Commonwealth v. Sullivan
| Decision Date | 17 June 1914 |
| Citation | 218 Mass. 281,105 N.E. 895 |
| Parties | COMMONWEALTH v. SULLIVAN. COMMONWEALTH v. O'HALLORAN. |
| Court | United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Exceptions from Superior Court, Middlesex County; Frederic H. Chase, Judge.
Timothy E. Sullivan and William O'Halloran were convicted of keeping a room for the purpose of registering bets, and buying and selling pools upon the result of baseball games, and they excepted. Exceptions overruled.
John J. Higgins, Dist. Atty., of Boston, Chas. J. Wier, Asst. Dist. Atty., of Lowell, for the Commonwealth.
W. Scott Peters, Harry J. Cole, and Frederick H. Tilton, all of Haverhill, for defendant Sullivan.
Wm. H. McSweeney, Morgan J. McSweeney, and Francis H. Caskin, all of Salem, for defendant O'Halloran.
The defendants severally were charged under R. L. c. 214, § 17, with keeping rooms with apparatus, books and devices for the purpose of registering bets and of buying and selling pools upon the results of certain games of baseball. There was evidence tending to show that the defendants kept the rooms and there kept and sold, for twenty-five cents each, books entitled, ‘American and National League Baseball Schedule and Record Book.’ The book was exhibited in evidence and is described in the record as ‘containing many advertisements and a schedule of dates when and places where baseball games were to be played by the various clubs belonging to the American and National Leagues together with some other information.’ One page contained two coupons to be filled out in duplicate ‘by writing in the names of the baseball clubs which the contestant believed would score the greatest number of runs on each day of the following week.’ One coupon was to be given to one of the defendants and the other kept by the contestant. The names of six different baseball teams could be used, but the name of one could not be used twice during the same week. Prizes of considerable amounts were offered.
[1][2][3] While the selling of a pool and the registering of a bet is criminal, the offense of keeping a room for either or both of these purposes is single and is made out if the room is used for either unlawful purpose. Commonwealth v. Moody, 143 Mass. 177, 9 N. E. 511;Commonwealth v. Clancy, 154 Mass. 128, 27 N. E. 1001. A pool has been defined as ‘a combination of stakes the money derived from which was to go to the winner.’ Commonwealth v. Ferry, 146 Mass. 203, 15 N. E. 484. This does not mean, however, that all the money derived from the combination of stakes must go to the winner. Commonly the man who runs the pool makes something out of the transaction....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Com. v. Murphy
...27 N.E. 1003; Commonwealth v. Healey, 157 Mass. 455, 32 N.E. 656; Commonwealth v. Swain, 160 Mass. 354, 35 N.E. 862; Commonwealth v. Sullivan, 218 Mass. 281, 105 N.E. 895. It is of some significance, additionally, that in 1922 c. 271 had, and it now has, in other sections, express provision......
-
Philbin v. Marlborough Elec. Co.
...on to them whenever they were moistened with snow or rain, as they were liable to be at any time. It knew, or must be presumed to have [105 N.E. 895]known, of the statutes above referred to and of the danger of just such an accident[218 Mass. 397]as did happen. A jury well could say that it......
- Philbin v. Marlborough Elec. Co.