15 May, 1923.]

police find it so difficult to administer the Betting Act of 1906?-That is my opinion.

797. You find you can get no assistance from the public. In fact assistance is given to the betting people?-That is what usually happens. They warn them on the approach of the police.

798. Is the betting business done by the bookmaker well organised?—Yes, very well organised.

799. Do you have in Liverpool what we have heard exists in London, for instance? Do the bookmakers have a system of outlookers or spies to warn them when the police are coming?—Yes, and it is not as a rule the principal who does the betting himself.

800. First of all, the bookmaker has a system of spies to warn the betting men when the police are in the locality?-That is so.

801. Does the bookmaker himself bet in the street, or does he employ betting agents or touts? Of course there are some that bet themselves, but the majority of them employ men to do it for them.

802. We know that under the Act there is a fine of £10 for the first offence, £20 for the second offence, and £30 imprisonment for the third offence?—Yes.

or

803. May I take it that no bookmaker goes on betting in the street after his second conviction, but that he employs somebody else to do it for him and does not run the risk of going to prison?—Yes, and of course the bookmaker pays the fine.

804. So that the bulk of the betting is done by the betting agents or touts?— Yes.

805. If one of those agents is summoned or convicted his fine is paid for him by his employer?—Yes.

806. After he has been convicted does he transfer his services to some other bookmaker where he is not known?-Of course he might equally be caught and convicted again when acting for the other

man.

807. But the second time that agent would disappear and work in some other place, or in some other town, or some other part of the town, where he was not known?-I should think that would probably be so.

808. In addition to having the paid agents, or paid outlookers as I call them, do the people in the district warn them if they see the police coming? They do. 809. Then I take it that a uniformed officer is of no use for stopping this sort

[Continued.

of thing at all?-No, the detection is usually done by men in plain clothes, and men who have to adopt disguises.

810. I have heard it suggested that when a plain-clothes officer once summons a man, or arrests him, there will be outlookers at the police-court to get to know. him so that he will be recognised?—Yes, and that means constantly changing the men from one district to another.

811. In other words, is there any truth in this: It is part of the duty of some of these men employed by the bookmaker to learn to identify the plain-clothes officers, so that they can identify them and warn the bookmakers when they appear? I should say that was most probable.

812. Have your plain-clothes officers to resort to all sorts of different kinds of disguises? They have.

813. Is the result of all this that the number of prosecutions is comparatively small compared with the extent of the betting that goes on?-Yes. I think the number of prosecutions forms no real guide to the extent of the betting that goes on. The prosecutions only serve as a guide to the extent of comparing one year with another to see whether it is growing or decreasing.

814. Should I be right in saying that you have adopted the same methods and the same number of police in this branch for the last two or three years?—Yes.

815. So that the number of convictions would, in your opinion, be some guide as to the relative increase or decrease of betting?-Yes, that is so.

816. Will you tell us the number of prosecutions for the year ended 31st March last? The number of prosecutions for the year ending 31st March last was: For street betting, 227; for keeping betting houses, 53; betting clubs, 3; and betting in public houses, 4. That gives a total of 287 prosecutions.

817. How many of those were convicted? The majority of them. There were very few discharged. A very large percentage were convicted.

818. For the pre-war year 1913, were the prosecutions less?-They were less than half the number I have given. I think 113 was the total number in that year.

819. Taking your own personal experience, living in the place, is your own opinion, apart from these figures, that betting has about doubled since 1913?— Yes, I should say that was 60.

15 May, 1923.]

820. That is your own opinion ?—Yes. 821. By how much has the population increased since 1913?-There has been a considerable increase, but, unfortunately, I have not the last census figures.

822. You cannot tell us that?-No; but I should say that betting has increased out of proportion to the increase in population.

823. If it has doubled, the population of Liverpool has not doubled in ten years? That is so. The amount of betting has very largely increased.

824. I notice that you say there were only four cases of prosecutions for betting in public houses?—Yes. That is an exceptionally large number. In Liverpool there is practically very little betting in public houses.

825. I suppose in Liverpool the public houses belong to a very large extent to the brewers?-Yes, they are mostly owned by large brewery companies.

826. And they keep a strict outlook over them?-They are under strict management and supervision not only by the police, but by the agents of the brewers.

827. So that so far as Liverpool is concerned the licensed public house has nothing to do with the amount of betting? -Very little.

828. There were 53 prosecutions, you say, for keeping betting houses. That seems a large number. Would you tell the Committee what sort of houses those were? Were they shops?-Yes, those would be principally shops.

829. Shops in which the betting slips and the deposits are received, in the way you have told us, for the bookmakers ?Yes. There might be a café, or an eating house, but they are principally shops. 830. But I understand in no case would it be an office kept by the bookmaker himself? There might be one or two cases, for ready-money betting.

831. You had better tell us what are the usual fines that are inflicted?-During last year for street betting they were usually fined £5, but occasionally £10 or £15. That was for a second offence. Betting houses were fined from £20 to £30, betting clubs £20 to £30, and public houses from £30 to £50.

832. Were any of them sent to prison? -I should think there were very few. I have not the figures.t

833. Was that because they were none of them third offences? I should think probably it was?-Yes, I should think 60. + See Appendix I.

[Continued.

834. Do not take my word, of course. Is it not the fact that these men who are engaged in this business take very good care that after they have been convicted a second time they disappear to some other part to carry on their business, and they do not run the risk of going to prison?-Yes, it has a deterrent effect having an increased fine and the risk of imprisonment for the third offence.

Mr. Morgan Jones.

835. May I ask have you instances or records of people who have been convicted a first time in one part of Liverpool, and who have been convicted a second or a third time in another part of Liverpool? I could not say that we have had a second or third conviction in another place. I have not had instances of people being convicted in one part of Liverpool and then going to another.

836. Would not that tend to prove that the law is as a matter of fact effective? -Well, I think it is very ineffective. I do not think it stamps it out at all.

Chairman.

837. It is suggested that the fact that you have not instances of men who have got a second conviction against them shows that the law is effective. What happens to the man who has once been convicted?-I do not say we have not had a second conviction. I have not taken out the figures, but I should think a good many are second convictions.

838. What do you say about third convictions?-I shall be glad to supply you with those figures, but unfortunately I have not got them here.

839. Have there to your own knowledge and within your own recollection been men who have been convicted three times? -I do not like to say personally.

840. Will you analyse the figures of convictions for street betting, and let us know the number of first, second and third convictions?-Do you mean for street betting only? I should have no hesitation in saying we have had them three times convicted for street betting. I am certain about that.

841. Do I understand there have been no sentences of imprisonment, but it has always been a case of a fine? So far as I know they have all been fines.

an

842. If you would kindly send us analysis of all these convictions we should be glad to have it?-I should like to do that. Unfortunately I had not much time to prepare my evidence.

15 May, 1923.]

843. You understand what we want to get. We want the number of first, second and third convictions, and what the penalties were, and the total amount in money? If you multiply the number of cases by the average you would get that. I should think it would be a little over £2,000.

844. You have said that you have no record of a person being convicted in another place after having been convicted in one place. Seeing that betting is going on so much, do you mean that new people begin betting, or do you mean rather that those who are in the habit of betting and have been prosecuted once or twice and have been found guilty still keep on ?-I should say personally that a man probably does go on betting again. The reason that we do not get convictions is the difficulty we have in getting evidence. I would not like to say that a man who was convicted twice gives it up as a bad job.

845. But if the man is a betting agent and is convicted twice, what in your view becomes of him? Does he go to a different part of Liverpool, or does he go on betting where he was before and run the risk of a third conviction ?---Certainly he would not go on betting in the same place, because we give notice to the agent of the property at once in the case of a betting house, that the house is being run as a betting place and that there is a liability to a penalty if it goes on in the same place. The man has to move.

846. But in the case of a street betting man, what becomes of him on a third conviction ?-I should think he possibly migrates somewhere else. If he does not, then someone else takes his place, because betting is still growing.

847. If he is convicted a second time he either stops betting or goes elsewhere. Is that your view?-That is so.

848. At any rate what is perfectly clear is that the amount of betting goes on increasing? That is so.

849. But you have no record of the number of bookmakers engaged in street betting, or of the number of men employed as betting agents or touts which you can put before the Committee?-No. I might obtain an estimate of those if you like, but it would only be an estimate. I was asked to give evidence at very short notice, and I had not time to get out any estimates. I had simply to take the figures at my disposal.+

+ See Appendix I.

[Continued.

850. I think you might send an estimate of those numbers. Of course you will realise it is not worth much?-Yes. It is only an estimate, of course.

851. Can you tell us anything about the number of police officers engaged on this business of looking after street betting? -Yes. I had the actual hours of duty taken out carefully for the last year, that is the year up to the end of last month, and the statement shows that the full time of 28 police officers was occupied for the whole year.

852. What would the cost be?-With the pay and allowances and pension liability, the approximate cost would be £8,000.

Sir George Hamilton.

853. May I ask, in order that we may be quite clear about it, was that the net cost to Liverpool, because, of course, 50 per cent. is borne by the Exchequer?— That is the entire cost to the country. Half of it, of course, is paid by the Exchequer.

854. So that the net cost to Liverpool would be approximately £4,000?—That is so.

855. How would the fines taken at the Police Court compare with the total cost? -On the figures I have given the fines would amount to a little over £2,000.

Chairman.

856. We have had it that the number of prosecutions is very small compared to the extent of the betting which goes on, and you have given us the reason. In your opinion do the police force do their duty in these matters?-I certainly think they do.

857. I suppose they may be subject to offers of bribes by bookmakers?-Yes, but with regard to allegations which are sometimes made about bribes being given to the police by bookmakers, I think if such things do exist they are only very isolated cases.

858. My question was that bribes were offered-not accepted?-We have had experience of bribes being offered.

859. In your opinion is the position of the police officer a very good one, and it is not worth his while to take bribes ?My opinion is that his job is far too good a one to risk losing for the sake of a bribe.

860. That is your experience in 40 years with the police force?-Yes. Of course, I do not say there are not isolated cases, but they are very isolated, I should say. 861. Amongst all classes there are some that fall? Yes.

862. But your view is that they are very isolated cases?—Yes.

863. You have heard, I take it, that these allegations are made against the police force?—Yes.

864. And against the Liverpool police force? Yes, I have had them made from time to time.

865. Can you explain at all to the Committee how these allegations, in your opinion, come to be made?—I have had practical cases put to me by persons who know that street betting has been existing in certain quarters, and not knowing the difficulty of enforcing the law they have thought because there was not a prosecution or an arrest the police were paid for keeping their eyes shut. I have been told they are sure the police must. be bribed because there are no prosecutions. They do not realise the difficulty there is in enforcing the law, and they jump to the conclusion that the police are bribed.

866. Where any allegations are made you investigate them?-Yes. Such allegations are always very disturbing to any Chief Constable, and I am quite sure in my own case, and I may speak for the whole of the country, any such allegations are investigated very thoroughly by the Chief Constable.

867. Can you tell me in your view how much a particular betting agent would make in a day by taking bets during the flat racing season?-No, I am afraid I could not give you that. I would not like to give an estimate.

868. Can you tell me what length of street he perambulates in his business? What is the size of the area that a betting agent works in ?-It is not a very extensive one I should think. They usually have known pitches, where the clients. will find them, and that sort of thing.

869. You cannot tell me the size of the area he works in?-No, I cannot.

870. We had evidence the other day of the number of slips that were taken from a man when he was arrested. Can you give us any information about that? -I can get you that, but I could not give it you from memory.

871. You cannot tell us what sort of takings a bookmaker makes in this business in a day's work?-You mean in the betting houses?

872. No, in the street betting?—No, I

cannot.

[Continued.

no information to us. Could you make a guess? I could not give you any case with regard to street betting. In the betting houses it might run into hundreds of pounds. £300 or £400 we might find in a place when we raid it.

875. That is a very important statement?—I can supply you with figures of the amounts which we have found when we have raided a betting house.

876. When you have raided a betting shop?-Yes, when we have raided a betting shop, or a club.

877. It is rather a pity you were not prepared with those figures. Do I understand you have had some cases where you have found hundreds of pounds in betting shops?—Yes.

878. You will supply that information to us? Yes, I will supply that information.

879. And you will also give us the place where you found that large amount of money, with the slips that you found showing the average amount of the bets, and the number of bets on the slips, and that sort of thing?-In the betting houses there might be no slips at all. They would be kept in a book probably. I can try to get you some.

880. That is going to a different point. I understood you to tell me earlier on that the betting offices were mainly shops where the betting man went with a slip with his bet on it, or a number of bets on it, with the cash put in a sealed envelope, for a particular bookmaker?That is the case of a small shopkeeper, and I think I said in addition there might be a place where ready-money betting was carried on and it was a beting house, and there might be a case of a bogus club.

881. You gave us to understand that the number of places where people were betting for ready money was very rare? -Yes.

882. Which is the case where you found some hundreds of pounds?-The biggest amounts would be in bogus clubs or betting offices.

883. Well, can you send us that information, and can you also give us some information as to the amount of bets you found on any betting man that you arrested in the street?-Yes, I can get that for you.+

884. Could you also give us the number of commission agents in the City of Liverpool? That will only be an estimate.† I cannot give you the exact number.

+ See Appendix I.

886. The letter which is handed to me is from the Liverpool and District Commission Agents' Association, Limited, 33a, Chapel Walk, South Castle Street. It has a Council of at least a dozen names, and the telephone number is Bank, 9240. They write to the Clerk to the Select Committee on Betting Duty:

Referring to yours of May 9th and 11th, our President has sent you a precis of his evidence ", etc. Apparently they are sufficiently numerous to have an Association, with a Council of eleven names?-Those are credit bookmakers.

887. Those are credit bookmakers who are carrying on a legitimate business?— I have no doubt they will be able to give the exact number of their members.

888. And you will give us an estimate of the other people as best you can?—Yes. Mr. Forestier-Walker.

889. Can you distinguish between the commission agent who merely does work in the office, and the commission agent who is found on a racecourse?—I might be able to do that.

Chairman.

890. What becomes of the money that is seized when you make a raid either on a betting office, a betting house, or an individual bookmaker? Is that money forfeited?-It is forfeited under Liverpool Corporation Act.

our

you,

891. You have byelaws, have under which it is forfeited?—Yes. 892. Does that go to the City Fund then? Yes.

893. Does it go in relief of rates, or to pay police expenses?—Under the Corporation Act it goes to the City Fund.†

894. In your opinion do the present laws against betting have any preventive value? I think they have very slight value indeed.

895. In your opinion are they worth the cost that the enforcement of the law now entails?-I should think it is very doubtful. The preventive value of the present law is so slight.

896. Is that because betting is implanted in the human breast?—I suppose that has something to do with it. The preventive value is so slight because

+ See Appendix I.

[Continued.

of the ease with which the law is evaded really.

897. Are the methods of evasion very numerous? They are.

898. In fact you take the view that there are few persons who wish to make a bet who cannot find a means of doing so without incurring much risk?-That is

So.

899. I gather that you think it is not worth the cost and trouble entailed for the results you get?-I think it is very questionable whether it is worth the cost.

900. Supposing the law were altered, and supposing the bookmakers were licensed, and supposing they were only allowed to conduct their business in offices or on racecourses, would that enable you to stop street betting?—Yes, I think it would. I think if the bookmaker was licensed and was allowed to carry on ready money betting at a registered address, he would then do all he could to stop the illegal betting. We should have a friend instead of an enemy.

901. You think the bookmaker would become your friend?-Yes, certainly, a registered bookmaker.

902. You think you would have the sympathy of the public in stopping street betting? Yes.

903. Whereas now it is against you?— Yes.

904. In olden days before 1853 where there were betting offices they were found to be nuisances; but in those days the police were comparatively few and not properly organised? That is so.

905. If they were licensed offices now under the stringent conditions of the present police methods, do you think there would be any trouble in supervising them? -I do not think so. I think there should be some power given to the local authority to approve, because there are certain neighbourhoods where a licensed betting office might depreciate the value of property next door. I think that if there were approved and registered addresses there would be no great cause of com-plaint that I can see.

906. I understand you to say that under the present state of the law you cannot enforce the prevention of betting in the streets, or illegal betting? That is so. It is almost impossible to stop it. We are not stopping it in spite of all our trying.

907. Is there any other condition that you would make so far as licensing a bookmaker is concerned, except that the local authority should have a voice in