BOOKMAKING CHARGE.
JURY REJECTS JUDGE’S ADVICE. (Per Press Association.) AUCKLAND, May 9. At the Supreme Court Frederick Howard. a waterside worker. was charged with having published and publicly exhibited a “double” chart, and having carried on the business of a bookmaker. Detective Meiklejohn gave evidence to the effect that on a. ferry-boat conveying wafcersiders to a picnic he heard the accused accept a double. "Witness looked at the card. which showed twenty-two doubles, representing oas, had been laid. Witness knew from office records that accused had been fined for bookmaking. llis Honor, in summing up. said there might be differences of opinion as to the wisdom of certain legislation. The Court had nothing to do with that. If Parliament passed a law. it was his duty to administer it. The duty olj the jury was equally clear. Ft was there to return a verdict according to their oaths; otherwise the administration of justice would be reduced to a scandal. Tt was impossible to come to any other conclusion than that accused was guilty of book making if the evidence was to be believed. The jury returned a verdict of not guilty, and the accused was discharged.
Permanent link to this item
https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/TS19230510.2.95
Bibliographic details
Star (Christchurch), Issue 17037, 10 May 1923, Page 12
Word Count
196BOOKMAKING CHARGE. Star (Christchurch), Issue 17037, 10 May 1923, Page 12
Using This Item
Star Media Company Ltd is the copyright owner for the Star (Christchurch). You can reproduce in-copyright material from this newspaper for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International licence (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0). This newspaper is not available for commercial use without the consent of Star Media. For advice on reproduction of out-of-copyright material from this newspaper, please refer to the Copyright guide.
Log in