THE KEYNOTE CASE.

NZ Truth, Issue 604, 13 January 1917, Page 9

THE KEYNOTE CASE.

Conference Conclusions Criticised. The doping of Keynote and the judgment of the Racing Conference is still attracting much attention from the press of Australasia, and mostly the judgment of the writers is against the Conference. It is to be regretted that the president of the Conference did not go to a little more trouble m his selection of judges, and Vhile "Spearmint" says nothing against the gentlemen who officiated, he still joln3 m the chorus of those who think that a muchbetter selection could have been made for such a knotty, case. For Instance, why were not some of the leading K.'sC. asked to act It seems a great pity that gentlemen like the Hon. H. D. Bell and Mr. C P. Skerrett -were passed by, for a judgment from, these gentlemen or their like, no matter which way it went, would have been respected. The writer thinks that the finding was absurd. The facts of the case, which are admitted, are as follows: Keynote had had a race earlier In the \ day and was to start again. It was a 1 wet, miserable day, and Trask, the trainer of tho animal, gave it a mouthful of whisky before Its second start, for the reason, as sworn m his evidence, that it was cold and shivering. Stipendiary A. W. Gordon, who was officiating at tho meeting, took the case to the stewards, who suspended Trask for two months. The latter appealed > and the District Committee, upheld tho appeal/ The District Committee at Wellington comprises some of the most competent men on the turf, and men • who ore regularly called upon to act as appeal judges. Now, these same men upheld Trask's appeal, yet on an objection by the Stipendiary, the Racing Conference punished Tpsk and : gave judgment for tho stipendiary. "Spearmint" will „not. further discuss tho qualifications of tho Judges, btit will go lnto tno Judgment. The rule alleged to be infringed says: "No person shall administer, for tho purpose of affecting Uio speed of a horse, drugs or stimulants Internally, or by hypodermic or other methods." In the first place, tho evidence that tho whisky was given for tho purpose of affectf Ing the speed of the horse is very weak. It is tho "stipe's" word against the t trainer's, and one should have carried equal weight with tho other, and In tho • absenco of corroborative ovldenco supr porting tho "stipe," the matter should . havo been thrown out. Again can any reasonable person say definitely that t whisky m a drug that affocts the speed of a horse. When "effect" 18 said In thlj case It surely means quickens. . Has anyono over noticed whisky ciuickoning'a man's speed or does It 0 not hove the opposite effect. Webster gives the moaning of stimulant: "To oxclto as If with a goad, to rouso or animate io action or more vigorous c exertion by som« pungent motive or q by persuasion." Now, if n drop ot 1 whisky Ik a stimulant, "SpenrmJ.nl" ' wanj.s to point out that spurs aro equally ko. Docs not Uio uao of spurs - coma under tho heading of "administering Htimulnnt by other means"? , What ha« tho President to say to this? Will he, n« head of tho turf Jn tho Dominion, wso that In futoro spurs aro not used on his horses?