PAKAPOO

Sun (Auckland), Volume IV, Issue 932, 27 March 1930, Page 1

PAKAPOO

MYSTERIES OF CHINESE GAMBLE RESERVED JUDGMENT GIVEN Chinese and the game of pakapoo were the chief features in a reserved judgment given by Mr. W. R. McKean, S.M., at the Magistrate's Court today. The case, which was heard in the Lower Court recently, was between Ming Lee, laundryman (Mr. Tong), acting as administrator in the estate of Sing Hoy, deceased, and O. Hoy, Chinese agent, of Auckland (Mr. Munro). Ming Leo claimed £lO6 10s from the estate of O. Hoy. Mr. Tong said that the claim wa one to receive moneys due to the estate at the time of death. When plaintiff’s father was at the point of death plaintiff searched his effects and found £lO6 10s, among other moneys. This was paid to defendant to keep and was to be handed out when required. Of the amount about £59 was in notes and £4O in silver. It was not unusual for plaintiff to place this sum in the keeping of defendant, as deceased and defendants had been occupying the same premises. Mr. Munro, for the defence, contended that plaintiff had handed over the money on behalf of his father to a pakapoo bank, a gambling institution, with an illegal purpose, and the money could not now be claimed. The money was to distribute to shareholders in the bank as the result of gaming hazards. PAKAPOO TREASURER In evidence, defendant said he was a member of a pakapoo bank, and gave a list of Chinese names, including that of deceased, who was treasurer. When plaintiff opened deceased's boxes and looked over his effects, he said, “I will return the pakapoo money to the shareholders in the bank.” He then handed over £lO6 10s and when defendant saw him later plaintiff said that he w'ould hand over the remainder of the money in the bank, about £3OO altogether. This evidence was corroborated by Pang Kee, another Chinese. The game was then explained to the court. A number of Chinese formed a company by putting in about £SO and forming a bank. A number of tickets were issued bearing 80 characters, and these were sold to Chinese by agents at 6d each. Each buyer marked 10 of th© characters on a ticket, the choice being noted by the agent. The bank was open day and night and a draw was made each day and evening. There were four bowls, each containing 20 characters, and 80 corresponding with those on the tickets. One bowl was drawn and the 20 characters were chalked up on a board. The buyer of a ticket who had picked six of the 20 characters chosen, won 8s 6d. the picker of seven characters, £3 10s, the picker of eight £24, and the picker of nine £43. A ticket-holder who had marked 10 winning cha.racters won £BO. If nobody picked six of the 20 characters in the winning bowl the bank took all the profits from the sale of the tickets without paying out anything. In his reserved judgment today, Mr. YV. R. McKean said he was satisfied that the defendant’s evidence was not improbable. There was no other explanation for handing him the mono“I accept his explanation,” said ’the magistrate. Judgment was given for defendant.