Gambling against the odds

Temperance Societies flourished and there were many complaints at the number of public houses and beer houses which had sprung up on almost every corner of the town. In order to counter this growing evil, establishments were introduced which sold just tea and coffee and other houses selling non-alcoholics refreshing drinks were encouraged. However at one such establishment yet another vice was found to be developing.

On April 17 1892 at 7.30 pm a man named Joseph Slack went to a Refreshment House, a small shop on Effingham Street and ordered a lemonade. He was looking for his younger brother, who he knew had often frequented the shop on more than one occasion, and suspected that the establishment was being used for gambling purposes.

After being served with lemonade he went upstairs where he remained for half an hour. In the room upstairs he found a number of young men playing at cards at a game called ‘bank’ which involved betting upon the cards. Slack watched as the shop proprietor William Riley came up and asked the men what they wanted to drink and he then supplied them with non alcoholic beverages. Seeing what the men were doing, he remonstrated with them, telling them that they ought not to be gambling on cards. The men ignored him and continued with their game.

Slack saw Riley enter the room a second time and on this occasion he never mentioned the fact that the men were playing cards. As he was leaving the room however he glanced outside the windows and saw some police constables entering the building. Riley turned away from the window and kicking one of the younger men told them ‘the bobbies are here’.

Slack saw the men place the cards in their pockets and threw the rest under the long settle which stood against the corner. The constables led by Detective sergeant Roper found the cards and they took the names of the witnesses in the room. He charged Riley with keeping a gaming house and after the police had left Riley told the men ‘we have done it now and we will have to pay’. On Wednesday April 28 William Riley, described as ‘a refreshment house keeper’, was brought into court, charged with unlawfully keeping a common gaming house. Mr Hickmott prosecuted and Mr Gichard defended Riley. When the magistrates enquired whether Riley had a licence the chief constable answered him. He told the court that as the shop was not kept open after 10 pm at night therefore no refreshment house licence had been required.

Joseph Slack gave evidence that he had visited and had witnessing several young men playing at cards. On that occasion the men had been playing ‘bank’ but two Sundays before that he found that a game called ‘tippet’ was played, all of which involved money changing hands. On that occasion when Riley had found the men playing cards he had threatened to turn them out if they continued. The men simply continued playing once Riley had left the room.

He had given the information about the gambling to Detective Sergeant Roper, but he had stated that he could not be sure that Riley was aware of the gambling that went on in his upstairs room. Mr Gichard told the court that the case was an extremely strange one as the young men he intended to call, would refute the evidence of Joseph Slack. He added that the police had not produced the cards or the instruments of gambling when the charged the men with gambling.

Alderman Neill agreed and stated that Detective sergeant Roper had failed to get corroboration where he might have done. Then seven unnamed young men who had been charged with aiding and abetting gave their evidence and all denied the fact that there was any gaming at all.

The bench retired to consider the case and when they came back into the court the mayor stated that they had believed the statements of the witness Joseph Slack. He added if there was any doubt it at all, it had been entirely removed by the way in which the seven young men had given their own evidence

The magistrates considered the case to be proved and Alderman Neill told Riley that it was a very serious case and the punishment would reflect that. Riley was fined £5 including costs, and the young men were fined 5s each and costs.

* Margaret’s new kindle book is now available to download from Amazon. It is called Rotherham Crimes and is based on the stories that have appeared in the Advertiser, but expanded to contain letters and witness and prisoners statements, and is priced at £2.99.