NO MORE FREE TRIPS.

Press, Volume L, Issue 14886, 28 January 1914, Page 3

NO MORE FREE TRIPS.

THE DOMAIN FETE SCHEME. DECLARED TO BE A LOTTERY. CHAIRMAN OF ijOARD CHARGED. There was quit© a stir in the Magistrate's Court yesterday when a wellknown solicitor, was called upon to answer a charge. "Henry Joseph Beewick," announced the. Clerk of the Court,, "you are charged that you, within tho space of six months last past at Christchurch, did establish a scheme by which prizes wore gained by mode of ciiauce, to wit, tho art union in connexion with the Christchurch Domain Kose Carnival, which art union was drawn at Christchurch on the 31st day of December, 1913." "How do you plead? Guilty or not guilty ?" "Not guilty," replied Mr Beswick. "I appear for the accused," said Mr George Harper, drily. Mr Beswick is chairman of the Christchurch Domain Board. "We contest the information on a small technical point,"" Mr Harper declared, "on the ground that it is not laid under tho proper .section." In reply to his Worship, Mr Harper admitted that tho prize drawing had taken place. Mr Harper went on to say that sections 41 and 12 of the Gaming Act, VMS, dealt with the case. Ho submitted that section -12 dealt with art unions. It said :— '"If any person being tho owner of any painting, drawing, sculpture, or other work of art, or literature, or mineral specimens, or mechanical models, applies to tho Minister of Internal Affairs for permission to dispose of the same by raffle or chanco, the said Minister mar. if he thinks fit, grant a license? for that purpose, subject to such conditions and restrictions as he thinks right to impose." The tickets in this case, Mr Harper said, showed that the people who bought them had the opportunity of winning free passage tickets to Australia, the North Island, and Hanmer Springs. Now. these trips worn not works of art, and the eel.erne thereby was nothing in the nature ot an art union. Section 42 had been taken from the English Act, which defined art unions as "voluntary associations for the purchase of paintings, drawings, and other works of art .to be distributed by chance amongst the members.'" Now our Act was very much the same, and he submitted that the section had to be construed strictly. His Worship: What about those art union-, which give nuggets of gold as prize* ? Mr Harper: That is a different thing. His Worship: But they are not works of art. Mr Harper: They are specially allowed in the Act. Continuing, Mr Harper said that in tho case of Raddell v. McGrath, 2 G.L.R., Mr Justice Edwards said he quite agreed with the magistrate that to sustain a conviction it was necessary for the words to come within the statute. "What should have been done in this case," declared Mr Harper, "has been done in similar English cases. Section 41 is the section under which the information should have been laid. For the information of readers section 41 of the Gambling Act reads as follows: — "Every person who (a) establishes, commences, or is partner in any lottery, or in any scheme by which prizes, whether of money or of any other matter or thing are gained, drawn for, thrown, or competed for by lot, dice, or any other mode of chance; or (b) sells or disposes of any tickets or other means by which permission or authority is gained or given to any person to throw for, compete, or have any interest in any such lottery or scheme, whether promoted in New.Zealand.-or elsewhere; or (c) manages or conducts, or assists in managing or conducting, or canvasses for, subscribes to, or receives any money or valuable thing for tickets in or for'any purpose connected with any such lottery or scheme —is liable to a fine not exceeding £200, and for any second offence, besides such fine, is liable to imprisonment for any term not exceeding six months." His Worship' said the information could be altered at any time. He could take it under Section 41. Mr Harper: For four years this thing has been going on, and the police have never taken any action before. His Worship: I shall amend the information to bring it under Section 41. The information against Mr Beswick was accordingly altered to read as follows:— "Did establish a scheme by which prize.? were gained by mode of chance, to wit, the art union in connexion with the Christchurch Domain Rose Carnival, which art union was drawn at Christchurch on the 31st day of December, 1913." ' Mr Harper : We plead guilty to that. I submit that this echeme was for a very good and laudable object, .and we havo been offending in tho same way for the last four years. We had no intention of breaking the law. His Worship: It is true that this sort of thing has been going on all over the Dominion. " Sub-Inspector McKirmon : It has just been discovered that this sort of .thing has been going on without permits. His Worship: I don't think you can get a permit, not under Section*4l. Mr Heswick said he was not at tho drawing of tho prizes, being in Dune- [ din at the time. A policeman came to ! him, and he said he woulU take full responsibility if the Crown Law Officers thought the promoters of the fete had been offending against the law. The committee, which had the drawing of the prizes in hand, had invited a police officer to be present merely to see that everything was done properly. His Worship: Who was the police officer? Sub-Inspector McKinnon: Sergeant Ciarkson. His .Worship: Well, he should be cited. (Laugliter.) Continuing, the Magistrate said that the effect, no doubf, would be to put a stop to this sort of thing, and the indirect effect would be that some people would get no more cheap trips. Sub-Inspector McKinnon: We don't want to be severe. His Worship: There are lots of other illpjral things goi\g on in the Dominion. Sub-Inspector McKinnon agreed. Mr Harper asked that just a warning be given. His Worship expressed his reluctance to record a conviction against Mr Beswick, who had assumed all the responsibility, a conviction that might be thrown up against him on some future occasion. Mr Harper asked for the withdrawal of the information now that the object of the prosecution had been attained. The Magistrate said everyone knew his views on gambling, but of course there was no analogy between this case and general gambling. Most of the people who bought tickets really bought them for admission to the fete. But as tho information lay before him, he was bound to convict. The offence was not a trivial one, providing as it did for a penalty up to £200. "You cannot see your way, Mr McKinnon, to look into the matter, eeeing that one of your staff has been brought into it?" enquired his Worship of the Sub-Inspector, whilst a peal of laughter rang out. Sub-Inspector McKinnon asked for a fortnight in which to look into the matter. Mr Beswick, he said, was taking the responsibility of the citizens of Christchurch. His Worship said he did not like to convict Mr Beswick. No one- could suggest that he was chary of convicting, but it was quite another thing convicting a- respectable citizen for a thing for which he was not personally responsible. Hβ thought now that pub-

licity would be given to the matter the object of the police had been attained. Next time the scheme was tried a severe penalty must be imposed. The case was adjourned for a week.