MELBOURNE CUP.

Press, Volume XI, Issue 1378, 8 April 1867, Page 3

MELBOURNE CUP.

I From tho " Australasian," of March 23 ] DISPUTED FALCON CASE. Our readers will remember that iv the race for the last Melbourne Cup the judge omitted to place a third horse, Falcon, but that the stewards did so. The power of the latter to place a horse was disputed, aud the matter referred to England for Admiral Rous's opinion, which is, that the stewards have no power to place a horse, the sole power to do so restiug with the judge. " Bell's Life in London " has the following on the same subject:—

A curious dispute arose with reference to the placing of the third horse, Falcon. This animal waa ridden in colors different to those set down on the card, and the judge not recognising either Falcon or his rider declined to place a third. As place betting appears to be a 8 popular at the Antipodes as it ia in this country, and Falcon had been heavily supported for a situation, the anguish of his backers mny readily be imagined. Confusion and disputes without number naturally ensued, and the stewards of the meeting, exercising a discretion which seems to have met with only partial approval, determined that, although the judge had not placed the horse, yet as lie palpably finished third he should be returned so officially, and bets we presume go inglyThe following is the case as submitted to Admiral Rous, and his reply :— Kirk's Horse Bazaar, Melbourne, November _7, 1866. Honorable Admiral Rous, Dear Sir, —I have been requested to lay before you the following facts, and to ask your opinion on the subject: — A offers 100 to 30 against Falcon being placed in the late Melbourne Cup. Taken. The judge only places first and second ; the third, Falcon, weighed in, and was acknowledged by the stewards third (placed by the stewards third). B takes 30 to 10 Falcon is first, second, or third in the Melbourne Cup. Your reply will oblige. Your obedient Bervant, Richabd^Taxtebsallu A wins, as Falcon was not| placed by the judge. B loses, as the judge did not place a third horse. H. S. Eotis. The subjoined letter was afterwards received from the Admiral: — 15 Berkeley-square, January 25, 1867. My dear Sir, — If the judge declines to place a third horse the stewards have no power to interfere with his award, and if there is no money to be received by the third horse the judge may decline to notice him. I was muirh pleased to see tliat the gentlemen to whom the case was referred gave the right answer.

Very truly yours, H. S. Eotrs. To R. Tattersall, Esq The " Australasian," of 30th, says: —" A great many arguments could be adduced in favor of the judge's power being above all question, and his decisions being considered final: that is, supposing the judge to be competent. Mistakes rarely occur in England; here they frequently happen. We have not been particularly fortunate in our selection .of starters and judges. Yet it is a matter of n.ost vital importance to the V.R.C. that these offices should be efficiently filled, and still more so to the public. Our starters and judges are honorary. In England both are paid officials. The former are seldom reliable, the latter generally, we might say always. But in addition to competent officials being j appointed, the racing laws of this ■ colony must be thoroughly revised, and the betting fraternity must also be brought to acknowledge them. The -duties of starter and judge must be clearly laid down, and we must know whether such a law as No. 8 of the V.R.C. code means anything, and if so, what it does mean. Whether the judge and starter ate supreme or amenable to the stewards. It will never do for the stewards of an important club to act in accordance with a rule of their own, and the betting ring to turn round and tell them it is directly in opposition to English racing law or usage. Let us choose between Victorian law, w r eli and clearly defined, and English racing custom, or usage, or law whatever it is, foggy and undefined, and only clearly laid down in the brain of Admiral Rous. We are old enough to run alone Let us frame racing laws and betting laws that shall harmonise as much as possible. It will never do for owners of horses to doubt the efficiency of starter or judge, and to know there is no remedy, and if betting is the mainstay of the Turf, backers of horses, who keep the Ring in existence, will soon get disgusted if there are many repetitions of tbe Falcon case. And it will be to the interest of the Ring to acknowledge that their transactions shall in future be guided by the code of rules adopted by the V.R.C."