MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Dominion, Volume 8, Issue 2354, 9 January 1915, Page 3

MAGISTRATE'S COURT

CHINESE GAMING HOUSES RAIDED OFFENDERS IN COURT PENALTY OF £100 INFLICTED As a result of the recent raids on gaming houses in Taranaki and Haining Streets, four Chinamen appeared before Mr. D. G. A. Coopor, S.M., in the Magistrate's Court yesterday. Ah Yung was charged with being the occupier of premises at 39 Haining Street and using the same as a common gaming house; Kem Sing with being the occupier of 136 Taranaki Street, and using the same as a common gaming house; Wong Loui and Ah Loo with being found on the last-named premises. Mr. V. R. Meredith appeared for ali four, and in the first two cases entered pleas of guilty; and in the latter two pleas of not guilty. Inspector Hendrey said that some time ago, after Chinese had 1 been repeatedly _ convicted, it was thought that the gaming houses in and around Haining Street had been practically stamped out. Apparency lately the Chinese had come to the opinion that the game was worth the risk of detection The rising generation of Chinamen also realised that the game of pak-a-poo was not worth investing in, and so left it for foolish Europeans to buy tickets. The Inspector said ho knew well that _ a large number of Chinese in the City and the Dominion were particularly desirous of having 1 these gaming houses stamped out. Referring to the case of Ah' Yung, the Inspector said he had! been repeatedly convicted for offences similar to the one he was now charged with. In 190S he had been fined £25 for selling lottery tickets. In 1909 fined £25 for a. similar offence; in the same month of the fame year fined £40 for being the occuoier of a gaming house; in 1913 fined £20 for a like offence; and in 191.4 fined £50 for a like offence. As to Kem Sing, he had not been previously convicted, but nevertheless had been warned some month's previously by Detective Sergeant Cassells

Mr. Meredith submitted that the game was not such a desperately bad game as waa made out. Each case should be tried on its merits. Referring to the case of Kern Sing, counsel said that all he had been- doing was selling pak-a-poo tickets. He had not been previoasly convicted, and he un-derstood-the police could give Mm a good character. As to Ah Yung, he was a hard-working hawker.

The Magistrate said he must inflict substantial penalties. He knew what a great danger the game was to young Europeans. "I myself have'hnd several letters from mothers complaining of their sons losing all their earnings and bfiing led astray through frequenting Chinese gambling houses,!' said the Magistrate. Kem Sing would he fined £25, while Ah Yung, as an old offender, would be fined the maximum penalty of £100, in default three months in gnol. Each was ordered to pay 12s. 3d. costs. '

The two Chinese, Wong Loui and Ah Loo, who were discovered in the premises of the previous accused when the raid was made, both entered pleas of not guilty. Ah Loo said he had gone there on other business, and gave evidence to this effect The Magistrate pave him the benefit of the doubt, and dismissed the information. Wong Loui. went one further, and l said ho had gone on business and had just reached tho door when he was pulled inside by some policemen. As there were some discrepancies in his story, he waß convicted and fined .£l, with costs 125., in dafault seven days hi" gaol.

THE CASE OF AN EX-TROOPER. The case of Harry Tamm, charged with being a rogue and a vagabond in that he consorted with reputed thieves and people of ill-fame, again came before the Court. Mr. M. Luckie, m pleading for leniency, outlined accused s life for the past few years, and the offorts, he said, made for reform. Accused had lived practically a respectable life for the past few yearß. He had returned from the Chatham Islands just after war had broken out, and had immediately applied to join the Expeditionary Force. It was the delay in his ultimate admission into the force that had caused him to drift in with the bad companions he was charged with consorting with. It was true that accused- had since been dismissed from the Force he had joined some weeks back. Aocused had never been in gaol before in his life, and he (counsel) would ask the Magistrate to give. accusel one more chance, take a prohibition order out against him, and order him to come up for sentence when called upon, j.j Inspector Hendrey sara accused had already been given a. number of opportunities to reform, but had refused to avail himself of them. Accused was one of a dangerous gang, which, in spite, of warnings from the police, frequented tho bad parts of the City. Accused was a nuisance to himself, his people, and the community. _ The Magistrate agreed with Inspector Hendrey, and 6ent accused to gaol for throe months.

OTHER CASES. Arthur Hainsworth was remanded to January 13 on a charge of carnally knowing a girl under the age of lb years. Bail was allowed in tho sum of £100, with two sureties of £50. John Maddock, with two aliases to his name, was fined 10s., in default 48 hours' imprisonment, for using-threat-ening behaviour, and £3, with the alternative of one month's imprisonment, for using obscene language. For drunkenness, Caroline Smith and Mary Sprowell were each fined £2, or seven days' imprisonment; while Annie 5 Quinn, with more previous convictions to her name, was fined £2, or 14 days' imprisonment. Three first offenders were convicted and discharged for drunkenness.,

BY-LAW BREACHES. Finos of 5a.. with costs 73.. were imposed on the'following for the by-law broaches mentioned:—W. H. Edwards, depositing timber on tho Terrace and failing to put a light on the same after sunset; Bert. Press, riding a bicycle in Lambton Quay after dark without a light; Jas. Prockter, driving a motorcar along Lambton Quay without a tail light; John Roberteon, allowing the chimney of his houso to catch fire; Simmonda and Osborne allowing a horse to wander in Adelaide Road.