A REPLY TO "FAIR PLAY."

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume XXIV, Issue 9662, 6 November 1882, Page 3

A REPLY TO "FAIR PLAY."

TO THE EDJTDj). Sir, — One scarcely knows whether to pity or feel amused at a . writer w,ho makes himself appear ridiculous by rushing in to print and making reckless assertions which, on beiug put to tlie test, prove anything but the trulh. • In my last letter I most emphatically denied having written ore line either for cr apainst tbo handicaps for the Wanganni Spring Meeting, and I challenged I those who thought otherwise to Bearch a file of the Chronicle for proof. Notwithstanding my denial, '.'Fair Play," in his anything but gentlemany letter of Saturday morning, writes to the effect that " Souknr " (who he concludes is the owner of Hippodamia) wrote sporting criticisms reflecting on tbe injustice of the weight allotted her (Hippodamia). Now, Sir, would it not have been more honourable on the part of " Fair Play " had he referred to a file of your paper before he wrote his letter, he would then have avoided making an assertion which (if he had the spirit of fair play in him) he rnnst now acknowledge was untrue. " Fair Play," in his frantic endeavours to defend the Wanganui handioapper, makes the absurd assertion that Hipporica (surely be must have meant Hippodamia) could easily have won the Consolation, with all her Bst 101 b, and terms her " one of the fastest animals that ever ran on the Wanganni course." As Hipporina has only started twice in her whole racing career, and on both occasions was unplaced, it must be evident to every eaue person that " Fair Play " jumps at conclusions in a most extraordinary manner. Had "Fair Play" asserted that Hipporina was one of the very best bred mares that ever ran on the Wanganui course everyone might have agreed with him. That Mr Hately thinks his mare Scotch Mist a good one is quite evident, from the fact I hat notwithstanding her recent defeat in the Wanganui Consolation, he has since nominated her for the Auckland Cup, where the merest tyro in racing matters knows she will have to meet much better performers than Hipporina,, and give them weight. It therefore is plain that either Mr Hateley fancied his mare did not run up to bar true form, at the Wanganui Spring Meeting, or, if that was her best form, he must bs throwing his money away in nominating such an animal for a high class handicap. I would like to ask Mr Hately if he honestly thought Scotch Mist 251 b inferior to Hipporina, whom he considers, by his handicap'for the Wanganui Stakes, inferior to the Wanganui hack Dan by 251 b. Taking this line of argument, Scotch Mist would, according to the Wanganui handicapping, be 3st 101 b inferior to Dan, and as Dan would only get about Gstin the Auckland Cup, what weight does Scotch Mist expect to get ? " Fair Play " infers that the principal reason why sporting writers condemn Mr Hately's handicap is because that gentleman will not handicap to suit Mr Pollock's horses. Now, Sir, considering that Mr Hately's handicaps hare been unanimously condemned by every sporting writer and racing man in New Zealand these last two years, and that Mr Pollock has only within this last six weeks become possessed of racehorses for Mr Halely to handicap, it must be yatcnt to any person who will look at the matter from a disinterested point of view that Mr Pbllock cannot be h»ld rcspon- I sible for the adverse Qriticisias that Save

been passed on Mr Hately's productions. Probably " Fair Play " is one' of the would-be sportsmen who, from his own experience, knows little or notliirig'iibpul either horses or handicapping, and, having no good arguments to bring forward in defence of his friend, takes the same course as the legal fraternity are said < tc take when in a similar predicament, viz., "no case amise .tbe other side." The gentlemanly remark that Mr " Soukar " must be either a much-injured man, an artist, or a fool, is unworthy of notice, Further than that, it is a convincing proof that my previous letter " struck home," and "Pair Play" by his reply does not leave the public in doubt as to which is the artist and which, is the fool. P.S. — Since writing the above another anonymous letter has appeared in yout evening contemporary which sets forth that Mr Hately did not frame the handicap for the Consolation at the Wanganui Spring Meeting. If the writer, " Justice," is one of the W.J.C. Committee he need not have been ashamed to sign his name. If he is not a member of the committee, then his statement is entirely valueless, as no one except a member of the committee can know what is done at committee meetings. All that the outside public know is, that Mr Hately was appointed handicapper for the W.J.C, and if the handicap was made by the committee the race was then "no race," and those who entered horses can claim to have their entry money returned. However, as the requisite number of members of the W.J.C. have petitioned the club for an investigation, it is needless to make further comment. — I ami' &c, Sot/kAb.