Sporting Review. THURSDAY, MAY 28, 1891.

New Zealand Illustrated Sporting & Dramatic Review, Volume I, Issue 44, 28 May 1891, Page 3

Sporting Review. THURSDAY, MAY 28, 1891.

Thebe is a case that has lately occurred in Atickland that is of great importance to race- 1 horse owners, breeders, etc. A gentleman buys racehorse privately and enters him for certain racds. The secretary of that club comes to him And says—Mr. So-and-so owes my club so much for* entrances and acceptances, so you cannot rim your horse until this amount is paid. The purchaser -says—All owing on my horse was i ’ paid to your club. The secretary acknowledges • having received the sum due on this particular -horse, at the same time adding that he had placed it to Mr. So-and-so’s general account, < &nd that there was a back balance due for other z horses that were not likely to appear again in n public for some time. We contend that the secretary had no right to stop, a horse that had ‘no liabilities attached to him because his former - ! bvhier (it- being a bona fide sale) was a defaulter. It appears to us to be a bit of a try -i knowing that the money would sooner be paid than that the horse should be prevented , * from running. The question now is: Can a secretary stop a horse that has no liabilities because his previous owner was a defaulter in acceptances and entrance money, but owed no forfeits? Bules 78 and 78a read thus: “An

unpaid forfeit list shall be kept at the registry office, and shall be published at the conclusion of the racing season in every year. It shall include all due and unpaid entrances, stakes, fines, and forfeits which have b ee u notified as hereinafter mentioned, and shall state the real name or names (if any) of the persons from whom and the horses (if any) in respect of which the same is due. Entrances, stakes, fines, and forfeits which have so been published must be paid directly into the registry office, and until so paid they shall not be removed from the list, but non-publication shall not remove the liability from the defaulter.” 78a : The name of any person who shall fail to pay within four weeks after the same has become due any entrance, acceptance, stake, fine, fee, or forfeit, and any horse in respect of which such sum, may be published in the forfeit list. The A.R.O. is the Metropolitan Club of the district. We can certainly say that we have never seen—nor can we find anyone that has—an unpaid forfeit list in the registry office. We therefore contend that the secretary had no power to stop a horse that was free from liabilities running in a race when he had been bona fide sold. From what we can learn Bule 78 is very little regarded, especially in the North Island.

We would like to see it made imperative that all entrances and acceptances should be paid at the time appointed. If the secretary knows the nominator is a good mark let him if he likes accept the. nomination and be responsible for it. The answer that is given to this by the different secretaries is that if they did this there would not be so many entries. If a man cannot race without doing it on credit he had better leave it alone. Racing clubs would be in a much better financial condition if they insisted on cash down, as many of them going on the credit system have been unable to recover the entrance and acceptance money that is due to them. We hope that some of our Southern contemporaries will let us know how Rules 78 and 78a are carried out, and what is their opinion.

The Colonial Secretary has made two great mistakes as regards trotting races in Auckland. Judging from what took place last Saturday pony and trotting races are not likely to flourish as they are now constituted. The first mistake he made was, in his usual impetuous way, constituting the Auckland Pony and 7 rotting Club the Metropolitan Club, distinct from the New Zealand Trotting Association, without consulting others who are better acquainted with the affair. That the New Zealand Trotting Association, whose head-quarters are at Christchurch, should control the whole of New Zealand we fail to see, but they ought to have a say in the matter of appointing the other Metropolitan Clubs to look after the business in their own districts, letting there be one set of rules for the whole colony. The Colonial Secretary has also made an unfortunate precedence. When the Auckland Pony and Trotting Club applied for a permit for the use of the totalisator, at the same time pointing out that the meeting was for a charitable purpose, it was refused, on the grounds that they had held their proper quota of meetings, expressing regret in not being able to acquiesce in it, as it was for a charitable purpose. To get over the difficulty, they got the Otahuhu Trotting Club, which is virtually the same club, to forego their meeting, and it was held under their auspices, assisted by the Auckland Pony and Trotting Club. If this kind of thing is permitted the use of the. totalisator will be more abused than ever, and the sooner it is done away with the better.: That the stewards and committee of the Auckland Trotting Association are incapable of carrying out trotting in its integrity no one who has seen their races can d,eny. Horses are allowed to break, and on the far side of the course actually gallop, without being pulled down immediately, and no notice is taken of it. The judge’s box is full of people who have no business there. Last Saturday things were worse than ever. Very few horses trotted fairly, and time was so badly kept that two races had to be put off until last Tuesday. Things, however, culminated in the Selling Race. Thirteen started, the brown gelding Sailor Boy winning, having trotted fairly throughout; the brown mare Rambuster second, she having broken repeatedly and even galloped; the grey mare Blueskin, who: had trotted fairly, was third.

The winner was objected to for carrying the wrong saddle-cloth and colours, he having, had No. 1,5 instead of No. 16, the proper No. 15 being a chestnut gelding, pink jacket, black cap. .The crowd insisted on the money being paid to the proper No. 15, who had no saddlecloth. The stewards met, and after long deliberation determined to disqualify Sailor Boy for that race, refund the money on the machine to his backers, and fine the owner five pounds. The second race resulted in an easy'win fbr Disappointment, who was a bad fourth in the first heat, he paying the nice dividend Of 16's., there being only one ticket on him. We maintain that the stewards should have given the race to Sailor Boy, who came in first and complied with all the conditions of the race, and fined his owner the maximum penalty for running in his wrong colours. The numbered saddle-cloths are only for the public’s convenience, and a man that cannot tell a chestnut gelding from a brown one, and cannot affbrd to buy a race card, has no business to bet. The stewards, in disqualifying the first horse (which was a mistake), should have awarded the race to the second; but as he was objected to for galloping, the third, who trotted fairly, ought to have been awarded the race. To sum the whole affair up—the stewards are incompetent. >