THE GAMING BILL.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLIV, Issue 13602, 22 November 1907, Page 6

THE GAMING BILL.

£ SWEEPING REFORM.

DEBATE ON THE SECOND BEADING.

[BT TELEGRAM.—TRES3 ASSOCIATION.]. Wellington, Thursday. When the House met at 11 o'clock this morning the Premier moved the second reading of the Gaming and Lotteries Act Amendment Bill. The subject, he said, was surrounded with many difficulties. Abuses bad grown into existence, and public opinion called for some alterations. Any proposal to abolish betting altogether would imperil the passing of the Bill. He was in favour of encouraging legitimate sport, and the Government treated this subject in what they believed to be a practical manner, "not endeavour to limit the freedom of "the subject, but to,, prevent those evil effects which had been all too apparent. He explained in detail the provisions of the measure. In regard to the clause dealing with common gaming houses he pointed out. that the present penalty of six months' imprisonment, which could be imposed for keeping a common gaminghouse, gave the accused the right to be tried by a jury, and experience showed that juries would not convict in such cases. Therefore, the maximum penalty, had been reduced, so that such cases could be dealt with by a magistrate. Provision was, however, made for the accused to have power to appeal to the Supremo- Court. Betting by telegraph had grown to such an extent that the whole country was practically turned into a racecourse, and the prohibition of such telegrams had become a necessity. As to the clause preventing the publication of betting news, he proposed in committee to insert a. clause, prohibiting this, also the issue of "extras" or printed slips containing such information. Regarding tho compulsory licensing of bookmakers by racing clubs the Government was trying to confine betting to racecourses only, and it was expedient in making such a vast change to provide for the best class of bookmakers acting with the totalisator in providing for the accommodation of the public. Some amount of compromise was necessary in getting such a sweeping reform as this Bill on. to the Statute Book.

THE BOOKMAKING PROFESSION. Mr. Hemes doubted whether the Bill would do any good in remedying the gambling evil. He pointed out the inconsistency of saying that tho only way to get bookmakers off the street was to allow them to ply their calling on the racecourse. There were honourable men carrying on the calling of bookmakers, and thoy were at the top of the profession, for they had made it a profession. He, however, contended that the question of allowing bookmakers on the racecourse should be left entirely to the discretion of the clubs. The bookmaker should not be forced on them. He had no objection to bookmakers on a course so long as they were' approved by the racing clubs. The speaker proceeded to criticise what he described as faults in the details of the Bill. It was grossly unfair to put clubs without charters on the same footing as the first-mentioned. These clubs without charters were perfectly genuine, and no policeman should have the right to enter upon them at his own sweet will. Everybody knew that there were vindictive policemen. Mr. Wilford: What do you think of the clause doing away with trial by jury? Mi'- Hemes': 1 would always give every man a jury. Mr. Wilford: You don't r under this Bill.:.■■■'.'.

Mr. Hemes repeated that everybody charged with an offence should have the right logo before a jury. Clause 15 (power to,declare premises a garping-lnuse) required .roost careful and close consideration before it was passed The publication of " tips" was prohibited,- as well as the sale of any newspaper containing "lips." If a copy, of the Melbourne Argus containing a tip as to the probable result of the Melbourne Cup.was sold in New Zealand the seller was, liable to a hue of £20. This was an absurd provision. -There was no good reason, as far :vs hs couid see, why "tips" should not iv published. The tipster might be mulcted in the amount lost j by backers where his ''tips" were wrong, : and ho might bo entitled to a percentage of J tho winnings . where the " information" fructified. .He only, desired to see the ill improved, and "he hoped that th* Minister would acoopt reasonable amendments, The Kouso should bo given a free" band, ana the matter, should not be made a party question itt any way 'whatever. Mr. Wii ford congratulated '. the Government on its attempt to etop street betting and tote-shop betting. There wm far too much of the. latter in' the cities. As to the suppression of gamine houses, the Bill provided the strongest procedure ever put into any Bill in the world. He believed that (hat was the only way .to deal with such cases, but it was severe. If the "double tote" was prohibited the bookmaker also should be prevented from laying "doubles."

TOTALISATOU LICENSES. Mr. Fisher moved an amendment, "That, in the opinion of this House, tl*e time has arrived when tho Government should cease to participate in the revenue from totalisator licenses, and that the number of racing days throughout tho Dominion should be reduced." '

The amendment was negatived by 42 votes to nine. Mr. W. Eraser contended that the Bill forced bookmakers on racing clubs, and bookmakers were a, -worse evil than the double totalisator. Mr.'Major said it was a contest between the totalizator and the bookmaker for the support and patronage of the public, and to gain his own ends the bookmaker had made an ' unholy , alliance with another faction, which was represented in the House by Mr. Poole. > Mr. Rutherford said that if the - Premier would amend clause 35, which provides that racing clubs authorised to use the totalisator shall grant licenses to approved persons to carry on business as bookmakers, to read that clubs "may issue license*," the Bill would have his support. Mr. Jennings thought that the Bill should receive the support of every member of the House, as it went in the direction of grappling with what was admitted to be a great existing evil. > • : The motion to.go into committee was carried by 50 votes to two. ! 1 DEBATE IN COMMITTEE. Clause 2 describes a bookmaker as a person who carries on business as a bookmaker or turf commission agent, or who gains, or endeavours to gam, his livelihood wholly or partly by betting or making wagers.... Mr. Wilford moved to amend the clause by striking out "betting or making wagers," and substituting " laying the odds." The amendment was lost ou the voices. On the motion of Mr. Hemes, "bookmaker's clerk" was included in the definition of "bookmaker." ; The definition of " racing clubs" was, on the Premier's motion, fixed as " any club, association,- or body of persons, whether, incorporated or unincorporated, established for the purpose of conducting or controlling the sport' of racing." Replying to Mr, Wilford,.the Premier said that section 3 was intended to make the sale of Tattersail's tickets in New Zealand illegal. Clause 6, " No constable and no person acting under instructions from the superintendent' or inspector of police,- shall ■ be deemed, to be an offender or accomplice in the. commission of any offence against the Gaming Act, although such, constable might, but for this section, be deemed such an offender, or accomplice," was carried by 41 votes to seven. ' ",\- At clause 8, which makes betting by post, telegraph, or telephone.illegal,, Mr. Wilford moved to -strike out the words " post or telegraph.- 1 ; ■ ,' ~ : . -■This was -negatived .by' 41 votes to nine, and the clause was passed unaltered.; At clause 10, Mr. Wilford moved to increase' the sentence, for an offence to. six months, so ac to admit of the offender electing to be tried by' jury.. As it' wag, he'

said, an offender bad no chance of appealing to a jury, whereas a man' on a charge of indecent language had that, right. Mr. Stevens said he hoped the Premier would ameucl the ; clause. He would, support everv clause that would minimise the gambling "evil, but ho declined to support any clause that deprived an accused person of the right of trial by jury, even if he never occupied a ■ seat in"the House again. , The -Premier said he was a believer in % trial by jury,- but the position had not been correctly stated. There was under this Bill a right of appeal to a Supreme Court judge. Mr. Wilford: Yes, without evidence and no jury. .';■■■■■ The Premier, continuing, said if it was desired to make the whole clause worthless, then the best way was to give effect to M'r.' Wilfbrd's proposal. Mr. Masscy supported Mr. Wilford's amendment, as a man who was an offender should have the right of trial by jury. The amendment was negatived by-' 28 votes to 24, and the clause was passed unamended.

Clause 12 provides that for the purposes, of the Gaming Acts, any house, office, or room, or place, which would otherwise be a common gaming-house, shall deemed to be a common gaming-house, notwithstanding the fact that it is open only for the use of subscribers, or of members, or shareholders of any particular club, company, or corporation, and is not open to all persons desirous of using the same, provided this .section, shall not apply to any club holding a, charter issued under the ■ authority of the Licensing Act-, 1881., Mr. Herrioa moved an amendment to add the words." oi any club registered under the Unclassified ' Societies Registration Act, 1895."

The amendment was rejected by 59 votes to 17, and the clause was passed unamended. Clause 19 makes it. an offence to-be on premises declared to be a common gaminghouse (unless the person proves that he was, on entering, ignorant that they had been declared such), and subjects the offender to a fine of not. mom than £100 or imprisonment for not more than three months. . Mr. Wilford moved to make the sentence six months. to allow of the offender appealing to a jury. The amendment was rejected by 51 votes to 22, and the clause was agreed' to on the voices. . •

. Mr. Hemes moved a new sub-clause to provide ' that shall be paid to {■ho owner of premises which may be damaged by the police in gaining access to an adjoining gaminghouse, provided '.such, owner proves that ho hap no complicity with the gaming house. . This was rejected by 30 votes to 24. The Premier, replying to Mr. A.. L. D. Fraser, said the Bill was introduced to meet the demands' of the people of the country. The Government were responsible for the legislation, as they believed there was necessity for it. He had not changed his mind in regard to the use of the telegraph wires, but the Government considered that betting should bo confined to racecourses. He added that a.s Postmaster-General he had never ;.'■; discriminated against bookmakers or anyone else in regard to using' the wires.for their businesses, as telegraph facilities were provided for the general use of the public.

Mr. Wilfonl moved to strike out clause 31, which prohibits the publication of betting in regard to horse races, and also "prohibits tho publication of investments.on the totallsatdr.

Mr. Wilford withdrew his amendment, and on the Premier's motion the publication of starting prices was prohibited. The Premier also moved to prohibit any information as defined by clause 31 being publicly exhibited. This was agreed to. A new sub-clause was added to exempt any newspaper published out- of New Zealand from the provisions of the clause, by 53 votes to 15. The clause as amended was passed by 28 votes to 27. _ ■ ';"'-■■ j At clause 32, which prohibits double' betting on the totalisator, Mr. Remington moved to prohibit the use of the totalizator altogether. .••-■. " The Premier said if this was carried the Bill' would not pass. In : reply'to Mr. Lewis, the Premier said he did not,intend this to mean that he would drop tho Bill if Mr. Remington's' amendment, .carried. ..;-.-, ■ ;. On division.'the amendment was rejected ' by 37 votes to 17. The debate was still in progress when tho \ telegraph office closed.

NOTES ON THE DEBATE. OPINIONS OF MEMBERS. [BT TELEGRAPH.— CORRESPONDENT.] '■ Wellikgton, Thursday. "I have no hesitation. in saying that thin is a bookmakers' Bill franiy start to finish," said Mr. Rutherford, speaking on the Gaming Bill to-day. .In regard 7to i the clause < licensing bookmakers, he said it ; should bo optional and not mandatory upon the clubs, but he understood the Premier would not give way on that point. He (Mr. Rutherford) did not see why ho should submit such a clause, unless he was the friends of the bookmakers. He had, however, never heard it stated that the Premier had a little bit on ; with the bookmakers. . (Laughter.) He did not know whether he could say that of all the rest, of the Cabinet. (More laughter.). • Mr. Jennings read to the House a, letter from a sporting writer of over 25 years' experience, condemning the totalizator, and stating that the gambling mania was eating into the' vitals of the people. ' " If! he has been a sporting writer for 25 years, and has been giving, .'tips/ he must be a very inconsistent man," replied an hon. member. Mr. Jennings also read a newspaper paragraph stating that money had been rung on the totalisator at the Christchurch races five minutes after a race had been concluded. ."If this sort of. thing were done, people would," he said, " naturally be suspicious." Mr. Da vey warmly repudiated any suggestion of fraud in connection with the management at Christchurch. " There was no fraud at all. The men were simply ringing on the totals invested before the starting of the race. Mr. Jennings," ho added, "had no right to make such a statement.''

Mr. Jennings explained that he had no intention of imputing fraud, but he did' say that in the minds of the general publie there was a feeling of uneasiness when five minutes after a race bad J been run 35 tickets- bad been rung on. * Mr. Davey: That is quite another story. '.<'■,. Mr. Jennings : If I conveyed that impression I am sorry I have done so. Mr. La wry, during his oration on the subject, talked about Auckland clergymen and holy Joes" by the score gambling in scrip and land. Talking about judges versus trial by jury, Mr. Wilford said he knew of a J.P. who issued a prohibition order aganst a man. Next day the J.P. went out with the prohibited man, and both got drunk. •■ v

A DUNEDIN GAMING HOUSE. ■-■■-■ -•.'■■ ,- .. < ~ [BY TELEGRAPH.—PRESS ASSOCIATION.] . Dunedix, Thuraday.' • : In urging that the Gaming Bill , should be passed, so far as the . provisions 'aiming at the suppression of common gaming houses are concerned, the Otago Daily. Times represents the impossibility of raiding the infamous den "which is alleged to exist in Auckland. It adds that in Dunedin itself there is a more or less notorious gaming house, of the existence of , which the police cannot be unaware, and which, sets the law at defiance, presumably because it' has been found that the machinery of the' statute cannot be satisfactorily worked, ■ »■■"■' ' .1... , "A ROARING BUSINESS." [BT telegraph.— correspondent.] ,■-..:.■■■.."■ Wellington,' Thursday. . Apropos of the .recent. press telegrams from Auckland and Ihineain, it,may be mentioned that these cities are not the onlv one's in which betting offices are ?in full swing. in the main. street. Here a firm of bookmakers does a roaring business. Large numbers,of people daily patronise the office, and openly bet on the races that take place in different parts of the colony/ " /*. ** '