STATE LOTTERY IN BRITAIN

Press, Volume LXX, Issue 21355, 24 December 1934, Page 10

STATE LOTTERY IN BRITAIN

GOVERNMENT FIRM PROPOSAL HEAVILY DEFEATED (FROM OUR OWN CORRESI'ONDKNT.) LONDON, November 8. About a year ago Sir William Davison was given a majority in the House on a free vote for the first reading of a bill for the introduction of State Lotteries. At the Conservative Conference at Bristol recently, the delegates breezily carried a motion in favour of lotteries, yet when the House voted on the same subject this week under the guidance of the Whips, the voting was 219 against and 47 for the legalising of State Lotteries. It may safely be said that no British Government, for some years at least, would dare to face the outcry which would arise all over the country if they made State lotteries legal. Sir John Gilmour, the Home Secretary, made it quite plain that the Government would have nothing to do with any such scheme. In the debate on the Betting Bill Sir William Davison proposed to give, or, as he preferred to put it, reserve for, the Government, power to promote lotteries for such objects as the reduction of the National Debt, the relief of unemployment, and afforestation. Forty or fifty millions, he calculated, had been sent from this country in the last few years to lotteries in France and the Irish Free State. "A sweep to sweep away slums" would bring in £13,000,000. Ninety per cent, of members of Parliament saw no harm in lotteries, but some of them thought they knew how other people ought to spend their money. He had literally hundreds of, letters from all over the country supporting his point of view. The bill would be impossible to enforce unless they had some kind of national lottery. In their evidence before the Royal Commission the police and the Home Office admitted that, notwithstanding all their espionage and opening of private letters—both things which were hateful to British people—they could not enforce the prohibition against taking foreign lottery tickets unless they had public opinion behind them.

Churches' Opposition Mr I. Foot said that social reform must be paid for, but he would despair for the future of the country if it had to rest on these tricks, this cheating of the people, as gambling was in the end. Gambling was a perversion of hope. There were strong forces supporting the Government in this matter. The Churches were united upon it. If this amendment were adopted it would be to the Churches not a message of hope but of disappointment, and it would do more than anything else to bring down the Government. (Cries of "Rot!".) Mr George Lansbury (Leader of the Labour party) expressed the view that the growth of gambling in this country, and especially in the East End of London, was one of the most terrible evils of the day. Children were now betting, and if the amendment were carried and it was known that the House of Commons had said that they needed a national lottery for the purpose of- dealing with the National Debt, unemployment, and the other questions mentioned, they would justify every man, woman, and young person who often ruined themselves by gambling in one form or another. Mr Churchill's Views Mr Winston Churchill intervened for some brief and breezy minutes. He waved aside the economic argument and asked sarcastically: "What is the moral standard?" They were setting up "hundreds of casinos," establishing the evil thing on a gigantic scale—and then they were told that a national lottery would encourage gambling. Of all gambling to take a ten-shilling ticket in a sweep was the least injurious, the least likely to ruin a family. The position in the bill had no logic or morality. He believed that three or four national sweeps might actually diminish the amount of gambling in the country. Why should they not have a free vote? The people of the country had thought about these questions for* themselves and knew what they wanted. Yet the Government wished to be angels come down from on high and proclaim to them the gospel, "You may ruin yourselves on 104 days in the year, but if you take a ten-shilling ticket in a sweep you are lost beyond redemption!" Government's Attitude The Home Secretary, replying for the Government, said that State lotteries had existed in this country, and they became so vicious, not

only from the commercial and credit, but'from the moral point of view, that public opinion forced those in authority to appoint commissions to look into the problem. As a result that state of things ceased. Recently a Ptoyal Commission dealt with the problem, arid after hearing a vast amount of evidence, and considering, the matter in a most unbiased manner, took the view that there should be some relaxation of the law which provided that all lotteries of whatever kind, large or small, were illegal. The Government had considered this problem of central lotteries in all its aspects and had decided that it would not take the responsibility of conducting them. It was unfortunate that a flow of money should go from this country to Ireland or anywhere else, but the Government were taking powers to tightc. - up the regulations in this matter. The amendment was lost by 219 to 47—Government majority, 172. Clause 19 was ordered to stand part of the Bill.