San Antonio daily light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1886-1907, 1891-01-02
= POOL SELLING LAWFUL.

Important Decision Rendered by
Justice Van Brunt, of New York.
New YORK, Jan. 1.-THE general
term of the supreme court handed
down a decision, signed by Chief
Justice Van Brunt, and concurred in
by Justices Brady and Daniels, which
will interest not only every jockey
club, bookmaker and pool seller, but
every citizen who has ever bet dol
lar OH horse. or who expects to bet
In the future. The apparent effect
of the decision is to allow pool
SELLING or its equivalent to be
conducted in this city whenever
it is lawful on the race-tracks. Last
May Bookmaker Wynn, who has q
pool room at Barclay street, was
convicted in the General Sessions,
The indictment against him included
| 1--we counts-keeping q room for the
recording and registration of bets; oc-
cupying the room; keeping apparatus
1 for such purposes; recording bets and
| selling pools. The evidence was got
I by Detective William Flynn, who on
! May II placed S. on the horse Ford
| ham to run at Gravesend. The po-
| licemNn testified that he was re-
quired to fill out and sign a contract
| making Wynn his common carrier.
The jury found Wynn guilty of re-
| cordiug bet and keeping appa-
ratus. In the argument on appeal
| Mr.. Howe stated that the contract
quoted above had been drawn before
hand by Mr.. Hummel with the object
| of testing the law, and he challenged
the justices to find 1t detective. He
insisted that If it was legal TO bet up
on the race track, it was equally law
| full for citizens to delegate bookmak-
era or any other persons TO. bet for
| them upon the race track. IL was
simply question whether or not IL
was lawful for citizen
to give a power of attorney.
Judge Van Brunt says: "There
was no such recording or registering
of wager as brought the defendalt
within the prohibition of the statute.
| Although the detective sought to
| entrap the defendant into violation
| of the law there was refusal to en-
ter into any contract or agreement
| which would be violation of the
law, or from which could be inferred
an inten tion to violate the law. The
detective undoubtedly intended to
get evidence to convict the defendant
| of violation of the law, but the de-
PENDANT seems to have been too wary
| to be caught by the chaff which the
officer held out to tempt him. II the
action of the defendant is capable of
an innocent construction he is en-
| titled to receive the benefit of it, and
unless no other conclusion can be
| drawn than that of an intention to
violate the law the defendant is
| entitled to the presumption of inno-
cence." "By this decision A, B.
Hummell said tonight, "the Ives pool
\ law is rendered practically void so
far as pool selling in this city Is con-
cerned. During the period when it is
! lawful for any citizen to go to any
race track and bet what he chooses
on any horse it is also lawful for him
to remain in the city and commission
anybody he pleases, private friend or
professional bookmaker, TO place his
money on the races for him. Under
the law, as interpreted by this decls-
| ion, a boOkmaker has only to put up
partition between his business and
registering Office and the office where
! he receives his customers in order to
| be safe"