ARCHBISHOP’S BETS.

Star (Christchurch), Issue 17351, 16 May 1924, Page 8

ARCHBISHOP’S BETS.

CUSTOMS IN ENGLAND. WHAT ARE “ NAPS?” (Special to the ‘ Star.’’) LONDON, March 13. Entertaining views as to the rightness of taxing betting were aired in the House of Lords yesterday, and a motion was carried by 57 votes to 15 declaring that the taxation of betting is both desirable and practicable. The motion was put forward by Lord Newton, who stated in its support that the proposal to put a tax on bets was founded on common-sense, nul was in accordance with the gen era I interests ol the public. Betting in this country had spread to an almost incredible extent, Lord Newton proceeded, and it was a matter that must give rise to considerable misgiving. It was quite impossible t° stop betting under the present law, which was founded on two statutes passed fifty or sixty years ago, and was archaic, chaotic and ineffective. The street bookmaker had organised his illegal business in such a skilful way that it was almost impossible to catch him. There would be no difficulty in collecting a tax of £10,000,000 a year on a 10 per cent basis. Probably every member of the House of Lords had had a bet at some time or other. The Archbishop of Canterbury, when a young man. shot pigeons, and no doubt be made bets of three or four to one on the gun, like any of his fellow-undergraduates. He did not suppose the Archbishop suffered any moral or intellectual damage thereby. Lord Newton maintained that there was no harm in betting in moderation ; it only became a crime when it was carried to excess, when it became a great obsession in life, and when people bet who could not afford to do so. lu)rd Arnold, for the Government, asserted that at present betting was confined principally to the large towns and centres of industry, hut if licensed betting offices were to be set up all over the country, it seemed highly probable that betting would increase considerably in the smaller towns and villages. Taking everything into consideration the probable net yield from the tax as suggested was about 3£ million pounds. leaving moral considerations out of account, it was not a sound business proposition. The small yield would bo more than counter-balanced by the damage done to the financial credit of the country when it became known that Britain had instituted a betting tax.

Lord Carson declared that to say it would be shocking to legalise betting showed the depth of hypocrisy in which we lived.

The general public took far more interest in betting than even in the proceedings of the Labour Government. The first thing he saw the morning after the last Government was defeated were the placards announcing “ Naps for Newmarket.” And so interested was he that he asked n frien I what “ naps” meant. thinking ic might* have some connection with happenings the night before.