GAMBLING AFTERMATH

Evening Star, Issue 22252, 1 February 1936, Page 11

GAMBLING AFTERMATH

NIGHT LIFE IN LONDON BIS CLAIM FOR DAMAGES Prcu Association—ljy Telograpli—Copjrighl LONDON, January 30. As a sequel to a Mayfair card party, where a financier is alleged to have lost £IO,OOO to cardsnarpers, the King’s Bench Court was crowded with hundreds of fashionably dressed x>eople. Keith Hugh Williams, a company promoter, sued Jack Trevor, organiser of a charity card party at Sunderland Souse in December, 1934, for £IO,OOO damages for a breach of warranty; alternatively, negligence and breach of duty. The defence denied the allegations. Sir William Jowitt, for Williams, gnid that unless these parties, where baccarat and chemin de fer are played, were most carefully supervised they were occasions on which crooks and cardsharpers would descend like vultures on a corpse. The names of Lord Hindlip and Lady Cleveland appeared on the invitation Williams received. Trevor had the clearest warning of odd happenings at such parties, as when he asked certain people to act as croupiers Lord Hindlip, before the party, rang him up, saying that when three, suggested croupiers, after an earlier party, Went to the lavatory cards, mostly eights and nines, which are most valuable in baccarat, fell from their pockets. Sir William Jowitt said one of the Croupiers at Sunderland House was a man Lord Hindlip had warned Trevor against. Although it had been, emphasised that the guests would be most carefully supervised, they included Hymie Davis, who, Sir William Jowitt alleged, had been warned off dog. racing tracks, and a Mr Elliott, who was a croupier, despite 13 county court summonses against him. Sir William Jowitt said Williams saw Lord Hindlip take over the croupiership from Elliott, whereupon it was suggested that the cards should be counted. This was done, and they were 32 short. When Williams was about to take a bank at baccarat he wanted to shuffle, as is customary, but a croupier named Abrahams demurred. Williams noted that a man named Saville was remarkably lucky. Williams went to the cash desk and inquired regarding him, and was assured that he was a wealthy racehorse owner and above suspicion. Williams accordingly played until he lost about £IO,OOO. He rose from the table and made out a cheque for that amount. He had previously lost £I,OOO worth of counters. Williams later stopped the cheque, but eventually thought it better to pay it and bring an action _ to reveal the happenings at these parties. Subsequent inquiries showed that Saville was a bankrupt whose discharge had been suspended because He allegedly filed a misleading statement and used his client’s money. Another croupier was named Solomons, who, Sir William Jowitt alleged, was a convicted thief.

■Williams, who gave evidence, said: “ When I was banker and Abrahams croupier eights and nines phenomenally turned up against the bank.” Williams, who was cross-examined by Sir Patrick Hastings, said he went bankrupt in 1931, but made between £120,000 and £200,000 in 1932 owing to buying 4,000,000 gold mine shares at one farthing each. He denied Sir Patrick Hastings’s suggestion that he was a big gambler and the suggestion that only he and his friends got gold from the company, adding that the company was Consolidated Goldfields of South Africa, and the market knew how much gold was being got out of the mine.