BOOKMAKER CHARGED.

Northern Advocate, 23 June 1920, Page 3

BOOKMAKER CHARGED.

■COSTLY BETTING TRANSACTION

FIFTY POUNDS FINE

In the case Police v. Edward Hayes, at the Whangarei Magistrate s , Court yesterday, before Mr F. 11. Levien, S.iM., the defendant was charged with making a bet in a public place, Cameron street, on May lOtn. Constable Power said he nad known defendant two months, and by repute he knew him to be a bookmaker. He had not seen him engaged in any other occupation. He saw him in Cameron street on the 10th of May. and he believed that Richard La'cey, who lived in Walton street, worked with him as a partner. Hayes lived in the Whangarei Hotel, and was up and down Cameron street all the time plying his trade. CONSTABLE NEVER TRIED TO BET. To Mr Stout: He had never tried to make a bet with defendant; it would be no use. He knew pretty well the business of everyone in the town, and this man had not any recognised business. He had seen him talking to people. He had not heard the talk, but it was not a guess, it was common knowledge in the town that Hayes was a bookmaker. HEARSAY EXCLUDED. He had no personal knowledge that defendant had ever made a bet, he took the evidence of others who had told him. "I was told " bgan the constable. "I don't want to hear what you' were told," said Mr Stout. The Magistrate (to witness): "You must confine yourself to relevant evidence." To Mr Stout: "I did not know who was arranging Mr Connelly's affairs." Mr Stout: "There is something then that you did not know." To iSenior-lSergeant HolLis: "Mr Connelly would be in the same category as the defendant, a bookmaker, 'and," added the constable quickly, "an insurance agent." TESTIMONY OF A BACKER. William Scally, a musician, employed toy Mrs Mason, said he made a bet with Hayes outside Mr Chisselli's shop. He asked defendant, oh the day in question, what did he know? "What about Lochella?" he asked, and defendant said he would give £40 to ten shillings against a double for the Northern Steeples and Hurdles races at Auckland. Witness then gave him 10s, which defendant put in his pocket, after entering the ibet to witness' name in a book. Lochella won the first event, and on the sth of June, Hayes offered witness £10 to call the £40 double event off. That was in a billiard room in Cameron street. Witness declined, saying: "It can run for the full forty." On Monday the 7th of June, Lochella won, and on Tuesday, the Bth, Hayes said he couldn't pay witness, as it was someone else's double. "Who paid you the money?" I asked him, said witness. ''You did," Hayes replied.

Witness said he asked further; "Whose name did you put down in your book?" and Hayes replied: "I put your name down."

"Naturally, at this, I was wild," said witness, and when Qonsjtable Power, about two house after, asked me about it, I said: "Yes, I won a double, and he hasn't paid."

Constable Power then took witness down the street and confronted him with Hayes. The constable asked Hayes if he was going to pay, and Hayes denied laying a double. He also said he was not going to pay. Constable Power told him that the best thing he could do was to pay Scally what he owed. Hayes again said he didn't lay anything and refused to pay. Hayes, said witness, was now holding £1 of his money.

Witness admitted that he had given Hayes money for bets on other occasions. Off and on he had laid bets with Hayes for a couple of months. Hayes had always paid up before, but reckoned he wouldn't pay out on this deal because it was someone else's money. NOT HIS MONEY. The Magistrate: "Whose money?" Witness: "Dave Clarke's."

Hayes, added witness, stated that he had paid the double to Clarke.

To Mr Stout: He had never been a bookmaker's clerk, and had not run a book himself, He made a bit by backing when he could. He was quite sure that ... 'a not attempt to blackmail Hayes, and he did not rush to find Constable Power.

The Magistate checked Mr Stout in asking about witness being fined in Court previously in a case of assault. "That has nothing to do with this case," said the Magistrate.

•Mr Stout then elicited that the money he made the bet with was Clarke's ten shillings.

The Magistrate said it didn't matter whose money the bet was made with. He was there to decide whethr er a bet was made, not whose money it was made with.

To Mr Stout: Hayes told witness that Clarke was on his books for a lot of money, and Clarke, he said, had told him to stop the double. He (witness) had never tried to "scale" OUarke; he only wished to protect

himself. Five pounds had been mentioned. Witness did not want any trouble. If he had got five pounds it might have been right; he didn't want to be "scaled" for his money. He did not mention the five pounds to Constable Power. The five pounds were pledged to him (witness)through Clarke. Hayes came "on the bounce" and witness was doing the same when he remarked: "I may go the other way." It was not a threat to go to the police, but he came at a bit of bounce the same as Hayes.

Re-examined by Senior-iSergaant Hollis, witness said he made the wager by himself, but with 10s that Clarke gave him. When Clarke gave him the 10s he said he would give him a good cut out of it. Witness offered to share 5s with Clarke, but Clarke said: "No, I've more money than you." Clarke gave him to understand he would get £10. As soon as the double was won Clarke stopped it. '••■'■ TALK OF THE TOWN.

David Ernest Clarke, manager for Mason and Co., said he knew defendant, but did not know he was a bookmaker. He had given Scally different sums of money at different times. He did not know what he did with them. Scally had these sums without interest. He had never betted with defendant. He would swear that.

"(Nor with his partner?" asked the sergeant.

"No," replied witness. "They say he has a partner, but I don't know." He, witness, had never been indebted to Hayes in any way, nor to has partner. Since Lochella won he had never spoken to Hayes about it. He had interests in the Lochella wins, tout not with Hayes. He had never mentioned to Scally anything about this £40. He knew about it, because it was the talk of the town. He did not stop the payment of it; how could he?

To the Magistrate: He did not give this man ten .shillings at this time. He did his own betting.

To Senior-JSergeant: He had never at any time .had a bet with defendant. ■■.::• ;■; '■'■'

To Mr Stout: He had lent Scalily money at different times.

COUNSEL'S CONTENTIONS,

Mr Stout submitted that the only evidence against the accused was that of the man Scally. But first it must Ibe established that defendant was a bookmaker. There was no evidence of this. Constable Power had gone on whispers and reports, but had no knowledge himself; if he had, he would have known that Hayes was in Whangarei to attend to the affairs of his deceased cousin, Mr Connelly, There was no evidence-But Scally's, and that could not be taken in view of what he.had admitted. He had contradicted himself several times—

"Name them, Mr Stout," said the Magistrate.

Mr Stout gave the instance of the 10s..

The Magistrate: "On that point 1 hold that he did not contradict himself. What is the next, point?"

Mr Stout: "First he denied that, he was going to the police, and afterwards he had admitted that he said he •might."

"In that," said the Magistrate, "he was quite right. His name was in the (book and he had paid 10s, and he naturally said: 'If you don't pay I may go to the pollice.'"

'Repttyiiing ito ,the Magistrate, Mr Stout said did not intend to put the defendant into the box,

RULING OF THE BENCH,

The Magistrate reading from the Act said, it was clear that a bookmaker was a man who acted as a book maker, offering odds against the field one who allowed his client to choose the horse or horses he backed. In this particular case he thought witness Scally gave his evidence in a straightforward manner, and he could not find any contradiction. What looked like contradiction was merely an amplification of previous statements, He was satisfied therefore that the evidence was sufficient to convict defendant as a bookmaker, and he entered a conviction accordingly, and inflicted a fine of £50.