The Judge Forgot the Evidence, and the Gambling Case Walked

Charles Shaw, manager of the exclusive Union Club in the Boston block, was tried in the municipal court yesterday on the charge of conducting a gambling game. Shaw scored a partial success: the judge decided that certain material points in the evidence were not made, although City Attorney Winstock insisted they were, and dismissed the complaint. Then there was a flurry of excitement over the gambling-house furniture, but Chief Rogers still holds possession, and City Attorney Winstock says Shaw never will get it back.

The city’s case was made up of testimony from Chief Rogers, Detective Philbrick and Detective Wells. Apart from what Chief Rogers said, the testimony was in line with statements published in The Post-Intelligencer during the recent war on the club rooms. Neither Wells nor Philbrick ever saw money on the tables in the Union Club rooms. Chief Rogers told interesting stories of how Shaw came to him after receiving notice to stop gambling and asked what the order meant. Shaw said some of the best people in the city visited his place and that he would not have it raided for $300. Chief Rogers told him gambling was a thing of the past and he must close. Asked about the character of the Union Club, the chief said it was known as a gambling resort.

Attorney Wiley, for Shaw, asked that the case be dismissed on the ground that no evidence had been introduced to show games were played in the club for gain. City Attorney Winstock opposed the motion, claiming the gambling apparatus had been before the court; that Shaw, by his own admissions to the chief, was conducting a gambling house; and that the detectives’ evidence showed conclusively the games were being run.

The judge looked over the Revised Statutes and said he had been desirous of hearing evidence as to the general character of the club. “Why, I asked Chief Rogers a direct question on that point,” said Winstock, “and he replied that it was a gambling resort.” “If the question was asked,” replied the judge, “it has passed from my memory.” “The judge ought to remember the evidence,” said Winstock, “but I will put the chief on the stand again, if it is allowable.” “The case is closed,” put in Wiley, “and again, I objected to the question when it was asked and Winstock said he did not ask it to prove general reputation.”

The judge settled the wrangle by dismissing the case, whereupon Winstock immediately asked for an order to destroy the gambling apparatus and furniture, much to Wiley’s surprise. “I want immediate possession of the goods now,” said Wiley, “and ask that they be returned.” “I can cite authority to show,” said Winstock, “that it is not necessary to convict in order to get an order to destroy the apparatus.” “Well, I’ll argue the point with you any time next week,” put in Wiley. No time was set for argument, but Chief Rogers and his men went out of the courtroom dragging the precious gambling tools.