Opinion ID: 1165659
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Arkansas

Text: Arkansas Constitution, Art. 19, § 14, reads: No lottery shall be authorized by this state, nor shall the sale of lottery tickets be allowed. The Supreme Court of Arkansas in Longstreth v. Cook, 215 Ark. 72, 220 S.W. 2d 433, upheld a statute legalizing the pari-mutuel system of betting on horse races as not being in violation of Arkansas' constitutional prohibition against lotteries. The Court discussed the pari-mutuel system of horse racing, as follows: Horses are selected for entrance in a particular race by the Association, and the horses names are listed or lined up on a daily racing card, and there is sold a racing form which shows the weight carried by each horse and its handicap depending on the past performances of the horse in previous races at that or other tracks. This weight handicap is intended in some measure to equalize the speed of the horses, and the amount thereof depends upon the horse's record in prior races run within the preceding twelve months. (Emphasis supplied.) The owners have trainers who are skilled in handling horses with the purpose of increasing their speed and making them more responsive to the control of the jockeys. Many persons attend the races for the thrill of witnessing the horses as they cross the finish line, and add to the thrill and interest by betting on some horse without knowledge of the information disclosed by the form sheets.    But sources of information now are provided,    by which bettors may bet with more discrimination and with improved chances of selecting or picking a winner. These form sheets designate whether upon previous performances a particular horse is a fair mud runner, a good mud runner, or a superior mud runner   . Followers of racing who for long periods of time have studied the records of the horses choose as their selections the horse which in their opinion will be most likely to win and these are for sale and may be purchased at the track. Neither the Jockey Club nor any one connected with it fixes the odds which will prevail on any horse. The bettors themselves do this and it is done through the number of bets made and the amount thereof on particular horses. The animal equation enters into these races just as the human equation enters into sports between men and women. A horse may run better on one day than on another depending on the condition of the horse and it is the function of the trainer to see that the horses are in the best possible condition and properly trained. The element of chance necessarily enters into these races but it is by no means controlling. Other elements of more importance are the condition and the power of endurance of the horse and the skill and daring of its rider. Some jockeys win more races and a higher percentage of the races in which they participate than others.    (Emphasis supplied.) The Arkansas Court after discussing various decisions of other states concerned with the subject of pari-mutuel horse racing then ruled: It appears therefore that to constitute a lottery it is essential not only that the element of chance is present but also that it controls and determines the award of the prize whatever it may be.       The use of the pari-mutuel machine does not make the betting a lottery, if it is not otherwise so, as it makes no determination of what horses are winners. It is merely a wonderful machine which expedites calculations which could laboriously be made without its use. Its use in no manner affects the results of a race as it merely calculates the results of the betting after the races have been run and the respective winners announced. We conclude, therefore, that while the element of chance no doubt enters into these races, it does not control them, and that there is therefore no lottery. See also: Scott v. Dunaway, 228 Ark. 943, 311 S.W.2d 305.