THE Wairarapa Age MORNING DAILY. TUESDAY, DECEMBER 8, 1908.

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXI, Issue 3064, 8 December 1908, Page 4

THE Wairarapa Age MORNING DAILY. TUESDAY, DECEMBER 8, 1908.

A COSTLY EXPERIMENT. We wonder whether the Government, when it framed the new Gaming Act of last session legalising the bookmaker as part of the gambling accessories on the racecourse, counted the cost to itself, and to the country, in the way of direct loss of revenue. Probably the point was not thought of, or it it was, it was not deemed of much importance, otherwise the Government might have hesitated before it took a step

which promises to involve the Treasury in a pretty heavy annual loss, the benefit of which will not be derived by the public at large, but almost exclusively by the bookmaking fraternity. The loss will ensue in this way, that where thousands of pounds were previously invested through the medium of the totalisator, from which the Government draws a tax at the rate of 1| per cent., this money has gone, or promises to go, through the bookmakers' hands, a channel through which the Government draws nothing in the way of revenue. It; will be interesting to learn what the result of the first year's trial of the new Act will mean to the country in the way of lost revenue. Looking back over our files for the past few weeks, and taking therefrom the totalisator figures for the last six meetings of importance (excepting Takapuna), we find that in comparison with the amounts passed through the machine at five of those meetings last year, before the regime of the bookmaker, there is a decrease of £33,880 in the investments, while in the sixth case an increase of only £1,326 is shown. This works out roughly at a loss in totalisator taxation to the Government of *SOO on five meetings—an average of £IOO a meeting. The meetings represented are of varying grades of importance, and include the chief racing fixture of the year in the Dominion—the Canterbury Jockey Club's November meeting, at which the New Zealand Cup is decided. The figures and comparisons in detail are as follow: — Invest- Investments, menta. 1907. 1908. Decrease £ £ £ Feilding 27,318 16,983 10,335 Blenheim 8,208 3,184 5,024 Christchurch (Cup meeting) 93.133 88.219 4,914 Taratahi 19,269 11,811 7,458 Masterton 15,353 9,204 6,149 Totals 163,281 129,401 33,880 Increase Timaru 2,378 4,204 1,326 It will be seen that the meeting which does show a profit is only a small gathering, judging by the investments, and it will be further observed that in Wairarapa our clubs have felt particularly the presence of the bookmaker. Probably the whole matter of the legalising of bookmakers will be revived at the next session of parliament, as the new Act will then have had a good fifteen months' trial, and furthermore the anuual Government returns down to March 31st will supply an accurate statement of the total loss of revenue suffered by the Dominion as a result of this experimental Act. That it has not been in the interests of small clubs has been clearly demonstrated, and if some alteration is not made a good many old established country racing clubs must either run at a loss or suffer extinction, and naturally the officials will prefer the latter course. In the case of some of the larger clubs also the introduction of the penciller has meant a financial loss to the clubs, although in other cases the large number of bookmakers who paid the fees imposed meant that the club profited u comparison with previous years' totalisator figures. It stands almost to reason, however, that had the bookmakers not been present on the course the totalisator investments must have correspondingly increased. It is really impossible to say in what position a club is financially in respect of the bookmaker where an apparent comparative profit is made, but in all cases, .whether investments increase or decrease on the machine on previous year's figures, the Government is losing heavily every meeting. There is said to be an almost universal desire on the part of racing clubs to return to the old order of things, not only because the revenues of clubs are in jeopardy, but because the bookmaker has not justified the expectations formed of him by those who favoured his legislative recognition. Individual pencillers may be worthy enough, but clubs have, in cases, through circumstances beyond their control, issued licenses to men who were, in racing parlance, out-and-out "welshers," and whose business tactics have brought discredit on the whole fraternity. This is certainly unfortunate for the honest bookmaker, but in all the circumstances it cannot be fairly argued that the Government's action in per mitting bookmakers to compete on the racecourse with the totalisator has been justified. Why the totalisator has such strong claims, too, is that it is run in the interests of the racing public themselves, and not for the benefit of private individuals. Racing clubs do not declare annual dividends and distribute large profits among members. Their profits invariably go in increased stakes and general bettering of racing conditions. If it was imagined that by some occult means legalising the bookmakers was going to reduce the volume of gambling —which we do not for one moment think any sane pe r son will pretend was the object of the iiew measure—such a supposition must have been based on very small experience of racing matters generally. Where a few people invested in £1 totalisator tickets previously, many now specu.late down to a modest half-crown's

worth with the bookmaker. The mystery surrounding the establishment of the State bookmaker—for such he is, though he keeps the State's profits—is certainly unexplained up to the present.