The times., 1899-03-07
A VERDICT FOR THE
DEFENDANT KLEIN
Not Guilty of Violating the
Gaming Laws.
Verdict in Conformity With JUS
tice Bradley's Instructions.
The Result of the Trial in No Way
Affects Racing in the
Dist-ict.


charged with violating the gaming laws of
the District by setting up and keeping a
gaming table at the Benning racetrack,
was acquitted of the charge yesterday in
Criminal Court No. 9, Justice Bradley pre-
siding. This result was reached by the
jury under the direction of the court, who,
after hearing the testimony on both sides,
ordered the return of a verdict of not
guilty.
The result of the trial has been watched
with great interest by the general public,
for upon ii to greater or less degree de-
pends whether or not there shall be any
more racing at the Benning Tacetrack un-
der the auspices of the Washington or any
other jockey club. The circumstances un-
der which Klein was acquitted, however,
does not by any means signify that the
racing will be permitted under the exist
ing laws governing gaming in the District.
AS matter of fact, the result of the trial
of Klein in no way affects horse racing
within the District limits, nor does il even
determine that there shall or shall not be
bookmaking conducted in connection there
with. as his acquittal was based on the
facts and not upon the law relative TO the
matter.
Klein, with three others, W. J. Connor,
E NJ Gaines, and Charles Emerson, were
indicted some time ago at the instance of
United States Attorney for the District
Henry E. Davis on the charge of violating
the gaming laws of the District by setting
up and keeping gaming tables at the Ben
ming racetrack during the last meeting of
the Washington Jockey Club.
The case against Klein was decided upon
TO test the law and the hearing was begun
on Friday last before Justice Brasley and
jury. The Government introduced several
witnesses each of whom had visited the
Benning track and made bets with the de-
fendant, who, it was alleged, was conduct
ing a bookmaking business there. The
facts as presented by the Government Were
not combatted by the counsel for the de-
fense, but ii was claimed that they were
not sufficient TO make out a case, and
motion was made to take the case from
the jury.
This motion was argued at length on
| Friday and Saturday by Messrs. Joseph
Auerbach and Herbert Barry, of New York,
and WorthingtOn, Heald & Frailey for the
defense, and by District Attorney Davis
and Assistant District Attorney Ashley NJ.
Gould for the Government. The matter
| was taken under advisement by Justice
Bradley on Saturday and he delivered his
opinion on the points raised yesterday
morning, overruling the motion TO instruct
the jury 10 return verdict of not guilty,
as matter of law.
In passing upon the questions of law
presented Justice Bradley stated that had
the matter come TO him originally he
would find no embarrassment in dispos
ing Of 1t, but inasmuch practically the
same points now presented had been re-
viewed by the Court of Appeals for the
District in the Miller case, and had been
overruled by that tribunal, in Difference 10
that decision he. too refused to sustain the
| motion. He then explained the law Of 1883
under which the defendant was indicted,
which defines gaming table to be all
games, devices. and contrivances at which
money is waged. Under this law Justice
Bradley held that it would be difficult to
hold bookmaking, because the meaning of
the law was the setting up of gaming
table. AS an evidence that the law of 1859
did not include bookmaking, and that it
was not punishable under that statute he
said, was the fact that another act spe-
cially enumerating ii was passed in 1885
| and still another which prohibits the
making Of books, in this sense, within IA
| mile of the cities of Georgetown and Wash
ington.
Continuing his discussion of the decision
of the Court of Appeals. Justic Bradley
said he had read and reread it, but con-
fessed that he did not comprehend its
meaning.
In common with all good citizens, he
said he deprecated gambling. and believed
II TO be pernicious in any form; that he
| favored all legislation which has a ten
dency 10 put a stop to it, and would not
hesitate 10 enforce to the full extent all
statutes prohibiting it. Still, he said his
| objection to gambling would not induce
him TO stretch the law beyond the words
| OF the statute. His duty he conceived TO be
not to legislate. he said but to interpret
| the law.
| When the opinion of the court had been
| given, George o. WheelOck was called 10
| testify in behalf of the defence. He stated
| that he at one time had been bookmaker,
| but was now layer of odds" This, too.
he said, was the defendant Klein's busi-
ness and not that Of a bookmaker The
| defendant Klein was next called. and he
| testified that he was "a layer of odds. and
| was ct the last meeting of the Washington
| Jockey Club at the Benning race track
| That he could have been found in pretty
nearly the same place day by day. but that
he had no special place allotted to him by
| the management.
| Samuel Ross, member OF the executive
| committee Of the Jockey Club, corroborated
| the evidence of the other witnesses, and
| added that the layers of odds had uC
| special place at the track meted out tC
| them as their own over which they had
exclusive control.
This concluded the testimony for the de
fence, and then Mr. Worthington again re-
newed his motion to take the case away
from the jury. After some discussion Jus.
tce Bradley granted the motion. and in.
structed the jury TO render verdict OF Bo
guilty, which il did.
I Rnrc Chauce