« Ind. Courts - "Knightstown couple who lost home allege document 'robo-signers' aided lenders" | Main | Ind. Gov't. - "State ends food aid for developmentally disabled" »
Thursday, October 21, 2010
Courts - Even more on: Is the poker game Texas Hold 'em one of skill, or one of chance?
Updating the ILB entry posted just a few minutes ago, Lafayette attorney and blogger Doug Masson sends this note:
That poker game, skill or chance, story out of South Carolina is an almost exact replay of an 1870 Mark Twain short story called Science v. Luck:Except, Twain's story was set in Kentucky, not South Carolina. The game in question was "seven up" (a/k/a "Old Sledge"). And, he called it a game of "science" instead of "skill.'
The first couple of paragraphs:
At that time, in Kentucky (said the Hon. Mr. Knott M. C.), the law was very strict against what it termed "games of chance." About a dozen of the boys were detected playing "seven-up" or "old sledge" for money, and the grand jury found a true bill against them. Jim Sturgis was retained to defend them when the case came up, of course. The more he studied over the matter and looked into the evidence, the plainer it was that he must lose a case at last -- there was no getting around that painful fact. Those boys had certainly been betting money on a game of chance. Even public sympathy was roused in behalf of Sturgis. People said it was a pity to see him mar his successful career with a big prominent case like this, which must go against him.But after several restless nights an inspired idea flashed upon Sturgis, and he sprang out of bed delighted. He thought he saw his way through. The next day he whispered around a little among his clients and a few friends, and then when the case came up in court he acknowledged the seven-up and the betting, and, as his sole defence, had the astounding effrontery to put in the plea that old sledge was not a game of chance! There was the broadest sort of a smile all over the faces of that sophisticated audience. The judge smiled with the rest. But Sturgis maintained a countenance whose earnestness was even severe. The opposite counsel tried to ridicule him out of his position, and did not succeed. The judge jested in a ponderous judicial way about the thing, but did not move him. The matter was becoming grave. The judge lost a little of his patience, and said the joke had gone far enough. Jim Sturgis said he knew of no joke in the matter -- his clients could not be punished for indulging in what some people chose to consider a game of chance, until it was proven that it was a game of chance.
Posted by Marcia Oddi on October 21, 2010 02:02 PM
Posted to Courts in general