Chapter XXXVIII: Appendix: C

Since the observations on page 34 were written, the case of Carlill v. The Smoke Ball Company (see daily papers, 5th July, 1892) has been decided by Hawkins, J. The case can only be very shortly noticed here. The contract was that the Defendants would, if any person after having used their smoke ball for a given time should contract an attack of influenza, pay such persons £100. The Defendants contended that this was a wager contract. If tested by the light of the criteria suggested at page 34, it would seem to be far removed from a wager. The consideration received by the Defendants was the exploitation and experimenting by the Plaintiff of their smoke ball; and it was only after that had become an accomplished fact—_a certainty_—that they came under their conditional liability to the Plaintiffs. The learned Judge enters into a discussion of the essentials of a wager contract, on which the following observations may with deference be suggested:—(1) The backing or expressing of an opinion is not essential, as suggested at page 34. The man who is party to a wager selects a chance: an unknown or uncertain event in which he is to receive payment.

(2) A wager involves the selection of more than one event, otherwise the essential of mutuality is lost. Each party selects the event, positive or negative, on which he is to be paid by the other. A backs a horse with B; B of course may select the negative event that A’s horse will not win, or what is the ordinary contract of “the layer,” he merely backs the field, _i.e._, all the other horses but A’s horse. It is quite possible in the latter case that both events may happen, _e.g._, A’s horse may run a dead heat with one of the field. The rule here is that each party whose horse runs a dead heat wins half his stake, or in other words the money is put together and evenly divided. If A backed the horse at evens the bet is practically off; if he backed it at 5 to 1 he wins £2. A walk over of course counts as a win to the party whose horse walks over.

INDEX.

ADDED MONEY,
Recoverable, 73, 74

ADVERTISING
Betting House, illegal, 191
Betting Lists, do., _ibid._
Betting Clubs legal, 194
Commission business, _ibid._
Foreign houses, _ibid._
Information as to betting, 193
To Induce betting, _ibid._
To Infant, penal, 194
Lotteries (_see_ LOTTERY)

AGENT
Authority of,
to pay bets if lost, when implied, 45
to bet according to custom, 53
to make bets in his own name, 51
irrevocable after bets made, 47
personally responsible for bets, 51
_secus_, where bet made in principal’s name, 51
indemnity,
none in respect of wagers, 53
nor of illegal transaction, 164
winnings,
must account for to principal, 40
not liable for default in making bet, 43
estoppel from denying agency, 44
business (_see_ COMMISSION AGENT)
(_see_ BROKER, LOTTERY)

ART UNIONS
Exempt from Lottery Laws, 147

AUSTRALIAN LAW
of wagering similar to English, 79, note

BANK (_see_ GAMING HOUSE)

BANKER
cannot set up illegality of customer’s business, 164
not liable for receiving deposits on bets, 190

BANKRUPTCY
of principal determines agent’s authority, 61
of depositor, determines authority of stakeholder, _ibid._

BANK SHARES (_see_ LEEMAN’S ACT)

BARNARD’S ACT, 87

BAZAARS,
_semble_, within Lottery Act, 141

BETTING (_see_ WAGER-CONTRACT, BETTING HOUSE, AGENT: PUBLIC PLACE,
METROPOLIS)

BETTING HOUSE (_see_ PERSONS RESORTING THERETO)
a common nuisance, 165
advertising, 191
illegal betting within Act, 181, _et seq._
by correspondence, legal, 184
betting clubs, 183 (_see_ TATTERSALLS)
Deposits (_see_ DEPOSIT)
keeping house for receiving, 187
receiving, 190
acknowledgment of, _ibid._
commission agent taking (_see_ COMMISSION AGENT)
stakeholder, not liable, 167, 190
inviting persons to resort to, 192, _et seq._
manager of (_see_ MANAGER)
owner, occupier permitting user, 175
user of, 176, _et seq._
Warrant (_see_ PROCEDURE, PERSONS FOUND THEREIN)

BETTING LISTS
advertising illegal, 191
exhibiting not illegal, _ibid._
seizable when, 181, 200

BILL OF EXCHANGE (for betting debt), 11 (_see_ CHEQUE)
given for illegal consideration, 11 (_see_ ILLEGAL CONSIDERATION)
_secus_, if bet not on game or pastime, 11
or if bet made after race finished, 11
cheque for under £10 prepaid, 14
for gaming debt incurred abroad, 14
acceptor
liable to holder in due course, 19
paying indorsee can recover from
drawer or payee, 26
ditto with interest, 26
payment may be by cheque, 26
injunction against negotiation, 26
cheque, bill includes, 27
defect in title, meaning of, 19
gaming debt is, 19
shifts burden of proof on to holder, 19
notice, 21
overdue bill subject to, 19
void consideration is not, 20
drawer of, liable to acceptor who has paid, 26
indorsee for value
can sue acceptor when, 19
ditto indorser, 24
burden of proof on to show bonâ fides, 19
notice to, of illegality, 21

BILLIARDS (_see_ LICENSED PREMISES)
a lawful game, 85
a game of skill, 85, 208

BONDS
are within 5 & 6 Wm. IV., c. 41, 28

BREEDER
_query_, his right to recover prize in Breeders’ Stakes, 76

BROKER (_see_ STOCK EXCHANGE)
differences paid on client’s behalf, can recover, 97
on sale of bank shares, his position, 117 _et seq._

BUCKET SHOP
transactions in, sometimes wagers, 103
deposit in, right to recover, 66
query within Betting House Act, 184, 189

CARRYING OVER (_see_ STOCK EXCHANGE)

CHEATING AT PLAY, 165

CHEQUE (_see_ BILL OF EXCHANGE)
included in “bill” in 5 & 6 Win. IV., c. 41, 28
amounts to “payment” within do. 27, _ibid._
drawer of, for gaming debt, can recover from payee, 26
for gaming debt abroad, 14

CLUB
for gaming purposes illegal, 160
for betting purposes when legal, 183 (_see_ TATTERSALL’S)
committee of, liable as managers, 155, 160, 179
lottery in, illegal (_see_ LOTTERY), 132

COCK-FIGHTING, 85

COMMISSION AGENT (_see_ Agent)
business of lawful, 185
advertising lawful, 194
_secus_ if he takes money in advance, 190
cannot recover commission, 53
partnership in, 191

COMPANY (_see_ PARTNERSHIP LOTTERY)

COMPETITIONS, 186

CONFLICT OF LAWS,
general rules as to, 66 _et seq._
gaming debts contracted abroad not recoverable here, 68
money lent for gaming abroad, 16

CONSPIRACY (_see_ CHEATING)

CONSTRUCTION OF SPORTING CONTRACT,
steward’s decision generally final, 80
by Court, _ibid._
parol evidence admissible to explain, _ibid._
stamp necessary, 81
Newmarket Meeting, meaning of, 80
gentleman rider, do., _ibid._
evidence of usage, _ibid._
Rules of racing and betting evidence, 53, 81

CONTINUATIONS (_see_ STOCK EXCHANGE)

CONTRIBUTIONS TO PRIZE (_see_ WINNER, SUBSCRIPTION STAKES), 73

COUPONS, legal, 186

COVER (_see_ DEPOSIT)

CUP, meaning of, 74
_query_, within “prize,” 74

DEATH
of principal or depositor revokes authority, 60
of agent or stakeholder, _ibid._
of one party, bet off, _ibid._
of competitor in race,
_semble_, stakes recoverable by executors (_see_ EXECUTOR)
of nominator of horse avoids entry, 38

DEED (_see_ ILLEGAL CONSIDERATION)

DEPOSIT (_see_ SUBSCRIPTION TO PRIZE)
on bet when recoverable, 64
with keeper of Betting House, 65
in bucket shop transaction, right to recover, 66
_query_, illegal, 189
receiving, and keeping house for receiving (_see_ BETTING HOUSE
COMMISSION AGENT), 187, 190
race, to abide, equivalent to a wager, 36
subscription to prize, not the test of, 69, _et seq._
under £10, not within Statute of Anne and Wm. IV., 12
with stakeholder (_see_ STAKEHOLDER)
does not pass under gift of “money,” 60
in lotteries, recovery of, 143

DIFFERENCES (_see_ STOCK EXCHANGE, BROKER)

DIVIDENDS
sale of future, not void as wager, 102
forbidden on Stock Exchange, 103
distribution by lot, not a lottery, 138

ENTRANCE MONEY (_see_ SUBSCRIPTION TO PRIZE)
when it goes with stakes, 61, 74
when recoverable by executors, _ibid._

EXCESSIVE GAMING
under old statute, 6
_query_, illegal now, 160, 162
evidence of gaming house, _ibid._

EXECUTOR,
must not pay betting debts of testator, 38, 64,
nor sums deposited on bets, _ibid._, 64,
_secus_, where testator kept a Betting House, 65
of betting agent, _semble_, most account to principal for winnings,
41
must not pay stakes or forfeits, 38
_semble_, can recover stakes, deposited by testator, 61
do. entrance money when, _ibid._

FISH PONDS,
_semble_, illegal as lotteries, 142

FOREIGN LAWS (_see_ CONFLICT OF LAWS)

FORFEIT,
not enforceable, 38, 63
(_see_ PENALTY, EXECUTOR)

FRAUD (_see_ CHEATING)

GAMES
within statute of Anne, 7
“lawful games” within 8 & 9 Vict., c. 109, 82
unlawful games, _ibid._, 129, 152, 160
players at unlawful, 152, 161
cheating at, 165
of chance, what is, 207
in public place, _ibid._, 205

GAMING (_see_ GAMING HOUSE, UNLAWFUL GAMING, LOTTERY, WAGER-CONTRACT,
LICENSED PREMISES, PUBLIC PLACE, INSTRUMENTS OF GAMING, EXCESSIVE
GAMING, BETTING HOUSE)

GAMING HOUSE (_see_ BETTING HOUSE, LICENSED PREMISES)
illegal at common law, 148 _et seq._
a common nuisance, _ibid._
Evidence of, 156
bank kept by some of players, _ibid._
excessive gaming, 157, 160
unequal chances of game, 156
unlawful game, playing of, _ibid._
obstruction of officers entering under powers of Act, 154, 156
instruments of gaming, _ibid._
contrivances,
for destroying instruments, _ibid._
for barring doors or access, _ibid._
for giving alarm, _ibid._
MANAGER (_see_ MANAGER)
liability of, 155, 160
includes banker or croupier, _ibid._
obstructing or assaulting officers entering, 154
giving false names and addresses, _ibid._
Partnership in (_see_ PARTNERSHIP)
(_see_ PERSONS FOUND THEREIN)
club or private house may be, 160
procedure in respect of (_see_ PROCEDURE)
user of, 160 (_see_ Players)
warrant, 196, _et seq._ (_see_ PROCEDURE)

GRAND STAND,
_semble_ may be a “place” for betting, 171–174
stewards authority in, 191

GUARANTEE OF BET, 63

HAWKINS, Sir HENRY,
His judgments in
Read _v._ Anderson, 49
Taylor _v._ Smetton, 133
Jenks _v._ Turpin, 159
Reg. _v._ Cook, 180
Reg. _v._ Preedie, 174

HORSE-RACING,
a game within the Statute of Anne, 7
formerly illegal for over £10, 82 _et seq._
now all legal, _ibid._
within 10 miles of London require license, 84
chance, whether game of, 208
for stakes, equivalent to wager, 36 _et seq._
steeplechase, 84

ILLEGAL BETTING (_see_ BETTING HOUSE)

ILLEGAL CONSIDERATION (_see_ BILL OF EXCHANGE, _Lottery_)
void ditto, difference between and, 18–20
gaming debt is, 11
betting debt is, if bet on game, &c., _ibid._
bills or notes, effect of, on (_see_ BILL OF EXCHANGE)
is a defect of title, 19
should be specially pleaded, 23
deposit for, when recoverable, 143 _et seq._
should be accurately stated, 23
avoids bonds and other deeds, 24
part consideration illegal, whole avoided, 24 _et seq._
_secus_, where contract divisible, _ibid._
past race, bet on, not illegal, 11
deposit on race under £10, not an illegal consideration, 12

ILLEGALITY,
test of, 16, 162, _et seq._
3rd party cannot plead, 164
(_see_ PARTNERSHIP, AGENT, ILLEGAL CONSIDERATION, MANAGER, BANKER)

INDIAN LAW,
of wagers similar to English, 31
of speculative sales, 40
of lotteries, 131

INFANT,
sending advertisement or information to, 194

INFORMATION (_see_ PROCEDURE)
with respect to betting (_see_ ADVERTISING)

INSTRUMENT OF GAMING,
coin not included in, 205
pari-mutuel, _ibid._
in gaming houses, 156
may be seized by officers entering in Metropolis, 197
_secus_, out of Metropolis, _ibid._
superintendent entering may search for, _ibid._
evidence of gaming houses, 156
means for destroying ditto, _ibid._
magistrate may order destruction, 197–8

I O U,
not within 5 & 6 Wm. IV., c. 41, 28

IRELAND (_see_ METROPOLIS)

IRISH CASES,
Lynn _v._ Bell, }
Crofton _v._ Colgan, }
Graham _v._ Thompson, } (_see_ TABLE OF CASES.)
MacElwaine _v._ Mercer, }
Irwin _v._ Osborne, }
Newcomen _v._ Lynch, }

JUDGE (in race),
jurisdiction of, 76 _et seq._
decision final, _ibid._

LEEMAN’S ACT (_see_ STOCK EXCHANGE BROKER)

LICENSED PREMISES,
gaming in, permitting illegal, 202
knowledge or connivance of owner
necessary, _ibid._
what is gaming, 204
may be entered under Gaming and Betting House Acts, 200
betting in, when legal, 205
billiards, in, 85
public table, when legal, 157

LISTS (_see_ BETTING LISTS)

LOAN OF MONEY,
for gaming purposes, _semble_ illegal, 15, 16
for betting on game, &c., illegal, _ibid._, 15, 16
for paying lost bets recoverable, 15, 16
for illegal gaming, penalty, 15, 16, 162
cheques given to repay, 15, 16
for gaming abroad, 15, 16

LOTTERY (_see_ PLACE),
adventurers in, penalty on, 129, 130, 132
advertising illegal, _ibid._
penalty recoverable only in Attorney-General’s name, _ibid._, 131,
146
aiding and abetting, 130, 133
Art Unions, when legal, 147
bonus in companies, distribution of by lot, 137
companies formed for (_see_ PARTNERSHIP)
characteristics of, 140
charter for, void, 128
in club or private house, 132
Bazaars,
proceedings in, _qy._ within Lottery Acts, 142
definition of, 128, 140
fish ponds, 142
foreign lotteries, 133
illegality of, 142
deposits recoverable on notice, 143
vitiates subsidiary contract, _ibid._
little-goes illegal, 130
partnership in, 145
patent for, void, 128
sale under guise of setting up, 129, 130
stakeholder of, 133
sweepstakes, 134
tickets, sale of, 128 _et seq._
proceedings in case, 146
warrant for arrest, 130
Royal Palaces, exception in favour of, 86
no privilege of Parliament, 148

MANAGES OF BETTING HOUSE, GAMING HOUSE,
liability of 155, 160, 179
committee of club, _ibid._
banker or croupier, _ibid._
profits, cannot be sued for, 164
salary, cannot sue for, _ibid._
_secus_, if manager only of legal part of business, 180

METROPOLIS (_see_ PUBLIC PLACE)
cock-fighting in, 85
horse-race within 10 miles require licence, 84
Gaming Houses in,
Commissioners of Police may issue warrant to superintendent to
search, 197
superintendent entering may seize instruments of gaming, 197
Betting Houses (_see_ PROCEDURE)
penalties recovered in payable to Receiver of Police, 198
betting in streets of, 208
Ireland, in, means Dublin, 197

NEWMARKET MEETING,
exempt from old laws against horse-racing, 83
a moveable feast, 81

NOMINATOR,
death of, avoids entry of horse, 38

NOTICE,
to determine authority (_see_ STAKEHOLDER)
of illegal consideration (_see_ BILL OF EXCHANGE)

OCCUPIER (_see_ BETTING HOUSE PLACE)

OFFICIAL ASSIGNEE (_see_ STOCK EXCHANGE)

OPTIONS (_see_ STOCK EXCHANGE)

PALACES, ROYAL,
exempt from laws against unlawful games and lotteries, 86

PARTITION BY LOT,
among joint tenants, &c., exempt from Lotteries Act, 129, 141

PARTNERSHIP,
right to account of profits
in betting transactions, 41, 191
in lotteries, 115
in gaming house, 162
in commission agency business, 191

PENALTY TO ENFORCE WAGER NOT RECOVERABLE, 63

PERSON FOUND THEREIN (_see_ GAMING HOUSE, BETTING HOUSE)
may be arrested, 197
what to be done with, _ibid._, note
need not be found gaming, 198
presumption against, 156
penalty on (_see_ PLAYERS)

PERSONS RESORTING THERETO (_see_ BETTING HOUSE)
meaning of, 183
not within Act, 179

PLACE (_see_ PUBLIC PLACE BETTING HOUSE)
within Lottery Acts, 130
within Betting House Act
enclosures, 171
roof immaterial, 170
moveable structures, _ibid._
grand stand, 174
stool, 171
umbrella, 170
user of what amounts to, 176
habitual not necessary, _ibid._
occupier of, 169
person using same, 179
must be limited in space, 174
a room, 174
for cock-fighting, 169

PLATE, meaning of, 74, 82

“PLAY OR PAY,” meaning, 81 (_see_ APP. B.)

PLAYERS (in illegal games) 118, 121, 152, 161
in lotteries, consent of Attorney-General to prosecution, 132, 152

PRIVILEGE OF PARLIAMENT,
none in lottery prosecutions, 148
in gaming house, do., 165

PRIZE (_see_ SUBSCRIPTIONS TO PRIZE)

PROCEDURE,
1. Gaming Houses
_In Metropolis._
Commissioners of Police may issue order to superintendent to
search, 196 _et seq._
Power of superintendent to search for and seize instruments of
gaming, 197
Justices may order destruction of ditto, 197
_Out of Metropolis._
Justices may on information issue search warrant, 197
form of warrant, _ibid._
information need not show that persons were found playing for
money, 198
no power to authorize seizure of instruments of gaming, 197
may authorize destruction of ditto, 198
Persons found therein (_see_ PERSONS FOUND THEREIN), 197
may be apprehended on spot, _ibid._
whether gaming or not, 198
may be required to give evidence, _ibid._
but then free from prosecution, _ibid._
Vexatious Indictment Act applies, 199
penalties application of, 198
appeal, 199
no certiorari, _ibid._
actions against officers, _ibid._
2. Betting Houses
Justices may issue warrant to search and seize lists and documents,
200
in metropolis Commissioners’ powers same as in gaming houses, 200
information, fresh, necessary after arrest before prisoner charged,
200
may be before one justice, _ibid._ 201
licensed premises subject to Act. 200, 205

PRODUCE STAKES,
breeders cannot recover, 76

PROMISSORY NOTE (_see_ BILL OF EXCHANGE)

PUBLIC HOUSE (_see_ LICENSED PREMISES)

PUBLIC PLACE,
what is a, 206

PUNTERS (_see_ PLAYERS)

PURCHASE (speculative)
not a wager, 39

RACE COURSE,
_qy._ a place, 174
a public place, 206

READY MONEY BETTING,
place kept or used for illegal betting, 187 _et seq._
(_see_ BETTING HOUSE, COMMISSION AGENT, DEPOSIT)

RESCISSION (by wager)
void, 38

ROOM (_see_ PLACE)

ROYAL PALACE
gaming in, lawful, 86

RULES OF RACING EVIDENCE, 53, 81

RULES OF BETTING do., _ibid._ (_see_ APP. B.)

SALE,
wager under guise of, void, 35
lottery under guise of, illegal, 129, 139
bank shares (_see_ STOCK EXCHANGE)
speculative sales not wagers, 39
nor sales with contingencies, 36
of things first in possession, valid (_see_ INDIAN LAW), _ibid._
of public stocks not in possession formerly void under Barnard’s Act,
40, 87
of future dividends
not a wager, 102
forbidden by Stock Exchange Rules, 103

SCOTLAND,
Betting House Act applies to, 193

STAKEHOLDER,
agent for depositor only, 54 _et seq._
deposits revocable before paid over, _ibid._
notice necessary, 57
authority determined, 60
(1.) by express revocation
(2.) by impossibility of performing his trust
(3.) by death of depositor
(4.) by bankruptcy of depositor (_see_ LOTTERY)
liability of
for paying wrong person (_see_ WINNER), 62
for default in payment of stakes, _ibid._
cannot sue for stakes, _ibid._
not liable under Betting House Act, 190

STAKES
race for a wager contract, 36
difference between, and subscription to prize, 37, 73
cheque for, when for illegal consideration, 12
(see SUBSCRIPTIONS, STAKEHOLDER)

STAMP _semble_,
sporting agreement should have, 81

STARTER,
when necessary, 81

STEEPLECHASE (_see_ HORSE-RACE)

STEWARD OF RACE,
decision final (_see_ CONSTRUCTION), 78
difference between and arbitrators, 78
grand stand, can order off, 191
self-interest no disqualification, 78
liability of
for not appointing judge, 82
for default of stakeholders, _ibid._

STOCK EXCHANGE (_see_ BROKER)
bargains for differences not known, 96 _et seq._ (_but see_ BUCKET
SHOP)
test of difference, bargain, 91
customs of binding on principal, 117, 123
_secus_ if contrary to law, _ibid._
broker liable personally to jobber, 96
bank shares, sale of, 116
Leeman’s Act not regarded, 117
liability of broker for not complying with, _ibid._
_qy._ if principal has acquiesced, 119, 122
actual transfer not affected, 122
vendors indemnity against calls, 123
continuations, nature of, 108 _et seq._
whether in nature of wagers, 110
“taking in” by, different from loan, _ibid._
Contango, 109
Backwardation, 113
_Options_, puts, calls, nature of, 106
_semble_ not in nature of wager, 107
_Differences_,
bargains for, not known on, 90, _et seq._
test of, 94
broker can recover for, from client, 97
defaulter, due to, payable to official assignee, 89
_Official Assignee_,
receives differences due to defaulter, 89
claims against, for differences due to defaulter, _ibid._
Trustee in bankruptcy of defaulter cannot recover differences from,
_ibid._
_Time Bargains_, meaning of, 95, 101 (_see_ SALES)
_Wagering_,
unknown on, 96
test of, in transactions on, 94

SUBSCRIPTION TO PRIZE,
deposit with stakeholder not test of, 69 _et seq._
stakes are not, 36, 69
sum added by outsider, may be, 73
entrance money, 74
forfeits, _ibid._
cups, _ibid._

“SUM ADDED” by OUTSIDER,
recoverable, 73 (_see_ ADDED MONEY)
may be a subscription to a prize, _ibid._ (_see_ STAKES)

SUPERINTENDENT
(_see_ PROCEDURE, INSTRUMENTS OF GAMING, METROPOLIS)

SWEEPSTAKES (_see_ LOTTERY, STAKEHOLDER)

TATTERSALL’S,
not within Act, 183

TELEGRAM (_see_ ADVERTISING)

TICKET (_see_ LOTTERY)

TIME BARGAINS (_see_ STOCK EXCHANGE)

TIPSTER,
agreement with, 36, and note in APPENDIX A.
business of, not illegal, 193
advertising do., _ibid._ (_but see_ INFANT)

UMPIRE (_see_ JUDGE, WINNER)

UNLAWFUL GAMING
what is, 159
houses kept for, 154, 159
in licensed premises, 202
(_see_ EXCESSIVE GAMING, PLAYERS)

UNLAWFUL GAMES
what are, 129, 162
legal effect of, 162
in licensed premises, 202

USER (_see_ PLACE GAMING HOUSE)

VEXATIOUS INDICTMENT (_see_ PROCEDURE)

WAGER CONTRACT (_see_ SUBSCRIPTION TO PRIZE DEPOSIT)
nature and test of, 32 _et seq._
agent and principal, agreement between not in nature of, 40
consensus and knowledge of both parties necessary, 32
construction of (_see_ CONSTRUCTION)
dividends, sale of future, not, 102
games, &c., for money, are, 36
guarantee of, enforceable, 63
mutuality necessary, 33
parties select their own events, 33
penalty for non-performance not recoverable
rescission of contract by, void, 38
sale, under guise of, void, 35
sale of things not in possession, 39
time bargains (_see_ STOCK EXCHANGE)
winner and loser is of essence of, 33
Tipster, agreement with, 36 (but _see_ note in APPENDIX A.)

WARRANT,
general warrants bad, 197
against gaming and betting houses, form of, 196
lottery laws, breach of, 130

WELSHING, AN INDICTABLE OFFENCE, 195

WINNER,
second horse may be, 75
must be a competitor, _ibid._
there must be a loser, _ibid._
steward’s decision final, 78
umpire’s and judge’s do., 76
agent paving (_see_ AGENT), 52
stakeholder (_see_ STAKEHOLDER), 62

WINNING,
by fraud penal, 161
offence complete before payment, 165

-----

Footnote 1:

16 East, 150.

Footnote 2:

_Evans_ v. _Jones_, 5 M. & W., 77.

Footnote 3:

Cowp., 37.

Footnote 4:

1 T. R., at p. 60.

Footnote 5:

2 Cowp., 729.

Footnote 6:

4 Camp., 152.

Footnote 7:

1 B. & Ald., 683.

Footnote 8:

3 Camp., 168.

Footnote 9:

T. R., 693.

Footnote 10:

_Atherfold_ v. _Beard_, 2 T. R., 610.

Footnote 11:

_Squiers_ v. _Waiskin_, 3 Camp., 140.

Footnote 12:

_McKinnell_ v. _Robinson_, 3 M. and W., 435.

Footnote 13:

_Fisher_ v. _Waltham_, 4 Q. B., 889.

Footnote 14:

_Gilbert_ v. _Sykes_, 16 East, 150.

Footnote 15:

1 T. R., 56.

Footnote 16:

12 East, 247.

Footnote 17:

By 18 Geo. II., c. 34, the test of excess was extended to the loss of
£20 within 24 hours.

Footnote 18:

_Smith_ v. _Bond_, 11 M. & W., 549.

Footnote 19:

10 M. & W., 723.

Footnote 20:

2 Wils., 349.

Footnote 21:

10 M. & W., 723.

Footnote 22:

See _post_ p. 84.

Footnote 23:

5 Q. B., 693.

Footnote 24:

7 Bing., 405.

Footnote 25:

_Daintree_ v. _Hutchinson_, 10 M. & W., 85.

Footnote 26:

_Lynall_ v. _Longbottom_, 2 Wils., 36. 1 C. & M., 797.

Footnote 27:

_Jeffreys_ v. _Walter_, 1 Wils., 220.

Footnote 28:

3 M. & W., 435.

Footnote 29:

See _Squires_ v. _Waiskin_, 3 Camp., 140, and _Martin_ v. _Hewson_, 10
Exch., 737.

Footnote 30:

1 Q. B., 631.

Footnote 31:

_Emery_ v. _Richards_, 14 M. & W., 728.

Footnote 32:

2 Burr, 1080.

Footnote 33:

2 Camp.

Footnote 34:

2 Strange, 1249.

Footnote 35:

1 10 M. & W., 723.

Footnote 36:

See, too, _Thorpe_ v. _Coleman_, 1 C. B., 990.

Footnote 37:

7 Bing, 405.

Footnote 38:

2 Strane, 1155.

Footnote 39:

4 B. & Ald., 212.

Footnote 40:

Q. B., 631.

Footnote 41:

5 E. & B., 238.

Footnote 42:

10 M. & W., 723.

Footnote 43:

1 C. B., 990.

Footnote 44:

14 M. & W., 728.

Footnote 45:

1 Phil. 147.

Footnote 46:

8 Ch. Div., 756.

Footnote 47:

8 Ch. Div. 756.

Footnote 48:

8 L. T. N. S., 255, and see _Quarrier_ v. _Coulston_, 1 Phil. 147.

Footnote 49:

3 M. & W.

Footnote 50:

See _Foot_ v. _Baker_, 5 M. & G., 335.

Footnote 51:

7 Taunt, 246.

Footnote 52:

2 Phil. 801.

Footnote 53:

11 Ch. Div., 170.

Footnote 54:

15 Ch. Div. 247.

Footnote 55:

1 Ex Div., 13. A fuller report is in 33 L. T. n.s., 700.

Footnote 56:

_Post_, p. 42.

Footnote 57:

_Fitch_ v. _Jones_, 5 E. & B., 238. See Lord Campbell’s judgment.

Footnote 58:

45 & 46 Vict., c. 61.

Footnote 59:

23 Q. B. D. 345.

Footnote 60:

5 E. & B. 238.

Footnote 61:

56 L. J. Q. B. 248.

Footnote 62:

3 M. & K. 104.

Footnote 63:

Sm. & G. 194.

Footnote 64:

6 Ad. & E.

Footnote 65:

B. & Ald., 212.

Footnote 66:

O. XIX., r. 15.

Footnote 67:

_Harvey_ v. _Towers_, 6 Ex. 656.

Footnote 68:

2 M. & W., 641. See, too, _Bingham_ v. _Stanley_, 2 Q.B., 117.

Footnote 69:

1 Bing., N. C.

Footnote 70:

O. XXVIII, r. 6., Rules of Court, 1883.

Footnote 71:

4 B. & Ald., 212. _Ante_, p. 10.

Footnote 72:

3 Sm. & G., 194.

Footnote 73:

16 Q. B., 423.

Footnote 74:

L. R. 9 Eq., 471.

Footnote 75:

4 Taunt, 165.

Footnote 76:

1 H. & N. 278.

Footnote 77:

_Soulby_ v. _Portarlington_, 3 M. &. K., 104; _Pearce_ v. _Gray_, 2 Y.
& C. 322; _Milltown_ v. _Stewart_, 3 M. & C., 18; _Fox_ v. _Hill_, 2
D. & J., 353.

Footnote 78:

Sec. 24 (5).

Footnote 79:

13 L. T., 71 and 159.

Footnote 80:

Ir. Rep. 10, C. L., 487.

Footnote 81:

3 Sm. & G., 194.

Footnote 82:

Ir. Rep. 10 C. L. 487.

Footnote 83:

5 E. & B., 270.

Footnote 84:

1 Phil. 147; _Bubb_ v. _Yelverton_, L. R. 9, Eq. 471, was the case of
a bond but was decided on another point.

Footnote 85:

This expression did not apply to an action commenced before the Act
was passed. _Vide_ _Moon_ v. _Durden_, 2 Ex., 22.

Footnote 86:

L. R., 10 Q. B., 109.

Footnote 87:

1 Q. B., _vid. sup._, 9.

Footnote 88:

5 App. Ca. p. 344.

Footnote 89:

8 Ch. D., 756.

Footnote 90:

10 M. & W., 723.

Footnote 91:

4 Jur. N. S., 693.

Footnote 92:

4 Q. B. D., 685.

Footnote 93:

10 Q. B. D., 100.

Footnote 94:

5 E. & B., 238. _Vid. sup._, p. 11. _et seq._, as to the law relating
to bills given for an illegal consideration.

Footnote 95:

33 L. T. n.s., 561.

Footnote 96:

4 Q. B. D., 685. The cases bearing on this point are more fully
discussed in the next chapter on Stock Exchange Transactions.

Footnote 97:

Per COTTON, L. J., in _Thacker_ v. _Hardy_, p. 695.

Footnote 98:

2 Wils., 309.

Footnote 99:

See, too, _Caminada_ v. _Hulton_, 60 L. J. M. C., 116.

Footnote 100:

Each promise to pay on one event, being the consideration, and the
sole consideration for the promise to pay in the other event.

Footnote 101:

See Stutfield on “Tattersall’s Rules of Betting,” _Field_ Office,
where this view of the matter is fully elucidated.

Footnote 102:

4 H. & N., 359.

Footnote 103:

5 E. & B., 904.

Footnote 104:

11 C. B., 526.

Footnote 105:

10 Ir. Rep. Com. L., 133.

Footnote 106:

3 Bing., N. C., 88.

Footnote 107:

2 C. P. D., 76.

Footnote 108:

5 Q.B., 693.

Footnote 109:

2 Ex. Div. 422.

Footnote 110:

10 M. & W., 723.

Footnote 111:

7 D. M. & G., 55.

Footnote 112:

36 L. T. n.s., 702.

Footnote 113:

By. & M., 386.

Footnote 114:

B. & C., 1.

Footnote 115:

5 M. & W., 462.

Footnote 116:

4 Q. B. D., at p. 6.

Footnote 117:

33 L. T. n.s., at p. 563.

Footnote 118:

4 Q. B. D., at p. 688. See further on this topic the chapter on the
Stock Exchange.

Footnote 119:

26 L. J. Ch., 841.

Footnote 120:

12 C. B. 468.

Footnote 121:

36 L. J. Exch., 178.

Footnote 122:

_Ante_ p. 48, where the case is more fully set out.

Footnote 123:

15 Q. B. D., 363.

Footnote 124:

22 Q. B. D., 680.

Footnote 125:

7 T. R., 157.

Footnote 126:

See, too, and consider _MacRae_ v. _Clark_, L. R. 1 C. P., 403.

Footnote 127:

20 Q. B. D. at p. 643.

Footnote 128:

See _Ferrar’s Case_, L. R. 9 Ch. 355.

Footnote 129:

7 T. L. R. 748.

Footnote 130:

10 Ex., 572.

Footnote 131:

10 Ex., 614.

Footnote 132:

15 C. B., 562.

Footnote 133:

15 C. B. n.s., 316.

Footnote 134:

4 Taunt, 165.

Footnote 135:

W. N. C., 1870, 95.

Footnote 136:

24 L. T. n.s., 822.

Footnote 137:

4 Q. B. D., 685.

Footnote 138:

44 L. J. C. P., 309.

Footnote 139:

26 Sol. Jour., 509.

Footnote 140:

See per WILDE, C.J., in _Smart_ v. _Sandars_, 5 C.B., 895.

Footnote 141:

10 Q. B. D., 100.

Footnote 142:

15 C. B. n.s., 316.

Footnote 143:

33 L. T. n.s., 561.

Footnote 144:

10 Q. B. D., 100.

Footnote 145:

13 Q. B. D., 779; 51 L. T. n.s., 102.

Footnote 146:

15 Q. B. D., 363.

Footnote 147:

See _post_ Appendix B. and Stutfield’s “Tattersall’s Rules of
Betting:” _Field_ Office.

Footnote 148:

As bets are not recognised by law, this would seem to be the only
criterion in such matters, but see _Robinson_ v. _Mollett_, L. R., 7;
H. L. 802.

Footnote 149:

W. N. C., 89, p. 116.

Footnote 150:

_Hastelow_ v. _Jackson_, 8 B. & C., 225; _Aubert_ v. _Walsh_, 3 Taunt,
277; _Smith_ v. _Bickmore_, 4 Taunt, 474; _Howson_ v. _Hancock_, 8 T.
R., 575; _Robinson_ v. _Mearns_, 6 D. & R., 26; _Bate_ v.
_Cartwright_, 7 Price, 540.

Footnote 151:

14 M. & W. See, too, _Hudson_ v. _Terrill_, 1 Cr. & M., 797.

Footnote 152:

1 B. & Ald., 683.

Footnote 153:

14 M. & W., 728. See, too, _Maryat_ v. _Broderick_, 2 M. & W., 369,
where Parke, B., doubts the right of one depositor in a legal
horse-race to recover his stake.

Footnote 154:

5 C. B., 271.

Footnote 155:

10 Exch., 737.

Footnote 156:

9 Q. B., 431.

Footnote 157:

36 L. J. Exch., 178.

Footnote 158:

1 Q. B. D., 189.

Footnote 159:

8 B. & C., 225.

Footnote 160:

_Graham_ v. _Thompson_, Ir. R. 2 C. L., 64.

Footnote 161:

2 Ex. Div. 422.

Footnote 162:

5 App. Ca. 342. See also _MacElwaine_ v. _Mercer_, 9 Ir. Rep. C. L.,
17.

Footnote 163:

The reader should refer to the observations at p. 37, where the view
is expressed that the law relating to wagers applies to an ordinary
horse-race for stakes. The result of this would be that the present
observations as to the rights of depositors and stakeholders apply
also.

Footnote 164:

_Weller_ v. _Deakin_, 2 C. & P., 618; _Goldsmith_ v. _Martin_, 4 M. &
G., 5.

Footnote 165:

28 L. J. Q. B., 126. I. E. & E. 456.

Footnote 166:

7 D. M. & G., 55.

Footnote 167:

See _Markwick_ v. _Hardingham_, 15 Ch. Div., 339.

Footnote 168:

1 Q. B. D., 197.

Footnote 169:

5 C. & P., 147.

Footnote 170:

L. R., 2; P. C., 280.

Footnote 171:

L. R. 4, Q. B., 214 and _post_ p. 77.

Footnote 172:

5 Ir. Rep., C. L., 404.

Footnote 173:

See, too, _Daintree_ v. _Hutchinson_, 10 M. & W. 85, on this point.

Footnote 174:

7 D. M. & G., 55.

Footnote 175:

4 T. L. R., 326.

Footnote 176:

19 C. B. n.s. 765, but far better reported, 13, W. R., 390.

Footnote 177:

See _Rouquette_ v. _Overmann_, L. R., 10; Q. B., 525. For further
details and authorities reference may be made to “Story’s Conflict of
Laws,” or “Foote’s International Jurisprudence.”

Footnote 178:

2 Burr, 1,077. See, too, _Wynne_ v. _Callander_, 1 Russ., 293.

Footnote 179:

See _King_ v. _Kemp_, 8 L. T., n.s. 255.

Footnote 180:

1 Phil., 147.

Footnote 181:

12 O.B., 801.

Footnote 182:

_Vide sup._ p. 14, where this subject is dealt with in reference to
cheques.

Footnote 183:

_King_ v. _Kemp_, 8 L. T. n.s., 255.

Footnote 184:

5 C. B., 818.

Footnote 185:

1 Jur. N. S., 660. 5 E. & B. 270.

Footnote 186:

12 C. B., at p. 472.

Footnote 187:

11 Exh., 715.

Footnote 188:

5 Ir. Rep. C. L., 404.

Footnote 189:

L. R., 1 Ex., 248.

Footnote 190:

Ex. Div., 422; the facts are stated above.

Footnote 191:

5 App. Ca., 342.

Footnote 192:

5 App. Ca., 342.

Footnote 193:

L. R. 4 Q. B., 14.

Footnote 194:

L. R., 2 P. C. 78, _vide post_ p. 78.

Footnote 195:

_Vide sup._, p. 36, where this question is fully discussed.

Footnote 196:

In _Dowsen_ v. _Scriven_, 1 H. Bl., 219, “entrance money” was defined
as money which must be paid before the horse can start, but see Rule
of Racing 106.

Footnote 197:

Apply the principal of _Truman_ v. _Harris_, 9 Q. B. D., 264.

Footnote 198:

10 Ir. Rep., C. L., 133.

Footnote 199:

Defendant did not quote the saying of St. Paul, 1 Cor. ix. 24, “in a
race run all but _one receiveth_ the prize.”

Footnote 200:

1 C. P. D., 573.

Footnote 201:

5 Ir. Rep., C. L., 404.

Footnote 202:

28 L. J., Q. B., 126. 1 E. & E. 456.

Footnote 203:

L.R., 4 Q.B., 214. See, too, _Evans_ v. _Pratt_, 3 M. & G.

Footnote 204:

The point was not taken in this case that the agreement was in the
nature of a wager and the plaintiff therefore entitled to revoke the
stakeholder’s authority, but it will be observed that the defendant
had paid over the money _without receiving notice from plaintiff_.

Footnote 205:

14 M. & W., 193.

Footnote 206:

28 L. J., Q. B.

Footnote 207:

28 L. J., Exch., 1.

Footnote 208:

11 Exch., 715.

Footnote 209:

L. R., 2 P. C. 280.

Footnote 210:

The laws with regard to wagers in N. S. Wales, if, indeed, they were
in any way material to this case, seem to be a reproduction of 8 & 9
Vict., c. 109. _Trimble_ v. _Hill_, 5 App. Ca., 342.

Footnote 211:

15 D. R., 69.

Footnote 212:

Ir. Rep., 10 C. L., 248.

Footnote 213:

3 Camp. 168.

Footnote 214:

3 M. & G., 759.

Footnote 215:

10 M. & W., 85.

Footnote 216:

See Stutfield’s “Tattersall’s Rules of Betting,” p. 10.

Footnote 217:

_Dines_ v. _Woolf_, L. R. 2 P. C. 280. _Weller_ v. _Deakin_, 2 C. & P.
_Greville_ v. _Chapman_, 5 Q. B. 731.

Footnote 218:

_Evans_ v. _Pratt_, 3 M. & G., 759; and see 17 L. T., 323.

Footnote 219:

L. R. 2 P. C., 280. _Weller_ v. _Deakin_, 2 C. & P. _Greville_ v.
_Chapman_, 5 Q. B.

Footnote 220:

_Balfe_ v. _West_, 13 C. B., 466, at all events until he has done some
official act. See Rules of Racing, Part III.

Footnote 221:

See _Blaxton_ v. _Pye_, Wils, 309; _Applegarth_ v. _Colley_, 10 M. &
W., 723.

Footnote 222:

3 M. & G., 768.

Footnote 223:

3 M. & G., 765.

Footnote 224:

_Morley_ v. _Greenhalgh_, 32 L. J. M. C., 93.

Footnote 225:

See _Parsons_ v. _Alexander_, 1 Jur. N.S., 660.

Footnote 226:

_Ovenden_ v. _Raymond_, 34 L. T. N. S., 199.

Footnote 227:

As to hazard, see _McKinnell_ v. _Robinson_, 3 M. & W.

Footnote 228:

_R._ v. _Ashton_, 22 L. J. M. C., 1. 1 E. & B., 286.

Footnote 229:

See particularly the account of the Park Club Case (_post_ p. 158.)

Footnote 230:

See Stutfield’s “Rules and Usages of the Stock Exchange”; Effingham
Wilson.

Footnote 231:

_Wells_ v. _Porter_, 3 M. & W., 722; _Lyne_ v _Siesfield_, 1 H. & N.,
278; _Williams_ v. _Trye_, 23 L.J. Ch., 360.

Footnote 232:

4 Burr, 2070.

Footnote 233:

8 B. & Ald., 179; compare _Mortimer_ v. _MacCallan_, 6 M. & W., 58,
where the stock was actually delivered to the vendor.

Footnote 234:

5 E. & B., 999.

Footnote 235:

The Act provided that money paid to settle differences could be
recovered back by an action, sect. 5.

Footnote 236:

1 B. & P., 3—viz., that an agent cannot set up the illegality of a
transaction in answer to the principal’s claim for an account, but see
post pp. 162–4.

Footnote 237:

13 Ch. D., 667.

Footnote 238:

11 C. B., 526.

Footnote 239:

33 L. T., n. s., at p. 563.

Footnote 240:

4 Q. B. D., at p. 695.

Footnote 241:

W. N. C., 1 June, 1878; see, too, _Barry_ v. _Crosskey_, 2 J. & H., 1,
where this test was adopted.

Footnote 242:

At p. 694.

Footnote 243:

17 C. S. C., p. 475.

Footnote 244:

4 Q. B. D. 685.

Footnote 245:

5 M. & W., 462.

Footnote 246:

15 Ch. Div., 207.

Footnote 247:

As to carrying over, see _post_ p. 108, _et seq._

Footnote 248:

13 Ch. Div., 665.

Footnote 249:

_Byers_ v. _Beattie_, 16 W. R., 279.

Footnote 250:

4 Q. B. D., at p. 696.

Footnote 251:

16 C. S. C., 350.

Footnote 252:

33 L. T., N. S., 561.

Footnote 253:

This seems the result of the cases _Grizewood_ v. _Blane_, 11 C. B.,
526; _Ex parte Marnham_, 30 L. J., Bkpcy., 3.

Footnote 254:

4 T. L. R., 326.

Footnote 255:

17 C. S. C., 466.

Footnote 256:

“The evidence of Willis seems to make it clear that the customer had
this option, though this feature of the case was clearer in Howat’s
case (_post_). It does not appear whether the accounts were closed by
Shaw or by defendant’s instructions, but this does not seem to affect
the argument.”

Footnote 257:

30 L. J. Bkpcy. 3.

Footnote 258:

Since the above was written the case of _Stevens_ v. _Universal Stock
Exchange_ has been reported, 40 W.R. 494; in that case, however, it
does not appear that the printed conditions gave the customer the
option to treat the transactions as difference bargains.

Footnote 259:

See the Report of the Commissioners, p. 274, No. 6949.

Footnote 260:

See Report of 1878, at p. 29.

Footnote 261:

4 Q. B. D. at p. 696.

Footnote 262:

See as to this _Bongiovanni_ v. _Société Générale_, 54 L.T. n.s., 320,
and Stutfield’s “Rules and Usages of the Stock Exchange:” Effingham
Wilson.

Footnote 263:

30 L.J. Bkpcy., 1.

Footnote 264:

30 L. J. Bkpcy., 3.

Footnote 265:

In _ex parte Turner_, 3 D. & J., 46, it was held that carrying over an
account would bring a bankrupt within s. 201 of the Act of 1849, and
be a bar to his obtaining his discharge.

Footnote 266:

See Report, 1878, p. 23, Mr. Daniel’s evidence.

Footnote 267:

4 Q. B. D., 690.

Footnote 268:

33 L. T., N. S., 561.

Footnote 269:

1870, W. N. C., 95. See also the cases quoted above as to the right of
the agent to recover.

Footnote 270:

_Ex parte Ryder_, 1 De G. & J., 317; _Ex parte Wade_, 8 D. M. & G.,
241; _Ex parte Matheson_, 1 D. M. & G.

Footnote 271:

_Ex parte Turner_, 3 D. & J. 46.

Footnote 272:

See 46 & 47 Vict., c. 52, sec. 28(3) _d_.

Footnote 273:

9 Q. B. D., 546.

Footnote 274:

For the nature and incidents of this transaction, _vide_ _Coles_ v.
_Bristowe_, L. R., 4 Ch. 3., and Stutfield’s “Rules and Usages of the
Stock Exchange:” Effingham Wilson.

Footnote 275:

Not yet reported except in the newspapers, August 11, 1884.

Footnote 276:

15 Q. B. D., 388.

Footnote 277:

14 Q. B. D., 460.

Footnote 278:

“Times,” 4th April, 1892.

Footnote 279:

9 M. & W.

Footnote 280:

32 Ch. D. 625.

Footnote 281:

But see next page for the law as recently altered by the Gaming
Amendment Act, 1892.

Footnote 282:

P. 53.

Footnote 283:

11 Q. B. D., at p. 210.

Footnote 284:

See _O’Connor_ v. _Bradshaw_, 5 Ex., 882; _Fisher_ v. _Bridges_, 3 E.
& B., 642.

Footnote 285:

See _ante_, p. 86, as to the exception of Royal Palaces.

Footnote 286:

See _Taylor_ v. _Smetten_, 11 Q.B.D., p. 210.

Footnote 287:

14 M. & W., 711.

Footnote 288:

See pp. 129–130.

Footnote 289:

44 Ch. D. 306.

Footnote 290:

1 C. B., 974.

Footnote 291:

The learned Serjeant is evidently using the point decided in
_Applegarth_ v. _Colley_—that the Statute of Anne contemplated a case
where a single person lost £10.

Footnote 292:

9 Q. B., 431. See, too, _Mearing_ v. _Helling_, 14 M. and W., 711.

Footnote 293:

2 H. & C., 912., 28 J. P., 199.

Footnote 294:

5 Ex., 882.

Footnote 295:

11 Ch. Div., 170.

Footnote 296:

5 App. Ca.

Footnote 297:

10 Cox, C. C., 352.

Footnote 298:

11 Q. B. D., 206.

Footnote 299:

52 J. P. 821.

Footnote 300:

60 L. J. M. C. 116.

Footnote 301:

1 C. B. 974.

Footnote 302:

See per POLLOCK, C.B., in _O’Connor_ v. _Bradshaw_, 5 Exch. at p. 891.

Footnote 303:

3 E. & B., 642.

Footnote 304:

12 Geo. II., c. 28, 1.

Footnote 305:

2 Ex. Div. 422, _ante_ p. 58.

Footnote 306:

_Wilson_ v. _Strugnell_, 7 Q.B.D., p. 551. _Kearley_ v. _Thomson_, 24
Q.B.D., 742.

Footnote 307:

_Savage_ v. _Madder_, 36 L. J. Ex. 178.

Footnote 308:

9 Q. B. 431.

Footnote 309:

Per Fry, L. J. _Kearley_ v. _Thomson_.

Footnote 310:

2 Cowper 790.

Footnote 311:

See, too, _Jacques_ v. _Golightly_, 2 Black 1073.

Footnote 312:

_Allport_ v. _Nutt_, 1 C. B. 974.

Footnote 313:

1 C. B., 974.

Footnote 314:

_Vide sup._, p. 17.

Footnote 315:

1 B. & P., 3.

Footnote 316:

1 Ex. Div. 13.

Footnote 317:

Bell C. C.

Footnote 318:

5 B. & A., 555.

Footnote 319:

5 T. R., 338.

Footnote 320:

9 Dowl, 937.

Footnote 321:

11 Q. B. D. 207.

Footnote 322:

1 B. & C., 27.

Footnote 323:

These statutes have been set out above in the Chapter on Lotteries.

Footnote 324:

See _post_ p. 161.

Footnote 325:

13 Q. B. D. p. 524.

Footnote 326:

The importance of this as bearing on the present law of unlawful games
is dealt with in _Turpin_ v. _Jenks_ (see _post_).

Footnote 327:

13 Q. B. D., 377.

Footnote 328:

The procedure by which warrants may be issued and proceedings enforced
against the keepers of gaming houses is dealt with _post_ p. 196.

Footnote 329:

See sections 3 and 6, _post_ p. 196 _et seq._

Footnote 330:

We have already discussed the nature of gaming houses at Common Law,
pp. 149–151.

Footnote 331:

See _post_ for all full account of the case, 13 Q. B. D., 505.

Footnote 332:

13 Q. B. D., 505.

Footnote 333:

The case occurred within the C Division of Police, and so properly
belonged to the Marlborough Street Police Court jurisdiction; but,
being public prosecution by the police, was heard at Bow Street.

Footnote 334:

See _Crockford_ v. _Maidenhead_, 8 L. T., 217.

Footnote 335:

Sec. 16 of the Act of Henry forbade apprentices and artificers, &c.,
to play tennis, bowls, coyting, and other games.

Footnote 336:

As to what constitutes a game of chance, see _post_ “Betting in a
public place.”

Footnote 337:

13 Q. B. D., 505.

Footnote 338:

7 Taunt, 246.

Footnote 339:

2 Phil., 801.

Footnote 340:

15 Q. B. D., 363.

Footnote 341:

11 Ch. D., at p. 195.

Footnote 342:

9 M. & W., at p. 642.

Footnote 343:

1 B. & P., 3.

Footnote 344:

1 B. & P., 296.

Footnote 345:

11 Ch. D., at p. 194.

Footnote 346:

5 E. & B., at p. 1016.

Footnote 347:

4 Q. B. D., 685 _Lyne_ v, _Siesfield_, 1 H. & N., 278.

Footnote 348:

12 C. B., 468.

Footnote 349:

45 L. T., N. S., 512; 15 Cox, C. C., 3.

Footnote 350:

8 Cox, C. C., 305; 4 Cox, 390.

Footnote 351:

See _Smith_ v. _Bond_, 11 M. & W., 549.

Footnote 352:

As to the difference between the offence under this section, also
those specified in ss. 1 and 3, see _post_ p. 190.

Footnote 353:

19 C. B. N. S., 765; 34 L. J. C. P., 159. See _ante_ p. 65 as to this
case.

Footnote 354:

L. R., 9 Q. B., at page 443. Qy. whether the case would not come with
36 & 37 Vict., c. 94.

Footnote 355:

3 B. & S., 374; 32 L. J. (M. C.), 93.

Footnote 356:

L. R., 9 Q. B., at p. 444.

Footnote 357:

L. R., 9 C. P., 339.

Footnote 358:

L. R., 3 Ex., i. 37.

Footnote 359:

L. R., 9 C. P., 339. See 36 & 37 Vict., c. 94.

Footnote 360:

L. R., 9 Q. B., 440.

Footnote 361:

L. R., 10 Q. B., 102.

Footnote 362:

8 Q. B. D., 275.

Footnote 363:

14 Q. B. D., 588.

Footnote 364:

62 L. T. n. s., 433.

Footnote 365:

13 Q. B. D., 377.

Footnote 366:

Not yet reported, but likely to be reported in Cox, C. C., during
1892.

Footnote 367:

13 C. S. C. (Just.) p. 9.

Footnote 368:

62 L. M. S., 433.

Footnote 369:

192 1 Q. B., 20.

Footnote 370:

L. R., 10 Q. B., 102.

Footnote 371:

12 Q. B., D. 36.

Footnote 372:

44 L. J. C. P., 309; 32 L. T. N. S., 825.

Footnote 373:

L. R., 9 Q. B., 440.

Footnote 374:

10 Q. B., 102.

Footnote 375:

41 J. P., 792.

Footnote 376:

62 L. T. N. S. 433.

Footnote 377:

44 L. J. C. P., 309.

Footnote 378:

14 Q. B. D., 588.

Footnote 379:

See _Morley_ v. _Greenhalge_, 32, L. J. M. C., 93.

Footnote 380:

14 Q. B. D., at p. 591.

Footnote 381:

13 Q. B. D., 505.

Footnote 382:

37 J. P., 262.

Footnote 383:

13 Q. B. D., at p. 525.

Footnote 384:

13 Q. B. D., 377.

Footnote 385:

44 L. J. C. P., 309.

Footnote 386:

8 L. T., 217.

Footnote 387:

L. R., 10 Q. B., 102.

Footnote 388:

The preamble, however, does speak of setting up betting offices.

Footnote 389:

Hansard, Vol. 129, p. 87.

Footnote 390:

See, too, per Hawkins, J., _Reg._ v. _Preedie_, referred to, _ante_ p.
174.

Footnote 391:

As to these establishments, see _ante_ p. 66, and _ante_ the chapter
on the Stock Exchange.

Footnote 392:

60 L.J.M.C. 116: The case has before been dealt with under Lotteries.

Footnote 393:

34 J.P., 661.

Footnote 394:

24 Q. B. D., 529; better reported 62 L. T. N. S., 436.

Footnote 395:

13 M. & W., 838.

Footnote 396:

Hansard, Vol. 218, p. 595.

Footnote 397:

L. R., 12 Q. B. D., 128.

Footnote 398:

20 Q. B. D., 182.

Footnote 399:

_Reg._ v. _Newton_, L.R., 1892, 1 Q. B., 648.

Footnote 400:

A question was raised in _Turpin_ v. _Jenks_, as to what was to be
done with the “persons found therein.” The answer seems to be that the
power is given to enable the officers to ascertain by inquiry how far
these persons were responsible for the gaming. See per Field, J., in
_Anderson_ v. _Hume_, 46, J.P. 825; besides, the Statute 17 & 18
Vict., c. 38, compels these persons to give their addresses. It would
seem therefore that having given their addresses they should be
released until the police are in a position to make a definite charge
against them.

Footnote 401:

See, too, _Anderson_ v. _Hume_, 46 J. P. 825.

Footnote 402:

28 L. J. M. C., 45; 1 E. & E., 276.

Footnote 403:

Ex. Div. 320.

Footnote 404:

46 J. P., 825, and see _ante_, p. 197, note.

Footnote 405:

1 Ex Div., 320.

Footnote 406:

In the same case (2 Ex. Div., 335) it was held that there was no
appeal from the Divisional Court, this being a criminal matter.

Footnote 407:

_Lee_ v. _Gold_, 44 J. P., 395.

Footnote 408:

_Onley_ v. _Gee_, 7 Jur., N.S., 570.

Footnote 409:

See _Anderson_ v. _Hume_, 46 J. P., 825.

Footnote 410:

1 Q. B. D., 89.

Footnote 411:

1 Q. B. D., 84.

Footnote 412:

12 Q. B. D., 360.

Footnote 413:

_Ubi sup._

Footnote 414:

21 Q. B. D., 249.

Footnote 415:

1 E. & A., 286; 22 L. J. M. C., 1.

Footnote 416:

20 L. T., 483.

Footnote 417:

3 Q. B. D., 454.

Footnote 418:

22. Q. B. D. 351.

Footnote 419:

29 L. J. M. C., 189.

Footnote 420:

_Hare_ v. _Osborne_, 34 L. T., 294.

Footnote 421:

_Cooper_ v. _Osborne_, 85 L. T., 347.

Footnote 422:

5 M. & G., 335.

Footnote 423:

58 L. J. M. C.

Footnote 424:

34 L. J M. C., 50.

Footnote 425:

L. R., 6 Q. B., 130.

Footnote 426:

L. R., 6 Q. B., 514.

Footnote 427:

_Reg._ v. _Holmes_, 25 L. J. M. C., 121.

Footnote 428:

45. J. P., 469;

Footnote 429:

_Langrish_ v. _Archer_, 10 Q. B. D., 44; but see _re Freestone_, 1 H.
& N., 93.

Footnote 430:

34 L. J. C. P., 159.

Footnote 431:

13 Q. B. D., 505.

Footnote 432:

22 Q. B. D., 351.

Footnote 433:

See Stutfield’s “Tattersall’s Rules on Betting,” _Field_ Office.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

TRANSCRIBER’S NOTES

1. Silently corrected obvious typographical errors and variations in spelling. 2. Retained archaic, non-standard, and uncertain spellings as printed. 3. Re-indexed footnotes using numbers and collected together at the end of the last chapter. 4. Enclosed italics font in _underscores_.