GAMBLING SPELLS RUIN.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXIX, Issue 112, 3 July 1911, Page 5

GAMBLING SPELLS RUIN.

Mr T. Johnson, Chief Railway Commissioner in New South Wales, regards gambling as “a serious menace,” and that there is no excuse for State servants who are in receipt of regular wages to indulge in that vice. Ha expressed that opinion when a deputation from the Tramway Employees’ Union asked him to consider the verdict of “dismissal” that had boon given against several tramway employees, who had been found “guilty” in the Courts of “being in a common gaming house without lawful excuse.” Ho dismissed the appeal, saying that he was informed that Waverley was notorious for gambling raids, and that the gambling had been going on for years. Presumably to convince the men that lie practised what ho preached, and that example was bettor than precept, he continued: “I go out myself to Randwick frequently, to meet friends, and to sec the racing, but I have never wagered a penny on horses. I am in a much better position financially to indulge in gambling than 'the men concerned, but I am satisfied that the practice spells ruin in the end.” Ho said lie did not wish to ho vindictive; but, in order that this gambling should bo abolished, he intended to deal very harshly with employees who were guilty, of a broach of the law, and by so doing would impress upon other employees the seriousness of their position if they were caught committing the offence. . Mr. Lawton, president of the union, in pressing the men’s claims, said that they were not on the premises for gambling purposes, but to have shaves and hair-cuts. He said that they strolled into the room where the gambling was going on out of mere curiosity. The small amount of money on the tables showed that those who were gambling were only indulging in ordinary pastime. “Frequently men of good ’standing,” said Mr. Lawton, “men who occupied good positions in society, were guilty of playing cards, billiards, and other forms of recreation, for small sums of money, sufficient to arouse interest in the game. It was done, not only at residences, but on the trains and boats it was an everyday occurrence. What difference was there between the man who gambled for a small amount and the man who frequented the racecourse and lost much heavier stakes, and in some cases was ruined? One was legalised by law, while the other was illegal. Blit in both instances the gambling was for money.”