The Salt Lake tribune. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1890-current, 1909-06-25
MIR. FREED is RIGHT.

1t seems to lis that thc reasons givci
by Mr.. Lester Freed and those who sup
ported him in favor Of the expansion Of
the racing meet for the ten days op
tion carried in the contract. did not re
ceive the attention that their position
merits at the meeting Of the Officers
and directors of Utah State Fair AS
sociaton on Wednesday afternoon
OF course. there is no plea here in
favor Of betting at horse races, toutine
for horses, or any of the obnoxious
things that sometimes attend race
meets, and that to limited degree have
attended the present meet at the fan
grounds in this city. Not only do we
refuse TO make any such plea. but we
do not believe that any candid plea
can be made for those things II is A
JOY to see good, square horse race, but
it is an unmitigated evil to have the
pressure for betting, the tricks of touts,
and tho losing Of money by people who
cannot afford to lose 1T. Any departure
from n straightforward, honest race is
altogether indefensible. The pulling of
A horse that ought to win. the forcing
to the front Of horse that cannot and
ought not TO win on MS merits, the
tricks, the iockeying whereby the spec
tators are deceived as TO the relative
merits of the horses-all these things
cannot come in for too severe repre-.
hension, And wherever anything of
this kind is done. either here or else
where, there should be an immediate
stop put to it, al whatever sacrifice or
cost
But assuming that the race meet here
was fairly well conducted, and that the
attending evils were minimized AS much
as the Jockey club, under whose auspices
the meet was held, could possibly do.
we think that Mr.. Freed s plea was
n strong one. The Officers of the fair
association had made contract with
the club and had allowed. without pro
test or open limitation, the advertising
of forty DAYS racing meet. To he
sure. the absolute contract was but for
thirty days, but it seems to have been
understood on both sides that the op-
tion Of an extension Of ten days was
open TO the Jockey club in case il saw
fit 10 exercise it. Nothing to the con
trary appeared, so far as the public has
any knowledge. And there appears TO
be no sufficient justification for any
refusal on the part Of the officers of
the fair association TO refuse that op-
ton
The only reason that could rightly he
pleaded for refusal to extend the OPP
tion was misconduct on the part of
those conducting the races; something
that could be established rs fact or
reasonably true. But the fair associa-
ton IN refusing its consent 10 the ten
davs' extension did not put that re
fusal on any such ground, but merely
on the matter Of popular objection 10
the races. This popular objection TO
the races, however, was just as active,
Just as much 10 be reckoned with. be
fore the contract was entered into at
all for the thirty days of races. Those
who object 10 thc extension of ten days
for the races would have objected Just |
as strcnuously to the contract for thir-
ty days To urge that those who were
opposed altogether 10 the races, are still |
opposed TO them. as a reason against |
extension, is ridiculous. Ii is matter |
entirely of good faith, and no extra
neous make-weight should have been |
dragged in, If the officers of the fair |
association had taken the popular ludg |
ment III the first place. il would have |
refused undoubtedly TO allow the races |
at all, and no one would have had the |
least right to complain, The fact that |
this popular Judgment may not have |
been active and clamorous, cuts no |
Figure in the case; it was there lust |
the same all the time, and was known |
to be there. ii is too late TO plead that |
popular Judgment, after the contract |
II refusal to concede the option which |
the Jockey club supposed 10 be on its |
own part TO exercise or refuse. The
option was apparently An option Of the
Jockey club rather than Of the officers
of the fair association, unless some
ltdSoH dlIecDnp InS races themselves |
could be pleaded 10 the contrary No
such reason appearing. nothing Of the
kind being urged on the part of the fai.
association, common Justice, it seems TO
us, required that Mr.. Freed and his sup.
porters should have been listened to
with more attention, and their reasons
gwen more weight. Good faith and
reason were with them.
We suppose ii to be absolutely true
that if the directors had all been called
together in the first place. and the whole
matter threshed out, that the vote
against holding any race meet would
have been substantially the same as the
vote for refusing to extend this op.
ton. This being probably So we con
tend that il was no reason at all. Those
who are opposed 10 horse racing alto
gether where any open betting is to
be INDUCED in, certainly would have
opposed the thirty days as well as the