HC Deb 14 February 1922 vol 150 cc820-1
62. Mr. LYLE

asked the Home Secretary whether there is to be an appeal in the case of the Golden Ballot prosecution; if so, if he will explain why the authorities are unwilling to accept the decision of the lower Courts; and whether he will consider the point of view that the police authorities are unnecessarily occupied with matters of this subsidiary importance, especially as these prosecutions consume a large amount of public money?


There will be no appeal against the magistrate's decision in this case. I do not consider that, the question of the legality of this and similar undertakings is a matter of subsidiary importance. The costs of a prosecution are insignificant when compared with the large sums which the promoters of bogus lotteries are able to obtain from members of the public. The bona fides of the promoters of the "Different Golden Ballot" has never been questioned, but it was necessary to test the legality of methods which may be adopted for their own purposes by less reputable imitators.


Will the right hon. Gentleman see that all lotteries, whether in churches or chapels, are subjected to the same treatment?


The police, following their duty, will watch all these things, in order to prevent, as far as possible, the public being exploited.