view raw text
J , i 1 ; SOME MIGHT-HAVE-BEENS OF THE DERBY. : Mischances Which Deprived Great Horses of an Qpportunity to Win "Blue Riband of the Turf." No racing man can deny that the significance of that fatal sentence "What might have been" so remorseless in its intesity has influenced the destiny of many backers of horses, as it has been the destruction of other- people whose lives have been warped by accomplished facts the work of others. Consequently the Derby, as the most popu- . i lar race in the world, must claim more victims of circumstances over which they possessed no control than any other event of the kind, as such instances are referred to below will prove. So far as modern times are concerned, the two most unforunate horses which have been included In a Derby entry have been St. Simon and Orme, wliose prospects were ruined by their having been struck out at times when their successes appeared exceptionally bright; aud this view was endorsed by their subsequent performances. The withdrawal of St. Simon was entirely at- i tributed to the existence of the rule, to which large numbers of racing men object, which enacts that "entries, or rights of entry under them, become void on the death of a subscriber;" and, owing to the law being as it is, the sudden decease of that excellent and most popular sportsman Count Batthyany unquestionably deprived the best of his horses of the honors of being included in the ranks of Derby winners. The loss to the turf, however, proved to be a benefit to the Duke of Portland, who purchased St. Simon and won the Ascot Cup with him in tiie same season. This was the year in which St. Oatien and Harvester ran their dead heat, but some of the supporters of the pair were lucky after the numbers went up, as St. Gatiens owner was threatened by having an objection to defend on the ground of his horses pedigree being incomplete this was, however, withdrawn; while the unsoundness of Harvesters legs would probably have caused III in to break down in the run-off, had not Mr. Hammond been a sportsman, which accounts for the division. Eight years after the withdrawal of St. Simon, the Duke of AVestminsters Orme experienced a similar fate, as tin? son of Bend Or was struck out of the Derby, owing to his suffering from a mysterious illness which completely baffled the skill of his trainer and veterinary attendant to get hini to fjie post. All sorts of rumors regarding the nature of the sudden attack were to lie heard on all sides, but the most generally accepted view was that it was due to mercurial poison, though whether tins dose was the result of accident or design no one seemed able to decide. I believe, however, that the stalde entertained Hie conviction that somebody had got at the horse, but the inquiry that was held failed to enlighten the public at all, and consequently the cause of Onnes misfortune must be added to the category of unsolved mysteries. It is a Strang coincidence that the success of Ormes sire, Bend Or, was also the subject of an inquiry, and fo this day I believe that many people entertain the opinion that the. sou of Don-caster and Rouge Rose never won the Derby of ISS0. This is due to the statements which got about to the effect that there had been some mis-take. in changing two of the yearlings which were sent up from Eaton to Kingsclere; ami hence that the colt called Bend Or was in reality Tadcaster. Of course, no out: believed for an instant that the Duke of AAestminster and John Porter would have been parties to any fraud of the kind suggested, especially as Bend Or was by far the better bred colt of the pair. But the story of a stable boy got to be believed by some people who imagined that there had been an honest mistake; though the inquiry by the Jockey Club into the matter entirely vindicated the claim of Bend Or to be the son of lioucaster ami Roiige Rose. One thing is quite certain, however, and this is that Bend Or was a fortunate horse to win the Derby. The race was won by Rossiter, which was on Robert the Devil, turning round to take a look at Archer, of all men in the world, just as the sou son of Bertram had made the result a certainty, but the "Tinman." who was riding like a demon, snatched the verdict by a head. Poor Rossiter! He not only missed riding a Derby winner, but a St. Leger as well, for Tom Cannon was in the saddle when Robert the Devil got his own back with Bend Or at Doncaster. In the opinion of many good judges of racing, Archer was a pound lietter jockey at Kpsom than any of the heavy-weight riders of his time, and at all events those who saw the finish between Melton and Paradox in 1SS5 inclined to the belief that the man and not the horse was entitled to the credit of the victory. It was just a case of one of "Archers heads," as Paradox had been in front for a considerable way, whereas Melton hud not occupied a good place. I heard afterwards that Archer, who had ridden the horse upon several occasions, knew that Paradox disliked making the running, and consequently he waited behind with Lord Hastings horse. It became evident a few lengths from home, however, that Melton was not attending to business as closely as his jockey desired, and hence the necessity occurred for his memory being refreshed by a series of rib-benders, the memory of which-lingers in the minds of all who witnessed the performance. In short, many of those who saw the race, backers of Melton included, were convinced that if the jockeys had been changed, Paradox would assuredly have won, and hence the result of the Derby was included in the category of "what might have been" in 1SS5. Many old race-goers, who were unfortunate in their investments, considered that Blue Gown was lucky in winning the Derby of 180S, owing to the absence of The Earl, whose withdrawal caused a great deal of comment at the time. Some people, moreover, thought that a dauegrous opponent to Sir Joseph Ilawleys horse had practically been reduced to a nonentity by the appalling loss of form shown by Lady Elizabeth since her two-year-old days, and certaintly, although Lord Hastings filly ran in the Derby, it was pretty evident that the effects of her exertions in 1S07 had told their tale. Sir Joseph Hawley, however, exflencnced a piece of bad luck when Pero Gomez just got "nipped" by Pretender in 1S09. The verdict was, in my humble opinion, one of Judge Clarks few mistakes, and I am sure that nine-tenths of those who saw the race at the winning post would confirm the opinion. AVells often told me afterwards that he was sure that he won; but perhaps John Osborne may entertain a dilTerent recollection of the race. At all events the set-to between the old "Pusher" on Pretender and the "Brusher" on Pero Oomez was one of those sights one can look back upon as an exciting episode of the race course; but it is only fair to Wells to add that he once told me that he was nut really well enough to ride on the day. If he had been himself Sir Joseph Hawley would have repealed his successes of 1S5S and 1S59, in which years he won the Derby with AVells in the saddle on both occasions. I Ixdieve that Sloan has repeatedly told his friends that Flying Fox would not have won the Derby of 1S99 had not the French-bred Holo-causte fell at the bend ami broken his leg. It was pretty certain, however, that the Duke of WAtininsters horse was providing his opponents with something to take on. Some folks also argued that Meddler would have been close in Isinglass year had he not been scratched owing to the death of Air. Abingtoii. Of course, it cannot be denied that such horses as Holocauste and Meddler provide instances of things which "might" have happened;- but, granted that Flying Fox and Isinglass were lucky in having hail such opponents cleared out of their path, the consensus of opinion was that the best horse won beyond a doubt. AVheu Flair carried off the One Thousand Guineas in 1900, the idea gained ground that as colts which ran in the. Two Thousand Guineas were such a moderate lot. Sir Daniel Coopers smart filly was likely to win the Derby. Flair, however, went amiss, and had to be struck out, but the stable was fortunate in unearthing another repre-sentaive in Spearmint, which, as we all know, was fully equal to the occasion, but had Flair kept well, the result might have been different. The exigencies of space and time prohibit an allusion to The Tetrarch, whose book form suggests that an easy victory awaited the son of Roi Ilerode and Valireu if he had seen the post. Some men, wliose opinions count for more than a little, warned me as early as the previous autumn that the colt might not see Epsom, and tin; events of the concluding weeks of the season prepared the lacing public for a breakdown of The Tetrarch before Derby day came around. Special Contributor in London Sporting Life, - .
