BREACH OF LICENSING ACT.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XXXVIII, Issue 1530, 1 April 1916, Page 3

BREACH OF LICENSING ACT.

PERMITTING GAMBLING,

At the Magistrate’s Court yesterday morning before Mr J. W. Poynton, S.M., E- R. Freeman, licensee of Whyte’s Hotel, was charged with permitting gambling on the premises on March 3rd. Sub-Inspector Marsack prose cuted and Mr Cooper appeared for defendant, who pleaded not guilty. Frederick Woods stated that at about 10.20 o’clock on the night of March 3rd, he heard voices in thej room of Whyte’s Hotel next to the bar. The window was up, and he pulled the curtain to one side, and saw Henry Coley, George Coley, Captain Wills and Frank Proctor sitting round the table, and Robert Bryant and Charles Simmons standing up. The four at the table were playing cards, and the other two were looking on. He saw Mr Furrie coming along Main Street, and called him over. Mr Freeman was in the room, and appeared to be looking on. A minute or two later he went into the bar, and during his absence Proctor said “ We’ll have another at five shillings.” Henry Coley replied I’ve had enough of the game, and am not going to play any more.” Witness saw money change hands between Henry and George Coley and Proctor. The licensee then came back and said ,“ I think its time you chaps were getting home.” Proctor said, “ We’re having another,” and Freeman replied ‘‘•None of your double or quits; you had better get home.” Witness called out “ You had belter Stop that double or quits and gambling, and get home.” He then went to the back door, and met the men going out. Witness spoke to Freeman and asked him if he knew what time it was and he said “Yes, a little after ten.” Witness pointed out that it was half-past ten and told him that he shouldn’t allow gambling on the premises. Freeman said the men were not gambling—they were just “cutting up.” He couldn’t say what game they were playing but they were playing for money. To Mr Cooper : He got to the window at 10.20 o’clock and was there for about ten minutes. Was there three or four minutes before Mr Furrie came along. The men seemed to be picking the cards up off the table —they were not playing like one would play euchre. They might have been playing poker. He did not see any deal. No money changed hands while Freeman was in the room. Neither Simmons nor Bryant were playing. Simmons was a boarder. The hotel was well conducted generally.

Kenneth Furrie stated that he was coming along Main Street from the Post Office on the night in question when Constable Woods called him over. He did not see anything as he was stand--ing a few yards back holding his bicycle. He heard voices and thought he recognised those of Coley and Proctor. Heard Coley say, “It’s a of a game.” There was a confusion of voices and someone said, “Give me ten bob,” and also something about “change of a quid.” Questioned by Sub-Inspector Marsack as to a statement he had made to Constable Woods, witness said that he made no statement. Constable Woods came one day and read off a statement from a sheet of foolscap and asked him if that was all he knew and he replied, “That’s about it” or something to that effect. He did not read the statement. This concluded the evidence for the prosecution, and for the defence Mr Cooper called the defendant, Leonard Robert Freeman, who said that on the night in question four were playing cards before tea o’clock, but not afterwards, one of the players having left when the house was closed up. At ten o’clock witness shut up the premises, and ,was engaged for about half an hour straightening up and checking the cash. He was in the bar for some time, and went into the . room for the first time when his attention was called by some one tapping at the window. The men in the room were not playing, cards, but were only yarning. To the Sub-Inspector : The men were playing whist before ten o’clock. They had drinks after the game, one of the men paying for same. As far as he knew, there was no ill-feeling towards himself on the part of Constable Woods. He was not in the room except on the occasion when his attention was drawn by the tapping at the window. What be said to the men was, “It’s time to quit,” and certainly did not say anything about “double or quits.” Could give no reason why Constable Woods should swear falsely against him. When Woods came in the back door he only spoke to him about the time. The men were yarning in the room, and had no drink. His wife being away, he was particularly busy at the time, and did not trouble about the men In the room.

James Stewart, hemp grader, a boarder at the hotel, said that on the night in question he returned from the pictures at about x 0.15, and as he was going to Wellington in the morning, went into the bar to ask Mr Freeman to see that he was called in time. He went through the room in which the men were. They were sitting round the table talking, and were not playing cards. Charles Simmons, also a boarder at the hotel, said he went into the room between 10.15 and 10.30 o’clock, and was only there for about three minutes. The men a t the table were not playing pards ; they were talking. Woods

came to the window when he was there. Freeman came into the room when Woods tapped at the window. He was not in the room before that. Henry Coley said that he, with others, was playing cards in the house before ten o’clock. They had just finished a game ot whist at ten. After closing hour they remained talking, but did not play cards or gamble. When the police knocked, Freeman came into the room. He had not been in the room before that since closing time. To Sub-Inspector Marsack : Before ten o’clock they played a game of whist for drinks. They did not have any “dry ones.” Did not hear anyone say anything about “another one at five shillings.” He had certainly said that whist was a ot a game. They were then talking about the game of whist in general conversation. This concluded the evidence. In addressing the Bench, Mr Cooper said it was necessary for the prosecution to prove not only that gambling was going on, but that it was with the cognisance of the licensee, and be contended that the police had quite failed to do this. The evidence of Mr Stewart and Mr Simmons was to the effect that the licensee was not in the room, and the Court must be satisfied that there were conditions from which the licensee would know that gambling was taking place. Mr Cooper quoted authorities in support of his contentions. Sub-Inspector Marsack said the evidence of Mr Coley proved that there was gambling in the house, and he contended that the. police evidence proved that the licensee was in the room and must have known what was taking place., The Magistrate said the law was very strict in cases of gambling in public houses, it being regarded by the law as a serious offence. He didn’t think hotelkeepers realised how strict the law was on this point. It was held, however, that before a conviction could be entered it must be proved that the licensee was or should be cognisant of what was going on. In a case where gambling was proved, but where the licensee had gone to bed and the porter was in charge, it had been held, and rightly held, that the licensee could not be held responsible for what occurred, as he did not know it was going on. In this case, however, it was shown that, the licensee was in the room, or in any case a very short distance from it, and should have known that the men were playing for drinks. It was very unfortunate for Mr Freeman, who always conducted his hotel well, but in the circumstances he would have to enter ,a conviction. Defendant would be fined 40s with costs 7s,.and witness’ expenses 3s. Mr Poynton said that the offence under the circumstances was not a very serious one. Sub-Inspector Marsack said that in fairness to Mr Freeman he wished to say that bis hots.l was very ■ well conducted generally, and he really believed that he did not.know that he was committing an offence.

The Magistrate said he knew the house was well conducted, and didn’t think the licensee wilfully committed the offence.