CITY POLICE COURT.

Evening Star, Issue 3826, 29 May 1875, Page 2

CITY POLICE COURT.

Saturday, Mat 29. (Before E. B. Cargill, Esq,, aud A. Mercer, Esq., J.P.s.)

• —John Coalour was fined sa, in default twenty-four hours’ imprisonment; James Burke, charged with habitual drunkenness, was sent to gaol for two months. A er charge of drunkenness was withdrawn. Abusive Language. —Joseph Allwood was charged with using abusive language on the Main South Road, Green Island,—'The evidence of the arresting constable (Vemon) being directly contradicted by a witness for the defence, the case was adjourned till Monday. Gambling in an Hotel. —Richard Kingston, publican, was charged by Sergeant Deane with allowing gambling in his licensed house known as the Octagon } Cotel, he being the holder of a general license. Mr E. Cook, who defended, raised, as a preliminary objection, that defendant not being the holder of a license under the Ordinance, the offence was not properly laid* — Mr Cargill: It appears to me that you are questioning the statement of facts—that defendant is the holder of a license.— Mr Cook : No; I am objecting to the form of the summons. Ido not question his being the holder of a publican s license which is granted under the Acts of 1873 and 1874, but to the section of the Act under which the information is laid.—The Bench having overruled the objection, Mr Cook added that as the term gambling waa merely used as a general term there was no specificoffence. In the English and Victorian Acts the word “gambling” was unknown, “gaming” or wagering” being used.—The Bench consi- • lered it a waste of time for counsel to enter into such long disertations. They had their own iaws, and could interpret them without referring back to Acts passed in England or They, however, suggested that the information should be so amended as to read ‘gambling or playing a game of chance.” The information Having been so amended, Mr Cook submitted that the game should be specified, but the Bench did not think this necessary.—Mr Cook then stated that defendant was the holder of a license on the day in question, and that after business was °vor and the house closed he sat down' and played a game of cards with a lodger and one or two others. If playing a game of cards iu that way was an offence he (counsel) asked the Bench to look at the surrounding facts. Defendant was never brought before the Court before, he was a respectable man, and nothing was known against him. The game was not played by sharpers in whose plunder the landlord might share, but was a private game between defendant and others. The Bench took exception to Mr Cook’s statfacts before the evidence was beard. —Mr Cook ; But I plead guilty under the extenuating circumstances as stated.—The Bench could not take such a plea. Defendant must either plead guilty to the whole case or else not at all.—Mr Cook thought the police inspector might accept the admission and leave the case in the hands of the Bench. Nothing previously was known against defendant. Inspector Mallard admitted that up to the present time he could say nothing against defendant’s character, but he must now. ■ There was no doubt that gambling had been carried on at defendant’s place on the night in question. One witness had now gone into the country, and as he did not want the case to fall through he would put what evidence he had before the Court, and then ask the Bench to adjourn the case for a week, in order that he might get his other witness from Oamaru. As far as he (the Inspector) was told, it was a very b'Mi case —he would not say more—and he wanted to have the matter thoroughly sifted.—Mr Cargill thought that whatever evidence could be procured should be got. This was as much due to Kingston as it was to the public, after what had been stated.—Mr Cook asked that a decision should be now given, but the Bench refused to do so. —Mr Cook then objected to the case being partly heard to-day and then adjourned ; and it was ultimately decided to adjourn the whole case till Saturday next.