(To THE EDITOR 07 TEE "EYRCTATOL") Stn,—As I was one
of those who most reluctantly, but Tinder a deep sense of necessity, brought before the Dublin Yearly Meeting of the Society of Friends, held recently, the question of the regrettable part which some prominent members of the Society in England continue to take in the ownership of betting newspapers, which you commented on in your note of May 16th, I send you the proceedings of the London Yearly Meeting, held early this month, giving an account of the discussion there, where I was glad to see at the close of the debate the sense of the Meeting enabled the Clerk (who is in the position of President or Chairman) to make a minute (or resolution) reaffirming its adhesion. to the paragraphs in the Book of Discipline, of which I append an extract (Part II., chap. sill., see. 5) :— " (3) Wo recognize that the newspaper Press, with some exception, is deeply involved in the dissemination of betting news and racing predictions. This is one of the main incitements to the evil habit of betting and gambling, and is, we are certain, detrimental to the highest welfare of the community. We earnestly desire that the business of newspaper management may be purged of this growing evil. (4) The Church should seek remedies for this terrible disease of our national life. In the first place it is essential that we should dissociate ourselves from all participation in or en- couragement of gambling. This personal witness is the first step towards creating a sound public opinion on the subject."
The above will show that the Society of Friends quite dis- approve of betting or gambling, and any members encourag- ing same through the Press or otherwise do so on their own
responsibflity.—I am, Sir, &a., &mum. H. NEWSOM. Cork.
[We are delighted to see that our correspondent, in common with many other Friends, is determined to free the Society from the stigma of encouraging betting. It is clear that the Society does not encourage betting, but condemns it, and that, therefore, the blame is on the individual members, and not on the body as a whole. At the same time, as long as so close and intimate a Society as the Friends refuses officially to put the stamp of its condemnation on so notable an example of hypocrisy it will be impossible to get the man in the street, who never draws fine distinctions, to recognize that the Quakers are free from blame in this matter. For ourselves, we feel that the "personal witness" as regards the crime of hypocrisy is even more needed than tihe "personal witness" against gambling. A Quaker "plunger," or "a Bookie in a broad-brimmed hat," would be an infinitely more respectable character than a Quaker condemning betting as the offence with which there could be no parley, and then controlling a paper which lived on betting "tips," He who finds excuses for the hypocrite is very near the hypocrite.—ED. Spectator.]
Previous page
