RAILWAYMAN'S "DOUBLE."

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXIV, Issue 19677, 1 July 1927, Page 15

RAILWAYMAN'S "DOUBLE."

COURT IMPOSES PENALTY.

NO SUPPRESSION OF NAME.

"I am afraid I cannot make a special rule for tae sake of Civil servants," said Mr. W. li. McKean, S.M., in the Police Court yesterday, in refusing to suppress the name oi: Maurice Goodman, aged 28, railway employee (Mr. Goldstine), who pleaded guilty to carrying on the business of a bookmaker. The magistrate added that if he suppressed the name he would have to do the same in all cases of Civil servants, because under departmental regulations ';ht>y would be liable to dismissal.- and he did not think that was a sufficient reason.

Chief-Detective Cummings said that for about three weeks prior to the June race meeting accused had laid a "double" at £lO to is. He had laid off 128 doubles at Is each, and his books showed he had not been "struck." He was found out in consequence of a complaint by a client who alleged that he had "struck a double." Accused's books showed the client did not win the double, but had backed the two horses in question in different races. Mr. Goldstine said it was not an ordinary case of a man making a living at the business of bookmaking. Accused was mimed and had met with considerable misfortune. He had paid large sums for medical attention for a child who had been an invalid from birth. He had been unsuccessful in business at Taumarunui and assigned his estate to his creditors, who agreed to accept a certain sum in the £l. He had, however, stated his intention of paying his debts in full and had been sending money to his creditors weekly. Finding he was again getting into debt he had adopted this means of supplementing his income. All he actually received was £6 Bs, and he was liable to lose £lO.

In asking for suppression of accused's name counsel said a conviction would result in- dismissal from his employment as a railway car-cleaner. The Chief. Detective: If names hm suppressed where is this going to end ? The magistrate, imposed a fine of £7 10s.: