THE GAMBLING CASES.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 1165, 29 June 1894, Page 32

THE GAMBLING CASES.

STRONG COMMENTS BY THE BENCH. At the Stipendiary Magistrate's Court on Juno 2(3, the following were charged with being found without lawful excuse in a gaming house kept by one Josoph Burke, on tho 10th Juno last: —Thomas Smith, Leonard King, Stephen Tilly, John Lambert, John Winters, Alfred George Manthel, Norman Guild, Charles Anderson, Edwin Thomas, James McKee, Charles Ambrose, George Hyde, John Doncaster, Alfred Lindley, Patrick Mahoney and Roderick TJsmar. Mr Hannen appeared for tho accused, who pleaded not guilty. Mr James, Clerk of the Court, proved tho conviction of Joseph Burke, keeper of . the house, who was sentenced to three months' imprisonment. Detective Herbert gavo evidence of a similar character to that given at the hearing of tho case against Joseph Burke, who was sontenced to threo months. Ail tho accused were present when tho police raided the premiseu, and thoy gave no excuse for being there. No other evidence was given, and the case for the police closed. Mr Hannen said that of course the defendants had pleaded not guilty, but what he was about to say would be tantamount to a plea of guilty. The onus of proving the case lay on tho police. He could not expect the same Court that tried Burke to alter its opinion in any way, having oxpressed the belief that gaming was carried on in tho house. The evidence he could call would be just the same as that adduced in tho other caso, so that it was of no uso placing tho defendants in the box. They could tell him nothing more than he already knew, and ho merely purposed asking His Worship to deal with them as first offenders. None of them had been before tho Court before on a similar or any other charge, and were in nearly every instance working men. Very little money was found on them by the police, and he thought that they had been sufficiently punished by being arrested, and having their names published as being mixed up in such an affair. Ho asked the Court to deal with the men as leniently as possible. Mr Martin, in giving judgment, said that tho seriousness of the offence was aggravated by tho fact of tho defendants having committed deliberate perjury when they gave evidence in Burke's case, and not only did they commit deliberate perjury, but they concocted a story beforehand to swear to in the witness-box. The stigma that would attach to thrir connection with this case would stick to them all their lives, and if any of thorn came before him to give evidence in a civil or a criminal case he could not believe a word they said. He wouldn't hang a dog on the evidenco of any one of them. Their word could not bo taken on the most trival point. That would be the result of tho lies they told. After hearing tho evidence in Burke's case he, or anyone else, could come to no other conclusion but that tho house was a gaming-house, and that gambling was carried on there that night. Further, that - there was deliberate lying on the part of one and ail. He saw no reason why ho should not inflict the maximum penalty provided by the Act, and that was JBS. Each of them would be mulcted in that amount, with 7s costs on each summons. The default would be a month's imprisonment. Mr Hannen applied on behalf of the defendants for time in which to pay the fine. They were working men, and he believed some of them would want a month. His Worship said he could not grant a month. Thoy had had since tho 10th already, and, besides, they appeared to be able to spend their time and money in a common gaming-house. He would give them a week, but no longer. Some paid the fine, and others took advantage of tho days of grace.