The Sun.
London, England, 1868-07-20 00:00:00

FIDELIA

under the impression that she will be able to win the
Goodwood Stakes, I must give her the preference.
ORARNWOOD will certainly win the Bradgate Handicap,
despite his 4th penalty, if asked to do ao, and I should
be equally sanguine in favor of LIGURIAN for the County
Members' Plate if his number goes up. I should think
Lord Stamford would select to run CELLINA, who is
" turned loose" for the Stand Plate, but should he not do
so SKIPPER. looks most dangerous.

Friday's racing depends too much upon previous run-
nings, as the same horses aro engaged over and over
ag.tin, to allow me to express anypositivo opinion. Never-
theless I fancy WILD BRIAR for The Chesterfield Handi-
cap ; SISTER TO VEDA for The Nursery Handicap ; RAJAH
for The Rufford Abbey Stakes; FLYING JIB for The Forest
Plate ; AMADON for The Clamber Park Stakes; and ATHENA
for The Donnington Park Stakes.
It would be rank heresy, as according to the aristocra-
tic organ of the, sporting press, the Duke of Beaufort, the
Earl of Westmorland, and Sir F. Johnstone intend to
patronise Southampton Meeting on Thursday and Fri-
day next, not to allude to that pleasant meeting, which I
only do to express an anxious desire for its success, of
which, under such distinguished patronage there can be
very little doubt.

A FRESH MAN.

BOOKMAKERS versus LISTKEEPERS.

(From the Racing Times.)

Never was it more desirable, and indeed neces-
sary, for all classes of the sporting community
to coalesce together than at the present moment.
Backers of horses have had a great 'many bitter
lessons taught them lately, and it only wants a few
more examples of such bastard aristocracy, as Lady
Elizabeth proved herself in the Derby, to de-
moralise the Turf completely. In the meantime,
it: is not necessary for Bookmakers to assist
in prosecuting Listkeepers, whose character acd
position is equally good with their own. One of
the truest axioms is that " persons living in glass
houses should not throw stones," and the very
men who instigated the proceedings against sundry
of the ready money betters at Doncaster last
autumn would not reap much advantage from an
exposé of their antecedents. Bookmakers are
all very well in their way, but they are not
sufficiently advantageous to the general pub-
lic, and we do not hesitate to assert that a
great majority of the sporting public infinitely
prefer to speculate their money at the Lists. It
is very easy to take a case in point. Fine
weather, the expectation of a pleasant journey,
and probably the society of an agreeable
friend, are the inducements, at any rate in the
vicinity of the metropolis, to tempt many to pay a
visit to a race course. What is the consequence?
Unless the visitor is thoroughly conversant with
the regular members of the Ring, and he wishes to
speculate, which is usually the case, he is almost sure
to get into the hands of a " Welsher," and, more-
over, as he has not the advantage which is
always accorded to him at the Lists of selecting
the best price, he has to accept whatever the
bookmaker chooses to lay him. Another great ad-
vantage is, that the Listkeeper is always there
directly after the race is run, and ready to pay
whatever moneys ho his lost; whilst the
Bookmaker, who bets in the Ring, does not
inconvenience himself to settle there and then.
As a matter of course, therefore, a strong feeling
in favour of Listkeepers is obtaining, which, we pre-
sume, to be the chief cause of jealousy shown by the
inside division. Of the former class, where will be
found more straightforward men than Sidney Smith,
George Mather, Fisher. and Reynolds, P. Po wter,
Valentine and Wright, John Stirk, The Havelock
Turf Agency, &c., &c. The three first named
firms do not have lists in the country, but in town
they bet any amount of money at their several
places of business, and all the others have a good
reputation which extends to every race course in
the kingdom.
Several judges of the land have already decided
that the exposure of lists even on a race course is a
contravention of the law as it stands, and against
their decision there is no appeal ; but with all due
respect to them it is quite clear the Legislature,
when this measure passed through Parliament,
never intended to include Race Courses in the Act.
Common sense leads us to suppose it could only.
be intended for one object in view, namely, to
prevent the facilities afforded by these lists for
clerks and other servants to invest their money,
and thus be induced to rob their masters. Those
classes, it is natural to infer, would not be
allowed to attend such places without permission
of their employers, and in that case it is ridiculous
to legislate for parties who have no chance of com-
mitting the crime—if crime it be—of backing
horses more than once or twice a year. Un-
fortunately we have very few judges who are
competent to adjudicate on sporting affairs, and the
lamentable ignorance displayed by some of them in
connection therewith has been truly distressing on
several occasions. One of them, in deciding an
appeal some short time back, said be only re-
gretted the fine was not double the amount—for
betting on a race course, forsooth—and we consider
this is a specimen of one-sided justice, also a con-
vincing proof how few of them are competent to
give an opinion on racing affairs. Amongst the
category of Bookmakers and Listkeepers there
are, of course, an equal quantity of parasites, yclept
" Welshers ;" and if, instead of doing each other
injury, these parties would coalesce together to put
down the swindlers alluded to, they would far
better deserve the thanks of the whole sporting
community.
At any rate it is quite time the influence of some
influential member of Parliament, who is a supporter
of the Turf, should be brought to bear in favour of
Lists on Race Courses; and we shall certainly use
our influence, from time to time, to assist in carry-
ing out such a desirable alteration of the law in
this respect.