NEW YORK BETTING.

NZ Truth, Issue 605, 20 January 1917, Page 9

NEW YORK BETTING.

Following Is clipped from the American "Breeder and Sportsman": During the past two years racing has had a revival m New York owing to the fact that oral betting has been permitted at all the' tracks, and it is said that as many as 100 layers of odds have operated on the stake days at the tracks close to New York City. It has been claimed that so long as no printed odds were publicly displayed or no record kept of their bets by the. layer of odds, that the Hughes law was not violated, but recently an important decision was handed down by the Appellate division of the Supreme Court of New York, which puts a different light on this matter. The decision written by Justice Edward B. Thomas, holds that a man does not have to writo down bets to be guilty of bookmaking, lie may be held guilty, although the wagers are made orally. The opinion while general In effect was written m the epedal case of Morris Solomon aod Julius Calm, who were convicted for soliciting a bet from Detective Horn at the Aqueduct track last July. These men were notified that they wfll have to serve terms m the workhouse. When Solomon was sentenced to fifteen days and Cairn to thirty, both men appealed. The court said: "It Is not necessary that" the bookmaklng should be m writing. In this case, the accused announced odds to persons drawn to him, and ho conducted his operations as ' openly as he deemed safe. No one who applied to him to bat was rejected, not even the detective." j It was argued m behalf of the defendant that the statute was passed against professional gamblers, and the accused operated for too short a time to be placed m that category. "That would moan," saya the court, " that one person could with impunity have his day of doing what would be a crime if done for a time longer. 'It is not the duration of the alleged act, but what contrivance is used and ILb rotation to j the public that la determining."