BOOKMAKER CAUGHT.

Hawera Star, Volume XLV, 11 June 1925, Page 9

BOOKMAKER CAUGHT.

FINED £IOO. CASE AT HAWERA. COMMENTS BY MAGISTRATE. That he carried on the business oi a bookmaker was the charge preferred against David Arthur Anderson at- the Hawera Magistrate’s Court to-day. Defendant, who was represented by Ah O’Dea, pleaded guilty and elected to he dealt with summarily. ,

Sergeant Henry said that on the fourth of the present month, in company with Constable Tocker, he visited the White Hart- Hotel at about 12.15 p.m. After visiting the private bar they heard someone speaking on the telephone in the telephone room, and remaining outside for a moment, they heard that the conversation that was being carried on concerned betting. They went into the telephone room and there found defendant taking bets over the ’phone. Defendant hung up the receiver, but tiie Sergeant saw a document lying op. the table, which he could see was betting paraphernalia. After about a minute, the telephone rang, and a man gave him a bet, but the voice was indistinct, and lie could only catch the name ‘’Arthur.” Shortly afterwards there was another ring, and a voice asked, “Is that Dave:'” • non the. sergeant replying “Yes,” there came the answer “That’s not Dave’s voice.” Tlie person, whoever it was, then rang off. Three minutes later a man who gave Lis name and address-.as “Lou, Masonic Hotel, Waltar a,” rang up and made three bets, stating £3.' £1 and £1 as the amounts on different horses. A fourth cal! came, but the inquirer said, ‘‘That’s not Dave.” and rung off. Inside ten minutes from the time the police disturbed defendant a fifth message came over -the ’yhone. eight bets being laid, involving a sum of about £7. This person gave the name “Manaia.” Someone’came to the door, and shortly afterwards the ’plioue, which was an etxension. was cut off.

Sergeant Henry said that on asking defendant what he had to say about the occurrence, defendant replied, “Well, sergeant. 1 am going to give it up and leave the place.” Later defendant said ho would ..sooner be before the court on a hooking charge than steal a three-penny piece. The sergeant also mentioned * that on September 10 lie warned defendant about carrying on the business of a bookmaker, and defendant’s reply was “Thank you.” Proceeding, Sergeant Henry said lit was not prepared to say whether Anderson was acting as an agent or whether he was actually a bookmaker himself, blit as far as the Act was concerned. it did not matter whether he was a bookmaker, agent or clerk. Amongst the documents taken possession of was n note-book similar to that used by bookmakers* for the purpose oi recording bets. In this case the notebook contained 15 pages of entries, the amounts invested, the horses’ names, and then a fictitious name indicating the investor being given. The note-book was then handed up to the magistrate, who glanced through it.

Continuing, the sergeant said thal “day cards” on the Auckland and Otaki nice meetings were also found in defendant’s possession, in addition to a double chart, in which 12 doubles had been taken. A telegram was also secured on which was written: “Beautiful dav. All Wind.” There were furthei words on the telegram, which the sergeant took to be dividends, but this part of the message, was written ill code. Mr O’Dea: The words “All Wind” may have, meant that- it was a breezy dav.

Sergeant Henry said that Anderson had come to Hawera about two yo-:m ago, purchasing a tobacconist’s business, which ho later sold to his wife For the last four months defendant had not done any other work than bookmaking. Mr O’Dea, for tlio defence, emphasised the fact that defendant had foregone his right to be tried by a jury but bad pleaded guilty in the lowei court. Before a j\ir> only one .case against a., bookmaker had .previously succeeded, the case against 'Wlvithi beino- the onlv .one he knew oi. '1 be fact was that 99 out of 1.00 juries would not convict a man for bookmaking. The community did not think it and the present social system allowed of gambling in land. Bookmaking unallowed in some of the Australian States, and he asked if that were any worse than the present “hole and corner” business in New Zealand. Mi O’Dea further said that as far as Anderson was concerned there was nr doubt about it that- this was -the finish of the business as far as be was concerned. . . The magistrate, m giving hie decision, said it was not for the court- to criticise the wisdom, of the. law regarding bookmakers. * It was open, to any right-thinking citizen to consider the conditions of life in those countries where, -bookmakers were allowed. Only a few yearsi -ago bookmaking had -been prohibited in’ New Zealand, and in order to staisfy the public desire the .totalizator was brought into use. The bookmakers, however, did not assist, but- then continued to work against the law. Continuing, the magistrate strongly condemned the operations, ot the bookmakers, who. brought into, being bribery and vice. Eiven a public service that should be clean, wias debauched and made dirty by the -bookmakers. who broke the law' and also found the- means, of escaping punishment. Tlie position, he considered, would continue and get so bad that in the end legislators would have to make a clean-up. The magistrate agreed that defendant could have gone to the Supreme Court-, but lie would have gone, not with the knowledge that the police could, nob prove .their case, but in the hope that the jury would be false to their oaths and would nob convict.

In fixing a penalty of £IOO, the magistrate said he was administering the public, conscience, which was an argument in flavour of leniency. He also asked thlat the oireiunstianc.es be reported to the' Licensing Bench. Mr. O’Dea said that the licensee of the hotel, who was a brother of defendant, bad been away in hospital undergoing an operation and bad only retured home the day before the occurrence, Mrs. Anderson", who was in charge of the 1 hole!, was upstairs attending to defendant’s brother when the police were in the hotel.