§ 89. Mr. CROOKSasked the Home Secretary whether his attention has been drawn to a case at the North London Police Court in which the defendant was prosecuted for running what are called partners' whist drives; whether he is aware that the magistrate, while declaring his sympathy with the defendant, stated that his duty was to adhere to the law as laid down by the High Court, and imposed a fine; whether he is aware that, since the decision of the High Court in the case of Morris and Godfrey, the opinion has been generally held that while the ordinary progressive drive was illegal the partners' drive was not; and whether, in view of these circumstances and of the fact that the North London case is going to appeal, he will instruct the police to take no further action regarding partners' drives pending the final decision in the ease?
§ Mr. McKENNAI would refer my lion. Friend to the answer I gave to the hon. Member for Scarborough on the 25th of this month. While I should be glad to assist the police in the difficulties arising from the law as laid down in the case of Godfrey versus Morris, I do not think I could properly advise them to make the supposed distinction between partner drives and other whist drives.