FILLIES AND THE DERBY,

Otago Witness, Issue 2433, 31 October 1900, Page 39

FILLIES AND THE DERBY,

.„ It has often been a matter gj. -surprise, says "Vigilant," why so few fillies have won the Derby, but when looked into it will be seen that the majority of tlio best fillies ever bred have nob been entered for 'the first classic raoe at Epsom, and others, moreover, have lost it by the merest flukes. It was quite in a new order of things when Eleanor won the .Derby in 1801, as up to that time no filly had ever been in the race, but in that partioular year another filly ran — namely, the D«ke of Graf ton's Remnant, "who finished t'-iird to Eleanor, first, and an unnamed colt iby Fidget, Eeacmd, Remnant subsequently running fourth to Eleanor when the latter won the- Oa'cs. A filly oallc:! Margery ran unplaced in the next year's Derby, won by Tyrant, and in 1805 'there was the chestnut Sigismunda unplaced, and a filly by Mr Teaale ran in 1806. Lord Egremoul ran Brighton Las*, in 1807, and in 1810 the Duke of Graf ton's filly Pledge was probably overrated, as she. started at 3 to 1, but finished nowhere, and again' nowhere in tine Oaks. The famous Manuella, afteiwards the dam of Memnon and Belzoni, ran in the Derby ir 1812, starting second favourite, but she V/as not placed, though n. the following Friday she won tha Gak,=. In 1814 Sir G. Webster's Grand Duchess ran in both the Derby and Oaks, and in Mr Farrall's Dahlia ran in tho Derby, but. not in the Oaks, and exactly the same remark applies tc Lord Warwick's Selma in 1820. The Duke of Rutlpind ran Mandoline in the Derby of 1821, but she was not seen in the Oaks, and then there wus quite a decade before another filly was found in the Derby, for it was in 1831 (Spaniel's year) that Sam Chifney started his own unnamed filly by Emilius out of Surprise, and rode her himself. She ako ran in the Oaks, but without distinguishing herself. Mr Mill&'s Elate, by Lapdog, and Ohifney's Emiliana, by Emilius, both ian in the Derby of 1832, and, apparently, the former was thought the better of the two, as Chifney did not run hia own filly in the Oaks, but rode Kate for Mr Mills. Tho Chifneys were evidently bent on having an Eleanor, as in 1833 they ran Moorhen, by Emii'ius, in the Derby, and slio ran well enough in the

first event to become second favourite for tlie Oaks, but she was not in the placed division. In 1835 there is no question about it that a filly could have won the Derby and Oaks, as Queen of Trumps was a good 101b better than anything of her yeai, and Minidig, the Derby winner, was a moderate horse, and v^ell beaten by the Queen when she met him in the Si. Leger. In 1839 it was common opinion, that Mr Fuller Craien's Deception lost the Derby by a fluke. He,, ec'centrio owner would allow no one to ,ride ■her but his own man, Trenn, aa'd the latter, much 'bothered t>y the snowstorm that tfaged, made too great use of her, as she was ten 'lengths in front at Tattenbam Corner, but coming back to Bloomsbury she was second, jubt beaten, it being notable that she was the only [filly 'that ran dn a field of 21. On the Friday following, with John Day in the saddle, Deception won the Oaks very easlily. It was a bit of bad luck foi Lord George Bentinck that; Crucifix was not engagsd in t-he Derby, as she could not have lost it against the moderate pony Little Wonder, although it might have cost her the Oaks, as the gallop for that event practically * settled her. Two fillies ran in the Derby of 18"-1— namely, Mr Saddler's Protection and Mr Batson's Potentia. Many years elapsed now before another filly was seen in the Derby, the spell being at last broken in 1853. "West Australian's year, when Mr Wilkins's Peggy, by Pompey, ron, but quite in the real rank. It was in 1857 that the double event was to be brought off again, as Blink Bonny caiptured the Derby after a very close and doubtful finish, and she won the Oaks easily. That other fillies in thr last half-century could no doubt hay. won the Derby — as they were proved better than the colls — is probable, but they did not hold the better of the Epsom engagements. I allude to Marie Stuart, Jannette, Thebais, Geheimniss, and most cerl-ainly Memoii in Sainfoin's year. La Fleche's defeat in Sii Hugo's yeai was a more palpable fluke than when Deception was beaten by Blcomsbury, as she afterwards proved herself at least* 101b the better. Seabreeze, too, might have won the double, as she subsequently asserted hex superiority to Ayrshire, and it will be remembered that Queen Adelaide was the runner-up to the dead-heaters, St. Gatien. and Harvester. There had tiesn one \Derby winning filly though to follow oi Eleanoi and Blink Bonny, 'and it is a notable .fact th'd't in 'the year, 1882, all the classic races were won by fillies, the Two Thousand by Shotover, the Derby by the same, and she was not esteemed by John Porter to have been a'B good as the Oaks winner, Geheimniss, whilst both got beaten in the St. Leger by Dutch Oven.