422 



have to be added. Therefore, when a man has paid, say, £100— not to 

 speak of the maximum fees— his colts or fillies the day they first 

 start will stand him in every shilling of £350 apiece. That would not 

 be so bad if they all turned out well ; but not one in five does so, and 

 not one in twenty turns out first-class, while many, from one cause or 

 another, never see the starter's fl^g. Add the loss of the dead plus 

 that of the bad to the cost of the good ones, and then see what breeders 

 have to lay out by the time they have produced a really good horse. 



To cover the expenses of breeding alone, foals have to be sold at 

 proportionately high figures. The purchaser who does not breed under- 

 goes, of course, the sam3 expense with his young ones as the man who 

 breeds and has to face the same uncertainties. If, therefore, he pays 

 more than £300 or £400 for a yearling he has very much the worst of 

 the bargain. What, then, is to be said of those who pay £1,000 or 

 £2,000, not to speak of double the latter sum, for yearlings ? 



To make that sort of business pay is simply an impossibility. Not 

 one in five of these high-priced yearlings pay their own way, and 

 none of them pay the way of the bad and dead ones. 



How paradoxical is all this ! Long ago when times were good, and 

 our gentry had lots of money, with horses a vast deal better than 

 they are now, Stockwell's service could be got for £50. Going back 

 from his day, say only to Harkaway, whose fee was something like £10 

 or £12, we find all the great sires, including Melbourne, Touchstone, 

 Birdcatcher and other patricians of the Stud-book, standing at from 

 £15 to £30 ! 



Another dreadful injustice breeders labour under is that in the case 

 of a mare proving barren there is neither refund of fee nor other com- 

 pensation made. Surely one-half the service fee should be returned 

 and free service given next time. A man pays for the sight of a foal, 

 and he should get what he pays for. 



So far for our breeders and buyers of yearlings sired by fashion- 

 able stallions. Let us now consider the case of owners as a community. 



The relationship between owners of horses and executives of race 

 meetings has for all time been carried out on a wrong principle, and 

 quite -at variance with the custom invariably adopted in cases which 

 are, to all intents and purposes, identical. Race meetings have been, 

 and continue to be, got up presumably for the purpose of showing sport 

 to the public. The executives find the course, provide stand houses, 

 etc., and advertise stakes to be run for. They have, however, never 

 found it requisite to provide the factors who alone enable them to run 

 their show. They have always been supplied. Not alone that, but 

 money is paid by the factors to the racecourse executives which in 

 nearly all cases equals the amount of the stakes, all the time allowing 

 the latter functionaries to pocket the gate money. 



Now, may I ask, what would be thought of Sir Augustus Harris or 

 Mr. Michael Gunn, when advertising popular plays to come off at 

 Drury Lane or the Gaiety in Dublin, if they supplied only the stage 



