The Daily News. SATURDAY, JULY 2. THE GAMBLING QUESTION.

Taranaki Daily News, Volume LIII, Issue 71, 2 July 1910, Page 4

The Daily News. SATURDAY, JULY 2. THE GAMBLING QUESTION.

Since Judge Chapman indulged in his scathing remarks concerning bookmakers at Auckland the other day, no question, not even the licensing question, has been given so much prominence throughout the Dominion as the gambling question. There can be no doubt that the besetting vice of this young country is gambling, and that it is playing too great a part for the national well-being is evident to even the most superficial observer. The country has long been endeavoring to regulate the evil. A few years ago the Government were pressed to ")eg'">--late against the gambling tendency—to shut up the bookmakers' shops, street 'betting, and the various methods «f putting money on a horse. Parliament responded by legalising bookmakers, proscribing the publishing of betting news )in newspapers, and preventing tha nte of the telegraph on the racecourse. Hy these means it was hoped to limit betting to its proper place, the But the law has proved a dismal failure, and, instead of curbing the gambling evil, has encouraged it to an almost immeasurable extent. Racing clubs have had no option but to issue licenses to anyone willing enough to. pay the high fees demanded, and the consequence ljas been that ia lot of worthless individuals have beenVgiven a status they never could have "attained in the ordinary course of things. Had provision bsan made for persons applying for licenses to be carefully examined—not by jealous gamblers, clubs, .or other folk, or organisations interested in racing, but by independent men like magistrates—there might have been\ some sense in the Act, and better results obtained. It is this highly undesirable element that Judge Chapman had in view when passing his recent strictures. They are as so many human vultures, and the quicker they are extirpated the better for the community. The Judge said it was degrading that the bookmaker should be recognised and legalised. If he were not legalised , before, the bookie plied his, calling all the same.' It did not matter whether the State recognised him or not. He persisted then, and will persist again, while we have race meetings and so j.many people possess the gambling instinct. The racing clubs do not hound the bookie because these institutions ate worrying about the morals of the people. They do so because the bookie, whether he is "square" or a thief, cuts into their profits, though he pays such heavy fees to get on to a racecourse. If it is degrading to have legalised, bookmakers, ' it is degrading to have bookmakers who are not legalised. If they must exist, it is better to have them licensed, but, as we have said, not before they have been passed by a Magistrate, or someone else in authority, as possessing i character befitting them to ply their Open bookmaking, or laying "tote" odds, is infinitely better than the underground variety. '• The Government cannot consistently put down the | bookies without wiping out the totalisator at the. same time.- The two must go down together, if the passion for gambling is to be quelled. It is, however, extremely difficult to cure a popular bias by legislation. Under the. present law, the racecourse is allegedly the onlyplace where betting may be done, and that by licensed bookmakers. Does any one allege that this has prevented street or shop betting? It is illegal] for papers to publish betting news. Do-the betting public get betting news by wire and publish it by word of mouth, \ or do they not? It is impossible to get ft telegram taken to the racecourse by a.telegraph messenger. Is the number of racecourse wires less now than before, or are they not? The Government tried to put a spoke in the wheel of Australian sweeppromoters, yet an enormous sum goes out of New Zealand to Tasmania. A big proportion of the people will gamble because it is inherent, and this will have to be recognised when framing oi passing any future legislation dealing with the gambling question. is done, however, let it be consistent, practical, and effective, and not be i\c. laughing-stock of the whole countrysidfe, as is the present Gaming and Lotteries Act. " ; !W^