GAMING RAID

Evening Post, Volume CXXV, Issue 151, 29 June 1938, Page 15

GAMING RAID

CHINESE FINED

ALLEN STREET PREMISES

Nine Chinese fruiterers and one Chinese storekeeper appeared in the Magistrate's Court today, before Mr. A M. Goulding, S.M., as the result of a raid carried out yesterday by detectives on premises in Allen Street, allegedly used as a common gaming house. Harry Wong, a storekeeper, aged 36, was charged with permitting premises he occupied to be used as a common gaming-house, and the remainder of the defendants, all fruiterers, were charged with being on the premises. They were Charlie Hong, aged 45, Fee Joe, 34, Peter Young, 32, Wong Lee, 53, Tom Me Wong 43, Wong Hing, 54, Chin Heng Yen, 30, Ah Lim, 72, and Get Wong 46. All the accused pleaded guilty. Detective-Sergeant P. Doyle, who prosecuted, said that Detective-Ser-geant W. McLennan visited the premises frequently, and had several times warned Wong, but without avail. Yesterday Detective-Sergeant McLennan and Detectives Eitchie, Smeaton, and Tripney found 12 Chinese around a table in the centre of the shop gambling with dice and dominoes. Two men escaped through the door, and a third attempted to escape, but was caught by Detective Smeaton. EUROPEANS ALSO. The premises were used as a general Chinese store, said Detective-Sergeant Doyle, but gambling operations were not confined to Chinese, as Europeans employed at the markets had visited the place. Complaints had been received about these men spending money they should have brought home to their wives and families.

Mr. W. G. Mellish, who appeared for Harry Wong, said that his client had not been in trouble for 14 years. The Chinese used the place as a sort of club, and the gambling spirit inherent in thom had become apparent.

"This man Wong has been on the premises for only three months, and has been warned for this sort of thing," said Mr. Goulding. "There can be no doubt in my mind he knew perfectly well what he was doing, and knew the risk he was running." Harry Wong was convicted and fined £75, and each of the other defendants was convicted and fined £2.