FALLIBILITY OF PUBLIC OPINION. i8i 



These extracts are taken from a book called " The History of 

 the Horse," and the evidence was given before a Committee of 

 the House of Commons on gaming, 1844. In the same work 

 there is the evidence of other gentlemen on the same subject 

 which is hardly worth repeating here, as I think the Captain's 

 is sufficient for the purpose ; for as it is an expressed opinion 

 clearly and unmistakably in favour of a man doing as he 

 likes with his own horses, no argument worth hearing is left 

 in favour of a contrary idea. Indeed I think I may go so far 

 as to say, a man could not, in doing what he likes with his own 

 horse, do an act of injustice to another ; though many non- 

 owners are continually declaring themselves aggrieved, whilst 

 in truth no one has a share in their wrong but themselves. 



But it is not only the act of scratching that is found so 

 much fault with ; but also the condition of horses that run, 

 both before and after any race on which there has been much 

 speculation. One party is found affirming the animal is the 

 pink of condition, whilst others loudly assert he is not fit to 

 run for a saddle at a country fair : and after the result, be it 

 what it may, from one party or another, the poor owner comes 

 in for a round of abuse, as though he were the veriest rogue 

 in creation. " If a favourite," they argue, " does not run, he 

 dies from the effect of 'milk fever,' or succumbs after much 

 vitality to metallic influence after the last guinea has been 

 got out of him." 



Now there may not only be no word of truth in any of 

 these statements, but most certainly those who so glibly make 

 them have not a scintilla of knowledge to guide them. They 

 judge from appearances, and must of necessity condemn in 

 error. " After So-and-so " (one of the first horses introduced 

 into the betting) "had met with an accident he was, to the 

 owner's praise, honourably struck out," argues one. But another 



