Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

SUPREME COURT.

Per Press Association Wellington, February 8. At the Supreme Court to-day Ah Chow, found guilty of carnally knowing a girl under 16, and Yow Lee, who pleaded guilty to a similar offence, were put forward for sentence. They Here sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment. His Honour took into consideration, the fact that the girls had been previously corrupted and the jury's recommendation of Chow to mercy on the ground of solicitation hy the girl. William Scott and Harry Martmdale pleaded not guilty at the Supreme Court to an indictment of four counts, charging them with keeping a betting house at 57 Lambton Quay, and of receiving money for purposes of betting. IVo probationary constables gave evidence that on a series of dates they visited defendants' premises, made hots with each of the defendants and received dividends, paid by the accused, and saw defendants take bets from and pay money to others. Counsel for the defence pointed out that it was not illegal to carry on the business of bookmaker. The Legislature could not prohibit bookmaking while it legalised the totalisator. What was illegal was the localisation of the business. The onus was on the Crown to prove an actual physical resorting to the place for purposes of betting. It was not sufficient to establish mere casual betting; there must be a keeping or using of the place. The evidence of the probationary constables was such as must heavily discount it in tlio minds of the jury. The jury brought in a verdict of not guSty, and the defendants were discharged.

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/RAMA19070209.2.37

Bibliographic details

Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXXI, Issue 8736, 9 February 1907, Page 2

Word Count
262

SUPREME COURT. Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXXI, Issue 8736, 9 February 1907, Page 2

SUPREME COURT. Rangitikei Advocate and Manawatu Argus, Volume XXXI, Issue 8736, 9 February 1907, Page 2

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert