BOOKMAKERS’ ADVERTISEMENTS AND THE GAMING ACT.

New Zealand Illustrated Sporting & Dramatic Review, Volume XVII, Issue 965, 3 September 1908, Page 5

BOOKMAKERS’ ADVERTISEMENTS AND THE GAMING ACT.

AN ACT WHICH SHOULD BE REPEALED. In another column will be found an account of a police court case which is of much interest to racegoers. From this it will be seen that the proprietor of this Journal was fined for publishing advertisements from turf accountants. It will be noted that Mr. Dyer, S.M., in giving his decision against this paper, was not altogether certain that his ruling was a correct one, in which most people will cordially agree with him. He said that he would be pleased to offer every facility to take the case to a higher Court, and if he was wrong the higher Court would put him right. Now, we have no grievance whatever against Mr. Dyer, who is a most conscientious magistrate, and, although we entirely disagree with his reading as to the meaning of the Act, we are compelled to abide by it. What we do take exception to, as, indeed, we have done all along, is the cause of all the trouble —viz., the Act itself, which is one of the most absurd bits of farcical legislation ever placed on the Statute-book of the Dominion, and that is saying much. Here we have an Act which allows bookmakers to do business, but does not allow them to notify the public that such is the case. Could absurdity go further? It is an Act which allows the use of the totalisator, the Government deriving a revenue from it, but which refuses to allow the dividends to be published, although the dividends are the sole raison d’etre for the totalisator. These dividends are publicly notified to everybody on the course, who pass along the information to those who do not attend; but the newspaper must not say a word about them. This strongly suggests the action of the ostrich, which, hiding its head in the ground, thinks it cannot be seen. This extremely crude effort at legislation, badly digested and ungrammatical as it is, would be amusing if it were not so vexatious, and it has made us the laughingstock, of the world. The English footballers, when it was explained to them, refused to look upon it otherwise than as a joke; while the American sailors never could grasp how such an inane law could be tolerated by commonsense individuals. If a shopkeeper was allowed to sell goods, but was not allowed to advertise the fact, or if the members of the Stock Exchange were allowed to buy and sell shares, but were not permitted to publish the quotations for them, there would very

soon be an outcry, ana the public would demand the instant repeal of such a ridiculous enactment. Yet this is exactly analagous to some of the provisions iof Ithe Gaming and Lotteries Amendment Act.

The fact is, and it is no use burking it, this most objectionable measure was most hurriedly conceived as a sop to the clerical party, was badly drawn up, and most ill-considered. Intended no doubt to stamp out gambling, it has done nothing whatever of the sort, as anyone with any knowledge of human nature must have known would prove the case. It is a matter for general complaint that our best men do not nowadays go to Parliament, and that all interest in politics is fast dying out. Also it has been suggested if the Chamber at Wellington was closed for the next ten years the country would be saved an infinity of expense, and would be so much the better off. When one considers the exceedingly little worth of the bills passed during the last twelve months, and what the country has paid for them, there seems a great deal of merit in the contention. What will have to be stopped, however, is the constant whittling away of the liberty of the subject, and the passing of unnecessary laws, which are neither asked for or required. Such a measure is the Gaming Act, which is vexatious, unnecessary, and has proved an utter failure. Its prompt repeal should be one of the earliest acts when the new Parliament is gathered together.