A Sad Tale of Regency Gambling Woe

This is a little bombastic story I ran across.  Aside from his gambling habit, I think you will agree that the author has serious issues with women.

The following article is excerpted from Sporting Magazine: or, monthly calendar of the transactions of the turf, the chase and every other diversion interesting to the man of pleasure, enterprize, and spirit, 23, 1804. All but one of the images are from The Repository of Arts, Literature, Fashions, Manufactures, &c in the years 1818 and 1820

A VICTIM TO THE GAMING TABLE RECLAIMED.

MR. EDITOR,
I WRITE from an obscure retirement where your instructive Miscellany has accidentally reached me. As my history may not be uninstructive, I proceed. Deprived, in infancy, of a father whose professional merit as a physician yielded only to the sterling virtues of the man, I was left entirely to the management of my mother, the daughter of a tradesman rather respectable than opulent, not unjustly vain of her personal charms, and most passionately fond of the cardtable. She was left in the full possession of whatever property my father and her own left behind them. With me and the world she passed for a woman of no inconsiderable opulence: and to support that appearance as well as to gratify her sovereign passion for play and parade, she lived considerably beyond her income. Under such a guide, it may be naturally supposed that I could not find my way to the shrine of prudence or rigid virtue. No, Sir. I could support my part in the circle of slander or at the cardtable, before I could regularly subtract my stake from my winnings, or my losses from the former. Yet I was admired, at least in my mother’s presence, for my cleverness.

Having but few ideas, they were the more strongly impressed on my mind, and the more quickly and precisely managed in conversation. Nothing tended to undeceive me in the delusive vanity which the flattery or my mother’s whist and supper friends, and her own loquacious partiality inspired, but the manifest superiority that the dullest of my class-fellows had over me at school. That chagrin however was but transitory, for my master was too lazy to chide me; and as I was a day-boy, I soon forgot it every evening in my conscious cleverness at the card table, where my mother would often say she indulged me merely that, like the young Duke of  B. I should know how to guard my fortune from black-legs, though, poor woman ! As it afterwards came out, she had not then above seven hundred pounds in the world. But she had every year four or five shares in the lottery, and was confident it would make her fortune at last.

Continue reading “A Sad Tale of Regency Gambling Woe”

Nancy Mayer explains Regency Marriage Laws and How to Dissolve a Regency Marriage.

This is an excerpt from an article by Nancy Mayer. You can read the entirety of it on her website The Regency Researcher. As many of you know, I’m her web mistress.

After March 25, 1754, when the Hardwicke Act for the Prevention of Clandestine Marriages went into effect, couples marrying in England had to follow certain rules in order to be legally married.  Before that time, all that was needed was that they say their vows before  a clergyman of the Church of England.  The clergyman need not even be in charge of a parish as long as he had been ordained.  Many were to be found in the vicinity of Fleet prison where people were imprisoned for debt. Under these circumstances, it was easy for people to keep the marriages secret. Though secret marriages might be beloved of novelists, they were very much disliked by courts and genealogists. The informal manner of weddings made it easier for bigamists.

The new act was meant to make marriages more public and regular.  Though people had always been encouraged to have the banns called, it now became a requirement that they do so unless the couple obtained a license from the local bishop or the Archbishop of Canterbury. By 1811 the cost of a special license was £5.  It was mostly used by the aristocracy and men in the public eye. The standard license from a bishop required a bond for £100 to be forfeit if the couple lied about any allegation as well as a slight fee.  This license named the parish in which the wedding would be held.  This license entailed a wait of seven days. The couple still had to marry between the hours of eight and noon.

Wedding Dress from 1818

After the banns were read in the parish church for three successive Sundays, the couple had to be married in that church between the hours of eight in the morning  and noon by an ordained clergyman before two witnesses. Only if both the man and woman were Quakers or Jews were they exempt from this law. All others, even Roman Catholics, had to marry in the parish church of the Church of England unless they had obtained a special license. Even those with a special license had to be married by a man in holy orders.

By law the Roman Catholics were supposed to be married first by an Anglican priest before marrying by their rites, but in practice many married in Catholic rites first. However, the marriage was not valid until and unless they married according to the law by a clergyman of the Church of England.

All  marriages had to be registered in the parish register even if the couple married in a private house by special license.

Read the rest of the article at The Regency Researcher