The daily morning journal and courier., 1902-03-22

contribute to public enlightenment l though it may lead to no other result.
 It so happens-by the long headed fore 1 thought of Lord Salisbury-that most 1 of the members of this committee are well known turfites. To be sure, the good Bishop of Hereford is also mem | Der, but if, in the wind-up, several l sport-loving noblemen do not prove more than d match for single guile less cleric this writer is no prophet Judging from their questions some of the committee are apparently anxious to make out a case in favor of licensing bookmakers. But, as a city magistrate said, when asked for his opinion upon
 this point, if there was any desire to
 lessen or put down betting, the last
 thing to do was to give license to
 those who made trade of it, and Dr.
 Clifford last Sunday, in his great ser
 mon on "The Gambling Mania," used language more significant still. 'Li- Cense the bookmakers, indeed, License people whose trade is to induce their fellow men to make bets. License thing which judges tell us over and over is England's curse and the chief cause of our increasing defalcations and embezzlements! We have one trade li censed already and it has grown under license. It has become powerful and defiant under license, and now, when we want to reduce 1t, we are at our wits end'' This of course, refers to the liquor traffic, in which trade li- cense has come to be regarded in Eng I oe pf a1p value, to be taken away for the benefit of the public only after the state has paid a large sum in compensation.
 Pretty nearly, at one of its sessions, did the committee of inquiry into the betting evil get at the bottom of this, shady business. But the promised rev. elations were nipped in the bud. The chairman of the committee is Lord Durham, and from the following incl dent readers may jugde whether he is chiefly interested in getting at the | truth or is holding brief for the Brit f ish turf, The man giving evidence was | a professional packer and member of | the latter dignity giving | him good standing as a racing man. He objected, he said, to the quotation of odds because it led to malpractices A bookmaker he observed, might lay against a horse and be able to prevent 1t running, Then ensued this illumina- ting dialogue.
 Lord Durham: How is a bookmak- ar to prevent a horse running Wit ness: He can do so if he has instruc- ions to lay agains him.
 Then you are suggesting collision the owner and the bookmak- ar' Sometimes there is and then lorses are poisoned"
 That is mere conjecture" said Lord 
 But persisted the witness, take he case of Orme, the case of St. Simon if the Rock, Pensioner Clolster and 
 Lord Durham: Really, we can't ac- ept your statements as facts. What 'oint do you want to gice evidence ipon?
 Witness; I wish to tell the commit ee the mal-practices of betting. Such was his laudable object, but he idn't carry it out to any alarming ex- ent, because, evidently some of the l members of the committee had taken f larm. But he did get chance to say ( hat, from what he knew of the mal- I ractices to which It led he thought { rofessional betting ought to be stopped I Together, and that perhaps, consider | 1g it's source, is as useful and as en- bit of testimony as the bet Q Ing inquiry has thus far elicited. f.
 HENRY TUCKLEY. c