APPEAL FAILS

Manawatu Standard, Volume LXI, Issue 126, 30 April 1941, Page 8

APPEAL FAILS

Conviction for bookmaking. WELLINGTON, April 30. “All I’m concerned witti is that the law ways that hookmaking is a prohibited business,” said the Chief justice (oir Michael M.yers) in the Supreme Court at Wellington yesterday, wlien dismissing an appeal b,v Charles Joseph Wdliams against a sentence of six mouths’ imprisonment imposed on him by Air A. Al. Colliding, 6.M., in the Magistrate’s Court, Lower Hutt, on January 30, tor carrying on the business ol bookmaking. Air R. Hardie Boys, who appeared for prisoner, said it was not disputed that in ordinary circumstances such a sentence would have been justified, hut in the particular circumstances the sentence had been particularly severe, as oil eight previous occasions prisoner had been heavily lined. On the salutory sentence of a £2OU fine being imposed on him in August, 1939, Williams had given up the business of bookmaking, and from that time till Christinas last lie did no bookmaking, but had become what was known as a punter. “I have always said that it is not creditable to the administration of justice that a prohibited business should bo carried on,” the Chief Justice said. “What are fines but a license fee to carry on an illegal business?” Air Boys: When this man gave up business as a bookmaker he started as a punter. His Honour: Was ho able to get on tlio course r Air Boys: No; for the four days of the Christchurch meeting he operated outside the course and, lii his wile’s name, invested £I4BO on the totalisator, and in two days at. the trotting meeting invested £320 in wagers. His Honour: It matters not what the law may be; I have to administer it. Jt is contrary to the well-being of the State that people should ignore the law.

Air Boys said that being compelled to remain outside the course had brought AVilliams into contact with outcasts, with whom he took bets. He had been sentenced as if he had carried on in the same way as when he had engaged a large staff. His Honour: There is only one way of stopping bQokmakuig and that is by imprisonment. So long as they are only lined they regard it merely as a license fee for carrying on the business. PRISONER’S EVIDENCE. Giving evidence on his own behalf, Williams said that he was 41 years of age, and was a married man with two children. Since being fined £2OO, ho had disposed of his business as a bookmaker. He produced an account with the Canterbury Jockey Club showing that he had made investments extending over four days amounting to about £ISOO. He also produced an account with the Metropolitan Trotting Club showing investments made on the totalisator on November 12 and 14 last. Over the months from August to December he had invested about £2:30 on each race day. The betting he did at Trentham was with people who were prohibited from going on the course. Cross-examined b.v Air W. R. Birks, who appeared for the Crown, AVilliams said he gave up his bookmaking business at Palmerston North at the end of July, 1940. He admitted that he was accepting bets on every race on each of three days at Trentham. His average betting would bo about £ls on each race. * His Honour: How much did you get for your business at Palmerston North ? AVilliams; £2OOO. J n cash ? —A’es. A’ou have been fined heavily time and again. AATiv did you not give up bookmaking Jong before?—“Because I had a wife and family to support.” “Jt is perfectly plain,” said the Chief Justice, “that this Court should not and cannot interfere with the sentence. The Magistrate could not in this case, with due regard for the administration of justice, do other than sentence this man to imprisonment. He lias been deliberately flouting the law for years. The appeal will be dismissed, with seven guineas costs.”