THE PAINTED HELL.

Auckland Star, Volume XXX, Issue 196, 19 August 1899, Page 5 (Supplement)

THE PAINTED HELL.

EVILS OF MOXTK CARLO. \ In n continuation of his Interesting papers on Nice find its surroundings in the "Luilsate," Mr Wlllinm Le Quex lias some pregnant facts and a vivid description from ■ personal observation and experience to glvc< its an '"The Painted Hell." He writes:— Monte Carlo is a painted hell within a natural paradise. Many times I have con- i denined it: in print. One may wander j through It, play a little, dine well, enjoy ■ the music, sip p. "inazngrn.il" on the terrace | of the Cafe de Paris, <>r, if a winner, sup j at Clro'tf —that remarkable restaurant where everything ifl tlie liest that money can procure—yet one invariably goes away disgusted. I myself have seen DOZENS OF MEN RUIN THEMSELVES, and women, too. Indeed, the gambling fe- ; ver seizes the fair sex more acutely thait ! men, for, like drink, so .with gambling, a j woman who once acquires the habit can i never be broken off it. A man, if he has a few bad days, and loses, will judiciously make a vow to leave the tables alone, and go in for the more legitimate joys of smok- I ing, coffee-drinking, and music; but with women it is different. If they lose they j will only double their stakes, to lose again, j The Hank at Monte Carlo profits more upon | its dealings with women than with men, ! but perhaps most of all upon the various ; so-called "systems" which are so popular oil the Riviera, and can be bought in little | books with full instructions. The last of ! these SO-CALLED "SYSTEMS," and one which is very popular this season, i is a little red book, entitled "Ten Days at ] Monte Carlo at the Bank's Expense." On first reading the book I thought that at last the writer had hit upon a sound "system," I but as an habitue of Monte Carlo I am wary j before expending money, and therefore took counsel with an English friend, himself a constant player. We purchased the records of the winning numbers of one of the tables for a whole ygar.and carefully went through it, comparing it with this newly-discovered "system." On the first three days we found j that we really would have won, but on the j fourth day we found that our loss would j only have amounted to about £600, and again on the fifth! So we resolved to place that new "system" on the shelf, with the effusions of the other calculators. The truth is that there is no "system" that will ensure winning at Monte Carlo.