THE GAMING BILL.

King Country Chronicle, Volume V, Issue 314, 23 November 1910, Page 3

THE GAMING BILL.

® Some interesting points arose during the discussion on the -Gaming Bill in the Legislative Council. One ■amendment inserted by the Council provides for the whole Act coming into operation on January 31st next. Under the Bill as it stood the clause dealing with the duration of race meetings would have corne into force at once. This exempts all the coming holiday meetings from the provisions of the new law.

Several members of the Council expressed regret that the Bill did not prevent bookmakers' operations altogether. "It is merely paltering with the question," declared the Hon. G. Jones in pointing out that the Bill would allow betting to go on in private offices.

Dr Findlay remarked that this was as far as they could go short of trying to stop betting altogether. The Hon. C. M. Luke said he was told that the bookmakers were highly amused at Parliament's action in this matter and saying that they would be able to ply their business as successfully as ever, save on the racecourses. He would like to know whether it would be possible for a bookmaker under the guise of a commission agent to carry on business in an office. "No, he would not," said the Attorney-General, adding that as far as he knew there was no legal objection to a bookmaker going into an office and making a bet here. If, however, he was using a building for the purpose of making a bet, then it became a common gaming house at once.

The Hon. W. C. Smith said he was sorry that the law could not go any further.

Dr Findlay said it must be conceded that it was somewhat curious that in an intelligent democracy like this the officers of the law could pounce upon an old lady telling fortunes and send her to prison, while if a man were carrying on work such as had just been described he could'do so with impunity so long as he avoided conflict with certain provisions of the law.

There was a does division on an amendment moved by the Hon. J. Rigg, with the object of killing the clause which provides for setting up a commission to determine the number of licenses. The clause was retained by 14 votes to 13, the voting being as follows: —

For the clause: Findlay, Paul, Tucker, W. C. Smith, G. J. Smith, Baldey, Collins, Stevens, Loughnan, McLean. Ormond, Johnston, Anstey, Wigram. ' Against the clause: Macdonald, Cailan, Luke, Rigg, Barr, Jenkinson, Jones, Harris, Thompson, McGowan, Mills, Sinclair, Samuel. The Hon. O. Samuel moved to strike out the provision that the totalisator may be used on 250 days in the year, saying that his object was to retain the number of permits as at present. To reduce the privileges of the people as proposed without a mandate from the public—(Voices: "Question.") would be a very, harsh proceeding indeed. The Hon. W. C. Smith said that by striking out the number 250 it would give an opportunity to the advocates of still further reduction to move the insertion of 200 as the limit. A reduction was much more likely than an increase. (Hear, hear.) Dr Findlay declared that there was a very widespread and growing feeling in favour of reduction in the racing days. Many people were of opinion that in leaving the number at 250 it was too much. The amendment was withdrawn by Mr Samuel, one member commenting: "You lare wise to do it."