view raw text
REFLECTIONS By Nelson Dunstan Merritt Hearing Legal Brawl Dunne on Stand Three Hours Lawyers Snarl at Each Other But Racing Gets the Black Eye NEW YORK, N. Y.. April 19. The Jockey Club and State Racing Commission vacated their swank uptown premises to engage in a Hester Street brawl with jockey Bobby Merritt and his attorney on Tuesday night. The famous Running Rein trial of 1844 was actually mild in comparison with this 1944 trial or call it scandal, if you will of the case of a jockey who sought to match wits with the ruling bodies of racing and. through his at torney, won the opening round. But, we [ must add. other rounds are to come and, judging by the initial fracas, there will be little left of some reputations when the bell rings for the final round. When the Su- ; preme Court ruled that the Merritt case should be reviewed, it did not realize that it was to develop into a knock-down-drag-out battle between lawyers, and that, before the night was over, the witnesses were to be given lessons in the class and quality of horses, handicapping and. especially, the fine art of "pulling" a horse, as expounded by Francis Dunne, steward, representing the State Racing Commission When the trial started. Herbert Bayard Swope reminded those present that it would not be conducted in a strictly legal manner. Let it be said that is was not. While William Seligson. attorney for Robert Merritt, talked of sportsmanship, he used every legal trick in the bag in the defense of his client. Mr. Seligson is a smart trial lawver. He will stop at nothing to win a point, and he didnt. On one occasion in his cross-examination of Dunne, he said he knew little about racing. Later in the evening, when a former inspector for the State Racing Commission took the stand, he did not hesitate to become very sarcastic in ridiculing the man because he had only nine years experience on the race track. Seligson. as said, is a smart lawyer, or, it may be that he appeared smart, because Bobby Merritt was sitting behind him and prompting him with technical questions aimed to befuddle the witnesses. They were not only befuddled but made to look downright foolish. The case had not proceeded an hour when it was obvious that if Merritt could not win. he would see to it that racing would not win .ither. Early in the hearing the lawyers started 1 snarling and snapping at one another. Kenneth Greenawalt. counsel for The Jockey Club, made the opening address . and. as it was not a legal trial, insisted [ that the burden of proving his innocence , was on Merritt. Seligson. in his opening , address, said the burden of guilt rested with The Jockey Club to prove the charges • it had brought against the jockey. Francis [ Dunne, steward, was the first witness , called. He took the stand ac 7:40 p. m. and, with one brief pause while another . witness was on the stand, was under a . grilling until exactly 10:45 oclock. In the , beginning Dunne threw everything but the ! bucket at Merritt. He said that, no.t only p was Merritt a class D rider, but a class , . A tout. He said that he saw Merritt pull" the horse and Seligson promptly pulled , out a chart of the Empire City race track and demanded that the steward show exactly | where the "pulling" took place. After . much courtroom dramatics. Dunne made the statement that the whole thing was ; getting silly. It was, but Merritts lawyer ! was having all the best of the silliness. Greenawalt is a slim, red-headed man who takes offense easily. Seligson, sitting close to him. is a well-groomed, suave and smooth lawyer who can snap back when snapped at. The crowd in the courtroom were given a complete show when the two lawyers exchanged verbal brickbats. It is unfortunate, through all this, that racing was being dragged in the mud and that, when the evening ended, what little was left of the reputation of Bobby Merritt and The Jockey Club procedure went through the mud with it. When goaded to the point where he snapped back at the lawyer, Dunne produced evidence of the jockey having registered at a New Orleans hotel and in the company of three men whose reputations were anything but the best. One of these men. it developed from police reports, had been arrested for disorderly conduct, bookmaking, assault, vagrancy, petty larceny and finally was involved in a murder case. Merritt might win this case, but in dragging it in the open, he has lost more than the home he claims ho lost in obtaining ,500 to pay a law- yer to defend him in an alleged "ringing" case in Chicago. The admissions of Francis Dunne that Merritt was permitted to ride after the three stewards, on two previous occasions, had agreed he had pulled the horse, Peep Show, was an astonishing disclosure to those hearing the case. Later Dunne rather lamely said they wanted to be sure in their own minds that they were right in the first place. This case reflects more than ever the laxity of racing control. The sport will survive it; in fact, it will be a better sport for the reason that this case has been dragged into the open. We are holding no brief for The Jockey Club stewards, nor against Merritt. Merritts position in this case is of no importance whatsoever. The black eye he has received is nothing compared to the way in which racing might be injured. It is a filthy case from start to finish, but it will bring about changes which must be made if racing is to hold public confidence.
