Morning journal and courier., 1885-10-28
Frauds and Jockeys.

LH HASAA oAAo VI IAiSheiy aONiCW'J
 We certainly read in old racing chronicles of more fraud than we hear of nowadays. It may be they were more clumsy in the committal of it, or perchance time is sup posed to have condoned their iniquities, and men are more open-mouthed about them; yet from various sources come ominous whis- psrs of "jockey ring" than which if it really exists no heavier blow can be dealt at racing. If such is the case let the authori- ties look to it, and in no half-and-half fash ion. Find they but evidence of this, and the expulsion of the offenders for life from the Newmarket Heath, be they the best horsemen that ever crossed saddle, will not be too heavy punishment for men who are sapping the true interests of the turf as surely as the g1adistors at the beginning of the century dealt the first blow at the prize ring by perpetually lighting on the cross. {" Look, too, at what a dearth of talent there is now in the saddle. The fingers of two hands you will not want the thumbs, will amply suffice to reckon the number of first-class ar lists. When one thinks of the days when Butler, Alfred Day, Flatman, Marson. Mar. low, Wells just coming, Osborne still riding Custance. Daily, Aldcroft, &c., were all to the fore, it seems odd that we should now when there is more racing than ever was known in England, be so marvelously short of frst-rate horsemen. It is, indeed, the plethora of racing that is destroying the sport. Owners of horses have themselves in great measure to thank for the scarcity of jockeys. The perfectly absurd way in which the leading professionals are treated is enough to turn the heads of far higher edu- cated men than they as rule are. I have no wish to deny that to those who prosper in their business are given the attributes which tend to success in most professions-temper- ance, aye, abstinence, patience, hard work, and the submitting unfiinchingly to disci- pline in their earlier career; but when they become fashionable jockeys they receive such enormous fees, and are made so much of by their patrons; that no wonder, like other ''beggars on horseback" they give them selves airs, cannot move without their val cts, and might perchance decline to ride should the de cologne have been forgot ten. But to do them justice, the handful there are of them can ride, and to see Tom Cannon impart confidence to nervous two year-old or Archer get the last ounce out of 6 horse, is to recall the giants of yore. Back CTS of leading favorites on the verge of 8 great race now are wont to ask anxiously, "Who rides?" for we two often of late have seen the lesser lights of the saddle fairly out ridden by the cracks. It was once said by g leading turfte of Sim Templeman, "You may trust him to do his best, and he'll win if he is on the best horse.'' "Ah," rejoined his auditor, "but want jockey who will win upon one not quite good" That when large stakes are won owners should be liberal to their jockeys is only right. Hones- y is no doubt the best policy, but neverthe
 less honesty likes to be substantially con vinced of it. But what are we to say of 8 jockey being promised three thousand pounds sterling if he won particular races as it is rumored was the case the other day at Good r1115 o+o 1,,
 centive to corrupt practices hardly be conceived. It bears the ugly look of not only offering preposterous reward for win ming, but enabling the jockey to make it worth the while of five or six of his most dangerous antagonists that he should do so
 making no sweeping charge against them as class. Many of them are honest amid continual temptation, but to say that jockeys are immaculate would be as absurd as to pronounce human nature so.