Alexandria gazette. [volume] (Alexandria, D.C.) 1834-1974, 1896-04-30
COURT OF APPEALS.
THE MAupIN ELL. &C.

AS stated in the GAZETTE Of that date
Judge Keith, in the Coult of Appeals,
yesterday handed down decision in the
case of Richard NJ. Lacey, the represen
tative of the st. Asash and Old Do
minion race tracks, charged with
violating the provisions of the Maupin
and companion law prohibiting betting
on races and the transmission of money
to be bet on races outside the limits of
the commonwealth.
The court passed upon the constitu-
tionality of the anti-gambling act, ur
holding it in most of its features.
Richard NJ. Lacey, the man arrested at
Alexandria for violating the law, was
ordered to be discharged from custody
on the grouud that the justice erred
in committing him to Jail for trial by
the county court. Lacey sued out q
writ of habeas corpus against Palmer,
the sheriff and oflicio jailor at Alex
andria county, alleging that he was
unlawfully held a prisoner. The coun-
sal for the prisoner ccntended that the
Maupin law was repugnant to the con-
stitution of Virginia, which requires the
title of an act to embrace only one
object that it was repealed by implica-
ton by another and somewhat similar
act approved about the same time
that it was repugnant to the commerce
clause of the constitution of the United
States that the warrant was vague and
indefinite and failed to state precisely
what the prisoner was charged with,
and that the justice should have fixed
the punishment instead of committing
the man for trial by the County Court.
Judge Keith, president of the court,
read the opinion, which treated the
whole subject at some length. He
held first, that the title of the act was
not defective, but that pool selling is
the only form of gambling the act pro-
hibits; second, that there was no repeal
hy implication; third, that the act is
not repugnant to the constitution of
the United States, as the States have
the right to exercise their police pow
ers for the protection of morals and the
preservation of good order; fourth, that
the warrant was not defective, but it
would be better practice to state of.
fences with more precision than was
done here, especially as justices are
clothed with original jurisdiction to try
misdemeanors; fifth, that section 4,lO6
of the code, as amended by the act ap-
proved March 6, 1896, gave justices of
the peace jurisdiction to try misde-
meanors, which was not done in this
case. AS the law was violated in this
particular the release of the prisoner
was ordered.
Judge Keith in his opinion says: "a
pool is defined by the Century diction-
ary to be any horse racing, ball games,
&c. The combination of a number of
persons, each standing a sum of money
on the success Of horse in a race, the
contestant in a game, &c, the money
to be divided among the successful
bettors according to the amount put in
by EACH 1t is, therefore, one of the
forms of making bets or wagers upon
horse races, while the statute makes
unlawful bet or wager by any ways,
means or devices, or the receiving, or
recording, or registering, OF forwarding,
or purporting, or pretending to forward
any money, thing or consideration or
value to be bet or wagered upon the
result of any trial OF speed or power OF
endurance or skill Of animals or beasts
which is to take place beyond the linn.
its of the Commonwealth
While the decision upholds the un-
constitutionality of the laws, it dis
charges the defendant, Lacey. 1t is
G )uched in terms which apparently
Lave the question still an open one as
{, whether the system of betting for
,nducting which Lacey was arrested
is unlawful or not. !.
The decision reviews the claims OF
the defense that the statute is unconstl-
{ ,tional ard imperative; that the war