CONCLUSION 361 



always been of somewhat circumscribed dimensions — 

 for a club — were conspicuous among the breeders as 

 well as owners and runners of the best horses in 

 England, and the names of Chifhey, Eidsdale, Sadler, 

 Gully (ex-butcher, ex-prize-fighter, ex-publican, but 

 M.P.), Pedley, I'Anson, Snewing, J. Day, W. Scott, 

 W. Day, J. Dawson, Forth, J. Scott, Crockford (of 

 ' fishy ' antecedents), B. Green, and a host more, some 

 of them men of the very highest character, but 

 nevertheless bookmakers, trainers, and jockeys, or 

 persons ' in business ' (whether in the line of hosiery, 

 or ' Nicholson's gin,' or iron, or carpets and furniture), 

 as Messrs. Theobald (breeder of Stockwell), Graham 

 (who ' belonged to ' Regalia), Blenkiron (of Middle 

 Park) , Merry (the ' Glasgie body ') , Cartwright (owner 

 of the 'beautiful Ely'), and tutti quanti, were con- 

 stantly in the mouths of men as winners of the ' clas- 

 sic ' races, or breeders of the horses that won them. 

 Meanwhile the era of Stud Companies had set in, 

 and they too sent forth horses conquering and to 

 conquer. Observing all this, certain reformers arose 

 with propositions, and among them, Sir Joseph Haw- 

 ley (himself a prominent member of the Jockey Club) 

 raised the question, as we have seen, whether the 

 time had not come for ' extending the basis ' of that 

 Club which ruled the Turf and nearly everything that 

 appertained thereto, and rendering it more represen- 

 tative ; and the same question has been lately raised 

 again by Lord Durham (another prominent member 



