A Betting Case.

Manawatu Standard, Volume XI, Issue 1678, 7 April 1886, Page 2

A Betting Case.

('united press association*^ Christchdrcq, Tuesday . A nice little case about a cheque ;'!ercd to have been given m connec-. ■ 0.1 with wagering came before Mr lv?e:,i).~m, R. M., today. One Anderson, a com nercitl traveller, gave a .cheque ■o i-! 2to W. Triggs, late licensee of ■j s Lordship's Hotel. According to hie 01 statement, Anderson gave tha o.fu.'e to Triggs to collect, as he trae «o '••» -: out of town, and expected some j.i ■«»• to be paid to his account, bat o iie 'evidence showed that the cheque v 1 >ieeu given m connection with a »••■; c ■;. Triggs gave the cheque to w }rfc *, an hotel waiter, m paymentii" a oei which the latter h»d won m '•10 ' >.% Fusil ade m the last New Zealand] ■1 > luce. Most contradictory st»teu.'c >< < were made as to what was said ' • • wi Tiiggß and Saunders, who still i-.- •(' . kg cheque, and ol aimed to recover ' ■<: :'.uouot from Anderson, who had :.>>'«!, payment at the Bank. Mr }'," <n remarked that m ordinary v ' lie Magistrate. had to decide which • ■ .>■ v.-s speaking the truth, but m oasea v c c horses were concerned he had to 10c m »iie which side was telling tha Jo .e;>t lies. Mr Deacop, defendant'a co -nso l , relied on the fact that the %vii(»-3 transaction was a gambling one, fo We sufficient to nulify tha plaintiff's cV'.t), and referred generally to to* G'r.i/iis and Lotteries Act. Mr Westoo, foilbe plaintiff, contended that there was no' lung m the New Zealand law Io Vei iyo plaintiff of his right to recover t lie ba'ance' of the cheque, which hit Wo.bbip held had not been paid. His Wo.'suip reserved his decision.