ILLEGAL GAMING

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LIX, Issue 17958, 9 December 1932, Page 6

ILLEGAL GAMING

HOUSE IN GREY STREET

14 MEN CAUGHT IN RAID FINER RANGE FROM £2 TO £lO Fourteen men who were caught in a raid made bv the police on a house in Grey street ‘in the early hours of last Sunday morning were convicted by Mr P. H. Harper, S.M., in the Police Court to-day of breaches of the Gaining Act, and lines ranging from £2 to £lO were imposed. Two men charged respectively with keeping a common gaming house, and permitting premises to he used lor that purpose pleaded not guilty to the charges, but convictions were entered, and in consequence 12 other men charged with being found in a common gaming house entered pleas of guilty. Ah- S. V. Beaufoy appeared for all the men.

The first charges dealt with were those against Kenneth Charles May, 2d, of keeping a common gaining house, and Ernest Charles Curtis, 57, another occupier of the, same premises, of permitting them to be used as a common gaminghouse.

Senior-Sergeant Wade explained that three anonymous letters were received by the jxilice stating that the premises were being used for gaming. A watch was kept, for live weeks, and a search warrant was then executed. Air. Beaufoy submitted that as a series of charges was contained in each information the informations were had in law. The. magistrate agreed; that each information should be conlined to one date, and accordingly the charges were amended to relate only to December 4.

William G. F. Biguell, part owner of the promises, stated ‘that they consisted of a. shop at the front and living quarters at the rear. In May he let the premises to Curtis, and since then the rent had been paid by both Curtis and May. Last Saturday afternoon Curtis called avid asked that May’s name should be removed from the. rent book, as he had taken other premises. In reply to Air. Beaufoy, witness stated that no complaints had been made to him about the premises being used for gaming. Senior-Sergeant Wade stated in evidence that at 12.30 a.m. on Sunday, in eompanv with several members of the force, be executed a search warrant on the premises. Before entering the premises witness saw May in his room, preparing to go to bed. Through a door, witness could see a, number of men in the kitchen, playing some game. W4ien they entered the premises there was a general s*uffle, and the electric iiglit was turned off. A rush was made for the doors, but the use of electric torches prevented any escapes. A man named Mitchell attempted to escape through the window, hut Constable Bircri caught him in the yard. There were 14 men altogether in the premises, including May and Curtis. The back door had two bolts. There were blankets over the windows, and a blanket was spread over the table to deaden the ■sound of the money. All the occupants of the room were arrested and taken to the. police station. The police were in the neighborhood for about 20 minutes before the premises were entered. l’n reply to Mr. Beaufoy witness said he was sure that the door between May's room and the kitchen, was sufficiently wide open to enable him to see Through to the kitchen. Constable G. F. McKenzie stated that he hud had the premises under observation at night from October 13 to November 14. On two nights men were coming and going all night, and the lights were going until 5 o'clock ono morning. The windows and doors were covered to prevent anyone from seeing in, and at intervals a man 'came out and flashed a torch round the yard. Witness could hear the rattle of dice and coins. Constable Gedye stated that he had the prothisos under observation from November 3 to 14, and on tiie first-men-tioned date he saw men entering and leaving the premises. Witness could hear several remarks, and could also hear bets being made. Cm November 5 witness again saw numbers of men entering the premises, and as, ho went round to the back a man came out and flashed a 'torch. Witness could hear money being shaken. Witness made similar observations on later nights. Cross-examined by Air. Beaufoy, witness stated that when he heard the clink of money he was standing at the back window.

Constable, W. Cooper gave similar evidence and stated that on, one occasion Im saw Curtis walk through the room where the gaming was in progress into his own room. On another occasion he heard an argument over the game. On the several nights when he kept a watch on the premises ho could hear bets, being made. In the front shop Curtis conducted a second-hand business, and May did saddlery work. To Mr. Beaufoy witness stated that lie did not know whether May made any charge for play. Evidence on similar lines was given bv Constable 3.0. A. Gatehouse, who had the -premises under observation from November 14 to 28. Amongst remarks he heard were: “I had three aces and this had a full hand,” and “I should have had a routine flush that time; I had four diamonds.” Witness had seen May playing, but not Curtis, though ho had seen Curtis pass through tfie room.

Constable J. M. Birch gave evidence ot observations lie had made while Matching the premises on December 2 and 3.

Senior-Sergeant Wade’s evidence regarding the raid on December 4 was corroborated by Detective J. McLeod and ’frgeant Clark. The former stated that alter the lights were put on again, lie iound two florins and a 6d cm the floor, and a dice box.

,Wr Beaufoy. for the defence, quoted tlie decision r>} Mr. Justice Saiinoud as ty the question of whether or not the accused were running tho premises for the purpose of a business. He subnnlted that there was no evidence to prove Hint the premises were run as a, business, aid the decision referred to showed that people were entitled to mvitc tlioit friends for a game of cards, e\en though there might be gambling. Charges of keeping a gaming house were usually laid against bookmakers. In tins iasn the premises were a private house, and the only evidence that the count had was that a few men congregated for a game. Senior-Sergeant Wade submitted an authoritative definition of gambling and gaming, and pointed out that in the decision quoted, by Mr. Beaufoy it. was shown that gaming had taken place on only two occasions, -whereas in this case gaming had taken place on numerous occasions. The si’ ]ij or-sevgofi 11 1 ((u ot cm ( several authorities in support of his sillimission that (he premises were kept as a common gaining house. The magistrate said it was not necessary for him to consider the authorities emoted at length. He was satisfied that the evidence was sufficient to establish that the defendants did keep the premises as a common gaming house. As had been pointed out, gaming in itself was not illegal, amt a man had a right to invite his friends to his house to play any sort of game of chance or skill; but the Act prohibited the carrying on of a betting business in particular