The record-union., 1897-09-22
OF INTEREST TO HORSEMEA.
A FUTURITY STAKE CANNOT
BE DECLARED OFF.
Buckman & Carragher of This
City Secure an Interest
ing Ruling.

A case was decided by the Trotting
Horse Board of Appeals yesterday IN
San Francisco that is of great inter
est and importance to breeders who
participate in track events.
IN 1894 the Yolo County Agricultural
District Association offered a futurlty
trotting stake to come off this year.
There were thirty-four nominations on
which first payments were made, ana
five owners paid up in full, the pay
ments amounting in all to $50.
For reasons of their own the Direct
ors last July returned to the five own
ers who had made final payments their
entrance money, and declared the stake
off
Four Of the five accepted the money
and most Of the colts were put out
Of training. Messrs Buckman & Car
raghar, proprietors Of River View stock
farm, near this city, declined to accept
the check sent to them, however. They
denied the right of the association to
annul a futurity stake in that sum-
mary manner, and informed them that
their entry, Fraulien Dexter, would be
on hand on the date named for the
race, ready TO go for the money, and
would claim the stake.
At the late meeting in Woodland, on
the date for which the race had been
announced, Fraulien Dexter appeared
on the track, the Judges We're notified
that she was ready to go for the stake
and her driver weighed-in in the pres
ence of witnesses.
The Judges said there was to be no
such race, and abandoned the stand at
once, but the filly was sent over the
course. The demand of her owners for
the money that had been paid in was
refused, and they promptly took steps
to lay the whole matter before the
Board of Appeals.
That body met yesterday and heard
such evidence as each side had to Of
fer. with the result that the contention
of Messrs. Buckman & Carragher was
sustained.
The board decided, however, that as
the Secretary of the association had
failed to notify the other owners OF
the fact that Messrs. Buclknan & Car
ragher had declined to accept their en-
trance money, resulted in hardship
upon them, and that each Of those who
had paid their entrance in full was
entitled to share pro rata in the money
While this latter part Of the decision
may be in accordance with the rules,
it is manifestly unjust to Buckman &
Carragher. They all had the same op-
portunity to reject their entrance
money and to have their colts on the
track ready to race for the stake. Ev-
cry man is presumed to know the law,
and the same rule should hold good in
racing that is to be conducted honestly.
The owners of Fraulien Dexter
thought they knew the law (of racing),
or knew what it should be, and others
should have been equally wide-awake
if they did not wish to be imposed on.
1t is not fair, therefore, that men who
were only too glad, perhaps, to get
their entrance money back and to avoid
having to contend for it in the race,
should profit equally with the only
owners who had sufficient confidence
in their ability to win to prompt them
to face the music.
However, while Messrs. Buckman &
Cawagher may not get all that is just
ly due them, they deserve the thanks OF
all breeders for their pluck in refusing
to be denied their rights and thus de-
termining a principle in racing juris-
prudence that might otherwise have re-
mained long unsettled and worked in
jury to others.