Walker Lake bulletin. (Hawthorne, Nev.) 1883-1926, 1895-04-03

death finally and mercifnlly relieving
him of his sutferings.
But neither the sufferings of the poor
brute nor his miserable end are either
primarily or mainly responsible for the
prohibition by the racing officials of
the practice here described. The pro-
lection of the race horse from pain and
suffering is today little thought of by
the average owner or trainer. save
where it means SO many more dollars
with which to line his pockets. But
again, this question arises: If giving
the horse the dope or the injection is
done to increase his chances of victory,
and if the practice is not prohibited
because of its cruelty. why is it pro-
hibited and punished?
The reply is no less startling than
true, because it Injuries gambling. that
vice without which support no race
track in this day of foolishly enlarged
stakes and purses and exorbitantly
paid jockeys, trainers. starters, judges,
and other racing officials can exist.
OF course the two great governing
organizations of legitimate racing in
the east and west, respectively. would
insist that they prohibit the practice
because of its cruelty. but the officials
of the outlawed tracks and of those
conducting winter racing are in this
matter, at least, more frank and hon
est, and unhesitatingly declare that
they punish those who attempt it sim
ply because it Injuries gambling.
Tho manner in which tho injury is
done is rather ingeniously explained.
The public. such racing officials state,
really meaning the bookmakers who
support the tracks, being entitled to be
made acquainted in every possible way
with the racing abilities of every
starter in race, such information
cannot be obtained where the owner
or trainer willfuly and Intentionally
withholds it by secretly administering
to the animal. If. they explain, the
public (again really meaning the men
of odds could always know with abso-
Lutte certainty just when horse has or
has not been doped, or given the in
lection, all would be we'll. and no un-
fairness or deception could be practiced
in the matter.
For instance, the protectors of the
public say an owner or trainer has no
right to mislead the patrons of the
track by starting horse several times
without the dope or injection, the
animal being thereby hopelessly beaten
in each race. and the odds against him
correspondingly enlarged. and then in
the next race, by secret dosing, enabling
the animal to madly gallop in first, to
the great financial loss of the public.
That is. in reality, to the loss of those
bookmakers who were not given the
tip.
From this it will be seen that the
practice is prohibited and punished,
solely in the interests of the gambling
element, and not in the interest of
humanity. Of course it is not always
successful. Very often the fact that
the animal has been dosed is discovered
yofore the race, when it is prevented
from participating. Not infrequently
the race is run before it is discovered.
In such cases if the animal wins bets
are declared off or the race given to
the horse finishing second, the doped
winner being disqualified. The
scheme, however, is not always sue
cessful, the animal being beaten despite
the fact that it was dosed. But the fact
remains that it is doped or given the
injection for the purpose of increasing
its chances of victory, and that the
racing officials, acting alone in the
interests of the gambling element, pro-
hibit the practice and punish the
offending owners or trainers for the
sole reason that the practice Injuries
gambling.