BOOKMAKERS IN TROUBLE

Otago Daily Times, Issue 14684, 18 November 1909, Page 4

BOOKMAKERS IN TROUBLE

- ■ CHARGES OF STREET BETTING. SUBSTANTIAL FIXES. At the City Police Court yesterday Mr 11. Y. Widdowson, S.M., was engaged for some time in the hearing of charges against William • Forrester, Thomas Kerwin, and Sydney Wynne of having, on October 11, made bets in the public street. Frrresrcr's case was taken first. Mr Hay appeared for defendant. Chief Detective Herbert's evidence in this charge was heard on Saturday. Constable (le la Coin 1 said lie remembered October 14, when he was on special duty. Witnss knew defendant by sight, and met liini about 4.44 p.m. Witness was standing in High street outside Watson's Hotel. Defendant came out of the hotel. Witness went up to him and said, " I will have 5s on Eous in the Telegraph Welter Handicap," a race being run at Wingatui. Mr Hay: How do you know it was the Telegraph Welter?— Witness said he had since learnt that was the race.

Mr Hay: Wo don't want "what you have ' since learnt,' but what tool; place. Continuing, witness said he said to Forrester, 'I will have-5s on the last race." Defendant said "All right. Step inside and I'll fix yotl up." They went into the bar of _ the hotel, where Forrester said. "Five shillings Eous," and look a book from h:« waistcoat pocket and entered in it "Eous 65," and asked witness what initials he would put down. Witness-said 11. T., and handed defendant- one half-crown and two tlorius. Defendant handed hack Is 6d change, and witness had just got tho ehango when the chief detective eamo into tho bar. Forrester put the book in his pocket, and witness put his change in his pocket. Nothing was said, and defendant left tho hotel followed by witness and the chief detective. Witness had seen the defendant going into the hotel with men whom ho met on tho footpath. Cross-examined: Witness was in private clothes. Witness first, came to Dunedin on August 28. On the 30th of that month he left, and did not return until October 13. v\ ltness was at the races at Wingatui on October 13, but did not see defendant, W ttneas did not have a bet with defendant on October 13. Witness was not aware that bookmakers issued tickets. Witness did not get a. bookmaker's ticket from defendant. Witness did not ask defendant t? pa , J '-,,? ut ' < ? n . a t ' c ' cet ,v '" c '' be had on tho 13th, Witness did not ask for a refund of money cithef. Witness was a slivmgci' to Forrester.

Detective Mitchell said lie was on duty at the Wingatui races on October 14. The book produced was an official programme. The horse' Eous ran in tho last race, but was unplaced, Witness knew the defendant who was a bookmaker.

Mr Hay said ho did not intend to call evidence for tho defence, as he was satisnod there was no caso to answer. In tlio act, apart from exceptions 6Ct down, betting was not illegal, and it was quite lawful to make a bet in a hotel bar, as had been recently decided in an Auckland case. It was, too, quite lawful for a bookmaker to stand on tho street. The constable went to defendant and said, " Give me 5s on Eous." Defendant replied, "All right. Come insido and I will fix you'tip." They had gone off the street to bet. It must be proved that an essential material portion of tho transaction took place in the street, and as this was not done he (counsel) submitted that there was no ease to answer.

His Worship said that, as Mr Hay had put it it wa6 quite lawful for a bookmaker to stand on. the street, but it was not lawful for him to stand on the street for tho purpose of betting. It had been contended that as the witness de la Cour had said I want five bob on Eous." and that defendant lmd replied, "All right TT ~ ns' d £ 1 «'<" fix you' up," the defendant had gone off the street to bet OTOverTtW Tl Mr th&t must k proved that the essential, material part of the transaction was completed in the street before .defendant could be convicted. But it seemed to him that when the constablo jJtl rj I WWa r . Eous" and defendant replied "Come inside and I will I ft. ntial and substantial dW nJ J 1 ""Meted in the convict Th er !- C •'« must convict. The qestion of the penalty would ° V0I: " th ° ° ther caSM com

Mr Hay said lie would probably have to on'tho mXT" ° f Mr ' JuStice Willialns

to"*?* areahVa> * at Hberty nn T fw ni v! % w j" ": as next charged with, on Octobcr 14, betting in the street. Mr Ilanlon appeared for defendant. , Constable do la Cour said he was on dutv in Princes street on Octobci 14. Witness nt a with defendant about (LP Sn®M mS , S,>ndin S in h'Olit of the Giand Hotel, and witness asked him to show hmi (witness) his card (produced). J iio card showed the horses running on the second day of the Wingatui races. Witness looked through it, and said lie would Jia\a fivo bob on Spinning Flight in the Burnside Handioup, and half-a-erown on Warsaw, m the Ranfurly Handicap, DeIcndanl asked what .initials, and witness said "H T." Defendant entered the brand Hotel, and was there about 20 seconds. He came out and said, "That will be all right. 41. T.' you said?" Wit, ness said, Yes. I suppose I'll see you in the morning if I win." Defendant said. ics; 111 be about here. If you can'i see. me, I'll ba in (ho billiard room." Witness again spoke to him at 12.50. Defendant was standing against tho wall of the Grand Hotel in Princes 6trcet. Witness again asked to sec his card, and Jie said, ''All right; but don't let anyone seo It.. Witness had handed the card back on the first occasion. Witness looked down rhe card, and said ho would have half-a-urown on White Cockade in the last race. Defe , n , d r ant m sn'd, "Very well. Tho initials are 11. T., aren't they?" Witness said lmi- WaS tendered a florin and a Shilling. Defendant asked if he hadn't a sixpence, and witness said it was the smallest he had. Defendant went into tho hotel, asd returned' with the sixpence. Later, fitness put 6s on Pretty Nell, in the lasl race, and gave defendant a pound note, Defendant went into the hotel and returned w'lth. the change, Defendant aid "'I-I. T.,- _ isn t it?" and witness said, " fos." D«"ng the day witness 6aw a lot of men speak to defendant. Sometimes he would go into the hotel alone, and sometimes they would go with him. Witness had not previously known defendant.

Crcs-.-exammed: The whole thing took place in Princes street, on the footpath. »itness hao four bets with defendant. Defendant was leaning against tho pillars of ulO Grund Hotel, lie was not standing on P'hate property. lio was leaning against the pillars of the hotel, but his heels weie on tho footpath. Tlio fourth bet was made in the recess of the doorway. Witness thought defendant went 'ireide to attend to his book.

Dete.-.-tivo Hunt said that about 12.30 on Octobcr lie was standing under the Stock Exchange verandah. Witness saw the last witness approach defendant, who was leaning against, the. left-hand pillar of the doorway of the Grand Hotel. One foot was on tlio footpath, and the other was on the iloor of the hotel,

Mr Hanlon: We'll havo him inside soon. One foot at a time. .

Continuing, witness said that after the constable had boon talking for a moment Kerwin banded hiin something, that looked like a card. He then handed something to Kerwin, who put it in his trouserc pockofc and went inside the hetel, When ho relumed the constable was still there. Shortly uftorwards the constablo left defendant. Kerwin was a bookmaker. lio could lie found near the Grand Hotel any day. Chief-deeotive Herbert corroborated the previous witness's evidence. Witness thought that- defendant's feet were on the footpath. Whore defendant was standing might be private property, but it was recognised a? a public footoalh

Mr Hanlon said that- in this caso ho adopted Mr Hay's argument in regard to the charge ag*iinst Forrester. The present charge was one of being in the street for tile purpose of betting, and, as far as the tacts were concerned, it was not certain 'hat the beta weic made in the street at all, but there was room for a suggestion that they were transacted in portion of the hotel. If it was ccprect that defendant was Standing ni the hotel, even if visible from the street, there was no evidence before the court, that the tats took place iu the street, lie admitted that it was shown that bets took place from time to time, and it was a reasonable inference of betting in the street, but there was no evidence to showthat defendant was in the street for the purpose of belting. He was content lo rest the case there.

His \\ orship said defendant would be convicted.

Sydney A\ynne was then similarly charged. On behalf of defendant, Mr Hanlon pleaded."Not guilty." Constable de la Cour said that on October 14, about 12.30, he spoke to defendant in the street outside the Commercial Hotel,

in High street. Witness asked for 5s on White Cockade—first start. Defendant said: "All licrht; but I don't bot on the footpath. Come in here." 11c took witness into tlio doorway of the Commercial Hotel. Defendant said: ''You aro a stranger here?" Witness said: "No; I have been here for some time, but have been a way for a month or so." Defendant said: I thought I hadn't seen you about lately." Witness then gave defendant 6s. He said: " W hat initials shall I put down?" Witness replied as before, " 11. T." Cross examined: The bet was made in the doorway—three or four feet from the street. Ho was alxmt Zft oil the street Side of the actual doorway. Detective Hunt gave evidence as to watching Constable dc In. Coiir accost defendant on the date in question. They entered the hotel doorway, and disappeared from view. Witness went past, and then saw them standing in the doorway, 'l'hey were apparently talking. Defendant was a bookmaker. Mr llnnlon submitted that there was no ease to answer. The constable's evidence showed that oven when asked tile defendant refused to bet in the street, and did not. bet in the street. He had a right, to bet except under certain circumstances, and one of these was when in the street, lie refused to break the law. Nothing was done in the street. Defendant certainly stood there, but a man had n i«rfect. right to advertise himself as long as ho -did not. exhibit handbills. If a man liked he could stand about or wear a. top-hat, so as to become so conspicuous that people would say: "That's Brown, the bookmaker," or " Dr So-and-So." His Worship reserved his decision in this case. As regarded Eorrester and Kerwin, he said the minimum penalty for a. first offence was £20 and tho maximum £100. ' Defendants would oacli be fincj £50 and costs (7s), and security for appeal would bo the. amount o£ the Gnc and probable costs (£5). Mr Hanlon asked for time to pay, and his Worship granted 14 days. Mr Hay j obtained the same terms if he decides not to appeal.