GAMING. 447 



for ready money. The Legislature therefore having 

 encouraged cash or money transactions, it is quite conceiv- 

 able that a contract should he good so long as a money 

 payment was contemplated, hut become void between the 

 parties immediately on security being given. This con- 

 struction of the statute seems much more reasonable, than 

 that all contracts within 5 & 6 Will. 4, c. 41, in connection 

 with 9 Anne, c. 14, before any security is given, should be 

 void between the actual parties. 



To an action against the acceptor of a bill of exchange, Action against 

 drawn by the plaintiif, the defendant pleaded that a bet ^-^i^i^ ° 

 was lost by the defendant to A. B., and that the said bill of exchange, 

 exchange was, at the request of A. B., given and accepted 

 by the defendant in consideration of the said let, and to 

 secure payment thereof, contrary to the statute, &c., and 

 that there never was any other consideration for the 

 acceptance of the said bill ; and that the plaintiff at the 

 time when he drew, and the defendant accepted, the same, 

 had notice of the premises. The evidence was, that the 

 defendant had accepted a prior biU drawn by the plaintiff 

 in consideration of the het lost to A. B., and that the bill 

 sued upon was given in renewal of that prior bill. The 

 jury found that the bill declared upon was given in con- 

 sideration of the het, and that the plaintiff had notice of it. 

 And the Court of Queen's Bench held that the plea was 

 good, and was an answer to the action under 5 & 6 Will. 4, 

 c. 41 {g). 



Under 5 & 6 Will. 4, o. 41, s. 2, money paid to the Action by 

 indorsee by the acceptor of a bill of exchange, given for jj^f 0/'^ ° 

 a gaming consideration, may be recovered from the person exchange. 

 in whose favour the bill was originally accepted, in an 

 action for money paid by the plaintiif to the use of the 

 defendant at his request (A). 



And where such a bill ptid by the plaintiff bore interest Eecovery of 

 upon the face of it, it was held by the Court of Queen's \^f^l] '^"'^ 

 Bench that the plaintiff was entitled to recover back the 

 interest paid, as well as the principal money, both being 

 " secured" by the bill («'). 



In an action on a hill of exchange, the defence was, Evidence of 

 that the money for which a bill was given had been lost °^^°F "{^^ 



, ,■ mi 1 1 i_ j_i • gammg-nouse. 



m a gaming transaction. The person wlio let the room m 

 which the gambling took place, was asked a question tend- 



[g) Hay v. Ayling, 20 L. J., (h) Gilpin T. Olutterbuch, 13 L. 



Q. B. 171 ; and see Boulton v. Cogh- T. 71. 

 Ian, 1 Bing. N. C. 640. (i) lb. 159. 



