THESEare to give notice, that the Jewels of his late Royal Highness Prince Rupert have been particularly valued and appraised by Mr. Isaac Legouch, Mr Christopher Rosse, and Mr. Richard Beauvoir, Jewellers, the whole amounting to Twenty Thousand Pounds, and will be sold by way of Lottery, each Lot to be Five Pounds. The biggest Prize will be a great Pearl Necklace, valued at 8,000l., and none less than 100l.A printed Particular of the said Appraisement, with their Divisions into Lots, will be delivered gratis by Mr. Francis Child, at Temple Bar, London, into whose Hands, such as are willing to be Adventurers are desired to pay their Money, on or before the 1st Day of November next. As soon as the whole Sum is paid in, a short Day will be appointed which, (it is hoped, will be before Christmas) and notified in theGazette, for the Drawing thereof, which will be done in his Majesty’s Presence, who is pleased to declare, thathe himself will see all the Prizes put in among the Blanks, and that the whole will be managed with Equity and Fairness, Nothing being intended but the sale of the said Jewels at a moderate Value. And it is further notified, for the Satisfaction of all as shall be Adventurers, that the said Mr.Childshall and will stand obliged to Each of them for their several Adventures. And that each Adventurer shall receive their Money back if the said Lottery be not drawn and finished before the first Day of February next.
THESEare to give notice, that the Jewels of his late Royal Highness Prince Rupert have been particularly valued and appraised by Mr. Isaac Legouch, Mr Christopher Rosse, and Mr. Richard Beauvoir, Jewellers, the whole amounting to Twenty Thousand Pounds, and will be sold by way of Lottery, each Lot to be Five Pounds. The biggest Prize will be a great Pearl Necklace, valued at 8,000l., and none less than 100l.A printed Particular of the said Appraisement, with their Divisions into Lots, will be delivered gratis by Mr. Francis Child, at Temple Bar, London, into whose Hands, such as are willing to be Adventurers are desired to pay their Money, on or before the 1st Day of November next. As soon as the whole Sum is paid in, a short Day will be appointed which, (it is hoped, will be before Christmas) and notified in theGazette, for the Drawing thereof, which will be done in his Majesty’s Presence, who is pleased to declare, thathe himself will see all the Prizes put in among the Blanks, and that the whole will be managed with Equity and Fairness, Nothing being intended but the sale of the said Jewels at a moderate Value. And it is further notified, for the Satisfaction of all as shall be Adventurers, that the said Mr.Childshall and will stand obliged to Each of them for their several Adventures. And that each Adventurer shall receive their Money back if the said Lottery be not drawn and finished before the first Day of February next.
This Mr Child is said to have been the first regular banker. He began business soon after the Restoration,and received the honour of knighthood. He lived in Fleet Street, where the shop still continues in a state of the highestrespectability.[44]A subsequent notice says that
The King will probably, to-morrow, in the Banquetting House, see all the Blanks told over, that they may not exceed their Number; and that the Papers on which the Prizes are to be written shall be rolled up in his Presence; and that a Child, appointed, either by his Majesty or the Adventurers, shall draw the Prizes.
The King will probably, to-morrow, in the Banquetting House, see all the Blanks told over, that they may not exceed their Number; and that the Papers on which the Prizes are to be written shall be rolled up in his Presence; and that a Child, appointed, either by his Majesty or the Adventurers, shall draw the Prizes.
The most popular of all the schemes of the time was that drawn at the Dorset Garden Theatre, near Salisbury Square, Fleet Street, with the capital prize of a thousand pounds for a penny. The drawing began on October 19, 1698; and in theProtestant Mercuryof the following day its fairness was said to give universal content to all that were concerned. In the next number is found an inconsistent story as to the possessor of the prize. It runs thus: “Sometime since, a boy near Branford going to school one morning, met an old woman, who asked his charity; the boy replied, he had nothing to give her but a piece of bread and butter, which she accepted. Sometime after, she met the boy again, and told him she had good luck after his bread and butter, and therefore would give him a penny which, after some years keeping, would produce many pounds: he accordingly kept it a great while, and at last, with some friends’ advice, put it into the Penny Lottery, and we are informed that on Tuesday last, the said lot came up with £1000 prize.” This is a very fair specimen of the stories which were always afloat concerning the chief prizes in the principal lotteries, and which had always some superstitious current underlying them, much to the benefit of the vendors of tickets. The scheme of the Penny Lottery was assailed in a tract entitled “The Wheel of Fortune, or Nothing for a Penny; being Remarks on the Drawing of the Penny Lottery at the Theatre Royal, inDorset Garden.” (1698, 4to.) Afterwards this theatre was used for exhibitions of sword-and-cudgel players, prize-fighters, &c.; but the building was totally deserted in 1703. In the last years of the century, schemes were started called “The Lucky Adventure; or, Fortunate Chance, being 2000l.for a groat, or 3000l.for a shilling;” and “Fortunatus, or another Adventure of 1000l.for a Penny;” but purchasers were more wary, and the promoters’ plans in both cases fell to the ground. The royal patentees also advertised against the “Marble Board, alias Woollich Board lotteries; the Figure Board, alias the Whimsey Board and the Wyre Board lotteries.” The patentees were, in addition, always quarrelling among themselves; and the following lines from thePost-Boy, January 3, 1698, were very popular at the time, as giving an estimate of the disputes between the legalisedrogues:—
A Dialoguebetwixt theNew Lotteriesand theRoyal Oak.New Lott.To you the Mother of our Schools,Where knaves by license manage Fools,Finding fit Juncture and Occasion,To pick the Pockets of the Nation;We come to know how we must treat ’em,And to their hearts’ content may cheat ’em.Oak.It cheers my aged Heart to seeSo numerous a Progeny;I find by you, that ’tis Heaven’s willThat knavery should flourish still;You have docility and wit,And Fools were never wanting yet.Observe the crafty AuctioneerHis art to sell waste Paper dear;When he for Salmon baits his Hooks,That Cormorant of Offal books,Who bites, as sure as Maggots breed,Or Carrion Crows on Horseflesh feed;Fair specious Titles him deceive,To sweep what Sl—— andT——nleave.If greedy gulls you would ensnare,Make ’em Proposals wondrous fair;Tell him strange Golden Show’rs shall fall,And promise Mountains to ’em all.New Lott.That Craft we’ve already taught,And by that Trick have millions caught;Books, Baubles, Toys, all sorts of Stuff,Have gone off this way well enough.Nay, Music, too, invades our Art,And to some Tune wou’d play her Part.I’ll show you now what we are doing,For we have divers Wheels agoing.We now have found out richer Lands,Than Asia’s Hills, or Afric’s Sands,And to vast Treasures must give Birth,Deep hid in Bowels of the Earth;In fertile Wales, and God knows where,Rich mines of Gold and Silver are,From whence we draw prodigious StoreOf Silver coin’d, tho’ none in Ore,Which down our Throats rich Coxcombs pour,In hopes to make us vomit more.Oak.This Project surely must be goodBecause not eas’ly understood;Besides, it gives a mighty ScopeTo the Fool’s Argument—vain Hope.No Eagle’s Eye the Cheat can see,Thro’ Hope thus back’d by Mystery.New Lott.We have, besides, a thousand more,For Great or Small, for Rich and Poor,From him that can his Thousands spare,Down to the Penny Customer.Oak.The silly Mob in Crowds will run,To be at easy Rates undone.A gimcrack Show draws in the Rout,Thousands their all by Pence lay out.New Lott.We, by Experience, find it true,But we have Methods wholly new,Strange late-invented Ways to thrive,To make Men pay for what they give,To get the Rents into our HandsOf their hereditary Lands,And out of what does thence arise,To make ’em buy Annuities.We’ve mathematick Combination,To cheat Folks by plain Demonstration,Which shall be fairly manag’d too,The Undertaker knows not how.Besides——Oak.Pray, hold a little, here’s enough,To beggar Europe of this Stuff.Go on, and prosper, and be great,I am to you a puny Cheat.
A Dialoguebetwixt theNew Lotteriesand theRoyal Oak.
New Lott.To you the Mother of our Schools,Where knaves by license manage Fools,Finding fit Juncture and Occasion,To pick the Pockets of the Nation;We come to know how we must treat ’em,And to their hearts’ content may cheat ’em.Oak.It cheers my aged Heart to seeSo numerous a Progeny;I find by you, that ’tis Heaven’s willThat knavery should flourish still;You have docility and wit,And Fools were never wanting yet.Observe the crafty AuctioneerHis art to sell waste Paper dear;When he for Salmon baits his Hooks,That Cormorant of Offal books,Who bites, as sure as Maggots breed,Or Carrion Crows on Horseflesh feed;Fair specious Titles him deceive,To sweep what Sl—— andT——nleave.If greedy gulls you would ensnare,Make ’em Proposals wondrous fair;Tell him strange Golden Show’rs shall fall,And promise Mountains to ’em all.New Lott.That Craft we’ve already taught,And by that Trick have millions caught;Books, Baubles, Toys, all sorts of Stuff,Have gone off this way well enough.Nay, Music, too, invades our Art,And to some Tune wou’d play her Part.I’ll show you now what we are doing,For we have divers Wheels agoing.We now have found out richer Lands,Than Asia’s Hills, or Afric’s Sands,And to vast Treasures must give Birth,Deep hid in Bowels of the Earth;In fertile Wales, and God knows where,Rich mines of Gold and Silver are,From whence we draw prodigious StoreOf Silver coin’d, tho’ none in Ore,Which down our Throats rich Coxcombs pour,In hopes to make us vomit more.Oak.This Project surely must be goodBecause not eas’ly understood;Besides, it gives a mighty ScopeTo the Fool’s Argument—vain Hope.No Eagle’s Eye the Cheat can see,Thro’ Hope thus back’d by Mystery.New Lott.We have, besides, a thousand more,For Great or Small, for Rich and Poor,From him that can his Thousands spare,Down to the Penny Customer.Oak.The silly Mob in Crowds will run,To be at easy Rates undone.A gimcrack Show draws in the Rout,Thousands their all by Pence lay out.New Lott.We, by Experience, find it true,But we have Methods wholly new,Strange late-invented Ways to thrive,To make Men pay for what they give,To get the Rents into our HandsOf their hereditary Lands,And out of what does thence arise,To make ’em buy Annuities.We’ve mathematick Combination,To cheat Folks by plain Demonstration,Which shall be fairly manag’d too,The Undertaker knows not how.Besides——Oak.Pray, hold a little, here’s enough,To beggar Europe of this Stuff.Go on, and prosper, and be great,I am to you a puny Cheat.
New Lott.To you the Mother of our Schools,Where knaves by license manage Fools,Finding fit Juncture and Occasion,To pick the Pockets of the Nation;We come to know how we must treat ’em,And to their hearts’ content may cheat ’em.
Oak.It cheers my aged Heart to seeSo numerous a Progeny;I find by you, that ’tis Heaven’s willThat knavery should flourish still;You have docility and wit,And Fools were never wanting yet.Observe the crafty AuctioneerHis art to sell waste Paper dear;When he for Salmon baits his Hooks,That Cormorant of Offal books,Who bites, as sure as Maggots breed,Or Carrion Crows on Horseflesh feed;Fair specious Titles him deceive,To sweep what Sl—— andT——nleave.If greedy gulls you would ensnare,Make ’em Proposals wondrous fair;Tell him strange Golden Show’rs shall fall,And promise Mountains to ’em all.
New Lott.That Craft we’ve already taught,And by that Trick have millions caught;Books, Baubles, Toys, all sorts of Stuff,Have gone off this way well enough.Nay, Music, too, invades our Art,And to some Tune wou’d play her Part.I’ll show you now what we are doing,For we have divers Wheels agoing.We now have found out richer Lands,Than Asia’s Hills, or Afric’s Sands,And to vast Treasures must give Birth,Deep hid in Bowels of the Earth;In fertile Wales, and God knows where,Rich mines of Gold and Silver are,From whence we draw prodigious StoreOf Silver coin’d, tho’ none in Ore,Which down our Throats rich Coxcombs pour,In hopes to make us vomit more.
Oak.This Project surely must be goodBecause not eas’ly understood;Besides, it gives a mighty ScopeTo the Fool’s Argument—vain Hope.No Eagle’s Eye the Cheat can see,Thro’ Hope thus back’d by Mystery.
New Lott.We have, besides, a thousand more,For Great or Small, for Rich and Poor,From him that can his Thousands spare,Down to the Penny Customer.
Oak.The silly Mob in Crowds will run,To be at easy Rates undone.A gimcrack Show draws in the Rout,Thousands their all by Pence lay out.
New Lott.We, by Experience, find it true,But we have Methods wholly new,Strange late-invented Ways to thrive,To make Men pay for what they give,To get the Rents into our HandsOf their hereditary Lands,And out of what does thence arise,To make ’em buy Annuities.We’ve mathematick Combination,To cheat Folks by plain Demonstration,Which shall be fairly manag’d too,The Undertaker knows not how.Besides——
Oak.Pray, hold a little, here’s enough,To beggar Europe of this Stuff.Go on, and prosper, and be great,I am to you a puny Cheat.
The Royal Oak Lottery came in for a great share of public odium, it being regarded as the parent of all the others. A very curious tract of 1699 sets forth the various charges against it in the form of a trial. The pamphlet is called “The Arraignment, Trial and Condemnation ofSquire Lottery, aliasRoyal-Oak Lottery.” The various charges, defences, and counter-charges are very funny, and we regret that we have only room here for the jury list, which shows that the “British palladium” possessed then many of its present features, judged by the characters and pretensions of the jurymen. The descriptions of these latter would fit pretty well even in thesedays:—
The Jurors’ Names.Mr.Positive, a Draper inCovent Garden.Mr.Squander, an Oilman inFleet Street.Mr.Pert, a Tobacconist,ditto.Mr.Captious, a Milliner inPaternoster Row.Mr.Feeble, a Coffeeman near theChange.Mr.Altrick, a Merchant inGracechurch Street.Mr.Haughty, a Vintner byGrays-Inn, Holborn.Mr.Jealous, a Cutler atCharing Cross.Mr.Peevish, a Bookseller inSt. Paul’s Churchyard.Mr.Spilbook, nearFleet Bridge.Mr.Noysie, a Silkman uponLudgate Hill.Mr.Finical, a Barber inCheapside.
The Jurors’ Names.
It is noticeable that during the whole of the trial no individual interferes with either the Court or the witnesses, there being no mention in the report of “a Juror;” and as might have been anticipated, the trial ends with the wholesalecondemnation of Squire Lottery, and an order for his immediate execution. Private and fallacious lotteries had by this time become so common, not only in London, but in most other great cities and towns of England, whereby the lower people and the servants and children of good families were defrauded, that an Act of Parliament was therefore passed, 10 and 11 William III. c. 17, for suppressing such lotteries, “even although they might be set up under colour of patents or grants under the Great Seal. Which said grants, or patents,” says the preamble, “are against the common good, welfare, and peace of the kingdom, and are void and against law.” A penalty, therefore, of five hundred pounds was laid on the proprietors of any such lotteries, and of twenty pounds on every adventurer in them. Notwithstanding this, the like disposition to fraud and gaming prevailed again till fresh laws were enacted for their suppression. The public, or, as they were called, the Parliamentary, lotteries, went on, however, as merrily as before, though they were every now and again threatened—indeed for nearly a hundred and thirty years lotteries were always on the point of being abolished. The promoters of lotteries, even in the early days, thoroughly knew the value of advertising by means of puffs, and many of their paragraphs are found given as ordinary news, for the more effectual trapping of the gulls. Such a one is this from thePost-Boyof December 27,1710:—
We are informed that the Parliamentary Lottery will be fixed in this Manner:—150,000 Tickets will be delivered out at 10l.each Ticket, making in all the Sum of 1,500,000l.Sterling; the Principal thereof is to be sunk, the Parliament allowing nine per cent. Interest for the whole during the Term of thirty-two Years, which Interest is to be divided as follows: 3750 Tickets will be Prizes from 1000l.to 5l.per annum, during the said thirty-two Years; all the other Tickets will be Blanks, so that there will be thirty-nine of these to one Prize, but then each Blank Ticket will be entitled to fourteen Shillings a year for the Term of thirty-two Years, which is better than an Annuity for life at ten per cent. over and above chance of getting a prize.
We are informed that the Parliamentary Lottery will be fixed in this Manner:—150,000 Tickets will be delivered out at 10l.each Ticket, making in all the Sum of 1,500,000l.Sterling; the Principal thereof is to be sunk, the Parliament allowing nine per cent. Interest for the whole during the Term of thirty-two Years, which Interest is to be divided as follows: 3750 Tickets will be Prizes from 1000l.to 5l.per annum, during the said thirty-two Years; all the other Tickets will be Blanks, so that there will be thirty-nine of these to one Prize, but then each Blank Ticket will be entitled to fourteen Shillings a year for the Term of thirty-two Years, which is better than an Annuity for life at ten per cent. over and above chance of getting a prize.
Such was the eagerness of the public to secure shares in this great and liberal undertaking on the part of a beneficent Legislature, that Mercers’ Hall was literally crowded, and the clerks were found incompetent to receive the influx of names. Six hundred thousand pounds was subscribed by January 21; and on the 28th of February the required amount of a million and a half had been taken out in shares. This rage for speculation had much to do with the success of the South-Sea Bubble, which was attended by myriad smaller bubbles that in the grand collapse of the most magnificent swindle of modern times have been quite forgotten. But many large fortunes were made by small means. In the height of the speculative fever, hardly a day, certainly not a week, passed without fresh projects, recommended by pompous paragraphs in the newspapers, directing where to subscribe to them. On some six per cent. was paid down, on others one shilling per thousand at the time of subscribing. Some of the obscure keepers of these books of subscription, contenting themselves with what they had netted in the morning, by the registration of one or two millions, disappeared in the afternoon, the rooms they had hired being shut up, and they and their subscription-books being never heard of more. On others of these projects, two shillings, and two-and-sixpence, were paid down; for some few even half a sovereign per cent. was deposited, but this was only in the case of those who could find some person of standing to recommend them in Exchange Alley. Some were divided into shares instead of hundreds and thousands, upon each of which so much was paid down. Any impudent impostor, while the delusion was at its greatest height, needed only to hire a room near the alley for a few hours, and open a subscription-book for a pretended scheme relating to commerce, manufacture, plantation, or some supposed invention, having first advertised it in the newspapers of the preceding day, and he might in a few hours find subscribers for one or two millions of imaginarystock. Yet many of the subscribers were far from believing the project feasible; it was enough for their purpose that there would soon be a premium on the receipts for the subscriptions, when they could easily get rid of them in the crowded alley to others more credulous than themselves. Indeed some of these bubbles were so barefaced and palpably gross as not to have the shadow of anything like feasibility: such, for instance, were an insurance against divorces; a scheme to learn men to cast nativities; another for making butter from beech-trees; a project for a flying machine; a company for fattening hogs; and a proposal for a more inoffensive method of emptying or cleansing necessary-houses.
Addison, of course, availed himself of the opportunity afforded by the great lottery mania, and in theSpectatorfor Tuesday, October 9, 1711, he comments on the peculiarities of investors. “When a man has a mind to venture his money in a lottery,” says he, “every figure of it appears equally alluring, and as likely to succeed as any of its fellows. They all of them have the same pretensions to good luck, stand upon the same foot of competition, and no manner of reason can be given why a man should prefer one to the other before the lottery is drawn. In this case, therefore, caprice very often acts in the place of reason, and forms to itself some groundless imaginary motive, where real and substantial ones are wanting. I know a well-meaning man that is very well pleased to risk his good fortune upon the number 1711, because it is the year of our Lord. I am acquainted with a tacker that would give a good deal for the number 134. On the contrary, I have been told of a certain zealous dissenter, who being a great enemy to Popery, and believing that bad men are the most fortunate in this world, will lay two to one on the number 666 against any other number, because, says he, it is the number of the Beast. Several would prefer the number 12,000 before any other, as it is the number of the pounds in the great prize.In short, some are pleased to find their own age in their number; some that have got a number which makes a pretty appearance in the ciphers; and others because it is the same number that succeeded in the last lottery. Each of these, upon no other grounds, thinks he stands fairest for the great lot, and that he is possessed of what may not be improbably called—‘the golden number.’”
The reference to the number 134 is made on account of a bill which was brought into the House of Commons against occasional Conformity; and so that it should pass through the Lords, it was proposed to tack it to a money bill. This proposal caused some warm debates, and at last, on being put to the vote, it was found that 134 were for tacking. A large majority was, however, against it, and the motion fell through. The Beast’s number is, of course, a reference to Revelation xiii. 18; and the final allusion in the paragraph we will not insult the reader by attempting to explain. Addison then goes on: “These principles of election are the pastimes and extravagances of human reason, which is of so busy a nature, that it will be exerting itself in the meanest trifles, and working even where it wants materials. The wisest of men are sometimes acted by such unaccountable motives, as the life of the fool and the superstitious is guided by nothing else. I am surprised that none of the fortune-tellers, or, as the French call them, theDiseurs de bonne Aventure, who publish their bills in every quarter of the town, have turned our lotteries to their advantage. Did any of them set up for a caster of fortunate figures, what might he not get by his pretended discoveries and predictions? I remember, among the advertisements in thePost-Boyof September the 27th, I was surprised to see the followingone:—
This is to give Notice that ten Shillings over and above the Market Price, will be given for the Ticket in the 1,500,000l. Lottery, No. 132, by Nath. Cliff,at theBible and Three Crownsin Cheapside.
This is to give Notice that ten Shillings over and above the Market Price, will be given for the Ticket in the 1,500,000l. Lottery, No. 132, by Nath. Cliff,at theBible and Three Crownsin Cheapside.
“This advertisement has given great matter of speculationto coffee-house theorists. Mr. Cliff’s principles and conversation have been canvassed upon this occasion, and various conjectures made why he should thus set his heart upon No. 132. I have examined all the powers in those numbers, broken them into fractions, extracted the square and cube root, divided and multiplied them all ways, but could not arrive at the secret until about three days ago, when I received the following letter from an unknown hand, by which I find that Mr. Nath. Cliff is only the agent, and not the principal, in this advertisement. ‘Mr. Spectator,—I am the person that lately advertised I would give ten shillings more than the current price for the ticket No. 132, in the lottery now drawing, which is a secret I have communicated to some friends, who rally me incessantly upon that account. You must know I have but one ticket, for which reason, and a certain dream I have lately had more than once, I resolved it should be the number I most approved. I am so positive that I have pitched upon the great lot, that I could almost lay all I am worth upon it. My visions are so frequent and strong upon this occasion, that I have not only possessed the lot, but disposed of the money which in all probability it will sell for. This morning in particular I set up an equipage which I look upon to be the gayest in the town; the liveries are very rich, but not gaudy. I should be very glad to see a speculation or two upon lottery subjects, in which you would oblige all people concerned, and in particular, your most humble servant George Gosling. P.S. Dear Spec, if I get the 12,000l.I’ll make thee a handsome present.’ After having wished my correspondent good luck, and thanked him for his intended kindness, I shall for this time dismiss the subject of the lottery, and only observe, that the greatest part of mankind are in some degree guilty of my friend Gosling’s extravagance. We are apt to rely upon future prospects, and become really expensive while we are only rich in possibility. We live up to our expectations, not to our possessions, and make a figureproportionable to what we may be, not what we are. We outrun our present income, as not doubting to disburse ourselves out of the profits of some future place, project, or reversion that we have in view. It is through this temper of mind, which is so common among us, that we see tradesmen break, who have met with no misfortunes in their business; and men of estate reduced to poverty, who have never suffered from losses or repairs, tenants, taxes, or lawsuits. In short, it is this foolish sanguine temper, this depending upon contingent futurities, that occasions romantic generosity, chimerical grandeur, senseless ostentation, and generally ends in beggary and ruin. The man who will live above his present circumstances, is in great danger of living in a little time much beneath them; or, as the Italian proverb runs, ‘the man who lives by hope will die by hunger.’ It should be an indispensable rule in life to contract our desires to our present condition, and, whatever may be our expectations, to live within the compass of what we actually possess. It will be time enough to enjoy an estate when it comes into our hands; but if we anticipate our good fortune, we shall lose the pleasure of it when it arrives, and may possibly never possess what we have so foolishly counted upon.” We have quoted nearly at length, and offer no excuse; for those who are familiar with the lesson can do no harm by reading it anew, while those who are not may be tempted to dip deeper, and find in the pages of theSpectatormany new delights. We can offer no remarks of our own on the superstitions of “adventurers” fit to be placed by those we have extracted, and so will pass on to fresh incidents.
Lotteries abounded to such an extent about this time that we really have too much tempting material to choose from. There were the Greenwich Hospital Adventure, sanctioned by Act of Parliament; the Land Lottery, the promoter of which declared it was “found very difficult and troublesome for the adventurers for to search and find out what prizesthey have come up in their number-tickets, from the badness of the print, the many errors in them, and the great quantity of prizes;” as well as the Twelvepenny, or Nonsuch, the Fortunatus, and the Deer Lotteries, all flourishing; to say nothing of the smaller swindles, which, despite Parliament, were connived at by the minor authorities. The Hamburgh Lottery caused in 1723 some trouble in the House of Commons. It was ostensibly a scheme for promoting trade between Great Britain and the Elbe territories, but was as gross an imposition as even a lottery system could produce, and was ultimately suppressed by special Act, John Viscount Barrington being expelled the House for complicity in the snare. He was not the only man of rank who dabbled with dirty water, many members of the Commons being more or less openly convicted of fraud in connection with lotteries. George Robinson, Esq., member for Marlowe, disappeared mysteriously in 1731, and it was found that with him went all the hopes of the Charitable Corporation Society, who discovered upon investigation that the half million capital they thought themselves possessed of had been embezzled. Two other M.P.’s, Sir Archibald Grant and Sir Robert Sutton, were found to be concerned, in common with many other persons of position, in the defalcation, and were expelled from their seats, while their property was attached. A lottery was instituted for the benefit of the sufferers, and in 1734 they received nine shillings and ninepence in the pound. This is an advertisement published in theDaily Courant, July 1, 1734, with regard to the distribution of prizes in this samelottery:—
Lottery-Office, 28 June 1734.THEManagers appointed by an Act of Parliament for exchanging the Tickets in the Charitable Corporation Lottery give Notice, That Certificates for all Tickets in the said Lottery, which have been entered at their Office in the New Palace Yard, near the Receipt of his Majesty’s Exchequer, to the 29th Day of June, 1734, will be delivered out at their said Office, in Exchange for the said Tickets, on Wednesday and Thursdaynext, from Ten in the Forenoon ’till Two in the Afternoon of each Day; and that the Business of taking in the Tickets will be suspended ’till Friday the 5th Day of July.And whereas Tickets have been brought to be entered for Certificates, that have been altered from Blanks to Numbers intituled to Benefits (which Tickets have been detected) The Managers do hereby give Notice, that the same is declared Felony by the Act.
Lottery-Office, 28 June 1734.
THEManagers appointed by an Act of Parliament for exchanging the Tickets in the Charitable Corporation Lottery give Notice, That Certificates for all Tickets in the said Lottery, which have been entered at their Office in the New Palace Yard, near the Receipt of his Majesty’s Exchequer, to the 29th Day of June, 1734, will be delivered out at their said Office, in Exchange for the said Tickets, on Wednesday and Thursdaynext, from Ten in the Forenoon ’till Two in the Afternoon of each Day; and that the Business of taking in the Tickets will be suspended ’till Friday the 5th Day of July.
And whereas Tickets have been brought to be entered for Certificates, that have been altered from Blanks to Numbers intituled to Benefits (which Tickets have been detected) The Managers do hereby give Notice, that the same is declared Felony by the Act.
It is worthy of notice that sharpers of a description other than the promoters of lotteries were anxious to get all they could out of the ventures, and so winning numbers were very often fabricated; and in more than one instance the utterers being detected, were with the forgers tried and cast for death. A notable instance of this kind of fraud was made public in 1777, in the January of which year two Jews, Joseph Arones and Samuel Noah, were examined at Guildhall before the Lord Mayor, charged with counterfeiting the lottery ticket No. 25,590, a prize of £2000, with intent to defraud Mr Keyser, an office-keeper, who had examined the ticket carefully, and had taken it into the Stock Exchange to sell, when Mr Shewell happened to come into the same box, and hearing the office-keeper’s offer, asked to look at the ticket, as he recollected buying one of the same number a day or two before. This very fortunately led to the discovery of the fraud, and the two Jews were committed to take their trial. The number was so artfully altered from 23,590 that not the least erasure could be discerned. Arones was but just come to England, and Noah was said to be a man of property. In the February the two were tried at the Old Bailey for forgery and fraud. Their defence was that Arones found the ticket, and persons were produced to swear to the fact, which they did positively and circumstantially, that the prisoners were discharged. At the same sessions Daniel Denny was tried for forging, counterfeiting, and altering a lottery ticket with intent to defraud; and being found guilty, was condemned. In later days the small cards given on race-courses—and a few years back in the streets—by turf bookmakers to their customers were very successfully imitated, sometimes the number of a ticket which was known to be held by a winner being counterfeited, while at others the brazen-visaged presenter would simply depend upon his ability to “bounce” the layer of odds into the belief that the entry was wrong as to the amount or name of horse. In these latter cases the ingenuity exhibited was great—was in fact of the kind which judges are in the habit of instancing as worthy of better application. As if judges—and juries too, when they have sense—did not know that the only outlet for ability nine times out of ten in certain conditions of society is in a criminal direction. The kind of skill which brings a man to the Central Criminal Court is not likely to find much of an opening so far as money-getting is concerned, and from the ingenuity of the great bank-forgers of 1873, down to that of Counsellor Kelly and Jim the Penman of watch-robbery recollection, there is a wide field of skill for which virtue has small market, and which therefore turns to vice for its reward. We say this without any wish to be regarded as encouragers of crime in any shape or form, but because we consider the words of the judge humbug, and the leaders in certain papers which always break out upon such occasions as we have referred to as cant of the most flagitious character. There is hardly a man now languishing in prison for being ingenious who will not tell you that ingenuity has been his bane, not alone because he yielded to temptation, but because he found the market overstocked with people quite as clever as himself who had additional advantages. This simply proves that the ability which looks so great when it has been devoted to the purposes of robbery is of a very small order after all, and shows itself in its true light when in its proper channel. What, if estimated at their proper value, were the qualifications of the American forgers or the English burglars? Are there not scores of confidential clerks and dozens of skilled mechanics who could have done as well or better thaneither if they had chosen so to do? Yes, decidedly. Yet in both cases, as well as in many others, the judge and jury, the public and the press, affected to be horror-struck at such a waste of talent. But, as they say in the novels, this is a digression.
In 1736 an Act was passed to build Westminster Bridge by means of a lottery, and by means of advertisement the following scheme was submitted to thepublic:—
LOTTERY1736,for raising 100000l. for building a Bridge atWestminster,consisting of 125000 Tickets at 5l. each.Prizes 1of20000l.is20000l.2„10000„200003„5000„1500010„3000„3000040„1000„4000060„500„30000100„200„20000200„100„20000400„50„200001000„20„2000028800„10„28800030616Prizes, amounting to52300094384Blanks.First Drawn1000Last Drawn1000125000525000The Prizes to be paid at the Bank in 40 Days after Drawing, without Deduction. N.B.There is little more than ThreeBlanksto aPrize.
LOTTERY1736,for raising 100000l. for building a Bridge atWestminster,consisting of 125000 Tickets at 5l. each.
The Prizes to be paid at the Bank in 40 Days after Drawing, without Deduction. N.B.There is little more than ThreeBlanksto aPrize.
Other lotteries were granted for the same purpose before the bridge was completed. Its structure must have been as rotten as the system on which it was built, as for many years before it was pulled down it was a disgrace to the neighbourhood; and as it was anything but old when it was demolished, it must have gone to decay almost as soon as it was opened. Almost every imaginable article was at this period disposed of by raffle or lottery, and Horace Walpole, writingabout one for an organ, says: “I am now in pursuit of getting the finest piece of music that ever was heard; it is a thing that will play eight tunes. Handel and all the great musicians say, that it is beyond anything they can do; and this may be performed by the most ignorant person; and when you are weary of those eight tunes, you may have them changed for any other that you like. This I think much better than going to an Italian opera or an assembly. This performance has been lately put into a lottery, and all the royal family choose to have a great many tickets rather than to buy it, the price being I think £1000, infinitely a less sum than some bishoprics have been sold for. And a gentleman won it, who I am in hopes will sell it, and if he will, I will buy it, for I cannot live to have another made, and I will carry it into the country with me.” As Walpole lived for sixty years after this, he must have lived to see much more wonderful instruments built, and possibly offered as prizes in lotteries. In June 1743 the price of lottery tickets rose from £10 to £11, 10s., the prizes being in no way increased, and a hint to the unwary was published, in which it was shown that adventurers “gamed at 50 per cent. loss; paying at that price 2s. 6d. to play for 5s.; the money played for being only three pound, besides discount and deductions.” The practice of giving £1000 each to the first and last drawn tickets led to a curious difficulty in 1774. On the 5th of January, at the conclusion of drawing the State Lottery at Guildhall, No. 11,053, as the last-drawn ticket, was declared to be entitled to the thousand pounds, and was so printed in the paper of benefits by order of the commissioners. It was, beside, a prize of a hundred pounds. But after the wheels were carried back to Whitehall, and there opened, the ticket No. 72,248 was found sticking in a crevice of the wheel. And, being the next-drawn ticket after all the prizes were drawn, was advertised by the commissioners’ order as entitled to the thousand pounds, as the last-drawn ticket; “which affair,” we aretold by theGentleman’s Magazine, “made a great deal of noise.” The State Lottery of 1751 met with much opposition from the press, and an article in theLondon Magazinegives the following computation of itschances:—
IN THE LOTTERY 1751 IT IS
The writer then goes on to say: “I would beg the favour of all gentlemen, tradesmen, and others, to take the pains to explain to such as any way depend upon their judgment, that one must buy no less than seven tickets to have an even chance for any prize at all; that with only one ticket it is six to one, and with half a ticket twelve to one, against any prize; and ninety-nine or a hundred to one that the prize, if it comes, will not be above £50; and no less than thirty-five thousand to one that the owner of a single ticket will not obtain one of the greatest prizes. No lottery is proper for persons of very small fortunes, to whom the loss of five or six pounds is of great consequence, besides the disturbance of their minds; much less is it advisable or desirable for either poor or rich to contribute to the exorbitant tax of more than two hundred thousand pounds, which the first engrossers of lottery tickets, and the brokers and dealers, strive to raise out of the pockets of the poor chiefly, and the silly rich partly, by artfully enhancing the price of tickets above the original cost.” The first price of tickets in this lottery was ten pounds. On their rise a Mr Holland publicly offered in an advertisement to wager four hundred guineas that four hundred tickets when drawndid not amount to nine pounds fifteen shillings on an average, prizes and blanks. As might have been expected, his challenge was never accepted. On the 11th of the next month (November) the drawing began, and notwithstanding the public-spirited efforts of individuals, societies, and papers which did not receive any benefit in the way of advertisements, to check the exorbitancy of the ticket-mongers, the price rose steadily and ultimately to sixteen guineas a ticket. All means were tried by the disinterested to cure this infatuation by writing and advertising; and on the first day of drawing, it was publicly averred that near eight thousand tickets were in the South Sea House, and upwards of thirty thousand pawned at bankers, &c., that nine out of ten of the ticket-holders were not able to go to the wheel, and that not one of them durst stand the drawing above six days. These dealers seem to have had an awkward knack of selling the same ticket to two buyers, or disposing of more than the proper fractional parts of one ticket, in the hope of its turning up a blank, thus “going for the gloves” in a style imitated in modern days by votaries of Tattersall’s and other betting institutions with much success. This arrangement, with others of a similar nature, led to the establishment of insurances offices, which, at first an ostensible protection by guaranteeing special numbers, and thereby preventing fraud on the part of sellers, became in time greater swindles than those they were supposed to prevent.
To prevent the monopoly of tickets in the State Lottery, and the consequent upheaval of rates, it had been enacted that persons charged with the delivery of tickets should not sell more than twenty to one person. This provision was evaded by the use of pretended lists, which defeated the object of Parliament, and injured public credit, insomuch that in 1754 more tickets were subscribed for than the holders of the lists had cash to purchase, and there was a deficiency in the first payment. The mischief and notorietyof these practices occasioned the House of Commons to prosecute an inquiry into the circumstances, which, though opposed by a scandalous cabal that endeavoured to screen the delinquents, ended in a report, by the committee, that Peter Leheup, Esq., had privately disposed of a great number of tickets before the office was opened to which the public were directed by advertisement to apply; that he also delivered great numbers to particular persons, upon lists of names which he knew to be fictitious; and that, in particular, Sampson Gideon became proprietor of more than six thousand, which he sold at a premium. Upon report of these and other illegal acts, the House resolved that Leheup was guilty of a violation of the Act and a breach of trust, and presented an address to his Majesty praying that he would direct the Attorney-General to prosecute him in the most effectual manner for his offences. An information was accordingly filed, and, on a trial at bar in the Court of King’s Bench, Leheup, as one of the receivers of the last lottery of three hundred thousand pounds, was found guilty (1) of receiving subscriptions before the day and hour advertised; (2) of permitting the subscribers to use different names to cover an excess of twenty tickets; and (3) of disposing of the tickets which had been bespoke, and not claimed, or were double charged, instead of returning them to the managers. In Trinity Term, Leheup was brought up for judgment, and fined a thousand pounds, which was at once paid. This was one of the grossest miscarriages of justice known with regard to the lottery frauds, as in the course of the evidence given it was discovered that the defendant had amassed by his trickery over forty thousand pounds for his own share. Another instance of the horrible effect these instruments of gambling had on the public mind is found in the madness of many successful speculators, as well as in the continuous suicides of the unsuccessful. On November 5, 1757, Mr Keys, a clerk, who had absented himself from businessever since the 7th of October, on which day was drawn the ten-thousand-pound prize, supposed to be his property, was found in the streets raving mad, having been robbed of his pocket-book and ticket.
The very small parts into which shares were divided more than a hundred years ago is shown by the following advertisement, published in several papers of November1766:—
DAMEFORTUNE presents her Respects to the Public, and assures them that she has fixed her Residence for the Present at CORBETT’S State Lottery Office, opposite St. Dunstan’s Church, Fleet Street; and, to enable many Families to partake of her Favours, she has ordered not only the Tickets to be sold at the lowest Prices, but also that they bedivided into Shares at the following low Rates,—viz.:—£s.d.A Sixty-fourth040Thirty-second076Sixteenth0150An Eighth1100A Fourth300A Half600By which may be gained from upwards of one hundred and fifty to upwards of five thousand Guineas, at her said Office No. 30.
DAMEFORTUNE presents her Respects to the Public, and assures them that she has fixed her Residence for the Present at CORBETT’S State Lottery Office, opposite St. Dunstan’s Church, Fleet Street; and, to enable many Families to partake of her Favours, she has ordered not only the Tickets to be sold at the lowest Prices, but also that they bedivided into Shares at the following low Rates,—viz.:—
By which may be gained from upwards of one hundred and fifty to upwards of five thousand Guineas, at her said Office No. 30.
As another instance of the superstition prevalent during the lottery mania we will give the following anecdote, which though old will bear repetition. A gentlewoman whose husband had presented her with a ticket, put up prayers in the church, the day before drawing, in the following manner: “The prayers of the congregation are desired for the success of a person engaged in a new undertaking.” Lottery tickets were often presented by gentlemen to ladies, and it is recorded that a lady falling in love with an actor, finding that the many letters of passionate admiration she sent him passed unnoticed, accompanied one of them with a gift of four lottery tickets. Whether they were successful, either as regards moving his obdurate heart or providing him witha prize, we are unfortunately not able to say. Anyhow, it doesn’t much matter, as the recipient of the favours died shortly afterwards; and most likely the unknown lady consoled herself with another and more willing lover, or else with a lottery.
Between 1770 and 1775 the tricks of the insurers occupied a great deal of attention, and almost left the ordinary office-keepers unnoticed. The two businesses were, however, pretty well mixed up by this time. An important trial took place at Guildhall for the purpose of deciding the legality of insuring on March 1, 1773, the Lord Mayor being plaintiff, and Messrs Barnes & Golightly defendants, but on account of an error in the declaration the plaintiff was nonsuited. On June 26, 1775, a cause came on in the Court of Common Pleas, Guildhall, between a gentleman, plaintiff, and a lottery office-keeper, defendant. The cause of the action was, that the gentleman, passing by the lottery office, observed a woman and a boy crying, on which he asked the reason of their tears. They informed him that they had insured a number in the lottery on the overnight, and upon inquiry at another office, found it to have been drawn five days before, and therefore wanted their money returned. The gentleman taking their part was assaulted and beaten by the office-keeper, and the jury, after hearing the evidence, gave a verdict in favour of the gentleman with five pounds damages.
In 1775 some of the Bluecoat boys appointed to assist in the drawing of the State Lottery were tampered with for the purpose of inducing them to commit a fraud. These attempts were successful in one instance that became known, and doubtless in many others that did not. This discovery led to certain regulations, which were carried out with great vigour. On the 1st of June a man was brought before the Lord Mayor for attempting to bribe the two boys who drew the Museum Lottery at Guildhall to conceal a ticket, and to bring it to him, promising that he would atonce return it. His intention was to insure it in all the offices with a view to defraud the keepers. The boys were so frightened at the proposition that they gave notice to the managers of the lottery, and pointed out the delinquent, who was, however, discharged, as there was no law by which to punish him. On the 5th of December another of the boys engaged to draw the numbers in the State Lottery at Guildhall was examined before Sir Charles Asgill relative to a number that had been drawn out the Friday before, on which an assurance had been made in almost every office in London. The boy confessed that he was prevailed upon to conceal the ticket No. 21,481, by a man who paid him for so doing; that the man copied the number; and that the next day he followed the man’s instructions, and put his hand into the wheel as usual, with the ticket in it, and then pretended to draw it from among the rest. The instigator of the offence had actually received £400 of the insurance-office keepers. Had all of them paid him, the whole sum would have amounted to £3000; but some of them suspected a fraud had been committed, and caused the inquiry which led to the boy’s confessing both the temptation and his folly. On the next day the man who insured the ticket was examined. He was clerk to a hop-factor in Goodman’s Fields; but not being the person who had persuaded the boy to secrete the ticket and pretend to draw it in the usual manner, and no evidence appearing to connect him with the actual seducer, the prisoner was discharged, though it was ascertained that he had insured the number already mentioned ninety-one times in one day. In consequence of the circumstances which led to this examination, the Lords of the Treasury inquired further and deliberated on the means of preventing a recurrence of such transactions. The result of their conference was the following order, which was, however, but privately circulated, and was never published in any periodical, book, or newspaper until after the abolition ofLotteries:—