THE TURF. 
This is now an old story ; and though we should be 
among the first to say 
" Curse on the coward or perfidious tongue 
That dares not e'en to kings avow the truth," 
yet we think the Jockey Club dealt rather hardly by the 
young prince, and he was quite right in refusing their 
invitation to return. We wish for proof before we con- 
demn ; and we think proof was wanting here. Where 
were the orders to the jockey to lose, and where was the 
money won by losing ? We can hear of neither. But 
if the change to a certain extent in a horse's running 
(accounted for by the late Samuel Chifney*, by the 
treatment of Escape) is of itself enough to damage the 
character of his owner, what would have become of that 
of his royal highness's principal accuser, the late Sir 
Charles Bunbury ? Look at the running of his Eleanor : 
it is well known she was the winner of both Derby and 
Oaks the best mare of her day. Well I at Huntingdon 
she was beaten by a common plater, a mare called Two 
Shoes, ten to one on Eleanor. The next week at 
Egham, she beat a first-rate race-horse, Bobadil, and 
several others, ten to one on Bobadil. In both these 
cases money was lost, and the question that follows is, 
who won it ? But Sir Charles too is in his grave, and 
therefore we say " requiescat in pace." 
* In his book " Genius Genuine," published in 1804 ; " Sold for the 
Author, 232 Piccadilly, and nowhere else," as saith the title-page- 
Price 51. ! 
187 
