City Council May Prohibit Pinball Play

The City Council's ordinance committee yesterday recommended the adoption of an anti-pinball machine policy, but the Council itself again held up action on the matter pending a hearing May 18.

Reasons for the delay were the uncertain legal status of the decision and the prevalent feeling that opponents of the proposed ban had not been properly notified of the drive. But Councillor Joseph A. De Gueglielmo '29, picked up strong support from the Cambridge Civic Association and from Councillor Charles Watson, who said he was "inclined to think they're almost all used for gambling."

DeGuglielmo explained to the committee that "a machine is not considered a good machine unless it brings in $100 a week," so that the city's 300 machines probably do a $1.5 million annual business. He pointed out that each machine has a counter which records the number of free games left unplayed; a number of unplayed free games may indicate that a "payoff" is involved.

City Solicitor Richard D. Gerould expressed the opinion that the Commonwealth had pre-empted the right to control the machines, so that it would be futile for the city to pass legislation against them. But DeGuglielmo's proposed order only advises the Cambridge Licensing Commission that the Council feels the machines should be banned.

Thus the Commission, which can issue and revoke the pinball permits, would not be required to revoke all the licenses, but "the chances are that they will adopt our policy," said DeGuglielmo. Operators of the machines would then have the right to take the matter to court for a decision, he added.