The Sun.
London, England, 1857-10-19 00:00:00

BETTING _HOUSE CONVICTION.

At the Middlesex Sessions on Saturday an ap-
peal by Charles Thorp, formerly of 124, Jermyn-
street, now of the White Bear, Piccadilly, was
heard, against a conviction for keeping a betting
house, under which he was sentenced to two
months' hard labour in the House of Correction.
Mr. Bodkin, instructed by the Solicitor to the
Treasury, appeared to support the Conviction ; Mr.
Sergeant Ballantine, and Mr. F. EL Lewis, in-
structed by Mr. S. B. Abrahams, for the appellant.
In opening the case, Mr. Bodkin said the legis-
lature having passed an act to remedy the evils result-
ing from the betting-houses, which were so much
complained of, the government bad felt it to be
their duty to support the conviction now appealed
against, particularly as the appellant had been be-
fore convicted of the same offence. Upon the
evidence he thought there could be no doubt
of the propriety of the conviction.
Inspector Webb, of the C Division, stated that
on the 4th of May he watched the house, 124,
Jermyn-street, then in the occupation of the ap-
pellant, by whom the shop door was opened about
ten in the morning. From ton to eleven 20 per-
sons entered and came out ; from eleven to twelve,
2766 fromfrm twelveofrom one to two,
41. The door was olosed
;andototo
three,orie 90 ;
at the latter hour, but at four several persons
knocked, and the appellant let them in. The total
number was 258, and many of them were known
to witness as betting men. He saw the appellant
at the window making entries in a book, and while
be was doing so he was surrounded by persons
whom witness had seen to go iu. They had books
in their hands. At half-past seven in the evening
he 'a ent with the superintendent of the C division
to the house, and on entering they found five per-
sons in front of the bar, upon which stood some
decanters of wine. The appellant was behind the
bar, and upon hearing their business—they had a
warrant—he hurried away through a back room,
and could not be afterwards found. The five per-
ms standing itifront of the bar were searched and
taken to the station-house. On searching the bar
ho found copies of telegraphic messages relating to
races, and memoranda of the sane kind. In a room
on the first floor he found a ledger, containing entries
of races, and the names of horses with figures at-
tached. The house was frequented by betting
men, and the appellant had been there for some
years. _ _

In cross-examination he said he could not swear
that bets were made.
George Draper, 326 A, deposed to going into the
house in plain clothes on the 4th of May. A person
there said, " What's the price about Leamington ?"
Appellant said,
you not give more than that'?" to which Thorp re-
plied, " Well, if " sto 1." The inquirer said, " Can
you want to back him I'll give you
6to 1." The person then put down a sovereign,
and Thorp made an entry in a book. The man
gave the name of Williams. •
Joseph Cox, late a constable of the D division,
gave similar testimony. He saw a bet made of 4
to 1 against a horse called Turbit, and on asking
the odds against horses entered for the Chester Cup
Thorp told him 5 to 1 against Leamington, 10 to 1
Van Duna, 20 to 1 Zig Zag. Thorp offered to lay
30 against the last named.
The next witness was Superintendent Hannant,
who deposed to the appellant escaping, when in-
formed of the nature of his visit to his house.
Kirby, an elderly-looking man, was next
called. "He said W wanted to know who was to
pay his expenses before he was sworn. He had
been kept in town four days, and his expenses were
13s. 6d. a day.
Superintendent aannant said the witness lived
at Boston, in Lincblnshire, and they went there to
serve him with a iibpoena, but they found he was
in town ; so when he was served he only received
ls. with the subpena.
Mr. Bodkin told the witness that the Solicitor
to the Treasury would pay all proper and reason-
able expenses.
Witness—Well, give me his address—but stop,
I don't know any Solicitor to the Treasury, and
before I begin I want my expenses.
Mr. Bodkin—.yon will find " Solicitor to the
t Treasury, Whitehall," on the back of your subpoena
—let me see it.
Witness—flora it is, but here's writing on it of
mine which I don't want you to see. It's the item
of my expenses. I want the money, sir, that's my
ticket. (Laughter)
Mr. Bodkin, to the bench—Sir, here is a witness
before you, whose 'air and reasonable expenses are
guaranteed by the Solicitor to the Treasury, and if
he refuses fnrther to give his evidence, I shall ask
you to commit him.
Witness—Well, rather than be committed I'll
begin, but the Queen is better able to pay my ex-
p.nses than lam to lose them'. I was "had" once
before in a horse ca.e. I was summoned 37 miles,
and was only laughed at after all. I don't mean to
be laughed at again like that.
much Sergeantconfi B d
is, that I'm confident I'
confidence anin her daje'ty's Treasury.
Witness—Not He does not appear to have
t 7
The representative of
sury here stepped up
all the confidence I've got
mean to b 3 paid.
the Solicitor to the Trea-
atid handed the witness 51.,
very well contented.
el no trade or business, but
wiHthe wthhieenh
aheeps9eseemd_ect I a
live at Boston. In May last
6) to 2 that Blink Bonny
Iditdwnotas m
Thorp en
laid a littlenie
a prboeptee o?
and Oaks. I won the bet.
Jerwyn-street—just at the
door. I used to go there to make bets. When I
asked him for my
win the thaetDle2r4b, y
money after Blink Bonny had
won the two races, he said he could not pay as the
police had taken his books. I produced my own
book in which he had written his name to the bet,
but he did not pay me, nor has he yet. He said I
must wait. I have paid him altogether 237. for b ts.
C, osse xarniued—l was once a farmer, but failed.
I never had 11 days through falsely stating that I
was an inspector of weigias and measures. I was
once at the assizes 11 days, but I do not know, and
never did rightly, what it was for, but this I know
I wai acquitted without the ail of either counsel or
solicitor.
Sergeant Ballantine—That's a libel by inference
upon the entire profession.
The witness added that he went to the White
Bear the preceding evening and saw the appellairt's
solicitor. He did not say he would stay away from
the court if 201. were given him, but he said if
Thorp would pay him the amount of his bet, he
would be out of the way—why should he Of, he
said. He had no ill-will against Thorp—but he
wanted his money for all that.
Sergeant Ballantiae—You aro from the north,
are you not?

lfitnass (winking}—l should sly I wag, a bit.
Mr. Scott, rate collector, proved that Ehe house 124
Jermyn-street, was rated in th© defindant'a name,
and that he paid the rates.

Mr. Sergeant Ballantine, .in his address to the
bench, said he mu t confess that be looked to the
r. salt of the case with deep anxiety, fraught as it was
with the most vital importance to the appellant,
who, if the conviction were affirmed, would have to
undergo the severe sentence of two months' hard
labour in a felon's gaol, upon acharge not supported
by the best proof which the Government could have
adduced, and which was not surrounded by any
flagrant or aggravating circumstances. He was ad-
dressing the bench as a court of law—he should also
address them ae a
,jury; and while they would de
cide the law of the ease, he should ask them to give
the appellant the benefit of any doubt he might be
able to raise in their minds as to the facts. The
statute under which this convic ion teolg- place was
one of a highly
penal nature, and must therefore be
strictly construed and the appellant was justified in
resorting to every means and argument to extricate
himself from the peril in which he was
placed. The
conviction, he contended, was not drawn up accord-
ing to the evidence it was made upon. The words of
the statute were, "Any person being the occupier of
any house, rooms, office, or other place," the convic-
tion was for " a certain house." Now it was clear
that the prosecutor bad the right to elect, and the
conviction ought to_ have been for a room, for the
evidence was that it was in a room that the betting
took place,
elusive evidence that such room was au actual part
of the house of
and where was the strictly legal and con-
The conviction was for " house," the evidence ap-
plied only to a which Thorp had been the occupier?
a. . room or shop which might be dis-
tinct from the appellant's house. He must admit
that there was no grave question upon facts; but in
such a penal matter every point must be scrutinised
most strictly.
Where was the evidence that Thorp's
house was used for betting, as the conviction
alleged. Persons went there for other purposes ;
and if even bettin
no grave crim eality
,r claw
had been going on there was
been e elected from a crowd. The sa
es, who were me t
lefting
on Thorp's part—but he had
was done in the lig' e
so d, and indulged in this vice with impunity,
thing
was done in the ligl:er classes, who were left uu-
so tthf d, and indulgeci in this vice with impunity,
while a person like Mr. Thorp was to undergo the
severe and terrible punishment of being sent to
associate with felons in a common gaol. He sub-
mittecl that there.was a link wanting in the case on