view raw text
THE LATEST DECISION ON BETTING. Frankfort. Ky., December 12. In the opinion of the Appellate Court, as indicated in its decision handed down yesterday in the case of B. M. Mc-Devitt against R. L. Thomas, betting on horse races is not "gaming" within the meaning of the statute of this state. The opinion was handed down by Judge Lassing. of which the following Is the most interesting part: "The words betting and wagering have a much broader and more comprehensive meaning than the word gaining. They are unrestricted in their scope, and it is immaterial whether the subject of the wager is one denounced or prohibited by the statute or not. The object of the wager may be and frequently is a perfectly innocent pastime or a legally authorized act, such as the test of the speed of animals or men, or the result of an election, or it may be based upon a mere matter of opinion or the exercise of judgment, such as the height of a mountain, the width of a river, the distance of an object or the weight of any given article. "Hence it is immaterial what the wager or bet is about, the purpose of the statute is to discourage betting or wagering by declaring all contracts relative thereto void, and by this means lessen what is generally regarded as a social evil. This statute imposes no punishment for the violation of its provisions, but simply provides that all contracts defended therein shall be void, and the law will not lend its aid looking to the enforcement of any such. The subject matter of this litigation fell clearly within Section 1955 of the Kentucky Statutes as indicated, and the appellee having pleaded this act in order to evade the payment of his debt, we are of the opinion that the trial judge did not err in giving peremptory instructions for the defendant." The decision means that no gambling debt can be collected, but the Appellate Court regards such a contract a debt.
