CRITICISMS OF HIS FOLLOWERS 159 



them ; but to send what may be regarded as a private 

 letter indiscriminately to covert-owners, subscribers, 

 and the poaching contingent of so-called hunting-men 

 must lead to friction. In the circular letters which I 

 have seen, the chief reference relates to the conduct of 

 second horsemen. The reference is entirely un- 

 necessary. It has always been the rule that the 

 second horsemen of members of the Hunt should 

 follow the second horsemen of the Master and the 

 Hunt servants. The position of a second horseman, 

 however, has never been clearly defined. Is the groom, 

 to whom you have deputed the custody of your child, 

 a second horseman, because you change horses with 

 him ? I agree with the abolition of pad-grooms, who 

 were never on the spot when their mistresses required 

 them ; but to call the groom in charge of a child a 

 second horseman is absurd. But the Master should 

 define a child as a boy or girl who cannot be trusted to 

 ride without the leading-rein. When our young sports- 

 men and sportswomen can be trusted to ride without 

 the leading-rein, they should be able to take care of 

 themselves in the hunting-field without the assistance 

 of a dry nurse in the shape of a groom. 



" For forms of government let fools contest! 

 Whate'er is best administered, is best." 



It would be well if Masters of Hounds were to give 

 more consideration to this couplet than they do give ; 

 and it would be well if the critics remembered the 

 epitaph on the tomb of Peter Beckford in Stapleton 

 Church : 



