Cases argued and decided in the Supreme Court of Texas, during the latter part of the Tyler term, 1874, and the first part of the Galveston term, 1875. Volume 42. Page: 186
viii, 704 p. ; 22 cm.View a full description of this book.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
186 ARMSTRONG v. PARCHMAN. [Term of
Opinion of the Court.
J. Payne, for appellant, cited Bailes v. Williams, 15
Texas, 318; Kirkland v.. Random, 8 Texas, 10; McElroy v.
Carmichael, 6 Texas, 454; Reynolds v. Williams, 4 McCord,
211; 2 Wills, 309; 1 Texas, 312; Clhamblee v. Tarbox, 27
Texas, 146; Bailey v. Mills, 27 Texas, 438; Rogers v. Brodnax,
24 Texas, 543: Spence v. Onstott, 3 Texas, 147; Chandler v.
Fulton, 10 Texas, 2; Lee v. Hamilton, 12 Texas, 413.
MOORE, J.-This was an action to recover from the stakeholder
money and property placed in his hands as a wager
upon a horse-race, upon the ground that the race upon which
it had been wagered had not been fairly run, in accordance
with the terms of said wager.
Contracts or agreements for wagers on horse-races, as has
been frequently said by this court, are not illegal at common
law, and as they are not prohibited by statute, they are, therefore,
excluded from the general class of gaming contracts, and,
when fair, and without taint of fraud or deceit in their fulfillment,
they may be maintained and enforced as any other valid
contract. (Kirkland v. Randon, 8 Texas, 10; McElroy v. Carnichael,
6 Texas, 454.) It has always been regarded, however,
as a fundamental principle, that sucl contracts, to entitle them
to the favorable consideration of the court, must be honest and
fair beyond exception, both in their inception and execution.
(Bailes v. Williams, 15 Texas, 318.)
The sole ground upon which wagers of this character are
sanctioned, is, that they tend to encourage an improvement in
the breed and qualities of tlle horse.
Therefore the main object and purpose of such contracts, in
contemplation of law, is to test the speed and endurance of the
respective horses upon which the wager is made. Surely,
then, if this purpose, for which the wager was made, has not
been accomplished, and the failure to do this is in no way
attributable to the party resisting the execution of tle contract,
it cannot be insisted that such wager has been either lost or
won. And, if not, certainly the parties to it may recover from
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This book can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Book.
Texas. Supreme Court. Cases argued and decided in the Supreme Court of Texas, during the latter part of the Tyler term, 1874, and the first part of the Galveston term, 1875. Volume 42., book, 1881; St. Louis, Mo.. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth28531/m1/194/: accessed April 23, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; .