GAMBLING ON LICENSED PREMISES.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLIII, Issue 13194, 4 June 1906, Page 6

GAMBLING ON LICENSED PREMISES.

AX INTERRUPTED GAME OF

" POKER."

A HOTELKEEPER FIXED.'

■ ISADORE Rothchild. licensee of the Star Hotel, Alberr-sneet. appeared at the Police Court, on Saturday morning, in reply to a. charge of having permitted the playing of a game of draw poker on his licensed premises, the players being defendant and several boarders in the hotel. Mr. F. E. Ratline pleaded guilty on behjjJL of ■the defendant. The Act. he said, provided that any game of cards played on li censed premises for stakes was gambling. The defendant had been licensee of the Star Hotel for some two and a-half years, and during that time there had never been a complaint against him. All the persons playing cards at the lime were lodgers, and were unaware of the fact that they were committing a breach of the law. The game was played in a room facing the street, and there had been no attempt at concealment, the window being open. When th~ scrjpa'.it of police demanded admittance he was at cr.ee allowed to go in and no attempt, was inrde to hide anything. A mistake had.been imde: by . the ■ licensee by -permitting and taking part in the game. • The Magistrate: Was it a game lor stakes? Mr. Baume: There were small -takes, I understand Gd. Continuing. Mr. Baume said those playing cards were all guests. There was no doubt that'the offence had been committed inadvertently. The infliction of a fine, he thought, would meet the case. , ■ Mr. T. Cotter, fo. tho owners of the hotel, said that some £25,000 had been spent on the hotel, which ranked as, one of tils leading residential hotels in the colony. It was not a hotel frequented by persons for liquor, but was residential, and was patronised by leading visitors. The hotel had always borne a good charactei. and the searching of records failed to disclose a single conviction against it. The offence was one that had been committed inadvertently rather than intentionally. It was no doubt foolish of the landlord to join in the game. . Whatever fine might be inflicted, he hoped . the. magistrate would not place- any penalty upon the owners. "' * . Mr.• S. Mays, who conducted the prosecution on behalf of the Crown Prosecutor, the Hon. J. A. Tole, endorsed the remarks of Mr. Cotter and Mr. Baume, as to the gamo being played in a room abutting on Albertstreet. The game was being played at halfpast two o'clock on Sunday morning. The window was open, but the blinds were down to within a couple of inches of the window sill. All the players were boarders, and threeof them were commercial travellers, and tho other a theatrical man. The police watched the game for a time, and then demanded admittance, which was speedily given. It was not a bad case, of gambling. He did not desire to ask for an endorsement. The highest amount; lost or. won by any player was £2. He thought if the maximum fine were, inSttcd it would, mark the folly of permitting gambling to go on in a hotel. The Magistrate said the circumstances were simple, and defendant had pleaded guilty to the act. It had been urged that the parties were guests, and that the game had been carried on openly. These might be extenuating circumstances, but the licensee had; acted ■ foolishly. Looking at the whole of the circumstances he thought the maximum penalty would meet the case. There had been .no previous convictions against the licensee, and the fine might be a warning to him. He would be convicted and fined £10, and costs £2 9s.