Pugh against Jenkins
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judgment Date | 10 May 1841 |
| Date | 10 May 1841 |
| Court | Court of the Queen's Bench |
English Reports Citation: 113 E.R. 1273
IN THE COURT OF QUEEN'S BENCH.
S. C. 1 G. & D. 40; 10 L. J. Q. B. 201 5 Jur. 1082.
PlKJH against jenkins. Monday, May 10th, 1841. A wager of more than 101. on a horserace already run is not illegal under stat. 9 Ann. c. 14, s. 5. [S. C. 1 G. & D. 40 ; 10 L. J. Q. B. 201; 5 Jur. 1082.] Assumpsit. The first count of the declaration stated that, before and at the time of the having of the discourse and making of the promise of defendant hereinafter mentioned, a certain race, called the Derby race, had been, on 15th May A.D. 1839, run, at Epsom in the county of Surrey, by and between divers horses, one of such horses being called Btoomsbury, and the said race had been won by one of the (a) Rex v. The Justices of the West Riding, 5 T. R. 629; Rex v. Mitchell, 5 T. R. 701. (b) May 6th. Before Lord Denman C. J., Patteson and Williams Js. Wightman J., having been engaged in the case as counsel, took no part in the decision. 1274 PUGH r. JENKINS 1Q.B. 832. said horses; and thereupon, on 16th May A.D. 1839, a certain discourse was had and moved by and between plaintiff and defendant, whether the said horse called Blooms-bury had won the said race or not: and thereupon, in consideration that plaintiff would pay defendant the sura of 11., defendant then promised plaintiff to pay him the sum of 501. in case the said horse called Bloomsbury had won the said race. And plaintiff says that he, confiding in the said promise of defendant, did then pay defendant the said sum of 11., and defendant then accepted and received the same. And plaintiff says that, at the time of the making of the said promise of defendant, the said horse called Bloomsbury had won the said race : and [632] defendant afterwards, to wit on, &c., had notice of the premises. Breach, nonpayment of the 501. Third plea. That the consideration for the making by defendant of the said promise was a certain illegal bet made by plaintiff, to wit a bet of 11. for 501. upon the result of a certain horserace, to wit the race in the declaration mentioned, contrary to the form of the statute, &c. Verification. Demurrer, alleging for grounds that the plea submits matter of law to the jury, and concludes with a verification, though no new matter of fact is alleged but only matter of law; and that the averments as to the nature of the bet, the description of the race, and the circumstances of illegality, are not sufficiently certain. Joinder. The defendant...
To continue reading
Request your trial