THE GAMING ACT.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXII, Issue 10620, 27 April 1912, Page 6

THE GAMING ACT.

TWO ALLEG Ei) BKEACH "S. j At the Magistrate's Court in Masterto'ii yesterday, before Mr L. G. Keid, S.M., Douglas Moore Graham, manager of the Wairarapa Daily Times, wiik charged that on March 23rd, 1912, at Masterton, he did print a certain, document on helialf of John Johnson, containing a aiotification, as to hotting o:i horse races—to wit, the Wainipi Cup and March Handicap, run"ai the Opaki racecourse on Maroh 28th, 1912. The chargo was laid under the Gaming Act, and Inspector Ellison prosecuted, Dr. Trimble appearing for the defence. Inspector Ellison stated that on , the. -Ith of this moncli he called on Mr Graham, in company v.ith Sergeant Miller and Detective Kemp, in reference ti> the printing of a certain bookmakers' card. Mr Graha.m admitted that tin card was printed in Ins office and had the (inn's imprint on it. .Witnc:.;: asked'if he was familiar 'with the Newspapers' .Uegi.sriatio.S, Act. Accused said that they were supposed to he. 'Witness showed him a copy of the Act, and then info: mod Mr' Graham that he was a Justice of the Poa.ce, and asked him to produce the copy of the card and the name of the'one for whom it was printed. Accused refused to produce the copy to witness, but said he would show it to any other .Justice. Mr Graham then suggested that he he given time to con-sider his position. Witness agreed' u> this, and returned later, when Mr Graham said ho was satisfied witness had authority to demand the production, of the copy. The copy of the card was produced, and it had the. name John Johnson, on the back of it. Mr Graham gave witness to under-; ! stand that he had not printed cards of this kind for anyone but John Johnson. Accused had produc.d a newspaper clipping of a case, and said lie understood from this that he could legally print the cards a.s long as he did not print the name and address of the person lor whom they were I printed. ' Arthur James Hathaway, secretary of the Masterton Earing Cub, gave evidence as to the Club holding races at Opaki on March. 28th amd 29th, and stated that the names of the horses printed in the card in question were those who accepted for the xMarch Handicap and Waipipi Cup. Detective Kemp, said that the card produced was a bookmaker's "double" card, belonging to a bookmaker known by the cede letters of "O.K. ' If the card came into the hands of any racing man in the "Wairarapa district he would know to whom it belonged. .He understood the card produced belonged to Johnson, a Masterton ■bookmaker.

!■ 'To Dri Trimble: He did not know of his own, knowledge that the card j was Johnson's; he was going by hearsay. Leonard James Williams, foreman of the Daily Times job-printing department, said ho recognised the card produced, which was printed at the Daily Time::: office. . "For whom was the card printed? asked Inspector Ellison. The witness- objected to answer the; question as he occupied a confidential position in the office. He was bound under his agreement not to give the .names of any of the office clients. The Magistrate held, that this was only a private arrangement, and the witness was not. privileged. The witness then stated that the account for the printing of tho cards was entered up to Johnston. Other cards had ibeeu printed for the same person with the same letters, "0.K., ' printed on them as far as he could remember. He had known Johnson to he a licensed bookmaker. To Dr. Trimble: He had no personal knowledge that tho letters "0.K." referee! to Johnson.

Constable Brown, of Masttrtou, said he recognised the card produced, and among betting men it was understood that the initials "0.K." were those used by John Johnston, a bookmaker. He had never known Johnston to follow any other occupation. To Dr. Trimble: His knowledge of who the card belonged to was gained by hearsay. For. the defence, Dr. Trimble said the defendant admitted printing the card. He quoted cases to show that to commit a breach of tho act the odds must bo printed by, or on behalf of, some person. Ho submitted that the printing in itself was not a breach of tho Act. 'His client admitted printing tho card for Johnston, /but he said there must be something on the card by which those receiving it could identify it. There was no evidence, he contended to show that- the letters "0.K." were sufficient to identify the card. There could not be common, knowledge that a card emanated from a. certain person, when there was no evidenco in support of this. In the case in which Scott and Martm-dale were convicted, tho firm's business

card was enclosed. His Worship said that as there was another case, hinging on this, he would like to hear the- evidence of tlie second case before giving judgment. Counsel for Johnston, Mr Blair, of ) Wellington, agreed to take the two cases together. CHARGE AGAINST JOHNSTON 1 . John Johnston wa.s charged with I printing and publishing a . betting card contrary to the provisions of the Gaming Act. Inspector Ellison, again prosecuted and Mr A. W. Bhuir "appeared for the defendant Johnston. L. J. Williams and Detective Kemp gave evidence! similar io that given by them in the previous case. Douglas Moore Graham, manager of the- Wairarapa Daily Times, admitted that the card produced was print';!! at the Times office. When asked if he knew for whom the card was printed, the witness claimed privilege, as he migiit incriminate himself, and the Magistrate uphold the claim. Sergeant Miller stated that on j March 23rd last he arrested a young man named Christopher Carr, and found the race-card in question in one jof his pockets.' Ho had never known ' Johnston to follow any other occupation than that of a bookmaker. Constable Brown said ho had known Johnston as a bookmaker. On March. 22ud lie showed accused a number of race-cards, among theme being the one produced. Johnston said the other cards were not his, and declined to answer when asked if the card in question was his. Accused did not deny tho card being his. To Mr Blair : He had no personal knowledge as to whom . the letters "0.K." referred. The general knowledge, referred to by him was only acquired in the last two months, and ho had resided in Masterton for three and a-balf years. Christopher Carr said ho remembered Sergeant Miller taking some cards off him in March last. He could not say if the card produced was one of them. The card was a "double" card, but lie did not know what races the double was on. He had other douhle cards on. lain at the time. He did not know by whom the card was issued. i He did not have any bet with Joh.n.S'in on the last Masterton. races. He had received a, double betting card from Johnston, hut it wa; a very long time ago. There were no O.K. letters on the card. This concluded the case for the prosecution. ; Counsel for the defence submitted ' that there was no case to answer on j cither charge. Tho only direct evidence ! on the charge of printing.was that of i Mr Graham, who admitted printing I tho card. 'This disposed of tho charge ] of printing preferred against John- ; ston. With regard to the charge of publishing, ho submitted that there was no evidence to connect Johnston with the publication of the card. In reference to the case against Mr Graham, His Worship said he considered the case had been proved, but he thought that as accused had heen misled to a certain, extent he considered the case one for a light penalty, and would fine accused £'l and lis court costs. Speaking of the case against Johnston, His' Worship said wlt.li regard | to the printing charge the evidence ~ was not very convincing, but in the ,j matter of publication he would like '/ time to consider his judgment. j