THE GAMING ACT.

New Zealand Herald, Volume XLIV, Issue 13612, 4 December 1907, Page 8

THE GAMING ACT.

PRIME MINISTER'S VIEWS.

DEPUTATION OF BOOKMAKERS

ADVICE TO RACING CLUBS.

A deputation of bookmakers, consisting of Messrs. R. L. Cleland, W. Lyons, and J. Davidson, waited on the Premier, Sir Joseph .Ward, yesterday afternoon, with reference to the attitude of certain racing clubs towards bookmakers since the new Gaming Bill has become law. Mr. W. E. Hackett, who acted as spokesman for the bookmakers, said they wished to convey through the Premier their deep sense of obligation to the Government for the status that had been conferred upon them by the recent legislation passed. By the new Bill a certain unjustifiable stigma had been removed from those following the bookmaking calling, and they had also been relieved of what they regarded as persecution. "FREED OF A TAEN'T."

Speaking for himself in his private capacity, and as a patron of sport, he could assure the Premier that ' bookmakers bad been freed of a taint which certain persons were inclined to associate with them, and the Government had adopted a line of l,conduct that, white it might not be received unanimously by all parties, would commend itself to the approval and support of an overwhelming majority of patrons of sport. First, he would like to assure the Premier, on behalf of the bookmakers, that it was their sincere desire to adhere strictly to the spirit and letter of the new Gaming Act. To that end local pencilled had already voluntarily cancelled bets made by them prior to the coming into operation of this legislation, and, further, they had closed down their offices where they were accustomed to carry on their business. They felt that by this Act, when carried into effect—and if the racing clubs would only co-operate with the Bookmakers—the ' Government would very successfully, finally and practically, grapple with* the betting evil, and this was their sincere desire. If, on the other hand, the various racing clubs were intent on perpetuating a policy of hostility, which they had shown in the past towards bookmakers, it was feared that the objects of the Act would be vitiated, and that the moral good which it was sought to accomplish would be destroyed irretrievably. While the bookmakers regarded with favour the right given to them ot betting on racecourses, they felt at the same time that there was another provision in the Bill with respect to the assessing of licensing fees, which would. practically deprive them of the privilege which.in theory was given them, if such fees were assessed unreasonably by racing clubs. If the clubs in and around Auckland went to the extreme and insisted on the maximum fee being paid, it would mean that the bookmakers pursuing their calling on the different racecourses would be subjected to a tax of £800 per man per, year.« Further, if the clubs followed the example of one club, and treated the bookmaker clerk as a bookmaker it would bring the tax up to £1600 a year, which was sufficiently absurd to render it unnecessary for him to argue about it. The clubs should take a fair view •; of the matter. Mr. Hackett proceeded to refer to the conditions obtaining in Australia, where, he said, there was no totalisator with its fasoination of two dividends, ' On Flemingtou and Randwick, which were the most prosperous and leading racecourses in the southern hemisphere, the maximum fee for bookmakers was £5- per day per man* with the privilego of betting in the . enclosure and saddling paddock. Even £3, £2, and practically, a nominal fee, was charged.' At Ellerslie,: prior, to the unceremonious expulsion of the bookmakers, the club was paid an annual fee of £75. *- Now the book- i makers, for .the purpose of showing their —abstaining from street betting and laying totalisator odds—and in order to cany on a legitimate trade on this course, were.prepared to give an increased fee by 25 per cent, to the Ellerslie Club, making the fee £100. They were prepared" to increase the fee to the Takapumv Club from £35 to £50, and that, to the Avondale Club from £21 to £35. . To the other clubs they were prepared to make a proportionate increase! The bookmakers, were prepared to make magnanimous offers, and they were magnanimous when it was considered that the opportunities now obtaining for betting were not so good as formerly. And yet they had great cause to fear that these "offers would not be acceptable. ' A member of the Auckland Club bad stated that the bookmaker would only get into Ellerslie at "the point of the bayonet." The bookmakers asked the Premier's intervention on their behalf. -While they were anxious to adhere strictly to the letter of the Act, they wished to have the concessions and privileges conferred on them by the ActNo doubt it could be suggested to the clubs that they should be amenable to-reason, and what would be a wise policy on their part. TheFeilding Club, as w'as known, had attempted to ring in the clerk as a bookmaker. No doubt he was, for the purposes of the penal section of the Act, but, surely, that was all. U the clerk was made a bookmaker for the purposes of the Act, it would mean that the maximum fee would be £40, instead of £20. /■.'/-.:-; PARLIAMENT'S INTENTIONS. Sir .Joseph Ward, in replying, said the Gaming Act was a very drastic one it was intended by Parliament to be drastic, for the House took into consideration the fact that there was a great consensus of opinion amongst the community against the gambling that was going on, and against totalisator odds and street betting. That agitation was not new; it had been moving for some four.or five years, and the Government, in going into the question of endeavouring to suppress street betting—although he did not suppose any Government couldabsolutely control it—had thought the drastic clauses of the Act would to a considerable extent help to put a stop to, some of the worst forms of the evil. That was the main object of the measure. Racing clubs were licensed, and permits were issued to each club, with the object, of limiting the number of days on which races could be held. There-was a general opinion that there were too many racing days now, and he himself thought "they should be reduced. That, however, was not the -point under review. The Government looked at the position in the light that where'' racing was carried on, and betting, whether by the totalisator or by the bookmaker, was to be indulged in, that betting should be confined strictly to the racecourse, and the Government, in the administration of its duty, did not recognise either friends or opponents of the totalisator. A great many ol the members of the House were in favour of the continuance of the totalisator, and as the House was against street toto. betting, and telegraphic betting, and was in favour of the totalisator, it came to the conclusion that if it was legitimate to license the totalisator on the racecourse, then it was legitimate to license the bookmaker. A great many people be-' lieved in horse-racing as a sport, and as Parliament believed racing could not bo carried on without the necessary* wherewithal, through the totalisator, " the Government came to the conclusion that a racecourse being lawful and a totalisator being legal, then it was the natural corrollary to say that reputable bookmakers should have similar opportunity, but only on racecourses, and that proposal was put into the Bill, and it was passed by Parliament, with •the bona-fide intention - of confining betting to the racecourse, and in the belief that it would be so regarded by racing clubs and by bookmakers, and that was the spirit in which the.law should be carried out. He could not interfere with the administration of an Act, bob the racing clubs should recognise, in their own interest, that if they took up a position that they were to be the only legal institutions to carry on the betting, then they would focus public opinion on themselves, and would suffer accordingly. He was speaking quite impersonally, 'in this, and could say that, the drastic legislation was put on the Statute Book with the intention ot" confining betting to the racecourse, and removing tie temptation, particularly from young; people in the towns. He was sorry ) to see that there was a tendency to defeat

the intention of Parliament, for there -was not a member of the House or the Government who expected that any racing club, would put the bookmaker's clerk, in the same position as the bookmaker for the purpose of charging doable fees. The pint and intention of the Act was that racing clubs should have the power to license bookmakers, and the clerks were made the same as bookmakers, only for the penal clauses, but nothing of the kind of meaning read into the Act, of power to charge double fees, was intended, and ho would be sorry to see that racing clubs, even if they had strong feelings in the matter, were going to so strain the intention of Parliament as to impose double fees. He could only say that Parliament intended to confine betting to the racecourses, and the legislation was passed in the belief that the clubs would work in the direction of seeing that what was fair wasdone. That was the spirit in which the Act should be carried out, for it was not necessary for him to s;ly that public opinion in the matter of gambling was very strong, and the clubs would only create a feeling against the totalisator, which a majority of the House were now in favour of. He had no hesitation in saying that the legislation confining betting to racecourses, and doing away with street betting and telegraphic betting would not have been, carried by Parliament unless the clause in the Bill providing for the licensing of bookmakers had been included. He said that with a full knowledge of the position, and those who wore carrying on racing in this country should recognise that. His own opinion was that the best, course was for all racing clubs to work with the reputable bookmakers, and raise the sport, to a standard that would not leave it open for such strong public opinion to be directed against it. He was sorry to hear there was any tendency to distort the meaning of the Act. ' ;

Mr. Lyons: They have already done it. Sir Joseph: Then it is contrary to what Parliament intended, and to the spirit of the Act. However, I hops that better counsels will prevail, and better conditions will be brought about.

DEPUTATION IN WELLINGTON.

INTENTIONS OF THE ACT.

STATEMENT BY DR. FINDLAY.

[BY TJtXEGEArU.—riIESS ASSOCIATION.]

Wellington-,- Tuesday.

About 20 bookmakers waited 'on the At-torney-General to-day to complain about the manner in which the new Gaming Act had been administered by the Feuding Racing Club last week, and to ask that the law should be carried out in the spirit intended by the Legislature. Mr. Scott (Wellington) said that tho deputation represented the bookmakers of New Zealand, who wished to protest against the manner in which the Feilding Jockey Club had violated clause .35 of the Act. They asked the Attorney-General to issue a. written mandamus to racing clubs, compelling them to administer the Act in the spirit of fairness intended by the Legislature. They protested against the charge of £20 per day each for a bookmaker and his clerk. It was reported that the Woodville Club intended to follow the lead, and would charge £20 per day for the clerk, as well as £20 per day for the bookmaker. The bookmakers, when they refused to pay the fees' demanded, were excluded from Feilding course as civilians. They did not want to bet' on the lawn or grandstand, but they did object to being roped in in an enclosure. They suggested that the rules of the A.J.C. or Y.RIC. or English rules be advocated. The bookmakers were trying to carry out the provisions of the new Act. r

Dr. Findlay: I want to know whether you, as leading bookmakers of the Dominion, are going to, on your part, carry out the intention of the Act? \ Mr. Scott: We are.

Dr. Findlay: You will have noticed that statements have been made in the newspapers that that is not so. - - Mr. Scott remarked that hew men; had " sprung up,'* and the leading, bookmakers could not be saddled with responsibility for their actions. v • .

Mr. Barnett (Christchurch) made a suggestion that the fee for bookmakers to carry on their calling on racecourses should be on the basis of one per cent., of the stakes offered. At Wellington ibis would mean a. fee of £20 per day, £15 at Feilding, and from £5 to £10 at the smaller meetings. In the course of his reply Dr. Findlay stated that the bookmakers had no right to expect thatthty would get any indulgence from the Government. The duty of. the Government wbidd not peimit any favour being shown to any agency for gambling. That he wished to make clear. It was the plain duty of the Government to see that the Act, whether for or against bookmakers, was being genuinely carried out. He was not. going to deal. with quibbling interpretations cf the law, nor with suggested evasions. The plain intention of the Act would be recognised by everyone who had the intelligence to read it. The intention of the Act was to confine betting on horseracing to the racecourses, so that the calling of bookpakers had been limited to a specific area. There was nothing in the law to compel a racing, club, which owned its own course, to grant licenses to bookmakers at all. Clause 35 of the newAct was this, that if a.club came to the Government and obtained ' a license to gamble by means of tho tote., then .the State had a right to impose such conditions as it saw fit. For the future one condition of the right to use a totalisator would be compliance bv the clubs with clause 35 of tho Art of 1907. , If a club' refused to carry out . section 35 then, under the authority conferred on him as Minister in charge, licenses to, such clubs to use totalisators would not bo granted. He pointed out that section 46 of _ the Gaming Act, of 1881, gave the Colonial Secretary entire discretion as to the issue or cancellation of licenses in regard to the totalisator. It was the duty of the Government to exercise tlie discretion given under clause 46 of the Act of 1881. to say whether a totalisator licenso should be issued or not in certain cases where clubs were wilfully refusiug to carry out the spirit of section 35 of tho Act of 1907. Ho desired to make it perfectly clear that he was not condemning the action of any racing club since the Act came into force. Ho would ascertain whether the conduct of tho clubs referred to (Feilding and Woodville) was.reasonable or not. but he could not. make a very definite pronouncement on the question without hearing the authorities ol the clubs, and making full inquiry. He had received information that several people connected with racing clubs were trying to induce the clubs to make section 35 a dead letter. He repeated that if, after full inquiry, he found that any club was acting in the manner indicated, then, subject to the approval of his colleagues, he would not hesitate to do his duty, to rescind the permit to use the totalisator. In regard to bookmakers themselves, they had the benefit of clause 35 in their own hands. The purpose of the section was to put bookmakers on a course in no better and no worse a position than the totalisator, so that 'there would bo fair competition between , each. He urged members of the deputation to meet the racing • authorities, and arrange > a working basis. A fee to bookmakers,, up to £20, was entirely in the discretion of tho clubs. ■He repeated at length that the clubs had no right to impose exacting conditions, .but they had a right to make reasonable conditions to ensure that' the operations of bookmakers would not become a nuisance.. He concluded by saying that if the clubs did not carry out the spirit of the Act, he would advise his colleagues to exercis6 the corrective he had referred to. * -

ADVENT OF PONY RACING. [BY TELEGRATH.—HIESS ASSOCIATION.] Wellington, Tuesday. One result of the licensing of bookmakers appears to-be.the probability of the advent of pony racing. A meeting has been held here for the purpose of forming a club. It was stated that negotiations were already proceeding for the purchase of a course close to the city, and all the money necessary, to equip it had'already been subscribed. It is understood that the course is. to be at Miramai-, where there is a large park, which was, once offered to-the city, but is now in private hi»nd«.'" • ■ ■

INOPERATIVE PROVISIONS. WELLINGTON SOLICITOR'S OPINION. ■'-.': \ [BY TELEORAPU.—OWN CORRESPONDENT.] Wellington, Tuesday. It is understood, says the Dominion, that a leading Wellington solicitor has given it as his opinion that in the event of Court proceedings it would in all probability be held that the inoro drastic provisions of the Gaming Act are practically inoperative. The matters in question nave, it is further stated, been referred to the Crown law officers. CONDITIONS AT WOODVILLE. [BY XELEGRArn. — ASSOCIATION.] : Woodville, Tuesday. The stewards of the Jockey Club have decided to allow bookmakers on the course on payment of £20 per 'day for themselves and £20 per day for their clerks. The other conditions are similar to those at Feilding. -yi