350 NATIONAL COURSING CLUB. 



property. There was some little difference between Mr. Blan- 

 shard's statement and the official counter-statement of the secre- 

 tary, but not in any essential point ; the Club at one 3 corning to 

 the conclusion that the case rested simply on two points first, 

 whether an owner can at any time draw his dog, whether lame or 

 not ? and, secondly, whether there is any limitation to bye dogs 

 except that of age ? Mr Blanshard's statement was simply that 

 'Meteor ' and ( Baffler ' being drawn together, he drew the former 

 as lame, and then put ' Wild Deer ' in the slips to run the bye ; 

 but this was not allowed by the acting steward, who told him that 

 he must either run 'Baffler' and ( Meteor' together, or run 

 6 Baffler ' single-handed. He submitted to do the latter, and now 

 asked the opinion of the Club, whether the stewards had any right 

 in the first place to attempt to coerce him to run ( Meteor,' and, in 

 the second, to deprive him of the usual assistance of a bye dog? 

 In conclusion he put in a certificate of Mr. Strangways, V.S., 

 Edinburgh, that the dog was lame and unfit to run, and dis- 

 claimed any desire to upset the decision of the stewards, merely 

 asking for the opinion of the National Club as a guide for the 

 future. 



Dr. Kichardson and Mr. Foster, who appeared on the part of 

 the Coquetdale Club, then each handed in a lengthy statement; 

 but on being asked if they wished them read, they preferred 

 making their own opinions known in a more conversational 

 manner. Mr. Foster commenced by protesting officially against 

 the question being entertained by the National Club, on the 

 ground that e Mr. Blanshard having refused to refer this dispute 



