THE GAMING ACT.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 841, 13 June 1910, Page 6

THE GAMING ACT.

Theke arc. signs that the periodical agitation against the Gaming Act is about to be started. The secretary of the local Anti-Gam-bling League, the llev. J. J. North, has opened the campaign with a letter to the press, and we have no doubt that his challenge will be taken up, and that there will be a good deal of correspondence on the subject. We doubt, however, that the agitation will have any immediate effect. Probably the AntiGambling League docs not expect it to. The middle session of a triennial Parliament is not the best occasion for a movement of the kind. Ministers and members as a rule give more attention to ."reform" Issues in the lust session—-that immediately ' preceding the general elections. They have a very keen eye for evidences of public sentiment about that time, and give an attentive ear to any loud volume id sound from their respective constituencies. The real difficulty in the way of the' "reformers"'is the strategical attitude taken up by the Government. . The Ward Administration is not an anti-gambling Ministry. It must be' remembered that it- legalised the bookmaker and forced him upon the racing olubs whether they liked it or not. It has reached out to grasp still further revenue from the racing clubs to swell the Treasury funds. Two members of the Ministry were the principal .figures at the opening of Tattcrsalls Club in AVellington about which the secretary, oi\ the Anti-Gambling League writes. The speeches delivered on that occasion should convince the Anti-Gambling League that they have very strong opponents in the Cabinet.itself. The real obstacle which the League has to face is the sympathy of the Government for the bookmaker. The Prime Minister himself, unless we arc greatly mistaken, has laid it down that the bookmaker stands or falls with the totalisator. Thus the racing clubs and their supporters are forced to join with the bookmakers to defend the position. It is all very well' for' the secretary of the League,to state that endeavours will be mado to kill the bookmaker first and the totalisator after. He will .probably find that his organisation will meet with a good deal of support in the former effort. But it will bo surprising indeed if the Piume Minister will allow the issue to bo decided that way. Taking the House as a whole, it >cah hardly bo regarded as an anti-gambling Parliament, although on a straight-out issue the bookmakers would probably bo sacrificed to public opinion. "When the Anti-Gambling League can prevail on the Government to allow the bookmakers and the totalisator to each stand or fall on their respective merits, there will be some hope of a successful movement against the former. Not, we fear, until then.