GAMING HOUSE

Southland Times, Issue 18618, 16 August 1919, Page 6

GAMING HOUSE

BILLIARD SALOON-KEEPER AND AN-

OTHER FINED,

Wm. Atkinson, charged with that, being the occupier of a billiard saloon in Esk street, he did use it as a common gaming house, and William Ratcliff, charged with assisting Atkinson to use the saloon for that purpose, appeared before Mr G. Cruickshank, H.M., at the Police Court yesterday morning.

Detective-Sergeant Cameron prosecuted, anti Mr Russell appeared on behalf of the accused who pleaded guilty. Detective-Sergeant Cameron said that the defendant, Atkinson, had been occupying the saloon for several mouths and Ratcliff who at one time was a horsetrainer, joined him a few weeks ago, having previously occupied a saloon further along the street. Some few months ago he had heard that Ratcliff was being financed to carry on a betting business, and although Atkinson was warned it had no effect. On Tuesday afternoon, in company with Senior-Sergeant Eccles, Sergeant McCarthy, and Constables Pender, Dunlop and Austin, he conducted a raid on the saloon. Ratcliff came out to the door and they searched him. He had £144 11s 6d in his possession at the time and also a large number of betting records and a few slips from clients giving instructions as to what was to be done with the money if the.horse they had backed won the race. On continuing their search of the premises they found a number of race-cards and other tilings which would suggest that the saloon was being used as a gaming house. When Atkinson was searched he had about 40 records of betting transactions in his pockets. A few years ago bookmaking was fairly common in Invercargill, but although there had not been so much of it going on until recently he was sorry to say that it was again on the increase. It was the duty of the police to suppress it, and the only way this could be done wais by substantial fines being imposed. As far as he knew Atkinson’s character was good apart from the fact that he was rather fond of drink. He knew nothing against Ratcliff.

Mr Russell, for the accused, said that Ratcliff admitted that he had been carrying on business as a bookmaker. For a time he was a horse-trainer, but when the racing was curtailed he ran a billiard saloon in Esk street. It was only during the last few weeks that any betting had taken place in Atkinson’s saloon, and Atkinson had never taken a single bet. The slips found in his possession had been left with him by clients to give to Ratcliff. Atkinson informed the police of this when the raid was made, and both the accused had been quite frank about the matter. He thought that it would be only right if Atkinson was treated more leniently than Ratcliff as he had nothing to do with the actual betting. Ratcliff was in the habit of carrying his own money and about £6O of the amount found on him when he was searched was not money which he had taken for bets. As it was their first offence he would suggest that the same fines should be imposed as in a similar case that had come before the court on a previous occasion.

Detective-Sergeant Cameron said that it was the duty of the court to see that the law was observed, and if it was necessary, to compel offenders to observe it. He quite agreed with Mr Russell, however, that it was Ratcliff who did the actual betting. It was a common thing for a fine of £SO to be imposed in such cases. The Magistrate said that it was no good inflicting a fine of £5 or £lO, as it would only appear to the accused like paying for a license. Ratcliff was fined £SO and Atkinson was fined £lO.