ADMIRAL ROUS ON SCRATCHING. 179 
bone of contention between those who keep racehorses and 
the public, is and always has been that of a spurious 
ownership ; the public erroneously thinking that every horse 
brought out to run, nay, from the moment of his appearance 
among the list of entries, becomes, and for ever remains, vir- 
tually the property of the British public, and that he should 
be run to suit their pleasure and for their own peculiar 
advantage. I need scarcely remark that I differ with this 
presumptive dictum, agreeing with owners in thinking that 
as long as they “ pay the piper,” they have a right to “ call 
the tune,” and if forestalled in one race, may run for another. 
Nevertheless such a belief prevails, and hence a perpetual 
warfare is waged by the two contending parties, to the injury 
and annoyance of both, That the public are wrong in thus 
interfering with and appropriating other people’s property 
is, I think, pretty clearly shown in this matter of forestalling. 
It is a usurpation of authority which owners resent, and are 
compelled in self-defence to meet, by the exercise of their 
undoubted right to scratch their horses. 
But let us hear as to ownership what the late Admiral 
(when Captain) Rous says in reply to certain questions put to 
him on the subject of betting. 
These questions epitomized would run somewhat as follows : 
“Have the public a right to complain when owners do not 
run their horses as they (the public) expect, and they lose 
their money?” 
“ Should a person have backed a horse that in his opinion 
has in some way or other been prevented winning, has the 
person a claim, under such circumstances, to recover his 
money ?” 
Again: “Supposing this horse could have won, had his 
_backer such a right ?” 
N 2 
