Sidelights on- Racing.

Manawatu Standard, Volume XL, Issue 7842, 20 May 1904, Page 5

Sidelights on- Racing.

(Continued, from page 2.)

The case Homes v\. Cameron \> as resumed at the Supreme Court this morning-. 4T? 11' Cohen, in opening the cjso for the defence, said the evidence of Homes and his conduct would not bear the weight of the ovidance in rebuttal .which he intended to produce- on behalf of the defendant Referring to the alleged admissions of the partnership, • counsel «ud that iiacl they been made to some more disinterested and independent persons than Goodall and Mc-Vrtncy and unotr other circumstances disclosed, then he, counsel, would htvo considered he had a stronger ca*e to meet. The evidence of Jfo-rios as to the existence of a partnership between he and' defendant w»^ o f a verbal and . utterly casual nature and m the stand he had --Vscn un he had placed both himself a,.;} his alleged co-partner on .lanjcr.-ras ground. Counsel pointed .-it that Homes had nominated the horse for all his engagements, and if what he said was true as to the-partnership Cameron could not get the -4aHP3 won by. the • horse. That, counsel pointed out, would be to *!ie disadvantage of the partnership, )<ut if the partnership had been made the stakes would be saved and the r.unor saved the probability of being wained off the course. Homes know those .steps would be taken. These sleps should have been taken in miy case, but particularly so after the hovsr; was discovered so good. Stjps cf the nature indicated would 1-aveLeen fair to Homes himself and to Cameron, but Homes did nor.<~ of these_ .things. Oouns-il pcoce-< td to criticiso the evidence Tiddneed ior tho plaintiff, and called ihe following $vi<clenc<>. ". The defendant, in his tvi<l. nee. said Homes had1,- previous to Ranoimoe, trained horses named Ronald and Hohio, but had never b;eti in partnership with him. Witness was l.ot a partner with C. Mcßoncll in HoMo, and he had nothing to do with them. The allegation of Homes that a partnership existed between witness and McDonell was untrue. Witness got Rangimoe from Mr Baldwin, anci could have purchased him for £50 at any time. Witness took him on the terms offered, but he xold MiBaldwin subsequently that the hoi so was such a'good one that if he, witness, took him to Auckland as a maiden he could get, perhaps, £300 for him. ]f he did he said he would give Mr Baldwin half of it. The latter said he would be quite satisfied to get £100. Witness subsequently told Homes how good the horse was, and saidlhe would like to get his opinion on the matter. To that end he sent the horse to Homes on the usual terms to train. If the horse was worth training he was io be kept, in work, and. witness told' Homes at the same time that Mr Baldwin had a full brother to Ran?imoe which he would also get if Eangmioe turned. out all right. At the 1< eliding- races Homes said Ran<nmoe was a good horse, and, he added, «g O and get his brother." It was left to Homes to nominate the horse the same as with Hokio He was the trainer .and knew best what to do. Witness described the various races the horse contested till January 23rd. When the horse ran January 23rd, when the horse ran Homes said the horse had a .neat chance and wished witness to put £o on for him. The horse didn't wm, and witness made s an entry in his diary to the following effect :- Raced. to-day ;• don't like the look of things; .will go to Bulls settle up with Homes, and take the horse home " Went to Bulls the next day but did not find Homes. However he saw him the next day and asked lor his account. • Homes gave him an account for Hokio and witness then asked him for Rangimoe's account. Homes had no entry in the book but made it up by agreement Witness asked for the horse and was told he had gone to Pahiatua. Witness enquired what was the good of sending him there when ho couldn't wm a race at Foxton. Homes said there had been bad luck at Foxton Up to that ' day, January 25th,' Homes had never mentioned the partnership. Witness went to the ■ .Pahiatua races on the 27th and 2Sth January, and arranged with Jenkins to rule the horse. Told Homes so. He said : " You can't do that • 1 have got McAleer to ride him."' Witness said it didn't matter, ULcAleer would, have to stand down. Homes enquired the reason, and witness said, "To find, out if my horse is a good one." Homes said, '•' I have told you the horse is a good one." Witness replied, "It scums so, after Foxton." Witness explained the matter-to McAleer, and Jenkins rode the horse, Homes making no further protest. Homes said the mile race was too fer for Rangimoe, and that he hadn't m a chance. The horse was nod backed the- first day. He didn't win but ran a good race, better than at Foxton. At this time C. McDonoll- was- desirous of buying the horse, and made an offer that was not accepted. Jenkins rode the horse the second day. Witness told Homes to give the instructions to Jenkins, though the latter already had his instructions from witness.

To his Honor : Jenkins was put up because. I was .suspicious of the horse's running at Foxton.

Continuing his evidence, witness ■ described the race won by his horse. With halt the journey gone, Rangimoe was in front. Witness said " This is a renewal of farm," and Homes said " We're gone a million." Witness was very angry and replied, "If my iiorse wins I will never own a hair in a race horse again." He' knew then- his horse had • not got justice at Foxton. Witness went away by himself, and later met Homes and Me'DonclL .Witness, saidl. to the latter " You' can have the horse at the offer you made last 'night."' McDanell replied "He ismine." Counsel again produced the dairy and showed the following entry :— '"' Rangimoc got home in the Welter; sold) him to McDonell for £120. Hope will never see Homes again." # Continuing, witness described the scene at Greatford when the horses were blocked in their boxes. Previous to that McDonell had paid witness for the horse: It was not till the horse was blocked at Greatford that any mention of a partnership was heard. Witness refused to comply with a request of Homes to go to Bulls and settle the matter, and asked JlcDonell to go for ihe

police. Constable Gleesoii "j came and, on his advice, witness let :uthe horse go to Bulls: At Bulls witness saw .: Homes, and he told witness that he had been to Mr .Baldwin for'the'two of them. Witness xtold him he had no right "to do so and said he would see Mr Baldwin. He, also, told him the horse was sold. Subsequently witness took the horse from Homes and on the same day offered him £25, amount due, which Homes refused. On the day he took the horse witness received a letter from Homes, per Mr Goodall, warning him not to take the horse away from Bulls,, and subsequently he got a letter from Hankins and Louglman suggesting partnership accounts should be settled and pointing out the necessity "of being very careful over the partnership affair, otherwise!/ there migfct be disqualification by the Conference. He, also, received notice of the dissolution of the partnership. Witness had to give McDonell back his money because he could not give him delivery of the horse owing to the service of an injunction on February 13th preventing any dealings with the horse. Witness received a letter from McDonell's solicitor on the matter. Baldwin had since declined to accept payment for the horse, but expected witness to keep'to his agreement. ... .

Cross-examined, witness said that McDoncll tjiad never paid any part of Hokio's account. An amount of £25 figuring as being received by Homes from McDonell was money borrowed. Witness could not explain the reason even if witness at the time did owe him £53 for fees. Homes had, also, asked witness for a loan of £10. Witness replied " You don't want a loan of £10; I will soon owe it to you" and the money was handed over. "Witness admitted he told Mr J. R. McDonald that he thought Rangimoe good on'ough to' win a Grand National ; when he had furnished. Considered that he had a fairly good horse after he won the race at Pahiatua. He certainly expected the sale to McDonell to be regarefcd as a genuine one. Witness admitted that he had tried to get tne horse from Homes' boys and he admitted, also, that ho would have taken the horse from the boys by force. He denied he had tried to sneak the -horse away when. Homes was not there. He did not back the horse heavily at Rangitikei, but at Foxton he put £25 on the horse, including £5 f ol - Homes. Witness did not consider his arr.angement with Mr Baldwin was necessary. S. Cameron, brother of th"c defendant, said that Homes hail told him to tell his brother that .Rangfmoe, was the best horse he had had in the stable since Ngaturei. C. McDonell, said that he Ka"d offered, previous to the Pahiatua races, £50 for a half share in Rangimoe. It was refused, and at Pahiatua witness offered defendant, before^ he raced on the second day, *"-ljii) for the Horse." Saw Homes, after the race, and while conversing with him, Cameron came up. and said to witness that he could have the horse at 'the price offered. Homes heard the conversation but '-did not speak. Witness said lie paid for Rangimoe the day after the. Pahiatua races at Feilding, but had not obtained possession of the horse. Witness had nothing to do with. Hokio. Witness had lent Homes £25.

Cross-examined, witness said lie was not aware that Rangirnoe was worth any more than £120. He knew that ■he was still in trainingin. J. j\fahcr's stable at Wanganui at Cameron's expense. Ke-oxamirred by' Mr • Cohen : Homes had never said to witness that he was a partner in the horse. Charles Jenkins, horseman, said he rode Rangimoe each' day at Pahiatua. Counsel was proceeding. .to ask' 'questions, as to .the instructions, given by Homes to witness as to his riding, but Mr Loughnan took exception on the ground that fraud had not been. set up, and that the information desired was not relevant to the proceedings. His Honor ruled that the question could not be permitted, as the question before the Court was not oiw of fraud but of partnership. Counsel, ±o witness: "If instructions were given you by the owner and trainer ,as well, which would you follow ?—The owner. Whose instructions did you follow at Pahiatua ?—The owner's. Was there any difference between the instructions ?—Yes, they were different. His Honor : That is all you cr.n ask. John Baldwin deposed to- Homes going to his place and telling him he was a partner with Cameron in the horse. Witness told him he was not aware of the fact. They looked over the gelding's -brother, and before, going away Homes gave him, against his will, a cheque for Rangimoe. ' Witness said he would rather, wait till Cameron settled up., rlhc cheque had not been cashed. The evidence of the last witness closed the case for the defence.

After luncheon, counsel agreeing not Ito "deliver addresses, his Honor, after describing.the' evidence on each side as not clear and decisive, said lie would dissolve the injunction previously granted Homes, refuse a decree, and allow defendant £20 w>sts and witnesses' . expanses • and disbursements.