The New York herald., 1921-03-24

disciplining, penalizing or controlling
any corporation or person under It's Ju-
risdiction for violation of the letter or
spirit of the law or rules as it may
determine by particular action in any
situation thhat may arise"
1t can readily be seen that the powers
of the commission are broad enough to
warrant the body in reversing the deci-
sion of a referee in the event of evil
dence supporting the charge that the
decision was not in accordance with JUS
tice.
when the Queensberry rules were the
only regulations governing boxing bouts
the decision of referee could not be
reversed. The final clause of the Queens
berry rules provided that all questions
not covered by it's few clauses should
be governed by the London rules.
Section A of the London rules provided
that "the decision of the referee, what
ever 1t may be, shall be final and
strictly binding on all parties. whether
as to the matter In dispute or the issue
OF the battle"
AS result of that rule, the records
Of boxing are full Of decisions that are
travesty on Justice.
William A. Gavin, who drew up the
Walker law, took cognizance of this fact
and inserted a provision which would
permit the boxing commission to undo
wrong perpetrated by faulty deci-
sion by referee or judges
The Boxing Commission has a plain
duty to perform. The members of the
commission can convince themselves
that ODowd was so severely injured
he was compelled to submit to a surgi-
cal operation. This fact can be obtained
at st. Johns Hospital, Long Island City,
ny- mr. "a IN N
physician. AS a matter OF simple jus
tice it is for the commission to reverse
the decision in the bout and take the
title from a man who was warned by
the referee and still dealt the blows
that incapacitated O'Dowd
As to Foul Blows.
The Walker law rule regarding foul
blows is as follows: "The referee shall
Immediately disqualify contestant who
is guilty of deliberate and wilful foul
and award the decision to his opponent.
1t is recommended that the referee shall
not give more than one warning for an
unintentional foul, which is likely to in
capacitate an opponent, and that he
shall disqualify the offender without
warning in case of actual injury"
1t was known as soon as o'Dowd
TeaCHeu MS uTtSSlIlB TpOItl tlldl he Hdu
been injured by foul blows, yet the Box
ing Commission. took no action in the
matter and apparently did not consider
the case of sufficient importance to war
rant an investigation.
In the course of report on the con-
test between Wilson and ODowd the
writer made this statement:
THE fact that o'Dowd easily won
eleven Of the fifteen rounds, was the
aggressor from start to finish and was
the victim of several foul blows, which
should have resulted in the disqualifl-
cation of his opponent, caused tbs
spectators to stare in amazement at
the verdict of the judges and referee"
Wilson hit at least six foul blows dur
ing the bout, and at the close OF the
ninth round, in which the champion
| struck palpably low blow, Referee Nc
Avoy went to Wilson's corner and
| warned him. On two other occasions
McAvoy warned the champion about hit
ting low, but toward the close of the
bout the referee ignored Wilson's tactics
and permitted the champion to hit where
he pleased without even mild repri-
| mand.
| The Boxing Commission now has an
opportunity to clear the sport Of an ugly
blot on its fairness