440 



GAMING. 



Betting in 

 streets in 

 Metropolis. 



Gaming on 



licensed 



premises. 



But depositing money as a bet on a race is not playing or 

 betting with a coin as an instrument of gaming (n) . 



In order to convict under tbis section, it is necessary to 

 allege and prove that the defendant was guilty of wagering 

 or gaming at some " game or pretended game of chance.'' 

 A conviction which only states that the defendant was 

 convicted of betting by way of wagering in a public 

 place, with certain articles used as a means of such wager- 

 ing, is therefore bad as omitting an essential part of the 

 case (o). 



By 30 & 31 Vict. c. 134, s. 23, "any three or more per- 

 sons assembled together in any part of a street within the 

 Metropolis for the purpose of betting, shall be deemed to be 

 obstructing the street, and each of such persons shall be 

 liable to a penalty not exceeding five pounds ; and within 

 the city of London and the liberties thereof, any constable 

 of the City Police Force, and without such limits any con- 

 stable of the Metropolitan Police Force may take into 

 custody, without warrant, any person who may commit 

 such offence in view of such constable." 



The Licensing Act, 1872 {j}), s. 17, enacts that if any 

 licensed person (1) suffers any gaming or unlawful game to 

 be carried on on his premises, or (2) opens, keeps, or uses, or 

 suffers his house to be opened, kept, or used in contravention 

 of the 16 & 17 Vict. c. 119, he shall be liable to a penalty 

 not exceeding for the first offence 10/., and not exceeding 

 for the second and any subsequent offence 20/. 



The conviction may be recorded on the licence (g). 



It would appear from the authorities that playing any 

 lawful games whether of chance or of skill, or of chance 

 and skill combined, for money or money's worth, is gaming 

 within the meaning of this enactment, convictions having 

 been held good for suffering cards {■>•), and skittle pool (s) 

 to be played for money on licensed premises; and ten 

 pins {t), and skittles («), for beer. So where a licensed 

 person permitted a game of skill to be played on his pre- 

 mises, in which each player contributed a certain sum 



(«) Hirst V. Molesbury, L. E. 6 

 Q. B. 130 ; 40 L. J., M. C. 76 ; 23 

 L. T., N. S. 55 ; 19 W. R. 246. 



(o) Sidgway v. Farndale, [1892] 

 2 Q. B. 309; 61 L. J., M. C. 199; 

 67L. T., N. S. 318; 41 W. E. 128; 

 56 J. P. 697. 



{p) 35 & 36 Vict. u. 94. 



[q) 37 & 38 Yiit. u. 49, ». 13. 



()•) Patten f. Shymer, 3 E. & E. 

 1; 29 L. J., M. C. 189; Sare v. 

 Osborne, 34 L. T., N. S. 294. 



(s) Dyson v. Mason, 22 Q. B. D. 

 351; 58 L. J., M. C. 55; 60 L. T., 

 N. S. 265. 



{t) Danford v. Taylor, 20 L. T., 

 N. S. 483. 



(«) Luff Y. Leapei; 30 J. P. 773. 



