SHOWED 'EM HOW TO BEAT THE BOOKIES

NZ Truth, Issue 1167, 12 April 1928, Page 7

SHOWED 'EM HOW TO BEAT THE BOOKIES

Unsympathetic Magistrate Eliminates Warren 9 s "Elimination Method" PROFITABLE POINTER fjOR PUZZLED PUNTERS (From "N.Z. Truth's" Special Auckland Representative.) Some months ago "N.Z. Truth" drew critical attention to a betting system which flounced itself before the New Zealand public as "the greatest historic discovery which the turf has ever known. " All the gullible punter had to do was to post ten guineas to P.O. Box 1749, Auckland, and he would be the fortunate recipient of "The Elimination Method of Scientific Totalisator Speculation," which, according to circulars issued on application, was "the turning point m the fortunes of those capable of grasping a great fact and stepping into the ranks of the successful before the door closed." In other words, the dinkum oil straight from the horse's mouth!

reference to the scheme 1 and its promoter was fully justified, for m the Auckland Magistrate's Court the other day, Edwin Willeson Warren was convicted and fined £25 on a charge of sending a circular with intent to induce persons to apply for advice for the purpose of wagering on horse races. The prosecution was based on certain clauses of the Gaming Act. The evidence was given some weeks ago before Magistrate Hunt, when Lawyer Goldstine, appearing for defendant, assembled a number of legal points strongly suggestive of inconsistency int the gaming legislation. After \3ue deliberation, his worship decided that a prima facie case had been established by the police. Further legal dissertation by counsel was unsuccessful, and Magistrate Hunt's decision went against the defendant. The police evidence was to the effect that Constable Haines sent the following letter to P.O. Box 1749, Auckland: "Haying noticed, your advertisement m the 'New Zealand Referee,' I have become interested to find out details of your methods of betting and would like some information on the matter, if you would send same, as I would like to get a start on it before the holidays." In reply, a floriferously-worded circular was promptly received by the | constable. "From time immemorial the key to success m totalisator investment has been sought," the circular read, "and time after time the turf speculator j has been driven back disheartened and sometimes ruined. ... "The originator, a gentleman of high mathematical attainment, with a great knowledge of racing and the patience Of a mole, approached the subject . . . and after eight years' racing m every possible way arrived at a wonderful result.

Detective Knows

"It is the result of this patient and exact study by the master mind that is now embodied under the title of 'The I Elimination Method,' and it is no exaggeration to say that it is the greatest racing discovery of all times." In an unrestrained flow of superfluous eloquence, the document further disclosed the extraordinary worth of the "discovery," terminating: "The price is £10/10/- and on receipt of this amount we will post you under registered post this clearly-typed and easily understood document, relying on your word of honor not to divulge its contents to any second person. "We would advise not delaying, as the racing season is m full swing and you will neglect great opportunity.— E. W. Warren, manager." , Overleaf, m Warren's handwriting 1 , appeared the following: "I regret I did not hear from you sooner, as we have been having a great run lately. "Whangarei, Timaru, Feilding, Woodville, Taumarunui, Waipa, Northern and Wellington Trots showed handsome profits. "Last Christmas we got 21 winning meetings on end, so we are looking forward to a profitable time. I would suggest replying at once to be with us." Cross-examined by Lawyer Goldstine, Constable Haines said he had seen the advertisement m the "N.Z. Referee," but had not read it. "Then you didn't know what it contained?" — "I was told." "What were you told?" — "That it was an Illegal system of betting." "And you didn't actually raad it yourself?" — "No." Chief-Detective Hammond, from the

box, stated that he dictated the letter to the constable. He had seen defendant personally and had been told by Warren that three solicitors had passed judgment on the system as leg-al. "As to the system, sir," said the chief detective, addressing the bench, "I know what it is. It advises you to follow, form and advocates the following of placed horses on the first day's racing." "It's as old as Methusaleh," added witness with a knowing shake of his head, "and to follow that system, there is only one termination — you lose!" Further, the chief-detective contended, it would be "impossible to follow the system without betting with bookmakers." "Mr. Hammond," remarked defendant's counsel, "you say that Warren would not give you his system because

of it being broadcast m court? He was prepared to give it, if satisfied that it would not become public property." Chief- detective Hammond: "His condition was that proceedings be abandoned." "Why did you not go on with it last July?" — "Because I have been endeavoring to get hold of the system without paying the ten guineas." "But you have just given it to us?" —^'Only the gist of it." "How can you, if you have never perused it?" — "I got it from others." "Then you have never actually seen the system or a copy of it?"— " No." "And what if I told you that what you have told us is positively incorrect?" — "That is the basis of the sys-

tem. It's based on for m — that's the only way, if of any value." Contending that no offence had been committed, counsel summarized an interesting- attack upon the interpretation of the Gaming Act. The circular, he said, had not been sent to the constable to induce him to apply for the system. He had made his own application. Magistrate Hunt: "What about the advertisement?" — "The witness said he had not perused it." Quoting from section 62 of the Act, counsel held that the words "wager or bet" pertained solely to a future bet and not to anything of the past. "Now, the circular m question deals solely with past events and is merely a statistical compilation of past records which a purchaser may — or may not — adopt as his future actions on the hope that history will repeat itself . . .

[ "Moreover, it does not relate to any particular horse or race and it is submitted that for the prosecution to succeed the circular must give advice or seek to induce a person to wager on some particular horse or raoe." The object of the Legislature, continued counsel, was to abolish tipsters. "The words 'such bet or wager' contemplated the making of a bet or wager which is illegal, but not m mak[ing bets with a totalisator, which is legalized." Supporting his argument on the grounds that m the case of totalisators and lotteries which are licensed, a person may advertise, circularize and advise by sending out notices with the j intention of inducing a person to obtain advice — without being m any way

liable — counsel exemplified the case of "the reverend gentleman who runs and i advertises a bazaar at which there are raffles held." His client's circular was m no i wise a breach of the Gaming Act any more than the actuary tables m connection with insurances, which counsel considered merely a legalized form of "gamble. As showing the anomalies which could arise within the Act if the con- I struction — as sought by the prosecution — were placed on certain sections therein, there was the matter of letters between friends or correspondence between owners and trainers. Even Jn the case of newspapers, which "constantly indicate which horses they think will win, frequently specifying a horse because of past performances, his weight, breeding and training work," the question must arise, counsel suggested, as to whether they published a document. "Defendant's circular," he concluded, "must be distinguished from 'tipping,' as it does not apply to any particular horses or races, but is merely a dissertation on what has taken place over a period of the last ten years." In reply to Lawyer Goldstine, Crown Prosecutor Hubble made lengthy reference to legal clauses pertaining to the case. Quoting from a decision of Chief Justice Innes, of New South Wales, counsel read: "The Legislature has, m my opinion, said: 'You shall not have a house for the transaction of business with reference to bets on < sporting matters and you shall not advertise that you will, on application, give information and advice with reference to such bets'." From another decision by the same judge, counsel asserted that the law

A Tipster's Fees

was fashioned "to prevent the publication of advertisements inserted with the intention of inducing persons to apply to t any house, office, room or place for the purpose of getting advice or information as to forthcoming horse-races." "There is no dispute about the facts," remarked his worship, m giving his decision. "The constable's letter brought a prompt reply. Since the circular did not bring forth the expected ten guineas, the defendant sent a second letter, offering to take payment m instalments and (quoting from the second circular) 'hoping to hear from you m time to take advantage of the many close-up meetings.' "It is wrong," continued the bench, "to send a circular offering to give advice on a horse-race, whether the bet is to be made with a bookmaker or on the machine. "I am mentioning this*point because it is clear that the purchaser of the information could not be at all the race meetings set out m the scientific system . . . Certainly two, if not three, of the meetings would be held op the same day. "He would therefore have to use a bookmaker or have an agent m each town to put his money on the machine. Both of these methods are illegal. . . "Many years ago it was found necessary to protects credulous people from tipsters and sharpers. "This case only differs from others of the same class m that the fee is about ten times more than the usual tipster asks. "But as against this, the circular is more elaborately got up and tells the purchaser that he is being advised by the. master mind of a man of great mathematical attainment. / "Defendant is convicted and fined £26."