1569. Dr Rawlinson, a distinguished antiquary of the last century,

produced before the Antiquarian Society in 1748 the following:-- A Proposal for a very rich Lottery, general without any Blankes, contayning a great N^{o} of good prices, as well of redy money as of Plate and certain sorts of Merchandizes, having been valued and prised by the Commandment of the Queenes most excellent Majesties order, to the extent that such Commodities as may chance to arise thereof, after the charges borne, may be converted towards the reparations of the Havens and Strength of the realme, and towards such other public good workes. The N^{o} of lotts shall be foure hundred thousand, and no more; and every lott shall be the summe of tenne shillings sterling only, and no more. To be filled by the feast of St Bartholomew. The shew of Prises ar to be seen in Cheapside, at the sign of the Queenes armes, the house of Mr. Dericke, Goldsmith, Servant to the Queen. Some other Orders about it in 1567-8. Printed by Hen. Bynneman. According to Stow the drawing of this lottery was commenced at the west door of St Paul’s Cathedral on the 11th of January 1569, and continued day and night until the 6th of May. It was originally intended to be drawn at Dericke’s house, but most likely, as preparations were made, it was discovered that a private establishment would be hardly the place for so continuous a piece of business. Maitland in his “London” says, “Whether this lottery was on account of the public, or the selfish views of private persons, my author[40] does not mention; but it is evident, by the time it took up in drawing, it must have been of great concern. This I have remarked as being the first of the kind I read in England.” By these remarks it would seem that neither Stow nor Maitland had seen the “Proposal” we have quoted above, which gives the reason for the lottery. In 1586 there was another drawing, about which we are quaintly told: “A Lotterie, for marvellous rich and beautiful armor, was begunne to be drawn at London, in S. Paules churchyard, at the great west gate, (an house of timber and boord being there erected for that purpose) on St. Peter’s Day in the morning, which Lotterie continued in Drawing day and night for the space of two or three daies.”[41] Of this lottery Lord Burleigh says in his diary at the end of Munden’s State Papers: “June 1586, the Lottery of Armour under the charge of John Calthorp determined.” About the year 1612 James I., “in special favour for the plantation of English colonies in Virginia, granted a lottery to be held at the west end of St Paul’s; whereof one Thomas Sharplys, a taylor of London, had the chief prize, which was four thousand crowns in fair plate.”[42] A correspondent of the _Gentlemen’s Magazine_ in 1778 gives Mr Urban some particulars regarding a lottery “held in London for the present plantation of English colonies in Virginia” in 1619. The writer says: “It may be found, perhaps, upon strict enquiry that this mode of raising money was authorized in many wealthy towns, as well as in the capital; and that it was attended with beneficial effects, not only to the colony of Virginia, but likewise to the town itself where the lottery was held. In proof of this supposition I send you the following authentic extract from the Register of charitable Gifts to the Corporation of Reading:”-- Whereas at a Lottery held within the Borough of Reading in the Year of our Ld. God 1619, Gabriel Barber Gent. Agent in the sd. Lottery for the Councell & Company of Virginia, of his own good Will & Charity towarde poor Tradesmen ffreemen & Inhabitants of the sd. Borough of Reading, & for the better enabling such poor Tradesmen to support & bear their Charges in their several Places & Callings in the sd. Corporation from time to time for ever freely gave & delivered to the Mayor & Burgesses of this Corporation the sum of forty Pounds of lawfull Money of England Upon Special Trust & Confidence, that the sd. Mayor & Burgesses & their Successors shall from time to time for ever dispose & lend these 40l. to & amongst Six poor Tradesmen after the rate 06l. 13s. 4d. to each Man for the Term of five Years gratis And after those five Years ended to dispose & lend the sd. 40l. by Such Soms to Six other poor Tradesmen for other five Years & so from five years to five years Successively upon good Security for ever Neverthelesse provided & upon Condition that none of those to whom the sd. Summs of money shall be lent during that Term of five years shall keep either Inn or Tavern or dwell forth of the sd. Borough, but there during that time and terme, shall as other Inhabitants of the sd. Borough reside & dwell. Memorand. that the sd. Sum of 40l. came not into the hands & charge of the Mayor & Burgesses until April 1626. The writer then concludes with the following somewhat puzzling sentence: “If it be asked what is become of it now? _gone_, it is supposed, _where the chickens went before_ during the pious Protectorship of Cromwell.” Hone in his “Everyday-Book” says that “in 1630, 6th Charles I., there was a project ‘for the conveying of certain springs of water into London and Westminster, from within a mile and a half of Hodsdon, in Hertfordshire, by the undertakers, Sir Edward Stradling and John Lyde.’ The author of this project was one Michael Parker. ‘For defraying the expenses whereof, King Charles grants them a special licence to erect and publish a lottery or lotteries; _according_,’ says this record, ‘_to the course of other lotteries_ heretofore used or practised.’ This is the first mention of lotteries either in the _Fœdera_ or Statute-book. ‘And for the sole privilege of bringing the said waters in aqueducts to London, they were to pay four thousand pounds per annum into the king’s exchequer: and, the better to enable them to make the said large annual payment, the king grants them leave to bring their aqueducts through any of his parks, chases, lands, &c., and to dig up the same gratis.’” In 1653 there was a lottery at Grocers’ Hall, which has escaped the observation of the earliest inquirers on this subject. In an old weekly paper, called _Perfect Account of the Daily Intelligence_, November 16-23, 1653, there is the following:-- ^Advertisement.^ _At the Committee for Claims for Lands in Ireland,_ Ordered, that a Lottery be at Grocers-Hall, London, on Thursday 15 Decem. 1653, both for Provinces and Counties, to begin at 8 of the Clock in the forenoon of the same day; and all persons concerned therein are to take notice thereof. _W. Tibbs._ After the Restoration, Charles, whose ideas of rewarding fidelity were always peculiar, granted plate lotteries “with a view to reward those adherents of the Crown who resided within the bills of mortality, and had served with fidelity during the interregnum.” By this is to be understood a gift of plate from the Crown to be disposed of by lot, certain persons--most likely those who had no claim whatever on the score of fidelity--having the privilege of selling tickets. The _Gazette_ tells us that in 1669 Charles II., the Duke of York, and many of the nobility were present “at the grand plate lottery, which, by his Majesty’s command, was then opened at the sign of the Mermaid, over against the mews.” Even if this had been a proper way to reward the faithful, the faithfullest must have felt it had been left rather late. From this plate lottery sprang many successors, the most noticeable of which was the Royal Oak, whose title explains itself. The rapid growth of the institution may be judged by the following, which, according to Anderson in his “History of Commerce,” was published shortly after the drawing to which we have referred:-- THIS is to give Notice, that any Persons who are desirous to farm any of the Counties within the Kingdom of England, or Dominion of Wales, in Order to the setting up of a Plate Lottery, or any other Lottery whatsoever, may repair to the Lottery Office, at Mr. Philips’s House, in Mermaid Court over against the Mews; where they may contract with the Trustees commissioned by his Majesties Letters Patent for the Management of the said Patent, on the Behalf of the truly Loyal Indigent Officers. It is stated that “the Crown exceeded its prerogative by issuing these patents, and the law was not put in motion to question them.” This was not the only point upon which the royal rights were extended, but the tide of loyalty had set in strongly, and Charles was not likely to miss any of the current’s strength. Book lotteries were before this time much in fashion, and with the kinds which came in afterwards, were drawn at the theatres. At Vere Street theatre, which stood in Bear Yard, to which there was an entrance through a passage at the south-west corner of Lincoln’s Inn Fields, another from Vere Street, and a third from Clare Market, Killigrew’s company performed during the seasons of 1661 and 1662, and part of 1663, when they removed to the newly-built theatre in Drury Lane; the Vere Street theatre was then probably unoccupied until Mr Ogilby, the author of the “Itinerarum Angliæ, or Book of Roads,” adopted it, as standing in a populous neighbourhood, for the temporary purpose of drawing a lottery of books, which took place in 1668. Books were often the species of property held out as a lure to adventurers, by way of lottery, for the benefit of the suffering Loyalists. In the _Gazette_ of May 18, 1668, is the following advertisement:-- MR. Ogilby’s Lottery of Books opens on Monday the 25th instant, at the old Theatre between Lincoln’s Inn Fields and Vere street, where all Persons concerned may repair on Monday May 18, and see the Volumes, and put in their Money. But the business being much better than was anticipated, the drawing had to be postponed, and so in the number of the _Gazette_ for May 25 there is this:-- MR. Ogilby’s Lottery of Books (Adventurers coming in so fast that they cannot in so short Time be methodically registered) opens not till Tuesday the 2d of June; then not failing to draw; at the old Theatre between Lincoln’s Inn Fields and Vere street. Ogilby had had a venture before this, about which there seems to have been some little difficulty, as in his “Proposal” for this same lottery he refers to aspersions which have been made. A correspondent of the _Gentleman’s Magazine_ of nearly a hundred years ago gives as a curiosity even then a copy of this “Proposal,” which, though rather long, is very interesting, and so we subjoin it:-- A SECOND PROPOSAL, by the Author, for the better and more speedy Vendition of several Volumes, (his own Works,) by the way of a standing _Lottery_, licensed by his Royal Highness the Duke of York, and Assistants at the Corporation of the royal Fishing. WHEREAS _John Ogilby_, esq., erected a standing Lottery of Books, and completely furnished the same with very large, fair, and special Volumes, all of his own Designment and Composure, at vast Expense, Labour and Study of twenty Years; the like Impressions never before exhibited in the English Tongue. Which according to the appointed Time, on the 10th of May, 1665, opened; and to the general Satisfaction of the Adventurers, with no less Hopes of a clear Despatch and fair Advantage to the Author, was several Days in Drawing: when its Proceedings were stopt by the then growing Sickness and lay discontinued under the Arrest of that common Calamity, till the next Year’s more violent and sudden Visitation, the late dreadful and surprising Conflagration, swallowed the Remainder, being two Parts of three, to the Value of three thousand Pounds and upward, in that unimaginable Deluge. Therefore, to repair in some Manner his so much commiserated Losses, by the Advice of so many his Patrons, Friends, and especially by the Incitations of his former Adventurers, he resolves, and hath already prepared, not only to reprint all his own former Editions, but others that are new, of equal Value, and like Estimation by their Embellishments, and never yet Published; with some remains of the first Impressions, Relics preserved in several Hands from the Fire; to set up a second standing Lottery, where such the Discrimination of Fortune shall be, that few or None shall return with a dissatisfying Chance. The whole Draught being of greater Advantage by much (to the Adventurers) than the former. And accordingly, after Publication, the Author opened his Office, where they might put in their first Encouragements (_viz._) twenty Shillings, and twenty more at the reception of their Fortune, and also see those several magnificent Volumes, which their varied Fortune (none being bad) should present them. [43]But the Author now finding more difficulty than he expected, since many of his Promisers (who also received great Store of Tickets to dispose of, towards promotion of his Business) though seeming well resolved and very willing, yet straining Courtesy not to go foremost in paying their monies, linger out, driving it off till near the time appointed for Drawing; which Dilatoriness: (since Despatch is the soul and life to his Proposal, his only Advantage a speedy Vendition:) and also observing how that a Money Dearth, a Silver Famine, slackens and cools the Courage of Adventurers: through which hazy humours magnifying medium Shillings loome like Crowns, and each forty Shillings a ten Pound Heap. Therefore, according to the present Humour now reigning, he intends to adequate his Design; and this seeming too large-roomed, standing Lottery, modelled into many less and more likely to be taken Tenements, which shall not open only a larger Prospect of pleasing Hopes, but more real Advantage to the Adventurer. Which are now to be disposed of thus: the whole Mass of Books or Volumes, being the same without Addition or Diminution, amounting according to their known Value (being the Prices they have been usually disposed at) to thirteen thousand seven hundred Pounds; so that the Adventurers will have the above said Volumes (if all are drawn) for less than two-thirds of what they would yield in Process of Time, Book by Book. He now resolves to attempter, or mingle each Prize with four allaying Blanks; so bringing down, by this Means, the Market from double Pounds to single Crowns. THE PROPOSITIONS.--First, whosoever will be pleased to put in five Shillings shall draw a Lot, his Fortune to receive the greatest or meanest Prize, or throw away his intended spending Money on a Blank. Secondly, whoever will adventure deeper, putting in twenty-five Shillings, shall receive, if such his bad Fortune be that he draws all Blanks, a Prize presented to him by the Author of more value than his Money (if offered to be sold) though proffered ware, &c. Thirdly, who thinks fit to put in for eight Lots forty Shillings shall receive nine, and the advantage of their free Choice (of all Blanks) of either of the Works complete, _viz._ Homer’s Iliads and Odysses, or Æsop the first and second Volumes, the China Book, or Virgil. Of which, The First and greatest Prize contains 1 Lot, Number 1. An imperial Bible with Chorographical and an hundred historical Sculps, valued at 25_l._ Virgil translated, with Sculps and Annotations, val. 5_l._ Homer’s Iliads, adorned with Sculps, val. 5_l._ Homer’s Odysses, adorned with Sculps, val. 4_l._ Æsop’s Fables paraphrased and Sculped, in Folio, val. 3_l._ A second Collection of Æsopick Fables, adorned with Sculps, never [_Rest imperfect._] His Majestie’s Entertainment passing through the city of London, and Coronation. These are one of each, of all the Books contained in the Lottery, the whole value 51_l._ The Second Prize contains 1 Lot, Num. 2. One imperial Bible with all the Sculps, val. 25_l._ Homer complete, in English, val. 9_l._ Virgil, val. 5_l._ Æsop complete, val. 6_l._ The Description of China, val. 4_l._ In all 49 Pound. The Third Prize contains 1 Lot, Num. 3. One royal Bible with all the Sculps 10_l._ Homer’s Works in English, val. 9_l._ Virgil translated, with Sculps and Annotations, val. 5_l._ The first and second Vol. of Æsop, val. 6_l._ The Description of China, val. 4_l._ Entertainment, val. 2_l._ In all 36 Pound. 1 Lot, Num. 4. One imperial Bible with all the Sculps, val. 25_l._ Æsop’s Fables the first and second Vol. val. 6_l._ In all 31 Pound. 1 Lot, Num. 5. One imperial Bible with all the Sculps, val. 25_l._ Virgil translated, with Sculps, val. 5_l._ In all 30 Pound. 1 Lot, Num. 6. One imperial Bible with all the Sculps, val. 25_l._ And a Description of China, val. 4_l._ In all 29 Pound. 1 Lot, Num. 7. One imperial Bible with all the Sculps and a new Æsop, val. 28_l._ 1 Lot, Num. 8. One imperial Bible with all the Sculps, val. 25_l._ 1 Lot, Num. 9. A royal Bible with all the Sculps, val. 10_l._ A Description of China, val. 4_l._ And a Homer complete, val. 9_l._ In all 23 Pound. 1 Lot, Num. 10. A royal Bible with all the Sculps, val. 10_l._ A Virgil complete, val. 5_l._ Æsop’s Fables the first and second Vols. val. 6_l._ In all 21 Pound. 1 Lot, Num. 11. One royal Bible with all the Sculps, val. 10_l._ And a Homer’s Works complete, val. 9_l._ In all 19 Pound. 1 Lot, Num. 12. One royal Bible with all the Sculps, val. 10_l._ And both the Æsops, val. 6_l._ In all 16 Pound. 1 Lot, Num. 13. One royal Bible with all the Sculps, val. 10_l._ A Virgil complete in English, val. 5_l._ In all 15 Pound. 1 Lot, Num. 14. One royal Bible with all the Sculps, val. 10_l._ A Description of China, val. 4_l._ In all 14 Pound. [_No. 15 imperfect._] 1 Lot, Num. 16. One royal Bible with all the Sculps. 10_l._ The second Volume of Æsop, val. 3_l._ In all 13 Pound. 1 Lot, Num. 17. One royal Bible with all the Sculps, val. 10_l._ And an Entertainment, val. 2_l._ In all 12 Pound. 1 Lot, Num. 18. One royal Bible with all the Sculps, val. 10_l._ 1 Lot, Num. 19. One royal Bible with Chorographical Sculps, val. 5_l._ One Virgil complete, val. 5_l._ In all 10 Pound. 1 Lot, Num. 20. One royal Bible with Chorographical Sculps, val. 5_l._ And a Homer’s Iliads, val. 5_l._ In all 10 Pound. 1 Lot, Num. 21. One royal Bible with Chorographical Sculps, val. 5_l._ And a Homer’s Odysses, val. 4_l._ In all 9 Pound. 1 Lot, Num. 22. One royal Bible with Chorographical Sculps, val. 5_l._ And a Description of China, val. 4_l._ In all 9 Pound. 1 Lot, Num. 23. One royal Bible with Chorographical Sculps. 5_l._ And Æsop complete, val. 6_l._ In all 11 Pound. 1 Lot, Num. 24. A royal Bible with Chorographical Sculps, val. 5_l._ And Æsop the first Volume, val. 3_l._ In all 8 Pound. 1 Lot, Num. 25. A royal Bible with Chorographical Sculps, val. 5_l._ And Æsop the second Volume, val. 3_l._ In all 8 Pound. 1 Lot, Num. 26. A royal Bible, ruled, with Chorographical Sculps, val. 6_l._ 1 Lot, Num. 27. A royal Bible, with Chorographical Sculps, ruled, val. 6_l._ 1 Lot, Num. 28. One royal Bible with Chorographical Sculps, val. 5_l._ 10 Lot, Num. 29. Each a Homer complete, val. 9_l._ 10 Lot, Num. 30. Each a double Æsop complete, val. 6_l._ 520 Lot, Num. 31. Each a Homer’s Iliads, val. 5_l._ 520 Lot, Num. 32. Each a Homer’s Odysses, val. 4_l._ 570 Lot, Num. 33. Each a Virgil complete, val. 5_l._ 570 Lot, Num. 34. Each a China Book, val. 4_l._ 570 Lot, Num. 35. Each the first Volume of Æsop, val. 3_l._ 570 Lot, Num. 36. Each the second Volume of Æsop, val. 3_l._ The whole Number of the Lots three thousand, three hundred, and sixty-eight. The Number of the Blanks as above ordered; so that the Total received is but four thousand, one hundred, and ten Pounds. The Office where their Monies are to be paid in, and they receive their Tickets, and where the several Volumes or Prizes may be daily seen, (by which visual Speculation understanding their real Worth better than by the Ear or printed Paper,) is kept at the Black Boy, over against St. Dunstan’s Church, Fleet Street. The Adventurers may also repair for their better Convenience, to pay in their Monies, to Mr. Peter Cleyton, over against the Dutch Church, in Austin Friars, and to Mr. Baker, near Broad Street, entering the South door of the Exchange, and to Mr. Roycroft, in Bartholomew Close. The certain Day of Drawing, the Author promiseth (though but half full) to be the twenty-third of May next. Therefore all Persons that are willing to Adventure, are desired to bring or send in their Monies with their Names, or what other Inscription or Motto they will, by which to know their own, by the ninth of May next, it being Whitson Eve, that the Author may have Time to put up the Lots and Inscriptions into their respective Boxes. Notwithstanding the positive promise given as to the date of the drawing, there seems, judging by the advertisements first quoted, to have been two alterations in the time. Mr Ogilby assorted his wares in the most tempting manner, and it is interesting to know what were considered the most marketable books, with their relative values, over two hundred years ago. Even then, and long before either became familiar to the bulk of English readers, the Iliad was worth a pound more than the Odyssey. Æsop was rated, entire, at more than the best of the Homeric books, but divided, he was inferior to either, and Virgil complete was worth exactly the same amount as the Iliad. A contributor to the _Gentleman’s Magazine_, about a hundred years back, states that he had seen a then very old but undated “Address to the Learned, or an advantageous lottery for books in quires; wherein each adventurer of a guinea is sure of a prize of two pounds value; and it is but four to one that he has a prize of three, six, eight, twelve, or fifty pounds.” The proposals for this lottery were, one thousand four hundred lots, at a guinea each, to be drawn with the lots out of two glasses, superintended by John Lilly and Edward Darrel, Esqs., Mr Deputy Collins, and Mr William Proctor, stationer; two lots of £50, ten of £12, twenty of £8, sixty-eight of £6, two hundred of £5, and one thousand two hundred of £3. Letters-patent on behalf of the promoters of Lotteries were from time to time renewed, and from the _Gazette_ of October 11, 1675, it appears by those dated June 19 and December 17, 1674, there were granted for thirteen years to come, “all lotteries whatsoever invented or to be invented, to several truly loyal and indigent officers, in consideration of their many faithful services and sufferings, with prohibition to all others to use or set up the said lotteries.” These officers were also granted powers to give licences and name agents. In the _Examiner_, about the time when Lotteries were suppressed, there is much information concerning them, and the writer among other things finds, from a copy of the _London Gazette_ of May 17, 1688, that “Ogilby, the better to carry on his ‘Britannia,’ had a lottery of books at Garraway’s Coffeehouse in ’Change Alley.” Lotteries of various kinds seem to have been very general before this date; indeed so much so that Government issued a notice in the _London Gazette_, September 27, 1683, to prevent the drawing of any lotteries (and especially a newly-invented lottery under the name of the riffling, or raffling, lottery) “except those under his Majesty’s letters-patent, for thirteen years, granted to persons for their sufferings, and have their seal of office with this inscription, ‘_Meliora Designavi_.’” In 1683, Prince Rupert dying rather poor, a plan was devised to obtain money by disposing of all his jewels; but as the public were not satisfied with the mode of drawing the lotteries, on account of the many cheats practised on them, they would not listen to any proposals until the King himself guaranteed to see that all was fair, and also that Mr Francis Child, the goldsmith at Temple Bar, would be answerable for their several adventures, as appears by the _London Gazette_, October 1, 1683:-- THESE are to give notice, that the Jewels of his late Royal Highness Prince Rupert have been particularly valued and appraised by Mr. Isaac Legouch, Mr Christopher Rosse, and Mr. Richard Beauvoir, Jewellers, the whole amounting to Twenty Thousand Pounds, and will be sold by way of Lottery, each Lot to be Five Pounds. The biggest Prize will be a great Pearl Necklace, valued at 8,000_l._, and none less than 100_l._ A printed Particular of the said Appraisement, with their Divisions into Lots, will be delivered gratis by Mr. Francis Child, at Temple Bar, London, into whose Hands, such as are willing to be Adventurers are desired to pay their Money, on or before the 1st Day of November next. As soon as the whole Sum is paid in, a short Day will be appointed which, (it is hoped, will be before Christmas) and notified in the _Gazette_, for the Drawing thereof, which will be done in his Majesty’s Presence, who is pleased to declare, that _he himself will see all the Prizes put in among the Blanks_, and that the whole will be managed with Equity and Fairness, Nothing being intended but the sale of the said Jewels at a moderate Value. And it is further notified, for the Satisfaction of all as shall be Adventurers, that the said Mr. _Child_ shall and will stand obliged to Each of them for their several Adventures. And that each Adventurer shall receive their Money back if the said Lottery be not drawn and finished before the first Day of February next. This Mr Child is said to have been the first regular banker. He began business soon after the Restoration, and received the honour of knighthood. He lived in Fleet Street, where the shop still continues in a state of the highest respectability.[44] A subsequent notice says that The King will probably, to-morrow, in the Banquetting House, see all the Blanks told over, that they may not exceed their Number; and that the Papers on which the Prizes are to be written shall be rolled up in his Presence; and that a Child, appointed, either by his Majesty or the Adventurers, shall draw the Prizes. The most popular of all the schemes of the time was that drawn at the Dorset Garden Theatre, near Salisbury Square, Fleet Street, with the capital prize of a thousand pounds for a penny. The drawing began on October 19, 1698; and in the _Protestant Mercury_ of the following day its fairness was said to give universal content to all that were concerned. In the next number is found an inconsistent story as to the possessor of the prize. It runs thus: “Sometime since, a boy near Branford going to school one morning, met an old woman, who asked his charity; the boy replied, he had nothing to give her but a piece of bread and butter, which she accepted. Sometime after, she met the boy again, and told him she had good luck after his bread and butter, and therefore would give him a penny which, after some years keeping, would produce many pounds: he accordingly kept it a great while, and at last, with some friends’ advice, put it into the Penny Lottery, and we are informed that on Tuesday last, the said lot came up with £1000 prize.” This is a very fair specimen of the stories which were always afloat concerning the chief prizes in the principal lotteries, and which had always some superstitious current underlying them, much to the benefit of the vendors of tickets. The scheme of the Penny Lottery was assailed in a tract entitled “The Wheel of Fortune, or Nothing for a Penny; being Remarks on the Drawing of the Penny Lottery at the Theatre Royal, in Dorset Garden.” (1698, 4to.) Afterwards this theatre was used for exhibitions of sword-and-cudgel players, prize-fighters, &c.; but the building was totally deserted in 1703. In the last years of the century, schemes were started called “The Lucky Adventure; or, Fortunate Chance, being 2000_l._ for a groat, or 3000_l._ for a shilling;” and “Fortunatus, or another Adventure of 1000_l._ for a Penny;” but purchasers were more wary, and the promoters’ plans in both cases fell to the ground. The royal patentees also advertised against the “Marble Board, alias Woollich Board lotteries; the Figure Board, alias the Whimsey Board and the Wyre Board lotteries.” The patentees were, in addition, always quarrelling among themselves; and the following lines from the _Post-Boy_, January 3, 1698, were very popular at the time, as giving an estimate of the disputes between the legalised rogues:-- A DIALOGUE _betwixt the_ NEW LOTTERIES _and the_ ROYAL OAK. _New Lott._ To you the Mother of our Schools, Where knaves by license manage Fools, Finding fit Juncture and Occasion, To pick the Pockets of the Nation; We come to know how we must treat ’em, And to their hearts’ content may cheat ’em. _Oak._ It cheers my aged Heart to see So numerous a Progeny; I find by you, that ’tis Heaven’s will That knavery should flourish still; You have docility and wit, And Fools were never wanting yet. Observe the crafty Auctioneer His art to sell waste Paper dear; When he for Salmon baits his Hooks, That Cormorant of Offal books, Who bites, as sure as Maggots breed, Or Carrion Crows on Horseflesh feed; Fair specious Titles him deceive, To sweep what Sl---- and T----n leave. If greedy gulls you would ensnare, Make ’em Proposals wondrous fair; Tell him strange Golden Show’rs shall fall, And promise Mountains to ’em all. _New Lott._ That Craft we’ve already taught, And by that Trick have millions caught; Books, Baubles, Toys, all sorts of Stuff, Have gone off this way well enough. Nay, Music, too, invades our Art, And to some Tune wou’d play her Part. I’ll show you now what we are doing, For we have divers Wheels agoing. We now have found out richer Lands, Than Asia’s Hills, or Afric’s Sands, And to vast Treasures must give Birth, Deep hid in Bowels of the Earth; In fertile Wales, and God knows where, Rich mines of Gold and Silver are, From whence we draw prodigious Store Of Silver coin’d, tho’ none in Ore, Which down our Throats rich Coxcombs pour, In hopes to make us vomit more. _Oak._ This Project surely must be good Because not eas’ly understood; Besides, it gives a mighty Scope To the Fool’s Argument--vain Hope. No Eagle’s Eye the Cheat can see, Thro’ Hope thus back’d by Mystery. _New Lott._ We have, besides, a thousand more, For Great or Small, for Rich and Poor, From him that can his Thousands spare, Down to the Penny Customer. _Oak._ The silly Mob in Crowds will run, To be at easy Rates undone. A gimcrack Show draws in the Rout, Thousands their all by Pence lay out. _New Lott._ We, by Experience, find it true, But we have Methods wholly new, Strange late-invented Ways to thrive, To make Men pay for what they give, To get the Rents into our Hands Of their hereditary Lands, And out of what does thence arise, To make ’em buy Annuities. We’ve mathematick Combination, To cheat Folks by plain Demonstration, Which shall be fairly manag’d too, The Undertaker knows not how. Besides---- _Oak._ Pray, hold a little, here’s enough, To beggar Europe of this Stuff. Go on, and prosper, and be great, I am to you a puny Cheat. The Royal Oak Lottery came in for a great share of public odium, it being regarded as the parent of all the others. A very curious tract of 1699 sets forth the various charges against it in the form of a trial. The pamphlet is called “The Arraignment, Trial and Condemnation of _Squire Lottery_, alias _Royal-Oak Lottery_.” The various charges, defences, and counter-charges are very funny, and we regret that we have only room here for the jury list, which shows that the “British palladium” possessed then many of its present features, judged by the characters and pretensions of the jurymen. The descriptions of these latter would fit pretty well even in these days:-- _The Jurors’ Names._ Mr. _Positive_, a Draper in _Covent Garden_. Mr. _Squander_, an Oilman in _Fleet Street_. Mr. _Pert_, a Tobacconist, _ditto_. Mr. _Captious_, a Milliner in _Paternoster Row_. Mr. _Feeble_, a Coffeeman near the _Change_. Mr. _Altrick_, a Merchant in _Gracechurch Street_. Mr. _Haughty_, a Vintner by _Grays-Inn, Holborn_. Mr. _Jealous_, a Cutler at _Charing Cross_. Mr. _Peevish_, a Bookseller in _St. Paul’s Churchyard_. Mr. _Spilbook_, near _Fleet Bridge_. Mr. _Noysie_, a Silkman upon _Ludgate Hill_. Mr. _Finical_, a Barber in _Cheapside_. It is noticeable that during the whole of the trial no individual interferes with either the Court or the witnesses, there being no mention in the report of “a Juror;” and as might have been anticipated, the trial ends with the wholesale condemnation of Squire Lottery, and an order for his immediate execution. Private and fallacious lotteries had by this time become so common, not only in London, but in most other great cities and towns of England, whereby the lower people and the servants and children of good families were defrauded, that an Act of Parliament was therefore passed, 10 and 11 William III. c. 17, for suppressing such lotteries, “even although they might be set up under colour of patents or grants under the Great Seal. Which said grants, or patents,” says the preamble, “are against the common good, welfare, and peace of the kingdom, and are void and against law.” A penalty, therefore, of five hundred pounds was laid on the proprietors of any such lotteries, and of twenty pounds on every adventurer in them. Notwithstanding this, the like disposition to fraud and gaming prevailed again till fresh laws were enacted for their suppression. The public, or, as they were called, the Parliamentary, lotteries, went on, however, as merrily as before, though they were every now and again threatened--indeed for nearly a hundred and thirty years lotteries were always on the point of being abolished. The promoters of lotteries, even in the early days, thoroughly knew the value of advertising by means of puffs, and many of their paragraphs are found given as ordinary news, for the more effectual trapping of the gulls. Such a one is this from the _Post-Boy_ of December 27, 1710:-- We are informed that the Parliamentary Lottery will be fixed in this Manner:--150,000 Tickets will be delivered out at 10_l._ each Ticket, making in all the Sum of 1,500,000_l._ Sterling; the Principal thereof is to be sunk, the Parliament allowing nine per cent. Interest for the whole during the Term of thirty-two Years, which Interest is to be divided as follows: 3750 Tickets will be Prizes from 1000_l._ to 5_l._ per annum, during the said thirty-two Years; all the other Tickets will be Blanks, so that there will be thirty-nine of these to one Prize, but then each Blank Ticket will be entitled to fourteen Shillings a year for the Term of thirty-two Years, which is better than an Annuity for life at ten per cent. over and above chance of getting a prize. Such was the eagerness of the public to secure shares in this great and liberal undertaking on the part of a beneficent Legislature, that Mercers’ Hall was literally crowded, and the clerks were found incompetent to receive the influx of names. Six hundred thousand pounds was subscribed by January 21; and on the 28th of February the required amount of a million and a half had been taken out in shares. This rage for speculation had much to do with the success of the South-Sea Bubble, which was attended by myriad smaller bubbles that in the grand collapse of the most magnificent swindle of modern times have been quite forgotten. But many large fortunes were made by small means. In the height of the speculative fever, hardly a day, certainly not a week, passed without fresh projects, recommended by pompous paragraphs in the newspapers, directing where to subscribe to them. On some six per cent. was paid down, on others one shilling per thousand at the time of subscribing. Some of the obscure keepers of these books of subscription, contenting themselves with what they had netted in the morning, by the registration of one or two millions, disappeared in the afternoon, the rooms they had hired being shut up, and they and their subscription-books being never heard of more. On others of these projects, two shillings, and two-and-sixpence, were paid down; for some few even half a sovereign per cent. was deposited, but this was only in the case of those who could find some person of standing to recommend them in Exchange Alley. Some were divided into shares instead of hundreds and thousands, upon each of which so much was paid down. Any impudent impostor, while the delusion was at its greatest height, needed only to hire a room near the alley for a few hours, and open a subscription-book for a pretended scheme relating to commerce, manufacture, plantation, or some supposed invention, having first advertised it in the newspapers of the preceding day, and he might in a few hours find subscribers for one or two millions of imaginary stock. Yet many of the subscribers were far from believing the project feasible; it was enough for their purpose that there would soon be a premium on the receipts for the subscriptions, when they could easily get rid of them in the crowded alley to others more credulous than themselves. Indeed some of these bubbles were so barefaced and palpably gross as not to have the shadow of anything like feasibility: such, for instance, were an insurance against divorces; a scheme to learn men to cast nativities; another for making butter from beech-trees; a project for a flying machine; a company for fattening hogs; and a proposal for a more inoffensive method of emptying or cleansing necessary-houses. Addison, of course, availed himself of the opportunity afforded by the great lottery mania, and in the _Spectator_ for Tuesday, October 9, 1711, he comments on the peculiarities of investors. “When a man has a mind to venture his money in a lottery,” says he, “every figure of it appears equally alluring, and as likely to succeed as any of its fellows. They all of them have the same pretensions to good luck, stand upon the same foot of competition, and no manner of reason can be given why a man should prefer one to the other before the lottery is drawn. In this case, therefore, caprice very often acts in the place of reason, and forms to itself some groundless imaginary motive, where real and substantial ones are wanting. I know a well-meaning man that is very well pleased to risk his good fortune upon the number 1711, because it is the year of our Lord. I am acquainted with a tacker that would give a good deal for the number 134. On the contrary, I have been told of a certain zealous dissenter, who being a great enemy to Popery, and believing that bad men are the most fortunate in this world, will lay two to one on the number 666 against any other number, because, says he, it is the number of the Beast. Several would prefer the number 12,000 before any other, as it is the number of the pounds in the great prize. In short, some are pleased to find their own age in their number; some that have got a number which makes a pretty appearance in the ciphers; and others because it is the same number that succeeded in the last lottery. Each of these, upon no other grounds, thinks he stands fairest for the great lot, and that he is possessed of what may not be improbably called--‘the golden number.’” The reference to the number 134 is made on account of a bill which was brought into the House of Commons against occasional Conformity; and so that it should pass through the Lords, it was proposed to tack it to a money bill. This proposal caused some warm debates, and at last, on being put to the vote, it was found that 134 were for tacking. A large majority was, however, against it, and the motion fell through. The Beast’s number is, of course, a reference to Revelation xiii. 18; and the final allusion in the paragraph we will not insult the reader by attempting to explain. Addison then goes on: “These principles of election are the pastimes and extravagances of human reason, which is of so busy a nature, that it will be exerting itself in the meanest trifles, and working even where it wants materials. The wisest of men are sometimes acted by such unaccountable motives, as the life of the fool and the superstitious is guided by nothing else. I am surprised that none of the fortune-tellers, or, as the French call them, the _Diseurs de bonne Aventure_, who publish their bills in every quarter of the town, have turned our lotteries to their advantage. Did any of them set up for a caster of fortunate figures, what might he not get by his pretended discoveries and predictions? I remember, among the advertisements in the _Post-Boy_ of September the 27th, I was surprised to see the following one:-- _This is to give Notice that ten Shillings over and above the Market Price, will be given for the Ticket in the 1,500,000l. Lottery, No. 132_, by Nath. Cliff, _at the_ Bible and Three Crowns _in Cheapside_. “This advertisement has given great matter of speculation to coffee-house theorists. Mr. Cliff’s principles and conversation have been canvassed upon this occasion, and various conjectures made why he should thus set his heart upon No. 132. I have examined all the powers in those numbers, broken them into fractions, extracted the square and cube root, divided and multiplied them all ways, but could not arrive at the secret until about three days ago, when I received the following letter from an unknown hand, by which I find that Mr. Nath. Cliff is only the agent, and not the principal, in this advertisement. ‘Mr. Spectator,--I am the person that lately advertised I would give ten shillings more than the current price for the ticket No. 132, in the lottery now drawing, which is a secret I have communicated to some friends, who rally me incessantly upon that account. You must know I have but one ticket, for which reason, and a certain dream I have lately had more than once, I resolved it should be the number I most approved. I am so positive that I have pitched upon the great lot, that I could almost lay all I am worth upon it. My visions are so frequent and strong upon this occasion, that I have not only possessed the lot, but disposed of the money which in all probability it will sell for. This morning in particular I set up an equipage which I look upon to be the gayest in the town; the liveries are very rich, but not gaudy. I should be very glad to see a speculation or two upon lottery subjects, in which you would oblige all people concerned, and in particular, your most humble servant George Gosling. P.S. Dear Spec, if I get the 12,000_l._ I’ll make thee a handsome present.’ After having wished my correspondent good luck, and thanked him for his intended kindness, I shall for this time dismiss the subject of the lottery, and only observe, that the greatest part of mankind are in some degree guilty of my friend Gosling’s extravagance. We are apt to rely upon future prospects, and become really expensive while we are only rich in possibility. We live up to our expectations, not to our possessions, and make a figure proportionable to what we may be, not what we are. We outrun our present income, as not doubting to disburse ourselves out of the profits of some future place, project, or reversion that we have in view. It is through this temper of mind, which is so common among us, that we see tradesmen break, who have met with no misfortunes in their business; and men of estate reduced to poverty, who have never suffered from losses or repairs, tenants, taxes, or lawsuits. In short, it is this foolish sanguine temper, this depending upon contingent futurities, that occasions romantic generosity, chimerical grandeur, senseless ostentation, and generally ends in beggary and ruin. The man who will live above his present circumstances, is in great danger of living in a little time much beneath them; or, as the Italian proverb runs, ‘the man who lives by hope will die by hunger.’ It should be an indispensable rule in life to contract our desires to our present condition, and, whatever may be our expectations, to live within the compass of what we actually possess. It will be time enough to enjoy an estate when it comes into our hands; but if we anticipate our good fortune, we shall lose the pleasure of it when it arrives, and may possibly never possess what we have so foolishly counted upon.” We have quoted nearly at length, and offer no excuse; for those who are familiar with the lesson can do no harm by reading it anew, while those who are not may be tempted to dip deeper, and find in the pages of the _Spectator_ many new delights. We can offer no remarks of our own on the superstitions of “adventurers” fit to be placed by those we have extracted, and so will pass on to fresh incidents. Lotteries abounded to such an extent about this time that we really have too much tempting material to choose from. There were the Greenwich Hospital Adventure, sanctioned by Act of Parliament; the Land Lottery, the promoter of which declared it was “found very difficult and troublesome for the adventurers for to search and find out what prizes they have come up in their number-tickets, from the badness of the print, the many errors in them, and the great quantity of prizes;” as well as the Twelvepenny, or Nonsuch, the Fortunatus, and the Deer Lotteries, all flourishing; to say nothing of the smaller swindles, which, despite Parliament, were connived at by the minor authorities. The Hamburgh Lottery caused in 1723 some trouble in the House of Commons. It was ostensibly a scheme for promoting trade between Great Britain and the Elbe territories, but was as gross an imposition as even a lottery system could produce, and was ultimately suppressed by special Act, John Viscount Barrington being expelled the House for complicity in the snare. He was not the only man of rank who dabbled with dirty water, many members of the Commons being more or less openly convicted of fraud in connection with lotteries. George Robinson, Esq., member for Marlowe, disappeared mysteriously in 1731, and it was found that with him went all the hopes of the Charitable Corporation Society, who discovered upon investigation that the half million capital they thought themselves possessed of had been embezzled. Two other M.P.’s, Sir Archibald Grant and Sir Robert Sutton, were found to be concerned, in common with many other persons of position, in the defalcation, and were expelled from their seats, while their property was attached. A lottery was instituted for the benefit of the sufferers, and in 1734 they received nine shillings and ninepence in the pound. This is an advertisement published in the _Daily Courant_, July 1, 1734, with regard to the distribution of prizes in this same lottery:-- Lottery-Office, 28 June 1734. _THE Managers appointed by an Act of Parliament for exchanging the Tickets in the Charitable Corporation Lottery give Notice, That Certificates for all Tickets in the said Lottery, which have been entered at their Office in the New Palace Yard, near the Receipt of his Majesty’s Exchequer, to the 29th Day of June, 1734, will be delivered out at their said Office, in Exchange for the said Tickets, on Wednesday and Thursday next, from Ten in the Forenoon ’till Two in the Afternoon of each Day; and that the Business of taking in the Tickets will be suspended ’till Friday the 5th Day of July._ _And whereas Tickets have been brought to be entered for Certificates, that have been altered from Blanks to Numbers intituled to Benefits (which Tickets have been detected) The Managers do hereby give Notice, that the same is declared Felony by the Act._ It is worthy of notice that sharpers of a description other than the promoters of lotteries were anxious to get all they could out of the ventures, and so winning numbers were very often fabricated; and in more than one instance the utterers being detected, were with the forgers tried and cast for death. A notable instance of this kind of fraud was made public in 1777, in the January of which year two Jews, Joseph Arones and Samuel Noah, were examined at Guildhall before the Lord Mayor, charged with counterfeiting the lottery ticket No. 25,590, a prize of £2000, with intent to defraud Mr Keyser, an office-keeper, who had examined the ticket carefully, and had taken it into the Stock Exchange to sell, when Mr Shewell happened to come into the same box, and hearing the office-keeper’s offer, asked to look at the ticket, as he recollected buying one of the same number a day or two before. This very fortunately led to the discovery of the fraud, and the two Jews were committed to take their trial. The number was so artfully altered from 23,590 that not the least erasure could be discerned. Arones was but just come to England, and Noah was said to be a man of property. In the February the two were tried at the Old Bailey for forgery and fraud. Their defence was that Arones found the ticket, and persons were produced to swear to the fact, which they did positively and circumstantially, that the prisoners were discharged. At the same sessions Daniel Denny was tried for forging, counterfeiting, and altering a lottery ticket with intent to defraud; and being found guilty, was condemned. In later days the small cards given on race-courses--and a few years back in the streets--by turf bookmakers to their customers were very successfully imitated, sometimes the number of a ticket which was known to be held by a winner being counterfeited, while at others the brazen-visaged presenter would simply depend upon his ability to “bounce” the layer of odds into the belief that the entry was wrong as to the amount or name of horse. In these latter cases the ingenuity exhibited was great--was in fact of the kind which judges are in the habit of instancing as worthy of better application. As if judges--and juries too, when they have sense--did not know that the only outlet for ability nine times out of ten in certain conditions of society is in a criminal direction. The kind of skill which brings a man to the Central Criminal Court is not likely to find much of an opening so far as money-getting is concerned, and from the ingenuity of the great bank-forgers of 1873, down to that of Counsellor Kelly and Jim the Penman of watch-robbery recollection, there is a wide field of skill for which virtue has small market, and which therefore turns to vice for its reward. We say this without any wish to be regarded as encouragers of crime in any shape or form, but because we consider the words of the judge humbug, and the leaders in certain papers which always break out upon such occasions as we have referred to as cant of the most flagitious character. There is hardly a man now languishing in prison for being ingenious who will not tell you that ingenuity has been his bane, not alone because he yielded to temptation, but because he found the market overstocked with people quite as clever as himself who had additional advantages. This simply proves that the ability which looks so great when it has been devoted to the purposes of robbery is of a very small order after all, and shows itself in its true light when in its proper channel. What, if estimated at their proper value, were the qualifications of the American forgers or the English burglars? Are there not scores of confidential clerks and dozens of skilled mechanics who could have done as well or better than either if they had chosen so to do? Yes, decidedly. Yet in both cases, as well as in many others, the judge and jury, the public and the press, affected to be horror-struck at such a waste of talent. But, as they say in the novels, this is a digression. In 1736 an Act was passed to build Westminster Bridge by means of a lottery, and by means of advertisement the following scheme was submitted to the public:-- LOTTERY 1736, _for raising 100000l. for building a Bridge at_ Westminster, _consisting of 125000 Tickets at 5l. each_. Prizes 1 of 20000_l._ is 20000_l._ 2 „ 10000 „ 20000 3 „ 5000 „ 15000 10 „ 3000 „ 30000 40 „ 1000 „ 40000 60 „ 500 „ 30000 100 „ 200 „ 20000 200 „ 100 „ 20000 400 „ 50 „ 20000 1000 „ 20 „ 20000 28800 „ 10 „ 288000 ------ ------ 30616 Prizes, amounting to 523000 94384 Blanks. First Drawn 1000 Last Drawn 1000 ------ ------ 125000 525000 ------ ------ The Prizes to be paid at the Bank in 40 Days after Drawing, without Deduction. N.B. _There is little more than Three_ Blanks _to a_ Prize. Other lotteries were granted for the same purpose before the bridge was completed. Its structure must have been as rotten as the system on which it was built, as for many years before it was pulled down it was a disgrace to the neighbourhood; and as it was anything but old when it was demolished, it must have gone to decay almost as soon as it was opened. Almost every imaginable article was at this period disposed of by raffle or lottery, and Horace Walpole, writing about one for an organ, says: “I am now in pursuit of getting the finest piece of music that ever was heard; it is a thing that will play eight tunes. Handel and all the great musicians say, that it is beyond anything they can do; and this may be performed by the most ignorant person; and when you are weary of those eight tunes, you may have them changed for any other that you like. This I think much better than going to an Italian opera or an assembly. This performance has been lately put into a lottery, and all the royal family choose to have a great many tickets rather than to buy it, the price being I think £1000, infinitely a less sum than some bishoprics have been sold for. And a gentleman won it, who I am in hopes will sell it, and if he will, I will buy it, for I cannot live to have another made, and I will carry it into the country with me.” As Walpole lived for sixty years after this, he must have lived to see much more wonderful instruments built, and possibly offered as prizes in lotteries. In June 1743 the price of lottery tickets rose from £10 to £11, 10s., the prizes being in no way increased, and a hint to the unwary was published, in which it was shown that adventurers “gamed at 50 per cent. loss; paying at that price 2s. 6d. to play for 5s.; the money played for being only three pound, besides discount and deductions.” The practice of giving £1000 each to the first and last drawn tickets led to a curious difficulty in 1774. On the 5th of January, at the conclusion of drawing the State Lottery at Guildhall, No. 11,053, as the last-drawn ticket, was declared to be entitled to the thousand pounds, and was so printed in the paper of benefits by order of the commissioners. It was, beside, a prize of a hundred pounds. But after the wheels were carried back to Whitehall, and there opened, the ticket No. 72,248 was found sticking in a crevice of the wheel. And, being the next-drawn ticket after all the prizes were drawn, was advertised by the commissioners’ order as entitled to the thousand pounds, as the last-drawn ticket; “which affair,” we are told by the _Gentleman’s Magazine_, “made a great deal of noise.” The State Lottery of 1751 met with much opposition from the press, and an article in the _London Magazine_ gives the following computation of its chances:-- IN THE LOTTERY 1751 IT IS 69998 to 2 or 34999 to 1 against a £10000 Prize 69994 to 6 or 11665 to 1 against a 5000 or upwards 69989 to 11 or 6363 to 1 against a 3000 69981 to 19 or 3683 to 1 against a 2000 69961 to 39 or 1794 to 1 against a 1000 69920 to 80 or 874 to 1 against a 500 69720 to 280 or 249 to 1 against a 100 69300 to 700 or 99 to 1 against a 50 60000 to 10000 or 6 to 1 against a 20 or any Prize. The writer then goes on to say: “I would beg the favour of all gentlemen, tradesmen, and others, to take the pains to explain to such as any way depend upon their judgment, that one must buy no less than seven tickets to have an even chance for any prize at all; that with only one ticket it is six to one, and with half a ticket twelve to one, against any prize; and ninety-nine or a hundred to one that the prize, if it comes, will not be above £50; and no less than thirty-five thousand to one that the owner of a single ticket will not obtain one of the greatest prizes. No lottery is proper for persons of very small fortunes, to whom the loss of five or six pounds is of great consequence, besides the disturbance of their minds; much less is it advisable or desirable for either poor or rich to contribute to the exorbitant tax of more than two hundred thousand pounds, which the first engrossers of lottery tickets, and the brokers and dealers, strive to raise out of the pockets of the poor chiefly, and the silly rich partly, by artfully enhancing the price of tickets above the original cost.” The first price of tickets in this lottery was ten pounds. On their rise a Mr Holland publicly offered in an advertisement to wager four hundred guineas that four hundred tickets when drawn did not amount to nine pounds fifteen shillings on an average, prizes and blanks. As might have been expected, his challenge was never accepted. On the 11th of the next month (November) the drawing began, and notwithstanding the public-spirited efforts of individuals, societies, and papers which did not receive any benefit in the way of advertisements, to check the exorbitancy of the ticket-mongers, the price rose steadily and ultimately to sixteen guineas a ticket. All means were tried by the disinterested to cure this infatuation by writing and advertising; and on the first day of drawing, it was publicly averred that near eight thousand tickets were in the South Sea House, and upwards of thirty thousand pawned at bankers, &c., that nine out of ten of the ticket-holders were not able to go to the wheel, and that not one of them durst stand the drawing above six days. These dealers seem to have had an awkward knack of selling the same ticket to two buyers, or disposing of more than the proper fractional parts of one ticket, in the hope of its turning up a blank, thus “going for the gloves” in a style imitated in modern days by votaries of Tattersall’s and other betting institutions with much success. This arrangement, with others of a similar nature, led to the establishment of insurances offices, which, at first an ostensible protection by guaranteeing special numbers, and thereby preventing fraud on the part of sellers, became in time greater swindles than those they were supposed to prevent. To prevent the monopoly of tickets in the State Lottery, and the consequent upheaval of rates, it had been enacted that persons charged with the delivery of tickets should not sell more than twenty to one person. This provision was evaded by the use of pretended lists, which defeated the object of Parliament, and injured public credit, insomuch that in 1754 more tickets were subscribed for than the holders of the lists had cash to purchase, and there was a deficiency in the first payment. The mischief and notoriety of these practices occasioned the House of Commons to prosecute an inquiry into the circumstances, which, though opposed by a scandalous cabal that endeavoured to screen the delinquents, ended in a report, by the committee, that Peter Leheup, Esq., had privately disposed of a great number of tickets before the office was opened to which the public were directed by advertisement to apply; that he also delivered great numbers to particular persons, upon lists of names which he knew to be fictitious; and that, in particular, Sampson Gideon became proprietor of more than six thousand, which he sold at a premium. Upon report of these and other illegal acts, the House resolved that Leheup was guilty of a violation of the Act and a breach of trust, and presented an address to his Majesty praying that he would direct the Attorney-General to prosecute him in the most effectual manner for his offences. An information was accordingly filed, and, on a trial at bar in the Court of King’s Bench, Leheup, as one of the receivers of the last lottery of three hundred thousand pounds, was found guilty (1) of receiving subscriptions before the day and hour advertised; (2) of permitting the subscribers to use different names to cover an excess of twenty tickets; and (3) of disposing of the tickets which had been bespoke, and not claimed, or were double charged, instead of returning them to the managers. In Trinity Term, Leheup was brought up for judgment, and fined a thousand pounds, which was at once paid. This was one of the grossest miscarriages of justice known with regard to the lottery frauds, as in the course of the evidence given it was discovered that the defendant had amassed by his trickery over forty thousand pounds for his own share. Another instance of the horrible effect these instruments of gambling had on the public mind is found in the madness of many successful speculators, as well as in the continuous suicides of the unsuccessful. On November 5, 1757, Mr Keys, a clerk, who had absented himself from business ever since the 7th of October, on which day was drawn the ten-thousand-pound prize, supposed to be his property, was found in the streets raving mad, having been robbed of his pocket-book and ticket. The very small parts into which shares were divided more than a hundred years ago is shown by the following advertisement, published in several papers of November 1766:-- DAME FORTUNE presents her Respects to the Public, and assures them that she has fixed her Residence for the Present at CORBETT’S State Lottery Office, opposite St. Dunstan’s Church, Fleet Street; and, to enable many Families to partake of her Favours, she has ordered not only the Tickets to be sold at the lowest Prices, but also that they be _divided into Shares at the following low Rates_,--viz.:-- £ _s._ _d._ A Sixty-fourth 0 4 0 Thirty-second 0 7 6 Sixteenth 0 15 0 An Eighth 1 10 0 A Fourth 3 0 0 A Half 6 0 0 By which may be gained from upwards of one hundred and fifty to upwards of five thousand Guineas, at her said Office No. 30. As another instance of the superstition prevalent during the lottery mania we will give the following anecdote, which though old will bear repetition. A gentlewoman whose husband had presented her with a ticket, put up prayers in the church, the day before drawing, in the following manner: “The prayers of the congregation are desired for the success of a person engaged in a new undertaking.” Lottery tickets were often presented by gentlemen to ladies, and it is recorded that a lady falling in love with an actor, finding that the many letters of passionate admiration she sent him passed unnoticed, accompanied one of them with a gift of four lottery tickets. Whether they were successful, either as regards moving his obdurate heart or providing him with a prize, we are unfortunately not able to say. Anyhow, it doesn’t much matter, as the recipient of the favours died shortly afterwards; and most likely the unknown lady consoled herself with another and more willing lover, or else with a lottery. Between 1770 and 1775 the tricks of the insurers occupied a great deal of attention, and almost left the ordinary office-keepers unnoticed. The two businesses were, however, pretty well mixed up by this time. An important trial took place at Guildhall for the purpose of deciding the legality of insuring on March 1, 1773, the Lord Mayor being plaintiff, and Messrs Barnes & Golightly defendants, but on account of an error in the declaration the plaintiff was nonsuited. On June 26, 1775, a cause came on in the Court of Common Pleas, Guildhall, between a gentleman, plaintiff, and a lottery office-keeper, defendant. The cause of the action was, that the gentleman, passing by the lottery office, observed a woman and a boy crying, on which he asked the reason of their tears. They informed him that they had insured a number in the lottery on the overnight, and upon inquiry at another office, found it to have been drawn five days before, and therefore wanted their money returned. The gentleman taking their part was assaulted and beaten by the office-keeper, and the jury, after hearing the evidence, gave a verdict in favour of the gentleman with five pounds damages. In 1775 some of the Bluecoat boys appointed to assist in the drawing of the State Lottery were tampered with for the purpose of inducing them to commit a fraud. These attempts were successful in one instance that became known, and doubtless in many others that did not. This discovery led to certain regulations, which were carried out with great vigour. On the 1st of June a man was brought before the Lord Mayor for attempting to bribe the two boys who drew the Museum Lottery at Guildhall to conceal a ticket, and to bring it to him, promising that he would at once return it. His intention was to insure it in all the offices with a view to defraud the keepers. The boys were so frightened at the proposition that they gave notice to the managers of the lottery, and pointed out the delinquent, who was, however, discharged, as there was no law by which to punish him. On the 5th of December another of the boys engaged to draw the numbers in the State Lottery at Guildhall was examined before Sir Charles Asgill relative to a number that had been drawn out the Friday before, on which an assurance had been made in almost every office in London. The boy confessed that he was prevailed upon to conceal the ticket No. 21,481, by a man who paid him for so doing; that the man copied the number; and that the next day he followed the man’s instructions, and put his hand into the wheel as usual, with the ticket in it, and then pretended to draw it from among the rest. The instigator of the offence had actually received £400 of the insurance-office keepers. Had all of them paid him, the whole sum would have amounted to £3000; but some of them suspected a fraud had been committed, and caused the inquiry which led to the boy’s confessing both the temptation and his folly. On the next day the man who insured the ticket was examined. He was clerk to a hop-factor in Goodman’s Fields; but not being the person who had persuaded the boy to secrete the ticket and pretend to draw it in the usual manner, and no evidence appearing to connect him with the actual seducer, the prisoner was discharged, though it was ascertained that he had insured the number already mentioned ninety-one times in one day. In consequence of the circumstances which led to this examination, the Lords of the Treasury inquired further and deliberated on the means of preventing a recurrence of such transactions. The result of their conference was the following order, which was, however, but privately circulated, and was never published in any periodical, book, or newspaper until after the abolition of Lotteries:-- ORDER _of December 12, 1775_. A DISCOVERY having been made that WILLIAM TRAMPLETT, one of the Boys employed in drawing the Lottery had, at the Instigation of one CHARLES LOWNDES, (since absconded) at different Times in former Rolls, _taken out of the Number Wheel_ THREE _numbered Tickets, which were at_ THREE _several Times returned by him into the said Wheel, and drawn without his parting with them_, so as to give them the Appearance of being fairly drawn _to answer the purpose of defrauding by insurance_: IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED, for preventing the like wicked Practices in future, that every Boy, before he is suffered to put his Hand into either Wheel, be brought by the Proclaimer to the Managers on Duty, for them to see that _the Bosoms and Sleeves of his Coat be closely buttoned, his Pockets sewed up, and his Hands examined_; and that during the Time of his being on Duty, _he shall keep his left Hand in his Girdle behind him, and his right Hand open with his Fingers extended_; and the Proclaimer is not to suffer him at any Time to leave the Wheel, without being first examined by the Manager nearest him. The Observance of the foregoing Order is recommended by the Managers on this Roll to those on the succeeding Rolls, till the matter shall be more fully discussed at a general Meeting. It is noticeable that though only one ticket was spoken of in the police case, the secret instructions refer to three. It is likely that if it had been known that more than one had been tampered with, a general unpleasantness would have resulted, and the whole of the drawing been declared null and void. As it was, there was some difficulty in keeping the matter within bounds; and the trifling proportion of the attempted cheat, as compared with the magnitude of the general issue, was the strong point of the lottery managers. The exposure of the attempted, and so far as two tickets were concerned apparently successful, fraud, would have led to a vast amount of trouble and expense, and would have considerably added to the unpopularity of lotteries--a feeling which, as it was, made itself now and again very manifest. Anyhow the secret was kept for over sixty years, as it was never divulged until the general dissolution of the lottery system in 1826, when the following on the same subject was also for the first time made public:-- ORDER _at_ GENERAL MEETING. A PLAN OF RULES AND REGULATIONS to be observed in order _to prevent the Boys committing Frauds, &c._, in the Drawing of the Lottery, agreeable to _Directions_ received by Mr. Johnson on Tuesday the 16th of January 1776, from the LORDS OF THE TREASURY. THAT ten Managers be always on the Roll at Guildhall, two of whom are to be conveniently placed opposite the two Boys at the Wheels, in order to observe that they strictly conform themselves to the Rules and Orders directed by the Committee at Guildhall, on Tuesday, December 12, 1775. THAT _it be requested of the_ TREASURER OF CHRIST’S HOSPITAL _not to make known who are the twelve Boys nominated for drawing the Lottery till the morning the Drawing begins; which said Boys are all to attend every Day, and the two who are to go on Duty at the Wheels are to be taken promiscuously from amongst the whole Number_ by either of the Secretaries, _without observing any regular Course or Order; so that no Boy shall know when it will be his turn to go to either Wheel_. THIS METHOD, though attended with considerable additional Expense, by the extra Attendance of two Managers and six Boys, will, it is presumed, effectually prevent any Attempt being made to corrupt or bribe any of the Boys to commit the Fraud practised in the last Lottery. In July 1778 there was tried before Lord Mansfield at Guildhall a case wherein a merchant was plaintiff and a lottery-office keeper defendant. The action was for the purpose of recovering damages against the office-keeper for suffering plaintiff’s apprentice, a youth, to insure during the drawing of the last lottery, contrary to the statute; whereby the lad lost a considerable sum, the property of his master. The jury, without leaving their box, gave a verdict for the plaintiff, and the judge ordered the defendant to pay £500 penalty and be imprisoned for three months. During the same year, Parliament having discussed the evil of insuring, and the mischievous subdivision of the shares of tickets, passed an Act for the regulation of lottery offices, by which it was enacted that every office-keeper should pay £50 for a licence, and give tangible security not to infringe any part of the Act; that no smaller portion of any ticket than a sixteenth should be disposed of under a penalty of £50; that any person disposing of goods or merchandise upon any chance relating to the drawing of any ticket should be liable to a fine of £20; and that all shares should be stamped at an office established under the said Act, the original tickets being kept at the office till after the drawing. Many other regulations were made in the same law, and in the following year the question was again subject of legislation; but notwithstanding all the efforts of the Commons, the ruinous practice of insuring was still conducted with dexterity and great profit by the office-keepers. This is one of their plans for evading the law:-- _November 7, 1781._ MODE OF INSURANCE, WHICH continues the whole Time of drawing the Lottery, at CARRICK’S STATE LOTTERY OFFICE, King’s Arms, 72, Threadneedle Street. _At one Guinea each_ NUMBERS _are taken_, to return three Twenty Pound Prizes, value Sixty Pounds, for every given Number that shall be drawn any Prize whatever above Twenty Pounds during the whole drawing. ⁂ _Numbers at half a Guinea to receive half the above._ And here is another of about the same date, which openly violates the spirit if not the letter of the law:-- J. COOK respectfully solicits the Public will favour the following _incomparably advantageous plan_ with attention, by which _upwards of thirty-two thousand Chances for obtaining a Prize (out of the forty-eight thousand Tickets) are given in one Policy_. POLICIES OF FIVE GUINEAS _with three Numbers_, with the first Number will gain 20000 if a Prize of £20000 10000 „ £10000 5000 „ £5000 _with the second Number_ will gain 6000 guineas if 20000 3000 „ 10000 1500 „ 5000 _with the third Number_ will gain 3000 guineas if 20000 1500 „ 10000 1200 „ 5000 Then follow the address and other tempting inducements. In 1781 an Act was passed to prevent the insurance of tickets by any method. The office-keepers continued to insure notwithstanding, and many prosecutions resulted; but as the profits were greater than the fines, business continued to run briskly. One man was in 1784 fined fifteen hundred pounds, and he brought an action in 1785 to recover the money from the sheriff who had levied the amount on his goods. The case was tried in the Court of King’s Bench, and ended in an almost immediate nonsuit. In February 1793 the Commissioners of the Lottery, in order to abate insuring, determined that no persons should be suffered to take down numbers except the clerks of licensed offices known to the Commissioners. No slips were to be sent out; but the numbers were to be taken down by one clerk in one book; Steel’s list of lottery numbers was to be abolished, and a recompense made for it; and the magistrates resolved to apprehend all suspicious persons who should be seen taking early numbers. Yet in 1796 there was a class of sharpers who took lottery insurances, and this gambling among the higher and middle classes was carried on to an extent exceeding all credibility, producing consequences to many private families of great worth and respectability, of the most distressing nature. The insurance offices in London numbered over four hundred. To many of them persons were attached called Morocco men, who went from house to house among their customers, or attended in the back parlours of public-houses, for the purpose of making insurances. It was calculated that at these offices (exclusive of what was done at the licensed offices) insurances were made to the extent of eight hundred thousand pounds, in premiums, during the Irish Lottery, and above one million during the English, upon which it was calculated that the insurers made from fifteen to twenty-five per cent. profit. This confederacy, during the English Lottery of the year 1796, supported about two thousand agents and clerks, and nearly eight thousand Morocco men, “including a considerable number of ruffians and bludgeon men, paid by a general association of the principal proprietors of the establishments, who regularly met in committee in a well-known public-house in Oxford Market, twice or thrice a week during the drawing of the lottery, for the purpose of concerting measures to defeat the exertions of the magistrates by forcibly resisting or bribing the officers of justice.” Lotteries were declared by the Parliamentary reports of 1807 to be inseparable from illegal insurances. The reports further state that “the Lottery is so radically vicious, that under no system of regulations which can be devised will it be possible for Parliament to adopt it as an efficient source of revenue, and at the same time divest it of all the evils and calamities of which it has hitherto been so baneful a source.” Among these evils and calamities the Committees of Parliament enumerate that “idleness, dissipation, and poverty were increased,--the most sacred and confidential trusts were betrayed,--domestic comfort was destroyed, madness was often created, suicide itself was produced, and crimes subjecting the perpetrators of them to death were committed.” Sir Nathaniel Conant, who in 1816 was chief magistrate of Bow Street, stated to a committee of the House of Commons that the Lottery was one of the predisposing causes by which the people of the metropolis were vitiated; that it led to theft, to supply losses and disappointments occasioned by speculating on its chances; and that illegal insurances continued to be effected. “There are,” he says, “people in the background, who, having got forty or fifty thousand pounds by that, employ people of the lowest order, and give them a commission for what they bring; there is, _a wheel within a wheel_.” Another magistrate giving evidence before the same committee, said, “It is a scandal to the Government, thus to excite people to practise the vice of gaming for the purpose of drawing a revenue from their ruin. It is an anomalous proceeding by law to declare gambling infamous; to hunt out petty gamblers in their recesses, and cast them into prison; and by law also to set up the giant gambling of the State Lottery, and encourage persons to resort to it by the most captivating devices which ingenuity uncontrolled by moral rectitude can invent.” This evidence may be regarded as the ultimate cause of the suppression of lotteries, which might have dragged on an existence for a few more years had it not been for the atrocities of the insurance-mongers. We will now turn towards the closing scenes in this eventful drama. Seldom was human ingenuity more exercised than in giving public notoriety to lottery schemes. The originators or proprietors of lotteries used to employ a number of persons, frequently of considerable literary ability and talent, to attract the public attention by verses, ingenious advertisements, and decoy paragraphs in the newspapers, engaging the attention of the readers by smart allusions to political topics or other matters of interest, which entrapped the unwary into lottery puffs. Thirteen thousand pounds was usually paid into the Exchequer for duties on these and other methods of advertising practised by the lottery people, and some of the agents spent as much as £20,000 in puffing and advertisements. Take the following as a specimen of the puffing which marked the later days of the Lottery:-- Before the time of Sir Isaac Newton, various notions were entertained concerning colours. Plato said colour was a flame issuing from bodies, the Indians of America believed the same, and when any person read a letter they believed it spoke, and blessed the paper in proportion as they were moved by it. What emotions would the following billet excite? “The bearer may receive one hundred thousand pounds.” This would make a deep impression on the natives of every country, and may now be realised; for by the present Grand Lottery a single ticket may bestow on the Bearer One Hundred Thousand Pounds. Here is another of the same ingenious description, which kept the trap constantly baited for the unsuspecting:-- DUEL.--On Friday last a meeting took place near Plymouth, between Capt. G---- and Lieut. R----, both of the Royal Navy, when, after exchanging shots, happily without effect, the seconds interfered and amicably adjusted the dispute. The following is said to have been the cause of the duel:--Lieut. R---- had dreamt three successive nights that a certain number would be a prize of £3000, in the ensuing lottery, which he mentioned to Captain G----, but never intimated any intention of having that ticket; he, however, wrote up to his agent in London to procure it, who found the Captain was beforehand with him, as he had got it the day before, and refused to give it up. By the intercession of the seconds, it is settled that they are each to have half the ticket, and as they are both very meritorious officers, we sincerely wish they may have one of the numerous Capital Prizes with which the scheme abounds. The most stupendous efforts were made to promote the success of the last lottery, which, however, languished sadly. The price of tickets was arbitrarily raised, to induce a belief that they were in great demand, “at the very moment when,” says Hone, writing immediately afterwards, “their sale was notoriously at a stand; and the lagging attention of the public of the metropolis was endeavoured to be quickened by all sorts of stratagems to the 18th of July, as the very last chance that would occur in England of gaining ‘Six 30,000_l._ besides other Capitals,’ which it was positively affirmed were ‘all to be drawn’ on that fatal day.” Besides the dispersion of innumerable bills and aspersions on Government for extinguishing the Lottery, those most interested in its preservation caused London and the suburbs to be paraded by a most magnificent procession, in which was a band of music which played to attract attention, and then a man stepped forward, and ringing a bell, announced the death of the Lottery. Cartloads of bills were showered down areas and thrust under doors, and no effort was spared to make the end crown the work of centuries. Chief among the office-keepers of the period was a Mr T. Bish--one of whose earlier prospectuses we present in exact facsimile--who showered millions of bills and miles of doggerel verse upon London just before the final draw took place. He had been a considerable adept in the art of puffing by means of the mock news-paragraphs to which reference has just been made, one of his best being that which follows:-- A laughable circumstance occurred at the Opera House a few evenings since. The Honourable Mrs H---- C---- in the confusion that takes place in the lobby on quitting the theatre, dropped her reticule, and was some minutes before she regained it; when on looking at its contents she exclaimed: “I have lost my duplicates!” This created surprise, not that the company had any doubt when the lady pledged her word, but they thought she had pledged her jewels. However, on enquiry, it was found that the lost duplicates were Two Tickets of one number (which she had purchased that evening) in the Lottery to be drawn the next Tuesday; luckily she soon after found them, and anticipates getting £20,000, as she had procured them at Bish’s well-known office, Charing Cross. [Illustration: If U R a man struggling to get through the world or surrounded by crosses or if you wish to lay by a Fortune for your Children go to Bish or his Agents WHO MAY MAKE YOU independent and above the frowns of the world By the purchase of a Ticket or Share in the New Lottery, to be all drawn in Two Days, 5^{th} and 18^{th} OCTOBER. Two of £20,000, Two of £10,000, &c. All Sterling Money. All the 4500 Tickets drawn the First Day are sure to be Prizes. Two of £10,000 in the First Quarter of an Hour. Only 7600 Tickets. (_See the Scheme._) If _you are a man struggling to get through the world, or surrounded by crosses; or_ if _you wish to_ lay _by_ a _Fortune for your Children_, go to _BISH or_ his _Agents_, who may make you _independent, and_ above the frowns of the _world_. Tickets and Shares are selling by BISH CONTRACTOR FOR ANOTHER LOTTERY 4, CORNHILL, & 9, CHARING-CROSS, LONDON, and by ALL HIS AGENTS IN THE COUNTRY ] It would be impossible here to give the many specimens which have been preserved of Bish’s handiwork just before the close of the lotteries, but from an _embarras de richesses_ we select the following:-- BISH. _The Last Man._ In reminding his best friends, the public, that the State Lottery will be drawn this day, 3d May, Bish acquaints them that it is the _very last but one_ that will ever take place in this kingdom; and he is THE LAST CONTRACTOR whose name will appear _singly_ before the public, as the very last will be a coalition of all the usual contractors. Bish being “the last man” who appears singly, has been particularly anxious to make an excellent scheme, and flatters himself the one he has the honour to submit must meet universal approbation. At the back of the bill were some verses after the style of the “Cajolery Duet.” This is one of them:-- TO-DAY, OR NOT AT ALL. _Run Neighbours, Run!_ Run, neighbours, run! To-day it is the Lott’ry draws, You still may be in time if your purse be low; Rhino, we all know, will stop of poverty the flaws. Possessed of that, you’ll find no one to serve you slow. The ministers in Parliament of lotteries have toll’d the knell, And have declared from Cooper’s Hall dame Fortune soon they will expel; The Blue-coat boys no more will shout that they have drawn a capital! Nor run as though their necks they’d break to _Lucky Bish_ the news to tell. Run, neighbours, run, &c. Although the last lottery was expected to take place on the 18th of July, it was not until the 18th of October that the closing scene in an eventful history took place. For this Bish, among many other handbills, produced the following:-- THE AMBULATOR’S GUIDE TO THE LAND OF PLENTY. BY PURCHASING A TICKET _in the present Lottery_ You may _reap_ a golden _harvest_ in _Cornhill_, and pick up the _bullion_ in _Silver_-street, have an interest in _Bank-buildings_, possess a _Mansion-house_ in _Golden-square_, and an estate like a _Little Britain_; never be in _Hunger_ford-market, but all your life continue a _Mayfair_. BY PURCHASING A HALF, You need never be confined within _London Wall_, but become the proprietor of many a _Long Acre_; represent a _Borough_ or an _Aldermanbury_, and have a share in _Threadneedle-street_. BY PURCHASING A QUARTER, Your affairs need never be in _Crooked-lane_, nor your legs in _Fetter-lane_; you may avoid _Paper-buildings_, steer clear of the _King’s Bench_, and defy the _Marshalsea_; if your heart is in _Love-lane_ you may soon get into _Sweeting’s Alley_, obtain your lover’s consent for _Matrimony-place_, and always live in a _High-street_. [Illustration: ADVERTISING THE LAST STATE LOTTERY DRAWN IN ENGLAND. 1826.] BY PURCHASING AN EIGHTH, You may secure plenty of _provision_ for _Swallow-street_; finger the _Cole_ in _Coleman-street_; and may never be troubled with _Chancery-lane_. You may cast _anchor_ in _Cable-street_; set up business in a _Fore-street_; and need never be confined within a _Narrow-wall_. BY PURCHASING A SIXTEENTH, You may live _frugal_ in _Cheapside_; get merry in _Liquorpond-street_; soak your _hide_ in _Leather-lane_; be a _wet sole_ in _Shoe-lane_; turn _maltster_ in _Beer-lane_, or _hammer_ away in _Smithfield_. In short, life must indeed be a _Long-lane_ if it’s without a _turning_. Therefore, if you are wise, without _Mincing_ the matter, go _Pall-mall_ to _Cornhill_ or _Charing-cross_, and enroll your name in the _Temple_ of Fortune, BISH’S. Advertisements in the newspapers were not, however, plentiful. The office-keepers seemed to prefer the pomp and circumstance of processions and bands and funeral speeches, to the cold respectability which was just then part of the newspaper system. Bish had many eccentric illustrations in his handbills, and some of his verses went beyond even the bounds of eccentricity. As the eventful day approached, the efforts in the handbill line redoubled, and people were provided with waste paper for an indefinite period; but there was little to notice in the columns of any of the chief journals. On October 7, 1826, a public notice appeared on the front page of the _Times_, in company with the advertisements of Swift and Eyton, two office-keepers; but whether it was placed there by order of the “powers that be,” or was in the interests of the dealers, we must leave our readers to judge for themselves. The latter seems most probable:-- PUBLIC NOTICE.--The Licenses granted by 4th Geo. IV. cap. 60, to the Lottery-office-keepers, to sell and divide into shares State Lottery Tickets, will cease and determine on Wednesday the 18th of this month, when all the Six Prizes of £30,000, and every other prize, amounting to £389,000, must be decided, and all Lotteries end in this kingdom. Government, having already given extra time for the sale of tickets, will not grant an hour beyond the 18th instant. Hazard was the rather appropriate name of another promoter whose advertisements are published just at this time; but they are, as are the others, small and unpretentious when in the newspapers, and are only noticeable as records of the finishing days of the great State Lottery. In the _Times_ of October 13 there is this notice, which was repeated on the 16th and 17th, on the last-named date having the word “to-morrow” inserted instead of “next Wednesday:”-- DRAWING of the LOTTERY.--Whereas it is maliciously asserted by an Anonymous Correspondent in the Morning Chronicle of this day, that application would be made to the Lords of the Treasury for a further Postponement of the Lottery, the Public are most unequivocally and positively assured by the Contractors that no such application has been made, nor even contemplated; but on the contrary, it is absolutely and inevitably determined by Government, that this last of all lotteries shall and must be decided NEXT WEDNESDAY, 18th instant. On the day before the drawing, the advertisements in the _Times_ showed that great apathy existed, and that the tickets had not gone off well, as the office-keepers had evidently many yet left on hand. Even the advertisements have a dispirited appearance:-- FINISH of LOTTERIES.--SWIFT and Co. respectfully inform the Public that the last and only day of drawing the STATE LOTTERY is Wednesday the 18th of this month, when 6 prizes of 30,000l. and all the other capitals in the scheme will be determined. Every ticket will receive 5l. independent of any sum to which it may be entitled. In the last Lottery containing 30,000l. prizes Swift and Co. sold two out of four of them at their offices 11, Poultry; 1, Strand; and 31, Aldgate High-street. It is almost evident that the Lottery was “played out” on its own merits, and that the interference of Parliament only hastened the end so far as concerns the important events. Another firm of contractors put forth a final appeal thus:-- THE LAST of ALL, TO-MORROW, 18th October.--J. and J. SIVEWRIGHT, Contractors, most positively assure the Public that-- To-morrow, Six of 30,000l. must be drawn. To-morrow, 389,000l. will be decided. To-morrow, all Lotteries end in this kingdom. To gain a Prize of 30,000l. you must buy THIS DAY. Tickets and Shares are selling by J. and J. SIVEWRIGHT, Contractors, 37, Cornhill; 11, Holborn; and 38, Haymarket; who shared and sold 12,478, a prize of 30,000l.; 3,613, 21,055l.; and in the last Lottery, 1,783, a prize of 21,000l.; and 3,925, a prize of 21,000l. On the fatal day itself the only noticeable advertisement in the _Times_ is that of Bish, which is the same as had been running for some little time, and which on the 18th of October 1826, with the word “this day,” instead of what had appeared before, stood thus, a specimen of the last newspaper appeal in regard to a forthcoming State lottery:-- THE inevitable and absolute FINISH of LOTTERIES, THIS DAY.--BISH, in soliciting for the last time the favours of his best friends, the Public, assures them that, This Day, a Ticket must gain £30,000 This Day, a Half must gain 15,000 This Day a Quarter must gain 7,500 This Day an Eighth must gain 3,750 This Day a Sixteenth must gain 1,875 This Day, all the Six of £30,000 will be drawn, every number decided, and every ticket a Prize. This Day, 18th instant, all lotteries end for ever. Tickets and Shares are selling by BISH, Stockbroker, 4, Cornhill, and 9, Charing-cross, who shared and sold, within the last 12 months, 5 prizes of 30,000l. and 9 of 20,000l., and in the very last drawing, 3d of May, No. 1,833 (Class B), 21,000l., and 3,925 (Class A), 21,000l. The following is the record of the last drawing, as published in the Thursday’s papers: “Yesterday afternoon, about half-past six o’clock, that old servant of the State, the lottery, breathed its last, having for a long period of years, ever since the days of Queen Anne, contributed largely towards the public revenue of the country. This event took place at Cooper’s Hall, Basinghall Street; and such was the anxiety on the part of the public to witness the last drawing of the lottery, that great numbers of persons were attracted to the spot, independently of those who had an interest in the proceedings. The gallery of Cooper’s Hall was crowded to excess long before the period fixed for the drawing (five o’clock), and the utmost anxiety was felt by those who had shares in the lottery for the arrival of the appointed hour. The annihilation of lotteries, it will be recollected, was determined on in the session of Parliament before last; and thus a source of revenue, bringing into the treasury the sums of £250,000 and £300,000 per annum will be dried up. This determination on the part of the Legislature is hailed by far the greatest portion of the public with joy, as it will put an end to a system which many believe to have fostered and encouraged the late speculations, the effects of which have been and are still severely felt. A deficiency in the public revenue to the extent of £250,000 annually will, however, be the consequence of the annihilation of lotteries, and it must remain for those who have strenuously supported the putting a stop to lotteries to provide for the deficiency.”--“Although that which ended yesterday was the last, if we are informed correctly the lottery-office keepers have been left with a great number of tickets remaining on their hands--a pretty strong proof that the public in general have now no relish for these schemes.”--“The concourse of persons in Basinghall Street was very great; indeed, the street was almost impassable, and everybody seemed desirous of ascertaining the fortunate numbers. In the gallery the greatest interest was excited, as the various prizes were drawn from the wheel; and as soon as a numbered ticket was drawn from the number wheel, every one looked with anxiety to his share, in order to ascertain if Fortune smiled on him. Only one instance occurred where a prize was drawn and a number held by any individual present. The fortunate person was a little man, who no sooner had learned that his number was a grand prize, than he buttoned up his coat, and coolly walked off without uttering a word. As the drawing proceeded disappointment began to succeed the hopes indulged by those who were present. On their entrance to the hall every face wore a cheerful appearance; but on the termination of the drawing a strong contrast was exhibited, and the features of each were strongly marked with dissatisfaction. The drawing commenced shortly after five o’clock, and ended at twenty minutes past six. The doors of the various lottery offices were also surrounded by persons awaiting the issue of the drawing.” [Illustration: THE LAST OF THE LOTTERIES.] The _Times_, in a short leader--short and few were the leaders in the _Times_ of that day--published on the Thursday, says: “Yesterday terminated the lotteries in this country--may we say for ever? We know not. Such a result will depend upon the wants of Government, and the morality of its ministers. However, we rejoice at their suspension,--a suspension which we hope we have in some degree assisted in effecting,--yet rejoice with fear. Looking at the Stock Exchange, at the time bargains, and at all the iniquities practised there, we have only to hope that the place of the lotteries may not be supplied by some more mischievous system of knavery. Time was when all the robberies were committed on the king’s highway. The lighting, watching, and general improvement of our roads, have nearly put an end to this practice; but housebreaking has unfortunately taken its place! And yet the people of England is not a gambling people like the French, as is evident from the fate of the last lottery. We have heard that hardly half the tickets were sold; from which it is evident, that the spirit of lottery-gambling was extinct before the system; and if that spirit had not been kept alive by incessant stimuli, it would have expired long ago.” It may be as well to mention, though it is generally known, that an Act of the 9th and 10th Vict. was passed for legalising Art Union Lotteries within certain limits and under certain conditions. Though our chapter has run over its length, we can hardly conclude without quoting the wise words of Adam Smith on the subject of lotteries. “The chance of gain,” says he, “is by every man more or less overvalued, and the chance of loss is by most men undervalued.... The world neither ever saw, or ever will see, a perfectly fair lottery, or one in which the whole gain compensated the whole loss; because the undertaker could make nothing by it. In the State lotteries the tickets are really not worth the price which is paid by the original subscribers, and yet commonly sell in the market for twenty, thirty, and sometimes forty per cent. advance. The vain hope of gaining some of the greatest prizes is the sole cause of this demand. The soberest people scarce look upon it as a folly to pay a small sum for the chance of gaining ten or twenty thousand pounds; though they know that even that small sum is perhaps twenty or thirty per cent. more than the chance is worth. In a lottery in which no prize exceeds twenty pounds, though in other respects it approach much nearer to a perfectly fair one than the common State lotteries, there would not be the same demand for tickets. In order to have a better chance for some of the great prizes, some people purchase several tickets, and others small shares in a still greater number. There is not, however, a more certain proposition in mathematics, than that the more tickets you adventure upon the more likely you are to be a loser. Adventure upon all the tickets in the lottery, and you lose for certain; and the greater the number of your tickets the nearer you approach to this certainty.” Though this was written in reference to a state of affairs long past, the lesson is not without value nowadays. October 18, 1826, saw the last of the State lotteries, but it was long before the smaller fry were eradicated. Conducted very quietly at first, but after a while their promoters growing bolder, lotteries for clothes, furniture, and, especially at Christmas-time, for food and drink, were openly advertised under the title of “sweeps” up to comparatively recent times. A few police prosecutions about a dozen years back improved these relics of a past day off the face of the earth. There were, however, still left what were called “specs,” which violated both the Betting-House Act and the Lottery Act, and the promoters of the chief of them in turn suffered under the majesty of the law about the period of the raid on the commission agents referred to in a previous chapter. Under the guises of picture and circular sales these turf lotteries are still continued, an advertisement in a sporting paper of June 1874 giving an address in Glasgow, informing all those whom it most concerns that the “East End Circular” has for disposal 30,000 circulars, at 1_s._ each; the profits, about £800, will be distributed on THE DERBY. 2000 PRIZES. FIRST, £300. This circular needs no recommendation. It is a fortune to all who invest in it. The winners of all the large races have been sent in it. Every purchaser has a fair chance of securing the £200. For circulars, 1_s._ each, apply at once to E. Jones, 128, Renfield Street, Glasgow, or in person to any of his well-known agents. Then follows a list of names of people living in various parts of the kingdom who are empowered to sell the circulars. Within the past twelvemonth certain small papers which added to their circulation by the presentation of coupons entitling the holders to shares in lotteries for prizes of all descriptions, received solemn warning from the Home Office, and had to discontinue their projects. That this was wise, considering the innocence of the arrangement, we do not think; that it was not impartial, the notice from which we have just quoted proves. For the Lottery Act extends to Scotland, even if the Betting Act does not.[45] [40] Stow. [41] Stow’s Annals. [42] Baker’s Chronicle. [43] Whereas, some give out that they could never receive their Books after they were drawn in the first Lottery, the Author declares, and it will be attested, that of seven hundred Prizes that were drawn there were not six remaining Prizes that suffered with his in the Fire; for the Drawing being on the 10th of May, 1665, the Office did then continue open for the Delivery of the same (though the Contagion much raged) until the latter End of July following; and opened again, to attend the Delivery, in April, 1666, whither Persons repaired daily for their Prizes, and continued open until the Fire. [44] _Examiner_, October 22, 1826. [45] Since the above was written the Betting-House Extension Act of 1874 has become law, and, curiously enough, has caused the cessation of a procedure which was rendered illegal by an Act passed nearly fifty years before, a fact which our detectives with proverbial dulness were unable to discover. This was perhaps because there was nothing to be got by the discovery.