“TOO DRASTIC”

New Zealand Times, Volume XLIX, Issue 11305, 2 September 1922, Page 5

“TOO DRASTIC”

THE LAW AND RAFFLES “A GOOD DEAL OF MISAPPREHENSION AND CONFUSION.” MINISTER EXPLAINS POSITION. Another question respecting raffles was raised in the House of Representatives yesterday afternoon, Mr D. G. Sulliyan asking the Minister for Internal Affairs whether he would state, for the benefit of the House and the country, the basis on which the Internal Affairs Department grants permits for art unions. There appeared to he a great deal of misapprehension and confusion in regard to the whole matter, he 6aid. Raffles were held throughout the country, and he thought it would help to clear the matter up if the Minister would state what the position was. He suggested that the Minister should consider making the whole position more elastic than it appeared to be at the present time in cases where people were not promoting the art unions for private gain. REPLY BY MINISTER. In the oouree of his reply, the Hon. W. Downie Stewart said that the law on the subject was quite clear. The Gaming Act provided that it was not permissible for anyone to raffle any personal property. Certain exceptions were made in which the Minister was allowed to authorise the raffling ot Works of art, such as sculpture, paint-, ing or literature. Mr T. W. Rhodes: Gold nuggets. Mr Stewart said there was also, an exception allowing stock and poultry to be raffled when exhibitions were being held. So far as the general question went, it arose from various expeddients to get round the law. Members all were acquainted with the expedient of raffling a painting or a photograph of a racehorse, when the real thing was the racehorse itself. • They were being asked continually whether they , could, raffle a wristlet watch, etc., hut it was not the "province of his department to give advice oh 'the law. As a matter of fact, continued the Minister, the law was got round a good deal, because those desiring to do so could ask how many peas there were in a bottle, and, ’so long as the police could he satisfied that there was' more skill than chance, it was all right. He would advise the hon. member who asked the question that if he was promoting anything of the kind he should submit his scheme to the police/and if they'were satisfied that skill predominated, all would he well. So far as the statutory law went, it was emit© clear. ,

Mr Witty: Too drastic, all the same. Mr Sullivan: I. think you ought to ease up where private property is not concerned.