LAW REPORTS.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1702, 19 March 1913, Page 5

LAW REPORTS.

LOWER COURT,

DECISION IN THE POKER CASE. IN CUBA STREET HOUSE, Mr. W. G. Eiddell, 5.M.,. presided at yesterday's sitting of tho Magistrate's Court. In giving judgment in the gaming case, Police v, Jarvis and Eager, his Worship said that Samuel Jams was charged with being tho occupant of a common gaming house in Cuba Street. Tho charge against Eager was one of assisting Jarvis in tho management. It had' been contended by counsel for the defence that the game of poker was not a game of chance, but he had held before (and he still held the samp opinion) that tho game was pne of chance. It was certainly a game of chance within the meaning of Section 10 of the Gaming Acte 1910. Both defendants had made admissions that this game had been in progress when the police arrived and these admissions must be taken into account. There was also evidence that the game had been played at this' house on more than one occasion. Evidence, moreover,. went to show that the defendants did not play the game for amusement, but for gain. Both must bo convicted, Jarvis for keeping a . common gaming house, and Eager for assisting. Tho ease, .however, was not cue in which a heavy penalty should be imposed. Both defendants would be fined 40s. each, and Court costs 75., in default seven days' imprisonment. Witnesses' expenses amounting to 225. were also ordered to be paid by the defendants.,-

INSOBRIETY. William Ballantyje was fined 20s. in default three days' imprisonment for inscbriety. On a similar charge Charles Kill was ordered to pay 17s. Gd. medical expenses, and was also declared an habitual drunkard. He was made tlui subject of a prohibition order. Two first offenders were convicted and discharged.

CIVIL BUSINESS. (Before Dr. A. M'Arthur, S.M.) j_ . CLAIM FOE 'COMMISSION. H. F. M'Neill and Coy., Wellington, land agents, sued John Pilbrow, Lower Kutt, farmer, for JE27 10s. commission, on the exchange of a property in linroa Road, Wellington, to one William Georgetti. at the price of ,£SOO. Mr. D. M. Findlay appeared for the plaintiffs and Mr. T. M. Wilford for defendant. Counsel for defendant stated that ho wished a short adjournment in order to consult his client respecting a document which plaintiff produced, and of which defendant had no knowledge. Upon ; the case being resumed Mr. Wilford remarked that it would not be defended, but he would object to judgment being given. Couiiiel's reason for this was that an, action was to bo taken in' another Court for specific performance, and he did not want it to appear that he had consented to judgment_ on matter which was going to be disputed. At the conclusion of the evidence, his Worship gave judgment for plaintiff for the. amount claimed, with costs. JLi 2s.

UNDEFENDED CASES. Judgment for plaintiff was given by default in the following cases-.—Stewart Timber, Glass, aiul Hardware Co., Ltd., v. John Thomas Gunn, £2 lGs.. costs 125.; A. E. Budd and Co. v. Wm. Thornton Abr'.iham, c£o 7s. fid., costs .£1 Ds. 6d. j R. G. Dun and Co., v. Patrick J. Henley, .£7 12s. !)d., costs -£1 Ss. Gd.; Peerless Art Studios v. K. Farroll, -El, costs Gs.; same v. Mrs. G. W. Item mi t, jt! 55., costs 65.; same v. Mrs. B. Davis, 175., costs 95.; same v. Mrs. A. 8.. Gilbert son,vJßl 12s. fid., costs Gs.; Norman M'Farlaho v. David Fisher, .£G 175.,-costs .61 3s. 5d.; Wm. .Henry Suckling v. Tutu vaka Rameka, .£9 10s., costs .£1 12s. C-d.; Stewart Dawson and C)., Ltd. v. Tai Hekcta, .£lO, costs .fit 12s. Gd.; Hush G. Young v. August Mahoney, ■£!. costs 55.; Field and Luckio v. D. Jameson, .£2 Es., costs ss.

JUDGMENT SUIIJIONS.ES. Horatio Martelli was ordered to nay the Stewart Timber, Glass, and 1 Hard-, ware Coy. JGIO Bs. Bd. by April 1, 111 default seven days' imprisonment.