Rowland, in his 'Judicial Astrology Condemned,' relates the following anecdote of Cuffe, the Secretary of the Earl of Essex, "a man of exquisite wit and learning, but of a turbulent disposition," who was hung at Tyburn, on the 13th of March, 1602, for having counselled and abetted the Earl in his treason. "Cuffe, an excellent Grecian, [141] and Secretary to the Earl of Essex, was told twenty years before his death that he should come to an untimely end, at which Cuffe laughed, and in a scornful manner, intreated the astrologer to show him in what manner he should come to his end; who condescended to him, and calling for cards, intreated Cuffe to draw out of the pack three which pleased him. He did so, and drew three Knaves and laid them on the table with their faces downwards, by the wizard's direction, who then told him, if he desired to see the sum of his bad fortunes, to take up those cards. Cuffe, as he was prescribed, took up the first card, and looking on it, he saw the portraiture of himself, cap-a-pie, having men compassing him about with bills and halberds; then he took up the second, and there he saw the judge that sat upon him; and taking up the last card, he saw Tyburn, the place of his execution, and the hangman, at which he laughed heartily; but many years after, being condemned for treason, he remembered and declared this prediction."
Queen Elizabeth, as well as her sister, Mary, was a card player; and even her grave Lord Treasurer, Lord Burleigh, appears to have occasionally taken a hand at Primero. [142] That she sometimes lost her temper, when the cards ran against her, may be fairly inferred from the following passage, which occurs in a letter, written in the latter part of her reign, by Sir Robert Carey to his father, Lord Hunsdon: her violent language must have been the result of her holding a bad hand at the moment that the presence of young Carey reminded her of his father's procrastination. "May it please your L. t'understande that yesterday yn the afternune I stood by hyr Matie as she was att Cards in the presens chamber. She cawlde me to hyr, and askte me when you mente too go too Barwyke. I towlde hyr that you determinde to begyn your jorney presently after Whytsontyd. She grew yntoo a grete rage, begynnynge with Gods wonds, that she wolde sett you by the feete, and send another in your place yf you dalyed with hyr thus, for she wolde not be thus dalyed withall. [143]
Though the laity of all ranks and conditions—except apprentices [144] —appear to have played at cards and dice without let or hinderance, notwithstanding any statute to the contrary, yet the clergy seem to have been rather more sharply looked after. In the 'Injunctions geven by the Quenes Majestie, as well to the Clergye as the Laity,' printed by Richard Jugge and John Cawood, 1559, the clergy are thus admonished: "Also the sayde ecclesiastical persons shall in no wyse, nor for any other cause then for theyr honeste necessities, haunt or resort to anye Tavernes or Alehouses. And after theyr meates, they shall not geve themselves to any drynkyng or ryot, spendyng theyr tyme idelly by day or by nyght, at dyse, cardes, or tables playing, or anye other unlawfull game." [145] In the 'Injunctions exhibited by John, Bishop of Norwich, at his first visitation, in the third year of our Soveraign Ladie Elizabeth,' printed at London by John Daye, 1561, officials are enjoined to inquire, "Whether any parson, vicare, or curate geve any evell example of lyfe; whether they be incontinent parsones, dronkardes, haunters of tavernes, alehouses, or suspect places; dycers, tablers, carders, swearers, or vehementlie suspected thereof."
A notice of a dramatic representation of the game of cards occurs in the accounts of Queen Elizabeth's 'Master of the Revels,' 1582. [146] In that year he and his officers were commanded "to show on St. Stephen's day at night, before her Majesty at Wyndesore, a Comodie or Morral devised on a game of the cardes," to be performed by the children of her Majesty's Chapel. From the following observations of Sir John Harrington on this "Comodie or Morral," it would seem to have been a severe satire on those Knaves who enrich themselves at the nation's expense: "Then for comedies, to speake of a London comedie, how much good matter, yea and matter of state, is there in that comedie cald the play of the cards? in which it is showed how foure Parasiticalle knaves robbe the foure principall vocations of the Realme, videlicet, the vocations of Souldiers, Scollers, Marchants, and Husbandmen. Of which comedie I cannot forget the saying of a notable wise counseller who is now dead (Sir Frauncis Walsinghame), who, when some (to sing Placebo) advised that it should be forbidden, because it was somewhat too plaine, and indeed, as the old saying is, Sooth boord is no boord, yet he would have it allowed, adding that it was fit that 'They which doe that they should not, should heare that they would not.'" [147]
The mention of a comedy shown before the Queen at Windsor by the children of her Majesty's Chapel, naturally suggests the recollection of John Lyly's Court Comedies, which were wont to be shown by the same children, as well as by the "children of Poules;" and as in one of those comedies,—Alexander and Campaspe,—Lyly has committed an anachronism with respect to cards, [148] an opportunity is thus afforded of here introducing the pleasantly conceited song that contains the error,—a song, which Elia would have encored, and which even Mrs. Battle herself would have allowed to be sung at the card table during the intermission of the game at the end of a rubber, when cutting in for new partners. [149]
Before taking leave of the reign of Elizabeth, it seems proper to insert here what Philip Stubbes says about Cards, Dice, Tables, Tennis, and other games, in his 'Anatomie of Abuses.' [150] "As for Cardes, Dice, Tables, Boules, Tennisse, and such like," says the moral dissector, speaking in the person of Philoponus, "thei are Furta officiosa, a certaine kind of smothe, deceiptfull, and sleightie thefte, whereby many a one is spoiled of all that ever he hath, sometimes of his life withall, yea, of bodie and soule for ever: and yet (more is the pitie) these be the only exercises used in every mans house, al the yere through. But especially in Christmas time there is nothyng els used but Cardes, Dice, Tables, Maskyng, Mummyng, Bowling, and such like fooleries. And the reason is, thei think thei have a commission and prerogative that tyme to doe what thei list, and to followe what vanitie they will. But (alas) doe thei thinke that thei are privileged at that time to doe evill? the holier the time is (if one time were holier then another, as it is not) the holier ought their exercises to bee."
He, however, thinks that at some games, under certain circumstances, Christian men may play for the sake of recreation; for, in answer to the question of Spudeus, "Is it not lawfull for one Christian man to plaie with an other at any kinde of game, or to winne his money, if he can?" Philoponus thus replies: "To plaie at Tables, Cardes, Dice, Bowles, or the like, (though a good Christian man will not so idely and vainely spende his golden daies), one Christian with an other, for their private recreations, after some oppression of studie, to drive awaie fantasies, and suche like, I doubt not but thei may, using it moderately, with intermission, and in the feare of God. But for to plaie for lucre of gaine, and for desire onely of his brothers substance, rather then for any other cause, it is at no hande lawfull, or to be suffered. For as it is not lawfull to robbe, steale, and purloine by deceite or sleight, so is it not lawfull to get thy brothers goodes from hym by Cardyng, Dicyng, Tablyng, Boulyng, or any other kind of theft, for these games are no better, nay worser than open theft, for open theft every man can beware of; but this beying a craftie polliticke theft, and commonly doen under pretence of freendship, fewe, or none at all, can beware of it. The commaundement saieth, Thou shall not covet nor desire any thing that belongeth to thy neighbour. Now, it is manifest, that those that plaie for money, not onely covet their brothers money, but also use craft, falshood, and deceite to winne the same."—There are doubtless many card-players, who, conscious of their want of craft, can safely deny the truth of Stubbes's sweeping conclusion; but it is to be feared that most crafty players will not lose if they can avoid it, either by hook or by crook.
In the reign of James I, the game "went bonnily on." His son, Henry, Prince of Wales, who died in 1612, aged nineteen, used occasionally to amuse himself at cards, but so nobly and like himself, as showed that he played only for recreation, and not for the sake of gain. [151] James himself was a card-player; and his favorite game was Maw, which appears to have been the fashionable game in his reign, as Primero was in the reign of Elizabeth. His Majesty appears to have played at cards just as he played with affairs of State—in an indolent manner, requiring in both cases some one to hold his cards, if not to prompt him what to play. Weldon, speaking of the poisoning of Sir Thomas Overbury, in his 'Court and Character of King James,' says: "The next that came on the stage, was Sir Thomas Monson; but the night before he was to come to his tryal, the King being at the game of Maw, said, 'to-morrow comes Thomas Monson to his tryal.' 'Yea;' said the King's card-holder, 'where if he do not play his master's prize, your Majesty shall never trust me.' This so ran in the King's mind, that at the next game he said he was sleepy, and would play out that set next night." From the following passage in a pamphlet, entitled 'Tom Tell-troath,' supposed to have been printed about 1622, [152] it would seem that the writer was well acquainted both with his majesty's mode of playing at cards, and with the manner in which he was tricked in his dawdling with state affairs: "In your Majestie's owne tavernes, for one healthe that is begun to your-selfe, there are ten drunke to the Princes your forraygn children. And, when the wine is in their heads, Lord have mercie on their tonges! Ever, in the very gaming ordinaries, where men have scarce leisure to say grace, yet they take a time to censure your Majestie's actions, and that in their oulde schoole terms. They say, you have lost the fairest game at Maw that ever King had, for want of making the best advantage of the five finger, and playing the other helpes in time. That your owne card-holders play bootie, and give the signe out of your owne hand. That hee you played withall hath ever been knowne for the greatest cheater in Christendome. [153] In fine, there is noe way to recover your losses, and vindicate your honour, but with fighting with him that hath cozened you. At which honest downe righte play, you will be hard enough for him with all his trickes."
The following verses, which might have been written by Tom Tell-troath himself, form part of an inscription beneath a caricature engraving of the same period, representing the Kings of England, Denmark, and Sweden, with Bethlem Gabor, engaged in playing at cards, dice, and tables with the Pope and his Monks. [154]
From the allusions to the five fingers and the ace of hearts, in the preceding extracts, it would appear that the game of Maw was the same as that which was subsequently called Five-Cards, for, in both games, the five of trumps—called the five fingers—was the best card, and next to that was the ace of hearts. [155]
From the frequent mention of cards by writers of the time of James I, it would appear that the game was as common a diversion with his Majesty's peaceable subjects, as it was with the fighting men who followed the banner of Wallenstein or Tilly in the Thirty-Years' War. Inordinate gaming in one country, according to certain authorities, was the result of long-continued peace and too much ease; according to others, it was the natural consequence of war; in England, the devil, finding men idle, gave them employment at cards and dice; and in Germany, where they were busy in the work of destruction, he encouraged them to play as a relaxation from their regular labours. Prodigals, in each country, lighted their candle at both ends: English gallants used to divert themselves with cards at the playhouse before the performance began; [156] and desperate hazarders in the imperial camp staked, on a cast at dice, their plunder, ere it had well come into their possession.
In the reign of James I, a controversy arose respecting the nature of lots, in which the lawfulness—"in foro theologorum"—of deciding matters by lot, and of playing at games of chance, such as cards and dice, was amply discussed. It was maintained by one party, that as lots were of divine ordinance, for the purpose of determining important matters, [157] and of so ascertaining, as it were, the divine will, their employment for the purpose of amusement, was a sinful perversion of their institution, and a disparaging of Divine Providence, which was thus made the arbiter of idle and immoral games. [158] In opposition to this opinion, the learned Thomas Gataker published his treatise, historical and theological, 'Of the Nature and Use of Lots,' in 1619. In this work he treats of casual events in general, and of the different kinds of lots, which he thus classes under three heads: 1, Lots which are commonly employed in serious affairs; 2, Lots which enter into games of chance; 3, Lots extraordinary or divinatory. The first are generally admitted to be innocent; but the third are absolutely condemned by Gataker, except when they are expressly required to be used by a revelation or a divine command. [159] With regard to lots of the second kind, he contends that they are neither prohibited in the Scriptures nor evil of themselves; though, like those of the first, they are liable to great abuse. The abuse he earnestly condemns; but at the same time shows that it is not a necessary consequence of the employment of lots in games of amusement. He also refutes the arguments of James Balmford, who, in a small tract which appears to have been first published about 1593, had maintained that all games of chance were absolutely unlawful. An account of the controversy on this subject, between Gataker on one side, and William Ames and Gisbert Voet on the other, will be found in the preface to the second edition of Barbeyrac's 'Traité du Jeu.' [160]
In the reign of James I, and in the early part of that of his successor, ere the discussion of political grievances had produced a decided effect on the public mind, the fashionable vices of excess in apparel, gaming, drinking, and smoking tobacco, were fertile themes of declamation with a certain class of reformers, both lay and clerical. Their denunciations of the vanity and wickedness of wearing fine clothes are merely variations to Stubbes's 'Anatomy of Abuses;' while their fulminations against tobacco are generally pitched in the somewhat loud key of King James's Counterblast. Their common-places against drunkenness and gaming, are, in general, "very common indeed,"—as Sir Francis Burdett said of a certain common lawyer, who, since his elevation to the peerage, has been convicted of a petty larceny on the literary property of Miss Agnes Strickland, and who seems to be an adept at Cribbage, though no card-player.
In a woodcut on the title-page of 'Woe to Drunkards,' a sermon preached by Samuel Ward, of Ipswich, 1627, the vices of that age are typically contrasted with the virtues of a former one. In the upper compartment we are shown what men were of old by the open Bible, the foot in the stirrup, and the hand grasping the lance; while in the lower, the degeneracy of their descendants is typified by the leg and foot, decorated with a broad silk garter and a large rosette; by cards and dice, and a hand holding at the same time a lighted pipe and a drinking cup with a cockatrice in it. Twenty years afterwards, these types would have been more strictly applicable, with the inscriptions merely transposed.
At what time the manufacture of cards was established in this country, has not been ascertained; though from their being included in an Act of Parliament of 1463, prohibiting the importation of sundry articles, as being injurious to native manufacturers and tradesmen, it would seem that there were card-makers in England even at that early period. [161] Barrington, referring to a proclamation of Elizabeth, and another of James I, says, "It appears that we did not then make many cards in England." In his paper in the 'Archæologia,' he gives a fac-simile of the cover of an old pack of cards, as a decisive proof that cards were originally made in Spain. On this cover was printed a wood engraving of the arms of Castile and Leon, together with a Club, a Sword, a Cup, and a piece of Money, the marks of the four suits of Spanish cards. To an inscription purporting that they were fine cards, made by Jehan Volay—"Cartas finnas faictes par Jehan Volay"—there was also added, in letters of a different character, either by a stencil, or by means of inserting a new piece of wood in the original block, the name "Edward Warman," probably that of the English vendor of the cards. The maker's name, Barrington reads, "Je (for Jean or John) Hauvola," and the final Y he mistakes for the Spanish conjunction "and." The whole of the inscription, he says, being rendered into English, runs thus: "Superfine cards made by John Hauvola, and (Edward Warman)," the last name being substituted for that of a former partner of John Hauvola. [162] Mr. Barrington's reading of the maker's name, Je. Hauvola, instead of Jehan Volay, and his then introducing Edward Warman into the firm, by means of the final Y, construed as a copulative conjunction, are fair specimens of the proofs and illustrations which he adduces in favour of his theory about Spanish cards.
Jean Volay, as I learn from Leber, [163] was one of the most celebrated French card-makers of the sixteenth century; at what time "Edward Warman" lived, whose name also appears on the cover, is not known; but Mr. Barrington says that a person of that name kept a stationer's shop somewhere about Norton Folgate, about fifty years before the date of his paper, that is about 1737. Any vogue that Spanish cards might have had in the more northerly countries of Europe, during the times of Elizabeth and James I, was probably owing rather to the circumstance of so many Spaniards being then resident in the Low Countries than to any superiority of the cards manufactured in Spain. Until a comparatively recent period, large quantities of cards used to be sent from Antwerp to Spain. [164]
From the following verses, in "The Knave of Harts his Supplication to the Card Makers," in Samuel Rowlands' satire entitled 'The Knave of Harts,' [165] 1612, it would appear that cards were then commonly manufactured in England, for it cannot be fairly supposed that the Knave's supplication was addressed to foreign card-makers. The foregoing cut, which is a fac-simile of that prefixed to the edition of 1613, shows the Knaves of Hearts and Clubs in the costume complained of.
In Rowlands' 'More Knaves Yet? The Knaves of Spades and Diamonds,' published after his 'Knave of Harts,' the Knaves of Spades and Diamonds are represented in a modernised costume, bestowed on them by the printer, and the favour is thus acknowledged.
By a proclamation of Charles I, June, 1638, it was ordered that after the Michaelmas next all foreign cards should be sealed at London, and packed in new bindings, or covers. A few years later, it would appear that the importation of foreign cards was absolutely prohibited; for, in July, 1643, upon the complaint of several poor card-makers, setting forth that they were likely to perish by reason of divers merchants bringing playing-cards into the kingdom, contrary to the laws and statutes, order was given, by a committee appointed by parliament for the navy and customs, that the officers of the customs should seize all such cards, and proceed against the parties offending. [167]
When the civil war commenced, and the people became interested in a sterner game, card-playing appears to have declined. The card-playing gallant whose favorite haunts had been the playhouse and the tavern, now became transformed into a cavalier, and displayed his bravery in the field at the head of a troop of horse; whilst his old opponent, the puritanical minister, incited by a higher spirit of indignation, instead of holding forth on sports and pastimes and household vices, now thundered on the "drum ecclesiastic" against national oppressors; urged his congregation to stand up for their rights as men against the pretensions of absolute monarchy and rampant prelacy, and to try the crab-tree staff against the courtier's dancing rapier.
Among the numerous pamphlets which appeared during the contest there are a few whose titles show that the game of cards, though not so much in vogue as formerly, was still not forgotten. [168] The following are the titles of three of such pamphlets, all quartos, the usual form of the literary light infantry of the period. "Chartæ Scriptæ, or a New Game at Cards, called Play by the Booke, 1645."—"Bloody Game of Cards, played between the King of Hearts and his Suite against the rest of the pack, shuffled at London, cut at Westminster, dealt at York, and played in the open field."—"Shuffling, cutting, and dealing, in a game at pickquet, being acted from the year 1653 to 1655, by O. P. and others, 1659." [169] In a 'Lenten Litany,' a backward prayer for the Rump, written in the time of the Long Parliament, the appointment of three keepers to the great seal is thus commemorated:
It was probably as much owing to the circumstance of regular playing-cards being in small request, as to any desire to promote learning, that we have the "Scientiall Cards" mentioned in the following title of a work, in which cards are made subservient to the purposes of instruction, and which appears to have been one of the earliest of the kind published in England. [171] "The Scientiall cards; or a new and ingenious knowledge grammatically epitomised, both for the pleasure and profit of schollers, and such as delight to recollect (without any labour) the rudiments of so necessary an art as grammer is, without hindering them from their more necessary and graver studies, offering them as a second course unto you. Which, in all points and suits, do represent your vulgar or common cards; so that the perfection of the grammer principles may hereby be easily attained unto, both with much delight and profit. Together with a key showing the ready use of them. Written by a lover of ingenuity and learning. And are to be sold by Baptist Pendleton at his house, near St. Dunstan's Church in the east, or by John Holden, at the Anchor in the New Exchange. 1651." Of those cards, or of the key, showing how they are to be used, I know nothing beyond what is contained in the title above given, which is preserved amongst Bagford's collections, Harleian MSS. No. 5947, in the British Museum. I, however, greatly suspect that the "lover of learning and ingenuity" who devised them, was specially employed for the purpose by the maker, Mr. Baptist Pendleton, who, sensible of the decline of his regular business, and noting the signs of the times, might think it both for his interest and credit to manufacture cards, which might serve indifferently for the purposes of instruction, but equally as well for play as "your vulgar or common cards," which were then in very bad repute. The Scientiall cards would appear to have been well adapted for the use of persons who wished to save appearances with the Puritans, and yet had no objection to play a quiet game with the profane.
In 1656 was published a little book intitled 'The Schollers Practicall Cards,' by F. Jackson, M.A., containing instructions by means of cards how to spell, write, cypher, and cast accounts; together with many other excellent and necessary rules of calculation, without either almanack or ephemeris. "I am persuaded," says the author in his preface, "that the cards, now in common use, may be reduced to such a way of use as may not only contribute to knowledge and good learning, but may also remove the scandall and abuse, which every tinker that can but tell his peeps [pips] exposeth them unto. To that end I have framed, for the recreation of sober and understanding people, that which (although in form they represent common cards) in the inside, as to the use that be made of them, affords profitable learning and honest recreation: and herein there is much difference; the common cards being meer fiction, like the foolish romances, not applicable to any morall, or anything to be learned by them that is laudable." His method, like all others of the same kind, may be interesting, from its complicated absurdity, to those who already understand what he proposes to teach; but must have formed an almost unsurmountable obstacle to the unlettered, unless they were previously well grounded in Gleek, Ruff, Post and Pair, Saunt, [172] Lodam, and Noddy,—the games to which he chiefly refers in his instructions.
William Sheppard, sergeant-at-law, a great stickler, during the ascendency of the Rump, for the reformation of the law and the correction of manners, thus sets forth certain grievances, and, like a good Samaritan, propounds a remedy for them in his work, entitled 'Englands Balme.' [173]
"It is objected,
"That there is no certain and clear law to punish prophane jesting, fidling, ryming, piping, juggling, fortune-telling, tumbling, dancing upon the rope, vaulting, ballad-singing, sword-playing, or playing of prizes, ape-carrying, puppet-playing, bear-baiting, bull-baiting, horse-racing, cock-fighting, carding, dicing, or other gaming; especially the spending of much time, and the adventuring of great sums of money herein.
"It is offered to consideration,
"That to the laws already made: 1. That it be in the power of any two justices of the peace to binde to the goode behaivour such as are offensive herein. 2. That they be, so long as they use it, uncapable of bearing any office in the commonwealth. 3. That all payments to the commonwealth be doubled on such persons."
His saintly delicacy, if not his Christian charity, is displayed in the following "grievance" and "remedy:"
"There are some other cases wherein the law also is said to be somewhat defective: as
"That there is no law against lascivious gestures, wanton and filthy dalliance and familiarity, whorish attire, strange fashions; such as are naked breasts, bare shoulders, powdering, spotting, painting the face, curling and shearing the hair; excess of apparel in servants and mean people.
"It is offered to consideration,
"1. That the justices of the peace at their Quarter Sessions >may binde any such to the good behaivour.
"2. That for a whorish attire, something of note be written upon the door of her house to her disgrace, there to continue till she wear sober attire."
The character of this puritanical reformer's liberality may be estimated by his proposed remedies for the abuses of the press. As his party were in power, there was no longer any occasion for free discussion. Milton was opposed to such canting reformers as Sheppard, and maintained the liberty of unlicensed printing.
"It is objected,
"That there are disorders in printing of books, for which there is no remedy.
"It is offered for this to consider of these things:
"1. That printing-houses be reduced to a number.
"2. That no books be printed but be first perused.
"3. That no dangerous books be printed here, carried beyond sea, and brought in hither.
"4. That the right of every mans copy be preserved.
"5. That every man shall licence his own book and be answerable for it."
On the accession of Charles II, a reaction took place; and people who had felt themselves coerced in their amusements by the puritanical party, seem now to have gloried in their excesses, not so much from any positive pleasure that they might feel in their vicious courses, but as evincing their triumph over those who formerly kept them in restraint. From the example of the king himself, a sensual, selfish profligate, vice became fashionable at court, where gross depravity of manners seems to have been admitted as prima facie evidence of loyal principles. His majesty's personal favorites, from the wealthy noble who had a seat at the council-table, to the poor gentlemen who served as a private in the horse-guards, seem all to have been eager to divert the "merry monarch" by their shameless profligacy. The man of ton of the period, was professionally a rake and a gamester, and often a liar and cheat; boasting of an intrigue with "my lady," while in truth he was kept by "my lord's" mistress; and pretending that he had won a hundred pieces of "the duke," at the groom-porter's at St. James's, when he had merely "rooked" a gay city 'prentice of five pounds at a shilling ordinary in Shire Lane. The morals and manners of the country, generally, at that period, are not, however, to be estimated by those of the court and the so-called "fashionable world." A numerous and influential class remained uncontaminated by their example; and laboured zealously to stem the torrent of vice which, issuing from the court, threatened to deluge the whole country. Though "the saints" no longer enjoyed the fatness of the land, they still exercised great influence over the minds of the middle classes, and fostered in them a deep religious feeling, and a strict observance of decency, which were in direct opposition to the principles and practice of the sovereign and his court. At no period of our history, do the profligacy of one class and the piety of another appear in more striking contrast. On looking closer, however, it would seem that this effect is, in a great degree, produced by the approximation of the extremes of each,—of sinners who painted themselves blacker than they really were, and of saints who heightened their lights and exalted their purity, while they were in truth but as "a whitened wall." A slight glance at the literature of the time of Charles II, will show that mankind do not become worse as the world grows older: the depravity which existed in his reign, is generally dwelt on by historians and moralists, though but few take the trouble of informing their readers that correctives for it, in the shape of good books, were at no period more abundant. For a picture of the manners of the time, we are referred to licentious plays and obscene poems, as if they formed the staple literature of the day,—as if all men frequented the playhouse and read Rochester, but never went to church or conventicle, nor read the numerous moral and religious works which then issued from the press. In the time of Charles II, the representation of plays was almost exclusively confined to London; and it may be questioned if even one of the licentious comedies of the period was represented on a provincial stage. The obscene books which were written in his reign for the entertainment of the fashionable world have sunk into disrepute, and are only to be found in the libraries of collectors of what are termed "Facetiæ;" while those of higher purpose are in constant demand, and are known to millions. More copies of Bunyan's 'Pilgrim's Progress' have been sold than of all the bad books that ever were written through the encouragement of Charles II and his courtiers.
But to come from this digression to the game we have in hand. Barrington, who is singularly unfortunate in his speculations about cards, and who seems to have been prone to draw general conclusions from special premises, says, that "Ombre was probably introduced by Catherine of Portugal, the queen of Charles II, as Waller hath a poem 'On a card torn at Ombre by the Queen.'" The game, however, was introduced before the arrival of the queen; for a work entitled the 'Royal game of Ombre' was published at London in 1660, [174] and Catherine did not arrive at Portsmouth till 14th May, 1662. Charles, on hearing of the queen's arrival, seems to have intrusted a right reverend prelate with a delicate commission: his majesty, according to Aurelian Cook, Gent., "having sent the Bishop of London thither before him to consummate the sacred rights of marriage, which was to be done in private." [175]
From the following passage in Pepys's Diary, under the date 17th Feb. 1667, it would appear that her majesty was accustomed to play at cards on a Sunday,—a crime of the greatest magnitude in the eyes of certain persons, who insist that the Christian Sunday should be observed like a Jewish Sabbath, and who yet have no objection to roast pig. [176] "This evening," says Mr. Pepys, "going to the Queene's side to see the ladies, I did finde the Queene, the Duchesse of York, and another or two, at cards, with the room full of ladies and great men; which I was amazed at to see on a Sunday, having not believed it, but, contrarily, flatly denied the same a little while since to my cosen Roger Pepys." The Duchess of York here mentioned, was Anne Hyde, first wife of James, Duke of York, afterwards James II. Her daughter, Mary, afterwards Queen of England, used also to play at cards on a Sunday, as we learn from the following passage in the diary of her spiritual director, Dr. Edward Lake, printed in the Camden Miscellany, vol. i, 1847: "Jan. 9. 1677-8. I was very sorry to understand that the Princess of Orange, since her being in Holland, did sometimes play at cards upon the Sundays, which would doubtless give offence to that people. I remember that about two years since being with her highness in her closett, shee required my opinion of it. I told her I could not say 'twas a sin to do so, but 'twas not expedient; and, for fear of giving offence, I advised her highness not to do it, nor did shee play upon Sundays while shee continued here in England." Card-playing on Sundays would appear to have been equally common with the select circle who had the honour of partaking of his majesty's amusements. Evelyn, in his Memoirs, writing on 6th Feb. 1685, the day when James II was proclaimed, says, "I never can forget the inexpressible luxury and profaneness, gaming and all dissoluteness, and as it were total forgetfulness of God (it being Sunday evening), which this day se'nnight I was witness of, the king sitting and toying with his concubines, Portsmouth, Cleaveland, and Mazarine, &c., a French boy singing love songs in that glorious gallery, whilst about twenty of the great courtiers and other dissolute persons were at Basset [177] round a large table; a bank of at least £2000 in gold before them, upon which two gentlemen who were with me made reflexions with astonishment. Six days after, all was in the dust!"
In the sixteenth year of the reign of Charles II an act was passed which might justly be entitled "An Act to legalise Gaming; to prevent wealthy Pigeons being plucked by artful Rooks, and to discourage Betting or Playing for large Sums upon Tick." An act of the same kind, passed in the reign of Queen Anne, was repealed in 1844, in consequence of its penalties being likely to fall heavy on some eminent sporting characters who had been so indiscreet as to receive sundry large sums in payment of bets lost to them upon credit. Its enactment and its repeal are significant indications of the state of the sporting world at the two respective periods. It seems to have been framed on a presumption that, in gaming, noble and wealthy sportsmen would be most likely to lose; and to have been repealed because certain noble and wealthy sportsmen had won, and received their bets. The parties in whose favour the act was repealed, were said to have been liable to penalties to the amount of £500,000: the law did not anticipate that lords and squires would be winners, nor intend that needy prosecutors should be enriched at their expense. The preamble and some of the provisions of the act of Charles II are here given as "Curiosities of Gambling Legislation."
"Whereas all lawful Games and Exercises should not be otherwise used than as innocent and moderate recreations, and not as constant trades or callings, to gain a living, or make unlawful advantage thereby; and whereas by the immoderate use of them many mischiefs and inconveniences do arise, and are dayly found to the maintaining and encouraging of sundry idle, loose, and disorderly persons in their dishonest, lewd, and dissolute course of life, and to the circumventing, deceiving, cousening, and debauching of many of the younger sort, both of the nobility and gentry, and others, to the loss of their precious time, and the utter ruin of their estates and fortunes, and withdrawing them from noble and laudable employments and exercises.
"Be it therefore enacted, that if any person or persons, of any degree or quality whatsoever, shall by any fraud, cousenage, circumvention, deceit, &c. in playing at Cards, Dice, Tables, Tennis, Bowls, Kittles, Shovel-board, or in or by Cock-fightings, Horse-races, Dog-matches, or Foot-races &c. or by betting on the sides or hands of such as play, win, obtain, or acquire any sum or sums of money or any other valuable thing; that then every person so offending shall ipso facto forfeit treble the sum or value of money, or other thing, so won, gained, or acquired.
"And for the better avoiding and preventing of all excessive and immoderate playing and gaming for the time to come, be it further enacted, that if any person shall play at any of the said games, or any other pastime whatsoever (otherwise than with and for ready money), or shall bet on the sides of such as play, and shall lose any sum of money or other thing played for, exceeding the sum of one hundred pounds, at one time or meeting, upon ticket or credit, or otherwise, and shall not pay down the same at the time when he shall so lose the same, the party who loseth the said moneys, or other things so played for, above the said sum of one hundred pounds, shall not, in that case, be bound or compelled to pay or make good the same; and that all Contracts, Judgments, Statutes, Recognizances, Mortgages, &c. made, given, acknowledged, or entered for security and payment of the same shall be utterly void and of none effect. And, lastly, it is enacted, that the person, or persons, so winning the said moneys, or other things, shall forfeit and lose treble the value of all such sum and sums of money, or other thing which he shall so win (above the said sum of one hundred pounds), the one moiety to the King, and the other to the Prosecutor." The passion for gaming at that period, and its consequences to wealthy flats, are thus described by Dryden: