450 



BETTING HOUSES, 



Moveable 

 Desk. 



Cricket 

 ground. 



Pigeon 

 shooting'. 



the Judges in tlie Court below in thinking- that a mere 

 spot, although not a " house," " office " or " room," would 

 not alone prevent it from being a place within the Act. 

 But he thought it must be a place capable of having an 

 owner or occupier, which that was not. There the defen- 

 dant resorted to a spot by a tree. The crowd might push 

 him away in moving about. There was no fixity of tenure 

 even for the daytime. He had no more exclusive occupa- 

 tion of the spot than anyone else in the park (/"). 



In Sludc V. Morlei/ {[/), the facts were as follows: On 

 land adjoining a Race-course, and just outside an inclosure 

 reserved for ticket holders, was a long strip of ground of 

 six feet wide, bounded on one side by an iron railing, 

 which surrounded the inclosure, on the other side by a 

 l^ermanent wooden paling facing the open ground. Within 

 this strip were placed temporary wooden structures, in 

 which during the Races the business of betting was 

 carried on. They had desks fronting both ways, and at 

 each desk was a clerk with a book, and a person standing 

 in front of each desk conducted the business on behalf of 

 the person who rented the strip of land, and the bets were 

 'recorded by the clerk. At one of these structures the 

 defendant conducted this business, and, on appeal from a 

 conviction under section 3, it was held that this was an 

 " office " and a " place " within the meaning of the statute, 

 and that the appellant was rightly convicted. And Kelly, 

 C. B., expressly said that it did not matter whether there 

 was a roof or none, or whether the structure was moveable 

 or fastened to the earth. 



A ground used for Cricket, Foot-racing, and other 

 Games or Sports, is a place within the meaning of the Act, 

 and the Owner, Occupier or Keeper, may be convicted 

 under the Act for knowingly permitting any other person 

 to use any such place for the purpose of betting with 

 persons resorting to it, though the person so using it is in 

 no sense the Occupier or Keeper of the premises {/i). 



In Easticood v. Miller the defendant was the Occupier of 

 enclosed grounds, in which a pigeon shooting match between 

 two persons for 10/. a-side, and afterwards afoot-race, took 

 place : and into which the public were admitted on payment 

 of money. The persons who were admitted into the grounds 



(/) Borigdt v. Cattcrns, 19 C. B., 

 N. S. 767 ; and see per Grove, J., 

 Gallaicay v. Maries, L. R., 8 Q. B. 

 D. 280, 281. 



((/) L. E., 3 Ex. 137; 37 L. J., 



M. C. 105. 



{h) Haigh v. Sheffield (Corpora- 

 iiou), L. E,., 10 Q.'B. 102; 44 L. 

 J., M. C. 17; 31 L. T., N. S. 536 ; 

 23 W. R. 517. 



