AUSTRALIAN BEITING LAW.

Otaki Mail, 10 January 1923, Page 4

AUSTRALIAN BEITING LAW.

HIGH COST OF SECTORING . CONVICTIONS. CROWN GAINS £SSO, BUT LOSES ; £30,000 A Y-EAE. j A few weeks ago the prciuis.es of 17 bookmakers, several of them leading ■ members of the A.J.C. ring, were raided. A largo amount of money was seizI t'll, huJ the offices wero proclaimed i through (he Government Gazette to be ' common gaming-houses. l"or 10 days • or u fortnight the promises (says the Sydney Sun of December 13th) were j guarded for the 24 hours of the clock j by police., no fewer than 51 being cmS ployed for this purpose. I In spite of these facts, some of the I bookmakers resumed business almost ( immediately, just as though nothing j had happened. They simply took a room next door, and directed their clients past the police guarding the old j ! office, | In a couple of weeks the announcement was quietly made that no further ! proceedings were to be taken against these bookmakers. All the money that was confiscated from the various offices during the raid was handed back. Since then other raids have been made, proceedings taken and penalties imposed, notwithstanding the fact that in one case at least, the bookmaker concerned is as reputable as any of the 17 ■who were white-washed by the Crown. I The inconsistency of the law in re-1 gard to betting is illustrated by tho j fact that if these 17 bookmakers had been convicted the State would have gained, .say, £SS0 —£00 fine for each — but lost about £30,000 a year in betting j

j taxes alone. I For A.J.C. bookmakers pay £7O a I year as a tax to the Government —not Ito the A.J.C. —to bet at Randwick, £2S a year to bet at suburban courses. £2S a year to bet at the ponies, and £l4 a year to bet at provincial courses, as well as from £IU to £.12 a day in stamp r duty on the tickets they issue. This I amounts to about £IBOO a year for each bookmaker. From the State’s point of view, therefore, it may be accounted bad business to lose £30,000 a year for the sake of collecting one sum of £s3o in tines. For if an A.J.C. bookmaker is convicted he automatically loses his license, and the Government his £IBOO a year. The bookmaker who brings in this revenue to the Crown, however, is on a j worse footing than the barber's shop I bookmaker, who contributes nothing j and does not even use the trains, and trams to go to the races. The registerjed man who is convicted loses his j A.J.C. license and forfeits his chief ' means of livelihood. The other fellow (pays his fine and carries on his barber's shop—and the betting business —just the same.