WELLINGTON TOPICS

Hokitika Guardian, 8 January 1926, Page 4

WELLINGTON TOPICS

cabinet making

SO.NIE GUESSES

(Special to “ Guardian.”) WELLINGTON, January 6. 'J'lie .suggestions of the “Auckland ■ Star ” in regard to the personnel o! the reconstructed Cabinet have set other authorities speculating as to the Prime Minister's intentions. The general opinion in political orcles here is that Mr Coates will not content hintself with merely filling the vacancy occasioned by Mr Massey’s death and Ihe vacancies to follow by the retirement of Sir Francis Bell and Sir Heaton Rhodes. That, it is held, would not lie reconstruction at all, but simply inadequate patching of the old garment. It is finite true, as one of the critics said this morning, that Mr J. A. Young, the member for Hamilton, has well earned promotion, and that Mr K. S. 'Williams, the member for Bay of Plenty, has displayed qualities which are bound to bring him into prominence before long. But Mr David Jones, Sir Heaton Rhodes's successor in the representation of Ellesmere, can hardly expect to possess his predecessor’s portfolio as well as his seat in the first session of the new Parliament. The name that seems most impressive among those mentioned by the “ Star” is that of Nlr F. J. Rollestoir. The member for Tiirnru has inherited many of the qualities of his distinguished father and has added to them a wide knowledge of affairs which places him in the very front rank among the young members of the House. OTHER SPECULATIONS. In ordinary circumstances it would ho difficult for a Prime Minister to give much serious consideration to Mr Rolieston’s claims to ministerial rank. During the life of the last Parliament the member for Timaru again and again criticised the legislation and the administration of Ihe Government with a freedom and candour usually reserved for the members of the Opposition. On one or two occasions he sided with the Labour Party in divisions against both Reformers and Liberals. r l hat is what liis father would have done in similar circumstances. But his honest convictions and his absolute good faith that no one dreamed of questioning his loyalty or his motives. His inclusion In the reconstructed Cabinet would he a concession to the progressive spirit that is abroad in the country and in keeping with the Prime Minister's declared intention "to place patriotism before aprty. Fir James Parr's succession to the High Commissionership now appears to lie taken for granted and his retirement, of course, would create another vacancy in the Cabinet. AN ellinformed circles in Auckland, according to the “ Star.” expect Mr E. P. Lee to step into Si'' James’s shoes, but here the member for Oamnni, though with previous ministerial experience is not counted among the “strong men” needed to give effect to Afr Coates s inspiring evangel. THE BETTING LAW. The “Evening Post,” at the risk of being suspected of still rankling under the line imposed upon it the other day for indicating totalisator odds, returns to what it calls the farce of the betting law. “To-day,” it says in.its current issue, “we have another phase of the whole ridiculous business. Three bookmakers have been fined sums totalling £350. One of them is a returned soldier living on a. pension and a night-watelmmn's pay. Ilis line was £SO. We do not contend that hookuuiking should be carried on without Id or hindrance in spite ol the law, but is it not a fact that the offenders who are punished are always the small fry:-' Is is not a fact, also, that while the big “ principals,” often referred to in prosecutions are believed to be operating extensively, they are never caught in the net? AN hat can be said of a law that is framed this wav;- I* i, time that the Legislature gave serious attention to the whole business and amended the law to make it both logical and enforenble.” The ••Post" very properly divests itself of all symnathy with the bookmaker, big or small, but perhaps it is iust a little disposed to make ad miserieordiam appeal on behalf of the returned soldier whoso military services, admirable as they doubtless were, do not entitle him to break the law with impunity. THE BOOKMAKERS. There can tic no question, however, that, the “ Post ” is rendering a good service to the community by iterating and reiterating its demand that the betting law shall lie administered strictly ami impartially. The prohibition of the publication of totalisator figures and dividends by the newspapers probably was well intended thirty years ago, and may have served some usotul purpose; but to-day, when the information. is available from a score of other sour 'vs, it is, os the “ Post ” l\os pointed out repeatedly, a ludicrous example of the survival of an inane law. This absurdity persits mainly because it has been used in Parliament iviion the gaming laws have been under eorsideration as a sop to the antiracbig people. They may have failed in cvciy other attack upon the nationl sport, but they have succeeded in maintaining the prohibition upon the newspapers and so played directly into the hands of the bookmakers. As for the practical immunity of the big Ir-ok-li'.sl ers from prosecution, tins is n national scandal for which the politicians must share responsibility with the administrative authorities. Every one knows of the existence of these pei.iiv, a i i 'go number of people are acquainted with the ramifications of their operations, and yet none of them ever is landed in gaol. It still remains ter some thorough-going reformer to ex-pe-c the whole sordid business.