THE "WEXFORD" CASE.

Mount Ida Chronicle, Volume III, Issue 197, 6 December 1872, Page 6

THE "WEXFORD" CASE.

'- It is very seMom that the stewards of any Jockey Club place themselves' in such a position as to make their decisions a matter for'legal interference. In the few isolated cases that do oreur, the public sympathy almost invariably supports the action taken by the stewards. Nor is this unfair; for these 'gentlemen—for no gain, for no hope of praise ; on the other hand, certain loss of time, abuse, and annoyance —undertake their duties with the sole hope of providing amusement for the public, and an honest recompense for' the owners of good horses. At the same time, having underiaken these duties, they have no right to give other than their best attention to the carrying out to a successful issue of the published programme. That t]\e stewards of the Cromwell Spring "Race Meeting have nothing to blame but tlieir own dilafoririess in attending to their du'ies for the unpleasant dispute that has since arisen, must be clear to all who have read the very full account of the " Wexford " 'ease published n the 'Cro nwell A;*gus.' It is always cusiomary lor the winner of a Selling lince to be led direct from the. scales to the judge's box, for sale. The'evidence of the auctioneer shows that this was done ; that he (the auctioneer) waited in the buggv, which did duty as judge's box, a Considerable time before beginning the sale, which was conducted in the usual way—Hie hammer falling t»the owner's bid of £ls. That the horse would have fetched a much higher, sum if the stewards had seen to their duties we have no' doubt. The 'act is, they did not; and we are glad, therefore, that they, and they alone, are to suffer by it. I The defence set up by the Stewards,' that afrer the race the winner became tiv'ir pr >perty, is absurd, even when qualj.fi.''d by the term ''possessory right." The custom is, as we have indicated above, that'the sale follows the weighing in of the winner, an I t\y ste.w.i-'ds shml I hive been sufficiently alive to their duties! to prevent a sale going on from the -judge's box without their knowledge.

i Tn giving judgment iu this case (James i ijfazlett y. Taylor and others, stew-' arls of the Cromwell Spring Race M-iet- : in? —an action to recover the sum of £ls, ; being amount of'prize advertised to be [paid jfco the-winner of the Hack Selling i."Ric>\ run at- C/omwell racecourse on the 27; h September last.) the Resident Magis- | trate s-u"d the Bench had come to the con- ' elusion that the plaintiff was undoubtedly 1 entitled to the stalcas. It was admitted ; by the that they ninde no special ' appointment of an auctioneer, and, u.ider the circumstances, the auctioneer c mid not be blamed for acting as he had done. It was in umbent upon! the stewards to prove that the sale had been conducted with undue hast", and with an apparent ; disposition to get, the hors-> knocked down 'to the owner. The advertisement simply s'ated the winner was "to be sold for £15." The sale took place,: but there was no proof of any collusion between the owner and the auctioneer. The.whole procedure certainly seemed very loose, and the Bench would' recommend that strict rules should be laid down for (he future. The verdict would be for the plaintiff in the f u il amount claimed, together with £1 2s. professional costs, 245. costs, and 235. witness' expenses. The Bench had remarked a very flat contradiction in the statemmts of two of the witnesses, either of whom, i'aey trusted, must be greatly at fault as'regarded memory.