LETTERS - TO THE EDITOR A TAX ON BETTING [To the
Editor of the SPECTATOR.] Sin,—It has been my good fortune to be associated with Canon Green in so many philanthropic endeavours that- I am conscious of a certain pain in disagreeing with him about the moral aspect of the proposed tax upon betting.' Happily, however, he and I are seeking the same goal, although we
seek it by different roads. -
It seems to me that he is guilty of exaggeration when he says that "the practical proposals put forward by the Home Office " would" fill every religious and social worker, with any first-hand knowledge of the conditions which exist in our great industrial centres, with despair." How can he know that this is the universal feeling among religious and social workers? It is not universal among the clergy, as recent discussions in Convocation and at Diocesan Conferences hive shown, and, so far as my experience goes, I do not think it is universal among other persons who are devoting themselves to social reform.
He says that in all countries where betting is regularized boOkmakers "do as much, and more, business as of old." Here again I have found a difference of opinion in my travels over the Empire. But if the regularization of betting is found everywhere to increase, and not to diminish, the evil with which it deals, why is it continued ? The natural course of statesmen in'these countries would be to give it up ; for they cannot desire to increase the amount of betting and gambling. .
Canon Green holds that " betting is a sin." I do not know whether he would go so far as another opponent of a tax upon betting in saying that a- person who stakes a shilling upon .a ship's run at sea is as much a sinner as a person who steals a shilling. There are, no doubt, people in whose eyes it is a sin to stake a shilling upon the ship's run at sea, as there are other people in whose eyes it is a sin to drink wine, even, I suppose, in the Holy Communion. But the great majority of men and women, even of those who are strongly Christian in thought and life, will never, I think, be converted to so extreme a view ; and the consequence is that all reform; whether in drinking or. in betting, is impeded, and I may almost say prevented, by the extremists ; for in a democracy it is impossible that any reform should be effected, unless it commands a majority of votes. The policy of-" everything or nothing" generally ends in nothing. It is so that a fanatical view of betting as well as of drinking is itself a serious obstacle to all reform.
It is almost an absurdity' to pretend that the State does not now recognize betting, but would recognize it by imposing a tax upon it. Who can seriously maintain that the State does not recognize the Derby ? And why it should be not only legitimate but desirable to impose heavy taxation upon the liquor trade, and yet immoral to impose any taxation at all upon the gambling fraternity, is for many advocates of social reform, and for myself among them, impossible to understand. A tax upon betting may or may not be prac- ticable, and it may or May not be profitable. With the economic side of such a tax I am not competent to deal ; but there can be no doubt that it wOuld diminish some of the malpractices which are now almost inseparably connected with betting and gambling, whether upon the Turf or elsewhere. Not only so ; but it ii at least possible that the licensing of betting would Produce the same effect as the licensing of public-houses—a system which was introduced because the -evil arising from unlimited 'Opportunities of drinking was acknowledged on all hands to be intolerable. The taxation of a business is generally regarded*not -as an encouragement of the -bilsiiiess, but as 'a limitation'set upon its activity.'
Yet tile. point which I especially wish to urge is, What policy do Canon Green and other opponents of the taxation of betting wish to adopt ? The crusade against betting has hitherto been cairied. on ifi:the Main by 'sermons which the gambling fraternity do not generally hear, by .papers which they do not generally read, and by meetings which they hardly' ever attend. Meanwhile the evil of betting and ganibling has reached such a point that, according to the report of the Select roriunittee on the taxation of betting, "the total sum staked each year with professional bookmakers" of all kinds has been estimated as reaching the gigantic figure of /500,000,000. The evil could hardly become worse, whatever the State might do. It is indeed, I cannot help feeling, difficult to believe that anybody who wishes to bet would say to himself : "If the State taxes betting, I shall be justified in making the bet ; but if not, I will not make it." But while the amount of betting increases from year to year, no valid effort is being made by the State to control it. The taxation of betting; apart from its economical effect, might, and in the judgment' of some social - reformers would, tend to mitigate certain' of the worst features of betting. But it seems to me that the Social reformers who are opposed to such taxation may reasonably be expected to suggest some novel effective means of coping with an evil which is one of the worst causes of national demoralization. If the policy of a tax upon betting is rejected, what other policy do they propose ? should be only too glad to adopt it. But do not let them sit ' by with folded hands, doing nothing themselves and preventing- other people from doing anything.—! am, Sir, &c., J. E. C. WELLDON.
The Deanery, Durham.,
Previous page
