YOUTHFUL INVESTOR.

Press, Volume LI, Issue 15170, 7 January 1915, Page 3

YOUTHFUL INVESTOR.

SEQUEL TO TOTALISATOR TRANSACTION.

A ease of interest to racing people came oofore Mr H. W. Bishop, S.M., yesterday at the Magistrate's Court. William Archibald Binnie was charged that, on November 11th last, at Riccarton racecourse, being of the age of seventeen years, by falsely, representing himself as being of the age of twenty-one years, ho was permitted ly a servant of the Canterbury Jockey Club operating the totalisator to make an investment on the totalisator contrary to the form of the statue.in Mich case made and provided. Mr A. T. Donnelly, who appeared for defendant, pleaded ifuilty. George Mason was - then charged with, on November 14th last, at Riccarton iaceooursc, being aservant of the Canterbury Jockey Club, did knowingly receive an investment on the totalisator made by a person under tho age of twenty-one years, to wit ono William Archibald Binnie, a person of the ago of seventeen years, contrary to the form of the statue in such case mado and provided. Mr B: L. Lane, who appeared for defendant, said the facts would be admitted, but defendant had no facilities of seeing the boy. 'The aperture, at which the tickets were *old was very small. Detective Ward stated that on the day in question, at -.55 p.m., he _.aw the boy Binnie approach ono of tho totalisator windows at which Mason was present. Witness- in a voice loud enough for Mason to hear, said: ••-o>_ are not twenty-one." But Binnie averred that he was. When Binnie stated that he was 21, Mason handed him the ticket. Defendant said the sale of the ticket and the question asked by Detective Ward were simultaneous. The act of selling a ticket only took two seconds, and was nractioally done automatically. His Worship said he would inflict a heavy penalty on Mason in order to show that the totalisator officials could not sell to anyone they- liked. His Worship, after pointing out that defendant was liable to a penalty of £100. said he was not satisfied with defendant's evidence at all. He. considered it was clearly the duty of. people in this sort of case to refuse to sell tickets -sooner than take the chance of selling io boy-i under age. The drastic • penaltyprovided by the Legislature showed that they regarded the matter seriously. Only the other day he had fined two bookmakers £20 each, but though there was no difference morally, the totalisator was protected. Yet here it was breaking the law. ~,__,' Chief-Detective Bishop submitted that the defendant had ample opportunity in this case to see the boy, as there* was no rush at the tame. _ His Worship considered the C..J ._•. •would \ye safer to refuse to sell tickets in doubtful cases than to take the risk. . , _, Binnie was fined £-3 and costs, and Mason £10 and costs.