The Stourbridge Observer, Cradley Heath, Halesowen & District Chronicle.
Stourbridge, West Midlands, England, 1870-04-23 00:00:00

44e citour4rible Oturber.

SATURDAY, APRIL 28, IWO.

H ORSE RACING AND BETTING.

Whenever an argument arises for and against
horse-racing, an argument that is adduced in
favour of it is that it tends to improve the breed
of horses. Almost, as a matter of course, those
who oppose horse racing, chiefly on moral
gronude, know less about the breed of horses
than those who advocate racing, and who gene-
rally take an interest in it, and this argument it
has often been found difficult to COM bat. A very
great authority on racing matters—Sir Joseph
Hawley, whose name appears in the report of
ahnoet every race —now comes forward, however
and maintains, with arguments which appear to
us to be unanswerable, that the present system
of running horses tends directly and indirectly
to deteriorate the breed. On this nice and ab-
struse question, which is now agitating the
sporting world, we shall not enter; but Sir
Joseph, in his efforts to reform the turf, alludes
to another subject which is f immense import-
ance to the public. He, of course, looks at this
matter as a sporting gentleman, and calls on the
leading sporting association, the Jockey Club,
to alter their rules, so as to discourage what he
considers gambling and an unfair syntena of bet-
Hog. They who look at the entire matter from
a moral point of view, will probably go much
farther than this, and exclaim, " rennin it alto-
gether." _

- -
Sir Josaph Hawley denounces the system of
"play or pay '' bettaag, a klydl.ool Which is affec-
ted by the sr:racking " of a horse at any mu.
meat, and thus depriving one portion of the
bettors of all chance of winning, which certainly
IS not fair, awl which, so long ago as 1557, Lord
tilasgew and tieueral Peel denounced as giving
'• facility and inducement to the commission of
fraudulent practices greatly injurious to the
character aud interests of the Turf." Those
gentlemen looked at the matter from a spurting
point of view, but it needs no argument to show
that fraudulent practices must have their influ-
ence far beyond the Turf. :dr Joseph new ap-
peals to the Jockey Club to abolish this system
of " play or pay," and wo earnestly hope that
this halm:tidal club may listen to the words of
wig-ism Rua sound Council. But he goes farther
than this. He hopes to induce the club of
which lie id a member to obtain from Parliament
u bill to prohibit these seductive advertisements
Irma betting agents. commission agents, and
keepers of betting hats. Whether the Jockey
Chu wid di this remains to be seen. There is
co isiderablo difficulty in the way. Immediately
th t any attempt is made to put down betting
IL o_iag the innlain and worxing classes, what is
O Led the IL peaise argatuent is at once used,
and Tatb,r,:iiii's the gre ttest betting establish-
ment in the world, is pointed to. Here, how-
• r, c totes in simmer very. important argument
on the other side. Sapposing that au undoubted
evil exists id several 'Laces, sad that Parliament
can put it dew,' in same, :mil cannot put it down
others, is it not the duty of Pardament to do
what 1.4 in its power? There is an old adage
which is applicable to this —if you cannot do as
well as you could wish, do as well as you can.
We sa Imo v hist M tile upper ra dts of life fur-
taues are Les, fil:llialt.'d [11.11,11, dud good time
tarnished by neary loses ii betting; but we
cannot aler this. Sir Joseph Ilawley says Par-
ham lit can atter Some ot it—tliat is 110 reason
why reform should not Ito cifJet,d where it can
ho d Tun evils of betain4 are pretty gene-
ral) aoau yvleAge.l, O.IL Idle its .i.akna a powerful
writer 'rho discusses the subject. '• There is
scarcely a inereratile tslialinsflun2nt," he says,
scarcely a private house, which has not had
reason to deplore tie irreparabm mischief caused
by the temptations to and facilities for betting

on every possible event." After mentioning
these temptations and facilities, " then comes,"
he adds, the frequenting of betting houses
and the society of low betting men. In such
vile company as this every early principle of
right and wrung is sapped, honest work grows
hateful, the unfortunate victim hastens to be-
oinie rich, and then follow embezzlement, theft,
detection, and crone.' Is this picture, we
would ask, over-coloured? We think not.
Were it needed many cases might be cited to
, prove the truth of this sad outline. And these
-tstenienta du not only refer to the past; they
affect the present, and foreshadow the future.
the evil moreover is growing ; it is permeating
.iiieiety, and injuriously affecting every grade,
(ruin the highest to the lowest. Some Indy saj
that the evil therefore is too great for Parliament
to grapple with. We think net. Of course uo
Act of Parliament nor any numLer of Acts of
Parliament can prevent private betting; at least
we cannot see how this could be done in Imola a
country as ours; but surely Parliament can deal
with the " temptations and facilities 'alluded to.
Something in this direction has already been
done in putting down Derby sweeps," specs,"
and lotteries, but even in this particular branch
of the betting evil our legislation should be
more precise and definite. Why cannot some.
thing more be done in regard to the betting-list
men and other people of that class? The bet-
ting malady iS a wide-spread and deeply.rooted
disease, and perhaps legislation is powerless en-
tirely to eradicate it ; but its evil effects may be
mitigated by legislating on some of the causes.