The Sun.
London, England, 1868-07-02 00:00:00

Egyptian, 7 per Cent
1)o. Se,owt Issue . •••
£5 in Bonds
00.1106 Bonds B3
1861
Do. Account
Do. £5 /0 Bonds
Do. £lOO Bonds B3k
Government Rail way Debentures ..... 921
Greek 5 per Cent., 1821 5, ex Coups
Do. Account
Do. Coupons -
Do. AccJuut
Guatemala .5 per Cent • .
Honduras Gov. Rail. Loan., 10 p. Ct., £25 p
It, Nan 5 per Cert., 1865
Do, Account ~
Do. Maremmana Raiway
Mexican :3 per Cent
Ditto for Account
D.. 1864
Dc 6 per Cent. Anglo-French
llonteritla.4 o per Cent.
Nloorish Imperial 5 per- Cent
New Granada
1)0 3 per Con
Do. Defer.3,l
Do Lauri Warrauts (llectares)
Per ivian 5 per Cent. 1865
Do Account 79 1 81 9
Do 4% per Cont. (Uribarron) .. --
Do 1,1; per Cent.. 162
Do Account
Port Agues. .4 per Ct., 1,45:4, '6, '7, '9,130,'2,”,
Do. do. 1 67 391
Do. do. Sc ip, £2O pail
ssian 5 per Cont., 1.8:.:z, st B6l
Do 4i, po:- Cent. 1850
per C.-nt., 18Go
Do 3 per Cent., 1859 54
Do 5 per Cent., 1862
Do. Anglo-Dutch, 1861, £lOO 130ndt...,_
Do. do. £Bl 15s. d 0...,
Do., Do., 1866, £lOO Bonds.
Do. do £B4 13s. do
Co Nicolas Railway 631
Sa •diuian, 5 per Cent
Stoutish 3 per Cen
Do. Acc,,unt
D 1867
Do• New Deferred
Do. Account
Do. Passive
Do. Acc. ant
Do. Corn. Cert. of Coup. not funded
Do. Account
Tur dsh 6 per' Cent.
Do Account
Do 6 per Cent. 1858
Do Account
Do £lOO Bonds
Do 6 per Cent., 1862
Do Accoun t
Do .£IOC Bonds 64 31
Da. 1863
Do 5 per Cent., 1865
Do Account
Do 6 per Cent., 1865
liividencts on the above payable in Lounok..
Austrisu a par Cent. Ex 10 Florins
4i per cent., Ex. 25f.
Dutch 2 per Cent. Ex. 12 Gnil.. —
D,o Account
French Routes, 3 per Cent., Ex. 23f.
Itqlian 5 per Cent. 1831, Ex. 23f.
Do. Account 5ll
CLOSING PRICES.
Consols, Money 9441 5 xd
Do. Account, July 9

61i 4

THE BETTING LISTS AT NEIVCASTLE

IL4 CES.

At the Manors Police-court, Newcastle, on Tues.
day (before the Mayor, Mr. Alderman Pollard, and
H. Milvain, Esq.), a number of betting men, who
had exposed lists at the recent race meeting, were
summoned under the Act for the suppression of
Betting Houses. Thirty-two summonses had been
issued, but only about a dozen of them served upon
the parties ; and the only defend.tnt who appeared
was Charles Heed, of Leeds, thongh he was sum-
moned as Charles Heads.

Detective Superintendent Dixon proved that he
served the summonses o❑ the other defendants, who
had not attended in answer to them.

Capt. Sylvester, chief constable, conducted the
case against the defendant Heed, and stated that he
had been summoned under the 16th and 17th Vic-
toria, cap. 19, sec. 3, which sets forth as follows :
" Any person who, being the owner or occupier
of any house, office, room, or other place, or a per-
son using the same, shall open, keep, or use the same
for the purpose hereinbefore mentioned, or either
of them ; and any person who, being the owner or
occupier of any house, room, office, or other place,
shall knowingly and wilfully permit the same to be
opened, kept, or used by any other person for the
purposes aforesaid, or either of them ; and any
person having the care and management of, or in
any manner assisting in conducting, the business
of any house, office, room, or place opened, kept,
or use.' for the purposes aforesaid, or either of them,
shall, on summary conviction thereof before any two
justices of the peace, be liable to foi feit and pay such
penalty, not exceeding one hundred pounds, as shall
be adjudged by such justices, and may be further
alju lged by such justices to pay such costs attend-
ing such conviction as to the sai 1 justices shill
seem reasonable ; and on the non-payment of such
penalty and costs, or in the first instance, if to the
said justices it shall seem fit, may be committed to
the common gaol or house of enrrection, with or
without hard labour, for any time not exceeding six
calendar months." The defendant was the owner
or occupier of an office, for the purpose of betting,
on the Town Moor, on June 23. It was a tempo-
rary office, erected on four posts, and he believed
that it had a desk. He should prove by a witness
that the defendant was the occupier of the office,
was receiving bets on certain races that were taking
place, and conducting the business himself. He then
referred to the case of Shaw v. Morley, which came
before the justices of the borough of Doncaster on
September 19, 1867, when a conviction was ob-
tained, and a penalty of £2:5 and costs imposed,
which was appealed against in the Court of Exche-
quer on April 22, when Chief Baron Kelly said—
" It seems to me plain that what is here described
is an office' or place.' It makes no difference
whether such a structure be roofed or roofless, on
wheels or not on wheels, moveable or otherwise ;
it is not the less an office and a place. And as
for the purpose for which this structure was used,
it is clearly within the meaning of the Act." Tho
conviction was affirmed by the higher Court. He
then called

Detective Superintendent Dixon, who stated that
on June 23, the first day of the races, he saw the
defendant at the upper side of the ring, outside
the ring, and he was making bets in an erection
raised from the ground with four posts, and he had
a book. Defendant was standing on the erection
inside, but be (witness) would not like to say whe-
ther there was a desk or not, for he thought there
was merely a sort of handrail. There was no cover
on the erection. The defendant had his name on a
sheet of
paper on the erection, Charles Heads—
(Defendant—Charles Heed is the proper name ;
that is my name)—and the name was also on his
belt. He saw the defendant take several bets. On
the 25th he served the defendant with a summons
in the same place. He gave his name and was

very civil.
Defendant —Was I inside or outside?
Witness—l believe at the time I took your name
you were on the outside of the office, on a stool.
You had a clerk inside.
Defendant—Did I pay any money?
Witness—l don't think I saw you pay any
money ; but I saw you receive some.
The defendant, in reply to the charge, said he
had been greatly misled, and was not aware that
he had been guilty of a breach of the law in any
shape or form, and if the least warning had been
given to him that he was doing wrong he would not
have taken the place. Ile did not get his livicg
by going to race meetings, for he was a tradesman.
A gentleman came to him with a policeman, No.
125, when he was outside the ring, and asked
him if he was going to stand there like that, or was
going to have one of those erections, and he asked
if they were allowed. The gentleman told him
they made a difference in the. charge, and gave him
a ticket, saying that if he had a stool to stand on the
charge for three days would be 55., but for a box
like that it would be 103. 61. The policeman was
along with the gentleman at the time. If he had
broken the law, they had been his rulers. Ile had
travelled from Leeds that morning on purpose to
answer the summons, bee tuse he did not wish to do
anything wrong in any shape or form.
The Bench retired, and after an absence of a few
minutes returned, when the Mayor said they had
carefully considered the case. There had been a
clear breach of the law, but on account of the can-
did way in which the defendant had acted, they
fined him in the mitigated penalty of 10s., but
hoped it would be a caution to him.
Warrants were granted against the men who had
.lot
.attended in answer to the summonses served
upon them.—Newcastle Chronicle.