§ 3. Sir R. THOMASasked the Home Secretary whether, in view of the illegality of lotteries, he proposes to take action in the matter of the Stock Exchange Derby sweepstake?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSIt has never been the practice to interfere with private lotteries which do not involve some, at least, of the mischiefs against which the law is properly directed in the case of public lotteries.
§ Sir R. THOMASDoes the right hon. Gentleman consider that this Stock Exchange lottery is not a public one and a gamble? Does he think it fair to allow that lottery to take place when a shopkeeper in a back street, who at Christmas time tries to dispose of a goose by means of a lottery is penalised and fined? Does he think it is fair that such a contrast should be made between these two sections of the community?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSThe law very frequently does involve contrasts. I am advised by my legal advisers that this is not a public lottery, and, as such, I have no right to interfere.
§ Sir R. THOMASWill the right hon. Gentleman explain to us what it really is, if it is not a public lottery?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSI should say it is a private lottery with certain semi-public characteristics.
§ Mr. MONTAGUEHas the Home Secretary evidence that members of the Stock Exchange have bought and retained over 1,000,000 of these vouchers; and is he aware that the big banks are prosecuting the Calcutta sweep in every direction, while small societies and trade unions all over the place are being harassed? I press for an answer.
§ Mr. SPEAKERIt would be most irregular to have a Debate on this subject at Question Time.
§ Mr. MONTAGUEThere is one law for the rich and another for the poor. Hundreds of trade unions are being prosecuted for doing exactly the same thing in exactly the same way.
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYDoes the right hon. Gentleman's answer mean that there will be no more persecution of people who organise hospital tombolas?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSFirst of all, the hon. and gallant Member must not talk about "persecution," or confound that with prosecution.
§ Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHYI meant the word "persecution."
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSThen, as far as that is concerned, I have no answer to make.
§ Mr. HORE-BELISHADoes not the right hon. Gentleman consider that there is already enough stupid interference by his Department?
§ Sir W. JOYNSON-HICKSThe hon. Member must not confound the action of my Department with the action of the police. The duty of the police throughout the country is to take action in cases where it is brought to their knowledge that the law has been evaded or broken in any respect. It is not the duty of my Department. My Department does not interfere with the action of the local police.
§ Sir R. THOMASrose—
§ Mr. SPEAKERThe hon. Gentleman has received a quite definite answer to his question.
§ Mr. SHINWELLHon. Members on the benches opposite have all bought tickets.
§ Sir R. THOMASIt is not a satisfactory answer.
§ Mr. SPEAKERrose—
§ Sir R. THOMASHaving regard to the very unsatisfactory nature of the reply of the right hon. Gentleman, are we not entitled to ask supplementary questions to try to get a satisfactory answer?
§ Mr. SPEAKERQuestion Time is not the time for argument. The hon. Gentleman put a question on the Paper and has received his answer, although it may not be an answer which is satisfactory to him.
§ Sir R. THOMASWith all respect, is not Question Time a time for us to try to get satisfactory answers from Ministers?
§ Mr. SPEAKERIt is a time for asking for information.
§ Mr. MONTAGUEWhy not prosecute the banks? They are selling Calcutta tickets everywhere.