Jane Austen Clubs

ALMACK'S
(with several notes on the waltz and quadrille)

Close by the St. James’s Theatre are “Willis’s Rooms,” a noble suite of assembly-rooms, formerly known as “Almack’s.” The building was erected by Mylne, for one Almack, a tavern-keeper, and was opened in 1765, with a ball, at which the Duke of Cumberland, the hero of Culloden, was present. Almack, who was a Scotchman by birth, seems to have been a large adventurer in clubs, for he at first “farmed” the club afterwards known as “Brooks’s.” The large ball-room is about one hundred feet in length by forty feet in width, and is chastely decorated with columns and pilasters, classic medallions, and mirrors. The rooms are let for public meetings, dramatic readings, concerts, balls, and occasionally for dinners. Right and left, at the top of the grand staircase, and on either side of the vestibule of the ball-room, are two spacious apartments, used occasionally for dinners.

“Almack’s” was already established as a place of public entertainment as far back as 1768, for in the Advertiser of November 12th, in that year, we find the following notice: --- “Mr. Almack humbly begs leave to acquaint the nobility and gentry, subscribers to the Assembly in King Street, St. James’s, that the first meeting will be Thursday, 24th inst. N. B. Tickets are ready to be delivered at the Assembly Room.”

In a satire on the ladies of the age, published in 1773, we read ---

“Now lolling at the Coterie and “White’s,”
We drink and game away our days and nights.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
No censure reaches them at Almack’s Ball;
Virtue, religion -- they’re above them all.”

Here, from 1808 to 1810, Mrs. Billington, Mr. Braham, and Signor Naldi gave concerts, in rivalry with Madame Catalini at Hanover Square Rooms.

The assembly which bore the title of “Almack’s” was in its palmy days under the regulation of six lady patronesses, of the first distinction, whose fiat was decisive as to admission or rejection of every applicant for tickets, and became a most autocratic institution --- quite and imperium in imperio. In fact, the entrée to “Almack’s” was in itself a passport to the highest society in London, being almost as high a certificate as the fact of having been present at Court.

Lady Clementina Davies writes in her “Recollections of Society: --- “At ‘Almack’s,’ in 1814, the rules were very strict. Scotch reels and country dances were in fashion. The lady patronesses were all powerful. No visitor was to be admitted after twelve o’clock, and once, when the Duke of Wellington arrived a few minutes after that hour, he was refused admission.”

A writer in the New Monthly Magazine (1824) observes: “The nights of meeting fall upon every Wednesday during the season. This is selection with a vengeance, the very quintessence of aristocracy. Three-fourths even of the nobility knock in vain for admission. Into this sanctum sandorum, of course, the sons of commerce never think of intruding on the sacred Wednesday evenings; and yet into this very ‘blue chamber’ in the absence of the six necromancers, have the votaries of trade contrived to intrude themselves."

Mr. T. Rakes tells us in his “Journal” that, "the celebrated diplomatiste, the Princess Lieven, was the only foreign lady who was ever admitted into the exclusive circle of the lady patronesses of this select society, into the tracasseries of which establishment she entered very cordially, though her manner, tinctured at times with a certain degree of hauteur, made her many enemies."

top

Captain Gronow writes, “one can hardly conceive the importance which was attached to getting admission to ‘Almack’s,’ the seventh heaven of the fashionable world. Of the three hundred officers of the Foot Guards, not more than half a dozen were honoured with vouchers of admission to this exclusive temple of the beau monde, the gates of which were guarded by lady patronesses, whose smiles or frowns consigned men and women to happiness or despair as the case might be. These ‘lady patronesses,’ in 1813, were the Ladies Castlereagh, Jersey, Cowper, and Sefton. Mrs. Drummond Burrel, afterwards Lady Willoughby d’Eresby, the Princess Esterhazy, and the Princess Lieven.”

“The most popular amongst these ‘grandes dames,’" he adds, “was Lady Cowper, now Lady Palmerston. Lady Jersey’s bearing, on the contrary, was that of a theatrical tragedy queen; and whilst attempting the sublime, she frequently made herself simply ridiculous, being inconceivably rude, and in her manner often ill-bred. Lady Sefton was kind and amiable, Madame de Lieven haughty and exclusive, Princess Esterhazy was a bon enfant, Lady Castlereagh and Mrs. Burrell de très grandes dames.”

“Many diplomatic arts, much finesse, and a host of intrigues, were set in motion to get an invitation to ‘Almack’s.’ Very often persons whose rank and fortunes entitled them to the entrée anywhere, were excluded by the cliquism of the lady patronesses; for the female government of ‘Almack’s’ was pure despotism, and subject to all the caprices of despotic rule: it is needless to add that, like every other despotism, it was not innocent of abuses. The fair ladies who ruled supreme over this little dancing and gossiping world, issued a solemn proclamation that no gentleman should appear at the assemblies without being dressed in knee-breeches, white cravat, and chapeau bras. On one occasion, the Duke of Wellington was about to ascend the staircase of the ball-room, dressed in black trousers, when the vigilant Mr. Willis, the guardian of the establishment, stepped forward and said, ‘Your Grace cannot be admitted in trousers;’ whereupon the Duke, who had a great respect for orders and regulations, quietly walked away.”

“In 1814, the dances at ‘Almack’s’ were Scotch reels and the old English country dance; and the orchestra, being from Edinburgh, was conducted by the then celebrated Neil Gow. It was not until 1815 that Lady Jersey introduced from Paris the favourite quadrille, which has so long remained popular. I recollect the persons who formed the first quadrille that was ever danced at ‘Almack’s:’ they were Lady Jersey, Lady Harriet Butler, Lady Susan Ryder, and Miss Montgomery; the men being the Count St. Aldegonde, Mr. Montgomery, Mr. Montague, and Charles Standish. The ‘mazy waltz’ was also brought to us about this time; but there were comparatively few who at first ventured to whirl round the salons of ‘Almack’s;’ in course of time Lord Palmerston might, however, have been describing an infinite number of circles with Madame de Lieven. Baron de Neumann was frequently seen perpetually turning with the Princess Esterhazy; and, in course of time, the waltzing mania, having turned the heads of society generally, descended to their feet, and the waltz was practised in the morning in certain noble mansions in London with unparalleled assiduity.”

top

Mt. T. Raikes thus commemorates the arrival of the German waltz in England: --- “No event ever produced so great a sensation in English society as the introduction of the German waltz in 1813. Up to that time the English country dances, Scotch steps, and an occasional Highland reel, formed the school of the dancing master, and the evening recreation of the British youth, even in the first circles. But peace was drawing near, foreigners were arriving, and the taste for Continental customs and manners became the order of the day. The young Duke of Devonshire, as the ‘magnus Apollo’ of the drawing rooms in London, was at the head of these innovations; and when the kitchen and country dance became exploded at Devonshire House, it could not long be expected to maintain its footing even in the less celebrated assemblies. In London, fashion is or was then everything. Old and young returned to school, and the mornings which had been dedicated to lounging in the Park, were now absorbed at home in practising the figures of a French quadrille, or whirling a chair round the room, to learn the step and measure of the German waltz. Lame and impotent were the first efforts, but the inspiring effect of the music, and the not less inspiring airs of the foreigners, soon rendered the English ladies enthusiastic performers. What scenes have we witnessed in those days at ‘Almack’s, &c.! What fear and trembling in the débutantes at the commencement of a waltz, what giddiness and confusion at the end!”

“It was perhaps owing to this latter circumstance that so violent an opposition soon arose to this new recreation on the score of morality.”

“The Anti-waltzing party took the alarm, cried it down, mothers forbade it, and every ball-room became a scene of feud and contention; the waltzers continued their operations, but their ranks were not filled with so many recruits as they expected. The foreigners, however, were not idle in forming their élèves; Baron Tripp, Neumann, St. Aldegonde, &c., persevered in spite of all the prejudices which were marshalled against them, every night the waltz was called, and new votaries, though slowly, were added to their train. Still the opposition party did not relax in their efforts, sarcastic remarks flew about, and pasquinades were written to deter young ladies from such a recreation.”

“The waltz, however, struggled successfully through all its difficulties; Flahault, who was la fleur des pois in Paris, came over to captivate Miss Mercer, and with a host of others drove the prudes into their entrenchments; and when the Emperor Alexander was seen waltzing round the room at ‘Almack’s,’ with his tight uniform and numerous decorations, they surrendered at discretion.”

The author of “Memoirs of the Times of George IV.” favours us with the following curious comments on quadrilles, then (1811) newly exhibited in England: --- “We had much waltzing and quadrilling, the last of which is certainly very abominable. I am not prude enough to be offended with waltzing, in which I can see no other harm than that it disorders the stomach, and sometimes makes people look very ridiculous; but after all, moralists, with the Duchess of Gordon at their head, who never had a moral in her life, exclaim dreadfully against it. Nay, I am told that these magical wheelings have already roused poor Lord Dartmouth from his grave to suppress them. Alas! after all, people act about it as gravely as a company of dervishes, and seem to be paying adoration to Pluto rather than Cupid. But the quadrilles I can by no means endure; for till ladies and gentlemen have joints at their ankles, which is impossible, it is worst than impudent to make such exhibitions, more particularly in a place where there are public ballets every Tuesday and Saturday. When people dance to be looked at, they surely should dance to perfection. Even the Duchess of Bedford, who is the Angiolini of the group, who make an indifferent figurante at the opera; and the principal male dancer, Mr. North, reminds one of a gibbeted malefactor, moved to and fro by the winds, but from no personal exertion.” In July, 1821, a splendid ball was given here in honour of the coronation of George IV by the special Ambassador from France, the Duc de Grammont. The King himself was present, attended by some of his royal brothers, the Duke of Wellington, and a numerous circle of courtiers. “Whatever French taste, directed by a Grammont, could do,” writes Mr. Rush in his “Court of London,” “to render the night agreeable, was witnessed. His suite of young gentlemen from Paris stood ready to receive the British fair on their approach to the rooms, and from baskets of flowers presented them with rich bouquets. Each lady thus entered the ball-room with one in her hand; and a thousand posies of sweet flowers displayed their hues, and exhaled their fragrance as the dancing commenced.”

Boodle’s” is the last of the three surviving clubs which have been identified with the names of individuals; it was so called after its first founder, of whom, however, little or nothing is known. It is still the property of his representatives, though governed by a committee. Like “White’s,” it has a very modest and unpretending aspect when compared with some of the lordly edifices in its neighbourhood; but it is said to be marked by most agreeable and comfortable arrangements within. It is frequented mainly by elderly country gentlemen, chosen indifferently from both of the two great political parties. Hence this club has never been identified with politics. It has been sarcastically said to be sacred to Boeotian tastes, but it has had distinguished persons on its list of members --- Edward Gibbon, for instance, whose waddling gait and ugly visage convulsed with laughter not merely such fast friends as Lord and Lady Sheffield, but many of his literary friends and compeers.

Brooks's

view the Subscription-Room at Brooks's

“Brooks’s,” preeminently the club-house of the Whig aristocracy, occupies No. 60 on the west side of St. James’s street. It was originally established at “Almack’s,” in Pall Mall, in 1764, buy the Duke of Portland, Charles James Fox, and others. They afterwards removed it to St. James’s Street, and the club-house, designed by Holland , was opened in 1778. The early history of this club, so long the head-quarters of the leaders of the old Whig party, is thus told in the “Percy Anecdotes:” --- “When the Whigs, with Mr. Fox for their leader, commenced their long opposition to the Tory party under Pitt, they formed themselves into a club at ‘Almack’s,’ for the joint purpose of private conference on public measures, and of social intercourse. In 1777, a Mr. Brooks built, in St James’s Street, a house for the accommodation of the club, and had the honour of conferring on it the name by which it has ever since been known. The number of members is limited to four hundred and fifty..... A single black ball is sufficient to exclude. The members of the club are permitted by courtesy to belong to the club at Bath, and also to ‘Miles’s’ and other respectable clubs, without being balloted for. The subscription is eleven guineas a year. Although, strictly speaking, an association of noblemen and gentlemen for political objects, gaming is allowed.....It was in the bosom of this club that Fox may be said to have spent the happiest hours of his life. Here, when the storm of public contention was over, would the banished spirit of true kind-heartedness return to its own home. Here, with Sheridan, Barre, Fitzpatrick, Wilkes, and other men of the same stamp, did his spirit luxuriate in its natural simplicity; and hence, after a night of revelry, he would hasten off to he shades of St. Anne’s Hill, near Chertsey, and with a pocket Horace --- his favourite companion --- bring back his mind to contemplative tranquility.”

If we may trust Captain Gronow’s “Anecdotes and Reminiscences,” at “Brooks’s,” for nearly half a century, the play was of a more gambling character than at “White’s.” Faro and Macao were indulged in to an extent which enabled a man to win or to lose a considerable fortune in one night. It was here that Charles James Fox, Selwyn, Lord Carlisle, Lord Rovert Spencer, General Fitzpatrick, and other great Whigs won and lost hundreds of thousands, frequently remaining at the table for man hours without rising. On one occasion Lord Robert Spencer contrived to lose the last shilling of his considerable fortune given him by his brother, the Duke of Marlborough. General Fitzpatrick being much in the same condition, they agreed to raise a sum of money, in order that they might keep a faro bank. The members of the club made no objection, and ere long they carried out their design. As is generally the case, the bank was a winner, and Lord Robert bagged, as his share of the proceeds, one hundred thousand pounds. He retired, strange to say, from the fetid atmosphere of play, with the money in his pocket, and never again gambled. George Harley Drummond of the famous banking-house at Charing Cross, played once only in his whole life at “White’s” at whist, on which occasion he lost twenty thousand pounds to Brummel. This event caused him to retire from the banking-house of which he was a partner. Lord Carlisle was one of the most remarkable victims amongst the players at “Brooks’s,” and Charles Fox was not more fortunate, being subsequently always in pecuniary difficulties.

The membership of “Brooks’s Club,” in the days of Pitt and Fox, was a sort of crucial test by which the members of the Whig party of the time were distinguished. It was a passport to Holland Devonshire House, and also to Carlton House, while the Prince of Wales was at war with his father and his ministers. Hence, on Sheridan’s entrance into the House of Commons, in 1789, one of the first objects of Fox and his friends was to procure his admission inside the doors of “Brooks’s.” But he was, personally, most unpopular with two of the leaders of the Whig coterie, George Selwyn and Lord Bessborough, who were resolved to keep him out. As one black ball at that time excluded a candidate, the Foxites resolved to get him by a ruse. Aided by Georgiana, Duchess of Devonshire, the presiding genius of the Whig party, when the time for the ballot came on, they sent false messages conveying alarming news of the illness of near relative, to both of the dissidents. The bait took in both cases, each no doubt supposing that the other would be in his place to give the black gall; and the result was the election of Richard Brinsley Sheridan, wit, dramatist, orator, and statesman in one.

Even after he had published the first volume of his “History.” Gibbon observes that his forced residence in London was sad and solitary. “The many forgot my existence when they saw me no longer at ‘Brooks’s,’ and the few who sometimes had a thought of their friend were detained by business or pleasure; and I was proud if I could prevail on my bookseller, Elmsley, to enliven the dullness of the evening.”

BROOKES'S
(from Ackermann's Microcosm of London, 1809)
(With a long-winded treatise on the evils of cards and gaming)

Brookes's Subscription-House, in St. James's-street was built by the late Mr. Brookes, about the year 1777, for the express purpose of accommodating the political club which had been formed some years before that period, under the tutelar auspices of the late Mr. Charles Fox, at Almack's. The room is 37 feet long, 22 feet wide, and 25 feet high. The architect was Mr. Henry Holland. This club is known by the title of Brookes's, and is honoured by the names of the Prince of Wales, the Dukes of York and Clarence, and the principal nobility and gentry, who have usually appeared in the ranks of opposition with the late Mr. Fox. The number of its members is limited to four hundred and fifty; the candidate for admission must be nominated by a member, and his name exposed in a list for that purpose at least one week before the ballot, which can only take place during the meeting of Parliament, and when at least twelve members are present. A single black ball is sufficient to exclude. The Royal Family do not undergo this ceremony for admission, and they are not competent to exercise the invidious power of voting at the election of other members.

The business of the club is managed by a committee of six gentlemen, who are chosen annually. All new rules proposed are ballotted for. The members of this club are permitted by courtesy to belong to the clubs at Bath, and also to Miles's, and other respectable clubs, without being ballotted for. The subscription is 11 guineas per annum. The game of hazard is seldom or ever played, and there is no billiard-table. The present fashionable games are quinze, wist, piquet, and maccaw.

This club has continued at Brookes's for upwards of thirty years, and is more properly an association of noblemen and gentlemen, connected by politics, than gaming; it is not to be denied, that a few years since this destructive propensity was carried beyond all the purposes of amusement or pleasure, and that some of our great popular characters have been accused of indulging a most inordinate passion for ti; but the taste for play seems, in a considerable degree, to have abated, although some men, of sanguine tempers and ardent dispositions, still continue partial to this amusement. During the time this club met at Almack's, a regular book was kept of the wagers laid by the different members, as well as of the sums won or lost at play, which were carried to the accounts of the respective parties with all the forms of mercantile precision. We are old enough to remember the circumstances which gave rise to some of these wagers; which, as they shew the opinions entertained by persons who shone so conspicuously in politics, upon the particular subjects to which they allude, may be considered at least as interesting as some of the Ana with which the public have been entertained: we shall therefore insert a few.

"March 11, 1774, Almack's. Lord Clermont has given Mr. Crawford ten guineas upon the condition of receiving 500l. from him whenever Mr. Charles Fox shall be worth 100,000l. clear of debts.

"Lord Northington bets Mr. C. Fox, June 4, 1774, that he (Mr. C.F.) is not called to the bar before this day four years.

"March 11, 1775. Lord Bolingbroke gives a guinea to Mr. Charles Fox, and is to receive a thousand from him whenever the debt of this country amounts to 171 millions. Mr. Fox is not to pay the 1000l. till he is one of his Majesty's cabinet.

"April 7, 1792. Mr. Sheridan bets Lord Lauderdale and Lord Thanet, twenty-five guineas each, that Parliament will not consent to any more lotteries after the present one voted to be drawn in February next."

Perhaps no invention has been prostituted from its original purpose than card-playing.

Cards were at first for benefits design'd;
Sent to amuse, and not enslave the mind:
But from such wise end they must soon depart,
From this principle of the human heart,
Which not in pleasure's self can pleasure find,
Unless it comes with agitation join'd;
Which, basking warm in Fortune's sunshine clear,
Sighs for the shifting clouds of hope and fear;
And tir'd with looking on the listless deep,
When lull'd by summer gales to silver sleep,
Would rather far the tempest's fury brave,
When danger rides on ev'ry wave.

The honour of their first discovery is contended for by two nations, the French and Spanish. From the materials of which cards have always been made, they are supposed to have been invented subsequent to the days of Charlemagne. In the three Essays on the "ANTIQUITY OF CARD-PLAYING," (Archaeologia, vol. VIII.) the pretensions of the Spaniards to this discovery seem to be supported. Others, on the contrary, attribute it to Jaquemin Grigonneur, a French painter, who is said to have made them with a view to divert the melancholy which Charles the Sixth of France had fallen into, about the year 1390. Those who support this supposition, contend that they were not in use before that period:

1. Because no cards are to be seen in any painting, sculpture, tapestry, &c. more ancient but are represented in many works of ingenuity since that age.

2. No prohibitions relative to cards are mentioned in the king's edicts, although but a few years previous, a most severe one was published against all sports and pastimes (by name), in order that the people might exercise themselves in shooting with bows and arrows, and be in a condition to oppose the English.

3. In all the ecclesiastical canons prior to the said time, there occurs no mention of cards; although twenty years after that date, card-playing was interdicted the clergy by a Gallican synod.

4. Because about this time is found, in the account-book of the king's cofferer, the following charges:

"Paid fifty-six shillings of Paris to Jaquemin Grigonneur, the painter , for three packs of cards, gilded with gold, and painted with divers colours and divers devices, to be carried to the king for his amusement."

In the synodical canons before alluded to, they are called "pagellae pictae," little painted leaves.

5. Because about thirty years after this, came out a severe edict against cards in France; and another by Emanuel, Duke of Savoy, only permitting this pastime to the ladies "pro spinulis," for pins and needles.

By the coeurs (hearts) are meant the gens de coeur, choice men and ecclesiastics; and the Spaniards have copas, or chalices, instead of hearts.

By the ends or points of the lances are represented the nobility, or first military men; the Spaniards have espadas (swords), in lieu of pike-heads, and our ignorance of the meaning of the figure induced us to call them spades.

By the diamonds are designed the class of citizens, merchants, and tradesmen, carreaux (square stones, tiles, or the like); the Spaniards have a coin, dineros, which answers to it; and the Dutch call the French word carreaux, sticneen, stones, and diamonds, from the form.

Treste, the trefoil leaf, or clover-grass (corruptly called clubs), alludes to the husbandmen and peasants. How this suit came to be called clubs, I cannot explain, unless borrowing the game from the Spaniards, who have bastos (staves or clubs), instead of the trefoil, we give the Spanish signification to the French figure.

The four kings are David, Alexander, Caesar, and Charles, representing the four celebrated monarchies of the Jews, Greeks, Romans, and the Franks under Charlemagne.

By the queens are intended Argine (which word is an anagram of regina), Esther, Judith, and Pallas, names which the French still retain on their cards, and are typical of birth, piety, fortitude, and wisdom.

By the knaves are designed the servants to the knights; for knave originally meant servant, and in an old translation of the Bible, St. Paul is called the knave of Christ; for pages and valets, now indiscriminately used by various persons, were formerly only allowed to persons of quality (escuiers), shield or armour-bearers. Others again have fancied, that the knights themselves were designed by the knaves; because Hogier and Lahire, two names on the French cards, were famous knights at the time cards were supposed to have been invented.

The ruinous vice of gaming, so destructive in all places, and so difficult, if not impossible, to be entirely restrained in any, has engaged the attention of legislators in all the countries of Europe. In France, Germany, and every part of the Continent, the attempt has been made, and made in vain. This very circumstance, perhaps, excited in a higher degree the indignation of the Emperor Joseph (who would not admit any difficulty to stand in the way of his reforming plans); he therefore prohibited all games of chance whatever, under the severest penalties; and, in the year 1786, this law was so rigidly enforced, that eleven officers of grenadiers were in a single instance, not only deprived of their commissions, but degraded to the humiliating condition of serving in the ranks as common soldiers; a punishment which had till then been considered as peculiar to the Russian service. In the year 1788, the Prince Bishop of Liege issued a proclamation against gaming in any part of his dominions, but particularly at Spa, under the penalty of 200 gold florins for the first offence, and two years imprisonment for the second.

By the 12th statute of George II. the games of faro, hazard, &c. are declared to be lotteries, subjecting the persons who keep them to a penalty of two hundred pounds, and those who play, to fifty pounds. One witness only is necessary to prove the offence before a justice of the peace, who forfeits ten pounds if he neglects his duty. By the 8th statute of George I. the keeper of a faro-table may be prosecuted for a lottery, where the penalty is five hundred pounds. By the 16th statute of Charles II. c. 7. if any person, by playing or betting, lose more than one hundred pounds at one time, he shall not be compellable to pay, and the winner shall forfeit treble the amount. The 9th statute of Anne, c. 14. makes all bonds and other securities given for money won at play, or money lent at the time to play withal, utterly void; and mortgages, or a like consideration, to be and enure to the heir of the mortgager: and if any person lose more than ten pounds at play, he may sue the winner, and recover it back; and if he does not, any other person may sue the winner for treble the sum so lost, and the winner shall also be deemed infamous, and suffer such corporal punishment as in case of willful perjury. By the 18th statute of George II. c. 34. this statute is farther enforced, and its deficiencies supplied; and if any person be convicted, upon information or indictment, of winning or losing ten or twenty pounds within twenty-four hours, he shall forfeit five times the sum. Such has been the anxiety of the legislature to suppress faro-tables, and other games of chance, that the several penalties have been inflicted, founded on the fullest conviction of the pernicious consequences of such practices: "and yet," says Mr. Colquhoun (in his treatise on the Police of the Metropolis), "houses are opened, under the sanction of high-sounding names, where an indiscriminate mixture of all ranks are to be found, from the finished sharper, to the raw inexperienced youth; and where all those evils exist in full force, which it was the object of the legislature to remove."

When a species of gambling, ruinous to the morals and to the fortunes of the younger part of the community, who move in the middle and higher ranks of life, is suffered to be carried on in direct opposition to a positive statute, surely blame must be attached somewhere. When such abominable practices are encouraged and sanctioned by high-sounding names, when sharpers and black-legs find an easy introduction into the houses of persons of fashion, who assemble in multitudes together for the purpose of playing at the odious and detestable games of hazard, which the legislature has stigmatized with such marks of reprobation, it is time for the civil magistrate to step forward, and to feel, that in doing that duty, which the laws of his country impose on him, he is perhaps saving hundreds of families from ruin and destruction, and preserving to the infants of thoughtless and deluded parents that property which is their birthright.

Tacitus has observed (de Mor. Germ. c. 24.) that, by a wonderful diversity of nature, the Germans are by turns the most indolent and the most restless of mankind; they delight in sloth, they detest tranquility: the languid soul, oppressed with its own weight, anxiously required some new and powerful sensation, and war and gaming were the gratifications most suited to this temper of mind. In the dull intervals of peace, they were immoderately addicted to deep gaming and excessive drinking; both of which, by different means, alike relieved them from the pain arising from want of employment: they glorified in passing whole days and nights in this tumult of the passions, and the blood of friends and relations often stained their numerous assemblies. Such was the point of honour among these barbarians, or rather depraved obstinacy, as Tacitus calls it (ea est in pravâ pervicaciâ, ipsi fidem vocant), that the desperate gamester, who had staked his person and liberty on the throw of the die, patiently submitted to the decision of fortune, and suffered himself to be bound hand and foot, and sold into remote and cruel slavery, by his weaker and more lucky antagonist.

We shall conclude this article by an account of a determination (Michaelmas term 1760), in a cause which had been long depending between the executors of Sir John Bland and a French gentleman. The case was nearly this: Sir J. B. had lost at play about 350l. and borrowed 300l. more for the same purpose of gaming; afterwards, for the whole sum he drew a bill of exchange upon himself payable in London. According to the laws of England, the security for the whole became void; but the laws of France make a distinction between a debt incurred at play, and money lent for the purpose of gaming, the latter being recoverable as if lent for any other purpose: hence the cause became curious, and gave occasion to very ingenious arguments. It seemed reasonable, on one hand, to pay a regard to the law of France in a matter transacted at Paris; and, on the other hand, it was urged, that the lender of the money accepted the payment In London, and therefore became subject to the law of England. It was at length, however, judiciously determined to set aside the whole security; but, at the same time, to establish the contract for the 300l. as valid.

The Thatched House

The “Thatched House Tavern,” the name of which implies a very humble and rural origin, was probably an inn which had existed in the days when St. James’s was a veritable hospital and not a palace. It stood near the bottom, on the western side of the street. When the Court settled at St. James’s, it was frequented by persons of fashion, and grew gradually in importance, as did the suburb of which it formed part. We should like to have seen it in the days when the frolicsome maids of honour of the Tudor and Stuart days ran across thither from the Court to drink syllabub and carry on sly flirtations. In the absence of documents, it is impossible to trace its growth down to the days of Swift, who speaks in his “Journal to Stella,” in 1711, of “having entertained our society at dinner at the Thatched House Tavern;” it was, however, a small hotel at that day, for the party were obliged to “send out for wine, the house affording none.” It was possibly on account of this and other proofs of its earlier stage of existence, that even when the “Thatched House” had grown into a recognized rendezvous of wits, politicians, and men of fashion, Lord Thurlow alluded to it during one of the debates on the Regency Bill as the “ale-house.” By the time of Lord Shelburne, or at all events in the days of Pitt and Fox, it had become one of the chief taverns at the West-end, and had added to its premises a large room for public meetings.

Here the Earl of Sunderland, the great Duke of Marlborough’s son-in-law, having shaken off the cares of state, would dine off a chop or steak, in a quiet way, along with Lord Townsend, or his constant companion, Dr. Monsey. The tavern was for many hears the head-quarters of the annual dinners or other convivial meetings of leading clubs and literary and scientific associations. The Literary Society (or Club) was limited to 40 members, and its meetings in 1820 were held here. At that time Canning was a member of it; so were Sir William Scot (Lord Stowell), Sir William Grant, and Mr. J. H. Frere.

Mr. Cradock tells us in his “Memoir,” that one evening he dined with the club, being introduced by Dr. Percy, and met, inter alios, Edmund Burke and Oliver Goldsmith. “The table that day was crowded, and I sat next Mr. Burke; but as the great orator said very little, and as Mr. Richard Burke talked much, I was not aware at first who my neighbour was.” He adds an amusing story which beings in both Burke and Johnson, and my therefore well bear telling here: --- “One of the party near me remarked that there was an offensive smell in the room, and thought it must proceed from some dog that was under the table; but Burke, with a smile, turned to me and said, ‘I rather fear it is from the beef-steak pie that is opposite us, the crust of which is made of some very bad butter which comes from my country. Just at that moment Dr. Johnson sent his plate for some of it; Burke helped him to very little, which he soon dispatched, and returned his plate for more; Burke, without thought, exclaimed, ‘I am glad that you are able so well to relish this beef-steak pie.” Johnson, not at all pleased that what he ate should ever be noticed, immediately retorted, ‘There is a time of life, sir, when a man requires the repairs of a table.’

“Before Dinner was finished, Mr. Garrick came in, full-dressed, made many apologies for being so much later than he intended, but he had been unexpectedly detained at the House of Lords; and Lord Camden had absolutely insisted upon setting him down at the door of the hotel in his own carriage. Johnson said nothing, but looked a volume.

“During the afternoon some literary dispute arose; but Johnson sat silent, till the Dean of Derry very respectfully said, ‘We all wish, sir, for your opinion on the subject.’ Johnson inclined his head, and never shone more in his life than at that period. He replied, without any pomp; he was perfectly clear and explicit, full of the subject, and left nothing undetermined. There was a pause; and he was then hailed with astonishment by all the company. The evening in general passed off very pleasantly. Some talked perhaps for amusement, and others for victory. We sat very late; and the conversation that at last ensued was the direct cause of my friend Goldsmith’s poem, called ‘Retaliation.’”

Here, in the beginning of the 19th century, the “Neapolitan Club” used to dine, the Prince of Wales of the Duke of Sussex taking the chair. Beckford was frequently a guest, and so were “Beau” Brummell, Sir Sidney Smith, Richard Brinsley Sheridan, and Tommy Moore, then quite a young man. Here, too, the members of the Old Royal Naval Club --- not a club in the modern West-end sense, but a charitable institution for dispensing of charity among old “salts” and their families --- used to dine on the anniversary of the battle of the Nile.

top

Watier's

At the opposite (east) corner of Bolton Street, (Piccadilly) stood, from 1807 to 1819, Watier’s Gambling Club. Concerning the origin of this club--or rather, gaming house, for it was nothing more--the following anecdote is told by Captain Gronow:--
”Upon one occasion, some gentlemen of both ‘White’s’ and ‘Brooks’s’ had the honour to dine with the Prince Regent, and during the conversation the Prince inquired what sort of dinners they got at their clubs; upon which Sir Thomas Stepney, one of the guests, observed that their dinners were always the same, the eternal joints or beef-steaks, the boiled fowl with oyster sauce, and an apple tart. “That is what we have at our clubs, and very monotonous fare it is.’ The Prince, without further remark rang the bell for his cook, Watier, and in the presence of those who dined at the royal table, asked him whether he would take a house and organise a dinner-club. Watier assented, and named the Prince’s page, Madison, as manager, and Labourie, from the royal kitchen, as cook. The club flourished only a few years, owing to the night-play that was carried on there. The favourite game played there was ‘Macao.’ “ The Duke of York patronised it, and was a member. Tom Moore also tells us that he belonged to it. The dinners were exquisite; the best Parisian cooks could not beat Labourie.

Mr. John Timbs, in this account of this club, remarks, with sly humour, “In the old days, when gaming was in fashion, at Watier’s Club both princes and nobles lost or gained fortunes between themselves;” and by all accounts “Macao” seems to have been a far more effective instrument in the losing of fortunes than either “Whist” or “Loo.”

Mr. Raikes, in his “Journal,” says that Watier’s Club, which had originally been established for harmonic meetings, became, in the time of “Beau” Brummell, the resort of nearly all the fine gentlemen of the day. “The dinners,” he adds, “were superlative, and high play at ‘Macal’ was generally introduced. It was this game, or rather losses which arose out of it, that first led the ‘Beau’ into difficulties.” Mr. Raikes further remarks, with reference to this club, that its pace was “too quick to last,” and that its records show that none of its members at his death had reached the average age of a man. The club was closed in 1819, when the house was taken by a set of “black-legs” who instituted a common bank for gambling. This caused the ruin of several fortunes, and it was suppressed in its turn, or died a natural death.

White's

“White’s Club,” near the top of St. James’s street on the east side, occupies the site of the town-house of Elizabeth, Countess of Northumberland, daughter of Theophilus, Earl of Suffolk. Here she lived in her widow hood, if we may trust Horace Walpole, whose information came from the lady’s niece by marriage. She was “the last lady who kept up the ceremonies of state of the old peerage. When she went out to pay visits, a footman, bareheaded, walked on each side of her coach, and a second coach with her women attended. I think,” adds Horace Walpole, Lady Suffolk told me that her daughter-in-law, the Duchess of Somerset, never sat down before her without her leave to do so. I suppose old Duke Charles, the ‘proud’ Duke of Somerset, had imbibed a good quantity of his stately pride in such a school.”

“White’s” originally stood at the bottom of St. James’s Street, on the eastern side. Gay, in his “Trivia,” thus brings to the mind’s eye the scene which in former times might here be witnesses --- in the winter, of course: --

At ‘White’s’ the harness’d chairman idly stands,
And swings around his waist his tingling hands.”

The history of the establishment of this club is related as follows in the “Percy Anecdotes:” --- “When ‘Brooks’s’ became the head-quarters of the Foxite party, their opponents formed on the other side of the street a club which, from the name of its first steward, took the name of ‘White’s.’ Here those measures which were to agitate Europe were submitted to the country gentlemen, whilst the spirit of resistance to the minister’s power and ambition was cherished and fed at the other club. In the morning they met to organise and train their opposing forces; at night, when debate was over, each party retired, the one to ‘White’s,’ and the other to ‘Brooks’s’ to talk over triumphs achieved, or to sustain disappointed hopes by new resolves and new projects.”

“White’s” was the great Tory club, and in the days of the Regency, when Whig and Liberal peers could almost be counted on the fingers, it embraced two-thirds, if not three-fourths, of the “upper ten thousand” among its members. Being so fashionable, it is not a matter of wonder that it should have been extremely difficult to gain entrance to it. Its doors were shut against anybody, however rich, who made his money by mercantile industry. Its large bow window, looking down into St. James’s Street, during the season, was very frequently filled by the leading dandies and beaux, who preferred lounging to politics; such as the Marquis of Worcester, the Duke of Argyle, Lord Alvanly, Lord Foley, Mr. G. Dawson Damer, Hervy Aston, “Rurus” Lloyd, &c.

Mr Rush, the American ambassador, speaks of “White’s” as the Tory Club established in the reign of Charles II, and consisting of five hundred members. He adds that it was generally so full that there was great difficulty in gaining admission; and that the place of head-waiter was said to be worth five hundred pounds a year. The club was a great place of resort among the “upper ten thousand.” “Whenever I lose a friend, “ said George Selwyn, “I go to ‘White’s,’ and pick up another.”

This club was originally one of the headquarters of the Tories of the old school, who here, in 1832, discussed the advisability of throwing out the first Reform Bill. But from and after that day it adopted a neutral tint, being frequented by members of both sides of the house.

top

The records of “White’s” are said to be perfect from 1736. To this club belonged Sir Everard Fawkner, an official high in the Post Office department, who was celebrated for playing cards for high stakes, and very badly, too. In allusion to his office, George Selwyn used to say, that some one who played with him was “robbing the mail.”

At this club, on the last night of the year 1754, the first Lord Montfort supped and played at cards, as usual, and on leaving told the waiter to send his lawyer to wait on him the next day at eleven, as he had important business to transact. The important business was simply the work of blowing out his brains with a horse-pistol. Lady Hervey says that the sole cause of this rash act was a taedaem vitae, quite accountable in a man who had enjoyed all the success of public life.

Colley Cibber, “player, poet, and manager,” not only an excellent actor, but the author of a treatise on the stage, which Horace Walpole terms “inimitable,” was a member of “White’s Club.” Davies, in his “Life of Garrick,” tells us the following story about him: --- “Colley, we are told, had the honour to be a member of the great club at ‘White’s;’ and so, I suppose, might any other man who wore good clothes, and paid his money when he lost it. But on what terms did Cibber live with this society? Why, he feasted most sumptuously, as I have heard his friend Victor say, with an air of triumphant exultation, with Mr. Arthur and his wife, and gave a trifle for his dinner. After he dined, when the club-room door was opened and the laureate was introduced, he was saluted with a loud and joyous acclamation of ‘O, King Coll!’ ‘Come in, King Coll!’ and ‘Welcome, welcome, King Colley!’ And this kind of gratulation Mr. Victor thought was very gracious and very honourable.”

“White’s Club” is more than once alluded to by Pope, as a place where high play and loose morality prevailed in his day. In one of Walpole’s letters occurs the following rich bit of satire on the folly of betting, which we may imagine was here indulged in to a very large extent: --- “Sept. 1st, 1750. -- They have put in the papers a good story made at ‘White’s.’ A man dropped down dead at the door, and was carried in; the club immediately made bets whether he was dead or not; and when they were going to bleed him, the wagerers for his death interposed, and said it would affect the fairness of the bet.”

By common consent, as it would appear from Captain Gronow, the late Lord Alvanly was regarded as the author of the chief witticisms in the clubs after the abdication of the throne of dandyism by Brummel, who, before that time, was always quoted as the sayer of good things, as Sheridan had been sometime before. Lord Alvanly had the talk of the day completely under his control, and was the arbiter of the “school for scandal” in St. James’s. A bon mot attributed to him gave rise to the belief that Solomon caused the downfall and disappearance of Brummel; for on some friends of the prince of dandies observing that if he had remained in London something might have been done for him by his old associates, Alvanly replied, “He has done quite right to be off: it was Solomon’s judgment.”

Of “White’s Club,” Lord Russel tells in his “recollections” an amusing story. “A noble lord, who owned several ‘pocket boroughs’ in the good old days of Eldon and Perceval, was asked by the returning officer whom he meant to nominate. Having no ‘eligible’ candidate at hand, he named a waiter at ‘White’s,’ one Robert Mackreth; but as he did not happen to be sure of the Christian name of his nominee, the election was declared void. Nothing daunted, his lordship persisted in his nomination. A fresh election was therefore held, when the name of the gentleman having been ascertained, he was returned as a matte of course, and took his seat in St. Stephen’s.” In order to do this, he must at that time have been qualified by his patron with freehold land to the value of £300 a year! Such was the representation of England in the good old days before the Reform Bill!

Art	Events	Gardens &c.	Military	Politics	Sports
Books	Exhibits	Hotch-Potch	Miseries of Life	Rambles	Theatre &c.
Clubs &c.	Fashion	Inventions	People	Servants	Things
Domestic News	Foreign News	Language	Places	Society	Travel
English Life	Foreign Travel	Law & Order	Poetry	Spar Wars	Weather