BETTING. 267 



would suppose no living creature could be gulled by it, yet that 

 it pays, its constant repetition must be taken as conclusive 

 evidence. 



Of a somewhat different type is that philanthropic gentle- 

 man from Sharpshire, who is intimately acquainted with several 

 of the leading owners and trainers within that favoured district, 

 and who is anxious to enter into correspondence with other 

 sportsmen on topics which may prove of mutual interest and 

 advantage. Which being interpreted means, ' A traitor in two 

 or three camps wishes to put his treachery up for purchase by 

 the highest bidder.' 



Not, one would think, a tempting negotiation, even for 

 speculators of tough moral fibre to enter upon — yet if nothing 

 is ever caught, why is the trap so constantly baited ? The pos- 

 sible exceptions (to which allusion has been made) to the broad 

 rule that tipsters are mostly swindlers may be found in certain 

 industrious students of public form from book or from personal 

 observation on racecourses, who print and privately circulate 

 yearly, monthly, or weekly analyses of past racing, with reason- 

 able deductions as to their bearing on future events. These 

 men also send to their subscribers daily telegrams indicating a 

 certain number of probable winners. Whether the game is 

 worth the candle to the subscriber, no sufficiently scientific 

 data are forthcoming to assure us. Often during a meeting 

 are heard such expressions as these : 



' That's a wonderful man of mine — hardly ever wrong, 

 spotted five winners out of six to-day,' or ' If I'd only followed 

 Trinket's advice, I should have won a monkey ; ' but to the 

 query, ' Did you back the wonderful man's five winners ? ' or 

 ' Why did you not follow Trinket's advice,' come almost invari- 

 ably the melancholy rejoinders : 'Because I got the telegram 

 too late,' or ' I put it in my pocket and forgot it,' or ' I wanted 

 to follow his tips and was talked out of them all at the last 

 moment.' So in the long run the priceless information would 

 seem to profit no one but the sender, who, whatever his intel- 

 lectual shortcomings may be, is no doubt wise enough to 



