MIDGET GOLF

Gisborne Times, Volume LXXI, Issue 11382, 6 December 1930, Page 2

MIDGET GOLF

COURSE OPEN ON SUNDAY.

MAXIMUM FINE IMPOSED,

FACTOR. OF ‘'PRIVATE GAIN.”

Stating that the position was. quite different when the gaihe was run : for private gain, Mr P. H. Harper, S.M.,' in the Police . Court yesterday, imposed the maximum; fine of £5 oilRobert James .Kerridge who. had admitted keeping open his midget , golf course for play on Sunday, , Ndveni-■bef-30. On that day .the notice visited the- Garrison Hall, where play, was in progress, and closed the premises. also taking the names of about 70 players who were then taking part in the game. Senior-Sergt. Wade prosecuted and Mr. L. T. Burnard appeared on bohalf of defendant. vSenior-Scrgt. Wade explained that the police, became aware, on November 30, that defendant was running his miniature golf in the Garrison Hall. Sergeant Cull&ty went across and found a girl in tho ticket office collecting Is from each player. Defendant came along and stated he lmd taken legal advice on the matter also, that there were 16 courses in Auckland, all allowed to be open on Sundays. . He asked why the police bad sorted him out and pointed out that tennis was played on the courts at the Waikan#e Beach adding' that be had seen a policeman'playing there one Sunday. Kerridge also said'"You have no- right cross-examining the girl about the matter.” adding that, if the police blocked him in this way, he would form a club or association and so defy them. The seniorsergeant also pointed out that defendant had boon running picture shows for a: number of Fears, so must bo acquainted With the Act as far as Sunday trading was concerned/ It bad been suggested defendant took this action as an advertisement, but even if the maximum fine was imposed, it'Was only £5. "It should be pointed out,” added the senior-sergeant, “that all .the people playing or looking on at the game are liable to be prosecuted for aiding and abetting. I don’t know whether those Whose names, were taken will be prosecuted, but, if thcro is a recurrence of the matter, they will be.”

F'or the defence, Air Burnard contended that there Were a. number of considerations which distinguished the case from ordinary breaches of .section 19 of the Act. These could be briefly summarised as follows: — (1) Sunday golf was a. recognised pastime throughout .the world, and although there was a. distinction in law between the case of a club member playing bis round on the club links and a member of the. public playing a. round on the midget golf course, there was no very broad distinction in morals. ■ . . (2) Midget golf had been i.h full swing for the past two months in many parts 'of Australia and New Zealand. Everywhere it-. had. been played on Sunday, and no objection apparently taken by the police. (3) Throughout Australia and in parts of New Zealand activities exactly analogous in character to those of the defendant were conducted on Sunday by various .associations and corporations without question. Bathing shod®, for example, were open on Sundays and costumes were hired in exactly the same way as the defendant had opened his budget golf course and hired out clubs. Tennis courts in many cases were opened on Sunday by beach associations or municipal councils and hired out for play. It could not be said that bathing and tennis were of greater necessity to the community than midget golf. It was all a question of one’s personal preferences on a particular occasion. Sunday bathing and the hiring out. of courts for Sunday tennis, both were conducted in Gi* borne in common with the _ other places referred to without objection on the part, of the police. Under the circumstances, continued counsel, the defendant was surely justified In supposing that the practice he was adopting was a lawful one, and that it if. was the intention of the Police Department in New Zealand to object, to the practice he would have been informed of the objection and given an opportunity of looking into tho position. Mr Kerridge had gone to a good deal of trouble to conduct a good class of entertainment. He recognised that the views of the religious community were entitled to consideration, and although in answer to the demand he had maclo his course available for play on Sunday afternoon, ho had been very particular to keep the premises closed both in the morning and in the evening during thei times of religious services. (Counsel con. eluded by asking that tho charge be dismissed as trivial.

Senior-Sergeant Wade submitted that there was no evidence whatsoever to show that the game was allowed in other, towns in New Zealand. Even should that be the ease, it was no reason why Gisborne should overlook it. The position was quite different as far as the beach tennis courts were concerned, for there all the money received from the public was put back in the way of iinproveiments to the beach. It ,would have been useless to notify defendant of the fact that he was committing a breach of the Act, for last Christmas Day. when refused pernlission to open his picture show, lie did so in defiance of the council. If it was held legal to open the midget golf, then the same ruling would apply to billiard saloons.' “Furthermore,” added the senior-sergeant, ‘‘it is my opinion that the game can develop into a common nuisance. Any child, as long as he. has 6d, can go in and have a game. It may well become an objectionable nuisance.” Ylr. Burnard registered a protest against the tone of the seniorsergeant’s comment. Ylidget golf wos played throughout the world by millions' and to term it “objectionable” was wholly absurd. Regarding defendant’s alleged flouting of the Borough Council, counsel explained tliat Kerridge had put iri an' application and the council met to doiisidcf this, but were unable to obtain a quorum.- Kerridge, believing that the permission would be granted as a matter of course, had continued with the screening in this belief.

In effect, added counsel, the sen-ior-sergeant contended that because the motive was a good one, then the party concerned could break tho law. Aii individual was hot to' be Allowed tb carry on busih&^s"if or profit, but an. association oh corporation could do so. This could hot be sound law. • “Tho principal distinction between tliis ' game 'and any other finch- as gait of tennis, as played by members of a club of on 'Courts tun by ; a corporation,” said' the magistrate, “is that the midget' golf was fun for private gain,' a very ;d iff event mattef inde&d. There iff really no objection to any games on a Sunday, pfovidecl they are hot for the purposes of private gain. l " Before opening on Sunday’s, defendant; should •have inquired* from the..police whether, they had- any objection to his doing'so. 1 cannot see that he had aiiy .excuse. Surely the (other days of the week were sufficient for him to keep open ? He will be convicted and fined £5 and costs.”