EACH FINED £300.

Auckland Star, Volume LXI, Issue 182, 4 August 1930, Page 9

EACH FINED £300.

WELLINGTON BOOKMAKERS.

BOTH PREVIOUSLY BEFORE COURT.

TWO MEN REMANDED,

(By Telegraph.—Own Correspondent.)

WELLINGTON, this day,

As a sequel to arrests which were made by the police on Saturday, Ralph Ellis Thompson, aged 50, and Thomas Phillips, aged 58, pleaded guilty, before Mr. W. Hi Woodward, S.M., to-day, to charges, of bookmaking.

Regarding Thompson,: it was stated by counsel that he had not yet fully paid the last fine inflicted on him. The man now realised the position, and if he was not imprisoned-ho intended to give up book-making for ever. Thompson had had a long and honourable career, and counsel used the word "honourable" advisedly because, after all, there was no moral offence in 'bookmaking, as it was only an offniice created by statute. Thompson had always met his obligations, and the public had demanded his services and he had given them. Ho had a wife and family of five children, three of whom were dependent on him.

Phillips' counsel said he would not offend again if he was made to make a substantial contribution to the Sinte instead of being gaoled, for ho had decided about the middle of the ' year to give up gambling. Before his last*fine he had paid a deposit on passage" money for himself, his wife and his daughter to England. , He had. had some money to collect and while collecting it the inevitable had happened and he had taken more bets. Apart from bookmaking accused had had no' previous convictions and he was an honourable man in his calling, illegal though it might be.

The Magistrate: I think I should accept the sentence imposed by the Supreme Court as 6ome indication that this Court should , treat these offenders not merely as a source of revenue to the country, but to show that the .'law intends that this offence shall .cease. J. don't propose to take the extreme step of inflicting a term of imprisonment in Thompson's case, but I ehall impose a fine which must necessarily exceed the fines previously inflicted. In the ease of Phillips he was convicted three months ago, when he was fined £2f)o, and on the whole his case seems wtiree than that of Thompson, who also has two convictions and was fined £200. On the other hand, I am'willing to give him the benefit of what seems to be a genuine decision to give the practice up.

"Itpropose :to fine each of the accused £300, and in default of payment they will each be sentenced' to six months' imprisonment. I will allow in the ease of Phillips 14 days in which to pay, and in the case of Thompson one month. I do not hold out any hope whatever of an extension of those periods.