CHAPTER IX.
Winners of prizes--Attempt to put down the practice of insuring--Steps taken to prevent it--Specimen handbill--Bish, the lottery office-keeper--Lottery for the “Pigot” diamond--Lottery-office agencies--Shortening the time of drawing the lottery--Story of Baron d’Aguilar.
As usual, the annual lottery for 1792 was passed in Parliament (32 Geo. III. c. 28), which, giving £500,000 in prizes, brought in a net profit of £300,136 6_s._ 10_d._ This lottery began drawing February 18, 1793, and in a handbill of Messrs. Richardson, Goodluck, and Co., a very respectable firm of office-keepers, whose offices were by the Bank of England, we learn to what varied grades in life the lottery prizes fell. It was No. 12,087 ticket, a £30,000 prize in the last lottery, sold by this firm in sixteenths.
1 sixteenth to a Clergyman near Brigg, Lincolnshire. ” ” Tradesman at Dartford, Kent. ” ” Gentleman in Scotland Yard, Westminster. ” ” Housekeeper in a Gentleman’s family, King Street, Grosvenor Square. ” ” Tradesman in Long Acre. ” ” Servant at Newbury, Berks. ” ” Gentleman and Lady in St. Martin’s Lane. ” ” Innkeeper at Gillingham, Kent. ” ” Gentleman at Malverton, Somersetshire. ” ” Gentleman at Hazlemere, Surrey. ” ” Two Gentlemen’s Servants, in Hamilton Street, Hyde Park Road. ” ” Two Gentlemen at Newmarket. ” ” Two young ladies (sisters), Bloomsbury. ” ” Two Servants to a Widow Lady at Epsom. ” ” Six Servants at a Merchant’s, St. Mary-at-Hill. ” ” Twelve Tradesmen in King’s Gate Street, Holborn.
Hornsby and Co., another respectable firm, advertise the capital prizes sold by them in the last two lotteries.
No. 33,979 a Prize of £30,000 42,569 ” 30,000 41,346 ” 10,000 36,986 ” 2,000 41,574 ” 2,000 9,192 ” 1,000 35,254 ” 1,000 44,057 ” 1,000 43,875 ” 1,000 43,549 ” 500 33,225 ” 500 1,144 ” 500 41,081 ” 500 9,950 ” 500
In 1793 was a lottery drawn February 17, 1794 (33 Geo. III. c. 62), which was not so successful as its predecessors, for though the same amount, £500,000, was distributed in prizes, the Government reaped but a poor net profit of £160,218 10_s._ 10_d._ In connection with this lottery a determined stand was made against the custom of insuring lottery tickets, of which I shall have more to say by-and-by. These insurances consisted in the payment of a small premium to insure the payment of a larger sum, if any given number in the lottery, on a given day, were drawn blank or a prize. The premiums were adapted to all descriptions of people; any sum might be insured from one to twenty guineas, so that persons of the poorest class might be accommodated. The price of an insurance for a guinea, at the commencement of the drawing of a lottery, was eight-pence and gradually increased as the drawing of the lottery proceeded, and the numbers to be drawn diminished from day to day.
Every exertion was made, by prosecutions for penalties, as well as by proceeding against the offenders, as rogues and vagabonds, under the third section of the Act of 1787, to put an end to this growing evil; but these exertions were ineffectual, owing to the apparently inexhaustible fund of ingenuity practised in evading the laws. In connection with these prosecutions, a most serious nuisance sprang up from the power given to magistrates, by the Act, 27 Geo. III. c. 1, to commit the persons prosecuted to the House of Correction, there to remain till the next General Quarter Sessions. It was open to any common informer, aided by professional attorneys, to issue process at his own discretion against any persons he might think proper, specifying the amount of penalties sued for, and to arrest them for the same. Hundreds of persons were sent to prison upon the oaths or pretended oaths of people who could not afterwards be found, and solely for the purpose of extorting money. The arrests were, usually, on a Saturday evening, in order to keep the party in custody on a Sunday, as being the most favourable day for the prosecutor to make his terms of compromise; and there was too much reason to believe that some of the sheriff’s officers were in collusion with the common informer or his attorney. The writs of _Capias_ were said to have become so numerous, that the sheriff represented that his officers could do no other business, so that it became necessary in this year’s Lottery Act (33 Geo. III. c. 62) to insert a clause, that no prosecution for penalties should be instituted, except in the name of His Majesty’s Attorney-General.
The evil, however, of illegal insurance appears to have continued unabated, by the distribution of the knowledge of the numbers of the tickets drawn, the easy access to the Guildhall, where the lotteries were drawn, and the facility with which numerical books were obtained. Any person might take down the numbers of the tickets as they came out of the wheel; and so prevalent was the mischief, that the insurance was carried on, even from hour to hour, during the drawing. The evidence given before the Commission of 1808 states that the seats provided for persons who attended to take down the numbers, were not confined to the clerks of licensed lottery office-keepers, but any person who could raise enough money to pay for a seat was admitted, and many of the persons who attended to take down the numbers, were employed solely to enable themselves and others to carry on the system of insurance. Immediately after each day’s drawing, they assembled at different places appointed for the purpose, where a great number of others also met to post their books. The result of each day’s drawing becoming known by this means, the persons interested were enabled to ascertain the event of their insurance, and to renew the same, if so minded, from day to day, during the continuance of the drawing.
The profits derived from letting these seats in the Guildhall made part of the revenue of the Corporation of the City of London, and amounted to between four and five hundred pounds per annum.
To remedy this evil, the Commissioners of Stamp Duties directed that an agreement should be made with the Corporation to rent that part of the hall during the drawing of the lottery, in order that the seats might be under their authority, and be confined to the clerks appointed by the managers and directors, and also the clerks of the office-keepers licensed by the Commissioners of Stamps.
In order that the agreement might have full effect, regulations were introduced, in 1793, in the annual Lottery Act of 33 Geo. III. c. 62--
(1) That no person should attend to take down the numbers of the tickets, as the same should be drawn, unless employed as clerk to the managers and directors, or be licensed to do so by the Commissioners of Stamp Duties.
(2) That every person so licensed should provide proper numerical books, of large dimensions, to be stamped by the Commissioners on every leaf thereof, and that they should grant such licences to such persons who should be duly licensed to keep lottery offices, and to no others, and that one person only should be licensed for each office; and that all persons present at the drawing, not being duly authorized, who should take down the number of the tickets, should be liable to penalties, and that magistrates should have power to issue their warrants to apprehend offenders, and to commit them for non-payment.
(3) That persons summoned as witnesses, and not appearing, should be subject to a penalty of £50.
In this way the event of each day’s drawing became known only to the licensed lottery office-keepers, and the effect was to check the illegal insurances very considerably, and to lead to the shutting up of a great number of offices, hitherto kept open solely for transacting the business of insurance.
In a handbill anent this lottery, it says, “_Somebody must_ have a _Prize_. _Any body may_ have a _Prize_. _Nobody_ can tell who _will_ have a _Prize_. And, therefore, _Every body_ is justified in trying for a _Prize_. Thus, _Hope_ animates their waking thoughts--_Hope_ inspires their dreams--_Passions_ are _corrected_ by the _Hope_ of a _Prize_--_Tempers_ are _sweetened_ by it. The fireside brightens when the prudent parent communicates to his wife and children that they have a chance for the THIRTY THOUSAND POUNDS.... In England and Ireland there are Ten Millions of people. There are but 50,000 tickets for the whole. To rate persons of property in both Kingdoms at Five Hundred Thousand, (and the Fund holders, alone, nearly amount to that,) there is but the _tenth part_ of a _Ticket_ for each of them--but, when we consider the _Middle Classes_, who, if not _Rich_, are, _generally, highly comfortable_ in their _circumstances_, and who buy, at least, 30,000 tickets in Shares, can we possibly doubt, for a single Moment, but that _tickets this year_ will at least be
EIGHTEEN GUINEAS.
But we can _now_ buy for less than _Sixteen Guineas_, we can _now save Two Guineas_ a ticket; and, by _saving_ we _gain two Guineas_. We will therefore _buy now_....
“In pining Love what healing Balm is found To ease the Heart, like THIRTY THOUSAND POUND? To the dull Mind, when anxious Cares abound, What Joys burst forth in THIRTY THOUSAND POUND! We that have oft complain’d that Fortune frown’d, Now seek her Smiles in THIRTY THOUSAND POUND! They dread no Claims when Quarter-day comes round, Who boast a share of THIRTY THOUSAND POUND! The Bells ring out, we hail the welcome Sound, And clasp with Bliss the THIRTY THOUSAND POUND!”
In 1794 there was the usual Lottery Act passed (34 Geo. III. c. 40), £500,000 given in prizes, and this year an improvement in the price paid to the Government, the net gain being £229,893 0_s._ 7_d._ In 1795 (35 Geo. III. c. 36), the prizes being £500,000, the net gain was £245,208 18_s._ 11_d._ This lottery was drawn on February 22, 1796, and it is in connection with it that we are first introduced to the name of T. BISH, who afterwards was the best-known lottery office-keeper, especially noted for his varied powers of advertising, before whom our most celebrated advertising firms must “hide their diminished heads,” and from whom they might take many useful lessons. Of his origin, or previous career, we know nothing, but in this year he was a partner with a very respectable stockbroker and lottery office-keeper, James (afterwards Sir James) Branscomb, who had been established in business for thirty years. They dissolved partnership at the end of 1798, and Bish took over Branscomb’s offices at 4, Cornhill, and started a branch at Manchester. He afterwards had branch establishments or agents in all the principal towns in England, Scotland, and Ireland. We know that he contemplated obtaining a seat in Parliament, for a highly ornamental card is extant. “Mr. Bish, Candidate to represent in Parliament the Ancient and Independent Borough of LEOMINSTER, solicits the Honour of your Vote and Interest.” We also know that he was the prominent broker in every lottery from 1799 to the last one in 1826, and that is all we know of him.
Prizes. Net Profit. £ £ _s._ _d._ 1796 (36 Geo. III. c. 104) 500,000 267,831 13 10 1797 (37 Geo. III. c. 113) 500,000 130,919 11 8 1798 (38 Geo. III. c. 75) 500,000 154,824 6 8 1799 (39 Geo. III. c. 91) 500,000 191,385 8 8 1800[20] (39 & 40 Geo. III. c. 52) 500,000 311,191 19 11 1801 (41 Geo. III. c. 27) 500,000 185,589 6 11
[20] Bish’s price in December, 1800, for a ticket in this lottery was £16 18_s._, and he says, “Tickets and Shares will rise gradually, as the Drawing approaches.”
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
The Right Hon. George, Lord Pigot, died, and, among his other property, was a large diamond of the estimated value of £30,000. As his property had to be divided amongst his heirs, and no purchasers could be found for a diamond of this size, an Act was passed (39 and 40 Geo. III. c. 102) to enable his heirs to dispose of it by lottery--11,428 tickets at two guineas each, or £23,998 16_s._ This lottery was drawn on January 2, 1801, and the diamond was won by a young man. It was afterwards sold at Christie’s on May 10, 1802, to Messrs. Parker and Birketts, of Princes Street, pawnbrokers, for 9500 guineas, Mr. Christie remarking at the sale “that its owners were unfortunate in its being brought to a market where its worth might not be sufficiently valued, where the charms of the fair needed not such ornaments, and whose sparkling eyes outshone all the diamonds of Golconda. In any other country the Pigot diamond would be sought as a distinction where superior beauty was rarely to be found.”
It was again sold, and is said to have passed into the possession of Messrs. Rundell and Bridge, Court jewellers, Bond Street, who are reported to have sold it to an Egyptian Pasha for £30,000. It is not known in whose possession it is now. There is some discrepancy among authorities as to its weight, Mawe giving it as forty-nine carats, Emanuel as eighty-two and a half.
To show how widely spread was the lottery fever at this time, and how deep were its ramifications all over the country, we need only look at Branscomb and Co.’s list of agencies--Aberdeen, Bath, Beverley, Bristol, Blandford, Boston, Bridgewater, Birmingham, Bury, Coventry, Canterbury, Chatham, Chester, Chichester, Dorchester, Dundee, Exeter, Gloucester, Glasgow, Gosport, Hull, Liverpool, Marlborough, Newark, Norwich, Northampton, Plymouth, Portsea, Reading, Salisbury, Stamford, Shrewsbury, Sherborne, Tiverton, Weymouth, Wolverhampton, Worcester, Yarmouth, and York.
In 1802 was the largest lottery (42 Geo. III. c. 54) since 1755, the amount given in prizes being £900,000, and the net profit accruing thereon being £340,458 5_s._ 1_d._
In this Act alterations were introduced as to the preparing and method of drawing tickets, and fixing the days of drawing, etc., and, as the method now introduced, for the first time, of drawing the lottery in eight days instead of forty-two days was designed to considerably reduce the illegal insurance, if not put an end to it, several new regulations were introduced into this and subsequent Lottery Acts, with a view to extend the sale of lottery tickets and the legal shares of tickets as much as possible. By the same statute the Irish lotteries were abolished, and the tickets of the lottery in Great Britain were divided into three separate drawings. After the conclusion of the third drawing, directions were given by Mr. Vansittart, then one of the secretaries of the Treasury, that inquiry should be made as to the effect of these regulations. It was elicited, that by drawing the lottery in eight instead of forty-two days, the business of illegal insurance had undergone a complete change, by being rendered dangerous and unprofitable to both parties. It had driven all the men of large capital out of the business, and the agents usually employed by them, who had before gained a livelihood by collecting the insurances in coffee-houses and private families, and others who kept unlicensed offices for that purpose, were reduced to the greatest distress, and rendered incapable of obtaining a living.
There is a story told in connection with the lottery drawn this year, that old Baron d’Aguilar, the Islington miser, was requested by a relation to purchase a particular ticket, No. 14,068, in this lottery, but it had been sold some few days previously. The baron died on the 16th of March following, and the number was the first drawn ticket on the 24th, and, as such, entitled to £20,000. The baron’s representatives, under these circumstances, published an advertisement, offering a reward of £1000 to any person who might have found the said ticket, and would deliver it up. Payment was stopped. A wholesale linen-draper in Cornhill (who had ordered his broker to buy him ten tickets, which he deposited in a chest), on copying the numbers for the purpose of examining them, made a mistake in one figure, and called it 14,168 instead of 14,068, which was the £20,000 prize. The lottery being finished, he sent his tickets to be examined and marked. To his utter astonishment, he then found the error in the number copied on his paper. On his demanding payment at the lottery office, a _caveat_ was entered by old d’Aguilar’s executors; but, an explanation taking place, the £20,000 was paid to the lucky linen-draper.
The lottery office-keepers plumed themselves on their sale of tickets which became prizes, and certainly did not hide their lights under bushels. The following is a list of “Capital Prizes sold by Richardson, Goodluck, and Co. in the State Lotteries drawn in and for the year 1802”:--
Three prizes of £20,000 Three ” 5,000 One ” 2,000 Three ” 1,000 Four ” 500