HERBERT R. O'CONOR, GOVERNOR. 1729

private citizens asserted that they were demoralizing in-
fluences.

The Democratic Party at its Convention prior to the last
gubernatorial election formally took notice of this issue. Its
representatives from all over the State, without a dissenting
vote, adopted a plank in the party platform which read as
follows:

"We vigorously oppose the State's continuing the
practice of resort to the licensing of pinball machines
and similar gambling devices as a means of raising
revenue. "

As the candidate for Governor of the Party, I publicly de-
clared, my agreement with this formal stand and repeatedly
during the campaign asserted that I felt that relief needs
could and should be met without resorting to the dubious
method of raising funds by legalizing gambling devices. The
voters had a right to assume that I meant what I said during
the campaign when I declared that I would veto any bill that
was passed undertaking to continue the legalization and licens-
ing of these devices. Not only did the people apparently ap-
prove of our stated policy in this respect but at the election
they voted on the proposed constitutional amendment relating
to Lotteries and the voters rejected it by a vote of 123, 365
to 90, 805.

The General Assembly, the majority of which were members
of our Party, lived up to its promise not to continue the legali-
zation of these machines. An adequate relief program was
adopted without resorting to this method of revenue raising.
After it was apparent that a State-wide pinball law could not
be passed, the present County measures were introduced. Be-
cause they were local in nature it is apparent that the ma-
jority of the members of the General Assembly treated the
proposals as relating exclusively to the particular counties.
However, I find it difficult to conclude that what is admittedly
detrimental to the interests of the State as a whole would be
beneficial to particular sub-divisions of the State. It is hardly
consistent to establish a State policy outlawing these devices
and then to sanction their operation in a few places.

I am inclined to the belief that possibly other delegations
from the city or counties were deterred from introducing
similar local legislation by our announced attitude against
these measures. Were I to approve the four measures which
were enacted, I feel it would be unfair to the other counties
which proceeded on the assumption that such machines would
not be legalized.