STATE LOTTERIES

Waipa Post, Volume 42, Issue 3303, 30 May 1931, Page 8

STATE LOTTERIES

THE GAMBLING INSTINCT.

FUTILE TO ATTEMPT TO KILL IT.

The much-discussed proposal that the law should be amended in Great Britain to allow of lotteries being conducted for the raising of money for the hospitals was rejected by the House of Commons last week in fairly decisive manner.

Actually not one half of the House voted on Sir William Davison's motion for leave to introduce a Bill to legalise sweepstakes for this purpose. The fact suggests that a great many members were either not interested or else were unwilling id participate in the division upon a legislative proposal which, being free of party significance, would make them directly responsible to their constituencies for the votes they would record.

The defeat of the motion may, nevertheless, be taken as a fair indication of the disfavour with which numbers of people disregard sweepstakes. The consideration that moneys obtained through the lotteries would be devoted to the public hospitals, which in England are supported by private benefactions and are continually in need of funds, might in itself have been expected to secure a certain amount of approval for the Bill, but the preponderant feeling apparently is that even a humanitarian cause does not justify an appeaf to the gambling instincts of the community.

The argument put forward by those in iavour of the legalisation of lotteries is that wnile xne law of Great Britain prohibits the holding ox sweepstakes it cannot prevent people from participating in them. The recent Irish Free State sweepstake was, it is well known, liberally supported in Great Britain, and it may be assumed that the next one win be jusc freely supported. An incident in the House oi Commons a few weeks ago, when a woman member endeavoured to snatcn a boo* of sweepstake tickets from parliamentarians who were sedately filling m forms during a debate, emphasised the ludicrous defiance of the law chat is at present possible. But the iacc tnat many people will indulge in a sweepstake gamble in spite of prohibitions constitutes a weak argument with which to advocate tbe introduction of national lotteries, it would be scarcely more irrational to claim that; because the law against homicide has not eliminated murders, it should be repealed. The plea that the hospitals would benefit is more . worthy of attention, but it evades the question of most importance, which is whether the encouragement of lotteries is desirable. To "tnat question a reply has been made by the Manchester Guardian that carries conviction: — " They are ' offensive not so much because they lead people to pay a little money in the hope of winning a lot as because they unduly exalt the natural cupidity of man, clothe it with a kind of romance, justify it. Sweepstakes are a gold rush without even the digging." It would be futile to attempt to kill the gambling instinct in mankind, which manifests itself for the most part harmlessly in a " little flutter " at the races, at the bridge table, or in a bet on a football match. There appears however (says the Otago Daily Times) to be no sufficient reason why the State should make special provision, in the face of the considerable prejudice of many good citizens, for encouraging this desire to gamble and for affording opportunities on a large scale for gambling. It is somewhat exasperating, oj. course, to know that from England, and from New Zealand, large sums are sent overseas for the purchase of tickets in sweepstakes, and that each country is, in consequence, so much the poorer; but that is not in itself a justification for repealing the existing law, provided the Parliament in each country is honestly convinced that it is a good law. Interest in sweepstakes is very considerable at the present time, mainly, it would seem, on account of a shortage of ready money that makes people unusually prepared to risk a few spare shillings in the chance of gaining a sum large enough to free them from all immediate anxieties. The success of recent " art unions " in New Zealand, which have returned net profits of. over 50 per cent, and have shown that the instinct to ganir ble has not been stifled, has led to the suggestion being made by Mr W. H. Mclntyre, M.L.C., chairman of the Buller Hospital Board, in.the journal of the Hospital Boards' Association, that a State lottery might be instituted with a view to obtaining fresh finance for New Zealand hospitals. This proposal is open to the same objections which decided the House of Commons against the introduction of lotteries at Home, with, perhaps, the added objection that in New Zealand the maintenance of the hospitals has always been regarded as the concern of the taxpayers. Superficially attractive though the scheme for securing finance for hospitals through the legalisation of lotteries may appear at first glance, there can be no doubt that a moral issue is involved that is more important. It is the duty of the Government to measure very carefully the possible effect upon the public mind of an appeal to " natural cupidity " before it considers favourably any proposal for making sweepstakes an exciting feature of our national life.