Hungerford ; 5 to 4 against him. The Selling Stakes, five starters, Sweetheart won, beating four others ; and this exhausted the list. The interest, however, ended with the race—and route - for the Great Yorkshire. The ring was raving to get on “ Hawley."

Wednesday, the anniversary of the seventy-fourth St. Leger, drew its thousands to the scene of action once more. “ The Grand Stand was crowded to the summit, and the balcony was filled with ladies ; but we recognized very few persons of distinction”.... Thus said the reporter. “Something rotten in the state" of a noble, national sport. What else could be anticipated, seeing “to what base uses” it has come? The rooms were full, but not of profitable people. The customers by no means equalled the demand for business. “Betting was bad ;' which means there was not enough of it. All the ring requires is plenty to do. Still quotations were pretty steady. Hernandez, who ought to have won the Derby, was booked for the Leger ; on the principle, probably, of compensation—a popular myth of modern philosophy. Indeed, the only animals in the market were Aphrodite and Hernandez ; the mare towards the close having the “ call” of the colt. There was keen encounter between the “cavaliers and round”-legs, and diamond cut paste was the order of the day. All the ordinary concomitants of the town disposed of, we are once more upon the ground. The list began with The Municipal Stakes ; six subscribers, and four at the post, leaving a net stake of nine hundred pounds for the winner. The odds were, 6 to 5 on Claverhouse, 5 to 2 against Herschel, and 5 to 1 against Hesperus. This being a Red House in affair, they were soon in earnest about it. In this mind the favourite quickly took the lead, and so carried it past the chair-fast in hand—first by a length. The Doncaster Plate drew together eight aspirants. The odds were 2 to 1 against Coticula, 5 to 1 Croupier, ditto The Cutler, ditto Madame Wharton, ditto Prince Caradoc Colt, and 6 to 1 Tightwaist. The course was the same as before, and so was the policy. They came away as hard as they could crack ; at the Stand Croupier got to the front, there stayed, and won by a length. We have now reached the all-absorbing problema—the question about to be solved for the cognoscenti, but by no means by them. Were any of the tips right this time “any how," or were they all wrong, some how? .... The St. Leger Stakes . ... The winner to pay one hundred sovereigns towards the expenses : twenty-five sodereigns for the judge, and twenty-five sovereigns for the starter!! 119 subscribers. It is perhaps needless to premise that the existing conditions of this celebrated stake are, 25 sovs. each, all forfeit. Thus nothing is gained by not starting, save “expenses” not provided for in the articles. The consequence was, a very considerable field-in point of numbers at the post. Eighteen started, at the following prices : 6 to 4 against Hernandez, 2 to 1 Aphrodite, 5 to 1 The Ban, 12 to 1 Newminster, 18 to 1 Miserrima, 40 to 1 Lough Bawn, and 50 to 1 Phlegra. The office of starter upon this occasion was discharged by Capt. Rous. The late Lord George Bentinck was at one time in the habit of officiating in a similar capacity. The practice, as the Italian proverb says of the medal, “ has two sides." Of the performance in the present instance, Bell's Life observed—“The start, we should add, not being the best we ever saw." But they are off, “any how." The

lead was taken by the gelding—Deceitful—who led up the hill and down, and did not lose it till the Red House turn was accomplished, when Aphrodite went to the front. Next to her up the course for the Stand was Newminster, with Hook'em Snivey and Sir Rowland Trenchard “handy ;" the rest of the party “pretty well out of it,” as some one remarked. Inside the distance Newminster, being so induced by Sim Templeman, gave the mare the go by, beat her without an effort, and went in first by two lengths in a canter; Hook'em Snivey was a bad third .... and Phlegra, a shocking bad fifth, was lengths before the “ crack” (“ and no mistake about that” ....) The time, as it appeared upon paper, was good, viz., three minutes twenty seconds . ... The " settling," as it is called, was tolerably mild. There was one big burst, and some few lesser explosions ; but,

This is no world
To play with mammets and to tilt with lips ;
We must have bloody noses and cracked crowns,
And pass them current too."

In the words of the philosopher Reineke, “one has to make one's own way in the world.” The winner is a son of that honest old mare, Beeswing, once the Camilla of the Tyne . ... The issue adds another to the ample catalogue of the glorious uncertainties of the turf!... Her Majesty's Plate was run a match between the Maid of Masham and Cossack ; 11 to 8 on the former. This was the correct reading, as she won with all ease by a length. A Sweepstakes of 10 sovs. each, for two and three-year-olds, brought out seven of the eleven subscribers. They laid 6 to 4 against Trousseau, the same about Iris, and 5 to 1 against the Sister to Wanota. Trousseau made her own running from end to end, and won in a canter by a length; the winner of the Oaks second. The Two-year-old Produce Stakes Claverhouse was allowed to walk over for, and the sports ended for the day.

Thursday, rife in the forenoon with the common casualties of the day after the Leger, was of itself flat, and unprofitable withal. The programme contained six races, but the fact was diminished onethird, by arrangements. The first event on the cards was a Sweepstakes of 20 sovs. each, for two-year-olds. Fourteen subscribed, and five ran. The betting was 6 to 5 agst. Alfred the Great, 3 to 1 Hyacinth, and 7 to 2 Vortex. There was some trouble in getting the fleet under way; but when they did go, they went “with a will." The run-in was a slasher between Alfred and the filly by the Merry Monarch, out of Cestus, whereof the colt had the best by a neck. The Cleveland Handicap, 32 subscribers, got together seven of the batch. The odds were 2 to 1 against Le Juif, 4 to 1 Vatican, and the same about the Heroine, 5 to 1 Vanguard, 8 to 1 Hungerford, and the same about Worcester. More mischief at the post. When the start was effected, they wended their way as wild geese are wont. At the distance they were on better terms-Worcester first, and Le Juif next him. This pair fought it out from that point, the favourite winning on the post by a head. For the Foal Stakes, 100 sovs. each, h. ft., six subscribers, Iris walked over, dividing the forfeits with Hernandez ; and then came a Handicap Sweepstakes of 10 sovs. each, 15 named, and nine to contest. The betting was 2 to 1 against Old Rowley, 7 to 2 Senorita, 5 to 1 Equal, the same about the Birdcatcher filly, and the same against The Shadow. This “ Red. House-in" scurry was a very downright demonstration, as usual. The ultimate length the Birdcatcher filly placed between herself and The Shadow, who was second. A Handicap Sweepstakes of 10 sovs. each, for three-year-olds, six subscribers, was run a trio. 5 to 4 against Hungerford, 6 to 4 True Blue, and, in the course of the race, 2 to 1 about Mrs. Birch. It was a very severe finish, in which Mrs. Birch beat the favourite by a lead. For the Scarborough Stakes Jack Leeming walked over; and thus the half-dozen events were disposed of.

Friday—which now judiciously winds up the meeting with the eclat that here most especially waits upon the Cup (or “ Coop" in the vernacular)—bated none of its popularity on the occasion to which this notice refers. Before we relate its “ varios casus," a word must be appropriated to the vexata questio of exchequer. In addition to the Cup, value 300 sovereigns, there was added to the stakes given for plates, and the Queen's guineas, in specie, £885. Deduct from this £105 for her Majesty's Plate, and for expenses £230, and the net sum given by the meeting to the credit of the racing interest was 550 sovereigns, and a cup “ value £300.”

The racing began betimes with a Sweepstakes of 200 sovereigns each, h. ft., four subscribers, and three at the post. They betted 7 to 4 on Hippolytus, and 5 to 2 against Confidence. Won in a canter by the favourite, by a length. A Handicap Plate of 70 sovs., for three-yearolds and upwards. Half-&-score ran for this money, 7 to 4 against Clincher, 5 to 1 against Miss Fanny, ditto Haresfoot, 6 to 1 The Sweep, 7 to 1 Humphrey, and 8 to 1 Grief. The lucky baronet was victorious, Clincher winning cleverly by a length. The Park Hill Stakes, with an entry of 26, had a field of five. Betting : 3 to 1 on Aphrodite, and 4 to 1 against Trickstress. This was a burlesque on a race, the favourite cantering home first by eight lengths. Another main for Sir Joseph. The Doncaster Cup, value 300 sovs., seven telegraphed to start. Once upon a time, Nancy was talked about for this event ; but it was “vox et præterea nihil.” Then there was exceeding excitement anent The Ban, and then the market closed as follows : Even betting about the Maid of Masham, 5 to 2 against The Ban, and the same about The Black Doctor. The play was made in downright earnest by Lough Bawn, who was half a distance before the remaining half-dozen over the hill. There his bolt was shot, and Vatican relieved him of the lead. Second, at this point of the contest, was the favourite. Thus they came to the Red House, where the Maid of Masham was first, The Ban and The Black Doctor being in perilous propinquity. At the distance, the Maid gave in, having broken down. "The Ban and The Doctor then raced for the chair, the former winning very cleverly by a couple of lengths......" On returning to scale, the rider of The Black Doctor objected to the winner, on the ground that the owner started two horses in the race.”...... Without prejudice to the assumption set forth on the part of some “who did not hesitate to assert that the sale" (of Vatican, previous to the race, to Mr. Morris) “was a colourable one, for the purpose of evading the rule which provides that no person shall run two horses for any cup or plate for which no stake is made by the owner," as stated by a sporting paper, it may be convenient, as regards precedent, to examine the virtual status of this rule, and the objection urged upon it. In Rule 40 of the “ Rules concerning Horse Racing in General,” it is recited...“ It being an established rule that no person can enter and run (sic in the Book Calendar), either in his own name or in the name of any other person, two horses of which he is wholly or in part the owner, for any plate ; and doubts having arisen as to the true definition of the word plate, the Stewards of the Jockey Club have decided that where a sum of money is given to be run for without any stake being made by the owners of the horses (the entrance money, whether given to the owner of the second horse or applied to the Racing Fund, not being considered a stake), such prize shall be construed to be a plate. But where a stake is deposited by the owners of the horses which is to go to the winner, and an additional sum of money, or a cup, or piece of plate, or other reward is offered as a prize to the winner, even though such addition shall be denominated a plate by the donorsuch race shall be taken to be a sweepstakes, and not a plate." I apprehend this rule was the authority upon which the objection was lodged against The Ban as the winner of the Doncaster Cup. How does that trophy come within the true definition of “ a plate," as specified in the rule quoted ? It was not “ a sum of money given to be run for without any stake being made by the owners of the horses." According to the spirit of the text it was undoubtedly a plate : according to the letter it undoubtedly was not. When shall we have a revised code of racing law, that “ all who run may read”—and construe? that will admit of interpretation without a wrangle? Should the issue be made to turn upon the fact of Vatican's being or not being the property of Sir Joseph Hawley, when“ entered,” and when he “ ran,” for the race in dispute, I cannot suppose the arrangement of the question could occupy more time than would be required to receive an answer upon the point from the owner of The Ban*...... The Nursery Plate, for two-yearolds—as the title would imply—had half a score of runners. The odds were 5 to 2 against Merry Bird, 3 to 1 against Bird-on-the-Wing, 4 to 1 against Equal, 5 to 1 against the filly by Lanercost out of Jemima, 6 to 1 against Evadne, and the same against Sir Charles Napier. This ruck of young ones came together past the distance : at the Stand, Euphony and Bird-on-the-Wing were at it ding-dong—the former winning by a length. This was a bit of green fat for the ring. The Doncaster Stakes, for three-year-olds, came off a quartet, with 4 to 1 on Aphrodite! This finest filly of her year—" by cbalks”-cantered astern to the turn for home, then cantered on, and won by half-a-dozen lengths—a pretty little picking of seven hundred and fifty pounds-and Sir Joseph Hawley's fourth main for the day! The Don Stakes, 50 sovs. each, h, ft., Teddington walked over for, suffering Prime Minister to draw his stake; and a match not coming off in consequence of the death of one of the “ parties," tbe list was at finis. What fell out in

* The subjoined paragraph, in reference to this affair, is copied from Tattersall's report for Monday, the 22nd ult., which appeared in the Times of the following morning....“ The objection made against The Ban at the time of weighing not having been represented to the Stewards, the Cup, we are informed, has been handed over to Sir Joseph Hawley, and bets bave in most instances been paid on the race. The Black Doctor party, however, intend to proceed with the matter, and decline banding over a large sum laid by them against The Ban and the lot' until it be decided.”

the matter of lists of another kind is as conveniently left unsung. That mortal mania is on the wane. Sweeps are going out of fashion, and young “ gents” with more bounce than brains bid fair once again to become the peculiar prey of those fishers of men, who, as Mr. Thackeray tells us, “ from the days of Jacob downwards, have believed and swindled.”......

A little pamphlet made its appearance a few days ago, published by Mitchell, of Bond-street, in which the principle of making the revenue of the turf available for its promotion and support is advocated, in some instances, in the very words used with a similar view in these pages ...... “A fellow feeling makes us wondrous kind.” So the substance of the brochure is added by the way of postcript to a review of the past month's racing policy. It is entitled “ What is to be done with the Crystal Palace ?” and thus propounds question and answer touching that all-engrossing proposition :

QUESTION PUT

“What is to be done with the Crystal Palace ?”

-PAMPHLETS AND PARAGRAPHS, passim.

When first the proposal was made that the world should be invited to do homage to Progress in the British capital, what troops of doubts and dangers were arrayed in opposition to it! Still it held on the even tenor of its way, and in fulness of time was inaugurated with surpassing pomp and circumstance, at a shrine, the like of which had never before crowned the labour of man's hands.

Thus it fared with the early days of “ The Great Exhibition of the Works of Industry of all Nations.” It grew and prospered exceedingly. It matured into a moral and material marvel. It has accomplished its end. Its triumph is complete, beyond the anticipations of hope. It will cast a halo on the annals of the age, and will mark with a fitting memorial a time when there was “ on earth peace and good-will toward men.”

But let not the mighty social fact which has shed glory on the nineteenth century be mistaken for a successful experiment. It was an effect of which progress was the cause, a modern and a memorable instance, indeed, of what may be achieved by those who “take occasion by the front," and rightly calculate “ the hour and the man." And now, the Temple of Art, Skill, and Industry-its grand and grave mission accomplished-is about to close, and the question is mooted, “What shall be its future destination ?" The answer should seem to be suggested by the moral of the course it has already run. It has served to enlighten and instruct—henceforth let it contribute to embellish and delight, as leisure waits on labour. There is good assurance that its ultimate fate is with those who

“Count nothing done while aught remains to do.” If the building be retained, its future appropriation is most probaby al. ready determined. Should, however, another policy prevail, and those best qualified to decide decree its removal, the following suggestions are offered, as being, at all events, in sympathy with their object. The purpose for which it is-s0 to speak to the matter made, is that of a national Rural Resort, such as no capital in the world possesses, and which no capital in the world has such claim to possess as London. This would be a graceful end and a gracious aim : and to that it is sought to consecrate it.