view raw text
PROMOTING GOOD HORSE BREEDING. Purpose for Which Racing Is Countenanced in Kentucky — "Police Powers" of Racing Commission. Frankfort. Ky.. February S. Pacing in Kentucky is permitted strictly under the police [lowers of the state and countenanced solely for the purpose of promoting good horse breeding, the Court of Appeals asserted win 11 handing down an opinion by Judge Clarke, affirming the Jefferson Circuit Court and upholding the right of the Pacing Commission tii regulate the purses to be offered. Tlie Douglas Park Jockey Club sued the Racing Commission to enjoin the enforcement of the rule promulgated last September, requiring a minimum pane of .$ M on tracks operated within ten miles of a city of 2IMUHHI population and a minimum purse of in on other tracks. The club alleged that the commission has no authority to regulate purses and that this particular regulation is a discrimination in favor of the Lexington track and results in depriving the club of property without due process of law. Reviewing the reason for permitting racing under the commission, the court said it was for tin-sole purpose of promoting the breeding industry and the commission has authority in the exercise of police powers to make and enforce any regulation to realize the object for which it is permitted. If a club may offer a nominal purse or no purse at all. it might result in inferior thoroughbreds or "scrubs" being raced, which would not promote breeding of good stock, but would "afford only an opportunity for gambling." This particular regulation, considering the difference in con li tions and the size of the communities, cannot be attacked on the ground of discrimination. The question of the arbitrariness or unreasonableness of the regulation itself was not raised. The club undertook to draw a parallel between regulation of and discrimination in rates for railroads and in purses required at race tracks; but the court s.iid lli-rc is no comparison : for while "a railroad company is authorized to operate and earn a profit on its la 11 ill air at. appellant has no right whatever to do the business for which it is lii--nsed. except upon such conditions as will pro te a particular industry of the state and prevent an attendant public evil, regardless of whether or not it is profitable." The commission is exercising "a police power declared by the legislative authority of tic state to bt necessary to render the appellants busin. ss legal and not a nuisance." The commission "has the right to revoke a license whenever its operation ceases to promote breeding and is profitable only because of betting and this right carries with it the right to prescribe such regulations as will prevent such a contingency."
