Evening star., 1907-10-15
Motion to Quash Indictment
Argued by Counsel.
THE OPINION TOMORROW
Defense Alleges That the 1ndict-
ment Is Defective.
DISTRICT ATTORNEY RESPONDS
Governments Contention That
Joinder Of Counts Is Authorized
by Section 1924, r. s.

| Justice Barnard presiding in Criminal
| Court No. 3 will render tomorrow morn
| ing his decision on the motion to quash
| the indictment against George l.. Good
| acre, charged with setting up gaming
| table by having fixed place at which
bets on the result of horse races might
| be made. Counsel argued the case yes
| terday afternoon before the court until
O'Clock.
Attorneys II. E. Davis. Campbell Car
rington and R. B. Behrend. representing
| the defendant. urged on the court that
the indictment is defective in that 1t fails
to define specifically the kind of device or
| contrIvance alleged to have been used and
that different offenses are charged, at the
| trial of one of which three challenges
| only might be exercised and on another
| ten challenges are allowed.
| In answering the two contentious raised
| by the defendants. that the government
| had no right to join the several counts,
and that each count was bad. oniteu
| States Attorney Baker stated that the
joinder was authorized by section 1024 OF
| the Revised Statutes of the United States.
which expressly allows ]oinder where
the offenses grow out of the same trans
| action or are similar, or are connected TO-
| gether.
Substance Of First Count.
The government claimed that the first
count, charging a violation of section st9
of the code, in the making of bet. that
it described the offense fully, giving notice
to the defendant of the time and place
when and where the bet was made and
the party with whom 1t was made; that
| it was unnecessary to set out what was
paid. as the code Furnishes the act of bet
| ting. without regard to the thing used for
| the purpose of betting. The government
| further contended that the second and
third counts of the indictment. charging
| a violation of section S65 of the code. In
| the setting up of a gaming table and the
keeping Of house for gaming. respec-
| lively. were warranted by the decisions of
the Court Of Appeals in the Miller case
| t6 Appeal Cases, D. c.. page II. the counts
| in the present indictment differing from
those in the Miller case only in the use
! in the third count.
For the Defense.
| In his contention before the court for
the defense. Mr.. Darlington said:
! '"The learned district attorney and all
engaged IN this matter. including your
honor. have said that they do not know
the meaning of the word 'bookmaker' as
| L
\ to define the word The ordinary book
maker is man that makes books; the
beokmaker at the race tracks I don't
mean the memorandum taker OF bets) is
a well-dressed person. who separates you
| from your money In chunks. by having
| control of the horses. by percentage, or
| by manipulation OF the odds in betting.
The man walking home from the race
| track without an oyercOat. thinking he
will get In his next winters coal and pay
| ID
man speeding along the same road in a
red or yellow automobile. clad in seal
skin or Persian lamb overcoat discussing
in what part Of the continent he will pass
the winter. Is the bOokmaker.
| Having shown your honor what
bookmaker Is. I am now prepared to
demonstrate to you beyond question that
the defendant In this case is not a book
bookmaker as alleged nthis indictment: (:
that the running of race horses in New
York. If used here by him. cannot be a
device or contrivance In legal contempla-
ton.
"a man cannot set up a gaming table
unless he has either the control of the
game or has a percentage derived from It,
or Is able to manipulate the odds. and
for this reason the two last counts in this
indictment should be uuashed
Always Controls the Odds.
"In bookmaking the real bookmaker
always controls the odds, and makes
them. and by so doing he can On every
race make what is termed percent
| age" book. and win In every race. He
also frequently controls the horses. and
| sometimes the Jockeys But in this
case it Is impossible for the defendant
! to control the horses in New York, and
| it is not claimed that he makes the
odds. He simply bets on the running
| races with another man and makes a
memorandum Of the bet. In other
words. he is a bettor. and not book
maker. What Is the difference between
a bettor and bookmaker in this juris-
diction? The statute clearly defines It,
| bettor. or one who makes bets and
memorandum of them. within the
! mile limit Is guilty of misdemeanor
under section $50. while the other Is a
book maker, who controls the horses or
the odds, and has fixed place In so
doing. and Is punished under section
565. and may be sent to the penitentiary
for five years.
Requisites to Bookmak1ng.
'Goodacre cannot set up a gaming ta
BILE with a device over which he has no
| control and in which he does not make
| the odds. or In any way manipulate the
| -aces There are no bookmakers in this
District. and can't be unless they make
the odds. or have control Of the races
they are bettorS. People who take bets
even at the race track in this District
as they now take them. are not book
makers. They are 'peripatetic memoran-
dunn makers, or betto-s. Congress has
said that If any one bets outside Of the
mile limit he is not guilty of an offense
but If the bets are made within the mile
limit they are punishable under section
500"
Postpones improvements.
PITTSBURG. October 15.-James Nc
Crea. president of the Pennsylvania rail-
road. accompanied by several members Of
the board Of directors. left yesterday for
an extended tour Of inspection over the