FLAYING "TWO UP”

Manawatu Times, Volume LII, Issue 3578, 8 April 1927, Page 3

FLAYING "TWO UP”

Echo of Police Paid ONE “SCHOOL” NEAR JOHNSTON PARK TEN PLAYERS PINED. The hearing: was concluded at the Magistrate’s Court yesterday by Mr. J. L. Stout, S.M., of the prosecution of| ten men for playing “two-up” on the banks of the Oroua river, near Johnston’s Park, and a line of £3 and costs was imposed in each case. On Sunday, February 20, Constables McCall and Pike secreted themselves in the] , lupins close to the bank of the Oroua river opposite to Johnston’s Park, and after a long wajt they were rewarded by witnessing a crowd of men participate in the gambling game known as “two-up.” After watching for well over an hour and noting down the names of those present, the two constables raided the “ring.” As a result twelve men were summoned and the case opened a fortnight ago, but was adjourned until yesterday. The defendants were : E. H. Cullum, John Mansfield, Jas. Reddy, Richard Jones, Albert Larsen, John Hourigan, F. W. Hefferman, Thomas Fogarty, John Evans and Richard Benge. They were all represented by Mr. D. C. Cullinane. Sergeant Cahill prosecuted. Constable Pike corroborated the evidence given at the last sitting of the Court by Constable McCall, detailing how he selected the hiding-place which enabled observation of all those taking part in the game. When the "ring” was rushed there was a general scatter. Johnston’s Park was opposite to the locality where defendants were congregated and it was possible for people in the park to see the defendants. Both witness and Constable McCall satisfied themselves positively on this point and had further established that the locality of the ring was visible from Drake street. Witness produced the “kip” and also 5s which had been picked up. ■ To Mr. Cullinane : The “ring" was not screened in and was visible from Johnston’s Park and Drake street. For the defence, Mr. Cullinane said he proposed to establish that the locality of the “ring”, could not be seen from Johnston’s Park or from Drake street, and, in fact, the "ring” was not within view of a public place. Edward H. Fisher, J.P., said he inspected Johnston’s Park and also the locality on which it was alleged “twoup,”'had been played. The “ring” was situated between two willow trees under a high bank and there was a depression in the ground from 12in. to IS in. After inspecting this, witness crossed the river to Johnston's Park and endeavoured without success, to locate the “ring” site. There was a considerable growth of lupins and other weeds. Witness also attempted to pick up the site from the stone-crushing plant, but failed and even found it difficult to locate the willow trees. In witness’s opinion, any assembly of men on the “ring” site could not be seen from Johnston’s Park. / To Sergeant Cahill : Witness could see Johnston’s Park from the “ring” site. * • To the Magistrate : Witness could not say that a group of men would not be seen from Johnston’s Park. All he could say that he could not see the “ring.” 1 To Mr. Cullinane : Witness could not see the handkerchief which was suspended from one of the willow trees. J Harold Hayward, taxi-driver, who accompanied the last witness, told the Court that he was unable to locate the “ring” from Johnston’s Park, nor could he pick up the handkerchief which was suspended about seven feet from the ground. Witness considered that men standing in the “ring” could not be seen from Johnston’s Park. Counsel suggested that the Magistrate should view of the locality, but Mr. Stout did not consider this necessary as the point could be decided on the weight of evidence. Francis Hefferman, one of the defendants, gave evidence admitting being present but denied taking part in the game. To Sergeant Cahill : He had never been there before and he did not go down with anyone. He had been told the ring was there and had gone down on his own account. He saw Jones and Benge and they were all he could remember. He did not see Kircaldie at the “ring.” He wanted the Court to believe that he had just gone down to see the game as he had never seen it before. He could not give the name of any person who told him where the ring was. To the Magistrate : He had been told the route to follow to arrive at the “ring.” The Magistrate : The evidence is that you put your hand in your pocket and apparently handed out money. Witness: Tes : I changed some money for Voice.

Tile Magistrate ; What happened when the police came ? Witness : I didn’t see them coming and X was caught, (daughter). The Magistrate ; Why did you run ?■ —I simply followed the others. To Mr. Cullinane : Witness told the police that he was not taking any part in the game.

Richard Jones, slaughterman, another defendant, explained his presence at the "ring” by stating that he heard there was to be a meeting of slaughtermen on the river bank on the particular afternoon and, he had accordingly strolled over. When he got there he saw the Union representative, Voice, who said that “All negotiations were off”—this referring to the slaughtermen’s dispute. Witness then went to sleep, and woke up with a start when the , police arrived. (Laughter). To Sergeant Cahill : He was not aware that he was one of the ringleaders of the “school.” He was a married man and he was not going to borrow money with which to gamble. Witness had played previously, but not on the day in question. This was all the evidence counsel proposed to call and submitted that the cases should be dismissed on the ground that the game was not played within sight of a public place. The police had exaggerated the case and their evidence could not be relied upon. Independent evidence had been called to show that men standing in the “pitch” could not be seen from any point of vantage on Johnston’s Park.

In summing up, the Magistrate said that there was no doubt that the prosecution had established that the game of “two-up” had been played. As far as Hefferman and Jones were concerned, the police evidence was that they were taking part in the game. Hefferman could be convicted for aiding and abetting the game by changing money for Voice. The evidence of Jones was very unsatisfactory and it %vas rather" difficult to believe. Although Jones said he was asleep he was wide awake enough to escape hurriedly from the clutches of s the police. It was their own fault In being present and they did not act as innocent persons. The only other point to decide was whether the “ring” or locality was visible from a public place. Taking the evidence of the defence first the Magistrate considered the .tests taken were not altogether fair as there were no men In the “ring” when observations were made. He was satisfied with the evidence of the police constables and that of the Borough Inspector as to the place being visible. All with the exception of Kifcaldie, whose case had not beet) heard, would be convicted. k On the question of penalty, Mr. Cullinanc pointed out that the defendants were working men employed at the freezing works and owing to industrial troubles were hard-up. The Magistrate said that he could not take into consideration any question as to labour troubles. That was entirely the concern of the men who, if they refused to work when work was offering, must accept the consequences. Bach defendant would be fined £3 and costs. A month was allowed in which to pay the fine. The case against Kircaldie was adjourned apd that against Voice held over as service had not been affected.