Sporting Review. THURSDAY, AUGUST 9, 1894.

New Zealand Illustrated Sporting & Dramatic Review, Volume V, Issue 211, 9 August 1894, Page 4

Sporting Review. THURSDAY, AUGUST 9, 1894.

The President of the Auckland Racing Club had a very satisfactory report and balance-sheet to place before the annual meeting of the members, which was held at the club’s rooms on Monday last. He was in a position to honestly congratulate members, for the report showed that every meeting held during the past year had resulted in a profit with one exception, the Autumn Gathering, on which the loss was, however, only a small one. This was no doubt due to that meeting clashing with important Napier and Christchurch Meetings. In submitting the proceedings of the past year, the President pointed out that in all five meetings had been held the added money in connection with which had amounted to /8910. The previous year the figure was /'B9OO. The profits amounted to j£475, besides a sum of /500 that had been expended in improvements. There was also the Government tax of which had for the first time been paid out of the revenue instead of by the public. He alluded to the establishment of the new race, the Royal Stakes, and then went on to remark that notwithstanding all the recent talk re the totalisator, the way was clear for one year, and on the expiration of that period he hoped the people would be more enlightened respecting that subject. He ventured the belief that by that time Victoria would have the machine legalised, and daring as the prophecy may appear, we are inclined to support it. We have always maintained that it is only a matter of time for its adoption to come to pass in the Victorian city. Speaking further on the subject the President remarked that although in the old days there was no machine, the club had progressed favourably, and no doubt he was right in saying that even if it went out to-morrow the affairs of the club would still progress in the right direction. A member of the club made some reference to the reduction in totalisator permits that would take place in twelve months’ time, but the chairman appeared to believe that there would be no reduction so far as the A.R.C. was concerned. An interjection that the A.R.C. would have their wings clipped proportionately with other clubs in the province did not apparently find support with the Chairman, for he remarked in a somewhat unbelieving manner, “ We will see if the club will suffer with the others.” The falling off in subscriptions was referred to by him, and he naturally expressed a wish that members would do their utmost to extend the membership of the club. The members present —a small number, by the way—had very little to ask concerning the balance-sheet, with the exception of a very pertinent inquiry by Mr Edwards respecting the item “ unpaid subscriptions / 177 10s.” He was, however, fully answered by the chairman assuring him that he had gone through the list and had found that all the outstanding subscriptions were secure and could not be classed as bad debts. The only other business transacted at the meeting was the appointment of committeemen, and a ballot saw Messrs Morrin, Dickey, Russell, Philson, Gorrie and Thompson elected. The unsuccessful candidate was Mr Kidd, a gentleman who would have done good service for the club had the honour of election been paid to him. In addition to the balancesheet and profit and loss account, members were furnished with a statement of accounts for the five meetings held during the year. The totals were as follows :— Spring Meeting. Receipts/6 2 3 17s nd,

expenditure profit /go 17s nd. Second Spring Meeting: Receipts /1708 16s +d, expenditure /1516 3s 3d, profit £192 13s id. Summer Meeting: Receipts /558 s 19s id, expenditure ss, profit /1234 14s id Autumn Meeting: Receipts/i877 5s 3d, expenditure /'lBBO os gd, loss £2 15s 6d. Winter Meeting : Receipts £ 1603 6s 4d, expenditure /1430 is 2d, profit £173 5s 2d.

The dispute between the Victorian Club and Bowes’ Tattersall’s Club took on a new phase last week when eight prominent members of the Victorian Club were brought before their committee to show cause why they should not be suspended or have their names erased from the members roll of the club. The delinquents were charged with conduct detrimental to the interests of the Victorian Club, and the ground of the. charge was simply the coutinuance by the offenders of membership of Bowes’ Club ! They were told to chose between the two clubs and when they declined to sever their connection with Bowes’, “ a threat of further proceedings ” was hurled at them, but what the upshot has been has not yet come over the water. Why membership of Bowes’ club should be thought such a crime by the Victorian Club authorities is a puzzle, and their action must be considered arbitrary and despotic by every fair minded sportsman. The rule under which the offenders are to be expelled by the Victorian Club runs as follows :— “ The committee shall annually revise the roll of members, and may suspend any member or remove therefrom the name of any person the continuance of whose membership would, in their opinion, be detrimental to the interests of the club ; but no person shall be suspended, or cease to be a member, unless a notice shall have been previously sent to his address inviting him to attend before the committee, and acquainting him of the complaint against him. Under this rule five shall form a quorum of committee.” Of course the power to expel under such a rule entirely rests with the interpretation placed on the words “ the continuance of whose membership would in their (the committee) opinion be detrimental to the interests of the club.” The committee apparently hold that recognition by Bowes is sufficient to place members beyond the pale, and lay them open to a charge of detrimental conduct; but over here the reason for such an interpretation is anything but clear. In the past the Victorian Club people have not stamped membership of Bowes as synonymous with objectionable conduct, and they can therefore hardly turn round now and set forward such a interpretation. The trouble between the clubs simply amounts to an objection by the Victorian Club to the calling over of the card by Bowes ; but surely that is no ground for charging Bowes’members with conduct detrimental to the interests of the Victorian Club.

The last number of the Australasian to hand contains a very seasonable and excellently written article on scientific breeding, and at a time like the present, its value to breeders cannot be overestimated. The leading contention of our contemporary’s article is choosing a union, breeders are too\_£<. to be carried away by faddists’ love of scientific breeding, a choosing of blood, and a desire to avoid inbreeding, while little or no attention is paid to the most important matter, viz , the peculiar conformation of the sire and dam to be mated. As the journal quoted remarks, blood is not everything, and crosses of Touchstone and Stockwell, the lines of Whalebone, etc., are not everything. A horse may be wonderfully bred on these scientific lines, may fairly riot in the possession of the best running blood, and yet, through the mating of a well-bred sire and an equally well-bred but unsuitable mare, in the way of conformation, the product may be a very moderate, if not a rank duffer. There is no royal road to successful scientific breeding, and with the best blood in the world at his command, if a breeder does not exercise his eyes and judgment in the matter of the build of the animals to be mated, inglorious failure will be the result of the union. Then there is the deep rooted aversion to inbreeding that is so prevalent amongst breeders. But then we have the awkward fact that Galopin, who sired St. Simon and Donovan, was extraordinarily inbred, Voltaire appearing as his great-grand-sire on both sides of his pedigree. And as the Australasian points out, “ Wisdom, another successful sire in England, is more inbred still, as he is by a son of Rataplan, from a mare by

Stockwell, who was a full brother t(B Rataplan. Amongst the stallions ini these colonies Musket was inbred toH Touchstone, while his greatest son, Car-W bine, is more inbred still, and possesses aW queer cross through his sire’s dam and ' his dam’s sire. Chester was essentially > an outbred horse, but three of his best I sons, Carlyon, Dreadnonght, and Oran- ’ brook, own Stockwell twice as their I great grand-sire. Nordenfeldt is inbred ' to Melbourne and Touchstone I” Taking all blood as equal, then, the Australasian thinks a great deal more should be thought of the conformation of the sire and dam. To quote :—“ We have seen a beautifully-bred horse, a grandson 'of - Stockwell, and who was no mean performer, placed in a first-class stud of imported mares, and though only dead 15 years you can hardly find a trace of his blood in our Stud Book. The reason was, breeding from a long, weak - backed horse, who got nearly all his stock with bad backs and coffin heads—even the best blood in the world could not put right the faulty conformation.” That is sound argument, and something that will pay breeders to take to heart. There is no doubt that breeders’ best interests would be, of course, to study running blood, but to do so without running blind to a faddish extreme, and to above all, pay the greatest attention to the peculiar conformation of the stallion and mare to be mated. We cannot do better than quote the concluding paragraph of our contemporary :— “ If racehorses could be produced simply by putting the right blood together we should not see so many bad ones which are own brothers to good horses. Even in Victoria anyone who takes the trouble to watch what mares produce, can see the difference in the progeny, although got by the same sire. We admit that theoretical breeding is a very interesting study, but most of those who favour it get wrapped up too much in their favourite strains of blood, and they forget altogether that formation and rearing are equal if not greater component parts in the building of a first-class racehorse.”

In one of our leading articles of last week reference was made to the report of the racing delegates’ meeting stating that the Dunedin representatives were the only members of the gathering to oppose the proposal re the establishment of a New Zealand Jockey Club. Knowing Auckland is as much opposed to the formation of a N.Z.J.C. as Dunedin, we remarked that Mr Lawry could not have been well advised of local wishes, and it now appears that Mr Lawry’s failure to oppose the proposition was not in the least his fault. The following memo, from our Wellington representative will explain matters With reference to your sub-leader in last week’s Review in connection with Mr Lawry (the delegate of the Auckland Racing Club to the recent Conference) not following out the wishes of his Club by voting against the proposal to the formation of a N.Z. Jockey Club, Mr Lawry states he has been placed in a false position. At the outset he was appointed one of three delegates to represent the Auckland Club at the Conference, but afterwards he received a wire asking him to be the sole representative. He consented, and telegraphed for information as to how the Club desired him to act. No reply was sent to his communication, and, to use his own words, ‘he was a dummy’ at the Conference. When the resolution came on re the formation of the N.Z. Jockey Club he abstained from voting, as he had no official instructions. Therefore he did not commit the ‘ dreadful deed ’ with which he was given credit.” We never implied Mr Lawry was to blame. We simply remarked he was not well-advised of local wishes, and the truth of that is apparent from the above memo.

The opinion of Mr Hogg, M.H.R., regarding the Stout Gaming Bill:—“ An appropriate name for this Bill, in my opinion, would be ‘ A Bill for the Toleration and Perpetuation of Gambling.’ ” One of the totalisator’s fiercest opponents in the Victorian Assembly is a member of the V.R*C., Mr F. Madden. That gentleman, speaking against the machine, stated, “ the late Hon. James White, who had the cream of horses and won the best stakes, showed by a return extending over seven years that, putting prize money against expenses, he had lost /15,000.” “ Terlinga,” the sporting editor of the Australasian, replies as under:—“ I have before me a return of Mr White’s winnings during the time he was on the turf, and I find he won /121,38 s in stakes alone I Will anyone believe that Mr White’s expenses topped this amount ? If they will, they must be given credit for an extraordinary amount of credulity. Allowing that he had 20 horses in work for the whole of the twelve years he was on the turf, and they cost /4 a week each (a liberal allowance), the total would only be 449.5W0.” - *