WHITTA CASE

Greymouth Evening Star, 4 June 1921, Page 7

WHITTA CASE

PETITION FOR RELEASE. ’ J DEPUTATION’S RECEPTION. I WELLINGTON, May 31. , A deputation, consisting of Mr W. T. Lester, Mayor of. Lyttelton, and Mr H. T. Armstrong, waited on the Acting Prime Minister and Minister of Justice this morning regarding the Whitta case. It was introduced by Mr G. Mitchell, one of the "Wellington members of Parliament, . acting for Dr Thacker, who, Mr Mitchell • explained/ \vas too ill to attend. “I know ■ nothing of this case,” said Mr Mitchell. Mr Lester, in presenting the petition, said it was signed by 12,000 or 13.000 residents of Christchurch, with the view of endeavouring to impress upon the Min- > islet’ the feeling of that portion of the community in connection with the sentence imposed upon Mr Whitta. The petition would show the ground for putting forward the request, and there was no endeavour to interfere with Acts or laws or statutes of the Government. This was more an endeavour to plead with the ' Acting-Prime Minister to make some al- ■ teration in the sentence passed upon Mr Whitta. He read the first portion of the petition bearing on this matter, and went on to point out that this was one case out of five or six in which bookmakers were charged under this new law, and Mr Whitta was the only one found guilty and put under punishment. Sir Francis Bell: By a jury.

> Mr Armstrong said'the case had created more public interest than any that had occurred in Christchurch for a long time. It would’ be possible to secure double the number of signatures, or more, if they had gone to the necessary trouble. A verv large proportion who had signed it were not betting people at all. “We realise,” he said, “that while the Act is in operation, those who break it should take the consequences, and that the proper course is to wait until the time is opportune to have the law repealed. But we don’t think it is fair in the ease of Mr Whitta, because the offence is hardly any more serious than others that have come before the Court. Because he has carried on his business in a straightforward manner, open and above board, it has been possible to get a conviction againt him. when it. would not have been possible if he had carried on his business underground.” The effect of the Act, Mr Armstrong went on to say, would be the opposite of what was thought by the Government.

Sir Francis Bell; By Parliament. Mr Armstrong: By Parliament. I am one that thinks it will have an opposite effect. It will drive, honest men ont of it so that the state of affairs will be worse than the old system. If racecourse gambling is illegal,, then the totalisator is the greatest evil of all. Eight millions were put through' the /totalisator last year, and the Government derived a revenue of £415,000 from racing, most of it from the totalisator itself. We are inclined to think, if gambling on races is to be abolished, then it will be necessary to abolish racing itself, because it exists by the gambling that is carried on. There are other forms of gambling just as injurious as racehorse gambling, and the great bulk of the people are victims to this, more than they are to betting with a bookmaker. There is gambling in mines and on the Stock Exchange, and on the part of lang agents, who take advantage of. the housing situation, and in the food supplies of the country. I don’t think I have had a bet with a bookmaker for upwards of twenty years, arid I believe that could be said of a large number who signed this petition. . Those engaged in bookmaking carry on their business in as honest and upright a manner as other businesses are carried on. I don’t know Whitta personally, and I don’t know that I ever saw him in my life, but this was the first conviction under the Act, and it appears that Whitta is to be made the chopping block for all the bookmakers carrying on business in New Zealand at the present time. He sent two sons to the war, and he served a very useful purpose some time back in using his money for building operations that are veiy necessary and desirable. These things should be taken into consideration, also that he has paid a rather severe fine, and the costs of the prosecution were very considerable. He has now served some time in prison, and his state of health is such that he should not be allowed to remain there. Taking all these things into consideration, the law will, have been vindicated if the balance of Whitta’s sentence is remitted. MINISTERS’ REPLIES.

Sir Francis Bell: The matter is more one for my colleague (Mr Lee) than for myself, and I will ask him to give the answer as Minister of Justice, but, speaking for myself, I should “say that you must recognise that interference by the Government with the deliberate sentence of a Judge of the Supreme Court is a very serious matter indeed, and should not be entered upon except for very grave reasons. I gathered from the last speaker that if the totalisator existed, it was necessary to have an ambulatory totalisafor in addition id the shape and form of the bookmaker. Well, that is not the view of Parliament, and I don t think that what has been said that subject is relevant to the question. Hie Government is as much bound to abide by the law as you or the bookmaker, and the Government is bound to administer it, in so far as the administration lies in its hands. It must not be influenced by any suggestion that the law is unnecessary or harsh. With regard to the health of this prisoner, from my point of view I am not at all desirous, even if I had the right, of anticipating or influencing anything my colleague may have to say. But speaking for myself, with regard to. all the prisons due provision is made that if the term of imprisonment is injuring the health of a prisoner, the Department of Justice receives a warning from the medical officer, and steps are taken to provide for hospital treatment in such cases. I know of no reason why this prisoner s case should be treated differently from any other in this respect, and that is al! I have to say. The Hon. E. P. Lee said : I shall give consideration to the petition, and. ghe you an answer, later on. I wish, however, to sav this: That notwithstanding the law passed last session by Parliament, it is common knowledge that it js openly, and continually, flouted, and designedly floated, and, further, that it is exceedingly difficult. under the systems that are in vogue to obtain information regarding offences, and that there is a further difficulty in obtaining convictions. I have announced

in the public Press frpm time to time that instructions have been given to every officer of the Police Department to see that the law which has been passed by Parliament is carried out. Further, I have given instructions to the police that the law is directed not only againt the bookmaker, but also against the individual who bets with the bookmaker. Instructions have been given that such persons have to be prosecuted also when they have been detected in breaking the law. It does seem to me, in view of the publicity that has been given, extraordinary that it should be put forth as an excuse that this is a new law, and that those who break it have very little knowledge of what is passed in Parliament. On the special question of the prisoner’s health a decision will be. given later. Where the health of a prisoner is such that it requires special treatment, or the prisoner is in any danger, the matter is considered by . the Prisons’ Board, and I can assure you that if the prisoner’s health is indifferent, full consideration will be given by the medical authorities and by the Prisons’ Board. WHITTA JUNR’S CASE. (Special to the Star. ) CHRISTCHURCH, June 3. The Hon. E. Leo, Minister of Justice, replying to the complaint of the Council of Churches that insufficient public explanation for’ the remission of the sentence on Whitta junr. for' bookmaking was forthcoming, say.fi: “I am unable to add anything to the communications I have already sent you, excepting to repeat that the sentence imposed on Whitta junr. was remitted by the Government on the recommendation of the Stipendiary Magistrate who tried the case.”