THE NGINGONGINGO CASE

Otago Daily Times, Issue 21538, 9 January 1932, Page 15

THE NGINGONGINGO CASE

STATEMENT BY THE TROTTING ASSOCIATION Mr J. H. Williams, president of the New Zealand Trotting Association, has addressed a letter in the following terms to the president of each trotting club in the Dominion: — “ As the members of the New Zealand Trotting Association have been elected by, and are"the administrative representatives of, the trotting clubs of New Zealand, they consider that it is necessary to submit the facts which led to their recent decision to resign, “ I am enclosing a copy of the evidence upon which the Judicial Committee of the Auckland Trotting Club disqualified the horse Ngingougingo, and also the driver, Andrew Bryce, for a period of 12 months for inconsistent and unsatisfactory running. It will be seen from this evidence that not only was there no evidence which would justify a conviction for inconsistency, but the evidence of the stipendiary steward who stated ‘ 1 had a look at the horse in the birdcage and he appeared to me a beaten horse; in fact, lie appeared distressed ’ negatives the suggestion that he was a non-trier. “ Bryce lodged an appeal, and although he submitted some fresh evidence in support of it, the association, solely on the evidence submitted at the Auckland inquiry, allowed his appeal, being in no way influenced by the additional evidence referred to. Furthermore, it held that before punishment could be inflicted for inconsistency it is obviously necessary that inconsistency should be proved and that, there being no evidence before the association of inconsistency and the evidence of the stipendiary steward indicating that the horse was a trier, the association could not uphold the club’s decision. This, I think, yon will admit was the only and proper conclusion that could be come to, especially when it is remembered that the punishment inflicted meant taking away a trainer and driver’s livelihood for 12 months, the taking away from an innocent owner of a substantial stake, and disqualifying his horse for 12 months. “ The dub then appealed to the conference, which, after calling additional evidence and hearing the appeal, reversed the association’s finding and ordered the disqualifications imposed by the club to stand, the association to pay the costs of the appeal. The nature of that additional evidence the members of the association are still entirely in ignorance of, but our

representative at the appeal advised us that it did not materially assist the case for the stipendiary steward. “ The rules of trotting provide that all decisions pf clubs must come before the association for endorsement or otherwise. Before endorsing any penalty imposed, the association considers it incumbent on it to be satisfied that the right of imposition of such penalty must be supported by the evidence submitted at the club’s inquiry. This is a commonsense view to take, yet under the decision of the appeal judges in the recent case, the association is bound by the rules to endorse disqualifications for inconsistent anfi unsatisfactory running in the absence of evidence which warrants such endorsement.

“It is a well-known fact that in the past we hqye had instances where judicial committees—in the majority of eases with the best of good intentions —have imposed unjust penalties, which have been removed by the association, and the said judicial committees have realised that the finding of the association has been just and in the best interests of the sport. The recent decision of the appeal judges deprives the association of the power to rectify any similar wrong in the future. In the position in which the association now finds itself, it feels that it cannot function as hitherto. That is the fundamental and only reason why the members considered that the unusual circumstances demanded unusual action, and that therefore they could not remain in office. “ They have always been able to accept with the best of good grace a reversal of their decisions where in cases there has been any doubt, but in the case under review they were unanimous that there was no possible doubt, as the decision of the appeal judges was totally unsupported by evidence of either fact or motive. “ The association is naturally much concerned because of the effect the judgment will have in the future, both on the work of administration and trotting generally, and perhaps of the influence it may have on owners to make them relinquish their connection with a sport that has taken so many years to bring to its present standard and popularity. “ A special meeting of the conference is called for the 21st inst., to consider the resignation of the members of the association and what steps should be taken in connection therewith, also an application from Mr Morten for the removal of the disqualification of his horse, or the appointment of fresh judges. The copy or the evidence supplied will enable clubs to confer with their delegates and discuss the position with them before attending the conference and considering any resolution which may be placed before them at the special meeting.