GAMING ACT BREACHES

Wairarapa Times-Age, 26 January 1939, Page 6

GAMING ACT BREACHES

TWO MASTERTON MEN FINED.

REFERENCE TO "PRINCIPALS."

Jack Brooks was fined- £2O and 10s costs and George Herbert Lavery £5O and 10s costs when they pleaded guilty in the Masterton Magistrate’s Court today to breaches of the Gaming Act. Mr H. P. Lawry, S.M., was on the Bench and Detective-Sergeant W. Kane prosecuted. Detective-Sergeant Kane said that when a search warrant was executed on a hairdresser’s, saloon in Queen Street on January 19 a small amount of betting material was found on defendant. He said he had no more betting material and was told that the police had sufficient evidence for a prosecution. Mr C. C. Marsack, who entered a plea of guilty on behalf of Brooks, said that defendant had a small oneman saloon and had taken small bets to oblige his customers. He was not the agent for a principal bookmaker, but was merely an agent’s agent. His volume of business was small. Detective-Sergeant Kane: “My information is entirely different. The premises are rented by a well-known reputed Masterton bookmaker. While we were in the shop the telephone rang and a man asked for the wellknown bookmaker. I previously warned this young man on two occasions. In the premises there is a room with a desk and an unlisted telephone. My department is considering taking action to have certain premises in Masterton closed for a period under the section of the Act dealing with owners or occupiers knowingly permitting premises to be used as common gaming houses.”

BroOks was convicted and fined £2O and 10s costs. He was j given a month to pay. ,

■ONE OF THE BIGGEST IN TOWN.” Described by Detective-Sergeant Kane as one of the biggest bookmakers in town, George Herbert Lavery pleaded guilty to using premises as a common gaming house. "I knew you were coming and I got rid of it,” Lavery told the DetectiveSergeant when asked for his betting material. Defendant had been taking bets in an extensive manner, the De-tective-Sergeant stated, and he was reported to be one of the biggest bookmakers in town and was the agent for a well-known Wellington bookmaker.

Mr I. A. Hart, who appeared for defendant, entered a plea of guilty. Lavery had drifted into the business when in ill-health, counsel said. It was ridiculous to say that he was one of. the largest bookmakers in town. He denied that Lavery was an agent tor a Wellington firm and said he was acting for a Masterton principal. Lavery was convicted an'cl fined £5O and 10s costs.

On the application of the police a remand until March 2 was granted in lhe case in which Arthur Lobb was charged with a breach of the Gaming Act. Through his counsel (Mr R. R. Surridge) defendant pleaded not juilty.