JUDGES DISCUSS WHIST

Evening Star, Issue 20252, 13 August 1929, Page 1

JUDGES DISCUSS WHIST

UNLAWFUL DRIVES IN CLUB ELEMENT OF CHANCE. A discussion on progressive wills'# took place in the Court of Criminal Appeal during the hearing of an appeal by .a Liverpool whist club. The court was composed of the Lord Chief Justice, Mr Justice Avory, and Mr Justice Swift. Appellants were the O.K. Social and Whist Club, Ltd., which had been fined 20s at tho Liverpool City Sessions on * charge of keeping a gaming house. Air Glynn Blackledge, arguing th» appeal, suggested that there was an element of skill introduced into the whist drives organised by the club, because instead or the winning pairs moving up, they remained at the same tables. Air Justice Avory: I don’t understand that. In that way a player might. have bad partners throughout the evening, and nothing upsets a good player so much as having a bad partner. Air Blacklcdgc; And nothing pleases a good player so much as getting rid of a bad partner. Air Justice Avory; It seems that- you are showing what a gamble it is. (Laughter.) Counsel stated that within fifteen months the club had a membership exceeding 8,000. In the .second year tb» number dropped to 3,500, possibly because of the threat of police proceedings. In addition to dancing and refreshments nightly progressive whist drives were conducted and prizes offered. During Mr lllackledge’s argument, Air Justice Swift observed; You keep speaking of whist as a game of skill. Counsel: As it was played here.

Sir Justice Swift: Has it act to be a game of mere skill. How can you eliminate chance from a. game of cards? I suppose you do nob. mean that the cards are dealt with skill? (Laughter.)

Mr • Blackledgo I can assure your lordship that there is no skill in that tvav.

Lord llcwart: At liny rate, in that respect every effort was made that mere chance should prevail. Mr Justice Swift: Shuffling and dealing are part of tho game, are they not?

Mr Blackledge: That is not usually regarded as.part of tho game. Mr Justice • Swift: You would soon object if somebody monopolised the dealing. (Laughter.') Mr Blackledge; Not unless .[ was unduly suspicious. Counsel said that it was not disputed that the same people attended the whist-drives night after night. Lord Hewart, -giving the judgment, said it was contended that the Recorder was wrong in holding that progressive whist, as played at the appellant dull, where the partners as well.as the cards were shuffled, was an illegal game. The winning pairs in the drive remained together as long as they won. Is was apparent that the Recorder hold that the game of progressive whist as played in the dub, involving as it did at every turn the element _of chance, and multiplying and confusing tho elements of chance' by particular rules ns to the, progression of tho partners throughout the evening, was not a game of more skill, hut was an unlawful gamble. In those circumstances the jury found the appellants guilty on tlio indictment. There was no error in law at the trial, and the appeal was dismissed.