But we have never met. If this meets his eye, probably he will send a
cheque for £700 to the office of _Mr. Punch_. I have often regretted
the circumstance, as it was my most fortunate _coup_ on the Turf, and
above all, reflected credit on my judgment of a horse.

Conversing afterwards with a friend on this event, I expressed
surprise that _my_ horse had not been a favourite, considering his
agreeable exterior.

"Why, you Juggins," he answered, "_Rumtifoo_ was a moral--everybody
knew _that_; but everybody knew he wasn't meant; he was being kept
for the Polehampton Stakes. He only won because he got the better of
little BOTHERBY, his jockey, who couldn't hold him. Why, the crowd
nearly murdered him, and his master sacked him on the spot--the little
idiot!"

I do not quite understand this explanation. Poor _Rumtifoo was_
"moral," like the "moral mare" mentioned by ARISTOTLE in the _Ethics_.
He did his best to win, and he did win; what else can you ask for in a
horse?

There is, apparently, more in horse-racing than meets the eye. I am
not addicted to remembering much about the "previous performances" of
horses, as some men are, who will tell you that _Cynic_ was third in
the Kelso Hunt Cup for last year, and that you ought to keep an eye
on him for the Ayrshire Handicap. But I have remarked that horses are
not like men; they do not always run almost equally well, though the
conditions of the race seem similar. No doubt this is owing to the
nervousness of the animal, who may be discouraged by the noise, the
smell of bad tobacco, and so forth.