WHAT IS A TOTALISATOR?

Auckland Star, Volume LIX, Issue 236, 5 October 1928, Page 5

WHAT IS A TOTALISATOR?

IMPORTANT APPEAL CASE. BETS TAKEN AT WINDOWS. (By Telegraph.-—Press Association.) WELLINGTON, this day. An appeal of considerable interest, particularly to the racing community, came before the Full Court yesterday and to-day. Harold Edward Goggin, secretary of the New Zealand Metropolitan Trotting Club, Christchurch. appealed against the decision of a Christchurch magistrate, Mr. E. D. Mosley, in convicting him on a charge that, as a servant of the club, he did unlawfully permit to be received an investment on the totalisator elsewhere than at the totalisator itself. At the hearing in the Magistrate's Court it was adduced in evidence on behalf of the informant and admitted by the defendant, that besides the main totalisator, the club used two separate windows, one in the members' stand and one in the stewards' stand; that these windows were not connected by tele graphic communication or by any other means with the main totalisator; that the window in the members' stand closed six minutes before and the window in the stewards' stand Ave minutes before the closing of the main totalisator; that some official came from the main totalisator building and checked the tickets in each of these boxes; and that all such sales were then recorded on the face of the main totalisator. The magistrate, being of opinion that the word "totalisator" as used in the Gaming Act did not extend to cover windows of members' and stewards' stands, accordingly convicted defendant of receiving investments contrary to the provisions of the statute. Mr. C. S. Thomas, in opening for defendant, outlined the method adopted by the trotting club authorities in establishing these boxes and the objections raised by the police. "It is admitted," he continued, "that moneys were received at these boxes, but it is our submission that these boxes are part of the totalisator, and therefore there is no offence." Mr. A. Fair, the Solicitor-General, urged that Mr. Thomas' argument was fallacious, for he had been speaking of the popular meaning of "totalisator," and had forgotten that what the Court had to decide was the meaning of the word as defined in the Act legalising the use of the totalisator. Witnesses for the defence in the Court below had spoken of what the public considered the word to mean to-day, but that was no guide to what the Legislature meant in 1881. The boxes complained of had none of the characteristics of the original totalisator, and in the light of the statute they could not be considered a part of the totalisator. The essential feature was a mechanical device for in-dicating-the amount laid on each horse and, incidentally, the total amount laid on the race. Mr. Justice Reed remarked that he was at a loss to know why the police had brought the prosecution, for there was no allegation of abuse against the Metropolitan Club. The Court reserved its decision.