GAMING HOUSE CHARGE

Bay of Plenty Beacon, Volume 2, Issue 187, 17 July 1940, Page 5

GAMING HOUSE CHARGE

. . 1.. I , I • - PROPRIETOR FINED £10 POLICE WATCH 111 ROUGH SKYLIGHT A fine of £10 was imposed and an order for the confiscation of a ~ 'fruit machine' was made when the proprietor of the Qpotiki Shooting Parlour, Daniel L. Leach, appeared before Messrs J. T. Merry and C. Pipe, Justices, in the Opotiki Court, to answer a charge of being thej occupier of premises used as a common gaming house. Accused, represented by Mr N. V. TlodgJ son, entered a plea of not guilty In evidence, Sergeant Isbister said that the police had been keeping a watch on the premises for some time, during which the fruit machine had been in operation. Hie, police had received complaints that young men were wasting their money in gambling. The fruit machine was located at the rear of the premises and it could be heard quite distinctly. It was possible to see through the skylight and see men go into the room but it was not possible to see the machine. - Witness could see men handed discs. On Friday, July 5, witness saw two brothers go into the room. The eldest purchased four discs for 2s. The youngest then borrowed some discs as he had no money. That youth owed accused £2 5s of which 10& had been paid off leaving £1 15s owing. Sergeant Isbister then produced a small book taken from accuscd in which he alleged "numerous other residents were shown as owing sums of money. Witness said that he saw a certain note being made in book. For Amusement Only. Continuing, Sergeant Isbister said that as a result of information received, he had a .warrant issued which was executed by Constables Cooper, Rathie <?ndhiias'df. Witness said that he actually heard the machine being used by two men who were facing charges of being found in a common gaming house. Neither man had any excuse. The proprietor then came along and saiid that the machine had been operated for amusement only. Witness pointed out to accused that he had seen money being handed over for tokens. Questioned by Mr Hodgson, witness said that lie had known of the machine about a fortnight or three weeks. In his opinion accused was making most of his money out of this machine. It was' at night when he saw the two boys through the skylight, where he could see into the room through plain glass. Witness had frequently seen accuscd supplying tokens to other men. Asked why he had not taken steps soon.ee witness replied that he wanted to (be able to prove the charge and he saw no. necessity to break through the door. He had been there on hal'S a dozen occasions when he had seen discs handed,out. Evidence was also given by Constable Rathie. The Defence. Mr Hodgson submitted that it was not necessary to call evidence as the charge had not been proved. He quoted the case of FitzgilSbons which showed the necessity of proving that a business was' being car-* ried on. In actual fact, Mr Hodgson claimed, the police had not produo ed any evidence to say that they had seen the machine operated. The. machine could be operated an occasions without discs. There was nothing illegal in operating, or owning the machine. It was suggested that the machine was being operated for pleasure. The Bench: Why are the winning numbers on the front? Mr Hodgson said that there must be some indication as to whether the players Avere winning or not, just as in any other game. The Writing was probably on the. machine when it was bought by accused. It was only a scoring board and- no money was represented. The Benchc Would, you suggesij that it was there just for the amuse ment of the public? Mr Hodgson replied that any game of chance has an attraction, for the public, whether they get any money out of it or not. At this stage the Bench indicated that it would like to hear accused. /' Accused's Statement. Laurence Leach said that he did not like leaving a man with a gun, and that was why he shut the front door. Witness had a lot of games of skill. The fruit machine was in (Continued foot next column).

the back of the shop as the shooting gallery took up all the front of the shop. Witness bought the'machine for his own amusement when ; he Avas farming. The 'game, was a very fascinating one, and-if it was in the front of the shop he: not be able to stop people from usj> ing it. • , ■ Sergeant Isbister said that any. man pliaying the game. would be likely to come forward and tell the court about it. He submitted that it had been proved that money had been charged. If the machines was so amusing it would be keptt in the front of the shop to attract customers, ; Mr Hodgson replied that if thd machine were kept in the front of the shop, people would be plajang. with it for nothing and not with ;, the other machines. There was northing to connect the book with the machine. Two men who were found on the premises appeared before the court charged with being found in a common gaming house. One pleaded guilty and the other not guilty. The Bench stated that it had decided to convict Leach and invited Mr Hodgson to address the Bench on the question of the penalty. Mr Hodgson asked that the penalty be at least £5 Is for the purpose of appeal. The Bench convicted Leach and: imposed a fine of £10, ordering that the machine be confiscated. • Each of the other accused convicted and fined £1.