MESSENGER AXD HIS ANCESTORS. 217 



-we must consider somewhat in detail Mr. Weatherby's methods 

 .and the degree of responsibility he assumed for the accuracy of his 

 compilations. In 1791 he published what he called ''An Intro- 

 duction to a General Stud Book/' containing, as he says, "a small 

 collection of pedigrees which he had extracted from racing cal- 

 endars and sale papers, and arranged on a new plan." In May, 

 1800, he issued a supplement to his "Introduction" bringing 

 down the produce of mares to 1799. In 1803 he issued what we 

 .suppose is the first edition of the first volume of tne Stud Book. 

 The title-page reads, "The General Stud Book, containing pedi- 

 grees of race horses, etc., from the Restoration to the present 

 time." The imprint is, "Printed for James Weatherby, 7 

 Oxenden Street, etc., London, 1803." The volume contains 

 three hundred and eighty-four pages, while the edition of 1827 

 contains four hundred and forty-eight pages. There is no 

 'Volume I." on the title-page, nor is there any indication that 

 this is a continuation or revision of any preceding work. It 

 brings down the list of produce in many cases to and including 

 1803, but none later than that year, so there can be no mistake 

 as to when it was issued. 



I have been thus particular in identifying this first edition 

 of the first volume of the English Stud Book, for it gives us an 

 insight into the methods employed by Mr. Weatherby in the prog- 

 ress of his work. Upon a careful comparison of the editions of 

 1803 with 1827 extending through the letters A, B, and M, we 

 find that he has thrown out more than ten per cent, of the entire 

 families in the edition of 1803. By "entire families" I mean 

 T)rood mares, with their lists of produce. In making these ex- 

 clusions he seems to have confined himself to what may be con- 

 sidered the historic period, at that day, and did not go back 

 further than about twenty years. Beyond that period everything 

 was traditional, and he appears to have shrunk from all responsi- 

 bility of attempting the exclusion of families. On and near the 

 border line between these periods he seems to have taken the re- 

 sponsibility of cutting off a great many individuals of doubtful 

 identity, even though the family was left to stand on its uncer- 

 tain basis of tradition. I cannot say positively that the dam 

 of Messenger and her sister were cut off with the multitude of 

 others, but I can say that neither of them ever appeared again 

 in the Stud Book. Other members of the family of the Eegulus 

 mare have places for their descendants in subsequent volumes, 



