A GAMBLING SCANDAL.

Wairarapa Daily Times, Volume XV, Issue 4410, 4 May 1893, Page 3

A GAMBLING SCANDAL.

A Country-Youth, (lets "Lambed-Down" , MoniKssEs v, Holey. ! This was a case brought under an Act" for the bettor prevention of excessive awl deceitful gaming," passed in the ninth year of the reign of Queon Anne, and which provides,tta'. any person losing' ilO.atcards, dice, etc,, may sue /or the money within three mouths, and also ilut it the loser or losers do not sue, any other person may, and recover with treble value, one moiety to go to the informer, and the other to the. poor.. The Act also provides that any person winning by. fraud above £lO at one sitting,-shall on being convicted forfeit life tiine3 tho vatua of tho sum, and bo deemed an " infamous person " and subject, to the. penalties for wilful perjury. Mr liuiiuy, for the defendant, explained that this case was to recover the 6-im. of £2O lost while playing curds and dice on the 4th and sth of February last.' On the oveniog of Saturday, tho Ith of February, the plaintiff was induced to gamble-for sums of money with the defendent and auother man until £2O was gone, and was undoubtedly ■ obtained by. Hebley by sharp practise, ' ;,i ' H The defendant was not present nor ' yet; represented by counsel, ,■ Poter Moriensen, plaintiff,./ gave evidence that on Saturday, February the 4th, lio went to '.ibe Star- Hotel about midnight, with two. friends. Five or six persons were throwing dice. The proprietor was in and out. Witness and the persons in the rco'm in* eluding Ilebl.ey first had." a shilling iu," and afterwards Hebley- proposed throwing dico at os a' throw, Witness. and his friends agreed. His friends lost,, but he cainc ou V about level.; Hebloy. said ,5s was not enough and proposed throwing for a pound each time,- Witness agreed and in a .short time dropped £lO, Several persons were present,. After losing .the,.money lie borrowed £5 from bis trierid Albertsori, the cheque being, cashed by. Mr'. Eastwood ■■ in singlo notes. Eastwood said if they intended to continue. playing, they would havo to go into another room, .This:%as.donor - A man named Johns and another were, sitting on the sofa, and oa witness ; 'and Hebley sitting down at the table, Hebley suggested one of the men coming up to see fair play. Johns said "all right" .and came forward, but took no,part, in the play. Witness lost the £lO to Hebley and then borrowed other. £5. froui. his friend Albertson,' Went back again and ■ lost £3. ■' .Then put two half .sovereigns on tho table, when one disappeared. Witness asked where it was and Hebley. snid he .would bet a pound he coald tell.; Witness made tho bet, and. Hebley then - said the halfeoyereigri.wnsin.;,witnoss'..pocket, Johns' at the rtquett of Hebley,' put his hand in witness' pocket and found it was there. Witness wsb not drunk. Paid the pound bet.witb some, silver and again laid the lwlf sovereign on the table. Happening to look awuy for a moment tho hulf sovereign wout away.again, ;;.; Witness asked where it was and Hebloy said, V Perhaps you (meaning- witness) picked it up again." Witness remonstrated and . demanded that they, all bo searched, Johns and himself agreed, but Hebley refused and walked out. 7 Was! satisfied he had been swindled,', Told Eastwood about tlio matter and lie offered to give witness tbo half sovereign to say'nothing, about it. Hebloy was a stranger ,to ..him.. When they were throwing, if witness would throw first, Hebley always tied or beat' him, .At the last round Hebley threw eighteen four times. Did not liko being swindled and wished if possible, to get his money back, and had therefore'gone to Mr Bunny for advice. Was living at Mauiiceville at tho time and had. engaged beds at a boarding bouse. Eventually stayed at Eastwood's on the night of tho 4th February. Henry Neilson, the next witness called, gave ovidence of a corroborative nature,

His Worship (Mr T. Hutchison, 8,M.) said that this was a case, which by the ingenuity of Mr Bunny bad been brought uuderaveryold statute. From the evidence there was no doubt the defendant was an" infamous person" within tbe meaning of tho act, which provided, in another section, that tho offender should suffer corporal punishment, The plaintiff certainly appearfd to bo a very foolish man, and a"pigeon"easily plucked. Ho was much surprised that tho matter had not come before the Court in another form. With reference to the amount claimed, on the ovidenoe, he could only give judgment for £l9, as the transaction with the half-sovereigns was certainly stealing. Judgment for the plaintiff would bo given accordogly for f lfhofl WfitrSG 6s 2d,