Gambling Sport in Greenwood
BY: BG EDITOR
Jun 2, 2018 — GREENWOOD, BC (BG)
One of the popular forms of entertainment found in turn of the century Greenwood was gambling on card games. In particular, poker was a favourite pastime among men in the mining camps and in downtown establishments.
Over the first decade of the 1900s, the law tried hard to squash the gambling sport. They no doubt wished to spare people the pain of losing their hard-earned money in a game of chance, or at the hands of professional card sharks and flim-flammers. Of course, much of this money was earned by engaging in an even greater gamble: mining for gold and metals. Nonetheless, the law took a dim view on gambling… for the most part. One exception to the rule is found in a humorous news story from October 1898:[1]
Case Dismissed
"Miller & Iveyson, of the Gem Cigar Store, who were charged with running a gambling joint, appeared for trial before Judge Spinks on Monday. J. P. McLeod and A. Leamy appeared for the defence and A. S. Black represented the Crown.
While G. H. Ford, the prosecuting witness, was in the box, Mr. Black asked him to describe the game of poker. "Oh, that's not necessary," said the Judge," you and I know what draw poker is; we've played together."
Judge Spinks announced later that he often played poker and didn't consider himself a gambler. He held that poker wasn't a game of chance. Mr. Black practically threw up the case and the charge was dismissed."
"Miller & Iveyson, of the Gem Cigar Store, who were charged with running a gambling joint, appeared for trial before Judge Spinks on Monday. J. P. McLeod and A. Leamy appeared for the defence and A. S. Black represented the Crown.
While G. H. Ford, the prosecuting witness, was in the box, Mr. Black asked him to describe the game of poker. "Oh, that's not necessary," said the Judge," you and I know what draw poker is; we've played together."
Judge Spinks announced later that he often played poker and didn't consider himself a gambler. He held that poker wasn't a game of chance. Mr. Black practically threw up the case and the charge was dismissed."
A few months after this court case, there was a report that the British Columbia legislature was working to curb the gambling sports, dovetailing new regulations into the liquor license law. The following amendment[2] applied to all licensed houses:
"Every holder of a retail liquor license who allows the gambling games known as draw poker, stud poker, black jack, faro, or any other games of chance to be played for money, or for checks, or other devices that represent money, in or on any part of his premises to which the guests and public have access is guilty of an offence, and liable, on summary conviction before a county court judge, stipendiary magistrate or two justices of the peace, to a penalty not exceeding one hundred dollars nor less than twenty dollars for the first offence, and not exceeding two hundred dollars nor less than one hundred dollars for the second offence, and in default of payment to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months, and in case of the holder of a retail liquor license being convicted a third time the license to be cancelled."
By 1904 the prohibitions against gambling were ratcheting up, and in Phoenix the pendulum had swung all the way:[3]
PHOENIX GAMBLING
Shaking Dice for Drinks is Strictly Prohibited
"Phoenix has gone to the extreme on the gambling question. Last week's Pioneer has the following.
If any stranger should come to Phoenix and flip coins for cigars, or anything of that kind, he stands a good chance of interviewing Police Magistrate Williams, and getting fined $20 for gambling. At least, the developments of this week point that way, and for the present, at least, the man who takes chances on throwing dice, whether for cigars, drinks, or for nothing, also takes chances of having an opportunity of examining the inside of the city bastile. That seems to be the situation regarding gambling here at present.
Chief Flood was given orders to stop gambling, and he is doing it. Webster's latest edition of the International dictionary defines gambling as follows: "Gambling — To play or game for money or other stake." It will be noted that it is not necessary to have any money up to constitute gambling. Ordinary poker checks or dice will answer to get you into trouble now, even if they do not represent cash.
Tuesday blue papers were served on Thos. Russell and Robert Bailey, charged with gambling. They appeared and pleaded guilty, having been seen throwing dice in the Summit hotel, and were fined $20 each. The next day John Graham, John Haverty and John Waiters were up before Police Magistrate Williams also on the same charge. They asserted they had not been gambling, pleaded not guilty, were given a lecture by the justice, and warned not to be brought before him again on the same charge or a term in Nelson jail might result, and discharged."
Shaking Dice for Drinks is Strictly Prohibited
"Phoenix has gone to the extreme on the gambling question. Last week's Pioneer has the following.
If any stranger should come to Phoenix and flip coins for cigars, or anything of that kind, he stands a good chance of interviewing Police Magistrate Williams, and getting fined $20 for gambling. At least, the developments of this week point that way, and for the present, at least, the man who takes chances on throwing dice, whether for cigars, drinks, or for nothing, also takes chances of having an opportunity of examining the inside of the city bastile. That seems to be the situation regarding gambling here at present.
Chief Flood was given orders to stop gambling, and he is doing it. Webster's latest edition of the International dictionary defines gambling as follows: "Gambling — To play or game for money or other stake." It will be noted that it is not necessary to have any money up to constitute gambling. Ordinary poker checks or dice will answer to get you into trouble now, even if they do not represent cash.
Tuesday blue papers were served on Thos. Russell and Robert Bailey, charged with gambling. They appeared and pleaded guilty, having been seen throwing dice in the Summit hotel, and were fined $20 each. The next day John Graham, John Haverty and John Waiters were up before Police Magistrate Williams also on the same charge. They asserted they had not been gambling, pleaded not guilty, were given a lecture by the justice, and warned not to be brought before him again on the same charge or a term in Nelson jail might result, and discharged."
An interesting 1907 news story[4] tells us more about the degree to which the boot of the law landed heavy on local hoteliers who allowed gambling on the premises. In this case the report emphasized not the crime of playing a hand of poker, or even allowing a group to sit down at the table for a game, but the hotel management itself taking chips from the table to keep the bar tab paid up! In fact, this article seems to indicate that by the spring of 1907, the law had relaxed and people were now permitted to sit down and gamble on poker.
A CASE OF JACK POT
"Police Magistrate Hallett got a whole lot of information on Wednesday. Ignorant of the mysteries of draw poker, he got enlightened on several terms he was unfamiliar with. He was at sea in the matter of rake-off, and jack pot and dummy, and knew nothing of the ethics and etiquette of the game. To do justice to the case in hand he was obliged to probe into such things, and his decision shows he probed only too well.
On February 23rd, James Kinney drifted into town from Grand Forks. He wasn't busy, and he seems to have had no trouble in locating a comfortable place to spend the evening. He elected the Windsor, as he had done before and sought the green table for diversion as well as profit, and that was the origin of a case that occupied the police court Wednesday last.
Kinney didn't seem to think he had got all that was coming to him. He claimed that a jack pot belonging to him went to another. Unable to persuade the players or the banker that he had been defrauded, if not out of his own, of somebody else's hard earned dollars, his chivalry led him to squeal against the house, and so had Earnest J. Cartier bailed before the magistrate for conducting a disorderly house, implying thereby a gambling house.
The magistrate went into the case very patiently in order to get at the mysteries of the game, and the measure of responsibility chargeable against the accused. It would appear, from the judge's remarks, that the matter of taking chips from the stakes by the house, presumably to pay for cards, rent and drinks, was what constituted gambling under the statutes, and not the mere playing for the amount involved. While he thought four or more men could set down and play a game of thaw poker for money, and not be indictable under the statute, he would resolutely set his face against gambling as he interpreted the law, and the defendant having plead guilty, he would fine him $100."
"Police Magistrate Hallett got a whole lot of information on Wednesday. Ignorant of the mysteries of draw poker, he got enlightened on several terms he was unfamiliar with. He was at sea in the matter of rake-off, and jack pot and dummy, and knew nothing of the ethics and etiquette of the game. To do justice to the case in hand he was obliged to probe into such things, and his decision shows he probed only too well.
On February 23rd, James Kinney drifted into town from Grand Forks. He wasn't busy, and he seems to have had no trouble in locating a comfortable place to spend the evening. He elected the Windsor, as he had done before and sought the green table for diversion as well as profit, and that was the origin of a case that occupied the police court Wednesday last.
Kinney didn't seem to think he had got all that was coming to him. He claimed that a jack pot belonging to him went to another. Unable to persuade the players or the banker that he had been defrauded, if not out of his own, of somebody else's hard earned dollars, his chivalry led him to squeal against the house, and so had Earnest J. Cartier bailed before the magistrate for conducting a disorderly house, implying thereby a gambling house.
The magistrate went into the case very patiently in order to get at the mysteries of the game, and the measure of responsibility chargeable against the accused. It would appear, from the judge's remarks, that the matter of taking chips from the stakes by the house, presumably to pay for cards, rent and drinks, was what constituted gambling under the statutes, and not the mere playing for the amount involved. While he thought four or more men could set down and play a game of thaw poker for money, and not be indictable under the statute, he would resolutely set his face against gambling as he interpreted the law, and the defendant having plead guilty, he would fine him $100."
While the law eventually relaxed and allowed citizens to choose for themselves whether or not to risk gambling in poker games, the local newsmen still gave readers periodic reminders that they would indeed be playing at their own risk when sitting down with the sharks who rolled through Greenwood:[5]
"The man who took the $250 from a local poker stalwart in the Bodega saloon at Nelson a few weeks ago was in camp on Wednesday. He says people who can't hide the fact that they have a good hand shouldn't play poker, if they are not ready to take the consequences."
By 1908, it seems that a liberal mood had once again settled over the district. Instead of threatening news reports about hefty fines or jail time, we read this announcement:[6]
"Among the encouraging signs of the return of good times in the Boundary is the rumor of a real old-fashioned $10,000 poker session."
We close with this little ditty… the chorus of a popular song of the day, entitled "Foolish Mother", which gives us another view on gambling:[7]
Just to pass the time away
Pa plays poker with the neighbors;
I have often heard him say
Any man's a fool who labors;
Father loafs without a care
Sister gads and so does brother
When it's dark and when it's fair—
Everybody's glad but mother.
Pa plays poker with the neighbors;
I have often heard him say
Any man's a fool who labors;
Father loafs without a care
Sister gads and so does brother
When it's dark and when it's fair—
Everybody's glad but mother.
FOOTNOTES:
[1] Boundary Creek Times — Oct 15, 1898, p. 14
https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcnewspapers/xboundarycr/items/1.0170623
[2] Boundary Creek Times — Mar 08, 1899, p. 3
https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcnewspapers/xboundarycr/items/1.0170444
[3] Boundary Creek Times — Sep 23, 1904, p. 3
https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcnewspapers/xboundarycr/items/1.0170821
[4] Boundary Creek Times — Mar 01, 1907, p. 5
https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcnewspapers/xboundarycr/items/1.0171995
[5] Boundary Creek Times — Apr 24, 1908, p. 1
https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcnewspapers/xboundarycr/items/1.0171577
[6] Boundary Creek Times — Dec 18, 1908, p. 4
https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcnewspapers/xboundarycr/items/1.0171257
[7] Boundary Creek Times — Nov 09, 1906, p. 7
https://open.library.ubc.ca/collections/bcnewspapers/xboundarycr/items/1.0172570
