BOOKMAKING.

Press, Volume LXIX, Issue 20790, 25 February 1933, Page 19

BOOKMAKING.

TWO MEN FINED £IOO EACH, U-ilE*3 ASSOCIATION IKUiQiUJI J N., February 24. Fines of £IOO each wore to-day imposed on Charles Joseph Williams and James Leonard Purvea, who wcro charged with frequenting a street for the purpose of lotting. The police said both men were perfectly open about the matter. Counsel said the bookmaking business had been hard hit by the depression, and suggested that a £23 fine now was Heavier than a £IOO one two years ago. "Have J not to consider how much the Government needs revenue?" was the Magistrate'o reply. ! INTERESTING BETTING CASE. (I'EE93 ASSOCIATION TEI-KORAH.) BLENHEIM, February 24. A case of unusual interest in racing circles was concluded iiL the Pieton Court to-day. J&me» FnlTer sued Richard Peters, a former bookmaker, for £l4, the balance due on a dishonoured promissory note for £SO. •(Defendant swore the note represented the balance due pn a large betting transaction on the. trotter Tenedos at Reef ton some time ago, the bet made allegedly with defendant by H. E. Fuller on behalf of plaintiff. The horse ivon, and plaintiff paid some hundreds in -cash arid the balance in promissory notes, of which all had been honoured except the one in dispute, on which £l4 was owing. Plaintiff, in evidence, swore he made the bet as an agent for S. A. Edwards, a Ohristchurch trainer, and when defendant could not pay in full plaintiff paid Edwards " out of his own pocket and accepted Peters's notes. The Magistrate upheld defendant s contention that the note was voi^d under the Gaming Act, and, further, that the transaction was illegal under the law regarding bookmakers. Judgment was for defendant, without *eosts.