THE RACING IN JULY. BY CRAVEN, "I pray thee, cease thy counsel; Which falls into mine ears as profitless As water in a sieve." SHAKSPEARE. If Homer and Pindar are entitled to our credit, the Olympic games were the sports of the chivalry of Greece. The turf in this country during the first century of its institution in like manner was supported by persons of position and substance as being calculated to promote public good, and to minister to a wholesome social enjoyment. Whether the contests of chariots and horsemen became the sources of mercantile speculation among the frequenters of Elis, or whether the Hippodrome was the resort of dealers and chapmen, history does not inform us. The rules were certainly not so artistic as ours; the system was not so polished, neither, there is reason to believe, was it so keen as that at present recognized. Here, peradventure, the reader is about to exclaim, "Cease thy counsel!" We cry his courtesy; we entreat a brief word with him, albeit the matter of our discourse should fall into his ears "As profitless As water in a sieve." A journalist is the sentinel of the time; the watch whose especial duty it is to guard the social policy "from foes or wreck." To those who take umbrage at our interference and ask, "Shall there be no more cakes and ale ?" we answer, "Eat, drink, and be merry;" but do not stuff like an alderman, or swill like Jacob's sow. Eat, so that "good digestion wait on appetite;" drink, so that you may have a welcome for the morning's meal; and be as merry as you will, bearing in memory the vulgar caution that it is possible to laugh wrong side of the mouth." "Of all the horrid, hideous notes of woe, Sadder than owl-songs or the midnight blast, at the This is true; nevertheless, on occasion, it is necessary to be "cruel— only to be kind.” . . As the test of manly courage, and the text of fair play, the ring for many years had the hearty support and the humble patronage of the writer of this paper. When Spring was first its champion, he was its friend; but when it was fast falling from the principles which the professors of his school had endowed it with-when, in lieu of being a passage of bravery and science, a prize fight was a pretence for robbery and a licence for ruffianism-he withdrew from the advocacy of professional boxing, and, in the discharge of a public obligation, denounced it as unworthy popular confidence, and unfit for the countenance of honourable men. For a time he stood alone among sporting journalists in this view and in this practice. How is it now? Those who adhered to it per fas et nefas have at last abandoned its defence in despair and disgust. 66 Let us turn to the turf, and let me deal with its present position and future prospects in my proper person. A quarter of a century ago pugilism was an English national sport: not the most high-bred or wellbred it may be, but still a robust recreation in very general account. It is no longer patronized or promoted by persons of character or condition. Is it because our sporting taste has become less gallant and doughty than it was? Go to the next steeple-chase for your answer. No one can gainsay the cause; only when the ring became a snare and a scandal did those that had anything to jeopardy or lose keep aloof from it. Were they precipitate in their retreat? Hundreds of good men and true stuck to it with the devotion of martyrs. I didn't cut it," said one of the worthies of Cribb's day, when we were canvassing the subject, "though they had held me up by the heels four times to shake the money out of my pockets, until the last summerset gave me a touch of convulsions." . Although the machinery of the turf is still what it was-although horses, jockeys, trainers, stakes, and so forth, are still part and parcel of racing, in principle it is utterly changed. The race itself is only the material portion of the sport, its spirit or essence is the money invested. If it were convenient, if it were fit, if it were possible, that such things should continue as they are (to say nothing of their going on at the present ratio of progress), is it likely the pages of a sporting journal would be thus occupied? Is it reasonable to suppose a work of this class opposed from prejudice to the institutions it professes to support and forward? Give ear, 0 sieve, and retain at least so much of our counsel as may damp thy disposition to scoff, that thou mayest read haply to mark, even shouldest thou, after all, decline to learn. As far back as the episode of Tregonwell Frampton-when Dawson poisoned horses while they drank; still latter, when the "talents," according to the records of the Jockey Club, hammered the shins of racers to compromise their agility, there were bad subjects connected with the turf. Still that was no reason the race course should offer carte blanche to thieves. Though two negatives in logic make an affirmative, all the rogues in the world won't constitute an honest company. About a dozen years ago public attention took a bias towards horse-racing which had not previously been manifested. Attendant on it, of course, was the public press. The daily papers, which previously took as little notice as possible of sporting issues or theories, now had their especial racing correspondents to tell of all that was passing-some even to tell what should come to pass. Instead of duplicates of minute flimsy" they had goodly columns (duly leaded"); and you might hear 'Change Alley prating of the whereabouts of the Two Thousand. For a while this new-fangled fancy assumed a miscellaneous character -but as all things do in this country, where method is instinct-it presently found for itself 66 "A local habitation and a name." In the houses of the vintners of the metropolis and the publicans of the provinces, turf speculation was "at home"-under the title of a racing" sweep" or lottery. Thus, for a time, it sped, with various fortune as regarded the "bulls," but with a steady five per cent. (lowest ruling) in favour of the "bears ;" and for a time the bargains kept within the bounds of convenient arithmetic. Mine host of the Dove and Falcon insinuated that he had a little scheme-for the behoof of his friends exclusively-" tickets five pounds a-piece-approaching Derby -winner to give five dozen of champagne-five per cent. for expenses -and so forth." Next week the Sunday papers announced that "Augustus Tomlinson, of the Jack and Gudgeon, had great pleasure in informing his particular patrons and the public generally that he had on hand a sweep on the forthcoming Ascot Cup: tickets ten pounds apiece-winner to give ten dozen of champagne-ten per cent. deducted for expenses"-et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. That day se'nnight Paul Clifford, of the Hookey Walker, Chisel-street, came out with his "Extraordinary Novel Sweep ;" followed, as fast as circumstances would permit, by Hookem, of the Fox and Goose, who advertised his Equitable Monster!!" accompanied by a chevaux de frise of notes of admiration. About this period it occurred to me that a hint as to the pace might not be thrown away upon racing novices; so I suggested that the hosts aforesaid should not make such strong running. This was taken as advice commonly is-it was thrown to the dogs. Indeed, the suggestion seemed to induce them rather to "set to" than take a prudent "pull." Instead of the convivial contrivances they formerly were or at the least that they assumed to be-Derby sweeps are now advertised in batches of columns, thus-" A splendid fortune for a guinea ! ! !".... Several of them had their five hundreds for first prizes; a brace of hundreds for the second horse; and so forth. Now, this was serious work, and ominous; and so I designated it. I asked, did the Bonifaces suppose they would be permitted to monopolize such a mine of wealth, even should the Crown forego its privileges? I said, as surely as this implied immunity for gambling existed, it would be taken up by others of the industrious classes; and I predicted, not very many months ago, in these pages, that unless precautions were taken to restrain it, the public thoroughfares of the metropolis would have their racing lottery offices upon the scale of other great marts of commerce and merchandize. How has the result borne me out? Go into the Strand, and see. There you will find one of those marts of Mammon at which already, on two races to be run for in the present month and during September, prizes are announced exceeding ONE HUNDRED AND FORTY-FIVE THOUSAND POUNDS! The better to convey an idea of the character of these temples of fortune, the high-priests shall speak for themselves. At one, where the current average is some ten or twenty thousand a month, the prospectus is thus written :-" The directors feel imperatively called upon to return their sincere acknowledgments for the hitherto extensive patronage which has enabled them to carry out the monster sweeps in as satisfactory a manner as the most scrupulous could wish; they therefore trust, by that straightforward line of conduct and strict integrity which have characterized this establishment, that the public will join with them to secure the universal approbation that always commands an honest concern."...... Is this a translation from the French? Another-with, it is to be supposed, a capital of a million or the like-is thus precise and conclusive as to the nature of its arrangements :-" This establishment has been formed for the better security of parties who may wish to invest their money in the great racing events of the country. It will be under the direction of competent managers, and strengthened by the guarantee of unquestionable trustees, in whose joint names all monies will be lodged. P.S.-Provincial agents required.".... ... Another, with twenty-five thousand tickets for the St. Leger, states-" The draw will take place in a room capable of containing all the subscribers." ....... That the gigantic system to which these elegant extracts relate cannot much longer be overlooked by the authorities having in trust the social interests is either a fact, or the social interests are grievously illrepresented. In this condition of the question, a petition intended for presentation to the Home Secretary has been despatched on a pilgrimage in quest of signatures. I met with it by sheer chance the other day, in one of the most sequestered nooks of Her Majesty's European dominions; and a less worthy supplication, I confess, I cannot call to mind. Its logic is battle, murder, and sudden death to the Executive which, under any circumstances, shall meddle or make with the popular right to gamble, how and where and when the popular caprice may think fit its principle contends for a monopoly to cater for this taste in favour of persons having licences for the sale of wines and spirits. By what succession do the keepers of taverns and gin-shops claim to be the exclusive heirs of Derby sweeps ? Whence do they derive their train of argument-their "ramonneur" association? But, above all, what have people in their way of life to do with problems of moral and social fitness ? On what pretence do they assume to counsel the Queen's Government in a matter of policy or prudence? Are they volunteer counsellors on the strength of the axiom, "in vino veritas"? If the officers of the Crown do not think the occasion one which requires legislation, it is because there is a law existing applicable to the emergency; or because they are satisfied there is no emergency in existence. If racing sweeps and lotteries are illegal, it is not for Sir George Grey or anybody else to grant them leave and licence. If there is no provision by law to suppress them, it is not competent for the Secretary for the Home Department or any one else to prosecute those who speculate in them. But the case is not a doubtful one. In reply to the question on the subject, Sir George Grey promptly and distinctly said, in his place in Parliament, that " he had been assured by the law authorities that Derby sweeps were illegal, and that the proper steps had been taken to suppress them." Are we to suppose that this was mere mockery; a figure of senatorial speech? Or was it not a statement, which made the pledges that followed it matter of course? . . . . . . I have seen it urged that if you put a stop to these speculations, you must shut up Tattersall's and indict the whist parties at Brookes's. Either those who use this sophistry are very ignorant, or they are very much to blame. Do we see whole newspapers taken up with alluring schemes and seductive projects to tempt the unwary to betake them to Hyde-park Corner or St. James's-street? Is it logic, is it fact, to assume that as much social risk is incurred by the betting at Tattersall's and the whist-playing at Brookes's as by the inducement held out to the whole population of the kingdom to gamble at public houses? Because a few men with time and money to spare squander them both, is that a reason that those who have no superfluity of one or the other should, upon principle, be surrounded with temptations to idleness and prodigality? This theory of moral fitness, however, is altogether apart from the issue. A large and influential class is engaged in organizing and extending a vast system of gambling, which is peculiarly addressed to the industrial portion of the community, and so ordered as to come within the means of the most limited resources. If this be contrary to law, a heavy responsibility rests on those who have thus long permitted it to exist. If there be no statute applicable to the evil, those who assume to lead society should exert their influence to abate it so long as the legislature shall leave it without a remedy. Those who wish well to the Turf should be among the foremost to annihilate this plague of sweeps these earth's bubbles. The Newmarket July Meeting fell this year on the 4th-the day, of course, Tuesday. The three days of July are among the most aristotocratic of the season, at the metropolis of the Turf. They are remarkable for no feature. No popular handicap brings down its Cockney company; no cup affords an excuse for a holiday. There is racing without a pageant, sport without turmoil and "business." Still, there was a movement on the late occasion not common to all the summer anniversaries. Among the élite of the two-year-old stock to début, fame had heralded a phenomenon belonging to Lord Eglintoun, appropriately denominated "The Flying Dutchman. He is the half-brother of Van Tromp, and showed that in his person rumour was not as little faithworthy as she is represented to be. Not to go as fast, however, in our narrative as Mynheer, it should be observed that, by grace of the rail that now joins the two capitals, a good attendance was found on the heath at the hour announced for the opening of the meeting, which was late, for the list contained but four events. We will join the rendezvous on the course. This was "beyond the Ditch." The betting ring, which here forms adjacent to the stand, was by no means active in its operations. The "crack" monopolized the July negotiations, such as they were. With about 2 to 1 on him, how could it have been otherwise?......The first race was a Handicap Sweepstakes of 20 sovs. each, new T.Y.C., for all ages except two-year-olds; a dozen starters. This Lord Clifden won with a three-year-old-Tamarind-carrying 6st. It was, of course, a rattling scurry, looking at the weight and the distance. For a Sweepstakes of 100 sovs. each, three subscribers, Chesterfield Course, the trio ran; and the Duke of Bedford's St. Rosalia won by a head. Another brisk burst. This brought on the July Stakes, thirty-five subscribers and eight runners. They laid 7 to 4 on the Dutchman; and they were quite right, for he won in a canter, and could have given a couple of stone to the second. The pace was as good as the pursuers could make it. A Sweepstakes of 10 sovs. each, two middle miles, Radulphus won by a couple of lengths, two others having started; and so the list was run out. On the heath, 12 to 1 was taken about the winner of the July for the Derby. Wednesday had the same number of events on the cards, albeit the |