_SWINDLES AND HOAXES._
It is of course only natural that as soon as advertising became general,
that portion of the community which regards the other portion as its
oyster, was not slow to discover the advantages which were soon to
accrue in the way of increased facilities for publishing new dodges, or
of giving extended scope to those which were old, but had so far
attained only limited circulation. This has been so conclusively shown
by specimens already given, and references made, that there is no
necessity to discuss the question anew, and therefore we will at once
plunge into the thick of those advertisements which have special
qualifications for treatment different from that given to the milder
classes of rogues and scoundrels. The first transaction which calls for
attention is in connection with Queen Anne’s farthings. No popular
delusion has perhaps made more dupes than that relating to these coins.
Innumerable people believe that there never were but three farthings of
this description, two of which have found their way in due course to the
British Museum, the third only being still abroad; and it is also
believed that the Museum authorities would give a very large sum for the
possession of the missing token. Now there are no less than six distinct
varieties of Anne’s farthings known to exist, and specimens of them are
not at all rare. Some of them may be procured at the coin-dealers, for
ten or twelve shillings; but there is one variety, struck in 1713, which
is extremely rare, and would bring from £5 to £10. There is also a
small brass medal or counter of Queen Anne, about the size of a
farthing, of which there are hundreds. A publican once procured one of
these, and placed it in his window, ticketed as “_the_ real farthing of
Queen Anne.” Credulous persons came from far and near to view this
wonderful curiosity, and the owner turned his deception to good account.
Sometime about the first quarter of this century, a man in Ireland
received twelve months’ imprisonment for secreting a Queen Anne’s
farthing. He was shopman to a confectioner in Dublin, and having taken
the farthing over the counter, he substituted a common one for it.
Unfortunately for him, he told his master how he had obtained it, and
offered it to him for sale. The master demanded the treasure as his
property, the shopman refused to give it up, was brought into the
Recorder’s Court, and there received the above sentence. When rogues
fall out, honest men know what they have lost. It is wrong to assume
that because thieves quarrel, their natural enemies “get their own.” At
all events, experience has never taught us so, and the proverb, as
generally read, is wrong.
Numerous are the instances of people having travelled from distant
counties to London, in order to dispose in the best market of the
supposed valuable farthing. The custodian of the medals in the British
Museum used to be besieged by applicants from all parts of the country,
offering Queen Anne’s farthings and imitations of them for sale, and of
course the dealers in coin even now receive a liberal share of the same
annoyance. Whence the treacherous fable originally sprung has never been
satisfactorily explained. It is certain that Anne’s farthings never were
very common, though of one variety, coined in 1714, not less than from
300 to 500 must have been put in circulation. But the others were mere
patterns, and were never struck for currency: all of them were coins of
great beauty, and for this reason, as well as on account of their being
the only copper coins struck in the reign of Queen Anne, it is probable
that they were soon hoarded and preserved as curiosities, thereby
acquiring an imaginary value, which grew rapidly as soon as some sharp
fellow saw how useful the figment might be made. But the immediate cause
of the popular fallacy concerning the scarcity and great value may be
found in the fact, that at the end of the last century a lady of
Yorkshire having lost one of these coins, offered a large reward for it.
Probably it was valuable to her as a souvenir of some departed friend;
but the advertisement, and the comparative scarcity of these farthings,
gradually led to the report that there was only one such token in
circulation, and that the unique coin was of course of almost priceless
value. Long before this, however, advertisements in reference to Anne’s
farthings had found their way into the papers. So far as we can
discover, the first of these appeared in the _General Advertiser_ of
April 19, 1745, and ran as follows:--
WHEREAS about seven years ago an Advertisement was published in some
of the Daily Papers offering a Reward for a Queen Anne’s Farthing
struct in the year 1714.
_This is to inform the_ CURIOUS
That a Farthing of Queen Anne of that year of a very beautiful dye may
be seen at the Bar of the Pensylvania Coffeehouse in Birchin Lane. The
impression is no ways defaced but as entire as from the Mint.
This, probably, just at the time when a furor was in existence with
regard to the farthings, must have given a fillip to the business at the
Pennsylvania Coffee-house; and must have done a great deal to spread the
belief that a Queen Anne’s coin was much more desirable than the
wonderful lamp of Eastern story, or the more modern but quite as
powerful four-leaved shamrock. That in 1802 the fiction was still lively
is shown by an advertisement which appeared in the February of that
year. This was disguised so as to appear like an ordinary paragraph:--
The Queen Anne’s farthing, advertised to be disposed of in Pall Mall,
proves to be an original. There were only _two_ coined in that Queen’s
reign, and not _three_ as has been erroneously stated. That which was
sold by the sergeant from Chatham for £400, was purchased by a noble
viscount, curious in his selection of coins, &c. Seven Hundred guineas
was the price asked for the one advertised last week. Five hundred was
offered for it and refused. The owner lives at Lynn, in Norfolk. The
offer was made by the son of a baronet, who wants to complete his
collection.
Attention and credulity were so excited by the above paragraph, and many
others of the same tendency, that no one thought of doubting that a
Queen Anne’s farthing was worth more than a Jew’s eye; nor was it till
some time after that the whole was discovered to be a fabrication,
intended either to impose upon the credulity of the public, or, what is
more likely, to enhance the value of such a coin to the holder, who was
quietly waiting to realise. Whether he did so or not does not appear,
but it is more than likely that he did not allow his opportunity to
slip, but hooked one of those unconsciously greedy people who are always
falling victims to their own selfishness as much as to the sharpers, and
who, as soon as they are deluded, look for sympathy and redress to those
very laws they were prepared to outrage when anything was apparently to
be got by so doing. The belief that Queen Anne’s farthings are very
valuable still obtains among the vulgar, notwithstanding the many times
its absurdity has been exposed; and there is no particular reason for
imagining that it will become at all exploded until some fresher but
quite as illogical a fiction is ready to supply its place.
One of the most notorious swindlers of the early part of the present
century was Joseph Ady, who used to profess that he knew “something to
your advantage.” As he did not deal in advertisements, perhaps he has no
right here; but as about 1830 he was constantly being referred to in
newspaper paragraphs, and was a feature of the time among sharpers, he
is entitled to passing notice, if only as a newspaper celebrity. At the
period we mention, “Ady was a decent-looking elderly man, a Quaker,
with the external respectability attached to the condition of a
housekeeper, and to all appearance considered himself as pursuing a
perfectly legitimate course of life. His _métier_ consisted in this. He
was accustomed to examine, so far as the means were afforded him, lists
of unclaimed dividends, estates or bequests waiting for the proper
owners, and unclaimed property generally. Noting the names, he sent
letters to individuals bearing the same appellatives, stating that, on
their remitting to him his fee of a guinea, they would be informed of
‘something to their advantage.’ When any one complied, he duly sent a
second letter, acquainting him that in such a list was a sum or an
estate due to a person of his name, and on which he might have claims
worthy of being investigated. It was undeniable that the information
_might_ prove to the advantage of Ady’s correspondent. Between this
_might be_ and the unconditional promise of something to the advantage
of the correspondent, lay the debatable ground on which it might be
argued that Ady was practising a dishonest business. It was rather too
narrow a margin for legal purposes; and so Joseph went on from year to
year reaping the guineas of the unwary--seldom three months out of a
police court and its reports--till his name became a byword; and still,
out of the multitudes whom he addressed, finding a sufficient number of
persons ignorant of his craft, and ready to be imposed upon--and these,
still more strange to say, often belonging to the well-educated part of
society.”[36] In all the police cases we have come across, in which Ady
was concerned, he seems to have considerably “sat upon” the magistrates,
the “great unpaid” of the City being quite unable to hold their own with
him, notwithstanding the disadvantage at which Joseph was placed.
The claims for precedence of the two most important advertising
swindles of the present day are so equally divided, that it is hard to
say which has caused the greater amount of ruin among credulous persons
who have invested their last few coins in the hope of the certain
success, or which has returned most profit to the exchequers of its wily
promoters. The two claimants are the Turf-Circular and the
Home-Employment swindles, both of which have been allowed full play. We
will give the “home-employment” arrangement preference of treatment, as
it appeals to wider sympathies, the victims being mostly credulous only,
and not selfishly and idiotically greedy for other folk’s goods; and
being, as well, mostly poor hard-working women, and not a few children.
One of the most notorious of these advertisers flourished half-a-dozen
years ago. He used to insert a small notice in the daily papers,
informing those who had leisure that he could find ample remunerative
employment for them, and directing applications to be made by letter at
a given address, enclosing a stamped addressed envelope. Then the
swindle commenced, the reply being as follows:--
GROVE HOUSE, TOTTENHAM ROAD.
ISLINGTON, LONDON, N.
_In reply to your application as per my Notice_ (Leisure Time, _&c._,
_&c._,) _I very respectfully inform you that it has now become
impossible to describe my Advertisement on employing leisure time
fully in the Newspaper in which the little abridged notice appeared,
owing to the enormous charge demanded for inserting it, namely £2 16s.
for each time it appears. So that in consequence I am compelled,
reluctantly, to trouble my correspondents to forward their envelope
for the purpose of an extended explanation, which I think cannot be
clearer done than my forwarding in print, as under, a copy of the
intended announcement, which after reading, and you deciding on
sending for the packet, please deduct from the number (eighteen) the
three Penny Postage Stamps you will necessarily have used, and only
enclose (fifteen) which trifling outlay I think you, like others, will
have no cause to regret._
_Yours faithfully_,
EVERETT MAY.
THE UNDER WILL BEST EXPLAIN:--
LEISURE TIME.--FOUR GUINEAS PER WEEK.--HOW TO REALISE
THIS AT YOUR OWN HOMES.
MR EVERETT MAY, of Kingsland, begs to apprise the Public that he is
sending off as rapidly as possible by every post his far-famed Packet,
the contents of which will show the many plans of getting money most
honourably by either sex employing leisure hours at their own homes.
£2 to £6 weekly may be most certainly realised by all industrious
persons, without five shillings outlay or any risk, by following the
easy, respectable and clear instructions. Sent by Mr Everett May, of
Grove House, Tottenham-grove, Kingsland, London, N. This is no
visionary theory. The Present Season highly suitable. Enclose eighteen
penny stamps, and you will receive post free punctually per return
THIS PROVED BOON TO THE INDUSTRIOUS OF BOTH SEXES.
But to remove any doubt that sceptical persons may entertain as to the
truth of the above, I here insert the under six letters received, with
hundreds of others. The parties are very respectable and each
well-known in the towns they reside.
Calverton, near Nottingham.
Dear Sir,--I beg to inform you that your packet came quite safe, and I
was surprised and highly pleased with its contents. Like others who
doubted the truth, I was ready to conclude it was only to catch those
foolish enough to try it. But I have now proved otherwise, and can
testify that you are no other than a true and faithful man. The
contents of your indeed famed packet are well worth twenty times as
much, and whoever the party may be receiving it will have no cause to
repent. Yours very truly,
SETH BINCH.
Another--Spettisbury, Blanford, Dorset.
Dear Sir,--I beg to inform you that the Packet ordered arrived safely,
and allow me to tender you my sincere thanks for it. Your plans for
getting money so honourably are indeed excellent. Anyone having a
doubt may most certainly remove such doubt. Hoping you may long
continue in your good work is the earnest wish of your obedient
servant,
W. OAKLEY.
Then follow the remaining four letters, which have an astonishing family
likeness to the two chosen, and as these six were only inserted to show
what the careful May would have done had he been able to launch into
lavish expenditure in the interests of his clients, he gives a statement
after the last epistle:--
_Such is the exact copy of the advertisement I intended to have placed
before the public by inserting in the Newspapers had the charge not
been so high, but as I now do so by this circular I can add a few more
of my correspondents’ approval letters, in furtherance of a still more
convincing proof of the value of this esteemed Money Making Packet._
After this he gives a string of letters, which must have demanded great
ingenuity on the part of their writer, if only on account of the number
of signatures he must have invented. Occasionally he breaks down,
however, and has to fall back on initials. We should like to reproduce a
lot of these expressions of gratitude as forms to be used at any time
when thanks are required for any great benefit, but space will not allow
of it, and we must be content with two, which are redolent of truly
Christian thankfulness:--
Short Heath Road, Erdington, near Birmingham, December 13th, 1867.
Mr. May, Dear Sir,--I have received your Packet, and am at a loss how,
adequately, to express to you what I think about it--suffice it to say
that I consider your Packet to be an inestimable boon to the
unemployed of every class. Thousands will, doubtless, make money by
it. It professes only to be a guide to the employment of leisure
hours, but in reality it is a guide to the employment of a whole life,
and an easy path to opulence. “Whoever receives it will have no cause
to regret.” “It is worth twenty times as much.” “Anyone having a doubt
may most certainly remove such doubt.” I heartily re-echo these
testimonials, and recommend your Packet to every unemployed person,
this is no more than I am in equity bound to do. I am, Dear Sir,
faithfully yours,
THOMAS JONSON, JUN.
1, Vincent Terrace, Frome, October 5th, 1867.
Dear Sir,--I have carefully examined the contents of your excellent
Packet, and am astonished and delighted with them. He or she would
indeed be difficult to please who could not select from so extensive a
stock some profitable employment congenial to their taste. The
instructions are explicit, and the minute details in each case fully
and clearly explained. A person of moderate industry and perseverance,
furnished with your Packet may attain, if not a fortune, at least a
very comfortable living. It ought to be widely known, and I for my
part shall not fail to recommend it. I admit I answered your
advertisement merely from a curious desire to know what was the latest
dodge (pardon the word) for hoaxing the public, and I am now heartily
glad I did answer it, though ashamed of the motive that induced me to
do so. I am, Dear Sir, faithfully yours,
JOSEPH JOHNSON, Schoolmaster.
The poor gulls, after reading these effusions, which all play on the
same strings of wonder, satisfaction, and gratitude, are of course
anxious to participate in the benefits of lucrative employment, and off
go the stamps. If the mischief ended there, the matter would not be so
bad; but these advertising scoundrels have various courses open to them.
If they judge that nothing more is to be obtained from the sender, they
calmly pocket the stamps and take no further notice. In the event of
continued “annoyance,” or threats of exposure, they will send forth a
circular which states that a packet was posted, and must have been lost
or stolen in transit. This circular speaks of the post-office, and other
institutions, in the most disparaging manner, and of the transactions of
its writers as not only just, but infallible. One of them winds up
thus:--
_Another matter I wish to inform you upon, namely, an error prevails
regarding the punctual and prompt conveyance of Packets by the Post
Office. This is at times impossible. If the letter mails are heavy,
Packets are sometimes left until the following day. So that I cannot
guarantee it will be delivered at your residence by return, but you
may fully expect it by the second if not by the first mail, postage
free, well packed, and secure from observation. These remarks may
appear trifling, but they are really necessary, and while on the
subject I will name another, also of importance, it is this--several
of my correspondents when applying for these particulars send only
their name and address on a stamped envelope, and when ordering the
Packet enclose their name and omit the address, and this not being
retained by me renders it impossible to forward it. So that a distinct
name and address is, in the second instance, absolutely necessary. It
is required for no other object than to enable me to promptly forward
the order, which I can do to any address in the United Kingdom._
The correspondent who dates from a good address, or whose letter looks
promising, is likely to be despoiled still more. The stamps are
acknowledged, and at the same time information is tendered that a
special order for the peculiar fancy goods upon which the income is to
be made has just come in; and that if the intending employée will send a
fee, say five shillings, for registration, and a deposit, say five
pounds, for security, she will receive a packet containing the
work--which is very easy--and ample instructions. A little delay enables
these wandering tribes to change both names and addresses, and to appear
in greater force than ever in the advertisement columns. No wonder the
writers we have quoted show such gratitude for the receipt of promised
parcels! But we did know two real people who got what they bargained
for. One, who only paid the eighteenpence, obtained, after a good long
time, and the expenditure of many threats, some scraps of brown paper,
which were said to be patterns for pen-wipers, “the manufacture of which
would be found to yield a lucrative profit, if a market could be found
for them.” There is much virtue in an _if_ in this case. The paper went
on to say that there were many shopkeepers who would be glad to sell
them on commission, “the article being extremely rare.” It is noticeable
that the circular received on this occasion was printed, with blanks
left for description of the patterns and the name of the work for which
they were to be used. A man of imaginative mind might in the course of
the day have run through a considerable list of trades; and as the
reference to the demand for the article and the sales by commission
would be the same in all the notices, the demand upon truth was
evidently not particularly excessive. The other successful applicant was
a lady who began by writing out of mere curiosity, and who gradually got
on until she had parted with not much less than ten pounds. A sharp
letter from a solicitor brought no answer to him, but succeeded in
sending the long-expected parcel to his client. It was heavy, and
accompanied by a short letter, which said:--
BIRMINGHAM, October 7, 1869.
MADAM,
We beg to inform you that some little delay has been caused by the
failure of a company to whom we entrusted the manufacture of a large
quantity of articles. We have now however great pleasure in forwarding
you a sample of an enamelled leather child’s button boot, with lasts
and leather for you to follow model. As soon as we receive from you
specimen equal to pattern we shall be glad to afford you constant
employment.
Yours obediently,
VENTNOR AND MORRIS.
The parcel contained some old odd lasts, a really well-made little boot,
and some queer bits of leather, which the cleverest man in the world
could have done nothing with; a shoemaker’s knife, an awl, and a lump of
cobbler’s wax! This expedient enabled the swindlers to tide over the
time till a new name and a fresh address were decided on. It is worthy
of note--and we shall refer to it a little further on--that the
statement of one of these scoundrels would lead to the impression that
extra prices are charged for these swindling advertisements. If larger
prices are charged to men because their advertisements are fraudulent,
no amount of false logic or forensic oratory can dispose of the fact
that the proprietors of the papers are accessories in any robbery or
swindle that is committed; and the insertion of such advertisements,
knowing them to be traps for the unwary, at a price which denotes the
guilty knowledge of the proprietors, is as gross a breach of the trust
reposed in them by the public as was ever committed by smug, well-fed,
Sabbath-observing sinners. There is, unfortunately, but too much reason
to believe that extra prices are charged for these fool-traps, and that
in the most pious and pretentious papers. At the time of the
baby-farming disclosures which led to the execution of Margaret Waters,
one paper openly accused another--a daily of large circulation--with
charging three or four hundred per cent. over the ordinary tariff price
for the short applications for nurse children which were then usual.
Perhaps the accusation was not worth disproval--at all events it remains
uncontradicted till this day. These murderous advertisements presented
no particularly destructive features, they simply said in each case that
a nurse child was wanted at a certain address; and sometimes an offer
would be made to take a baby altogether for a lump sum. This is one of
a lot taken from a leading daily paper:--
ADOPTION.--Child Wanted to NURSE, or can be LEFT ALTOGETHER. Terms
moderate. Can be taken from birth. Address ----.
Sometimes the terms were mentioned, and, as a rule, the sum named showed
that even the tender mercies experienced by Oliver Twist and his friend
Dick at the farming establishment inhabited by them could hardly have
been expected by the most confiding of parents. Thus:--
A RESPECTABLE Woman wishes to adopt a CHILD. Premium £6. Will be taken
altogether and no further trouble necessary. Apply ----.
As some of these establishments may be still in existence, we refrain
from republishing the addresses. These specimens, as advertisements,
simply call for no comment at our hands, and so we will get on with the
more pronounced, though less guilty, swindlers. Here is a specimen which
doubtless gave the postman some extra work:--
GENTLEMEN having a respectable circle of acquaintance may hear of
means of INCREASING their INCOME without the slightest pecuniary risk,
or of having (by any chance) their feelings wounded. Apply for
particulars by letter, stating their position &c. to W. R. 37, W----
Street C---- Square.
To such an advertisement as this--one of exactly the same kidney--which
appeared in _Lloyd’s_, under the head of “How to make Two pounds per
Week by the outlay of Ten Shillings,” and asking for thirty stamps in
return for the information, the following belongs. It is sent in reply
to the letter enclosing the fee, and is too good a specimen of the
humour possessed by these rogues to be passed over:--
“First purchase 1 cwt. of large-sized potatoes which may be obtained for
the sum of 4s., then purchase a large basket, which will cost say
another 4s., then buy 2s. worth of flannel blanketting and this will
comprise your stock in trade, of which the total cost is 10s. A
large-sized potato weighs about half-a-pound, consequently there are 224
potatoes in a cwt. Take half the above quantity of potatoes each evening
to a baker’s and have them baked; when properly cooked put them in your
basket, well wrapped up in the flannel to keep them hot, and sally forth
and offer them for sale at one penny each. Numbers will be glad to
purchase them at that price, and you will for certain be able to sell
half a cwt. every evening. From the calculation made below you will see
by that means you will be able to earn £2 per week. The best plan is to
frequent the most crowded thoroughfares, and make good use of your
lungs, thus letting people know what you have for sale. You could also
call in at each public-house on your way and solicit the patronage of
the customers, many of whom would be certain to buy of you. Should you
have too much pride to transact the business yourself (though no one
need be ashamed of pursuing an honest calling), you could hire a boy for
a few shillings a week who could do the work for you, and you could
still make a handsome profit weekly. The following calculation proves
that £2 per week can be made by selling baked potatoes:--
“1 cwt. containing 224 potatoes sold in two evenings at
1d. each, £0 18 8
Deduct cost, 0 4 0
-------
£0 14 8
3
-------
Six evenings’ sale, 2 4 0
Pay baker at the rate of 8d. per evening
for baking potatoes, 0 4 0
-------
Nett profit per week, £2 0 0.”
Many and most curious are the answers received from time to time by
persons with sufficient faith to make application to these advertisers,
the foregoing being by no means unique. One reply received in return for
half-a-crown’s worth of stamps, which were to have purchased much wisdom
in the way of money-saving, was this: “Never pay a boy to look after
your shadow while you climb a tree to see into the middle of next week.”
A man who would send his money to such evident scamps, could hardly see
into the middle of anything, no matter where he chose his
vantage-ground. Fortunately for the interests of the community at large,
these tricksters now and again are made to feel that there is justice in
the land. Twenty years ago, a City magistrate did good service by
exposing a man who lived abroad in splendour at the expense of the poor
governesses he managed to victimise through the advertising columns of
the _Times_. This rascal used, by means of the most specious promises,
to drag young girls to a foreign land, and there leave them to become a
prey to other villains, or to make their way back accordingly as
circumstances permitted. But as at the present time there are streams of
foreign girls decoyed to London under all sorts of pretexts for the
vilest purposes, the least said as to the criminality of one single
individual among the shoals of scoundrels who live by means of
advertisements the better. Since Mr Fynn was unmasked many other hawks
have been captured, and only recently two have found their way into the
obscurity of penal servitude under circumstances worthy of mention.
_Place aux dames_: we will give precedence to Mistress Margaret Annie
Dellair, though her retirement was subsequent to that of the other
claimant on our attention. The difference of date is, however, extremely
small. Mrs Dellair lived at Croydon, and for a long time lived in peace
and plenty on the post-office orders, or rather the cash received in
exchange for them, obtained by means of the following advertisement:--
HOME EMPLOYMENT.--Ladies in town or country wishing for Remunerative
EMPLOYMENT in Laces, Church Needlework, &c., should apply at once to
M. D., Fern House, West Croydon, enclosing a directed envelope.
Reference to ladies employed by permission.
This must have been a fruitful source of income to M. D., who seems to
have considered that people were calmly content to part with their
money, as she made no attempt to put off the day of reckoning which was
bound to arrive. So in due course Mrs Dellair found herself charged with
fraud before the Croydon bench, and ultimately she appeared at the bar
of the Central Criminal Court in April of the present year. Her mode of
procedure, described during the trial, was this. Applicants in due time,
after sending in their stamped and addressed envelopes, received
circulars, stating that the work which the sender was able to furnish
comprised braiding, point lace, tatting, church needlework, and Berlin
wool. The needlework was to be done at the ladies’ homes, and they were
never to earn less than eightpence or a shilling per hour. To secure
employment the applicants were informed that the payment of one guinea
“for registration fee, materials, and instruction,” was required, half
of which sum was to be returned when the employment was resigned.
Post-office orders were to be made payable at the office, Windmill
Street, Croydon, to Margaret Dellair. “There is,” says a writer at the
time commenting on this case, “something quite admirable in this calm
repudiation of the anonymous, in this wearing of the heart upon the
sleeve, on the part of Mistress Dellair. The bait she threw out was
swallowed with avidity by many young ladies--some with more money than
wit, others painfully anxious to secure bread-winning employment; others
less solicitous about procuring work for themselves than inquisitive to
discover, for the benefit of society in general and their friends in
particular, whether the transaction was _bonâ fide_. Then the curtain
rose on the second act of the drama. Some ladies sent post-office
orders to Windmill Road; others took the train to Croydon, and had
personal interviews with the benevolent recluse of Fern House--a little
cottage near a wood--who did not fail to represent that she was
extensively employed by some eminent firms of church furnishers in the
metropolis.” One young lady having sent her guinea, received, after a
lapse of some weeks, and after repeated communications on her part, ten
toilet-mats, with the materials for braiding them. There was not enough
braiding, and so she wrote for more, but received no reply. Then she
finished the mats with materials purchased by herself, and despatched
the articles to Croydon; but neither reply nor payment was forthcoming.
After many more weeks Mrs Dellair wrote to say that she was in
ill-health. Seeing, however, that the advertisement was continued in the
papers, the defrauded young lady wrote to Fern Cottage, demanding the
return of ten shillings, being one-half of the sum she had disbursed for
“registration fee, materials, and instruction.” No answer was returned,
of course; and the victim not only lost her money, but her time and her
labour, to say nothing of postage, worry of mind, and other incidental
expenses. One of the principal witnesses against Dellair was the Croydon
postmaster, who stated that he had known her a year and a half. She had
been in the habit of bringing post-office orders to his office to cash.
She had brought between three and four hundred orders since July 1872,
principally for guineas, but there were some for half-crowns and some
for half-guineas. They were brought principally by her daughter, but
sometimes by a servant. On the 30th of October 1873 a post-office order
(produced) was brought to him, and the payee’s signature was that of the
prisoner. He paid the money to the person who brought it. The house at
which the prisoner lived was a small private house, called Fern Cottage,
and there was no show of business kept up there. On cross-examination by
prisoner’s counsel, the postmaster stated that the fact of so many
orders being cashed by Mrs Dellair excited his suspicion. He, however,
knew that she was getting her living by sending parcels of needlework by
post, and since he had ascertained that fact, he did not think it so
extraordinary. Mrs Dellair was in the habit of purchasing postage stamps
in large quantities of him. She sometimes purchased ten shillings’
worth, and once or twice had bought them to a larger extent. At the
trial the entire seat in front of the jury-box was filled by young women
who attended to prosecute, some of whom had been prudent enough to ask
for references, but imprudent enough to part with their guineas,
although the testimonials received were not quite satisfactory. Some
applicants had interviews with Dellair at Croydon, and then she gave the
names of one or two eminent firms as her employers, but at the trial
representatives of these firms swore that she was totally unknown to
them. One of the most peculiar points in this trial was the line taken
by the counsel for the defence, who argued that although the victims of
his client might be deserving of sympathy, they had parted with their
guineas in a foolish and careless manner, and the real question was
whether the accused was guilty of a fraudulent pretence or not. The
advocate raised the curious point in favour of his client, that although
she had avowedly four hundred transactions with different persons, it
was extraordinary that she had not been discovered and prosecuted
before; but he forgot how much more extraordinary it was that for her
defence the prisoner was unable to bring forward out of her four hundred
clients a single witness who could swear to receiving remunerative
employment from her. The defence was original, and originality in
defence has a good deal to do with success when a case is being tried by
a common jury; but it did not succeed, and Mrs Margaret Annie Dellair
was found guilty. The woman was an impudent and abandoned swindler, who
had been systematically preying for years upon a class that can, of all
classes, the least afford to be cheated--decently-educated young women
of small means, who fill respectable positions, and whose consequent
need of employment which will enable them to earn a little something
above their ordinary salaries is always pressing and frequently
imperative. Before sentence was passed an inspector from Scotland Yard
stated that the prisoner and her husband had formerly lived at Finchley
under another name; that they had afterwards kept a shop in Bloomsbury
under the title of “Fuller & Co.,” where they advertised to give
“remunerative employment” both to young ladies and young gentlemen; that
in May 1872 the husband was sentenced at the Middlesex Sessions to five
years’ imprisonment for fraud; that on his conviction the woman removed
to Fern Cottage; and that after her arrest, and its consequent
publication in the papers, upwards of eighty letters had been received
by the police complaining of her dealings. All that Margaret Annie
Dellair could do when she was called up for sentence was to plead that
she had been left in an all but penniless condition with seven young
children; that she had tried in vain to obtain an honest livelihood by
keeping a stall in a bazaar; and that her crime was caused by a desire
to avert starvation from her innocent offspring. A good deal of sympathy
was of course expressed by the public--especially by those who have
nothing to lose--not for the victims, but for the victimiser. The
interest taken in criminals nowadays, when they have the slightest
claims to be out of the common order, would be regarded as quite
overdrawn if described in a novel.
The other delinquent was not so interesting, and being only a man, did
not find any hearts to bleed for him even among those who had not been
deceived. His practices were provincial, his advertisement, of which the
following is a copy, being inserted in the Warwickshire and London
papers:--
HOME EMPLOYMENT.--Ladies (several) wanted to COPY manuscript SERMONS
for supply to the clergy. Reasonable terms. Apply by letter only to R.
H., 39, New-buildings, Coventry.
R. H. was Robert Hemmings, who was eventually tried at the Warwick
Assizes of last March, and whose _modus operandi_ was then described.
Several young ladies seeing the advertisements, and wishing for
employment, wrote to the address given, in answer to which they received
the “Prospectus of the Private Office for the Supply of Sermons and
Lectures to Clergymen and Public Speakers.” In this highly-titled and
pretentious document, clergymen “who find the composition of sermons too
heavy a tax on their ingenuity, are invited to subscribe for manuscript
sermons, arranged according to the three schools of thought in the
English Church. The High Church section is subdivided into Ritualistic
and moderate Anglican. The subscription for three sermons weekly is four
guineas per annum, payable in advance. The same sermon will not be sent
to any two clergymen within twenty miles of each other.” It also states,
that the business of the office rendering necessary the employment of
copyists, it has been decided to employ ladies only, the reason being
that home occupation to gentlewomen of limited income is such a great
desideratum of our times. Then it goes on to say that “the ordinary
avenues for respectable women desiring to replenish their scanty purses
are so overstocked that the limited number we are able to employ will
gladly welcome the opportunity of turning a fair handwriting to a
profitable account. The remuneration paid will be 2d. per 100 words. To
avoid the possibility of unscrupulous persons obtaining valuable sermons
on pretence of copying, a guarantee of 10s. will be required from each
copyist before MSS. are sent, to be returned when she may discontinue
working. Applicants for employment should enclose 2s. 6d. on account of
their deposit, which will either be returned or a notification of
engagement sent. In the latter case the balance must then be remitted,
in order that the first parcel may be supplied. All communications to be
sent to Mr Robert Hemmings, 39, New-buildings, Coventry.” One young lady
resident in London, who gave evidence, sent the half-crown, and then
received a letter stating that she would be employed on forwarding a
post-office order to Birmingham for 7s. 6d. She did not do so, but many
other ladies were not so wise. The prisoner having obtained the money,
ceased to communicate with the applicants. The jury found the prisoner
guilty, and the judge sentenced him to twelve months’ imprisonment with
hard labour.
A more fortunate rogue was one who came into notice at the Sussex
Assizes four or five years back. Justice may or may not have overtaken
him since, for these fellows have so many and such various aliases that
unless you happen to see one tried and hear him sentenced, there is no
way of telling who he is or what he may have been. The object of our
care at the present moment was known at Bognor in Sussex as Henry
Watkis, though as he admitted to one more name, the suggestive one of
Walker, even there, it would be difficult to say what might be his name
in London or any other large town. He used to advertise to procure
situations in London daily and weekly papers, and some complaints having
been made to the police, he was taken into custody on a warrant, and
appeared at the Chichester Quarter Sessions. From a newspaper report of
the time we take some of the following particulars of what must be
considered a decided miscarriage of justice.
Watkis lived at 6 Jessamine Cottages, Bognor, and when the
superintendent of police from Chichester searched his cottage, he found
under the stairs 530 letters, consisting of testimonials, replies to,
and drafts of advertisements; and in another part of the house he found
about 150 envelopes, apparently sent for replies, from which stamps had
been cut. When Watkis was apprehended, he acknowledged that he was the
person who had been advertising in the name of “B. C., Post-office,
Chichester,” by which it seems that he had still another alias, though
not in Bognor. On that day he sent a lad to the Chichester post-office,
and a large bundle of letters, addressed as above, was brought back from
the office. In the course of a few days after Watkis’s apprehension,
between seven and eight hundred letters were received at the post-office
all directed in the same way. Evidence was given that advertisements
were inserted in the _Daily Telegraph_ and _Lloyd’s_ in consequence of
orders received in letters signed “Hy. Watkis,” and “Hy. Walker.” About
500 letters were received at Chichester, addressed “X. Y. Z,” in
accordance with one of the advertisements, and a very large number were
also received at Emsworth under still a fresh set of initials.
Altogether nearly 20,000 letters are supposed to have been sent to the
two offices for the accused. It was proved that 34s. worth of stamps,
all singles, had been sold by Watkis. At the conclusion of the address
for the prosecution, the deputy recorder ruled that there was no case to
go to the jury as far as the law was concerned. There was no proof that
Watkis had, either on his own part or on that of others, no such
situations to offer as had been advertised. The jury were not satisfied
without hearing the evidence that the prisoner was not guilty. The
deputy recorder said they had placed him in a very difficult position,
and he must tell them again that the indictment could not be maintained
in point of law. Therefore they would be doing a very irregular thing to
go into the case. It was for them to find a verdict in accordance with
the ruling of the court on the point of law. After some discussion the
jury returned into court, and the foreman, in answer to the usual
question, said, “If we are obliged to say not guilty, we must; but the
jury wish to express a strong opinion.” By advice of the deputy
recorder, however, this opinion was not recorded, and the prisoner was
accordingly discharged.
We will wind up this portion of our list of swindles with an
advertisement of the same order, which succeeded in realising a good
income for its promoter:--
LADIES and EDUCATED WOMEN are respectfully invited to consult Mrs.
EGGLESTON’S SERIES of 60 HOME and other NEW EMPLOYMENTS, which are
beginning to attract a large share of public interest for their marked
superiority over very unremunerative pursuits usually engaged
in.--Enclose an addressed stamped envelope to Mrs Eggleston, ----,
Ramsgate, for prospectus.
Sixty different businesses to choose from for home employment! Dollseye
and leather-apron weaving was doubtless among them; and in sorting out
those occupations most suited to her various correspondents, Mrs
Eggleston doubtless passed a pleasant time at the seaside, even if she
did not lay up riches against the time she returned to London.
Turf-swindlers are next upon our list, and no one will doubt that these
gentry are well deserving of attention, the more so as, partly by
themselves, and partly by means of the shortsightedness peculiar to the
public, which causes it to form judgments on subjects it does not
understand, welchers and thieves who advertise the most impossible
“certainties” have been in numerous instances taken to represent the
respectable and honourable turfite. We know it is the custom now to
assume that a man is bound to be dishonourable if he be professionally
connected with racing in any capacity; and any effort made to contradict
wholesale and thoughtless accusations is supposed to be the outcome of
self-interest, or the blind devotion of quixotry. Men who are cool and
calculating enough when discussing ordinary subjects, become almost
rabid when the turf is mentioned; and in most articles which have been
written on the subject of sporting advertisements, it is assumed that
the scheming concocters of baits for fools are fair representatives of
the bookmaking class, and all are alike denounced. Surely it would be as
just to assume that the baby-farmers and promoters of home employment
whose effusions we have quoted were fair representatives of ordinary
commerce, as that the “discretionary-investment” promoter is in any way
connected with the legitimate bookmaker. We have no wish here to argue
for or against betting; but we cannot help noticing that even in
Parliament--which is never supposed to legislate upon what it does not
understand!--notorious thieves have been taken to represent the
principal advertising bookmakers, and long arguments as to the equity of
the Betting-House Act framed on the assumption. During the present year
there has been considerable discussion in the House of Commons with
reference to the Act which was passed in 1853, Scotland being at the
time exempt from its operation. The effect of leaving the “land of
cakes” in the position of one who is known to be too virtuous to need
protection was not visible for some years; for though the Act of Sir
Alexander Cockburn had the effect of clearing away the numerous
betting-offices, which were undoubtedly at the time public nuisances and
open lures to men whose speculative disposition was in inverse
proportion to its means of gratification, the better-class agents, whose
business was carried on through the post only, continued to flourish or
decay, according to circumstances, until 1869. The attention of the
police being then drawn to numerous advertisements which appeared in the
London and provincial papers on the subject of betting, a raid was made
on a large establishment near Covent Garden: books and papers, clerks
and managers, were seized and conveyed to Bow Street; and though the
employés were ultimately discharged, the proprietor was ultimately fined
heavily, the decision of the magistrate being eventually endorsed by the
judges to whom the case was referred on appeal. A flight of betting men
resulted, the resting-place of some being Glasgow, and of others
Edinburgh; from both of which places they put forth their advertisements
as before, safe in the knowledge that so far, at all events, the law was
on their side. The extension of the Act of 1853 was of course only
matter of time; but the first two or three efforts failed signally,
principally on account of the blind animosity of the promoters of the
measure, which caused them to frame bills which, for intolerance and
hopeless stupidity, have perhaps never been equalled. Another cause was
a feeling that, while one form of betting was allowed at Tattersall’s
and the chief sporting clubs--a form which had shown itself equal to
ruining several peers and hundreds of young men of less degree--it was
impolitic to over-legislate with regard to the half-crowns and
half-sovereigns of working men and small tradesmen, and to say to them,
while yet the terrible “plunging” years were fresh in memory, “Dukes and
marquises only shall ruin themselves at will, you, the common people,
must be saving as well as industrious.”
At last Mr Anderson, one of the members for Glasgow, introduced his
Extension Bill (1874), and though his arguments were eminently
ridiculous, as he assumed that every advertiser was a swindler, his
legislative attempt was a much greater success than any former effort
had been in the same direction, and his bill, with a few modifications,
eventually became law. As an instance of the feeling to which this
measure gave rise, we quote part of a criticism upon it from the most
able of the sporting papers which make the turf their principal study,
the _Sportsman_, the first journal that refused the advertisements of
swindlers whose intentions were evident, a method of self-abnegation
which might be studied to advantage by many virtuous newspapers, which,
while they weep over the iniquity of sporting advertisements, are
strangely oblivious as to the character or effect of those which appear
in their own columns. It must be remembered that the “ring” and
Tattersall’s betting--of which mention is made in the following--is not
interfered with by law, because nothing is staked before the decision of
the race but “honour.” This, being often deeply mortgaged, is found
insufficient for the demand when settling-day arrives.
Says the writer in the _Sportsman_, after demolishing several of the
charges made against ready-money betting: “Take the case of those who
bet in the ring, or at Tattersall’s, or in the clubs. What guarantee is
there between the contracting parties that there shall be no element of
fraud, and consequently no immorality in the transaction? And what
guarantee is there that one or other of the contracting parties who is
induced to bet is not a person who cannot afford to lose? There is an
inducement to bet on either side: on the side of the layer and on the
side of the backer, and will any one acquainted with the subject be
prepared to say that in scores of cases there is not on both parts a
total inability to pay in the event of loss? What man is there who,
having seen much of the ring, cannot recall many instances of layers
betting to such an extent that they could never pay if the fates were
against them, and of backers ‘having’ the ring all round without a
sovereign in their pockets? Nay, cannot even the general public who are
not initiated into such mysteries remember numbers of men who have
ruined themselves and others under the system in which Mr Anderson ‘does
not feel there is any immorality,’ because in it ‘the element of fraud
is not introduced,’ and because under it ‘people who cannot afford to
lose’ are not induced to bet? The result of his bill will be that he
will drive men from one style of betting, in which they lose or win,
knowing the extent of their gains or their losses, to another, under
which they may be drawn into hopeless speculation, and perhaps
concomitant fraud, simply because they are not called on for ready
money. We do not propose to follow Mr Anderson through his ingenious and
amusing descriptions of the advertisements of tipsters and
‘discretionary-investment’ people. He was good enough to introduce
ourselves as a striking example of the facility with which such persons
could foist their schemes on the public, and of the large profits which
were derived by certain newspaper proprietors from them. He had the
honesty to acknowledge that we had refused to take any further
announcements with respect to ‘discretionary investments,’ and that we
had persistently cautioned our readers to have nothing to do with
them.... As for tipsters, who merely offer to give information for a
shilling’s worth of stamps, what immorality can there be in that which
is not to be found in the ‘selections’ of the daily newspapers? Even the
_Times_, in a roundabout ‘respectable’ way, now and then indicates
horses which, in the opinion of its sporting writer, will win certain
races, and there is hardly a daily paper in town or country which has
not its regular ‘prophet,’ who from day to day lifts up his voice or his
pen and offers inducements to the public to bet. Can any one of such
journals say to us, ‘I am holier than thou, because I sell my prophecies
for a penny, and thou insertest the advertisements of men who want a
dozen stamps for theirs’? But the whole policy of objecting to certain
classes of advertisements is absurd. If the proprietor of a newspaper
were to inquire, even superficially, into the _bona fides_ of all the
announcements he makes every day, his journal could not be conducted. If
he were even to confine his attention to the examination of the
prospectuses of joint-stock companies--and this will appeal to Mr
Anderson--he would be in the Bankruptcy Court in six months. Suppose the
directors of any one of hundreds of bubble concerns which every year
carry away the public with ‘bogus’ announcements were to appear before
the manager of the _Times_ with their prospectuses, what would they
think if he said, ‘Gentlemen, before I insert this you must prove to me
that it is not a gross swindle;’ and how would they proceed to do so?”
We admit to a weakness for reading the sporting papers, and can
therefore vouch for the truth of what the _Sportsman_ says about its own
action. It would have been well, however, if other papers had been as
careful, for we happen to know that all the contemporaries of the
journal from which we have quoted did not come out with quite such clean
hands. Some not only continued to insert the advertisements, despite
numerous complaints, but actually _doubled the usual tariff price_ to
the thieves. This seems to have been a pretty general proceeding when
the discretionary movement was at its height, all papers which continued
to insert the specious swindles after the exposures had begun being very
careful to be well paid for their trouble. As in these days the plain
truth is often the most desperate of libels, we must refrain from
particularising; but we should think that no one in his sober senses
will dispute the evident fact that such newspaper proprietors as took
double pay from men because they knew they were assisting them in
robbery, were morally far and away more guilty than the robbers
themselves. If any apology is needed for our going so far into the
betting subject, it will be found in the almost total ignorance, as well
as the blind prejudice, which is every day manifested about the
difference between the commission agents and their greatest enemies, the
advertising welchers.
The raid which drove the bookmakers from London to the principal towns
in Scotland seems almost to have been organised by the authorities in
the interest of the scamps of the betting world. It certainly was
considerably to the latter’s advantage. In the hurry and turmoil which
eventuated from the hegira, it was hard for people who were not experts
to tell the good men from the bad; and as, the more unfounded a man’s
pretensions, the greater were his promises, letters containing
remittances almost swarmed into the offices least worthy of confidence.
One good, however, resulted from this. The conversion of sinners we have
the best authority for regarding as a blessing, and it must be admitted
that owing to the manner in which money poured in upon them, and one or
two subsequent bits of luck in the way of unbacked horses’ victories,
men who went to Glasgow and Edinburgh as adventurers, if not as actual
thieves, remained to become not only solvent, but strictly virtuous. It
was not, however, until affairs had somewhat settled down in the North,
until Scotland began to be regarded as the permanent abode of the layer
of odds, that advertisements which on the face of them were gigantic
swindles appeared. Hitherto the attempts of impostors had been confined
to a semblance of really fair and legitimate business, the firm being
existent as long as there was nothing to pay, and _non est_ immediately
the blow came. And people who imagine that a bookmaker has nothing to do
but take money, would respect him rather more than they do now if after
one or two big races they could see his account, and note the scrupulous
manner in which every debt is paid, if he bids for respectability in his
vocation. A delay of a day in his settlement would lead to unpleasant
results, for the very contiguity of the thieves makes the honest men
more exact in their transactions. So it is usual, when a man has money
to receive by post from a commission agent, for him to get it at once,
or most likely not at all. The tipstering and touting fraternities had,
while the headquarters of advertising turfites remained in London, been
satisfied with short paragraphs intimating their absolute knowledge of
the future, and their willingness to communicate such knowledge to the
British public for a consideration in the way of stamps, or a percentage
on winnings. But when once ready money had been tasted, it seemed to act
on these people as blood is said to on tigers, and they determined to
have more at all risks. It was useless to try for it a year or so after
the migration by applications couched in the ordinary style, for the run
of business was by that time divided among certain firms, and the old
slow way of giving advice for shillings and sixpences was abhorrent to
minds that soared after bank-notes and post-office orders; besides, it
had very nearly worn itself out. Fresh moves were therefore necessary,
and they were made in various ways, each of which was more or less
successful. The most important of them all, and the one with which we
have to do now, was the discretionary-investment dodge, which was for a
time a complete success, and which would have lasted much longer than it
did, had it not been for the faculty of imitation possessed by thieves
other than those who inaugurated the venture. Imitation may be the
sincerest form of flattery, but even flattery must be painful when it is
destructive, and Messrs Balliee & Walter could doubtless have dispensed
with the crowds who followed in their wake, and almost made the fortunes
of all papers who would take their advertisements. We are not aware
whether the system was invented by Balliee & Walter, either or both;
but, anyhow, they were its first promoters to any extent, and became
thoroughly identified with it. Rumour states that Balliee was a kind of
Mrs Harris, and that Walter was the firm. This is nothing to us, though,
however much it may be to those who were despoiled of their cash by the
discretionary swindle. The advertisements put forth for the benefit of
those willing to trust their money blindly into the hands of men of whom
they knew nothing must have been very successful, for it is admitted
that the letters received in Glasgow for Balliee & Walter were so
enormous in quantity that special arrangements had often to be made for
their delivery. It is noticeable that swindlers of this description
always assume that their firm is not only long established but well
known, and the following, taken from the first page of the _Sporting
Life_ of the Derby-day 1871, will show that the particular people in
question had no scruple about inventing facts for the purpose of
substantiating their arguments:--
THE KINGSCLERE LONDON AND GLASGOW TURF
COMMISSION AGENCY.
Messrs. BALLIEE and WALTER beg to inform their subscribers and the
sporting public that, in consequence of increase of business, they
have opened a Commission Agency in Glasgow, where in future all
commissions will be executed.
Gentlemen may rely on liberal treatment and prompt settlement of all
claims. All letters answered same day as received.
* * * * *
MESSRS. BALLIEE AND WALTER
(Members of the principal West-End Clubs),
62, JAMAICA STREET, GLASGOW.
As heretofore, Commissions of every description, and to any amount,
will be undertaken, the following being the leading features:--
INVESTMENTS ON FORTHCOMING EVENTS effected at the best Market Prices.
FIRST FAVOURITES backed at the post, and the rate of odds guaranteed
as quoted by the sporting paper the investor chooses to adopt.
JOCKEYS’ MOUNTS invested upon in accordance with any scale or
principle.
POST COMMISSIONS for EPSOM MEETING will meet with prompt attention.
* * * * *
THE EPSOM CARNIVAL.
THE OAKS A CERTAINTY.
“So if to be a millionaire at present is your aim,
Don’t hesitate, but join at once our systematic gains.”
Shakspeare, revised and improved.
A SAFE INVESTMENT.--WINNING A CERTAINTY.
KINGSCLERE RACING CIRCULAR
DISCRETIONARY INVESTMENTS.
Messrs. BALLIEE and WALTER, Proprietors
(Members of the principal West-End Clubs).
The only recognised method by which backers of horses can win large
sums at all the principal meetings.
PROSPECTUSES FREE ON RECEIPT OF ADDRESS.
* * * * *
MESSRS. BALLIEE and WALTER draw the attention of investors to the
all-important fact that they alone of all firms who undertake
Discretionary Investments are to be seen personally in the Ring, and
are represented at the lists outside, at every meeting throughout the
racing season. Some firms, although they state they are present, are
never to be seen.
SELECTED MORTEMER TO WIN AND A PLACE
FOR CHESTER CUP;
THE DWARF,
GREAT NORTHERN;
LORD HAWTHORN,
FLYING DUTCHMAN;
STANLEY,
DONCASTER SPRING HANDICAP;
With nearly every other winner at York and Newmarket.
We defy contradiction, and court inquiry.
RESULTS OF LATE MEETINGS:--
Each £10 investor at York was remitted by Friday’s post (May 12) £108
nett winnings.
Each £5 investor at Doncaster was remitted by Monday’s post, £85.
Being exclusive of stake and nett return after commission (5 per
cent.) had been deducted.
Newmarket accounts and winnings were forwarded by Tuesday’s post, May
16.
Gentlemen of capital and backers of horses can now judge of the
intrinsic value of this infallible system of backing our Final
Selection at the post.
* * * * *
MESSRS. BALLIEE and WALTER will continue their highly successful
system of DISCRETIONARY INVESTMENTS at the
EPSOM MEETING,
where they personally attend, and as such a great influx of business
is expected during the Derby Week, they have engaged three extra
Commissioners to assist them in carrying out the system, and again are
sanguine of realising a gold-achieving victory.
AT EPSOM MEETING LAST SUMMER, SEASON 1870,
Each £25 investor was returned £703 nett Winnings, in addition to
stake deposited.
Each investor of £20 in 1868 realised £487.
„ £25 „ 1869 „ £324 15s.
„ £50 „ 1870 „ £1,406.
The above sums were paid to each investor of the specified amounts,
and this season we with confidence assert that the investments will be
more remunerative to the investor.
The Oaks this season will be won by, comparatively speaking, an
outsider. Last season’s subscribers will remember our warning them
against Hester, and we assure our readers that Hannah will, like all
the Baron’s favourites, be doomed to defeat. A clever Northern
division have a filly the beau ideal of Blink Bonny, as being tried a
7℔ better animal than Bothwell, and with health must win the fillies’
race in a canter. The owner most unfortunately omitted to enter her
for the Two Thousand and Derby, or we should have seen her credited
with the first-named event, and first favourite for Blue Riband
honours.
SEVERAL RODS ARE IN PICKLE
for the minor events. Particulars were given in our last week’s
Circular (May 12), and even at this distant period we are enabled to
predict the success of six certain winners.
HAVING HORSES OF OUR OWN,
and others identical with our interests, running at this meeting,
coupled with the important commissions we have the working of at
EPSOM.
Our knowledge of market movements, the intimate terms we are on with
the various owners, jockeys, and trainers, our social position with
the élite of the racing world, enables us to ascertain the intentions
of other owners and the chances their respective candidates
possess--information far beyond the reach of other advertisers.