THE BOOKMAKER.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 978, 19 November 1910, Page 6

THE BOOKMAKER.

• « V/HAT IS HIS STANDINC? POSITION UNDER THE GAMING AMENDMENT. The position which may arise in reSard to bookmakers, as a result of tho amendments raado by the Legislative Oouncil in tlio Gaming Amendment Bill, and one of which was particularly outlined in The Dominion- yesterday, ivas the subject of consideralilo discussion yesterday. According to a statement made by the Attorney-General yesterday the intendments were very carefully drawn, ind their sole purpose was to prevent ivasions of tlio law and failures to obtain convictions owing to the uncertainty or ambiguity of moaning of some .vords in its original clauses. Section 2, as amended in the House of Representatives, forbade bookmaking "in my public placo or premises." Tliero ivas a definition of "public place," but there was no legal definition of "public premises." As the House had not de:recd bookmaking to bo an illegal occupation, the Council's task was to do its best to mako a definition to meet the :ase. "Clause 4," continued Dr. Findlay, 'makps it the duty of those who are n charge of any racecourse on which i raco meeting is being lield, to prorent, by. all reasonable means, any lookmaker from plying his trade,, and ;his section includes tho power (if the lookmaker does not heed a warning) a havo him put off by a. constable or an igcnt or servant of the club. If the lookmaker, after being removed, comes jack, he may be arrested, and, oil conviction, sent to gaol for three months. :f tho racing club does not prevent, a. >ookmaker from plying his trado and him if ho persists, it is "the liity of tho Minister for Internal Ufairs to revoke the club's license and •efuse to issue any further license to .ho club for a.period of twelve months rom the dato of the revocation. It rill thus he seen," added Dr. Findlay, 'that any club which does not use all ■easonablo means to exclude the bookmaker incurs the liability of being exlinguished. "Having provided that the booknaker could not carry on business on i racecourse on which a raco meeting fas being held; it would have been in:onsistent to have provided that bets nade by a bookmaker on such a course vero illegal. Tile provision for the ex>ulsion of a bookmaker from the course nakes him in effect a trespasser illegally on premises, and is a much more Irastic provision than .merely declaring hat betting by him on a racecourse is llegal. Tho bookmaker has 110 right oii he course, itself when .a raco. meeting s in progress, and, .with'this in view, o provido that bets made by him on rucli a' course should he illegal would lave been to assume that he had a ight, in tho first place, to bo there. That was an inconsistency which the Iraughtsman of the amended clause r ory properly avoided." - It would be clearly seen that tho amendments put in by Dr. Findlay in he Council mad© tho wholo law against he bookmaker much more stringent ind effective. Tlio liberty of tho bookmaker to liet n privato offices—the subject of comuent in the Council on Thursday—was eft in the Bill by tho House of Repre;entatives.