Having satisfactorily explained how it came that I was on the Downs when, by a not unnatural coincidence, the Derby was decided, I proceed to consider the question that has been propounded to me. Is sporting speculative finance illegal? It is not a matter that can be decided off-hand. One must be careful not to interfere with the policy of trade, and do nothing to impede the development of honest industry. I am asked by a correspondent, who dates "From Sheffield," if there is anything undignified in his appearing as a "bookie" in a pink velvet coat, a yellow slouch hat, with blue feathers, and black leather knickerbockers. I can see no objection to a tradesman wearing any costume he determines to select. It would perhaps be as well not to attempt to disguise his features, as the operation might savour of secrecy, the chief element of fraud. This limitation of course does not apply to an auctioneer, who, having his name and address displayed on a board hanging on the rostrum he occupies, can legally carry on his business, if it so pleases him, in a false nose, a comic wig, and a pair of green spectacles. But really, a consideration of the costume of the "bookie" merely reaches the fringe of the subject. The real point at issue is this--Is betting legal or illegal? It is hard to say. That a bet made on the racecourse is recoverable is questionable. Suppose that A is prepared to give odds against _The Earl's Choice_ (the favourite, quoted officially at 2 to 1) at the rate of five shillings against one thousand pounds sterling. Presume that B agrees to the wager and _The Earl's Choice_ wins. B naturally asks for the immediate payment by A of one thousand pounds sterling. A declines. Has B any remedy against A? I am afraid that the Court (although allowing costs on the higher scale) would not assist the plaintiff in making good his claim. However, it would be possible for B to represent to the other side that the conduct of A was of a character warranting chronic detention in a lunatic asylum. If this suggestion were adopted with the necessary discretion, I have no doubt that a compromise satisfactory to B would eventually be the outcome of the negotiations. However, although I am a little uncertain about other bets, I have no doubt in my own mind that coach sweepstakes under certain circumstances should be discouraged. I do not wish to rely upon case law, but would rather appeal to that honest, manly feeling that is (so I have been given to understand) the birthright of every Englishman. When all Nature is smiling, and man (smoking a three-shilling cigar) is at rest, why trouble about mounts and starters and blanks?