The Doctor and the Gambler's Ledger
A courtroom dispute between two men over unpaid poker debts descends into an itemized accounting of every game played in 1892.
The story, cleaned up
A cleaned-up reading of the newspaper page: spelling and layout repaired, one story lifted off a crowded page. It follows the original closely but it is not a transcription. The original page is below; read it if a detail matters.
The dispute between Dr. M. White Fredrick and Samuel Cohn as to which of the two is in debt to the other on account of their quiet little games of draw poker still goes on, as is evidenced by the defendant Cohn's bill of particulars filed in the superior court yesterday. In the suit, Dr. Fredrick alleged that there had been but one game, and that at that one game he had lost to the defendant $1,150, which he wished to recover. Cohn replied admitting the playing of many games, but denying the debt. On the contrary, he alleged that Fredrick won $1,523 from him, making a considerable balance due from the doctor. The doctor objected and asked Cohn to set out fully the time, place and amount lost by him at each one of the alleged games. Nothing daunted, Cohn did so yesterday. The record of the games for 1892 is as follows: August 7, $25; August 11, $10; August 13, $30; August 17, $80; August 20, $5; September 2, $25; September 3, $7.50; September 4, $39; September 6, $120; September 8, $15; September 9, $10; September 12, $5; October 10, $50; October 18, $120; October 20, $10; October 24, $75; November 4, $5; November 5, $80; November 10, $60; November 12, $3; November 24, $40; December 5, $87.50; December 7, $45; December 25, $75. In the present year but two games were played, but they were stiff ones. They were on March 8, when $105, and on March 14, when $100 are alleged to have been lost to Fredrick.
“The dispute between Dr. M. White Fredrick and Samuel Cohn as to which of the two is in debt to the other on account of their quiet little games of draw poker still goes on.”
This case highlights the messy intersection of private vices and public law in late 19th-century Seattle. While gambling debts are generally unenforceable in modern courts, this dispute serves as a reminder of how the civic institutions of the '90s were often pressed into service to settle the petty, sordid affairs of the city's social elite.
From readers
No comments yet. If you know something about this story — a correction, a family memory, a source — it belongs here.