Barrett, Appellant; Flynn, Respondent

• Jurisdiction: Ireland
• Judgment Date: 23 November 1915
• Date: 23 November 1915
• Court: King's Bench Division (Ireland)

Barrett,

Appellant

and

Flynn,

Respondent (1).

K. B. Div.

CASES

DETERMINED BY

THE KING'S BENCH DIVISION

OF

THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE IN IRELAND,

AND ON APPEAL THEREFROM IN

THE COURT OF APPEAL,

AND BY

THE COURT FOR CROWN CASES RESERVED.

1916.

Unlawful Gaming — “House” — Distribution of Prizes by Lot or Chance — Lottery — Gaming Houses Act, 1854 (17 & 18 Vict. c. 38), s. 4 — 11 Anne, c. 6 (Ir.), s. 1.

Section 4 of the Gaming Houses Act, 1854 (17 & 18 Vict. c. 38), enacts that “any person, being the owner or occupier, or having the use of any house, room, or place, who shall open, keep, or use the same for the purpose of unlawful gaming being carried on therein … and any person having the care and management of, or in any manner assisting in conducting the business of any house, room, or place opened, kept or used for the purpose aforesaid” shall, on summary conviction, be liable to a penalty not exceeding £500.

By 11 Anne, c. 6 (Ir.), sec. 1, all lotteries in Ireland are to be deemed to be public nuisances, and a penalty is imposed on persons opening, playing, or drawing at such lotteries.

The president of a workmen's club was prosecuted for having kept open and used the hall of the club for the purpose of unlawful gaming being carried on therein. The game played was called “House.” The nature of the game

and the manner in which it was played were described as follows:—In a large room off the hall of the club were 100 men, seated on forms at tables. Rectangular leather cards, each containing three horizontal rows with five figures in each row, were distributed amongst the men at the rate of one penny per card. Sometimes as many as forty dozen of these cards were issued in a game. From a box or urn, “the president,” the respondent in this case, drew a card and called out its number, whereupon any player upon whose card the number was, crossed that number out with a piece of chalk. The game finished by a player shouting “House,” walking up to “the president,” and showing him his card, for which he (the player) claimed “House,” so claiming from the fact that all the five numbers on one horizontal row were chalked out. In this particular case the winner was handed twenty-seven shillings, one penny to the shilling having been deducted by “the president,” for the lighting, &c., of the hall.

Held, that the game of “House” was a lottery, and as such was prohibited by the Lottery Acts, and that the playing of it, whether in public or private, was “unlawful gaming” within the meaning of section 4 of the Gaming Houses Act, 1854.

Per Cherry L.C.J.: The game of “House” carried on as described was “unlawful gaming,” not only because it was a lottery, but because it was a game of pure chance carried on for a pecuniary profit to the owners of the hall.

Case Stated by Mr. Swifte K.C., a divisional justice of Dublin, under 20 & 21 Vict. c. 43.

At a sitting of the Dublin Metropolitan Police Court on the 14th May, 1915, William Flynn was charged in a summons, framed under sect. 4 of the Gaming Houses Act, 1854 (17 & 18 Vict. c. 38), for that he on the 4th March, 1915, at 49 Cuffe Street, in the city of Dublin, “(a) did unlawfully have the care and management of, and (b) did assist in conducting the business of, a certain house, to wit, the Bricklayers' Hall, the said house then being opened, kept, and used for the purpose of unlawful gaming being carried on therein.” The complainant was Police Inspector Daniel Barrett.

The case stated by Mr. Swifte was as follows:—

“At the hearing of the said complaint it was proved that the complainant visited the Bricklayers' Hall, 49 Cuffe Street, in the said city of Dublin, on the 4th day of March, 1915, about 10.10 p.m., when he found in a large room at the back of the said hall about 100 men, most of whom were seated at tables, and to whom leather cards bearing numbers were being issued. They were rectangular, each bearing fifteen numbers in three horizontal rows, five distinct numbers being in each row. The numbers were all different, and ranged to seventy-five. One James Lightholder (the defendant in another summons heard by me on the same day as that against William Flynn) was engaged in distributing the cards and taking in the money, and the defendant William Flynn, described as ‘the president,’ was in a small office in a corner of the room, looking after the money, and issuing the cards. He informed the complainant that they had roughly forty dozen of the cards, and that sometimes they were all issued in a game. The complainant saw one game played, the net amount payable to the winner of it being 27s. The defendant Flynn informed the complainant that one penny to the shilling received on the game had been deducted for the lighting, &c., of the club. The defendant had a tin can and shook it, pulled out a number on a piece of leather at random, looked at it and shouted it out loudly and distinctly, so that it would be heard throughout the room. Any player on whose card the number was stroked that number out on his card with a piece of chalk. The game finished by a player shouting ‘House’ walking up to the president, and showing him his card for which he (the player) claimed ‘House,’ so claiming from the fact that all the five numbers on one horizontal row were chalked out. The president then checked that off by referring to the numbers he had abstracted from the can and announced to the room. He then handed over the 27s. to the winner. That ended the game, which had occupied about five minutes altogether, and all the players handed in their cards. The cards were then distributed again at a penny each, some players taking more than one card. The chalk marks could be wiped off the cards. A second game proceeded at once on the same lines as the first, about 100 men joining in it. There was no other form of amusement provided, except the game of ‘House.’ There were no newspapers or anything else in the room. One Richard O'Carroll (the defendant in another summons disposed of by me on the same day as the present one) was described as the ‘secretary,’ and lived on the premises upstairs. The room in which the play went on was on the ground floor. The defendant Flynn, in reply to the complainant, stated that the money taken on the game (i.e., the penny in the shilling produced by the sales of the tickets) was used for lighting purposes, &c.

The complainant was the only witness examined.

...