Evening capital and Maryland gazette. (Annapolis, Md.) 1910-1922, 1922-03-02
THURSDAY. MARCH 2. 1929.
GIVING UP THE .RAKE OFF,

1t has been said that very old
things are either antiquated or in
dispensable. 1t is a convenient
saying, though hardly exhaustive
NcTy old things may be simply
pcrnicious. possessing an incred-
ible vitality. Gambling, for eX-
ample. was not an invention of a
particular year or even century.
for it is almost "as old as the
hills" However. it declines 10
appear antiquaed and it will
hardly be claimed that it is in
dispensable.
Doubtless, the psychological
motive is the craving for excite
ment or diversion, but after all,
as an economic proposition.
chance is the method of harbar-
ism versus civilization as a
means of distribution. Civiliza-
ton seeks good effects through
good causes, and strives for pro-
lection against unproductive or
evil tendencies. Gambling Is
therefore, discountenanced by
the criminal law of the State
as being contrary to til c
peace and good order OF any COM
munity, so that there is direct
concurrence between the civil
and religious codes in placing 1T
under the ban of each.
The financial welfare of the
State aud Nation needs a suffi-
Cient cause to promote it, which
must be industry and produc-
tiveness among citizens, with in
teligence and honesty in the gov
ernmcnt. History reveals no
other secret, even rich colonies
of exploitation helping nation
but for Il short time.
The above observations point
TO the inherent weakness in the
argument advanced by the advo-
Gates of partnership between
the State and the race tracks in
the gambling business. The
whole proposition is fundamen-
tally wrong as a matter OF State
policy, as it is directly contrary
to the spirit of both law and of
political economy. No state can
endure or prosper which depends
for its revenue. even in part, upon
an institution whose only contri-
button To society is affording an
opportunity for taking chance
This principle has been repudiat-
ed by the criminal law from time
immemorial. and no matter what
may be said for or against it as a
personal proposition. or as mat
ter of private morals. as gov
crnmental policy its rejection was
inevitable. 1t were Just as well
that the end came now rather
than postpone the agony any
longer
The loss OF revenue to the State
from the dissolution of this part
nerShip between the State and
the race tracks is by no means as
appalling as its proponents point
out. 1t is said TO amount, APP
proXimately, TO Ss00,000 a year.
but the value of the dissolution
cannot be measured in dollars
and cents. nor is il TO be COM
puted as of any particular year
or short period of time. Its
wholesome effect will be OF great
er value with the passing years.
However, whether this partner
ship be good State business or
otherwise. the fact is that the
representatives OF the people OF
Maryland are now speaking for
them on the subject in no uncer-
tain terms. and if the ultimate de-
Cision should be in favor of the
dissolution. the people them
selves will have voluntarily as
sumed whatever burden in in
creased taxation will be made
necessary by their decision.
1t all comes back to the axiom
that the people can get just what
kind OF government they want.
and it is getting palmer every day
that they do not want a govern
Fnent financed through this kind
nj narfuarSfip