The sun., 1903-11-14
SUE AGAIN FOR JOCKEY HICKS
NEW ORLEANS MEN TRY HERE
AFTER FAILING AT SARATOGA.
Ownership Of the Services Of . Highly
valuable COIOred Steerer OF Race.
horses at stake in q Suit which, COun.
sci Says, Recalls the Dred Scott Case.

horses at Stake in q Suit which, COun.
sci Says, Recalls the Dred Scott Case.
Another attempt was made yesterday
before Justice Clarke in the Supreme Court
by persons in New Orleans to get control
OF the person and earnings of the colored
jockey Wallace Hicks. The first attempt
by practically the same persons was made
in Saratoga last summer when one night
last August the lad was taken from his
bed about midnight by two Fulton county
deputy sherifrs on a writ Of habeas corpus
issued by Justice Spencer Of the Third
Judicial Department. The boy was taken
over to Fulton. brought back before JUS
tce Spencer in picnic pavilion. whore
court was held, the next morning and the
Justice, after hearing William T. Houston
in support Of the writ and Senator Edgar
r. Bracket for its dismissal, promptly
set the boy at liberty.
Now the same thing is being tried in
New York. The facts are: Wallace Hicks
was bound out by his father. Atimore
in March. 1902, to Chrystie Wright and
Alfonso j. Plique for period of three
years. Plique and Wright were to teach
the boy to ride, feed clothe and take good
care Of him and give to old Atimore Hicks
$40 every three months. They, in turn.
we're to receive whatever they could get
for the Jockeys services.
Wright and Plique dissolved partnership
and Plique, who brought the boy North.
gave first call on his services to Perry Bel
mont and second call to John Z. Madden.
The boys mounts were no successful
that his services were in great demand.
His name was much in the papers and
Wright and others in New Orleans thought
that Plique was having too much of good
thing. In Saratoga they asserted practi-
cally that Plique had kidnapped the boy.
They couldn't sustain the charge 80 they
resorted TO the habeas corpus proceedings.
Wright were prominent in pressing the
case in Saraoga and Fulton counties. In
the New York case Vidrine does not appear,
but Hamilton Wri ight appears by one
Ernest ". Reiss, his attorney. The case
sued by Justice Mccall, at the instance
of Reiss, commanding Plique to show
cause why he should not surrender Wallace
Hicks forthwith to Reiss. In the argument
yesterday Mr. Houston who has been the
through, produced copy Of an agreement
entered into last July between old man
Hicks and Hamilton Wright. in which
Wright was empowered to cancel the con-
tract between the older HICKS ana wright
and Plique for the Jockeys services.
w. Fl. Page. Jr., appeared for Plique.
He said that II Justice Clarke sustained
the writ he would be following along the
lines of the Dred Scott decision which was
one of the chief causes that led to the civil
war He also said that such a contract Is
nothing more nor less than gambling
transaction.
Wright" said Mr.. Page, agamblee
with the father of Wallace Hicks that he
will break the contract made between
the defendant fPlique) and the father;
that he will obtain the custody Of said
| minor; that he will make valuable contracts
for his services; and the father CANDLES
/ that he will not be able to do anything Of
the kind, but that if he does succeed he
will give him half the boy earns. There
can be no question that however such
agreement is looked at it cannot be upheld.
Certainly it does not lie with this plaintiff
to attack the validity OF the contract Of
| apprenticeship made between the father
and the defendant. which was made under
the sanction Of the State Of Louisiana and
in the same breath declare that this con-
tract made between Wright and Atimore
Hicks was valid contract"
Justice Scott took the papers and reserved
decision.