BOOKMAKER CASES.

Auckland Star, Volume LV, Issue 169, 18 July 1924, Page 7

BOOKMAKER CASES.

WHY THEY FA Tli. LEGISLATIVE COUNCILLOR'S VIEW. Speaking in the Legislative Council, tho Hon. O. Samuel had something to say concerning the prosecution of book 1 makers, a number of which prosecutions failed some little time ago. Mr. Samuol said that apparently it was now considered not wise to institute prosecutions under the Gaming Act, and that such prosecutions were likely to lead to disagreements. Why was it, he asked, that prosecutions under the Gaming Act failed in their object. There was such a thing as unwritten law, recognised throughout the world, and acquiesced in by some of the most eminent judges the world had produced. This rested on the contention that our laws should be a record of public opinion, and when they were not tlie public revolted against what was conceived to be injustice. A bookmaker who cared to gamble in a small way or a comparatively large way in towns, or in shops, or on the street, was to be looked on as a criminal, while those who carried on gambling to a huge extent on the racecourses were not. The Hon. Sir Francis Bell: Why not? You are criminals! Mr. Samuel: We are not regarded as such, and the State encourages and levies a toll of betting on the racecourses. Mr." Samuel said juries had declined to_ return a verdict of guilty which might result in the prisoner being imprisoned for two years—it was at the option of the judge—while the other man, who gambled through another channel, held up his head aa a follower of sport, free from any taint whatever. The Hon. T. W. Hislop said the verdicts in bookmaker cases were brought about not by any defect in the system, but by the condition of public opinion, which had not been brought up to such a state as to have a verdict in such' cases against the prisoner. |