Tom Watson's Magazine, Vol. I, No. 3, May 1905Various
History
Tom Watson's Magazine, Vol. I, No. 3, May 1905
Various
United States -- Politics and government -- Periodicals
It was said at the time that the racing associations and the bookmakers
had collected a fund of $700,000, and intended to use it in buying enough
votes in the convention to defeat the anti-gambling amendment. Who said
it? The newspapers. True? Not at all likely. The racing associations
were able to raise such a fund, but would have got little assistance
from the bookmakers. The latter were an asset of the racing associations
and knew it; they must be taken care of. ’Twas said, when Mr. Jerome was
at Albany championing the Dowling bill, that the gamblers of New York
had contributed $100,000 for the purchase of the Black Horse Cavalry
in the Legislature. The press gave Troy as the headquarters of the
gamblers’ committee. There was no such committee. The gamblers of New
York, including Canfield, who had more at stake than any other gambler,
did not contribute a dollar for the purpose of killing the Dowling bill.
The latter was passed with surprising ease in Assembly and Senate, and
had become a law before the “clever division” had begun to think of the
possibility of such a result. This law, in the hands of Mr. Jerome, has
proved rather embarrassing to the gambling fraternity, and may give him
an opportunity of distinguishing himself in a manner after his own heart
before many weeks have passed.
The anti-gambling amendment to the Constitution was ratified by a popular
majority of nearly 90,000 votes. Some of the voters believed, doubtless,
that it would eliminate betting on race-tracks. These forgot that the
amendment was of little worth unless the Legislature made such gambling
an offense and also made a punishment to fit the offense. The Legislature
which followed the adoption of the Constitution was “open to reason.”
How much money was required to salve its conscience I do not know, but
the manner in which it replied to the demand of the popular vote shows
that it was dishonest. By the anti-gambling clause of the Constitution
it was ordered to “pass appropriate laws to prevent offenses against any
of the provisions of this section.” Instead of obeying such mandate it
adopted the Percy-Gray law, which makes gambling in poolrooms a felony
and gambling on race-tracks a misdemeanor. In other words, if the keeper
of a poolroom takes a bet on a horse race he commits a felony and can be
sent to jail, for according to the law he has committed a penal offense,
whereas if a bookmaker accepts your money on the same race he does not
commit a felony and you are at liberty to publish yourself as a poor sort
of creature by attempting to recover your money by civil action. Class
legislation? It looks like it. But class legislation is unconstitutional.
That is the general opinion, but in this particular case many thousands
of dollars have been spent in an effort to discover whether or not the
present racing law is unconstitutional, and the dollars have been thrown
away.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account