The record-union. [volume] (Sacramento, Calif.) 1891-1903, 1895-12-31
SACRAMENTO RECORDlNIoN,

such nickel-in-the-slot machines as are
prohibited by the ordinance, as it does
faro, stud-horse poker, craps" tan
and lotteries, all of which last men
| toned games are now and have been
for number of months past, conducted
| and carried on in this city
The Mayor might have, with as much
| consistency, SO far as your rights are
concerned, and with a great deal more
safety to you If you followed his advice,
advised you to pass an ordinance icens-
ing larceny
That you may more readily under
stand the import of the foregoing, and
without explaining at this time why,
in my opinion, a nickel-in- the-s slot ma
chine comes within the purview of the
| provisions of the Penal Code herewith
quote Sections $50 and 337 of said CODE
Section $50. Every person who deals,
plays, or carries on, opens, or causes to
be opened, Or who conducts, either as
owner or employee, whether for hire or
not, any game of faro, monte, roulette,
| lasquenet, rouge ct noire, rondo tan,
fan-tan, stud-horse poker, seven and-a
half, twenty-one, holxey-pokey, or any
with cards, dice, or any device, for
money, checks, credit, or other repre-
sentative of value, and every person
who plays or bets at or against any of
said prohibited games is guilty of a
mfsdemeanor, and shall be punished by
fine not less than one hundred dollars
nor not more than five hundred dollars.
or by Imprisonment in the County Jail
not exceeding six months, or by both
such fine and Imprisonment
Section 337. Every State, county.
city, city and county, town or township
officer, or other person, who shall ask
for, receive or collect any money or
other valuable consideration, either for
his own use or the public use, for and
with the understanding that he will
aid, exempt or otherwise assist any per-
son from arrest or conviction for VIC
lation of Section $50 of the Penal Code;
or who shall issue, deliver or cause to
to be given or delivered to any person
or persons, any license, permit or other
privilege, giving or pretending to give
any authority or right to any person or
persons to carry on, conduct, open or
cause to be opened any game or
tied by Section $50 of said code; and
any of such officer or officers who shall
vote for the passage of any ordinance
or bylaw giving, granting or pretend
ing to give or grant to any person or
persons any authority or privilege to
open, carry on, conduct or cause to be
opened, carried on or conducted any
game or games prohibited by said Sec
ton $50 of the Penal Code is guilty of
felony
The laws of this State with reference
to gaming are very strict, and it would
be more in keeping with a conscien-
tious performance of duty for the
Mayor to give orders to the police de-
partment for their strict enforcement
than it is for him to advise what is
prohibited by law, and sanction, as is
now done, the occasional arrest or
those engaged in fragrant violation of
the law in conducting and carrying on
the games heretofore mentioned. 1t is
disgrace and a shame to this city and
county that gambling has virtually
been licensed in this city for a number
of months past. The revenue to the
city from this source has been nearly
1900 during the past year, but this
city has not become SO far lost to all
sense Of decency as to accept this money
willingly, knowing the source from
which and the manner in which it is
derived. know that reputable citizens
do not sanction 1t, but whether they do
or not, there is but one course to pur-
sue, and that is to enforce the law as
we find it.
l,or- Ix-se p
as fully as might in the premises, but
sufficiently SO that you viii not act, I
hope, upon any ordinance regulating
gambling without due elaboration.
Yours respectfully,
]. FRANK BROWN, City Attorney.
Sacramento, Dec. 80, 1895.
The proposed ordinance was read
again, and Kent moved that it be laid
on the table, but his motion met with no
second.
Leonard said the ordinance was
copied from the San Francisco ordi-
nance, which has been declared by the
Corporation Counsel and other good at
torneys not to conflict with the State
law, as there is nothing in it that al
lows money machines, there being
something always received in return
for the nickel in the machines specified
in the ordinance.
Davis thought If the Corporation
Counsel thought the ordinance all right
it would do no harm to pass it, and if
found afterward to be in conflict with
the law, the board could at any time re-
peal it.
Yes, and what if you lost your office
in the meantime?" said Pennish.
Il am not at all afraid Of that" re-
torted Davis.
Devine thought If the San Francisco
ordinance was all right this one would
also be so.
After some discussion, the matter was
deferred for a week in order that the
board may investigate the law and take
advice upon it.
SAN FRANCISCO STOCK MARKET.
SAN FRAN CISCO, Dec. 80, 1895.
GI,gG