The Gisborne Herald. IN WHICH IS INCORPORATED “THE TIMES.” GISBORNE, MONDAY, MARCH 25, 1946. GAMING LAWS IN NEW ZEALAND

Gisborne Herald, Volume LXXIII, Issue 21979, 25 March 1946, Page 2

The Gisborne Herald. IN WHICH IS INCORPORATED “THE TIMES.” GISBORNE, MONDAY, MARCH 25, 1946. GAMING LAWS IN NEW ZEALAND

After being prompted once or twice by the spread of unofficial rumours, the Minister of Internal Affairs, Mr Parry, lias made the definite announcement that a Royal Commission is to investigate the gaming laws of New Zealand. * This decision on the part of the Government constitutes one of its best post-war resolutions, ranking in importance with the similar attention paid last year to the subject of liquor licensing. The gaming laws and the licensing laws of the Dominion have indeed been queer evolutionary trends • m our democracy and it may be that, the recommendations of the respective commissions, if adopted, will go a long way towards forcing the country’s emergence from the atmosphere of Gilbert and Sullivan comic opera.

Mr Parry’s announcement will have created wide interest throughout the whole of New Zealand, particularly perhaps among the racing fraternity. The general feeling has been that changes calculated to eliminate the absurd underground activity in the betting world are long overdue. Now that arrangements have been made for a commission to sit—a commission of men in whose judgment there should be every faith —outside advice as to what exactly should be done would be superfluous. “In view of the very contentious matters to be considered,” said Mr Parry, “the Government feels very strongly that the commission should he a body of men entirely independent of sectional interests —and men, moreover, who by their standing, training and experience are qualified to arrive at conclusions that would confirm a basis of legislation which would be a satisfactory solution of this most difficult problem.” Evidence From All Sides.

With these sentiments there should be hearty agreement. It is reassuring, also, to note that the order of reference has been made as wide as possible so that all people concerned with any aspect of New Zealand’s gaming laws will he afforded an opportunity to present evidence. This procedure follows closely the principles laid down for bearing evidence on the licensing question and it may therefore be assumed that the sittings of the latest Royal Commission will be of long duration, culminating in the release of a comprehensive report. Admittedly, it will be difficult to reconcile all aspects of public thought on this thorny topic. Many people can live quite happily without taking the slightest interest in racing or in any form of gambling, but in New Zealand, as in most countries, there is a big following of the “Sport of Kings.” It is partly the love, of horses and partly the love of a gamble. At any rate, it is something which can never be eliminated through repressive legislation, scolding and lecturing.

For the sake of those who are troubled in their minds over the moral aspect we feel we can do no better than refer to an article by that great essayist and Christian thinker, Arthur Christopher Benson. In his book “Along the Road,” appears an article on gambling which states, inter alia: “I listened the other day to an earnest and eloquent sermon against gambling and betting which left an unsatisfactory impression on my mind. No one, of course, has any doubt that gambling is responsible for a great deal of crime and misery and that it is, in a large number of eases, an entirely reprehensible and pernicious practice. But the difficulty about it is that it seems impossible to lay down absolutely cogent and conclusive moral reasons against it. The same is not the case with things like theft or cruelty, which can be condemned root and branch.” Many Forms of Gambling. Mr Benson answers the argument that it is not honest to take money that one has not earned by stating that this plea cannot be for an instant sustained, because it would do away with the possibility of accepting all gifts and legacies or the increment of a fortunate investment. “Are there moralists so strict as to think themselves bound, if a perfectly bona fide investment turns out well, to pay the proceeds to the State, or devote it all to charitable uses?” lie asks. “Moreover, what becomes of such a thing as life insurance? There is nothing considered to be more virtuous or prudent or well-regulated than for a young man to insure bis life. Yet the transaction is nothing more nor less than a bet. If you insure your life, you are betting on your death, while the insurance company is betting on your life.”

The burden of his conclusions is that if a man who can afford it bets, and does not bet beyond Ins means; on the ground that it. amuses him, it is very difficult to say where the moral guilt comes in. This means, in other words, that it is wrong to lose money that you cannot pay or money which ought to be devoted to reasonable thrift or to the education of children. Money can be sinfully wasted in many other ways and it is the duty of all citizens to spend within their means. But it would be the purest socialism, and socialism of an advanced type, to say that no one lias the right to spend more than he requires for the bare necessities of life. The essayist believes that a weakening of the moral fibre takes place only in those so foolish as to succumb to the passion for gambling, but he advances what he calls one perfectly reasonable argument against the whole practice—the enormous waste involved in the establishment of an unproductive class of betting and gambling agents of all descriptions. Yet racing is an industry which does support a large number of men who have a genuine interest in horses for their own sake. It is an industry which will remain part of New Zealand life no matter what its critics have to say. The only course open to us, therefore, is to make sure that it is an industry which is well run. The Royal Commission should be capable of effecting a big improvement on present conditions.