BEND OR

AN INVESTIGATION INTO HIS TRUE IDENTITY

The Derby of 1880 was run on Wednesday, May 26. On Saturday, July 3, a rumour started that the winner Bend Or was in reality Tadcaster, the names of the two Doncaster colts being mixed up when they were handed over to their trainer. On Thursday, July 15, the joint owners of the second, Robert the Devil, objected to Bend Or, the allegations being that he was not the horse he was represented as being, either at the time of the entry or the time of the race. On Saturday, July 24, the stewards over-ruled the objection and the result stood. In 2012 it was proved by mtDNA tests on the skeleton of Bend Or that he was, in fact, Tadcaster.

BEND OR

Inbred to MULEY 5 x 5 and TOUCHSTONE 5 x 5
Coefficient of Inbreeding = 3.13

TADCASTER

Inbred to TOUCHSTONE 5 x 3
Coefficient of Inbreeding = 3.91

The London Evening Standard, Monday, July 5, 1880, page 2, says - "The Rumours About Bend Or. A very sensational rumour was afloat on Saturday in respect of the Derby winner. The stud groom at Eaton Hall, the Duke of Westminster's breeding establishment in Cheshire, is said to have read a description of Bend Or in some of the papers, and to have remarked that the colt with the 'white star and snip, and near white hind heel' was the colt of Doncaster out of Clemence, subsequently named Tadcaster, and not the colt of Doncaster out of Rouge Rose, whom we know as Bend Or. It seems that these colts did not go direct from the paddocks where they were reared to Russley, but spent a short time at Newmarket, and a contention is that a mistake was made in giving their names when they were handed over to Robert Peck. The Duke of Westminster, who was at Russley on Saturday, has been communicated with by those interested in Robert the Devil, and has promised to investigate the Eaton stud-book, which will of course contain particulars of the markings of the colts out of Clemence and Rouge Rose, from observations made at the time of their being foaled. No objection has been lodged, nor is it true that any discharged servant has said he is in a position to prove that Bend Or is Tadcaster, and vice versa. The greatest excitement, however, prevails in sporting circles, and if it should turn out correct this year's Derby would be rendered quite as sensational as was that for which Orlando came in second, but subsequently got the stakes. The Duke of Westminster's reference to his stud-book will give the necessary information as to the identity of the two colts of whom the recognised Tadcaster is regarded as moderate, though he won the Municipal Stakes at Doncaster, in which his solitary oponent was Lizzie Lindsay. Good odds are, however, betted on the Derby verdict being undisturbed; but if Bend Or were disqualified for that contest and all the others he had won within the twelve months of the objection being made, he might not get the bets according to the reading of the second rule of betting as under: - 'The interests of the bets are inseparable with the interests of the stakes, except when the winning horse is disqualified owing to a default in making stakes; or if an objection be made to the qualification of a horse on the ground of incorrect pedigree or nomination, after the race is run, the bets shall go to the horse that comes in first, provided he is of the right age, and that in other respects he has not transgressed the rules of racing; but if the owner of a horse, or a person on his behalf, succeeds by fraud or by false statements in starting him for a race for which he is legally disqualified, making himself liable to the penalties in Rule 18, "Laws of Racing," the bets will go with the stakes, whether any objection be made either before or after the race.' No time will, of course, be lost in ascertaining what truth there may be in the rumour which is at present arresting so much attention and causing speculation on future events to be almost a dead letter, and it is to be hoped that a day or so will reveal the best or the worst".

The London Daily Telegraph, Monday, July 5, 1880, pages 4 and 5, says - "If the objection to Bend Or, made on Saturday to the Duke of Westminster by Mr. Brewer and Charles Blanton - the joint owners of Robert the Devil, who came in second for the last Derby - can be substantiated, there is little doubt that the latest recurrences of England's greatest race will deserve to be bracketed with 'the memorable Derby of 1844.' Happily, however, there is a wide difference between the two cases. In 1844 the horse that went first past the post for the Derby Stakes was Running Rein, who was subsequently shown to be a four-year-old; while in 1880 it is affirmed by the owner of Robert the Devil that, in consequence of a mistake - the existence of which can easily be disproved, or the reverse, as the case may be - the winner of the Derby was not the son of Doncaster and Rouge Rose, but the son of Doncaster and Clemence. Each of these colts was bred by the Duke of Westminster, and each was chesnut in colour; but if the alleged testimony of a groom, who was employed by the Duke of Westminster in 1878, but has since been discharged, admits of substantiation, Bend Or, the son of Doncaster and Rouge Rose, is in reality Tadcaster, the son of Doncaster and Clemence. In 1844 there was an undoubted and dangerous fraud, the outcome of a deeply-laid and daring conspiracy, which substituted a four-year-old for a three-year-old; but in 1880, if the reports which have flown like wildfire through the country since Saturday morning are confirmed, one three-year-old has inadvertently been substituted for another. It may well be, then, that - as Signor Lanciani suggests - the names of Bend Or and Tadcaster will be so famous in connection with the Derby of 1880 as to make it possible that, two thousand years hence, when the port of London has become what the port of Ostia is now, knife-handles or children's toys or bits of pottery may be found, to remind those who are then living that in 1880 there was a great English race in which an animal called Bend Or played a conspicuous figure. The intelligence that Bend Or is believed to be Tadcaster, and Tadcaster to be Bend Or, will naturally awaken much sympathy for their noble owner, the Duke of Westminster. So far back as 1870, when, shortly after the death of his father, the Duke sent two or three obscure yearlings, by an unfashionable sire named Romulus, into training at Stanton, where the horses of his uncle, Lord Wilton, have been long and ably prepared for their engagements by Wadlow, it was the general hope of lovers of the Turf that the new head of the House of Grosvenor would soon show himself a conspicuous patron of that national sport to which his grandfather and great-grandfather were once so attached. Nor was this hope falsified by subsequent experience, seeing that a few years later the Duke afforded abundant evidence that he desired to see another Touchstone at Eaton by giving an unprecedented sum for one of the grandest sires in England. The purchase of Doncaster for fourteen thousand guineas was followed by that of a host of 'Belgravian mothers,' selected from the studs of the late Mr. King, the breeder of Apology; of General Pearson, the breeder of Lord Lyon and Achievement; and of Lord Falmouth, the breeder of so many redoubtable animals that it is impossible to enumerate them here. Other wealthy and powerful noblemen in the past have engaged with like ardour in the fascinating pursuit of horse-racing, and, after profuse and long-sustained expenditure, have retired from the Turf without ever owning a single great racehorse. The Duke of Westminster, however, had not long to wait before success rewarded his costly efforts. Within three or four years of the transference of Doncaster to the Eaton paddocks, a son sprung from his loins, and pronounced by many excellent judges to be almost faultless in shape, make, action, and courage, carried the famous yellow jacket of Eaton in triumph past the winning-post in five two-year-old races. Little more than a month ago the same chesnut colt with a white blaze on his face and a white heel was declared to have won that historical race at Epsom which, although shorn in some measure of its former splendours, is still the foremost equine prize in the world. If, then, the investigation to which the objection of Saturday must necessarily give rise should end in the disqualification of Bend Or for a race in which it is clear that a three-year-old colt, belonging to the Duke of Westminster, was the best animal engaged, there can be no question that the general disappointment and regret will be deep and wide. The further controversy with regard to bets, not only in connection with the Derby but also with all the two-year-old races won by 'a chesnut colt' belonging to the Duke of Westminster, will, no doubt, awaken much heartburning and discussion. It seems probable, however, that, no fraud having been attempted, and the animal in question being of the right age, respect will be shown to the rule of racing which enacts that 'if an objection be made to the qualification of a horse on the ground of incorrect pedigree or nomination, after the race is run, the bet shall go to the horse that comes in first, provided he is of the right age, and that in other respects he has not transgressed the rules of racing.' Truth is said to be often far stranger than fiction, and we can conceive nothing less antecedently probable than that it should be possible for such a mistake to be made as the accidental substitution of one colt for another, in the case of a carefully managed stud, the property of a wealthy and upright nobleman, who has tried and faithful servants in his employment. For these reasons it will be generally hoped that the alleged testimony of the stud groom, who had charge of Doncaster in 1877 and 1878, will break down under the fierce light of the scrutiny certain to be poured upon it. For the present the report is that between the departure of the two chesnut colts, as yearlings, from Eaton Hall, and their arrival at Russley, their names were ignorantly changed by the boys in charge, and that the colt by Doncaster out of Rouge Rose was handed over to Robert Peck as being Bend Or, while in reality he was Tadcaster, and vice versa. During the whole of their racing career as two-year-olds, and down to the Derby Day, these two animals are said to have borne incorrect names without any suspicion of mischief having been entertained, and without a shadow of wrong being intended. This error seems at first to be so ridiculous that the rumour of it has been received with wide discredit; but such, we regret to learn, is not the view taken of it by those most nearly concerned. The stud-book at Eaton, if kept, as will undoubtedly prove to be the case, with the same accuracy as prevailed when Nutting was in charge of Touchstone and Pantaloon some thirty years ago, may be trusted to show whether the colt born of Rouge Rose in 1877 had or had not a white blaze down his face and a white heel when he came into the world. In the meanwhile, it is curious to remark how consistently the Derby at Epsom keeps up its character for strange and unexpected surprises when the race is over. To go no farther back than 1839, when Bloomsbury won, it will be remembered that Mr. Fulwar Craven, the owner of Deception, who was second, posted up a notification at Tattersall's, stating that the pedigree of the winner had been wrongly described, and warning those with bets upon the race not to settle until his objection had been weighed. It was at once overruled by the Epsom stewards, but it is now the general opinion that Mr. Craven was right, and that he was entitled to the race. Five years later came the discreditable attempt, which so nearly succeeded, to win the Derby and the Oaks with a couple of four-year-olds. In the next year Mr. Crockford, the owner of Ratan, a leading favourite, died between the race and the settling day, and furious was the controversy which was waged to decide whether his estate was liable for the payment of the bets he had lost, and entitled to receive the far larger amount of bets he had won. In 1865 there was an objection to Gladiateur, and again, in 1869, Sir Joseph Hawley, the owner of Pero Gomez, the second horse, stopped the settlement until he could ascertain whether Mr. Sadler, the nominator of Pretender, had died, as was rumoured, before the race. But the objection lodged last Saturday - more than five weeks after the Derby Day - against Bend Or has no parallel in the history of the Turf".

The London Evening Standard, Tuesday, July 6, 1880, page 3, says - "The Bend Or Case. But little fresh news cropped up yesterday relative to the Bend Or case, but the probability of the colt being disqualified for all the races he has won was discussed at the clubs, to the detriment of speculation on future events, which proved only of a desultory character. According to the rules of racing, any objection against a horse, on whatever grounds, cannot be made after the lapse of a twelvemonth, and therefore it seemed a certainty that Bend Or's Chesterfield Stakes success could not be disturbed, the year having expired on Saturday, when it was stated no formal objection had been made from any quarter. To-day, however, a rumour gained general credence that the Duke of St. Albans, whose filly Petal ran second to Bend Or for the stake above-named, had lodged a protest on the ground of wrong nomination. It was mentioned that his Grace, who is at present in Ireland, had telegraphed to Messrs. Weatherby on Saturday morning, so that the protest would be just within the stipulated time. If an objection has really been lodged, the case will have to be gone into, whatever the Duke of Westminster may reply to the inquiry of the joint owners of Robert the Devil. It was rumoured this afternoon that the Russley patron had felt inclined to pooh-pooh the matter altogether, and had declined to take any steps to ascertain whether there was any truth in the statement of Bend Or and Tadcaster getting mixed, but this was subsequently contradicted, and there can be little doubt that for his own sake the Duke will make a thorough investigation. Should it prove true that Bend Or is not the horse we have become so familiar with, he must, of course, be disqualified for every race he has won, and the Duke of Westminster will have to return no inconsiderable sum in stakes. The bets, however, according to the second rule of betting, which we again give, are not likely to be reversed. 'The interests of the bets are inseparable with the interests of the stakes, except when the winning horse is disqualified owing to a default in making stakes; or if an objection be made to the qualification of a horse on the ground of incorrect pedigree or nomination, after the race is run, the bets shall go to the horse that comes in first, provided he is of the right age, and that in other respects he has not transgressed the rules of racing; but if the owner of a horse, or a person on his behalf, succeeds by fraud or by false statements in starting him for a race for which he is legally disqualified, making himself liable to the penalties in rule 18, "Laws of Racing," the bets will go with the stakes, whether any objection be made either before or after the race.' This is a great point, and to contemplate the fact of all the money that has been paid over Bend Or being got back again is awful for bookmakers, who would of course find the customers they had to pay over Robert the Devil easily enough. Should it happen that Robert the Devil is awarded the bets, more than one bookmaker has expressed his intention of resigning the business rather than re-settle, and it is not too much to say that a satisfactory adjustment would never be effected. At present, however, the problem is no nearer solution than it was when the rumour first got abroad, but before the Newmarket July Meeting is brought to a conclusion something definite is pretty sure to have transpired. It is not anticipated that the settling will be disturbed, whatever may happen to the stakes, but there will come a question as to how bets will go on the St. Leger, people who have supported Bend Or contending that they will not lose their money, while the other side are equally positive that wagers must be paid. Of course, if it is proved that Bend Or is Tadcaster, and vice versa, both animals will have been wrongly nominated for the Doncaster race, and, therefore, not eligible to compete, but the question as to the liability of the supporters of Bend Or is a nice one, and can only be settled by the highest turf authorities. The St. James's Gazette says :- 'One of the oddest stories which have ever been supplied by the Turf is that of the Duke of Westminster's Bend Or, the winner of the Derby this year. The owners of Robert the Devil, the horse which came in second for that race, have lodged an objection against Bend Or on the ground that he is not Bend Or, but Tadcaster. Both horses are the offspring of Doncaster, and of the same age. But the dam of Bend Or was Rouge Rose and the dam of Tadcaster was Clemence. It is now said that they were in some way accidentally changed when, as yearlings, they were transferred from the Duke of Westminster's stud at Eaton to the stables of his trainer at Russley, and hence during the whole of their racing career the two horses have borne the one the other's name, and have been incorrectly described in their entries. There is not the slightest suspicion of fraud in the case, and hence it seems that the bets which have been won and lost over the Derby will not be affected by the result of any inquiry which may be made, the rule under this head being that 'if an objection be made to the qualification of a horse on the ground of incorrect pedigree or nomination, after the race is run, the bet shall go to the horse that comes in first, provided he is of the right age, and that in other respects he has not transgressed the rules of racing.' As to which of his horses is Bend Or and which Tadcaster the Duke of Westminster's stud-book will no doubt supply conclusive evidence; for although they are both chestnuts, one of them has a white star on his face and a white heel, and he was the winner of this year's Derby. Of course, if the change has been made the Duke of Westminster will have to give up his Derby stakes, owing, so far as is yet surmised, to the carelessness of some of his grooms and stable-boys. Bend Or is not a lucky name for the Grosvenors. Nearly five hundred years ago, after the most celebrated trial ever held on such a question in the Court of Chivalry, Sir Richard Scrope worsted Sir Robert Grosvenor in a suit raised about the bearings 'azure a bend or' before the Constable and Marshal of England. The arms 'azure a bend or' were, after some years of litigation, assigned to Sir Richard Scrope, and Sir Robert Grosvenor assumed 'azure a garb or' as his arms, which have ever since been borne by his descendants".

The Leeds Mercury, Wednesday, July 7, 1880, page 4, says - "It is announced that the question raised as to the misdescription of Bend Or, the winner of the Derby, has been settled, and that the identity of the horse has been thoroughly established. The Judges' verdict therefore remains undisturbed".

The Western Gazette, Friday, July 9, 1880, page 5, says, - "The Turf Difficulty is not yet adjusted. The owners of Bend Or and Robert the Devil appeared before the stewards of the Jockey Club on Wednesday, when the stud book of the Duke of Westminster was produced. The book appeared to favour the theory that the horse known as Bend Or is Tadcaster; but the entries have been so carelessly made that they are almost wholly unreliable. The stewards of the Jockey Club met again on Thursday, when they decided that so conflicting was the evidence brought before them that they felt constrained from offering any advice to Messrs. Brewer & Blanton, the owners of Robert the Devil, who had placed themselves in their hands. Messrs. Brewer & Blanton have decided to take time to consider what course they shall pursue".

The Cardiff Times & South Wales Weekly News, Saturday, July 10, 1880, page 8, says, - "Dispute About The Derby Stakes. The Jockey Club Decline To Adjudicate. A very sensational rumour was afloat on Saturday in respect of the Derby winner. The stud groom at Eaton Hall, the Duke of Westminster's breeding establishment in Cheshire, is said to have read a description of Bend Or in some of the papers, and to have remarked that the colt with the 'white star and snip, and near white hind heel,' was the colt of Doncaster out of Clemence, subsequently named Tadcaster, and not the colt of Doncaster out of Rouge Rose, whom we know as Bend Or. It seems that these colts did not go direct from the paddocks where they were reared to Russley, but spent a short time at Newmarket, and a contention is that a mistake was made in giving their names when they were handed over to Robert Peck. The Duke of Westminster, who was at Russley on Saturday, has been communicated with by those interested in Robert the Devil, and has promised to investigate the Eaton stud-book, which will of course contain particulars of the markings of the colts out of Clemence and Rouge Rose, from observations made at the time of their being foaled. No objection has been lodged, nor is it true that any discharged servant has said he is in a position to prove that Bend Or is Tadcaster, and vice versa. The greatest excitement, however, prevails in sporting circles, and if it should turn out correct this year's Derby would be rendered quite as sensational as was that for which Orlando came in second, but subsequently got the stakes. The Duke of Westminster's reference to his stud-book will give the necessary information as to the identity of the two colts of whom the recognised Tadcaster is regarded as moderate, though he won the Municipal Stakes at Doncaster, in which his solitary oponent was Lizzie Lindsay. Good odds are, however, betted on the Derby verdict being undisturbed; but if Bend Or were disqualified for that contest and all the others he had won within the twelve months of the objection being made, he might not get the bets according to the reading of the second rule of betting as under: - 'The interests of the bets are inseparable with the interests of the stakes, except when the winning horse is disqualified owing to a default in making stakes; or if an objection be made to the qualification of a horse on the ground of incorrect pedigree or nomination, after the race is run, the bets shall go to the horse that comes in first, provided he is of the right age, and that in other respects he has not transgressed the rules of racing; but if the owner of a horse, or a person on his behalf, succeeds by fraud or by false statements in starting him for a race for which he is legally disqualified, making himself liable to the penalties in Rule 18, "Laws of Racing," the bets will go with the stakes, whether any objection be made either before or after the race.' No time will, of course, be lost in ascertaining what truth there may be in the rumour which is at present arresting so much attention and causing speculation on future events to be almost a dead letter, and it is to be hoped that a day or so will reveal the best or the worst. Important Meeting. By arrangements made with the Duke of Westminster, there was a meeting of stewards of the Jockey Club, at Newmarket, on Wednesday morning. Messrs Brewer and Blanton, the joint owners of Robert the Devil, attended. The Duke of Westminster in accordance with his promise produced his private stud-book, containing the descriptions of the foals of Rouge Rose and Clemence, foaled in 1877. It was found that the markings attributed to the Clemence colt, now called Tadcaster, corresponded with those on Bend Or, but the book has been so irregularly kept, and is so full of errors in other respects, that the stewards of the Jockey Club could not advise the owners of Robert the Devil what to do under the circumstances until they have heard the evidence of the stud groom. Messrs Blanton and Brewer are perfectly satisfied to accept the decision of the stewards of the Jockey Club as final, and with the Eaton-hall Stud-book in such a condition as regards the descriptions of the other horses that are in Peck's stables, the weight of evidence is most certainly in favour of Bend Or; and after the inquiry, on Wednesday, odds of 50 to 1 were betted on the judges verdict remaining undisturbed. The Stewards of the Jockey Club have decided that so conflicting is the evidence brought before them in the case of Bend Or, that they feel constrained from offering any advice to Messrs Brewer and Blanton, who had placed themselves in their hands; and the owners of Robert the Devil have decided to take time to consider what course they shall pursue".

The Yorkshire Gazette, Saturday, July 17, 1880, page 10, says, - "The Derby Difficulty. - The legal advisers of Messrs. Brewer and Blanton have not yet given any opinion as to what action should be taken by the owners of Robert the Devil in re the Derby difficulty. Should it be determined to go to law upon the point, the intervention of the long vacation would preclude all possibility of the case being heard before November. Meanwhile the St. Leger has to be decided in September. - On Thursday morning Messrs. Blanton and Brewer, joint owners of Robert the Devil, who ran second for the Derby, objected to Bend Or, who was placed first for the race, the allegations being that the chesnut colt described as Bend Or, by Doncaster, out of Rouge Rose, was not the horse he was represented as being, either at the time of the entry or the time of the race. The objection was lodged with Messrs. Weatherby, as stakeholders, and also with the Old Burlington Street authorities, as representatives of the Jockey Club Stewards".

The Illustrated London News, Saturday, July 17, 1880, page 59, says, - "The Bend Or difficulty seems no nearer elucidation than it did when we wrote last week. The Duke of Westminster has produced his stud-book before the Stewards of the Jockey Club, and the entries contained in it relative to Bend Or and Tadcaster certainly seem to favour the idea that the former is the son of Clemence and not of Rouge Rose. However, the entire book has been kept so irregularly, and the mistakes in it appear to be so numerous, that, after a long discussion, the Stewards did not feel justified in advising Messrs. Brewer and Blanton that they had good ground for objecting to the winner of the Derby. These gentlemen have, therefore, no resource left but an appeal a court of law. We rather doubt if the matter will be carried to that length; for, as the entire onus of proof would rest with the plaintiffs, it will easily be understood that their case would not be a very strong one, especially as Sir Henry Hawkins - an honorary member of the Jockey Club - has given an unofficial opinion that the Eaton Hall stud-book would be practically worthless as evidence".

The Exeter and Plymouth Gazette, Friday, July 23, 1880, page 5, says - "The Bend Or inquiry was resumed yesterday. The stewards present were Lord Calthorpe, Mr. Lowther, and Mr. W. G. Craven. The proceedings commenced by the examination of Messrs. Brewer and Blanton, who expressed their firm conviction that the horse known as Bend Or was really Tadcaster. George Good, who was formerly stud-keeper to Lord Falmouth, positively stated that, whereas the horse which passed the winning-post at the Derby had a peculiar 'blaze,' the real Bend Or had no such mark. The stud-book submitted by Messrs. Brewer and Blanton was carefully scrutinised. The inquiry was adjourned until to-day, when evidence against the objection will be taken. Owing to the continued illness of the Duchess of Westminster, the Duke was unable to be present, but he will, if possible, attend for a short time to-day".

The Sheffield Daily Telegraph, Friday, July 23, 1880, page 4, says - "The Bend Or Difficulty. Yesterday afternoon the inquiry respecting the Bend Or difficulty was resumed at the residence of the Right Hon. James Lowther, in Grosvenor Street, Piccadilly, as was announced at the meeting on Tuesday last, which was purely of a preliminary character, and nothing further was done on that occasion than to arrange for the way in which the investigation should be conducted. It was resolved that the Press should be excluded, and also that the whole of the investigation should be conducted in the most strictly private manner. With a view to this being carried out, not only the public but the principals themselves were entirely kept in the dark with regard to the nature of the evidence that had been adduced, and neither of the joint owners of Robert the Devil nor the Duke of Westminster were present whilst the witnesses were giving their evidence. In addition to Mr. Lowther, their were present Lord Calthorpe, acting on behalf of Sir George Chetwynd, who has bets upon the race, and Mr. W. S. Craven. The inquiry commenced shortly after two o'clock, Messrs. Brewer and Blanton together with their witnesses, having arrived a short time before. The witnesses on behalf of the objectors were Richard Arnold, Richard Arnold jun., George Arnold, and Goode, Lord Falmouth's stud groom. We are authorised to state that the announcement that Sir Henry Hawkins would officiate on behalf of Lord Rosebery, who is at present on the Continent, is incorrect, Sir Henry declining to act, we believe, in consequence of his having expressed an opinion respecting the manner in which the Eaton Hall Stud Book was kept before the inquiry took place. Mr. Lowther informed the representative of the Sportsman that it was not intended to try and complete the inquiry that day, as the witnesses would have to be examined at great length, and only those on behalf of Messrs. Brewer and Blanton would be called, when the case would be adjourned to the following day. Messrs. Weatherby's shorthand writer was present to take a report of the proceedings. After Messrs. Brewer and Blanton had fully stated their case they left the house, and Goode was next called, he being followed by the Arnolds. It was seven o'clock before the evidence of the witnesses was concluded, and as they had been specially cautioned to maintain strict secrecy with regard to the evidence they had tendered, no intelligence was to be obtained. Neither the Duke of Westminster nor Lord Falmouth were present. Robert Peck and the witnesses on behalf of Bend Or will be examined this morning, and they were expected to arrive in town yesterday evening. The inquiry will be resumed this morning at eleven o'clock, and it is hoped that the case will be concluded this evening, though it is not at all improbable that it will have to be further adjourned until eleven o'clock on Saturday morning, when it is believed the question will be definitely settled. A Central News telegram says :- The stewards of the Jockey Club, Mr. W. G. Craven and Mr. Jas. Lowther, assisted by Lord Calthorpe, acting for the senior steward, Sir George Chetwynd, met at the residence of Mr. Lowther, 59, Grosvenor Street, London, yesterday afternoon at two o'clock. The object of the meeting was to hear the evidence to be produced by Messrs. Charles Brewer and Charles Blanton, the joint owners of Robert the Devil, which ran second to Bend Or in the last Derby. Messrs. Brewer and Blanton were duly in attendance with their five witnesses, namely, R. Arnold, sen., R. Arnold, jun., Geo. Arnold, J. Sexton, and W. Goode. Arnold, sen., was the former stud groom at the Duke of Westminster's stables at Eaton Hall, and the other four were his assistants. The Duke of Westminster was not present, nor did any of his witnesses attend. Lord Falmouth, Sir H. Hawkins, and Sir George Chetwynd also failed to put in an appearance, although the latter was expected to make a brief call to hear a portion of the evidence. The Jockey Club shorthand writer was present during the sitting, and took full notes of the testimony. The meeting was strictly private, but it has transpired that the evidence yesterday was strongly in favour of the contention that the horse known as Tadcaster is the original and real Bend Or. It was further asserted that the Stud Book at Eaton Hall was not carelessly kept, nor accessible to all comers, and that reference to it will show that the horses' names have been changed by mistake as previously alleged. On account of the absence of the Duke of Westminster and his witnesses no decision was arrived at, and the proceedings will be continued in all probability to-day (Friday.) It is well understood that the Duke will call as witnesses his master of horse, Major Barlow; the trainer, Mr. Peck, and some twenty-five other persons. The Stud Book will also be produced".

The final decision given by the stewards on Saturday, July 24, 1880, says - "We, as Stewards of Epsom, unanimously decide that the chesnut colt Bend Or, which came in first for the Derby of 1880, is by Doncaster, out of Rouge Rose, and therefore the objection lodged by Messrs Brewer and Blanton is over-ruled".

The Sporting Times, January 17, 1903, page 7, in the obituary of Bend Or, says - "As the summer wore on it began to be rumoured that there was some flaw in the entry of Bend Or for the Derby, and this took tangible shape when Mr. Brewer objected to him on the ground that instead of being by Doncaster out of Rouge Rose he was by that sire out of Clemence. This was made on the representations of a couple of stud grooms at Eaton, who declared that some mistake was made in confounding one with the other after they had left Eaton. That such a mistake was quite feasible, both colts being the same colour, we know full well, as two similar ones that have been detected and corrected in late years amply prove. The evidence in this case, however, was very tainted, the grooms, though they professed to have known of the mistake for some time, not having said a word until they were discharged from Eaton; and, moreover, it was discovered that there were many flagrant errors in the Stud Book that was kept at Eaton. On this the objection was overruled. As both Bend Or and Tadcaster were in the Derby it did not, of course, matter to the Duke of Westminster whether Bend Or should have been called Tadcaster or not, and it would have been cruel had he been disqualified on this ground. [This is incorrect. The Duke of Westminster's other horse in the race was Muncaster]. Disqualified, however, he must have been had the statement of the grooms been confirmed. To the day of their death, and to their own friends, and when they had nothing to gain by lying, they maintained that the two colts had, innocently, of course, been transposed as far as their names were concerned. There is much to be advanced in support of this. As to whether it really was so or not is now important only as affecting the theory of breeding. Rouge Rose never bred another good horse, and none of her stock resembled Bend Or. Clemence, on the other hand, was a very beautiful Newminster mare showing in a marked degree all the splendid quality we saw so much of in Bend Or, and on being put to Doncaster she threw a smart animal in Sandiway, who ran second to The Lambkin for the St. Leger. She, of course, would be own sister to Bend Or if the grooms' contention was correct. Some of Clemence's descendants, too, we believe did big things in Australia. Assuming that Bend Or was out of Clemence, he would come of quite the orthodox cross of Stockwell on Touchstone, which carried all before it. With Rouge Rose for dam, on the other hand, he would come of a cross that has given us nothing, and all the many others of her produce were next to worthless".

mtDNA

Mitochondrial D-Loop DNA was obtained from the bones of Bend Or. If the mtDNA matches the mitochondrial lineage of his dam Rouge Rose, then the skeleton is indeed that of Bend Or. Conversely, if the mtDNA matches the mitochondrial lineage of Clemence, then the skeleton is that of Tadcaster.

An article in Archaeometry 54, 5 (2012) 916-925, entitled 'Truth in the Bones: Resolving the Identity of the Founding Elite Thoroughbred Racehorses', by M A Bower et al, says - "If the skeleton of the 1880 Derby winner, claimed to be Bend Or, is indeed Bend Or, the mtDNA sequence should be concordant with Family 1. If, however, the skeleton belongs to Tadcaster, then the mtDNA sequence should be concordant with Family 2. Families 1 and 2 are separated by eight nucleotide substitutions. The mtDNA sequences from the skeleton named Bend Or group clearly with those of Family 2 (n = 18) and not Family 1 (n = 21); therefore, the skeleton is that of Tadcaster.

The male line descended from Bend Or is the most influential in the world today, while all those that are not descended from him in the male line carry many crosses of him in their pedigrees. Tadcaster was a gelding, so has had no influence on the Thoroughbred at all. I would suggest that the records show 'Bend Or (Ran as Tadcaster)' and 'Tadcaster (Ran as Bend Or)'. It is ironic that the heir apparent of Bend Or in the male line, Frankel, is a direct descendant of Rouge Rose in the female line. She is his 12 greats grandam.

THE PEDIGREE OF THE 1880 DERBY WINNER

HOME PAGE | TOP OF PAGE