The first of the strictly-called Gaming Acts is one of Charles II.'s reign, which was intended to check the habit of gambling so prevalent then, as before stated. By this Act it was ordered that, if any one shall play at any pastime or game, by gaming or betting with those who game, and shall lose more than one hundred pounds on credit, he shall not be bound to pay, and any contract to do so shall be void. In consequence of this Act losers of a less amount—whether less wealthy or less profligate—and the whole of the poorer classes, remained unprotected from the cheating of sharpers, for it must be presumed that nobody has a right to refuse to pay a fair gambling debt, since he would evidently be glad to receive his winnings. No doubt much misery followed through the contrivances of sharpers; still it was a salutary warning to gamesters of the poorer classes—whilst in the higher ranks the 'honour' of play was equally stringent, and, I may add, in many cases ruinous. By the recital of the Act it is evident that the object was to check and put down gaming as a business profession, 'to gain a living;' and therefore it specially mulcted the class out of which 'adventurers' in this line usually arise.
The Act of Queen Anne, by its sweeping character, shows that gaming had become very virulent, for by it not only were all securities for money lost at gaming void, but money actually paid, if more than L10, might be recovered in an action at law; not only might this be done, within three months, by the loser himself, but by any one else—together with treble the value—half for himself, and half for the poor of the parish. Persons winning, by fraudulent means, L10 and upwards at any game were condemned by this Act to pay five times the amount or value of the thing won, and, moreover, they were to 'be deemed infamous, and suffer such corporal punishment as in cases of wilful perjury.' The Act went further:—if persons were suspected of getting their living by gaming, they might be summoned before a magistrate, required to show that the greater portion of their income did not depend upon gaming, and to find sureties for their good behaviour during twelve months, or be committed to gaol.
There were, besides, two curious provisions;—any one assaulting or challenging another to a duel on account of disputes over gaming, should forfeit all his goods and be imprisoned for two years; secondly, the royal palaces of St James's and Whitehall were exempted from the operation of this statute, so long as the sovereign was actually resident within them—which last clause probably showed that the entire Draconian enactment was but a farce. It is quite certain that it was inoperative, and that it did no more than express the conscience of the legislature—in deference to PRINCIPLE, 'which nobody could deny.'
After the lapse of many years—the evil being on the increase—the legislature stirred again during the reign of George II., and passed several Acts against gaming. The games of Faro, Basset, Hazard, &c., in fact, all games with dice, were proscribed under a penalty of L200 against the provider of the game, and L50 a time for the players. Roulette or Roly Poly, termed in the Act 'a certain pernicious game,' was interdicted, under the penalty of five times the value of the thing or sum lost at it.
Thus stood the statute law against gaming down to the year 1845, when, in consequence of the report of the select committee which sat on the subject, a new enactment was promulgated, which is in force at the present time.
It was admitted that the laws in force against gaming were 'of no avail to prevent the mischiefs which may happen therefrom;' and the lawgivers enacted a comprehensive measure on the subject. Much of the old law—for instance, the prohibition of games which interfered with the practice of ARCHERY—was repealed; also the Acts of Charles II., of Queen Anne, and a part of that of George II.—Gaming houses, in which a bank is kept by one or more of the players, or in which the chances of play are not alike favourable to the players—being declared unlawful, as of old. Billiards, bagatelle, or 'any game of the kind' (open, of course, to legal discussion), may be played in private houses, or in licensed houses; but still, in the case of licensed houses of public resort, the police may enter at any time to see that the law is complied with. 'Licensed for Billiards' must be legibly printed on some conspicuous place near the door and outside a licensed house. Billiards and like games may not be played in public rooms after one, and before eight, o'clock in the morning of any day, nor on Sundays, Christmas Day, Good Friday, nor on any public fast or thanksgiving. Publicans whose houses are licensed for billiards must not allow persons to play at any time when public-houses are not allowed to be open.
'In order to constitute the house a common gaming house, it is not necessary to prove that any person found playing at any game was playing for any money, wager, or stake. The police may enter the house on the report of a superintendent, and the authority of a commissioner, without the necessity of an allegation of two householders; and if any cards, dice, balls, counters, tables, or other instruments of gaming be found in the house, or about the person of any of those who shall be found therein, such discovery shall be evidence against the establishment until the contrary be made to appear. Those who shall appear as witnesses, moreover, are protected from the consequences of having been engaged in unlawful gaming.'(151)
(151) Chambers's Cyclopaedia, Art. Gambling.
The penalty of cheating at any game is liability to penal servitude for three years—the delinquent being proceeded against as one who obtains money under false pretences. Wagers and bets are not recoverable by law, whether from the loser or from the wager-holder; and money paid for bets may be recovered in an action 'for money received to the defendant's use.' All betting houses are gaming houses within the meaning of the Act, and the proprietors and managers of them are punishable accordingly.
The existing law on the gaming of horse-racing is as follows. Bets on horse-races are illegal; and therefore are not recoverable by law. In order to prevent the nuisance which betting houses, disguised under other names, occasioned, a law was passed in 1853, forbidding the maintenance of any house, room, or other place, for betting; and by the new Metropolitan Traffic Regulation Act, now in force, any three persons found betting in the street may be fined five pounds each 'for obstructing the thoroughfare'—a very odd reason, certainly, since it is the BETTING that we wish to prevent, as we will not permit it to be carried on in any house, &c. These LEGAL reasons are too often sadly out of place. Any constable, however, may, without a warrant, arrest anybody he may see in the act of betting in the street.