THE FAIR AGNES COLT DISQUALIFICATION.

Lyttelton Times, Volume LIX, Issue 6874, 12 March 1883, Page 6

THE FAIR AGNES COLT DISQUALIFICATION.

to xa» aoxxoß, Bib, There appear* a letter la yom columns, on the abor* subject, purporting U be signed by Menieun BoOimon aud Lanoe but which I certainly at fflr*t looked upon tu a cruel hoax upon those gentlemen. How ever, they hare since acknowledged thci: authorship, and, therefore, 1 must deal wilt it ae tbeire. It must not be forgotten that both M Bgbineon and Mr labco are member* of th Canterbury Jockey Club. Mr Lance i Chairman -of it# Committee and a etewani und Mr fiobinson is also a member of th Committee. Mr L»noe took an aotire pat ia preparing the rate* of th* Club, and unde nijr eiroumstanoe it must bo taken that tw gueh experienced mm in racing matters mm be perfeetly conversant with those rule*, tu 4m which their home are entered for th vmriooe nets. One of three rale* a to thi figmt "The decision of the Stewards fl 4t the dub, in ease of appeal, ehall he fine &nd tha» not be questioned in any Com eicepiby lease of the Stewards, by whom i was made.*' The other is as follow*:"Srery objection shall bo deteminod by th Stewards, and their deiermlmslitm ehaU J eabjeci to ivpMl to %h» dob, through to Stewards of the meeting, and wiCi their cons« and that of the (Sub and not other wire." If tnaa enter* a hores lor a race which is to I run under the Canterbury Jockey Club rule and wai our raoaa are so advertised, surely h

must be taken la be ewer* of what those rules are, and moire especially It be happens, a* in the present case, to be not only a member of the Club, bul alto Ctuirman of Its Committee. But what is the «h hero? Messrs Robinson end Lance disregard one of the moel important rule* of the Club, end under cirenmslaocv# which ere grossly intuits tt|( la the whole Club. They no* " that the Stewards of the Cantorbury Jockey Club gee# ut no opportunity of either defending ourselves or producing evidence on the occasion of their bearing the protest.” A» a metier of feet, both those gentlemen were prevent el the races. The notiw* of the protost wee potted e» usual, end hath gentlemen were present, end might here Ce iute the room if they h»ti chosen. Mr lee, I believe, spoks to one of the Steward* and told him of the protest having been entered, and asked him logo into the Steward*' room. The owner# were represented by their jockey, Iterriu., and hie evidence was token at length, and he was al»o asked if he had any further evidence to bring on behalf of the owner#, when he replied in the negative $ and 1 am given to understand, and, indeed, Messrs Mobinran and Lnnce'e personal friend* who aw amongst the Steward* admit, that it was principally on their Jockey*» evidence that they decided the esse, and they had no hesitotton, much to their regret, in disqualifying the calk Maesro Robinson and Lanw »ay in their Idler that they, a* well a* a large number of the public, were dissatisfied with the cisquridlralioc, and that St was known they were, coniidericg what course to adopt to «*cure a consideration of the cm*, if this was *o why did they not apply for an appeal under the rule P Are we (wild to believe that gentlemen of Mew* Robinson and Lane®'* experience in racing were not cognisant of the rule ? Are we allied to believe that they were utterly ignorant of the rale# under which their horse# were entered, and that they have been completely done by the wily Steward# (tome of their own peri tonal friend* amongst them), and Committee of the Jockey Club ?!! They also say that the Committee expressed "great diwatwfaction" at the idea of two member* of the Club going to law, and then follow* an utter •an trqvihtr ic these word*, " but the appeal to the Club here teem* little more than a farce." In the first place it is not true that the Club expressed great dissatisfaction at the fact Cut two members of its body threatened legal proceeding* against the Club. What tbs Committee said was, that the member* " regretted exceedingly that gentlemen of so many yea#*’ experience with racing, and who have S 3 long been connected with theO.J.O., both of whom arc also members of the Club and of the Committee, should have considered it neee&sury to threaten the dub with I legal proceeding*, under the circumstance*." I fee! confident that every member of the Club will agree with the Committee in the expression ot that regret The passage 1 have quoted above a* to the appeals to the Club being a farce is certainly one of the moat deliberate intuits that any man can offer to another. Hero we have the Chairman of the Committee of this very Club, signing * letter in which he deliberately accuse* the whole Club of being unfit to discharge its duties under the rules. If an outsider had stated this it would have been had enough, surely, bat that the Chairman and a member of the Committee should gratuitously insult the whole body of members in this manner, is what I trust the dub will not tolerate. What ground has Mr Lance, or Mr Bobiu•on either, for saying that an appeal to the Club would be a farce ? Have they ever made an appeal to the Club under its rules against any eeeisioa from which they have had experience of their appeal being treated as s farce ? X never beard of each an appeal being heard by the Club. Surely these gentlemen must have known that they should have applied at ones to the Stewards for their consent to have no appeal heard by the Club. ’The Committee answered their application by a simple fact, viz.. That th*y had no power to deal with the matter. But even euppoiing the Committee to bare been wrong, surely that did not justify these gentlemen in growly intuiting the Club by saying that an appeal to its members is " little more than a farce." But not content with thu* gratuitously intuiting the Club they make the matter infinitely worse by accuisngtha Steward* of deciding without taking evidence on their side. In addition to the fieri accai&tion that the Steward* gave them no opportunity of either " defending ourselres or producing evidence," they say, further on, they would be willing to abide by the decision of the Steward* in any ease where "as owner*, our side had been beard by them, but to interfere with a man’s private property without giving him an opportunity of defence is neither law nar Jcstiee.” How, considering that sever-1 of the Stewards at the late meeting are intimate personal friends of the two person* who signed there remarks, it really seems almost incredible that these words could hare been written with any thought os to their import. I have already pointed out that Messrs Robinson and Lance's jockey (f'erritl) was examined, and that it was on bis evidence principally that the colt was disqualified j but, in addition to this, surely it does not become these two old-experienced racing men to insult their own friends and other Stewards by each a statement as this. Did Mr Lance or Mr Robinson offer any farther evidence to the Stewards ? They were both on the ground, and there was nothing to prevent their going into the Stewards’ room and offering any evidence they bad. They both were aware of the ca»e being beard, and if they had wished to be present there was nothing to prevent them. But their own Jockey said he had no further evidence to nring, and, without any hesitation, the Stewards decided unanimously that the colt must be disqualified. I am perfectly convinced of one thing, end it is this : That not only will Messrs Robinson and Lance’s personal friends regret the count they have token in deliberately ignoring one of the principal rules under wnieh the? entered their horses, but every member of the Club, and every man who takes an interest in racing, will fully reciprocate the feeling of the Committee, that they exceediogiy regretted the threatened proceeding* wader the circumstances. With regard to the references to what Admiral Rous said, It is only necessary to «ay that they do not apply at all to the present case. Persons who . enter horses to be run under the O.J. Club rules are bound by those rulee, in the i absence of fraud, as a matter of course, and , Messrs Eobiosou and Lance should be the - last men to turn round and decline to abide , by the very rale* which one of them at any rate framed, and they cannot possibly plead t ignorance of them. The last paragraph quoted os Admiral Rous* is a mere truism. Of course no Jockey t/lub or any other body can deprive any auo of his " lawful right to refer his grievances to a legal tribunal;” and certainly the Committee of the O,J. Club have not r attempted to deprive these gentlemen of their } lawful right, > If they were dissatisfied with the decision, * os they now say they were, and had applied * to the die wards under the rule* for an appeal r to the Club, no doubt tbs Stewards and the 1 Club would have granted it. But Meters Robinson and Lance not baring availed themr selves of this appraL now deliberately assert 6 that such an appeal would be a farce. They * also blame the Committee for not doing that ’» which they have no power under our roles to * do, as that is clearly » matter for the Stewards * and for the Committee. The final paragraph v of their letter it earely very significant. They 0 say—" We bow to the supremacy of the law," 11 There is some little consolation, at any rate, in ** these words, as they indicate that Messrs i° Robinson and Lance, although quite prepared u to defy the rates of the Chub, are not quite ' r prepared to defy the supremacy of the law, *> fa the matter bat been brought before thi •t public by Messrs Robinson and Lance, it is It ooly right that the whole correspondence ~ should 09 published, and I will forward you s e copy for that purpose.—l am, &c-, • H. WYNN WILLIAMS. ie «—■—