APPEAL ALLOWED.

Star (Christchurch), Volume XLIV, Issue 579, 8 October 1932, Page 27 (Supplement)

APPEAL ALLOWED.

Poker Dice in Hotel Bar. CONVICTION QUASHED. (Special to the “ Star.”) AUCKLAND, October 7. A sequel to the conviction of an Auckland licensee on a charge of permitting gambling in his hotel was heard in the Supreme Court, before Mr Justice Smith. On September 2 last Charles Edward Adams, licensee of the Empire Hotel, was charged, before Mr F. K. Hunt, S.M., with the offence mentioned, and was fined £lO. Against this conviction Adams appealed, and the appeal came up in the form of a rehearing of the case. Adams claimed that he was not guilty, and that the magistrate’s finding was not supported by evidence, and was against the weight of the evidence. Council for the respondent said a man named Anderson, after attending wrestling at the Town Hall, visited the Empire Hotel and played poker dice with the licensee. He lost heavily, and made a complaint to the police, stating that he had been “ taken down ” for £5 17s. John Wilfred Anderson, motor driver, said he went to the Empire Hotel on the night of June 27. He had been there after licensed hours twice before, lie found the licensee, Adams, and five others in the bar with dice and drinks in front of them. Adams brought the dice along, and wanted witness to throw against him for a shilling. The stakes were increased to 2s fid and then to £1 a time, for three throws. _ Counsel for Adams said the prosecution rested on the uncorroborated story of one man, who was obviously “ disgruntled ” at what had taken place, and who had made untrue statements to the police. Adams, giving evidence, said the box and dice were hotel property when he took over the house. lie himself had never gambled with them. The dice were used for throwing for drinks, but not for gambling purposes. Anderson had wanted drink on credit on one occasion, and when witness would not allow him credit Anderson abused him. “ Selling a Horse.” Witness was closely questioned bicounsel regarding various names appearing as those of boarders in the hotel register. Witness admitted that, with on exception, lie did not know anything about them. lie admitted they had no luggage with them. Witness also admitted that “ selling a horse ” on the principle of “ a shilling in and the winner shouts” was illegal, but lie had only just ascertained that. Witness reasserted that the dice were used only for throwing for drinks and not for gambling. Giving judgment, his Honor said the circumstances of the case were very suspicious, and there was no doubt in his mind that the game of poker dice had been played in the hotel, but. seeing that the case was.a re-hearing, lie had to determine whether, upon the evidence before him, it had been proved that gambling took place on that particular night. Ilis Honor said it had to be considered whether Anderson was a witness whose credibility could be relied upon. “ Although the circumstances j are very suspicious,” said his Honor, “ I have come to the conclusion that j. the case is of the type where a judge ! would direct a jury that the evidence ; is not strong enough to convict.” His Honor accordingly allowed the appeal, and, in reply to counsel for the j appellant, said he would issue a direc- j tion that the endorsement of Adams’ ! license should be expunged. His Honor pointed out that the circumstances of the case had been materially altered by fresh evidence given during the* Supreme Court hearing. j