NGINGONGINGO CASE

Evening Post, Volume CXIV, Issue 11, 13 July 1932, Page 4

NGINGONGINGO CASE

A TROTTING PROBLEM

REVIEW •: BY PRESIDENT

The Ngingongingo case ■was men tioned by the president of the New Zealand Trotting. Conference (Mr. H. P. Nicoll) at-the annual meeting of the conference' yesterday- • The disqualification of the horse Ngingogingb by the Auckland Trotting Club was-followed by a train of unusual incidents, without precedent in the racing or trotting. •World .(said . Mr.' Nicoll). The driver of the horse,"who was in charge, was ..also disqualified, and he appealed on behalf 'of the owners to the association, which, body... allowed the' appeal. The Auckland Trotting-Club' appealed against the association's finding to the conference.. The Appeal Judges, after an exhaustive inquiry, found that the club's decision was correct, and that the running of the horse was inconsistent and unsatisfactory, and therefore allowed the club's appeal. The association members thereupon, with one exception, gave notice to resign, stating that, in their opinion, rule 336 unduly limited their power to reverse decisions of clubs, where, in the opinion of the association, it might be necessary so to do. The matter appeared to be of so_ much importance to clubs, the association, and the conference, that your executive decided to,call a special meeting of the conference to discuss the position. That meeting was held last January, when it was decided that clubs should nominate candidates for a newb'oard, to be 'balloted for in accordance with" rule. 39.' It was; however, discovere'd'afterwards that' there was no proV vision in,the rules for such.an eyentuality—the association being left with no quorum available, and therefore unable to appoint scrutineers and a returning officer' under rule 40—consequently the ma* chiqefy for a frssh election was not workable. "In these circumstances it appeared! that if the association members carried out their intention to resign there wouldbe no" means 'of filling the. vacancies without another; meeting of the'conference in order to,pass.a new rule, such as is upon the agenda paper ;to-day. : I-had no doubt in my mind that it would be detrimental to' trotting if the men. .comprising. the board, who had been associated .with the sport for so many years, were to sever their connection. collectively, and as some of them had already intimated to me that they 'might-.withdraw their resigaation if a satisfactory agreement to rule 336 could be agreed Tipon, I therefore attended a meeting of the association. : It was evident tome that the association members considered that .they, were in- a-difficult position,., and though > your. executiv. c did not,agree with them in their interpretation ;of rule 336, i yet, as the association member^were anxious and willing to meet the position, Fagreed to assist in an alteration to the rule, subject to the approval of the executive. This was subsequently obtained by a majority vote, and the members of the association then decided to carry on, and the incident was closed. You will remember that at the special meeting referred to, Mr. R. M. D. Morten, one of the registered owners of Ngingongingo, through his legal adviser, who acted as delegate for one of the clubs, applied to have the case reconsidered, with/a view to (the. conference removing the' djsijualificatipnV-: or .appointing fresh iudgesjto review the case, but "the conference decided'to'take no action. Proceedings, by Mr. Morten were later taken in the .Supreme1 HCburt against- your executive,[ixi have^set aside and declared void the disqualificiation" of ,-ithe horse; which had'':bfeehVr^!fin'posed,'\by" the Appeal Judges.^/ MrCrfJistice-Adams; in;a considered: ju'dgmehfi;? found' that "throughout the .inquiries' there: were obvious infieations of a desire on behalf of the arbitral! tribunals' to-give owners every fair andreasonable opportunity, and that, everything that' could have been urged on behalf of. the plaintiff was placed before the tribunals'." Considering the whole of the facts his Honour "was unable to find any .reasonable ground upon which proper objection could be based"; he said that substantial justice had been done," and dismissed the appeal with costs. Thus ended.one of the most important affairs that has ever occupied your attention. The prestige of the conference, and judicial impartiality of your Appeal Judges, was affirmed by the Supreme Court, and it is more than satisfactory'to know that our rules and our procedure will stand the stern; test of a Supreme Court action. A" letter from Miss E. Hinds asking that the disqualification of Ngingongingo should be' removed was "received." Similarvaction was taken in respect of an application by -Andrew Bryce "for' the removal'of Ins disqualification.