CHAPTER XVIII.
HISTORY OF MESSENGER.
Messenger’s racing in England—His breeder unknown—Popular uncertainty about the circumstances and date of his importation—The matter settled by his first advertisement—Uncertainty as to his importer—Description of Messenger by David W. Jones, of Long Island—Careful consensus of descriptions by many who had seen Messenger—His great and lasting popularity as a stock horse—Places and prices of his services for twenty years—Death and burial.
Messenger made his first appearance on the turf in October, 1783, then three years old, and ran twice, successfully, that year. He continued on the turf till November, 1785, winning eight races, losing six and receiving forfeits in two. Most of his races were practically matches, and all were single dashes but one, in which he was beaten. Two of his winnings were less than a mile, five at the distance of a mile and a quarter, and one at two miles. These distances are approximate. He was beaten at two and a quarter miles, three, and three and a half miles. He never appeared in any great racing event, but seemed to be managed with a special view to picking up small prizes at short distances. His owner and manager, Mr. Bullock, was a very shrewd “professional” at Newmarket, he had quite a number of horses in the same stable with Messenger and some of them seem to have been selected always to run for the more valuable prizes. Considering the short distances he was able to run and the unimportant character of the contests in which he was engaged, we must conclude that Messenger was a very ordinary race horse.
It is not known by whom Messenger was bred. In his first advertisement in this country it is stated that he was bred by John Pratt, of Newmarket, but in the fourth volume of Pick’s “Turf Register,” continued by Johnson, it is stated explicitly that he “was bred by and the property of Mr. Bullock, of Newmarket.” Mr. John Pratt was a breeder as well as a racing man of some prominence, in his day, and the certificate of pedigree from him and purporting to have been issued by him was probably a fraud, as he died May 8, 1785. This was while Messenger was still on the turf, and owned and controlled by Mr. Bullock for two years previous to this, still no mention is made of the fact, and Mr. Pratt is made to say that he sold him to the Prince of Wales, while all the evidence, which must necessarily be of a negative character, goes to show that the Prince of Wales never owned him. Mr. Pratt was a Yorkshire man, of Askrigg, in the North Riding, and although he died at Newmarket we have no trace of any of the family from which the dam of Messenger was said to have descended ever being in his possession. Besides this, it is not likely that the importer of Messenger got a certificate from him two years after his death.
The different representations that have been made about Messenger’s importation would fill a much larger space than would be profitable. About no horse has there been so much written, and about no horse has there been so little really known. His character and memory have never suffered defamation, for every writer was a eulogist of the most enthusiastic type, whether he knew anything of his hero or not. As a specimen of the admiration which he excited, it has been told a hundred times that when the horse came cavorting down the gangplank from the ship, with a groom hanging on to each side of his head, literally carrying them for some distance before he could be checked, an enthusiastic horseman shouted out, “There, in that horse a million dollars strikes American soil.” This story has been told so often, even in England, that no doubt many people believe the startling prophecy was really uttered. Indeed we have heard the name of the prophet, but as he was a distinguished New Yorker and as debarkation took place at Philadelphia, we never have been able to fully reconcile the actor with the occasion. The reputed prophecy, like the reputed pedigree, seems to have been an afterthought, but unlike the pedigree it proved true, whether uttered or not. Some said he was imported 1785, while others dribble along through the intermediate years till 1800 was fixed upon with great positiveness as the precise year. One of these gentlemen, we remember very well, was entirely confident he returned to England and was brought back again after a number of years. Less than twenty years ago the breeding world was favored with scores upon scores of this kind of teachers, not one of whom knew what he was talking about. The most surprising example of this kind of writing, however, is furnished by Mr. C. W. Van Ranst, himself, who was part owner of the horse a number of years. In a communication published in Skinner’s “Turf Register,” 1831, he says Messenger was imported into New York in 1792, and in the same publication for 1834 he says he was imported into New York 1791. As the sequel will show, Mr. Van Ranst, although his owner, had no definite knowledge of the early history of the horse.
From some slight investigations I became satisfied, years before, that Messenger made his first appearance in this country at Philadelphia, and that he was imported into that city instead of New York. In that view all the writers of the whole country were opposed to me; but, as it became more and more evident that those writers were merely copying from one another and that none of them had ever made an honest search for the truth, I resolved to follow my own convictions and to commence there an investigation that would settle the matter one way or the other. In a few hours after reaching that city I found a file of the old Pennsylvania Packet, and in the number dated May 27, 1788, an advertisement of which the following is a true copy:
JUST IMPORTED
The capital, strong, full blooded, English stallion,