.rj
John Quinn.
.ll
P. S.—I will say good-bye with the last words of our baby’s prayer: bless
mamma and papa, grandma and grandpa, and everybody.
.pm end_letter
I was pardoned November 9, 1888, and two days later, when the
long hoped for document reached the prison, I was discharged. I was at
liberty, but carried in my heart a double desolation. Not for me did the
sun shine and the face of Nature smile. In a cemetery at St. Louis was
a little grave that held the sacred dust of the being once dearest to me on
earth, and in my heart I carried the tomb of a buried hope.
My foreman in the prison shop, Mr. George H. Eastman, welcomed
me to liberty, and invited me to his house, where I was most hospitably
entertained for a week. I next went to St. Louis, but remained only one
day; long enough to gaze once more at the home where I had last lived
with my wife and child, now gone from me forever. A sense of utter
loneliness came over me; the world seemed strange; my identity
was all that I could call my own.
From St. Louis I came to Chicago, where I sought out my old friend
and quondam partner, Ben Demint, whose warm greeting was a cordial to
my heart, and under the influence of whose genial encouragement I began
to look upon the world as not altogether lost.
Two objects were uppermost in my mind. One was to prepare and
deliver a lecture, in which I might demonstrate my innocence of the
crime of which I had been convicted; the other was to publish a work on
gambling, through which I might, by exposing the cheats and frauds of
the professional gamester, deter others from entering upon the path
“whose gates take hold on Hell.” My first lecture was delivered in the
auditorium of the First M. E. Church, at Chicago, on the evening of
Monday, May 20, 1889. My book (the present volume) is before the
public.
The fact that I was contemplating issuing the present volume became
known to some members of the “profession” in Chicago a year ago, and
on June 27, 1889, about ten o’clock in the forenoon, I was arrested by
detectives Kehoe and Flynn, without the shadow of a charge having been
preferred against me. For five hours I was deprived of my liberty.
What a commentary upon the nature of the relations existing between the
“profession” and the custodians of public morals.
In this connection I desire to return thanks to John Cameron Simonds,
Esq., and Mr. Matthew W. Pinkerton, of Chicago, for their generous
intervention in my behalf. To their kind efforts I owe my speedy release.
.bn 070.png
.pn +1
During my lifetime I have thus far been called upon to mourn the
loss of father and mother, three brothers—Dick, Robert and Victor—and
two sisters—Laura and Roma. Of eight children, but three of us survive,
George Sidney, who still lives in Randolph County, Missouri, where he
was born and reared; Hatsel Seldon, at present at Hot Springs, Arkansas,
and myself.
To the press of Chicago, which so kindly encouraged him in his early
ventures in the lecture field, the author desires to express his grateful
acknowledgements. Unknown and friendless, he felt the timidity incident
to one inexperienced in public speaking, and who carried in his breast the
knowledge of his own past wrong-doing. But the journals of the city in
which he made his maiden effort, those leaders and exponents of public
sentiment, sustained him, and their words of commendation imparted to
him fresh courage.
I hardly know how better to close this recital of a part whose shameful
recollections might well overcome a stouter heart than mine, than by
the following quotation from an old verse-writer, which have long floated
through my memory. They present, in homely language, a truth which
strikes a responsive chord in the heart of every man who is not panoplied
in serene satisfaction with his own virtues. The lines run as follows:
.pm start_poem
“Thou may’st conceal thy sin by cunning art,
Which will disturb thy peace, thy rest undo;
Yet conscience sits a witness in thy heart;
And she is witness, judge and prison too.”
.pm end_poem
.il fn=i_064.jpg w=300px ew=50% align=r alt='John Philip Quinn'
.bn 071.png
.pn +1
.sp 4
.h3
THE THREE STAGES OF A GAMBLER’S LIFE.
.il fn=i_065.jpg w=500px ew=90%
.sp 2
The foregoing illustration presents, in a form calculated to strike the
eye and impress the mind, a view of the gradations in the downward
career of a gambler.
Starting out, with high hopes of pleasure to be derived and wealth
to be gained through a life devoted to the ruin of his fellowmen, he
boldly enters upon the way whose end is death and whose steps “take
hold on hell.” Costly is his attire and elastic his step as he at first
ventures upon the road whose path is a quagmire and whose downward
course is beset with thorns.
As he advances, he finds the declivity growing steeper; his feet are
sore and his raiment torn. Too late he perceives his error, and realizes
that it is far easier to descend than to climb the tortuous, slippery path.
The illusion is dispelled; the glamour has gone out in darkness. No
longer the jovial, roystering, “hail-fellow-well-met,”—he has become
the midnight prowler, dependent for his very subsistence, upon the scanty
earnings which he derives from the percentage doled out to him by more
prosperous members of the same villainous craft for betraying the confidence
of his friends and luring the unwary to their destruction. He
realizes his situation, only to curse it; he would retrace his steps if he
knew how, but his chosen sin holds him with a grasp as close as the
coil of the deadly anaconda.
.bn 072.png
.pn +1
In the figure of the forlorn tramp, a destitute, penniless wanderer, a
pariah and an outcast, we see him approaching his wretched end. The
pitiless storm that beats in his face is but the sighing of the summer
wind as compared with that which rages in his breast. The wind that
howls in his ears seems to chant the requiem of home, happiness, hope,
honor,—all that men hold dear. And yet he must go on; on, into the
blinding sleet; on into the unknown future; on, until he reaches the
Potter’s Field; on until he stands before the bar of God.
Certainly it can be no mistake to call such an one a “fool of fortune,”
a fool enslaved by his own degraded instincts and besotted passions, a
fool who, in the words of Scripture, “has said in his heart there is no
God.” But professional blacklegs are not the only “fools of fortune.”
The young man, just entering upon the path of life; the middle aged man
of family, who squanders at the gaming table the money which should
go to buy luxuries, comforts, perhaps even necessaries for those dependent
upon him, the old man, who, about to sink into the grave, finds it
impossible to overcome the fascination of the vice which has reduced him
from affluence to penury—these, one and all, are fools. The savings of
a lifetime, dissipated in an hour, the cherished hopes of years blighted
by the turn of a card—these are every day occurrences in the hells where
one class of fools worship “Fortune,” and another class delude themselves
by the belief that it is possible for money dishonestly acquired to
bring with it anything but a curse.
It is with the hope that those who have not already entered upon
this course may be deterred from entering upon it and that those who
may have already tasted the false pleasures of an unhealthy excitement may
be induced to pause before it is too late, that the author has made his frank
confession of his own follies and his revelation of all the secret arts of the
gambler’s devil born art.
.il fn=i_066.jpg w=400px ew=75%
.bn 073.png
.pn +1
.pm chaphead 'CHAPTER I.' 'PRELIMINARY REMARKS—FOOD FOR REFLECTION.' chap1
.sp 2
Only gamblers defend gambling. Those who play faro, roulette,
hazard; those who buy mutual pools or “puts and calls;” and even those
whose instinct for gaming is satisfied with a partly legitimate business,
go on with their practices without an analysis of their actions. It is the
object of this work, not only to trace the history of gaming, so far as is
recorded, but to expose to the mind of the most casual reader the
sophistries upon which the art of gambling is based. In other words, the
author will show that if men seek for happiness in games of chance they
find sorrow; if they hope for gain, they fall into penury; if they flee from
care, they suffer unending perplexity; if they be honorably ambitious,
they forfeit all public regard.
It is a sad fact that ethics—the science of human duty—had reached
its summit long before the Roman Empire was founded. The philosophers
of Africa and Asia taught to the students of Greece all that this work
can teach to English-speaking people. Aristotle classed the gambler with
the thief and robber, and so just was the mind of Alexander’s preceptor,
that he hated even usury. If man studied ethics, with any other purpose
than for mental relaxation, there could be no gambling; there could be
none of the gross selfishness and competition which shames our civilization,
and in reality gives to the barbaric spirit of conquest that relief
which it finds in gambling.
We have, then, only to repeat the warnings of the sages of the world,
and to reinforce them with the history of the gaming vice in all ages.
Thousands of years have elapsed since man learned that gambling was
morally wrong. Why, then, does he gamble? Because he does not
know that all wrong is a source of unhappiness. No man wishes to
be unhappy. All men are unhappy; they seek peace. In the fact that
argument has failed to carry home to the human mind this conviction,
that gaming cannot give peace, the author finds his reason for writing.
Only by patient iteration of the principles which Aristotle accepted, and
only by a persevering recital of the evils which gambling has wrought
on men, can it be hoped that the young student will accept as a truth,
without personal proof, that doctrine which, to prove, would cost his
fortune and his happiness.
.bn 074.png
.pn +1
Why, then, is gambling wrong? Why did Aristotle denounce it?
Why does the young man of to-day need further proof that gambling is
wrong and disappointing—why does he lose years of time, hazard his
respectability, acquire dangerous habits and diseases, and regret the
experiment he has made? To answer these questions requires this
volume.
Blackstone cleverly calls gaming “a kind of tacit confession, that
the company engaged therein do in general exceed the bounds of their
respective fortunes; and therefore they cast lots to determine upon whom
the ruin shall at present fall, that the rest may be saved a little longer.”
This statement, which has stood the criticisms of centuries, leaves to the
gamester the unhappy knowledge that some one in his company is to
be destroyed. Instead of sitting at an entertainment, then, he is a
pall-bearer. He carries away the dead because he himself is not dead.
To begin, therefore, the gambler who thinks must have throttled pity.
He knows it is a funeral; he is so selfish that he cares only for his own
welfare. When two or more men gamble, the winners win and the losers
lose, but there is no productive labor; therefore, nobody profits except it
be the owner of the premises who has put his building to an unproductive
business—a business closely allied with other vices that at once rob their
agents of honor, health and fortune. Commerce, when flying almost in
the face of nature, will, if successful, benefit man and alleviate his needs,
but the gambler spends his time and his energies in that which (as this
work will carefully show) is of enormous evil. It is more than a waste
of time. It is more than a waste of money. It is more than a waste of
health. It is more than a waste of thought. For gambling, as Charles
Kingsley has said, is almost the only thing in the world in which the
honorable man is no match for the dishonorable man. The scrupulous
man is weaker, by the very fact of his scruples, than he who has none.
When a man begins to play he may have a high feeling of honor, but what
right has honor to sit at a gaming-table? There’s the rub. When he
wins he will consider it folly not to extend the hours of play, and will
begin an expense that he did not indulge before. With greater expense,
he will be keener at the game—more zealous to win. But he will lose
anon, and further anon his losses and gains will be equal. Then his
increased expense—the luxury of late hours, with dinners, carriages, and
personal service—must be paid from the income that was deemed insufficient
to support a more modest mode of life. As this manifestly cannot
be done, recourse in hope must be had to the gaming-table once more,
where, with losses and gains so far equal, the increased disbursements
must be made good. To win, the tricks of the gambler must be used;
friends must be inveigled to their ruin; advantages must be seized; a sight
of the opponent’s cards must be used for whatever it will win, and one
.bn 075.png
.pn +1
step after another gradually reduces the player to a condition in which he
secretly knows he is a rogue. Others about him have long known it.
The true philosopher knows it the moment the “high-minded player”
sits down to the game.
But ignorance does not depict a scene so deplorable. The gambler
in his best days, is lured by a brighter vision. He does not value money,
and gathers that reward which comes from a princely generosity and a
reckless patronage of all who desire to serve him. But of real humanity
he has none, because his business, veil it as you may, is robbery. The
man who plays against the gambler is called a “producer,” and what can
that mean but fool or victim—a victim whose greed is his ruin. Despising
respectable men who play with him as greedy fools, the gambler
must oppose honest men (who will not play) as foes. Hating all men,
he must hate women; therefore marriage is rare among the “profession.”
If he secures a fortune, so that he may “retire” from hazard, it will be
seen that he owns and enslaves both men and women, and never aids the
emancipation of society. Sensualism and materialism are his characteristics.
If he loves power in his community, it is for private aggrandizement.
The hand of society has been against him; he cannot forget it.
Reform would be forgiveness, and the gambler never forgives. True respectability
would be forgetfulness of the past, and the gambler never forgets.
Such is the successful gamester—the “retired gamester.” And to
secure that much of success how many thousands of victims are in his
train? His charities are a sham, like the subscriptions of Monte Carlo on
Riviera; like the proffered relief to flood sufferers by the Louisiana lottery.
While the wail of the unhappy and the lost is heard at the wheel,
the cruel game goes on without mercy. The very existence of these
splendid dens of dishonesty and inhumanity, are a menace to men.
But success in this crime is as rare as success in any other. The ordinary
gambler does not “retire.” He dresses extravagantly, he lives in
ignorance, he pursues the existence of an ape. The mere sensualist sins
and repents, but the reformer who toils with the drunkard and the fallen
woman despairs of the gambler. He lives his short life, and dies alone
in his garret or in prison. His fellow-gamblers are glad he is dead. They
say he was unfit to live, and they know.
Of all acts, gambling induces most often to suicide. It is believed
that the number of “the profession” is not relatively large considering
the total population, yet the suicide of the professional gambler is a matter
of the most frequent note. In England eight persons out of 100,000
kill themselves in a year. At Monaco, a solitary gambling establishment,
one hundred suicides were reported in one season. The German tables
of play have sent thousands out to death. The reason why a gambler
should kill himself appears to him in the aspect of lost honor. If he
.bn 076.png
.pn +1
joins to this a loss of money—the only thing for which he has striven—he
cannot summon fortitude to live. He goes out of the world, impelled
by a just nature, that thus removes his life from the earth which he has
encumbered.
The strain of gambling is a sharp one. It breaks the nerves and prematurely
ages the face. Losses, if they do not paralyze the mind, at least
enrage it against circumstances and events, turning the man to a veritable
horned beast, or to a poisonous serpent, bent on inflicting a blow though
it be on its own body. The natives of India call this passion “hot
heart,” or inner rage without vent. The revulsion has been severe to
the extent of our conception. Fortune was near, nor is it far. The loser
feels that fate is a sentient being—a hag whom he must tear with his
nails. Her blow has been twice as harsh as if he had not hoped, and it
falls on one ill-prepared to receive it. There lies but one escape, and
that is death. Hence the excitement with which professional gamblers
behold the loss of their means of livelihood. Where suicide does not follow,
the most painful blows are often delivered by the gambler upon his
own temples and forehead. He has no pity on himself for losing money
that he ought to have kept.
Gambling is closely allied with forces which tend to the subversion
of social order; it is directly conducive to various crimes of frequent occurrence.
The gambling mania is at war with industry, and therefore,
destructive of prosperity and thrift. Devotion to the gaming habit will
in time hush the voice of conscience and is a constant menace to honor
and happiness. Once possessed of the passion, an individual is lost to every
sense of duty as husband, father, citizen, and man of business. His heart
becomes the prey of emotions at enmity with affection and sound morality.
In this condition, a man is unfitted for any responsibility requisite to the
welfare of society. In spirit, if not in fact, he is an Ishmaelite—an outlaw;
then, expediency is his only principle, and necessity his only law.
In heart, at least, he is a criminal. As a result, the man is false to every
confidence, recreant to every trust! Is this not true? Look about you
and see! How many bloody tragedies are directly traceable to the gambling
“hell?” How has this vice fed the mania for homicide, the tendency
to suicide? The business world is rife with forgeries and defalcations,
which may be directly ascribed to gambling. Widows and orphans
are plundered by their trustees, corporations wrecked by their officers, one
partner made the victim of another, the employer betrayed by his employee,
all because of this terrible passion. But is this the end? Is it
even the worst? In gambling, as in other forms of evil, are not the “sins
of the father visited upon the children, even unto the third and fourth
generation.” It would seem so, if Dr. Ribot is an authority. Descending
from sire to son, from ancestor to posterity, the vice enters into the very
.bn 077.png
.pn +1
fiber of the soul. Ribot asserts of gambling, as of avarice, theft and murder,
that the propensity is subject to the law of heredity; that the “passion
for play often attains such a pitch of madness as to be a form of insanity,
and like it transmissible.” And Da Gama Machado says: “A lady of
my acquaintance, and who possessed a large fortune, had a passion for
gambling, and passed whole nights at play. She died young of pulmonary
disease. Her eldest son, who was very like his mother, had the same
passion for play. He, too, like his mother, died of consumption, and at
about the same age. His daughter, who resembled him, inherited the
same taste, and died young.” Justified twice over, then, is society, in
protecting itself against a practice so terrible, so deadly, so far reaching
in its effects.
In course of time, this seems to have been realized by all nations
pretending to civilization, whether ancient or modern. Whatever may
have been the private practice of rulers and statesmen, in this respect,
their public policy and legislative enactments were against gambling.
Some of the laws of the ancients against gambling are worthy of
adoption to-day, and are well calculated to check the destructive evil.
Amongst the Jews, for instance, a gambler could not act as a magistrate,
or occupy any high or honorable office, nor could he be a witness in
any court of justice. Such disqualifications, at the present day, would
largely decimate the judicial ranks and deplete the government roll. In
ancient Egypt, again, a convicted gambler was condemned to the quarries
of Sinai, there to expiate his offense. Would not a kindred punishment,
now, be effectual with the “genteel” gambler—with ye “gentleman”
gambler of the gilded “hell” and “club house.” Yea, extended, even
in a general sense, to all persons, whatever their position in life, convicted
of the offense of gambling, would it not go far toward a reduction of this
great and growing evil?
No where is the capriciousness and inconstancy of the ancient Greeks
more manifest than in their policy toward gambling. Denouncing it in
the abstract, they were universally addicted to the practice. At one time
the object of legislative prohibition, with them, at another it would be
granted a license, or permitted to flourish without “let or hindrance.”
To the Romans has been ascribed a talent for political organization; a
genius for jurisprudence. Strangely inconsistent, however, was their
position on the subject of gambling. By the Roman laws, ædiles were
authorized to punish gambling, except during the Saturnalia—a time
when every passion was allowed to run riot. In other respects, the
Roman law on this subject resembled that now obtaining in England and
America. Money lost at play could not be legally recovered by the winner,
and the loser could recover the money paid by him to the winner.
Under the Justinian Code, according to Paulus, a master or father had a
.bn 078.png
.pn +1
remedy against any person inducing the servant or son to play. This
must have been a wholesome measure. Why may it not be on every statute
book in the United States? The most radical feature of the Roman law,
perhaps, was that by virtue of which a gambling house might be forfeited
to the State, and this equally so, whether it belonged to the offender, or
to another person cognizant of the offense. Had this Roman law of confiscation
been some years since ingrafted on the law of each State in the
Union, it may be a matter of speculative opinion, of course, how many
“club houses” would have passed into the hands of the government.
If wagers did not violate any rule of public decency or morality, or
any rule of public policy, they were not invalid by the common law of
England. And such was the principle of law inherited by the English
colonies in America, and recognized by the courts of the respective States
of the Union.
In England, however, dating from the middle of the eighteenth century,
a series of statutes has been enacted, aimed not only at gambling in
stocks, but at all wagering contracts. In 1834, the well known statute of
Sir John Barnard was enacted. This act was intended to prevent what it
styled the “Infamous Practice of Stock Jobbing.” This statute was
repealed by 23 and 24 Victoria, Ch. 28. By the act of 8 and 9 Victoria,
Ch. 109, S. 108, “all contracts or agreements, whether by parol or in
writing, by way of gaming or wagering, shall be null and void, and no
suit shall be brought in any court of law or equity for recovering any sum
of money or valuable thing alleged to be won upon any wager.” This
statute is now in force. These enactments aside, the English courts were
wont to reprehend such contracts, and frequently expressed regret that
they had ever been sanctioned.
The authorities in this country are far from uniform on the common
law doctrine; some leaning decidedly against wagering contracts. Others,
on the other hand, have countenanced them. Such contracts have been
sustained by the United States courts, and the courts of New York, California,
Texas, New Jersey, and Delaware. In Maine, Massachusetts,
New Hampshire, Vermont, and Pennsylvania, a wager was never a valid
contract. Now, by the revised statutes of New York all “wagers, bets,
or stakes, made to depend upon any race, or upon any gaming by lot or
chance, casualty, or unknown or contingent event whatever, shall be unlawful.
All contracts for, or on account of, any money or property, or a
thing in action, so wagered, bet or staked, shall be void.” Similar, and
even more stringent, legislation of like character, exists in Ohio, Iowa,
West Virginia, Virginia, Wisconsin, Missouri, New Hampshire, and
Illinois.
In many states gambling is a misdemeanor only. Where this is the
case, the gambler is allowed to prey upon the community at his pleasure,
.bn 079.png
.pn +1
and compelled to pay only an occasional fine. In not a few of the states,
however, the offense is a felony which may be punished by imprisonment
in the penitentiary. May it become the law in all the states. More than
this, the penalty should not be an alternative between a fine or imprisonment.
The prison door should be open to every convicted gambler,
without hope of escape.
From all this it will be seen not only that gambling has long been
denounced, and with good cause, as a great social evil; but that it has
been an important object for legislation. It will clearly appear, also, that
all laws, provisions and penalties have been ineffectual to suppress it,
prevent its growth, or counteract its demoralizing influence. That
gaming is an evil of the most pernicious character in society, no man can
have the effrontery to deny; but a doubt may be reasonably entertained
whether the propensity be not too strong to be controlled by law, and too
human for any legislative enactments.
More than human wisdom and effort is required to master the ruling
and inherent passion of universal man. Moreover, if the law is to successfully
suppress public gambling, it must be by enactments falling with
equal weight, and operating with just severity on all practitioners of the
principle which it is the object of the law to discountenance; and not by
measures protecting one class of offenders and punishing another; not by
exempting those high in social position, while those of lowly estate are
made to feel the heavy hand of authority. If at all, it is to be accomplished
only by striking at the whole system of gaming, as far as the law
can effect the object, upon one great principle, letting law go hand in
hand with justice, in the work, so that it err not in the principle of its
enactments or in the equity of its administration.
.bn 080.png
.pn +1
.pm chaphead 'CHAPTER II.' 'HEBREWS, PERSIANS, CHINESE AND JAPANESE.' chap2
.sp 2
The Hebrews, in resorting to the casting of lots, believed it was an
appeal to the Lord. It was not thought to be gambling. It is useful
that the reader should understand this. Thus by lot it was determined
which of the goats should be offered by Aaron; by lot the land of
Canaan was subdivided; by lot Saul was chosen to wear the crown; by
lot Jonah was discovered to be the cause of the storm. It is well to note
that herein gambling had its sacred origin. Man cannot easily surrender
the idea that Heaven directs the casting of a die. It is possible that man
founds his passion for hazard upon his love of the mystic. Yet no laws
are so exact as the laws of chance, and none are so sure to seize on those
laws as the professional gambler. The priests of Egypt assured Herodotus
that one of their kings visited alive the infernal regions, and that he
there gambled with a large party. Plutarch recites an Egyptian story to
the effect that Mercury having fallen in love with the earth, and wishing
to do the earth a favor, gambled with the moon, and won from the moon
every seventieth part of the time she illumined the earth. Out of these
seventieth parts Mercury made five days, and added them to the earth’s
year, which had formerly held but 360 days.
The examples of these gods could not but move the people to gamble.
We know that the vice prevailed because we discover the existence of
heavy penalties against it. In Egypt, if a person were convicted of the
crime of dice-playing, or of being a gamester, he was sent to work in the
quarries, to recruit those vast companies which were continually engaged
in public enterprises, such as the pyramids, the labyrinth, the artificial lake
and the lesser monuments.
.sp 2
Persians.—We gather that gaming with dice was a fashionable
diversion at the Persian court 400 years before Christ, from the historical
anecdotes recited by Plutarch in his life of Artaxerxes. The younger
Cyrus, son of Queen Parysatis, had been killed at the order of Artaxerxes
by a favorite slave of the king; and the queen, who was the mother
also of Artaxerxes, burned secretly for revenge on the slave, whose name
was Mesabetes. But as the slave had merely obeyed the monarch, her
son, the Queen laid this snare for him. She excelled at playing a certain
.bn 081.png
.pn +1
game of dice. She had apparently forgiven her elder son, the King, for
his cruel deed, and joined him continually at play. One day she proposed
playing for a stake of $500, to which the King agreed, and she, feigning
lack of skill, lost the money, and paid it on the nail. But affecting sorrow
and vexation over her ill-luck, she pressed the King to play for a
slave, as if her cash were short. The King suspected nothing, and accepted
the stake. It was stipulated that the winner should choose the
slave. Now the Queen resorted to all the arts of gaming, which easily
procured a victory. She chose Mesabetes, the slayer of Cyrus, and this
slave, being delivered into her hands, was put to the most cruel tortures,
and to death. When the King would have interfered, she only replied
with a smile of contempt: “Surely you must be a great loser, to be so
much out of temper for giving up a decrepit old slave, when I, who lost
$500, and paid on the spot, do not say a word, and am satisfied.”
To properly understand this story, it must be remembered that a slave
had no rights whatever, being treated simply as cattle. Should a man
express pity for a rat in the teeth of a terrier, he would be on a par with
Artaxerxes if he pitied Mesabetes. The grief of the outwitted King was
unmanly, from the ancient standpoint, but it is notable that dice ministered
to the plot of revenge and murder.
The laws of the modern Persians, who are Mohammedans, prohibit
all gambling. The Persians evade the sin by making alms of their winnings—a
sorry device, for it is only the robbery of Peter to give larger to
Paul. Like all other evasions, even this practice soon degenerates into
gambling pure and simple, the excuse being that skill more than chance
has to do with the game. The public spirit, however, is happily adverse
to the practice, and any gambling-place is called in detestation, a morgue,
a carrion-house, a “habitation of corrupted carcasses.”
.sp 2
The Hindoos.—At the “Festival of Lamps,” in honor of the goddess
of wealth, the Rajpoots make a religion of gambling. At such a
time vice may indeed prosper. Easy was the conquest of a people whose
sensuality and superstition could be so well united in the service of the
priesthood. The specialties of Hindoo gambling are interesting. The
hot climate stimulates the passion, and the greater the Raja, or King, the
longer the tale of his fortune at play.
The ancient Hindoo dice, known as coupeen, were similar to modern
dice, and were thrown from a box. The practice of “loading” is plainly
alluded to, and there was opportunity for skill in handling the box. In
the more modern Hindoo games, called pasha, the dice are not cubic but
oblong, and they are thrown like printer’s quads in “jeffing”—that is,
out of the palm of the hand. The throw may be made either directly
upon the ground, or against a post or board, which will break the fall and
render the result more a matter of
.bn 082.png
.pn +1
A story of a Rajah’s insane love of play forms a striking passage in
the great Sanskrit poem of the Veda. The famous gambling-match was
the outcome of a conspiracy between two brothers, Duryodhana and Duhsasana,
and their uncle Sakuni, of the family of the Kauravas, for the
purpose of robbing Yudhisthira of his Raj, or the kingdom of the Pandavas.
The poem deals with the conception of a Nemesis. Envy and love
of conquest led the conspirators to invite Yudhisthira to a game of
coupeen at Hastinapur. The Veda is translated as follows:
“And it came to pass that Duryodhana was very jealous of the pomp
of his cousin Yudhisthira, and desired in his heart to destroy the Pandavas
and gain the Raj. Now Sakuni was the brother of Gandhari, who
was the brother of the Kauravas, and he was very skillful in throwing
dice, and in playing with dice that were loaded, insomuch that whenever
he played he always won the game. So Duryodhana plotted with his
uncle, and then proposed to his father, the Maharaja, or Great Raja, that
Yudhisthira should be invited to the Festival, and the Great Raja was
secretly glad that his sons should be friendly with their cousins, the sons
of his deceased brother, Pandu, and so he sent his younger brother,
Vidura, to the city of Indraprastha to invite the Pandavas to the game.
“And Vidura went his way to the city of the Pandavas, and was
received by them with every sign of attention and respect. And Yudhisthira
inquired whether his kinsfolk and friend at Hastinapur were all well
in health, and Vidura replied, ‘They are all well.’
“Then Vidura said to the Pandavas: ‘Your uncle, the Great Raja,
is about to give a great feast, and he invites you and your mother and
your joint wife to come to his city, and there will be a match at dice-playing.’
“When Yudhisthira heard these words he was troubled in mind, for
he knew that gaming was a frequent cause of strife, and he was in no way
skillful in throwing the dice, and likewise knew that Sakuni was dwelling
at Hastinapur, and that he was a famous gambler. But Yudhisthira
remembered that the invitation of the Great Raja was equal to the command
of a father, and that no true Kshatriga could refuse a challenge
either to war or play. So Yudhisthira accepted the invitation and commanded
that on the appointed day his brethren and their mother and their
joint wives should accompany him to the city of Hastinapur.
“When the day arrived for the departure of the Pandavas, they took
their mother Kunti, and their joint wife Draupadi, and journeyed from
Indraprastha to the city of Hastinapur, where they first paid a visit of
respect to the Great Raja; and they found him sitting among his chieftains,
and the ancient Bhishma, and the preceptor Drona and Karua, who
was the friend of Duryodhana, and many others were sitting there also.
“And when the Pandavas had done reverence to the Great Raja, and
.bn 083.png
.pn +1
respectfully saluted all present, they paid a visit to their aunt Gandhari,
and did her reverence likewise.
And after they had done this, their mother and joint wife entered
the presence of Gandhari, and respectfully saluted her; and the wives of
the Karauvas came in and were made known to Kunti and Draupadi.
And the wives of the Kauravas were much surprised when they beheld
the beauty and fine raiment of Draupadi; and they were very jealous of
their kinswoman. And when all their visits had been paid, the Pandavas
retired with their wife and mother to the quarters which had been prepared
for them, and when it was evening they received the visits of all
their friends who were dwelling at Hastinapur.
Now, on the morrow the gambling match was to be played; so
when the morning had come, the Pandavas bathed and dressed, and left
Draupadi in the lodging which had been prepared for her, and went their
way to the palace. And the Pandavas again paid their respects to their
uncle, the Maharaja, and were then conducted to the pavilion where the
play was to be; and Duryodhana went with them, together with all his
brethren, and all the chieftains of the royal house. And when the assembly
had all taken their seats, Sakuni said to Yudhisthira: “The ground
here has all been prepared, and the dice are all ready: Come now, I pray
you, and play a game.” But Yudhisthira was disinclined, and replied:
“I will not play, excepting upon fair terms; but if you will pledge yourself
to throw without artifice or deceit, I will accept your challenge.”
Sakuni said: “If you are so fearful of losing you had better not play at
all.” At these words Yudhisthira was wroth, and replied: “I have no
fear either in play or war; but let me know with whom I am to play, and
who is to pay me if I win.” So Duryodhana came forward and said: “I
am the man with whom you are to play, and I shall lay any stakes against
your stakes; but my uncle Sakuni will throw the dice for me.” Then
Yudhisthira said: “What manner of game is this, where one man
throws and another lays the stakes.” Nevertheless he accepted the
challenge, and he and Sakuni began to play.
At this point in the narrative it may be desirable to pause, and
endeavor to obtain a picture of the scene. The so-called pavilion was
probably a temporary booth, constructed of bamboos and interlaced with
basket work; and very likely it was decorated with flowers and leaves
after the Hindoo fashion, and hung with fruits, such as cocoa-nuts, mangoes,
plantains, and maize. The chieftains present seem to have sat upon
the ground, and watched the game. The stakes may have been pieces of
gold and silver, or cattle, or lands; although, according to the legendary
account which follows, they included articles of a far more extravagant
and imaginative character. With these passing remarks, the tradition of
the memorable game may be resumed as follows:
.bn 084.png
.pn +1
So Yudhisthira and Sakuni sat down to play, and whatever Yudhisthira
laid as stakes, Duryodhana laid something of equal value; but
Yudhisthira lost every game. He first lost a very beautiful pearl; next a
thousand bags, each containing a thousand pieces of gold; next a piece of
gold so pure that it was as soft as wax; next a chariot set with jewels and
hung all round with golden bells; next, a thousand war elephants, with
golden howdahs set with diamonds; next a lakh of slaves all dressed in
good garments; next a lakh of beautiful slave girls, adorned from head to
foot with golden ornaments; next all the remainder of his goods; next all
his cattle; and then the whole of his Raj, excepting only the lands which
had been granted to the Brahmins.
Now when Yudhisthira had lost his Raj, the chieftains present in the
pavilion were of the opinion that he should cease to play, but he would
not listen to their words, but persisted in the game. And he staked all
the jewels belonging to his brothers, and he lost them; and he staked his
two younger brothers, one after the other, and he lost them; and he then
staked Arjuna, and Bhima, and finally himself, and he lost every game.
Then Sakuni said to him: “You have done a bad act, Yudhisthira, in
gaming away yourself and becoming a slave. But now, stake your wife,
Draupadi, and if you win the game you will again be free.” And Yudhisthira
answered and said: “I will stake Draupadi!” And all assembled
were greatly troubled and thought evil of Yudhisthira; and his
uncle Vidura put his hand to his head and fainted away, whilst Bhishma
and Drona turned deadly pale, and many of the company were very sorrowful;
but Duryodhana and his brother Duhsasana, and some others of
the Karauvas were glad in their hearts, and plainly manifested their joy.
Then Sakuni threw the dice, and won Draupadi for Duryodhana.
Then all in that assembly were in great consternation, and the chieftains
gazed upon one another without speaking a word. And Duryodhana
said to her uncle Vidura. “Go now and bring Draupadi hither, and bid
her sweep the rooms.” But Vidura cried out against them with a loud
voice, and said: “What wickedness is this? Will you order a woman
who is of noble birth, and the wife of your own kinsman, to become a
household slave? How can you vex your brethren thus? But Draupadi
has not become your slave, for Yudhisthira lost himself before he staked
his wife, and having first become a slave, he could no longer have power
to stake Draupadi!” Vidura then turned to the assembly and said:
“Take no heed to the words of Duryodhana, for he has lost his senses
this day.” Duryodhana then said: “A curse be upon this Vidura, who
will do nothing that I desire him.”
After this Duryodhana called one of his servants, and desired him to
go to the lodgings of the Pandavas, and bring Draupadi into the pavilion.
And the man departed out, and went to the lodgings of the Pandavas, and
.bn 085.png
.pn +1
entered the presence of Draupadi and said to her: “Raja Yudhisthira
has played you away, and you have become the slave of Raja Duryodhana:
So come now and do your duty like his other slave girls.” And Draupadi
was astonished at these words, and exceedingly wroth, and she replied:
“Whose slave was I that I could be gambled away? And who is such
a senseless fool as to gamble away his own wife?” The servant said:
“Raja Yudhisthira has lost himself, and his four brothers, and you also,
to Raja Duryodhana, and you cannot make any objection. Arise, therefore,
and go to the house of the Raja.”
Then Draupadi cried out: “Go you now and inquire whether Raja
Yudhisthira lost me first, or himself first; for if he played away himself
first, he could not stake me.” So the man returned to the assembly, and
put the question to Yudhisthira; but Yudhisthira hung down his head
with shame, and answered not a word.
Then Duryodhana was filled with wrath, and he cried out to his servant:
waste of words is this? Go you and bring Draupadi hither,
that if she has aught to say she may say it in the presence of us all.” And
the man essayed to go, but he beheld the wrathful countenance of Bhima
and he was sore afraid, and he refused to go, and remained where he was.
Then Duryodhana sent his brother Duhsasana; and Duhsasana went his
way to the lodgings of Draupadi, and said: “Raja Yudhisthira has lost
you in play to Rajah Duryodhana, and he has sent for you. So arise now
and wait upon him according to his commands; and if you have anything
to say, you can say it in the presence of the assembly.” Draupadi replied:
“The death of the Karauvas is not far distant, since they can do such
deeds as these.” And she rose up in great trepidation and set out, but
when she came near to the palace of the Maharaja, she turned aside from
the pavilion where the chieftains were assembled, and ran away with all
speed toward the apartments of the women. And Duhsasana hastened
after her and seized her by her hair, which was very dark and long, and
dragged her by main force into the pavilion before all the chieftains.
And she cried out: “Take your hands from off me.” But Duhsasana
heeded not her words, and said: “You are now a slave girl, and slave
girls cannot complain of being touched by the hands of men.”
When the chieftains thus beheld Draupadi, they hung down their
heads from shame, and Draupadi called upon the elders amongst them,
such as Bhishma and Drona to acquaint her whether or no Raja Yudhisthira
had gamed away himself before he had staked her; but they likewise
held down their heads and answered not a word.
Then she cast her eye upon the Pandavas, and her glance was like
the stabbing of a thousand daggers, but they moved not hand or foot to
help her; for when Bhima would have stepped forward to deliver her
from the hands of Duhsasana, Yudhisthira commanded him to forbear,
.bn 086.png
.pn +1
and both he and the younger Pandavas were obliged to obey the command
of their elder brother.
And when Duhsasana saw that Draupadi looked towards the Pandavas,
he took her by the hand, and drew her another way, saying:
“Why, O slave, are you turning your eyes about you?” And when
Kama and Sakuni heard Duhsasana calling her a slave, they cried out:
“Well said! well said!”
Then Draupadi wept very bitterly, and appealed to all the assembly,
saying: “All of you have wives and children of your own, and will you
permit me to be treated thus? I ask you one question, and I pray you
to answer it.” Duhsasana then broke in and spoke foul language to her,
and used her rudely, so that her veil came off in his hands. And Bhima
could restrain his wrath no longer, and spoke vehemently to Yudhisthira;
and Arjuna reproved him for his anger against his elder brother,
but Bhima answered: “I will thrust my hands into the fire before these
wretches shall treat my wife in this manner before my eyes.”
Then Duryodhana said to Draupadi: “Come, now, I pray you, and
sit upon my thigh;” and Bhima gnashed his teeth and cried out with a
loud voice: “Hear my vow this day: If for this deed I do not break
the thigh of Duryodhana, and drink the blood of Duhsasana, I am not
the son of Kunti.”
Meanwhile the Chieftain Vidura had left the assembly, and told the
blind Maharaja, Dhritarashtra, all that had taken place that day, and
the Maharaja ordered his servants to lead him into the pavilion where
all the chieftains were gathered together. And all present were silent
when they saw the Maharaja, and the Maharaja said to Draupadi: “O,
daughter, my sons have done evil to you this day. But go now, you and
your husbands, to your own Raj, and remember not what has occurred,
and let the memory of this day be blotted out forever.” So the Pandavas
made haste with their wife Draupadi, and departed out of the city of
Hastinapur.
Then Duryodhana was exceeding wroth, and said to his father: “O
Maharaja, is it not a saying that when your enemy hath fallen down, he
should be annihilated without a war? And now we that had thrown the
Pandavas to the earth and had taken possession of all their wealth, you
have restored them all their strength, and permitted them to depart with
anger in their hearts; and now they will prepare to make war that they
may revenge themselves upon us for all that has been done and they will
return within a short while and slay us all. Give us leave, then, I pray
you, to play another game with these Pandavas, and let the side which
loses go into exile for twelve years; for thus, and thus only, can a war be
prevented between ourselves and the Pandavas.” And the Maharaja
granted the request of his son, and messengers were sent to bring back
.bn 087.png
.pn +1
the brethren, and the Pandavas obeyed the command of their uncle, and
returned to his presence; and it was agreed upon that Yudhisthira
should play one game more with Sakuni, and if Yudhisthira won the
Kauravas were to go into exile; and that if Sakuni won, the Pandavas
were to go into exile, and the exile was to be for twelve years, and
one year more; and during that thirteenth year those who were in
exile were to dwell in any city they pleased, but to keep themselves so
concealed that the others should never discover them; and if the others
did discover them before the thirteenth year was over, then those who
were in exile were to continue so for another thirteen years. So they
sat down again to play, and Sakuni had a set of cheating dice, as before,
and with them he won the game.
When Duhsasana saw that Sakuni had won the game, he danced
about for joy; and he cried out: “Now is established the Raj of Duryodhana.”
But Bhima said: “Be not elated with joy, but remember my
words: The day will come when I will drink your blood, or I am not the
son of Kunti.” And the Pandavas, seeing that they had lost, threw off
their garments and put on deer-skins, and prepared to depart into the
forest with their wife and mother, and their priest Dhaumya; but Vidura
said to Yudhisthira: “Your mother is old and unfitted to travel, so
leave her under my care;” and the Pandavas did so, and the brethren
went out from the assembly hanging down their heads with shame, and
covering their faces with their garments; but Bhima threw out his long
arms, and looked at the Kuravas furiously, and Draupadi spread her long
black hair over her face and wept bitterly. And Draupadi vowed a vow,
saying:
“My hair shall remain disheveled from this day, until Bhima shall
have slain Duhsasana and drunk his blood; and then he shall tie up my
hair again, whilst his hands are dripping with the blood of Duhsasana.”
Such was the great gambling match at Hastinapur in the Heroic age
of India. * * *
The avenging battle subsequently ensued. Bhima struck down
Duhsasana with a terrible blow of his mace, saying: “This day I fulfil my
vow against the man who insulted Draupadi!” Then setting his foot on
the breast of Duhsasana, he drew his sword and cut off the head of his
enemy; and holding his two hands to catch the blood, he drank it off,
crying out: “Ho! ho! Never did I taste anything in this world so sweet
as this blood.”
.sp 1
Chinese.—Many gambling games have been invented by the Chinese
and gambling houses are numerous in their cities and towns. Into these
dens, as is the case in other countries, the inexperienced are enticed by
sharpers, there to be plundered of their money. It is the old story; the
sharper pretends friendship for the unsophisticated visitor and a desire to
.bn 088.png
.pn +1
show him the notable sights. Once in the den, the victim is permitted to win
a small sum, several perhaps, but the result is always the same—he is
fleeced of his ready money, which may not be all his own, but entrusted
to him by neighbors and friends with which to purchase goods for them.
With money gone and character ruined the poor Chinaman, in many cases,
becomes a vagabond, in process of time, a beggar, or a thief, and finally
ends his course in suicide.
A common gambling instrument in China, consists of a circular
board, some 18 inches in diameter, which is divided, either into 8 or 16
equal parts, with lines drawn from the center to the division points at the
circumference. In the center is a standard, or post, some 8 inches high,
upon which two or three inches from the top, is placed a slender wooden
stick in such a manner as to revolve easily. At one end of this piece of
wood is tied a string, which hangs down nearly to the surface of the
board. Being turned by a sudden movement of the hand, the horizontal
stick will continue to revolve for sometime. When it stops the string indicates
the division of the board which wins. The player places his bet
on any division he may favor and whirls the stick himself. If the string
stops over any other place than the one upon which he placed his money,
he loses. If he wins, the proprietor of the concern pays him in money,
or sweetmeats, as he may prefer. This gambling device operates upon
the same principle as the modern “wheel of fortune.”
Another method of gambling may be called the “literary” or “poetical.”
The “banker,” or gambler proprietor, having provided himself
with a table, seats himself behind it, in the street. On the table, for the inspection
of those who may wish to gamble, is written a line of poetry of,
say, five or seven characters, one word of which is omitted. A list of
several words is furnished, anyone of which, if inserted in the blank
place, will make good sense. In betting which of these words is the one
omitted consists the gambling. He who guesses the right word receives
five times his stake. Yet another method of gambling is this: Provided
with three slender slips of bamboo, or other wood, eight or ten inches
long, the gambler seats himself by the wayside and, grasping the slips at
one end, holds them up so that they diverge from each other. A red
tassel, or string, hanging from the hand which conceals from sight the
lower ends of the slips, is supposed to be attached to one of them. He
who wishes to play the game bets that he can guess the slip to which the
string is attached. If he fails, he loses his stake; if he succeeds he receives
back his stake and twice as much more. The game is often dishonestly
operated, and the operator seldom forfeits any money.
Frequently, the red string is attached to all three of the slips, but in such
a way that when one of them is pulled from the hand which grasps it, it
will slip off and remain on the other two. If, then, one of these is pulled,
.bn 089.png
.pn +1
it slips again and remains attached to the one still held in the hand.
Then the gambler opens his hand to show that everything has been conducted
“fairly” and the thread is seen to be attached to the slip that was
not drawn, thus everything seems to have been honestly managed. Of
course, the man who operates deceitfully and unfairly does not allow the
condition of the string on the ends of the sticks in his hand to be seen or
examined at the beginning of the game.
In China, gambling is forbidden by law. It is tolerated by the government,
nevertheless, and considerable sums of money are realized by it
from this source. Indeed, certain magistrates at Canton once actually
converted their spare rooms in their respective “yamuns” into gaming
houses. But, as a rule, the dens are in back or side streets, for, there as
well as here, the more respectable trades people object to such an establishment.
In 1861, all the shop-keepers in a particular street in Canton
closed their shops and refused to open them, until the Governor-General
of the province promised to issue an order directing the district ruler to
close a gambling house which he had permitted to be opened in the street.
It appeared, however, that these merchants did not object to the gambling
establishments on moral grounds, but through fear that their business
would be injured.
There are various kinds of gaming houses in China. Some are conducted
by joint-stock companies, consisting of ten or twenty partners. In
such houses there are usually two apartments. In the front room is a
high table, in the center of which is a small square board, the sides of
which are numbered one, two, three and four. The game in this room
requires the presence of three of the partners. One is called the Tan-koon,
or croupier; the second, Tai-N’gan, or shroff, and sets by the side of
the former with his tables, scales and money drawers; and the third, the
Ho-Koon, who keeps account of the game and pays over the stakes to the
rightful winners. The gamblers and their patrons assemble around the
high table, on which the Tau-Koon, or croupier, places a handful of
“cash,” over which he immediately puts a cover so that the gamblers
cannot calculate the amount. The players are then requested to place
their stakes on such side of the square as they may choose. When this
has been done, the cover is removed by the croupier, who, using a thin
ivory rod a foot long, proceeds to diminish the heap of coin by drawing
away four pieces at a time. Should one piece remain the gambler who
placed his stake on the side of the small square marked one is the winner.
If two or three remain he saves his stake; if four, he loses it. This game
is called Ching-low and the player has one chance of winning, two of
retaining his stake and one of losing it. Another game, called Nim is
played at the same table. At this game the player has one chance of
winning double the amount of his stake, two of losing it and one of retaining
.bn 090.png
.pn +1
it. Should his stake be placed on that side of the board numbered
two, and two pieces of money remain of the heap after successive removals
of four, his winnings are double the amount of his bet. If three pieces
remain he retains his stake, but if either one or four remain he loses it.
Yet a third game played at this table is called Fan, in which the player
has one chance of winning three times his stake and three chances of
losing it. Still another and similar game at this table is known as Kok.
In it the stake is placed at a corner of the board, between two of the numbers,
and if either of them corresponds to the number of pieces left of the
pile of money, the player wins the amount of his stake; if either of the
other two numbers corresponds he loses his bet.
In the inner apartment of these establishments, the stakes are all
silver coin, and here also three of the partners are required to conduct
the game. The stakes are often heavy and the money is not placed on
the table for fear the vagabonds or desperate characters in the place should
make a rush and seize it. The players and their stakes are therefore
distinguished by corresponding cards from different packs. Because of
the large sums paid monthly to the mandarins by the proprietors the
expenses of the latter are very heavy and they exact from the players
seven per cent. of all the winnings. Sometimes gaming establishments
are started by prostitutes, but they are generally closed by the authorities
as soon as detected.
One peculiar mode of gambling is called Koo-Yan, or “The
Ancients,” sometimes known under the name of “Flowery Characters.”
This game, it is said, originated in the department of Chun-Chow, and
was introduced in the 28th year of the reign of Taou-Kwang. The term
“ancients” means a number of names by which thirty-six personages of
former times were known. These names are divided into nine different
classes as follows:
1. Four men who attained the highest literary distinction. In a
former state of existence these men were respectively a fish, a white goose,
a white snail, and a peacock.
2. Five distinguished military officers. These men were once
respectively a worm, a rabbit, a pig, a tiger, and a cow.
3. Six successful merchants. These were once respectively a flying
dragon, a white dog, a white horse, an elephant, a wild cat, and
a wasp.
4. Four persons who were for their uninterrupted happiness
on earth. Respectively, in former state, a frog, an eagle, a monkey,
and a dragon.
5. Four females. Respectively a butterfly, a precious stone, a
white swallow and a pigeon.
.bn 091.png
.pn +1
6. Five beggars. Respectively a prawn, a snake, a fish, a deer,
and a sheep.
7. Four Buddhist priests. Respectively a tortoise, a hen, an elk,
and a calf.
8. Two priests. Respectively a white egret, and a yellow
streaked cat.
9. The name of a Buddhist nun who, in another world, was a fox.
The company selects a person who has an aptitude for composing
enigmas, to whom they pay a very large salary. New enigmas are constantly
wanted, as the houses where this game is played are open twice
daily, at 7 A. M. and 8 P. M. Each enigma is supposed to refer to one
of the creatures enumerated. When an enigma is composed, it is printed
and sold to the people, the sale of itself bringing in a considerable revenue.
When the purchaser of an enigma thinks he has discovered the creature to
which it refers, he writes his answer on a sheet of paper, and at the
appointed hour hastens to the gambling house and gives it into the keeping
of a secretary, together with the sum of money he is prepared to stake
upon the correctness of his guess. When all the answers and stakes
have been received, the names of those who have answered correctly are
recorded by the secretary. Suspended from the roof of the chamber,
where the players are assembled, is a folded scroll containing a picture of
the creature to which the enigma refers. At the proper time this scroll is
unfolded by the secretary, and as soon as the picture is seen it is greeted
with a loud shout of exultation by the successful few and with murmurs
of discontent from the many who have guessed wrong. “It is hardly
necessary to add that the managers take care to provide enigmas of such
ambiguous character that the majority are always wrong in their conjectures.
The amount staked in these places is limited.”
Much money is lost at such establishments by ladies, but as they
are not allowed to appear in public, they are represented by their female
servants.
Large sums are daily lost by all classes in a game called ta-pak-up-pu,
or “strike the white dove.” A company is formed of fifty partners,
having equal shares. One acts as overseer, and, for reasons which will
presently appear, is required to live in strict retirement. To him is given
a sheet of paper on which are eighty Chinese characters, representing,
respectively, heaven, earth, sun, moon, stars, etc. In his private apartment,
he makes twenty of the characters with a vermilion pencil. The
sheet is then deposited in a box, which is carefully locked. Thousands of
sheets of paper, containing eighty similar characters, are then sold to the
public. Marking ten of the eighty characters, the purchasers next morning,
take their papers to the gambling establishment to have them compared
with the one marked by the overseer. Before they give them up,
.bn 092.png
.pn +1
they make and retain copies of them. When all the papers have been
received, the box containing the overseer’s paper is unlocked, and when
taken out, the player’s papers are compared with it. If a player has not
marked more than four of the characters marked by the overseer, he
receives nothing. If he has marked five, he receives seven “cash;” if
six, seventy “cash;” if eight, seven dollars; and if ten, fifteen dollars.
A person can buy as many as three hundred copies of the gambling sheet,
but he must make them all alike. There are never more than two establishments
of this kind in large cities and their winnings must be very
great, judging from the number of sheets sold daily.
There are also houses in which cards are played night and day, and
in them many persons are brought to ruin. To elude the vigilance of the
authorities, these establishments are more or less private, but card players
experience little trouble in finding such haunts. Gambling by means of
oranges is also practiced at fruit stalls, the wagers being made upon the
number of pips or seeds an orange may have. At fruit stalls, also, it is
common to gamble for sticks of sugar cane. The cane is placed in a
perpendicular position, and he who succeeds in cutting it asunder from
top to bottom with a sharp edged knife, wins it from the fruitier. Should
the attempt fail, the fruitier retains his cane and wins more than its value
in money. Gambling by means of a joint of meat, or pork, or fish, is a
very common pastime. The joint or fish is suspended from the top of a
long pole and bets are taken as to its weight.
The games prevalent in Japan closely resemble those practiced in
China. Cards and dice are strictly prohibited, and, although the law is
said to be transgressed by the gambling houses, at home the Japanese
respect it.
.bn 093.png
.pn +1
.pm chaphead 'CHAPTER III.' 'ANCIENT AND MODERN GREEKS AND ROMANS, TURKEY IN EUROPE, AND ASIA MINOR.' chap3
.sp 2
It is probable that the fall of Greece was due to the license that
prevailed as to gaming, and consequently to all other and lesser forms
of dissipation and corruption. Philip of Macedon was planning the battle
of Cheronea at the very time when dicing had reached its most shameful
height in Athens. Public associations existed, not for the purpose of defending
Greece against her foes, but for the encouragement of the basest
passions that surge in the human breast. Both Philip and Alexander
knew the value to despotism of vice among the people. Alexander put a
fine on those of his courtiers who did not play, for he had a jealous fear
of subjects who were engaged in more serious pursuits.
But dice alone did not furnish the implements of gambling. The
ancient Greeks had the equivalent of Cross and Pile, and gambled at
cocking mains. The Athenian orator, Callistratus, notes the desperation
of these practices when he says that the games in which the losers go on
doubling their stakes “resemble ever-recurring wars, which terminate
only with the extinction of the combatants.”
It was a practice of the ancients to put the invention of vicious acts
or games upon foreign nations. Thus we have Plutarch’s indignant
answers to Herodotus; but no Grecian ever resented the story that dice
was first made by Palamedes, at the siege of Troy. Dice were called alsae
by the Romans, and there were two kinds, the tali, or four-sided knucklebones,
and the tesserarae or six-sided bones. The tali has four sides
long-wise, the two ends were not regarded. Up one side there was an
ace, or canis; on the opposite side six; on the other two sides four and
three. On the tesserarae the numbers were from one to six. But on both
sides of alsae or dice the numbers on the upper and lower side would make
seven, as now-a-days on dice.
The game was played with three tesserarae and four tali. They were
put into a box made into the form of a tower, with a straight neck—wider
below than above, called fritillas turris, turricula, orca, etc. This
box was shaken, and the dice was thrown upon the gaming board, forus,
alvenus, tabulalus oriae. The highest or most fortunate throw was called
Venus, or jactus venereus, or basilicas (the King’s throw.) It consisted of
three sixes on the , and differing numbers, as two alike, on the
.bn 094.png
.pn +1
tali. The worst throw, the dog throw, was called in Latin jactus pessimus,
or jactus canes. In this throw, the three tesserarae must be aces, and the
tali all the same number. The other throws were valued according to the
numbers. Cocked dice nullified the throw, as now-a-days. While throwing
the dice it was customary to name the desires of the player, and this
practice still holds with negroes in their game of craps. Old men were
specially fond of the game. Jacta alsa, esto! Let the die be cast! was Cæsar’s
cry at the Rubicon when he betrayed the Roman republic. The law prohibited
dice-playing, except in the month of December, during the Saturnalia,
and the character of gamesters was then as infamous as now,
although there was much gambling. The works of Horace, Cicero,
Suetonius, Juvenal, Tacitus, Plautus, Varro, Ovid, Pliny, and Paulus, show
by direct reference and by metaphor, the familiarity of dice in the public
mind, and the evils they involved. Persius, in his satires, speaks of the
practice of cogging the dice, and cheating the unwary.
Augustus, the first Roman emperor, was an habitual gambler, and,
notwithstanding the laws prohibiting the practice, gambling was prevalent
at Rome in all ranks of society. Although the emperor was a passionate
gambler—as devoted to the vice, at least, as his cold and deliberate nature
would permit—yet he was nothing if not a politician, and in frequenting
the gaming table, he had motives other than cupidity. For example, he
wrote Tiberius: “If I had exacted my winnings during the festival of
Minerva; if I had not lavished my money on all sides, instead of losing
twenty thousand sestercii (about $5,000) I should have gained 150,000
sestercii (about $37,000). I prefer it thus, however, for my bounty should
win me immense ‘glory.’”
If Horace may be credited, they could “cog” a die in the Augustan
age, if they could not “secure” it, as in this.
The emperor, Caligula, converted his palace into a gambling house,
and while indulging his passion for play, this human monster conceived
his most fiendish deeds, and resorted to falsehood and perjury in his efforts
to escape the tide of ill-luck that set against him. When frenzied by losses,
this wretch would vent his cruel spleen upon those about him, and to make
good what he had lost he did not hesitate at murder most foul and confiscation
most wanton. On one occasion, it is related, after having condemned
to death several Gauls of great opulence and confiscated their
wealth, he rejoined his gambling companions and exclaimed, “I pity you
when I see you lose a few sestercii, whilst, with the stroke of a pen I have
just won six hundred millions” (about $150,000,000). Although the
author of a treatise on gambling, yet the emperor Claudius played like an
imbecile. In gaming, as in all else, Nero was a veritable madman, and
would stake hundreds of thousands on a single cast of the dice. In ghastly
.bn 095.png
.pn +1
humor the imbecile, Claudius would play against the estates of his murdered
victims. In his caustic description of the hypotheosis of Claudius,
the great Seneca brings the emperor finally to hell, and represents him as
there condemned to play at dice forever with a bottomless box, always in
hope, but ever balked.
.pm start_poem
“For whenso’er he shook the box to cast,
The rattling dice delude his eager haste;
And when he tried again, the waggish bone
Insensibly was through his fingers gone;
Still he was throwing, yet he ne’er had thrown.”
.pm end_poem
Cicero is authority for the statement that Cato, the censor, was an
inveterate gambler. If so, how inappropriate the appellation which has
brought to his memory an ill-deserved fame? With what consistency could a
man addicted to gambling censure the conduct of his fellow man? Domitian
was blamed for gaming from morning till night and without cessation
even on the festival days of the Roman calendar. But this is scarcely
notable in a man who was brutal in every instinct, base in every passion.
In his satires Juvenal exhibits children playing dice in imitation of their
fathers, and in his third satire they are represented cheating in their
games. The fighting quails of the Romans are mentioned by Plutarch,
and to him we are also indebted for the lament of Marc Antony, that even
the very quails of Octavius Caesar were superior to his own. Was this
a foreboding of the fate of Cleopatra’s lover at the battle of ? Returning
to Juvenal we find this graphic picture: “When was the madness
of games of chance more furious? Nowadays, not content with carrying
his purse to the gaming table, the gamester conveys his iron chest to the
play room. It is there that, as soon as the gaming instruments are distributed,
you witness the most terrible contests. Is it not mere madness
to lose one hundred thousand sestercii, and refuse a garment to a slave
perishing with cold?” This inexorable and terrible satirist was the
contemporary of eleven Roman Emperors, including Domitian.
Gibbon, quoting from Ammianus Marcellinus, thus describes the
situation at Rome at the end of the fourth century: “Another method of
introduction into the houses and society of the ‘great’ is derived from the
profession of gaming, or, as it is more politely styled, of play. The confederates
are united by a strict and indissoluble bond of friendship, or
rather of conspiracy. A superior degree of skill in the “tessarian” art is
a sure road to wealth and reputation. A master of that sublime science
who, in a supper or assembly, is placed below a magistrate, displays in
his countenance the surprise and indignation which Cato might be supposed
.bn 096.png
.pn +1
to feel when he was refused the prætorship by the votes of a
capricious ‘people.’”
All authorities who mention the subject agree that gambling made
fearful havoc in society and government under the Emperors, and the
conclusion is irresistible, that the “decline and fall” was due in a large
measure to the prevalence of this infatuating and demoralizing vice. It
is asserted, on good authority, that at the epoch when Constantine abandoned
Rome, never to return, every inhabitant of that city, down to the
populace, were addicted to gambling.
The Greeks are to-day famous for the number of sharpers that ply
their trade, both with dice and cards, but especially with cards. To cheat
in this way the Greek relies on shifting the cut, which is done in many
ways:
1. As the Greek lays down the pack to be cut, he is ready to seize
that part of the deck which his opponent leaves on the table, and lay it
on the other so that the upper part projects over the lower and toward
him. This offers a niche for the insertion of the little finger of the hand
which raises the pack. It is possible for a player having his little finger
thus in a pack, to twirl the two parts and restore them to their original or
uncut position. All that can be seen is a whirring movement, and even
this cannot be seen if the hand falls for an instant beneath the table.
2. To pass the cut, the sharper replaces the top part of the deck
himself, but so quickly that it is impossible to see that he puts the top
part almost half way back off the deck. With the right hand he raises
the misshapen pack to the palm of his left hand. As the back of his left
hand obscures the vision, he clutches the forward or lower half of the
pack and brings it to the top, the appearance being that he is straightening
the pack, in order to deal. He now has the cards as he stocked them
in the first place. This trick is called the straddle and other names.
3. A wider card is introduced from another pack, and placed exactly
over the stocked portion of the deck. As this card is about half-way
down, and as it offers a salient edge for the fingers, the victim usually
makes the cut precisely where the sharper designed it.
4. The bridge is formed by bending half the deck convexly and the
other concavely. Thus, if the other half be convex at the face of the
card, it is difficult for the victim to lift any of the lower half, and he will
make the cut in precisely the same place as if there were a wider card to
aid him.
.bn 097.png
.pn +1
In dealing, the sharper can at any time retain on the top of the pack
a card which he does not wish to deliver, and it is impossible to detect
the cheat until after a long study of the motions of the player. When
gamesters play with each other, they are constantly on the lookout for
this trick, which is aided by the crimping or denting of important cards.
A gambler examines his aces closely to see if his opponent has crimped
them. If not, he crimps them. If two gamblers confront each other in
a game where “producers” are present, the two gamblers “take the
office” and cheat together, dividing stakes after the play.
The palming of cards is practiced where two of the sharpers sit
together in a large game. The dealer holds a “hand” in the palm of
his right hand, dealing to himself a hand at his extreme left. As he lays
down the deck he lowers his left arm upon his fair “hand” and pushes it
along, meanwhile pretending to pick up the “hand” which has been in
the palm. The confederate stays out of the play and with his right arm
receives the fair “hand” and throws it in the rejected cards along with
his own hand.
The roof is a large number of cards which the sharper holds from a
deck of thick cards. The decks are changed by consent from very thin
faro-cards to very thick cards. At the first deal of the victim the roof is
placed on in the act of cutting, and the victim cannot detect the difference
in thickness because of the change of decks. Thus the victim deals
himself four kings and his dishonest foe four aces. Counting the cards,
he finds the deck complete. Vain in the belief of his acuteness, he bets
and loses.
The cold deck is a pre-arranged pack, introduced under the tray of a
waiter at the call for liquor, or carried in rear pockets called finetles.
Pockets called costieres are in front. To mark the cards, the Greek will
buy the stock of a tradesman and exchange the goods on some excuse,
often preparing and sealing the decks. Then, at some future time, he
has the satisfaction of being asked to play with cards bought by his
victim, every one of which carries a mark known only to the rogue.
The Greek carries a tin-box under the fore-arm, in his coat sleeve.
This is called the bag in English. Projecting from the sleeve is a pair of
pincers which will seize and withdraw any card that may be desired.
Basiled cards, or strippers, were one of the most effective methods of
cheating in the eighteenth century, when the secret was known only to
sharpers. Strippers are made by cutting the cards so that they are wider
at one end than at the other. Now, if one of the cards be turned, it will
present, at the narrower end of the deck, the feeling of a wide card, and
can be stripped out of the deck in a twinkling. In the hands of an
expert, the basil may be scarcely perceptible to the touch, and the further
advantage of a variety of basils may be obtained. Thus, with a convex
.bn 098.png
.pn +1
basil or ax-like edge, the gambler may feel for a court card, while with
a convex basil, or razor-like edge, he may detect a low card. Thus he
may cut high or low with only a few cards turned, and those by accident
in the hands of his victim. Basiled cards cannot be detected without a
delicate touch and close scrutiny, implying suspicion and inviting a
quarrel if the rogue be vicious, as none is so jealous of his honor as a
thief.
The chapelet is an arrangement or stock of cards by the order of
certain words. One of the oldest chapelets is found in Latin, and each
word means a certain card of the pack of fifty-two.
The poverty, squalor and filth among the Turks and the Greeks is
due, in a considerable degree, to gambling. Men gamble away their
money, their merchandise, their household, their clothes, and not infrequently
they hazard themselves, on the chance of a die.
“One of my sudri, or carriers,” writes a gentleman to us, “when I was
going from Jenidscheh up into the Rhodope mountains, had lost himself
in this way and had become the property of a wealthy ‘Broussa’ merchant,
but on the death of the latter he again became free and resumed his
precarious gambling life. That is only one instance out of hundreds to
be found in the Turkish Peninsula, of men becoming so degraded by this
mad passion for gaming.
“I remember once stopping at a street corner in Zante, the capital
of the Island of Currants, the Zacynthus of the ancients, and watching a
party of ragged idlers, who had chosen a shady corner of a colonnade
as they played ‘comboloio.’ The ‘comboloio’ is a rosary, or bead string,
and the game is played with the loose beads and a ‘Kanate’ or earthen
jar, with a long, narrow neck, generally used for water. I didn’t understand
the rationale of the game, but it seemed to consist of betting on which of
the colored beads would come out successively, after being shaken up
in the ‘Kanate.’ Presently one of the party went off to fetch some wine
and I strolled away down to the harbor. I had occasion to pass the
same spot in the evening, about dusk, or rather the short twilight that
answers to dusk in those latitudes, and the group was still there, rolling
the colored beads out of the water vessel, and passing little copper coins
to and fro. They were always good humored and merry. Indeed,
amongst the lower classes in Greece, and particularly amongst these
loafers of the street, one rarely meets with any strong display of feeling
over losses or gains at play. They have become largely imbued with the
spirit of the Turk, and take everything that comes with a dull resignation
to fate. There are few large gambling houses in Greece, as far as I
know, but every town has plenty of little ‘dens’ and ‘joints’ where
gaming is openly practiced and allowed.
.bn 099.png
.pn +1
“The spirit of hazard is inherent in the Greek, and everywhere one
finds the dice box, the wheel, the ‘Koulai,’ or card tables. Cheating
is regarded, I will not say as legitimate, but at least as justifiable. If a
man is fool enough to allow himself to be cheated, he must suffer the
consequences, and his acceptance of these consequences is always graceful
and blended with a sort of admiration for the cheater. Speaking of this,
I remember seeing in the museum at Athens (I think it was)
a number of the Kanatii mentioned above, with false bottoms carefully
fitted to them. They are a standing puzzle to the ceramist. If they
were used simply as vessels for holding water or wine, the use of these
false bottoms seems inexplicable, but I believe this was only a device
used by the gamblers in the game of ‘comboloio.’
“The American gentleman, traveling in Greece, had better beware
of sitting down at the card table with delicate handed Greeks. He is
sure to be invited wherever he goes, and unless he knows his company
well, he is sure to lose his money, no matter how skilled he may be in the
tricks common to the fraternity in his native land in the west; and if he
should take a hand and find that he is being plucked, the only way is to
ignore it, and withdraw from the game at an opportune moment. It
would never do to treat the Greek in the manner that certain parties once
treated Ah Sin when playing ‘The game he did not understand.’ Everywhere,
through the Grecian Islands, one will find these dens kept by
Levantines and Greeks, and fitted up with all the modern paraphernalia
of gambling.
“This is the most beautiful part of Europe. The waves of the
glorious Mediterranean wash eternally on the ‘Shores of the old
Romance.’ No spot of the land, or the sea, but has a history, a legend,
or a poem. Here in old Salonica, the seven-towered citadel, once the
Acropolis, still watches o’er the town, its rugged cliff facing Mount
Olympus across the gulf. Down below, in the town itself, is many a
temple, but little attended since the days when Olympus was the abode
of the gods. What a great pity that the people should have become so
degraded.
.pm start_poem
‘We have the Pyrrhic dance as yet;
‘Where is the Pyrrhic-phalanx gone?”
.pm end_poem
“Sings Byron. Yes, the Pyrrhic-dancer and the Pyrrhic gambler
meet one at every step. Some of these old houses that I have mentioned
were pointed out to me as noted gambling hells, and they have probably
been so for centuries.
“One house that I went into at Corfu, just off the Italian-looking
Spianata, or Esplanade, had scratched on the tiled walls of the rooms
some jokes and ribaldries, which must have been hundreds of years old.
Among other things there was a representative of the old tessara, or
.bn 100.png
.pn +1
marble game, a sort of pocket billiards, now to be found only in the lowest
dives, and usually played with biased balls.
“At Milon, a suburb of Corinth, is a magnificent gaming house,
worthy of Monte Carlo, and it would seem as if a special Providence
watched over it. The street in which it stands has been twice almost
entirely destroyed by fire, but the house has escaped; earthquake after
earthquake has left the place intact; and while I was in the city there
was a very severe shock of earthquake, which desolated the entire suburb,
but did not even disarrange the mirrors in the ‘Glass Room,’ a chamber
where only high play is permitted, and whose very floors and ceilings are
of plate glass. By the way, there is an ugly hole through one of these
very mirrors, a little round hole, which has not starred the glass,
telling that a certain Russian Prince once shot himself with a revolver
in that room, and in his death agony pressed the trigger again, firing
another shot which pierced the mirror behind
.il fn=i_094.jpg w=125px ew=20%
.bn 101.png
.pn +1
.sp 4
.pm chaphead 'CHAPTER IV. ' 'GERMANY, RUSSIA, ROUMANIA, BULGARIA AND SERVIA.' chap4
.sp 2
“The Huns,” says St. Ambrose, “a fierce and warlike race, are always
subject to a set of usurers, who lend them what they want for the
purpose of gaming. They live without laws and yet obey the laws of
dice.” The Father adds that when a player has lost he sets his
liberty and often his life upon a single cast, and is accounted infamous if
he does not pay his “debt of honor,” as a debt of dishonor has always
been named.
We are told by Tacitus, in his history of the Germans, that the warriors
gambled without the excuse of being drunk, which was probably an
ironical indictment of the Romans, who did the same thing. The practices
noted in a later age, by St. Ambrose, are described by the great
Roman scholar, who says that a German who loses his liberty, submits to
be chained and exposed to sale. The winner is always anxious to barter
away such slaves.
Let us now look into the Germany of to-day. In 1838, the government
at Paris abolished the public salons of play, and then arose Baden,
Weisbaden, Sissingern, Wilhelmbad, Koethen, Hamburg, Ems, Spa, Geneva
and Monaco. The gaming season began in the spring, when the
leaves were green and closed in the late autumn. The opening and closing
days of the tables were like the saturnalia of the Romans. Rouge-et-noir
and roulette were the games.
.il fn=i_096.jpg w=450px ew=80%
.ca The Garden at Wiesbaden.
In 1842, Homburg was an obscure village, the capital of the smallest
of European countries. Its inhabitants were poor and unassuming.
There was one inn, the “Aigle.” To this, a few German families came
to drink the waters of a mineral spring. In the year 1842, the famous
Blanc brothers arrived from Paris, from whence they had been driven.
Frankfort had refused to receive them, and hearing of Homburg, they
traveled thither in a diligence, and put up at the “Aigle.” The prime
minister, who governed the Landgrafate of Homburg, at a salary of $300
a year, was open to the offers of a visitor so rich as the elder Blanc. Permission
was given to set up a roulette-wheel at the inn and an old and
skillful croupier of Frascati turned the wheel. No one could beat this
wheel. So successful was the summer’s business that Blanc, at its close,
obtained from the prime minister an exclusive concession to build a cure-hall,
.bn 102.png
.bn 103.png
.pn +2
lay out a public garden, and pay into the national exchequer 40,000
florins (over $17,000) a year. With this concession Blanc went to Frankfort,
and the Jews aided him in forming a company with a capital stock of
about $175,000. Of this sum the Jews took half, and the Blancs half.
During the winter a small cure-hall was built, and advertisements of the
properties of the waters filled Europe. Next year visitors poured
into Homburg in large numbers, and they were offered fully as much gambling
as mineral water. From this beginning arose the great “company.”
In 1867, the place was the most noted gaming resort in Europe. Nature
and art had conspired to make it attractive. On one side are the mountains;
on the other the river plains; the stream being the Main. On the
mountain-side is a forest, with walks for the visitors. Gardens, lawns,
groves, lakes, fountains, swans, music, and perfume, all united to dull
the sense of right, and make a heaven of hell, for hell was what Homburg
had come to be in 1867.
Fronting on the main street of the town, built of brown freestone in the
fashion of a palace of Florence, was the “Temple of Fortune.” A spacious
vestibule, paved with Roman mosaic, led to the great salon, whose
walls and ceilings were laden with gilt and sculpture, mirrors and curtains
of velvet and satin. Sofas and chairs of damask appeared to invite to rest,
but there was no rest in that dread chamber. The rattle of the balls went
on. Money sounded and checks clicked. There came regularly the cries
of the croupiers, the cappers and the recommenders: “Make your play,
gentlemen and ladies;” “The play is made; nothing more goes.”
As he entered, the visitor must remove his hat, as if he were in St.
Peter’s. The goddess of fortune was a jealous and very exacting deity.
From a gentleman once connected with the “Levant Herald,” we
are indebted for the following glimpses of gambling as it obtains in the
Balkan Peninsular to-day:
“In Bulgaria and Servia I have seen the peasants throwing dice, or
coins, or even a notched stick, to decide the point as to who should pay
for the morning meal of ‘yekmek e’ soot’ (bread and milk.)
“The gamins of the street gamble for ‘,’ little sticks of
what looks like ‘Turkish Delight.’ In all the towns one may see at the
street corners, the ‘hakimal,’ or ‘fakirs,’ with their packs of greasy cards,
wheels of fortune, and little cunning traps of dingy brass work into which
you drop small pieces of money and see whether it will ever reach the
bottom. Unfortunately that happy event rarely occurs. The coin almost
invariably becomes intercepted in its tortuous path and is claimed by the
swarthy proprietor of the “faki.” Very often these men carry jewelry,
and will match their wares against some property of your own; then play
you ‘double or quits’ at ‘djini,’ which is practically the same as three
card monte, only both parties have the privilege of a throw. While in
.bn 104.png
.pn +1
Belgrade I came across an Arab, a most intelligent man, who had been a
courier in Europe for years. I remarked to him upon this passion for
gambling, and denounced its results in very strong terms. ‘Yes,’ he
said, ‘but what would you have? These people are happy; they enjoy
themselves. Why should they work when they can earn money so
‘Ed djunya djifetun ve talibeha khilab’ (The world is an abomination,
and those that work thereon are dogs.) This man had a supreme
contempt for manual labor, and would spend days and nights in gaming
houses. He was a master of the art of cheating, and told me he never
employed any but fair means. ‘I know enough to guard myself from
others,’ he said, ‘but why should one waste one’s talents on cattle like
these?’ pointing to a long-bearded, venerable ‘hakimal’ near by. I think,
however, that he did use his ‘talents’ pretty freely, for I noticed that he
never came away from the table empty-handed.
“Now here was an instance of a man with remarkable natural
intelligence, a fine linguist, well read, cultivated, a most agreeable
traveling companion; but he was a gambler, and all his thoughts and
energies were directed to one object—the winning of money by unfair
means. He won immense sums, and if he had kept them, would have
been a very wealthy man. But ‘light come, light go,’ and every cent was
squandered in pleasure, often of the vilest, most revolting kind. I told
him how it would probably end in a horrible death from starvation.
‘No,’ he replied quietly, ‘not like that. There is always a way out of
life,’ and he pointed significantly to a small Malay creese which he
carried in his belt. I went with him one night to the ‘Tag Alek’ in
Belgrade, a hell of the worst reputation, and where I would not have
ventured alone for a kingdom, but I knew I was safe in the company
of ‘Le Brulant,’ as the courier was called. We passed through a
dimly lighted court yard and entered by a little arched door-way, which
opened into a small stone hall with a little fountain in the middle. My
companion spoke a few words to the man in charge (cawass), who supplied
us with felt sandals, and also gave me a loose gown to put over my
European dress. Then we passed into a long, low room filled with little
tables, each occupied by its group of card players, who were waited on
by nearly nude negroes.
.il fn=i_099.jpg w=378px ew=75%
.ca The Old Castle, and View of Baden-Baden.
“There was almost perfect silence, broken now and then by a
muttered oath or exclamation. The players were well, and even richly
dressed, and seemed to embrace many nationalities. We went through
noiselessly, and into another small room fitted up with divans and
lounges. This was a conversation room, and there were two or three
men talking in a Slav dialect in one corner. From here one could pass
by separate doors, to the rooms where roulette, rouge et noir, and other
games were played, but my companion refused to enter these, saying we
.bn 105.png
.bn 106.png
.pn +2
should only disturb the players. We sat down, and an attendant brought
us some coffee, black and bitter as gall, then handed us each a
‘tcihbouque’ (pipe), to light while a little boy dressed as an Albanian,
brought us a piece of red hot charcoal on a platter. After a few minutes
‘Le Brulant’ proposed that we should see the rest of the house. I agreed,
and we arose. ‘Let’s go to the Shades first,’ he said. I asked him
what he meant. ‘Well,’ was the reply, ‘the rooms over these,’ pointing
to the way by which we had entered, ‘are nothing. The men who
play there are quiet, steady people. They are not initiated. Look here,’
and he drew back a heavy gold-embroidered curtain which concealed the
end of the passage we had traversed. It was a magnificent room which
lay beyond, gorgeous with gold and silver, and all the vivid colors of
oriental furnishing. At the different tables were men and women seated,
and apparently absorbed in their game. The attendants in this room
were young girls dressed in a single fold of a fabric so fine and transparent
that the white flesh gleamed through like pearl. My companion dropped
the curtain and said: ‘Ah, there’s no one there to-night but the Lurley
(mentioning the soubriquet of a woman infamously known all over
Europe) and she seems to have a new victim.’ The Arab ground his
teeth together savagely, as he hissed: ‘They may well call her the
Lurley.’ We looked into a number of other rooms, where the same
scene was being enacted, with variations. These were the public rooms,
but there were also private dens, some of which were set apart for opium
devotees. ‘But,’ I said to ‘Le Brulant,’ ‘I don’t see any danger in
coming here. Everything seems quiet and orderly. How is it that the
house has such a fiendish reputation?’ ‘Yes, you see the fair side
to-night,’ he answered, ‘but if I was to leave you now, you might never
get out of this place alive, if you had any money or jewelry about you.
One of those sirens yonder would soon lure you to a nice, cool resting
place at the bottom of the Danube.’ He said this so fiercely that I
shuddered, and the thought struck me that the gambling fever might
flash out in his veins at any moment and leave me without a protector
in this hell upon earth. He saw my disquietude, and said gently:
‘Come, let’s go; its best not to stay too long.’ We passed out by
another door opening on the same dark court yard, and I breathed more
freely when we reached the open air, and I could see the stars above my
head and feel the fresh breeze blowing down from the mountains, sweeping
away the sense of languor and enervation imbued by the heavy scented
atmosphere of the Tag’ Alek.”
At the German watering places the gambling houses were required to
pay a heavy tax by the several principalities, which licensed them, notwithstanding
games of hazard were forbidden by the laws. Moreover, the
respective governments were so perfectly conscious of the ruin caused by
.bn 107.png
.pn +1
gaming that they prohibited their subjects from patronizing the licensed
establishments. In Homburg the law even forbade citizens from living
intimately with gamblers and visitors, under a penalty of from 30 to 150
florins.
“The bankers” of Baden-Baden paid an annual license of 300,000
francs ($60,000), which was expended in constructing and beautifying the
baths. The “bankers” were at an annual expense, in addition to this
license, of 700,000 francs ($140,000), yet, notwithstanding this, the net
profit of one season amounted to 2,000,000 francs ($400,000).
At Wiesbaden and Ems, the tables belonged to a joint stock company,
which paid 115,000 florins for the double license. So profitable was the
business that the company offered 100,000 florins more for the privilege of
keeping the establishment open during the winter. The expenses of the
company, for the season of 1860, were estimated at 750,000 francs, yet,
from the net profit of the year, a dividend of 49·30 francs was paid on
each one of the 25,000 shares of stock, showing an aggregate net profit
of 1,232,500 francs ($246,500). At Wiesbaden there were two tables for
roulette and two for rouge-et-noir, and at Ems one for each.
Homburg paid a license of 50,000 francs ($10,000), for which it had
the privilege of keeping the tables in operation throughout the year. The
society, or company, defrayed the expense of all buildings and embellishments.
Its capital was divided into 10,000 shares, each of which earned
a dividend of fifty-three francs.
Spa, for a time one of the most flourishing gaming resorts, paid a
net annual profit of more than 1,000,000 francs from the operation of one
roulette and one rouge-et-noir table. Geneva, like Spa, paid no license.
The gaming “sessions” were held in a mansion of the President of the
Council, for which, in 1860, a rental of 25,000 francs was paid. The
general expenses that year were about 125,000 francs, and the net profits
300,000 francs ($60,000). Towards the end of the last century, Aix-la-Chapelle
was a great rendez-vous of gamblers, and play there was generally
desperate and ruinous. The chief banker paid a license of 4,000
Louis. The gaming profits in 1870 were 120,000 florins ($70,000).
Wiesbaden is in the Duchy of Nassau, being three or four miles
farther from the historic city of Frankfort, to the westward, than Homburg
is to the northward. Situated on the spurs of the Taunaus, about
100 feet above the Rhine, it is environed by beautiful villas, remarkable
for the picturesqueness of their gardens—the residences, for the most
part, of the wealthy bankers of Frankfort, the financial center of continental
Europe. Wiesbaden is one of the oldest watering places in Germany.
The locality is referred to by Pliny, in his natural history, and
the remains of a Roman fortress were discovered some twenty years ago
in the Heidenburg, north of the city.
.bn 108.png
.pn +1
Among the noteworthy buildings of the place are the Ducal Palace,
built in imitation of the Alhambra, the ministerial building, once occupied
by the Florentine Consulate, and the Catholic Church. Until 1872, the
architectural and social center was the Cure Hall. In this structure the
principal hall once contained copies of the Apollo, Venus, Laocoon and other
celebrated productions of ancient art, and was embellished with pillars of
red and gray marble quarried in the region. Outwardly, the Cure Hall
is a reproduction of the immortal Pantheon, with its imposing portico
fronting upon a charming square, wherein fountains play in the sunlight
or beneath the soft rays of the moon, glinting through the leaves and
branches, all of which makes beautiful shades and contrasts of color. On
each side of the square are broad colonnades lined with fancy shops. The
interior of the Cure Hall was furnished and adorned in a sumptuous and
florid manner, as at other German Spas, and the pleasure grounds in the
rear presented a charming prospect of walks, grottoes, and miniature lakes.
When gambling was in the ascendant at Wiesbaden, society there
was in a very mixed and deplorable state. The fast were in full possession,
almost, and as late as 1872 respectable women dared not take a stroll
in the grounds outside the Cure Hall. When gambling, with “hideous
mien,” stalked through this fair scene, the aged, broken down courtesans
of Paris, Vienna and Berlin made Wiesbaden their autumn rendez-vous.
A correspondent of the London Daily Telegraph described them as
in all the colors of the rainbow, painted to the roots of their
dyed hair, shamelessly decollette, prodigal of “free” talk and unseemly
gestures, these ghastly creatures, hideous caricatures of youth and beauty,
flaunted about the play rooms and gardens, levying blackmail upon those
who were imprudent enough to engage them in “chaff” or badinage,
and desperately endeavoring to hook themselves onto the wealthier and
younger members of the male community. They poison the air around
them with sickly perfume; they assume titles and refer to one another as
“cette chere comtesse,” their walk was something between a prance and a
wiggle; they prowled about the terrace whilst the music was playing,
seeking whom they might devour, or rather whom they might inveigle
for their devouring. How they did gorge themselves with food and drink
when some silly lad or aged roue allowed himself to be bullied or wheedled
into paying their scope, their name was legion and they constituted the
very worst feature of a palace which, naturally a paradise, was turned
into a seventh hell by the uncontrolled rioting of human passions. They
had no friends, no “protectors.” They were dependent upon accident
for a meal or a piece of gold to throw away at the tables; they were
plague spots upon the face of society; they were, as a rule, grossly ignorant,
and horribly cynical, and yet there were many men who were proud
of their acquaintance, always ready to entertain them in the most expensive
.bn 109.png
.bn 110.png
.pn +2
manner, and who spoke of them as if they were the only desirable
companions in the world.
.il fn=i_103.jpg w=400px ew=75%
.ca The Conversationhaus, Exterior and Interior.
In all the world cannot be found an inland watering place so charming
as Baden. The climate is invigorating, the situation unequalled and
the locality, from every point of view, exceedingly beautiful. Situated
on the confines of the “Black Forest,” in the beautiful valley of the Oelbach,
and surrounded by green and graceful hills, Baden resembles
both Heidelberg and Freiburg, but is more lovely than either. Overlooking
the town are the fine old ruins of a castle, dating from the 11th
century. This castle was for centuries the residence of the Margraves of
Baden, and was destroyed as late as 1869 by the French. From the ruins
a beautiful panorama is unfolded to the view. In the distance can be seen
the broad valley of the Rhine, from Strasburg to the ancient town of
Worms. Nearer lies the delightful valley of Baden, with its green pastures,
and groves of fir trees and charming villas. Near the castle are
huge and irregular masses of porphyry, which seen at a distance, reminds
one of ruined towers and crumbling battlements.
The pleasant walks and drives, which are numerous about the town,
lead one to pretty villages and fine views of old Roman ruins. Baden
has only about 8,000 inhabitants, but the annual influx of visitors has
been known to reach 50,000 or 60,000.
Prior to 1873, the central attraction of Baden was, of course, the
conversationhaus (Conversation House); so called, it is presumed, because
no one was permitted to speak there above a whisper. Applying the
name “conversationhaus” to a gambling hall must have been due to
some Teutonic vagary in which irony was uppermost. The conversationhaus
contained drawing, reading, dining, concert and gaming rooms, all
elaborately gilded and frescoed and richly furnished. Great mirrors, on
every side, reflected all that transpired and made the place appear larger
and the players more numerous than they really were.
The promenades of Baden, during the afternoon and evening, when
an excellent band played before the gambling hall, presented a very
animated and attractive scene. There representatives could be seen from
all quarters of the world and of every nationality claiming to be civilized.
The great majority were faultlessly attired in the latest fashion, and many
very elegant toilets were to be seen. No better opportunity could be
imagined to show a pretty face, a fine figure, or costly jewels and gowns,
and the women were therefore happy. The men struggled to express that
grand insouciance which indicates the final fathoming of all social profundities.
The pleasantest feature of Baden were the walks and promenades
where one could stroll leisurely with the bright sunshine overhead,
soft and perfect music in the ear, and a gay panorama of pretty women and
well dressed men before him.
.bn 111.png
.pn +1
The gambling rooms at Baden usually had six roulette and rouge-et-noir
(trente-et-quarante) tables running. The games opened daily at 11
o’clock in the morning, and ran continuously until 11 o’clock at night.
The place was almost as public as the street. Everybody went in or went
out, played or refrained from playing, as he pleased. There was no one
to question or interrupt, to invite or discourage, any respectably dressed
or decently behaved stranger, who, from curiosity, inclination or other
motive might desire to enter and look about. It was contrary to the
rules for one to wear his hat or to take a cane or umbrella into the
gambling rooms, and in the vestibule, lackeys were stationed to relieve
visitors of these articles. These lackeys wore livery not unlike a court
costume and were most obedient, obsequious and ready to do any one’s
bidding, with the expectation of course, of receiving a “tip” for their
trouble. The Directors paid a license of $75,000 a year and paid out as
much more for the running expenses of the establishment, yet reaped immense
profit. The season extended from May until October and was at
its height from the middle of July until the first of September.
The Baden salons during the height of the season, were attractive
to the mind and interesting to the eye. The contemplative spectator, the
student of human nature, saw much relating to cosmopolitan society
which he could scarcely find elsewhere. The roulette and trente-et-quarante
tables were always crowded, while the games were in progress. Well
dressed men and women, young and old, notables and nobodies, many of
distinguished bearing, sat around the tables, or leaned over from their
standing posture behind, and placed their bets, raked in their winnings,
or scowled and muttered curses when they lost. All the players were
absorbed in the game. Around each table, also, were to be seen, scores
of persons, whose despondent countenances told, as plainly as words could
express it, that their last louis had been swept away. The “banker” or
dealer, and the croupiers, his assistants, occupied seats raised above those
of the players, that they might the better see what was transpiring on
the table, and not to be interfered with by the movements of the bettors.
No attache of the establishment was ever known to ask any one, even
in the most indirect manner, to take part in the game. All seemed indifferent
on that point, and visitors were free to play or not as they pleased.
Dealers, croupiers, and lackeys—all maintained an air of good breeding
and never allowed themselves to exhibit emotion or even any particular
interest. Thousands were raked in, or paid, with each deal or roll of the
ball, and all proceeded in a marvelously mechanical way. The players did
but little talking and rarely spoke above an undertone. The chink of the
coin could be distinctly heard, as the dealer tossed it adroitly to the winning
stakes, or as the croupiers raked in the losses. Over all, like a sad
refrain, was heard periodically, the dealers direction to the players, “faites
.bn 112.png
.pn +1
votre jeu, messieurs,” “le jeu est fait,” and “rien ne va plus.” (“Make
your play, gentlemen!” “Nothing more
Baden was the most dangerous of all gambling resorts, though the
most respectable. On arriving from Homburg or Wiesburg, say in 1860,
and entering the Maison de Conversation, at Baden, one could hardly
believe, for the moment, that he was in a gambling house, for the interior
was in striking contrast with that of most places devoted to this purpose.
The attendants were neatly attired and quite courteous. The company
was elegantly dressed and no one over-stepped the bounds of strict decorum.
The professional gambler was a rarity. The titled aristocrat was
there and potentates arrived in their elegant carriages, from the city, or
the country. Representatives of the demi-monde were there, but they
differed little, in outward aspect, from the most respectable.
Writing of the interior of the Conversationhaus in 1870, Mr. Whitelock
said: “How shall I describe to my readers, in language sufficiently
graphic, one of the resorts the most celebrated in Europe—a place if not
competing with Crockford’s in gorgeous magnificence, use, and display,
at least surpassing it in renown, and known over a wider sphere? The
metropolitan pump-room of Europe, conducted on the principle of gratuitous
admittance to all bearing the semblance of gentility and conducting
themselves with propriety, opens its Janus doors to all the world with the
most laudable hospitality and with a perfect indifference to exclusiveness,
requiring only the hat to be taken off upon entering, and rejecting only
short jackets, cigar, pipe, and meerschaum. A room of this description, a
temple dedicated to fashion, fortune, and flirtation, requires a pen more
graphic to vivify and depict. Taking everything, therefore, for granted,
let us suppose a vast salon of regular proportions, rather longer than
broad, at either end garnished by a balcony; beneath, doors to the right
and left and opposite to the main entrance, conduct to other apartments,
dedicated to different purposes. On entering, the eye is at once dazzled by
the blaze of lights from chandeliers of magnificent dimensions, composed of
lamps, lustres, and sconces. The ceiling and borders set off into compartments
showered over with arabesques, the gilded pillars, the moving
mass of promenaders, the endless labyrinth of human beings, assembled
from every region in Europe, the costly dresses, repeated by a host of
mirrors, all this combined, which the eye conveys to the brain at a single
glance, utterly fails of description. As with the eye, so it is with the ear;
at every step a new language falls upon it and every tongue with different
intonation, for the high and the low, the prince, peer, vassal and tradesman,
the proud beauty, the decrepit crone, some freshly budding into the world,
some standing near the grave, the gentle and the stern, the sombre and
the gay; in short, every possible antithesis that the eye, ear, or heart can
perceive, hear, or respond to, or that the mind itself can imagine, is here
.bn 113.png
.pn +1
to be met with in two minutes. And yet all this is no Babel; for all,
though concentrated, is admirably void of confusion; and evil or strong
passions if they do exist, are religiously suppressed—a necessary consequence,
indeed, where there can be no sympathy, and where contempt
and ridicule would be the sole reciprocity. In case, however, any such
display should take place, a gendarme keeps constant watch at the door,
appointed by the government, it is true, but resembling our Bow street
officer in more respects than one.”
We here append what a traveler witnessed within the Cure-hall at
Baden in the summer of 1854:
“Almost immediately on our entrance our attention was attracted to
a young Englishman, fashionably dressed, but yet of such rakish and sinister
aspect that I set him down at once as a black-leg who had figured at
Epsom or Newmarket; a London roue, who, having lost character and
means at home, now formed one of that base band of English sharpers
who are to be found on the continent, and who initiate our young bloods
into the mysteries of the gambling tables, or fleece them at private gaming
parties. In eager excitement this person pressed through the crowd, and,
bending over the table, repeatedly deposited a handful of silver florins,
until nearly every yellow line or space had a stake placed upon it. It
seemed as if he had set his life upon the cast and was resolved to take the
bank by storm. Within a few minutes, however, his entire cash was
lost, and as the croupiers remorselessly gathered it in with their little
rakes, he turned abruptly away.
“But whose are the small gloved hands and rounded arms which,
just at my left, are suddenly thrust forward to obtain silver for the Napoleon
d’or which she gives to the markers? I look around and see a tall
and elegantly dressed French lady standing at my side. She cautiously
deposits one or two florins on the board, and with subdued excitement
watches the progress of the game. At length the silver pieces are all
staked and lost. Now, with gloved hands, she unfastens the string of
her purse and other gold is produced and changed, until all is gone, and
she, too, suddenly disappears.
“The game has progressed but a few moments when our countryman
returns and proceeds as before, with the same result, and then disappears
again. Now, here is also the French lady again, with her silk purse containing
gold pieces, and playing with greater excitement than ever; but
after some winnings, she, too, loses all.
“Yonder stands a tall, thin lady, who seeks the table on which small
sums can be played. See how anxiously she glances over the table, and
how cautiously she deposits her little sum. Once or twice she wins, and
her pale cheeks become flushed, and her eyes kindle; but in a short time
it is all gone, and then, leaving the place, she retires to one of those garden
.bn 114.png
.pn +1
chairs sitting apart from the rest of the people, her cheeks more wasted,
her eyes duller, apparently broken-hearted, as if the thought of her confiding
husband and little ones far away oppressed her spirit. But look
again and you will see another lady with a younger lady by her side. It
is her daughter, and she is initiating her into the mysteries of gambling.
Who would like to marry such a woman, thus trained into the mysteries
of such a game as this?
“A man now enters the room. His dress and person are neglected,
his face is unwashed, his long and curly hair falls wildly over his forehead,
seamed and furrowed with deep wrinkles, A little girl is by his
side. She, too, is miserably dressed, and his rank seems to be that of a
peasant. He is an inveterate gambler and cannot do without his excitement.
He takes a seat at the foot of the table, deposits a florin from time
to time, and carefully examines a small marked card on which is marked
the result of each revolution of the deal. For a time familiarity with the
game seems to give him an advantage, and with a calm satisfaction he
rakes in his winnings in a heap, on which the little girl bends her glistening
eyes. And there he sits until the evening closes, when he departs,
having passed an evening of feverish excitement and lost all. The face
of that gambler and the little girl, who was always with him and who
seemed as if she were the only one left of a ship-wrecked and ruined family,
haunt me to this hour.
“At rouge et noir is a more select class than is generally found
playing at roulette. English, French, Germans, Russians, and Poles,
and the fire of Mammon always burning on his altars and the doomed flies
buzzing about them, some with already scorched-off wings; it is a scene
of external gaiety with all that is internally hollow and deceiving.
“The lights are burning brightly overhead, the players nearly all
seated, and a large number of people forming an outer circle.
“Here are two gentlemen who are bold players. They never stake
silver. A pile of Napoleons lies at the side of each. One player is about
sixty years of age, tall and robust; the other a little, dark haired, black
eyed man, and both appear to be habitues of the place. Three gold pieces
formed the first stake, and the player winning, the same was doubled.
Five more Napoleons are won.
“At this moment one of the proprietors can be seen talking with
some friends nonchalantly, and apparently uninterested in the game, in
the background; but if you will watch him carefully, you can see that he
ever and anon casts a searching glance toward the table, for this evening
the game is going against the bank. But soon caution on the part of the
player is gone, and golden visions beckon onward. One of the gentlemen
leaves ten gold pieces on the cloth, another turn and all is gone.
.bn 115.png
.pn +1
.il fn=i_109a.jpg w=500px ew=90%
.ca Gambling Saloon at Wiesbaden.
.il fn=i_109b.jpg w=500px ew=90%
.ca The Kursaal at Wiesbaden.
.bn 116.png
.pn +1
“It was here that an Englishman played one night until he lost
£180,000, and announced his determination to win it back or to
lose everything; but he was doomed to drink, and justly too, the cup of
bitterness: he lost everything.”
Mrs. Trollope has thus described two specimens of the gamestresses,
who were wont to frequent the German watering places:
“There was one of this set,” she says, “whom I watched day after
day, during the whole period of our stay, with more interest than, I
believe was reasonable; for had I studied any other as attentively, I might
have found less to lament.
“She was young, certainly not more than twenty-five, and though
not regularly nor brilliantly handsome, most singularly winning, both in
person and demeanor. Her dress was elegant, but peculiarly plain and
simple—a close white silk bonnet and gauze veil; a quiet colored silk
gown, with less of flourish and frill, by half, than any other person; a
delicate little hand, which, when ungloved, displayed some handsome
rings; a jeweled watch of peculiar splendor; and a countenance
expressive of anxious thoughtfulness—must be remembered by many
who were at Baden in August, 1833. They must remember, too, that,
enter the room when they would, morning, noon or night, still they found
her nearly at the same place at the rouge et noir table.
husband, who had as unquestionably the air of a gentleman, as
she had of a lady, though not always close to her, was never very distant.
He did not play himself, and I fancied, as he hovered near her, that his
countenance expressed anxiety. But he returned her sweet smile, with
which she always met his eye, with an answering smile; and I saw not
the slightest indication that he wished her to withdraw from the table.
was an expression in the upper part of her face that my blundering
science would have construed into something very foreign to the
propensity she showed; but there she sat—hour after hour, day after day,
not allowing even the blessed Sabbath, that gives rest to all, to bring it
to her;—there she sat, constantly throwing down handfuls of five-franc
pieces, and sometimes drawing them back again, till her young face grew
rigid from weariness, and all the lustre of her eye faded into a glare of
vexed inanity. Alas! alas! is that fair woman a mother? God forbid!
figure at the gaming table, which daily drew our attention,
was a pale, anxious old woman, who seemed no longer to have strength
to conceal her agitation under the air of callous indifference which all
practiced players endeavor to assume. She trembled, till her shaking hand
could hardly grasp the instrument with which she pushed, or withdrew her
pieces; the dew of agony stood upon her wrinkled brow; yet, hour after
hour, day after day, she, too, sat in the enchanted chair. I never saw
age and station in a position so utterly beyond the pale of respect. I
.bn 117.png
.pn +1
was assured she was a person of rank; and my informant added, but I
trust she was mistaken, that she was an
Ems is a quiet village in the Duchy of Nassau, fifteen miles north of
Wiesbaden, situated picturesquely on the river Lahn; it is surrounded by
green hills, beautiful landscapes and delightful drives. The discovery of
ancient vases and coins in the vicinity indicates that, like Wiesbaden, it
was known to the Romans. Ems has a population of less than 5,000, but
entertains about 8,000 visitors each summer. When gambling flourished
at Ems, years ago, there was a croupier whose life had been a most
adventurous and checkered one. The illegitimate son of a German Margrave,
he was educated a soldier and served with distinction. Leaving
the army, he traveled through the East—was in succession a Mohammedan,
a member of the Greek church, an Israelite, a Roman Catholic, a
Buddhist and an Atheist. By his father’s death he inherited a large fortune.
Married three times, he had quarreled with and separated from
each wife. Becoming an epicurean and dilettante, he was soon a sensualist
and a sot. Broken down with dissipation, and reduced to poverty,
he found himself at Ems. Thoroughly familiar with gambling, he was
given a situation as croupier, provided he would give up drinking. This
he agreed to do, and kept his pledge. A man of exceptional ability, and
unusual opportunities, he had, in twenty short years, ruined his prospects
and his health, and settled down to the monotonous and hopeless career
of a croupier in a gambling house.
The Russians, late to learn civilization, but keenest of its students,
have begun—so say the English, their enemies—by learning all the vices.
Like Alexander the Great, the Russian autocrat permits a dissolute life
among the nobility, in order that the empire may not have to confront
the resolutions of more honorable men. Ennui wears upon the gentry.
At Moscow and St. Petersburg, the man of the fashionable world dwells
in a state of social license that contrasts sharply with his political restrictions.
Moscow is filled with men in disgrace, who are here allowed to
live in splendid exile. Gaming, racing, intemperance, and libertinism are
the most striking features of the Russian realistic novel. If we read
“Anne Karenina,” by Tolstoi, we shall be outraged with the gross treatment
of an honest husband, at the hands of an author who pretends to
follow the practical teachings of Jesus of Nazareth. The minister of state,
who suffers from the incursions of a libertine, is dwelt upon, and held up
to ridicule, while the inner life of a villain who steals away the love of a
bad wife, is glazed over and made entertaining to low minds. It may be
said that this was necessary, in a land where a betrayed husband was the
butt of ridicule; but why should the life of a woman offer a field for the
apologetics of Tolstoi? Why should the noble author who toils like a
peasant in the field, have no word of praise for a husband whose every
.bn 118.png
.pn +1
act was visibly an attempt to do justice and serve the state? Why should
not gambling and racing receive a stinging rebuke at the hands of an
author who is not afraid to rebuke all other iniquities? Possibly “Anne
Karenina” would have had a very limited sale, if gamblers, libertines,
and a wicked woman had not figured as the principal characters.
In Roumania, lansquenet, makaw, baccaret, and other games are the
pastimes of old and young, and consequently the Shylock flourishes. All
Roumanians play, and it is difficult for the visitor to resist the epidemic.
The Roumanians lay the blame on the Russians and declare that gambling
sprung up during the two military occupations. Exiles like the
emigrants from France, weary of absence from their own vodki, introduced
games of chance; and card playing is now the only social
of the salons. “Every drawing-room in Bucharest is an unlicensed
cure-halle,” say a recent writer.
.il fn=i_112.jpg w=500px ew=90%
.ca VIEW OF EMS.
.bn 119.png
.pn +1
.sp 4
.pm chaphead 'CHAPTER V.' 'ITALY, MONTE CARLO, FRANCE, SPAIN, MEXICO, CENTRAL AND SOUTH AMERICA.' chap5
.sp 2
Histories, accessible to the author present but few glimpses here and
there of the gambling vice as it has prevailed in modern Italy. He found
but few allusions to the subject by historians, and only an occasional word
in books of travel. However, from what is generally known of Italy,
and Italians, it is beyond question that in gaming this people are not behind
the rest of their fellow men. In Naples, while under the Spanish
dominion, there was scarcely one viceroy who did not issue a decree
against games of chance; but all their efforts were in vain, for the governor
of the Vicarial Court farmed out the gaming tables to the nobles,
the people and the soldiers. The nobility at that time, especially, were
passionately devoted to every sort of gaming. When in 1620, A. D.,
Cardinal Zapata assumed the government, he forbade the further farming
of the gaming table by the governor, who complained loudly. This prohibition
remained in force, only until a son of the Cardinal was appointed
to the gubernatorial office. Thousands of ducats were staked upon
cards and dice during this period. In the year 1631, the Duke
of St. Agata lost ten thousand ducats at tarocchi. Vencinzio Capece,
the natural son of a Knight of Malta, acquired sixty thousand ducats by
lending money to be used in gaming. His income, from interest on such
loans, amounted to fifteen and even twenty ducats daily. When the
Neopolitan people revolted, in 1647, they complained that gaming had
been encouraged by the nobility. On the 29th day of July, of that year,
the people assembled in groups to visit the gambling resorts—even the
Royal Palace was not spared. A mob entered the house of one Belogna,
where the nobles of highest rank were accustomed to meet for gaming
purposes. “Ye lord cavaliers,” called out one of the leaders, “do you
think that you will be allowed to go on with such doings? For what
else but to indulge in your evil passions for dice and cards, have you sold
the poor citizen to his arch-enemy? For what else have you sold your
votes to the Viceroy that he may burden us to his heart’s desire?” The
mob then set fire to the house, which was destroyed, together with its
contents—household furniture, tables, cards and dice. It has been estimated
that more than one hundred gaming houses were at this time consumed
.bn 120.png
.pn +1
by fire. Not only the nobility, but numerous adventurers gained
a livelihood at these licensed redoubts, (as the gaming resorts were named).
For instance, under the Second Duke of Alcala, a Calabrian cavalier,
Muzio Passalacqua, kept a house of this character, where the play was so
high that Bartholo Meo Imperiali lost sixty thousand ducats in one evening.
We are told that during the time under consideration a similar state
of affairs prevailed throughout the Italian Peninsula.
The picture given reflects the vices of Italian society, which had then
prevailed for more than four hundred years. Sismondi and John Addington
Symonds, clearly indicate that during the twelfth, thirteenth and
fourteenth centuries, the gaming vice spread amongst all classes of
Italians. In the princely castle, the ducal palace, the lowly cot, and
even the monastery, dice and other gaming devices held sway. From
such views as we obtain from the later Latin historians, of their barbarian
neighbors in the north, we know that with their invasion of Italy, was
introduced the gaming vice in its most persistent and pernicious features.
How prone the modern Italian is to the fascination of gaming, is evident
from the papal lottery system as it flourished in all parts of the country.
Passing to the northwest, we reach the little principality of Monaco,
and the notorious Monte Carlo. Monaco is now reduced to a square mile
or two, but has a malodorous reputation greatly exceeding its political
importance or geographical dimensions. Leaving the city of Nice, by
train, and passing through a tunnel, you come full upon the beautiful
little bay of Villa Franca. Go under ground, again, and you presently
emerge upon a rocky headland jutting out into the sapphire, sea. This
cape bears aloft the little town of, Monaco. On the extreme southern side
of the headland is a deep bay, beyond which, at a distance of less than
half a mile, stands Monte Carlo on another and lesser promontory. The
bay is lined with hotels, cafes, shops and lodging houses. The famous
Casino crowns the slope of Monte Carlo, and contains the gambling
rooms, concert hall, and theatre. Near this massive structure are more
hotels and the enclosures for pigeon shooting. The walks are shaded by
orange trees and cacti, while a velvet turf spreads like a verdant
carpet under the trees. All this was the work of the late M.
Blanc, who established the Casino and its environs, after his enforced
departure from Baden-Baden. But in reality this stately palace was
erected, and the surrounding grounds laid out, at the expense of the
dupes, the blacklegs, and the courtesans of Europe. M. Garnier, who
planned the Grand Opera House, at Paris, designed the architecture of
the Casino in its sensuous detail. But this devil’s university of Monte
Carlo, with its classic rooms, and chairs for Professors Belial and Mammon,
is, in sober truth, the erection of those named. The fortune is
always with roulette and rouge et noir.
.bn 121.png
.bn 122.png
.pn +2
.il fn=i_115.jpg w=339px ew=70%
.ca The Casino at Monte Carlo, Monaco.
There are six tables in the Casino for roulette, where the lowest stake
is twenty-five francs. Two rouge et noir, where the lowest stake is
twenty francs. These tables are always crowded, Sundays and week days
alike. Some persons, it is true, make lucky coups, but the majority lose,
of course. Some years ago a British dowager won four hundred pounds,
and a German two thousand pounds the same day.
By some Europeans, it has been insisted that while Monte Carlo may
not have moral or elevating influence, yet men will play, and it is not
worse there than at the club. This plea is specious and superficial. The
club is private; it is not open to women and children. The mischief that
might occur there is not an example for the public, and therefore not contagious.
The club does not exist for the sole purpose, and is not supported
by the profits of the play. It is not an instrument of wholesale
demoralization, as is Monte Carlo. The latter is a curse, a public scandal,
and an unmitigated evil. In these times of spirited foreign policy, a
more wholesome exercise of diplomacy cannot be imagined for some
influential European power, than bringing pressure to bear on France
for the extinction of Monte Carlo. It is a disgrace to the French Republic
that under its protecting wing this pandering to European vice should be
allowed, or that Monte Carlo should be a shelter for the sharpers expelled
from other haunts on the continent, there to fatten on the wages and spoils
of iniquity. If Monaco and Monte Carlo were cleansed of this blot, they
would be among the most alluring resorts of the world. The demoralizing
tables, and the vicious crew should not be allied with such delightful
scenery and salubrious climate. Let us hope that the report is not true
that an American syndicate has offered eight million francs for the right
of keeping a gambling house at Taft-chi-dar, Hungary, like that at
Monte Carlo.
.il fn=i_116.jpg w=500px ew=90%
.ca ROULETTE WHEEL AND LAY OUT.
M. Blanc, now dead, obtained the lease of the place from the Prince
of Monaco, agreeing to pay him an enormous rental, one-tenth of the
profits of the game, and to defray the expense of maintaining the standing
army, the police, and the menials of the principality. M. Blanc’s widow
.bn 123.png
.pn +1
now enjoys the profits accruing from the bargain made by her husband.
The games at Monte Carlo are kept running from noon until 11 o’clock at
night, every day in the year, Sundays not excepted, and are patronized by
the titled and most aristocratic personages in Europe. In the height of the
season, from December to April, Monte Carlo is one of the most cosmopolitan
places on earth. English, French, Germans, Russians, Americans, Spaniards—all
nationalities, almost, are to be seen about its gaming tables.
Elegantly dressed women, young and old, some of them the wives, or
members of the families, of the most reputable men in Europe; some representatives
of the demi-monde mingle with the throng and engage in the
play. The interior of the Casino presents the appearance of a grand drawing
room feté. Monte Carlo is the last and sole of the class
of gambling resorts of which Baden Baden, Wiesbaden, Homburg; and
Ems, were formerly notable examples.
It is said that the game at Monte Carlo is undoubtedly fair. This
may be true. The eyes of the greatest scoundrels in Europe, it is argued,
are bent upon the dealers, and that ought to be a guarantee
against any fraud being practiced. But this does not certainly follow.
The powers of a Professor of Legerdemain are admitted, and knowing
this, it would be childish to guarantee the integrity of any professional
gambler.
.il fn=i_117.jpg w=500px ew=90%
.ca ROUGE ET NOIR.
At the Casino eight roulette and two trente et quarante, or rouge et
noir tables, are kept running. Roulette is not played precisely as in America,
the player has less odds against him, from the fact that the tables
have only one zero instead of two. The heaviest play occurs at the
trente et quarante tables. This game is played with six packs of cards of
52 each. Having shuffled the cards, the dealer passes them to the
nearest player, sometimes the nearest female player, to be cut. It is a
gamblers superstition that bad luck attends the one who cuts the cards,
and accordingly the professional often shirks that duty. The pack is not
cut as in the United States. The operation consists of inserting a blue
.bn 124.png
.pn +1
card in the sextuple pack. Two rows of cards are dealt on the table, the
first representing black and the second red. The ace counts as one, and
court cards as ten each, and the tailleur, or dealer, continues to turn
cards for the black row until the aggregate number of their spots exceeds
thirty. Suppose he deals three “court” cards, or tens, he must deal
another. If it is a deuce he calls “deux,” and then proceeds to deal the
red row, which, perhaps, aggregates thirty-five. “Cinq,” exclaims the
dealer. The black row being nearest to thirty wins, and accordingly, all
who have bet on the black win the amount of their stakes, and the bank
rakes in all that has been bet on the red.
Should the two rows tie, on thirty-one, the bank takes half of the
stakes, but ties on any other number are considered as a stand-off and the
player is free to withdraw or shift his bet, as he pleases. Bets may also
be made on “couleur,” or “envers,” the former winning, when the winning
color is the same as that of the first card dealt; and the latter, when
it is not. In the time when Baden-Baden and Homburg preserved the
air of Paris; when Meyerbeer played at Spa, and while Tamberlik was
losing his Louis, trente et quarante was played with a quart de refait,
which only gave the bank a quarter, instead of a half, of the money on
the table, in case of a tie at thirty-one. This was the practice, also, at
Monte Carlo, until these other public gambling establishments were
closed. These ties, like all other manifestations of chance, occur with
great irregularity. On some days there will be scarcely one; on others
they will occur with terrible frequency. M. Blanc invented a system of
insurance against these ties at thirty-one, and heavy players generally
avail themselves of it. It consists, simply, in the player paying to the
bank one per cent. of his bet, which being done, the bank does not take
any of his stake when such tie occurs. In such case the player pays one
per cent. for the privilege of playing a game in which the chances are
precisely even.
At Monte Carlo no bet of less than a Louis (four dollars) is taken at
the trente et quarante tables, and no bet larger than 12,000 francs ($2,400).
The smallest bet allowed at roulette is five francs, and the largest 5,000
francs. On a single number, nine Louis, or 180 francs, is the largest bet
permitted. Roulette, compared with trente et quarante, is a very unfavorable
game for the player.
Formerly, at European gaming resorts, the game was played with
two zeros and thirty-six numbers; that is, two chances out of thirty-eight
were reserved for the bank. With the advent of M. Blanc at Homburg a
more liberal policy was inaugurated, and only one zero was employed.
When M. Blanc went to Monte Carlo he made the game still more favorable
to the players by taking, when the ball struck zero, only half, instead
of the whole of the bets on the colors, odd or even, etc. Including the
.bn 125.png
.pn +1
zero, the Monte Carlo roulette table has thirty-seven numbers, and the
player on a single number is paid thirty-five for one. The advantage
which the bank has, is easily seen. In backing two numbers with a single
bet, one is banking one eighteenth of the table, and is paid seventeen
times his stake. In backing four numbers, “en carré,” as it is called, he
bets on one-ninth and is paid eight for one. Accordingly, as he places his
bet, the punter, even though he stakes but a single coin, can play one,
two, three, four, or six numbers at once. He can also bet on the
first, second or third twelve in the thirty-six numbers, or one of the three
columns in which the numbers are arranged on the board, or on the
colors, or odd or even, or on what is called “manque et passe,” the former
signifying the numbers from one to eighteen, and the latter those from
nineteen to thirty-six. Betting on the columns, or the dozens, against
which the bank pays two to one, is a favorite game for punters, who potter
about the room with a handful of five-franc pieces, and struggle all day
long to win or lose a Louis or two. Twenty francs is a Louis, in the language
of the gamester. However he may bet, the advantage is ever
preserved by the table.
Though the games at Monte Carlo are kept running throughout the
year, the great rush of visitors occurs between December and April,
during which period hundreds of thousands from all parts of the civilized
world visit the Casino. Very many stay at the hotels or villas in Monte
Carlo, but the majority come and go on the trains from Nice, Menton,
San Remo and other Riviera resorts. Particularly is this true of the sports
of both sexes, who, for the most part, make Nice their headquarters.
The gardens and drives about Monte Carlo are as famous as those of
any other Riviera towns, and share, with the Casino, the attention of
visitors.
Connected with the Casino is a spacious and richly adorned theater,
in which an orchestra of about seventy-five instruments furnish, each
afternoon and evening, as fine music as can be heard in Europe. These
entertainments are free, and are always crowded. The most stylish hotel
and café, the Hotel de Paris and the Café de Paris, which flanks the
Casino on either side, respectively, are both under the same management
as the Casino. The café, particularly at night, is a gay place, and couples
are continually emerging from the “lair of the tiger” to while away a
few minutes in the enjoyment of ices and liquid refreshments under the
cool awning of the café. This is a favorite resort of the courtesans, who
are ever on the watch for men who have made a winning, and who, in
consequence, are often in a mood to be lavish in spending their easily
procured gains.
In French story and song we read much of the chivalry—the valor
and honor—of their Kings and nobles in the days of old.
.bn 126.png
.pn +1
Here, again, “distance lends enchantment to the view.” If we are
to credit the impartial annalist, bad is the pictures of the noblesse in early
France, addicted as they were to violence, and gaming. In
spite of the admonitions of the virtuous St. Louis, his brother was a determined
gamester and, while in prison, gambled away his estates. We
have it, on authority of Froissart, that the Duc de Touraine, a brother of
Charles VI, set to work eagerly to win the King’s money, and was transported
with joy, one day, at having won five thousand livres; his first cry
was: “Monseigneur, faites-moi payer!” “Please pay me, Sire.” Gambling
went on, not only in the camp, but even in the face of the enemy. In
their devotion to the practice generals squandered their property and
imperiled the safety of their country. While in command of the French
army before Florence, under Charles V., Philibert Chalon, Prince d’Orange,
lost at play the money with which he had been entrusted to pay
the soldiers. As a result, he was obliged to capitulate to those he might
have conquered. During the reign of Charles VI, the Hotel de Nesle
was made infamous by a series of gaming catastrophes, in which, among
the nobility and opulent men of the day, who alone were allowed to frequent
it, not a few lost their fortunes and their honor and some even their
lives. In the following reign, that of Charles VII, a wonderful reformation
in the matter of gambling was effected among the lower and middle
classes, and by the preaching of an Augustinian friar, at whose instigation
the people lit fires in several quarters of Paris and, with the greatest
enthusiasm, threw into them their cards and other gambling instruments.
This reformation did not reach the royal Palace and mansions of the
nobility, where gaming continued as before, but it seems to have quite
effectively checked the gambling mania among the common people for a
number of years.
Louis XI, according to Brantome, being desirous, one day, of having
something written, called to him an ecclesiastic who had an inkstand hanging
at his side, and bade him open it. As the later obeyed a set of dice
fell out.
“What kind of sugar plums are these?” asked his majesty.
“Sire,” replied the priest, “they are a remedy for the plague.”
“Well said,” exclaimed the king, “you are a fine paillard,” (a word he
was wont to use) “you are the man for me.”
Thereupon the king took the priest into his service, for he was fond
of bon mots, and sharp wits, and was not adverse to tempting dame Fortuna
himself with the dice.
Henry III established card and dice rooms in the Louvre, and information
to this effect having been sent to a coterie of Italian gamesters by
their representatives in Paris, they gained admission at court and won
thirty thousand crowns from the king. Henry III, according to Brantome,
.bn 127.png
.pn +1
was very fond of play, but not through cupidity or avarice. He
was wont to play tennis and, if he won, distribute his winnings among
his companions, and, if he lost, would pay, not only his wager, but the
losses of all engaged in the game. At that time, the stakes were not
usually above three or four hundred crowns. Later, play ran much
higher, and bets of ten or twelve thousand crowns were not uncommon.
It is related that a French Captain, named La Roue, once offered a
bet of twenty thousand crowns against one of Andrew Doria’s war galleys.
Doria took the wager, but immediately declared it off, fearing the ridiculous
position in which he would be left should he lose. “I don’t wish
this young adventurer,” he said, “who has nothing worth naming to
lose, should he win my galley, to go and triumph in France over my fortune
and my honor.”
Henry IV, when very young and stinted in ready money, used to
raise money with which to gratify his growing passion for gaming by
sending his own promissory note to his friends with the request that they
should cash it, an experiment that almost invariably succeeded, as his
friends were only too glad to have the prince beholden to them. The
influence of Henry IV was exceedingly pernicious in the matter of gaming,
as in other vices. Gambling became the ruling vice, and many noted
families were brought to ruin by it.
In a single year the Duc de Biron lost over 500,000 crowns
(£125,000). The celebrated D’Audigne wrote: “My son lost twenty times
more than he was worth, so that, finding himself without resources, he
abjured his religion.” Henry IV was, indeed, the gambling exemplar of
France. He was very avaricious, and those who played with him had
either to lose or to offend their sovereign.
The Duke of Savoy, it is said, once sacrificed 40,000 pistoles (about
£28,000) rather than incur the king’s enmity. The king always
wanted “revanche,” or revenge, when he lost, and often used his
royal authority in exacting it. The extent of gambling in France at this
period was astonishing, and Paris swarmed with gamesters.
Bassompierre says in his memoirs that he won 500,000 livres in a
single year, and that his friend, Pementello, won more than 200,000
crowns (£50,000—$250,000). It was at this period that, for the first
time, were established “Academies de jeu,” or gaming academies, as they
were called. They were public gambling houses, to which all classes of
society, even to the lowest, were admitted. Scarcely a day passed without
its suicide or scandal arising from the ruin of somebody through gambling.
Upon the accession of Louis XIII the laws against gambling were
revived, and a vigorous attempt was made to enforce them. Nearly fifty
licensed gaming houses in Paris, which had been paying half a sovereign a
.bn 128.png
.pn +1
day to each of a number of magistrates, were closed. As a consequence
of this movement, gaming among the lower classes was checked to a considerable
extent, but little, if any, effect was produced upon the progress
of the vice among the nobility and the rich, beyond causing the practice
to be carried on with much greater secrecy.
It is said that the favorite stake of the Marechal D’Ancre was 20,000
pistoles (£10,000—$50,000). Louis XIII was opposed to gambling,
and indeed to all games, with the single exception of chess, of which he
was exceedingly fond.
Gambling became furious and universal again under the reign of
Louis XIV. The revolutions effected in morals by Cardinal Richelieu
were entirely nullified, at least so far as gambling was concerned, by Cardinal
Mazarin. He introduced gaming at the court of Louis XIV in
1648, and, according to St. Pierre, induced the king and queen regent to
not only countenance, but engage with much interest in various games of
chance. Everybody who had expectations at court learned to play cards
as a prerequisite to success. Games were often continued all through the
night, and the gaming mania quickly spread from the court to the city,
and thence to the country. One of the evil effects of this was shown in
the marked decrease in the respect shown to women. Under the infatuation
of the play they would remain up all night in company with their
male fellow gamesters and would give up their honor to pay their losings,
or to secure a loan with which to continue the indulgence of their passion
for play.
From the time of Louis XIV., gambling again spread among the
French people, even the magistrates becoming inveterate gamesters.
Cardinal de Retz stated that in 1650, the oldest magistrate in the
of Bordeaux, also reputed the wisest, staked his entire property at
play one night, and that so general was the gambling mania, the act was
in no wise thought to his discredit.
Madame de Sevigne, familiar as she was with all that transpired at the
“iniquitous court,” as she calls it, has left more than one picture of the
disgraceful state of the gambling habit there present. In the private
houses of the crown officials, even the nobility gambled for money, lands,
houses, jewels and wearing apparel. Gourville, in his memoirs, writes
that within a few years he won more than a million francs, while a
few won considerable amounts, many more brought ruin upon themselves
and their families.
In addition to the licensed gaming houses, others were maintained in
the mansions of the ambassadors and representatives of Foreign Courts.
Indeed several gamesters of quality, in fullness of their offered
.bn 129.png
.pn +1
to hire a hotel for a certain plenipotentiary and to defray all expenses incident
to the establishment, if he would but permit one apartment to be
used for play, and allow their valets to wear his livery. In 1775, Sartines,
lieutenant of police, licensed gambling houses in Paris, and directed that
the fees thus obtained should be applied to the foundation and support of
hospitals.
Women were then allowed to visit these houses two days in the week.
So numerous became the crimes, misfortunes and scandals directly attributable
to gambling, that it was prohibited in 1778. At court, and in the
houses of the ambassadors, however, it continued to flourish, soon the
public houses re-opened their doors, and the vice was even more rampant
than before, because of the temporary check. Suicides and bankruptcies
became so frequent, that the attention of parliament was called to the subject,
and it placed the gambling houses under rigid regulations, which the
proprietors were forbidden to violate, under penalty of the pillory and
whipping post.
Gambling was a conspicuous vice during the reign of Louis XVI.
Fouche, the minister of police, received an income of £128,000 ($640,000)
a year for licensing, or “privileging” the gaming establishments. These
furnished employment for not less than 120,000 persons, and, it is said,
they were all spies of Fouche. In 1836, so long, so scandalous and so
disastrous had been the rule of licensed vice, that public opinion revolted
at a further continuance of the policy, and all gambling houses were
ordered closed from January 1st, 1838. Since that time none have been
licensed, and gambling in France is on the same footing as in England,—prohibited
by law, but protected in secret.
In the French world M. Vernon was both influential and conspicuous
in his day. He has given to the world an interesting sketch of gambling
in Paris, from the Consulate to 1840. When a young man he sought the
allurements of the gaming table, and for several years was addicted to the
practice of this vice. His experience as a gamester would be a lesson, in
itself, for every thinking man, could it be here given in all its masterly
analysis. So elaborate is it, however, that it cannot be given the necessary
space.
Under the regime of 1840, M. Thiers, then president of the cabinet,
offered M. Vernon several places in the employ of the government. The
latter, however, requested the Maître des Requêtes. “The thing is impossible,”
replied Thiers; “the traditions of the country would not allow
an ex-manager of play to such a noble and M. Thiers
instanced, among others, a State Counselor, whose name and virtue then
commanded the highest respect. M. Vernon smiled and left M. Thiers
.bn 130.png
.pn +1
to his allusion. This very virtuous statesman, like M. Vernon, had been
one of the most assiduous frequenters of the gambling houses. One day,
thereafter, M. Vernon placed twenty francs on the rouge; he won, and
was paid by the banker; wishing, soon after, to take up his twenty francs,
he found they had disappeared. When the “deal” had ended, a player
stepped up to M. Vernon, and said: “See here, Monsieur, here are the
twenty franc pieces you are looking for. I took them up by mistake.”
This absent-minded player was none other than M. Thiers’ virtuous State
Counselor.
Two popular gambling resorts in the Paris of that day were Frascadi’s
and the Circle des Etrangers. In both places visitors were required
to leave their hats with the servants, in the vestibule, for which they were
given a check. Servants also brought sugar and water gratuitously;
while at Frascadi’s refreshments, in large variety, could be ordered. At
the Circle des Etrangers, the visitor was permitted to sup with the person
or persons he had invited to the resort. In some gambling houses of the
lower order, money upon personal credit was loaned to the patrons by the
inmates. At Frascadi’s and the Circle des Etrangers as well, large sums
were loaned to known players without a receipt. Such loans were
always recompensed at the will of the borrower. One could bet as low as
ten cents in some houses of the second and third class, but at roulette, as a
rule, the first stakes could not be under two francs, and at trente et un, the
first stake could not be less than five francs. In all games, the first or the
highest doubling stakes, could not exceed 12,000 francs. All gambling
houses opened at noon and closed at midnight. At the Circle des Etrangers
gambling commenced at eight o’clock only on the days that dinners
were given, and on all other days at ten o’clock. At Frascadi’s and the
Circle des Etrangers suppers, were occasionally given, with balls.
“I often met at one resort,” said M. Vernon, “a literary man with
powdered hair, who in his lucky bets, would rejoice over his winnings in
Latin. He was a poor wretch, and the least loss would make him penniless.
One day he touched me on the shoulder and led me out into the
hall: ‘See here,’ said he, ‘take this Persius and this Juvenal, and give
me forty cents.’ I refused to pay less than a dollar for these two Latin
poets. His joy was excessive, but in half an hour he returned to me, and
putting his hand in his pocket said, ‘take that pair of black silk stockings,
and give me what you please.’ I had consented to diminish his
library, but I would not consent to wear his old clothing.”
“At one time a young man, who was about to be married, came up
from the provinces with 1,500 francs to purchase his wedding gifts. He
returned home, at the end of the week, empty-handed, having lost everything
at play. His fiancee, on learning the facts, broke the engagement.
“The bank is not completely protected from swindlers. Two young
men entered Frascadi’s one evening. One staked on the rouge fifty Louis
.bn 131.png
.pn +1
d’or in double Louis. The other staked on the noir, the same sum in
similar coins. The rouge won and the fifty Louis were paid. The stakes
and money won were immediately taken away. The banker took up the
stakes lost on the noir, and saw that these double Louis were merely
forty cent pieces well gilded. The player who had won had instantly
departed. The other was arrested, whereupon, he was not at a loss for
argument. ‘I did not say,’ he said, ‘that I staked fifty Louis. I have not
given you counterfeit money; nay I lost a hundred francs. It was your
business to be more careful about paying the party beside me.’ The
affair ended here, and the bank lost its 900 francs.
“A celebrated general invented a trick which still bears his name.
One day, during the empire, he staked at the Circle des Etrangers, at
rouge et noir, a small rouleau sealed at both ends, which looked exactly
like a rouleau d’or of 1,000 francs. After he lost, he took up the rouleau
and gave the bank a thousand franc notes. He won, and said to the banker
who in turn offered him a thousand franc notes, ‘I beg your pardon,
I staked more than that.’ He opened the roll, and drew out of the midst
of some gold pieces it contained, fifteen or twenty thousand franc notes. The
general was paid, but the lesson was never forgotten, and no one was
allowed to play except with his money open and with limited stakes.”
Before 1779, public gaming was authorized in France, but was afterwards
abolished. Under the Consulate, Fouche farmed out the gambling
privileges to a certain Perrin, and enjoined him especially to open a Circle
des Etrangers. However, this offer was not gratuitous. Benazet, who was a
farmer of the gambling houses during the Restoration, said that Perrin
gave to Fouche fifty Louis d’or every morning without taking a receipt.
Not satisfied with this, Fouche frequently made police drafts on him of
ten or twenty thousand francs.
The Circle des Etrangers frequently gave balls, known as the Bals
Livre. During the Directory and under the Consulate, Bals were all the
rage. Baron Hamelin, Madam Tollien, and indeed all the distinguished
ladies of society were invited to these Bals. During the Consulate and the
first days of the Empire, Napoleon, in company with Duroc, one of his
most intimate generals, visited them for a few hours, on several occasions,
both being masked. The president of the Circle des Etrangers barely
allowed Perrin to show himself. If the unanimous testimony of all contemporaries
of the Directory and the Consulate can be trusted, nothing can give
an idea of the pleasures, the brilliancy and the intoxication of this period
of revival.
Perrin, who was made colonel, in order that he might deal Pharaon
before the queen without offense, was succeeded by Chalabre. Marie Antoinette
played Pharaon nearly every evening at the Tuilleries, at Versailles
and Trianon. Subsequently, the farming of the gambling houses was
.bn 132.png
.pn +1
public, and the four successive farmers were M. Bernard, Chalabre, Boursault
and Benezet. In every respect Chalabre was a man of the old regime.
He powdered, and was a man of fine manners. Boursault, on the contrary,
was a man of the times, with a marked face, heavy voice, violent
and passionate. He made himself heard, perhaps applauded, in more than
one club during the Restoration. It was his aim to participate only in
that which gave large profit. He therefore contracted for the mud, for
the night-soil and for the gambling houses of Paris. His house was splendidly
arranged, and he had also a rare collection of plants and flowers,
which in those days were a luxury. Benazet, the last farmer of the gambling
houses, was an ex-attorney, a man of talent and enterprise, and both
obliging and generous. At the revolution of July, he was elected the
commandant of one of the legions of the National Guard of the environs
of Paris. He was subsequently appointed chevalier in the Legion of
Honor. When alone with his intimate acquaintances, they called him the
“Emperor.” At the Cheque office of the Theatre Francais, they invariably
said to him “Mon Prince.”
While M. Benazet was farmer, all the gambling houses in Paris were
open. Said M. Vernon, “the leases each contained the following provisions.
The farmer paid the treasurer by equal monthly instalments, the
annual sum of 5,500,000 francs. Upon this sum appropriated to the city,
the Minister of the Interior, and under the Restoration, the Minister of
the King’s Household, received annually, and by equal monthly instalments
the sum of 1,660,000 francs, as an appropriation to the theatres
and other places of amusement. The Minister of the Interior took from
it also a good deal more money for the political refugees, or the disasters
in the department, and for charity and all sorts of misfortunes.
“The expenses of the gambling houses were fixed in the lease in the
sum of 2,400,000 francs. The farmer also received out of the net receipts
100,000 francs as his interest, and was obliged to have always either upon
the gaming tables or in his safe, 1,219,000 francs. The result of gambling
per day, and per gaming table was stated in a formulated journal. The
total capital at the beginning and at the end of the gambling, was written
in the presence of the cities’ controllers, and showed the net proceeds.
The ninth article of the lease stated that all expenses of the administration
to the annual sum of 5,550,000 francs appropriated to the city being
there paid, should further be appropriated to the city, all the net profits
when there were profits, one-half when the total annual net profits did
not exceed 9,000,000 francs belonging to the farmer. On the 31st day of
December, 1837, the gambling houses of Paris were closed by vote of the
Chamber of Deputies. From 1819 to 1837 the gambling houses cleared
from 6,841,838 francs to 9,008,628 francs per year, making a grand total
from 1819 to 1837 of 137,313,403 francs, and the money of foreigners
formed a greater part of this sum.”
.bn 133.png
.pn +1
Gambling was universally prevalent in Paris during 1829-30, and the
houses were very numerous and varied in character. Of the higher order,
were the Salon and Frascadi’s; specimens of the lower class were to be
found in the Palais Royal. The Salon and Frascadi’s were on the Rue
Richelieu, near the boulevard. They were of pretentious appearance,
externally, and magnificently furnished. They pretended to be exclusive
and to admit only such as were vouched for by some person of recognized
standing. Access was not difficult, however, and at Frascadi’s particularly,
admittance was rarely refused to those who were decently dressed.
This most popular resort opened for business at one o’clock. Rouge et
noir, roulette and dice, were played in different rooms, the first named
being most popular. In addition to the elegant furnishings of the
establishment, which included everything conducive to the comfort and
convenience of the patrons, the directors provided another feature “for
the good of the house.” They admitted a number of the demi-monde,
and, in fact, encouraged their presence. The beauty, rich toilets and
engaging manners of these females were an attraction to young men, who
would not otherwise have visited the establishment.
These women played more or less, and naturally their example was
followed by the rich scions who sought their favor. Five francs was the
smallest, and 12,000 francs the largest wager permitted at Frascadi’s.
These rooms were frequented by the nobleman, the mechanic, and the
loafer, provided their apparel was tolerably presentable. A large
of the patrons were foreigners, the English predominating.
The lower class of gambling houses, in the Paris of that time, were
supported mainly by mechanics, clerks, draftsmen, and the like, men
whose character would have been ruined had it been known that they
were addicted to play, and who would not have gambled, probably, had
not the law thrown its protecting arm around the gaming dens.
In an English work on ecarte, the author says of gambling in Paris:
“In no capital of the world, are the exigencies of the needy and dissipated
made more an object of speculation than in Paris. As for our Jews, or
usurers, they are not only honest, in comparison, but far inferior, both in
their number and in their practices, to the wretches who are everywhere
to be met with in the French capital, ready to advance their money at an
extortionate interest, provided the security afforded by the parties is such
as to preclude all possible risk. With the natives of the country themselves,
these people are not only limited in their advances, but scrupulous
to a nicety in regard to public credit, since, as by the loss of friends,
a debtor for a term of confinement not exceeding five years, is entitled
to his liberty, and becomes exonerated from any pre-existing claim,
it not infrequently occurs that those who are heavily laden with debt,
prefer to be incarcerated for a few years, to giving up property which
.bn 134.png
.pn +1
constitutes their whole fortune and the means of their future subsistence.
The money lenders keep a regular list of names noted down in their books,
to which, in cases of necessity, they usually refer and advance or withhold
in proportion as their employers have been more or less forward in their
liquidation of former engagements. This caution has only reference to
the gay and dissipated of their own country. But with foreigners, and
Englishmen in particular, the case is widely different, for upon these they
have a hold which is equal to all the mortgages and freehold securities in
the world, being in the event of defalcation almost certain of the
debtor and for life.
“But the principal auxiliaries of these people are the dashing, splendid
females, who frequent the salons d’ecarte. Although the greater number
of these women have independent incomes, and form attachments for
young men, they usually meet in these haunts, without any view of personal
interest. Still there are many who are often without any other gifts than
those afforded by their natural attractions, and on whom the irresistible
impulse of play operates a desire to produce, in any possible manner, the
means of gratifying their favorite propensity. Most of these also have
some sort of , either with their own countrymen or with strangers.
When, therefore, as the natural result of the play and lavish expenditure
of his chere amie of the moment, the immediate finances of the young
man are exhausted, and he has no longer the means of gratifying his
favorite passion, or of conducing to the amusement of the mistress, she
kindly suggests the possibility of his procuring a sum of bills on such and
such terms. These are ever in favor of the money lender, and furnished
with the necessary powers, she instantly repairs to one of them and
bargains for a present for herself in proportion to the amount required.
Then when the money is all expended, either wholly ruined, or what is
nearly the same thing, thrown into St. Pelagie, at all events, unable to
command further resources, the young man can no longer please his fair
enchantress; she forsakes him without the least ceremony, and looks out
for some other lover whose prospects are yet in a flourishing condition.
Very frequently these women have for their lovers young men moving in
the first sphere of Parisian society, yet rendered nearly as indigent as
themselves from play, whose credit with the money lending race has long
been
Gambling in Paris is carried on mainly in resorts of three distinct
kinds,—regularly established clubs, places called “clubs,” but which are
open to the public solely for gambling purposes, and the illegal gambling
houses. At all the clubs properly so-called, play runs high. Strange as
it may seem, at first thought, the danger of being cheated is greater at
these “clubs” than elsewhere, for the reason that occasional visitors do
not suspect dishonest methods in such a place. Knowing this, sharpers
.bn 135.png
.pn +1
manage to introduce themselves and then fleece the members as rapidly
as is possible, without exciting suspicion. This cannot be so readily
accomplished in the so-called “clubs,” which are maintained solely for
gambling, owing to the constant watch maintained by the crooks, sharpers
and professionals who frequent these resorts. The same state of things
prevails at the illegal gaming houses. The French are quite as fond of
gambling as they ever were, though there has been a change in the manifestation
of the propensity. They now seem to gamble more for pleasure
than gain, and to prefer games of the simpler sort. In betting they are
excitable like the Italians, but show better judgment. The English
surpass them in coolness, and the Americans in shrewdness and audacity.
The most approved methods of cheating are practiced in the Paris
gambling dens. One is by arranging a “chaplet,” that is, putting the
cards into the deck in some particular order, the succession of which is
retained by the memory of the dealer; “stocking” the cards, as it is
called in the United States. The collusion of a card room attendant is
necessary to affect this. With a “chaplet” the dealer knows, of course,
what each card is before it is turned. Dealers have been known to obtain
an unfair advantage by having on a table in front of them a highly
polished snuff box, or cigarette case; which, serving as a mirror, enables
their quick and practiced eye to catch the reflection of the cards, as they
are dealt.
In American parlance, the same device is called a “shiner.” The
time honored fraud of “ringing in a cold deck” is still occasionally
practiced, and the utmost watchfulness does not always prevent it. The
dealers are sometimes the losers at this game, for, through bribery, or
otherwise, sharpers now and then succeed in having attendants supply
decks of marked cards. An instance is told of a sharper who obtained a
supply of marked cards of fine quality and then succeeded in selling
them in large quantities to persons who supplied such goods to gaming
establishments. Waiting until the cards were in use, the sharper won
many thousands of dollars before the fraud was discovered. From time to
time the same trick has been successfully played in many parts of the
United States.
M. Des Perriers, it is stated, once saw a friend of his playing ecarte
with a stranger and after watching the game for awhile perceived that his
friend was being cheated. Watching his opportunity Des Perriers warned
his friend of the fact, and the latter coolly replied “Oh that’s all right, I
know perfectly well that he is cheating me, but it is agreed that every
time I catch him at it, I shall score an extra point.” This recalls the
story of the game on a river boat, wherein one friend warned
another that the latter was being cheated by a certain gambler in the
game. “Well, what of it, Isn’t it his deal?” the friend replied.
.bn 136.png
.pn +1
The number of celebrated Frenchmen who have been ruined by gambling
is great. Of the number were Coquillart, a poet of the 15th century,
Guido the great painter, Rotrote, Voiture, M. Sallo, counselor to
the parliament of Paris, and Paschasiur Justus, a celebrated physician.
Montaigne and Descartes, the philosophers and Carden the scientist, were
all gamblers at one stage of their life, but each succeeded in conquering
the passion.
Previous to the reign of Louis XIV., women could not gamble openly,
and retain their reputation. If it was known that they were addicted to
play, they lost caste. Before the end of the reign of Louis XV., the wives
of aristocrats, generally, played heavily in their own houses without exciting
much, if any, adverse criticism; and, by the close of the last century,
gambling among women of the higher classes was almost universal
and viewed as a matter of course. It has been often remarked that with
the so-called respectable there has been less honor among women gamesters
than among men; many of them, indeed, not hesitating to claim unfair
advantages, and even to engage in downright lying and cheating. Many
women of wealth and title have by heavy losses at the gaming table, been
brought to a state of desperation and degradation most surprising. Instances
have been numerous where they have sacrificed their virtue in
order to obtain money with which to continue the indulgence of their
passion for play. Cases are not unknown where they even sacrificed the
virtues of their own daughters to the same end. The beautiful Countess
of Schwiechelt, it is said, after losing 50,000 livres at Paris became so
desperate that she resorted to the robbery, of a friend, Madame Demidoff,
in order to repair her losses. The latter possessed a magnificent coronet
of emeralds which, at a ball given by her, was stolen by the Countess,
who next day proceeded to raise money with the coronet as collateral.
She was detected and convicted of the crime. She had many influential
friends who tried to induce Napoleon I. to pardon her, which he steadfastly
refused to do.
Towards the close of the Reign of Napoleon III., the circles or clubs,
became greatly demoralized by card gambling. Heavy play, which had
been confined chiefly to the mansions of the rich, places of considerable
privacy, began to be common at the clubs and be talked about in public.
Disregard for the gambling laws gradually increased, until after the
Franco-Prussian war, and numerous “clubs” were organized solely as
gambling resorts. The authorization of the Prefect of Police was necessary,
whenever a circle or club was started, and one of the stipulated
conditions was, that no play for ready money stakes should occur at such
club. It is unnecessary to say that this regulation is now scandalously
ignored and that the authorities wink at the infraction. Baccarat is the
favorite game at these resorts, as it is in the more aristocratic and legitimate
.bn 137.png
.pn +1
clubs of the city. In this connection, by way of illustration, the
following experience of a once prosperous founder of one of these circles,
or clubs, told by himself, is interesting:
“I had never been in a gambling club in my life,” he “until
one evening in 1872, a friend took me to the circle de —— in the Place
de l’Opera. I had a capital dinner and a cigar of the first choice, and
after this everybody went into the card room. “Cincq cents louis en
banque,” (five hundred louis in the bank) were the first words I heard,
and then I watched the people play. I understood nothing of Baccarat
at that time, and my friend had to explain to me how it was played, how
much the different counters were worth, and how the man sitting in the
centre of the table opposite the dealer, and passing the cards to the players
with a sort of lath, and paying out counters or raking them up after
each coup, was an attendant, called a croupier, specially engaged for the
purpose of conducting the play. I was struck by seeing this croupier at
each bank, about every ten minutes on an average, drop several counters,
representing a louis each, into a small slit in the table within easy reach
of his hand. “Why is he doing that?” I asked my friend. “That is
the percentage which the house takes on the banks,” he replied, “ostensibly
for the use of the cards. That slit you perceive into which the money
is dropped is called the “cagnotte.” Not wishing to play myself, and
having nothing else to do, I thought I would see exactly how much the
croupiers would put in this “cagnotte” within a given time, and I found
that in an hour twenty-nine louis had been levied on the various banks.
“But at this rate,” I said to my friend, “the house must take in an immense
lot of money in the course of a few months.” “Rather,” he
replied. “It is one of the greatest money-making concerns in the world.”
“And how do they manage to start these clubs?” I asked. “Well, you
see, it all depends upon the Prefecture; if you can only get an authorization
you will find any number of capitalists to give you what money you
want to carry on your club with.” I said nothing, but I determined to
get an authorization for a club myself, if I could. I spoke about it to
some of my friends—you must know that I was then a fabricant de
brouges, and got my decoration just after the war for having allowed them
to convert a lot of my bronzes into a cannon for the defence of Paris—I
spoke to my friends, and we formed a committee, and then I waited on
the Prefect’s secretary with a document setting forth that a few commercial
gentlemen of the —— arrondissement wished to open a club where
they could meet after the business of the day, etc. “Yes, but you are
sure you will have no cards?” said the secretary, “Monsieur le Prefect
won’t hear of gambling.” I said: “Only a little Piquet, perhaps, or
ecarte; nothing more.” Well, after waiting a few months I got my
authorization, and then that scoundrel, Theodore, who cheated me out
.bn 138.png
.pn +1
of seventy thousand francs later on, come in with capital as cashier. Ole
Z., the usurer, came in too, and we took that apartment on the boulevard—only
16,000 francs rent. We sent out our invitations to the press, and
to the leading players, and gave a grand dinner for the opening night.
Well sir, you may believe me if you like, but we made 12,000 francs
cagnotte in that one evening, and the first year I made 300,000 francs for
my share, and ought to have had more, only Theodore and Z. swindled
me. But then, of course, I had to play; I had to keep the game going,
and the luck was always against me. I had to sell out my share in the
club. I lost that, and now you see where I am.”
“It was unnecessary for the narrator to finish for the one to whom he
was speaking knew “where he was.” He had gambled away nearly a
million francs in four years and exhausted his credit, and finally had been
forced to take a position as “commissaire des jeux,” or steward in
another den similar to the one at the head of which he had formerly
prospered. He had dealt “banks” at a thousand or two thousand louis,
and won and lost time and again a hundred thousand francs in a night.
Now he was receiving in his menial position only a few guineas a week
and his one consuming desire was to wager these at the table as soon as
he got possession of them. This was not easy to do, for the commissaires
are expected to refrain from playing. But he managed it in some way
or another and invariably lost them before the evening passed. During
the rest of the week, until his next wages were due, his only pleasure
consisted in rehearsing to whoever would listen to the experiences of his
halcyon days.”
Many men of like experience are to be found in the baccarat clubs of
Paris. Some are in the height of their short-lived prosperity; the greater
number, however, are wrecks. The class includes unsuccessful speculators
on the Bourse, ex-government officials, and men who have failed in
the legitimate callings in life. Gambling dens, the world over, are peopled
by a horde of broken down, disreputable, and degraded beings, and those
of Paris are not an exception.
So profitable to their managers are these baccarat clubs, that it is not
surprising their number increased rapidly, until, at one time, there were
nearly a hundred of them, the majority of which occupied pretentious
and well-appointed quarters, until, a few years ago, in obedience
to public indignation, an attempt was made to close them up. Many
were compelled to shut their doors, but, as the movement was not thorough,
a score or more remained, defiling and corrupting the best quarter
of the city, prospering the more because of the diminished competition.
As a rule, these clubs bear high-sounding names, not calculated to arouse
suspicion in the mind of a stranger of the iniquitous business going on
within their walls. The Cercle des Arts Liberaux, Cercle des Arts Industriels,
.bn 139.png
.pn +1
Cercle des Artistes Dramatiques; such were and are specimens of
these names. Standing side by side with clubs of genuine respectability,
are some of these dens, in which it is unsafe to leave anything of the
slightest value in an over-coat pocket. As a rule the baccarat clubs are
managed with great shrewdness. Rules regarding entrance fees and dues
exist, but merely that they may be cited when necessary in support of a
claim that these institutions partake of the character of genuine clubs.
“Members” are rarely asked for either fees or dues. Invitations by the
hundred are sent to frequenters of the boulevards, and each one is given to
understand that he may take his friends. Practically, these cercles are
open to all who have money. Emissaries, known variously as rabatteurs,
racoleurs, or rameneurs, or, as the English would call them, “bennets,”
frequent public places, in order to specially invite rich foreigners and
greenhorns with whom they may become acquainted. Journalists are
always welcomed and treated handsomely, in order that they may puff the
musical or other attractions offered, and that they may refrain from exposing
the real character of the places. Elaborate dinners and luncheons are
served at nominal prices; the rooms are richly furnished and adorned;
there are reading rooms, containing a wide range of current literature,
and writing rooms replete with all that convenience could suggest; liveried
attendants, deferential and polite to a nicety, attend to all possible
wants, and, in short, almost every conceivable attraction is provided.
Those who enter and, amid all these seductions, resist the temptation to
play, are exceedingly few, and to play is to lose. Visitors naturally infer
that they are in the private club house of a company of gentlemen. The
elegance is substantial enough, but the company in reality is largely composed
of genteel scoundrels and thieves, who scruple at no dishonesty,
provided the chances are fairly against detection.
These Paris clubs are exceedingly demoralizing, not only to the members
and visitors, but to their attaches. Hundreds of persons, employed
at first when mere boys, as pages, and rising (rather descending) to be
croupiers, dealers, cashiers, etc., and gradually acquiring the desire to
own houses and carriages, and keep mistresses, can attribute their ultimate
ruin to these dens.
Dishonest playing is probably more rife in the Paris clubs now than
ever before, and is carried on with skill never before equaled. Once in a
while, as in the case of the very “respectable” Cercle de la Rue Royale,
an expose is made of a system of cheating that has been pursued for
months, perhaps, and for a week or two all Paris talks of the scandal.
If the truth were known it would be found that similar practices obtain
in nearly every gambling club. Only collusion between a menial, a
croupier, the dealer, and perhaps one or two others, is necessary for
marked cards to be introduced. Those in the secret, divide the ill-gotten
.bn 140.png
.pn +1
profits and detection is not probable, unless a quarrel arises over the
division of plunder. Cheating at baccarat is general, and organized bands
of sharpers scour the cities of Europe, reaping a rich harvest from each one.
The mechanism and methods of cheating at gambling have been perfected
wonderfully within the last twenty or thirty years, as the reader of M.
Hector Malots’s novel, “Baccara,” can well understand, and nowhere
has this perfection manifested itself to a greater extent than in Paris.
That Gambling is having a most demoralizing effect in Paris is indisputable.
The time is ripe for a reformation in Paris, and many are praying
that it may come soon and be sweeping and thorough in character.
.il fn=i_134.jpg w=500px ew=90%
.ca DISTANT VIEW OF MADRID CLUB HOUSE.
The Spaniards are as much addicted to gambling, at least, as any
nationality. There is a tradition that they were once very liberal in their
gaming, and Voltaire says: “The grandees of Spain had a generous
ostentation; this was to divide the money won at play among all the bystanders
of whatever condition.” Montefiero tells of the liberality of the
Duke of Lima, Spanish minister to the Netherlands, who, when he
entertained Gaston (brother of Louis XIII), with his retinue, was accustomed,
.bn 141.png
.pn +1
after dinner, to put two thousand louis d’or on a large gaming
table, to be gambled for by the Prince and his attendants. Such open-handedness
certainly does not characterize the Spanish gamester of this
day. He is as greedy as any gamester, judging from appearances. Gambling
in Spain is general, and has always been practiced more openly than
in other European “I have wandered through all parts of
Spain,” writes a traveler, “and though in many places I have scarcely
been able to procure a glass of wine, or a bit of bread, or any of the first
conveniences of life, yet I never went through a village, however mean
and out of the way, in which I could not have purchased a pack of
cards.”
The nobility of Spain, for centuries, have been especially addicted to
gambling. Not a few of this class, indeed, are said to live from the proceeds
of the gaming table, and that, too, without any apparent loss in
reputation. The condition of things in Spain thirty years ago, is thus described
by another traveler: “After the bull-feast, I was invited to pass
the evening at the hotel of a lady who had a public card assembly. This
vile method of subsisting on the folly of mankind is confined, in Spain, to
the nobility. None but women of quality are permitted to hold banks,
and there are many whose faro banks bring them in a clear income of a
thousand guineas a year. The lady to whom I was introduced is an old
countess, who has lived nearly thirty years on the profits of the card tables
in her house. They are frequented every day, and though both natives and
foreigners are duped out of large sums by her, and her cabinet junto, yet it is
the greatest house of resort in all Madrid. She goes to Court, visits people
of the first fashion, and is received with as much respect and veneration
as if she had exercised the most sacred functions of a divine profession.
Many widows of great men have kept gaming houses, and lived splendidly
on the vices of mankind. If you be not disposed to play, be neither a sharper
nor a dupe you can not be admitted a second time to their assemblies. I was
no sooner presented to the lady, than, she offered me cards, and on my excusing
myself, because I really could not play, she made a very wry face,
turned from me and said to another lady in my hearing, that she wondered
how any foreigner could have the impertinence to come to her house for no
other purpose than to make an apology for not playing. My Spanish conductor,
unfortunately for himself, had not the same apology. He played
and lost his money—two circumstances which constantly follow in these
houses. While my friend was thus playing the fool, I attentively watched
the countenance and motions of the lady of the house. Her anxiety, address
and assiduity were equal to that of some skillful shop-keeper, who
has a certain attraction to engage all to buy, and diligence to take care that
none shall escape the net. I found out all her privy counsellors, by her
arrangement of her parties at the different tables, and whenever she showed
.bn 142.png
.pn +1
an extraordinary eagerness to fix one particular person with a stranger, the
game was always decided the same way, and her good friend was sure to win
the money. In Madrid one is scarcely welcome in polite society, unless
he engages in play, and, it may be added, unless he loses much more than
he wins. In the capital there are resorts where all classes meet and play
together. In these places the tables are managed by suspicious looking
men, who insist that you will be almost certain to win, if only you engage
in play: They even go so far, in inviting you to play, as to assert that
they themselves do not play for gain but for
Gambling is perhaps more distinctively a characteristic of the Latin
races than of any other. Not only is it almost universal in Spain, but it
seems to cling to Latin blood wherever it is found, however much it intermingles
with that of other peoples. In Mexico, Central America, and the
countries of South America, gambling thrives as in the mother country.
“Chusa,” dice, cards, and lotteries are the principal means of indulging the
vice, but there are many other devices and games in use. The lottery is an
especial favorite, and no Mexican, Nicaraguan or Brazilian neglects
taking one or more chances of getting a fortune in each drawing, as it
occurs. Gambling in these countries is carried on with more publicity
than in England, France or Germany. In none of the Spanish Republics
on our South, is it acknowledged as one of the most debasing and ruinous
vices to which humanity is addicted; indeed, by many, it is scarcely
thought to occupy a place among the vices at all. It is regarded scarcely
to the injury of a person’s reputation that he gambles, and it will doubtless
be many years before serious attempts are made in these countries to
suppress the evil.
In this connection may appropriately be appended a picture drawn
by a tourist in Mexico, a Mr. Mason, illustrative of the gambling propensities
of the Spanish Americans in that country. He writes: “This,
being Easter Eve, was the first of those days especially set apart for
gaming and idleness, and at about nine o’clock I went to the Plaza—an
open space near the church—where I found many hundred people
already assembled to amuse themselves. A large circle, surrounded by
spectators and dancers, was especially set apart for fandangoes, which,
whatever they may be in Spain, are in the New World much inferior in
grace and activity to the common American dances, though the latter, it
must be confessed, are usually to the sound of tin pans and pots and
empty gourds. Here the music was somewhat better, though not less
monotonous, and consisted of a guitar, a rude kind of harp, and a screaming
woman with a falsetto voice. Beyond the fandango stood a range of
booths beneath which men and women of all descriptions, old and young,
rich and poor, officers in full uniform and beggars in rags, were
gambling with the most intense interest, and individuals who, from their
.bn 143.png
.pn +1
appearances, might be considered objects of charity, were fearlessly
staking dollars—some even venturing a handful at one time. The favorite
game was called “Chusa,” which is played on a deep saucer-shaped
table, and resembled the “E. O.” of England.
“When the oppressive glare of the sun had ceased, and the cool
evening breezes set in, Donna Francisca announced to me her intention
of visiting the “Chusa,” and invited me to accompany her. She walked
there in good state between Don Antonio and myself, preceded by her three
servant maids, one of whom was in her Indian dress and had charge of the
cigars for her mistress. We found our way to the largest gambling table,
at which Francisca, having elbowed some ragged women off the only
bench in the place, established herself in full play. Even ladies with
mock jewels, and women of all shades and colors, with every variety of
mien, crowded around their favorite game, and my landlady having
succeed in getting the balls in her hands, became entirely occupied in
throwing them, with such gestures, or turns of the arm, as, in her opinion,
would insure success. Before leaving the Plaza, where Francisca remained
playing until nearly daylight, I made my way through the crowd to take
a last peek at her, and saw a fellow to whom I had paid a real (the eighth
of a dollar) in the morning for sweeping before my door, and who was
almost in rags, standing beside my fair friend, acting as banker to the
table, at which I suppose he had been successful. He ventured his
dollar at every turn with the most perfect sang froid. The apparent indifference
to losses, and apathy when successful, is very remarkable with all
classes of Mexicans, but they gamble so incessantly that I should conceive
all excitement in this dangerous fashion must be deadened and that love
of play at last becomes a disorder, rather than an amusement. I have
frequently seen a couple of poor porters, who had not a farthing of money,
sit gravely down in the dust with a greasy pack of cards, and anxiously
stake their respective stock of paper cigars until one or the other became
bankrupt.”
This picture of life in Mexico is typical of all Spanish America.
.il fn=i_137.jpg w=125px ew=15% alt='owl'
.bn 144.png
.pn +1
.pm chaphead 'CHAPTER VI.' 'ENGLAND.' chap6
.sp 2
Under the second Henry, when the courtiers grew weary of the
minstrels and jugleurs, or when they were not occupied in making love,
they beguiled the lagging moments by gaming in every form then known.
Before the third crusade, there was no check upon the gaming vice, and
no limit to the stakes. The gamester, when he had been defrauded
of his patrimony, in turn preyed upon the unsuspecting youth. He lived
upon the weaknesses of human nature then as now, and watched with
pleasure the trembling fingers and flushed cheeks of his victim, led on, as
they were, by apparent carelessness, to risk a larger sum after losing a
smaller. The victim was left by the gamester, only when the former
could not even call his clothes his own. The dupes often discovered,
when it was too late, that they had been ruined, not by the superior skill
of their adversary, but by his dishonesty. For their own advantage,
then, they who had been victims began to practice the arts of deception,
chief among which was the loading of the dice.
During the reign of Richard I., (he of the Lion’s Heart) and that
of King John, dice constituted the chief amusement of the nobility, and
the length to which they carried the game, may be inferred from the fact
that not even the “pomp and circumstance” of the martial field could
allure them from the fascinating pursuit. The Barons who collected to
resist the tyranny of John, were reproached by Matthew Paris with
spending their time in gambling with dice when their presence was
required in the field. Even the flames and the dissensions of civil war
could not excite in them an ardor equal to that induced by the dice-box.
But the evil did not stop here, and honor itself was sacrificed at the shrine
of the unworthy and demoralizing passion by some of that brilliant band
of cavaliers to whom England is indebted for her fundamental privileges
and constitutional liberty. Should still stronger proof be required of the
prevalence of the gaming vice among the Anglo-Normans of to-day,
it would be found in the instrument which was prepared by the “allied”
kings of England and France in 1190, for the government of the forces
they had fitted out against the Saracens, and which related particularly
to this vice. It was thereby enacted that “knights and clerks should be
restrained to the loss of twenty shillings in one day, but that sailors and
soldiers detected in playing for money at all should be fined at will, or
.bn 145.png
.pn +1
‘ducked.’” During subsequent reigns gaming, although generally condemned,
was vigorously pursued. How the practice operated upon the
morals of the English people, during the reign of Elizabeth and her
immediate successors, may be inferred from that phrase in Shakespeare
which avers “dicers’ oaths are accounted proverbially false.” Gambling
prevailed in England under Henry VIII, and it seems the King himself,
was an unscrupulous gamester. The evidence is ample that gambling
flourished during the reigns of Elizabeth, James I, and in the time of
Charles II. Evelyn, writing on the day when James II was proclaimed
King of England, says: “I can never forget the inexpressible luxury
and profaneness, gaming and dissoluteness, and, as it were, total forgetfulness
of God (it being Sunday evening), which this day I was witness
of. The King sitting and toying with his concubines, Portsmouth,
Cleveland and Mazarine, a French boy singing love songs in that glorious
galaxy, whilst about twenty of the great courtiers and other dissolute
persons were at Basset round a large table, a bank with twice two
thousand pounds in gold before them, upon which two gentlemen who
were with me made reflection with astonishment. Six days after, all was
in the dust.”
From the Harleian Miscellany, we copy the following observations on
gaming in England during the year 1668:
“One propounded this question: Whether men in ships at sea were
to be accounted amongst the living or the dead—because there were but
a few inches betwixt them and drowning. The same query may be made
of gamesters, though their estates being never so considerable—whether
they are to be esteemed rich or poor, since there are but a few casts at
dice betwixt a person of fortune and a pauper.
“Betwixt twelve and one of the clock a good dinner is prepared by
way of ordinary, and some of civility and condition oftentimes eat there
and play a while for recreation after dinner, and both moderately and most
commonly without deserving reproof. Towards night, when ravenous
beasts shall seek their prey, there come in shoals of hectors, trepanners,
gilts, pads, biters, prigs, divers, lifters, kidnappers, vouchers, millikens,
pie-men, decoys, shop-lifters, foilers, bulkers, droppers, gamblers, donnapers,
cross-biters, etc., under the general appellation of “rooks,” and in
this particular it serves as a nursery for Tyburn, for every year some of
its gang march thither.
“Would you imagine it to be true that a grave gentleman well
stricken in years, in so much that he cannot see the pips of the dice, is so
infatuated with this witchery as to play here with other’s eyes, of whom
this quibble was raised; ‘That Mr. Such-a-one plays at dice by the ear.’
Another gentleman, stark blind, I have seen play at hazard, and surely
that must be by the ear, too.
.bn 146.png
.pn +1
“Late at night, when the company grows thin, and your eyes dim
with watching, false dice are often put upon the ignorant, or they are
otherwise cozened with topping, or slurring, and if you are not vigilant
the book shall square you up double or treble books, and though you have
lost your money, dun you as severely for it as if it was the justest debt in
the world.
“There are yet some more genteel and subtle ‘crooks’ whom you
shall not distinguish, by their outward demeanor, from persons of condition,
and who will sit by a whole evening and observe who wins, and
then if the winner be ‘bubbleable’ they will insinuate themselves into his
acquaintance, and civilly invite him to drink a glass of wine, wheedle
him into play, and win all his money either by false dice, as high fulhams,
low fulhams, or by palming, topping, etc. Note by the way, that
when they have you at a tavern, and think you are a sure ‘bubble,’
they will many times purposely lose some small sums to you the first time,
to encourage you more freely to ‘bleed’ at the second meeting to which
they will be sure to invite you. A gentleman whom ill fortune had hurried
into a passion, took a box to a side table and then fell to throwing by
himself. At length he swore with an emphasis—‘Now, I throw for
nothing, I can win a thousand pounds, but when I play for money I lose
my all.’”
In the time of Henry VIII., as stated heretofore, gambling pervaded
every rank of society. Sir Miles Partridge threw dice with this king and
won from him the celebrated “Jesus bells,” then the largest in England,
which were in the tower of St. Paul’s. Partridge was hung for some
criminal offense in the time of Edward VI. During the Protectorate of
Cromwell, vigorous attempts were made to suppress gaming; but under
Charles II., a dissolute monarch, the vice more than recovered the ground
it had lost. The aristocracy of the period plunged into gaming as it did
into other dissipation. After the death of this King the gambling mania
again declined only to revive during the classic reign of Queen Anne.
Parliament thereupon turned its attention to the subject, and passed stringent
measures against the evil.
Under the first and second Georges, faro and hazard were subjected
to heavy penalties and yet, these and other games continued to be played
by all classes. In his correspondence with Horace Walpole, Lord Oxford
makes pregnant and forcible reference to the absorbing passion for play
that distinguished, or rather, disgraced, the times. December 13, 1754,
Walpole wrote: “I met Dyke Edgecombe and asked him with great
importance, if he knew whether Mr. Pitt was out?” “Yes,” replied
Edgecombe, who was too much of a gamester not to have a sportsman’s
conception of the meaning of “out,” “How do you know?” I asked,
“Why, I called at his door, just now, and his footman told me so,” he
.bn 147.png
.pn +1
Another incident, related in Lord Oxford’s correspondence,
shows to what ruin the desperate play of that time sometimes led. After
expressing his surprise at the extraordinary death of ——, a most accomplished
man of the day, he says: “He himself, with all his judgment in
debts, would have bet any man in England against himself for self murder.
Yet, after having been supposed the sharpest genius in his time, he, by
all that appears, shot himself in the distress of his circumstances.
He lost £1,200 a year by Lord Albemarle’s death and more by Lord Gage’s,
late Duke of Bedford. The same day he asked immediately for the government
of Virginia, or the fox hounds, and pressed for an answer with
the eagerness that surprised the Duke of N., who never had a notion of
pinning down the relation of his own, or any man’s wants, to a day. Yet
that seems to have been the case with ——, who determined to throw the
die of life or death upon that answer from the court. Tuesday was the
night for the answer, which did not prove to be favorable. He consulted,
indirectly, and at last directly, several people of the easiest method of
finishing life, and seems to have thought that he had been too explicit, and
invited company to dinner on the day of his death, and ordered a supper
at White’s, where he had supper but the day before. He played until it
was one o’clock in the morning; it was New Year’s morning. Lord
Bertie drank to him a happy New Year. He clapped his hands strangely
to his eyes. In the morning he had a lawyer and three witnesses to
execute his will, which he made them read twice very carefully, paragraph
by paragraph, and then asking the lawyer if that would stand good
though a man were to shoot himself, and being assured that it would, he
said, “Pray be seated while I step into the next room,”—and shot himself.
I feel for the distress this man must have felt before he decided on so
desperate an action. He had the the most compendious understanding of
any man I ever saw. He had effected a finesse in many matters beyond
what he deserved, and aimed at reducing affections to a calculation like
Demoirves.
Again Lord Oxford writes: “The great event is the catastrophe of
who has frittered away his whole fortune at hazard, but that
does not exceed what was lost by the Duke of Bedford, he having lost at
one period of the night (though he recovered the greater part of it)
230,000 pounds. The citizens put on their double chameleoned pumps and
trudged to St. James Street expecting to see judgment on White, angels
with flaming swords and devils playing away with the dice box, etc., but
there was nothing
In gambling, the reign of George III. was no improvement on those
of his predecessors, but quite the contrary. The vice became more
general among the nobility and, if possible more desperate. The most
talented men of the day were heavy players at faro and hazard. Lord
.bn 148.png
.pn +1
Lauderdale states that £5,000 ($25,000) were often staked on a single
card at faro; and, on authority equally good, we learn that Mr. Fox
played at hazard for twenty two consecutive hours and lost on an average
£500 ($2,500) in cash each hour. Fox was an infatuated gamester, and
he once declared that the greatest pleasure in life was to play and win,
and the next greatest pleasure to play and lose.
Under this monarch, gambling invaded private mansions to an
extent greater than ever before, or since. Many noblemen, enjoying
public esteem and political confidence, permitted their homes to become
virtual gambling dens. Lords, statesmen, and orators received from
ten to twenty guineas per hour for dealing faro in the houses of eminent
personages. At this time, women of the highest rank plunged into
gaming and in their houses promoted the terrible evil.
Since the time of George IV. gambling among the aristocracy has
decreased greatly. Gambling parties in the houses of the higher classes
are now exceedingly rare. The English Lord or Baronet now gambles at
his club, at Monte Carlo, or some other Continental resort. One sees many
English women playing at Monte Carlo, but it is said with them to be
a pastime mainly. Gambling is still largely indulged in by the lower
classes of London, but is attended with much inconvenience and risk
owing to the vigilance of the police. Turf betting, however, in which all
classes join, goes on unchecked.
In gambling, as in all other occupations, the Englishman manifests
his race characteristics. Cool and collected, he bets in a cold-blooded
sort of way, impossible to an Italian or Frenchman. The Englishman
knows generally what he is doing and rarely “loses his head,” whatever
else he may lose. Although conservative, he will, at times, bet heavily
and desperately. The gambling propensity in England now exhibits
itself on the turf more than elsewhere. Gambling houses have flourished
for 200 years at least. Formerly, gambling among the nobility was carried
on at clubs or “coffee houses,” and was one of the understood features
of club-life. It was also largely practiced in private mansions. In
time, establishments, devoted solely to gambling, were started, and
called “clubs,” that an air of importance and respectability might be
thrown about them. The practice has continued to this day and the
vilest gaming “hells” in London are known by the euphonious name of
“clubs.” Some of the gaming resorts once noted in London were:
“White’s”, “Brooks’”, “Crockford’s”, “Fishmongers’ Hall”, the
“Berkely Club”, “St. James”, “Melton-Mowbray”, “Strangers”,
“Cavendish”, “Leicester”, and “Hertford.”
In its day, “Fishmonger’s Hall” was the most celebrated den of the
metropolis. A description of this place was given in a communication to
the London Times, of July 22nd, 1824 as follows:
.bn 149.png
.pn +1
At the head of these infamous establishments is one yclept,
“Fishmongers’ Hall,” which seeks more plunder than all the others
put together, though they consist of about a dozen. This place has been
fitted up at an expense of about £40,000, and is the most splendid house
interiorly and exteriorly in all the neighborhood. It is established as a
bait for the fortunes of the great, many of whom have already been very
severe sufferers. Invitations to dinners are sent to noblemen and gentlemen,
at which they are treated with every delicacy, and the most intoxicating
wines. After such enjoyment a visit to the French hazard table in
an adjoining room is a matter of course, where the consequences are
easily divined. A man thus allured to the den may determine not to
lose more than a few pounds, which 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 upon his checks,
which being known to be good, are readily cashed for very considerable
amounts. In this manner £10,000, £20,000, £30,000, or more, have
often been swept away. The profits for the last season over and above
expenses, which cannot be less than £100 a day, are said to be fully
£150,000 ($750,000 It is wholly impossible, however, to come at the
exact sum unless we could get a peep at the ledger of accounts of each
day’s gains at this pandemonium, which, though, of course, contains
no name, as it might prove awkward, if at any time that book
fell into other hands. Some idea can be formed of what has been made,
when it is understood that £1,000 alone was given to be divided among
the waiters at the end of the last season, besides the “Guy Fawkes” of
the place, the head servant having that amount given him last year as a
New Year’s gift.
“It would be well for the frequenters of this resort to understand
that it is their money that pays the rent and superb embellishments of the
house, the good feed and fashionable clothes which disguise the knaves of
the establishment, the refreshments and wine with which they are regaled,
and which are served with no sparing hand in order to bewilder the
senses, to prevent from being seen what is going forward, and which will
not be at their service longer than they have money to be fleeced of; they
may also understand that it is their money which has gone to make the
vast fortunes of which two or three of the keepers are possessed. The
‘hellites’ at all the ‘hells,’ not content with the gains by the points
of the game in favor of the bank, and from the equal chances, do not fail
to resort to every species of cheating. The dealers and croupiers are
especially selected for their adeptness in all the mysteries of the black art.
Sleight-of-hand tricks at rouge et noir, by which they make any color when
they wish, false dice and cramped boxes at French hazard, are all put in practice
with perfect impunity, when every one save the banker and croupiers
.bn 150.png
.pn +1
are in state of delirium of intoxication. About two years ago false dice
were detected at the French hazard bank in Piccadilly, in which the proprietors
of the ‘Fishmongers’ Hall’ had a share. A few noblemen and
gentlemen had been losing largely, (it is said about £50,000) when the
dice became suspected, one gentleman seized them, conveyed them away,
and found the next morning that they were false.
‘hells’ generally are fitted up in a very splendid style, and
their expenses are very great. Those of the ‘Fishmongers’ Hall’ are not
less than £1,000 per week. The next in importance are about £150 per
week, and the minor ones from £40 to £80.
“The inspectors, or over-lookers, are paid from £6 to £8 a week
each, the croupiers or tailleurs £3 to £6, the waiters and porters £2, and a
looker-out for the police officers, to give warning of their approach £2.
What may be given to the watchman upon the beat of the different
houses, besides liquor, etc., is not known, but they receive no doubt
according to the services they are called upon to render. Then comes
rent, and incidental expenses, such as wines, etc. There is another disbursement,
not easily ascertained, but it must be very large, viz.: the
money annually given in a certain quarter to obtain timely intelligence of
any information laid against a ‘hell’ at a public office, to prevent sudden
surprises. This has become the more necessary since by recent act the
parties keeping the houses, and those playing and betting at them are,
when sufficiently identified, subject to a discipline at the tread mill. The
houses are well fortified with strong iron-plated doors, to make the
ingress into them a tardy and difficult matter. There is one at the bottom
of the stairs, one near the top, a third into the room of play. These are
opened or closed one after another as the person ascends or descends, for the
doorkeeper to take a bird’s eye view of the person. The appearance of
the houses, attention of the waiters, civility of the dealers, condescension
of the bankers, refreshments and wine, all combined, have an intoxicating
influence upon the inexperienced and unreflecting mind. The proprietors,
or more particularly speaking, the bankers of these houses of robbery are
composed for the most part of a heterogenous mass of worn out gamblers,
blacklegs, pimps, horse dealers, jockeys, valets, pettifogging low tradesmen
that have been dealers at their own, and at other tables. They dress
in the first style of fashion, keep good houses, women, carriages, and fare
sumptuously, bedizen themselves out with valuable gold watches, chains,
diamonds, and rings, costly snuff boxes, etc.—property with but
little exception originally belonging to unfortunates who had been fleeced
out of everything, and who, in the moment of disaster, parted with them
for a mere trifle. Some have got into large private mansions, and keep
very respectable establishments, but persons with a superficial knowledge
of the world can very easily see through the disguise of the gentlemen
.bn 151.png
.pn +1
they assume. They are awkward and vulgar in their gait, nearly all
without education and manners, and when they discourse, low slang
bespeaks their calling—escapes them in spite of their teeth. There is not
a single constant player who can say that he is a winner by them.”
In 1830 “Crockford’s” was one of the most prosperous gambling establishments
in London. It was situated on the west side of St. James street,
Piccadilly, and was built by the man whose name it bore. Although
devoted to gambling purposes, “Crockford’s” was a private club, and
numbered among its members several gentlemen of eminent respectability.
It was from this fact, doubtless, that the place succeeded in maintaining
a fair reputation and was not interfered with by the authorities. Mr.
Crockford, early in life, had been a fishmonger, which occupation he abandoned
to become a gaming-house keeper. With a man named Taylor, he
for a time, managed the “Waiters’ Club,” which had for its patrons
employes and well-to-do trades-people. In little more than a year Crockford
amassed a large sum of money. Being ambitious, he next constructed
a net for higher game, in his St. James street palace. In its meshes he
would entangle the aristocratic and wealthy. In this he succeeded to a
remarkable degree, and, within a few years, accumulated a fortune.
His “club house” was most magnificent within and imposing without.
The interior comprised a grand drawing-room, library, billiard room,
supper room, and several “parlors” devoted to play. All the apartments
were embellished and furnished at enormous expense and with a
magnificence quite beyond description. From the start every precaution
was taken to make the membership as select as possible; the founder
sagaciously perceiving that no surer course to success could be adopted.
The most distinguished personages of the day, including the Duke of
Wellington, were members, and “Crockford’s” became the “fad” in
fashionable London. Play was heavy in this palatial “hell,” and repeatedly
£10,000, £15,000, £20,000, and even more, were lost at a single
sitting by members of the nobility. It is said that not less than a dozen
lost £100,000 each at this fashionable “den.” Crockford’s policy
extended a liberal credit to his noble dupes. A score or more of the heads
and scions of great families were indebted to him constantly to the extent
of hundreds of thousands of pounds. He retired in 1840 but long before
that was a millionaire. Building for himself an expensive town residence
and buying an estate at Newmarket, once the property of a proud nobleman,
Crockford lived like a prince, and that, too, without losing favor
with the titled dupes whom he bled. It would seem as if the aristocrats
deemed it a privilege to impoverish themselves in his “gilded hell.” It
was said, perhaps in the bitterness of irony, that Crockford retired only
because there were not remaining enough unplucked noblemen to make it
an object to continue his business.
.bn 152.png
.pn +1
“White’s Club,” established as a “chocolate house” in 1698, near
the bottom of St. James street, was the most famous gaming resort of its
time. Dean Swift, in his essay on Modern Education, says of the place:
“I have heard that the late Earl of Oxford, in the time of his ministry,
never passed by White’s Chocolate House, a common rendezvous of famous
sharpers and noble cullies, without bestowing a curse on that famous
‘academy’ as the bane of half the English nobility.” White’s was the
place where the nobility indulged their passion for play, and of the number
who frequented its baneful precinct, were the Duke of Devonshire, the
Earls of Chesterfield, Chalmanely, Colley Cibber, Major John Churchill,
and Budd Doddington. It was there that Chesterfield uttered many of
his celebrated witticisms, and afforded delightful entertainment to a distinguished
company. He gambled, although fully aware of the inevitable
results of the practice. Indeed, according to Walpole, he once told his
son that “a member of a gambling club should be a cheat or he would soon
be a beggar.” Pelham, the Prime Minister, was a life-long gambler, and,
even when holding his exalted office, divided his time between attending
to its duties and playing at White’s. In a letter to Dr. Doddridge, in 1750,
Lord Littleton said: “I tremble to think that the rattling of the dice box
at White’s may, one day or other, if my son should become 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 town, what devastations are
made by that destructive power, the sport of play.” Faro was the principal
game at White’s, and professional gamblers, provided they were
thought honest, were admitted. “Heavy” betting was the practice, and
Lord Carlisle lost £10,000 at one sitting. During the game he stood to
win £50,000 of Sir John Bland, of Kippax Park, who, himself, after losing
£32,000 one night, in winning back the greater part of it.
In 1755, however, he gambled away his whole fortune at hazard. At this
period almost every difference of opinion regarding expected occurrences
was made the subject of a bet. A book for the recording of such bets was
kept at White’s and some of the entries were of the strangest character.
One member bet that the first baronet to be hung would be Sir William
Burdette, who seems to have been the black sheep of a very respectable
family. Bets were recorded on the duration of the ministry, the receiving
of titles, on earthquakes, scandals, births, deaths, marriages, and countless
other events. One day a man fell to the pavement in front of White’s
and instantly a member bet that he was dead and the wager was accepted.
When it was proposed to bleed the man the gamesters protested vigorously
on the ground that the use of the lancet would interfere with a fair
settlement of the bet. Walpole writes: “A person coming into the club
on the morning of the earthquake of 1750, and hearing bets laid whether
the shock was caused by an earthquake or the blowing up of a powder
.bn 153.png
.pn +1
mill, went away in a hurry, protesting that they were such an impious set
that he believed ‘if the last trumpet were sounded they would bet puppet
show against judgment.’” And in another place he says, “One of the
youths at White’s has committed murder and intends to repeat it. He
bet £12,000 that a man could live twelve hours under water, hired a desperate
fellow, sunk him in a ship by way of experiment, and both ship and
man have not been heard of since. Another man and ship are to be tried
for their lives instead of the real murderers.” “Lord Digby,” wrote
Guy Williams, “is very soon to be married to Miss Fielding. Thousands
might have been won at White’s on his lordship not knowing that such a
being existed.” One of the entries in the book read, “Lord Mountford
bets Sir John Bland 20 guineas that Nash outlives Colley Cibber.” Neither
won the bet, for both committed suicide before either Nash or Cibber died.
Bets were also made that Sarah, Duchess of Marlborough, would out-live
the Duchess of Cleveland.
Play at White’s was believed to be “on the square,” but there is
much information to the effect that it was not. The fact that professional
gamblers were admitted ought to be conclusive on the point. Hogarth,
in his representation of gambling at White’s, places a highwayman at the
fireside, waiting until the heaviest winner shall depart and thus furnish
his opportunity.
“Brooks’ Club” was founded in 1764, immediately south of White’s,
on St. James street. Of the celebrities who frequented it, one time or
another, were Sir Joshua Reynolds, Garrick, Hume, Gibbon, Sheridan,
Fox, Pitt, Lords Euston and Chatham, Wilberforce, Horace Walpole, the
Dukes of Roxburgh and of Portland, the Earl of Strathmore, and Mr.
Crew, afterwards Lord Crew. It did not flourish at first and Brooks, its
proprietor, died in poverty in 1772. The club then became known as
“Almack’s” and for a time enjoyed prosperity as the favorite rendezvous
of the rich and great men of London. That the betting was heavy there
may be inferred from the fact that a certain Mr. Thynne, because he won
only 12,000 guineas ($63,000.) in two months, retired in disgust on
March 21st., 1772. Fast scions of noble families were accustomed to lose
or win from £10,000 to £25,000 in an evening at “Almack’s”. It was
asserted that when play was in progress there was rarely less than £10,000
in bets on the table. Lord Starbordale, one night while he was still in
his minority, lost £10,000, but won it back by one fortunate turn at
hazard, whereupon he exclaimed, with a great oath: “Now if I had been
playing deep I might have won millions.”
The fashionable young men of the day were veritable dudes and
affected foreign notions and tastes and wore curls and eyeglasses. When
about to sit down to play, they replaced their embroidered coats with
others of frieze, or turned them wrong side out for luck. They slipped
.bn 154.png
.pn +1
on leather wristlets to save their lace ruffles. To avoid disarranging
their hair and to protect their eyes from the light, high-crowned broad-brimmed
hats were worn by them. Pitt put his whole soul in play
while at it, as into all else that he did. When Wilberforce returned in
triumph to Parliament and to London, in 1790, he was at once elected to
membership in all the “clubs.” “Almack’s,” however, was his favorite
resort, where he became very intimate with Pitt, whom he had known
at Cambridge. Wilberforce was not a heavy gambler and did not continue
the practice long. It has been handed down that he once lost £100
and that on another he kept the bank and won £600.
Gibbon, the historian, spent much of his time at “Almack’s”, and
was far from averse to play. He was accustomed to indite his correspondence
from there and in one letter, dated June 24th, 1776, wrote:
“Town grows empty, and this house, where I have passed many agreeable
hours, is the only place which still invites the flower of English
youth. The style of living, though somewhat expensive, is exceedingly
pleasant, and notwithstanding the range for play, I have found more
entertainment and rational society than in any other club to which I
belong.”
Six years before, Horace Walpole, in a letter to Mann, draws a less
favorable picture. “Gaming at “Almack’s”, which has taken the place
of “Whites”, is worthy the decline of our Empire, or the decline of the
wealthy, as you choose.”
The “Berkley Club” enjoyed its greatest prosperity about the
middle of the present century. It had spacious and finely furnished
rooms and afforded every convenience to its members. French hazard
was the principal game at this resort. No stake less than a sovereign
was accepted and players were allowed to bet as high as they desired.
The terms of play, as well as the management, were such as to exclude
all except the wealthy elite. These frequented the place in considerable
numbers, but it never had the patronage once enjoyed by “White’s”,
“Almack’s”, and “Crockfords.”
The “Waiter’s Club,” in Piccadilly, flourished in the early part of
the present century. For ten years, or more, the company wont to gather
there was rather select, but the ruinous effects of play (dishonest play, it
was quite generally believed) soon demoralized and actually forced them
to disband. By an easy transition the place passed to the management of
a set of blacklegs, who conducted it as a common gambling “hell.”
Gambling in the 18th century, in England, is thus described in the
Eclectic Magazine for May, 1885: “In the more contracted sense in which
we understand the word ‘gambling,’ our grandsires appear to have been
more attached to it than the generations which went before them. The
actor and the politician, the divine and the tradesman, were alike infected
.bn 155.png
.pn +1
with the rage for gaming. The Duke of Devonshire lost his valuable
estate of Leicester Abbey, to Manners at a game of basset. Peers were
impoverished, and estates mortgaged, in a single night, and the men who
had entered the room in a state of affluence, rushed madly into the streets
at night, penniless, and probably in debt to a large amount. The chocolate
rooms in the neighborhood of Charing-cross, Leicester-fields, and Golden
Square, were the principal ‘hells’ of the West end, and it was not far for
ruin, disgrace and despair to find oblivion in the bosom of the Serpentine,
or the Thames. The coffee houses, we are told, most notorious for gambling,
were ‘White’s Chocolate-house,’ for ficket or basset clubs, in 1724,
‘Littleman’s,’ for faro, which was played in every room; ‘Oldman’s,’
‘Tom’s,’ ‘Will’s,’ and ‘Jonathan’s’ Coffee-houses, for ‘ombre,’ ‘picquet,’
and ‘loo.’ About 1730 the ‘Crown’ Coffee-house, in Bedford-row, became
the rendezvous of a party of whist players. Early in the century,
although Swift mentions it as a clergyman’s game, whist appears to have
been less in vogue, excepting with footmen and servants, among whom it
kept company with foot and all fours.
“From the frequent mention of it in Swift’s ‘Journal to Stella,’ we
should surmise that ‘ombre’ was in great fashion about 1710 to 1730, as
was crimp among the ladies, according to Steele, and, in 1726, we find in
‘Gay’s Correspondence’ a letter to Swift, in which he alludes to the favor
in which the game of quadrille was then held: ‘I can find amusement
enough without quadrille, which here is the universal employment of life.’
‘Nay,’ cries honest parson Adams, in the ‘True Briton,’ on January the
28th, 1746, ‘the holy Sabbath is, it seems, prostituted to these wicked
revellings, and card playing goes on as publicly as on any other day. Nor
is this only among the young lads and the damsels, who might be supposed
to know no better, but men advanced in years, and grave matrons are not
ashamed of being caught at the same pastime.’
“The Daily Journal of January 9th, 1751, gives a list of the officers
retained ‘in the most notorious gaming houses,’ showing how these
matters were then managed. The first twelve were:
“1. A commissioner, always a proprietor, who looks in of a night,
and the week’s account is audited by him and two other proprietors.
“2. A director, who superintends the room.
“3. An operator, who deals the cards at a cheating game called
‘faro.’
“4. Two crowpiers (croupiers) who watch the cards and gather in
the money for the bank.
“5. Two puffs, who have money given them to decoy others to
play.
“6. A clerk, who is a check upon the puffs, to see that they sink
none of the money given them to play with.
.bn 156.png
.pn +1
“7. A squib is a puff of lower rank who serves at half-pay salary
while he is learning to deal.
“8. A flasher, to swear how often a bank has been stripped.
“9. A dunner, who goes about to recover money lost at play.
“10. A waiter, to fill out wine, snuff candles, and attend to the
gaming rooms.
“11. An attorney, a Newgate solicitor.
“12. A captain, who is to fight any gentleman who is peevish at
losing his money.
“The green-rooms of the theatres even, were the scenes of great doings
in the gaming way, and Miss Bellamy tells us that thousands were
frequently lost there in a night—rings, brooches, watches, professional
wardrobes, and even salaries in advance, being staked and lost as well as
money.
“It was in vain that essays, satires and sermons were written with a
view to checking this universal vice. Hogarth has depicted it in all its
horrors, whether in the scene where it first leads the idle apprentice into
sin, or in others, where it shows the young rake on the way to jail. But
its dreadful consequences were most forcibly placed before the eyes of the
infatuated town by Edward Moore, in a tragedy, first performed at Drury
Lane in 1753, and entitled the “Gamester.” How did “the town”
receive this lesson? The “New Theatrical Dictionary” says: “With
all its merits, it met with but little success, the general cry against it being
that the distress was too deep to be borne. Yet we are rather apt
to imagine its want of perfect approbation arose in one part, (and that
no inconsiderable one) of the audience from a tenderness of another kind
than that of compassion, and that they were less hurt by the distress of
“Beverly” than by finding their darling vice—their favorite folly—thus
vehemently attacked by the strong lance of reason, and dramatic
execution.”
But gambling in England has never been confined to the aristocracy.
If anything, it has been even more prevalent in the “Lower orders of
society.” The play in the “dens” frequented by them has been less
“heavy,” but none the less ruinous and far more productive of misery
and crime. Such resorts have thrived for centuries in every part of London,
and indeed, in every large English city. Many of them have been
known as “clubs,” as are those of to-day, which the police raid from time
to
In these places, as in those more aristocratic, hazard became the
favorite game immediately upon its introduction from Paris, early in the
century, and for a time almost superceded other gambling devices. St.
James street early became the center for aristocratic gambling, and in no
quarter of London were the third and fourth class “hells” so numerous as
.bn 157.png
.pn +1
in the section surrounding this district. After “Crockford’s” was
established and it became apparent that it was not only prospering under
the protection and patronage of the ennobled and wealthy, but was also
safe from police interference, the gamblers who designed to prey upon the
lower classes were not slow to conclude that nowhere in London would
they be so secure as in the same vicinity. Accordingly, in a short time,
scores of “clubs” sprung up in Leicester Square, the Quadrant, in Regent
street, and between Bennett and Jermyn Streets. The Quadrant was known
as “Devil’s walk,” getting the name because of the half dozen or more
“hells” which flourished on its North side, between the County Fire
offices and Glasshouse street, and because of the hundreds of abandoned
women who promenaded the pavement then, as now, during the closing
hours of the day and far into the night. It was a locality especially
favorable to these “dens.” The throngs of people were greater in its
vicinity at night than in any other part of London. Competition between
the different houses was so sharp that each had its messengers on the
street, mixing with the people, and thrusting into their hands cards of
invitation to their respective resorts. Even the courtesans solicited for
the dens at the time they solicited for themselves.
The Quadrant “clubs” have been the ruin of thousands of young
men. Finally, the scandal became so great and openly offensive that the
public revolted. Some young men turned over the cards of invitation to
their parents, the latter in turn passing the invitations to the police.
With the cards as a clue the authorities began a determined fight upon the
evil, and finally exterminated the infamous resorts. Their doors had
opened readily, day and night, Sundays included. Anyone, no matter
how high or low in degree and circumstances, was welcome, and all were
systematically plucked.
As late as 1844 there were no less than fifteen gambling houses,
well known to the police, in the parishes of St. James’, St. George’s, St.
Ann’s, and St. Martin’s-in-the-fields, besides the rooms of public houses,
billiard rooms and coffee shops, in which gambling was conducted. These
latter, known as “copper halls,” usually accepted the lowest stakes,
down to a penny or a ha’penny, and were patronized mainly by clerks
and servants.
Gambling establishments, pure and simple, and of the lowest order,
have generally “followed the races;” that is, have been opened during
race week in the town where the courses are located—such as Warwick,
Doncaster, etc. Allusion has been made already to the fact that betting
on horse races is a favorite species of gambling in England. That subject
receives due attention in another part of this work. Reference is
proper here, however, to the gambling by those who attend the races. It
was said of Doncaster in 1846: “The Eldorado, or grand source of income
.bn 158.png
.pn +1
and wealth to the proprietors, arises from the prolific revenue of the play
of gaming tables, of which there are usually six in constant nightly operation
during the racing week. The proprietors of the Subscription Betting
Rooms are not ostensibly connected in the co-partnership of the banks, or
in the business of the tables, but they are, nevertheless, largely interested
in the successful issue of the week, as will be shown. In the first instance
it should be stated that the sum of £350 or £400 is paid down to them
by the party contracting for the tables, and for the privilege of putting
down the banks. This is all clear profit, paid for in advance, and without
any contingency, and in addition to this large sum so paid, for the
mere privilege of finding capital, there is a stipulation also on the part of
the proprietors of the room, that they shall receive a considerable part or
share of the clear profits or gains of the week, accruing from the tables,
and this without the risk of a single shilling by them under any unlooked-for
reverse of fortune.”
Doncaster, at an earlier period, often harbored fully thirty or forty
gambling establishments during race week, which were conducted in the
most open manner. Men were stationed in front to hand to passers by
cards bearing such inscriptions as, “Roulette, £1,000 in the A
former magistrate of Warwick certified that once during the races nearly
every house in a certain street was utilized for gambling purposes, and
that the windows were wide open so that those who were passing could
see what was transpiring within. Though the sporting gentry had usually
to pay large fees for the privilege of running race week “hells,” they could
well afford to do so in view of their enormous profits. The games usual
at such places were roulette and hazard. Both French and English hazard
were in favor, the latter to accommodate the older generation of “sports,”
with whom it was a favorite. French hazard is a quiet game; English
hazard a noisy one. In the former, the players have simply to place their
stakes in particular positions on the table; as they wish to bet, and await
the result of the cast. They need not utter a word. At the English game,
on the contrary, every player is usually shouting at the top of his voice,
and the scene is not unlike that in the wheat pit of a Board of Trade or
in the Stock Exchange in New York. “The caster’s in for five pounds!”
“done;” “I’ll bet fifteen to ten!” “What’s the main and chance?”
“Seven to five;” “I’ll take on doublets!” “The caster throws before
the five for ten pounds.” These are samples of the exclamations made by
those who are offering and taking bets. The players in the English game
bet against each other and not against the banks as in the French game.
Wranglings, disputes and hot words are frequent, owing to misunderstandings
and the efforts of sharpers to impose upon those whom they take to
be inexperienced and susceptible to bravado.
.bn 159.png
.pn +1
An English hazard game is superintended by a “groom-porter,” as
he is called, who presides at the table to regulate the bets made between
the “caster,” or thrower of the dice, and the “setter,” or person opposed
to him. The proprietor does not get a percentage of the money staked
as in the French game, but derives his profit from a stipulated amount
from all the players who are fortunate enough to throw on three mains,
or win three times successively. Such winnings, it has been estimated,
occur eight times an hour. Accordingly the proprietor gets about $40 an
hour for each table, or $400 a night on the basis of ten hours. Of course,
the amount varies with the number engaged in playing. But the amount,
whatever it is, is clear profit, for the use of the table only is involved.
The “groom porter” has very arduous duties to perform, and must, of
necessity, be quick and determined, in order to keep track of all the bets
made and to defeat the frequent attempts at fraud by knaves and scoundrels
who sometimes stake less than their proportion, or endeavor to escape
their “obligations.”(?) In return for this protective vigilance he receives
a gratuity of a guinea or more from every one who throws six mains, or
wins six times successively. When betting is large his “doucers” are
generally increased, and sometimes he receives as much as five or ten
pounds.
In these “dens” the roulette tables are usually more numerous than
those devoted to hazard, and they prove more remunerative to the
proprietors, as the percentage against the players is about five and a half,
or more than three times what it is in hazard. The profits during race
week averaged, some times, £2,500 each.
Of the low gambling resorts in London, early in this century, Fraser’s
Magazine, of August 1833, gives this interesting account: “On an average,
during the last twenty years, about thirty ‘hells’ have been regularly
open in London for the accommodation of the lowest and most vile set of
hazard players. The game of hazard is the principal one played at the
low houses, and is, like the characters who play it, the most desperate
and ruinous of all games. The wretched men who follow this play are
partial to it, because it gives a chance, from a run of good luck, to become
possessed speedily of all the money on the table. No man who plays
hazard ever despairs making his fortune at some time. Such is the nature
of this destructive game, that I can now point out several men, whom you
see daily, who were in rags and wretchedness on Monday, and, before the
termination of the week, they rode in a newly purchased stanhope of their
own, having several thousand pounds in their possession. The few instances
of such success, which unfortunately occur, are generally well-known,
and consequently encourage the hopes of others who nightly
attend these places, sacrificing all considerations of life to the carrying their
all (if it be only a few shillings) every twenty-four hours to stake in this
.bn 160.png
.pn +1
great lottery, under the delusive hope of catching Dame Fortune at some
time in a merry mood. Thousands annually fall, in health, fame and
fortune, by this mad infatuation, while not one in a thousand finds an
oasis in the desert. The inferior houses of play are always situated in
obscure courts, or other places of retirement, and most frequently are kept
shut up during the day, as well as at night, as if unoccupied; or some
appearance of trade is carried on as a blind. A back room is selected for
all operations, if one can be secured sufficiently capacious for the accommodation
of forty or fifty persons at one time. In the centre of the room
is fixed a substantial circular table, immovable to any power of pressure
against it by the company who go to play, a circle of inlaid white hollywood
is formed in the middle of the table, of about four feet diameter, and
a lamp is suspended immediately over this ring. A man, designated the
“groom porter,” is mounted on a stool, with a stick in his hand, having
a transverse piece of wood affixed at its end, which is used by him to rake
in the dice, after having been thrown out of the box by the caster, (the
person who throws the dice). The avowed profits of keeping a table of
this kind is the receipt of a piece for each box-hand—that is, when a
player wins three times successively, he pays a certain sum to the table,
and there is an aperture in the table made to receive these contributions.
At the minor establishments, the price of a box-hand varies from one
shilling to half-a-crown, according to the terms on which the house is
known to be originally opened. If there is much play, these payments
produce ample profits to the keeper of the house, but their remuneration
for running the risk of keeping an unlawful table of play, is plunder. At
all these houses, as at the better ones, there is always a set of men who
hang about the table like sharks for prey, waiting for those who stay late,
or are inebriated, and come in towards morning to play when there are but
few lookers-on. Unfair means are then resorted to with impunity, and all
share the plunder. About eleven o’clock, when all honest and regular
persons are preparing for rest, the play commences, the adventurers being
seated around the table, one takes the box of dice, putting what he is
disposed to play for into the ring marked on the table, as soon as it is
covered with a like sum, or ‘set,’ as it is termed, by another person,
the player calls ‘a main,’ and at the same moment throws the dice, if
the call comes up, the caster wins, but if any other ‘main’ comes uppermost
on the dice, the thrower takes that chance for his own, and his
adversary has the one he calls, the throwing then continues, during
which bets are made by others, on the event, until it is decided. If
the caster throws or aces, when he first calls ‘a main,’ it is
said to be ‘crabbed,’ and he loses, but if he throws the number named,
he is said to have ‘nicked it,’ and thereby wins. Also, if he should call
six or eight, and throws double sizes, he wins, or if seven be the number
.bn 161.png
.pn +1
called, and eleven is thrown, it is a ‘nick,’ because those chances are
‘nicks’ to these ‘mains,’ which regulation is necessary to the equalization
of all the chances at this game when calling a ‘main.’
“The odds against any number being thrown against another number
varies from two to one, to six to five, and consequently keeps all the
table engaged in betting. All bets are staked, and the noise occasioned
by proposing and accepting wagers is most uproarious and deafening
among the low players, each having one eye on the black spots marked
on the dice, as they land from the box, and the other on the stake, ready
to snatch it if successful. To prevent the noise being heard in the street,
shutters closely fitted to the window frames are affixed, which are padded
and covered with green baize. There is also invariably an inner door
placed in the passage, having an aperture in it, through which all who
enter the door from the street may be viewed. This precaution answers
two purposes, it deadens the sound of the noisy voices at the table, and
prevents surprise by the officer of justice. The generality of the minor
houses are kept by prize fighters, and other desperate characters, who
bully and hector the more timid out of their money, by deciding that
bets have been lost when in fact they have been won. Bread, cheese,
and beer are supplied to the players, and a glass of gin is handed when
called for, gratis. To these places thieves resort, and such other loose
characters as are lost to every feeling of honesty and shame. A table of
this nature in full operation is a terrific sight, all the bad passions appertaining
to the vicious propensities of mankind are portrayed on the
of the players. An assembly of the most horrible demons could
not exhibit a more appalling effect, recklessness and desperation overshadow
every noble trait, which should enlighten the countenance of a
human being. Many, in their desperation, stripped themselves on the
spot of their clothes, either to stake against money, or to pledge to the
table-keeper for a trifle to renew the play, and many instances occur of
men going home half naked, after having lost their all. They assemble
in parties of from forty to fifty persons, who probably bring on an average
each night of from one to twenty shillings to play with. As the money
is lost the players depart, if they can not borrow or beg more, and this
goes on some times in the winter season for fourteen or sixteen hours in
succession, so that from 100 to 150 persons may be calculated to visit one
gambling table in the course of a night; and it not unfrequently happens
that, ultimately, all the money brought to the table gets into the hands
of one or two of the most fortunate adventurers, save that which is paid
to the table for box-hands, whilst the losers separate, only to devise plans
by which a few more shilling may be secured for the next night’s play.
“Every man so engaged is destined either to become by success a
more finished and mischievous gambler, or to appear at the bar of the
.bn 162.png
.pn +1
‘Old Bailey’ where, indeed, most of them may be said to have figured
already.
“The successful players, by degrees, improve their external appearance,
and obtain admittance to the houses of higher play, where 2s. 6d.,
or 3s. 4d. is demanded for box-hands. At these places silver counters
are used, representing the aliquot parts of a pound; these are called
‘pieces,’ one of which is a box-hand.
“If success attends them, in the first step of advancement, they next
become initiated into pound-houses, and associate with gamblers of
respectable exterior, where, if they show talent, they either become confederates
in forming schemes of plunder, and in aiding establishments to
carry on their concerns in defiance of the law, or fall back to their old
station of playing chicken-hazard, as the small play is designated.
“The half-crown, or third rate houses, are not less mischievious than
the lower ones. These houses are chiefly opened at the west end of the
town, but there are some few at the east. In the parish of St. James, I
have counted seven, eight and nine, in one street, which were open both
day and night.
“One house in Oxenden street, Coventry, had an uninterrupted run
of sixteen or seventeen years. Thousands have been ruined there, while
every proprietor amassed a large fortune. The man who first opened the
house (G. S.) has resided at Kentish Town for years past, in ease and
affluence, keeping his servants and horses, although he rose from the
lowest of the low.
“Several others who have followed him have had equal success. The
watchmen and Bow street officers were kept in regular pay, and the law
openly and expressly set at defiance, cards being handed about, on which
were written these words: ‘Note, the house is insured against all legal
interruptions, and the players are guaranteed to be as free from officious
interruptions as they are at their own
“At another of these medium houses, known by the numerals ‘77,’
the proprietor, (a broken down Irish publican, formerly residing in the
parish of St. Anne’s) accumulated in two years so much money that he
became a large builder of houses and assembly rooms at Cheltenham,
where he was at one time considered the most important man of the place,
although he continued his calling to the day of his death. ‘Alas! J. D. K.,
hadst thou remained on earth thou wouldst ere this have been honored
with the title of Grand Master of all the Blarney Clubs throughout the
United Kingdom. Many a coroner hast thou found employ, and many a
guinea hast thou brought into their purses, and many a family hast thou
cast into the depths of sorrow.’ So runs the world. Fools are the natural
prey of knaves, nature designed them so, when she made lambs for wolves.
The laws that fear and policy framed, nature disclaims; she knows but
.bn 163.png
.pn +1
two, and those are force and cunning. The nobler law is force, but then
there’s danger in’t; while cunning, like a skillful miner, works safely
and unseen.
“The subject of these remarks was not only subtle, wily, and in some
measure fascinating, but most athletic and active in person. He was part
proprietor of No. —, Pall Mall, for many years, where he would himself
play for heavy stakes. And it was a favorite hobby of his to go into St.
James’ Square, after having been up all night, to jump over the iron
railings and back again, from the enclosure to the paved way.
“The average number of these third-rate houses in London, open for
play, may be calculated at about twenty-five. If there were not a constant
influx of tyro-gamblers this number would not be supported. Their agents
stroll about the town, visiting public house parlors, and houses where
cribbage-players resort, whist clubs, also billiard and bagatelle tables,
experience having taught them that the man who plays at one game, if the
opportunity be afforded him, is ever ready to plunge deeper into the vice
of gambling on a large scale. Junior clerks, and the upper class of gentlemen’s
servants are the men whom they chiefly attack.
“It is an extraordinary and uncomfortable fact that no set of men are
more open to seduction than the servants of the nobility, and the menials
of club-houses, an instance of which occurred a few months since, in the
case of a servant of the Athenæum Club, who was inveigled into a house
in the Quadrant, where he lost, in two or three days, a considerable sum
of money belonging to his employers.
“The sum annually lost by the servants of the present day may
reasonably be laid at one million and a half sterling. At most of the
middle class gambling houses, play is going on from three o’clock, p. m.
to five or six o’clock a. m. In the afternoon, from three to seven, it is
called morning play, being generally rouge-et-noir or roulette.
“As soon as the proprietor of a ‘crown-house’ amasses money
enough to appear on the turf, and becomes known at Tattersall’s as a
speculator on horse-racing, he is dubbed a gentleman. Associating now
with another class of men, a high ambitious spirit prompts him to open a
superior house of play, where the upper class of gamblers and young
nobility may not be ashamed of meeting together. All petty players are
excluded. When he has accomplished his object he deems himself in the
high road for the acquirement of a splendid fortune, being now master of a
concern where money and estate are as regularly bought and sold as any
commodity in a public market; one man of fashion betraying another—the
most intimate and bosom friends colleaguing with these monsters for
the purpose of sacrificing each other to the god Plutus, instances of which
occur in this viciated town as often as the sun rises and sets.
.bn 164.png
.pn +1
“It might be thought invidious to mention names by innuendo, but
every man of the world, or rather of the London world (which comprehends
some thousand swindlers intermingled with the same number of
nobility and gentry), must have a knowledge of those characters who
have elevated themselves from the lowest state in society by gambling, to
associate on terms of equality with nobles. One married his daughters to
peers of the realm, and was treated with respect daily at the table of those
who enact laws for the punishment of swindlers, and also of bishops who
expatiate daily against all kinds of vice, including that of gambling, and
the sin of countenancing those who promote it. Another, whose confederate
was executed for poisoning horses, to secure for himself and his
honorable employer a large sum of money, now stalks through the halls
of our proud Norman, but too susceptible aristocracy, with as much freedom
and nonchalance as one who could trace his ancestry back to William
the Conqueror, and was possessed of a pure and unblemished reputation.
When the history of this individual and that of six others, who, to use
their own phraseology, have rowed through life together in the same boat,
are before the world, scenes will be developed which will stand as beacons
to warn future generations against coming in contact with such characters.
“In accordance with the reigning spirit of the day, such persons
having acquired money, no matter how, rank as gentlemen, and are
qualified to sit at the tables of the nobility. The company of fashionable
or club society is that of black-legs, and it would not be difficult for
me to name from twenty to thirty individuals at this moment who associate
with, and move among, persons of high life, who were, but a few years
back, in low vice and penury, and who have possessed themselves of a sum
of money certainly not less than from eight to nine millions sterling.
“Again, there are hundreds of others who have amassed from ten to
twenty thousand pounds each. Add to these the two or three thousand
who annually make smaller sums of money, or manage to keep themselves
and families in comfortable style by ‘hokey-pokey’ gambling ways, as
Brother Jonathan would say, some estimate may be made of the evil
occasioned to society by the movements of these men in it.”
One of the most deplorable phases of gambling in England is that
women have figured prominently. Incredible as it may seem, numerous
instances are recorded where the honor of wives and daughters has been
staked in the desperation of cowardly men. It may be believed that this
occurred only when all else had been swept away, and by persons from
whom every vestige of manhood had departed. Ethiopians, it is said, have
been known to gamble away their wives and children, and Schouten tells
of a Chinaman who lost his family in this manner. A similar story is told
of a Venetian, by Paschasius Justus, and in the wicked Paris of Louis XV,
debauched nobles played at dice for the favor of a notorious courtesan.
.bn 165.png
.pn +1
English literature contains many allusions to women gamblers. So
far did ladies of fashion carry the vice that certain nights for meeting were
set apart in their private mansions, at which young and old, married and
single, played with a desperation that must have made their husbands
and fathers tremble. Professionals, whose morals were not above reproach,
were engaged to conduct the games, and thus the women were thrown
into association with bad characters, and their names and reputations
bandied about in the mouths of the sporting gentry of London.
In 1820, James Lloyd, a harpy who practiced on the credulity of the
lower orders by keeping an illegal lottery, was arrested for the twentieth
time to answer for the offense. Lloyd was a Methodist preacher, and on
Sundays expounded the gospel to his neighbors; the remainder of the
week he instructed them in the gambling vice.
“In the same years,” says a writer of the time, “parties of young
persons robbed their masters to play at a certain establishment called
‘Morley’s Gambling House,’ in the city of London, and were there
ruined. Some were brought to justice at the Old Bailey, others in the
madness caused by their losses, destroyed themselves while some escaped
to other countries.”
To the games of faro, hazard, macao, doodle-doo and rouge-et-noir,
at this time, more than to horse-racing, may be ascribed the ruin of
many London merchants who once possessed fortunes and prosperous
business. Thousands upon thousands were thus ruined in the vicinity of
St. James; but this was not confined to youths of fortune only, but to
decent and respectable merchants, who were engulfed in its vortex.
Of the “South Sea Bubble,” a writer in the Eclectic Magazine for
May, 1885, says: “If not the earliest, at least the most remarkable
instance of this national spirit of gambling displayed itself in the last
century, and was the infatuation which led all classes to commit themselves
to the alluring prospects held out to them by the South Sea Company.
The public creditor was offered six per cent. interest, and a participation
in the profits of a new trading company, incorporated under the style of
‘The Governor and Company of Merchants of Great Britain trading to
the South Seas and other parts of America.’ But, whatever chances of
success this company might have had, were soon dispersed by the breaking
out of the war with Spain, in 1718, which rendered it necessary for
the concoctors of the scheme to circulate the most exaggerated reports,
falsify their books, bribe members of the government, and resort to every
fraudulent means, for the purpose of propping up their tottering creation.
Wonderful discoveries of valuable resources were trumped up, and, by the
mystery which they contrived to throw around the whole concern, people’s
curiosity was excited, and a general, but vague impression got abroad
that one of the South Sea Company’s bonds was talismanic, and there was
.bn 166.png
.pn +1
no reckoning the amount of profit it would bring to the fortunate possessor.
The smallest result expected from the enterprise was that in twenty-six
years it would pay off the entire amount of the National debt.
“How it was to be done no one knew, or cared to inquire, it was
sufficient to know that it was to be done. Trade and business of all kinds
was suspended, every pursuit and calling neglected, and the interest of the
whole nation absorbed by this enchanting dream. Money was realized in
every way, and at every sacrifice and risk, to be made available in the
purchase of South Sea stock, which rose in price with the demand
from £150 to £325. Fresh speculators came pouring in, and the
price went up to £1,000. This was at the latter end of July, but
alas, a whisper went forth that there was something wrong with the South
Sea Company. The chairman, Sir John Blunt, and some of the directors
had sold their shares. There was a screw loose somewhere, and on the
2nd of September it was quoted at £700. An attempt to allay the
panic was made by the directors, who called a meeting on the 8th, at
Merchant Tailors’ Hall, but in the evening it fell to £640, and next day
stood at £540. The fever had been succeeded by a shivering fit, and it
was rapidly running down to zero. In this emergency, the king, who
was at Hanover, was sent for, and Sir Robert Walpole called in, when the
case was desperate. He endeavored to persuade the Bank of England to
circulate the company’s bonds, but in vain. The stock fell to £135, and
the bubble burst. The duration of this public delirium, as has
truly called it, may be estimated when we state that the bill enabling the
company to raise the subscription received the royal assent on the 7th of
April, 1720, with the stock at £150; that the price subsequently ran up
to £1,000; and that, on the 27th day of September it had again sunk to
£150, and the delusion was over, and the nation in a state of panic,
with public credit shaken to its center. Investigations were now made
into the conduct of the managers of this marvelous fraud. A bill was
first passed through parliament to prevent the escape of the directors from
the kingdom, and then a Committee of Secrecy appointed to examine into
their accounts. It then came out that the books had been destroyed, or
concealed, entries erased and altered, and accounts falsified; that the
king’s mistress, even, the Duchess of Kendal, had received stock to the
amount of £10,000; another favorite, the Countess of Platen, £10,000;
Mr. Aislabie, Chancellor of the Exchequer, £70,000; Mr. Graggs, father
of the Secretary of State, £659,000; the Duke of Sutherland, £160,000;
Mr. Graggs, Jr., £30,000; and Mr. Charles Stanhope, Secretary of the
Treasury, two amounts, one of £10,000, and another of £47,000. The
manner in which these worthies, who were in the secret, could anticipate
and influence the markets, is obvious. Poor Gay had received an allotment
of stock from Mr. Secretary Graggs which was at one time worth £20,000,
.bn 167.png
.pn +1
but he clung fast to the bubble, refused to sell at that price, and waited
till it was worthless, when he found himself hugging the shadow of a
fortune. The amount of the company’s stock, at the time of the inquiry,
was found to be £37,800,000, of which £24,500,000 belonged to
individual proprietors. As some compensation to these rash and ruined
speculators, the estates of the directors were confiscated. Sir George
Caswell was expelled from the House of Commons, and made to disgorge
£250,000; Aislabie, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, was expelled, and
committed to the Tower; Sir John Blunt, the chairman, was stripped of
all but £5,000, and the excitement and popular resentment was so intense
that it is marvelous that they escaped with their lives.
“The South Sea frenzy was not sufficient to engross the gambling
spirit that it had generated, simultaneously there oozed up a crowd of
smaller bubbles, of which Malcom counted 156. The titles to some of them
were sufficient to illustrate the madness which had seized upon the nation.
There were companies for carrying on the undertaking business and furnishing
funerals, capital £1,200,000 at the ‘Fleece Tavern’ (ominous sign,)
Cornhill; for discounting pensions, 2,000 shares at the Globe Tavern; for
preventing and suppressing thieves, and insuring all persons’ goods from
the same (?), capital £2,000,000, at Cooper’s; for making Joppa and Castile
soap, at the Castile Tavern; for sweeping the streets, for maintaining
bastard children; for improving gardens and raising fruit trees, at Carraway’s,
for insuring horses against natural death, accident or theft, at the
Brown Tavern, Smithfield, another at Robin’s, of the same nature, capital
£2,000,000; for introducing the breed of asses; an insurance company
against the thefts of servants, 3,000 shares of £1,000 each, at the Devil
Tavern; for perpetual motion, by means of a wheel moving by force of
its own weight, capital £1,000,000 at the Ship Tavern,” etc., etc. The
Prince of Wales became governor of a Welsh Copper Company. The
Duke of Chandos was Chairman of the York Building Company, and of
another Company for building houses in London and Westminster.
“Many of these speculators were jealously prosecuted by the South
Sea Company, but they all succeeded, in a greater or less degree, in
spreading the general panic. The amount of capital proposed to be
raised by these countless schemes was three hundred million sterling—exceeding
the value of all the lands in England. The most amusing
instance of the blind credulity of the public was in the success which
attended one wary projector, who, well knowing the value of mystery,
published the following proposal:
“‘This day, the 28th inst., at Sam’s Coffee-house, behind the Royal
Exchange, at three in the afternoon, a book will be opened for entering
into a joint co-partnership for carrying on a thing that will turn to the
advantage of all concerned.’
.bn 168.png
.pn +1
“The particulars of this notable scheme were not to be revealed for
a month, and, ‘in the meantime’ says , he declared that every
person paying two guineas should be entitled to a subscription of one
hundred pounds, which would produce that sum yearly.’ In the forenoon,
the adventurer received a thousand of these subscriptions, and, in
the evening, set out for another kingdom.
“Some curious satires on these several schemes are preserved in the
British Museum, in the shape of a book of playing-cards. Thus, one is a
caricature of York-buildings, with the following lines beneath it:
.pm start_poem
‘You that are blessed with wealth by your Creator,
And want to drown you money in Thames water,
Buy but York-buildings, and the cistern there
Will sink more pence than any fool can spare.’
.pm end_poem
“A ship-building company is thus ridiculed:
.pm start_poem
‘Who but a nest of blockheads to their cost
Would build new ships for freight when trade is lost?
To raise fresh barques must surely be amusing,
When hundreds rot in dock for want of using.’
.pm end_poem
“The Pennsylvania Land Company comes in for a share of the
satire:
.pm start_poem
‘Come, all ye saints, that would for little buy
Great tracts of land, and care not where they lie,
Deal with your Quaking friends—They’re men of light,
The spirit hates deceit and scorns to bite.’
.pm end_poem
“The Company for the insurance of horses’ lives against death, or
accident, is thus dealt with:
.pm start_poem
‘You that keep horses to preserve your ease,
And pads to please your wives and mistresses,
Insure their lives, and, if they die we’ll make
Full satisfaction—or be bound to break.’
.pm end_poem
“ gives us a more dismal picture. ‘The whole nation,’ he
says, ‘was infested with a spirit of stock-jobbing, to an astonishing
degree. All distinctions of party, religion, sex, character, and circumstances
were swallowed up. Exchange-alley was filled with a strange
concourse of statesmen and clergymen, churchmen and dissenters, Whigs,
and Tories, physicians, lawyers, tradesmen, and even with females. All
other professions and employments were utterly neglected.’
“It is not to be wondered at that various lottery schemes were started
and prospered immensely at a time when the public mind was in the state
indicated above. They were launched by the State, by private companies
and by individuals. These institutions played no small part in
the general debasement of the public mind and the ruin of fortunes and
families.” This will appear more fully in the treatment accorded to lotteries
elsewhere in this book.
.bn 169.png
.pn +1
The history of anti gambling legislation in England, and the various
efforts which have been made to suppress or regulate the vice forms an
interesting phase of the subject, and also suggests how the evil was
regarded from time to time in the public mind. The earliest legislation
on the subject appears to have been based on the idea, not that gambling
was immoral and degrading, but that it interfered with the of
servants and employes, induced idleness, and diverted attention from
archery. “The first statute (12 R. 2, c. 6) in England (1388) prohibiting
gambling, applied only to servants of husbandry, artificers, and victuallers—not
to servants of gentlemen—and commanded such to refrain from
‘hand and foot ball, quoits, dice, throwing of stone kayles, and such other
importune games.’ The next statute (1409) enforced the above, with a
penalty of six days imprisonment for such offence. The next act (17 Ed.
4, c. 3, 1477,) after naming in a preamble the foregoing games, says,
‘Contrary to such laws, games called kayles, half-bowles, hand-in-hand-out,
and queckeborde, from day to day are used in divers parts of the
land,’ then provides that no occupier or master of a house shall voluntarily
permit any prohibited person to play at any such game in said house,
under pain of three years’ imprisonment and forfeiture of £20 for each
offense. No prohibited person could play under pain of two years’ imprisonment
and £10 default. Another act (11 H. 7, c. 2, 1494,) provided
that no artificer, laborer or servant should play any unlawful game except
at Christmas, while the law (19 H. 7, c, 12) of 1503, absolutely prohibited
certain persons named therein from playing at any game. In 1511, (3 H.
8, c. 3) unlawful games were again prohibited, and a still more stringent
law enacted in 1535 (22 H. 8, c. 35).
“In 1541, (33 H. 8, c. 25) the manufacturers and dealers in archery
petitioned Parliament to prohibit all games and enforce the practice of
archery. Accordingly, in 1542, a most stringent act was passed, obliging
all able-bodied men, between the ages of 17 and 60 years, except ministers
and judges, to own bows and arrows, and to practice with the same.
Masters were required to see that their servants were provided with bows
and arrows and instructed in their use; if not provided, the master must
furnish the same, and was empowered to deduct the price from the servant’s
wages. This act repeals all other laws concerning gaming, and
then prohibits the keeping of any ‘common house, or place of bowling,
coytinge, cloyshe, cayles, half-bowle, tannys, dysing table, or cardianage,
or any other unlawful new game hereafter to be invented,’ under a of
40s. for each offense. Magistrates, sheriffs, bailiffs, constables, and
head officers of cities, boroughs and towns, were required and authorized
to enter all such places, at any time, and arrest offenders; they must also
search at least once a month to discover such places, and suppress the
same under a monthly penalty of 40s. for every
.bn 170.png
.pn +1
Section 16, of this act then provided that “No manner of artificer,
craftsman, husbandman, apprentice, laborer, servant at husbandry, journeyman,
or servant of artificer, mariner, fisherman, waterman, or servingman
shall play at the tables, tennis, dice, cards, bowles, clash, coyting,
logating, or any other unlawful game, out of Christmas, under pain of 20s.
for each offense.” At Christmas, this class could play only in their
master’s house or presence. This act made no game in itself unlawful.
It only became unlawful by being used by certain persons at certain times,
or certain places. The keeping of a common gambling house for any unlawful
game, for lucre or gain was prohibited, but no game was made unlawful
unless played in such common house. Faro and rouge et noir were
not then considered unlawful games.
In 1745, faro, bassett, ace of hearts, hazard, passage, roly-poly, roulette,
and all games of dice, except backgammon, were prohibited under a
penalty to the “setter-up,” of £200, and £50 fine for players. A subsequent
act repealed so much of the act of 1542 as prohibited bowling, tennis
and other games of mere skill.
Justices of the Peace, at their annual licensing meetings, were empowered
to grant license to persons to keep a room for billiards, bagatelle-boards,
and the like, but these were prohibited between the hours of 1 and
8 A. M., and on Sundays, Christmas, Good Friday, or any public feast,
or Thanksgiving day. Gambling was not then indictable at common law.
In England, at common law, it was held, “a common gambling house
kept for lucre or gain, was per se a common nuisance, as it tends to draw
together idle and evil-disposed persons, to corrupt their morals and ruin
their fortunes, being the same reasons given in the case of houses of common
prostitution.” (King vs. Rogers and Humphrey.)
The following curious piece of evidence is probably an extract from
the Journal of the House of Lords, although there is no reference to the
subject in the published debates.
.pm sectionhead '“DIE LUNÆ, 29 DEGREES, APRILIS, 1745—GAMING.”'
“A bill for preventing the excessive and deceitful use of it having
been brought from the Commons and proceeded on, so far as to be agreed
to in the committee of the whole house with amendments, information was
given to the house that Mr. Burdus, Chairman of the Quarter Session for
the sitting and liberty of Westminster; Sir Thomas Deveil, and Mr. Lane,
Chairman of the Quarter Session for the County of Middlesex, were at the
door. They were called in and at the bar severally gave an account that
claims of the privilege of peerage were made and insisted on by Ladies
Mordington and Cassilis, in order to intimidate the peace officers from
doing their duty in suppressing the public gaming houses kept by said
ladies. And the said Burdus thereupon delivered the instrument in the
.bn 171.png
.pn +1
written hand of said Lady Mordington, containing the claim she made of
privilege for her officers and servants employed by her in her said gambling
house; and then they were directed to withdraw, and the said instrument
was read as follows: ‘I, Dame Mary, Baroness of Mordington, do
hold a house in the great plaza Covent Garden for, and as an assembly,
where all persons of credit are at liberty to frequent and play at such
diversions as are used at other assemblies, and I have hired Joseph Dewbery,
William Horsely, Ham Croper, and George Sanders as my servants
or managers under me. I have given them orders to direct the management
of other inferior servants, namely, John Bright, Richard Davids,
John Hill, John Vandevoren as book-keepers, Gilbert Richardson as house-keeper;
John Chaplin, William Stanley, and Henry Huggins, servants that
wait on the company of the said assembly, and all the above named persons
I claim as my domestic servants, and demand all those privileges that
belong to me as a peeress of Great Britain pertaining to my said assembly.
M. Mordington. Dated, 8th of January, 1744.’ Resolved and declared
that no person is entitled to the privilege of peeress against any prosecution
or proceeding for keeping any public gaming house, or any house,
room, or place, for play at any game or games prohibited by any law now
in force.”
In the time of Queen Anne gambling ran riot to such an extent that
it commanded the attention of Parliament, and resulted in the following
act: “Whereas, divers low and dissolute persons live at great expense,
having no visible establishment, profession, or calling to maintain themselves,
but support these expenses by gaming only, it is hereby enacted
that any two justices may cause to be brought before them all persons
within their limits whom they shall have just cause to suspect of having
no visible establishment, profession, or calling, to maintain themselves by,
but do, for the most part, support themselves by gaming; and if such persons
shall not make the contrary appear to such justices, they are to be
bound to their good behavior for a twelve-months, and in default of sufficient
security, to be committed to prison until they can find the same, and
if security be given it will be forfeited on their betting or playing for—at
any one time—more than the value of twenty shillings.”
This act was further enforced and its deficiencies supplied during the
reign of George I and George II, and the forfeiture under that act could
be recovered in a court of equity; and, moreover, if any man were convicted,
upon information or indictment, of winning or losing, at any one
sitting, ten pounds, or twenty pounds, within twenty-four hours he forfeited
five times that sum. Another statute also inflicted pecuniary penalties
as well upon the master of any public house wherein servants were
permitted to gamble, as upon the servants who were found in the act of
gaming. Nor were the statutes against their masters less severe. During
.bn 172.png
.pn +1
these reigns the games of faro and hazard were by law declared to be lotteries,
subjecting those persons in whose houses they were played to the
penalty of £200, and all who played at them to that of £50.
The records of Marlborough street police-court show that in 1797 information
was laid against Lady Elizabeth Lutterell and others, for having, on
the night of the 30th of January last, played at faro at Lady Buckingham’s
house in St. James square, and a Mr. Martindale, then living in Broad
street, was charged with being the proprietor. The defendants appeared
by their counsel. Witnesses were called to support this information, whose
evidence went to prove that the defendants charged had a game at their
houses by rotation; that is, that they played at faro, rouge et noir, etc., meeting
at different houses upon certain days of the week; that Mr. Martindale
acted as master of the tables, generally, and that they began to play
about eleven or twelve o’clock at night and continued to play until three
or four o’clock in the morning. Martindale’s penalty was £200 fine, as
proprietor of a faro table, and the Countess of Buckingham, Lady Lutterell
and Mrs. Sturt were fined £50 each for playing. A Mr. Mathias O’Brien
was subsequently brought in. He was also fined for participating in
these same games.
In 1817 a prosecution occurred at Brighton which elicited a queer
array of facts, illustrating the gambling methods of that day. A warrant
was sworn out by one William Clarke against William Wright and James
Ford, on the charge of feloniously stealing one hundred pounds. But
Clarke did not appear to prosecute, and when the magistrate issued a
warrant to compel his attendance he hastily The prisoners
were discharged, but very shortly afterward Wright was summoned before
the magistrate to give evidence in an examination against one Charles
Walker, of the Marine Library, for keeping an unlawful gaming house.
Wright testified that Clarke engaged him about five weeks previously as
a punter, or decoy player, to a game called “noir, rouge, tout les deux,”
and that at the game was a gentleman who lost £125. Clarke asked
witness if he thought the gentleman was rich, and being answered in the
affirmative, told witness to invite the gentleman to dinner, let him have all
the wine he wanted, and to spare no expense to get him drunk. This
was done, and the gentleman returned to play again. As he had nothing
but large bills he was induced to go to London with witness to change
them, witness being enjoined to be sure to bring him back. One of the
firm, which was composed of Clarke, O’Mara, Pollett and Moreley, gave
the gentleman a letter to certain London Brokers to enable him to change
his bills. On their way back to Brighton witness told the gentleman that
he suspected the firm would substitute a false table during their absence.
However, the gentleman returned to play, and witness and another decoy
named Ford were given £100 each with which to play and to lead the
.bn 173.png
.pn +1
gentleman on, and if possible to fulfil the expectations of the firm, which
were to fleece the gentleman of five or six thousand pounds. As they
entered the library, Walker accosted them and wished them better success,
but he trembled visibly and seemed ill at ease. The game was carried on
in a room over the library, for which the firm paid rent of twelve guineas
a week. As the gentleman ascended the stairs a porter locked the door,
by Walker’s order, and when he came into the gaming room he became
alarmed at the appearance of the men there, and hastily descending the
stairs and giving a plausible excuse to the porter, was allowed to pass out
and thus escaped. Witness had not returned the £100 to Clarke, and it
was on that account that Clarke had sworn out a warrant against him.
Afterward Clarke had visited him and offered him £100 if he would not
tell what he knew to the magistrate.
Ford and the gentleman substantiated Wright’s testimony, and the
latter said that he went to Walker and demanded back the £125 which
he had been cheated out of at play at the start. Walker was very much
confused and nervous, and finally offered to return £100 of the sum,
which offer was refused; and thereupon he laid the whole matter before
the magistrate. Walker was found guilty and sentenced to several years
imprisonment.
Messrs. Houlditch, the coach makers of Long Acre, had a traveling
salesman whom they sent to the Continent to dispose of their goods. Like
thousands of other employes, holding responsible positions of trust, he fell
a victim to the vice of gambling, and soon found himself a defaulter and
reduced to the utmost desperation. While in this frame of mind he wrote
the following letter to his employer, which was read in subsequent court
proceedings, and is given here to illustrate how frightfully ruinous the
passion for play becomes when once it gains possession of a young man.
The letter reads:
.pm start_letter
“Sir:—The errors into which I have fallen have made me so hate myself that
I have adopted the horrible resolution of destroying myself. I am sensible of the
crime I commit against God, my family and society, but have not courage to live
dishonored. The generous confidence you placed in me I have basely violated. I have
robbed you, and though not to enrich myself, the consciousness of it destroys me.
Bankruptcy, poverty, beggary and want I could bear—conscious integrity would support
me; but the ill-fated acquaintance I formed led me to those earthly hells,
gambling houses, and then commenced my villainies and deceptions to you. My
losses were not large at first, and the stories that were told me of gain made me hope
they would soon be recovered. At this period I received the order to go to Vienna,
and, on settling at the hotel, I found my debts trebled what I had expected. I was in
consequence compelled to leave the two carriages as a guarantee for part of the debt,
which I had not in my power to discharge. I had hoped success at Vienna would
enable me to reinstate all to you, but disappointment blasted every hope, and despair, on
my return to Paris, began to generate the fatal resolution which, at the moment you
read this, will have matured itself to consummation. I feel that my reputation is
.bn 174.png
.pn +1
blasted, no way left of reimbursing the money wasted, your confidence in me totally
destroyed, and nothing left to me but to see my wife and children and die. Affection
for them holds me in existence a little longer. The gaming table again presented
itself to my imagination as the only possible means of extricating myself. Count
Montoni’s 3,000 francs, which I received before you came to Paris, furnished me the
means—my death speaks the result.”
.pm end_letter
The legal aspects of gambling in London early in this century are
well treated in an article in Fraser’s Magazine for August, 1833, which
says: “The officers of justice are regularly kept in the pay of the proprietors
of the gaming houses, through whom timely notice is always
given of any information laid against the establishment, and the intended
attack guarded against. If this be doubted the same can be attested on oath,
and otherwise proved beyond disputation. The expense of some of the gaming
houses in London during the season (seven months) exceed £10,000.
What, then, must be the gains to support this advance and profusion of
property? Elegant houses are superbly fitted up, the most delicate viands
and the choicest wines, with every other luxury, are provided to lure and
detain those for whom the proprietors’ nets are spread. It is almost an
impossibility to convict these wicked men under the present law; their
enormous wealth is applied to the corruption of evidence, always unwilling,
because the witnesses expose their own habits and culpability in
attending these notorious dens of infamy. The sleeping partners are
ever ready to advance money to oppose prosecutions, and often come forward
to give evidence in opposition to the witnesses’ and to blacken the
character of those who offer their testimony. Then there is always
money to support those who may chance, once in ten years, to be convicted.
Many practicing attorneys, too, are connected with these establishments,
who threaten to prosecute for conspiracies, and not unfrequently,
fictitious debts are sworn to, and arrests for large amounts made, to keep
witnesses from appearing at court on the day of trial. One professional
man in the parish of St. Anne has, to my knowledge, supported himself
for thirty-five years by lending himself in this way to the middle-rate gambling
houses, at the west end of town. His method is either to suborn or
intimidate the parties, by threatening to indict them for perjury or otherwise
persecute them to utter destruction.
“When it is considered that those who are competent to give evidence
calculated to produce convictions well know the characters with
whom they have to contend, and the phalanx of scoundrels there is
always arrayed against them, it is not to be wondered at that they should
be deterred from coming forward at the last moment, when even their persons
are not free from danger, particularly as all minacious tricks are
backed with a bribe, thus bringing fear and interest to bear against their
antagonists. As every one who comes forward to give evidence against
.bn 175.png
.pn +1
a gambling house must himself have been a participator in the offence of
play, no man who has been the cause of a conviction has ever yet escaped
ruin; no matter the motive which influenced him, whether it be remorse,
pique, or public good, the conspiracy against him will be so powerful and
ramified, through the leading men’s numerous emissaries and dependants,
that his future course in life will be tracked, and his character blasted in
every neighborhood where he may take up his abode. In one instance a
young man who had laid information against a house, although no conviction
followed, was hunted out of no fewer than eight situations. The
clique of gamblers he had made his enemies contrived to find out in whose
employ he was engaged, and then daily assailed his master with anonymous
letters, defaming the young man’s character to such a degree that
few could well retain him in their service, especially as the fact of having
himself gambled at a public table could never be gotten rid of.
“When all other means of deterring a witness are exhausted, personal
threats are used by ruffians, who are employed to cross him in whatever
public company he may join, seeking every occasion to insult and quarrel
with him until he is intimidated, and all other would-be witnesses, through
fear of similar persecution, are prevented from offering any obstruction to
their establishments.
“By these confederacies, backed as they are with enormous capital,
notwithstanding the existing laws, houses have been kept open for the
indiscriminate mixture of all grades, from the well bred gentlemen, the
finished sharper, the raw and inexperienced flat, to the lowest description
of pickpockets and other wretches of public nuisance, and, where all
the evils the acts of Parliament were intended to annihilate, have for
years past been in full activity. But in no period of our history have
misery, distress—and crime, been so conspicuous, and the cause so manifestly
and decidedly traced to the gambling habit of the community, as in
the present day.
“As before observed, the incompetency of the magistracy, as now
armed by law, to oppose the growing evil, is mainly attributable to the
methodized system of confederacy and partnership concerns, wherein
capitals are embarked by a large number of individuals, who have,
(with a very few exceptions) sprung originally from the very scum of
society. Now suppose one or more magistrates, employed especially as
guardians of the public morality, whose peculiar duty it should be, acting
on private information, to direct their officers to adopt any lawful mode
of obtaining evidence to convict offenders against the law; could anything
be more easy than to send two well-dressed men, under the authority
of a magistrate, into the town with money in their pockets, who might in a
short time, with very little tact, mix with gambling characters, and in a
few weeks have free ingress and egress to all the hells in London, as
.bn 176.png
.pn +1
amateur players? Nor can the keepers of these places ever by possibility
guard themselves against this mode of attack, as the persons so employed
might always be kept behind the curtain, introducing others of their
friends, who could again, (as many as were needed) continue to introduce
others, until every player and keeper of a gambling house was
identified, and ample testimony for their conviction be prepared, when the
blow might be struck against all in one day, and the fullest penalty of the
law enforced on each offender.”
A writer in Bentley’s Magazine, speaking of the warfare that had
been made on the gambling houses in England in 1838, said: “Hence
arose appeals to the law and indictments against the parties which, in
their success, gave encouragement to similar proceedings by others, and
in the course of time this system was discovered to afford a fine source of
profit to the prosecuting attorneys in the shape of costs, and they were,
in consequence, frequently gotten up by some of the riff-raff of the profession,
in the name of fictitious parties and with the sole view of extracting from
the different houses large sums of money in settlement of the matter,
without proceeding to trial. This was finally discovered, by the keepers
of the houses, and after turning the tables on the prosecutors, and, indeed,
convicting several for perjury, gambling houses went on again more
vigorously than ever.”
The prosecution of gamblers and gambling house-keepers, in London,
has been more thorough during the last quarter of a century than ever
before and in these days there appears to be, on the part of the authorities,
a sincere desire to exterminate the evil of common gambling, so far
as they may be able to effect it. Every week, almost, the police raid
one or more of the “dens,” which, though run solely as gambling
resorts, assume to be “clubs,” in order to increase their chances of being
unmolested. Usually, the proprietors are fined heavily. Yet, these
“hells” resume business, or start up in a new place. The profits are so
large that the proprietors willingly take all risks of being prosecuted.
Gambling is indulged in, in the aristocratic west end clubs, but the
authorities assume to know nothing of it.
The noted Englishmen who were addicted to gambling are very
numerous, and many of the incidents related of them, in connection with
the vice, are most interesting. Sir Arthur Smithouse, once possessed of
a very valuable estate, and considerable ready money, lost everything at
play and died in extreme want. Sir Humphrey Foster lost the greater
part of his possessions, but by a fortunate run of luck, won them back,
and could thereafter never be induced to jeopardize them The
celebrated Mr. Hare meeting at Bath one day the well known Major
Brereton, who was an habitual and heavy player, asked how the world went
with him. “Pretty well,” replied Brereton, alluding to his success at
.bn 177.png
.pn +1
the gaming table, “but I have met with a sad misfortune lately, I have lost
Mrs. Brereton.” “At hazard or quine?” asked Hare. Major Aubrey
was not only a great lover of gaming, but was very skillful. He won and
lost three fortunes at play, and early in his career had the foresight to
place a comfortable annuity for himself beyond danger of being swept
away by any ill run of luck. He once lost £25,000 at billiards. It is
related that he was once heard to say: “Play is like the air we breathe;
if we have it not we die.” His life was a most eventful one. In early
life he went to India, and the ship took fire. He jumped overboard and
floated on a hen coop until picked up by another ship. “I was completely
surrounded by sharks,” he said, “just as I have been ever since.”
Lord Barrymore and Sir John Lade, who had fine estates, lost them
to sharpers. Mathias O’Brien, an ignorant Irish adventurer, yet a very
shrewd man, succeeded in gaining the confidence of the high-born sportive
gentry, of the latter part of the last century, to such an extent that he
dined at the tables of the great, and entertained them at his own house in
return. He boasted that he had at one time sitting around his table, two
princes of the blood, four dukes, three duchesses and several counts,
besides others of distinction of both sexes. One night he won at picquet
£100,000 from a titled gentleman. Knowing perfectly well that his antagonist
could not pay this immense sum, and suspecting that if he could not
pay it all he would not pay any of it, he purposely allowed him to win
back all but £10,000, which amount the gentleman paid. This incident
caused Mr. Hare to give him the name of “Zenophon O’Brien,” on
account of his “retreat with ten thousand.”
Fox, the celebrated statesman, was an inveterate and desperate
gambler. A few evenings before he moved the repeal of the marriage
act, in February, 1772, he went to Brompton on two errands, one to consult
Justice Fielding on the penal laws, and the other to borrow £10,000
with which to continue his gambling. He was a most skillful whist and
picquet player, and one of his contemporaries said that if he had confined
himself to those games Fox could easily have won £4,000 a year. But he
could not let faro and hazard alone, and he almost invariably lost heavily.
He reduced himself many times to extreme want, and lacked such small
amounts as were necessary to defray little daily expenses of the most
pressing nature. He was often obliged to borrow a few shillings of the
waiters at Brooks’. He had lodgings in St. James street, close by Brooks’
Club, at which he spent almost every hour that was not devoted to the
House of Commons.
It is said by Lord Tankerville that Fox once played cards with Fitzpatrick,
at Brooks’, from ten o’clock at night until near six o’clock the
next afternoon, a waiter standing by to tell them whose deal it was, they
being too sleepy to know. Fox once won about £8,000, and one of his
.bn 178.png
.pn +1
bond creditors, who soon heard of his good luck, presented himself and
asked for payment. “Impossible, sir,” replied Fox, “I must first discharge
my debts of honor.” The bond creditor remonstrated. “Well,
sir, give me your bond,” said Fox. The bond was produced and Fox
tore it in pieces and threw it in the fire. “Now, sir,” said Fox, “my
debt to you is a debt of honor,” and immediately paid him. Amidst the
wildest excesses of youth, even while a perpetual victim of his passion for
play, Fox cultivated his taste for letters, especially the Greek and Roman
historians and poets, and he found solace in their works under the most
severe depressions occasioned by ill success at the gaming table. One
morning, after he had passed the whole night with Topham Deauclere
at faro, the two friends were about to separate. Fox had lost throughout
the night, and was in a frame of mind bordering on desperation.
Deauclere’s anxiety for the consequences which might ensue led him to
be early at Fox’s lodging, and on arriving he inquired, not without
apprehension, whether he had risen. The servant replied that Mr. Fox
was in the drawing room. Deauclere walked up stairs and cautiously
opened the door, expecting to find a frantic gamester stretched on the
floor bewailing his losses, or plunged in moody despair, but he was
astonished to find him reading Herodotus. “What would you have me
do?” said Fox, “I have lost my last shilling.” Upon other occasions,
upon staking all that he could raise upon faro, instead of exclaiming
against fortune, or manifesting agitation natural under such circumstances,
he would lay his head upon the table, and retaining his place, but
exhausted by mental and bodily fatigue, almost immediately fall into a
profound slumber.
Fox’s love of play was frightful. His best friends are said to have been
half ruined in annuities given by them as securities for him to the Jews.
“£500,000 a year of such annuities of Fox and his estates were advertised
to be sold at one time.” Walpole further notes that in the debate
on the 39 Articles, February 6, 1772, Fox did not shine, nor can it be
wondered at. He had sat up playing at hazard at Almack’s from Tuesday
evening the 4th, until 5 in the afternoon of Wednesday the 5th. An
hour before he had recovered £12,000 that he had lost, and by dinner,
which was at 5 o’clock, he had ended by losing £11,000. On Thursday
he spoke in the above debate, he went to dinner at half past eleven at
night, and from thence to White’s where he drank until seven the next
morning, thence to Almack’s where he won £6,000, and, between three
and four in the afternoon, he set out for Newmarket. His brother
Stephen lost £2,000 two nights afterwards and Charles £10,000 more on
the 13th.
Monsieur Chevalier, Captain of the Grenadiers in the first regiment
of foot Guards, in the time of Charles II., was one of the most remarkable
.bn 179.png
.pn +1
gamesters known in history. He was a native of Normandy, and in
his youth was a page to the Duchess of Orleans. Going to England to
seek his fortune, he soon an ensign in the first regiment of foot
Guards. He took to gaming and met with such success that he very
quickly was enabled to live in a style far above his station. He once won
from a nobleman a larger sum than the latter could pay down, and upon being
asked for time, granted it in such a courteous and obliging manner that
the nobleman, a fortnight later, wishing to show him that he appreciated
his kindness, went to him and told him that he had a company of foot
to dispose of and that, if it was worth his while, it should be at his service.
Chevalier gladly accepted it, and got his commission signed the same day,
well knowing that it was immensely to his advantage to have a visible
position and income, for without them, one who lives like a gentleman
and makes gaming his sole occupation would naturally be suspected of
not playing merely for diversion, if, indeed he was not charged with resorting
to sharp practices.
“Chevalier once won 20 guineas from ‘Mad Ogle,’ the Life Guardsman,
who understanding that the former had bitten him, called him to account,
demanding his money back, or satisfaction on the field. Chevalier
chose the latter alternative. Ogle fought him in Hyde Park, wounded
him in the sword arm and was returned his money. After this they were
always good friends.”
It is said that Chevalier was so skillful at “cogging” dice and throwing
that he could chalk a circle the size of a shilling on the table, and
standing a short distance away, could throw a die within it and have it
show an ace, tray, six, or whatever he pleased. Aubrey de Vere, Earl of
Oxford, had a consuming desire to rival Chevalier in dice throwing, but,
though he practiced for days and weeks, Chevalier always worsted him,
and won large amounts from him. Chevalier, it is said, was a thorough
sharper, and knew all the tricks of gaming, such as loaded dice, etc. Occasionally
he was detected, and was obliged to fight several duels to square
the injury done his antagonist. He was severely wounded a number of
times, and got so that he would avoid fighting whenever it was possible
to do so. How he did this on two occasions is thus related: “Having
once ‘choused,’ or cheated a Mr. Levingstone, page of honor to King James
II, out of fifty guineas, the latter gave the captain a challenge to fight
him next day, behind Montague House, a locality long used for the purpose
of duelling. Chevalier seemingly accepted the challenge, and next
morning, Levingstone, going to Chevalier’s lodgings, and finding him in
bed, put him in mind of what he was come about. Chevalier, with the
greatest air of courage imaginable, rose, and having dressed himself, said
to Levingstone, ‘Me must beg de favor of you to stay a few minutes, sir,
while I step into my closet dere, for, as me be going about one desperate
.bn 180.png
.pn +1
piece of work, it is very requisite for me to say a small prayer or two.’
Accordingly, Mr. Levingstone consented to wait whilst Chevalier retired
to his closet to pray, but hearing the conclusion of his prayer to end with
these words: ‘Me verily believe spilling man’s blood is one ver’ great
sin, wherefore I hope the saints will intercede with the virgin for my
once killing Monsieur de Blotieres, at Rochelle; my killing Chevalier de
Comminge, at Brest; killing Major de Tierceville, at Lyons; killing
Lieutenant du Marché Falliere at Paris, with half a dozen other men in
France, so, being also sure of killing him I’m now going to fight, me
hope his forcing me to shed his blood will not be laid to my charge.’
Quoth Levingstone to himself, ‘and are you then so sure of me? But
I’ll engage you sha’nt, for if you are such a devil at killing men, you shall
go and fight yourself and be ——.’ Whereupon he made what haste he
could away, and shortly Chevalier coming out of the closet and finding
Levingstone not in the room, was very glad of his
King James ascended the throne, the Duke of Monmouth
raised a rebellion in the west of England where, in a skirmish between
the Royalists and Rebels, he was shot in the back, and the wound was
believed to be given by one of his own men, to whom he had always been
a most cruel, harsh officer, whilst a captain of the Grenadiers of the Foot
Guard. He was sensible himself of how he came by his misfortune, for
when he was carried to his tent, mortally wounded, and the Duke of
Albermarle came home to visit him, he said to his Grace, “Dis was none of
my foe dot shot me in the back.” “He was none of your friends that
shot you,” the Duke replied. He died a few hours afterwards, and was
buried in a field near Philip Norton Lane, as the old chronicler says,
“Much unlamented by all who knew him.”
Monsieur Germain, born of low parentage in Holland in 1688, is
celebrated for having introduced into the gambling circles of London a
game called Spanish whist, by which those with the tricks of the
game won great amounts. He was also noted for his expertness in playing
ombre, which Pope describes entertainingly in his “Rape of the
Lock.” Germain became intimate with Lady Mary Mordaunt, wife of
the Duke of Norfolk, whom he first met at a private gambling party.
The Duke obtained a divorce from her, in consequence, and thereafter
she lived openly with Germain until her death.
Tom Hughes was a London gambler whose life well illustrated the
ups and downs of the profession. He was born in Dublin and when a
young man became a London sport. He played heavily and skill and
good luck enabled him to win a great deal of money which he spent as
fast as he made it, chiefly at a resort for frail females in the Piazza,
Covent Garden. He was for a time proprietor of E. O. tables, in a house
in Pall Mall, kept by a Dr. Graham, and was often to be found also at
.bn 181.png
.pn +1
Carlisle House, in Soho Square. He once won £3,000 from a young
man, just of age, who made over to him a landed estate for the amount.
Being admitted a member of the Jockey Club, he was quite prosperous
for a time but, his luck changing, he fell into the clutches of “Old Pope,”
the money lender, and was obliged to give up to him the estate he had
won. He fought several duels over disputes arising at the gaming table
and finally died in a debtor’s cell leaving not enough to pay for his coffin.
It is narrated of Whig Middleton, who was wealthy, handsome and
dressed in extreme fashion, that, after losing a thousand guineas one
night, to Lord Montford, he was asked by the latter, in gambler’s parlance,
what he would do, or would not do, to get home? “My Lord,”
said he, “prescribe your own terms;” “Then” replied Lord Montford,
“dress directly opposite to the fashion for ten years.” Middleton
accepted the terms and lived up to them “dying nine years afterward,”
as the narrator expresses it, “so unfashionably that he did not owe a
tradesman a farthing, left some playing debts unliquidated; and his coat
and wig were of the cut of Queen Anne’s reign.”
Wrothesly, Duke of Bedford, fell amongst a party of sharpers, including
a manager of a theatre and Beau Nash, master of ceremonies, who
had conspired to bleed him. After he had lost £70,000 the Duke rose in
a passion and pocketed the dice, declaring that he intended to inspect
them and see if they were crooked. He then threw himself on a sofa
and fell asleep. The sharpers held a consultation, as to what they had
best do, and it was finally decided that they would cast lots to see who
should pick the Duke’s pocket of the loaded dice and put fair ones in their
place. The lot fell on the theatre manager, and he performed the feat
without being detected. The Duke examined the dice when he awoke and,
being satisfied that they were all right, returned to playing and lost
£30,000 more.
The sharpers had received £5,000 of the money they had won, and
when they came to dividing it got to quarreling. Beau Nash was so dissatisfied
that he went to the Duke and exposed the whole scheme of robbing
him. The Duke believed this was done purely through friendship
and, accordingly, made Nash a handsome present and patronized him ever
afterward.
Beau Nash, as is well known, was an immense favorite with the
aristocratic society of his time. He was both homely and clumsy, yet his
wit, flattery and fine clothes made him a pet of the ladies. “Wit, flattery
and fine clothes are enough to debauch a nunnery,” he was wont to say.
Nash was a barrister and lived in Middle Temple, where, when still a
young man, he organized and directed the grand “revel and pageant,”—the
last of its sort—upon the accession of King William. This he did so
successfully that the King offered to knight him, which Nash declined,
.bn 182.png
.pn +1
saying: “Please your Majesty, if you intend to make me a knight, I
wish it may be one of your poor knights of Windsor and then I shall
have a fortune at least able to support my title.”
It is said of Nash, that when he submitted his accounts to the Masters
of the Temple, this item was among them: “For making one man happy,
£10.” Being asked to explain it, Nash said that he overheard a poor
man declare to his wife and large family that £10 would make him happy,
and that he could not resist the temptation to give him the sum. He
offered to refund the money, if the item was not allowed. The Masters,
struck with such good nature, not only allowed the bill but thanked him
for his generosity and doubled the allowance.
Nash became subsequently Master of the Ceremonies, at Bath, then
the popular fashionable summer resort, where he ruled with such undisputable
authority that he was styled “King of Bath.” Gambling was
deep and furious at Bath, and, in consequence of disputes over the table,
swords were frequently resorted to in settling matters. Thereupon Nash
commanded that no swords should be worn at Bath, and the order was
obeyed. Nash’s later years were spent chiefly in gambling in a small way.
He died at Bath, in 1761, and was buried with great ceremony in the
Abbey Church, three clergymen preceding the coffin, aldermen acting as
pall-bearers, the Masters of the Assembly Rooms following as chief
mourners and the streets and housetops being thronged with people
anxious to do honor to him, whom they regarded as “the venerable
founder of the prosperity of the City of Bath.”
Richard Bennett is an example of a gambler, who, through a long
life, enjoyed almost uninterrupted prosperity. He was of the unscrupulous
sort, and rose from being a billiard sharper in Bell Alley, to be partner
in several of the aristocratic “houses” or “clubs” in St. James street.
He brought up and educated a large family. He was finally indicted
for keeping several gaming houses, and sentenced to imprisonment until
he should pay fines aggregating £4,000. He remained in prison for some
time, but managed to effect his release without paying his fines.
A circumstance almost identical to the one related of the Duke of
Bedford, is told of another noble duke. “The late Duke of Norfolk,”
says the author of “Rouge et Noir,” writing in 1823, “one evening lost
the sum of seventy thousand pounds in a gaming house, on the right side
of St. James street, and, suspecting foul play, he put the dice in his pocket,
and, as was his custom when up late, took a bed in the house. The
blacklegs were all dismayed, until one of the worthies, who is believed to
have been a principal in poisoning the horses at Newmarket, for which
Dan Dawson was hanged, offered, for five thousand pounds, to go to the
Duke’s room with a brace of pistols and a pair of dice, and if the Duke
was awake to shoot him, if asleep to change the dice. Fortunately for
.bn 183.png
.pn +1
the gang the Duke ‘snored,’ as the agent stated, ‘like a pig,’ and the
dice were changed. His Grace had them broken in the morning, when,
finding them good, he paid the money, and left off gambling.”
The Earl of March, better known as the Duke of Queensberry, who
lived in the middle of the last century, was one of the most famous and
genial “sports” that England ever produced. He was an adept, not
only at all card games, but also at dice and billiards. And in the mysteries
of the turf, and in all knowledge—practical and theoretical—connected
with the race course, he was perhaps never surpassed. He won 2,000
Louis ($8,000) once of a German, at billiards, and time and again won
thousands of pounds betting on the races, his intimate knowledge of all
horse flesh and race track conditions giving him advantages which few
possessed.
Dennis O’Kelly, if accounts of him may be credited, was a Napoleon
of the turf and the gaming table, devoting his whole time to the former
by day and the latter by night. He was accustomed to carry a great
number of bank notes, crumpled up loosely in his waistcoat pocket. On
one occasion he was seen turning over and over again a great pile of them,
and, being asked what he was doing, replied, “I am looking for a little
one—a fifty or something of that sort, just to set the caster.” At another
time he was standing at play, at the hazard table, when some one opposite
perceived a pickpocket in the act of drawing a couple of notes from
O’Kelly’s pocket. The alarm was given, and many wanted to take the
offender before a magistrate, but O’Kelly seized him by the collar and
kicked him down stairs, exclaiming as he returned: “He’s punished
enough by being deprived of the pleasure of keeping company with gentlemen.”
A large bet was once offered to O’Kelly at the gaming table
and accepted, whereupon the proposer asked him where lay his estates
which would be surety for the amount if he lost. “My estates?” cried
O’Kelly, “Oh, if that’s what you mean, I’ve a map of them here.” And
he opened his pocket book and showed bank notes to ten times the
amount of the wager, to which he soon afterward added the contribution
of his opponent.
Dick England, one of O’Kelly’s associates, was also a notorious gambler.
These two and several others plundered a clerk of the Bank of
England, who robbed the bank of an immense sum with which to pay his
“debts of honor.” Dick England and fourteen others once conspired to
beat a Jew at dice, and upon their entry one of them laid a wager of
£10, calling “seven the main.” Six was the cast, whereupon the player
with great effrontery declared that he had called six instead of seven.
After the matter had been disputed for a time, it was agreed to leave it
to a majority of those present, whereupon Dick England and the twelve
others in the conspiracy declared in favor of “six,” and then they went
.bn 184.png
.pn +1
out and divided the plunder. This same Dick England, with two or
three associates, once made a bold attempt to plunder a rich young man
named D——, from the country, at Scarborough. They got into his
company and set to drinking with a view of getting him drunk so that he
could be bled more easily. They succeeded so well in this that the young
man became so stupidly drunk that he could not play at all. Not to be
frustrated, however, the conspirators played for a short time and then
proceeded to make out three “I. O. U’s.,” two of which read: “D——
owes me eighty guineas;” and “D—— owes me one hundred guineas;”
and the third, which Dick England had, read, “I owe D—— thirty
guineas.” The next day Dick England and the young man met and the
latter for becoming intoxicated and hoped he had given no
offense. Dick assured him that he had not and then producing the evidence
of indebtedness, proceeded to discharge it by handing the young
man thirty guineas. The young man declared that he had no recollection
at all of playing, but finally took the thirty guineas, and paid Dick a high
compliment for acting in such an honorable manner. Meeting the holders
of the other papers shortly afterward he renewed his apologies and again
complimented Dick England for having paid to him a bet which he had
no remembrance of making. At this juncture the two produced their
papers which purported to show that the young man owed them 100 and
80 guineas respectively. He was astonished, of course, and protested
that he did not think he had played at all, but he had compromised himself
by accepting his thirty guineas, and finally, he decided to make the
best of a bad matter by paying the claims. Before he could do so, however,
his friends interfered, and, after a little investigation, exposed the
whole fraud, and saved him his money. At another time, Dick England
won £40,000 from the son of an Earl, who was so broken up at the loss,
that he went to Stacia’s hotel and shot himself, almost at the very hour
that his father sent his steward to pay the debt, though being convinced
that his son had been cheated out of the amount. Dick England
is known to have fought eleven duels and to have ruined about forty
persons at play.
The Gentlemen’s Magazine published the following account of a tragic
occurrence in the life of Dick England.
“Mr. Richard England was put to the bar at the Old Bailey, charged
with the ‘willful murder’ of Mr. Rowlls, brewer, of Kingston, in a duel
at Cranford Bridge, June 18, 1784.”
“Lord Derby, the first witness, gave evidence that he was present at
Ascot races; when in the stand upon the race course, he heard Mr.
England cautioning the gentlemen present not to bet with the deceased,
as he neither paid what he lost, nor what he borrowed; on which Mr.
Rowlls went up to him, called him rascal or scoundrel, and offered to
.bn 185.png
.pn +1
strike him, when Mr. England bid him stand off, or he would be obliged
to knock him down, saying at the same time, ‘We have interrupted the
company sufficiently here, and if you have anything further to say to me,
you know where I am to be A further altercation ensued, but
his Lordship being at the other end of the stand, did not distinctly hear it,
and then the parties retired.
“Lord Dartrey, afterward Lord Cremorne, and his lady, with a
gentlemen, were at the inn at the time the duel was fought. They went
into the garden and endeavored to prevent the duel. Several other persons
were collected in the garden. Mr. Rowlls said, if they did not retire, he
must, though reluctantly, call them impertinent. Mr. England at the
same time stepped forward, took off his hat, and said, “Gentlemen, I
have been cruelly treated, I have been injured in my honor and character,
let reparation be made, and I am ready to have done this moment.” Lady
Dartrey retired. His Lordship stood in the bower of the garden until he
saw Mr. Rowlls fall. One or two witnesses were called, who proved
nothing material. A paper, containing the prisoners defense, being read,
the Earl of Derby, the Marquis of Hertford, Mr. Whitbred, Jr., Col.
Bishopp, and other gentlemen were called as to his character. They all
spoke of him as a man of decent gentlemanly deportment, who, instead
of seeking quarrels, was studious to avoid them. He had been friendly
to Englishman when abroad and had rendered some service to the military
at the siege of Newport.
Justice Rooke summed up the evidence, after which the jury
retired for about three quarters of an hour, when they returned a verdict
of The prisoner having fled from the laws of his
country for twelve years, the Court was disposed to show no lenity. He
was therefore sentenced to pay a fine of ten shillings, and be imprisoned
in Newgate twelve months.”
Dick England died in 1792 from a cold caught in jail, where he had
been sent in consequence of having been arrested at a gaming table.
The celebrated Selwyn was a devoted patron of the gaming table,
and often played high. In 1765 he lost £1,000 to a Mr. Shafto, and it is
said, was frequently the victim of sharpers. Late in life he gave up his
ruinous diversion. Lord Carlisle, who was second cousin of Lord Byron,
was a victim of the infatuation of play and his losses brought him to
financial straits. In his letters he reproaches himself deeply for yielding
to the vice and shows that he fully appreciated the degrading effects of
indulging in it. Like Selwyn he finally succeeded in emancipating himself
from his terrible master. Pitt, the celebrated statesmen, was another
eminent who, at one time, in his career, was an inveterate
gambler, and who subsequently reformed. “We played a good deal at
, wrote Wilberforce, “and I well remember the intense
.bn 186.png
.pn +1
earnestness which Pitt displayed when joining in these games of chance.
He perceived their increasing fascination, and soon after abandoned them
forever.” Wilberforce once lost 500 pounds at the faro table. At
another time he was at the club and, the regular dealer being absent, a
gentleman jokingly offered him a guinea if he would take his place.
He accepted the challenge and quit the table £600 winner.
“On my first visit to Brooks’” wrote Wilberforce, “scarcely
knowing any one, I joined, from mere shyness, in play at the faro tables,
where George Selwyn kept bank. A friend, who knew my inexperience,
and regarded me as a victim decked out for sacrifice, called to me— Selwyn quite resented the interruption,
and, turning to him, said in his most expressive tone, ‘Oh, sir,
don’t interrupt Mr. Wilberforce, he could not be better employed.’” And
again: “The first time I went to Boodle’s I won twenty-five guineas of
the Duke of Norfolk. I belonged, at this time, to five clubs, Miles’ and
Boodle’s, White’s and Goosetree’s.”
Sir Philip Francis, who many believe was the author of the famous
“Junius Letters,” was much addicted to gambling and was a boon companion
of Fox. The career of the Rev. Caleb C. Colton is an interesting
one. He was educated at Eton, graduated at King’s College, Cambridge,
as a Bachelor of Arts, in 1801, received the degree of Master of Arts in
1804 and held a curacy at Tiberton. He speculated heavily in Spanish
bonds and yielded to the ruling passion of gaming, and his financial
affairs becoming involved, he absconded. Subsequently, he reappeared
in order to retain his living, but he lost it in 1828. After some time
spent in the United States, he returned to Europe and became a frequenter
of the gaming resorts in the Palais Royal in Paris, where, it is said, he
won in a year or two £25,000. Part of his wealth he devoted to establishing
a picture gallery.
Upon Lord Byron’s death he composed and printed for private distribution
an ode on that event. Having become afflicted with a disease which
necessitated a painful surgical operation, he blew out his brains rather
than submit to it. This occurred at Fontainbleau in 1832.
Beau Brummell was even a greater gambler than was Beau Nash, and
his end was far more sad. He frequented “Wattier’s,” where the play
was so high that the club and almost every one connected with it, were
ruined. One night in 1814, it is related, Pemberton Mills entered the
club just in time to hear Beau Brummell, who had lost heavily for five
successive nights, exclaim that he had lost his last shilling and that he
wished some one would bind him never to play again.
“I will,” said Mills, and taking out a ten-pound note he offered it to
Brummell on condition that he should forfeit a thousand if he played at
White’s within a month from that evening. The beau took it, and for a
.bn 187.png
.pn +1
few days discontinued coming to the club, but about a fortnight after,
Mills happened to go in, and saw him hard at work again. Of course the
thousand pounds was forfeited, but his friend, instead of claiming it, merely
went up to him, and touching him gently on the shoulder, said, “Well,
Brummell, you may at least give me back the ten pounds you had of me
the other night.”
One night at Brook’s club, Alderman Combe, the brewer, then Lord
Mayor of London, was busily playing at hazard in company with Brummell
and others. “Come, Mash-tub,” said Brummell, who was the
caster, “What do you set?” “Twenty-five answered the
alderman. “Well, then,” returned the beau, “have at the mare’s pony”
(a gaming expression for twenty-five guineas). He continued to throw
until he won twelve ponies of the Lord Mayor, and then, getting up and
making him a low bow, whilst pocketing the cash, he said, “Thank you,
alderman; for the future I shall never drink any porter but yours.” “I
wish, sir,” replied the brewer, “that every other blackguard in London
would tell me the same.”
Brummell was concerned in an incident which occurred at Wattier’s
club one night which threw all present into consternation. One of the
players was a Mr. Bligh, whom every one knew to be a mad-man, but
did not think especially dangerous. The incident is thus told by Mr.
Raikes:
“One evening at the maco table, when the play was very deep, Brummell,
having lost a considerable stake, affected, in his farcical way, a very
tragic air, and cried out, ‘Waiter, bring me a flat candle-stick and a
pistol.’ Upon this, Bligh, who was sitting opposite to him, calmly produced
two loaded pistols from his coat pocket, which he placed upon the
table, and said, ‘Mr. Brummell, if you are really desirous to put a period
to your existence, I am extremely happy to offer you the means without
troubling the waiter.’ The effect upon those present may easily be imagined
at finding themselves in the company of a known mad-man who had
loaded weapons about him.”
Brummell lost all of his money and a large amount beside, which he
succeeded in borrowing of the money-lenders on bills signed by himself
and several friends. Serious trouble over the division of one of these
loans caused Brummell to flee to France. He used to say that up to a
particular time in his life he prospered in everything, and that he attributed
his good fortune to the possession of a silver sixpence with a hole in
it, which a friend had given him “for luck.” One day he gave it to a
cabman by mistake and from that time nothing but disaster had attended
him in everything. One person to whom he told this asked him why he
did not advertise for his lost sixpence. “I did, and twenty people came
with sixpences having holes in them to obtain the reward, but mine was not
.bn 188.png
.pn +1
amongst them.” “You never afterwards ascertained what became of it?”
“Oh, yes,” he replied, “no doubt that rascal, Rothschild, or some of his
set got hold of it.”
Beau Brummell died at Caen, in 1840, at the age of 62, having long
been in great poverty, and for some time in a demented condition.
Tom Duncombe was one of the high-flyers of his day. He was heir
to an income of more than £12,000 a year but he anticipated the whole of
it before he was thirty. His father, at one time, intending to pay off the
debts contracted by his reckless son, caused a schedule of them to be made
and it was found that they aggregated £135,000. He increased them to
a still larger amount before he finished his career.
The cases of Lords Halifax, and Shaftesbury, and hundreds
of others might be referred to were it necessary, to show how great havoc
the passion for play has caused in the English aristocracy. But it is not
necessary. Enough has been said to point a moral, it would seem, that
all cannot but heed.
.bn 189.png
.pn +1
.sp 4
.h2 id=pt2
PART II.
.bn 190.png
.bn 191.png
.pn +2
.pm chaphead 'CHAPTER I.' 'GAMBLING IN THE NEW WORLD.' chap1
.sp 4
It may be questioned whether any other country on the globe affords
a more striking illustration of the prevalence and the power of the gambling
mania than does the great Republic of the North American Continent.
Nor are the reasons far to seek. Hereditary titles of nobility are not
recognized by the American constitution. In the general scramble for
position and power, wealth counts for more in the United States than in
any other land under the blue vaulted dome of Heaven.
At the same time it should not be supposed that an insane desire to
accumulate fortunes lies at the root of American gaming. The hard, practical
common sense of the average Yankee convinces him that he is not
likely to win a competence at the green cloth. A large majority of American
gamesters (i. e., local, as distinguished from professional) gamble because
their brains are in a constant whirl of excitement. Rest has no charms
for them; they seek recreation in the substitution of one form of mental
stimulant for another. The “operator” on the exchange, whose days
are spent in watching the rise and fall of commodities purely speculative,
finds the ordinary paths of life too quiet, too monotonous, to elicit more
than a passing thought. From the moment when he leaves “the floor”
until he returns to it next day, his brain is in a mad whirl of excitement.
What more natural than that he should seek relief for an overtaxed mind
through exchanging one avenue of activity for another?
The application of these remarks, however, cannot be confined to
“stock-jobbers” and manipulators of “corners.” The same spirit pervades
all classes of society. This accursed thirst for gold—sacra auri
fames—enters every American home, as the serpent insinuated his wiles
into the Garden of Eden, and destroys at once domestic happiness and
individual peace. The mechanic stakes and loses his week’s wages; the
clerk risks his month’s salary; the husband and father ventures upon the
turn of a card the money which should be devoted to the support of wife
and children. Yet, as has been said, this reckless improvidence cannot
be ascribed solely to a hope of acquiring rapid gains. The feeling of dissatisfaction
with his condition which lurks in the breast of the average
American, leads him, insensibly to himself, into all sorts of rash excesses,
among which is gambling at cards.
American gambling, however, presents some distinctively characteristic
features. In the first place it is mainly conducted on the floor of the
exchange, rather than in public gaming rooms. The Stock and Produce
.bn 192.png
.pn +1
Exchanges are sapping the very vitals of the country’s morality. For
“stakes” are substituted “margins;” for “winnings” read “profits;”
while the designation of “players” is changed into the more euphonious
appellation of “speculators.” With these changes in nomenclature, the
game is the same in principle; the same in the method of its manipulation;
the same in its demoralizing results. Even “suckers” are known, but
they are termed “lambs.”
Professional gamblers have not been slow to recognize this fact, nor
have they scrupled to avail themselves of it. From this circumstance
has sprung into existence the “bucket shops,” those preparatory schools
for the penitentiary in which the young, the poor and the unsophisticated
are incited to avarice, duplicity, embezzlement and actual theft. The
school boy, the artisan and the bootblack read or hear of colossal fortunes,
accumulated on the “floors” of commercial exchanges. To operate a
“corner” is beyond their means; but the conviction is not slow in forcing
itself upon their minds that they may at least follow humbly in the footsteps
of men whose faults the public is willing to condone in view of
their success. Herein lies the chief danger—to the perpetuity of the
Nation—in those marble halls wherein gambling is conducted upon a
scale in comparison with which that at Monaco and Monte Carlo is
dwarfed into insignificance, and where one man rides triumphantly into
wealth and power upon a sea whose bottom is strewn with wrecks.
Yet another form of gambling which prevails in the United States
more than in any other civilized nation on the globe is the mania for
lottery speculation and particularly for “policy playing,” by which latter
term—as is elsewhere more fully explained—is meant betting on the
particular numbers which will win a prize at any given drawing. These
forms of gaming are confined to neither sex, nor do they know the limitation
of age, occupation or social rank. The official list of drawings is
scanned with equal solicitude by the leaders of society and the outcasts of
the slums; by the reckless young “blood,” who “takes a flyer” by day
and leads the german at night and by the old negro, who risks
his last dime upon “4-11-44;” by the veteran and the school-boy, by
the philosopher and the proletaire. That the general sentiment of the
country as voiced by the exponents of public opinion has uniformly and
unhesitatingly condemned the practice is unquestionable. While the
vice is peculiarly American, in the number and character of its devotees,
it is totally un-American in so far as the moral countenance of the Nation
is concerned. Minor principalities of Europe have sought to replenish
treasuries drained by the extravagance or debauchery of their rulers
through the institution and legal authorization of lottery schemes, whose
world-wide advertisement might draw to the country English pounds,
French Napoleons and American Eagles. It has remained, however, for
.bn 193.png
.pn +1
the State of Louisiana to bring disgrace upon the Republic by accepting,
through her law-makers, a direct pecuniary bribe to consummate her
public shame. Even the new State of North Dakota with its farmers
crying for seed wheat showed the moral courage to resist the fastening
into its vitals of the delicate, but deadly tendrils of the octopus which saps
the morals of the commonwealth which tolerates its embrace as does its
physical prototype the very life blood of the individual victim on which
it fastens its fangs. Louisiana prides itself on its cognomen of the
“Pelican” State. What a misnomer! While the pelican robs her breast
to minister to her young, her mistaken namesake robs her own young to
feed the vulture which first whets its appetite on her own offspring and
later gorges its distended veins and arteries on the very vital fluid of
other States and Territories. Out upon the indifference to public morals
which recognizes, in this matter, a mere question of sectional lines.
Shame upon the venality which would bring a nation into disrepute
before the whole world in order that a purchasable Syndicate of corrupt law-makers
might be enriched. The remedy for such a state of public morals is
not easy to find. It is idle for any given community to insist that their
chosen representatives do not represent the average morals of the district
which places the latter in positions of responsibility. And yet the commonwealth
of Louisiana would consider its character impugned should the
palpable inference be drawn. It remains to be hoped that the legislators
of the future may be able to devise some method by which the escutcheon
of this great State may be relieved of the shadow which just now
dims its brightness. This sort of dissertation, however, is hardly in place
in the present connection. Gambling on the exchange and in the bucket-shops
is discussed elsewhere. The history of the Louisiana lottery, from
its inception, is given in another chapter. Nevertheless in an introduction
to the general subject of American gambling, it is impossible to
avoid these allusions although they are, perforce, of a somewhat desultory
character.
What we are particularly considering in this section of the volume,
#Part II:pt2#, is gaming as practiced in the halls, the club room and private
houses in the United States. For those who, from poverty or other
causes, are unable to gratify their taste for public gambling in rooms
devoted to the purpose there is a multiplicity of devices, found upon fair
grounds and at various other localities at which large crowds are wont
to gather, which offer to the casual gamester an opportunity for gratifying
his thirst for excitement at an expense sometimes trifling and sometimes
costly.
At the gaming houses proper, the preference is given to what are
known as “banking games.” By this term is meant games where the
deal never passes from hand to hand, and where all players bet against
.bn 194.png
.pn +1
one central fund, known as the “bank,” which is owned and operated by
the proprietors of the resort. Of this class of games, faro, roulette and
rouge et noir, are by far the most popular, the star of the former being
decidedly in the ascendant. Another game of this description which
holds a high place in public favor is keno (a full explanation of which
may be found in Chapter IV) the popularity of which is due, primarily,
to the small capital necessary to play, and, secondarily, to the belief that
the legitimate percentage in favor of the bank is so great that the temptation
to fraud is reduced to a minimum, if not an infinitesimal quantity.
Next to the banking games in the estimation of the bettors comes
poker, both “draw” and “stud.” The former is played according to
recognized rules, but the “house” exacts a percentage from the holders
of certain winning hands. This percentage is technically known as the
“rake-off,” and insures the proprietors of the establishment a handsome
royalty on all winnings. In “stud” poker the dealer always represents
the “house.” The players are never permitted to handle the cards. To
quote Tennyson’s poem of The Brook, the “man in the chair might say—
.pm start_poem
‘Men may come and men may go,
But I go on forever.’”
.pm end_poem
In the public gambling rooms, also, many of the gaming devices seen
upon fair and circus grounds are to be found, notably the wheel of fortune.
These various contrivances are fully explained in subsequent chapters.
Public American gaming resorts are ordinarily classified under two
general headings—“square” and “brace.” Under the former caption
are included those where the “occasional player” is supposed to enjoy
an opportunity of laying a wager with some possible chance of winning.
“Brace” games, as the term is understood among the fraternity, are
veritable “hells,” into which a victim is enticed for purposes of downright
robbery under the pretence of a game of “chance.” The dupe who enters
a room of this character, seals his own doom by the mere fact of entrance.
The proprietors, from that moment, mark him as their own peculiar prey.
If he has but little cash, he is promptly and incontinently relieved of it.
If he is a “pigeon” whose future “plucking” promises a rich harvest,
his mentors are merciful, and he is encouraged to “call again.” “Luck”
appears variable, although, as a matter of fact, in a “brace” house—otherwise
yclept a “skin game”—“luck” is dependent solely upon the
will of the dealer.
In regard to American gambling houses generally, it may be
remarked that there exists a popular misapprehension as to the relative
proportion of “square” and “brace” resorts. It is unquestionably of
no small value to any resort that it should enjoy the reputation of being
“square,” and it cannot be denied that there are those where, under
ordinary circumstances, the “bank” contents itself with its legitimate (?)
.bn 195.png
.pn +1
percentage. Yet, as a matter of fact, it may be doubted whether there is
a “square” hell (what a contradiction in terms!) in the country which
has not conveniently at hand and ready for use, all the fraudulent contrivances
so dear to the heart of the “brace” dealer. Not always are
they brought into requisition, but, like the reserves of an army, are
always at hand, and always ready to be brought into action.
The fact that the statutes of nearly every State prohibit gambling,
necessitates a sort of sub-rosa activity. At Monaco, Baden-Baden and
Monte Carlo gaming is carried on, not only under the very eyes, but even
under the sanction and patronage of the government. Not so in the
United States. The genius of American institutions has stamped upon
gambling the seal of its statutory condemnation. Two elements have
combined, incidentally, against any action which would enforce the will
of the The first is the half-heartedness of the war waged against
gambling by municipal authorities; the second is the assistance which
proprietors receive from outside confederates. The latter “goes without
saying.” Every habitue of a gaming house knows that there are “cappers.”
Equally thorough is the knowledge enjoyed by every proprietor that some
sort of satisfactory arrangement can be made with the municipal authorities.
What is the result? Each of the operating causes produces its
own effects. Guests at the hotels of every large town are persecuted by
solicitations to gamble, while the Mayor and Common Council of the
average city indulge in raids at a set time, for the simple reason that the
officers of the law exact and receive a percentage on the profits of every
game which they tolerate.
Outside of “banking” games, however, there is one which is almost
as peculiarly American as is base ball. “Poker” seems to be, for some
unexplainable reason, looming up as a National pastime. Some reference
has already been made to gambling at the fashionable club house and in the
family circle. Under such circumstances poker is the game par excellence.
Stakes ordinarily run high, no matter how small the introductory ante
may be. As a matter of fact there is scarcely a club house in any prominent
commercial center of the Union in which there is not an apartment
curtained from the vulgar gaze, where play is not carried on for high
stakes. And these very gentlemen who play a friendly game rarely suspect
that into their midst there is sometimes introduced a professional,
who not only wins a handsome stake for himself, but also assists in recouping
losses sustained by the gentlemen who introduced him. This statement
may seem incredibly absurd upon its face, yet the author knows
whereof he speaks.
There is still another distinctive feature of American gambling which
deserves notice. Men who know that they cannot be admitted as members
of any recognized club form an association by themselves, also known
.bn 196.png
.pn +1
as clubs, which are organized for gambling purposes, pure and simple.
Associations of this character are primarily conducted for the convenience
of players, yet the keeper of the room rarely fails to “earn a profit”
through selling liquid refreshments and the manipulation of the “rake-off,”
which is conducted in a manner similar to that followed in public houses.
The interference by the municipal authorities with the “hells” is
regarded by the proprietors as a contingency too remote to be worth seriously
considering. There are various reasons for the excellent understanding
which usually exists between the gamblers and the “powers that be.”
Political influence sometimes lies at the bottom of the friendliness. It is
also a sad truth that too often the explanation is to be found in actual
venality on the one hand and corruption on the other. Yet there is one
circumstance which should not be lost sight of. The “fraternity” not
infrequently renders valuable assistance to the officers of the law by disclosing
the habits, haunts, and sometimes the whereabouts of criminals
who are being sought for by the authorities. Not that they are anxious
to serve the ends of justice, but that they look upon the rendering of such
assistance in the light of a quid pro quo for the “protection,” otherwise
immunity, which they enjoy. The reader who will thoughtfully peruse
chapter X of this part of the book will gather much interesting information
on this point which will afford him food for no little serious reflection.
Another pronounced feature of American gaming is the number of
itinerant gamblers who wander about the country, infesting railway trains
and steamboats, invading the summer resorts, and coming down upon
country towns after the manner of a wolf upon the sheep fold. These
peripatetic sporting men are adepts at all card games and thoroughly
versed in every fraudulent device. They combine the arts of the card
sharp and the confidence man. For them honor is a by-word and virtue a
mockery. They are destitute alike of conscience and of pity, and ill fares
the luckless wight who falls a victim to their blandishments.
Hitherto, except in a few comparatively isolated localities, legislation
has proved powerless to repress gambling in the United States. The “Johnson
law,” so called from the name of its author, the Hon. Charles P. Johnson,
of Missouri, making gambling a felony, operated to check it in that
State and brought about a positive hegira of the men who had been thriving
upon the gullibility of a too confiding public. Similar results have followed
its adoption and enforcement in other States. But it is idle to
encumber the statute book of any commonwealth with laws whose enforcement
is not demanded by public sentiment. The vice of gaming, like its
twin relic of barbarism, drunkenness, will be suppressed only when an
outraged nation rises in its righteous wrath and forever stamps out of
existence the viper which has buried its fangs deep in the very vitals of
the body politic.
.bn 197.png
.pn +1
.pm chaphead 'CHAPTER II.' 'FARO GAMBLING AND GAMBLERS.' chap2
.sp 2
The general belief that cards were invented in the fourteenth century
to amuse the imbecile Charles VI. of France is one of those popular
errors which, despite the proofs arrayed against them by modern research,
seem destined to be perpetual truth, though booted and spurred, seldom
overtakes a plausible historical fable if the latter has the advantage of a
start of three or four centuries, and therefore the idea that cards were
originated by Gringonneur, a Parisian portrait painter, to tickle the fancy
of a royal idiot, will probably continue to exist in the public mind for
centuries to come. The public journals, in their answers to correspondents,
reiterate the same old stereotyped tale, which seems destined to
have an immortal lease of life.
The truth, however, is that cards, like chess, originated in the Orient,
and were first introduced into Southern Europe by gypsies toward the
close of the thirteenth century. How long they had been in use in the
East is a matter of conjecture, pure and simple, but there is ground for
the belief that they are as old as the Pyramids. This is a question for
archaeologists to settle, and the answer to it does not fall within the
scope of the present work. It is certain that they rapidly grew in public
favor. During the seventeenth century the passion for card-playing
became a veritable mania among the nobility and gentry, royalty itself
setting the example. Louis XIV., in whom were united the incongruous
characteristics of a gambler and a miser played nearly until the day of his
death. During the regency, and throughout the dissolute reign of Louis
XV., under the influence of Madame de Pompadour and the infamous
Dubarry, the court gambled from morning till night and from night till
morning, while the nation followed suit. So in England, substantially
the same state of affairs existed, Charles II., with his courtiers and favorites,
setting the fashion. In a word, all Europe was card-mad.
America’s turn came later. With prosperity came a taste for
sumptous amusements—the legitimate offspring of wealth and leisure—and
it may be questioned whether there is any country in the world where
card-playing is so universal, or where so much money is staked upon the
issues as in the United States.
The origin of the game of faro, like that of most games of cards, is
obscure. There is a tradition that it emanated from the shores of the
Nile, and that its antiquity is as venerable as that of the pyramids. Perhaps
this rather fanciful theory has grown in favor from the fact that its
.bn 198.png
.pn +1
name is sometimes spelled “pharo,” the name of the founder of the great
Egyptian dynasty, whose head is said, in ancient times, to have been
depicted upon one of the cards. Be this as it may, it is certain that
centuries ago it was popular among the gamesters of France and other
countries of Europe, whence it crossed the channel to the British isles
and later was brought across the Atlantic to America. In the United
States, it is a game par excellence at every gambling establishment,
being at once the most absorbingly fascinating to players and the most
profitable to the bank. Across the green cloth which separates the
former from the latter, fortunes are hourly lost and won. The monotonous,
droning call of the dealer, falling upon the ears of players, whose
interest is breathless in its intensity, has proved to thousands the knell of
doom to wealth, honor, integrity, and happiness. With its allurement of
excitement and its tempting bait of gain, it woos its votaries to shipwreck
equally certain and no less terrible than that which befell the
mariner of old, whose charmed senses drank in the intoxicating music of
the siren’s song. Faro has been happily likened to the “tiger,” which,
crafty, treacherous, cruel and relentless, hides under cover waiting, with
impatient eagerness, for the moment when it may bury its velvet covered
claws within the vitals of its unsuspecting victim and slake its fiery,
unquenchable thirst with his life blood.
The principles of the game as fairly played to-day do not materially
differ from those laid down by Hoyle a hundred years ago. Be it understood,
however, that this remark applies to modern faro, as played in the
“hells” of this year of grace, only in the abstract. The principles (sic)
upon which it is practically conducted by the dealers of to-day are of a
sort calculated to astound that eminent authority on the doctrine of
chances. In order, however, that the reader may thoroughly comprehend
to how great an extent the player is at the mercy of the banker, it will be
necessary to explain first the method of legitimate playing (i. e., if any
gambling can be properly called legitimate) and then some of the devices
whereby the dealer may transform his naturally overwhelming chances of
winning to a practical certainty.
As preparatory to a discussion of the first branch of the subject, it
may be remarked that faro is pre-eminently a game of chance. Even
when played with absolute fairness, success or failure, fortune or misfortune,
depend—not upon the skill of the player, but upon the caprice of
blind chance. It is true that mathematical science has attempted to
reduce this chance to some sort of law, and has formulated a theory as to
the inherent probability or improbability of certain events happening or
failing to happen, and there are devotees of faro who play upon what they
believe—with a faith which approaches the sublime—to be an infallible
“system.” But the doctrine of chance is, after all, but an approximation
.bn 199.png
.pn +1
to accuracy, and the only certainty about any system, however cunningly
devised, is the certainty that at the supreme moment it will prove
a delusion and a snare.
.il fn=i_193.jpg w=500px ew=90% alt='faro hand'
But, to return to the method of playing: Any number of persons may
participate in the game, which requires a full pack of fifty-two cards.
The dealer acts as “banker,” and may, at his discretion, limit the sums
to be played for, according to the amount of his capital. At public games,
this functionary, assisted by one or more persons known as “lookers-out,”
whose duty it is to watch the table, the players and the bets, with a view
to seeing that the bank’s winnings are promptly gathered in, and that the
interests of “the house” are properly guarded. In order to facilitate the
making of bets, players purchase checks, usually made of ivory or bone or
composition, though sometimes of paste-board, from the banker, who
redeems them at the option of the holder. Their value is denoted either
by their color, or figures stamped upon them. The banker usually limits
the sums that may be bet in accordance with his capital, and the limit
may be of two kinds, known as the plain and the running limit. The
plain limit is usually twice as much for double, treble or quadruple cards
as for single cards. That is to say, if a player may bet fifty dollars
on either or all of the latter, he may bet $100 on all or any of the double.
The running limit is any sum named and its multiple of four. To illustrate,
the running limit may be 50 and 200; in that case, the player may
bet fifty dollars, and if he wins, may suffer the original stake and its
increase (which would amount to $100) to be where it is or move it to
another place, where he may win another $100, thus giving him with
his first stake $200, which is the limit. This is known as parleeing a
bet, and if the first bet is five, the second will be ten, the third twenty,
.bn 200.png
.pn +1
the fourth forty, and so on. Almost all bankers will allow a player to
“parlee,” as the percentage is largely in favor of the bank.
Each banker is provided with a “board” about three by one and
one-half feet in dimensions, which is placed on a table about four by two
and one-half feet. This “board” is covered with green cloth, on which
one suit of thirteen cards of the ordinary pack are portrayed in the order
shown in the foregoing illustration.
In the centre of the cut given above, the arrangement of the cards
in the “lay-out” is shown. The outer line of the parallelogram represents
the table. Letter “G” indicates the seat of the dealer; “I” that
of the “lookout;” “F” that part of the table on which the “case
keeper” (the use of which will be explained later) is placed; and “H”
shows where sits that important functionary who operates the “case
keeper.” The players sit or stand all around the table. “A” represents
the dealing box, and “B” and “C” the two piles into which the cards
are divided as they issue from the box. “D” shows the “check-rack,”
or the apparatus for holding the “checks,” and “E” shows the position
of the money drawer.
The ace, deuce, queen and king are called the big square; the deuce,
tray, queen and jack the second square, and so on; the six, seven and
eight are called the pot. The players select their cards upon which they
wish to bet, and lay upon them their checks.
All preliminaries being settled, before any bets are made the dealer
shuffles and cuts the cards and places them face upward in a metal box,
containing an aperture at the top, sufficiently large to allow the full faces
of the cards to be seen. Originally, the cards while being dealt, were
held in the dealer’s hands, and in Germany they are nailed to the table
and torn off one by one. For many years, however, it has been the
practice to deal from an uncovered metal box, a little longer than the
pack, in which are placed the “pasteboards” faces upward, so that the
top card is always exposed to view. Near the top of one end of this
receptacle is a horizontal slit, wide enough to admit the passage of a
single card, and at the bottom are four springs, which, pressing upward,
automatically force the pack toward the top of the box, thus keeping one
card always opposite the slit. The top card, called the “soda,” having
been seen, is not used for betting, and is laid aside. The card immediately
below is the banker’s card, and it wins for him all stakes placed upon it
in the “lay-out,” provided it has not been “coppered,” as explained
below. The next is the player’s card and wins for him in the same manner.
Each pair of cards taken from the box and exposed constitute what
is denominated a “turn.” It may happen, however, that the player
may wish to bet that a certain card may lose. In that case he places a
copper (which is provided for the purpose) upon the top of his stake.
.bn 201.png
.pn +1
This is called “coppering,” because originally old fashioned copper cents
were employed for this purpose instead of the wooden checkers.
Whenever two cards of the same denomination appear in the same
“turn,” the dealer takes half the money found upon such card. This is
called a “split,” and is, in effect, a percentage taken by the bank. If a
player wins his bet and allows both stake and winnings to remain on the
same card for another “turn,” he is said to play a paroli or parlee. At
the end of a “turn” a pause is made, to permit the paying of bets already
determined and the making of new ones. And the same routine is followed
until the pack is exhausted, when a fresh deal is made and the
process repeated. It will be seen that there are twenty-five “turns” in
every deal. The dealer may close the game at the end of any deal when
he may see fit. The last card remaining in the box at the end of each
deal neither wins nor loses, although originally it was claimed by the
dealer, who took all the money staked upon that card. The bank thus
had the certainty of winning such stakes, with no possibility of loss;
hence, that card came to be called “hock” or “hockelty,” which means
certainty, and by that name it is known.
A player may avoid risking his stake on any particular turn by saying
to the dealer, “I bar this bet for the turn”—pointing to it—in which
case it can neither lose nor win, but remains barred until he says “it
goes.” Again, he may reduce his stake one-half, by saying to the dealer,
“one-half this bet goes,” and this, unless the order is revoked, will be
understood to be his intention until the close of the deal.
When there is but one turn left in the box, the player may “call the
last turn;” that is, guess the order in which the cards will appear. If
he guesses correctly, he receives either two or four times the value of his
stake, according to the advantage which he enjoys through the character
of the turn. If the three cards are three denominations, they may come
out in any one of the six different ways; if, on the other hand, two of
the three cards are of the same denomination, only three arrangements
are possible. Hence, in the former case, if he guess correctly, the banker
pays him four times the amount of his wager; in the latter (which is
technically called a “cat hop”) he wins double its value.
As has been shown, there is a multiplicity of methods of betting
open to the player, but it remains to explain one of the most common, as
well as fascinating, modes in vogue among the patrons of the “green
cloth,” a method, too, which more than any other has been prolific of
disputes. It consists of placing bets not only upon any card or cards, but
upon the margin of the “lay-out.” These are called “string bets,” an
explanation of which would tend rather to confuse than to enlighten the
inexperienced reader.
.bn 202.png
.pn +1
It being of the utmost importance to both dealer and player that
the cards remaining on the box should be known, an effort is made to
keep an accurate record of the deal in such a way that its every phase
may be seen at a glance. For this purpose a printed card, known as a
“cue card,” is given to each player if he desires it, with the characters
A, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, J, Q, K, arranged in a perpendicular row,
“A” representing the ace, the numbers indicating the spots, and the
letters “J, Q, K” standing for the court cards. As each card is dealt
the player denotes the denomination on his “cue card” by placing in
the proper line a zero (0) if it lose, and a straight perpendicular mark (I)
if it wins, the last or “hock” card being indicated by a double dagger ([++]).
The Chances of the Game.
The following statement of the odds against winning any number of
times consecutively is applicable to faro or any other game of chance.
The computation is that of Mr. Hoyle, who, as an honest man, had not
forecast the devices of the modern sharper.
Champions of this game, however, claim that when fairly conducted,
the percentage of the bank against the player is less in faro than in any
known game; and it is probable that the fact of this belief being wide
spread accounts for its wonderful popularity in the United States. In
fact, when fairly dealt, the only percentages in favor of the game are the
“splits” and “calls.” Mr. Hoyle gives the following computation of
the odds at the game.
The chances of doublets vary according to the number of similar cards
remaining among those undealt. The odds against the player increase
with every “turn” that is dealt.
When only eight cards are remaining, it is five to three in favor of the
bank:
.ta l:50 r:8 w=90%
When only six cards, it is | 2 to 1
When only four cards, | 2 to 1
That the player does not win his first stake is an equal bet.
That he does not win twice following, is | 3 to 1
Three times following, is | 7 to 1
Four ditto, is | 15 to 1
Five ditto, is | 31 to 1
Six ditto, is | 63 to 1
.ta-
Having briefly outlined the method of playing, and shown how even
when fairly played there is a very large percentage of odds in favor of the
bank, it remains to point out some of the practices resorted to by those
professional gamblers known as “advantage players,” “brace dealers,”
.bn 203.png
.pn +1
etc., to take advantage of the gullible and unwary, called among the fraternity
“chumps,” or by the still less euphonius term of “suckers.”
These practices may be grouped under three different heads: First,
the cards themselves; second, the dealing box; and third, a system of confederates.
These will be taken up in the order given.
1st. The cards themselves. The “skin gambler” never deals a
game of faro without making use of cards known as “strippers,” or
“humps.” These may be bought from dealers in gambling implements,
or may be prepared by the gambler himself by using “trimming shears,”
a tool devised for this special purpose, and costing from forty to seventy-five
dollars per pair. “Strippers” are ordinary playing cards of the same
size and form as the “square” ones used in dealing faro, from the edge
of which a very little “strip” has been trimmed, thus making them a
fraction narrower at one end than at the other. The “strip” cut off does
not exceed one thirty-second part of an inch at one end and runs to a point
at the other. These are used that certain cards may be reversed and
known; that is, the narrow ends of some turned with the wide ends of
others. Thus, the dealer may take all the cards under seven, and turn their
narrow ends with the wide ends of the rest of the pack, thus greatly
increasing the chances for “splits,” on which the banker wins half the
stakes; moreover, the cards are used more in bunches, whereby the odds
in his favor are still further increased. When the wide ends of such a
pack are all together, it is difficult to detect them; but when a part only
is reversed they are more easily distinguished, since if the pack be taken
by opposite ends all those turned opposite ways will easily come out if
pulled by the ends.
The cards just described are known as “side strippers.” Another
variety, which has some advantage over these is called “end strippers,”
or “rakes.” As their name implies, they are cut on the end instead of
the sides, but are arranged, sanded, and used as are the others. Before
making a deal, the cards are “pulled” and “run in” endwise, after
which they may be shuffled any number of times without changing their
relative positions. They will apparently change their positions, but
owing to the manner in which they are cut and their being sanded, they
adhere in pairs all through the pack. When the cards are trimmed on
the side, displacement during shuffling is unavoidable; hence, the advantage
of using “rakes.”
Other prepared cards are called “hollows” and “rounds.” These are
cut in plates made for the purpose, and a portion of the pack is wider
across the middle, and tapers a very little toward the ends. The rest of
the pack is hollowed out a little in the middle and broader at the ends.
Strippers of this sort are used for the same purpose as those first described,
but are used by taking hold of the pack at the middle and one end instead
of at both ends.
.bn 204.png
.pn +1
The very closest observation is necessary to detect cards prepared in
either of these ways, and soft, smooth hands are necessary to use them
advantageously. The advantages resulting to the skillful dealer from
their use, however, are too palpable to call for further elucidation, except
in connection with the explanation of fraudulent, or “fake” dealing
boxes, which will be given below. Sometimes the odd spot cards, the
jack and king are trimmed differently from the remainder and then
reversed. They are then “run in,” an odd against an even, and can be
told through the difference in their size. This stratagem insures, at the
pleasure of the dealer, the effectual bankruptcy of the man who plays
upon a “system.”
“Squares and rounds” are made in much the same way. They are
cut to pull from the ends like Like “hollows and rounds”
they can be turned around without producing any effect upon them; and,
like both, when properly “sanded” (which process is explained below),
they can be shuffled without changing their relative positions. They are
used in the same way as common “strippers.”
Another process to which the cards of the “skin” faro gambler are
subjected is the preparation of them in such a way that they will adhere
together. This is accomplished by rubbing them, sometimes with sandpaper,
sometimes with rosin and glass, and sometimes with pumice stone.
If, however, the surface be too much scratched, the abrasion will become
visible when the cards are held up to the light. To accomplish the result
desired most effectually, and at the same time with the least possible risk
of detection, a powder composed of fish bone and rosin is sprinkled over
them. When it is remembered that the dealing cards are extremely thin
and smooth, the ease with which this device can be carried into successful
operation can be imagined. Sometimes the backs of certain cards are
roughened and the faces of others; the adhesion is then rendered very
close and the added thickness so slight as absolutely to defy detection.
To facilitate the use of cards thus prepared, a special dealing box, known
as the “sand tell” box, has been devised, a description of which may be
found in its proper place.
Still another resource, however, remains to the dealer of a “fake”
game. He marks his cards along the edges on the faces, by which simple
but effective plan he can always tell, with approximate accuracy, the
denomination of any card below the top. This is accomplished by putting
dots on the edges and it is absolutely essential to the successful operation
of most of the “faked” boxes described below. Similar dots may be seen
along the left hand edge of the card shown in the accompanying cut of
the dealing box.
2nd. The Dealing Box.—When the dealing box was first introduced,
more than half a century ago, it was claimed in its behalf that it
.bn 205.png
.pn +1
insured absolute protection against fraud on the part of either dealer or
players. Practically, as years have passed and new features have been
engrafted upon it, it has become the most effective agency for unlimited
fraud that the most nefarious dealer could desire. Indeed it may be questioned
whether the original object of its introduction was not to render
more easy the task of completely stripping every man who should venture
to play against the bank. Hoyle points out that the odds, even in legitimate
play are always in favor of the banker, and it seems hardly probable
that he would himself suggest an innovation which might in any degree
lessen his chances. The first boxes were made of brass, a very little
larger than the pack, and about half an inch wider, with one side left
open for the admission of the pack. The side opposite had an opening,
close to the top, large enough to allow a single card to slip out, and in
the top of the case was another of sufficient size to permit the insertion of
the end of the finger to slip off the top card. At the bottom were
springs to keep the pack constantly pressed up to the top of the box.
That such a contrivance might be used with perfect fairness in dealing
faro cannot be disputed. The fact remains, however, that almost every
American gambling den to-day has at hand boxes which are cunningly
contrived devices to facilitate the fleecing of the ignorant, to convert
chance into certainty, to transform the unsuspicious player into the victim
and the dealer into the harpy.
In order to have a thorough comprehension of the following description
of some of the “fake” boxes now in use, it may be well that the reader
understand the object sought to be gained through them. The rules of
the game require that but one card shall be dealt at a time. To a dealer
determined to win, it is of the utmost importance to know, before the card
issues from the box, what that card is going to be. In this, he is greatly
aided by the preparation of the cards as described above. Still, he needs
some mechanical device through which he may put this knowledge into
practical operation, either by failing to deal any certain card at a moment
when its issuance from the box means loss to the bank, or by putting out
a card which is sure to win for himself. To give him this advantage he
uses a box so constructed that he can control its operations at will. It
will thus be seen that his cards and his box supplement each other. To
know the cards would avail him nothing unless he might use those which
he needed; to be able to deal fraudulently would be of no possible advantage,
unless he knew precisely which card to deal. Taken together, they
form a combination so strong as to be impregnable to the dupe who fancies
that he and his crafty opponent meet on a fair field in open, even if not
honorable, combat.
At the present time, the “fraternity” generally use one of three
varieties of boxes, known respectively as the “lever,” or “end squeeze
.bn 206.png
.pn +1
movement,” the “needle movement,” and the “sand tell” box. Of
these, the former is the most common, and the second the most expensive,
while the third is commonly employed for a special purpose, which will
be
The accompanying cut shows the mechanism of the “screw box,” at
one time very popular with gamblers, and still used in some houses.
.il fn=i_200.jpg w=250px ew=50% alt='screw box' align=l
The front side of this box, “A,”
is provided with three thin perpendicular
plates, of which two are
stationary, but all of which seem
to be solidly joined together. Between
the stationary plates “B”
and “D,” whose inner surfaces are
so highly polished as to reduce
friction to a minimum, slides another
and invisible plate, marked “C,”
and which is adjustable and highly
sensitive to the secret manipulation
of the practiced dealer. This centre
piece “C,” when properly placed
and at rest, presents an upper edge
a trifle above the two stationary
plates, leaving an aperture so narrow
that the dealer can take but one
card from the box at a time.
“F” is a screw which operates a secret lever, “E C,” between the
two plates “B” and “D.” This lever hangs on a pivot, and by slightly
pressing the screw with the thumb the adjustable plate “C” quickly
responds, and drops until its edge is even with those of the stationary
plates “B” and “D,” thereby enabling the dealer to take two cards from
the box at one time without observation.
Upon removing the thumb pressure from the screw “F,” the
adjustable plate “C” rises to its original position.
There is a flat metal piece in the inside of the box at the bottom,
which, when pushed forward, instantly and securely locks the box, preventing
the discovery of its mechanism, should any of the players request
permission to examine it. Such permission is always cheerfully, and
usually courteously given.
Finally, inside of the box, as in all others, is a thin plate the size of
the cards, which is placed in a level or horizontal position, upon which
the cards rest, and which is supported by four steel springs, that force
the cards up to the top of the box so that they may always be ready
for dealing.
.bn 207.png
.pn +1
The “lever,” or “end squeeze” box—the one which is perhaps just
now most in favor among “skin” gamblers—is operated on the same
principle as is the “screw” box. The screw, however, is replaced by a
mechanical contrivance which enables the dealer to raise the middle plate
(lettered C in the illustration) by means of pressure or “squeezing”
applied at the end of the box. The “lever” box also differs from the
“screw” in the manner of locking the secret mechanism. In the essential
principles of the “fake,” however, the two closely correspond. The
underlying fraud in both consists of the manipulation of a concealed
middle plate, substantially in the manner already explained.
The “needle” movement box is so called from the fact that at one
end, on the inside, is a small spring, lying the thickness of three cards
from the top, and having a fine point, like that of a needle, which catches
on the edges of the cards. The dealer remembers which cards are
round—which, as has been said, may be the odd numbers or may be
those having a less number of spots than seven; the remainder of the
pack is, of course, cut hollow at the ends. By the aid of the spring, the
dealer is enabled to tell whether the first card is round or hollow, and
also what the second card is; as when the round card comes in contact
with the spring, it pushes it in, and as the latter slips it makes a slight
noise, similar to the grating of the finger He can thus tell whether
it is for his interest to take the second card or not, and—thanks to his
previous preparation of the cards—it is as easy for him to take one as the
other. An incidental advantage of this box is, that in case any of the
players object to the apparently undue advantage in favor of the bank,
it is possible for the dealer to offer to permit any player thus dissatisfied
to deal in his stead, while he himself bets against the bank. Should his
offer be accepted and a player open a bank, the latter, of course, not being
acquainted with the secret spring of the box, will derive no benefit from
the grating noise even should he notice it; while by reason of the professional
dealer understanding the sound made by the secret spring, the
latter is able to tell very nearly, if not absolutely, what card is coming
next.
The “sand tell” box is particularly designed for the use of gamblers
who desire to induce a player to deal the game. As its name implies, the
cards used in it are “sanded,” while the “tell” consists of a small extra
perpendicular plate near the front of the box on the inside, a trifle below
its mouth, which causes the top card to stand slightly in advance of the
, so that the gambler can readily distinguish the card underneath.
.il fn=i_202.jpg w=175px ew=20% alt='case-keeper' align=r
A record of the game is kept by means of an implement known as a
“case-keeper,” which is usually placed in care of an employe of the
.bn 208.png
.pn +1
establishment. This device is a miniature “lay-out,” with four buttons
attached to each wire as shown in the illustration.
These buttons run on wires, one of which extends
from the end of each card. When the deal begins,
all the buttons are shoved up close to the cards;
as soon as a “turn” is made, the two buttons
opposite the cards dealt are shoved to the opposite
ends of their respective wires. This enables anyone
around the table to see, at a glance, how
many cards of each denomination remain in the
dealer’s box. When all four cards of any one denomination have been
dealt, that is said to be “dead.” When three cards of any one denomination
have been dealt, the one remaining in the box is called the “case,”
or “single card.”
It may sometimes happen that the tally of a player will not agree
with that of the case keeper, owing to the fact that the dealer has withdrawn
two cards where he should have taken one. In such a case, a trick
known as the “put back” is employed. A confederate of the dealer attracts
the attention of the players while the extra card or cards taken from the
box are adroitly returned to it by the dealer. Of course, there must be a
perfect understanding between the latter and the case keeper, so that
when two cards are dealt at once a signal may be given showing the
denomination of the second card.
In case a player making a bet finds that he has been misled by the
incorrectness of the record kept by the cue keeper, the invariable rule is
that the bet must be determined by the cards remaining in the dealing
box, a regulation which is, to say the least, not at all to the disadvantage
of the bank.
But the cheating is not all on one side, and a device called a hair
“copper” is sometimes employed by players to guard against a possible
loss on a certain description of bets. This hair “copper” consists of a
piece of shoemaker’s wax, the color of the check, a horse hair, and a
string of rubber attached to a band around the wrist, secreted in the sleeve.
The wax adheres to the copper at one end of the horse hair, which is
invisible, the other end being fastened to the rubber string which is
extended in the hand to the tops of the fingers. Placing this copper on
a bet, if the turn comes in favor of the dealer the player quickly and
without observation loosens the rubber which jerks the “copper” into
his sleeve, causing the dealer to pay the bet he may have fairly won.
Another scheme for beating the dealer is not infrequently resorted to
by professional gamblers. It is technically known among them as
“snaking” the card. This consists of “ringing in” upon the proposed
victim of certain prepared cards, which are placed among the other dealing
.bn 209.png
.pn +1
cards in some secret manner, and at a time when he is not aware of it.
Sometimes, when no other opportunity presents itself, the faro dealer’s
room is entered by false keys during his absence, and his cards are so
operated upon that the operator can, to a certainty, break the bank at the
first opportunity. There are gamblers who travel through the country
for the purpose of “snaking” games, seldom engaging in any other
species of gaming, and it often happens that many professionals are badly
bled through this means without suspecting it. Sometimes the services of
some person who is a stranger to the dealer are secured to play against the
bank in order to allay suspicion.
The modes of “snaking” are various. One of the earliest consists
of placing an extra plate in the dealing-box, in connection with a piece
of steel not larger than a cambric needle. The cards are then cut on the
edges in such a way that the appearance and disappearance of this piece
of steel tells whether the next card will win or lose. This steel point, in
the rapidity of its motion, was compared to a snake’s tongue, and it is
probable that the origin of the term “snaking” is to be found in this
fancied resemblance.
Another method of “snaking” cards is as follows: The deck is prepared.
Let us suppose that the “pot” cards—the six, seven and eight—are
the ones selected. A pack of cards is taken, and the sixes, sevens,
and eights sanded on the backs and the remainder of the pack on the
faces. Small dots are then made on the face of each card in the deck, near
the edge. The position of these dots is determined by measuring on the
card with the plate which belongs to the dealing box. Now, when a
sanded deck of cards is placed in a “sand tell” dealing box, every time
a card is taken from the box the card next to the one taken moves a little
forward in consequence of the card taken from the box pressing on the
one underneath it. But, with these “snaked” cards, the case is somewhat
different; while dealing with these cards, should a smooth one be
next to the one drawn from the box, it would be drawn a little forward,
i. e., if there is not one of these “sanded” cards underneath this smooth
one. If there should be one of the sanded cards under the smooth one,
the card left on the top, after making a turn, will be held back by the
sanded card which is underneath it, and it will not be pulled forward at
all. Now, when a card which is left on the top, after making a turn, is
pulled forward, these dots (above mentioned) are visible on the face of the
card, denoting that neither of the pot cards can lose on the first turn; consequently
the pot cards are played to win as long as this dot is visible on
the face of the top card. But, in case, after a turn is made, the top card
should not move forward, then the dot on the face of the card underneath
could not be seen, which shows that one of the pot cards (which are the
six, seven or eight) will certainly lose on that turn; of course the pot is
instantly coppered, that is, betting that these cards will lose.
.bn 210.png
.pn +1
Another and simpler plan is to perforate all the cards of a certain
description, perhaps of either dark suit, from the two to the ten, with an
instrument known as the “card punch,” of which the accompanying
illustration will enable the reader to form a fair conception.
.il fn=i_204.jpg w=250px ew=50% alt='card punch'
It is made of the finest steel, and is employed to puncture cards at the
center. A “deck” thus prepared is substituted for that which the
banker intends to place in the box. Sometimes, however, in this
“diamond cut diamond” game, an entrance is effected to the dealer’s
room and the “punch” is employed on his own cards. The substitution
of the prepared pack for that of the banker is the fundamental point to be
attained, and occasionally resort is had to desperate expedients. A fight
is raised, and in the melee which ensues the dealer’s box is thrown upon
the floor and the substitution quickly accomplished.
This shameless trick is played by one gambler upon another without
the slightest compunction. What a commentary does this afford upon
the hollowness of the old adage regarding “honor among thieves.” The
author having never been guilty of larceny, as defined by either the common
law or the criminal code, cannot speak for “thieves” technically
defined as such. As to those greater thieves known as gamblers, however,
he does not hesitate to say that among them “honor” is a word as
unmeaning as the mirage of the desert is illusory.
But to return to the punctured cards. The holes made by the punch
are so small that the player is often “beaten” by it. Whenever a white
surface is seen through this small hole, the player is perfectly certain that
the card underneath is the deuce, four, six, seven, eight or ten, and may
accordingly back these cards to win for himself with absolute certainty.
If a colored surface is discerned, he is equally certain that the next card
will be of another denomination.
Yet another method is to sandpaper the edges of one-half the cards.
Then, as the edge of the under card is seen through the slit in the dealing
box, the outside player can tell in which half it belongs by noticing
whether it is bright or dull. Of course, to practice this successfully, the
player must remember correctly the cards making up each half; but when
the division is made upon a system, this is an easy matter.
Besides the methods of cheating already described, which relate
more particularly to the preparation of the cards and the construction and
operation of the dealing box, there are other methods well known to professionals,
which may be employed with comparative immunity and great
success against the unsuspecting.
A favorite stratagem is to use a prepared deck containing fifty-three
cards, one more than the legitimate pack contains, known among the fraternity
.bn 211.png
.pn +1
as the “odd.” The odd card is never seen by the player; and as
the cues come out correct, there is nothing of which he can complain.
The advantage of its use to the gambler is that it gives him one sure turn
during each deal, and he usually prefers to employ it on the last turn. In
such a case, it is impossible for the bettor to win on the call, and he is
equally certain to lose on any bet which he may make on that turn. The
advantage of such a large additional percentage in favor of the game is
palpable. A large proportion of players are fond of calling the “last
turn,” because of the greater odds given by the bank; they are also more
disposed to bet high on single cards at this stage of the deal, for the reason
that a “split” is impossible. This is called playing cases. The manner
in which a deck of fifty-three cards may be manipulated to the certain
loss of such bettors may be best shown by means of an illustration. The
denomination of the extra card is a matter of no importance, but we will
suppose it to be an ace; its introduction would then make five aces in the
pack. All the cards are then sanded except these five aces, which are
marked on the edges with one or two dots, so as to be instantly recognized.
The deck, having been thus prepared, is played in the following
manner: The cards are first shuffled a few times from bottom to top, the
dealer not then knowing the position of any card. The latter then commences
finding the aces, which is easily accomplished, inasmuch as they
are the only cards not sanded and are marked on the edges. While shuffling
he places one ace on the top of the deck, over this he places a card
of some other denomination, and on this another ace, and over this again
yet another card. A false cut (which is accomplished in various ways,
and is really no cut at all) is then given to the cards, which are next
placed, faces upward, in the dealing box, the arranged cards being of
course now at the bottom. Let us suppose that when the last turn is
reached it consists of an ace, king and queen. Of course there are really
two aces in the box, though only one is shown. If the dealer wishes to
make the ace lose, all that he need do is to turn one card and then take
two cards instead of one, through the aid of his “faked” box, the bottom
one of these two cards being one of the aces, this leaves one card in the
box, as there should be. Should he desire to make the ace win, he draws
two on the first pull, and only one afterward, which results in one of the
aces never being seen, making the cues on the last turn come out correct.
Sometimes the cards are cut fairly, and the extra card comes in the middle
of the deck; in such a case, when the dealer arrives where the aces
are arranged, he is aware of it and acts in the same manner as has been
already described when they are placed so as to fall in the last turn.
Sometimes two odd cards are added to the deck, making the pack consist
of fifty-four cards. When properly manipulated, the dealer has the advantage
of being able to manage two turns instead of one.
.bn 212.png
.pn +1
Even when both cards and dealing box are perfectly “square,” it is
still in the power of the professional gambler to take such advantages of
persons not posted as to be morally certain of winning their money. For
instance, should a player select certain favorite cards on which to bet (as
is often the case), on the next deal the dealer may easily cause such cards
to win or lose all the way through as he may desire, the bettor never suspecting
that the run was not a matter of pure chance. As these favorite
cards come out of the box, the dealer—at a moment when the bettor is
not observing—places them at the bottom at the end of the deal, where
they are not disturbed while shuffling. The deck is then “run in” endwise,
and these cards being separated, will either win or lose throughout
the game.
“Faked” dealing boxes are not always the “thing of beauty” and
perennial source of joy which their manipulators would like to see them.
They occasionally “get out of order;” a little sand works its way between
the plates, and even an expert “brace” dealer finds it more or less difficult
so to use the device that its employment cannot be detected. At
Laredo, Texas, a few years ago, a “professional,” who is now dealer at a
famous house in a Western city, encountered a difficulty of this sort. He
“pulled” two cards, but so clumsily that the “sucker” observed it.
“What’s the matter with your box?” the player asked. “O, it’s a little
old, and don’t work just right,” was the answer. “Well, see here,” said
the Texan, “that was an almighty short deal, somehow. Reckon I’m
going to lose money any way; but hadn’t you better go a little slower and
make one of them long deals? I’d like to take a little more time.” The
game progressed and the stranger rose from the table a loser to the
amount of three hundred dollars. “Look here,” he remarked to the
dealer, “I reckon you’d better give me back the money you’ve cheated
me out of.” The gambler, with an air of the utmost nonchalance, replied
that he would be blanked if he gave back any of it. “Well,” remarked
the countryman, as he drew down his slouch hat over his eyes and left the
room, “I’ll be back in a few minutes.” No sooner had he left than one
of the employes of the establishment took the proprietor aside and advised
him either to return the money or close the place at once, if he did not
want the victim to return and shoot him “on sight.” The proprietor
was a capital “brace” dealer, but physical courage was not his chief
characteristic. He lost no time in acting on his subordinate’s suggestion.
Hastily raising the window he called out to the victim—whose rapidly
vanishing form was still in sight—“I say, you! Come back here a minute;
I want to see you.” The “sucker” came back; the gambler greeted him
cordially. “You old idiot,” said he, “can’t you take a little joke? Of
course I knew that you were ‘capping,’ (i. e. acting as ‘capper’) for the
.bn 213.png
.pn +1
game. Here’s your money old He handed him a roll of currency,
which the stranger pocketed with a grim smile of satisfaction. But subsequent
events proved that the proprietor “had builded better than he
knew.” Sitting around the room were other men who had lost money
and seen a fellow sufferer receive back his losses, it did not take long
for the crowd to extinguish the lights, and in the darkness the unlucky
dealer was “held up” for every dollar that he had with him.
3rd. The third adjunct to success in a “brace” faro game is by no
means the least important. Confederates on the outside are considered
sine qua non in every “skin” gaming hell. They are technically known
as “ropers” or “steerers.” This euphonious appellation sufficiently
indicates at once their character and the nature of the duties with which
they are charged. The man who for a percentage and under the guise of
friendship lures a man to loss is, if possible, morally lower than the
scoundrel who robs him.
To be a good “steerer,” a man should possess some education and be
endowed with a courteous and affable demeanor. The more polished his
manners, the greater the value of his services. Men of this stamp hang
about the depots, infest the corridors of hotels of every grade, and patrol
the streets with far more watchfulness than does the average policeman.
Their methods do not vary, in any marked respect, from those employed
by “cappers” and “steerers” in other games, which are fully disclosed
under other head lines. About the same qualifications are expected of
faro and “bunko steerers,” and those required of the latter are plainly
indicated in Chapter VIII.
There is, however, a class of “ropers” who do rather more than
“dirty” work. These men hang about the entrances to houses which
are alleged and believed to be “square,” turn out the gas in the stairway,
and when a would-be player presents himself, assure him that “the house
is closed for the night, but that they (or he) can ‘show him where a game
is running.’” Should the verdant dupe be sufficiently gullible to believe
the story, one of these miscreants “steers” him to a “brace” house, sees
that he is “plucked,” and then claims and receives his percentage on the
amount which the victim has lost.
Among broken-down gamblers who have lost the last vestige of self-respect,
another game is popular. Individuals of this sort will hang about
the side-walk in front of a “hell.” When a player goes up-stairs into the
rooms, they watch him. If they can gain access to the house they watch
his play; if they are too disreputable in appearance to be allowed inside
the doors, they await his return. In either event, they ascertain whether
he has lost or won. If the former, they promptly present themselves before
the proprietor and claim the usual percentage paid to a “steerer,”
.bn 214.png
.pn +1
and usually receive it. This sort of scamp is known among the fraternity
as a “gutter snipe.”
Once in a while one of them proves himself of some service. On a
certain evening, two young men had been playing faro at a “skin” house
on the Bowery, in New York. They had pooled their resources and one
of them had been doing all the betting. Their losses footed up about
eighty dollars. After coming down stairs they stood upon the corner,
bewailing their hard luck, when they were accosted by an individual
who, although decidedly seedy, presented the appearance of being the
wreck of what was once a gentleman. He told them that he had overheard
their conversation and asked them if they would like to get a part
of their money back. Being answered in the affirmative, he went on to
say that he himself did not dare to go up into the rooms, but that if the
man who had not done the betting would return alone and claim to have
been acting as a “steerer,” he would receive from the proprietor a “capper’s”
percentage of the house’s winnings. The advice was acted upon;
one of the two again mounted the stairs, entered the , demanded
his forty-five per cent. of the money lost and received it without
objection. The stranger was made happy by receiving a five dollar bill,
and the friends walked away considerably wiser, if somewhat poorer, than
when they first entered the den.
While speaking of “steerers” there is one fact which should not be
overlooked. Not a few of the proprietors of the so-called “square”
houses run “brace” games at other localities, “on the quiet.” These
men keep “ropers” at the foot of the stairways leading up to their
respectable (?) establishments, whose duty it is to inform any particularly
verdant “sucker” that there is “no game being played here to-night,”
and then “steer” him to the place where he can be fleeced with more
ease and expedition. The same tactics are employed at times when public
sentiment compels the closing of the gaming hells. The “reputable”
gamblers shut their doors, and open a room either at a hotel or in some
out of the way location, whither their “steerers” guide victims, thus
partially at least, recouping their losses resulting from the closing of their
regular rooms. Where they do not open other places they sometimes
“stand in” with the keepers of “skin” rooms, to have their employes
“steer” their patrons to the latter resorts, the “square” players, of
course, receiving a percentage of the winnings.
The better class of houses of play close at about two o’clock in the
morning, when the cards, dealing boxes and other paraphernalia are given
a few hours rest. Others are open all night, and at Pueblo, Colorado,
there is a resort whose doors are never closed. At all establishments,
however, there are at least two sets of employes, known respectively as
the “day” and “night-watch.” The day men arrive about nine in the
.bn 215.png
.pn +1
morning, the dealer having the combination of the safe. He takes out the
money, chips, cards, etc.; the “house is ready for business,” or to state
it more accurately, the trap is set and baited for fresh game.
It is generally during the earlier hours of the day-watch that the
game is “thrown off,” if at all. This term is a bit of gambler’s slang,
and always means that some one is victimized through a gross breach of
good faith, in other words, the victim is “thrown” to a confederate as a
bone to a dog. The “throwing off a game” is usually worked as follows:
Suppose that A, B and C enter into partnership to conduct a gaming
house. A and B secretly agree to defraud C of the capital which he has
advanced. C closes the house at night and A opens in the morning. B
arranges with an outside party to come to the house in the morning while
C is absent, and by collusion with the dealer, A, “win out the roll,” as it
is technically termed, that is, win the money of the firm so that C’s share
may be divided among the two scoundrels. Of all dastardly confidence
games this may be probably set down as the meanest, and the fact that it
is ever done shows how far the maxim “honor among thieves” applies to
professional blacklegs.
.pm sectionhead 'A UNIQUE ESTABLISHMENT.'
The establishment at Pueblo to which reference has been made above,
is probably the largest in the United States. It contains six faro tables,
four roulette wheels, four hazard tables, two “stud” poker tables, two
“draw” poker tables, one “short faro” table, one vingt-un table, one
hieronymus bowl, and one table for playing a game known as “high suit.”
They are all in one large room, which opens directly off the street,
without any pretense of concealment, and contains, besides, a bar and a
lunch counter. Back of this is an apartment in which occur two
drawings daily, and yet farther in the rear is a keno room, where a game
is run every night. This mammoth hell never closes its doors. Three
sets of employes relieve each other, each “shift” (a designation for the
alternate “watches,” borrowed from the phraseology of the Colorado
miners) being on duty eight hours. As may be imagined, the cost of
running such an establishment is enormous, and the fact that the
proprietors continue to prosper financially shows that dupes are found in
abundance.
There is one feature in the management of this Pueblo resort peculiar
to itself. It is a very common thing in all gambling houses for a player
who “has lost his roll” to ask a donation—or a “loan,” as he prefers to
call it—of a small sum, wherewith to get a drink, procure a meal, or pay
for a night’s lodging. Only in the lowest dives is such a request refused.
In the Pueblo den, however, a different system is pursued. The proprietors
never give money to any man, for the reason that they apprehend
.bn 216.png
.pn +1
that the beneficiary might use it in playing against the house. At the
same time no sober applicant (unless a chronic “dead beat”), whether
player or stranger, is ever refused a drink, a cigar, a square meal, or a
night’s lodging. Instead of cash, however, he is given a brass check
which, while not receivable at the tables as stakes, is good at the bar, the
lunch counter, or at a lodging house owned and run by the establishment,
for refreshments of whatever kind he may desire.
.pm sectionhead 'SHORT FARO.'
This is a vastly simplified modification of the game of faro. The
lay-out consists of six cards—ace, king, queen, jack, ten, and nine. The
dealer commonly uses two or more packs, which he shuffles and usually
deals from his hand, though sometimes from a box. The first three cards
run off are for “the house,” and are dealt faces down and not exposed.
The second three cards are for the player and are shown. Bettors place
their stakes on the card or cards in the lay-out which they may select
before the deal begins. The mode of play may be best shown by an illustration:
Suppose a player wagers a dollar on the queen. If one of the
three cards exposed happens to be a queen he wins one dollar; if two are
queens he receives double the amount of his stake; if all three should
prove to be queens the dealer returns him his original stake augmented by
three times the amount; if no queen is shown the “house” gathers in the
stake. It does not require a particularly erudite mathematician to discover
that the odds at this game are enormously in favor of the bank. In
the first place the player can win only should one of six cards out of fifty-two
turn up. Moreover, of the six cards dealt he is allowed to see only
three, thus reducing his already insignificant chances by one half. Even
when fairly played the game, like roulette, is little short of downright robbery
by the dealer, and when to this preponderance of chances one adds
the numerous advantages which a professional “brace” dealer has over a
greenhorn it is easy to foretell who will have the money at the end of the
game.
.pm sectionhead 'POLICE PROTECTION TO GAMBLING.'
The attentive reader will find, at various parts of this volume, allusions
to the tacit understanding which often exists between the fraternity
of black-legs and the police. The personal experience of the author is
referred to and the chapter devoted to local gambling is replete with
recitals of facts which afford food for reflection.
It may not be out of place here, however, to describe briefly the
methods adopted for rendering ineffective even a carefully planned and
honestly executed raid, if undertaken or managed by inexperienced or
incompetent officers. The latter on gaining entrance to a room do not
.bn 217.png
.pn +1
find any gambling in progress and are therefore unable to capture any
property or make any arrests. The outer doors of the resorts are usually
constructed of ponderous oak timbers, from four to ten inches thick,
fastened together by means of heavy iron bolts. Of late years steel has
been substituted for wood, and it is said that at one of the Chinese gambling
hells in San Francisco the doors are made of thick rubber, resembling
car springs in texture, the elasticity of which repels the blows of a
sledge hammer as a marble pavement gives a rebound to a rubber ball.
The object of making such doors is, of course, to prevent forcible intrusion.
It is not of the employment of violence, however, that I am about to speak,
but of those raids where the officers are given admission. It should be
added that not infrequently entrance is granted, after a short delay, because
the hospitable proprietors have been privately warned of the intended
visit.
A small aperture in the door enables the door-keepers, one of whom
is always in attendance, to inspect applicants for admission before undoing
the bolts. If the custodian is in doubt as to the character of the callers,
the proprietor is summoned. If the visitors are recognized as officers, an
electric bell sounds a note of warning, and a parley between the blue-coats
and the Cerebus at the portal follows. In the twinkling of an eye
the cards, boxes, chips, lay-out, case-keeper, and money disappear into the
safe. The table is at once transformed into an ordinary round-topped
affair, covered with a crimson cloth. Scattered around the room are well
dressed, quiet mannered gentlemen engaged in reading the newspapers,
in discussing politics, or in general conversation. The police see nothing,
and after apologizing for their intrusion, withdraw. Often the proprietor
accompanies them to the stairway, and, cordially shaking hands, leaves
in the honest (?) palm of the one in command a substantial token of his
readiness to “bury the hatchet.” Scarcely have they reached the sidewalk
before the table is placed in position, the safe unlocked, the money
and paraphernalia taken out, the players resume their seats, and the game
goes on as before. Is it surprising that the man who witnesses such a
farce as this should entertain a contempt for the very name of law?
.pm sectionhead 'REMINISCENCES AND INCIDENTS.'
From what has been said, some unsophisticated reader may be led
to suppose that running a faro bank is a short and easy road to fortune.
No more fatal mistake could be made. Professional gamblers, almost
without exception, die paupers. Nor is the reason far to seek. The
gambler “on the inside,” is likely to win, even if the game is fairly
played; and the skin dealer never loses, even by accident. But the
curse of Heaven seems to attach to money thus accumulated. The winners
rarely keep it long. The terrible fascination of the mania for gaming
.bn 218.png
.pn +1
is no less potent with professionals than amateurs. The author might
multiply illustrations, drawn from his own experience. A successful
proprietor of a faro game will often draw from his safe thousands of his
nefariously won money to drop it on the table in another house. Even
Morrissey, the gambling king of the country, twice a member of the
New York State Senate and later of the United States House of Representatives,
owner of the most luxuriously appointed gambling house of
the American metropolis and of the world famed “club house” at Saratoga,
which vied with Monaco and Monte Carlo in its elegance—even Morrissey,
the “prince of good fellows,” the idol of his friends, the once millionaire,
died insolvent. The history of American gambling abounds in incidents
scarcely less striking. Ephemeral success, debauchery, drunkenness,
poverty, suicide or death from violence—this is the epitome of the career
of the average blackleg. O! young men of America, you who are upon
the very threshold of life, you who are in doubt as to “which way” you
will direct your steps, you in whom are centered the fondest affections of
so many hearts, you before whom so bright a future is opening, you
upon whom depends the future of this great country, listen to the advice
which comes from a heart that would avert from you the pangs which
it has suffered. Believe one who has drained the cup to its very dregs,
that at the bottom you will find only a serpent!
William one of the best known and most expert manipulators
of a brace box known to American gamblers, who won heavily and bet as
freely, died a pauper.
John Timmins, a successful dealer, “went broke” and in a fit of
desperation, ended his miserable existence with a bullet.
Sam Cade, a “faro bank fiend” and one of the best poker players
known in the “hells” was buried by a fund to which I was myself a subscriber.
These are but a tithe of the many instances that I might adduce in
corroboration of the truth of what has been said.
An illustration of the well-nigh irreclaimable depravity of the case-hardened
professional happened not many years ago in a St. Louis gambling
house. A well dressed young man entered, sat down at the faro
table, and in a very short time lost $500. His money gone, he hurriedly
rose and left the room without a word. After his departure one of the
“profession,” who was sitting in the room, looked toward the door and
remarked, “Well, he dropped his little roll rather sudden.” Then he
added, with a pensive air, “but it comes easy?” “What is he?” asked the
dealer. “Why don’t you know?” was the inquiry of the first speaker.
“He’s one of the finest ‘dips’ in the country.” “What’s a dip?” was the
next conundrum of the proprietor. “Why, you driveling idiot,” replied
his confrere, “a dip’s a pick-pocket.” “Well,” answered the winner,
.bn 219.png
.pn +1
with a yawn, “I don’t care. Glad he makes money so easily. Hope
he’ll ‘dip’ some more. A dip’s money is just as good to run bank with
as any other.” And with this remark he wheeled about in his chair and
was soon immersed in the newspaper, awaiting the arrival of another
victim.
I cannot close this chapter on faro without a passing reference to an
old gambler who at one time was a prominent figure all along the Mississippi
valley, and whose face was as familiar to patrons of the river steamers
as were the sand-bars which blocked the channel. I refer to “Colonel”
Charles Starr. His long yarns were proverbial. According to his own
story he owned half the plantations skirting the river. Occasionally some
one would “pick him up” by telling him that he (the skeptic) was the
owner of those broad acres. No such trifling circumstance as this abashed
the “Colonel” in the least. Like Banquo’s ghost, he peremptorily and
perennially refused to “down.”
Stories about him were as plentiful as “pickaninnies” about a negro
cabin. It is said that once, at an Arkansas watering place, he was
approached by an itinerant blackleg who asked for half a dollar with
which to get something to eat. The “Colonel” surveyed him leisurely,
from head to foot, before either granting or refusing his request. Finally
he said: “How long did you say it was, young man, since you had anything
to eat?” “Two days, Colonel.” “Well,” drawled Starr, “I
reckon I don’t want to give you a half a dollar, but if you go without
eating two days longer, I’ll give you a hundred dollars for your appetite.”
Starr was a gourmand, though a dyspeptic, and withal rather selfish.
He went into a restaurant in New Orleans one day and ordered a sumptuous
repast. A hungry, penniless gambler entered while he was eating,
and approaching him, said: “Colonel, I’m awful hungry and I’m dead
broke. Can’t you ‘stake’ me with some of that?” “Oh, no,” answered
Starr, “you see, I’m a capper for the house, and my play doesn’t go.”
He accumulated a fair competence, but gambling and dissipation
reduced him to poverty, and he died a pauper. The evening of the day
preceding his death he entered a fashionable restaurant and ordered a
dinner costing some seven or eight dollars. The proprietor called him on
one side, and told him frankly that he did not feel disposed to “carry” him
any longer, that he must pay cash for his order or it would not be filled.
Starr said nothing, but went out and borrowed five dollars from a friend;
returning, he threw it on a table and ordered the best meal obtainable for
that sum. When it was set before him he deliberately turned every dish
upside down upon the cloth, and walked out of the place. The following
morning he died.
.bn 220.png
.pn +1
.pm chaphead 'CHAPTER III.' 'POKER AND POKER PLAYERS.' chap3
.sp 2
The game of poker is undoubtedly one of the “peculiar
of the United States and, like base-ball, may be called a “National game.”
It finds an abiding place alike among the pineries of the frozen Kennebec
and the orange groves of Florida, in the gilded salons of Manhattan
Island, the backwoods of Arkansas, and the mining camps of California.
It numbers among its devotees men of letters and of the proletariat, the
millionaire and the shoe-black, the railway magnate and the tramp. It
recognizes no distinction of “age, color, or previous condition of servitude.”
It draws not the line at sex, and is equally at home in the fashionable
club house and the gambler’s den, the private parlor and the cheap
lodging house. Men who avowedly abhor it, play it behind closed doors
and drawn curtains, and ladies of culture and high social position are
among its most devoted and most skillful patrons. To describe its fascination
is as difficult as to account for it, yet the undisputable fact remains
that of the vast army of men connected with mercantile pursuits in the
United States, comparatively few can be found who have not some knowledge
of the game; and were the whole truth disclosed, no insignificant
number might reveal a tale of losses of no little magnitude.
Gentlemen, who would not, for worlds, enter a gaming hell, and who
are apt to pride themselves upon their ignorance of faro, play poker at
their clubs and by their own firesides, without either compunction of conscience
or pretence of concealment. Intelligent, thoughtful men, eulogize
the game as far removed from vulgarity, as calling into exercise some of
the highest faculties of the human mind, and as resulting in healthy,
moral effects.
This enthusiastic laudation of the game is all very well, but the naked
facts remain, that whatever argument may be advanced against any form
of gambling, may be urged with equal force against poker; and that this
game sanctioned as it practically is, by the countenance of the reputable
men who never set foot within a gaming house, has done more to weaken
the moral sense of the country at large as to the general question of gambling
than any other single agency. Its growing popularity and increasing
prevalence constitute a menace by no means to be ignored to the
prosperity, the morals, even the perpetuity of our people. A nation of
gamblers is a nation whose course is already turned towards the setting
sun.
.bn 221.png
.pn +1
As in the chapter devoted to the game of faro, the game will be first
described as squarely and fairly played, after which the principal tricks of
“card sharpers” will be taken up.
Foul Hand.—A hand composed of more, or less than five cards.
Going Better.—When any player makes a bet, it is the privilege of
the next player to the left to raise him, that is, after making good the
amount already bet by his adversary, to make a still higher bet. In such
a case it is usual to say, “I see you, and go (so much) better,” naming
the extra sum bet.
Going In.—After making good the ante of the age and the straddles
(if any) for the privilege of drawing cards and playing for the pool.
Limit.—A condition made at the beginning of a game, limiting the
amount of any single bet or raise.
Making Good.—Depositing in the pool an amount equal to any
bet previously made. This is done previous to raising or calling a playing,
and is sometimes called seeing a bet.
Original Hand.—The first five cards dealt to any player.
Pat Hand.—An original hand not likely to be improved by drawing,
such as a full, straight, or flush.
Pass.—“I pass,” is a term used in Draw Poker, to signify that a
player throws up his hand and retires from the game.
Raising a Bet.—The same as going better.
Say.—When it is the turn of any player to declare what he will do,
whether he will bet, or pass his hand.
In the fair game, the deal is of no special value and anybody may begin.
The dealer, beginning with the person at his left, throws around
five cards to each player, giving one card at a time.
The dealer shuffles and makes up the pack himself, or it may be done
by the player at his left, and the player at his right must cut.
To begin the pool, the player next to the dealer on his left, must
put up money, which is called an “ante,” and then in succession, each
player, passing around to the left, must after looking at his hand determine
if he goes in or not; and each player deciding to play for the pool
must put in twice the amount of the ante. Those who decline to play
throw up their cards, face downward on the table, and per consequence in
front of the next dealer.
When all who wish to play have gone in, the person putting up the
ante can either give up all interest in the pool, thus forfeiting the ante
which has been put up, or else can play like the others who have gone in,
by “making good,” that is, putting, up in addition to the ante as much
more as will make him equal in the stake to the rest.
The players must throw away their discarded cards before taking
up or looking at those which they draw.
.bn 222.png
.pn +1
In poker, as fairly played, every player is for himself and against all
others, and to that end will not let any of his cards be seen, nor betray
the value of his hand by drawing or playing out of his turn, or by change
of countenance, or any other sign. It is a great object to mystify your
adversaries, up to the “call,” when hands have to be shown. To this
end it is permitted to “chaff,” or talk nonsense, with a view of misleading
your adversaries as to the value of your hand, but this must be without
unreasonably delaying the game.
When the drawing is all complete, the betting goes around in order,
like the drawing, to the left. The ante man is the first to bet unless he
has declined to play, and in that case the first bet is made by the
player nearest to the dealer on his left. But the player entitled to bet
first may withhold his wager until the others have bet round to him,
which is called “holding the age,” and this being considered an advantage,
is very frequently done.
Each bettor in turn must put into the pool a sum equal at least to the
first bet made; but each may in turn increase the bet, or “raise” it, as
it comes to him; in which case the bets proceeding round in order must
be made by each player in his turn, equal to the highest amount put in
by any one; the party who fails being required to go out of the play, forfeiting
his interest in the pool.
When a player puts in only as much as has been put in by each player
who preceded him, that is called “seeing the bet.”
a player puts in that much, and raises it, that is called seeing
the bet and “going better.”
When the bet goes around to the last bettor, or player, who remains
in, if he does not wish to see and go better, he simply sees and “calls,” and
then all playing must show their hands, and the highest hand wins the
pool.
When any one declines to see the bet, or the increase of bet, which
has been made, he “lays down” his hand; that is, throws it up with the
cards face downwards on the table. If all the other players throw down
their hands, the one who remains in to the last wins, and takes the pool
without showing his hand.
To “bluff” is to take the risk of betting high enough on a poor hand
or a worthless one, to make all the other players lay down their hands
without seeing or calling you.
When a hand is complete so that the holder of it can play without
drawing to better it, that is called a “pat” hand. A bold player will
sometimes decline to draw any cards, and pretend to have a “pat” hand,
and play it as such when he has none.
A skillful player will watch and observe when each player draws, the
expression of the face, the circumstances and manner of betting, and
.bn 223.png
.pn +1
judge, or try to judge, of the value of each hand opposed to him accordingly.
No one is bound to answer the question, how many cards he drew,
except the dealer; and the dealer is not bound to tell after the betting has
begun.
.pm sectionhead 'RELATIVE VALUE OF HANDS IN THEIR ORDER, BEGINNING WITH BEST.'
1. A Sequence Flush—Which is a sequence of five cards, and all of
the same suit.
2. Fours—Which is four of the five cards of the same denomination.
3. A Full—Which is a hand consisting of three cards of the same
denomination and two of likewise equal denomination.
4. A Flush—Which is all five cards of the same suit.
5. A Sequence—Which is all five cards not of the same suit, but all in
sequence. [In computing the value of a sequence, an ace counts either
as the highest or the lowest card; that is below a deuce or above a king.]
6. Threes—Which is three cards of the same denomination, but the
other two of different denominations from each other.
7. Two pairs.
8. One pair.
When a hand has neither of the above the count is by the cards of
the highest value or denomination.
When parties opposed each hold a pair, the highest pair wins, and
the same when each party holds threes or fours.
When each party holds two pairs, the highest pair of the two determines
the relative value of the hands.
When each party holds a sequence, the hand commencing with the
highest card in the sequence wins; so, also, when two or more parties
hold flushes against each other.
That full counts highest of which the three cards of the same denomination
are highest. The two cards of same denomination help only to
constitute the full, but do not add to the value of the hand. When hands
are equal so far that each party holds a pair, or two pairs, of exactly the
same value, the next highest card or cards in each hand must be compared
with the highest card or cards in the other hand, to determine which
wins.
In case of the highest hands, (which very seldom occurs) being
exactly equal, the pool is divided.
.pm sectionhead 'TECHNICAL TERMS USED IN POKER.'
Age.—Same as eldest hand.
Ante.—The stake deposited in the pool by the age at the beginning
of the game.
.bn 224.png
.pn +1
Blaze.—This hand consists of five court cards, and, when it is played,
beats two pairs.
Blind.—The ante deposited by the age previous to the deal. The
blind may be doubled by the player to the left of the eldest hand, and the
next player to the left may at his option straddle this bet, and so on,
including the dealer, each player doubling. The player to the left of the
age, alone has the privilege of the first straddle, and if he decline to
straddle it debars any other player coming after him from doing so. To
make a blind good costs double the amount of the ante, and to make a
straddle good costs four times the amount of the blind. Each succeeding
straddle costs double the preceding one.
Call.—When the bet goes round to the last bettor, a player who
remains in, if he does not wish to see and go better, simply sees and calls,
and then all those playing show their hands, and the highest hand wins
the pool.
Chips.—Ivory or bone tokens, representing a fixed value in money.
Chipping, or to Chip.—Is synonymous with betting. Thus a player,
instead of saying may say “I chip” so much.
Discard.—To take from your hand the number of cards you intend
to draw, and place them on the table, near the next dealer, face downwards.
Draw.—After discarding one or more cards, to receive a corresponding
number from the dealer.
Eldest Hand, or Age.—The player immediately at the left of the
dealer.
Filling.—To match, or strengthen the cards to which you draw.
The following descriptions of what are known as “jack-pots,” a modification
of the game of draw-poker, is taken from “Trump’s American
Hoyle,” which Blackbridge pronounces the standard authority on this as
on all other card games:
When all the players pass up to the blind hand, the latter allows his
blind to remain in the pot, and each of the other players deposit a similar
amount. The blind now deals, and any player in his regular turn may
open or break the pot, provided he holds a pair of jacks or better, but a
player is not compelled to do so, this being entirely optional.
Each player in turn, commencing with the one at the left of the
dealer, declares whether he can and will open the pot; if he declines to
open, he says, “I pass.” If he has the requisite hand, and elects to
open, he says, “I open.”
If no player opens the pot, then each player deposits in the pool
the same amount that was previously contributed, and the deal passes
to the next player. The same performance ensues until some player holds
the necessary cards, and is willing to break the pot.
.bn 225.png
.pn +1
A player may break the pot for any amount within the limits of the
game and each player in turn must make the bet good, raise it, or pass out.
After all the players who determined to go in have made good the
bet of the player who opened the jack-pot, and the hands have been filled,
then the opener of the pot makes the first bet.
If all pass, up to the player who broke the pot, the latter takes the
pool, and can only be compelled to show the jacks, or better, necessary
to break the pot.
One of the most vital adjuncts to poker games as played in the
many “club-rooms” scattered throughout the United States is technically
termed the “take off.” It is an amount taken by the proprietors out of
the pots as a percentage due the “house” on every hand “called,” and
shown down; a pair of aces and another pair, and you must “go to the hole”
with a check. The “hole” is a slot cut in the middle of the table, leading
to a locked drawer underneath, and all checks deposited therein are
the property of the keeper of the place. At other resorts the house “takes
off” for each pair of jacks or any better hand shown on the call, while at
others the percentage is exacted for any two pairs shown. It will be
readily seen, by any intelligent reader, that it is only a question of time
when all the player’s chips will go into the “hole.” The exaction of the
“take off” is justified on the score of incidental expenses, lights, etc., but
a compound interest note, on which interest is computed quarterly, will
not take away your money more surely or more rapidly than this innocent
looking “hole.”
In “stud-poker” the dealer attends to the “take off.” He is
supposed to take one check for every pair in sight, and for every “call,”
but owing to a manual dexterity acquired through long practice he is
enabled considerably to exceed the stipulated limit, and it is but a short
time before all the money played against the game is in the table drawer.
Having briefly outlined the principles of the fair game of poker, and
explained the relative value of the hands of cards which may held by
players, it is next in order to explain the various advantages obtained by
professional gamblers over those whom they propose to fleece, such as
stocking the cards, employing marked cards or cards previously prepared,
“crimping,” “ringing in cold decks,” “holding out,” false shuffles and
cuts, “convexes” and “reflectors,” &c., &c.
First will be described the simplest of all known methods of stocking
the cards, viz.:
.pm sectionhead 'STRIPPERS.'
Prepared cards are either “Strippers” or “Briefs.” In preparing
“Strippers” the professional selects from the pack two hands, which may
be either “Fulls,” “Flushes,” or “Fours.” The sides of the remaining
.bn 226.png
.pn +1
cards are then prepared so that they shall be a little narrower than
the hands selected. The cards withdrawn for stripping are then cut
slightly convex on the sides, somewhat after the manner of strippers prepared
for faro.
The number of cards taken out varies according to the character of
the hand to be made up. If the sharper wishes to deal flushes he will
require ten cards of the same suit. If full hands are desired he picks out
two sets of three of a certain denomination together with four smaller
cards of a kind. The object of this selection is to give variety to the hands
to be dealt. The manner of conducting this scheme of fraud is substantially
as follows: As the gambler shuffles it is not difficult for him to feel
along the sides of the pack with the fingers of his right hand; he then
draws out the wider cards, which he places upon the top of the pack.
When he has succeeded in getting the wide cards on top he next divides
the pack, then taking each portion by the outer ends, he places the two
halves evenly together and then, with comparative ease, so shuffles them
in that no two cards of the same size shall lie together, but instead shall
alternate over and under each other throughout the whole deck.
The reader who will carefully study the foregoing explanation will
see that the cards will run off “Four-handed;” that is that they will fall
to the hands of opposite players.
In the practice of this trick the professional finds the services of a
partner of great value to him. If, however, he have none, when he deals
he places one card above the hands which he has set up in order that his
antagonist may receive one of the arranged hands while he takes the
other. Let us suppose that the hands have been arranged as “Flushes.”
If the dealer finds that in his hand he has not an ace, as a matter of course
he refrains from betting. If, however, the hands be “Fulls,” the professional’s
acquaintance with the arrangement enables him to know which is
the better hand, and he bets, or refrains from betting, as he knows is best.
It is also possible to employ strippers in a two-handed game. In the
latter case the dealer strips the pre-arranged hands, but does not mix them
as in a four-handed game, preferring to “shift” on his own deal and
allow the cards to run without cutting on that of his antagonist.
Sometimes in using strippers in a four-handed game the dealer will
place a “Jog,” that is a hand, over them and allow his confederate to cut
the pack down to the prepared place. At first sight the employment of
cards thus prepared may appear rather difficult, yet the professional blackleg
finds it comparatively easy after a little practice. “Full” hands and
“Fours of a kind” may be set up without difficulty. The swindler
knows which the ten strippers are, and in taking up his five cards he is, of
course, well informed as to the value of the five cards which his opponent
has, and guides himself accordingly. To illustrate: Suppose there are
.bn 227.png
.pn +1
ten strippers made up of four fives, three aces and three kings, and that
the sharper secures three aces and two kings. Naturally he refuses to bet,
being well aware that the four fives and the king must be held by his
antagonist.
.pm sectionhead 'BRIEFS.'
The “Brief,” which is a card used not only in poker, but also in
various other games, is a card nicely trimmed on the sides to such a width
that it can be readily distinguished by the dealer’s touch.
The advantage of using such a card is that it enables the party
knowing of its existence to cut at the point where it lies. Sometimes the
“brief” is placed on the top of the prepared hand and the confederate of
the dealer uncovers the pre-arranged cards by making precisely the
correct cut.
.pm sectionhead 'STOCKING.'
By far the most common description of frauds employed by professional
gamblers in playing poker, however, is that of “stocking” the
cards. Four varieties of “stocks” are employed by the fraternity, commonly
known as the top stock, the bottom stock, the jog stock and the
palm stock.
.pm sectionhead 'THE TOP STOCK.'
Of all these, perhaps the one most ordinarily employed—possibly
because the one most easily accomplished—is the top stock. In preparing
the pack for the perpetration of this fraud, the dealer selects a pair and
places between the two cards as many others as there are players at the
table, less one. Thus, if there are four persons playing he inserts three
cards between the two constituting the pair; if five, he places four; and
so on, as the number of players is greater or less. His next step is to
place above the pair thus arranged, the same number of cards which he
has placed between them, the result being that when he deals, the two
cards which he desires must necessarily fall to his own hand. A partner
is also a desirable adjunct in this case, as he ordinarily sits at the right
hand of the dealer, in order that he may either give the cards a false cut,
or allow them to run. If, however, the dealer has no partner, he ordinarily
has to resort to the device of “shifting the cut” (a trick which
will be explained below), in order that the arrangement of the pack may
not be disturbed. If the sharper can manage to get hold of the three
cards of the hands which are thrown up, he may sometimes find it practicable
to arrange “threes of a kind” in this way, as well as a pair.
.bn 228.png
.pn +1
.pm sectionhead 'BOTTOM STOCK.'
In executing the bottom stock the tactics employed are substantially
the same as in the top stock, by that the pair are placed on the bottom of
the pack instead of on the top. The dealer takes great care in shuffling
that he shall not disturb the lower part of the pack. The point at which
the deck is cut makes considerable difference in the success of this
maneuver. If, after cutting, it is found that all of the pack, except the
cut, is necessary to supply the players with the requisite number of cards,
then the pair will fall to the hand which has the last card, for the reason
that the player who receives the bottom card must necessarily have also
received the other; but if the dealer sees that the bottom card is not
destined to fall to himself, when he reaches the last two cards he “shifts”
them, that is, reverses the order of dealing so that the party who should
receive the top one receives the lower, while that uppermost falls to the
next player. It may be readily perceived that by this trick the dealer has
separated the pair, one falling to one hand, and the other to the player
seated immediately upon the dealer’s left. I have already stated that the
point at which the deck may be cut plays no unimportant part in the successful
accomplishment of this maneuver. In fact, in order to succeed
it is essential that the sharper have a partner at his right who will cut so
near to the bottom of the deck that the lower cards will have to be run
off. It is immaterial to the two scoundrels which of them receives the
pre-arranged pair, inasmuch as the winnings are to be divided between
them, consequently the bottom stock affords a double chance for the
perpetration of fraud.
Occasionally a blackleg who has no partner, but who observes that
some particular player is in the habit of cutting the pack very deep, will so
arrange matters that he may sit next to him, this renders an innocent
party inadvertently an accomplice to his nefarious practices. When two
sharpers sit in a game with honest players and have resort to the use of
the bottom stock, especially if to this be added “signing up,”—by which
is meant “signaling” to one’s confederate the cards which one has—it is,
however, a moral impossibility for the to beat the combination
of the sharpers.
Should the trick be suspected the sharp rogues will place the remainder
of the pack on top of the cut, suffering a “jog”—which will be explained
later—to lie over it, by which means they are enabled to deal from the
entire pack, which usually tends to counteract suspicion. Sometimes,
after the pair has been placed on the bottom of the pack another card is
put underneath, the result being that the player who receives the next to
the last card will receive the pair. This very simple trick has been found
most efficacious in puzzling a suspicious player, who is ordinarily greatly
.bn 229.png
.pn +1
surprised to find that the hand into which falls the last card has not
received the prepared pair. Sometimes two, or even three cards are placed
on the bottom, the principle being the same, although in this case it is
necessary that the dealer should carefully remember the number of cards
so placed, in order that he may know precisely when he reaches the lower
card of the pair.
.pm sectionhead 'THE JOG STOCK.'
The “jog” stock is a device which it is absolutely impossible to
execute without the aid of a confederate, yet it is regarded by professionals
as one of the most effectual means of defrauding an honest player.
As in the case of the top and bottom stocks, a pair is arranged by the
dealer, who places upon it a sufficient number of cards to make the pair
fall to his own hand. He next shuffles the pack once or twice in such a manner
as to keep the arranged cards on the top, after which he slides a portion of
the deck over the pair, leaving a narrow break or jog along the side, thus
separating the hand which he has put up from the remainder of the pack.
His confederate, it should be remembered, always sits on his right, then
takes that part of the deck which rests upon the top of the stocked hand,
with the thumb and finger of his right hand grasping them by the ends.
Then with the thumb and middle finger of his left hand he seizes, in the
same manner, the pre-arranged cards underneath; he draws out the latter
and places them on top of the others, leaving them in precisely the same
position as they were before his confederate offered them to him to cut.
An expert sharper, after winning once through these means, on his
next deal so arranges the pack that the pair shall fall to his partner,
with whom he bets, and to whom he apparently loses money. After this
the cards are permitted to run naturally for one or two hands, when the
second scoundrel repeats the same tactics.
The reflecting reader will readily perceive that this device is far less
likely to arouse suspicion than the employment of either the top or bottom
stock, and for this reason is more popular with experts than either of the
other two.
In playing this trick many sharpers have resorted to the use of glazed
cards. Usually the backs have been previously prepared by slightly
roughening them with very fine sand-paper. The object of doing this is
to cause the cards to adhere together and prevent them from slipping about
during the process of shuffling. This enables the dealer to place the pack
to a very fine break, which renders the cutting more easy and attracts less
attention. I have known experts who were able to set up “three of a kind”
in this way as easily as a single pair, although for the successful accomplishment
of this it is necessary that the two confederates should understand
each other thoroughly. In such a case the partner sitting on the dealer’s
.bn 230.png
.pn +1
right observes what pair the latter has, and, if possible, either by cutting
the third card into his own hand or from the hands thrown down, and
turns it to his confederate with the proper number of cards beneath. If
the dealer allow the hand to pass to his partner, the latter, if he wins and
deals, passes the cards on to the bottom, in order that the hand may run
out on the bottom stock.
.pm sectionhead 'PALM STOCK.'
No little dexterity is required to manipulate the “palm stock.” I
have seen professionals attempt its execution and come to no small grief
through its being detected in consequence of their clumsiness. In order
to execute this maneuver effectually, the party intending to employ it
must be on the left of the dealer. He obtains possession of a high pair—perhaps
kings or aces—and while he is holding one in each hand in such
a way that neither can be perceived, he asks that he be allowed, after the
shuffling and cutting, to cut the deck again. Permission having been
granted, he seizes the pack in his right hand, places one of the cards
which he has withheld in his hand on top of the pack, and as he cuts he
leaves as many cards on the table as may be necessary to intervene between
the pair in order that they may be “Put up.” Then as he grasps these
cards with his left hand he places the other card of the pair on the top
and throws them on top of the pack. It is not difficult to see that the
result of this maneuver is to place the two cards which he has “palmed”
in such a position that they will inevitably fall to himself. Of course it
is not possible to practice this trick frequently without exciting suspicion,
but I have, myself, by employing it judiciously, managed to win no
inconsiderable sums. As a rule, after executing the “Palm Stock,” the
black-leg “goes a blind,” and the trick is rarely attempted unless there
is a large “ante.”
.pm sectionhead 'FALSE SHUFFLE.'
Another favorite practice among the black-legs is the “False Shuffle.”
Almost all sharpers have their own individual methods of shuffling;
but perhaps the one which is most approved is that known among the
profession as “the intricate shuffle.” It is executed substantially as follows:
The cards are “ripped,” that is, the deck is divided into two
halves, which are pushed entirely through each other, after which they
are drawn out at the ends, and the half which was previously on top is
replaced in the same position. Some professionals shuffle only the lower
half of the pack, not disturbing the top, but concealing the upper cards by
means of keeping three or four fingers over the end of the pack which is
towards their antagonist. Sometimes a very quick shuffle is employed
which does not disarrange the cards on the top, and after this the pack is
.bn 231.png
.pn +1
given a double false cut, by means of which the cards originally uppermost
are retained in the same position. The device, which, if rapidly
executed, appears to the unsophisticated player a perfectly fair shuffle,
only a practical acquaintance with the operation of the trick enables the
verdant amateur to detect this trick when executed adroitly.
.pm sectionhead 'FALSE CUTS.'
Besides false shuffles, professionals also have resort to false cuts.
Of these, there are but two varieties in common use, known respectively
as the “over hand” and “double” cut. In the former about one-third
of the pack is taken with the right hand, while one-half the remainder is
concealed in the left. The party cutting brings the left hand towards him,
that portion of the deck which is left on the table is then covered by the
dropping of the cards held in the right hand, the hand still being kept
over them, while those in the left hand are thrown over and beyond the
others; the maneuver is completed by placing the cards in the right
hand on the top.
In the execution of the “double” cut, the middle of the pack is
drawn out at the end with the thumb and middle finger, after they are
brought to the top of the deck, the cards originally uppermost are caught
by the lower part of the thumb and three fingers, drawn out at the end
and once more placed on the top. In either case the pack is left in precisely
the same position as it was before the seeming cut had been made.
The object is the same in the case of both false shuffles and false cuts;
that is, to leave the pre-arranged pack in precisely the condition in which
the dealer wished it to be.
Sometimes, when a perfectly fair cut is made by an honest player,
the professional finds it desirable to “shift” the cut, or, in other words,
to replace the two sections of the pack in the same condition in which they
were before they had been offered for cutting. The methods of executing
this trick are multiform. Ordinarily, however, the operator finds it
desirable to have a partner on his left; in fact, in draw-poker it is difficult
to execute the maneuver without some assistance. Three of a kind
having been placed on top in the shuffle, the cut is left on the table, and
the professional deals from the remainder. The deal being completed,
removed from the table with the right hand, the cut “shifted,” and the
pack dropped into the left hand ready for his partner’s draft.
This piece of chicancery, if successfully performed, is almost impossible
of detection by a greenhorn, and even the professional gamblers are
not infrequently deceived by its dexterous manipulation.
.bn 232.png
.pn +1
.il fn=i_226.jpg w=500px ew=90%
.ca “TIPPING THE HAND.”
The accompanying illustration affords a view of two “skin” gamblers
engaged in victimizing a “sucker” by means of a trick familiarly
known among the fraternity as “tipping” or “signing the hand.” Large
sums of money have been won through this means, not only from verdant
dupes, but even from professionals who prided themselves upon their
astuteness. In order to work it successfully, marked cards are indispensable,
and at least one of the confederates, who act in unison, must be
an expert at the use of “paper,” as marked or “advantage” cards are
called among the gamblers.
The cut shows the method in which the trick is carried on. Player
number 3 represents the “sucker;” player number 2 the swindler who
has induced him to play on the promise of “tipping” the “hand” of
number 1, who is in reality the partner of number 2, although, of course,
this latter fact is unknown to number 3. The method of playing this
nefarious confidence game may be best shown by an illustration. Number
2 always faithfully signals number 3 precisely what cards are in the
hands of number 1. The latter being an expert marked card player,
of course, knows with absolute certainty what cards are held by number
3. Let us suppose that number 1 holds a pair of sixes and number 3
a pair of fives. Number 2 signals to number 3 that number 1 has in his
hand a low pair. Number 3 is naturally in the dark as to whether the
pair in question is of a lower denomination than his own, and in the hope
that it may prove to be makes his bet. Number 1 immediately “raises”
him, and this is continued as long as the victim can be induced to wager,
or until number 3 has “staked” his The hands being “shown
down,” of course number 1 takes the stakes.
.bn 233.png
.pn +1
.pm sectionhead 'RUNNING UP TWO HANDS.'
Perhaps one of the most successful feats accomplished by the professional
gambler is that known as “running up two hands.” Under such
circumstances the game is no longer a contest, but a certainty. It is
sometimes played with a partner, sometimes without. If the operator
have no partner, he usually selects his seat on the right of the man whom
he considers the most verdant of the players. When he observes that his
left hand neighbor has a prospect of winning, he immediately “passes,”
and taking up the pack prepares the hand as follows:
He selects the individual to whom he proposes to give, let us say,
three tens; also, the one upon whom he intends to bestow the larger set
of threes, say three kings; in putting up the hands, however, he commences
with his own, and while the cards face him for the reason that he
knows that when the pack is reversed for the purpose of dealing the
uppermost card facing him will be the last one dealt, and as he sits on the
right of the dealer, it will of course fall to him. Having selected a
king (the face of the pack being uppermost) he places as many cards
below as there may be players on his right between himself and the
person to he wishes to give the three tens. Below these he places
another ten, and underneath that as many cards as there are players between
himself and the player who is to receive the tens. In the same manner
he arranges the other tens together with the kings, so that the three
tens may be brought to the bottom. This being done the pack is turned
over and as a matter of course the ten placed on the bottom now becomes
the top card. His next move is to place as many cards over these as
there are players on the left of the dealer, between the latter and the
unfortunate individual who is destined to receive the tens.
This explanation may not be as clear to the reader as some of those
which have preceded it, yet to go into full details would require more
space than can be afforded to a description of the trick. The preparations
having all been arranged, the expert very rapidly gathers in the cards as
they are thrown down, placing them underneath the pack. He then begs
to be permitted to shuffle before the regular dealer. If the request be
granted he takes care so to shuffle as to not disturb the hands which he
has arranged with so much care. In fact he usually has recourse to the
device which has been already described as a “false shuffle.” Sitting on
the dealer’s left, of course the cut falls to him, and he either gives the
deck a false cut, or says “let them run.”
The consequence of this maneuver is that the blackleg receives the
three kings, while one of the other players obtains the three tens. The
three tens being considered a safe hand upon which to bet, it is not a
difficult matter to induce the verdant player to stake a considerable sum,
.bn 234.png
.pn +1
which the expert invariably wins. The sharper, however, finds it far
more easy to accomplish his nefarious end if he has a partner. The latter
individual, after the cards have been stocked, gives a “false shuffle.”
Professional No. 1, who sits at his partner’s right, gives the deck a false
cut, and professional No. 2 runs the cards off. It may seem incredible to
the average reader that men will sit around a poker table and permit such
dallying with the pack.
After long experience, however, I must say that the cases are exceptional
in which a smart operator may not manage to arrange three or four
such hands in the course of an evening’s play. Sometimes two sharpers,
acting as partners, manage to keep the deal between them for two or
three consecutive times; meanwhile they arrange the cards on the bottom
by degrees, and when everything has been completed the bottom of the
pack is transferred to the top. Sometimes hands are arranged in this
way and dealt in the same manner as from the bottom stock, which has
already been explained, the confederate, as a matter of course, being fully
aware which is the best hand.
The ease with which even those hands which at first sight appear
most difficult to arrange, may be prepared in this way, is almost inconceivable
to the novice. “Flushes” seem an intricate hand to arrange,
yet in fact they are among the easiest. A detailed explanation of their
arrangement, however, would hardly be either intelligible or interesting
to the average reader.
.pm sectionhead 'CRIMPING.'
A favorite method of cheating at poker is that known as “crimping”
the cards, which is effected in one of either two ways: The former
is when the player is at the left hand of the professional dealer, in a four-handed
game, or his opponent in a two-handed game.
The second method is when the sharper deals himself. In the former
case the player so stocks a hand that it shall fall to himself, after
which he “crimps” or bends down the sides of the cards of which it is
composed. This having been done, after the shuffle has been made the
sharper may readily cut to the hand prepared, since there will be a hardly
perceptible space between it and the cards above it. If the dealer shuffles
“over-handed,” the hand will rarely be broken. If crimping is to be
resorted to on one’s own deal, the expert usually waits until he has secured
a high hand, when he bends it down, as above described. He then
places it on the bottom of the pack, and shuffles in such a way that it
shall not be disturbed. After dealing, he lays down his own cards as
quietly as possible, close to the deck; then, with his left hand, he draws
the “crimped hand” from the bottom, and with his right places the remainder
of the pack on the top of the hand which he had originally received.
.bn 235.png
.pn +1
He then shoves them aside, and at the same moment lifts from
the table the prearranged hand, which is thus substituted for the one
which he has secretly discarded. In order to guard against detection,
the moment when the other players are engaged in examining their hands
is the one usually selected by the blackleg for the execution of this
maneuver.
.pm sectionhead 'COLD DECKS.'
The use of “cold decks” in almost all card games has become so
common, among the professionals, that the term, “ringing in a cold
deck,” has achieved a recognized place in the vocabulary of American
slang. Almost every one knows that the expression refers to a substitution
of one thing for another, yet not every one knows whence the phrase
has its origin.
A “cold deck” is a pack previously prepared, in which the hands
of the dealer and all the other players have been carefully arranged. To
“ring in” such a pack, is to substitute it for the one which has been
fairly shuffled and cut. There are many ways of accomplishing this
substitution. Sometimes a bill is dropped on the floor, and while the
dealer is engaged in looking for the greenback the “cold deck” is raised,
the original pack being secreted. This method, however, has become
ancient, not to say effete. The most approved method now-a-days, is to
place the prepared pack in the lap, to raise it nearly to the line of the
table with the left hand, and, after the true deck has been cut, draw the
latter to the edge of the table with the right hand directly above the
“cold deck;” at the same time the latter is raised, the discarded pack is
simultaneously dropped into the lap, where it falls into a handkerchief
previously spread in order to receive it. The deal having been made, the
sharper folds up his handkerchief and places it in his pocket.
.pm sectionhead 'MARKED CARDS.'
Marked cards are among the favorite and most profitable “tools” of
the professional blackleg. Among the fraternity they are technically
known as “paper.” When successfully used every element of chance is
eliminated from the game, and the play is practically reduced to a cut-throat
contest, in which the professional alone carries the knife. In a two-handed
game no honest player can ever hope to win against a gambler
who employs them. They are usually marked so as to indicate not only
the suit, but also the denomination of each card in the pack. As he deals
the professional reads and remembers the hand of his opponent, and bets
only when he knows that he has the advantage. At the same time it is
sometimes deemed expedient to place a wager even upon an inferior hand,
lest suspicion be excited by the too pronounced uniformity in winning.
It is hardly necessary to point out the tremendous percentage of profit
which is bound to accrue to one using cards of this character. Marked
cards may be bought, from all dealers in what are known as “gambler’s
.bn 236.png
.pn +1
goods,” but some experts prefer to purchase cards which are entirely
“straight,” and mark them themselves. The sight of the name of a
well-known manufacturer of playing cards, whose reputation is unblemished,
will usually prevent or disarm suspicion on the part of a greenhorn.
In a two-handed game the cards thus prepared are usually marked to
indicate only the size, the suit being a matter of comparative indifference.
The method of using them in a four-handed game differs somewhat from
that employed where one party plays against a single antagonist, but the
reader may readily imagine that in either case the advantage in favor of
the professional is simply enormous. A detailed explanation of the method
in which they are employed would hardly prove profitable reading to the
general public, and for this reason the subject is passed over somewhat
lightly. Some are marked with a representation of the American
eagle (what a travesty on the emblem of equality and fraternity!), and
during the war thousands of the brave boys who took their lives
in their hands in defense of the “old flag” were defrauded of the
scanty pittance paid them by the government, through the machinations
of unscrupulous scoundrels, who cheated them at poker through marked
cards on whose backs was depicted a mimic representation of the standard
for which they fought. Satire could not well go farther, inasmuch as the
government which they had sworn to defend, tolerated the rascally proceedings
even under the very folds of the starry banner itself.
Besides the “stamped” cards—i. e., those on which the secret
marks are printed—professional blacklegs use others. An ordinary pack
may be prepared by an “artist in coloring” in such a way that he may
read the backs as easily as the faces. For this purpose a paint composed
of chloroform, alcohol and some pigment is applied with a camel’s hair
brush. The pigment may be of any hue—ultramarine, vermillion, etc.—the
color selected being always the nearest approximate shade to that of
the backs of the cards played with. Card sharpers who are expert marked
card players (and it must be remembered that not every professional
gambler possesses the necessary qualifications) always travel with a full
outfit of packs. On steamboats they will buy out the entire stock of the
bar keeper, furnish him with a fresh supply gratuitously, and even pay
him a bonus to handle their goods. The result is that when any player
on the boat wants a fresh pack, he finds himself compelled to buy the
cards whose backs the professionals can read. In towns these manipulators
of the pasteboards will either secure the introduction of their cards at
the gaming houses through the payment of a percentage, or will see that
they are placed on sale at some jewelry, drug, stationery or cigar store
near the locality where the game is to be played. The next move is to
introduce them at the card table, which is sometimes found to be a very
easy matter. In some of the paragraphs of this chapter the
.bn 237.png
.pn +1
reader will find related some of my own experiences in this direction
which may not prove uninteresting.
A favorite method of “ringing in” these cards—as gamblers term
their introduction—is as follows: Two sharpers act in concert. One
goes to a town and selects a victim, who is usually a country youth who
has money. He tells his dupe that he is “dead broke,” perhaps because
of sickness, perhaps for some other reason; that he is a professional
gambler and can teach any man how to win at cards. The cupidity of
the young man from the rural districts is aroused. The gambler shows
him some marked cards and teaches him how to read the backs. Then
he sends for his confederate. When the latter arrives the first swindler
professes not to know him, and pretends to make his acquaintance for the
first time. He then tells the selected victim that he has found a “soft
mark,” (which in the vernacular of the profession means a particularly
gullible dupe), and offers to introduce him, so that the countryman may
win his money through the marked cards. The game is begun; of course
the supposed “stranger” is as familiar with the marks as is the greenhorn,
besides being master of innumerable other arts of the blackleg, of which
the greenhorn knows nothing. The result is a foregone conclusion; the
sharper wins all the money which the verdant young man can be induced
to bet.
Sometimes it happens that the dupe becomes discouraged at his poor
success and declines to play further. In such a case, if the rascals believe
that he has any more money, the first confederate will secretly offer to
“tip off” the new comer’s hand, a device which rarely fails to prove
successful under such circumstances, and an explanation of which has
been already given.
.pm sectionhead 'PARTNERSHIPS.'
As a rule, professional gamblers who travel through the country with
a view to defraud the unsophisticated by means of poker-playing, ordinarily
work in partnership. Sometimes two—sometimes more—players
compose the traveling combination, and divide the proceeds with more or
less equality. A thorough understanding among the confederates is, of
course, absolutely essential. But this having been once attained, the advantages
of the partnership are obviously very great. They convey to
each other surreptitious information across the table as to the nature of
their respective hands, so that only the one who has the better chance
may “go in.” I have already explained how they may co-operate with
one another through means of false shuffles and false cuts. They may
also prove of material assistance to each other in holding out, and in various
other ways, to such a degree that the verdant individual who supposes
that he is enjoying a “fair show” for the amount of money he has
wagered, is, as a matter of fact, absolutely at their mercy.
.bn 238.png
.pn +1
At the same time the members of such a dishonest firm have little
confidence in one another, but watch each other as though they were enemies
rather than confederates. Yet on one point they are at perfect
harmony and act in absolute unison; that is, in the fleecing of greenhorns;
and woe betide the unlucky wight who finds himself between the
upper and nether mill-stones of such a combination.
.pm sectionhead 'DOUBLE DISCARD.'
Yet another device of the professional poker-player is known as the
“Double discard.” The blackleg does not discard until after he has made
a draft. He separates the cards which he wishes to discard from the four
which he nominally proposes to retain, holding the former in his left hand
and the latter in his right, ready for a fraudulent discard, in case he sees
fit. Calling for four cards, he drops those which he has in his right hand
immediately in front of him. Next, he lifts the draft with his left hand,
the odd card of course coming on top; if now he finds in the draft one or
more cards which he perceives will, with the aid of the four cards lying
in front of him on the table, improve his chances, he retains that, and
again discards the four cards. He then drops the one which he has retained,
upon the four originally rejected, raises the hand, and of course
is prepared to wager, with an approximate certainty of success.
.pm sectionhead 'FLUSHES, FULLS AND FOURS.'
These hands are more difficult to arrange than either “pairs” or
“threes,” although an expert blackleg is soon able to reduce the art to a
science.
The manner of setting up a “flush” differs from that of arranging a
“full” or “fours.” In preparing flushes ten cards of any suit are first
selected, and being placed face uppermost before the operator, are so arranged
that the highest card shall be either the second, fourth, sixth,
eighth or tenth in order. The ten cards are then put on the top of the
deck, which the sharper takes in his left hand. He uses the fore-finger
and thumb of his right hand in shuffling, placing the former on top and
the latter underneath, and drawing one card from the top and one from
the bottom at each “pull.” These he throws upon the table in pairs.
The same tactics are repeated ten times, each two cards, as drawn off, being
laid over the preceding pair. The rest of the cards are then similarly
treated, but thrown on the table at a short distance from the twenty first
drawn. The sharper then places the latter upon the larger half of the
pack, and a false shuffle and false cut are made.
If the player sitting on the left of the blackleg happens to be the
dealer, (and in no other case can the trick be successfully worked as here
.bn 239.png
.pn +1
described), the professional who has arranged the cards will always receive
the higher flush, and the player sitting at the dealer’s left, who is
of course directly facing the blackleg, is bound to receive the smaller one.
The method of arranging “fulls” is very similar to that described
above. The hands, however, are first made up singly, the highest threes
being put in alternately as the second, third, fourth and sixth, counting
from the top of the pack as it lies face uppermost before the operator.
The latter then “strips” one card each from the top and bottom simultaneously,
as in the preparation of the flush. The hands fall to the players
in the same manner, the larger one falling to the dealer’s right and
the smaller on his left.
In stocking the cards for a hand containing “four of a kind,” the
hands are put up separately, the higher four being so arranged as to be
second, fourth, sixth, and eighth, from the top of the pack as it faces the
manipulator. The latter draws a card from the top and bottom at the
same time, as in the arrangement of the “flushes” and “fulls,” but
instead of drawing ten cards he pulls eight. The result in all three cases
is precisely the same, that is, the larger hand will invariably fall to the
player on the dealer’s right—(that is, the sharper)—and the smaller one
to the individual facing him, who sits at the dealer’s left.
.pm sectionhead 'HOLDING OUT.'
Of all the practices of a dishonest gambler at poker, “holding out”
is perhaps the most frequently resorted to. It consists of abstracting one
or more cards from the pack, which are secreted either about the person
of the player, or beneath the table. It is most commonly employed upon
the blackleg’s own deal. Several cards may be “held out,” provided
that the number is not sufficient to attract notice by perceptibly diminishing
the size of the pack. The object of course is that the sharper may
have desirable cards ready to produce when a favorable opportunity
offers. If the person to be deceived is especially verdant the cards withdrawn
from the pack are sometimes concealed behind the collar, or under
the joint of the knee or may be laid upon a handkerchief in the lap.
Professionals, however, usually prefer either the vest or the sleeve
as a place of secreting them. Different sorts of apparatus are also employed
to facilitate the operation; now-a-days nearly all professionals employ
some one of the four mechanical contrivances which are described
below.
.bn 240.png
.pn +1
.pm sectionhead 'I. THE BUG.'
.il fn=i_234a.jpg w=100px ew=15% alt='the bug' align=r
I. The Bug.—This instrument is very simple in its construction,
and although sold by dealers in “fake” goods, is often made by gamblers
themselves. Its mechanism is shown in the accompanying cut. “B”
represents a piece of watch spring which is fastened to the table by means
of an awl “A” in such a way that the point may curl over. The awl is
pressed into the under side of the table, just far enough from the edge to
permit the placing of a card. The watch spring snaps up against the
bottom. The method of using it is as follows: Some high card, for example,
the king or an ace, is slipped under the bottom of the table, the watch
spring holds it firmly in place. As soon as the party receives, in the regular
course, a card, or perhaps a pair of the same denomination
as the one which he has secreted in the “bug,”
he puts his hand over the edge of the table, under
which he puts his thumb, he then deftly raises the card
which he has concealed, at the same time taking an inferior card from his
hand and placing the latter in the “bug” instead of the one which he
has taken out. It will be seen that he thus obtains a high pair, or possibly
three high cards of the same denomination.
.il fn=i_234b.jpg w=200px ew=33% alt='the sleeve hold out' align=l
II. The Sleeve Hold Out.—This apparatus consists of a leather
band, (lettered A in the illustration) fastened around the right arm,
beneath the coat sleeve, near the elbow, to which is attached a spring,
pressure upon which works a rod which connects
with a plate (lettered B in the cut). The
method of using this device is shown in the
illustration. The cards which are “held out”
are placed beneath the plate B, which holds
them in position. When the player wishes to
draw them from his sleeve, he presses his arm against his body, thus setting
in operation the spring which works the rod and throws forward the
concealed cards from behind the plate, as shown in the cut.
.il fn=i_234c.jpg w=220px ew=40% alt='the table hold out' align=l
III. The Table Hold Out.—As are the three other contrivances
above described, so is this a device for concealing cards abstracted from
the pack during the progress of a game of poker. It differs from the
others, however, in that it is permanently
attached to the table, instead of being carried
about by the player himself. The
illustration shows the plan of its construction.
A card may be seen protruding
above the surface of the table, directly
where the cloth covering joins the wooden
border. This card is forced up through
a concealed slit at the will of the gambler,
by means of a hidden mechanism. The
.bn 241.png
.pn +1
dotted line running from the slit to the foot of the table’s leg represents a
wire which operates a spring whereby the card is forced upward, or
lowered, through the slit, at the option of the manipulator. “A” is a
point at which is inserted a small knob, or button, pressure upon which
works the spring. By pressing with his foot at “B,” the player accomplishes
the same result. The method of its use is as follows: The
abstracted cards are placed in the slit, the player holding his hand of cards
in front of it; they are then drawn down and retained beneath the table
until the moment arrives when they are to be used. Pressure at either
“A” or “B” forces them up, and the sharper takes them in his hand, at
the same time discarding an equal number of cards from his hand into the
slit.
.il fn=i_235.jpg w=175px ew=33% alt='vest hold out' align=r
IV. Vest Hold Out.—Some gamblers prefer this contrivance to
any other, for the reason that it permits the
holding out of an entire hand if the player so
desires. The accompanying illustration shows
the method in which it is worked. “A” indicates
the location of that part of the mechanism
which holds the abstracted cards; “B” is a
piece of catgut attached to that part of the
apparatus concealed beneath the vest, and running
underneath the clothing to the heel,
where it is fastened either to the shoe or the
clothing. The cards selected to be “held out”
are placed inside the clamp underneath the
vest. When the player stretches out the leg
along which runs the catgut, the plate inside
the vest comes forward and the cards may be
easily withdrawn; when the heel is drawn
back beneath the chair the tension on the catgut is increased, and the
clamp recedes behind the vest.
.pm sectionhead 'CONVEXES, OR SHINERS.'
Of all the devices for defrauding at poker, the “shiner,” or “convex”
is perhaps the most simple and the most effective. They are of various
forms. At first a circular piece of silver highly polished and convex in
form, about the size of a five-cent piece, was used. The player employing
it places it on the table in front of him, using the utmost pains to conceal
it from observation. The advantage resulting from its employment is
its power of reflecting whatever is held above it at any angle, thus
enabling the dealer who used it to read the face of each card as it was
taken, face downward, from the pack. Of late years, however, the makers
of these implements have greatly improved the process of manufacture.
.bn 242.png
.pn +1
Looking glass has been substituted for silver, the reflection being much
more brilliant. Modern convexes are also considerably larger than those
of former days. Some players attach them to the knee, some to the
thigh—as shown at point “C” in cut illustrating the “Vest Hold Out”—and
some fasten them to the coat. In one description of the convexes, a
slender bar is attached to the article at its end, a joint containing a spring
being fastened to the other extremity of the bar. In using this contrivance
the cheat places it on top of a few bank notes, and then with the other
bills entirely conceals it from view. In dealing he apparently carelessly
rests his hand upon the joint, in doing which he necessarily brings pressure
to bear upon the spring; this in turn forces the convex to fly upward
toward the dealer, and enables him to see the face of each card as it is
dealt. Occasionally magnifying glasses, technically known as “reflectors,”
are used. The blackleg places one of these on his lap, or attaches it to the
table in such a way that he may cause it to drop by means of a spring.
The forms of the “reflectors” are numerous, and no good purpose can be
served by describing any further varieties. It may be observed, however,
that new shapes are being constantly invented, as well as new contrivances
to enable cheats to use them without detection.
I have seen a convex employed upon a Mississippi steamboat with
remarkably confusing effect. Two professionals were each trying to
take advantage of the other, supposing him to be an amateur. For a
time neither gained any advantage. At length, one of the sharpers temporarily
excused himself. Going to his state room, he returned with his
“shiner.” Meantime his antagonist had arranged a “cold deck,” which
he proceeded to “ring in” on his own deal, much to the betterment of
his finances. Thus emboldened, he bet wildly on his deal, the
result being that the caller recouped his losses, with interest.
Once at the Mound City Hotel, in St. Louis, I had succeeded in
bringing two “skin” gamblers together. I had told each that I intended
to “throw off” the other to him, consequently I felt certain of receiving
my share of the winnings, no matter which of the pair succeeded in fleecing
the other. One of them had prepared a table which he could take
apart and carry with him. On the top of it was a box about a foot square,
inside of which was a “shiner” made of looking-glass. Half of the side
facing the operator was a slide which was raised, when occasion required,
by means of a string which passed down the leg of the table to the foot.
As the game progressed and the excitement increased, the foot of the operator
slipped from the pedal. The result was that instead of the
cover returning quietly to its place, it fell with a sharp click, which
attracted the attention of his opponent, who quickly springing to his feet
ran around the table and asked, “what’s that?” and then realizing its
meaning, laughingly remarked: “Say, the tail piece of your wagon just
fell out. What’s that dog-house you’ve got on the table, anyway?”
.bn 243.png
.pn +1
.pm sectionhead 'THE “NAIL PRICK” OR “SECOND DEALING.”'
.il fn=i_237.jpg w=100px ew=20% alt='nail prick' align=r
This is a device practiced by professional gamblers with great success.
In order to play the “second” effectively, the operator trims the
thumb nail on his left hand to a fine point, as shown in the accompanying
cut at letter “A.” Sometimes, instead of trimming
his nail he attaches to the ball of the thumb, by
means of a small piece of kid and a little shoemaker’s
wax, a fine needle point, lettered “B” in
the illustration. As the game progresses, he gradually
pricks the aces and kings on the face in the left hand corner of each,
which, when they are turned over, becomes of course, the right hand corner.
The cards are dealt from the end, the dealer seizing them by the
corner with the thumb of the right hand. When one of the pricked cards
is felt, the dealer slips it back and deals from under it until he comes to
himself, when he secures it for his own hand, thus gradually obtaining a
pair of aces or kings, sometimes two pairs, and occasionally three of a
kind. When this trick is successfully performed, the professional is
usually able to “clean out” a greenhorn with the utmost ease and dispatch.
It is a favorite mode of swindling at poker, inasmuch as it requires
no partner, no stocking of cards, and admits of their being fairly shuffled.
.pm sectionhead 'THE “TELEGRAPH.”'
By the word “telegraph” as employed in gamblers’ parlance, is by
no means meant the ordinary electric wire through which are transmitted
messages upon which depend not only men’s safety and lives, but even
the welfare of nations and the peace of the civilized world. The gamblers‘
“telegraph” is used for entirely different purposes. It consists of
a wire running from a poker table to some point of vantage, usually
behind a “peep-hole,” by means of which one confederate advises another
when to bet. Of course collusion between two is essential. The man at
the peep-hole, which is not infrequently in an upper room, sees through
the aid of a magnifying glass the hands of all the players. He controls
one end of the wire, the other extremity of which is attached to the clothing
of his partner. A pre-arranged system of signals conveys to the latter
all the information necessary to enable him to place a wager with the
absolute certainty of winning. On its face this species of fraud appears so
disreputable that the average reader will question whether the device may
not have originated in the author’s brain. Alas, for human nature! The
telegraph is an actual fact, no less deplorable because its existence is
assured. The number of saloons which employ it is “legion,” and it
may sometimes be found in places which would be considered most
unlikely. The only safe plan to be pursued is never, under any circumstances,
to sit down to a game of poker, no matter how trifling the ante.
.bn 244.png
.pn +1
.pm sectionhead 'A SURE HAND.'
Reference is made elsewhere to the advantage taken by professional
gamblers and confidence men of the cupidity, venality and dishonesty of a
certain class of “suckers.” It is not an uncommon experience with
black-legs to be invited by some man of good repute in the community
in which he resides, to visit the town with a view to fleecing some moneyed
friend of the latter individual, the gain accruing from the execution of the
rascally enterprise to be equally divided between the confederate scoundrels.
This is known in gambler’s slang as “throwing off a sucker.”
Under the present title will be explained one of the most effective
methods by which the scheme is executed. The author can best illustrate
it by recounting a bit of his own experience:
In a certain western town once resided a man whom we may call Mr.
X—--, who had an intimate friend—a man of some means—who
will be referred to in this connection as Mr. Y——. Mr. X—— conceived
the idea of winning some money from his friend, and appealed to me to
assist him in the enterprise. At that period of my life I was little troubled
with qualms of conscience, and I lent a willing ear to the suggestion. I
went to the city in question, and in due course was introduced to Mr.
Y—— by Mr. X—— as a verdant sort of an individual, almost too green
to be attractive to a bovine quadruped, but with plenty of money. Mr.
X—— proposed to his friend that they should engage me in a little game
of “draw;” that he, Y——, should sit behind me and “tip off” my hand, a
knowledge of which was certain to enable X—— to win all my cash.
Mr. Y—— was nothing loth, and readily consented to become a party to
a transaction which was, on its face, a bold scheme of fraud. Undoubtedly
he was a “sucker,” but it is a question whether sympathy would
not be wasted upon him.
The plan worked admirably. X—— and myself met at a pre-arranged
“trysting-place,” and sat down to play poker. Y—— dropped in and
took a seat where he could over-look my hand. A “cold deck” had been
prepared—need I say by whom?—and after I had lost a few trifling stakes
X—— proceeded to “ring it in” on me, in accordance with his previous
understanding. Regarding the operation from a “professional” standpoint,
I may say that I never saw a trick more clumsily performed. Had I
been, as Y—— supposed, a mere tyro, I could hardly have failed to detect
it, so bunglingly was it done. However, I preserved a stolid demeanor,
and proceeded to examine my hand. I found a pair of queens with three
nines. Mr. X—— had a “full”—three jacks and a pair of tens. Of
course this latter was a strong hand. He bet; I promptly “raised” him
one thousand dollars, putting the money on the table. Naturally, he
professed to regard my “raise” as a mere “bluff,” and asked his friend,
.bn 245.png
.pn +1
Y——, to lend him enough money to “see” me. Y—— rose from his
chair, and, walking around the table, looked at X——’s hand. Seeing a
“full house,” with jacks at the head, as against a smaller one, “nine full,”
he willingly loaned the money. With a tolerable simulation of tremulous
excitement, Mr. X—— contrived to display his cards. I promptly called
for two cards, discarding a like number, and received, as I knew I should,
two queens, thus securing “four of a kind,” which always wins against
a “full.” The reader who has perused the explanation of the fair game,
as given above, will, of course, perceive that in his intense anxiety to win
a dishonest $500, Mr. Y—— had overlooked my right to “draw,” although
he was satisfied that on the hand which he had seen me hold, I was morally
certain to be content with the cards which I had. Yet, cupidity often
over-reaches itself in a similar way.
Of course I won and pocketed the stakes, although, in justice to myself,
I may add that I divided my winnings fairly with Mr. X——, who
received exactly one-half of the money out of which his friend had been
cheated.
If the inexperienced, unsophisticated reader will carefully peruse the
foregoing paragraphs, he will have but little difficulty in reaching the conclusion
that playing poker is about as hazardous as “encountering the
tiger in his lair.”
.pm sectionhead 'STUD POKER.'
Another variety of poker in great favor among the gambling fraternity
is called “stud poker,” a stud poker table being now considered a necessary
adjunct to every first-class gambling house. The necessary outfit
for the game consists of checks, cards and a table large enough to seat 10
or 12 persons. Regular dealers are employed and usually four or five
“pluggers” (by which term are designated men who play for the house
and with money belonging to the proprietors). The game is very simple,
and any one acquainted with the value of draw poker can play, and lose
his money as easily and rapidly as he could possibly desire. The game
may be illustrated as follows: Suppose four persons, whom we will designate
as A, B, C and D, sit down to play. In some games, in fact usually,
each player puts up one check as an ante. This having been done, the
dealer deals the first card, face downward, to each player, beginning with
the one who sits immediately on his (the dealer’s) left; another card is
then dealt around with the face exposed, as must also be the other three
cards in case a hand of five is dealt. Let us suppose that A’s exposed
card is an ace, B’s a queen, C’s a nine spot, and D’s a ten. It is then A’s
first bet because he has the highest card in sight. He can wager any
amount he chooses, and the others can throw away their cards or “stay
in,” by putting up an equal stake to that of A’s. If B, C and D should
throw down their cards, the checks in the “pot” belong to A, and the
.bn 246.png
.pn +1
dealer shuffling, begins another deal. Should either B, C or D “see” A’s
bet or “raise” him, the dealer, deals off another card, face upward,
when the player who has the highest cards in sight, has another opportunity
to “pass” or bet, while the others have the choice of throwing
away their cards or “seeing” the bet, and so on until five cards are
dealt, when the players must guess at each other’s buried card, or “hole
card” as it is technically called.
Sometimes at stud poker an instrument known as “The Buck” is
used. This is employed where all the players do not “ante.” Any article
may be used for this purpose. Sometimes an ivory chip with a string
running through it; sometimes a circular piece of leather, its material and
form are unimportant. It passes in rotation, one to another, the player
in front of whom it is placed being required to “ante” a chip and receiving
the first card dealt. The game then proceeds as already described.
The chances for “crooked work” at this game are legion. In a word
nearly every fraudulent device employed in “draw” poker may be utilized
in “stud” poker. “Stocking,” “palming,” “holding out,” “false
cuts,” “paper,” “partnerships,” etc., etc., are just as useful in one case
as in the other.
.pm sectionhead 'INCIDENTS AND REMINISCENCES.'
The vicissitudes of the life of a professional gambler are numerous
and shifting, and perhaps the ups and downs of a poker player’s career
are as varying as those which attend the checkered experience of any
other description of gambler.
I remember some rather startling experiences of my own in this
direction. I was once traveling in partnership with a man named
Enyert. At a town in Missouri we fell in with a mule-buyer named
Brown. Enyert was cursed with one of the most violent tempers that
falls to the lot of man. So also was Brown. Both of them were known
as “dangerous” men, i. e., ready with the pistol. I was dealing marked
cards and my knowledge of Brown’s character made me extremely nervous.
I knew that if he detected any cheating my life would be exacted
as a forfeit. An expert marked card player always needs his wits, and
my nervousness prevented me from using mine. On the other hand, I
knew that if my partner (Enyert) did not win he would accuse me of
“throwing him off” to Brown, i. e., of playing in collusion with the
latter, in which case I was quite as likely to be shot by him. To use
a slang expression, I was too badly “rattled” to be of any use as a
dealer and brought the game to a close as soon as possible.
This man Enyert shot the son of the Mayor of Ottumwa, familiarly
known as “Billy” Orr, and would, on one occasion, have carved up my
anatomy with a bowie knife, had I not dissuaded him by showing him
.bn 247.png
.pn +1
the muzzle of a six-chambered navy revolver. Brown’s son inherited his
father’s disposition. Having some trouble with his wife’s parents, he
emptied both barrels of a shotgun into them, killing Dr. Parish, his
father-in-law, and seriously wounding the Doctor’s wife. He was tried,
convicted, and sentenced to be hanged. His wife visited him in his cell
and contrived to convey to him, secretly, a dose of poison. They
mutually agreed to end their lives at an appointed time. The hour fixed
fell in the night preceding his execution. When it arrived the woman
blew out her brains with a pistol, but Brown lacked the physical courage
to carry out his part of the contract, and was publicly hanged on the following
day after making an impassioned appeal to the crowd in behalf of
his son. He and his devoted wife were buried in the same grave.
I was once playing marked cards with a Boston “drummer,” whose
name need not be mentioned. At the time I had a partner. I had instructed
the traveling man in the art of reading the cards by their backs and proposed
to him that I would “throw off” a “sucker” to him. He assented,
and I introduced my partner. We practised the same game which we
had worked together many times before. I began to “hold out” cards
and did it so clumsily that any one might detect it. My partner waxed
furious at the fraud and I was promptly “barred out,” leaving the drummer
and my confederate to play single handed, which was precisely what
we wanted. The commercial traveler rose from the table a loser to the
amount of $400. I condoled with him; and inasmuch as we were supposed
to be acting in unison probably I ought to have stood half the loss
but I still owe him my share.
One more narrative of my experience with marked cards, and I have
done. While traveling in partnership with a man named Sam Martin,
whom I have mentioned in my autobiography, we were going down the
Mississippi in a steamboat. Martin had placed a number of packs of
marked cards with the bar-keeper, with instructions to “ring them in,”
that is, to sell them to customers asking for playing cards. We wandered
about the boat, separately, looking for victims. At length I formed the
acquaintance of a tall, handsome man, who suggested a game of euchre
for the cigars. We had not played long when the stranger proposed
poker for a small ante. I said that I was not accustomed to playing for
money, but that if he would promise not to expose me if I lost I would
chance a few dollars. Martin was in the cabin waiting for me to give him
a signal to approach. On receiving it he drew near the table and I
accosted him with: “Well, stranger, will you join us in a game for a
small ante?” He answered that he would if my friend had no objections,
although it was near his bed time. We played a few games and quit
losers. We knew that our “mark” was going to Memphis, and that we
would have an abundance of time in which to win our money back. The
.bn 248.png
.pn +1
next morning we resumed play. I lost fifty dollars (which of course was
won by Martin), and said that I would have to withdraw from the game
unless they would consent to place stakes against a draft. [In those days
I always traveled with a liberal supply of worthless ] I left the
table and Martin and the stranger (who gave his name as Walton) played
single-handed, which was precisely what the former wanted. They were
using the marked cards which my partner had placed with the bar-keeper.
It was not long before Martin had won all the stranger’s money—some
$800—besides a valuable gold watch and chain. At the conclusion of the
game the winner invited his dupe to take a drink at the bar, which invitation
was accepted. As they were drinking Walton looked at Martin and
said: “You are a very lucky man. I believe that you might fall
overboard without getting wet, and I certainly should expect to see
your body floating up stream. You have all my money, and I don’t
mind telling you, now, that I was cheating all the time. I was ‘holding
out’ and playing the ‘double discard’ from the beginning, and I don’t
see how you managed to come out ahead.” “Well,” said Martin, “since
you have been so frank I will be equally so. I am an expert marked-card
player, and each pack that we played with was one of mine. I knew that
you were cheating, but didn’t care. My ‘percentage’ was too strong for
you. Here is your watch and chain and fifty dollars for a ‘stake.’ But
I can tell you right here that you won’t ever have any show against an
artist who can read your hand at sight, and remember it.” And there
is no doubt that “Sam” was right. Yet if an accomplished card sharp
like Walton can be thus taken in, even while practicing his professional
tricks, what possible chance remains to a greenhorn?
.il fn=i_242.jpg w=250px ew=50% alt='card game'
.bn 249.png
.pn +1
.pm chaphead 'CHAPTER IV.' 'SHORT GAMES.' chap4
.sp 2
The name “short” games is applied among gamblers to those which
require comparatively little time in which to determine the issue of the
hazard. In the present chapter, those best known and most commonly
played in gaming houses will be described and the methods of trickery
employed by those who conduct them will be pointed out.
Chief among games of this description are “rouge et noir,” “roulette,”
“keno” and “rolling faro.” These will be taken up in the order
indicated.
.hr 15%
.pm sectionhead 'ROUGE ET NOIR.'
As played in this country, this game differs materially from the mode
of playing in vogue on the continent of Europe. In foreign gaming
houses—particularly at the more famous resorts, such as Monte Carlo or
Baden-Baden—the game is probably conducted fairly. In other words,
the proprietors are satisfied with the revenue which they can derive from
the legitimate percentage which accrues in their favor under the operation
of the ordinary laws of chance. In
this country, however, not only is the
method of play vastly simplified, but
it has degenerated into a mere scheme
of robbery. The players are utterly
at the mercy of the manipulators of
the machine.
.il fn=i_243.jpg w=225px ew=45% alt='rouge et noir layout' align=l
The game is always played with the
adjunct of a “lay-out,” which is
depicted in the accompanying cut.
The outer line, as shown in the illustration,
represents the outer edge of
the table, which is covered with a
green cloth. The middle line serves
no special purpose, but adds one more
striking feature to the device. The
inner line serves to mark off that portion
.bn 250.png
.pn +1
of the table on which are depicted the representation of the four
jacks found in every pack of cards. At the two ends of the table and on
the right hand side are blank spaces. Those at the ends are colored—the
one at the top red, the one at the bottom black. The space on the right
hand side is for the placing of wagers.
Any number of persons may play.
Bets may be made in either one of the four ways—on the red; on
the black; on either jack, or on any one of the four jacks. In the two
cases first mentioned the bettor places his wager on the color which he
selects. If he wishes to bet on any particular jack (that of hearts, clubs,
diamonds or spades), he lays his money on that one which he chooses.
If he prefers to bet that some jack (without indicating which) will win,
he lays his venture upon the blank space at the right hand side of the
table, as shown in the diagram.
If he bets on the winning color, the bank pays him an amount equal
to the sum staked, which latter, of course, he receives back. If he selects
a particular jack and the one on which he has placed his wager happens
to win, his stake is returned to him, together with an increment of ten
times the amount. If he places his wager on the blank space to the right
he is understood to have bet that some one of the four jacks will win, and
if his hazard prove successful, his gains are measured by a sum twice that
of his original bet.
The bets having all been made and placed, the play commences. The
banker places a full pack (fifty-two cards) in a dealing box, similar to
those used in playing “faro,” which have been already described, but
with this variation: In “faro” the cards are inserted and dealt face
uppermost, the opening being large enough to afford a clear view of the
card; in rouge et noir they are inserted and dealt face downward, and the
in the box is only large enough to permit the dealer to run them
off readily with the index and second fingers of the left hand.
The first two cards, after being withdrawn from the box, are laid
upon the table, faces downward, and the third is turned over. This constitutes
a “run,” and the gains or losses of the players are determined by
the color (and sometimes the denomination) of the third card. If it
happens to be red the bank pays all bets placed on the space at the upper
end of the table, marked “red,” and gathers in all other wagers placed
upon the table. If it chance to be a jack, and any player has placed his
money on the representation of that particular jack upon the “lay-out,”
the fortunate individual wins ten times the amount which he ventured.
If a player has bet upon “jacks,” without naming any particular one—placing
his money in the space at the right hand side of the table—and a
jack of any suit is turned up, he is given, as his winnings, double the
amount of his wager.
.bn 251.png
.pn +1
On the other hand, if the bettor has laid his stake either upon “jacks”
or on any particular jack, and no jack turns up, he loses.
Even when fairly played, the chances in favor of the bank are large
enough to satisfy any banker whose greed for gain is not abnormal. But
as in all other games, the rapacious sharks who operate it are not satisfied
with even the most extraordinary percentage of chances. What they
seek is absolute certainty, and in the game of rouge et noir, as conducted
even in so-called “square” houses, they have contrived to secure it.
In dealing the cards, resort is had to many of the same tortuous
devices which are employed in “faro,” an explanation of which may be
found in the chapter devoted to that game.
“Faked” boxes, similar in construction to those used in “faro,” are
employed, and the cards are “stripped” and “sanded” as in that game.
The “strippers,” however, are arranged on a somewhat different principle.
The red and black cards having been separated so that the pack
shall be divided into two lots, one-half being red and the other black,
the narrower ends of the two colors are placed opposite each other. The
dealer then takes the red cards in one hand and the black in the other.
Through long practice he is able to put the two packs of cards together in
such a way that a card of one color shall rest directly upon a card of the
opposite color all the way through the pack. The cards are then pressed
together, so that the entire pack shall lie, one card upon the other. The
reader will perceive that, owing to the use of the “strippers,” the end of
each card is a trifle narrower than the end of the one directly above it.
The manipulation of the pack in the box is practiced in the same
way as has been already explained under “faro.” The result of this
arrangement of cards is that the dealer knows perfectly well the color
of the card under his hand at any given moment. If he considers it
worth his while to change the color before exposing the card to the view
of the players, the “sanding” and “stripping” of the cards, in connection
with the “faked” box, enables him to draw two cards instead of one
through the aperture, thus reversing the run of the colors.
The usual method in which bets are made upon this game is as
follows:
A player having laid a wager on either the black or red, and
having lost, naturally supposes that if he suffers his money to lie upon
the table long enough, the color on which he has made his bet must win
before the entire pack shall have been run out of the box. Accordingly,
if he has a wager of one dollar on the black and the first run shows that
he has lost, he doubles his stake and awaits the result of the second run.
If he finds he has lost again, he doubles his stake once more, and
continues playing in this manner until the entire pack has been run out
.bn 252.png
.pn +1
of the box. If he is a loser when all the cards have been dealt, he may,
if he choose, continue to double his stake as long as his funds will permit.
The reader can scarcely fail to perceive how soon this sort of play
will bankrupt the unsophisticated gamester. Every time he doubles his
stake he is offering the bank enormous odds. It requires a very short
time, for a bet of one dollar under such circumstances, to run up to a
wager of $128, $256, $512, etc. As a matter of fact, the player, under
such circumstances, is offering the bank odds amounting, sometimes
$4,000 to one. Thus, if a player starts in, with a wager of one dollar,
and continues to double it as he loses until he has risked $100,000 or
more, he is still actually betting that enormous sum that he will eventually
win the trifling sum of one dollar. If he should continue to play
for seventy-two consecutive hours on the same principle, and the doubling
of his stake run up into the millions, all that he could possibly hope to
win at the close of the play would be a dollar.
But there is another device known to the manipulators of this game
which is even a more bare-faced robbery than the use of “strippers” and
“faked” boxes. When a “soft mark” is playing at the table and has
repeatedly doubled his stake, and begins to see the bottom of the pile of
money which he has brought with him, he very frequently asks the dealer
how long he will be permitted this mode of play. The dealer, after
estimating in his own mind the amount of money which the dupe may
have in his possession, tells him that the doubling must quit on either
the second or third run. As soon as the proprietors are satisfied that the
unfortunate victim has staked his all, the dealer turns a jack, and remarks
that “this is the only percentage that the bank has,” whereupon he at
once gathers in the player’s entire stake without any sign of shame or
compunction of conscience. Should the player manifest any unwillingness
to continue doubling his wager, the banker informs him that if he loses
at the end, his money will be returned to him, less five per cent. Relying
upon this assurance, and always hoping that his luck will turn, the poor
fool keeps on, only to be confronted at the end by the turning of a jack and
to be assured that this entire venture has been incontinently swept away.
“Steerers” or “ropers” are invariably employed by the proprietors
of this game. Their duty is to select victims and guide them into the
resort where this knavery is carried on. They are paid the usual percentage
allowed “cappers;” that is, forty-five per cent, of the bank’s
winnings from the dupe whom they may allure.
While a rouge et table is considered a necessary adjunct to the
outfit of every American gaming house, the game is not so popular in
this country as in Europe nor is the method of play precisely the same
in both continents. An explanation of the devices used in the old world
may be found in #Part I:pt1#.
.bn 253.png
.pn +1
.pm sectionhead 'ROULETTE.'
.il fn=i_247.jpg w=225px ew=40% alt='roulette' align=l
Roulette, as will be seen from the illustration, is played upon a table
in the form of an oblong square, covered with green cloth, at one end of
which is a round cavity, around the sides of which, equi-distant one from
the other, are arranged several metal bands—usually of copper—which,
commencing at the top, descend to the extremity of the machine. The
cavity is movable, and in its centre is a circular bottom containing thirty-nine
holes to which the bands are
attached, and upon which are
painted, alternately, in black and
red, thirty-six numbers, running
from 1 to 36, besides (0), a (00),
and a picture of an eagle or the word
itself printed thereon. In the middle
of the cavity, are three or four
little metal prongs, centering at
“D,” which are used in imparting
a rotary motion to the bottom. The
revolution of the ball is checked by
slender metal plates (indicated on
the diagram by the letter “B”)
about two inches in length and
rising about one-quarter of an inch
above the lower surface.
The remainder of the table is laid
out as shown in the cut. The figures
are arranged in three columns,
and above them in two divisions
nearest the Roulette wheel, are
single and double 00 respectively.
The figures are painted black or
red, to agree with the corresponding
color of the numbers on the
wheel. At the head of each column
there is a compartment for placing
a stake which is made on the column.
On each side of the foot of
the columns of figures are three
spaces, each of which contains the
number twelve. These are known,
respectively, as the 1st, 2nd and 3rd
twelves. Stakes placed on the first
.bn 254.png
.pn +1
space are considered to be bets on the numbers 1 to 12; the second space
is for bets on numbers 13 to 24; the third space for numbers 25 to 36, all
inclusive.
The space on either side of the entire length of the columns is divided
into three parts. The upper left hand division is for bets on numbers 1
to 18; the corresponding right hand division is for numbers 19 to 36. The
large division in the middle of the left hand side, lettered “B” in the illustration,
is for bets on the black; the similar one upon the right, marked
is for wagers on the red.
The lower division on the left hand is for bets on even numbers; the
division opposite on the right is for odd numbers.
There is a banker and several assistants; an unlimited number of
persons may play.
One of the assistants sets the machine in motion, at the same instant
throwing an ivory ball into the cavity in the opposite direction to the
movement which he has given to the movable bottom. The ball makes
several revolutions with great rapidity until its momentum being
exhausted, it falls into one of the thirty-nine holes formed by the copper
bands. It is the hole into which the ball falls that determines the gain or
loss of the numerous chances which this game affords to players.
If the reader will examine the cut showing the lay-out, he will perceive
that there are numerous chances to be played for: Single and double
(0); the “eagle;” black and red; the three columns; the first and last
of the numbers, respectively, consists of 1 to 18, and 19 to 36 inclusive;
the three 12’s, consist of 1 to 12, 13 to 24 and 25 to 36; odds and
even; and lastly, the numbers, either single or in small groups.
Stakes bet on black or red; the first or last half of the numbers; also
on odd and even, are called single stakes. Stakes on either of the three
12’s, or on either of the three columns, win double the amount. Stakes
on any single number, or on either of the (0’s), or the eagle, are paid
thirty-five times their amount if they are successful.
Bets may be made on groups of not over six consecutive numbers,
and win as many times the amount of the stakes as the grouping is contained
in thirty-four, omitting all fractions; so that a bet on any four
designated consecutive numbers would win eight times the amount of the
stake, provided any one of these numbers comes out.
It has already been stated that the space occupied by thirty-six numbers
are all either red or black; and as the numbers are equally divided
between the colors eighteen to each, a stake on either color is a single bet.
The 0’s and the eagle are painted green, and if a zero or eagle turns up,
bets on either black or red are lost by the players.
It is only of late years that the majority of roulette wheels contain a
picture of an eagle, a similar picture being painted upon the cloth. Bets
on the eagle, if won by the player, are paid in the ratio of 35 to 1.
.bn 255.png
.pn +1
The legitimate percentage of chances in favor of the bank in this game
is enormous. Out of thirty nine chances, the bank runs eighteen of losing
and has twenty-one of winning, or three additional chances in its favor,
which is equivalent to fully 5½ per cent. in favor of the bank in all cases,
even where a bet is placed upon either of the zeros or the eagle. In the
latter case, the bet on either zero or on the eagle is paid 35 to 1, the same
as on any single number.
Here the bank has thirty-five chances out of thirty-nine of winning,
and only one of losing, or four more chances in its favor than the payments
warrant, thus yielding the same 5½ per cent.
It follows that the odds against the players in the various chances
may be expressed as follows:
.ta l:30 l:5 l:5 w=70%
Upon a single number, | 37 | to 1
Upon any twelve numbers, | 13 | to 6
Upon two numbers, | 18 | to 1
Upon three numbers, | 11⅔ | to 1
Upon four numbers, | 17 | to 2
Upon six numbers, | 16 | to 3
Upon odd or even, red or black,| 10 | to 9
.ta-
In the case of a bet on the first or last eighteen numbers, the odds are
ten to nine, the same as on odd or even, or red or black.
When, however, a stake is laid on all the numbers, and the bank only
pays the winner thirty-five times his stake, it clears four; thus, supposing
thirty-nine dollars to be a stake, and that the ball is thrown twice in a
minute, the gain of the bank, without incurring the slightest risk, would
be eight dollars per minute, or $480 per hour. Although, in whatever
way a player may bet, the chances are always in favor of the bank, still
the latter’s risk varies in proportion to the number of chances which are
not filled up. To illustrate, if only ten numbers are filled, and the ball
were to enter one of them, the bank would, in that case, lose thirty-four
dollars, and only win eight; whereas, when all the numbers are filled, it
wins four without risking a cent.
From what has been said, as to the chances in favor of the bank, it
would seem to be hardly necessary to use any additional means of swindling,
inasmuch as the percentage in its favor is so large that the game is
very seldom beaten, even if “played on the square.” An old gambler
once remarked in my presence, that the percentage of the game was forty
per cent. worse than stealing. However, despite this fact, the gambler is
not satisfied, and has succeeded in devising schemes, whereby he may
win every bet made against him, if he sees fit.
The first method of cheating which I will describe, is as follows:
The roulette is manufactured for the purpose, the machinery being
entirely concealed from view. The gambler who manages the game can
.bn 256.png
.pn +1
cause the ball (A) to fall in a red or black number, as he may think proper.
After throwing the ball he watches it closely, and if it should fall in the
red, when he wished it to go into the black, while still revolving, its
course can be quickly changed to the desired color. This is accomplished
by means of a lever attached to the circular wheel, and connecting with
one of the legs of the roulette. This leg has the same appearance as
others, but is a trifle shorter, not quite touching the table on which the
roulette rests. The gambler has only to touch this leg while the wheel is
revolving, and in a second the ball is changed from one color to another,
as he may prefer. In fact, so quickly can the ball be changed, that it is
difficult to detect the motion after one has been shown how it is managed,
unless the wheel is turned slowly. This is one of the most ingenious contrivances
in use.
There is yet another kind of roulette, which is made in the following
manner: One-half of the small pieces of metal which form the pockets for
the ball are made a trifle longer than the others, lettered on the diagram
E E E. After the stakes have been placed, if the proprietor wishes the
ball to fall in a red color, it is necessary for him merely to throw the ball
around to the right hand, and if he wishes it to fall in the black, he casts
the ball toward the left. The players may observe that he throws the
ball in a different direction on different occasions, but the action appears
to be so trivial that it excites no suspicion.
Another fraudulent contrivance used in playing this game consists in
the gambler’s having two centers to a wheel, apparently identical, one of
which, however, is “square” and the other “faked.” This device is
known to the members of “the profession” as the “double center.” The
“square” wheel is used at first, and, at an opportune moment, the
“fake” is substituted, after which the sharper has everything his own
way. This wheel is operated on very much the same principle as the
“needle wheel,” for the construction of which the reader is referred to the
chapter containing a description of that device. A system of levers radiating
from the centre of the apparatus is operated by a rod terminating
at the edge of the table. By bringing to bear the requisite pressure, these
levers cause fine needle points (lettered C C C on the diagram) to rise
through the cloth, one coming up in front of each alternate compartment
on the rim, thus obstructing the entry of the ball and causing its course
to be so changed that it shall fall into one of the next adjacent divisions,
as in the case of the “needle wheel” above referred to.
It is easily perceived that the players can have no possible chance
when playing against such roulettes as these, and there is a large number
of them in use all over the country.
.bn 257.png
.pn +1
.pm sectionhead 'KENO.'
This game is a favorite one with nearly all non-professional gamblers,
not only because the risk of loss involved is not large, but also because
of the popular impression that it is always played “on the square.” As
a matter of fact, it usually is conducted fairly, although, as will be
explained, sometimes bare-faced swindling is resorted to by the proprietors.
.il fn=i_251.jpg w=250px ew=50% align=l alt='keno'
The game very closely resembles
the children’s pastime of
“lotto.” Any number of persons
may play. Each one desiring
to participate in the game
buys a card on which are three
horizontal rows of five numbers
each, arranged altogether without
regularity. The price paid for a
card is commonly twenty-five
cents, although sometimes the
stakes are considerably higher.
None of the cards contain a
higher number than ninety-nine.
The conductor of the game—who
is known as the “roller”—takes
his position, usually upon a
raised platform, in full view of the players. Before him is placed a globe
containing ninety-nine balls, numbered consecutively from one to ninety-nine,
to correspond with the figures on the players’ cards. The balls having
been thoroughly mixed, the “roller” presses a spring at the bottom of
the globe, opening an aperture just large enough to permit one ball to
drop at a time. As soon as the first one has fallen, the aperture is closed
and the “roller,” in a loud voice, calls out the number inscribed upon it.
If a player finds the number in either of the three horizontal rows on his
card he places a button over it. When any player has all five, numbers
in any one of his rows thus called out, he exclaims “keno,” after which
the “roller” takes no more balls from the globe. His card is then
inspected by one of the “collectors”—of whom there are usually two—and
if his tally is correct he is given the entire amount of money paid by
all the players (which is called “the pot”) less a discount of fifteen per
cent., which is retained by “the house” as its “percentage.” Thus, if
there are a hundred players, each of whom has paid twenty-five cents for
a card, the winner receives twenty-one dollars and twenty-five cents,
the bank reserving to itself three dollars and seventy-five cents as
“percentage.”
.bn 258.png
.pn +1
Matters having been thus arranged, fresh stakes are advanced by
those wishing to play again, the balls put in the globe and the game is
resumed.
It may be readily seen that the “bank” incurs no risk whatever, and
its sure percentage on the stakes is large enough to satisfy the cupidity of
most gamblers. Fortunes have been won by the proprietors of these
games, one concern alone in St. Louis having made $190,000 thereby.
Still, the instinct to cheat is strong in the breast of the professional
sharper; and sometimes a confederate of the proprietor plays in the game
and wins the “pot,” through the co-operation of the “roller.” The
latter withholds from the globe several balls, which he substitutes, from
time to time, for the ones which he should have taken from the globe.
The numbers on these withheld and substituted balls correspond to those
necessary to fill out one of the horizontal rows on the confederate’s card
and the latter is thus enabled win through fraud.
.pm sectionhead 'ROLLING FARO.'
This game is similar in its general principles to those of the “squeeze
spindle,” “needle wheel,” and “corona,” which have already been
described. It is a favorite game upon fair-grounds, as are the others, but
it is frequently found in resorts which are known as “first-class” gambling
houses. There is scarcely a “hell” in the city of Chicago in which
this apparatus cannot be found. This circumstance, in itself, affords a
striking commentary upon the principles
which underlie the management
of what the uninitiated are
wont to call “square houses.”
.il fn=i_252.jpg w=250px ew=50% alt='rolling faro' align=l
The accompanying cut shows the
device used in playing the game,
not only as it appears to the outsider,
but also with the “fake”
element exposed. A circular ring
of wood, about three inches broad,
is attached to a square board which
is placed upon a table. At four
points in the ring, equi-distant from
each other, are the painted representations
of four jacks. Between each pair of jacks are eight blank
spaces, each one of which is usually numbered, the numbers running
from one to thirty-two, consecutively. Sometimes ordinary playing cards
.bn 259.png
.pn +1
are substituted for the numbers. Each of the four blocks of numbers is
painted a distinct and separate color. In the centre of the inner circle
is placed a metal arrow, having a pointed quill attached to the smaller
end, the whole swinging upon a central pivot. Prices are placed at intervals
upon the numbered squares. When the game is played at gambling
houses, the only prizes offered are sums of money, varying in amount, and
between these the numbers are left blank. When the device is operated
upon a fair-ground, there are no blanks, articles of jewelry of trifling
value being placed between the money prizes.
The mode of play is usually different upon fair-grounds from that
which is followed in the regular gaming houses. In the former case,
players pay twenty-five cents each for the privilege of swinging the
arrow, and take the prize opposite the quill point when it stops revolving.
At regular gaming houses players place their stakes upon whatever number
or color they may select, and if they win the bank pays them the
amount due them. The bets may be made either upon any one of the
four jacks or on either of the four colors. If the player stakes his money
upon a jack and wins, the proprietor pays him ten times the amount of
his stake. If he lays his wager upon any given color,—if he is playing
upon a fair-ground,—he receives simply his original stake, together with
an equal sum. If, however, he is playing in a house, and names the
lucky color, he receives two for one.
The chances having been bought or the bets laid, some one—either
one of the players, or the proprietor, or a bystander—sets the arrow in
motion. When the pointer comes to rest, if any player has laid his bet
upon the number at which it stops, he receives either the prize thereon
placed or the amount of his winnings in cash.
The “fake” element, as has been said, is shown in the illustration.
There is a wire rod running from points B and C to the central pivot. As
in the “squeeze spindle,” they are sunk into the table and concealed by
the cloth covering. That which runs to point B is manipulated by pressure
with the hand; that which terminates at point C is operated by
pressure from the hip. When the operator pushes against either of these
rods, he checks the revolution of the arrow by creating friction at the
pivot, and brings the pointer to a standstill at any part of the circle which
he may desire.
Very little reflection is necessary to show the reader how great is the
legitimate percentage in favor of the bank, even were this game played
without any resort to trickery. There are four colors and four jacks
upon which a player may bet. It follows that the odds are seven to one
in favor of the house against any individual player naming the winning
color or card. And when to this percentage against the players
there is added the absolute certainty of winning which the bank gains
.bn 260.png
.pn +1
through the operation of the fraudulent device above explained, it is apparent
that no one can possibly win except through the consent of the proprietor
of the machine.
A rather striking illustration of the utter lack of good faith which
characterizes gamblers in their dealings with one another, and their general
moral perversity is furnished in the following narrative, for the truth
of which the author vouches. Two sharpers, each with a rolling
faro outfit were traveling on a Missouri river steamboat. The year was
18—, and the season was autumn, when county fairs were at full blast
and men of that ilk were reaping a rich harvest. Both men were destined
for the same point, and each had been anxious to secure a monopoly of
the “privilege” of running his machine at the fair in question. One of
them discovered that his business rival had forestalled him, and that—to
use a —“his cake was dough.” The gambler who had
succeeded in obtaining his license retired early, serenely confident that the
following day would witness not only the discomfiture of his rival but
also his own success. But he had reckoned without his host. Scarcely
had he fallen asleep before the form of his wily antagonist might have
been seen prowling among the freight upon the main deck. Stealthily
he moved in and out among the piles of stuff until he discovered the
wheel of the licensed monopolist. Then followed a dull, grating sound,
as of some one drawing a heavy box across a floor; then came a sudden
splash, and to this succeeded silence. The gambling machine of the enterprising
gamester who had secured the license, had sunk beneath the
waters of the Mississippi, to be seen no more by mortal eyes. The next
morning there was a brief season of pandemonium. The situation, however,
was simple. There was but one fair, one license and one outfit,
yet there were two gamblers. One of them had a license, but no paraphernalia;
the other had paraphernalia, but no license. There was but one
solution; the two found themselves compelled to “pool their issues.”
In other words, the man who had thrown his rival’s wheel overboard
forced the man who had owned it to divide his profits with him in consideration
of being permitted to use the only wheel available.
The author was himself present at the fair where these two men
operated the wheel to which reference has been made. On the way back
a fearful scene was witnessed. A quarrel over “privileges” had arisen
on the grounds and was continued on the boat. A gambler familiarly
known as “Curley” the hog driver, a bulldozer, when heated by passion
and liquor, was raising a terrible disturbance when another sporting man,
Sherman Thirston, interfered to restrain him from mischief. “Curley”
drew his revolver and fired three shots at Thirston, one breaking a spittoon
which he held in front of him, and one grazing Lone Wolf’s forehead.
Thirston advanced upon “Curley” and disarmed him.
.bn 261.png
.pn +1
.pm sectionhead 'HIGH BALL POKER.'
This game derives its name from the fact that balls are used instead
of cards, and that bets may be “raised” as in poker. In fact, “bluff”
is resorted to in both games in about the same ratio. The method of play
is exceedingly simple. All that is necessary is a cloth-covered table
(usually about six feet long by three and one-half feet broad), a leather
bottle, one hundred wooden or ivory balls, numbered from one to one
hundred consecutively, and some “chips.” The latter are sold to the
players by the proprietor at five or ten cents each. Those wishing to
indulge in the game put down their “ante,” as in straight or draw poker.
The “ante” is usually one chip. The person conducting the game then
takes the bottle, in which the balls have been placed, in his hand, and
throws them from its open mouth, one to each player. The latter then
examine the little spheres which they have received and either forfeit the
chips which they have already laid down or make their bets in the same
manner as in playing poker. Precisely the same tactics are employed in
both games. When the “call” is made the player holding the ball on
which is inscribed the highest number wins the bet, by which is meant
all the stakes which have been placed upon the table.
This is a favorite game in many gambling houses, especially those of
an inferior class. The “house” always takes a percentage, or “rake-off,”
as it is frequently called. This percentage consists of either one or two
chips, as may be agreed upon. It follows that the proprietors run no
risk, being absolutely certain of winning something each time that the
balls are thrown. In “skin” gambling houses, however, the owners are
not content with this percentage of profit. A “capper” is called into
the game, who usually sits at the end of the table toward the banker’s
left hand. The latter finds it necessary to be very cautious in collecting
the balls from the players, lest some one who had received a high number
might withhold it in order to bet upon it on the next throw. Accordingly,
he examines each ball as it is returned to him. This affords him ample
opportunity for holding out some high number in his hand, which he
throws to his confederate the next time, thereby enabling him to bet with
approximate certainty of winning everything in sight. These cappers
are commonly known as “pluggers,” and are paid a stated per diem,
being looked upon as regular employes.
.bn 262.png
.pn +1
.pm chaphead 'CHAPTER V.' 'VARIOUS CARD GAMES.' chap5
.pm sectionhead '“SEVEN UP,” OR “OLD SLEDGE.”'
The game, sometimes called Old Sledge and Seven-Up, is played
with a full pack of fifty-two cards, which take rank as at Whist—the
Ace being the highest and the Deuce the lowest.
The players cut for deal. The dealer then gives six cards to each
player, three at a time, and turns up the thirteenth, if there be two
players, and the twenty-fifth if there be four. The turn-up is the trump.
The non-dealer then looks at his hand, and determines whether he
will hold it for play, or beg. If he is satisfied with his hand, he says,
“I stand;” but if he is not satisfied with his cards, he says, “I beg,” in
which case the dealer must either suffer his adversary to score one point,
saying, “Take one,” or give each three more cards from the pack, and
then turn up the next card, the seventh, for trumps; if however, the
trump turned up be of the same suit as the first, the dealer must go on,
giving each three cards more, and turning up the seventh, until a change
of suit for turn-up takes place.
After these preliminaries have been settled, if two only are playing,
the non-dealer leads a card, and the dealer plays a card to it; these two
cards constitute a trick.
The player who plays the highest card of the suit led, or trumps,
wins the trick, and has the next lead. The play proceeds in this way
until all the tricks are played.
Each player must follow suit, if he can, unless he chooses to trump.
The points that may be scored are herewith given in their order of
precedence.
High.—The highest trump out; the holder scores one point.
Low.—The lowest trump out; the original holder scores one point,
even if it be taken by his adversary.
Jack.—The Knave of trumps. The winner of the trick containing it
scores one point.
When the Jack is turned up for trump, it counts one point for
the dealer, and in that case takes precedence of every other point in the
score.
.bn 263.png
.pn +1
Game.—The greatest number that in the tricks gained, can be shown
by either party; reckoning for
.ta c:5 l:10 r:6 c:7 c:5 w=75%
Each |Ace | four |towards| game.
” |King | three | ” | ”
” |Queen | two | ” | ”
” |Jack | one | ” | ”
” |Ten | ten | ” | ”
.ta-
The other cards do not count towards game; thus it may happen
that a deal may be played without either party having any score for game,
by reason of holding neither face cards tens.
When the players hold equal numbers, the dealer’s hand scores the
point for game.
One card may count all “fours;” for example, the oldest hand holds
only the jack of the trump suit, and stands his game, the dealer, having
neither trump, ten, ace nor court card, it will follow that the jack will be
at once high, low, jack and game.
The game consists of seven points, and the player who first scores
that number wins the game. If the non-dealer is dissatisfied with his
hand, he may “beg,” i. e., ask the dealer to “give” him one point on his
score. If the latter refuse, he must “run the cards,” by which is meant,
turn down the trump, deal three cards each to his antagonist and himself,
and turn another card. If the latter happen to be of the same suit as that
previously turned, it is turned over, and the “running for trumps” is
continued until some card of a different suit is turned.
In four-handed Seven-up the parties usually decide who shall be
partners by cutting the cards, the two highest and the two lowest playing
together. The four players divide themselves into two sets, each player
sitting opposite his partner, as at whist. The first deal is decided by
cutting the cards, the highest cut having the deal, but afterward it is
taken by each player in rotation.
The dealer and the player on his left only are permitted to look at
their cards, previous to the latter deciding upon his hand, and in case he
begs, the other parties must not raise their cards until the dealer
announces whether he will “give one” or “run the cards” for another
trump.
There can be little question but that the popular game of seven-up
had its origin in the United States, although whether in the East or West
is a question, the answer to which is shrouded in obscurity.
Half a century ago the wild frontiersman of Indiana and Illinois were
accustomed to while away their nights by playing “High, Low, Jack,”
with a greasy pack of cards, upon the head of a whiskey barrel, never
quitting the game until they had consumed the contents of the barrel.
.bn 264.png
.pn +1
Fully as long ago the stalwart lumbermen of Maine sat down upon
improvised seats in the pine woods, and devoted Sunday to the same
amusement. In these early days the game was, if anything, more popular
than at present, for the reason that fewer games of cards were known to
the great masses of players.
Occasionally matches, which might nowadays be euphoniously designated
as tournaments, were held. In the simple language of those
times they were generally referred to as “bouts a keards.” It is probable
that even then more or less fraud was practiced by the players, since
deception seems to have been a prominent characteristic of the human
family since the days of the “fall,” and when cards are played for money
the temptation to cheat seems to be, to a certain class of men, irresistible.
“Wet groceries” were the favorite stakes of the rough Western farmers
and the Eastern lumbermen, yet play was not confined to these. Money
earned by long and patient toil of the hardest sort was piled upon barrel
heads or laid upon the ground, and it is doubtful whether the losers bore
their losses with any more equanimity than do the same class of players
to-day. But it has remained for the blackleg of these latter days to introduce
into the game those finer arts such as the “half stock” and the
“whole stock,” by means of which the unwary are entrapped and the
gullible fleeced. To the untutored minds of the early players to whom
reference has been made, the idea of reading the cards by the back would
have seemed an utter absurdity; but it is true that the farmers and
lumbermen have since grown wiser, through no little bitter experience.
The result has been that the gamblers do not as easily find victims to-day
as they did twenty-five or thirty years ago. This very circumstance shows
the benefit effected by the knowledge, and it is the mission of this work
to spread broadcast throughout the land such knowledge that he who
may be swindled through such artifices as herein described, has only himself
to blame for his folly. Infatuation and ignorance have but a poor
show of success in a contest with chicanery and skill.
Some of the most common, and at the same time most effective
descriptions of fraud practiced in this game will next be concisely
described.
.pm sectionhead '“STRIPPERS.”'
In preparing “strippers,” to be used in seven-up, the blacklegs elects
either three aces or three jacks, which he leaves in the same condition as
that in which they came from the manufacturer. The remainder of the
pack he slightly trims down. In using a pack thus prepared the cheat
takes advantage of his antagonist’s deal by drawing out these three cards
from the pack by their sides, instead of giving the deck a fair, honest cut.
Having drawn them out he throws them upon the top, and as a matter of
course receives them as his own first three cards. If he has the deal himself
.bn 265.png
.pn +1
he “strips” them, that is draws them out of the pack by the sides,
places them on top and throws three cards over them. If his adversary
has cut the pack, the gambler “shifts” the cut, as described in the
chapter relative to poker. Of course his antagonist now receives the
three cards which were thrown on top of the pack, while the sharper
receives the three aces or jacks.
.pm sectionhead '“BRIEFS.”'
The same “brief” is employed in seven-up as in poker. It consists
of one wide card which is drawn out and placed on top of the three cards,—usually
an ace, deuce or jack—which have been previously arranged
together. The object in using this card, as in poker, is to enable their
sharper to cut the pack in such a way as to uncover the prepared hand.
It may be remarked concerning both “stripper” and “briefs” that their
employment is usually more easy of detection than “stocking,” when
practiced by an expert, and for this reason they are not favorite devices
with most of the profession in playing short games, unless their antagonist
be particularly verdant.
.pm sectionhead 'HALF STOCK.'
In this arrangement of the pack the gambler, having first selected a
card of any suit, places above it three others of the same suit. It is a
common practice to select the high (ace) the low (deuce) and the jack;
above these three others are placed. In shuffling the dealer is careful not
to disturb the seven cards thus arranged. Having completed his shuffle,
he offers them to be cut. After the cut he deals, as he should do, from the
remainder of the pack and leaves the cut lying upon the board. The
trump is fairly turned, but as he exposes it the sharper throws it to one
side; he then picks up the cut with his right hand and places it on top of the
remainder of the pack. His antagonist, being engaged in looking at his hand,
naturally fails to observe the order in which the two halves of the pack are
put together. The advantage of this maneuver is that if his adversary
“begs” the dealer runs off to him the three top cards which he had previously
placed together and which, of course, lie on top of the cut, which
is now uppermost in the deck. He himself receives the three best cards
(perhaps the ace, deuce and jack) of the same suit, which, as we have seen,
laid beneath the three upper cards; he then turns a new trump, the seventh
card, which, it will be remembered, was also of the same suit. He now
holds the high, low and jack of the new trump suit and is naturally in a
far better position than his antagonist. Of course the half stock is comparatively
valueless unless his opponent begs. But in the course of a
rubber the latter is reasonably certain to do this often enough to entail a
serious loss upon himself.
.bn 266.png
.pn +1
.pm sectionhead 'THE WHOLE STOCK.'
In a case where the cards have been stocked on the system of the
“whole stock,” it makes not the difference to the sharper whether
his adversary beg or not.
The blackleg who intends to employ this artifice is careful to attempt
it only when there have been but twelve cards dealt from the pack on any
particular hand, for example, when he himself has “stood” on his
antagonist’s deal. In picking up the twelve cards from the table he
selects four cards of some one suit, of course taking care to choose the
highest four which have been played during that hand. Over these four
cards he places the remaining eight, above these again a thirteenth card
of the same suit, which he takes from the pack. Of course, at this
moment the faces of the cards are uppermost. By placing the thirteen
arranged cards on the bottom and turning the pack over in order to
shuffle, the former are brought to the top. In shuffling he takes great
care not to disarrange the prepared thirteen. When his antagonist has
cut, the sharper “shifts” the cut, as in poker, thus restoring the cards to
their original position. The result is, that in dealing, the last three cards
of the original twelve will necessarily fall to himself, and they will of
course be of the same suit as the trump card turned.
.pm sectionhead 'CRIMPING.'
Crimping in all games is practiced on substantially the same principle.
In seven-up the dishonest gamester “crimps,” or bends down, one or
more—even three high cards. Of course it is an artifice which can prove
of advantage to the operator only on his adversary’s deal, in which case
he cuts down to the “crimped” cards, the location of which is perceived
by the bent card slightly raising those above it, from those below. If
only a single ace be crimped, the result is a very heavy percentage of
odds in favor of the sharper.
.pm sectionhead 'MARKING THE EDGES.'
The object of marking the edges of the cards is practically the same
as that of crimping; that is, to enable the blackleg to cut down to any
desired card. The edges of the ace or jacks, or possibly of both, are very
carefully marked with India ink. Cards thus prepared are useful to the
cheat only on his opponent’s deal; but in the latter case he is invariably
able to cut the pack in such a way that he will himself receive one of the
cards thus marked.
.pm sectionhead 'THE HIGH HAND.'
There are two “high hands” in Seven-up, one called the “long
hand,” the other the “short hand.” To run up a “long hand” requires
more time than can usually be obtained by making a seemingly fair deal
.bn 267.png
.pn +1
or turning up a jack or ten-spot. However, thousands of dollars have
been won on this game, as the major hand seems to a tyro a perfectly
sure hand for four points—the fact being that it is a “sure thing” the
other way.
The “long hand” is a device to which professional gamblers
frequently resort, and which often proves highly successful. It is introduced
at a stage of the game where the pack has been “run off” to an
extent sufficient to give each player nine cards. Of course, the perpetration
of the trick presupposes that the pack has been carefully “stocked.”
The player who is to be victimized is given the four court cards, ten-spot
and deuce of some suit, e. g., of spades, together with the kings of the
three other suits. The gambler has dealt himself six of the remaining
spades, and the aces of hearts, diamonds and clubs. He then turns a
spade—let us say the nine spot.
The reader who has mastered the explanation of the game already
given, will comprehend that the dupe is certain of winning three points—the
high, low and jack, and with six trumps and three kings of outside
suits his chances of making “game” are apparently excellent. He is,
therefore, easily induced, even if he does not himself offer, to bet that he
will score four points. Now, mark the issue. The “sucker” inevitably
makes his “high, low and jack,” but when the count is made for game
he finds his reckoning to be 20 (ace 4, king 3, queen 2, jack 1, and ten-spot
10), to his adversary’s 21 (three aces 12, three kings 9, making 21), the
result being the loss of his stake.
The “short hand” at “Seven-up” is a trick to which gamblers
resort at the stage of the game when the score stands 6 to 5 in favor of the
“sucker” and the “professional” has the deal. Six cards having been
dealt to each player, the cheat turns up, let us say, a heart, although the
particular suit is altogether immaterial, provided the pack has been
properly “stocked.” When the greenhorn picks up his cards, he finds
he has the aces of the three other suits. Of course, if he is an average
player he “begs,” i. e., asks his adversary to “give” him one point.
Inasmuch as such a “gift” would make his score seven, and decide the
game in his favor, the gamester refuses. The only course remaining is to
“run for a new trump.” The dupe now feels perfectly sure of winning
the game. He knows that the ace is necessarily “high,” which point
counts first in determining who wins the game; and inasmuch as he is
aware that either hearts, diamonds or clubs must next be the trump, and
he holds the ace of each of these three suits, he “bets his pile” in serene
confidence that he will win. And now comes in the “fine work” of the
sharper. He takes the deck and “runs off” six cards; he then turns up
the seventh, which is always a jack of the suit originally turned, thus
adding one to his own tally, and making the score stand 6 to 6. As the
.bn 268.png
.pn +1
rules forbid the same suit being trump, he has to “run” again. Once
more the seventh card is turned; another jack (of course of another suit)
is exposed: the gambler scores another point for “turning jack,” thus
making his account seven and winning the game, leaving the unlucky
“sucker” to lament the cruel fate which so effectually prevented him
from scoring “high” on either of his three utterly worthless aces.
.pm sectionhead 'HOLDING OUT.'
It is unnecessary to enter into any detailed description of this method
of fraud as practiced in seven-up, for the reason that it has been already
fully explained in treating of poker. The most common means of practicing
this cheat is the employment of the “bug.”
It is, however, for two objects; first to secrete an ace, ten, jack or
deuce with a view to their further use, and, secondly as a means by which
the sharper may deal to himself seven cards. This latter purpose, and
the method by which it is achieved may be worth describing.
On the second run of the deal, the blackleg gives himself four cards
instead of three. He then takes out some low card of his strongest suit,
places it on top of his cards and his hand on the table. If his adversary
stands, he discards some one of his seven cards into the “bug,” thus
leaving the proper number in his hand. If on the other hand his antagonist
begs, he runs off the desired cards and picking up his own, raises
the three last received, on the one which he had previously placed upon the
top of his original hand, then exclaims that he has dealt himself four
cards instead of three and that the bottom card must be the trump. He
thereupon turns over the card of his strongest suit and places it on the top
of the deck as the trump, leaving his hand with only the proper number
of cards.
.pm sectionhead 'MARKED CARDS.'
Marked cards are often used by professionals in playing seven-up,
but the blacklegs do not find them of nearly as great advantage as in many
other games. The description of the manner in which they are prepared
has already been given in the chapter on poker and need not be here
repeated.
.pm sectionhead 'TURNING JACK FROM THE BOTTOM.'
This is a very common custom with professional gamblers, who,
through long practice, have acquired a manual dexterity which virtually
defies detection. The first step of the sharper is to place a jack at the
bottom of the pack, leaving it in that position while he deals. If his
adversary cuts, the cheat “shifts the cut,” in the same manner as at
poker, restoring the cards to their original position. Then, after dealing,
.bn 269.png
.pn +1
he places his hands over the deck, in such a way as to conceal it from
view. Then, grasping the pack by its outer edge with his right hand,
he turns it over on the jack, simultaneously drawing the latter toward the
inside, with his left hand, so that it may meet the other cards as they
turn over. He all the time imparts a slight upward movement to the
pack, which he finally drops upon the table.
Of course, as above explained, by “turning up jack” the dealer
scores one. If, now, his opponent begs, the gambler takes occasion
surreptitiously to observe the suit of the bottom card. If it happens to
be the same as the strongest suit in his own hand, he repeats the trick,
turning it for trump, thereby practically placing himself in a position
where the chances for winning decidedly preponderate in his favor.
The sharper very commonly selects as the moment for using this
stratagem, that period of the game when the score stands six to six, thus
scoring the single point necessary to enable him to win.
.pm sectionhead 'WHIST.'
Whist is too tedious a game for the professional gambler; it is peculiarly
a game of skill, and therefore less adapted to cheating purposes,
than are many others, the issue of which depends more upon chance. At
one time both long and short whist were very popular at evening parties,
but neither of them was ever a general game for money in this country,
and even as a pastime Euchre has far surpassed it in public favor.
Still, trickery may be employed with telling effect, and the professional
blackleg brings his ill-directed skill to bear upon it in a variety of
ways.
The chief advantage to be obtained by the deal is with a “second,”
and the gambler who is sufficiently dexterous to give the aces, kings and
queens to himself and his partner can make the “odd trick” every time
he deals.
“Signing up” between partners is also an essential element in fraudulent
whist playing. For although each confederate has a general knowledge
of the contents of his partner’s hand, yet there are critical periods
in the game, especially when one of the two holds uncertain cards, when
“signing up” is of great value in determining the event with absolute
certainty. This secret telegraphy is arranged beforehand between the
pair of swindlers, the signals for “suit” and “size” being mutually
agreed upon; and where the understanding is perfect the defeat of any
honest players with whom they may be contending, is a moral certainty.
“” ‘’
Another favorite device of card sharpers is to “ring in a cold deck,”
by which is meant the substitution of a pack of cards having precisely
similar backs as those used in the game, but which have been previously
so arranged that while the greenhorns shall receive excellent hands, it is
a matter of utter impossibility for them to score the odd trick. The substitution
.bn 270.png
.pn +1
having been effected, one of the swindlers contrives some excuse
for not looking at his hand until after his antagonists shall have examined
theirs. Perhaps he lights a cigar, protesting that it will not “draw.”
After the dupes have seen their cards, he proposes a wager—“just to make
it interesting”—that he and his partner will win the odd trick. He adds
that he will bet on his hand “unsight, unseen.” The honest player
usually protests that he has looked at his cards already. “O, well,” says
the blackleg; “never mind that. I’m in for a ‘spec,’ and if you want a
little ‘go,’ I’m your man for twenty or At this point, the moral (?)
companion of the sharper interferes with a protest. He doesn’t believe in
betting on a friendly game; money is not so easily made that it can be
thrown away, etc., etc. But this is so artfully said as to stimulate rather
than to check the greenhorn’s desire to bet. A little more conversation
almost invariably results in the making of a wager, the limit of which is
determined by the purse and the verdancy of the victim. The stakes
having been placed the game proceeds. The inevitable result follows:
The “suckers” win the first six tricks and the sharpers the last seven and
the money. The original pack had been put out of sight and the dupes
rarely discover the manner in which they have been swindled, even if
they suspect that any fraud whatever has been practised.
To illustrate the manner in which a pack of cards has been prepared
for this purpose, let us suppose a party seated at the whist table. A,
a sharper, deals to B, his verdant antagonist, the ace, king, queen, knave,
ten and nine of hearts, which we will assume to be trumps; the ace, king,
queen and knave of clubs; and the ace, king and queen of spades; the
hand being, of course, void of diamonds. Every whist player would
recognize this as an exceedingly strong, if not an impregnable, hand.
But observe what A gives himself and his partner; the eight, seven, six,
five, four, three and deuce of trumps, and of the rest of the pack, it is a
matter of indifference. Now, mark the result. B leads off with his
trumps, of which he has six; A follows suit every time, having seven;
next B leads his ace of spades, which A takes with his remaining trump.
The lead being now with the latter, he plays his six diamonds, each one
of which, of course, takes a trick, the blackleg thus securing the odd
trick. In considering a trick of this kind, the average man is at a loss
whether to admire its ingenuity or condemn its rascality.
.bn 271.png
.pn +1
.pm sectionhead 'CASINO.'
This is one of the games of cards usually first taught to children and
commonly considered too simple to interest matured minds. As a matter
of fact, to play it successfully requires an exercise of memory second only
to that necessary in playing at Whist.
It is not a favorite with gamblers for the reason that it presents comparatively
few opportunities of using the advantages so dear to the heart
of the blackleg. At the same time “eminent professionals” have been
known to win $1,000 on a single game, and I have myself played for (and
won) $50 on the hazard of one hand. It is related of “Canada Bill,”
elsewhere referred to as the “king of the monte men,” that he deceived
himself into believing that he understood the game. While he was
making his headquarters in Kansas City he was wont to make short trips
upon the railways centering there, from which he would not infrequently
return with $2,000 or $3,000. He was then willing to have a bout at
casino (and he would play no other game) for from $100 to $500 with any
one who offered. Shrewd rascal as he was, he was the veriest tyro—in
fact a “sucker”—at his own favorite pastime, and the blacklegs of the
place used to fleece him unmercifully.
The main reliance of the gambler at this game, however, is in the
superior skill resulting from careful study and long practice. An expert
gamester can always tell the cards remaining in the pack at the commencement
of the last deal, even on a perfectly fair game.
Of course “paper,” i.e., marked cards, are invaluable to the cheat at
this as at all other games, and this is really the principal scheme of fraud
of any importance ever attempted at this game. Occasionally, when a
professional is playing with a greenhorn, he will contrive to keep a nine
spot on top of his pile of tricks, which he uses in “building” to suit himself.
Sometimes also a card of some low denomination (e.g. the three spot of
hearts) is substituted for the ace of spades, which the sharper abstracts
and conceals, placing it among his tricks and using it in counting his own
points for game. This is rather unsafe, however, as the duplicate cards
occasionally come together.
Casino is an amusement frequently affected by broken down gamblers,
whose depleted resources do not permit them to “sit in” a game of
poker, and who seek to rehabilitate their fallen fortunes by playing casino
for a stake of five cents on a game of twenty-one points.
.bn 272.png
.pn +1
.pm sectionhead 'EUCHRE.'
Perhaps no game is more universally played in the United States
than Euchre. It is pre-eminently a social amusement. While it does not
possess the absorbing fascination of whist, it permits free and unrestrained
conversation among the players, which circumstance has unquestionably
contributed largely to its popularity.
It is probable that it originated in the Western States, but its devotees
are to-day confined to no section, and the pastime finds its defenders
alike in the saloon, the gaming “hell” and the drawing room.
To be a successful Euchre player calls for the exercise of excellent
judgment, considerable finesse and no little boldness. As it is never
played with a pack of more than thirty-two cards, this game does not
afford so many opportunities for fraud, but the slightest advantage which
can be gained, tells with unfailing certainty.
In fleecing victims at euchre, professional gamblers resort to many of
the practices which are so successfully employed at “seven-up.” “Marked”
or “advantage cards,” are among the most common devices of the
sharpers.
“Strippers” are also found extremely useful. These are prepared in
the same manner as in all other games, i. e. by removing—either from
each side or both ends—a narrow, triangular “strip,” not wider than one-sixteenth
of an inch at the widest part. One of the “surest things” is to
have the cards cut for two jack “strippers,” which the “professional” can
strip on the top of the pack on his opponent’s deal, thus securing two
bowers. Sometimes one jack of a red and one of a black suit are selected
for this purpose, but it is usually considered better to use two jacks of the
same color, for the reason that should a trump of that color be turned,
(which is likely to occur at least half the time) the cheat is sure of both
bowers. This, as every euchre player knows, gives an immense advantage.
Yet this trick is not always certain to win; sometimes “luck” will
favor the honest player, and it is recorded that a guileless and unsuspecting
neophyte once won sixteen consecutive games from a blackleg who
trusted to this expedient. Such instances, however, are almost as rare as
ice in the tropics; and any man is utterly devoid of sense who imagines
that he is safe in trusting to chance, as against skill combined with
chicanery.
“Briefs” may also be used at euchre. The gambler
places a “brief” above two bowers, or a bower and an ace, and the cut is
made down to it on his adversary’s deal, thus insuring at least two high
cards.
“Stocking” is far more easily accomplished at this game than at
either poker or “seven-up,” and the gamester who is proficient in arranging
.bn 273.png
.pn +1
the cards for either of the other two games finds it an easy matter to
“put up” a deck for euchre, although it is absolutely essential to his
success that he should be an expert at “shifting the cut.”
“Crimping” is practiced precisely as in “seven-up,” the most common
device being to “crimp” a jack and then cut to it. The sharper
also not infrequently marks the edges of the bowers with India ink, whereby
he is always able so to cut the pack as to be certain of securing one of
these desirable cards, with the chance of another one should two happen
to lie together.
As in poker, the “bug” is sometimes used for “holding out” a
valuable card—e. g., a bower or ace, and sometimes two. A card “held
out” is occasionally “palmed;” by which is meant that it is concealed by
the black-leg in the palm of his hand when the pack is handed him to
cut. He then adroitly drops it on top, lightly taps the deck and allows
the cards to run. If the gambler wishes to palm a card on his own deal,
he places it on top of the pack as described and either makes a false cut or
shuffles the pack through once without disturbing the one palmed.
However, although these nefarious artifices are constantly practiced
by black-legs upon the unsophisticated player, it is only right to say that
the “profession” does not regard euchre with favor as a game at which
quick and large returns may be realized. It is mainly employed to fleece
victims through a device technically called the “high hand,” which, as
thus used, has very generally supplanted “three card monte” on railroad
trains and steamboats. These conveyances are most commonly selected
by this class of card sharps as the theater of their exploits. In the operation
of this scheme of fraud, two confederates act in concert. Usually the
game is commenced by “roping in” two greenhorns to make up a euchre
party, “just for amusement,” or possibly for stakes, which are merely
nominal. As soon as a fairly good hand has been obtained by one of the
pair and the next deal is to fall to his confederate, he “plays it alone,”
his accomplice gathering in the tricks as they are made. As he does so
he can easily arrange the cards so that when dealt they will inevitably fall
into “poker hands,” that is, into “single pairs,” “full houses,” “four
of a kind,” etc.—for an explanation of which terms the reader is referred
to the chapter on “Poker and Poker Players.” One of the sharpers at
once offers to bet at poker; his ally accepts the gauntlet thus thrown
down, the stakes are put up, and the bet won. As soon as occasion offers
these tactics are repeated, until finally one of the “suckers,” who has
been given what would be an extraordinarily strong hand at “bluff,” is
induced to bet. The stakes are at once “raised,” as at poker, and when
the hands are shown, the victim always finds that he has lost, for the
reason that the sharper always holds a hand “just a little
.bn 274.png
.pn +1
a “gudgeon” displays an unusual reluctance to “snap at
the bait” sometimes he is given four kings—a hand which only four aces
or a “royal flush” can beat. If he still hesitates the confederate who
sits next to him shows him an ace in his own hand, thereby convincing
him that his adversary, at best, cannot have four aces, and inducing him
to believe that he has a “sure thing.” When the “show-down” comes
the dupe is amazed to be confronted by four aces in his opponent’s hand!
The explanation is simple; the pack had five aces.
.pm sectionhead 'CRIBBAGE.'
Cribbage is a quicker game than whist, and therefore better adapted
to the requirements of the professional blackleg. It is not so popular in
this country as in England, although extensively played and constantly
gaining in favor.
As five-spots are most valuable cards at cribbage, various devices are
employed by professionals to secure them. One of the most common is
“palming.” In accomplishing this the sharper conceals two five-spots
and any other two cards in the palm of his right hand, alternating the
fives with indifferent cards, and playing them so that the five-spots shall
be below the others. Having arranged the cards in this manner in his
hand, the sharper—with an air of candor—passes the rest of the pack to
his antagonist, with the request that the latter shuffle them while he is
lighting his cigar. The cards having been shuffled, the blackleg takes
them in the hand in which he has “palmed” the four cards, which are
thus placed upon the top of the pack, and, of course are dealt first.
Sometimes the professional marks all four fives, so that while dealing he
may not only avoid giving them to the dupe, but may, as opportunity
offers, appropriate them to himself. Another trick sometimes practiced
by less dexterous manipulators is to place the fives at the bottom of the
pack, and quietly drop them into the dealer’s hand. Cards are also sometimes
secreted between the knee and the table, or in the “bug,” as in
poker, or in the coat collar, so that the swindler may exchange bad cards
received during a deal for good ones previously abstracted from the pack.
The coat collar, and the knee-and-table method have generally fallen into
disfavor as being too clumsy and liable to detection.
Cards are sometimes prepared for cribbage as follows. The sixes,
sevens, eights and nines are cut slightly shorter than the others, while the
fives, court cards and tens are cut a trifle narrower. If a sharper wishes
a card of one of the former denominations to turn up, he cuts the pack by
lifting the ends, and one of the cards which he needs is certain to be
uppermost on the cut, for the reason that they are shorter than the others.
.bn 275.png
.pn +1
But if a five, ten or court card be desired, he cuts by taking hold of the
cards on the sides, and the card which he needs, being narrower than the
rest, will be infallibly discovered.
Crimping is also practiced at cribbage. In the course of two or three
deals, the sixes, sevens, eights and nines are bent in the middle lengthwise,
the sides inclining downwards. By this means it is possible for the
sharper to obtain one of the important cards at the start, should he want
it, by cutting the pack where he sees the bent card. Sometimes two or
three small cards are surreptitiously taken from the pack. The dupe, not
knowing this, plays at a great disadvantage, while the knowledge of the
fact is proportionately of benefit to the blackleg.
A common method of cheating at cribbage, euchre, and in fact nearly
all card games, is the “telegraph.” A confederate gambler looking over
the shoulder of an honest player, under pretense of taking an interest in
the game, with, perhaps, the excuse of a trifling bet on his success,
reads off his hand to the other gambler, who is thereby thoroughly informed
as to its nature and value. This information can be conveyed in
a hundred ways, without speaking a word or moving a finger. An almost
imperceptible movement of the eyebrows, an expansion of the nostrils, a
puff of cigar smoke to the right or the left, an opening of the mouth, a
turn of the head, biting the lip, chewing a toothpick—these and a
thousand other equally simple devices, previously agreed upon and
thoroughly understood, may be employed to abstract money from the
pocket of an unsuspecting dupe. Of course, under such circumstances
the confederate sharpers pretend to be utter strangers to each other, and
not infrequently there occurs a slight wrangle between them, which serves
still further to instil into the mind of the victim the belief that the
sharper who acts as “stool pigeon” is his friend.
Considered on the whole, however, cribbage is not a favorite game
with professional blacklegs, for the reasons stated above. There are, however,
many persons who are exceedingly fond of it, and who are easily
induced to play for stakes in the belief that cheating at it is practically
impossible. To such players as these the foregoing remarks are especially
commended. There is no game where innocence and ignorance are a
match for chicanery. Nor does the expert card-sharper know either pity
or remorse. The man who sits down at a table to play for stakes is
supremely foolish, and the man who gambles with a stranger is preternaturally
idiotic. The only safety for the unsophisticated youth, the
only safe rule for every man, young or old, is to abstain from gambling
altogether.
.bn 276.png
.pn +1
.pm sectionhead 'VINGT-UN, OR TWENTY-ONE.'
This game of vingt-un, as its name denotes, originated in France,
but has achieved wonderful popularity, not only all over the continent of
Europe and the kingdom of Great , but also on the shores of the
Western Hemisphere.
It is played by any number of persons, seated around a table similar
to that used in faro. The banker always deals, and uses one, two, or
three packs of cards, according to the number of players.
After the cards are shuffled he draws one from the pack and places it
at the bottom, face upward. This is called “burning” a card. The
object is to prevent what is known among gamblers as “bottom dealing,”
and this practice measurably interferes with one of the favorite practices
of card sharpers. First, all bets are made before they deal. Two cards
are given to each player, one at a time. When all have been supplied,
the players look at their hands. The king, queen, jack and ten spot each
count ten; an ace counts one or eleven, at the option of its holder, but he is
always guided in his determination by the exigencies of his hand. The
remainder of the cards are reckoned according to the number of spots upon
their faces. Each player signifies his satisfaction, or dissatisfaction with
his hand by “standing” or calling for a card which is dealt to him, face
upward. If this does not satisfy him he can call for a second or even a
third, as long as it does not count more than twenty-one. If a player,
who elects to draw to his hand, finds that the number of spots on the
cards drawn, added to the number on those which he first received,
exceeds twenty-one, he is said to have “burst,” and throws his hand
face downward upon the table, the stake being forfeited to the banker,
who is always the dealer.
After all have stood or drawn, the dealer turns his hand face upward
on the table, and either stands or draws. If he draws and “bursts,”
that is makes his count exceed twenty-one, he pays to each player the
stake which he has advanced, provided such player has not already
overdrawn. If he stands, or draws so that his hand does not exceed
twenty-one, he receives from or pays to each player in rotation; the one
whose cards reckon up nearest twenty-one being considered the winner.
In the case of a tie between the dealer and any of the players, the former
takes the stakes.
Every man who has ever played Vingt-un knows that the foregoing
description of the game is palpably incomplete. The author does not
aim fully to instruct the ignorant as to the legitimate method of playing
all games of cards. Wherever a game, as honestly played, is described
in this book, it is his intention to give only such an explanation of the
game as may enable the reader thoroughly to comprehend the frauds
.bn 277.png
.pn +1
practiced by blacklegs. It is idle folly to say to a man that he is on the
edge of a precipice, who does not understand what a precipice is.
There can be no question that the explanation of the tricks of
“professionals” in this game will be thoroughly comprehended by those
who have ever played it, either for the purposes of amusement or in a
gaming “hell.”
In the first place the dealer enjoys an unquestionable advantage, and
the sharper always endeavors to obtain the deal if possible. Failing in
that, two other resources are open to him. As honestly played, the
game is one which calls for the exercise of some little discretion, considerable
finesse and extraordinary boldness. If square players possess
these qualifications, it is necessary for the “professional” to encounter
from some “point of vantage.” The most common agencies employed
to effect this result are the use either of marked cards or of the “bug.” If
he uses the latter, it is comparatively easy for him to fill in his hand without
a draft, standing on two cards and raising from—and at the same
time discarding to the “bug.” If he is able to make use of the marked
cards, it is, of course, easy for him to tell what he will receive on the
draw, and he guides his action accordingly.
The “second” hand, is often found invaluable to gamblers who wish
to win at this game. If a sharper has marked cards, or “paper,” he can
readily deal from eight, while he draws with absolute . If, on
the other hand, he is using a fair pack, it is not much trouble for him to
prick those above the nine. This having been done, on dealing a
“second,” it is the simplest thing in the world to pick up twenty-one
every time.
It is much easier to deal a “second” at vingt-un than at poker, for
the reason that the deal affords far better opportunities for delay and
stoppage in the former game than in the latter.
Any reader who is not a preternatural idiot can easily see that a
“professional” who uses “paper” has enough percentage to bankrupt a
greenhorn with the utmost celerity and dispatch.
Sometimes a partner is found valuable. In such a case, the latter
usually sits directly on the right hand of the dealer. A system of signals
between the two confederates having been arranged, the “elder” hand is
able to tell precisely when it is advisable for him to “draw.” This he
does without any regard to his own hand. It is no difficult matter for an
accomplice to continue his draft until some card appears on top that will
fill the hand. Marked cards, are of course, an advantage even in
the accomplishment of this scheme. When both circumstances are combined—i. e.
“paper” and partner—there can be little doubt as to which
party will win.
.bn 278.png
.pn +1
It is not an uncommon practice among gamblers to “stand” on their
first two cards without drawing, even when they have not more than
twelve or thirteen. The object is to mislead an unsuspecting player into
the belief that they already hold nineteen or The result often is
that the latter is thus induced to draw until he “bursts.” Just here, is
where the advantage of having a partner is most apparent. The dealer
either draws according to some previously determined system of signals
between himself and his partner, or is guided by the action of his confederate
not drawing.
.sp 4
.il fn=i_272.jpg w=250px ew=50% alt='joker'
.bn 279.png
.pn +1
.pm chaphead 'CHAPTER VI.' 'DICE AND THE DICE BOX.' chap6
.sp 2
The origin of dice is shrouded in obscurity, but it is certain that their
use has come down to modern days from a period of remote antiquity.
Dice throwing has always been one of the most popular forms of gaming,
and in days gone by immense fortunes have been staked and lost upon
the throwing of the cubes. Of late years, however, the popularity of this
method of gambling has been rather on the wane, as compared with the
past. It is by no means so common a recreation of gentlemen gamesters,
who delight in playing a fair game of chance for stakes with their friends.
It is now chiefly played in gaming houses, and the dice are among the
implements of the professional gambler.
Nevertheless dice are among the most time-honored tools of the “professional.”
The honor of their invention is ascribed to the Egyptians,
and in some of the bas-reliefs that have been disinterred in the land of the
, figures playing with something closely resembling dice are
discernible. The Ethiops of three or four thousand years ago were, it is
believed, addicted to gaming of this sort, and in this connection it may be
remarked that gambling is quite as much a barbaric as a civilized vice. In
fact it may be questioned whether the Troglodytes did not gamble in their
caves, and swindle one another out of the spoils of the chase before they
had learned to construct huts in which to live.
It is not the intention of this chapter to describe all the games of dice
which may be played—some of which are yet a favorite amusement among
gentlemen—but to explain those most commonly used by card sharpers
as a means of defrauding the ignorant. In fact the practices described in
this chapter hardly deserve to be ranked with “games” considered as
such. They partake rather of the nature of tricks, and, without exception,
are illy concealed games of fraud.
The various devices will be treated . And first we will begin
with one of the best known and most frequently played.
.pm sectionhead 'HIERONYMUS.'
This is, perhaps, one of the most successful games of dice—considered
from the standpoint of the operator—known to the gambling fraternity.
The illustration affords a view of all the paraphernalia employed in
conducting it. On a cloth-covered table rests an inverted tambourine,
above which stands an implement substantially of the form depicted in the
.bn 280.png
.pn +1
cut. The latter may be best described as consisting of two wooden bowls,
the smaller ends of which are placed opposite each other and connected by
a hollow tube as shown in the diagram. On the cloth which covers the
table are painted numbers from one to six. Three dice are used in
playing, differing from ordinary dice, only in being larger and in having
figures painted on the faces, instead of the small black dots commonly
employed.
.il fn=i_274.jpg w=400px ew=75% alt='hieronymus'
The mode of playing is as follows: Players select the number or
numbers on which they wish to bet, and place their wagers on the corresponding
squares on the The dice are then placed in the upper
bowl and permitted to drop through the tube, and fall upon the tambourine,
directly under the inverted bowl. The bowl is then raised, and if the
bettor happens to have placed his stake on the number appearing on one
of the upper faces of the cubes, he wins the amount of his bet. If the
number which he selected appears on two of their faces, the proprietor of
the bowl pays him double. If the three dice all show the same number
and he has happened to place his wager thereon, the operator pays him
three to one.
The “percentage” against the players in this game is so large that
the proprietors are ordinarily content to play it “on the square.” It sometimes
happens, however, that the operation of the reorganized laws of chance
seems to be reversed, and a player wins over and over again. Of course,
.bn 281.png
.pn +1
this is not to be tolerated. The proprietor of the game is running it for
his own pecuniary profit; the idea of conducting a scheme for the benefit
of the general public has never to him. Accordingly he has
resort to trickery. Sometimes instead of taking all three dice from the
tambourine, he removes only two, thus retaining a knowledge of at least
one of the winning numbers. I have also known a device of this kind to
be resorted to: When a certain number is winning repeatedly, the operator,
having (apparently by accident) knocked the dice off of the table,
while stooping to pick them up will substitute another set of three cubes,
none of which contains the cubes in question.
But the most contemptible form of swindling consists in replacing
the tambourine by a thin board, which may be so agitated, by means of
a concealed spring, as to overturn the dice after the manipulator has ascertained
the numbers shown by looking through the tube.
Sometimes the operator provides himself with dice having all the
faces marked with the same number, by substituting one or more of which
he is able to cast whatever throw he pleases.
.pm sectionhead 'CHUCK-A-LUCK'
This is a simple little game of dice, yet one of the most fascinating
of all games of chance. It is sometimes designated as “the old army
for the reason that soldiers at the front were often wont to beguile
the tedium of a bivouac by seeking relief from monotony in its charms.
The outfit requisite to play the game is simple and inexpensive, consisting
of three small dice, a dice-box, and a cloth on which are inscribed
the numbers one to six, corresponding to the dots, or “pips,” on the
six faces of the cubes.
.il fn=i_275.jpg w=450px ew=80% alt='chuck-a-luck'
Bets are made by placing the money wagered on the numbers on the
cloth. The dice, having been placed in the box, are shaken and thrown
upon the table. Bets made upon either of the three numbers which come
uppermost are won by the players. Money staked on either of the
remaining numbers are won by the bank.
On its face, this game appears to be one of pure chance. As played
upon fair and circus-grounds, however, there is very little chance about
.bn 282.png
.pn +1
it. The “banker” does not throw the dice fairly. Through long
practice, he is able to retain two of them between the fingers of the hand
which he holds over the inverted dice-box. The other die he allows to
remain in the box, and rattles it against the sides, occasionally knocking
the box itself against the button of his coat in order to simulate the sound
produced by the shaking of three dice. When he removes his hand from
the mouth of the dice cup, he drops upon the table the two dice which he
held in his hand and permits the third die to fall by chance. The reader
will perceive, that he thus makes himself absolutely certain as to two
of the faces which will be exposed when the cup is lifted. When it is
remembered, that the box is not agitated until all the bets have been
made, it will be readily perceived how great is the unfair advantage thus
obtained.
This game is a favorite one with outside sharpers for “ringing in”
loaded dice on the manipulators. It is a very simple matter to substitute
prepared cubes for those used by the operator, and, after winning his
money, to replace those originally employed by him. I have myself
successfully practiced this trick many times, very much to the financial
loss and mental chagrin of the proprietor of the dice and box.
One of the most artful devices practiced by swindlers in operating this
game is that which I will now describe. The proprietor of the game has,
as a confederate, a “side partner,” who keeps himself studiously in the
back-ground until the opportune moment presents itself for his appearance
upon the scene of action. Meanwhile, the chief manipulator of the
scheme inveigles a countryman, whose avarice surpasses his sense, to enter
into a partnership with him for the purpose of fleecing his own friends
and acquaintances. This individual is to develop, later, into the dupe.
He is required, before securing an interest in the prospective profits of
the game, to advance a sum of money, the amount of which is gauged
only by the size of his pocket and credulity. After the proprietor has
received the cash, the countryman remains by the table where the game
is being operated, serenely confident that he is about to win a large sum
through imposing upon the confidence of his towns people. The “side
partner” soon makes his appearance, usually in a state apparently bordering
on beastly intoxication. The greenhorn regards him in the light of
a “soft mark,” and at once approaches him with the suggestion that he
“try his luck.” To this the seemingly drunken man assents, substitutes
loaded dice or “other ringers” for those previously used by the operator,
thus winning the entire amount of his stake. This he continues to do,
until he has won a sum sufficient to absorb all the “capital” which the
“sucker” had advanced. The result is that the latter’s interest in the
concern is speedily wiped out, and the proprietor and his confederate
divide the sum thus gained between them.
.bn 283.png
.pn +1
.pm sectionhead 'CRAPS.'
This is a favorite game among steamboat men, and is particularly
popular among colored people. I first became acquainted with it on board
the steamboat “City of Chester” on the Mississippi river. I was traveling
in partnership with a man named Martin, and we had succeeded in
fleecing one man out of some $800, at poker in the cabin. I went out on
deck, and my attention was arrested by hearing a negro crying in a stentorian
voice, “come 7 or 11,” then another man calling out, “chill’en
cryin’ fo’ bread.” This was followed by the sound of something rolling
on the floor. My curiosity was aroused, and I went below to learn what
was going on. Here I first saw the game of “craps” and my introduction
to it cost me precisely $15. I went up-stairs and informed my partner
that I had discovered a new game. He was anxious to see it, and together
we returned to the main deck where the play was in progress. He dropped
$10 to the “crap” roller, expressed himself as satisfied, and we
returned to the cabin. I did not at the time understand how I was
cheated, although I was perfectly well satisfied that the cheating had been
done. Since then, I have discovered all about it.
The game is played with dice about half the size of the cubes ordinarily
used in other games. Only two are employed and they are held
in the hand and thrown forward upon the table or whatever surface may
be convenient. The numbers 7 and 11 are called “craps.” After the
dice have ceased rolling the spots on both sides are added together, and if
the sum is equal to 7 or 11, the “crap” thrower wins all bets which have
been made against him. If the same amount to two, three, or twelve, he
loses, and is required to pay each player the amount of his stake. Should
the sum of all the spots on the two dice amount to four, five, six, eight,
nine or ten, he is entitled to continue throwing, until he has either cast the
amount thrown again, or throw a seven. In the former case he wins the
player’s bets; if, however, the sum of the spots amount to 7 before the
number first thrown turns up again, he loses.
The game commences by one player throwing the dice until he loses,
when the next player at his left takes the cubes, and so on in rotation.
The favorite method of cheating at this game is by the substitution
of unfair dice. For this purpose, loaded dice are sometimes used, and
sometimes dice specially prepared, on the faces of one of which, are painted
two aces, two twos and two sixes, while the other dice is with two
threes, two fours and two fives. If the reader will take pains to figure
out the combination of numbers which may be made with two dice so
prepared, he will see that it is an utter impossibility for the thrower to
make either, two, three or twelve, the numbers which will be a loss to
him. In addition to this circumstance it is also apparent that the chances
of throwing 7 are very greatly increased by the arrangement of two fours
on one dice and two threes on the other, as well as two fives on one and
.bn 284.png
.pn +1
two twos on the other. The small size of the dice employed in playing
this game and the fact that they are thrown from the hand, renders the
substitution of unfair dice a comparatively easy matter.
Although the game, as I have said, is an especial favorite among
negroes and deck-hands, nevertheless it is frequently played by “high
toned” gamblers and for large stakes.
Of course, the dice are usually made of bone, although in a recently
raided game in Chicago, the players anticipating interference on the part
of the police, had their little cubes made of cut sugar, and when the
officers of the law made their appearance, swallowed the dice, and there
being no gaming implements found, the case against them was necessarily
dismissed.
.pm sectionhead 'EIGHT-DIE CASE.'
This is a favorite game with traveling sporting men, who introduce
it at county fairs, and on circus grounds, and at other places where there
is a large crowd. The diagram represents the arrangement of the interior
of a glass covered case containing prizes. The divisions in the case are
numbered from eight to forty-eight, inclusive, to correspond with the
numbers which may be possibly thrown in casting eight dice, which the
proprietor carries with him, together with a dice box. For a stipulated
consideration, he permits any one who may wish, to throw the dice upon
the glass cover of the case. The sum of the spots on the upper faces is
taken, and the player is given whatever prize the number may call for.
When the game is introduced upon fair-grounds, the directors of
which insist that there shall be no blanks, small articles of cheap jewelry
are put inside the case as prizes, although gamblers prefer to use money
prizes only, for the reason that it gives the outfit a more attractive
appearance.
An examination of the diagram will show that the higher prizes are
invariably placed in squares corresponding to a number which it is almost
impossible for a player to throw. Thus, a $500 prize is placed in the
square numbered eight. To win this, it would be necessary to cast eight
aces. Another prize of like amount is numbered forty-eight, and cannot
be won unless the player throws eight sixes. Those numbers which may
be easily thrown are always attached to squares containing small prizes,
or which are inscribed with the abbreviation “rep.” These letters, as in
all similar games, stand for “represent,” and when a player has thrown
a number corresponding to a square so marked, he is required to double
the amount already put up or submit to the loss of his stake.
This game affords a rare opportunity for cheating, although the fraud
is not perpetrated by means of loaded dice, as many persons suppose.
The proprietor counts the spots on the dice thrown to suit himself, and
after hastily calling out the number replaces the cubes in the box.
.bn 285.png
.pn +1
Strange as it may appear, it is not one man out of fifty who ever insists
upon counting the spots on his own throw. If the owner of the device
has reason to believe that the player has money and is a “soft mark,” he
calls out the number corresponding to one of the “represent” squares.
He then tells the victim that he has neither won nor lost and must double
the amount previously advanced and “try his luck” again. This practice
is continued until the dupe has been induced to stake all of his money,
when the proprietor calls out a number corresponding to the square
marked “blank,” of which there is always one in every case. Of course,
the operator then informs the “sucker” that he has lost all the money
which he had paid.
It sometimes happens that a player grows suspicious, and asks how
long this doubling his stake is to continue. In such a case, the operator
mentally calculates the amount of money which the man probably has,
and tells him that he will be required to double only two or three times
more, when, if he again throws a “represent” number, the proprietor
will return all of his money except five per cent., which is the percentage
belonging to the game. The victim does not throw a “represent” number
the last time under such circumstances, but is thrown upon the
“blank” square, which means that the proprietor has won the entire
stake. “Cappers” are as useful in this game as in any other. Their
methods of operation are similar to those elsewhere described and need
not be more particularly dwelt upon here.
.pm sectionhead 'Eight-Die Case.'
.ta |c:8 |c:8 |c:8 |c:8 |c:8 |c:8 |c:8|
_
Jewelry.|Jewelry.|Jewelry.| $3.00 |Jewelry.|Jewelry.| Rep.
19 | 38 | 24 | 9 | 37 | 21 | 15
_
25 cts.|Jewelry.| $1.00 |Jewelry.| Rep. | Rep. | $5.00
13 | 30 | 43 | 33 | 18 | 29 | 46
_
Rep. |Jewelry.| $5.00 | $20.00 | Rep. | 50 cts.|Jewelry.
23 | 39 | 8 | 1215 | 36 | 12 | 34
_
Rep. | Blank. |Jewelry.|Jewelry.|Jewelry.|Jewelry.|Jewelry.
32 | 17 | 35 | 28 | 16 | 41 | 22
_
$2.00 | $5.00 | Rep. |Jewelry.|Jewelry.| $50.00 | $10.00
11 | 48 | 20 | 42 | 31 | 10 | 37
_
| $2.00 |Jewelry.|Jewelry.|Jewelry.|Jewelry.| Blank.
| 44 | 27 | 14 | 25 | 04 | 20
_
.ta-
.bn 286.png
.pn +1
.pm sectionhead 'POKER DICE.'
This game is usually played in saloons for drinks or cigars, though
sometimes for money, and occasionally even for higher stakes. Five
ordinary dice and a dice cup is used. Each player has three throws. The
highest score which can possibly be made is five aces, the next, five sixes,
then five fives, and so on. Next to five similar spots, the best throw is
four of one kind and an odd number, the relative value of such throws
being measured by the number of spots upon the top of the four dice, aces
ranging highest. The game is called “poker” dice, because of the general
resemblance between it and “bluff,” so far as the value of the throws is
concerned as compared with that of the hands held at poker.
I have never known but one scheme of fraud to be employed in playing
this game, which consisted in so placing the five dice within the box
that the thrower was able to turn out whatever number he might see fit.
I have known two men, both of whom are at present in Chicago, who can
cast any throw which they may wish at their own will. They do not employ
loaded dice, but, through long practice have acquired such dexterity in
placing the cubes in the box and throwing them upon the table, that they
are able to play with absolute certainty.
.pm sectionhead 'OVER AND UNDER SEVEN.'
This game is most frequently played on fair and circus grounds, at
public meetings, barbacues, political rallies, and other places where a
large crowd is assembled. The outfit requisite to its operation consists of
a dice box with two dice and a cloth, about 2½ feet long, on which are outlined
three squares, in each of which is painted the figure 7. One of these
squares is in the centre of the cloth, the other two at the respective ends.
In one of them is painted the word “over,” and in another the word
“under.”
The method of play is as follows: Bets may be placed upon either of
the three squares. If laid on the centre square, the proprietor pays the
winner two for one. After the wagers have all been laid, the dealer
throws the dice. If the sum of the spots on the upper face of the two
cubes is equal to 7, and no stake has been laid on that number, he wins.
If it is more than 7, bets placed upon the squares containing the word
“over” are paid to the bettors. If the total is less than 7, the proprietor
pays those who have laid their money upon the other square.
The mode of cheating at this game is substantially the same as that
already explained in the description of the game of “chuck-a-luck.” The
operator retains one of the two dice in the fingers of the hand which he
.bn 287.png
.pn +1
places over the mouth of the cup and rattles the dice about, inside. When
he lifts the box, he is absolutely certain as to the number of spots upon
the die which he has held in his hand, thereby gaining an immense
advantage over the bettors, inasmuch as he has it practically within his
power to cause the wager of any particular player to be lost.
.pm sectionhead 'TOP AND BOTTOM.'
This game of dice—if it may properly be called a game—is a swindling
device, pure and simple. It is, in effect, nothing but a scheme of
fraud, for the successful operation of which are required two sharpers,
who act as confederates, a dice box, three ordinary dice, a “ringer” and
a “sucker.” The place commonly selected for working it is a saloon,
and the method in which it is operated is as follows:
The victim having been selected and located in a saloon, the first
sharper scrapes an acquaintance with him and induces him to throw dice
for the drinks or cigars. While the dice are being handled, the gambler
calls the attention of the dupe to the fact that the number of spots on the
faces of the three dice added to the number on the three reverse sides is
always equal to twenty-one. This fact necessarily follows from the construction
of all fair dice; on the reverse face from the ace is a 6; opposite
to 3 is 4; and directly opposite to 5 is 2. There are, however, many persons,
who not having had their attention directed to this circumstance,
are ignorant of the fact. The “sucker” usually satisfies himself of the
correctness of the statement made by his newly formed acquaintance
through throwing the dice several times in succession, until he becomes
convinced that the sum of the six numbers is always equal to twenty-one.
At this point sharper number two makes his appearance. He
strolls up to the pair and offers to join in throwing dice for refreshments.
The first swindler proposes that they guess as to the number of spots on
the upper and under sides of the three dice. To this sharper number two
assents, and guesses, say, 25. As a matter of course, the greenhorn
guesses 21 and wins. The second confederate thereupon remarks that
he is a “pretty good guesser.” To this the first swindler replies that
“the gentlemen can tell the number every time.” The confederate demurs
to this statement, saying that it is impossible. He offers to bet the price
of a box of cigars that the dupe cannot do it. His accomplice retorts
that he would be willing to bet $1,000 that he can, and offers to lend the
dupe money to add to whatever sum the latter may wish to bet for the
purpose of laying a stake against his confederate. The bet having
been made, the attention of the victim is momentarily diverted and the
.bn 288.png
.pn +1
“ringer”—either a loaded dice or one prepared after the manner
described in the paragraph upon the game of “crap”—is substituted
for one of the fair dice. The throw is cast, and when the spots are added
together their sum is inevitably found to be either greater or less than
21. Sharper number two thereupon demands and takes the stakes.
Ordinarily the dupe is too bewildered at the moment to understand the
precise nature of the game which has been played upon him until after
the two confederates have left the house. Should he, however, remonstrate
and undertake to raise a disturbance, it is usually found an easy
matter to quiet him by summoning the town marshal or some other police
officer. In fact, I have known an officer actually summoned, who insisted
upon the dupe keeping quiet, for which service he received a bonus from
the pair of swindlers.
.pm sectionhead 'HIGH AND LOW DICE TOPS.'
These little implements are used chiefly for winning drinks or cigars,
or small sums of money. They are eight-sided spinning tops made of
ivory, the respective sides being numbered one to eight. Sometimes they
are made fairly, but dice tops of the latter description are not in favor
with the professional gambler, who uses a top having a moveable iron
peg which the sharper may so arrange as to cause the high or low numbers
to fall uppermost when the top comes to rest, after being spun. If
the peg be turned one way a high number will come uppermost; if the
other, a low number. Of course the greenhorn, not being aware of this
little peculiarity of the top, it is comparatively an easy matter for the
confidence man or other cheat to arrange the peg in such a way that when
he spins for himself he turns up a high number, and when his opponent
takes the same article in hand, however, he invariably turns up a low one.
It may be seen that the former has it in his power to win as often as he
chooses, but in order that his luck may not to be positively miraculous,
he sometimes permits his dupe to win.
.pm sectionhead 'GRAND HAZARD.'
Three dice are used in this game. Sometimes they contain spots, as
do ordinary dice, sometimes on the faces are painted representations of
birds, animals, or reptiles, such as an elephant, an eagle, a rattlesnake,
etc. On the table upon which the dice are thrown is spread a cloth on
which are depicted numbers or figures corresponding to those upon the
faces of the cubes. Bets are made by playing the stakes upon whatever
square or squares the player may select. The dice are dropped through a
funnel-shaped cup, somewhat similar in form to that used in “hieronymus,”
and the gains or losses of the bettors are determined by inspecting
the face of the dice which lie uppermost after they have fallen upon the
.bn 289.png
.pn +1
table. If any player has wagered his money, for instance, upon the
number six, and one of the dice show a six-spot on its upper face, the
bettor is paid the amount which he has ventured. In case the three dice
should all show the same number or figure when they fall, the proprietor
pays to the bettor, who has placed his stake upon the corresponding square
on the cloth, 180 for 1.
In this, as in all other fraudulent games with dice, gamblers resort
to the substitution of “ringers” for fair dice, and have the poor fools,
who risk their money on such schemes, practically at their mercy.
.pm sectionhead 'MUSTANG.'
This game is substantially identical with “grand hazard,” the only
variations being, that differently inscribed dice are employed. The same
sort of cloth on which are depicted squares containing the prizes is used,
and the dice are dropped through a similar metal funnel. The dice, however,
are usually of either one of the two sorts. In those of the first
description, the faces of the cubes are painted, respectively, with a club,
a heart, a spade, a diamond, an anchor and a star. The faces of the other
description of dice employed, are respectively marked with a snake, an
elephant, an eagle, a baby and a turtle.
.pm sectionhead 'LOADED DICE.'
Almost every one has heard of loaded dice, but there are comparatively
few among the guild of professional gamblers who are experts in their
use. The sharper who does not travel, preferring to wait, at home, such
victims as the antipodes of Providence may send him, is satisfied with
employing occasionally, a set of high dice. But the peripatetic scoundrel
who, like Satan, “wanders to and fro upon the earth,” seeking for victims,
usually provides himself with three sets—one “high,” one “low,” and
one “square.” The fraudulent dice are loaded with quicksilver, the
interior of each dice being hollowed out in such a manner as to cause the
weight to fall upon the opposite side to that intended to come up, the
weighted side being, of course, always undermost.
The professional, in using these dice against a single adversary,
usually works very rapidly, distracting the dupe’s attention, as far as
possible, from his operations by story telling or some other interesting
conversation. He changes the cubes swiftly and often, “ringing in” the
“high” one for himself, and the “square” ones for his opponent; or the
latter for himself and the “low” ones for his victim, occasionally, however,
using the fair dice for both, in order to disarm suspicion.
.bn 290.png
.pn +1
.pm chaphead 'CHAPTER VII.' 'GAMES AT FAIRS AND CIRCUSES.' chap7
.sp 2
There is scarcely a person who has visited a county fair, or patronized
a circus, whose attention has not been attracted by the presence upon the
grounds of an immense of “fakirs,” as peripatetic tricksters are
often called. Probably many excellent people have wondered how it
happened that men of this class were allowed to introduce gambling
devices upon grounds which were supposed to be used for purposes of
rational entertainment, even if not of instruction. No gambling device
can be operated upon any fair-ground without the consent of the directors
of the Fair Association having been first had and obtained. The members
of this august body are usually selected on account of their social prominence
and their supposedly high moral character. It would be, therefore,
charitable to suppose that they are not aware of the precise nature of the
schemes the manipulation of which they tolerate.
A county fair, however, is essentially a money making scheme, and
the license fees derived from this source constitute no unimportant feature
of the managers’ revenue. Sometimes the “fakirs” gain permission to
work their various schemes through the ignorance of the directors. More
frequently they are well aware of their nature, and exact high fees in
consequence of this very knowledge. To illustrate: I myself once made
application for a license to operate a hap-hazard upon the grounds of one
of these associations. The secretary was a bank cashier, and the moment
that he saw my machine, exclaimed: “Why, I know all about that
thing. You can stop that whenever want to. Pay me $50, and you can
go on the grounds and ‘skin’ all you want to.” Naturally I paid the
sum demanded, and I happened to know that some fifteen or twenty other
contrivances of a like character were admitted to the same grounds upon
the same terms. This is but one instance of many that I could cite, in
which the director was equally well convinced that my contrivance was a
“fake,” pure and simple.
Such a transaction is a high-handed outrage upon the community.
The men who license schemes such as are described in this chapter are
licensing scoundrels, in comparison with whom pickpockets are respectable,
to prey upon their own towns-people, pocketing the money which
they well know has been made by fraud.
Sometimes it is thought necessary to preserve at least the semblance
of innocence on the part of the managers. When the application for a
.bn 291.png
.pn +1
license of one of these machines is received by the directors, some one of
the latter, whose conscience (?) will not permit him to sanction schemes
of fraud asks if the device in question is to be operated as a “gift enterprise?”
By this, he means, are there to be any blanks? If so, his high
moral sense will not permit him to tolerate its introduction upon the
grounds over which the Board has control. This objection is easily removed,
by introducing into the scheme a number of articles of valueless
jewelry, the presence of which among the prizes usually removes all conscientious
scruples of the objector. Occasionally, when the moment for
taking a vote arrives, “Squire Brown” is conveniently absent, and the
majority of the board acts without him. Sometimes the gamblers are
told that it will be necessary for them to submit to an arrest and pay a
small fine in order that the scruples and prejudices of the public may be
appeased. I have myself known this to happen more than once.
After the license has been granted and the various games are in
operation, it is not an uncommon occurrence for the town marshal or
sheriff to put in an appearance, and extort from $5.00 to $10.00 per day
in consideration of there being no molestation offered. This payment is
what the “fakirs” call “sugaring,” and I have never known one of these
officials for whom the dose could be made too sweet. I have submitted
to this extortion of blackmail (for it is nothing else) several times when I
was convinced, to a moral certainty, that the directors were receiving a
percentage of the money which I paid over to the officers.
Sometimes a different policy is adopted by the managers. The prosecuting
attorney and sheriff find it necessary to leave town on urgent business,
and are therefore totally unaware of what is going on. In such a
case, a purse is usually made up for these officials by contributions from
the proprietors of the various “fakes,” which is always understood by
the gamblers to be intended for the sheriff and prosecutor. It may be
that a portion of the money raised sticks to the fingers of the man to
whom its payment is entrusted, but my own impression is that in a
majority of cases the greater proportion of it, reaches the parties for whom
it was intended.
It is the hope of the author that what is here said may serve to open
the eyes of reflecting citizens to the grave character of the evil which is
pointed out. Too much cannot be said in reprehension of such conduct
on the part of men to whom the community entrusts interests of such a
character. And if any member of any Board of Directors of any county
fair will carefully read the pages which follow, he will, at least, find it
forever impossible hereafter to plead ignorance, by way of extenuation of
a vote to tolerate the introduction of any of these devices among his own
acquaintances.
.bn 292.png
.pn +1
.pm sectionhead 'NEEDLE WHEEL.'
.il fn=i_286.jpg w=250px ew=50% align=l alt='needle wheel'
This is an exceedingly ingenious and very delicately constructed
piece of mechanism. The accompanying cut affords a view of its appearance,
but cannot be understood without some explanation. It consists of
three parts. The outer rim, which is stationary, contains thirty-two metal
grooves, or pockets, numbered, apparently without special arrangement,
from one to thirty-two. Inside this rim, is a circular piece of wood,
resembling a wheel, but without
spokes, which is covered with
cloth. Above this, and of about
equal size with it, is a saucer-shaped
piece of wood, in which are
bored three holes. On the table on
which the wheel is placed stands a
wooden box, containing thirty-two
compartments, numbered consecutively
from one to thirty-two. In
these compartments are placed sixteen
money prizes, which the players
believe they have a chance to
win. Apparently, the chances are
exactly even, the number of prizes and of blanks being equal.
When the game is played upon fair-grounds, and the directors of the
fair insist that it shall be operated as a gift enterprise in which there shall
be no blanks, articles of cheap jewelry are placed in the compartments,
which under other circumstances are left blank.
The mode of playing is as follows: One wishing to win a prize pays
fifty cents or $1.00 (in proportion to the size of the crowd) for the privilege
of making the attempt. He then places a marble in the upper wheel
or saucer, which is given a twirl, either by himself or the proprietor, the
lower wheel being usually set in motion at the same time, but in an
opposite direction. As the upper wheel revolves, the marble flies around
and finally falls through one of the holes on to the lower wheel. The
latter slopes gently from centre to circumference and the marble naturally
rolls down to one of the compartments in the outer rim, where it stops.
If it has fallen into a winning number, the player receives the prize
placed in the compartment of the box or case, having the corresponding
number. If, on the other hand, it has fallen into a blank number, he
receives nothing.
To the uninitiated, this appears very fair. The “fake” element consists
of the apparatus which is concealed beneath the table, the existence
of which is not even suspected by the players. Running up through the
middle of both wheels is a rod ornamented with a knob on the top. This
.bn 293.png
.pn +1
knob actually operates a thumb-screw which sets in motion a system of
sixteen wire levers, lettered “b, b, b,” on the diagram, which force up
through the cloth covering a like number of fine needle points, “c, c, c.”
One of these points (none of which are larger than the point of a fine
cambric needle and cannot be detected by the eye) rises in front of each
winning number, and when the marble is in danger of entering a lucky
compartment it strikes against one of these points, its course being thus
deflected into one of the adjacent pockets, resulting in the players
inevitably drawing a blank.
Naturally, after a greenhorn has lost several times consecutively, he
grows suspicious, and in order to induce him to venture still farther, it is
necessary that some one should appear to win. Just here comes in the
“capper,” whose assistance in all games of this description is indispensable.
When he makes his appearance, he is at once recognized by the
manipulator of the machine through giving a pre-arranged signal. As
soon as he buys a chance, the proprietor relaxes the tension of the thumb-screw;
the wire levers fall; the needle points sink below the surface of
the table; and the marble is allowed to go where chance dictates. If the
confederate fails to win the first time, he perseveres until he succeeds.
The result is that the waning confidence of the crowd is restored, and the
poor, deluded fools once more press eagerly forward to “try their luck,”
in a game where “luck” is an utter impossibility.
This is a favorite game for playing “doubles or quits,” or, as gamblers
sometimes say, “representing.” By this is meant doubling a stake
once lost; thus, if a man loses $1.00, he risks $2.00 a second time; if he
loses again, he stakes $4.00, then $8.00, $16.00, $32.00, and so on. The
author has himself won $1,300 under this system of betting by means of
this device from one man at a single county fair.
The services of the “capper” are of great value in inducing players
to adopt this system of betting. When he makes his appearance, he
ordinarily asks some bystander to twirl the wheel and drop the marble for
him. When he has won, he usually buys another chance for the benefit
of the “sucker” who has kindly performed this office for him. The
victim is, of course, quite willing to play at some one else’s expense,
and is not infrequently induced, after losing the $1.00 which was put up
for him, to continue playing, with his own money, on the system of
“doubles or quits,” as explained
.pm sectionhead 'CORONA OR MASCOT.'
This game is of recent date as compared with the needle wheel and
squeeze spindle, of which it is, in effect, but a modification. I first saw
it in the autumn of 1884, while I was traveling with “Mexican Cortenas’
Wild West Show.”
.bn 294.png
.pn +1
.il fn=i_288.jpg w=275px ew=55% align=r alt='corona'
To operate the machine two men are necessary, in addition to a number
of “cappers.” The apparatus consists of a circular piece of wood,
usually some 2½ feet in diameter,
at the outer rim of which
are painted numbers from 1
to 60. Inside this is placed a
round plate of heavy glass,
on which is painted either an
arrow or a small pointer. This
inner plate revolves upon a
central pivot. Prizes of money
or jewelry are placed upon
the numbers. Those who wish
to win any of them buy tickets,
on each of which is inscribed
a number, the purchaser
selecting his ticket at
random, from a large number
which are placed in a box. At the right of the ostensible proprietor sits
his confederate, who poses as “book-keeper.” In order that no “sucker”
may, by any chance, win a prize of any value, a lever, similar to that used
in the squeeze spindle is sunk into the table and concealed by the cloth
cover. The “book-keeper,” by pressing on the end of the wire rod,
which is directly underneath his book, can apply friction to the pivot and
cause the wheel to stop at any number which he may choose. It is hardly
necessary to say that the box from which the purchaser takes his
ticket contains none bearing the number which would call for a valuable
prize. In order, however, to keep up the interest of the dupes and stimulate
their spirit of gaming, the occasionally brings the
glass to a stand still at a point where the arrow indicates a money prize.
Instantly a “capper” steps forward from among the crowd, presents a
ticket and claims the prize. The ticket is carelessly thrown on one side
and the money handed over to the confederate, who takes his departure.
The unsuspecting fools who are not in the secret pursue the play with
fresh zest, each one fancying that he has some chance of winning a large
stake “next time,” but unfortunately for the victim the moment for his
winning never comes.
In case any of the players should become suspicious, and demand a
sight of the tickets remaining in the box, in order to satisfy himself that
the numbers corresponding to the money prizes are actually there, the proprietor
cheerfully assents, readily producing the box, into which he has
surreptitiously transferred the necessary cards from his pocket.
.bn 295.png
.pn +1
.pm sectionhead 'WHEEL OF FORTUNE OR CHUCK-A-LUCK.'
This is the name given to a gambling device which has been a
favorite with the “fraternity” for many years, and which has never
failed to prove a sure bait to trap the unwary and an unfailing source of
rich income to its manipulators.
.il fn=i_289.jpg w=275px ew=45% alt='wheel of fortune' align=l
It is made with or without a “fake” attachment, its general appearance
in either case being the same. The nature of the “fake” and its
mode of operation will be
explained below; the construction
of the wheel will
be first described.
It is a handsome apparatus,
standing about seven
feet high. The wheel itself
is usually about four feet in
diameter, and rests upon a
tripod three feet in height.
Inside the rim of the wheel
is a twelve-pointed star, between
each two points of
which are inscribed either
five or six numbers, the
figures being painted on the
rim and running from one
to sixty or seventy-two,
consecutively. The wheel
and star revolve simultaneously
around a common
axis. At the top of the
wheel is an arrow, pointing
downward, which serves
as an indicator.
Around the wheel is a
wooden frame which is covered
with cloths on which,
when the seventy-two number
wheel is used, are
painted the numbers one to six, or on which are arranged paddles, each
one of which is marked with either one or six numbers, the uses of which
will be described later.
The wheel is used either as an adjunct to a scheme for the distribution
of cheap prizes or as a means of making bets. The former plan is
.bn 296.png
.pn +1
the one generally adopted at small fairs, when a “lay-out” of inexpensive
queen’s or glass ware is spread upon the table, each article, or lot,
bearing its own number. In this case, the manipulation of the wheel is
sometimes conducted fairly, the legitimate odds in favor of the proprietor
being sufficient to justify him in giving the dupes some sort of a chance.
Where the game is played for prizes, the common practice is to use
the paddles above referred to, each inscribed with six numbers, the twelve
paddles embracing the range from one to seventy-two. Each person
wishing to take a chance pays for a paddle (usually twenty-five cents),
and when all possible have been sold, the wheel is set in motion. When
it comes to rest, the indicator at the top points to a number, and the
holder of the paddle bearing the corresponding number has it at his
option either to take the prize or $1.50 in money.
The most profitable form of the wheel, however, is that which is
sometimes designated the “six number wheel,” so called because the
spaces between the points of the star are each numbered from one to six.
When this device is operated, the frame is sometimes covered with oil-cloths,
each containing six squares, numbered from one to six. Sometimes
six paddles, each bearing a separate number (running from one to
six) are employed besides the cloths; and not infrequently a double set
of paddles, similarly numbered.
In the latter case, the players place their stakes on some one or more
numbers upon the cloth. The paddles are used when the crowd is too
great to be accommodated at the cloths. When the wagers have all been
placed, the wheel is set in motion. Breathlessly the players await the
result. When it ceases to revolve, the indicator at the top points to some
number. The player who has placed his stake upon that number has it
returned to him, increased by four.
As a matter of fact, however, when the wheel comes to rest it is
usually discovered that no heavy player has been fortunate enough to
make just that bet. The reason is simple. The reader who will carefully
examine the accompanying diagram will perceive the representation
of a rod running through the upright support of the wheel and one of the
legs of the tripod, thence turning to the right and terminating under a
plank in the floor, directly below the operator’s foot. By simply pressing
on this , the latter checks the motion of the wheel by application
of friction at the pivot, and brings it to a standstill at any point
which he may desire.
Not always, however, is the proprietor of the wheel the only sharper
on the ground. Sometimes he discovers, when it is too late, that he has
been playing a game of “diamond cut diamond.” His apparatus fails to
work as he had expected, and when he has “gone broke,” as gamblers
term financial ruin, he carefully examines his wheel, and learns that some
.bn 297.png
.pn +1
more astute scoundrel than himself has plugged some point on the circumference
with lead, bringing it to rest by the simple but sure operation
of the law of gravitation.
Sometimes, instead of the numbers above referred to, there are used
certain printed inscriptions, representing speculative articles dealt in on
the floors of the stock and produce exchanges, such as pork, lard, wheat,
corn, oats, rye, barley, seeds, and various kinds of corporation stocks.
This form of the device is ordinarily known as the “Board of Trade
Wheel,” and is sometimes found to be very popular in rural districts.
.pm sectionhead 'SQUEEZE SPINDLE.'
This device has been successfully employed in defrauding the unwary
for nearly two score years, and is still to be found on every fair ground
in the United States where the directors are men of sufficiently easy morality
to permit unprincipled sharpers to fleece their townspeople for a consideration.
I have myself won thousands through this very means.
.il fn=i_291.jpg w=450px ew=85%
.ca SQUEEZE SPINDLE.
It is usually made of wood, with a metal arrow, weighing about
seven pounds, swinging on a pivot in the centre (I). About this pivot
are arranged numbers—generally either from 1 to 16 or from 1 to 32, in the
form of an ellipse. At three points, equidistant from each other, are
depicted three horses and the numbers are arranged in alternate blocks,
usually of red, white and black. Outside the ellipse are little metal pegs,
one being placed opposite each number.
The mode of playing is simple in the extreme. As many persons
can engage in the game as can stand around the table. Each player
places the amount which he wishes to bet on the color or horse which he
.bn 298.png
.pn +1
selects. The proprietor gives odds of ten to one on the horses and even
bets are made on the colors. That is to say: if a player wagers a dollar
on the red and wins, the proprietor pays him a dollar and returns his
stake. If he bets a dollar on a horse and wins, he receives $10 in addition
to his original wager.
The bets being all made, some one—it is immaterial who—sets the
arrow in motion. When it ceases revolving, the slender point, to which
is usually attached a small piece of leather, comes to rest between some two
of the pegs, and the player whose money has been placed on the number
indicated wins the amount of his stake.
As a matter of fact, however, it is impossible for any one to win
without the proprietor’s consent. At the point four, as shown in the diagram,
is placed a metal disc, resembling a button, which is attached to a
stout wire rod, which in turn is sunk into the wooden top of the table and
entirely concealed from view by the cloth covering of the latter. When
this metal button is pressed, it operates the rod, the other end of which,
by creating friction at the central pivot, gradually stops the movement of
the arrow, and the operator is enabled to bring the latter to a standstill at
whatever point in the ellipse he may see fit. It would seem that this contrivance
gave the proprietor of the machine sufficient advantage over the
unsuspecting players, but he is not content with this. To operate the
wire it is necessary that he should put his hand upon the table. Sometimes
a “sucker” objects to this movement, and demands that he remove
his hand. In order to be prepared for such an emergency, another contrivance
is attached, the location of which is indicated on the diagram by
figure three. In its essential features, the latter contrivance closely resembles
the one operated by the button, but it is worked by pressure from
some part of the body, usually the hip.
To show how easily and successfully a machine of this sort may be
used for purposes of swindling, I will relate an incident in my own experience
which happened while I was at a county fair, at Olney, Ill., in
the autumn of 1882. In connection with a partner, I was operating one
of these spindles of the sort which I have described. At the fair was a
young man from the country, who had disposed of a horse for $140. He
had seen me working the machine, and was anxious to quit the dull monotony
of country life and travel with me, as a gambler and a man of
leisure. I had an interview with him at the hotel the same evening, and
disposed of one-half interest in the business for $60, which he promptly
paid in cash. Thereupon I instructed him in the operation of the machine,
but concealed from him the existence of the wire which was operated
by pressure from the hip. The following day we repaired to the
fairgrounds, and I left him in charge of the apparatus. His bank roll
consisted of $160, of which we had each advanced $80. The young man
.bn 299.png
.pn +1
was not aware that I already had a partner in the business, the latter
having been acting as “capper” and keeping himself in the background.
When the country boy began to run the machine, my partner sauntered
up to the table and began to play. I was on one side, at a safe distance,
watching the entire game. My new partner undertook to work the wire
which was to be operated by the hand; my former partner forestalled all
his efforts by working the rod which was pressed by the body. The result
was that the bank was speedily broken, my original partner walking
off with the assets and leaving my new acquaintance in a condition of
decided financial embarrassment. He still, however, owned a nominal
one-half interest in the machine, which I soon learned was for sale, and
that being known we directed our efforts to winning this back. Accordingly,
I bought him out for $20. He next entered into an agreement with
the man who had succeeded so admirably in beating him, and they agreed
that if I would stand back from the table and permit them to twirl the
spindle, they would risk their joint funds. Once more my former partner
operated the wire with his hip, and the result was that in a short time we
had again in our possession the $20 which I had paid to repurchase his
half interest to me. When he went home, he was undoubtedly a sadder,
though I doubt whether, to this day, he is a very much wiser man.
In the latest construction of these fraudulent spindles, the cheats
have invoked the aid of science, and the result has been a machine which,
for simplicity and perfection of operation, cannot be surpassed. It is
known among sporting men as the “magnetic spindle,” because of the
sinking of magnets into the table directly below the losing numbers. The
cloth which covers them, while it conceals them from view, does not interfere
with their operation. The needle, being of brass, necessarily
comes to rest directly above some one of them, thus indicating a number
which inevitably brings loss to the player. This contrivance is of comparatively
recent invention and is highly prized by men of the class who
use devices of this description.
Of course, with such a machine, it is impossible that the arrow should
ever point to a winning number. This would seem to render the employment
of confederates as fictitious winners of prizes an impossibility. To
obviate the difficulty which thus presents itself, the proprietor simply
changes the location of some prize in the “lay-out” from a winning to a
losing number, to correspond with that which the “capper” has made.
Yet another form of the “squeeze spindle”—which made its appearance
some years after the centennial of ’76, and which soon found favor
among professional “brace” gamblers and confidence men, is known to
the profession as the “three spindle” machine. It differs from the
“squeeze spindle” already described, only in that it contains three arrows
or “pointers,” instead of one, two of which are under control of the
.bn 300.png
.pn +1
operator through the employment of friction at the pivot by means of precisely
similar contrivances. There is a slightly better chance given players,
for the reason that one of the revolving needles is allowed to come
to rest by chance. It is not difficult, however, to perceive the very large
preponderance of chances in favor of the sharper, who has it always in
his power to determine who shall win the large wagers.
Gamblers who work a contrivance of this character always offer to
pay the bettor three to one, on the contingency of all three arrows stopping
on the same number. It would be comparatively safe for them to
offer considerably heavier odds, inasmuch as such an event constitutes one
of the remote possibilities of a century.
In the “three spindle” machines, the numbers are commonly arranged
in blocks of from one to six, but the “horses” are sometimes represented.
“Suckers” are more easily attracted by this arrangement, inasmuch as
they suppose that they have four “chances” (?) to win, instead of one.
In connection with the explanation of the operation of the squeeze
spindle it may not be out of place to relate a little narrative of what the
author once personally witnessed upon the fair-grounds at a Missouri
town. A sharper, who had “interviewed” the directors, “convinced”
them that his machine was entirely honest, and “arranged” matters
satisfactorily all around, felt serenely secure in the operation of his “privilege.”
[And right here I again condemn the granting of such “privileges.”
A “privilege” to do what? To prey upon the ignorant; to
dupe the unwary; to victimize the unsuspecting; to debauch the
young; and to scatter broadcast the seeds of corruption, whose fruit will
be misery in every home.] But this is by the way, let us return to the
narrative. The “privileged” gambler had set up his wheel, and to use a
slang phrase, “was doing a land-office business.” A verdant countryman
approached the machine. Over and over he tried his “luck,” which
every time—as a matter of course—rested with the “privileged” monopolist.
This went on for some time, and I, as a disinterested spectator,
watched the game. The agriculturalist quit a loser to the extent of some
$50. The blackleg’s face was impassable. The countryman thrust his
hand into his pocket; when he withdrew it, it clasped a long-bladed
knife, the blade reflecting the light. “Stranger,” said he, “I want my
money back. I don’t know how you did it, but you’ve cheated me, and
I’m going to get even. Give me back that money!” Only the unnatural
pallor on the old man’s face indicated the extreme tension of his feelings.
The swindler looked at him. At least seventy-five or a hundred persons
were standing around; something had to be done, and promptly. “Why,
old man,” said the proprietor, “there’s no use in your cutting up rough.
Of course you can have your money. I was only joking.” And with
these words he returned the dishonest winnings.
.bn 301.png
.pn +1
.pm sectionhead 'TIVOLI OR BAGATELLE.'
This game is at once one of the most seductive and the most deceptive
in the outfit of the peripatetic gambler. In some minor respects
it resembles the children’s game of the same name, inasmuch
as both are played upon a board containing a number of pins and having
numbered compartments at the lower end. At this point, however, the
resemblance ceases.
.il fn=i_295.jpg w=250px ew=50% alt='tivoli'
The gambling device known by this name is shown in the accompanying
illustrations, figures 1
and 2. Figure 1 represents
the table and figure 2 the
cloth which always hangs behind
it, and forms an indispensable
feature of the game.
In explaining the diagrams,
the construction of the table
will be first described. It is
made of wood usually about
3½ to 4 feet in length and 2
feet broad, and when in use the
upper end rests upon a wooden
framework, giving the board an
inclination of some 30 degrees.
Running lengthwise through the
centre of the table is a wooden
partition, dividing it into two
equal parts. At the lower end
of each division are ten compartments,
open at the top, each set
being numbered 1, 2, 3, 4, 5,
6, 7, 8, 9, 0. At the upper end
of each division is a gate, lettered
on the diagram c.c. Between the gates and the numbered compartments
are placed metal pins or pegs, arranged substantially as shown by the
dots on the diagram. Directly below the lower row of pins and extending
over the upper ends of the compartments is a board, which runs entirely
across the table, but only one-half of which is shown in the illustration.
Before describing the mode of play, an explanation of the cloth
(as shown in ) is necessary. This cloth is generally three feet in
length by two in breadth, and is divided into 100 squares, arranged and
divided as shown in the cut. The figures—$1.00, $5.00, etc.—in the
.bn 302.png
.bn 303.png
.pn +2
squares indicate the prizes which may be won by the players. The abbreviation
“bl’k.” stands for “blank,” and indicates the losing numbers,
on which no prize is paid. The letters “rep.” are an abbreviation for
“represent,” and show that the player who happens to make the number
in that square must, if he does not wish to lose his stake, double it and
play again.
.pm sectionhead 'Tivoli or Bagatelle.'
.ta |c:8 |c:8 |c:8 |c:8 |c:8 |c:8 |c:8 |c:8|
_
Jewelry.| $5.00 | $2.00 | $10.00 | $1.00 | $10.00 |Jewelry.| Blank.
20 | 47 | 79 | 11 | 71 | 25 | 6 | 16
_
Rep. |Jewelry.| $10.00 | $10.00 | $5.00 | $5.00 | $10.00 |Jewelry.
96 | 26 | 97 | 29 | 83 | 39 | 59 | 32
_
Blank. | $5.00 |Jewelry.| Rep. | $2.00 | $5.00 | Rep. | $1.00
00 | 85 | 34 | 58 | 41 | 21 | 68 | 55
_
$1.00 | Blank. | $5.00 | $1.00 |Jewelry.| $5.00 | Blank. | Rep.
91 | 40 | 5 | 75 | 62 | 93 | 72 | 14
_
Rep. |Jewelry.| Rep. |Jewelry.| Rep. | $2.00 |Jewelry.| Rep.
22 | 80 | 54 | 28 | 84 | 57 | 64 | 42
_
Jewelry.|Jewelry.| $10.00 | $2.00 | $10.00 |Jewelry.| $5.00 | $2.00
66 | 30 | 45 | 2 | 35 | 78 | 7 | 27
_
Blank. | Rep. | Rep. | Blank. |Jewelry.| $5.00 | $20.00 |Jewelry.
18 | 88 | 38 | 10 | 92 | 53 | 17 | 48
_
Jewelry.| Rep. |Jewelry.|Jewelry.| $25.00 | $2.00 | $1.00 | $1.00
50 | 74 | 94 | 24 | 33 | 99 | 81 | 23
_
$1.00 |Jewelry.| $2.00 | $5.00 | $5.00 |Jewelry.| $5.00 | $2.00
65 | 86 | 61 | 49 | 63 | 76 | 69 | 37
_
Blank. | Rep. |Jewelry.| $1.00 | $5.00 | $5.00 |Jewelry.| Rep.
46 | 56 | 36 | 77 | 43 | 19 | 60 | 12
_
$2.00 | $5.00 |Jewelry.|Jewelry.| Rep. | $5.00 | $5.00 | Rep.
95 | 1 | 52 | 82 | 70 | 31 | 13 | 90
_
Jewelry.|Jewelry.|Jewelry.| $2.00 | Rep. | $5.00 | $5.00 | $5.00
8 | 4 | 98 | 73 | 44 | 9 | 51 | 87
_
=nb= | =nb= | $2.00 | $5.00 | $2.00 | $2.00 | =blt= | =nb=
=nb= | =nb= | 15 | 67 | 89 | 3 | =blt= | =nb=
_
.ta-
Those who wish to play, pay the proprietor a certain sum for the
privilege of dropping two marbles down the board, one rolling through
each of the gates C.C. The little spheres (d.d.) roll down the inclined
plane, their course being deflected from point to point, by the metal pins
until they finally come to rest in the compartments at the lower end, one
on each side of the centre board. The operator then looks to see the numbers
into which they have fallen. If the left hand marble has rolled into
“0,” the number of the right hand one only is taken. If the latter rolls
into “0,” and the left hand one, into some compartment bearing a significant
number, the entire amount is read as 10, 20, 30, 40, etc. If both
numbers roll into the numbered compartments, both figures are read, as
e. g. 56, 79, 84, etc.
The number made by the player having been thus learned, the cloth
is inspected with a view to ascertaining the result of his play. If the
number which he has made calls for a prize, the same is handed to him.
If he has “drawn a blank,” he has to content himself with his loss. If
his number corresponds to a square containing the abbreviation “rep.,”
he may either lose the sum paid or double his stake and try again.
To show how utterly impossible it is for a chance player to win, it is
only necessary to explain the very simple secret mechanism which enables
the operator to send the marble into a losing compartment at his own
will. If the reader will look at the diagram, I, he will see a slender
line running from the right hand set of numbered compartments along
the entire length of the board, on its right hand side, and terminating
near the gate (c.), its course being indicated by the line (b.b.). This line
represents a stiff wire lever, placed below the board and entirely under
the control of the manipulator. By working this lever he can raise a
row of ten triangular metal points, marked a,a,a, all of which are covered
by the board at the lower end of the table, and which are so arranged
that one shall stand in front of each alternate compartment. When the
marble strikes one of these points, as a matter of course, it inevitably
glances off into one of the adjacent divisions. The peculiar beauty of the
contrivance, as viewed from a gambler’s standpoint, is the fact that the
compartments in front of which the points are placed are inscribed with
the winning numbers. The divisions into which the marbles are forced to
roll invariably correspond to those numbers on the cloth which contain
those words (so ominous to the greenhorn) “blank” or “represent.”
.bn 304.png
.pn +1
In this, as in all similar games, the assistance of “cappers” is indispensable.
The dupes who stake their money in good faith are never permitted
to win, but unless somebody occasionally draws a prize, interest
is certain to be supplanted by a sense of discouragement. It follows that
confederates must be at hand. One of these will approach the table and
after being recognized by the operator will buy a chance. At once the
metal points are so placed that he has an even chance of winning and he
perseveres until he draws a handsome prize. Ordinarily, however, the
“capper” resorts to stratagem. Approaching a countryman, he offers to
“divide risks” with him; i. e., to advance half the money and share
equally in the gains or losses. As long as the “capper” and the “sucker”
play together, they invariably lose. Should the dupe become disgusted
with his “run of hard luck,” the “capper” continues to play alone. The
operator works the lever and his confederate soon wins a prize; the greenhorn
(who always stands near, to await the issue) at once feels encouraged,
and it usually requires little persuasion on the “capper’s” part to
induce him to make another venture.
.pm sectionhead 'Jenny Wheel Table.'
.ta |c:8| c:8| c:8| c:8|
_
$2.00 |Jewelry.|Jewelry.| Rep.
9 | 14 | 2 | 8
_
$1.00 | $10.00 | $10.00 |Jewelry.
3 | 27 | 21 | 18
_
$5.00 |Jewelry.|Jewelry.| $5.00
23 | 32 | 16 | 25
_
$2.00 |Jewelry.|Jewelry.|Jewelry.
13 | 20 | 28 | 4
_
$10.00 | $5.00 |Jewelry.|Jewelry.
17 | 1 | 10 | 22
_
$10.00 |Jewelry.| Blank. |Jewelry.
5 | 30 | 26 | 12
_
Jewelry.| $10.00 | $1.00 | $2.00
24 | 11 | 15 | 29
_
$2.00 |Jewelry.| $10.00 |$25.00
19 | 6 | 31 | 7
_
.ta-
.bn 305.png
.pn +1
.pm sectionhead 'THE JENNY WHEEL.'
This device is most commonly used by the “small fry” gamblers,
and I have never known any large sum to be either won or lost through
its manipulation. It is a “fake,” pure and simple, and the apparatus for
cheating is so simple in construction that it could be easily detected should
a victim ask for the privilege of examining it.
Should such an inconvenient request be made,
however, the manipulator can readily pick up
the whole apparatus and deposit it in his overcoat
pocket.
.il fn=i_299.jpg w=200px ew=40% align=l alt='jenny wheel'
It is some 6 or 8 inches in diameter, and is
made of wood. In its general principle it
closely resembles the “needle wheel,” although
far less ingenious and by no means so complicated.
It consists of a disc of wood, on the
rim of which are painted numbers 1 to 32, in consecutive order. Between
each two numbers is placed a thin brass plate, about a quarter of an inch
in height. Every alternate piece runs a little farther in toward the centre
than does the one next to it. The disc slopes a little outward from the
centre all around toward the circumference. Above the disc is placed a
somewhat smaller saucer-shaped piece of wood, similar to that used in the
“needle wheel,” and likewise perforated with three holes near the centre.
This upper saucer-like plate revolves. In it is placed a marble, and the
saucer is set in motion. The marble falls through one of the holes, and
rolls down the incline into one of the little numbered compartments which,
as I have said, are separated by thin brass plates.
A small case containing articles of cheap jewelry stands near the
wheel, each one bearing a number. The player pays a stipulated sum—usually
twenty five cents—for the privilege of twirling the saucer containing
the marble and taking his chances of winning a prize. If the marble
falls into a compartment numbered to correspond with the number attached
to any one of the prizes exposed in the case, the article so numbered
is given to him. If, unfortunately, he draws a blank, he receives
nothing.
The “fake” element in the device consists in the prolongation of each
alternative brass division between the numbers on the wheel. Of course,
the saucer is always set in motion in the same direction, usually from left
to right. The marble necessarily rolls in the same direction, and when it
strikes one of the protruding brass plates it inevitably rolls into the compartment
just next to the prolonged division. In numbering the prizes
the proprietor is careful so to arrange the blanks that the latter may always
correspond with the numbers of the compartments into which the marble
is sure to roll. The saucer plate into which the marble is first placed, sets
.bn 306.png
.pn +1
down so close upon the lower disc, that the ends of the dividing plates
cannot be seen by the players, who naturally suppose that they are all of
equal length.
As I have said, this apparatus is not well adapted to winning large
sums, yet where a fair is being held, as much as $50 or $60 may be won
in one day. This, however, is considered a comparatively poor return for
the risk, expense and trouble which the operator incurs.
.pm sectionhead 'O’LEARY BELT.'
Like the other swindling devices which have been described, the
mechanism of this contrivance is easily operated, and, when explained,
readily comprehended. It is, however, what is called, in the slang of
the street, a for the manipulator. Thousands of dollars
have been won through its operation in a single day, without the
possibility of the dupes discovering how they have been defrauded.
.il fn=i_300.jpg w=350px ew=60% align=l alt='o’leary belt'
In order to work it successfully, it is indispensable that the top of
the machine be
raised high enough
above the heads of
the surrounding
crowd to prevent
the bystanders
from seeing the interior,
inasmuch as
such a view would
disclose the apparatus
by means of
which they are
robbed of their
money. With this
end in view, the
gambler always
operates it from a
buggy, the upper
part of the machine
standing about
three feet above the
floor of the conveyance.
As will be seen in
the cut, the device
consists of a hoop-wheel (D B), a supporting rod and a box platform,
.bn 307.png
.pn +1
supporting the rod and wheel. The apparatus maybe taken apart and
neatly packed in this box. On the box is placed a valise containing
money. The wheel, or “belt,” is made of brass, and is about sixteen
inches in diameter and four inches broad. It contains thirty-two compartments
or pockets, each one containing a card, which is held in position
by a small fold of metal on each of three sides. These cards may
be perfectly blank, though usually they contain pictures of famous
beauties, or other celebrities. The valise, which is shown in the illustration
at the foot of the upright rod, contains money. Inside the metal
hoop is a leather belt, on which, at equal distances, are painted numbers
representing sums of money, so arranged that one will fall behind each
alternate compartment. When the cards are raised, the belt is seen
through a rectangular opening at the back.
The driver of the buggy carries a number of whips. As soon as a
crowd has gathered around him (which is certain to happen in a very few
moments), he informs the spectators that any one or more may, for $1.00,
purchase a chance to win a money prize, varying in amount from $1.00 to
$20.00. Some one having expressed an inclination to buy, the proprietor
takes his money and hands him a whip, with which to point to any one
of the thirty-two sections of the “hoop” which he may select. The
purchaser having rested the whip on a compartment, the operator removes
the card which he has touched. Underneath is shown either a blank
space on the “belt” or one inscribed with a certain sum. If it happen
to be the latter, the buyer is given the amount indicated; if the former,
he receives nothing.
Of course, as in all similar gambling machines, it is optional with the
manipulator whether the player win or lose. In the apparatus in question,
the “fake” is worked as follows: The inside of the “belt” contains
very small numbers, corresponding precisely in location to those
seen when the cards are raised. The operator, standing in the buggy, is,
of course, able to see these inner numbers. As soon as a “sucker” has
touched a card, the proprietor knows number, if any, lies beneath
it. If below it there is a blank space, he at once raises the card and
shows the dupe that he has lost. If, on the other hand, he perceives that
the victim has won a prize, he stoops down toward the valise, ostensibly
to take out money, but really to touch a secret knob or button, (lettered
F in the cut) which works a wire (c) concealed beneath the cover of the
box and running up through the hollow rod until it terminates in a hook
(A B), which, by pressure, may be attached to the inner leather belt.
By operating this wire, he is able to shift the position of the latter and
thus so transfer the positions of the numbers thereon painted that a
blank may be substituted for a prize at his own will. Thus, when a
player has in fact won a prize, the gambler, through a dextrous manipulation
.bn 308.png
.pn +1
of the inner belt, by means of his secret apparatus, shifts a blank
to the aperture, removes the card which the player has touched, and,
presto! shows him that he has lost.
Before commencing operations, the proprietor usually removes the
inner belt, which he exhibits to the crowd, in order to show them that
there is nothing concealed. The curved hook (A B), of course remains,
hidden from view behind the metal hoop.
Many and ingenious are the devices of the operator to induce greenhorns
to purchase chances. A favorite method is to offer to buy the
player’s chance as soon as he touches a card with his whip, offering him
$2.00 or $3.00 therefor. If he accepts, the manipulator, by moving the
inner belt before he withdraws the card, can show him a large prize
painted thereon and thus easily convince him that had he declined the
offer he might have won five, ten, or even twenty dollars.
Of course, the aid of “cappers” is a sine qua non, since, if no one
wins, the crowd will soon grow suspicious. When a confederate buys a
chance and touches a card with the whip, the manipulator looks at the
inside of the belt to ascertain whether he has won a prize. If he has,
the sum called for is given him; if not, the “belt” is shifted by means
of the hook until a prize is brought behind the aperture, when the card
is raised and the crowd is speedily informed of his “good luck.”
As many persons can buy chances at one time at this game as the
proprietor has whips, usually six or seven players taking one each. No
two players, however, are allowed to touch adjacent sections, inasmuch
as in such a case one of them would inevitably win. When several purchase
chances at one time, the operator raises but one card at a time, and
thus finds abundant leisure in which to move the belt to meet the
exigencies of each case as it presents itself.
It may be easily seen that this device is better adapted for use upon
fair grounds, or other open places, than in the public streets. Its successful
operation depends upon the proprietor’s being so far above the heads
of the crowd that his manipulation of the inner belt cannot be seen.
When the fraud is practiced in a crowded thoroughfare, great care must
be taken by the sharper that his movements are not watched by prying
eyes from some over-looking window. Another danger which threatens
detection is the disposition of the crowd to climb upon the buggy. This,
however, may be overcome by the use of a slight degree of force, and by
refusing to proceed until such inquisitive interlopers have resumed their
places on the ground. But the man whom the proprietor most dreads is
the individual on horse-back, who forces his way up to the buggy, and
from his point of vantage obtains a full view of the modus operandi. I
once saw an amusing incident of this description at a fair in a small
Missouri town. The rider would insist upon taking a position near the
.bn 309.png
.pn +1
buggy in which the apparatus stood, and it was evident that he was giving
telegraphic signals to a friend in the crowd. The operator rose equal
to the occasion. Persuasion was idle; force impossible. He took the
only course open to him and bribed the horseman to ride away, paying
him handsomely for the concession.
Notwithstanding all these draw-backs, the contrivance is a prime
favorite with itinerant gamblers, in consequence of the ease with which it
is manipulated and the general confidence with which it is regarded until
the idea that it is a “fake” dawns upon the mind of the crowd.
The name of the device is supposed to have been the same as that of
its inventor. A well-known confidence operator by the name of O’Leary
flourished some years ago, who was recognized among his companions as
an expert manipulator of this apparatus, and it is generally believed
among the guild of peripatetic gamesters that the idea of its construction
was conceived in his fertile brain, through the direct inspiration of the
antipodes of Providence.
.pm sectionhead '“HAP-HAZARD” OR “BEE-HIVE.”'
The accompanying illustration gives an excellent idea of the general
appearance of this device, which is one of the most successfully contrived
schemes for swindling which has ever fallen under my observation. It
is known indiscriminately as “hap-hazard” or “bee-hive.” The former
name was probably given because of its being, to all appearance, exclusively
a game of chance; it has been called “bee hive” because of its
shape, but it is safe to say that the “suckers” get none of the honey.
It consists of two cones, an inner and outer, lettered “B” and “D”
on the diagram, placed upon a heavy, circular piece of wood, around the
rim of which are thirty-two compartments, numbered from one to thirty-two,
and separated by thin metal plates. Driven into the surface of the
inner cone are small nails or metal pegs, the arrangement of which is a
matter of comparative indifference, although they are usually rather close
together and approximately equi-distant. The outer cone serves as a cap
or case. Formerly this was made of tin, but of late years glass has been
substituted, with the exception of the lower inch, which is still made of
metal, silver-plated, for reasons which will be presently explained.
Fair and circus grounds are the localities usually selected for working
this scheme, the operation of which is very simple. A case containing
numbered prizes forms part of the paraphernalia of the proprietor, and
always occupies a conspicuous place near the machine.
The manner of using the apparatus for gambling purposes is as
follows: Any one wishing to “try his luck” (?) pays a fixed sum
(usually 50 cents to $1.00, according to the size of the crowd) for the
.bn 310.png
.pn +1
privilege. The outer cap (D) having been placed over the cone (B), a
marble is dropped through an opening (C) in the top of the former.
Striking upon the surface of the inner cone, it pursues a “hap-hazard”
course, striking against the nails, or pegs, as it falls to the bottom.
Should it roll into a compartment numbered to correspond with one of
the prizes in the case the fortunate player is given the particular prize
called for.
.il fn=i_304.jpg w=450px ew=85%
.ca “HAP-HAZARD,” OR “BEE-HIVE.”
The “fake” element may be very easily explained. If the reader
will look at the accompanying diagram, he will perceive at the base of
the inner cone (B), three small dots, lettered A, A, A. These dots represent
pegs driven at precisely equal distances from each other, a row of
which runs all around the base of the inner cone. The arrangement of
these pegs is such that each of them may be made to stand exactly above
the alternate compartment in the lower plate. When the cap is placed
over the apparatus, by an ingenious device at the bottom, the manipulator
is able, by slightly turning the outer cone, to arrange this lower row
of pegs so that each of them may stand directly over a winning number.
The result of this arrangement is that when the marble, in its descent,
strikes against one of these lower pegs its course is necessarily deflected
into one of the compartments on either side, the division into which it
inevitably falls always being a blank.
.bn 311.png
.pn +1
An unsophisticated player can, consequently, never win except
through the consent of the operator. In order to encourage the crowd in
playing, “cappers” have to be employed, who are always on hand to
draw prizes. As soon as one of these individuals makes his appearance
and is recognized by the proprietor, the latter gives a slight turn to the
outer case, in such a way as to bring the lower row of pegs directly above
the blanks. The consequence is that when the “capper” drops the marble
through the aperture above referred to, it must necessarily fall into a compartment
numbered to correspond with a prize.
The devices of the “capper” are sometimes very ingenious. In
order to disarm suspicion he will occasionally approach a verdant looking
countryman with the statement that he sees that the game is perfectly fair
and would like to take a chance, but is restrained by the presence of his
wife and son. He therefore asks the countryman to take his money, buy
him a chance and drop the marble for him. The old farmer is naturally
pleased with the suggestion, inasmuch as it gives him all the excitement
of gaming without any of the risk. He very readily complies with the
“capper’s” request, and the latter standing behind him gives a prearranged
signal to the operator that the player is acting for him. The
countryman draws the prize, which he honestly turns over to the “capper.”
The latter, thereupon, usually gives the farmer a dollar with which to
make a venture on his own account. As a matter of course he loses, and
it is usually not very difficult to induce him to make another trial, on the
principle of “double or quits,” or “representing,” as has been before
explained in the remarks under the “needle wheel.”
Some idea of gambler’s profits from this machine may be formed
when I say that the man operating such a device, who fails to take away
from a fair ground at least $500 a week in clear profits, considers that he
is doing a small business, and I have myself nearly doubled that sum
within that time.
It sometimes happens, however, that the verdant looking countryman,
after receiving the dollar from the “capper” and winning a prize
for the latter, forthwith “makes tracks” for parts unknown, leaving the
proprietor and his astute confederate to mourn the loss of their money and
to bewail their own misplaced confidence in human nature.
.pm sectionhead 'BOX AND BALLS.'
.il fn=i_306.jpg w=350px ew=70% align=l alt='box and balls'
This is a device by no means common, there being very few of the
“fraternity” who can operate it successfully. Yet there are two sharpers
in the country, who have won fortunes through its manipulation, either of
whom would promptly resent any imputation upon his character as an
.bn 312.png
.pn +1
insult. In the accompanying diagram, Figure “1” shows the exterior of
the box, which is of wood, about ten inches long, four and one-half inches
broad and two and one-half
inches deep. Inside
this box “B,” are
placed thirty ivory
balls or marbles, each
of which are numbered.
Near the operator
stands a table on
which is a show case
containing twelve prizes, part of which are articles of jewelry and the
remainder sums of money. The players, of whom there may be seven or
eight, pay from fifty cents
to a dollar each for the chance
of winning a prize. When a
sufficient number of chances
have been sold the operator
shakes the box, causing the
balls to roll from one end to
the other. Letter “A” on
figure 1, represents a slide at
one end of the box. This slide
is raised by the manipulator
and allows one ball to escape
at a time. The number of the
marble is examined, and if it
be found to correspond with
that attached to a prize in
the show-case, the fortunate
player is given the article or
money which he has won.
The diagram of the case is
shown in figure 3.
.dv class='tblleft'
.pm sectionhead 'BOX AND BALL CASE.'
.ta id='lefttable' |c:8| c:8 |c:8 |c:8| c:8|
_
$10.00 |Jewelry.| Rep. | $10.00 | Rep.
1 | 8 | 12 | 29 | 4
_
$52.00 |Jewelry.| Blank. | $20.00 |Jewelry.
15 | 24 | 28 | 17 | 10
_
Jewelry.| $10.00 | $5.00 |Jewelry.|Jewelry.
6 | 21 | 3 | 22 | 14
_
$5.00 |Jewelry.| Rep. |Jewelry.| $5.00
11 | 27 | 30 | 26 | 7
_
Rep. | $5.00 | Rep. | $10.00 |Jewelry.
18 | 25 | 20 | 19 | 16
_
$10.00 |Jewelry.| $5.00 | Rep. |Jewelry.
5 | 13 | 23 | 9 | 2
_
.ta-
.dv-
The fraud consists of two elements, one relating to the marbles, and
the other to the box. In the first place, the ivory spheres are not all of
equal size, the twelve whose numbers correspond to the valuable prizes
being the merest trifle larger than the eighteen which call for articles of
no value. So slight, however, is the variation in size that it is absolutely
impossible to detect it by the eye. The “fake” in the box is in the slide,
“A,” and is shown in figure 1, which gives an enlarged view of this
part of the apparatus. In this figure the line “B” represents a shoulder,
whose height above the bottom of the slide (which is shaved almost as
.bn 313.png
.pn +1
thin as paper,) is so delicately adjusted that it stops the larger balls, and
allows the smaller ones to strike against the thin wood. The sensitive
finger of the manipulator readily discerns the striking of a ball against
this part of the slide. If he feels it he knows that he must raise the slide
and allow one of the smaller marbles to escape, inasmuch as the latter
calls for no article of value.
The “cappers” are useful in this as in all similar games. They
serve to stimulate the interest of the players and revive their confidence
when it begins to fail. Of course, when a “capper” is playing, the operator
shakes the box until he knows from the absence of pressure upon the
thin edge of the slide that one of the larger marbles will escape by raising
the same. He takes out the ball, and hands his confederate the valuable
prize for which the number calls.
This is a favorite game for playing “doubles or quits,” or “represent.”
In fact, sometimes more money is made in this way than by the
regular sale of chances.
I was using this device on one occasion in company with a partner.
The game is a difficult one to work, and I was not an expert. The
result was that the wrong ball escaped, and a sucker won a twenty
dollar prize. I was much chagrined, and endeavored to shift the responsibility
of the loss upon my partner, by telling him that he had signaled
that the player was a “capper.” My partner followed the stranger and
requested him to divide; on the ground that he had been the means of
his winning. The countryman, however, smilingly retained the money,
leaving my confederate to mourn.
.pm sectionhead 'MINIATURE RACE TRACK.'
The miniature race track is a game which resembles the “needle
wheel” and other similar contrivances which have been already described.
It consists of a wooden disc, about four feet in diameter, the outer rim of
which is stationary, and within which revolves an inner wheel of the
same material. The outer periphery of the disc contains a representation
of the “judges’ stand” on a race track, from the center of which extends
a line running toward the middle of the circle. On the inner revolving
wheel are painted representations of, say, half dozen horses, each picture
being accompanied by the name of some famous racer.
Players make their bets as follows: A set of paddles equal in number
to that of the horses depicted on the inner wheel, and containing corresponding
descriptions, are sold the bettors at a stipulated price each—usually
from twenty-five cents to five or even ten dollars. The paddles
having been sold, the inner wheel is set in motion, and when it comes to
rest the player who has placed his wager upon the horse which is nearest
.bn 314.png
.pn +1
the inner side of the line extending from the “judges’ stand” wins the
pool, the percentage which the proprietor claims upon the operation of
the apparatus having been first deducted.
It is easily seen that the owner of the machine incurs no risk, inasmuch
as he always receives a percentage of the stakes, no matter which
one of the bettors may prove to be the winner. This should be
enough to satisfy the money-making instinct of any ordinary man,
but the parties who run an apparatus of this kind are not ordinary men.
They seek for still further advantage, and they obtain it through the
manipulation of a concealed lever, which brings friction to bear at the
centre pivot, in the same manner as has been already described in a number
of similar contrivances. The result is, that if possible the proprietor
allows no one to win. If, however, bets have been placed upon each of
the half dozen horses, the manipulator has it in his power always to bring
the inner wheel to a stand-still when the horse upon which the lowest bet
has been placed is nearest the magic line.
The advantages arising from the employment of a “capper” in a
scheme of this sort are too apparent to call for special elucidation. A
confederate may bet upon a certain horse, and the proprietor always has
it within his power to allow his accomplice to win.
.pm sectionhead 'STRIKING MACHINE.'
This is a very simple contrivance, and used by small “fakirs,” who
are content with very paltry winnings. It is an apparatus by which to
measure the force of a blow. A dial, in the center of which is placed an
arrow-shaped pointer, registers the number of pounds representing the
strength of the striker’s arm. The “fakir” usually allows two blows to
be struck for the small sum of five cents. At the back of the dial is a
concealed spring, by means of which, through applying friction at the
pivot on which the pointer revolves, the operator is able so to check the
movement of the latter that it is impossible for the striker to record upon
the dial any large number of pounds.
It is a common practice, too, for a “capper” to be standing around,
who offers to strike, in connection with the stranger, to see who shall pay
the five cents for the two blows. When his confederate strikes the machine
the proprietor, by diminishing the friction at the pivot, suffers the
pointer to make almost a complete revolution. When the “sucker”
takes his turn, the friction is increased, and of course he is compelled to
pay the stipulated nickel.
This contrivance is of so insignificant a character as hardly to merit
description. It is worthy of mention only as showing the natural bent
of the mind of men of this character, and of illustrating the contemptible
schemes to which they will resort.
.bn 315.png
.pn +1
.pm sectionhead 'TOP AND BOTTOM BOXES.'
This is another confidence game, the success of which appeals not
only to the avarice but also to the dishonest impulses of the dupe. The
latter is induced to believe that he can gain a decided advantage over a
sharper through the carelessness of the confidence man and the superior
astuteness which he flatters himself that he possesses. Its operation calls
for three small paper boxes, each of which has a false bottom, from
which circumstance the trick has been given the name which appears
at the head of this paragraph.
The man who intends to victimize any “sucker” whom he may be
able to find, first exposes a bill of some large denomination, which he
places in one of the boxes. He raises one of the covers and places the
greenback inside, shutting down the top in such a way that a corner
of the bill is left exposed apparently by accident. He then changes the
relative position of the boxes and asks which one of the three contains
the bank note, the guess to be made simply “for fun.” Of course, the
greenhorn, who has seen the corner of the bill protruding from beneath
the cover has no difficulty in locating its position. This may be done,
perhaps, more than once. The next step on the part of the sharper is to
produce a time piece, (e. g. a watch), which he assures his dupe is one of
rare value, but which he is willing to dispose of at a comparatively nominal
price, say, $50. He then takes a bill of a large amount—possibly
$100—from his pocket and places it inside one of the boxes. He next
shuffles the boxes about, apparently with the intention of confusing the
dupe as to the precise position of the one containing the bill. The latter,
however, feels fully satisfied that he can locate the box in question, for
the reason that he feels sure that he sees the corner of the note protruding
from beneath the cover.
The sharper then tells the “sucker” that he will sell him the “chronometer”
for the agreed price, which, he says, is ridiculously low, and
will also give him a chance to guess which box contains the
bill. The dupe thinking that he knows precisely the box in question,
pays no attention whatever to the watch, his attention being centered on
the money. He assents to the proposal and a transaction which, on its
face appears to be a legitimate sale is concluded. The money is paid and
the utterly worthless watch is handed over. Then the eager dupe guesses
which of the three boxes contains the bill. The cover is removed and
nothing is seen. The reason is that just outside the false covers the confidence
man has pasted the corner of a fictitious greenback, the appearance
of which misleads the dupe, while the actual treasury note is safely
in the sharper’s pocket, or in one of the other two boxes.
.bn 316.png
.pn +1
.pm sectionhead 'THE SWINGING BALL.'
This is a simple little contrivance, usually operated by small “fakirs,”
yet I have known from sixty to seventy dollars a day to be made therefrom
on circus and fair-grounds. Its construction may be readily understood
on an examination of the diagram. The lower line represents
the support on which rests a frame, composed of two uprights, and connected
at the top by a cross-piece. From the centre of the latter hangs a
string, at the end of which is a wooden ball, lettered
“C.” In the centre of the lower support there is
placed a triangular pin, lettered “D” on the
diagram.
.il fn=i_310.jpg w=100px ew=20% alt='swinging ball' align=l
Those who wish to try their luck pay twenty-five
cents for the privilege of swinging the ball.
The player stands in front of the frame and throws
the ball from him. If, as it swings back it overturns
the peg, he receives back his twenty-five
cents, together with a dollar. If, unfortunately, he
overturns the peg as the ball moves from him, he loses.
In order to guard against the happening of the former catastrophe,
the ball is usually slightly deflected toward either the right or left
as it leaves the hands of the player. If the uprights remain perfectly
perpendicular, the chances are that the ball, on its return, will
strike the peg through the operation of the law of gravitation. Just here
is where the operator does a little “fine work.” The uprights are always
made a little loose, so that by a very slight pressure from the shoulder on
the part of the manipulator, at the point “A,” they may be bent from a
perpendicular position to that indicated by the dotted line B. The inevitable
result is that when the ball swings back, the force of gravity draws
it on one side of the peg, and the unfortunate speculator sees that he has
lost the money which he paid for the privilege of throwing it.
This game, at first blush, appears to be so perfectly “square,” that
the assistance of the “capper” is rarely needed, although sometimes they
may be employed to advantage.
.bn 317.png
.pn +1
.pm chaphead 'CHAPTER VIII.' '“GOLD BRICKS.”' chap8
.sp 2
Of all the devices which the fertile brain of the confidence operator
has originated, it may be questioned whether any is more ingenious in
conception or has reaped a richer harvest for the scoundrels who have
operated it than has the “gold brick swindle.” Notwithstanding the
fact that the secular press throughout the country has, for years past,
repeatedly directed public attention to the general nature of this method
of fraud, yet even in the present year of grace the newspapers are month
after month called upon to chronicle new exploits of the same character,
and to record the names of fresh victims.
These journals, however, have never thoroughly ventilated the scheme
in all its details, and in their description of the tactics employed by the
operators they not infrequently draw largely upon their imagination, substituting
fiction for fact. The victim himself is often restrained, by a
sense of shame, from unfolding the full depth of his credulity, not more
than fifteen per cent. of the dupes ever making their losses public. The
author believes that the present exposure is the first authentic recital of
the methods of this class of sharpers ever given to the public from a reliable
standpoint.
.il fn=i_311.jpg w=500px ew=90% alt='gold brick swindle'
To perpetrate the fraud successfully, the co-operation of at least three
confederates is essential, of whom two must be gifted with some dramatic
power. Some little cash is also required, it being necessary to procure a
sample of filings of refined gold, one or two nuggets, and a “brick,” or
bar, of some thirty pounds in weight, composed of brass and copper, costing
about twenty-five cents per pound.
.bn 318.png
.pn +1
The first objective point is the selection of a victim. He must be a
man whose resources are of such a sort as to enable him to produce, at
short notice, a considerable amount in ready cash. It is not considered wise
to deal with a man who may find it necessary to ask for accommodation
at his bank, inasmuch as such action on his part might result in the institution
and prosecution of numberless inconvenient inquiries by the bank
officials. Incredible as it may appear, it is the literal truth that in choosing
a “mark,” the confidence operators frequently have recourse to a reputable
business man in the community, who furnishes the swindlers with
what is known, in slang phrase, as a “pointer” concerning the resources
and personal characteristics of the prominent men in the neighborhood.
In such a case, the party furnishing the information is always fully
informed as to the purpose for which it is desired, and is promised a stipulated
percentage of the dishonest gains, should the fraud be successfully
consummated. The inherent of such a transaction is well calculated
to make the reader recoil in disgust, if not in horror. The author,
however, has been told by men who have successfully perpetrated the
fraud, that men of unblemished reputation, occupying high positions in
social, professional, or commercial circles, some of them even filling posts
of responsible trust in public life, have been personally paid in the presence
of his informants, the notes which constituted their agreed proportion
of the money obtained from the wretched dupe whom they had assisted
in defrauding.
The victim having been thus carefully selected and located, the next
step is to excite his cupidity. The ordinary modus operandi is substantially
as below.
One of the confederates, attired as a miner from Mexico or the far
West, calls upon the party chosen at the latter’s residence. Every detail
of his appearance is attended to with the utmost care, from the seemingly
sun-browned face, the apparent result of years of honest toil in the open
air, to the well-worn, patched trousers carelessly tucked in the large, coarse,
dusty boots. A battered cowboy’s sombrero is negligently perched upon
the head, and around his waist is drawn a buckskin money belt. Having
gained the presence of his prospective dupe, the pretended miner from the
rude camps of “the Rockies” presents a paper on which is written, in
sprawling characters, the victim’s name. For the purpose of illustration
any name will answer; let us suppose that it is Thomas Jones. After he
has handed this paper to the individual in question, the confidence man
(who feigns illiteracy and pretends to be entirely destitute of worldly
wisdom) simulates acute disappointment at discovering that he is not
the Tom Jones for whom he had been looking. He draws out an old
red cotton handkerchief and wipes his eyes, as he sinks, apparently
.bn 319.png
.pn +1
exhausted, into a chair. Naturally the sight of so quaint-looking an
individual awakens the interest of Mr. Jones, and his simulated fatigue
and grief arouse his curiosity, if not his sympathy, and he asks the cause
of his distress. “No, no,” the sharper answers, “You’se not the Tom
Jones I knows; and we’s come so far, and the Indian’s so sick he can’t
tote the gold no furder. And Tom Jones he was to give us the paper
money.” And here the pretended miner permits his feelings wholly to
get the mastery of him, and he bows his head in deepest sorrow. Mr.
Jones would be either more or less than human if, after this, he did not
seek for further information. “What Indian? What gold? What paper
money?” are among the questions which rise to his lips. The confidence
man hesitates for a moment, and if there are any other persons in the
room requests that the latter withdraw. Then he says to Mr. Jones, with
the air of one imparting a great secret: “You looks honest, and I’ll tell
you. We’se got a heap o’ gold, me and the Indian; and we’s looking for
Tom Jones, cause he’s got lots o’ paper money, piles o’ paper money,
locked up in an iron box. And now I can’t find him. I could make him
and all his chillen rich.” “Where did you get the gold?” asks the
now deeply interested Mr. Jones. “We’se tooken it out o’ the mine, way
down in Mexico.” “Where is it?” pursues Jones. “The Indian, he’s
got it,” replies the miner. “And where is the Indian?” “Oh,”
answers the sharper, “he’s down to the big camp, back over there
(pointing), with the house built over the water (a bridge). He’s sick, and
couldn’t come no furder.”
It usually occurs to Mr. Jones at this stage of the conversation that
he has been strangely unmindful of the duties of hospitality, and he
directs that some refreshment be prepared and set before his guest. While
this is being done, the host, who has by this time become very urbane,
tells the stranger that he (Jones) is a wealthy man; that he owns lands
and stock and property of various descriptions, and that he has “paper
money, lots of it;” that it is therefore unnecessary for the miner to seek
for the other Mr. Jones, as he can do business with him. To this proposal,
however, the unsophisticated miner refuses to assent. He wants to see
“his” Mr. Jones, and he expresses his intention of going on to the next
town, where he professes to believe that he can find tidings of the whereabouts
of that mysterious individual. Before he takes his departure he
promises, in compliance with the oft-repeated request of his host, that in
case he fails to find the man of whom he is in quest he will return.
It is a very common practice, in working this scheme, for the swindler,
shortly before leaving his victim, to take from his belt a small nugget,
which he hands to the intended dupe, with the request that he take it to
the nearest “medicine shop” (drug store), and after he has had some
“smoke water” (acid) poured on it to carry it to the watchmaker’s (jeweler’s)
.bn 320.png
.pn +1
and sell it for what it is worth, bringing back the proceeds. This shrewd
move of the confidence man serves a double purpose: it convinces the
victim that he actually has gold, and at the same time leads him to suppose
that he is dealing with a man wholly inexperienced in the ways of
the world.
After a day or two the swindler returns, attired as before. He has
failed to find the Thomas Jones whom he was seeking, but has learned
where he is. Will the Mr. Jones whose acquaintance he has so recently
formed kindly write a letter to his old friend at his dictation? Of course
Mr. Jones assents, and the epistle is indited to the mythical personage,
something after the following manner:
“Dear Friend, Mr. Tom Jones:—Me and the Indian has come on
with the first lot of gold.”
Here the pretended miner pauses, and asks his amanuensis if he will
keep his secret. Jones, who is anxious to hear what is to follow, readily
promises. The sharper, however, insists upon his taking an oath of
secrecy, which is duly administered, the affiant sometimes, in his eagerness,
raising both hands. This ceremony having been performed, the
writing of the letter is resumed, its tenor running something after this
fashion:
“We’s got all the rest hid away, and there’s ten millions worth of it.
Now you come right off with the paper money, ’cause the Indian
he’s sick, and me and him wants to go back to Mexico. Come right now.
We’s got enough to make us all rich.”
The thought of $10,000,000 in the hands of an ignorant old miner and
an untutored child of the forest excites the cupidity of Mr. Jones to a
high degree. He chafes under the reflection that his chance of securing
a considerable proportion of this vast sum is drifting away from him.
He believes that his superior knowledge of the world and his familiarity
with business customs and forms would render it a comparatively easy
matter for him to make himself the owner of the lion’s share of an
immense fortune, and he mentally curses the other Jones, from the bottom
of his heart.
The letter having been completed, the miner is asked to give the
address. He promptly answers, “Mississippi.” “Mississippi,” repeats
Mr. Jones. , Mississippi is a big State, like this. Your
letter will never reach him directed to Mississippi. What The
sharper does not know any other address, and begins again to bemoan
his hard lot at having come so far to no purpose, and “the Indian so
sick.”
The “sucker” believes that this is his opportunity. He again
assures his new friend that he himself will buy the gold from him, and
after much persuasion prevails upon the confidence man to reveal the
.bn 321.png
.pn +1
whereabouts of the “Indian” who has in his custody so much of the
precious metal.
The result of this interchange of confidence is that the swindler and
the “sucker” start together for the town where the “Indian” is supposed
to be. Usually some point at a distance of perhaps 100 or 200
miles is chosen in which to locate this mysterious personage. Sometimes
the confidence man buys the railroad tickets, sometimes the dupe; at all
events, the fares are paid and the pair start for their point of destination.
On arriving at the place named, the two confederates (who have
usually been apprised of the hour of their arrival) are there at the railway
station, and carefully note the signal given by the “miner.” If the
latter raises his hat, they know that everything is proceeding satisfactorily.
If he shakes the lapel of his coat, they understand that “the jig
is up,” and that they had better “take quick steps and long ones.”
Sometimes the information is conveyed by means of an umbrella or stick.
If the same is carried across the shoulder, “all is well”; if as a walking
cane, there is “danger ahead.”
It is needless to say, that of these two confederates one is the mysterious
“Indian.” The other is what is technically known as a “trailer,”
whose duty it is to follow the “sucker” wherever he goes, keeping him
continually in sight and noting his every movement.
Immediately upon receiving the pre-arranged signal at the station,
the first confidence man and his victim now repair to the spot
in the woods whither the “Indian” has gone. On reaching the
locality the bar is exhumed from the hiding place in which it had
been previously buried. The “redskin,” whose “make-up” has
been as carefully arranged as that of the “miner,” corroborates the statement
that the gold is there, and Mr. Jones is given a glimpse of the glittering
but spurious metal.
If the latter should go to a drug store and purchase a bottle of acid,
with which the supposed gold may be tested, the services of the third
confidence man are called into requisition, but he himself is kept carefully
in the background. When the dupe procures the necessary acid, the
“trailer” buys a precise duplicate of the bottle. The contents of this
latter bottle, however, are poured out and replaced by water.
When the victim returns to the spot on which he has left the
“Indian” and the supposed “miner,” the latter has already received
from his confederate the bottle of water, identical in size, appearance and
label with that which the dupe has in his pocket. “Mr. Jones” is informed
that the “Indian” has no objection to the pouring of “smoke
water” (acid) upon the “brick,” but that he is fearful of being put to
sleep through the administration of “sleepy water” (chloroform). This
ingenious story satisfactorily accounts for the request which the sharper
.bn 322.png
.pn +1
makes that “Mr. Jones” shall hand the bottle to him, in order that the
“Indian” may receive the acid from the hands of his This suggestion
appears reasonable, and the eager dupe promptly turns over his
bottle to the “miner,” who easily substitutes therefor his own previously
prepared bottle of water, which is poured upon the composition, and of
course without effect. The dupe now feels tolerably certain that the bar
shown him is of genuine gold. In order to satisfy him completely, however,
the confidence man produces an augur and brace, which he hands
to the dupe with a request that the latter bore into the “brick” and
carry off the filings in order to have them assayed. As soon as a sufficient
quantity of filings has been obtained, the sharper places them in a piece of
paper torn off from that which the “brick” has been wrapped, and ostensibly
hands them to Jones. As a matter of fact, the latter does not
receive the borings which he believes that he does, the swindler dexterously
substituting at the critical moment, a package similar in appearance,
but containing filings of refined gold with which the have
taken the precaution to provide themselves.
The assay naturally shows gold of from 18 to 20 karat fineness, and
Mr. Jones is now quite ready to make the purchase. He goes to his
bank, draws his money, and returns to the “Indian” and the “miner.”
The bar is weighed and its value is computed. Mr. Jones then asks how
the money is to be divided. “Why,” replies sharper number one, “into
three piles; one for you, one for me and one for the Indian.” This
arrangement is eminently satisfactory to the “sucker,” who has probably
already attempted to defraud his companions by means of a false computation,
and who now thinks that he sees his way clear to make a purchase
of pure gold at about two-thirds of its value.
The money having been paid over, the brace of confederates at once
take their departure for parts unknown and Mr. Jones returns to his home
laden down with a ponderous mass of metal worth about $9, but for which
he has paid many thousands.
Another favorite method of perpetrating the swindle is as follows:
Two confederates repair to the farm of some wealthy man and at a chosen
spot bury one of the bars of spurious gold. A chart showing a “lay of the
land,” is then carefully prepared and so treated as to give it the appearance
of antiquity. All preparations having been carefully made, the confidence
men drive up to the residence of the intended dupe, and after some
conversation in the course of which they are at pains to satisfy themselves
that he is the individual for whom they are looking, they inform him that
they have learned that there lies buried upon his farm a mass of gold of
great value. Some plausible story is invented to account for their having
come into possession of this information. The chart is now produced,
and the farmer is surprised to see so correct a diagram of his property.
.bn 323.png
.pn +1
The spot where the “brick” has been buried is carefully and accurately
located upon the plat.
This appeal to the avarice of the intended victim rarely fails to accomplish
the end desired. He is anxious to commence digging for the
precious metal without delay. The swindlers allow him to conduct the boring
himself. Operations having been begun, in due time the spade or pick
of the digger strikes the bar, whose glittering appearance arouses every
instinct of cupidity in the breast of the countryman. The sharpers at
once offer to sell out their interest to him for comparatively one half of
the value of the supposed gold. The same tactics, substantially, with
regard to testing and assaying the metal are resorted to which have been
already described. The value of the “find” is computed, the “sucker”
pays over his money, and the confidence man leaves him to repent of his
folly at his leisure.
.il fn=i_317.jpg w=500px ew=90%
.ca THE “MINER” AND “TOM” JONES.
.bn 324.png
.pn +1
.nf c
EVERY BIT TRUE.
[BY REV. JOHN SNYDER.]
.nf-
.sp 2
.pm start_poem
There’s no art
To find the mind’s construction in the face:
He was a gentleman on whom I built
An absolute trust.
—[Shakespeare.
.pm end_poem
.sp 1
The “second bell” had rung and yet I had not responded to the
clamoring call to breakfast. An impatient rap at my door.
“Papa, papa,” from my oldest daughter. “There’s a gentleman
waiting to see you.”
“Yes, yes, I am coming. I am not one of the seven sleepers.”
Who could it be? The early morning hour is sacred to beggars
having elaborate and well-worn letters of introduction, some of which
have seen service so long that the paper upon which they are written
holds together as poorly as the clumsy tales of their bearers. Sometimes
calls for funeral services come in the dewy morning, and oftener bashful
young gentlemen stop in buggies and say with nervous energy, but
trembling lips, “Dr. Snyder, I would like—we would like to have you do
a little job for me—I mean for us. We’re going to get married to-morrow
night and we’d like to have you tie the knot. We often come to hear you
preach on Sunday evenings.” And then I recognize the sterner half of
a handsome young couple who come rather late to church and sit on the
back seat and keep up a religious conversation during the whole service.
All this time I am hurrying into my morning gown. It is a little
torn in the sleeve, by the way, and when I am in haste I always strike
the wrong side of the sleeve-lining. Down stairs I go, and in the hall
sits a man who has none of the blushing uneasiness of the prospective
bridegroom. My hand is cordially grasped in a palm that seems to bear
enthusiastic honesty and simple affection in its very grip.
“Are you Dr. Snyder?”
“So people call me who don’t know the facts of the case,” I
answer with a smile.
“John Snyder,” he persists, with increasing eagerness.
a question.”
I never saw a deeper melancholy shadow a man’s face or sadden his
voice. He seemed broken-hearted, bewildered with some unspeakable
sorrow.
“I’ve come 2,500 miles to see you, and now you ain’t the man I’m
looking for,” he said at last.
.bn 325.png
.pn +1
I drew him into the parlor, and in the bright light got a better look
at his face and form. He was one of Bret Harte’s portraits stepped out
of the frame. Of medium height, slightly but strongly built, his form
had about it that untaught and indefinable grace of movement which it is
popularly supposed is imparted only by the untrammeled freedom of
forest life. His long brown hair slightly curled, fell about his neck, and
his handsome beard evidently was as innocent of steel as that of a Nazarite’s.
He was roughly dressed, having a pair of alligator boots, to which
doubtless the newsboy’s “shine” was an untried novelty. But it was
his face that chiefly charmed me. His nose was straight and clearly cut
and his eye was as frank and innocent as a baby’s. When he spoke his
speech was flavored with that Southern twang which no man not to the
“manner born” can ever imitate.
“Yes,” he repeated, with increasing sorrow in his soft voice, “I have
come 2,500 miles to see you, and you ain’t the man.”
“You were looking for somebody bearing my name?”
“Yes, sir. You see I’ve been livin’ for about twelve or thirteen
years down on the borders of old Mexico, among the Indians and half-breeds.
An’ there was a man come down there several years ago by the
name o’ Snyder, John Snyder, that’s your name, ain’t it? Yes. Well,
he’d been a Methodis’ preacher and he come from my own State, North
Carliny. He used to work in the mines an’ he used to preach, too. An’
I tell you he was a mighty good man. ’Fore he come things was awful
rough in that camp. Why, they use ter kill a man almost every week.
I’ve seen a fellow shot right dead on a bar-room floor and nobody’d take
any notice of him, and one of them rough women would go up to the bar
to take a drink of whisky and her clothes would jest brush over the dead
man’s face! But I tell ye when that preacher come things began to be
different. All that killing business begun to stop. The boys jest thought
everything of him. They’d trust him with everything they had in the
world. And he come to St. Louis about five or six months ago and I
want to find him the worst way.”
Thinking that as my heroic namesake had come from North Carolina,
he would naturally belong to the M. E. Church, South, I directed
my disconsolate visitor to the book concern of that branch of the church
militant. As he turned to leave the door he said, “If I didn’t find that
preacher, could you let me come back and get you to write me a letter,
for I can’t write?” I was touched by the sense of desolation and
pitiable ignorance in which this lonely creature seemed to dwell, and said
cordially:
“Come back, and I will do anything I can to serve you.”
In the early morning of the next day my backwoods hero presented
himself. He had searched the city through, but the saintly miner-preacher
.bn 326.png
.pn +1
was nowhere to be found. And yet there was a gleam of dimmest
hope in his eye and a sweet and quiet smile upon his lips, for he
seemed to transfer all his loving, clinging confidence to me.
“Well, I couldn’t find him,” he said. “Now, I’ll just tell you in
what kind of a fix I’m in. I’ve been out of the mines fur nigh onto
thirteen years, and sometimes I’ve got together as much as $12,000 or
$13,000 at a time, and then it would jest kinder melt away from me.
Now I see a chance to make some money. Fur about twelve years I’ve
hed a chum who’s a half-breed Indian, a fellow by the name of
Zamora. Well, about six months ago he was out hunting with some
full-blooded Indians, and they chased a small deer up the side of a hill;
when all of a sudden the deer went out of sight. My chum went up to
the place where he missed him, and looking down a hole, saw him jest
about four or five feet down. So he went down after him. When he
got down there he forgot all about the deer, I tell ye. He was jest in a
hole o’ gold! He got the Indians to help him, and right there and then
he got out some chunks, and buildin’ a fire where they was campin’,
they made what them fellers call a dobie mold and jest run some of the
gold into that. After he had filled them Indians full o’ whiskey he knew
they’d never think of the place again, and so when he got rid o’ them he
went back alone and got what stuff was on the surface. Then he come
and told me about it; but mind ye, he didn’t show me the place. Them
half-breeds are mighty suspicious. But he brought out three of the
chunks. I showed a piece of the stuff to a fellow named Bailey—Capt.
Bailey they called him, and he stole it. He said, ‘An Indian ain’t got
any rights Well, if I’d tried to get it back none of the boys
would ’er backed me up, ’cause they’re all down on Indians, and Zamora
wouldn’t let me trust another feller in the camp. He says to me, says he,
‘Let’s go look for that preacher; we can trust him; these fellers ’ill not
only rob us, but put lead into us, too.’ So we come to Kansas City and
I buried two of the chunks of stuff in a hole about three feet deep, and
then we brought the other chunks here. Now, you see what we want
to do is this: First of all, we want to find some man we can trust. That
half-breed won’t hardly let me speak to a white man. He is always
sayin’: You’ve been cheated once trustin’ a white man, now jest do
my way. Let’s find that preacher, we know we can trust him. Well,
we’ve lost the trail of that preacher and I want you to help us out. I’ll
pay you well fur your trouble.”
I said: “My business is to help people in trouble. What can I do
for you?”
“Jest this. We want to go back to that country and fetch out the
rest of that stuff. We’ve got to get a lot o’ burros and some wagons,
and some full-blooded Indians and some good ponies and rifles. There’s
.bn 327.png
.pn +1
a town, a little place, about ten miles from where this half-breed has hid
the stuff. My plan is to take the Indians to this place and then Zamora
and me to start off in the night with two or three burros. We’ll go at
night so’s no feller’ll foller us. We’ll get the stuff, pile it on the burros,
and bring it all away at the same time. If we give them Indians $10
apiece and a new rifle and plenty of whiskey they’d be drunker’n owls
before night. Then we can ship the stuff on a railroad and bring it here.
Now, we’ve got to get about $2,500 or $3,000 to get the things we want;
and we want to raise it on the price of the stuff we’ve got along with us.
Now, will you help us? I believe we can trust you, ’cause you look
square and straight.”
I endeavored to blush at the childlike compliment, and said:
“What can I do? I never had $3,000 in my life, and never expect
to have.”
“Mebbe you know somebody that’ll help us.”
“Where is the gold and the half-breed?”
“Down on that street where they’re puttin’ up a big brick building.”
“On Olive street. Why don’t you take the gold and sell it
”
“Now, that’s jest where the stubbornness of that half-breed comes
in. He’s sick in bed. Got the worst kind of a cold, on his lungs, I
guess, and he won’t let that chunk go out of his sight. He’s afraid that
if we take that stuff to find out how fine it is somebody’ll foller us, and
we’ll never get out of this town alive. You know them fellers is awful
suspicious. What I want you to do if you’re willin’ to help us, is to
jest come down and take a bit of this stuff and see how fine it is, and
mebbe you can find some way to help us out.”
Curiosity mingled with benevolence. I was anxious to see this mass
of gold and talk with this suspicious half-breed. While going to Fourteenth
and Olive streets, where the treasure rested under the sleepless
eye of the non-confiding son of the forest, my innocent miner would turn
his soft and girlish eyes upon my face and speak with wonder and awe of
the height of the and the crowded condition of the streets. I was
ushered into a darkened room with much mystery, where a human figure
was lying in bed, with his face muffled up in the bed clothes. Like
Claude Melnotte, he had not found the raw atmosphere of St. Louis like
“the soft air of his native South.” Between his half-suppressed groans
he uttered a few words in Spanish and my guide answered in the same
musical tongue. After locking the door and looking cautiously about,
my friend drew from under the mattress at the foot of the bed something
wrapped in the fragment of an old bed-comforter. In a moment a mass
of metal weighing about thirty pounds and shaped like a bar of washing
soap was revealed. Evidently a pure gold brick.
.bn 328.png
.pn +1
“Now,” said David, my innocent-faced friend, “I’ll tell you what
we’ll do. I’ll jest bore some holes in this brick, and I’ll get you to take
the shavings and get ’em melted into a button. Then nobody’ll suspect.
Don’t you see? Then take it to some place down town and have ’t tested.
A feller told me out in the mines that he couldn’t tell how fine it was, but
he knew it was over 18 karats.”
So he bored a dozen holes into this mass of treasure, and collected the
golden shavings into a fragment of the Globe-Democrat. As he came out
of the darkened chamber Davis grasped my hand with deep emotion, and
said: “This is the only chance I’ve had in nigh thirteen years; if this
don’t go through, it jest seems as if I’ll lose my grip.”
I tried to cheer him with a word of sympathy, and hurried to my
friend Witt, of the Eugene Jaccard Company, and giving him a portion of
the metal, begged him to have it tested. We went together to the workroom
of the establishment, where the foreman of the melting department
tested the specimen and declared it to be as fine as coin. It nearly took
my breath away! The long and weary pilgrimage of my humble and
sad-faced friend of the wild woods was about to come to a golden end. He
stood on the threshold of a splendid future! In one of his bursts of generous
trust he had confided to me the secret that the half-breed owned and
had secreted seventy-three other lumps of the virgin metal not counting the
one upon which my eyes had feasted and the two safely hidden in the hillside
at Kansas City. Seventy-six golden bricks, each weighing over thirty
pounds! Let anybody make the calculation and see what prospects the
confiding Davis and the untutored half-breed had in store.
Then I sought out my friend, the United States Assayer, and told
him the brilliant story. I told him of the sweet and Raphael-like countenance
of my friend, of the melancholy sickness and sad distrusts of the
lonely half-breed, who was longing for the sight of his native woods. I
showed him the coin-fine precious metal I held in my hand, and consulted
him about the readiest means of helping the two “babes in the
wood,” who, in their ignorance, were the custodians of this uncounted
wealth. He listened with unflecked courtesy, and then responded in a
voice not musical with tearful sympathy:
“Doctor, I wouldn’t touch it with a ten-foot pole.”
I told him that financially, the pole—so to speak—would have to be
considerably more than “ten foot” to enable me to touch it, even if I was
so disposed. In other words, I was not momentarily fixed to engage in
such enterprises, even if they were endorsed by the angel-faced backwoodsman,
and re-inforced by my own sympathy.
“It looks,” he said, “like a gold brick. It seems to me that I recognize
the not unfamiliar features of an auriferous brick. Why doesn’t
he bring the priceless treasure here? I will pay him the highest price for
.bn 329.png
.pn +1
it. If he doesn’t want to sell I will advance the money they require for
burros, wagons and Indians.”
I meekly presented the picture of the half-breed, whose lungs were
evidently affected and who could not endure the rigors of the St. Louis
climate. He was still obdurate, and refused to invest even intellectually
in this hidden treasure. I said that all the symptoms were undoubtedly
gold-bricky. That there were unquestionably parts of the story that
would not “hold water,” to use the vernacular. That the suspiciousness
of the half-breed was certainly over-strained and phenomenal in its
excess. That the confidence that my friend of the infantile face was willing
to repose in myself, a perfect stranger, was not marked by those
periods of slow evolution by which confidence is proverbially brought to
fruition. Still, I said, that gentle, guileless, St. John-like face haunted
the chamber of my soul’s sympathy. I would as soon expect to see the
wondrous Madonna leave its frame in the Sistine Chapel and try to cheat
me with a dozen semi-decayed peaches at the street corner as to look for
deceit lurking behind the bland and child-like smile of John Davis, the
miner. My friend, the assayer, suggested that the sad smile and Madonna
face of John were part of his stock in trade. “At any rate, Doctor,”
said he, “let him bring the brick here. When I melt it and run it over I
will believe it is solid gold; not till then.”
I sought out Davis and told him that Zamora’s confidence would
have to bear an additional strain; that if it was a necessity he could be
carried on a stretcher to the assay office, bearing the precious nugget in
his bosom if he chose, but that nobody would advance money on a gold
brick of which they had seen nothing but shavings. A mist of tears
seemed to spring into his handsome eyes, and he replied broken-heartedly:
“I’m afraid that I can’t bring him to it. He had to get the doctor
to see him this morning ’cause he was spitting blood, and he’s sure he’ll
die if he don’t get out of this big town. I can’t help him any longer than
to-night, I know. He don’t know the difference, ye know, between a
hundred dollar bill and a one dollar bill, an’ if I could only get some
money jest to show him and let him see that the parties meant fair, ye see,
he’d let the stuff go out of his sight. Then we could sell it or raise the
rest of the money on it, and inside o’ two months I could have the rest o’
that pile here in St. Louis. I tell ye, it jest breaks me up to think o’
losing this chance”—and his words were broken with a heavy sigh.
He wrung my hand warmly and we parted.
.tb
That sad face haunted me. My wife of course saw that something
was troubling my dreams and waking hours, and gave me no rest until I
had confided the whole melancholy story to her. With that wifely anxiety
.bn 330.png
.pn +1
respecting the family income and expenses characteristic of the worthy
ones of her sex, she exclaimed at once: “You are quite sure that this
sympathy didn’t reach your pocket-book?”
“No,” I said, “I am not out of pocket one cent, but if I had been
rich, I am pretty certain I should have invested in that face, even though
there are thin places in the story.”
Strange as it may seem, my word-photograph of that manly woodman’s
countenance did not move her sympathies a whit. A half-dozen
times a day she would inquire, with a mischievous twinkle in her eye:
“Any news yet from Kansas City?” I tried to show her that, on
account of that subtle influence which will always reveal its presence in
the face, it is impossible for a rogue to bear such a face as Davis owned.
The very spiritual laws of the universe were involved in the denial of such
a monstrous supposition. Her only reply was in the expression of a hope
that my pocket-book should not get entangled in any of these psychological
theories.
Four days passed, and still no news of the weary-hearted Davis. On
the fifth day I came into the house bearing a letter in my hand, and said:
“My love, I think I’ve got news of that gold brick.”
My friend the assayer had written to this effect:
“My Dear Doctor:—I wish you would call at the office some time
to-morrow, if you are down town. I have an interesting specimen to
show you.”
I went. On a shelf in the inner vault of the assay office laid that
gold brick. There was no mistaking that treasure. It lay like Cæsar in
the Capitol, its dozen wounds looking dumbly up and pleading to me for
recognition. Thirty pounds of solid coin-fine gold, a fraction of the
stately fortune of that mysterious half-breed who
.pm start_poem
Came like truth and disappeared like dreams.
.pm end_poem
Only the day before a stranger had entered the assay office bearing a
gold button, the quality of which he wished determined. He said his
brother had taken stock in a mine and he wished from this specimen to
know the value of the product. It was as fine as a $20 gold piece. Very
probably it was part of a $20 gold piece.
Some hours later he came again, bearing the precious brick in his
arms. Wonderful to relate! He had seen the borings from this massive
bit of wealth tested and tried, and found to be pure gold, and some
envious fairy, with a magic wand that was able to neutralize the alchemist’s
potent secret, had changed it into a baser metal. He bore in his
arms but thirty pounds of solid brass. He also bore a letter to this
effect:
.bn 331.png
.pn +1
“Sir:—You have been a —— fool to buy thirty pounds of brass. If
you can find another man who will be —— fool to give you $2,000 for
this brass, I will come and do the talking for you and take half the profits.
.ll 66
.rj
John Williams.”
.ll
.sp 1
My dream was shattered. My Bret Harte hero, with his saintly face
and with the flavor of the forest about him, was a vulgar fraud! And yet
he was not all bad. Observe the delicate touch of thoughtful benevolence
with which he generously offered to come back and help his victim regain
a part of what he had lost! There must have been something essentially
noble about him to write like that!
Of course I saw what a clumsy trick it all was. The borings were
made from the lump of brass, but were simply changed after being wrapped
in the bit of newspaper. I have no doubt the gentleman who purchased
the brick sees it clearly enough also.
Since that time I have thought it was not a universal experience
which is expressed in Whittier’s celebrated lines:
.pm start_poem
Of all sad words of tongue or pen,
The saddest of all are “It might have been.”
.pm end_poem
.il fn=i_325.jpg w=275px ew=50%
.ca THE “TRAILER” AND THE “SUCKER.”
.bn 332.png
.pn +1
.pm sectionhead 'BUNKO.'
It is doubtful whether there is a man, woman or child in the United
States, who has been in the habit of reading the daily press, who has not
heard of “Bunko,” and does not have a vague sort of idea that it is a
gigantic scheme for swindling. Yet so hazy is the general information
of the public as to the details of its operation, that even those who may
have read the published accounts of the mode in which the thousands of
unfortunates have been victimized through this scheme, are liable themselves
to be defrauded in a precisely similar manner because of their own
ignorance. I believe that I speak within bounds when I say that millions
have been lost and won through this game. It is my intention to so
thoroughly expose the methods of its manipulators, that hereafter those
who may be fleeced through their operations can attach the blame primarily
only to themselves.
The essential requisites of a “Bunko” outfit are—9 small dice with
a dice-box, a “Bunko” chart, and—last, but by no means least—a skillful
and in every way competent “capper.” It is the peculiar province of
the latter to seek out victims and “steer” them to their ruin. The
devices resorted to in order to lure the unsophisticated into the den of
“Bunko” sharps are too numerous to admit of any detailed description.
There is, however, one fundamental principle underlying them all,—to
gain the confidence of the man whom it is proposed to rob, and then, by
specious representation, to draw him on, step by step, until the unprincipled
gang of scoundrels shall have bled him of the last cent which they
can obtain. Of all descriptions of gamblers, “Bunko” men are, if not
the most astute, certainly the most unscrupulous and the most pitiless.
No chicanery is too contemptible, no treachery too base for them to
employ; and not infrequently they consummate their schemes of fraud by
the perpetration of deeds of actual violence.
The prospective victim having been enticed into the “den of thieves,”
the modus operandi by which he is fleeced will now be described as briefly
as a necessarily full explanation will permit. The first object that meets
his eye is a table upon which is spread an oil-cloth, on which are painted
forty-six squares, numbered from 9 to 54, inclusive. The arrangement
of the numbers is shown in the accompanying diagram, which also shows
the fortune which awaits the players. The game is played by means of
throwing the above mentioned dice. The nine little ivory cubes are
placed in a box and either the “sucker” or the “capper” (who, as a
pretended friend, always plays in concert with the dupe) throws them
.bn 333.png
.pn +1
upon the table. The spots on the top of all the dice are added together,
and the sum total is taken as the number which has been thrown. Reference
is now had to the chart, and the legend painted upon the square
containing the number thrown by the players is read off.
In order to follow the game through, the chart itself must now be
explained. If the reader will look at the diagram, he will see that
some of the squares contain, in addition to the numbers which are painted
upon all of them, figures representing certain sums of money, while
others are marked “0,” yet others “00,” while upon some of them is
depicted the abbreviation “rep.” He will also observe that some of the
squares contain figures representing sums of money which are inscribed
with the abbreviation “cond.” The letters “rep” stand for representing;
“cond” is the abbreviation for conditional. The mode of play may
be best explained by an illustration. If the player, for instance, throws
18, (which number may be found in the upper left hand corner of the
chart), it will be seen that the square bears the abbreviation “rep.” This
indicates that the player may double (i. e., either pay for another chance
and throw again), or withdraw from the game, forfeiting the 50 cents or
$1.00 (usually the latter sum) which he has already paid. Suppose that
he throw 15, which number may be found in the fourth square from the
left in the upper row of the chart, he wins $1.00. If he throws 54—the
second number to the right in the fourth horizontal row of squares—he
wins $500. If he throws a number painted upon a square inscribed with
“0,” “00,” or the abbreviation “chic’y” (which is a contraction for
chancery), he neither wins nor loses, and the proprietors magnanimously
permit him to try his “luck” (God save the mark) again.
But it is when he throws a number corresponding to that in a square
inscribed with a sum of money and the abbreviation “cond” (conditional)
that his bad fortune commences.
And just here it is proper to say, that as a matter of fact it makes
comparatively little difference what number he actually throws, inasmuch
as the man behind the cloth usually counts the spots on the dice to suit
himself. As a rule, the man who is fool enough to risk his money at
such a scheme is too great a fool to see that his number is correctly read.
But if he should insist upon examining the dice for himself, his pseudo-partner,
the “capper,” who sits at his elbow, is always at hand to overturn
one of the cubes, thereby defeating his last, laudable attempt at
self preservation.
.pn +1
.pm sectionhead '“BUNKO” CHART.'
.ta |c:9 |c:9 |c:9 |c:9 |c:9 |c:9|
_
| Cond. | | | |
Rep. | | Rep. | $1.00 | Rep. | $500.00
| $500.00 | | | |
18 | | 39 | 15 | 27 | 10
| 25 | | | |
_
| | | | | Cond.
Rep. | Rep. | Rep. | Ch’cy. | Rep. |
| | | | | $5000.00
32 | 46 | 30 | 42 | 36 |
| | | | | 23
_
| | | | |
$20.00 | $5.00 | $1.00 | 0 0 | $300.00 | 0
| | | | |
12 | 50 | 14 | 20 | 51 | 45
_
| | | Cond. | |
Ch’cy. | $500.00 | Rep. | | $1000.00 | Rep.
| | | $500.00 | |
37 | 54 | 19 | | 53 | 16
| | | 33 | |
_
Cond. | | | | | Cond.
| Rep. | $1000.00 | Rep. | 0 0 |
100.00 | | | | | $100.00
| 24 | 9 | 43 | 49 |
17 | | | | | 28
_
Cond. | | | | |
| Bl’k. | Rep. | Ch’cy. | $5.00 | 0 0
$500.00 | | | | |
| 29 | 35 | 26 | 13 | 34
48 | | | | |
_
| | | Cond. | | Cond.
0 | 0 0 | $300.00 | | Rep. |
| | | $100.00 | | $1000.00
22 | 41 | 11 | | 21 |
| | | 31 | | 40
_
=nb= | Cond. | | | | =blt=
=nb= | | $500.00 | Rep. | Rep. | =blt=
=nb= | $500.00 | | | | =blt=
=nb= | | 52 | 38 | 47 | =blt=
=nb= | 44 | | | | =blt=
_
.ta-
.sp 1
Before describing further the misfortunes of the victim, it will be
well to give a synopsis of the inscription upon the squares, and to point
out the exceedingly ingenious manner in which they are arranged.
The lowest number is nine, for the reason that nine dice are thrown,
and as none of the cubes contain a blank side nine aces is the smallest
.bn 334.png
.bn 335.png
.pn +1
throw that can be made. The diagram gives a fair idea of the arrangement
of the numbers on the average chart. The squares contain:
.ta r:3 l:27 r:7 c:6 w=50%
1 | | $5,000 |prize.
3 | | 1,000 | ”
7 | | 500 | ”
2 | | 300 | ”
3 | | 100 | ”
1 | | 20 | ”
2 | | 5 | ”
2 | | 1 | ”
4 | | Double 0s.|
2 | | Single 0s.|
15| | “Represents.”|
1 | | “Blank.”|
3 | | “Chancerys.”|
——| | |
46 | | |
.ta-
Of the twenty-one prizes, eight are marked “conditional,” the signification
of which word in this connection will be presently explained. Of
the remaining thirteen, the majority are painted upon squares containing
numbers which it is a moral impossibility to throw. Thus a $500 prize
is inscribed over 54, a number which cannot be won by the player unless
all the nine dice thrown turn up sixes, which has never been known to
happen; a $1,000 prize is numbered 9, and cannot be won unless all the
dice turn up aces, which they never do; another $1,000 prize requires a
throw of 53 to win it, which would involve casting eight sixes and one
five, the probability of which is too remote to be worth considering. It
is, however, quite within the range of possibility that a “sucker” may
throw a number calling for one of the smaller prizes, which serves to encourage
him to persevere in his folly.
When a dupe, throwing in concert with a “capper,” has cast a number
calling for a “conditional” prize, the proprietor informs them that
they have each won the sum inscribed upon that square, but only “conditionally,”
the condition being that before payment they shall show that
they have that amount of cash. He exhibits his money to pay the prize,
and professes his willingness to pay it over as soon as he is convinced
that he has not been risking his money against “wind.” Of course, this
claim is preposterous. When the victim was induced to play, he was
invited to buy a chance in a prize distribution scheme, and not a word
was said to him about putting up any stakes or incurring any risk whatever,
other than the loss of his dollar.
However, this reflection does not present itself to the dupe, and under
the exhilarating and stimulating influence of the “capper,” to which
.bn 336.png
.pn +1
is added the apparent prospect of winning a large sum of money for nothing,
he leaves the room in order to obtain the necessary amount, with
which he and the “capper” invariably return. At the same moment, departs
a third confederate, technically known as a “trailer.” The business
of the latter individual is to follow the “sucker” and observe his every
movement. Of course he is expected to return to the “office” of the
gang before the victim and the confederate shall have arrived.
No movement of the dupe escapes him. If he goes to a
bank, in order to draw money, the “trailer” stands close at his
heels, with a bill of some large denomination in his hand, for which he is
prepared to request change in the most courteous manner. No action on
the part of the greenhorn is left unobserved, and when the latter returns
to the room, in company with the “capper,” the proprietor of the scheme
has been thoroughly informed as to every movement which he has made
since his departure. As soon as he shows the money, the man behind
the cloth takes possession of it, and informs the players that they are entitled
to another throw. The “capper” appears to be much excited under
the influence of the extraordinary good fortune which has fallen to their
lot, and the victim is easily induced again to take the box and throw the
dice. If he manifests any hesitation, however, the “capper,” (who, it
must be remembered, always acts as his partner), seizes the box and hurriedly
throws for both, before the “sucker” has time to remonstrate. Of
course, this time he loses. Even should the spots on the cubes as thrown,
when added together, amount to a total sum calling for a prize upon the
chart, either the operator will read the total erroneously, or the “capper”
will overturn one of the dice, thus changing the number actually thrown.
The proprietor at once announces that the two players have lost the
amount of money, which they brought with them and placed in the
banker’s hands. It is idle for the “sucker” to protest that he was not
laying a wager, and that this interpretation of the contract is altogether
wrong and unfair. The “bunko” sharpers have his money and they
intend to keep it, despite all remonstrances. If he offers to make any
disturbance, or manifests any disposition to recover his loss by force, he
is at once either knocked down or thrown out of the room, or sometimes
both together. When he succeeds in summoning the officers of the law
to his aid, and in company with the police revisits the room in which he
was fleeced, he finds that his tenants have departed, carrying with them
the paraphernalia of their trade.
A favorite device under such circumstances, after the greenhorn has
returned with his money and has been induced to throw again, is so to read
the number thrown by him as to call upon him to “represent,” which is
accomplished by calling off a number corresponding to one of the squares
upon the chart which is inscribed with the abbreviation “rep.” In this
.bn 337.png
.pn +1
case, he is told that he must double the amount placed in the banker’s
hands and throw once more, or lose his “stake.” If he is particularly
gullible, and the “capper” has succeeded in persuading him to bring
with him to the den a larger sum of money than that called for by the
proprietor, he will frequently consent to double his money and try again.
As long as he can be induced to keep this up, the sharpers will continue
to play with him. As soon as they discover either that he has no more
money or that he is unwilling to risk any additional sum, he is informed
that he has lost whatever money he may have already advanced.
From the circumstance of sending a dupe after more money, this game
has, of late years, been sometimes designated by members of the fraternity
as
It sometimes happens, however, that the “sucker” when he returns
with this money, insists upon being paid the amount of the prize which
he has won and flatly refuses to put up any more money in the game.
When the sharpers perceive that they cannot induce him to play further
the proprietor takes his money, and makes an entry in a large book, with
a view to giving the transaction a business like appearance. He then
counts out a sum, smaller by some $200 than the amount of the prize, and
places this amount together with the victim’s money in an envelope and
seals it up. He counts the money in the presence of the dupe and informs
him that he has not got the full amount at hand in currency, but that his
agent will call upon him in the morning and pay him the balance. Meanwhile,
he is at liberty to take with him the envelope, containing his own
money and that portion of the prize which the bank is able to pay at the
moment. The banker further states that in order that the agent shall pay
the money it is essential that the seals of the envelope should not be
broken, adding that if they are, no further money will be paid. To this
the victim assents, and he is at once handed an envelope, identical in size
and appearance with that in which he saw the money placed, and sealed
in a precisely similar manner. As a matter of fact, however, the proprietor
has substituted for the envelope containing the money one so closely
resembling it in appearance that the difference cannot be discovered, but
which, instead of currency, contains nothing more valuable than blank
paper.
The manner in which the substitution is effected before the very eyes
of the “sucker” without his knowledge is as follows: The operator
opens the ledger and places between two of the leaves the envelope containing
the bank bills. He then presses down upon the cover of the
ledger, apparently with a view of sealing the package more tightly.
When he opens the ledger, he opens it at another page and takes out the
previously prepared envelope. He then marks a cross in pencil over the
.bn 338.png
.pn +1
seal and asks the dupe to write his name across the flap, in order that
there may be no possible mischance in the identification of the package
when the agent shall call in the morning.
In the description of this game which has been given above, reference
has been made only to the casting of dice as a means of determining the
number made by any player. Sometimes, however, when an attempt is
made to operate the game in resorts of a “higher tone,” cards inscribed
with numbers and abbreviations corresponding to those shown in the
diagram are used. The number of cards is, of course, the same as the
number of squares on the cloth—46. When cards are employed they are
dealt from a box similar to that employed in dealing faro, for a description
of which the reader is referred to the chapter on “Faro.”
In 1882, Floyd Creek, Pete Lelin, and George Curtis, while traveling
in disguise as fugitives from justice—their crime having been the fleecing
of one Wilson, at Eureka Springs in 1881, his disastrous losses causing
instant death—received a “pointer” from a school teacher concerning a
man who had deposited a large sum of money in the bank, and who was
supposed to be a “soft mark.” They watched him carefully and eventually
succeeded in selling him bricks to the value (?) of $22,000. They
received this large sum in gold, and at once took boat for Pensacola.
They did not gain anything by their outrageous swindle. While they
escaped the justice of man, the vengeance of God overtook them speedily,
for their boat sunk and all were drowned, their ill-gotten gains going to
the bottom with them.
.il fn=i_332.jpg w=500px ew=90%
.ca THE FICTITIOUS “ROLL.”
.bn 339.png
.pn +1
.pm chaphead 'CHAPTER IX.' 'CONFIDENCE GAMES.' chap9
.sp 2
The devices of confidence operators for fleecing their victims are
more numerous and ingenious than the minds of unsophisticated, honest
men can readily conceive. These gentry know neither honor, pity nor
remorse. Among their ranks, however, may be found men of brilliant
intellect and high education, who, had they devoted to some honest pursuit
the time and thought which they have expended upon the conception
and execution of schemes of fraud, might have acquired a comfortable
competence and occupied an enviable position in the professional or commercial
world. Their moral nature, however, has become so warped, that
fraud has become instinctive with them and the very name of virtue a
by-word and a mockery.
At the same time, it is but right to say that their success, in the vast
majority of cases, would be impossible were it not for the fact that they
appeal not only to the cupidity of their dupes, but also to a latent element
of dishonesty which requires only temptation and opportunity to call it
into active exercise. The reader who will carefully scan the pages which
follow cannot fail to perceive that the “suckers”—as the confidence men
denominate their victims—are, at heart, no more honest than are the
sharpers themselves. The trap is spread for them and baited with the
prospect of winning “something” for “nothing,” and of deriving advantage
through a resort to deception and trickery. If the dupe did not
believe that he is about to defraud some one else, he would never become
a victim of scoundrels more astute, but little more dishonest than himself.
The man who, when a scheme of fraud is proposed to him, indignantly
repudiates the implied suspicion that he is willing to sacrifice his honor
and integrity for money is not likely to become the dupe of scoundrels
who resort to such practices as are explained in this chapter. It has
always seemed to me that there is a great waste of sympathy upon men
thus victimized. While too much cannot be said in condemnation of
men who make a living through systematic fraud, what is to be said of
those who are eager to avail themselves of dishonest devices which they
themselves have not been sufficiently cunning to invent, but which commend
themselves at once to their avarice and lax morality?
.bn 340.png
.pn +1
.pm sectionhead 'THREE CARD MONTE.'
This is an ancient device of sharpers, with the modus operandi of
which a majority of persons have some acquaintance. It is commonly
resorted to by all gamblers and confidence men, who find their most successful
field of operation upon railway trains; although fairs, circus
grounds, and even camp meetings afford them opportunities of plying
their vocation. The game is played with three cards, which are held by
the operator, who is known in gamblers’ slang as the “spieler,” in his
right hand, between the thumb and first two fingers, the backs towards
the palm, and the cards themselves slightly bending inward. To work
the trick successfully, some sleight of hand is necessary, to acquire which
considerable practice is necessary. The cards are thrown by the “spieler”
upon some flat surface, faces downward. Before throwing them, he shows
the bystanders the cards which he holds in his hand, and after they have
been thrown he invites bets as to the location of some particular card.
To illustrate: he may hold in his hand two aces and a queen; these
he shows; he then places them in his right hand, in the position above
described, and throws them upon the flat surface, faces downward; he
then asks some one to bet which is the queen. The queen may have
been the middle of the three cards as they were held in his hand, but it
by no means follows that it will be the middle of the three cards as they
lie upon the
To work the game successfully, at least one and generally two confederates
are necessary. It has already been said that the favorite place
of operation is the railroad train, and perhaps the reader will gain the
best idea of how the trick is done by describing the manner in which these
sharpers secure and fleece their victims under these circumstances. The
“spieler” is usually attired after the manner of a well-to-do country
farmer or stock-raiser. On his head he wears a battered slouch hat, his
neck is ornamented with a loosely tied red cotton handkerchief; and his
worn trousers are stuffed carelessly into the legs of his cow skin boots.
His confederates, who are technically called “cappers,” are dressed after
the manner of respectable business men of easy circumstances. It should
be remarked, however, that when the precious trio board the train the
“spieler” presents a far more fashionable appearance than when dressed
for business. He usually carries with him a false shirt bosom, an old
overcoat and the slouch hat mentioned above. After he has entered the
cars he takes his seat in the rear end of the coach, and the two “cappers”
pass through the car looking for some one who promises to be an easy
.bn 341.png
.pn +1
prey, and who is commonly known to the fraternity as a “mark” or a
“sucker.” If none is found upon the first car entered, the gang repairs
to the next one, the “spieler” taking up his position in the rear as
before. As soon as a “mark” is selected, one of the “cappers” takes
his seat beside him and raises his hat. At this signal the “spieler”
arranges his cotton handkerchief, puts on his disreputable hat, dons his
well worn overcoat, and tucks his trousers in his boot legs. The effecting
of this transformation scene is known among gamblers as “ringing up.”
The “spieler” goes forward and takes the seat either just before or
directly behind his confederate and intended victim. He engages the
former in conversation, representing himself as a heavy stock-raiser from
the Southwest. He goes on to explain how he has been swindled or
“slicked” out of $500 by a “card sharp.” He adds, however, that they
failed to get all that he had, and thereupon displays or “flashes” a large
roll of money, and slapping his hand upon his side, remarks in a loud
tone, that he has $10,000 more in his belt. At this point the confederate,
with the air of a man of kindly disposition and one who is familiar with
the wickedness of the world, remarks to him that he perceives that he
(the “spieler”) has traveled very little, and advises him to avoid displaying
money in the presence of strangers. The “spieler” laughs, and says
that “he reckons he is able to look after himself.” He adds that he
bought the “paste boards” with which he had been cheated from the
man who had swindled him, and that he intends to take them home and
get his money back by betting with his friends, mentioning, perhaps, by
way of illustration, that he means to “win Bill Jones’s mule, and make
him walk home the very next night that he comes to see his sister.”
His accomplice thereupon asks to see the cards, and they are promptly
produced. The “spieler” begins to exhibit his skill and urges the partner
to bet. The latter says that he can distinguish the cards readily
enough, but does not wish to win the man’s money. After much urging,
the “capper” consents to bet and usually wins two wagers as a matter of
course. The “spieler” thereupon remarks that he does not care to bet
with him any longer, as he is too lucky, and asks the stranger to make a
bet. If the latter shows any hesitation, or if, perchance, he expresses
some scruples on moral grounds, the “capper” whispers to him that he
has a dead certainty of winning and that he had better bet and win, and
“teach the fool a lesson,” after which he can return the amount won if
he chooses. The “spieler” next throws the cards, and while he turns his
head the confederate raises the card and shows the stranger which it is,
slightly bending the corner in order that it may be readily recognized.
The victim is now satisfied that he can bet with certainty, and when
the “spieler” again picks up the cards to throw them he stakes his wager.
The operator, however, with his little finger dexterously flattens out the
.bn 342.png
.pn +1
corner which his accomplice had bent up and bends up the corner of an
entirely different card. When the cards are next thrown, the victim
selects the one with the bent corner, and is deeply chagrined to discover
that it is not the one which he believed it to be.
Sometimes, instead of bending the corner of one of the cards, resort is
had to another and equally effective device. While the three cards are
lying faces downward, the confederate, with a pencil, makes a mark upon
the corner of the winning card. When the “spieler” again turns his
head toward the cards, he picks them up and thrusts them into his
pocket with the remark, “oh, you fellows wont bet anyway.” In his
pocket he has three other cards, duplicates in all respects of those which
he has before shown, and on the corner of one of which is a pencil mark
precisely similar to the one made by the “capper,” but it is not on the
winning card. As he is about to leave, his confederate urges him to
remain, saying, “yes we will bet, come back.” The stranger thinks that
he recognizes the pencil mark, stakes his money, selects the marked card,
finds it is not the winner, and of course loses.
The principal object in having a second is to keep off
disinterested persons who might endeavor to put the proposed victim on
his guard.
Formerly, monte men refused to play for anything except cash; now-a-days,
they are willing to accept bank checks, and the third man is found
extremely serviceable as an innocent purchaser. If the “sucker” raises
a row, and threatens to stop payment of the check, it is a common practice
to produce a piece of paper, perhaps a blank check, folded, which is torn
up in the victim’s presence. The latter, believing that he has seen his
check destroyed, takes no further steps in the matter. It sometimes
happens, however, that a victim will say nothing, but at the same time
secretly intends to stop the payment of the check. To guard against this,
the third man appears upon the scene and with a great show of righteous
indignation, or possibly representing himself to be an officer of the law,
demands that the “spieler” return the check to the victim. Hot words
then pass, and the latter says that if there is going to be such an everlasting
fuss made about so small a matter he will tear up the check and have
done with it. Thereupon, he produces his paper, which he tears up, as
already described, throwing the pieces out of the car window. Of course
in either case, the check remains safe in the sharpers’ possession. The
second confederate, by his apparently magnanimous and disinterested interference
in the victim’s behalf, naturally wins his confidence. He
thereupon makes it his business to remain with him until the “spieler”
and his remaining accomplice shall have had time to present the check for
certification at the bank upon which it was drawn.
It is said, and universally believed by the sporting fraternity, whose
belief is based upon actual experience, that the conductor of the train upon
.bn 343.png
.pn +1
which a game such as has been described is successfully practiced always
expects and receives a percentage of the winnings. If the trick is perpetrated
on a sleeping car, the porter is always given a handsome bonus.
The author has himself been told by one of the latter sort of gentry that
his fees from this source considerably exceeded his pay from the sleeping
car company.
Probably, the king of the monte men was a man known in sporting
circles as “Canada Bill.” He was recognized as a general “all around
confidence operator,” and so distrustful were those who knew him of
appearances which he put forth that on the occasion of his funeral, as the
coffin was being lowered into the grave, one of his friends offered to bet
$1,000 to $500 that “Bill was not in the box.” The offer found no
takers, for the reason, as one of his acquaintances said, “that he had
known Bill to squeeze through tighter holes than that.” It was reported
some years before his death that he had offered one of the Trunk Lines of
Railroad a premium of $25,000 per annum to be allowed to practice confidence
games upon its trains without molestation; a condition of the offer
being that he would not attempt to victimize any class of passengers
except preachers.
One of the most successful schemes for perpetrating this fraud is
known as the “send,” so-called because in some of its essential features
it is closely allied to the game of “bunko.” In both cases the victim is
sent after more money, in order that the harvest of the rascally manipulators
may be increased. One of the favorite modes of winning the confidence
and money of an intended dupe is as follows: The victim having
been selected,—usually a farmer of some wealth,—two of the sharpers
drive up to his residence in a buggy, ostensibly with a view to purchasing
his farm. They are always well dressed and present the appearance of
men of large means. To gain the confidence of the unsuspecting agriculturalist
is a comparatively easy matter. He shows them over his place,
they express their entire satisfaction, and offer him a sum in cash which
is not only far beyond his expectations but also considerably in excess of
the actual value of the property. To complete a bargain under such circumstances
is an easy matter. The trade is made, and the sharpers invite
the farmer to accompany them to the nearest town, where they propose to
draw from the bank the cash necessary to complete the transaction. On
the way to town, they encounter another man, also riding in a buggy,
who engages them in conversation. The stranger represents himself to be
the agent of a new scheme of gift distribution, and at once enlists the interest
of the “capper,” who is riding with the farmer. The party alight
from their buggies and the new-comer introduces the old game of “three
card monte.” He invites them, at first, to “try their luck for fun,” and
by showing them what large sums they might have won had they been
.bn 344.png
.pn +1
playing for actual stakes, he soon induces them to take a venture. In
working this scheme, however, playing cards are seldom used, for the reason
that the average country farmer always cherishes a suspicion of the
paste boards. Accordingly, some other description of cards is employed.
It is usually found to be an easy matter to interest the countryman,
who sees the “capper” apparently “playing in great luck.” He is soon
induced to risk a small amount, and the operator tells him that he and “his
friend” have each won a large sum—perhaps $1,000 or $5,000. The
sharper has now resorted to the devices of the “bunko banker,” and informs
his victim that it will be necessary for him to show the amount of
money which he has won in order to prove that he would have been actually
able to pay the stake had he lost. The countryman, thoroughly convinced
that he is on the eve of winning a large sum, expresses his willingness
to go to town and raise the money. Of course, the of the
gift distribution scheme, obligingly offers to await his return. The farmer
goes to town, obtains the money, and comes back, like the moth to the
candle.
When he returns, the same trickery is resorted to as in the operation
of the game of “bunko,” for a full explanation of which the reader is referred
to that heading. Of course he loses all that he can be persuaded
to venture, and inasmuch as the only two vehicles on the ground are in
the possession of the two sharpers, while the victim is, perforce, compelled
to go afoot, it is a very easy matter for the former to place such a
distance between themselves and the “sucker,” that by the time the latter
has reached some point where he may summon assistance, the precious
pair are far advanced upon their road to safety.
.pm sectionhead 'BOGUS CHECKS.'
The use of fraudulent checks as a means of winning money from the
unwary is a device of confidence men which, although venerable in its
antiquity, is still practiced to a very considerable extent in all parts of the
country. Notwithstanding the fact that it has been repeatedly exposed,
there are probably hundreds of men in the United States who derive a
comfortable income every year through following it up.
The method of operation may be very briefly described. To perpetrate
it successfully sharpers ordinarily act in concert. A favorite field of
operation is found in depots and railroad trains, although hotels and even
public thoroughfares are not despised. The first thing to be done is to
learn the name of the proposed victim, after he has been selected. This
selection is usually easily made, the experienced confidence man having
.bn 345.png
.pn +1
little difficulty in choosing a man whose appearance indicates that he is
not only in good financial circumstances, but also of a nature which renders
him peculiarly liable to be defrauded by this sort of trick. His name
is usually learned by accosting him by some name which the sharper
knows to be incorrect. Naturally, the stranger corrects him by stating
who he is and where he resides. This much learned, reference is had to
a bank directory of the United States (a copy of which these men always
carry with them), and the name of the banks and bankers and prominent
business men at his place of residence, ascertained. Having thus posted
himself, the swindler informs the “sucker” that he hails from the same
locality and is well acquainted with Mr. So-and-So, naming some prominent
citizen of the town or city in which the victim resides. If the game
is to be played at a depot, the sharper enters the train with the dupe and
takes a seat near him. He has previously been at great pains to make
himself as entertaining and confidential as possible. All at once, sharper
number two appears upon the scene and presents a bill to his confederate,
saying that he has made it out in compliance with his request and upon
his promise that it should be paid. The swindler expresses himself as
entirely satisfied with the account, but says that he has not sufficient
currency to make a full payment. He thereupon produces a check for
a considerably larger sum, which he asks his confederate to cash, discharge
the debt, and return him the balance in money. This, of course,
the second sharper says that he cannot do. Sharper number one now
turns to the “sucker,” and asks him if he will be kind enough to loan
him the amount of his confederate’s pretended claim, taking the check as
security. In seven cases out of ten, the swindlers have so carefully
selected their victim and so artfully won his confidence, that the dupe
readily consents to make the loan desired. If, however, he has not the
full amount of money with him, his new acquaintance is quite ready to
accept what he has, with which he makes a payment on “account” to his
friend. The “sucker” takes the check and puts it away in his pocket-book
as security. The two confederates then walk down the aisle of the
car, chatting pleasantly and exchanging words of farewell. When they
reach the platform they both jump off the car and the victim sees neither
of them again. When he attempts to realize upon his supposed “security,”
he finds that the draft is not worth the paper on which it was written.
Among sharpers this trick is commonly known as the “con game,”
or “check racket.”
Sometimes an appeal is made to the sympathy of the proposed victim.
At the city of Louisville, Kentucky, one of these gentry appealed to a
stranger to cash a check for him on the score that he was entirely unacquainted
in the city and was carrying home the body of his deceased
brother for burial. He led his dupe to the baggage car and showed him
.bn 346.png
.pn +1
a box containing a coffin. It is needless to say that the corpse contained
therein was that of a person entirely unknown to him. Producing a
draft for $1,700, he so artfully worked upon the sympathy of the man
to whom he had appealed, that the latter handed him the sum of $520—all
that he had with him—and took the worthless paper as security, the
sharper representing that he was journeying to the same point of destination
as was the dupe, and that on their arrival there he would experience no
difficulty in obtaining currency for the draft. On the same day the same
individual victimized another stranger out of $225 by the same device,
pointing out the identical corpse which he had shown to his first victim.
Of course this particular form of this phase of swindling cannot be perpetrated
successfully unless the swindlers are, by chance, favored by
finding a coffin on some departing train.
.pm sectionhead 'OVER ISSUE.'
This is a comparatively modern variation of the old “saw-dust”
swindling scheme. It is frequently found to be very easy to work, and
the returns are sometimes large. Usually two sharpers act in concert,
although sometimes one plays the game alone.
The victim selected is usually a man greedy for gain, rather “tight-fisted,”
and one who is supposed not to be over scrupulous. Considerable
care is exercised in selecting the person on whom it is to be played. He
is approached by one of the confidence men, who informs him that he has
on hand a large money-making scheme, the probable profit of which will
run up to at least $100,000. The sharper displays plenty of money
and soon succeeds in convincing the prospective dupe that he is a man of
large wealth. The interest of the victim having been awakened, it not
infrequently happens that he invites the confidence operator to be a guest
at his house. Should this occur, the invitation is invariably declined, the
swindler saying that he is paying some $4 or $5 per day for his board,
but that that outlay is entirely immaterial to him, inasmuch as he has an
abundance of cash. After several business conversations have taken place
between the two, and the cupidity of the victim has been thoroughly
aroused, the sharper hands him a bill of some large denomination, with
a request that he go and purchase some cigars. When he returns with
the change, the operator asks him if the bill was good. Receiving an affirmative
reply, he nods his head sagely, and says, “I thought so.” His
next move is to take from his pocket a large roll of bills, from which he
desires the dupe to select one, which he is to take to the bank in order to
get change. On his return, the confidence man, after pledging him to inviolable
.bn 347.png
.pn +1
secrecy, informs him that he will make his fortune in a year. He
tells him that he has an uncle in the treasury department at Washington
that at the time of the last printing of treasury notes, there was surreptitiously
secured an over-issue of $5,000,000; that he (the sharper) is
agent for his uncle for the disposition of $1,000,000 of the sum. He adds
that he cannot allow any single purchaser to take more than $10,000 or
less than $3,000, but that within these limits he will dispose of these bills,
printed from genuine plates and on government fibre paper, at the rate of
50 cents on the $1.00.
The greenhorn thus sees the way clear to a speedy, even if dishonestly
acquired fortune. When he has bitten at the bait and expresses himself
ready to go on with the transaction, the confidence man takes him to
another town, where the money is to be paid over to him. A common
device then is to go to some hotel, where the money is counted out in the
presence of the sucker and placed in an express envelope, which is securely
sealed. The package is addressed to the victim at the town in
which he resides, and the pair leave for the express office. Of course, the
package which is delivered to the express company is not the one which
the dupe saw sealed up. Another one, precisely similar in size and appearance,
has been substituted without his knowledge. The dupe pays
over his money and the sharper disappears from the scene of action.
When the victim reaches home and obtains his package from the
local agent of the company, he finds upon opening it that it is filled with
blank paper.
I have never known but one instance in which a man thus duped
undertook to make any fuss. Usually, the sharper sends his dupe a
letter, calling his attention to the fact that to attempt to stir up any
difficulty will be simply to expose his own stupidity and dishonesty.
This view of the matter is so eminently logical that the victim submits to
his loss without a .
.pm sectionhead 'DROPPING THE PIGEON.'
This device of confidence operators is sometimes known as the
“pocket book game.”
One of the ways in which the trick is played may be thus described.
A piece of pasteboard, cut in the form of a Greek cross, is folded over in
such a way that the arms shall cross at the centre. A slit is neatly cut in
the middle square and a small silver coin, perhaps a three or five cent
piece, placed therein. Another coin of the same denomination is placed
on the square itself, underneath the folded arms. The whole is then tied
.bn 348.png
.pn +1
up with a piece of blue ribbon. When a “mark” has been selected, one
of the two confederates who are to operate the game drops it on the road
or on the sidewalk, as the case may be. The second confederate, who has
managed to scrape an acquaintance with the proposed victim, comes along,
walking in his company. His eye at once rests upon the peculiar looking
package, which he stoops and raises from the ground. Opening it, the
sharper and the dupe examine it together. The former calls the attention
of the latter to the exposed silver coin. Raising his eyes, he sees his confederate
approaching and looking at the ground as if for something he had
lost. He directs the eyes of the “sucker” toward him and remarks that
they will now “have a little fun.” Taking the coin, he hands it to the
dupe, telling him to put it in his pocket. As soon as his confederate
comes near enough, sharper number one asks him if he has lost anything.
The accomplice replies in the affirmative, saying that it was a keepsake
from his mother, which he valued highly. He describes the package, and
says that it contained a coin of a certain denomination. The first confidence
man thereupon produces the package, but tells him there is no coin
inside of it. The pretended owner professes great surprise, and offers to
bet any sum that a coin of the denomination named is within the bundle.
The “sucker,” thinking that he sees an opportunity to make some money
without incurring any risk, accepts the wager. The money having been
put in the hands of the first confidence man, the confederate opens the
package, raises the concealed slip in the pasteboard, and reveals the hidden
coin. Of course he is at once declared to have won the bet.
Sometimes, instead of a piece of pasteboard prepared as described, a
pocket-book with a secret compartment is employed.
Another form of the “pocket-book game” is to drop a wallet containing
a considerable sum in counterfeit money. This is found by the
confidence man and the “sucker.” The former, having picked it up, exhibits
its contents to the dupe, whose cupidity is at once aroused. His
companion offers to allow him to take the pocket-book and advertise for a
reward, provided that he (the “sucker”) will give him $25. The greenhorn
thinks that this is a very easy way of making money, and having no
intention of advertising the finding of the wallet and being chiefly anxious
to get rid of the only witness of his intended fraud, readily assents. If he
offers to pay the $25 from the bills in the pocket-book, the confidence man
refuses to accept them, alleging as a reason that the man who lost the
money may possibly have made a memorandum of the numbers of the bills
or have some other means of identifying them.
In such cases as these, the victim rarely makes complaint, for the
reason that to do so would be to expose his own avarice, greenness, and
dishonesty.
.bn 349.png
.pn +1
.pm sectionhead 'THE TOBACCO BOX.'
This scheme of fraud is sometimes successfully worked; although to
operate it, it is necessary to secure a peculiarly gullible victim. Two
confederates act in unison.
After a dupe has been selected, sharper number one approaches him
and engages him in conversation. He soon produces a wooden tobacco
box, the cover of which swings upon a pivot placed at one end. This he
opens and takes out a chew, at the same time offering the box to the
“sucker.” He then asks the latter if he does not admire his box, which
he says was a present to him from a friend. He then closes the cover
and hands it to the dupe for examination. Inside the box, is a slender
wire, which, when the box is inverted, falls upon a groove in the top and
effectually prevents its being opened. The greenhorn attempts to slide
the cover around, but finds it impossible. The sharper laughs, and tells
him that there is a little trick about the box by means of which he has
won money, drinks and cigars. He then takes it in his hand, secretly
unlocks it, and holding it out toward the dupe, presses on the end and
tells him to try again to open it. Of course, the box being unlocked,
the slide swings easily. The victim believes that the secret of opening
lies in pressing on the end, and is confirmed in this belief by making
repeated trials. At this juncture, upon receiving a preconcerted signal,
the confederate approaches and asks for a chew of tobacco. The first
confidence man hands the box to his partner, who professes to be unable
to open it. “Why,” exclaims sharper number one, “this gentleman can
open it easily enough.” The confederate offers to bet that he cannot.
The money is produced and the stakes placed in the dupe’s hands. The
latter is given the box, and, it being unlocked, opens it without difficulty.
The money is then handed to the owner, and the second sharper remarks
that if the gentleman can open it he can. The box is then locked by its
owner, before he hands it over to his confederate. The latter makes an
attempt to swing the lid, and pretending that he is unable to turn it
(although he well knows the secret of its mechanism), offers to bet $100,
or any sum which it is thought that the dupe may be induced to wager,
that the stranger cannot open it either. The “sucker,” feeling confident
that he has “a sure thing,” accepts the bet, stakes his money, placing it
in the hands of sharper number one, and is given the box, which has
been securely locked. When he attempts to turn the cover by pressing on
the end as before, he finds it absolutely impossible to move it. Of course,
the second confidence man claims the stakes, which are promptly paid
him by his confederate.
.bn 350.png
.pn +1
.pm sectionhead '“KNIFE.”'
This device for swindling is similar, as regards the method of its
operation, to the game of the “tobacco box.”
The fraud is perpetrated in substantially the same way, and the trick
consists of the use of a secret mechanism in each which so effectually prevents
the opening of either of them that the dupe is put at the mercy of
the sharpers.
One of the modes of fleecing a “sucker” by this means (and the
same method is sometimes employed with the “tobacco box”) is to instruct
him in the mode of opening the device in question under any and
all circumstances. After he has thoroughly learned the whole secret of
the contrivance, a confederate opportunely happens along, and after some
conversation, in the course of which the particular device is produced and
discussed, offers to bet that he can open it, at the first trial. The greenhorn
accepts the wager and puts up his money. The second sharper, who
has been posing as an entirely unsophisticated individual, takes the contrivance
in his hands and, knowing the secret through which it may be
worked, opens it without any difficulty, whereupon he claims and receives
the stakes.
.pm sectionhead '“PADLOCK” AND “SAFE.”'
In some of its features these devices resemble the “tobacco box” and
“knife.” The mode of working the cheat, however is somewhat different.
Both the “padlock” and “safe” open with a lock, the operation of
which is explained to the proposed dupe. After the latter believes that
he thoroughly understands the entire scheme, and is willing to lend himself
to the perpetration of a fraud upon someone else, a confederate conveniently
appears. A bet is soon arranged between the sharper and the
“sucker,” and the money placed in the hands of the man who has produced
the device and explained its construction to the victim. The greenhorn,
after putting up his money, proceeds to demonstrate how easily he
can open the lock. The fraud consists in the substitution (or ringing in,
as gamblers term it), to a different lock or safe, which is handed to the
dupe instead of the one first shown him, and which he finds himself utterly
unable to open for the exceedingly satisfactory reason that although
the keyhole is there, the contrivance contains no lock whatever. Having
failed to perform what he undertook to do, he is promptly declared to
have lost his wager, and the stakes are handed over to the confidence
man who has laid the wager against him.
I was once engaged in fleecing the unwary by means of one of these
padlocks at Little Rock, Arkansas. Another gambler was using the same
.bn 351.png
.pn +1
trick at the same place. He had in tow, as an intended victim, a “manufactured
sucker,” a man I had previously instructed in the trick, and to
whom I had given a padlock precisely similar to the one which was being
used by the other confidence man. At the proper moment, the supposed
“sucker” substituted the latter for the one handed him by the
other sharper. As a matter of course, when he undertook to unlock the
one which I had given him, he was able to do so without any difficulty.
My rival in business was undoubtedly immensely surprised, but paid the
greenhorn the amount of his winnings without question. I do not pretend
to say that I was actuated on this occasion by any philanthropic motives.
My act was influenced only by a desire to get the better of a man
who prided himself on being so astute at working confidence games that
no one could impose upon him.
.pm sectionhead '“QUARTER UNDER FOOT.”'
This swindling trick can rarely be played except for small sums. It
is usually practiced at saloons, and requires the co-operation of a confederate.
One of them first enters the resort, and, after patronizing the bar,
stands around after the manner of ordinary customers. At the proper
moment, the accomplice enters, feigning drunkenness. He accosts his
confederate—the one who first entered the drinking place—and offers to
throw dice with him to see which of the two shall pay for the liquid
refreshments for all present. Some conversation ensues, in the course of
which the second sharper, after drawing some money from his pocket,
contrives to drop a quarter on the floor. Assuming an air of drunken
braggadocio, he offers to bet that no one in the room can take the quarter
from under his foot, which he places directly upon the coin. Sharper
number one begins to “chaff” him, and the apparently intoxicated individual,
staggering to and fro, moves his foot off of the coin. As he
momentarily turns his head, the confederate lifts the money from the
floor and places it in his own pocket. When his accomplice again turns
around, he tells him that he is exceedingly drunk, but that he will bet
them there is no quarter under his foot at all. The “sucker” meanwhile
stands by, an interested spectator, and an appeal to his greed for money
usually induces him to make a bet with the man whom he believes to be
drunk, on an issue which he considers to be a certainty in his favor. The
money having been placed, the second sharper at once drops the appearance
of intoxication, and drawing off his boot shows a quarter between
his stocking and the inner sole. The terms of the wager having been
.bn 352.png
.pn +1
that there was no coin “under his foot,” he has technically won, and the
stakes—which are always held by the confederate—are handed over to
him and the pair of scoundrels leave the premises at the earliest convenient
moment.
.pm sectionhead 'THE “SHOT GUN.”'
This is a trick which can be played only upon individuals who are
pretty nearly destitute of all sense. All that is necessary for its accomplishment,
after such a “mark” has been found, is the co-operation of
two confederates and a single barrel shot-gun. Inside the latter are
placed two separate charges of shot, so arranged that one may be drawn
from the gun without disturbing the load underneath. One of the two
confidence men contrives to form the acquaintance of the proposed dupe,
and after pointing out to him his confederate suggests that they withdraw
the charge from the weapon and then offer to bet the individual whom he
has pointed out that he (the confederate) cannot hit the victim’s hat at
the first fire. The countryman usually falls in with the suggestion and
the wager is soon arranged, the upper charge having been withdrawn by
the confidence man in the presence of his dupe. The latter hangs up his
hat and the confederate takes the gun. Of course, the under charge still
remaining in the barrel, the hat is riddled with shot at the first fire and
the “sucker” discovers that he has been gulled when it is too late for
him to recover his money.
This is not always a safe game to attempt. I myself once came
near being lynched by a crowd who were excited by the vociferous remonstrances
of my dupe. I compromised the affair by returning him his
money and buying him a new hat, after which I was only too happy to
depart from the locality with a whole skin.
.pm sectionhead '“GIVE-AWAY.”'
This is a confidence game, the origin of the name of which may be
readily understood by any one who will take the trouble to read the following
explanation of the way in which the trick is operated. It is always
worked by a man driving a horse and buggy, who ordinarily selects a
street corner, where two crowded thoroughfares cross, and who depends
for success upon the co-operation of “cappers,” or confederates. The
operator represents himself as the agent of some fictitious jewelry manufacturing
concern—perhaps the “Milton” Gold Co. He informs his auditors
.bn 353.png
.pn +1
that it is his intention to present each and all of them with a gift,
his object being to introduce to public notice the wares of the company
whose agent he is. He requests those who wish to receive presents to take
their stand, in line, near the buggy, and not leave the spot until the gifts
shall have been distributed. His first move is to scatter a handful of small
coin—nickles or dimes—among the crowd, which are, of course, eagerly
gathered up and the attention of the spectators is riveted upon a man who
appears to be crazy. He then asks if there is any one in the crowd who
will give him ninety cents for a dollar. Of course, a confederate promptly
offers him that sum, and he thereupon at once proposes to sell it to any
one who will pay him seventy-five cents; the seventy-five cents he offers
to sell for a half a dollar; the fifty cents for a quarter, and so on. He
next produces a quantity of collar-buttons, which he says are made of
“Milton” gold, and worth a dollar each, but which he is willing to dispose
of at twenty-five cents apiece, in order to introduce his wares. He
also wishes customers to remain in line and hold up their hands with the
collar-button exposed, in order that they may receive the twenty-five
cents which he intends to give each and all of them. When he has a line
of sufficient length before him, he hands to each one, in rotation, as he
exhibits his purchase, a silver quarter, to which he not infrequently adds
a dime, with the request that they will spend the latter sum in drinking
his health.
He next produces jewelry to which he attaches a higher value, such as
chains, rings or lockets. His next move is to offer for sale watches at,
say, $15, $20, or $25 each. By this time he has aroused the enthusiasm
of the crowd to a high pitch. They are wondering what is going to be
his next move, and it is by no means difficult to find buyers for all the
watches which the confidence man dares to offer. Each purchaser is informed
that he will receive a liberal rebate, and the money pours in upon
the man in the buggy in a continuous stream. As soon as he has obtained
all that he thinks possible to be gathered in from the crowd before him,
he puts the money in his pocket, whips up his horse, and drives away,
leaving the bewildered spectators to mourn the credulity which induced
them to part with their ready cash.
Sometimes the playing of this game is attended with more or less
personal risk, and I have myself known operators of this description narrowly
to escape lynching.
.pm sectionhead '“FIVE CARDS.”'
This is a device of confidence men, which is often successfully worked,
but never for large stakes. Two confederates are necessary to its successful
operation. Five business cards, the character of which is immaterial,
.bn 354.png
.pn +1
are taken by one of the sharpers, who exhibits them to his intended victim.
The swindler informs his dupe that it is his intention to “beat” a
man whom he points out for the drinks or cigars. The individual designated
is, of course, a confederate of the sharper. The latter shows the
“sucker” the five cards—which always bear different inscriptions—and
making a mark with a pencil on one of them, tells him that the trick
consists in inducing the supposed greenhorn to bet with the “sucker”
that the latter cannot select a certain card, naming the marked one, from the
five cards when shuffled and exposed, backs upward. The dupe assents to
the proposal, and the “capper,” after making this trifling bet, draws the
wrong card, whereupon he liquidates the bills for refreshments for the
crowd. The confederate then offers to wager a sum of money that the
“sucker” cannot again pick out the card in question. The dupe, not perceiving
the snare set for him, accepts the proffered wager, and the cards
are again shuffled. This time, however, his pretended friend reverses the
ends of the cards, exposing a mark precisely similar to the one which the
victim has seen before, but placed upon another card. The poor fool, influenced
by a desire to obtain an unfair advantage over a man whom he
regards as an easy prey, eagerly points out the card which bears the private
mark similar to that shown him before. Of course he loses, and the
stakes are handed over to the confederate of the original swindler.
I have said that this trick is usually played only for small stakes, but
I have myself won $125 thereby from a single victim at one venture.
.pm sectionhead '“SHELL GAME.”'
In some of its salient features this game resembles “three card
monte,” which has been already described. It is essentially a confidence
game, and although very old and already frequently exposed, scores of
confidence men annually reap a rich harvest from the credulity and cupidity
of dupes.
.il fn=i_348.jpg w=350px ew=60% alt='shell game'
The only implements necessary are three hollow shells and a small
rubber ball, about the size of a buckshot. Halves of English walnut
shells are the ones commonly employed, although any hollow hemispheres
will answer; sometimes operators use halves of potatoes scooped out. The
simplicity of the apparatus enables the “shell” man to carry his outfit
with him in his vest pocket wherever he may go, and he is accordingly
able to ply his vocation at any spot where he may be able to gather a
crowd.
.bn 355.png
.pn +1
A “capper” is an indispensable accessory. As soon as the operator
has taken up his position and is ready to commence operations, the confederate
mingles with the crowd. The man with the shells places them
upon some flat surface and produces the ball, which he places first under
one and then another of the three hemispheres. He does this rapidly, and
by alternating the position of the ball is able to confuse the spectators as
to its precise location. The “capper,” after watching him for a few
moments, offers to bet that he can tell under which shell the ball lies. Of
course the wager is accepted, and frequently several bets are made, the
confederate winning and losing indifferently.
The confidence men are well aware that after they shall have victimized
a “sucker,” the fraudulent nature of their maneuvers will be so
apparent that it will be imperatively necessary for them to “move on;”
therefore, the first object which they have in view is to ascertain the individual
in the crowd, who is sufficiently gullible to serve as a dupe, who
may have the largest amount of money in his pocket. To acquire this
knowledge, the operator, after rolling the ball, places one of the shells over
it in such a way that the edge of the latter shall be slightly raised, thus
affording a plain view of the ball underneath. He then offers to bet any
man in the crowd $100 that he cannot tell under which of the three cups
the ball lies. The spectators, each and all, being able to see precisely
where it is, those who have money reach for their pockets, believing that
they will be able to secure an unfair advantage and bet with certainty. Of
course, the “shell” man and the “capper” are now thoroughly informed
as to which of the crowd have money, which they are willing to wager.
The confederate next approaches the individual whose location is
thus rendered easy and begins to converse with him, at the same time
feigning to be much excited. It is not, however, the intention of either
of the two confederates that any such bet shall be made. Accordingly,
the “capper” calls out to his accomplice that he does not wish to win his
money unfairly, and that one of the shells is propped upon the ball. Confidence
man number one looks down, as though he were glad to have his
attention called to the fact, and taking the ball between his fingers begins
rolling it again. After he has placed it under one of the shells, he renews
his proposition to bet. At this point he makes some excuse for turning
away his head. The “capper” thereupon raises the shell under which
the ball is lying, and shows the latter to the dupe. As the operator again
turns around and faces the crowd, his confederate offers to bet five or ten
dollars that he can designate the location of the ball. “No,” says the
accomplice, “I will not accept so small a bet. I want to wager fifty or
one hundred dollars.” Sometimes even a larger sum is named, the
amount depending upon the estimated size of the victim’s pocket book
and the extent of his credulity. The “capper,” who appears to be in a
.bn 356.png
.pn +1
state of great excitement, urges the dupe to accept the offer, and bet on
the shell under which he has shown him the ball. At the same time, he
hands him five or ten dollars, with which to complete the amount of his
wager. The “sucker” usually assents, and the money is placed in the
hands of the operator. The dupe then raises the shell under which he
has seen the ball, when lo, it is not there. The reason is simple. The
“capper,” when he raised the shell in question, removed the ball, which,
owing to its small size and to its being hollow and of soft rubber, he is
able easily to conceal between his fingers. Of course, the victim loses the
amount of his stake.
The “capper” then professes great indignation at his stupidity, and
tells him that he raised the wrong shell. To prove the truth of his words,
he raises the one next to it, and exposes a ball, which he (the confederate)
at the same moment dropped from between his fingers. It not infrequently
happens, that the victim is satisfied that he himself made a
mistake, and can be induced to make another venture. I have myself
known the same individual to be so utterly devoid of sense as to lose
money through this device four or five times in succession.
Another method of inducing “suckers” to wager their money at
this game is known among confidence men as the “blow-off.” In this
case, the confederate lifts the shell and removes the ball, at the moment
when the operator averts his eyes. The confederate then offers to bet that
the ball is not under any of the shells, and the greenhorn is induced to
lay a wager by means of the same tactics which have been already
described. Of course, the “shell” man shows a ball underneath one of
the hemispheres and the dupe is declared to have lost. The ball which is
shown, however, is one which either he himself or his confederate placed
there at the moment of raising the cup.
One of the best known “shell men” in the country for many years,
was “Jim” Miner, better known as “Umbrella Jim,” who was fond of
introducing his games by singing the following doggerel:
.pm start_poem
“A little fun, just now and then
Is relished by the best of men.
If you have nerve, you may have plenty;
Five, draws you ten, and ten, draws twenty.
Attention giv’n, I’ll show to you,
How umbrella hides the peek-a-boo.
Select your shell, the one you choose;
If right, you win, if not, you lose;
The game itself is lots of fun,
Jim’s chances, though, are two to one;
And I tell you your chance is slim
To win a prize from ‘Umbrella Jim.’”
.pm end_poem
.bn 357.png
.pn +1
.pm sectionhead '“DOLLAR STORE” OR “DROP CASE.”'
This is an old game, but none the less successful because of its
antiquity. Wherever cupidity and ignorance are found together, there
this ancient device takes root and flourishes.
.il fn=i_351.jpg w=250px ew=50% alt='drop case' align=l
The outfit required is a wooden case, holding one hundred or more
envelopes. Most of them contain blank cards, though inside a few are
placed tickets bearing numbers. Near this case stands a show case containing
a glittering array of
prizes, including watches, chains,
jewelry, silverware and money.
The verdant speculator who is
allured by this dazzling display
pays a dollar for an opportunity
of acquiring title to a portion of it.
Having paid his money, he is permitted to draw an envelope from
the case, which he proceeds to examine. If it contains a blank card, of
course he has lost. If it contains a card bearing a number, the proprietor
of the case compares the number with the list and informs the purchaser
whether or not he has drawn a prize. As a matter of course, there are
a few comparatively valueless prizes, the winning of which is left to mere
chance, although a majority of the numbered tickets do not call for any
prize whatever.
The most money making feature of the scheme is worked by the aid
of a “capper,” or confederate. One of these individuals saunters up to the
case at a moment when he sees there a person whom he considers likely
to prove a “soft mark.” The confederate and the intended victim look
over the envelopes together listlessly, and the proprietor invites them each
to draw one “just for fun.” The “capper” opens his envelope, and finding
that he has drawn a blank remarks, “that is just my luck; I never drew
a prize yet, and don’t believe that you have one in your whole outfit.”
The proprietor professes much righteous indignation that his integrity
should be thus assailed, and, to prove his good faith, he says: “I’ll tell
you what I’ll do; I’ll make a special prize of one thousand dollars out of
one of those numbers which you two gentlemen have just drawn and
give you a chance to win it for five hundred dollars.” The “capper”
laughs, and hands him the card which he has drawn, which is usually
numbered “eleven.” The operator replaces it in the envelope and lets
down the back of the show-case, in order to enter a special prize on his
list. As he does so, he slips the envelope containing the ticket marked
“eleven” into a little secret pocket, from which at the same time he
draws another envelope holding a ticket marked “forty-four.” He then
places this envelope, together with the one held by the “sucker,” in the
box, in such a way that the edge of one of them rises a little above the
rest. Both the “capper” and the greenhorn perceive this circumstance
.bn 358.png
.pn +1
and the latter supposes it to have been the result of accident. The
“capper” then draws the envelope whose corner is raised and the dupe
takes the one next to it. The proprietor asks his confederate to advance
his money. The latter replies that he has not more than fifteen or twenty
dollars with him. “Well,” answers the operator, “put up that amount,
and if you have drawn number eleven, I will pay you an amount equal
to your stake.” The “capper” hands over his money, and on looking in
his envelope finds that he has drawn a blank. Simulating deep chagrin,
he curses his “luck.” The proprietor at this moment conveniently turns
his head, and his confederate, snatching the envelope from the hand of
the dupe, hastily raises the flap, pulls out a small portion of the ticket
within, thus showing the tops of figure forty-four, which leads the greenhorn
to believe that he has drawn the lucky eleven. This, in gamblers’
parlance, is called “giving a flash.” In ninety-nine cases out of every
hundred, the cupidity of the “sucker” is aroused, and in the firm confidence
that he has a “sure thing,” he pays over all the money which he
has, in the hope of winning a like amount. Until the money has been
paid, he is not permitted to examine his ticket. When, having paid his
cash, with trembling hands he opens the envelope, he discovers that
instead of the magic “eleven” he has drawn “forty-four,” having been
misled by the resemblance between the upper ends of the figures “four”
and “one,” shown him in the momentary glance which the “capper”
gave him of the card. Of course, he is utterly without redress, and has
to bear his loss with such degree of equanimity as he may be able to
command.
Strange as it may appear, it is a fact that persons are found who are
fools enough to be caught by this trick three times in succession. It is
from the majority of such “suckers” as these that the proprietors reap a
golden harvest. A man at Council Bluffs stood at the case and bought
ticket after ticket until he had dropped six thousand dollars into the
coffers of the scoundrels who were manipulating the device.
This game is most successfully worked by the aid of “ropers,”—by
which term is meant confederates who allure, or “steer,” victims into the
booth or room in which the trick is being operated. The devices resorted
to by these “steerers” are numerous and ingenious. Sometimes the dupe
is induced to visit the place by means of an offer to sell him a piece of
cloth worth two dollars per yard for forty cents; sometimes he is shown a
sample of choice tea, which he is told he can purchase at a ridiculously
low price. When the greenhorn has been brought in front of the ticket
case with the adjacent array of prizes, it is usually an easy matter to
induce him to speculate. The “ropers” are paid a commission of forty-five
per cent. on all winnings which are made from the men whom they
bring in, and I have myself received commissions for this sort of work
amounting to more than three hundred dollars in a single day.
.bn 359.png
.pn +1
.pm sectionhead 'MINOR CONFIDENCE GAMES.'
Among the petty schemes to which professional sharpers have resort
is one known as “betting on weight.” A single illustration, drawn from
my own experience, may serve to show to the unsuspecting reader precisely
the way in which this petty scheme is carried out.
The incident which I am about to relate happened at Hot Springs,
Arkansas, where I had been playing poker—of course on the principles
of the “skin” gamblers—in connection with a partner. We had succeeded
in fleecing a “sucker” out of a considerable sum of money. He
was moody over the loss of his cash, and we believed that he was disposed
to be slightly suspicious. In order to disabuse his mind of any such idea,
my partner accompanied him down the street, condoling with him as to
his losses. My accomplice suggested to him that he might possibly “get
even” with me by venturing a wager on some chance subject. “That man,
Quinn,” he said, “is ready to bet on anything; he would even bet on
spitting at a mark or the weight of a stone,” pointing to a rock which lay
in the street. As though struck by a sudden inspiration, he suggested,
“Suppose we weigh that rock and bet on a That is the only
chance which we will ever have to get our money back.” The greenhorn
assented, and the weight of the stone was carefully and accurately
ascertained. The next morning, having been fully posted by my confederate,
I walked down the street and met my partner and the dupe in company.
After cordially greeting them, I asked if either of them wished to
bet upon any chance whatever. After some little badinage, the “sucker”
offered to bet as to the weight of the stone which he and my partner had
caused to be carefully weighed the day previous. Of course I assented
and the bet was made. Very much to our surprise the prospective victim
had only $87 in his pocket, but this he cheerfully staked. The stone
was weighed and my guess proved to be the exact weight of the rock.
The reason was, that between the moment when my partner suggested
the scheme to the dupe and the time the stone was weighed, we had
caused to be chipped off a section, whose weight we knew exactly. The
greenhorn, on this occasion, “kicked” violently and insisted upon having
the stone reweighed. We found it convenient to have recourse to the
scales of a Junk dealer who had been previously “fixed” for the occasion
and who had officiated as “weigher” the night before. “Oh,” said the
descendent of Abraham, “I din’d know vat you shentlemen’s means, I
had as many as doo scales; von vat I buy mit and de odder as I sells py.
I vays dit mid by separate times on each scale. Vat were you shentlemen’s
want This argument proved conclusive and the “sucker”
submitted to the loss of his $87 without further protest.
.bn 360.png
.pn +1
.pm sectionhead 'THE GRANDMOTHER TRICK.'
This is a very simple trick to play, after the operator has acquired the
necessary degree of manual dexterity. Its success depends primarily
upon sleight of hand, and secondarily upon the assistance of a confederate.
In fact, the trick itself is so simple that gamblers who enjoy any
standing in the “profession” rarely resort to it until they find themselves
in a position where money is absolutely indispensable. Under such
circumstances, blacklegs,—even those of a better class—never hesitate to
resort to the grossest and most contemptible species of fraud. When one
of these gentry sees that he has but one “sawbuck” remaining in his
pocket, there is no device too contemptible for him to employ with a view
of replenishing his pocket book.
The method of playing this trick is as follows: Two aces are selected
and shown to the prospective victim. They are then placed together,
the pack cut, and the two cards selected are placed upon the top of one of
the piles. At this moment the confidence man—apparently by chance—turns
his head. It is easy to invent a pretext. A coughing fit, a sneeze,
a slight noise made by a confederate—any one of these, or a score of
other excuses will afford the “capper,” (whose assistance is indispensable)
an opportunity to perform his part of the scheme which will be
explained below. Before the manipulator averts his eyes he says that
“if they go in together they must come out together,” which is a self-evident
proposition. At the moment when he turns his head the confederate
raises one of the aces, and removing a number of cards from the
other, turning, places them upon the remaining ace, puts the ace which
he has withdrawn in the place of those which he has taken from the
second pile. The “sucker” is now thoroughly satisfied that the two
aces shown him cannot possibly “come in” to the pack “together.”
The operator again turns around and picks up the two piles, leaving the
one containing the removed ace upon the top. This latter card he conceals
in his hand and commences to draw from the bottom of the pack,
turning each card drawn face upward. Of course he knows the card lying
directly next to the ace, which is in the middle of the pack. As soon as
he sees this he is aware that the next card exposed will be that particular
ace. He then repeats the remark, “if they go in together they must
come out together,” and offers to bet that the card following this ace,
which he shows, is its companion. Naturally, the greenhorn is firmly
persuaded that this is impossible, and bets are made as to the happening
of this contingency. Usually, the “capper” is exceedingly anxious to
bet some trifling wager, perhaps the drinks or cigars. The sharper permits
him to win and the same process is again repeated. This time the
victim is induced to bet, the stakes being made considerably larger. When
.bn 361.png
.pn +1
the bottom of the pack from which the confidence man has dealt is
exposed, it is seen that the lower card is the other ace, the sharper having
adroitly passed it from his hand to the bottom of the pack.
While this game is not well adapted to winning large sums, it is a very
common thing for men operating it to take $10 or $20 from a dupe, and I
have even known as much as $50 to be won through its manipulation.
A brace of blacklegs in San Francisco once swindled an innocent
player out of what was to him a considerable sum of money through this
means. The victim caused the arrest of the pair, and it is said that when
they were brought before the magistrate for trial the court asked them
to explain the manner in which the trick had been done, the sharpers
having already pleaded guilty. One of them performed the trick for the
edification of the court, after which the judge, turning to one of the
swindlers, said: “Well, sir, I will give you one year;” and then, turning
to the other, added: “I will give you six months. You may go in
together, but I’ll show you that you won’t come out together.”
.pm sectionhead 'THE “SOAP GAME.”'
This is a trick of confidence operators which often proves exceedingly
successful in extracting money from the pockets of men who consider
themselves fairly well versed in the knowledge of the world. The outfit
is very simple, and by no means expensive. A number of small cakes of
soap of no particular value are procured, or sometimes soap is bought in
bars, which are cut into pieces of the desired size. A quantity of cheap
pasteboard boxes, each having a drawer somewhat larger than is the
piece of soap which it is to contain, are procured and soap placed inside
of them. In order to work the game, a room—usually one opening off the
street—is rented. The “soap man” his position on a raised platform,
and when a crowd has gathered to see what is going on he takes
out a cake of cleansing soap, i.e., a preparation for removing grease and
similar substances from cloth. He proceeds to expatiate upon its merits,
illustrating his remarks by experimental demonstration. If he is a good
talker, and intersperses his remarks with a few interesting anecdotes,
he succeeds in attracting and keeping the interest of his audience.
When he has proceeded far enough in his remarks he informs his listeners
that the manufacturers of this wonderful preparation are seeking to introduce
it in a somewhat novel way; that they propose to place a given
amount of currency in a certain number of boxes together with a cake of
soap in each. These boxes, he says, will be thoroughly mixed and every
purchaser will be allowed to select any three boxes (the price of which
.bn 362.png
.pn +1
will be $1.00) from the entire number offered. To prove his sincerity and
truthfulness he draws from his pocket several bills, of denominations
ranging from $1.00 to $20.00, and announces that he will place them
inside the boxes in the presence of the crowd. He takes the bills in his
hand, one at a time, folds them up carefully, and apparently inserts
them in the boxes. Each box, after the bank note has been placed in it,
is dropped into a large leather sachel. When he has disposed of all the
bills, he takes the sachel in both hands and shakes it, with a view to
thoroughly mixing the boxes. He then opens it and offers to allow anyone
present to select three boxes on the payment of one dollar. It is the
easiest thing in the world to sell the soap, but no legitimate purchaser
ever succeeds in obtaining more than a single dollar bill. The reason is
that the vendor adroitly “palms” off the bills of larger denominations,
substituting therefor dollar bills which he has previously rolled up and
which he holds in his hand at the time that he apparently inserts the large
bills into the boxes in the presence of the spectators. In other words,
when the boxes have been dropped into the sachel and mixed none of
them contain a note of a larger denomination than one dollar, the confidence
man having still in his possession all of the large bills. When it
is remembered that not more than one box in ten contains any money
whatever, the chances of drawing a prize are readily seen to be exceedingly
small. The buyers, however, believe that they have seen the large bills
placed in the boxes before their eyes, and part with their money very
readily. It may be easily seen that “cappers” are almost indispensable
in this as in so many other confidence games. It is not necessary that any
signal should pass between the confederates. The “capper” usually places
his three boxes in his pocket as soon as he has purchased them. Some one in
the crowd is always certain to ask him to open them. At first he objects,
but finally yields to persuasion. He takes out three boxes from his
pocket and one of them is always found to contain a large bill. The
explanation of his apparent good luck is very simple. When he puts the
three boxes in his pocket he had there another one, precisely similar in
size and appearance, containing the bank note which he exhibits to the
crowd. When he drew three boxes from his pocket, he took the one
which he previously placed there together with two of those which he had
taken from the bag.
.bn 363.png
.pn +1
.pm sectionhead 'THE FOOT RACE.'
This is a confidence game which is one of the most direct outrages
ever perpetrated upon an unsuspecting dupe. And yet, like most similar
tricks, it can be successfully worked only when the proposed victim is
ready to sacrifice his own integrity to his avarice.
Two foot racers act in concert with a third man, who personates the
“backer” of one of them. The first racer gains the confidence of the
man to be swindled, who must necessarily possess some means. He convinces
him by actual ocular demonstration that he is a speedy runner,
and one on whom it is safe to lay a wager. This done, confidence man
number two makes his appearance, attired very much after the fashion
of a tramp. He says that he is anxious to find some one with whom to
run a race for money. Naturally, his appearance not being such as to
inspire any faith in his ability as a pedestrian, a match is soon arranged
with the runner. The newcomer puts up all the money
which he has—perhaps some $30 or $40—together with his watch, and
the race is run. The tramp is beaten “out of sight.” The latter,
apparently considerably chagrined, says that he is glad that his
(or some other friend, whom he named), was not there, inasmuch as he
would have wagered $20,000 upon him. He adds that the mysterious
“uncle,” or friend, has a “barrel of money,” and would have been
willing to have staked it all upon his success.
The winner of the race thereupon proposes that he bring his “uncle”
there, and that another race be arranged, and it will be an easy thing
to “beat” his friend out of a large sum of money, which may be
divided between the pair. Of course, as the reader has probably already
understood, the two racers are confederates. The proposed victim—the
man who has been backing the first racer—falls in with the suggestion
and urges the mysterious tramp to induce his friend to come. The second
sharper, however, professes great reluctance to defraud his “uncle,”
and says that he will go to the latter’s farm and go to work. His confederate
and the dupe accompany him to the train, the former constantly
urging him to consent to the proposed scheme. At the last moment, the
simulated virtue of sharper number two vanishes, and he says that he
will induce his “uncle” to come down and lay a wager upon his success,
provided that his connection with the scheme shall be kept forever a
secret.
In due time the tramp returns, accompanied by an individual to personate
the moneyed man who is to put up the necessary stakes. Arrangements
are made for the race, the bets are made, and at the termination of
the contest it is discovered, much to the surprise of the victim who has
been backing the winner of the first race that the tramp, who was on that
.bn 364.png
.pn +1
occasion so easily defeated, has won without difficulty. The stakes are
paid over to the winners, and the party of scoundrels at once take their
departure.
Sometimes the swindlers find it necessary to place a long distance
between themselves and their victims. The latter are tolerably certain to
discover, without much reflection, the manner in which they have been
defrauded, and they are apt to follow up the gang in company with
officers of the law. I have known cases where confidence men who have
successfully worked this scheme, have been compelled to disgorge the
lion’s share of their ill-gotten gains.
.pm sectionhead '“FLIM-FLAM.”'
This is another of those bare-faced schemes of fraud which are daily
perpetrated upon an unsuspecting public. The method of operation is extremely
simple, and it may be that some of the readers of this volume may
be able to discover, from the description here given, the manner in which
a gross imposition has been practised upon them. The “flim-flam” operator
appeals, not to the avarice but to the good nature of his victim.
The favorite localities for playing the trick are fairs, circuses and
railroad trains, and—as in the case of a large number of confidence games—large
sums are sometimes paid for the “privilege.” The innocent
looking news agent or peanut boy is often an adept at practicing this sort
of fraud. The accommodating individual whom you see outside of a
circus tent, carrying a small valise, from which he produces tickets
which he offers for sale is apt to be a “flim-flam” sharper, who pays a
percentage of his gains to the proprietors in consideration of being
allowed to carry on his practices with immunity.
The game is always worked in substantially the same way. To
begin with, the train boy, after selecting his victim, (otherwise termed
“mark,”) he approaches him with an offer to sell something—perhaps
a book, perhaps candy, possibly fruit. It is of comparatively little
consequence whether he buys or not. The next move of the sharper is
to ask the proposed dupe to give him a bill of large denomination for
several small ones, which he produces. Sometimes he introduces a
quantity of small change. After counting the money into the stranger’s
hands, the swindler begs him to count it back to him, in order that he
may see that it is right. This done, the scoundrel “palms” one of the
bills or pieces of money, i.e., secretes it in the palm of his hand, and
turns over the cash (apparently intact) to the “sucker,” who, nine times
.bn 365.png
.pn +1
out of ten, puts it into his pocket without looking at it. Men on circus
grounds operate in the same way, though generally for larger amounts.
Sometimes a bill is folded in the middle, so that each end may count for
a separate note of the same value.
.il fn=i_359.jpg w=400px ew=80%
.ca METHOD OF WORKING THE FLIM-FLAM SWINDLE.
.bn 366.png
.pn +1
.pm chaphead 'CHAPTER X.' 'GAMBLING STORIES AND PERSONAL REMINISCENCES.' chap10
.hr 15%
.pm sectionhead 'RUINED BY A FUNERAL.'
As illustrating the inherent uncertainty of betting, the following
story of the adventure of an old negro slave in Alabama during the days
before the war may serve at once to “point a moral and adorn a tale.”
“Old Mose” was a tried and faithful servant whose inclination towards
amusement his mistress was disposed to indulge. One day the aged
African became possessed with the demon of gambling, and confided his
desires to his mistress. Finding that remonstrance was in vain, she
finally determined to give the old man five dollars, with which he might
amuse himself in any way that he saw proper. The negroe’s eyes
brightened and his ivories were displayed from ear to ear as he grinned
his thanks and disappeared. A few hours later he returned, with the
same expression of supreme satisfaction still illuminating his black face.
“Well, Mose,” said his mistress, “did you have a good time gambling?”
“Laws, Missus, I’se done had heaps o’ fun out o’ dem five dollahs dat
you gib me.” “How much money did you win, Mose?” asked his
patroness. “Won lots,” was the reply; “you jes’ wait an’ let dis chile
tell you. You see, I goes down de street an’ I meets a white gem’man,
and we gambles on de kind o’ folks what comes ’long. I took de white
people, an’ he took de black fo’ks. Fust dere comes ’long a white
gem’man, an’ he gibs me a dollah. (Now, Missus, you jes’ count an’ ses
how much I wins.) Den dere comes ’long two mo’ white gem’men, an’
he done gib me two mo’ dollahs. Dat makes free?” “Yes, Mose.”
“Den comes free mo’, an’ he gibs me free mo’ dollars; how many’s dat,
Missus?” “Six, Mose.” “Den dere was four mo’ white folks, an’ I
gets four mo’ dollars; how many was dat, Missus?” “Ten dollars.
Mose; you did very well; give me your money and I will take care of it
for you.” “Hol’ on, Missus,” said the old darkey, “de game didn’t
close right dar’. Me an’ de white gem’man stood dar fo’ about five minutes,
an’ ’long comes a cullud fun’ral, and wiped dis heah niggah right
off de face of de yarth.”
At this point in the conversation, Moses’ master made his appearance
on the veranda, entering through an open window. He had overheard
.bn 367.png
.pn +1
the narrative of the negro and thought that it would be a favorable opportunity
for him to offer a little friendly advice. “Mose,” said he, “that
man knew that funeral was bound to pass that spot inside of twenty
minutes after you got there. My boy, never attempt to gamble with a
professional, for he is sure to ‘ring in’ a cold deck on you every time.”
“” ‘’
.pm sectionhead '“FLY LOO.”'
A typical Western gambler, well known among the profession but
whose name it is unnecessary to mention, tells the following story of his
experience at a game which is not generally known to the public. It is
designated by the euphonious appellation of “fly loo,” and was first played
in this country either in Texas or New Mexico. The method of play is
simplicity itself. Each man lays a piece of sugar on the table and the
first one that gets a fly loses the drinks or stakes. The gambler in question
was one day sitting in a resort at Denver, when a smooth-faced gentleman
from the East walked in and suggested “fly loo.” His proposition
was accepted, and two lumps of sugar having been procured from the
bartender, the pair sat down to await the result. It had been stipulated
that the owner of the lump on which the first fly rested was to be considered
the loser and should pay the other a dollar. The first fly alighted on
the lump of the gambler, as did also the next eight. It began to dawn upon
him that the man from the Atlantic coast must have doctored his lump,
inasmuch as not a solitary fly would approach within a foot of it. He felt
sore, but just then he conceived a brilliant idea. He proposed that they
try ten “goes” at $10 a-piece. The stranger assented and the money
was put up. The loser then insisted upon a change in the rule, and that
the man on whose lump the first fly alighted should win instead of lose.
To his great surprise the smooth-faced stranger readily assented. No sooner,
however, had the lump been placed upon the table than the flies began to
swarm all over the latter’s lump for ten straight times, not one coming near
that of the man who had proposed the change. Of course the Eastern man
pocketed the stakes and the other was probably the maddest man in Colorado.
He knew he had been fleeced, but he was utterly unable to tell
how it had been done. Finally he called the stranger aside and said,
“My friend, don’t think I am impudent or inquisitive, but I have a curiosity
to know how you wound me up. If you will put me on, I’ll promise
not to work the game in your territory, and buy a bottle of wine.” He
laughed and said, “Well, I don’t mind telling you that I put a drop of
stuff on my lump that will make a fly hunt for the next county mighty
quick.” thought as much,” answered the loser, “but how about the
last time we played?” “Oh, I supposed you would want to switch, so
I just changed lumps on you.”
.bn 368.png
.pn +1
.pm sectionhead 'THE “TOP STOCK” BEATEN.'
The most astute professionals sometimes over-reach themselves. I
was once playing poker with a young man, an entire stranger to me
before the commencement of the game, whom I soon discovered to be a
practiced gambler. It did not take me long to discover the particular
species of the trick which he was playing. I recognized what is known
among the “profession” as the “top stock.” An explanation of this trick
may be found in the chapter relating to poker. It is enough to say here
that it consists in so arranging the hands, that the proposed victim, when he
asks for fresh cards, shall receive a good hand, while the dealer himself,
who of course takes the second draw, gets a better one. After a little
experimenting, I found that when I asked for three cards on the draw, I
usually received three of a kind. While my opponent would always draw
three or more, but invariably succeeded in getting three of a higher
denomination than mine. After thoroughly satisfying myself as to his
tactics, I continued playing until I thought that the time had come for me
to act. I had resort to a little policy, whereby I succeeded in winning all
the money which he had with him beside a silver watch, the value of
which, however, scarcely exceeded $1.25. After the deal, when he asked
me how many cards I wanted, I replied that I had made a mistake in my
hand; that I supposed I had a pair, but found that I had not. Throwing
down my cards upon the table, I asked for five. Any old poker player
will understand the effect of such a demand upon the arrangement of the
cards by the dealer. For the benefit of those who have never played
poker, I may explain that the six upper cards had been previously “fixed”
in such a way that I should receive three of a kind, while he would
get another set of three but of a higher denomination. By drawing
five cards I completely overturned his scheme. As a matter of course, I drew
what is known as a “full house,” i. e. three of one denomination with a
pair of another. My unfortunate adversary had been rash enough to make
his wager before the draft, feeling confident that I would either “stand
pat,” i. e. bet on the hand which I originally received, or draw one, two,
or perhaps three cards.
He cherished a conviction that in any event he would be able, through
the aid of his “top stock” to hold a hand superior to mine. When he
perceived that I had seen through his little game and had secured five of
the cards which he had cunningly arranged, he was well aware that I
held a “full.” His face turned all the colors of the rainbow, and he
made no objection whatever to my gathering in the stakes. At his
earnest request, I returned to him his watch, but accompanied this
friendly act by a bit of advice to the effect that the next time he tried to
play “top stock” on a stranger he had better make himself tolerably
certain that his antagonist had not seen the same game played before.
.bn 369.png
.pn +1
.pm sectionhead 'A WOODMAN IS KNOWN BY HIS CHIPS.'
The confidence which some men possess in their own ability to play
card games which they know nothing about would be sublime if it were
not so amusing. I was sitting one evening in a gaming house watching
a number of men playing poker. While thus employed a broken-down
gambler approached me and asked me if I would lend him $5.00 with
which he might play against the faro bank. He added that he would
much rather that I should loan him $20.00 in order that he might sit in
the poker game. I asked him if he was “dead broke,” and he replied
that he was. I next asked him if he was a good poker player, and he
made answer that he was the best bottom dealer in the country. I looked
at him a moment and said, “It seems rather strange to me that an expert
like yourself should be without any money. I used to travel a good deal
in Arkansas, where the people managed to support themselves in part by
killing ’coons and selling the skins. These skins they generally hung up
on the outside of the house to dry. When I came across a cabin, the
outer walls of which were covered with skins, I made up my mind that
the occupant was a good hunter. When I saw only one or two hanging
out, I felt satisfied that the owner was either very shiftless or a very poor
shot. Now Bob,” I continued, “if you are as good a poker player as
you claim to be, where are your ’coon skins?’”
The same question might be asked of many men who make great pretensions
to ability in higher walks of life than gambling. Whenever I
hear a man loudly boasting of his own ability who cannot point to any
one great thing which he has achieved, I always feel like asking him
“where are your coon skins?”
.pm sectionhead 'THE “MORNING” PRINCIPLE.'
On general principles it is usually safe not to lend money to a man
who promises to “pay you in the morning.” Professional gamblers
form no exception to the general operation of the rule. A blackleg,
who was known among the fraternity as “Stuttering Jim,” once fell into
misfortune in St. Louis, while I was a resident of that city. Just what
fraud he had been guilty of, I do not now recall; but I remember that
the police justice fined him five dollars. “Jim” had no money, and
appealed to the clemency of the court for a suspension of the fine. The
justice asked him if he was willing to leave town, and if so how long he
would require to get beyond the territorial limits of the State of Missouri.
The culprit eagerly grasped at the prospect of freedom, and turning to the
magistrate with a beaming smile, said: “J-j-judge, wh-what’s the b-best
time ever m-made over the b-bridge?” His appeal was not without
.bn 370.png
.pn +1
effect, and the judge allowed him six hours in which to take his final
departure from the western shore of the Mississippi. I was among the
first men whom he met after his exit from the court house. Concealing
the fact of his trial and sentence, he asked me for a loan of $10 “t-till
m-morning.” I saw that he was in distress and at once made up my
mind to give him the money which he needed. However, I determined
to make use of caution. “Jim,” said I, “are you sure that I will see
you in the morning?” “W-well, John,” said he, “n-n-not if I see you
f-first.” It remains to be added that “Jim” has up to this time scrupulously
kept his promise. I have never seen him from that day to this;
probably when I meet him he will take great pleasure in redeeming his
word.
.pm sectionhead 'A FRIEND’S BAD FAITH.'
Among the common devices of faro gamblers to entrap victims, few
are more common than to suggest to the proposed dupe that he enter
a gambling house and play against the bank, at the same time receiving
the secret assistance and co-operation of the dealer. That is to say, the
latter individual, who works for a salary, will so manipulate the cards
that the outside player shall win the proprietor’s money, after which the
dealer and the winner will divide the profits. This scheme usually works
well and even old gamblers are sometimes entrapped by it. A veteran
dealer of New York City is authority for the following statement, a reminiscence
of his own experience:
“A few years ago I was one of the dealers in a faro bank up town,
and an acquaintance whom I liked very much was a dealer in a similar
bank in the next block. Both were reputed to be, and undoubtedly were,
‘square’ games. The proprietor of the game my friend dealt for, however,
was known to be extremely close and mean in money matters, and
everybody disliked him, but as his game was trustworthy, his place was
well patronized.
“I was not surprised one day when my friend came and told me that
‘Old Nick’ (that’ll do for the proprietor’s name) owed him $5,000, representing
his interest in the game in lieu of a salary, which he refused to
pay over. My friend proposed that I should come to his bank and play
while he was dealing, and he would fix the deck so that I could win out
what ‘Old Nick’ owed him and something over for myself. Being a
dealer myself, and knowing that a sign from my friend would indicate
just how the cards were to run through a deal, I saw that it was possible for
me to right my friend’s wrongs and make a few hundred out of ‘Old
Nick.’
.bn 371.png
.pn +1
“The first night everything seemed to go wrong. I got the sign
to play ‘single out’ and the cards ran ‘double out,’ and when I played
‘double out’ they ‘singled out.’ I lost $1,000 and left the place, as mad
a man as you ever saw. The next day I met my friend, who declared
that it was the most astonishing thing he ever heard of, that he had acted
squarely all through, and that somebody must have changed the decks in
the drawer of the table so that he got hold of the wrong one. He offered
to make my loss good if I did not win out the full stake at the next sitting.
He seemed square and I believed him. The next night I lost
$2,000 more, and when I left the place I was crazy mad. I didn’t dare
say anything there, for it would have hurt me at my own place to have it
known that I was in a ‘brace’ at another man’s game. I decided to wait
until the next day and give the false friend a thrashing at least.
“The next day, however, the bank was closed and the dealer had
skipped. ‘Old Nick’ had lost money on the races, had grown desperate,
had ‘plunged’ and ‘gone broke.’ His partner, my friend, the dealer,
knew that the bank would close and roped me in for a ‘stake’ to get
away with. I was terribly angry, for I had been influenced almost
entirely by my sympathy for my friend and I wanted to help him out.
“Did I ever get my money back? Well, I should say I did! I was
out West two years ago, and one night strolled into a game in Kansas
City. Just as I was about to buy a stack of chips, I noticed my friend in
the look-out’s chair. He saw me at the same time, and motioned for me
to come to him. As I approached he drew out a roll of money and said,
‘Here’s the dust you loaned me some time ago; much obliged, old man.’
I counted it and found it correct. Calling another man to the chair, he led
me aside and explained that he had been in a desperate strait at the time and
had always intended to repay me. He was now prosperous, he said, and
making a fortune rapidly. I played at his game all that night and lost
just the $3,000 he had paid me. I felt very queer when I went away, but
I felt too cheap to say or do anything. I have come to the conclusion
that there’s no money in ‘bucking the tiger,’ unless you are behind the
game. I never play in front of the table any more. I can’t afford it.”
.pm sectionhead 'THE INFLUENCE OF MONEY ON PARENTAL DISAPPROBATION.'
There exists a class of people—and its members are far too numerous—who,
while condemning gambling in the abstract, and particularly
outspoken in their denunciation of the vice when practiced by members of
their own family, nevertheless have such a respect for money, that “lucre,”
even when won at the gaming table, is not too filthy to command respect
for its owner. The motto of such people seems to be: “Get money—honestly
.bn 372.png
.pn +1
if you can, but get it.” An old acquaintance of mine once told
me the following story, which is an illustration of the foregoing reflection,
for the truth of which he vouched:
The young man, whom we will call James, once lived in a small
Western city. His fondness for amusement led him into bad company,
and he plunged into all sorts of dissipation, soon becoming a devotee of
the green cloth. His parents deplored his lapse from morality, and
frequently consulted together as to the best means of effecting his reformation.
To deny him admission to the house might be to send him to ruin;
persuasion they had found to be utterly without avail; example he derided
and threats were a subject for mockery. Accordingly, they decided to
adopt an attitude of what might be called, for want of a better name,
“armed neutrality.” They determined to allow him to occupy his room
and take his meals at home, but never to speak to him. The wayward
son used to return to the paternal roof at all hours of the early morning,
and after a few hours of sleep would make his appearance at the breakfast
table. His father filled his plate and his mother poured his coffee. The
rest of the family carried on a conversation, but no one spoke to James.
One night the youth had been “playing in great luck,” and had
returned home a winner to the amount of several hundred dollars. The
following morning at the breakfast table his little sister asked her mother
for half-a-dollar, with which to buy a school book. The old lady referred
her to her father, who looked sour and querulously said that he saw no
reason why he should buy it. The prodigal had heard what had been
said, and drawing a roll of bills from his pocket handed the little one a
five dollar bank note, saying: “Here, sis, get your book and keep the
change.” His mother looked at the old man, and the latter stared at his
son. Raising her spectacles and looking at her erring boy with a glance
of mingled affection and pride, she asked in honied tones: “James, son,
dear, is your coffee sweet enough?”
.pm sectionhead 'TIMIDITY OF PROFESSIONAL GAMBLERS.'
In various chapters throughout this work, I have related experiences
of my own in which I have exhibited myself in the light of being naturally
rather timid. I do not think that my inborn proclivities were towards
cowardice, however much they may have inclined me toward
vice. The truth is, that “conscience doth make cowards of us all.” A
few incidents in my own career may serve to illustrate the truth of this
principle.
I was once playing poker with a partner and a stranger. My confederate
and myself had succeeded in winning a large amount of money from
the greenhorn who had been rash enough to try his luck against us.
.bn 373.png
.pn +1
Success had so far emboldened me that I lost all regard for ordinary
prudence. I dealt the greenhorn four kings and gave myself four aces.
He was irritated in no small degree by his losses and determined to bring
matters to a focus. When he looked at his cards and saw that he had
four kings, he drew a Remington six shooter from his pocket, and laying
it upon the table announced his intention of shooting any man at the
board who had a hand to beat his. My partner was struck with terror
and signalled me to allow the man to win. I felt rather uneasy myself,
but determined that if I must die I would at least pass out of this life with
the best grace possible under the circumstances. Looking at my adversary
with a bland expression I said, in dulcet tones, “you don’t mean
before the draw, do you, sir? I would rather look for a free lunch than
for a fight any day.” This remark appeared to mollify him somewhat,
and I asked him how many cards he wanted. He looked at me grimly
and said, “None.” “Well,” said I, “I believe that I shall have to take
two.” Having said this, I discarded two aces, drawing in exchange the
first two chance cards which happened to lie upon the top of pack. Of
course, this ruined my hand, but I am inclined even to this day, to believe
that it saved my life.
.pm sectionhead '“OLD BLACK DAN.”'
I recall another incident which illustrates the same principle. In
almost every country town there are many men who like to be regarded
as “sports.” They consider themselves champion card players, and are
fully convinced of their own ability to get the best of any stranger who
may put in an appearance. When they find that they have “caught a
Tartar” and are losing money, they not infrequently resort to the expedient
of calling in some local bully, whose brawny arms and ponderous
fists may accomplish, through brute force, what they have failed to effect
through skill. I once found an illustration of this fact in a small Missouri
I was playing poker in a room at the hostelry, with
about as unsavory a lot of country “bummers” as it was ever my
bad fortune to meet. Among them were men whose physiognomy indicated
that for many years they had held their own through the aid of
sling shots, jimmies and other “implements of modern warfare.” The
nose and cheeks of most of them testified to their devotion to the pleasures
of the wine cup,—or perhaps I should say their fondness for the consumption
of corn whiskey. I was playing with marked cards, and was gradually
but surely winning all their money. Their disgust knew no
bounds. It was not long before there entered upon the scene an American
citizen of African descent upon whose ebony skin charcoal would have
made a white mark. His scarred and battered face gave him the appearance
.bn 374.png
.pn +1
of a veteran of the prize ring who had returned home for purposes of
recuperation and repairs. He modestly took his seat in a corner of the
room, and half closing his eyes began to sing this plaintive ditty:
.pm start_poem
“Give me some of dat, or I’ll brok up your game,
I guess you ‘gams.’ knows who I is.
Old Black Dan—dat is my name;
If you ’siders me in, go on with your biz.”
.pm end_poem
I had heard of “old black Dan” from men of my profession who had
visited the same town before. He was an amateur prize-fighter, who, with
proper training, might have made his mark as an athlete. To pick a
quarrel with him was the last ambition that I had on earth. I thought
it was best to meet him on his own ground. Accordingly, I counted up
the value of the pile of chips which I had before me, in order that I might
know just how the game stood at the moment of his entrance. Without
betraying any apparent emotion, I began to sing the following impromptu
doggerel:
.pm start_poem
“Consider yourself in from this time on;
I am always square with every man;
You’ve no more need to sing that song,
For I want no trouble with old black Dan.”
.pm end_poem
It is hardly necessary to add that “Dan” got his full proportion of
the winnings.
.pm sectionhead 'EFFECT OF A SENSITIVE CONSCIENCE.'
In “skin” gambling houses of a low order, it is not an uncommon
practice for those around the table to steal the chips of a player whose
attention is temporarily diverted from the game. I once had an experience
of this character in Wichita, Kansas. I had a considerable “stack”
lying before me on the table and turned away my head for some purpose
or other, to find on again looking at my pile that my chips had been
abstracted. I was aware of the character of the house in which I was
playing and knew that stringent measures must be adopted if I expected
to recover my stolen property. Accordingly, drawing a pistol (which,
by the way, was not loaded) from my hip pocket, I stated in a loud tone
of voice that if the man who had taken my chips did not return them to
me at once I would shoot him on the spot. My action produced a profound
sensation. Not less than a half dozen men sitting near at once
handed me chips, the result being that when I returned my revolver to
my hip pocket and resumed my seat I had more than when I had turned
away my face from the table. As the game proceeded, I observed that
a typical Westerner was watching me very closely with a look the reverse
of friendly. When I had finished playing I arose from the table, cashed
.bn 375.png
.pn +1
my chips, pocketed my money and walked out of the room and down
stairs. On reaching the side-walk I found the unpleasant looking
stranger close at my heels. “Look here,” said he, “you said something
upstairs about somebody stealing some of your chips. I reckon that you
meant me. You’re kind o’ handy with your shooting iron; I’m going
to give you a chance to use it.” At the same time he drew his own pistol.
I perceived that I was in a dilemma. My weapon was not loaded
and the stranger’s manner left no doubt as to the sincerity of his intentions.
“How are we going to settle this?” he went on. I suggested
that we should shake hands, turn back to back, each walk fifteen
paces, and then turn and fire. To this he agreed. We carried out
the programme up to the point of turning back to back and starting
to walk the prescribed number of paces. With solemn and stately tread
he measured off his portion of the stipulated distance, but when he turned
around I was no longer visible to the naked eye. While he had been
stepping off fifteen paces, I had contrived to cover two hundred.
.pm sectionhead 'HOW AN OLD SCOUT HELD AN “ACE FULL.”'
One of the best known characters around Sioux City in 1876 was a
scout known as “Wild Bill.” He had a weakness for poker, though he
knew no more about the game than a baby. The consequence was that
he was “picnic for the sports,” and they fleeced him right and left. He
was repeatedly warned that he was being robbed, but he always replied
that he was able to take care of himself. One night he sat down to play
with a fellow named McDonald, a “fine-worker” and expert. McDonald
did as he pleased, and the scout found his pile getting smaller and
smaller as the game progressed. As he lost he began drinking, and midnight
found him in a state of intense but suppressed excitement, a condition
that made him one of the most dangerous men in the West. It was
at this juncture that McDonald, smart gambler as he was, made his mistake.
He should have quit. However, “Wild Bill’s” apparent coolness
deceived him. Finally the scout seemed to get an unusual hand and
began to bet high and heavy. McDonald raised him back every time,
until finally the top of the table was out of sight. At last there was a
call. “I’ve got three jacks,” said McDonald, throwing down his hand.
“I have an ace full on sixes,” replied Bill. “Ace full on sixes is good,”
said McDonald cooly, turning over his opponent’s cards, “But I see only
two aces and a six.” Whipping out a navy revolver, the greenhorn said
in a tone of determination, “here’s your sixes, and here,” drawing a
bowie-knife, “is the one spot.” “That hand is good,” said McDonald
blandly, arising, “take the pot.”
.bn 376.png
.pn +1
.pm sectionhead 'THE FAILURE OF A TELEGRAPH WIRE.'
The “telegraph,” as explained in the chapter on Poker, is a favorite
resource of professionals. It is not always easy to employ this stratagem,
but when it can be employed successfully the results are of a sort
extremely satisfactory to the manipulators. While I was running a
saloon in Columbia, Missouri—which was in fact, but a cloak for secret
“brace” gambling—I had an apparatus of this sort attached to a peep-hole
in such a manner that I could readily signal to my confederate when
it was safe for him to bet high. Of all victims in the world the “skin”
gambler is especially rejoiced to meet a man who is in the habit of drinking
to excess. During my entire career as a gambler I always felt reasonably
sure of winning the money of such a man. On the particular occasion to
which I am about to refer, two individuals, both somewhat inebriated,
dropped into the saloon, and it was by no means difficult to engage them
in a game of poker. My partner, whose name was Forshay, sat at the
table together with the strangers, while I retired to a convenient spot in
order to work the telegraph apparatus. The device succeeded admirably.
Forshay experienced no difficulty in winning the money of the chance
visitors, but in his exhilaration over his success he forgot prudence.
The wire went through the floor; two casual customers entered the place
and called for drinks; Forshay jumped up from his seat to wait on them,
and forgetting in his excitement that the secret wire was attached to the
bottom of his trouser’s leg by means of a fish-hook, omitted to detach the
same. The result was that he went sprawling full length upon the floor,
the entire mechanism of the machine being exposed to the curious eyes of
any member of the vulgar herd who might have happened to be about.
The situation was a critical one, but Forshay rose equal to it. One glance
towards the table satisfied him that the two “suckers” were so far gone
in their cups that any man of average intelligence might have driven
a royal Bengal tiger across the table without attracting their
Forshay himself was so far gone under the influence of the
“ardent” that a small object, such as a jack rabbit, might have escaped
his notice, but his fall had a sobering effect upon him. When he arose
from the floor his clothes were covered with sawdust, and he was
altogether as disreputable an object as one would wish to see. Brushing
the dirt from his knees and apologizing for the torn condition of his nether
habiliments, he resumed his seat at the table, which he occupied just long
enough to detach the hook from his clothing. He waited upon the customers
and returned to his place without having attracted the attention of
the greenhorns. This anecdote has a moral of its own. In the first place,
it is in itself a condensed temperance lecture; in the second, it may serve
to convince the reader that however attractive a saloon may be, he can
.bn 377.png
.pn +1
never determine by himself what sort of risk he runs by engaging in a
“friendly” game, at any of the tables which the hospitable proprietor offers
for his use.
.pm sectionhead 'A QUEER STAKE.'
The excitement of play has prompted men to wager almost everything
that they possess, and sometimes a good deal that they did not own,
but it is doubtful whether any game was ever played for quite as strange
a stake as that once indulged in by a professional gambler who was temporarily
“under a cloud” in Georgia. The blackleg in question had
become involved in a dispute with one of the natives over a game of
cards, and the disagreement had resulted in the Georgian going to the
hospital and the gambler to jail. Popular prejudice against gambling
ran high in the community at the time, and the professional was advised
by his counsel that he was likely to have a rather hard time in getting
out of the scrape. While a prisoner, he cultivated the acquaintance of
the sheriff, whom he found to be a good-natured, jovial sort of a fellow.
One day he discovered, by accident, that his was a devotee of
faro. It appeared that he had been moderately wealthy at one time, but
had lost nearly all his property in playing against faro banks, and would
still walk ten miles through a swamp to get a chance to play again. The
gambler saw his opportunity. He chalked out a layout on the floor of
his cell, procured an old pack of cards and proceeded to deal faro for the
sheriff. Buttons were used for chips, and the officer of the law would
squat outside the grated door of the cell and tell the prisoner where to
place his bets. In a few days the gambler had all of his ready cash.
Then he sold a mule and lost the proceeds. Head by head of the
sheriff’s live stock went the same way. Then he put up his watch and
chain and a suit of clothes. The professional won them and insisted upon
their delivery to him. In a week the prisoner’s cell presented the appearance
of a country store. It contained boots, hams, a pair of scales, all
the sheriff’s stationery, a barrel of flour, a saddle and a feather bed. At
last the Chief Executive Officer of the county came to the cell to interview
his prisoner. “John,” said he, “I’ll tell you what I’ll do. You
have won everything I can move except the old woman and the kids.
Now I’ll play you a game of seven-up for all that I have lost against your
liberty.” The prisoner promptly assented. They played through the
grated door, and it was probably the most exciting game to both parties
that either of them had ever indulged in. At last the score stood six to
six. The gambler turned up a jack. “That puts you out,” said the
sheriff and he unlocked the door; “now get out.” The blackleg lost no
time in taking advantage of the permission. The Sheriff fired a shot
.bn 378.png
.pn +1
at his retreating form, undoubtedly claiming that this right was reserved
to him by the terms of the wager. Probably his excitement rendered
him nervous; at all events the charge passed over the head of the fleeing
ex-prisoner and crippled a darkey in an adjoining corn-field. The gambler
who narrates this bit of experience always assures his auditors that
only the pressing nature of his business prevented him from stopping to
inquire how seriously the negro was hurt.
‘’
.pm sectionhead 'DAN RICE’S BIG POKER GAME.'
The following story relative to “Uncle Dan Rice,” the veteran showman,
has appeared before, but will certainly bear repetition. The following
version of it is given, as nearly as possible, in his own language.
“When they talk about winnin’ money at cards,” he said, “they
make me tired. Why they don’t bet big money nowadays. They ain’t
got the money in the first place, and if they have they ain’t got the nerve
to put it up. What’s $30,000? Sho! Why I won $280,000 one night
playin’ poker. I won it from two smart gamblers, too—Canada Bill and
George B. Pettibone. O! they were cunnin’ but your ‘Uncle’ Dan was
too smart for ’em. George Pettibone taught me to play chuck-a-luck and
won my money, but I got even with him.
“It was this way: I had my circus in Cincinnati in 1851. The
cholera broke out and we had to get away quick. So I loaded the whole
durned circus onto a boat and started for Pittsburg, drew all my money
from the bank and put aboard. I had about $350,000 in cash. Carried
it in a safe in my state-room. People was a-dyin’ on the lower decks, and
Canada Bill, Pettibone, my ringmaster, named Fowler, and I went upstairs
to play poker. Did that to keep our minds off the cholera, don’t
you see? We started in at a quarter limit. Then we got to playin’ a no-limit
game, and I had ’em then. I had dollars to their buttons. About
4 o’clock in the mornin’ we got to bettin’ on a hand. All had big hands.
We played with a short deck. Took everything below the tens out and
threw ’em overboard. Bill and Pettibone had everything on the table—money,
watches, diamonds, and everything. I told Fowler to watch ’em,
and I went back to my state-room and got $250,000 out o’ the safe. My
wife says—good woman, my wife—she says:
“‘Where are you goin’ with that money?’
(“I had it in canvas bags. It made an armful.) ‘I’m goin’ to bet
it,’ says I.
“‘No you ain’t,’ she says.
“‘Yes, I am,’ I says, and I slammed the door.
“I threw it on the table. ‘There,’ I says to Bill and Pettibone, ‘I
raise you that.’ They demanded a sight. I wouldn’t give it to ’em. It
.bn 379.png
.pn +1
was a no-limit game, don’t you see, and they couldn’t see my hand without
putting up the money. They didn’t have any more.
“They drew bowie knives. Yes, sir, bowie knives—great big long
fellers. I whispers to Fowler. I says: ‘Swipe the swag and sherry
your nibs.’ That’s slang you know. Then I says to Bill and Pettibone,
I says: ‘Hold on, hold on; don’t let’s have any trouble,’ and while I
was sayin’ that, I picks up a chair and hits ’em both. O, I lammed ’em
good. Lord, I was a strong young feller then. People came runnin’ out
in their night clos’—great excitement. The cap’n wanted to throw Bill
and Pettibone overboard but I wouldn’t let him. I gave ’em their watches
back. I handed my wife a big diamond ring. That shut her up. Then
I promised her I’d never gamble any more, and I never have.”
.pm sectionhead 'A DISCOURAGED SPECULATOR.'
I have always regarded faro dealing as being but a very few degrees
less respectable than operating upon the floor of the stock or produce
exchange. The same essential elements are present in both cases—a disposition
to obtain something for nothing, a rash venture by an inexperienced
player, and a determination on the part of a practiced veteran to
win the money of his antagonist. As illustrative of this point I might
recount a narrative told of a certain gambler who once visited Chicago.
For two or three days he played poker with decided success, and found
himself the winner of several hundred dollars. Elated by his good fortune
the idea occurred to him that he possessed all the qualifications necessary
to operate upon a wider scale. He determined to try his luck upon the
Chicago Board of Trade. One of his friends suggested to him that however
much he might know about dealing or “holding out” a poker hand,
he was utterly ignorant of the course and manipulation of the wheat market.
His friend also urged that a capital as small as his would not go far
toward the control of a “corner.” However, serenely confident of his
own sagacity, the poker player determined to take the chances. Employing
a broker, he made a purchase. For a day or two the market went in
his favor, and he smiled at the contemplation of his own superior wisdom.
He wrote to his father, who lived in a country town not more than a hundred
miles away, to meet him at the depot with a carriage the following
Saturday; that he was about to return home loaded down with presents
for all members of the family. But, “woe betide the cruel fate!” In
less than twenty-four hours after sending this exultant message a decline
in grain wiped out all his margins and left him comparatively penniless.
His next to his father was of a decidedly different tenor. It ran
thus: “Dear father; meet me at the nearest railroad crossing with a hat
and pair of shoes. I have a blanket myself.”
.bn 380.png
.pn +1
.pm sectionhead 'THE LUCK OF A ONE-EYED MAN.'
One of the most bare-faced, yet at the same time most successful confidence
tricks which I ever saw perpetrated was played upon an individual
who prided himself on the strength of his eyesight. Going into a bar-room
one day, he offered to wager that he could look directly at the sun
longer than any other living man. There were three or four professional
sports sitting around, one of whom promptly offered to cover any amount
which he might wish to put up, provided he was allowed ten minutes to
produce a contestant. The terms having been accepted, the stakes were
put in the hands of a third party. The “sport” went out of the room,
and soon returned, accompanied by a rather dilapidated looking individual
who said that he “reckoned he could look right smart.” At the same
time, he stated that he did not wish to risk blindness in both eyes, but
was willing to venture one of his optics in any good cause. The party
went out into the sunlight, and the man who had proposed the wager
looked steadily at the orb of day for a number of seconds that was actually
surprising. When pain compelled him to lower his gaze, the “dark
horse” which the gambler had brought forward covered one of his eyes
with his hand, and, raising his head, apparently looked at the sun without
being in the slightest degree affected. He easily surpassed the record
of the first gazer, and the confidence man claimed and received the stakes.
The stranger reluctantly acknowledged that he had fairly lost his money
and departed much chagrined. Probably he is not aware to this day
that the man who had excelled him had only one eye and was looking at
the sun through a glass substitute for the one which had been removed.
.pm sectionhead 'BOTTOM DEALING.'
This term, as understood among gamblers, refers to that method of
dealing which consists of drawing a card from the bottom of the pack
instead of, or at the same time with, one from the top. I once met a gentleman
at St. Louis, who had been a physician of some standing, but
who had yielded to his gambling instincts to such a degree that he had
lost not only his money, but also his self-respect. We will call him Doctor
Rodman. As an illustration of the inveteracy of his passion for play,
I need only mention the fact that one night, while engaged in a game of
poker, I saw him draw from his mouth his artificial teeth, which were
attached to a gold plate, and offer to stake them for $ He claimed to
be a professional, and undertook to enter into a partnership with me. I
asked him to indicate what was his “strong-hold” in the line of a professional
card sharper. He said that he was as good a “bottom dealer”
in the country. I sat in a room while he was playing and
.bn 381.png
.pn +1
watched him closely with a view to ascertaining how much he knew
about running the cards from the bottom of the pack. I soon saw that
while he could draw two cards at the same time, one from the top and the
other from the bottom, he did it so clumsily that the operation was accompanied
by a resounding thwack, sufficiently loud to attract the attention
of every player at the board. When he left the table and came into the
open air, I told him that an idea had just occurred to me, through working
which he and I together might beat the world at playing poker. I
added that I knew it to be a “sure thing.” His interest was awakened
at once, and he impatiently asked me to tell him what my project was.
“Well,” said I, “Doctor, I have a horse pistol right here in my pocket.
I’ve noticed your skill as a bottom dealer, and I believe if you will only
give me a signal when you intend to draw a card from the bottom of the
pack, I’ll fire off my gun at the same time, and so fully attract the attention
of every man in the room that nobody will notice what you are doing.
At all events nobody will hear that horrible noise that you make in practicing
your little game.” The doctor’s face fell, and I have never been
able to tell why, from that moment forward, he always appeared to avoid
my company.
.pm sectionhead 'A WHIFF FOR A NICKEL.'
I was once traveling through the country with a partner named
Barnes. He was not without some good traits, but he was unquestionably
the smallest pattern of a man in money matters that I ever had the misfortune
to meet. I used to twit him with this fact, and he was accustomed
to account for a peculiarity which he did not attempt to deny by saying
that he owed it to his grandfather, who had brought him up. He was
fond of telling stories of his ancestor’s meanness. When the old gentleman
used to send him down stairs, of a winter night, after apples, he used to
insist upon his whistling all the time, in order that there might not be any
doubt as to the fact that he was not eating any on his way back
to the kitchen. Another narrative which he was fond of relating about
his grandfather was to the effect that the old man once hired him to go
supperless to bed in consideration of the payment of five cents. The next
morning his affectionate grandparent, finding that he was exceedingly
hungry, insisted upon the return of the five cents before allowing him to
eat his breakfast. How much truth there may have been in these stories
of Barnes I cannot tell, but I had an opportunity once of observing the
closeness of his calculations. We were stopping together at a hotel. He
was going out to visit a young woman that evening, and, being engaged
in making his toilet and wanting some perfumery, he asked me if I would
take a good-sized bottle which was standing upon the dressing case, and
.bn 382.png
.pn +1
repair to a drug store to buy five cents worth of attar of roses. It occurred
to me that five cents was not much money to invest in perfumery, but as
I knew nothing of the value of attar of roses, I took the bottle, together
with the nickel which he handed me, and started for the drug store.
When I arrived there I handed the bottle to the man behind the counter,
and told him that I would like to get some attar of roses. He smiled
graciously, and asked me how much I wanted. In an off-hand way, for
I felt rather ashamed of the mission with which I had been charged, I
replied: “Oh, give me a worth.” I shall never forget the
expression that came into that man’s eyes. He glared at me for a full
minute without a word. Then, in a commiserating tone he said: “My
friend, attar of roses is worth twenty-five cents a drop, but if you’ll hand
me your nickel I’ll let you smell of the bottle.”
It is not necessary to say that from that time forward I did not
undertake to execute any commissions for Barnes of a precisely similar
character. As I have said before, like a yellow dog, he was not without
his good points, but to discover them required more patient assiduity
than I possessed.
.pm sectionhead 'A GOOD SWIMMER.'
As is explained in another chapter, a favorite device of confidence
operators is to induce a victim to back a good runner for a race which it
has been previously arranged that he shall lose. The method in which
the trick is played is one set forth at that part of the work above indicated
and need not be more fully described. One of this class of gentry once
undertook to “work” a similar trick upon a wealthy man in a western
town. He succeeded in making his dupe believe that he was an expert
skater. The “sucker” was fond of athletic sports and much given to
betting, and in the hope that he had a fair prospect of winning a large
sum during the following winter, after the ice had formed and the weather
was propitious, he supported him all through the summer. The sharper
lived in clover until the cold blasts of winter had touched the lakes and
streams with an icy kiss. The smooth, glassy surface being well adapted
to the use of skaters, his patron suggested that they should talk business;
i.e., make arrangements for the skating contest. The confidence man
saw that the “jig was up,” and placidly looking his host in the eye, said:
“Well, Colonel, to tell the plain truth, I don’t know much about skating
nohow, but I’m the doggondest best swimmer in the country.”
.pm sectionhead 'A HUNGRY TRIO.'
The preference which some men give to whisky over food is not
only surprising, but at times, decidedly embarrassing to those who do not
.bn 383.png
.pn +1
share in the same disposition. A striking illustration of this assertion
once happened in my own experience. In company with two partners I
was operating a game on the fair-grounds at Macon, Missouri. Luck had
not been particularly propitious to us during the day, and night fell upon
three hungry and tired gamblers, whose combined resources did not
exceed $7. To get something to eat was the main trouble with us
all. One of the party was deputed to go into town and purchase some
provender, the fact that we were all camping on the grounds preventing
our visiting a hotel or restaurant in the village. Unfortunately, the man
selected for this all-important duty was one who never hesitated between
a glass of liquor and a loaf of bread. I am fully aware that the same
statement might be predicated concerning many a consistent prohibitionist;
the difference between the prohibitionist and our messenger, however,
was that while the former would take the bread, the latter invariably
chose the stimulant. We waited long and patiently for his return, and
as the hours passed away our hunger increased. We began to doubt
whether he might not have deserted us, and the question presented itself,
should we ever see him again? At last, in the glimmering darkness we
discerned his form approaching with rather uncertain tread. As soon as
he came within hailing distance, he accosted “Boys,” said he, “I’m
all there.” To say that we felt relieved is to state the case mildly. From
the length of time which he had taken to execute his commission, we felt
he must have provided a “lay-out” which might have tempted Epicurus
himself. The reader may judge of our disappointment when he put down
a package which he evidently regarded as the most precious object of life,
and on opening which, we found it to contain precisely three bottles of
“appetite bitters,” for which he had paid $2.00 per bottle. We said
nothing; we felt that language was inadequate to express our feelings.
The hour was near midnight, and we retired to our beds upon the
ground, in the hope that the sweet oblivion of sleep might bring to us a
happiness, equal in degree, if differing in kind, from that which was
enjoyed by our companion.
.pm sectionhead 'A CASE OF MISTAKEN IDENTITY.'
Much is said in this volume regarding the venality of the police. An
efficient municipal administration can always suppress gambling, if the
task is undertaken in genuine sincerity of purpose and with an inflexible
resolution to succeed. As tending to show how susceptible is the average
policeman to the influence of a bribe I might relate stories which
would fill a work of considerably larger size than this. I have had an
extensive and varied experience with the officers of the law. I was once
arrested in a Missouri city for having perpetrated a scheme of fraud upon
.bn 384.png
.pn +1
a verdant and gullible stranger. When the policeman placed his hand
upon my shoulder and informed me that I was under arrest, my first impulse
was to get away, and I twisted my body into as many contortions
as are discernible upon the face of a man who is shaving himself with a
dull razor. I soon found that escape was impossible. The blue-coated
minion of authority held me with a tenacious grip. Then I began to
appeal to the finer instincts of his nature. I told him that I was innocent;
he laughed at me. I told him of my poverty, talked to him of my family,
and otherwise appealed to the gentler side of his character. He listened
to all I had to say in silence, and with a smile that Artemus Ward would
have described as “coldly cynical.” Inserting the thumb and forefinger
of my right hand in my vest I drew out a ten dollar treasury note, which
I quietly slipped into the hand of the protector of public morals. His
large fingers closed over it with the same firm grasp with which they had
prevented my escape. Stepping back from me one or two paces, he
looked earnestly into my face and exclaimed, “Well, begorrah, an’ Oi
believe
.pm sectionhead 'THE WOULD-BE CONFEDERATE DISAPPOINTED.'
There is a class of amateur gamblers who are always ready to fasten
themselves upon men whom they discover to be professionals, with a view
to induce or to compel them to divide their winnings. They are wont to
claim that without their assistance the blackleg would not have been able
to have won anything. These men are as essentially dishonest as any
confidence man either inside or outside the penitentiary, but they are not
usually particularly astute. I was once playing in a poker game in
an Indiana town, where one of these gentry sat directly over my left hand.
As the game progressed and the gentleman from the rural district perceived
that I was winning largely, he began to kick me under the table.
I at once perceived what he wanted and returned his kicks with great
vigor. When the play was over and we had left the room, the unsophisticated
individual approached me and inquired how much I thought was
his share of the money which I had won. I was not at all surprised, and
answered him in the blandest tone, “nothing.” “Why,” said he,
“didn’t I kick you under the table that I was in with you?” “Yes,”
I replied, “and didn’t I kick you right back that you weren’t?”
.pm sectionhead 'FIVE EQUAL HANDS.'
One evening, while I was running a saloon at Columbia, Missouri, in
the absence of business I began carefully to study the characteristics of
the loungers about the place. They were all broken-down “bums,” men
who claimed to be gamblers, but who were never known to have a dollar
.bn 385.png
.pn +1
in their pockets. As I have said, trade during the day had been very
quiet, and I felt that something must be done to enliven the proceedings.
Taking the gamblers apart, one by one, I lent each one of the four two
dollars, with which to sit in a poker game which I told them I was about
to open and in which I proposed to take a hand myself. To an old and penniless
gambler, the prospect of enjoying all the excitement of poker playing
without any risk is an alluring prospect. After I had “staked” them all,
I produced a deck of cards and we all sat around the table to play. I had
previously prepared a “cold deck,” with precisely similar backs, by taking
all the aces from five packs, and abstracting sixteen cards from the
original deck, to make the correct number. After playing a few rounds,
the deal coming to me, I gave to each man at the table, including myself,
four aces. To see the smile of satisfaction which lighted up each one of
those four faces was worth all the money that it cost. Every man believed
that he had a “sure thing.” Betting began and the limit of each man’s
pile was soon reached. One player became so excited that he took off his
coat and vest, and placing them on the table said, “let ’em go for what
they’re worth; I’ll bet all I’m worth on this hand.” When the hands
were “shown down” each man around the board displayed four aces. It
did not take long for the true inwardness of the situation to dawn upon
the minds of the crowd. A general “guffaw” followed, and I invited all
hands to repair to the bar and indulge in a little liquid refreshment. My
joke had cost me just $8.00, but the story was soon noised about town,
and the following day I did the largest saloon business on record in the
town since the first white man erected the little log cabin which marked
the site of the present thriving city.
.pm sectionhead 'A CHANGE OF DEMEANOR.'
Once, while I was in partnership with a gambler named Martin, to
whom I have frequently referred, I received a telegram from a lawyer
in Jefferson City, Missouri, urging me to come to the latter place with a
view to winning some money at poker. The source from which the
invitation proceeded, left no doubt in our minds that it was possible to
make a snug little sum, and we accordingly went. My partner represented
himself as a drummer for a wholesale liquor house, while I posed as a
traveling representative of a concern engaged in the manufacture of
playing cards. We were introduced into the poker party without difficulty
and with but very little ceremony. We found that there were seven
players, and that the ante was five cents. They called it “playing for
amusement.” We concluded that it would not be policy on our part to
manifest the slightest anxiety to sit in the game, and therefore when
invited to play we declined. One of the party repeatedly urged me to
.bn 386.png
.pn +1
take a hand, saying that “it was only a five cent ante game which they
were playing just for fun.” By way of reply I told him of an infatuated
card player who had once entered a gaming house and was accosted with
a similar invitation. Shivering and trembling, he declined the invitation,
saying that a previous indulgence in the same sort of “fun” had compelled
him to wear his summer clothes all through the winter.
Among the players was an individual whose dignified mien I shall
never forget. When I was introduced to him he recognized my existence
only by the most distant nod. I at once made up my mind that he was
a member of that numerous class who, having a little money in their
possession, consider themselves the superiors in point of wealth, intelligence
and respectability to all the rest of mankind. I made no effort to
force my company upon him, nor did I seek to cultivate his acquaintance.
Within a day or two, after much solicitation, Martin and I consented
to play. Day by day the demeanor of the arrogant stranger became more
and more cordial toward me. At first he condescended to speak to me
by name, gradually he so far forgot himself as to offer me his hand, and
finally grew so familiar that he used to slap me on the back on any and
all occasions, however inopportune. The secret of this change of conduct
on his part was that my partner and myself had succeeded in winning
between $800 and $1,000.
This sum, however, did not represent a net gain to us, inasmuch as
we were obliged to pay the distinguished member of the bar who had
introduced us into the game, the sum of $200 as a commission for his
services. The limb of the law was so elated over his sudden acquisition
of this ill-gotten wealth that in a moment of confidence induced by a too
free indulgence in the cup that both cheers and inebriates, he disclosed
the secret. The result of this imprudence on his part was that an icy
barrier was raised between him and his acquaintances. The stilted individual
to whom I have already referred assured me that the attorney
little thought that his fingers were “involuntarily contracting in a desire
to grasp his throat in a suffocating clutch.” Martin and I left Jefferson
City with damaged reputations, but with tolerably well filled pockets.
We afterwards learned that the lawyer had been “barred out” from
playing poker in any decent circle. This may have proved to have been
a blessing in disguise, inasmuch as of all the poker players that I ever
saw I think that he knew the least about the game.
.bn 387.png
.pn +1
.pm chaphead 'CHAPTER XI.' 'MY WIFE.' chap11
.sp 2
Fannie May Harvey was the daughter of Dr. W. C. Harvey, of Roanoke, Howard
county, Mo., a physician who, in addition to the social prominence which his profession
conferred, had accumulated a competence and enjoyed a lucrative income from
his practice. Tenderly nurtured in the surroundings of a home of wealth and luxury,
of which she was the pride and pet, gifted with rare graces of mind and person, and
endowed with education and accomplishments unusual even for one of her age and
station, through the anxious care of parents ambitious for her future, brilliant in wealth
and station, May Harvey had reached the bloom of womanhood singularly unspoiled
by her advantages and surroundings, and possessed a sweet amiability of disposition
and a gentle and loving way that endeared her to all who were brought into contact
with her. As one has said, “none knew her but to love her, nor named her but to praise.”
My father’s farm was but four miles distant from the home of Dr. Harvey, and being thus
almost neighbors, we were thrown into contact at that stage of life when the heart
of each was most susceptible to the tenderest and truest impulses of affection. That I
should have surrendered to the influence of such a nature all the ardor of a youthful
and undisciplined enthusiasm of love was not to be wondered at. That my affection,
earnest and sincere, and unbroken as it remains to this day to her memory, should be
returned might be wondered at, when it is remembered, as the reader will have
before learned, that my name had already been associated with crime. The standing
of my family had, however, shielded me to some extent from the consequences of the
reckless tendencies of my life, and what might have been characterized by a harsher
verdict was to some extent condoned as youthful wildness. This was sufficient to
excuse our earlier association, and when the parents of May Harvey had awakened to
the serious nature of our intimacy, our hearts had become knit with an affection
stronger than parental remonstrance or interference was able to move. Once aroused,
Dr. and Mrs. Harvey took active measures to separate their daughter from the danger
which they foresaw from such a union. But, as it very often happens, opposition
served but to fan the flame of devotion between us, and to strengthen our mutual
resolve to unite our love and fortunes in an indissoluble tie. Finding her parents unrelenting,
it became evident that the only course was to accomplish our happiness by
means of an elopement, and this was carried into effect on the night of August 24, 1870.
May’s natural aversion to this extreme and undesirable step, and her knowledge of the
anger which it would awaken in the hearts of her parents were undoubtedly overcome
not alone by the promptings of her love for me, but by the belief growing out of the
tenderness of her heart, that her parents loved her too dearly to be long unreconciled
and that regard for her happiness would overcome a temporary displeasure. Well do
I remember that night on which she left the home of her childhood, the surroundings
of luxury and the love of parents; a sacrifice to a greater love. Before leaving the house
she played on the piano and sang “Good-Bye, Old Home,” with an intensity of feeling
that none but herself realized. She bade good-bye to several friends with a seriousness
which was mistaken for badinage, and I with a horse from the barn being
waiting in the vicinity, she was soon speeding on the way to the opening of life’s tragedy.
We rode eighteen miles to Renick, where we were married by ’Squire Butler, a justice
of that place.
.bn 388.png
.pn +1
As may be imagined, when Dr. and Mrs. Harvey learned of the event, their wrath
knew no bounds. The brilliant hopes which they had entertained of a career of social
distinction for which they had aimed to fit their favorite daughter, and to which they
had looked forward to a marriage of wealth as the key, were not only dashed to the
ground, but they had the added bitterness of knowing that it was not poverty alone
to which their daughter had been wedded, but a poverty tainted by social disgrace, for
the object upon whom she had bestowed the wealth of her affection was comparatively
an outcast, a gambler by profession, and even at that time resting under suspicion.
Looking back now, without prejudice and in the light of a fuller experience, I can
hardly feel justified in condemning them for the bitter feeling which they displayed
toward me. Yet, at the time, the animosity with which they pursued me awakened a
deep, and, as I thought, justifiable resentment, for I had acted with honest motive,
and, as I then thought, with pure and unselfish regard for the happiness of one who was
dearer to me than life, for even to this day I can say with truth and sincerity that one
of the sweetest faces in all the world to me is one that comes to me as a hallowed
memory; and the sweetest thoughts are those which cluster around the life which,
through good and ill report, we led together. And I can add now without
resentment that it was not politic toward me nor christian duty toward her whose life
was irrevocably linked to mine, that they should cast her off and bid her never again
to darken their doors, and thus add to such unhappiness as her life encountered by
long years of cold and unfeeling denial of the boon of forgiveness, for which the heart
hungered from the parental love by which her childhood had been blessed and brightened.
It is right to say that her father would probably have relented after our marriage
but for the influence of her mother, a cold, haughty and determined woman, who
said in a voice of steel, “she is dead to us all,” and who kept her relentless renunciation
a cruel and living fact for nearly eight years.
Her father said: “As for my daughter—the worst punishment that could be
inflicted upon her is to leave her alone with her villain of a husband.” It is sad to
think that parental love could so soon become cold, and that a social disappointment
should transform a mother’s tenderness into obdurate and unforgiving rancor to last,
as it transpired, through so many years. In later years I had a boy whom I loved with
all my heart, and had I under any circumstances forsaken him I would have expected
God to desert me.
This separation and its cruel circumstances, and the disappointment of her expectation
of a reconciliation after reasonable time were very hard upon the tender and affectionate
heart of my wife. At times she would weep as if her heart would break, and
yet I am confident that at no time, nor in any of the vicissitudes of her married life,
did she ever falter in her faith in the love that had led her to make the sacrifice. We
struggled along through the varying changes of fortune which make up the gambler’s
career; at one time abounding in comforts, at another pinched for the necessaries of
life. It is an old saying that love and poverty cannot dwell together in the same cottage
longer than between two Out of my experience I can dispute that proverb
in at least one exception, and testify that while love and poverty during the ten years
we were together struggled through many a close place, love, though sometimes saddened
with suffering and misfortunes, survived to the end in all its sweetness and sincerity,
trust and hope.
On one or two occasions my wife wrote home, but always received the same reply—“I
will never see you again.” After several years’ residence about Roanoke, we removed
to Moberly, Mo., and there my wife was seriously ill and was anxious to have her father
attend her. He came, and the fact of his visit did her more good than his prescriptions.
We were told that her mother came with him on the occasion, but remained at the
.bn 389.png
.pn +1
hotel, saying that if her daughter died she would then come and see her. What a grim
and terrible illustration of the implacable and unhallowed spirit which now filled the
bosom that once had swelled with pride and affection under the love of this unforgiven
daughter’s childhood.
Soon after May’s recovery we removed to St. Louis, and here life began to wear a
brighter outlook and the future to be gilded with a rosier hue. Dr. Harvey purchased
for us a suite of furniture—the only thing he ever gave us after our marriage—and
comfort and happiness seemed to give assurance of a permanent stay. But, alas! for a
time, only! Soon the old vice of gambling reasserted its alluring sway, with the result
which inevitably follows its capricious favors. Straightened circumstances again
pinched us with their implacable necessities, and one day my wife sat down and penned
the following letter to her mother:
.pm start_letter
“My Dear Ma:—Since you sent me from you in such deep, and from your point
of view, just anger, because of my marriage, I have often longed to be reconciled to
you and dear Pa. Is my offense so heinous that you cannot forgive me? The worst that
can be said of John is that he is a gambler; God knows that is bad enough, but as a
husband he has always been good and kind to me. At present he is doing nothing.
Could you see the poverty to which we are reduced, I think you would have some pity
upon your daughter. I do not like to ask any favor of you but if you will help us a
little now I will pay you back. Will you never soften your heart?
.nf r
Your loving daughter,
May.”
.nf-
.pm end_letter
Sealing this letter, which had melted her heart to tears, she handed it to me to
mail. I went out, and after remaining a short time, returned but with the letter still
in my pocket. A few days passed in which the clouds of adversity had seemed to
gather thicker around us, and we were as a last resort, compelled to mortgage our furniture.
“Well, John,” she sadly remarked, “it seems as if ma and all the world have
forsaken us.” Seeing her so deeply affected, I took the letter from my pocket and
placed it in her hand. “Oh!” she exclaimed, “it makes me feel so much better to
know that my mother did not refuse my letter.”
Eight years had elapsed since she had looked upon the home of her happy childhood,
when at length came an invitation from her mother to pay her a visit. For a
long time the pride of the wife and a sensitive spirit wounded by long repulse, battled
against the yearning love for father, mother, sisters, and home. At length she decided
to go, but when only a few days there, her mother endeavored to persuade her to
renounce me. At once her constant and faithful heart revolted, and she went out and
ordered a man to call for her trunk. At the family’s entreaties she finally consented
to remain, but it was with the understanding that she had made her choice and would
abide by it; that if she deplored our misfortunes she did not regret her love. This
second separation from home and from the luxury and magnificence which she saw
around her, tempting her the more by their inviting contrast to the hard conditions by
which experience had tried her married life, have always seemed to me to be the
noblest sacrifice and adds a hallowed lustre to the brightness with which memory
enshrines the recollection of her unfaltering love and devotion.
Two years more we struggled on through varying fortunes. Her father on one or
two occasions visited her, but having failed to separate us, her mother gave no more
sign of reconciliation. One Saturday evening my wife and self and our colored
boy, Charley, went to market, and while out I purchased for her a satin dress,
jokingly remarking that it would “help her to catch a new beau.” She replied,
might be buried in it.” After purchasing our Sunday supplies, I put her and the colored
boy on the car to return home, while I left all that was best and dearest to me to
follow the irresistible and fatal fascination of the green cloth table. I gambled till a
.bn 390.png
.pn +1
late hour and then started for On the street everything seemed to be to me, so that I was compelled to ask a policeman for direction home. Arriving,
I retired to bed, but a strange and somber feeling had taken possession of me.
An unaccountable sadness seized my soul; a vague and irrepressible sense of impending
calamity, without any palpable or definable reason, weighed upon me, and I burst
into a passion of tears. My wife asked me what the trouble was, but that I did not
know myself.
On Monday her mother called during my absence, and induced her to go down
town. They remained together at the Laclede Hotel during Monday and Tuesday
nights. This absence seemed to intensify the gloomy forebodings which I could neither
explain nor comprehend, nor shake off. It almost seemed as if I were going to lose
the one joy of my life. The pall of gloom upon my mind was such that sleep or rest
was impossible. For hours I would get up and walk the floor, wrestling with the
shadowy terror which seemed so close and incomprehensible. Was it the warning
from another world of a direful grief so soon to befall? The dread rustling of the
wings hovering even now over the happiness of my hearthstone?
Wednesday morning she returned home. I remember that we had a box of sardines,
and ate them out of the same saucer. She said we would go down in the same
car together and might possibly meet her mother at one of the stores. She requested
me to speak to her mother if we met, which I at first declined, but on seeing that it
grieved her, consented to. She also requested me to buy some little presents for her little
invalid sister, Zollie, whom she tenderly loved, and on leaving her I went to the St. Bernard’s
dollar store and made some purchases for this purpose and proceeded with them to
the hotel. Enquiring for Mrs. Harvey, I was told that she and her daughter had left for
home. “My God!” I exclaimed to myself, “has May forsaken me?” I immediately took
a car home, and there, to my inexpressible relief and delight, was May, herself, looking
a thousand times fairer than ever before. Doubtless, she had employed this last interview
with her mother in endeavoring to promote the reconciliation which her tender
heart, filled with affection for both husband and parent, so fully desired. She told a
friend of ours that when her mother left her that morning she had said: “Daughter,
I would rather see you in your grave than continue to live with that man.” Little she
recked that before the sun should go down upon the bitterness of her heart the fell
wish would become a tragic reality.
I was at this time interested in a foot race and was in training at Court Brilliant
race track. I kissed her good-bye about 10 o’clock of the day her mother left St. Louis,
saying that I would be back for dinner between 3 and 4 o’clock in the afternoon. Little
did I dream that this embrace had parted us forever on earth! When I arrived
home the colored boy, Charley, met me at the door, saying, “Miss’ May fell down
stairs and was hurt bad.” Alarmed, I hastened into the house. It was full of strangers.
I rushed to the bedside, and there, white and still, lay my wife, the dear one who had
so often told me she would lay down her life for my sake. I put my lips to hers; they
were not yet cold. With a cry of agony I knelt by her side and my heart seemed to
cease to beat. It could not be possible that my May, so full of life when but a few
hours before I had left her, was now lying dead before me! That those eyes would
never again open to look upon me with an affection that never wearied or grew faint!
That those lips were never more to open to speak to me one word of hope or love! Words
fail to depict the anguish and the utterness of the loss which it seemed so hard to realize.
Death is hard and cruel even when it comes to those whom age or disease has
long marked for its own; but how unutterably sad when it comes without warning and
sweeps away in one moment the brightness and sweetness of life alike from the victim
and from those who are left to mourn!
.bn 391.png
.pn +1
I was informed subsequently that in descending the stairs she had caught her foot
in her dress and fallen headlong, striking the door sill with her head. She was carried
up to her room, insensible, and lay for about three hours in a comatose condition. At
length she rose up in bed, exclaiming, “Where is John? Oh, ma! ma! you break my
heart! You won’t forgive me! Take down my hair, I am dying!” This was the
last effort of consciousness. She lay back in bed and passed quietly into the silent
sleep from which there is no waking. She expired at half past three on April 29, 1880.
Her father, who had that morning arrived at the Union Stock Yards, was notified
and came immediately, and I have often wondered what were his thoughts as he stood
by the bedside of his dead child, to whose life his unforgiving spirit had brought so
much sadness. In this trial there was one circumstance that has always afforded me a
melancholy satisfaction. Although we had been poor almost the entire portion of our
married life, at the time of her death I was in a position to give her honorable and reverent
sepulture, and to respect her wishes oft expressed in life with regard to burial.
She had always desired to be laid to rest in a corner of the lawn at her parental home,
at Roanoke, and there it was agreed her remains should be taken. This time, as she
crossed the threshold of the old home, there was no unkind look or word of reproach,
for upon her pallid and peaceful brow there was enthroned the majesty of the sovereign
fate of all, before which the paltry passions of pride and anger shrink away in shame.
As she lay there surrounded by father, mother, sisters and friends, the look of trouble
and care which had rested there of late had all disappeared, and only the sweetness
and peace of eternal rest remained. Listening to the expressions of love, sympathy
and admiration which came from those who surrounded her bier, I could not but think
that it might have been better if a few of the tokens of affections now extended around
her lifeless form had been bestowed while her warm and loving heart had hungered
and yearned in vain during the struggle of our married life. But pride and anger had
been allowed to stand in the way of natural affection, and both hearts had suffered. It
was now too late for vain regrets to make atonement or to undo the wrong from which
only death gave relief to her gentle spirit.
I certainly think if her parents could have seen us on several occasions struggling
through the hard places, they would have come to our relief. Her father showed at
times that he felt kindly for his child and was willing to take her back into his heart
as he had taken her in his arms when a little child, but her mother, who exercised a
great deal of influence over him, would not forgive nor allow him to forgive. I suppose
she thought she was doing a mother’s duty and that morality compelled her to
treat her child as a stranger and an outcast. I have sinned often in allowing the tears
to gather in the eyes of my dear wife, but I know this: she was troubled more by the
way her parents treated her than by any sorrow that came through my life. True, I
was a gambler, and as she said, “God knows, that’s bad enough!” but I was always
good to her, and so far as it was in my power, strove to make her happy.
I have sometimes thought that I did her a wrong in our marriage. From the time
I was sixteen years of age I had been familiar with the vicissitudes of a gambler’s life,
and had always in good luck or bad fortune remained light hearted. If fortune smiled
upon me I was the gayest of the gay; if fortune frowned I whistled and waited for a
better day. With my wife it was otherwise. She had been brought up so tenderly
that she knew not what it was to have a wish ungratified or a want unsupplied. She
was not in any way prepared to meet the fickle and uncertain experiences to which a
gambler necessarily subjects his family. As a flower bends before the wind which
blows too rudely upon it, so she bowed when ill luck brought us to want and privation.
The only excuse I have to offer is that I sincerely loved her and thought I could
make her life happy. If I failed may God forgive me, but I did the best I could.
.bn 392.png
.pn +1
As I look back after the experience of years, I come to this conclusion—she was
too good for me. In the hours of gloom there was never a look or word of reproach.
Had there been more of the force of a sterner character about her I might have yielded
to her influence and stopped gambling, settled down and become a steady, industrious,
God-fearing man. I say God fearing because I always had a deep sense of religious
truth. My companions used to say, “John, you were never cut out for a gambler;
you would make a good minister.” This element of sternness she did not possess.
Her nature was all love and gentleness, and so, like two heedless children, we played
with life; ate of its good things when fortune brought us plenty; drank of its bitter
water when we had lost our all.
I thought then that it was terrible for her to be cut off almost in the springtime of
her life; that my affliction was unendurable, and that life without her would be intolerable.
But I feel now that all things are in the hands of One whose wisdom is beyond
our thought. Better for her to rest in the dreamless sleep of eternity than to bear the
shame and trouble that a gambler brings upon his family. Her power over me for
good has been greater in death than in life, although at first I did not listen to the
voice of love which came to me; yet there was a constant power drawing me to the
better life. If angels are allowed to pray for and visit their holy influence upon those
they love upon earth I know now that my dead wife followed me through all the years
of my subsequent career until the light of God’s truth broke in upon my heart in the
prison at Jeffersonville.
.pm start_poem
“Oh, friends, I pray to night,
Keep not your kisses for my dead, cold brow,
The way is lonely, let me feel them now.
Think gently of me; I am travel worn;
My faltering feet are pierced with many a thorn.
Forgive, oh, hearts estranged, forgive I plead!
When dreamless rest is mine, I shall not need
The tenderness for which I long to night.”
.pm end_poem
.bn 393.png
.pn +1
.il fn=i_387.jpg w=350px ew=70%
.ca MRS. MAY HARVEY QUINN.
.bn 394.png
.pn +1
.pm chaphead 'CHAPTER XII.' 'LOCAL GAMBLING.' chap12
.sp 2
Like all kindred vices, gambling flourishes best in large cities.
Centres of commerce are also centres of speculation, and the man whose
brain has been busy all day in the consideration of perplexing problems
of trade finds it easy to transfer the theatre of his ventures from the counting
room to the gambling hell. There is, besides, a class of men,—and
notably of men engaged in the learned professions—who claim that they
find at the faro or poker table a relaxation and a healthful amusement.
It is unnecessary to point out the fallacy of such a view. Any recreation
the nature of which is to stimulate some of the most ignoble of the passions
that sway the human heart, to debauch the morals and to work the ruin
of those who have resort to it, can scarcely be characterized as legitimate,
far less as innocent or healthful.
Moreover, the transient population in every metropolitan city is
enormous, and strangers are regarded by professional sharpers as their
peculiar prey. The holding of a fair, the assembling of an encampment,
in a word, the gathering of any great crowd draws gamblers to a town as
a carcass attracts vultures. Hence it is that the gambling element becomes
a power, both pecuniary and political, in large cities. Professional cheats
are numerous; they band themselves together for purposes both offensive
and defensive, and their cunning is matched only by their rapacity. None
know better than they that it is entirely within the power of the municipal
authorities to prevent the successful conduct of their nefarious
calling. It follows that they must have a tacit understanding with the
latter, in order that they may enjoy what they denominate “police protection.”
In other words, officials sworn to enforce the laws must be
induced to “protect” those who openly violate them! The influences
brought to bear to accomplish this end are multiform, but may be resolved
into three general categories. Money is freely used, and the acceptance
of a bribe places the receiver within the power of the payer; political
influence is also employed, liberal subscriptions being made to the campaign
funds of both parties, but besides these two agencies there is yet a
third. The professional gambler has an intimate acquaintance with the
criminal classes; he knows their movements and their haunts, and more
than one arrest which the public considers as “unusually clever” is made
upon information given to the detectives by men who are willing to hand
over a friend to the gallows in consideration of their own immunity from
interference. The statements regarding local gambling contained in this
chapter are in part based upon the personal knowledge and in part upon
trustworthy information derived from authentic sources.
.bn 395.png
.pn +1
.pm sectionhead 'GAMBLING IN CHICAGO.'
Among the most prominent gamblers in Chicago in the early ’40’s
were George C. Rhodes, the Smith brothers—George, Charles and
Montague—Conant (familiarly known as “King Cole,”) John Sears, Cole
Martin, Walt Winchester, Blangy and Curtis. Some of these men lasted
until a few years ago, but I believe that at present few of them survive.
The last one to conduct business in Chicago was George (nick-named
“One-Lung”) Smith, who not many years ago ran a handsomely
equipped establishment on State street, opposite the Palmer House. He
was a gambler of the old school, fond of “high rolling,” and fearless even
to recklessness. On leaving Chicago he went to New York, where he
passed through all the varying vicissitudes of a gambler’s life. One day
a run of luck filled his coffers to overflowing; perhaps within a week his
losses had reduced him almost to penury. He died gambling on borrowed
capital; using money loaned him by men who retained confidence in him
because of their knowledge of his abstemious habits and his long (if unsuccessful)
experience.
In those early days faro had not attained its present popularity, and
in some houses whole days might pass without anything but “short
games” being played. In the latter case, however, ten per cent of the
stakes went to the proprietors as a percentage, or “rake-off” due the
house. Brag, poker, seven-up, cribbage and even whist were favorites,
and in some rooms chess, checkers and backgammon were occasionally
played, the proprietors, however, invariably receiving their proportion
of the wagers. The roulette wheel did not make its appearance
until after 1850, and hazard, “stud” poker, the “big wheel,” twenty one,
rouge-et-noir, the “squeeze spindle” and high ball poker are of comparatively
recent introduction.
John Sears was another of the “old time sports,” whose commanding
figure, attired richly but in perfect taste, was formerly a familiar figure
upon Chicago streets. He was a singularly handsome man, of jovial and
generous temperament, and with faultless manners, the latter characteristic
being perhaps partially traceable to his French descent. Possessed
of a fair education, he was very fond of reading, and was well versed in
the writings of the standard poets. He adored Shakespeare and
worshipped Burns. He was an entertaining conversationalist, and was
fond of interspersing choice and apt poetical quotations with funny stories,
of which he had an inexhaustible fund. His friends (and their roll numbered
many, outside gamblers’ ranks) loved him dearly. He enjoyed the
reputation of being a thoroughly “square” player, and though he died
poor, his demise was widely and sincerely lamented.
“King” Cole (Conant) was endowed with some of the same traits
.bn 396.png
.pn +1
as was Sears, and popular among his associates. He played boldly and
won heavily, but spent his winnings lavishly. In 1852, in company with
Cole Martin, he went to St. Paul, where they opened one of the earliest
gambling houses in that city. The firm prospered, but having squandered
their gains in riotous living, returned to Chicago, comparatively
penniless. There Conant died, a financial, physical and moral wreck.
“Skin” gamblers came to Chicago at a very early period in the
city’s history. At first they conducted no regular houses, but dealt
banking games at various places, as opportunity offered, paying ten per
cent. of their winnings to the owners of the rooms used. It was not long,
however, before this class of professionals began to find for themselves
permanent locations. For many years, and even down to the mayoralty
of “Long John” Wentworth, patrons of the race courses were familiar
with the faces of H. Smith, Bill McGraw, Dan Oaks, “Dutch” House
and “Little Dan” Brown. Roulette and chuck-a-luck were run in full
blast at these gatherings, and “Dutch” House was considered as
particularly skillful in conducting “the old army game.”
All these men have passed away. With the exception of one
who died at Milwaukee possessed of some property, their “last end was
worse than the first.” Bill McGraw died of delirium tremens, and “Little
Dan” Brown ended his days in the poorhouse.
Gambling became more and more open, and the ranks of professionals
were swelled, year by year, until at length the business was conducted
with scarcely a pretence of concealment. This was the state of affairs
when “Long John” Wentworth was elected mayor for the first time.
He at once inaugurated a policy of reform. His first crusade was against
swinging signs and other street obstructions, a vast number of which were
“gathered in” during one night and piled in one heap at the corner of
Lake and State Streets. The next morning the Democrat (the mayor’s
paper) announced that all persons who had lost property of this
the preceding night would find it at that locality. Claimants began to
appear early, and each and all were promptly and impartially fined under
the city ordinance.
The gamblers began to feel apprehensive. Wentworth warned them
through the columns of the Democrat that they would be the next victims
of the besom of reform, but long immunity made them incredulous.
They were not left long in doubt as to the sincerity of the mayor’s intentions.
One warm summer afternoon he opened his war of extermination
by sending two policemen to visit Burrough’s establishment, which was in
a building on Randolph Street, standing on the present site of Epstean’s
Dime Museum. The officers climbed upon an adjacent roof and gained
entrance to the rooms through the rear windows on the second floor,
which they found open and unguarded. They proceeded leisurely, and
.bn 397.png
.pn +1
captured no one but the dealer, who tarried to secure the contents of his
cash drawer. The players incontinently fled down the stairs, at the foot
of which they rushed into the arms of a cordon of police, behind whom
towered the gigantic frame of “Long John” himself. He it was who
headed the mournful procession that wended its way to the calaboose in
the basement of the Court House, encouraging the drooping spirits of the
gamesters by insuring them in stentorian tones, and in language more
forcible than elegant, that he “intended to teach them a lesson that they
would remember.” He personally superintended the booking and locking
up of the prisoners, and announced that if any person holding a city
license appeared to offer bail for any one of them, the license would be
summarily revoked. This threat was leveled particularly at saloon
keepers and hackmen, whom Wentworth cordially detested, and between
whom and the gamblers there existed the warmest friendship.
An exciting episode of the raid was the appearance at the calaboose
of an attorney, “Charley” (now Colonel) Cameron, who demanded an
interview with a client—one of the four Smith brothers, all of whom were
in the lock-up. His request was refused, and going outside he attempted
to hold a consultation through the grated window. The watchful eye of
the mayor espied him. “What are you doing there, you —— rascal?”
fairly shrieked His Honor. “Get away, I tell you; get away!” Cameron
replied that he was exercising the right of an attorney in consulting
a client. Angered beyond endurance, Wentworth rushed at him. “Don’t
you dare to touch me,” shouted Cameron. “Oh, no; Oh, no” yelled the
mayor; and grasping the attorney with a vise-like grip, he forced him into
the city prison, never relaxing his hold until he had seen him safely placed
behind the bars.
All these proceedings may have been the very acme of arbitrariness,
but they are worth recounting, as showing how raids were conducted
under the first administration of “Long John.” Everything found in
the rooms was confiscated, and when the tenants returned they found
only bare walls and a carpetless floor. The proprietors plead guilty and
were fined heavily. The “inmates” appealed to a higher court and were
each mulcted in the sum of twenty-five dollars and costs; the total expense
of each player, including attorney’s fees, being about sixty dollars. Cameron
caused the arrest of the mayor for assault and false imprisonment,
but the case never came to trial.
Thus ended the first, and, up to the present time, the only raid upon a
Chicago gambling house conducted by the city’s chief executive in person.
It proved one of the most effective known to history. Open gambling ceased
at once, and the “hole-and-corner” variety of the vice was soon hunted
out. Banking games were no longer to be found, and the few poker
rooms that were started in out-of-the-way places were speedily discovered,
.bn 398.png
.pn +1
raided, and forced to close. Occasionally a game of faro was dealt; Saturday
night being the time usually selected and the game lasting until
well-nigh into Sunday morning; but when an adjournment was had, it
was “sine die,” and no two consecutive games were played at the same
place.
It must be remembered that all this occurred before the beginning of
the present era of club life, which has done so much to pervert the morals,
if not to overturn the foundations of society. It is a notorious fact
that the heaviest play in Chicago to-day may be found in the most aristocratic
and exclusive clubs. The police, of course, are not aware of it.
Every man in Chicago doing business in what is known as the “Board of
Trade district” has heard of the existence of a small club, whose membership
is chiefly composed of operators on the floor of ’Change, and most
men about town know where it is located. The appointments of the rooms
while not luxurious, are of simple elegance and the cuisine and buffet are
said to be matchless. Stories are current of fabulous sums having been
lost and won across the tables in this exclusive resort. It is charitable to
suppose that the authorities lack either the knowledge or the legal power
to interfere with the gambling here conducted. However this may be, the
fact remains that the patrol wagons laden with blue-coated officers of the
law rattle over the stones beneath its very windows, intent upon proving
at once their watchfulness and their fidelity by arresting a half-score of
Mongolians for indulging in “fan tan,” or “running in” a dozen negroes
who may be found “throwing craps.”
Still, even before the days when Wentworth reigned autocrat of Chicago,
and even during his administration, there existed in the city a club,
composed of choice spirits selected from both the professional and commercial
walks of life. Among its shining lights were such men as Doctor
Egan, Maxwell, Maxmire, Judge Meeker, Justice Lamb, Judge Wilson,
Col. Carpenter, “Bob” Blackwell, and a host of other men equally well
known in their day. Politics and religious creeds were forgotten. Relaxation,
unrestrained social intercourse, and mental improvement were nominally
the objects sought. At the same time often a game of brag was
played. This was the favorite pastime, although poker had its devotees;
whist held its own, while cribbage, and even old sledge, were not too
plebian amusements. Games were sometimes played for high stakes,
among the most venturesome players being Egan, Maxwell and Carpenter.
At these gatherings hilarity was unbounded. Thomas F. Marshall,
of Kentucky, during one summer that he spent in Chicago was wont to
charm the members with his oratory, logic, wisdom and wit; John
Brougham, E. L. Davenport, and James E. Murdock, famous the world
over for their histrionic talent, were frequent and welcomed guests.
Of these perhaps the former was somewhat the favorite with the members.
.bn 399.png
.pn +1
He wrote a poem addressed to Egan’s daughter, and dedicated a
book to the doctor:
[In this connection, it may not be amiss to repeat a well authenticated
story of Murdock, which has come down as a tradition from the
days when the club flourished. The members took their guest to the
race course to see Chicago’s favorite win. So elated was the crowd over
the triumphs that champagne flowed like the pent up rivulet bursting
through a rocky chasm. That evening Murdock was to play Claude Melnotte.
When he undertook to recite the description of the palace by the
lake of Como his articulation became thick and indistinct. Recognizing
the demands of the situation the great tragedian hurriedly bowed himself
off the stage. His place before the foot-lights was promptly taken by
Manager McFarland, who, in tones of the severest courtesy, apologized
for the “sudden and unaccountable (sic) illness of Mr. Murdock,” in consequence
of which he craved the indulgence of the audience during the
few moments necessary for him to consume in dressing, when he, himself,
would assume the part. Assent having been secured, McFarland finished
the role to a crowded if not over-critical house.]
Keno was just beginning to grow into favor with the gaming public
at the time when Mayor Wentworth so ruthlessly suppressed the vice.
Some of the games were “square;” others “brace.” The latter were at
first conducted by “Billy” Buck, and later by “Ed” Simpson. Both
men were fond of drink, and the games were run in meanly furnished
rooms in localities ill suited to their successful operation.
The gambling fraternity, recognizing in Wentworth a foe who could
be neither cajoled, bribed, nor intimidated, began, with practical unanimity,
either to look for some other walk of life in which they might exercise
their peculiar talents, or to seek localities where the head of the city
government was more amenable to “reason.”
“Long John” was succeeded by Mayor Haynes, and the hydra-headed
monster once more began to lift its head from the seclusion into
which it had been forced. In other words the gamblers determined to
see whether the new city administration was to be controlled by the same
influences and actuated by the same principles as had been its predecessor.
Slowly they felt their way. At first Daniels, Avery, Sears, and Winchester
opened their houses in a quiet and unobtrusive manner. Other members
of the fraternity, finding that these were not molested, followed suit,
and during several successive administrations, down to the time of Medill,
everything was smooth sailing. Raids were of infrequent occurrence, and
altogether farcical in their character. They appeared to be conducted
not so much with a view of suppressing the vice or injuring the business
of the houses raided, as for the purpose of raising a sort of indirect tax,
or levying an illegal assessment. No one ever thought of destroying the
.bn 400.png
.pn +1
personal property found in the resorts, and the fines imposed were usually
very light. In fact, so little attention was paid to them that the proprietors
were wont to admit the officers with the utmost cheerfulness; and
when a hell was “pulled” hacks were at once called into requisition and
the dealers and players rode together to the office of the nearest police magistrate,
where bail was at once accepted, and the party again entering
their carriages, returned to the rooms and resumed play. Of course, under
such a regime, gambling houses multiplied rapidly, and to attempt an
enumeration of the resorts or of their keepers would occupy too much
space. A few of the more prominent, however, may be mentioned. These
were the Smiths, Holland, Howland, Scott, Robbins, Lawler, Holt, Jones,
Bachelor, McDonald, Martin, Walpole, Cameron, Dowling, Peters, Page,
Hynes, Wicks, Blanga, Curtis, Wallace, Buchanan, Kellogg, Bowers, Taylor,
Donaldson, Corcoran, Nellis Adams, Daniels, Hugh Dunn, Dutch
Charley, Cy Janes, H. Jeff & Co., Hankins, H. Smith, and Beach.
One of the best known houses during this period was that of Theo.
Cameron, at the Northeast corner of Clark and Madison Streets. Fred
White was employed as dealer. The profits of the establishment were
very large, owing to the fact that the proprietor employed competent
“steerers,” who found little difficulty in securing dupes, whom he was
fond of calling “fat suckers.” But Cameron was a man who, had he
made a hundred thousand dollars in a night, would have contrived to get
rid of it during the next twenty-four hours, even if he had to burn it up.
Among his compeers he was known as “a bad man from Texas and
handy with a gun.” One evening several “tough” citizens, among
whom was a recent graduate from the State institution at Joliet, dropped
into his place and lost all the money which they had. Meeting a friend
on the outside, the latter informed them that they had undoubtedly been
“skinned.” After holding a council of war they concluded to return to
the place and demand that their money be returned to them. Accordingly,
the three went up stairs, and while two stationed themselves at the
door, the ex-convict entered the apartment, pistol in hand, and demanded
the money. While the dealer was endeavoring to placate him, Cameron
entered the place and took in the situation at a glance. Stealing, with
cat-like step, to the sideboard, he took a revolver from one of the drawers
and opened fire on the intruder, wounding him at the first shot. A mutual
fusillade followed, which continued until the victim dropped dead.
Cameron promptly surrendered himself, but when his trial occurred, found
no difficulty in securing abundant evidence that he had acted strictly in
self-defense.
Subsequently the same man opened a “brace” game at 68 Randolph
Street. The place was expensively furnished, and was conducted on a
scale of prodigal extravagance. The “sporting” fraternity knew it as a
.bn 401.png
.pn +1
“bird house.” The lodging rooms were fitted up most luxuriously, and
were always at the disposal of the guests and employes. The sideboard
was stocked with the choicest liquors, and with cigars of the finest brands,
while the wines were the best the market afforded. “Dr.” Ladd was Cameron’s
partner, owning a half interest in the house, and it was his duty to
supervise this part of the business. all this lavish
outlay, the house made a great deal of money; yet when the hells were
again closed and the gamblers forced to seek other fields of action,
Cameron was so poor that he left the city with scarcely five hundred
dollars in his pocket.
“Colonel Wat” Cameron ran a house at 167 Randolph Street. It
enjoyed the reputation of being a “square” game, and was liberally
patronized by a good class of players. He finally came to grief, it is said,
through the machinations of “Gabey” Foster and “Old Ben” Burnish,
who, however, allowed him a percentage of the winnings. They made a
great deal of money there and in other parts of the city.
“Gabey” Foster, whose name is mentioned above, was not well
liked by the fraternity at large, who regarded him as a decidedly mean
specimen of humanity. He became a confirmed victim of the opium
habit, and “hitting the pipe” at last brought him to his death. His
brain became affected, and while at Little Rock, Arkansas, he wandered
away into the woods, where his body was found frozen stiff. His paramour
sent for his remains and gave them a decent interment.
Another noted “brace” dealer of those times was a man known as
“Jew” Hyman. He possessed a fine physique, and a mind of more than
average capacity. He was fond of playing against the bank in other
houses, and found no difficulty in scattering his winnings. He was much
devoted to all the pleasures of sense; a high liver and fond of women.
He married a notorious courtesan some thirty years ago. He died in a
West Side Chicago lodging house, broken down in health, and with a
disordered brain, and was buried by the woman to whose fortunes he had
linked his own, and who had supported him for many years.
In 1863 the city received a new influx of “skin” gamblers, some of
whom are still residents of Chicago, but not at present actively engaged
in the practice of their “profession.” As tending to illustrate the characteristics
of a certain class of “brace” dealers, and as serving to show
the depth of degradation to which the gambling vice will sometimes sink
its votaries, the following incident may prove not only interesting, but
instructive. The story is literally true, only the names of the actors
being withheld. The gang of sharpers who came to this city in 1863 was
one of the most unscrupulous that has ever cursed any city. They commenced
operations as “ropers in” for the most disreputable resorts. It
was their custom to gain access to the hallways of gaming houses in
.bn 402.png
.pn +1
which players were allowed some little chance of winning, and turn out
the gas. As soon as a visitor appeared, some member of the coterie
would inform him that the place was closed for the night, and at once
“steer” him to some hole where he was certain to be shamelessly plundered.
At length, one of them contrived to become proprietor of a small den,
which his fellows at once made their headquarters, and where “suckers”
were robbed without the slightest regard to even the semblance of
decency.
Among the visitors to this place was a man who occupied a position
of high trust in a well known private corporation. The keeper of the
hell assiduously cultivated his friendship, and easily won his money.
He then insinuated into the mind of his dupe the belief that his only hope
of recovering his losses was to plunge still deeper into the game. Step by
step the unfortunate man fell. Knowing the combination of the company’s
vault, it was easy for him to gain an entrance thereto and abstract
large amounts of currency. This he did night after night. At length
he abstracted $5,000 in one package, carried it with him to the den in
question, staked it at the faro table, and lost every cent. The proprietor
had always posed as his friend, and the wretched devotee of play took
him into his confidence. He told him that he was a defaulter to the
extent of $31,000. “Better go and get it all, and see if you can play out,”
was the advice of the gambler. He added that if he lost it he would be
in no worse condition than he then was. After considerable argument
and no little persuasion, the official of the corporation consented, and the
two went together to the company’s office. The gambler held a lamp in
order that his dupe might be able to see more clearly the combination of
the safe. When it was opened he extended his hand for the money,
which the victim handed to him. With the money in his possession,
the scoundrel’s manner soon changed entirely. He told the unhappy
defaulter that it would be far better for him to go to California, where he
would keep him well supplied with money, while meanwhile a compromise
might be effected with the company. This was not at all satisfactory
to the embezzler, who insisted upon taking the money and risking it at
play. But the gambler was obdurate, and flatly refused to turn over any
more cash than was necessary to enable the miserable man to leave town.
They drank and quarreled until morning. The position of the official
was a most distressing one. He dared not return to the office; he was
absolutely penniless; and to attempt to compel the surrender of the
money by the gambler would be to proclaim his own shame. Accordingly,
he found himself compelled to accept the terms proposed to him. His
pretended friend stuck close to him, escorted him to the train, bought
him a ticket and gave him a little money and much advice, bidding him
farewell with a profusion of promises. The money which the absconding
.bn 403.png
.pn +1
treasurer had taken with him was soon spent, but the man who had been
the cause of his ruin refused to take any notice of his appeals for further
assistance. At last the unhappy man concluded, like the prodigal in the
parable, to “arise and go to his father.” The latter was a man of wealth,
and on learning of his son’s whereabouts, at once sent him money with
which to come home. As soon as the victim reached Chicago, the
gambler was arrested and placed in jail, where he languished for some
three months, being unable to secure bail chiefly because of his notoriously
bad character. He finally secured his release through a compromise,
restoring the $20,000 which he had taken from the defaulter on the night
before he left the city. The victim of his knavery died soon afterwards
of consumption, supposed to have been aggravated, if not induced, through
the dissipation to which he resorted in order to drown his shame.
At the expiration of Mayor Haines’ term of office, Mr. Wentworth
was again elevated to the chief magistracy of the city. He found a very
different state of affairs from that which he had left. While things had not
exactly “gone to the dogs,” the laws were by no means strictly enforced
and many of the minor city ordinances had become dead letters. Particularly
was this true in the case of those relating to bawdy houses and
gaming hells. This circumstance may be accounted for in part by the
fact that there did not exist an overwhelming public sentiment in favor of
their suppression. Then, as now, there was a large and influential element
in the community which openly claimed that while these resorts
were to be condemned on principle, their toleration in a large and constantly
growing city was a necessary evil. Another class protested loudly
against any interference by the legislative or executive departments of the
government with what they were pleased to denominate the “personal
liberty of the citizens.” Others, still, who never gambled themselves,
looked upon the harm done by this class of houses as being no affair of
theirs, and regarded the ruin of the occasional players at faro with the utmost
indifference.
Wentworth was quick to feel and respond to the public pulse upon
this question. During his second term he was by no means the terror to
evil-doers that he had been throughout his first. He had already shown
what he could do, and the cognomen of a “reform Mayor,” appeared to
have for him no further charms. While his enforcement of the laws cannot
be said to have been lax, neither was it particularly stringent. Nevertheless,
he occasionally made life exceedingly interesting for the
gamblers.
The years during which Mayors Rumsey and Sherman held office,
were halcyon days for Chicago sporting men. This was the era
of the war, when gambling flourished all over the country and raised its
serpent head with a brazen effrontery never seen before. Paymasters,
.bn 404.png
.pn +1
contractors and army officers gambled with a reckless prodigality which
was as surprising as it was reprehensible. These classes constituted,
perhaps, the richest prey for the professional gamblers. Next to them,
the numerous professional bounty-jumpers, who rapidly scattered at the
gaming table the money out of which they had defrauded the government.
Those were mad, wild times, when money was abundant and speculation
ran riot. It was pre-eminently a period of “brace” games, the reckless
players being apparently utterly indifferent as to the character of the game
at which they staked their money.
Among the professionals who came prominently into public notice
at this time were William Leonard, (sometimes known as “Old Bill”)
Otis Randall, George Trussell, and Judd.
The latter was known as a “forty-niner.” He entered upon his
career as a gambler in the far west, carrying a roulette wheel on his back
from one mining camp to another. He accumulated a considerable amount
of money through gaming, and retired from its active pursuit. Going
from Chicago to New York he became associated with John Morrissey in
the proprietorship of some of the most elegant gaming houses in that city.
Rumor has it that he also had an interest in several resorts of an inferior
grade. He was what is known among the fraternity as an “all-round
sport,” equally adept at all games. His fondness for liquor proved
the cause of the loss of his fortune, and compelled him once more to become
a wanderer.
George Trussel, who during the time of which we are writing, owned
and conducted one of the most popular resorts in Chicago, was a man of
fine physique, scrupulous in his dress, and extravagant in his tastes and
habits. His establishment was elegantly, if not sumptuously furnished,
and the refreshments provided for the guests were noted for their fine
quality, no less than for the fastidiousness displayed in the manner of
their service. He came to a wretched end. His discarded mistress shot
and killed him at the entrance to Rice’s livery stable, as he was returning
with a horse and buggy in which he had taken her rival for a drive.
The case awakened no little interest at the time, and the trial was fully
reported in the daily prints. The woman was acquitted by the jury,
whose sympathies were aroused by the deplorable tale of seduction, neglect,
abuse and desertion which she revealed.
Another gambler who met a somewhat similar fate was Charley
Stiles, who was shot and killed at his room in the Palmer House by a
courtesan whom he had outrageously abused. The verdict of the jury in
her case was a somewhat anomalous one. They found her mentally irresponsible
at the time of the commission of the deed, yet fixed her punishment
at one year’s imprisonment in the penitentiary.
.bn 405.png
.pn +1
Mayor Rumsey ruled with a by no means iron hand. The blacklegs
found comparatively little occasion to find fault with his administration of
city affairs. Occasionally, a complaint on the part of some victim or an
unusually bitter newspaper attack would compel him to resort to harsh
measures. At such times, one or two raids would be made; the gamblers
were forced to open their safes, and the tools and furniture taken away,
though their destruction was rarely attempted, the owners being usually
allowed ample time in which to sue out writs of replevin.
Reference has been made to the prosperous times which the fraternity
enjoyed under the rule of Mayor Sherman. Connected with his administration,
however, was Chief of Police Washburne. In the latter official
the gamblers found a bitter and uncompromising foe. He raided the hells
constantly, earnestly and viciously. Furniture and tools costing thousands
of dollars were ruthlessly destroyed; and if the owners replevined
the property seized and attempted to resume business “at the old stand,”
they soon found they had reckoned without their host. Washburne at
once paid them a midnight visit, and again removed the paraphernalia of
their houses. It was his custom to insist upon heavy fines, and this circumstance,
taken in connection with the destruction of property, soon
made the business unprofitable. He gave the “sports” no rest,
them night and day.
His laudable efforts to suppress the gaming houses were materially
hampered by the treachery and insubordination of his officers. The sympathy
of a very large proportion of the police force was with the proprietors
of the hells, and the latter were constantly apprized of intended raids,
and were generally kept tolerably well posted as to the intentions and
doings of the chief. As a matter of course, for services such as these the
“crooks” were willing to pay, and pay well. As a result of this state of
affairs, it was no uncommon occurrence for the raiders to find a house
empty and securely closed at the time of their nocturnal visit. Sometimes
the keepers adopted other tactics. Instead of closing the house,
they quietly awaited the arrival of the police, in company with a few pretended
players, whom they had hired to submit to an arrest. On such
occasions, the only property found consisted of an empty tin box and a
few stacks of old and worn out chips.
Notwithstanding all these hindrances, Washburne was vigilant and
energetic. His exertions knew no cessation. He not only rendered it
unsafe to conduct a gaming house, but made it dangerous and costly to
be caught in one. The contest proved to be an unequal one, and the
gamblers abandoned the field to their determined antagonist. To their
patrons they said that it was their intention to “close up for a little while,
until the storm blew over or the authorities were fixed.” For a time,
there was no public gambling in the city, but soon some of the more
.bn 406.png
.pn +1
venturesome members of the fraternity began to “play a little on the
quiet.” They at once discovered that this would not do. The risk of
playing was so great, however, that only “brace” or “snap” games
were opened. The efforts of the blacklegs in this direction were supplemented
by the opening of “bunko” rooms, with occasional ventures at
rouge-et-noir, while “top and bottom” joints were scattered about the
city.
Gaming, as such—by which is meant the playing of a game of
chance—was unknown. The sports were penniless and needed money;
they were aware that their operations must be conducted quickly if they
were to avoid arrest, and in consequence, they had resort to every sort of
device known among professionals as “sure things.” The robbery
carried on was of the most outrageous and shameless description, and the
harvest, if confined within a brief period, was golden while it lasted.
Temporary games were numerous and gamblers thrived. Hotels, lodging
houses, the back rooms of saloons, in fact, every available place was
utilized. Rooms were rented for a short time only and cheaply furnished,
here, there and everywhere. Yet Washburne hounded them from place
to place, although embarrassed by lukewarmness, if not positive corruption
on the part of his subordinates. Indeed, there was an element in
the force which was constantly plotting against him and incessantly
scheming for his removal. Many of his descents upon the hells proved
futile for the reasons already stated. Despite all these hindrances, however,
the strife went on, and Washburne showed no sign of weakening.
When Mayor Rice assumed control of the city’s executive department,
the gamblers began to resume operations more openly. They soon
found that prosecutions were by no means so numerous as they had been
while Washburne filled the position of Chief of Police, while raids were
comparatively infrequent. Boldness soon succeeded timidity, and during
the latter part of Mayor Rice’s term, as well as throughout the mayoralty
of Mason, the list of gaming houses was constantly augmented. In fact,
“crooks” found no better territory for their operations throughout the
length and breadth of the land than Chicago. Confidence men swarmed
upon the public streets and plied their nefarious vocation without let or
hindrance. The fame of the city as a safe stamping ground for swindlers
soon spread abroad, and there occurred a general hegira of gamblers to a
place where they knew that they ran no risk of molestation. As a result,
Chicago was soon filled with a set of sharpers drawn from all quarters of
the United States, and comprising as motley, disreputable and dishonest
a class as ever cursed any city under the face of Heaven. Wealthy
“suckers” were found in abundance, and “brace” dealers, “bunko”
men and rogues of every description carried off money in bundles.
.bn 407.png
.pn +1
Among the most prominent men engaged in gambling in Chicago at
this period were Harry Lawrence (afterward a dealer in “Rock and Rye,”
and partner of Morris Martin), Mike McDonald, “Bill” Foster, “Big
John” Wallace, “Little John” Wallace, “Trailer,” “Appetite Bill,”
“Nobby Tom,” Sam Hueston, Harry Monell, “Bill” Close, “Hank”
Maguire, Tom Daniels, “White Pine,” “Snapper” Johnny, “Rebel”
George, “Long” John, “Billy” Singleton, Grant, “Jake” Lehman,
“Johnny” Molloy, Lew Lee, “Jew” Myers, and at least fifty more of the
“small fry” class.
The winnings of some of the men named above were a theme of
gossip among gamblers all over the continent. The “bunko” men were
particularly successful. To rob a man out of $5,000 was a common
occurrence; $7,000 was occasionally made; while there were those who
repeatedly won $10,000 from a single victim; and one of this class of
sharpers succeeded in taking $20,000 from one of his dupes. Meanwhile
the profits of the “skin” houses were enormous.
This was the state of affairs existing at the time of the visitation of
the city by the holocaust of 1871, when the United States military were
called upon to protect the people and the city was placed under martial
law. Thugs, thieves, confidence men, “skin” gamblers and rogues of
every sort might be found on any street corner. From Harrison Street
on the south, to Lincoln Park on the north, roamed a homeless, hungry,
penniless mob, whom the prospect of starvation soon drove across the
river to the West Side. With the crowd went Martin, Kellogg, Batchelder,
McDonald and Dowling. “Watt” Robbins and John Lawler
opened a house on State Street, and the games measurably flourished until
the election of Joseph Medill in the spring of 1872.
He assumed office with many promises of reform, which he carried
out to the best of his ability. One of his first acts was a declaration of
war upon the gamblers, and vigorously was it prosecuted. The houses
were promptly and permanently closed, and the only gambling done during
his term of office was attended with great risk to those who engaged
in it. Still, the task of supplying the needs of the destitute and guarding
the other interests of the city were so great that some were found who
ventured to incur the hazard of playing an occasional game, which was,
of course, always of the “brace” variety. Yet, on the whole, Medill
fully merited the high encomiums bestowed upon him by the enemies of
gambling for his effective, restrictive policy and his manly enforcement of
the laws.
He was succeeded by H. D. Colvin, familiarly nicknamed by the
sporting men as “Harvey,” just as the same class afterwards spoke of
Mayor Harrison as “our Carter.” His was an administration which might
be fairly described as one under which “everything went.” Scarcely had
.bn 408.png
.pn +1
he taken his seat before the gamblers began to furnish and open many
houses in all quarters of the city. Those who had emigrated from the
South to the West division, returned to their former haunts. Among the
rest was one who located himself at the corner of Clark and Monroe
Streets where he conducted the European Hotel, with a saloon and gambling
rooms attached. This place continued to run for many years. The
worst elements of the community were in the ascendent. Dance halls,
concert saloons and disreputable houses of every description abounded
and flourished. “Toughs” of every grade walked the streets without
fear; and the bunko men, “brace” dealers, monte players and “crooks”
of high and low degree openly plied their vocations. The “sucker” who
wished to lose his money, had his choice of no less than eight “brace”
gaming houses, twelve bunko shops, and an innumerable assortment of
joints where rouge-et-noir, wheel of fortune, and “top and bottom” were
but a few of the devices employed to fleece greenhorns. The mayor manifested
utter indifference to the enforcement of the laws, and it was said
that his personal example was not of a kind to instill into the minds of the
average citizen a respect for authority. Of all the “free and easy” cities
in the Union, Chicago was at this time the worst. The town was literally
handed over to the criminal class who held high carnival by day as well
as by night.
One of the best known gamblers who flourished at this period, and
who has since attained considerable influence in local politics soon forged
to the front and became the recognized “boss.” It was commonly stated
at the time that he was personally interested in not a few resorts of
questionable character, and that he was wont to levy a contribution upon
every gambler who came to Chicago. Be that as it may, it is certain that
the games no longer lurked in dark corners and out of the way localities,
but opened their doors upon the city’s principal streets, their proprietors
carrying on their nefarious business with as little concealment as though
they had been engaged in legitimate commercial pursuits.
Another professional sport who figured prominently before the public
at that time as proprietor of two “dollar stores,” with back-room attachments
where “bunko” and “top and bottom” were played, has since
become a reputable citizen, the proprietor of a large store in Chicago, and
is reputed to be millionaire.
The press scored Colvin roundly, and the indignation of the decent,
law-abiding citizens against him knew no bounds. Threats of impeachment
were freely made but never enforced. Vice and crime continually
stalked brazenly through the streets until the close of his term when he
was succeeded by Mayor Hoyne, who gave way, in turn, to Heath.
The rule of the latter was as radically stringent as that of Colvin had
been disreputably lax. He at once set about righting many wrongs,
.bn 409.png
.pn +1
establishing order, and enforcing the laws. The work which he thus
mapped out was an herculean task, for pandemonium reigned and the
“gang” was determined not to be driven out without making a severe
struggle. One of Heath’s first orders was to the effect that the gambling
houses should be closed. The proprietors seemingly acquiesced, but
actually carried on business surreptitiously, and raiding was at once begun.
When the police endeavored to force an entrance into the gambling rooms
at the “Store,” a well known resort on Clark Street, connected with a
hotel, they committed the blunder of breaking into the rooms of the
caravansary. The wife of the proprietor promptly resented this intrusion
upon the premises by firing at the officers, although no one was hit.
She was arrested and defended by A. S. Trude, who secured her discharge
from Judge McAllister on the plea that her house was her castle and that
the law justified her in defending it. The incident caused much excitement
in the city at the time, and Mayor Heath became yet more aggressive
and was as unremittent in his attentions to the gamblers, whose houses he
kept closed.
In 1877 a loud cry was raised against “bunko” and “bunko steerers,”
and it was charged that this class of swindlers found victims in alarming
numbers, and that the unsophisticated “stranger within the gates”
was being guided to his financial ruin with great rapidity. On motion of
Alderman Cullerton the mayor was instructed to appoint a special committee
to ascertain if public gaming houses were tolerated in the city. His
Honor named as such committee Aldermen Cullerton, Phelps and Waldo.
The “bunko” men were subsequently thinned out by the police.
Carter H. Harrison succeeded Heath as mayor. The radical policy of
his predecessor was not pursued by the new incumbent, and charges were
constantly made by the press that gambling was rampant in the city.
Austin Doyle had been chief of police under Mayor Heath, and for a
time filled the same position under his successor. The frequency of complaints
by victims and the numerous and bitter attacks upon the administration
in the public prints stimulated Mr. Doyle to take active measures
toward suppressing the vice. Through his energetic tactics the
houses were compelled to close their doors, and for a time public gaming
came to an end. Doyle, however, was offered a responsible position in
the employ of a private corporation, and resigned his public office. His
successor did not meet with the same success in suppressing the nuisance.
Harrison served two terms and it is not too much to say that throughout
the greater part of the four years during which he was mayor those
who wished to encounter the “tiger in his lair” found little difficulty in
gratifying their inclination.
Roche followed Harrison, holding the reigns of city government for
two years. He owed his elevation to office in a large measure to the support
.bn 410.png
.pn +1
which he received from the “law and order” element of the community,
and was tacitly if not avowedly pledged to carry out their wishes.
He soon began to make things interesting for the gamblers. They were
given fair notice of his intentions and instructed to close. Those who
failed to comply with his command soon discovered that the city’s executive
meant what he had said and had the power to his behest.
Public houses were forced to close their doors, and the city for a time
enjoyed a comparative rest. Occasionally games were played at the
hotels, private club rooms, and over saloons, but generally speaking it
was a “hole-and-corner” sort of play, and it was by no means an easy
matter to discover where the games were going on. The result was that
many of the “sports” who had prospered during the years preceding,
found themselves forced to seek “fresh fields and pastures new.”
When Roche’s name was presented to the public as that of a candidate
for re-election the hostility of the fraternity toward him quickly
found vent. His opponent, Cregier, received the support of the men who
had learned to hate the administration which interfered with their business,
and he was elected by a very decided majority. At the present time the
number of gambling houses in the city may be said to be legion. The
proprietors have taken leases of the premises for two years, in some cases
giving the previous tenants a bonus to move out; removing partitions,
enlarging entrances, building new stairways, and otherwise intimating
their belief that, for a time at least, they cherish no apprehension of molestation.
Raids are infrequent, although, occasionally, a few Mongolians
are captured while playing “bung-loo,” and once in a while a squad of
negroes is taken to the station as a punishment for being detected in
playing “crap.” The larger houses suffer but little from police interference.
When a raid is made on one of these establishments, the officers
placidly await the coming of the patrol wagon while the players escape
through a convenient window or sky-light. Enough “pluggers” are captured
to fill one or two wagons and are driven to the nearest police station
with much clatter and display. The proprietors promptly bail out their
employes, and the next morning pay the small fines imposed upon them.
Within an hour or two after the descent of the police the game is again in
full operation.
Some idea of the success which attends public gaming houses in
Chicago at the present time may be formed from a consideration of the
fact that the largest and best patronized house has, on an average, forty
men on its pay-roll; that sometimes twenty games are in full blast at one
time; and that the estimated net winnings of its owners amount to
$20,000 a month. To this place professionals are not admitted, it being
found more remunerative to encourage the patronage of amateur players.
.bn 411.png
.pn +1
So notorious is this fact that the habitués of this resort are commonly
termed the “dinner pail brigade.”
The following may be accepted as a correct statement of the regular
weekly salaries at a Chicago house doing a good business: Two faro
dealers at $40 a week; three ditto at $35; two roulette croupiers at $30;
two hazard dealers at $30; two stud-poker dealers at $30; one outside
watchman at $ one doorkeeper at $25; sixteen “pluggers” and
“cappers” at $2.50 per day; total salary list, $690 per week.
It is fair to presume that this is an average outlay for weekly salaries
by the numerous gaming houses. The estimate does not, of course, include
miscellaneous expenses, such as rent, fuel, lighting, free eating and
drinking for the habitués, nor the large percentage on profits paid to
“ropers” and “steerers.” It must be plain to the dullest comprehension
that a business of such magnitude as to be able to pay nearly $700 in
weekly salaries, is in favor of the army of unemployed gamblers who are
temporarily “down on their luck.”
However, there are some gaming houses in the city where high rollers
can always gain admittance and find congenial company; where the
obliging proprietors are always willing to “remove the limit” for a
regular patron; and which enjoy the reputation of being comparatively
“square.”
One of the peculiar features of Chicago gambling is the reported
existence of a “gamblers’ trust.” The use of the word “trust” as
applied to establishments which cannot in any sense be called commercial,
seems, on its face, to be anomalous, yet, if all reports be true, the term
is not a misnomer. It is understood that a combination of sporting men
exists, the nature of the tie that binds them being the contribution by
the proprietors of each establishment belonging to the pool of either a
fixed sum weekly or an agreed percentage of the winnings toward a
common purse. Just what is done with the money is known only to
those who handle it, but when it is remembered that the contributors
enjoy practical immunity from police interference, its disposition is a fair
subject of conjecture.
Within the last month (July, 1890), the question of selling pools
upon races has loomed up into prominence. One of the chief operators
in this line, a man who is reputed to have cleared $190,000 through this
means during the racing season of 1889, has invoked the aid of private
detective agencies for the suppression of his business rivals. The latter
have retaliated by employing the city police to interfere with his operations.
The result has been a sort of Kilkenny fight, in which charges
seriously reflecting upon the city’s chief executive have been filed in the
courts.
.bn 412.png
.pn +1
.ta l:37 r:5 r:5 r:5 r:5 r:8 bl=n w=100%
SELECTIONS FROM A PRICE LIST OF SPORTING GOODS MANUFACTURED AND\
FOR SALE BY A FIRM IN CHICAGO, ILL.
FARO TOOLS.
Trimming Shears, double bar, brass block |||||$40 00
\ \ ” \ \ \ \ \ \ \ ” \ \ \ with attachment for cutting briefs|||||45 00
Cutter, for cutting round corners on cards |||||20 00
Trimming Plates, will cut any style of cards||||| 8 00
Trimming Shears repaired and sharpened.
Dealing Boxes, Lever movement ||| $35 00 to $60 00||
\ \ ” \ \ \ \ \ \ ” \ \ \ End, or Needle movement|| | $50 00 to $100 00||
\ \ ” \ \ \ \ \ \ ” \ \ \ Sand Tell || $13 00, $15 00 to $18 00 | ||
\ \ ” \ \ \ \ \ \ ” \ \ \ \ ” \ \ \ ”\ \ \ to lock up square ||||$20 00, $25 00|
Dealing Boxes repaired, or changed to end or needle squeeze.
Faro Dealing Cards, unsquared, per doz. ||||| $15 00
\ \ ” \ \ \ \ \ ” \ \ \ \ \ ”\ \ \ \ squared, per doz. ||||| 15 00
\ \ ” \ \ \ \ \ ” \ \ \ \ \ ”\ \ \ \ \ \ \ ” \ \ \ \ per pack ||||| 1 25
\ \ ” \ \ \ \ \ ” \ \ \ \ \ ”\ \ \ \ Linen, second quality |