MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

Dominion, Volume 6, Issue 1699, 15 March 1913, Page 22

MAGISTRATE'S COURT.

'(Before Mr. W. G. Riddell, S.M.) ' I ALLEGED GAMING HOUSE. THE DETECTIVES' VIGIL. At the Magistrate's, Court, before'' Mr; W. G. Riddeil, S.M., yesterday, .Samuel Jarvis was charged with keeping a common gaming house, Wm. Eager, was charged with assisting Jarvis in the management of the same, and Gustavo Bibbing,' H. E. Sayßrs,-Steve Hansen, W. Mason, Augustus Davis; John Walker, and Ed. M'Carthy wero jointly charged with having been found on-tho premises. Sub-Inspector Sheehan conducted tho proceedings on behalf of tho police, and Mr. M. Myers appeared for all' the accused. What the Watchers Saw. Detective Dempsey said that on tho nights of February 15 and 16 he had, with Detective-Sergeant Cassells, watched No. 277 Cuba Street. On the night of February 16 he heard the clinking of money, and had seen several persons leaving tho house. A man was patrolling in front of tho place. He saw the defeudant. Eager, look over the fence, and Detective-Sergeant Cassells called out: "Hallo, Oxenliaml" whereupon Eager hurried to the front of tho house, and knocking- loudly on the dooT called out". "Look out! look . out I" Witness and Cassells simultaneously jumped over tho fence, and the latter asked Eager what ho was doing, to whicli Eager replied, "Only having' l a game of cards." ( Witness then went to the front door' and knocked, and heard Cassells knocking at the side door, saying, "Police here!" For about twenty minutes witness waited ■outside. When'lio saw Jarvis, the latter said tliat he had been in financial difficulties, his wife was ill,-and ho owed .£B. Ho also,remarked that he intended to "turn the gamo up when he got square." Jarvis told Cassells that they had been playing, hazards. On being questioned, Eager said that he was not "running the show." Jarvis intervened and said that Eager "only collects the money." Witness said that soine six or seven people whoso names he did not get must have escaped by the back window. Concerning the Detectives' Notes. ■ When questioned by Mr. Myers, witness 6aid that ho and Detective-Sergeant Cassells had permission to go into tho adjoining backyard to watcli defendant's bouse. He admitted that ho had not a warrant to* search defendant's house. Up to the time ho joined Cassello at tho side of the house ho had no evidence against the defendants. Jarvis and Eager admitted them to the house. They only found a pack of cards. Detective-Sergeant Cassells then asked Jarvis where tho hazards box was, and Jarvis replied that' someone must have taken it away. Continuing, witness said that he accompanied Detective-Sergeant Cassells to the Manners Street Pojice Station. Mr. Myers: Did you write your notes at Manuers Street? • Witness: Yes. Mr. Myers: Did Detective Cassells write his notes also? Witness: Yos, he was writing in'a book. Mr. Myers: Did you compare your notes? Witness, after some hesitation, replied: *No, he did not read his notes over to me. Mr. Myers: Has ho read them over to yon? Witness: No, he has not read them ovor to me. Mr. Myers: Do you know what was b,is own notes ? Witness: I have seen his report. Witness, continuing, said he went to the Manners Street Police Station with Cassells, as tho latter had left his bicycle there. Mr. Myers: Why did you not go homo and wrife up your notes independently of Cassells? Witness: It did not occur to mo at tho time. Detective Cassell's Story. Detective-Sergeant Cassells- said that when he questioned Eager, at tho house, and asked him what ho was doing, tho defendant replied: "Just having a game of cards." Later, witness said: "This nlaco is only a gaming-house," to which Eager replied: "The old man must do something for a living." On being invited into the house, lie found the pack of cards (produced). Witness, in answer to Eager, told him that there would be a prosecution, although at tho time he did not think so. He warned Jarvis to "knock the c;ame off," and Jarvis replied that ho would. To Mr. Jlyers: He had known Jarvis as a hard-working man. He had no evidence against the defendants, and lie did not think a prosecution would follow. 1 Witness and Dempsoy both wrote thcar

notes in tho same rotfm at tho Manners ijtreet station. Jlr. Jlyers: Why did yon not let the mail go to the Lamblon Station and make him own notes? Witness: I did not stop him, Mr. Myers: Does it surprise you to know that your notes are practically word ■ for word with that of tho other detectivfe? Witness: I would be surprised to know that. ' Mr. Myers: Would you Ire surprised to know that all the points noted in your book and Demppy's asree, and on the points yon have not noted, you disagree? 'Witness: I don't know anything about that. Counsel then examined witness as to who sot permission to go into the adjoin ing .back-yard to watch tho defendant's house, witness replied that Dempsey had. Mr. Myers then pointed out-that the point as to who obtained permission to go into the adjoining back-yard, was not noted in either of the detective's books, and they in evidence differed on this ono noint. Other Witnesses.' Maurice Goldberg, accountant, residing at No. 275 Cuba Street, stated that his house was situated in" front of the defendant's place. He said he had seen a» many as 20 to 30 men go up tho passage byl his house on one Sunday. This occurred oil. 1 one or two Sundays and perhaps two week nights. This had been going on for about nine" months. Jlr. Myers: Oh, has it? For nine months! Alfred Pacey, wife of Edward Pacey, No. 279 Cuba Street, said that slio knew that Jarvis occupied No. 277. She said Fnat Detectives Cassells and Dempsey had called on her. To Mr. Myers: She had not given either of the detectives permission to go on her property. Mr. Myers submitted that those who had been charged with being found in a common gaming house should have their informations dismissed. They were not found on the premises. They camo out of tho house and gave their names outside. His Worship concurred, and said that those cases would have to be dismissed at once. The admission made by Jarvis and Eager v.-ere evidence against them, but not against the other defendants, unless tho admissions were made in their presence. Sub-InspeotJr Slieehan: But presuming your Worship holds that the house is a common gaming house, these informations could not be dismissed. His Worship upheld tho officer, and said he would decide the motter later. Final Argument..

Mr. Myers said that he felt bound to say that tho case, from tho point of view of the police, was a very unsaiisfactoVy one. It had been, said timo and again that tho polios should bo careful in taking down notes, in, this case they had not been as .careful as they should have been. Th:se two detectives had gone ; unnecessarily to the Manners Street oliice to make their notes. Every'material point was given word for word in the two notebooks. Continuing, he said his Worship knew tliat when two or even half a dozen men were giving evidence, especially iivo minutes alter a. conversation, they would not agree unless they had been in collaboration. The only point that had not been noted in tho d-etectives' books was the ono on which three witnesses disagreed. Counsel did not wish to infer that Detectives Cassells and Dempsey-were making untrue .statements. There was a very strong probability of' a mistake. The witness Dempsey. had said that Cassells had got permission to stay in tho yard. -Cassalls Jiad said that Dempsey got permission to stay in the yard. Mrs. I J acey had stated that neither, of them got permission to stay in the yard. Something had been said in evidence about a dico or hazard'box, but no box was found. No dico "were found oil the prcnises. Even if a gamo of poker wa9 played on the promises, it was certainly not a geme of chance. It was a gamo of considerable skill. No one could eay it was a gamo of chance. What evidonco was there to prove that the house was a common gaming house? The caso might even be a. suspicious one, but it was a caso in which nonjury would conrict. Sub-Inspector Sheehan: -But Jarvis candidly admits" that the game was going on, and Eager admits that lie was col- - lecting money. His Worship said that it was clear that tho place could not be held as a common gaming house, therefore the information against all the accuscd, with the' exception of Jarvis and Eager, must be dismissed. He reserved decision in tho case of Jarvis and Eager, adding that the information against those who wero r.ot prcssnt in the Court would bo withdrawn. j . ALLEGED PERJURY. . , George Williams'was charged with having committed perjury by swearing at a certain judicial proceeding heard by Mr. W. G. Riddell, S.M., that he did not visit certain premises in Martin ' Street on March 5, whereas certain evidence was brought to show that he did visit tho premises. Mr. J.. J. M'Grath appeared for the defendant, who was remanded until March 19. • POLICE CASES, Annie Courtney was fined 40s„ in default seven days' imprisonment,, on a charge of accompanying a prohibited person into a hotel, well knowing that person to be prohibited. For bre'acues of their prohibition orders, Edward Moham, James V. Morris, and Samuel Telfer, were ea'ch fined £3, in default 14 days' imprisonment. For similar offences, Maud. Lim Leo was fined 205., in default seven days' imprisonment, and Florence M'Anally was lined 405., in default seven days' imprisonment. Louisa Maitland was fined 55., in default 24 hours' imprisonment, for insobriety. For a similar offence, Allan M'Phen wa9 ~ lined 10s., with the option of 48 hours' imprisonment. James Henry Doyle pleaded guilty to a charge of being intoxicated whilst in charge of a horse and cart on Thorndon Quay. The defendant was fined 205., in default 48 hours' imprisonment, , MILITARY CASES.

For failing to comply with the dcfenco regulations, the following wero ordered to.pay. court costs 7s.:—Arthur"V. Lancaster, Arthur Hobbs, A. Watson, C. Nelson, Leslie Woolcy, Lionel Tucker, Roy Harrison. John A. Leggat, and Andrew Muir. For obstructing a parade,. Henry W. Furness and Charles Short were each fined ss. ' BY-LAW CASES. Deano Orford Shute was convicted of having failed to connect his dwelling in Charlotte Avenue with the corporation drainage system, and was fined 205., with' court costs 75., in default 48 hours. Walter Norris and E. C. Young wero fined ss. and 10s., in default 24 and 48 hours' imprison ment respectively, - for failing to register their dogs. TRAM FARE CASE. The Tramway authorities proceeded against H. H. Travers, charging him with, having failed to pay his fare whilst travelling on one of the Corporation cars. 111-. M. Myers appeared for the defend- ' ant, and Jlr. Beechy represented the i civic authorities. Conductor Toohill said that on March 5 the defendant boarded his car at Wellington Road and handed witness a sliil- . ling, at the same time asking- for a two- ' penny ticket, which took defendant to Couftenay Place. After leaving Cour- , tenay Place, witness went round to coli leet.'t'lio fares, but defendant did not pay. , To Mr. Myers: Witness said that some people did not always hear the conductor , requesting fares to be paid. Witness callE ed out, "Fares, please!" Inspector Dunn gave evidence as to 'askj ins defendant for his ticket. To Jlr. Jlyers: Witness admitted seeing a ticket, and a penny in defendant's hand. H. 11. Travers gave evidence to the eft feet that when he paid his fare he in- , tended to get out at Courtenay Place. > However, when at Courtenay Place, he 3 decided to continue on his journey, and 3 got a penny out to pay for another seel tion. lie kept the penny in his hand, j but did not see or hear the conductor - until the inspector came round.

His Worship said he had held before that, Avlien a conductor came to Hie compartment, and called out for fares, it was the passenger's duty to hand over the fare. If a passenger were deaf it was all tho more reason why they should bo on the look-out for the conductor. However, he went on, there appeared to have been some doubt in the matter, and his Worship was willing to eivo defendant 1 lie benefit of the doubt, The information was dismissed.