LORD DURHAM ON TURF REFORM. (The Sportsman.)

Otago Witness, Issue 1891, 1 May 1890, Page 25

LORD DURHAM ON TURF REFORM. (The Sportsman.)

A very powerful contribution to the discussion on "Turf Eeform" is made by the Earl of Durham through the medium of the March number of the New Eeview. The article should be read in its entirety by all who are interested in the " sport of kings." Lord Durham commences with the state? ment of a truism — namely, that it is the fate of all who are rash enough to suggest reforms in old-established institutions to find that their views are misrepresented and their motives misconstrued. But, as he goes on to say, no reform is worth carrying which has not been subjected to severest tests, and if it can pass through the ordeal qf constant and virulent misrepresentation it becomes purified, and gives unmistakeable proof of healthy vitality. He proceeds : There may be those who will say, "Why attempt to reform the turf, which is beyond redemption? Ending, not mending"— -as has been said of another institution—" is the most suitable method of dealing with the turf." Is I it not worth while to inquire whether this is the case? It is not pretended that horseracing is an ideal sport, necessary to the existence of the British nation, or that, if it were not already established, its invention would be desirable. But, in point of fact, the turf is a great national amusement, and has become so ingrained in the constitution of the Anglo-Saxon that it flourishes and finds a congenial place in every part of the world where the English language is spoken. It has taken deep root in America, in Australia, and in Africa, Throughout Europe it is rapidly becoming the one popular sport, and is the only pastime of English origin that finds adherents of all nations as ready in their appreciation of it as they seem incapable of understanding our other national games. I freely admit that it has a mean side — what pursuit in life has uot ? — but it has also a bright one. First and foremost, racing is the only possible means of obtaining a true test of a horse's speed, courage, and endurance. The very trying preparations that horses have to undergo in their training, and the severe exertions of a race itßelf, soon find out any latent defects in their organisation and weakness in their constitutions. Horse raoing'is invaluable for breeding purposes, as it produces tte survival of the fittest, and relegates to their proper sphere horses^ that have failed to exhibit those qualities which are necessary to success on the turf. Secondly, it may be conceded that racing is not only beneficial in improving the breed of horses, but that it also develops certain good qualities in men. Deoision, rapidity of eye, courage of opinion, oapacity to take defeat smilingly, and the ever-hopeful desire to win, are all what may be called the Palmerstonian virtues. Further, it is a mistake to suppose that the turf generates suspicion, fraud, and untruthfulness in any greater degree than other pursuits from which, unfortunately, these vices are inseparable. Nowhere are generosity, confidence — upon which all turf transactions in the way of betting are based — and loyalty more conspicuous than amongst all classes of men — bookmakers, jockeys, trainers, and owners — associated with the turf. Nor ia it unworthy of consideration that race meetings are the cheapest and most accessible forms of amusement within the reach of the great masses of our population, and draw together all classes in a common and friendly appreciation of the sport. There is sufficient truth and the requisite amount of exaggeration in Lord George Bentinck's dictum that "all men are equal upon the turf and under it " to make it acceptable to racing men. It is true that the wealthiest owner of horses in England is upon an equality with the humblest race-goer in hia love of a good horse and in his pleasure at seeing a good race. It ia a great mistake to suppose that genuine enthusiasm ia absent .from the

turf. Those who saw the Great Ebor Handicap at York last August will remember the extraordinary outburst's of excitement and enthusiasm with which the victory of Mr J. Lowther's King Monmouth was greeted. It was a well-merited tribute to a good horse and to a straightforward and deservedly popular owner, I cannot but think that suoh a scene would have favourably impressed even those who look upon the turf as the shortest and quickest road to perdition. There is a Puritanical spirit which ia anxious to curtail, if not to destroy, many of the amusements and favourite pastimes of the masses, but I hope that it will be long before any serious attempt is made to interfere with what is a healthy and cheerful amusement. In the interests, then, of owners and of horsebreeding, and of a popular amusement, Lord Durham maintains that it is not so absurd as it might appear (to whom? we would ask) to wish to r- form certain abuses which have crept into the management of this great sport. These abuses, he argues, ate not inherent in the sport itself, but are the result of the manner in which the rules of the tnrf have been drawn up and administeied. A hundred years ago, when the Jockey Club bad not long been instituted, race meetings were few and far between, and the stakes to be run for were of insignificant value. Gatemoney meetings were unknown, Owing to the difficulties of travelling, none but exceptionally good horses were sent to compete at meetings far distant from their training grounds, and few people patronised any but their local racecourses. The functions and duties of ' the Jockey ,Olub were practically confined to their own ground at Newmarket and to the arrangement of matches and sweepstakes amongst their members. The club was originally an association of gentlemen for social purposes, and it was only by degrees that it assumed legislative command of the turf. Now, on the other hand, race meetings have multiplied throughout the country, the numbers of racehorses have enormously inoreased, and tha expansion of railways and of the telegraph have revolutionised the old system of racing. Last year the sum of £480,000 was won in races, for which 2100 horses competed. The old order changes and continues to change, but the supreme authority which controls the turf ha 3 remained stationary. I urged in a speech at the Gimorack Club in York, last December, that this anachronism 3hould no longer be allowed to exist, being a source of weakness to the true interests of the turf, I suggested that the Jookey Olub should have a considerable increase of members, and that it should be made more "representative." This has been interpreted to mean by those who ought to know better, that the Jockey Club should be a body "eleoted" by constituencies arbitrarily chosen from the different classes of racing men. This is an attempt at a reductioad ahsurdum based on misrepresentation of language and of intention. A body can be representative without necessarily being eleoted. It is not, perhaps, absolutely the best and most satisfactory form of representation, but it is in some oases the best possible under aotual conditions. It is unnecessary to hold up the House of Lords as a model of a Second Chamber, but it may be claimed for it that it is fairly representative of certain interests, such as the landowning interest, the Established Church, the legal professions, and the wealthier classes of the community. ..... Is it unreasonable that a similar contention should be now put forward on behalf of the Jockey Olub in order that it may become more representative of raoing than of social qualities ? " It is often triumphantly asked, remarks Lord Durham, " Who are the men, outside the existing members, who are fit to belong to the Jockey Club ? " Such a question, he contends, amounts to an insult to a large number of gentlemen deeply interested, both financially and practically, in the sport of racing. Are there not scores of gentlemen fond of racing who are in every way qualified to h,e members of a turf legislature, and who compare favourably both in social and moral qualities with any existing members of the Jockey Club 1 " Mr Lowther has stated that several mem: bers of the Jockey Olub do not own horses, but are none the less valuable advisers to the club, and are of great assistance in framing and in carrying out their legislation. He onght, a fortiori, to admit that men who have owned horses for years, who take a practical interest in the sport, and who have full knowledge of all the ins and outs of racing, are calculated to form a valuable addition to the influence and capacity of the Jockey Club. This increase in the numbers of the Jockey Club would immensely facilitate the transaction of business. According to the present constitution of the governing body, the three stewards represent the executive of the Jockey Clu,b, and are a court of appeal against the decisions of the local stewards. Owing to the liability under which they rest of having their decisions reversed, local stewards are very chary of settling difficult questions, and are very prone to refer them to the Jockey Club. This course entails great delay and much inconvenience. If, as I suggest, the Jockey Club were so enlarged that most of the stewards of local meetings were included in it, we should have less friction than at present." Lord Durham says he knows by experience that with the Jockey Olub as at present constituted it is almost hopeless to get reforms carried. An infusion of fresh blood will rouse ita energies, will enable it to arrive at a more correct estimate of the wishes of the racing J world, and will give it a more representative j character, by affording a wider choice from which to Beleot its stewards, who should be appointed, not as they are now, by the nomination of the retiring steward, but by the ballot of the whole olub. .... The' question may be asked, " Has the Jockey Club so much future legislative work to do, and so many reforms to carry out, that it is necessary to increase its numbers and its influence ?" The answer is that an increase is required to enable the club to administer well its laws as they exist, and that there are reforms needed which it is impossible to promote with the body as at present constituted. One very important reform has been made in the new Rules of Racing. I allude to the obligatory publication annually in the] "Racing Calendar" of all paitnerships in and leases of horses. This is a most salutary rule, ana will for ever destroy the old system whereby a man could run two or three horses in which he was interested in one race, but under the name of different owners, with the sole knowledge of his confederates. The unfortunate public frequently imagined a race to be bona-Jide race between horses in different interests when it was nothing of the kind. Had it not been for the exposure of this system in the turf trials last year, I am confident

that I should have met with polite but over-whelming opposition to my proposal that this annual publication should be enforced, in order that racegoers may be in a position to know to whom a horße really belongs. The opposition would not have been in defence of a vicious system, but owing to an overwhelming spirit of conservatism and to a constitutional dislike to pass any new rule whatever,

Here are a few urgent reforms which Lord Durham would suggest :

(1) " Assumed names " ought to be abolished There are various reasons for wbioh men race under an assumed name, but none of them deserve the support of the Jockey Olub. For example, a man races under an assumed name because he is engaged in some business which would suffer in the confidence of hia clients if it were known that a partner was "on the turf." It may be a foolish prejudice on the part of the clients, no doubt, but is it right that the Jookey Club should assist a man to deceive them ? Or, a man adopts an assumed name in order to conceal from his parents or guardians the fact that he is indulging in a sport which he may have pledgod himself to avoid or to give up. Is it fair that tha Jockoy Olub should give him opportunities ao to act under false pretencss? Or, a man chooses an assumed name beoause he considers that his own is too good to be known in connection with racing. This seems to be a reason that is scarcely worthy of the recognition of the Jockey Olub. (2) The meetings of the Jockey Olub should be fully reported. (3) Every clerk of the course should have a shorthand clerk afc every race meeting to take down the evidence given at all investigations conducted by the stewards. The slipshod manner in which these proceedings are now conduoted would be almost incredible to ordinary men of business, and it is a fact that no record of Jockey Olub or stewards' inquiries is kept. (4) An effort should be made to reduce the number of short races and to encourage competition for long-distance races. The modern system of exoessive two-year-old racing may be a test of speed, but it is detrimental to the supply of stout weight -carrying horses. It is natural that owners should prefer to run their horses in short raoes rather than in Ion 3 ones, for the course of trainings not so severe for the former as for the latter, and the suras of money to be won now seem to diminish in a direct ratio with the increase in length of a raoe. But this might be changed if the stewards of the Jookey Club and the managers of the great race meetings would confer upon the subject and agree to reduce the value of five-furlong races and to increase the added money for races of a mile and upwards.