WAGERS. 405 



there was nothing in the case which was struck at by the 

 Act of Parliament, and that the Act was only intended to 

 strike at unlawful games (b). This view has, however, 

 been held by the Court of Appeal to be erroneous (c) ; 

 and it has been decided that an agreement to walk a match 

 for 200/. a-side, the money being deposited with a stake- 

 holder, is a wager, and null and void under the statute ; and 

 that the deposit of the money is not a subscription or 

 contribution for a sum of money to be awarded to the winner 

 of a lawful game within the proviso. 



And in a case in which the plaintiff agreed with B. and Contribution 

 others, that a match should be made between a mare, the uo^i^atinff 

 property of M., and a mare, the property of the plaintiff, winner not 

 and that the party nominating the winner should receive 'within pro- 

 from the others 100/., and that 100/. should be forfeited by ™°- 

 the party making default in causing the mare nominated by 

 him to run, it was held by the Irish Court of Queen's Bench 

 that no action was maintainable upon such an agreement, 

 inasmuch as it did not come within the proviso of the sec- 

 tion (d), which excepts " any subscription or contribution, or 

 agreement to subscribe or contribute, for or toward any 

 plate, prize, or sum of money, to be awarded to the winner 

 or winners of any lawful game, sport, pastime, or exercise," 

 from the operation of the previous part of the section ; 

 and that this contract was a mere wager depending upon an 

 accidental circumstance, and not upon the running of a race (e). 



The proviso that the foregoing part of this section shall Second horse 

 not apply to any subscription or contribution, for or towards ™^y of "the^ 

 any plate, &c. to be awarded to the winner or winners of stakes within 

 any lawful game, is not the less applicable where the entire the proviso. 

 sum of money subscribed is not awarded to the first horse. 

 Therefore where the conditions of a race were that a sub- 

 scription should be made up of the sum of 3/. each, 

 subscribed by the owners of the horses, and a sum of 

 thirty sovereigns added thereto out of the race fund, out 

 of which the expenses and a sum of 11. 10s. were to be 

 deducted and paid to the treasurer, and 3/. 3s. to the owner 

 of the second horse, they were held to be good, and satisfied 

 the requirements of the proviso (/). 



{b) See per Lord Cairns, L.C., (<«) 8 & 9 Vict. c. 109, s. 18. 



Biqqle T. Hkgs, 2 Ex. D. 422 ; {e) Irwin v. Osborne, 5 Ir. C. L. 



46 L. J., Ex. 721 ; 37 L. T., N. S. E. 404. 



27- 25 "W. R. 777— C. A.; and (/) CroftonY.Coli/an,10lr.O.'L. 



ante, p. 377. E- 133. 



(c) Diggle v. Siggs, nbi supra. 



