Year: 1870




Mn. EDIToR Having read your account of the
dispute between the friends of the Maryland
horse Cecil and those of the Delaware horse,
and knowing that you will be governed by
spirit of fairness we ask leave to submit the other
side of the question and hope to be able to show
that your local reporter has been misinfoimed in
some respects, and left in Ignorance as to other
important ones. Now sir, when the race was
made q written agreement was entered into
that it should be trotted according to the rules
governing Suffolk Park. On the second heat,
McCrone, having the inside track, forces Giles
pie off the track, colliding with him, driving him
into the fence and throwing him out We in
charity to Mr. McCrone, attributed the collision
to accident for although he had been heard to
say, both in Elkton and Warwick, that he
''would win the race, else take wheel off the
other sulkey,h yet after the collision he showed
n disposition to stop and see what damage he
had inflicted, but was urged by several parties
to "drivc on round and win the heat" This
shows they intended to bc governed by rules
and that they would claim the " heat " and pos
sibly Il - distance" But in the meantime while
the dispute was at its height, the judges, two
out of three of lhc,n decided that collision,
whether by accident intent, constituted
foul and that McCrone having made a foul
they must award the race TO the sorrel horse


To this McCrone demurred, telling the stake
holder not to give up the money. After this,
McCronc, probably, wishing TO be fair, said just
as he was leaving the track, as can be proven by
responsible Witnesses "that he was sorry for the
accident he had no control over his horse; that
the other side might take the money, and he
would pay for the sulkcy, and for any medical
attendance consequent to the injuries sustained
by Gillespie thereby acknowledging the justice
of the decision.


We claim that your reporters story that
they threatened TO seize the stakeholder ana take
the money from him by violence" is false; but
we do say that he acted in the most high-handed
manner, and with no regard for justice, when he
chose to disregard the decision OF hco Judges, and
refused to deliver up the stakes to those justly
entitled TO them.


The gentleman whom your reporter seems TO
make such IL joke of, thought he was acting for
his best interests when he applied for foreign
attachment" to secure money rightfully belong
ing to him; and although he was probably not
quite well posted in such matters rs such wise
acres of the law us even the stakeholder seemed
10 be, yet he did his best to recover his own;
and it really seemed as though the stakeholder
himself was pccuniarily interested.


He drove off in the midst of the huzzns OF his
friends, and is now cnSconced in Delaware,
doubtless receiving tho congratulations OF W
who set aside the opinions OF ttco Judges ana mas
ten TO agree with the single Mird one.


Your reporter says that Mr.. Foard's horse
kicked the sulkey to pieces this is an error and
is calculated 10 damage the value of him. The
sulkey was broken by collision with the fence,





wards by running into carriages when the horse
left the track.


lie says that this will be the last race over that
course for long time. We are sorry we cannot
agree to this, and think it hard that Mr.. Giles
pie who makes his living by it should suffer by
no fault of his; but because Delaware horse,
driven by Delaware driver, runs into him after
forcing him off the track and yet when ma
jorty Of the judges (nO objection being made TO
their appointment) declare it to be foul, and
award the stake to the sorrcl horse, Delaware
minority judge dissents, and tells II Delaware
stakeholder not to give up the money. The
MarylanderS were fully as much disappointed at
not being able TO see well contested race but
how the blame can he laid to the door of any one
but a Delawarean, we are really at a loss TO


Very respectfully, CECIL.


We are sorry our Elkton friends are SO
hard on the Transcript reporter" accus-
ing him of making false reports. We pub
lished as correct an account of the race as
we could gather from persons who wit
messed it, and since receiving the above
letter we have made further inquiry into
the facts of the case, and find them Just
as we published them last week We do
not wish to injure the value of Mr.. Foard's
horse (most any horse would kick under
the circumstances), or Mr.. Gillespie's bu-
siness, nor do We wish to be considered as
defending the stakeholder or the doings of
Mr.. McCrone, for we are not horse Jockey
enough to know who should have the
stakes.