view raw text
PUNISHMENT FOR FOUI.1NG. "Turf critics east and west have been wasting much time and space in a discussion pro and con of the California rule of racing, which permits the coast racing stewards to place a horse disqualified for fouling in any lower position than the one where he finished, instead of eliminating the offender entirely from any share whatever in the race and purse. The discussion arose over the recent placing of Yellow Tail third in a race in which he finished first after bumping the contending horses. It is difficult to imagine any circumstances to warrant the California ruling. On general principles it is absurd," says the New York Evening Sun. "If one horse fouls another in a race, whether the offense be the fault of the horse or jockey, the owner and backers of the animal offending must pay the penalty in accordance with the common rule that a principal is responsible for the acts of his agent. Moreover, no 1 less a penalty than the total elimination of the horse from the race will in justice fit the i crime. Even in imaginable cases, where at first glance injustice-might seem to be done, , it will appear on closer consideration that : the strictest interpretation of the rule is the s only truly just one. For instance, take a . race like the Futurity, in which one owner might have several entries. Imagine that one of this owners starters finishes in front, but that another of his candidates commits a foul during the race that may not seem to have materially affected the result It is often argued that in such a case the owner of the winner should not be deprived of the fruits of victory because the second or third string to his bow disturbed the general harmony of the event. But right here is where the very essence of the general rule of disqualification should be applied. It may well be that the offending horse bumped into another that, with fair sailing would have been the contending horse at the finish, and might have won but for the interference. True, the fouling might be the result of pure accident, but, on the other hand, it might result from a deliberate intent on the part of a jockey to insure the victory to his employer. In either event, the owner of the horse fouled has been deprived of his rights, namely, a fair field and no favor, and by no process of reasoning is the offending owner entitled to escape the penalty. California is the only locality on the face of the globe, so far as the writer is .ware, where the racing stewards are permitted to exercise-their discretion in mitigating the punishment for fouling, and the sooner the coast racing authorities conform their rule to the dictates of common sense, the better for their reputations as wise judges and for the interest of the sport in that State."
