ROYAL DESPATCH CASE

Evening Post, Volume CVIII, Issue 76, 26 September 1924, Page 10

ROYAL DESPATCH CASE

JONES AND M'CARTEN'S STATEMENTS. ' When Mr. H. A. Knight, the owner of Royal Despatch, was before the A.J.C. Committee in support of his appeal, in which he was successful, he stated that Mr. Higgins, .the chairman of the stipendiary .stewards, had not taken into account the.erratic nature of Royal Despatch. "Cardigan," of the Sydney "Referee," then goes on to say : Another point that Mr., Knight commented- on was' the fact of Mr. Higgins saying .that Royal Despatch was seventh at the turn, while Mr. Coombes said he was tenth. Mr..; Hayes, another stipendiary steward, reported that he did not see Royal Despatch at all entering the straight. Mr. Higgins eaid that Royal Despatch finished well, but Mr. Knight pointed out that, as he was placed -sixth, he could not have made up much ground. Mr. Coombes (stipendiary steward) said that M'Carten had hold of Royal Despatch's head at the turn, and that M'Carten made no attempt to ride him. . ' . _ Mr. Knight also drew attention to the extract from the letter from Jones dated 7th August, in which Jones said : M Carten does not like Royal Despatch. He went well on Tuesday, but very badly on Thursday. I think the best thing to do is to sell him if possible. _ Please let me know your value. This letter carried no weight whatever, as it was-quite evident that the stewards were of the opinion that tnie letter was written for a purpose. NO MOTIVE. Royal Despatch's owner stressed the point that both Jones and M'Carten had absolutely no motive, and had everything to lose by wrong doing. Both had unblemished reputations, with prospects that were never better. Ho also suggested that if Jones and M'Carten had beeti guilty of malpractice, it would be a good plan to submit them to an examination for lunacy. Both are abovo the. average in intelligence and respectability He submitted that mistakes could be made, and if there was a <loubt at all, surely the past careers of Jones and M Carten entitled them to the benefit. MAY BE DEVELOPMENTS. It would appear that the Royal Despatch case is finally closed, but it will be surprising if such is the case, as looking through the New Zealand Rules of Kacing, it seems within the bounds of possibility that Jones and M'Carton may be able to appeal to the New Zealand Racing Conference. There i« certainly reciprocity between the New Zealand Racing Conference and the Australian Jockey Club in regard to disqualifications, but as far as I know, there is nothing definite laid down, and although in the past it. has been accepted by both bodies, it is not so certain that the racing conference will endorse the disqualifications without first of all carefully going through the evidence. Whether the A.J.C. will allow the conference that privilege is another matter, and if they do not, then there may be many interesting developments. JONES'S EVIDENCE. Mr. Knight, after seeing the evidence on which Jones and M'Carteu were disqualified, is more than ever certain of their innocence. Jones and M' Carten are satisfied to allow the public to judge and have given me a copy of their statements, which were placed before tho A.J.C. Committee. Jones's statement, which was addressed to the chairman of the A.J.C, reads as follows :— Owing to deafness, I beg leave to present my evidence in the Royal Despatch case before you in writing. I started- Royal Despatch at Moorfield on 19th July in the Maiden Handicap, and thinking he had a good chnnco I put £100 on him through Mr. T. J. Marks, £50 of which was For myself, including £5 I put on for the rider out of my own pocket.. I mentioned in course of conversation with Mr. Cliieriolm before the race at Mooreficld, that although I was backing the horse I could not really advise, him to back him, as he was a bit dirty and might run off. In E. Lowe's hands, a jockey who had never, ridden for me before, although a New Zealander, the horse ran a wretched, race, the worse feature of which was his running wide at the home turn. After the inquiry, at which both Lowe and myself were exonerated, Mr. Higgins Slid : "Jones, I don't want you to ira away with the idea that we want y.i to back your horses if you don't think they can win." On Saturday last at Canterbury Royal Despatch started in the first division of the Maiden Handicap, and was ridden by M. M'Carten, who had come over from New Zealand immediately after the conclusion of the New Zealand racing season. On the Friday I drew £150' at the Union Bank of Australia and to Mr. Marks at his office' and asked him if he was going to Cant£r^ Ul' y> .as l wo«'d like him to put £100 on Maurihaupo. J said : "As for Koyal Despatch, you can please yourself about backing him. ,Ho hasn't done anything better on the track than ho did- before Moorofield, but I'm sure it wasnt his form there, nnd I'm EO iim to put £25 on myself, £10 of which is for me which should get my £50 back from Mporefield; but if ho gOCa no hotter this time I'll give him up." Tho &25 was made up as follows; £l 0 T put on for myself, £5 for tho rider out •md the rest for friends in New Zealand £2 each Mr. W. Bryan, who did al my rttohrt year, put the mon ™ on also, £15 between himself and Mr r red Amor. I am not a heavy better, and rarely y^'.s ?22£?_fe' £3.°- &a a hows, My,

"bank pass-book of last year, which accompanies this letter, will show the sura won in betting transactions over the stable's three wins at Hosehill. Eight different friends of mine were interested in my betting at this period, and seven of the same people backed Royal Despatch on the Saturday -at Canterbury. Eoyal Despatch, has always been'a very hard horse to manage, and I' have never heen able to work him with ' a light boy on him. On the Tuesday before the race at Canterbury, while working on the A grass, he hit the rails on the course proper with his chest; he is a very hard puller, with.a bad mouth,' and he always runs out. I use a standing martingale on the horse in all hie work. On the following Thursday while running five furlongs with Killocra he ran out at the straight entrance, and finished outside the flags. Your * track officials] Mr. Johnston anH Mr. Page, car. verify, what I have said about the horse's behaviour while working. The only orders that I gave M'Carten was not to be on the outside of the field when he reached the turn, as I thought the horse might go off the course like he did at Moorefield. I will leave M. M'Carten to explain his running. Immediately after the race M'Carten and I were called in by Mr. Higgins, who questioned me about my betting which I explained by stating who did it, and I wanted to. get the tickets straight away, and even after bringing Mr. Bryan in soon after the stewards refused to accept the ticket*. At the inquiry on Monday last the first question put to me was about the betting, and Mr. Bryan, who was present, produced the tickets to the satisfaction of the stewards. The only other question put to me was what orders I il?,osiven M'°arten. After questioning M Casten .we were sent outside pending decision, and on being called backM Garten was disqualified for twelve months for improper practice. Then Mr. Higgins turned to me and said, "Jones are you still satisfied with M'Carten's riding?" I B aid, "Yes," to which Mr. Higgins replied, "Well,- we'll give you a similar period." I have known M'Carten ever since he first; started to ride, and have implicit confidence in him, and have absolutely no reason to doubt his riding of the- horse.

During the inquiry I mentioned that I had been twenty-four years before the public without ever having been questioned, and that M'Carton had been his ten years without a .blemish, but Mr. Higgins said, ','We don't want to know what' you've done' or what you haven't done before," and showed us clearly that our character carried no weight whatever. The letters to Mr. Knight and to my intimate friends in Wellington and Christchurch, in which I stated what betting I was doing for them, were posted on the Thursday preceding last Saturday's races and inquiry, and they would reach Wellington on Tuesday, on 12th Angiist, and Oliristchurch to-day, 13th August. I have cabled to have the letters returned so that they can be produced at the appeal. I think, gentlemen, that my record as a jockey and trainer for the past twenty-four years should help my case, and the same remarks apply to M'Carten. I cannot imagine what motive your stewards imagined either M'Carten or myself could have had in connection with this ■ case. Mr. Knight not being here, and being left in f.ull chargo of his horses, coupled with the.fact that Royal Despatch's running had been questioned so.. recently, .Would even make me more particular than I have ever been about the horse 3 I am training.

I am absolutely innocent of tho chargo against me, and share the opinion of every New Zealand owner of any standing with regard to M'Carten's integrity as a, rider. I certainly think the sentence of twelve months imposed on me by your stewards is entirely inadequate should I have been guilty of the charge. I am sending iii with this statement: — (1) My bank passbook of last year. (2) Letter-cards written to Mr. Charles Bush showing the amounts I was putting on my horses for him. (3) Letter-cards to Mr. C. Grimmer showing the betting I have been doing for him. In that, dated 7th August, yon will see that I adviso him I am putting £5 on Murihaupo and £2 on Royal Despatch at Canterbury. (4) Letter dated.,7th August advising W. Larkin that I was putting £2 on Royal Despatch and referring to M'Carten's opinion of tlm horse. (5) Letter from S. Gibbons, part-own-er of Murihanpo, onclosing cables sent him and interpretation of same. ' {6) Code book used by me last year and again, this. Horses' names not with team last year written in by mo in pencil. (7) Letter from Mr. H. A. Knight. (8) Cables from prominent New Zealand racing men. (9) Copies of references from Hon. .T DT Ormond, Mr. J. B. Reid, and Mr G. G. Stead. (10) Scrap-book with originals of above. Jones attached to his statement cables he had received from prominent New Zealand racing men. He has shown me these cables, and they are from men1 of all shades of opinion, and the majority hold high positions in the public life of the Dominion. THE JOCKEY'S STATEMENT. M. M'Carten's statement is as follows:— ' I am a licensed jockey of the Now Zoalaiid Racing Conference, and reside •il Fordell, Wauganui, and am 22 years of ago. 1 was apprenticed to I<\ Tilley. and served three years' apprenticeship, and am still in his employ. I rodo firsl ;is an apprentice, and tlien obtained a jockey's license. I was licensed as a jockey in 1918, and have never been disqualified ; nor have I ever had any charge made against me for improper practices or dishonesty. My average earnings for the last three years would bo £1500 a year, and I get plenty of mounts. I headed the list of winning jockeys for the last two years, and my services are always sought after. I ride in New Zealand for Messrs. W. Duncan and T. Duncan. I also ride for Mr. Knight. Messrs. Duncan are stewards of the Wanganui Jockey Club. I also ride, in New Zealand for Jones. I came to Australia last year with Jones, and rode Ballymena, Murihaupo, Urgency, and Zaragoza. I won the Derby and three other races. All the&e horses were in Jones's stable. I was engaged to ride Ballymena with the Test of Jones's team at all meetings in Australia. I came across about 26th July last. The first ride I had on this trp was Alfonso at Rosehill, and next Royal Despatch at Canterbury. In the latter race I was disqualified. . . My grounds of appeal are: Firstly, I consider the stewards' decision is against the evidence and the weight of the evidence. In my evidence I say I did my best to win and rode according to instructions. Jones, the trainer, admits that I rodo according to instructions, and expressed himself as satisfied with my handling of the horse. I want to impress upon you that this horse only started twice here once when ,Lowe rode him, and then when I rode him. He is a five-ynar-old, and still a maiden. How could the stewards form an opinion as to the abilities of this horse when they had only seen it race once previously?" Is it fair to deprive, a, boy of-his means of livelihood and, also dajnu lija reoutatioa-on-suck

flimsy evidence? Now let me point out that I rode Royal Despatch at work, and found he was- a very heavy-headed horse with a bad mouth, and hung out badly. In order to verify my statement, and prove to your satisfaction that my statement is correct, I arranged for Munro to ride this horse, and you have heard his evidence. Munro is an entirely independent witness, and he conclusively proves "the- truthfulness of my evidence. I also mentioned that while going to the post to gallop he took off and ran into a fence, cutting his chest. This is corroborated by your officials. On tho Thursday, when galloping with Killocra, he hung out . badly, going on the outside, of the flags.. Mr. Johnston, your employee, verifies this. In view of these facts, I submit that yon can have no doubt that the horse hangs out badly, which fact was known to Jones, who gave me my instructions in the Maiden Race, in respect of which I was disqualified. Jones's instructions were to try and keep on the rails, as the horse might run off the course, as .he did at Moorefield. Did I carry out these instructions? I respectfully submit that the evidence conclusively proves I did. I drew No, 11 • marble at the post, jumped off v. ell, but could not go with the first division, so I eased over to the rails, ar-d was there a^l the way round. The horse was not good enough to win,, although I used my best endeavours to do so. The fact .that Jones put*£s on the horse for me shows what ray intentions were. I did not m any manner or form prevent tlie horse from winning, but strained every nerve to win. Secondly, I consider that the stewards founded their decision on opinion evidence only. Can that be considered reasonable? There is no evidence whatever to show inconsistent running by this horse, which is a maiden. PROBABILITIES. _ Thirdly, •in all cases of this description there is generally some motive. I submit there is absolutely no evidence whatever of any ulterior motive. Lei me put it to you from my point of view.. I am leading jockey in New Zealand, and held that position the year previously. I have never been questioned by the stewards before, and always had a high reputation in New Zealand, as is evidenced by the New Zealand Racing Conference. My prospects of riding winners at the coming meeting are exceedingly bright. Is it likely that with ' such bright prospects 1 would risk my reputation and prospects in a Maiden Handicap -worth about £100? In New Zealand a hoy musthave the best of characters before he obtains a license, and a disqualification by your body would ruin my "prospects entirely., I have a lucrative pro- i fession, and I would not be so foolish' as to jeopardise my position. I had i everything to gain by winning. . Fourthly, if you have any doubt in the matter I am entitled to the benefit of the doubt. I say there is no doubt i whatever of my innocence, but if you ] gentlemen have any doubt, I am entitled' to the benefit. Does it not amount to this? The stewards have convicted on opinion evidence only, such opinion being formed on seeing the horse run once. My evidence and that of my witnesses shows actual knowledge of the horse,' and is fact, not opinion. How, then, could anyone say there is no doubt m the matter? Fifthly, in conclusion, I would like to point out that' I am the sole support of my widowed mother, and I would never do anything to imperil her position-or bring-discredit upon her. I put more value on my good name than anything else, and, therefore, respectfully ask for a complete exoneration.