“ROLL-DOWN GAME”

Evening Star, Issue 19272, 10 June 1926, Page 6

“ROLL-DOWN GAME”

HAT GAME Of CHANGE BUT VOGUE BASED ON GAMBLE JUDGMENT AGAINST DEFENDANTS. WELLINGTON, June 10. Giving judgment in the “ roll-down ” case against Bishop and Dawson, Mr Page, S.M., said that the tests conducted showed an element of skill, and ho held that : L . was not a game e£ chance within the meaning of the Gaming Act. It was difficult to lay down a rule as to what degree of playing and wagering at a legitimate game would cause premises to become a public nuisance. The game had attained some degree of popularity; there was no opportunity for cheating; no assemblage of bad characters; no nuisance or annoyance to adjoining premises; but the game had no intrinsic merits. Its vogue was based solely upon the gamble associated with it. In view of the facts that a larg< number of its devotees were ohildrea ani young people, also that, among adults, probably a number could noi well afford the money wasted—also that the amount of play readied substantial dimensions, and the game was a gamble, he 1 ought it prejudicial to the morals of the participants, and held the keeping of the premise# illegal. Defendants wore convicted, and th® fine fixed at £5 Is to enable an appeal to be made, security for which was fixed at £ls 15s.