AT TOTE ODDS.

Auckland Star, Volume LIV, Issue 295, 11 December 1923, Page 8

AT TOTE ODDS.

SEQUEL TO A BET. JUDGE DISMISSES APPEAL.

An appeal against a conviction for making a single bet at totalisator odds and a sentence of two months' imprisonment without the option of a fine for the offence, w-as unsuccessfully made to Auckland Supreme Court yesterday, his Honor Mr. Justice Reed presiding, by Edward Wilton (Mr. J. J. Sullivan).

Mr. Paterson, for the Crown, said the appellant was convicted for making a bet with a police constable at Birkenhead on June 15. The evidence given before Mr. J. \V. Poynton, S.M., showed that when the constable was introduced

to the appellant the latter said, "You are not a policeman?" A bet on Ranui was made, and the horse winning, the totalisator dividend was £2 19/6.

Evidence was called before his Honor, and Chief-Detective Hammond admitted that that was the first occasion on which appellant had been convicted of betting.

Mr. Paterson contended that the grounds of the appeal were not valid.

Mr. Sullivan argued that the amending Act of 1920 had to be read with the Gaming Act of 1908, and that not only must it be proved that appellant-, made a bet, but also that it was part of his business or occupation to make bets.

His Honor said he could not agree that the 1920 legislation in any way altered the offence of laying a bet at totalisator odds.

Mr. Sullivan then asked his Honor-to reduce the punishment from two months' imprisonment for a first offence to a fine. He thought the Court might exercise some leniency where it was toe man's first offence.

His Honor: In my opinion bookmaking is one of the greatest curses from which we suffer in this country, and it is responsible for nearly as mucti crime as liquor. I have no sympathy with offences of this nature, and I do not feel disposed to disturb the sentence of the magistrate. The appeal is dismissed with £12 12/ costs.