Untitled

New Zealand Illustrated Sporting & Dramatic Review, Volume IV, Issue 168, 12 October 1893, Page 4

The ‘ tote’ men are having a hard time of it in Sydney at present ; hardly a day passing without someone being fined by the N.S.W. magistrates. Writing on the subject in the Referee ‘ Verax’ (Nat. Gould) says : —‘ Last week John Croft was brought before Mr G. H. Smithers, D.S.M., at the Water Police Court, for having, in plain, not legal phraseology, run a tote. Mr E. Wallace, who defended, argued — (1) That the evidence for the prosecution showed that the office mentioned in the information was the office of J. Barkell, and that the defendant was merely a servant of his ; (2) that the subscription of money by a number of persons into a common fund or stake (with the agreement among themselves that their money should be held by an individual as a stakeholder, and handed over to such of the subscribers who would select the first, second, or third horses in the race) was not a receiving of money by such stakeholder as a consideration or a promise to give thereafter certain money on the contingency of such race, as stated in the section of the Act; that there was no evidence of such promise, undertaking, or agreement on the part of the defendant in that case.

Mr Smithers considered the case proved, and fined defendant £2O, ’with £5 5s costs. An appeal, we hear, is to be made, and Mr Wallace’s arguments are certainly to the point. If his arguments hold good, “tote” promoters will find very little difficulty in carrying on their operations in future. It will be interesting to see what the result of such an appeal is if it be made.’ It is evident the ‘ tote’ men are going to fight hard for existence, but they will have a hard task in Sydney, where the feeling is very strong against workers of the machine.