THE RACE MEETINGS BILL.

Lyttelton Times, Volume CXX, Issue 15184, 23 December 1909, Page 9

THE RACE MEETINGS BILL.

SIR JOSEPH WARD AND MR MILLAR DECLARE AGAINST THE TOTALISATOR. [From Our Correspondiott.] WELLINGTON, December 21. Speaking on the third reading of the Race Meetings Bill, Sir Joseph Ward stid, " When the time comes I shall vote against the continuance of the totalisator and the bookmaker." He considered it illogical that one form of betting should be declared legal and another form illegal. Mr Davey expressed regret at hearing such a statement. Where they had one bookmaker previous to the passing of the last Gaming Act they now had fifty. Where the totalisator provided revenue for carrying on racing clubs bookmakers provided nothing at all. "There's a den of thieves there," he added, referring to the pony races at Miramar. He declared that there would have been no pony racing there but for the legalisation of bookmakers. Tho Hon J. A. Millar said that racing clubs deliberately licensed as bookmakers men whom they knew to be swindlers, with the cbject of bringing discredit on the Gaming Act. He would vote every time for the abolition of the totalisator. Bookmakers and the totalisator would go together as far as he was concerned.

Mr Biiick contended that racing clubs had no option but to license bookmakers unless the applicants were known to be of bad character. The Manawatu Club had doubts about licensing one or two applicants and applied to the police, who said that they were no worse than other bookmakers. It was a hard job to prove that a man was a disreputable character, unless he had been in gaol. Mr Hemes said he did not want to stir up. trouble, but what Mr Millar had said was contrary to fact. Bad characters

could go on the course and bet whether the club liked it or not. There was no penalty for betting without a license. If clubs refused men a license they could bet on the course just the same. Such persons could' not be forcibly ejected, except from a course which was freehold. Mr Witty said that the Canterbury Jockey Club had been trying to arrange that applications for bookmakers' licenses should be dealt with by the police, but they could not get any help to that end, therefore Mr Millar had no right to make such a statement as he had made. The proper thing would have been to give clubs the option of granting or refusing licenses to bookmakers. . , The Bill was read a third time and passed. The House rose at 4.15.