EUCHRE ILLEGAL?

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XVIII, Issue 46, 6 February 1928, Page 9

EUCHRE ILLEGAL?

SUPREME COURT TO DECIDE. PROGRESSIVE TOURNEYS. Christchurch, Feb. 3. An appeal was made by the police in -the Supreme Court yesterday against the decision of Mr. E. 8. Mosley, S.M-, to dismiss the charge against William Britten that by conducting progressive euchre tournaments he was keeping a gaminghouse. •Mr. A. T. Donnelly said Britten had conducted progressive euchre tournaments at tile Sydenham Football Club’s rooms. A charge of 2/6 for admission was made, and prizes ranging from £lO down to 5/- were given. Between 200 and 300 people attended these tournaments each night, and the ordinary rules of progressive euchre were observed. The magistrate had held that the game of euchre was not unlawful, that is was a game of skill. Counsel for Britten said the question was one of very great importance, for such tournaments were carried on all over the country for private gain and to aid chib funds of all «orts. Prosecutions had been brought in all parts of the countfy, and had been dismissed with the exception of a case in Auckland, in which there had been a conviction. The dismissal of the case at present before the Court after the Auckland decision had been followed by the present appeal Tlie game of euchre was a game of skill as ordinarily played. His Honour: A game of mixed chance and skill. AVhere there is a dealing of cards it cannot be held to be a game of skill. Counsel contended that there was a substantially operative element of skill, and so the game was not unlawful. His Honour reserved his decision.