CONCLUSION 365 



was something like half a century before the days of 

 Tambour-Battant and Triboulet. 



In a history of horse-racing the hateful and vexed 

 question of betting cannot be altogether ignored, but 

 as little as possible has been said about it. What tre- 

 mendous influence, however, it has upon the affairs of 

 the Turf may be inferred from the following little 

 narrative, which is specially interesting at the end of 

 this year, 1886, when for the first time within the recol- 

 lection of man there have been obstacles placed in the 

 way of French candidates for the Cesarewitch and Cam- 

 bridgeshire. ' That Plaisanterie put in an appearance 

 [in 1885] for the Cesarewitch,' says the editor of ' L' 

 Entraineur,' ' is owing to two " bookmakers," MM. T. 

 Wilde and Jack Moore. It was they who made it 

 worth the while of the famous filly's owners, to whom 

 they guaranteed 33 to 1, having themselves obtained no 

 more than 20 to 1 in England. . . . Jack Moore paid 

 nearly 600,000 francs (24,000/.) in five-franc, ten-franc, 

 twenty-franc, and [if there are any] fifty-franc pieces at 

 the highest, to backers of Plaisanterie. . . . T. Wilde 

 was the " agent de change " — I can find no better term 

 — who brous^ht over from EnMand to France the 

 greater part of the Jive millions [of francs] that we won 

 by backing Plaisanterie.' Five millions of francs ! That 

 is, 200,000/. ; confessedly extracted from perfidious 

 Albion. Hinc illce lacrymcB^ no doubt : hence that ex- 

 clusive edict issued by the English Jockey Club. It 

 was the prodigious amount of money won in bets by 

 the ' French contingent ' that produced so great an 

 effect ; Plaisanterie might have won the two handicaps 

 and welcome otherwise. Especially as, being a daughter 

 of Wellingtonia, she was no less English than most Frencli 

 winners were in the good old times, when nobody 



