Bingo, Morality and the Criminal Law

The Catholic Lawyer, Mar 2016

By Frederick J. Ludwig and Dominic Hughes, O.P., Published on 03/23/16

A PDF file should load here. If you do not see its contents the file may be temporarily unavailable at the journal website or you do not have a PDF plug-in installed and enabled in your browser.

Alternatively, you can download the file locally and open with any standalone PDF reader:

https://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1002&context=tcl

Bingo, Morality and the Criminal Law

Bingo, Morality and the Criminal Law Frederick J. Ludwig Dominic Hughes Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/tcl Part of the Criminal Law Commons, and the Religion Law Commons Recommended Citation - Article 3 The following article is based upon the belief that the wisdom and prudence of operating bingo games for humanitarian purposes should be left to the discretion of the administrators of religious, charitable and fraternal organizations, and that the criminal law should control but not prohibit bingo under such auspices. BINGO, MORALITY AND THE CRIMINAL LAW FREDERICK J. LUDWIG* DOMINIC HUGHES, O.P. A BROOKLYN PASTOR may be forced to close a newly constructed recreation center that had almost untenanted notorious neighborhood pool rooms because local law enforcement authorities suddenly ceased to ignore bingo games that made mortgage payments possible.' A teaching sister, principal of a parochial school in California, is about to stand trial and risk the stigma of conviction as a criminal because a child naively believed that the local district attorney would buy a chance on a school raffle if only he would ask him.2 In Pennsylvania, an American Legion post commander is under arrest and has lost his job as public school teacher for similar fund raising activity.3 Should these individuals be considered criminals? Is gambling really morally wrong in itself or does it become wrong only under certain circumstances? And specifically, are bingo, lotto, raffles or lotteries when conducted under proper auspices still so dangerous to the public welfare as to require not merely regulation but complete suppression by the criminal law? The adoption by 3 to 1 of a referendum in New Jersey in 1953 authorizing bingo, lotto and raffles 'by licensed educational, charitable, patriotic, religious and public spirited bodies, has made more insistent the demand for similar law revision in other states. In 1954 a half dozen such proposals were introduced in the New York State Legislature and other * For a biographical sketch of the authors see pages 78, 79. 'N. Y. Times, Oct. 12, 1954, p. 52, col. 2. For fuller report of this case, see page 74. N. Y. Times, Sept. 10, 1954, p. 25, col. 6. The person in the above photograph is playing six cards or boards in a single game. The detached sheets in the upper left corner will be used for the special games. The ball marked 68 in the center of the photograph is drawn from the drum by the person operating the game and appears here only for illustrative purposes. states will undoubtedly follow suit. With the exception of a few states such as Nevada, however, there seems to be no great public demand to remove virtually all restrictions on gambling, particularly professional gambling. Consequently the present discussion is limited to the question as to whether certain forms of gambling operated on a non-professional basis by religious, charitable or fraternal organizations for laudable purposes should be prohibited or merely regulated by law.4 It is proposed to examine the problem in the light of moral norms and of legislative and judicial experience. Before the contours of workable legislation may be suggested, however, some pertinent facts concerning gambling should be considered and the moral norms should be defined. For a good summary of the case against gambling casinos as they are operated in Germany, see Ermecke, The State and Legalized Gambling, II Theology Digest 94 (1954). This Wagering World With the doubtful exception of the Eskimo,' all contemporary societies are characterized by the human aleatory urge. Absence of money hardly explains the Eskimo's lack of conformity, since his canoes, weapons and jade could be staked. More primitive societies, without monetary media, have bequeathed archaelogists not only their own but also the bones of animals characteristically cubed and marked. The essential humanity of the Eskimo, however, has been established beyond reasonable doubt by occasional cosmopolitan tribesmen who, having mingled with white men and Indians, have returned to exhibit the proof of their conversion, cards and dice. Elsewhere in the world where the climate has perhaps less chilling effect on human ardor, the problem of gambling is presented.6 Except in some Anglo-American areas, governments have sought to monopolize, control, regulate, license or tax gambling, but not to prohibit it. Such is the case of Monaco, capital of the world's spinning industry since 1863, with its %oths of a square mile of sovereignty on the Mediterranean. Ten percent of its annual $3 million budget is raised by a tax in like amount on the gross intake of Monte Carlo. The casino belongs to an intricately organized stock company euphemistically labeled The Sea Bathing Society. Three-quarters of its shares are distributed among 30,000 Frenchmen who cannot be wrong about this investment. Sea Bathing stock has current capital value of about $ (...truncated)


This is a preview of a remote PDF: https://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1002&context=tcl

Frederick J. Ludwig, O.P. Dominic Hughes. Bingo, Morality and the Criminal Law, The Catholic Lawyer, 2016, Volume 1, Issue 1,