New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1911-05-24
RACING MEN MAKE PLEA
Advocate Repeal Of Law Making
Directors Liable for Betting.
WANT BO0KMAKING DEFINED
Opponents of New Bills Say Git
tins Bills Would Restore
Old Conditions.
nv TnlnEranh 70 The Tribune I


Albany, May 23-Holding that horse
racing Is dead in New York state unless
some relief is given from the present pro-
visions of the anti-racetrack betting laws,
many men prominent in the racetrack
world appeared this afternoon before the
Senate Codes Committee to advocate the
two racetrack bills Of Senator Gittns.
one would repeal the provision in the
present law so much feared by racetrack
| men, making directors of racetrack asso-
Citations personally liable for all betting
at their tracks The second defines book
making a. "the laying or publishing of
odds to all corners or to the public
The advocates of the proposed legislation
/ declared that II was wrong i'm principle 70
make director Of n racetrack associa-
| ton guilty Of crime when he had no
| knowledge Of the crime and was not at
| the track at the time IT was committed
| They also held that i was necessary to
| define bookmaking so that II would not
| he considered crime for two persons to
make a wager at racetrack with each
| other.
Those opposed to tho bills. on the other
hand. maintained that the purpose Of the
4
! store racetrack gambling and that II the
bills were enacted into law the same con-
ditions will exist as i'm the DAYS before the
| enactment of the Agnew-Hart law, when
| was designed TO suppress bookmakng. They
look upon the word AL" i'm the second
| bill rs n Joker which would practically To-
ealize betting on racetracks. They said
| that the tookmsker could escape punish
ment. even though he should lay wagers, II
he could prove that he did not do so with
everybody who attended the meeting
The opponents Of the proposed legisls
ton were particularly bitter against the
/ bill striking out the directors liability
clause as they declared that that was
the only means by which racetrack gam
bling could he effectually stopped
Richard r Wilson. ir. president of the
Saratoga Racing Association. headed the
delegation favoring the bills He said that
the racetrack men themselves are opposed
IN betting and would not have the anti
gambling laws repealed If they could, but
he believed that in their present form they
are too drastic. He declared that oi
course some betting goes on at the tracks
and tina, it vii continue to go on there
and elsewhere 50 long as the world turns
round. He believed that the best that
could he done was To minimize it,
IF the present laws" he said. were lit
| orally construed and enforced they would
close every club and every director OF a
railroad and every proprietor OF note
| could he sent To jail.
| Because of the directors liability pro-
vision. Edward \. Upton, one OF firm
handling blooded horses. said that his firm
had not sold n single thoroughbred. except
for export. FOR the, last year or two. John
Sanford the Amsterdam horse breeder
Charles \. Lexow, representing the hotel
| Mems Association Of New York, and others
also spoke for the bills.
Harry Brolaskl, reformed book
maker" denounced the bookmakng ocCu-
patton as thievery and declared that a
connection existed between the racetracks
and The poolrooms He said that because
II his own experiences on the racetracks
he knew that betting odds were manip-
ula,ed. Jockeys biibed and the public
robbed The horse is the only honest thing
on racetrack. he said.
The Rev. q. r. Miller, of the lnterna-
ticnal Reform Bureau, Canon William
g. Chase and the Rev. George w. Peck.
Of Buffalo. were among others who APP
peared against the bills.