BANNING THE BOOKIE.

Manawatu Herald, Volume XLII, Issue 2151, 17 July 1920, Page 3

BANNING THE BOOKIE.

DRASTIC SUPPRESSION BILL,

Wellington,Duly Hi,

Drastic provisions, aiming at the complete' suppression of the bookmaker, are contained in the amendment to the (faming Act, iptroduced by Mr Anderson. Clause 2 reads; — “The business or oceupalion of a book-maker is hereby declared to he unlawful. Every person carrying on sqch business or occupation commits an offence against this Act, and is liable, upon summary conviction, to a fine of £SOO or to imprisonment for a term of two years.” ( Another clause imposes a fine up to £IOO, or one month's for (he offence of betting with a bookmaker. In any prosecution, the fact that a person indirectly or directly has offered lo take-a bet, or has issued a card or circular stilting the odds, shall he sufficient evidence, until the contrary he proved, that such a person is a bookmaker. Investments on the tolalisator arc not affected, nor are isolated bets hptAvoen individuals. Clause 5 roads: —“No person shall he doomed to commit an offence against this Act, by reason merely of the fact that he lias made a bet Avith \ any other person upon* any particular event, unless it is part of the business or occupation of either of such persons to make bets.” The former provisions of the 1910 Act, relating lo betting in the street, racecourse, public places, and the right of racei ourse authorities to remove bookmakers from the course after warning them to desist from betting, are repealed, and there is a uoav clause empowering the removal of bookmakers without "warning.