ETHICS OF BETTING

Taranaki Daily News, 6 October 1931, Page 4

ETHICS OF BETTING

CYERGYBAN’S CONFESSION. ■ u, “NOTHING MORALLY WRONG.” The confession: “I rather enjoy being in a sweepstake,” is made by the Rev, A. Russell Allerton, vicar of St. Thomas’ Church, Freeman’s Bay, Auckland, in an article on gambling in the parish magazine. , “There is nothing morally wrong in betting in itself” asserts Mr. Allerton, “There are obviously great dangers arising therefrom, and these dangers confuse many well-meaning folk into addled thinking and rash speaking, “Betting on horses is clearly a serious temptation to stupid people who ar® vain enough to think that they are cleverer or more ‘knowing’ than common sense and experience justify, to people so ignorant of mathematics that they be-' lieve in ‘systems’ and to those unfortunate people who have both the above failings, plus a desire to get rich quickly and to be on something for nothing. “As we are all more or less stupid, think we know more than we do, and sincerely feel that we could do. with more money than we have, it will be clear that in such an imperfect world a bookmaker will , not lack punters, the stock exchange speculators, or the tables players. If betting were wrong in itself, then we ought not to tolerate ,it either on the course or the Stock Exchange, through a bookmaker, a broker or the ‘tote.’ As it is not necessary it might be desirable to suppress it altogether as a dangerous nuisance—like motor-cycles. “When I was a body I visited a prohibition State and noted the amount of drunkeness and th© almost uni vex sal facilities for drinking. Now I live where bookmaking is illegal and Dr. North assures us that bookmakers are legion and that fpunting’ is general. This is a deplorable state of affairs. It brings the law into contempt, gives opportunites for corruption and blackmailing, provides a maximum of facilities for betting with a minimum of security all round. ~ “The obvious solution would seem to be the licensing of reputable bookmakers under conditions that would at once make for security, control facilities for betting and abolish touting. It may be said that this has been tried in New ealand and was a failure. lam assured that the previous licensing of dookmakers gave neither security nor control, but merely legalised a nuisance. ’> ,r X am quite sure that, in spit© 9* weighing my words carefully,.! shall be misunderstood by many who dislike thinking'carefully. Both sides will, no doubt, declare that I have sided with them more than I have. I do not bet myself except when I go to the races, and 1 have not been to. the races, for three years. I rather enjoy being in a sweepstake. I have bought only one art union ticket sine© I have been in New Zealand and I enjoyed doing that mainly because a desr old lady by my I side was bursting to denounce me with pseudo-pontifical pronouncements as to what the church said on the subject. “I cannot understand the pleasure that many get out of backing horses they cannot see, but I know many excellent people who do, and I accept that fact. I also know of people who are too fond of money to risk losing ft bob on a horse. I advise people strongly not to bet, but I have more confidence in the building up of a disciplined Christian life and character than in puritanical prohibitions. A humble, generous person will not lose his head about money, either on or off a horse. Prohibitionists are always in danger of becoming prigs —than which I can conceive nothing more foot-provoking.”