“I believe that in England there is a law forbidding an innkeeper to allow any gaming on his premises,” I remarked.
“Yes,” said the English barrister. “Any licensed innkeeper who suffers any gaming or betting or unlawful games upon his premises, runs the risk of being fined.”[160]
“What do they consider gaming?” asked a rakish looking individual, who seemed as if he understood practically what it was.
“Playing at any game for money,[161] or beer, or money’s worth;[162] or even exhibiting betting lists.”[163]
“That seems precious hard,” quoth the rake.
“In one case an innkeeper was punished for allowing his own private friends to play at cards for money in his own private room, on the licensed premises.”[164]
“Not much liberty in England,” remarked the youth.
“That was almost as bad as the tavernkeeper who was fined by some energetic Yorkshire magistrate for being drunk in his own bed, in his own house!”[165] observed another.
“Farewell to the fond notion that an Englishman’s house is his castle!” melodramatically exclaimed the youth.
“But please allow me to say that Lust, J., held, in a very recent case, that although an innkeeper, if drunk on his own premises while they are open, is as much amenable to the penalty as if he was found drunk upon the highway, yet it could never have been intended that an innkeeper who is drunk in his own bedroom should be liable any more than a person—not a publican—found drunk in his own private house,”[166] said the Englishman.