STOLEN RACEHORSES.

Northern Advocate, 16 August 1919, Page 3

STOLEN RACEHORSES.

GERMANY'S "THEFT AND BLACKMAIL."

At a meeting of the English Jockey Club, held in May, the Earl of Jersey proposed the followinf resolution, which was seconded by Sir Hedworth Meux, and carried:

"That it be an instruction to the registry office that until further notice no entries for i aces under Jockey Club rules be accepted for horses the property of any persons being German, Austrian, Hungarian, Bui garian or Turkish subjects or in which such persons have any interest whatsoever. Also that should any applications for admission to the studbook of horses the property of such persons, or bred in or imported from those countries, be received by Messrs Weatherby they be requested to give special consideration to the circumstances under which horses have been stolen from Belgian owners, and the doubt which must prevail as to the genuineness of any certificates received from Germany."

In moving the resolution, the Earl of Jersey wished to make it clear that he was in no way actuated by any blind hatred against beaten enemies. There was much to be said for the exclusion of persons of those nationalities from taking any part in racing in England, for many reasons; and he -thought it would be easy to defend it on the grounds of public policy, but he was quite content to ask the club to support the resolution entirely on grounds which came within the direct cognisance of the Jockey Club, a body which in order to.promote a high standard of turf morality, entered into reciprocal arrangements with the ruling turf authorities in other countries. It naturally followed that when those turf authorities had shown themselves to be lost to all sense of honour the Jockey Club could have no further dealings "with them, or, indeed, with those whom they governed. They had been informed by the Belgian Jockey Club that many thoroughbreds, both yacehorses, • and horses and mares from breeding studs, had been stolen by the German #rmy, or had been requisitioned by the German authorities. Those horses had been sent to Germany, and had been sold for racing or breeding purposes, but, of course, without the necessary papers to prove their identity, they were useless for either purpose. Those certificates, consequently, had been asked for, and had 'been, of course, refused by the Belgian Jockey Club. The Union Club of Berlin, which was the German Jockey Club, had insisted on the papers being delivered up, and searches had been made in the offices of the Belgian Jockey Club, with the avowed object of taking those papers by force. Those searchps being fruitless, the starter to thp Belgian Jockey Club, ati Englishman over 50 years of age, had been deported to Germany, in order to force the hands of the Belgian authorities. The Belgian -Jockey Club had asked that he should be allowed to return. The Union Club of Berlin had replied that a ' certain Prince would have- that done if he received a certificate for a valuable mare which had been stolen from a Belgian stud, and which the Prince himself had taken possession of for his own private use. That had 'been refused, and then came a letter saying thaf because of the refusal nothing could be done for him, and that the Belgian stewards were the o-nly people to blame. The members of the club would note that that was a far more serious matter than the horses b ( 'ing seized by the "German army in th« course of military operations. The Union Club, which was the Jockey Club of Germany, had deliberately identified themselves with the policy of theft and blackmail for private purposes, and fn doing so he thought the members would agree th p y had disgraced themselv('3 in the eyes of all honourable men. The Belgian Jockey Club has asked the Jockey Club of England to support them by ostracising those people, and he could not think that the club would hesitate to agree that that ought to be dow.