UNIFORMITY OF SENTENCES.

Otago Witness, Issue 2429, 3 October 1900, Page 39

UNIFORMITY OF SENTENCES.

One of tho tasks which the Jevi:ey Olul will sooner or *ater, wo thinfc^nn'l jit expedient to undertake, h»vs Ih Ktvj3 t wi"l te ?r.6 establishment of >a&,e ur^jjg&tty to pt'ac* tice on the part of acting- 1' xfc.tf^ is no position mere unonvinJo J «J»an ll>»t J^ «t race steward, for he is never called, ui^o, tc

act except in a crisis, and it is the rarest thing possible for the matter he has to adjudicate upon to be otherwise than disagreeable. It is a gieat thing for the turf that there are gtntlemen of position, to whom it would almost be an affront to bear testimony to their integrity of purpose, always ready to fill the thankless positions. In some cates the stewards have the hard and fast letter of the law to guide them, but in very many more instances they have to depend upon the evidence of others, and upon that weighty matters have to be decided. There Uno cavilling at those decisions, but it cannot fail to strike followers of racing that the same decision^ do not invariably have the same consequences. Too often the sentence bears the appearance of being at vaiiauce with the verdict. We (have in our mind the case of the jockey .-whose horse fouls another in a race, this being the most prolific cause of trouble on the racecourse. To our thinking stewards canHot be too severe on offender? when the jockey is considered to be at fault; but, whether severe or not, the off ence should be visited by approximately ihe same puuish- » jnent, whenever proven. This, however, is not the- order of affairs obtaining. Take the case of Kleon. At Liverpool he twice bumped into Cutaway, who had to be pulled up to save his jockey from going over the rails. Eicon's jockey was reprimanded and cautioned as "to his iuturc riding. Now the jockey vraa either guilty or not guilty, and the sentence of the steward-s,_ therefore, erred either on the side of severity or leniency. If it was not the fault cl the jockey that Kleon interfered with Cutaway," then there was no justification for a leprimand or cauiion. On tho other hand, if he could have prevented tne mishap but did not, then a mere reprimand Was ridiculously inadequate. Later on, at Hurst Park, Kleon, when ridden by another Soekey, swerved again very badly. The jockey was brought before the stewards, sus.pendsd for a portion of the afternoon, and ireoorled to the s towards of the Jockey Club. Each body of stewards was, of course, acting according to his view of the strictest sense of justice, but to the calm onlooker it will seem that it would be better if the Jockey Club could formulate. penalties for offences. In such a matter as riding foul there can be no mitigating circumstance; it must be deliberate or not. If it is not deliberate, and yet the jockey's fault because he cannot control his horse, that would supply a reason for taking away his license on the g-rennd of incapacity. But when the act is sufficiently deliberate to call for a reprimand and caution, it is serious enough to incur more tangible punishment.