254 MODERN FARRIER, 



Case 3. — The winner of a plate, whose horse had 

 distanced all the others, applied for the stakes or 

 entrance-money, which was advertised to be paid to 

 the second best 'horse that won a clear heat : one of 

 the distanced horses had won the first heat. 



Answer. — The winning horse cannot be deemed 

 the second horse, and therefore is not entitled to the 

 stakes, to which the owners of the other horses (be- 

 ing distanced) have also no claim. 



Case 4. — For a plate, the horses came in as follows : 

 Question, whether B was entitled to the stakes ? 

 A - - - - 2 11 

 B (fell) - - - 10 2 dis. 

 C - - - - 3 dr. 



It w^as decided that B, being distanced, was not 

 entitled to the stakes. 



Case 6. — A gold cup, &c. for horses that never 

 won; 



A 1 



B 2 



C 3 



The owner of B claimed on the ground of A's 

 disqualification, he having the preceding year won a 

 clear heat at Chelmsford, to entitle him, according 

 to their articles, to the stakes or entrance-money. 



Answer. — The stewards are of opinion, that A 

 was not disqualified, and consequently is entitled to 

 the cup, &c. — the term ' winner,' they conceive, ap- 

 plies only to the horse that beats all the rest. 



Case 6. — An enquiry whether a horse having won 

 a sweepstakes of 23 guineas each (3 subscribers) is 

 qualified to run for a 50/. plate, expressed to be for 

 horses that never won plate, match, or sweepstakes, 

 of that value. 



Answer, by the stewards of the jockey club. 



That it has been the practice, in estimating win- 

 nings, to consider the clear sum gained only, and 



