The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1895-03-26
NO ROOM FOR DOUBT
JUDGE MCRAY CLEARLY OUTLINES
THE LAW on POOL ROOMS.
DougIass's Case in the Hands of the
Jury-Not Necessary to Prove
Who Sold.

The Samuel L. Douglass pool room case
was given to the jury at 3 o'clock yester-
day evening. At 1890 O'Clock last night a
verdict had not been reached, and Judge
McCray went home. Yesterday afternoon
was devoted to the argument. The conten-
ton of Douglass's attorneys was that a bet
could not be registered until it was made;
that whoever left his money in this room
left it there to be placed on q race outside
the State. The bet was telegraphed to the
man who offered the bet in the other State
and it was made when it was accepted. If
the man won his bet, the better in the 9TH
er State telegraphed through the Mercan-
tile company to the bettor here that he had
won, and ordered the company to pay the
money. 1t was held that Douglass, as rep
resentative of the Mercantile Telegraph
Company, did nothing more in the matter
than to transmit the message back and
forth for hire, the same as any other tele-
graph company would do in sending a
money order.
In delivering his instructions to the jury,
Judge McCray said, in part:
You observe that the charge in the in
dictment is the keeping of a certain room
with blackboard, blanks, apparatus and
other devices for registering and recording
result of any trial or contest of speed or
power of endurance of man or beast. You
VIII LIE ODScINe tldI the statute makes
it an offense to manage or keep a room
with these devices for the purpose of reg
istering bets or wagers or selling pools,
and while the State goes further and makes
it an offense to register and record such
bets or to act as depository for hire in hold
ing stakes, yet this clause of the statute
makes 1T an offense to keep such a room
with such devices for the purpose of regis
tering and recording such bets or wagers
or of selling such pools. This seems clear
from the plain language of the statute, and
this is. clearly charged in the Indictment.
The question, then, Tor your determination
is, did the defendant, March 5, 1894, keep or
manage a room in Marion county with APP
pliances, blackboard, papers and blanks and
other devices for recording bets or selling
pools on the result of TRIALS. of speed or
skill between man or beast
ut is not necessary for the State to prove
that a bet or wager was made, recorded or
registered there or that a pool was sold
there. 1t is an offense under the statute If
the defendant, beyond a reasonable doubt,
kept or managed this room with the appa-
ratus. including blackboard, blanks, etc,
for the purpose of registering bets. 1t is
immaterial in this cause where money
placed in this room is sent or how or to
whom it is sent, or that any bets were re-
corded or registered or pools sold. for the
charge IS not the registering or the record
ing of bets, nor is there a charge of making
bets, but the charge against the defendant
is the keeping of a room with the appli-
ances and devices named in, the indictment
for the purpose of recording and registering
bets or wagerS or selling pools, and not a
charge of making bets or selling POOLS"