Chapter XVI: Lotteries and Lottery Insurances (2)

_THE Managers 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 Thursday next, 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 than either 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 the public:--

LOTTERY 1736, _for raising 100000l. for building a Bridge at_
Westminster, _consisting of 125000 Tickets at 5l. each_.

Prizes 1 of 20000_l._ is 20000_l._
2 „ 10000 „ 20000
3 „ 5000 „ 15000
10 „ 3000 „ 30000
40 „ 1000 „ 40000
60 „ 500 „ 30000
100 „ 200 „ 20000
200 „ 100 „ 20000
400 „ 50 „ 20000
1000 „ 20 „ 20000
28800 „ 10 „ 288000
------ ------
30616 Prizes, amounting to 523000
94384 Blanks.
First Drawn 1000
Last Drawn 1000
------ ------
125000 525000
------ ------

The Prizes to be paid at the Bank in 40 Days after Drawing, without
Deduction. N.B. _There is little more than Three_ Blanks _to a_ Prize.

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, writing about 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 are told by the _Gentleman’s Magazine_, “made a great deal of noise.” The State Lottery of 1751 met with much opposition from the press, and an article in the _London Magazine_ gives the following computation of its chances:--

IN THE LOTTERY 1751 IT IS

69998 to 2 or 34999 to 1 against a £10000 Prize
69994 to 6 or 11665 to 1 against a 5000 or upwards
69989 to 11 or 6363 to 1 against a 3000
69981 to 19 or 3683 to 1 against a 2000
69961 to 39 or 1794 to 1 against a 1000
69920 to 80 or 874 to 1 against a 500
69720 to 280 or 249 to 1 against a 100
69300 to 700 or 99 to 1 against a 50
60000 to 10000 or 6 to 1 against a 20 or any Prize.

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 drawn did 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 notoriety of 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 business ever 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 November 1766:--

DAME FORTUNE 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
be _divided into Shares at the following low Rates_,--viz.:--

£ _s._ _d._
A Sixty-fourth 0 4 0
Thirty-second 0 7 6
Sixteenth 0 15 0
An Eighth 1 10 0
A Fourth 3 0 0
A Half 6 0 0

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 with a 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 at once 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 of Lotteries:--

ORDER _of December 12, 1775_.

A DISCOVERY having been made that WILLIAM TRAMPLETT, one of the Boys
employed in drawing the Lottery had, at the Instigation of one CHARLES
LOWNDES, (since absconded) at different Times in former Rolls, _taken
out of the Number Wheel_ THREE _numbered Tickets, which were at_ THREE
_several Times returned by him into the said Wheel, and drawn without
his parting with them_, so as to give them the Appearance of being
fairly drawn _to answer the purpose of defrauding by insurance_:

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, for preventing the like wicked Practices in
future, that every Boy, before he is suffered to put his Hand into
either Wheel, be brought by the Proclaimer to the Managers on Duty,
for them to see that _the Bosoms and Sleeves of his Coat be closely
buttoned, his Pockets sewed up, and his Hands examined_; and that
during the Time of his being on Duty, _he shall keep his left Hand in
his Girdle behind him, and his right Hand open with his Fingers
extended_; and the Proclaimer is not to suffer him at any Time to
leave the Wheel, without being first examined by the Manager nearest
him.

The Observance of the foregoing Order is recommended by the Managers
on this Roll to those on the succeeding Rolls, till the matter shall
be more fully discussed at a general Meeting.

It is noticeable that though only one ticket was spoken of in the police case, the secret instructions refer to three. It is likely that if it had been known that more than one had been tampered with, a general unpleasantness would have resulted, and the whole of the drawing been declared null and void. As it was, there was some difficulty in keeping the matter within bounds; and the trifling proportion of the attempted cheat, as compared with the magnitude of the general issue, was the strong point of the lottery managers. The exposure of the attempted, and so far as two tickets were concerned apparently successful, fraud, would have led to a vast amount of trouble and expense, and would have considerably added to the unpopularity of lotteries--a feeling which, as it was, made itself now and again very manifest. Anyhow the secret was kept for over sixty years, as it was never divulged until the general dissolution of the lottery system in 1826, when the following on the same subject was also for the first time made public:--

ORDER _at_ GENERAL MEETING.

A PLAN OF RULES AND REGULATIONS to be observed in order _to prevent
the Boys committing Frauds, &c._, in the Drawing of the Lottery,
agreeable to _Directions_ received by Mr. Johnson on Tuesday the 16th
of January 1776, from the LORDS OF THE TREASURY.

THAT ten Managers be always on the Roll at Guildhall, two of whom are
to be conveniently placed opposite the two Boys at the Wheels, in
order to observe that they strictly conform themselves to the Rules
and Orders directed by the Committee at Guildhall, on Tuesday,
December 12, 1775.

THAT _it be requested of the_ TREASURER OF CHRIST’S HOSPITAL _not to
make known who are the twelve Boys nominated for drawing the Lottery
till the morning the Drawing begins; which said Boys are all to attend
every Day, and the two who are to go on Duty at the Wheels are to be
taken promiscuously from amongst the whole Number_ by either of the
Secretaries, _without observing any regular Course or Order; so that
no Boy shall know when it will be his turn to go to either Wheel_.

THIS METHOD, though attended with considerable additional Expense, by
the extra Attendance of two Managers and six Boys, will, it is
presumed, effectually prevent any Attempt being made to corrupt or
bribe any of the Boys to commit the Fraud practised in the last
Lottery.

In July 1778 there was tried before Lord Mansfield at Guildhall a case wherein a merchant was plaintiff and a lottery-office keeper defendant. The action was for the purpose of recovering damages against the office-keeper for suffering plaintiff’s apprentice, a youth, to insure during the drawing of the last lottery, contrary to the statute; whereby the lad lost a considerable sum, the property of his master. The jury, without leaving their box, gave a verdict for the plaintiff, and the judge ordered the defendant to pay £500 penalty and be imprisoned for three months. During the same year, Parliament having discussed the evil of insuring, and the mischievous subdivision of the shares of tickets, passed an Act for the regulation of lottery offices, by which it was enacted that every office-keeper should pay £50 for a licence, and give tangible security not to infringe any part of the Act; that no smaller portion of any ticket than a sixteenth should be disposed of under a penalty of £50; that any person disposing of goods or merchandise upon any chance relating to the drawing of any ticket should be liable to a fine of £20; and that all shares should be stamped at an office established under the said Act, the original tickets being kept at the office till after the drawing. Many other regulations were made in the same law, and in the following year the question was again subject of legislation; but notwithstanding all the efforts of the Commons, the ruinous practice of insuring was still conducted with dexterity and great profit by the office-keepers. This is one of their plans for evading the law:--

_November 7, 1781._

MODE OF INSURANCE,

WHICH continues the whole Time of drawing the Lottery, at CARRICK’S
STATE LOTTERY OFFICE, King’s Arms, 72, Threadneedle Street. _At one
Guinea each_ NUMBERS _are taken_, to return three Twenty Pound Prizes,
value Sixty Pounds, for every given Number that shall be drawn any
Prize whatever above Twenty Pounds during the whole drawing.

⁂ _Numbers at half a Guinea to receive half the above._

And here is another of about the same date, which openly violates the spirit if not the letter of the law:--

J. COOK respectfully solicits the Public will favour the following
_incomparably advantageous plan_ with attention, by which _upwards of
thirty-two thousand Chances for obtaining a Prize (out of the
forty-eight thousand Tickets) are given in one Policy_.

POLICIES OF FIVE GUINEAS _with three Numbers_, with the first Number
will gain

20000 if a Prize of £20000
10000 „ £10000
5000 „ £5000

_with the second Number_ will gain

6000 guineas if 20000
3000 „ 10000
1500 „ 5000

_with the third Number_ will gain

3000 guineas if 20000
1500 „ 10000
1200 „ 5000

Then follow the address and other tempting inducements. In 1781 an Act was passed to prevent the insurance of tickets by any method. The office-keepers continued to insure notwithstanding, and many prosecutions resulted; but as the profits were greater than the fines, business continued to run briskly. One man was in 1784 fined fifteen hundred pounds, and he brought an action in 1785 to recover the money from the sheriff who had levied the amount on his goods. The case was tried in the Court of King’s Bench, and ended in an almost immediate nonsuit. In February 1793 the Commissioners of the Lottery, in order to abate insuring, determined that no persons should be suffered to take down numbers except the clerks of licensed offices known to the Commissioners. No slips were to be sent out; but the numbers were to be taken down by one clerk in one book; Steel’s list of lottery numbers was to be abolished, and a recompense made for it; and the magistrates resolved to apprehend all suspicious persons who should be seen taking early numbers. Yet in 1796 there was a class of sharpers who took lottery insurances, and this gambling among the higher and middle classes was carried on to an extent exceeding all credibility, producing consequences to many private families of great worth and respectability, of the most distressing nature.

The insurance offices in London numbered over four hundred. To many of them persons were attached called Morocco men, who went from house to house among their customers, or attended in the back parlours of public-houses, for the purpose of making insurances. It was calculated that at these offices (exclusive of what was done at the licensed offices) insurances were made to the extent of eight hundred thousand pounds, in premiums, during the Irish Lottery, and above one million during the English, upon which it was calculated that the insurers made from fifteen to twenty-five per cent. profit. This confederacy, during the English Lottery of the year 1796, supported about two thousand agents and clerks, and nearly eight thousand Morocco men, “including a considerable number of ruffians and bludgeon men, paid by a general association of the principal proprietors of the establishments, who regularly met in committee in a well-known public-house in Oxford Market, twice or thrice a week during the drawing of the lottery, for the purpose of concerting measures to defeat the exertions of the magistrates by forcibly resisting or bribing the officers of justice.”

Lotteries were declared by the Parliamentary reports of 1807 to be inseparable from illegal insurances. The reports further state that “the Lottery is so radically vicious, that under no system of regulations which can be devised will it be possible for Parliament to adopt it as an efficient source of revenue, and at the same time divest it of all the evils and calamities of which it has hitherto been so baneful a source.” Among these evils and calamities the Committees of Parliament enumerate that “idleness, dissipation, and poverty were increased,--the most sacred and confidential trusts were betrayed,--domestic comfort was destroyed, madness was often created, suicide itself was produced, and crimes subjecting the perpetrators of them to death were committed.” Sir Nathaniel Conant, who in 1816 was chief magistrate of Bow Street, stated to a committee of the House of Commons that the Lottery was one of the predisposing causes by which the people of the metropolis were vitiated; that it led to theft, to supply losses and disappointments occasioned by speculating on its chances; and that illegal insurances continued to be effected. “There are,” he says, “people in the background, who, having got forty or fifty thousand pounds by that, employ people of the lowest order, and give them a commission for what they bring; there is, _a wheel within a wheel_.” Another magistrate giving evidence before the same committee, said, “It is a scandal to the Government, thus to excite people to practise the vice of gaming for the purpose of drawing a revenue from their ruin. It is an anomalous proceeding by law to declare gambling infamous; to hunt out petty gamblers in their recesses, and cast them into prison; and by law also to set up the giant gambling of the State Lottery, and encourage persons to resort to it by the most captivating devices which ingenuity uncontrolled by moral rectitude can invent.” This evidence may be regarded as the ultimate cause of the suppression of lotteries, which might have dragged on an existence for a few more years had it not been for the atrocities of the insurance-mongers. We will now turn towards the closing scenes in this eventful drama.

Seldom was human ingenuity more exercised than in giving public notoriety to lottery schemes. The originators or proprietors of lotteries used to employ a number of persons, frequently of considerable literary ability and talent, to attract the public attention by verses, ingenious advertisements, and decoy paragraphs in the newspapers, engaging the attention of the readers by smart allusions to political topics or other matters of interest, which entrapped the unwary into lottery puffs. Thirteen thousand pounds was usually paid into the Exchequer for duties on these and other methods of advertising practised by the lottery people, and some of the agents spent as much as £20,000 in puffing and advertisements. Take the following as a specimen of the puffing which marked the later days of the Lottery:--

Before the time of Sir Isaac Newton, various notions were entertained
concerning colours. Plato said colour was a flame issuing from bodies,
the Indians of America believed the same, and when any person read a
letter they believed it spoke, and blessed the paper in proportion as
they were moved by it. What emotions would the following billet
excite? “The bearer may receive one hundred thousand pounds.” This
would make a deep impression on the natives of every country, and may
now be realised; for by the present Grand Lottery a single ticket may
bestow on the Bearer One Hundred Thousand Pounds.

Here is another of the same ingenious description, which kept the trap constantly baited for the unsuspecting:--

DUEL.--On Friday last a meeting took place near Plymouth, between
Capt. G---- and Lieut. R----, both of the Royal Navy, when, after
exchanging shots, happily without effect, the seconds interfered and
amicably adjusted the dispute. The following is said to have been the
cause of the duel:--Lieut. R---- had dreamt three successive nights
that a certain number would be a prize of £3000, in the ensuing
lottery, which he mentioned to Captain G----, but never intimated any
intention of having that ticket; he, however, wrote up to his agent in
London to procure it, who found the Captain was beforehand with him,
as he had got it the day before, and refused to give it up. By the
intercession of the seconds, it is settled that they are each to have
half the ticket, and as they are both very meritorious officers, we
sincerely wish they may have one of the numerous Capital Prizes with
which the scheme abounds.

The most stupendous efforts were made to promote the success of the last lottery, which, however, languished sadly. The price of tickets was arbitrarily raised, to induce a belief that they were in great demand, “at the very moment when,” says Hone, writing immediately afterwards, “their sale was notoriously at a stand; and the lagging attention of the public of the metropolis was endeavoured to be quickened by all sorts of stratagems to the 18th of July, as the very last chance that would occur in England of gaining ‘Six 30,000_l._ besides other Capitals,’ which it was positively affirmed were ‘all to be drawn’ on that fatal day.” Besides the dispersion of innumerable bills and aspersions on Government for extinguishing the Lottery, those most interested in its preservation caused London and the suburbs to be paraded by a most magnificent procession, in which was a band of music which played to attract attention, and then a man stepped forward, and ringing a bell, announced the death of the Lottery. Cartloads of bills were showered down areas and thrust under doors, and no effort was spared to make the end crown the work of centuries.

Chief among the office-keepers of the period was a Mr T. Bish--one of whose earlier prospectuses we present in exact facsimile--who showered millions of bills and miles of doggerel verse upon London just before the final draw took place. He had been a considerable adept in the art of puffing by means of the mock news-paragraphs to which reference has just been made, one of his best being that which follows:--

A laughable circumstance occurred at the Opera House a few evenings
since. The Honourable Mrs H---- C---- in the confusion that takes
place in the lobby on quitting the theatre, dropped her reticule, and
was some minutes before she regained it; when on looking at its
contents she exclaimed: “I have lost my duplicates!” This created
surprise, not that the company had any doubt when the lady pledged her
word, but they thought she had pledged her jewels. However, on
enquiry, it was found that the lost duplicates were Two Tickets of one
number (which she had purchased that evening) in the Lottery to be
drawn the next Tuesday; luckily she soon after found them, and
anticipates getting £20,000, as she had procured them at Bish’s
well-known office, Charing Cross.

If U R
a man struggling to get through the world
or surrounded by crosses
or if you wish to lay
by a Fortune for your
Children
go to Bish or his Agents
WHO MAY MAKE YOU
independent and above the frowns of the world

By the purchase of a Ticket or Share in the New Lottery, to be all
drawn in Two Days, 5^{th} and 18^{th} OCTOBER. Two of £20,000, Two of
£10,000, &c. All Sterling Money. All the 4500 Tickets drawn the First
Day are sure to be Prizes.

Two of £10,000 in the First Quarter of an Hour. Only 7600 Tickets.

(_See the Scheme._)

If _you are a man struggling to get through the world, or surrounded
by crosses; or_ if _you wish to_ lay _by_ a _Fortune for your
Children_, go to _BISH or_ his _Agents_, who may make you
_independent, and_ above the frowns of the _world_.

Tickets and Shares are selling by

BISH CONTRACTOR
FOR ANOTHER LOTTERY
4, CORNHILL, & 9, CHARING-CROSS, LONDON, and by
ALL HIS AGENTS IN THE COUNTRY

]

It would be impossible here to give the many specimens which have been preserved of Bish’s handiwork just before the close of the lotteries, but from an _embarras de richesses_ we select the following:--

BISH.

_The Last Man._

In reminding his best friends, the public, that the State Lottery will
be drawn this day, 3d May, Bish acquaints them that it is the _very
last but one_ that will ever take place in this kingdom; and he is

THE LAST CONTRACTOR

whose name will appear _singly_ before the public, as the very last
will be a coalition of all the usual contractors. Bish being “the last
man” who appears singly, has been particularly anxious to make an
excellent scheme, and flatters himself the one he has the honour to
submit must meet universal approbation.

At the back of the bill were some verses after the style of the “Cajolery Duet.” This is one of them:--

TO-DAY, OR NOT AT ALL.

_Run Neighbours, Run!_

Run, neighbours, run! To-day it is the Lott’ry draws,
You still may be in time if your purse be low;
Rhino, we all know, will stop of poverty the flaws.
Possessed of that, you’ll find no one to serve you slow.
The ministers in Parliament of lotteries have toll’d the knell,
And have declared from Cooper’s Hall dame Fortune soon they will
expel;
The Blue-coat boys no more will shout that they have drawn a
capital!
Nor run as though their necks they’d break to _Lucky Bish_ the news
to tell.
Run, neighbours, run, &c.

Although the last lottery was expected to take place on the 18th of July, it was not until the 18th of October that the closing scene in an eventful history took place. For this Bish, among many other handbills, produced the following:--

THE AMBULATOR’S GUIDE
TO THE LAND OF PLENTY.

BY PURCHASING A TICKET
_in the present Lottery_

You may _reap_ a golden _harvest_ in _Cornhill_, and pick up the
_bullion_ in _Silver_-street, have an interest in _Bank-buildings_,
possess a _Mansion-house_ in _Golden-square_, and an estate like a
_Little Britain_; never be in _Hunger_ford-market, but all your life
continue a _Mayfair_.

BY PURCHASING A HALF,

You need never be confined within _London Wall_, but become the
proprietor of many a _Long Acre_; represent a _Borough_ or an
_Aldermanbury_, and have a share in _Threadneedle-street_.

BY PURCHASING A QUARTER,

Your affairs need never be in _Crooked-lane_, nor your legs in
_Fetter-lane_; you may avoid _Paper-buildings_, steer clear of the
_King’s Bench_, and defy the _Marshalsea_; if your heart is in
_Love-lane_ you may soon get into _Sweeting’s Alley_, obtain your
lover’s consent for _Matrimony-place_, and always live in a
_High-street_.

BY PURCHASING AN EIGHTH,

You may secure plenty of _provision_ for _Swallow-street_; finger the
_Cole_ in _Coleman-street_; and may never be troubled with
_Chancery-lane_. You may cast _anchor_ in _Cable-street_; set up
business in a _Fore-street_; and need never be confined within a
_Narrow-wall_.

BY PURCHASING A SIXTEENTH,

You may live _frugal_ in _Cheapside_; get merry in
_Liquorpond-street_; soak your _hide_ in _Leather-lane_; be a _wet
sole_ in _Shoe-lane_; turn _maltster_ in _Beer-lane_, or _hammer_ away
in _Smithfield_.

In short, life must indeed be a _Long-lane_ if it’s without a
_turning_. Therefore, if you are wise, without _Mincing_ the matter,
go _Pall-mall_ to _Cornhill_ or _Charing-cross_, and enroll your name
in the _Temple_ of Fortune,

BISH’S.

Advertisements in the newspapers were not, however, plentiful. The office-keepers seemed to prefer the pomp and circumstance of processions and bands and funeral speeches, to the cold respectability which was just then part of the newspaper system. Bish had many eccentric illustrations in his handbills, and some of his verses went beyond even the bounds of eccentricity. As the eventful day approached, the efforts in the handbill line redoubled, and people were provided with waste paper for an indefinite period; but there was little to notice in the columns of any of the chief journals. On October 7, 1826, a public notice appeared on the front page of the _Times_, in company with the advertisements of Swift and Eyton, two office-keepers; but whether it was placed there by order of the “powers that be,” or was in the interests of the dealers, we must leave our readers to judge for themselves. The latter seems most probable:--

PUBLIC NOTICE.--The Licenses granted by 4th Geo. IV. cap. 60, to the
Lottery-office-keepers, to sell and divide into shares State Lottery
Tickets, will cease and determine on Wednesday the 18th of this month,
when all the Six Prizes of £30,000, and every other prize, amounting
to £389,000, must be decided, and all Lotteries end in this kingdom.
Government, having already given extra time for the sale of tickets,
will not grant an hour beyond the 18th instant.

Hazard was the rather appropriate name of another promoter whose advertisements are published just at this time; but they are, as are the others, small and unpretentious when in the newspapers, and are only noticeable as records of the finishing days of the great State Lottery. In the _Times_ of October 13 there is this notice, which was repeated on the 16th and 17th, on the last-named date having the word “to-morrow” inserted instead of “next Wednesday:”--

DRAWING of the LOTTERY.--Whereas it is maliciously asserted by an
Anonymous Correspondent in the Morning Chronicle of this day, that
application would be made to the Lords of the Treasury for a further
Postponement of the Lottery, the Public are most unequivocally and
positively assured by the Contractors that no such application has
been made, nor even contemplated; but on the contrary, it is
absolutely and inevitably determined by Government, that this last of
all lotteries shall and must be decided NEXT WEDNESDAY, 18th instant.

On the day before the drawing, the advertisements in the _Times_ showed that great apathy existed, and that the tickets had not gone off well, as the office-keepers had evidently many yet left on hand. Even the advertisements have a dispirited appearance:--

FINISH of LOTTERIES.--SWIFT and Co. respectfully inform the Public
that the last and only day of drawing the STATE LOTTERY is Wednesday
the 18th of this month, when 6 prizes of 30,000l. and all the other
capitals in the scheme will be determined. Every ticket will receive
5l. independent of any sum to which it may be entitled. In the last
Lottery containing 30,000l. prizes Swift and Co. sold two out of four
of them at their offices 11, Poultry; 1, Strand; and 31, Aldgate
High-street.

It is almost evident that the Lottery was “played out” on its own merits, and that the interference of Parliament only hastened the end so far as concerns the important events. Another firm of contractors put forth a final appeal thus:--

THE LAST of ALL, TO-MORROW, 18th October.--J. and J. SIVEWRIGHT,
Contractors, most positively assure the Public that--

To-morrow, Six of 30,000l. must be drawn.

To-morrow, 389,000l. will be decided.

To-morrow, all Lotteries end in this kingdom.

To gain a Prize of 30,000l. you must buy THIS DAY.

Tickets and Shares are selling by J. and J. SIVEWRIGHT, Contractors,
37, Cornhill; 11, Holborn; and 38, Haymarket; who shared and sold
12,478, a prize of 30,000l.; 3,613, 21,055l.; and in the last Lottery,
1,783, a prize of 21,000l.; and 3,925, a prize of 21,000l.

On the fatal day itself the only noticeable advertisement in the _Times_ is that of Bish, which is the same as had been running for some little time, and which on the 18th of October 1826, with the word “this day,” instead of what had appeared before, stood thus, a specimen of the last newspaper appeal in regard to a forthcoming State lottery:--

THE inevitable and absolute FINISH of LOTTERIES, THIS DAY.--BISH, in
soliciting for the last time the favours of his best friends, the
Public, assures them that,

This Day, a Ticket must gain £30,000
This Day, a Half must gain 15,000
This Day a Quarter must gain 7,500
This Day an Eighth must gain 3,750
This Day a Sixteenth must gain 1,875
This Day, all the Six of £30,000 will be drawn,
every number decided, and every ticket a
Prize.
This Day, 18th instant, all lotteries end for ever.

Tickets and Shares are selling by BISH, Stockbroker, 4, Cornhill, and
9, Charing-cross, who shared and sold, within the last 12 months, 5
prizes of 30,000l. and 9 of 20,000l., and in the very last drawing, 3d
of May, No. 1,833 (Class B), 21,000l., and 3,925 (Class A), 21,000l.

The following is the record of the last drawing, as published in the Thursday’s papers: “Yesterday afternoon, about half-past six o’clock, that old servant of the State, the lottery, breathed its last, having for a long period of years, ever since the days of Queen Anne, contributed largely towards the public revenue of the country. This event took place at Cooper’s Hall, Basinghall Street; and such was the anxiety on the part of the public to witness the last drawing of the lottery, that great numbers of persons were attracted to the spot, independently of those who had an interest in the proceedings. The gallery of Cooper’s Hall was crowded to excess long before the period fixed for the drawing (five o’clock), and the utmost anxiety was felt by those who had shares in the lottery for the arrival of the appointed hour. The annihilation of lotteries, it will be recollected, was determined on in the session of Parliament before last; and thus a source of revenue, bringing into the treasury the sums of £250,000 and £300,000 per annum will be dried up. This determination on the part of the Legislature is hailed by far the greatest portion of the public with joy, as it will put an end to a system which many believe to have fostered and encouraged the late speculations, the effects of which have been and are still severely felt. A deficiency in the public revenue to the extent of £250,000 annually will, however, be the consequence of the annihilation of lotteries, and it must remain for those who have strenuously supported the putting a stop to lotteries to provide for the deficiency.”--“Although that which ended yesterday was the last, if we are informed correctly the lottery-office keepers have been left with a great number of tickets remaining on their hands--a pretty strong proof that the public in general have now no relish for these schemes.”--“The concourse of persons in Basinghall Street was very great; indeed, the street was almost impassable, and everybody seemed desirous of ascertaining the fortunate numbers. In the gallery the greatest interest was excited, as the various prizes were drawn from the wheel; and as soon as a numbered ticket was drawn from the number wheel, every one looked with anxiety to his share, in order to ascertain if Fortune smiled on him. Only one instance occurred where a prize was drawn and a number held by any individual present. The fortunate person was a little man, who no sooner had learned that his number was a grand prize, than he buttoned up his coat, and coolly walked off without uttering a word. As the drawing proceeded disappointment began to succeed the hopes indulged by those who were present. On their entrance to the hall every face wore a cheerful appearance; but on the termination of the drawing a strong contrast was exhibited, and the features of each were strongly marked with dissatisfaction. The drawing commenced shortly after five o’clock, and ended at twenty minutes past six. The doors of the various lottery offices were also surrounded by persons awaiting the issue of the drawing.”

The _Times_, in a short leader--short and few were the leaders in the _Times_ of that day--published on the Thursday, says: “Yesterday terminated the lotteries in this country--may we say for ever? We know not. Such a result will depend upon the wants of Government, and the morality of its ministers. However, we rejoice at their suspension,--a suspension which we hope we have in some degree assisted in effecting,--yet rejoice with fear. Looking at the Stock Exchange, at the time bargains, and at all the iniquities practised there, we have only to hope that the place of the lotteries may not be supplied by some more mischievous system of knavery. Time was when all the robberies were committed on the king’s highway. The lighting, watching, and general improvement of our roads, have nearly put an end to this practice; but housebreaking has unfortunately taken its place! And yet the people of England is not a gambling people like the French, as is evident from the fate of the last lottery. We have heard that hardly half the tickets were sold; from which it is evident, that the spirit of lottery-gambling was extinct before the system; and if that spirit had not been kept alive by incessant stimuli, it would have expired long ago.”

It may be as well to mention, though it is generally known, that an Act of the 9th and 10th Vict. was passed for legalising Art Union Lotteries within certain limits and under certain conditions. Though our chapter has run over its length, we can hardly conclude without quoting the wise words of Adam Smith on the subject of lotteries. “The chance of gain,” says he, “is by every man more or less overvalued, and the chance of loss is by most men undervalued.... The world neither ever saw, or ever will see, a perfectly fair lottery, or one in which the whole gain compensated the whole loss; because the undertaker could make nothing by it. In the State lotteries the tickets are really not worth the price which is paid by the original subscribers, and yet commonly sell in the market for twenty, thirty, and sometimes forty per cent. advance. The vain hope of gaining some of the greatest prizes is the sole cause of this demand. The soberest people scarce look upon it as a folly to pay a small sum for the chance of gaining ten or twenty thousand pounds; though they know that even that small sum is perhaps twenty or thirty per cent. more than the chance is worth. In a lottery in which no prize exceeds twenty pounds, though in other respects it approach much nearer to a perfectly fair one than the common State lotteries, there would not be the same demand for tickets. In order to have a better chance for some of the great prizes, some people purchase several tickets, and others small shares in a still greater number. There is not, however, a more certain proposition in mathematics, than that the more tickets you adventure upon the more likely you are to be a loser. Adventure upon all the tickets in the lottery, and you lose for certain; and the greater the number of your tickets the nearer you approach to this certainty.” Though this was written in reference to a state of affairs long past, the lesson is not without value nowadays.