AMONG those leaders of society' who, since what is termed the coaching revival, have been most prominent at Magazine meets, and whether in the olive green or the buff and blue have sought to witch the world with noble coachmanship, none are better known than the distinguished diplomatist whose most happy likeness our artist this month adds to ' Baily's' gallery.

An ambassador on a coach-box would, twenty years ago or less, have been considered in an anomalous position. We had very few coachmen ourselves then, and those there were hid their lights under bushels. With the rather contemptuous opinion that Englishmen used to entertain of the sporting tastes and pursuits of all foreigners, we should have scouted the idea that a German could drive. But the world has marched with wonderful strides in twenty years, and in the development of sport in all its branches continental nations, especially France and Germany, have shown a remarkable proficiency. Racing, hunting, driving, are no longer the gift and heritage of Englishmen alone, and if imitation is the sincerest flattery we ought to be a proud people indeed. Count Munster is a sportsman in his own country, and his love of coaching we need scarcely dwell upon here. No meet of the Four-in-Hand Club would be complete without His Excellency driving his wellknown chestnuts with the Countess Olga by his side. Eminently popular in English society, his liking for a good old English pastime is an additional claim to the kindly feeling with which he is regarded.

VOL. XXXI.-NO. 211.

B 2

A WORD WITH OUR CONTEMPORARY
REVIEWER.

"Tis pleasant, sure, to see one's self in print,' and that pleasure
must be considerably enhanced when an appearance in type is made
in good company, and under distinguished editorial auspices. The
incongruity of the subject-matter signifies but little, for periodicals
nowadays appeal to the tastes of so many classes of readers that
we are not surprised to find things a little mixed;' the philosopher
rubbing shoulders with the athlete; the man of science pairing off
with the racing commentator; and the politician retiring from the
field or discussion in favour of the disciples of Nimrod or Walton.
We shall not be astonished to hear presently of a racing tipster having
been engaged for 'Good Words;' or to peruse a series of sporting
articles in the pages of the 'Record.''Baily' is not unlikely to
publish one of Mr. Jack' Russell's sermons as a sort of appanage to
the biography of the reverend deer-hunter of the West; and we
may expect to see the driver of Our Van' pulling up at a 'Friends'
meeting-house in place of the sporting diversoria upon which and
their contents it pleases him to discourse so pleasantly. But,
seriously speaking, the situation' must be grave indeed when the
"Contemporary Review' opens its bilious covers to the Balaam
who not only comes to curse the Turf and its belongings, but refuses
to budge an inch in the direction of turning his malison into
benison. Some beast of ill omen must surely have spoken to the
prophet by the way, or he would never have dipped his pen in
such gall of bitterness as pervades the article The Horse as an
'Instrument of Gambling.' What do the fellow-contributors of
this writer think of his presence among their ranks, recruited from
such potent, grave, and reverend seigneurs' as condescend to educate
refined æsthetic tastes by essays on serious subjects, far from the
'madding crowd's ignoble strife' on the racecourse, or to discourse
on the amelioration of the social condition of their species, rather
than on the improvement of the breed of horses, and similar grovel-
ling topics? They must feel like tabbies with a dog in the room,
resenting his presence, but none of them liking to make the first
move, and deeming discretion the better part of valour. We are
considerably surprised to find our solid and powerful contemporary
descending from its high line of philosophy, religion, and politics,
to descant upon so lowly a theme as Turf ethics; but the reason,
perhaps, is not after all very far to seek. A slashing' article
directed against racing scandals and abuses, in a high-class
periodical usually averse from such uncongenial topics, is sufficient
of itself to attract increased public attention, and consequently a
greater demand. Nobody can blame editors for thus keeping their
eyes on the main chance;' but it may be doubted whether the
policy is not a slightly undignified one which commends itself to
them of taking up, for the sake of mere sensation, a subject which

they would drop like a red-hot coal if it were presented to them in its normal guise. But the policy is at least a safe one, for while ordinary readers of the Contemporary Review' will perhaps not trouble their heads very much about the matter, and skip' the article accordingly, or take it all upon trust, a vast number of casuals will be induced to purchase the magazine containing so rare a feature as a racing article among papers devoted to deeper and more abstruse topics. In certain circles, unfortunately, a scathing attack upon what Mr. Tom Hughes has been pleased to term a 'canker of civilisation' is always acceptable; and as schoolboys, when no better amusement presents itself, set up a 'cock-shy' of a bottle or potsherd out of mere wanton mischief, knowing that no one is likely to say them nay, so is it the custom with a certain class of purists, for want of some more serious occupation, to preach a crusade against any one of the social evils affecting society, among which they are pleased to reckon racing, as one of Satan's chief implements for the destruction of mankind. We have a word or two to speak to our Reviewer on the subject which he has taken in hand, and shall proceed to notice certain portions of his article which bear the highly novel and attractive' title of The Horse as 'an Instrument of Gambling.'

Were we asked to define meaning, scope, and object of this somewhat remarkable production, our first impression of it might be described as hazy and indistinct; but upon re-perusal at least one distinct issue is discovered to be propounded, up to which all arguments might be supposed to lead, and to which we shall presently allude. The figures relating to blood-stock, with which a commencement of the article is made, we shall not dispute, but shall content ourselves with asking why the high-priced yearling' episode was dragged into a statistical statement, except for the purpose of having a sly cut at the 'offensive nomenclature,' which has no more bearing upon the question of average prices, than the antecedents of a celebrated brood-mare which are likewise imported into the subject. Statistics, to possess any value whatever, should be at least correct as regards the sums quoted as forthcoming for certain animals; therefore we may ask why the price paid for Marie Stuart has been so egregiously exaggerated; and, as a matter affecting the knowledge of his subject by the Reviewer, what have Julius and Paul Jones done, that they should be found in such good company as Blair Athol, Doncaster, and other crack'sires of the day"? The reason given by the writer for entering thus minutely into the finance of horse-racing is, 'to show how utterly impossible it is for a racehorse, as a general 'rule, to recoup its owner's expenditure by any sums that may be < won in stakes.' Surely he cannot mean to bring this statement forward as an original one, seeing that Lord George Bentinck's maxim that 'No one could afford to keep racehorses who did not 'bet' has been dinned into our ears ad nauseam since the date of its utterance, some thirty or forty years since! We should have thought its truth must have been over and over again made patent

to every racing tyro; but our Reviewer evidently regards himself in the light of a discoverer, since he goes on to prove his assertion by statistics, and finishes up by suggesting a 'cheap method' of deciding between the merits of Derby horses by putting the names of the 'animals into a hat or a vase, and drawing the prize as in a lottery!' We have quoted the above, not because we imagine for one moment that the suggestion was made in sober seriousness, but for the purpose of showing that the Reviewer takes a purely f. s. d. view of the question, apart from all considerations of sport, for which he makes no allowance as prompting outlays of money for indulgence in its attractions. And this brings us to the discussion of how far his remarks are justified in respect of the long prices paid for yearlings, on the chance of their turning out profitable bargains. By the line of argument taken he would seem to be desirous of making it appear that extravagance in securing first-rate appliances for carrying on sport was limited solely to that branch of it with which we are now concerned, while no abnormal risks or expenditure were incurred in obtaining instruments' wherewith to insure success in the hunting-field, in the stubble or coverts, on the salmon stream, among the wild red deer, or any other expensive hobby having similar claims to fall within the category of recreations with racing itself. Are there no 'ridiculous' prices given for hunters and dogs, for rights of fishing, shooting, and stalking, in fact for the chance of the highest means of enjoyment in every sphere of English sport or pastime ? 'The value of an article is said to be what it will bring in the market,' and accepting the truth thus enunciated we may point out that other things than yearlings are a fearful lottery,' and it did not need for the late master of Russley to be brought from his grave to repeat so dismal a truism. We assert that most high-priced yearlings are purchased by spirited bidders, such as Mr. Stirling Crawfurd, Mr. Gretton, the Duke of Westminster, and other leading patrons of racing, more with a view of attaining the highest honours of the Turf, such as the great three-year-old races, than with any primary intention of converting them into 'instruments of 'gambling.' With men of mark like the above, betting may or may not be incidental to the use of their expensive purchases, but it is merely a secondary consideration, and long prices are forthcoming for yearlings with an eye to future utility quite as much as to immediate enjoyment. Every one is of course anxious to buy, to train, to keep for private use or to resell a Doncaster, and we believe that there still remains a leaven of good sportsmen who would give their ears to win a Derby, even though the success were not further sweetened by the addition of such good round sums' in bets as enhanced the victories of Beadsman and Musjid, of Thormanby and The Hermit. The question Does it pay?' is an eminently pertinent and practical one, and characteristic of this our 'nation of shopkeepers,' but we may be permitted to doubt whether it is one which suggests itself, as a primary consideration, to the minds of those upon sporting distinctions intent; indeed it has come

to be considered as rather a reproach to think of profit in connection with pastime, and as savouring of professional interest in a sphere which should occupy attention from the amateur alone. That racing is the most expensive of all amusements we are ready to admit, nor shall we attempt to controvert the 'o'er true' assertion that many are induced to engage in it with means ridiculously inadequate for its successful prosecution; but there are plenty of other ways of dropping money, and it is no inherent fault of the sport that it affords a ready means of gambling, but only an accidental external connection, which, in default of some more convenient object, would attach itself to any other species of recreation. But the Turf has most unjustifiably been made a scapegoat for all manner of sins which cannot be laid at its door, and has been pilloried for every casual evil-wisher and puritanical prig to have his fling at, while Prejudice and Ignorance have been well contented to stand by and to applaud the throwing of mud, some of which is of course certain to stick. It is in this spirit that our Contemporary Reviewer has seen fit to garnish his article, before finally serving it up, with the narration of scandals exhumed for the purpose of rendering it more piquant and attractive. He will not suffer the festering carcases to rest in the ground, which we hoped had finally covered them, but must drag them into the light of day, and taint the air with their corruption. We fail to see what end can be attained by a réchauffe of the recent doings in connection with Petrarch and Hampton, which are unfortunately too fresh in the public recollection to need repetition. Nor can it serve any useful purpose to turn a light upon the dark doings in connection with certain racing episodes with which all possessing the smallest Turf experience are unfortunately too familiar. We are led to look upon only the dismal reverse of the medal, the 'night side' of the subject, as though no brighter obverse was ever presented to our gaze, no ray of light ever broke upon the eye. And since no remedy is suggested for any of the evils so prominently exposed, we are entitled to infer that the case is a hopeless one, and that the Reviewer would have our racing system disestablished, and its ends and objects finally defeated because it offered opportunities for gambling, which if suppressed here, would certainly not fail to break out in another place. Nor do we see what right the Reviewer has to infer from the recent casual appearance of an Arab in the royal colours that a certain distinguished personage has any intention of forming a more intimate connection with racing than the ordinary sporting tastes of an English gentleman would be likely to dictate. Nor can we perceive by what process of reasoning he manages to arrive at the conclusion that because Admiral Rous is no more, therefore the time for 'Turf reform' is at hand. As regards the betting question only we are at one with our Reviewer in his strongly expressed opinion as to the inutility and unfairness of the measures adopted to suppress betting, and the anomaly of speculation being permitted in one place in hundreds,