CHAPTER XII.

_SWINDLES AND HOAXES._ It is of course only natural that as soon as advertising became general, that portion of the community which regards the other portion as its oyster, was not slow to discover the advantages which were soon to accrue in the way of increased facilities for publishing new dodges, or of giving extended scope to those which were old, but had so far attained only limited circulation. This has been so conclusively shown by specimens already given, and references made, that there is no necessity to discuss the question anew, and therefore we will at once plunge into the thick of those advertisements which have special qualifications for treatment different from that given to the milder classes of rogues and scoundrels. The first transaction which calls for attention is in connection with Queen Anne’s farthings. No popular delusion has perhaps made more dupes than that relating to these coins. Innumerable people believe that there never were but three farthings of this description, two of which have found their way in due course to the British Museum, the third only being still abroad; and it is also believed that the Museum authorities would give a very large sum for the possession of the missing token. Now there are no less than six distinct varieties of Anne’s farthings known to exist, and specimens of them are not at all rare. Some of them may be procured at the coin-dealers, for ten or twelve shillings; but there is one variety, struck in 1713, which is extremely rare, and would bring from £5 to £10. There is also a small brass medal or counter of Queen Anne, about the size of a farthing, of which there are hundreds. A publican once procured one of these, and placed it in his window, ticketed as “_the_ real farthing of Queen Anne.” Credulous persons came from far and near to view this wonderful curiosity, and the owner turned his deception to good account. Sometime about the first quarter of this century, a man in Ireland received twelve months’ imprisonment for secreting a Queen Anne’s farthing. He was shopman to a confectioner in Dublin, and having taken the farthing over the counter, he substituted a common one for it. Unfortunately for him, he told his master how he had obtained it, and offered it to him for sale. The master demanded the treasure as his property, the shopman refused to give it up, was brought into the Recorder’s Court, and there received the above sentence. When rogues fall out, honest men know what they have lost. It is wrong to assume that because thieves quarrel, their natural enemies “get their own.” At all events, experience has never taught us so, and the proverb, as generally read, is wrong. Numerous are the instances of people having travelled from distant counties to London, in order to dispose in the best market of the supposed valuable farthing. The custodian of the medals in the British Museum used to be besieged by applicants from all parts of the country, offering Queen Anne’s farthings and imitations of them for sale, and of course the dealers in coin even now receive a liberal share of the same annoyance. Whence the treacherous fable originally sprung has never been satisfactorily explained. It is certain that Anne’s farthings never were very common, though of one variety, coined in 1714, not less than from 300 to 500 must have been put in circulation. But the others were mere patterns, and were never struck for currency: all of them were coins of great beauty, and for this reason, as well as on account of their being the only copper coins struck in the reign of Queen Anne, it is probable that they were soon hoarded and preserved as curiosities, thereby acquiring an imaginary value, which grew rapidly as soon as some sharp fellow saw how useful the figment might be made. But the immediate cause of the popular fallacy concerning the scarcity and great value may be found in the fact, that at the end of the last century a lady of Yorkshire having lost one of these coins, offered a large reward for it. Probably it was valuable to her as a souvenir of some departed friend; but the advertisement, and the comparative scarcity of these farthings, gradually led to the report that there was only one such token in circulation, and that the unique coin was of course of almost priceless value. Long before this, however, advertisements in reference to Anne’s farthings had found their way into the papers. So far as we can discover, the first of these appeared in the _General Advertiser_ of April 19, 1745, and ran as follows:-- WHEREAS about seven years ago an Advertisement was published in some of the Daily Papers offering a Reward for a Queen Anne’s Farthing struct in the year 1714. _This is to inform the_ CURIOUS That a Farthing of Queen Anne of that year of a very beautiful dye may be seen at the Bar of the Pensylvania Coffeehouse in Birchin Lane. The impression is no ways defaced but as entire as from the Mint. This, probably, just at the time when a furor was in existence with regard to the farthings, must have given a fillip to the business at the Pennsylvania Coffee-house; and must have done a great deal to spread the belief that a Queen Anne’s coin was much more desirable than the wonderful lamp of Eastern story, or the more modern but quite as powerful four-leaved shamrock. That in 1802 the fiction was still lively is shown by an advertisement which appeared in the February of that year. This was disguised so as to appear like an ordinary paragraph:-- The Queen Anne’s farthing, advertised to be disposed of in Pall Mall, proves to be an original. There were only _two_ coined in that Queen’s reign, and not _three_ as has been erroneously stated. That which was sold by the sergeant from Chatham for £400, was purchased by a noble viscount, curious in his selection of coins, &c. Seven Hundred guineas was the price asked for the one advertised last week. Five hundred was offered for it and refused. The owner lives at Lynn, in Norfolk. The offer was made by the son of a baronet, who wants to complete his collection. Attention and credulity were so excited by the above paragraph, and many others of the same tendency, that no one thought of doubting that a Queen Anne’s farthing was worth more than a Jew’s eye; nor was it till some time after that the whole was discovered to be a fabrication, intended either to impose upon the credulity of the public, or, what is more likely, to enhance the value of such a coin to the holder, who was quietly waiting to realise. Whether he did so or not does not appear, but it is more than likely that he did not allow his opportunity to slip, but hooked one of those unconsciously greedy people who are always falling victims to their own selfishness as much as to the sharpers, and who, as soon as they are deluded, look for sympathy and redress to those very laws they were prepared to outrage when anything was apparently to be got by so doing. The belief that Queen Anne’s farthings are very valuable still obtains among the vulgar, notwithstanding the many times its absurdity has been exposed; and there is no particular reason for imagining that it will become at all exploded until some fresher but quite as illogical a fiction is ready to supply its place. One of the most notorious swindlers of the early part of the present century was Joseph Ady, who used to profess that he knew “something to your advantage.” As he did not deal in advertisements, perhaps he has no right here; but as about 1830 he was constantly being referred to in newspaper paragraphs, and was a feature of the time among sharpers, he is entitled to passing notice, if only as a newspaper celebrity. At the period we mention, “Ady was a decent-looking elderly man, a Quaker, with the external respectability attached to the condition of a housekeeper, and to all appearance considered himself as pursuing a perfectly legitimate course of life. His _métier_ consisted in this. He was accustomed to examine, so far as the means were afforded him, lists of unclaimed dividends, estates or bequests waiting for the proper owners, and unclaimed property generally. Noting the names, he sent letters to individuals bearing the same appellatives, stating that, on their remitting to him his fee of a guinea, they would be informed of ‘something to their advantage.’ When any one complied, he duly sent a second letter, acquainting him that in such a list was a sum or an estate due to a person of his name, and on which he might have claims worthy of being investigated. It was undeniable that the information _might_ prove to the advantage of Ady’s correspondent. Between this _might be_ and the unconditional promise of something to the advantage of the correspondent, lay the debatable ground on which it might be argued that Ady was practising a dishonest business. It was rather too narrow a margin for legal purposes; and so Joseph went on from year to year reaping the guineas of the unwary--seldom three months out of a police court and its reports--till his name became a byword; and still, out of the multitudes whom he addressed, finding a sufficient number of persons ignorant of his craft, and ready to be imposed upon--and these, still more strange to say, often belonging to the well-educated part of society.”[36] In all the police cases we have come across, in which Ady was concerned, he seems to have considerably “sat upon” the magistrates, the “great unpaid” of the City being quite unable to hold their own with him, notwithstanding the disadvantage at which Joseph was placed. The claims for precedence of the two most important advertising swindles of the present day are so equally divided, that it is hard to say which has caused the greater amount of ruin among credulous persons who have invested their last few coins in the hope of the certain success, or which has returned most profit to the exchequers of its wily promoters. The two claimants are the Turf-Circular and the Home-Employment swindles, both of which have been allowed full play. We will give the “home-employment” arrangement preference of treatment, as it appeals to wider sympathies, the victims being mostly credulous only, and not selfishly and idiotically greedy for other folk’s goods; and being, as well, mostly poor hard-working women, and not a few children. One of the most notorious of these advertisers flourished half-a-dozen years ago. He used to insert a small notice in the daily papers, informing those who had leisure that he could find ample remunerative employment for them, and directing applications to be made by letter at a given address, enclosing a stamped addressed envelope. Then the swindle commenced, the reply being as follows:-- GROVE HOUSE, TOTTENHAM ROAD. ISLINGTON, LONDON, N. _In reply to your application as per my Notice_ (Leisure Time, _&c._, _&c._,) _I very respectfully inform you that it has now become impossible to describe my Advertisement on employing leisure time fully in the Newspaper in which the little abridged notice appeared, owing to the enormous charge demanded for inserting it, namely £2 16s. for each time it appears. So that in consequence I am compelled, reluctantly, to trouble my correspondents to forward their envelope for the purpose of an extended explanation, which I think cannot be clearer done than my forwarding in print, as under, a copy of the intended announcement, which after reading, and you deciding on sending for the packet, please deduct from the number (eighteen) the three Penny Postage Stamps you will necessarily have used, and only enclose (fifteen) which trifling outlay I think you, like others, will have no cause to regret._ _Yours faithfully_, EVERETT MAY. THE UNDER WILL BEST EXPLAIN:-- LEISURE TIME.--FOUR GUINEAS PER WEEK.--HOW TO REALISE THIS AT YOUR OWN HOMES. MR EVERETT MAY, of Kingsland, begs to apprise the Public that he is sending off as rapidly as possible by every post his far-famed Packet, the contents of which will show the many plans of getting money most honourably by either sex employing leisure hours at their own homes. £2 to £6 weekly may be most certainly realised by all industrious persons, without five shillings outlay or any risk, by following the easy, respectable and clear instructions. Sent by Mr Everett May, of Grove House, Tottenham-grove, Kingsland, London, N. This is no visionary theory. The Present Season highly suitable. Enclose eighteen penny stamps, and you will receive post free punctually per return THIS PROVED BOON TO THE INDUSTRIOUS OF BOTH SEXES. But to remove any doubt that sceptical persons may entertain as to the truth of the above, I here insert the under six letters received, with hundreds of others. The parties are very respectable and each well-known in the towns they reside. Calverton, near Nottingham. Dear Sir,--I beg to inform you that your packet came quite safe, and I was surprised and highly pleased with its contents. Like others who doubted the truth, I was ready to conclude it was only to catch those foolish enough to try it. But I have now proved otherwise, and can testify that you are no other than a true and faithful man. The contents of your indeed famed packet are well worth twenty times as much, and whoever the party may be receiving it will have no cause to repent. Yours very truly, SETH BINCH. Another--Spettisbury, Blanford, Dorset. Dear Sir,--I beg to inform you that the Packet ordered arrived safely, and allow me to tender you my sincere thanks for it. Your plans for getting money so honourably are indeed excellent. Anyone having a doubt may most certainly remove such doubt. Hoping you may long continue in your good work is the earnest wish of your obedient servant, W. OAKLEY. Then follow the remaining four letters, which have an astonishing family likeness to the two chosen, and as these six were only inserted to show what the careful May would have done had he been able to launch into lavish expenditure in the interests of his clients, he gives a statement after the last epistle:-- _Such is the exact copy of the advertisement I intended to have placed before the public by inserting in the Newspapers had the charge not been so high, but as I now do so by this circular I can add a few more of my correspondents’ approval letters, in furtherance of a still more convincing proof of the value of this esteemed Money Making Packet._ After this he gives a string of letters, which must have demanded great ingenuity on the part of their writer, if only on account of the number of signatures he must have invented. Occasionally he breaks down, however, and has to fall back on initials. We should like to reproduce a lot of these expressions of gratitude as forms to be used at any time when thanks are required for any great benefit, but space will not allow of it, and we must be content with two, which are redolent of truly Christian thankfulness:-- Short Heath Road, Erdington, near Birmingham, December 13th, 1867. Mr. May, Dear Sir,--I have received your Packet, and am at a loss how, adequately, to express to you what I think about it--suffice it to say that I consider your Packet to be an inestimable boon to the unemployed of every class. Thousands will, doubtless, make money by it. It professes only to be a guide to the employment of leisure hours, but in reality it is a guide to the employment of a whole life, and an easy path to opulence. “Whoever receives it will have no cause to regret.” “It is worth twenty times as much.” “Anyone having a doubt may most certainly remove such doubt.” I heartily re-echo these testimonials, and recommend your Packet to every unemployed person, this is no more than I am in equity bound to do. I am, Dear Sir, faithfully yours, THOMAS JONSON, JUN. 1, Vincent Terrace, Frome, October 5th, 1867. Dear Sir,--I have carefully examined the contents of your excellent Packet, and am astonished and delighted with them. He or she would indeed be difficult to please who could not select from so extensive a stock some profitable employment congenial to their taste. The instructions are explicit, and the minute details in each case fully and clearly explained. A person of moderate industry and perseverance, furnished with your Packet may attain, if not a fortune, at least a very comfortable living. It ought to be widely known, and I for my part shall not fail to recommend it. I admit I answered your advertisement merely from a curious desire to know what was the latest dodge (pardon the word) for hoaxing the public, and I am now heartily glad I did answer it, though ashamed of the motive that induced me to do so. I am, Dear Sir, faithfully yours, JOSEPH JOHNSON, Schoolmaster. The poor gulls, after reading these effusions, which all play on the same strings of wonder, satisfaction, and gratitude, are of course anxious to participate in the benefits of lucrative employment, and off go the stamps. If the mischief ended there, the matter would not be so bad; but these advertising scoundrels have various courses open to them. If they judge that nothing more is to be obtained from the sender, they calmly pocket the stamps and take no further notice. In the event of continued “annoyance,” or threats of exposure, they will send forth a circular which states that a packet was posted, and must have been lost or stolen in transit. This circular speaks of the post-office, and other institutions, in the most disparaging manner, and of the transactions of its writers as not only just, but infallible. One of them winds up thus:-- _Another matter I wish to inform you upon, namely, an error prevails regarding the punctual and prompt conveyance of Packets by the Post Office. This is at times impossible. If the letter mails are heavy, Packets are sometimes left until the following day. So that I cannot guarantee it will be delivered at your residence by return, but you may fully expect it by the second if not by the first mail, postage free, well packed, and secure from observation. These remarks may appear trifling, but they are really necessary, and while on the subject I will name another, also of importance, it is this--several of my correspondents when applying for these particulars send only their name and address on a stamped envelope, and when ordering the Packet enclose their name and omit the address, and this not being retained by me renders it impossible to forward it. So that a distinct name and address is, in the second instance, absolutely necessary. It is required for no other object than to enable me to promptly forward the order, which I can do to any address in the United Kingdom._ The correspondent who dates from a good address, or whose letter looks promising, is likely to be despoiled still more. The stamps are acknowledged, and at the same time information is tendered that a special order for the peculiar fancy goods upon which the income is to be made has just come in; and that if the intending employée will send a fee, say five shillings, for registration, and a deposit, say five pounds, for security, she will receive a packet containing the work--which is very easy--and ample instructions. A little delay enables these wandering tribes to change both names and addresses, and to appear in greater force than ever in the advertisement columns. No wonder the writers we have quoted show such gratitude for the receipt of promised parcels! But we did know two real people who got what they bargained for. One, who only paid the eighteenpence, obtained, after a good long time, and the expenditure of many threats, some scraps of brown paper, which were said to be patterns for pen-wipers, “the manufacture of which would be found to yield a lucrative profit, if a market could be found for them.” There is much virtue in an _if_ in this case. The paper went on to say that there were many shopkeepers who would be glad to sell them on commission, “the article being extremely rare.” It is noticeable that the circular received on this occasion was printed, with blanks left for description of the patterns and the name of the work for which they were to be used. A man of imaginative mind might in the course of the day have run through a considerable list of trades; and as the reference to the demand for the article and the sales by commission would be the same in all the notices, the demand upon truth was evidently not particularly excessive. The other successful applicant was a lady who began by writing out of mere curiosity, and who gradually got on until she had parted with not much less than ten pounds. A sharp letter from a solicitor brought no answer to him, but succeeded in sending the long-expected parcel to his client. It was heavy, and accompanied by a short letter, which said:-- BIRMINGHAM, October 7, 1869. MADAM, We beg to inform you that some little delay has been caused by the failure of a company to whom we entrusted the manufacture of a large quantity of articles. We have now however great pleasure in forwarding you a sample of an enamelled leather child’s button boot, with lasts and leather for you to follow model. As soon as we receive from you specimen equal to pattern we shall be glad to afford you constant employment. Yours obediently, VENTNOR AND MORRIS. The parcel contained some old odd lasts, a really well-made little boot, and some queer bits of leather, which the cleverest man in the world could have done nothing with; a shoemaker’s knife, an awl, and a lump of cobbler’s wax! This expedient enabled the swindlers to tide over the time till a new name and a fresh address were decided on. It is worthy of note--and we shall refer to it a little further on--that the statement of one of these scoundrels would lead to the impression that extra prices are charged for these swindling advertisements. If larger prices are charged to men because their advertisements are fraudulent, no amount of false logic or forensic oratory can dispose of the fact that the proprietors of the papers are accessories in any robbery or swindle that is committed; and the insertion of such advertisements, knowing them to be traps for the unwary, at a price which denotes the guilty knowledge of the proprietors, is as gross a breach of the trust reposed in them by the public as was ever committed by smug, well-fed, Sabbath-observing sinners. There is, unfortunately, but too much reason to believe that extra prices are charged for these fool-traps, and that in the most pious and pretentious papers. At the time of the baby-farming disclosures which led to the execution of Margaret Waters, one paper openly accused another--a daily of large circulation--with charging three or four hundred per cent. over the ordinary tariff price for the short applications for nurse children which were then usual. Perhaps the accusation was not worth disproval--at all events it remains uncontradicted till this day. These murderous advertisements presented no particularly destructive features, they simply said in each case that a nurse child was wanted at a certain address; and sometimes an offer would be made to take a baby altogether for a lump sum. This is one of a lot taken from a leading daily paper:-- ADOPTION.--Child Wanted to NURSE, or can be LEFT ALTOGETHER. Terms moderate. Can be taken from birth. Address ----. Sometimes the terms were mentioned, and, as a rule, the sum named showed that even the tender mercies experienced by Oliver Twist and his friend Dick at the farming establishment inhabited by them could hardly have been expected by the most confiding of parents. Thus:-- A RESPECTABLE Woman wishes to adopt a CHILD. Premium £6. Will be taken altogether and no further trouble necessary. Apply ----. As some of these establishments may be still in existence, we refrain from republishing the addresses. These specimens, as advertisements, simply call for no comment at our hands, and so we will get on with the more pronounced, though less guilty, swindlers. Here is a specimen which doubtless gave the postman some extra work:-- GENTLEMEN having a respectable circle of acquaintance may hear of means of INCREASING their INCOME without the slightest pecuniary risk, or of having (by any chance) their feelings wounded. Apply for particulars by letter, stating their position &c. to W. R. 37, W---- Street C---- Square. To such an advertisement as this--one of exactly the same kidney--which appeared in _Lloyd’s_, under the head of “How to make Two pounds per Week by the outlay of Ten Shillings,” and asking for thirty stamps in return for the information, the following belongs. It is sent in reply to the letter enclosing the fee, and is too good a specimen of the humour possessed by these rogues to be passed over:-- “First purchase 1 cwt. of large-sized potatoes which may be obtained for the sum of 4s., then purchase a large basket, which will cost say another 4s., then buy 2s. worth of flannel blanketting and this will comprise your stock in trade, of which the total cost is 10s. A large-sized potato weighs about half-a-pound, consequently there are 224 potatoes in a cwt. Take half the above quantity of potatoes each evening to a baker’s and have them baked; when properly cooked put them in your basket, well wrapped up in the flannel to keep them hot, and sally forth and offer them for sale at one penny each. Numbers will be glad to purchase them at that price, and you will for certain be able to sell half a cwt. every evening. From the calculation made below you will see by that means you will be able to earn £2 per week. The best plan is to frequent the most crowded thoroughfares, and make good use of your lungs, thus letting people know what you have for sale. You could also call in at each public-house on your way and solicit the patronage of the customers, many of whom would be certain to buy of you. Should you have too much pride to transact the business yourself (though no one need be ashamed of pursuing an honest calling), you could hire a boy for a few shillings a week who could do the work for you, and you could still make a handsome profit weekly. The following calculation proves that £2 per week can be made by selling baked potatoes:-- “1 cwt. containing 224 potatoes sold in two evenings at 1d. each, £0 18 8 Deduct cost, 0 4 0 ------- £0 14 8 3 ------- Six evenings’ sale, 2 4 0 Pay baker at the rate of 8d. per evening for baking potatoes, 0 4 0 ------- Nett profit per week, £2 0 0.” Many and most curious are the answers received from time to time by persons with sufficient faith to make application to these advertisers, the foregoing being by no means unique. One reply received in return for half-a-crown’s worth of stamps, which were to have purchased much wisdom in the way of money-saving, was this: “Never pay a boy to look after your shadow while you climb a tree to see into the middle of next week.” A man who would send his money to such evident scamps, could hardly see into the middle of anything, no matter where he chose his vantage-ground. Fortunately for the interests of the community at large, these tricksters now and again are made to feel that there is justice in the land. Twenty years ago, a City magistrate did good service by exposing a man who lived abroad in splendour at the expense of the poor governesses he managed to victimise through the advertising columns of the _Times_. This rascal used, by means of the most specious promises, to drag young girls to a foreign land, and there leave them to become a prey to other villains, or to make their way back accordingly as circumstances permitted. But as at the present time there are streams of foreign girls decoyed to London under all sorts of pretexts for the vilest purposes, the least said as to the criminality of one single individual among the shoals of scoundrels who live by means of advertisements the better. Since Mr Fynn was unmasked many other hawks have been captured, and only recently two have found their way into the obscurity of penal servitude under circumstances worthy of mention. _Place aux dames_: we will give precedence to Mistress Margaret Annie Dellair, though her retirement was subsequent to that of the other claimant on our attention. The difference of date is, however, extremely small. Mrs Dellair lived at Croydon, and for a long time lived in peace and plenty on the post-office orders, or rather the cash received in exchange for them, obtained by means of the following advertisement:-- HOME EMPLOYMENT.--Ladies in town or country wishing for Remunerative EMPLOYMENT in Laces, Church Needlework, &c., should apply at once to M. D., Fern House, West Croydon, enclosing a directed envelope. Reference to ladies employed by permission. This must have been a fruitful source of income to M. D., who seems to have considered that people were calmly content to part with their money, as she made no attempt to put off the day of reckoning which was bound to arrive. So in due course Mrs Dellair found herself charged with fraud before the Croydon bench, and ultimately she appeared at the bar of the Central Criminal Court in April of the present year. Her mode of procedure, described during the trial, was this. Applicants in due time, after sending in their stamped and addressed envelopes, received circulars, stating that the work which the sender was able to furnish comprised braiding, point lace, tatting, church needlework, and Berlin wool. The needlework was to be done at the ladies’ homes, and they were never to earn less than eightpence or a shilling per hour. To secure employment the applicants were informed that the payment of one guinea “for registration fee, materials, and instruction,” was required, half of which sum was to be returned when the employment was resigned. Post-office orders were to be made payable at the office, Windmill Street, Croydon, to Margaret Dellair. “There is,” says a writer at the time commenting on this case, “something quite admirable in this calm repudiation of the anonymous, in this wearing of the heart upon the sleeve, on the part of Mistress Dellair. The bait she threw out was swallowed with avidity by many young ladies--some with more money than wit, others painfully anxious to secure bread-winning employment; others less solicitous about procuring work for themselves than inquisitive to discover, for the benefit of society in general and their friends in particular, whether the transaction was _bonâ fide_. Then the curtain rose on the second act of the drama. Some ladies sent post-office orders to Windmill Road; others took the train to Croydon, and had personal interviews with the benevolent recluse of Fern House--a little cottage near a wood--who did not fail to represent that she was extensively employed by some eminent firms of church furnishers in the metropolis.” One young lady having sent her guinea, received, after a lapse of some weeks, and after repeated communications on her part, ten toilet-mats, with the materials for braiding them. There was not enough braiding, and so she wrote for more, but received no reply. Then she finished the mats with materials purchased by herself, and despatched the articles to Croydon; but neither reply nor payment was forthcoming. After many more weeks Mrs Dellair wrote to say that she was in ill-health. Seeing, however, that the advertisement was continued in the papers, the defrauded young lady wrote to Fern Cottage, demanding the return of ten shillings, being one-half of the sum she had disbursed for “registration fee, materials, and instruction.” No answer was returned, of course; and the victim not only lost her money, but her time and her labour, to say nothing of postage, worry of mind, and other incidental expenses. One of the principal witnesses against Dellair was the Croydon postmaster, who stated that he had known her a year and a half. She had been in the habit of bringing post-office orders to his office to cash. She had brought between three and four hundred orders since July 1872, principally for guineas, but there were some for half-crowns and some for half-guineas. They were brought principally by her daughter, but sometimes by a servant. On the 30th of October 1873 a post-office order (produced) was brought to him, and the payee’s signature was that of the prisoner. He paid the money to the person who brought it. The house at which the prisoner lived was a small private house, called Fern Cottage, and there was no show of business kept up there. On cross-examination by prisoner’s counsel, the postmaster stated that the fact of so many orders being cashed by Mrs Dellair excited his suspicion. He, however, knew that she was getting her living by sending parcels of needlework by post, and since he had ascertained that fact, he did not think it so extraordinary. Mrs Dellair was in the habit of purchasing postage stamps in large quantities of him. She sometimes purchased ten shillings’ worth, and once or twice had bought them to a larger extent. At the trial the entire seat in front of the jury-box was filled by young women who attended to prosecute, some of whom had been prudent enough to ask for references, but imprudent enough to part with their guineas, although the testimonials received were not quite satisfactory. Some applicants had interviews with Dellair at Croydon, and then she gave the names of one or two eminent firms as her employers, but at the trial representatives of these firms swore that she was totally unknown to them. One of the most peculiar points in this trial was the line taken by the counsel for the defence, who argued that although the victims of his client might be deserving of sympathy, they had parted with their guineas in a foolish and careless manner, and the real question was whether the accused was guilty of a fraudulent pretence or not. The advocate raised the curious point in favour of his client, that although she had avowedly four hundred transactions with different persons, it was extraordinary that she had not been discovered and prosecuted before; but he forgot how much more extraordinary it was that for her defence the prisoner was unable to bring forward out of her four hundred clients a single witness who could swear to receiving remunerative employment from her. The defence was original, and originality in defence has a good deal to do with success when a case is being tried by a common jury; but it did not succeed, and Mrs Margaret Annie Dellair was found guilty. The woman was an impudent and abandoned swindler, who had been systematically preying for years upon a class that can, of all classes, the least afford to be cheated--decently-educated young women of small means, who fill respectable positions, and whose consequent need of employment which will enable them to earn a little something above their ordinary salaries is always pressing and frequently imperative. Before sentence was passed an inspector from Scotland Yard stated that the prisoner and her husband had formerly lived at Finchley under another name; that they had afterwards kept a shop in Bloomsbury under the title of “Fuller & Co.,” where they advertised to give “remunerative employment” both to young ladies and young gentlemen; that in May 1872 the husband was sentenced at the Middlesex Sessions to five years’ imprisonment for fraud; that on his conviction the woman removed to Fern Cottage; and that after her arrest, and its consequent publication in the papers, upwards of eighty letters had been received by the police complaining of her dealings. All that Margaret Annie Dellair could do when she was called up for sentence was to plead that she had been left in an all but penniless condition with seven young children; that she had tried in vain to obtain an honest livelihood by keeping a stall in a bazaar; and that her crime was caused by a desire to avert starvation from her innocent offspring. A good deal of sympathy was of course expressed by the public--especially by those who have nothing to lose--not for the victims, but for the victimiser. The interest taken in criminals nowadays, when they have the slightest claims to be out of the common order, would be regarded as quite overdrawn if described in a novel. The other delinquent was not so interesting, and being only a man, did not find any hearts to bleed for him even among those who had not been deceived. His practices were provincial, his advertisement, of which the following is a copy, being inserted in the Warwickshire and London papers:-- HOME EMPLOYMENT.--Ladies (several) wanted to COPY manuscript SERMONS for supply to the clergy. Reasonable terms. Apply by letter only to R. H., 39, New-buildings, Coventry. R. H. was Robert Hemmings, who was eventually tried at the Warwick Assizes of last March, and whose _modus operandi_ was then described. Several young ladies seeing the advertisements, and wishing for employment, wrote to the address given, in answer to which they received the “Prospectus of the Private Office for the Supply of Sermons and Lectures to Clergymen and Public Speakers.” In this highly-titled and pretentious document, clergymen “who find the composition of sermons too heavy a tax on their ingenuity, are invited to subscribe for manuscript sermons, arranged according to the three schools of thought in the English Church. The High Church section is subdivided into Ritualistic and moderate Anglican. The subscription for three sermons weekly is four guineas per annum, payable in advance. The same sermon will not be sent to any two clergymen within twenty miles of each other.” It also states, that the business of the office rendering necessary the employment of copyists, it has been decided to employ ladies only, the reason being that home occupation to gentlewomen of limited income is such a great desideratum of our times. Then it goes on to say that “the ordinary avenues for respectable women desiring to replenish their scanty purses are so overstocked that the limited number we are able to employ will gladly welcome the opportunity of turning a fair handwriting to a profitable account. The remuneration paid will be 2d. per 100 words. To avoid the possibility of unscrupulous persons obtaining valuable sermons on pretence of copying, a guarantee of 10s. will be required from each copyist before MSS. are sent, to be returned when she may discontinue working. Applicants for employment should enclose 2s. 6d. on account of their deposit, which will either be returned or a notification of engagement sent. In the latter case the balance must then be remitted, in order that the first parcel may be supplied. All communications to be sent to Mr Robert Hemmings, 39, New-buildings, Coventry.” One young lady resident in London, who gave evidence, sent the half-crown, and then received a letter stating that she would be employed on forwarding a post-office order to Birmingham for 7s. 6d. She did not do so, but many other ladies were not so wise. The prisoner having obtained the money, ceased to communicate with the applicants. The jury found the prisoner guilty, and the judge sentenced him to twelve months’ imprisonment with hard labour. A more fortunate rogue was one who came into notice at the Sussex Assizes four or five years back. Justice may or may not have overtaken him since, for these fellows have so many and such various aliases that unless you happen to see one tried and hear him sentenced, there is no way of telling who he is or what he may have been. The object of our care at the present moment was known at Bognor in Sussex as Henry Watkis, though as he admitted to one more name, the suggestive one of Walker, even there, it would be difficult to say what might be his name in London or any other large town. He used to advertise to procure situations in London daily and weekly papers, and some complaints having been made to the police, he was taken into custody on a warrant, and appeared at the Chichester Quarter Sessions. From a newspaper report of the time we take some of the following particulars of what must be considered a decided miscarriage of justice. Watkis lived at 6 Jessamine Cottages, Bognor, and when the superintendent of police from Chichester searched his cottage, he found under the stairs 530 letters, consisting of testimonials, replies to, and drafts of advertisements; and in another part of the house he found about 150 envelopes, apparently sent for replies, from which stamps had been cut. When Watkis was apprehended, he acknowledged that he was the person who had been advertising in the name of “B. C., Post-office, Chichester,” by which it seems that he had still another alias, though not in Bognor. On that day he sent a lad to the Chichester post-office, and a large bundle of letters, addressed as above, was brought back from the office. In the course of a few days after Watkis’s apprehension, between seven and eight hundred letters were received at the post-office all directed in the same way. Evidence was given that advertisements were inserted in the _Daily Telegraph_ and _Lloyd’s_ in consequence of orders received in letters signed “Hy. Watkis,” and “Hy. Walker.” About 500 letters were received at Chichester, addressed “X. Y. Z,” in accordance with one of the advertisements, and a very large number were also received at Emsworth under still a fresh set of initials. Altogether nearly 20,000 letters are supposed to have been sent to the two offices for the accused. It was proved that 34s. worth of stamps, all singles, had been sold by Watkis. At the conclusion of the address for the prosecution, the deputy recorder ruled that there was no case to go to the jury as far as the law was concerned. There was no proof that Watkis had, either on his own part or on that of others, no such situations to offer as had been advertised. The jury were not satisfied without hearing the evidence that the prisoner was not guilty. The deputy recorder said they had placed him in a very difficult position, and he must tell them again that the indictment could not be maintained in point of law. Therefore they would be doing a very irregular thing to go into the case. It was for them to find a verdict in accordance with the ruling of the court on the point of law. After some discussion the jury returned into court, and the foreman, in answer to the usual question, said, “If we are obliged to say not guilty, we must; but the jury wish to express a strong opinion.” By advice of the deputy recorder, however, this opinion was not recorded, and the prisoner was accordingly discharged. We will wind up this portion of our list of swindles with an advertisement of the same order, which succeeded in realising a good income for its promoter:-- LADIES and EDUCATED WOMEN are respectfully invited to consult Mrs. EGGLESTON’S SERIES of 60 HOME and other NEW EMPLOYMENTS, which are beginning to attract a large share of public interest for their marked superiority over very unremunerative pursuits usually engaged in.--Enclose an addressed stamped envelope to Mrs Eggleston, ----, Ramsgate, for prospectus. Sixty different businesses to choose from for home employment! Dollseye and leather-apron weaving was doubtless among them; and in sorting out those occupations most suited to her various correspondents, Mrs Eggleston doubtless passed a pleasant time at the seaside, even if she did not lay up riches against the time she returned to London. Turf-swindlers are next upon our list, and no one will doubt that these gentry are well deserving of attention, the more so as, partly by themselves, and partly by means of the shortsightedness peculiar to the public, which causes it to form judgments on subjects it does not understand, welchers and thieves who advertise the most impossible “certainties” have been in numerous instances taken to represent the respectable and honourable turfite. We know it is the custom now to assume that a man is bound to be dishonourable if he be professionally connected with racing in any capacity; and any effort made to contradict wholesale and thoughtless accusations is supposed to be the outcome of self-interest, or the blind devotion of quixotry. Men who are cool and calculating enough when discussing ordinary subjects, become almost rabid when the turf is mentioned; and in most articles which have been written on the subject of sporting advertisements, it is assumed that the scheming concocters of baits for fools are fair representatives of the bookmaking class, and all are alike denounced. Surely it would be as just to assume that the baby-farmers and promoters of home employment whose effusions we have quoted were fair representatives of ordinary commerce, as that the “discretionary-investment” promoter is in any way connected with the legitimate bookmaker. We have no wish here to argue for or against betting; but we cannot help noticing that even in Parliament--which is never supposed to legislate upon what it does not understand!--notorious thieves have been taken to represent the principal advertising bookmakers, and long arguments as to the equity of the Betting-House Act framed on the assumption. During the present year there has been considerable discussion in the House of Commons with reference to the Act which was passed in 1853, Scotland being at the time exempt from its operation. The effect of leaving the “land of cakes” in the position of one who is known to be too virtuous to need protection was not visible for some years; for though the Act of Sir Alexander Cockburn had the effect of clearing away the numerous betting-offices, which were undoubtedly at the time public nuisances and open lures to men whose speculative disposition was in inverse proportion to its means of gratification, the better-class agents, whose business was carried on through the post only, continued to flourish or decay, according to circumstances, until 1869. The attention of the police being then drawn to numerous advertisements which appeared in the London and provincial papers on the subject of betting, a raid was made on a large establishment near Covent Garden: books and papers, clerks and managers, were seized and conveyed to Bow Street; and though the employés were ultimately discharged, the proprietor was ultimately fined heavily, the decision of the magistrate being eventually endorsed by the judges to whom the case was referred on appeal. A flight of betting men resulted, the resting-place of some being Glasgow, and of others Edinburgh; from both of which places they put forth their advertisements as before, safe in the knowledge that so far, at all events, the law was on their side. The extension of the Act of 1853 was of course only matter of time; but the first two or three efforts failed signally, principally on account of the blind animosity of the promoters of the measure, which caused them to frame bills which, for intolerance and hopeless stupidity, have perhaps never been equalled. Another cause was a feeling that, while one form of betting was allowed at Tattersall’s and the chief sporting clubs--a form which had shown itself equal to ruining several peers and hundreds of young men of less degree--it was impolitic to over-legislate with regard to the half-crowns and half-sovereigns of working men and small tradesmen, and to say to them, while yet the terrible “plunging” years were fresh in memory, “Dukes and marquises only shall ruin themselves at will, you, the common people, must be saving as well as industrious.” At last Mr Anderson, one of the members for Glasgow, introduced his Extension Bill (1874), and though his arguments were eminently ridiculous, as he assumed that every advertiser was a swindler, his legislative attempt was a much greater success than any former effort had been in the same direction, and his bill, with a few modifications, eventually became law. As an instance of the feeling to which this measure gave rise, we quote part of a criticism upon it from the most able of the sporting papers which make the turf their principal study, the _Sportsman_, the first journal that refused the advertisements of swindlers whose intentions were evident, a method of self-abnegation which might be studied to advantage by many virtuous newspapers, which, while they weep over the iniquity of sporting advertisements, are strangely oblivious as to the character or effect of those which appear in their own columns. It must be remembered that the “ring” and Tattersall’s betting--of which mention is made in the following--is not interfered with by law, because nothing is staked before the decision of the race but “honour.” This, being often deeply mortgaged, is found insufficient for the demand when settling-day arrives. Says the writer in the _Sportsman_, after demolishing several of the charges made against ready-money betting: “Take the case of those who bet in the ring, or at Tattersall’s, or in the clubs. What guarantee is there between the contracting parties that there shall be no element of fraud, and consequently no immorality in the transaction? And what guarantee is there that one or other of the contracting parties who is induced to bet is not a person who cannot afford to lose? There is an inducement to bet on either side: on the side of the layer and on the side of the backer, and will any one acquainted with the subject be prepared to say that in scores of cases there is not on both parts a total inability to pay in the event of loss? What man is there who, having seen much of the ring, cannot recall many instances of layers betting to such an extent that they could never pay if the fates were against them, and of backers ‘having’ the ring all round without a sovereign in their pockets? Nay, cannot even the general public who are not initiated into such mysteries remember numbers of men who have ruined themselves and others under the system in which Mr Anderson ‘does not feel there is any immorality,’ because in it ‘the element of fraud is not introduced,’ and because under it ‘people who cannot afford to lose’ are not induced to bet? The result of his bill will be that he will drive men from one style of betting, in which they lose or win, knowing the extent of their gains or their losses, to another, under which they may be drawn into hopeless speculation, and perhaps concomitant fraud, simply because they are not called on for ready money. We do not propose to follow Mr Anderson through his ingenious and amusing descriptions of the advertisements of tipsters and ‘discretionary-investment’ people. He was good enough to introduce ourselves as a striking example of the facility with which such persons could foist their schemes on the public, and of the large profits which were derived by certain newspaper proprietors from them. He had the honesty to acknowledge that we had refused to take any further announcements with respect to ‘discretionary investments,’ and that we had persistently cautioned our readers to have nothing to do with them.... As for tipsters, who merely offer to give information for a shilling’s worth of stamps, what immorality can there be in that which is not to be found in the ‘selections’ of the daily newspapers? Even the _Times_, in a roundabout ‘respectable’ way, now and then indicates horses which, in the opinion of its sporting writer, will win certain races, and there is hardly a daily paper in town or country which has not its regular ‘prophet,’ who from day to day lifts up his voice or his pen and offers inducements to the public to bet. Can any one of such journals say to us, ‘I am holier than thou, because I sell my prophecies for a penny, and thou insertest the advertisements of men who want a dozen stamps for theirs’? But the whole policy of objecting to certain classes of advertisements is absurd. If the proprietor of a newspaper were to inquire, even superficially, into the _bona fides_ of all the announcements he makes every day, his journal could not be conducted. If he were even to confine his attention to the examination of the prospectuses of joint-stock companies--and this will appeal to Mr Anderson--he would be in the Bankruptcy Court in six months. Suppose the directors of any one of hundreds of bubble concerns which every year carry away the public with ‘bogus’ announcements were to appear before the manager of the _Times_ with their prospectuses, what would they think if he said, ‘Gentlemen, before I insert this you must prove to me that it is not a gross swindle;’ and how would they proceed to do so?” We admit to a weakness for reading the sporting papers, and can therefore vouch for the truth of what the _Sportsman_ says about its own action. It would have been well, however, if other papers had been as careful, for we happen to know that all the contemporaries of the journal from which we have quoted did not come out with quite such clean hands. Some not only continued to insert the advertisements, despite numerous complaints, but actually _doubled the usual tariff price_ to the thieves. This seems to have been a pretty general proceeding when the discretionary movement was at its height, all papers which continued to insert the specious swindles after the exposures had begun being very careful to be well paid for their trouble. As in these days the plain truth is often the most desperate of libels, we must refrain from particularising; but we should think that no one in his sober senses will dispute the evident fact that such newspaper proprietors as took double pay from men because they knew they were assisting them in robbery, were morally far and away more guilty than the robbers themselves. If any apology is needed for our going so far into the betting subject, it will be found in the almost total ignorance, as well as the blind prejudice, which is every day manifested about the difference between the commission agents and their greatest enemies, the advertising welchers. The raid which drove the bookmakers from London to the principal towns in Scotland seems almost to have been organised by the authorities in the interest of the scamps of the betting world. It certainly was considerably to the latter’s advantage. In the hurry and turmoil which eventuated from the hegira, it was hard for people who were not experts to tell the good men from the bad; and as, the more unfounded a man’s pretensions, the greater were his promises, letters containing remittances almost swarmed into the offices least worthy of confidence. One good, however, resulted from this. The conversion of sinners we have the best authority for regarding as a blessing, and it must be admitted that owing to the manner in which money poured in upon them, and one or two subsequent bits of luck in the way of unbacked horses’ victories, men who went to Glasgow and Edinburgh as adventurers, if not as actual thieves, remained to become not only solvent, but strictly virtuous. It was not, however, until affairs had somewhat settled down in the North, until Scotland began to be regarded as the permanent abode of the layer of odds, that advertisements which on the face of them were gigantic swindles appeared. Hitherto the attempts of impostors had been confined to a semblance of really fair and legitimate business, the firm being existent as long as there was nothing to pay, and _non est_ immediately the blow came. And people who imagine that a bookmaker has nothing to do but take money, would respect him rather more than they do now if after one or two big races they could see his account, and note the scrupulous manner in which every debt is paid, if he bids for respectability in his vocation. A delay of a day in his settlement would lead to unpleasant results, for the very contiguity of the thieves makes the honest men more exact in their transactions. So it is usual, when a man has money to receive by post from a commission agent, for him to get it at once, or most likely not at all. The tipstering and touting fraternities had, while the headquarters of advertising turfites remained in London, been satisfied with short paragraphs intimating their absolute knowledge of the future, and their willingness to communicate such knowledge to the British public for a consideration in the way of stamps, or a percentage on winnings. But when once ready money had been tasted, it seemed to act on these people as blood is said to on tigers, and they determined to have more at all risks. It was useless to try for it a year or so after the migration by applications couched in the ordinary style, for the run of business was by that time divided among certain firms, and the old slow way of giving advice for shillings and sixpences was abhorrent to minds that soared after bank-notes and post-office orders; besides, it had very nearly worn itself out. Fresh moves were therefore necessary, and they were made in various ways, each of which was more or less successful. The most important of them all, and the one with which we have to do now, was the discretionary-investment dodge, which was for a time a complete success, and which would have lasted much longer than it did, had it not been for the faculty of imitation possessed by thieves other than those who inaugurated the venture. Imitation may be the sincerest form of flattery, but even flattery must be painful when it is destructive, and Messrs Balliee & Walter could doubtless have dispensed with the crowds who followed in their wake, and almost made the fortunes of all papers who would take their advertisements. We are not aware whether the system was invented by Balliee & Walter, either or both; but, anyhow, they were its first promoters to any extent, and became thoroughly identified with it. Rumour states that Balliee was a kind of Mrs Harris, and that Walter was the firm. This is nothing to us, though, however much it may be to those who were despoiled of their cash by the discretionary swindle. The advertisements put forth for the benefit of those willing to trust their money blindly into the hands of men of whom they knew nothing must have been very successful, for it is admitted that the letters received in Glasgow for Balliee & Walter were so enormous in quantity that special arrangements had often to be made for their delivery. It is noticeable that swindlers of this description always assume that their firm is not only long established but well known, and the following, taken from the first page of the _Sporting Life_ of the Derby-day 1871, will show that the particular people in question had no scruple about inventing facts for the purpose of substantiating their arguments:-- THE KINGSCLERE LONDON AND GLASGOW TURF COMMISSION AGENCY. Messrs. BALLIEE and WALTER beg to inform their subscribers and the sporting public that, in consequence of increase of business, they have opened a Commission Agency in Glasgow, where in future all commissions will be executed. Gentlemen may rely on liberal treatment and prompt settlement of all claims. All letters answered same day as received. * * * * * MESSRS. BALLIEE AND WALTER (Members of the principal West-End Clubs), 62, JAMAICA STREET, GLASGOW. As heretofore, Commissions of every description, and to any amount, will be undertaken, the following being the leading features:-- INVESTMENTS ON FORTHCOMING EVENTS effected at the best Market Prices. FIRST FAVOURITES backed at the post, and the rate of odds guaranteed as quoted by the sporting paper the investor chooses to adopt. JOCKEYS’ MOUNTS invested upon in accordance with any scale or principle. POST COMMISSIONS for EPSOM MEETING will meet with prompt attention. * * * * * THE EPSOM CARNIVAL. THE OAKS A CERTAINTY. “So if to be a millionaire at present is your aim, Don’t hesitate, but join at once our systematic gains.” Shakspeare, revised and improved. A SAFE INVESTMENT.--WINNING A CERTAINTY. KINGSCLERE RACING CIRCULAR DISCRETIONARY INVESTMENTS. Messrs. BALLIEE and WALTER, Proprietors (Members of the principal West-End Clubs). The only recognised method by which backers of horses can win large sums at all the principal meetings. PROSPECTUSES FREE ON RECEIPT OF ADDRESS. * * * * * MESSRS. BALLIEE and WALTER draw the attention of investors to the all-important fact that they alone of all firms who undertake Discretionary Investments are to be seen personally in the Ring, and are represented at the lists outside, at every meeting throughout the racing season. Some firms, although they state they are present, are never to be seen. SELECTED MORTEMER TO WIN AND A PLACE FOR CHESTER CUP; THE DWARF, GREAT NORTHERN; LORD HAWTHORN, FLYING DUTCHMAN; STANLEY, DONCASTER SPRING HANDICAP; With nearly every other winner at York and Newmarket. We defy contradiction, and court inquiry. RESULTS OF LATE MEETINGS:-- Each £10 investor at York was remitted by Friday’s post (May 12) £108 nett winnings. Each £5 investor at Doncaster was remitted by Monday’s post, £85. Being exclusive of stake and nett return after commission (5 per cent.) had been deducted. Newmarket accounts and winnings were forwarded by Tuesday’s post, May 16. Gentlemen of capital and backers of horses can now judge of the intrinsic value of this infallible system of backing our Final Selection at the post. * * * * * MESSRS. BALLIEE and WALTER will continue their highly successful system of DISCRETIONARY INVESTMENTS at the EPSOM MEETING, where they personally attend, and as such a great influx of business is expected during the Derby Week, they have engaged three extra Commissioners to assist them in carrying out the system, and again are sanguine of realising a gold-achieving victory. AT EPSOM MEETING LAST SUMMER, SEASON 1870, Each £25 investor was returned £703 nett Winnings, in addition to stake deposited. Each investor of £20 in 1868 realised £487. „ £25 „ 1869 „ £324 15s. „ £50 „ 1870 „ £1,406. The above sums were paid to each investor of the specified amounts, and this season we with confidence assert that the investments will be more remunerative to the investor. The Oaks this season will be won by, comparatively speaking, an outsider. Last season’s subscribers will remember our warning them against Hester, and we assure our readers that Hannah will, like all the Baron’s favourites, be doomed to defeat. A clever Northern division have a filly the beau ideal of Blink Bonny, as being tried a 7℔ better animal than Bothwell, and with health must win the fillies’ race in a canter. The owner most unfortunately omitted to enter her for the Two Thousand and Derby, or we should have seen her credited with the first-named event, and first favourite for Blue Riband honours. SEVERAL RODS ARE IN PICKLE for the minor events. Particulars were given in our last week’s Circular (May 12), and even at this distant period we are enabled to predict the success of six certain winners. HAVING HORSES OF OUR OWN, and others identical with our interests, running at this meeting, coupled with the important commissions we have the working of at EPSOM. Our knowledge of market movements, the intimate terms we are on with the various owners, jockeys, and trainers, our social position with the élite of the racing world, enables us to ascertain the intentions of other owners and the chances their respective candidates possess--information far beyond the reach of other advertisers. This is by no means all; we merely pause to take breath and recover self-possession, after a steady perusal of Mr Walter’s benefactions. It is noticeable that the standard of verse employed by these philanthropists is about on a par with their standard of morality. It seems wonderful that any sane person should believe in the existence of a certain guide to the winning-post, and the idea that, if there had been such a thing, Messrs Balliee & Walter would have assuredly used it for themselves alone, never seems to have entered into the heads of their victims, at all events until too late. After the vaunt about position and information, the intimates of “the _élite_ of the racing world” go on:-- MESSRS. BALLIEE and WALTER, alone of all firms that undertake Discretionary Investments, are to be seen personally in the Ring, and they wish to draw the attention of Turf speculators to the fact that NO OTHER ADVERTISERS ARE OWNERS OF HORSES, despite what they may say to the contrary. If their systems equalled ours, would they not accept the challenge given by us for the past twelve months in the various sporting papers? Vide commencement of advertisement. So sanguine are we of success at Epsom, the innumerable and peculiar advantages presented, and every facility being offered for the successful working of our DISCRETIONARY METHOD, that we are enabled to GUARANTEE AGAINST LOSS, and assert with confidence that WINNING IS REDUCED TO AN ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY. DEPOSIT REQUIRED FOR DISCRETIONARY INVESTMENTS AT THE EPSOM SUMMER MEETING:-- £500, £100, £50, £25, £10, or £5. By investing in accordance with this infallible method of backing our final selections at the post, loss is simply an impossibility, and guaranteed against, WINNING BEING REDUCED TO AN ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY. This often-repeated assertion (and not once contradicted for the past five years), and the winnings realised weekly for subscribers who patronise this system, is sufficient to prove its intrinsic value. This is just the sort and class of meeting for gentlemen of capital and systematic investors to invest a £500 or £1,000 bank, being indeed a golden opportunity that all should embrace. The fact of our guaranteeing A WIN EQUAL TO OUR SUCCESS OF LAST SUMMER, and, as previously stated, GUARANTEE TO HOLD THE INVESTOR AGAINST LOSS OF EVEN A FRACTIONAL PART OF CAPITAL EMPLOYED, should be sufficient to convince gentlemen of the true character and value of this infallible method of backing our final selections at the post. CAN ANY SYSTEM BE SO LUCRATIVE TO THE INVESTOR? Our position as owners of horses and proprietors of “THE KINGSCLERE RACING CIRCULAR,” the most successful medium of all Turf advices, and has treble the circulation of any other circular published; the flattering encomiums passed on our “Infallible Method” by the Sporting Press of the United Kingdom, and being recommended by them as “The only recognised method by which backers of horses can win large sums at all the principal meetings;” coupled with our position as the most influential Commission Agents both in the London and Manchester Markets, ensure gentlemen entrusting us with Discretionary Investments being fairly and honestly dealt with, and the successes that we promise and achieve meeting after meeting in the columns of this and other papers. * * * * * FACTS ARE STUBBORN THINGS. The following average results speak volumes in favour of this method:-- The following successes have been achieved this season by THE KINGSCLERE RACING CIRCULAR’S INFALLIBLE METHOD OF DISCRETIONARY INVESTMENTS. Each £25 investor at Enfield received nett winnings value £200. Each £10 investor at Lichfield was remitted by Thursday’s post (April 13) £82 10s., being winnings and stake included, after the 5 per cent. commission had been deducted. Each investor of a £10 stake at the Lincoln Meeting received nett winnings of £180 10s. by Tuesday’s post, March 28. Each investor at Liverpool in accordance with this system, on two investments, viz., THE LAMB Win, SCARRINGTON A place, realised £75 with each £10 invested. A £10 stake realised £200 nett winnings at the Burton (Lincoln) Meeting. A £25 stake invested on Waterloo Cup realised £300, MASTER MCGRATH being selected right throughout the piece, and again in finals with Pretender. A £10 stake realised at the Cambridgeshire Meeting the sum of £240 nett winnings. A £5 stake at the West Drayton Meeting realised £30 nett winnings. Bromley and several other meetings were also highly successful. At Croxton Park each £10 invested realised £102 nett. Each £25 invested at Thirsk realised £150. THE ABOVE AMOUNTS HAVE BEEN PAID THIS SEASON TO ALL PATRONS WHO ENTRUSTED US WITH DISCRETIONARY INVESTMENTS OVER THESE MEETINGS, again proving the value of this method over all others advertised. The past augurs well for the future, as the above successes testify. We personally attend EPSOM, and are always successful at this meeting. A LOSS HAS NEVER OCCURRED TO FOLLOWERS OF OUR SYSTEM, and this season we are even more than ever confident of success. Cash reaching us on Thursday will be in time for two days’ investments; and cash arriving by Friday’s first post will be invested on Oaks winner and the last day of the meeting. Five per cent. deducted from all winnings. THE LARGER THE STAKE, THE GREATER SCOPE IS AVAILABLE FOR LUCRATIVE SPECULATION. LOSS OF STAKE IS IN ALL CASES GUARANTEED AGAINST. The opulent winnings realised weekly throughout the season cannot fail to convince systematic speculators that this system is the par excellence of all methods for winning large sums at each and every important race-gathering. Winnings and account of investments will be forwarded on Monday, May 29. Investors can have their winnings (less 5 per cent.) remitted by open cheque or bank notes, as preferred, by signifying their wishes on that point when remitting cash for investment. One trial is sufficient to prove to the most sceptical the value of this method over all others advertised. Gentlemen who have lost their money in the so-called winning modus swindles, or through following their own fancies, advice of puffing tipsters, newspaper selections, backing first favourites, jockeys’ mounts, or any other system, should give our infallible method a trial at the Epsom Meeting. Cash should be forwarded to reach us on or before Tuesday, addressed to Mr W. H. WALTER, 62 Jamaica-street, Glasgow. If after that date, address letters, &c., &c., W. H. WALTER (of Kingsclere), Box 20, Post-office, Epsom, where due precaution has been taken for their safe delivery. Cheques to be crossed, Bank, Newbury. Letters containing gold or notes to be registered. Scotch and Irish notes taken as cash. Stamps, 20s. 6d. to the pound. P.O. Orders in all cases to be made payable to W. H. WALTER, and drawn on the Post-office, Newbury, Berkshire. ⁂ The successes we achieve weekly, our social status on the Turf, the years we have been before the public, the fact of our being promoters of Discretionary Investments, our selecting Jack Spigot for City and Suburban, Vulcan for Lincoln Handicap, the Lamb for Grand National, Bothwell for Two Thousand, Mortemer (a place), Chester Cup, the Dwarf for Great Northern Handicap; Lord Hawthorn, Flying Dutchman’s Handicap; Stanley, Doncaster Handicap, with nearly every other winner at York and Doncaster, &c., prove the value of our information and the integrity and value of our system of backing Discretionary Investments. * * * * * THE KINGSCLERE RACING CIRCULAR of Friday next (May 26), price 1s., will contain a Review of the Derby running, and the WINNER OF THE ASCOT STAKES, with some important notes anent ROYAL HUNT CUP and ST. LEGER, with selections and keys for all races at the Manchester, Scarborough, Winchester, West Drayton, and Wye Meetings. Notes on the Two Year Old Form of the Season, and a Bird’s-eye View of the Middle Park Plate, being particulars of Walter’s Visit to the Dark Two Year Olds at their Training Grounds. Terms:--Season, 21s.--Address orders and letters, W. H. WALTER (of Kingsclere), Ravenscourt Park, Hammersmith, London, W. In thanking our Derby subscribers for their past support, we respectfully solicit a continuance of their favours on the above terms. The Private Telegraphic Key Book will be issued to Season Subscribers only in the course of a few days. Those that intend renewing their subscriptions should do so at once. It must not be imagined that this advertisement was intended to obtain one large haul before the business was abandoned. With little alteration it ran for a very considerable time in many papers, and the expenses of advertising alone must have been enormous. For it is not to be expected that any blind credulity exhibited itself in the various publishing offices, and hard cash, and plenty of it, had to be expended before a line of Balliee & Walter’s was allowed to appear. It will be seen by what we have quoted that winnings and accounts of investments are promised on Monday, and in true business-like style every depositor received his envelope. With what feverish anxiety many must have torn open the enclosure! So many men, so many minds, says the proverb, and the ways of expressing wrath must have been various indeed. We are, however, not in a position to furnish any particulars as to how the news was received, it is enough to know what the information was. And, as may be guessed, it was not satisfactory. The circulars were always neatly constructed, and set forth with a regret that owing to a combination of untoward circumstances the hopes of the chief investor, “the man at the post,” had been dashed, and for that week--always the first week of such an occurrence--matters had resulted disastrously. Then would follow a statement of account, in which it was shown that investments had been fortunate at the outset, that then they had changed, and that by placing too much money on an apparent certainty, so as to recover the losings, the whole bulk of the bank had departed, never to return. The sums received by Messrs Balliee & Walter were of course various, and according to the amount, so was the table arranged; but there was a great family likeness about them all, the principle being to show that the horses, when they did not win, were very close up, and so seconds, with now and again a third, were nearly always chosen! Thus one £10 stake for the Derby week of 1871--the week in which the advertisement given appears--was accounted for thus:-- Epsom, Tuesday, May 23. Won. Lost. Trial Stakes, Manille, -- £0 10 0 Horton Stakes, Trident, -- 1 0 0 Maiden Plate, Queen Bee, -- 2 0 0 Rous Stakes, Banderolle, -- 0 10 0 Woodcote Stakes, Cremorne (11 to 8 on), £0 14 6 -- Wednesday. Bentinck Plate, Lady Atholstone, -- 0 10 0 Derby, King of the Forest, -- 1 0 0 Stanley Stakes, Hamilton, -- 2 0 0 Match, Lizzie Cowl (5 to 4 on), 0 8 0 -- Manor Stakes, Holdenby, -- 0 10 0 Town Plate, Banderolle, -- 1 0 0 Thursday. Glasgow Plate, Countryman (2 to 1 on), 0 5 0 -- High Level Handicap, Free Trade, -- 0 10 0 Two-year-old Stakes, Clotilde filly, -- 1 0 0 Tadworth Stakes, Manna, -- 2 0 0 £1 7 6 £12 10 0 With five per cent. commission charged on the winnings, this left a balance £1, 3s. 9½d. due to Messrs Balliee & Walter, which it was hoped would be at once remitted. This was cruel, but crueller still was the statement, that had the stake been larger, affairs would have arranged themselves satisfactorily, as a great change took place at the close of Thursday and on Friday, and those whose banks lasted over the first run of ill-luck left off winners of large sums. With the demand for payment of balance came a request which, from its very coolness, must have staggered those who, being once victimised, could see through the swindle, though in very many instances--as if in corroboration of Mr Carlyle’s theory--it was complied with. This was a desire for a fresh trial, and positive security from loss was guaranteed. It is noticeable in the table given that by a judicious selection of races and horses the winnings were bound to be always low, as animals with odds on are selected, and that when stakes are lowest. When on the doubling principle the stake on the chosen winner would be inconveniently large a race was omitted. The returns made were necessarily various, but that given is an accurate representative of the system. Balliee & Walter continued to flourish for a long time; but whether it was that they became individually greedy, whether newspaper proprietors became exorbitant in their demands on the spoil, or whether rivalry affected them, we know not, all we do know is that they committed a most openly outrageous act on a race-course, and the bubble at once burst. It may seem strange that anything discretionary-investment agents, who had been gradually becoming a byword and a reproach, could do would affect their position; but our duty is to record the fact, and not to allow it to be disputed on any theoretic grounds. If they had calmly continued to merely swindle, they might have advertised till now; but they outraged the sanctity of the British race-course, and were damned for all time, if not to all eternity. They had become possessed by some means or other of a hurdle-racer called Goodfellow, and two or three weeks before one of the suburban gate-money meetings they made a match for him to run a race at it against a very moderate mare. Immediately this was done they circularised all customers, telling them to be sure and back Goodfellow, as he could not possibly lose, and stating that on account of very heavy investments already made, they could afford, as a favour to their clients, to return them double the odds which would be laid against Goodfellow on the day. In the _Kingsclere Racing Circular_, a weekly pamphlet issued by these honourable gentlemen, we find under date March 10, 1871, the following ingenious application. This, it has been since proved, brought heavy sums to the Ravenscourt Park exchequer, whence it was not allowed to depart, Messrs Balliee & Walter, like true and legitimate bookmakers, preferring to lay the 6 to 4’s against their own horse themselves, rather than that their patrons should be inconvenienced by having to take shorter prices from others:-- CROYDON SPECIAL INVESTMENT. The match--Goodfellow v. Harriett--will come off at Croydon on Tuesday next. It is simply a matter of putting the coin down and picking it up again. It is any odds on our horse, and as we wish our Subscribers to participate in this certainty, we will undertake to obtain for them 6 to 4 for all cash sent, which must reach Mr Walter, Ravenscourt Park, if possible by Monday evening, and not later than Tuesday’s first post. Gibson is sure to back Harriett for a 1000, and probably bring her favourite. The sole reason of us wishing Subscribers to allow us to invest for them, is to prevent them rushing on and spoiling the market, which will be to their interest as well as our own. We have engaged one of the cleverest cross country riders of the day to ride Goodfellow, and our horse never was so fit and well as at the present time. Daniels will have the mount of Harriett. Such a chance may not occur again throughout the season. Investors should speculate a £50 or £100 Bank. We cannot undertake to invest more than £300 for any one of our patrons. By this means Balliee & Walter obtained from their purblind dupes a large amount of money with which to back Goodfellow, and of this they of course placed as much as they could upon Harriett, the opposing candidate. In the race, if race so iniquitous a transaction can be called, the discretionary-investment horse was, as might have been expected, “pulled,” so that Balliee & Walter had all the money they received to the good, besides what they won from the unsuspecting by backing the animal they had pretended to oppose. This led to their gradually disappearing from the front pages of the newspapers, though they continued their business under an _alias_ very successfully. Walter was eventually fined a hundred pounds at one of the metropolitan courts, under the Betting-House Act, 1853, for having carried on a part of his business at Hammersmith. It seems rather ludicrous that a man should have been fined for what he in reality never did. But lawyers and magistrates could not distinguish the difference between betting and only pretending to bet, so they fined Mr Walter just as they would have done if he had been a really honourable man, and had therefore deserved punishment. From the discretionary-investment class of turf-swindler we will now pass on to another, quite as ingenious and very often as dangerous. A few years back, when opportunity served--that is, when the honest layer of odds was harassed by the police and driven from London, and when good men and bad were almost irremediably mixed up--a sharp rogue hit upon an idea for making the tipstering and private-advice business a means to quite a new phase of imposition. This was known among those who profited by it as “forcing the voucher,” and a very pretty little game it was while it lasted, though the profits of pioneers were of course considerably diminished as soon as ever the secret got wind, by the imitative faculty to which reference has been already made. Commencing, as usual, with small advertisements and large profits, forcers in time found themselves, by stress of competition, obliged to spend a good share of their hard earnings in specially-tempting invitations to those who would go any but the right way towards being wealthy; or else to seek other courses. So in 1872 we find three or four firms occupying a large share of the papers, and giving forth promises without stint. Whether the original forcer was in any of these partnerships it is impossible to tell, as the names were, as a rule, fictitious, and often changed; but whether or not, it is certain that those who advertised heaviest drove all small thieves from the field, and so, two years back, the business, as far as we are concerned, was carried on chiefly by Adkins & Wood, Robert Danby & Co., Marshall & Grant, and James Rawlings & Co., who advertised quite separately, but whose notifications might very easily have been the work of one pen. We will therefore take Rawlings & Co. to represent the fraternity, and in their advertisement which appeared at the end of April 1872 will be found the peculiarities of all the others. This is it:-- DIGBY GRAND sent to every season subscriber, and for a place at 6 to 1, to every reader of THE PREMIER RACING CIRCULAR. Proprietors, JAMES RAWLINGS and Co., 65, YORK PLACE, EDINBURGH. Published by the Proprietors every Saturday, at their chief office, 65 York Place, Edinburgh. THE PREMIER RACING CIRCULAR still maintains its well-merited reputation as the only infallible and unerringly-successful winning guide, by the aid of which private backers can and do, week by week, realise hundreds of pounds with perfect safety over the principal races throughout the kingdom. The uninterrupted series of successes which have attended its vaticinations during past seasons have been gloriously crowned by the success of every special investment advised in its pages this season, as will be seen by the following list of winners already given:-- Price at which clients were Race. Selection. Result. put on. Croydon Footman Won 15 to 1 Lincoln Handicap Guy Dayrell Won 20 to 1 Grand National Casse Tête Won 25 to 1 Nottingham Handicap Flurry Won 10 to 1 Great Warwick Handicap Cedric the Saxon Won 12 to 1 Warwick Grand Annual Snowstorm Won 7 to 1 Northamptonshire Stakes Messager Won 8 to 1 City and Suburban Digby Grand Won 25 to 1 Thus a £10 stake on each of our selections already made this season has now won the handsome sum £1,164 after deducting our commission of 5 per cent. If one statement of the above glorious triumph is untrue, we boldly invite our subscribers and clients to expose us in the fullest manner in the sporting papers. Promptitude, despatch, exactitude, and liberality, as in the past, will ever be our watchwords in the future. Every reader of “The Sporting Life” is earnestly invited to send at once for this week’s number, as the information therein contained will enable everyone to win a little fortune over that splendid and highly lucrative mode of investment-- A DOUBLE EVENT That cannot be upset. The positive Winners of THE TWO THOUSAND and ONE THOUSAND GUINEAS. It is rarely that we advise this method of investing, but when we have sent out to our clients a double event it has never failed to come off. Last year we advised a double event for these races-- Two Thousand Bothwell Won One Thousand Hannah Won And this year both our selections are, if possible, greater and more undeniable certainties. THE TWO THOUSAND GUINEAS. Of all the good things that in the course of a long and varied experience on the Turf it has ever been our good fortune to be possessed of, we cannot recall a single occasion on which every attendant circumstance combined so surely to render, as in the present instance, the race such an absolute foregone conclusion for our selection. The trial which took place this week was unprecedented in its severity, and, to the surprise of owner and trainer, the animal performed so far beyond their most sanguine expectations or hopes as to show them that success is reduced to the greatest moral certainty ever known in the history of the English Turf. This is an opportunity similar to those that have made the fortunes of many of our most wealthy speculators, for whom, as in the present instance, victory is a foregone conclusion and defeat a moral impossibility. Everyone should seize the opportunity of reaping the rich harvest of golden fruit that awaits the bold speculator of foregone conclusions like this. THE ONE THOUSAND GUINEAS. It is to us an easy task to select the winner of this race, as the immense superiority she enjoys over every other animal engaged (known only to owner, trainer, and ourselves) is so vast that this race will be little more than an exercise canter for this speedy filly. So quietly has this good thing been nursed by the shrewd division to which the mare belongs, that a real good price is now to be had, though when this superb specimen of an English thoroughbred is seen at the post, we are confident that even money will be eagerly snapped up by those who till then neglect to back her. THE DOUBLE EVENT, as stated above, is as sure to come off as these lines are in print. Send then at once for this week’s number, and do not delay an hour if you wish to land a fortune over these two genuine certainties. We could wish no better opportunity to display the genuine good things sent out by the “Premier Racing Circular” than these two races present, and we beg that everyone will at once send six stamps and stamped addressed envelope for this week’s number, and stand these morals to win them a fortune. Address-- JAMES RAWLINGS and Co., 65, YORK PLACE, EDINBURGH. If we were not certain that these men got large sums of money from willing victims, it would seem almost impossible that people could be found credulous enough to believe that absolute certainty could be secured on the turf. Certainty of losing is naturally much easier than certainty of winning, and yet even loss cannot be reduced to less than imminent probability so long as a horse goes to the post unphysicked, and the jockey is not allowed to openly pull him. And so, though no one will attempt to defend Messrs Rawlings & Co., their dupes deserve but the smallest amount of pity; for even the most foolish of them must have known that certainty of winning to them must have meant certainty of losing to the other side, and that therefore, even if the contract had been carried out, somebody must have been swindled. If it were not for the greed and avarice which mainly direct the actions of those who are generally known as fools, magsmen, sharpers, discretionary-investment commissioners, and voucher-forcers would have to take to honest employment. This may seem a truism, yet when a skittle-sharper or “street-mugger” is tried in a police court, and convicted for having victimised a “flat,” it never seems to strike the magistrate or the general public that the prisoner simply swindled a man who had all the will but not the ability to swindle him. And there can be no reasonable doubt--we should much like to see the matter tried--that the principal supports of rogues are the most grasping, selfish, and hard-hearted of mortals, and not at all the soft, good-natured bumpkins that they are generally depicted. We should not like to trust to either the honour or the honesty of any man who had been concerned even as a victim in one of the transactions which now and again appear in the police reports; and if we had any sympathy, which is not very likely, to bestow on either side, it would certainly be given to the man who gets sent to prison. Rawlings & Co. seem to have managed the spring campaign of 1872 very successfully, for while other members of the same brotherhood had to drop out of the papers or to appear in new guise after April, we find our heroes still merrily addressing the public from the front page of the sporting papers of June 8, and as able to guarantee freedom from loss as ever. And though it may not seem long from the end to April to this early part of June, it must be recollected that within that space several very important meetings are held, and that dismal gaps are found in the ranks of both “wrong” and “right” men after a Derby, especially after such a Derby as Cremorne’s, which found out the weak spots in a good many big books, and altered the prospects of many a turfite, professional and amateur. So finding Rawlings so well through, we were tempted at the time to communicate with him, and discover the principle upon which he “forced the voucher.” Here is his advertisement of June 8, in which he glories in past triumphs and feels confident of future successes:-- CREMORNE, QUEEN’S MESSENGER, AND REINE. JAMES RAWLINGS and Co., the oldest established Turf advisers in Great Britain; proprietors of THE PREMIER RACING CIRCULAR, the most successful winning guide extant. * * * * * THE PREMIER RACING CIRCULAR, selected Cremorne and Reine. * * * * * THE PREMIER RACING CIRCULAR of this day contains three certainties. * * * * * THE PREMIER RACING CIRCULAR’S selections pulled off the double event for the Derby and Oaks, likewise Queen’s Messenger for a place at 4 to 1. * * * * * THE PREMIER RACING CIRCULAR has this season selected each and every important winner, as may be seen by referring to back numbers of this publication, invaluable alike to large and small speculators. The proprietors beg respectfully to draw the attention of that section of the public who have neglected to take advantage of the opportunities that they have, for the past three months, weekly drawn attention to in the columns of this and other journals, that this week’s number of the Premier Racing Circular will contain three of the greatest morals and most undeniable certainties ever known in this or any other era of the Turf’s history, namely, the winner of THE ASCOT STAKES, a real good thing, at a real good price. Over this race any gentleman may safely invest as heavily as he may think fit, as we know that our selection cannot be beaten; the course is peculiarly adapted to the animal’s action, and the stable have satisfied themselves, past question or doubt, that he possesses both speed and stamina to land this event with the utmost ease. THE ROYAL HUNT CUP is equally a certainty for a veritable flyer, whose merits have hitherto been so cleverly concealed by the owner, that the handicapper has no idea of his sterling excellence. He is undergoing a special preparation for this race, the best light-weight in the world will be in the saddle, and a long price is now to be had. THE NORTHUMBERLAND PLATE. We have never yet missed selecting the winner of this race, and as the cleverest division on the Turf, as to whose movements we are always au fait, have specially laid themselves out to secure this prize, the public may rely upon it that, as in past years, we shall again select the winner. This week’s number contains full particulars of these undeniable and gold-producing morals, in addition to a mass of other information invaluable to backers. No one should invest a shilling on any one of the above races without first forwarding us six stamps and stamped directed envelope for this week’s issue. Address-- JAMES RAWLINGS and Co., 65, YORK PLACE, EDINBURGH. Six stamps and a stamped directed envelope were accordingly sent, and in return we received a copy of the _Premier Racing Circular_, dated June 6, which was full of congratulations, and which promised far more than even the advertisements did. One paragraph in it was specially worthy of attention. It ran thus: “_We have several commissions still unsettled over the Derby and Oaks. Gentlemen holding winning vouchers will please send them in at once._” What could be more fair, honourable, and straightforward than this; and who would think of suspecting Rawlings of unfair dealing? Yet, at the very time the invitation we have quoted appeared, the people who sent in their winning vouchers received in return, not money, but the following circular, which we reprint exactly, and which, with the alteration of the signature and the name of the meeting, will do for any firm and any week’s racing the reader may choose. This is one of a lot we have collected at times from many victims:-- 65 YORK PLACE, EDINBURGH. SIR, We regret to inform you that, in consequence of some of our important Accounts not having been settled at Epsom this week, we must unavoidably postpone the settlement. This is the first time that such an unpleasantness has occurred, but we can assure you that we have done all in our power in the matter. No one regrets this unfortunate affair more than ourselves, after serving the public so faithfully for such a number of years, and all we can do is to remit you immediately we receive winnings from the temporarily embarrassed Commissioners. Meanwhile, We remain, Yours faithfully, JAMES RAWLINGS & CO. There is no boast in the statement, that when we received the _Premier Racing Circular_, we were pretty well acquainted with the manner in which Rawlings conducted his business--it would be a poor thing to boast about--and so we turned to the envelope to look for the vouchers we knew would be there. And there they were, enclosed in a piece of paper, on which was the information, that owing to the large sums they had invested when the horses were at long shots, they could afford to return odds considerably over the current market; and winding up with a request that intending backers would at once forward the amounts for which the vouchers were filled in, or any part of it which would suit them. Yes, there they were, three in number, looking like cheques--the first, No. 32,323, being for the Ascot Stakes, and bearing the bet of £200 to £10 against Palmerston for the Ascot Stakes. The second was numbered 36,162, and said £300 to £10 Pitchfork for the Royal Hunt Cup; and the third was 39,346, and was to the tune of £400 to £20 Minerve for the Northumberland Plate. And this is the advice with regard to them, given in the _Circular_, without the alteration of even a letter:-- _THE PITCHFORK, PALMERSTON, AND MINERVE COMMISSION_ We have been able to work the Commission (Pitchfork, Palmerston, and Minerve), at an unusual liberal price, and we herewith offer for your acceptance, as per enclosed vouchers, the very advantageous bets about these absolute morals. Should you accept the whole (which we strongly recommend), you will please forward stake money by return and retain vouchers; if only a portion, return same, with stake money, and a corrected voucher to amount of stake will be at once forwarded to you. In the remote contingency of your not accepting any portion of either bet, you will please return vouchers without a moment’s delay, that we may have an opportunity of offering the bets to other clients. Those who wish to back Pitchfork, Palmerston, and Minerve for a place, can be on at one-fourth the odds, but to no greater amount than a £50 stake. The secret of forcing the voucher, therefore, lay in the fact of offering far longer prices than could be obtained of any one who intended to pay when the races were over; for on June 6th, 1872, the day on which the vouchers were drawn, the market prices, as quoted in the papers Mr Rawlings advertised in, were 10 to 1 against Palmerston for the Ascot Stakes; 15 to 1 against Pitchfork for the Royal Hunt Cup; and 10 to 1 against Minerve for the Northumberland Plate. Now as double the fair price is offered, and as the quoted market represents the odds which are laid at the chief clubs by the chief men, who can say that the victims of Rawlings deserve pity? The ability of Rawlings & Co. as tipsters is strangely shown in this transaction. In their circular, Pitchfork, Palmerston, and Minerve are their selections for the several races, even to people who only accepted their advice and did not intrust them with commissions. They assert that they have positive information that these horses cannot lose. Under the head of “Royal Hunt Cup,” and perfectly independent of anything but the private-advice department, they say, in reference to Pitchfork: “This is a ‘Woodyeates moral,’ and all must be on. Every now and then this influential coterie throws in for a fortune, and when they do, the good thing invariably comes off. We have never missed the winner of this race, and now, with all confidence, we assure every client that no better opportunity could possibly occur of landing a rich and substantial stake. Some of our clients will neglect the opportunities we frequently lay before them; but on this occasion as the price is so liberal, we do heartily hope that one and all will go in for a rattling good stake.” Then about Palmerston for the Ascot Stakes, they tell us that “previous to the great Epsom event, Palmerston performed such a wonderful feat with the Brother to Flurry as to show the stable that the Ascot Stakes were completely at their mercy. Mr Payne and the owners who train at Fyfield look upon defeat as impossible, and will stand their horses to win a very large stake. We cannot recollect a more genuine investment, and must urge all to stand this moral freely.” For the Northumberland Plate they are, if anything, still more confident, their article on it containing this: “Another triumph awaits the French contingent in the Northumberland Plate, as Minerve, own sister to Miss Hervine, is certain to carry off this event.” Rawlings’s prophecies might have turned out right if they had had a chance, but he does not seem to have possessed even a hint as to what would be started for the various stables, for not one of the three selected ever saw the course on which victory was to be so easily obtained. What sorry rogues make fortunes nowadays! It is more than likely that Rawlings, or whatever this trickster’s name was, like his own selections on this particular occasion, had never seen a race-course. Strange as this may seem, it is not at all improbable; for there are lots of men who live by the turf, and who are as conversant with pedigrees and performances of horses as can be, yet who know nothing beyond what they see on paper, and who, authorities on racing when in Fleet Street, would be quite nonplussed if taken to Newmarket among the horses whose names they know so well. We trust we have now made plain the two greatest swindles in connection with the turf, and at the same time shown the unworthiness of even the pretence to knowledge made by them. But we have no wish that readers, forgetting the scamps with whom we set out, shall conclude this chapter with the impression that there are no thieves so bad as sporting thieves, and so we will fall back on some swindling advertisements of the general kind, from the general papers, which are not only as roguish, but as ignorant of the subjects selected as the effusions of Rawlings himself. Here is one from the _Weekly Times_ of a couple of years or so back:-- WONDERS OF THE HOROSCOPE.--Any person sending an addressed envelope, age, height, colour of hair and eyes, together with 13 stamps, will receive within 24 hours a correct likeness of their future husband or wife, and date of marriage.--Address, A. WEMYSS, 2, Drake-street, Red Lion-square, London. We don’t mind giving Mr Wemyss--what an aristocratic name, by the way!--a gratuitous advertisement, though we hope that the first customer he gets through our instrumentality will be the reverse of profitable. Wemyss can do better still at a better price, as other advertisements show. He is a milder form of rascal than Methralton, who makes offer as follows in several of the weekly papers, and who is not content with his effect on the mind, but actually wishes to interfere with the matter:-- WONDROUS ARTS.--Your future revealed--Seven years, six stamps; lifetime twelve stamps. State age. Love Charm, sixteen stamps. Medicine for removing Gravel and Private diseases in a few days, without injuring the constitution, sixty stamps. Methralton’s Bible Key, twenty-six stamps. Book of Spirits, 408 pages, thirty-two stamps. Millennial Prophecies, Gratis. METHRALTON, the Seer, Daventry. Another kind of scoundrel, whose victims are like those of the home-employment robbers, mostly poor helpless girls, and whose villany is far greater than that of the discreet Walter or the forcible Rawlings, is the fellow who advertises constantly for actors and actresses, who may be perfectly inexperienced, but who are to get salaried engagements through his influence. His form varies, but this is one of his concoctions, and is from the _Daily Telegraph_:-- THE STAGE.--WANTED, TWELVE LADIES and GENTLEMEN (ages 16 to 40) for salaried engagements. Totally inexperienced persons may apply.--Communicate, by letter only, enclosing photograph and thirteen stamps, Histrionicus ----. This is either a swindle on the girls, or else on the members of the British public who pay their money to see acting. It is rumoured that now and again women moving in a certain hemisphere give large sums for the purpose of appearing on the stage. This may be, but we fancy the managers are quite shrewd enough not to let outsiders like the advertiser, Histrionicus, interfere in such delicate matters. It might be as well to ask why the “promotion in absentiâ” dodges are still allowed to parade themselves in the leading papers, or in fact why people should be permitted to take upon themselves titles they have no right to. Possibly the matter is thought too ridiculous to call for interference, but there are other qualities besides those of ridicule and contempt to be found in connection with the following, which is an advertisement having no particularly distinctive features, and therefore will represent the thousands of the same order that appear during the year, and for payment of which a considerable number of spurious degrees must be manufactured:-- PROMOTION IN ABSENTIÂ.--Qualified surgeons, chemists, dentists, oculists, chiropodists, and professors of music or arts aspiring to a doctor’s degree, may communicate by letter to Professor ----. Qualified, forsooth! why, any one who liked to pay could obtain the most honourable degree for the biggest idiot in Earlswood Asylum. One of the chief difficulties to be encountered over such a bad business as this is that the good and the sham degree holders very often get irretrievably mixed up in certain phases of society. Physicians, surgeons, and gentlemen in similar position are protected, and so little dealing is done in medical, surgical, or chemical degrees; but bachelors and masters of arts and doctors of laws are made by the score, the recipients of honours being in a majority of cases men whose ignorance must be probed before it is appreciated, but whose depth requires no delving whatever. Now, when a man of this kind elects to call himself doctor, or puts B.A. or M.A. after his name, even those who know what little right he has to the degree are hardly quixotic enough to decline giving him the title he covets; so in a year or so, Dr Brown or Dr Jones has as firm a hold upon his title as if he had obtained it by a personal examination under the most rigorous system; and strangers who are unable to discover for themselves the unworthiness of the pretender, give him all the honours which belong to the learned. Sometimes the applicant swindles the professor, and we not long back heard of an aspiring youth who paid for the degrees of M.A. and LL.D. with a cheque and a bill, each being for £20, and both being dishonoured. It is a pity that these two scamps cannot be treated to three months in the House of Correction, just to encourage all other professors and practisers of small and paltry swindles. There is yet another kind of rogue for whom we have room, who addresses his victims by means of advertisements. This is the sorrowful Christian, who makes the profession of religion his stock-in-trade, and finds it profitable. Under the guise of sanctity there is hardly anything at which he will stick--he is the foulest and nastiest of all the foul and nasty birds who have supplied material for this chapter. He is as great an impostor in his pretences as any of the other swindlers are in theirs, and so it would be just as fair to blame religion for the existence of the sanctimonious scoundrel, or commerce for the home-employment agent, as it is to blame racing for the welcher and the forcer. Here is a sample of the whining and despicable hound, compared with whom, to our taste, the ordinary pickpocket is a gentleman:-- TO THE LORD’S PEOPLE.--A dear Christian tradesman, who about four months ago drew from the Savings’ Bank £60, his all therein, to give to a fellow Christian who urgently required that sum, “thus lending and hoping for nothing again” but from a bountiful “God whose name is Love,” is now in WANT OF FORTY POUNDS to pay all demands upon him, ere he accepts a call to the ministry of the Everlasting Gospel, which he believes his Heavenly Father is about to make known unto him. A lady, his friend in Christ the Lord as revealed, in the power of God the Holy Ghost, thus ventures in simple faith to try the door of Providence in his behalf; and would leave the issue in the hands of Him who has heart, hand, breath and purse of men at sovereign command. The smallest help will be gratefully acknowledged by the Advertiser. Address to ----. If this is not blasphemy, what is it? Imagine the greasy smirk of satisfaction with which the coin of the faithful was received and divided between the dear Christian tradesman and his lady friend. There is something suspiciously jocular about the wind-up of the application; but then, as an old proverb informs us, people who are doing well can afford the luxury of laughter. Another plan of the religious rascal is to answer applications for loans, and under the guise of philanthropy and Christianity to offer the required accommodation. By this means, and by the exhibition of certain forms, he obtains a deposit from the unfortunate would-be borrower, and decamps. This is, however, but a means of relaxation, and is simply indulged in at intervals, just to keep the hand in while more important business is in course of projection. The loan-office advertisements may to a certain extent be regarded as swindles, especially when they promise money without security. Depend upon it, no professional money-lender is likely to let out his cash without security any more than without interest. Still loan-office advertisers are not swindlers absolutely, as they do lend money and to some extent perform their contracts. The papers at the present time swarm with their advertisements, and the curious reader may inspect them as they appear, as for obvious reasons we must decline making a selection, which might be the reverse of judicious, more especially as the notices do not come strictly within our limits. Now and again temporary offices are started, generally in poor neighbourhoods, for the purpose of bagging the inquiry fees, and with no intention whatever of lending money. Their general ultimatum is, “Security offered insufficient;” and a good story is told of a gentleman who from motives of curiosity applied for a loan of £5, and gave as guarantors two of the most notoriously wealthy bankers of the City. In due course he received the usual notification, that the security offered was not sufficiently “responsible,” and that the accommodation could not therefore be afforded. This brings us to the end of our list of swindlers and thieves; and if we have succeeded in our endeavour to show that the advertising rogue belongs to no particular class or profession, and that it is idle to assume that any rank or class is answerable for him, we shall be well satisfied. To our mind, and we have studied the subject rather closely, the advertising swindler is a swindler _per se_, and attaches himself to anything which offers a return, without caring what its title so long as it has claims to attention. It would be a great pity, therefore, to assume that these men have anything to do with the respectable forms of the professions--from sporting to religion--they from time to time adopt, and a great blunder to blame any body of respectable men because a lot of rogues choose to assume their business. As long as there are advertising swindlers, some profession or other must have the discredit of them. There are, however, still advertisement swindles of a totally different description from any that have been here mentioned or referred to. There is the swindle of the newspaper proprietor who guarantees a circulation which has no existence, and who, when he takes the money of those who insert notices in his journal, knows that he is committing a deliberate and barefaced robbery. There are in London, at the present time, papers that have absolutely no circulation, in the proper sense of the word, whatever; and of which only a sufficient number of copies is printed to supply those who advertise in them, according to the custom observed in many offices. The readers, therefore, pay a rather heavy premium for the privilege of perusing each other’s announcements. It may seem that this state of affairs cannot possibly continue long; but whatever theorists may make of it, we can speak with confidence of more than six papers which to our knowledge have possessed no buyers whatever for more than six years, yet their proprietors get good livings out of them--better, perhaps, than they would if sale and not swindle was the reason of their being--and calculate on continuing this state of things for their time at all events. After them the deluge may come as soon as it likes. We remember quite well an office in which six of these newspapers were printed--that is, supposed to be printed, for with the exception of an alteration of title and a rearrangement of columns, and with, very rarely, the substitution of a new leading article for an old one, these six newspapers were all one and the same to the printers. Now, of course, had there been any chance of one man buying two copies of this instrument of robbery under any two of its distinct names, the swindle would have run some risk of being exposed; but so far as we could discover, there was no desire ever shown to buy even one, the circulation being exclusively among the advertisers. A very small circulation which finds its way in any particular direction may often be far more useful to one who wishes his notice to travel that way than would the largest circulation in the world; but the intensest of optimists could hardly discern any likelihood of benefit in the system just noticed. Still another kind of advertisement swindle--still more distinct from the general run of swindles--is that by which certain ambitious persons try to obtain a spurious notoriety. Their desire is in no way connected with trade, though as it has in its effect the passing off of inferior wares upon the public as though they were of first-class quality, the word swindle very properly applies to their little trickery. These men pine for recognition in the public prints, and so long as their names are mentioned, no matter how, they regard the task of achieving a cheap immortality as progressing towards completion. Literature and the various phases of art suffer most from these impostors, who very often not only attain notoriety by means of the specious puffery they exercise, but by it obtain money as well. No one can be blind to the manner in which some very small literary lights manage to keep their names continually paraded before the public; and the puffs are so worded that the unthinking are bound to believe that these rushlight writers are the souls of the literature and journalism of the present day. Said the publisher of a magazine, who is not renowned for either taste or education, when it was proposed that a really eminent man should write him an article, “No; I dessay he’s very good, but I want men with names. I can get Montague Smith and Chumley Jones and Montmorency Thomson, all famous, and all glad to write for two pound a sheet--why, I never heard of your man, and yet he wants ten times as much. I never see his name in the papers.” This was the publisher who is said to have refused to pay for the refrain of a set of verses except where it first occurred, and demanded that the rest should be measured off and deducted from the price originally agreed upon. So not only in the case of the publisher, but in that of the public do these small potatoes, who have a knack of glossing over their mean surnames with high-sounding prefixes, render themselves representatives of an institution the real leaders in which are often quite unknown out of their own circles. For every thousand familiar with the name of Shakespeare Green, the writer of “awfuls,” there is not one who can tell you who are the editors of the leading daily papers and principal reviews. The anonymity of journalism has its advantages, and very likely the directors of public opinion are content to remain behind its curtain; but it is through this same anonymous arrangement that the smallest of small fry measured on their merits are enabled to parade themselves as they do. There are, we know, many deservedly well and widely known writers for newspapers and serials who are really what they profess to be, and who depend upon nothing so much as merit, for success; but even they must admit the truth of what we have said, and must often feel very like the apples did as they went down stream in the fable. It might be as well here to say a few words about the advertisement swindles that are perpetrated by means of photographs. It has long been a crying evil that at certain theatres shameless women who wear many diamonds and few clothes are allowed to appear upon the stage and play at acting. Much training enables them now and again to deliver half-a-dozen lines without displaying their ignorance and peculiarity of aspiration too glaringly; but they cannot be depended on to do even this much with certainty. Sometimes they sing in the smallest of small voices, and a few of them have mastered the breakdown and the _can-can_; but their chief attraction consists, to the audience, in their lavish display of limbs and “neck,” and, to the manager, in their requiring but nominal salaries. One would have thought it sufficient that such creatures should exhibit themselves to the people who choose to go and see them; but it is not so, they get themselves photographed in the most extraordinary attitudes, and their counterfeit presentments leer out from the shop windows upon passers-by in much the same manner as in the flesh--sometimes in very much of it--they leer at their friends in the stalls and boxes. Now and again we see the portrait of one real and justly-celebrated actress surrounded by these demireps, but of late what are known as actresses’ portraits consist mainly of those to whom the title is convenient, or of those who combine a little of the actress with a great deal of the courtesan. Those artists whose portraits should grace the photographers’ show-cases hardly care to run the risk of being mixed up in the questionable society they see there; and we can vouch for the fact that in a leading thoroughfare, of twenty-five English portraits exhibited in a window as those of actresses, at which we were looking but recently, there were not five that were really what they pretended to be. Of hoaxes which come within our scope a very noticeable one took place in August 1815. A short time previous to the departure of the French Emperor from our coast on his last journey, to St Helena, a respectably-dressed man caused a quantity of handbills to be distributed through Chester, in which he informed the public that a great number of genteel families had embarked at Plymouth, and would certainly proceed with the British regiment appointed to accompany the ex-Emperor to St Helena: he added further, that the island being dreadfully infested with rats, his Majesty’s ministers had determined that it should be forthwith effectually cleared of those noxious animals. To facilitate this important purpose, he had been deputed to purchase as many cats and thriving kittens as could possibly be procured for money, in a short space of time; and therefore he publicly offered in his handbills “sixteen shillings for every _athletic full-grown tom-cat_, ten shillings for every _adult female puss_, and half-a-crown for every thriving _vigorous kitten_ that could _swill_ milk, pursue a ball of thread, or fasten its young fangs in a dying mouse.” On the evening of the third day after this advertisement had been distributed, the people of Chester were astonished by an irruption of a multitude of old women, boys, and girls into their streets, each of whom carried on his or her shoulders either a bag or a basket, which appeared to contain some restless animal. Every road, every lane, was thronged with this comical procession; and before night a congregation of nearly three thousand cats was collected in Chester. The happy bearers of these sweet-voiced creatures proceeded (as directed by the advertisement) towards one street with their delectable burdens. Here they became closely wedged together. A vocal concert soon ensued. The women screamed; the cats squalled; the boys and girls shrieked aloud, and the dogs of the street howled to match, so that it soon became difficult for the nicest ear to ascertain whether the canine, the feline, or the human tones were predominant. Some of the cat-bearing ladies, whose dispositions were not of the most placid nature, finding themselves annoyed by their neighbours, soon cast down their burdens and began to box. A battle royal ensued. The cats sounded the war-whoop with might and main. Meanwhile the boys of the town, who seemed mightily to relish the sport, were actively employed in opening the mouths of the deserted sacks, and liberating the cats from their forlorn situations. The enraged animals bounded immediately on the shoulders and heads of the combatants, and ran spitting, squalling, and clawing along the undulating sea of skulls, towards the walls of the houses of the good people of Chester. The citizens, attracted by the noise, had opened the windows to gaze at the fun. The cats, rushing with the rapidity of lightning up the pillars, and then across the balustrades and galleries, for which the town is so famous, leaped slap-dash through the open windows into the apartments. Never, since the days of the celebrated Hugh Lupus, were the drawing-rooms of Chester filled with such a crowd of unwelcome guests. Now were heard the crashes of broken china; the howling of affrighted dogs; the cries of distressed damsels, and the groans of well-fed citizens. All Chester was soon in arms; and dire were the deeds of vengeance executed on the feline race. Next morning above five hundred dead bodies were seen floating on the river Dee, where they had been ignominiously thrown by the two-legged victors. The rest of the invading host having evacuated the town, dispersed in the utmost confusion to their respective homes. In 1826 the following handbill was circulated in Norwich and its neighbourhood for some days previous to the date mentioned in it, and caused great excitement:-- _St James’s Hill, back of the Horse Barracks._ The Public are respectfully informed that Signor CARLO GRAM VILLECROP, the celebrated Swiss Mountain Flyer, from Geneva and Mont Blanc, is just arrived in this City, and will exhibit with a Tyrolese Pole, fifty feet long, his most astonishing Gymnastic Flights, never before witnessed in this country. Signor Villecrop has had the great honour of exhibiting his most extraordinary Feats on the Continent before the King of Prussia, Emperor of Austria, the Grand Duke of Tuscany, and all the resident Nobility in Switzerland. He begs to inform the Ladies and Gentlemen of this City that he has selected St James’s Hill and the adjoining hills for his performances, and will first display his remarkable strength in running up the hill with his Tyrolese Pole between his teeth. He will next lay on his back, and balance the same Pole on his nose, chin, and different parts of his body. He will climb upon it with the astonishing swiftness of a cat, and stand on his head at the top; on a sudden he will leap three feet from the Pole without falling, suspending himself by a shenese cord only. He will also walk on his head up and down the hill, balancing the Pole on one foot. Many other feats will be exhibited, in which Signor Villecrop will display to the audience the much-admired art of toppling, peculiar only to the Peasantry of Switzerland. He will conclude his performance by repeated flights in the air, up and down the hill, with a velocity almost imperceptible, assisted only by his Pole, with which he will frequently jump the astonishing distance of Forty and Fifty Yards at a time. Signor Villecrop begs to assure the ladies and gentlemen who honour him with their company that no money will be collected till after the exhibition, feeling convinced that his exertions will be liberally rewarded by their generosity. The Exhibition to commence on Monday, the 28th of August 1826, precisely at half-past five o’clock in the evening. On the evening of the 28th August there were more than twenty thousand people assembled at the foot of the hill, on foot, on horseback, and in every kind of conveyance. Of course Signor Carlo Gram Villecrop did not put in an appearance, for that best of all the reasons that could be given--his having no existence out of the minds of the perpetrators of the swindle. * * * * * We had intended to introduce as a congenial subject the great bottle-trick hoax, but as we have already run to such length, and as this famous piece of humbug will stand well alone, we give it a chapter to itself. [36] Book of Days.