view raw text
REFLECTIONS " ii By Nelson Dunston ] Merritt Wins Reinstatement Barred Jockey Gets License Jockey Club Had Weak Case Secrecy Passes From Rulings * NEW YORK. N. Y., Apni 28. The decision in the Merritt case was no r surprise to those who listened to the testi- a mony. But in granting the jockey a license p to ride, the Joint bes- to ride, the Joint bes- sion of the State Rac- c ing Commission and s The Jockey Club e stressed that the stewards properly exercised ■ their discretion in re- v fusing to issue a jock- s eys license for the year 1943. They took the c stand that he had been j severely punished by j his two-year stay on j the ground. William Seligson. who put up r a fine defense for Merritt, did not see why they had to wait until July 17. but he told i the writer, "I look upon it as a complete vindication for Merritt and I believe he has I cleared his name by the fight he put up. j As bur as we are concerned the case is now closed." The Jockey Club did not have a i | ] very strong case and for the simple reason , j that it is next to impossible to prove that | a man pulled" a horse. Instead of trying I to point out where the alleged act took place, as one steward did. they should have simply stood on the fact that they were ; j in the stewards stand by virtue of their i experience and that they did not have to go beyond their own opinion in matters j such as this. Should the future bring any | similar cases, the stewards will know how to conduct themselves while under cross- | examination. I On the evidence as presented, only one verdict was possible — and that was the one given. Seligson won sympathy for his client — and to be brutally frank about it — not because the jockey had clearly established his innocence, but more because The Jockey Club insisted in the secrecy of Major Belmont and refused to admit that the game of 3.500 spectators with the secrecy of old, had I now grown into a game of 35,000 I fans who were entitled to know the facts. j Major Belmont was a great "power for, the finer side of racing, but he hushed any wrong -doing on the false premise that it ; was good for the turf. His ideas have been t handed down as heirlooms, but with the . changes in racing and the public attitude toward the sport, it was only a question j of time when "a Merritt case" had to drag | these matters into the open. The three I New York stewards are fine, honorable i men and we have the greatest respect fori them. But, in this case, they made the selfish mistake of keeping their own linen clean by sending a boy foiih as if he had done no wrong. A highly specialized court room audience listened to that testimony I in astonishment. That one point did more | to harm The Jockey Club case than any ! other. The Merritt case is going to do racing a lot more good than harm. It has established a precedent whereby The Jockey Club will have to end an era of secrecy and give, the public the full facts. If the stewards were trying to be good fellaws with the man they suspected, they were not being good fellows with the thousands of people who are wagering on the horses on the days that Merritt was supposed to have indulged in his saddle antics. Had they suspended him on July 17. 194:!, and told the world why they had suspended him, they would have i earned the admiration of the racing I public. But, in not doing so. they have brought a situation that should I be corrected, now that it has been I brought into the clear. i 1 If any jockey is gloating over the fact, j that he can now drag a case into court i after he has been suspended by the stew-j aids, he has a rude awakening coming to i him. In the trial, as conducted. Merritt was a lucky boy. Whether he knowrs it orj | not. Merritt has ended — once and for all — " the practice of evading a suspension and a I j I trip to another track in another state with I I clean silks. Any more lawsuits will mean 1 ! in the future a rider may be formally suspended for a long period and the stewards 1 will not be so kind-hearted when they take • the stand and are asked for their reasons 1 j for the suspension. That is as it should bej and the racing public will applaud these men who are charged with the grave responsibility of protecting them to the utmost There is one more chapter to the Merritt case. William Seligson. his attorney, told us on two occasions: "I am absolutely convinced of the innocence of this jockey." For the sake of the man who defended him. but more, for his wife and three children, Merritt should come back to be the rider his lawyer promised he would be if given a licence. Th# Jockeys Guild has a responsibility here. John Swisher, head of the Guild, should point out to these boys that any future suspensions may mean at least two years on the ground and possibly the penalty that, if the case goes against them, they may never be able to ride on an American track again.
