Brownlow's Knoxville Whig, and rebel ventilator. [volume] (Knoxville, Tenn.) 1863-1866, 1866-02-14
Decision of the Supreme Court.

THE STATE rs. JOSEPH H. BLACKB URN
The presentment in the cases charges that ~. H.
Blackburn, the 10th day of April, 1865, in De-
kalb county, did bet on horse race, money, bank
notes. greenbacks and other valuable property
Said race not being run legally licensed track.
At the October term 1865 of the Circuit Court for
said county, the defendant was tried upon plea of
"not guilty ?" and convicted; he moved for a new
trial. which was refused; he then removed in arrest
of Judgment, which was sustained, and the iudg-
ment was arrested upon the ground the presentment
charged no offense against the laws of Tennessee,
and the Attorney General has appealed to this court
Former adju1ications of this court, upon statutes
enacted prior to the adoption of the code, for the
prevention and punishment of gaming and horse
racing and which have been substantially transfer
red to the code, conflicting In the case of the
State VS.. Posey, LIST Hump 364, and in the case OF
DObkins VS.. The State, Hump. 424, the language
of the presentments was substantially the same en-
ployed in the now under consideration. In the
former this court held the presentment was good,
and did charge OfeDse and in the latter case it
was holden the pTesentment charged Offense
against the laws Of Tennessee and was therefore
fatally defective, and if there had been no change
in the law since these adiudcatiOns, we should feel
constrained to follow the latter and affirm the iudg
ment of the Circuit Court. But by section 1870 of
the code enacted since the decision of the cases be-
fore referred to: "If any person play at any game
of hazard or address, for money or other valuable
things, make any bet wager for money or other
valuable thing, he is guilty of a misdemeanor."-
Now what Is the plain and obvious meaning of this
section? We think the language susceptible of but
one construction; by its very terms it declares two
ofenses-one is the playing at any game of hazard
address for money, other valuable things, and
the other Is the making of any bet or wager for
money or other valuable thing = then the simple
act Of betting by this section declared to be Of
Tense for the commission of which the guilty party
is liable to indictment or presentment or punish
ment. And the charge that the defendant bet money
upon horse race which was not run upon licensed
track, is no less charge that he did bet than is a
charge that he bet upon game of cards. In either
case the language contains charge of betting,
whether be necessary to add to the charge of bet
ting the specific game, contest or issue upon which
the bet or wager was laid we do not now determine
but if it be done done in this case, it only
throws upon the prosecution the Of proving as
in this case, that the bet was upon horse race,
which was not run upon a licensed track result of
which the defendant would not complain before and
cannot be heard to complain after the verdict.
The law was made for the prevention, discourage
ing and suppression of gaming-its terms are I'M
ambiguous. The Legislature has prescribed no lin
itations or restrictions upon its construction app
cation. We can impose none and were it susceptible
of different constructions we should feel it to be the
duty of the courts of the country to give it that
struction which, without doing violence to the Ian
guage employed would most tend to the accomplish
ment of the object Of the Legislature To give it
any other construction than that which we have
given would most clearly be doing violence to the
plain letter of the law and instead of aiding would
tend TO defeat the object of the law, and facilitate
the escape of offenders.
1t can make no difference that the presentmnt was
framed with the view of charging an ofFense against
some other provision Of the code. By the verdict
of the jury the defendant stands convicted of the
charge in the presentment, and trial upon the
facts has been refused him The question is not
what ofense was intended to be charged, but does
the presentment charge an ofense against the laws
Of the States for which the defendent is liable TO
presentment and punishment.
The Judgment of the Circuit Court in arresting
the judgment upon the finding of the jury is erro-
neous, and will be revised, and the cause remanded
when the Circuit Court will proceed to pronounce
judgment upon the verdict.
HAWKINS, Judge.
Attest j. G. FRAZER, Clerk.