DISQUALIFICATION OF THE FAIR AGNES COLT IN THE MIDSUMMER HANDICAP.

Lyttelton Times, Volume LIX, Issue 6872, 9 March 1883, Page 5

DISQUALIFICATION OF THE FAIR AGNES COLT IN THE MIDSUMMER HANDICAP.

TO TUB BWTOB. Bib, —lt wu generally understood that ve, in common with alarge portion of the public, were dissatisfied with the decision of the Stewards allowing the disqualification of the Fair Agnes oolt, and that we were considering which was the host course to adopt to secure a re-consideration of the case. As the Stewards of the 0. J.O. gave us no opportunity of either defending ourselves or producing evidence on the occasion of their hearing the protest, and disqualifying the Fair Agnes oolt, the only course that seemed open to us was to gain a bearing through tbo Law Courts, Finning there was an appeal to the Club wo abandoned the law, and adopted the former coarse. This failing, as the Club refused us a hearing, upon the ground that wa had not given notice to the Treasurer not to pay over the stakst, and we having given up the idea of law (although advised that ve have a good case), being unwilling that the Club, who had paid away the stakes in the absence of notice from us, should suffer pecuniary low, trust that you wiU allow ns space in your columns to explain that which hitherto we have had no opportunity of doing. We did not particularly wish, that if successful ia our suit the stakes should bj awarded us, but we did wish to have it clearly laid down that stewards are bound by law to give an owner official notice of an objection, axd teat they are bound to hear any evidence

enquiry at his request, should he be able to prove to them that he can produce any fresh evidence. We (ball not remark on the decision of the stewards farther than to say that we think, if we had bad the opportunity, we could have submitted evidence and arguments that would, we are confident, have induced the steward* to come to » contrary derision upon this protest. The C J.O. Committee have expressed great dissatisfaction at the idea of two members of the Club going to law, but the appeal to the Club here seems little more than a farce. When an appeal Is made to the English Jockey Club, is all probability an entirely different set of men decide the case; bare it would be the reverse. Wo should have been willing to abide by the decision of the steward e in any cose where, as owners, our side had been heard by them, but to interfere with a man's private property without giving him an opportunity of deferce it neither law nor justice. Admiral Bern, in commenting on the derision of the steward* being final, says:—•« This exposes a wonderful ignorance of the British Constitution and of the law of the land. It it the boast of every man in this country that he can appeal to a Court of Law if he fauciee himself aggrieved j ” and though disapproving of Law Courts as racing tribunals, a* a rule, except in certain coses, be continues: “The Jockey Club never dream of attempting to deprive any man of hie lawful right to refer his grievance to a legal tribunal.” We bow to the supremacy of the law.—Ws are, W. BOBIHSON. HENEY P. LANCE.