SYSTEM OF BETTING.

Auckland Star, Volume LIX, Issue 233, 2 October 1928, Page 7

SYSTEM OF BETTING.

SEQUEL TO PROSECUTION.

MATTER BEFORE SUPREME COURT. APPEAL OX LEGAL GROUNDS. The hearing of an appeal on grounds of law by Edward Willerson Warren against his conviction in February last by Mr. F. K. Hunt, S.M., on charges under the Gaming Act, was commenced in the Supreme Court yesterday afteruoon before Mr. Justice Smith. Warren is the owner of "The Elimination Method of Scientific Totalisator Speculation," and the charges were in respect to the exploiting of the system. Warren had been convicted and fined £25. Mr. Goldstine appeared for the appellant and Mr. Hubble for the respondent. Chief Detective Hammond. Mr. Goidstine said that the charges had been laid under a section of the Gaming Act which made it an offence to send, exhibit or publish any letter, circular, telegram, placard, handbill, card or advertisement "with intent to induce any person to apply to any premises, or to any person with the view to obtaining information or advice for the purpose of any such bet or wager, or with respect to any such event or contingency as is mentioned in the Act, or for the purpose or with respect to any sweepstake or any lottery or scheme similar thereto." Counsel submitted that the intention, of the legislation was the suppression of beting houses. The words "such bet or wager" referred to bets or wagers made in houses kept for the purpose of betting. A circular, to come within the section, must be sent with in ten o induce he recipient to apply for advice. On tM contrary the constable had written asking for the circular. Furthermore the section applied only to circulars dealing with future events. The circular in question related only to past. The section contemplated an illegal bet or wager, whereas, as a matter of fact, the originator of the system advised against backing "doubles," or betting with bookmakers. The system did not require its followers to bet on every race. The hearing of teh respondent's argument was adjourned until to-day.

Case For the Police. Mr. Hubble said the offence consisted of three elements, namely, (a) the sending of the circular, (b) with the intent to induce an application to defendant for advice, (c) that advice to be "for tha purpose of any such bet or vager." It was true the constable had written for a circular, but the appellant had followed the first circular with a second. The offence was the sending to applicant of a circular to induce a further application. The first two elements were supported by fact, and with respect to these there could be no appeal on grounds of law. In reply to Mr. Goldstein's arguments counsel said that, although the system was based on the results of past races, it was meant to be used in respect to future races. His Honor asked if one friend wrote to another to say he had a "tip"' for the races which the second could havd if he wished, would that letter come within the meaning of the section? Mr. Hubble said that he would have to go as far as that. His Honor: Then the law must be often broken. His Honor: Would a letter written by one friend to another stating that there was going to be a lottery in Tasmania and that he had particulars of it come within the meaning of the section? Mr. Hubble: I am puzzled about the words "in Tasmania." There might be a question of jurisdiction. If it was "in New Zealand" I would say it certainly came within the section. After hearing Mr. Goldstein in reply his Honor said he vas very much obliged to counsel for their exhaustive argument and would take time to consider his judgment.