DUNEDIN POLICE COURT.

Otago Witness, Issue 3114, 19 November 1913, Page 3

DUNEDIN POLICE COURT.

Saturday November 8. (Before Mr H. Y. Widdoweon, S.M.) Breach of the Gaming Act. —Oharlps Alex ander Shiel was charged with that, c.:. October 13, lie established a lottery b\ which process a Ford motor car and othci articles were competed for by moans ol chance, contrary to “ The Gaming Act, 1903,” *also that, on October 25, ho did sell a ticket by which authority was given to a person to have an interest in a lottery, contrary to the Gaming Act.—Mr Callan appeared for the defendant, and submitted that the information was a little vague, and, in his opinion, the defendant should know what he was asked to plead on. The information said “ A Ford motor car and other articles.” Was not the defendant entitled to know what these other articles were?—'Sub-inspector »'Fouhy said the ‘‘motor car” was what the police based their cose on. —It was stated that there were other articles treated in a like manner to the motor car, but they had not proof of this. Ho asked that the words “and other articles ” ho struck out. of the information. Ho -said ho had a ticket on the motor car which he purchased at the bazaar. —The Magistrate said it was not a question as to whether the sub-inspector had a ticket, but whether there had been a lottery for other articles.—Mr Callan intimated'that the defendant was auite prepared to plead guilty to establishing a lottery in connection with the motor car, but not in connection with other articles.— The Magistrate st-aled that if it was alleged that there was more Ilian one article in connection with which a lottery had been established, then the prosecution should, if necessary, prove it. —The facts sot out by the Sub-inspector were that a bazaar was held by the Christian Brothers for the purpose of raising funds for a new school* to bo erected in Dowling street. A committee was appointed to control this bazaar, of which the defendant was chairman. They obtained a permit from the Minister of Internal Affairs to raffle works of art. — The Magistrate: Is not a motor car a work of art? —Mr Callan: After careful consideration, your Worship, I have decided not to raise the point as to whether the motor ear was a work of art ” —The Sub-inspector said that other articles than those for which authority had been obtained had boon disposed of. He himself wont to the bazaar and told defendant that a breach of the Gaming Act had been committed, and that ho wanted to purchase a ticket for the purpose of the prosecution. Defendant supplied him with a ticket for half-a-crown.— The Magistrate said that the maximum penalty for such an offence was £2OO. A permit conld he obtained to raffle certain articles, but they could not raffle beyond thn* permit. It would, have been just as well to study the Act more particularly. Defendant would he convicted and fined £lO. with costs (7sl.