LAW REPORTS.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1653, 21 January 1913, Page 9

LAW REPORTS.

'LOWER COURT. (Before Dr. M'Arthur,-S.M.) JAMES SCOTT AND HIS CHART. THE DECISION. ONE OF THE CHARGES FAILS. Decision was delivered in the Magistrate's Court yesterday by Dr. M'Arthur, S.M., in the cases in which James Scott was charged with having been on Lambton Quay on December 13, 1912, for the purpose of betting, and with having published a double chart concerning tho Auckland races.

1 1 he facts, said his Worship,' "are very' brief,.-and are admitted by,counsel for the defence. On the day named in the informations, the defendant was on.Lambton • Quay, One Aiissell, a witness, gave evidence that he crossed the street and asked Soott for a double chart or card on horse raoes.. Scott took-a chart out of his pocket and handed it to the No conversation took place as to betting,.nor was any bet made then or afterwards*. Aussell stated that he did not know, that Scott was a bookmaker. £0 the above facts support the informa5 r 4? n °t? It' was 6worn by Detective-Sergeant Cassells that Scott was a bookmaker. I take it that a bookmaker has a right to be in the street as long as Jie is not there for the purpose ofbetting. There must be some evidence to prove. that purpose. Is the mere giving, on request, a chart to a person, without conversation'as to betting, or the making of a bet, sufficient evidence that the de-' fendant was. in,the street for -the purposo of betting? Such conduct may arouse suspicion, but, in my opinion, it is not sufficient to convict a person of being in f tho purpose of' betting., I think, therefore, that the first information. '-must be dismissed;" , ' ..As to the. charge of having published the chart, his Worship held that the evidence showed that Scott had . published a prohibited document. On this charge Scott was convicted anil fined <£10. Mr. M. Myers, counsel for the defendant, asked his Worship to delay the actual' entry of his decision pending the decision of "a case which was to, come before the Full Court in AjjriL This, said Mr. Myers, might .avoid an appeal in the present case. 1 r His Worship .agreed to the oourse, and adjourned the decision sine die, on the condition that Scott deposited j£lo 17s. with : the olerk' of the Court. v

r short weights IN SHOPS. Ying, Lee and. Co. and William Cook and Sons were' each fined 105.,' with costs 75., for having short-weight weights in • their possession. . , Defendants stated that they had not known of the fact of the light weights until tho test was made. : DEFICIENT MILK. Ellen A; Pentecost was fined iOsl, with costs ,£1 18s. Cd., for having, sold milk which did not comply with the standard required by the Act. ■ j . OTHER CASES./ V _ Herbert Wallace walchargcd iwith having stolen a pair of boots anil about 10s. from Patrick Landy, and 9s. from James Cos. He desired to be tried by Va jury, and after the depositions.had been thken lie Was committed ; to tho Supremo Court for trial. ■ William Slack was'fined <£2for having used certain language. Harriet SMoney was fined ;E1 for hav-. ing'broken a prohibition order, Arthur Norton was fined £3 for having assaulted; Foo Tong Kwee in Frederick Street on Saturday night. . - ' For having disobeyedmaintenance orders, Julius Tocker was sentenced to seven days' imprisonment, and Alfred Edward Lanev. to. fourteen days' imprisonment.' Both warrants were suspended till January 27. ' Alfred Ede and Walter Ede were ordered to contribute to the support of.eeveral children (relatives), who were in the Wellington Receiving Home 1 .