CORRESPONDENCE.

Globe, Volume XXIII, Issue 2227, 18 April 1881, Page 4

CORRESPONDENCE.

Tho following letters appeared iu this morning's “Press„ THE SCRATCHING- OF NATATOR. to the bditoe op the press. Sib, —A friend of mine in tho North Island is in ’the habit of saying, after you have wasted a great deal of argument upon him, “ Well! you say so, but what then P ” Such in my answer to the committee of the Dunedin Jockey Club. They say in their resolution that they express strong disapproval of the course I pursued, and Mr Dowse is reported to have said that mine was not an honest action. I say that I did nothing for the committee of the D. J. O. to disapprove of, and that my action In the matter was not dishonest, and what then ? For a public body like the committee of a club, who judging from their published reports have shown so much animus against me, to say that I have done something dishonest is not sufficient, they must prove it. I think I shall be able to prove, from the report of their own proceedings, that no injustice was done by me to the public either wilfully or unintentionally, and this can bo the only plea for tho disapproval of the club. There were several acceptances for the Forbury and only two runners—were all the other horses scratched overnight, and if not, according to Mr Dowse, have they done no wrong P I know of one animal at any rate that was backed, and was not scratched till after my horse. Mr Gourley in his wisdom will remark— But that animal was upon the ground. Is not the fact of the animal being on the ground far more likely to mislead the public than the fact of my horse being sent away. After I had made up my mind I made no secret of my having given my jockey instructions to send Natator away, as, in the most open manner, I told several gentlemen that the horse was going homo by the early train. The only way in which I could have injured the public was by getting money out of them through my horse. This I did not do, either directly or indirectly ; nor do the members of the club assert that I did so; as Mr Hazlett says complained of being fleeced, it was mere talk.” Mr Dowse says—“lt is impossible to prove he was a party to betting or gambling on the hone, or to the sale of the horse in the Calcutta sweep.” Mr Dowse, no doubt, would have proved it if he could. These statements are not contradicted. I have made the closest inquiries, and from all I can gather, there was no straight-out betting whatever in this race, either for or against my horse, or any other horse; in fast, from what I can learn, fifty pounds would cover tho losses or gains upon the race.

If, then, there was no betting, who has suffered P

Having then, I think, shown, from the admissions of the D.J.O. committee, that I did the public no wrong, and being able to state positively that other horses were not scratched sooner, or as soon as mine, my only crime can have been that I ordered a horse-box overnight in case I elected to go away in the morning. With reference to this I would merely say, that what I wrote in my letter to the Jockey Club was perfectly true, though Mr Qourley curtly remarks that it was impossible it could be. I was very anxious to get home, especially for On Dit’s sake, as she is a delicate mare, and when away a bad feeder. Seeing, however, that I had paid my nomination fees for both the Forbury and Flying Handicaps, I had a right to look at the weights before finally making up my mind what I should do ; and should I have got a box if I bad waited until after the acceptances appeared ? I think not. I simply prudently provided for the contingency of running or sending the horse home. Now, then, a few words with regard to the spirit in which this investigation has been undertaken by the committee of the D.J.O. In the first place, I had done nothing against racing law, and as I bad not defrauded the public, which fact Mr Hazlett and others admit, I had done nothing against racing morality, therefore the committee exceeded their powers in demanding any inquiry. Next, the committee having passed a resolution of a decidedly damaging nature, asking for an explanation of the scratching of Natator, without waiting for a reply, publish that resolution through the length and breadth of New Zealand. Surely a most improper thing for any right-thinking committee to do. Next, at their meetings, the particulars of which you have already published, the majo. rity having decided that there was no legal case against me, they fall back on the last resource, a damaging resolution, and the publication of the whole proceedings. For this I thank them, as anything more onesided than their discussion it is impossible to conceive. These proceedings of the committee I will leave the public to judge of, merely remarking that, as before mentioned, Mr Q-ourley curtly and calmly says that my letter eannot be true; that Mr Hazlett, who states they have no law on their side, and admits that no money was got out of the horse, says that I have done an unjust thing, and he should like to disqualify me ; and that the chairman with admirable justice remarks that they can punish without giving any explanation, and when he sees that Mr Q-ourley’s amendment for disqualification would not even find a seconder he suggests that the meeting should adjourn. At the final meeting Mr Dowse states that he thinks no member present considered mine an honest action. I can only say that if such was the case I trust there were not many members there, as they must have boon singularly deficient in common-sense and proper feeling.

The committee have simply got up a frivolous and vexatious inquiry, having no case whatever against me. They with most questionable taste publish their first resolution asking for an explanation without having the courtesy to wait for my reply, and after receiving it their discussions have been characterised by want of fairness and want of fact, at the same timo being full of the greatest malevolence towards myself without any reason.

With these remarks I shall let the matter rest. The public are well aware that they always receive fair play from Mr Robinson and myself with our horses—a fact which is best proved by the manner in which any horse of ours that has a fair chance is backed by them, they well knowing that they get a good run for their money. Yours, &c., Hekby P. Lancb. TO THE EDITOR OF THE PBEBB. SlB, —As I have only just arrived in the colony, and being in Ei.gland somewhat of a racing man, I naturally take great interest in the animated discussion that took place on the 15th inst. between the members of the Dunedin Jockey Club with regard to tho scratching of Natator. Tho remarks of the members of tho Jockey Club are sublime, and it is clear that moat of them are old turfites. Might I suggest to that august body the following rule :—"No horse shall be entered for a race unless he starts. In case of the sudden death of tho horse previous to tho running of tho race no blame ohall bo attached to tho owner.” I shall hopo to forward this interesting controversy to England, where doubtless it will bo enjoyed by many, and perchance it may be the humble meons of reforming some unprincipled owners who do not consult the public before scratching their horses. Tours, &0., TIiAVELLEH.