house. We are clearly of opinion with Mr. Harmer, that of the two it is better to proceed upon the former statute, than upon the new Vagrant Act*. We have purposely omitted the circumstance that many of the persons lately seized, as proprietors of gaminghouses, have been Frenchmen. Here we would say, with the Times, if these men are amenable to the Alien Act, “let them be carted out of the country without ceremony, and without delay." But, for heaven's sake, let us look to the principle of the thing, and not to the name and nation of the parties. We shall indeed suffer, and deserve to suffer, if we allow our English feelings and English prejudices to vary our notions of right and wrong, or extinguish our regard for liberty, justice, and expediency. But to return-it would be well, we think, to respect private property, although it should happen to belong to the proprietor of a "Hell." To break doors, to demolish furniture, to make a forcible entry into a house through the windows, are methods against which our very nature revolts. The necessity for having recourse to them must be not only alleged, but absolutely and incontrovertibly proved. Yet far the worst part of the business remains. We must fix our eyes steadfastly upon the facts. Now, according to the terms of the commitment, the persons convicted were sent to the House of Correction, not for keeping a gaming-house, but for "playing at a certain unlawful game called Roulette." Nay more-if no proof can be produced that they were playing, it is sufficient that they were in the room. "If," says Mr. Halls, "it is proved that gaming was going on, I regard all persons present as participators in it;" or, in other words, a man may be sentenced to a long, a degrading, a laborious, a painful punishment; may be condemned to imprisonment, disgrace, and almost torture, because he has foolishly risked his own money, or has been casually present at the game of Roulette. This is dreadful. It is See also the Times of October 28th, for the two trials of Carter v. Oldfield and Bennett, and Carter v. Abbott, Holdsworth, and Davis. Here the Editor himself remarks: "The keepers of common gaming-houses have been attacked in a way which they will probably feel more than any police prosecutions. They have had actions brought against them in the Court of King's Bench, and have been forced to disgorge in one or two instances a portion of the spoil." monstrous; it is intolerable: it shall not be endured. Where are we, Sir ? Can these things happen in England, and be disregarded? Sir, we will venture to affirm, that not only do people in general, almost without an exception, play at cards for money in private houses, which is gambling as far as it goes; but that there are few young men in London, arrived at the age of thirty, who have not, once or twice in their lives, been in the inside of a common gaming-house, or "Hell," either in a state of intoxication, or in a moment of curiosity, or for the purpose of meeting an acquaintance, or from some other accidental cause. Suppose, then, Sir, that a relation of your own is among the number; suppose that he is present at the game of Roulette "for three minutes without playing : " and next suppose, Sir, that on this account he is sent to the tread-mill for a month, and disgraced for life, on a warrant from two Justices of the Peace. This, Sir, has not yet happened to a relation of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, but it very well may happen; and if it has happened to any other Englishman, where is the difference? Again, Sir, they who are found in a gaming-house must be either gentlemen, or not. Consider the dilemma. Suppose, in the first place, the person seized to be low in his connexions, and poor in his circumstances. What, Sir, will be the reflections of such a man ?---They will be these. "What offence have I committed against society, that the law should punish me? I have merely speculated with that which was my own. I know that gaming is carried on with impunity every where around me. I see one man betting a thousand pounds upon a race; I hear of another almost ruining himself by a trotting match: I am told of princes, and dukes, and lords, and baronets, members of both houses of parliament, winning and losing fortunes in a night;— but they are rich, and noble, and can do all this without imprisonment, and without fear; while I, because I am poor and friendless, and unconnected with men of rank or influence, I am sent to the House of Correction and the tread-mill for staking my five shillings, or my half-crown. Care, Sir, must be taken that punishments are equalized. In these times, as it will never do to incarcerate Carlile, or Dolby, or Samuel Waddington, if Lord Byron is left unmolested, and exulting in his attacks upon the religion and morals of mankind; so it is neither prudent, nor just, to deal in a severe and arbitrary manner with the unhappy men who go to a gaming-house which is common, while they are spared who go to a gaming-house which is fashionable or select. But, Sir, the fact is, that the gamesters of the metropolis are, for the most part, men of respectable birth and liberal education. As far as station of life can make a gentleman, they are gentlemen. Why, the very scoundrels, who are twice steeped in infamy-who are disgraced as gamesters, and doubly disgraced as informers-informers, too, without attempting to adduce a charge of unfairness and dishonesty against the proprietors of the house-even these men are both of them officers in the king's army. Then be assured, Sir, that to condemn men of this stamp to the tread-mill is not to reform, but to exasperate, them. All gamesters are desperate men; but, by such a mode of proceeding, they will be driven to ten-fold desperation. Let our words be marked. We have a strong apprehension that murder will be the consequence of the present system rather than the suppression of gaming-houses. Gamesters will play; and there are many men, we feel morally certain, who will go to the gaming-house with a pistol in their pockets; and, rather than suffer themselves to be arrested,-with the tread-mill, and the company of pick-pockets and felons, and disgrace for life, before their eyes,-they will shoot the first officer who touches them through the head, or throw him out of the same window by which he entered, and with as little ceremony. Lastly, Sir, if men deserve imprisonment in its most aggravated form for being present in a gaming-house, or for playing at Rouge et Noir or Roulette; where is the man, from Ruthven the Bow-street officer, who confesses that he has played, but cunningly lays the scene of action in France, to the peer of the realm or the prince of the blood, who can lay his hand upon his heart and say that he has not deserved such imprisonment? We could put these arguments in a hundred shapes, and bring a hundred more in addition to them; but we shall only repeat that one argument, which comes with such overwhelming force as to render all the rest utterly superfluous. If, Sir, this system is wrong, why is it not abandoned ?— if it is right, what becomes of the lottery? The two things must be viewed in connexion; for, in fact, the two things are one. The lottery is a species of gaming; they who speculate in the lottery are gamesters. While the lottery is sanctioned-while betting at horse-races is expressly legalized,―to condemn any gamester to the tread-mill is the most atrocious and tyrannical injustice. To talk about the lottery as a vent for gambling, is to talk a kind of unprincipled nonsense, which is unworthy any other answer than a laugh of contempt. Do we give men brandy to prevent them from intoxicating themselves with wine? To allow the lottery, and to punish gaming with excessive rigour, is to support a man with one hand, that you may knock him down with the other. The thing then, Sir, must end here. "To this complexion must it come at last." Either the lottery must be abolished, or the present severities must be stopped. Men will not bear them; and to the other fatal consequences it may be added, that all rational persons-all lovers of civil freedom, will at length learn to sympathize with gamesters, and lose their abhorrence of the crime in their indignation at the punishment. For one moment, Sir, look to yourself. While you,the Chancellor of the Exchequer,-encourage and incite your fellow-citizens to stake twenty pounds upon the lottery, can you sit quietly down, and suffer men to be condemned to imprisonment and to the tread-mill for hazarding five shillings at roulette; can you reconcile it to your feelings -can you reconcile it to your reason-can you reconcile it to your conscience? No, Sir, it is impossible that you should. We We have, therefore, addressed ourselves to you. now expect that you will take care, that no Englishman shall suffer such extremity of punishment for merely playing, or being present, at a gaming-house; that you will do your endeavours, with regard to some at least of the persons lately convicted, that their appeal to the Sessions shall not be in vain ; and that in the next meeting of Parliament you will yourself move, either for the abolition of the lottery, or for the repeal of the new Vagrant Act. We are, Sir, Your most obedient Servants, ON LITERARY AND PHILOSOPHICAL SOCIETIES. GENTLEMEN, Letter to the Council. THAT periodical meetings for the purpose of discussing literary questions of general interest are in a high degree favourable to the propagation of useful knowledge has long been one of my most favourite opinions. Of its accuracy I think but few will entertain a doubt, and among those I cannot presume to reckon any of the Members of your Council. I will not consume any of your valuable time in attempting to advance arguments in support of my proposition, presuming that it has already met with your assent; but will immediately call your attention to the object of my communication.-Observing with much satisfaction that the plan pursued by your monthly publication is one of general, I may almost say of universal, utility, I am inclined to think that you will not consider it derogatory to the dignity of your work to devote a little of its space to the recommendation of societies formed for the exclusive purpose of extending literary and philosophical knowledge-I have been rather surprised that in this day of universal inquiry so few Institutions of this description exist. I am at a loss to discover the cause-I cannot suppose that any real objection can be urged against them. And have therefore presumed to call your attention to the subject. Accident has just thrown in my way the plan and regulations of a society which I now enclose. It appears to me well calculated to effectuate its objects, and I think embraces every particular that can facilitate the improvement of its members. Of its place of meeting of the character and abilities of its supporters, I know nothing; neither am I aware whether it still exists or no; but merely enclose its Prospectus, as conveying more accurately the idea of those Institutions which I wish to encourage I rely upon your candour to excuse this intrusion, and as my only object is the advancement of the cause of literature, I trust an ápológy is unnecessary. I remain, Sir, Your most obedient servant, October 16, 1822. C. H. |
