NINETEENTH ANNUAL YEAR BOOK— PART II 93 



No. 3. "No deductions from money winners." There never was any 

 excuse for an association's taking money away from a horse after he had 

 earned it. It simply is a relic of the old days, when the entrance fee was 

 customarily 10% to enter. After awhile, owing chiefly to competition be- 

 tween associations, this was changed to 5% entrance, but 5% was also de- 

 ducted from each of the four money-wnners. This made a reduction in 

 the advertised purse of 20%, and that meant that when an association of- 

 fered a $1,000 purse, they really only paid out $800, as the 5% that they 

 deducted from each money winner cut it down to that. This is a form of 

 "camouflage" that should never have been permitted, and I thoroughly 

 agree with the horsemen on this point. 



pMo. 4. "No more declaring off when there is one horse ready to start." 

 This would not be fair to the associations. The association offers purses 

 for the purpose of attracting entries to compete before its grandstand and 

 entertain the public that has paid admission. One horse going around the 

 track at any gait his driver saw fit, would be anything but pleasing to the 

 grandstand patrons, and if two horses are not on hand ready for the word, 

 that race should fall of its own weight. In the final analysis, it is the 

 public that pays the bills, and it must be pleased or racing will stop. I 

 think the horsemen should *ut out this point. 



No. 5. "No more penalizing a good horse by splitting the purse." I 

 know of no rule of either of the trotting associaions compelling this. It 

 is only done by agreement between the association and all the owners 

 having entries in the race. This is more usually asked for by the horse- 

 men themselves, as they think their chances of earning money are better 

 when the fields are not so large. This is an unimportant matter anyway, 

 as the occasions when it occurs are very few in the season. It should 

 not be dignified as a point. 



No. 6. "No more 5% to enter and 5% from money winners." This is 

 only a repetition of Point No. 2, and should be eliminated. 



No. 7. "No more entertaining the public without fair compensation." 



If Point No. 2 is upheld, this should be stricken out. There is plenty of 

 money offered for harness racing if the expenses connected therewith 

 could be reduced. No one is competent to say what "fair compensation" 

 is. It all depends. There are horses that are not good enough to win 

 $300 purses, that can win $100 ones. On the other hand, there are horses 

 that can win $5,000 or $10,000 purses, and others that cannot win these, 

 but can win $1,000 ones. This is a free country, and everyone should be 

 allowed to use his own judgment, as to where his horse shall be entered. 

 My experience has been that it does not take long to cure an owner of 

 starting his horse in a $5,000 or $10,000 purse, when his capacity is not 

 above a $1,000 one. The expense account will soon tell him where he 

 belongs. 



8-9-10-11-13. 



"No more robbery by draymen". 

 "No more robbery by feed men". 

 "No more robbery and inconvenience by railroads." 

 "No more leaky and unsafe stalls". 

 "No more drunken grooms and drivers". 



