NEW ZEALAND TROTTING ASSOCIATION.

Otago Witness, Issue 3292, 18 April 1917, Page 42

NEW ZEALAND TROTTING ASSOCIATION.

THE EMILITJS CASE. A meeting of the executive of the New Zealanil Trotting Conference was held on Tuesday evening; present —Messrs J. Rowe (president), D. H. Roberts, E. Pox, C. E. Mackay, and W. J. Gore. Tho President said that the first business was the appeal of tho Metropolitan Trotting Olub against tho decision of the Trotting Association in the Emilius case. There were several rules to be considered. The position was rather awkward, as the association had since notified the conference that the decision it had arrived at was null and void because of the fact that three members who hadi taken part in the discussion, and voted on the case, were members of the club, and they had acted in contravention of Rule 38. Strictly speaking, there was nothing before the conference, but he thought that they should pass a resolution on. the subject, and endeavour to have the question settled, for it had already been hung up for a considerable time. The stakes had not yet been paid over, and he understood that some people were still holding totalisator tickets in connection with the case. The members of the executive were no doubt familiar with the facts of the case, but he must say that he could not find that the rules gave the association power to inflict a fine, as is had done. Mr Pox said that he did not intend to take any part in the discussion of the case, but the club were anxious to have a decision whether the association had power to take such a step as it had! done in reversing the decision of the club's stewards. Messrs Smlthson and Mosley, on behalf of the club, contended that the association did not have power to deal with the matter under Rule 286. They submitted that the finding of the olub under Rules 252* and 279 was final and conclusive, and was in accordance with the rules. The association had only limited powers under Rule 286, and they submitted that rule did not give the association auy power to review a decision of the stewards on a matter which was clearly a question of fact and not even subject to appeals. They submitted finally that the only questions which the conference had to determine were—(a) Had the asociation the right to act under Rule 286? (b) if the association had such right, ought the association, under the circumstances of the present case, to havo acted and reversed the decision of the stewards?" Mr Mackay said that the rules they had to consider bearing on the subject were very vague, and very contradictory He understood that the president of the association proposed to deal with the matter de novo; but if the association could get a quorum to deal with the matter, which he doubted, and came to the same decision, there would, no doubt, be an appeal again to the conference, and much delay would be involved. The rule, under which action was taken (286) was a most extraordinary one, and the . association in dealing with" such a oase should have acted very warily. M'Donnell had never been informed that the question of fining him was being considered, and it was not in accord with ordinary equity that a man should be fined without being given an opportunity of being heard in his own defence. He therefore moved—" That the executive, having considered: all the facts elicited at this inquiry, and being satisfied that the association had no power to inflict a fine, recommends to the association and the club that the original decision of tho Metropolitan Club be regarded as valid, and the stakes be paid over accordingly." Mr Gore, in seconding the' motion, said that he endorsed Mr Mackay's remarks. The President said that he-' quite agreed with the motion, which was carried unanimously. It was also recommended that the nlub's appeal deposit should be refunded. The advisableness of amending several of_ the rules of trotting Was discussed, and remits to the annual meeting of the conference were suggested. A special meeting of the board of the New Zealand Trotting Association was called for Monday morning to consider matters in connection with the Emilius case. There were present— Messrs P. Selig (president), W. J. Hopkins, R. W. Short, and J. H. Williams. The President said that they had not a quorum, and the meeting was consequently quite an informal one. On Monday week he had discovered that when the association was dealing with the Emilius case three- of the members who had taken part in the discussion and voted on the case—Messrs Nicoll, Denton, and Hopkins—were members of the New Zealand Metropolitan Trotting Club. The board's decision was consequently ultra vires, and, as he thought it should not be allowed to stand for a moment longer than possible, he had taken the earliest opportunity to oall the members together to declare the decision null and void. The present meeting had been called under the rules, which provided for five days' notice, and that was the earliest opportunity of bringing them together. He had no doubt that the members concerned had acted quite innocently in the matter, overlooking the fact that, as members of the Metropolitan Trotting Club, they were not entitled to sit on the case. The day after ho had discovered that the board's action was ultra vires the facts had been notified in the newspapers. He was informed that the Metropolitan Club had appealed to the conference, but personally he did not see how an appeal could lie, and he was fortified in that view by the opinion of the board's solicitor and also of Mr Kitchingham, who, with himself and Mr Mark, had been responsible for framing the rules He thought if the club was basing its appeal on the fact that the board's decision was illegal because of the facts he had mentioned, it was a pity the association had not been so informed. He would advise the conference that he had declared the association's decision null and void. Mr Williams said that, ' as the meeting was an informal one, he felt that he could speak on the subject. The Metrbpolitan Club was anxious to see the case decided on its merits, and the point in regard to the illegality of the association's action had only been discovered at tb-a last minute After some further informal discussion the meeting ended. MEETING OP THE BOARD. A meeting of the Board of the New Zealand Trotting Association was held on Wednesday evening; present—Messrs P. Selig (president), W. J. Hopkins, R. W. Short, W. H Denton. H. P. Nicoll, and J. H. Williams. Mr Nicoll said he had read the remarks the president was reported to have made at the special meeting of the board, called to consider the Emilius case, and ho toot exception to the suggestion of blame cast on himself and Messrs Hopkins and Denton by the president. Mr Selig said that the case would be brought up later on at the meeting, and Mr Nicoll could make his explanation if he wished. Mr Nicoll said that it was a personal explanation, and he preferred to make It at once. The Emilius case had been.before the board on several occasions, and the membership of the Metropolitan Trotting Olub had never previously been mentioned. Personally, he was so olosely associated with the Ashburton Trotting Club that his membershir, of the New Zealand Metropolitan Trotting Olub had escaped his thought*. He thought the president should have protected ■ the members better than he did, and pointed out the fact that the three members concerned had voted (gainst the club to which they belonged, which elbowed their impartiality. It seemed to him that the president had attempted to whitewash himself at the expense of the members. . ... The President said that no suggestion of white-, wash'nz had been intended by his remarks. There wa3 -othln* in his action which ho wanted to hide He had always said, and he said so again, that he considered the members of the board acted impartially in carrying out their duties, and he was sorry if members thought he intended to bestow anv blaroo on them. When the Emilius case had come before the board, ha had drawn atteiv tion to the fact that Mr Williams was an official of the Metropolitan Club, and it had not occurred to

him that other members of the board were alr;o members of that club. Mr Hopkins said that he had been under the Impression that a member of the board was only prevented from dealing with a case in which his club was concerned if he was a steward or official of that club.

Mr Denton said that he had had a similar impression. The President said that the rule was quite clear on tho subject. It prevented a member of a club from dealing with a case in which his club wis directly or indirectly interested. Mr Williams said it had been made to appearthat he was anxious to take port in consideration of tho case" until the president had pointed) cut to him that, as an official of the Metropolitan Club, he was not permitted to sit on that To this he tooit exception. When the case first came before the board he had offered to retire from the room, but had been told that it was not necessary for him to do that. He had taken no part in the hearing of the case. The President said that Mr Williams had noi been treated differently from other members of the board. It had been his practice when cases had come before them concerning other clubs, officials of which were also members of the board, to point out that they could take no part in the discussion, and that was all he had done in Mr Williamis's case.

Subsequently a letter was read from Messrs Smithfon anflMosley, giving notice of their intention to appeal to the Trotting Conference on behalf of the New Zealand Metropolitan Trotting Club against the decision of the association in the Emilius case.

The President said tho executive of the Trotting Conference had dealt with the case. He was rather surprised at this, in view of the fact that, in conversation with the president of the conference on the evening before the conference executive had met, Mr Bowe expressed the opinion that, as the association's decision had been deolared null and void, there was really nothing to come before the conference. Personally, said Mr Selig, he did not Bee how, under the rules, an appeal to the conference could lie, and in that view he was fortified by the opinion of the board's solicitor, and also of Mr Kitchingham. Mr Kitchingham considered that if the conference was of the opinion that the question was subject to appeal it shou'd be carried to the courts by way of a friendly action, in order to have it'definitely and finally settled. Mr Selig said that it seemed to him that the conference executive had adopted an extraordinary attitude. They had been advised that the association's decision was null and void, and therefore there was re-ally nothing to come before them, but they had recommended a certain course of action which, seemed to him to suggest that the members of the conference executive were of the opinion that there was no appeal. Mr Itowe had pointed out that the case had been hung up for some time, and that certain people were holding totalisator tickets, waiting for results. It was true that the case had been hung up for a considerable time, but he understood that the full dividend had been paid out, and no claim could be made- on that ground. Had he known that it was the intention of the association to deal with the case, he would have deemed it his duty to place before them. the facts of the case as they appeared to the association. He did not agree "with Mr Kitnhingham's suggestion that the matter should be taken to the courts. If, after the case had been dealt with by the association at a meeting with a quorum competent to consider it, it was taken to the conference in proper form, and that body gave a decision, he would be prepared to abide by that decision. The board could not deal with the case at that meeting, as there was not a quorum, apart from the members who were connected with' the Metropolitan Trotting Club, but he felt that it was his duty to mak'e a statement to the board on the subject. Mr H. W. Kitchingham wrote suggesting that the board should take steps to cancel the license's of any riders, drivers, or trainers who had been called up in the ballot and had failed to respond. There was In his district a man who had failed to respond when called up, but was training horses by virtue of his license. —Mr Nicoll said that such a suggestion as that made by Mr Kitchingham would cast a grave reflection on tho general body of trainers. Personally he knew of no man whb had not responded when called up.—lt was decided to telegraph to Mr Kitchingham asking him to furnish the board with the name of the licenseholder he was referring to, in order that the case might be dealt with by the Licensing Committee. A letter from D. P. Mahoney, making a complaint of insulting behaviour against P. Holmes, sen., was referred to the Licensing Committee. Licenses as recommended by the Licensing Committee were issued, that of T. Frost being granted with a caution. WARRINGTON STUD SALE. (Fiaois Oub Special Rkfoetkb.) CHRISTCHTJBCH, April 10. At the Warrington stud sale the following prices were made: —Ventosa, 6gs; Ventalera, 25gs; Afer and foal, 30gs; Olivine, 25gs; Monture, 36gs; Rubellte and foal, 4Bgs: Wabnn, S6gs; Chinook and foal, 71gs; Similette and foal, 43gs; Scarab, 43gs. Sarto was passed in at 375g5. YEARLING SALES AT SYDNEY. SYDNEY, April 10. At the yearling sales bidding was brisk, and fair prices were obtained. A Linaere —Nutraille colt secured the top price—B2sgs. April 13. At the yearling sales, although the prices generally were low, high figures were paid for a few choice lots. The Tressady—Desert Rose colt fetched loOOgs, and the Maltster—Ardea colt 800 gs. Mr E. .7. Watt paid ,425g3 for a Varcoe —Lukewarm colt, 280 gs for a Fortafix —Panada colt, and 170 gs for a Fortafix—Panada fllly, Mr J. .Brown paid 80g3 for a Cooltrim —Drowsy filly, and Mr H. A. Taylor 70gs for a Charlemagne—Loch fillv., ' April 13. At the yearling sales the demand was good, and prices were satisfactory. The 31-1 lots brought a total of £43,f>fi2gs. A Flavus—Boiling colt, a brother of the Sydney Cup winner The Fortune. Hunter, brought 1025g5. On behalf of Mr J. B. Held, oil New Zealand, a Kilbroney—Mazurka colt brought Gsogs, a Kilbroney—Siberia colt 400 gs, and six other Kilbroney youngsters ranged from 150 gs to 370 gs. On behalf'of Mr G. M. Currie, a King Bufus—Bronze filly brought 390 gs, a King Kufus— Roscommon filly 210 gs, and four colts ranged from 75gs to 200 gs. April 14. At the yearling sales' Mr W. Duncan paid 120 guineas for the Yolpone—Dundrum colt. TWO-YEAR-OLD STAKES * RECORD. SYDNEY, April 10. It is claimed that Thrice has established an Australasian two-year-old record, winning £8692 in stakes.