Rejecting Nomination.

Patea Mail, 24 August 1880, Page 2

Rejecting Nomination.

(by leolinus.) When the acceptances for the Hawke’s Bay Jockey Club made their appearance ■last month, I in'common"with many others was surprised to find the name of Hailstorm did not appear, as it was understood that Mr Povvdrell intended taking, him and his half-brother Tally-ho to the Napier meeting. I believe the facts are these. On the programme, horse owners were informed that nominations for the Spring and Flying Handicaps would close on Tuesday, May 25th. Mr Powdrell posted Hailstorm’s nominations for these events on the day mentioned, and they were received in Napier a few days afterwards, and no objection was raised about being late. On the Ist July the weights appeared in the papers, but Mr Powdrell did not. receive an official list of them until the 29th inst., nine days after the acceptances closed, on account of a mistake on the part of the secretary in addressing them to Wanganui. However, Mr Powdrell took the newspaper reports, and sent the acceptances by registered letter on the 17th of the month from the Patca post office. The letter, it appears? did not reach Napier till the 22nd, apd although the stewards took the trouble to find out that the post marks were correct, they decided not to accept the letter, and returned it with a note from the secretary who, acting under instructions from the stewards, expressed regret, &c., and informed Mr Powdrell that the stewards would bo quite willing to let Hailstorm run if the owners would consent. A list of the names of owners was supplied, and I noticed amongst them the name of a steward who had seconded the resolution which was the cause of the entry not being accepted. Now it was not a very likely thing that Mr Powdrell could expect the consent of this one party even if he thought fit to try and obtain it from the others. I contend there is nothing stated in the programme which would bind the club not to accept the entry, and I am aware of no rule under which the}’ run that applies to the case. Rules and conditions are made to prevent fraud, but no attempt at fraud can be shown ; therefore I say the stewards should have exercised the discretionary power allowed them, and accepted the money. They did accept the nomination money, which could not have been in the secretary’s hands on the date advertised. They have not only debarred Hailstorm, but have been the cause of Mr Powdrell scratching Tally-ho and a filly from the guineas, while they have lost the support of two horse owners who have contributed largely to the revenue of Napier race meetings for the last 16 years. I am disposed to be charitable and shall attribute the stewards’ conduct to a want of knowledge of their business ; although I cannot help noticing some statements made at the annual meeting of the club, when this matter was again brought forward. The secretary is reported to have said: “ The printed programmes of the races distinctly stated that the acceptances with fees must be in the hands of the secretary.” Mr Winter said : “ Wanganui is the only place where entries are received in this way,” 1.c.. bearing the post mark. Both these statements were misleading to the other members of the club. No such words as those mentioned by the secretary appear in the programme ; and Mr Winter was misinformed, for he certainly did not speak from experience. I was also surprised to read an editorial footnote to a letter written by Mr Powdrell, senr., in the Hawke’s Bay Herald. The footnote said “The decision of the Jockey Club was in strict accordance with the printed conditions, and with the rule of the Canterbury Jockey Club read at the meeting.” I say distincty that it was not in accordance with the conditions ; and I would ask what the Canterbury Jockey Club rules have to do with the case, when the club advertises that the “rules of the Hawke’s Bay Jockey Club will be strictly adhered to ? ”

Now it is apparent from the following resolution proposed at the meeting that the club had no rule bearing on this particular question : “ That no nomination or acceptance be received by the stewards under any circumstance whatever, unless accompanied by the necessary amount in cash. Per the future entries by telegram, stating that the money has been forwarded by post, be not received, unless the fees be in the hands of the secretary before the hours of closing such nominations or acceptances.” From the sporting editor’s n 0 te it would appear that the club finafc determined the case on a rule of the Canterbury Jockey Club. Under-the circum-

stances or conditions by which the clnh returned, the acceptance, Mr Powdrcll can compel them to return the "amount of Hailstorm’s acceptance, and proceed for the recovery of the money if his horse won. The incompetency of stewards often; makes itself evident ; and the present case shows the position racing men may find themselves in when at the mercy of such a tribunal as the committee of the club referred to. Hailstorm, to my knowledge, had been backed to win the double, and a good deal of money was laid on Tally-ho for the Guineas and Wanganui Derby last year; while the two-year old filly by Papapa was also supported for the Guineas of 1881. Of course the backers of these animals will lose their money; but apart from all betting considerations, common justice should be done.