52.
53 266
11
only local. Ordinance against Gambling! No. 14 of 1
which the latter states to have been
40
ill
penned as to be found to be inoperative". I conceive such
observation to be specially unfortunate as the Ordinance in question
is remarkable for completeness, distinctness
and
never heard of
J'cent brevity. I certainly have heard of any escape from justice through its deficiency, though I have heard of numerous Cases
of
the guilty escaping through the corruption and venality of the persons charged with execution of the Laws, and who under
the old system would
"
put aside as one Ordinance, In toto lift as readily fact Me" Anotey might
omuse himself
draughting twenty Ordinances on the subject, but of what use would
1844.
they all be, if the gamblers could purchase
immunity from the Police. Quis Custodes custodiat ipsos? I therefore regard all such discussion
now that we have had experience as mere waste of time.
By so far as Legislation goes for suppression of Crime the progress in recent years
has been peculiarly marked, and subjects which it was thought hopeless
to grapple with, such as Piracy, have been effectually dealt with. This Government is therefore not open to the charge of inertness in that respect. Nevertheless, no legislation can prevent employees selling their influence for money, if there be parties who have money
13
Tex