LOWER HEATHCOTE BRIARLEAF CASE.

Otago Witness, Issue 1898, 6 April 1888, Page 25

LOWER HEATHCOTE BRIARLEAF CASE.

(editor witness). SIH, — As sporting writers in some instances disagree with the action of the stewards in this case, and as I differ with " Mazeppa," I will give you reasons for same. ) "Mazeppa "quotes Rule 108: "If a jockey! do not weigh in . ... . his horse shall be disqualified unless he can satisfy the stewards .that he was justified by extraordinary circumstances." \ In 'the Referee, " Sir Launcelot " has quoted the rule in exactly the same manner, leaving out all the words between " weigh in " until he comes to the words "his horse shall be disqualified." The words left out are, "or he short of weight, or be, guilty of any fraudulent practice with respect to weight or weighing, or' dismount before reaching the scales, or touch (except accidentally) any person or thing other than his own equipments before weighing in." > I hold that the words left out are the gist of the question, and that they are the extraordinary circumstances to which Kule 108 alludes. The catch-words of Rule 107 are : " Jockeys to weigh in immediately after the race j" and of Rule 108 : "Jockeys failing to- weigh in &o. to be disqualified." In Admiral Rous' work on horseracing the following cases are quoted : Case 53— Winning jockey not weighed in, and jiorse consequently distanced. Huntingdon came in first in the third heat, but fell after passing the winning-post, and the rider being much hurt was carried away without being weighed. • [This I take to be identical with the Briarleaf case]. Case 22— Jockeys dropping stirrup leather after passing winning-post. A jockey of a whining horse after passing' the loses his stirrup leather and iron, which fall to the ground. It was handed to him by a person on the course before going to the scales to weigh. Query: Does the act of receiving the stirrup leather and iron and carrying same v to the scales disqualify the home rode by that jockey] although it was proved that , he' was the proper weight without it. The stewards of the Jockey Club are of opinion that the horse is not disqualified 1 under the circumstances above stated. Now, Sir, such cases as decided by the English Jockey. Club in case 22 are, I think, the extraordinary circumstances alluded to in Rule 108. ' i > Suppose a case where a jockey was killed. How can he satisfy the stewards ; and although they may be satisfied from other evidence, I am of opinion that he cannot legally be declared " weight " by the proper officer, the clerk of the scales, without he weighs in. Again, suppose this had happened in a big betting race. Do you think bets would be paid without at least going through the formality 1 of referring it to the committee of the metropolitan club for interpretation of the rule °as provided for in Rule 128 ? This indeed opens np a large question as to whether your humble 1 servant or Colonial stewards, or committees are a fit tribnnal to "interpret" English racing laws.— l am &c. Sydney James. P.S. — I trust you will ndt be bo ungenerous as to aay I am " hurling " Admiral Rous at you.'