THE GAMBLING EVIL.

Otago Daily Times, Volume 13694, Issue 13694, 10 September 1906, Page 2

THE GAMBLING EVIL.

DEJIOSSraA'JTOX IN DUNEDIX. Tho Melhcdi&t Central Mission's broiJierhoot mating in tlio Girrb.oii Hallyvsk-rdny afternoon took the form of an anli-gambling demonstration. • Mr Justice Cooper presided, avid this Bttcndauco oi mon was large. Proceedings commenced with tlio customary ■ exercises. Tho absence of Mr 11. Y. Widdowson was apologised for, tho iwn,,!.l. '

popular magistrate being sick. i Tho Chairman said: My ,principal duty this cfternoon is to preside over this meeting, but, in introducing Ihe subject and tho speakers who will address you, I desire to niako a few remarks. Wo liava met together to discuss tho subject of gambling, and particularly to hear and consider' tho reasons why it is wrong. Those reasons will bet given y Dr Nisbet and tlio other E-aitloinen who will support him. I do not jiroposo to do moro than to speak shortly on tho subject generally of gambling. Gambling, it has been said, originates in the desire to obtain without «arning what othors rtako with similar bopes; It is an endeavour on tlio part of one person to enrich himself without labour at tho expeiiEC of another or others. As the Rev, Charles Kinrsley says: "It is getting money_ without earning it; and, more, it is getting money,, or trying to get it, out of your neighbour's ignorance"— to whioh I may add, "or want of skill or absenco of. luck." The vicc is as old as human nature, It wos prevalent among j tho communities of ancient Kiypt, and in ■tho great cities of Assyria and' Babylonia; it- was a dominant factor in the degradation of ancient, Greece; it sapped the lifeblood, and destroyed the oivic conscience of old Home; it- was preKinfc nt Calvary, when before the Cross tu 0 Komait soldiers cast lots for tho seamless gainwnt.oi Christ,: and throughout tho ages to t,ho present | time it has been ono of the cardin.il tins of humanity, It is protean in ils manifestations. It sometimes appears under tho sanction of religion at church bazaars and fancy fairs in the guise of rallies and lotteries and lucky-bags, Jt is culled speculation upon the Mining Exchange. It is very much in evidence on I ho racecourse, where, in ono form, it is undor ihe protection of 'the law, and is called " investing on tho tot.alisator"; while in another form it is damned undor the Gaming Acts, and is termed '"lietling in a public place" or "laying totaksator odds," and is an oft'enep punishablo by lino and imprisonment. Hoys and young mon play cards for money, or .toss pennies, or play t\vo ; un in our publio parks antj gardens in secluded spots, and are occasionally caught by the police and punished by the magistrate, and the offence is called "playing or gaming in a public place." Gambling is to bo found ill tho drawing rooms of society, but it is there disguised undor the respectable mono of "bridge." When, in t|io form of fan-tan and pak-a-poo, it is played ju a Chinaman's parlour, tho house is raided by tiiio police and tho guileless Celestials ar o takon to the police station and loeked nn. It has invaded our football grounds, our cricket fields; our athletic games, and lias tainted very nearly all British sport. It has 'mightily increased of late years in these colonics. Whether in this colony tire increase of gambling is due lo the'introduction and legalisation of the totalizator I cannot say. This is a controversial question upon which conflicting views have been expressed, and I' have not sufficient data or knowledge to justify mo in venturing an opinion. Certainly, however, this niav b? .said without question, thai, tho tolallsator wus legalised in 1881, aful it. is within the past 25 years that tho increase of gambling has been so marked in this, colony. While o|?o tho diflicultios in the way of the bookmaker plying his trade have -been increased, on the other hand the totalisaior affords an easy and an apparently respectable means for speculating at a race meeting. Whether, however, the totalisator i 3 rcoponsiblo for the increase in gambling evident in this colony, or whether tho evil will bo minimised by its abolition, are questions upon which' I liavo formed 110 concluded opnion. Let ine say a word upon the consequences which attend nn indulgence in this vico. II; lowers a man's moral standard; it weakens his moral fibre; "it gives," says a wnler upon the subject, "a distaste for intellectual pursuits, making its victims restless, nnlieedful, impatient, dispelling the halo of' sacredness which should encircle human life, and weakening tho desiro for every form of useful service; it lowers a man's chivalry and makes him selfish; it distinctly strengthens the worst sido of human nature; it deteriorates tlio mind and blights tho character, it creates troops of idlers; it cankers tho affection of I ho home and destroys its peaco; it is anti-social. Men who begin to bet and gamble for pleasure bocomo little by little so inured to „tho wrongnoss of it that tlio stings of conscience itself seem to bo of little or no account." Tlio three great viccs which afflict our social conditions aro drunkenness, impurity, and gambling. Tho Hisliop of Exeter has said that it is hurd to say which of thesD commits the deadliest liavoo in England. A very b.rgo ' proportion' of tho crimes of forgery, embezzlement, and breaches of , trust committed each year in this colony aro committed by those who have liecome this victims of the gamblng habit. In my profession I have known of men of ability, with every prospect before them of an honoured career, who have become possessed willi, a passion for gambling, and who have ruined thojr homes, destroyed their business, blasted their reputation, unci to avoid the penal consequences of breach of trust to their clients have fled tho colony. I have had to .send to prison many men, young and old, who, having given way to this vicc, have committed crimes of dishonesty. Everyone knows of cases whore careers have been destroyed, wives and families have been left homeless, reduced to want, through gambling. And there are numberless cases among all classes-fur gambling is just as prevalent among the working classes as it is among other classes of our Eociely-wluiro the peace and happiness of the home has been endangered,, where monoy which could bo ill spared has been lost, where affect ion has been blunted, and selfishness !.ns reigned became of the indulgence of ti'is habit. Tho indirect results of gambling I are almost r.s destructive as are those of Hear, bear.") Canon Lvttelion : s;i .-aid that if this evil is not cheeked ■■', • ruin of England is not far oft'. In Ihw • liny our welfare is being menaced and '■ m: 1 tone of the community is lowored by :ne prevalence 'of the gambling habit j amongst in.—('' Hear, hear.") What ought :» be done. I linvo already referred to Ilio fad that the Rambling instinct is as old as humanity. , Herein lies irs difficulty. You may legislate, prohibit, penalise; a few Chinamen may now and again be baled before the magistrate, a bookmaker or two may be occasionally seni- to prison, you may abolish tho tolulisator and pass other restrictive measures, but you will "«t, destroy tho evil; you will- barely

scofch _ Hear, ticar.") So long as gambling is not considered humoral by the community generally, eo long'as it is winked at by our churches, favoured ill a respectable fonn in our -society drawing rooms, looked upon as a legitimate mode of recreation, quite pardonable if it is not abused, so long; will it flourish, and, hydra-headed, striko with its poison fangs and claim its victims in every section of society. The conscience oE tho people wants arousing.—-(Applause.) Men and women _ want_ to learn that gambling is anti-social, vicious, immoral, against the best interests of the homo, tho family, and tho Stato; and that is tho way I welcome Dr Nisbet and our other friends hero this afternoon, for they will clearly give the rcasotiß wny gambling is wrong and injurious to tho commonwealth and why it '-I ■'-'■■ the public conscience shoultk lie quickened.—(Armlansc.) ; Tho Roy. Dr Nisbet tafd they all ftpprecifrtcQ very highly indeed the forcible remarks ■. made by his Honor Mr Jiffitico Loopcr. ihoro was a generally prevailing /impression that such remarks, coming from a prominent layman,- wero of more value and more entitled to the earnest consideration of the community than the opinions of a parson. It had been to tho interest of those who wero personally invoived in.the-encouragement of tho vice of gambling; to produce the impression that tho average parson knew very little about the various political and social subjects upon which he, from time to time, felt called upon to . speak. A • greater fallacy could hardly bo conceived. Clorgymonsaw not only a great deal of tho.seamy sido of life, of (he evils resulting from the prevalence of gambling, hut, also, what others often failed to see, the seamy side of good people. They would feel happier, though loss conscious of doing their duty, if they know a little less about ilio hardships entailed 011 piany in tho community by the brutal selfishness of those who. thinking ■ only about their own gratification, eavo way to the viccs to whieli his Honor had referred. " Gambling,'! said tho Rev. Charles Kingsley, " led me into companv and into passions unworthy, not only of a scholar ' and of a gentleman, but of a rational or honest bargeman or collier. Of all h fid 13 gambling is intrinsically the most savage; morally it is unchivalrous and unchristian. The devil is the only father of it-"—(Applause.) If he (Dr Nislicl) were to speak out as strongly on tho subject lie would be hold up to public view as a specimen of everything lliafc was narrow and puritanical, and opposed to everything that, was bright and happy in life. There was_ a email Puritanical, scction in the Christian Church that frowned, apparently, upon all amusement, but the vast majority of Christians had no desire whatever to interfere with any honest or healthy entertainment, game, or sport pleasing to different sections of tlio community. Tliey wished only to touch on that which debased and degraded nearly every sport in the country. The Rev. Charles' Kingsley, who denounced gambling as unchivalrous, was ono of the most liberal-minded, one of the least Puritanic'of tho elcrgvnien of tho last contury v To what extent" was he justified in describing gamhling as unchivalrous, irrational, and un-Christian? His Honor had referred to tho troubles that came npon many ancient oitie-, through the gambling vice. In tho palmiest, days of the Roman Republio gambling was absolutely prohibited. It was only allowed during ihe Saturnalia, and to very old men. In Greece gambling was just as stonily repressed during the, days of tho nation's vigour. ,' It was .not, necessary for him at that time and placo to refer to the cvidouce Of Sir George Chetwynd, and of many owners of racehorses, and men prominent in tho vai'ious sports, regarding the folly of a man' entering into gambling speculations in tho hope that, in the long, run,, ho would bonefit himself thereby. The absolute folly of it had been insisted upon by learned judges on the bench, by influential editors in the daily press, by nien holding lii"h commercial positions, s,nrl others equally well qualified' to judge. It was scarcely necessary to labour the point, arid he, therefore, merely referred to it, that gambling was un-Christian; that it violated the whole law of Christian brotherhood; tli'.it it was completely opposed to the teaching of Jesus Christ. Gambling violated (it least two of the commandments in tho Decalogue—tßo basis of all law systems that wero of any worth in tho world—the eight and the tenth. Few would care to dispute that it violated tho Commandment, " Thou shalt not. covet," bccauso tho whole spirit of the gambler was duo to covotousnoss. Ho who had learned to say with St. Pan!, "In whatever state I am therewith • I shall be content," had no'desiro to get from another man that which he possessed without giving him any equivalent at all. The transgression of tho Tenth Commandment was obvious. Ho went further, and ventured to assert that wo wore within measurcablo distanco of the time when, through a qniokening of the publio conscience, gambling would bo regarded ill all Christian communities as a violation of tho Eighth Commandment, I'Thou shalt not steal."—(Applause.) Apologists for gambling might say ho was overstating the case; that ho was indulging in the rhetorical exaggeration, of which parsons wero fond, This was exactly the standpoint taken by apologists for gambling, though frequently they had less right to speak in tho matter than had the averago eleric. Tho gambling apologist was often a man of wealth, who knew little or nothing about tho circumstances that had been produced, tho unliappincss in the homes, tho pinching and suffering endured by women and children, through gambling. What did he know about tho multitudinous cases , arising out of gambling in tho law courts? Ho was generally removed abovo anything of that kind. Tho apologist for gambling said about that vice almost precisely wliat. the apologists for tho duello said 100 years ago, and from then on until duelling had been abolished in all English-speaking countries. " It is quito true that if I am successful, if I kill my rival, 1 ' said tho apologist for tho duel. '*you may ta'k as if I had committed murder; but, in doing so, I risked my jife. Therefore, 'hold me absolved. I can ilo what I liko with my own life, and I risked it." Tho gambler's argument was; "My money is my own; I risk it; I can do what I please with my own money. If 1 win my neighbour's money, it is by perfectly fair means. Wo each ran the same risk. He iost; I won."! The duellist made, that dofenea in regard to tho risk of life, but. as public opinion beeamo enlightened, duelling had tn go. In 1544, owing largely to tho efforts of the Prince Consort, duel'.ing was made practically impossible in EnglUnd; though, ns late as 1853, Lord Cockburn, in a hook published that year, said a man might murder another without guilt if ho did it ill a duel, provoked by aggravated insult. If a. duel were fought to-day anywhere within the British Empire, it. would not mattor bow great tho provocation, or what ihe excuse, tho duellist would lie treated and tried as a murderer, and, whatever fate overtook him, tlio community would agreo 1 that it f-erved him right. 110 believed wo wero within measurablo distanco of 'bo

time viiei) the community would treat the gambler—the man , who took awnv his neighbour's goods without adequate return— as a thief. A well-known English library wan, discussing several reecnt American books, 1 called attention to tho fact that when tho oonscionco of a nation was arousod that nation bceamo its own most Wvcre critic. Tho scathing things by Americans against Charles Dickens because !]'« j great English novelist had dared to criticise certain aspects of American life appeared futile to-day, in view of tho fact that Mrs Edith Wharton, Upton Sinclair, and 'Win. ston Churchill (the ' American Winston Churchill, not the 'Under-Secretary for the ' Colonics in tho Ctimpboll-Bannerinan I Ministry) had criticised America and i American affairs more severely than any outsider had ever dared to do, We had Uudyard Kipling's authority for the statement " thoro aro no 10 commandments east of Suez." ■It would bo an exaggeration to say there wera none north of the tropie of Capricorn. But it was triis that tho farther north w-o went tho Jess severo was publio opinion in regard to many matters. It was a striking com, mentary on the gambling question that tho Legislative Assembly of New South Wales, sitting in Sydney, had boon considering recently one of tho most draetio bills in connection with tho vieo of gamblins that any legislative body had aa yet had before it.—(Applause,) ft v,-as truo that men could not be made moral by act of Parliament, but it was equally truo that a great deal could lie done to assist tho community towards morality, or to drive the oommututy into immorality, by various legal enactments; and that it- was a reproach to the fair name mid famo of Now Zealand that, its Parliament should have.passed any enactment, that practically legalised a particular form of gambling. Tho result of the present and similar meetings, if thoso who attended were in earnest, would undoubtedly he la bring about a better and more wholesome fctato of affairs, though ' he should liko to say here, in reference to a remark made by hia Honor that, as far as the Church winking at tho gambling evil was concerned, tlm hands of at least, (lie Methodist, and Presbyterian Churches wore perfectly cleau.-lAppiauso.) Throtnhout the whole-of A wtra-lasia tho Supreme Courta of the P«sbyt«rian Church had prohibited their various congregations' fi- om conducting anything in the shape of a lottery or radio in ;iny sale or bazaar thev might hold,—(Ayplausp.) As, he had already rtnia-vkea,- he believed wo wero Within moasuvabL* distance of tho time when every sport and pastime in New'Zealaml would bo fre.o from tho blight that had fallen upon them through this gambling evil;':when newspaper editors would ooase to pultli'-h information that was of servieo to gamblers; when tho great army of bookmakers and eporting men, who at present fattened .on "tlm''credulity of their dupes, would turn to a'form of living more creditable to themselves and mora to tho pood of the community.' But, in connee-' tion with this and overy other reform, the old English linos still hold good: ' If svejy man would see to his own reformation, How Y«ry -easily- wo might roform the nation.

Mr A. fj. Adams said that after tho weighty words spoken by his Honor and Dr Isi.ibii ho found wmo difficulty in saying any nov; thing which should bear directly on the question 'under discussion. He understood that the object of t,ho Sfeakor.s was to furnish reasons v.'by gambling was wrong; and, in truth, that had been one of tho greatest difficulties m connection with tho discussion of tliis Question during many yonrs—tho difficulty of putting a finger right, on tho, spot, aJicl announcing with ucouraoy the precise immorality attaching to tho individual. act of gambling. As president of tho Baptist Union of Now Zealand, ho was glad to clear that body a;id tho Baptist churches of this colony of any sort of complicity in any sort or form of gambling in connection with any of their gatherings. He did not romombar & timo when those ohurehes had any sprt of complicity in any such practice. Ho'had in his hands papors containing statements of great importance and value in.this matter, Iwndod to him since •ho came into the mooting; but with tlioee no could not now deal. Ho' affirmed that tlio act of gambling was immoral and wrong. Why? Tho reason had already beon givoiij hut, perhaps, without any very great particularity.. Rambling was irrational. What did they mean by that? Ho meant (hot tiie gambler, in the rJbt of gambling, dethroned his reason: lie deliberately set himself to dofeat oil the purposes .which 1»3 reason served, While a man concerned with ordinary transactions, mercantile or other, would 6eek sedulously to eliminate' all chance, 60 far as he could, tlio gambler set out with the one object of eliminating everything ntJT chance, so that tho whole) wmilt of what he and his neigh-' hour should do should be dependent upon circumstances ontirely beyond control of the so-called contracting parties.—!" Hear, hear.") Tho nnin who entered into such a transaction as that had dethroned his reason and .was a party to an unhuman bargnin. It was, non-moral, to say the least, of it. No question of benevolence or advantage or right or justice entered,into the consideration of any gambling transaction. It was non-moral, with a very dangerous tondeney to direct immorality. How was that? Because, first of all, there was the elimination of the human reason, the elimination of all things except pure' chance. Then there was a setting frco of tlw ingenuity of tho human wit to invent methods by which a man might circumvent his neighbour; that being the only channel in which human ingenuity was .left frco to exoteiKo itself.—(" Hear, hear.") As to -any gambling transaction, tho man who sought to speak for tho defence could ai'gtio only on the lowost. possible piano of utility, and must abandon every moral consideration that- ought to operate on men's minds and consciences in considering any social act. They were met .constantly with tlfo sptort' that the wrongfulness of the art depended entirely on the position of Hie parties— that if a man had money enough of his own in .his pocket it. would bo perfectly right for him to gamble, the money being his own. to do what be liked with. Thus there was left entirely out of flic'consideration tlie other parly to the contract, who might operate with money not his own, or money which even in the court of conscience of' his would l)o money marked with a. trust. No man had' any right to £ay that tlio money lie had waa his to uso in any gambling transaction.—('Hear, hear.") _• Kvery gambling transaction waa from his (the speaker's) point of view, immoral.—(Applause.) The man who played cards for threepenny points might curl his lips with disdain as ho heard that, but he stood condemned at. the bar of public conscience when ho entered into 1 a "■ambling transaction for his own pleasure alone. But, might a- man not risk id in a game of cards? Well, why did he do it?- How many men could enjoy a gamo of cards without risking 3d? Tho exercise of skill, the nleasuro of intercourse, all tlio things that went to make the pleasure of' the game, were surely pleasures enough for the man who wanted ipnooent relaxation;, ho need not add to it tho excitement of trying to filch 3d 1 from his pockets.—(" Hear, hear.") The man who coulil not enjoy a gamo without there was 3d depending on it, was a man with a mora* sense so vitiated that he must odd, to an otherwise inuoeont pleasure tho chanco of getting 3d that belonged to his neighbour. Conduct such as that was not merely non-moral; it was anti-Christian. It was opposed to overy law of bcnevolenoe; it was treating ono's neighbour as one's enemy, and not as one's friend. . The acts of gambling could not/ho brought \tmr,T cover of any moral nrinriple whatever.—(Applause.) They mot with tho objeclion that mai|y commercial contracts stcod n;-on tho same footing as did what were called tho contracts of gambling. If so, so much tho worse for ..such commercial contracts.—(" Hear, hear.") He was not there to defend such ajctions of commercial men as trenched upon the forms cf gambling. It would bo a gocd thing for the whole world, when commerce had - icon so reformed that it would not, he possible to establish any argumentative parallel between acts of gambling and commercial transactions (Applause.) Tho man wlio, on the Stock Kxphange. trafficked in shares, and took .his neighbour's money for what ho knew to bo worthless, was as much guilty of moral wrong-doing as tho man who, by betting, took money from his neighbour's pocket without giving any equivalent.— ("Hear, hear.") The man who sold for 15s shares ho kmw to hp worth only 10s, ploying on iiis neighbour's ignoranco of their veal value, \ya.s not an honourable ■man, and was dealing with his neighbour on principles opposed lo all.social progress. But. let litem note this distinguishing difference, bet ween all commercial undertakings anil all gambling transactions: Ihe gambler set himself sedulously lo eliminate from i|!r ' ral^ ac ' 10 n' everything lint pure chance. J no effort of every person who was a party lo a commercial undertaking was just tho opposite of that.--(' ( ' Hear, hear.") The man of business sought lo eliminate chance and to make everything | or nearly as possible a certainty for himself. _ When two parties approached a ba.'gain with thai objccl. they had established ihe antithesis of the gambling idea. There was no relation—no sort of relation— buiween healthy commercial transactions and gambling transactions.—{" Hour, hear.") It seemed almost like beating out fine gold to talk to an audience in Dunedin with iho object of convincing f tluit gambling

was 'wrong. And vet they found in tho daily press men of light and leading, men wrong, that it depended altogether on tho who ought to kiiow much better than they wrote, telling them that gambling wag not gambler. Tho _ act of gambling, whether it bo by a prince or by a peasant, was based upon wrong principles, and was, therefore, an immoral act, arid, • as thq theologians would say, a sinful act, an act against the social order. One of the papers banded to him that afternoon was a pago taken from a weekly paper published ih Ohristchurch. Ho found that that paper actually went tho length of. repeating in critical detail not merely tho chances of horses at (ho races, but also the edda given py various men who run toto shops. In short, tho decent, roputablo press of tho colony was actually lending itself to tho multiplication of news ;hoets such as this, with a view of pulling such information into tho hands of everybody, and making it possible for even office boys to engage m betting, and begin the downward couiso which too often, alas! ended up in tho felon s dock and in our gaols. He said that) there could lie 110 question, if anyono would approach this matter with nil unprejudiced mind, that the act of gambling was socially and morally wrong—(" Hear, hear."),—and that it was the duty of ever? community to do it« best to stamp out any suoti practice. In this colony gambling was becoming ono of tho greatest menaces to tsocial order juid good government, and the Government arid tho people ought to tako evci-jr possible nicana .of diminishing opportunities of gambling, and to putting an end to it. The responsibility was, after all, au individual one. If tho individual would reform himself tho community would bo already reformed. Moral reforms must all b» matters of tha reform of individuals, lfo hojjed such an agitation would bo kept np in this ' colony as they bail recently seen in a neighbouring colony, until such an inSnento is brought to bear upon tho Government as would affect- our laws, and eo put into the hands of the people 1110 opportunity to protect themselves from this appalling and growing evil. (Applause.) Tlm Chairman said ho should likp to say, regarding his remark as to'jjio Church winking at this vice, that lie did not refer to any particular section of tho Church. 110 was exceedingly glad to hear from -Dr

Nkbet I lint, that great oongregntion of tlio Cliristia.il Church (thu lVibyteriiui denomination) hud taken a - strong stand in this miller. Ho supposed it was quito recently. ' . Dr Nitibot: Yes. We winked for a good while.—(Laughter.) The Chairman sfiid that ho was glad to know that, tho same statement applied to tho Methodists. liis pcoplo had been Baptisis for many generations, am] ho never heiml in a jiaptist Church of ruffles or lotteries. Bilk he would not like it to go forth that ho was referring to any parf.ioid»r section of the. Christian Church. Ho was referring to whnt was, at anyrato ot ono time, an evil not confined to a particular denomination. Ho 'hoped that the .public feeling and tho public conscience would ho eo roused that as to no section of the Church would it. ever again bo able to be said that while they condemned gambling in the bookmaker anil gambling in the card-player, they looked upon lotteries in bazaars as a legitimate means of swelling tho resources of tho. cluirclic9.—(Applause.) Thev must all thank T)r Niabet and Mr Adams for tho Tory ablo and, forceful addresses they had delivered that .afternoon.—(Renewed applause.)

Dr Nisbet remarked that ho had not, misunderstood his Honor's remarks; but as other churches had been mentioned it should bo btated that within the lost fortnight tho Anglioan • Archbishop at Melboitrne and Cardinal Moron in Sydney had both spoken out very slrongly on this matter. The proceedings wore, as usual, diversified by sacred solos and musioal items. tft: rwnvnrr, o-v. cwPOHftS. (PiR Ukited Press Ashocutios.) WKMJNUU'OX. .September 8. Tho Council of Evangelical Churches has arranged to wait on the Premier on Monday morning on the subject or gambling.' The -deputation will urge on tho Government: (1) The abolition of tho totalisntor, on the ground that it givos State sanction and respectabilityto vice, and has enormously increased the area of gambling. (2) Isolntiop of ratwmrsß from telegraphic and tolephoniu communication, which will tend to restrict; gambling to' the actual courso where rnccw a«< lioing hold. (3) Rendering illegal tho publication of betting news and rcsidts in daily papers. •