Betting may just now be termed a national craze, for more persons bet now than ever, though individual speculations may not be on as large a scale as formerly. For this state of things several reasons may be submitted. Racecourses and race-meetings have multiplied; sporting intelligence is more widely disseminated by means of press agencies, telegrams, and evening papers; while coursing in inclosed grounds has given an impetus to wagering in connection with that branch of sport. There is also an increased number of bookmakers plying their calling, and the growth of betting may be further assumed from the fact that members of the fraternity are constantly localising themselves in provincial towns; while it is not uncommon for a tradesman in a town to do a commission business on a large scale. The betting world consists of two great divisions, bookmakers and backers. In theory, bookmaking is a very simple business. The bookmaker makes a book of a certain amount, a hundred, a thousand, or a ten thousand pound book, and his aim is to lay an equal amount against every horse in a race—a hundred pounds, assuming the book to be a hundred pound one. The rate of odds will of course vary with the market quotations of each horse. If there are five starters for a race, one of which is at level money, the bookmaker will lay £100 level. Against another at 2 to 1 he will lay £100 to £50; against a third at 5 to 1 he will lay £100 to £20, and so on; though the amount laid against each horse may have to be made up of many bets.
In practice, however, bookmaking is a much more complicated business, and calls for great quickness, industry, and a head for figures. It is seldom that the bookmaker succeeds in laying against even a large proportion of starters; and when the majority of races are won by favourites, the day's balance is in favour of backers. Of backers there are two classes, those who bet more or less, because it provides them with amusement and adds to the interest of a race, and 'professional backers,' as they are styled, who endeavour to make a living by attending race-meetings and backing horses. 'Touting' has now been brought to a fine art, and the bookmaker has little if anything the better of the professional backer in obtaining information; consequently, in the race between the two classes there is not a very great margin on the side of the bookmaker, whose riches come from the pockets of the general public. 'Hedging' is an important operation in betting, and consists in laying the odds against a horse which the person desirous of hedging has previously backed at a longer price. For example, suppose a horse backed for £1 by A for a future race at 30 to 1, comes to 10 to 1 say a month before the race is to be decided. A then lays the latter odds against the horse, and thus stands £20 to nothing. If the horse wins, he gets the £30 for which he backed the horse, and loses the £10 he laid against him; should the horse lose he pays the bookmaker £1, and receives £1.
Betting has probably existed ever since there was anything to bet about; but in the early history of horseracing (with which betting is chiefly connected) there were no professional betting men, and gentlemen had to bet with one another, the result being, that those desirous of backing a horse often experienced great difficulty in finding any one to bet with them. The demand, however, created the supply, and 'bettors round' or 'legs,' as the phrase then ran, sprang into existence; though bookmaking can hardly be said to have become a science until the time of William Ogden, about 1793. Since that day betting has undergone a great change. Time was when a great amount of wagering took place many months before the more important races were set for decision, whereas now the bulk of the speculation goes on when the numbers of the horses are hoisted just prior to the start. Foal and yearling books, too, are now never heard of.
The manner in which the law regards betting has had a not unimportant influence on the method in which it is carried on. A bet per se is not illegal, it is only void at law—that is to say, neither party can bring an action to enforce payment. Where betting is carried out upon a tolerably extensive scale, it has been found convenient to employ a 'commissioner,' who makes bets for his principal, pays or receives, as the case may be, and then renders his statement. Although if A made a bet with C neither party could recover, it has been held that if A were to employ B as a commissioner, A could bring an action against B to recover what had been paid him by C, in the event of A winning, and that B could successfully sue A for the amount of bets lost by A, and paid to C by B. The result of this ruling has been to encourage the business of a 'turf-accountant,' otherwise a commission agent.
Betting houses were forbidden in 1853 by 16 and 17 Vict. chap. 119, commonly known as Cockburn's Act, from the bill having been introduced by the late Lord Chief-justice, Sir Alexander Cockburn. The act, however, did not extend to Scotland, so the bookmakers removed their establishments across the Border, settling chiefly in Glasgow. They carried on their business with immunity from legal proceedings until 1874, when the Act 37 Vict. chap. 15 was passed. This statute, by extending Cockburn's Act to Scotland, again ousted the betting men, who thereupon took refuge in Boulogne, whence they were expelled in 1891. The Act of 1874 contained further provisions to suppress betting advertisements; but they do not reach tipsters; the act only makes it illegal to advertise willingness to give information on bets themselves, not to advise how to bet.
At the Ascot meeting of 1887, two welshers were given into custody for attempting to run away with money which had been deposited with them by one of the public, who had backed a winning horse with them. The magistrates convicted the prisoners, and the Court for the Consideration of Crown Cases Reserved affirmed the conviction, thus making welshing a felony. An act of 1892 made penal the inciting of infants (young persons) to betting, wagering, or borrowing money.
Cockburn's Act put a stop to the exhibiting of 'lists' in public-houses, an invention of Davies, the 'leviathan,' who, after beginning life as a jobbing carpenter, rose to the position of the most influential man in the ring. He had scarcely been a bookmaker for eight years, when he was supposed to have commenced the racing season of 1852 with £140,000 lying to his credit at the London and Westminster Bank. It occasionally happened that he encountered severe losses. In the Flying Dutchman's year (1849) he paid away nearly every pound he possessed; and his list clerks alone paid away more than £40,000 over Voltigeur. In 1853 he is reported to have won more than £50,000 over the Cesarewitch and Cambridgeshire. The famous
Lord George Bentinck won £20,000 by Crucifix's victory in the Oaks in 1840, and all her successes are said to have put £70,000, exclusive of stakes, into the pocket of her owner. In 1843 Lord George stood to win £150,000 over his horse Gaper for the Derby on that year, but he saved upon Cotherstone, and netted £30,000. When John Gully and Ridsdale were partners, their joint winnings are said to have been enormous. St Giles and Margrave brought them in upwards of £100,000 by winning the Derby and St Leger in 1832. Sir Joseph Hawley was one of the heaviest bettors of his day; he pocketed £80,000 over Beadsman's Derby in 1858, and many other large sums at other times. 'He took away as much of the plungers' money as any half-dozen bookmakers put together; yet while his two-year-olds were winning races, and he was winning large bets, he was at the same time advocating the abolition of two-year-old racing, and was declaiming against heavy betting! The unfortunate Marquis of Hastings lost £103,000 over Hermit's Derby, and it was soon after his time that plunging went out of fashion. Two others have tried it since, but failed to win, and it may be safely said that men do not now bet such large sums as formerly; no modern speculator would care to lay £90,000 to £30,000, a bet which is said to have been booked between the old Lord Glasgow and Lord George Bentinck. The morality of betting need not be here discussed; but it is noteworthy that the notorious O'Kelly, the owner of Eclipse, who owed nearly all he possessed to successful betting and gaming, provided, on leaving his Clay Hill estate to his nephew, that the latter should forfeit £500 for every bet he made upon horseracing; and at least two others, who owed their position to betting, adopted a similar course with regard to the recipients of their property.
The use of a betting apparatus called a 'Pari-mutuel,' deserves a word of notice, owing to the action, in 1887, of the French authorities with regard to the bookmakers. The 'Pari-mutuel' is a large frame, with a number of purse-like receptacles on it, each receptacle being devoted to a separate horse. The intending backer places his stake in the purse appropriated to the horse of his fancy, and when the race has been won, the backers of the winner divide among themselves all the money staked upon the different horses, less ten per cent. which goes to the proprietor of the machine. This method of gambling differs from ordinary betting, in so far as there are no regular odds against any of the starters. Suppose, for instance, that four horses are engaged in a race, and that the stake is 5s. Ten persons may back A the favourite, five may fancy B, while C and D may only have one supporter each. The machine will thus contain seventeen contributions, amounting to 85s. in all. Should A win, the ten backers have 85s. to divide between them; so each would get 3s. 6d. in addition to his original stake of 5s.; in other words they would be laying about 6 to 4 on the winner. If, on the other hand, C or D won, the solitary backer of either would take the whole of the 85s., equivalent to having taken 10 to 1 about the winner. The 'Pari-mutuel' was introduced into France about 1865, and found its way to England about 1868 or 1869. Its use gave rise in 1870 to the case of 'Tullet v. Thomas,' in which it was held to be a gaming machine, and therefore illegal. On nearly every racecourse are seen placards stating that 'Illegal betting is strictly prohibited.' This illegal betting consists in the backer depositing his money at the time of making the bet. So long as they bet on credit, the parties are safe from molestation on a racecourse. Of betting the Jockey Club takes no cognisance, though this was not always the case, as they met and settled a disputed case which arose in connection with the Ascot meeting of 1815. Matters connected with betting are now ruled by the committees of Tattersall's and the Newmarket Rooms, and in February 1886 Tattersall's overhauled the rules of betting, and made some alterations; the most important of them being with regard to defaulters, and a declaration that all races should thenceforth be 'Play or Pay.' See Tattersall's Rules on Betting, by Stutfield (1888).