Gambling in High Society
A prominent Englishman, well known in American circles, who has had the best opportunities for judging as to where gambling is prevalent writes exclusively for us the following article: New York, March 30. The crusade which has been inaugurated by prominent members of society here against the vices of the "submerged tenth" is to have its counterpart in a movement directed against the vicious habits of the upper classes. It is the pulpit now which has risen up in its might to, combat the advance of Beelezebub in Fifth avenue and kindred localities. The seat of war is to be carried from the Red Light district to Murray Hill. The Magclalcnes arc to be left to their own devices while the Zenobias and Cleopatras are taken to book. Do women gamble? The question is a mockery. Everyone knows that the Smart Set and a dozen other sets nearer or farther from the inner circle gamble recklessly. The raiding of public gambling houses will have no effect upon public morals while the desecration of the home continues. It is not, as has been claimed, the "newly rich" who are responsible for this condition of things, because those who practically are admitted to the outer fringe of society on sufferance do not set its pace. Those who know the inside history of the defalcations and failures of certain business men which have caused a temporary ripple in financial circles from time to time could add columns of interesting matter on this subject. The "Kitty" 'and' the "Jack-pot" differ only in name. The supposed harmlessness of one is only a surer sign of its dangerous character.
When one goes to a gambling den among strangers to play for whatever stakes he can afford he faces expected risks. When he sits down to bridge whist among his serial equals and often his inancial superiors he is frequently led unexpectedly into playing for high stakes and is ashamed to get out of the game before it is too late. Not only has financial ruin resulted from these private whist gatherings, but many divorces as well I have known the man who paid a woman's debts of honor subsequently supplant her husband in her affections. At the time when the American newspapers were raising a tremendous sensation over the British baccarat scandal, in which King Edward figured so prominently, the select circles of Chicago, Philadelphia and New York were honeycombed with poker and whist clubs, as they are today, and the trouble is that the situation seems to be gradually growing worse. The craze for making money is no longer confined to the office and the exchanges. Men and women who should be fagged out in their efforts during the day to secure an abnormal share of the enormous wealth being created by the working classes of this country carry the feverish craze for money making into their own home circles and under the gnise of pleasure seek to prolong the struggle for making more until it is almost time for them to go back to their desks again. When they leave the city to spend a few weeks at fashionable resorts, they carry the fever with them and the baneful influence spreads into stiil wider circles.
Playing at cards is no longer considered fun unless there is a stake attached to it. Although, undoubtedly, such women as Mrs. Hermann Oelrichs and Miss Helen Gould believe they are speaking the truth in denying the prevalence of gambling in social circles, the weight of utcered evidence against their opinions both from the pulpit and society is overwhelming. The clergymen who have joined hands in pushing the crusade are: Rev. Dr. Braddin Hamilton, Rev. Dr. W. R. Huntington, Rev. Dr. Morgan Dix. Rev. K. S. Me Arthur, Rev. W: S. Rainsford, Rev. T. DeWitt Talmage. Below are a few statements made relative to the matter by the above and by persons prominent in society: "I heard of a young man "who lost $1,500 in one evening playing bridge whist, and his hostess forced him to give his I. O. U. for it. His salary is $1.500 a year." "i know of a young girl, who won $500 at cards on Sunday when she should have been at church." "I know a woman at Newport who paid for her cottage by playing bridge whist there. She belongs to the exclusive set." "Sometimes people don't know they are playing for money until they are told so at the end of the game. I know of a woman who werit to an evening whist at the house of a friend and was suddenly told that she had lost $50. And the woman had thought she was playing just a social game,". "I have seen one of the best known society women at-Newport drunk at the Casino." "There are several families in society in the season at Newport that set a bad example and indulge in gambling and drunkenness and appear to have no idea of what a bad effect the renown of their names and wealth have on people whose one idea in life is to be swell' " "That church women will encourage card playing, accompanied by gambling, in their homes, is a practice that anyone familiar with the habits of certain circles in social life will not deny.
"It is useless, however, to condemn gambling in low resorts if it is practically indorsed in the homes of the cultured church people.' Outside of the women who positively deny knowing anything of gambling habits among the Four, or Six Hundred, many shades of opinion are expressed by well known society lights. A prominent member of Mrs. Astor's set says: "If children are going to gamble when they grow up, as ten chances to one they would, they might as well be taught to gamble at home. Another well known society woman said: "I know of one woman who has been to 52 card parties this winter. She has paid for her tickets from §1 to $2, and sometimes $3 apiece. "When I asked her if she would have been willing to give her money to charity without playing the whist or euchre that went with it she confessed that she would not. That is the way with a great many women. They say they're playing for charity, when really they are gambling for a prize.' The depth of the religious sentiment among some of our leading New Vork women may be easily gauged by this frank statement. Another woman says: "I think Dr. Huntingtou takes a very narrow view about card-playing and T. cannot agree with him when he calls card-playing gambling. "And it seems to me a woman has a perfect rignt to entertain at cards in her own home" and another remark: "New Yorkers do play cards for money habitually. I have seen it sometimes and I have clone it sometimes. I have lost and I have won."
When one goes to a gambling den among strangers to play for whatever stakes he can afford he faces expected risks. When he sits down to bridge whist among his serial equals and often his inancial superiors he is frequently led unexpectedly into playing for high stakes and is ashamed to get out of the game before it is too late. Not only has financial ruin resulted from these private whist gatherings, but many divorces as well I have known the man who paid a woman's debts of honor subsequently supplant her husband in her affections. At the time when the American newspapers were raising a tremendous sensation over the British baccarat scandal, in which King Edward figured so prominently, the select circles of Chicago, Philadelphia and New York were honeycombed with poker and whist clubs, as they are today, and the trouble is that the situation seems to be gradually growing worse. The craze for making money is no longer confined to the office and the exchanges. Men and women who should be fagged out in their efforts during the day to secure an abnormal share of the enormous wealth being created by the working classes of this country carry the feverish craze for money making into their own home circles and under the gnise of pleasure seek to prolong the struggle for making more until it is almost time for them to go back to their desks again. When they leave the city to spend a few weeks at fashionable resorts, they carry the fever with them and the baneful influence spreads into stiil wider circles.
Playing at cards is no longer considered fun unless there is a stake attached to it. Although, undoubtedly, such women as Mrs. Hermann Oelrichs and Miss Helen Gould believe they are speaking the truth in denying the prevalence of gambling in social circles, the weight of utcered evidence against their opinions both from the pulpit and society is overwhelming. The clergymen who have joined hands in pushing the crusade are: Rev. Dr. Braddin Hamilton, Rev. Dr. W. R. Huntington, Rev. Dr. Morgan Dix. Rev. K. S. Me Arthur, Rev. W: S. Rainsford, Rev. T. DeWitt Talmage. Below are a few statements made relative to the matter by the above and by persons prominent in society: "I heard of a young man "who lost $1,500 in one evening playing bridge whist, and his hostess forced him to give his I. O. U. for it. His salary is $1.500 a year." "i know of a young girl, who won $500 at cards on Sunday when she should have been at church." "I know a woman at Newport who paid for her cottage by playing bridge whist there. She belongs to the exclusive set." "Sometimes people don't know they are playing for money until they are told so at the end of the game. I know of a woman who werit to an evening whist at the house of a friend and was suddenly told that she had lost $50. And the woman had thought she was playing just a social game,". "I have seen one of the best known society women at-Newport drunk at the Casino." "There are several families in society in the season at Newport that set a bad example and indulge in gambling and drunkenness and appear to have no idea of what a bad effect the renown of their names and wealth have on people whose one idea in life is to be swell' " "That church women will encourage card playing, accompanied by gambling, in their homes, is a practice that anyone familiar with the habits of certain circles in social life will not deny.
"It is useless, however, to condemn gambling in low resorts if it is practically indorsed in the homes of the cultured church people.' Outside of the women who positively deny knowing anything of gambling habits among the Four, or Six Hundred, many shades of opinion are expressed by well known society lights. A prominent member of Mrs. Astor's set says: "If children are going to gamble when they grow up, as ten chances to one they would, they might as well be taught to gamble at home. Another well known society woman said: "I know of one woman who has been to 52 card parties this winter. She has paid for her tickets from §1 to $2, and sometimes $3 apiece. "When I asked her if she would have been willing to give her money to charity without playing the whist or euchre that went with it she confessed that she would not. That is the way with a great many women. They say they're playing for charity, when really they are gambling for a prize.' The depth of the religious sentiment among some of our leading New Vork women may be easily gauged by this frank statement. Another woman says: "I think Dr. Huntingtou takes a very narrow view about card-playing and T. cannot agree with him when he calls card-playing gambling. "And it seems to me a woman has a perfect rignt to entertain at cards in her own home" and another remark: "New Yorkers do play cards for money habitually. I have seen it sometimes and I have clone it sometimes. I have lost and I have won."