view raw text
WHY C. E. DURNELL WAS DISCIPLINED. Action the Outcome of An Accumulation of Offensive Occurrences. New York, December 14. It can be said in connection with the case of "Boots" Durnell that the Jockey Club took long-considered action that is likely to be final. The following stewards were present at the meeting which decided the case: August Belmont, James R. Keonc, F. K. Sturgis, J. H. Bradford, n. K. Knapp and Andrew Miller. The published matter about the reasons for Dur-nells punishment arc far wide of the mark. It is absurd that he should have come under the Jockey Clubs ban for talking to Dugan, ids employee before a certain or any race, whether Dugan rode the winner or the loser of it. The action against Durnell was because he had been found guilty of many offenses against the good of the turf, as considered by the Jockey Club. Plenty of evidence in the case has been collected from maiiy sources. Only Durnell, and not John W, Gates or any individual, was tried and disciplined. Durnell has been a troublesome factor in racing for several seasons. He gambled too much, quarrelled publicly too much and worked out too many of bis woes in too noisy a way". There is no question but that the Jockey Club has "the goods" on Durnell and that the eastern and California turf will within a few days be closed to him. Durnell will thus pay the penalty of a good many able men in a good many fertile fields who have overreached themselves.
