Not to be trusted in London

Quick Index Board Index Home FAQ Site Map

View thread | Previous message | Next message

Not to be trusted in London Written by Barbara (9/19/2005 6:40 p.m.)

Sir Walter is apparently 'not to be trusted' in London. I was wondering what kind of trouble would he be able to get into in London that he couldn't manage in Bath?

He saw someone coming out of Tattersall's, which my notes say was a gambling establishment. Would that be the danger in London and was there no (or less) gambling in Bath?

Also, why would it be less expensive to be "important" in Bath than in London? Is it just that there would be fewer people of the same rank around to have to invite over or entertain? A smaller house?

Previous message | Next message | Board index

Not to be trusted in London Barbara (9/19/2005 6:40 p.m.)

my assumption while reading Rebecca Nix (9/19/2005 7:13 p.m.)
- I think it is a bit of both. It would be more expensive Annette J. (9/19/2005 7:20 p.m.)
  - Agreed Maisy (9/20/2005 10:49 a.m.)
- I think so too. Emmeline (9/20/2005 6:19 a.m.)
Tattersall's Cheryl (9/19/2005 8:25 p.m.)
- Strange Barbara (9/19/2005 9:42 p.m.)
  - Aha! Barbara (9/19/2005 9:50 p.m.)
- Thanks! (NFM) BarbaraB (9/19/2005 9:52 p.m.)

Groupread is maintained by Myretta with WebBBS 3.21.

View thread | Previous message | Next message Board index

- Jane Austen | Republic of Pemberley -

Quick Index

Home

Site Map

JAInfo