Legal “Housey” Sought By School Committees

Press, Volume XCVI, Issue 28434, 14 November 1957, Page 14

Legal “Housey” Sought By School Committees

Legalising of the game of “housev,” where profits are for school purposes, will be sought by the Canterbury School Committees’ Association. It will ask the next conference of the Dominion School Committees’ Federation to make this recommendation to the Government. After a debate in which speakers for and against were equally adamant, the motion was carried with only four persons dissenting in a meeting of 40 delegates’ to the association.

Most school committees found it difficult to keep special funds at a level sufficient to provide amenities not covered by the incidental grant, said the Shirley Primary School Committee’s letter, which made the proposal. “Properly organised ‘housey’ would be one of the most painless and, at the same time, most enjoyable methods of extracting funds from parents.” the letter said.

Housey and Horses “Legally, ‘housey’ is a game of chance and is prohibited; but properly-supervised and approved raffles and the Totalisator Agency Board’s chaih of establishments for gambling are perfectly legal,” the committee said. “It seems ironical that the vast organisation for betting on horses should be approved by law while the playing of the innocuous game of ‘housey’ in public is a breach of the Gaming Act, even where profits are devoted to charitable purposes.” Mr J. Palmer (Burwood) moved that this issue be discussed in committee.

The secretary (Mr A. Greenwood) said he could see no grounds for this. “To my knowledge this association has gone into committee only once and that was 14 years ago,” said Mr R. J. Cooper, a former president. Mr Palmer said he did not mind the principle being openly discussed; “but certain committees, which might be named, would not want to have a visit next Saturday night.”

Newspaper representatives were asked if they would delete any schools named in open meeting. Reporters refused. “Delegates know just how far they can go and if they cause trouble it will be their own fault,” said Mr R. K. Milne (Wharenui).

The motion to go into committee was defeated, about five voting in support.

“Minority Dictation” The president (Mr R. Claridge. of Shirley) said many schools conducted card evenings which were not particularly profitable so some, in the past, arranged games of “housey” “which helped.” It was unlikely that the prohibition on “housey” would be unconditionally lifted; but the executive had been advised that a good case could be made for schools. “Vociferous minorities in this country seem to dictate to the majority in most matters; but we feel that this proposal will be widely supported,” Mr Claridge said.

“What are the objections? Is this game evil?” asked Mr D. H. Allison (Shirley Intermediate). “I know a school, which ran ‘housey’ for 40 years, where it has just been stopped because they got

the wink,” said Mr Cooper (Spreydon). “Elderly people enjoyed a 3d game and hurt nobody. It is not gambling as we know it. Why this sudden death on housey?” , One district’s organisation had bee., “crippled” because a zealous police officer took it upon himself to have a clean-up, said Mr R. M. Luke (Spreydon). About £411.000 had been put through the T.A.B. recently, yet housey was banned. If schools were granted a permanent permit—even paid a licence fee of £s—the game could be adequately policed. Some years ago, public euchre was illegal, said Mr J. Palmer (Burwood). Now it was allowed on permit. The same could apply to “housey,” provided it was not for private gain. He was informed that at least seven members of Parliament regarded the present ban as farcial and would support the change. Conducting “housey” would not be mandatory and those who objected could refrain from holding games. “This Undoubtedly Smells” “I have listened carefully to explanations of this ‘innocuous pleasure ’; but I think this business undoubtedly smells,” said Mrs M. E. Holland (Fendalton). “This association should not belittle itself by sending forward this motion. My committee would be the last to support ‘housey.’ If some feel a change should be made, they could make an individual approach.” ‘‘That is a back-door method," said Mr E. Jackson (Sumner). “If we think this way. we should say so openly. The simple issue is: Is it morally correct for schools to promote gambling?” Mr F. Sisson (Bishopdale) said he thought any approach was better made through an organisation than by individuals. Someone had suggested a roundtable conference with the police, said Mr Claridge. The present motion was the result. The police said they could not shut their eyes to breaches of the law. “Of course they can’t,” said Mrs Holland. “They don’t make the law.”

The motion was then carried by a large majority, about four dissenting, of whom Mrs Holland and Mr Allison asked that their objection be recorded.