CONSULTATIONS.

Otago Witness, Issue 2410, 10 May 1900, Page 38

CONSULTATIONS.

When Mr Lawry announced that he would again bring in his bill to amend the Gaming and Lotteries Act so that consultations or sweeps .could be held in New Zealand, he stateel that, out of 74- members of Parliament 50 hadjjpromised J»im their support when he should reinlroduce his measure. If Mr Lawry is correctly reported, and he himself has made no mistake, the bill is practically assured a safe passage through the Legislature. I hope, however, that there is a mistake somewhere. As a sporting writer with over 20 years' experience, I hone»tly believe that consultations are a curse to lacing. There does not seem to be much to be said in favour of them. Sporting Review, one of the Auckland papers, takes up Mr Lawry' s cause editorially, and this is a fair summary of the arguments employed: "The reception of Mr Lawry's statement was, extremely cordial, and the appreciation manifested was unanimous. Men of all shades of political opinion weie pre.=pnt, and there were men who take no interest in racing, but still all, with the same heartiness, expressed their conviction that the spirit of Mr Lawry's bill was one that should meet with universal support. It has been e»titnited that the people of New Zealand send away over £70,000 every j-ear for investment in sweeps in other colonies. That money ought to remain in the colony, every penny of it. The Government derives an income from Ihe postage and registration fee^ for tending money out of the colony for inu^tmsnl in these consul tat ion? ; the Government receives a good income from the totah■atoi — a far more dangerous form of investment — '-o the step tor the Government to take would be only a very little one. But the Government has shown a natural hesitancy in dealing' with this question, so it becomes the duty of a private member to introduce the bill, and it remain* with members of Parliament generally to see th&t the mepsure i» pas-ed by Both Houses. There need he no feai that the bill will not be safeguarded on all sides. The measure meets with the approval of either parly, so we can »afe!y assume that nothing will be left undone to piotect the interest.' of the public. It i« a popular me&Kire, and therefore claims the attentio i of every member of the House of Representatives and every Legislative Councillor. Not a tithe oE New Zealand money invested in loreign consultations evni comes back, and therefore a measure which provides the .same sort of entertainment, and keeps the money in the colony, must appeal to all sensible men. On this question every volcr ii,^ every constituency should urge hi" member lo support Mr Lawry in his laudable efforts to^ ktep New Zeabnd money in New Zealand." If this v all that can be said on behalf of the consultation, it i& not a very strong case that thoce of us who don't believe in consultations have to meet. The cordial reception at the banquet counts lor very little. If Mr Lawry had proposed free drinks for eveiybody in perpetuity, or the abolition of hard work, there is little doubt that such a parly of banqueteers would have accorded the proposals a cordial reception. The hirther statement that the applause camo partly from men who take no interest in racing is also unconvincing. It is just what I .should expect. What is surprising is that men who do take an interest in racing should join in the approval. Boiled down, the cape for consultations seems to be this: that the Government already derives income from consultations, in the way of stamps and rests{ration fees, therefore it would be only a IHtle step ahead to aooeofc the presence of

the- consultation, and thereby keep £70,000 a year in the colony. The plea is the same as ■ that put forward by Captain Marryatt's girl, who wondered why they were making such a flips about her having a baby, seeing that it was such a very little one. Surely the consultation advocates can raise some better argument than this old joke. If not, J take leave to think they are not serious. The contention that it is allowrble to go one step further stands on the same insecure basis. If it can be used to justify consultations, it oould also be used to defend State lotteries and a turning of New Zealand into a miniature Monte Carlo. I am no' sentimentalist, but in consultations I have seen a grave danger to our racing and a direct fpe to those habits of steadiness and businesslike application which are making New Zealand a- great country, and I say solemnly that we should be doing a foolish thing if we surrendered these advantages for twice £70,000 a year.