case stanhope against smith Michaelmas term will roll a note give for money  win at play videlicet eighty pound to the plaintiff and forty pound more from  another person be not void by the car c although both sum be lose at one sit  for that statute intend to prevent more than be lose at one sit to one person  a action be bring upon a note for money win at play the defendant plead the  statute car c of game and set forth that at one sit he lose eightyfive pound  to the plaintiff and forty pound more to one Yate upon demurrer it be argue  that the Act make no security void neither be the winner to pay the Triple  value of the money win unless it be above one hundred pound for if three man  shall each of they win fifty pound neither of they shall forfeit for though it  be more than one hundred pound among they all yet it be under that sum to each  and the statute make no forfeiture but where the person win have get above one  hundred pound at one sit modern on the other side it be allege that in Hilary  term car two judgement be give car rot Hodgson v Mallen a against the plead to  demurrer upon the like plea and in the case of edgebury v Rossindale lev vent  b which be upon article concern a horsematch wherein the defendant agree to  run four heat at several day for forty pound each heat and this be hold by my  Lord hale to be but one agreement though to be run at several time and the  defendant in that case have judgement but in the principal case judgement be  give for the plaintiff for the statute intend a remedy where more than a  hundred pound be lose to one person and at one sit for if it be lose to  several it be not within that Act the same point adjudge in Dickson v Pawlett  salk c as for instance if a man lose ninetyfive pound to one man and refuse to  play any long with he and then voluntary lose ten pound to another at the same  sit this shall not defeat the first person of the money which he lawful win  but now by whether c all note bill bind judgement mortgage or other security  or conveyance whatsoever give by any person whatsoever when the whole or any  part of the consideration of such security shall be for any money or other  valuable thing win by game or play at card dice table tennis bowl or other  game or game whatsoever or by bet or those who do play or for reimburse or  repay any money know lend or advance for such game or bet or lend or advance  at the time and place of such play to any person so game or bet shall be utter  void and since this statute be hold that both contract and security make or  give for money win at play be void Robinson v Bland burr although the security  be in the hand of a innocent endorsee without notice bowyer v Bampton stram  peacock v Rhodes dougl low v Waller dougl and if the money be pay on such void  security it may be recover back rawden v Shadwell ambler but where money be  fair lend at play this statute will not make the contract void burr and  therefore the lender may maintain his action for it Barjeau v Walmsley stram d  modern er p