best colt and the best filly, are the property of Lord Rosebery; Galtee More belongs to an Irish sportsman who is well known and highly esteemed on the racecourse and in the hunting-field; Vesuvian is in the famous Kingsclere stable; Mr. Leopold de Rothschild owns Goletta; Mr. Lorillard, a keen and respected American owner, has Berzak and Sandia; Fortalice is Lord Ellesmere's; Titaré, Lord Wolverton's; Crestfallen, Lord Derby's; Hellebore, Lord Durham's; Minstrel, the Duke of Devonshire's. The list might be largely prolonged, but it may be briefly said that practically all the best two-year-olds belong to gentlemen.

Such patrons of the sport form a powerful phalanx against its enemies, who are, moreover, for the most part insignificant. None of these are more virulent than the directors of the Anti-Gambling League; and this is said without the very slightest desire to uphold and advocate the practice of betting, a business which in the long run must almost inevitably prove unfortunate for the amateur. In most games the professional followers have the best of it, and backing horses is certainly one of these. A considerable proportion of the leading owners of horses do not bet at all; multitudes of others amuse themselves with wagering to an extent which in no way inconveniences them when the usual results follow; a number of rash and foolish men, on the other hand, do inconvenience themselves very seriously indeed. But why the proceedings of the Anti-Gambling League are wholly mischievous may be very simply explained. The League can no more suppress betting than it can suppress eating and drinking. If men want to bet they will find a hundred ways of gratifying their injudicious desire; but whereas at present salutary and efficient supervision is exercised over those who make wagers, if the League had its way the supervision would be withdrawn, betting would be carried on in holes and corners, to the immense advantage of the rogues and the furtherance of rascality. This view of the matter might easily be proved; and no one doubts that if those who want to bet could not speculate on horses they would do so on other hazards. But this bears only indirectly on the subject of the present article, to which I may proceed after stating my deliberate conclusion as one who has seen much of the inner life of the Turf from various points of view, and who assuredly recommends no one to gamble.

When the season of 1896 opened a trio of three-year-olds were principally discussed-the Prince's Persimmon, Mr. Leopold de Rothschild's St. Frusquin, and the Duke of Westminster's

Regret; and not a few cautious students of racing believed that the last of the three would prove the best. How entirely wrong they were we all now know; but they had reason for the faith that was in them. Regret had only been seen once, and did not impress by his good looks; it was his action which caused him to be admired as he cantered away with the Houghton Stakes on the occasion of his solitary two-year-old appearance, beating nothing, it is true, but doing all that he could have done in the handsomest fashion. It was reported, however, that he was as good as Omladina, and this seemed to mean much. It is worth while to recur to the subject as an example of how the most apparently logical and careful arguments may lead to utterly incorrect conclusions; and from this a hint may be gained for the benefit of those who are inclined to risk money on the Turf. Omladina, it was believed at the end of last year, ought to have won the Middle Park Plate. Her jockey, Mornington Cannon, instead of waiting with her and riding the sort of race of which he is so fond-keeping his horse well back, and coming with a rush at the finish for once made running, in order to cut down Persimmon, who was esteemed the chief danger. He readily disposed of the Prince's colt, seeming to confirm the then current opinion that Persimmon did not stay (for though Persimmon had been troubled with his teeth shortly before, and was said to be not at his best, his friends were decidedly confident on the day). St. Frusquin, however, came out from the distance and wore the filly down, beating her half a length; Persimmon five lengths behind. If Omladina's jockey had ridden his favourite race, the half-length, it was thought, would have been the other way-at any rate, there appeared little to choose between them; and Regret was understood to be so backward that he had far more scope for improvement than St. Frusquin. As good as Omladina,' therefore-and Porter's trials can usually be relied on-meant to all seeming as good as St. Frusquin; and when Regret's expected improvement had been made, better than Mr. de Rothschild's colt. St. Frusquin's forelegs, moreover, it was generally agreed, did not look like lasting, and he had shown incapacity to come down hill on more than one occasion. Did not this all appear excellently well for Regret? Against him was the cautious apprehension of John Porter, his trainer, who had observed to the Duke of Westminster that it was a pity the colt should lose his maiden allowance by success in such a small race as the Houghton Stakes, as he might want the 7 lb. in some of his races next year; and there was the notorious softness of

6

his dam, Farewell, which he might possibly have inherited; but as to the former of these objections, Porter's estimate of what is wanted for a Derby horse is something extreme, as he very completely demonstrated when he sold Sainfoin a few seasons ago, supposing that even in a very moderate year he could have no

chance.

One cool and experienced judge was not led away by what I confess seemed to me the very conclusive argument just set down. Seeking an opinion, I wrote to this gentleman and asked him for his idea of the then two-year-olds, in order that I might give it in one of my Notes. He kindly sent it, begging me, however, not to mention his name, and I therefore merely referred to him as a Member of the Jockey Club.' He was, I may now say, Mr. Daniel Cooper, and his handicap ran:

Regret did show himself well over a stone behind St. Frusquin, still it required some self-reliance to express an opinion to that effect last spring. But I am anticipating.

St. Frusquin was to appear at an unusually early date for the Derby horse. He came out in the Column Produce Stakes at the Newmarket Craven Meeting, and performed a very easy task with perfect ease. Some time before the Two Thousand Guineas it was rumoured to be doubtful whether Persimmon would start, though it had been generally supposed that he had a better chance of beating St. Frusquin over the Rowley mile than at Epsom. The rumour proved true; he could not be got ready, and St. Frusquin thus had the way absolutely cleared for him. It seemed as certain that Labrador would be second in the Two Thousand as that St. Frusquin would win, but the Kingsclere horse ran very moderately, and the poor performances of the horses from this stable in the spring excited much surprise; nor indeed, though St. Frusquin won by three lengths, did he exhibit the freshness and dash which had characterised him in his previous race.

The ground early in the season was cruelly hard, and though the Newmarket Stakes, worth close on 3,000l., was a tempting prize, Mr. Leopold de Rothschild judiciously decided to keep St. Frusquin for the Derby. Galeazzo, his second string, however, was a most efficient substitute, for the colt won, Labrador being only able to get fifth, several lengths behind. Whether

Persimmon was or was not a really good horse became the subject of constant discussion, opinions being affected, moreover, by the fact that sometimes he went extremely well at exercise, and sometimes very badly. This, indeed, has always been characteristic of the horse, and in a recent number I quoted Watts, to the effect that, early in July, Persimmon 'could not have caught a selling-plater.' The Derby therefore was regarded as practically at the mercy of St. Frusquin, whose admirers, however, were not entirely pleased with his appearance when they looked him over before the race. The Prince of Wales's colt, on the other hand, was found to be extremely fit and well; but, nevertheless, odds of 13 to 8 and more were laid on St. Frusquin, and 5 to 1 was always readily obtainable against Persimmon. One thing St. Frusquin effectually disproved during the race, and that was the idea that he could not come down a hill, for he strided down from Tattenham Corner in perfect style. But a surprise was in store; for when it came to a race he could not hold his own, and Watts carried the royal jacket first past the post by a neck.

The effect of this was to render the Princess of Wales's Stakes, a month later at Newmarket, one of the most exciting races of the year. St. Frusquin's friends were staunch, and slightly influenced, perhaps, by the fact that he had 3 lb. the best of the weights, he stood in the market at 5 to 2; 4 to 1 being laid against the Derby winner. Regret, however, was favourite at 7 to 4, but the running bore out with singular accuracy Mr. Daniel Cooper's handicap just quoted, for with 9 lb. the worst of the weights, St. Frusquin beat Regret by a length, Persimmon dividing the pair.

The Eclipse Stakes came a fortnight later, and here this running with Regret was confirmed, St. Frusquin, however, extending the half-length to a length and a half. The 'market' may of course be taken as an indication of public opinion, and the prevalent impression was shown to be that St. Frusquin would beat Persimmon in the St. Leger. But unfortunately the two were not destined to meet again. Just when everybody had found it convenient to forget the prophecies that St. Frusquin would not stand, without any warning information came that he had broken down and been struck out of the Doncaster race; and so this good horse finally disappeared from the Turf, a piece of misfortune for Mr. Leopold de Rothschild, whose luck up to this time had been amazingly good, for meeting after meeting the dark blue and yellow cap had been seen in front. St. Frusquin's disappearance of course seemed to give Persimmon a very easy task at Doncaster

and afterwards in the Jockey Club Stakes. though his performance in the St. Leger was not of remarkable merit, as Labrador stuck to him with unexpected persistency, and Watts on the Prince's colt had to use his whip a long way from home.

During the spring and early summer the Kingsclere horses had run very disappointingly indeed, and it remains a mystery why they should have been so backward after an unusually open winter; but at Ascot they had returned to their form. Shaddock won a couple of races, showing in very different guise from his moderate display at Sandown Park at the end of April, when Lord Hervey gave him 7 lb. and beat him by three lengths. Helm, Zebac, and Labrador all won races at the Royal meeting, as did Omladina, her success being achieved in the Fernhill Stakes over five furlongs; for it had by this time been ascertained that she was an arrant non-stayer. Of the three-year-olds, St. Frusquin and Persimmon obviously stand out by themselves, though the Duke of Westminster has won a number of stakes with Shaddock, Labrador, and Regret, useful second-class horses.

Previously to Ascot the two-year-olds who had chiefly distinguished themselves were Mr. Fairie's Eager and Lord Rosebery's Chelandry, and the former was then supposed to be something much out of the common- —a kind of mistake that usually is made early in the season; but Mr. Fairie, in this case, had justification for his belief, as Matthew Dawson had told him that if the running in the Royal Two-Year-Old Plate at Kempton Park were really true, Eager, who beat Chelandry by a length and a half, must be a good horse. It was reported, however, that Lord Rosebery had a colt in his stable who was a long way better than his filly. This was Velasquez, who was due to run in one of the two-year-old races at Ascot, not having appeared in the Woodcote Stakes at Epsom, though it might have been supposed that the ex-Premier would have liked to win a race so near his home. Eager's friends had, however, very little fear of Velasquez at Ascot, in spite of the report as to his being three lengths in front of Chelandry, and when someone asked Mr. Fairie whether Velasquez was running in the Coventry Stakes, the owner of Eager replied that Lord Rosebery was not likely to court inevitable defeat, and would certainly reserve his colt for the New Stakes on the Thursday.

Velasquez was so reserved, but not for the reasons indicated. He won in a canter, Monterey, who was second favourite, and therefore supposed to be the chief source of danger, making a very moderate display; Alfar beat Monterey by five lengths for