BETTING TRANSACTIONS.

Otago Daily Times, Issue 19198, 14 June 1924, Page 7

BETTING TRANSACTIONS.

INTERESTING APPEAL CASE. (Per United Press Association.) NAPIER, June 13. An appeal case of some interest was heard in 'the Supreme Court, before Air Justice MacGregor. J. W. Barrio appealed against the decision of the magistrate in favour of J. M. Brown in a claim to recover £53 13s 6d. Barrio gave Brown £5 to put on Ore Oro in the Grand National Hurdles. The horse was placed second, and paid £4 14s, and the respondent, did not hand over the monev. Subsequently respondent agreed lo put $lO of the Oro Ore dividend on Nicotnar in the Hunt Cup in the Waikato mooting. Nicomar paid £lO odd. To effect n settlement appellant agreed to accept the Oro Ore dividend and £lO which appellant put on Muraahi at Wellington for Brown, but Brown did not pay up. The defence was that the transaction was illegal under section 53 of the Gaming Act. Mr Mason, for the appellant, said if the Magistrate’s ruling were upheld people who could not afford £1 could not legally bet, as they would be liable to a penally if they made up a ticket with others. His Honor; That is so. A person who cannot afford lo bet should not, go to the races. His honor upheld the magistrates decision. He said it was cjuite clear tho money claimed was won on the totalisator and should have been paid over but the transaction was an illegal one under section 55. Both parlies had contravened the Statute. It might be that the Act would cause inconvenience, but people so placed would have to give up betting.