THE TOTALISATOR IN AUSTRALIA.

Auckland Star, Volume XXIX, Issue 306, 28 December 1898, Page 4

THE TOTALISATOR IN AUSTRALIA.

Just as the subject of the abolition of the totalisator is one which arises perennially in our New Zealand Pai'liument, so does the question of its legalisation crop up in the Victorian and New South Wales .Legislatures. The most lecent effort to get Parliament to sanction the introduction of the totalisator was that embodied in a Bill which came before the Upper House of New South Wales a few days ago. The measure, which had been amended by a select committee, was sftnply an Act authorising- the working of the totalisator on lines similar to those in force in this colony, but contained no provision for the restriction, of betting as was. the case when the totalisator was legalised in New Zealand.

Tne arguments before the select committee of the advocates of the introduction of the machine were those commonly adduced: it was contended that with the totalizator in force the various clubs would be able to pay better slakes, one result; of Svhich would be a greater incentive to win, while there would be less need for owners to bet largely to cover the expenses they were put. to in connection with their racing" stables. Another purifying factor would be the elimination of personality in the betting" attendant on the introduction of the. machine. It is recognised that horses are often run 'stiff in big races consequent on the receipt of a sum from a large bookmaker, who, having tlie horse in his bag, as the racing phrase has it, can lay all the money he can obtain against it. The case foi the totalisator as put forward before this select committee rested very largely on an elaboration of this statement that the machine cannot lie or cheat by influencing an owner or jockey as an unscrupulous bookmaker may do.

The great argument against the machine was the demoralising effect legalising betting might have. Clerics were the main witnesses against the Bill, and although they confessed to the most absolute ignorance of the forms and nature of gambling, they put forward-their opinions, for the most, part, as of the greatest possible weight. South Australia and New Zealand were held up as examples providing proof of the assertion that the totalisator increases the. gambling spirit, because betting sanctioned by the Government appears respectable: and with regard to these colonies a statement was made that a deplorable increase, of betting by women was noticeable. *

In, the course of the evidence the Eev. Rainsfoi'd Bavin in answer to the, question, 'Qari you adduce a single instance of any-great misfortune ever having- occurred in' any family in. Xew Zen land in consequence of the comparatively innocent betting—because it ..is comparatively innocent:—that takes place through the • totalisator?' file reverend gentleman replied: 'Yes; ft case precisely of this kind came under my notice. I was visiting' a poor widow, and on one occasion I foiintl her iv.very great trouble. I asked her what, was the matter, and she said that her boy, who was an apprentice, had invested in an innocent sort of way, as he believed, a small sum—l think about half a crown—and it had been the means of his comingl into possession of £100. The mother, who was in,-very humble .circumstances, was simply heartbroken; she said that had been the absolute ruin of her son. The point that impressed me Avas that the woman said that since the boy came into possession of that money he had thrown tip his trade, and work any more he would not. He was a, ruined boy.' ■-./-■ ■:■■'■ • '; r:■;-.:'■ *

While . not wishing to east any: doubts on the authenticity or accur-} 'acy of this story, it may be pointed '■ out that no dividend has been; paid in New Zealand which would give a return of ,£ 100 for the in-; vestment of Half a trown,! or for ■ the .matter ,of that; double the amount. The money had; evidently been invested in oae of the' big Australian sweeps..

Those who were arguing in favour, of the legalisation of the machine. pointed out the fact tha| all- the ( gambling requires to be cash, downs is in itself a considerable deterrent. In ' this- connection it may be noted that evidence ■wa*' given before this committee to the• effect that statistics sbxViyecl fewer cases of embezzlement" in South Australia subsequent to the Government legalising; the totalisator , than was the case previously. . j

When the • second reading of the; niil was proposed in the Upper House as amended by the select committee, '."the. .repeat was construed by both the opponents and .-supporters of the Bill as being favourable to their antagonistic views. No new matter was introduced and the arguments pro and con were practically identical with those which had been ventilated in the evidence before the committee. A feature of the debate was the speech of the Atloriiey-Geenral (the Hon. J. IT. Want), who said he had to candidly admit That, the view .he*-took of tha Bill now was different to what it was when the proposal was previously before them. Since he had opposed the measure formerly he had had an opportunity of seeing the way in which the machine was worked, both in Tasmania and South Australia, and of observing the effects with regard, to the conduct of betting and of the breeding ;df: racehorses. His opinion had been completely changed, and .he, intended to vote for the Bill. Itwas all very well to, say that this Bill would . encourage . gambling1; but. itwas impossible to stop gambling. All that could be done was to pass legislation' controlling the vice; The people who objected to this Bill were opposed to the liquor traffic, but they did not object to legislation controlling that traffic. The' same rule ought to apply to both evils, and if they could not stop gambling they should do their best to-keep it under control. Eventually with the consent of the mover of the second reading the debate Avas adjourned for a fortnight, which in all probability means the shelving of. the. question for the present session. The. interests against the introduce tion of the totalisator are very strong in New • South Wales and Victoria, and the struggle which the larger racing clubs have made for its introduc-, tion lias been prolonged and strenuous; bur it seems as if legislative opinion in New South Wales is more in favour of, it now than has previously been the case. Properly controlled by the State and with restriction placed on the number of permits the amount of racing in New South Wales would be very considerably reduced, the racing would be improved, and it would be possible to make stringent regulations against numerous forms of betting of a most pernicious character now rife. To anyone familiar with the vast extent,of the bookmaking' profession in the two chief Australian centres, and the existence of illegal tote shops, the fear that making betting at race meetings by the medium of the machine legal would increase thevolumeof gambling seems very poorly founded. At the same thne it is not easy to show from New Zealand experience that the totalisaior has in any degree reduced the amount of gambling, and if sanctioned at all its use should be. strictly restricted to a limited number of important race meetings.