The Washington times., 1908-03-11
Justice Stafford Rules
That Technicality of Law
Allows Perambulat-
ing Odd Takers.
No MoleStation for the
Knights of Chalk at Ben
ming During Coming
Spring Meet.

The bookmakers may ply their
trade at the spring meet at the Ben
ming race track without fear of ar
rest so long as they move around
and refrain from establishing a sta
tionary place of business.
a decision handed down this
morning by Justice Stafford, of
Criminal Court No. i, declares that
perambulatory boolmaking is not
unlawful, and pending the outcome
of an appeal to the Court of Ap-
peals District Attorney Baker win
make no attempt to stop the book
making.
This decision was made on the
demurrer filed by attorneys for
John Walters, the New York book
maker, who was indicted shortly
after the fall meet at the Benning
race track for offenses against the
gambling law.
Justice Stafford, in closing his
opinion, places the responsibility
for the insuficiency of the law upon
Congress. He states that as a citi-
zen he should be glad TO see a stop
put TO all gambling, but as a judge
must follow the statute.
Construction of Law.
The opinion Of Justice Stafford makes
IL plain that while the laws as they
stand prohibit the setting up Of gam
ing table in any part OF the District,
the law against bookmak.ng without
specifying the setting up Of bOOkmaking.
does not apply more than one mile be-
yond the city limits. Benning IS two
miles from Washington.
Tee appeal on this case viii be heard
Jointly with the appeal Oh -he Davis
case. Davis was convicted OF book
making, in his case il being alleged
that he did have a specified place at
the tack.
Section S69, Of the Code of Law for
the District Of Columbia. which makes
il unlawful TO bet. gamble. or make
books or pools on the result of any
race. contest, election, etc. applies
only &c portion of the District, the
cities OF Washington and Georgetown
J
In the opinion Justice Stafford says:
In passing upon the several counts
now before me the difficulty is 10 de
termine just how far one may go in
making of books without setting Il UP
The Governments contention is that Il
8 set UP when it is carried on generally
and the public generally are invited Il
bet with the boollmaker. The embsr-
al T-feu s
that il does not seem TO leave any rea
and substantial distinction between
bookmakIng and the setting up of book
making. For, as I understand IT, the
mere making Of books implies this very
thing-a making OF divers bets with div
ers persons, according TO stated odds Of
fered generally by the maker OF the
book II is not an individual act Oh
betting.
1T is not the offer and acceptance OF
a bet even though a memorandum OF
that bet be made that constitutes book
making, but the general offer ard ac'
Ceptance of the bets and the systemat
ic recording OF them None Of tht
counts charge expressly that the defend
ant was carrying on bookmaking as 6
business They charge tsat he Offered
10 take, and did take, bets from diver
persons that he exhibited a program Oh
which were displayed the odds he wa
offering. The exhibiting and the Of
fering are alleged to have been 10 di
vers persons. which would be satisfied
hy proof of two or more, such being
the definition of divers.
Takes Narrow Position.
so far as The number OF persons i
concerned with whom the defendant
alleged to have done business. it is no
perceived how he could have been max
Continued on Eleventh Page)