The Washington times., 1895-03-19
BOOKMAKERS' LAST CHANCE
n ca
Swept Away BY the Court of Appeals
Decision.
Opinion in Miller's Case-B -Bookmaking or ANY
Other Form of Wagering Money is
Illegal in the District.

The Court of Appeals yesterday decided
to be illegal bookmaking or any other form
of wagering money on the result OF horse
race. baseball game, football game, foot
race, cock fight, or any form of contest in
which the element OF uncertainty is in
yolved.
The opinion was in the case of Fred
T. Miller against the United States, and
the question was upon an appeal from
Judge Coles decision overrling Miller's
demurrer to the indictment against him
for making a book last fall upon an unim-
portant race at the Bennng's track. Judge
Alvey wrote the paper.
1t has been a sharp legal contest De-
tween District Attorney Birney and Mr..
Harry f. Davis. Mr.. Davis labored under
the disadvantage of being obliged, in order
10 win. to induce Judge Cole and Judge
Alvey to change their views as expressed in
decisions already rendered. The case was
argued before the Court of Appeals ten
days ago.
RESULT NOT UNEXPECTED.
The result announced yesterday was not
unexpected at the courts. though the racing
fraternity have been very confident that
they would win their case. They were
proportionately disappointed. A number
We're in the courtroom after adjournment
to read the opinion. The case cannot be
taken to the Supreme Court, but 1t is prob
able rehearing before the court or appeals
win be asked for.
The points at issue were whether the act
of 1888 covered book-making, and whether
the acts of 1888 and 1S91 did not repeal that
act end leave book-makers free to operate
anywhere outside OF a line run mile from
rfac =. .an1(
town.
The decision OF the court Of appeals over
rules the demurrer and suStains Ar. Blrney.
Itpoints ont at greatlength and with copioIs
citatioas OF authorities that the phrase
ology of the law of 1888 clearly includes
book making in any form, or any other sort
OF scheme by which men may lay and win
or lose money on horse race, cock fight,
baseball game, etc.
The essence Of the offense, il is stated,
is in the evil OF establishing any sort OF
place or getting up any plan by which the
improvident may be allured into risking
their money.
LAWS DO NOT CONFLICT.
There is no conflict whatever. Judge
Alvey goes on TO say, between the two laws
That of 1888 refers to the setting up of a
! gaming table or deyiceof any kind.
1t makes no difference whether the pro-
pretor or manager is at the place where
| the betting is done,, at all, nor whether
| he personally engages in the operation of
| the scheme, plan or device, he is still guilty.
But the law of1s91 refers to the specific
| act of betting, and applies to persons who
| wager their money orother property. They
may or may not be guilty of the other Of
| fense, for which the older law fixes the
| heavier penalty.
| Upon the question OF conflict and iegis-
| lative construction. authorities are again
| quoted. That reviewing most fully Ques-
tions involved in this case, is the opinion
| OF Judge Cooley, late Of the Interstate Com
merce Commission, rendered when he was
chief justice of the Michigan supreme bench.
| 1t is known as People vs.. Weithoff, 81
| Mich, 253.
In concluding, the opinion states, that
/ the pleading as to hie location OF Benning
and the effect OF the repeal is to he disre-
1 garded as mere surplnsage.
Unless new hearing is granted by the
court of appeals. the case Will now go to a
trial before Judge Cole npon its merits.