STATE LOTTERIES SOUGHT

Taranaki Daily News, 29 May 1933, Page 11

STATE LOTTERIES SOUGHT

FAVOURED BY FARMERS’ UNION. OPPOSITION BY PRESIDENT. A remit urging the Government to conduct State lotteries, which has been before the conference of the North Taranaki Farmers’ Union on several occasions witlfout success, was again brought before the conference on Friday by Mr. W. J. Maloney, Omata. There was a decided swing in the opinion of delegates, with the result that the remit was carried by'a considerable majority. In moving the remit Mr. Maloney said he would advocate State lotteries being run, the proceeds to be devoted to charitable purposes such as the relief of distress, of which there was much in New Zealand. He respected the opinions of those who were opposed to gambling, but he pointed out that gambling already existed in the Dominion and would always exist, as they could not alter human nature. It, however, should be possible to control gambling. There was at present in New Zealand a company promoted for the purpose of running lotteries. It collected the money in New Zealand but operated the lottery elsewhere, though it was looking forward to legislation enabling it to hold the lottery in the Dominion. At' present they had art unions and the totalisator as legalised forms of gambling.

Mr. M. Davis (Midhirst) seconded the motion.

Mr. B. Richmond (Wharehuia) agreed that gambling was present in New Zealand and could not be stopped. It was therefore far better to have it controlled. A State lottery would be fairer than the present art unions as, for instance, the number of tickets sold would be limited in each case.

The president, Mr. H. E. Blyde, opposed the remit. He held that gambling was wrong and two wrongs did not make a right. The money spent on lottery tickets could be spent otherwise in a far better way by buying tools, etc. He held that some of the money now given in charitable aid would be utilised to purchase lottery tickets. He did not think a responsible body like the Farmers’ Union should advocate the introduction of-fur-ther facilities for gambling. Mr. R. Corrie supported the motion and Mr. J. B. Paulger opposed it bn principle. Mr. Moir said that the lottery could be regarded as taxation.

Mr. J. B. Cafr said he thought' that as with the Australian Prime Minister Mr. Blyde would favour the lotteries later if they were introduced. Mr. A. Busing (Mangorei) held that the institution of a State lottery would prevent a lot of money leaving the country. Mr. Maloney in reply said those "opposed to lotteries on principle had not brought forward any resolution urging that the present systems of gambling should be abolished. The remit was carried.