THE LAWS OF GAMBLING.

Thames Star, Volume XI, Issue 3511, 27 March 1880, Page 4

THE LAWS OF GAMBLING.

judgment delivered by the KesfuSSiMagistrate of Blenheim, in the case of Shepherd v. Neale a claim for £7 3s cash lent, the defence being that this was a gambling transaction :—" In this case plaintiff sues defendant for cash lent. It appeared that the plaintiff is billiard marker at the Club Hotel and that the ' defendant one night- was playing " pool " at plaintiff's table. That defendant was short of money and requested plaintiff to stake or lay down half-crowns for him from time to time, which ultimately amounted to the sum demanded in the action. It appeared that subsequently, and before the action was brought, defendant admitted the amount claimed and offered to repay by instalments. This it appears was refused, when defendant said he would not pay at nil but would plead the Gambling Act. The law does not appear very lucid on this subject, but the general principle would ~ appear to be,' That money lent to play at any game not prohibited by Act of Farliment; may be sued for and recovered provided the loan is not part and parcel of a wagering or gambling contract.' ('Addision} on Contracts, 7 Sd 6 211.) However, in this case it appears to me that any legal obscurity connected with the case is got over by defendant's own admission of the debt in question, for it did not appear upon the evidence that at the time of the admission he was ignorant of the fact of the possibility that the debt was tinged with illegality of any sort, judgment must be for the plaintiff with costs."