The times dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1903-1914, 1913-07-28
WILL GIVE DUKEDOM
TO PRINCE ARTHUR

Duke of Fife was the chief, and there
is no Carmichael among the descend
ants OF any OF the I'VE earls
AS l have pointed out before in these
letters. men of good birth In England
when involved In the tolls of criminal
la~, invariably cndcavor TO conceal tho
names OF their family. for the purpose
of averting tho disgrace resulting even
from a mere charge Of crime against
one Of its members. When foreigner
In this country Is locked up in con
nection with some criminal offense and
claims 10 be noble. his preten sions
fcay therefore nearly always be re-
garded with contempt and derision
Thus. last month nearly every news
paper in the country printed the story
OF 4 convict on his release from the
Federal prison Mt Lcavensworth, Kan.
on the completion OF his three-year
term, TO the effect that nc was in
reality Sir Frederick; Grey. and claim
ing to be the son and heir Of Lord
Grey de Ruthyn. and brother of the
Hon. Lady Edith Grey. or Ruthyn.
Lanca shire." Incidentally he admitted
having done time in England before
crossing the Atlantic.
Now. the most cursory reference to
any of tho English "pccrages." is sutY-
cicnt TO show that the patronymic of
Lord Grey de Ruthyn Is not GREY.
but Clifton. Also that the late Lord
I II.
pccrage some thirty years ago, died
last year without leaving any chill
dren. The present Lord Grey de
Ruthyn is an elderly bachelor, who
passed through New York the other
dag from England. on mis- way to his
ranch. near Round Up. Montana where
ne has made his home for the past
quarter of j century. lie has two sis
tiers, one OF them seXagenarian
widow known as Mrs. Lancolot Butler
Bowden. of Balbro House. Chesterfield,
England, while the other sister.
Florence. now near hfty years or age.
married Sir Alan Bellingham. Conse
qucntly there is no such person as
Lady Edith Grey OF Ruthyn." Finally.
Ruthyn. or Ruthin, is not in Lam
cashire, but in Denbighsh;re. Wales.
II 90 TO the trouble to explain
this. II is to relieve Lord Grey dc
Ruthyn and his family-one OF the most
historic and honored houses OF the old
English aristocracy-of the imputation
under which they have been placed
by the Leavcnworth prisoners widely
published lies of having a twice con
vicred criminal among their members.
Mention has often been made in these
letters of the fact that the triumvirate
of stewards of the English Jockey Club
are rho supreme court Of the British
turf against whose decisions there is
to tn. query as to whence this trium-
viratc derives it's authority.
The question has once more been
brought upon the tapis by the action
OF the stewards in disqualifying Bruce
Ismays horse Craganour. which came
In first at the recent Derby race. MIL
lions of dollars changed hands In con-
nection with this race. both in Eng
la nd and abroad. and II is. therefore. but
right that an explanation should be
given as to the right of the stewards
OF the Jockey Club to thus disqualify
the winner. and TO accord the victory
TO the horse which came in second.
The fact of the matter is that the
Jockey Club, which dates from 1851,
has gradually acquired control OF al
most all the racing Of Great Britain.
and having drawn up regulations
known as the rules of racing every
owner who enters a horse for a race
TO be run under these rules Is held
to have agreed to be bound by them.
When an owner enters a horse for any
race. he. ipso facto, becomes party
TO a contract, OF which one of the prin-
pal clauses runs 10 the effect that any
dispute as to the fulillment OF the
conditions by either side shall be re-
ferred to the stewards and finally de-
termined by them.
Naturally, Bruce Ismay could have
appealed from the decision of the
stewards about Craganour in the last
Derby race, to court of law. But II
wss pointed out 10 him that he would
have no chance OF success, and his at
tcntion was called to the circumstances
that In the very few instances where
an appeal had been made to the courts
from the decision OF the stewards of the
Jockey Club, the latter had been up
held In every instance. Thus, some
sixty years ago, when the owner OF
horse ut the Bowden Spring meeting
sued the owner OF the actual winner
of the race. horse pamed Milkmaid,
for the stakes. on the ground of foul
riding, he was defeated. II being held
that the rules OF racing provided that
all disputes should be settled by the
stewards OF the Jockey Club. whose
decision shall be final" The court
therefore. held that there could be no
appeal from the stewards on matters
OF fact. or the Interpretation OF the
rules of the race, unless there had been
any material alteration of the consti
tuition OF the tribunal which the trium
virate formed without the consent OF
the disputants.
Copyright, 1913. by the Brentwood
Company