loo A MIRROR OF THE TURF. 



required to revise his judgment and alter his 

 verdict ; as a rule his decree is final, although, 

 in the opinion of thousands who have witnessed 

 the contest, it may be an erroneous verdict. In the 

 race for the Derby Stakes of 1869, when Pero 

 Gomez and Pretender ran so close together, it 

 was generally considered, till the numbers went 

 up, that Pero Gomez had beaten Pretender, 

 and many who saw the race insist it was so, and 

 that the judge on that occasion committed an 

 error in awarding the Blue Ribbon to the northern- 

 trained horse. 



Long ago, say sixty years since, complaints 

 against judges were much oftener indulged 

 in than they are at present. A writer on turf 

 matters, in speaking of the judging of the period 

 (1829), says : 



" I have frequently known much dissatis- 

 faction to arise from the manner in which the 

 judge has placed the horses ; for instance, at 

 the last Epsom Races (1829), the first race, the 

 first day, was very closely contested by Conrad 

 and Fleur de lis. I was nearly opposite the 

 winning-post, and felt no hesitation in supposing 

 Conrad the winner ; I heard great numbers 

 express their opinion to the same effect. The 

 judge decided otherwise. At the Liverpool 

 Meeting in July, 1829, the Gold Cup was decided 

 in favour of Velocipede, though many persons 

 insisted that Dr. Faustus was the winner. 

 Templeman, who rode Dr. Faustus, unhesitatingly 

 declared his unqualified conviction that he won 

 the race. Now, since no person can tell so 

 exactly which wins as the judge, from the situa- 

 tion in which he is placed, I am very willing 



