268 HOESE-KACING IN FRANCE 



' placed ' at Newmarket by the judge, Mr. Clark. They 

 even appear to have thought that M. Lefevre's horse 

 won the Two Thousand, if there be anything in the re- 

 marks printed in ' Le Sport' on April 24, 1886. 'M. 

 Lefevre,' we are told, ' won a race one day with a colt 

 named John [by Dollar]. The horse had taken a 

 lead of a length on the post beyond the three com- 

 petitors that finished with him. Mr. Clark did not even 

 place him in the first three. The same owner's Negro 

 [by Saccharometer ?] won a Biennial [not specified] by 

 half a length and was not placed. It was the same with 

 Beauminet in the Two Thousand.' All this really looks 

 as if there were something in the famous remark at- 

 tributed to a ' leg ' (who was ' in the know ' and had 

 backed ' Eimning Eein' for the Derby of 1844) when 

 he observed bitterly, ' What's the use of winning the 

 Derby if they won't let you have it ? ' Still there cer- 

 tainly was something said at the time about Beauminet's 

 treatment, though it is doubtfid whether any impartial 

 spectator really thought or contended that he had 

 actually won. On the other hand, no doubt, there were 

 many people ready to maintain to their latest breath 

 that Daniel O'Ecurke did not really win the Derby ol 

 1852, and that Lord Clifden did win that of 1863 ; but 

 some of us saw with our own eyes either both or one 

 of them and know better. 



The year 1881 was to be no more favourable for 

 the 'Frenchmen' than 1880 had been. True the 

 ' foreigner ' was to have it all his own way in England 

 and in the Grand Prix de Paris ; but the ' foreigner ' 

 was to be American, not French, and the year was to 

 be Iroquois's year and Foxhall's year. 



Let us first of all record the melancholy fate of 

 M. H. Delamarre's Vizir (tliree years, son of Vermont 



