RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Temuka Leader, Issue 1232, 26 August 1884, Page 2

RESIDENT MAGISTRATE’S COURT.

Teuuka —Monday, August 25, 1884. [Before S. D, Barker, D. Inwood, and John Talbot, Esq*., J.P.’s.] GAMBLING.

John Cross Smithson was charged with having allowed illegal games in his house on the 10th day of June last. Mr Hamersley appeared for the defendant.

Charles Reid : I am a shopkeeper it Temuka, Remember the night of tin 10th of June last. I wa«, with a aroori

! ew others, in the Temuka Hotel. Wen

into the billiard-room about 11 o’clock, and from there into the bar-parlor, ( where there were nine or ten other?. We bad a drink there, and had a gam? of cards. We started at poker. A long discussion took place here as regards the game. The constable wanted to get a description of the game, but the witness appeared unable to answer without leading questions bring put to him, and to leading questions Mr Hamersley objected. Ultimately (lie examination of the witness was continued : It was a shilling “ auty ” at first. Then if you got a good hand you could back it. If another thought he had a better band than you, he would back his also. The practice is betting on your bands. On the night in question we played for a short fine, and Mr Smithson came in and would not allow us to play any more that night. Constable Morton ; On your solemn oath, did you not tell me on the 18th instant—

Mr Hamersley objected to this question on the ground that the witness was

ior the-prosecution and could not. be treated as an adverse one. Such leading questions could not be put except by the consent of the Court, 1 lie constable said he could not gal anything cat of the witness, and it was necessary for him to treat him as an adverse witness. His Worship reminded the witness that he bad nothing, to fear from anything that might happen as regards this case; “ It 'was better" that the constable should not treat the witness as an adverse one for the present. Examination continued : Whan I looked over the transactions that occurred that night 1 remembered that Smithson was not playing that night. Nobody “jogged ” ray memory. It was the block, of my cheque book reminded me. I thought over who were playing and remembered Smithson was not there, A man named Sneap spoke to me about that. Ido not remember wlmt was the biggest haul taken. There might have been £2 or £8 taken. I do not remember ±,20 being taken. Constable Morton : Hid: you not tall me £2O was taken by Hunter ? His Worship ; Cross-examiniay

again. Constable Morton: But ha really told me certain things, and now he denies them. The Court ; You will have an opportunity of giving evidence. Examination continued : Men named Hunter, Cameron, and Forward wer® there. I do not remember who wo» the £2 or £3, It was not on that night Hunter hvulad £2O off in- on® pool. It was after I received the summons that 1 knew it was not on that night Hunter won the money. The only thing I bad to remind me was th® cheque. I did look in the same cheque-, book on. the morning of the 18th, but never thought about it. I may hay® seen the letter produced before. Here an altercation took place at to whether evidence should be given regarding a piece of paper on which there was some writing. This appeared to be a paper on which Constable Morton wrote down certain statements made by Reid, The paper was written in Reid’s shop, according to the constable. Mr Hamersley interposed, and the Court disallowed the evidence. To Mr Hnraersley.You have to know something about the game before you can play it. It requires skill, t - John Hunter : I am leasee of th® billiard-table in the Temuka Hotel, I remember playing poker but cannot remember the date. Mr Haraersley asked to hare the date fixed, and said he expected the witness bad been cross-examined by the constable before. Examination continued : Constable Morton has not spoken to me bafore about the case. I remember playing poker with Reid. Constable Morton : Was Smithson playing? Mr Hamersley insisted upon the date being fixed before the question was asked. The constable complained that Mr Hamersley was making known to th® witness what was ssid by the former witness. It was no use otdering the witnesses out of Court under these cir-

cumstances. The Court held that if the witness could not fix the date his evidence would be irrelevant. The constable pointed out that Reid bad sworn to the date, and that Hunter was with him there. Hunter fiimaelf admitted he was there with him.- ' Mr Hamersley quoted Roscoe on Evidence, to the offset that evidence should he confined to the matter at issue.

The Court ruled on this point, and the examination continued. Witness : A beginner would have as good a chance to win at an old player, because it depends on the kind of hand lie holds. Never saw anyone win so high as £2O in one haul. George Sneap ; I am gardener for Mr Wheelband; I used to attend in the bar, but was not barman. I know Reid, Hunter and Cameron. Cameron came on two or three occasions, but went to Tiraaru by the last train. He stayed there one night. I ?nw him playing cards with Reid, and Hunter and Forward. I don’t remember the dat-’.

'I o Mr Hamersley ; I was not a servant. 1 merely “officiate” in the bar.

This concluded the evidence. Mr Hamersley said there’ was no evidence to show that Smithson was licensee of the hotel.

The Court thought they had a right to exercise their own knowledge, Mr Hamersley said if the Bench would take cognisance of what they knew of their own knowledge they would have to submit themselves to examination, to see whether their knowledge was exact

Constable Morion pointed out it was competent fur the Court to call evidence.

Mr Hamersley said if the Court (iked to put itself in the position of prosecutors it could, but he did not think it was desirable that the Court should do «o.

Mr Hamersley cited the case of Regina r. Murdoch which met the case. After some consideration, the Court said the case fell through owing to there being no evidence that Smithson knew anything about it before he came in and stopped the game. The Bench thought common sense would be outraged by the idea that the Bench ought to dismiss the case on the ground that , the license was not put in, CIVIL CASHS. F; Franks v. T. Pyle—Claim £1 Ba, Judgment summons. Ordered to pay

within one week or go to gaol for three weeki. J. Brown r. James Conway—Claim 19s ; 6d, Judgment summon?. Ordered to pay within a week or go to gaol for fourteen d»y§. W. Ackroyd. v, A. Wilson—Claim L 8 14s 4d. Ordered to pay in two instalments —one this day week, and k another a month: later —or in default one month’s imprisonment. ■ . . J. Whitehead v. D, Quarry— Claim LI 155.. Judgment by dafault for the amount claimed and costs. The Coart then rose.