Thames Star SATURDAY, JANUARY 11, 1936. GAMING LAW CRUDITIES.

Thames Star, Volume LXVI, Issue 19606, 11 January 1936, Page 2

Thames Star

SATURDAY, JANUARY 11, 1936. GAMING LAW CRUDITIES.

“With malice towards none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right."—Lincoln.

It has been revealed that the Government, in addition to the ordinate amount of new legislation necessary for the shaping of its new, policy, will have to review the Statute book to wipe out numerous enactments known to be obsolete and useless. There are, however, laws in operation that are nothing else but a travesty, and among them those relating to gaming. Bookmaking is supposed to be illegal, or, in other words, is prohibited. In an almost Jarconic manner the law is enforced, offenders are arraigned before the courts, frowned upon by magistrates, generally lined, and, occasionally gaoled, just superficially to indicate that a law, which is llagrantly disobeyed, should be obeyed. Every man, woman and child in the country knows that betting in every form —not omitting what we prefer to call speculation or investment on the Stock Exchange —is rife and that the itinerant bookmaker is not the least of those in “business” accommodating enough to take the oddson risk. As an entity in any community lie could not exist if the people respected the law and were prepared to accept and be satisiied with the mechanical and distant occasional totalisator. Whether we like it or not, we must admit that there is something human about gambling or betting, though, like everything in life or in an ordered nation, it must be controlled. The persistence of the bookmaker is hut the lesson of psychology. The forced class legislation which has helped towards the crippling of this Dominion in recent years is perfectly reflected in the flourishing of the “bookie,” who, in spite of his supposed non-existence, pays incometax, and, further to justify himself in the sight of numerous clients, submits to formal court fines or condign punishment- —all a sort of accepted sacrifice for his openly acknowledged profession. For a decade or so the Government, spurning to hr really honest, has winked an eye at this sort of thing and people from abroad have |aughed at our childishness —the paradox of the bookmaker and the widespread organisation to which he belongs. Is it not time that we had properly licensed bookmakers again to remove the stigma of national hypocrisy? Then there is the spectacle of the people gambling week in and week out on semi-privately-controlled art unions; of thousands of pounds going out of the Dominion to sweeps in Australia and other countries, hut prohibited in our own land —probably in all amounting to a million or so 'that could be conserved within our own Treasury to immense advantage. All this errant misdirection of liquid resources or excess cash flowing out of the, country, while racing and other legitimate, healthy sport is bled to desperation point with taxation! However, there is hope for a vast change. It comes with the new Government. The Premier, when in opposition, frankly stated that lie did not believe in the taxation of sport, hut he was wise enough to add that any relict from existing taxation could not he considered as a separate question. The Premier believes in the recreative benefits of the turf, and, provided that relief given will ensure compensating advantages down to the lowliest stable-hand, no doubt this Government will make some valuable changes concurrent with other reforms in harmony with better gaining laws long overdue. W e cannot expect too much for a start, hut our Prime Minister has never been a man given to needless volubility. II can ho taken for granted that Mr. E. W. Schramm, M.P., had an inkling of possible changes contemplated, judging by his hint in the

| Auckland Court yesterday while de- ! lending the usual New Year coterie I of bookmakers being mulcted following their summer meeting returns. That extra “tax,” of course, is invariably forthcoming!

GROUP MARKETING SCHEME,

it is no surprise that the Government has decided to postpone tire promulgation of the new scheme of dairy produce marketing, which the Dairy Board had proposed to start in August. The Minister for Agriculture, the Hon. Lee Martin, with his colleagues in Cabinet, probably decided on this course of action for several good reasons. First and foremost is the fact that the Government, in accordance with its proclaimed policy, desires to introduce guaranteed prices, which, as the term implies, means greater security for the farmer. New Zealand has a considerable experience of this form of assisting and promoting development and export. The subsidy system, as a reality, contributed to the Dominion’s former prosperity, so the Government is not without substantial precedent —here, and abroad — in its intention to reinstitute guaranteed prices. However, the method of applying the system to conform with the new policy of improved finance, so essential to New Zealand, is to be decided, and it is well that Cabinet makes haste slowly until its comprehensive programme takes some shape. A further reason for delaying the dairy distribution scheme is that there is by no means unanimity among the suppliers on tho proposals which involve something like a pooling co-operative, giving powers to the controlling board that certainly deserve full consideration bv the authorities, who must be aware that the scheme adopted by the Dairy Conference had not been presented first for approval of dairy factories. The Government may think it undesirable that any such scheme of group marketing should be foisted upon the industry, when a new system of trading, backed by guaranteed prices, is about to be introduced. NEW ERA IN ENGLAND. Magistrates and their clerks all over England recently were busy setting up the new machinery to prevent hard-up defendants from going to prison. The new Act came into operation on January 1. Among other things, the revised system involved the scrapping of enormous quantities of existing forms, and the printing of hundreds of thousands of new summonses, warrants and notices. One new instruction was that when a defendant was fined he was given time to pay. During that period he may be placed under supervision. And the supervisor is to “befriend and advise” the dcbtoi to induce him to pay and so avoid going to prison. A new form of imprisonment was indicated. Instead of issuing a warrant of commitment to prison, a magistrate can sign a warrant to commit the debtor to a police station. He must not, however, be kept in their custody later than eight o’clock on the morning after arrest, so that he will not be prevented from going to work. The detention wipes out the debt whatever the amount. Another alternative is for a debtor to be kept in custody in the precincts of a police station for four days.