THE TOTE TRANSACTION.

Southland Times, Issue 14578, 19 November 1910, Page 4

THE TOTE TRANSACTION.

The Parliament of New Zealand never showed to less advantage titan on Wednesday afternoon when it devoted valuable time to the discussion of a dispute between a woman and the Woodville Jockey Club with reference to a totalisator transaction. The facts are set forth as follows. A Mrs A. Treweek went to the Woodville races, and on the advice of her husband went to the totalisator and asked for eight £1 tickets on a certain horse (No. 4). She was given one £5 ticket on No. 4, and three £1 tickets on No. 5 ; but she thought that all were tickets on No. 4. The race was won by No. 5, and it was not until after the races were over that she discovered that she had three tickets on tiles' winner. Next day, on the advice of her husband, she applied for the dividend on the three tickets, but was refused. She, therefore, petitioned Parliament for relief.

The petition came before the M. to Z. Petitions Committee of the House, which reported as follows :—ln the opinion of the Committee Mrs Treweek is entitled to be paid the dividend on the three tickets in dispute by the Woodville District Jockey Club, and also that it be a suggestion to the New Zealand Racing Conference that the New Zealand Jockey’s rules of racing be so amended that consecutive numbers be provided on all tickets issued in any race, in order to obviate the likelihood of similar mistakes occurring in the future, and that a copy of this recommendation be sent by the clerk of the House to the President of the Racing Confex’ence. That a Committee of the House and then the House itself should have set aside even a few hours in the last days of the session to such a matter as this is deplorable. We entirely agree with Mr T. E. Taylor's view of the incident. Because there is a partnership between the State and the totalisator the time of the national assembly is taken up with what Mi Taylor called “a wretched dispute be tween a woman gambler and a racini club." The State’s interest in the totalisator consists, of course, in its percentage levy on all the money that passes through the machine, and so

long as it draws revenue from this source it cannot disclaim responsibility to the public for the proper working of the totalisator. The great gambling instrument is legalised by the State, and in respect to its relations with the public the State must recognise and carry out its obligations. Therefore, when Mrs Treweek was refused payment on her tickers she made her grievance the subject ofa complaint to Parliament, and Parliament had perforce to take it up as a matter of national moment. Nothing could be more derogatory to the dignity of Parliament or distasteful to the public. In the merits of the case we have neither concern nor interest, but we should say that another Incident of this kind will occasion so much public disgust that a demand for a revision of the State s attitude towards the totalisator will follow.