BOOKMAKIXG. iSi 



heard about it, purchased, it is said, a brougham and a 

 pair of horses as a present for his wife,' A few days 

 later, however, the bookmaker and his client happened 

 to meet, and whilst the peer, so the story goes (it may 

 not be true, however), genially accepted a glass of 

 sherry, ho took care to remind the man of odds of 

 the £3 000, ' observing that he had not asked for it on 

 the Monda}', as it might have cramped his debtor in 

 his settling' 



Readers may place what construction they please 

 on this mode of conducting business, but it is quite 

 certain that, if his lordship had lost his bet instead of 

 winning it, the stake would have been carefully asked 

 for. The bookmaker who dealt with the nobleman 

 referred to was not, however, a bit worse than many 

 of his brethren of the pencil. ' What do I owe you V 

 they ask. If you name a smaller sum than the 

 correct amount, it is not their business to keep you 

 right. That is their argument. Moreover, they reply, 

 ' If we make a blunder we have just to suffer for it ; no 

 one who may be paid a tenner too much ever says a 

 word about it.' As the bookmaker has it, it is a case of 

 diamond cut diamond. Other sins of a still more 

 heinous nature are not seldom laid at the door of 

 the bookmaker. 



1 he hero of the anecdote just referred to was on 

 some occasions a very heavy speculator on the turf, 

 making every now and then bets to win or lose large 

 sums of money, wagering, for instance, £3,000 to win 

 £5,000, or vice versa, and not seldom proving 

 victorious. The final transaction on the turf of this 

 gentleman was ri;:king £10,000 to win £4,000, the 



