RACE CARDS SEIZED.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1158, 20 June 1911, Page 2

RACE CARDS SEIZED.

A PRINTER PROSECUTED

CASH UNDER GAMING ACT FAILS. FINED IN OTHER CASES. After two adjournments, the hearing of four charges against a local printer named Denis came on before Mr. W. G. Riddel 1, S.M., in the Magistrate's Court yesterday morning. Tho fil\-t information was laid under the Gaming Act, and charged Driscuil wit', printing a document, on liny 13, an behalf of a certain person, as to belling on the double —Great Northern Hurdles and Great Northern Steeplechase-- to be decided at Auckland on Juno 3 and 5. The other informations were laid under the Printers' and Newspapers liegistTation Act, and charged Driscoll— With printing a certain paper for pain, and neglecting to print thereon the name and placo of abode of bis employer. With printing a certain paper and neglecting to print thereon his namo and place of abode. With keeping a printing press for printing, and not having it registered. A pica of guilty was entered to the last charge, and pleas of not guilty to tho others. Chief-Detective Broberg prosecuted, and Mr. P. W. Jackson appei.rwl for defendant.

Inspector Ellison's Visit. Inspector Ellison produced threo double, cards and a business card which came to him by post on May 22. These lad bsen handed to the Chief-Detective, and, on May 2."), witness cnllcd at 27G Lam Men Quay, and there saw defendant. There was' a small printing machine on the premises. In answer to a question, defendant replied that he was the tenant of the place. Witness then asked him to look at tho Act, mentioning S3C.liens 4, 18, 19, and 20, and defendant vent asido with Detective Kemp, who had a copy of tho statute, and looked oyei' it. Tho Inspector next asked him inr a copy of a double card, which, if was understood, defendant admitted luving printed, but defendant replied that he had no copy. In answer to a further question, defendant'stated that his punting press was not registered, but 'that liis office was registered as a iaetorv, and he added that ho did not know that it was necessary to keep a copy of anything he printed. Later he said: "I had better not say anything, and I won't say anything, or admit anything.' To Mr. Jackson: It was true that defendant expressed considerable surprise after referring to the sections of the Act, and true that he had stated that lie had never known anything of these things before. Referring to a certain card marked "Auckland," witness remarked that it was a common double betting card on two races in Auckland, but witness did not know (of his,own knowledge) that those races had been run in Auckland—not any more than what was common public knowledge.

Tho Word of the Detectives. ' Detective . Kemp stated that, on May 23, in company with Detective Hammond, lis had visited Driscoll at his office in Lambton Quay, and had asked him if he had printed the three cards produced. Driscoll at first denied, hut subsequently admitted printing one, though ho continued to deny printing the other two, and also tho business card bearing tho name "Scott and Martindale." Witness asked who "A.8.C." was, and defendant replied: "You know; you know; I don't like to say. I printed a number for them. They pay me well." Witness knew that "A.8.C." was simply Scott and Martindale. Tho double chart indicated that the firm .was prepared to do business oh two events at Auckland at the prices stated. It was advertising their prices. The events were tlitu Great Northern Hurdles, run on June.3 at, Auckland, and the Great Northern Stceplcclfase, run on Juno 5 at Auckland. At the limo when witness first called at Driscoll's office, the latter was printing a double chart for "A.B.C.'' Evidence as to the visit on Jlay 25 was also given by witness. A second visit on May 23 was made by witness, who then seized a number of cards under a search, warrant. To Mr. Jackson: Witness bad no personal knowledge that races were held in Auckland—only common knowledge. Neither Had he personal knowledge that tho Great Northern Hurdles and tile Great Northern Steeplcchaso were run on particular dates. There was no mention of Great Northern Hurdles and Steeples, but the nanus of the acceptors for those races were on the chart. These names were advertised in all tho newspapers, and witness got them from The Dominion. Any racing man would know that the card referred to the events named.

In further cross-examination, Mr. Jackson asked witness if they had not put certain questions to defendant to catch him, but witness denied this. Did you say to him: "You know d well, Driscoll, who printed the cards?"— "I never used the words, Mr. Jackson." Did Hammond say it f—"Hammond said: 'We know who printed them, and who they were printed for, but wo want you-to tell us.' Continuing, witness said that defendant seemed reluctant about telling anything. Witness believed that Scott and jlartihdale had occupied the office before defendant, but the cards could not have l>ecn left there by them, as they referred to recent events. The reason why witness said that ','A.B.C." represented Scott and Jlartindale was because ho had seen them use thess letters on charts 011 their boards at the last meeting at which they did business. Re-examined by Chief Detective Brobcrg, witness said that it was well known that all bookmakers used initials on their cards, and it was .common knowledge that "A.8.C." represented Scott and Jlartindale. Defendant .was a printer, but not a bookmaker, The Chief Detective Returns Thanks. The Chief Detective was proceeding with his re-examination, when Jlr. Jackson objected to leading questions, and the magistrate hold that the questions could not Ire put in the particular form. "The Chief Detective's a great leader," commented Jlr. Jackson.

"A great leader, thank you," replied (he Chief Detective, with a smile. Detective Hammond also gave evidence corroborative of what the previous witness had stated. At this stage, the Chief Detective said that, if his Worship-held that it was essential to prove that the races were run at Auckland, it would be necessary to ask for an .adjournment to call an official from Auckland. The prosecution had recognised that this was necessary, but had refrained from railing anyone from Auckland on account of the expense as there had already been two adjournments. It was not expected that the point would be disputed. Jlr. Jackson opposed any adjournment, as defendant could not claim expenses. The police should have been ready to state their case that day. His AVorship was not prepared to grant an adjournment, and the Chief Detective intimated that that was all the evidence which he had lo call. How Counsel Put It. Jlr. Jackson staled in regard to the charge lo which his client had pleaded guilty, that, shortly after hn commenced business, he went to the Labour Department and registered his place of business as a factory, and thought that that was all that was necessary. Since I he present informalion 'had been laid the printing press had been registered in compliance with the law. Counsel wished (0 put in the original paper received from the Labour Department, but the Chief Detective objccicd, and the paper was not put in. Continuing, Jlr. Jackson contended that there was no evidence that defendant printed double charts, and defendant himself would deny it. Ilis Worship hero intimated that counsel need not trouble to refer to (he charge laid under the Gaming Act. In regard (0 the. other charge.s, JFr. Jackson said that he proposed (0 prove that the cards referred (0 were not papers within the moaning of the "I'rinlers' and Newspapers Registration Act, IMS." They were not books w pamphlets, but purely business cards, and, under .Section S of the Act. business cards, ball programmer, olc., were exempt. Counsel contended that; if the same information were print- 1

Ed on linen, his ■Worship would not say that it was a paper within the meaning of llio Act, ami further contended that tho Printers' and Newspapers' Act had nothing lo do with these race cards. Tho Gaming Act came in there. Moreover, counsel submitted that the word "paper," in the old Act, always referred to newspaper.

The Magistrate's Finding. 'J'lic magistrate dismissed the charge laid under the Gaming Act lor want of sutlicient evidence. Jn legard to the charge to which defendant pleaded guilty, his Worship pointed out that he was liable to a line of not less than .£5, and not more than .£2O. As the printing press was now registered, tho minimum penalty of .£5 would bo imposed, with Court costs, 7s. On each of tho other two charges, arising out of the same circumstances, defendant was liable to tho same extent. His Worship was not prepared to hold with counsel that these cards were not papers within the meaning of the Act. In each case defendant would be fined .£5, and Court costs, 7s. Security for leave to appeal was fixed at J) 10, and payment of fine and costs.