The Sun.
London, England, 1864-10-13 00:00:00

SCRATCHINGS AT NEWMARKET.

Newmarket Oaks— All have paid forfeit but the follow-
ing : Fair Sophia, Teneriffe, Syren, Bradamante, Pro-
scription, Auricula, Beatrix, Fillo do l'Air, Tomato, Breeze,
Evelina, Molly Carew, Chalybeate, Lady Mary, BigotEy,
Battaglia, and Goldylocks.
Bretby Stakes —The following are left in :—Elaine,
Klarinska, White Duck, and Convent.
Sweepstakes of 300 Sovs—The following have paid :
Anadyomene and Archimedes.
Sweepstakes of 500 Sovs. 11,M.—General Peel walks
over.

The Caversham Stakes at Reading —This race has been
awarded by the stewards of the Jockey Club to Nebuchad-
nezzar, who came in first.

BETTING AT MANCHESTER—WEDNESDAY,
CAMBRIDGESHIRE.
fn 1 .ust (Tratitnds halm 100 to 15)
mu to 6 agst Prince Plausible (taken)
100 to 6 agst Bayard (taken)
100 to 6 agat Muezzin (taken)
100 to 6 agst Tattoo (offered)
20 to 1 agst Brick (taken)
20 to 1 agst Stockinger (taken)
25 to 1 agst Accident (taken)
25 to 1 agst Trap (taken)

Important Decision.—Railway Refreshmen'

Rooms.

It will be remembered that a few days since Mr, Arnold
gave his decision, concurrently with that of his brother
magistrate at the Westminster Police-court in a case of the
legality of considering persons departing from railway

stations as travellers. The question had arisen out of a
complaint against Mr. Robert Fisher, proprietor of the
refreshment-rooms at the Victoria station, Pimlico, and on
judgment being pronounced and the defendant convicted,
Mr. Child, solicitor to the Licensed Victuallers' Protection

Society, availed himself of a suggestion thrown oat by the

magistrate, and said he should like to state a case and take
it up for decision to a superior court, but before doing so
he begged to call the attention of the magistrates to the

27th and 28th Victoria, cap. 64, sec. 10, an act passed last
session of Parliament, for the regulation of refreshment.
houses, the last section of which says, " Nothing heroin
contained shall apply to the sale at a railway station between
the hours cf. one and four o'clock in the morning of excis.

able liquors or refreshments to persons arriving at or de-
parting from such station by railroad." Mr. Arnold upon
this begged it to be considered that his decision had not
been given, and took time to see whether it would haveany
bearing on the matter at present under consideration ; and
yesterday Mr. Child again attended to ascertain the magis-
trate's views on the subject, and, should his decision be
adverse, to state a case, and enter into the necessary recog-
nisances to have the matter decided in the Court of Queen's

Bench.
Mr. Arnold said he had considered the clause of the
act of Parliament referred to by Mr Child, and he did not
think it had any bearing upon the question before him, espe-
cially as the latter part of the sth section of the very same
act said—" Nothing herein contained shall authorise a
licensed victualler to sell exciseable liquors, on any Sunday,
Christmas-day, Good Friday, or day appointed for public
fast or thanksgiving or otherwise than during the times at
which he is now authorised by law to sell the same, or au-
thorise any other person to sell exciseable liquors, keep open
any refreshment house, or sell refreshments otherwise than
at the times and upon the conditions prescribed by the acts
magistrate) thought Mr Child could use
of Parliament
(Patrhleiawmoerntthiyn that behalf made.'' The only way in which
the 10th section would be to found an argument upon it,
that if persons arriving at railway stations were travellers,
then persons departing from stations were travellers.
Mr Child remarked that was precisely what he intended
to do. If persons arriving were travellers, so were those
departing.
Mr Arnold said the act of Parliament did not speak of
them as travellers. It made an exception for persons"
arriving at and departing from, but it did not designate
them as travellers.
.The argument cut both ways.
ps his opinion might be erroneous that a person
allowed and in fact compelled to
e finished. his journey.
arrivingPelia at a railway station was a. traveller. It might be
; it did not treat these persons
that he was no longer in the situation of a traveller to
ttiaoitswnaabadaprpefreshment to travellers then there
He did
ngasoiwhomvtte:harvie
nefak:
travellers.
publican
the
Ise section
e:
would have been a strong arment ; but the section did not
throw any light upon the present. case, which seemed, from
the correspondence going. on in the newspapers, to have
excited considerable attention and interest ; and the general
supposition seemed to be that a person intending to go by
a railway became a traveller the moment he left his house
for the purpose of going
ito the station, whether in a cab, his
own carriage, omnibus, or ▪ n any other way. It that were
the case the person would have a right to stop at any public-
house on the road and receive refreshment, and the result
would be that all the public▪
-houses would be opened at all
hours
would let them in, and thus the law relating
to
Sunday
would be a dead letter in a large town,
c persons
like London, for instance. He and his colleague (Mr Selfe)
still retained it as their opini▪
on that a person going to a rail-
way station under ordinarycircumstances was not a travel-
lwerouulnd not pretend eprileatednbd to eguna journey. But at the same time he
decide that any person might not be
a traveller, and that there might not be exceptional cases.
Suppose a person arrived at the Great Western Railway
station, and then took a cab to Victoria, he thought that
would be an exceptional case. Their decision, therefore,
was that the parties in thi▪ s case who came to the station
were not travellers in the meaning of the Police Act, under
which the summons bad been taken out.
Mr Child observed that ever since the passing of this
atatuto his worship was a are that there had been a difd-